The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1986 08-11 CCP Regular Session CITY_COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AUGUST 11, 1986 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 Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. 6. Approval of Minutes - July 28, 1986 - Regular Session *7. Appointment of Election Judges for the September 9, 1986 Primary Election 8. Presentation: a. 75th Anniversary Celebration Executive Committee Report and Request for Final Contribution 9. Resolutions: *a. Accepting Bid and Approving Contract for Sidewalk Improvements on Humboldt Avenue North (Project No. 1986 -06, Contract 1986 -N) *b. Accepting Bid and Approving Contract for Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment District Phase II Streetscape Improvements (Project No. 1986 -15, Contract 1986 -0) *c. Providing for Hearing on Proposed Assessments for Diseased Shade Tree Removal Costs, Public Utility Hookup Charges, Delinquent Public Utility Accounts and Delinquent Weed Removal Accounts d. Declaring Cost to be Assessed and Providing for Hearing on Proposed Assessments for Shingle Creek Parkway Street Turnlane Improvement Project No. 1986 -07 Assessed to Ryan Construction and Target *e. Amending the Schedule for Planning and Inspection _Department Fees CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- August 11, 1986 *f. Amending the 1986 General Fund Budget to Provide for Wage and Salary Adjustments - Annual authorization to Allocate Salary increases from the Unallocated Department Budget 10. Ordinances: (7:30 p.m.) a. An Ordinance Creating Chapter 22 of the City g p y Relating to a Tax Imposed Upon Lodging -This ordinance was first read on July 14, 1986, published in the City's official newspaper on July 24, 1986 and is offered this evening for a second reading. b. An Ordinance Amending Chapters 8 and 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding Licensing of Bottled and Canned Soft Drinks -This ordinance was first read on July 14, 1986, published in the City's official newspaper on July 24, 1986 and is offered this evening or a second g reading. g c. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Regarding Administrative Permit Fees -This item deletes all references to fees in the zoning ordinance. This ordinance is offered for a first reading this evening. d. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding the Zoning Classification of Certain Land -This item will accomplish the rezoning from I -1 to R7 for the Earle Brown Commons Development. This ordinance is offered for a first reading this evening. 11. Planning Commission Items: (7:45 p.m.) a. Planning Commission Application No. 86029 submitted by David Otto requesting a variance from Section 35 -704 of the City Ordinances to allow full retail use of the building at 5810 Xerxes Avenue North while providing fewer parking stalls than required by ordinance. This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 31, 1986 meeting. b. Amended Building Plan submitted by Stephen Cook, Planning Commission Application No. 86013. An informational hearing has been set for this evening's meeting and notices have been sent. 12. Public Hearing: (8:00 p.m.) a. Hearing regarding proposed street improvements on 69th and 70th Avenues North between Dupont Avenue and T.H. 252, Project No. 1986 -10 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- August 11, 1986 1. Resolution Ordering Improvement Project No. 1986 -10 2 Resolution Accepting Bid and Approving Contract for Street Improvements to 69th /70th- Avenue North between Dupont Avenue and T.H. 252 (Project No. 1986 -10, Contract 1986 -M) *13. Licenses 14. Adjournment t MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JULY 28, 1986 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:04 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, y $ p Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, HRA Coordinator Brad Hoffman, and Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone. Councilmember Gene Lhotka was absent from this evening's meeting due to illness. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Councilmember Scott. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted the Council had not received any requests to use the Open Forum session this evening. He inquired if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to address the Council. There being none, he continued with the regular agenda. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Hawes requested that item 8g be removed from the Consent Agenda, and Councilmember Theis requested that item 8b be removed from the Consent Agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 14 1986 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the minutes of the July 14, 1986 City Council meeting. The motion passed. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 86 -113 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1986 -L (SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -14) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. 7 -28 -86 -1- a RESOLUTION NO. 86 -114 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROJECT, ACCEPTING CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT AND APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR EARLE BROWN FARM TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT PHASE II STREETSCAPE, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -15 (CONTRACT 1986 -0) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -115 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER TO CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -23, CONTRACT 1986 -C) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the following list of licenses: AMUSEMENT DEVICE - OPERATOR Ground Round 2545 County Road 10 K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Drive AMUSEMENT DEVICE - VENDOR D.V.M. Inc. 119 State Street GARBAGE HAULERS VEHICLE LICENSE Waste Control 94 West Ivy Street MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Michael Glynn 5801 Lyndale Avenue North Green Mechanical 8811 E. Research Center Rd. Preferred Sheet Metal Inc. 90 West Woodlynn Avenue RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE Initial: Jim and Norma Donovan 4207 Lakeside Ave. N. #234 Eugene L. Temple 4207 Lakeside Ave. N. #235 Dennis and Joan Leonard 4207 Lakeside Ave. N. #325 Renewal: Lloyd J. Waldusky Georgetown Park Townhouses Lyn River Corp. Lyn River Apartments Douglas J. Bistodeau 5541 Emerson Avenue N. Jay Showalter 6742, 44 France Avenue N. Eugene Van Lith 2901 Mumford Road Roland Scherber 7212 Newton Avenue N. • 7 -28 -86 -2- Harshad Bhatt 7206, 12 West River Road Charles Q. Hillstrom 1215, 17 54th Avenue N. The motion P assed. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) The City Manager presented a Resolution Accepting Proposals for Booster Pumps and for Reconstructing Pump Vaults for Water Quality Improvement Project No. 1986 -18. Councilmember Theis referred to item 5 in the resolution and asked what the funding source refers to. The Director of Public Works said the funding source should be the Public Utilities Fund. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -116 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption subject to the amendment of item 5 as follows: ' "5. Payment for work completed under the contracts above shall be charged to the Public Utilities Fund." RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSALS FOR BOOSTER PUMPS AND FOR RECONSTRUCTING PUMP VAULTS FOR WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -18 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott and the motion passed unanimously. y PROCLAMATION DECLARING "NATIONAL NIGHT OUT" AUGUST 12 1986 Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Phil Cohen, President of the Brooklyn Center Crime Prevention Fund, who stated that "National Night Out" has been proclaimed by Congress as August 12, 1986. Mr. Cohen ointed out that various p rious communities in the Twin Cities previous ties area have participated in the National Night Out in g years. He said this activity recognizes that the community has citizen participation in crime prevention, and it lets the criminal element know that Brooklyn Center is alert to what is happening in its community. Councilmember Theis asked if the value of this one night out is expected to show a decrease in crime for the one night or over a longer period of time. Mr. Cohen responded that the one night will not necessarily have an effect on the overall crime rate, but it does let the community know that the Crime Prevention Fund is involved. He pointed out that the Crime Prevention Fund has the crime tips phone available 365 days per year. Member Bill Hawes introduced the following proclamation and moved its adoption: PROCLAMATION DECLARING "NATIONAL NIGHT OUT ", AUGUST 12, 1986 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing proclamation was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving Agreement with City of Brooklyn Park for Extension of Trail System in Palmer Lake Park (Improvement Project No. 1986 -13). He noted that the bicycle trail stops 600 feet short of the northern boundary of Brooklyn Center. In the past, the City did not know where Brooklyn Park would build their trail to Brooklyn Center's City limits, 7 -28 -86 -3- but now the plans are firm. The City Manager said the Director of Public Works feels the price for this project is a good one. The Director of Public Works - noted that when the entire project is totally completed, the trailway system will go all the way to Coon Rapids. Councilmember Theis asked how much of Palmer Lake will not have a trail around it, and the Director of Public Works said there will only be a gap between 69th and 70th Avenues North on the north side of the lake. Councilmember Theis requested that this area be considered for final development. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -117 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK FOR EXTENSION OF TRAIL SYSTEM IN PALMER LAKE PARK (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -13) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion P asked unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Amending Appropriation for Remodeling of Police Department, Phase II (Improvement Project No. 1986 -02, Contract 1986 -B). Councilmember Scott asked if this would complete everything that the Police P Y g Department needs done for its remodeling, and the City Manager responded affirmatively. He added that there will be some repainting of the squad room, but this will be a 1987 budget request. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -118 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING APPROPRIATION FOR REMODELING OF POLICE DEPARTMENT, PHASE II (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -02, CONTRACT 1986 -B) The Director of Public Works pointed out a typographical error in the resolution, noting that the word "finding" in the last sentence should read "funding ". Councilmember Scott requested that this correction be made in the resolution. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken on the resolution, the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving Change Order to Contract for Construction of Storm Sewer for Earle Brown Farm (Improvement Project No. 1986 08, Contract 1986 -I). He noted this change order provides for the installation of storm and sanitary sewer connections to serve the proposed Earle Brown Commons site. Councilmember Hawes asked why the change order is necessary and wondered if this was overlooked at the time of the original bid. The Director of Public Works stated that the sanitary sewer running across the parking lot to Ryan's office building will serve the proposed housing complex. At the time of the development of the specifications and the bidding, the proposed housing complex was not mentioned in the original contract. There was still a possibility at that time that the design and location of the housing complex would change, and, therefore, staff did not feel comfortable including this item 7 -28 -86 -4- in the contract. The Director of Public Works continued that now the design is definitely established and Ryan Construction will construct -a holding pond, so it is only natural for them to do this project. RESOLUTION NO. 86-119 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER TO CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWER FOR EARLE BROWN FARM (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -08, CONTRACT 1986 -I) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEM WEED HEIGHT ORDINANCE The City Manager noted that the current ordinance on weeds includes the state adopted criteria on noxious weeds, and the housing code ordinance requires mowing of property according to "community standards He requested the City Council to direct staff to set a six -inch limit on the length of the weeds, which would help in enforcement and handling of complaints. The City Manager pointed out that the range of other cities' ordinances is from four to ten inches. Councilmember Hawes felt that six inches is fine, because by the time the City is able to enforce the ordinance the height of the grass will be eight to ten inches in length. The City Manager stated that staff would like to work with the City Attorney in developing an ordinance amendment. Councilmember Theis expressed concern that six inches would be too short for issuing citations. The City Manager pointed out that a compliance order is first issued before a citation, and if there is no compliance, the property owner is given a certain number of days to comply. When there is no compliance, the City will mow the property and bill the owner. The City Manager pointed out that if the ordinance is passed, it will be more timely next year rather than this year. Councilmember Theis referred to a memorandum from Patti Page, in which the cities of New Hope and St. Louis Park thought the six -inch maximum is too difficult to enforce. The City Manager stated that he did not think it would be that difficult. Councilmember Theis requested additional information as to why New Hope and St. Louis Park feel it is difficult to enforce a six -inch length limitation. Councilmember Scott pointed out that warm and rainy weather like this spring should be taken into account when amending the ordinance, because at times it may be too wet to mow. Councilmember Scott agreed that a height limit is a good idea, but she is not sure what is a good height. Mayor Nyquist agreed, noting twelve inches is definitely too long. He added that whatever the height is set at, the City will not be enforcing it until it is a few inches longer than the limit. Councilmember Theis pointed out that if the limit is set at six inches, there will be a problem maintaining City owned property. The City Manager said it is possible that there will be some problems, unless special exemptions are made. Councilmember Theis stated that he supports efforts for an easily enforced ordinance. The City Manager said he will obtain more details and report back to the City Council. INFORMATIONAL HEARING 7 -28 -86 -5- The City Manager stated that an informational hearing is scheduled regarding proposed installation of sidewalks on the west side of Humboldt Avenue North between 69th and 70th Avenues North and between 72nd Avenue North and Woodbine Lane (Improvement Project No. 1986 -06). He noted there are no assessments being levied, and the City will pay for the improvements. The City Manager noted that the hearing this evening is being held for the residents, and this subject grew out of past traffic problems occurring on Humboldt Avenue North. He reviewed the current and proposed sidewalks in the area. Councilmember Theis asked if those receiving notice of this - evening's informational hearing have property abutting the improvements, and the City Manager responded affirmatively. Councilmember Hawes asked if there is room for snow storage along the sidewalks and the City Manager again responded affirmatively. The Director of Public. Works pointed out that there is a nine foot boulevard and five foot sidewalks, which would bring everything within one foot of the property line. Councilmember Hawes asked if there would still be enough room for snow storage with the bus turn lane on southbound Humboldt Avenue North. " The Director of Public Works noted that there is plenty of room for this. Councilmember Hawes asked if the bus shelter will be in front of the sidewalk, and the Director of Public Works noted that there is a slab in front of the bus shelter and the sidewalk will connect into the slab. He noted these improvements were discussed last fall at the neighborhood meeting. In addition, the Director of Public Works noted that property owners were notified and requested to complete a questionnaire regarding their feelings about the sidewalks. He noted that four of the questionnaires were returned, and of those four, three supported the sidewalks and one said they would go with the majority. The rest of the residents expressed no opposition. He added that the property owners had been notified of the hearing this evening. Councilmember Theis asked about the details of the accident occurring in this area last fall, and the City Manager noted the accident occurred near the bus stop and it appears the incident was not related to the sidewalk. The Director of Public Works reviewed the location of traffic controls in the neighborhood. Councilmember Hawes asked if at one time the City had discussed widening Humboldt Avenue North, and the City Manager said this did occur at one time, but presently staff would like to leave the street as it is and observe the effects of the reconstruction of T.H. 252. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Paul Byrne, 7007 Humboldt Avenue North, who stated that the installation of the sidewalk is for the safety of the children in the neighborhood. Mayor Nyquist also recognized another resident living in the area of 70th and Humboldt Avenues North, who stated he recently purchased his home on Humboldt Avenue North with the understanding that the sidewalk would be installed. Mayor Nyquist recognized Ms. Barb Lippold, 7012 Humboldt Avenue North, who pointed out that the sidewalk is for the safety of the children, particularly for children catching the bus to Jackson Jr. High School. The City Manager explained that there is no action required at this point by the City Council, as the project has already been ordered. Councilmember Hawes asked if there would be a crosswalk at the equivalent of 70th Avenue North, and 7 -28 -86 -6- the City Manager reviewed the location of the crosswalks. Councilmember Scott asked when the project will be started. The Director of Public Works said the bids will be opened on August 7, 1986 and a resolution should be before the City Council in two weeks for acceptance of the bids. Expected completion date would be before school starts in the fall. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 86025 SUBMITTED BY BROOKDALE OFFICE PARK PARTNERSHIP REQUESTING 'SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A FIVE BUILDING OFFICE COMPLEX AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 10 AND NORTHWAY DRIVE AND PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO 86026 SUBMITTED BY BROOKDALE OFFICE PARK PARTNERSHIP REQUESTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO COMBINE INTO A SINGLE LOT THE TWO VACANT COMMERCIALLY ZONED LOTS BETWEEN THE BROOKLYN CROSSING OFFICE BUILDING AND THE F AND M BANK The City Manager noted that these applications were recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 17, 1986 meeting. The Director of Planning & Inspection first reviewed Application No. 86025, referring to the Planning Commission minutes of July 17, 1986, pages one through four, and the two attached informational sheets with these minutes. He proceeded to review the site plan and the informational sheets, as well as the 13 conditions approved by the Planning Commission on pages two and three of the July 17, 1986 Planning Commission minutes The Director of Planning & Inspection also reviewed the informational sheet of Application No. 86026. He noted the Planning Commission recommended approval of the application subject to three conditions, adding that there is a public hearing scheduled on Application No. 86026. Mayor Nyquist asked why the applicant changed its approach, which originally was for a multi- story- office building. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated that the developers feel there is a need for more one story office buildings, which are more service oriented. Mayor Nyquist pointed out that there is less square footage under this proposal, and the Director of Planning & Inspection agreed with this statement. Councilmember Hawes asked for clarification of the trash receptacle area, and the Director of Planning & Inspection reviewed the plan for this. Councilmember Hawes asked if there is another driveway off of Northway Drive besides the main entrance, and the Director of Planning & Inspection said there will be one entrance closer to the F&.M Marquette Bank. The City Council and staff discussed easements, lighting of the parking lot, and fencing around the area of this project. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 86026 submitted by Brookdale Office Park Partnership requesting preliminary plat approval to combine into a single lot the two vacant commercially zoned lots between the Brooklyn Crossing Office Building and the F&.M Bank. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone present in the audience 7 -28 -86 -7- who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 86026 submitted by Brookdale Office Park Partnership. The motion passed. Councilmember Hawes expressed concern about the brightness of the lights in the parking lot as they affect the neighborhood, and staff explained that the lighting should not affect the neighborhood. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve Planning Commission Application No. 86025 submitted by Brookdale Office Park Partnership requesting site and building plan approval to construct a five building office complex at the northwest corner of County Road 10 and Northway Drive, subject to the following conditions 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The buildings are to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas, 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built utility survey of the property prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. On -site traffic control signs shall be installed in accordance with the recommendations of the Director of Public Works. 7 -28 -86 -8- 11. The replat of the property shall receive final approval by the City Council and be filed at the County prior to issuance of permits. 12. The applicant shall submit drainage calculations and means for purification of storm water for review by the City Engineer for compliance with watershed district regulations prior to the issuance of permits. 13. The applicant shall verify that site lighting shall be in conformance with the Zoning Ordinance prior to the issuance of building permits. The motion passed. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve Planning Commission Application No. 86026 submitted by Brookdale Office Park Partnership requesting preliminary p q roar plat approval to combine " g P y p pp into a single lot the two vacant commercially zoned lots between the Brooklyn Crossing Office Building and the F&M Marquette Bank, 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 necessary documents for relocating the existing utility easements shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and the City Attorney prior to final plat approval. The motion passed. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:05 p.m. and reconvened at 8:23 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS (CONTINUED) PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION N0. 86010 SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER REQUESTING REZONING FROM I -1 TO R7 THE LAND IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE EARLE BROWN FARM AND EAST OF THE BROOKDALE CORPORATE CENTER III SITE PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO 86027 SUBMITTED BY EARLE BROWN COMMONS PARTNERSHIP REQUESTING SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT AN 11 STORY 140 UNIT APARTMENT BUILDING AS THE FIRST PHASE OF A TWO -PHASE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THE VACANT LAND SOUTH OF THE EARLE RLE BROWN FARM AND EAST OF THE BROOKDALE CORPORATE CENTER III SITE PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 86028 SUBMITTED BY EARLE BROWN COMMONS PARTNERSHIP REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 35-700 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO 7 -28 -86 -9- ALLOW A GREENSTRIP OR PARKING SETBACK OF LESS THAN 15' ADJACENT TO THE EARLE BROWN DRIVE WESTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY ON - A TEMPORARY BASIS The Director of Planning & Inspection noted that these three applications are related and will be discussed at this time. He turned first *_t*d to Application No. 86010 and referred the Council to the Planning Commission minutes of July 17, 1986, particularly pages four through eight of these minutes. He also reviewed the informational sheet attached to Application No. 86010. With regard to this application, - the .Planning Commission approved two resolutions for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The Director of Planning & Inspection reviewed the resolutions passed by the Planning Commission on July 17, 1986, in particular Planning Commission Resolution No. 86 -02 and Planning Commission Resolution No. 86 -03. The Director of Planning & Inspection noted that there will also have to be an ordinance amendment when the new plat is brought before the City Council at a future date. The Director of Planning & Inspection proceeded to review Application No. 86027, referring the City Council to the July 17, 1986 Planning Commission minutes, in particular pages six and seven. He reviewed the informational sheet and site plan for Application No. 86027, and reviewed the 21 conditions approved by the Planning Commission. The Director of Planning & Inspection then reviewed Application No. 86028, reviewing the one condition approved by the Planning Commission at its July 17, 1986 meeting. Councilmember Hawes asked if the walkway between the apartment building and the office building is enclosed, and the Director of Planning & Inspection said it would be totally enclosed and heated. He added that a similar structure would be connecting the apartments to the hippodrome if deemed necessary at a future date. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 86010 submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center requesting rezoning. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 86010 submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center requesting rezoning. The motion passed. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -120 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 82 -255 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) RELATIVE TO LAND LOCATED IN AND AROUND THE EARLE BROWN FARM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -121 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 7 -28 -86 -10- RESOLUTION REGARDING DISPOSITION OF APPLICATION NO. 86010 SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (HRA) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve Planning Commission Application No. 86027 submitted by Earle Brown Commons Partnership requesting site and building plan approval to construct an 11 story, 140 unit apartment building as the first phase of a two -phase residential development on the vacant land south of Earle Brown Farm and east of the Brookdale Corporate Center III site, subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built utility survey of the property prior to release of the performance guarantee 10. The replat of the property shall receive final approval by the City Council and be filed at the County prior to the issuance of permits. 7 -28 -86 -11- a 11. Plan approval is contingent upon a rezoning of the land south of the Earle Brown Farm site and east of the Brookdale i Corporate Center III site to R7. 12. Plan approval acknowledges a density credit of 67,324 sq. ft. for the entire two -phase development (each phase to be accorded a separate density credit based on land area and covered parking) based upon a minimum of 135 covered parking stalls on the site. 13. Plan approval is contingent upon the applicant entering into an agreement with the City to provide additional parking based on the proof -of- parking plan upon a determination by the City that such additional spaces are required for the public welfare. Said agreement to be filed with the title to the ro ert p p at the Count as a deed restriction i Y y prior to the issuance of P ermits 14. Plan approval is contingent upon the granting of a temporary greenstrip variance under Application No. 86028. 15. Necessary documents to relocate utility easements for City water main and storm sewer shall be executed and filed with the title to the property at the County prior to the issuance of building permits for Building B. 16. The applicant shall enter into standard utility maintenance agreement with the City prior to the issuance of permits. 17. A cross access agreement between the residential site and the office site to the west shall be executed and filed with the title to the property prior to the issuance of permits. 18. Planting of four 6 diameter trees on the Phase I site in accordance with Section 35 -410 shall be deferred for up to five years to allow for completion of the second phase. 19. Plan approval is subject to review and approval of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission with respect to ponding and water purification requirements prior to the issuance of permits. Ponding areas shall be protected by easements to be filed with the title to the property prior to the issuance of permits. 20. Plan approval specifically excludes the connecting link between the existing office building at 6100 Summit Drive I and the hippodrome on the Earle Brown Farm. 21. Plan approval applies to development of Building A, the existing office and the common area. Site and building plan approval of the second phase, Building B, is subject to further review and approval when proposed for construction. 7 -28 -86 -12- Councilmember Theis asked if the walkway is excluded from this application, and the Director of Planning & Inspection noted that the walkway between the hippodrome and the apartments is excluded, but there will be a walkway between the office building and the apartment building. Upon vote being taken on the foregoing motion the motion passed. g g P There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve Planning Commission Application No. 86028 submitted by Earle Brown Commons Partnership requesting a variance from Section 35 -700 of the zoning ordinance to allow a greenstrip or parking setback of less than 15' adjacent to the Earle Brown Drive westerly right -of -way on a temporary basis, subject to the following condition: 1. The City Attorney shall comment to the City Council on the progress of acquiring the underlying land in the right -of- way to be vacated prior to Council action on Application No. 86027. The motion passed. OTHER DISCUSSION The City Manager noted that the Thrifty Scot Motel has changed ownership but not management, and a request has been made to continue the special use permit to allow commercial development in an I -1 zone. There was a- motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Scott acknowledging the transfer of ownership and continuance of the special use permit for the Thrifty Scot Motel. The motion passed, ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:05 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 7 -28 -86 -13- The following persons are recommended for appointment as election judges for the September 9, 1986 Primary Election: Precinct 1 Precinct 6 Head Judge D- Loretta Stewig Head Judge R- Catherine Wetzel R- Marian Smith D -Beth Rygh D -Vy Peterson R- Josephine Swart R- Mildred Egnell D -Myrna Kragness D -Mary Gwen Stein R -Alice Velander R -Donna Bennett D- Lillian Peterson Precinct 2 Precinct 7 Head Judge R- Beverly Madden Head Judge D -Mona Hintzman D- McKevha Thomas R- Susan Heisler R- Adeline Lonn D -Carol Benkofske D- Esther Kelsey R- Jerine Polack R -Ray Freund D -Helen Julkowski D -Kay Brosseau R- Imelda Mayleben Precinct 3 Precinct 8 Head Judge R- Kathryn Dziedzic Head Judg e D- Eileen Hannan D -Kathy DouVille R- Doloris McGeorge R- Jo ce Shud D- Ethel Y D Et Y hel Pettman D -Mary Goenner R- Lorraine Wyman R- Debbie Kersten D -Anne Bergquist D- Arlene Clark R -Trudi Ann Gores Precinct 4 Precinct 9 Head Judge D- Robert Leach Head Judge D- Alice Madir R- DeLila Newman R -Jean Sullivan D- Alberta Ruf D- Margaret Stellburg R- Marilyn Heinke R -Grace Freund D -Joan Hagemann D -Tracy Tyler R- Thelma Jacobson' Precinct 5 Standby- Election Judges Head Jude D -Gerry D Judge y orphy D -Susan Krekelber g -R- Gladys Leerhoff R- Marion Alford D -Alice Van Meerten D- Dolores Seal R -Jean Lindstrom R- Dennis Benton D- Lorraine Halter D- Evelyn Hilstrom R- Arlene Kemp R -Frank Slovak R- Angie Olson R- Dorothy Rogers Absentee- Ballot Precinct D -Jean Tubman R- Barbara Sexton R- Bonnie Lukes D- Marilyn Tyler D- Sharon Knutson M h Brooklyn Center n 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Years \ Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 1986 _ August 11, 1986 EarteBromnDays To The Honorable Mayor Dean Nyquist Members of the City Council City- Manager From: Phil Cohen, Chairman Brooklyn Center 75th Anniversary Committee Subject: Committee Report Update on Finances & Activitie With a number of major events having been concluded and the planning for the final activities of the committee, this report is submitted to bring the Council and Staff up to date. FINANCIAL REPORT & CITY FINAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE COMMITTE Please find attached the financial report that is being submitted by Mike Nelson, Chairman of the Budget Committee. Based upon the cash position of the 75th Anniversary Committee, it is the recommendation of the committee that the $2,500 final payment be deferred at this time. It appears that this contribution may not be needed, however until all events have been concluded and the final audit has taken place we would like the status of the payment be in a "deferred status. Since this item is on the council agenda this evening, that is the action that the committee is requesting of the City Council. FUTURE ACTIVITIES TO CONCLUDE THE 75th ANNIVERSARY COMMITTEE: A MAJOR EVENT OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANC September 14th 2 -5PM at Central Park & the Civic Center: This event will trace the community's history and the highlight will be the visit of City Officials from BROOKLYN, MICHIGAN. The history books tell us that Brooklyn Center was named by the people from that town in Michigan that first settled here. Also, we will be recognizing residents who have resided in the community for over 50 years and present and former elected officials. In addition there will be a "Taste of Brooklyn Center" supplied 4-y the many food operations in the community. August 11, 1986 75th-ANNIVERSARY C014MITTEE- REPORT Page 2 (Future Activities, continued) . ESSAY CONTEST- "WHY I LIKE BROOKLYN CENTER ": This is sponsored by the North Suburban Kiwanis Club and entrys "will be received September 8 -26th. THE GRAND EVENT- CELEBRATING GOING FORWARD TO BROOKLYN CENTER'S CENTENNIAL & THE OPENING OF THE RAMADA IN October 4th at the Ramada Inn is the time and place for this event, which will formally conclude the 75th Anniversary Celebration. -well sort of! We look at this event as not the conclusion, but moving onto the great future of this community. The formal plans for the event are being put together and the council will receive the information within 2 weeks. . THE TIME CAPSULE TO BE PLACED EITHER IN CENTRAL PA OR ON CITY HALL GROUNDS This would really be the final event to be scheduled for Mid - October. All the goings on 75th Anniversary, Earle Brown Days, All America City, etc. will be placed in this time capsule - to be opened 25 years from now at the occasion of Brooklyn Center's Centennial. The Council will also be asked to participate in this event and the information will be forthcoming within the next 30 to 45 days. The events that have taken place since January been measured as a success if the participation by the community and comments received is considered. Starting in January, with-the Kickoff event with the Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce:; in February with-the. Birthday Party Celebration, Fireworks, etc.; in May the Earle 'Brown Days Carnival.that continued in to June; in June, the formal kickoff to Earle Brown Days at Brookdake with the Ice Cream Social; in July, the delayed Sunday in Central Park Dedication, Band Concert &`Fireworks finale- to _Earle Brown Days along with the great Circus: later in the, month- a great number of the people have participated in this year long birthday party. We feel that the windup activities will hopefully make this a year to remember. History will only tell us that. We want to thank the City Council and City Staff for the great cooperation that the committee has received at every turn in the road in the planning and carrying out of the schedule of events. Without this help and cooperation, the success achieved to date would not have occurred. Brooklyn Center \ Yews 1986 v �D — all F"ge Brown Do" "WHY I LIKE BROOKLYN 1986'CONTEST RU In exactly 75 words (no more no less) not including the title "Why I Like Brooklyn Center ", in your own words write why you like Brooklyn Center. The contest is open to everyone except members and family of the North Suburban Kiwanis Club. There are five(5) entry divisions. There will be a prize forthewinning er in each division and the winningentries win be published in the B ookl n Center POST. There also will be a random drawingy of all entries and an additional prize will be awarded. Decisions of the judges will be final. Be sure you enter the appropriate division: A. Elemen e en to ry school. students B. Junior high school students C. Senior high school students D. Adults, 18 -64 years old E. Senior adults, 65 years old and up Put the letter for your division in the upper right hand corner of your entry, along with your name and address. Entries should be brought or mailed in between September 8 and 26,1986 to: Cit of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 -Good luck! 've Brooklyn Center 75th Anniversary rsary Budget Report, - Activity Through August 4, 1986 Projected Actual Through Through 8 -4 -86 ' 8 -4 -86 Cash Generated by Project` Button Sales $ 235 $ 2,176 * Birthday Party 1,150 218 Fireworks ( 3,000) ( 3,000) Ramada Inn - Final Event - - * Parade ( 6,425) ( 7,339) Circus 2,655 2,230 * Carnival 1,488 Merchandise Sales 657 ( 817) All America City Expenses ( 1,999) General Overhead ( 2,860) ( 1,928) Unallocated City Appropriation 10,000 12,500 Unallocated Donations - 21,408 * Hot Air Balloons ( 3,700) f 4;250) Auction (' 724) A Major Event of Great Historical Significance - - Other ( 375 $( 1,288 $ 19,588 1985 Carryover 5,060 Cash Balance on August 4, 1986 $ 24,648 * Project Complete Hot Air Balloon Race Actual Bud et Through R h - - 8486 Income Allocation of City Funds $ 400 $ 400.00 Expenses Prize money $ 1,725 $ 2,600.00, Publicity 50 - Insurance 250 350.00 Security 400 400.00 Participation fee 1,275 1,300.00 00.00 Banners aoo Total Expense $ 4,100 4,650.00 Net Cost $(3,700 $(4,250.00 Project Complete Fireworks Displays Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 Income Allocation From City Budget $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Cost of Fireworks Displays* $11,000 $(8,000) Net Cost $(6,000 $(3,000 * 1 @ $5,000 2 @ $3,000 General Overhead Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 Stationary '& Letterhead $ 500 $ 497.81 Photocopying /Printing 150 38.45 Postage 110 Care Bear 50 Publicity 1,000 1,048.49 Unallocated Insurance 1,000 322.50 Miscellaneous 150 2.50 Supplies 100 17.53 Net Cost $(3,060 $(1,927.28 Parade June 26 Actual Budxet Through 8 -4 -86 I Income Allocation of City Allowance $ 7,100 $ 7,100.00 Expenses y Judge 150 140.00 Paid Marching Units 1,000 2.,,325.00 Security 7,100 7,100.00 Trophies 250 237.43 Mailings 75 Sanitation 950 Food for Bands &Other 850 444.75 Prize Money for Bands 2,000 2,000.00 Other 150 1,191.71 Insurance 1 1,000.00 Total Expense 13 525 XP � $14,438.89 Net Cost $ (6,425 $ (7,338.89 Project Complete Button Sales Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 Income Prize Buttons 1,500 @ $1 $ 1,500 $ 3,481.06 Lapel Pins 250 @ $2.50 625 Total Income 2,125 $ 3,481.06 Expenses Cost of Buttons (3,000 @ .23) $ 690 $ 1,048.25 Prizes 700 256.75 Cost of Lapel Pins (500 @ $1) 500 Total Expenses _ $ 1,890 $ 1,305.00 Net Income $ 235 $ 2,176.06 Circus July 31 2 Performances Actual Budget Throunh 8 -4 -86 Income - Ticket Pre- sales $10,400 $10,896.00 - Ad Sales 5 @ $150 750 - City Funds 500 500.00 - Tickets Point of Purchase (10 %) 663.96 Total Income $11,650 $12,059.96 Expenses Reservation Fee $ 395 $ 395.00 Tickets to Advertisers (25 child each) 450 Insurance - - Revenue Sharing Sales tax - 720.95 100% of 1st 250 adult tickets 1,250 1,250.00. 50% of excess .adult tickets 2,625 2,160.35 75% of childrens tickets 2,925 1,942.25 Telephone sales 1,574.05 Water & Electricity 100 - Security 500 500.00 Permits - 12.00 Clean UP 100 75.00 Sanitation 150 Publicity 500 736.52 Telephone Sales 463.51 Total Expenses $ 8,995 $ 9,829.63 Net Profit (Loss) $ 2,655 2,230.33 Carnival Mem. Day Week Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 Income Allocation of City Funds $ 2,000 $ 2,000.00 Income 1,150 3,064.25 Total Income $ 3,150 $ 5,064.25 Expenses Permits $ - $ 24.00 Utilities 450 715.76 Insurance _ Clean Up 100 75.00 Security 2,000 2,000.00 Sanitation 500 625.00 Publicity 100 136.80 Total Expenses $ 3,150 $ 3,576.56 Net Cost $ $ 1,487.69 Project Complete Birthday Party February 15, 1985 Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 Income 300 @ $ /each $ 4,500 2,940.00 (196) Expenses Meals 300 @ $7.15 /each $ 2,325 1,588.00 Beverages 150 Insurance Allocation _ _ _Entertainment 75 600.00 Publicity 200 77.75 Licenses & Permits Decorations & Place Settings 150 112.95 Donation to MADD or SADD 300 100.00 Lunch for School Principles (25 @ $6) 150 85.18 Other 158.15 Total Expenses $ 3,350 $2 Net Profit $ 1,150 $ 217.97 Project Complete Merchandise Sales Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 Income Baseball Caps (250 @ $5) $ 1,250 $ 321.00 Wind Socks (125 @ $3.50) 437 Mugs (250 @ $3) 750 94.50 Balloons (250 @ $1) 250 - Total Income $ 2,687 $ 415.50 Expenses Baseball Caps (500 @ $1.30) $ 650 700.00 Wind Socks (250 @ $1.79) 448 Mugs (500 @ $1.29) 645 532.50 Balloons (500 for $87) 87 Shoulder Patches 200 - Total Expenses $ 2,030 $ 1,232.50 Net Profit n Ramada Inn - Final Event Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 Income (75 couples @ $50) $ 3,750 - Expenses Awards for volunteers $ 250 Entertainment 400 Total Expenses $ - 650 Net Profit 3,100 All- America City Expenses Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 All America City Banner $ 400 $ - Washington Trip 5,000 - Logo Design and Graphics 200 Slide Show Graphics 1,840 1,500.00 Display Booth Design /Community Use 1,290 Other 1.270 498.73 $10,000 $ 1,998.73 Other Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 Interest Income $ - $ 393.55 Other 21.50 $ - $ 415.05 Balloons - Sunday in the Park $ 465.00 1985 Earl Brown Days Expense $__ - . 64.24 Ambassadors 71.14 Brooklyn Center Senior King and Queen 90.06 Square Dancers 100.00 $ $ 790.44 $ - $( 375.39 Auction Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 Proceeds $ - $(100.50 Printing 143.90 Purchased Items 400.00 Miscellaneous - 79.41 Total Expenses $ - $ 623.31 Net Profit (723.81) A Major Event of Great Historical Significance Actual Budget Through 8 -4 -86 Revenue $ - $ Publicity $ 500 $ Prizes 100 Tent and Location Cost 150 Entertainment 250 Total Cost 1 000 $ - Net Cost $ 1 1 000 $ Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FOR SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS ON HUMBOLDT AVENUE NORTH (PROJECT NO. 1986 -06, CONTRACT 1986 -N) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1986 -06, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer, on the 7th day of may, 1986. Said bids were as follows: Bidder l �� tS' � Bid Amount Alexander Construction Company, Inc. $ 21,429.75 Gunderson Brothers Cement Contractors 25,844.00 Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. 28,622.25 WHEREAS, it appears the Alexander Construction Company, Inc. of Apple Valley, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract, in the amount of $21,429.75 with Alexander Construction Company of Apple Valley, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1986 -06 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. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that: 1. The estimated cost of Improvement Project No. 1986-06 is hereby amended according to the following schedule: As Approved As Bid Contract $ 25,079.50 $ 21,429.75 Contingency (10 %) 2.510.50 $ 27,590.00 Engineering (9 %) 2,210.00 1,928.65 Administration (1%) 280.00 214.30 Legal (1%) 280.00 214.30 Total $ 30,360.00 $ 23,787.00 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 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY ! :B ROOKLYN � BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: August 8, 1986 RE: Sidewalk Improvements on Humboldt Avenue North Project No 1986-06, 6 06, Contract 1986 -N The City of Brooklyn Center received bids August 7, 1986 at 11:30 a.m. and a tabulation of those bids follows: Bidder Bid Amount Alexander Construction Company, Inca $ 21,429.75 Gunderson Brothers Cement Contractors 25,844.00 Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. 28 622.25 The Engineer's Estimate for this project was $25,079.50. We received three competitive bids. The low bidder, Alexander Construction Company, Inc., has successfully completed other work in the City. Most recently the firm subcontracted all the curb work required for the Shingle Creek Parkway reconstruction. This project is funded by the local Municipal State Aid account as recommended in the Engineer's Report. It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution, a resolution accepting bid and approving contract for sidewalk improvements on Humboldt Avenue North (Project No. 1986 -06, Contract 1986 -N). R s'ectfull submitted, 4pproved for submittal, i H.R p rier a pp City En i eer Director of Public Works HRS:j ,- '74C m „ t v Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: i RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FOR EARLE BROWN FARM TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT PHASE II STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NO 1986 -15 CONTRACT 1986 -0) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1986 -15, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer, on the 11th day of August, 1986. Said bids were as follows: Bidder Bid Amount D.F. Schmidt Construction $ 49,873.50 C.R. Brazier, Inc. $ 54,535.25 WHEREAS, it appears the D.F. Schmidt Construction of Rogers, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract, in the amount of $49,873.50 with D.F. Schmidt Construction of Rogers, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1986 -15 according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that 1. The estimated cost of Improvement Project No. 1986 -15 is hereby amended according to the following schedule: As Approved As Bid Contract $ 48,700.00 $ 49,873.50 Contingency (10 %) 4,900.00 $ 53,600.00 $ 49,873.50 Engineering (9 %) 4,300.00 $ 4,487 50 Administration (1 %) 500.00 449.00 Total $ 58,400.00 $ 54,810.00 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 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 C r r TELEPHONE 561 -5440 ENTL R EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: August 8, 1986 RE: Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment District Phase II Streetscape Improvement Project No. 1986 -15, Contract 1986 -0 The City of Brooklyn Center received bids August 11th, 1986 at.11:00 a.m. and a tabulation of those bids follows: Bidder Bid Amount D.F. Schmidt Construction, Inc. $_49,873.50 C.R. Brazier, Inc. $ 54,535.25 The Engineer's Estimate for this project was $55,370. We received 2 competitive bids. The low bidder, D.F. Schmidt Construction, Inc., has not worked for the City of Brooklyn Center but has successfully completed work in the City of Golden Valley and the City of Brooklyn Park. Checking those references the City of Golden Malley and the City of Brooklyn Park reported that the low bidder performed acceptable and timely work. These cities indicated that they would be willing to use this firm for work in the future. This project is funded by the Earle Brown Tax Increment as recommended in the Engineer's Report. A draft for of the attached resolution was included in the Council packet. It appears that D.F. Schmidt Construction, Inc. is the lowest responsible bidder. Therefore, it is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution accepting the bid and approving contract for Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment District Phase II Streetscape Improvements. Re ull submitted, Approved for submittal, urrier S / nrpp ity E 'neer Director of Public Works HRS : j n .. ?AC So M 1 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FOR EARLE BROWN FARM TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT PHASE II STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS (PROJECT NO 1986 -15 CONTRACT 1986 -0) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1986 -15, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer, on the 11th day of July, 1986. Said bids were as follows: Bidder Bid Amount WHEREAS, it appears the of Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract, in the amount of $ with of Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1986 -15 according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that: 1. The estimated cost of Improvement Project No. 1986 -15 is hereby amended according to the following schedule: As Approved As Bid Contract $ 48,700.00 Contingency (10 %) 4.900.00 $ 53,600.00' Engineering (8%) 4,300.00 Administration (1 %) 500.00 Total $ 58,400.00 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 r on said p resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: August 8, 1986 RE: Earle Brown -Farm Tax Increment District Phase II Streetscape Improvement Project No. 1986 -15, Contract 1986 -0 The City of Brooklyn Center will open bids for the referenced project on Monday, August 11, 1986 at 11:00 a.m. Due to the fact that there is a Thursday deadline for agenda items we cannot submit an analysis of bids with the agenda. The analysis of bids and recommendation will be available shortly before City Council meeting on Monday, August 11, 1986. XR3 submitted, &proved for submittal, er P er r of Public Works HRS ' "'74 SoNwGClCi 7Il atc ( „ CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTE R EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: August 8, 1986 RE: Public Hearings for 1986 Special Assessments Attached are resolutions which set public hearings for the proposed special assessments that the City proposes to certify in 1986. Supplemental attachments include the proposed assessment roll and calculation sheets that explain how the assessments are computed. The proposed assessments will be levied for different terms. The Director of Finance recommends the interest rate charged on the unpaid balance be 12% as established in Resolution No. 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. The action requested will be adoption of the resolutions which set public hearings for the proposed assessments the City proposes to certify in 1986. Those resolutions are as follows: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED SHADE TREE REMOVAL COSTS, PUBLIC UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES, DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY ACCOUNTS AND DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL ACCOUNTS RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY STREET TURNLANE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -07 �•� 57. m August 8, 1986 Page 2 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY TABLE Levy No. Improvement Description Total Assessed Term (Years) 10250 TREE REMOVAL 86 -3 $ 2,949.29 3 (1985 and 1986 Removals) 10251 TREE REMOVAL 86 -5 $ 994.39 5 (1985 and 1986 Removals) 10252 WATER HOOKUP 86 -10 $ 490.00 10 10253 WATER HOOKUP 86 -20 $ 1,375.67 20 10254 SEWER HOOKUP 86 -10 $ 1,467.90 10 10255 DELINQUENT PUB UTIL 86 $ 2,109.27 l 10256 WEED DESTRUCTION 86 $ 1,836.65 1 10257 STREET (86 -07) 86 $22,098.13 15 (Turnlane Construction) k tfu submitted, A proved for submittal, S y a p Dire for of Public Works HR : j SPECIA MEM - Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED SHADE TREE REMOVAL COSTS, PUBLIC UTILITY HOOKUP CHARGES, DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY ACCOUNTS, AND DELINQUENT WEED REMOVAL ACCOUNTS BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1. A hearing shall be held on the 8th day of September, 1986, 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 inspection by any interested persons 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. 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 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.: 1986 -04 Levy No.: 10250 Description: Cost of diseased shade tree removal to Fund /Code No.: those tracts or parcels where trees were removed during 1985 or 1986, by written Levy Description: TREE REMOVAL 86 -3 agreement with the property owner or by order of the City Tree Inspector at a Levy runs three (3) years (from 1987 to 1989) cost less than $300 with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent. ' Location: Various City Locations First payment;; with property taxes payable in 1987 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Improvement Hearing Date: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 8, 1986 Improvement Ordered on: N/A by Resolution No.: N/A Adopted on: i Assessment District: N/A by Resolution No.: Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: Method of Apportionment: Direct cost plus administrative costs assessed Cost Summary " from Resolution No.: N/A Total Improvement Cost: $ 2,949.29 Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00 (Fund M.S.A.) Less Other Payments: $ 0.00 Total Assessed to Property: $ 2,949.29 Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Private Property: $ 2,949.29 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER TREE REMOVALS MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 3 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 1 OF 2 PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification LEVY PROJECT PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL Address Name Name NO. NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. PRINCIPAL Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address Mailing Address 10250 01- 118 -21 -12 -0016 89295 $288.00 5921 Lyndale Avenue North Mark C. Kuduk 5921 Lyndale Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 10250 01- 118 -21 -31 -0051 89385 $195.11 5535 Bryant Avenue North Herbert & Ann Thunder 5535 Bryant Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 10250 01- 118 -21 -33 -0034 89365 $163.00 5427 Fremont Avenue North James & Eileen Mack 5427 Fremont Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 10250 02- 118 -21 -14 -0090 90055 $197.00 5743 Humboldt Avenue North Jerome Westlund 5743 Humboldt Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 10250 02- 118 -21 -22 -0054 89441 $73.52 5942 Vincent Avenue North William & Mandea Diggs Lee R fi Phyllis Nelson 5942 Vincent Avenue North Route 1, Box 285A Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Deerwood, MN 56444 10250 02- 118 -21 -33 -0016 89535 $162.41 5324 North Lilac Drive Donn & Deborah Burseth 5324 North Lilac Drive Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 10250 02- 118 -21 -41 -0082 89580 $280.00 5650 Logan Avenue North Lucille Eilertsen 16490 Gannon West Rosemount, MN 55068 10250 03- 118 -21 -24 -0045 89665 $136.25 3825 France Place Thomas & Barbara Bryant Herbert Aaker & Michael Mohs 3825 France Place 4351 Scott Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 Robbinsdale, MN 55422 10250 25- 119 -21 -44 -0016 89639 $291.00 7029 Willow Lane Wayne & Terry LaFore 7029 Willow Lane Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 10250 27- 119 -21 -42 -0026 89662 $245.00 7124 France Avenue North Benjamin Sugimura 7124 France Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 10250 33- 119 -21 -42 -0116 89343 $245.00 6300 Unity Avenue North John Bourasa 6300 Unity Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 I CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER TREE REMOVALS MONIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 3 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 2 OF 2 PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification LEVY PROJECT PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL Address Name Name NO. NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. PRINCIPAL Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address Mailing Address 10250 34- 119 -21 -14 -0057 89397 $245.00 3107 - 66th Avenue North Earl H. Larsen 3107 — 66th Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 10250 34- 119 -21 -43 -0049 90066 $288.00 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard Bertil Johnson 5333 East Twin Lake Boulevard Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 10250 34- 119 -21 -44 -0101 89392 $140.00 6113 Xerxes Avenue North Rosita Acosta P.O. Box 10937 Minneapolis, MN 55440 • s s CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No.: 1986 -04 Levy No.: 10251 Description: Cost of diseased shade tree removal to Fund /Code No.: those tracts or parcels where trees were removed during 1985 or 1986, by written Levy Description: TREE REMOVAL 86 -5 agreement with the property owner or by order of the City Tree Inspector at a Levy runs five (5) years (from 1987 to 1991) cost greater than $300 with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent. Location: Various City Locations First payment, with property taxes payable in 1987 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Improvement Hearing Date: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 8, 1986 Improvement Ordered on: N/A by Resolution No.: N/A Adopted on: Assessment District: N/A by Resolution No.: Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: Method of Apportionment: Direct cost plus administrative costs assessed Cost Summary from Resolution No.: N/A Total Improvement Cost: $ 994.39 Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00 (Fund M.S.A.) Less Other Payments: $ 0.00 Total Assessed to Property: $ 994.39 Assessed to City Owned Property. $ 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Private Property: $ 994.39 I CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER TREE REMOVALS MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 5 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 1 OF 1 PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification LEVY PROJECT PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL Address Name Name NO. NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. PRINCIPAL Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address Mailing Address 10251 01- 118 -21 -32 -0053 89001 581.00 5539 Girard Avenue North Brian D Schumann 5539 Girard Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 10251 10- 118 -21 -12 -0076 90081 413.39 5107 Ewin g Avenue North Karen Christenson 5107 Ewing Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No.: N/A Levy No.: 10252 Description: Charges established for hookup to Fund /Code No.: City water system Levy Description: WATER HOOKUP, 86 -10 Levy runs ten (10) yearn (from 1987 to 1996) 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 1987 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Improvement Ordered on: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 8, 1986 by Resolution No.: N/A Adopted on: Assessment District: N/A by Resolution No.: i Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: Method of Apportionment: Charges as agreed upon in Utility Hookup Agreement Cost Summary from Resolution No.: Total Improvement Cost: $ 490.00 Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00 (Fund M.S.A.) , Less Other Payments: $ 0.00 Total Assessed to Property: $ 490.00 Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Private Property: $ 490.00 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER WATER HOOKUP CHARGE MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 10 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 1 OF 1 1 PROPERTY ASSESSED i OWNER 1 Additional Notification I I LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I Address 1 Name 1 Name I NO. I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.I NO. I PRINCIPAL I Addition /Legal Description 1 Mailing Address 1 Mailing Address 1 1-1-1 1 1 I 1 1 110252 1 133 - 119 -21 -44 -0002 1 89033 I $490.00 14701 63RD AVENUE NORTH (HELEN S. PANAYOTOFF 14701 - 63RD AVENUE NORTH I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 IBROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 1 I I I CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No.: N/A Levy No.: 10253 ` Description: Charges established for hookup to Fund /Code No.: City water system Levy Description: WATER HOOKUP 86 -20 Levy runs twenty (20) years (from 1987 to 2006) 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 1987 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Improvement Ordered on: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 8, 1986 by Resolution No.: N/A Adopted on: Assessment District: N/A by Resolution No.: Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: i Method of Apportionment: Charges as agreed upon in Utility Hookup Agreement j i Cost Summary from Resolution No.: Total Improvement Cost: $ 1,375.67 Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00 (Fund M.S.A.) Less Other Payments: $ 0.00 Total Assessed to Property: $ 1,375.67 Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Private Property: $ 1,375.67 i i ! � CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER WATER HOOKUP CHARGE MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 20 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 1 OF 1 1 PROPERTY ASSESSED 1 OWNER I Additional Notification ' LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I Address 1 Name Name 1 I NO. I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. I PRINCIPAL I Addition /Legal Description 1 Mailing Address ( Mailing Address 1 1- 1-1 1-1- I I I 1 110253 1 101- 118 -21 -34 -0065 ( 89225 ( $1,375.67 15327 BRYANT AVENUE NORTH (RIC WHITLEY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 15327 BRYANT AVENUE NORTH 1 1 1 ( I 1 1 1 (BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 ( 1 i i CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No.: N/A Levy No.: 10254 Description: Charges established for hookup to Fund /Code No.: City sewer system Levy Description: SEWER HOOKUP 86 -10 Levy runs ten (10) years (from 1987 to 1996) 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 1987 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Improvement Ordered on: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 8, 1986 by Resolution No.: N/A Adopted on: Assessment District: N/A by Resolution No.: Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: Method of Apportionment: Charges as agreed upon in Utility Hookup Agreement Cost Summary from Resolution No.: Total Improvement Cost: $ 1,467.90 Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00 (Fund M.S.A.) Less Other Payments: $ 0.00 Total Assessed to Property: $ 1,467.90 Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Private Property: $ 1,467.90 � ! i CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SEWER HOOKUP CHARGE MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 10 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 1 OF 1 1 PROPERTY ASSESSED I OWNER 1 Additional Notification LEVY (PROJECT( PROPERTY I ADDN. I TOTAL I Address ' Name I Name 1 I NO. I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. I PRINCIPAL I Addition /Legal Description I Mailing Address I Mailing Address 1 1-1-1 1 1 I I 1 1 110254 1 133- 119 -21 -44 -0002 1 89033 1 $1,467.90 14701 - 63RD AVENUE NORTH (HELEN S. PANAYOTOFF I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14701 - 63RD AVENUE NORTH 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I 1BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 1 1 i I CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No.: N/A Levy No.: 10255 Description: Delinquent Public Utility Charges Fund /Code No.: Levy Description: DELINQUENT PUB UTIL 86 Levy runs one (1) year (1987) Location: Various City Locations with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent. I Improvement Hearing Date: N/A First payment, with property taxes payable in 1987 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Improvement Ordered on: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 8, 1986 by Resolution No.: NIA 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: $2,109.27 Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00 (Fund M.S.A.) Less Other Payments: $ 0.00 Total Assessed to Property: $2,109.27 Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Private Property: $2,109.27 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DELIQUENT.- PUBLIC UTILITY ACCOUNTS MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 1 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 1 OF 1 PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification LEVY PROJECT PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL Address Name Name NO. NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. PRINCIPAL Addition /Legal Description Mailing Address Mailing Address 10255 01- 118 -21 -32 -0047 89001 $109.68 5650 HUMBOLDT AVENUE NORTH GEORGE J DUNN 5650 HUMBOLDT AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10255 01- 118 -21 -33 -0075 89675 $109.68 5447 DUPONT AVENUE NORTH FRED 0. PERSONS 5447 DUPONT AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10255 01- 118 -21 -42 -0008 89385 $59.84 5530 LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH VIRGINIA HEDBERG 5530 LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10255 01- 118 -21 -42 -0009 89385 $109.68 5524 LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH ROBERT & BONNIE MAVIS 5524 LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10255 01- 118 -21 -42 -0022 89385 $84.76 5611 LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH PATRICK & CHARLENE MULVILLE 4008 - 79TH LANE BROOKLYN PARK, MN 55443 10255 02- 118 -21 -23 -0019 89760 $1,266.44 2920 COUNTY ROAD 10 EXECUTIVE HEALTH SPA, INC. HEALTH INDUSTRIES EUROPEAN HEALTH SPAS 30555 SOUTHFIELD ROAD, !/ 400 7301 OHMS LANE, SUITE 165 SOUTHFIELD, MI 48076 EDINA, MN 55435 10255 02- 118 -21 -41 -0076 89580 $109.68 5602 LOGAN AVENUE NORTH RICHARD J ARMSTRONG 5602 LOGAN AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10255 02- 118 -21 -44 -0133 89961 $109.68 5419 HUMBOLDT AVENUE NORTH LAWRENCE MICKELSON 5419 HUMBOLDT AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10255 10- .118 -21 -23 -0004 89010 $66.45 4837 FRANCE AVENUE NORTH JOSLYN MFG & SUPPLY CO COLE TRUCKING 2 NORTH RIVERSIDE PLAZA P.O. BOX 29067 CHICAGO, IL 60606 BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 10255 34- 119 -21 -42 -0004 89370 $83.38 6325 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD MICHAEL & GARY WAGNER SARAH HUEBNER 6325 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No.: NIA Levy No.: 10256 Description: Cost of noxious weed removal to those Fund /Code No.: tracts or parcels where pursuant to City Ordinance, Section 19 -1601 through 19- 1604, Levy Description: WEED DESTRUCTION 86 noxious weeds were destroyed by order of the City Weed Inspector and the cost for Levy runs one (1) year (1987) such destruction, having been billed to with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent. the property owners, remains unpaid First payment, with property taxes payable in 1987 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Location: Various City Locations Date of Assessment Hearing: September 8, 1986 Improvement Hearing Date: N/A Adopted on: Improvement Ordered on: NIA by Resolution No.: N/A by Resolution No.: Assessment District: NIA Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: I Method of Apportionment: Direct costs Cost Summary from Resolution No.: $ 1,836.65 Total Improvement Cost: $ 0.00 Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00 (Fund M.S.A.) Less Other Payments: $ 0.00 I Total Assessed to Property: $ 1,836.65 Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Private Property: $ 1,836.65 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DELIQUENT WEED REMOVAL ACCOUNTS MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 1 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE Z OF 4 PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification LEVY PROJECT PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL Address Name /Mailing Address (from H.C. Tax Book and NO. NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. PRINCIPAL Addition /Legal Description (per Assessing's Records) original invoice address) 10256 01- 118 -21 -12 -0033 89510 50.50 6007 Lyndale Avenue North HELEN M CARLSON 6007 LYNDALE AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10256 01- 118 - 21-21 -0001 89001 50.50 Part of Unplatted Section 1 BILL D GRAEN 38865 BURNS PARKWAY NW ANOKA, MN 55303 10256 01- 118 -21 -34 -0059 89225 50.50 5412 Colfax Avenue North JOHN TSCHOL/LARRY J CRONIN 4650 NINE OAKS CIRCLE BLOOMINGTON, MN 55437 10256 01- 118 -21 -34 -0100 89225 50.50 5345 Colfax Avenue North SHARON MULFORD 5345 COLFAX AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10256 01- 118 -21 -43 -0068 89225 126.50 5315 - 4th Street North GLEN T & VICKY L RUPERT 5315 - 4TH STREET NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10256 02- 118 -21 -11 -0006 89791 101.50 Tract B, R.L.S. 1458 RFI, INC. RON FLETCHER, ATTORNEY 6548 HIGHLAND ROAD LARKIN, HOFFMAN ETAL PONTIAC, MI 48054 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH BLOOMINGTON, MN 55431 AND TEXAS AIR CORP PROPERTY TAX SERVICE 1827 WALDEN OFFICE SQ, 475 SCHAUMBURG, IL 60195 10256 02- 118 -21 -22 -0055 89441 29.25 5936 Vincent Avenue North ATA INDUSTRIES, INC. SECURITY BANK & TRUST CO 4718 - 42ND AVENUE NORTH GLENCOE, MN 55336 ROBBINSDALE, MN 55422 AND DAVID FELLAND 2800 FOSHAY BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 10256 02- 118 -21 -22 -0056 89441 29.25 5936 Vincent Avenue North ATA INDUSTRIES, INC. SECURITY BANK & TRUST CO 4718 - 42ND AVENUE NORTH GLENCOE, MN 55336 ROBBINSDALE, MN 55422 AND DAVID FELLAND 2800 FOSHAY BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 0 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DELIQUENT WEED REMOVAL ACCOUNTS MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 1 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 2 OF 4 PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification LEVY PROJECT PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL Address Name /Mailing Address (from H.C. Tax Book and NO. NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. PRINCIPAL Addition /Legal Description (per Assessing's Records) original invoice address) 10256 02- 118 -21 -22 -0057 89441 29.25 5930 Vincent Avenue North ATA INDUSTRIES, INC. SECURITY BANK & TRUST CO 4718 - 42ND AVENUE NORTH GLENCOE, MN 55336 ROBBINSDALE, MN 55422 AND DAVID FELLAND 2800 FOSHAY BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402. 10256 02- 118 -21 -22 -0058 89441 29.25 5924 Vincent Avenue North ATA INDUSTRIES, INC. SECURITY BANK & TRUST CO 4718 - 42ND AVENUE NORTH GLENCOE, MN 55336 ROBBINSDALE, MN 55422 AND DAVID FELLAND 2800 FOSHAY BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 10256 02- 118 -21 -22 -0059 89441 29.25 5918 Vincent Avenue North ATA INDUSTRIES, INC. SECURITY BANK 6 TRUST CO 4718 - 42ND AVENUE NORTH GLENCOE, MN 55336 ROBBINSDALE, MN 55422 AND DAVID FELLAND 2800 FOSHAY BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 10256 02- 118 -21 -22 -0060 89441 29.25 5912 Vincent Avenue North ATA INDUSTRIES, INC. SECURITY BANK 6 TRUST CO 4718 - 42ND AVENUE NORTH GLENCOE, MN 55336 ROBBINSDALE, MN 55422 AND DAVID FELLAND 2800 FOSHAY BUILDING MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 10256 02- 118 -21 -34 -0051 89435 37.75 5308 Russell Avenue North PARK METROPOLITAN INV FUND ROBERT L. HANSEN 1595 SELBY AVENUE 4951 LOGAN AVENUE NORTH ST. PAUL, MN 55104 BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10256 02- 118 -21 -34 -0052 89435 37.75 5312 Russell Avenue North ROBERT L. HANSEN 4951 LOGAN AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 10256 03- 118 -21 -22 -0036 89611 50.50 Outlot D, Moorwood Townhouses WHEELOCK ENTERPRISES 6205 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55432 10256 10- 118 -21 -13 -0001 89010 50.50 5046 Drew Avenue North LINDA & BETTY NORDQUIST 5046 DREW AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DELIQUENT WEED REMOVAL ACCOUNTS MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 1 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 3 OF 4 PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification LEVY PROJECT PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL Address Name /Mailing Address (from H.C. Tax Book and NO. NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. PRINCIPAL Addition /Legal Description (per Assessing's Records) original invoice address) 10256 10- 118 -21 -23 -0002 89010 37.75 ,Part of Unplatted Section 10 TRI -STATE LAND COMPANY C/O SOO LINE RAILROAD SOO LINE BUILDING TAX DPT MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55440 10256 10- 118 -21 -24 -0001 89010 37.75 !Part of Unplatted Section 10 TRI -STATE LAND COMPANY C/O SOO LINE RAILROAD SOO LINE BUILDING - TAX DPT MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55440 10256 34- 119 -21 -41 -0010 89391 56.88 3206 - 63rd Avenue North LUCILLE & SUSAN JOHNSON 3206 - 63RD AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 10256 34- 119 -21 -42 -0006 89370 56.88 '6315 Brooklyn Boulevard RAUL LOPEZ MICHAEL J ADKINS 3017 - 74TH AVENUE NORTH 13640 ALAMO STREET NE BROOKLYN PARK, MN 55444 HAM LAKE, MN 55304 10256 34- 119 -21 -43 -0056 89753 50.50 Tract A. R.L.S. 1192 BOYER H PALMER 5322 MINNETONKA INDUSTRIAL RD MINNETONKA, MN 55343 10256 34- 119 -21 -43 -0061 01792 50.50 Lot 2, Block 1, PBC 2nd Addition LITTERMAN HOMES, INC. GERALD J SMITH 500 S 3RD STREET 7038 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD OSSEO, MN 55369 BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55429 10256 35- 119 -21 -11 -0015 00257 50.50 '6637 Humboldt Avenue North TERRY /EILEEN /MIKE SONNACK 3615 - 37TH AVENUE NE #203 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55412 10256 35- 119 -21 -13 -0015 02256 63.25 Tract E, R.L.S. 1572 SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY 625 - 4TH AVENUE SOUTH, 1550 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415 10256 35- 119 -21 -22 -0012 01318 63.25 Lot 1, Block 1 SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY Earle Brown Farm Estates 1st 625 - 4TH AVENUE SOUTH, 1550 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415 10256 35- 119 -21 -23 -0002 89779 63.25 Tract B, R.L.S. 1377 SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY 625 - 4TH AVENUE SOUTH, 1550 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415 10256 35- 119 -21 -41 -0009 02965 63.25 'Lot 1, Block 1 Richardson Addition SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY 625 - 4TH AVENUE SOUTH, 1550 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415 i CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DELIQUENT WEED REMOVAL ACCOUNTS , MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 1 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 4 OF 4 PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER Additional Notification LEVY PROJECT PROPERTY ADDN. TOTAL Address Name /Mailing Address (from B.C. Tax Book and NO. NO. IDENTIFICATION NO. NO. PRINCIPAL Addition /Legal Description (per Assessing's Records) original invoice address) 10256 35- 119 -21 -41 -0011 02965 63.25 Lot 3, Block 1 Richardson Addition SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY 625 - 4TH AVENUE SOUTH, 1550 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415 10256 35- 119 -21 -41 -0012 02965 63.25 Lot 4, Block 1 Richardson Addition SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY 625 - 4TH AVENUE SOUTH, 1550 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415 10256 35- 119 -21 -41 -0013 02965 63.25 Lot 5, Block 1 Richardson Addition SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY 625 - 4TH AVENUE SOUTH, 1550 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55415 10256 36- 119 -21 -13 -0031 89720 35.62 Tract D, R.L.S. 678 MARVIN & BETTY NELSON C/O STEVE NELSON 104 DORADO COURT PLANT CITY, FL 33566 10256 36- 119 -21 -13 -0032 89720 35.63 Tract E, R.L.S. 678 MARVIN & BETTY NELSON C/O STEVE NELSON 104 DORADO COURT PLANT CITY, FL 33566 10256 36- 119 -21 -13 -0033 89720 35.63 Tract F, R.L.S. 678 MARVIN & BETTY NELSON C/O STEVE NELSON 104 DORADO COURT PLANT CITY, FL 33566 10256 36- 119 -21 -21 -0002 87105 50.50 707 - 69th Avenue North OMAR ANAS P.O. BOX 7582 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55407 10256 36- 119 -21 -42 -0016 01417 56.88 6357 North Lilac Drive LYNBROOK PARTNERS 850 DECATUR AVENUE NORTH GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55427 10256 36- 119 -21 -42 -0017 01417 56.88 Lot 3, Block 1, Lynbrook Bowl MARVIN & BETTY NELSON C/O STEVE NELSON 104 DORADO COURT PLANT CITY, FL 33566 � # i Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -07 (SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY TURNLANE CONSTRUCTION) WHEREAS, construction of Improvement Project No. 1986 -07 is complete and the tabulated costs are: Contract $ 19,242.90 Engineering (9%) __ _ 1,731.86 _ Administration (1 %) 192.43 Legal (1%) 192.43 Capitalized Interest 819.75 TOTAL $ 22,179.37 AND; WHEREAS the City Clerk with the assistance of the City Engineer has calculated the proper amount to be specially 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 and a copy of such proposed assessment is filed in the office of the City Clerk for public inspection: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The portion of cost of such imp- rovement to be paid by the City is declared to be $0.00 and the portion of the cost to be assessed against benefitted property owners is declared to be $22,179.37. 2. A hearing shall be held on the 8th day of September, 1986, in the City Hall at 8:00 P.M. to pass upon the proposed assessments 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 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 property 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.: 1986 -07 Levy No.: 10257 Description: Construction of turnlanes on Fund /Code No.: Shingle Creek Parkway Levy Description: STREET (86 -07) 86 Location: On Shingle Creek Parkway at Levy runs fifteen (15) year !(from 1987 to 2001) Summit Drive and John Martin Drive with interest at the rate of twelve (12) percent. Improvement Hearin Date: N A mP g / First payment, with property .taxes payable in 1987 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Improvement Ordered on: N/A Date of Assessment Hearing: September 8, 1986 by Resolution No.: N/A Adopted on: Assessment District: Lot 1 and 2, Block 1 Shingle Creek Center by Resolution No.: Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: Method of Apportionment: Direct costs in accordance with the provisions listed in the Subdivision Agreement — Cost Summary from Resolution No.: Total Improvement Cost: $ 22,098.13 Less Direct City Share: $ 0.00 (Fund M.S.A.) Less Other Payments: $ 0.00 Total Assessed to Property: $ 22,098.13 Assessed to City Owned Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property: $ 0.00 Assessed to Private Property: $ 22,098.13 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY TURNLANE CONSTRUCTION MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLL 15 YEAR ASSESSMENT PERIOD PAGE 1 OF 1 1 PROPERTY ASSESSED 1 OWNER I Additional Notification 1 LEVY 1PROJECTI PROPERTY i ADDN. I TOTAL I Address I Name I Name I I NO. I NO. (IDENTIFICATION NO.1 NO. I PRINCIPAL I Addition /Legal Description 1 Mailing Address I Mailing Address I I 1-1- 1 I 1 (10257 I IO2- 118 -21 -12 -0012 1 02733 1 7,258.05 16000 & 6050 Shingle Creek Parkway IRYAN CONSTRUCTION CO OF MN I 1 1900 - 2ND AVENUE SOUTH I 1 1 1700 INTERNATIONAL CENTRE 1 1 1 I I (MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 I 1 1 110257 1 135- 119 -21 -43 -0009 1 02733 1 14,840.08 IL2, Bl, Shingle Creek Center IRYAN CONSTRUCTION CO OF MN (DAYTON HUDSON CORPORATION I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1900 - 2ND AVENUE SOUTH (PROPERTY TAX DPT, SUITE 240 i 1 ( 1 1700 INTERNATIONAL CENTRE 1777 NICOLETT MALL 1 1 1 1 I I (MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 (MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 1 i i 9 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT FEES WHEREAS, Chapters 3,15, 34, and 35 of the City Ordinances require the payment of fees for building permits, plumbing permits, electrical system permits, mechanical system permits, sign permits, Planning Commission applications, flood plain use permits, and administrative land use permits; and WHEREAS, Chapters 3, 15, 34 and 35 of the City Ordinances further authorize the setting of various fees by City Council resolution; and WHEREAS, City Council Resolution Nos. 81 -123 (adopted 6/8/81) and 83 -65 (adopted 4/11/83) together comprise a schedule of fees collected by the Planning and Inspection Department; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it appropriate to modify and update the fees contained in said resolutions and to adopt a new fee schedule. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to adopt the following fee schedule: PLANNING AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE 1. Building Permit Fees Building permit fees shall be based on the valuation of each building. The building valuation shall be computed using the up -to -date average construction cost per square foot established from time to time by the State Building Inspector. Valuation Fee $1.00 to $500.00 $15.00 $501.00 to $2,000.00 $15.00 for the first $500.00 plus $2.00 for each additional $100.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $2,000.00 $2,001.00 to $25,000.00 $45.00 for the first $2,000.00 plus $9.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000.00 $25,001.00 to $50,000.00 $252.00 for the first $25,000.00 plus $6.50 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000.00 $50,001.00 to $100,000.00 $414.50 for the first $50,000.00 plus $4.50 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000.00 $100,001.00 to $500,000.00 $639.50 for the first $100,000.00 plus $3.50 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000.00 RESOLUTION N0. Building Permit Fees continued - $500,001.00 to $1,000,000.00 $2039.50 for the first $500,000.00 plus $3.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000.00 $1,000,001.00 and up $3539.50 for the first $1,000,000.00 plus $2.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof Also, a Plan -Check fee of 65% of the amount of the permit fee is collected except for one and two family residences (including townhouses as on family residences). 2. Plumbing Permit Fees Plumbing permit fees shall be computed on the basis of the number of plumbing fixtures and devices and of the type of system or plumbing work as set forth below. A plumbing fixture is defined as a device intended to be connected to the plumbing system, such as any sink, bathtub, or any other such devices. Fee (a) Minimum Fee $ 18.75 (b) Plumbing fixtures installed 10.00 (c) Plumbing fixture opening for future installation 6.25 (d) Catch basin installed 15.00 (e) Water heater installed 10.00 (f) Ground run to building 15.00 (g) Rainwater leader 10.00 (h) Installation of water treating or filter device 12.50 (i) Potable water well drilling 25.00 (j) Irrigation connection 25.00 (k) Sewer or Water connection 31.25 /conn. (1) Sewer or Water disconnection 31.25 /dis Conn. (m) Repair or alteration of existing plumbing or water 3% of distribution system estimated cost (n) New single family dwelling plumbing system (including 55.00 fixtures, devices, openings, and water piping) RESOLUTION N0. Plumbing Permit Fees continued (o) Fire Suppression Systems Standpipes, 1 -3 floors 30.00 Each additional floor 3.75 Automatic Sprinklers, 1st floor 62.50 Each additional floor 18.75 (p) A plumbing permit shall be required for gas piping; the permit fees are set forth below. (Fees for gas fitting of appliances and heating systems are set forth under Mechanical System Permit Fees contained in this schedule. Up to 2 -inch diameter pipe 1 -3 openings 5.75 Each additional opening 2.50 2 -inch and over diameter pipe 1 -3 openings - 15.00 Each additional opening 3.25 3. Electrical System Permit Fees Electrical system permit fees shall be calculated and paid according to the following: Fee (a) Minimum Permit 18.75 j (b) Services, changes of services, temporary services additions, alterations or repairs on either primary or secondary services shall be computed separately as indicated below. In the case of services in excess of 250 volts, the following fee amounts shall be doubled. 0 to and including 60 amp capacity 7.50 61 to and including 100 amp capacity 10.00 101 to and including 200 amp capacity 12.00 For each additional 100 amp capacity or fraction thereof 5.00 (c) The fee for circuits installation of, additions to, alterations of, or repairs of each circuit or sub- feeder shall be computed separately, including circuits fed from sub- feeders and including the equipment served, except as provided for in items (d) through (h). In the case of services of 250 volts, the following fee amounts shall be doubled. 0 to and including 30 amp capacity (maximum number of 0 to 30 amp in any one cabinet) 2.50 31 to and including 100 amp capacity 5.00 RESOLUTION NO. Electrical System Permit Fees continued For each additional 100 amp capacity or fraction thereof 2.00 (d) New single family dwelling electrical system (including 55.00 service, feeders, circuits, fixtures and equipment) (e) The fee on a new multiple family dwelling building shall be $25.00 per dwelling unit for the first 20units and $12.50 per dwelling unit for the balance of the units. ,(f) In addition to other fees, each permit for wiring, installing and connecting transformers and generators for light, heat and power shall be computed separately at $6.25 per unit for the first 25 KVA or fraction thereof; plus $.40 for each KVA or fraction thereof, in excess of 25 KVA, but not exceeding 200 KVA; plus $.40 for each 10 KVA in in excess of 200 KVA. (g) In addition to other fees, all transformers for signs and outline lighting shall be computed at $10.00 for the first 500 VA or fraction thereof per unit, plus $.30 for each 100 VA or fraction thereof in excess of 500 VA. (h) In addition to other fees, (except dwellings) remote control, signal circuits of less than 50 volts shall be computed at $7.50 per each ten openings or devices of each system plus $1.00 for each additional ten or fraction thereof. (i) For special inspections or services, or for reinspections of improper work, the Building Official may impose such additional charges as are reasonably related to the cost of providing the service. 4. Mechanical System Permit Fees - Mechanical system permit fees shall be calculated and collected according to the following: (a) Installation, alteration, reconstruction, or repair of any heating, ventilating, comfort cooling, or refrigeration equipment, shall be computed on the basis of the estimated cost of the proposed work except as herein provided. Fee Up to and including $500 $12.50 Over $500, but not over $50,000 2% of valuation Over $50,000 1% of valuation (b) A mechanical permit shall be required for gas pipe fitting for connection to any gas burning device, except as herein provided.; the fees are set forth below. (Fees for gas piping are additional and are set forth under Plumbing System Permit Fees contained in this schedule). The appropriate fee for gas water heaters shall be applied to the plumbing permit rather than a mechanical permit. The permit fee for installing each gas stove, range, water heater, process burner, or similar gas burning device not used in connection with a heating system shall be: RESOLUTION NO. Mechanical System Permit Fees continued Input (B.T.U'S) Fee Not exceeding 99,999 $12.50 100,000 199,999 18.75 200,000 399,999 33.75 400,000 - 599,999 47.50 600,000 - 999,999 62.50 Over 999,999 - use gas burner /heating system schedule below. The permit fee for installing gas burners and fittings for use in connection with a heating system shall be: Input (B.T.U'S) Up to 999,999 use gas appliance /nonheating schedule above. 1,000,000 - 2,499,999 $105.00 2,500,000 - 9,999,999 125.00 10,000,000 49,999,999 180.00 50,000,000 - 74,999,999 230.00 75,000,000 and over 305.00 (c) A mechanical permit shall be required for the installation, for the removal, and for the replacement of any in- ground or above- ground tanks or vessels and related piping used for the storage of gaseous or liquid fuels or chemicals. Permit fees shall be: Above- ground new installation $37.50 In- ground new installation 50.00 Above- ground removal 25.00 In- ground removal 37.50 Replace like tank to existing system 37.50 (d) It is not intended that permits shall be required for portable heating, ventilating, comfort cooling, or refrigeration equipment, nor for the replacement of any component part or assembly of an appliance which does not alter its original approval and which complies with other applicable requirements of the Building Code. 5. Sign Permit Fees Sign permit fees shall be collected before issuance of any sign permit required under the provision of the Sign Ordinance and shall be calculated according to the following: (a) The fee for any permanent freestanding or non - freestanding sign 5 sq. ft. in area or less shall be $10.00. (b) The fee for any permanent freestanding or non - freestanding sign over 5 sq. ft. in area shall be $30.00 for the first fifty (50) square feet of gross area or fraction thereof and $12.50 for each additional fifty (50)square feet of gross area or fraction thereof . RESOLUTION N0. Sign Permit Fees continued (c) The fee for permits for the installation of any electrical wiring for any sign shall conform to the electrical system fee schedule contained herein. 6. Planning Commission Fees Planning Commission fees shall be collected at the time applications are executed according to the following: Fee (a) Rezonings $350.00 (b) Site and Building Plans 250.00 (c) Preliminary Plat 100.00 (d) Variance 50.00 (e) Special Use Permit 5 0.00 (f) Extension of Special Use Permit 25.00 (g) Appeal 50.00 (h) Determination 50.00 In addition to the above fees, the applicant shall sign an agreement, on forms provided by the City, to pay the cost of all engineering, planning and legal consulting expenses incurred by the City in processing the above applications. 7. Administrative Land Use Permit Fees Administrative Land Use Permit fees for temporary activity shall be collected before the issuance of any such permit required under the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance according to the following: (a) Out -of -door Church functions, civic functions, $10 /10 days charities, carnivals, etc. (b) Off -site signs for .civic functions or community $10 /10 days events per location (c) Out -of -door nursery and garden center sales and $25/30 weeks displays (d) Miscellaneous out -of -door sales, displays or $10/10 days promotional events (e) Miscellaneous out -of -door sales, displays or $10/30 days promotional events for gasoline service stations (f) Car wash fund raisers $10 /10 days 8. Flood Plain Use Permit Fees Flood Plain Use Permit Fees shall be collected before the issuance of any flood plain use permit required under the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and shall be calculated according to the following: RESOLUTION N0. Flood Plain Use Permit Fees continued Area Fee Up to 10,000 sq. ft $12.50 From 10,000 sq. ft. to 1 acre $1.25/1,000 sq. ft. From 1 acre to 5 acres $25.00 /acre Over 5 acres $18.75 /acre BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the above schedule of Planning and Inspection Department Fees shall become effective on Monday, September 29, 1986, Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was d seconded b member � � Y Y 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: Ronal A. (�t•v`� Ronald .Warren, Director of Planning and Inspectia�i'J DATE: August 8, 1986 SUBJECT: Planning and Inspection Department Fee Schedule A resolution amending the schedule for Planning and Inspection Department fees is recommended and being offered to the City Council for adoption at their August 11, 1986 meeting. This matter was before the City Council for discussion purposes on July 14, 1986. Attached is a copy of my July 11, 1986 memo explaining the recommended fee schedule and a cop of the current fees. If this fee schedule is adopted and becomes effective on September 29, 1986, it is anticipated that approximately $6,000.00 to $8,000.00 additional revenue will be generated in 1986 for these various fees. I will be reviewing the revenue figures already submitted to Paul Holmlund for the 1987 budget to see if adjustments in these figures would be appropriate as well. Also, on the August 11 Council agenda is the first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 35 regarding Administrative Permit fees. The purpose of this amendment is to delete the current fees contained in the ordinance and add language to acknowledge that the fees for Administrative Permits will be as set forth by City Council resolution. RAW:mlg MEMORANDUM: TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspectiob /�•a- DATE: July 11, 1986 SUBJECT:. Planning and Inspection Department Fee Schedule On the July 1 City it Council en a is Y � 9 y agenda discussion of proposed increases in the fees collected b our department for various applications. Attached Y P s ermits and pplic P are copies f C' p o City Council Resolution Nos. 81 -123 and 83-65 which together make-up g P the Planning and Inspection ng pec ion Department fee schedule. We are now in the process of drafting a proposed resolution to amend and update these fees but not all our research is completed on all of the various fees. Hopefully, a proposed new schedule will be available for review and discussion Monday evening. Generally, the proposed fee increase will be an approximate 25% increase. Cost of living has increased about 27% since 1981 when the current fee schedule was instituted. The most significant increase, much more than 25 %, will be in the charges for building permits. Historically, we have adopted the Uniform Building Code (UBC) recommended fee schedule and our current building permit fees are those contained in the 1979 UBC. We are recommending adopting the schedule recommended by the 1985 UBC. We will be adopting the 1985 UBC later this year as the updated State Building Code. That fee schedule is based on building valuation and will amount to increases between 30% and 50% depending upon the category. Also, this schedule recommends collecting an additional plan check fee that is 65% of the permit fee. Currently our plan check fee is 50% of the permit fee. We do not charge a plan check fee for one and two family dwelling (including townhouses) permits. The City Council may want to consider whether to continue with this policy or charge a plan check on all building permits. The following is a list showing comparison of the current and proposed building permit fees based on certain permit valuations: Current Fee Proposed Fee Valuation (1979 UBC) (1985 UBC) $ 500 $ 10.00 $ 15.00 1,000 17.50 25.00 2,000 32.50 45.00 10,000 85.50 117.00 25,000 170.50 252.00 50,000 283.00 414.50 75,000 358.00 527.00 100,000 433.00 639.50 500,000 1 2,039.50 1,000,000 2,683.00 3,539.50 Memo to Gerald G. Splinter Page 2 July 11, 1986 We are also proposing that the fees for Planning Commission applications be increased as follows Type Existing Fee Proposed Fee Rezoning $ 175 $350 Site & Building 100 250 Plan Preliminary Plat 50 + 5 /lot 100 I Variance 50 50 Special Use Permit 50 50 Extension of Special 25 25 Use Permit Appeal 25 50 Determination O 0 5 Regarding sign permit fees, we recommend that the schedule be modified to provide a new category g y of sign, that being signs from 0 to s ft. an that a ermit fee of ng g 5 d ha q P $10.00 be charged. This would affect primarily home occupation sign permits that currently ost 2 .00. The Y $ 5 most common complaint is that the permit fee is exorbitant in comparison to the cost of the may sign. This discourage some from Y taki ng a permit for these signs, ns discour e 8 > but it does no however,, o ver Y neeessaril them from putting up these signs. It is believed that a lower .charge of $10.00 will not be a hindrance to obtaining a permit and lead to better enforcement and control of home occupation signs. The recommended fee for other sign permits is $30.00 for signs between 5 sq. ft. and 50 sq. ft. in area plus $12.50 for each additional 50 sq . ft. over 50 sq. ft. Finally we are recommending that administrative land use permits be added to the department fee schedule. This would involve an ordinance amendment to authorize these fees to be set by City Council resolution. Currently the permit charges are $2.00 for a ten day promotional type permit and $5.00 for a thirty week garden center permit. The fees have remained unchanged since prior to 1968. It is recommended that the new fees be $10.00 for a ten day promotional permit and $25.00 for a thirty week garden center permit, a five fold increase in these fees. As indicated previously, we hope to have other recommended fees for plumbing, mechanical and electrical permits by Monday evening, if possible, and a final format for the Council's consideration. We are considering an effective date for these new fees of Monday, September 29, 1986. lm t Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 81 -123 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT FEES WHEREAS, Chapters 3, 15, 34, and 35 of the City Ordinances establishes fees to be charged for building permits plumbing permits, electrical system permits, mechanical system permits, sign permits, as well as various Planning Commission fees; and WHEREAS, these fees are collected by the Planning and Inspection Department as a part of the application process and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it would be less cumber- some and a better method of ensuring a uniform fee structure to set forth these fees in a single fee schedule; and WHEREAS, Chapters 3, 15, 34, and 35 of the City Ordinances have been amended to authorize the setting of various fees by City Council resolution rather than by ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Resolution No. 80 -214, in part, to increase the fees charged for sewer or water connections and sewer or water disconnections. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to adopt the following fee schedules; PLANNING AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE 1. Building Permit Fees Building permit fees shall be based on the valuation of each building. The building valuation shall be computed using the up -to -date average construction cost per square foot established from time to time by the State Building Inspector.` Valuation Fee $ 500.00 $ 10.00 11000.00 17.50 2,000.00 32.50 10,000.00 80.50 25,000.00 170.50 50,000.00 283.00 75,000.00 358.00 100,000.00 433.00 500,000.00 1,433.00 1 2,683.00 Also, 2 the amount of permit fee is collected for Plan -Check fee on all plans except one and two family residences (including townhouses as one family residences). RESOLUTION NO. 81 -123 2. Plumbing Permit Fees Plumbing permit fees shall be computed on the basis of the number of plumbing fixtures and devices and of the type of system or plumbing work as set forth below. A plumbing fixture is defined as a device intended to be connected to the system, such as any sink bathtub, or any other such devices. Fee (a) Minimum Fee $ 15.00 (b) Plumbing fixtures installed 7.50 (c) Plumbing fixture opening for future installation 5.00 (d) Catch basin installed .12.50 (e) Water heater installed 7.50 (f) Ground run to building 12.50 (g) Rainwater leader 7.50 (h) Installation of water treating or filter device 10.00 (i) Potable water well drilling 20.00 (j) Irrigation connection 20.00 (k) Sewer or Water connection * 25.00 /conn. (1) Sewer or Water disconnection * 25.00Jdisconn. (m) Repair or alteration of existing plumbing or water 3% of estimated distribution system - cost (n) New single family dwelling plumbing system (including 45.00 fixtures, devices, openings, and water piping) (o) Fire Suppression Systems Standpipes, 1 -3 floors 25.00 Each additional floor 3.00 Automatic Sprinklers, 1st floor 50.00 Each additional floor 15.00 (p) A plumbing permit shall be required for gas piping; the permit fees are set forth below. (Fees for gas fitting of appliances and heating systems are set forth under Mechanical System Permit Fees contained in this schedule. Fee Up to 2 -inch diameter pipe 1 -3 openings 4.50 Each additional opening 2.00 * Amends Resolution No. 80 -214 RESOLUTION NO. 81 -12 Plumbing Permit Fees continued Fee 2 -inch and over diameter pipe 1 -3 openings 12.50 Each additional opening 2.50 3. Electrical System Permit Fees Electrical system permit fees shall be calculated and paid according to the following: Fee (a) Minimum Permit 15.00 (b) Services, changes of services, temporary services, additions, alterations or repairs on either primary or secondary services shall be computed separately as indicated below.: In h p teea e s P Y of services in excess of 230 volts the following fee amounts shall be doubled. 0 to and including 60 amp capacity 6.00 61 to and including 100 amp capacity 7,50 101 to and including 200 amp capcity 9.00 For each additional 100 amp capacity or fraction thereof 4.00 (c) The fee for circuits installation of, additions to, alterations of, or repairs of each circuit or sub - feeder shall be computed separately, including circuits fed from sub - feeders and in- cluding the equipment served, except as provided for in items (d) through (h). In the case of services in excess of 230 volts, the following fee amounts shall be doubled. 0 to and including 30 amp capacity (maximum number of 0 to 30 amp in any one cabinet ) 2.00 31 to and including 100 amp capacity - 4.00 For each additional 100 amp capacity or fraction thereof 1.50 (d) New single family dwelling electrical system (including service, feeders, circuits, fixtures and equipment) 45.00 (e) The fee on a new multiple family dwelling building shall be $20.00 per dwelling unit for the first 20 units and $10.00 per dwelling unit for the balance of the units. (f) In addition to other fees, all transformers and generators for light, heat, and power shall be computed separately at $5.00 per unit plus $ .30 per KVA up to and including 100 KVA and $.30 per KVA for 101 KVA and over. The maximum fee for any transformer or generator in this category shall be $50.00. RESOLUTION NO. 81 -12 Electrical Permit Fees - continued (g) In addition to other fees,all transformers for signs and outline light- ing shall be computed at $7.50 for the first 500 KVA or fraction thereof per unit, plus $.25 for each 100 VA or fraction thereof in excess of 500 VA per unit. (h) In addition to other fees, (except dwellings) remote control, signal circuits of less than 50 volts shall be computed at $6.00 per each ten openings or devices of each system plus $.75 for each additional ten or fraction thereof. (i) For special inspections or services, or for reinspections of improper work, the Building Official may impose such additional charges as are reasonably related to the cost of providing the service. 4. Mechanical System Permit Fees Mechanical system permit fees shall be calculated and collected according to .the following: (a) Installation, alteration, reconstruction, or repair of any heating, ventilating, comfort cooling, or refrigeration equipment, shall be computed on the basis of the estimated cost of the proposed work except as herein provided. Fee Up to and including $500 $ 10.00 Over $500, but not over $50,000 2% of valuation Over $50;000 1% of valuation (b) A mechanical permit shall be required for gas pipe fitting for connection to any gas burning device, except as herein provided; the fees are set forth below. (Fees for gas piping are additional and are set forth under Plumbing System Permit Fees contained in this schedule). The appropriate fee for gas water heaters shall be applied to the plumbing permit rather than a mechanical permit. The permit fee for installing each gas stove, range, water heater, process burner, or similar gas burning device not used in connection with a heating system shall be: Input (B.T.U'S) Fee Not exceeding 99,999 $ 10.00 100,000 - 199,999 15.00 200,000 - 399,999 27.00 400,000 - 599,999 38.00 600,000 - 999,999 50.00 Over 999,999 - use gas burner /heating system schedule below. The permit fee for installing gas burners and fittings for use in con- nection with a heating system shall be: RESOLUTION NO. 81 -123 Mechanical System Permit Fees continued Input (B.T.U'S Fee Up to 999,999 - use gas appliance /nonheating schedule above. 1,000,000 - 2,499,999 $ 84.00 2,500,000 - 9,999,999 - 100.00 10,000,000 - 49,999,999 144.00 50,000,000 74,999,999 184.00 75,000,000 and over 244.00 (c) A mechanical permit shall be required for the installation, for the removal, and for the replacement of any in- ground or above - ground tanks or vessels and related piping used for the storage of gaseous or liquid fuels or chemicals. Permit fees shall be: Fee Above - ground new installation $ 30.00 In- ground new installation 30.00- Above- ground removal 20.00 In- ground removal 30.00 Replace like tank to existing system 30.00 (d) It is not intended that permits shall be required for portable heating, ventilating, comfort cooling, or refrigeration equipment, nor for the replacement of any component part or assembly of an appliance which does not alter its original approval and which complies with other applicable requirements of the Building Code. 5. Sign Permit Fees Sign permit fees shall be collected before issuance of any sign permit required under the provisions of the Sign Ordinance and shall be calculated according to the following: (a) The fee for any permanent freestanding or non- freestanding sign shall be $25.00_for the first fifty (50) square feet of gross area.or. fraction thereof and $10.00 for each fifty '(50) square feet of gross area or fraction thereof. (b) The for permits for the installation of any electrical wiring for any sign shall conform to the electrical system fee schedule contained herein. 6. Planning Commission Fees Planning Commission fees shall be submitted at the time applications are executed according to the following; (a) Rezonings Fee $ 1 75.00 (b) Site and Building Plans 100.00 (c) Preliminary Plat 50.00 plus ( 5.00 each lot d) Variance 50.00 (e) Special Use Permit 50.00 (f) Extension of Special Use Permit 25.00 (9) Appeal 25.00 RESOLUTION NO. 81 -123 Planni Commission Fees continued In addition to the above fees, the applicant shall sign an agreement, on forms provided by the City, to pay the cost of all engineering, planning and legal consulting expenses incurred by the City in processing the above applications. BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED that the above schedule of Planning and Inspection Department Fees shall become effective on June 28, 1981. June 8. 1981 Date Mayor 100100 ATTEST: /L C f'�, --., ,..�.{ Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof Mayor Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lohtka, . and Celia" Scott; and the following voted against the same; none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption _ RESOLUTION NO. 83 -65 RESOLUTION AMENDING CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 81 -123 ESTABLISHING FLOOD PLAIN USE PERMIT FEES WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center adopted Resolution No. 81 -123 on June 8, 1981 establishing a fee schedule for various fees collected by the Planning and Inspection Department; and WHEREAS, on January 25, 1982 the City Council adopted a Flood Plain Manage- ment Ordinance which requires the issuance of a "Use Permit" for various activities conducted within the Flood Plain; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is appropriate to establish a permit fee for Flood Plain Use Permits to offset the costs to the City for the administration, enforcement and inspection of said use permits and WHEREAS, the City Council has approved an Ordinance Amendment authorizing a Flood Plain Use Permit fee to be established by City Council Resolution. - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to amend City Council Resolution No. 81 -123 by adding the following to the Planning and Inspection Department Fee Schedule: Flood Plain Use Permit Fees Fee Up to 10,000 sq. ft. $10.00 From 10,000 sq. ft. to 1 acre $1.00 /1,000 sq. ft. From 1 acre to 5 acres $20.00 /acre Over 5 acres $15.00 /acre BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the above fees shall become effective o April 23, 1983. April 11, 1983 D Mayor ATTEST: C1 erk The motVnfor 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. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapters 8 and 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding Licensing of Bottled and Canned Soft Drinks and setting a public hearing date for August 11, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF ULTIMAP SYSTEM BY LOGIS The City Manager noted that this item was tabled after preliminary discussion at the June 23, 1986 Council meeting. RESOLUTION NO 86 -11 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXPENDITURE OF APPROPRIATION FOR DEVELOPMENT OF ULTIMAP SYSTEM BY LOGIS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. POLICY FOR ACOUISITION OF PROPERTY ALONG MISSISSIPPI RIVER BETWEEN 53RD AND 57TH AVENUE NORTH The City Manager stated that there are two owners along the east side of Lyndale Avenue who have expressed an interest in selling their property. They have inquired of the City staff whether the City is interested in buying their land. The City Manager asked the Council how they would want staff to approach this matter. Councilmember Scott asked when the Metro Council would be meeting to vote on the feasibility of the park without the Brooklyn Center property. The City Manager stated that the Metro Council should be meeting by August 1. Councilmember Lhotka stated that he did not believe the Metro Council would disapprove the project. He added that he would like to wait until a firm decision has been made by Metro Council before any action is taken on acquisition of property by the City. Councilmember Scott stated that it was her impression that the Metro Council still has the power to include the Brooklyn Center property in the park plan. The City Manager stated that was correct but that he was inclined to believe that the Metro Council would not include the Brooklyn Center property without the community's cooperation. Councilmember Scott stated that she agreed with Councilmember Lhotka that the staff should wait to make any decisions on acquiring property along the east side of Lyndale until the Metro Council has made their decision. The City Manager stated that he would inform the two property owners of the Council's decision. SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT FEES The City Manager briefly reviewed a memorandum and proposed resolution concerning a - schedule for Planning and Inspection Department fees. He noted that there was no action required by the Council this evening but that some action should be taken within the next few weeks. Councilmember Hawes asked how these new fees would compare with the other cities. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that most communities in the area use the Uniform Building Code for setting their fee structure. Councilmember Hawes asked if these fees are more in line with the City's costs. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that this was a fair representation of the City's costs. He stated that the resolution before the Council could be brought back in two weeks for 7- 14 -86, -9- C try Ccce,�L /'ninru�s -4 consideration. He noted the effective date of the rate change would be September 29, 1986. The City Manager stated that in the future these changes could be made more frequently to reduce the resistance to change. Councilmember Hawes asked if staff had any information regarding the increase of revenue due to the increase in fees. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that he did not have those figures at the present time but could make some projections after reviewing past permits. The City Manager stated that information could be gathered for the next Council meeting. Councilmember Theis asked if there was going to be any review of the rental dwelling license fee. The City Manager stated that fee would be reviewed at a later date. The Director of Planning and Inspection noted there would be a housekeeping ordinance amendment also dealing with this item. OTHER BUSINESS Councilmember Lhotka noted that the Tri -City Lakes Commission has been reformed and that they would be reviewing boating activity, storm sewers and flowage. He stated that if any of the Councilmembers were aware of any problems, they should let him know and he would review it with the Tri -City Lakes Commission. The City Manager stated that in the future the Pa will be looking at what to do with the excess ark land. He noted that t there is a large amount of excess park land around the lake area. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9• J .31 P .m. City Clerk Mayor 7 -14 -86 -10- (IIRABFSA) Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1986 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 23, 1985, the City Council of the .City of Brooklyn Center adopted a budget for the calendar year 1986; and WHEREAS, when said budget was adopted, 1986 salaries and wages for City employees had not been set; and WHEREAS, the City Council did appropriate funds for departmental labor and fringe,benefits in the amount of $200,966 to Unallocated Departmental Expenses (Department #80) to provide funds for 1986 salary and wage settlements;' and WHEREAS, all wages and salaries for the calendar year 1986 have now either been set by the Council or can be reasonably projected. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to transfer $155,597 from the following Unallocated Departmental Expense (Department #80) appropriations: 01 -4100 Salaries, Regular Employees $ 125,098 01 -4141 PERA- Regular 1,513 01 -4142 PERA - Combined 4,453 01 -4143 PERA- Police 6 01 -4144 Social Security 7,456 01 -4151 Hospitalization Insurance 10,459 01 -4152 Life Insurance 145 01 -4157 Deferred Compensation 128 $ 155,597, and RESOLUTION NO. Increase the following departmental or divisional appropriations in the total amount of $155,597 as follows: Depart_ Salaries Salaries Salaries PERA PERA PERA Health Life Def. Nadi- Dis. ment cr Regular Overtime Tegmrary Regular Ombined Police FICA IrarMW Inam. Omp care Inar Divisicn 4100 4112 4130 4141 4142 4143 4144 4151 4152 4157 4147 4158 '$ 13,462 0 0 0 456 0 768 164 -24 159 0 0 Electirns 219 0 0 0 10 0 16 41 -1 0 0 0 Assessing 5,077 0 370 0 232 0 389 492 -12 0 0 0 Finanoe 7,07 4 0 0 _ 3, 100 1 X 556 0 2,617 984 -24 0 0 0 Cbvt. Bld 5,653 0 0 0 240 0 X 405 738 -18 0 0 0 Police 21,913 13,046 2,675 95 410 2 594 5,043 -123 0 359 0 Fire 0 0 0 3360 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 P 5,763 0 441 , 0 269 - 0 327 615 -15 0 0 0 aelgaW 1,153 0 0 0 7 119 72 123 -3 0 0 0 Aninal. Ch 0 0 197 0 9 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 EYgineer 12,485 0 0 327 398 0 389 1,107 -27 0 0 0 Streets 14,150 0 0 309 476 0 801 1,647 X41 0 0 0 Veh. Main 4,639 0 0 0 197 0 331 516 -13 0 0 0 R&P Adnin 8,262 0 0 0 351 0 591 615 -15 0 0 0 P&*3 11c 9,561 0 0 123 356 0 599 837 -27 0 0 0 Total $ 109,411 13,046 7,043 -2,246 4,967 2,251 7 12,922 343 159 359 115 .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. C3 F Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1986 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 ma b majority vote of its members transfer Y� Y J Y , unencumbered appropriation balances from one office, department, or agency to g Y another within the same fund; and WHEREAS, on September 23, 1985, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center adopted a budget for the calendar year 1986; and WHEREAS, when said budget was adopted, 1986 salaries and wages for City employees had not been set; and WHEREAS, the City Council did appropriate funds for departmental labor and fringe benefits in the amount of $200,966 to Unallocated Departmental Expenses (Department #80) to provide funds for 1986 salary and wage settlements; and WHEREAS, all wages and salaries for the calendar year 1986 have now either been set by the Council or can be reasonably projected. NOW, THEREFORE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to transfer $192,939 from the following Unallocated Departmental Expense (Department #80) appropriations: 01 -4100 Salaries, Regular Employees, $ 162,440 01 -4141 PERA- Regular 1,513 01 -4142 PERA- Combined 4 01 -4143 PERA- Police 6 01 -4144 Social Securit Y 7 456 01 -4151 Hospitalization Insurance ce 10 459 01 -4152 Life Insurance 145 01 -4157 Deferred Compensation 128 $ 192 and RESOLUTION N0. Increase the following departmental or divisional appropriations in the total amount of $192,939 as follows: Depart- Salaries Salaries Salaries PERA PERA PERA Health Life Def. Nbdi- Ms. meet or Regular Overtirm T e4porwY Plegular Canbined Police FICA Inge Inar. cars 7ns�.m. Division 4100 4112 4130 4141 4142 4143 4144 4151 4152 4 ca 4 4158 MmagEr$ 13,462 0 0 0 456 0 768 164 -24 159 0 0 Elections 219 0 0 0 10 0 16 41 -1 0 0 0 Assessing 5,077 _ 0 370 0 232 0 389 492 -12 0 0 0 Finance 7,074 0 0 3,100 1,556 0 2,617 984 -24 0 0 0 Gavt. Bld 5,653 0 0 0 240 0 405 738 -18 0 0 0 Police 55,731 15,534 2 95 410 6,489 594 1,722 -123 0 359 0 Fire _ .0 . _ 0 . _ 3,360 _ , 0 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 115 Plan/InsP 5,763 0 441 0 269 0 327 615 - 15 0 0 0 RwrgemY 1,153 0 0 0 7 119 72 123 -3 0 0 -0 Animal (h 0 0 197 0 9 0 14 0 0 0 0. 0 Eggineer 12,485 0 0 0 - - 327 398 389 1,107 - 27 0 0 0 Streets 14,150 0 0 4 6 0 309 7 801 1,647 -41- 0 0 0 Veh. Main 4,639 0 0 0 197 0 331 516 -13 0 0 0 R&P Adnin 8,262 0 0 0 351 0 591 615 -15 0 0 0 Parks Me 9,561 0 0 123 356 0 599 837 -r( 0 0 0. Total $ 143,229 15,534 7,043 -2 4,967 6,608 7,913 9 ,601 343 159 359 115 ------------------------------ - - - - -- -------------------------- 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. w 4114 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 11th day of August, 1985 at 7:30 p.m. at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider creating Chapter 22 of the City Ordinances Relating to a Tax Imposed upon Lodging. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE CREATING CHAPTER 22 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES RELATING TO A TAX IMPOSED UPON LODGING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES 'ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS Section 1. Chapter 22 is hereby created as follows: Section 22 -001 DEFINITIONS For the purpose of this Chanter the following terms phrases and words and their derivations shall have the meaning given herein. When not inconsistent with the-context, words used in the present tense include the future, words in the plural number include the singular number and words in the singular number include the plural number. The word "shall" is always mandatory and not merely directory Subd. 1. The term "director "'means the Finance Director of the City. Subd. 2. The term "City" means the City of Brooklyn Center. Subd. 3. The term "Iodginz" means the furnishing for a consideration of lodging by a- hotel. motel or rooming house except where such lodging shall be for a continuous period of thir*w (30) r days or more to the same lodges) The furnishing of rooms by religious educational or nonprofit organizations shall not constitute "lod 'n I" for purposes of this Chapter Subd. 4. The term "operator" means a person who provides lodging to others or any officer agent or employee of such person Subd. 5. The t erm "person" means any individual corporation partnership association, estate, receiver. trustee, executor. administrator, assi ee. syndicate. or anv other combination of individuals Whenever the term "person" is used in any provision of this chapter rescribin and imposin a P g penalty the term as applied to a corporation association or partnership shall mean the officers. or partners thereof as the case may be - Subd. 6 The term "rent" means the tots consideration valued in mo e charged for lodging whether paid in money or otherwise but shall not include any charges for services rendered in connection with furnishing lodging other than the room charge itself, Subd. 7 The term "lod er" means the erson obtainin lod in f om an operator. Section 22 -002. IMPOSITION OF TAX TT is hereby imposed a tax of three -1- ORDINANCE NO. (3%) percent on the rent charged by an operator for providing lodging to any_ person on and after the effective date of this ordinance The tax shall be stated and char ed separately and shall be collected by the operator from the lodger. The tax collected by the operator shall be a debt owed by the operator to the City and shall be extinguished only by Rayment to the Citv In no case shall the tax imposed by this section upon an operator exceed the amount of tax which the operator is authorized and required by this chapter to collect from a lodger. Section 22 -003 COLLECTIONS Each operator shall collect the tax imposed by this chapter at the time the rent is paid The tax collections shall be deemed to be held in trust by the operator for the City, The amount of tax shall be separately stated from the-rent charged for the - Section 22 -004 EXCEPTIONS AND EXEMPTIONS Subd. 1. EXCEPTIONS. No tax shall be imposed on rent for lodging paid by any officer or employee of a foreign government who is exempt by reason of express provisions of federal law or international treaty. Subd. 2. EXEMPTIONS An exemption shall be granted to any person as to whom or whose occupancy it is beyond the power of the City — to-tax. - No exemption shall be granted except upon a claim therefor made at the time the rent is collected. and such a claim shall be made in writing and under penalty of perjury- on forms provided by the City All such claims shall be forwarded to the City when the returns and collections are submitted as required by this a ter Section 2 -005 ADVERTISING NO TAX It shall be unlawful for any operator to advertise o hold out or state to the public or any customer. directly or indirectly, that the tax or any part thereof will be assumed or sorbed—h the operator. or that it will not be added to the rent or that if added it or any part thereof will be refunded In computing the tax to be collected amounts of tax less than one cent shall be considered an additional cent Section 22 -006 PAYMENT AND REMMS The taxes imposed by this chapter shall be paid by the operator to the City monthly nthly not later than 25 days after the end of the month in which the taxes were collected At the time of payment the operator shall submit a return upon such forms and containing such information as the d ector ma re u 'e, The return shall contain the follow* minimum information 1 The _ total amount of rent collected for lodging during the period covered by the return. 2 The amount of tax reauired to be collected and due for the period 3 The signature of the person filing the return or that of his a gent duly authorized in writing -2- ORDINANCE NO 4. The period covered by the return 5. The amount of uncollectable rental charges subject to the lodging tax The operator maw o ffset against the taxes payable with respect to any reporting period. the amount of taxes imposed by this chapter previously paid as result of any transaction the consideration for which became uncollectable during such reporting period but only in proportion to the portion of such consideration which became-uncollectable, Section 22 -007. EXAMINATION OF RETURN ADJUSTMENTS NOTICES AND DEMANDS The director_ shall after a return is filed examine the same and make any investigation or examination - of the records and accounts of the person making the return deemed necessary for determining its correctness The tax computed on the basis of such examination shall be the tax to be paid If the tax due is found to be greater than that paid such excess shall be paid - to-the City within ten 10) days after receiRt of a notice thereof given either personally or sent by registered mail to the address shown on the return If the tax paid is greater than the tax found to be due the excess shall be refunded to the person who paid the tax to the City within ten (10) days after determination of such refund. Section 22 -008, REFUNDS. Anv person may apply to the director for a refund of taxes paid for a prescribed period in excess of the amount legally due or that period provided that no application for refund shall be considered unless filed within one vear after such tax was paid or within one year from the filing of the return whichever period is the longer, The director shall examine the claim and make and file written-findings-thereon denying or allowing the claim, in whole or in part and shall mail a notice thereof by registered mail to such person at the address stated upon the return.- If such claim is allowed in whole or in part. the director shall credit the amount of the allowance against any taxes due under this chapter from the claimant and the balance of said allowance if any shall be paid by the director to the claimant Section 22 -009 FAILURE TO FILE A RETURN Subd. 1. If any operator required by this chapter to file a return shall fail to do so within the time prescribed or shall make willfully or otherwise an incorrect false. or fraudulent return the operator shall upon written notice and demand. file such return or corrected return within five (5 ) days of receipt written notice and shall at the same time paY any tax due on the basis thereof If such person -shall fail to file such return or corrected return. the director shall make a return or corrected return for such person from such knowledge and information as the director can obtain and assess a tax on the basis the eof which tax (less-any payMents theretofore made on account of the tax for the taxable period covered by such return ) shall be aid upon within five 5 days of the recei t of written notice and demand for such payment. An such return or assessment made bathe director shall fo prima facie correct and valid and such .person shall have the burden of establishing -3- ORDINANCE NO its incorrectness invalidity in any action or proceeding in respect thereto Subd. 2. If any portion of a tax imposed by this chapter including penalties thereon, is not paid within thirty (30) days after it is required to be paid. the Citv Attorney may institute such legal action as may be necessary to recover the amount due plus interest penalties the costs and disbursements of any action. Subd. 3. Upon a showing of good cause the director may grant an operator one thirty (30) days extension of time within which to file a return and make payment of taxes as required by this chapter provided that interest during such period of extension shall be added to the taxes due at the rate of ten (10 %) percent per annum. .Section 22 -010. PENALTIES Subd. 1. If any tax imposed by this chapter is not paid within the time herein specified for the payment or any extension thereof there shall be added thereto a specific_ penalty equal to ten (10 %) percent of the amount remaining unpaid. Subd. 2. In case of any failure to make and file a return within the time prescribed by this chapter, unless it is shown that such failure is not due to willful neglect there shall be added to the tax in addition to the ten (10 %) percent specific penalty provided in subdivision 1 above ten (10 %) percent if the failure is for not more than thirty (30) days with an additional five (5%) Percent for each additional thirty (30) days or fraction thereof during which much failure continues not exceeding twenty-five (25 %) percent in the agaregate If the penalty as computed does not exceed $10 a minimum penalty of $10 shall be assessed The amount so added to any tax shall be collected at the same time and the same manner and as a part of the tax unless the tax has been paid before the discovery of the negligence in which case the amount so added shall be collected in the same manner as the tax Subd. 3. If any person willful y fails to file any return or make any payment required by this chapter or willfully files a false or fraudulent return or willfully attempts in any manner to evade or defeat any such a tax or Payment thereof, there shall also be imposed as a penalty an amount equal to fifty (50 %) percent of any tax (less any amounts paid on the basis of such false or fraudulent return ) found due for the period to which such return related The penalty imposed by this subdivision shall be collected as part of the tax and shall be in addition to any other penalties provided by this chapter. Subd. 4. All payments received shall be credited first to penalties next to interest. and then to the tax due Subd 5. The amount of tax not timely aid together with an enalt provided by this section shall bear interest at the rate of eight (8%) percent per annum from the time such tax should have been paid until paid. Any interest -4- ORDINANCE NO and enalt shall a 11 be added p v d to the tax and be collected as part thereof, Section 22 -011, ADMINISTRATION—OF-TAX, The director shall administer and enforce the assessment and collection of the taxes imposed by this chapter The director_ shall cause to be prepared blank forms for the returns and other documents reauired by this chapter and shall distribute the same throughout the City and furnish them on application but failure to receive or secure them _ shall not relieve any person from any obligation required of him under this chapter, unless it can be—established-that the required forms were not available from the City. Section 22 -012 EXAMINE RECORDS The director and those pers ons actin on behalf of the director authorized in writing by the director may examine the books, papers and records of any operator in order to verify the accuracy of any return made. or if no return was made to ascertain the tax as provided in this chapter. Every such operator is directed and reauired to give to the said director or to his duly authorized agent or employee the means facilities and opportunity for such examinations and investigations as are hereby authorized - Section 22 -013 CONTRACT WITH STATE The City- Mang ger is authorized to confer with the Minnesota Commissioner of Taxation to the end that an agreement between the City and the Commissioner of Taxation may be entered into for the purpose of providing for the administration and collection of the taxes imposed by this chapter. Such an agreement shall not become effective until presented to the Council for its approval and when so approved the tax imposed —by 'this c a ter shall be collected and administered pursuant to the terms of said agreement. Section 22 -014 VIOLATIONS Any person who shall willfully fail to make a return reauired by this chapter• or who shall fail to pay the tax after written demand for payment: or who shall fail to remit the taxes collected or any penalty or interest imposed by this chapter after written demand for such payment. or who shall refuse to permit the director or any duly authorized agents or employees to examine the books records and papers under his or her control. or who shall willfully make any incomplete false or fraudulent return shall be gu_i.lty of a misdemeanor Section_ 22-015, USE OF PROCEEDS The ninety five (95 %) percent proceeds obtained from the collection of taxes pursuant to this chapter shall be used in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 477A.018 as the same may be amended from time to time to fund a local convention or tourism bureau for the purpose of marketing and promoting the City as a tourist or convention center, Section 22 -016 APPEALS, Subd, 1. Any operator aggrieved _by any notice order or determination made by the director under this chapter may file a petition for review of such notice, order or determination detailing the operator's reasons for contest n the notice• order or determination The petition shall contain the name of the -5- ORDINANCE N0. petitioner. the petitioner's address and the location of the lodg_in_g subject to the order, notice or determination Subd. 2. The petition for review shall be filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) days after the notice order or determination for which review is sought has been mailed or served upon the person requesting review. Subd. 3 Upon receipt of the etition the City or his desiznee shall set a date for a hearing and give the petitioner at least five (5) days Prior written notice of the date time and place of the hearing Subd. 4. At the hearing. the petitioner shall be liven an opportunity to show cause why the notice order or determination should be modified or withdrawn. The petitioner may be represented by counsel of petitioner's choosing at petitioner's own expense Subd. 5 The hearing shall be conducted by the City Manager or his designee. provided only that the person conducting the hearing shall not have participated in the drafting of the order notice or determination for which review is sought Subd. 6. The person conducting the hearing shall make written findings of fact and conclusions based upon the applicable sections of this chapter and evidence presented. The person conducting the hearing may affirm reverse or modify the notice order or determination made by the director Subd. 7. Any decision rendered by the City Manager pursuant to this subdivision may be appealed to the City Council A petitioner seeking to appeal a decision must file a written notice of appeal with the City Clerk within ten 10) days after the decision has been mailed to the petitioner The matter will thereupon be placed on the Council agenda as soon as is practical The Council shall then review -the findings of fact and conclusions to determine whether they were correct. Upon a determination by the Council that findings and conclusions were incorrect the Council may modify. reverse or affirm the decision of the 6. -City Manager or his designee upon the same standards as set forth in subdivision Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1986 Mayor -6- ORDINANCE N0. ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter.) -7- M & C No. 86 -08 August 7, 1986 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Subject: Recommended Changes to the Proposed Ordinance Establishing a Tax Imposed upon Lodging within Brooklyn Center To the Honorable Mayor and City Council Attached please find a copy of a memorandum from Paul Holmlund, Director of Finance, to myself relating to proposed changes in two sections of the proposed ordinance (Sections 22 -002 and 22- 007). Mr. Holmlund and I both believe strongly that these modifications as suggested in his memo be considered as changes to the ordinance. I have had an opportunity over the last couple of weeks to review what other communities have done with this type of tax, and I have some concerns about how these funds will be used after they have been collected and directed to the proposed tourism promotional bureau. In some communities such as Bloomington (which operates under special legislation) there are more strings attached to the control of the use of these funds which allow input by a city. Under current legislation there are limited opportunities for input available to the City once this operation has been set in motion, and that is not "all bad ". The City Attorney informs me that the City Council could opt out of the Process on any given year. However, this would be a rather drastic and cumbersome step for the City Council to take. The City of Brooklyn Center and the Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce over the years have established a good working relationship as it relates to community development and promotion, and I believe Brooklyn Center has been well served by this cooperative action. That community development and promotion effort would now have a third partner. That third partner is the Tourism Bureau which would be financed by the proposed ordinance you are considering. I have reservations about the ability of the three agencies, the City, the Chamber, and the Tourism Bureau, to work well over time without a clear, initial understanding of the absolute need for cooperative effort. I understand that there is a representative of each City on its Board of Directors and also two representatives from each Chamber. I am not sure this Board of Directors'. structure alone is enough to assure a cooperative effort. M & C No. 86 -08 -2- August 7, 1986 I have no reservations about the eventual desirability of this type of promotion activity and the Tourism Bureau, but I do have concern about the ability to establish a coordinated_ effort by all the agencies involved. The argument can be made that the hotels and motels are asking for this tax upon themselves and, therefore, they should have total and complete control over the monies. However, if they want complete and total control over the use of the monies, they could impose this fee or tax upon themselves voluntarily without City involvement by private joint agreement. The State of Minnesota chose to allow cities to take this action on behalf of the lodging, hotel and entertainment industry, and they limited city participation. Cities are not able to use a tax on the entertainment and hospitality industry for general revenue purposes. However, I believe the Legislature obviously saw the wisdom for a coordinated promotion and tourism effort on the part of all the major elements of the community, which includes the City of Brooklyn Center, its Chamber of Commerce, and the lodging industry. I also believe it would be a mistake at this time to pass this ordinance before there is a clearer understanding of the need for and commitment to coordinating community promotional activity. It is my recommendation, that your action be to table this matter for further review and direct the City Manager to meet with the Brooklyn Center Chamber and the proponents of the lodging tax, and report back to the City Council on the feasibility of adopting methods of assuring cooperative community promotional activity. Re °pectfully submitted, AMU Gerald G. S inter City Manager r DEPARTMENT CITY O OF BROOKLYN FINANCE .CENTER MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter FROM: Director of Finance DATE: August 6, 1986 SUBJECT: R _C T O PRO CITY OR DINANCE EL RATING TO A TAX IMPOSED UPON L ODGING W I met with the Finance Directors of Brooklyn Park and Fridley to review the proposed City Ordinance relating to a tax imposed upon lodging in our respective cities. After reviewing the ordinance, we agreed to recommend three changes to the ordinance. They are as follows: Section 22- 002 IMPOSITIM-OF TAX 1. The first sentence should be amended to read "T here isher imp a ta_x of thre (_3_%) perce on the re c harged by ' an o per at o r f or pro- Vlding lodgingt0 " any p erson " after th e a doptio n o f th is or din anc e a nd upon thirty (30) days follo i l egal publication." (This will replace "on and after August 1, 1986.") 2. Immediately following the second sentence, which states "The tax, shall be stated and charged separately and shall be collected by the operator from the lodger ", the following sentence should be inserted: "Th purpos of tax must b e ma to the" by ei ther inserting _th_e _s tatem ent '_Pro ceeds f rom this tax used .to "f 'a l ocal co or tourism bur eau' on th lo dger ' s re or byp osting`the'statem ent at _the _registra desk wh ere i can be c learly "se b y the lod ger . " (We feel that the lodger should know that this is not a general City sales tax.) " Sosuet 461 n NtC .. f S Memorandum to Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager August 6, 1986 ' Page Two Section 22-007. EXAM INATION OF RETURNS, ADJUSTMENTS, NOT AND DEMAND 3. This paragraph should be replaced by the following paragraph: "The director may rely up on the Minne S ales tax return filed by th_e_operator with the State o Minnesot in d the _accuracy of a r eturn fi und this ordinance. - However th di shall be authorized t o make any` nvestigation ( on o f the records and_a_ccou_n_ts of the person I makinq th re turn i t he di reasona determin _t _ su_ch .steps ar neces for de th 'correctn of the r eturn. The tax computed on the basis o s uch � exa shall be the tax to be If the tax due 'is- f oun d to be rg -eater th t hat paid, such ex sh be paid to th City within ten {10) da ys a fte r rec eipt of ` a _n t given eithe or se by r egi st ere d mail to t he _a ddre ss sho on the return. If the tax paid is gre th the to be due, the excess sh all be r efunded t o the pe rson who paid _the 4 _tax _tot - Cit ywith in ten (1 des af det of su refund. (This statement would allow the finance director to rely on the sales tax return as filed with the State and still allows the director to examine the operator's records if the director reasonably determines that such steps are necessary.) Paul W. Holmlund PWH:ps lob CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 11th day of August, of 1986 at 7:30 p.m." at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway to consider an amendment to Chapters 8 and 23 regarding licensing of bottled and canned soft drinks. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the Personnel Coordinator at 56 -5440 to make arrangements, ORDINANCE N0. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 8 AND 23 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING LICENSING OF BOTTLED AND CANNED SOFT DRINKS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: follows.: Section 1. Chapter 8, Section 3. Subd.'5 is hereby amended as I I, Section 3. Licenses. Subd. 5. License Fee. Fees for licenses issued hereunder shall be in the amount set forth by the Council from time to time for Bakery Food Vehicles, Catering ood Vehicles, g Food Establishments, Itinerant Food Establishments, Readily - perishable Food Vehicles, Vending Machines ( excludes bottled and soft drink vending mac_ hines) and Special Food Handling Licenses. Section 2. Chapter 23 -010 is hereby amended as follows: Section 23 -010 LICENSE FEES. The fees for the various licenses shall be as hereinafter stated, not withstanding other ordinance provisions regarding the specific fee. . Fee. (annual un- Jyoe of License Required by Section License less otherwise Expires stated Vending Machine - Vendor [8- 101.01] 88 -Sec.5 February 15 Bulk Vendor 1 $25 Nonperishable Vendor texcludes bottled and canned soft $8 plus $4 per drinking vending machines) machine location Section 3. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1986. ORDINANCE N0.' Mayon ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter.) Md CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of 1986.at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek, Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding administrative permit fees. ORDINANCE N0. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT FEES 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 -800 ADNaNISTRATIVE PERMITS. No person shall use his property or /and assist, countenance or allow the use of his or of anther's property located within the municipality for any of the following purposes or uses without first having obtained a permit from the City zoning official. The use shall not for the duration of the permit, considering the time of year, the parking layout for the principal use, the nature of the proposed use and other pertinent factors, substantially impair the parking capacity of the principal use or impair the safe and efficient movement of pedestrian and vehicular traffic either on or off the premises. A waiver from certain provisions of the sign ordinance and from certain parking requirements of this ordinance is implied by the granting of an administrative permit, but only for the duration of the permit and to the extent authorized by said permit. 1. Tents, stands and other temporary structures for church functions, civic functions, charities, carnivals, and similar purposes for a period not exceeding 10 days. The permit fee shall be [$2] as set forth by City Council resolution Certificates of insurance may be required to assure the public welfare. 2. Off -site signs promoting or announcing civic functions or community events may authorized by the City Council for a period not exceeding 10 days provided: a. The off -site signs are located on private property in the Commerical (Cl, C1A, and C2) or Industrial (I -1 and I -2) zoning districts. b. The off -site signs are limited to no more than five locations; and c. There are no more than one sign per location. Permits for such signs will be considered independent of any other permits authorized by this section of the ordinance. The permit fee shall be [$2] per sign location and as set forth by City Council resolution. 2. Out of door retail sale, storage and display -of merchandise or offering of services when accessory to or promoting a permitted use or a special use within a nonresidential zoning district as follows: ORDINANCE N0. a. The out of door retail sale, display, and storage of nursery and garden merchandise lawn furniture and equipment, for a period not to exceed 30 consecutive weeks in any one calendar year. The permit fee shall be [$5.I as set forth by City Council resolution. b. Miscellaneous out of door retail sales or displays or promotional events for periods not to exceed 10 consecutive days. Two such 10 day permits may be allowed per premises per calendar year. The permit fee shall be [$2.] as set forth by City Council resolution. C. Gasoline service stations may have miscellaneous out of door retail sales, displays or promotional events for periods not to exceed 30 consecutive days. Three such 30 day permits may be _ allowed per premises per calendar year. Car wash fund raisers which are not classified as being accessory to or promoting a service station activity are permitted for periods not to exceed 10 consecutive days. Four such 10 day permits may be allowed per premises per calendar year. Permit fees shall be [$2.] as set forth by City Council resolution. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Pate (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of 1986 at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding the zoning classification of certain land. ORDINANCE N0. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN LAND THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 35 -1160 and Section 35 -1200 of the City Ordinances are hereby amended in the following manner: Section 35 -1160. MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT (R7). The following properties are hereby established as being within the (R7) Multiple Family Residence District zoning classification: [ Outlot F, except the westerly 100 feet of that part of Outlot F, Brooklyn Center Industrial Park Plat l which lies in Section 2, T118, R21.1 Tract B, R.L.S. No. 1543. Tract A, R.L.S. No. 1380. Tract I, R.L.S. No. 1594• All of the southeasterly half of vacated Earle Brown Drive, as platted in Twin Cities Interchan a Park, according to the recorded plat ti�o� adjoi ning sa d Tract A. The westerly 40 feet of Tract H, R.L.S. No. 1380, south of the easterly extension of the line of Tract A, Section 35 -1200. INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT (I -1). The following properties are hereby established as being within the (I -1) Industrial Park District zoning classification: (Lot 3, Block 1, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition. Outlots C and D, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition, except that portion of said Outlots lying within Tracts B, C, and D of Registered Land Survey No. 1274. That part of Outlot I, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition, lying east of the following described line: Commencing at a point in the northerly line of said Outlot I, distant 770 feet southeasterly (as measured along said northerly line) from the most northwesterly corner thereof,- (said - northerly line assumed at bearing south 68 45' 34 east); thence south 21 14' 26 west a distance of 695.13 feet; thence southwesterly along a tangent curve, concave southerly, having a radius of-2233-35 feet, central angle of 110 27' 38 to the intersection of said curve with the right -of- way line of Shingle Creek Parkway, and there terminating. ORDINANCE NO. Lot 2, Block 3, Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Plat 2. The west 325 feet as measured along the north and south lines thereof, of the following described property: Than part of the southeast 1/4 of the northeast 1/4 of Section 35. Township 119, Range 21, lying north of the north line of Lot 2, Block 1, Brooklyn Center Industrial Park Plat 2, and the north line of Lot 1, Block 1, Twin Cities Interchange Park and its eastely extension and lying east of the east line of Lot 1, ,Block 1, Brooklyn Center Industrial Park Plat 2 and its northerly extension. The north line of said property being determined by Judicial Landmarks set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 4945.7 Tracts D, H, I, K, and L of R.L.S. No. 1499• Tract A, R.L.S. No. 1274. Tract B, R.L.S. No. 1348. Tracts A, B, C, D, R.L.S. No. 1360• Tracts B and C, R.L.S. No. 1382. Lot 2, Block 1, Berean Addition. Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Plat 2. Lot 3, Block 1, Twin Cities Interchange Park Addition. Tracts A, B, C, and D, R.L.S. No. 1329. Tracts A, B, C, D, E, F and H, R.L.S. No. 1482. Tract A, R.L.S. loo. 1538. Tract A, R.L.S. No. 1405. Tract A, R.L.S'. No. 1537 Tracts A, B, and C, R.L.S. No. 1564. Tracts A, B, C, D, E, F and G, R.L.S. No. 1572• Tracts A, B, C, D and E, R.L.S. No. 1377. Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Brookdale Corporate Center Addition. ' Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Brooklyn Farm Plat. Tracts D and F, R.L.S. No. 1594• Tracts D and E R.L.S. No. 1380, except highway. ORDINANCE NO. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 1986, Mayon ATTEST Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) I MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION JULY 31, 1986 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Lowell Ainas, Mike Nelson, Planning Director of re Wallace Bernards and Ann Wallerstedt. Also present were and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planner Gary Shallcross. The Secretary noted that Commissioner Sandstrom had called to say that he would be unable to attend and was excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 17, 1986 Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve the minutes of the July 17, 1986 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Ainas, Nelson, and Bernards. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Wallerstedt. APPLICATION NO. 86029 (David Otto) o1F lowingThee hairrm na s� explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for a variance from Section 35 - 704 of the City Ordinances to allow full retail use of the building at 5810 Xerxes Avenue North while providing fewer parking stalls than required by the ordinance. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 86029 attached). The Secretary noted that the Planning Commission had recommended a change in the retail parking formula which would have eliminated the need for the variance. He stated that the City Council considered that amendment and deferred approval of a first reading and asked for more information. The Secretary stated that, since that time, the Planner had prepared a memo providing additional information on potential building construction resulting from the formula change and the potential traffic generation. He stated that the City had also received a comment from Short - Elliott - Hendrickson on this topic. He reminded the Commission of the traffic study done by Short- Elliott- Hendrickson at the request of the City in 1985 He stated that the intersection that would probably be most affected by the ordinance change would be John Martin Drive and Shingle Creek Parkway. He noted that the letter from SEH stated that the level of service might, at worst, drop to level of service C from level of service B under the probable development scenario in the traffic study. The Secretary stated that staff would recommend an ordinance amendment more strongly than a variance in this case, but that a variance could be justified under the present ordinance. Commissioner Bernards asked for an explanation of the reference to the "southeast" corner of the building. The Secretary explained that that is where the proof -of- parking area within the building is located. Commissioner Bernards asked whether parking was permitted on Xerxes Avenue North or Northway Drive. The Secretary stated that Xerxes Avenue North was posted "no parking ", but that he was not sure if Northway Drive is posted or not. He stated that he had never seen anyone park on Northway Drive. Commissioner Bernards asked whether both accesses to this site were on the property in question. The Secretary stated that the easterly access was shared with the Health Spa. 7 -31 -86 - r Commissioner Malecki asked whether there would be a surplus of 13 parking stalls under the new formula. The Secretary responded in the affirmative. There followed a discussion of the options before the Planning Commission. The Secretary stated that the variance could be denied with a recommendation to adopt the ordinance, or tabled with recommendation that the ordinance be studied by the City Council. He also stated that the matter could be sent on to the City Council together with a recommendation to approve the variance, but accompanied with a recommendation to change the ordinance as well. Chairman Lucht asked whether the tenant remodeling would come back to the Planning Commission. The Secretary responded in the negative. Chairman Lucht then asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Otto stated that he had nothing to add to the report. He stated that he did not believe there was parking allowed on Northway Drive. He also explained that his lease agreement with the Health Spa for parking stalls on the St. Paul Book site had lapsed and that, therefore, he was free to use all of the stalls on his property. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing on Application No. 86029 and asked whether anyone present wished to comment. Seeing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86029 AND RECOMMENDING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 86029 on the basis of the findings listed below and recommending adoption of an ordinance amendment regarding the retail parking formula. The findings in favor of the variance are as follows: 1. A hardship is experienced by the applicant in that a substantial portion of the building is reserved for proof -of- parking and is, therefore, underutilized in order to deal with a potential parking problem which has no history of existing on the site. 2. The reuse of the building originally designed and used for another purpose is somewhat unique within the C2 zoning district. 3. The hardship is created by the existing ordinance which requires much more parking for each 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area for a smaller retail establishment than for a larger retail center. 4. No detriment to surrounding property is anticipated if the entire building is utilized for retail sales purposes. Voting in favor of the previous motion: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Ainas, Nelson, Bernards and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. 7 -31 -86 -2- I'� ADJOURNMENT efi�i Secretary briefly mentioned to the Planning Commission upcoming business items on an apartment development on 69th Avenue North and the cut - through traffic concern in the Central Neighborhood. There was a motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:09 p.m. Chairman 7 -31 -86 -3- Planning Commission Information Sheet Applicant: David Otto Location: 5810 Xerxes Avenue North Request: Variance The applicant requests a variance from Section 35 -704, Subdivision 2c of the Zoning Ordinance to allow less than the required number of parking stalls for retail use of the entire building at 5810 Xerxes Avenue North. The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded by Xerxes Avenue North on the west, by Northway Drive on the north, by First Minnesota Savings Bank on the east, and by the health spa building and TCF on the south. Issue Clarification and Background The building in question has a gross floor area of 14,743 sq. ft. Under the parking formula set forth in the Zoning Ordinance for retail establishment, the entire building would be required to have 11+ (8 x 13.743) = 121 spaces. The applicant, who owns the building, proposes 14,353 sq. ft. of retail space and 390 sq. ft. of warehouse space for a total requirement of 119 spaces. The site presently has 92 spaces and there are five additional proof -of- parking spaces inside the building which would be lost to the proposed interior remodeling. The extent of the variance is, therefore, 27 spaces. The existing building is in conformance because the floor space within the building is divided into 11,700 sq. ft. of retail space requiring 96.6-or 97 spaces, and 3,043 sq. ft. of garage parking area within the building which has been used for limited storage space. No additional parking spaces were required for the garage /storage area. The internal parking spaces were accepted by the City in 1975 when the City lifted a deed restriction on the use of the building for an S and H Greenstamp Redemption Center and replaced it with a restriction that approximately 3,000 sq. ft. within the building be reserved for proof -of- parking and storage use. The proof -of- parking provision has never been exercised for customer parking since 1975. In fact, for 10 years, the Health Spa had an agreement with this property to use over 20 parking stalls on the lot at 5810 Xerxes Avenue North. Variance Standards The proposed variance is subject to the Standards for a Variance contained in Section 35 -240 of the Zoning Ordinance (attached). The applicant, Mr. David Otto, has submitted a letter addressing those standards (also attached).. Mr. Otto states that the proposed remodeling would make better use of existing parking by adding an entrance to the north' side of the building toward the east lot. Two of the tenants presently face Xerxes Avenue North and have no parking directly in front of their space. Mr. Otto argues. that the business in the building are assets to the community and that a real hardship is worked on them when improvement of the tenant layout is limited by an overly restrictive parking requirement. Regarding standard (b) pertaining to uniqueness of the circumstances, Mr. Otto simply asserts that the existing site circulation and shape are unique and not common generally to other property in the same zoning classification. Mr. Otto states that the hardship is the result of the ordinance parking requirement and has not been created by anyone presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. Finally, Mr. Otto states that the granting of the variance will have no detrimental effect on surrounding property, but will, in fact, serve to enhance the Is vitality of this commercial node. 7 -31 -86 -1- Application No. 86029 continued Analysis The applicant pictures the hardship as an imbalance between parking and building entrances caused by the existing restriction on space within the building which reduces flexibility in arranging tenant spaces. (The restricted area is at the southeast corner of the building and does somewhat limit the possibilities for entrance on the east side of the building where much of the site's parking is located). While this is a valid point, it seems clear that the existing tenant spaces could be provided more convenient access without doing away with the restricted area in the building. It seems to us that what the applicant really wants is full or nearly full utilization of an existing building in the C2 zone for uses which are permitted in that zone. The real hardship is that building space is being kept out of use to meet a potential parking problem when, in actual fact, a parking surplus has existed for years.- Further, the City recognized the parking excess in 1975 when it gave its blessing to an off -site parking agreement with the Health Spa for use of over 20 spaces on the subject site. So, the hardship is really underutilization of existing building space in order to live within the letter of the ordinance, not because an actual parking shortage exists. The applicant states that the shape and site circulation are unique. Certainly, every commercial site can be said to be unique. The site design in this case may qualify for being uniquely bad - ie. two tenant entrances on the west side of the building (for visibility onto Xerxes) with no parking adjacent to those spaces. However, it is not unique in the sense of the CEAP property or the Brookdale Six Office buildings, with elongated accesses and soil and topographic problems. It is a small retail center with frontage on two streets, one of which is a major thoroughfare. The site layout is certainly poor, but this circumstance was not really created by the City, or the ordinance parking requirement. It was created by the original owners and developers of the property with the help of their architects. With respect to detrimental effects on surrounding property, we would agree that, in this case, no detrimental effect should occur, that parking would be adequate. The detrimental effects would be more indirect. The granting of variances unless clearly justified generally undermines community standards from which all presumably benefit. The Health Spa will also be more restricted in its ability to find additional parking. Assuming for the moment that the circumstances in this case are unique (which they do not appear to be) and there will be no detrimental effect from granting a variance, the real question is what is the hardship and what created it? The hardship cited by the applicant restricted tenant layout - was really created by the previous owner, not the Zoning Ordinance. A hardship of underutilization, however, does seem directly related to the ordinance parking requirement rather than to any parking shortage which.has actually been experienced. Recommendation As the Commission is aware, the retail parking formula in the Zoning Ordinance has been under study for almost a year. One of the unique features of the existing formula is that it requires much more parking for the first 15,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area than for additinal floor area. Since the building in question is just under 15,000 sq. ft., it bears the heaviest burden under the formula. Parking studies do not bear out the presumption in the ordinance that the initial square footage in a center generates a larger share of the traffic. In fact, they indicate that traffic generation per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area increases generally with the size of the development and breadth of the tenant mix. We again recommend 7 -31 -86 -2- Application No. 86029 continued consideration of an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to make the retail parking formula more neutral in its effect, rather than weighted so heavily at the low end. (Further information on the proposed ordinance amendment is attached). However, if it is felt that an ordinance change is unwarranted, we would still recommend a variance be granted. A parking variance (Application No. 78009) was granted in somewhat similar circustances when Pilgrim Cleaners converted a former gas station into a dry cleaners and pick -up station. Both cases involve the re -use of buildings originally designed for somewhat different purposes than their present use. 7 -31 -86 -3 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the day of , of 1986 at p.m. at the City Hall, 330 Shingle Creek Parkway to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding parking requirements for retail buildings. 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. -0RDINANCE N0. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR RETAIL BUILDINGS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 35 -704. MINIMUM PARKING SPACES REQUIRED 2. Commerce (Retail and Service /Office) c. Other retail stores or centers and financial institutions: [Eleven] Ten spaces for the first 1,000 square feet of gross floor area or fraction thereof; [eight spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 1,000 square feet, but not exceeding 15,000 square feet; six spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 15,000 square feet, but not exceeding 30,000 square feet; 5.5 spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area exceeding 30,000 square feet.] Five (5) spaces for each additional 1,000 square feet of gross floor area up to 500,000 square feet; 5.5 spaces for each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area over 500,000 square feet. Section 2.- This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) /1fl MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection',( DATE: August 7, 1986 SUBJECT: Amended Building Plan for Stephen Cook at 5312 Russell Avenue North During the past six months the Planning Commission and City Council had considered two applications submitted by Stephen Cook involving the property at 5312 Russell Avenue North. The first application (Application No. 86005) was a request for a lot area variance so that Mr. Cook could construct a two - family dwelling in the R2 zoning district. , That application was approved by the City Council on February 24, 1986 subject to replatting of the property into a single parcel and review by the City Council of a site and building plan for the purpose of possibly adding conditions necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood. The other application, submitted by Mr. Cook (Application No. 86013) was for preliminary plat approval at which time he also submitted a site and building plan indicating his proposal for developing a two - family dwelling on the parcel. That application, along with the final plat, was approved by the City Council on April 7, 1986. Mr. Cook's plan was for a 56' x 46' side -by -side two- family dwelling to be situated in approximately in the center of the lot set back approximately 17.5' from the north property line and 16.36' from the south property line. Attached are copies of the information sheets, Planning Commission minutes, City Council minutes and the site and building plans relating to Planning Commission Application Nos. 86005 and 86013 for your review. Mr. Cook, apparently for financial reasons, is unable to build that plan and has submitted a revised proposal for an upper - lower type of two- family dwelling with an attached three car garage /entry area. The building will have the appearance of a single- family split entry home with an attached three car garage, although it would be a legal two - family dwelling. The dimensions are 28' x 44' for the upper -lower dwelling units, 40' x 22' for the attached garage /entry area. It will be located in the center of the lot with an 11' setback from the north property line and 11.75' setback from the south property line. The upper unit, which Mr. Cook and his family plan to occupy, would be three bedrooms while the lower unit would be two bedrooms. Attached are copies of Mr. Cook's current site plan and the building and floor plans for his proposal. These applications generated some concern and comments from neighbors in the area as is indicated in the minutes. Due to the changes, and the fact that the Council had required its review of the plans, the matter must go back to the City Council before Mr. Cook can obtain permits to construct the project. We have sent an informational notice (attached) to those neighbors that had previously been contacted indicating that the Council may take additional comments. Mr. Cook's amended plans are in conformance with all Zoning Ordinance requirements. It is my opinion that the development of the new plan will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood. Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council acknowledge the amended plans as being consistent with its past approvals and authorize the issuance of the building permits subject to compliance_ with Building Code requirements. RAW:mlg e Planning Commi ssion Information Sheet Application No. 86005 Applicant: Stephen L. Cook Location: 5312 Russell Avenue. North Request: Variance. The applicant requests a variance from Section 35 -400 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow construction of a- duplex on a lot that is deficient in area. The property in question is zoned R2 and is bounded on the north by a duplex, on the east and south by single - family homes, and on the west by Russell Avenue North. Two family dwellings are permitted uses in the R2 zoning district. Specifically, the applicant wishes to build on two parcels of land that are combined for tax purposes and are for sale jointly. One lot is 60.5' wide by 133.45' deep. The other half -lot to the south is 30.25' wide by the same depth. The total area of the combined lots is 12,110 sq. ft. The Zoning Ordinance requires that two- family dwellings in the R2 zoning district have a land area of 6,200 sq. ft. per dwelling unit, or 12,400 sq. ft. for the total structure. The deficiency in this case is, therefore, 290 sq. ft. (approximately 2.34 %). A lot area variance is subject to the standards set forth in Section 35 -240 of the Zoning Ordinance and Section 15 -112 of the Subdivision Ordinance (see both attached). In general, these standards require that: the circumstances of the property be unique; that the applicant will suffer a hardship if the ordinance is strictly follow because he/she will be denied the reasonable use of their property; that .the circumstance was not caused by the applicant or the - property owner past or present; and that the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the sur- rounding neighborhood. The applicant, Mr. Stephen Cook, has submitted a letter (attached) addressing the variance standards. Mr. Cook points out that the 60' lot is buildable by itself for a single - family dwelling and.that, if the variance is denied, he would have no reason to buy the additional 30' wide lot. - He states that, to the best of his knowledge, the situation in question is unique and not common in the R2 district. Mr. Cook goes on to say that the situation has not been caused intentionally by anyone by anyone presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land and also that granting the variance would not be detrimental to. . . the neiohbor- .hood. The letter does not really reason how the standards are met, 'but, for -the most part, simply asserts that they are met. While the applicant's arguments are understated, we agree with the conclusion. Given the alternatives (two single- family homes with a 30' no -man's land left tax delinquent in between), it would seem unreasonable in this case to deny the variance request. The situation is fairly unique. There are other vacant multiple - lot combinations in the city, but, in most of those cases, both lots are buildable in their own right (eg. two 40' wide lots which, under Section 35 -500 are usually buildable). The situation has not been created by the property owner. The existino R2 zoning and the lot area requirement for a duplex have come about after the proper - ty was subdivided. Finally, there is no real negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood. There are four additional duplexes further north on Russell Avenue North and an additional 12 duplexes within a two block radius of the property. It should be noted that the current owner of the property in question (who is also the former owner of 5300 Russell Avenue North, the house to the south) has submitted a letter also requesting that the variance be granted (see attached), 2 -13 -86 -1- k s Application No. 86005 continued The general policy on lot variances over the last 10 years or so has been to allow a variance if two of the three lot requirements (area, width and depth) are met. The width requirement for a two - family interior lot is 75'. The minimum depth is 110'. Both these requirements are met in this case. It would, therefore, seem .consistent with past policy to approve the variance request. Section 35 -540 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that multiple parcels devoted to a single use must be combined into.a single parcel through platting or registered land survey. Accordingly, staff would recommend that the application be approved subject to the following condition: 1. The property in question shall be combined into a single parcel through I t platting or reaiste d p g re land survey, said plat or R.L.S. to be filed at the County prior to the issuance of a building permit. I 2 -13 -86 -2- 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 FEBRUARY 13, 1986 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, Carl Sandstrom, Wallace Bernards and Ann Wallerstedt. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planner Gary Shallcross. Chairman Lucht noted that Commissioner Nelson had called to say he would be unable to attend and the Planner noted that Commissioner Ainas was coming from Brainerd and, due to the weather conditions, might not make the meeting. ADMINISTER OATH OF OFFICE The Secretary then administered the oath of office to Commissioner Sandstrom for a new two year term to expire December 31, 1987. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 30, 1986 Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Wallerstedt to approve the minutes of the January 30,1986 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Bernards, and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Sandstrom. The motion passed. / APPLICATION NO. 86005 (Stephen Cook) . Noting that the applicant for the first item was not present, Chairman Lucht recommended that the application of Stephen Cook be considered first. The Secretary then introduced Application No. 86005, a request for - a variance from Section 35 -400 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow construction of a two - family dwelling on two combined parcels of land that together are deficient in required land area. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No.. 86005 attached). Commissioner Bernards asked whether there were any structures on the lot. The Secretary responded in the negative. Commissioner Wallerstedt asked whether there was a problem with building a home on two lots. The Secretary stated that the - property would have to be replatted into a single parcel. The Secretary further explained the location of other duplexes in the surrounding area along Russell, Queen and Penn Avenues. Chairman Lucht asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Stephen Cook stated that he planned to build a double bungalow and live in one of the units. He stated that there have been some concerns expressed regarding crowding by people who live in the neighborhood. He pointed out that he also has a concern for the area since he would live there in the future and has lived in the Brooklyn Center area in the past. Commissioner Malecki asked whether the duplex would have to meet setback requirements. The Secretary responded in the affirmative. He explained that the variance was only for lot area and that no other variances were implied in the application. 2 -13 -86 -1- PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 86005) Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Mr. Louis Hedlund of 5316 -20 Russell Avenue North pointed out that the lot in question fell below the minimum requirements for a two - family dwelling. He stated that the other lots along Russell and in this neighborhood generally were larger than the minimum requirement for two - family dwellings. He also stated that g the single-family le -fami 1 lots to the g Y south and east are the same size lots as that proposed for a two - family dwelling in this case. He pointed out that the applicant would be able to put a garage three feet from the side lot line. He stated that he did not want a two - family dwelling on too small a lot. He concluded his comments by stating that he opposed the application and recommended denial. Commissioner Wallerstedt asked Mr. Cook how the duplex would sit on the lot. Mr. Cook responded that he had not decided on a layout because plans were tentative until the variance was approved. He stated that the setbacks for a single- family home would be the same as for a double bungalow. He also stated that a single - family home on a 60' lot (which would not require a variance) would be more crowded than a two - family dwelling on a 90' lot. Mr. Hedlund noted that Mr. Cook had stated that he would occupy one of the units, but pointed out that Mr. Cook could leave at any time and rent out both units. Mr. Robert L. Hansen of 4951 Logan Avenue North, the owner of the vacant lots in question, explained the past history of providing utilities to properties in the area. He stated that the City never reimbursed him for a common sewer line along 53rd Avenue North. He stated that he lost money in providing those utilities and had always wanted to build a double bungalow on the property in question in order to recoup some of the money he had put into utilities. Mrs. Hedlund of 5316 -20 Russell Avenue North pointed out that all of the lots in the neighborhood that are two - family lots are much larger than the lot in question, by about 2,000 sq. ft. She stated that this lot was about 20' narrower than the other lots in the area that have duplexes. Mr. Ray Blacik of 5324 -28 Russell Avenue North stated that he had owned his duplex since September of 1984. He stated that one of the selling points for his property was the large lots in the area. He stated that he had wanted to get away from the crowding that he experienced in living in St. Paul. He asked how close the duplex could come to a side lot line. The Secretary explained that the minimum sideyard setback for dwelling space is 10 whether it is ,a duplex or a single- family dwelling. He explained further that dwelling space could be allowed to be 5' on one side.if,it was 15' on the other side. He also pointed out that the two - family dwellings in the area have the right to expand up to the minimum setback requirements. Mr. Blacik stated that he wished to express his protest against the proposed variance. Mrs. Vincent Hall of 5311 Queen Avenue North stated that she preferred one two - family to two singles. Mr. Blacik commented that the applicant could not put two single- family dwellings on the property. There followed a discussion concerning the 30' half lot which was being sold with a 60' lot to make up the lot in question. It was pointed out that the property to the south also has a 30' half lot which, if combined with the 30' lot on the south side of this property, could make up a second single- family lot. 2 -13 -86 -2- i Mrs. Ellenwood of 5300 Russell Avenue North stated that she has the same size lot as proposed by the applicant for a two - family dwelling and she feels that it is fine for a single - family, home. She stated that she opposed the variance. Commissioner Wallerstedt asked what would be the market value of the duplex which Mr. Cook would build. Mr. Cook responded that his duplex would be a smaller version of one that his brother built along Brooklyn Boulevard and that the market value would likely be between $150,000 and $175,000. Mr. Blacik stated that the market value of his double bungalow is $109,000 as valued by the City. Mr. Cook clarified that he was estimating the market value, not the Assessor's value. Mrs. Hedlund asked about the size and layout of the duplex. Mr. Cook stated that that has not really een designed gned yet because his plans are tenative , subject to approval of the variance. , He stated that the property in question was only about 3' short of having the legally .required land area. Mrs. Hedlund stated that most of the neighbors surrounding the property are opposed to the variance and urged the Planning Commission to recommend denial. Chairman Lucht asked whether anyone else had anything to say. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Bernards to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that it was not Mr. Cook's fault that the lot in question was slightly smaller than required by City Ordinance. He stated that he did not know what other people in the area would do with the lot if they owned it, but stated that he felt a two- family dwelling in the area would enhance the neighborhood. Commissioner Wallerstedt noted that the lot in question is 2.34% deficient in land area. She asked at what point a deficiency becomes critical so that the variance would behave to be denied. The Secretary stated that there was no definite level. He stated that the City used to have as part of its ordinance a "70% rule" whereby dots that met the 70% of the minimum requirement were granted variances. He stated that the ordinance has to be looked at as a minimum, not an average. He added, however, that the policy on lot variances has generally been to allow a variance if two of the three standards (area, width and depth) are met and as long as the request appears reasonable. Commissioner Wallerstedt asked whether the view would be obstructed possibly or property values detracted from if the two family were built up to the setback. The Secretary stated that he could not say for sure. He asked in return whether perhaps the vacant lot devalues adjacent property. He stated that the Assessor would not likely rule that a two- family dwelling would devalue neighboring property. Regarding setbacks, he stated that the duplex would not obstruct views more than a single - family home, because both are subject to the same setbacks. Chairman Lucht pointed out that a single - family house on the lot in question could have the same floor area as a two- family dwelling. The Planner stated that one of the concerns regarding the variance was the possibility of building 'a single-family home on only a 60' lot and that the 30' lot might somehow go delinquent or not be properly maintained. He pointed out that a two - family dwelling on the 90' lot would be consistent with the zoning district and would make full use of the available land. 2 -13 -86 -3- ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86005 (Stephen Cook) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend approval of Application No. 86005, - on the grounds that the Standards for a Variance are met, and subject to the following condition: 1. The property in question shall be combined into a single parcel through platting or registered land survey, said plat or R.L.S. to be filed at the County prior to the issuance of a building permit. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Bernards and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 86004 (Paul Worwa) The Secretary then introduced what had originally been scheduled as the first item of business, an appeal from a de ermination that Section 35 -405 of the Zoning Ordinance permits only five childre , including children,of the resident family, in a family day care operation in the R3 zoning district. e Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (See lanning Commis ion Information Sheet for Application No. 86004 attached). The ecretary also larified the wall separation between townhouses. He stated that t o one -hour lls are required by a property, line separation, not by zoning designa ion. He g e examples of rental townhouse complexes (Marvin Gardens, Victoria To houses Georgetown Townhouses) which do not have two one -hour separations be ween ts. He also reviewed with the Commission the past revision of the or . anc which allowed day care and other permitted home occupations in multiple - anvil residential districts. He stated that five children was decided on as a li 't be cause of a concern regarding possible congestion in multiple - family distric s, particularly apartment zones. The Secretary also referred to the licensing t dards used by the State and the County in determining how many children could go nto a family day care situation. The Secetary stated that he did not have thos standards at hand, but would try to get them for the Commission's review in dete 'ning what is an appropriate number of children to be allowed in a townhouse f ly day care operation. Commissioner Wallerstedt asked if the e wa a specife recommendation from the staff. The Secretary answered that a di not recommend that the la P nnin hold the appeal Commission uphold cal since it pp eemed airly obvious that allowing beyond five children in the R3 district would e contr ry to the ordinance. He stated that the Planning Commission may, however, ish to c nsider a change in the ordinance to allow more children in a day care op ration i a townhouse. The Secretary then paraphrased the requirements of the tate law ith respect to zoning. He stated that 12 children in a licensed day are operat on must be allowed as a permitted single- family use. He stated tha 13 to 16 hildren in a licensed day care operation in a multiple - family istrict mus be allowed "unless otherwise provided." He stated that the Cit does otherwi e provide through its limitation of five children including child en of the famil in multiple-family districts. The Secretary explained that he di not feel the la requiring 13 to 16 children in a day care operation as a permitte use in the multi p e- family districts referred to operations within a single resid ntial dwelling uni , though it might exist within such a district or within a compl x. The Secretary s ated that the Commission might want to look at land area as some ind of a g uge for the number of children that could be allowed. He pointed out that ingle- family homes are required to have more land area than townhouses, which, in turn, are required to have more land area than apartment units. 2 -13 -86 -4- RESOLUTION NO. 86 -32 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH BRAUN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC. FOR CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATIONS AND TESTING SERVICES FOR PROJECT NO. 1985 -23, CONTRACT 1986 -C (CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager noted that the Resolution Approving Limited Use Permit from MN /DOT for Use of Properties at Centerbrook Golf Course would be tabled; until the next meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS V PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 86005 SUBMITTED BY STEPHEN COOK REQUESTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 35 -400 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF A TI FAMILY DWELLING ON TWO COMBINED PARCELS OF LAND THAT TOGETHER ARE DEFICIENT IN REQUIRED LAND AREA The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its February 13, 1986 meeting. The Director of Planning & Inspection referred the Council to pages one through four of the February 13, 1986 Planning Commission minutes and the attached informational sheet on Application No. 86005 attached with those minutes. He roceeded to review the he a p pphcation and noted that the deficiency is 290 square feet or approximately 2.34 %. He added that the Planning Commission did recommend approval of Application No. 86005 subject to the . property being combined into a single parcel through platting or registered land survey. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated that there were many people present at the February 13, 1986 Planning Commission meeting who objected to the duplex because of the negative impact it may have on the other sites in the area which are larger. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated that the Planning Commission does not normally ask for site and building plan approval for one and two family residences. Councilmember Lhotka asked about the required setbacks. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated the front setback would be 35 and the side setback would be 10 noting the exception that it could be less than 10' but no closer than 5' provided it is 10' on the other side and that there are no doors or windows on the 5' side. Councilmember Hawes asked about the width of the lots to the ,north of the proposed site. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated that these lots are between 100' and 110' in width. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 86005 submitted by Stephen Cook requesting a variance from Section 35 -400 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow construction of a two- family dwelling on two combined parcels of land that together are deficient in required land area. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to speak at the public hearing. Mayor Nyquist recognized Ms. ,Vivian Hedlund, 5316, 20 Russell Avenue North, who stated that she is concerned that the proposed lot is much smaller than the other duplex lots in the area. She added that her lot is 117' wide. 2 -24 -86 -6- Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Alonzo Ellenwood, 5300 Russell Avenue North, who asked what the setbacks are. The Director of Planning & Inspection explained the setback policy. Mr. Ellenwood then stated that he felt the lots should be left as they area Mayor Nyquist then recognized Mr. Lewis Hedlund, 5316, 20 Russell Avenue North, who stated both the owners to the north and south object to the proposed lot and the owner to the east also objects. He stated that there are three single family homes around the proposed lot and that the proposed lot is smaller than any of the other duplex lots in the area. He stated he was concerned with the fact that the building would be very close to the property lines. Mayor Nyquist then recognized Mr. Robert Hansen who is the owner of the property. Mr. Hansen stated he felt the variance should be granted. Mayor Nyquist then recognized Mr. Stephen Cook, the applicant, who stated that this would be an owner occuppied duplex with one side being rented. Mr. Cook noted that he felt with the apartments across the street and duplexes on most of the block he felt his property would be devalued if he built a single- family home. Councilmember Scott asked Mr. Cook what the width of his building would be. Mr. Cook stated the width is 66' and the depth is 70' to 77'. Councilmember Hawes asked if the duplex would be two or three bedrooms. Mr. Cook stated they would be three bedroom units with the bedrooms above the garage area. Councilmember Hawes asked if the units would be similar to those on Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Cook stated that they would be similar to the units on Brooklyn Boulevard but they would be cut down in size. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mrs. Vincent Hall who stated that she lives directly behind the proposed site. She stated that she has no objections s to this building. Mayor Nyquist asked if there was anyone else present at the meeting this evening who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 86005 submitted by Stephen Cook. The motion P as sed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka to approve Planning Commission Application No. 86005 with the condition that site and building plans be brought back to the Council for approval. The City Attorney stated that the City has the right to attach certain conditions on the size to protect the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood, but that if the site and building plans meet code the plans must be approved. The Director of Planning & Inspection noted that the platting ng must come before the Council. Councilmember h Lhotka agreed to rephrase motion. g P se his There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve Planning Commission Application No. 86005 submitted by Stephen Cook requesting a variance from Section 35-400 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow construction of a two- family dwelling on two combined parcels of land that together are deficient in required land area, subject to the following conditions: 1. The property in question shall be combined into a single parcel through platting or registered land survey, said plat or R.L.S. to be filed at the County prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2 -24 -86 -7- 2. The site and building plans are to be brought back to the City Council for the purpose of adding such conditions as are necessary to protect the health, safety and welfare of the neighborhood The motion passed unanimously.' The Director of Planning & Ins ection asked if the Cpuncil would like the Planning Commission to also review a site plan. rilmember Lhotka responded affirmatively. The Director of Planning & Insp ction stated that the applicant had requested indefinite tabling of Planning mmission Application No. 86006. There was a motion by Councilmembe Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to table Planning Commission Applicat on No. 86006 indefinitely. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council rece sed at 8:30 p.m. and reconvened at 8:44 p.m. RESOLUTIO14S (CONTINUED) RES OLUTION NO. 86 - Member Gene - oUa introduced the f lldwing resolution and moved its adoptions RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWAR ING CiTRACT 1986 - (RECONDITIONING OF WATER TOWER NO. 3 -LOCATED SOUTH OF T. H. 00 W ING , RLY OF LIONS PARK, PROJECT N0. 1985 -28 The motion for the adoption of th ./foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented $ a Resolution Establishing Project, Accepting City Engineer's Report. and Approving Plans and Specifications for Project No. 1985 -27 and 1986 - 07, Contract 1986 -G (Geometric Improvements and Resurfacing of Shingle Creek Parkway from C.S.A.H. /10 to I94 -694). He oted that in order to conform to the requirements of the bonding laws the City was re uired to separate this resolution into two separate projects. RESOLUTION NO. 86 - lember Celia Scott i roduced the following res lution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISH R G PROJECT, ACCEPTING CITY °E GINEER S REPORT AND APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROJECT NO. 1985 -27 ND 1986 - 07, CONTRACT 1986 -G l The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resoluti n was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Ma nager�� resented a Resolution Relating to Co ercial Development Revenue Bonds (Brookdale Three Limited Partnerships Project); A thorizing the Execution of a First Supplemental Indenture of Trust and Certain Other Documents. He noted that this resolution refers to phase one of the Ryan office building adjacent to the Earle Brown Farm buildings. He stated that this resolution establishes a final funding location for the bonds. 2 -24 -86 -8- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86013 Applicant: Stephen Cook Location: 5300 block of Russell Avenue North Request. Preliminary Plat, Site layout The applicant requests preliminary plat and site plan approval for a double bungalow on the 5300 block of Russell Avenue North. The property in question is zoned R2 and is bounded on the west by Russell Avenue North, on the north by a double - bungalow, and on the east and south by single- family homes. This property was the subject of Application No. 86005, under which a variance for lot area was granted. The preliminary plat provides for one lot, 90.75 wide by 133.45' deep (12,111 sq. ft. in area), to be legally described as Cook Estates. A 5' wide drainage and utility easement is indicated along the rear lot line and a 10' easement is shown along the front. A sewer service to the half -lot on the south portion of the plat will have to be disconnected at the main unless separate sewer systems are proposed for the , two units. The site layout for the proposed double - bungalow places the structure in the middle of the lot. Each unit is 26' wide by 46' deep. The total width is, therefore, 52'. The setback is a little over 19' on each side. The building is to be slightly cocked to allow an 18.36' setback to the southeast corner and a 20.36' setback to the north- east corner. The units are also staggered 2', the northerly unit protruding in front, the southerly unit in back. The floor plan shows three bedrooms, a living room, dining room and kitchen on the upper level. A two -car garage, utility roon, recreation room and optional bedroom are indicated on the lower level. Two and a half baths are provided overall. The plan is generous for a double- bungalow. The proposed plat and site and building plan appear to be 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 plat of the property shall receive final approval and be filed at the County prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. The existing sewer service to the half -lots on the south side of the property (ofd legal description: North half of Lot 4, Block 2, Robert L. Hansen 's First Addition) shall be disconnected at the main prior to the issuance of building permits unless separate sewer systems are provided for the two units. 3 -27 -86 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. 3.- The preliminary R.L.S. shall be modified to indicate the following: a) Land area, zoning and proposed use of the property and such other information deemed appropriate by the City Engineer. b) An easement agreement over the northerly portion of the property for the private access road, a 15' greenstrip adjacent to the access road, and a 25' building setback from the road,` shall be provided prior to filing of the subdivision at the County. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Sandstrom, Nelson, Bernards and Wallerstedt. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 86013 (Stephen Cook) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for preliminary plat and site plan approval for a two - family dwelling on the 5300 block of Russell Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 86013 attached). The Secretary also noted that the City Council had requested a site plan to accompany the preliminary plat. He noted that each unit in the double bungalow would be 28' wide rather than 26' as indicated on the plan. He pointed out that the resulting setbacks would be between 16.36' at the southeast corner and 18.36' at the northeast corner of the building. He noted that the revised plan still exceeds the setback requirements of the City ordinance. Commissioner Bernards inquired as to the setback for a rear deck. The Secretary stated that the setback for a deck is not the same as for a dwelling. He added that a three- season porch would have the same setback, in this case, a minimum of 1 40' from the rear property line. He pointed out that the plans submitted by the applicant show a setback of approximately 50 feet. Chairman Lucht then asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Stephen Cook stated that he would have separate sewer services for the dwelling units on the lot. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 86013) Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting fora public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Mrs. Vivian Hedlund of 5320 Russell Avenue North stated that the proposed plan called for a three bedroom unit on each side with a possible fourth bedroom. She stated that this would be a- bigger house on a smaller lot within the neighborhood. She expressed concern that the house would look out of place on this block. Mr. Lewis Hedlund of 5320 Russell Avenue North also stated that the single family home to the south is a smaller building and that the other double bungalows in the area, including his own, are smaller. He stated that the proposed duplex would have 3 -27 -96 -3- a ground coverage of 2,560 sq. ft. and that it was 24% larger than the other doubles, while the lot area is 16% less. Mr. Hedlund went on to point out that the other houses on the block are a little more than 26' deep, while the proposed double bungalow is 46' deep. He stated that the double being built by Mr. Cook should be smaller since it is on a smaller lot rather than larger than other double bungalows in the neighborhood. Mr. Hedlund added that another neighbor in this area was opposed, and would have come, but had to work. Chairman Lucht pointed out the tuck -under garage proposed for this double bungalow. Mr. Hedlund stated that other bungalows on the block also have tuck- under garages. Mr. Robert Hansen, of 4951 Logan Avenue North, the owner of the property, explained that he bought the property when the zoning was only single - family. He pointed out that doubles are now allowed in this neighborhood. He stated that he could not understand why other people who live in double bungalows on the block are complaining about having another double bungalow on the street. The applicant, Mr. Stephen Cook, stated that he had been trying to comply with the neighbors' wishes. He stated that the elevation of the double bungalow that he proposes is the same as the other doubles on the street: two stories. He stated that his building would not crowd the lot and that the side of the double bungalow would not be very visible from the street. He stated that he felt some of the requests being made by the neighbors were unreasonable. Chairman Lucht asked whether anyone else wished to speak. Mr. Lewis Hedlund again addressed the Commission. He stated that he had objected to the variance and that he objects to the proposed building. He clarified, however, that he no longer objected to a two - family dwelling since that question had already been decided. He stated that he wanted the new double bungalow to be kept in perspective with the rest of the neighborhood Chairman Lucht asked what size Mr. Hedlund's double bungalow was. Mr. Hedlund answered that it was 72' wide by 27 1/2' deep. Chairman Lucht observed that his double bungalow was wider from the street than that proposed by Mr. Cook. Mr. Hedlund explained that he was on a wider lot so he still had considerable setback area Mr. Cook stated that he would build a double bungalow, but that he wanted enough size for his own family. He stated that if he were forced to build a small double bungalow, he would not live in it, but would rent both units out. Chairman Lucht then observed that the double bungalow proposed by Mr. Cook was essentially the same building as the double bungalow built by his brother along Brooklyn Boulevard. He stated that it was a very attractive building. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht asked whether there were any other comments. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Wallerstedt asked what control there would be on the renting of the units in the double bungalow, assuming the application were approved- The Secretary stated that there could be no restrictions placed on renting the units 3 -27 -86 -4- I under the City's Zoning Ordinance. He stated such controls might besought under a deed restriction, but that there may well be constitutional problems even with such a private agreement. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he felt the applicant had made a good attempt to complement other units along Russell Avenue North. He added that a three bedroom unit is good for resale value. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86013 (Stephen Cook) Motion, by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to recommend approval of Application No. 86013, 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 plat of the property shall receive final approval and be filed at the County prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. The existing sewer service to the half -lots on the south side of the property (old legal description: North half of Lot 4, Block 2, Robert L. Hansen's First Addition) shall be disconnected at the main prior to the issuance of building permits unless separate sewer systems are provided for the two units. Voting in favor: Chairman Lueht, Commissioners Sandstrom, Nelson, Bernards and Wallerstedt Voting against: none. The motion passed. The City Engineer left the meeting at 8:40 p.m. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION N0. 86013 SUBMITTED BY STEPHEN COOK RE UESTING PRELIMINARY PLAT AND SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A TWO FAMILY LOT ON THE 5300 BLOC ` OF RUSSELL AVENUE NORTH The City Manager noted this item was recommended for a K Commission at its March 27, pproval by the Planning Inspection referred the Council l to 6pages meeting. three throw five of the March 27, The Director of Planning & 1986 Planning Commission minutes and the informational sheet on A throu No. 86013 attached with those minutes. Pplication and noted that each unit in the double bungalow would �be wide ratherat an the 26' as indicated on the lan. P He noted that the revised plan still exceeds the setback requirements of the City ordinance. He added that the applicant intended to install separate sewer and water services for each unit. Director of Planning & Inspection stated that the Planning Commission had recommended a The ' 27, 1986 meeting o subject Ptonfou� conditions which No. 86013 at its March y he reviewed for the Council. (``-- Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on 4 -7 -86 -11- Planning Commission Application No 86013 submitted by Stephen Cook requesting preliminary plat and site plan approval for a two family lot on the 5300 block of Russell Avenue North. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to speak at the public hearing. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Lewis Hedlund, 5316,20 Russell Avenue North, who stated he felt the proposed building was disportionately large as compared to the existing duplexes. He added that he would like to request that the duplex be kept in proportion to the other duplexes on the block. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Robert Hansen, 4951 Logan Avenue North, the owner of the property, who explained that he bought the property when the zoning was only y sin le famil y. He pointed out that doubles are now allowed in this neighborhood. g rhood. He added that he could not understand why people Y who live in double bungalows on the block are complaining about having another double bungalow on g the block Mayor Nyquist then recognized Mr. Stephen Cook, the applicant, who stated that he has been trying to comply with the neighbor's wishes. He added that he felt some of the requests being made by the neighbors were unreasonable. Mayor Nyquist asked if there was anyone else present at the meeting who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application submitted b S PP n No. 86013.. y Stephen Cook. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve Planning Commission Application No. 86013 submitted by Stephen Cook requesting preliminary plat And site plan approval for a two family lot on the 5300 block of Russell Avenue North, 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. Y es. 3. The plat of the property shall receive final approval and be ° filed at the County prior to the issuance of building permits. 4. The existing sewer service to the half -lots on the south side of the property (old legal description: North half of Lot 4, Block 2, Robert L. Hansen's First Addition) shall be disconnected at the main prior to the issuance of building permits unless separate sewer systems are provided for the two lots: The motion passed unanimously. FINAL L P LAT APPROVAL COOK ESTATES There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the final plat of the Cook Estates. The motion passed unanimously. 4 -7 -86 -12- : l■ ■ ■■ ■■ r �■ ■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■ ■■ ■■ dS m mm MIMI �■�■ ■� r■■ ■■ mm mm mm AP NJ; moll ire . � ?d� � � ■1111111■ MINN S PARK • - ■�� ■ `'�', ® ■� If ■ ■■■■■111■■ - -1 �,�. =® �■® BUS.: (612) 544 -7619 LAND Certificate of Surve R RVEY�RS _ M. SURVEYING d LAND PLANNING for 1415 NORTH LILAC DRIVE. GOLDEN VALLEY, MN 55422 STEVE COO BFF� 133. ...... ..... ,�. 4. W o Co as.o u x n Q q —s- x ! or a � tl Proposed : `�, o Duplex `i L ,vo'..e of /ot h 1 as.o 4, b /k. 2 u r .3so • o --�— 30 Srgo, /ine ovP /V of /o/ 4, b/k e, I: 30 Ro6e�� C. Honsen� Fist Ado:i`ron. IC, r DS'SCRIPMA) : N N i orth 2 of Jot 4 and n// of lot 5, block 2, ROBERT L. HR/VSEN'S MST RDD1770N, H i ennep R County, Minnesota. s4a.z Denotes existing elevation SCRL E : 1 " 30' -�- Denotes direction of drainage o Demotes iron monument WE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF A SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LAND ABOVE DESCRIBED AND OF THE LOCATION OF ALL BUILDINGS, IF ANY, THEREON, AND All VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, IF ANY, FROM OR ON SAID LAND. Dated this 2 7th doy of _danyory A.D. 19 Revsed Propos>rd bui /dhg and e%v. ifsfo. poo 3 /! /�B6' lob No. 00 by ej Book Page 61 Surveyor, Minnesota Rooistrotion No. 1729.E Set. 2 T. 11 R. al V4, t t ecLe[a wa I 3�y�, r / ' 1 ��++-- rr••rr++ ;��. +I-- � � 4'f 0. : , � :.11li4ML5.. WF C O 7 fll , I - pli...... asc ojjw > i a yrim I ja a I ,G�v` z fte IF 9 ��I �— I ud4 rllx.w� r_ t6bw _ I. � � II � d �� x t• l .� •inane - � i it< �'�� w rr. aas -r � wnu I � II ��1 -• I t z,v SW t BUS 16121544-7619 LAND Certificate of Survey Ew . SURVEYING d LAND PLANNING for: 1415 NORTH LILAC DRIVE. GOLDEN VALLEY. MN 55422 STEVE C /1 V O 30 Q/S� S f el /33. 45 ..- 9s.0...... I of Q; Q ' i o b x u O tl I O eo Qj L — �rap osed '•, 0 0 N� - %h /:ne aF ,off ti GuP /ex ti 4 310.....' I r� e — 1 -- o 30 1 30 oa D�SCRrPriow : 19^6 North % Of lof 4 and al/ Of if tKlY,C /of S, block R, ROBERT" L. � Cf17 , If„ , HR/VSEIU'S F ADDITION Henneolr County, Minnesota. 844.z Den exisf eleva fion 5CAL E Denotes d4recfr6n of drainag o - 9 Del�os iro mon ument WE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF A SURVEY OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LAND ABOVE DESCRIBED AND OF THE LOCATION OF ALL BUILDINGS, IF ANY THEREON, AND All VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS, IF ANY, FROM OR ON SAID LAND Doted th ?7�0'h day of January A D 19 &' Rey3ry Prof+osrdboid�9 oneee% ..'�to. 7r��rd /� Job No. 20801 � OrsAO! �/!O �d 6�ur,oirT :�c/Pie� ./ & by i2�x/N �1 ,24. Book Page 61 SurvoYOr• _M innesota Registration No 12 9 $eY. 2 T. �� R zr 1 � c ■ .f a s - - a r ,tS � • i � �.y � �.. fi �++�saca¢ay'.�. ,.is.,,:, . .�4 't+t,.* -�� .$- �'r •c a .c.. � w.. • ":.x. � _ — _ �� .F e fill P-1 MIN V� I �� l � • � �� min 11 ill � J+ � _m ■ MIN ' .y� Y ■ I I � �4�SRhH..�R'+ - y/ . in ✓.Y�� .9r1r !F�1 t 4� ` � Cdi'i� IMM %� ��m 1 � � ■ ■ C 1a'� ■ � � � � �I .,A�. � �.�� , , I ( �t�. �� I I ^ ° t r ,� ��I � - ��j sl = 1 �v�', `� � 7 � � ��,. • I • ^� � I �. ""' .� � n��/M I L. c wc _ E�- O�_0 - -� _ -�.--- ----- -• - --_._ _ _..- _,Z,Qj� OIL I , I � `i �` �l' ' =• = Z =.Z • 1 { � � _ IZf2�twc.�. tiAta. � i a o �! 0 K _ X1¢iFi: - � _ t . ,' t O cam• ts�y �4. ; lII 1 - ►lx w N t AA _ I a - i <r it 1. s r .• x � � �:.� rfrc.+ -•a +,-�- «mot r�•� --„ ` s ♦ F fa y� t �" ,, f .T; " +riz - y 4 j � .i F .► � '��. r t��. �rt`b._'r'. ♦ ,t ", r a r• •+ . �' a r l r+ r '+�. 1 _'_ 0.: tlf L. � .5 ->< -+ -- _ (::: <..L i• � na z .r Y ' Y x �'1< d ,,y, Y .,.� r . { "♦';.� S t+ f. + -!' i 'L f' �/ '.•� <� �� a+ Sri ++ {� /- r �r .. +' +! '` 'fit �y ��:•: ' . ,{ +tea, Y4cy q�y; �r,� - Y}. � : .) . �,�. r t y_ .yo., t, .2 . � F . ,�"'� ,., •tl -;, r - -. t �. � ar``,> I �,Iii'R..� �' • + t .� _ "+ ti..F :.� .�� ~ Z oa ''*r a i • + F � � y .. s - �.�RK.I.;�. ,.3 ..I~' � „��. �. 7 � Y _, ° :`- - r�.�� .1.2�Y� ^ ,.. �-�! ',;.�y: 4 f.,, ^N ! 4 4 < %p; '' .r ,�. es fit. Fr a t 'G;r% F .,.,�.' C ;, sti+r 4t - .V', . J ' . y t .,i. �j, - .ti ,r. ;._... <�' • +. 2 �s r -^ �� " •y F • r _ fi ( _ - r_ "_ •-�? • t' 1 r :.a'- y 'r,"Cr c: . c . � i, • � r... � k .,+ t .�,'i� x �i1it J�' M�-wt� =2'�' �,•• -,��' r �.. - . •� ►• t � - < "�-�.-•— ...""__ '•� - � — _ j = � k:..•.^t ' T ".k�^�, f � '� r? y - � ...... . .. - ... Y._rr. +". 1 , I GR:S+Ra�L•s. Y�I:1;r� 9 i • _: ._..� a -- ---- . .. - -- - -- -- ------- - - - - -- - -- -- . . _ •TL- GµZ�•+c-_$•CJC _.._ eA t- ., T 'TZr- Gl:1.fG. 1 I IT -- - - -- - - - - Cz I _ _ 1 t i - 4 t t , I i I _ I .. M ► '-_ _ - .. ... _. _ _.. b 1 f '!.� - � � f. y ` �: l {. 5 .- - µG . �, ��0 •.. i ,- �• i C -f • � •; � , t °' •4 '' , � = ' y; T ;� a k y�.. �"Z.�'L� ? — .».:.Z. .; �:- .:=-�. : � ' k' � k, '�Yw y .w.w•u �: ' h - t � ; - z rr:,f• y ,K• Ali V F W • �� .'. —..' • 1 ij'i t f: J,• , r ' .� ,. Ll s '.r r a t; " *'� :.+r.> f .� ti !., � �`.� '` +. ` 4,AC .i' a =� " '.'�' ' ,�• a • r t '�'?'� .,• --e .. r� � �'' •• _' S f "'�.(� :.�. .• ''t rY ::z '� �-` "� I y - ...f• _t-f} ..' �� . r� •:,;: y.. L vim. f • ' �! i ; ti? 'f'.+ x Y d; ..:c'j%'r. S:•: CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER CITY COUNCIL 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway INFORMATIONAL NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Please be advised that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center will review a revised building plan submitted by Stephen Cook for construction of a two- family dwelling at 5312 Russell Avenue North. The Council will consider this matter at its meeting on Monday, August 11, 1986 at approximately 7:45 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway. On February 24, 1986 the City Council approved Planning Commission Application No. 86005 involving a variance request to allow Mr. Cook to build a two- family dwelling on two lots which were proposed to be combined into a single lot, but were slightly deficient in land area. Mr. Cook was required to combine the two lots through platting and submit a building plan for review by the City Council. On April 7, 1986 the City Council approved Planning Commission Application No. 86013 submitted by Stephen Cook which was a plat combining the lots mentioned above into a single legal lot. The Council also reviewed a building plan for an approximate 56' x 46' side -by -side two family dwelling on the lot. Mr. Cook is now unable to build that particular plan and has submitted a revised proposal for an approximate 28' x • 44 upper - lower, two- family dwelling with an attached 40' x 22' three car garage /entry area. The attached garage would be set back 11' from the north property line and the dwelling units would be set back 11.75' from the south property line. The building would have the appearance of a single family split entry home with an attached three car garage, although it would be a legal two family dwelling. The upper unit, which Mr. Cook and his family plan to occupy, would be three bedrooms with a living room, dining room and kitchen, while the lower unit would be two bedrooms with a living room, dining room and kitchen. Due to the proposed changes and the fact that the City Council required its review of the previous building plan as part of the variance granted under Planning Commission Application No. 86005. This building plan will be back before the Council for their review and comment. This meeting is a public meeting and comments relating to the proposal may be accepted by the City Council. If you have questions or comments concerning this matter, please contact me. Sincerely, Ronald A. Warren�� Director of Planning and Inspection RAW:mlg M APPENDIX A, PACKET MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS AS LISTED IN APPENDIX B ON JULY 24TH, 1986 July 24, 1986 RE: Notice of Public Hearing Dear At 8:00 P.M. on Monday, August 11, 1986 the Brooklyn Center City Council will conduct a Public Hearing on the proposed construction of a bituminous roadway with concrete curb and gutter connecting 69th Avenue North to 70th Avenue North • between Dupont Avenue North and Trunk Highway 252. As noted in the enclosed ` Notice of Public Hearing and detailed in the City Engineer's report (enclosed), the proposed area to be assessed is the property adjacent to the proposed roadway. You are referred to the page of this mailing where you will find the proposed charge against your property. Please note that the hearing offers you an opportunity to express your opinion on the proposed improvement of 69th and 70th Avenue. The City Council will consider your comments and imput before a decision is made whether or not to proceed with the project. You are encouraged to call the Engineering Department at 561 -5440 if you need additional information or have questions which could be resolved in advance of the meeting. Sincerely, H.R. Spurrier Cit y Engineer ineer - HRS : j n S N NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING . FOR IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, will meet at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, on Monday, August 11, 1986 at 8:00 o'clock P.M. central daylight time, for a public hearing on the following proposed improvement: Improvement Project No. 1986 -10 Description: Intersection realignment, sidewalk and bikeway construction, subgrade preparation, installation of concrete curb and gutter, and bituminous paving. Location: 69th Avenue North and 70th Avenue North between Dupont Avenue North and T.H. 252 Estimated Cost: $308,950.00 The benefitted areas proposed to be assessed for these improvements are as follows: The NE1 4 and the SW1 4 of the of Section 25 Township 119 Ran / / T P � e 21 g • Evergreen Estates.; Lott, Block 1 and Lot 1, Block 2, Thomas Construction Company 2nd Addition; and Lot 51, Lot 52 and part of Lot 53 Auditor's Subdivision No. 309. All these properties being along and adjacent to the 69th and 70th Avenue collector street between 69th and Dupont Avenue and Trunk Highway 252. The Council proposes to proceed under authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 429.011 to 429.111. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to the proposed improvements will be heard at this meeting. X, x D. K. WEEKS CITY CLERK CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Dated July 14, 1986 By order of the City Council i (Published in the Brooklyn Center Post on July 31 and August 7, 1986.) • CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF :BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE C E NTER 911 ENGINEERING REPORT STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -10 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Street Improvement Project No. 1986 -10 includes intersection realignment, sidewalk and bikeway construction, subgrade preparation, installation of concrete curb and gutter, and bituminous paving. PROJECT LOCATION The street improvement consists of the connection of 69th Avenue North to 70th Avenue North between Dupont Avenue North and T.H. 252. INTRODUCTION The street improvement project referenced above for 69th Avenue and 70th Avenue North is Phase II work and completes a project initiated in 1982 as a result of recommendations made in the "Evergreen Area Improvement Concept B ". DISCUSSION The "Evergreen Area Improvement Concept B" recommended the construction of an East -West collector route in the neighborhood following 70th Avenue between T.H. 252 and Camden Avenue then following a curvilinear route south to the alignment of 69th Avenue near Colfax Avenue. The westerly terminus of this proposed project is at 69th Avenue and Dupont Avenue. A major part of the rough grading and part of the bituminous paving for this collector street was accomplished by the Phase I project, Street Improvement Project No. 1982 -09. Map l identifies property abutting this improvement which was benefitted by and assessed for pavement as a part of that improvement. Phase II of the collector street construction benefits the district shown on Map 2. Some property not abutting the 1982 project has been assessed for pavement, but none of the abutting property has been assessed for curb and gutter. - ,.,eke So «�e►tkiig nI ogre �� •• Engineer's Report • Project No. 1986 -10 Page 2 It was anticipated in 1982 that the assessment and the Phase II work on this collector be done in conjunction with the construction of T.H. 252. The work on 70th Avenue East of Camden is now definitely scheduled for the late summer and fall of 1986. In accordance with that original plan we are now recommending the Phase II construction of the collector street. It is recommended that the City of Brooklyn Center proceed with a contract for improvement of the segment between Dupont Avenue and Camden Avenue . MNDOT has contracted for the segment between Camden Avenue and T.H. 252, with partial reimbursement for the costs by the City under a Cooperative Agreement with MNDOT. The proposed collector street between Dupont Avenue and Camden Avenue will be 32 feet wide and have B -618 curb and gutter in accordance with Municipal State Aid Standards. A detail of the proposed roadway section is included in the Appendix. The proposed collector street between Camden Avenue and T.H. 252 will taper out to 4 lanes at the intersection with T.H. 252. A detail of the intersection is in the appendix. • Other work anticipated includes minor storm sewer realignment in order to control surface drainage problems in the vicinity of Colfax and Bryant Avenues along 69th Avenue North. A sidewalk and bicycle path will be constructed adjacent to the proposed facilities between T.H. 252 and Dupont Avenue. These facilities will be integrated with existing facilities serving ivergreen Park and Evergreen School. The plan provides for construction of both a sidewalk and a bikeway along the northerly side of the roadway for the entire project length - from Dupont Avenue to T.H. 252. In addition, a new sidewalk will be constructed on the southerly side from Dupont Avenue to the proposed pedestrian crosswalk which leads to the easterly entrance to Evergreen School. The routing for this sidewalk and the location of the pedestrian crossing have been coordinated with the Principal of the Evergreen School. FUNDING The collector street on 69th and 70th Avenue between Dupont Avenue and T.H. 252 is on the City's Municipal State Aid system and, as such, is eligible for funding from the Regular Municipal State Aid Account. Engineer's Report Project No. 1986 -10 Page 3 A summary of the project cost is detailed below: 69th & 70th 70th Avenue Dupont to Camden Camden to TH 252 No. 1986 -10 No. 1986 -17 Item City Project MNDOT Project Total Total Construction Costs $255,328.50 $ 57,999.17 $307,327,67 Contingency (10 %) 25,531,50 0.00 25.531.50 Subtotal $280,860.00 $ 51,999.17 $332,859.17 Engineering (8 %) $ 22,470.00 $ 4,159,93 $ 26,629.93 Administration (1%) 2,810.00 0.00 2,810.00 Legal (1%) 2.810.00 0.00 2,810.00 Total Project Cost $308,950.00 $ 56,159.10 $365,109.10 The Phase II Improvement District shown on Map 2 has the three assessment zones • described below: Zone 1 Reconstruction Zone - Property assessed for reconstruction in accordance with Resolution No. 86 -17, which establishes street reconstruction rates for 1986. Zone 2 Curb and Gutter Construction Zone - Property previously assessed for Phase I pavement but not assessed for curb and gutter. Zone 3 Curb and Gutter and Pavement Construction Zone - Property outside Phase I not previously assessed for curb and gutter or pavement. The assessment rate for property in Zone 1 has been established by Resolution No. 86 -17 and will be $1,300.00 per single - family site. The assessment rate for Zone 2 is established by adjusting the 1982 rate for new curb and gutter. The 1982 rate was $11.00 per front foot. The Twin Cities Consumer Price Index has increase 12.2 %. The 1986 rate is therefor $12.34 per front foot for new curb and gutter construction. I The assessment rate for Zone 3 is established by adjusting the 1982 rate for complete street construction. The 1982 rate was $21.40 P er front foot increased by 12.2% the rate will be $24.00 per front foot. t � O ,�. t 'rA°�'�aa t t S •w -r+-r t •.o....,.�,� f t t co f �+ f so • M /1 IA e i #4 MOOT lob OITA . .- • > • I LI Ow ff pal s • N_i 1 in APPENDIX B POTENTIAL ASSESSMENTS LISTED BY PARCEL PROPOSED TERM: 20 YEARS 69TH & 70TH STREET PROJECT NO. 1986 -10 FIRST PAYMENT: TAXES PAYABLE 1988 ASSESSABLE TOTAL OWNER /PARCEL /ID NO. UNITS ZONE 1 ZONE 2 ZONE 3 ASSESSMENT MARY HOBBS 1 SFS $1,300.00 $1,300.00 6842 DUPONT AVENUE NORTH 36- 119 -21 -21 -0067 JOSEPH BULDIC 1 SFS 1,300.00 $1,300.00 6843 COLFAX AVENUE NORTH 36- 119 -21 -21 -0013 JAMES BAUMGARTNER 1 SFS 1,300.00 $1,300.00 6844 COLFAX AVENUE NORTH 36- 119 -21 -21 -0020 RONALD DENNY 1 SFS 1,300.00 $1,300.00 6845 BRYANT AVENUE NORTH 36- 119 -21 -21 -0035 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 821.46 FF 19,715.04 $19,715.04 WATER TOWER SITE 25- 119 -21 -34 -0019 INVESPRO II LMTD PARTNERSHIP 351.31 FF 8,431.44 $8,431.44 407 - 70TH AVENUE NORTH 25- 119 -21 -43 -0049 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 271.00 FF 6,504.00 $6,504.00 VACANT PROPERTY 25- 119 -21 -43 -0050 TOWER, PARK & VACANT LAND 954.99 FF $11,784.58 $11,784.58 25- 119 -21 -31 -0085 25- 119 -21 -34 -0018 & 0019 INVESPRO II LMTD PARTNERSHIP 300.00 FF 3,702 00 $3,702.00 407 - 70TH AVENUE NORTH 25- 119 -21 -43 -0049 MELBA EVANSON 170.07 FF 2,106.44 $2,106.44 800 - 69TH AVENUE NORTH 25- 119 -21 -34 -0007 LAWRENCE & MARY ELLEN FLORIAN 224.14/8 FF 345.74 $345.74 861 - 70TH AVENUE NORTH 25- 119 -21 -34 -0009 857 70TH AVENUE NORTH 224.14/8 FF 345.74 $345.74 25- 119 -21 -34 -0010 - ROBERT RODE 224.14/8 FF 345.74 $345.74 869 70TH AVENUE NORTH 25- 119 -21 -34 -0011 DAVID RODE 224.14/8 FF 345.74 $345.74 865 - 70TH AVENUE NORTH 25- 119 -21 -34 -0012 S RICHARD /MARILYN SILVERNESS 224.14/8 FF 345.74 $345.74 873 - 70TH AVENUE NORTH 25- 119 -21 -34 -0013 877 - 70TH AVENUE NORTH 224.14/8 FF 345.74 $345.74 25- 119 -21 -34 -0014 JAMES & MARY HOKANSON 224.14/8 FF 345.74 $345.74 881 - 70TH AVENUE NORTH 25- 119 -21 -34 -0015 885 - 70TH AVENUE NORTH 224.14/8 FF 345.74 $345.74 25- 119 -21 -34 -0016 - -- - - - - - -- -- --- - - - - -- - - - - -- $5,200.00 $20,358.94 $34,650.48 $60,209.42 SFS = SINGLE FAMILY SITE FF = FRONT FOOT August 11, 1986 • City Of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Public Meeting TODAY. August 11, 1986 at 8 PM, TODAY At City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Re: City's "S" Connection, 69th Avenue to 70th Avenue to TH 252. About 2/3 of a mile further each -trip from 69th to TH 252, or about 1 miles further each DAY.traveling to and from Minneapolis. TO THE CITY THE CITY'S TAXPAYERS AND THE TRAVELING PUBLIC 1. The City proposes to levy SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS, MSA 429, to provide a proposed S ROADWAY for the COLLECTOR STREET 69th Avenue North TO 70th Avenue, TO a limited access highway, TH 252. This Writer has been unable to find ANY PROVISIONS in either the • State Highway Statutes, or the State Constitution, or the Federal Highway Statutes for SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS to provide a ROADWAY for a Collector Street 69th Avenue that is NOW FINANCED by the ROAD USER TAX as a Municipal State -Aid Highway. This Writer DOES NOT BELIEVE the LAWS OF MINNESOTA require the PROPERTY OWNERS ADJOINING the proposed "S" CONNECTION to PAY SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS to build a ROADWAY that requires the TRAVELING PUBLIC to drive on an "S" Connection an additional 1 miles FURTHER EACH DAY to and from Minneapolis, WHEN, A STRAIGHT SHORTER ROADWAY, 69th Avenue is already constructed and in excellent condition. The RECORDS REFLECT that NEITHER the City Of Brooklyn Center, NOR, MN /DOT has had a PUBLIC HEARING on closing A COMMON LAW PUBLIC • PASSAGEWAY, 69th Avenue North to and from T.H. 252. J City of Brooklyn Center, Public Meeting, August 11, 1986, Page 2 The Hennepin County Highway Department has a MAP dated 1870, that shows 69th Avenue North as a COUNTY HIGHWAY connecting to the West River Road. 2. The RECORDS REFLECT that 69th Avenue North is a COMMON LAW PUBLIC PASSAGEWAY to and from the West River Road, to and from the Palmer Lake Basin that has been established by the American Indians before the White Man arrived in the Northwest Territory. 3. The RECORDS REFLECT that NEITHER the City Of Brooklyn Center, NOR, MN /DOT has prepared an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT for the proposed COLLECTOR STREET "S" CONNECTION, adjacent to a Public Park and Public Grade School, As REQUIRED by MSA 116D, State Environmental Policy Act, that states in part: • MSA 116D.02(i). Practice THRIFT in the use of ENERGY and maximize the use of ENERGY Efficient Systems for the utilization of ENERGY, and MINIMIZE the Environmental Impact from ENERGY production and USE. MSA 116D.02(k) Reduce WASTEFUL PRACTICES . . . . MSA 116D.02(1) Minimize WASTEFUL and unnecessary depletion of non- renewable resources, MSA 116D.02(p) Reduce the deleterious IMPACT ON AIR AND WATER QUALITY from all sources, including the deleterious ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT due to operation of VEHICLES WITH INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES in URBANIZED areas. MSA 116D.02(q) Minimize NOISE, particularly in urban areas. 4. The Project Map REFLECTS: Project No. 1986 -10 (Municipal State Aid Project 109- 125 -02). • From Dupont Avenue North to Camden Ave. North, 1,680 feet, 0.32 Miles City of Brooklyn Center, Public Meeting, August 11, 1986, Page 3 • Structural Design 9 TON. Design Speed 30 MPH. The Standard Specifications For Construction 1983 Edition shall govern. NOTE. If this Writer correctly understood the Specification booklet, the DESIGN SPEED is 45 MPH, on a COLLECTOR STREET, and a 9 TON Structural Design seems appropriate for Horse and Buggy Path, NOT for a COLLECTOR ROAD to a LIMITED ACCESS T.H. 252. MSA 116D.04 Subd. la(d) "Governmental Action" means activities, including PROJECTS wholly or partially conducted, permitted, - assisted, financed, regulated or approved by Units Of Government, including the Federal Government. MSA 116D.04 Subd. 2a. Where there is potential for significant • Environmental effects resulting from any Major Governmental Action, the ACTION shall be preceded by a detailed ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit. READER please note: The ROUTING of several thousands of VEHICLES WITH INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES in an URBANIZED area ADJACENT to a PUBLIC PARK and nearby PUBLIC GRADE SCHOOL, on a "S" COLLECTOR ROAD to a LIMITED ACCESS T.H. 252 that will undoubtedly be a SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION, HOLDING MANY VEHICLES WITH INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES RUNNING, until the TRAFFIC SIGNAL changes to permit the VEHICLES to enter the LIMITED ACCESS T.H. 252, will adversely affect the AIR QUALITY of the PUBLIC PARK, and also of the nearby PUBLIC GRADE SCHOOL PLAYGROUND, is a "Governmental Action" f City of Brooklyn Center, Public Meeting, August 11, 1986, Page 4 • Where there is a potential for significant Environmental effects, that shall be PRECEDED by a detailed ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT. 5. Sheet 3 of 9 Sheets SHOW, Abandon Storm Sewer This 16 inch tile storm sewer serves the Road and ditches along 69th Avenue NOW. What is to replace this Storm sewer and carry away the water and snow from the ROAD and DITCHES ? ?? 6. An examination of the 9 °Sheets did NOT SHOW a Cyclone Fence Separating the COLLECTOR STREET from the Public Park and nearby PUBLIC GRADE SCHOOL, NOR, is there a BARRICADE or Cyclone Fencing that would LIMIT the Bicycle Rider from driving off the Bicycle Path DIRECTLY onto TH 252 at the 70th Avenue CONNECTION. • 7. The Residents of Property on the River Side of TH 252 will be required to travel to either 73 Avenue or to 66 Avenue, FIRST, before gaining ACCESS to 69th Avenue North, an Intercity and Intercounty COLLECTOR Highway. This will incur additional driving if the trip was just to the Postoffice on 69th. 8. The 70th Avenue North connection to TH 252 DOES NOT SHOW SIGNAL LIGHTS on this Intersection for the BUS RIDER from DOWNTOWN, to CROSS TH 252 to reach the 70th Avenue North SIDEWALK. A NOTE on the MAP states, "SEE Sheet 176 for Intersection details." This sheet 176 may show the SIGNAL LIGHTS for this Intersection, j 9. Has the T.H. 252 PROJECT Proceeded so far that the PRESENT 69th Avenue North CONNECTION to TH 252 could NOT BE CONTINUED simply by a CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION? City of Brooklyn Center, Public Meeting, August 11, 1986, Page 5 • 10. OR, has the TH 252 PROJECT proceeded so far that the "S" CONNECTION from 69th Avenue to 70th Avenue to TH 252 is IRREVERSIBLE? 11. IN THE EVENT that TH 252 PROJECT CONNECTION to 70th Avenue North is IRREVERSIBLE, this Writer has been UNABLE TO LEARN the MOST COMPELLING REASON for the 70th Avenue Connection, when, 69th Avenue North provides a STRAIGHT, SHORT, DIRECT AND MORE FEASIBLE CONNECTION to TH 252, Also, this 69th Avenue CONNECTION provides the Residents Of Property on the River Side of TH DIRECT access to the POSTOFFICE and an INTERCITY and INTERCOUNTY ROAD. Some of the City Taxpayers SPECULATE upon the City's REASON for the 70th Avenue CONNECTION to T.H. 252 and CONCLUDE that the TRAFFIC adjacent to VACANT LAND, • would provide an IDEAL SITE FOR A SHOPPING CENTER, within the City Of Brooklyn Center. 12. IN THE EVENT that the CITY'S PURPOSE for the 70th Avenue CONNECTION to T.H. 252 is to provide TRAFFIC FOR A PROPOSED SHOPPING CENTER, this Writer DOES NOT BELIEVE that the 70th Avenue CONNECTION to T.H. 252 is IRREVERSIBLE, and that a SIMPLE RESOLUTION by the City Council TONIGHT, could CONTINUE THE 69th Avenue COLLECTOR STREET CONNECTION TO T.H. 252. This letter is WRITTEN AS A PETITION to the.Brooklyn Center COMMON Council to ADOPT A SIMPLE RESOLUTION, "The Brooklyn Center COMMON Council held a PUBLIC MEETING on SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS to REROUTE A COMMON LAW INTERCITY AND INTERCOUNTY COLLECTOR STREET, 69th Avenue North, City of Brooklyn Center, Public Meeting, August 11, 1986, Page 6 • now a Municipal State -Aid Street, From Dupont Avenue and 69th Avenue North to Camden Avenue and 70th Avenue North, 1, 680 feet, 0.32 Mile, AND, at the PUBLIC MEETING FOUND that the PROPOSED REROUTING is NOT AUTHORIZED BY THE LAWS OF MINNESOTA, Because, the REROUTING is adjacent to a PUBLIC PARK AND PLAYGROUND, and is nearby a PUBLIC GRADE SCHOOL PLAYGROUND, and Because, the REQUIRED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT has NOT been prepared, and Because, the AIR POLLUTION will INCREASE, and Because, the NOISE LEVEL will INCREASE, and BECAUSE, the TRAVELING PUBLIC will be required to drive an ADDITIONAL 1.2 Miles each day if going to Minneapolis, and BECAUSE the Residents on the River Side of T.H. 252 will NOT have a DIRECT ROUTE to 69th Avenue North, and BECAUSE, we NOW HAVE 69th Avenue Roadway that is in excellent Condition, and 69th Avenue CONNECTION to TH 252 is the MOST DIRECT, FEASIBLE CONNECTION. Respectfully Submitted For A Direct Connection on 69th TO T.H. 252, 379 -4665 IaA Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO 1986 -10 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 86 -104 adopted the 14th day of July, 1986 fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed improvement of 69th and 70th Avenue North, Dupont Avenue to T.H. 252; and WHEREAS, 10 (ten) days published notice of the hearing through two weekly publications of the required notice was given and the hearing was held thereon the 11th day of August, 1986 at which time all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota it is hereby determined necessary and in the best interest of the City and the owners of property specially benefitted that: 1. The following improvement as proposed in Resolution No. 86 -104 adopted the 14th day of July, 1986 shall be constructed: IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -10, CONTRACT 1986 -M 69TH AND 70TH AVENUES NORTH DUPONT AVENUE TO T.H. 252 2. The estimate cost will be financed by: Special Assessments Private $ 22,197.99 City 38,003.62 Regular M.S.A. Fund 2613 $308,113.92 MNDOT Contributions $ 51,375`.18 Subtotal Revenue $419,690.71 Local M.S.A. Credit ( 54.581.61 Total Revenue $365,109.10 3. The City expects to be reimbursed by Municipal State Aid to the extent of $308,113.92. 4. Any difference that arises between the reimbursement from Municipal State Aid and the contribution by City M.S.A. fund to finance the project remains in the City M.S.A. fund and may, at the Council's discretion, be used for projects or matching funds on State Aid qualified streets. i RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. i CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF _ :BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 CENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: August 8, 1986 RE: Street Improvement on 69th and 70th Avenue North Dupont Avenue to T.H. 252 Project No. 1986 -10 The Engineer's Report was prepared and submitted to City Council on July 14, 1986. On that date City Council adopted Resolution No. 86 -104 providing for a public hearing on the project. Notices of the public hearing and a copies of the Engineer's Report were mailed to all property owners benefitted by the proposed improvement. The action requested is that City Council hold a public hearing on the proposed improvement, determine that the improvement should be made as recommended and adopt the attached resolution ordering Improvement Project No. 1986 -10, the improvement of 69th and 70th Avenue North, Dupont Avenue to T.H. 252. Rep (1eer submitted, A roved for submittal, H P Sy app City En Director of Public Works HRS : j HEAR . I "7 laA� Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FOR STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO 69TH /70TH AVENUE NORTH BETWEEN DUPONT AVENUE AND T.H. 252 (PROJECT NO. 1986 -10, CONTRACT 1986 -M) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1986 -10, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and Engineer, on the 7th day of July, 1986. Said bids were as follows: Bidder Bid Amount C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. $ 214,443.15* Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. $ 218,530.90 Preferred Paving, Inc. $ 218,624.62 Alexander Construction Co., Inc. $ 219,604.30 Valle Pavi 227 Y g, $ , 886.15 Alber Construction, Inc. $ 229,645.95 Ideal Pavin g Inc. $ 231 Barber Construction Co., Inc. $ 273,485 *° *Denote Correction Upon Engineer's Extension WHEREAS, it appears the G.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. of Maple Grove Minnesota e ota is the lowest responsible bidde NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of x Brooklyn Center Minnesota: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract, in the amount of $214,443.15 with C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. of Maple Grove, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Proj No. 1986 -10 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 h4s been signed. RESOLUTION N0. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that: 1. The estimated cost of Improvement Project No. 1986 -10 is hereby amended according to the following schedule: As Approved As Bid Contract $255,328.50 $214,443.15 Contingency (10 %) 25.531.50 $280,860.00 Engineering (9%) 22,470.00 19,299.25 Administration (1 %) 2,810.00 2,128.80 Legal (1 %) 2.810.00 2.128.80 $308,950.00 $238,000.00 A Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: - and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF :BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 CENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: August 8, 1986 RE: 69th and 70th Avenue North, Dupont to Camden Avenue Project No. 1986 -10, Contract 1986 -M The City of Brooklyn Center received bids August 7,1986 at 11:00 a.m. and a tabulation of those bids follows: Bidder Bid Amount C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. $ 214,443.15* Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. $ 218,530.90 Preferred Paving, Inc. $ 218,624.62 Alexander Construction Co., Inc. $ 219,604,30 Valley Paving, Inc. $ 227,886.15 Alber Construction, Inc. $ 229,645.95 Ideal Paving, Inc. $ 231,733.74 Barber Construction Co., Inc. $ 273,485.64* *Denote Correction Upon Engineer's Extension The Engineer's Estimate for the project was $255,328.50. The low bidder, C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc., is familiar to the City and has successfully performed numerous other contracts for the City. C.S. McCrossan is also the firm building T.H. 252 for the Minnesota Department of Transportation. We are very pleased that the bidding was extremely competitive_ as evidenced by the fact that the difference between the four low bids is so small. This project is funded by a combination of Special Assessments and Regular Municipal State Aid. The City has received approval by the State Aid office of the Minnesota Department of Transportation and, therefore, the City may accept the bid and approve the contract for this project. August 8, 1986 Page 2 It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution, a resolution accepting the bid and approving the contract for street improvements to 69th and 70th Avenue North between Dupont Avenue and Camden Avenue North (Project No. 1986 -10, Contract 1986 -M) R s e full submitted, A proved for submittal, .R. P rrier Sy aPP City En '1 eer Director of Public Works HRS:jrh- i i /3 Licenses to be approved by the City Council on August 11, 1986: AMUSEMENT DEV r E ICE - OPERATOR Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. ief of Police GARBAGE HAULERS VEHICLE LICENSE Block Sanitation 6741 79th Avenue North Browning Ferris Ind. of MN 9813 Flying Cloud Drive Minneapolis Hide & Tallow Co. P.O. Box 12547 Sanitarian ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Brooklyn Center Rotary Club 7456 Colfax Avenue North T�Qp/I'l Sanitarian SIGN HANGER'S LICENSE Crosstown Sign Company 10166 Central Avenue NE n ' Signcrafter's Outdoor Display, Inc. 7775 Main Street NE Buil ing M Officia l l SPECIAL FOOD HANDLING LICENSE C.O.M.B. Company y 5425 Xerxes Avenue North Sanitarian GENERAL A PPROVA c AJ52� D. K. Weeks, City Clerk