Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986 07-28 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER JULY 28, 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 14, 1986 - Regular Session 7. Proclamation Declaring "National Night Out ", August 12, 1986 8. Resolutions: *a. Accepting Work Performed Under Contract 1986 -L (Sidewalk Improvement Project No. 1986 -14) - Construction of sidewalk on south side of Summit Drive from Shingle Creek Parkway to 1,000 feet easterly of Shingle Creek Parkway *b. Accepting Proposals for Booster Pumps and for Reconstructing Pump Vaults for Water Quality Improvement Project No. 1986 -18. r *c. 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) d. Approving Agreement with City of Brooklyn Park for Extension of Trail System in Palmer Lake Park (Improvement Project No. 1986 -13) e. Amending Appropriation for Remodeling of Police Department, Phase II ( Improvement Project No. 1986 -02, Contract 1986 -B) *f. Approving Change Order to Contract for Construction of Centerbrook Golf Course (Improvement Project No. 1986 - 23, Contract 1986 -C) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- July 28, 1986 *g. Approving Change Order to Contract for Construction of Storm Sewer for Earle Brown Farm (Improvement Project No. 1986 -08, Contract 1986 -I) -This change order provides for the installation of storm and sanitary sewer connections to serve the proposed Earle Brown Commons site. 9. Informational Hearing: (7:30 p.m.) This is an informational hearing 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). 10. Planning Commission Items: (7:45 p.m.) a. 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. This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 17, 1986 meeting. b. 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. This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 17, 1986 meeting. c. Planning Commission Application No. 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. This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 17, 1986 meeting. 1. Resolution Recommending Amendment of City Council Resolution No. 82 -255 (Comprehensive Plan) Relative to Land Located in and around the Earle Brown Farm 2. Resolution Regarding Disposition of Application No. 86010 Submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) d. Planning Commission Application No. 86027 submitted by Earle Brown Commons Partnership requesting site and building plan approval to construct an ll story, 140 unit apartment building as the first phase of a two- phase residential development on the vacant land south of the Earle Brown Farm and east of the Brookdale Corporate Center III site. This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 17, 1986 meeting. CITY COUNCIL - AGENDA 3- July 28, 1986 e. 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. This item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its July 17, 1986 meeting. 11. Discussion Item: a. Weed Height Ordinance *12. Licenses 13 Adjournment MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JULY 14, 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 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Bill Hawes, and Celia Scott. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, HRA Coordinator Brad Hoffman, Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, and Administrative Aid Patti Page. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Father Griles of St. Alphonsus Church. Councilmember Rich Theis entered the meeting at 7 :04 p.m. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted he had received one request to use the Open Forum this evening from Pastor Tom Brock, 5200 Emerson Avenue North. Mayor Nyquist recognized Pastor Brock, who stated he was present this evening to discuss pornography within the City. Pastor Brock stated that he had recently entered a local video rental store and was shocked to find a number of X -rated videos for rent and display. He stated he would like the City Council to discuss and consider the possibility of the Police Department enforcing the City's obscenity laws more strictly. Mayor Nyquist asked the City Manager if the Police Department has investigated this matter. The City Manager stated that he was not aware of any Police Department investigation at the present time. He added that in the past the Police Department did investigate those' stores selling pornographic magazines. He added that he would direct the Police Department to look into this matter and would report back to the Council in two weeks. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the Consent Agenda, and no requests were made. FINAL PLAT- TWIN CITY FEDERAL There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the final plat for the Twin City Federal registered land survey. The motion passed unanimously. MAYORAL APPOINTMENT - URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN 7 -14 -86 Y There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to appoint Mrs. Barbara Jensen to the Urban Hennepin Count Community Development Y Y i Block Grant Citizen Participation Plan. 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 Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Avenue North Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Avenue North. Davanni's 5937 Summit Drive Green Mill Inn Inc. 5540 Brooklyn Boulevard Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Boulevard MTC 6845 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Scoreboard Pizza 6816 Humboldt Avenue North T. Wrights 5800 Shingle Creek Pkwy, AMUSEMENT DEVICE - VENDOR Theisen Vending Company 3804 Nicollet Avenue S. Twin City Novelty Co. 9549 Penn Avenue South - CIGARETTE LICENSE Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Boulevard FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Target 6100 Shingle Creek Pkwy. GARBAGE HAULERS VEHICLE LICENSE Bergstrom Trucking 5860 73rd Avenue North Hilger Transfer Inc. 8550 Zachary Lane Midwest Grease Buyers, Inc. P. 0. Box 26 Peterson Brothers Sanitation, Inc. 18605 Lake George Blvd. Rapid Way Disposal 685 123rd Avenue NW Robbinsdale Transfer Inc. `5232 Hanson Court ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Brooklyn Center Babe Ruth 6401 Kyle Avenue North Brooklyn Center Jaycees 1316 68th Lane Brooklyn Center Park & Recreation 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy. St. Alphonsus Fun Fair 7025 Halifax Avenue North MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Flare Heating and Air Cond. Inc. 664 Mendelssohn Avenue N. General Sheet Metal Corp. 2330 Louisiana Avenue N. Grendahl Mechanical Inc. Box 208 NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Boulevard PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE 7- 14' -86 - -2- Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Boulevard SIGN HANGERS LICENSE DeMars Sign Company 4040 Marshall Street NE TAXI CAB LICENSE Yellow Taxi Service Corp. 3555 5th Avenue South TEMPORARY ON -SALE NONINTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE St. Alphonsus Fun Fair 7025 Halifax Avenue N. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 23 1986 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of June 23, 1986. The motion passed. Councilmember Hawes abstained from voting as he was not present at the June 23, - 1986 meeting. RESOLUTIONS The City Manager introduced a Resolution Accepting Bid and Approving Contract for Sealcoating of Streets (Improvement Project No. 1986 -12, Contract 1986 -J). He noted that the bids were opened earlier in the day and that the Council had before them a completed resolution for the project. Councilmember Theis asked if this company had been used in the pasta The Director of Public Works responded affirmatively. RESOLUTION N0. 86 -103 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FOR SEALCOATING - OF STREETS (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -12, CONTRACT 1986 -J) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Establishing Project, Accepting City Engineer's Report, Calling for a Hearing Thereon and Approving Plans and Specifications for Street Improvement Project No. 1986 -10, 69th and 70th Avenues North Dupont Avenue to T.H. 252 (Contract 1986 -M). Councilmember Lhotka asked if there had been any changes in this project from past discussions. The Director of Public Works stated that this project was initiated in 1982, and that it was decided at that time that the *project would be split. He added that this work would complete the project. Councilmember Lhotka asked if the excess property along the south edge of 69th Avenue would revert back to the property owners. The Director of Public Works stated that the property owners have agreed to maintain the property as their own but the City would remain the owner. RESOLUTION NO 86 -104 7 -14 -86 _ -3- Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROJECT, ACCEPTING CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT, CALLING FOR A HEARING THEREON AND APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -10, 69TH AND 70TH AVENUES NORTH DUPONT AVENUE TO T.H. 252 (CONTRACT 1986 -M) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Establishing Parking Restrictions on 69th and 70th Avenues North Between Camden Avenue North and Dupont Avenue North. Councilmember Hawes asked why the area between Camden and T.H. 252 was not covered by this project. The Director of Public Works stated that this project was not covered by MSA funds, but added that the parking restriction had been placed by a resolution approved in May. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -105 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON 69TH AND 70TH AVENUES NORTH BETWEEN CAMDEN AVENUE NORTH AND DUPONT AVENUE NORTH The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis and the mot' ion a p ssed unanimously.. The City Manager presented a Resolution Establishing Project, Accepting City Engineer's Report and Approving Plans and Specifications for Humboldt Sidewalk Improvement Project No. 1986 -06 (Contract 1986 -N). RESOLUTION N0, 86 -106 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution ion d g an moved its adopt RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROJECT, ACCEPTING CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT AND APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR HUMBOLDT SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -06 - (CONTRACT 1986 -N) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving Specifications for Delivery of Four (4) Four -Door Police Patrol Sedans. Councilmember Scott noted that these vehicles did not have the olice p ackage included P p g and asked what the cost would � be to modify defy them for a police package. The City Manager er stated that . P g y g s taff is current n 1 waiting a. g for bids on the tires and steering which are part' of a' normal police package vehicle. Councilmember Scott asked if the light bars and grills were bought separately for each car. The City Manager stated that these items are transferred from car to car. Councilmember Scott asked what the delivery date was on these new vehicles. The HRA Coordinator stated that the delivery date is mid September. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -107 7 -14 -86 -4- Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS FOR DELIVERY OF FOUR (4) FOUR -DOOR ( ) POLICE PATROL SEDANS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -108 ' Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR FOUR (4) FOUR -DOOR POLICE PATROL SEDANS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving Contingency Appropriation for Purchase of Replacement Lawn Mower. He noted that the tractor was destroyed by an accidental fire on July 8, 1986 and added that this was a piece iece of equipment for the Parks Department. p rtment. Councilmember Scott asked what type of training the employees receive for equipment fires. The City Manager stated that this was a member of the City's volunteer Fire Department which was operating this particular piece of equipment, and that he should be well trained for any type of fires. RESOLUTION N0 86 -109 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING CONTINGENCY APPROPRIATION FOR PURCHASE OF REPLACEMENT LAWN MOWER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving Agreement for Design Services for Improvement of Storm Sewer System Through Centerbrook Golf Course. The Director of Public Works briefly reviewed past discussions relating to the storm sewer system through Centerbrook Golf Course. He noted that the State has agreed to allow ow the City to install the storm sewer system and will reimburse the City for 65% of the cost. Councilmember Lhotka asked if these were new costs or if they had been included in the original bid. The Director of Public Works stated that this cost had not been anticipated at the time of the award. Councilmember Hawes asked if there h re was a possibility that the cost would run higher because of g the poor soil conditions in the area. The Director of Public Works stated that he could not be certain until negotiations were finished with Schaffer Contracting, but added that there is good soil in the area and that there would only be approximately 150 feet of bad soil. Councilmember Theis asked if there would be other properties that would benefit from this project other than MN /DOT or the golf course. The Director of Public Works stated that there would be other property owners including the church and green house in the area. 7 -14 -86 -5- RESOLUTION NO. 86-110 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT FOR DESIGN SERVICES" FOR IMPROVEMENT OF STORM SEWER SYSTEM THROUGH CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and the motion passed unanimously. PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSE The City Manager stated that there is a public hearing scheduled for 7:30 p.m.' this evening on an application for a private kennel license from Jeffrey S. Lewis and Janelle L. Klimek. He noted that the normal procedure for public hearing is to allow the Councilmembers time to question the applicant and then open the public hearing for anyone else interested in speaking. He stated that after reviewing the past history of the applicant, it is the staff's recommendation to deny the application. The City Manager stated that the Council could authorize the kennel license for a reasonable amount of time to allow the applicant time for removal of the animals. Councilmember Lhotka asked if the Council did not approve the application, would a grace period be given to allow the applicant time to remove the animals. The City Attorney stated that the action could be handled in either manner described by the City Manager or Councilmember Lhotka._ He noted that the City Manager's suggestion would allow for no technical violation of the ordinance. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on a private kennel license application from Jeffrey S. Lewis and Janelle_ L. Klimek, • 5732 Knox 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. Russell Doliber, 5727 James Avenue North, who stated that the back yard has become nothing more than a mud hole and it appears to be very unsanitary. He stated that the yard smells quite bad from the dogs. He added that these dogs appear to be very powerful and that they are able to jump over a 6' fence._ Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. John McArdell, 5738 Knox Avenue North, who stated that the dogs have growled at him by his own front door, He noted that everyone else in the neighborhood who owns one or two dogs cleans up after their own dogs but that the applicant does not. He also added that the dogs challenge the children in the neighborhood. Councilmember Hawes asked if Mr. McArdell had spoken to the applicant regarding this problem. Mr. McArdell stated that he had spoken to the applicant, but he could not repeat what the applicant said. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Jeffrey S. Lewis, the applicant, who stated that all these' incidents which the neighbors are citing are from the past. He noted that he now has a pen in the yard and no longer allows his animals to run loose. Councilmember Theis noted that in the report it states that the dogs jump over the fence, and asked if this fence has been changed. Mr. Lewis stated that the dogs are between eight and ten years old and that they are not able to jump the fence any longer. Councilmember Hawes asked Mr. Lewis how many dogs he had on his premises. Mr. Lewis stated that he had three grown German shepherd's and i 7 -14 -86 -6- one small dachshund. Councilmember Hawes stated that the health department had noted more dogs than this. Mr. Lewis stated that after receiving the City's ordinance on private kennel licenses he removed the two additional dogs. Mayor Nyquist stated that the reports indicate there has been a problem at this residence since 1982. Councilmember Theis asked the applicant at what point things deteriorated with the neighbors. Mr. Lewis stated that he does not recall any of the neighbors ever speaking to him regarding this problem. Mayor Nyquist recognized Ms. Cheryl McArdell, 5738 Knox Avenue North, who stated that the stench is so bad it has made her ill. She stated that the dogs frighten the children in the neighborhood and added that the dogs had chased her teen age daughter two to three weeks ago. She noted that just last week she had counted five dogs. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Will Dahn, 5733 Knox Avenue North, who stated that the problem began approximately six years ago with barking dogs. He noted that over the years there has never been less than five dogs at the residence, and added that he and his wife have ceased making complaints because complaints only brought forth confrontations and profane words thrown across the street. Mr. Dahn asked what assurances the residents have that the applicant will live within the restrictions set by the City. Mr. Lewis stated that he has made an effort to change the situation and noted that he feels this issue is being overstated. Councilmember Lhotka stated that he has a hard time accepting the statement that things will change since the problem has been going on for so long. There was a motion b Councilmember ilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to deny the private kennel license application for Mr. Jeffrey S. Lewis, 5732 Knox Avenue North, and to allow the applicant 30 days in which to remove the excess dogs. The motion passed unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING - 1985 DISEASED SHAD TREE REMOVAL COSTS Councilmember Scott asked why some of the names on the list were the same as those that appeared last year. The Director of Public Works stated that in some cases, owners have more than one tree on their property which must be cut in consecutive years. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on proposed assessment for 1985 diseased shade tree removal costs. He 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 Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to close the public hearing on proposed assessment for 1985 diseased shade tree removal costs. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO 86 -111 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 7 -14 -86 -7- RESOLUTION CERTIFYING DISEASED SHADE TREE REMOVAL COST TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:15 p.m. and reconvened at 8:28 p.m. TOURISM BUREAU The City Manager stated that there were members from the area hotels and the Chamber present this evening to discuss the proposed ordinance for the tax imposed upon lodging. He stated that the cities of Fridley, Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn. Park are participating in this program. He noted that an ordinance has been included in the Council packets and a first reading could be held on the ordinance, if the Council was so inclined. The City Manager then introduced Mr. Steve Anderson from Ramada Hotels. Mr. Anderson briefly reviewed the budget and business plans before the Council this evening. He stated that he was here this evening to gain support for the approval of a three (3 %) percent tax on lodging. He noted that five (5%) percent of the total tax would go to the City to offset the costs from collecting the tax from the five properties within Brooklyn Center. He stated that by promoting the area for conventions and leisure not only the hotels would benefit, but all businesses in the surrounding area. He noted that generally for every dollar that is spent through conventions or leisure vacations 38 cents goes toward hotels and 62 cents goes toward food, transportation, movies, etc. Mr. Anderson stated that the roceeds from m this: tax would allow the committee to promote the area locally and at trade shows and out state advertising._ He noted ` that almost every state has a room tax. Councilmember Hawes asked if the bureau could ever be increased or decreased by the number of cities involved. Mr. Anderson stated that in the future it could be increased. .Councilmember Hawes asked how the fines were determined and if the Legislature set these penalties. Mr. Anderson stated that generally the penalties are set according to the state - sales tax penalties. There was a brief discussion of the tax and penal ies which would be collected and the manner in which it would be handled. Councilmember Hawes asked the Director of Finance if he felt five (5 %) percent would be adequate to repay the City. The Director of Finance stated that at this time he was not able to make a determination. He noted that in the proposed ordinance the effective date was August 1 and that his department would not be ready to implement the program by August 1. The City Manager stated that the effective date could be adjusted, ORDINANCES There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve for first reading An Ordinance Creating Chapter' 22 of the City Ordinances Relating to a Tax Imposed Upon Lodging with an adjustment being made to the effective date._ The motion passed unanimously. The public hearing was set for August 11, 1986 at 7:30 p.m. 7 -14 -86 -8- 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 N0. 86 -112 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 ACQUISITION 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 f the y 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 ro"ec p � t. He added that he would "k lie to wait until affirm 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 b w g back in two weeks for 7 -14 -86 -9- I� 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 Park and Recreation Commission will be looking at what to do with the excess park land. He noted that 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 :31 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 7 -14 -86 - -10- MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Nyquist and City Council Members FROM: Phil Cohen DATE: July 28, 1986 SUBJECT: "National Night Out" The Brooklyn Center Crime Fund is supporting neighborhood par - ticipation in the "National Night Out" program on August 12, 1986. Neighbors are encouraged to sit out in front of their homes or otherwise be visible from 8:00 to 9 :00 PM on that date. The purpose of this is to show support for citizen par- ticipation in crime prevention programs, especially formal or informal neighborhood watches. Participants will demonstrate that they are concerned about what goes on in their neighbor- hoods. The Brooklyn Center Crime Fund is asking for Council support of this demonstration and also for a proclamation naming August 12, 1986, as "National Night Out" in Brooklyn Center. Phil Cohen, President BROOKLYN CENTER CRIME FUND PROCLAMATION DECLARING "NATIONAL NIGHT OUT" ON AUGUST 12 1986 WHEREAS, the National Town Watch Association is sponsoring a special, coast -to -coast community crime prevention project on the evening of August 12, 1986, called "National Night Out "; and WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Crime Prevention Fund plays an essential role assisting the Brooklyn Center Police Department through its cooperative crime prevention efforts in Brooklyn Center and is supporting "National Night Out" locally; and WHEREAS, "National Night Out" provides an opportunity for Brooklyn Center to join together with other communities across the country in support of safer neighborhoods and to demonstrate the success of cooperative crime prevention efforts; and WHEREAS, neighborhood spirit and cooperation is the theme of the "National Night Out" project and is also the key ingredient in g helping the Brooklyn n Cente p g y r Police Department to fight crime. NOW, THEREFORE, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of Minnesota do hereby call upon all of the citizens of Brooklyn Center to join the Brooklyn Center Crime Prevention Fund and the National Town Watch Association in supporting and participating in "National Night Out" on August 12, 1986. FURTHER, LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT, I, AS MAYOR OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, State of Minnesota do hereby proclaim Tuesday, August 12, 1986, as "NATIONAL NIGHT OUT" in the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor Seal Attest Clerk Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: • RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1986 -L SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO 1986 -14) WHEREAS, pursuant to written Contract 1986 -L signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Alber Construction, Inc. has satisfactorily completed the following improvement in accordance with said contract: SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -14, CONTRACT 1986 -L (Construction of Sidewalk on South side of Summit Drive from Shingle Creek Parkway to 1,000 feet easterly of Shingle Creek Parkway) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said contract is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: As Approved Final Amount Original Contract $ 7,395.00 $ 5,841.18 2. The value of work performed is less than the original contract amount by $1,553.82 due to a general overestimation of planned quantities. 3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $5,841.18. 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. b Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSALS FOR BOOSTER PUMPS AND FOR RECONSTRUCTING PUMP VAULTS FOR WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -18 WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has received proposals for furnishing of booster pumps for water quality improvements, submitted bids being as follows: Bidder Bid Amount Tri- State Pump and Control $ 7,622.00 Keys Well Drilling Company 12,952.68 WHEREAS, the proposal of Tri -State Pump and Control, in the amount of $7,622.00 is the lowest responsible proposal received and the Director of Public Works has recommended that a contract be awarded to said firm in that amount; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has received proposals for installation of the booster pump piping valves and other appurtenant facilities, submitted proposals being as follows: Bidder Bid Amount 0 Hank Weidema Excavating $ 8,540.00 0 & P Contracting, Inc. 21,500.00 Kirkwold Construction 26,500.00 WHEREAS, the proposal of Hank Weidema Excavating, in the amount of $8,540.00 is the lowest responsible proposal received and the Director of Public Works has recommended that a contract be awarded to said firm in that amount: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1. The following project is hereby established: WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -18 (WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS IN AN AREA BOUNDED BY 65TH AVENUE NORTH AND 63RD AVENUE NORTH WEST OF NOBLE AVENUE NORTH) 2. The costs for Project No. 1986 -18 are estimated as follows: Contract Cost (Piping) $ 2,733.17 Contract Cost (Booster Pumps) 7,622.00 Contract Cost (Manholes & Castings) 1,268.90 Contract Cost (Installation) 8.540.00 Subtotal $20,163.17 Engineering Costs (6 %) 1.206.83 TOTAL $21,370.00 RESOLUTION N0. 3. The proposal of Tri -State Pump and Control, in the amount of $7,622.00, is hereby accepted. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with said firm in that amount. 4. The proposal of Hank Weidema Excavating, in the amount of ,$8,540.00, is hereby accepted. The City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with said firm in that amount. 5. Payment for work completed under the contracts above shall be charged to the 1986 budget for the Public Utilities Division of the General Fund. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF B: ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: June 24, 1986 RE: Water Quality Improvement Project No. 1986 -18 In an effort to improve water quality, three circulating pumps were temporarily installed in 1984 at three locations in the West part of Brooklyn Center between 65th and 63rd Avenues. These installations were at Unity Avenue, Regent Avenue and Orchard Avenue. The ur ose o f the installation was to maintain p p n a chlorine residual so as to improve rove water p quality in this area b circulating q Y Y g the flow in the water mains. Circulation alone did not maintain a sufficient chlorine residual and so supplemental chlorine addition was incorporated in one of the installations. During the past two years the circulating pumps and supplemental chlorine additions have improved water quality in our distribution system by successfully maintaining a residual of chlorine in the water supply. Because of the success of this experiment we plan to install a permanent in -line booster pumps to circulate the flow dependably. A different pump system must be used because the existing temporary installations are subject to damage from high water table and damage from accumulated heat By utilizing a different pump system there is no buildup of heat and no threat of damage from high water table. We have received quotations for the pumps and we have received quotations for the construction of vaults in which the pumps will be installed. The two bids for the booster pumps are as follows: 1. Tri -State Pump and Control — $2,486.00 er urn Total 7 458.00 P pump $ , 2. Keys Well Drilling Company s $4,317.56 per pump Total - $12,952.68 By a considerable margin Tri -State Pump and Control submitted the lowest quotation and it is recommended that we accept their proposal. We have received quotations for the installation of the pumps and vaults for the three locations. Those quotations are as follows: " "Ne So� N anc ,• July 24, 1986 Page 2 Bidder Bid Amount Hank Weidema Excavating $ 8,540.00 0 & P Contracting, Inc. 21,500.00 Kirkwold Construction 26,500.00 Hank Weidema Excavating has supplied the low quotation for the installation of pumps and vaults. It is obvious that there is a very great difference between the low bidder and the other two. It is our opinion that the bid submitted by Hank Weidema is a responsible bid and that he has full understanding of the project requirements. The high prices submitted by the other two bidders reflects the fact that there is much work available. In fact, a fourth contractor who was asked to bid declined to do so because he is unable to handle any additional work. Accordingly, it recommended that the City accept the proposal of Hank Weidema Excavating. It is my recommendation that City Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the acceptance of the proposals as described above to make the recommended water quality improvements. It is noted that, despite the work accomplished to date, and the additional work recommended herein, citizens within this neighborhood have continued, and will continue, to experience some problems with water quality. however, it is our opinion that sugnificant improvements have occurred and that the current proposed work will insure that this level of improvement will be sustained. In the meanwhile, the Public Utility Division is continuing to work with the residents, with plumbers, and with engineering testing laboratories to develop additional, cost effective solutions to the problem. Respectfully submitted, Approved for submittal, H.R. Spurrier Sy naPe City Engineer Director of Public Works HRS:'n J Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. 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) WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported to the City Council that it is necessary and in the best interests of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota to construct the streetscape improvements along Summit Drive and along Earle Brown Drive; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared specifications for the proposed work; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has estimated the cost of said improvement to be $58,400.00. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The City Engineer's Report is hereby accepted. 2. The following project is hereby established': EARLE BROWN FARM TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT PHASE II STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -15 3. The specifications for Contract 1986 -0 for said improvement project prepared by the City Engineer are hereby approved and ordered filed with the City Clerk. - 4. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least twice in the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall appear not less than ten (10) days prior to the date for receipt of bids, and specify the work to be done, state that said bids will be received by the City Clerk until 11:00 A.M. on August 11th, 1986, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers at City Hall by the City Clerk and City Engineer, will then be tabulated and will be considered by the City Council in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check., bid bond, or certified check payable to the City for 5 percent of the amount of such bid. 5. The accounting for Project No. 1986 -15 will be done in the H.R.A. Fund. RESOLUTION N0. 1 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 I : 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: July 24, 1986 RE: Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment District Phase II Streetscape Improvement Project No. 1986 -15, Contract 1986 -0 Attached is the Engineer's Report for the above referenced project. I've also attached a copy of a resolution which: 1. Establishes Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment District Phase II Streetscape Improvement Project No. 1986 -15; 2. Accepts the Engineer's Report; and 3. Approves plans and specifications for the improvement. Details of the project are contained in the Engineer's Report. A very compact timeline is proposed because work on the landscape node adjacent to the Lombard retail center should be completed before the center opens September 26, 1986. The action requested is the adoption of the attached resolution. * submitted, Approved for submittal, S knpp Director of Public Works HRS: jn ,• 7lc Se «wa!�i�g 71t one „ CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 ENGINEER'S REPORT EARLE BROWN FARM TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT PHASE II STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -15 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project includes retaining walls, subgrade preparation, pavers and sidewalk. PROJECT LOCATION The Streetscape Improvement consists of a landscape node in the northeast quadrant of the northerly intersection of Summit Drive and Earle Brown Drive and a landscape node in the northwest quadrant of the southerly intersection of Earle Brown Drive and Summit Drive. Also included is sidewalk construction north of the northerly intersection of Earle Brown Drive and Summit Drive on the east side of Earle Brown Drive from Summit Drive to a point approximately 230 feet north of Summit Drive. The remainder of the sidewalk includes the completion of sidewalk on Summit Drive from a point approximately 1,200 feet east of Shingle Creek Parkway to the southerly intersection of Earle Brown Drive and Summit Drive and along Earle Brown Drive west of Summit Drive approximately 360 feet. INTRODUCTION - On May 19, 1986 the City Council initiated work on the Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment District Streetscape Improvements by awarding a contract for the construction of Phase I work on Summit Drive and John Martin Drive. When the work was authorized we anticipated staging the work in up to 4 additional phases described in the May 14, 1986 status report prepared by Sy Knapp and included in the Appendix. The work proposed by this report is the Stage 1 and Stage 2 work described in that report. DISCUSSION The May 14th status report indicates that the improvements adjacent to the Lombard retail center, Brookview Plaza, and the streetscape improvements adjacent to Ryan's office center, Brookdale III, would be separate projects. Due to the timing of these projects it is possible to combine those stages into one phase which would be completed by mid - September. • Engineer's Report - Project No. 1986 -15 Page 2 Based on the current schedule, we would expect the remaining Streetscape work to be staged in two additional phases. Phase three would be a general contract which would include the following: 1. Installation of the lighting system for the entire district; 2. Construction of the remaining nodes; 3. Landscaping for all nodes built to that date; 4. Construction of some sidewalks and pavers; and 5. Installation of street furniture. The final phase would be construction of sidewalks adjacent to two proposed projects. One is the Ryan Construction Company Phase IV development adjacent to the Earle Brown Farm and the second is the Earle Brown Commons development also ' adjacent to the Earle Brown Farm. FUNDING Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment District streetscape improvements are elements of the public project of that district. Therefore, the project will be funded by H.R.A. A summary of project costs is detailed below: Item Total Construction Costs $ 48,700 Contingency (10 %) 4.900 Subtotal $ 53,600 Engineering (8 %) $ 4,300 Administration (1%) 500 Total Project Cost $ 58,400 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The improvements as described above are feasible under the conditions outlined and at the cost estimated. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution establishing the project, accepting the City Engineer's Report and approving plans and specifications for this improvement, Project No. 1985 -15, Contract 1986 -0. EARLE BROWN FARM TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT PHASE II STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENT 1986-15 y FREEWAY BLVD. 65TH W r � � Z 7 U Q � W cr U . X ! m k ENTRAL / PARK V � CITY '! a CIVIC C R� � y Xsc GARDE N � w CITY i� PARK SUMMI li HENN.C AND�Ya� 2 2 1 Q GOVT SERV CENTER p 0 X� W EAR GRANDVIEW BROI yZ /Q�o. PARK SC". Z 1X \ ,r` �\ n d ` "T '1 A �© CSAH NO 10 LANDSCAPE NODE • - ------ A& COMPLETED NODE PHASE I PROPOSED NODE Ir SIDEWALK A P P E N D I X CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF B:ROOKLYN BROOKLY N CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE May 14, 1986 RE: Status of Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment District Streetscape Improvements Following is a summary of plan development status and work completed to -date relating to the proposed Streetscape improvements within the Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment District: 1. Preliminary concept plans and cost estimates developed by Westwood Planning and Engineering March, 1985 2. Detailed conceptual designs and cost estimate (see copy attached) developed by Westwood Planning and Engineering (with $8,000 design fee, as per agreement approved by City HRA on 11/4/85) February, 1986 3. Obtain easements for construction of landscape nodes (still in process) February - June, 1986 4. Soil borings and analysis obtained for all landscape nodes March, 1986 5. Construction elements placed under contract to -date: - installation of retaining wall as required to allow extension of the right turn lane for Northbound traffic on Shingle Creek Parkway between Summit Drive and I694 ramp terminal April, 1986 6. Construction elements for which bids and /or quotations will be submitted to the City Council for consideration at the 5/19/86 Council meeting: ..74 . m ,, May 14, 1986 Page 2 (a) Phase I Streetscape improvements (Project No. 1986 -09, Contract 1986 -H) Note: this project consists of the construction of the retaining walls and pavers at the 6 nodes adjacent to the Target /Shingle Creek Shopping Center May 19, 1986 (b) Installation of sidewalk on South side of Summit Drive adjacent to the Target /Shingle Creek Shopping Center May 19, 1986 As shown on the attached cost estimate, one of the major cost items included in the project is the proposed street lighting. The $386,250 cost estimate would provide for "code lighting on all streets within the district. Based on our staff meeting with Tim Erkkila on May 12, 1986 we now recommend that the number of street lighting fixtures be reduced to about half of the number required for code lighting, and that pedestrian lights be included at the nodes and along the sidewalk on the North side of Summit Drive (since this will be the "arterial" sidewalk serving the District). With that policy question now resolved, we have requested Westwood Planning and Engineering to submit a proposal to provide design services as required to allow preparation of construction plans and specifications for the remaining work. It is our plan to have Westwood develop the plans and specifications relating to lighting, to landscaping and to street furniture. With some design assistance from Westwood, our office will develop detailed plans and specifications for construction of the retaining walls, pavers, and sidewalks. Our office will then assume responsibility for "packaging" the remaining work into contracts so as to complete all work in coordination with site developments within the District. It now appears that this work may have to be staged as follows: (1) work adjacent to Lombard Development Companies shopping Center ( "Brookview Plaza ") i.e. nodes and sidewalks (2) work adjacent to Ryan Construction's Phase III office building i.e. nodes and sidewalks (3) a general contract which includes installation of the lighting system for the entire district, most of the remaining nodes, landscaping for all nodes built to that date, some sidewalks, pavers and street furniture i May 14, 1986 Page 3 (4) construction of sidewalks adjacent to Ryan's Phase IV development, adjacent to the Earle Brown Farm, and adjacent to the proposed Earle Brown Commons will be scheduled in conjunction with these developments. Attached hereto is a proposal from Westwood Planning and Engineering to provide the services described above. A resolution is provided for consideration by the City Council. R:: Jfully submitted, Sy P Director of Public Works Attachments SK: jn�� 8C] Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK FOR EXTENSION OF TRAIL SYSTEM IN PALMER LAKE PARK (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -13) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center that: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into an agreement with the City of Brooklyn Park for extension of the trail system in Palmer Lake Park from the end of the existing trail system northerly approximately 600 feet to the boundary line between Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park. 2. The estimated cost for said construction, based on a contract awarded by the City of Brooklyn Park, is $10,200,. 3. The proposed project will be designated as Project No. 1986 -13. 4. The accounting for this project will be done in the Capital Projects Fund. 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 I:BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: July 24, 1986 RE: Agreement with the City of Brooklyn Park for Extension of Trail System in Palmer Lake Park The City of Brooklyn Center's Shingle Creek Trailway system now terminates at a point in Palmer Lake Park approximately 600 feet south of the boundary between the City of Brooklyn Center and the City of Brooklyn Park. The City of Brooklyn Park now plans to proceed with the construction of a trailway system which serves the portion of Palmer Lake Park lying within the City of Brooklyn Park. Plans and specifications have been prepared for this work and bids have been taken for the completion of this project. Brooklyn Park received 6 bids for the project with total bids as follows: Bidder Amount Veit and Company $110,800.00 Ideal Paving, Inc. $115,148.00 Hardrives, Inc. $154,495.00 Alber Construction $160,545.00 Barber Construction $182,883.00 C.S. McCrossan, Inc $189,835.00 Based on earlier discussions with us the Brooklyn Park specifications provided that the City of Brooklyn Park may require the contractor to construct the missing segment in Brooklyn Center if the City of Brooklyn Center requests that the City of Brooklyn Park proceed with that construction on a reimbursement basis. Our analysis shows that the Brooklyn Center portion for construction of the 600 feet of trailway within Brooklyn Center would be as follows: Construction Contract Cost $ 8,418.00 Contingency (10 %) 842.00 Subtotal $ 8,260.00 Engineering (10 %) $ 940.00 TOTAL COST $ 10,200.00 „ *7/t e 5% m e, e „ July 24, 1986 Page 2 It is my opinion that this is a very reasonable price and I recommend that the City of Brooklyn Center enter into agreement with the City of Brooklyn Park for completion of the trailway system under their contract. Attached hereto is a proposed agreement for this purpose and a resolution approving that agreement for consideration by the City Council. Respec fully submitted, Sy a pp Director of Public Works cc: File 1986 -13 SK: jn Li = __ �-• .` � „ B"LLYN PARK ! ac II -• .:: ` PARK . al. IMCREAT/OW P ,41E " - \ 1• �1 �� � ���1�� S \ lam._ '=• n4. _ ._• � 3 �•-,� � �f• �l ' •.'! �. � _ ^^ ' -.mot y) 3P�... • ` I �- L � \� ��.v.. e �f . .. _ mss• 1, - t d Ali f TRAIL OVER SHALLOW ORGANIC SOIL -- - TRAIL OVER ORGANIC S81L, GEOtEXTiLE SUPPORT NOTE: TRAIL LOCATIONS SHALL BE AS STAKED + IN FIELC N CMP CULVERT, 812E AS INDICATED WITI•I APRON EACH END . AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA AND THE CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK, MINNESOTA PROVIDING FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A TRAILWAY SYSTEM IN THE PALMER LAKE PARK PORTION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1986 by and between the City of Brooklyn Center, a municipal corporation of the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota, hereinafter called "Brooklyn Center ", and the City of Brooklyn Park, a municipal corporation of the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota, hereinafter called "Brooklyn Park ", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center has previously constructed a trailway within the Palmer Lake Park area to a point approximately 600 feet south of the boundary line between Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park; and WHEREAS, Brooklyn Park has prepared plans and specifications for the construction of a trailway system within the Palmer Lake Park area of Brooklyn Park, and has received the following bids for construction of the trailway system in accordance with these plans and specifications: Bidder Amount Veit and Company $110,800.00 Ideal Paving, Inc. $115,148.00 Hardrives, Inc. $154,495.00 Alber Construction $160,545.00 Barber Construction $182,883.00 C.S. McCrossan, Inc $189,835.00 AND, WHEREAS, Brooklyn Park has awarded a contract for construction of said project to Veit and Company, the lowest responsible bidder; and WHEREAS, the specifications for this contract provide that Brooklyn Park may order the contractor to construct the missing 600 foot segment within the Brooklyn Center portion of Palmer Lake Park based on the unit prices contained within the contract; and WHEREAS, the estimated cost for completion of the trailway system within Brooklyn Center is detailed as follows: Page 1 of 3 ESTIMATED UNIT ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT QUANTITY PRICE AMOUNT Granular Material TN 945.00 $ 4.00 $ 3,780.00 Aggregate, Class V TN 172.33 6.00 1,034.00 Bituminous Mixture (2341) TN 90.00 28.00 2,520.00 Geotextile Fabric SY 1,000.00 0.70 700.00 18" CMP LF 16.00 14.00 224.00 18" Apron EA 2.00 80.00 160.00 Subtotal $ 8,418.00 Contingency (10 %) 842.00 Subtotal $ 9,260.00 Engineering (10 %) 940.00 TOTAL COST $10,200.00 NOW, THEREFORE, Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park hereby agree as follows: 1. Brooklyn Park will order its contractor to proceed with completion of the trailway system within the Brooklyn Center portion of Palmer Lake Park on the basis of the costs as itemized above. 2. Brooklyn Park will provide construction supervision and inspection of the entire project including the segment within Brooklyn Center to assure compliance with the plans and specifications. Brooklyn Center will provide assistance as necessary in order to assure proper routing of the trailway system and to assure compatibility of the trailway with the existing Brooklyn Center trail. 3. Brooklyn Center will reimburse Brooklyn Park on the following basis: a. A payment equal to $5,100 (50% of the estimated total amount) within 30 days after notice to Brooklyn Center that Brooklyn Park has executed the required documents with the contractor. b. The remaining balance, based on `final contract costs for the segment within Brooklyn Center, within 30 days after notice to Brooklyn Center that the contract has been completed and that payment therefore has been accepted by the contractor. Page 2 of 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereunto authorized and entered into this agreement upon authority of the City Council of Brooklyn Center and the City Council of Brooklyn Park. In the presence of CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER BY Mayor BY City Manager In the presence of: CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK BY Mayor BY City Manager Page 3 of 3 �G Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER TO CONTRACT FOR REMODELING OF POLICE DEPARTMENT, PHASE II (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -02, CONTRACT 1986 -B) BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER that Resolution No. 85 -229 is hereby amended to increase the appropriation for Project No. 1986 -02 (Remodeling of Police Department, Phase II) from $50,000 to $55,000. Said finding is hereby appropriated from the Capital Project fund balance. 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. Y P P CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF I:BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 C ENTER TELEPHONE 561.5440 ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: July 25, 1986 RE: Amending Appropriation for Remodeling of Police Dept. The following additional items have been identified as necessities in conjuction with remodeling of the Police Department: Telephone system changes (quote from Air Comm) = $ 450.00 Radio system changes (quote fron Motorola) = $ 828.00 Installation of new camera and monitor (quote from Video Tronix) _ $ 1529.00 Subtotal (see attached memo fron Jim Lindsay) _ $ 2807.00 Installation of smoke detectors and ; ventilation system automatic shutdown (Estimate) = $ 2300.00 Estimated Total — $ 5107.00 *Note: Three quotations have been requested for installation of the smoke detectors and automatic shutdown system. One has been received to date, at a price within the above noted estimate of cost. Following is a summary of project costs to -date, including the above- noted items: Contract Base Bid _$ 38,564 Change Order No 1 =$ 5,162 Additional work Items as noted above _$ 5,107 Architectural fees _$ 5,000 Estimated Total =$ 53,833 A project budget of $50,000 was established by Resolution No. 85 -229. It is recommended that the City Council be requested to increase that appropriation by $5,000. A resolution for that purpose is submitted for Concil consideration. Respectfully submitted, Sy Knapp Director of Public Works MEMORANDUM TO:` Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Jim Lindsay, Chief of Police DATE: June 27, 1986 SUBJECT: Additional Remodeling Costs I have been in contact with people from Air Comm, Motorola and VideoTronix to establish the additional costs in connection with the current remodeling. Air Comm gave me a price of $450.00, which includes moving all phones requested and the purchase of an additional 20- station telephone. Motorola quoted me a price of $828.00 to move the buttons for the security door, relocate a speaker and install on off switches es on two speakers.. VideoTronix gave a rice g of 1 i P $ ,529..00 for a new camera and monitor for the entry way nd to move the Y existing ron t entry g y and put a corner housing and new lens on that camera. The price also includes a twelve month warranty on equipment. This comes to a total of $2,807.00 in additional expenses. These expenses P were expected p to come out of the surplusbudgete� for remodeling with the under bid. However, the problems we had once construction started which necessitated the changes in the plan resulted in there being no excess money in the remodeling t>adget' to cover these items. If you have any questions, please contact me. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER TO CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF CENTERBROOK GOLF COURSE (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1985 -23, CONTRACT 1986 -C) WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has recommended certain changes to the construction details for the Centerbrook Golf Course (Improvement Project No. 1985 -23, Contract 1986 -C) and has negotiated a proposed Change Order to the contract with Shafer Contracting, Inc; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the proposed changes and it is the opinion of the Council that these changes will improve the quality of the project while reducing the costs thereof: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The proposed Change Order, providing for the following changes, is hereby approved: Contract Contract Cost Cost Description Increase Decrease Install New 16 Inch Transmission Watermain 39,545 -- Delete Old Water Service to Clubhouse -- 27,000 Delete Old 16 Inch Watermain Crossing Under Driveway -- 10,000 Install Sanitary Sewer Forcemain 12,550 -- Delete Gravity Sanitary Sewer -- 30,000 Reshape Sliding Hill 795 - Net Decrease $ 14,110 2, The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Change Order on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center. 3. The cost for Item No. 1 (Install 16 Inch Transmission Watermain) shall be charged to the Public Utility Fund. 4. All other cost increases and decreases shall be accounted with the Centerbrook Golf Course Improvement in the Capital Projects Fund No. 25, Division 48. 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 B R OOKLY F BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 N TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY - POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: July 24, 1986 RE: Change Order to Contract for Construction of Centerbrook Golf Course (Improvement Project No. 1985 -23, Contract 1986 -C) The City's contract with Shafer Contracting Company for construction of the Centerbrook Golf Course includes the followin g three line items: Description Contract Amount Furnish and Install Water 6 Inch Supply Service to Proposed Clubhouse Complete (Includes Piling) $ 27,000 Furnish and Install 16 Inch Watermain Under Clubhouse Driveway (Includes Piling) Note: This item was included to provide for the installation of a 16 inch watermain under the main driveway to the clubhouse so as to allow the future extension of this transmission main, north across T.H. 100 to connect to the transmission main in place on C.R. 10 at Shingle Creek Parkway, and south through Lions Park to connect to the 16 inch watermain which serves Water Tower No. 3. 10,000 Furnish and Install Sanitary Sewer Service to Proposed Clubhouse Complete $ 30,000 Recognizing that these 3 items in the contract were very costly items, our office has been working with the project architect and with the contractor to find ways to reduce this cost. Following detailed review, evaluation and negotiations, includes the following basic changes: July 24, 1986 Page 2 Water Main System Changes After detailed review of the soil conditions encountered during construction we have been able to identify a route for a watermain through the project which does not require support of the watermain on piling. J q PP . P g This route is located under the proposed parking lot (see attached plan). Accordingly, we now recommend that the City install a 16 inch watermain along this route, with a 6 inch connection to the clubhouse, thereby providing service to the clubhouse and at the same time completing that segment of the proposed 16 inch transmission line. Shafer Contracting has agreed to accomplish this installation at a total cost of $39,545, as compared to the $37,000 cost for the first 2 items noted above. Although this cost is slightly higher, g y ghe the proposed installation will be a permanent installation which serves both purposes (service to clubhouse and as a transmission main). Because the primary function of this new main is to serve as a transmission main it is recommended that the entire cost be charged.to the Public Utility Fund rather than to the golf course project, thereby reducing the charges to the golf course project by $37,000. Sanitary Sewer Service to Clubhouse The existing contract with Shafer Contracting provides for installation of a gravity sanitary sewer service to the clubhouse at a cost of $30,000. This cost can be reduced substantially b installing a grinder um in the Y Y g g pump clubhouse and installing a forcemain sanitary sewer instead of the gravity sewer, along the same route as originally proposed. Shafer Contracting's proposed price for the forcemain is $12,550 as compared to the $30,000 price for a gravity sewer. However, the required grinder pump will add approximately $8,000 to the building construction cost, thereby providing a net project cost reduction of approximately $9,500. In addition, under this option, the City must F anticipate increased operational and maintenance P cost associated with the grinder pump and forcemain. It is estimated that these costs will be approximately $500 per year, resulting in a 20 year payback period for the gravity line. Reshavinp; Slidiniz hill in Lions Park Because as -built plans for the sliding hill in Lions Park did not accurately show existing conditions, it is necessary to revise the grading plans. We have negotiated with Shafer Contracting to make the required change fit a lump sum price of $795.00 July 24, 1986 Page 3 Summary and Recommendations Following is a summary of the recommended changes: Contract Contract Item Cost Cost_ No. Description Increase Decrease 1. Install New 16 Inch Transmission Watermain 39,545 -- 2 Delete Old Water Service to Clubhouse -- 27,000 3. Delete Old 16 Inch Watermain Crossing Under Driveway -- 10,000 4. Install Sanitary Sewer Forcemain 12,550 -- 5. Delete Gravity Sanitary Sewer 30,000 6. Reshape Sliding Hill 795 - Net Decrease $ 14,110 A resolution providing approval of the proposed Change Order is attached for consideration by the City Council. Respectfully submitted, Sy Knapp Director of Public Works SK: jn AJ It P / PROPOSED Rty LILAC � ►� p v fG VE ,� • • T�•� ���tdiYNilw n / ) v ST 4 • MOPOtW ��� r / CWT NOUts g _ - • , ' • • • . CoNTslAToR CONSTRUccr S wER a WATER TO FlNISNEO wQ.O .. . - t1.00R ELEV. X1.4 „"' Q •,.• :�- • • L PROPOSED d `' DUCTILE IRON K' ... PIPE ON Pt . . • , , '' ' ,r "' C SEE OEM s-' r: CQ :. tr. i• TO UK PROPOS . e PRACITCP STS 6" G.V. GREEN a t G x6' TEE h' Tam* CQMT "?LOCATE Qsr MYO NEW 6 x6'TEE :O ANCHOR To_ E E PILE BENT E DETAIL) �� / /1 /D�i � // IRNISH 8 INSTALL G.V. ON .NI% d "O. LEAO a 4v p !' O.LP. TAT 41 1!!R V q E.J j Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING CHANGE ORDER TO CONTRACT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF STORM SEWER FOR EARLE BROWN FARM (IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO.-1986-08, CONTRACT 1986 -I) WHEREAS, the City Council entered into Contract 1986 -I with Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota for the construction of Improvement Project No. 1986 -08; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has determined that certain modifications to the contract to facilitate the construction of the project, said modifications being construction of sanitary sewer across the southeast corner of Lot 2, Block 1 for a total estimated cost of $21,747.00; and WHEREAS, the contractor, Ryan Construction Company of Minnesota, agreed to the prices for the modification as noted above: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the above modification to Improvement Project No. 1986 -08 is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that there is appropriated from the H.R.A. Fund the sum of $21,757.00 for the additional cost. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: July 24, 1986 RE: Brooklyn Farm Storm Sewer Improvement Project No. 1986 -08, Contract 1986 -I Before parking lot and Common Access Road construction can proceed sanitary sewer lines under these facilities should be constructed. In order to expedite this work we have received a proposal from Ryan Construction Company, contractor on the above referenced project, totalling $21,747.00. That proposed cost was reviewed by Westwood Planning and Engineering Company and, although it exceeds the Engineer's Estimate by approximately S %, it is a reasonable price for the proposed work. Since the construction of this sanitary sewer enables us to avoid damage to parking lot and roadway we recommend adoption of the attached resolution authorizing the execution of Change Order No. 1 for the Brooklyn Farm Storm Sewer Improvement Project No. 1986 -08, Contract 1986 -I. Respectfully submitted, Approved for submittal, H.R. Spurrier Sy Knapp City Engineer Director of Public Works HRS : j n Nou Amu EARLE BROWN DRI E.w $lry iC! ._ v Fntry DIN � two ' ,� •`.,' total- STING I \ ' �, .. '' \ PODROME NNECTIN G V' �: . /� Iwo lt•sf: _ _• � � in :,1• ao� sa�i•s • � � � \ 3TINO eN401NG ea �: �...1.._.._. • j\ ; t . BUILDING X OF p ON 1� oil �—, • ' is • �- �, , •�?''•: •� :5�: , � ` - !, as SANITARY - -- �, SEWER WORK PROPOSED UNDER CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 ,., BROOKLYN FARM STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO 1986 -08 ,CONTRACT NO. 1986-1 a j CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF :YROOKLYBROOKLYN �T CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 l� TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 TO: Property Owners Along West Side of Humboldt Avenue North - Between 69th and 71st Avenues North and - Between 72nd Avenue North and Woodbine Lane FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: July 18, 1986 RE: Proposal to Install Sidewalk, Notice of Hearing On Monday, July 28, 1986 the City Council will conduct a hearing regarding the proposed installation of sidewalks on Humboldt Avenue, as recommended in the Engineer's Report (copy enclosed). That hearing is scheduled for 7:30 p.m. in the City Council chambers at the City all 6301 Sh Creek Parkway. . g y Although no special assessments would be levied against your property as a result of this improvement, this hearing is being conducted to provide you with an opportunity to express your support or opposition to the proposed project. Following this hearing, the City Council will decide whether or not to order the project installed. _ Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at 561- 5440. Yours very tru y, S Kna Y PP Director of Public Works SK:j _ 19R61LL-IAIERIG OIY i CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF . B R OOj� T v�T BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 1,L l j� TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE - FIRE 911 T0: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FRAM: H.R. Spurrier, City Engineer DATE: July 11, 1986 RE: Sidewalk Improvement Project No. 1986 -06 Humboldt Avenue Sidewalk Attached is the Engineer's Report for the above referenced project and a resolution which establishes the project, accepts the Engineer's Report and approves plans and specifications for the improvement. The report discusses the details of this project and concludes that the project is feasible. It is my recommendation that the attached resolution be approved. Res e t lly submitted, Approve for submittal, H. rr er Sy K PP City Engine Director of Public Works HRS : j n ,• Ilse — SwW� nt are CITY 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY OF :BROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY POLICE - FIRE 911 ENGINEERING REPORT SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -06 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sidewalk Improvement Project No. 1986 -06 includes grading and construction of sidewalk. PROJECT LOCATION The sidewalk improvement consists of sidewalk construction between 69th and 72nd Avenues North along Humboldt Avenue North. INTRODUCTION This sidewalk improvement project on Humboldt Avenue North was the result of an appearance by area residents at the City Council meeting August 23rd, 1985. DISCUSSION In August, 1985 the City received requests for the installation of sidewalks along the West side of Humboldt Avenue. One request asked for sidewalk between 70th and 71st Avenues, and another request asked for installation of sidewalk between 72nd Avenue and Woodbine Lane. On October 9th, 1985 City staff held a "Neighborhood Meeting" with residents along Humboldt Avenue to discuss numerous issues including the requests for sidewalk installation. After hearing both support and objection, the City Manager stated that a study would be conducted to determine whether sidewalk would be utilized in this area. The results of this study were presented to City Council as a Discussion Item at the January 13th, 1986 council meeting. City Council expressed a favorable concensus for constructing the sidewalk. Following the Council meeting, a survey was prepared to get comments from the 12 property owners along Humboldt. Five property owners returned the survey. Four supported the proposed sidewalk and the fifth agreed to "go with the majority ". Staff initial analysis determined that the work was best completed in conjunction with the construction of the collector street along 69th and 70th Avenue. That project was coordinated with T.H. 252 construction and would not be completed prior to school opening. We want the work completed prior to September, 1986 and so it was necessary to make this a separate project. Engineer's Report Project No. 1986 -06 Page 2 FUNDING Sidewalk along Humboldt Avenue cannot be funded by the Regular Municipal State Aid Account because permanent improvements to Humboldt Avenue are not being made' with this project. In accordance with current City policy, this sidewalk would be funded by the Local Municipal State Aid Account. Project costs and funding is summarized below: Humboldt Avenue Sidewalk Project No. 1986 -06 Item Local MSA Total Construction Costs $ 25,079.50 Contingency (10 %) 2.510.50 Subtotal $ 27,500.00 Engineering (8 %) $ 2,210.00 Administration (1%) 280.00 Legal (1%) 280.00 Total Project Cost $ 30,360.00 Sufficient funds are available in the Local Municipal State Aid Accounts to fund the sidewalk on Humboldt. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS _ The improvements as described above are feasible under the conditions outlined and at the cost estimated. It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution establishing the project, accepting City Engineer's Report and approving plans and specifications for this Improvement Project No. 1986 -06, Contract 1986 -N. I hereby certify that this plan, specification, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that am a du Registered Professional Engine 'r under the la s f the State of Minnesota. Date istraticn No. 13089 ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1986 -06 HUMBOLDT AVENUE SIDEWALK Item 1986 -06 # Contract Item Unit Unit Price Quantity Cost 2021.501 MOBILIZATION LS 5,000.00 0.20 $1,000.00 2101.502 CLEARING EACH 100.00 3 300.00 2101.507 GRUBBING EACH 50.00 3 150.00 2104.501 REMOVE CONCR C & G (ALL DSGNS) LF 2.75 40 110.00 2104.505 REMOVE CONCR PAVEMENT (6" & 8" SY 7.25 12 87.00 2104.505 REMOVE BIT PVMT (ALL DEPTHS) SY 2.50 65 162.50 2104.511 SAWCUT CONCR PVMT (4 6 ", 8 ") LF 6.00 140 840.00 2104.513 SAWCUT BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT LF 2.50 224 560.00 2105.501 COMMON EXCAVATION CY 6.00 200 1,200.00 2357.502 BITUMINOUS MATERIAL FOR TACK GAL 1.50 60 90.00 2361.504 ASPHALT CEMENT TON 200.00 1 200.00 2361.508 WEARING COURSE MIXTURE TON 22.00 15 330.00 2521.501 4 CONCRETE WALK (HI EARLY) SF 2.00 7,800 15,600.00 2571.502 FURNISH & PLANT SHADE TREE EACH 200.00 6 1,200.00 2575.505 SODDING WITH 4" TOPSOIL SY 3.25 1,000 3,250.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $25,079.50 CONTINGENCY (10 %) 2,510.50 SUBTOTAL $27,590.00 ENGINEERING (8%) 2,210.00 ADMINISTRATION (1%) 280.00 LEGAL (1$) 280.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST $30,360.00 TO: Property Owners Along West Side of Humboldt Avenue North - Between 69th Avenue North and 71st Avenue North; and Between 72nd Avenue North and Woodbine Lane FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: January 21, 1986 RE: Requests for Installation of Sidewalks on West Side of Humboldt Avenue North In late August, 1985 two requests were submitted to the City for the installation of sidewalk along the West side of Humboldt Avenue (see map attached). - One request asked for installation of sidewalk between 70th and 71st Avenues (Note: This request for sidewalk was included in a list of other requests relating to traffic and pedestrian problems on Humboldt Avenue between 69th and 73rd Avenues.) The second request asked for installation of sidewalk between '72nd Avenue and Woodbine Lane. On October 9, 1985 City staff held a "Neighborhood Meeting" with residents along Humboldt Avenue to discuss numerous issues, including the requests for sidewalk installation. At that meeting, several people supported the proposed sidewalk extensions. However, some abutting property owners also objected to the proposed extensions. The City Manager stated that a study would be conducted to determine the number of students who would utilize sidewalks in these areas, and the City staff would then make its recommendations to the City Council. On Tuesday, October 22, 1985 the Engineering staff conducted counts of the number of pedestrians who walk along the boulevards on four segments of Humboldt - Avenue where no sidewalk currently exists. Copies of the detailed counts are attached, and are summarized as follows: Total Number of Pedestrians Location Counted in 12 -Hour Period West side of Humboldt between 69th and 70th Avenues 11 West side of Humboldt between 70th and 71st Avenues 29 January 21, 1986 Page 2 Total Number of Pedestrians Location Counted in 12 -Hour Period Woodbine Avenue between Humboldt and Knox Avenues 17 Note: It is 'assumed that these pedestrians would use a sidewalk on the West side of Humboldt Avenue between 72nd Avenue and Woodbine Lane, if such a sidewalk were installed. West side of Humboldt Avenue between Woodbine Lane and 73rd Avenue S * Note: This count represents only those who walked on the grass boulevard or along the side of the roadway, existing conditions. Y g Based on this information, the Administrative Traffic Committee (which consists of the City Manager, the Chief of Police, and the Director of Public Works) recommended that sidewalks be installed on the West side of Humboldt Avenue from 69th to 71st Avenues and from 72nd Avenue to Woodbine Lane. That recommendation was submitted to the City Council on January 13, 1986. Following discussion of the recommendation, the City Council expressed support for the proposal, and directed staff to individually contact each property owner along these segments to Y request our individual comments. q Accordingly, the purpose of this letter is to solicit your input relating to this proposal. The following information is provided to assist you in evaluating the effects of this proposal: If these sidewalks are installed, they would be.installed within the existing right -of -way for Humboldt Avenue, approximately one foot from the right -of -way line. (Note: This would be an extension of the alignment for those sidewalks which are now in lace between 71st and 72nd Avenues.) •) However, to allow the sidewalk grades to be blended properly to existing driveways, front yards, etc. , we would probably request some property owners to provide "slope easements ". If slope easements cannot be obtained, some areas may require construction of retaining walls as an alternative. If the sidewalks are installed the entire costs would be P aid from the City's Municipal State Aid Street fund. No P ortion of these costs would be levied as special assessments to abutting property owners. Also, if the sidewalks are installed, the City will be responsible for operation and maintenance costs - including snowplowing and future repair costs. Enclosed is a questionaire which you may use in advising us of your comments regarding this proposal. Please complete this form and return it to us in the enclosed return envelope by January 31, 1986. January 21, 1986 Page 3 Following receipt of your replies, we will summarize these responses and submit our analysis to the City Council. A copy of the analysis will be sent to you, along with a notice of the date and time at which the City Council will formally consider this issue. After that hearing, the City Council will decide whether or not to order the project installed. Note At the neighborhood meeting several property owners expressed serious concern regarding the difficulty in backing out of their driveways onto Humboldt Avenue. At that time we suggested two alternate remedies for this problem - ie. (a) construction of a "backaround" adjacent to the driveway or (b) construction of some form of horseshoe driveway (see sketches attached). If the sidewalk project is approved, it would be advantageous to coordinate installation of such driveway modifications into the same project. While the cost for those modifications would be the responsibility of the benefited property owner, the City would certainly be willing to work with you in trying to get this accomplished. So, if you're interested in this type of driveway modification, please include that in your reply to our questionaire. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please call me at 561 -5440. Yours very truly, Sy Knapp Director of Public Works Enclosures SK: jn ' HUMBOLDT .INE SIDEWALK MAILING 69TH TO 71ST AND 72ND TO WOODBINE &ford T. Hill /L n Goole � y 7027 Humboldt Avenue North 1501 Woodbine Lane Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 John A. Dorholt vDaniel J. Morrissette, Sr. 7031 Humboldt Avenue North 1500 - 72nd Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Gale R. Anderson 7025 Humboldt Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Lee James Hollister 7019 Humboldt Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 0 J sie D. Herbal Humboldt Avenue North oklyn Center, MN 55430 VPaul.H. Byrne 7007 Humboldt Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 t./Robert J Beugen Robert J. Beugen 7001 Humboldt Avenue North 2395 West County Road C2 Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Roseville, MN 55113 Brookdale Towers Program Brookdale Towers Program 6915 Humboldt` Avenue North 5217 Wayzata Boulevard #108 Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 St. Louis Park, MN 55416 TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works RE: Sidewalks on Humboldt Avenue North In response to your letter dated January 21, 1986, I submit the following comments: I (we) support the proposed sidewalk installation. I (we) oppose the proposed sidewalk installation. Comments /Questions. Names(s) Address ` Telephone 73 RD AVE. NO. WOODBINE LA. ND AVE. N. w Z 72 > ND AVE. N0. AMY LANE w 0 J Q 72ND AVE. NO. o o Z z Z Tl ST AVE N0 z > w f a Q O I Q d Z 2 41 Z O N Z LU O � 0 � _ Q W W a V � W G > Cl) Q W ? 70TH AVE. NO. i i ---- EXISTING SIDEWALK un�nn� PROPOSED SIDEWALK 1 ATC 85 -033 12 HOUR PEDESTRIAN COUNT - OCTOBER 22, 1985 HUMBOLDT AVENUE - 69TH TO 71ST AVENUES 1. West side of Humboldt Avenue from 69th Avenue to 70th Avenue 7:00 - 8 :00 4 1:00 - 2:00 0 8:00 - 9:00 2 2 :00 - 3:00 0 9:00 - 10:00 0 3:00 - 4:00 1 10:00 11:00 3 4:00 5:00 4 bikes 11:00 - 12 :00 0 5:00 - 6:00 1 12:00 - 1:00 0 6:00'- 7:00 0 Total 11 +4bikes 2. West side of Humboldt Avenue from 70th Avenue to 71st Avenue 7:00 - 8:00 7 1:00 - 2:00 0 8:00 9:00 5 2:00 - 3:00 1 9:00 - 10:00 0 3 :00 - 4:00 10 10:00 - 11:00 2 4:00 - 5:00 1 11:00 - 12:00 0 5:00 - 6:00 0 12:00 - 1:00 0 6:00 - 7:00 3 Total 29 Attached is 15 minute breakdown. ATC 85 -034 SCHOOL HOUR PEDESTRIAN COUNT - OCTOBER 22, 1985 WOODBINE LANE AND HUMBOLDT AVENUE Woodbine Lane Humboldt Avenue Both directions between West side only between Humboldt & Knox Avenues Woodbine & 73rd Avenue 7:45 - 8:00 1 p 8:00 8:15 p 1 8:15 - 8:30 g 3 8:30 - 8:45 p p 8:45 - 9 :00 p 0 9 4 - 11:30 - 11:45 p p 11 :45 - 12 p p 12 :00 - 12:15 p p 12:15 - 12:30 p p 12 :30 - 12:45 p p 0 p 3 :15 3:30 p p 3:30 - 3:45 5 _ 1 3:45 4:00 3 p 4:00 - 4:15 0 0 8 l I f I Lo7"` 2 I S �S� 3 ' 35' S¢fbQ�k. I Q ar � .Q J I o - I �x isfi Orive�cvay 1 a LotL��e 3 � 5'St+!I 35'Se7t6ack i I TYP.co/ y f � o `01 "v Eacis7`iny OrivPcuoy i Lo;0,Line 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 JULY 17, 1986 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Carl Sandstrom, Lowell Ainas, Mike Nelson and Wallace Bernards. Also resent were Director of Planning p 1 ng and Inspection Ronald Warren, City Engineer Bo Spurrier, and Planner Gary Shallcross. Chairman Lucht noted that Commissioner Wallerstedt had stated that she would be late to the meeting. (However, Commissioner Wa.11erstedt was unable to attend). APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 22, 1986 Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Malecki to approve the minutes of the May 22, 1986 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, and Bernards. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioners Ainas and Nelson. The motion passed. WITHDRAWAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86024 (Martin Dynneson) Following the Chairman's explanation — th — e - UTirman noted that Application No. 86024 had been withdrawn by the property owner, Raymond Hawk. He asked for a motion to acknowledge the withdrawal. Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to acknowledge withdrawal of Application No. 86024. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Ainas, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NOS. 86025 AND 86026 (Brookdale Office Park Partnership) The Secretary then introduced the next two items of business, a request for site and building plan approval to construct a five building office complex at the northwest corner of County Road 10 and Northway Drive and a request for 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 MBank. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff reports regarding these applications (see Planning Commission Information Sheets for Application Nos. 86025 and 86026 attached). The Secretary left at 8:41 p.m. and returned at 8:43 p.m. with water. Commissioner Nelson asked whether the access to the existing building is through the same driveway onto Northway Drive and whether an access easement existed between the two properties. The Secretary responded that there is an access easement at present and that it should be updated because of the relocation of the driveway through the five building office complex. Commissioner Sandstrom inquired as to requirements for lighting on the property. He expressed some concern that there could be dark spots around the building if there is inadequate lighting. The Secretary stated that the Zoning Ordinance limits the amount of light in foot candles that can be measured at a property line adjacent to a residential district. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he was more concerned 7 -17 -86 -1- about the safety on the lot from a possible lack of light. The Secretary responded that the developer would most likely want to meet the demands for lighting on the site and that the City's concern is more how lighting can disrupt the use of adjacent properties. Commissioner Bernards asked whether the main access to the site would be off County Road 10 through Northway Drive. The Secretary responded in the affirmative. He pointed out that a car can travel left from eastbound County Road 10 to northbound Northway Drive, but cannot in turn turn left onto County Road 10 from southbound Northway, Drive. Commissioner Bernards also inquired as to the freestanding identification sign. The Secretary explained that that sign would identify the complex itself and that there would be an additional directory sign within the complex which would simply direct cars toward different buildings within the complex. Commissioner Malecki inquired as to the zoning and building code violations that would be presented by basements if they were put in. The Secretary referred to the example of Boulevard Plaza, an office condominium development at 71st and Brooklyn Boulevard. He pointed out that there have been problems controlling the finishing off of basement areas for occupiable space which exceeds the parking available on the site and does not meet exiting requirements of the building code.' Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether the buildings were planned for expansion in the future. The Secretary stated that he did not think so, but that additional parking would have to be added to accommodate that. Chairman Lucht asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. David Carland, with Brookdale Office Park Partnership, stated that he had nothing to add to the report. Commissioner Sandstrom asked Mr. Carland what plans there were for lighting on the site. Mr. Carland answered that there would be low pressure sodium light fixtures on the buildings themselves and the parking lot lights as shown on the plan. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 86026) Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing on Application No. 86026, a preliminary plat. He asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner_ Sandstrom to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86025 (Brookdale- Office Park Partnership) Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 86025, 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, utilty and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 7 -17 -86 -2- t 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. n 9. The applicant shall submit an as -built utility survey of the property prior to release of the performance gurarantee. 10. On -site traffic control signs shall be installed in accordance with the recommendations of the Director of Public Works. 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. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Ainas, Nelson, and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86026 (Brookdale Park Office Partnership Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to recommend approval of Application No. 86026, 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. 7 -17 -36 - -3- 1 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. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Ainas, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. EARLE BROWN COMMONS APPLICATIONS Application No. 86010 (Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority) The Secretary then introduced three applications regarding the Earle Brown Commons Residential Development proposed south of the Earle Brown Farm. The first application was 86010, a request to rezone from I -1 to R7 the land immediately south of the Earle Brown Farm and east of the Brookdale Corporate Center III site. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 86010 attached). The Secretary also explained a proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the area north of Summit Drive presently zoned I -1. That amendment, he explained, would allow for mixed uses in this area including high -rise residential, high -rise office, and commercial uses. Chairman Lucht referred to the Year 2000 Study and asked whether the Zoning Ordinance would allow for a 7 Eleven type development in the R7 zone. The Secretary stated that if such a commercial operation were clearly accessory to the residential development, it would be comprehended under the existing ordinance. He stated, however, that a separate commercial development would not be allowed in the R zone. P 7 P Commissioner Bernards asked whether the mixed use recommendation in the Comprehensive Plan amendment would be inconsistent with the restoration of the Earle Brown Farm and with the City's desire to control that redevelopment. The Secretary stated that the City would still have control of the reuse of the Earle Brown Farm through development contracts, etc. He stated that the - mixed - use designation would allow more flexibility in the reuse of the Farm complex to allow a mixture of uses within that complex as well as in the surrounding area. The Secretary then reviewed draft resolutions on the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed rezoning. Application No. 86027 (Earle Brown Commons Partnership) The Secretary then introduced the site and building plan application for the residential complex proposed for the land area south of the Earle Brown Farm. He explained that the proposal included both a master plan and a plan for a first phase, eleven store 140 unit a partment building. The Secretary reviewed the contents of Ys P g Y the staff report (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 86027 attached). The Secretary went on to explain that the second building within the complex might be a market rate rental building, separated from the first building ather than attached b a common area. The Greta c mm a Se r � Y y reviewed with the Commission the proposed building elevations and noted that Westwood Planning is making recommendations to the City on exterior treatment of the buildings. Application No. 86028 (Earle Brown Commons Partnership) Finally, the Secretary introduced a request for a variance from Section 35 -700 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a greenstrip or parking setback less than 15' and a building setback less than 50' from the westerly right -of -way line of Earle Brown 7 -17 -86 -4- Drive on a temporary basis. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 86028. The Secretary explained that the City was in the process of a quick take of the property. Chairman Lucht asked the applicant whether r he had anything to add. Nor. Al Beisner of Earle Brown Commons Partnership explained that the roof of the apartment buildings would not be a hip roof because the sides of the roof would not meet, but that there would be a flat area on top. He stated that the roof would be too high for the sides to join at a peak. PUBLIC HEARING (Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Application Nos. 86010 and 86028 Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and the proposed rezoning and on the variance application. He asked whether anyone present wished to speak regarding any of these applications. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 86 -2 Member Carl Sandstrom 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 Molly Malecki, and the motion passed. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -3 Member Mike Nelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSTION OF APPLICATION NO. 86010 SUBMITTED BY THE BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY H ( RA) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Carl Sandstrom, and the motion passed. Commissioner Bernards noted the conditions regarding proof -of- parking to be installed if required for the "public welfare ". He asked whether this was to allow for possible traffic related to tourism to the Earle Brown Farm site. The Secretary responded that the proof -of- parking was spaces required for the residential complex which the developer showed could be put in, but chose not to install He stated that the spaces would be required if there were a parking problem associated with the residential use of the property. Commissioner Bernards concluded that the parking provided in front of the reception center was not intended to be used by people going to the Earle Brown Farm. The Secretary agreed. He stated that the parking in front of the reception building was for the residential complex and that those stalls were counted toward meeting the requirement of two parking stalls per unit. Commissioner Bernards suggested that a sign may be needed designating those parking stalls as private if they are not intended to be used for traffic going to the Earle Brown Farm. The Secretary explained that each use within the Farm complex and adjoining developments would have to meet its own requirements. 7 -17 -86 -5- Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether parking spaces within the ramp would be designated for each of the units within the complex. Fir. Al Beisner of Earle Brown Commons Partnership responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Bernards stated that he hoped the City would have understanding neighbors adjacent to the Earle Brown Farm on the question of using parking spaces. The Secretary pointed out that additional parking would be provided on the Earle Brown Farm complex, but that certain special events might result in parking being used on adjacent properties. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86027 (Earle Brown Commons Partnership Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to recommend approval of Application No. 86027, 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 Y underground irrigation system shall be installed in all g g 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. g. 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. 11. Plan approval is contingent upon a rezoning of the land south of the Earle Brown Farm site and east of the Brookdale Corporate Center III site to R7. 7 -17 -86 -6- 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 property at the County as a deed restriction prior to the issuance of permits. 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 5 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 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. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Ainas, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 86028 (Earle Brown Commons Partnership Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Nelson to recommend approval of Application No. 86028, subject to the following condition: 7 -17 -86 -7- 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. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Ainas, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ADJOURNMENT Following a brief discussion of upcoming business, there was a motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:27 p.m. Chairman 7 -17 -86 -8- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86025 Applicant: Brookdale Office Park Partnership Location: County Road 10 and Northway Drive Request: Site and Building Plan The applicant requests site and building plan approval to construct a five - building office complex on the 4.33 acres of vacant land immediately east of the Brooklyn Crossing office building at County Road 10 and Brooklyn Boulevard. The property in question is zoned ClA and is bounded on the north by single- family residential homes, on the east by the F and M Bank, on the southeast by Northway Drive, on the south by County Road 10, and on the west by the Brooklyn Crossing office building. The five buildings would all be one storey, ranging in size from 6,000 sq. ft. to 8,400 sq. ft. The proposed plan replaces the latter two phases of the Brook lynCross i ng office development proposed under Application No. 81017 by C and G Transcontinental Developers. The site is presently two parcels which are to be combined by plat (Application No. 86026). Access /Parking Access to the complex will be via the existing 30' driveway off Northway Drive approximately 290' north of County Road 10. That driving lane, which presently aligns with the north side of the existing five - storey office building, will be realigned within n the site to empty out at the main entrance of the larger building. Three of the proposed buildings will be located north of this main drive and two to the south. The total development, including the large existing building requires 428 parking spaces (254 for the 55,193 sq. ft. building and 174 for the five buildings totalling 34,800 sq. ft.). The proposed plan provides approximately 192 stalls for the new multi - building development. There will, therefore, be some excess parking available to allow for medical tenants (up to 10,800 sq. ft. of gross floor area). The parking is arranged so that each building has 20 to 30 stalls immediately adjacent and some additional perimeter stalls. Landscaping /Screening The site is presently screened from the residential district to the north by a 6' high board on board fence in accordance with Section 35 -4 11 of the Zoning Ordinance. The plan provides the required 15' wide buffer greenstrip adjacent to the residential district and a 35' wide greenstrip adjacent to County Road 10 which is classified by the Zoning Ordinance as a major thoroughfare. A 25' wide greenstrip is proposed along Northway Drive consistent with the side corner building setback. In addition, each building is surrounded by a landscaped area containing sod and trees and sidewalk from parking to building entrances. No foundation shrubs are indicated. The plan calls for 23 Sugar Maple (2 112" dia. ) and 47 smaller Red Maple. In addition, 7 Little Leaf Lindens, 8 Flowering Dogwoods, and 14 Blue Spruce are scheduled, along with 56-shrubs including Mockorange, sand cherry, and junipers. The plantings are fairly distributed except that there are few trees along County Road 10 to allow greater visibility. The site plan indicates underground irrigation as required. The total points represented by the proposed plantings is 427 based on the schedule tentatively adopted by the Commission. This exceeds what we have looked at as a minimum for a 4.33 acre site (387 points). Drainage /Utilities The land is fairly flat, requiring numerous catch basins around the site to collect the runoff. Under the interim regulations of the Shingle Creek Watershed District, this site is not required to meet storm water purification and runoff attenuation requirements because it is less than 5 acres. Nevertheless, because those 7 -17 -86 -1- Application No. 86025 continued regulations are interim only, the City Engineer has requested drainage calculations for the 5 year and 100 year storms to check against available storm sewer capacity. Regarding utilities, it should also be noted that two of the proposed buildings will lie on existing sanitary sewer lines. These must be relocated and proper easements executed before building permits may be issued. Building / Signery The buildings as indicated previously will all be one storey, ranging in size from 6,000 sq. ft. to 8,400 sq. ft. There are no basements proposed and staff would strongly discourage such a feature as it has lead to zoning and building code conflicts at Boulevard Plaza office condos. The proposed buildings are each expected to be multi - tenant buildings, but will be leased, not sold. The complex aims to serve office clients who want fairly direct exposure to customer traffic. Multiple entrances will be provided. The exterior of the buildings is to be brick similar to the larger existing office building to the west. Tenant identification signery is permitted in one- storey office buildings though only building identification signs are allowed in multi- storey office buildings. The applicant has indicated that tenant identification signs will be allowed by the owner, but will have to be of individual letters of a uniform style and size. The Sign Ordinance allows up to 10% of the wall area to be devoted to signery. In addition, the applicant intends to have a freestanding project identification sign at County Road 10 and Northway Drive and a directory sign within the complex listing only building addresses. Lighting /Trash The plan shows little in the way of site lighting other than a couple of standards in the parking area between these low -rise buildings and the taller building to the west. No lights are indicated on the buildings either. A trash enclosure is indicated at the northeast corner of the site. Concern would be that lighting not be directed into the neighboring residential area and meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance where commercial property abuts residential. Residential Generally, the plans are in order and approval is recommended, 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. 1 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. 7 -17 -86 -2- Application No. 86025 continued 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. 11. The replat of the property shall receive final approval by the City Council and be filed at the County prior to issuance of building 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 Zoning Ordinance prior to the issuance of building permits. 7 -17 -86 -3- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86026 Applicant: Brookdale Office Park Partnership Location: Northway Drive and County Road 10 Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant requests preliminary plat approval to combine into a single parcel the two vacant lots between the Brooklyn Crossing office building and the F and M Bank. The land in question is zoned C1A and is bounded by a single - family residential district on the north, by the F and M Bank on the east, by Northway Drive on the southeast, by County Road 10 on the south, and by the Brooklyn Crossing office building on the west. The land is being combined into a single parcel to contain the five building office complex proposed under Application No. 86025- The land is presently described as Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Brooklyn Crossing Addition. The proposed legal description is simply Lot 1, Block 1, Brooklyn Crossing 2nd Addition. The lot area is 4.33 acres. There are presently two utility easements through the property for sanitary sewer dines linking trunk lines in Zenith and Abbott with mains in Northway Drive and County Road 10. The proposed development of the property will require relocation of these utilities and the easements for them. There is also a 15' easement along the south edge of the property for sidewalk purposes. Altogether, the plat appears 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 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. 7 -17 -86 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86010 Applicant: City of Brooklyn Center HRA Location: Northerly of the intersection of Summit Drive and Earle Brown (east leg) Request: Rezoning The applicant requests rezoning from I -1 to R7 of two parcels of land totalling approximately 7 acres in area located northerly of the intersection of Summit Drive and Earle Brown Drive (east leg). The parcels are currently described as Tract I, R. L. S. 1594 and Tract A, R. L. S. 1380. These two parcels are proposed to be combined in a future replatting of this area that will create two new lots for a two phase residential development. The first phase proposes 140 high -rise residential units for the elderly, while the second phase proposes 129 high -rise residential uses also for the elderly, although the possibility exists that the second phase might be a nonelderly market rate residential development. This application was first considered by the Planning Commission on March 13, 1986 at which time the Commission reviewed the proposal, opened and continued the public hearing and directed the staff to prepare resolutions recommending the rezoning and recommending a Comprehensive Plan amendment. The matter has not been back on the Commission's agenda due to further review of possible site plans and replatting and also, deliberation regarding whether or not there should be a physical link or connection between the proposed elderly development and the hippodrome on the Earle Brown Farm. The Earle Brown Farm Committee is expected to make its final recommendations regarding this aspect of the plan in September of this year. However, it is believed that it is appropriate to proceed with the various planning applications at this time. Also, some of the delay has been due to the possibility that the second phase, or future phase, may not be an elderly residential development. Attached for the Commission's review are copies of the Planning Commission minutes from March 13, 1986 and also, the Planning Commisssion Information Sheet which was presented at that time. The basic question to rezone from I -1 to R7 still exists although it should be done in full light of the fact that the entire project may not be elderly residential. The assumptions for justifying the rezoning and for recommending a Comprehensive Plan amendment are basically the same. The high -rise residential development, whether elderly or market rate rental,.will generate less traffic (both average daily and p.m. peak traffic) in the area than that projected for a full service /office development of the land as currently recommended by the Comprehensive Plan. Also, the residential development is looked at as assisting in achieving long term preservation of the Earle Brown Farm for historic purposes. With these points in mind, a Comprehensive Plan amendment that would change Table 14 and Figure 15 regarding land use plan revisions is recommended to the Commission. - A public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan amendment was scheduled for June 26, 1986, but had to be continued until July 17, 1986 due to a last minute cancellation of the June 26 Planning Commission meeting. The Plan amendment would be to revise the Comprehensive Plan to allow mixed use developments, including high -rise residential and general commerce along with service /office uses in this area. This is also believed to be an appropriate amendment because it will offer additional opportunities for varying potential uses on the Earle Brown Farm itself which will better lead to development which will insure its historic preservation. 7 -17 -86 -1- Application No. 86010 continued The recommended amendment is considered to be consistent with other portions of the Comprehensive Plan which strongly encourage preservation of the Earle Brown Farm and the proposal appears also to be consistent, in part, with Plan recommendations to provide more elderly housing in the community. The public hearing on the rezoning ( Application No. 86010) , as mentioned above, has been continued. A second hearing regarding the Comprehensive Plan amendment is scheduled for Thursday evening. A resolution recommending approval of the rezoning and one recommending approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment will be offered to the Commission at that meeting. 7 -17 -86 -2- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86027 Applicant: Earle Brown Commons Partnership Location: 6100 Summit Drive Request: Site and Building Plan The applicant requests site and building plan approval to construct a 140 unit high- rise elerly residential building on the vacant land south of the Earle Brown Farm complex. The land in question is the subject of a City- initiated application to rezone the land to R7. It is bounded on the north by the Earle Brown Farm, on the east and south by Earle Brown Drive, on the south and west by Summit Drive, and on the west by the site of Ryan Construction's Brookdale Corporate Center Phase III. There is no height limit in the R7 zone. The proposed building will be 11 stories in height. The residential project is part of the development plan for the Tax Increment Financing District established in this area which includes this land and the Earle Brown Farm site. A second 9 storey phase of 129 units is planned for future development. Access /Parking The site will be served by one access drive off Summit Drive and three off Earle Brown Drive. The access off Summit Drive actually intersects the public street at the southeast corner of the Corporate Center III property. From there it traverses northeast onto the residential (if rezoned) land and moves northward on the west side of this site until it ends at horseshoe shaped parking and drop -off area west of the old office building. The middle access off Earle Brown Drive will serve both the upper and lower level of a parking ramp to be located south of the building. It is really a double access with entrance and exit traffic between each ramp level and the street. Staff would recommend that the driveways from each level be separated as much as possible. The southerly access off Earle Brown Drive serves surface parking on the second phase and is linked with the access off Summit. The northerly access is a narrow, angled drive for service vehicles. The first phase site plan shows 171 parking spaces in the two -level ramp and 33 surface parking spaces. The Zoning Ordinance requires two spaces per unit, in this case 280 spaces for Phase I. Additional proof -of- parking spaces are documented on the master plan which includes the second phase. Total parking for both buildings will eventually include 328 ramp stalls, 115 surface stalls, and 95 proof-of- parking stalls for a total of 538 stalls, two for each unit. Density The entire land area to be rezoned for the residential development is presently 7 acres, to be expanded to 7.1 acres by the vacation of a 10' wide portion of the Earle Brown Drive right -of -way. The Zoning Ordinance requires 1,400 sq. ft. of land per dwelling unit in the R7 zone, but allows for a density credit of up to 500 sq. ft. per under- building or covered parking stall may be granted. The proposed master plan for 269 units meets density requirements with the granting of a density credit of 67,324 sq. ft. as shown below: -269 units x 1,400 s.f. = 376,600 s.f. (8.65 acres) gross required -Land area provided 309,276 sq. ft. or 7.1 acres - Density credit required 67,324 sq. ft. - Excess land = • acres -163 covered stalls x 500 = 81,500 (1.88 acres) -Net land area required = 294,600 s.f. (6.76 acres) 7 -17 -86 -1- Application No. 86027 continued As can be seen, the proposed master plan provides for more covered parking stalls than necessary to justify the needed density credit. The 7.1 acres will be subdivided into two lots at a later date. Each lot will have sufficient area and covered parking in combination to meet the density requirements of the Zoning Ordinance separately. Landscaping The master landscape plan provides 35 trees 6" in diameter, 5 more than required by ordinance for 269 units. However, if the first phase were to stand on its own 1 9 , , P six inch trees would be required and only 15 are indicated on the area to be platted as a lot for the first phase. It does not seem appropriate to require an over concentration of large trees on the Phase I lot if the second phase does proceed. However, it is `reco n mme ded that a 1 trees e held to uarantee for additional are b e g g assure independent compliance of the first phase if the second phase does not proceed within five years. The total planting schedule for the master plan provides 784 points based on the ' point system tentatively adopted by the Commission and this exceeds by a considerable amount (222 points) the level recommended in that schedule. More than half these points are accounted for on the first phase site. Plantings are generally more dense on the northern portion of the site. Some garden plots are indicated toward the southern end of the complex. A plaza area in the triangle of land south of the first phase building and east of the second phase building is proposed with five Flowering Crabs, four Skyline Locust, and a $" diameter Green Ash. Other shade trees include Hackberry and Sugar Maple. Some existing trees will be preserved and five existing Green Ash are to be relocated. The plan provides only 7 coniferous trees (Black Hills Spruce). Although overall landscaping is acceptable, more conifers would be welcome provided sight lines are observed. Grading /Drainage /Utilities The grading plan generally provides for drainage to flow toward the west side of the site where a holding pond with skimmer control will be provided to meet the requirements of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management District. The proposed pond provides adequate runoff attenuation for the parking surfaces proposed to be built and does not provide for proof -of- parking areas should they be constructed. A City storm sewer line which presently traverses the proposed location of Building B (the second phase) must be partially rerouted around the south end of that building. A water main in roughly the same location will also be routed along the north side of the site connecting lines in Earle Brown Drive and Summit Drive. The utility easement protecting the existing utilities will have to be redescribed to protect the relocated utilities. Those documents must be executed and filed with the title to the property at the County prior to issuance of permits. A utility maintenance agreement will also be required. Building The proposed buildings would both be L- shaped. The first phase (Bldg. A) is to be 11 stories, the second phase (Bldg. B) 9 stories. The buildings are to be connected to each other by a one- storey lounge with optional dining facilities. This connecting link will in turn be connected to the existing office building. The plan further proposes a connecting link between the office building and the hippodrome to the north given the prospect of senior services being located in the Earle Brown Farm buildings. That prospect, however, is far from certain at this time while the Earle Brown committee deliberates the future use of the Farm complex. Approval of this specific aspect of the plan, therefore, is not recommended at this time. 7 -17 -86 -2- Application pp cation No. 86027 continued The exterior of the building is not specified at this time. One possibility is to attempt to match the brick exterior of the existing office building and this is the preferred option at this time. The roof is to be a hip roof and there will be a wood trim line around the top of the building matching the existing office building. The proposed plans call for 53 one - bedroom units and 87 two- bedroom units in Bldg. A. Project totals are 98 one - bedrooms 171 two - bedrooms (various styles of units will be available). Thirteen (13) to 3 0 1 handica ed units will be ( ) PA provided. Corridors P are shown at 5 width. Covered arki will a out 11 be accessible ou de the b uilding P � g f rom the first floor level. The building will be fire sprinklered in accordance with the State Building Code. Lighting /Trash Trash will be handled entirely within the building. Site lighting is proposed on light standards around the proposed ramp, along the entrance drive off Summit and in the horseshoe drive -up area. Size and style of light standard and fixture are presently being reviewed by the Earle Brown Farm committee. Recommendation Altogether, the plans are in order, and approval is recommended 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 b the Ci E n g ineer, p rior to the. issuance of P P Y Y � �P 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. -3- Application No. 86027 continued 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. 11. Plan approval is contingent upon a rezoning of the land south of the Earle , Brown Farm site and east of the Brookdale 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 property at the County as a deed restriction prior to the issuance of permits. 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. 161. 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 5 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 and the hippodrome on the Earle Brown Farm. 21. Plan approval applies to development of Building A,. the existing office, and connecting links. Site and building plan approval of the second phase, Building B, is subject to further review and approval when proposed for construction. 7 -17 -86 -4- I Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 86028 Applicant: Earle Brown Commons Partnership Location: 6100 Summit Drive Request: Variance The applicant requests a variance from Section 35 -700 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a greenstrip or parking setback of less than 15' from public right -of -way on a temporary basis. And also a variance from Section 35 -400 to allow a building setback of 40' rather than the 50' required, again, on a temporary basis. The first request applies to two small portions of the proposed parking ramp for the Earle Brown Commons residential development which will be located approximately 9' from the existing westerly right -of -way line of Earle Brown Drive. The second request is where the northeasterly corner of the site is at the closest point to the Earle Brown Drive right -of -way. The development in question is proposed under Application No. 86027 and is located south of the Earle Brown Farm and east of the Brookdale Corporate Center III development. No written arguments have been submitted addressing the standards for a variance (see Section 35 -240 attached). However, the only real argument for this variance is that it is a temporary condition until the westerly 10' of the Earle Brown Drive right -of -way is vacated, at which time the greenstrip will be more than the required 15' and the building setback will meet the 50' minimum requirement. Temporary variances of this sort have been granted to Village Properties for a relocated apartment building at Evergreen Apartments and for Dr. Schell's dental clinic at 412 66th Avenue North. The central condition of those variances was that the agency possessing the excess right -of -way (in those cases it was MN /DOT) supply a written statement that the excess right -of -way would exist in the future and would be made available to the abutting property owner when no longer needed. In the present case, the City does intend to vacate the westerly 10' of the Earle Brown Drive right -of -way. However, the underlying rights to that land do not belong to the owner of the adjacent parcel, as is normally the case, but to the owner _ of Tract H, R.L.S. 1380, the parcel of land dedicated for roadway purposes at Earle Brown Drive. The City is, therefore, negotiating to acquire the underlying rights to the portion of Tract H to be vacated. In conclusion, staff recommend that the variance requested be granted noting that the City is in the process of acquiring Tract H, R.L.S. 1380 for the purpose of vacating excess right -of -way and 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. 7 -17 -86 Member Carl Sandstrom introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 86 -2 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 82 -255 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) RELATIVE TO LAND LOCATED IN AND AROUND THE EARLE BROWN FARM WHEREAS, the City Council on December 20, 1982 adopted Resolution No. 82- 255, adopting the updated Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Plan's Land Use Plan at page 98 (Table 14 and Figure 15) designates the area in andaround the Earle Brown Farm for service /office uses; and WHEREAS, the Plan (on page 82) also calls for development of housing designed specifically for elderly and handicapped; and WHEREAS, the Plan (on page 84) also calls for preserving the character of the Earle Brown Farm buildings; and WHEREAS, a rezoning request (Application No. 86010) by the City of Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) has been submitted to rezone an approximate 7 acre portion of this area to R7 (high density, high- rise residential) for the purpose of developing elderly housing; and WHEREAS, the rezoning request is inconsistent with the portion of the Comprehensive Plan recommending only service /office uses in this area; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the above recommendations in conjunction with the rezoning application, and finds the rezoning proposal to be in the best interests of the community; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 35 -202 of the City ordinances, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 17, 1986- to consider an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 35 =202 of the City ordinances, that City Council Resolution No. 82 -255 (Comprehensive Plan) be amended to allow mixed use developments including high density, high -rise residential and general commerce in addition to service /office uses in the general area of the Earle Brown Farm, based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed use of this area for high density residential elderly housing is consistent with that portion of the Comprehensive Plan that encourages development of housing for the elderly and the handicapped. 2. That by allowing more diverse land uses in and around the Earle Brown Farm will offer additional opportunities for varying potential uses on the Earle Brown Farm which will lead to development which will help insure its historic. preservation. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -2 3 • Preservation of the Earle Brown Farm is a stated goal of the Comprehensive Plan and this plan amendment is believed to be consistent with that recommendation. 4. Traffic impact in this area will not be adversely effected by such an amendment and this amendment has no adverse effect on any Metropolitan systems. 5. That such a Comprehensive Plan amendment is in the best interests of the community given the above considerations. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council that the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan be revised to read as follows: No. 11 of Table 14 on page 98 of the Comprehensive Plan regarding the Land Use Plan be changed from "service /office" to "mixed use development (including high density, hi h- 'se residential, service /office and general commerce use July 17,1986 Date Chairman ATT Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Mal ecki and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof; George . Lucht, Lowel l Ai nas, Mol ly_ Mal ecki, Wal l ace Bernards, Mi ke Nel son, and Carl Sandstrom and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member Mike Nelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 86 -3 RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF APPLICATION NO. 86010 SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (HRA) WHEREAS, Application No. 86010 submitted by the Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) proposes rezoning from I -1 (Industrial Park) to R7 (High Density Residential) of 7.1 acres of land south of the Earle Brown Farm and east of Brooklyn Farm Addition; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on March 13, 1986 when testimony regarding the request was taken; and WHEREAS, the Commission on July 17, 1986 considered and recommended an amendment to the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan allowing for mixed use development in this area by Planning Commission Resolution No. 86 -2; and WHEREAS, an appropriate development plan has been submitted to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the plans and the proposed rezoning have been reviewed by the Planning Commission in light of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, including the restoration of the Earle Brown Farm NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 86010 submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority be approved in consideration of the following: 1. The proposed use described in Application No. 86010 is consistent with the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan as proposed by Planning Commission Resolution No. 86 -2. 2. The high -rise residential development will generate less traffic (both average daily and p.m. peak traffic) in and around this area than projected for a full service /office development of the area. 3. The proposed rezoning is viewed as assisting in achieving the long -term preservation of the Earle Brown Farm for historic purposes. 4. There is a need for elderly housing within the community which will be served by such a rezoning. 5. The proposed use is consistent and compatible with other surrounding development both in existence and proposed for the future. RESOLUTION NO. 86 -3 6 . The subject property can support the development within the requirements of the R7 zoning classification as witnessed by the proposed site plan submitted under Application No. 86027. 7. In light of the above, it is believed that the proposed rezoning meets the guidelines for evaluating rezonings set forth in Section 35 -208 ;Of th B ooklyn Center Zoni Ordinance. z July 17, 1986 Date Chairfirin AT ST: b.�. Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Sandstrom and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof; George Lucht, Lowell Ainas, Molly Malecki, Wallace Bernards, Mike Nelson and Carl Sandstrom and the following voted against the same; none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. lQe Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT OF CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 82 -255 (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) RELATIVE TO LAND LOCATED IN AND AROUND THE EARLE BROWN FARM WHEREAS, the City Council on December 20, 1982 adopted Resolution No. 82- 255, adopting the updated Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Plan's Land Use Plan at page 98 (Table 14 and Figure 15) designates the area in and around the Earle Brown Farm for service /office uses; and WHEREAS, the Plan (on page 82) also calls for development of housing designed specifically for elderly and handicapped; and WHEREAS, the Plan (on page 84) also calls for preserving the character of the Earle Brown Farm buildings; and WHEREAS, a rezoning request (Application No. 86010) by the City of Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) has been submitted to rezone an approximate 7 acre portion of this area to R7 (high density, high- rise residential) for the purpose of developing elderly housing; and WHEREAS, the rezoning request is inconsistent with the portion of the Comprehensive Plan recommending only service /office uses in this area; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has considered the above recommendations in conjunction with the rezoning application, and finds the rezoning proposal to be in the best interests of the community; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 35 -202 of the City ordinances, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 17, 1986 to consider an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 86 -2 - recommending adoption of the proposed Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, the Council considered the proposed Plan amendment at its July 28, 1986 regular meeting in light of the overall objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and appropriate planning considerations for the Earle Brown Farm and the surrounding land. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, pursuant to Chapter 35 -202 of the City ordinances, that City Council Resolution No. 82 -255 (Comprehensive Plan) is hereby amended to allow mixed use developments including high density, high -rise residential and general commerce in addition to service /office uses in the general area of the Earle Brown Farm, based upon the following findings: 1. The proposed use of this area for high density residential elderly housing is consistent with that portion of the Comprehensive Plan that encourages development of housing for the elderly and the handicapped. RESOLUTION N0. 2. That by allowing more diverse land uses in and around the Earle Brown Farm will offer additional opportunities for varying potential uses on the Earle Brown Farm which will lead to development which will help insure its historic preservation. 3. Preservation of the Earle Brown Farm is a stated goal of the Comprehensive Plan and this plan amendment is believed to be consistent with that recommendation. 4. Traffic impact in this area will not be adversely affected by such an amendment and this amendment has no adverse effect on any Metropolitan systems. j 5. That such a Comprehensive Plan amendment is in the best interests of the community given the above considerations. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan be revised to read as follows: I I No. 11 of Table 14 on page 98 of the Comprehensive Plan regarding the Land Use Plan be changed from "service /office" to "mixed use development (including hi h s't hi high-rise residential, p g density, y, g d , service /office and general commerce uses)." lip 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 against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 10C.2 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING DISPOSITION OF APPLICATION NO. 86010 SUBMITTED BY THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (HRA) WHEREAS, Application No. 86010 submitted by the Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) proposes rezoning from I -1 (Industrial Park) to R7 (High Density Residential) of 7.1 acres of land south of the Earle Brown Farm and east of Brooklyn Farm Addition; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on March 13, 1986 when testimony regarding the request was taken; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission on July 17, 1986 considered and recommended an amendment to the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan allowing for mixed use development in this area by Planning Commission Resolution No. 86 -2; and also approval of rezoning Application No. 86010 by Planning Commission Resolution No. 86 -3; and WHEREAS, an appropriate development plan has been submitted for the land in question; and WHEREAS, the plans and the proposed rezoning have been reviewed by the City Council in light of the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, including the restoration of the Earle Brown Farm at its July 28, 1986 regular meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted at its July 28, 1986 meeting a resolution amending the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan to allow mixed use development, including high -rise, high- density residential development on the land in and around the Earle Brown Farm. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that Application No. 86010 submitted by the City of Brooklyn Center Housing and Redevelopment Authority be approved in consideration of the following: 1. The proposed use described in Application No. 86010 is consistent with the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan as proposed by Planning Commission Resolution No. 86 -2. 2. The high -rise residential development will generate less traffic (both average daily and p.m. peak traffic) in and around this area than projected for a full service /office development of the area. 3• The proposed rezoning is viewed as assisting in achieving the long -term preservation of the Earle Brown Farm for historic purposes. 14. There is a need for elderly housing within the community which will be served by such a rezoning. 5. The proposed use is consistent and compatible with other • surrounding development both in existence and proposed for the future. RESOLUTION N0. 6. The subject property can support the development within the requirements of the R7 zoning classification as witnessed by the proposed site plan submitted under Application No. 86027. 7. In light of the above, it is believed that the proposed rezoning meets the guidelines for evaluating rezonings set forth in Section 35 -208 of the Brooklyn Center Zoning Ordinance. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof; and the following voted against the same; whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, p City Manager FROM: Brad Hoffman, HRA Coordinator DATE: July 24, 1986 SUBJECT: Weed Height Ordinance Many of the weed complaints I receive relate most directly to the length of grass or to weeds not defined as noxious weeds by law. To date, we have been successful in getting most of these problems corrected. However, I feel that it would make it easier, as well as provide a certain comfort level, if the City were to define a specific length of grass or a nuisance under Chapter 19. I have attached several ordinances from other communities for your review as well as a memo from Patti Page. If the Council is inclined, we could prepare specific language for an ordinance. I will be available Monday to further discuss this matter. Section 1020:00 Section 1020 Noxious Weeds and Grass Cutting Section 1020:00. Weed Elimination - Duty of Owner. Subd. 1. Any weeds, whether noxious or not as defined by state law, growing upon any privately owned lot or tract of land in the City or upon any public boulevard or similar public property alongside the traveled portion of a street or alley abutting the private property at a height greater than 6 inches are hereby declared to be a nuisance. Subd. 2. The owner or occupant of any such property or abutting property shall prevent such nuisance on the property or on the abutting public boulevard or similar public property alongside the traveled portion of a street or alley and, if such nuisance occurs, the owner or occupant shall cut and remove the weeds from the property: Section 1020:05. Weed Elimination Notice On or before June 1 of each year, and at such other times as ordered by resolution of the Council, the City Clerk shall publish once in the official newspaper a notice directing owners and occupants of property within the City o destroy all weeds Y declared by Section 1020:D0/ to be a nuisance and stating that if not so destroyed the weeds will be destroyed by the Director of Public Works at the expense of the owner and if expenses thereof be not paid prior to the following September l the charge for such work will be made a special assessment against the property c oncer n ed. Section 1020:10. Notice Costs and Assessment. Subd. 1. Weed Elimination When an owner or occupant permits `a nuisance to exist in violation of Section 1020:00 the City Clerk shall serve a notice on the owner of the property ordering removal or elimination of the nuisance within ten days after the service of the notice. Subd. 2. Notice; Service When there exists a public nuisance on private property, or upon any public boulevard or similar public property alongside the traveled portion of a street or alley, a notice to remove the nuisance shall be served upon the owner, lessee or occupant thereof by the City Manager or his designated agent. The notice shall be served by registered mail or by personal delivery. When the property is occupied, service upon the occupant is deemed service upon the owner; where the property is unoccupied or abandoned, service shall be by mail to the last known owner of record of the property. Sections 1020:00 1020 :05 and 1020:10 added by Ordinance = 1983- 439(A). Section 1020:10 Subd. 3 Subd. 3. Notice; Contents The notice required by this code or Minnesota Statutes 429.101 shall state: A. The nature and location of the nuisance; B. That the nuisance must be removed or abated within 10 days of service of the notice; and C. That if the nuisance is not so removed or abated, it will be removed or abated by the City and the cost of such removal or abatement assessed against the property. Subd. 4. Abatement by City If the owner or occupant fails to comply with the notice within the period allowed for com- pliance after service, or if no owner, occupant or agent can be found, the City Manager or his designated agent may: A. Cutting by City. It shall be the duty of the City Engineer to c u t u t all grass and eliminate weeds growing within the platted limits of any public street or alley and on private property and to abate these nuisances when the same are not cut by the property owners as required by Section 1020:00. It shall likewise be the duty of the City EncTineer to keep an accurate account of the cost of such cutting opposite each lot and certify the same to the City Council to be specially assessed against the abutting property in accordance with the authority established -� 101-- and -by - -- this- - ,ordinance, B. Abatement by the City after failure of the owner or occupant to do so shall not relieve such owner or occupant of a violation of the Ordinance Code. Subd. 5. Costs The City Manager or his designated agent shall keep a record of all costs incurred by the City in the I removal and abatement of nuisances pursuant to this section including all administrative costs involved in the service of the no �. notice required b this sub t q Y erection, and shall .report o the City Clerk rk ot later than a Y n Au g ust 1. Subd. 6. Assessment On or before September 1 of each year the City Clerk shall list the total costs incurred by the City under this section against each separate lot or parcel to which they are attributable. The City Council shall then spread the costs against each property as a special assessment for collection as other special assess- ments in the following year, all as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section 429.101. Section 1020:10 added b Ordinance Y 1471983-439(A). Section 1020:15 Section 1020 :15. Personal Liability The owner of property for which a current service has been performed shall be personally liable for the cost of such service.: As soon as the current service has been completed and the cost thereof determined, the City Manager shall, prepare a bill stating the amount due for such current service and stating that if the bill is not paid prior to September lst the same will be made a special assessment against the property concerned pursuant to Section 1020:15, Subd. 6 and shall mail the bill and notice to the owner and thereupon the amount shall be immediately due and payable to the office of the City Finance Director. Section 1020:20. Noxious Weeds The regulatory provisions of Minnesota Statutes 1982, Sections 18.171 to 18.272 are hereby adopted for the control of noxious weeds within the City of Brooklyn Park and three copies of said sections of the Minnesota Statutes are on file in the office of the City Clerk and marked "City of Brooklyn Park Official Copy ". Said state regulations are incorporated in and made a part of this ordinance as completely as if set out here in full. Section 1020:25. Cutting Grass and Weeds In addition to the regulations contained in Section 1020:00, it shall be the duty of every owner of property abutting on any public street or alley to cause the grass and weeds to be kept cut to the center of such platted street or alley. If the grass or weeds in such a place are 6 inches or more in height it shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this section. Sections 1020:15, 1020:20 and 1020:25 added by Ordinance #1983'- 439(A) MEMORANDUM TO: Brad Hoffman, HRA Coordinator FROM: Patti Page, Administrative Aid DATE: July 22, 1986 SUBJECT: Weed Height Ordinance I have spoken with the cities of Crystal, Golden Valley, New Hope, Plymouth, Robbinsdale, and St. Louis Park regarding their height ordinance for weeds and grass. Each city has sent me a copy of their ordinance and below is indicated the maximum height for each city. Crystal 12 inches Golden Valley 8 inches New Hope 6 inches Plymouth 8 inches Robbinsdale 12 inches St. Louis Park 6 inches Both the City of New Hope and the City of St. Louis Park indicated they felt 6" was too short and very difficult to enforce. I have tried to contact Brooklyn Park regarding their ordinance, but my calls have not been returned. Crystal City Code 640.01 "(1981) l . Section 640 Noxious 'Needs (Ord. 81.9) 640.01. Definition of Weeds For purposes of this Section the term "weeds" means noxious weed'as defined by state law and all such useless and. troublesome plants as are commonly known as weeds to the general public. 640.03. Nuisance All weeds or growing grass upon any lot or parcel of land in the City in excess of one foot in height, or which have gone or are about to go to seed, are hereby declared to be a nuisance and dangerous to the health, safety and good order of the City. 640.05. Notice When the owner or occupant of premises permits a nuisance to exist in violation of Section 640.03, the Weed Inspector, shall serve a notice on the owner, occupant or agent of the owner of such lot or parcel of land ordering such person to have such weeds or grass cut and removed or otherwise eradicated or removed within ten days after the service of such notice. The notice shall also state that in event of non — compliance, removal will be done by the City at the owner's expense. When no owner, occupant or agent of the owner can be found,. notice shall be sent by registered mail to the person who is listed on the records of County Auditor or County Treasurer as the owner. Service will be complete with mailing. 640.07. Assessment If such person fails to comply with the notice within ten days after service, or if no owner, occupant or agent can be found, the Weed Inspector shall have such weeds cut and removed or otherwise eradicated. A record showing the cost of such work attributable to each separate lot or parcel shall be delivered by the Weed Inspector to the City Clerk. On or before the first day of August of each year, the amount so charged against said lot or parcel of land, together with a description of the premises and the name of - last known owner shall be reported by the Clerk to the City Council. The Council shall then spread the costs against each property as a special assessment for collection as other special assessments in the following year, all as authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.101 and Section 8.02 of the City Charter. 640.09. Weed Inspector The Mayor is the Weed Inspector as provided by law. The Mayor may assign the duty to the City Manager. 640.11. Penalty Any person who fails or neglects to cut and remove or otherwise eradicate weeds or grass as directed in this Section, or who fails, neglects or refuses to comply with the provisions of any notice provided herein, or who violates the provisions of this Section,. or who resists or obstructs the Weed Inspector in the cutting, removal or eradication of weeds or grass, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day on which such violation continues shall constitute a separate r offense. �T\ Section 660:00 Section 660 Control of Weeds and Vegetation Section 660:00. Cutting and Removal of Grass _ Weeds, and other Rank, Poisonous, or Karmf l a etation. t Shall be unlawful any owner, essee, or occupan , or ary agent, servant, representative, or employee of any such owner, lessee, or occupant having control of any occupied or unoccupied lot or land or azW part thereof in the Village of Golden Valley, Minnesota, to permit or maintain on any such lot or land, or on or along the sidewalk, street, or alley adjacent to the same 'between the property line and the curb or middle of the alley, or to the center of the platted street or alley if the same be not improved, any growth of weeds, grass, or rank vegetation to a greater height than eight (8) inches on the average, or ac erag , any cumulation of dead weeds or grass. It Shall also be unlawful for any such person or persons to cause, permit or allow poison ivy, ragweed, or other poisonous plants or plants detri- mental to health to grow on any such lot or any such land in such manner that any part of such ivy, ragweed, or other poisonous or harmful weeds Shall extend upon, overhang or border any public place or allow to seed} or to permit pollen or other poisonous particles or emanations therefrom to be carried through the air into any public place. Section 660:10. Duty of Owner Lessee or Occupant. It shall be the duty of the owner, lessee or occupant of any lot or land to cut and remove, or cause to be cut and removed, all such weeds, grass, or rank poisonous or harmful vegetation as often as may be necessary to comply with the provisions of Section 660:00; provided that the rutting and remviag of such weeds ass or vegetation on vacant � 8r ge cant tracts of one 1 acre or more at least twice between May 15 and September 15 in any one year shall be deemed to be in compliance with this ordinance, but - the first cutting shall be not later than June 15 and a second cutting Shall be made between July 15 and September 15. Section 660:20. Weed Inspector. The Park and Recreation Department of the Village of Go den Valley shall have the duty to supervise and inspect the Village with respect to determining compliance with the provisions of this Ordinance. In addition, the Village Manager shall designate a specific person within said Park and Recreation Department to serve as the Weed.Inspector for the V Section 660:30. Compliance with and Enforcement of Weed Control. If the provisions of the foregoing section bons d c.ng are not complied wi , the Village Weed Inspector shall serve written notice upon the owner, lessee or occupant, or any person having the care or control of any such lot or land to comply with the provisions of this Ordinance. If the person Upon whom the notice is served fails, neglects, or refuses to cut and remove, or to cause to be cut and removed, such weeds, grass, or other vegetation within five (5) days after receipt of such notice or if no person can be found in the V of Golden Valley who either is or Claims to be the owner of such lot or Land, or who either represents or Claims to represent such owner, the said Inspector shall cause such weeds grass, and other vegetation on such lot or land to be cut and removed, and the actual cost of such cutting and removal, plus 5% of said actual cost of cutting and removal for inspection and other additional costs in connection therewith, shall be certified by the said Weed Inspector to the Village Council of the Village of Golden Valley prior to the first day of October of each year. The amount so charged against said premises, lots, or parcels of land shall be a lien upon the property on which said weeds, grass, and vegetation were located, and shall be added to, and become, and form part of the taxes next to be assessed and Section 660:30 (Cont.) levied upon such lot or land, and the Village Council shall, by approp- riate resolution, assess the costs above mentioned against said premises, and certify the same to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota. The same shall be collected and enforced in the same manner as the col- lection of real estate taxes. Section 660:40. Grading and Removal of Debris. Any ground, lot, parcel, ' vacant lot or portion thereof located either within or within one hundred (100) feet of a residential zoning district shall be graded and kept free of debris so that it can be mowed and kept free of rank vegetation growth in compliance with the provisions of Section 660:10 specified above. The provisions of Section 660:30 above respecting notice, work by the Village, and addition of costs to taxes for vegetation mowing shall also apply to any costs incurred by the V illag e for grading and removal of debris so that said vegetation can be mowed in those cases where it becomes necessary for the Village to undertake such action in light of the failure of the person having care or control of the property to do so. Section 660 :50. Violations. Any person who shall neglect to cut and remove weeds,grass, or other vegetation as directed in this Ordinance or Who shall fail, neglect, or refuse to comply with the provisions of any notice herein provided, or who shall violate any of the provisions of this Ordinance, or who shall resist or obstruct the Weed Inspector, or his employees, in the cutting and removal of weeds, grass, and other vegetation, shall upon conviction thereof, be subject to a fine of not more than One Hundred Dollars ($100.00), and each day on which such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. Any property owner feeling aggrieved by the failure of another to comply with the terms of this Ordinance shall have the right to file a complaint based thereon as respects a y property owned by him and lying within two hundred (200) feet of the property being complained of. In addition complaints for violation of this Ordinance may be filed by the Count Weed Inspector for Hennepin County, Minnesota., the Village Weed Inspector for the Village of Golden Valley, Minnesota, and the Village Council of Golden Valley, Minnesota'. Section 660 :60. Definitions. The word 'person: as used in this Ordi- nance, shall mean and :.nclude one or more persons of either sex, natural Persons., corporations, partnerships, associations, societies, and all other entities of any kind capable of being sued. Section 660:70. Conflicting Ordinances. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in coz=ct with the provisions of this Ordinance are hereby repealed. \---f ULO 9.70, 9.701, 9.702, 9.703, 9.704, 9.705 9.70 WEED ELIMINATION • r 1 9.701 When Weeds Nuisance Any weeds, whether noxious as defined by law-or not, growing upon any lot or parcel of land outside the traveled portion of any street or alley in the City, to a height g reater than six inches or which have one or are about to r g g o to seed are a nuisance. The owner and the occupant shall abate or prevent such nuisance on such property and on land outside the traveled portion of the street or alley abutting on such property. 9.702 Notice to Destroy On or before June 1 of each year and at such other times as ordered by resolution of the Council, the Clerk shall publish once in the official newspaper as prescribed by Minnesota Statutes 18.271, a notice directing owners and occupants of property within the City to destroy all weeds declared by this section to be a nuisance and stating that if not so destroyed within ten days after publication of said notice, the weeds will be destroyed by the Department of Public Works at the expense of the owner and if not paid, the charge for such work will be made a special ss m assessment ent against the ro ert Y concerned. P P 9.703 Removal by City If the owner or occupant of any property in the City fails to comply with the notice provided above within ten days after its publication, the Department of Public Works shall cut and remove such weeds. The Department shall keep a record showing the cost of such work attributable to each separate lot and parcel and shall deliver such information to the Clerk. 9.704 Assessment. On or before September 1 of each year, the Clerk shall list the total unpaid charges for the weed removal against each l j separate lot or parcel to which they are attributable under this section. The Council may then spread the charges against property benefited as a special assessment under Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.101 and other pertinent statutes for certification to the county auditor and collection the following year along with current taxes. 9.705 Penalty for Interference Any person who interferes with a City employee or other authorized person in the performance of his duties under Section 9.703 is guilty of a misdemeanor, but a prosecution shall be brought for such violation only on the direction of the Council. (Code 010166) 9 -36 C7 072684 � • .'All. •r'f 1 ORDINANCE N06 82 - ' AMENDING SUBSECTION 810.03 OF THE PLYMOUTH CITY CODE, SUBDIVISION 2, "NUISANCE WEEDS" BY THE ADDITION OF LANGUAGE CLARIFYING THE PROPERTIES SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS y THE CITY COUNCIL THE CITY OF PLYMOjJTH ORDAINS: Sectioe 1. Section 810.03, Subdivision 2,.Weeds as a. Nuisance, is amended to read: Subd. 2. Weeds as a Nuisance Weeds, tall grasses and.other rank or harmful vegetation, excluding noxious weeds, growing upon any lot or parcel of land outside the travelled portion of any street or alley.in-',. the City of Plymouth, exceeding the height of eight 48) inches. ow Properties other than agricultural or natural preserves shaill be cuts destroyed, or otherwise eradicated by the owner or occupant of the Property. Agricultural land shall be properties located in the.FRD zoning district and under current cultivation or properties. used: for grazing purposes or undeveloped land not in the FRDo district excluding Portions of such property abutting within 200 feet of property develop",.-.- or under development, improved public or private facilities or city streets. Natural Preserves shall be publicly owned lands designated as ' ' - park or open space or private properties approved by the City which are set aside to preserve their natural characteristics and qualities: Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective.upon passage and publication. aY ATTEST: i C ty Clerk. {� * This ordinance now means that all weeds and tall• grasses olrer- ' must be cut all the way to the.street.and /or alley. 1 ' i• 4.' Y . 197 Section 25 -608 WEED CUTTING. It shall be the duty-of every owner of property- abutting on any public street or alley to cause the grass and weeds to be kept cut to the center such platted street or alley and upon his property. If the grass or weeds in such place are twelve- inches or more in height, it shall be prima facie evidence of a violation of this section. Section 25 -609 WEED CUTTING BY CITY. It shall be the duty of the weed inspector to cut and destroy all grass and weeds growing within the platted limits of any public street or alley when the same are not cut by the property owners as required by the preceding section. The cost thereof shall be reported to the City Clerk and may be charged to abutting property owners. Section 25 -610 PENALTY. Any person, firm or corporation who shall violate any of the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall upon conviction thereof be punished by a fine of not more than Three Hundred Dollars ($300.00) or imprisonment for not more than ninety (90) days, or both. As amended by City Ordinance No. 68 -16, adopted by the City Council on the 9th day of December, 1968. As amended bry City Ordinance No. 69 -10, adopted by the City Council on the 11th day of August, 1969. Snow, Rubbish Removal Section 6 -150.' Definition The term "current service" as used in this ordinance means one or more of the following activities by the City of St. Louis Park: removal -of - dangerous snow, ice or rubbish from public sidewalks; #mi»atton °of- weeds,from , A public'or private property; and repair of unsafe sidewalks. Section 6 -151. Snow, Ice and Rubbish a Public Nuisance on Sidewalks — Wemova by Niner - .'(1)_,- All.snow, ice and rubbish being on a public sidewalk in such quantities, or in such a manner, as to render - _ the use of the sidewalk by a pedestrian unsafe, is hereby declared a public nuisance. (2) The owner or occupant of any property abutting a —public sidewalk shall remo ve and clear away all -snow, ice and rubbish from so much of the sidewalk as is in front of or abuts on the property as follows -- (i) Snow and ice shall be removed from all sidewalks in all business and industrial districts within 4 business hours after the cessation of any fall of snow, sleet . - or freezing rain or by the beginning _ of business hours of the next business day r i i • following s ch fall whichever rod s _ .. such shorter. Snow and ice shall be removed -from all other sidewalks on the same day of the cessation of any fall of snow, sleet or freezing rain when at least 6 hours of daylight remain after the cessation, or otherwise by noon on the following day, whichever period is longer. _ (ii) Rubbish shall be removed from all sidewalks within 12 hours after its accumulation thereon. Section 6 -152. Sidewalk in Disrepair a Public Nuisance Duty of Owner ;! y (l) A public sidewalk in such a condition of disrepair as to render its use by a pedestrian unsafe is hereby I ' declared a public nuisance. i (2) The owner or occupant of any property within the City abutting a public sidewalk shall keep the sidewalk in repair and safe for use by pedestrians: Repairs shall be made in accordance with standard specifications on file in the office of the City Engineer. 3 'r or b -lfi3. ° - Wje&- Ejiarination - Duty of Own (1) Any weeds, whether noxious or not as defined by state law, growing upon any privately owned lot or tract of land in the City or upon any public boulevard or similar public property alongside the traveled portion of a street or alley abutting the private property at a height greater than 6 inches are-hereby declared to be a nuisance: (2) The owner or occupant of any such property or abutting property shall prevent such nuisance on the property d or similar public i public boulevard P - or on the abutting p , et property . alongside the traveled p ortion of a street l cut and 1, , or all and, if such nuisance occurs, shat , remove the weeds from the property. (Sec. 6- 153(2) Amended -by Ordinance 1335, M 1, 1976 i Section 6 -154. Mad-r Elimination - Notice. On or b efb'he June _ of each year, and at such other times as ordered by resolution the °.of the Council, the City Clerk shall publish once in he 'newspaper a notice directing owners and occupants of property . within the City to destroy all weeds declared by Section 6j153 to be a nuisance and stating that if not so destroyed the weeds will be destroyed by the Director of Public Works at the expense .of the owner and if expenses thereof be not paid prior to the following September l the charge for such work will be made a special assessment against the property concerned. Section 6 -155. Notice. �1) Snow, Ice and Rubbish Removal When an owner or occupant permits nuisance to exist in violation of Section 6 -151, the City Clerk may service a de rin 9 e rt or he ro f t Y notice on the owner o propert November 1, 1976 98 removal, elimination, or repair of the nuisance within seven days after the service of the property. The notice shall state that in the event of non - compliance, removal or elimination may be done by the City of St. Louis Park at the owner's expense, and that if the expenses are not paid prior to the following September 1 the charge for the work will be made a special assessment against the property. When no owner or agent of the owner can be found, notice shall be sent by certified mail to the person who is listed on the records of the County Auditor or County Treasurer as the owner. Service will be .completed upon mailing. _ .... (Sec. C-155 0) Amended by Ordinance 1335, May 24, 1976) (2) fdewalk Repair anf -Elimination When an owner or occupant permits a nuisance to exist in violation of Sections 6 -152, 6 -153 or 6 -154,_ the City Clerk shall .serve a notice on the owner of the property ordering removal, elimination, or repair of the nuisance ;= ..xithin seven -days after the service of the notice. ""The notice shall state that in the event of non- compliance, removal or elimination will be done by - City at the owner's expense, and that if the - expenses are not paid prior to the following September l the charge for the work will be made a special assessment against the property. When no ..owner or agent of the owner can be found, notice shall be sent.by certified mail to the person who is listed on the records of the County Auditor or County Treasure as t co Treasurer he owner. Services will be completed I upon mailing. Section 6 -156. Abatement by City. If the owner or occupant fails to comply with the notice within the period allowed for compliance after service, or if no owner, occupant or agent can be found the Director of Public'works may: (l) Cause the snow or ice or rubbish constituting the nuisance to be removed; or (2) In the case of a public sidewalk which is unsafe and in -need of repairs, report the facts to the City Manager who in turn shall report them to the City Council. The Council thereupon, by resolution, may Y 9 order the.Cit Manager to cause the sidewalk to _ be repaired and made safe for pedestrians by city , crews or by contract let in accordance with law, or November 1, 1976 y.. (3) .jEause- -the weeds constituting the nuisance to be removed. Abatement by the City after failure of the owner or occupant to do so shall not relieve such owner or occupant of a violation of the Ordinance Code. ' (Sec. 6 -156 Amended by Ordinance 1335, May 24,, 1976) Section 6 -157. Personal Liability_ The owner of property for which a current service has been performed shall be personally liable for the cost of such service. As soon as the current service has been completed and the cost thereof determined, the City Manager shall prepare a bill stating the amount due for such current service and stating that if the bill is not paid prior to September 1st the same will be made a special assessment against the property concerned and shall mail the bill and notice to the owner and thereupon the amount shall be immediately due !` and payable to the office of the City Treasurer. i Secti 6-158. Assessment. After September lst of each year, the Clerk shall list the total unpaid charges-for each type of current service against each:separate lot or tract of land to which they are attributable under this ordinance.. The Council may then spread the 'charges against property benefited as a special assessment under Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.101 and other pertinent statutes, for certification to the County Auditor and collection for the following year along with current taxes. i November 1, 1976 ln! ` �a Licenses to be approved by the City Council on July 28, 1986: AMUSEMENT DEVICE - OPERATOR Ground Round 2545 County Road 10 K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Drive C of of Police AMUSEMENT DEVICE VENDOR D.V.M. Inc. 119 State Street ief of Police. GARBAGE HAULERS VEHICLE LICENSE — r. 4. Waste Control 94 West Ivy Street Sanitarian &k- MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Michael Glynn 5801 Lyndale Avenue North Green Mechanical 8811 E. Research Center Rd. Preferred Sheet Metal Inc. 90 West Woodlynn Avenue �. Buildihj Official 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 0 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. Harshad Bhatt 7206, 12 West River Road 1 Charles Q. Hillstrom 1215, 17 54th Avenue N. Director of Planning and Inspection GENERAL APPROVAL: D. K. Weeks, City Clerk