Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982 07-26 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER JULY 26, 1982 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Invocation 4. Open Forum 5. Approval of Consent Agenda -All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. *6. Approval of Minutes July 12, 1982 7. Resolutions: *a. Approving Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to Contract No. 1981 -E (Shingle Creek Trailway Project No. 1978 -42, Parks Improvement Project No. 1981 -14, Storm Sewer Improvement Project No. 1981 -16) -This resolution provides for approval of various improvements required to complete the referenced projects. Improvements include items con- structed in conjunction with Shingle Creek Trailway, curb installation around apparatus areas in various parks and storm sewer extension in Lions Park. *b.- Accepting Work Performed Under Contract 1981 -E (Shingle Creek Trailway Improvement Project Nos. 1978 -42 and 1980 -10, 69th Avenue North Pedestrian Trail Improvement Project No. 1981 -12, Parks Improvement Project No. 1981 -14, Storm Sewer Improvement Project No. 1981 -16) w *c. Accepting Work Performed Under Contract 1982 -B (Xerxes Avenue, 55th Avenue, 56th Avenue Street Reconstruction Project.No. 1982 -02, and Brookdale Access Improvement Project No. 1982 -03) *d. Declaring Cost to Assessed and Providing.for Hearing on'P Assessment for Improvement Project'No.- 1982 -02 (Xerxes Avenue, 55th Avenue, 56th Avenue Street Reconstruction) e. Establishing Lions Park West Trailway Improvement Project No. 1982 -18 Central Park /Garden City Trailway Extension Improvement Project No. .1982 -19, Lions Park Tennis Court Project No. 19,82 -20, Civic Center Access Improvement Project No: 1982 -21, Civic Center Parking Lot Improvement Project No. 1982 -22', Approving Plans and Specifications, and Directing Advertisement for Bids (Contract 1982 -J) City Council Agenda -2- July 26, 1982 *f. Establishing Fuel Dispensing System Improvement Project No. 1982 -23, Approving Plans and Specifications, and Directing Advertisement for Bids (Contract 1982 --K) -This item would provide for the installation of a new motor fuel dispensing system at the City's Municipal Service Garage and is included in the 1982 Budget of the Vehicle and Maintenance Division. 8. Planning Commission Items (7:30 p.m.) a. Planning Commission Application No. 82029 submitted by Northwestern National Bank for site and building plan approval to install an 11' _ x 12' automatic teller machine in the parking lot in front of Hirshfield's in Westbrook Mall, 5717 Xerxes Avenue North. The Planning Commission_ recommended approval of Application No. 82029 at its July 15, 1982 meeting. b. Planning Commission Application No. 82023 submitted by Bergstrom Realty Company for amended site and building plan approval for Phase I of the Hi Crest Square Estates in the 1300 block on the south side of 69th Avenue North. This application received an initially favorable rec 3rmeemda- tion on June 17, 1982 and a revised plan was tabled on July 1, 1982. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 82023 at its July 15, 1982 meeting. C. Planning Commission Application No. 82026 submitted by Bergstrom Realty Company for a variance from Section 35 -410, Subdivision 3 to allow a 3 foot wide buffer strip adjacent to the City's pump house at 1207 69th Avenue North rather than the ordinance required 15 feet. This application received an initially favorable recommendation on June 17, 1982 and the item was deferred until a site plan was submitted. 9. Final Plat - Hi Crest Square Estates , a. Resolution Approving and Authorizing Execution of Subdivision Agreement' for Hi Crest Square Estates 10. Discussion Items: a. Ordinance Amending Chapter l of the City Ordinances Regarding Private Kennel Licenses 'Phis item is related to the Open Forum request made by Mr. Jesse Sandoval, 5548 Logan Avenue.North, at the June'28, 1982 City Council meeting.con,- cerning Section 1 -106 of the City Ordinances regarding limiting the number of dogs per household. b. Joint Powers Agreement to Retain the Services of Wendell R. Anderson. as a Lobbyist for North Crosstown Highway (T.H. 610)..' C. Staff Report on Sunday Law 11. Licenses ; 12. Adjournment f MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JULY 12, 1982 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City.Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:08 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist,- Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Chief of Police James Lindsay, Assistant City Engineer Jim Grube, and Administrative Assistant Tom Bublitz. INVOCATION - The invocation was offered by Pastor Maple of the Brooklyn Center_nvangelical Free Church. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted the Council had not received any requests to use the Open Forum session this evening. He inquired of the audience if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. There being none, he proceeded with the regular agenda items. CON SENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any of the Council members desired any items removed from the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Hawes requested that item 8e be removed from the Consent Agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 28, 1982 There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of June 28, -1982 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS / RESOLUTION NO. 82 -124 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FOR CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -12 (ATHLETIC FIELD FENCING CONSTRUCTION; CONTRACT 1982 -E) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, -.the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich .Theis; and the following voted against the sames none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 7 -12 -82 -1- RESOLUTION NO. 82 -125 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FORM NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS IMPROVEMENT • .PROJECT NO. 1982 -13 (DRINKING FOUNTAIN INSTALLATION; CONTRACT 1982 -F) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -126 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: I RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PARK SHELTER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -17 (GRANDVIEW, NORTHPORT, HAPPY HOLLOW SHELTER IMPROVEMENTS), APPROVING. PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (.CONTRACT 1982 -I) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Establishing Evergreen Park Soccer Field Improvement Project No. 1982 -16 and pointed out that the resolution would approve the project to allow it to be set up for bidding. Councilmember Lhotka stated he is concerned with the cost of the soccer fields in light of the existing budget constraints._ The City Manager reviewed the use of the current soccer fields and noted that soccer fields can be used for football use but the football fields cannot be used for soccer because of the required size of the soccer field. He explained the existing soccer field in the City is very heavily used and that additionally, soccer fields require good soil so that level fields may be built with clear site lines for players to see the ball. He pointed out that soccer fields cannot be constructed with high areas or crowns. Councilmember Lhotka then inquired what plans had been made for soccer fields in the Central Park area. The City Manager. stated that a portion of Central Park was sized for soccer field but with football, baseball, and soccer in one area there would be many scheduling conflicts.. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -127 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING EVERGREEN PARK SOCCER FIELD IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -16 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: Gene Lhotka, whereupon.said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -128 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 3982 GENERAL FUND BUDGET 7 -12 -82 -2- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Approving Specifications for Upgrading Municipal Communications System and Ordering Advertisement for Bids. He stated that this resolution comprehends the upgrading of the City's radio communications system including the police and fire dispatch center. The City Manager pointed out that the consultant retained to prepare the specifications believes that the mobile radios can also be replaced within the budget limits set for the upgrading of the system. He added that the City now has an additional frequency which is shared with the City of St. Paul. He added his thanks to Chief McCutcheon, of the St. Paul Police Department, for his efforts in assisti g the City in obtaining the additional frequency. He explained that with the addition of the new frequency the signal from the "handi- talkie" used by a police officer is transmitted to the repeater station where the signal is rebroadcast at a stronger end different frequency. 'He explained the repeater system allows a signal to come in on one frequency and go out on another frequency, thereby, eliminating the overridE problem with radio signals which would interfere with the transmission from the " andi- talkies" or mobile radios. In response to a question from Councilmember Scott, th City Manager stated that the system should be operational as early as February of 1983, RESOLUTION NO. 82 -129 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS FOR UPGRADING MUNICIPAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FORBIDS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -130 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR REMODELING POLICE DEPARTMENT DISPATCH AREA AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAM Mayor Nyquist introduced Mr. Phil Cohen, of the Board of Directors of the Brooklyn Center Crime Prevention Fund. Mr. Cohen stated the Crime Prevention Program • in Brooklyn Center is an example of how civic groups and the City can work together 7 -12 -82 -3- in a positive fashion to develop an important program for City residents. He explained the Crime Prevention Fund is nothing new and that the cities of Edina and St. Louis Park have had the program for a number of years. He pointed out that the Chamber and Rotary introduced the idea in Brooklyn Center and that this was the starting point for • the development of the program. He explained that the Crime Prevention Fund is a citizen's sponsored fund and its direct purpose is to obtain information on unsolved crimes. He explained that over $2,000 has been contributed to the fund so far, and that•the money will be used as a source of funds which will assist the Police Department in solving.crimes and to further reduce crime in Brooklyn Center. Mr. Cohen stated that $25,000 is ultimate goal and that the funds will supply rewards or buy information to assist the Police Department in solving crimes and assist in crime prevention. He added -that the group also hopes to work with..the Neighborhood Crime Watch Program.. He added that the Crime Prevention Fund is a service which does not use tax dollars to accomplish its goal. Mr. Cohen thanked the City Council for allowing him to make the .presentation this evening. Councilmember Lhotka stated that he thinks the concept is a fantastic idea and the Council owes a debt of gratitude to those who have worked on it. He stated he believes the Council will support the Crime Prevention Fund in any way possible. DISCUSSION ITEMS REPORT ON OPEN FORUM RE2UEST The City Manager explained the staff has been assembling ordinance language with regard to Mr. Jesse Sandoval's request made at the June 28, 1982 City Council meeting concerning Section 1 -106 of the City Ordinances regarding limiting the number of dogs per household. He stated the staff i.s re arin ordinance language which would allow an individual p P g to obtain a private kennel license. He stated the process would require an individual to apply for the license with the City and that the neighbors in the area would be notified of the application. He added that the license could be issued administrative with a provision for an appeal to the Council or the license could come directly before the Council similar to a special use permit. He stated that the staff will be preparing the ordinance language for City Council review. Councilmember Lhotka commented he would like to see the ordinance language drafted similar to the home occupation section of the zoning ordinance which would require Council review and he also suggested that the number of animals not be stated "in the . ord ii : ,ance . Councilmember Hawes inquired whether the ordinance language could, give the option of the applicant or the City notifying the neighbors of the application. The City Manager commented that there are two lines of thought in this area, that being, that if the applicant notifies the neighbors of the application, it may cause a neighborhood problem and that he would hope to avoid any neighborhood dispute with the ordinance amendment. Councilmember Hawes noted that there may be some situations where the applicant may want to notify the neighbors by himself. The City Manager indicated that in other cities where the private kennel license is allowed the applicant may visit the neighbors before any notice is issued by the City. Couneilmember Lhotka stated he believes the procedure should be handled like a public ! hearing with input from the neighbors. RECESS the Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 7:50 p.m. and reconvened at 8:10 p.m. 7 -12 -82 -4- PUBLIC HEARING ON ALLEY IMPRO`dEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -14 (.BETWEEN DUPONT AND EMERSON AVENUES FROM 53RD TO 54TH AVENUES) The City Manager explained that the alley improvement project was petitioned by the residents in the area and that this evening's public hearing has been scheduled to decide whether or not the project should be approved. The Director of Public Works explained the project was initiated by a petition of the property owners which was signed by 11 of the 18 affected property owners. He stated the petition represents 61% of the property owners in the area and represents 53% of the frontage on the alley. He proceeded to review the recommended construction specifications for the alley project. He also reviewed the financial considerations and assessment procedures related to the proposed - .project. He noted that the estimated- total cost of the project would be $20,240 and that the estimated assessment for the project would be $16.77 or $17 per linear foot. The Director of Public Works stated he had received correspondence from Mr. John S. Tschohl, 4659 Oaks Circle in Bloomington, regarding the project. He pointed out Mr. Tschohl is the owner of the property at 5352 Emerson Avenue North and that he has expressed opposition to the project. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Alley Improvement Project No. 1982 -14. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Melvin Westlund, 5358 Emerson Avenue North. Mr. Westlund expressed a concern over the number of drains that would be installed in the alley. The Director of Public Works stated he believed the number will be four but that he would like to review the project further to see if it would be possible to complete the project with three drains because of the added cost. The City Manager pointed out that detail design work has not been completed on the project yet, and that this will be necessary to determine the need for three or four drains. Mr. Westlund also expressed a concern that the travel of garbage trucks on the alley be taken into consideration when the alley is designed. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Tom Doane, 5359 Dupont Avenue North, who stated that he believes the grader operator is not grading the alley properly at this time. The City Manager explained he believes that even with an experienced grader operator the drainage problefa could not be solved on the alley due to the extreme flatness of the alley where water becomes trapped. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Earl Rydholm, 5307 Dupont Avenue North who expressed a concern over the location of the sewer line. The Director of Public Works reviewed the proposed catch basin location and explained that in order to minimize the length of pipe it was originally proposed that an easement be acquired to run the pipe to Dupont Avenue. He added the property owners are reluctant to have the pipe come through their property and noted that the houses are rather close together in this area with many trees and flowers that would have to be removed to allow for the line. He added that it appears the project will have to go to 54th Avenue and connect with the storm sewer there Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else who wished to speak at the public Bearing. There being none, he entertained a motion to close the hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to close. the public hearing on Alley Improvement Project No. 1982 -14. Voting in favor: Mayor 7 -12 -82 -5- Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -131 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the.following. resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ORDERING ALLEY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -14 (ALLEY BETWEEN DUPONT AND EMERSON AVENUES FROM 53RD TO 54TH AVENUES NORTH) The motion for the - adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. $2 -132 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoptions RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR 69TH - 70TH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -09, SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -10, WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982- 11, ALLEY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -14, EVERGREEN PARK SOCCER FIELD IMPROVEMENT. PROJECT NO. 1982 -16 (CONTRACT 1982 -H) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 82028 SUBMITTED BY DEBORAH TOBAKO FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO CONDUCT CERAMICS CLASSES IN THE BASEMENT OF THE RESIDENCE AT 5635 GIRARD AVENUE NORTH Councilmember Lhotka left the table at 9:46 p.m. and returned at 9:48 p.m. The Director of Planning & Inspection presented and reviewed for Council members pages 1 through 3 of the July 1, 1982 Planning Commission minutes and also the Planning Commission information sheet prepared for Application No. 82028. The Director of Planning & Inspection proceeded to review the application stating that the applicant is requesting a special use permit to conduct group ceramic classes in the basement of her home at 5636 Girard Avenue North. He stated that the applicant is proposing a class size of six to eight people one night per week from 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 P.M. Wednesday evenings. He added the applicant is requesting that as other class sessions are needed they would be held on week day evenings or Saturday from 10 :00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. The Director of Planning & Inspection pointed out the key question in this application is the need for on- street parking. He reviewed a similar application for a special use permit to conduct ceramic classes which was made by Mrs. LaVonne Malikowski..' He stated that in Mrs Malikowski's special use permit no on- street parking was permitted. He added that the key question regarding this application is the possible need for on- street parking. 7 -12 -82 -6- The Director of Planning & Inspect.ion stated the Planning Commission held a public hearing on Application No. 82028 on July 1,1982 and that the applicant was present at the public hearing but that no else appeared at the public hearing. He explained the Planning Commission recommended approval of the application subject to six conditions, which he reviewed for Council members. He added that the required notices had been sent regarding tonight's public hearing and that the applicant is present this evening. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Application No. 82028 and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one appeared to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to close the public hearing on Application No. 82028. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist,.Council-- members Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Lhotka commented that he feels strongly about -on- street parking in regard to home occupations but stated that Girard Avenue is not a busy street and tha_`'he' would support the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval if condition No. 4 is amended to require City Council review of the parking situation in one year. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve Planning Commission Application No. 82028 in consideration of a finding that the proposed home occupation would not be feasible without on- street parking, and subject to the following conditions: 1. The permit is issued to the applicant as operator of the facility and is nontransferable. t 2. The permit is subject to all codes, ordinances, and regulations. Any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. No more than 10.students shall attend any one class in accordance with Section 35 -406 of the Zoning Ordinance. 4. All parking shall be off- street on space provided by the applicant to the maximum extent feasible. On- street parking shall be limited to two. spaces in front of the applicant's property as the need arises. The City. Council shall, within, one year from the date of approval of the permit, review the parking requirements stipulated in this .condition to determine whether or not the parking requirements are adequate for the home occupation. 5. The hours of operation shall be no more than: ' Monday to'Thursday, 6:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.. and Saturday, 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. 6. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations .of the .Building Official prior.to the issuance of.the Special Use Permit. , 7 -12 -82 -7- Councilmember Theis questioned whether one year is an 'appropriate time to review the parking requirements and noted that he is concerned that the Council is approving an application based on a limited number of classes at the outset. Councilmember Lhotk stated his intent was that it be reviewed in one year to see if additional parking is '- needed. Mayor Nyquist expressed a concern over how the review will be conducted. a Mayor Nyquist called for a vote on the motion on the floor. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEMS (CONTINUED) EXECUTIVE SESSION ON WAGE NEGOTIATIONS The City Manager stated that state law has changed to allow an executive session to review labor negotiations strategy. He added that he is proposing a session of the r City Council which would include the City Manager, Chief of Police, the City's Labor Relations Consultant, and City Attorney. 9 The City Attorney pointed out that the law which was passed in 1981 in response to the difficulty of carrying out labor negotiations at a public meeting. He explained the City has the authority to hold a meeting to discuss negotiation strategy which may include organized and non - organized personnel. He added the requirements of the meeting are that the date.and time of the meeting must be announced in advance and that a tape recording of the meeting must be made and kept for two years. Also, he pointed out, a record must be kept and made public of all persons attending the meeting. The City Manager pointed out that he believes such an executive session is more important this year given the financial constraints cities are - ,under. After discussi f by Councilmembers, there was a general concensus among Councilmembers to support the executive session. LIQUOR LICENSE - T- WRIGHT'S, 5800 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY The City Manager introduced the next agenda item, which was a, liquor - license application for T- Wright's located at 5800 Shingle Creek Parkway. The City Manager stated the staff is recommending approval of the liquor license for T- Wright's. Councilmember,Lhotka stated that he is not comfortable with the license application and inquired why the background investigation of the individuals applying for the license was not included. Chief Lindsay pointed out that because of the necessity of sending an investigator to Miami, Florida the background investigation of individuals was not included in the report. He added that the records of the individuals are, however,_ clear. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the intoxicating liquor license for T- Wright's, 5800 Shingle Creek Parkway.- Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: Councilmember Lhotka. The motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the following list of licenses: 7-12-82 CIGARETTE LICENSE Interstate United 1091 Pierce Butler Rte. Ault Inc. 1600 Freeway Blvd. GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION LICENSE Bautch Disposal Service 10264 Xylite St: N.E. Bergstrom Trucking 6509 76th Avew N. Big Garbonzo 8037 6th St. N.E. Block Sanitation 6741 79th Ave�k N. Brooklyn Disposal, Inc. 7959 191st Ln. N.W. Browning- Ferris Ind. 9813 Flying Cloud Dr. Klein Sanitation Co. 10690 100th Ave. N. L & N Disposal 3417 85th Ave. N. MCS Refuse, Inc. 10050 Naples St. N.E. Metro Refuse 8168 W. 125th St. Shobe and Sons 3621 85th Ave. N. Woodlake Sanitary Service 4000 Hamel Rd. ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE St. Alphonsus'Catholic Church 7025 Halifax Ave. N. MECHANICAL SYST LICENSE Nielsen Sheet Metal, Inc. 6324 Lakeland Ave. N. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Interstate United Corp. 1091 Pierce Butler Rte. Ault, Inc. 1600 Reeeway Blvd. Royal Crown Beverage Co. P.O. Box 43466 Car X Muffler Shop 6810 Brooklyn Blvd. Humboldt Square Cleaners 69th and Humboldt PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Interstate United Corp. 1091 Pierce Butler Rte. Ault, Inc. 1600 Freeway.Blvd. f TEMPORARY ON -SALE BEER LICENSE St. Alphonsus Catholic Church 7025 Halifax'Ave. N. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember�Hawes to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:15 P.M. Clerk Mayor L 7 -12 -82 -9- Member " introduced the Following resolution and r moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. L RESOLUTION COMMENDING THE BROOKLYN CENTER POLICE - DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, on Saturday, July 17, 1982, Mrs. Randi Petersen was shot and killed by rifle shot in her home at 5309 Bryant Avenue North WHEREAS, this senseless act of violence and murder shocked and saddened the community of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Police Department responded to this crime in an exemplary manner which led to the early apprehension of the suspects; and WHEREAS, all members of the Brooklyn Center Police Department put forth an extraordinary effort in the investigation of this crime. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that all members of the Brooklyn Center Police Department including Investigators, Patrol Officers, Sergeants, Chief of Police, Captain, Dispatchers, Administrative and Clerical Staff are hereby commended for their extraordinary devotion to duty and their efforts in solving this tragic death merit the gratitude of all the citizens of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the.same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. h 1 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: t I i RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPRQVING SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NUMBER 2 TO CON'T'RACT 1981 -E (SHINGLE CREEK TRAILWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1978 -42, PARKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 -14, STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 -16) _ t f WHEREAS, the City Engineer has deemed it in.the best interests of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, to provide for: 1. Improved disposal. of storm water runoff in the Civic Center complex by reconstruction of existing curb and gutter. 2. Construction of footings for railings along the trail under the westbound I -694 entrance ramp for future placement of a railing system. 3. Repair of electrical services at various parks. 4. Regrading of apparatus areas at various parks in conjunction with perimeter curbing installation. 5. Improved disposal of storm water runoff in Lion's Park by grading adjacent to an existing storm sewer outfall; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has a contractural agreement with Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. for similar work under Contract 1981 -E. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to Contract 1981 -E in the amount of $2,001.00 providing for an itemized increase in the contract. Date. Mayor _ ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. I Mn /DOT 2134(5.78) STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OIL TRANSPORTATION Supp. to Contract No. 1981 - Ph. 2 SUPPLE PIENTA . A R � Sheet 1 of %- W -tor XVkYnajcn4 City Projects State Project No. afer Contracting Co. Inc. 1978 -42, 1.981 -14, 1981 -16• N/A ddress Location - Shafer, Minnesota 55074 Various Locations This contract is amended as follows: The contractor shall provide all labor, materials, and equipment 0"d necessary to complete the following work in accordance with the provisions of the Contract: uua Project 1978 -42: (1) Remove and replace B612*curb and gutter in northwest corner of north parking lot at City Hall for purposes of trail construction. (2) Construct w� [ four footings for railings under bridge of westbound I -694 access. eA� Project 1981 -14: (1) Repair damaged electrical service to trail lights at Orchard Lane 4 tl 0 Park. (2) regrade subgrade for curb installation at Lion's Park and East Palmer Lake Park due to grade change. a3w Project 1981 -16: Grade storm sewer outfall of Lion's Park storm sewer extension. t wo Payment for the required work shall be in accordance with the following schedule: c Project Item Unit ^� Number Number Item Unit Ouantity Price Amount : ° 0 1978 -42 1 Remove B612 C & G L.F. 30 $ 4.00 $120.00 oaf 1978 -42 2 B612 C & G L.F. 30 $ 10.00 $300.00 N 0 1978 -42 3 Construct railing Each 4 $200.00 $800.00 . `° v post footing 1981 -14 4 Repair electrical L.S. 1 $114,00 $114.00 ffi service x w a v 1981 -14. 5 Regrade for C& G L.S. l $492.00 $492.00 o installation a 1981 -16 6 Grade storm sewer L.S. l $175.00 $175.00 a o outfall $2,001.00 a This results in an increase of $1,220.00 in Project 1978 -42; $606.00 in Project 1981 -14 and $175.00 in Project 1981 -16. Pro.No, Account I.D. Organ ization F.V. Requisition No. Vendor Number Type Terms Source S. ACt. Task S..Task Cost, Job or Client Code Amount Suffix Object SEND TYPE OF TRANSACTION Entered by A40 Q A4 Date N umber O E Entered by A44 A4i A46 Date Number APPROVED: Original Contract Commissioner of Administration r •.• $349, 818.25 Dated �[`�I 19 z -4 � Ap rov d by Project ngineer or Architect 0 $ 10, 224.00 S.A. #1 �. Dated 19 By Acccp d by Contractor { Approved as to farm and execution Dated 19 Datcd District Director Dated 19 Assistant Attorney General Approved by Agency Head 1 - STATE AUDITOR (White or iginal) 2 - CON'rRACTOR (Pink) 3- AGENCY (Goldenrod) TO: Sy Knapp,.Director of Public Works FROM: Jim Grube, Assistant City Engineer, DATE: July 21, 1982 RE: Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to Contract 1981 -E for Additional Services Provided Attached herewith is Supplemental Agreement No. 2 to the referenced Contract 1981 -E (Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. contract for Shingle Creek Trails, curbing of park apparatus areas, etc.) providing for payment in the amount of $2,001.00 for additional services provided. A brief summary of the various services, as outlined on the Supplementary Agreement follows. Project No. 1978 -42 (Shingle Creek Trailway C.S.A.H. 10 to C.S.A.H. 130) Item.- Removal and replacement of existing B612 curb and gutter in the northwest corner of the north parking lot at City Hall was required to provide for overland drainage of the lot. This work, plus reconstruction of the deteriorated spillway to Shingle Creek, was completed in conjunction with the trail way construction at a cost of $420.00. Item The Contractor constructed four railing post footings along the trail system adjacent to Shingle Creek under the westbound 1 -694 entrance ramp. The work was completed in conjunction with the trailway construction at a cost of $800.00. The railings were subsequently installed by City forces. Total Additional Cost to Project -No. 1978 -42 $1,220.00 le Project No. 1981 -14 (Curb Installation at Apparatus Areas in Various Parks) Item - The Contractor provided for repair of electrical service to Orchard Lane Park after the service was inadvertently cut due to an inaccurate line location by City personnel. Cost of the repair, completed by a licensed electrician was $114.00. Item - The Contractor regraded the subgrade for curb installation at the appartus areas of Lion's Park and East Palmer.Lake.Park after it was determined that the playground.apparatus would fit the area better if the grade 'of the area .(and curb) was" raised slightly. The cost of regrading the two apparatus areas was $492.00. Total Additional Cost to Proj.ect No. 1981 -14 - ..$606.00 July 21, 1982 Page 2 Project No. 1981 -1 . -' . 7 6 (Storm Sewer Extension In Lion's Park) Item - The Contractor provided grading equipment necessary to grade for positive drainage of the area adjacent to the storm sewer outfall constructed under Project No. 1981 -16. The grading item had not been contemplated because the area was previously. overgrown by weeds and cattails and was inaccessible to City equipment. Cost of grading was $175.00. Total Additional Cost to Project No. 1981 -16 $175.00 TOTAL ADDITIONAL COST - $ 2,001.00 The Contractor was directed to complete the various tasks outlined as it became evident the corrective measures were necessary toe — provide the desired results, and only after consultation between the Contractor's foreman and the Project Engineer. Upon completion of the work and negotiation of resultant costs, it was agreed the various items would be presented to the City Council at one time. It is therefore recommended the attached Supplemental.Agreement be submitted to the City Council for its approval in conjunction with the final acceptance of Contract 1981 -E. JNG:jn I W Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO.. i RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1981 -E (SHINGLE CREEK TRAILWAY IMPROVEMENT PART I IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1978 -42, SHINGLE CREEK TRAILWAY IMPROVEMENT - PART II IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1980 -10, 69TH AVENUE NORTH PEDESTRIAN TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981-12, PARKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 -14, STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 -16) WHEREAS, pursuant to written Contract 1981 -E signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. of Shafer, Minnesota has satisfactorily completed the following improvements in.accordance with said contract: Shingle Creek Trailway - Part I Improvement Project No. 1978 -42 Shingle Creek Trailway - Part II Improvement Project No., 1980 -10 69th Avenue North Pedestrian Trail Improvement Project No. 1981 -12 Parks Improvement Project No. 1981 -14 Storm Sewer Improvement Project No. 1981 -16 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the-City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said contract, and supplemental agreements is accepted and approved according to the following schedule. SHINGLE CREEK TRAILWAY IMPROVEMENT - PART T IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1978 -42 Previously Final Approved. Amount Original Contract Amount $108,743.45 $101,681.75 Supplemental Agreement No. 1 10,224.00 10,375.80 Supplemental Agreement No. 2 / 1,220.00 1,220.00 TOTAL $120,187.45 $113,277.55 SHINGLE CREEK TRAILWAY IMPROVEMENT - PART II IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1980 -10 Original Contract Amount $153,779.00 $127,566-.76 69TH AVENUE NORTH PEDESTRIAN TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 -12 Original Amount $ 11,506.40 $ 9,981.25 RESOLUTION NO. �• PARKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 -14 Previously Final Approved Amount Original Contract Amount $ 64,966.90 $ 51,799.69 Supplemental Agreement No. 2 606.00 606.00 TOTAL $ 65,572.90 $ 52,405.69 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 -16 Original Contract Amount $ 10,822.50 $ 10,664.64 Supplemental Agreement No. 2 175.00 175.00 TOTAL $ 10, 997.50 $ 10,', 2. The total value of work performed, at -a cost of $314,070.89, is less than the sum of the original contract and supplemental agreements by $47,972.36 due to a general overestimation of planned quantities. 3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be. paid for said improvements under sa.idcontract shall be $314,070.89. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption o£ the foregoing' resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. i TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: July 22, 1982 RE: Acceptance of Work Performed Under Contract 1981 -E Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. has completed the work comprehended under Contract 1981 -E; therefore, it is recommended the City Council accept the work in accordance with the provisions of the attached resolution. A brief summary of the project locations and descrip- tions is provided to assist in the review of the resolution. Improvement Project No. 1978 -42 Description: Construction of pedestrian and trails Location: Central Park northerly along Shingle Creek to C.S.A.H. 130 (69th Avenue) Final Cost: $113,277.55 Funding Source: LAWCON, LCMR, City funds Improvement Project No. 1980 -10 Description: Construction of pedestrian and bicycle trails Location: South limits to T.H. 100; C.S.A.H. 130 (69th Avenue) to north limits Final Cost: $127 r Funding Source: LAWCON, LCMR, City funds Improvement Project No. 1981 -12 Description: Construction of pedestrian trail Location: C.S.A.H. 130 (69th Avenue) from Shingle Creek to Oliver Avenue North Final Cost: $9,981.25 - Funding. Source City funds Improvement Project No. 1981 -14 Description: Curb installation at apparatus areas Location Various parks Final Cost: $52,405.69 Funding Source: Federal and City funds Improvement Project No. 1981 -16 Description Storm sewer extension. Location : - Lion's Park Final $10,839.64 Funding Source : Federal and City funds Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION.NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1982 -B (XERXES AVENUE, 55TH AVENUE, 56TH AVENUE STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT NO. 1982 -02, AND BROOKDALE ACCESS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -03) WHEREAS, pursuant to written Contract 1982 -B signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, C.S. McCrossan, Inc. of Osseo, Minnesota, has satisfactorily completed the following improvements in accordance with said contract:. Xerxes Avenue, 55th Avenue, 56th Avenue Street Reconstruction Project No. 1982 -02 Brockdale Access Improvement Project No. 1982 -03 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota,. that: 1. The work completed under said contract is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: j XERXES AVENUE, 55TH AVENUE, 56TH AVENUE RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT NO..1982 -02 Previously Final Approved Amount i Original Contract $287,766,10 $261,415.90 BROOKDALE ACCESS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -03 Original Contract Amount $ 21,887,70 $ 26,122.20 2. The total value of,the work performed, at a cost of $287,538.10, is less than the sum of the original contract by $22,115.70 due to a general overestimation of the planned .quantities. 3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvements under said contract shall be $287,538.10. Date Mayor 'ATTEST: ` Clerk RESOLUTION NO. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: i RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING COST TO BE ASSESSED AND PROVIDING FOR HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENT FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -02 (XERXES AVENUE, 55TH AVENUE, 56TH AVENUE STREET RECONSTRUCTION) WHEREAS, the construction of Street Reconstruction Project No. 1982 -02 is complete. The tabulated costs are: city Assessable Share Share Contract Cost $83,255.64 $178,160.26 Utility Connection 739.33 1,478.67 Loop Detector Installation 620.00 1,2'4�,".GOt Total Construction Cost $84,614.97 $180,878.93 Engineering (9% of Construction Cost) 7,615.35 16,279.10 Administration (.1% of Construction Cost) 846.15 1,808.79 Legal and Bonding (1% of Construction Cost) 0.00 1,808.79 Interest 0.00 4,339.44 $93,076.47 $205,095.05 WHEREAS, the City Clerk has notified the City Council that a proposed assessment has been completed and filed in his office for public inspection. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, f Minnesota that: 1. The portion of cost of such improvement to be assessed against the property owner of Tract A, Registered Land Survey 1235 for improve ments completed in accordance with Council,Resolution 82 -43 is hereby declared to be $13,208.57. 2. The - portion of the cost of such improvement to be paid by the City is hereby declared to be $93,076.47. 3. The portion of the cost of such improvement to be assessed against all benefited property owners is hereby declared to be.$191,886.48. 4. A hearing shall be held on the 23rd day of August, 1982, in the City Hall at 8:00 P.M. to pass upon such proposed assessment and at such time and place all persons owning property affected by such improvement will be given an opportunity to be heard with reference to such assessment. F S. The City Clerk is directed to cause a notice of the hearing on the proposed assessment to be published once in the official newspaper at least two weeks prior to the hearing, and he shall state in the notice the total cast of the improvement. 1 RESOLUTION NO. 6. The City Clerk shall cause mailed notice to be given to the owner of each parcel described in the assessment roll not less than two weeks prior to the hearing. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. s TO: Gerald,G._Splinter, City Manager FROM Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: July 21, 1982 RE: Xerxes Avenue, 55th Avenue, 56th Avenue Street Reconstruction Project No. 1982 -02 Project Costs /Special Assessments Y The following information is submitted to assist in the review of assessment costs to be considered for the referenced street recon- struction project: STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT NO. 1982 - As Assessed/ As Ordered .. Finance,' �. Contract Cost $353,240.00 $261,415.90 Utility Connection 1,500.00 2,218.00 (Street Lights) Loop Detector Installation 0.00 1,860.100 Subtotal Construction Cost $354,740.00 $265,493.90 Engineering _31,930.00 23,894.45 Legal and Bonding 3,550.00 1,808.79 Administration 3,55,0.00 2,654.94_ Interest 21,280.00 4,319.44 TOTAL $415,050.00 $298,171.52 In accordance with the proceedings of the improvement hearing of February 811 1982, and an agreement between the City and Westbrook Mall providing for construction of a turn lane into the mall, the : project,costs, based on actual construction costs, were dispersed as follows City Cost $132,550.00 $ 93,076.47 Westbrook Mall Cost 17,400.00 13,208.57 Special Assessments 265,100.00 191,886.48 Total $415,050.0-0' . ' $29$,171.5,2. ,: . July 21, 1982 Page 2 As a result of the Orsements proposed, the assessment rates were - affected as .follows: As Assessed/ s As Ordered Financed Zone A Assessment Rate Per Acre $ 4,230.77 $ 3 Zone B Assessment Rate Per Acre 1,830.80 1,325.18 Westbrook Mall (for turn lane 17,400.00 13,208.57 only) SUMMARY As shown above, the reduction in the proposed assessment rate as compared to the estimated amounts provided at the improvement hearing results benefited property. lts in a significant saving by owners of the . .. e i p p y SK:jn Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. t RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING LION'S PARK WEST TRAILWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -18, CENTRAL PARK /GARDEN CITY TRAILWAY .EXTENSION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 =19, LION'S PARK TENNIS COURT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -20, CIVIC CENTER ACCESS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -21, CIVIC CENTER PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT. PROJECT NO. 1982 -22, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (CONTRACT 1982 -J) WHEREAS, the City Council deems it necessary and in the best interests of the City of Brooklyn Center to provide increased access.to the regional pedestrian/bicyle trailway system for the neighborhood west of Lion's Park and the neighborhood west of Garden City Park; at estimated costs of $50,400.00 and $65,000.00 respectively; and WHEREAS, a portion of the questions of the Special Referendum of May 6, 1980, resolved in the affirmative the proposed construction of tennis courts in Lion's Park; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported to the City Council on the feasibility of completing required subgrade correction for said tennis courts in 1982 at an estimated cost of $21,780.00; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported to the City Council on the feasibility of constructing certain improvements to the northerly access drive and parking lots of the Civic Center at estimated costs of $65,170.00 and $43,500.00 respectively. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The following projects are hereby established in order to provide for said improvements: LION'S PARK WEST TRAILWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -18 I CENTRAL PARK/GARDEN CITY TRAILWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -19 LION'S PARK TENNIS COURT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -20 (Subgrade correction only) CIVIC CENTER ACCESS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -21 CIVIC CENTER PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -22 2. The plans and specifications for Contract 1982 -1 for said Improvement Projects prepared by the City Engineer are hereby approved and ordered filed with the City Clerk, l RESOLUTION NO. 3. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least twice in the official newpaper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall appear not less than seven (7) days prior to the date for receipt of bids, and specify'the work to be done, state that said bids will be received by the City Clerk until 11:00 A.M. on September 9, 1982, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers at City Hall by the City Clerk and City Engineer, will then be tabulated and will be considered by the City Council at 7:00 P.M. on September 13, 1982, in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier'.s check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City for five (5) percent of the amount of such bid. 4. The accounting for the Improvement Projects shall be in accordance with the following schedule: Improvement Project No. 1982-18- Capital Improvement Fund (Division 98) Improvement Project No. 1982 -19 Capital Improvement Fund (Division 49) (additional funds to be appropriated from Divisions 56; and 98 as required) Improvement Project No. 1982 -20 -Capital Improvement Fund (Divisione88) Improvement Project No. 1982 -21 -Access Improvements- Capital Project Fund (Division 57) Plaza- Improvements - General Fund Budget (Division 19) Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works A d - DATE: July 21, 1982 RE: Extension of Trailway System Through Lion's Park West Improvement Project No. 1982 -18 Pursuant to recent City Council directives regarding completion of the extension of the pedestrian /bicycle trailway along 53rd Avenue North extended) between Lion's Park and Upton Avenue, the staff has submitted formal application to the appropriate federal and state agencies for amendment to existing LAWCON and LCMR grants. Upon re- ceipt of verbal.approval. from the State Planning Agency (agency acting as grant administrator) the staff has developed plans and specifications for said trailway extension, including installation of a bridge crossing Shingle Creek. A summary of the estimated improvement cost follows: Construction Cost $41,650.00 Contingencies 4,170.00 Subtotal Construction Cost $45,820.00 • Engineering (9% of Construction Cost) 4,120.00 Administration (1% of Construction Cost 460'.00 TOTAL $,50,400.00 It is proposed to fund this improvement project from unencumbered LAWCON, LCMR, and City funds provided for the development of the Shingle Creek Trailway (II) project. The proposed improvement, as described above, is feasible at the costs estimated, and it is recommended the proposal be forwarded to the City Council for further action. SK: j n Al at 1 .; �4 IL „ c firs U W Arij 4& W4 � r = AII ir 611 VA AV f , w! i TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works.. DATE: July -21, 1982 RE: Completion of Central Park /Garden City Trail.Extension. Improvement Project No. 1982 -19 Pursuant to recent City Council directives regarding completion of _ the Central Park /Garden City Trail Extension, the staff has submitted formal application to the appropriate federal and state agencies for amendment to existing LAWCON and LCMR grants. Upon receipt of verbal approval from the State Planning Agency (agency acting as grant administrator) the staff has developed plans and specifications for the following g 1. completion of the exercise trail loop along the westerly ,edge of Garden City park following installation of the water main through the area 2, construction of a connection from the exercise trail loop to the Brooklyn Drive /65th Avenue intersection, and 3. extension of the trail along the southerly and easterly edges of the soccer field area with another bridge crossin Shin le r g g g Creek, providing a connection to the main regional trail at south edge of Central Park. A summary of the estimated improvement cost follows: Construction Cost $53,720.04 Contingencies 5,370.00 Subtotal Construction Cost ,$59,090.00 Engineering (9% of Construction Cost) 5,320.00 Administrative (1% of Construction. Cost) f 590.00 TOTAL $65,000.00 It is proposed to fund this improvement project from unencumbered LAWCON, LCMR, and City funds provided-for the various trailway improvements w' 'ects Fund Division 49 within h parks a P i the k (Capital Projects p ( p � and 56), and unencumbered City funds available from the Shingle Creek Trailway I project. A summary of the various funding sources follows: Division 49 (Central Park /Garden City Trail) ( LAWCON, LCMR, City) $48,040.00 Division 56 (Central Park III) ( LAWCON, LCMR, City) $ 2,420.00 Division 97 (Shingle Creek Trailway I) (City) $14,540.00 TOTAL $65,000.00 July 21, 1982 Page 2 �. The ro osed improvements, as described above are.feasible at the P P P costs estimated, and it is recommended the proposal be forwarded to the City Council for further action. SK:jn f • ` i•. x.,1;: Ira '`r I�r ~y Poor" top i t* M Q rm abb.. .w fir ilt• �r.r r .�* �� , W, 1, ►�►• w�� _ • r, �+ rte' • f r t+ � �'�� r > . iy � , . I of r • +. OWN= As AA 41% dr AA I w TO: Gerald G.- Splinter, City Manager t FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works, DATE: July 21, 1982 RE: Lion's Park Tennis Court Improvement Project No. 1982 -20 Pursuant to recent City Council directives regarding completion of subgrade correction within the Lion's Park tennis court site, the staff has developed plans and specifications for necessary soil corrective measures to be completed in 1982, thereby reducing chances of settlement during surface construction in 1983. It is recommended the project be included in a construction contract together with trail construction in Lion's Park, Central Park and Garden City Park, and the Civic Center improvements proposed under Projects Nos. 1982 -21 and 1982 -22 in order to provide cost reductions resulting from "quantity purchasing ". Based upon the above recom- mendation, the costs related to the subgrade correction and grav'el­ base installtion are estimated as follows: Construction Cost $18,000.00 Contingencies 1,800.00 Subtotal Construction Cost $19,800.00 Engineering (9% of Construction Cost) ' 1,780.00 Administration (1% of Construction Cost) 200.00 TOTAL $21,780.00 Funding for the tennis court construction will be from the 1982 Neighborhood Parks Budget (Division No. 88) of the Capital Projects Fund. The proposed improvement, as described above, is feasible at the costs estimated, and it is recommended the - proposal be forwarded to _the City_ Council for further action. SK:jn 3 1 t 84d t y 1 ~ &43 s I f w .._.. — •• Vic / . • � � , f ' ;:fit ,�`-- �~ SROOKLVN "CENTER PARKS & RECREATION DEPT. SROOKL' CENTER MINN. \ • �1_ •� -� , •• ,- yM _ - � - -�+_ /y� \ TENNIS COURTS L104 'S PARK RUSSELL AVE. NO. , „ a, n,c.by a. atl y cn.e enl. F lan. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER _ epe [ic at or ^ under ° ay dl:aset by 1 NGINEERIPN y,pEPARTN.EN' av <rvlaion and then lan a Ouly C 1 I:on ie mead Pu one Kng an ant the laws o! tna Atato. o[ .,� :CITY ENGINEER Y, nlnn•aota' p DATI DRAWN Y I h NO. S _ a Imo_.. TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works,4 DATE; July , 21, 1982 RE: Completion of Civic Center Access Improvement Project No. 1982 -21 It is proposed that the City Council provide for completion of the north access to the Civic Center complexion conjunction with.the completion of the parking lot improvements comprehended under the adopted 1982 Budget. The proposed Civic Center access improvement provides for: 1. Installation of 24 inch storm sewer connection beneath the access embankment. 2. Construction of concrete curb and gutter, concrete median, and concrete sidewalk along the entrance from Shingle Creek Parkway to the north parking lot access. 3. Permanent bituminous pavement structure from Shingle Creek Parkway to the north parking lot access. 4. Replacement of traffic signal loop detectors at Shingle Creek Parkway (the existing system will be destroyed during reconstruc- tion) . 5. Bituminous overlay of the unimproved pavement within the front plaza. 6. Sealcoating of the entire access and front plaza. 7. Extension of the lawn irrigation system throughout the improved and reconstructed areas adjacent to the north and south access drives. A brief summary of the estimated costs and revenue sources follows Estimated Costs Construction $53,860.00 Contingencies 5,390.00 Subtotal Construction Cost $5.9,250.00 Engineering (9% of Construction Cost)_ 5,330.00 Administration (1% of Construction Cost) 590.00 TOTAL $fi5,170.00 July 21 1982 Page 2 Rev'enife SoUrces Capital Project Fund (Division No. 57) $60,170.00 Government Buildings Budget (Division No. 19) 5,000.00 TOTAL $65,170.00 The proposed improvements, as described above, are feasible at the costs estimated, and it is recommended the proposal be forwarded to the City Council for further action. SK:jn TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: July 21, 1982 RE: Civic Center Parking Lot Improvements Improvement Project No. 1982 -22 The 1982 Budget of the Government Buildings Division (Division No. 19) comprehends improvement of the north and south parking lots of the Civic Center. A brief summary of the improvements and estimated costs follows: South Parking Lot Improvements include: Repair of sunken areas, bituminous overlay of the "old" portion of the lot, installation of bumper posts, and repair of an existing parking lot light. Estimated Construction Cost $27,070.00 Contingencies 2,700.00 Subtotal Construction Cost $29,770.00 Engineering (9% of Construction Cost) 2,680.00 Administration (1% of Construction Cost) 300.00 TOTAL $32,750.00 r North Parking Lot Improvements include: Installation of bumper posts and seal coating of entire lot. Estimated Construction Cost $ 8,880.00 Contingencies .890.00 Subtotal Construction Cost $ 9,770.00 Engineering (9% of Construction Cost) 8`80.00 Administration (1% of Construction Cost) 100.00 TOTAL $10 ESTIMATED TOTAL COST OF PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS $43,500.00 .The 1982 Budget provides $43,500.00 for.the proposed improvements.. The proposed improvements, as described'above,'are feasible at the costs estimated, and it is recommended the proposal be forwarded to the City Council for consideratiom. r _ t ., .� _`- , �— ^•s.w�Ww ••"' - -- is � - +.... ...�•. 1r cenlce } cotOlumir + / 1 1 2 - / -pt CK SH Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING FUEL DISPENSING SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -23, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (CONTRACT 1982 -K) WHEREAS, the City Council of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota deems it necessary to provide for the improvement of the municipal fuel dispensing system at an estimated construction cost of $14,000.00 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that said improvement be provided through the establish- ment of Fuel Dispensing System Improvement Project No. 1982 -23 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that: 1. The specifications for Contract 1982 -K for said improvement prepared by the City Engineer are hereby approved and ordered filed with the City Clerk. i 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least twice in the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall appear not less than seven 7 days prior to the date for receipt of bids, and specify the work to be done, state that said bids will be received by the City Clerk until 11 :00 A.M., local time, August 19, 1982, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers at City Hall by the City Clerk and City Engineer, will then be tabulated and will be considered by the City Council at 7:00 P.M. local time, on August 23, 1982, in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bond, or certified check payable to the City for one thousand dollars ($1,000.00). 3. The accounting for Project No. 1982 -23 will be done in the General Fund Budget, Division 43 (Vehicle Maintenance). Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk RESOLUTION NO. t f n . } t The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. i i TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works, DATE: July 21, 1982 RE: Fuel Dispensing System Improvement Project No. 1982 -23 The 1982 Budget of the Vehicle Maintenance Division (Division No. 43) provides $14,000.00 for the installation o(f a motor fuel dispens- ing system in conjunction with the completion of plans for the ultimate development of the City Garage site at 6844 Shingle Creek Parkway. Recent discussions with Lindberg Pierce, Inc. Architects, have resulted in formulation of preliminary site and building usage concepts, therefore, the staff proposes to proceed with the purchase and installation of the equipment. In conjunction with the system installation, the staff will work with LOGIS on the recently activated Equipment Control Module, an equip= ment inventory system provided for the Public Works Users Group of LOGIS. The ultimate goal of the system is the ability to provide direct data input from the fuel dispencing system to the main computers of LOGIS under an "enhancement" to the Equipment Control Module, thereby eliminating the "hand transfer" of data between the Street and Finance Divisions. The major features of the proposed system will be; 24 hour unattended accessibility - security system activated by personal land vehical "key cards" ability to record simultaneous pump utilization automatic fuel rationing for particular vehicles automatic pump shut-off electrical and battery operated memory system for times ..of power failure. In summary, -it is recommended the proposal for purchase and instal- lation of the fuel dispensing system by forwarded to the - City Council for authorization to proceed. SK: jn - 1 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COU14TY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JULY 15, 1982 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Mary Simmons, Nancy Manson, Lowell Ainas, Carl Sandstrom and Donald Versteeg. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, Assistant City Engineer James Grube, and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - July 1, 1982 Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve the minutes of the July 1, 1982 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Commissioners Manson, Malecki, Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. Not toting: Chairman Lucht. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 82029 (Northwestern National Bank) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for site and building plan approval to install an automatic teller machine in the parking lot in front of Hirschfield's at Westbrook Mall at 5717 Xerxes Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission information Sheet for Application No. 82029 attached). x The Secretary explained that the automatic teller machine would be installed on a temporary basis to test the market in the Brooklyn Center area for a branch of the Northwestern National Bank. Chairman Lucht asked whether the applicant had anything to add to the staff presentation. Mr. Wally "Klux . of Northwestern National Bank, stated that he had nothing further to add to the Secretary's report. Commissioner Manson asked Mr. Klus why it would be necessary to take the machine out, even if the market in the Brooklyn Center area is adequate to support a new branch facility.. Mr. Klus' answered that Northwest Banco was committing itself to this location for five years and that after that time a decision' would be made.as to whether,to keep the machine at its proposed 'location or to remove He stated that the technology of banking was changing so rapidly that he could not be sure what the will decide to do in five years . Commissioner Manson stated that she had seen three cars stacking at a.money machine in another location. Mr. Klus stated that he could not guarantee there would never be cars stacking behind the money machine; but added that he expected the peak times for the automatic teller machine to be when the surrounding stores are not busy. He stated that the bank would be most interested in rectifying any problem that might arise since troubles in providing service will have a negative impact on the bank's business. Commissioner Simmons expressed concern about vandalism and mechanical difficulties with the machine. Mr. Klus stated that he was not 7 -15 -82 -1- aware of any mechanical problems with the machine. He stated that the bank is working to make the automatic teller machines as error- free as possible. He noted that the bank will be installing 3,500 automatic teller machines throughout 10 states and that it is im- portant the machines work properly. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 82029" (Northwestern National Bank) Motion by Comnu.ssioner Ainas seconded y Commissioner Sandstrom to recommend approval of.Application No. 82029, subject to the following conditions : - 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes to, the issuance of permits. 2. :Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are. subject to review and approval by the. City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager)-shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4 Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 5. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all concrete islands. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Manson, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 82023 (Bergstrom Realty Company) The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for amended site and building plan approval for Phase I of the Hi Crest Square Estates in the 1300 block on the south side of 69th Avenue .Nor'-h. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information for Application No. 82023 attached). The Secretary stated that he wished to strike the last sentence of the second paragraph of the report in that he felt the newly submitted plans are substantially different from those submitted to the Planning Commission on June 17, 1982. The Secretary also reminded the Planning Commission of the memo prepared by the Assistant City Engineer re- garding three ponds in Brooklyn Park and observations on the proposed pond at the Hi Crest Square Estates. Ile also noted that the Commis- sion had received the City Ordinance requirement for fencing around swimming pools. He asked the Planning Commission to come to a determination of whether the proposed pond should be considered a swimming pool and, therefore, fenced. The Secretary also briefly mentioned that screening of the project from the single family homes to the east had been provided by landscaping, which was accepted by the Planning Commission at its .7une 17, 1982 meeting. He added that 8' high opaque screening from Iitunboldt Square had become the burden of the R3 property as a result of rezoning the land from C2 to R3. The Secretary also mentioned the previous approval of the variance from the buffering requirement of the R3 development from the City's 7 -15 -82 -2- s pump house property on 69th Avenue North. He stated that no action need be taken again on that application. Chairman Lucht asked the applicant whether he-had anything to add. Mr. James Merila, representing Bergstrom Realty, stated that he felt everything had been covered. The Commission was then approached by Mr. John DeVries of DeVries Builders, who asked the Planning Commission -to table the application for one meeting until he could resolve with Mr. Merila the dispute between them regarding the use of plans which had been prepared for the Earle Brown Farm Estates, a project which he is building. Mr. 'DeVries stated that he felt the Planning Commission had been asked to make a legal judgment regarding the status of the proposed plans by seeking site and building plan approval. Mr. DeVries stated that he did not feel the plans submitted at the June 17, 1982 Planning Commission meeting were "prototypes" as the staff report indicates. He stated that he could recall no mention of the word "prototype" in the Planning Commission minutes of that meeting. He t stated that when these plans were not used in seeking City Council F approval, the entire planning process should have been restarted. E Mr. DeVries stated that he had no idea that Mr. Merila was using any of the plans that had been prepared for the Earle Brown Farm Estates. He stated that he had not had time to review the new plans which were submitted on Tuesday of this week to the City. Mr. DeVries pointed out that he and Mr. Al Beisner wished to meet with the applicant, Mr. Bergstrom, along with Mr. Merila before the next Planning Commission meeting and discuss the proper submittal of plans. Finally, Mr. DeVries reiterated that he felt a legal_ question had to be answered between the parties before the Planning Commission could act on the plans. The Secretary stated that the staff have to assume that the plans submitted for site and building plan approval are legitimate. He stated that he did not _feel it was the Planning Commission's re- sponsibility to settle the dispute between the parties. Regarding the request to table the matter, the Secretary stated that the Planning Commission should consider the feelings of the applicant and whether the plans as submitted are in order. The Secretary also pointed out that the Planning Commission does not have to act on the plans for another 30 days. The Planning Commission was then approached by Mr. Bill Clelland, Attorney for James Merila. Mr. Clelland stated that the request to table the application was improper. He stated that the dispute between Mr. Merila and Mr. DeVries boils down to whether Mr. DeVries has the exclusive rights to use the plans which were prepared for the Earle Brown Farm Estates. Mr. Clelland stated that such building plans are not owned by the builder who uses them and added that it is Mr. DeVries who wants the Planning Commission to settle a legal question which should be answered in court. Mr. Clelland pointed out there is obviously competition between developers of similar types of townhouse projects. He stated that tabling the matter would favor one developer over the other unjustly.. Mr. Clelland added that the matter has been thoroughly discussed with Mr. DeVries' attorneys Mr. Merila then approached the Planning Commission and explained at. some length the background to the dispute which was being aired before 7 -15 -82 -3- the Planning Commission. Mr. Merila pointed out that when a con - ceptual site and building plan was brought to the Planning Commission during the hearings on the rezoning application, a speculative lay- - out was used because no builder had been lined up. He admitted that the building layout utilized the same footprint of the buildings developed on the Earle Brown Farm Estates. He stated that.the plan had always been referred to as a concept plan as opposed to a definite design. Mr,.Merila explained that the rezoning approval was based on a preliminary plat and grading and utility plans. He noted that there were no building plans because the builder had not been selected -at that time.. He stated that after receiving approval of the preliminary plat and the grading and utility plans, the applicant,- Mr..Bergstrom, wanted to start grading the site in prepar - ation of..the development. However, Mr. Merila went on, staff required full site and building plans and final plat approval before issuing permits for grading and utilities.. Mr.. Merila explained that at that point a builder still had not been selected. Mr.`Merila went on to explain that H. E. Homes looked at the plans prepared by Janis Blumentals for John DeVries. These plans were to be changed, he said. During the time immediately before the Planning Commission of June 17, 1982, Mr. Blumentals was out of town and, therefore, the building plans for the Earle Brown Farm Estates were submitted with a new name stamped on the plans. Mr. Merila admitted that this was a mistake and stated that H.E. Homes has attempted to redesign the building plans since that time. He explained that the plans submitted at the July 1, 1982 meeting were pulled from the agenda because H. E. Homes was concerned that Mr. DeVries and Mr. Beisner had not been satisfied with the revisions. Mr. Merila stated that the new plans submitted since that time are substantially different, utilizing as they do, a larger foundation plan and a different arrange- ment of rooms- throughout the units. Mr. Merila apologized for the inconvenience that this private dispute had caused to the Planning Commission. li Commissioner Simmons noted that Mr. Merila did not want the plans before the Commission to be tabled. She stated that Mr. Merila was saving money by having a nonarchitect make changes to plans which had been prepared previously by an architect, and then having them recertified by a structural engineer. She stated that if no one had been at the July.1, 1982 meeting to object to the plans submitted at that time, she suspected that Mr. Merila would have gone forward with those plans for approval rather than withdrawing them. Mr. Merila stated that he had asked the architect (Janis Blumentals) for P plans from the Earle Town arm t permission to show the la f m E rl B F Estates to H. E. Homes. He stated that Mr. Blumentals gave that permission. Commissioner Simmons noted that Mr. Merila was working in the same capacity for Mr. Bergstrom as he had Mr. DeVries earlier. Chairman Lucht stated that he failed to see the relevance of these questions to the Planning Commission's functions. Commissioner Simmons stated that she was not satisfied with Mr. Merila's explanation as to why the plans have been brought to the Planning Commission and revised twice. She stated that it seemed to be part of the Planning Commis- sion's function to approve plans that are legitimate for application for building permits. The Secretary explained that the Planning Commission's responsibility is to make recommendations to the City Council. He explained that 7 -15 -82 -4- i the Planning Commission had 60 days before it must act on an appli- cation. He stated that the Planning Commission must decide whether they are ready to recommend a set- of based on whether those .plans are in order. He recommended that the Planning Commission not delve.into who did what. However, he went on, if the Planning 4 Commission is not ready to make a recommendation at this time, it can still table the application for up to 30 more days. If the Planning Commission is ready to act on the application, they can do so at this meeting, he stated. Commissioner Simmons asked whether the entire discussion had been impertinent. The Secretary explained briefly why the plans have been redesigned and stated that the Planning Commission should look at the plans irrespective of how or why they have been redesigned and should simply decide on whether they can be recommended to the City Council at this time. The Secretary explained that the applicant asked to resubmit the plans once the dispute arose following the June 17, 1982 meeting. At the July 1, 1982 meeting, the applicant asked to have the plans tabled again in order to do further redesigning. He'concluded by saying that the differences between private parties-should be aired before a court and not settled by the Planning Commission. In response to a question from Commissioner Simmons regarding the requirement for the plans to be signed by a registered architect, Mr. Merila stated that the plans will be submitted by Rydell Home Designers and Cordell Engineering, a structural engineering firm. Commissioner Simmons asked whether Cordell Engineering would..be qualified to sign the plans as structural engineers. Mr. Merila responded in the affirmative. The Secretary explained that the Zoning Ordinance required that ®" site and building plans be submitted by a registered Minnesota architect. He explained that the policy in the past has been that site plans may be submitted by either an architect or a registered engineer. He stated that before building permits have been issued, . building plans must be signed by either a registered architect or structural engineer. He explained that the question of certification was discussed with people at the State Building Codes Division and that they have ruled that townhouses in groups of more than two units must be designed by a registered architect or structural engineer. Mr. DeVries stated that there was a confusion in the way the ordinance was written, that the ordinance does not mention structural engineers. The Secretary stated that the ordinance requires plans to be submitted by a registered architect and agreed that it does not mention structural engineers. He stated that the policy in the past has been to accept drawings which have been submitted by either an architect or a I structural engineer in the case of building plans or a registered land surveyor or civil engineer in case of site plans. Mr. DeVries stated that he felt there are other questions besides whether the plans are qualified for approval which the Planning Com mission must be aware of. He stated that he had no contact with Mr. Bergstrom, who he assumes is still the developer for the project. Mr. DeVries also stated that he did not think Janis Blumentals would say that he had given permission to use the Earle Brown Farm Estates plan. He stated that although the applicant has a concern regarding" the time delay because of a tabling, there are at the same time, savings to be gained from not having plans prepared by an architect. Mr. Clelland stated that his client asked for decision regarding the 7 -15 -82 -5- plans and added that Mr. DeVries could raise his issues in court. Commissioner Ainas stated that he considered the basic question to be whether the plans are in order regardless of who prepared what. Chairman Lucht asked for a clarification of Conditions No. 11 and 8 in the Information Sheet. The Secretary answered that the Assistant City Engineer has recommended maintaining the water level in the holding pond at the Hi Crest Square Estates at 840 feet. The-" Assistant City Engineer stated that the memo he had prepared looked at-three.ponds in Brooklyn Park. He stated that ponds with vertical drainagq'were not aesthetically pleasing. He recommended maintaining a minimum water level so that the pond does not become a maintenance problem. Commissioner Simmons noted that Condition No. 8 referred to "an acceptable safety risk." She- asked - whether it would'be appropriate' to do-a larger study on ponds as part of_ application or for it to be done independently of this application. The Secretary stated that the staff needed direction from the Planning Commission as to - what'it wanted in terms of information in order to make a decision. He stated that it was up to the Commission to decide. He stated that he did not consider the proposed pond to be a swimming pool and sugges.ed that perhaps signs posted "No Swimming" would perhaps eliminate any need for fencing around the pond. He also stated that the recommendation to keep the water level high actually adds to the safety risk, but to not maintain the water level would detract from the aesthetic appearance of the pond. In answer to another question from Commissioner Simmons, the Secretary recommended that the Planning Commission decide whether the proposed pond is acceptable for this particular development and study other ponds later. Commissioner Simmons pointed out that Brooklyn Center is experiencing increased pressure on its drainage system and that ponding is being used more and more to control drainage patterns. She stated that the need for aesthetic appeal and for economy and providing for drainage is always assumed in the Planning Commission's deliberations, but that safety seems to be less of a concern. The Secretary asked the Planning Commission to decide how they wanted to deal with the question of ponds. The Assistant City Engineer explained that in this __.narti.cular case, the ground water level is 842 feet and the pond outlet is 840 feet. He concluded, therefore, that at most times the water level will be at 840 feet, except in dry periods. During these times, he explained, there would be a need for 'additional water to be pumped into the pond to maintain a level of 840 feet. Mr. Merila stated that one of the problems he was trying to deal with in designing the drainage system was.the drainage problems of the single- family - homes to the east. He stated that an open pond would function better and would be more aesthetic for the development. He added that the applicant has no problem providing a water supplement to the `pond. Chairman Lucht stated that the "No Swimming signs could be used. Commissioner Simmons stated that she felt such signs were inadequate. Commissioner Simmons again stated that there may be a need to address the general question of ponds in Brooklyn Center and wondered whether it was appropriate to study the question at this time. The Secretary answered that that could always be done in the future and that approval of the present application need not hinge on such a study. Commissioner z 7 -15 -82 -6-- - Simmons stated that the conclusion of a future study might have to be applied retroactively to the pond in question and this might be more difficult at that time. Chairman Lucht stated that he felt the pond at the Hi Crest Square Estates would be unique because of the water table feeding into it. Commissioner Manson stated that she did not know of anything -that would eliminate all risk in association with this pond. She stated that the parents must be left with some responsibility and recommended that the plans be approved as is, without any barriers around the pond. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 82023 (Bergstrom Realty Company) Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Manson to recommend approval of Application. No. 82023, subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits; and specifically, � m should conform to the revisions and requirements set forth in the Assistant City Engineer's memo dated 6 -14 -82 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site im provements for the entire development. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities shall be appropriately screened from view. 5 Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 6. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas 7. All areas regraded, but not developed according to plan shall be seeded to maintain adequate ground cover for dust control. , 8. The _Assistant City Engineer shall. report to the City Council on how the proposed plan compares with other ponds-on private developments in the City and on whether the proposed pond will fulfill'its function as both a drainage control device and an..aesthetic, asset to the townhouse development, with an acceptable safety risk. 9. Plan approval acknowledges the proposed landscape treatment along the east side of the development as acceptable screening in lieu of the ordinance required 4' high opaque fence. 7 -15 -82 -7- The building plans shall be certified by a registered Minnesota Architect prior to the �, ,t issuance of building permits if so required � by the State Building Codes Division. 114 The site plans shall be amended to incorporate a system to supplement natural ground water inflow into the proposed pond thus, maintaining a constant water level elevation of 840 feet (U.S.G.S. Datum). 12. The final.plat shall be amended to reflect the .changes in the site and building plan submitted'. on July .12, 1982. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Ainas and Sandstrom. Voting against: Commissioners Simmons and Versteeg. The motion passed. Commissioners Versteeg and Simmons both expressed concern that the private dispute should be settled first before action is taken on the proposed plans. OTHER BUSINESS The Secretary reviewed upcoming business items and asked who would be unable to attend the July 29, 1982 Planning Commission meeting. Chairman Lucht and Commissioners Manson, Simmons and Sandstrom all said that they would be out of town. The Secretary stated that the meeting would, therefore, have to be cancelled and that the next Planning Commission meeting would be on August 12, 1982. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9 :27 p.m. Chairman a 7 -15 -82 -8.- m _a Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82029 .Applicant: Banco Properties Location: 5717 Xerxes Avenue North (Westbrook Mall parking lot) Request: Site and Building Plan The applicant requests site and building plan approval to install an automatic teller machine in the Westbrook Mall east parking lot in front of,Hirschfield's at 5717 Xerxes Avenue North. The area in question is bounded by Dayton's Nome Store to the north, by the Westbrook Mall shopping center on the west, by Jerry Leonard's store for men on the south, and by Xerxes Avenue North on the east. The property is zoned C2 and the proposed automatic teller machine (ATM) is a permitted use in that zoning district. The proposed ATM will be located 50' west of the Xerxes Avenue North westerly right -of -way line (the minimum setback required from major thoroughfares. The ATM itself is about 11' x 12' and will be tilted at an angle so as to be con- gruent with the angle parking stalls in the parking lot. There is also an. attached canopy which extends over the drive -up lane and which also extends legally into the 50' setback area. Cars using the ATM will travel along the eastbound driving lane in front of Hirshfield's and angle into the ATM drive -sp in the same fashion they would enter a parking space. Cars will then exit into the westbound driving land running toward Hirschfield's (see drawing attached). It is not anticipated that vehicle stacking for the ATM will cause problems for cars parked in adjacent spaces since the main hours of use will be nonbusiness hours. It is also recognized that the existing uses in the shopping center are low traffic generators and it is, therefore, unlikely that spaces adjacent to the ATM will regularly be occupied. The applicant estimates, given the speed of transactions, that no more than one car would ever be waiting to use the machine. The proposed ATM drive -up will eliminate five (5) parking stalls from the West brook Mall p arking lot. A proof -of- parking plan submitted in support of Appli cation No. 77016 showed 574 parking spaces, a surplus of three (3) spaces for the entire shopping center. (Only 437 stalls have actually been put in with 137 deferred). Staff feel that it would be possible to glean two more stalls from this plan to make up for the five stalls lost to the ATM. Banco has indicated that the structure, in all likelihood, will be at this site'for no more than 5 years. In general, the plans appear to be in order and approval is recommended subject g _ to at least the following conditions. 1 Building plans. are subject to review and approval by the Building E Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer; prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) be sub - mitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 5. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all concrete islands. 7 -15 -82 - ,!Manning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82023 Applicant: Bergstrom Realty Company Location: 1300 block on south side of 69th Avenue North . Request: Site and Building Plan The applicant requests amended approval of site and building plans for the first phase of the Hi Crest Square Estates townhouse development on the south side of the 1300 block of 69th Avenue North. This application received approval by the Planning Commission on June 17, 1982 and a revised building plan was tabled on July 1, 1982. The change involves a new building design for the six unit buildings and four unit buildings throughout the project. No other changes have been made to the site, landscaping or grading plans. The design submitted at the June 17, 1982 meeting was essentially a carbon copy of the design used in the Earle Brown Farm Estates developed by DeVries Builders and was intended as a prototype rather than a final design. Because of concerns raised by DeVries Builders and Dominion Development over the use of the plans, the applicant wishes to submit a new design for amended approval by the Planning Commission. The new design differs from the design previously submitted in certain respects. The foundations of the outer four units (two on each end) will be 20' x 32' wi an enclosed foyer between the garage and the main living area. The previous design called for the outer two units to be 19' 6" x 30' with mechanical /laundry rooms between the garage and the main living area. The new interior units are 17' 6" x 32' as opposed to 16' x 30' as proposed earlier. The general arrangement of rooms within the units is not different, though the dimensions vary slightly. _ The front exterior elevations are substantially changed from the design proposed at • the June 17, 1982 meeting. Rather than the narrow lap board siding, the applicant proposes to use a stacato exterior with cedar batting boards in a vertical pattern. Face brick columns about 3' to 4' high accent the garages. Rear and side elevations do have horizontal lap board siding. The new plans have been designed by Dennis Rydell who is not a registered architect. However, the applicant has agreed to have the plans certified by a registered structural engineer prior to the issuance of permits, as required by City Ordinance. Altogether,,the plans appear to be acceptable and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval.by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance p of permits.: 2: Grading, drainage', utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits; and specifically, should conform to the revisions and requirements set forth in the Assistant City Engineer.'s.memo dated 6- 14 -82. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements for the entire development. • 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities shall be appropriately screened from view. 7 -15 -82 -1- Application No. 82023 continued 5. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 6. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 7. All areas regraded, but not developed according to plan shall be seeded to maintain adequate ground cover for.dust control. 8. The Assistant City Engineer-shall report to the City Council on how the proposed plan compares with other ponds -on private developments in the City and on whether the proposed pond will . fulfill function as both a drainage control device and an aesthetic asset to,the townhouse development, with an acceptable safety risk... 9. Plan approval acknowledges the proposed landscape treatment along the east side of the development as acceptable screening in lieu of the ordinance required 4 high'opaque fence. 10 The building plans shall be certified by a registered Minnesota Architect prior to the issuance of building permits if so required by the State Building Codes Division. ll. The site plans shall be amended to incorporate a system to sup- plement natural groundwater inflow into the proposed and thus maintainin a constant water elevation g level elevationof $40: U.S.G.S. Datum). . ) I. 7 -15 -82 . -2- l Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. f RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT F OR HI CREST SQUARE ESTATES BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the Subdivision Agreement between the City of Brooklyn Center, and Bergstrom Realty Company is hereby approved. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center. 6 Date Mayor. ATTEST: Clerk i 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. r r TO: 'Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works t FROM:. Jim Grube, Assistant City Engineer :., DATE: July . 21, 1982 RE: Final Plat of Hi Crest Square-Estates Located South of.69th Avenue North and East of Emerson Avenue North (Planning Commission Application No. 82016) Mr. James Merila, on behalf of the owner, has petitioned the Engineering g g to final the referenced plat. The prelim- inary plat was approved by the City Council at its April 26,1982 meeting subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2.: The final plat is subject to the requirements Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3.. Homeowner's Association Documents shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval. Y P P PP 4. Grading, drainage, utility and berining plans are subject to review and approval b e th City Engineer prior PP Y Y g' pr o to the issuance of P ermits. 5. The plat must be given final approval by the City Council and filed � at the County prior to the issuance of building permits. Subsequent to the preliminary plat approval,_the'owner has modified the dimensions of various parcels to accommodate a change in design- . of the townhouse units. Accordingly, , the Planning Commission, in its review of amended site and building plans submitted under Planning g P g Commission Application No. 82023 has required the owner to amend q o n the final lat as necessary to reflect P 1 changes. e t th Y e A review of the final plat confirms the necessary changes es have been incorporated and that hat .the.. proposal meets the requirements of Chapter q P 15 of the City Ordinances. The City Attorney Y to e has had an opportunity Y Y PP Y to review the Homeowner's Association Documents and an u to date e Abstract of Title and has determ d i e both documents to be acceptable. The grading, drainage, utility, g g, g y, and berming plans have been reviewed and the applicant is proceeding with the plan amendments required.:. by the staff. The staff has drafted a Subdivision Agreement for review by the applicant. Pursuant to said review, the applicant has given verbal approval of the documents contents and intent. It is, therefore, presented to the City Council for review and approval in conjunction, with the final plat acceptance. July 21, 1382 Page 2 ` In summary, the applicant has met all conditions set by the City Council and approval is recommended. Said approval should be granted with the stipulation that no building permits be issued until the . plat has been filed at the County. JNG:jn f S ' HI CREST SQUARE EST ATES , 169Th AIMS_ NCRTH) ` .J t \�t►�' 'f -.-- -ST; TI: '• --- :».: S�Sil;1'::.."f — ... g% t;'•�3- --= MAT--N • `il �^'^•••. K /nt dj1oIZ. 1, N.' (uft •f(— w _ o Sf Ent of CO N.i�.tt /Ya 130 Olaf IlOa OK. fI1469t� . ENHEPiN COUNTY HIGHWAY NO. 130 ., •ter r�i ��•` /•!s' e !lf CO H I °y H. �i vtv 1.)tvlt tf•N J000 ,)V. 7SJJ000 Li O v v r ;6 +ys �$ j 1 g a — / 9SSS —last OUTL07 A 2u : �x+4/�3'2 8th ? t o� Saao m ca �• h � .vd5'J0'! t r i NOS' D o •a` Nls O� "It• i e c� l7.00 KIS•NY C'+ 4 • t %YJt NOS•Jrt _ _ --; - ' r.p•.tt d:7 wo�._w�u k_ . c. �: iV - - ;•$i •r� R•tGNf ,Car lr 0� '� H' l �S't w b 2 rs 'l �• .`g NO3't 6 '. td� � � a'+ „ -• rids•17 "f w � - /ts :y JJW .NdO ¢SJ iJA tCJO dA00 Z ,, i - - I OU7L07 8 �? i 6 i • 5 ^4 ? • 3 t :tolls of n1Ji"50 POW JJ 00 % V • uKC N rat a NOS•t% 43 [ - t!C (;` NOe SOS N A ' .� _ .. iCOO .. o OENO'ES WON ►tChtAJ:YT ' i / tt •b� , ,. �.•w� sue NOSNJO•F� BEAMUSS S)i ARE ASStM. . t mg i C � 4 �� q ssc4• � a til 0) 1 X e. +met oC? r- 1 Jt7s•077C .( P� O ff" �: t t i? dt �c Y c ' O MOT �.� sttf•a 2 't't�eb • � t •$ •f� G y a 4 ( i •0 .. w •a ' -KOfb �\ � t {f� • 1V =` f. Z, 2 • 9a i u 3d O. )i f . ► uw L IM $ k t ics E ' � 9l cot be ^ seon o �> y ��` N�J•.d' . a n07 E 1$ "OUTLOT F ~ Nr� 8 $ 3 OU : yx pm 2 NJ utr ae+r rs ►•» r 9•rtF< Nay ..� -Y wltf `,_ • - 'n'. fart _ ...... t to V4 ♦ ,`.t i . �/ ! trt. -e.J tl.�lJ � t«w .« .. 6tt^ t t,w 4t/ h'! /.•I;C ASS!- ,. SUBDIVISION AGREEMEN THIS AGREEMENT, Made and entered into the day and year= set forth hereinafter, by and between BERGSTROM REALTY COMPANY, a corporation organ- ized and existing under the laws of the State of . Minnesota, hereinafter called the "Developer ", and the CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, a municipal corporation in the State of Minnesota, hereinafter called the "City ", WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developer is the owner of a part of Lot 2 Block 1 HI CREST SQUARE ADDITION located in Section 36, Township 119, Range 21, in the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Developer proposes to replat and develop the property under the name of HI CREST SQUARE ESTATES, hereinafter called the "Subdi= vision ": NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: DIVISION 1 - APPLICATION OF THIS AGREEMENT 1.1 That the provisions of this agreement shall apply to all portions of the Subdivision. All references to portions or tracts within the Subdivision shall be deemed to apply to all portions or tracts of the Subdivision, unless the context in which such reference is used clearly indicates its application to only specified portions or tracts. DIVISION 2 UNPAID CURRENT ASSESSMENTS 2.1 That Exhibit A, attached hereto, lists the unpaid balance of current special assessments which have been levied against the Subdivi- i sion for improvement projects previously completed by the City. That the Developer hereby acknowledges the benefits received from these projects. That all special assessment payments due with property taxes payable in 1982 shall be paid in full. That the balance of the special assessments will be apportioned to the various tracts of the Subdivision in accordance c with the provisions of the attached Exhibit A. DIVISION 3 PENDING ASSESSMENTS 3.1 There are no special assessments pending against the Subdivision for improvements which are currently approved or in the process of planning. DIVISION 4 - UTILITY CONNECTIONS AND HOOKUP CHARGES 1 _ 4.1 That Exhibit B, attached hereto, summarizes the utility connections, and hookup charges which will be assessed against the Subdi- vision. That the Developer hereby acknowledges the benefits received from these connections and hookups and that he is responsible for the payment thereof in accordance with the provisions of the attached Exhibit B. DIVISION 5 ADVANCE PAYMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS 5.1 That advance payment of all special assessments levied against individual residential tracts within the Subdivision shall be made by the Developer at the time it conveys title of said individual tracts. 5.2 That upon conveyance of title of said individual residential tracts, the Developer shall pay to the City CASH, in an amount equal to one and one -half times (1k X) the estimated total of all assessments for said property if the assessment roll has been adopted by the City Council. 5.3 That in the event the payment made in advance of the adoption of the assessment roll is greater than the actual assessment levied, the City will return such excess to the Developer within 30 days' t after the adoption of the assessment roll. 5.4 That in the event the payment made in advance of.the adop- tion of the assessment roll is less than the actual assessment levied, the Developer shall make payment in the amount of the difference within 30 days after the adoption of the assessment roll DIVISION 6 OTHER RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE DEVELOPER 6.1 That the Developer shall install all water main, storm sewer, and sanitary sewer to adequately serve the Subdivision; said installations to be constructed in accordance with established City standards at no cost to the City: 6.2 That the Developer shall provide for the design, construction staking, and inspection of the various utilities outlined in paragraph 6.1 above; said services to be provided by Registered Professional i Engineers and Land Surveyors at no cost to the City. That the City has the authority to supplement said professional services as may be determined necessary to guarantee the desired installation of said utilities. 6.3 That the Developer, upon acceptable completion of sanitary and.�torm sewer extensions beyond the perimeter of said Subdivision, shall relinquish all rights of ownership of said sanitary and storm sewers in- stalled beyond said perimeter to the City. Said sanitary and storm sewer installations shall be considered acceptable upon receipt, by the City, of proper notice from the Developer's representative (as describe(V in paragraph 6.2 above) verifying that said sanitary and storm sewer installa- tions were completed in accordance with established City standards. 6.4 That the Developer shall secure appropriate utility ease- ments (see sample - Exhibit C) from the various landowners through which said sanitary and storm sewers traverse to provide the required connection of the Subdivision -to the existing sanitary sewer system. Said utility easements shall be granted to the City, in perpetuity, for the operation and maintenance of said sanitary and storm sewer extensions. 6.5 That the Developer will be required to provide a financial performance guarantee to assure that on -site improvements (including placement of appropriate survey monumentation and establishment of a viable turf throughout the entire Subdivision in conjunction with all phases ofdevelopment) will be constructed, developed and maintained in conformance with the plans, specifications and standards as required by the City's zoning' and platting ordinances, and as approved by the City Council through Planning Commission Application No. 82023. That the Developer shall execute.a Performance Agreement (see sample - Exhibit D) in conjunction with the issuance of the financial guarantee, thereby acknowledging the conditions under which said guarantee has been provided and will be released. 6.6 That the Developer shall provide evidence to the City -that any and all proposed utility connections to existing private utility.mains are completed at the approval of the'owner of said utility mains, said, verification of approval to be provided prior to connection.. ` 6.7 That, upon installation of water mains, sanitary sewer mains, and storm sewer within any portion of the Subdivision, the Developer will execute a Water and Sewer Main and Fire Hydrant Maintenance and In- spection Agreement (see sample - Exhibit E) providing authority to the City to enter the Subdivision and implement necessary corrective measures in k times of perceived emergency conditions which may affect the general well being of the City and its citizens. 6.8 That the Developer shall grant the City right of access to the private drives within the Subdivision for purposes of access to the City's well site located adjacent to the Subdivision at 1207 69th Avenue North. ,. • s 6.9 That the Developer will be required to gay SAG charges as described in Exhibit F. t 6.10 The Developer shall guarantee the development and continuation of one Homeowner's Association for all phases of development of the Subdi- vision in accordance with established City policies. The amendment of any and all portions of the association documents shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney, thereby providing assurance that the intent of this paragraph is met by the Developer. DIVISION 7 - MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS - >, 7.1 That the following exhibits, attached hereto, are made a part hereof by this reference: Exhibit G - proposed plat of HI CREST SQUARE ESTATES (Planning Commission Application No: 82016) Exhibit H proposed site plan (Planning Commission Application No. 82023) x t r IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this easement agreement to be executed in the day and year first above wiitten. Developer BY: Its BY: Its (Corporate Seal) STATE OF MINNESOTA) SS. COUNTY OF } On this day of , 1982, before me, a - ____ Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and , to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn they did say that they are respectively the and of the corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its and said and acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. Notary Public .County, My commission expires t t CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER By. Its Mayor . By: ( SVIL) Its Ci ty Manager WITNESSED: z . 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) \ On this day of 19 , before me, a �. Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me perms -6 liy known, who, being each by me duly sworn they did say that they are respectively the Mayor and City Manager of the corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is. the corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its _ and said and acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. " Notary Public' County, My commission expires i y • -3- UNPAID CURRENT ASSESSME Following is a list of the levied special assessments currently being paid with property taxes on that part of Lot 2 Block 1,` j HI CREST SQUARE, lying East of the West line of Lot 48, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 310. CURRENT PAYMENT ORIGINAL PRINCIPAL BALANCE (due with property tax .LEVY NO. IMPROVEMENT AMOUNT (after: 1982. tax payment) . _ payable in 1982) 3678 Storm sewer $5954.40 $ 1190.88 $'372.20 8193 Weeds $ 199.00 NONE -$ 228.90 TOTALS $6153.40 $ 1190.88 $ 601.10 APPORTIONMENT OF LEVIED ASSESSMENTS The levied special assessments, for which any balancer remains after payment of property taxes payable in 1982, shall be apportioned equally among the 60 potential residential lots indicated on the Preliminary Plat approved by the City Council on April 26, 1982, through Planning Commission Application No. 82016 for the Subdivision. The resulting apportionment to the parcels of the Subdivision shall be as follows: NUMBER SHARE OF ORIGINAL SHARE OF PROPERTY ' OF LOTS ASSESSMENT PRINCIPAL BALANCE Each lot within 28 $ 2778.72 $ 555.74 Blocks 2 through 11 inclusive ($99.24 per lot original assessment) Outlot A 6 595.44 119.09 Outlot B 6 595.44 119.09 Outlot C 6 595.44 119.09 Outlot D 6 595.44 119.09 Outlot E 4 396.96 79.39 Outlot F 4 396.96 79.39 TOTALS 60 $ 5954.40 $ 1190.88 o The resultant principal balance per lot shall be $19.85. i UTILITY CONNECTIONS, HOOKUP CHARGES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS • ' �he by execution of this Subdivision Agreement, hereby i requests permission to connect the Subdivision to the existing municipal sanitary sewer and water systems and, in consideration therefor, agrees to pay hookup charges as follows: 1. Sanitary Sewer The property within the Subdivision has been fully assessed for existing sanitary sewer facilities. The Developer shall bear the cost of all installations required to serve the Subdivision. There will be no hookup charge for this utility. 2. Water The property within the Subdivision has not previously been assessed for water. It shall be assessed in accordance with the established water assessment policy for frontage along 69th Avenue North and for the entire area beyond the 135 foot standard depth in accordance with established City policies. - The water hookup charge shall be calculated as follows: Frontage (1982 rate -= $22.60 per foot) 343.46 feet x $22.60 per foot = $7,762.20 $ 7,762.20 Area (1982 rate = $7.00 per 100 square feet) Total are of Subdivision - ,325,.:000 square feet Less: Area assessed with frontage - 46,367 square feet New right of way area 1,7 square feet TOTAL -276 square feet 276,909 square feet x $7.00 per 100 square feet = $19,.383.60 Total water hookup charge = -$27,145.80 Upon execution of this agreement; the water hookup charge shall be levied as a special assessment against.the Subdivision, for period of ten years at an annual interest rate.to be determined by the City { Council upon adoption of the levy. r The total water hookup charge stated above shall be divided equally . Among the 60 potential residential lots indicated on the Preliminary Plat approved by the City Council on April 26, 1982, through Planning Commission Application No. 82016 for =the Subdivision. The resultant assessment per lot is $452.`43. This special assessment shall be subject to the provisions of Division 5 of`this agreement. The x apportionment to the parcels of the Subdivision is summarized as follows: NUMBER PROPERTY OF LOTS WATER 'HOOKUP CHARGE Each lot within Blocks 2 through 28 $ 12,668.04 11, inclusive ($452.43 per loth I i Outlot A 6 2,714.58 Outlot B 6 2,714.58 Outlot C 6 2, 714 7 .`� ...,� Outlot D 6 2,714.38 Outlot E 4 1,809.72 Outlot F 4 .1,80.9.72 TOTALS 60 $ 27,145.80 1 1 EASEMENT GRANT AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT 8 This easement agreement.is made this � day of 19 by ana beb een � Grantor, and the City of Brooklyn Center, a Minnesota municipal Corporation, s Grantee. t*MREAS, the Grantor is the owner of the following described property: f NOW, THEREFORE, Grantor, for the sum of one and no /100 ($1.00) Dollar and other good and valuable consideration to it in hand paid by Grantee, receipt.of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant and convey to the Grantee, its successors and assigns, a perpetual ease *ent for installation and maintenance Of y including but not limited to. and other appurtenances necessary to the installation and maintenance thereof, over, under and across the real estate described herein. The Grantee shall omplete the installation and any future maintenance reasonably required as expeditiously as i.s reasonable under the circumstances, shall cause no unnecessary interference with the rights of Grantor, and after completion of installation and any maintenance thereof, shall restore the real estate to the oondition in which it was found prior to the comvmcee ent of such installation or maintenance. i f IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the part of the First part ha here • f unto set hand the day and year first above written. State Deed Tax due hereon: Torrens /Abstract Property. 4 In presence of: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )ss. On this day of , l9 , before me,a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he executed the same as free act and deed. Notary Public My commission expires: (NOTARIAL SEAL) y DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND INSPECTION - CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1 PERFORMANCE AGREEMEN - File No. This Agreement is entered into by hereinafter called the Developer and the City of Brooklyn Center, -a Municipal Corporation, under the laws of the State of hereafter called the City. d THE WORK The Developer has received approval of its Development Plans by the City Council of the City (pursuant to City Ordinances), subject to the execution of this Performance Agreement, pursuant to the City Council approval of and in accordance with said Development Plans all of which are made a part hereof by reference. In consideration of such approval, the Developer, its successors and assigns, does covenant and agree to perform the work as set forth in the Development Plans, ns, in the aforesaid Approval, and as hereinafter set forth, upon the real estate described as follows: The Work small consist of the improvements described in the Development Plans, in the aforesaid Approval (to include any approved subsequent amendments) and shall be in compliance with all applicable Statutes, Codes and Ordinances of the City. COMPLETION DATE The undersigned Developer agrees that the said Work shall be completed in "` ( o=' 7 a 9 mp en£lret Y on or before the day of 19 and no extension of time shall be Valid - un- less the same shall be approved in writing by the City Manager. Said extension of time shall be valid whether approved by the City Manager before or after the completion date and failure of the City to extend the time for completion or to exercise other remedies hereunder shall. in no way work a forfeiture of the City's rights hereunder, nor shall any extension of time actual] granted b the i a Y 9 Y City Manager er work an forfeiture of the it rights hereunder. It 9 Y City's Y 9 shall be the duty of the Developer to notify the City of completion of the Work at least 10 days prior to the Completion Date and t call 11 for final P 1 by employees of the City. I y I • MAINTENANC The Performance Agreement, in its entirety, shall remain in full force and .effect for a period of one year after actual completion of the Work to determine that the useful life of all Work performed hereunder meets the average standard for the particular industry, profession, or material used in the performance of the work. Any work not meeting uch standard shall no bell 9 t deemed complete hereunder. Notice of the date of Actual Completion shall. be given to the Developer by the Director of Planning and Inspection of the City. FINANCIAL GUARANTEE The Developer agrees to furnish the City with a Financial Guarantee in the form of a cash escrow, a bond issued by an approved corporate surety, licensed to do business in the State of Minnesota and executed by the Developer as principal, or other Financial Guarantee as, approved by the City Manager of the City, in the amount of $ .: Such Financial Guarantee shall coRtinue in full force and effect until the City Council shall have by motion approved and accepted all the Work undertaken to be done, and shall thereby have released the Surety and /or Developer from any.'further liability; provided however, that the City Council may by, motion reduce the amount of the Financial Guarantee upon partial completion of the work, as certified by the City Manager. Such Financial Guarantee shall be' conditioned upon the full and faithful. performance of all elements of this Agreement and upon compliance with all applicable Statutes, Codes, and Ordinances of the City, and shall further be subject to the following provisions which shall be deemed to be incorporated in such Financial Guarantee and made a thereof. art th ; NOTICE The City shali be required to give prior notice- the'eorate surety and the Developer of - any default hereunder before proceeding to enforce such Financial Guarantee or before thLr City undertakes- any work for which the City will he reimbursed through the Financial Guarantee. Within 10 days after such notice to it, the surety shall notify the City in writing of its in- tention to enforce any rights, it miuhi haVe unde►• Lhi; Veriormancc Agreement or any Performance Bond by stating in writing the manner in which the default will be cured and the time within which such default will be cured, said time not to exceed 60 days unless approved by the City. REMEDIES FOR BREACH At any tint after the Completion date and any extensions thereof, or during the Maintenance Period, if any of the work is deemed incomplete, the City Council may proceed in any one or more of the following ways to enforce the undertakings herein set forth, and to collect any and all overhead expenses incurred by the City in connection therewith, including but not limited to engineering, legal, planning and litigation expenses, but the enumeration of the remedies here under shall be in addition to any other remedies available to the City. 1) Completio by the Cit y. The City, after.notice, may proceed to have the Work done either by contract, by day labor, or by regular. City forces, and neither the Developer nor the Corporate Surety may question the manner of doing such work or the letting of any such contracts for the doing of any such contracts for the doing of such work. Upon completion of such Work the Surety and /or the • Developer shall promptly pay the City the full cost thereof as aforesaid. In the eventthat the Financial Guarantee is in the form of a Performance Bond, it shall be no defense by the Surety that the City has not first made demand upon the Developer, nor pursued its rights against the Developer. 2) Specific Performance. The City may in writing direct the Surety or the Developer to cause the Work to be undertaken and completed within a specified reasonable time. If the Surety and /or the Developer fails to cause the Work to be done and completed in a manner and time acceptable to the City, the City may proceed in an action for Specific Performance to require such work to be undertaken. 3) Deposit of Finacial*Guarantee In the event that the Financial Guarantee has �. been submitted in the form of a Performance Bond, the City may demand that the Surety deposit with the City a sum equal to the estimated cost of completing the work, plus the City's estimated overhead expenses as defined herein, in cluding any other costs and damages for which the Surety may be liable hereunder, but not exceeding the amount set forth on the face of the Performance Bond, which money shall be deemed to be held by the City for the purpose of reimbursing the City for any costs incurred in completing the Work as hereinbefore specified, and the balance shall be returned to the Surety. This money shall be deposited with the City within 10 days after written demand therefor, and if the Surety fails to make the required deposit within 10 days, the City shall have the right to proceed against the Surety with whatever legal action is required to obtain the deposit of such sum. 4) Funds on Deposit In the event that the Financial Guarantee is in the form of cash, certified check, or other arrangement making the Financial Guarantee im- mediately accessible to the City, the City may, after notice to the Developer, deposit the Financial Guarantee in its General Account. The City may then pro- ceed to complete the Work, reimburse itself for the cost of completion as de- fined hereunder, and return the balance to the Developer. PROCEDURES A copy of this Performance Agreement shall be attached to the Corporate Surety Bond, if any, and reference to this Performance Agreement shall be made in any such bond, but no corporate surety shall assert as a defense to performance hereunder, any lack of reference in the bond to this Performance Agreement. The original and two copies of this Agreement, properly executed, together with the appropriate Financial Guarantee shall be submitted to the City. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Developer and the City have executed this Agreement this day of 19 Witness Witness • Subscribed and sworn to before we this day of 19 " toning Official WATER AND SEWER MAIN AND PIFtr. HYDRANT MAINTENANCE AND INSPECTION i EASEMENT /AGREEMENT s THIS EASEMENT /AGREEMENT is entered into this day of 19 between the City of Brooklyn Center, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as the "City ", and a corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, its successors and assigns, here -, inafter referred to as the "Owner ". It is intended that the term "Owner" shall apply to subsequent or part owners. WHEREAS, the Owner holds title to certain property within the. City of Brooklyn Center, County of Hennepin, described as: WHEREAS, the above described property is served by the City sanitary sewer, storm drainage and water systems and the connection thereto is made through lateral mains and drainage ways constructed upon said private property; and WHEREAS, because damage to or faulty operation of said lateral mains and drainage ways constructed on private property could result in loss of water, contamination, loss of pressure, infil -. tration, flooding, or other damage to the City systems or other Properties, it is necessary that the City have control over and access to said mains and drainage ways for the purposes of main'° nance, inspection, and repair; THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED between the parties hereto: 1. The City shall have access to said lateral mains and drainage ways and to the accessories connected thereto for the purposes of inspection, repair and maintenance whenever the Director of Public Works in the exercise of reasonable discretion shall determine that such access is necessary; 2. Whenever inspection, repairs, or maintenance are necessary, the City may, upon request of the Owner or after reasonable notice to the Owner, under the circumstances, on its own volition, perform such work as is necessary, and the Owner shall reimburse the City for the cost of labor, materials and equipment used in the work,•plus a fixed -charge of forty per cent (41 %) of said costs as re- imbursement. for the proportionate cost of insurance, PERA contributions, vacations, sick leave, clerical, and other miscellaneous costs. 3.. The Owner agrees to indemnify and.hold the City harmless from any claim for damages or other relief arising out of or in connection with any work done by the City on said'lateral mains and drainage ways and the acces- sories connected thereto, unless arising out of the negligence or wrongful act of the City or its agents. 4. The Owners hereby convey to the City, its successors and assigns, an easement for the purposes hereinabove set forth, over, under and across that tract of land herein- above described. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the Owner has caused these presents to be executed the day and year first above written. Name of Corporation By: Its By: Its 3 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN } t On this day of . 19_, before me appeared to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that he the of a corporation, + that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the # corporate seal of said corporation, and that said instrument was executed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of and that said acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said corporation. Notary.Public State Deed Tax due hereon $ Torrens /Abstract Property This Instrument was drafted by: - LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'BRIEN & DRAWZ 103 Brooklyn Law Center 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 Tax statements for real property described herein should be _,� ; sent to: "NO CHANGE:. r i SERVICE AVAILABILITY CHARGE The Service Availability Charge (SAC) shall be levied against the parcel at the time a building permit is issued. The t SAC charge is a one -time charge to pay the Metropolitan Waste } Control Commission for the debt service on reserve, or unused k capacity available for future wastewater flow to the area's inter } ceptors and treatment plant in accordance with the provisions of Subd. 3 and 4 of Minnesota Statutes 473C.08. Information taken from submitted building plans and ' appropriate related data shall be used in the determination of the number of SAC units attributed to each structure (in accordance with guidelines established by the Metropolitan Waste Control Com- mission). A SAC unit has been determined to equal 274 gallons of daily sewage volume, and the charge for 1982 is $425 per unit. 1 i — EXHIBIT G ESTATES HI CRE (F9TH AVENJE !2LRT }!i _1 t\I�rcr•_ .1,1,7E STS A:D l��61;1 " ,^f ._ —. - -- - -- - kre of Loft, B/k / 9; Gesl core ° + er r/146929 o U M no+ nd SYy /iM of to.H.yhway Na liO pl 21 p ' -- • •HENNEPIN COUNTY HIGHWAY NO, 130 t -- J` H`;�, `t��'•� NQf•LY 43 °E NBI 4ti •. nr� /1: Ir \�� /1 6 — Q U O: 00 .y�°V b l iti V1Y 1�11V1V 2500 7000 V ` 17301 %SJ�2000 "� pv 2 W - iV {1•-� c l ° o a° OUTLOT A oN ids '�5 I�4 � $1 $b `i; Qw St200 2 - - 2000 1/250 /7c0 1100 2.} JO " 2 ' 30.00 ik C o Zz \ P 4 /26.00 E P� ins. wea• 47.00 Nes °Mf K� pi %°� ! Y 3989 �' p ^'/ � � /1 2 • po � IW ^y %r NBS' • so'/ - - S N�6'.�a9 A - mt. 17 u pig -216 /9 t i • w d. 10 EI 1 I n"2c9g9 t 470 ? ;,r) A� ..`Yn. Nd5. 2Ye5 "L � I1PA 1 1 /YeB•a6'w �4 ep NBS p ° f 12,51 40 $ /2500 1� ' fig. 40 O 2 3 "Co 24 1V 1 zaao 23.aa yr/ hh oo I o o W W e2 °� B 8� 2 62 ^5 4.P°3 n2 OUT 7P o$ c q �O i a yi so Ice v /� m 2 2.00 taoo 1750 2000 2300 $ o iu�t la eel l AIM* N �' 1/•43 "E `� � 0 6, w •!E- eR00 r � O DENOTES IRON MCNUta;N' r� V85 "Po" � ' b .vB� W BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASS; S ,re\ W ' C V {\ U a • B t O Q �\ . /. � ♦. a P+` 8' E - 069° 6ap0 $ a O O ` - /Y /.e/ NJ3 / 6 ' l0•W '�'eoeb ?a +' $ •� o > - -� v o r J i� s,, ° rL o. .0 O 1 e� a qA OUTLOT 9 F) Sv MN Oj (( p t f B p � xe3 °0 ?'f : 4 441 NB 94.0 Q 1 �",�• 9400 „o 49 00 cs �^ a v W $ NBP 922" 2 �bZ a,,A a som � a OUTLOT E 8 o�•OUTLOT F °o + Ne -'800 ; �„ _. S B v 1 , Y M.00 a v ; xs °si xesw [ ? o 8 0l r'2 2 ' 2 R NF'9.31F � ":�. �1t NBY °!1 N70t fr2oe - Lit .. \ t+. r•� T - f•1 � !• �� (.: J t glror t - .. „ ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 1 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING PRIVATE KENNEL LICENSES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS; Section 1. Chapter 1 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 1 -101. DEFINITIONS. The following definitions shall apply to terms as used in this ordinance: Animal. Animal means dogs, domestic animals, an wild animals. Animal Control Officer. Animal Control Officer means that person or agency designated by the City Manager tocontrol the keeping of animals within Brooklyn Center. Commercial Kennel. Commercial kennel means any place limited to C2,11, y� and I2 zoning districts where the business of keeping, raising, selling, boarding, breeding, showing, treating, or grooming of dogs and other animals is conducted. The term commercial kennel shall include pet shops, animal hospitals and other similar type operations. Family. An individual or individuals living together as a single housekeeping unit in a dwelling unit. Owner. Owner means any person or the parent or guardian of a person under 18 years of age who owns, harbors, or keeps an animal in the City of Brooklyn Center. Person. Person means any person, firm, corporation, partnership, joint venture or association. Private Kennel. Private kennel means any premises where three to five dogs over six months of age are kept or harbored. Dogs occupying the private kennel shall be owned by the licensee. Section 1 -102. LICENSES REQUIRED. 1. -Dog License. Every dog owner in Brooklyn Center shall annually obtain -from the City Clerk a dog license and tag for each dog exceeding six months old. Dogs kept in a commercial kennel need not be individually licensed. A license tag shall be affixed by the owner to the collar of each dog so licensed and shall be constantly worn. 2. Commercial Kennel License. Every person desiring to operate.a commercial kennel shall annually obtain from -the City Clerk,.upon authorization by the City Council, a commercial kennel license. Kennel licenses shall be posted in a conspicuous place within the licensed premises. ORDINANCE NO a 3. Private Kennel License Every person desiring to establ a private �!' kennel shall annually obtain from the City Clerk, upon authorization by the City Council, a private kennel license Section 1 -103. VACCINATION REQUIRED. The owner of every dog in Brooklyn Center shall cause such dog to be currently vaccinated for rabies. A certificate of vaccination or other statement of the same effect executed by a licensed veterinarian shall constitute prima facie proof of the required vaccination. Section 1 -104. LICENSE APPLICATION PROCEDURES. 1. Dog License. Applications for dog licenses shall be made before the City Clerk. Upon receipt of the license, fee and upon presentation of proof of rabies vaccination, the City-Clerk is authorized to issue a receipt of payment and a metallic, identifying license tag. 2. Commercial Kennel License. Application for a commercial kennel license shall be made to the City Clerk. A plan and description of the kennel premises and proposed operation shall be submitted to the extent requested by the Public Health Sanitarian. Upon receipt of the license fee the City Clerk shall refer the application to the.Public Health Sanitarian for recommendation and to the City Council for approval. 3. Private Kennel License. Application for a private kennel license shall be initiated by the family requesting the license. The application shall be referred to the City Council for public hearing. a. The applicant shall submit, in writing, to the City Clerk his request for a r rivate kennel license. The application shall be file with the City Clerk at least fourteen (14) days before the date of the public hearing. The City Clerk shall place the application on the agend of the next regular City Council meeting. b. Not less than seven (7) days before the date of the hearing, the City Clerk shall mail notice of the hearing to the applicant and to property owners abutting the applicant's property. C. The City Council shall make a final determination of the application within forty -eight (48) days of the public hearing d_. The applicant or his agent shall appear at each meeting of the City Council during which the ap P lication is considered. e_. The City Clerk, following the City Council's action upon the ap plication, shall give the applicant a written notice of the action taken. A -copy of this notice shall be kept on file as part of the permanent r - the application. f. Annual renewal of the private kennel license shall be issued by th Cif Clerk; upon authorization by the City Council, and payment of the license fee by the applicant. ORDINANCE NO. 4. Standards for Private Kennel License A p rivate kennel license may be �. granted by. the City Council after demonstration b e vidence that all of the following are met a. � t o eration of the private kennel ote a �ange hance the general ublic wel ar and will not be detrimental r en e �u lic health, sa e y, morals, or comfo b. The private kennel will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes a permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair proper values within the neighborhood. c. The establishment of the private kennel will not impede the nor and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property fo uses permitted in the district. 5. Conditions and Restrictions. The City Council may impose such c onditions and restrictions, upon the establishment and operation of the private kennel as deemed necessary for the protection of the public interest and to secure compliance with requirements specified in this ordinance. In all cases in which private kennel licenses are granted, the City Council may require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as part of the conditions stipulated in connection therewith. Section 1 -105. LICENSE FEES AND CONDITIONS. 1. Annual Fees. Dog License -Male of Female. . . .$ 5.00 - Neutered Male ... .$ 3.00 - Spayed Female . . . . . .. . . .$ 3.00 (Upon presentation of proof thereof) Delinquent Dog License . . . . . . . . . . . . . $15.00 Commercial Kennel License. . . . . . $35.00 Private Kennel License . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $25.00 2. Expiration Dates. [Dog licenses shall expire on May 31 each year.] Commercial kennel a private kennel licenses shall expire December 31 each year. Applicants for a dog license shall provide a certificate issued by a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine showing that the animal in question has been vaccinated.against rabies, the type vaccine used and the length of time the vaccination is effective. The license shall be effective for the duration of the vaccine effectiveness, as . stated in the official Comprehendium of Animal Rabies Vaccines published by the Conference of State Public Health Veterinarians and the Center for Disease Control of the Department of Health and Human Resources. 3. Refunds, Prorations, and Transfers. No dog. -or kennel license fees shall be refunded for any reason. Neither shall such license fees be prorated. Licenses* shall not be transferable. ORDINANCE NO. 4. Lost, Destroyed or Mutilated License Tags. The City Clerk shall, upon payment of $3, issue a duplicate dog license tag to an owner whose dog license tag has been lost, destroyed or mutilated. Section 1 -106. KEEPING OF DOGS LIMITED. - No family shall own or keep more than two dogs exceeding six months of age on the family premises in Brooklyn Center without obtaining a private kennel license. Section 1 -107, MANNER OF KEEPING ANIMALS. No person shall keep any dogs or other animals in Brooklyn Center in an insanitary place or condition or in -a manner which results in noisome odors, or in such a way as to constitute a nuisance or a disturbance by reason of barking, howling, fighting or other noise, or in such a way as to permit the animals to annoy, injure or endanger any person or property. Section 1 -108. CONFINEMENT AND CONTROL. No person who owns or keeps an animal shall allow or permit such animal on the private property of another person except upon invitation from such other person. When upon his owner's private property an animal must be effectively restrained to the premises by leashing or fencing or by responding to the immediate supervision and verbal command of the Owner or his agent. No person who owns or keeps an animal shall allow or permit such animal to be on any public street, public park, school grounds or other public place without being effectively restrained by chain or leash. - Animals in heat shall be confined to the owner's premises in an enclosure which prevents escape or the entry of other animals. Section 1 -109. COMMERCIAL KENNEL DESIGN. Commercial kennel floors and walls shall be constructed of easily cleanable materials and all structures, areas, and appurtenances so designed as to facilitate convaenient cleaning Commercial kennels shall be adequately ventilated and all doors, windows and other openings to the out of doors shall be screened from May to October. Commercial kennels shall be provided with adequate and safe water and sewer facilities. Plans for all new commercial kennels or for repairs and alterations to existing kennels must be filed with and approved by the City Public Health Sanitarian as a condition of licensure . Section 1 -110. COMMERCIAL KENNEL OPERATION'. 1. Treatment of Animals. Commercial kennels shall be operated in a humane manner. The licensee and his agents shall not deprive the kenneled animals of necessary food, water, or shelter, nor.perform any act of cruelty to the animals nor in any way permit or condone cruelty to the animals. 2. Sanitary Conditions Required. Every commercial kennel shall be maintained in a clean, healthful, sanitary, and safe condition in a manner not to create a health hazard or a public nuisance. All cages, pens, benches, boxes or receptacles in which animals are confined shall be kept sanitary and in good repair and shall be humanely proper in size for the confinement of the respective animals. Animal delivery vehicles shall be kept clean. All plumbing fixtures ORDINANCE NO. V and all utensils used in the preparation of food and the feeding of the animals hall be kept clean, sanitary, d in good repair. All refuse and other wastes s ep ea s y, an g p shall be removed frequently and stored and disposed of as prescribed in Chapter 7 of the City ordinances. Section 1 -111. DISEASED ANIMALS PROHIBITED. No person shall knowingly bring into Brooklyn Center nor have in his possession nor sell to another person any animals that are afflicted with infectious or contagious diseases All such diseased animals must be destroyed in a humane manner unless the disease is curable and the animal is under the care of and receiving treatment from a licensed veterinarian. Section 1 -112. ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER. The Animal Control Officer shall have the following duties: a. To impound any dog found within the municipality without a current license. b. To impound any animal found within Brooklyn Center running at large off the premises of the owner and out of the immediate supervision and verbal command of the owner or his agent. c.. To dispose of all unclaimed dead animals found within the city. d. To patrol the streets of Brooklyn Center for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of this ordinance. Section 1 -113. IMPOUNDMENT ADMINISTRATION. The City Manager . shall establish animal impoundment procedures including designation of impound- ment facilities, provisions for notification and release to the owner of impounded animals, disposition of unclaimed animals, and 'a schedule of charges intended to, cover apprehension and impoundment costs. - Section 1 -114. UNLICENSED DOGS Unlicensed dogs which are apprehended by the Animal Control Officer shall be impounded. No unlicensed dog shall be released to the owner thereof until the owner has secured a dog license by paying the delinquent dog license, fee in addition to other apprehen- sion and poundage fees established. Securing such delinquent_dog.license and paying such poundage fees shall not relieve the owner of any misdemeanor charges which may be filed under the provisions of this ordinance Section -1 -115. INTERFERENCE PROHIBITED. No person shall interfere with nor hinder the Animal Control Officer nor the City Public Health Sanitarian in the discharge of their duties under this ordinance. ORDINANCE NO. 4 Section 1 -116. IMPOUNDMENT FOR BITING. Any animal which is capable of transmitting rabies and which has bitten a human being shall be Impounded for at least ten days, separate and apart from all other animals and under the care and supervision of a licensed veterinarian until it is determined whether or not said animal had or has rabies. If the animal is found to be rabid, it shall be destroyed; if it is found not to be rabid, the animal shall be returned to the owner provided that the owner shall pay the full costs of impoundment. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of lg Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) cif lob coon rapids July 6,1982 Wendell R. Anderson .Larkin, Hoffman, Daly and Lindgren, -Ltd. City Manager of Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Brooklyn Center, Maple Grove, Administrator County of Anoka, Executive Director Chamber of Commerce - Prior to his leaving on vacation, Bob Thistle requested that -I prepare a joint powers agreement for consideration by the various governmental entities and Chambers of Commerce listed above to retain the services of Wendell R. Anderson to represent our interests in promoting the financing and construction of proposed North Cross- town. Ana agreement has been g reached h d between several of the cities and Mr. Anderson. He has started his services for us as of the first of the month. Enclosed is a draft of a proposed joint powers, agreement for your consideration. The document has been kept relatively simple and has been left open -ended so that other governmental entities or groups interested in participating will be allowed to join. It is my understanding that there has been no firm discussions or agreement on the pro - rating of the costs of the program. It is our thought that the fairest method of proration would be on the basis of population of the participating municipalities or groups. The population would be the most recently certified Metropolitan Council figures. As an example, based on the 1980 census figures, if only the cities of Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Park, Champlin and Coon.Rapids participated, there would be a total of 133 units. Each unit would be equal to $30 per month. Anoka, with 16 units, would be charged $480 i g per .month; Blaine, with 29 units, $870; Brooklyn Park, with 43 units, $1,260; Champlin, with 9 units, $270; and Coon Rapids, with 36 units, $1,080. Obviously, if more communities participate, the number of units will be increased and the cost per unit reduced. The figures will also change as new population figures are released by the Metropolitan Council. As indicated above, the document is only a draft. We certainly welcome any comments or suggested changes which you might have.' Please give me a call at 755 -2880 with any such comments. 1313 Coon Rapids Boulevard, Coon Rapids, Minnesota 55433 (612) 755.2$80 Page 2 ® After all comments have been received, we will prepare a final draft of the agreement for execution by the various participating entities. As indicated in the agreement, each municipalit should F Y have their City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the execution of the agreement. A copy of the resolution should be forwarded to I Bob along with an executed copy of the agreement. To expedite matters, I would suggest that each municipality execute a counterpart of the agreemen rather than forwarding one agreement around for all to sign. Your r tr . f Leonard Kne City Attorney gk .•_. Enc. r t' r t JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT TO RETAIN THE SERVICES OF WENDELL R. ANDERSON AS A LOBBYIST FOR NORTH CROSSTOWN HIGHWAY (TH 610) 3 This agreement made and entered into effective the first day of July, 1982, by and between the Cities of Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Park, Champlin and Coon Rapids, parties of the first part hereinafter referred to as the "Agencies" and Wendell R. Anderson, of Larkin, Hoffman, Daly and Lindgren, Ltd., Attorneys at Law, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor ", WITNESSETH: Over the past several years, the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation has had under consideration construction of the North Crosstown Highway to be known as Trunk Highway 610 creating a link between U.S. Highway No. 10 in Coon Rapids and.Inter state Highway No. 94 in Maple Grove. The project contemplates the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi River between Brooklyn Park and Coon Rapids. '• The project has proceeded to the point of holding public hearings on design features of the project. The project is proposed to be financed from Federal Interstate Substitution Funds. The Metropolitan Council has given the project number one priority for funding under the Interstate Substitution Program. The President of the United States has proposed a reduction j in the total dollars available for funding through the Interstate Substitution Program. The federal government is contemplating revising its policies for the allocation of the funding from a state basis to a nation -wide basis, thus resulting in considerable competition among all states for the remaining substitution funding., The construction of North Crosstown project has been 1 supported by the County of Anoka and the communities in the north suburban area, both in Anoka and Hennepin counties for a number of. years. The project is deemed critical to the future development and viability of the northern.suburban.area. Each of the Agencies 4 which are a part of this agreement deem it in the best interests of their community that the North Crosstown be constructed. Each of 1 the Agencies, however, realizes that the project cannot be constructed without the Interstate Substitution funding. The Agencies deem it necessary and imperative that the need for the project be clearly and explicitly made known to Members of Congress and to the appropriate representatives of the federal and state governments. To accomplish this the Agencies deem it imperative that the services of a lobbyist be retained.to represent the e A en ' es y p Agencies at the various levels of government. Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59 authorize: two.or more governmental units to enter into an agreement for the joint and cooperative exercise of any power common to the contracting parties. The Promotion of the development of a community is an inherent power exercisable b each of the Agencies which are a Y g party to this agreement. Now, therefore, pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59, the parties hereto do agree as follows: 1. Retaining of Contractor The Agencies,do hereby retain the services of the Contractor effective the first day of July, 1982, such services to continue on a month -to -month basis unless and until terminated as hereinafter provided. 2. Services The Contractor shall represent the.Agencies in the promotion of the funding and construction of the North Crosstown Highway (TH 610) from Interstate Highway No. 94 in Maple Grove to U. S. Highway No. 10 in CoonRapids.The Contractor shall represent the Agencies as their interests may appear and dictate. Such services may be conducted in Washington, D. C. and such other places as as the • p .parties may mutually determine to be desirable and necessary. 3. Compensation The Agencies shall compensate the . Contractor for all services and costs incident thereto at a rate 1 of $4,000 per month for each and every month that this contract is in effect. i 4. Billing Contractor shall submit a monthly billing for services provided. The statement shall be forwarded to Robert D. Thistle, City Manager of the City of Coon Rapids and shall be paid by the City of Coon Rapids within ten (10) days after receipt. 5. Allocation of Costs Payments made to the Contractor shall be allocated among the participating Agencies on a monthly basis in accordance with the following formula: �. Each participating Agency shall be assessed one unit 4 per each 1,000 population or major equivalent thereof. If the County of Anoka elects to participate as an Agency, it shall be allocated the number of units equal to the units of all municipalities within the county that are participating in this agreement. i If one or more of the area Chambers of Commerce elect to participate in this agreement, they shall be • _ allocated one unit for each 100 members or fraction thereof with a minimum of one unit. Population of the participating Agencies shall be based upon the 1980 federal census figures or estimated population figures from the Metropolitan Council which- ever are the more current. Upon receipt of the monthly billing from the Contractor, the City of Coon Rapids shall pro -rate the billing among the participating Agencies in accordance with the above formula. Coon Rapids shall send monthly statements to each of the participating Agencies for their share of the monthly billing. 6. Reports Contractor shall make periodic reports no Tess often than once a month to.Robert D. Thistle, City Manager of the City of Coon Rapids who shall act as the designated representative, for the participating Agencies. He shall keep all other Agencies informed of the activities of the Contractor. 7. Withdrawal Any Agency may withdraw from this agreement - by giving written notice to the designated representative in writing at least ten (10) days prior to the end of the then current billing period. Such withdrawal shall be effective as of the end of the billing period in which received. The withdrawing Agency • I shall be responsible for its share of the bill for such period. i 8. Termination This agreement may be terminated by either party at the end of any billing period by the giving of written notice to the other party at least ten (10) days prior to termination. 9. Additional Parties Other cities, counties or Chambers of Commerce may join the Agencies by executing a counterpart to this agreement and by filing of the same with the designated representative. 10. Notices All notices or other communications required hereunder shall be sufficiently given and shall be deemed given when delivered or mailed by registered or certified mail, postage_pr id, addressed to the following parties: To the Agencies: Robert D. Thistle, City Manager City of Coon Rapids 1313 Coon Rapids Boulevard Coon Rapids, Minnesota 55433 To the Contractor: Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd. IDS Center Minneapolis, Minnesota Attn: Wendell R. Anderson 11. Multiple Execution This joint powers agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, each of which counterpart shall be deemed to be an original and all such counter- parts shall constitute but one and the same instrument. An originally executed counterpart shall be filed with Robert D. Thistle. Each i of the participating agencies shall also file a certified copy of a resolution of its governing body authorizing the execution of the agreement. In.witness whereof the parties hereto have executed this '. agreement effective as of the day and year first. above written. LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. i By: Wendell R. Anderson - CITY OF By: t Its: Mayor B 1 Its: City Manager Cl of j oon rapids July 19, 1982 City Managers of Anoka, Blaine, Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Brooklyn Center and I Maple Grove Curt Pearson, the City Attorney for Brooklyn Park, had several suggested language changes in the proposed Joint Powers Agreement for the retention of Wendell R. Anderson as a consultant for the various communities. These changes have been incorporated into the Joint Powers Agreement and I enclose'a revised copy of the agreement for your review and execution. The principal changes are the change of the word "Lobbyist" to "Consultant ". The second change appears in the last paragraph prior ++ ++ o the common powers of es t � to the Now, therefore, clause and relates _ P the municipalities which will be exercised through the Joint Powers Agreement. Section 2, Services also changes the scope of services to require the cities to cooperate with the State of Minnesota acid other governmental entities in our efforts to secure the Interstate Substitution funding. It thereby makes it clear that we will continue to support the Interstate Substitution process as opposed to earmarking the funds. The North Crosstown will be the number one project in Minnesota under the Interstate Substitution process. However, should they go to an earmarking process'in Washington, we will be in a position to argue effectively for the inclusion of our project. An additional change was in the address for the Larkin, Hoffman law firm which is located in the First Bank,Place West rather than the IDS Center. In all other respects the - agreement is the same as previously submitted to you. if your Councils have acted favorably on the agreement, I would appreciate if you would forward an executed copy of the agreement along with a certified copy of the resolution- .authorizing the execution of the agreement to me. Again, if there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours very.truly, -Robert D. Thistle City Manager gk Enc. 1313 Coon R. � -ids Boulevard, Coon Rapids, Minnesota 55433 (612) 755 -28$0 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT TO RETAIN THE SERVICES OF WENDELL R. ANDERSON AS A CONSULTANT FOR NORTH CROSSTOWN HIGHWAY • i (TH 6'1.0.) This agreement made and entered into effective the first day of July, 1982, by and between the Cities of Anoka, Blaine, t Brooklyn Park, Champlin and Coon - Rapids, parties of the first part hereinafter referred to as the "Agencies" and Wendell R. Anderson, of Larkin, Hoffman, Daly and Lindgren, Ltd., Attorneys at Law, hereinafter referred to as "Consultant ". WITNESSETH: Over the past several years; the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation has had under consideration construction of the North Crosstown Highway to be known as Trunk Highway 610 creating a link between U.S. Highway No. 10 in Coon Rapids and Inter- state Highway No. 94 in Maple Grove. The project contemplates the construction of a bridge across the Mississippi River between Brooklyn Park and Coon Rapids. - - The project has proceeded to the point of holding public hearings on design features of the project. The project is proposed to be financed from Federal Interstate Substitution Funds. The Metropolitan Council has given theproject number one priority for funding under the Interstate Substitution Program. The President of the United States has'proposed a reduction in the total dollars available for funding through the Interstate Substitution Program. The federal government is contemplating revising its policies for the allocation of the funding from a state basis to a nation -wide basis,•thus resulting in considerable competition among all states for the remaining substitution funding.. The construction of North Crosstown project has. been supported by the County of Anoka- and communities in.the north years. The project is deemed critical, to the future development and viability of the northern suburban area.. Each of the Agencies " which are a part of this agreement deem it in the best interests of their community that the North Crosstown be constructed. Each of the Agencies deem it necessary and imperative that the need for the w project be clearly and explicitly made known to Members of Congress and to the appropriate representatives of the federal and state.- governments. To accomplish this the Agencies deem it imperative that x the services of a Consultant be retained to represent the Agencies at the various levels of government. Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59 authorizes two or more s governmental units to enter into an agreement for the joint and cooperative exercise of any power common to the contracting parties. Whereas, the construction of streets, highways, bridges and other N. public improvements to aid in the development of transportation facilities to serve the agencies and to promote the public's health, safety and general welfare are powers common to all the Agencies' members, each Agency has the power to hire consultants and experts necessary to accomplish these common powers. Now, therefore, pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes Section 471.59, the parties hereto do agree as follows:_ 1. Retaining of Consultant The Agencies do hereby retain the services of the Consultant effective the first day of July, r 1982, such services to continue on a month -to -month basis unless and until terminated as hereinafter provided. 2. Services The Consultant shall represent the Agencies in the promotion of the funding and construction of the North Cross- town Highway (TH 610) f.rom Highway No. 94 in Maple Grove to U.S. Highway No. 10 in Coon Rapids and TH 252 from I -94 in Brooklyn Center north to the North Crosstown Highway (TH,610) *in Brooklyn Park. The Consultant 'shall represent the Agencies as their interests may appear and dictate. The Consultant shall work.to encourage the continued use of the Interstate Substitution process at a federal level, and will coordinate his efforts within the State of ` Minnesota with MnDOT, Metropolitan Council, City of Minneapolis and other appropriate cities and agencies. Such services may "be conducted in Washington, D.C. and such other places as the parties may mutually determine to be desirable and necessary. Consultant for all services and costs incident thereto at a rate of $4,000 per month for each and every month that this contract is in effect. 4. Billing Consultant shall submit a monthly billing for services provided. The statement shall be forwarded to Robert D. Thistle, City Manager of the City of Coon Rapids and shall be paid E _ by the City of Coon Rapids within ten (10) days after receipt. 5. Allocation of Costs Payments made to the Consultant shall be allocated among the participating Agencies a monthly basis in accordance with the following formula: Each participating Agency shall be assessed one unit per each 1,000 population or major equivalent thereof. If the County of Anoka elects to participate as an Agency, it shall be allocated the number of units equal to the units of all municipalities within the county that are participating in this agreement. If one or more of the area Chambers of Commerce elect to participate in this agreement, they shall be allocated one unit for each 100 members or fraction thereof with a minimum of one unit. Population of the participating Agencies shall be based upon the 1980 federal census figures or estimated population figures from the Metropolitan Council which- ever are the more current. Upon receipt of the monthly billing from the Consultant, the City of Coon Rapids shall pro -rate the billing among the participating Agencies in accordance with the above formula. Coon Rapids shall send monthly statements to each of the participating Agencies for their share of the monthly billing. 6. Reports Consultant shall make periodic reports no less often than once a month to Robert D. Thistle, City Manager of the City of Coon Rapids who shall act as the designated representative for the participating Agencies. He shall keep all other Agencies informed of the activities of the Consultant. 7. Withdrawal Any agency may withdraw from this agreement ,. by giving written notice to the designated representative in writing at least ten (10) days prior to the end of the then current billing period. Such withdrawal shall be effective as of the end or me Dilai p e.ele.)u - lit wacle11 a - Vr - wrcz1ut.nw ng ascjcii�� shall be responsible for its share of the bill for such period. 8. Termination This agreement may be terminated by either i, party at the end of any billing period by the giving of written notice to the other party at least ten-(10) days prior to termination. 9. Additional Parties other cities, counties or Chambers of Commerce may join the Agencies by executing a counterpart to this agreement and by filing of the same with the designated representative. 10. Notices All notices or other communiciations required hereunder shall be sufficiently given and shall be deemed given when delivered or mailed by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the following parties:. To the Agencies: Robert D. Thistle, City Manager City of Coon Rapids 1313 Coon Rapids Boulevard Coon Rapids, Minnesota 55433 To the Consultant: Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd. 1700 1st Bank Place West Minneapolis, Minnesota Attn: Wendell R. Anderson 11. Multiple Execution This joint powers agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, each of which counterpart shall be deemed to be an original and all such counter- parts shall constitute but one and the same instrument. An originally executed counterpart shall be filed with Robert D. Thistle. Each of the participating agencies shall also file a certified copy of a resolution of its governing body authorizing the execution of the agreement. In witness whereof the parties hereto have executed this agreement effective as of the day and year first-above written. LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. By: Wendell R. Anderson Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce 5930 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD • SUfTE 200A • BROOKLYN CENTER MN 55429.612/566 -8650 DATE July 22, 1982 MEMO TO: Mayor Dean Nyquist Councilmember Celia Scott Councilmember Gene Lhotka Councilmember Bill Hawes Councilmember Rich Theis FROM Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors SUBJECT North Crosstown Highway System This morning the Chamber's Economic Development Committee considered the North Metro cities' hiring of a lobbyist to further their cause in obtaining interstate substitution funds for the North Crosstown project. The committee and subsequently full Chamber Board of Directors see this as a positive move and urge that Brooklyn Center be involved in the funding of the lobbyist. Please refer to the resolution attached. If you have 'any questions, please call the Chamber at 566- 8650. . e Resolution of Support North Crosstown Highway System WHEREAS the North Crosstown bridge and highway has long been a t priority transportation project of the northern metro area and of the Metropolitan Council, and t WHEREAS the Brooklyn Center City Council and Brooklyn Center Chamber -: of.Commerce have on various occasions offered their support of this project, and Y.. WHEREAS the first phase of the project includes the reconstruction. of Highway 252 which is a vital artery in Brooklyn Center, and WHEREAS the monies designed as Interstate Substitution Funds which would fund this project seem now to be issued at the federal instead of the state level, and WHEREAS the services of a full -time lobbyist seem 'appropriate to further our interests in securing these substitution funds THEREFORE be it resolved that the Board'.gf Directors of Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce support the concept of the City, Brooklyn Center joining with the other northern metro cities in providing fundin g for a'lobb y ist to help secure the funds to make this North. Crosstown Project a reality.. j G July 21, 1982 Mr. Jerry Splinter City Manager City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Dear Jerry: Attached is a copy of a letter sent to Dick Braun, Commissioner of the Department of Transportation. I thought you should know where the City of St. Lou Park stands on the allocation of in- terstate substitution funds and what our current situation is with reference to the expenditure of local funds. At the last Council meeting, we discussed the possibility of the City participating in your lobbying effort; however, given the directives under which your lobbyist is to perform, we decided that it would be best not to participate at this time. Since your effort has a tremendous impact on the Highway 100 1W. 36th St. interchange improvement, you can expect me to be per - iodically contacting you for the latest information. Very truly yours, James L. Crimeyer City Manager enc. 5005 minnetonke boulevard • at. louts park, minnesota 66416 • phone (612) 9203000 d July 21, 1982 Commissioner Richard Braun Minnesota Department of Transportation Transportation Building St. Paul, MN .55155 Dear Commissioner Braun: At the Council meeting on Monday, July 19, 1982 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 7182 approving our Memorandum of Understanding between the City and the Minnesota Department of Transportation (at- tached). As you know, this memorandum serves to reduce the cost of the project, doubles the financial commitment of the City of St. Louis Park and in- creases the commitment of the Department of Transportation for this intersection improvement. Both of these commitments are.contingent upon the availability of interstate substitution funds to be allocated r by Congress. This agreement greatly increases the financial risk _for the City; however., we are willing to make this commitment based on our conversations with the Metropolitan Council's staff, members of the Transportation Advisory Board and representatives from the Depart- ment of Transportation. Current advice is that if a greater commitment is made by the local agencies, we will have a better chance of as- suring our Congressmen that interstate substitution funds should be allocated to those projects that have some reasonable expectation of Proceeding to construction. It was - also our understanding that an effort to "earmark" the funds would be considered undesirable and that all of us -- cities, Depart- ment of Transportation, and Met Council -- would encourage our Con - gressmen to allocate sufficient funds to the State of Minnesota. The City of St. Louis Park has abided by this understanding and has not _made any special effort to lobby specifically for the Highway 100/ W. 36th St. interchange improvement. However, we have recently learned that a consortium of northern suburbs has retained a special.lobbyist to intervene on their behalf to obtain an allocation for the State of Minnesota, and failing that objective, to specifically allocate funds 5005 min netonka boulevard e ' tt. loule park, minnesota 55418 phone (M) 920.3000 E- i Commissioner Richard Braun MnDOT - July 21 1982 - Pg. 2 for the North Town Bridge, without regard to other projects established on the priority list. We are very disappointed to hear of this effort as i t appears they are not dealing with the complete l i s t of priority . projects established for the metropolitan area but one very specific project. - Given the above information, the City Council of St. Loui Park has agreed to the terms of the Memorandum of Understanding; however, we are forced into a position of deferring our commitment to the purchase of right -of -way because the financial risk would be too great -for the City. If the lobbying effort as described above is successful and funds are earmarked for the construction of the North Town Bridge, there probably will not be any interstate substitution funds available.for any of the other metropolitan projects in the very near future. One would therefore have to assume that the improvement of the Highway :1.00 /W. ` 36th St. interchange would no longer be a viable project. We would appreciate any assistance or advice you might provide us with in reference to this matter. Thank you. Very truly yours,,. .tM • iL�� James L. Brimeyer City Manager attachment cc: Dick Koppy, Dir. of Public Works ' Bill Crawford, District V i ` { ` 4 I MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING p k • WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (hereinafte r "MnDOT ") and the City of St: Louis Park (Hereinafter "City ") are engaged in the design, financing, and construction of a highway interchange at Highway 100 and West 36th Street; .WHEREAS, the project has been consistently identified as a high priority improvement eligible for Federal Interstate Substitution funding; WHEREAS, the City is the lead agency on the interchange project with the r State acting as agent for the City with the Federal Highway Administration; WHEREAS, MnDOT and the City are involved in co- financing the local costs;. WHEREAS, Interstate Substitution Funds have been limited by federal cut - backs; WHEREAS, MnDOT and the City have reduced the scope of the interchange project to lower the overall improvement costs in accordance with the direction of Metropolitan Council which intends to maximize the impact of the.Interstate Sub- stitution dollars; WHEREAS, the revised plan which is estimated at 10.3 million dollars (including engineering) includes the layout described in M. &-C. No. 82 -16, attached hereto as Exhibit A and fully incorporated herein, and embodies design revisions estimated to reduce costs by $1,600,000 from the original plan which was approved by the City Council in 1980; WHEREAS, the project is approaching a phase of inactivity because the critical action is property acquisition for which no Interstate Substitution Funds are avail- able at the present time, and without the acquisitions the project will not be able to proceed into the construction phase; WHEREAS, in order to keep the project on schedule for 1983 construction, the City has pursued the concept of purchasing all of the necessary property with local Minnesota State Aid.System funds; WHEREAS, MnDOT officials and City official's have met to discuss the contents, of Exhibit.A and have reached a mutual understanding; therefore, IT.IS AGREED THAT: 1. Plan revisions .described in Exhibit A will. be diligently pursued by 'both agencies with-desig -n details and "right -of -way acquisitions implemented accordingly; 2. The City shall use MSAS funds to-acquire all of the necessary rights- of -way for the construction of the entire interchange project in accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 (P.L. 91 -646); 3. The City may use. MSAS funds (where eligible) or local funds to pay for the following construction items: • a. The cost of widening Wooddale Avenue from Oxford Street to West 36th Street; b. Any work on West 36th Street that is necessary at the intersection of Wooddale Avenue; r c. Any corrective work on Park Center Boulevard south of West 36th Street to the west property line of the Byerly's property; d. The new traffic signal at the Park Center Boulevard /West 36th Street intersection; and e. Seven and one -half percent of al.l eng- ineering costs for design. 4. MnDOT shall be.responsible for and pay the following costs: a. 100 percent of the local share of the construction costs except those items mentioned in No. 3 above; b. All of the construction engineering costs for the inter- change project. 5. The Federal Highway Administration will obligate Interstate Substitution Funds for construction and engineering costs with the exception of those costs listed in 2, 3 and 4 above; 6. The following cost schedule dated June, 1982 is based on the cost responsibilities listed in items 2, 3, 4 and 5: Source Cost Federal Highway Administration $ 6.8 million Minnesota Department of Transportation 1.2 million City of St. Louis Park 2.3 TOTAL O ncludes.en.gineering) $10.3 million 7. The following schedule of critical activities shall be pursued diligently by MnDOT and City to reach a construction bidding phase by June of 1983: Activity Completi Date Submit layout revisions of MnDOT approval July, 1982 , Request State approval of revised financing plan July, 1982 Submit layout revisions for the FHWA approval August, 1982 Right -of -way parcels appraisal September, 1982 Detailed Plan Preparation January, 1983 Bidding Documents and Specifications March, 1983 Right -of -way purchases March, 1983 Bid Opening May, 1983 8. This Memorandum of Understanding may be ammended in writing, by mutual agreement of all the parties. RICHARD BRAUN PHYLLIS McQUAID, MAYOR Commissioner, Minnesota Department City of St. Louis Park of Transportation Dated: Dated: WILLIAM CRAWFORD JAMES L. BRIMEYER, CITY MANAGER District Five Administrative Engineer City of St. Louis Park Minnesota Department of Transportation Dated: Dated: Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce 5930 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD • SUITE 200A • BROOKLYN CENTER MN 55429.612(566 -8650 DATE July 20, 1982 MEMO TO: Mayor.Dean Nyquist Councilmember Celia Scott Councilmember Rich -Theis Councilmember Gene Lhotka Councilmember Bill Hawes City Manager Jerry Splinter 41- FROM Paul DesVernine, President Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce This memo is to .re- affirm the support of the Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce for the Sunday Brunch Law for Brooklyn Center. The Chamber originally passed support of the Sunday Brunch Law in September of 1981. Further support of the issue was sent to the City Council in _ December 1981 from the city's restaurants. Since that time further study has found that the following area cities have passed the Sunday Brunch Law: Minneapolis Crystal Plymouth Saint Paul Anoka (Robbinsdale - Brooklyn Park Golden Valley has no liquor estab- lishments) The Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce again urges your support of this law for our city's restaurants because of the competitive stance of our surrounding communities. If we can be of further help to you in this issue, or any other, please do not hesitate calling on us. ` e Licenses to be approved by the City Council on July 26, 1982 CIGARETTE LICENSE Uncle Bob's Quik Six 6600 Lyndale Ave. N.. LA c� City Cle FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Uncle Bob's Quik Six 6600 Lyndale Ave. N. Sanitarian GASOLINE SERVICE STATION LICENSE Uncle Bob's Quik Six 6600 Lyndale Ave. N.,�T City Clerk.(� MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Chapman Heating & Air Cond. 4017 Zane Ave. N. Conservenergy Systems, Inc. 6505 Taft St. ` i 1 Ideal Heating & Air Cond. 3116 Fremont Ave. N. Build i g Official RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE Renewal: Darrell A. Farr Development Beach Apartments Lloyd J..Waldusky Georgetown Park Townhouses Lyn River Corporation Lyn River Apartments Charles Q. Hillstrom 6527 Drew Ave_.,N--' David Vosick 6731 Ewing Ave. N. Roland Scherber 7212 Newton Ave. N. Dave Bradley 6725 W. River Rd. Harshad Bhatt 7206 -7212 W. River Rd. Irwin Ketroser 6525 ' - 27, 29 Willow In. Roger & Marie Krawiecki 5209 Xerxes Ave. N. Director of Planning 'Q r and Inspection SIGNHANGER LICENSE Macey Sign Company 451 Wilson St. N.E. W_' Buildin fficial 1' ol GENERAL APPROVAL: Gerald Splinter, City Clerk