Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011 03-14 CCP Regular Session AGENDA CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION March 14, 2011 6:00 p.m. City Council Chambers A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. 1. City Council Discussion of Agenda Items and Questions 2. Miscellaneous 3. Discussion of Work Session Agenda Items as Time Permits 4. Adjourn • • ** ** CITY COUNCIL MEETING REVISED City of Brooklyn Center March 1.4, 2011 AGENDA 1. Informal Open Forum with City Council—6:45 p.m. -provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on the agenda. Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes, it is not televised, and it may not be used to make personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a dialogue with citizens. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Open Form will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments"made but, rather, for hearing the citizen for informational purposes only. 2. Invocation—7 p.m. 3. Call to Order Regular Business Meeting The City Council requests that attende es turn of cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. • 4. Noll Call 5. Pledge of Allegiance 6. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda —The following items 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 at the end of Council Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes 1. February 28, 2011 —Study Session 2. February 28, 2011 —Regular Session 3. February 28, 2011 —Work Session b. Licenses C. Letter of Support for Grant to Purchase Thermal Imaging Camera(s) d. Approval of Site Performance Guarantee Reduction for 2850 Northway Drive (Gateway Commons Apartments) . Presentations/Proclamations/Recognitions/Donations 7 g • —None. REVISED CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- February 28, 2011 • 8. Public Hearings a. Proposed Special Assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs, Delinquent Weed Removal Costs, Delinquent Nuisance Abatement Costs, and Delinquent Administrative Fines/Citations, and Administrative Vacant Building Registrations 1. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls 2. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Weed Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls 3. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Nuisance Abatement Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls 4. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Administrative Fines/Citation Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls 5. Resolution Certifying Special ,Assessments for Administrative Vacant Building Registration Costs to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls —This item was first read on February 14, 2011; published in the official newspaper on February 24, 2011; and is offered this evening for Public Hearing. Requested Council Action: —Motion to open Public Hearing. Motion to take public input. —Motion to close Public Hearing. • —Motion to adopt resolutions. b. An Ordinance Amending and Repealing Certain Sections of Chapter 23 Relating to Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments —This item was first read on February 14, 2011; published in the official newspaper on February 24, 2011; and is offered this evening for second reading and Public Hearing. Requested Council Action: —Motion to open Public Hearing. —Motion to take public input. —Motion to close Public Hearing. —Motion to adopt ordinance. 9. Planning Commission Items—Revised a. Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002 Submitted by Mark Kemper, PLS. Request for Preliminary Plat/Subdivision Approval of Storla Addition, a Lot Division to Create a New Residential Lot at 6536 Willow Lane. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its March 10, 2011, meeting. 1. Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002 a request for preliminary plat/subdivision • approval at 6536 Willow Lane Requested Council Action: —Motion to adopt resolution. REVISED CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- February 28,2011 • b. Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003 Submitted by Loren Van Der Slik. Request for Planned Unit Development Amendment to the Brookdale C- 2/PUD, the Redevelopment of this Regional Shopping Mall to a 65 Acre Town Center Commercial Development to be known as Shingle Creek Crossings. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its March 10, 2011, meeting. t Requested Council Action: —Motion to accept the Planning Commission findings and recommendations on approving the Planned Unit Development Amendment for Shingle Creek Crossing and authorize the City Attorney to prepare the appropriate resolution and PUD development agreement for Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003 submitted by Loren Van Der Slik for Planned Unit Development Amendment approval to the Brookdale C-2/PUD. 10. Council Consideration Items a. An Ordinance Amending and Repealing Certain Sections of Chapters 1 and 19 Relating to Private Kennel Licenses Requested Council Action: • —Motion to approve first reading and set second reading and Public Hearing for April 11, 2011. 11. Council Report 12. Adjournment Agenda Items Tabled or Continued An Ordinance Amending Chapter 4 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter, Sections 4.01 and 4.02 —This item was first read on April 12, 2010; was published in the official newspaper on April 22, 2010; and the Public Hearing was continued at the May 10, 2010, meeting until such time as the Charter Commission makes its recommendation to the City Council. Resolution Establishing Fees for Community Garden Plots Regulated by the City of Brooklyn Center —This item was tabled at the May 10, 2010,meeting. EDA MEETING • City of Brooklyn Center March 14, 2011 AGENDA 1. Call to Order —The EDA requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full City Council packet, including EDA (Economic Development Authority), is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda —The following items are considered to be routine by the Economic Development Authority (EDA) and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Commission Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes 1. February 14, 2011— Regular Session 4. Commission Consideration Items •' a. Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 2011 -09, Earle Brown Heritage Center Connecting Link Requested Commission Action: — Motion to adopt resolution. b. Resolution Reauthorizing EDA Resolution 2009 -17 Providing Authority to Staff to Acquire Certain Foreclosed Homes Within the City and to Execute all Instruments and Contracts Related Thereto Requested Commission Action: — Motion to adopt resolution. 5. Adjournment • AGENDA CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WORK SESSION March 14, 2011 Immediately Following Regular City Council and EDA Meetings Which Start at 7:00 P.M. . Council Chambers City Hall i A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS PENDING LIST FOR FUTURE WORK SESSIONS Later /Ongoing 1. Progress Reports on Achievement of Strategic Goals 2. School District Discussions/BC Strategic Plan Report 3. All City Open House 4. Sister City Update 5. Neighborhood Designations 6. Department Year End Reports 7. Active Living Program • 8. Graduated Sanitary Utility Rate Study 9. Garbage Hauler Organized Collection Update 10. Joint Meeting with Commissions April 6th Follow -up 11. Shingle Creek Crossing 12. Financial Commission Report 13. Youth Participation Request 14. Budget Reductions to Lower City's Reliance on State LGA 15. Highway 252 Update — June 2011 0 City Council'Agenda Item No. 6a • • MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL • OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION FEBRUARY 28, 2011 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Carol Kleven, Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Director of Fiscal and Support Services Dan Jordet, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, and Carla Wirth, Timesaver Off Site Secretarial,_ Inc. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF AGENDA ITEMS AND QUESTIONS Mayor Willson referred the donation request from the Confederation of Liberian Organizations in Minnesota to staff for a written response indicating the CDBG distributions had already been considered for 2011. City Manager Curt Boganey requested a revision to Consent Agenda Item 6b, Licenses, to remove the nine rental properties under current standards, which would be presented for consideration at the next meeting. Mr. Boganey advised of a correction to Item 6i, Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Letter of Engagement for Professional Audit Services for the 2010 Fiscal Year, to correct the maximum dollar figure from $39,500 to $38,500, in both the cover memorandum and resolution. MISCELLANEOUS Councilmember Lasman referenced an article in last week's National League of Cities publication advising that five cities won Silver Awards of Excellence, Minneapolis being one, for its public WiFi program. She asked if the City should revisit the option of providing public WiFi. Mayor Willson advised that President Obama will be introducing a bill related to wireless internet access which may include financial and federal support. Councilmember Kleven requested discussion on the bids being received on March 24, 2011, for the high -rise building near City Hall. Mr. Boganey indicated the City would not submit a- bid to purchase that building but intended to work with the successful bidder to determine if the City could acquire land adjacent to the park. 02/28/11 -1- DRAFT Mr. Boganey stated staff has discussed that when the building was rented almost exclusively to seniors, it was a much better community asset with fewer policing issues. However, it was never . a senior -owned building. The City would like to encourage the successful bidder to consider converting it to an exclusively senior building and if done, the City would consider how it could support and facilitate that endeavor. Councilmember Roche asked about the terms of the shared easement. Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel described the area east of the shelter that is privately owned. Mayor Willson asked whether Hennepin County may be interested in facilitating senior -only tenant housing. Mr. Boganey noted it is close to the bid deadline, but the City can invite the County to the "table" to facilitate a senior -only facility. Mayor Willson suggested the bidders be made aware of the City's interest in facilitating senior housing. - Councilmember Lasman stated she would support the creation of senior -only housing especially because of its location convenient to services and shopping. Councilmember Kleven stated support for providing senior housing; however, noted this building would require a lot of remodeling to facilitate senior use. Councilmember Roche stated there is already a senior tower by the Earle Brown Farm, and he knows of single mothers who found it beneficial to live in this high -rise building. He advocated for finding ways to keep young families in the building because it is about the City's future. Pp Mayor Willson supported additional discussion on that issue. • Y Councilmember Ryan agreed this matter should be part of a larger discussion on what can or should be done on behalf of lower- income housing that also considers the existing level of low- income housing and demands it places on City services. Councilmember Roche noted the City currently has four colleges: ITT, Minnesota School of Business, Brown College, and National American University and reported that Brown College is moving into the old OfficeMax site, in the strip mall by Best Buy. Mayor Willson asked if it will impact taxes on that building. Mr. Eitel noted that Brown College is a tenant so it does not impact taxes, and staff has the understanding this is an expansion, not relocation. Mr. Boganey indicated that staff would obtain more information about this matter. Councilmember Kleven referenced the Met Council e-mail news relating to funding for cleanup projects in Brooklyn Center. Mr. Boganey advised that the City had received a $50,000 grant. It was noted the grant would be used to help clean the Howe Fertilizer site. • 02/28/11 -2- DRAFT DISCUSSION OF WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEMS AS TIME PERMITS • NORTHPORT PARK RECOMMENDATIONS BY CITIZENS — MAYOR WILLSON Mr. Boganey advised that a letter was received from Dominic Thor and Ker Xiong to make improvements to Northport Park as a service learning project. He stated staff was also approached several months ago by a volunteer group that is considering making substantial improvements to the Northport Park; however, that offer has not yet been finalized. The majority consensus of the City Council/EDA was to inform the volunteer group of the request received from Dominic Thor and Ker Xiong and to refer their request to the Park and Recreation Commission for a recommendation. HIGHWAY 252 UPDATE Mr. Boganey explained this item was referred to staff several months ago to provide an outline of how the Council could proceed with the Highway 252 corridor. Director of Public Works /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug referenced his memorandum outlining the process to pursue solutions for issues with the Highway 252 corridor that had been identified by the City. , He reported that until recently, Mn/DOT planned to expand the Highway 252 corridor; however, its 2010 Transportation Policy Plan eliminated the planning and funding for the expansion of Highway 252 through the cities of Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park other • than the addition of a northbound lane on either side of 81 Avenue in Brooklyn Park. Mr. Lillehaug explained that a Phase 1 feasibility study would focus on collectively identifying all local and regional transportation issues, develop concepts, coordinate with Mn/DOT and other partners, identify funding strategies, and develop an implementation strategy. It is estimated that such a Phase 1 study would cost approximately $60,000 and take about four months. Phase 2 would implement interim improvements and Phase 3 would involve the ultimate solution, may cost up to $1 million, and be 20 years in the future if Mn/DOT does not participate. Mr. Lillehaug asked if the Council wanted to pursue Phase 1 before approaching Mn/DOT and Brooklyn Park. Mr. Boganey clarified that Brooklyn Park had previously indicated it was willing to listen, not necessarily partner. Councilmember Ryan indicated the State should have done something long ago with the Highway 252 corridor and asked if the advantage to getting involved is having a greater voice in the planning process. Mr. Lillehaug stated it is up to the City to take the lead if it wants something done and during the interim, staff can make application for funding. 02/28/11 -3- DRAFT ADJOURN STUDY SESSION TO INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL er oche seconded to close the Stud • Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember R y Session at 6:45 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. RECONVENE STUDY SESSION Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded to reconvene the Study Session at 6:50 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. HIGHWAY 252 UPDATE — CONTINUED The discussion continued on the Highway 252 Update. Councilmember Roche stated the extension of Highway 610 to 694 in Maple Grove will create a juggernaut, so it would be nice to address Highway 252 before that happens. He supported proceeding with Phase 1 and future Phases, if warranted. Mayor Willson noted there is currently no funding to complete the last two miles of Highway 610 to Maple Grove. Councilmember Lasman asked how Phase 1 would be funded. Mr. Lillehaug stated he was not • aware of an applicable federal grant and expects Brooklyn Center would pay for most of the $60,000. Mr. Boganey stated the City will ask for assistance from Brooklyn Park and other agencies, but he expects the City will be funding Phase 1 Councilmember Ryan stated in normal budget times he would support an expenditure of $60,000 for this report and was open to hearing comments on the impact of this expenditure. He asked how the Council can determine the benefits, which may be marginal, and whether to proceed with Phase 2 unless it completes feasibility study. Mr. Lillehaug stated if the Council supports Phase 1, staff would research funding opportunities and program the expenditure with other projects. Councilmember Lasman stated the needs are great and she is glad that Mn/DOT is considering the addition of a north bound lane on either side of 81" Avenue. However, she cannot support a $60,000 expense since Mn/DOT has eliminated this corridor from its Transportation Plan. She noted the City wants to maintain access points, which is a stumbling block that first needs to be resolved. Councilmember Lasman stated a feasibility study will be needed eventually, but she cannot support the expenditure at this time. • 02/28/11 -4- DRAFT ADJOURNMENT member La man moved and Councilmember Council s Ryan seconded to close the Study Session at 6:59 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. i 02/28/11 -5- DRAFT i 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 FEBRUARY 28, 2011 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 6:45 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Carol Kleven, Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Director of Fiscal and Support Services Dan Jordet, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Carla Wirth, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. , Mayor Tim Willson opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum. • P g pmP Jo Roberts, 6001 78 Avenue N., Brooklyn Park, stated she had intended to ask the Council when it would address the Shingle Creek Crossing project and learned from the Sun Post that it would be on March 28, 2011. Diane Sannes, 7006 Willow Lane, commented on the recent passing of Brooklyn Park Mayor Lampi. She then announced the kickoff of the "Shop Local savings coupon booklet and encouraged all to shop locally. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded to close the Informal Open Forum at 6:50 p.m. I Motion passed unanimously. 2. INVOCATION Mayor Willson commented on the passing of Brooklyn Park Mayor Lampi, a great man and friend of the City, , and requested a moment of silence and personal reflection in his memory. • 02/28/11 -1- DRAFT I 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 7:00 p.m. 4. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Carol Kleven, Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Director of Fiscal and Support Services Dan Jordet, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and Carla Wirth, Timesaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 5. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was recited. 6. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, with amendments to Item 6b, Licenses, to remove rentals under current rental standards, and to revise Item 6i to indicate a not -to- exceed cost of $38,500 (rather than $39,500), and the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. February 14, 2011 — Study Session 2. February 14, 2011 — Regular Session 3. February 14, 2011 — Work Session 6b. LICENSES RENTAL — STANDARDS PRIOR TO MARCH 6, 2011 INITIAL 1543 Humboldt Place N. Peter Imasuen RENEWAL 6807 Quail Avenue N. Randall Johnson 6e. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -33 APPROVING THE CONTRACT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES (LELS) LOCAL 86 AND THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE CALENDAR YEARS 2011 AND 2012 02/28/11 -2- DRAFT 6d. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -34 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, • IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -01, 02, 03, AND 04, PALMER LAKE EAST NEIGHBORHOOD STREET, STORM DRAINAGE, AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS 6e. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -35 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2011 -05 AND 06, UNITY AVENUE AND SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY STREET IMPROVEMENTS 6f. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -36 ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2010 -16, SHINGLE CREEK RESTORATION IMPROVEMENTS 6g. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -37 SUPPORTING A STRONG, EFFECTIVE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL FOR THE TWIN CITIES REGION 6h. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -38 OPTING NOT TO WAIVE LIMITED TORT LIABILITY FOR 2011 6i. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -39 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A LETTER OF ENGAGEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL AUDIT SERVICES FOR THE 2010 FISCAL YEAR , Motion passed unanimously. 7. PRESENTATIONS/ PROCLAMATIONS /RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS 7a. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -40 EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF SHARON KEPHART Mayor Willson read in full a resolution thanking Sharon Kephart for her work related to the City of Brooklyn Center 100'' Anniversary Parry. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -40 Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Sharon Kephart. Motion passed unanimously. 7b. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -41 EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF THE BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL EVENTS COMMITTEE 02/28/11 -3- DRAFT Mayor Willson read in full a resolution thankin the Special Events. Committee for its work • related to the City of Brooklyn Center 100 Anniversary Parry. Mayor Willson and Councilmember Lasman presented resolutions to the following Committee Members: Phil Cohen, Doug Darnell, Dale Greenwald, Bruce Hobbs, Dorothy Jacobson, Tony Kuefler, Sue LaCrosse, Kay Lasman, Len Lasman, Baylon Loosbrock, Sue Low, Dr. Duane Orn, Margaret Sandberg, Tom Shinnick, and Tim Willson. Mayor Willson announced that the City's Centennial Birthday was the party of the century and thanked the Committee for its hard work to ensure that success. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to approve RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -41 Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of the Brooklyn Center Special Events Committee. Motion passed unanimously. 7c. RECOGNITION OF BROOKLYN PARK MAYOR STEVE LAMPI Mayor Willson recognized the achievements of the late Brooklyn Park Mayor Steve Lampi. Councilmember Ryan stated the passing of Brooklyn Park Mayor Steve Lampi was a tragic loss and he will be missed. Councilmember Ryan mentioned Mr. Lampi's kindness and appreciation for his personal support on several matters. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS - None. 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. CONSIDERATION OF TYPE IV 6 -MONTH PROVISIONAL RENTAL LICENSE FOR 6020 EMERSON AVENUE NORTH Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning advised that 6020 Emerson Avenue North was inspected and 11 property code violations were cited and ultimately corrected. This property qualifies for a Type IV six -month provisional rental license based on the number of property code violations found during the initial rental license inspection. The property owner is also required to submit a mitigation plan and report monthly on the progress of that plan. Staff has reviewed that mitigation plan and held discussion with the property owner and recommends approval based on meeting standards in the mitigation plan. 02/28/11 -4- DRAFT Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to open the Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. No one appeared to speak. Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to close the Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Roche seconded to approve the issuance of a Type IV six -month provisional rental license and mitigation plan for 6020 Emerson Avenue North, with the requirement that the mitigation plan must be strictly adhered to before a renewal rental license would be considered. Motion passed unanimously. 10b. CONSIDERATION OF TYPE IV 6 -MONTH PROVISIONAL RENTAL LICENSE FOR 4718 TWIN LAKE AVENUE Ms. Schleuning advised that this'property was inspected and nine property code violations were cited and ultimately corrected. In addition, there was one validated police incident/nuisance call in the past 12 months. This property qualifies for a Type IV six -month provisional rental license based on the number of property code violations found during the initial rental license • inspection. The property owner is also required to submit a mitigation plan and report monthly on the progress of that plan. Staff has reviewed that mitigation plan and held discussion with the property owner and recommends approval based on meeting standards in the mitigation plan. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to open the Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. No one appeared to speak. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to close the Hearing. Motion passed unanimously. Mayor Willson referenced a letter from the applicant denoting delinquent payments. Ms. Schleuning stated that issue had been resolved and added to the mitigation plan to assure future compliance. Councilmember Roche moved and Councilmember Lasman seconded to approve the issuance of a Type IV six -month provisional rental license and mitigation plan for 4718 Twin Lake Avenue, with the requirement that the mitigation plan must be strictly adhered to before a renewal rental license would be considered. • 02/28/11 -5- DRAFT Motion passed unanimously. 11. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Roche reported on his attendance at the following: • February 17, 2011, Planning Commission meeting. • February 22, 2011, sex offender community notification meeting. Councilmember Roche reminded residents to RSVP to attend. the March 1, 2011, Burglary Prevention Workshop that would be held at Police Headquarters at 6:30 p.m. He also invited residents to attend the upcoming Planning Commission meeting to learn about potential development within the City. Councilmember Roche stated he is looking forward to the March 5, 2011, facilitated Council retreat. He indicated he had enjoyed the opportunity to read to his son's fourth grade class and thanked Councilmember Kleven for donating a life -sized Cat in the Hat to the Evergreen Elementary School Media Center. Councilmember Lasman reported on her attendance at the following: • February 16, 2011, Crime Prevention meeting. • February 22, 2011, sex offender community notification meeting. • February 23, 2011, specific neighborhood meeting where concerns were addressed with the Police Department and a plan created to partner with residents to remedy a problem. • February 24, 2011, community prayer and healing service for Steve Lampi. i Councilmember Kleven reported on her attendance at the following: • February 17, 2011, Planning Commission meeting. • February 18, 2011, orientation meeting with Mr. Boganey and department heads. • February 22, 2011, notification meeting for predatory offender. • February 24, 2011, luncheon with the Brooklyn Center Business Association with Mr. Boganey who gave the State of the City address. • February 24, 2011, community gathering of unity and healing. • February 25 -26, 2011, all -day conference for newly elected officials of Minnesota. Councilmember Kleven noted she was wearing a Centennial logo shirt and advised of branded clothing that was available for sale at the Community Center. She noted the City Council meets every second and fourth Monday and welcomed residents to visit and share their concerns at the Informal Open Forum. Councilmember Ryan reported on his attendance at the following: • February 15, 2011, Parks and Recreation Commission meeting where discussion took place about making City parks tobacco free. • February 16, 2011, Centennial Celebration Committee meeting. • February 17, 2011, Planning Commission meeting where a hearing was held on the Shingle Creek Crossing redevelopment of the Brookdale site and recommendation given for approval. i 02/28/11 -6- DRAFT • February 22, 2011, public informational meeting held by the Brooklyn Center Police Department regarding a Level 3 sex offender. . • February 25 and 26, 2011, League of Minnesota Cities training for elected officials at Earle Brown Heritage Center. Councilmember Ryan stated he is looking forward to the March 5, 2011, facilitated Council retreat where goals and objectives will be reviewed. Mayor Willson reported on his attendance at the following: • February 17, 2011, Public Safety Answering Points meeting with Mr. Boganey that was hosted by Hennepin County Commissioner Stenglein to address how to better coordinate 911 services. • February 25, 2011, he enjoyed reading to Evergreen School first and fifth graders. 12. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded adjournment of the City Council meeting at 7:34 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. i 02/28/11 -7- DRAFT MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC • DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA WORK SESSION FEBRUARY 28, 2011 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Work Session called to order by Mayor /President Tim Willson at 7:34 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor/President Tim Willson and Councilmembers /Commissioners Carol Kleven, Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building & Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, Carla Wirth, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. HIGHWAY 252 UPDATE — CONTINUED . Discussion continued on the Highway 252 Update. Director of Public Works /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug reviewed the upgrades made by Mn/DOT to the Highway 252 corridor and future safety projects under consideration. Councilmember /Commissioner Kleven asked if Brooklyn Park has plans to do its own feasibility study. Mr. Lillehaug stated he is not aware of any such plans. Mayor/President Willson noted this is not a budgeted item and the City's contingency fund is only $200,000. He spoke in support of delaying consideration until the Federal government and State Legislature have concluded budget deliberations and indicated he did not oppose addressing issues and funding options with Brooklyn Park, Hennepin County, and Mn/DOT during the interim. Mayor/President Willson stated it is good to hear that Mn/DOT is working on one of the turn lanes to improve pedestrian safety. Councilmember /Commissioner Ryan concurred with the suggestion to delay consideration and asked if the City will be forced to the back of the line with other State transportation studies and projects. City Manager Curt Boganey stated a postponement would allow time for staff to approach other entities, determine funding sources, and potential impact to other projects planned for 2011. Councilmember /Commissioner Roche agreed with the suggestion to postpone but noted that Phase 1 is needed before funding can be identified for a pedestrian bridge in the next ten years. Mr. Lillehaug advised there is nothing in the City's Capital Improvement Plan related to the 02/28/11 -1- DRAFT Highway 252 corridor except to work with Mn/DOT. In addition, the Federal funding deadline for applications has expired so the next round of funding is next fall. • Councilmember /Commissioner Roche stated his support to address the 66 Avenue interchange, one of the worst intersections in the metropolitan area. The majority consensus of the City Council/EDA was to delay consideration until June of 2011 and ask staff to provide information on funding sources and potential impact to other projects planned for 2011. PRESENTATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT REPORT RELATING TO THE CREATION OF TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NO.5 (SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING) Mr. Boganey introduced the item and indicated the intent tonight is to provide additional information to the City Council. Jennifer Wolfe, Senior Project Manager with Springsted, Inc., provided a presentation on the establishment of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District No. 5 and explained how it would fund the economic assistance necessary for the redevelopment of the Brookdale Mall property into the Shingle Creek Planned Unit Development (PUD). She advised that the projected tax increment generated by the proposed new TIF District is expected to repay the debt service on the general obligation (GO) bonds and the borrowed funds from TIF No. 2 within the maximum duration of the TIF district. Mr. Boganey reviewed the wording revision related to this project not having a significant • g Y impact on City services. Ms. Wolfe and Mr. Boganey answered questions of the City Council/EDA related to the creation of TIF No. 5. It was noted that a Public Hearing on the creation of a Renewal and Renovation District is scheduled for March 28, 2011. PROGRESS REPORT ON ACHIEVEMENT OF STRATEGIC GOALS Mr. Boganey indicated that the City Council/EDA had identified strategic goals at its retreat a year ago as well as aggressive targeted dates to achieve those goals. He presented the report indicating 28 targets were met, 19 targets were not met, and 33 targets are yet to be determined. Mr. Boganey and the City Council/EDA reviewed each of the strategic goals and discussed targeted goals. The City Council/EDA agreed with the importance of neighborhood meetings to gain resident input and the need to conduct a statistically valid resident survey in 2012 to determine whether several goals had been met. Mr. Boganey noted the census data will be available shortly and also provide valuable information related to housing ratios. • 02/28/11 -2- DRAFT Mr. Boganey indicated that Commission membership will be reviewed to assess equal access and representation. Councilmember /Commissioner Roche stated he found the target to not have been met related to Kylawn Park. Mr. Boganey noted this goal relates to maintenance and accessibility of facilities, but Kylawn Park was not available due to other factors, not due to maintenance or accessibility. Councilmember /Commissioner Ryan asked if the goal related to minimizing any increase to future traffic delays and congestion contains a poor definition. Mr. Boganey indicated staff will provide alternate wording that narrows the focus of this goal as well as the goal to minimize the amount of regional traffic flow on local streets. The City Council/EDA asked staff to determine how the City can partner with EarthFest activities. Mayor/President Willson requested future discussion on additional budget reductions to lower the City's reliance on State LGA dollars. Councilmember /Commissioner Lasman noted the Police Department distributed resident surveys during neighborhood meetings and suggested that information be compiled. Mr. Boganey stated some of that information has been compiled, and in 2011 staff will assure survey handouts include questions on the goals. • Councilmember /Commissioner Roche stated his support to also survey those outside Brooklyn Center to determine their perception of the City. Mayor/President Willson stated he understands the interest but would like to hear how pride of community may impact such a survey. Mayor /President Willson noted that whether goals were met or not, the City now has better statistical data which is a positive outcome from this process. Councilmember /Commissioner Lasman agreed that making progress results in meeting those goals. Councilmember /Commissioner Ryan stated his strong support for staff's efforts to follow through with the Council's goals, noting some are at the mercy of the economy, and he appreciated receiving this information in close proximity to the date of the Council retreat. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember /Commissioner Lasman moved and Councilmember /Commissioner Ryan seconded adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at 9:34 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 02/28/11 -3- DRAFT City Council Agenda Item No. 6b • • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: March 8, 2011 • TO: Curt Bo ane City Manager g Y> tY g FROM: Maria Rosenbaum, Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT: Licenses for City Council Approval Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the following licenses at its March 14, 2011, meeting. Background: The following businesses /persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each business /person has fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective licenses, submitted appropriate applications, and paid proper fees. Applicants for rental dwelling licenses are in compliance with Chapter 12 of the City Code of Ordinances, unless comments are noted below the property address on the attached rental report. MECHANICAL Air Mechanical 16411 Aberdeen Street NE, Ham Lake • Auto Garage Door & Fireplace 8900 109 Avenue N, Champlin B & D Plbg, Htg & A/C 4145 MacKenzie Court, St. Michael Corporate Mechanical 5114 Hillsboro Avenue N, New Hope Corval Constructors, Inc. 1633 Eustis Street, St. Paul D J's Heating & A/C 6060 LaBeaux Avenue NE, Albertville Do Pham Inc. 10709 Foley Boulevard, Coon Rapids Fireside Hearth & Home 2700 Fairview Avenue N, Roseville Genz Ryan Plbg & Htg Co. 2200 West Highway 13, Burnsville Gilbert Mechanical 4451 West 76 Street, Edina Golden Valley Heating 5182 West Broadway, Crystal Harris Companies 909 Montreal Circle, St. Paul Heating Guy, LLC 3004 Ottawa St, So St. Paul Hoffman Refrigeration & Heating 5660 Memorial Avenue N, Stillwater Home Energy Center 2415 Annapolis Lane N, Plymouth Metro Heating and Cooling 255 Roselawn Avenue E, St, Paul Horwitz Inc. 4401 Quebec Avenue N, New Hope Kath Fuel Oil Service dba Kath HVAC 3096 Rice Street, Little Canada Kramer Mechanical Plbg & Htg 7860 Fawn Lake Drive NE, Stacy Master Mechanical 1027 Gemini Road, Eagan McDowall Company P.O. Box 606, Waite Park Metropolitan Mech Contractors 7450 Flying Cloud Drive, Eden Prairie Midwest Heating & A/C 26355 Tucker Road, Rogers • Minnesota Petroleum Service 682 39 Avenue NE, Minneapolis Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Pierce Refrigeration 19202 d Avenue S, Anoka Practical Systems 4342B Shady Oak Road, Hopkins • Precision Heating & Cooling 3650 Chestnut Street, Chaska Riccar Heating & A/C 2387 Station Parkway NW, Andover Ron's Mechanical 12010 Old Brick Yard Road, Shakopee Royalton Heating & A/C 4120 85 Avenue N, Brooklyn Park Schadegg Mechanical Inc. 225 Bridgepoint Drive, So St. Paul Solid Refrigeration LLC 1125 American Boulevard, Bloomington Southside Heating & A/C 10800 Normandale Boulevard, Bloomington Southtown Refrigeration 6325 Sandburg Road, Golden Valley Standard Heating & A/C 130 Plymouth Avenue, Minneapolis St. Cloud Refrigeration 604 Lincoln Avenue NE, St. Cloud Total Comfort 4000 Winnetka Avenue N, New Hope RENTAL See attached report. SIGN HANGER Albrecht Sign 7775 Main Street NE, Fridley Sign 4835 L dale Avenue N Minneapolis Install This Awning & S P g g 3'n Topline Advertising 17755 Justen Circle, Maple Grove • • ?lsission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe conununity that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Rental License Category Criteria Policy — Adopted by City Council 03 -08 -10 Property Code and Nuisance Violations Criteria License Category Number of Units Property Code Violations per (Based on Property Inspected Unit Code Only) Type I - 3 Year 1 -2 units 0 -1 z Type II — 2 Year 1 -2 units Greater than 1 but not more than 4 �. 13 01 31 Type III —1 Year 1 -2 units Greater than 4 but not more than 8 Type IV — 6 Months 1 -2 units Greater than 8 License Number of Units Validated Calls for Disorderly Conduct Category Service & Part I Crimes (Calls Per Unit/Year) No Category 1 -2 0 -1 Impact .< s PAWKIWEVIN 5 or more units 0 -0.35 Decrease 1 1 -2 Greater than 1 but not more than 3 Category 5 or more units Greater than 0.35 but not more than 0.50 Decrease 2 1 -2 Greater than 3 Categories I 5 or more units Greater than 0.50 Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust 3225 64th Ave N Single Family Initial Ron Huckabee 3 II N/A II OK OK 4909 68th Ave N Single Family Initial Donald Yaeger 3 II N/A II OK OK 6119 Beard Ave N Single Family Initial Konrad Wagner 2 II N/A II OK OK 6809 Fremont PI N Single Family Initial Ali 5ajjad 0 II N/A II OK OK 5713 Humboldt Ave N Single Family Initial Janice Biorn 1 II N/A II OK OK 6830 Scott Ave N Single Family Initial Chou Thao 8 III N/A III OK OK Maranatha Place 1 Bldg 2 5415 69th Ave N 65 Units Renewal Center Park Senior Apts 0 I .3 /Unit I OK OK 1 Bldg 6109 -11 -13 Beard Ave N 3 Units Renewal James & Bobbie Simons 0 I 0 I OK OK 3313 63rd Ave N Passed w /Weather Deferral Single Family Renewal Yuan Xiong 3 II 0 1 OK OK 6124 Emerson Ave N Passed w /Weather Deferral Single Family Renewal Nicholas Lewis 3 1 0 1 OK OK 6401 Emerson Ave N Single Family Renewal Jennifer & Leif Ronken 0 1 0 I OK OK 6037 Ewing Ave N Single Family Renewal Thor Yang 8 III 0 III OK OK 2741 Freeway Blvd Single Family Renewal Motel 6, 1460 0 1 0 1 OK OK 5315 Fremont Ave N Single Family Renewal David Barnhart 0 1 0 1 OK OK I 5548 Girard Ave N Single Family Renewal Berisso Bekuto 2 II 0 II OK OK 6007 Girard Ave N Passed w /Weather Defferal Single Family Renewal Ben Dossman IV 2 1 0 1 OK OK 7211 Girard Ave N Passed w /Weather Deferral Single Family Renewal Tommy Vang 2 1 1 1 OK OK 5636 Humboldt Ave N Passed w /Weather Deferral Single Family Renewal Gao Qiang Liu 2 II 1 11 OK OK 6436 Indiana Ave N Passed w /Weather Deferral Single Family Renewal Harry Narine 5 11 0 11 OK OK 3318 Mumford Rd Single Family Renewal Beng Thao 0 1 0 1 OK OK 5344 Twin Lake Blvd E Single Family Renewal Takasi Sibuya 0 1 0 1 OK OK 3806 Urban Ave Single Family Renewal Greg Gervlis 0 1 0 I OK OK 4318 Winchester La Single Family Renewal Deepak Nath 0 1 0 1 OK OK * CFS = Calls For Service for Renewal Licenses Only (Initial Licenses are not applicable to calls for service and will be listed N /A.) ** Final License Type Type I = 3 year Type If = 2 year Type III = 1 year Type IV = 6 mos City Council Agenda Item No. 6c • • . COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Lee Gatlin, Fire Chief DATE: February 25, 2011 SUBJECT: Letter of Support for Grant to purchase Thermal Imaging Camera(s) Recommendation: I am requesting that the City Council authorize the City Manager to provide a letter in support of a grant from the Fireman's Fund Insurance Company to purchase Thermal Imaging Camera(s) for the Brooklyn Center Fire Department. Background: The Brooklyn Center Fire Department has been seeking funding to replace one or both of its' thermal cameras. A thermal imaging type camera is a e of camera used in firefighting. Such cameras allow firefighters to see areas of heat through smoke, darkness, or heat - permeable barriers. These cameras are also used to locate victims, including firefighters who are lost or trapped in low visibility environments. The fire department had two cameras; both well over 15 years old. One quit working over 7 months ago and the other, while still working, was damaged at a recent fire. Steve Browning from the Fireman's Fund Insurance Company has been assisting in preparing a grant for funding for the Thermal Imagers as their company is currently gearing up for their lst quarter process. As requested, we have provided them with information about our department. They are requesting a letter in support of this grant from our City Officials. I have submitted a draft letter to be used for your consideration. Budget Issues: This letter does not require financial support for this item(s). There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Strategic: 1. We will ensure a safe secure community. Friday, February 25, 2011 • Fireman's Fund Insurance Company 5901 Golden Hills Drive Golden Valley, MN 55416 To Whom It May Concern: We are writing in support of the grant request for the Brooklyn Center Fire Department for new Infrared Thermal Imaging equipment. This life saving tool will greatly enhance the capabilities of our fire department and will directly benefit our community. Located approximately 7 miles north of Minneapolis, Brooklyn Center has become an attraction for residents and businesses alike. The City has three high -speed highways, local and county roads that pass through the city. Through contractual agreements, our Fire Department also provides fire /rescue service to many of our neighboring communities. While our city is experiencing new growth which has been great for our community, it has also resulted in an increase in the number of calls our firefighters to handle on a • yearly basis. A large percentage of our fire department's call volume is for fires and medicals, and motor vehicle crashes. This grant will enable the fire department to purchase new state -of -the -art thermal imaging equipment that will enable our firefighters to locate fire extension and hotspots in and around walls as well as locate firefighters and other victims lost or trapped in smoke filled structures. The thermal imager is used to locate hot spots in automobile fires. While we occasionally respond to water emergencies, the thermal imager will locate victims in water as well. The Fireman's Fund Insurance Company has been a long -time supporter of the fire service and we appreciate your dedication to our nation's first responders. Thank you for considering the Brooklyn Center Fire Department's request and we hope that you are able to help our community through a Heritage Program Grant. Sincerely, Mayor City Manager i Employee Bucket Brigade Grant Nomination Form Fireman's Fund" • The Heritage Programs"" Insurance Company at Fireman's Fund Insurance Company A company of Atilianz 0 Employees interested in nominating eligible fire service or qualified non -profit organizations are required to complete this application in consultation with the organization. Name of Fire Department or Non -Profit Organization: Brooklyn Center Volunteer Fire Department Is this organization or its municipality insured by or an applicant for insurance with a Fireman's Fund® company? (If yes, this may affect their eligibility for a grant): No Organization Address: 6645 Humboldt Ave N City: Brooklyn C ent e r State: Minneso Zip: 55 Main Telephone Number: 763- 503 -3160 Web Site: http://www.ci.brooklyn- center.mn.us/ index. asp? Type= B_BASIC& SEC= { -2l B6- 4lA8- A866- Dl5E659EE93F) Fire Department Contact Name: Greg Jones Title: Assistant Chief Phone Number. 763 -549 -3640 Email: gjones @ci.brooklyn- center.mn.us • Fire Chief name, if different from above: Lee Gatlin Phone: 763- 503 -3160 Type of fire service organization (Career, Volunteer, Combo, Paid on -Call, Fire District, etc): Volunteer Approx. annual fire dept. budget: $900,000 Percentage of budget available for capital expenditures (request info from Chief): less than 10% Total annual call volume: (2010) 1,752 Fire: (2009) 503 EMS: (2009) 550 Ot ( 2009) 167 Population Served: 30,000 Greater population served through local mutual aid agreements: 400,000 Specific request (list each item and associated cost): TIC - Thermal Imaging Camera = $8,000 approx? Link to preferred TIC from Bullard: http://www.fts-ne.con Total dollar amount requested: $8,000 List local television stations and newspapers in region: Newspapers: Star Tribune, Pioneer Press, Golden Valley Sun Post TV Stations: KMSP -TV (FOX Television), KARE (Multimedia Holdings Corp), KSTP -TV (Hubbard Broadcasting Inc.), WCCO -TV (CBS Broadcasting Inc) How would the fire department promote the grant from Fireman's Fund, should it be funded: The Fire Department, along with Fireman's Fund employees and RJF Agency representatives would appear before the city • council for a presentation and demonstration. 1 Employee reason for the nomination. Please note how it relates to the Fireman's Fund® values of being inspired, caring, courageous • and dependable: Inspired, caring, courageous, and dependable are four virtues I would imagine Mr. and Mrs. Koerner exuded in their lives. Unfortunately we will never have the opportunity to know first hand as they passed away. The Koemer's were not only a strangers to myself, but also to the Brooklyn Center Fire Department (BCFD); and to their surprise and appreciation they allotted funds in their 'last will and testament' to them for the purchase of a new thermal imaging camera (TIC). BCFD keeps the Koemer's picture and story posted in their fire stations as a memorial of their life and gift. Unfortunately, as time passed and technology improved the once state of the art TIC aged into an inoperable condition. Brooklyn Center is a metropolitan city bordering Minneapolis and other suburban communities. It also has three major roadways used daily by commuters (AZFF employee's included) running through it. Along with road traffic the city also has industrial businesses, professional businesses, familial neighborhoods, and schools. The BCFD has two fire stations in their community, they however only have one TIC - making the life saving capabilities provided by TICs impossible when the ill- equipped station is called to an emergency. (Not to mention the TIC they have is 17 years old.) Many people know a TIC is incredibly useful during fires locating hot spots and people trapped in buildings. Letting fire fighters know more about the dangerous environment before they enter, giving them a safer starting point with hopes of a safer outcome. But what most don't think about is how useful TICs also are during traffic accidents. With three major roadways running through the city a portion of BCFDs calls are traffic related. A TIC can be used to evaluate the safety of the vehicle(s) involved in a serious accident and can also save precious time locating a person who may have been ejected from their vehicle during the accident. I am nominating BCFD for a new TIC to not only keep alive the Koemer's gift, but also to provide an added measure of safety for AZFF commuters, local school children, businesses, and most importantly for the fire fighters that risk their lives on a daily basis. Summary: • BCFD has 2 stations, but only has 1 TIC • The TIC BCFD currently has is 17 years old • The TIC will help with not only fire related calls, but traffic calls as well Expected community impact of grant: • The.expected community impact of this grant is that it will improve the safety of the community. It will provide an added measure of safety for the fire fighters using it on a call and it will also benefit the citizens and travelers by giving the first responders the tools necessary to provide the life saving activities required in an emergency faster; therefore increasing the chances of success and safety. Endorsement by Fireman's Fund Insurance Company — appointed agency (Endorsements are strongly encouraged but not required). If you have more than one agency, please include info in attachment section. Agency Name: RJF Agencies Agency Address: 7225 Northland Drive North, Suite 300 City: Minneapolis State: Minnesota Zip: 55428 -1516 Telephone Number. 763- 746 -8000 Web Site: www.dfagencies.com Contact Name(s): Jan Farrington Rationale /Explanation of Agency Support: ' Please see attached letter from Jan Farrington with RJF Agencies RJF Agencies is a Firemark Agency. • 2 • If applicable, please list any elected officials or community leaders /groups supporting the nomination: * Please see attached letter from XXX Does the organization need outside volunteers for specific projects? If so, please outline possible volunteer opportunities: * No volunteers needed at the moment, but BCFD will approach Fireman's Fund in the future if something arises. * AZFF will also keep BCFD in mind for service projects aligned with Days of Sharing as they are located close to the Minneapolis office. Fireman's Fund has vendor partnerships with Bullard® for thermal imagers and with Morning Pride/Total Fire Group® for personal protective equipment. These partnerships include pricing discounts available only for Heritage Program grants, and enable our dollars to support more firefighters. If your grant nomination is for one of these items, please confirm that these vendors are acceptable to the fire service organization. (Exemptions may be made if the fire department provides an explanation on how utilizing these vendors could affect firefighter or community safety.): Other relevant information not covered elsewhere: • 3 Name of Lead Fireman's Fund Employee Submitting Nomination: Stephen Browning & N icole Kasper • Title: Assistant Vice President of Customer Service / Underwriting Associate Office: Minneapolis Email: stephen.browning @ffic.com ( nicole.kasper@Mc.com Phone: steveoffice:952 -486 -5353 ( stevecell:763- 218 -9051 / nicoleoffice: 952 -486 -5330 1 nicolecell: 763 -242 -3931 Additional Employee Support: (Note that all supporters must have enrolled in the Bucket Brigade by successfully completing the on -line certification course BUE -960' Certifications are confirmed by the Heritage Program so if you are aware of an employee supporter who uses a different name than what we would find recorded in the On -Line Learning Center, please note here.) • Please see attached letter from Damon Shinder • Please see attached letter from Christine Andrews OPTIONAL: Employees may submit up to 12 pages of attachments to supplement the application. These attachments may include: - Letter of support from an insurance agency • - Letters of support from elected officials or community leader Letter of support from employees Photographs that are formatted for black and white and inserted into a Word document. - Bids providing detailed pricing Other relevant information Completed forms and attachments should be emailed to bucketbrigade @ffic.com. Thank you for your participation in the Fireman's Fund Heritage Programs"' 4 02008 by Fireman's Fund Insurance Company. Novato, CA All rights reserved. City Council Agenda Item No. 6d • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: March 9, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development SUBJECT: Site Performance Guarantee Reduction — Gateway Commons Apartments (2850 Northway Drive) Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approving the reduction of the site performance guarantee being held by the city for completion of various site improvements associated with the 2010 construction of the community room/pool at Gateway Commons Apartments (2850 Northway Drive) Background: On June 14, 2010 the City Council approved a site and building plan application for construction of a new 6,000 sq. ft. community building. The approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2010 -008 included conditions, one of which is related to the posting of a financial guarantee: 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee in an amount to be determined based on cost estimates shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to • assure the completion of all site improvements. On June 23, 2010, a cash deposit was made by the developer /property owner to secure the following improvements: • Connection of utilities to the municipal water and sanitary sewer systems. • Erosion control. • Replacement of landscaping. • Submission of an as -built survey of the utility plans. On November 12, 2010 a temporary Certificate of Occupancy was issued. The developer /property owner has completed the above improvements and has recently submitted an as -built survey which has been accepted by the Public Works Department. It is recommended that 10% or $1,000 be retained, pending a final landscape inspection to verify a successful one year growth cycle. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Ongoing: 5. We will improve the image of the City with citizens and others is Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust City Council Agenda Item No. 8a COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: March 14, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Vickie Schleuning, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards SUBJECT: Public Hearings on Proposed Special Assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs, Weed Removal Costs, Nuisance Abatement Costs, Administrative Vacant Building Registration and Administrative Fines /Citations Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council conduct the subject public hearings and consider approval of the attached resolutions certifying special assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs, Weed Removal Costs, Nuisance Abatement Costs, Administrative Vacant Building Registration Costs and Administrative Fines /Citations. Background: Five public hearings are scheduled for March 14, 2011 to consider certification of proposed special assessments. The Council called for a March 14, 2011 public hearing at its February 14, 2011 meeting. All potentially affected property owners have been notified by certified mail of the date of the public hearing and the amount of the proposed special assessments. As of March 7, 2011, no appeals have been made to city staff since the February 14, 2011 Council meeting. The following is a brief summary of the minimum process involved in city - facilitated abatements. • A written compliance notice is provided to the owner of record. In addition to notifying the owner of record, in certain cases, properties may be posted or other responsible parties may be notified. • A follow up inspection is conducted to verify compliance. • If compliance is not achieved, the city will take corrective actions to remove the public nuisance or hazard. • The City bills the owner of record for the portion of costs the city has incurred directly related to the abatement action. A service charge is applied to help recover city costs associated with the entire abatement process- inspections, notifications, invoicing, administrative systems, etc. • The direct costs of the abatement are recorded as pending special assessments and this information is available to the public. When a property is sold, agencies or parties often conduct property searches to determine the pending and levied special assessment amounts. Payments of any pending or levied special assessment should be determined by the sellers and buyers as part of the sales transactions. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Recommended Council Procedure Staff recommends that the City Council conduct the hearings concurrently. The attached resolutions certifying the assessments to the Hennepin County tax rolls are provided for Council consideration upon closing of the public hearings. If any additional property owner files an appeal with the City Clerk prior to the public hearing,or should any person appear at the hearing and object to an assessment,staff recommends that the Council refer any substantive objections to staff for a report back to the Council at a continued hearing. An example might be an issue whereby staff would need to research the history of a particular complaint and assemble documentation. The Council should consider removing the objection related assessment from the proposed levy roll and adopting the remaining proposed assessments. If an appeal-for a specific property is actually filed within district court, the City Attorney will advise the Council of options for handling the dispute and potential litigation issues. Payment Options available to Property Owners Once an assessment roll is adopted by the Council,the owner of each property has the following options: 1. Pay the entire amount of the special assessment, without interest,between March 15, 2011 and April 13,2011 2. From April 14, 2011 through November 29, 2011, the property owner may pay the total assessment, with 6.0 percent interest calculated from April 14,201 lto the date of payment. 3. If payments are made with property taxes,the first payment will be due with taxes in 2012. The total principal will be payable in annual installments for the period stated on the levy roll and as indicated below. Interest of 6.0 percent is accrued on the unpaid balance: Diseased Tree Removal Costs Five Years Weed Removal Costs One Year Nuisance Abatement Costs One Year Administrative Vacant Building Registration One Year Administrative Fines/Citations One Year Partial prepayments(such as paying half now and certifying the balance) are not allowed under current assessment policy. Mission:Ensuring an attractive,clean,safe conununity that enhances the quality of fife and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Budget Issues: • The levy roll for diseased tree removal totals $17,904.90. The levy roll for weed removal costs totals $41,548.62. The levy roll for nuisance abatement costs totals $19,490.16. The levy roll for administrative vacant building registration costs totals $6,600. The levy roll for administrative fines/citation costs totals $23,445.00. Attachment: Resolutions- Diseased Tree Removal Weed Removal Nuisance Abatement Administrative Vacant Building Registrations Administrative Fines/Citations List of Levied Properties - will be updated based on payments made Council Goals: Strategic: 1. We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods Ongoing: • 1. We will provide streamlined, cost effective, quality services with limited resources • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moves its RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has caused the removal of trees on certain properties within the City during 2010 under the authority of Minnesota Statutes, Section 18G.13 and /or by written agreement with the owners of such property; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where tree removal costs are to be assessed, together with the amounts proposed to be assessed to each property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for tree removal costs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of tree removal costs incurred during the year 2010 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 17874. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable in equal annual installments with interest thereon at six (6) percent per annum, extending over a period of five years. The first of the installments shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2012, and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from April 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 13, 2011. After April 13, 2011, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from April 14, 2011, through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close of business November 29, 2011 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. If the owner wishes to pay off the balance at some point in the future, such payment must be made before November 15 or interest will be charged through December 31, of the succeeding year. RESOLUTION NO. ATTEST: 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. March 14, 2011 Date Mayor City 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. Municipal Code No. 22 Levy No. Owner Name(sl 17874 Gina Whittaker Bruce Whittaker 17874 Lee Tillman Ruby Tillman 17874 Lee Khang Nicholas Clarity 17874 Michael Gonzales 17874 Tremayne Williams 17874 Joel Van Den Boom Kathleen Van Den Boom 17874 Brian Bloomquist Theresa Bloomquist 17874 Susan Brown - Whistler 17874 James Burton Angela Wuensch City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Trees) 2010 Tree Removal Printed March 14, 2011 Property Address 5511 Emerson Ave N 5807 Humboldt Ave N 5332 Knox Ave N 5825 Pearson Dr 5201 Xerxes Ave N 6907 Palmer Lake Dr W 6306 Perry Ave N 6527 Drew Ave N 6400 Girard Ave N Property ID 01- X118 -21 -32 -0097 02- 118 -21 -14 -0066 02- 118 -21 -44 -0100 33- 119 -21 -41 -0132 Pending Amount 1,653.13 1,011.88 550.00 03- 118 -21 -24 -0073 744.69 10- 118 -21 -11 -0023 2,812.72 27- 119 -21 -43 -0102 657.66 1,359.22 34- 119 -21 -13 -0037 5,388.41 36- 119 -21 -32 -0050 2,882.19 Levy Runs Five Years Capital S ecial Total Interest Assessment Amount Charge Charge Certified 30.00 30.00 1,713.13 30.00 30.00 1,071.88 30.00 30.00 610.00 30.00 30.00 804.69 30.00 30.00 2,872.72 30.00 30.00 717.66 30.00 30.00 1,419.22 30.00 30.00 5,448.41 30.00 30.00 2,942.19 Total: 17,599.90 Page 1 of 1 adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moves its RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the Weed Inspector of the City of Brooklyn Center has caused noxious weeds and tall grass to be cut down on properties within the City under the authority of Minnesota Statutes Section 18 -78 and City Ordinance Section 19 -1601 through 19 -1604; and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2011, certain weed destruction accounts for removal of said weeds and tall grass remained unpaid; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll for unpaid accounts from 2010, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where an unpaid weed destruction account is to be assessed, with the amounts to be assessed; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute authorizes the certification of delinquent weed destruction accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for weed destruction costs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of unpaid weed destruction accounts incurred during the year 2010 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 17875. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2012, in one annual installment with interest thereon at six (6) percent per annum and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from April 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 13, 2011. After April 13, 2011, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from April 14, 2011, through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close of business November 29, 2011 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. ATTEST: RESOLUTION NO. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. March 14, 2011 Date Mayor City 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. Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2010 Weed Destruction Printed March 14, 2011 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year Capital Special, Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Levy No. Owner Name(s1 Property Address Property ID Amount Charge Charge Certified 17875 Diana Whitaker 6028 Bryant Ave N 01- 118 -21 -21 -0087 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 17875 Laurence Grivna 6027 Fremont Ave N 01- 118 -21 -22 -0064 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 17875 Troy Davis 5817 Colfax Ave N 01- 118 -21 -24 -0022 258.21 10.00 30.00 298.21 17875 Wells Fargo Bank N A 5750 Bryant Ave N 01- 118 -21 -24 -0043 564.52 10.00 30.00 604.52 17875 Stephanie Schaffer 5838 Bryant Ave N 01- 118 -21 -24 -0091 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Andrea Larsen 5641 Dupont Ave N 01- 118 -21 -32 -0002 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Lumarie Orozco 5547 Girard Ave N 01- 118 -21 -32 -0075 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Edward Doll 1201 57th Ave N 01- 118 -21 -32 -0105 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Tong Yang 5408 Humboldt Ave N 01- 118 -21 -33 -0065 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 May Thao 17875 Thomas Spencer 5333 Dupont Ave N 01- 118 -21 -33 -0139 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Rosie Gordon - Spencer 17875 Bank of America BAC Home Loans Servicing LP 5454 Colfax Ave N 01- 118 -21 -34 -0051 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Carlos Trejo 5340 Colfax Ave N 01- 118 -21 -34 -0067 858.80 10.00 30.00 898.80 Jennifer Wersal 17875 Edward Weber 5301 Colfax Ave N 01- 118 -21 -34 -0087 370.23 10.00 30.00 410.23 Sally Weber 17875 Houmpheng Bounsavath 5438 Dupont Ave N 01- 118 -21 -34 -0109 1,129.04 10.00 30.00 1,169.04 17875 Kim Julin 5815 Humboldt Ave N 02- 118 -21 -14 -0065 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Chester Julin 17875 Dexter Williams 5728 Irving Ave N 02- 118 -21 -14 -0093 430.35 10.00 30.00 470.35 Charlene Guerrero 17875 Amer Home Mtg Sery Deutsche Bank Natl Trust 5836 Vincent Ave N 02- 118 -21 -23 -0002 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 Co 17875 Deutsche Bank Natl Trust Co 5836 Xerxes Ave N 02- 118 -21 -23 -0009 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Michael Mcalpin 5527 Humboldt Ave N 02- 118 -21 -41 -0002 1,177.12 10.00 30.00 1,217.12 17875 Frank Henry 5533 Irving Ave N 02- 118 -21 -41 -0030 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Suzette Jackson Henry City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Page 1 of 6 Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2010 Weed Destruction Printed March 14, 2011 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year Capital Special Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Levy No. Owner Name(s) Pronerty Address Property ID Amount Charge Charge Certified 17875 Morrice Fadina 5632 James Ave N 02- 118 -21 -41 -0048 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Denise Fadina Mojirade Fadina Samuel Fadina 17875 Linda Anderson 5603 James Ave N 02- 118 -21 -41 -0059 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Bernadette Anderson 17875 Aspire Enterprises LLC 5556 Logan Ave N 02- 118 -21 -41 -0099 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 17875 Kenneth Boyd 5321 James Ave N 02- 118 -21 -44 -0058 540.46 10.00 30.00 580.46 Marie Boyd 17875 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp 5345 Humboldt Ave N 02- 118 -21 -44 -0113 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Wells Fargo Bank N A 5338 Irving Ave N 02- 118 -21 -44 -0117 418.33 10.00 30.00 458.33 17875 US Bank Home Mortg MN Finance Agency 6001 Zenith Ave N 03- 118 -21 -11 -0051 418.33 10.00 30.00 458.33 17875 Mouniratou Segbaya 5924 Beard Ave N 03- 118 -21 -11 -0071 200.00 10.00 30.00 240.00 17875 Bac Home Loans Servicing LP 5950 Beard Ave N 03- 118 -21 -11 -0074 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 17875 Midland Mortgage Co Midfirst Bank 5925 Xerxes Ave N 03- 118 -21 -11 -0115 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 BANK OF AMERICA 5919 Xerxes Ave N 03- 118 -21 -11 -0116 834.74 10.00 30.00 874.74 17875 Donald Willman 6001 Brooklyn Blvd 03- 118 -21 -12 -0020 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 17875 Jeremiah Andresen 5924 Admiral La 03- 118 -21 -12 -0050 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 17875 Vang Vue 6042 Ewing Ave N 03- 118 -21 -12 -0085 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 See Xiong 17875 Moises Soto 5712 Northport Dr 03- 118 -21 -13 -0007 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 Blanca Acuna 17875 Teizu Jones 5800 Ewing Ave N 03- 118 -21 -13 -0030 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 17875 Christina Akinola 5801 Ewing Ave N 03- 118 -21 -13 -0039 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp 5936 Halifax PI 03- 118 -21 -21 -0048 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Gilbert Shannon 6007 Halifax Pl 03- 118 -21 -21 -0056 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 17875 Bac Home Loans Servicing LP 4113 61st Ave N 03- 118 -21 -21 -0121 382.26 10.00 30.00 422.26 17875 Wells Fargo Bank N A 4007 61st Ave N 03- 118 -21 -21 -0125 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Jay Severson 6025 June Ave N 03- 118 -21 -22 -0007 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Page 2 of 6 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy No. Owner Name(s) 17875 Somphaena Soundara Lavonne Soundara 17875 Carolyn Decko 17875 Adem Rabsa Adil Hamid 17875 Tory Thelen 17875 U S BANK N A 17875 Mary Ann Snow 17875 Andrea Portinga 17875 Wells Fargo Bank N A 17875 Alison Fields Jesse Johnson 17875 Philip Stevenson 17875 Spec Loan Sery U S Bank N A 17875 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp 17875 Muktar Abdurahman 17875 Pa Xiong 17875 Saiyid Rizvi 17875 Philip Thao My Sao Lor 17875 Brett Corbin 17875 Sean Sullivan 17875 Ricardo Gomez Maria De Jesus Rodriguez 17875 Hogenson Properties Ltd 17875 Thao Nguyen Chung Nguyen 17875 Real Assets LLC City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2010 Weed Destruction Printed March 14, 2011 Pronerty Address 5937 June Ave N 5731 Halifax Ave N 3824 56th Ave N 5530 Halifax Ave N 5649 Brooklyn Blvd 5549 Brooklyn Blvd 5336 Northport Dr 5147 Drew Ave N 4944 Abbott Ave N 3815 52nd Ave N 3912 51st Ave N 7235 Camden Ave N 6912 Morgan Ave N 1607 70th Ave N 7112 Halifax Ave N 7218 Kyle Ave N 7130 Kyle Ave N 6933 Major Ave N 7125 Palmer Lake Dr W 3813 Urban Ave 6913 Regent Ave N 6730 Scott Ave N Property ID 03-118-21-22-0020 588.56 03- 118 -21 -24 -0002 03- 118 -21 -31 -0049 03- 118 -21 -31 -0062 03- 118 -21 -42 -0016 03- 118 -21 -42 -0018 03- 118 -21 -43 -0092 10- 118 -21 -12 -0031 10- 118 -21 -14 -0043 10- 118 -21 -21 -0003 10- 118 -21 -24 -0014 25- 119 -21 -31 -0080 26- 119 -21 -43 -0009 26- 119 -21 -44 -0050 27- 119 -21 -31 -0043 27- 119 -21 -32 -0089 27- 119 -21 -32 -0093 27- 119 -21 -33 -0039 27- 119 -21 -41 -0016 27- 119 -21 -43 -0063 28- 119 -21 -43 -0005 33- 119 -21 -12 -0075 Levy Runs One Year Capital Special Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Amount Charge Charge Certified 10.00 30.00 628.56 552.49 10.00 30.00 592.49 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 200.00 10.00 30.00 240.00 540.46 10.00 30.00 580.46 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 306.30 10.00 30.00 346.30 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 246.19 10.00 30.00 286.19 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 834.75 10.00 30.00 874.75 258.21 10.00 30.00 298.21 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Page 3 of 6 Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2010 Weed Destruction Printed March 14, 2011 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year Capital Special Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Levy No. Owner Name(s) Property Address Property 1D Amount Charge Charge Certified 17875 Joseph Okrakene 5124 65th Ave N 33- 119 -21 -13 -0053 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Skrogcorpholdings LLC 5112 65th Ave N 33- 119 -21 -13 -0055 394.28 10.00 30.00 434.28 17875 Yee Xiong 6523 Unity Ave N 33- 119 -21 -13 -0079 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 17875 Steven Thao 5131 Howe La 33- 119 -21 -13 -0085 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 Amenda Thao 17875 Kevin Opsahl 6530 Orchard Ave N 33- 119 -21 -14 -0002 564.51 10.00 30.00 604.51 17875 Furmencio Mendoza Tapia 4913 Winchester La 33- 119 -21 -14 -0024 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 17875 Arthur Zink 6342 Orchard Ave N 33- 119 -21 -41 -0016 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Bee Yang 6400 Orchard Ave N 33- 119 -21 -41 -0017 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 Houa Lor 17875 Ralph Gohman 6413 Orchard Ave N 33- 119 -21 -41 -0036 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 17875 Maisoua Vang 6425 Scott Ave N 33- 119 -21 -42 -0037 540.47 10.00 30.00 580.47 Thong Yang 17875 Nou Thou Vang 6113 Quail Ave N 33- 119 -21 -44 -0033 270.23 10.00 30.00 310.23 17875 Natl City Re Services LLC 6119 Perry Ave N 33- 119 -21 -44 -0045 370.23 10.00 30.00 410.23 17875 Robert Ubelhoer 6818 Zenith Ave N 34- 119 -21 -11 -0060 588.56 10.00 30.00 628.56 Viola Ubelhoer 17875 Bank of America N A Bac Home Loans Servicing 6800 Abbott Ave N 34- 119 -21 -11 -0121 870.82 10.00 30.00 910.82 LP 17875 Dreanna Alston 6825 Drew Ave N 34- 119 -21 -12 -0043 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 17875 Solomon Frank - Sawari 3400 66th Ave N 34- 119 -21 -13 -0012 200.00 10.00 30.00 240.00 17875 U S BANK N A 3707 66th Ave N 34- 119 -21 -13 -0028 528.44 10.00 30.00 568.44 17875 Doris Tuttle 6532 France Ave N 34- 119 -21 -13 -0030 516.42 10.00 30.00 556.42 17875 Earl Swenson 6533 Ewing Ave N 34- 119 -21 -13 -0033 258.21 10.00 30.00 298.21 Ilene Swenson 17875 Federal Natl Mortgage Assn 6532 Ewing Ave N 34- 119 -21 -13 -0041 370.23 10.00 30.00 410.23 17875 Adolf Zydowicz 3112 67th Ave N 34- 119- 21 -14- 0094 ` 1,225.22 10.00 30.00 1,265.22 Anna Zydowicz City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Page 4 of 6 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy No. Owner Name(s) 17875 Dao Moua Tong Moua 17875 Jeffrey Garding 17875 DRU Properties II 17875 James Caples Madeline Caples 17875 Chia Lor Yer Vang Lor 17875 USBankNA 17875 Fabulous Buys LLC 17875 Xay Xiong 17875 Duc Minh Truony 17875 Moeen Masood 17875 Robert Peterson Donna Peterson 17875 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp 17875 Litton Loan Sery Deutsche Bank Natl Trust Co 17875 Sufeng Zheng 17875 Nicole Franklin 17875 FANNIE MAE Federal National Mtg Assn 17875 Tong Vue Pai Her Vang Seng Her 17875 c/o Best Assets Inc Secy Hsg & Urban Develop 17875 EMC Mortgage Corp The Bank of New York Mellon 17875 Azeem Begum 17875 Mn Housing Finance Agency City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2010 Weed Destruction Printed March 14, 2011 Property Address 3125 66th Ave N 3016 Quarles Rd 6319 France Ave N 6401 Major Ave N 4219 Janet La 6231 France Ave N 3207 64th Ave N 3107 65th Ave N 6142 Brooklyn Blvd 6753 Humboldt Ave N 6336 Brooklyn Dr 2801 Ohenry Rd 2901 66th Ave N 2813 66th Ave N 2807 66th Ave N 6706 Colfax Ave N 6801 Dupont Ave N 6737 Dupont Ave N 6837 Emerson Ave N 6712 Emerson Ave N 6620 Bryant Ave N Property ID 34- 119 -21 -14 -0060 34- 119 -21 -14 -0081 34- 119 -21 -31 -0018 34- 119 -21 -32 -0024 34- 119 -21 -34 -0018 34- 119 -21 -34 -0092 34- 119 -21 -41 -0044 34- 119 -21 -41 -0112 34- 119 -21 -43 -0037 35- 119 -21 -11 -0017 35- 119 -21 -31 -0005 35- 119 -21 -32 -0091 35- 119 -21 -32 -0113 35- 119 -21 -32 -0114 35- 119 -21 -32 -0115 36- 119 -21 -21 -0042 36- 119 -21 -22 -0009 36- 119 -21 -22 -0011 36- 119 -21 -22 -0028 36- 119 -21 -22 -0050 36- 119 -21 -24 -0017 Pending Amount 246.19 Levy Runs One Year Capital Special Total Interest Assessment Amount Charge Charge Certified 10.00 30.00 286.19 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 246.19 10.00 30.00 286.19 600.58 10.00 30.00 640.58 588.56 10.00 30.00 628.56 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 482.26 10.00 30.00 522.26 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 370.23 10.00 30.00 410.23 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 318.33 10.00 30.00 358.33 370.23 10.00 30.00 410.23 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 282.26 10.00 30.00 322.26 Page 5 of 6 Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Grass /Weeds) 2010 Weed Destruction Printed March 14, 2011 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year Capital SSnecial Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Levy No. Owner Name(s) Property Address Property ID Amount Charge Charge Certified 17875 Momolu Kpakelipaye 6618 Colfax Ave N 36- 119 -21 -24 -0057 100.00 10.00 30.00 140.00 Florence Kpakelipaye 17875 Premiere Asset Sery Wells Fargo Bank N A 6325 Girard Ave N 36- 119 -21 -32 -0065 870.82 10.00 30.00 910.82 17875 Carla Nelson 6214 Lilac Dr N 36- 119 -21 -33 -0006 294.28 10.00 30.00 334.28 17875 Aurora Loan Services LLC 810 61st Ave N 36- 119 -21 -34 -0097 442.38 10.00 30.00 482.38 Total: 39,004.73 City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Page 6 of 6 adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moves its RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR NUISANCE ABATEMENT COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS and RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has caused abatement removal on certain properties within the City during 2010 under the authority of City Ordinance Section 12- 1504 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 429 and /or by written agreement with the owners of such property; and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2011, certain abatement accounts remained unpaid; WHEREAS, an assessment roll for unpaid accounts from 2010, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where abatement costs are to be assessed, together with the amounts proposed to be assessed to each property; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute authorizes the certification of delinquent abatement accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for abatement costs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of abatement costs incurred during the year 2010 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 17876. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2012, in one annual installment with interest thereon at six (6) percent per annum and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from April 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 13, 2011. After April 13, 2011, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from April 14, 2011 through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close of business November 29, 2011 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. RESOLUTION NO. ATTEST: 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. March 14, 2011 Date Mayor City 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. Municipal Code No. 22 Levy No. 17876 17876 Owner Name(s) Diana Whitaker Hennepen Forfieted Land 17876 Citimortgage Inc 17876 Edward Weber Sally Weber 17876 Dexter Williams Charlene Guerrero 17876 Rose Dominguez Efrain Dominguez 17876 Deutsche Bank Natl Trust Co 17876 Kenneth Boyd Marie Boyd 17876 Wells Fargo Bank N A 17876 US Bank Home Mortg MN Finance Agency 17876 Bac Home Loans Servicing LP 17876 Midland Mortgage Co Midfirst Bank 17876 BANK OF AMERICA 17876 Moises Soto Blanca Acuna 17876 Bac Home Loans Servicing LP 17876 Mary Ann Snow 17876 American Home Mortg Deutsche Bank Natl Trust Co 17876 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp 17876 Federal Natl Mortgage Assn 17876 Philip Thao My Sao Lor 17876 MGC Mortgage Inc LNV Corporation 17876 U S BANK N A City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN 55430 Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Abatement) 2010 Abatement Printed March 14, 2011 Levy Runs One Year Capital Special Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Property Address Property ID Amount Charge Charge Certified 6028 Bryant Ave N 01- 118 -21 -21 -0087 325.00 10.00 30.00 365.00 5800 Bryant Ave N 01- 118 -21 -24 -0083 1,582.50 10.00 30.00 1,622.50 5336 Colfax Ave N 01- 118 -21 -34 -0074 425.00 10.00 30.00 465.00 5301 Colfax Ave N 01- 118 -21 -34 -0087 657.66 10.00 30.00 697.66 5728 Irving Ave N 02- 118 -21 -14 -0093 320.00 10.00 30.00 360.00 5931 Vincent Ave N 02- 118 -21 -22 -0038 665.00 10.00 30.00 5836 Xerxes Ave N 02- 118 -21 -23 -0009 815.00 10.00 30.00 5321 James Ave N 02- 118 -21 -44 -0058 350.00 10.00 30.00 5338 Irving Ave N 02- 118 -21 -44 -0117 300.00 10.00 30.00 6001 Zenith Ave N 03- 118 -21 -11 -0051 320.00 10.00 30.00 5950 Beard Ave N 03- 118 -21 -11 -0074 300.00 10.00 30.00 5925 Xerxes Ave N 03- 118 -21 -11 -0115 250.00 10.00 30.00 5919 Xerxes Ave N 03- 118 -21 -11 -0116 250.00 10.00 30.00 5712 Northport Dr 03- 118 -21 -13 -0007 600.00 10.00 30.00 4113 61st Ave N 03- 118 -21 -21 -0121 325.00 10.00 30.00 5549 Brooklyn Blvd 03- 118 -21 -42 -0018 625.00 10.00 30.00 5031 Drew Ave N 10- 118 -21 -13 -0047 245.00 10.00 30.00 7235 Camden Ave N 25- 119 -21 -31 -0080 365.00 10.00 30.00 7212 Lee Ave N 27- 119 -21 -32 -0008 265.00 10.00 30.00 7218 Kyle Ave N 27- 119 -21 -32 -0089 480.00 10.00 30.00 7212 Kyle Ave N 27- 119 -21 -32 -0090 380.00 10.00 30.00 6913 Palmer Lake Dr W 27- 119 -21 -43 -0101 225.00 10.00 30.00 705.00 855.00 390.00 340.00 360.00 340.00 290.00 290.00 640.00 365.00 665.00 285.00 405.00 305.00 520.00 420.00 265.00 Page 1 of 2 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year Levy No. Owner Name(s) Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Abatement) 2010 Abatement Printed March 14, 2011 Property Address Property ID Pending Amount Capital Special Total Interest Assessment Amount Charge Charge Certified 17876 Yee Xiong 6523 Unity Ave N 33- 119 -21 -13 -0079 565.00 10.00 30.00 605.00 17876 Furmencio Mendoza Tapia 4913 Winchester La 33- 119 -21 -14 -0024 265.00 10.00 30.00 305.00 17876 Bee Yang 6400 Orchard Ave N 33- 119 -21 -41 -0017 315.00 10.00 30.00 355.00 Houa Lor 17876 Maisoua Vang 6425 Scott Ave N 33- 119 -21 -42 -0037 280.00 10.00 30.00 320.00 Thong Yang 17876 Kong Meng Vang 4919 61st Ave N 33- 119 -21 -44 -0065 915.00 10.00 30.00 955.00 17876 Bank of America N A Bac Home Loans Servicing 6800 Abbott Ave N 34- 119 -21 -11 -0121 330.00 10.00 30.00 370.00 LP 17876 Federal National Mtg Assn 6712 Ewing Ave N 34- 119 -21 -12 -0015 965.00 10.00 30.00 1,005.00 17876 Michelle Murch 6707 Drew Ave N 34- 119 -21 -12 -0026 380.00 10.00 30.00 420.00 17876 Dreanna Alston 6825 Drew Ave N 34- 119 -21 -12 -0043 350.00 10.00 30.00 390.00 17876 U S BANK N A 3707 66th Ave N 34- 119 -21 -13 -0028 300.00 10.00 30.00 340.00 17876 Dao Moua 3125 66th Ave .N 34- 119 -21 -14 -0060 715.00 10.00 30.00 755.00 Tong Moua 17876 U S Bank N A 6231 France Ave N 34- 119 -21 -34 -0092 365.00 10.00 30.00 405.00 17876 Federal Home Loan Mtg Corp 2801 Ohenry Rd 35- 119 -21 -32 -0091 350.00 10.00 30.00 390.00 17876 FANNIE MAE Federal National Mtg Assn 6706 Colfax Ave N 36- 119 -21 -21 -0042 750.00 10.00 30.00 790.00 17876 Premiere Asset Sery Wells Fargo Bank N A 6325 Girard Ave N 36- 119 -21 -32 -0065 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 Total: 18,795.16 City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN 55430 Page 2 of 2 adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moves its RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE VACANT BUILDING REGISTRATION COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has caused Administrative Vacant Building Registration costs for certain properties within the City during 2010 under the authority of City Ordinance Section 12 -1504 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 429 and /or by written agreement with the owners of such property; and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2011, certain Administrative Vacant Building Registration costs remained unpaid; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll for unpaid accounts from 2010, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where Administrative Vacant Building Registration costs are to be assessed to each property; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute authorizes the certification of delinquent Administrative Vacant Building Registration accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for Administrative Vacant Building Registration costs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of Administrative Vacant Building Registration costs incurred during the year 2010 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 17878. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2012, in one annual installment with interest thereon at six (6) percent per annum and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from April 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 13, 2011. After April 13, 2011, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from April 14, 2011 through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close of business November 29, 2011 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. RESOLUTION NO. ATTEST: 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. March 14, 2011 Date Mayor City 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. Municipal Code No. 22 Levy No. Owner Name(s) 17878 Hennepen Forfieted Land 17878 Houmpheng Bounsavath 17878 Hennepin Forfeited Land 17878 Gilbert Shannon 17878 Carolyn Decko 17878 Joyce Cooper 17878 Muktar Abdurahman 17878 Hogenson Properties Ltd 17878 Adolf Zydowicz Anna Zydowicz 17878 Dao Moua Tong Moua City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Administrative Vacant Building Registration) 2010 Administrative Vacant Building Registration Printed March 14, 2011 Property Address 5800 Bryant Ave N 5438 Dupont Ave N 5331 Morgan Ave N 6007 Halifax PI 5731 Halifax Ave N 3713 53rd PI N 6912 Morgan Ave N 3813 Urban Ave 3112 67th Ave N 3125 66th Ave N Levy Runs One Year Capital Special Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Pronertv ID Amount Charge Charg Certified 01- 118 -21 -24 -0083 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 01- 118 -21 -34 -0109 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 02- 118 -21 -43 -0060 03- 118 -21 -21 -0056 03- 118 -21 -24 -0002 03- 118 -21 -43 -0066 26- 119 -21 -43 -0009 27- 119 -21 -43 -0063 34- 119 -21 -14 -0004 1,000.00 10.00 30.00 1,040.00 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 1,400.00 10.00 30.00 1,440.00 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 400.00 10.00 30.00 440.00 34- 119 -21 -14 -0060 1,000.00 10.00 30.00 1,040.00 Total: 6,600.00 Page 1 of 1 adoption: Member introduced the following resolution and moves its RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE FINES /CITATION COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has caused Administrative Fines /Citation costs for certain properties within the City during 2010 under the authority of City Ordinance Section 18 -204 and Minnesota Statutes, Section 429; and WHEREAS, on March 14, 2011, certain Administrative Fines /Citation costs remained unpaid; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll for unpaid accounts from 2010, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where Administrative Fines /Citation costs are to be assessed to each property; and WHEREAS, City Ordinance Section 18 -210 and Minnesota State Statute authorizes the certification of certain delinquent Administrative Fines /Citation accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for Administrative Fines /Citation costs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of Administrative Fines /Citation costs incurred during the year 2010 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 17880. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2012, in one annual installment with interest thereon at six (6) percent per annum and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from April 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 13, 2011. After April 13, 2011, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from April 14, 2011 through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close of business November 29, 2011 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. RESOLUTION NO. ATTEST: 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. March 14, 2011 Date Mayor City 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. Municipal Code No. 22 Levy No. Owner Name(s) 17880 Miguel Vergara 17880 Glenn Kurke 17880 J & M Homes II LLC 17880 Wells Fargo Bank N A 17880 Dawn Gieseke 17880 Wells Fargo Bank N A 17880 Bank of America BAC Home Loans Servicing LP 17880 Randy Barnhard 17880 Jeffrey Lewis Janelle Klimek 17880 Dawn Flory 17880 Amer Home Mtg Sery Deutsche Bank Natl Trust Co 17880 TCF National Bank 17880 Linda Anderson Bernadette Anderson 17880 Aspire Enterprises LLC 17880 Jessica Purnick 17880 Luis Juarez - Ferrer 17880 U S Bank Home Mortg U S BANK NA 17880 Bac Homeloans Sery Mtg Elec Reg Systems Inc 17880 Kenneth Boyd Marie Boyd 17880 Midland Mortgage Co Midfirst Bank 17880 Mansfield Duopu Constance Duopu 17880 Wells Fargo Bank N A 17880 Carolyn Decko City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Admin Fines /Citations) 2010 Administrative Penalty /Citation Printed March 14, 2011 Property Address 5931 Colfax Ave N 6021 Bryant Ave N 5715 Emerson Ave N 5750 Bryant Ave N 5607 Aldrich Ave N 5568 Humboldt Ave N 5454 Colfax Ave N 711 Bellvue La 5732 Knox Ave N 5727 Humboldt Ave N 5836 Vincent Ave N 5635 James Ave N 5603 James Ave N 5556 Logan Ave N 5548 Knox Ave N 1900 Brookview Dr 5500 Oliver Ave N 5318 Irving Ave N 5321 James Ave N 5925 Xerxes Ave N 6001 Admiral Pl 6001 June Ave N 5731 Halifax Ave N Levy Runs One Year Capital Special Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Property ID Amount Charge Charge Certified 01- 118 -21 -21 -0020 250.00 10.00 30.00 290.00 01- 118 -21 -21 -0097 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 01- 118 -21 -23 -0017 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 01- 118 -21 -24 -0043 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 01- 118 -21 -31 -0090 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 01- 118 -21 -32 -0066 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 01- 118 -21 -34 -0051 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 01- 118 -21 -34 -0139 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 02- 118 -21 -14 -0039 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 02- 118 -21 -14 -0092 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 02- 118 -21 -23 -0002 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 02- 118 -21 -41 -0055 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 02- 118 -21 -41 -0059 1,875.00 10.00 30.00 1,915.00 02- 118 -21 -41 -0099 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 02- 118 -21 -41 -0114 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 02- 118 -21 -42 -0111 2,000.00 10.00 30.00 2,040.00 02- 118 -21 -42 -0121 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 02- 118 -21 -44 -0041 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 02- 118 -21 -44 -0058 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 03- 118 -21 -11 -0115 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 03- 118 -21 -21 -0005 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 03- 118 -21 -22 -0011 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 03- 118 -21 -24 -0002 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 Page 1 of 4 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy No. Owner Name(s) 17880 Adem Rabsa Adil Hamid 17880 Robert Batta 17880 Mary Ann Snow 17880 Joyce Cooper 17880 Sylvester Seward Cecelia Seward 17880 Nicholas Ramnarace 17880 Jem Realty Inc 17880 Sam Yang Michelle Yang 17880 CEL MONTON LLC 17880 Rick Pha Youa Vang Tom Vang 17880 Muktar Abdurahman 17880 c/o Best Assets Inc Sec of Housing & Urban Development Secy Hsg & Urban Develop Bac Home Loans Servicing LP Faye Larry MGC Mortgage Inc LNV Corporation c/o Best Assets Inc Secy Hsg & Urban Develop Judith O'Dean c/o Best Assets Inc Sec of Housing & Urban Development Sufeng Zheng Deutsche Bank Natl Trust Co c/o Cedar Mgmnt Mallard Creed Townhome Assn 17880 17880 17880 17880 17880 17880 17880 17880 17880 17880 City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Admin Fines /Citations) 2010 Administrative Penalty /Citation Printed March 14, 2011 Property Address 3824 56th Ave N 5655 Brooklyn Blvd 5549 Brooklyn Blvd 3713 53rd PIN 5012 Lilac Dr N 3416 50th Ave N 5012 Abbott Ave N 5104 Twin Lake Blvd E 4806 Twin Lake Ave 1101 73rd Ave N 6912 Morgan Ave N 6919 Morgan Ave N 7019 Morgan Ave N 4009 73rd Ave N 7137 France Ave N 7212 Kyle Ave N 4307 Woodbine La 6915 Major Ave N 7036 Ewing Ave N 6910 France Ave N 7156 Unity Ave N 7081 Unity Ave N Property ID 03- 118 -21 -31 -0049 03- 118 -21 -42 -0017 03- 118 -21 -42 -0018 03- 118 -21 -43 -0066 10- 118 -21 -13 -0030 10- 118 -21 -13 -0032 10- 118 -21 -14 -0084 10- 118 -21 -21 -0079 10- 118 -21 -32 -0061 25- 119 -21 -32 -0001 26- 119 -21 -43 -0009 26- 119 -21 -43 -0015 26- 119 -21 -43 -0061 27- 119 -21 -31 -0032 27- 119 -21 -31 -0050 27- 119 -21 -32 -0090 27- 119 -21 -32 -0106 27- 119 -21 -33 -0042 27- 119 -21 -43 -0036 27- 119 -21 -43 -0062 28- 119 -21 -42 -0032 28- 119 -21 -43 -0142 Levy Runs One Year Capital Suecial Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Amount Charge Charge Certified 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 1,875.00 10.00 30.00 1,915.00 375.00 10.00 30.00 415.00 375.00 10.00 30.00 415.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 375.00 10.00 30.00 415.00 875.00 10.00 30.00 915.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 1,875.00 10.00 30.00 1,915.00 250.00 10.00 30.00 290.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 105.00 10.00 30.00 145.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 Page 2 of 4 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy No. Owner Name(s) 17880 Mary Nachtwey 17880 c/o Best Assets Inc Sec of Housing & Urban Development 17880 Michael Johnson 17880 Alfred Seley Martha Kugbeh Kpana Seley 17880 Steven Thao Amenda Thao 17880 OCWEN LOAN SERV HSBC Bank USA N A 17880 Ralph Gohman 17880 David Rosenberg 17880 Nou Thou Vang 17880 Natl City Re Services LLC 17880 Wachovia Mortgage Wells Fargo Bank N A 17880 Clarence Dudley 17880 Ernie Zheng 17880 Doris Tuttle 17880 MAE Properties LLP MAE Properties LLP 17880 Fabulous Buys LLC 17880 Rufina Baranova 17880 Citimortgage Inc 17880 Nicole Franklin 17880 FANNIE MAE Federal National Mtg Assn 17880 Tong Vue Pai Her Vang Selig Her City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Admin Fines /Citations) 2010 Administrative Penalty /Citation Printed March 14, 2011 Property Address 6931 Perry Ave N 6924 Quail Ave N 6900 Quail Ave N 5130 Howe La 5131 Howe La 4900 Howe La 6413 Orchard Ave N 6125 Scott Ave N 6113 Quail Ave N 6119 Perry Ave N 6101 Perry Ave N 6510 Brooklyn Blvd 6607 Beard Ave N 6532 France Ave N 6500 Brooklyn Blvd 3207 64th Ave N 2910 68th Ln N 2935 67th Ln N 2807 66th Ave N 6706 Colfax Ave N 6801 Dupont Ave N Property ID 28- 119 -21 -44 -0005 28- 119 -21 -44 -0036 28- 119 -21 -44 -0040 33- 119 -21 -13 -0061 33- 119 -21 -13 -0085 33- 119 -21 -14 -0049 33- 119 -21 -41 -0036 33- 119 -21-43 -0039 33- 119 -21 -44 -0033 33- 119 -21 -44 -0045 33- 119 -21 -44 -0048 34- 119 -21 -13 -0010 34- 119 -21 -13 -0011 34- 119 -21 -13 -0030 34- 119 -21 -13 -0084 Levy Runs One Year Capital Special Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Amount Charge Charge Certified 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 250.00 10.00 30.00 290.00 375.00 10.00 30.00 415.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 875.00 10.00 30.00 915.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 250.00 10.00 30.00 290.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 375.00 10.00 30.00 415.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 250.00 10.00 30.00 290.00 34- 119 -21 -41 -0044 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 35- 119 -21 -22 -0028 250.00 10.00 30.00 290.00 35- 119 -21 -23 -0042 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 35- 119 -21 -32 -0115 875.00 10.00 30.00 915.00 36- 119 -21 -21 -0042 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 36- 119 -21 -22 -0009 250.00 10.00 30.00 290.00 Page 3 of 4 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy No. Owner Name (s) 17880 c/o Best Assets Inc Secy Hsg & Urban Develop 17880 EMC Mortgage Corp The Bank of New York Mellon 17880 Wells Fargo Bank City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Admin Fines /Citations) 2010 Administrative Penalty /Citation Printed March 14, 2011 Property Address 6737 Dupont Ave N 6837 Emerson Ave N 6600 Dupont Ave N Property ID 36- 119 -21 -22 -0011 36- 119 -21 -22 -0028 36- 119 -21 -24 -0038 Levy Runs One Year Capital Special Total Pending Interest Assessment Amount Amount Charge Charge Certified 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 125.00 10.00 30.00 165.00 375.00 10.00 30.00 415.00 Total: 23,115.00 Page 4 of 4 • City Council Agenda Item No. 8b COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: March 7, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk SUBJECT: An Ordinance Amending and Repealing Certain Sections of Chapter 23 Relating to Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council open the Public Hearing, take public input, close the Public Hearing, and consider adoption of An Ordinance Amending and Repealing Certain Sections of Chapter 23 Relating to Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments. Background: At its February 14, 2011, meeting the Brooklyn Center City Council approved first reading of An Ordinance Amending and Repealing Certain Sections of Chapter 23 Relating to Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments. Attached are the materials provided at the February 14, 2011, meeting and the ordinance amendment as it was approved at first reading. The second reading and Public Hearing are scheduled for this evening. Notice of Public Hearing • was published in the Brooklyn Center Sun -Post newspaper on February 24, 2011. If adopted, effective date will be April 23, 2011. Budget Issues: While there are no tattoo and body piercing establishments within the city, the shifting of the administration of licensing and inspection of this type of a commercial- service use to the State has the potential to minimize the future costs to the City. Council Goals: Strategic: 1. We will ensure a safe and secure community Ongoing: 1. We will provided streamlined, cost effective, quality services with limited resources i :Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby that a public hearing will be held on the 14th day of March 2011 Y > at 7:00 � P g Y p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider amendments to Chapter 23 of the City Code relating to tattoo and body piercing establishments. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please notify the City Clerk at 763 -569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REPEALING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 23 RELATING TO TATTOO AND BODY PIERCING ESTABLISHMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 23- 006.05 of the Brooklyn Center City Code is amended as follows: Section 23- 006.05. PAYMENT OF PROPERTY TAXES REQUIRED. No license shall be granted or renewed for tobacco related products; bowling alleys; public dancing; filling stations; pawnbrokers; secondhand goods dealers; motor vehicle dealerships; saunas and sauna • baths; massage parlors; rap parlors, conversation parlors, adult encounter groups, adult sensitivity groups, escort services, model services, dancing services, or hostess services; or amusement devices; for operation on any property on which taxes, assessments, or other financial claims of the state, county, school district, or city are due, delinquent, or unpaid. In the event a suit has been commenced under Minnesota Statutes, Section 278.01 - 278.03, questioning the amount of validity of taxes, the City Council may on application waive strict compliance with this provision; no waiver may be granted, however, for taxes or any portion thereof which remain unpaid for a period exceeding one (1) year after becoming due. Section 2. Section 23 -2301 of the Brooklyn Center City Code is amended as follows: Section 23 -2301. FR4DINGS AND PURPOSE. LOCATION OF TATTOO AND BODY ART AND PIERCING ESTABLISHMENTS. The purpose of this section is to regulate the location business of tattooing ands body art and piercing establishments licensed pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 146B in order to protect the eneral health safety, welfare of -Chapter , p g Y the community. The City Getmeil finds that the &x-penenee of other- eities indirates that there is a 69£inR£t}e . between r- ccsrc v9 dy pier-eing and hepatitis and —vtzr ctcrcn pr-eblems. • ORDINANCE NO. • U The Cit Co eil fi thm st6a eat eg l.,tie,r,s gecie,-„i tntteei,. 1. }�� llllb tat teein lll� n Jj F7SGClZ1 ,may, n1ze the hepat d isease risk, n tl�ferefeFe N eteet th teaM, safety, and welfue of the eenuvwi+ky. C. a. No tattoo or body art or piercing establishment shall be located on property that is not properly zoned or does not qualify as a legal nonconforming use for such establishment. b. No tattoo or body art or piercing establishment shall be located on premises licensed to furnish alcoholic beverages. C. No tattoo or body art or piercing establishment shall be located on the premises of an adult establishment pursuant to Section 35 -2182. d. No tattoo or body art or piercing establishment shall be located on premises within 300 feet of, or in the same building as, or on the same legally subdivided lot, piece, or parcel of land as any of the following uses: a church, school, day care center, hospital; on -sale liquor establishment, halfway house, currency • exchange operation, theater, residence (except as allowed under state law), pawnshop, secondhand goods dealer, massage parlor, sauna, or another tattoo or body art or piercing establishment. Section 3. The following sections of the Brooklyn Center City Code relating to Tattoo and Body Piercing'Establishments are repealed in their entirety: 23 -2302 (Definitions); 23- 2303 (Business License Required); 23 -2304 (Personal Service License); 23 -2305 (License Fee); 23 -2306 (Investigation Fee); 23 -2307 (Granting of License); 23 -2308 (Persons Ineligible for License); 23 -2309 (Places Ineligible for License); 23 -2310 (Conditions of License); 23 -2311 (Health and Sanitation Requirements); 23 -2312 (Penalty); 23 -2313 (Hindrance); and 23 -2314 (Conflict of Provisions). Section 4. The Brooklyn Center City Code is amended by adding the following new Section 23 -2302: Section 23 -2302. PENALTY. And person violating Section 23 -2301 is guilt misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished not more than the maximum penalty for a misdemeanor as prescribed by law. i ORDINANCE NO. Section 5. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) • P p Y days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 2011. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication: Effective Date: ( keeut indicates matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) • COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: February 8, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development SUBJECT: An Ordinance Amending and Repealing Certain Sections of Chapter 23 Relating to Tattoo and Body Piercing Establishments Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval/adoption of the first reading for the above entitled ordinance amendment. Background: The August 9, 2010 City Council Work Session included a discussion on a legislative change relating to State standards for the licensing of both tattoo and body piercing establishments and body art technicians. The new statute provided the City Council the following options: 1. Get out of the licensing business for this activity. 2. Retain the city ordinance and issue establishment licenses. 3. A combination of l and2, get out of licensing but control the location of the establishments. The majority consensus of the City Council was to divest the City of Brooklyn Center from the expense of licensing tattoo and body piercing establishments, but to regulate the location through the Zoning Ordinance. Attached for your reference is a copy of the minutes of this work session item, staff and attorney's memorandums on this matter and a copy of the City's current licensing requirements on tattoo and body piercing establishments (Chapter 23 -301 thru 23 -314). Ordinance provisions regulating the location of tattoo and body piercing establishments: The proposed ordinance amendment maintains the current regulations relating to the location of this use: a. The use must be on property properly zoned. b. The use shall not be located on premises licensed to furnish alcoholic beverages. C. The use shall not be located on premises of an adult establishment. d. The use shall not be located within 300 feet of a building, lot or parcel of land of any of the following uses: Mission: Ensuring an WftwFve, dean4 sale eomm alry that mkwwa the quality of life and p vwva the public last COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM a church, school, daycare center, hospital, on sale liquor establishment, halfway house, currency exchange, theater, residence (except as allowed under state law) pawn shop, second hand dealer, massage parlor, sauna, or another tattoo or body art or piercing establishment. Budget Issues: While there are no tattoo or body piercing establishments within the city, the shifting of the administration of licensing and inspection of this type of a commercial - service use to the State has the potential to minimize the future costs to the City. Council Goals: Strategic: 1. We will ensure a safe and secure community Ongoing: 1. We will provide streamlined, cost effective, quality services with limited resources Mml wn- Ensuring an &*se m dean, safe commmNy Ad MhOW0 Oe luallly of life and prnmw Ike pauk ima • Avenue is open to the general public to access the voting precinct. Mr. Boganey answered in the affirmative. Councilmember Ryan asked if the Dupont bridge is closed. Mr. Boganey answered in the affirmative. Mayor Willson stated he gets a lot of calls asking who is paying for the Bass Lake Road project. Mr. Lillehaug advised that the City's website contains information on that project. DISCUSSION OF WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEMS AS TIME PERMITS REGULATION OF TATTOO AND BODY PIERCING ESTABLISHMENTS Mr. Boganey advised the State has adopted a new statute to govern and regulate tattoo and body piercing activities. The City has three options: 1) Get out of the licensing business for this activity; 2) Retain City ordinance and issue establishment licenses; or, 3) A combination of the two by not licensing but continue to control location of the establishments through the zoning ordinance. The Council discussed this matter and noted the City no longer licenses home -based daycares but does the inspection for the State for a fee. Mr. Boganey stated the City probably started regulating tattoo and body piercing establishments due to health and safety concerns. The Council discussed the three options and Mayor Willson and Councilmembers Lasman and Ryan indicated support for Option 3 so the City is able to determine the location. It was noted that the State's requirements are more restrictive than the City's. The Council discussed whether a distance requirement should be established and if the Planning Commission should be asked for a recommendation. Mr. Boganey answered questions of the Council and indicated City staff is qualified to do this licensing and there are no current licenses in effect. He explained the City wants to assure the business is conducted in a safe manner so if there is a complaint, the City has the ability to issue a citation and revoke the license. However, now the State will be able to take this action. Councilmember Yelich indicated that when the State becomes responsible for licensing and setting standards, he wonders if that is a quality program and asked what is its track record for inspections and licensing. Mr. Boganey stated he thinks they will do an adequate job but is unable to give an objective answer since the City does not have much to compare it to since there are no current licenses. Councilmember Yelich indicated support of Option 3. It was the majority consensus of the City Council that the City should divest itself of the expense to license tattoo and body piercing establishments, assuming the State adequately performs this function, but to regulate the location through the Zoning Ordinance. ADJOURN STUDY SESSION TO INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL 08/09/10 -3- MEMORANDUM- COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE: A • i- ugust 5, 2010 - TO: City Council FROM Coat Boganey, City SUBJECT: Regulation of Tattoo and Body Piergng Fstablis Recommendation: - It is urconnmeaxled that the City Council consider providing duwdm to staff regarding the regulation of Tattoo and Body Piercing establishments Background: - The City has an ordinance flax regulates tattooing and body piercing establisbments that requires licensing by the City. Ciurently the City has no such licensees in effect During the most recent legislative session the State established standards for licensing tLese same activities. . As outlined in the men . dftdied f m our City .Attorney this new law provides the City with several options; It can repeal its ordinnum and allow the State to regulate this activity► completely, stay in the business of licensing business but not individuals, or stop licensing but continue to regulate location: of such businesses. Policy Issues:. >. Is it in the interest of the City to CGU9 ue rcgnlating tattoo and body piercing activities m Brookbm Center?' Council Goals: ' ongoili& 1.. We will provide streamlined, east a ive, quaHW services with limited iesounnes Affnim Ewnfft act &Wmdfm desk =i owmnw lD' drd adm a dre 4ffff ► of) a adpnwff a die p"* &"- Mary D. Tiegen 470 US Bmtc Plea 200 Sou6i Sixth Street Mmumpoli: MN 55402 . (612) 337 -9277 tielephooa (�I2 •337 -9310 foc CHARTERED MEMORANO M To: Brooklyn Center Mayor and City Council Cart Boganey, City Manager Froia: Mary Tietjeo, assistant city attoioey Date: August 4, 2010 Re: Reghladimi of Tattoo and Body Piercing Eitalffis Brooldyn Center cummily regulates tattoo and body Piercing'eiabtisb>ttsrts at S 6ations 23- 2301' - • 23-2314 of the City Code. The ordinance requires a business liccom for specific locations and a O Personal service license finer all passams who tie in such wank. The ordinance also establishes conditions of licensure and health and won standards. This session, the legislature adopted a new Chapter 146E specificaRy dealing with this same subject The statute, which was dkctive July 1, 2010, establishes state standards for licensing both establishments and what is described as body art tecbnlcians, i.e. those who lxaatice tabooing and body piercing. Sanitation standards are established and persons desiring body art Uchaician licenses must have a nw imum of 200 hours of stervised wMerience. Establish must meet th a state licensing requires by Jam my 1, 2011 but are a mn" if they are licensed under a city our other local a ce - �viri& meets or aaceeds the stadrtocy goviairc>s '. Indnviduahs must be licensed as body art technicians under flee state statute by Ianuary 1, 2011 regardless of best licensing. The statute Y provides that no&ing PramPtS or supersedes any municipal ordinancx relating to bad use, building and constmetion. swndm&% nuisance control or the licensing of commercial wises in general In light of the abtwr, we believe the City has essentially three op dmw. 1. Get out of the lice t b ushm& The city could repeal its ordinance and allow the state t+o regulate tattooing and body piercing. The city would pave oat: L-%w activity to regulate and enforce. 2. Stay m the licemsina business. The city could main its ordinance and stay in the business of 37n24vIMvrBIZ29I=4 - 1 . i issuing establishment licenses afflwagh there may no longer be any need to license indivutWs. The. ordinance V+ould need some revi m to comply with state law . tike . s ordinance allovvs p younger . than 18 years of no. to i+coeiva tDW with the consent and in *epresence of parents or guacdiens.. The staftne prolifints thus practice reprdless of parental consent In order to be exempt *from state'fic=uM establislm eats must be licensed under a city ordinance which is at least as restrictive as the statute. 'like owe would have to be reviewed and revised in all respects with which it does not cwm tly meet this standard. 3. hat out of 1he h but oontinnhe to cMIMI 10 location of This middle pxmd positio®, which is cally auffiorized, by state law, recognizes that OtICS may want to be &ee from the burden of li ceoswe sad eaftcament but st:11 wish all 1 -where such establishnacmts may locate in the comtaun ity. This approach wow City to regulate - in what zoning disficts such estsblishmertta could locate, provide for sprang or - "dunce hom!' requires and continue to allow regulation -of the mrismw aspects of the business. The City's (Section 23- 2309) cva+ectdy contains some restrictions m locstian. For eicea*e, no esteblishmeat may be located on property that is not properly zoned or where alcohol is served. These provisions may ba mteined if due City chooses to COD&Ru to regulate the loc a ion of these types of estabfishments. Staff n t�iat flue City eoumcil diaries theme options and direct staff accordingly. ` oc. Charlie LeFev C' • • ere, try Attorney i 37u,►1brsM1 -4 Z - Section 23 -2205. PENALTY. Any person who violates or fails to comply with any provision of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a find not to exceed $1,000 or imprisonment for a period not to exceed ninety (90) days or both, together with the costs of prosecution. Such penalty may be imposed in addition to a decision by the Council to disapprove applications for new licenses or license renewals. TATTOO AND BODY PIERCING ESTABLISHMENTS Section 23 -2301. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE. The purpose of this section is to regulate the business of tattooing and/or body piercing in order to protect the general health, safety, and welfare of the community. a. The City Council finds that the experience of other cities indicates that there is a connection between tattooing/body piercing and hepatitis and other health problems. b. The City Council finds that stringent regulations governing tattooing and body piercing can minimize the hepatitis and disease risk, and therefore protect the general health, safety, and welfare of the community. c. It is not the intent to prohibit tattoo and/or body piercing establishments from having a reasonable opportunity to locate in the City. • Section 23 -2302. DEFINITIONS. The following words and terms when used in Sections 23- 2301 through 23 -2314 shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: a. Body Piercing: Penetrating or making a hole in or through the human body to place jewelry or objects of metal, plastic, wood, bone, or other foreign material on any area for cosmetic purposes. b. Branding: The use of heat, cold, or any chemical compound to imprint permanent markings on human skin by any means other than tattooing. c. Clean: The absence of dirt, grease, rubbish, garbage, and other offensive, unsightly, or extraneous matter. d. Operator: Any person who performs or practices the art of tattooing and/or body piercing on another person in connection with the operation of a tattoo and/or body piercing establishment and receives compensation from the owner of the business or its patrons. e. Good Repair: Free of corrosion, breaks, cracks, chips, pitting, excessive wear and tear, leaks, obstructions, and similar defects so as to constitute a sanitary, workable, and sound condition. • City of Brooklyn Center 23 -97 City Ordinance I f Issuing Authority: The City Manager or the Manager's designee. g. Owner: Any individual, firm, company, corporation, or association that owns an establishment where tattooing and/or body piercing is performed. h. Scarification: The cutting or tearing of human skin for the purpose of creating a permanent mark or design on the skin. i. Tattoo, Tattooing: The marking of the skin of a person by insertion of permanent colors by introducing them through puncture of the skin. person, Section 23 -2303. BUSINESS LICENSE REQUIRED. partnership, UIRE No Pe n, or corporation shall operate any establishment where tattooing and/or body piercing is practiced, nor engage in the practice of tattooing and/or body piercing without being licensed under Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314. Jewelry stores and accessory stores that exclusively provide ear piercing services using piercing guns shall be exempt from this license agreement. The application for a tattooing and/or body piercing establishment business license shall be submitted on a form provided by the City and shall include: a. If the applicant is an individual, the name, residence, phone number, and birth date of the applicant. If the applicant is a partnership, the name, residence, phone number, and birth date of each general and limited partner. If the applicant is a corporation, • the names, residences, phone numbers, and birth dates of all those persons holding more than five (5) percent of the issued and outstanding stock of the corporation. b. The name, address, phone number, and birth date of the manager of such establishment, if different from the owners. c. The address and legal description of the premises where the tattoo and/or body piercing establishment is to be located. d. A statement detailing any conviction relating to tattooing and/or body piercing or the operation of a tattoo and/or body piercing establishment by the applicant or manager and whether or not the applicant or manager has ever applied for or held a license to operate a similar type of business in other communities. In the case of a corporation, a statement detailing any felony convictions by the owners of more than five (5) percent of the issued and outstanding stock of the corporation and whether or not those owners have ever applied for or held a license to operate a similar type of business in other communities. e. The activities and types of businesses to be conducted. f The hours of operation. • City of Brooklyn Center 23 -98 City Ordinance • g. The provisions made to restrict access by minors. h. A building plan of the premises detailing all internal operations and activities. i. Whether the applicant has previously been denied a license of this type by any other government unit. j. The names, street addresses, and business addresses of three (3) residents of Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, Washington, Scott, or Carver Counties who are of good moral character and who are not related to the applicant and not holding any ownership in the premises or business, who may be referred to as to the applicant's character. k. Whether all real estate and personal property taxes that are due and payable for the premises to be licensed have been paid, and if not paid, the years and amounts that are unpaid. 1. All applications for a license under Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 shall be signed and sworn to. If the application is that of a natural person, it shall be signed and sworn to by such person; if that of a corporation, by an officer thereof; if that of a partnership, by one of the general partners; and if that of an unincorporated association, by the manager or managing officer thereof. Any falsification on a • license application shall result in the denial of a license. All applications shall be referred to the Issuing Authority for verification and investigation of facts set forth in the application, including any necessary criminal background checks to assure compliance with Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314. The application shall be issued or denied by the Issuing Authority in accordance with Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314. Section 23 -2304. PERSONAL SERVICE LICENSE. No operator shall perform tattoo and/or body piercing services within the City without being licensed as provided in this section. Any person desiring a personal service license shall file a written application on a form provided by the City. The application shall include the following information: a. The business address and all telephone numbers where the service is to be practiced or based. b. The name, birth date, complete home address, and telephone number of the applicant. c. The tattoo and/or body piercing business history and experience, including but not limited to whether or not the applicant, in previously operating in this or another city or state under license or permit, has had such license or permit denied, revoked, or suspended and the reason therefore, and the business activities or occupations subsequent to such action of denial, suspension, or revocation. City of Brooklyn Center 23 -99 City Ordinance d. All criminal convictions other than misdemeanor traffic violations, fully disclosing • the jurisdiction in which convicted or arrested and the circumstances thereof. e. All applications for a license under Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 shall be signed and sworn to by the applicant. Any falsification on a license application shall result in the denial of a license. All applications shall be referred to the Issuing Authority for verification and investigation of facts set forth in the application, including any necessary criminal background checks to assure compliance with Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314. The application shall be issued or denied by the Issuing Authority in accordance with Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314. Section 23 -2305. LICENSE FEE. a. The annual license fee is set by City Council resolution. b. Each application for a license shall be submitted to the City Clerk and payment made to the City. The initial license fee shall be paid in full with cash, or certified or cashier's check, before the license is issued. Renewal license fees shall be paid in full at the time of application for renewal. Upon rejection of any application for a license, the applicant may be refunded a portion of the license fee in accordance with the fee resolution, except where rejection is for a willful misstatement in the license application. c. All licenses shall expire on the last day of December in each year. Each license shall be issued for a period of one (1) year, except that if a portion of the license year has elapsed when application is made, a license may be issued for the remainder of the year for a prorated fee. In computing such fee, any unexpired fraction of a month shall be counted as one (1) month. d. Once a license has been granted, no part of the fee paid by any licensee shall be refunded, except that a prorated portion of the fee shall be refunded in the event of the complete closure of the business and cessation of business activities for any of the following reasons and upon application to the City Clerk within thirty (30) days from the happening of the event, provided that such event occurs more than thirty (30) days before the expiration of the license: 1. Destruction or damage of the licensed premises by fire or other catastrophe. 2. The licensee's illness. 3. The licensee's death. 4. A change in the legal status making it unlawful for licensed business to continue. • City of Brooklyn Center 23 -100 • City Ordinance e. Each application shall contain a provision on the application indicating that any withholding of information or the providing of false or misleading information will be grounds for denial or revocation of a license. Any changes in the information provided on the application or provided during the investigation shall be brought to the attention of the City Clerk by the applicant or licensee. If said changes take place during the investigation, said data shall be provided to the Police Chief or the City Clerk in writing. Section 23 -2306. INVESTIGATION FEE a. At the time of the original application for a license, the applicant shall deposit the investigation fee set by City Council resolution. The investigation fee may be paid in cash or with a personal check. The investigation fee is non - refundable. An investigation fee must be tendered with each new application for a license and must also be paid at any time when there is a proposed change of ownership or reapplication for a license wherein additional or different parties other than the original licensee and parties are proposing to be licensed. Section 23 -2307. GRANTING OF LICENSE a. The Issuing Authority shall complete his/her investigation within thirty (30) days after the City Clerk receives a complete application and all license and investigation fees. b. If, after such investigation, it appears that the applicant and the place proposed for the business are eligible for a license under the criteria set forth in this section, then the license shall be issued by the City Council within thirty (30) days after the investigation is completed. Otherwise, the license shall be denied. c. Each license shall be issued to the applicant only and shall not be transferable to another holder. Each license shall be issued only for the premises described in the application. No license may be transferred to another premises without the approval of the City Council. If the licensee is a partnership or a corporation, a change in the identity of any of the principals of the partnership or corporation shall be deemed a transfer of the license. Any tattoo and/or body piercing establishment existing at the adoption of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 shall be required to obtain an annual license. d. If the license is denied, the applicant may request a hearing before the City Council by filing a written request therefore with the City Clerk within fifteen (15) days after the applicant has received written notice of denial. If the license application is denied by the City Council after a hearing, the applicant may appeal the decision to the appropriate court of competent jurisdiction. City of Brooklyn Center 23 -101 City Ordinance If a tattoo and/or body piercing establishment is lawfully in existence at the time of the adoption of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314, the tattoo and/or body piercing establishment may continue in business until the court action is completed. Otherwise, the applicant may not commence doing business until the judicial action has been finally resolved. Section 23 -2308. PERSONS INELIGIBLE FOR LICENSE. No license under Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 shall be issued to an applicant who is a natural person; general or managing partner of a partnership; or manager, proprietor, or agent of a corporation or other organization if such applicant: a. Is a minor at the time the application is filed. b. Has been convicted of any crime directly related to the occupation licensed as prescribed by Minnesota Statutes, Section 364.03, Subd. 2, and has not shown competent evidence of sufficient rehabilitation and present fitness to perform the duties of the licensed occupation as prescribed by Minnesota Statutes, Section 364.03, Subd. 3. c. Who is overdue or whose spouse is overdue in his or her payment of City, county, or state taxes, fees, fines, or penalties assessed against them or imposed upon them. d. Who has been denied a license by the City or any other Minnesota municipal • corporation to operate a tattoo and/or body piercing establishment or whose license has been suspended or revoked within the preceding twelve (12) months, or who is residing with any such person. e. Who has not paid the license and investigation fees required by this section. f. Is not of good moral character or repute. Section 23 -2309. PLACES INELIGIBLE FOR LICENSE a. No license shall be granted or renewed if the property is not properly zoned or does not qualify as a legal nonconforming use for tattooing and/or body piercing establishments. b. Premises Licensed For Alcoholic Beverages. No license shall be granted or renewed if the premises is licensed for the furnishing of alcoholic beverages or is an adult establishment pursuant to Section 35 -2182. • City of Brooklyn Center 23 -102 City Ordinance • c. No license shall be granted if the premises is within 300 feet of, or in the same building as, or on the same legally subdivided lot, piece, or parcel of land as any of the following uses: a church, school, day care center, hospital, on -sale liquor establishment, halfway house, currency exchange operation, theater, residence, pawnshop, secondhand goods dealer, massage parlor, sauna, or another tattoo or body piercing establishment. Section 23- 2310. CONDITIONS OF LICENSE. Every license shall be granted subject to the following conditions and all other provisions of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314, and of any applicable sections of the City Code, the City's zoning ordinances, the Building Code, the Fire Code, the City's health regulations, and all provisions of state and federal law. a. No person shall tattoo or pierce any person under the age of eighteen (18) except in the presence of, and with the written permission of, the parent or legal guardian of such minor. The consent must include both the custodial and non- custodial parents, where applicable. b. The license granted under Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 is for the owner and the premises or operator named on the approved license application. No transfer of a license shall be permitted from place -to -place or from person -to- person without first complying with the requirements of an original application, except in the case in which an existing non - corporate licensee is incorporated and incorporation does not affect the ownership, control, and interest of the existing licensed establishment. c. All licensed premises shall have the license posted in a conspicuous place at all times d. A licensee under Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 shall not be open for business for tattooing and/or body piercing before 7:00 a.m. or after 10:00 p.m. e. The tattoo and/or body piercing establishment license is only effective for the compact and contiguous space specified in the approved license application. If the licensed premises is enlarged, altered, or extended, the licensee shall inform the Issuing Authority. No person shall engage in the practice of tattooing and/or body piercing at any place other than the place or location named or described in the application and license. A separate room shall be required for body piercing and tattooing services. The applicant shall submit a drawing to scale of the tattoo and/or body piercing facilities. f. No person shall solicit business or offer to perform tattooing and/or body piercing services while under license suspension or revocation by the City. g. The licensee shall be responsible for the conduct of the business being operated and shall at all times maintain conditions of order. City of Brooklyn Center 23 -103 City Ordinance h. The licensee shall provide to the Issuing Authority a list of operators who perform • tattooing and/or body piercing at the licensed establishment and shall verify that each operator has received a copy of Health and Safety Requirements and Sanctions for License Violations as appear in Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314. i. All licensees shall have at all times a valid certificate of insurance issued by an insurance company licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota indicating that the licensee is currently covered in the tattoo and/or body piercing business by a liability insurance policy. The minimum limits of coverage for such insurance shall be: 1. Each claim, at least Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000). 2. Each group of claims, at least Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) Such insurance shall be kept in force during the term of the license and shall provide for notification to the City prior to termination or cancellation. A certificate of insurance shall be filed with the City. j. Inspections. 1. City Initiated. The Issuing Authority or designated health professionals shall, at minim conduct one (1) randomly scheduled inspection of each licensed • facility each year to determine compliance with City requirements. 2. Compliance Certification. A health professional who is retained by the licensed operator and acceptable to the Issuing Authority shall inspect the licensed premises in the month ofNovember of each calendar year. Said inspection is to determine compliance with City requirements and a written report documenting findings shall be submitted to the Issuing Authority within fifteen (15) days from the date on which the inspection took place. k. Branding and Scarification are prohibited in the City of Brooklyn Center. Section 23 -2311. HEALTH AND SANITATION REQUIREMENTS. No person shall engage in the practice of tattooing and/or body piercing at any place in the City without complying with the following regulations: a. Every place where tattooing and/or body piercing is practiced shall be equipped with an adequate conveniently located toilet room and hand lavatory for the d � and co mend Y ry accommodation of employees and patrons. The hand lavatory shall be supplied with hot and cold running water under pressure; shall be maintained in good repair at all times; and shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. City of Brooklyn Center 23 -104 City Ordinance • Toilet fixtures and seats shall be of a sanitary open front design and readily cleanable. Easily cleanable, covered receptacles shall be provided for waste materials. Every lavatory facility shall be provided with an adequate supply of hand cleansing compound and single service sanitary towels and hand drying devices. b. No person having any communicable blood or skin infection or other communicable diseases of the blood or skin shall practice tattooing and/or body piercing or shall be tattooed or body pierced. c. All disposable needles, razor blades, sharps, or other equipment utilized for penetrating the skin shall be individually pre- packaged and pre- sterilized and stored in a self - sealing sterilizing pouch. No such equipment shall be used for more than one customer. Tools and supplies must be stored in a dust -free container. All bio- hazardous waste shall be disposed of in accordance with law, and disposal procedures shall be approved by the Issuing Authority. Sterilizing solutions and methods may be used for the purpose of sterilizing instruments other than needles, razor blades, sharps, or other equipment utilized for penetrating the skin when such sterilizing solutions and methods are approved by the Issuing Authority. d. The following procedures shall be used for skin preparation: 1. Each operator shall wash his or her hands thoroughly with soap and water and • then dry them with a clean towel before and after each tattoo or body piercing. Operators with skin infections of the hand shall not perform any tattooing or body piercing services. 2. Whenever it is possible to shave the skin, pre - packaged, pre - sterilized, disposable razor blades shall be used. 3. The skin area to be tattooed or pierced shall be thoroughly cleaned with germicidal soap, rinsed thoroughly with water, and sterilized with an antiseptic solution approved by the Issuing Authority. Only single service towels and wipes shall be used in the skin cleaning process. 4. All bandages and surgical dressings used in connection with the tattooing and/or body piercing of any person shall be individually pre - packaged, pre- sterilized, and disposable. e. All tables, chairs, furniture, or area on which a patron receives a tattoo or body pierce shall be covered by single service disposable paper or clean linens, or in the alternative, the table, chair, or furniture on which the patron receives a tattoo and/or body pierce shall be impervious to moisture and shall be properly sanitized after each tattoo or body pierce. Tables and counter tops shall be industrial grade Formica or similar material. Drop cloths made of two -ply paper and plastic shall be available for use as needed. City of Brooklyn Center 23 -105 City Ordinance f. Every operator shall provide single service towels or wipes for each customer or • person and such towels and wipes shall be stored and disposed of in a manner acceptable to the Issuing Authority. g. Every operator shall wear clean, washable garments and protective latex disposable gloves when engaged in the practice of tattooing and/or body piercing. If garments are contaminated with blood or body fluids, such garment shall be removed and changed and cleaned or disposed of in a manner acceptable to the Issumg Authority. h. Pigments used in tattooing shall be premade and commercially prepared and free from bacteria and noxious agents and substances including mercury. The pigments used from stock solutions for each customer shall be placed in a single service receptacle, and such receptacle and remaining solution shall be discarded after use on each customer in accordance with b the Issuing Authority. procedures approved P Y g Ty i. Jewelry for the other parts of the body shall be made of implant grade, high- quality stainless steel (300 series), solid 14K and 18K gold, niobium, titanium, platinum, or a dense, low- porosity plastic such as monofilamentnylon, acrylic, or Lucite. Ear studs or other jewelry designed for earlobe piercing are not appropriate jewelry for other body parts. Jewelry shall have no nicks, scratches, or irregular surfaces, which might endanger the tissues. Jewelry shall be pre - sterilized and in a sealed package. j. There shall not be less than one hundred fifty (150) square feet of floor space at the • place where the practice of tattooing and/or body piercing is conducted, and said place shall be so lighted and ventilated as to comply with the standards approved by the Issuing Authority. k. No person shall practice tattooing and/or body piercing while under the influence of alcoholic beverages or illicit drugs. No customer shall be tattooed and/or body pierced while under the influence of alcoholic beverages or illicit drugs. 1. The operator shall provide the person tattooed and/or body pierced with p rinted instructions on the approved care of the tattoo and/or body pierce during the healing process. m. No place licensed as a tattoo and/or body piercing establishment shall be used or occupied as living or sleeping quarters. Section 23 -2312. PENALTY. a. Any person violating any provision of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 is guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be punished not more than the maximum penalty for a misdemeanor as prescribed by law. City of Brooklyn Center 23 -106 City Ordinance • b. The City Council may, upon ten (10) days written notice to the operator and following a public hearing, revoke the license or suspend the license if the licensee submitted false information or omitted material information in the license process required by Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314. The City Council may also revoke the license or suspend the license for a violation of: 1. Any provision of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 or any other local law governing the same activity during the license period. 2. Any criminal law during the license period which adversely affects the ability to honestly, safely, or lawfully conduct a tattooing and/or body piercing business. Section 23 -2313. HINDRANCE. Any person hindering the efforts of City officials to investigate possible violations of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Section 23 -2314. CONFLICT OF PROVISIONS. In any case where a provision of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 is found to be in conflict with the provision of any zoning, building, fire, safety, or health ordinance or code in the City, the provision which establishes the higher standard for the promotion and protection of the health and safety of the people shall prevail. • In any case where a provision of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 is found to be in conflict with a provision of any other ordinance or code of the City existing on the effective date of this ordinance which established a lower standard for the promotion and protection of the health and safety of the property, the provision of Sections 23 -2301 through 23 -2314 shall be deemed to prevail. The determination of the applicability of this ordinance in light of the above rules of interpretation shall be made by the City and its determination shall be final. City of Brooklyn Center 23 -107 City Ordinance • Ci ty g Council Agenda Item No. 9a r COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: March 11, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development SUBJECT: Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002 (6536 Willow Lane — Preliminary Plat/Subdivision Approval) Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, approve the Resolution Regarding the disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002 Submitted by Mark Kemper, PLS for Preliminary Plat/Subdivision approval. Background: On February 17, 2011,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002 submitted by Mark Kemper, on behalf of Ned Storla,for a preliminary plat approval of Storla Addition,the subdivision of an existing 23,150 sq. ft. residential lot, located at 6536 Willow Lane. At that time the Commission directed the preparation of a resolution recommending approval of the proposed subdivision and further investigation on possible corrective actions for the existing non-conforming structure. . On March 10, 2011,the Planning Commission unanimously moved the adoption of the enclosed Planning Commission resolution recommending approval of the application for Preliminary Plat approval of Storla Addition, (Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002) Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002, an area map showing the location of the property under consideration,the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter and other supporting documents included in this review. Final Platting Process: The subdivision ordinance provides that the Final Plan will incorporate all changes or modifications required by the Council; otherwise it shall conform to the Preliminary Plan. The variance provisions of the subdivision ordinance provide that the Council may authorize a variance from the subdivision regulations when in its opinion,undue hardship may result from the strict compliance. The ordinance prescribes that the following findings shall be made by the Council in the granting of a variance: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting said property such that the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land. 2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property • right of the petitioner. Mission:Ensuring an attractive,clean,`safe comnulnity that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • 3. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious €�' g p J to other property in the territory in which said property is situated. The subdivision code indicates that applications for any such variance shall be made in writing b the subdivider at the time when the preliminary plat is filed for consideration of the Council, Y p �'Y p stating full and clearly all facts relied u p on by the petitioner and shall be supplemented nted with maps,plans, or other additional data which may aid the Council in the analysis of the proposed project. Attached is a letter from the applicant requesting that he be allow to reduce the lot width of Lot 2 from 75 feet to 73.29 feet which would allow the existing residence on Lot l to have a lot width of 80.23 feet. The additional lot for lot 1 allows the existing residence to meet the minimum side yard setback of 10 feet with windows/openings. Condition No. 7 of the Planning Commission's Resolution provided the applicant the option of either making the necessary alterations to the south wall of the residence to meet the side yard building setback(a zoning standard) or obtain a 1+foot variance in lot width for Lot 2 (a subdivision standard). Should the Council authorize the modification as requested by the applicant,the final plat resolution will formally nclude the necessary findings for the subdivision variance in lot width. Y �'Y g • Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Strategic: 3. We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods • Mission:Ensuring an attractive,clean,safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING THE DISPOSITION OF PLANNING ' COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2011-002 A REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT/SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AT 6536 WILLOW LANE WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002 submitted by the Mark Kemper, PLS. requests Preliminary Plat approval of a subdivision, to be known as Storla Addition, a replat to spilt an existing residential lot (6536 Willow Lane) , to create a second buildable lot; and WHEREAS, this property has 155.15 feet of frontage on Willow Lane and a lot area of 24,150 sq. ft. which would allow the creation of two lots which exceed the minimum dimensional standard of 75 feet of lot width and minimum lot area requirement of 10,500 sq.ft.; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on February 17, 2011, at which time a staff report and public testimony regarding the preliminary plat of Storla Addition were received; and • WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended approval of Application No. 2011-002 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-01; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered Application No. 2011-002 at its March 14, 2011 meeting, considered the Preliminary Plat in light of all testimony received and the Planning Commission' s recommendations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that Application No:2011-002, submitted by Mark Kemper, PLS. be approved with the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer Department. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. That the plat is subject to review by the West Mississippi Watershed, the DNR, and Army Corps of Engineers. 4. The dedication of a 20 foot drainage and utility easement along the rear lot • line from the 818 elevation on the south lot line to the 818 elevation on the north lot line. RESOLUTION NO. . 5. That no fill is placed below the 100 year flood elevation. 6. That a final grading plan is approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit, 7. That the lot width of Lot 2 is allowed to be reduced to 73.29 feet. 'March 14, 2011 Date Mayor ATTEST: City 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. • Application Filed on 1-11-11 City Council Action Should Be 3-12-11 Taken By (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 2011-002 Applicant: Mark Kemper,PLS Location: 6536 Willow Lane Request: Preliminary Plat-Subdivision Approval BACKGROUND On February 17,2011,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Preliminary Plat of Storla Addition,the subdivision of an-existing homestead located at 6536 Willow Lane R into two plats. The Commission tabled consideration to allow staff to meet with the City Attorney to address the following items: • Confirmation on the Torrens Proceedings which established the northern lot line (judicial landmark). • • Review of the non-conforming status of the existing residential building. • Option of a variance from the subdivision code to reduce the lot width by 0.5 ft. to 1.7 ft. for the proposed lot to enable the existing structure to meet a 10 ft. side yard setback vs.the option of removal of the windows which would allow a 5 ft. setback from a wall with no openings. Attached for your reference is a copy of the February 17, 2011 staff memorandum. STAFF COMMENT I have met with the City Attorney and the City Engineer on the above matters and would offer the following: 1. A written confirmation on the use of the judicial mark and the lot line established from the 2000 Order and Decree of Registration No. 20359,which defined this property as: That Part of Lot 15,Auditor's Subdivision No, 310,Hennepin County,Minnesota, lying East of the center line of Willow Lane. The North line of the above land has been determined by judicial landmark set pursuant to Torrens Case No. 19581. • Page 1 3-3-11 . 2. It was recommended that the non-conforming status of the residential structure for front yard setback and minimum floor elevation below the 100 year flood elevation, be allowed to continue without further consideration necessary as aprt of this subdivision process. 3. The City Attorney has indicated that the court ruling on zoning variances do not apply to the subdivision code. Consequently,the applicant could apply/request a lot width variance from 75 ft. to 73+ft. based on the hardship caused by the location of the existing residence. Attached is a copy of Section 15-112 Variance.) RECOMMENDATION It is the staff's recommendation that a motion be made to approve this application by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-01,A Resolution Regarding the Recommended Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002, A Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of 6536 Willow Lane(Storla Addition) subject to the conditions of approval outlined in the resolution. • Page 2 • 3-3-11 I'' • Section 15-106. MINIMUM SUBDIVISION DESIGN STANDARDS. g. Lots. 1. Location. With the exception of lots in a condominium single-family attached dwelling unit subdivision, all lots shall abut by their full frontage on a publicly dedicated street or a street that has received the legal status as such. 2. Size. The minimum interior lot dimensions in subdivisions designed for single family detached dwelling developments in the RI and R2 Districts established by the Zoning Ordinance shall be: aa. RI District: 75 feet wide at the established building setback line; R2 District: 60 feet wide at the established building setback line; bb. not less than 60 feet in width at the front lot line; cc. not less than 30 feet in width at the rear lot line; dd. not less than 110 feet in average depth; and • ee. Rl District: not less than 9,500 square feet in area; R2 District: not less than 7,600 square feet in area. Section 15-112. VARIANCES. a. The council may authorize a variance from these regulations when in its opinion, undue hardship may result from strict compliance. In granting any variance the council shall rescribe only conditions that it deems necessary to or desirable for the P Y public interest. In making its findings as required herein below, the council shall of land the existing use of land in the take into account the nature of the proposed use g vicinity, the number of persons to reside or work in the proposed subdivision and the probable effect of the proposed subdivision upon traffic conditions in the vicinity. To grant a variance,the council shall find: 1. That there are special circumstances or conditions affecting said property such that the strict application of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his land. 2. That the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner. City of Brooklyn Center 15-1 City Ordinance F 3. That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which said property is situated. b. Application for any such variance shall be made in writing by the subdivider at the time when the preliminary plat is filed for the consideration of the council, stating fully and clearly all facts relied upon by the petitioner and shall be supplemented with maps, plans or other additional data which may aid the council in the analysis of the proposed project. The plans for such development shall include such covenants, restrictions, or other legal provisions necessary to guarantee the full achievement of the plan. • • City of Brooklyn Center 15-2 City Ordinance • Application Filed on 1-11-11 City Council Action Should Be 3-12-11 Taken By (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 2011-002 Applicant: Mark Kemper, PLS Location: 6536 Willow Lane Request: Preliminary Plat-Subdivision Approval The applicant,Mark Kemper,PLS, is requesting preliminary plat approval of Storla Addition, the subdivision of a 0.55 acre (24,150 sq. ft.)homestead to create a 12,870 sq. ft. lot for the existing residence and a 12,546 sq. ft. lot for a new residential lot. The property is located south of the intersection of 66th Avenue North and Willow Lane and has 155 ft. of frontage along the Mississippi River. UTILITIES Municipal water and sanitary sewer improvements are available within Willow Lane. The city's 2007 Riverwood Area Improvement Project provided utility stubs to serve this future/proposed lot. The property was assessed as two units. ZONING • The property is zoned R-1 (Single Family Residence) and is within the following overlay zones: -Critical Rivers Boundaries -Flood Fringe The R-1 zoning district has the following minimum lot standards: -Lot Width 75 ft. -Lot Area 10,500 sq. ft. This zoning district also has a minimum front lot setback requirement of 35 ft. and a side yard setback of 10 ft. Exceptions to the side yard setback are: -An accessory structure must be setback 3 ft. from an interior lot line. -The primary structure may be located less than 10 ft.,but not less than 5 ft.,from not more than one interior lot line provided: 1. All other setbacks are met 2. The remaining minimum ten(10) foot interior side yard,between the dwellings and the lot line, shall not be used for any accessory building. Page 1 i 2-17-11 • 3. The exterior wall of the dwelling, facing the interior side yard of less than ten (10) feet, shall contain no openings including doors, or windows, or provision for mechanical equipment. The Flood Fringe provisions, Section 35-2150,permits structures providing that the lowest floor is elevated on fill and is above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. Structures that are not elevated on fill or flood-proofed in accordance with the ordinance are only allowed as Special Uses in the district. Attached for reference is a copy of the Flood Fringe District and the FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency)Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)which identifies this area as being in Zone X"Other Flood Areas". These areas are of a 0.2% annual chance of flood; areas of a 1%annual chance of flood with average depths of less than one foot or with drainage areas less than one square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1%annual chance of flood. Attached for your reference is a copy of a portion of this map relating to this property. The property is also subject to the DNR regulations of the Mississippi Corridor Critical Area regulations. STAFF COMMENT The proposed lot split has been laid out to meet the minimum dimensional standards of the R-1 (Single Family Residence) zoning district. However, there are several issues relating to the existing residence which need to be acknowledged. 1. The existing structure as shown on the tax records was built in 1956. It is considered a non-conforming structure in that it does not meet the 35 ft. minimum front setback for the southwest corner of the residence. The preliminary plat identifies a 2.3 ft. encroachment into the minimum front yard area. (Note: The Torrens proceeding, dedicated this right of way for Willow Lane.) 2. The preliminary plat identifies the Base Flood Elevation at 818.3 ft. with the rear elevation of the residence at 817.27. As noted, structures that are not elevated on fill or flood-proofed are only allowed as a special use in the Flood Fringe District. 3. To meet the 75 ft. minimum lot width for the new lot,the setback to the existing residence is less than 10 ft. (1.62 ft. southwest and .5ft southeast). This would require that the current openings(windows) would need to be closed to meet the ordinance requirements. 4. The plat identifies a jurisdictional land market that was set as part of a previous Torrens proceeding which adjusted the northern lot line. This adjusted lot line increased the lot width of this parcel and affected the setback to the adjoining garage, • Page 2 2-17-11 • shown at 2.43 ft. This structure would also be considered a non-conforming structure. These matters relate to the actions and conditions which existed prior to this subdivision/lot split application. RECOMMENDATION The preliminary plat provides for the creation of a new residential lot which illustrates that a 50 ft. wide building pad can meet all of the required setbacks and has ground elevations that are approximately 5 ft. above the base flood elevation. Also based on staff review of the ordinances, it appears that the lot with the existing residence can become a conforming lot with the following actions: 1. The minor encroachment to the front yard is allowed. 2. Approval of a special use permit within a flood fringe. ° 3. Alterations to the south wall of the existing residence are made to accommodate city ordinance requirements. Staff is requesting that after the public hearing is held,this item be tabled until the March 3,2011 Planning Commission meeting to allow staff the opportunity to work with the City Attorney to draft a Planning Commission resolution for preliminary plat approval that also addresses corrective actions for the existing non-conforming structures. • . Page 3 2-17-11 • MEMORANDUM O ANDUM DATE: January 5,2011 TO: Gary Eitel, Community Development Director FROM: Bruce Johnson,Engineering Technician Supervisor SUBJECT: Drat Preliminary Plat Review—Storla Addition Public Works Department staff reviewed the following draft preliminary documents submitted for review for the proposed Storla Addition plat, draft preliminary plat dated December 7, 2010 and have the following comments: 1. Subject to a review by the West Mississippi Watershed. 2. Subject to DNR/Army Corps of Engineers approval. 3. Subject to final plat approval requirements. • 4. Subject to review by the city attorney. 5. No negative impacts on adjacent properties.The grading must be revised on Lot 2.Add a slight drainage swale.along the southerly property line to eliminate the potential for negative runoff impacts.The proposed swale along the northerly line must be revised to direct runoff around/away from the existing retaining wall. 6. Water and Sanitary connection fees need to be paid prior to home construction. 7. Existing building is less than the required 35 foot front setback 8. A 20 foot Drainage and Utility easement along the rear lot running form the 818 elevation on the south lot line to the 818 elevation on the north lot line. 9. Northerly lot line needs to be verified and legally determined. a. Lot 4, Block 2 existing house is 2.43 feet from lot line per the preliminary plat.The distance is 7.5 per the Lot Survey,surveyors signed certificate dated April 2005. b. Lot 4,block 2 lot width as shown is 5.10 feet less than plat distance recorded. c. Found%:"pipe 5.06 feet south of northwest corner and lines of occupation conflict with shown property. if found''/:" pipe is used this would also make Lot 4,Block 2 the correct width. • 10. No filling below 100 year flood elevation. 11. Proposed low floor elevation must be 1-foot above 100 year flood elevation. 12. Existing building is within the 100 year flood zone.A decision needs to be made as to whether the existing dwelling would need to comply with the City code listed below. Compliance No new structure or land shall hereafter be used and no structure shall be located, extended,converted, or structurally altered without full compliance with the terms of this ordinance and other applicable regulations which apply to uses within the jurisdiction of this ordinance.Within the Floodway,Flood Fringe and General Flood Plain Districts,all uses not listed as permitted uses or special uses in Sections 35-2140, 2150, and 2160 that follow,respectively, shall be prohibited. z3 ' r t � Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002 pp -'----— 8542 OM6 ANNA _- -• � �� W3 Sul ss2s 9818 6512 X42 ems _ . E�SCDi 6SOO x 3 x 85TH AVE N w t c ` 7 �''. Al�ga�m7�ur ,Aad11S- ¢�}L6W£�"u f - • • KEMPER & ASSOCIATES INC. ———— `�" — m71 PROFESSIONAL LAND SUAVSYORS "NN +`I -- 1 PRELIMINARY PLAT OF a¢f� maare�"r s STORLA ADDITION mE-aro-me, 11 m • al 6536 WILLOW LANE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA (SEE LEGAL DESCRIPTION BELOW) 1It SECMN 36.Y11W.RZW zI rya eJ '.-r`r W a>'S• .1 " 'n mw.e..sw L a 1 1 ..I ^� i• NN f es6 ,4)As , BASIS FOR BEARINGS 85'25'38`E+'B"03' • 1 f � g!y53 E 1•. _-- �, __ - E "\ BASIS FOR ELEVATIa'! y 1\\\\ N MAP •p"+p>WHOP lm-El SUMMARY _— •.4.:.", :����'!'..':'?��:�. I ° , \�� ewrv.x we m wacwu sssm an n oN �9k `�_c ' ,•'_`' e� 4t i v �' 1\1\ iwiK KfA�1]41¢6 SR R wf 3QlYtl NGEB ..'.'.. asa' 1 � 1 +, M Mprt-K-44r EsaElt:R � ':''�'w""'y'. ' �•'. �, '� 9°'"°"' .".° +,1 LIZ ."eemo�w..,ssm�r:�°w�"�66¢ae u) FLOOD ZONE DESImIATxxI IEGM !low L:KW.�N¢bM6 \1No o, M,w;w . ^ •.ellvNews owvnep6,3 eecr N rvrNt¢"¢IF. p4 � •: �� —. 1 + �) n0 w1,KN¢K CNN R¢¢D,t1N PL¢¢D KEN W 1N"f ''.•'•.:-` ,r31 NNW Cw6weE —M a�mr MN t IWW•fa¢ppR//NMNpN¢NxxNE KW,fa8 �E45E6 FN"NY"NMUK MN,�Iw:{t° "� ELECTRIC EASEMENT EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTRIN wEeww¢tREAmmEr ncoN G'4 �:L•'�''�' �M7_ _-- -- -- - - - t _ 1\l\ ,xm '"""", f,mN,mt w. ....mr¢aawax• =1Z sM Nt el bt.t x�l✓.p•a",lanm 310. NmN e°,r,preme qN,.w ram a6s .':.,:'..�.':... _"______ _'(___ \ \ —,•-u„sa[,up amm: w,nvN Mm elm Eaw M4:, N,erp¢on Z"�•.,. I< —...� Z ___ >. 1 ��C`,� .�.roam wmr �ww a.. Rwu wa ei w. °e 'xmm�aei¢„a a u• £..:.. _ _ .,sae cr.".w raa'""°wmN, ate•�so.'°e'."°xn°0"i.mr ,.>�'.:: .�` wWN! ¢m r�NN• C.t a�n"¢m�.m >auw = F/✓,; 1 +,+\+ 6.•mst"u:ew11� gar�y,' saw w¢�"�mNe ,,t;_'•�`' y 1 MUM='AM` ZONING REMIRNDAENTS zw,m¢-,are rxrr Kawma 6pMmr . 3{�S'C Samw mta Nrc wmvm Mwra asn,6s4r w.c wmtx.... .��.,..,':':::�'�.``. �4*"� a � 3� \II t 4 ���xpUHO,N�iaxvm s4 rt ru unr '¢ amen a, Ep"• O\\\ \\ + aK A¢a•r� 8 v •mm ° \ 1\ \ , MAwmrtEr ewr mr us MKSrcEr vNw W:...'.. �Z �S _- ___ 1 kM'N6R[MK t M ME E6r6eNMm pN WT uxN m¢RUn Mti.ME K4NK¢ Ana 4NUeaa NR ME for tpep 1 .+m. 1 1 uYO ,1 I pnN¢w Np¢wnK fon NNU WW6 ....•..'.:•..`4':.' ',� —' _- - _ .mo §i:. '•:.''`•,. � - ,,, eXf°s668fgtlA °wham. •m".. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY .x",85" �>mN I"' " �"� �`�•���''� � »-�6,-.� m°vn NNCwW� NM v0 • � i STORLA ADDITION R.T.DOC.NO. 1'1 � ••_ ,wun�v EmE of wr..6EOIX z. 1II A sw fF.u.d N 65K5.36'E*161 PII - • ' 1 iu .ow rom..a..x.ie 125.66 �-- ° ._;'•��••_ N ].91 B5'25.36'E 25.16 1 5,6583'36-W 1118 —_�--] 2 25 ° ul 25 u `1 wI N• ` ` r® FEE; nl I_�1 W ` • �` wrvt EUV,nW.sWta(NRWeN LOT 1 1 � N O sXr wrx c c e.�w'YN.. � ��"µiaNf.sari R N• 1\ �•',, �/^ ®�rM1owJMS.LAX wNeN�r 1J./1r BOtFS MuMPNtt SVXVEY \J ILn BLOCK 1 ( 1 2 r to --_--------- 58519'06'W*165 ------ N, •__ W L u 127.42 ---�---._._ —� LOT 2 1 1 DRMNADE AND UDNtt EASEMENI9. 1,\ �w 11 1� ARE mm ,1 £ � S 851908 W*168 W °«5S%Io EaW 1 25 '; \ KEMPER & ASSOCIATES INC. LoT _NOe,NEn�.ENE o<wr x wuN - oruuwse X19 gg W 25.73 - PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS \ SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS s i+ I•IC+4012(6r83) No, 20359 DISTRICT COURT STATE OF MINNESOTA, FOURTH JUDICIAL.DISTRICr � COUNTY OF HENNEI IN ' GJ In the Matter of the Application of "i' Ned R. storla THIS DOCUMENT- ORDER AND DECREE � S REGISTERED Off" REM� o (heave Decree with Examiner no later than Thursday prior to the hearing--District Court Rules,Part II,Rule 8) To Register the title to Certain Land The above entitled matter came on for hearing at the Government Center in the City of Minneapolis,said County and State,before theDeputyExamiznerof'{ittes who has filed his reportherein,and to wbomsaidmattwhasbeen dnlyreferredtoheartheevidenoeinsaid cause and report his conclusions therefrom;and the Court having duly considered the Application,the Reports of the Examiner,the evidence adduced by the Applicant(S)and being fully advised in the premises,funds: I. That the estimated market value of the premises hereinafter described,exciusive of improvements,a=rdiag to the last official assessment thereof is a 77Oftta-_ 2 That ail the requirements of the law in respect to the Application and any amendments thereto have been eomaplied with and that all of ihedefendaats in this proceednag ba ne been dvlyserved with process asrequiredbylaw grhavecousented totheregistrad=herein . and it further appears that as Answer or Notice of Appearance has been fried in this p roceeding. 3 That,except as hereinafter provided,none d the defendants named in the Summons and any amendments or supplements thereto,have any right,title,estate,lien or interest in the real estate hereinafter described; 4.That the premises hereinafter described 1.s occupied by Ned R StOrl R - - pursuant to (mod any addzuonal fm&W and iiwaer them,begin with number S) ae• , (STAMP FOR FEE PAID REGISTRAR OF TITLES) (FILING STAMP CLERK OF DISTRICT COUIM F'_` �-= FEE PAS --— AUG 2 9 20 00 "rP 0 i noo IL,i3Y(y� cJ 4d';SiR .E�lsK gA U PUTT-" C (ADDITIONAL FINDINGS) 5. That William F. Young was recommended as a defendant; that his address is unknown and he has been served by publication 6. That Armas R. Lustig is deceased, and his estate has been probated in Hennepin County, and Probate Court File No. PO-97-2279 wherein decedents heirs were determined to be James D.Lustig, Don E. Lustig, Sheila Tromblay, Arlene Pekkala, Jacquelyn L. Carlson, and Herbert Jarvis. All of them have been made parties to this proceeding. 7. That is was the intent of William F. Young, who appears as grantor in that certain Warranty Deed filed for record in Book 2451 of Deeds, page 112, and that Warranty Deed filed for record in Book 2520 of Deeds,page 52, to convey the laud described in this Order, including the fee underlying the Bast half of Willow Lane, but subject to the easement of the public road. That it was the intent of James Lustig, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Armas R. Lustig, who appears as grantor in that Personal Representative's Deed filed for record.as Doc. No. 6898123, to convey the land described in this Order including the fee underlying the East half of Willow Lane, but subject to the easement of the public road. 8. That there exists an executed unfiled grant of easement running in favor of Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation. 9. That the telephone lines maintained by defendant, U.S. West, which.encroach along the Westerly line of the within land, subsists at sufferance. 10. That the occupants of the adjoining land to the North are Raymond A. Jefferson and Carla Jefferson That the chain link fence located along the Easterly portion of the Northerly line of the within land and encroaches upon the within land, subsists at sufferance. 11. That applicant and respondent, City of Brooklyn Center, by and through their respective attorneys, have stipulated that the City of Brooklyn Center" is the owner and holder of an easement for public right of way over and across the Westerly 25 feet of the land within. That said stipulation is now on file with the court, and that the easement granted the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby made a part of this Order. . 12. That the Petition and Order for Summons contained an error, in that list of defendant, Jacqueline L. Carlson, as a resident of the State of Minnesota, whereas, in fact on the date of issuance of the Land Title Summons her address was unknown and she has been given notice of this proceeding by Publication. +vsursc«taaaa NOW,THE IEFORE,IT IS HEREBY ORDERED,ADJUDGED AND DECREED,ss follows: 1.That a default as to each defendant named in the Summons and any amendments ac supplements;thereto and all heirs and devisees of anyof the persons named therein who are deceased and,"allotherpersons or Parties wAmown daim'ManY right,title, estate,lien or interest in the seal estate hereinafter descn`k+ed,"is hereby entered in the above entitled action. I That NO R. Storla whose postcam address is 6535 Willot�t_,Larte M. City of Brooklyn Cente ,;y E1 �21tL ,State of MjMMB= ,is{are)the owner(s)of an estate simple and appurtenant easement(strike out oae if not applicable)in laud in the County of Hennepin,State ofMinnesota,described at follows: That part of Lot 15, Auditor's Subdivision Mnber 310, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying East of the center line of Willow Lane.- The North line of the .above land has been dete=ined by judicial lanftwrket pursuant to Torrens Case No. 19 ss 581. • F according to the recorded plat thereof (strike out the one mhkh is not applicabk)Ofonlyan easementisre&tir ed,theeawmentdescriptionmastbefollowedby thedescriPt ion and certificate of Title number of the fee simple estate to which it is appurtenant) 111}}} 1�,1?•'? �•`=-�` //Y-°'r'� c•�„ �1.ry h 7 y 4W- Olt�j, f )- �1- o N f "' C N 241' -- � ---i9AU--- ; x , t r OPT .h , , % A Overhea A N 8� ° � t I Telephone tine r and � cn,. ` 4� � 0 0- Z XA C� �' 4 1� Ct 1-31 ! ' %T4 M 2s'Sa 22.2 V i d) J I v 46 The North ine of'.Cot 1� Aud . ,.. .,, F"p Metal Past 125.68__. ;'Wr'gh chsin Link.�'e�a a --- k« !'lrar`rl G rrrkerIce •=N.$9 5114 .i Concrete.Black lr#ti�fnrn9 W2!/ wla�r $rtee 125.5D-- ' The sopf line o 1.� ,;clack I5LAND':;VlEW'TAB NOTE,:` L tlli VIA T �1F Illm%015 ISLAND VIEW TERRACE IOCNI I YS SOUTH LINE 4 M .ar Ifa t l 1 .:M W1T�L wul. F r 0 r�, , sf z f r M _' i Ii�-Itr�ra.tnc=dr xfi 6i!'lti "I; N41�4 t f{A,. f�l �I �' R'�'IOUSL'f ONUi tI , y 1WFP k `EFf rf1fTI } f6f 101 I tt' I1 I MM { u k f. Storage of Materials and Equipment 1) The storage or processing of materials that are, in time of flooding, flammable, explosive, or potentially injurious to human, animal, or plant life is prohibited. 2) Storage of other materials or equipment may be allowed if readily removable from the area within the time available after a flood warning and in accordance with a-plan approved by the City of Brooklyn Center. g. Structural Works for Flood Control that will change the course, current or cross section of protected wetlands or public waters shall be subject to the provisions.of Minnesota Statute,Chapter 103G. Community-wide structural works for flood control intended to remove areas from the regulatory flood plain shall not be allowed in the floodway. h. A levee, dike or floodwall constructed in the floodway shall not cause an increase to the 100-year or regional flood and the technical analysis must assume equal conveyance or storage loss on both sides of a stream. i. To allow for the equalization of hydrostatic pressure, there must be a minimum of two-"automatic"openings in the outside walls of the structure • having a total net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding. There must be openings on at least two sides of the structure and the bottom of all openings must be no higher than one foot above the lowest adjacent grade to the structure. Using human intervention to open a garage door prior to flooding will not satisfy this requirement for automatic openings. Section 35-2150. FLOOD FRINGE DISTRICT(FF). 1. Permitted Uses Permitted Uses shall be those uses of land or structures listed as Permitted Uses in the underlying zoning use district(s). If no pre-existing, underlying zoning use districts exist,then any residential or nonresidential structure or use of a structure or land shall be a Permitted Use in the Flood Fringe provided such use does not constitute a public nuisance. All Permitted Uses shall comply with the standards for Flood Fringe "Permitted Uses" listed in Section 35-2150.2 and the standards for all Flood Fringe "Permitted and Special Uses" listed in Section 35-2150.5. • o City of Brooklyn Center 35-125 December 3, 2005 • 2. Standards for Flood Fringe Permitted Uses a. All structures,including accessory structures,must be elevated on fill so that the lowest floor, including basement floor, is at or above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. The finished fill elevation for structures shall be no lower than one(1) foot below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation and the fill shall extend at such elevation at least fifteen(15)feet beyond the outside limits of the structure erected thereon. b. As an alternative to elevation on fill, accessory structures that constitute a minimal investment and that do not exceed 500 square feet for the outside dimension at ground level may be internally flood-proofed in accordance with Section 2140.4e2c. C. The cumulative placement of fill where at any one time in excess of one thousand(1,000)cubic yards of fill is located on the parcel shall be allowable only as a Special Use, unless said fill is specifically intended to elevate a structure in accordance with Section 35-2150.2a. d. The storage of any materials or equipment shall be elevated on fill to the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. • e. The provisions of Section 35-21,50.5 of this Ordinance shall apply. 3. Special Uses Any structure that is not elevated on fill or flood-proofed in accordance with Section 35-2150.2a-b or any use of land that does not comply with the standards in Section 35-2150.5 shall only be allowable as a Special Use. An application for a Special Use Permit shall be subject to the standards and criteria and evaluation procedures specified in Sections 35-2150.4 and 35-2190.4 of this Ordinance. 4. Standards for Flood Fringe Special Uses a. Alternative elevation methods other than the use of fill may be utilized to elevate a structure's lowest floor.above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. These alternative methods may include the use of stilts,pilings, parallel walls, etc., or above-grade, enclosed areas such as crawl spaces or tuck under garages. The base or floor of an enclosed area shall be considered above-grade and not a structure's basement or lowest floor if. 1)the enclosed area is above-grade on at least one side of the structure; 2) is designed to internally flood and is constructed with flood resistant materials; and 3) is used solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage. The above-noted alternative elevation methods are subject to the following additional standards: City of Brooklyn Center 35-126 December 3, 2005 1) Design and Certification - The structure's design and as-built condition must be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect as being in compliance with the general design standards of the State Building Code and, specifically,that all electrical,heating, ventilation, plumbing and air conditioning equipment and other service facilities must be at or above the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation or be designed to prevent flood water from entering or, accumulating within these components during times of flooding. 2) Specific Standards for Above-Grade,Enclosed Areas-Above-grade, fully enclosed areas such as crawl spaces or tuck under garages must be designed to internally flood and the design plans must stipulate: a) A minimum area of"automatic"openings in the walls where internal flooding is to be used as a flood-proofing technique. There shall be a minimum of two openings on at least two sides of the structure and the bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot above-grade. The automatic openings shall have a minimum net area of not less than one square inch for every square foot subject to flooding unless a registered professional engineer or architect certifies that a smaller net area would suffice. The automatic openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, valves,or other coverings • or devices provided that they permit the.automatic entry and exit of flood waters without any form of human intervention; and b) That the enclosed area will be designed of flood resistant materials in accordance with the FP-3 or FP-4 classifications in the State Building Code and shall be used solely for building access,parking of vehicles or storage. b. Basements,as defined by Section 35-900 of this Ordinance,shall be subject to the following: 1) Residential basement construction shall not be allowed below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. 2) Nonresidential basements may be allowed below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation provided the basement is structurally dry flood-proofed in accordance with Section 35-2150.4c of this Ordinance. City of Brooklyn Center 35-127 December 3, 2005 • C. All areas of nonresidential structures including basements to be placed below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation shall be flood- proofed in accordance with the structurally dry flood-proofing classifications in the State Building Code. Structurally dry flood-proofing must meet the FP-1 or FP-2 flood-proofing classification in the State Building Code and this shall require making the structure watertight with the walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water and with structural components having the capability of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and the effects of buoyancy. Structures flood-proofed to the FP-3 or FP-4 classification shall not be permitted. d. When at any one time more than 1,000 cubic yards of fill or other similar material is located on a parcel for such activities as on-site storage, landscaping, sand and gravel operations, landfills, roads, dredge spoil disposal or construction of flood control works, an erosion/sedimentation control plan must be submitted. The plan must clearly specify methods to be used to stabilize the fill on site for a flood event at a minimum of the 100-year or regional flood event. The plan must be prepared and certified by a registered professional engineer. The plan may incorporate alternative procedures for removal of the material from the flood plain if adequate flood warning.time exists. • e. Storage of Materials and Equipment: 1) The storage or processing of materials that are, in time of flooding, flammable, explosive, or potentially injurious to human, animal, or N plant life is prohibited. 2) Storage of other materials or equipment may be allowed if readily removable from the area within the time available after a flood warning and in accordance with a plan approved by the City of Brooklyn Center. f. The provisions of Section 35-2150.5 of this Ordinance shall also apply. 5. St andar ds f or All Flood Fringe Uses a. All new principal structures must have vehicular access at or above an elevation not more than two (2) feet below the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. If a variance to this requirement is granted, the Board of Adjustment must specify limitations on the period of use or occupancy of the structure for times of flooding and only after determining that adequate flood warning time and local flood emergency response procedures exist. • City of Brooklyn Center 35-128 December 3, 2005 . b. Commercial Uses - accessory land uses, such as yards, railroad tracks, and parking lots may be at elevations lower than the Regulatory Flood Protection Elevation. However,a permit for such facilities to be used by the employees or the general public shall not be granted in the absence of a flood warning system that provides adequate time for evacuation if the area would be inundated to a depth and velocity such that when multiplying the depth (in feet)times velocity(in feet per second)the product number exceeds four(4) upon occurrence of the regional flood. C. Manufacturing and Industrial Uses - measures shall be taken to minimize interference with normal plant operations especially along streams having protracted flood durations. Certain accessory land uses, such as yards and parking lots, may be at lower elevations subject to requirements set out in Section 35-2150.5b above. In considering permit applications, due consideration shall be given to needs of an industry whose business requires that it be located in flood plain areas. d. Fill shall be properly compacted and the slopes shall be properly protected by the use of riprap,vegetative cover or other acceptable method. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has established criteria for removing the special flood hazard area designation for certain structures properly elevated on fill above the 100-year flood elevation - FEMA's • requirements incorporate specific fill compaction and side slope protection standards for multi-structure or multi-lot.developments. These standards should be investigated prior to the initiation of site preparation if a change of special flood hazard area designation will be requested. e. Flood plain developments shall not adversely affect the hydraulic capacity of the channel and adjoining flood plain of any tributary watercourse or drainage system where a floodway or other encroachment limit has not been specified on the Official Zoning Map. f. All manufactured homes must be securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system that resists flotation, collapse and lateral movement. Methods of anchoring may include,but are not to be limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to ground anchors. This requirement is in addition to applicable state or local anchoring requirements for resisting wind forces. g. If fill is placed or there is encroachment of any kind in the flood fringe, compensatory storage of equal or greater volume than the encroachment upon the flood fringe must be provided within the flood plain. This encroachment shall not create any surcharge, nor shall it create hazardous velocities. City of Brooklyn Center 35-129 December 3, 2005 LEGEND ZONE - SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS SUBJECT TO INUNDATION X BY THE 1 % ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD The 1% annual chance flood (100-year flood),also known as the base flood, is the flood B� that has a 1% chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. The Special S F F Hazard Area is the area subject to flooding by the 1% annual chance flood. Areas cial Flood Hazard include Zones A,AE,AH,AO,AR,A99,V, and VE. The Base Elevation is the water-surface elevation of the 1% annual chance flood. N ZONE A No base flood elevations determined. 472 -+ ZONE AE Base flood elevations determined. ZONE AH Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding); base flood ZONE elevations determined. X ZONE AO Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually sheet flow on sloping terrain); average depths determined. For areas of alluvial fan flooding,velocities also determined. ZONE AR Area of Special Flood Hazard formerly protected from the 1% annual w chance flood by a flood control system that was subsequently U, decertified. Zone AR indicates that the former flood control system is _ being restored to provide protection from the 1% annual chance or greater flood. ZONE A99 Area to be protected from 1% annual chance flood by a Federal flood protection system under construction; no base flood elevations m determined. ZONE V Coastal flood zone with velocity hazard (wave action); no base flood elevations determined. ZONE VE Coastal flood zone with velocity hazard (wave action); base flood elevations determined. Bl ® FLOODWAY AREAS IN ZONE AE The floodway is the channel of a stream plus any adjacent floodplain areas that must be kept free of encroachment so that the 1% annual chance flood can be carried without sub ntial increases in flood heights. 66TH AVE. OTHER FLOOD AREAS QO2471 X ZONE X Areas of 0.2% annual chance flood; areas of 1% annual chance flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 1 % annual chance flood. OTHER AREAS s k t , ZONE X Areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain. QO2470 ZONI ZONE D Areas in which flood hazards are undetermined,but possible. eH X ® COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM (CBRS) AREAS \� \ OTHERWISE PROTECTED AREAS (OPAS) ec CBRS areas and OPAs are normally located within or adjacent.to Special Flood Hazard Areas. Floodplain boundary fc Floodway boundary 000543 694 Zone D boundary •••••••••••••••••••• CBRS and OPA boundary -` Boundary dividing Special Flood Hazard Areas of different Q00545 X Base Flood Elevations, flood depths or flood velocities. 000546 QO2429 513- Base Flood Elevation line and value; elevation in feet* Base Flood Elevation value where uniform within zone; ZONE (EL 987) elevation in feet* LADEN X Q+� *Referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929. CT. A A Cross section line 94 23 - - - - - 23 Transect line , ; 1. .+►�i+i��'+���♦�°�'►� �♦♦tip♦���♦�r'���a ♦♦♦♦♦ '�.._ +♦�. s��+,.�D�.4.a,�ffi♦+♦tee,►. ♦.fis.♦.t+�♦.>�!♦:,♦♦+r.♦♦+++♦gig �r++ i��♦{ i�O,ii WN a♦♦e♦ a®♦ea ♦ w♦♦g►+i►♦+0E►►♦�r+♦i 6 s♦♦♦+< �♦Ord♦�♦�J�►i �%�+�P�� a►i�i+��♦�+�+�+� �►`i♦`v'♦,�-�r a *;+���►+a♦♦♦♦ �� ♦� ♦♦D i�♦ ++►+gip+♦+♦+♦+♦♦♦+++♦r♦� XX a 03109/2011 13:40 6516315805 KEMPER AND ASSOC PAGE 01 Kemper &Associates, Inc. • "721 Old Hwy.8 NW New Brighton, MN 55112 Telephone: (651) 631.0351 Fax: (651) 631-8805 email: kemper®pro-ns_net March 9, 2011 Via Fax Transmittal: 763-569-3360 Gary Eitel Community Development Director City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Brooklyn Center, MN 55430- RE: Storla Addition 6536 Willow Lane North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Dear Gary: Earlier today I left copies of the revised preliminary and final plat drawings at your office for the above referenced project. • These revised drawings reflect the addition of a 20-foot drainage and utility easement at the request of the City Engineer. This revision also reflects a change in the location of the division line between Lots 1 and 2 . This change of location places the division line 10 feet from the closest corner to the house from 'the property. Please note that the fireplace is allowed to encroach into the side 7.0 foot setback. In placing the existing house at 6536 ten feet from the proposed line, a variance will be required by the City as the remaining proposed southerly lot will only be 73.29 feet in width and not the required 75 feet . In reviewing Section 15-112 Variances of the City Code _it would appear that since the original lot has approximately 155. 17 feet of frontage on Willow .Lane North and since the City installed additional sewer and water services during reconstruction of Willow Lane North, also including two driveway aprons, it was the intention of the City that this lot could be further subdivided. In requesting a variance for this property, the applicant points out 'the following: 1. There are special conditions affecting this property that would deprive the applicant reasonable use of his land, i.e. the windows on the south side of the houses would have to be taken 03/09/2011 13:40 6516318805 KEMPER AND Assoc PAGE 02 • Gary Eitel March 9, 2011 f Page 2, out to meet the city side setback requirement if the houses were less than 10 feet from the lot line. 2 . The variance is necessary for the enjoyment of a substantial property right of the petitioner, i.e, without his side windows light and views would be diminished on his part. 3. The granting of this variance would not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other properties in the area. The above findings are consistent with City Code 15-112 and by virtue of these findings request that Mr. Storla be granted a variance to the front yard width requirement of 75. 00 feet . If you have any questions or concerns please give me a call. Sincerely-, Gam. Mark D. emper, PLS Kemper & Associates, Inc. as Applicant and Consultant to Ned Storla • KEMPER & ASSOCIATES INC. _ � PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PROMMONAL LAND SURMOR9 STO RLA ADDITION >n�..�.... {. -- ,o•wsuR.,msswu wu vo•as w m• w o5 ru ww.•„y,s (REVISED VERSION PARCH 8TH, 2011) 6536 WHWW IAANZ NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA y,ryW g-$�1,1 (SEE LIML DESfAI qM BELOW) . _, ..'' ,� t.. _,J{;r,p•`v,A'ss^^°° 9 �' 1 _ ±1 MCnON 36.n5w.R21W EE _��r• . ' 5 ,, °,s¢LIxoR,x E tTD+ Nm ; 11 S BASIS FOR BEARINGS VICINITY s•r3'!1'r�nnm r ° I A.,s+..� �°rrN,a,,;'•,s,. '" „sr ✓®..d 1 \` 1 \ tlIP Sr�u) �isr`onvvu°'"w`o a°`"wan°, 1 A. 1� ,.w , „ 1 O AREA SUMMARYm,. ` M , , \ w:r arA ,oR Srts�dnunsd a Naldre v Y E.1• ,.S�x'r,. 7i. 1 ,..., �-"'"/'�) V,.w '1 +.^..,.w•.x... wRrtr�ro 9 aRn xc-ss.ero win aP s i \ oRpm°x5wxinar a.'.".xc 1(, rt 93�w o.z9 1 ; u n a,r • P[.v=PRreosra� aoaac i. b n t,L• , 50 + ,•.• m 1 w, 1 1 \+ to. (io��dwxE m u�ssw PSilePl A. Y�v4 o5+r^^ 1„ `11 ; \ l/' ,mn .i,tw,°saris EA 10 s��s ..,u x., 11 ., - w• , 3 C{ 1 }s , `\1 ;\\ ,� Iro$,MIRSLINE ar uKSSSwp nKP7 r.•. ,.�.,, .., \ \\ .�,\ LEGEND FLOOD ZONE DESIGNATION . 1 $ t-' ' ' \ \ rd = 1 \ ` 1 .w,, AE saRV.�mrx,`°°:a,.axmMC0,c5POrwrror r , 'j ' ..,� 1` b.. 1 1 .0 .rtiD1wowi: drt .rt•w x[n..[wm: r w 1 O. ^ 8 "°n°m.• .^,., �� max. .,• ..�.. m[ v nartm m,3p01n °1 N' SA .5 PSR•w •�J ; , xm 11 ., suvi z'¢ ,ao°^.snnxc APUS ar a 1 .�i•.. 5.. j/i / ••, _ -- _ _ \ ,,�\ °w "R AA .r:wi`w°nr�Pna�"r:u,°Earwiso rrnA,rxnu i ulxx iMi+,a nom ELECTRIC EASEMENT ,x. �7 \ \ °"'' _ _ �!'•� ,,,.:.w o^n - _ ;; E)USTING LEGAL DESCRIPTION r"xwr°niromiP�n —EXT aRmxx[�m x� �m r na ,`n°�olw`.a v Neii�'"'"'°"u. ® 1`"=`�7§ , ,'1• ___ 'I __ _ ��-•'� u � �.-•v 1.�„r�4__fir• \ \ �S �.�� b, .�Rc,i.ii wi 1 ... o�p EA !O' I -p_ � • «1 ..�`\ , \ \ --Ir-nova rnw 1 fi � �"� �•\` and� - A 1 ° :•, + 1 ZONING REQUIREMENTS ® £ iq ,®°,�I'TT�i , 1 • \ 1 _ .7'....') '�4 a��If#3 a° °5 A, � }• O 1 'u` ` `i (PO,rox ro mu L• aO"' �ST uwwux /AC. rm°SQ ri.PCA I,m r U,sl,r4L°'•uxE xdm 1 P �_ �, Y PCAX. i0 rrQ�.ri \ . oru.+o•.r x soulm rzss , ;u 4 `6 --n,cv "" E -. 1 t.. eAxx'ra eit�wi oxroi u°zsrmr,usrsimrccr�Sw°"or , i w w°rts vxoxo[o ixu u,am[n scn•wcz urc .1` _ _ t s°-= �_.. � 1 airt,rArawc ro roor rmeeR sxR:me q - 1 1 , ran rxz or<wxa wro ns[orule awA ` s 5- _ - _ _ T 1 +�' usaiiN.cAl m:b•nM1N0°iv °" ` 1^.. i ----ran -- E _"°- '" -,w,-v _ _ ^�y., m,��5�x�i.o�,s ax�x�• RE.1R d65lfi MllAW INK x°RTI , Shy+ rj __ _ __ _ ___ ______ -N�D' _"--y-" +. Q, � o1F0i.�ia.wC.Mdm (.. . d mz rorw< 55 ten.,..• �y�•.�J ,� �rPl \ � --_ -_���-��_— q. ��wwva wnr�u'i•'�uv� �,�ty1a,.-1-�FT.rr�wMP \\.�¢y \ �i12'lUWw]0 S BSI �' ___ -• .m> �NU.�AiE��-Jap,w'r'W". \ ! \ .,'v"be'.i'Ypr }T , CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY " ,Rim A SY• - STORI A ADDITION RT.D.NO. i]t , is L'r••L:i�•`� ' ` °�ie�o°s cir u�iw a.. I.7+�rrr....c..Y.�ew0..9 .i�•.t�:�•=:•t•:'i 'aYrrt.wr is M«tr Ow r..O N�5X E 3101 � __�_ , is i �,�ti ' N067d E4SU --1,- -- 1 , 25 �i 1 _•� '�'„ t wl v s°w.aic.y Q. scuE wtiEr tww.y LOT 1 1 BLOCK ttt1 t11 i o :ti, 1 ._- K � .° 1 .►_—.�—.� tT7.M �i.Or E3106_-----, '_-,• �- --".— 1 t t LOT 2 t YIMIM[MY IIRIIT f� AI[ IOM llVt �- •7 , :3 1 ^Y a ___ ow rott w rw w.00�c � 12Ln N 061 E 3100 ur uo wow w.w ro , as K \ XENPM & ASSOCUTES INC. w.aw stt¢r ua w�aa us.. t- -.vaoss u[o s tus s jai tusr PYOPi6StONLL IAHD SON1TfOYB t SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS Member Parks introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-01 RESOLUTION REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2011-002, A REQUEST FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL OF 6536 WILLOW LANE (STORLA ADDITION) WHEREAS,Planning Commission Application No. 2012-002 submitted by Mark Kemper,PLS,requests Preliminary Plat approval of a subdivision,to be known as Storla Addition, a replat to split an existing residential lot(6536 Willow Lane),to create a second buildable lot; and WHEREAS,this property has 155.15 feet of frontage on Willow Lane and a lot area of 24,150 sq. ft. which would allow the creation of two lots which exceed the minimum dimensional standard of 75 feet of lot width and minimum lot area requirement of 10,500 sq.ft.; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on February 17,2011 at which time a staff report and public testimony regarding the preliminary plat of 6536 Willow Lane(Storla Addition) were received; and • WHEREAS,the proposed preliminary plat identified that the existing residence is located within the 100 year flood plain and lies 2.39 feet within the front yard setback; and WHEREAS,the review of this application has determined that the existing residence was constructed in 1956 and that this subdivision application does not expand or intensify the nonconforming conditions of the structure. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 2011-002 submitted by Mark Kemper,PLS be approved based upon the following considerations: 1. The final plat is subjeet to review and approval by the City Engineer Department. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. That the plat is subject to review by the West Mississippi Watershed,the DNR, and Army Corps of Engineers. 4. The dedication of a 20 foot drainage and utility easement along the rear lot line from the 818 elevation on the south lot line to the 818 elevation on the north lot line. • • 5. That no fill is placed below the 100 year flood elevation. 6. That a final grading plan is approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit. 7. That the property owner make the necessary alterations to the south wall of the residence to meet the side yard building setback or obtain a 1+foot variance in lot width for Lot 2. Date Chair r ATTEST;, Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Leino and upon vote being taken thereon,the following voted in favor thereof: Chair Rahn, Commissioners Kuykendall,Leino,Morey,Parks and Schonning. and the following voted against the same: None whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. • • • City Council Agenda Item No. 9b k HINSHAW & C U L B E R T S O N LLP ATtORRIl WS AT LAW 333 South Seventh Street Suite 2000 March 14, 2011 Minneapolis,MN 55402-2431 612-333-3434 612-334-8888(fax) VIA E-MAIL AND www.hinshawlaw.com BAND-DELIVERY FILE NO.64444-879479 " Mr. Curt Boganey Charles L. Lefevere, Esq. City Manager r City Attorney City of Brooklyn Center City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway c/o Kennedy&Graven Chartered Brooklyn Center,Minnesota 55430-2199 200 S. Sixth Street, Suite#470 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-1458 ✓Mr. Gary Eitel Director of Business and Development City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center,Minnesota 55430-2199 Re: Application for PUD Amendment for Property at 1108 Brookdale Center (the "Application'), submitted by Loren K. Van Der Slik of Gatlin Development Company, Inc. (the "Applicant') Gentlemen: As you know, our firm represents Sears Roebuck & Co. ""Sears") with respect to its interest in the Application.' This letter is written at the request, and on behalf,of Sears. City Staff has advised us that the Application submitted by the real estate developer, Gatlin Development Company, Inc., will be on the agenda for the City Council meeting tonight. Prior to the meeting,we look forward to receiving the documents that the City Council will rely t We previously corresponded to you regarding the Application in letters dated February 17, 2011 and March 1, 2011. Copies of those letters are attached and incorporated by reference. To date,Sears has received no response to either of the letters. 121277899v2 64444 Ari7nna l aunrnla FlnelAa Illinnk Inriiana Maaa a,-1...eni+a Mi....ve»ta AAiee.....i Al®.,.V».b (l.®...... Qk-A-W.-A \AY........:.. Mr. Curt Boganey Mr. Gary Eitel Charles L. Lefevere, Esq. March 14, 2011 Page 2 upon in considering the Application. At the moment, it is not clear that those documents have yet been made available to Sears or the public. The proposed redevelopment of Brookdale Center set forth in the Application contemplates demolition of approximately 750,000 square feet of the Mall, including the former J.C. Penney's, Mervyns and Macys stores, and replacing it with only a 150,000 square foot building that may be used as a Walmart store. While the Walmart store, itself, may be speculative,2 the real estate developer is not committing to building any more retail space ever. By approving the Application with the Resolution prepared by City Staff for the Planning Commission, the City Council will ensure the net loss of at least 600,000 square feet of existing retail space at Brookdale Center. The proposed redevelopment of Brookdale Center denies Sears the connection to the 750,000 square foot Mall that is guaranteed by the City under the existing Brookdale Center PUD, as well as the other guaranties afforded by the existing PUD, including access to the Sears' site from all four sides of Brookdale Center, ring road access, parking and visibility. Moreover, the proposed redevelopment of Brookdale Center isolates Sears' buildings in a remote and secluded comer of Brookdale Center.3 If approved by the City Council, the proposed redevelopment of Brookdale Center may have the effect of closing Sears' two stores. As a result, for the unsubstantiated opportunity to bring a 150,000 square foot Walmart store to Brookdale Center, if the City Council approves the real estate developer's request, the City Council will eliminate 750,000 square feet of existing retail space and may eliminate another 200,000 square feet of Sears' retail space. Surely, this net loss of 800,000 square feet of retail space, and trading one operating business (Sears) for the possibility of another(Walmart), cannot be justified on any rational basis. Sears has worked diligently with City Staff to obtain information on the proposed redevelopment of Brookdale Center and offer constructive suggestions to protect the City and Sears and improve the proposed redevelopment. For example, the City Attorney asked that Sears submit proposed conditions for inclusion in the Resolution Approving the Application should it 2 According to City Staff and files, the real estate developer has not provided copies of any agreements evidencing its right to purchase the Mall or to have Walmart operate the proposed 150,000 square foot building as a Walmart store. 3 Sears has not seen any effort to address the issues raised by Counciimember Roche in his February 17,2011 email to Curt Boganey. Councilmember Roche raised an important issue about the isolating impact of this decision on Sears. The lack of direction by City Staff to the Planning Commission and the City Council about this issue underscores Sears'concern about the rush to judgment on the Application. 121277899v2 64444 e Mr. Curt Boganey Mr. Gary Eitel Charles L. Lefevere,Esq. March 14, 2011 Page 3 be approved by the Planning Commission. As an attachment to our March 1, 2011 letter to you, a copy of which is enclosed, we submitted those Conditions. None of the proposed Conditions were included in the Resolution recommended by City Staff to the Planning Commission. At the March 10, 2011 Planning Commission meeting, City Staff never even-raised the proposed Conditions. Since it was first apprised of the Application, Sears has been consistently asking the City to carefully consider the Application in order to allow the following to occur: • provide Sears and the public with an opportunity to obtain all the documents and information submitted in support of the Application in order to be able to review and respond in a timely, complete, and responsible fashion and to allow Sears to determine whether to provide its consent, which is required under the PUD Ordinance and 1999 Declaration • provide Sears, the Mall owner, the Applicant real estate developer, and the City sufficient time to work through design issues to determine if a mutually agreeable plan can be agreed upon • ensure that the decisions on the Application, as well ,as those with respect to companion applications for the Preliminary Plat, Site Plan, and Tax Increment Financing,be coordinated and made consistent with each other • ensure that all issues are addressed properly in a comprehensive Development Agreement between the City, Mall owner, Applicant real estate developer, -and Sears regarding all material components of the redevelopment of the Brookdale Center,which agreement will be presented to the City Council for its approval -It is clear from the record that many members of the City Staff are exuberant over the proposed redevelopment of Brookdale Center and are intent on taking every step possible to ensure its approval. In doing so, however, it appears that City Staff may be assuming, naively, that the material issues raised by the real estate developer's proposed redevelopment, such as the net loss of 800,000 square feet of existing retail space and trading one operating business (Sears) for the possibility of another (Walmart), can be rectified later. This approach is not permitted and is not in the City's best interests. While Sears has expressed many concerns regarding the Application, City Staff appears intent on rushing the Application to a decision, even though there is no requirement to do so and, by Staff's own admission, other City approvals which are necessary to move the proposed redevelopment forward will not be brought to the City Council's attention for several weeks. Given the consequences of the Council's action, Staff's exuberance should be tempered. 121277899v2 64444 A r Mr. Curt Boganey Mr. Gary Eitel Charles L. Lefevere,Esq. March 14, 2011 Page 4 For the foregoing reasons, Sears respectfully requests: • a delay in any action on the Application so that all pending issues and other related applications, as well as a comprehensive Development Agreement, can be identified,addressed,resolved and acted upon in a unified manner at one time • that City Staff be directed to include Sears' proposed Conditions of approval in any proposed Resolution approving the Application presented to the City Council and, as to any Conditions not included, City Staff be directed to provide the City Council with an explanation for their exclusion • that the City Staff be directed to comply with all requirements of the 1999 Declaration and the City's Zoning Ordinance in responding to and recommending actions upon the Application p pp Finally, we request that a copy of this letter be given to the Mayor and each of the Councilmembers and be included in the official Minutes of the Council meeting. Very truly yours, H W CULBERTSON LLP V Rotman 61 -334-2675 trotman@hinshawlaw.com LJR/rep Enclosure cc: (via e-mail): Robyn Alexander, Esq. Thomas J. Radio, Esq. Thomas P. Kane, Esq. 121277899v2 64444 COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM • DATE: March 11 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Gary Eitel,Director of Business and Development' SUBJECT: Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003 (1108 Brookdale Center — Planned Unit Development Amendment) Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this matter, accept the Planning Commission findings and recommendations on approving the Planned Unit Development Amendment for Shingle Creek Crossing and authorize the City Attorney to prepare the appropriate resolution and PUD development agreement for Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003 Submitted by Loren Van Der Slik for Planned Unit Development Amendment approval to the Brookdale C-2/PUD . Background: On February 17, 2011,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003 submitted by Loren Van Der Slik, on behalf of Gatlin Development Company, for a Planned Unit Development Amendment to the Brookdale C- 2/PUD to be known as Shingle Creek Crossing. At that time the Commission directed the g g • preparation of a resolution approving the proposed amendment with the appropriate findings and conditions. On March 10, 2011,the Planning Commission unanimously moved the adoption of the enclosed Planning Commission resolution recommending approval of the application for a Planned Unit Development Amendment to the 1999 Brookdale C-2/PUD, (Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003). Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003, an area map showing the location of the property under consideration,the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of this matter and other supporting documents included in this review. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Strategic: 2. We will aggressively proceed with implementation of City's redevelopment plans. • Mission:Ensuring an attractive,clean,safe cone unity that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust • Application Filed on 1-20-11 City Council Action Should Be Taken By 3-21-11 (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 2011-003 Applicant: Loren Van Der Slik Location: 1108 Brookdale Center Request: Planned Unit Development Amendment, Shingle Creek Crossing BACKGROUND On February 17, 2011,the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider a Planned Unit Development Amendment to allow the following changes to the Brookdale PUD development plan: 1. The demolition of approximately 750,000 sq. ft. of the mall including the former J C Penney's,Mervyn's and Macy's stores. 2. The renovation of approximately 122,000 sq. ft. of the mall located north of Sears with architectural changes to provide exterior identity and access while maintaining an indoor mall component. 3. The planned development of a 398,794 sq. ft. community shopping center that includes a major anchor retailer with groceries,three junior box retailers, four restaurant pad sites, and six retail buildings providing for retail/service multi-tenant buildings. 4. The day-lighting of Shingle Creek and enhancements to on-site storm water management, landscaping and lighting. After conducting the public hearing,the Commission moved to table the application to staff to meet with the City Attorney and draft a resolution outlining the conditions of approval. Since the meeting,the developer has made the following revisions to address concerns and issues included in the staff and engineering memorandum, and comments reviewed at the public hearing: 1. 56th Avenue/Xerxes Entrance Aesthetic improvements to the western entrance, continuation of streetscaping and street lighting, and enhancements to pedestrian walkways. Reconfiguration of the parking areas adjoining Applebee's restaurant and the northern portion of the existing mall. Boulevard drive to the outer service drive to Building A and Midis site. . 3-3-11 Page 1 . 2. Building B Boulevard drive adjacent to Building J. An enlarged building pad with drive thru to represent a proposed bank site. 3. Buildings D A reduction in size of Building D to meet the parking ratio of 4.5 per 1,000 sq. ft. of retail and ten per 1,000 for restaurants. 4. Building Q Relocation of the loading deck for Building Q. 5. Sanitary Sewer Plan The force main from the left station serving Buildings M and Q has been relocated to flow into the existing sewer truck line. 6. Shingle Creek Daylighting Additional details on the aesthetic treatment of elements of the creek and day-lighting concepts have been included. 7. The parking calculations and parking stalls for retail and restaurant uses have been organized into serviceable areas with excess parking stalls identified for each area. • 8. Additional details on the signage package for freestanding and wall mounted signs. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PROVISIONS (PLAN AMENDMENTS) Section 35-355 Planned Unit Development, Subd. 5 Application and Review,Para. a Implementation of a PUD shall be controlled by the development plan. The development plan may be approved or disapproved by the City Council after evaluation by the Planning Commission. Para c. of this section identifies that the following criteria is considered in the initial creation of the PUD and consequently should be considered in subsequent changes to the PUD: 1. Compatibility of the plan with the standards,purposes and intent of this section;2 2. Consistency of the plan with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 3. The impact of the plan on the neighborhood in which it is to be located; and 4. The adequacy of internal site organization, uses, densities, circulation, parking facilities, public facilities, recreational areas,open spaces, and buffering and landscaping. Para. i. of this section identifies the process of amending the PUD/Development Plan: Any major amendment to the development plan may be approved by the City Council following the same notice and hearing procedures specified in this section. An amendment shall be 3-3-11 Page 2 considered major if it involves any change greater than that permitted by Subdivision 5d of this section. Changes which are determined by the City Council to be minor may be made if approved by the Planning Commission after such notice and hearing as may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. Attached for your reference is a copy of the November 10, 2010 Planning Commission memorandum which reviewed the PUD ordinance and its application to the Shingle Creek Crossing Project and proposed amendment to the Brookdale PUD. STAFF COMMENT Staff continues to work with the development team on adjustments and refinements to various components of the development plans including: ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES Further review and refinement of the design guidelines is recommended with specific focus on the following items: • Construction materials and a standard on the amount of concrete block that can be used on a wall area. (use as design feature for base or accent treatment) • Front wall treatments and attention to detail on all sides of the buildings that are . visible from public view. • Accent lighting to show case the building and enhance the overall character of the PUD. • The consideration to building height and architectural design of the retail buildings to promote a main street entry image and enhance the Town Center look. • Building treatments along Highway 100 (screening of loading & delivery areas, architectural treatment of walls and roof details, and ascent lighting). These elements will be complimented by a large pond, landscaping, and fountain to showcase the overall PUD. It is recommended that this review occur at the March meetings and added to the PUD final documents. DETAILS TO THE ENTRANCES AND INTERNAL STREETSCAPING COMPONENTS Further review and definition of the internal streetscaping (lighting, landscaping, and pedestrian movement) which are part of the EDA's public participation to enhance the project and will promote the Town Center image, identity, and ease of internal circulation of vehicles and pedestrians. • An overall plan which highlights the Bass Lake and Xerxes Avenue streetscape improvements (street lighting, boulevard treatment and trail &transit improvements)with the design considerations for the entrances and main internal drives. • 3-3-11 Page 3 • • The possible enhances to the street lighting poles to accommodate banners, flags, and flower baskets to enhance the overall PUD and attractiveness of this Town Center. It is also recommended that this review occur at the March meeting and added to the PUD final documents and where appropriate added to the phase I improvements. ENGINEER'S MEMORANDUM DATED MARCH 1, 2011 Attached is a copy of the City Engineer's memorandum which identifies concerns and issues which will be addressed with future plan submittals: 1. The future platting of the development into individual lots, possible outlots for common ownership and dedication of easements will be considered with the phased development. 2. Hennepin County has contracted with the planning consultant that prepared the initial Shingle Creek Day-lighting study, SRF Consultants, to undertake a feasibility study and design option that would provide for a full day-lighting of Shingle Creek. The applicant has indicated a willingness to consider the option as an alternative providing the economics of the concept are workable. 3. Should Kohl's remain part of this PUD amendment, a condition of approval will be the closure of this driveway onto Bass Lake Road. 4. Final details will either be part of the future site plan review or within the Phase I • improvements which include the relocation of the Shingle Creek Regional Trail. 5 & 6—will be addressed with the site plan reviews of the Walmart site and Building P site. SHINGLE CREEK DAY-LIGHTING An option that would provide a full day-lighting of Shingle Creek and the removal of the two 12'x12' concrete box culverts has been discussed and is now in the feasibility study stage. The concept involves the City, Hennepin County and Watershed and should also be completed during the month of March. The applicant has identified this area as part of the second phase of development and it does not interfere with proceeding with the scheduling of Phase I improvements. KOHL'S SITE The Kohl's site has been included in the overall plan documents for the PUD amendment and Platting. The staff reviews have identified issues and concerns relative to the Kohl's site such as: - removal of the access from Bass Lake Road, - apparent absence of storm water management - including the parking lot into the overall PUD design It is now our understanding that there are lease restrictions which prevent the applicant from the ability of addressing these issues. 3-3-11 Page 4 • Rather than compromising on design features and safety recommendations, we will be recommending that if the Kohl's site cannot be brought into the overall design of the Shingle Creek Crossing PUD at this time, that it be excluded from the PUD application and plat until such time as there is sufficient interest or control of the site to make the recommended changes. DEVELOPERS MEETING WITH SEARS The City has been informed that the applicant will be meeting with Sears in Chicago this Wednesday, March P Attached for your reference is a copy of a letter from Sear's Attorney which again requests the Planning Commission to postpone our decision. The letter includes the conditions of approval preliminarily requested by Sears. RECOMMENDATION It is the staff s recommendation that a motion be made to approve this application by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-02,A Resolution Regarding Recommended Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003,A Request for Planned Unit Development Amendment approval, Submitted by Loren Van Der Slik(For Gatlin Development Company) subject to the conditions of approval outlined in the resolution. • 3-3-11 Page 5 Z z z > / z < a Lua- w w m z: Ww Y. 59.TH.AVE..N x Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003 58TH AVE N / '• `, ORTHWA7.OR . 2 COUNTY ROAD 10 0 5?TH AVE..N Pip K 0 EItICON..OR. o p, 55THAVE N Lu 55YH kVE.ro �ay0 �`6+�C _1 Cow brbo (tpdfrsP � AV } *��TH. .E..N w a Ul LU LU 53 RDAUE_M_ X 53RD-AVE"N y 3 tME"'R"` � m M,p!= wiffiAmMS-CW4941.}�ocas(j7tEMS �� O 796t! i l • MEMORANDUM • DATE: March 1 2011 TO: Gary Eitel,Director of Business and Development FROM: Steve Lillehaug,Director of Public Works/City Engineer Bruce Johnson,Engineering Department Supervisor SUBJECT: Revised Shingle Creek Crossing PUD Review,City of Brooklyn Center Public Works Department staff reviewed the following PUD documents submitted for review for the proposed Shingle Creek Crossing Development: • PUD plans dated February 28,2011 The following are comments and conditions of approval for the referenced PUD documents: 1. Property boundaries must be typical and straight;minimizing property boundary irregularities for sole purposes of parking boundaries.Additionally,property lines for Sites N,K and P should be revised to maintain an adequate setback(10')between the building and property line. Final property lines will be subject to final City review and approval conditions of the Site Plan,Preliminary Plat and Final Plat. • 2. The"full"daylighting of Shingle Creek is desired through the entire site including the removal of the existing twin box culverts. Should these remain,the box culverts will remain the full responsibility and under the ownership of the property owner.Daylighting of Shingle Creek elements are recommended to be revised to incorporate the creek as more of a feature that is fully integrated into the development(e.g.more building pads orientated adjacent to the creek and use the creek as an amenity in lieu of just running along the side of a big box building wall, Site Q).The private road along the east side of the creek could be relocated further east on the Kohls site where there will be unused excess parking,creating another building pad on the east side of the creek to enhance and use the creek as a,feature.Daylighting of the creek as proposed is only a partial "daylighting"and is recommended to be done for the entire length,including the portion along Highway 100. 3. The easterly Kohls entrance from County Road 10 must be closed. Closure of the access supports the City's and County's roadway access management goals and also eliminates the trail safety conflict with this skewed access driveway. Adequate access is provided at the Shingle Creek Parkway intersection. 4. The internal trail/sidewalk crosswalks located on the north side of the existing building retail shops and on the southeast side of Site Q must be enhanced to improve pedestrian safety(raised crosswalk with special surface treatment and pavement marking delineation). • Final Revised Shingle Creek Crossing Page 2 of 2 PUD Review Memo,March 1,2011 i 5. All loading dock and truck turning/backing areas must be fully separated from public customer parking areas and not encroach on main drive aisles. Site,P, specifically does not meet this condition and must be revised. 6. Public parking lot ingress/egress routes must not be directed through loading dock areas and tamingibacking areas.The Wal-Mart drive-thru exit area must be revised to minimize and deter this issue. All items,recommendations and conditions are preliminary planned unit development review comments and are meant to represent and guide the future planning and development of site plans and the corresponding property plat and easements.All conditions are subject to further review,revision and approval as part of any future platting and site plan review. • gAengineering\development&planning\active development projeots\shingle creek crossing 2010\communication\project review& conditions\110301_final rev pud review memo.doc HINSHAW • & C U L B E R T S O N L L P ATTORNEYS AT LAW 333 South Seventh Street Suite 2000 March 1, 2011 Minneapolis,MN 55402-2431 612-333-3434 612-334-8888(fax) VIA E-MAIL AND www.hinshawlaw.com HAND-DELIVERY FILE NO.64444-879479 Mr. Curt Boganey Charles L. Lefevere, Esq. City Manager City Attorney City of Brooklyn Center- City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway c/o Kennedy& Graven Chartered Brooklyn Center,Minnesota 55430-2199 200 S. Sixth Street, Suite#470 • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-1458 Gary Eitel Director of Business and Development City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center,Minnesota 55430-2199 Re: Application for PUD Amendment for Property at 1108 Brookdale Center (the 'Application'), submitted by Loren K Van Der Slik of Gatlin Development Company, Inc. (the "Applicant') Gentlemen: This letter supplements and incorporates by reference our letter to you of February 17, 2011. Our client Sears Roebuck & Co. ("Sears") has been working with City staff and the Applicant to obtain documents submitted by the Applicant in support of the Application, as well as documents prepared by City staff or its consultants in response to the Application.- Sears acknowledges it has received some documents from the Applicant and the City. Sears is seeking to confirm whether it has received all documents submitted in connection with the Application or prepared by the City staff or its consultants in analyzing the Application. 1212771380 64444 Arizona California Florida Illinois Indiana Massachusetts Minnesota Miccniiri New vnrlr (J-. ,., Pk-Aa iii,.,r Mr. Curt Boganey • Mr. Gary Eitel Charles L. Lefevere, Esq. March 1, 2011 Page 2 A meeting between Sears and the Applicant is scheduled for March 2, 2011, which is one day before the Planning Commission meeting on March 3,'2011. As you are aware, Sears has repeatedly requested a postponement of the Planning Commission review and action on the Application,beginning with the February 17, 2011, Public Hearing on the Application, which was denied. Our letter to .you, dated February 17, 2011, detailed the reasons and benefits of postponing the Public Hearing on the Application. Those stated reasons and benefits are equally applicable to our request to postpone the Planning Commission action on the Application, now scheduled for March 3, 2011. We are hereby again requesting that the Planning Commission's review and action on the Application on March 3, . 2011, be postponed on the same grounds as originally stated. Namely, not all of the documents and information may have been provided to Sears and such a postponement would allow Sears an opportunity to carefully review the Application and its supporting documents, as well as to hold serious and meaningful discussions with the Applicant. It is our understanding that the City did not object to Sears' requested postponement of this matter from the Planning Commission March 3, 2011, meeting to its March 17, 2011, meeting, but that the Applicant objected to the • postponement. The City acquiesced to that objection and the matter will be heard on March 3, 2011. In conversations with the City Attorney, he asked that Sears submit proposed conditions for inclusion in the resolution approving the Application, if that is the determination of the Planning Commission. Attached is a document outlining the Conditions of Approval Preliminarily Requested By Sears (the "Conditions of Approval"). Sears' requested Conditions of Approval are preliminarily requested and subject to modification by Sears upon further review of documents submitted or to be submitted by Applicant or prepared or to be,prepared by the City. Subject to that review, Sears reserves the right to supplement or modify these requested Conditions of Approval. • 121277138x1 64444 Mr. Curt Boganey Mr. Gary Eitel Charles L. Lefevere, Esq. March 1, 2011 Page 3 We ask you to reconsider the decision on postponing the Planning Commission's consideration of the Application on March 3, 2011, and, if the consideration is allowed to occur, to include the requested Conditions of Approval. Very truly yours, HINS AW CULBERTSON LLP Thomas J. dio 612-334-2653 tradio@,hinshawlaw.com TJR/rep Enclosures cc: (via e-mail): • Robyn Alexander, Esq. L. J. Rotman, Esq. Thomas P. Kane, Esq. • 121277138v1 64444 Conditions Of Approval Preliminarily Requested By Sears' 1. Satisfaction by Applicant of all conditions recommended by City staff in their reports, including those by Business and Development Director Gary Eitel, dated February 16, 2011, and by Director of Public Works/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, and Bruce Johnson,Engineering Supervisor, dated February 3, 2011. 2. Compliance by the Applicant with the City's parking ratio requirement of 4.5 spaces per one thousand square feet of gross leaseable area on Applicant's own property. 3. The Amendment and related plat and site plan shall provide Sears with full and complete access to all driveways, ring roads, sidewalks, parking, and all other public amenities in the new development. 4. Applicant shall construct, as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds, improvements to the two Xerxes Avenue entrances consistent in quantity and quality as that which is proposed to be installed on Applicant's property along County Road 10. 5. Applicant to construct, as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds, a new exterior entrance and related improvements from the Sears Department Store to the proposed Walmart parking lot to replace the existing entrance from the Sears Department Store to the Mall. 6. Applicant to provide new landscaping, as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds, on the . Sears parcel consistent in quantity and quality as that installed on Applicant's property. 7. Applicant to construct, as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds, a new facade for the Sears buildings consistent with the style and design of the facade for the buildings proposed to be constructed on Applicant's property. 8. Applicant shall construct,as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds, an improved site access point to Sears parcel. 9. Applicant shall demolish the connection/corridor between the Sears building and Applicant's property, which includes the food court, and shall rebuild and improve, as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds, the areas consistent with the development's other improvements and shall, as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds and expense, add a vehicular drive, improved entrance and a pedestrian walkway between the Sears parcel and the Applicant's property. 10. Applicant shall resurface the pavement on the Sears Parcel, as a TIF eligible expense out of TIF funds consistent in quality to that of the Applicant's property along County Road 10. • Sears' requested Conditions of Approval are preliminarily requested and subject to modification by Sears upon further review of documents submitted or to be submitted by Applicant or prepared or to be prepared by the City. Subject to that review,Sears reserves the right to supplement or modify these requested Conditions of Approval. 121276886x5 0879479 64444 • 11. • Applicant shall demolish, as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds,the remaining portion of the Mall that is shown to be attached to the East side of the Sears Department Store Building shown on the Site Plan, and shall add a vestibule with Sears signage. 12. Applicant shall eliminate the proposed "N" building and, as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds, and replace it with parking and green space. 13. Applicant and City shall grant Sears an equal right with user of the Walmart parcel to use all pylon signs on Applicant's property. 14. Applicant shall provide, as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds, replacement signage on Sears property consistent with Applicant's proposed development. 15. Applicant shall provide, as a TIF eligible cost out of TIF funds, signage on its property providing directions to the Sears buildings. 16. The City and Applicant shall obtain the consent of Sears to the P.U.D. amendment, the preliminary plat, the site plan, and alLother required governmental approvals. 17. Applicant shall indemnify the City from all claims arising out of the review and approval of the Applicant's requested government approvals, including, but not limited to, claims for not having obtained Sears' consent to the Applicant's various applications and for any takings by the City's action, and to require the Applicant to post an irrevocable letter of credit or other suitable collateral in an amount not less than 1.5 times the stated amount of any such claim. 2 121276886x5 0879479 64444 • To: Members of the Planning Commission From: Gary Eitel,Planning Commission Secretary Date: November 9, 2010 Subject: Discussion Items for November 10,2010 Planning Commission Meeting Item No. 5a - Review of the PUD Ordinance The following identifies the sections of the PUD provisions of the Zoning Ordinance related to commercial developments and highlights the relative information that will be considered with the proposed amendment to the Brookdale PUD/Shingle Creek Crossing Development plans. (I believe this review will also be a helpful exercise and assist in processing a future application by Max Sun Foods to divide off the former Hollywood Video store at 63rd Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard.) • Section 35-355. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. Subdivision 1. Purpose. The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) district is to promote flexibility in land development and redevelopment, preserve aesthetically significant and environmentally sensitive site features, conserve energy and ensure a high quality of design. Subdivision 2. Classification of PUD Districts;Permitted Uses; Applicable Regulations. a. Upon rezoning for a PUD,the district shall be designated by the letters "PUD" followed by the alphanumeric designation of the underlying zoning district which may be either the prior zoning classification or a new classification. In cases of mixed use PUDs, the City Council shall, whenever reasonably practicable, specify underlying zoning classifications for the various parts of the PUD. In 1999, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 99-37 which changed the C--2 commercially zoned properties(Brookdale) to PUDIC-2. b. Regulations governing uses and structures in PUDs shall be the same as those governing the underlying zoning district subject to the following: • 1. Regulations may be modified expressly by conditions imposed by the 11-10-10 Planning Commission Memo Page 1 Council at the time of rezoning to PUD. 2. Regulations are modified by implication only to the extent necessary to comply with the development plan of the PUD. The Resolution establishing this PUD modified the following regulations for this PUD: - Allowed a 5 ft. rather than 15 ft green strip at certain locations with a 3 to 3 %ft. decorative masonry walk - Allowed 4.5 parking spaces per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross leasable area. - Allowed 60 ft. wide parking dimensions for standard 90 degrees parking and aisle width. - Allowed two freestanding signs up to 320 sq.ft. in area along Hwy 100. - Allowed an increase of 15 percent to 20 percent restaurant use without requiring additional parking. Subdivision 3. Development Standards. a. A PUD shall have a minimum area of one acre, excluding land included within the floodway or flood fringe overlay districts and excluding existing rights-of-way, unless the City finds that at least one of the following conditions exists: • The P roP e j'ty sizelarea included in the amendment is 68.65 acres. c. Setbacks, buffers and greenstrips within a PUD shall be consistent with Section 35-400 to 35-414 and Section 35-700 of this ordinance unless the developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser standard should be permitted with the addition of a screening treatment or other mitigative measures. The building and parking setbacks for a C-2 zoning district are: Building Front 35 ft125 ft corner lot Building Side loft. Building Rear 40 ft. Parking 15 ft. d. Parking provided for uses within a PUD shall be consistent with the parking requirements contained in Section 35-704 of this ordinance unless the developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser standard should be permitted on the grounds of the complementarity of peak parking demands by the uses within the PUD. The City may require execution of a restrictive covenant limiting future use of the property to those uses which will continue this parking complementarity, or which are otherwise approved 11-10-10 Planning Commission Memo Page 2 • by the City. Parking setbacks along Xerxes Avenue and a portion of Bass Lake Road were reduced to S ft. with the provision of a screening wall The parking standards for this PUD were established at 4.5 per 1,000 sq.ft. vs. the 5.5 per 1,000 sq.ft. of gross floor area of the zoning ordinance. Subdivision 4. General Standards. a. The City may allow more than one principal building to be constructed on each platted lot within a PUD. c. A PUD may only contain uses consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. d. All property to be included within a PUD shall be under unified ownership or control or subject to such legal restrictions or covenants as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the approved development plan and site plan. The property included in the amendment is under control of Gatlin Development Company and the balance of the 1999 PUD properties are under the legal restrictions (covenants and declarations) of the 1999 PUD. e. The uniqueness of each PUD requires that specifications and standards for • streets, utilities, public facilities and the approval of land subdivision may be subject to modifications from the City ordinances generally governing them. The City Council may,therefore, approve streets, utilities, public facilities and land subdivisions which are not in compliance with usual specifications or ordinance requirements where it is found that such are not required in the interests of the residents or of the City, except that these subdivisions and plans must be in conformance with all watershed, state, and federal storm water, erosion control, and wetlands requirements. Subdivision 5. Application and Review. a. Implementation of a PUD shall be controlled by the development plan. The development plan may be approved or disapproved by the City Council after evaluation by the Planning Commission. Submission of the development plan shall be made to the Director of Planning and Inspection on such forms and accompanied by such information and documentation as the City may deem necessary or convenient, but shall include at a minimum the following: 1. Street and utility locations and sizes; 2. A drainage plan, including location and size of pipes and water storage areas; 11-10-10 Planning Commission Memo Page 3 3. A grading plan, including temporary and permanent erosion control provisions; 4. A landscape plan; 5. A lighting plan; 6. A plan for timing and phasing of the development; 7. Covenants or other restrictions proposed for the regulation of the development; 8. A site plan showing the location of all structures and parking areas; 9. Building renderings or elevation drawings of all sides of all buildings to be constructed in at least the first phase of development; and 10. Proposed underlying zoning classification or classifications. Such information may be in a preliminary form, but shall be sufficiently complete and accurate to allow an evaluation of the development by the City. • b. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the development plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be published in the official. newspaper and actual notice shall be mailed to the applicant and adjacent property owners as required by Section 35-210 of this ordinance. The Planning Commission shall review the development plan and make such recommendations as it deems appropriate regarding the plan within the time limits established by Section 35-210 of this ordinance. A public hearing is scheduled for December 2, 2010 and notices will be sent to property owners within 350 ft. of the development The zoning ordinance provides the Planning Commission up to 60 days from the submittal date to complete their review and forward a recommendation to the City Council(15.99, 2010 MN Statutes). Note: The State law has established a time limit deadline of 60 days and includes the provision for an extension of this period providing a written notice, with reasons for the extension and anticipated length, is provided to the applicant. This extension may not exceed 60 days unless approved by the applicant. c. Following receipt of the recommendations of the Planning Commission, the City Council shall hold such hearing as it deems appropriate regarding the matter. The City Council shall act upon the development plan within the.time • limits established by Section 35-210 of this ordinance. 11-10-10 Planning Commission Memo Page 4 • The zoning ordinance provides the City Council 48 days from the date of the Planning Commission recommendation to make a final decision. The total time period from the date of referral to the Planning Commission is a maximum of 108 days. Approval of the development plan shall constitute rezoning of the property to PUD and conceptual approval of the elements of the plan. In addition to the guidelines provided in Section 35-208 of this ordinance, the City Council shall base its actions on the rezoning upon the following criteria: 1. Compatibility of the plan with the standards, purposes and intent of this section; 2. Consistency of the plan with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 3. The impact of the plan on the neighborhood in which it is to be located; and 4. The adequacy of internal site organization, uses, densities, circulation, parking facilities,public facilities, recreational areas, open spaces, and buffering and landscaping. • The findings will be included in both Planning Commission and City Council resolutions in addition to special conditions of approval for the general development plan. The City Council may attach such conditions to its approval as it may determine to be necessary to better accomplish the purposes of the PUD district. d. Prior to construction on any site zoned PUD, the developer shall seek plan approval pursuant to Section 35-230 of this ordinance. In addition to the information specifically required by Section 35-230, the developer shall submit such information as may be deemed necessaryor convenient by the City to review the consistency of the proposed development with the approved development plan. The plan submitted for approval pursuant to Section 35-230 shall be in substantial compliance with the approved development plan. Substantial compliance shall mean that buildings, parking areas and roads are in essentially the same location as previously approved; the number of dwelling units, if any, has not increased or decreased by more than 5 percent; the floor area of nonresidential areas has not been increased or decreased by more than 5 percent; no building has been increased in the number of floors; open space has not been decreased or altered from its original design or use, and lot coverage of any individual building has not been increased or decreased by more than 10 percent. 11-10-10 Planning Commission Memo Page 5 e. Prior to construction on an site zoned PUD the developer shall execute a y P development agreement in a form satisfactory to the City. The City has used the recording of a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions, which includes the Council approval resolution, the general development plan, and when available, the site plan drawings and exhibits, as the PUD development agreement. f. Applicants may combine development plan approval with the plan approval required by Section 35-230 by submitting all information required for both simultaneously. This application is being processed in the following manner: I"—PUD—general development plan 2nd—Preliminary Plat 3'd—Site Plan review g. After approval of the development plan and the plan approval required by Section 35-230, nothing shall be constructed on the site and no building permits shall be issued except in conformity with the approved plans. • h. If within 12 months following approval by the City Council of the development plan, no building permits have been obtained or, if within 12 months after the issuance of building permits no construction has commenced on the area approved for the PUD district, the City Council may initiate rezoning of the property. i. . Any major amendment to the development plan may be approved by the City Council following the same notice and hearing procedures specified in this section. An amendment shall be considered major if it involves any change greater than that permitted by Subdivision 5d of this section. Changes which are determined by the City Council to be minor may be made if approved by the Planning Commission after such notice and hearing as may be deemed appropriate by the Planning Commission. The removal of 750,000 sq.ft. of the mall and replacement with approximately 3 70,000 sq.ft. of a multiple building/open air community shopping center is a major plan amendment to the 1999 PUD. 11-10-10 Planning Commission Memo Page 6 • Item No. 5 b.— he Review Rev' of � t PUD amendment application and discussion on scheduling the preliminary,plat and 1st phase site plan review. I would like to discuss the attached schedule with the Planning Commission,which includes a second Planning Commission meeting in December(December 16, 2010)to hold a public hearing for the Preliminary Plat and approve a resolution forwarding your recommendations on the PUD to the City Council for their January 10, 2011 meeting. The review of the site plans for first phase development would occur on January 13, 2011 after the City Council's acceptance of the PUD and Preliminary Plat. • 11-10-10 Planning Commission Memo Page 7 l • Application Filed on 1-20-11 City Council Action Should Be Taken By 3-21-11 (60 Days) Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 2011-003 Applicant: Loren Van Der Slik Location: 1108 Brookdale Center Request: Planned Unit Development Amendment, Shingle Creek Crossing The applicant,Loren Van Der Slik for Gatlin Development Company, is seeking a Planned Unit Development Amendment to allow the following changes to the Brookdale redevelopment plan: 1. The demolition of approximately 750,000 sq. ft. of the mall including the former J C Penney's, Mervyn's and Macy's stores. 2. The renovation of approximately 122,000 sq. ft. of the mall located north of Sears with architectural changes to provide exterior identity and access while maintaining an indoor mall component. 3. The planned development of a 398,794 sq. ft. community shopping center that includes a major anchor retailer with groceries,three junior box retailers, four restaurant pad sites,and six retail buildings providing for retail/service multi-tenant buildings. 4. The day-lighting of Shingle Creek and enhancements to on-site storm water management, landscaping and lighting. BACKGROUND INFORMATION On March 8, 1999,the City Council accepted the Planning Commission recommendation and adopted Resolution No. 99-37 which approved the Planned Unit Development/Rezoning application to change the zoning of the Brookdale Mall properties from C-2 (Commerce)District to PUD/C-2. The PUD development plans provided for the expansion,redevelopment and rejuvenation of Brookdale Center and included the following components: - The reconfiguration of the west end of the mall to include an 89,650 sq. ft. second floor to include a 20 screen, 4,252 seat movie theater; - a 13, 200 sq. ft. addition to the north entrance to the mall for two restaurant sites and a new food court; - 13,000 sq. ft. addition for general retail use and revised entry way along the southerly side of the complex; - a 4,650 sq. ft. freestanding Applebee's restaurant; and - conceptual approval for three other buildings shown on the plan as buildings No. 3 (west of the Northway entrance onto Bass Lake Road)and 4 and 5 (adjacent to the eastern entrance service road), subject to review and approval in the form of a PUD amendment by the Planning Commission and City Council • 2-17-11 Page 1 • The A p plebee's restaurant and most of the interior improvements were completed by Brookdale Center,with the exception of the second story theater. Attached for your reference is a copy of the site plan and resolution which included the following PUD adjustments to the development standards: - Allowed a 5 ft. rather than 15 ft. green strip at certain locations with a 3 to 3 '/2 ft. decorative masonry wall. - Allowed 4.5 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft.. of gross leasable area. - Allowed 60 ft.wide parking dimensions for standard 90 degrees parking and aisle width. - Allowed two freestanding signs up to 320 sq. ft. in area along Hwy 100. - Allowed an increase of 15 percent to 20 percent restaurant use without requiring additional parking. On July 26, 2004 the City Council accepted the Planning Commission recommendation on a PUD amendment for a 4,195 sq.ft. Dairy Queen Grill and Chill restaurant on the site referenced as Building 3 (west of the Northway entrance onto Bass Lake Road.) That proposed development did not proceed and site remained an overflow parking area. On August 27, 2007,the City Council accepted the Planning Commission recommendation and adopted Resolution No. 2007- 112,which approved an amendment to the PUD involving the • demolition of the former Mervyn's (Donaldson's)Department Store to facilitate the construction of an 184,600 sq.ft. Wal-Mart Super Center. The proposal involved the creation of a 14.27 acre lot and involved the closure of the Northway intersection(Mall entrance). The proposed development was legally challenged by Sears under the terms and conditions of the Master Operating Agreement for the Brookdale Center and subsequently the application was withdrawn. In 2008-09,the Brookdale Mall properties were turned back to the lender, formal foreclosure proceedings occurred,the General Operations Agreement for the Mall expired, and the new property owner, Capmark Financial,retained a commercial real estate company to market the property. In 2010, Gatlin Development Company acquired the Macy's Site (former Dayton's lot)and entered into agreements with Capmark Financial to acquire the balance of the Mall, excluding the Sear's and Midas lots. ZONING The property is zoned PUD/C2 and is within the Central Commerce Overlay District. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Mall properties are identified as Retail Business with the Central Commerce Overlay District identified as a multi use area that could support future opportunities for housing, 1-13-11 Page 2 • office/service,retail business, and public& Semi Public uses. PUD PROVISIONS OF THE ORDINANCE The following identifies the sections of the PUD provisions of the Zoning Ordinance related to commercial developments and highlights the relative information that will be considered with the proposed amendment to the Brookdale PUD/Shingle Creek Crossing Development plans. The purpose of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) district is to promote flexibility in land development and redevelopment, preserve aesthetically significant and environmentally sensitive site features, conserve energy and ensure a high quality of design. a. The regulations governing uses and structures in PUDs shall be the same as those governing the underlying zoning district subject to the following: 1. Regulations may be modified expressly by conditions imposed by the Council at the time of rezoning to PUD. 2. Regulations are modified by implication only to the extent necessary,to comply with the development plan of the PUD. The Resolution establishing this PUD modified the following regulations for this PUD: • Allowed a 5 ft. rather than 15 ft. green strip at certain locations with a 3 to 3 '/2 ft. decorative masonry wall. Allowed 4.5 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable area. - Allowed 60 ft. wide parking dimensions for standard 90 degrees parking and aisle width. - Allowed two freestanding signs up to 320 sq. ft. in area along Hwy 100. - Allowed an increase of 15 percent to 20 percent restaurant use without requiring additional parking. The PUD development standards recognize the uniqueness of each PUD requires that specifications and standards for streets, utilities, public facilities and the approval of land subdivision may be subject to modifications from the City ordinances generally governing them. The City Council may, therefore, approve streets, utilities, public facilities and land subdivisions which are not in compliance with usual specifications or ordinance requirements where it is found that such are not required in the interests of the residents or of the City, except that these subdivisions and plans must be in conformance with all watershed, state, and federal storm water, erosion control, and wetlands requirements. The implementation of a PUD is controlled by the City Council's approved development plan. This development plan provides the framework of a Planned Unit Development and includes the following components: • 1-13-11 Page 3 1. Street and utility locations and sizes; 2. A drainage plan, including location and size of pipes and water storage areas; 3. A grading plan,including temporary and permanent erosion control provisions; 4. A landscape plan; 5. A lighting plan; 6. A plan for timing and phasing of the development; 7. Covenants or other restrictions proposed for the regulation of the development; 8. A site plan showing the location of all structures and parking areas; 9. Building renderings or elevation drawings of all sides of all buildings to be constructed in at least the first phase of development; and 10. Proposed underlying zoning classification or classifications. (NOTE: Such information may be in a preliminary form, but shall be sufficiently complete and • accurate to allow an evaluation of the development by the City.) The following information has been provided by the applicant and evaluated in review of this request a PUD amendment: 1. Street and Utility Locations The applicant has provided the following exhibits which illustrate the use of existin g street intersections internal traffic circulation, and public and private sanitary sewer and municipal water service. • Overall site plan • Water Utility Exhibit • Sanitary Sewer Exhibit • Circulation Exhibit 2. A drainage plan including location and size of pipes and water storage areas. The storm sewer exhibit illustrates the use of the existing 42 inch storm sewer and new storm water ponding before it enters the storm water improvements that were previously developed on the east side of Highway 100. The western portion of the site continues with its existing storm sewer system with all storm water treatment occurring on the east side of Highway 100. The 5.6 acre storm water ponding outlot is also used as a landscape feature and provides separation from 1-13-11 Page 4 • the truck service/docking areas and the bike trail and outer service road along the Highway 100 R.O.W. The plan provides for a partial day-lighting of Shingle Creek, with normal flows directed to a landscape creek/water amenity and high flows continuing the use of the existing storm sewer(two 12 ft by 10 ft box culverts). 3. A rg ading_plan including 1 mporar and permanent erosion control provisions. The grading exhibit illustrates the general concept of site grading and drainage features with details of site grading plans, erosion control and storm water management plans being provided with the Preliminary Plat. The Preliminary Plat is scheduled for the March 17'h Planning Commission meeting. Attached is a copy of the City Engineer's review on the proposed redevelopment of the Brookdale properties and comments relating to the PUD, platting and site plan review. 4. Landscaping Plan The landscape exhibit illustrates a landscape theme which complements the city's Bass Lake Road streetscape improvements, promotes the internal Town Center look, and defines internal circulation movement for both vehicles and pedestrians. Also landscape features include the Shingle Creek Day-lighting, the 5.6 acre • storm water ponding area and views from Highway 100 and the two Bass Lake Road entrances into the site. 5. A Lighting Plan The lighting exhibit provides photometric information on the lighting of the parking areas. Additional plans on the streetscape and pedestrian lighting will be developed as part of the site planning and Phase I site improvement plans. 6. A plan for timing and phasing of the development. The phasing exhibit illustrates the initial development of the major anchor site (Walmart), the Day-lighting storm water ponding, site utilities and the internal access and streetscaping. The balance of the out parcels and junior box sites will occur in later phases as market conditions permit. 7. Covenants and other restrictions proposed to regulate the development. The applicant has provided the attached architectural guidelines. In addition, the PUD will include a development agreement with cross easements for access, parking and private utilities, as part of the PUD agreement and subsequent platting of the property. Staff is reviewing the architectural guidelines to ensure that the Town Center image will be enhanced with the development of the out parcels with particular • 1-13-11 Page 5 • attention to building profiles, building height and streetscape appearance. 8. A site plan showing the location of all buildings and parking areas. The Shingle Creek Crossing development plan and rendering illustrates the overall building placements, site layouts and development features. The Shared Parking exhibit further identifies the allocation of site parking as it relates to the current proposed development. Attached for reference is a coy of the Shared Parking Analysis prepared by the project engineer. Table 2 of this report compares the city's standards with parking demand ratios from the Urban Land Institute's (ULI) Shared Parking Manual, Second Addition. The table identifies a recommended standard of 4.4 stalls per 1,000 sq. ft. of retail,4.6 stalls per 1,000 sq. ft. for banks, 14 stalls per 1,000 sq. ft. for fast food restaurants and 15 stalls per 1,000 sq. ft. for family restaurants. While Staff understands that the development continues to evolve based on market conditions and that the individual site plans will address the specific uses and parking needs and allocations of parking stalls as part of the overall site development and management of this PUD, however, it has been a concern that the proposed restaurant pad sites not be under parked. Consequently, it is our recommendation that the development plan be revised to • an earlier version which illustrated two uses in the commercial area along Bass Lake Road (between the Northway entry and the Shingle Creek parking entry). This would remove a conceptually shown 7,700 sq. ft. retail building and expand the parking area for the proposed or larger restaurant pad site overlooking the Shingle Creek ponding/water feature. Additionally, the City Engineer's memo, dated 2-16-11, identified issues and concerns with the proposed allocation of parking stalls of other areas within the development. Further review of the distribution of parking will be addressed and resolved as part of the site development plans. 9. Proposed underlying zoning,classifications. The underlying zoning classification is C-2 (Commerce) District and the site is a significant component of the City's Central Commerce Overlay District. As previously noted, the current zoning is PUDIC-2 and this is a plan amendment to portions of the 1999 PUD plans. The new PUD provisions would apply to the new Shingle .Creek Crossing Development and the existing PUD provisions would continue to apply to the Sears and Midas sites. A public hearing on the proposed Shingle Creek Crossing/Brookdale PUD was initially . 1-13-11 Page 6 • advertised and notices were sent to surrounding property owners for a December 3, 2010 Planning Commission meeting. That meeting was canceled to enable the applicant additional time to coordinate potential economic assistance to complete features associated with the Town Center and Day-lighting components. The meeting has been re-advertised and notices were mailed to surrounding property owners within 300 ft. of the development for the February 17,2011 Planning Commission meeting. The guidelines provided in Section 35-208 of the PUD provisions provide that the City Council shall base its actions on the rezoning upon the following criteria: 1. Compatibility of the plan with the standards,purposes and intent of this section; 2. Consistency of the plan with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 3. The impact of the plan on the neighborhood in which it is to be located; and 4. The adequacy of internal site organization, uses, densities, circulation, parking facilities, public facilities, recreational areas, open spaces, and buffering and landscaping. The findings and the special conditions of approval for the general development plan will be • included in both Planning Commission and City Council resolutions. In addition,the City Council may attach such other conditions to its approval as it may determine to be necessary to better accomplish the purposes of the PUD district. RECOMMENDATION Upon completing the public hearing and Planning Commission discussion on this application, Staff would recommend that the Commission direct the preparation of a resolution recommending approval of this PUD application with the necessary findings and conditions to be placed on the March 3, 2011 Planning Commission agenda. This application would then be forwarded to the City Council for their March 14, 2011 meeting for Council consideration and action. S1-13-11 Page 7 LL( Lu- - 1 i .. a FL y y — w - -a— -- OO' 2. _— .�_ m � w m N _...._ W f7� 9TH.AV.E.. w Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003 !: LU L STH AVE N `1 4 COUNTY ROAD 14) ,�---,.--..-_- BhBS..LAKE R6..�� 67YHgYE' N 57TH AV.E.,N y s 4, r j6 ERIf.AN RR ._ Nei s.' o A MI �55THAVE.N r y� { / pt;0 °Sp LfoasPark 1 Carlin brio GOR urvq } 1 W z z; i C: a Z J C W. LILAC DR N w w w }� N rn a 53 RDAVE M X _. ._. V. 4' I 53RD'AVE`Nr} 3RD74i�E°N H�,c ,ats.�#okt t �� a 7SGIt METRO TRANSIT STATION =____-_----- � Ail tl♦ {t ROW DEDICATION tl _-_ ___ _ ____ --=-- ` COUN D NO ' •q' /�% / - --ter....--"'__ BAS 5 LAKE ROAD --------- ---------------- -.-.._- ___- EXISTI . u,aemr 7,886f/ �� . 1 8 ,��Y / ! I , - II ♦ \\\ i ! .�.�.w EXISTING - �j• J KOHL'S f _Y" /! ! B.WO Q ♦, O \\ '/'�I �.® \�.^ �G•�:!;�'' _/�I:' -pg$ ipgi�� Ot 10.7J58f \ L It ♦ ` 7.<76af ♦t �%9 -`t_. 7.:'��':• +4 9 : Lh ` y//� 10.0 "- z'/', /' ♦` I5.020q ♦ t C% Y� ♦ \ `.,D' ,�C/i /q// ia. , EXISTING BUILDING. 1 0`Y�"' RETAIL 6 SHOPS ♦ i Walmart`" ^ i 1 �-`^ ♦ ♦♦ ` \ STORE$562540 G I' 150-SOL-NO 1 I \ 152,038 S.F.(APPROX.) ♦ BM. FEET Z e 7 PROPERTY Ir Q LINE LEGEND p 2 W X 1''' 1,��� '�I�'ff,, .` \ /''(`.// i' F%/�'�• I i•29 3 OR OEFIdT FOR SUBAREA 11 fM (•) it W rr. SUBAREA BOUNDARY ,•'-- e\\\ EARS AMICPATED AREA OF SHARED PMWNG > (NOT Bi CONTRACT) SITE DATA TABLE X. STORMWATER // i '•,.�\Gr' O W LE 2� Lit {• {' V1 1( W { ` (o: 1!II �G Y + `� �A \\ /' wr r W UJ U 1 PYP \1,�:f✓ �_,1(.(.}f '4�flA��G \\y/'i �`���� wr..rm1 nln.w.r. U} �� )'^ i' `.`•Ce is i T�•(71'y^�`'•'' _: /� wnm. mow..,. J Y e a T. _ Ls_ , ,r^ wnmF cnwn. O �i B _ ' 'M�7fy \, •' �� 1ml.war r.1�n.slev. An =m �j.7/' ,'• nan Nwrlaw nnar. „r/GE aml.rNw PROJECT NO ,'4}t, }4t{ i J,` 71 Iy'H'7'' `�JI�IT,1 o ru.°.wnrm.e...urnRr.or�aTSaawe.va 1006„7000 SH EET 111IBER .e� � El MEMORANDUM DATE: February 3,2011 TO: Gary Eitel,Director of Business and Development FROM: Steve Lillehaug,Director of Public Works/City Engineer Bruce Johnson,Engineering Supervisor SUBJECT: Shingle Creek Crossing PUD Review,City of Brooklyn Center Public Works Department staff reviewed the following PUD documents submitted for review for the proposed Shingle Creek Crossing Development: • PUD plans dated January 20,2011 • Preliminary Drainage Analysis dated January 20, 2011 • Shingle Creek Daylighting Preliminary Drainage Analysis dated January 19, 2011 • Sanitary Sewer Capacity Analysis dated January 10,2011,. • Traffic Impact Analysis dated January 20, 2011 • Shared-Use Parking Analysis dated January 20,2011 The following are comments and conditions of approval for the referenced PUD documents: • Easements and Agreements: 1. A development agreement is required that will include all conditions of the project approval, subject to the final review and approval by the City.This will be part of and subject to the final approval conditions of the Site Plan,Preliminary Plat and Final Plat. 2. All existing easements must be vacated and adequate easements dedicated for all public items including but not limited to utilities,sidewalks,trails, streetscaping,traffic signals, pedestrian bridge and other elements determined by the City during site plan and plat review. 3. An overall easement agreement is required that will provide the City accessibility to all utilities and storm drainage areas to inspect and enforce proper utility service and maintenance. 4. All easements must be of adequate width and centered on the existing utilities. Specific dimensions and widths of easements will further be determined upon review of the site plan and preliminary plat. 5. Show and dedicate easements for all existing and proposed trails and streetscape improvements as necessary, with a minimum width 16' for the regional trail(trail centered on easement). 6. Cross access,cross parking, shared parking and cross utility easements and agreements are required for all elements and between all property owners,both existing and future, as determined by the City. - 7. The existing County Ditch 13 easement must be maintained(do not vacate this easement). 8. The relocation of the regional trail from the east to the west side of the main site ring road south of Shingle Creek Parkway must include the vacation of the existing trail easements Shingle Creek Crossing Page 2 of 7 PUD Review Memo, February 3,2011 and rededication of the new trail easement including a direct easement dedication to the Three Rivers Park District for this trail. Permitting: 9. The property is located adjacent to Minnesota Department of Transportation(Mn/DOT) highway right-of-way and Hennepin County right-of-way. All Mn/DOT and Hennepin County comments will be conditions of approval. 10.Department of Health permit is required for watermain installation. 11.MPCA sanitary sewer permit is required. 12.MPCA NPDES is required. 13.Minnesota Department of Health permit is required. 14.Hennepin County access permit is required. 15. Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission(SCWMC)permit is required. 16.Department of Natural Resources, Army Corp of Engineers and other permits may be required as necessary. Storm Sewer System and Drainage: 17.All hydrology and hydraulic calculations must be presented to and approved by the SCWMC.This review will be performed during the final site plan review by the City. 18. Daylighting of Shingle Creek needs to be more of a feature and integrated into the development(e.g. more building pads orientated adjacent to the creek and use the creek • as an amenity in lieu of just running along the side of a big box building wall).The private road along the east side of the creek could be relocated further east on the Kohls site where there will be unused excess parking,creating another building pad on the east side of the creek to enhance and use the creek as a feature. 19. Daylighting of the creek as proposed is only a partial"daylighting" and should be done for the entire length, including the portion along Highway 100. 20. Provide details for the connection points of the daylighted portion of the creek to Shingle Creek at the termini of the diverted portion at the north and south ends.Details must include outlet details,wall details,riffle details, weir details and details for the aesthetics throughout. 21.The exact location of the twin 12'x12' box culverts must be identified and shown to a distinct survey quality level.All easement locations and widths will be determined and shown based upon this survey quality location. Actual exposure of the culverts may be necessary in multiple locations to ensure adequate location of the culverts. 22. All permanent stormwater ponds must be constructed in Phase 1. 23.No storm water detention basins that retain water for a duration greater than 48-hrs will be allowed over or directly adjacent to City public utilities(e.g.watermain, sanitary sewer, or storm sewer).This element is required due to the proper protection of underground utilities and the need to ensure proper maintenance and emergency repairs can be made without having adjacent high groundwater issues. Pond 4 is in direct conflict to this element and is not acceptable. 24.The property owner must enroll the twin box culverts into the state's annual bridge inspection program and provide the required inspection.and reporting.These are private • roadways that carry public traffic over these significant culverts and safety of the box gAengineering\development&planning\active development projectslshingle creek crossing 2010\communication\project review& conditions\110202_pud review memo.doc Shingle Creek Crossing Page 3 of 7 PUD Review Memo,February 3, 2011 • culverts must be ensured and properly inspected on an annual basis.The box culverts are not a City maintained utility on this property. 25. Provide sediment pretreatment facilities for all existing and proposed ponds and infiltration basins. 26. Provide sediment pretreatment facilities for all existing and proposed storm sewer piping prior to discharging directly into Shingle Creek(e.g.the Kohls storm sewer). 27. All SWPPP elements and strategies must be installed prior to any demolition. 28.Floodplain mitigation is required. Provide an analysis,report and plans showing proper floodplain impacts are being mitigated. 29. Provide and demonstrate that the required infiltration rate requirements and calculations per the SCWMC standards are being met. 30. Verify that there is no impact to the Sears storm sewer system and/or is being properly accommodated. 31.The existing storm sewer is shown underneath the easterly corner of building P. This must be revised. Watermain System: 32. The required regional water distribution evaluation remains outstanding and must be provided. Any impacts must be properly addressed and included with any approval of this project. 33. Hydrant locations are subject-to review by the Fire Chief. • 34.New watermain gate valves must be installed at all City watermain service locations. 35. Currently the watermain to the existing Sears site is provided by a service connected to a looped portion of watermain.The proposed plans eliminate this loop. Revise plans to eliminate the proposed "dead-end"water service and appropriately loop the watermain with the remainder of the site watermain. Sanitary Sewer System: 36.Further sanitary sewer capacity/flow calculations are required to verify that the existing gravity 8"VCP pipe can accommodate the capacity for the proposed 6" sanitary force main at the sewer connection point in the northwest corner by Northway Drive. 37. Further sanitary sewer capacity/flow calculations are required to verify that the existing gravity 8"VCP pipe can accommodate the capacity for the proposed 6" sanitary force main at the sewer connection point in the northeast for sites F,M and Q that are adjacent to Kohls. 38. Further sanitary sewer capacity/flow calculations are required to verify that the proposed gravity 18" sewer pipe can accommodate the capacity for the proposed new connections in the central portion of the site for buildings C,D,E, L and P and the,existing 12" forcemain. 39.The current sanitary sewer study does not provide groupings of buildings that can be used for anything other than a SAC comparison of the existing to the proposed use.Provide a sanitary sewer study that breaks down the sewer flow capacity by areas and buildings going into the different segments of sanitary sewer. 40. The City sanitary sewer through the site has been televised..The results indicate that significant segments of piping are in very poor condition and need to be replaced. Further g\engineering\development&plamring\active development projects\shingle creek crossing 2010\r-ommunication\project review& conditions\l 10202_pud review memo.doc Shingle Creek Crossing Page 4 of 7 PUD Review Memo, February 3, 2011 i development of a strategy and plan for the necessary sanitary sewer replacement will be coordinated with the developer. Site Plan: 41. Provide a drawing showing main site circulation routes. The main internal circulation route is disconnected and needs to be better defined between buildings J and K.This pertains to the main internal circulation route on the northwest portion of the development. 42.The Phase 1 completion needs to include the main site circulation route as indicated in item 9 above as well as the portion adjacent to and that is used for access to Midas. Curb and gutter and sidewalk must be installed for all main routes under Phase 1. 43. Construct raised medians in parking areas to separate and channelize the parking from the main drive aisles throughout the entire site. 44. Pylon sign locations need to compliment city streetscape improvements and not impair visibility. Pylon sign locations as shown along Bass Lake Road conflict with the park district kiosk in one location and with the Shingle Creek overlook area in the southwest quadrant of the Shingle Creek Parkway intersection. Specific sign locations and plans are required and must be specifically approved by the City. 45.The current and existing internal T-intersection just east of Xerxes Avenue at 56`h Avenue(just south of Applebees)is a poor existing design with minimal distance from the public intersection. This is typical in older developments but is very substandard. As i part of this project it must be redesigned to better accommodate operations,increased storage,better safety and better flow to and from the overall site. 46. As shown in the current PUD plans,the far southerly exit from the Applebee's site must be closed. 47. As shown in the current PUD plans,the intersection in southwest corner the of Kohls site (Ring Road intersection)was revised from a T-intersection to a radius so the primary route is well defined. Further revision and relocation of this intersection could allow implementation of another building site along the east side of the day lighted creek. 48. Close the easterly Kohls entrance from County Road 10. Closure of the access supports the City's and County's roadway access management goals and also eliminates the trail safety conflict with this skewed access driveway. Adequate access is provided at the Shingle Creek Parkway intersection. 49.As shown in the current PUD plans,the south leg(southbound)lane configuration at Shingle Creek Pkwy/CR 10 must include a thru lane and a thru-right lane.Both lanes must be carried through the first exit intersection to the west,then drop the second lane with standard tapers and channelization.This is needed due to the dual approach from the north as well as the dual left turn approach from the east and the need to eliminate the trap right turn lane. The median nose must remain pulled back and out of the crosswalk. 50. Truck turning movements at the Shingle Creek Parkway intersection with Bass Lake Road must demonstrate adequacy for a WB-67 vehicle for the westbound dual left turn lane and northbound right turn lane.This will further be reviewed during the final site plan review. 51. As currently shown in the PUD plans,eliminate the free right turn, converting the right iturn movement to a stop-right turn condition at the Shingle Creek Parkway intersection. gAengineeringWevelopment&planning\dctive development projectAshingle creek crossing 201ftommunication\pmoject review& conditionAl 10202 pud review memo.doc Shingle Creek Crossing Page 5 of 7 PUD Review Memo,February 3, 2011 • Geometric roadway,trail and streetscape impacts must be addressed and match the existing streetscape elements.Traffic signal system revisions are also required with these revisions. 52.Eliminate all trap thru lanes that turn immediately into turn lanes on the far side of intersections throughout the site. Provide proper geometrics of turn lanes and delineation of them. 53.As shown in the current PUD plans,revise the lane configuration at Northway Drive and Bass Lake Road on the north leg to a southbound right turn lane and a thru-left lane,the southbound lane of the south leg will be a single thru lane that lines up with the north leg's southbound thru-left lane. Geometric roadway,trail and streetscape impacts must be addressed and match the existing streetscape elements.The southwest quadrant of this intersection will need to be revised.Traffic signal system revisions are also required with these improvements. 54.Truck turning movements at the Northway Drive intersection with Bass Lake Road must demonstrate adequacy for a WB-67 vehicle for the eastbound right turning and the westbound left turning movements.The southwest quadrant will need to be revised so.the throat of the south leg of the southbound lane is only one lane(20-ft minimum opening). This will eliminate the trap right turn lane south of this intersection. ° 55. Alignments in the main drive aisle at the first intersection south of Northway Drive/Bass Lake Road are kinked.A skew of less than 20 degrees is acceptable but the alignments through the intersection must be smooth. The roadway radii between the two • intersections must be a minimum of 300-ft radius. 56.All internal intersections must be aligned properly through the intersections to eliminate any kinks and provide proper, smooth channelization and alignment. 57. Revise the sidewalk west of the site D to provide connectivity to the internal sidewalk system and to site C. 58.The pharmacy drive aisle geometrics will be further reviewed during the site plan review of the Walmart site. 59. As shown in the current PUD plans,the turning movements for major routes are shown and will be further reviewed during site plan review. 60.The loading zone for site Q must be fully and totally separate from the main ring road with no backing, sitting or stopping occurring on the main private road, which must be separated by curb and gutter. 61.The loading zone and truck turning movements for the Walmart site appears to be very difficult to maneuver for the northerly truck loading position.The parking immediately in front of the loading docks may need to be eliminated. This will be further evaluated during the site plan review. 62.The access to the loading zone for site N should be accessed from the southwest of the site and not through the Walmart site as shown. 63.Provide an assigned truck route for the entire site to each building pad. This must be a documented truck route that will be implemented and enforced by all property owners. 64.Provide better ring road transition at the southwest of the site between the proposed section and the existing ring road on the Sears property. • g:\engineering\development&planning\aactive development projectAs-I ingle creek crossing 201.0\communication\project review& conditions\!10202_pud review memo.doc Shingle Creek Crossing Page 6 of 7 PUD Review Memo,February 3,2011 65. The curb around the west, south and east sides of Walmart are not shown. Revise the site plan to show these with proper channelization for the drive aisles and separation of the building from the parking lot. 66. As shown in the current PUD plans,the northbound lane at the south leg of the intersection with the main Kohls entrance must be channelized so the thru lane does not line up with the southbound left turn lane into Kohls. 67. Provide boulevards (4-ft minimum)for all sidewalks adjacent to the main internal site circulation roadways. 68. The site's northerly circulation route from Xerxes Avenue at 56th Avenue to the middle part of the site is not very well defined. (e.g. If you enter from 56th enroute to Walmart, there is not a well defined route.The route would take you past Applebees, up to the northeast of site J,then south,dumping you into the parking lot on the east side of site J through a one way parking area and you are still not in the main parking lot of Walmart.) This needs to be revised and better defined. 69. As shown in the current PUD plans,the roadway south of Outlot A(northerly Outlot A) must be one way traffic only,westbound. (There are two outlots as shown.) 70. Revise plan to show sidewalk and curb around the entire site P building. 71. Provide an elevation rendering showing an example of the main roadway entrance point with plantings, decorative lighting, sidewalks, and other streetscape elements. 72. As shown in the current PUD plan,the Shingle Creek Parkway entrance has been revised to provide proper alignment through the intersection across Bass Lake Road and better • channelization.These improvements must be included as part of this project. 73.As shown in the current PUD plan, the raised median on the south leg of the Shingle Creek Parkway intersection is extended through the first intersection and to the main Kohls entrance.Turn lanes must be fully channelized with well defined turn lane tapers. 74. A better plan showing more detailed plantings of understory plantings as part of the general site and streetscaping is required. 75. Public improvement plans will be required separately from the on-site improvements. The public improvements include modification to the intersections along Bass Lake Road including but not limited to roadway and curb line geometric changes,trial/sidewalk, streetscape elements,irrigation system and traffic signal system. Traffic Study and Parking Study: 76. The shared parking evaluation and presentation is not adequate. Generally the evaluation needs to show available parking, required parking.and proposed shared parking locations per each individual building,defined in a table and specifically shown and detailed on a plan.Holistically grouping areas that are almost a'/a mile apart as is currently the case is not realistic.The evaluation should take into consideration different realistic peak times for the individual areas and buildings (e.g.sites C,D and E might have a significantly different peak than a 2 pm weekend timeframe). 77. Provide and add an Executive Summary in the Traffic Impact Analysis. 78. The travel demand trip reduction is based on a comparison to a"mixed-use" redevelopment in the City of Bloomington,but may not be comparable to this project if there was a residential element of mixed use in that project. The report identifies that • there is limited options in this retail center to employ travel demand strategies,yet uses g:\engineering\development&planning\active development projects\shingle creek crossing 2010\communication\project review& conditions\l 10202_pud review memo.doc Shingle Creek Crossing Page 7 of 7 PUD Review Memo, February 3,2011 and assumes a four percent reduction.This may be too generous of a trip reduction factor, simply by assuming the transit station is the sole trip reduction generator during the peak hour periods. Although the traffic numbers would not be significantly affected by this factor either way,this assumed reduction percentage is seemingly baseless relative to this development and must not set a precedent. 79.Table 1 —Provide daily trip generation data in addition to the peak hour data for comparison and future use. 80. Any assumed signal retiming used in the analysis must be approved by the County. 81.The 2012 Build operations appear to have better operations than the signal optimization that was ro osed for the 2012 No-Build scenario. This does not seem intuitive and must p p be reevaluated/verified for accuracy. 82. The 2030 Build operation results show a southbound thru delay at the Northway Drive intersection.This does not seem intuitive when compared to the other scenarios and must be reevaluated/verified for accuracy. 83. Figure 12—The regional trail at the intersection of 55th Avenue and Xerxes is located on the south side and must be revised. 84. Figure 12—The Metro Transit bus stops along Bass Lake Road are shown incorrectly and must be revised. 85. Recommendations section—Although the report indicates that no off-site mitigation measures are recommended to be installed as a part of the Shingle Creek Crossing,there are multiple off-site improvements that are required including the lane reconfiguration • and intersections modifications at both the Northway Drive/Bass Lake Road intersection and the Shingle Creek Parkway/Bass Lake Road intersections.Both improvements require signal modifications and roadway/sidewalk/streetscape modifications. All items,recommendations and conditions are preliminary planned unit development review comments and are meant to represent and guide the future planning and development of site plans and the corresponding property plat and easements. All conditions are subject to further review, revision and approval as part of any future platting and site plan review. • gAengineeringWevelopment&planning\active development projects\shingle creek crossing 2010\rommunication\project review& conditions\110202_pud'review memo.doc MEMORANDUM • DATE: February 16,2011 TO: Gary Eitel,Director of Business and Development FROM: Steve Lillehaug,Director of Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: Addendum to Shingle Creek Crossing PUD Review,City of Brooklyn Center Public Works Department staff reviewed the following additional PUD documents submitted for review for the proposed Shingle Creek Crossing Development: • Shared-Use Parking Weekend Peak Parking Demand dated February 7,2011 The following are additional comments and conditions of approval for the referenced PUD documents: Parking Study: I The irregular property boundaries shown on the shared parking layout will not be acceptable. Revise property boundaries that are more typical and straight,minimizing property boundary irregularities seemingly drawn only to demonstrate a parking balance.Must use shared parking agreements to balance the needed parking in lieu of the very irregular property boundaries. 2. Each site must demonstrate an acceptable number of stalls based on ULI projections at each individual use peak time,based on City requirements or based on the identified shared parking for this individual's property peak parking time(not necessarily occurring at the weekend peak). • Then,a collective shared parking exercise must be performed to determine then pm weekend peak parking demand for the overall site. 3. Proposed parking deficiencies and issues that are not acceptable and need to be revised for each site: A. Existing building and retail shop—This building will have access to the parking on the east side of the building in the Site N parking area and must be taken into consideration. The proposed parking and shared parking for this site is scattered and not realistic(e.g. on the north side of the site and omission of any parking for customers on the east side of the building). B. Site B—Must identify the required parking for the individual site and show accordingly. C. Site D—Must identify the required parking for the site and show accordingly. D. Site E—This site relies too heavily on shared parking,and the proposed parking for this site is scattered and not realistic. E. Site N—The required parking layout of the parking for this site is not realistic due to the required parking encroachment by Walmart into the realistic property boundary area north of Site N and the need to show parking on the east side of the existing building/retail shops in this same area.Proposed parking for Site N must be revised. F. Sites G,H,I and J—The proposed parking layout for these sites is not realistic and must be revised. All items,recommendations and conditions are preliminary planned unit development review comments and are meant to represent and guide the future planning and development of site plans and the corresponding property plat and easements.All conditions are subject to further review,revision and approval as part of any future platting and site plan review. • Member Ka Y Lasman introduced the following resolution and moved its . adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 99-37 RESOLUTION REGARDING DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 99001 SUBMITTED BY TALISMAN BROOKDALE, LLC. WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 99001 submitted by Talisman Brookdale, LLC proposes a rezoning from C-2 (Commerce) to PUD/C-2 of the Brookdale Regional Shopping Center which is botmded on the north'by County Road 10, on the east and south by T. H. 100 and on the west by Xerxes Avenue North; and WHEREAS, this proposal comprehends the rezoning of the above mentioned property and site and building plan approval for the expansion, redevelopment and rejuvenation y of the Brookdale Regional Shopping Center to include the following.; 1. The reconfiguration of the west end of the mall including an 89,650 sq. ft. second floor to include a 20 screen, 4,252 seat theater; • 2. An approximate 13,200 sq. ft. addition to the north entrance to the mall for two restaurant sites; 3. Aa approximate 13,000 sq. ft. addition for general retail use and revised mall entry way along the southerly side of the complex adjacent to Dayton's; 4. A 4,650 sq. ft. freestanding Applebee's restaurant building along Xerxes Avenue North, northerly of the 56th Avenue entrance to the Brookdale. Center; 5. Conceptual approval, subject to further Planning Commission and City Council review and approval, of four additional freestanding restaurant . and/or retail buildings to be located around the perimeter of the shopping center; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on February 25, 1999, when a staff report and public testimony regarding-the rezoning and site and building plan were received; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. • 99001 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 99-02 on February 25, 1999; and • RESOLUTION NO. 99-37 WHEREAS, the City Council considered Application No. 99001 at its March 8, 1999 meeting; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the rezoning and site and building plan request in light of all testimony received, the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in Section 35-208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the provisions of the Planned Unit Development ordinance contained in Section 35-355, the City's Comprehensive Plan and the Planning Commission's recommendation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City, of Brooklyn Center to approve Application No. 990,01 submitted by Talisman Brookdale, LLC in light of the following considerations: 1. The rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section • of the City's Zoning Ordinance and will allow for the redevelopment and rejuvenation of the Brookdale Regional Mall which is a unique development within the City of Brooklyn Center and whose viability is considered to be vital to the stabilization of other commercial properties within the community. 2. The rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal will allow for the utilization of the land in question in a manner which is compatible with, complimentary to and of comparable intensity to adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on surrounding land. 3. The utilization of the property as proposed under the rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal will conform with city ordinance standards for the most part with the exception of the following allowed variations from the zoning ordinance which are considered reasonable standards to apply to this proposal: • Allow 5 ft. rather than 15 ft. greeenstrips at certain locations where an appropriate 3 to 3 'A ft. high decorative masonry wall shall be installed to offset negative effects (this standard has been allowed in other areas within the city). RESOLUTION NO. 99-37 • Allow a 35 ft., or non-major thoroughfare setback for certain out building locations based on variances that have been allowed for other commercial buildings along major thoroughfares and seem appropriate in this location as well. • Allow a 4.5 parking spaces pe; 1,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable area rather than the 5.5 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area required based on the shared parking analysis provided-and on Urban Land Institute Methodology indicating a maximum of 5,133 parking spaces as being needed for the Brookdale Mall given the _ mix of uses and square footages proposed in order to meet the maximum weekday and weekend hourly demand, which is also in keeping with at least two major regional malls in the area. • Allow the 60 ft. wide parking dimension standard for 9Q degree • parking rather than the 63 ft. required separation based on the fact that Brookdale has previously been allowed to have the 60 ft. parking standard and it appears that it would work in this situation. • Allow two freestanding signs up to 320 sq. ft. in area along T. H. 100 based on the uniqueness of the size, diversity of uses and significance of Brookdale.Mall. • Allow an increase from 15 percent to 20 percent of the allowable restaurant use without requiring additional parking at Brookdale based on the uniqueness of Brookdale, the,mix of uses and dynamics of multiple stops per person at the Center. 4: The rezoning and Planned Unit Development proposal are considered compatible with the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the city. 5.- The rezoning and Planned Unit Development appear to be a good utilization of the property under consideration and the redevelopment and rejuvenation of Brookdale Regional Mall are an important long range use for the existing property and are considered to be an asset to the community. RESOLUTION NO. 99-37 6. In light of the above considerations, it is believed that the guidelines for evaluating rezonings contained in Section 35-208 of the City's Zoning Ordinance are met and that the proposal is, therefore, in the best interest of the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Cquncil of the City of Brooklyn Center that approval of Application No. 99001 be subject to the following conditions and considerations: 1. The 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 and utility 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 based on cost estimates shall be submitted prior to the issuance of building permits to assure completion of all approved site improvements. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop or on-ground mechanical equipmeat,shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The buildings and building additions 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 new landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery, which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances with the exception of allowing two freestanding suns up to 320 sq. ft. in area along T. H_ 100. 8. Plan approval acknowledges a proof of parking for the Brookdale Shopping Center based on:providing 5,700 parldng spaces on site • RESOLUTION NO. 99-37 The applicants are allowed to retain the existing parking configuration except where required modifications are to be made based on building expansions or additions.. New parking lot construction or reconfiguration shall require concrete parking delineators as approved by the City Engineer. 9. The applicant shall submit as built surveys of the property, improvements and utility service lines prior to release of the performance guarantee. 10. The property owner shall enter in an easement agreement for maintenance and inspection of utility and storm drainage systems as approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 11. All work performed and materials used for construction of utilities shall conform to the City of Brooklyn Center's standard specifications and details. • 12. Approval of the application is subject to the review and approval of the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission with respect to storm drainage systems. Effective compensating storage shall be approved prior to the construction and filling for the proposed building No. 5 on the site plan. 13. The applicant shall enter into a development agreement with the Ci ty of Brooklyn Center to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior ` to the issuance of building permits. Said agreement shall acknowledge the various modifications to city rdinances and the rationale for allowing such tY su deviations by the City Council and the conditions of approval to assure compliance with the approved development plans. 14. Plan approval is granted for the Applebee's Restaurant building as presented'(Building No. 2 on the site plan). 15. Conceptual approval only is granted for three other out buildings shown on the site plan as Building No.' 3 Building No. 4 and Build' g N . 5. Building ,, mo 0 Planning Commission review and City Council approval in the form of a Plann 7 Unit Development amendment shall be obtained prior to the • issuance of building permits for these buildings. RESOLUTION NO. 99-37 16. The costs for traffic signals at the 55th Avenue and 56th Avenue intersections with Xerxes Avenue shall be the responsibility of the,:,. applicant. 17. The plans shall be modified to show: a. A 3 ft. to 3 'fz ft. high decorative masonry wall in locations other than along T. H. 100 where greenstrips are less than 15 ft. b. The elimination of the access from die perimeter road to-the parking lot east of Building No. 3. C. The location of the Shingle Creek Regional Corridor Trail through the Brookdale parking lot. • d. The removal of Building No. I which is not part of the conceptual approval granted at this time. 18. Applicant shall enter into a development agreement, in a form approved by the City Manager and the City Attorney, that assures that adequate provision will be made to accommodate public .mass transit circulating through the parking lot of the center and to allow for passengers to be dropped off and picked up at the center. The applicant shall not be re q uired to provide space or accommodations for mass transit vehicles parking, stacking, or laying over; for parking of privately owned vehicles of mass transit patrons; or for the transfer of passengers between mass transit vehicles. March 8, 1999 Date May ATTEST: City Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Ed Nelson and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted • in favor thereof: Myrna Kragness; Kay Tasman, 'Ed Nelson, and Robert Peppe; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. I I luu I Iiih I Mi i Gha l air[ I Ilk I!tfi 11 JAI II • I I IV I l lit i "W ``. Ii�� cr. r't}i (. , ' �7 I [jr ;t • t •(t ,llta ( t(l I f j it � L {�{l ! {{.,t • i {t•, 1;�t1 ,t , 1�. E.l�#�. !� I ,•':� .t. d )r ,i�l , �;�1 �. tt . , � � ,t•i'�{�fl,l , 1 t 1 ! }r!� •� . ��t.:,�t!-t • � !�;. {tt1;l � t.l�lll t �,,�+ t ((#• +.f• f�i t�(: � t( itt,,.,t•t ► >tl tt� t� It+i•'I t!1 ;1 i111'1ili� 1!•,�+�t1�,!! �'- ( � {ri�,l•#,• r„ l' �•+,: ,r �,, rr f+ i t , ; {{� ., rt t �1, �e ( =t� y -{l: ff . . t�l .11 ti{! ,•r. L.�tt i �•!t rll �' li t•1• ! it • �' ('+.,1 i ,� �jri f j • i�••tjtl/,t/�: 1 1 �. Hill '• t {1, !I f(( �-� }•'!,t Itit(�;#,Ir,�'i�'� .•,(�l.I�f,�i; �+ +:•La t i�' rte( ,1(t.,.i��tu:I,, �tta :tt ., e „ tilt�fl�:�All;,.' "�ktlrl„ its ( EDI !- q r.t.,� �•i . :� q , slam t. . • ... .r • ,u uu u , ',�,. ,', ,uu Is r•`� , n,.un w , , , . �.• y� , m f,�f p �� un,n..E, ,� ,� ., S WL!turuuumuurur,�. 1 N h off u •,...uiTr.�..l ,� � f„ f um „ f,.,.,.,.,„ litillip 111MM.W.•. , , f is MM . h b a n� ., ,f , .r�; .. � n, t •rr ,uru,.,f r � ►''� 0 0 .1.0 1. .nmm�un.o nn•n • � , ..n.•nuu unu,u.. `l ' .,; _ Kimley Hom • D and Associates, Inc. Memorandum r dum To: Loren Van Der Slik, Gatlin Development Company Inc. From: Brandon Bourdon, P.E. Brett Wood Chris Iser Date: January 20,2011 Subject: Shingle Creek Crossing Shared-Use Parking Analysis Brooklyn Center, Minnesota . Kimley-Horn and Associates was retained by the Gatlin Development Company to analyze projected parking demands for the proposed redevelopment opportunity at Brookdale Center.Shingle Creek Crossing is the name of the proposed project.The impetus behind the analysis was a comparison of parking demands from nationally accepted shared use methodologies and the off-street parking requirements of the City of Brooklyn Center code of ordinances. The shared parking demand for Shingle Creek Crossing was analyzed using shared-use methodology and national parking accumulation rates as outlined by the Urban Land Institute (ULI)and the Institute of Transportation Engineers(ITE).The parking demand calculated in this analysis represents the minimum number of parking spaces that should be accommodated within the site—assuming consistent parking supply policies. This technical memorandum documents the general framework for the parking demand analysis and summarizes the assumptions,calculations and results. • �- Kimley-Hom Shingle Creek Crossing,January 20,2011,Pg.2 and Associates, Inc. Project Understanding The proposed redevelopment of the Brookdale Center is a Town Center style shopping development bounded by Trunk Highway 100, Bass Lake Road (CSAH 10),and Xerxes Avenue N.The proposed redevelopment plan for Shingle Creek Crossing includes retail, bank,fast-food restaurant and family restaurant land uses.The proposed land use intensities for the Shingle Creek Crossing are provided in Table 1. Table 1—Land Use Intensity Land Use Intensity Units Retail 552,178 Square feet Bank 7,700 Square feet Family Restaurant 44,272 Square feet This analysis is a cumulative analysis,reviewing these proposed land use • conditions to measure the overall parking demands for the site. The shared-use methodology assumes that one parking space may be available for two or more land uses without conflict or encroachment; especially in more mixed-use development areas where land uses typically generate off-setting demand peaking conditions.The result is often demand for parking spaces that is generally less than the demand generated by separate freestanding developments of similar size and character. This analysis is based on the Site Plan Exhibit dated January 20,2011, in which a total of 3,034 parking spaces are provided. Exhibit 1 that provides pertinent site plan information is included in the Appendix.This exhibit also shows the most current day-lighting configuration for Shingle Creek through the northeast corner of the site between Building Q and the existing Kohl's Tract. In addition to the land uses identified in Table 1 above,there are also two existing businesses(Sears and Midas)on site.The Sears has 180,669 s.f.and 1,069 available parking spaces.City code requires 994 parking spaces(5.5 spaces per 1,000 s.f.),so this use is adequately parked. • The Midas has 8,254 s.f.and 45 available parking spaces.According to city code,an auto service station requires three spaces for each enclosed bay, • Klm�ey'HOrn Shingle Creek Crossing,January 20,2011,Pg.3 CERand AssOCiates, Inc. plus one space for each day shift employee, plus a minimum of two spaces for service vehicles,and one additional space for each service vehicle over two in number.There are eight service bays, plus an enclosed lobby/cashier area at the Midas. If we assume that there are two employees for every bay plus two employees inside the lobby,there would be 18 employees.The required parking would be 24 spaces related to the service bays, 18 spaces related to the employees,and 2 spaces for service vehicles.This total is 44 spaces,which indicates that the site is adequately parked. Parking Accumulation Rates The peak parking accumulation rates used in the shared parking assessment were taken from national average rates typically used in shared use parking studies for each specific land use.These rates were also compared with local parking requirements to determine the difference in required parking on-site. • Local off-street parking requirements were obtained from the City of Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances, Chapter 35 (Zoning),Section 35-704 (Minimum Parking Spaces Required).The actual zoning for the Shingle Creek Crossing site is PUD-C2,which indicates that the site is a planned unit development area with commercial intentions.The requirements for parking for a PUD zoned development are stated as follows: Parking provided for uses within a PUD shall be consistent with the parking requirements in section 35-704 of the City of Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances unless the developer can demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that a lesser standard should be permitted on the grounds of the complementarity of peak parking demands by the uses within the PUD. The parking requirements outlined by the Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances(Section 35-704)are as follows: 1. Eating and drinking places: One space for every two seats,and one space for every two employees on the average maximum shift. 2. Other retail stores or centers and financial institutions: Eleven • spaces for the first 2,000 square feet of gross floor area or fraction thereof;5.5 spaces for each additional 1,000 square feet of gross • (� Kimley-Horn Shingle Creek Crossing,January 20,2011,Pg.4 and Associates, Inc. floor area exceeding 2,000 square feet. In multi-tenant retail centers no additional parking.spaces beyond those required by the retail formula shall be required of restaurant uses which altogether occupy not more than 15%of the gross floor area of the center.The parking formula for eating and drinking establishments shall apply proportionately to the seats and employees occupying space in the center over and above 15%of the gross floor area. In the case of the Shingle Creek Crossing development,while restaurant uses do not account for more than 15%of the retail uses,we are accounting for them separately because most of the on-site restaurants are free- standing. This analysis also evaluated parking demands based on nationally accepted parking accumulation rates, which have been used in similar studies and sites throughout the country. National average rates are developed based. • on actual field measurements of parking accumulation,and more closely resemble the actual parking conditions found in mixed-use developments. The main source for national average rates used in this analysis was the Urban Land Institute's(ULI)Shared Parking Manual,Second Edition. The ULI parking accumulation rates were used for the purposes of this analysis,as they most accurately reflect parking accumulation conditions for shared parking conditions,as prescribed by ULI.These rates differentiate between guest and employee parking. This is beneficial when analyzing shared use parking due to the variation in peaking patterns between the two types of users. This concept was taken into account when analyzing peak demand on the site. Local development ordinances typically require parking to sustain a single ,land use,which is not indicative of a shared use parking strategy. The sole use of these rate sources often times results in overdevelopment of parking facilities in mixed-use developments,which leads to large areas of unused parking. Over sized parking facilities result in several negative impacts including increased storm water impacts,additional construction costs associated with building underutilized facilities, reduced areas for storm water treatment and landscaping,and'a reduction in the potential area • available for development. Kim(ey-Horn Shingle Creek Crossing,January 20,2011,Pg.5 and Associates, Inc. The parking demand ratios compared in this analysis include those from ULI, as well as the requirements per the City of Brooklyn Center Code of Ordinances. These ratios are shown in Table 2. Table 2—Parking Demand Ratios(Weekday) Weekday Accumulation Rates Land Use User ULI City Units Retail Employees 0.8 5.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft. Patrons 3.1 Per 1,000 sq.ft. Bank Employees 1.6 5.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft. Patrons 3.0 Per 1,000 sq.ft. Fast-Food Employees 2.25 0.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft./per employee Restaurant Patrons 12.75 0.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft./per seat Family Employees 1.5 0.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft./per employee . Restaurant Patrons 9.0 0.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft./per seat Weekend Accumulation Rates -Land Use User ULI City Units Retail Employees 0.9 5.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft. Patrons 3.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft. Employees 1.6 Per 1,000 sq.ft. Bank patrons 3.0 5.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft. Fast-Food Employees 2.0 0.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft./per employee Restaurant Patrons 12.0 0.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft./per seat Family Employees 2.25 0.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft./per employee Restaurant Patrons 12.75 0.5 Per 1,000 sq.ft./per seat The corresponding parking demand on the Shingle Creek Crossing site is shown in Table 3. These values are based on a "Single Use Methodology", which does not account.for shared parking between land uses. Kimley-Horn Shingle Creek Crossing,January 20,2011,Pg.6 and Associates, Inc. Table 3—Parking Demand (Single Use Methodology) Weekday Land Use User ULI city Retail Employees 442 3,037 Patrons 1,712 Bank Employees 12 42 Patrons 23 Family Employees 66 53 Restaurant Patrons 398 642 Total 2,653 3,774 Weekend • Land Use User ULI City Retail Employees 497 3,037 Patrons 1,933 Bank Employees 12 42 Patrons 23 Family Employees 100 53 Restaurant Patrons 564 642 Total 3,129 3,774 From the table,the parking demand calculated from the national average rate is.several hundred spaces lower than that required by the local governing code of ordinances for both the weekday and weekend conditions.This is without accounting for the effects of shared parking or any type of trip reduction factors. In the previous parking analysis conducted for the Brookdale Center site, a regional shopping center site was analyzed to determine actual parking demands for peak holiday parking accumulation.The actual parking demand ratio from physically collected data on the site was 4.3 parking spaces per 1,000 s.f.,which is much closer to the national average rates iprescribed by the Urban Land Institute.That study went on to document how the similar site lobbied for an even lower rate (3.97 spaces per 1,000 • �'! KimleY-Horn Shingle Creek Crossing,January 20,2011,Pg.7 and Associates,Inc. square feet)to account for the fact that holiday peak conditions only account for approximately two percent of conditions during the year.Given this comparison and the actual data presented in that study,we feel it is acceptable to use the lower parking accumulation ratios prescribed by ULL The following sections describe the process of analyzing shared parking on the site, which aims to reduce the overall parking footprint further to account for offsetting peak conditions between differing land uses. Trip Reductions The rates presented in the previous section are developed under the assumption that each trip is generated by a vehicle with a single driver, making one stop at one destination,and driving a personal automobile. There is potential that some of the trips generated by the Shingle Creek Crossing will come from alternative modes of transportation(such as transit,walking,and cycling).The City's comprehensive plan states that over • 40%of the transit trips to Brooklyn Center were traveling to or from the Brookdale Mall site. The existing pedestrian volumes that were observed when the Brookdale Mall was in operation as documented in the, "Brookdale Mall Expansion Traffic Impact Study"completed by Spack Consulting in 2007 were reviewed. Based upon a review of the pedestrian volumes and heavy use of transit in the area,a four percent reduction in parking demand was assumed to account for multi-modal trips. The corresponding parking demand on the Shingle Creek Crossing site adjusted to account for multi-modal trips is shown in Table 4. These values are based on a "Single Use Methodology",which does not account for shared parking between land uses. • Kimley-Horn Shingle Creek Crossing,January 20,2011,Pg-8 and Associates, Inc. Table 4—Parking Demand Adjusted For Multi-Modal Trips— Single Use Methodology Weekday ULI Transit Reduced Land Use User Required Reduction Total Retail Employees 442 18 424 Patrons 1,712 69 1,643 Bank Employees 12 0 12 - Patrons 23 1 22 Family Employees 66 2 64 Patrons 398 15 383 Total 2,653 105 2,548 Weekend ULI Transit Reduced Land Use User Required Reduction Total Retail Employees 497 20 477 Patrons 1,933 78 1,855 Bank Employees 12 0 12 Patrons 23 1 22 Family Employees 100 4 96 Patrons 564 22 542 Total 3,129 125 3,004 _ Time-of-Day Adjustment Factors A shared parking analysis relies on time-of-day adjustment factors which represent the variations in parking accumulation at each land use type.This . variation in parking demand allows for the sharing of a single parking space between multiple uses. For example, a restaurant whose peak period is in the evening can share its spaces with a retail store that does most of its business during the day.The ULI Shared Parking Manual provides time-of- day adjustment factors for each type land use utilized in this analysis.The time-of-day adjustment factors can be found in the Appendix of this memorandum. Based on the land uses in the Shingle Creek Crossing,the peak hour is expected to occur in the early afternoon during the weekday and weekend peak conditions. • • Kimley-Horn Shingle Creek Crossing,January20,2011,Pg.9 and Associates,Inc. Peak Parking Demands - Shared Parking Peak parking demand represents the total number of parking spaces required to meet peak parking accumulation with an effective parking supply. The effective parking supply allows a small cushion of spaces(15%) over the peak parking accumulation to provide for operation fluctuations, incorrectly parked vehicles,vehicle maneuvers,and vacancies created by reserving spaces for specific users,such as disabled parking. The small cushion also reduces the need to search the entire system for the last few parking spaces,thus reducing patron frustration. Based on guidance by ULI, this effective supply cushion is already factored into their prescribed rates, which are shown in Table 2. Peak parking demand calculations were performed based on the land use mix, development intensities,and preferred travel modes as outlined in this report. As discussed previously, parking generation rates from ULI Shared Parking were used and then applied by time-of-day. • Based on this shared arkin analysis,the results in Table 5 were p g determined for the Shingle Creek Crossing. Table 5—Shared-Use Results based on ULI rates Weekday ULI Sharing Reduced Land Use User (w/Transit) Reduction Total Retail Employees 424 0 424 Patrons 1,643 0 1,643 Bank Employees 12 0 12 Patrons 22 11 11 Family Employees 64 0 64 Restaurant Patrons 1 383 1 38 1 345 Total 2,548 49 2,499 Kiml%Hom shingle Creek Crossing,January 20,2011,Pg.10 and Associates, Inc. Table 5(cont'd)—Shared-Use Results based on ULI rates Weekend ULI Sharing Reduced Land Use User (w/Transit) Reduction Total Employees 477 0 477 Retail Patrons 1,855 0 1,855 Employees 12 12 0 Bank Patrons 22 22 0 Family Employees 96 0 96 Restaurant Patrons 542 190 352 Total 3,004 224 2,780 The results of the shared-use methodology(based on ULI rates and time of day adjustment factors)show that the reduced parking demand for • weekdays is2,499 spaces(a 1.9% reduction in supply)and for weekends is 2,780 spaces(a 7.5%reduction in supply).These results indicate that the uses on site(retail and restaurant primarily) do not have drastically off- setting peaks,and therefore the reduction in supply for shared parking is only one to seven percent of the total required parking supply. To provide additional detail regarding projected parking demand on an individual parking area basis,the weekend shared ULlparking demand was calculated by building. The individual parking demand was then compared to the number of stalls supplied for each building. This information is presented in Table 6. This information shows that there are very few parking areas where the parking demand is anticipated to exceed supply during the weekend peak hour. During these periods adjacent underutilized parking areas will be utilized without a significant negative impact on operations. We also looked at each portion of the site to determine how shared parking might reasonably operate on the site.We can't expect the entire site to operate as one shared system,given the size of the site and walking barriers like the north-south interior spine roads.Exhibit 1, included in the Appendix,shows the anticipated location of the shared parking as well as the anticipate parking surplus or deficit during the weekend peak hour of • �_� Kimley"rlofn Shingle Creek Crossing,January 20,2011,Pg.11 and Associates, Inc. Table 6-Parking Comparison By Tract Excess ULI Parking Building Parking Provided Required Spaces by Tract Land Use (sq.ft.) (spaces) Parking* Tract Wal-Mart Retail 152,036 761 642 119 Existing Building Retail 123,242 519 520 -1 Family A Restaurant 6,033 55 61 -6 B Bank 7,700 55 0 55 C Retail 14,490 64 61 3 Family D Restaurant 7,105 61 72 -11 Family E Restaurant 7,885 69 80 -11 Family F(City Owned) Restaurant 10,905 50 110 -60 G,H,I,&1 Retail 45,020 203 190 13 K Retail 10,735 48 45 3 L Retail 10,920 49 46 3 • ^ Family M Restaurant 7,475 60 33 27 N Retail 53,850 242 227 15 P Retail 31,205 132 132 0 Q Retail 35,680 150 151 -1 Family Applebee's Restaurant -4,869 62 49 13 Kohl's Retail 75,000 454 317 137 *Based on peak weekend parking period(2 pm) parking demand for each of the parking subareas located on the site. The surplus or deficit information is based on the projected shared parking requirements from this study and the proposed parking provided from the most recent site plan. ■ The existing retail building, Wal-Mart, and building N will operate together—these three uses have a 133 space surplus. • The existing Applebee's and buildings A, B,G, H, I,J,and K will operate together—these eight uses have a 78 space surplus. ■ The existing Kohl's and building F will operate together—these two uses have a surplus of 77 spaces. • ■ Buildings L, M, P,and Qwill operate together—these four uses have a surplus of 29 spaces. Kimley-Horn shingle Creek Crossing,January 20,2011,Pg.12 ❑ and Associates Inc. ■ Buildings C, D,and E will operate together—these three uses have a deficit of 19 spaces. Buildings C, D, E, L, M,P,and Q will share spaces during the peak parking periods since there is a deficit in one area and a surplus in the other. Shared parking in this area is reasonable because the parking that would be shared is located close to buildings C, D,and E, a pedestrian crossing is provided across the east-west aligned internal roadway,and traffic volumes are anticipated to be relatively low on the internal roadway. Exhibit 1 shows the anticipated area where spaces will be shared. Conclusion The comparison of ULI parking accumulation rates and City of Brooklyn Center off-street parking requirements indicate that the site will need approximately 994 less parking spaces than required by city zoning codes. The parking demand on-site is driven by weekend usage, as that is the • highest point of the demand projections.There is not a drastic reduction in parking spaces when applying shared use parking methodologies,with weekend parking reductions around 7.0 percent of total supply.Given proposed land use mixture,this site should only require 2,780 spaces to accommodate peak demand conditions. This equates to a parking ratio of 4.6 stalls per 1000 s.f.for the described land uses. • IRI ii, - I�$ TRAL T7 mir -� I U�l 111111111 .e. x — — i' � ., �IIIIIIIIIIIIIII Y�IF �T� ' _� � t uunnu 1� t1J If .f /t, • . IC fill- 'Ill" r clrl r. y • r __ Y ���� _� � _ _ � .may _ s rX Brooklyn Center Zoning rF r Y © c I Dz R - � '~ ZONING 0157 RIMS �� -� i FZ_1033Cc 1„ is �.ocruay.r re+cc INDUTRY CtlRe.'P.�-°UOtC2 Rt it U'!A T"Y(.C][aCC WI�GI".1rT Cf.". ®?UD93 RE `•-C '1f YAN.E(lJI6 YIC.CpC 1C CX 9?CCRLLtYtD P II ..1111111111 F 12u +A. cn,.. d' JYC E TStA[O ACiQC21YA C -UDR I RB IIIIIIIIII @O11n tllEllllll � c+c,.l �` "'�1 '� NGA-{• Y C[ TK'AE:CPNCY JV IIIIIIIIII 10111 11 -.,`11 111111 =AM-Rc pDD'R? A.' u1YNL[,R.C m(,un+r hn n an=d IIP IIIDII III III A >:arcs ' INmI .`�` _ (IIIIIIIIII 1? �s1n�71xFn I�I�111 1111;11 s aw. c.. o� Anuh.s=�cra9ac"ncu 01 �Rt 2 Critical Mier 6ounJary ®Centtal GomrrtErce Eistict � a c b � city Parks c • adoption: Member Kuykendall introduced the following resolution and moved its PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-02 RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2011-003 SUBMITTED BY LOREN VAN DER SLIK(FOR GATLIN DEVELOMPENT COMPANY) WHEREAS,Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003 submitted by Loren Van Der Slik(For Gatlin Development Company)proposes a Planned Unit Development Amendment to allow the following changes to the Brookdale redevelopment plan: 1. The demolition of approximately 750,000 sq. ft. of the mall including the former J C Penney's,Mervyn's and Macy's stores. 2. The renovation of approximately 122,000 sq. ft. of the mall located north of Sears with architectural changes to provide exterior identity and access while maintaining an indoor mall component. 3. The planned development of a 398,794 sq. ft. of new retail space laid out in a Town Center theme that includes a major anchor retailer with groceries,three junior box retailers,four restaurant pad sites,and six smaller retail sites for retail/service multi- tenant buildings. • 4. The day-lighting of Shingle Creek and enhancements to on-site storm water management, landscaping and lighting; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 99-37, established a PUD/C-2 zoning classification for the Brookdale properties on March 8, 1999 and included the following modifications to the development standards for the redevelopment of the Brookdale Planned Unit Development: - Allowed a 5 ft. rather than 15 ft. green strip at certain locations with a 3 to 3 V2 ft. decorative masonry wall. - Allowed 4.5 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable area. - Allowed 60 ft. wide parking dimensions for standard 90 degrees parking and aisle width. - Allowed two freestanding signs up to 320 sq. ft. in area along Hwy 100. - Allowed an increase of 15 percent to 20 percent restaurant use without requiring additional parking; and, WHEREAS,Exhibit A, attached to this resolution identifies the commercial uses and intensity of development included in the 1999 PUD application and references the 2004 PUD amendment for a Dairy Queen Chill& Grill, and the 2007 PUD amendment involving the demolition of the Mervyn's site and construction of a 184,000 sq. ft. Super Walmart; and 1 WHEREAS, the applicant has provided the following PUD plans and exhibits which provide the framework for this Town Center redevelopment to be known as Shingle Creek Crossing: Master Plan, Site Plan, Phasing Plan, Existing Grading Exhibit, Proposed Grading Plan, Storm Sewer Plan, Water Utility Plan, Sanitary Sewer Plan, Lighting Plan, Landscaping Plan, Circulation Exhibit, Shared Parking Exhibit, Exterior Elevations, Shingle Creek Exhibits for DayLighting / Water Features / Bridge Elevation, rendering of the development, Roadway Cross Sections, and Signage Program; and WHEREAS, the proposed Planned Unit Development has been reviewed and found to meet the following PUD criteria for approval of a PUD amendment: 1. The plan is compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the PUD ordinance; 2. The plan is consistent of the plan with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 3. The plan will positively influence/impact the neighborhood in which it is to be located; and 4. The plans and exhibits demonstrates the adequacy of internal site organization, uses, densities, circulation, parking facilities, public facilities, recreational areas, open spaces, and buffering and landscaping. • WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on February 17, 2011, when a staff report and public testimony regarding the Planned Unit Development Amendment were received; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Planned Unit Development Amendment request in light of all testimony received and the provisions of the Planned Unit Development ordinance contained in Section 35-355 and the City's Comprehensive Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Application No. 2011-003 submitted by Loren Van Der Slik(for Gatlin Development Company) be approved in light of the following considerations: L The Planned Unit Development Amendment proposal is compatible with the standards, purposes and intent of the Planned Unit Development section of the City's Zoning Ordinance and will allow for the redevelopment of a significant portion of the Brookdale Regional Mall site which is considered to be vital to the stabilization of other commercial properties within the community. 2. The Planned Unit Development Amendment proposal will allow for the • utilization of the land in question in a manner which is compatible with, 2 complimentary to and of comparable intensity to adjacent land uses as well as those permitted on surrounding land. 3. The utilization of the property as proposed under the Planned Unit Development Amendment proposal will conform with city ordinance standards for the most part with the exception of the following allowed variations from the zoning ordinance which are considered reasonable standards to apply to this proposal: • Allow 5 ft. rather than 15 ft. green strips at certain locations where an appropriate 3 to 3 i/2 ft. high decorative masonry wall shall be installed to offset negative effects along Xerxes Avenue. • Allows a reduction in the 15 foot parking setback and 35 foot building setback along Bass Lake Road to offset the dedication of additional right of way for the trail improvements to replace the current trail easements. • Allow 4.5 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable retail area and 10 per 1,000 sq.ft. of restaurant area rather than the 5.5 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area and one per two seats and employee on a major shift for restaurants. • Allow the 60 ft. wide parking dimension standard for 90 degree parking rather than the 63 ft. and a 52.5 ft wide parking dimension • for 60 degree parking rather than the 57 ft. • Allow two freestanding signs up to 320 sq. ft. in area along T. H. 100 and two Town Center identification signs (one additional) along Bass Lake Road and one Town Center identification sign on Xerxes Avenue. • Allow an increase from 15 percent to 20 percent of the allowable restaurant use without requiring additional parking at Brookdale based on the uniqueness of Brookdale, the mix of uses and dynamics of multiple stops per person at the Center. 4. The Planned Unit Development Amendment proposal is considered compatible with the City's Comprehensive Plan for this area of the city. 5. The Planned Unit Development Amendment appears to be a good utilization of the property under consideration and the Shingle Creek Crossing redevelopment and is considered to be an asset to the community. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that approval of Application No. 2011-003 be subject to the following conditions and considerations: 3 • 1. Final site plan review by the Planning Commission and approval by the City Council in accordance with Section 35-230 Plan Approval of the Zoning Ordinance to include but not necessarily limited to parking, building placement, access, internal circulation, pedestrian walkways, site lighting, landscaping, utility connections, architectural treatment, and building signage. 2. Final review and approval of architectural review guidelines and standards of the Planned Unit Development Plans and Exhibits. 3. The removal of the Kohl's site from this PUD application with understanding that the site remains under the provisions of the 1999 PUD standards until such time as a PUD amendment is processed to include the site into the overall Shingle Creek Crossing PUD. 4. Review and approval of storm water management and drainage conceptual improvements by Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission with final approval before the issuance of demolition and building permits. 5. Review and approval of the proposed intersection improvements at Shingle Creek Parkway and Bass Lake Road by He County. 6. Review and approval of the necessary grading plans, water and sanitary sewer utility plans, storm water management-and erosion control plans, and intersection designs by the City Engineer as a condition to the issuance of permits for construction, grading, or demolition. 7. The applicant shall enter into a PUD development agreement with the City . of Brooklyn Center to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. Said agreement shall acknowledge the various modifications to City ordinances, the PUD requirements for site plan review, the framework of the PUD (Development Plans and Exhibits), cross parking and access agreements, responsibilities for private infrastructure and roadways, and conditions of approval to assure compliance with the approved development plans. 3-/0-11 Date Chair ATTEST: Secr The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Morey and upon vote being taken thereon,the following voted in favor thereof: Chair Sean Rahn, Commissioners Kuykendall, Leino,Morey, Parks and Schonning. and the following voted against the same: None • whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 4 • Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-02 Exhibit A On March 8, 1999,the City Council accepted the Planning Commission recommendation and adopted Resolution No. 99-37 which approved the Planned Unit Development/Rezoning application to change the zoning of the Brookdale Mall properties from C-2 (Commerce) District to PUD/C-2. The 1999 PUD development plans provided for the expansion,redevelopment and rejuvenation of Brookdale Center and included the following components: - the reconfiguration of the west end of the mall to include an 89,650 sq. ft. second floor to include a 20 screen,4,252 seat movie theater; - a 13, 200 sq. ft. addition to the north entrance to the mall for two restaurant sites and a new food court; - 13,000 sq. ft. addition for general retail use and revised entry way along the southerly side of the complex; - , a 4,650 sq. ft. freestanding Applebee's restaurant; and - conceptual approval for three other buildings shown on the plan as buildings No. 3 (west of the Northway entrance onto Bass Lake Road) and 4 and 5 (adjacent to the eastern entrance service road), subject to review and approval in the form of a PUD amendment by the Planning Commission and City Council; and the following PUD adjustments to the C-2 development standards were part of the 1999 PUD Development Plan: - Allowed a 5 ft. rather than 15 ft. green strip at certain locations with a 3 to 3 1/2 ft. decorative masonry wall. - Allowed 4.5 parking spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross leasable area. - Allowed 60 ft. wide parking dimensions for standard 90 degrees parking and aisle width. - Allowed two freestanding signs up to 320 sq. ft. in area along Hwy 100. - Allowed an increase of 15 percent to 20 percent restaurant use without requiring additional parking. On July 26, 2004 the City Council accepted the Planning Commission recommendation on a PUD amendment for a 4,195 sq. ft.Dairy Queen Grill and Chill restaurant on the site referenced as Building 3 (west of the Northway entrance onto Bass Lake Road.) That proposed development did not proceed and site remained an overflow parking area. On August 27,2007,the City Council accepted the Planning Commission recommendation and adopted Resolution No. 2007- 112,which approved an amendment to the PUD involving the demolition of the former Mervyn's(Donaldson's)Department Store to facilitate the construction of an 184,600 sq. ft. Walmart Super Center. The proposal involved the creation of a 14.27 acre lot and involved the closure of the Northway intersection(Mall entrance). • 5 Planning Commission Resolution No.2011-02 Exhibit A On August 27,2007,the City Council accepted the Planning Commission recommendation and adopted Resolution No. 2007- 112,which approved an amendment to the PUD involving the demolition of the former Mervyn's (Donaldson's) Department Store to facilitate the construction of an 184,600 sq. ft. Walmart Super Center. The proposal involved the creation of a 14.27 acre lot and involved the closure of the Northway intersection(Mall entrance). The proposed development was legally challenged by Sears under the terms and conditions of the Master Operating Agreement for the Brookdale Center and subsequently the application was withdrawn. In 2008-09, the Brookdale Mall properties were turned back to the lender, formal foreclosure proceedings occurred,the General Operations Agreement for the Mall expired, and the new property owner, Capmark Financial,retained a commercial real estate company to market the property. In 2010, Gatlin Development Company acquired the Macy's Site(former Dayton's lot) and entered into agreements with Capmark Financial to acquire the balance of the Mall, excluding the Sear's and Midas lots. • • 6 STo: Planning Commission Members From: Gary Eitel,Planning Commission Secretary Date: March 8,2011 Subject: Items on the March 10,2011 Planning Commission agenda Agenda Item No. 5— Mark Kemper, PLS 2011-002 Preliminary Plat/Subdivision approval of Storla Addition, a lot division to create a new residential lot at 6536 Willow Lane. Following the February 28U' Meeting, the applicant indicated that they were considering the option of submitting a request to City Council for a lot width variance from 75' to meet the minimum 10 foot side yard setback from the existing house. (0.5' SE corner and 1.72' SW corner). This adjustment could be made on the final plat if approved by the City Council Recommended Motion: It is the staff's recommendation that a motion be made to approve this application by adoption of • Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-01,A Resolution Regarding the Recommended Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002, A Request for Preliminary Plat Approval of 6536 Willow Lane(Storla Addition) subject to the conditions of approval outlined in the resolution. Attached is a copy of the proposed resolution. Agenda Item No.6. Loren Van Der Slik 2011-003 Planned Unit Development Amendment to the Brookdale C-2/PUD, the redevelopment of this regional shopping mall to a 65 acre Town Center commercial development to be known as Shingle Creek Crossings. Following the February 28a'Meeting,we did meet with the City Attorney on the draft resolution. The language on condition No. 7 has been amended to include (underlined areas added): The applicant shall enter into a PUD development agreement with the City of Brooklyn Center to be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. Said agreement shall acknowledge the various modifications to City ordinances, the PUD requirements for site plan review, the framework of the PUD (Development Plans and Exhibits), cross parking and access agreements, responsibilities for private infrastructure and roadways, and conditions of approval to assure compliance with the approved development plans. iAdditionally, we reviewed what changes to the Planned Unit Development Plan- should be considered as a major change to the PUD (i.e. require a formal public hearing review process) and what type of changes could be considered as a minor amendment and processed in conjunction with the Planning Commission's review and City Council's approval of a site plan the is consistent with the overall PUD theme and development concept. Also it was recommended that the City Council's execution of the PUD development agreement be deferred until either the March 28 or April I Ia' City Council meeting. This will allow the Planning Commission to complete its, review on the architectural guidelines and provide recommendations on the final architectural guidelines and standards. Recommended Motion: It is the staffs recommendation that a motion be made to approve this application by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-02,A Resolution Regarding Recommended . Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003,A Request for Planned Unit Development Amendment approval, Submitted by Loren Van Der Slik(For Gatlin Development Company) subject to the conditions of approval outlined in the resolution. Attached is a copy of the proposed resolution Agenda Item No.7 Discussion Items: • Review of 2011 Community Development Projects Brief review of the Draft 2011 Community Development Projects Map. April 6,2011 Joint City Council and Commission Meeting At the March 5h the City Council reconfirmed its commitment to the attached Mission,Values and Goals at its annual meeting with the City Manager and Department Heads. The annual meeting of the City Council and the Planning Commission,Housing Commission, Parks and Recreation meeting,is scheduled for Wednesday,April 60' at 7:00 . This annual meeting will also include a review of the City's Mission,Values and Goals and provides a opportunity to discuss opportunities on how the roles and responsibilities of the various Commissions can contribute towards achieving the Strategic and On Going Goals of the City. A review of 2010 Commission items, discussion on 2011 development activity projected, and discussion on the role of the Commission relating to the Council Goals will be scheduled for the March 17th Meeting. From this discussion,I believe that we can put together a brief power point presentation for the • Commission's review on March 31St before its presentation on April 6th. s i • MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION MARCH 10,2011 CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Rahn at 7:08 p.m. ROLL CALL Chair Sean Rahn, Commissioners Kara Kuykendall, Stan Leino, Rachel Morey, Michael Parks, and Stephen Schonning were present. Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission/Director of Business & Development, Gary Eitel, Planning and Zoning Specialist Tim Benetti, and Planning Commission Recording Secretary Rebecca Crass. Commissioner Morgan was absent and unexcused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES—FEBRUARY 17 2011 There was a motion by Commissioner Leino, seconded by Commissioner Morey, to approve the minutes of the February 17, 2011 meeting as submitted. The motion passed. Commissioner Kuykendall abstained since she was not at the meeting. • CHAIR'S EXPLANATION Chair Rahn explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions in these matters. APPLICATION NO. 2011-002 -MARK KEMPER PLS Chair Rahn introduced Application No. 2011-002,a request for Preliminary Plat/Subdivision approval of Storla Addition,to divide the single family lot located at 6536 Willow Lane into two single family lots. Mr. Eitel explained that there was a public hearing held at the February 17, 2011 Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Eitel presented the staff report commenting on the following: - Pictures of the existing house and proposed lot. - Exhibit of the floodplain map and reference that this neighborhood has been identified as having a 0.2% chance of flooding. - Reviewed the current nonconforming conditions of the existing residence (front yard setback encroachment of 2.39 feet for SW corner of the house and walkout elevation within the floodplain. 3-10-11 Page 1 - Noting that the lot width and lot area of the existing homestead would allow for two lots • which conform to the City's subdivision standards,that the 2007 street improvements provided a curb cut for the proposed lot and that the property has been assessed for two units. - Referenced discussions with the City Attorney that the nonconforming conditions of the existing residence do not need to be considered as part of this application, given that actions by subdivision neither expand nor provide an option to correct the nonconforming conditions. Indicated that the applicant has provided a letter requesting that the City Council consider a lot width variance from the subdivision ordinance,noting that this adjustment, if accepted by the City Council would be made on the final plat. ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-01 There was a motion by Commissioner Parks, seconded by Commissioner Leino,to recommend to the City Council that it approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-01 regarding the recommended disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2011-002, submitted by Mark Kemper, PLS for Preliminary Plat approval. Voting in favor: Chair Rahn, Commissioners Kuykendall, Leino, Morey,Parks, and • Schonning. And the following voted against the same: None Whereupon said resolution as declared duly passed and adopted. Planning Commission Resolution 2011-01 is made part of these minutes by attachment. The Council will consider the application at its March 14,2011 meeting. The applicant must be present. -Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Planning Commission will require that the application be returned to the Commission for reconsideration. APPLICATION NO. 2011-003 —LOREN VAN DER SLIK FOR GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. Chair Rahn introduced Application No. 2011-003,a request from Loren Van Der Slik for Gatlin Development Company, Inc., for a Planned Unit Development Amendment to the Brookdale C- 2/PUD,the redevelopment of this regional shopping mall to a 65 acre Town Center commercial development to be known as Shingle Creek Crossing. Mr. Eitel explained that following the public hearing at the February 17, 2011 Planning Commission meeting, staff met with the City Attorney to review a resolution and conditions approving Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003. He added that they also reviewed what changes to the PUD should be considered as a major change which would require another public hearing and review process, and what type of changes could be considered as a minor • amendment and processed in conjunction with the review and approval of a site plan that is 3-10-11 Page 2 i consistent with the overall PUD development concept. He briefly reviewed details of the proposed plan involved with the PUD redevelopment of Brookdale to be known as Shingle Creek Crossing that were discussed at the February 17, 2011 public hearing. Mr. Eitel pointed out the following plan changes as a result of issues and concerns identified at the February 17th public hearing: 56th Avenue/Xerxes entrance • Aesthetic improvements to the western entrance, continuation of streetscaping and street lighting, and enhancements to pedestrian walkways. • Reconfiguration of the parking areas adjoining Applebee's restaurant and the northern portion of the existing mall. • Boulevard drive to the outer service drive to Building A and Midis site. Building B • Boulevard drive adjacent to Building J. • An enlarged building pad with drive thru to represent a proposed bank site. Buildings D • A reduction in size of Building D to meet the parking ratio of 4.5 per 1,000 sq. ft.of retail and ten per 1,000 for restaurants. • Building Q • Relocation of the loading deck for Building Q. Shingle Creek Daylighting • Additional details on the aesthetic treatment of elements of the creek and day-lighting concepts have been included. • Continued work with Hennepin County on a full day-lighting of Shingle Creek option which will be considered within the next two to four weeks. Parking Lot Configuration The parking calculations and parking stalls for retail and restaurant uses have been organized into serviceable areas with excess parking stalls identified for each area. Building Signage Additional details on the signage package for freestanding and wall mounted signs. Mr. Eitel indicated that the execution of the PUD development agreement will be deferred until a future City Council meeting,which will allow the Planning Commission to complete the final review of the architectural guidelines and standards which will become part of the PUD agreement. Commissioner Parks asked for clarification on the different trees on the site. Mr. Eitel explained that the existing trees along County Road 10 belong to the City and the applicant plans to use the 3-10-11 Page 3 • same type of trees on the site as development takes place and will expand on that as things progress. ACTION TO REMOVE APPLICATION NO. 2011-003 FROM THE TABLE There was a motion by Commissioner Parks, seconded by Commissioner Morey,to remove Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003 from the table to open the application for approval. Voting in favor: Chair Rahn, Commissioners Kuykendall,Leino,Morey,Parks,and Schonning. And the following voted against the same: None ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2011-02 There was a motion by Commissioner Kuykendall, seconded by Commissioner Morey,to recommend to the City Council that it approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 2011-02 regarding the recommended disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2011-003, submitted by Loren Van Der Slik for Planned Unit Development Amendment approval. Voting in favor: Chair Rahn, Commissioners Kuykendall,Leino, Morey,Parks, and Schonning. And the following voted against the same: 'None Whereupon said resolution as declared duly passed and adopted. Planning Commission Resolution 2011-02 is made part of these minutes by attachment. The Council will consider the application at its March 14,2011 meeting. The applicant must be present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Planning Commission will require that the application be returned to the Commission for reconsideration. DISCUSSION ITEMS: REVIEW OF 2011 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Mr. Eitel described the following sites for future development in the City: • Lifetime Fitness Site • RER Site • Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor • Honda/Toyota Dealership on Brooklyn Boulevard • Restaurant pad on the Boulevard Market site • Northwest Family Service Center • Shingle Creek Day-lighting • Brookdale/Shingle Creek Crossing • 57th Avenue and Logan • Opportunity Site • • Embassy Suites Link 3-10-11 Page 4 • I 'h Acre Vacant Site (next to the Embassy Suites) APRIL 6 2011 JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND COMMISSION MEETING Mr. Eitel stated that the City Council reaffirmed their mission and values at their recent retreat with the City Manager and Department Heads. He added that he will put together a presentation for the Planning Commission Chair to present to the City Council at the Joint Meeting on April 6,2011 that will identify what the Planning Commission has been working on and what direction they will take in the future regarding development activities. Mr. Eitel added that he would like to discuss this further with the Commission at the March 17, 2011 meeting. OTHER BUSINESS: There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Kuykendall, seconded by Commissioner Leino,to adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:18 p.m. Chair • Recorded and transcribed by: Rebecca Crass I 3-10-11 Page 5 7. Is i 1100 { 1) 011 °. i °o � , = „ '•e'a o d,,,•,, r�1 +/Az/', ��4` .0+r P 9. _Q_°o0 0o.�0.4-♦O- o °Q--O-0--o--.- ; , o`�a :.,, ..-_o_.ti,..., a..� .-�a•.r o 0- 0 °moo 10 PROPOSED COUNTY ROAD N 7 PYLON SIGN PROPOSED MONUMENT 0 SED PYLON PROPOSED MONUMENT S I GN SIGN ® l r - � _ s_A lip PROPOSED MONUMENT / SIGN c EXISTING - 14,4900 6 - 7d ib,806sf ^• ,� i • / MIDAS _ " s EXISTING KOHL'S r`C ` �✓ ) X( t� ,RIFFLE_S AN WALL, 0 T i fIMPR VEMEN S OR i _ / PROPOSED SHINGLE r \ -� CREEK REGIONAL TRAIL i PROPOSED DAYLIGHTED" ' i SHINGLE CREEK \ _ PROPOSED A. - PROPOSED FREEWAY y 4 MONUMENT PYLON SIGN SIGN EXISTING s L CONNECTION BUILDING RETAIL i a 1 TO EXISTING BRIDGE i p _- • SHOPS ' i Walmart" STORE#5625-00 ? \ C-150-SGL-NO 'Y! 152,o36 S.F.(APPROX.) \ \\` y EXISTING SHINGLE 0` 4� i i � ✓;ll� N CREEK BOX CULVERTp 14 � 1 EXISTING Wr SEARS . (NOT IN coNrruc>7 1 v -ROPOSED FREEWAY SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING FYLON SIGN MASTER PLAN ' ��' - ►� �! �' ®� '"4 r -:.j- FEBRUARY 2011 i PROPOSED MONUMENT -------- ----- '` SIGN 0 60 120 240 FT lei r+fart-. f!x✓ P�� 400 let r Kimley-Horn GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY and Associates, Inc. 101 South Main Street .NWERSITY AVE, WEST. SUITE 345N Dickson,Tennessee 37055 5 AuL,MINNESOTA 55114 o, Tel 615-4457104 FAX, NO. (651)645-5645-4197 116 Fax:615-4457105 m EXISTING ===_ METRO TRANSIT STATION __ 11 _TRAFFIC��pp�� - - ------------- •r-----��p XI NG ULL - �Qg -T ACCESS COUNTY RD NO 10/BASS LAKE RD CCE T FlC - E i L==�� ti.. -�:.-.r-... �>- z= = --------------- -------7­�---- COUNTY RD NO 10 BASS LAKE ROAD COUNTY COUNTY RD NO 10 BASS LAKE RO. —----------------- ------------------- ------- 9 ALI 7,7 rf..777T 7, /7 IT, MIDAS PRQPEertv. B) ' ' ; h T,,A,,PA '60 Lill OU A OJE o OE OF 6 d , �+l/ ;... \r \``� j ' I \q ._. i._� 1 ` \ '- Vii" � s J-11 A --- -------- BLOCK 7 717=7-- L6 K J (j) 2 L g E TLOT B OG A c_✓O N - FUTURE LOT Z, O INE(TYP.) LOT 2. BLOCK 1 E E ej EI Wa I m a r t STORE#5625 r NORTH -00 BLOCK C -150.SGL-NO I LOT 1, 152,036 S.F.(APPROX.) 0 100 200 V, 'x SCALE FEET ` x Lu PHASING HATCH LEGEND: �17 r (D PHASE I - COMPLETE SITE BUILD-OUT U) el PHASE 11 (AS LEASING PROGRESSES) [UTILITIES STUBBED, SWPPP PROCEDURES AS L REQUIRED, GRADE SET TO BASE ELEVATION] , I AREA NOT TO BE DISTURBED DURING OUTLOTA I I , z z x - , _Z i \ .0 \ l/ \1\0\ CONSTRUCTION 0 V) z co zw u I z E 1 , % !g! 0 Lu % % (T11,PR IENCI 01 GROUN..ATER SHOULD BE A z ANTCIPATED ON THIS PROJECT.CONTRACTOR'S K Lu 0 BD SHALL INCLUDE CONSIDERATION FOR ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE. U_j "PROPER 0 LLI p! A R7 IS Z (. ,�<__ it 4LL CONTRACTORS MUST CONTACT C) GOPHER STATE CALL ONE W _j MN TOLL FREE 1-800-252-1166 BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS J 0 TNN CITY AREA 651-454-0002 0 0 ALERT TO CONTRACTOR: = z z cf) ALL M GENERAL CONTRACTOR WORK TO BE COMPLETED(EARTHWORK, E ,A FINAL UTIUT S.AND FINAL GRADING BY THE MILESTONE DATE IN D TE )TO BE KEPT FREE OF JOB /IA TRAILERS AND STORAGE AFTER THE CONTRACT MILESTONE DATE FOR 02 5/2011 E PROJECT DOCUMENTS.OUTLOT AREA THE 0 TLOT.WM GENERAL CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE CLEAR ACCESS PROJECT NO. FOR OUTLOT CONTRACTOR TO THE SPECIFIC PARCEL AT ALL TIMES AFTER MILESTONE DATE.PURCHASER OF OUTLOT TO PROVIDE PERMIT 160633001 E DOCUMENTS AND SWPPP REQUIRED By STATEADCAL REQUIREMENTS SHEET NUMBER E \,,.FOR SPECIFIC OUTLOT. 02 J } m m k I SF CE SF IF �___' r a 1 A t 4o _ !, pr � \ vA ; `�\ $ m ,r T v \\ i EXISTING . a F ` KOHL r cis xE /t': ,�.. r �/!/•% �'' y" � ~\�. .cF``.. .� �� Y � � C �\° \ �J''. o"idS eon 8-Q M4 /; 4. 15 0 EXISTING s j' SITE FEATURES BUILDING: 1.50% RETAIL ( �/ DIRECTION OF OVERLAND FLOW E i DD j 4- LIMITS OF DRAINAGE SUB-BASIN PROPERTY LINE SHOPS \. �` '' --- � `� (' PROPOSED LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE e y J d I' :/tiT. \•� 0 ,� rl.^i!' O P777777,� EXISTING BUILDING EXISTING CURB B 2 § 4di x e- yam`\\•'r➢ ` \ _ / i ";�/Q ,]�""� FLOOD ZONE X(PANEL NO.2701510212E) ` ` / ' Oaf ' \ 1� / --/ dii'}4•r �," `- FLOOD ZONE AE(PANEL NO.270151021 2E) < SHINGLE CREEK Lr IL m I (ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITf EXISTING STORM SEWER,TO BE REMOVED AREA)-IMPAIRED WATER N X 1 1 4 Q�• EXISTING '`�` �'� DD �°' � EXISTING STORM SEWER,TO REMAIN (Fl M �r � SEARS •`:,• c '__.,/ \^ i f ,i WETLANDS w (NOT IN CONTRACT) / \• :N / / n i I �� �� PROPOSED STORM SEWER Vl^ J EROSION DETAILS X SWPPP INFORMATION SIGN(SEE DETAIL SHEET) LLI � I ,f{ m a �I •,� �a, ,r' � IP INLET PROTECTION SEDIMENT CONTROL(SEE DETt = a \i I /' � ••; -- � '�� NORTH TREE PROTECTION FENCE(SEE DETAIL) (ll o / i --�� V SUBSTRATUM AND UDIP5AMMENT5 EG MPLEXT ;^ C z t v/ Z o ``,`` `-�- `, • ,^ 0 100 200 VA COVERING 1OD9.OF SITE ACREAGE Z vi w E ''. '' •'-/ SCALE FEET O CONSTRUCTION EXIT(SEE DETAIL) O o. 1 t• , , _/ yy.p...�O DIVERSION DIKE SEE DETAIL LL Lu DIVERSION SWALE(SEE DETAIL) Z ol i< \ as s �.' LLI j q ; -� ,at\ � �* `•• �- 0 TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAP(SEE DETAIL) w l L..l /1 / \J f ROCK CHECK DAM �/ Z ° jt \ � D dot's " ..—.--® PROPOSED REINFORCED SILT FENCE w \`., \\CCYYgi�• ? \ / Q "NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC"SIGN J O 6 \ `• (. e •i' ACREAGE SUMMARY O CONSTRUCTION FENCE (� z L 'fin,'`"1 , �•` ,�i :''i '� (IN ACRES) Z LL. W FLOATING SILT CURTAIN ��//�� Z W °u -i "` , \ ✓ \i e TOTAL PROJECT AREA 52.5 `"'� Q = W Z ON-SITE OISTU RBEO AREA 50.2 I 5 11 PERMANENT SEEDING/SODDING OFF-SITE DISTURBED AREA 1.1 DATE TOTAL DISTURBED AREA MUST MATCH Nq C Y 5 � ( ) 52'5 �..�°*;`.� EROSION CONTROL BLANKET 02/15/2011 �, " + `-J®`•(��` p � �%��i IMPERVIOUS AREA AT COMPLETION 42.4 PROJECT NO. ',�.` 1 •\`+ -' ���' ,,.a`- PERVIOUS/5EEDED AREA AT COMPLETION 10.1 TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN 160633000 SHEET NUMBER RR RIP-RAP PAD 03 a € # m •<_ y-�v_.�..'.e>_-.aiP�_�:37-.-�-ca+.`<-�}'-'N•,I -c-m z- --_ LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE SF _ _ 4,— 855 BAS ' a o � ' , CF +`S ; ®' "�•) m IN `, L F.F.E.=809.5 FF.E. .'f CRETE J MI '#.�ING LIMITS OF STUR�AN ° Si .g ``�'A�-" EXISTING , o � - L , • �✓,(� � •, '..'� KOHL'S nm ii ' 5 F.F.E.• / °° "! L..S`' ^es+ _ CD� �T\ "5��.�/�_ ip ``J� iii , ;.;• i' /� !� �,�\ �.-\'. .. - i" ,' ..� j� a„ ° 852.0 o 'r- -'• HO \ � 1 \ � ��' 11't CONCRETE � � e� 84 5 �Z HEADWALL. 3 ,r m 849.5 P! CF C• I e� E 1p -3T o :5 z! ,lG ✓` y/. � DRAINAGE i� ^!., �./ 1•/' � H��� 6 NDARY�` e� EROSION CON i�i ,"` LANKET LL -J'' "` •�J S.- ` �EOF-848.3 04 \ / //. w 4't RETAINNNI £ J'•`.J P �# �(`J1 �- r ,, I i �'/ L 4 WALL /• //,}' 'p. v 0 o � r r c 10.5 CONCRETE n 5 I"r fO 11'f CONCRETE F.E.=847.0 / H 6 -HEADWALL F.F.E.=850.5 ti / m 'T'A`G1RETAINING , V\ / /• SF WALL 1 \,' • W , EXISTING 4f _ / // SITE FEATURES 1 BUILDING: Walma�ti / // 1�1 DIRECTION OF OVERLAND FLOW > o •� RETAIL GE #56250 0 ' LIMITS OF DRAINAGE SUB-BASIN H ; ~o' S SHOPS STORE \\ \�\` `QeP� PROPERTY LINE r �•�'�. / 152,036 S.F.(APPROX.) t /p \Q\S�V ......... PROPOSED LIMITS OF DISTURBANCE d �•, F.F.E.=8520 J • � F,7777771 EXISTING BUILDING + , • ' .�;.= \ '. � C�t/ J - ---- PROPOSED BUILDING K )' R,t , ..� j==am• ,:::..` ...: EXISTING CURB j SF 7RUCKwai f 1 j `'• F.F.E. 852.5 .� ( FLOOD ZONE X(PANEL NO.270151D212E) Q = 0 mOT[DIU1/ /j FLOOD ZONE AE(PANEL NO.2 701 51 021 2E) -.:....- % EXISTING STORM SEWER,TO BE REMOVED z S ++I `\ °1 /, �, ✓!' IMPAIRED N51 E AREA y,—�►� EXISTING STORM SEWER,TO REMAIN _ 2 2_ EXISTING j. Sy y T j✓ wATE) 0 W SEARS _ WETLANDS S +•�� ,'D?c.a+ (NOT IN �EBAY rJT PROPOSED STORM SEWER I.L CONTRACT) N i / EROSION DETAILS BASIN I ➢ , I 1� .•� 0 100 200 m 5$ SWPPP INFORMATION SIGN(SEE DETAIL SHEET) ° i`t k ``1 / Z•�\ % •4� A O 111 m ++ ; ' /��' MYI. / �� JNp� •`O SCALE FEET @ INLET PROTECTION SEDIMENT CONTROL(SEE DETAIL, CF TREE PROTECTION FENCE(SEE DETAIL) L� ___ Z z U) , n OIL TYPN URBAN LAND, MEN T COIN WET '7 0 19 >�fORMWA COBERING 0 AND U517E ACREAGE COMPLEX 70 01..1_ Z E +,L� ++i: , N, p�� POND " ' + +� ` �:c; -. [A CE CONSTRUCTION EXIT SEE DETAIL ` . LIJ r AM.l1T `•��\ r'i'cer '}~ r.�-•-•-�-OD DIVERSION DIKE 1 a� ` �1 • �" SF (SEE DETAIL) E Y w o D DIVERSION SWAL (SEE DETAIL) CF ® TEMPORARY SEDIMENT TRAP(SEE DETAIL) Lu v J ROCK CHECK DAM PROPOSED REINFORCED SILT FENCE W Y c=m= "NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC"SIGN J O ACREAGE SUMMARY w (IN ACRES) �O•��O CONSTRUCTION FENCE T� O_ (1+� y, `i., 1` \• /`�<. "p TOTAL PROJECT AREA 52.5 ® FLOATING SILT CURTAIN �y/� w ON-SITE DISTURBED AREA 50.2 yJ = OFF-SITE DISTURBED AREA 1.1 PERMANENT SEEDING/SDDDING DATE TOTAL DISTURBED AREA(MUST MATCH NOI) 525 02/15/2011 t ' 1 ® EROSION CONTROL BLANKET IMPERVIOUS AREA AT COMPLETION 42.4 PROJECT NO. '4+ " n o ,i , o,`V PERVIOUS/SEEDED AREA AT COMPLETION E 10.I TEMPORARY SEDIMENT BASIN S ® H NUM 6O6 BEOR zE I RIP-RAP PAD • O 04 o € ------------------ -------- -----------*T=; E51`1�'__ ------------- ------------ E42 C NTY RD NO 10 BASS LAKE ROAD R AS I ------------ COUNTY R NO 10 ---------- --------- 4 $7 VIA 15" 15"_ F E 8M4.5 F E `4 5 F.F.E. F�, nEj 2x4'BOX b Q c F 853.0 18" CULVERT ISTING ISTIN�G_ E 16 MIDA 15- 15" EXIS' S- C�l 5'Nl 5!1�__, 15" A* KOF 15" 15' ........ uk- ­15' It 1, V v A Y' -) �\- 0, , (�) c � vD, F.F.E. vv PROPOSED 852.0 Q� 4,--) DAY-LIGHTED E , , \ SHINGLE CREEK A OC m ..0 15" 849.5 V\ OUTLO E'S 15' S2 15" w ig 10 EXIS__ KOI- j#N V " 15" 15 EXISTING g EDIMENT 36 2 6 15 XI NIL* 5" 15" 1:1 TRAP PPLE E APPL 41-1 ❑ fS ci, c� cv 75 41i E F.F.E. 847 0 x c F.F.E. 850.5 4h- E Yj <\ tC4 (��\ —1 r 5 EXISTING 15" 1 69 o ROOF DRAINS "� l� I �\: / /�// ° EXISTING 12" — BUILDING: Walmart x EXISTING 21 RETAIL X! SHOPS STO131i#.56,Z5-00 A C-1 SO-SG L-NO 152,036 S.F.(APPROX.) v LU < OONN Lu F.F.E, 8515 lk �NV U) ED x w k 0 100 200 0 EXISTING SEARS U) V, SCALE FEET (NOT IN RUNOFF RATES CONTRACT) 2x15" 2-YR (CFS) 1 10-YR (CFS) 1 100-YR.(CFS) 166.58 24924 i N N ° ' _'+b ),,8 N63 3T2 1 138.77 ��FROPOSED 55.76 < CD I RUNOFF 0 LUME z 8 EXISTING �31.094(Af) w PROPOSED 29448(Af) 0 Of of w z W PROPOSED STORM SEWER -L\!�) 00 W ui —— ————— — PROPOSED 6" PERFORATED PVC PIPE z No POND DATA TABLE *> PROPOSED STORM SEWER INLET C.) 0 NORMAL WATER TREATMENT 100 YR FLOOD ELEVATION LH v o (FT)/BOTTOM _j 0 c -------- 0 PROPOSED STORM SEWER MANHOLE} t� Y h\ VOLUME (AF) ELEV.(FT) \31 ELEVATION (FT) A PROPOSED FLARED END SECTION 0 0 `51 206 848.02 845.50 (BTM) a: POND 1 0. I r '1, '' ..,>7`, ' r� ,%'/ POND 2 0.080 847.42 845.00 (BTM) PROPOSED RIP RAP z POND 3 11,147 847.39 845.00 (BTM) W POND 4 2.999 846.76 839.00 DATE X" PROPOSED X—INCH STORM SEWER 02/15/2011 & PROJECT NO. 0633000 E SHEET NUMBER 05 E! _ 1\i- - - ny oV may. cycr This d...—Ft.together with the c. opts and designs p.....—herein,..-filet--t.1 e.r ,le intended only fpr the ap..Ifl.Du ...and client fpr—h It—pr.pdr.d.Rep..pf pnd p p 1.11,1 document wItl—written puthprizptlpn and pdbCbti by Iml.y- and A.-I.NI., c.eh."de wIlho lip 1111y N,NI y-Drn pnd AVENUE NORTH 'S = i XE RX - ,,��,�y,_.„ J .ter./ \\\\ � ' ii. ., '�,. `°•"`;;` nY \\ Oo Do __5 o\ m \ \\ X, = T X X 1 0 MO m m n D m z D m D I o o z I m D ;I) D m M m m D m 0 m Z A D C Zcn m M n W m 0 m ~ to to 0 � 0 � 0 � Oa Q \.I �✓ I II I I I LQ �II II = O ' � I o, 0 II m I� n II � II G� \ G M. X m z ` Z 0 0 \ v7 4(1) _ \ ♦\ \ r— i i \ r Ir(�► �� r r III Ili of i`"1� 1 Owl F �0+I 1 I j j I m ial ' . � I N i I { I I � I ! i I i ! I III I I II i � Ii U o _ 1 I a D 50. 14 I Ir Z O Ii (I III 1 --► II III it ;III! H11 e,�•�x:� r Iq II I I I I i 1� , r I I u ( 1 11 II II 11 - 11 II 11 1 p 111 II i I I, 1.I 1 if I ill qll �I I�!I SCALE DESIGN ENGINEER: rnA N WILLIAM MATZEK ❑-❑ Klmley-Hom Om 2 SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING WATER DESGNED BY m and Associates,Inc. O~ m U D MINNESOTA PEGISMATION NUMBER: W Nm BROOKLYN CENTER, MN UTILITY EXHIBIT °R"""BY ©2009 KINLEY_NDRN AND ASSOCIATES.IN Go O O 550 UNIVERSITY AVENUE NE T,SUITE 30BN BT.PAUL MN 5511. to OO CHECKED BY PHONE 651-6A55^I9p FAX fi51-fi.5-5116 HENNEPIN MINNESOTA DATE: wlrWKIMEY-NORM.CON No. REVISIONS DATE d-y tloaunent,t­—with Ihs.—Wt.mtl tlasl9na prex—heron,pa an matru —of xrncs,N nta—only/or the W-6.purpose ontl dknt for sfiid,it—p,bb—d R..of mtl­7;7--.I-—wt with-t--—horiz.—and—ptptlon by KLnl,y—mtl lY 'I IDI mI I I IZI I V i XERXES AVE q r \ \\ ....>„' All , to 6, 1,) 0 0 z z m 9 X m . v X m m 7 m m M X m m X 0 1 U M�i O z O O z V) 0 x m m N I X Z D D z 2 z z D _ D D N y A ZJ 2 z D N N m Z1 m m :E x { m m < N Zu A I m -u m o -, m A n m r m r m K m D m z r m 0 m Z 0 \I r fl 1 i> zzNx �0 Fn 0 0 Z L')Z X0 z � z Zm Zn / \ 2 � rn O x m 8 F........ 0,m EnmCX O�OCn C°nrZz G)0 \ d � o 0 �n z 00 M Z X m �q Z 0 � C � r ! Al M �A 1 \\,\ P/ r I� G) dL m tl III _ t fi i 1 'd I 1P 6Y. v � III I I _: 1 I Ny O v z ' O j -n J Z`—) ZI a O m °!u1 m co m U3 �Z''m� it 0 Fn Z 00 r MZ FO Iy l:: z xz gi V � I mU)N It Dmq I; 1 IT y 1 m m z ` II I _ — — --- �� W D O � 0) �z�N c� G \ \y� ell l /A� \ I 871r i.',iY �I ?1 0 'v III OT 0 V IZII (p z \ n Z.m �zj �3 10 fII IEDI II I(n �I! IU)1I it ��ll �X 0- �� DESIGN ENGINEER: _ Kimle Hom - m� ° WILLIAM MATZEK y m -2-1- SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SANITARY SEWER DESIGNED By �❑ and Associates,Inc. O ~ mr^ N D MINNESOTA REGISTRARON NUMBER: �I m OZ om BROOKLYN CENTER, MN DRAYNBY 2550DNI,ERSTYAYFMIEKST,WT206N V.I.,NN 5511♦ EXHIBIT ©2D09 wt�Y-HORN AND ASSOCIATES,INC. A CHECKED BY PHONE:651-645-119]FA% It. HENNEPIN MINNESOTA DATE: N--KINEE`'-NONN.— NO REIASIONS DATE BY N N o�0Wso -IX, Nome 0 En N � mm �CT) 'T0 ZN � I\ 0 ooa X �n z 00 M Z X m �q Z 0 � C � r ! Al M �A 1 \\,\ P/ r I� G) dL m tl III _ t fi i 1 'd I 1P 6Y. v � III I I _: 1 I Ny O v z ' O j -n J Z`—) ZI a O m °!u1 m co m U3 �Z''m� it 0 Fn Z 00 r MZ FO Iy l:: z xz gi V � I mU)N It Dmq I; 1 IT y 1 m m z ` II I _ — — --- �� W D O � 0) �z�N c� G \ \y� ell l /A� \ I 871r i.',iY �I ?1 0 'v III OT 0 V IZII (p z \ n Z.m �zj �3 10 fII IEDI II I(n �I! IU)1I it ��ll �X 0- �� DESIGN ENGINEER: _ Kimle Hom - m� ° WILLIAM MATZEK y m -2-1- SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SANITARY SEWER DESIGNED By �❑ and Associates,Inc. O ~ mr^ N D MINNESOTA REGISTRARON NUMBER: �I m OZ om BROOKLYN CENTER, MN DRAYNBY 2550DNI,ERSTYAYFMIEKST,WT206N V.I.,NN 5511♦ EXHIBIT ©2D09 wt�Y-HORN AND ASSOCIATES,INC. A CHECKED BY PHONE:651-645-119]FA% It. HENNEPIN MINNESOTA DATE: N--KINEE`'-NONN.— NO REIASIONS DATE BY Drawing name: K:\TWC_LDEV\GATLIN DEVELOPMENT\BROOKDALE CENTER\CARD\EXHIBITS\PUD SIMPLIFIED PLANS\08 - PHOTOMETRICS LAYOULawg 06 Feb 15, 2011 6:16pm by. trish.rothe This d...—b ta9ether with the--pt.pntl tlesigns presented herein,ps an Instrument of service.Is inlanded pnly fur the s ffid purpose and d,enl fer which it wa v pared.R--of and imp pe reli—an this dadpment wIkh..t written wkha isol{pn and°dpptplip by Klrn1e 11 rn and Assadiales.Inc.shall be without Nobility b K'mley-NOrn and Asapdieles.Inc an C Q \\\\\\ O C, \ m 1 W M i \ / To f/JrO� \ Q 04 ���../// 1 I °1 1 l° \ Z to Z )9 I I I J nl 1, i pit , \ ZI ) v I I I IJ 1 X 0� ^ 1 II Z \ r0m 3 I D \ D ;1yN �. z ap, \\ � � N�I rrrl II I' 1 a Il 1 i cam \ \ w n m -s -n O \ \r. n O IT � sw gyp`\ \,\. \\ l� i�Y "• /� ©� i �� I I� � pi \ 0 M U9 r r wen 'o r r a ¢ a.ss \ l r' ') \\ - �•/ Z e Sp7sae3ae _ \ \ \ G) 1 I j o A A m s a aaaaalaaaa'gal sir�zmvrCy� � � m y�omZ in Q i i 3 i i i i 8 b f\ \\ \\ \1 II ICI I m 2 \ \ �� II 1 �k{`{11omg� m A m�cK z Ins -i : : : � E � p=mr4y 1y I,m p z�i=g[�3ylTi m iZl `\\ \ </ V 6I_°a zmr,>m m to I i I I =n 17i m°z u, y ►°'°p°`° B° �` \\ �``1 c%' /g `���_ \.�' /' n iI I m a i g F 5 °?°R° R $ " in °g°IN° n° X x iDip DIN o : r- o iDip t ➢ `\� \`, 1 I A I I 1 I'�I ll I/�i �I in SCALE af51Q!ENGNEER: ma WILLIAM MATZEK ❑_❑ Kimley-Horn 0C)�o SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING DESIGNED BY and Associates,Inc. Oo = BROOKLYN CENTER MN YINNESOiA REGB RATCN NUMBER: ©moo KYEy_NIXN AND ASSOCIATES,INC. W�\� LIGHTING EXHIBI DNANNBY m O O 25511 UNIVERSTY AVENUE KST.SINTE 2XN ST.PAUL AN 55114 A 0. CHECKED BY p1 W:651-6�1197 FAX 651-eA5-5116 HENNEPIN MINNESOTA DATE: www.KINEEY-Nate— No REVISIONS DATE BY )rowing nome: K:\TWU_LULV\UAILIN UL\CLUr'MtNI\t1N0UKUALL C:LNIEN\CAUU\EXHItlIIS\HUU SIMI'LII-ILU VLANJ\UV - LAINUtiUAYt LATUUI.OWq U`.1 rsD ID, LUI1 0:e3pm Dy lhia 4..—N lapathar with Chi,can ap and daaiya......tad her m. --d only Ip•the apacific p p v and dent Ivr which it wa p p ad.P.—of and imp Pv reliance m IN.d.—t ------ ----------- 0 0 { l � � S9 \\ 'o\ 0 i71 N C W1,0G wom .D. 6,:* Sir y Z %jp X00 - trlsh.rotrls wilhaut.wiltan wlharizpllon and adaptation by Ki Il H—and Awaacialaw 1—vhall by wilhapt liobilily b K'W.,.—and A...ciata, ,• � �•`° rI���q VF N ti �TjTIT' m z Yt }1 1 d fix' i\ I 04 may. �r--- -4 \p7u�� I X, A ? \` \L, o� 0 Tin Im m 0x i Cp m \ \ D =cn { m �' \' \ (b Z of �. 0 O C Z A O Z O O O D rn r D m D 0 SCALE ...ENGINEER: m �� N WILLIAM MATZEK ❑�❑ KimleyHom SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING DESIONEDBY andAssodates,Inc. LANDSCAPE EXHIBIT MNNESO A FECS RA CN NUMBER: cp ; o�N BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SAWN By c 2009-iEY-Nd3N AND ASSOCIATES.W0. 2550 UNIVERSTY AVENUE NEST.SUITE 23SN ST.PAUL.MN 55114 DO OP Q CHECKED BY PHONE:851-615-119)FA%.851-815-5116 A HENNEPIN MINNESOTA DATE: www.KINLEY-HORN.caM NO REVISIONS DATE BY C m O D Tin m 'W' m m m { Do �m 00 z z �� C r z -o D M T. 0 DO n 7c O W ; r 0 0 > < D N A O r m D O L O m .-0 O C D C D n O O m Z o '� 0 'z m C `n p v x $ D { m X z C 0r 3 D X C < O z 3 z m 2 D 0 Z m A p C = Z v_ r y m Z O y CO tD m 2 (� o (a N -H x m v r S. m m m 3 7" m 0 O O O z m m m 0 < m w m < Z � C) I D m n m m 0 m q 01 to N N N N N Ni (n # # # # w w w w w mmm # o # 0 # 0 # o D CN77 D N D r r m o o 0 0 0 o W o m ED m m g g � mWWDo egg -1 -A -H -H -H WWW -H i71 N C W1,0G wom .D. 6,:* Sir y Z %jp X00 - trlsh.rotrls wilhaut.wiltan wlharizpllon and adaptation by Ki Il H—and Awaacialaw 1—vhall by wilhapt liobilily b K'W.,.—and A...ciata, ,• � �•`° rI���q VF N ti �TjTIT' m z Yt }1 1 d fix' i\ I 04 may. �r--- -4 \p7u�� I X, A ? \` \L, o� 0 Tin Im m 0x i Cp m \ \ D =cn { m �' \' \ (b Z of �. 0 O C Z A O Z O O O D rn r D m D 0 SCALE ...ENGINEER: m �� N WILLIAM MATZEK ❑�❑ KimleyHom SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING DESIONEDBY andAssodates,Inc. LANDSCAPE EXHIBIT MNNESO A FECS RA CN NUMBER: cp ; o�N BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SAWN By c 2009-iEY-Nd3N AND ASSOCIATES.W0. 2550 UNIVERSTY AVENUE NEST.SUITE 23SN ST.PAUL.MN 55114 DO OP Q CHECKED BY PHONE:851-615-119)FA%.851-815-5116 A HENNEPIN MINNESOTA DATE: www.KINLEY-HORN.caM NO REVISIONS DATE BY Or ing name: K:\TWCJAEV\GATLIN DEVELOPMENT\BROOKDALE CENTER\CAOD\EXHIBITS\PUD SIMPLIFIED PLANS\10—CIRCULATION LAYOUT.dwg 10 Feb 15, 2011 6:19pm by. trish.rothe awmenl.Lp tha with the­­L.­d dev9^s presented he.dn,ps an instrument o/s Vl ie intended only(w the specific purpose and diet far v i<h it was p spared.Reuse e1 and imp ope relim<e m IN.document wikn t written wthliz tJ and adoptable by Mmley-Ila pnd Asmclo Inc.shall Z VIN o \\\ \ Jv��" L�'I �11�C' :� _ ��/ _ \`,, tit "' UN 4-: Al I%1 %to J/ / ' '_..`. �y� vii P Z GZi 0 \ O--En X \ 'z 9i Z \\\ C •\ `\ \ \ 110 k lip D/ m e \ ✓ ; DI N R (11 I m 9 I m m + $$SS'I z i �l0: Oa wit I�ell i --i Ti, CMEpcED BY Na REV1510N5 � W ED 11 ;I �uI II _ �•�,'IIIII 00 \ "'A \ \ \ 1 \ \ \ N D (— m M Ar m m Z P Z c D C A El 0 O O U) m 0 0 m rn D D 0 0 n D O (A z _u C) _ ;7 D rn r m j \ \ 1 \ ✓ \ �I / \f \ \ O \ III �'`✓ , \ ✓ a o ` s, i/ / ) /V -1 �•' �11,/ 4 A i�i V1 C 111 F d I lr z Ili l• �1 1 11 110 y- i I \ I n I III i II ' 1 �mill t\ O C z�f. �\ li c ri 1 , D ; )1 cn I 1 � ] r� r>- ; ] D � t�11 0 ;I 110 k I I D/ I l \`\ ✓ ; O Ij (11 I m 9 I m m + $$SS'I z i �l0: Oa wit I�ell i --i Ti, CMEpcED BY Na REV1510N5 � W ED 11 ;I �uI II _ �•�,'IIIII D n 1 1 V N D (— m M m m Z P Z c j \ \ 1 \ ✓ \ �I / \f \ \ O \ III �'`✓ , \ ✓ a o ` s, i/ / ) /V -1 �•' �11,/ 4 A i�i V1 C 111 F d I lr z Ili l• �1 1 11 110 y- i I \ I n I III i II ' 1 �mill t\ O C z�f. �\ li c ri 1 , D ; )1 cn I 1 � ] r� r>- ; ] D � t�11 0 ;I m Imn z 110 k I I SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING BROOKLYN CENTER MN HENNEPIN MINNESOTA I l \`\ ✓ ; O Ij (11 I I m i iili�yyi) + $$SS'I �� i �l0: Oa wit I�ell i m Imn z 110 k I I SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING BROOKLYN CENTER MN HENNEPIN MINNESOTA 2 0 \`\ r Kimle Hom Y �❑ andAsswates,Inc. o G �RIYLEY6SOCI11 _ 2550 UNItENON A651- Al VEST,SURE 2551 Si. 5116 NH 5511♦ PHgIE:851-6a5-<19)FAX 651-fltl5-5118 I m i iili�yyi) + $$SS'I �� i �l0: Oa wit I�ell i ,6 Ti, CMEpcED BY Na REV1510N5 � �°. _VIII ' 11 ;I �uI II _ �•�,'IIIII usl , m Imn z 110 k I I SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING BROOKLYN CENTER MN HENNEPIN MINNESOTA C I R U LATI SCALE N9LLIAM MATZEK YINNESGTAHEgSR"°« "dM�", DATE: Kimle Hom Y �❑ andAsswates,Inc. o G �RIYLEY6SOCI11 _ 2550 UNItENON A651- Al VEST,SURE 2551 Si. 5116 NH 5511♦ PHgIE:851-6a5-<19)FAX 651-fltl5-5118 I m i iili�yyi) + $$SS'I �� i �l0: Oa wit I�ell i Ti, CMEpcED BY Na REV1510N5 � �°. _VIII ' 11 ;I �uI II _ �•�,'IIIII usl , m Imn z oo Z OP o �- N � SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING BROOKLYN CENTER MN HENNEPIN MINNESOTA C I R U LATI SCALE N9LLIAM MATZEK YINNESGTAHEgSR"°« "dM�", DATE: Kimle Hom Y �❑ andAsswates,Inc. o G �RIYLEY6SOCI11 _ 2550 UNItENON A651- Al VEST,SURE 2551 Si. 5116 NH 5511♦ PHgIE:851-6a5-<19)FAX 651-fltl5-5118 DESIGNED By �,�,BY CMEpcED BY Na REV1510N5 GATE BY ------------------- ------------------------------------------ ARCHITECTURAL CONSORTIUM LLC.1 901 North Third SU—L S.Ae 220 6124364030'.. Minneapolis.MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 i GATI1IV DEVELOPMENT COMPANY' ----- ----... — Key Plan _�U o /� p�,� v EX'STIN6 NORTH ELEVATION LJ 544LATEP $A[.K:lT pRBFI>L METAL erp,E _ FROSTED f.ORNLE PREfM.K'AL . 1V.! ILLL.IM's •-.--- E'fs --_- 92'JC S16nA6E NpgTN i TENANT _ TENANT :_-• Mark Revision/Iseue M Lit— — T •. F. s { SRNLA'ED GM'9A_C NUM TIM.MFTK ENTEArw;E DELORATiV7: A`i^D.AL:M. 5_PC GAM' ♦ 'O MA" IOW nTOREflEOVT PROPOSEO NORTH LLLVATIOIV 1 ---r ( - -- - - _ - --. (� SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING EX:S�;VS F_Xic*;h6 Ex15TIN5 wEST ELEVATION BROOKDALE CENTER PREFM,tCTAL L� rya'-I'-0 REDEVELOPMENT ""TM _. SIT A` ;T'ter® „„�, BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 4 — TENANT EF5 e� L u,;wreDT — __. ....:... .....�._...._.a TEWAW TENANT TENANT _.TElYWi._ c _ _#-R }._ _ U ELEVATIONS FREFIN,METAL G DELGRAT:'dE GAN;^5 rR^V M`'AL AV4✓'.A_„M c"'ti eA.� (X157116 LANOPr .; YJOE GOIRT L 6Nr Ntti'.1rGS cA�G: 5" "T.R.:4T •.CA_I.E.�i __ ___ __—_— OI-30-11 4 PROP05E1�WEST ELEVATION -_..�_�_- •.-. Ine•,1-0• Al Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 ARCHITECTURAL _ CONSORTIUM L.L.C. --J — 901 Nosh is,M 5540.Suite 220 :1424=549=30 Minneepoks.MN 55401 Faz - C�EXI5TiN6 O'✓LRAL L LAST ELEVATION GATLI 'DBIELOPMENT COMPANY - -- T».�. -- -- ?Mw _.._ TIN Plan H -- -- -- 7 �t � PROP05ED OVERALL)BAST LLL`✓AT ON /p � f��\, L9: 1y s {ivY�� EATS-INS C;X1w ENTIC EEYOND NORTH Mark Rtvisbn Its" Date ----------- EXISTING EAST ELEVATION WR',- -A" EwwR eEYCNP eeaae-e.Ew !TENANT —F!! TENANT i T171 • j peo=cs_�BAST=_L>:'✓AT oN .: I SHINGLE CREEK E CROSSING BROOKDALE CENTER 9W�6CY0147 -�E PORTION 6 EA STN6 _ ___------ ++i______ ""'LODE1E'"°"E' REDEVELOPMENT BROOKLYN CENTER,MN --------------�____— TER II EK5'MS ATR4N -- TO x REMOVED ii I I EXTERIOR EX15T'N6 EAST ELEVATION GONT NUED ELEVATIONS 5-1 ONE wc.atmrc FROSTED .• .• ILLUMNATEO 7 k 3 41M E E RO°05ED AST errs A2 TY —EFV`�+AL C,�NIAU �.'RiK.- 4NJ-Al:.. EEG, G CAV.�PY Ai hv55 145 STOR_FROVT b -EVATION COWIN ED Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 ARCHITECTURAL CONSORTIUM L.L.C.j ,..�y DlLQIAtIN! -t1,Lts1EMTNS7 ,-._.FILM.*ETK , LNMT ' 31CNAK � 901 North ThwO Sheet,Suits 220 612-136-1030 r :-.:: MOKLR Mmneapdis,MN 55401 Fax 612692-9960 Tidt111ii TENANT TENANT TENANT == BRICK I �---------0-t VA6C CD °AWAS PROPIK NCTK ANDD.A� QTUN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AWWVCS CANOPY STOREFRONT FRONT Key Plan pew" EMS I"WmA= LICKT SIGNAE,E FREFEIL I V TAL Co+cNICE • _.._-. TENNT.... TENANT „ TENANT TENANT... .TENANT TENANT I CRICK f CANOPY MCTK PANTED NOR CANVAS CMU GA/GP'( PETAL DOOR AWN;NSS NORTH RE R At" ROV611onlisM TYPICAL ELEVATIONS-PAD I3UILDIN73 ------- -- - I �I SACALiT POT N METAL FROSTED CLASS ILL:MINATED ZIPS TENANT' M-WA Trvg ANOD.ALM, PREPIN METAL OR" LW U6M' STORSRO.T OANOPY ------ PROW SHINGLE PRE�N�TTAL CROSSING SteNAx eiFs TENANT BROOKDALE CENTER --- REDEVELOPMENT { - BROOKLYN CENTER, MN I PA:N!ED t.OLLOW DEEORA.TIVE PxEiIN.MEl 4 £R.C' C-1v "V--AL DOOR L'E.T EANOPY SIP= EXTERIOR MON"r PARAPET ELEVATIONS EEYO"47 _ I_L.RI1NA71.—i E;E'JAEE TENANT v a-20-11 LOApIN6 Douc ow 9R:EK scram NIALL 00 TYPIC Q AL ELEVATIONS-MAJOR ANCHOR , `3 _.__.__ ................. _... ___ __._--. ----—-- — - -------- ........................ Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 x 7a. x "z 5'WALL RAILING 3'WALL l IMPROVEMENTS BOULDERS ON WEIR FOR RIFFLES AND AERATION OVERLOOK WITH JI EDUCATIONALAND ;r INTERPRETIVE SIGNA E fm BLDG. ( ` BRIDGE HEAD- r WALL&RAILING .a 0 7.5 15 30 •y I SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING �. WATER FEATURE CONCEPT FEBRUARY 2011 \� C=„ Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 101 South Main Street Dickson,Tennessee 37055 Tel:615-446-7104 Fax 615-446-7105 � � w 3',/-WALL tt 0 5'+/-MODIFIED EXISTING WALL WITH 8'+/-EXISTING WALL WITH �\ PATIO ARCHITECTURAL CLADDING ARCHITECTURAL CLADDING SHINGLE CREEK OVERLOOK WITH REGIONAL TRAIL EDUCATIONAL AND INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING WATER FEATURE CONCEPT SECTION FEBRUARY 2011 C:/1 Kimley-Horn and Associates,Inc. GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 101 South Main Street Dickson,Tennessee 37055 Tel 615.446-7104 Faz:615-446-7105 r M it I i it i SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING BRIDGE HEADWALL & RAILING ELEVATION Kimley-Horn FEBRUARY 2011 101 DEVELOPMENT COMPANY and Associates, Inc. l01 South Main Street 2550 tN1VER51TY A'. `f 345N Dickson,Tennessee 37055 ST.PAUL,MINNE50'n Tel-615-446-7104 TEL. NO (651)645-•414,' Fax 615-446-7105 rAx NO (65t!645-51'6 SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SIGN PROGRAM A. INTRODUCTION B. GENERAL LANDLORD/TENANT REQUIREMENTS: The intent of this sign criteria is to provide the guidelines necessary to 1. Each Tenant shall submit to landlord for written approval, three (3) copies of the achieve a visually coordinated, balanced and appealing sign detailed shop drawings of the proposed sign, indicating conformance with the sign criteria herein outlined. environment, harmonious with the architecture of the project, while maintaining provisions for individual graphic expression. 2. The landlord shall determine and approve the availability and position of a Tenant name on any ground sign(s). Submittal drawing(s) to indicate accurately scaled signage on the elevation shall be required. 3. The Tenant shall pay for all signs, related materials and installation fees including final inspection costs. Performance of this sign criteria shall be rigorously enforced and any nonconforming sign shall be removed by the tenant or his sign 4. The Tenant shall obtain all necessary permits. contractor at their expense, upon demand by the landlord. 5. The Tenant shall be responsible for fulfillment of all requirements of this sign Exceptions to these standards shall not be permitted without approval criteria. from the landlord and will require approval of a modification to the sign 6. It is the responsibility of the Tenant's sign company to verify all conduit and program application by the City. transformer locations and service access prior to fabrication. Accordingly, the landlord will retain full rights of approval for any sign 7. Should a sign be removed, it is the Tenant's responsibility to patch all holes, used in the center. paint surface to match the existing color, and restore surface to original condition. No sign shall be installed without the written landlord approval and the required City permits. PROJECT NUMBER. 1a1°1B-Bt ARCHITECTURAL ��{(/ SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SIGN CRITERIA ISSUED DATE „.�.,° - �� �/ DRAWN BY ES CONSORTIUM L.L.C. CMECNEDBY " 901 North 3rd Street 612-436-4030 GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : N.T.S. SC-1 .� Minneapolis.MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SIGN PROGRAM C. GENERAL SIGN CONSTRUCTION REQUIREMENT: 1. All signs and their installation shall comply with all local building and electrical codes. 9. All lighting must match the exact specification of the approved working drawings. NO EXPOSED CONDUITS OR RACE WAYS WILL BE ALLOWED. 2. All electrical signs will be fabricated by a U.L. approved sign company, according to U.L. specifications and bear U.L. Label. 10. Signs must be made of durable rust -inhibited materials that are appropriate and complimentary to the building. 3. Sign company to be fully licensed with the City and State and shall provide proof of 11. Color coatings shall exactly match the colors specified on the approved plans. full Workman's Compensation and general liability insurance. 12. Joining of materials le.g., seams] shall be finished in such a way as to be 4. All penetrations of building exterior surfaces are to be sealed, waterproof, and in color unnoticeable. Visible welds shall be continuous and ground smooth. Rivets,screws, & finish to match existing exterior. and other fasteners that extend to visible surfaces shall be flush, filled, and finished so as to be unnoticeable. 5. Internal illumination to be 30 milliamp neon, fluorescent tube or LED for storefront elevations and #3500 white neon or LED halo for freeway elevations. Installed and 13. Finished surfaces of metal sholl be free from canning and warping. All sign labeled in accordance with the "National Board of Fire Underwriters Specifications". finishes shall be free from dust, orange peel, drips, and runs and shall have auniform surface conforming to the highest standards of the industry. 6. Painted surfaces must have an acrylic polyurethane finish or baked-on finish. 14. In no case shalt any manufacturer's label be visible from the street from normal 7. Logo and letter heights shall be as specified and shall be determined by measuring viewing angles. the normal capital letter of a type font exclusive of swashes,ascenders and descenders. 15. Exposed raceways and conduit are not permitted unless they are incorporated See diagram on following page. into the overall sign design. 8. All sign fabrication work shall be of excellent quality. All logo images and type-styles 16. Exposed junction boxes, lamps, tubing or neon crossovers of any type are not shall be accurately reproduced. permitted. ARCHITECTURAL PROJECT NUMBER ISSUED DATE.. I I_ SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SIGN CRITERIA ���CeV CONSORTIUM L.L.C. 901 North 3rd Street 612-436-4030 GATL[N DEVELOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : N.T.S. SC-1 .2 Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SIGN PROGRAM D. SHOP TENANTS SIGNAGE SPECIFICATIONS: The intent of this criteria is to encourage creativity to ensure the individuality of In order to allow creativity and artistic designs, ascending and descending each tenant sign as opposed to similar sign design, construction, and colors shapes will be allowed to extend up to 25% beyond the envelope limits provided repeated throughout the project. Signs must be architecturally compatible with that the overall allocated square footage is not exceeded. In other words, these the entire center. areas have to be calculated individually. The following types of construction will be allowed: Ascender Acrylic face channel letters Through face and halo channel letters Reverse pan channel letters - - - - --J - Skeleton neon behind flat cut out shapes and letters. Open pan channel letters (Only in an artistic letter style /font) Push thru letters and logos in aluminum cabinets Flat cut out dimensional shapes and accents Descender-- Metal screen mesh accents Exposed skeleton neon accents Ascender: (The part of the lowercase letters, such as b, d, and h. that extends above the other lowercase letters). The idea of using dissimilar materials and creating signs with varying colors, layers and textures will create an exciting and Descender: (The part of the lowercase letters, such as g, p, and q, that extends appealing retail environment. below the other lowercase letters). PROJECT NUTABER. 10-1018-01 ARCHITECTURAL .�.//�'(/��\ SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SIGN CRITERIA DRAWNBy 1,.�_,° 'I �J DRAWN BY. ES CONSORTIUM L.L.C. CNECKE°BY KA 901 North 3rd Street 612-436-4030 GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : N.T.S. SC-1 .3 Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SIGN PROGRAM E. PROHIBITED SIGNS: 1. Signs constituting a Traffic Hazard 8. Light Bulb Strings: No person shall install or maintain, or cause to be installed or maintained, any sign External displays, other than temporary decorative holiday lighting which which simulates or imitates in size, color, lettering or design any traffic sign or signal, consists of unshielded light bulbs are prohibited. An exception hereto may be granted or which makes use of the words "STOP", "LOOK", "DANGER" or any words, upon review and at the sole discretion of the Landlord. phrases, symbols, or characters in such a manner as to interfere with, mislead or confuse traffic. 9. Banners, Pennants & Balloons Used for Advertising Purposes: Temporary flags, banners, or pennants, or a combination of same constituting an architectural feature which is an integra! part of the design character of a praiect may 2. Signs in Proximity to Utility lines: be permitted subject to Municipal Code requirements, landlord's, and City approval. Signs which have less horizontal or vertical clearance from authorized communication or energized electrical power lines that are prescribed by the IO.Biliboard Signs are not permitted. applciable laws and or code are prohibited. 11. The use of permanent "sale" sign is prohibited. The temporary use of these signs are limited to a thirty-day period and is restricted to signs affixed to the interior 01 3. Painted letters will not be permitted. windows which do not occupy more that 20% of the window area. Each business is permitted a total of not more than ninety (90) days of temporary window sale signs per 4. Wall signs may not proiect above the top of a parapet, the roof line at the wall, or calendar year. roof line. 12. No cabinet construction only allowed. 5. There shall be no signs that are flashing, moving or audible. F. ABANDONMENT OF SIGNS: 6. No sign shall project above or below the sign-able area. The sign-able area is delined in the attached Exhibit for major and shop tenants. Any tenant sign left after thirty (30) days fram vacating premises shall become the property of Landlord. 7. Vehicle Signs: G. INSPECTION: Signs on or affixed to trucks, automobiles, trailers, or other vehicles which are used to advertise, identify, or provide direction to a use or activity not related to its lawful Landlord reserves the right to hire an independent electrical engineer at the Tenant's activity are prohibited. sole expense to inspect the installation of all Tenant's signs. PROJECT MIMBER 1'J'1019-01 ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SIGN CRITERIA DRAU By, ES 10 '� DRANTI BY: _..__ ES ._ CONSORTIUM L.L.C. CHECKEOBY 901 North 3rd Street 612-436-4030 GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : N.T.S. SC-1 .4 Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SIGN PROGRAM 1'RETURNS "RETURNS j�L•7/S-PEG C•FfW►l; SECTION A / :INSTALL w17FCl-i/A-X3-uz'SCl!"NS NEW SINGLE FACED INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED LEXAN FACED CHANNEL LETTER DISPLAY }—} +NTOPIAST CAPNCHOR.$ ALIIMtNUM CHANNEL NTOExpANS10l+SHIEtD9EACH UTTER) ALUMINUMCHANNIi —11Ix2'IAG5IH10 Fx PA NSMJN SHIELDS lie X7'1A GS INiOFX PA NSI(IN SHI(LOS USE STANDARD ALUMINUM CONSTRUCTION WITH MATHEWS(OR EQUIVALENT)SEMI GLOSS INNI CAD AIVMIt:UM RA CE WAY —ALIIMINUM RACEWAY ACRYLIC POLYURETHANE FINISH,FACES USE TRANSLUCENT LEXAN WITH 3/4"TRIM CAP. -GTO-ISYnRE 7(xAN daCX UR- _ 010 is WIR! STANDARD GI ASS STAND 1RANSFORIOU? - TRANSFORFAEC ILLUMINATE WITH 30 ma NEON OR LED LAMPING WHERE APPROPRIATE,PAINT RETURNS ACRVJCFACE DISC ONNEC1SwITCH CIfARLFxIONTU9S DKCO►iNECiS)S17CH NEON TIAE NEON TUdE fLECIROEI`S CDtJDU1T w!GTOINSIDE VVEE►110lE5 P-K HOUSING WEEP HOLES 514'CONDUIT THRU p1AI L SECTION B FACIA FACIA-- NEW SINGLE FACED ILLUMINATED WALL DISPLAY USE FLAT CUT OUT 0.090 ALUMINUM sECT;oND SECTION A SIGN 10 SE UL APPROVED AND BEAR III tAdEi GRAPHICS WITH NEON OR LED AS APPROPRIATE BEHIND, PAINT ALUMINUM MATTHEWS(OR S+GN TO AF lR APPROVED AND SEAR.UI LAST( REVERSE PAN CHANNELS EQUIVALENT)SEMI GLOSS ACRYLIC POLYURETHANE,USE NEON WITH PK TYPE HOUSINGS. LEXAN FACED CHANNEL LETTERS THROUGH FACE AND HALO 1LLUMRIA110" PK HOUSINGS s'RETURN5 LAGS INTO EXPANSION SHIELDS1-3/A-PEG OFFMIA Li SECTION C 4—SCREWS METAL RACEWAY //:EINTO INSTALL YJrt t13-115"X 1-lry•SCREWS NEW SINGLE FACED INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED LEXAN FACED CHANNEL LETTER DISPLAY WITH GiO.1S WIRE EXPANSION SHIEIDSUACH LETTER) THROUGH FACE AND HALO ILLUMINATION.USE STANDARD ALUMINUM CONSTRUCTION WITH STANDAROGIASSSTAND TRANSFORMER ALUMINUM CHANNEL 1/d X 2'LA05+NTOEXPANSION SHIELDS F 1AICU70UT OISCONNECTSWITCH AIFIMINUMAACfVJA( MATTHEWS(OR EQUIVALENT)SEMI GLOSS ACRYLIC POLYURETHANE FINISH, FACES USE AwMINUM.ovFR:AtS CDNDunW/GTOWSIDE LExATHROUGP f GTO-ISWIRE HECNIUS( 112"CLEAR PL[%PUSHiHROUGH- LEXAN WITH 3/4"TRIM CAP, ILLUMINATE WITH 30 ma NEON OR LED WHERE APPROPRIATE FASCIA P-KHOUSING CLEAR LExANdACKS TRAHSFORMFR THROUGH FACE AND HALO, PAINT RETURNS IN1oPtA5T1C.NcH0R3 NTONTUS( _- GKCONNECTSIYITCH EIf CTRO61TS SECTIGNE WEFPHOLES- 314'CONOUJI IHRUWALI _�•"__ FACt4 SECTION D 51GN TO SE UE APP40VID AND SEAR Lk LABEL Exp05ED NEON FYITH AFLINArift FACE OIAVLAYS NEW SINGLE FACED INTERNALLY ILLUMINAItD ALUMINUM FACED CHANNEL LETTER DISPLAY SIGN To BE UL APPRTY LID AM ef4f u:LASH WITH THROUGH FACE AND HALO ILLUMINATION. USE STANDARD ALUMINUM CONSTRUCTION , eETu2fis T<EVF E PAN CHANNELS THROUGH FACE AND HALO lLLVMlNenpN WITH MATTHEWS(OR EQUIVALENT)SEMI GLOSS ACRYLIC POLYURETHANE FINISH. ROUTE OUT �JI 3ie RG OFF WAIL PUSH THROUGH GRAPHICS WHERE GRAPHICS OCCUR AND BACK UP WITH LEXAN, ILLUMINATE WITH 30 ma NEON OR LED INSTALIWTH.3 IA'X3-IJ2"SCREWS WHERE APPROPRIATE THROUGH FACE AND HALO. PAINT ALUMINUM FACE AND RETURNS. ' INTO PtASTEC ANCHORS ANCHOR SODTCJIj'"SDIC 12f PIU1:dNtIM CHANNTt 4p INTO 2-IAG5INTO EXPANSION SHIEL DS � Pi SadASiTTFD TO)1:P1501CTION TRIM CAP 'AIUti11Hl'M Rt.C(l0'AY PANTED 071AILIM. FE'.R APPROVAL / SIGN R ETURN SECTION E IEKAHfACES / TRANSF RM ONAtUM WIj4 GlRA rlALI ED TRANSFORETR ON ALUM WIR iNG1RACKlAii CLEAR LFXAN BACKS ACM Jc-SIGN FACE T- 1 fIJCLOSEDri+RIKG1 SAME AS"D"EXCEPT ROUTE OUT WHERE GRAPHICS OCCUR AND NFONTUSE 0rCCNNECTMOTCH EUCTROBITS T FLEXCOFJDU11SlIPPIHD PUSH THROUGH 1/2"CLEAR PLEX WITH APPLIED VINYL OVERLAYS. suRNISHEOBYSIGTJSMOV. tf;LETTER, H WEEPHOLES 1N'CONDV1TtHRVWAIL ANDCAVtK(DFYSIGNINSTmLIP fACiA EMPLISIGN RETURK 1'X 4-)L)NC110N yOx 5UPPLIT O SECTION F SECTIONC _^ SEALANT Ali SIDES 14DINSIMIEDEY6CIEUCTRCIAN — — SFCTIONF NEW SINGLE FACED INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED ACRYLIC FACED CHANNEL LITTER DISPLAY StGNTG R ELL APPROVED AND AFAR III LABEL SIGN TO DT tA APPROVED AND BI AP.UL LABEL USE STANDARD ALUMINUM CONSTRUCTION WITH MATTHEWS (OR EQUIVALENT)SEMI GLOSS LE.Iw4 FACED CHANNEL IFTTER9 --4ASCtA ACRYLIC FACED CHANNELS THR000,H FACE AND HALO IUUMR)ATICN 1NRH Ftl10211CFNT TUBE ACRYLIC POLYURETHANE FINISH OR BAKED-ON RNISH,FACES USE TRANSLUCENT ACRYLIC MASTC(ORMED _OVERSIZED HOIF FUZED OR LED ILLUMINATION WITH 3/4"TRIM CAP, ILLUMINATE WITH CWHO FLUORESCENT TUBES OR LED,PAINT RETURNS GRAPHICS W1 SRICONf ADHESIVE SECTION G TY P.3116•TRti ADED STUD NEW SINGLE FACED NON-ILLUMINATED WALL DISPLAY SECTIONG USE PLASTIC FORMED GRAPHICS, FLUSH MOUNTED SIGN 10 if Ul APPROVED AND SEAR UL LAdh NON-FtLUMINATfD PLASTC FORMED GRAPHICS PROJECT NUMBER 1410,R-01 ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SIGN CRITERIA ISSUED DATE 17-09.10 - CHECK BY ES CONSORTIUM L.L.C. CHECXECBV xA 901 North 3rd Street 612-4364030 GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : N.T.S. SC-1 •5 Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 61222-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 TENANT TENANT \ TENANT TENANT T -� TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT _ TENANT TENANT TENANT TDIWT _TENANT ----TENANT "- TENANT T Z e \l , _ NORTH TENANT " , •.4 TENANT r., TENANT .__ � ..TENANT 1 TENANT TENANT a rEwurr � , - TENANT __ �k SHINGLE CREEK CROSSINC 1 TENANT e _ TENANT -- x . TENANT TENANT A"t` TENANT TENANT - TENANT - - TENANT PROJECT NUMBER. 10-101"" ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SITE SIGNAGE EXHIBIT ISSUED DATE ES CHECKED BY: KA x70 oRAwN By Es _- CONSORTIUM L. L.C. 901 North 3rd Street 612-436-4030 GATUN DBTLOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : N.T.S. S E 1 . Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 i 101-0" INTERIOR ILLUMINATED TENANT 516N PANEL - TWO-SIDED - ❑ 18 5F 516N AREA "r - O SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 15'-0' TENANT PAD TENANT ! MONUMENT SIGN NOTE; CORPORATE LO60 / 6RAPH I C5 TENANT ME N IN. ALLOWED UPON REVIEYSI AID TENANT APPROVAL FROM INTERIOR ILLUMINATED LANDLORD o TENANT SIGN PANEL5 - 10'-O" ' �- -- TYVO-SIDED - TENANT 312 5F SIGN AREA i j TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT = TENANT J IN'T'ERIOR ILLUMINATED 516N PANELS - p TENANT TW0-51DED - a _ TENANT i 140 5F 516N AREA -- ( TENANT TENANT - - TENANT j MAJOR FREEWAY MAJOR PYLON 516N PYLON 516N PROJECT NUMBER ioloi i ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SITE SIGNAGE EXHIBIT DSSUED CA?E Es CHECKS V ES CONSORTIUM L.L.C. CRELREDBV ,� 901 North 3rd Street 612-436-4030 GATUN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : 1/8" = 1'-0" SE1 .2 Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 61292-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 TENANT SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING TENANT PAD TENANT MONUMENT SIGN TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT TENANT T TENANT 4 F a -- 1 TENANT --- ' TENANT MAJOR FREEWAY MAJOR PYLON SIGN PYLON SIGN PROJECT NUWER: Br _ES ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SITE SIGNAGE ORUEeB ORAYYN -- - E-s CFIEC�DBV. KA CONSORTIUM L. L.C. RENDERING - -- - 901 North 3rd Street 612-436-4030 GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : N.T.S. S E 1 .3 Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 MAXIMUM 90% SIZE: 1.5 SQUARE FOOT OF SIGN AREA PER LINEAR FOOT OF LEASED U) OF ADJACENT SURFACE LENGTH PREMISES, MAXIMUM OF 750 SQUARE FEET TOTAL PER ELEVATION. z ~ w w (D X J _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - __ - - - - MATERIALS: VARIETY OF TYPES PER SIGN CRITERIA, SINGLE TYPE OF Q - Q (n i i CONSTRUCTION ALLOWED W � = � rY 0 W O LLI I ILLUMINATION: YES> ANCHOR TENANT LLQaou.1 I COPY. TENANT NAME AND OR LOGO O W � L - - - - - - - o ? O U - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -J U yz ANCHOR TENANTS (OVER 90,000 SQUARE FEET) HEIGHT: SEVENTY PERCENT OF ADJACENT SURFACE MAXIMIUM 90% LENGTH: NINETY PERCENT OF ADJACENT SURFACE U) OF ADJACENT SURFACE LENGTH - TYPEFACE: CUSTOM LOGO AND TYPE OK Z = W W CD X J COLOR: CUSTOM COLORS OK U - Q _ I- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Q = SECONDARY SIGNS: YES(NOT TO EXCEED 25%OF TOTAL Q ( O N DA RY ALLOWABLE SIGN AREA)ONLY MAJOR SERVICES/DEPARTMENTS LL Q N W ALLOWED. NO ADVERTISING OR SLOGANS OLL _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - _ ZC.) TYPE AND LOCATION: AS SHOWN ON ATTACHED ELEVATIONS ~ U) ANCHOR TENANT SIGN EXAMPLE SECONDARY SIGN EXAMPLE Q6-4hP 0 o O ea o0 PROJECT NU.MER 10-tOt D-07 ISSUED ARCHITECTURAL ���/J� SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING ANCHOR TENANT DRAM DATE H-W-10 i...../ DRAWN BV-. ES CONSORTIUM L.L.C. BUILDING SIGNAGE CHECKED BY KA 901 North 3rd Street 612-4364030 GATLINDEVELOPMENTCOMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : N.T.S. SE2.1 Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 612 692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 Sign Qty Color Height Illumination Sq.Ft Total Sq.Ft A. Walmart 2 WhiteNellow 5`-6" Internal 298.00 596.00 B. Market&Pharmacy 1 White 2'-0" NIA 65.65 65.65 C. Home&Living 1 White 2'-0" N/A 46.47 46.47 D. Outdoor Living 1 White 2'-0" N/A 49.43 49.43 E. Pharmacy Drive-Thru 1 White 1`-6" N/A 39.88 39.88 F. Enter 1 White 1`-0" N/A 3.23 3.23 G. Exit 1 White I V-0" I N/A 1 2.34 1 2.34 Total Building Signage: 803.00 SIGN A nM�iO��o00 e a e iin SIGN D SIGN C SIGN A SIGN B SIGN E n; FF1 0 • o.�ro.o t� - - - I I • � I I � • I I - SIGN F/G PRMEC7 NUMBER i�-1C�9-0t ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING ANCHOR TENANT ISSUED DATE DRAWN By ES CHEC�DBV KA CONSORTIUM L.L.C. BUILDING SIGNAGE E2.2 612-436-4030 , , S 901 North 3rd Street GATLII�DEVELOPMENT COMPAI��Y BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE N.T.S. Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 _ MAXIMUM 70% SIZE: 1.5 SQUARE FOOT OF SIGN AREA PER LINEAR FOOT OF U) OF ADJACENT SURFACE LENGTH LEASED PREMISES, MAXIMUM OF 350 SQUARE FEET TOTAL Z ~ W PER ELEVATION. - - - - - - - - - - - - U - Q W MATERIALS:VARIETY OF TYPES PER SIGN CRITERIA,SINGLE Q = i TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION ALLOWED p W o W < UQ ? W i i ILLUMINATION: YES O LL C)f T, L - = O U — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — J COPY: TENANT NAME AND OR LOGO ° C MAJOR TENANTS (OVER 10,000 - 89,999 SQUARE FEET) HEIGHT: SEVENTY PERCENT OF ADJACENT SURFACE _ MAXIMIUM 70% LENGTH: SEVENTY PERCENT OF ADJACENT SURFACE U) OF ADJACENT SURFACE LENGTH Z = W TYPEFACE: CUSTOM LOGO AND TYPE OK U U X J Q W < _ r- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I COLOR: CUSTOM COLORS OK QW � w SECONDARY LL Q CD W SECONDARY SIGNS_YES(NOT TO EXCEED 25%OF TOTAL � ALLOWABLE SIGN AREA) OLL = L- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - Z) oC/) MAJOR TENANT SECONDARY SIGN SIGN EXAMPLE - EXAMPLE ........"... L--- - -- -- - --- T NA T ' --- -- --- - - -- --- I I TYPICAL MAJOR TENANT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" PROJECT NUMBER. tht°t¢Dt ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING MAJOR TENANT ISSUED DATE „.u-'° T DRANN BY: ES CONSORTIUM L.L.C. /T�/ / BUILDING SIGNAGE CHECKEDEY KA 901 North 3rd Street 612-436.4030 GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : AS NOTED SE3. Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 _ MAXIMUM 70% OF ADJACENT SURFACE LENGTH SIZE: H � FRONT ELEVATION: 1.5 SQUARE FOOT OF SIGN AREA PER Z = W LINEAR FOOT OF LEASED PREMISES, L1J (D X J F- — — — — — — — — MAXIMUM OF 150 SQUARE FEET TOTAL. I I REAR ELEVATION: 75%OF ALLOWABLE FRONT ELEVATION W O UJ ( i SIGNAGE. a0 _1 > O � � W I I I- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - MATERIALS: VARIETY OF TYPES PER SIGN CRITERIA � SHOP TENANTS (UP TO 10,000 SQUARE FEET) ILLUMINATION: YES *NOTE: ONE SIGN PER TENANT PER ELEVATION COPY: TENANT NAME AND OR LOGO HEIGHT: SIXTYFIVE PERCENT OF ADJACENT SURFACE LENGTH: SEVENTY PERCENT OF ADJACENT SURFACE TYPEFACE: CUSTOM LOGO AND TYPE OK COLOR: CUSTOM COLORS OK SECONDARY SIGNS: NO f I TENANT TENANT_"a TE(1ANT- -- — ----- -- I TENANT 7ENfATJT _- ENANT_I L_---------`J L--------- NO lw TYPICAL SHOP TENANT ELEVATION SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" PROJECT NUMBER 161°1Bt11 ISSUED ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING SHOP TENANT DRAWN BY. ,,.k.,° CONSORTIUM L.L.C. -DRAWN BY. ES BUILDING SIGNAGE CHECKED BY KA 901 North 3rd Street 612-436A030 GATLIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : AS NOTED SE4.1 Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 MAXIMUM 70% OF ADJACENT SURFACE LENGTH SIZE: 1.5 SQUARE FOOT OF SIGN AREA PER LINEAR FOOT OF Z ~2 W LEASED PREMISES, MAXIMUM OF 250 SQUARE FEET TOTAL i _ - - - - - - - - - - _ _ - - - - _ - - - _ _ _ PER ELEVATION. Q W a I - - - - _ MATERIALS: VARIETY OF TYPES PER SIGN CRITERIA,SINGLE QW O ; i i TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION REQUIRED. LL Q "T w I I O LL L - - - - _ - - ILLUMINATION: YES S OU LO = COPY: TENANT NAME AND OR LOGO CD *NOTE: TYP. ONE SIGN MAX. PER ELEVATION FOR SINGLE USER. HEIGHT: SIXTY FIVE PERCENT OF ADJACENT SURFACE OTHERS UPON REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY LANDLORD LENGTH: SEVENTY PERCENT OF ADJACENT SURFACE TYPEFACE: CUSTOM LOGO AND TYPE OK COLOR: CUSTOM COLORS OK SECONDARY SIGNS: NO TYPICAL SIGN TYPICAL SIGN EXAMPLE EXAMPLE -- --- ---- - --- TENANT --- L-------- -J - j PROJECT NUMBER. 10.1°10.01 ISSUED ARCHITECTURAL SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING PAD TENANT DRAYM DA i,-M.iD 'r �, DRAwN By� ES CONSORTIUM L.L.C. y/ \+ BUILDING SIGNAGE CHECKED BY NA 901 North 3rd Street 612-436-4030 GATUN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN SCALE : AS NOTED S E5.1 Minneapolis,MN 55401 Fax 612-692-9960 Architectural Consortium,L.L.C.2010 City Council Agenda Item No. 10a COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: March 14, 2011 • TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk .4" 4 1 vr SUBJECT: An Ordinance Amending and Repealing Certain Sections of Chapters 1 and 19 Relating to Private Kennel Licenses Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of first reading of an ordinance amending and repealing certain sections of Chapters 1 and 19 relating to private kennel licenses and set second reading and Public Hearing for April 11, 2011. Background: This ordinance relating to private kennel licenses is a housekeeping amendment and removes reference to private kennel licenses from the City Code. In 2001 the City Council amended the City Code of Ordinances regarding private kennel licenses so that no new private kennel license would be issued after April 23, 2001. However, persons who had received a private kennel license prior to April 23, 2001, could seek renewal of their private kennel license. Language regarding private kennel license application procedures and requirements remained in the ordinance since there were private kennel licenses that were issued prior to April 23, 2001. In August 2006 the last recipient of a private kennel license notified the City that she was moving out of the community and would no longer need to renew the private kennel license. Since there are no longer any holders of private kennel licenses, the language referencing private kennel licenses can be removed. There have been a few occasions when residents have called to inquire about obtaining a private kennel license, as they had read about the requirements on the City's website in the ordinance, but had missed the 1st paragraph of Section 1 -104 (2) (a) regarding no new private kennels license will be issued after April 23, 2001. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Council Goals: Strategic: 1. We will ensure a safe and secure community 3. We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods • Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 1 lth day of April, 2011, at 7 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an ordinance amending and repealing certain sections of Chapters 1 and 19 relating to private kennel licenses. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities are available upon request at least 96 hours in advance. Please contact the City Clerk at 763 -569 -3300 to make arrangements. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REPEALING CERTAIN SECTIONS OF CHAPTERS 1 AND 19 RELATING TO PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 1 -101 of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances is amended by deleting the following definition: O P r i va t e V 1 mems ., a e use f er- R! .a R2 er- defined in the Br-eek4ya Gen er- City ry me rs el�r older r k �, ,-b pets a nd of f GLllll� fling b e �di fig • � shewing ! grooming or- other- eeffffaervial puTe [and renumbering paragraph 9 of Section 1 -101 to paragraph 8] Section 2. Section 1 -102 of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances is amended as follows: Section 1 -102. LICENSES REQUIRED. <l-. Commercial Kennel License. Every person operating a commercial kennel shall annually obtain from the City Clerk, upon authorization by the City Council, a commercial kennel license. Commercial kennel licenses shall be posted in a conspicuous place within the licensed premises. kennel shall apqually obtain &m the City QeFk, upen auth • ORDINANCE NO. • Section 3. Section 1 -103 of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances is amended as follows: Section 1 -103. LICENSE FEES. The license fee for each commercial kennel license, eaeb private kennel , ach renewal license, and each impounding penalty described herein shall be as set forth by City Council resolution. 1. Refunds, Prorating, and Transfers. No commercial kennel license fee -ease keme! heense fee shall be refunded or prorated, the provisions of Chapter 23 of Brooklyn Center Ordinances notwithstanding. No license required hereunder shall be transferable. Section 4. Section 1 -104 (2) of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances is amended as follows: Section 1 -104. APPLICATION PROCEDURES AND ISSUANCE OF LICENSES. Applications for all licenses required by this epee Chapter shall be made to the City Clerk. S a. No now rat k enne l h e e nse A 411 b issued en or- after April 23, 2001. These p@fsvxra dX r 1 'iv= vvvr czsrc ed a privfk�£e�e - p� 6� , , may seek renewal ef their- private kennel heense as b. Renewal- biee e n ..heatie f r-e f a- private -kennel hee s ,il l.o ,1 amiva on O e t e b er- 1 t th Cit Cl bt 1, 11 m aintai n ., eei F kennel heenses. The applismien shall state the name and address of the , name age, bFeed, and sew e€esk deg t deg and the p e heense fee a set f t-tbt _b by City Gettt eil res olutio n m v xr ivuvxucavxxzlluv� eeempany th Ved-pr tien. e li appea t t k e333 el heense appheatien appr- ex + Ap 1 PP�� +1 Nothing here, shall autho the b o f .t t -i Leta,el t April .11.. 11.,....,� ...� » t,........., .�.,.....,. th avire he e ns e t at pr- to April 23 ynn. 01 . A4 s tieh time as the nu mber- e f .lees o n the l;eense.l p r e m i s e s c.ha4 e „ mor that, two dogs the heense shaH &xpir-e. A p&ate kennel lie shall be renewable en4y in the ev It e e that e e et..+ a t o e h eense aide no • h th ^ V GL t f th ' is m ade et,+ett pl.tted by the City nett «eil t he lies„ shall be , tteixlable -as —t - F.4t-t10_i,z tMs ham • ORDINANCE NO. 6. Standards fer A An applieatien f9F renewal of a private kennel heensee • s h a ll b rev b th e City J Ci m i t o p l nee with thi r hap t o wi� Ch ap t er- 19 f th City Ofdi naaees, a nd with „di fi , ; e d b th Cit.. d. bieense Reveeatie I th even a ., t has b e b Cit. „ffi, a l l r l City r Y ,.t ti, r h fl b e d t th City Geuneil by the City Clerk a th C;t„ 1V1 C i J i. YY d t th a ,. t; t t t„ s h e b the o s h , ,u not be revoke n he ense may r r � e eked fi „ 1 nt;.. e f thi Chapte 19 f th e D 1 1 G en 4 er- Q f di nanees, „diti i mpos ed b y the C er- Getmeil at the time of issuanee. Section 5. Section 1 -105 (STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE KENNELS) of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances is hereby repealed. Section 6. Section 19 -104, paragraph 1, of the Brooklyn Center City Code of Ordinances is amended as follows: Section 19 -104. LIMITATIONS ON KEEPING OF ANIMALS. It is hereby declared to be a public nuisance to permit, maintain or harbor any of the following: L More than two (2) dogs exceeding six months of ag u ^ p ri v a te kenne . liesense was issued piier- te A01 23, 2001, as set feith in Chapter- 1 of th Br-eeklyn Center- City Or-dinanees. Section 7. This Ordinance shall be effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 2011. Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication: Effective Date: (tee indicates matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) • I EDA MEETING City of Brooklyn Center March 14, 2011 AGENDA 1. Call to Order —The EDA requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the meeting. A copy of the full City Council packet, including EDA (Economic Development Authority), is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda —The following items are considered to be routine by the Economic Development Authority (EDA) and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Commissioner so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered at the end of Commission Consideration Items. a. Approval of Minutes 1. February 14, 2011— Regular Session . 4. Commission Consideration Items a. Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 2011 -09, Earle Brown Heritage Center Connecting Link Requested Commission Action: — Motion to adopt resolution. b. Resolution Reauthorizing EDA Resolution 2009 -17 Providing Authority to Staff to Acquire Certain Foreclosed Homes Within the City and to Execute all Instruments and Contracts Related Thereto Requested Commission Action: Motion to adopt resolution. 5. Adjournment EDA Agenda Item No. 3a MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION FEBRUARY 14, 2011 CITY HALL - COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Regular Session called to order by President Tim Willson at 10:10 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL President Tim Willson and Commissioners Carol Kleven, Kay Lasman, Tim Roche, and Dan Ryan. Also present were Executive Director Curt Boganey, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, Jim Glasoe, CARS Director, Assistant City Attorney Mary Tietjen, and Carla Wirth, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. • 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Roche moved and Commissioner Lasman seconded approval of the Agenda and Consent Agenda, and the following item was approved: 3a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. January 24, 2011— Regular Session Motion passed unanimously. 4. COMMISSION CONSIDERATION ITEMS 4a. EDA RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -03 AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER/EMBASSY SUITES CONNECTING LINK Executive Director Curt Boganey introduced the item, discussed the history, and stated the purpose of the proposed resolution to authorize advertisement for bids to construct a link connecting the Earle Brown Heritage Center and Embassy Suites. • 02/14/11 -1- DRAFT Commissioner Lasman moved and Commissioner Ryan seconded adoption of EDA RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -03 Authorizing Advertisement for Bids, Earle Brown Heritage . Center/Embassy Suites Connecting Link. Motion passed unanimously. Jim Glasoe, CARS Director, displayed pictures depicting the proposed link and advised of slight modifications to accommodate a fire hydrant and storm sewer. In response to the EDA's questions, he explained how the linkage will maintain the integrity of the D Barn's front fagade and the anticipated project schedule. 5. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Lasman moved and Commissioner Roche seconded adjournment of the Economic Development Authority meeting at 10:19 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. i • 02/14/11 -2- DRAFT • EDA Agenda Item No. 4a EDA ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE: March 8, 2011 • TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Jim Glasoe, CARS Director SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting Bid and A arding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 2011 -09, Earle Brown Heritage Center Connecting Link Recommendation: It is recommended that the Economic Development Authority consider approval of the lowest responsible bid and award a contract to Lund Martin Construction Inc. for Improvement Project 2011 -09, Earle Brown Heritage Center Connecting Link. Background; On June 28, 2010, the Economic Development Authority approved the fourth amendment to the development agreement with Brooklyn Hotel Partners LLC, related to the Embassy Suites Hotel development. Part of the fourth amendment shifts responsibility for construction of the connecting "Link" between the hotel and the Earle Brown Heritage Center from the developer to the City of Brooklyn Center. The City has, therefore developed construction plans, specifications and • contract documents and solicited public bids. The project was advertised in the City's official newspaper in accordance with Minnesota Statutes. Sealed bids for Improvement Project 20011 -09 were received and opened on March 8, 2011. The bidding results are tabulated below: BIDDER TOTAL Lund Martin Construction Inc. $673,000.00 Ebert Inc. $762,000.00 Meisinger Construction Company Inc. $779,000.00 A &L Construction Inc. $858,000.00 Of the four (4) bids received, the lowest of $673,000.00 was submitted by Lund Martin Construction Inc. of Minneapolis, Minnesota. Lund Martin Construction Inc. has the experience, equipment and capacity to qualify as lowest responsible bidder for this project. Budget Issues• The bid amount of $673,000.00 is within the budgeted amount (see attached Resolution- Cost and Revenue tables). The total estimated project budget was $860,000 and is amended to $810,000, a decrease of $50,000. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust EDA ITEM MEMORANDUM Funding sources for the EBHC Link project include: Earle Brown Heritage Center Capital Fund, ($60,000). The EBHC Capital Fund has a current cash balance of $587,728.00. Although there was no allocation included in the approved 2011 budget, no planned improvements would need to be delayed or eliminated as a result of this allocation. In addition, the fund would maintain a positive cash balance according to the plan through 2017. Tax Increment Financing District #2, ($324,000). The current cash balance for TIF #2 is $2,575,654.15. The approved 2011 budget estimates revenues of $975,000 and expenditures of $10,000. Although this allocation was not included in the approved budget, the fund retains adequate fund balance to support the expenditure. The attached letter from our legal counsel indicates that, in order for TIF #2 funds to be made available for this project, a separate funding plan must be approved by the Economic Development Authority following publication of notice and holding of a public hearing p t3' P g P g regarding g plan. lan. Economic Development Authority Fund Balance, ($426,000). The current EDA cash balance is $1,373,715.00. The approved 2011 budget anticipates revenues of $315,831.00 and expenditures of $389,677.00. With the exception of these planned expenditures, all of the remaining fund • balance is unallocated. Note: It is our intention that, once the Phase #2 property of the Embassy Suites site is sold, any, or all of the above allocations could be reimbursed by the sale proceeds. Council Goals: Strategic: 2. We will aggressively proceed with implementation of City's redevelopment plans Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust Commissioner introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING A CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2011 -09, EARLE BROWN HERITAGE CENTER CONNECTING LINK WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 2011 -09, bids were received, opened and tabulated by the City Clerk and CARS Director on the 8 th day of March, 2011. Said bids were as follows: BIDDER TOTAL Lund Martin Construction Inc. $673,000.00 Ebert Inc. $762,000.00 Meisinger Construction Company Inc. $779,000.00 A &L Construction Inc. $858,000.00 WHEREAS, it appears that Lund Martin Construction Inc. is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: • 1. The President and Executive Director are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Lund Martin Construction Inc., of Minneapolis Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 2011 -09, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the Economic Development Authority and on file in the office of the CARS Director. 2. The estimated project costs and revenues are as follows: Amended COSTS Estimated per Low Bid Contract $ 718,000.00 $ 673,000.00 Contingency $ 72,000.00 $ 67,000.00 Admin/Legal/Arch. $ 70,000.00 $ 70,000.00 Total Estimated Project Cost 860 000.00 $ 810 000.00 • RESOLUTION NO. Amended REVENUES Estimated per Low Bid EBHC Capital Fund $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000.00 City of Brooklyn Center TIF #2 $ 320,000.00 $ 324,000.00 EDA Fund Balance $ 480,000.00 $ 426,000.00 Total Estimated Revenue $ 860,000.00 $ 810,000.00 i March 14, 2011 Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner 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. • Offices in 470 U.S. Bank Plaza KJ 200 South Sixth Street -.r Minneapolis Minneapolis MN 55402 ` : 1, p Saint Paul (612) 337 -9300 telephone a► (612)337 -9310 fax e .. St. Cloud www.kennedy- graven.com CHARTERED ARir n uiV Action Equal opportunity Employer MEMORANDUM FROM: Mary Dyrseth Jenny Boulton DATE: August 17, 2010 RE: Use of TIF for D -Barn Link You have asked whether the City of Brooklyn Center and the Brooklyn Center EDA may use tax increments from Tax Increment District No. 2 under the temporary authority to spend increments in the 2010 Jobs Bill to finance the costs of an approximately 80 foot portion of the link that connects the Embassy Suites Hotel to the D -Barn up to a public entrance point and access to the rear service entrance to the D -Barn (the "Link ") where a privately operated spa and salon (the "Spa ") will be located pursuant to a 10 -year lease. In our opinion, assuming tenant improvements for the Spa are commenced before July 1, 2011 and the other requirements set forth in Section 1 below are met, tax increments from TIF District No. 2 can be used to pay costs of the Link. 1. Temporary Authority to Stimulate Construction The 2010 Jobs Bill authorizes tax increments from an existing tax increment district, whenever the district was certified and not withstandin g any law to the contrary, to be spent for any of the following purposes: (a) To provide improvements, loans, interest rate subsidies or assistance in any form to private development consisting of the construction or substantial rehabilitation of buildings and ancillary facilities, if doing so will create or retain jobs in the state, including construction jobs, and construction commences before July 1, 2011, and would not commence before that date without the assistance; and (b) To make a equity or similar investment in a corporation, partnership or limited liability company that the authority determines is necessary to make the construction of a development meeting the requirements of paragraph (a) above financially feasible. The authority must adopt a written spending plan that specifically authorizes the assistance. A notice of public hearing on the spending plan must be published in a newspaper of general circulation at least once and not less than 10 days and not more than 30 days prior to the date of hearing. The authority to spend tax increments under this authorization expires on December 31, 2011. Expenditures of tax increments are not allowed beyond that date. 373481 v3 MMD BR291 -303 2. Application of Temporary Authority to D -Barn Link (a) The Earle Brown Heritage Center is a publicly owned facility which, among other things, leases space to private entities, in this case the operator of the Spa. In order to use the , temporary spending authority of the Jobs Bill, there must be private development. Development of a portion of the D -Barn to be leased to and operated by the Spa operator is private development in our view because the proposed lease will be for 10 years which is a significant duration and the Spa operator will invest in tenant improvements necessary to develop the Spa. (b) It will be necessary for the Spa operator to represent that construction of the Spa facilities would not have begun before July 1, 2011 without the construction of the Link by the EDA and construction of the Spa facilities must in fact begin before July 1, 2011. Therefore, the EDA should enter into an agreement with the Spa operator in which the Spa operator commits to commencing tenant improvements before July 1, 2011. In addition, the goal of the Jobs Bill is to create jobs; consequently, it will be necessary for the agreement with the Spa operator to indicate the number of jobs that will be created by the Spa operation and the EDA will also want to keep a record of construction related jobs for both the Link construction and for the Spa tenant improvements. (c) It is our understanding that the Spa operator will represent that because they expect the majority of Spa clients will be Hotel clients who will come through the Link to use the Spa, construction of the Link is necessary to induce the Spa operator to enter into the lease and construct the tenant improvements. Based on that representation, we have concluded that using tax increments to finance the 80 foot portion from the Hotel to the Spa and the adjacent common entrance bears a reasonable relationship to the private development. While arguably the clients of the Hotel and Spa are also likely to be attending events at the conference center, we are • concerned that the portion of the link connecting to the conference center is less of a source of potential clients and therefore less critical to the private development of the Spa; therefore, we recommend funding that expense from other funds available to the EDA as is currently proposed. Likewise, the public entrance point will be the most convenient access point to the Spa from the parking lot and therefore is necessary for at least some portion of Spa clients; however, it is appropriate to allocate half of the cost of the entrance to the Link to the conference center because it will also be an access point from the parking lot to the portion of the link leading to the conference center. (d) As discussed above a portion of the cost of the link and the common entrance will be paid from other available EDA funds. The EDA would like to be able to reimburse itself for that expenditure if at some point it receives revenues from the sale of Lot 2, Block 2, Brooklyn Farm 2 " Addition (the "EDA Tract "). There should not be any limitation on reimbursing the cost of the link and the common entrance from sale proceeds of the EDA Tract. (e) Finally, in addition to meeting the factual requirements of the Jobs Bill, the EDA will also need to meet the procedural requirements. That simply requires adopting a spending plan which authorizes the use of tax increments from TIF District No. 2 for the Link after holding a public for which at least 10 days' notice has been provided. There is no specific format or content required for the spending plan. 3734810 MMD BU91 -303 2 • EDA Agenda Item No. 4b i EDA COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Tom Bublitz, EDA/HRA Specialis THROUGH: Gary Eitel, Director of Business & Development Director DATE: March 9, 2011 SUBJECT: Resolution Reauthorizing EDA Resolution 2009 -17 Providing Authority to Staff to Acquire Certain Foreclosed Homes Within the City and to Execute all Instruments and Contracts Related Thereto Recommendation: Staff is recommending approval of Resolution Reauthorizing EDA Resolution 2009 -17 Providing Authority to Staff to Acquire Certain Foreclosed Homes Within the City and to Execute all Instruments and Contracts Related Thereto Background: • Resolution 2009 -17 (copy attached) was adopted to provide a mechanism to allow staff to acquire certain vacant and foreclosed residential properties in the city in a timely manner. The acquisition provisions established by Resolution 2009 -17 were designed to be in effect for a specific time period, which was twelve (12) months from the date of its adoption on October 26, 2009.With the expiration of Resolution 2009 -17, the intent of the proposed resolution is to continue the mechanism, authorized by EDA Resolution No. 2009 -17, to acquire vacant /foreclosed properties in the city that are distressed and blighted. The land will be held by the EDA until an appropriate reuse can be determined that will be compatible with the surrounding including uses such as residential redevelopment, open public facilities ace , neighborhood, g p p p P ndin on the source of revenue used to acquire the blighted and other eligible uses depending q g P g property. In the past, EDA staff has brought specific properties to the Board and requested authority to purchase the properties for demolition and redevelopment. The EDA has successfully completed numerous scattered site redevelopments, throughout the city, in this manner. In the current climate of foreclosures and vacant properties, it has become apparent that, in order to work with bank owned properties and secure the homes to accomplish the objective of acquiring blighted properties, there is a need to be able to act more quickly than previous procedures have allowed. Asset managers representing bank owned properties are typically not willing to wait on an offer for several weeks to allow the traditional EDA process of acquiring properties to occur. As a result, Resolution No. 2009 -17 created a process to acquire certain foreclosed/vacant properties within very specific requirements. Resolution No. 2009 -17 allowed the Executive Director to negotiate and execute the purchase of properties within specific guidelines contained in the resolution. During the twelve month (12) period (October 26, 2009 to October 26, 2010) in which • Resolution No. 2009 -17 was in effect, the EDA acquired several residential properties, two of which were purchased pursuant to the criteria established in resolution 2009 -17. The guidelines contained in Resolution No. 2009 -17 for acquisition of properties by the EDA Executive Director include the following: • Properties must be registered as vacant. • Properties would be purchased either with TIF funds or federal Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds. • The property would be determined to be blighted as defined by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency in its application to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for NSP funding. • The purchase price could not be more than 65 percent of Hennepin County's latest Estimated Market Value for the property and could not exceed $80,000. • Prior to the acquisition of property, staff would conduct a due diligence investigation to protect the EDA's interest with regard to purchase of the property. • The authority to acquire property under the terms of the resolution would expire in 12 months from the date of its passage. Budget Issues: • Properties purchased under authority of this resolution must be purchased with either NSP or TIF funds Commissioner introduced the following resolution and • moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REAUTHORIZING EDA RESOLUTION 2009 -17 PROVIDING AUTHORITY TO STAFF TO ACQUIRE CERTAIN FORECLOSED HOMES WI'T'HIN THE CITY AND TO EXECUTE ALL INSTRUMENTS AND CONTRACTS RELATED THERETO WHEREA , S Economic Development Authority (EDA) Resolution '2009 -17 established certain standards and conditions which authorized EDA staff to acquire certain foreclosed homes; and WHEREAS, the EDA Board wishes to continue the standards and conditions established by Resolution 2009 -17 for the acquisition of foreclosed homes; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Development Authority of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1. That the Executive Director, with the assistance of EDA's legal counsel, is e ' hereby authorized to enter into purchase agreements and acquire Hain in the . of the EDA up to ten (10) single family, vacant, foreclosed homes (the "Properties ") on the conditions that: a. All properties are registered as vacant properties with the City of Brooklyn Center, and b. The Properties are each acquired with Neighborhood Stabilization Program Stabilization Program ("NSP'l Funds or TIF Funds, and are eligible for use of such funding; and C. Each property is a foreclosed property acquired from a lender or a lender's designee; and d. The properties have been vacant for at least 30 days prior to entering into a purchase agreement; and to be blighted as defined by the e. The Property is determined Minnesota Housing Finance Agency in its application to the US Urban D (HUD) for NSP Department of Housing. and P funding as follows: A blighted structure is one which, by reason of dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light, and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, deleterious land use, or obsolete layout, or any combination of these or other factors, is detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare ofthe community: and f. The purchase price is not more than 65 percent of Hennepin County's • latest Estimated Market Value for the Property and does not exceed $80,000; and g. Prior to the acquisition of each property, staff conducts appropriate due diligence to protect the EDA's interest. 2. That for purposes of this resolution, "single family" includes any property with fewer than three units. 3. That the Executive Director is authorized to execute such documents as shall be required in order to carry out the delegation provided in paragraph 1 hereof. 4. That the Executive Director shall report the acquisition of any Property pursuant to this Resolution at the next regular EDA meeting. 5. That disposition of acquired Properties shall be only by action of the EDA. 6. That the authority to enter into new purchase agreements granted hereby shall expire twelve (12) months from the date of this Resolution. • Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner 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 • Commissioner Kay Laswu introduced the following resolution and • moved its adoption: EDA RESOLUTION NO. 2009 -17 RESOLUTION A1JTI30RUM4G AUTHORITY STAFF TO EXECUTE ALL FORECLOSED HOMES WITH N TBE CITY TAND HERETO TO TO INSTRUMENTS AND CONTRACATS RELATED WHE the Economic Development Authority Brooklyn Center ("EDA.") including has established venous housing programs S its Remove and Rebuild Program, an acquisition an d demolition program to remove blighted, distressed and unmarketable properties and return the properties to an enhanced condition and use, compatible with the neighborhood (the "Prog'am'j; and W the Program is funded with funds from the Tax Increment District #3 ( "TIF Funds'); and WHEREAS, in order to expand the effectiveness of the Program, the EDA wishes to directlypurchase certain foreclosed properties to demolish and hold the lots for future development, rehabilitate or resell to private entities for development or rehabilitation; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the EDA to establish certain standards and conditions for such acquisitions and to authorize its Executive Director to proceed therewith without specific EDA approval of each transaction. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Economic Development Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center 1 . That the Executive Director, with the assistance of EDA's legal counsel, is hereby authorized to enter into purchase agreements and acquire in the name of the EDA up to ten (10) single family, vacant, foreclosed homes (the "Properties') on the conditions that: a. All properties are registered as vacant Properties' with the City of Brooklyn Center, and b. The Properties are each acquired. with Neighborhood Stabilization Program Stabilization Program (` W'j Funds or TIF Funds, and are eligible for use of such funding, and C. Each property is a foreclosed properly acquired from a lender or a lender's designee; and d. The properties have been vacant for at least 30 days prior to entering into a purchase agreement; and i i EDA RESOLUTION NO. 2009-17 e. The Property is determined to be blighted as defined by the Minnesota Housing Pittance Agency in its application to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for NSP funding as follows: A blighted structure is one which, by reason. of dilapidation, obsolescence, overcrowding, faulty arrangement or design, lack of ventilation, light, and sanitary facilities, excessive land coverage, deleterious land use, or obsolete layout, or any combination of these or other factors, is detrimental to the safety, health, morals, or welfare of the community: and f. The purchase price is not more than 65 percent of Hennepin County s latest Estimated Market Value for the Property and does not exceed $90,000; and g. Prior to the acquisition of each properly, staff conducts appropriate due diligence to protect the EDA's interest. 2. That for purposes of this resolution, "single family" includes any properly with fewer thaw three units. 3. That the Executive Director is authorized to execute such documents as shall • i be required in order to carry out the delegation provided in paragraph l hereof. 4. That the Executive Director shall report the acquisition of any Property pursuant to this Resolution at the next regular EDA meeting- 5. That disposition of acquired properties shall be only by action of the EDA. 6. That the authority to enter into new purchase agreements grantedhereby shall I expire twelve (12) months from the date of this Resolution. October 26 200 Date President The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner Dan Ryan and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Tina Willson, Ray Lasman, Tina Roche, Dan Reran, and Mark Yelich; and the following voted against the same: none; whereupon said resolution was.declared duly passed and adopted. i AGENDA CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WORK SESSION March 14, 2011 i Immediately Following Regular City Council and EDA Meetings Which Start at 7:00 P.M. Council Chambers City Hall A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary. ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS PENDING LIST FOR FUTURE WORK SESSIONS Later /Ongoing 1. Progress Reports on Achievement of Strategic Goals 2. School District Discussions/BC Strategic Plan Report 3. All City Open House 4. Sister City Update 5. Neighborhood Designations 6. Department Year End Reports • 7. Active Living Program 8. Graduated Sanitary Utility Rate Study 9. Garbage Hauler Organized Collection Update 10. Joint Meeting with Commissions April 6th Follow -up 11. Shingle Creek Crossing 12. Financial Commission Report 13. Youth Participation Request 14. Budget Reductions to Lower City's Reliance on State LGA 15. Highway 252 Update — June 2011 •