Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982 06-28 CCP Regular Session t CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER JUNE 28, 1982 7:00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Invocation 4. Open Forum S. Approval of Consent Agenda -A 11 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 - *Regular Session, June 14, 1982 *Board Equalization, June 7, 1982 *7. Performance Bond Releases: *a. Federal Lumber, 4810 North Lilac Drive *b. Lutheran Church of the Master, 1200 - 69th Avenue North *c. Thrifty Scot Motel, 6445 James Circle 8. Resolutions: a. Ordering 51st Avenue North Water Main Improvement Project No. 1982 -07 -The public hearing regarding this project was held on May 10, 1982. j Consideration of this resolution ordering the improvement was tabled until June 14, 1982 and again, until tonight, to allow developer Keith Harstad to submit plans for platting and development of adjacent properties. A four /fifths roll call vote is required to order the project constructed. b. Directing Condemnation of Certain Interests in (Easement for 51st Avenue Water Main Installation) C. Establishing Water Tower Improvement Project No. 1982 -15 (Painting of 1.5 Million Gallon Elevated Storage Tank) Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids (Contract 1982 -G) d. Revising Municipal State Aid Street System Designations within the City of Brooklyn Center -A similar resolution was adopted on March 22, 1982. Because of MN /DOT State Aid Division's policies this revised resolution is recommended for Council consideration. f -- CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- June 25, 1982 e. Authorizing Execution of Agreement for Engineering Services for Water ` { Supply Study Minnesota Transportation Department f. Accepting Work Performed under Minn p P g Traffic Control Signal Agreement No. 58929 (Replacement of Traffic Control and Street Lighting System at 58th Avenue North and T.H. 152' and Revision of Traffic Control Systems at 63rd and 69th Avenues North and T.H. 152) 9. Planning Commission' Items (7:30 p.m.) K a. Planning Commission Application No. 82024 submitted by DeVries Builders, Inc. for site and building plan approval to construct 16 townhouse units in the Earle Brown Farm Estates, 3rd Addition. The Planning Commission i recommended approval of Application No. 82024 at its June 17, 1982 meeting. s b. Planning Commission Application No. 82025 submitted by DeVries Builders, Inc. for preliminary plat approval to subdivide Outlot B of the Earle Brown Farm Estates, 1st Addition into a new 3rd Addition with 16 town- house units and one common area. The Planning Commission recommended ` approval of Application No. 82025 at its June 17, 1982 meeting. x Final Plat Approval -Earle Brown Farm Estates 3rd Addition • 10. Ordinances i it Easements Existing on Tract A 1 An Ordinance Vacating .Drains a and Utility g a. r g Y Registered Land Survey No. 1377 -The easements must be vacated in conjunction with the development of Shingle Creek Plaza II. The property owner has granted substitute easements for relocation of existing utilities and has relocated those utilities at no cost to the City. The ordinance was first read 2 and is recommended for a 2 1982 published on June 3 198_,. on May 4, P second reading this evening. A public hearing has been scheduled for the ordinance at 8:00 p.m. 11. Discussion Items: Employee ram 1982-1983 a o ee Assistance Program r P Y - Consideration of Contract Renewal for 1982- 1983 b. Freeway Park Shelter Building -The staff will be prepared to discuss this item at the meeting. 12. Licenses 13. Adjournment } -_ i MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION JUNE 14, 1982 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council net in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:05 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, Assistant City Engineer Jim Grube, City Assessor Pete Koole, and Administrative Assistants Brad Hoffman and Tom Bublitz. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Pastor Dana Hofseth of the Brooklyn Center Baptist 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. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any of the Council members desired any items removed from the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Lhotka requested that items 13i, J, 1, and p be removed from the Consent Agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES.- MAY 24, 1982 There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of May 24, 1982 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against none. The motion passed unanimously. SUBDIVISION BOND RELEASE - GARCELON SECOND ADDITION There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to authorize the release of the subdivision bond, in the amount of $6,450, for Garcelon Second Addition located at Camden Avenue and.56th Avenue. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed.unanimously. PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASES There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember.Theis to approve the performance bond release for Hotline Realty (Moorwood Townhouses), 58th and Shores Drive, in the amount of $4,000. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, k 6 -14 -82 -1- L_ Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by- Councilmember Theis to approve the performance bond release for Cass Screw, 4748 France Avenue North, in the amount of $3,000. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist,. Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a, motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to. approve the release the performance bond for Northbrook Estates, 58th and Logan Avenue North, in the amount of $3,000. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council- members Lhotka,.Scott, Hawes; and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND SERVICES ADVISORY COUNCIL SCHOOL- DISTRICT #281 - There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and,seconded by Councilmember Theis to =support the appointment of Ms. Patricia Hoyt Neils and Mr. Dan Donohue as repre- entatives to the Community Education and Services Advisory Council for Independent School District #281. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, ,Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. APPOINTMENT OF DIRECTORS TO NORTHWEST SUBURBS CABLE COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to appoint Councilmember Celia Scott and City Manager Gerald Splinter as the City of - Brooklyn Center's Directors on the Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission to serve for a one year period commencing June 1, 1982. Voting in favors Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 82 -100 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1981 -L (CENTRAL PARK /GARDEN CITY PEDESTRIAN TRAIL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 -15, EXERCISE STATION IMPROVE ,; Y MF ITT PROJECT NO. 1981 -25) 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. 82 -101 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1981 -G (SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 --13, CURB AND GUTTER REPAIR PROJECT NO. 1981 -21: VARIOUS LOCATIONS) 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 6 -14 -82 -2- { 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 -102 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved.its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -12 (ATHLETIC FIELD FENCING CONSTRUCTION), APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (CONTRACT 1982 -E) 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. 82 -103 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -13 (DRINKING FOUNTAIN INSTALLATION) APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (CONTRACT 1982 -F) 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. 82 -104 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF EASEMENTS FOR PEDESTRIAN /BICYCLE TRAILWAY 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. 82 -105 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and,moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DESIGNATING POLLING PLACES WITHIN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 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. 6 -14 -82 -3- t T RESOLUTION NO. 82 -106 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ORDERING THE ABATEMENT OF UNSANITARY, UNSAFE AND HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS EXISTING AT 6213 BEARD AVENUE NORTH IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SUCH THAT THIS DWELLING IS NOW UNFIT FOR HUMAN HABITATION 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. 82 -107 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING GIFT 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. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the following list of licenses: GAMBLING LICENSE St. Alphonsus Men's Club 7025 Halifax Ave. N. St. Alphonsus Rosary Altar 7025 Halifax Ave. N. MECHANICAL SYSTEM'S LICENSE Modern Heating & Air Conditioning 2318 First St. N.E.: Quality Refrigeration, Inc. 1105 W. 78 St. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Coca Cola Bottling Midwest 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd. Evergreen Park Manor 7224 Camden Ave. N. Kar Win Auto 6846 Humboldt Ave. N. SIGN HANGER'S LICENSE Signcrafters Outdoor Display 7775 Main St. N.E. SWIMMING POOL LICENSE Outdoor: Marvin Garden Townhouses 430 Oak Grove St. 6 -14 -82 -4- Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 82022 SUBMITTED BY BROOK PARK BAPTIST CHURCH FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL, TO PROVIDE SCREENING OF THE PARKING LOT AT 4801 - 63RD AVENUE NORTH The Director of Planning and Inspection presented and reviewed, for Councilmembers, pages 1 through 3 of the May 27, 1982 Planning Commission minutes and also the Planning Commission information sheet prepared for Application No. 82022. He explained that the applicant is seeking an alternate parking lot screening device. He explained the church has recently resubmitted a plan for a parking lot with 70 parking � arkin stalls which meets the ordinance requirement for a church with seating capacity of 210. He proceeded to review the location of the subject parcel and also the landscaping plan submitted with the application. He explained the Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 82022 at its May 27, 1982 meeting subject to four conditions, which he reviewed for Councilmembers. He noted that a representative of the church is present this evening. There'was a motion by Councilmember Scott, seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve Application No. 82022 subject to the following conditions: 1. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. I 2. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to m assure completion of .approved site improvements. 3. Any outside trash disposal facilities shall be appropriately screened from view. 4. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas'. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none The motion passed unanimously. CONTINUATION OF BOARD OF EQUALIZATION Mayor Nyquist noted that the City Council, serving as the Board of Review, had continued the Board of Equalization meeting from ,June 7, 1982 to this evening's meeting. The City Assessor reviewed the list of properties, and their respective assessments, which had been continued from the June 7, 1982 meeting. The City Assessor noted that there had been six cases which were continued from the June 7 meeting and he proceeded to review them on a case by case basis. The City Assessor reviewed Case No. 1, Mr. Donald A. Tinker, 3337 - Avenue North, PID No. 10- 118 -21 -13 -0017. The City Assessor explained that he had talked with Mr. Tinker a couple of times trying to set up a mutually agreeable time. to discuss his concerns regarding his assessment. He explained that he not been 6 -14 -82 -5- able to get together yet, but he has indicated to him that he would be glad to meet anytime. The City Assessor recommended that Mr. Tinker's value on his property } at 3337 - 49th Avenue North be upheld at $61,700 and that he would meet with him {$ and if the City can recommend a lower value after the meeting, the City could support Mr. Tinker at the next level of appeal. The City Assessor reviewed Case No. 2, Mr. William F. Shutte, 6715, 17, 19, and 21 Humboldt Avenue North, PID No. 35- 119 -21 -11 -0007, 8, 9, 10. The City Assessor explained that Mr. Shutte was to contact him if he wanted to review his valuations further, and that as of this time Mr. Shutte has not contacted him for such a meeting. He stated that he is recommending the values for Mr. Shutte's property be upheld at $126,700 for each parcel. The City Assessor reviewed Case No. 3, Mr. Kenneth Wutschke, 7226 Perry Court East, PID No. 28- 119 -21 -41 -0163. The City Assessor explained that he met with Mr. Wutschke on June 10, 1982 and reviewed with him all the properties to which he wished his 5 value compared. He explained that after the meeting Mr. Wutschke indicated that he is satisfied with his valuation as .established by the City. The City Assessor recommended that the value of Mr. Wutschke's property at 7226 Perry Court East be upheld at $77,100. " The City Assessor proceeded to review Case Nos..4, 5, and 6. He explained the property owner in. the last three cases is Prudential Insurance Company of America, and that the properties are located at 1600 - 1700 Freeway Boulevard, PID No. 35 11.9 -21 -14 -0011, 6820 Shingle Creek Parkway, PID No. 35 -- 119 -21 -12 -0002, and 6840 Shingle Creek Parkway, PID No. 35- 119 -21 -21 -0003. He explained that he met with Mr. James E. Holter on June 9 and explained that Mr. Holter represents the Prudential Insurance Company of America. The City Assessor explained that after his meeting with Mr. Holter, and as a result.of new data supplied by Prudential, he is recom- mending that the Board of Review make some adjustments in the valuation of the properties owned by Prudential. He explained that the properties in question are owned by Prudential and are some of the older spec buildings in the Industrial Park. He explained that Mr. Holter's concern focused on the age of the buildings and because of this they are more expensive to maintain. He also explained that one of the buildings has an access problem, noting that the truck bay is located in the center of the building and presents an access problem for truck traffic. He stated he is recommending the value of the property at 1600 - 1700 Freeway Boulevard be reduced to $1,405,000; that the value of the property at 6820 Shingle Creek Parkway be reduced to $2,507,200; and that the value of the property at 6840 Shingle Creek Parkway be reduced to $2,048,800. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the City Assessor's recommendations regarding the valuations of the properties in the above described cases and the City Assessor's recommendations contained in the minutes of the June 7, 1982 Board of Equalization meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. FINAL PLAT - HI CREST SQUARE ESTATES The City Manager explained that the City staff has not received from the developer all the information required to be submitted for final plat approval and that because of this the staff is not prepared to recommend.approval of Hi Crest Square Estates at this time. He added the staff is recommending that the Council table considerate of this plat until the next meeting. 6 -14 -82 -6- There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to table consideration of the final plat of Hi Crest Square Estates to June 28, 1982 because the developer did not provide the information required for final plat approval. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The'motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED The City Manager introduced a Resolution Directing Condemnation of Certain Interests in Land (easement for water main connection). The Director of Public Works reviewed the project for Councilmembers and recommended tabling the resolution because the owners have indicated a willingness to work out a voluntary negotiation for the _ easement. He stated, however, that the staff could proceed with placing the project under contract and stop short of the property in question if negotiations are unsuccessful for the easement. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to table consideration of a Resolution Directing Condemnation of Certain Interests in Land (easement for water main connection) to allow the staff to conduct voluntary negotiations for the easement. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -108 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FORM (CENTRAL PARK WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -05, KYLAWN PARK WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -06; CONTRACT 1982 -D) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Ordering 51st Avenue North Water Main Improvement Project No. 1982 -07. The Director of Public Works explained that since the last City Council meeting he has met with Mr. Harstad regarding develop- ment of his property. He reviewed Mr. Harstad's letter for Councilmembers, noting that Mr. Harstad is requesting additional time to develop his proposal. The Director of Public Works stated the staff is recommending tabling consideration of the resolution for two more weeks. Discussion ensued among Councilmembers regarding the project and the necessary timing of a proposal from Mr. Harstad and his request for more time 'to develop his proposal for development. - There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to table consideration of a Resolution Ordering 51st Avenue North Improvement Project. - No. 1982 -07 for two weeks at the request of the applicant, Mr..Keith T Harstad. Voting in-favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott., Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. 6 -14 -82 -7- RESOLUTION NO. 82 -109 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING CERTAIN CITY -OWNED PROPERTY AS SURPLUS, AUTHORIZING ITS RECONVEYANCE TO THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, AND APPROVING ITS CLASSIFICATION AS NON - CONSERVATION LAND 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 N0. 82 -110 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE AGREEMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Directing Condemnation of Certain Interests in Land (for right of way required from the Melba Evanson property for the 69 -70th Avenue connection). The City Manager explained the City Assessor has contacted Ms. Evanson regarding the property and that he has been unable.to negotiate for the required right of way. The City Manager stated that he is, therefore, requestin0 authorization to proceed with condemnation. The City Attorney pointed out that the condemnation procedure involves filing a petition with the court and asking the court to appoint three disinterested commissioners to conduct the proceedings. He added that both sides are present during the proceedings and each can present their arguments. He explained that the City can appeal any award presented by the three commissioners and can request a jury trial. In such event, he pointed out, the jury makes the final decision. He pointed out that the required time for such proceedings is approximately four months. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Paul Rosso, who inquired whether any Environmental Impact Statement had been prepared for this project. The City Attorney pointed out that no Environmental Impact Statement is required for this project and that if anyone wished to pursue such a project, a petition with 500 signatures is required and must be presented to the Environmental Quality Board before any Environmental Impact Statement could be required. Mr. Rosso continued to discuss the proposed 69 -70th roadway project and make inquiries of the staff regarding the project. He reauested a delay of the project for a year or so until questions regarding the project and the 252 highway project are answered. The Director of Public Works pointed out that MN /DOT requires planning information now so that planning for the design of 252 can proceed. The City Manager pointed 6 -14 -82 -8- out that the final design of the project must be submitted to the State to allow the 252 plan to proceed on schedule. • RESOLUTION NO. 82 -111 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN INTERESTS IN LAND (69TH - 70TH AVENUE CONNECTION 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 -112 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT NO. 1957 BETWEEN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, PROVIDING FOR THE MAINTENi- CE AND ELECTRIC ENERGY FOR STREET LIGHTING SYSTEMS OVER I -94 ON THE 53RD AVENUE AND 57TH AVENUE BRIDGES 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, 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. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Declaring Adequacy of Petition Establishing Project, Receiving City Engineer's Report, and Calling for Hearing on Improvement Project No. 1982 -14. The City Manager explained the City has received a petition from residents requesting the improvement of the alley between Dupont and Emerson Avenues from 53rd to 54th. The Director of Public Works reviewed the project location, the assessment district, and noted that 61% of the property owners owning 53% of the frontage in the project area have requested the project, and he is recommending that a public hearing be scheduled for the project. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -113 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING ADEQUACY OF PETITION, ESTABLISHING ALLEY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -14, RECEIVING ENGINEER'S REPORT, AND CALLING FOR A HEARING ON IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -14 (ALLEY PAVING 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 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. 6 -14 -82 -9- RESOLUTION NO. 82 -114 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING MINNESOTA LAW, 1982, CHAPTER 577, REGARDING HOME ENERGY CONSERVATION PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member`Celia - Scott, -and upon vote_ being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: 'Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -115 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING MINNESOTA LAW, 1982, CHAPTER 577, REGARDING HOUSING INTEREST BUY DOWN PROGRAM FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 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. 82 -116 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1982 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND THE 1982 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN • 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. RE NO. 82 -117 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER AND DESIGNATED STAFF TO WORK WITH THE BROOKLYN CENTER CRIME PREVENTION FUND ORGANIZATION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:15 p.m. and reconvened at 8:35 p.m.. DISCUSSION ITEMS 6 -14 -82 -10- PCA OPERATOR'S PERMIT, HOWE FERTILIZER, INC. The City Manager stated that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency is recommending the City Council's support of a draft operating permit for Howe, Inc. He pointed out that the permit is being submitted to the City Council for review before it goes to the PCA Board for their consideration. The City Attorney pointed out that the old operating permit expired approximately two years ago, and.that the findings of the lawsuit have been incorporated into the permit the Council has before them this evening. He pointed out that the City, during the two year period when the permit was expired, was exploring the use of monitoring systems during -a portion of this period., The City Manager explained that the City is not permanently giving up its monitoring option but under this permit it would be giving it up for a two year period. He added that the PCA believes the emissions from Howe, Inc. can be limited in frequency and intensity under this permit. Councilmember Scott stated that she supports the development of improved control over emissions and stated that, in her opinion, it is more useful than developing - a monitoring device. She also pointed out that spring - -is; apparently the busiest; time for Howe, Inc. and, consequently, in the spring there are increased emissions from •the plant. - Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Tom Howe, who stated that the emissions are not an issue of overloading the equipment. He explained - that -in spring, temperature inversions are experienced but that the equipment runs the same all the time. He added that the temperature inversions and weather conditions create the problems. He stated that Howe shuts down at 4:30 p.m. on week _days and does not operate on weekends, as stipulated in the judge's order. He added that Howe does start earlier in the spring. Councilmember Lhotka inquired of the City Attorney whether he saw any problems with the draft-operating permit. The City Attorney stated that he believes the permit is a good compromise, but that he does think a monitoring device would be helpful in determining the intensity of the ammonia; fumes: -- There was 'a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to authorize the City staff to recommend the Operating Permit For An Emission Facility_.,. i And Air Pollution Control Equipment in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Chapters 115. and 116 and Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Rule APC3 for Howe, Inc., 4821 Xerxes Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, as drafted for approval by the PCA Board. FOLLOW -UP REPORT ON NONINTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION FOR SHOWBIZ PIZZA PLACE The City Manager reviewed the follow -up investigation involving; the background of the newly designated manager at the ShowBiz Pizza Place. He added that the present manager meets all the requirements of the City ordinances and State Statutes. EXTENSION OF PEDESTRIAN /BICYCLE TRAIL SYSTEM; ALONG SOUTH CORPORATE LIMITS (53RD AVENUE EXTENSION) PROVIDING TRAIL CONNECTION BETWEEN UPTON AVENUE AND LIONS PARK The Director of Public Works reviewed the Lions Park area and the existing trail and proposed trail extension. He explained the plan comprehends construction of a trailway_ extension along 53rd Avenue North between Lions Park and Upton Avenue.; 6 -14 -82 -il- In discussion of the project Councilmember Lhotka inquired whether a 70 foot bridge was necessary across Shingle Creek. The Director of Public Works explained that the 70 foot span would accommodate the 100 year flood and that a smaller bridge would constrict the flow. The City Manager explained that the 70 foot bridge is what we now have on Shingle Creek in Central Park, and that the cost differential fora 50 foot bridge is approximately $2,000 to $3,000 less. The Director of Public Works also reviewed the next discussion item, extension of Central Park /Garden City trail south of soccer field. He explained that this plan comprehends a plan which would complete the exercise trail loop along the westerly edge of Garden City Park, connect the exercise trail loop to the Brooklyn Drive /65th Avenue intersection, and extend the trail along the southerly and westerly edges of the soccer field area with another bridge crossing Shingle Creek and providing a connection to the main regional trail at the south edge of Central Park. The Director of Public Works reviewed funding sources available for the project. The City Council continued.to discuss the proposed trailway projects and amendments to the LAWCON and LCMR trailway projects. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the extension of the pedestrian/bicycle trailway along 53rd Avenue North between Lions Park and Upton Avenue as an amendment to the. LAWCON /LCMR Trailway II Project. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, and Theis. Voting against: Councilmember Hawes. The motion passed. There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the extension of the Central Park /Garden City trail south of the soccer_ field as amendment to the LAWCON /LCMR Central Park Trailway Project. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: Councilmember Lhotka. The motion passed. LIONS PARK TENNIS COURT CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE The Director of Public Works explained that preliminary soil borings .,taken _ n the vicinity of the proposed tennis courts in Lions Park indicate that it will be necessary to excavate between two and one -half and eleven feet of undesirable soils and replace them with granular materials in order to construct the tennis court. He explained that it is recommended the soil correction work be done this . _ . year_and that the construction of the courts begin next year. Councilmember Scott commented on the cost of the soil correction work and inquired whether the court could be located elsewhere. The City. Manager explained that the Park and Recreation Commission and the staff looked at alternatives for servicing this neighborhood, but that no other sites were recommended. He added that because of the generally poor soils in most of the City parks, this type of soil correction work is not unusual. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to authorize the soil correction work necessary for the Lions Park tennis court construction, and that the soil correction work be conducted in 1982. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, and Theis. Voting against: Council - members Scott and Hawes. The motion passed. 6 -14 -82 -12 TRUNK HIGHWAY 252 DESIGN LAYOUT The Director of Public Works reviewed the T.H. 252 design layout as proposed by MN /DOT. He pointed out that the layout shows the removal of the service road at 65th Avenue on the west side of 252. He added that the roadway may extend into the Super America property and that the Sinclair station would certainly be taken by the project. He continued to review the required removal of homes and apartments as 252 proceeds north. The Director of Public Works also reviewed the alternatives for the layout of 252 at 70th Avenue showing a fourway intersection and a "T" intersection at 70th. He added that both alternatives for 70th Avenue will be shown at the public hearing conducted by MN /DOT. The Director of Public Works requested City Council input regarding their preferences for the design of the 70th Avenue intersection with 252. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to recommend that a "T" intersection be constructed at 70th Avenue North at its intersection with T.H. 252. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager stated that he believes the City should be represented at t'- -� public hearing to be held on June 28, and that he is recommending either himself or the Director of Public Works attend that meeting. GAMBLING LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve a Class B Gambling License for St. Alphonsus Catholic Church Men's Club and a Class A Gambling License for the Rosary Altar Society of St. Alphonsus Catholic Church. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to waive the $10,000 fidelity bond for the Class B Gambling License for St. Alphonsus Catholic Church Men's Club and the $10,000 fidelity bond for the Class A Gambling License for the Rosary Altar Society of St. Alphonsus Catholic Church. 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 10:00 p.m. Clerk Mayor 6- 14--82 -13- MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF' THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA Board of Equalization June 7, 1982 City Hall CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met as the Board of Equalization and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:09 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, City Assessor Peter Koole, Appraiser Joe DaBruzzi, Assessing Clerks Julie Caswell and Evelyn Byron, and Administrative Assistant Tom Bublitz. Mayor Nyquist reviewed the purpose of this evening's meeting pointing out that the City Council was serving as the Board of Equalization to conduct a review of assessed valuation within the City, and to allow a time for public inquiry regarding local assessments after the City Assessor makes his report. The City Manager pointed out that there are various steps that individuals must take when seeking adjustments in their valuations and he explained that the meeting tonight is the first step after which the inquiry is passed on to the County, and the County then passes it on to the State for their review. He explained that the values discussed this evening will serve as the basis for 1983 taxes. He added that the Board of Equalization reviews the City Assessor's work and he explained that the City appraisers and assessing staff are fully certified by the State of Minnesota. The City Assessor explained the appeal process, stating the channel of appeal begins with the local Board, then onto the County Board, the State Board, and finally to the tax court if carried that far. He also noted that individuals may appeal to the tax court directly without going to the County Board or State Board. He added that an individual must go to the local Board first before they can qualify for the next step, which is the County Board, and that an individual must also appeal to the County Board prior to appealing to the State Board. The City Assessor explained that the County Board of Equalization is appointed by the County Commissioners and that the Commissioner of Revenue serves as the State Board of Equalization. The City Assessor stated that the duties and the procedures to be followed by the local Board are set in Minnesota Statute 274.01 to "examine and see that all taxable property in the City has been properly placed upon a tax list and duly valued by the Assessor ". "Furthermore ", he stated, "on application of any person feeling aggrieved, the Board shall review the assessment and correct as shall appear just ". In reviewing the duties of the City Assessor, he noted the State Statute reads "All real property subject to taxation shall be listed and assessed every year with reference to its value on January 2, preceding the assessment ". The Assessor stated this has been done and the owners of the property in Brooklyn Center have been notified of any value changes. He also pointed out that Minnesota Statute 273.11 states, "All property shall be valued at its market value ". The City Assessor 6 -7 -82 -l- further explained the Statute states "In estimating and determining such value the Assessor shall not adopt a lower or different standard of value because the same is to serve as a basis for taxation; nor shall he adopt as a criterion and a value the price for which such property would sell at auction.or at a forced sale, or an aggregate with all the property in the town or district; but he shall value each article or of property by itself, and at such sum or price as he believes the same to be fairly worth in money ". The City Assessor noted in cases where a property may be "so unique as to make-a comparative market value hard to determine, Minnesota Case Law is clear as demonstrated in the case of State Minnesota versus Fritch. In this case, the court stated, "It is up to the Assessor to form an opinion of the market value even when there is no market or sales to aid in fixing values, where there have been no actual sales for a long period of -time; there is no way of determining values except by the judgment and opinion of men acquainted with the lands, their adaptability for use and the circumstances of the surrounding community ". The City Assessor explained that the assessor's work is based on historical value and that their data is based on actual sales and not projections. The City Assessor next reviewed the sales ratio studies. He' explained that the sales ratio study was a substantive part of what is done by the Assessing Department. The City Assessor briefly reviewed the 1981 sales ratio study noting the aggregate ratio is 93.9 %, the median ratio is 93.2 %, and the coefficient of dispersion is 6.5 %. He stated that the average sale price is $66,052 and the average market value is $61,763. He explained the Assessing 'Department analyzes the sales by style,_, location, price, age, and neighborhood. He reviewed the valuations of several homes located in different parts of the City, including homes located on a lake or river, in proximity to a highway or freeway, commercial and multiple family units, and homes located near parkland. He pointed out the percent of increases in sale prices in the City's neighborhoods ranged from 3% to 8% and that the average increase in valuation City wide was 5.9 %. He explained that in the 1980's the inflation rate in real estate is expected to lag behind inflation in other areas. The City Assessor reviewed inspections by the Appraisers. He commented that State law requires one- fourth of the properties in the City be revalued and inspected each year. He showed the Council on a map of the City which areas had been "revalued and inspected in 1981 for the 1982 assessment. He noted in addition to the regular inspections made each year, the Assessing Department must also inspect the work on each building permit. He noted that in -1981 there were 518 permits that had to be inspected at least once to determine what effect the work has had on the property value. The City Assessor next reviewed a tax comparison for properties which were chosen to be representative samples of homes in Brooklyn Center in two different price ranges. A comparison was made from the years 1973 to .1982. He stated these properties have not been extensively changed physically although normal maintenance and depreciation are present in their average properties. He explained the income adjusted homestead credit (circuit breaker) has not been considered in the example as listed on the chart. Historically, he pointed out, taxes on homesteaded properties have decreased over the years. The City Assessor then proceeded to review an example of how the homestead credit 6 -7 -82 -2 works with regard to taxes. For his example, the City Assessor assumed a gross tax of $1,100; when the 58% homestead credit ($638) is deducted the net taxes are $462. The City Assessor then assumed that the budget of the taxing authority increased by 10 %, or $1,100 plus $110 for a total of $1,210 reflecting the 10% g budget increase. The 1982 :toss tax, he pointed out, would then be $1,210 and g provides credit ro i s p the 58o homestead credit would be $701.80, however, th e homestead cre a maximum of $650, therefore, the net tax would be $1,210 less $650 or $560. The tax increase from one year to the next on the example property increased $98 for a 21.2% increase. He explained that the additional increase is due to adjustments made by the State Legislature. The City Manager pointed out that the City's share of the total tax dollar is approximately 15% to 170. The City Assessor proceeded to review small apartment building sales and also the sale of four - plexes in the last five years. He explained the use of the gross rent multiplier in developing values for apartment buildings. He explained that the gross rent multiplier is obtained by dividing the sale price of the building by the gross rent of the building. He pointed out that four - plexes that were sold more than once in eleven years experienced an annual inflation rate of 34.3% with regard to their selling price. j The City Assessor reviewed new legislation for the Council and pointed out that homestead properties with tax increases over 30% received refunds from the state for 75% up to $200. Mayor Nyquist proceeded to review the forms submitted by persons present at this evening's meeting who wished to ask questions regarding their valuations. The first persons to appear were Donald and Elizabeth Tinker, 3337 - 49th Avenue North, PID No. 10- 118 -21 -13 -0017. Mr. Tinker stated that his value was raised 33% in one year and that he believes this is too high since his valuation is up $18,000 from the year before. He stated that his tax statement is 100% over the year before. The City Assessor stated that Mr. Tinker's 1981 market value was $64,700. He pointed out that in March of 1982 the property was reappraised at $61,700. He stated that this is an example of an expansion home being revalued and he noted that these types of homes were grossly undervalued until 1981 which resulted in great tax increase when they were brought up to their proper value. He stated that he recommends the value remain as is for this property. The City Manager explained that the Assessing Staff can sit down with Mr. Tinker and compare values of other homes his neighborhood. Mayor Nyquist stated that he would recommend that Mr. Tinker get together with Mr., Koole s staff and examine the values as suggested by the City Manager. Mayor Nyquist stated that the next person making an inquiry regarding the valuation of his property was Mr. William F. Shutte, owner of the properties at 6715, 17, 19, and 21 Humboldt Avenue North, PID No. 35- 119 -21 -11 -0009, 0010, 0007, and 0008. Mr. Schutte stated that the property taxes on the four four - plexes he owns have gone up 200% in two years. He stated that he is questioning the fairness of computing the values of all multiple family type housing together. He stated that it does not seem fair to compare the small multiple family housing with large multiple family y housing nits. He stated that his valuation in 1981 was $112,900 and in g 1982 it was $126,700 per unit. The City Assessor stated that he agrees with Mr. Shutte in that he is competing with larger apartment complexes. He stated that 6 -7 -82 -3- four- plexes sell at a higher cost per unit than large-100 unit complexes and the assessment must reflect this. He pointed out that the State Legislature requires all multiple family type buildings, which includes anything over four units, to be in the same tax classification. He stated that the gross rent multiplier for t a four -plex is between 8 and 10 and that for larger units it is between 4 and 6. Councilmember Lhotka left the table at 8 :02 p.m. The City Assessor explained that there is more demand for four unit buildings than for sixteen unit buildings, thus the sales price is increased by the demand. He emphasized that there is more demand for the smaller unit. Councilmember Lhotka returned to the table 8:03 p.m. The City Assessor stated that he does not see'an inequity in the appraisal since the appraisal is based on the market value and it can be demonstrated that a four- plex can be sold for more per unit than a sixteen unit building. Mr. Shutte stated that he believes the expenses in maintaining the building should also be considered not just the gross rent multiplier. Mr. Shutte then requested information from the Assessor regarding the information 'the Assessing Department has on his rental income. Mayor Nyquist suggested that Mr. Shutte meet with Mr. Koole and his staff to clarify some of the questions he has regarding his property. Mayor Nyquist stated that the next person making an inquiry regarding valuation of his property '-was Mr. Charles Thompson, 4201 - 58th Avenue North, PID No. 03- 118 -21- 23 -0023. Mr. Thompson stated that between 1976 and 1981 the market value of his home increased from $56,000 to $118,300. He stated he believes this increase is too high. He stated his assessed valuation increased from $118,500 in 1981 to f $118,800 in 1982. The City Assessor noted that Mr. Thompson's property is located on the north end of Twin Lake and is-a single story home on a 2� acre lot with 2,214 sq. ft. of space. He added that the last appraisal of the property was conducted on April 10, 1981. Mr. Thompson stated he believes the market value is not what the home would sell for and that the value has doubled since 1976. The City Manager stated that the value of most homes in the City has doubled since 1976. He added that by law the City Assessor is required to assess on the value of property. The City Assessor pointed out that the valuation on Mr. Thompson's property in 1979 was $83,800, in 1980 it was $97,200, in 1981 it was $118,500, and in 1982 it was $118,800. He stated that he believes the valuation on Mr. Thompson's property is far below the market value of the property. Mr. Thompson stated he would take his protest to the next step, that being, the County. Mayor Nyquist introduced the next inquiry, from Mr. Kenneth Wutschke, 7226 Perry Court East, PID No. 28- 119- 21 -41- 0163. Mr. Wutschke stated that the valuation of his property at 7226 Perry Court East has increased from a valuation of $62,100 in 1981 to $77,100 in 1982 and that lie believes this is a rather large increase. The City Assessor noted that townhouses were .raised by a percentage this year to establish their valuation. He added that Mr. Wutschke's neighbor located at 7220 Perry Court East sold his unit for over $81,000. He added that the sale prices in the Creek Villa's Development have been very stable. Mr. Wutschke stated he believes his valuation is $5,000 greater than his neighbor's valuation and his neighbor has the same floor plan. The City Assessor stated that the staff will review Mr. Wutschke's property and set up a reappraisal appointment for his property. 6 -7 -82 -4- Mayor Nyquist introduced the next inquiry, from Kathleen A. Grisser, 1708 - 69th Avenue North, PID No. 26- 119 -21 -44 -0079. He explained that apparently Ms. Grisser • was present earlier in the meeting but that she was not present now. The City Assessor explained that the home at 1708 -- 69th Avenue North was an expansion home and was a non - homestead property. He added that in 1980 Ms. Grisser applied for an abatement with the County and the County approved the valuation of $48,000 in 1980 and that the property is still valued at $48,000. He stated that he would recommend the $48,000 valuation be reaffirmed. The City Assessor stated that this concludes the in person inquiries for this evening's meeting, but that a number of written protests will be entered into the record from persons who could not be present at this evening's meeting. Mayor Nyquist directed that the written protests be entered into the official meeting record. Letters of protests were received from the following: 1. Prudential Insurance Company of America, James North and Freeway Boulevard, PID No. 35- 119 -21 -14 -0004, 1982 value $3,900. 2. Prudential Insurance Company of America, 1600 and 1700 Freeway Boulevard, PID No. 35- 119 -21 -14 -0011, 1982 value $1,570,900. �- 3 Prudential Insurance Company of America, 6820 Shingle Creek Parkway,` PID No. 36- 119 -21 -12 -0002, 1982 value $2,638,200. 4. Prudential Insurance Company of America, 6840 Shingle Creek Parkway, PID No. 35- 119 -21 -21 -0003, 1982 value $2,245,300. 5. B & G Realty Incorporated, 6415 James Circle North, PID No. 36- 119 -21 -42 -0003 1982 value $1,500,000. 6. Edwin W. Elmer, 6500 West River Road, PID No_ 36- 119 -21 -13 -0008, 1982 value $163,800. The City Assessor stated that he will be meeting with a representative of the Prudential Insurance Company of America this week to discuss the problems related to the protested valuations. He stated he would recommend that the current values be reaffirmed, pointing out that this action would protect the right of appeal of the property owners to the next level. He added that he is awaiting information from B & G Realty Inc. and Mr. Edwin W. Elmer regarding the valuations of their properties. Mayor Nyquist noted that the Board of Equalization meeting would be continued to the June 14 City Council meeting and at that time the Board would review as many properties as the staff can 'report on in time for that meeting. Mayor Nyquist adjourned the Board of Equalization meeting at 8:40 p.m. Clerk Mayor l 6 -7 -82 -5- MEMORANDUM TO: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection FROM: Gary_Shallcross, Planning Assistant DATE: June 24, 1982 SUBJECT: Performance Guarantees The following performance guarantees are recommended for release: 1. Thrifty Scot Motel 6445 James Circle Planning Commission Application No. 80005 Amount of guarantee - $8,000.00 Bond Obligor - Brutger Companies Original bond of $58,000.00 was reduced to $8,000.00 by the City Council on June 22, 1981. At that time over 15 trees and shrubs around the site were found to be dead. These have been replaced. All required improvements have been installed. Recommend total release. 2. Lutheran Church of the Master 1200 - 69th Avenue North Planning Commission Application No. 80025 Amount of Guarantee - $6,000.00 Bond Obligor - Elview Construction Company Original bond of $30,000.00 was reduced to $6,000.00 by the City Council on October 19, 1981. At that time certain boulevard trees had not been planted, nor sod installed in many green areas around the site. Greenstrip areas and areas around the church building have been sodded. Boulevard trees have also been planted. All required improvements are now in. Recommend total release. 3. Federal Lumber 4810 N. Lilac Drive Planning Commission Applica on No. 81001 Amount of Guarantee - $25,000 000 Bond Obligor Federal Lumber Company . All improvements have been installed. Some variation in location of plantings from approved plan. However, entire project is of high quality. Recommend total release. Approve by Ronal A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection Member introduced the following resolution and j moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR 51ST AVENUE NORTH WATER M2\IN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -07 WHEREAS, Resolution No. 82 -57 adopted the 12th day of April, 1982, fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed improvement: 51ST AVENUE NORTH WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -07 WHEREAS, ten days' published notice of the hearing through two weekly ! publications of the required notice was given, and the hearing was held thereon on the 10th day of May, 1982, at which time all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that it is hereby determined that it is necessary and in the best interests of the City and the owners of property specially benefited thereby, that: 1. The following improvement as proposed in Council Resolution No. 82 -57 adopted the 12th day of April, 1982, shall be constructed: 51st Avenue North Water Main Improvement Project No. 1982 -07 2. The City Engineer is designated as the engineer for this improvement. The City Engineer shall prepare plans and p specifications for this improvement. 3.._ The estimated cost of the project is $36,140.00. 4. The estimated cost will be financed by: Special Assessment Fund $ 2,210.00 Public Utility Fund . $33,930.00 TOTAL $36,140.00 f Date Mayor j r ATTEST: i Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following g !� voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA • REGULAR SESSION JUNE 17, 1982 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER Tie Planning met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:37 p.m. POLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Mary Simmons, 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. Chairman Lucht noted that Commis- sioner Manson had called to say that she was ill and would be unable to attend and, therefore, was excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES May 27, 1982 Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to approve the minutes of the May 27, 1982 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NOS. 82024 and 82025 (DeVries Builders, Inc.) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first • two items of business, a request for site and building plan and prelimi- nary plat approval for 16 townhouse units at the Earle Brown Farm Estates on land described as Outlot B. Earle Brown Farm Estates First Addition. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application Nos. 82024 and 82025 attached).. Chairman Lucht asked the applicant whether he had anything further to add. Mr. John DeVries stated that he had no additional comments. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 82024'(DeVries, Builders, Inc. Motion by Commissioner Malecki secondea by Commissioner San Strom to recommend approval of Application No. 82024, 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 and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A performance agreement and'supporting financial guarantee • (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure completion of the approved site. improvements for the 3rd Addition prior to the issuance of building permits. 6- 17-82 -1- 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities shall be appropriately screened from view. ' 5. All common parking and driving areas shall be surrounded by B612 curb and gutter as shown on the approved drainage . and grading plans 6. Plan approval acknowledges a master plan for all phases of the Earle Farm Estates townhouse project. How- ever, each additional phase is subject to preliminary plat approval and site and building plan approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. `- 7. The developers shall take adequate measures to control dust and debris during construction. A viable turf shall be established and maintained in those areas subject to future development. 8 Phase 3 of the Earle Brown Farm Estates shall be included in the single Homeowners' Association for the entire development. Voting in favors Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing regarding Application No. 82025, preliminary plat for Earle Brown Farm Estates - Third Addition. He asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 82025 (DeVries Builders, Inc.) " ho n Ey Commissioner Malecki secondea By Commissioner San strom to recommend approval of Application No. 82025, subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. Homeowners' Association documents for all phases of the development are subject to approval by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval of each phase. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none." The motion passed. 6 -17 -82 -2- APPLICA NOS. 82023 and 82026 (Bergstrom Realty Company The Secretary introduced the next item of business, a request for site plan approval for a 60 unit townhouse project in the-.1300 block. of 69th Avenue North and building plan approval for Phase 1 including • 18 of those townhouse units. He also introduced Application No. 82026, a request for a variance from Section 35 -410, Subdivision 3 to allow a 3' wide buffer strip adjacent to the City's pump house at 1207 I' 69th Avenue North, rather than the ordinance required 15'. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff reports'concerning these applications (See Planning Commission Information Sheets for Appli- cation Nos. 82023 and 82026 attached). The Secretary noted that typically commercial uses are required to provide screening from abut - ting residential properties, but that in this case, because of the rezoning, the burden of the screening would be on the townhouse de m velopment, The Secretary also noted that the applicant was attempting g to negotiate an agreement for a sanitary sewer with an adjoining property owner. He stated that if the negotiations are successful, Blocks 8 and 9 would be shifted southerly,.but still be located with proper buffers and building setbacks. Following the Secretary's review of the staff report, the Assistant City Engineer reviewed an accompanying memo regarding grading and utility matters for the project (see memo attached). During review and explanation of Item No. 5 in his memo, the Assistant City Engineer discussed with the applicant and the Planning Commission at some length, the proposed pond on the west side of the site and the proposed depth of the pond. Mr. Grube asked Mr. Merila whether there would be five feet of water in the pond generally, or only during heavy rains. Mr. Merila answered that the water level would remain, generally, at five feet because of the drainage leading into the pond and because • the base of the Bond would be within the clay shelf which extends to the Mississippi River and that the water would not seep into 'the ground as a result. Mr. Grube stated that it would be important that the water have an appreciable depth to keep the pond from be din to the five to one slope a lea g coming arsh He stated that the fiv P g y pond and into the pond itself was a sufficiently flat grade that it should not pose a serious safety_hazard; however, he deferred the determination of a safety hazard to the Planning Commission. Commissioner Simmons stated that she felt the pond could be a safety problem with kids coming over to it from the single family neighbor- hood to the east. Mr. Merila responded that there are ponds in 'other townhouse developments, namely, the Island Ponds and Moorwood Town- houses. He stated that to put a fence around the pond for safety reasons would detract from the aesthetic benefits offered by the . pond. Commissioner Simmons asked whether the purpose of the pond was for aesthetics or for drainage. Mr. Merila answered that it served both purposes. He explained that the storm sewer leading from the pond at elevation 840 would allow water to seep up out of the pond once drainage from the area reached a certain level. Commissioner Simmons stated that it appeared to-her that safety was a secondary concern. There followed a lengthy discussion regarding the possibility of the pond becoming a mosquito problem. Chairman Lucht stated that he • did not consider it likely that mosquitos would be a big problem if water is running continually except in the dry months. Mr. Merila stated that the water level would be augmented by the City water supply, if necessary, during the dry months. 6 -17 -82 -3- Commissioner Malecki asked whether there was any special concern re- garding the proposed pond. The Assistant City Engineer answered that there is a pond at the DeVries townhouse project (the Earle Brown Farm Estates) which is strictly used for drainage control and, at present, is dry. He stated that he-wanted to know, and suggested that the Commission know, whether the proposed pond is going to be. a pond or just a device for drainage control. Chairman Lucht asked whether the five to one slope was not gradual enough to avoid safety problems. Mr. Grube answered that he con- sidered it to be 'such. He stated that the slope could be maintained and that it is not so steep a slope that anyone would tumble `down it into deep water. Commissioner Simmons asked whether there wouldn't be a problem in the early winter and late spring when there is thin ice over five feet of water and young children may try to walk out on it. The Assistant City Engineer acknowledged that this could be a problem, but added that it was hard to judge just how great the potential for harm would be in this case relative to other ponds in the City. The Assistant City Engineer completed his review of the memo regarding grading and utility aspects of the proposed site plan. He stated that all sanitary sewer plans and specifications must be approved by the Pollution Control Agency, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission and the water main must be approved by the Minnesota Department of Health.. i PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the variance application. Hearing no one, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. • CLOSE PUBLIC TEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. w ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 82026 (Bergstrom Realt Compan Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom secon e y Commi.ssxoner Simmons to recommend approval of Application No. 82026 on the following grounds: 1. The institutional nature of the abbuting R1 use. 2. There is considerable precedent for allowing a reduced buffer adjacent to institutional uses. 3. There would be no detrimental effect on other residential property in the area. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Sandstrom and Versteeg. The motion passed. Commissioner Malecki stated that she would like to know whether other ponds in the City are similar to the pond proposed at the Hi Crest Square Estates .Townhouse development. She stated that this comparison should show whether or not the proposed pond will • work as proposed. Following a discussion by the Planning Commission, it was decided by concensus that such a review should be made prior 4 =17 -82 -4- to review by the City Council. Commissioner Simmons asked whether the neighbors to the east had been consulted regarding the choice of landscaping to serve as a screening device rather than a fence. Mr. Merila stated that the neighbors to the east were extensively consulted during the re- zoning process and saw concept plans for the development. The Secretary also stated that he believed the screening issue was discussed during the rezoning hearings. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 82023 (Bergstrom Realty Company) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom 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, 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. 70, 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 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 r treatment along the east side of the development as acceptable screening in lieu of the ordinance re- quired 4' high opaque fence. 6 -17 -82 -5- i Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, and.Versteeg. Voting against: Commissioner Simmons. The motion passed. Commissioner Simmons stated that her vote to oppose the motion was based on her concern about the pond both for safety reasons and aesthetic reasons. DISCUSSION ITEMS a. SETBACK DEDUCTION The Secretary then introduced the first discussion item for the evening, a proposed deletion from Section 35 -400 of the Zoning Ordinance of the provision which allows only the area exclusive of setback areas abutting public streets to be used in calculating land for density. The Secretary referred the Commission's attention to a table attached to the agenda which lists various multi- family zoned properties in the City and shows the impact of the setback deduction in terms of the units allowed on given parcels of property. He then turned the discussion over to the Planning Assistant. The Planning Assistant explained that the table shows that the setback deduction reduced density on an average multi- family zoned parcel by 20 to 25 percent. He also explained that the setback deduction has different impacts on different parcels depending on whether they are located on a corner and how much overall area is involved. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether buildings -would be allowed to be built closer to the right -of -way as a result of eliminating the setback deduction. The Planning Assistant explained that -staff was only recommending that the deduction for density purposes be eliminated, not that the setbacks themselves be reduced or eliminated. He explained that the number of units allowed on a given parcel was determined by excluding the land area within the setbacks off a public right -of -way. He illustrated this in the case of the Columbus Village Apartment complex. The Secretary explained that the setback deduction makes certain small corner properties almost unbuildable because they are reduced to a total density of only two or three dwelling units which is essentially impractical for an R4 or R5 type use. He also pointed out that there have been very few apartments built since the setback deduction provision has been in effect. Therefore, he explained, most of the apartment developments in the City are nonconforming as to density and would only become conforming again as a result of eliminating the setback deduction. b. SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING The Secretary then briefly informed the Commission regarding a con - cept for elderly housing on the land situated east of Highway 100 and south of I -94 in the northwest corner of the Southeast Neigh- borhood He explained that the housing project would have about 127 total units based on the density allowed by the current ordinance (allowing for density credits for tuck -under garages). of these, he went on, there would be about 30 townhouses and the remainder of the units would be apartment units, half of which would be rental • and half of which would be condominiums. The- Secretary stated that the staff has been reviewing the possibility of allowing greater density for a senior citizens development because 6 -17 -82 -6- of the lower traffic associated with a senior development as com- pared with a normal townhouse or apartment development. He pointed` out that the average daily trips for a senior development are only about half the average daily trips for a normal townhouse or apart- ment development. He stated that one of the primary concerns of zoning is the amount of traffic generated by development of a given parcel of land. He stated that the City could either rezone part of the land to R5 or to somehow allow for greater density in cases where the development is for senior citizens. He stated that the problem in the latter case would be trying to restrict the development to occupancy only by seniors. He stated that it would be difficult to prevent younger couples from moving into a condominium unit in a buildin g P that was supposed to be reserved for seniors. Commissioner Sandstrom suggested that perhaps covenants could be placed on the property to require occupancy only by seniors. The Secretary answered that financial institutions tend to shy away from providing mortgages for projects which have such restrictions. The Secretary and Commissioner Sandstrom briefly discussed the question of density and the problems which may or may not be associated with apartment developments. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the restricted density has obviously made some properties useless. The Secretary stated that the property could be used, but that the density could not be as great as would be the case if the setback deduction were not in effect. Commissioner Sandstrom explained that the cash flow from the smaller number of units now permitted makes it uneconomic to develop most multi- family properties. Referring to Brookdale Ten, Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the P roblem with that development was not really the density, but the layout of the buildings and the size of the units which led to more transient tenants and a lower standard of maintenance. Chairman Lucht pointed out that he could develop his R3 property at a greater density if he chose to put a senior citizens development on the property. The Secretary stated that it may be legitimate -to allow greater density for seniors Based on the reduced traffic impact. Commissioner Simmons stated that she felt the project should be locked into senior occupancy only. Otherwise, she pointed out, the density credit would allow just another multi - family development at a greater density. The Planning Assistant pointed out that the planned residential development provision in the Zoning Ordinance applies only to parcels of land 15 acres or greater. He stated that the new Com- prehensive Plan recommended lowering this threshold to 5 acres. The Planning Assistant also stated that, as a practical matter, it seemed that it would be difficult to restrict lowrise to senior citizen occupancy. He stated that either because seniors like to be market he owri 1 e higher u or because they feel crowded out of t c g P they tend to move into taller buildings. Commissioner Simmons stated that seniors probably like to have an elevator to get to their units and that these are not ecomomical until the building is over three stories. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that con - versely, families wit4 children would_ tend to avoid tall buildings that separate living areas from play areas. Commissioner Sandstrom 6 -17 -82 -7- added that land is a scarce commodity and that its use must be in- tensified to keep up with trends that are beyond the City's con- trol. Commissioner Simmons stated that there must be adequate control on the development to ensure that it will be occupied by seniors. ADJOURNMENT Following a brief review of upcoming business items by the Secretary, there was a motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning.Commission adjourned at 9;38 p.m, Chairman ` J 6 -17 -82 -8- _ Planning Commission Information Sheet Application Nos. 82024, 82.025 Applicant: DeVries Builders, Inc. Location: 67th Lane, west of Xerxes Place Request: Site and Building Plan and Preliminary Plat The applicant seeks preliminary plat and site and building plan approval for the 3rd Addition to the Earle Brown Farm Estates. The Third Addition lies south of the First Addition (which is at the north end of the project) and west of the Second Addition (which is at the southwest corner of Xerxes Avenue North and Freeway Blvd.); it borders on "old Xerxes" Avenue on the west. Approval of the First and Second Additions was granted in 1981 and construction of the first 50 townhouses in the Earle Brown Farm Estates has proceeded satisfactorily. The proposed Third Addition is to have 16 townhouse units (two buildings of six units and one building of four units) and one lot as a common area. The Home - owners Association Agreement that applies to the first and second.additions will apply to these new units as well. A drainage and utility easement is indicated over the entire common area. Northern States Power Company also has a 60' wide power line easement over the west portion of the plat. Access to the townhouses in the new Third Addition would be off 67th Lane, an offshoot from Xerxes Place which is the main connection between the southerly four phases of the Earle Brown Farm Estates and Freeway Boulevard, the public access to the development. The site layout and the landscape plan are unchanged from the original master plan submitted under Application No. 81021, except that slightly more visitor parking is provided with the new plan. The landscape plan calls for 4' high # berms within the 60' wide N.S.P. easement on the west side of this phase. Seven (7) decorative trees are also indicated in this area to provide some buffering from the single family residences to the west. Eight decorative trees are also scheduled within the easement area to provide additional screening. It is recommended that approval of the site and building plans (Application No. 82024) stipulate a continuation of the conditions applied to approval of Appli- cation No. 81060 (the 2nd Addition) which are listed below; 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 and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure completion of the approved site, improve- ments for the 3rd Addition-prior to the A ssuance of building permits. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities shall be appropriately screened from view: 5. All common parking and driving areas shall be surrounded by B612 curb and gutter as shown on the approved drainage and grading plans 6 -17 -82 -1- Application Nos 82024 and 82025 6. Plan approval acknowledges a master plan for all phases of the Earle Brown Farm Estates Townhouse project. 'However, each additional phase is subject to preliminary plat approval and site and building plan approval by the Planning Commission and City Council 7. The developers shall take adequate measures to control dust and debris during construction. A viable turf shall be `established and maintained in those areas subject to future development. 8._ Phase 3 of the Earle Brown Farm Estates shall be included in the single Homeowners' Association for the entire development. Approval of Application No. 82025 is recommended, subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. Homeowners' Association documents for all phases of the development are subject to approval by the City Attorney prior to final plat .approval of each phase. 6 -17 -82 -2- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82023 Applicant: Bergstrom Realty Company • Location: 1300 block of 69th Avenue North Request: Site and Building Plan The applicant requests site plan approval, including landscaping, grading, and a master layout for 60 unit townhouse project on the south side of the 1300 block of 69th Avenue North. The applicant also re requests building plan q 9 P approval for two six -unit - buildings and three two -unit buildings (18 units in all) to constitute Phase I of the Hi Crest Square Estates development. The land in question was the subject of rezoning Application No. 82008 (to R3)and is bounded on the north by 69th Avenue North, on the east b a City um house - i Y Y u e and single-family famil residences on the south b two apartment i p p 9 Y Y buildings which face 67th Avenue North, and on the west by the Humboldt Square Shop - ping Center. The site is approximately 7.5 acres and the proposed 60 unit townhouse development is a permitted use in the R3 zoning district on a parcel of this size. Access to the development would be from a single driveway off 69th Avenue North adjacent to the City's pump house. All driving lanes within the project are at least 24' in width. Most units will have single -car garages and an additional driveway stall (some units will have double garages and 2 -car driveways) to meet the minimum parking requirement of two spaces per dwelling unit. In addition, there are 25 visitor parking stalls provided at scattered locations around the site. The landscape plan for the site proposes to utilize 17 existing trees, all over 10" in diameter. If these are credited toward the requirement of Section 35 -410 Subd. 6 for 6" diameter trees (nine 6" diameter trees are required for a 60 unit complex); there is no need for additional large trees. The landscape plan does call for six 4 diameter shad e rees throughout hroughout the project (three in Phase I). Species include °: Norway Maple, Littleleaf Linden,Hackberry, and Marshal] Ash. In addition, there are 27 smaller shade trees (1" diameter) scheduled throughout the project (10 in Phase I). The plan also calls for 17 Black Hills Spruce (22' high), 27 Russian Olives (7/8" diameter), 9 Radiant Crab (5' ht.) and a few Redtwig Dogwoods and Honeysuckle. Generally, most of the existing trees to be salvaged are either near the main access off 69th or along the eastern portion of the site adjacent to the single- family homes. A fair number of trees, both existing and new, are proposed along the west edge of the site to help screen out the Humboldt Square Shopping Center. A 6' high redwood fence is proposed for a length of 625' just inside the west property line to provide additional screening. Fewer trees are proposed along the southerly portion of the site adjacent to the apartments. It is recommended that a few more trees be scheduled immediately north of the apartment garages and in the areas between some of the units and the private roadway. The proposed townhouse units in Phase I range in size from about 1,000 sq. ft. to 1,350 sq. ft. in floor area. All have small concrete patios to the rear. The six - unit buildings would have narrow horizontal lap board siding, such as that used in the Earle Brown Farm Estates. The doubles are of two types, facing the private roadway along either their length or width (see site plan attached). These units have different floor plans, providing at least 2 bedrooms and possibly a third in the "horizontal" units. Siding of the doubles involves both vertical and horizontal board siding. Grading, drainage, and utility plans were submitted in conjunction with the pre- liminary plat under Application No. 82016. However, these plans have been modified somewhat. The Assistant City Engineer has reviewed the proposed plans and submitted a memo outlining certain revisions and conditions (see memo attached). It is recom- mended that the revisions and requirements contained in this memo be included as E 6 -17 -82 -1- ' g Application No. 82023 continued !! part of Condition No. 2 pertaining to grading., drainage and utility plans. Altogether, the plans are generally in order 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 of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the i ssuan(e 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. 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 coverfor dust control. 8. The landscape plan shall be amended to indicate additional trees in the area north of the apartment garages to the south and shall provide a tree between each dwelling unit and the private roadway which serves as access to it. 6 -17 -82 I TO: Ron Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection FRO, Jim Grubs, Assistant .City Engineer DATE: June 14, 1982 RE: Site and Building Plan Review of HI CREST SQUARE ESTATES (Planning Commission Application No. 82023) The referenced preliminary site and building plan was reviewed by the Engineering Department Staff and the following comments are submitted for your review and consideration. 1. The proposed development has received preliminary approval from Hennepin County. Permits must be secured for purposes of all utility connections within C.S.A.H. 130 (69th Avenue) right of way. Likewise, the applicant must secure a driveway access permit to provide access to the development from C.S.A.H. 130. 2. All interior streets will remain private roadways under the proposal. 3. General notes provided on the Master Site Plan reference use of B -612 curb and gutter. It is recommended the applicant be required to place the curb and gutter in all driving and parking areas and on all driveways to the. end of curb return from the street line (same provisions at Earle Brown Farm Estates) 4. The applicant is advised to review the proposed site grading in the north easterly corner of the site adjacent to 6837 and 6831 Emerson Avenue, as it appears the plan has not been completed 5. The applicant has not provided the bottom elevation of the proposed pond (previously determined to be 835.0) nor has the applicant provided confirmation of previously proposed grading of the pond's bottom (proposed at 5:1) 6. It is recommended the applicant be required to modify the grading plan adjacent to proposed catch basin between Block 10 and the existing garages for the 67th Avenue apartment complex (slopes greater than 3:1) 7. The Grading Plan does not provide finished floor elevations for the units in Block 5 and Outlot C: 8. The proposed street grade of the main drive between Block 4, at the most northerly east -west drive, and the catch basins, located approximately 145 feet southerly, is less than 0.5% (minimum acceptable grade). 9. Sideyard drainage between-Outlot A and Block 2, at the noted grade, would result in a drop curb section at the curb line to allow drainage to the proposed catch basin. A minor correc- tion in proposed grading will eliminate the apparent discrepancy. June 14, 1982 memo to R. Warren Page 2 10, The Utility Plan, as proposed, results in the insulation of approximately 950 feet of sanitary sewer. It is recommended the applicant be required to investigate alternate" pipe routing to eliminate this unacceptable condition. ° 11. The applicant proposes to connect the water main to a private system at Humboldt Square and to the municipal system in C.S.A.H. 130. Utility agreements must be executed by the Humboldt Square Partnership and the applicant to provide such connection and insure continued water supply. 12. It is recommended the applicant be required to provide three fire hydrants within the complex instead of the proposed two. It is recommended the applicant work with the staff in the location of the proposed hydrants. 13. It is recommended the applicant be required to provide storm drainage calculations to confirm the appropriate use of the proposed pond and internal piping systems and more specifically, the impact of storm water disposal into a (27 inch) interceptor not previously sized to accept flows from the site. 14. It is recommended the applicant.be required to use reinforced • concrete pipe for all storm sewer (proposal called for use of P.V.C. pipe) i Planning Commission Information Sheet ' Application No 82026 Applicant: Bergstrom Realty Co. • Location: 1300 block of 69th Ave. North Request: Variance The applicant requests a variance from Section 35 -410 Subdivision 3 to allow only a 3' greenstrip adjacent to the City pump house at 1207 - 69th Avenue North rather than the ordinance required buffer of 15' when R3, R4 or R5 uses abut R1 or R2 uses at a property line. The townhouse project is, of course, zoned R3; the pump house is zoned Rl._ The purpose of the variance is to allow a better location of the main driveway serving the proposed townhouse development so as not to crowd the townhouses to the west into a smaller area. The applicant has submitted no letter addressing the standards for a variance as set forth in Section 35 -240. Variances from the literal provisions of the Zoning Ordinance may be granted in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique and distinctive to the individual property under consideration. A variance may be granted after demonstration by evidence that all of the following qualifications are met (a) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topographical conditions of the specific parcels of land in- volved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out. (b) The conditions upon which the application for a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought, and are not common, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. (c) The alleged hardship is related to the requirements of this ordinance and has not been created by any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. (d) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the.parcel of land is located It does not appear that imposition of the normal buffer requirement would cause more than an inconvenience to the property owner since there is ample space on the site to arrange the location of 60 townhouses and necessary roads and buffers. However, there is precedent for reduced buffer strips adjacent to ins titutional -R1 uses. Reduced buffers have been accepted under Application No,4044 and 77052 in the cases of two industrial buildings in the Industrial Park abutting the Berean Evangelical Free Church. Other instances where less than the normally. required buffer have been accepted adjacent to institutional RI uses include: -K -Mart south of Garden City School. Victoria Townhouses (garages) south of the City water tower at 69th and France. 6 -17 -82 -1- Application No. 62026 continued Office Building at 5901 Brooklyn Boulevard, south of the Cross of Glory Lutheran Church. -Apartment p tment uses immediately north of Brooklyn Center Junior - Senior High School. Apartment uses east of Willow Lane School and east of Garden City School. There seem to be few, if any, instances where institutional uses have been buffered from multi- family residential uses. It may be appropriate, therefore, to waive the buffer requirement in this instance as well on theassumption that the -pump house will likely continue at the present location for as long as the proposed townhouse development. Such a waiver would be based on considerable precedent and would cause no harm to other residential property if confined to the abut- ment with institutional R1 uses. Based on the foregoing, approval of the variance application as a waiver of the 15' buffer requirement adjacent to the pump house is recommended on the following grounds: 1. The institutional nature of the abutting Rl use. 2. There is considerable precedent for allowing a reduced buffer adjacent to institutional uses. 3. There would be no detrimental effect on other residential property in the area. 6 -17 -82 -2- i � TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works ... FROM: Jim Grube, Assistant City Engineer DATE: June 25, 1982 RE: Final Plat of Earle Brown Farm Estates 3rd `Addition (P.C. Application No. 82025) The developer has petitioned the City to final the referenced plat in conjunction with preliminary plat consideration. Upon review of the proposed final plat, it has been determined that it is in proper order, meeting the provisions of Chapter 15 of*the City Ordinances. Financial guarantee for survey monumentation shall be provided in conjunction with the site performance guarantee required under Application No. 82024. As of this date, the developer has not presented the Homeowner's Association documents for review by Y the City Attorney. Therefore, it is recommended that the City Council approve the final plat contingent upon receipt and approval of the documents by the City Attorney. JNG: jn i CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 28th day of June , 19 82 at 8:00 p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider An Ordinance Vacating Drainage and Utility Easements Existing on Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1377. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS EXISTING ON TRACT A, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 1377 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Those portions of the utility easements existing on Tract A, .Registered Land Survey No. 1377 below described are h vacated as ublic utility easements P Y " A 40 foot wide easement over Tract A, Registered Lan S urvey No. 1377, files of the Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, the centerline of which is described as follows: Beginning at the cen of thef of Xerxes Avenue North and Shingle Creek Parkway, thence south 27 west a distance of 522 feet to the centerline of Xerxes Avenue North and Freeway Boulevard, thence south 52 east a distance of 345 feet, thence deflecting to the left 68 a distance of 50 feet to the true point of beginning, thence continuing along above mentioned line for approximately 4 feet to its intersection with Tract D of Registered Land Surve No. 1274, and there terminating"; and " A strip of land 20 feet wide in Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 1377, according to the plat of record thereof, files o the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, the centerline of which is described as Commencin g g at the northwest corner of Tract A, Registered L and Survey No. 1377; thence South 27 degrees West, along the bundar line of said Tract A, a distance of 522.53 feet to the true point of beginning of the centerline to be described; thence South 60 degrees, 6 minutes East a distance of 575 feet; thence South 40 degrees, 1 minute East a distance of 40 feet more or less to a point on the southeasterly line of said Tract A a nd there terminating Section 2: This ordinance shall be effective after'adoption and thirty (30) days-following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 Mayor 0 ATTEST:' } Clerk Date of Publication t Effective Date f - 8b Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DIRECTING CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN INTERESTS IN LAND (EASEMENT FOR 51ST AVENUE NORTH WATER MAIN INSTALLATION) WHEREAS, the City Engineer has advised the City Council that the acquisition of the easement hereinafter described is required to allow installation of Water Main Project No. 1982 -07 (51st Avenue North); and it appears to this Council that the acquisition of such interests in land is necessary and.desireable in the public interests and that the taking will be most fairly and equitably accomplished through eminent domain proceedings; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Br r i that: Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, 1. The City Attorney is hereby directed to file the necessary petitions to acquire a permanent easement for the installation and maintenance of a water main and appurtenances thereto across the following described property: That part of the northerly 30 feet of Government Lot No. 2 lying westerly of the easterly 1007.41 feet thereof; Section 10, Township 118 North, Range 21 West; EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING 2 PARCELS: Commencing at point of intersection of north line of Government Lot 2 and the southeasterly line of Lake Drive extended southerly, thence west along said north line 827.98 feet to actual point of beginning, thence south at right.angles 30 feet, thence west 100 feet, thence north 30 feet to aforesaid north line; thence east 100 feet to g be innin Section 10, Township 118 North, beginning; Range 21 West; Beginning at point of intersection of north line of Government Lot 2 and the southeasterly line of Lake Drive extended southerly, thence southerly along the extension of aforesaid road line 11.95 feet, thence westerly 423.58 feet to a point 20 feet south from north line of said Lot 2, thence northwesterly to a point in said north line distant 527.98 feet west from beginning, thence east to beginning; Section 10, Township 118 North, Range 21 West; according to the plat of record, files of the County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The conditions of the easement shall provide that no building shall be constructed and no trees planted thereon but that this easement does not explude other uses of the land within the easement which do not interfere with the operation and maintenance of the water main. RESOLUTION NO. 2. The City Attorney shall prosecute such action to a successful conclusion or until it is abandoned, dismissed or terminated by the court or by subsequent direction from this Council. 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. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 4 E RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING WATER TOWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO - GALLON ELEVATED STORAGE . 1982 15 PAINTING OF 1.5 MILLION G TANK APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (CONTRACT 1982 -G) WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported that the periodic water tower inspection program has revealed the necessity to clean and paint the interior and portions of the exterior of the City's 1.5 million gallon elevated water storage tank located southerly of T.H. 100 at an estimated cost of $46,600.00; and s WHEREAS, the City Council deems it necessary and in th the best interests � of the City to complete said work. {{ f, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, establishes the following project in order to provide for said improvement: WATER TOWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -15 I (PAINTING OF 1.5 MILLION GALLON ELEVATED STORAGE TANK) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota,.that: 1. The plans and specifications for Contract 1982 -G for said Improvement Project prepared by the City Engineer are hereby_ ` approved and ordered filed with the City Clerk. 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 improvement under such oved n specifications. The advertisement a r plans a s c ata.o e a d e pp P P 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 July 29, 1982, at which 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 August 9, 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 (5) percent of the amount of such bid. 3. The accounting for Improvement Project No. 1982- 15-shall be - done in the Public Utilities Fund, RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member - introduced the following resolution and 9 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REVISING MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET SYSTEM - DESIGNATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER WHEREAS it appears to the Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the following revisions should be made to the County State Aid Highway System designations and to the Municipal StateAid,Street System designations within the City of Brooklyn Center under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 161 and 162 as amended; and that said revisions comply to the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan and to the current policies of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA, that: 1. The City of Brooklyn Center hereby requests that the Board of Commissioners for Hennepin County and the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation approve the revocation_ of the "County State Aid Highway" (C.S.A.H. No. 130) designation on that portion of 69th Avenue North between Brooklyn Boulevard (T.H. 152) and West River Road (T.H. 252). 2. The City of Brooklyn Center hereby revokes the designation and r i Brooklyn Park and es e e t of B requests that the City Council of the C � Y Y Y the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation approve the revocation of the "Municipal State Aid Street" designation of that portion of Shingle Creek Parkway between 69th Avenue North and the north corporate limits _(M.S.A.S. Section No. 109, Segment 040), and the northern extension of this non- existing roadway into Brooklyn Boulevard. I. The City of Brooklyn Center hereby revoked the designation and requests that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Park and the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation approve the revocation of the "Municipal State Aid Street" designa tion of that portion of 73rd Avenue North between Humboldt Avenue North and Dupont Avenue North in Brooklyn Center (M.S.A.S. Section No. 118, portion of Segment 010). 4. The City of Brooklyn Center hereby revokes.the designation and requests that the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation approve the revocation of the "Municipal State Aid Street" designation of the following streets: M.S.A.S. M.S.A.S. Street Name From /To Section No Segment No 63rd Avenue North Xerxes Avenue to Brooklyn Drive 101 050 63rd Avenue North Brooklyn Drive to Shingle Creek 101 060 Parkway RESOLUTION NO. 5. The City of Brooklyn Center 'hereby establishes the designation and requests that the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation approve the establishment, location and designation of'the following described roads as Municipal State Aid Streets: Street Name From /To 51st Avenue North Brooklyn Boulevard (T.H. 152) to East Corporate Limits 69th Avenue North Brooklyn Boulevard (T.H. 152) to Dupont Avenue North 69th - 70th Avenue from the intersection of 69th Avenue North and Dupont connection (new Avenue North to the intersection of 70th Avenue North alignment) and Camden Avenue North 70th Avenue North Camden Avenue North to West River Road (T.H. 252) 6. Resolution No. 82 -48 adopted on March 22, 1982, hereby rescinded and replaced by this resolution. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two (2) certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation for his consideration and that upon his approval of these designations, these roads shall be constructed, improved and maintained as Municipal State Aid Streets of the City of Brooklyn Center, to be numbered as determined by the rules for State Aid Operations, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 1 -61 and 162, as amended. 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. jj TO: Gerald G Splinter, City Manager i FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: June 24, 1982 RE: Revision of Municipal State Aid Street System On March 22, 1982, the City Council adopted a resolution (copy attached) providing for certain revisions to the City's Municipal State Aid system. Subject to the approval of the Commissioner of MN /DOT. Those proposed revisions were based on our understanding of M.S.A. regulations including the following provisions (1) that the law providing for establishment of State Aid Street's specifically allows the establishment of joint Municipal- County State Aid Streets; and (2) that the regulations regarding Municipal State Aid designations provide that: a. The maximum mileage for Municipal State Aid Street desig- nation shall be 20 percent of the municipality's basic mileage - which is comprised of the total improved streets less Trunk Highway and County State Aid Highways." b. "However, the maximum mileage for State Aid designation may be exceeded to the extent necessary to designate trunk highway turnbacks, only if sufficient mileage is not g Y available as determined by the Annual Certification of Mileage; and C. "In the event the maximum mileage is exceeded by a trunk highway turnback, no additional designation other than trunk highway turnbacks can be considered until allowed by the computations of the Annual Certification of Mileage within.which the maximum mileage for State Aid designation is determined." It was our understanding that this last provision would prohibit any "exchange" of designations, once the maximum mileage - is exceeded because of a trunk highway turnback. For these reasons, the March 22nd, 1982 resolution included the designation of 69th Avenue North, between the West Corporate limits and Brooklyn Boulevard, as a combined Municipal- County State Aid Street. This action recognized that Hennepin.County wishes to revoke agreement its designation of that segment as soon as the reach a g ree y with Brooklyn Park to revoke designation of C.S.A.H. 130 within Brooklyn Park. At that time. the City's designation of that segment as a Municipal State Aid Street would automatically continue. June 24, 1982 memo to G. Splinter Page 2 Our March 22nd, 1982 resolution was submitted to MN /DOT in March. This week I was advised by MN /DOT State Aid Division, that, as a matter of policy: (1) they do not favor designation of joint Municipal - County State Aid Streets (2) The "exchange" of designations, even after the maximum mileage is exceeded because of trunk highway turnbacks, is allowed so long as the re Vocation and new designation are accomplished concurrently. Because of the opportunity for change of interpretation by future State Aid Administration, I requested that this be submitted to us in writing.. Their letter dated June 23, 1982 is attached. On this basis, I recommend that we agree to "do it their way ", ie: (1) that the City now adopt the revised resolution (copy attached) which retains the M.S.A. designation of 62nd Avenue between Dupont Avenue and Lyndale Avenue and of 67th Avenue between Dupont Avenue and West River Road. This revised resolution does not designate 69th Avenue from the West Corporate limits to Brooklyn Boulevard as a combined Municipal- County State Aid Street. (2.) That, in the future (when Hennepin County wishes to revoke its designation of this segment of 69th) - the City then act to concurrently revoke the designations of the 62nd and 67th Avenue segments and designate this segment of 69th Avenue. It is noted that the effect of this alternate approach to system designation will have a very small positive effect on our annual apportionment because we will be reporting "full needs" for 62nd and 67th Avenues rather than "50 percent" needs for 69th Avenue. Respectfully submitted, Sy napp Director of Public Works • Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 82 -48 RESOLUTION REVISING MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET SYSTEM DESIGNATIONS WITHIN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER WHEREAS it appears to the Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the following revisions should be made to the County State Aid Highway System designations and to the Municipal State Aid Street System designations within the City of Brooklyn Center under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 161 and 162 as amended; and that said revisions comply to.the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan and to the current policies of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER that: t 1- The City of Brooklyn Center hereby requests that the Board of Commissioners for Hennepin County and the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation approve the revocation of the "County State Aid Highway" (C.S.A.H. No. 130) designation on that portion of 69th Avenue North between Brooklyn Boulevard (T.H. 152) and West River Road (T.H. 252) 2- The City of Brooklyn Center hereby establishes the designation and requests that the Board of Commissioners for Hennepin County and ` the Commissioners of the Minnesota Department of Transportation - approve the joint "County - Municipal State Aid Street": designation of that portion of 69th Avenue North *.(C.S.A.H. 130) between the west corporate limits and Brooklyn Boulevard . (T.H. 152). 3 The City, of Brooklyn Center hereby revokes the designation and requests that the City.Council of the City of Brooklyn Park and the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of-Transportaticn approve the revocation of the "Municipal State Aid Street `designation of that portion of Shingle Creek Parkway between 69th Avenue North and the north corporate limits (M.S.A.S. Section No. 109, Segment 040), and the northern extension of this non - existing roadway into Brooklyn Boulevard. 4- The City of Brooklyn Center hereby revokes the.designation and requests that the City Council'of the City of Brooklyn Park and the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation approve the revocation of the "Municipal State Aid Street" designation of that portion of 73rd Avenue North between_ Humboldt North and Dupont Avenue North in Brooklyn Center (M.S.A.S. Section No. 118, portion of Segment 010). 5- The City of Brooklyn Center hereby revokes the designation and requests that the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation approve the revocation of the "Municipal State Aid Street" designation of the following streets: RESOLUTION NO. 82 -48 M.S.A.S. M.S.A.S. Street Name From /To Section No. Segment No. 63rd Avenue North Xerxes Avenue to Brooklyn Drive 101 050 63rd Avenue North Brooklyn Drive to Shingle Creek 101 060 Parkway 62nd Avenue. North Dupont Avenue to 0.16 mile east 120 010 62nd Avenue North 0.16 mile east to 0.32 mile east. 120 020 67th Avenue North Dupont Avenue to Camden Avenue 112 portion of 020 67th Avenue North Camden Avenue to West River Road 112 030 (T.H. 252) 6- The City of Brooklyn Center hereby establishes the designation and requests that the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation approve the establishment, location and designation of the following described roads as Municipal State Aid Streets: Street Name From /To 51st Avenue North Brooklyn Boulevard (T.H. 152) to East Corporate Limits 69th Avenue North Brooklyn Boulevard (T.H. 152)• to Dupont Avenue North 69th - 70th Avenue from the intersection of 69th Avenue North and Dupont Avenue connection (new North to the intersection of 70th Avenue North and Camden - alignment) Avenue North 70th Avenue North Camden Avenue North to West River Road (T.H. 252) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward two (2) certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department -of Transportation for his consideration and that upon his approval of these designations, these roads shall be constructed, improved and maintained as Municipal State Aid Streets of the. City of Brooklyn Center, to be numbered as determined by the rules for State Aid Operations, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 161 and 162, as amended. March 22 1982 Date Mayor ATTEST: erk 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, and Bill Hawes; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. '\ NNESp T q Minnesota O 2 n E ° Departments of Transportation is Transportation Building; ��Q St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 OFTtPP Phone 296 -1662 June 23 1982 Sy P. Knapps Director Brooklyn Center Dept. of Public Works 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway ' Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Dear Sy: As we discussed, the combination route on 69th Ave. from the West Limits to Brooklyn Boulevard cannot be approved without further documentation until Hennepin County revokes C.S.A.H. 130. This mileage is eligible on other locations which could, of course, later be revised in spite of being over designated due to future Trunk Highway turnbacks. This future action must be done concurrently. Sincerely, - George G. Quickstadp Manager Municipal State Aid Needs Unit An Equal Opportunity Employer Member introduced the following resolution and�� moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. As RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA, that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute a contract for Engineering Services with Black and Veatch, Consulting Engineers, to perform engineering services in connection with a water supply study and preparation of plans and specifications for a water supply well. The fee for basic services as detailed in the contract shall be a lump sum of $69,500, payable in accordance with provisions detailed in the contract. There is hereby appropriated the sum of $69,500 from the Public Utility.fund to provide payment of this contract. Date Mayor e 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. x .^ TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager _FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: June 25, 1982 RE: Recommendation to Employ Engineering Consultant For Water Supply Study History During 1980 the City employed the consulting engineering firm of Black and Veatch to conduct a study of our water supply require - ments and of our water distribution system. That study provided a quantitative analysis of our water needs, as well as a detailed evaluation of our distribution system requirements and recommended specific improvements to the distribution. system. Regarding water supply, that a report see es 20 to 22 makes the following P ( pages ) 9' recommendations: 1. that ....... a detailed hydrologic study be conducted to review and evaluate the City's long -range well production potential. The study would evaluate the long -term effort of regional groundwater use on Brooklyn Center's supply reliability. The study would also establish the location and capacity of additional wells." 2. that at - least one additional well be installed by 1981. 3. that the ultimate demand will require either the installation of 5 or 6 new wells or the installation of 3 new wells and gallon 9' a 2.5 million storage reservoir. 4. that a central control system be provided to operate all existing and future wells and water tanks. Review i ew and Comment Regarding the above recommendations, 1 submit the following review and commentary: 1. From my review of available information and discussions with other cities, it appears that the Jordan aquifer (where Brooklyn Center now gets all of its water supply) is an' excellent source - both as to the quantity and quality of water available for the foreseeable future. However, a certain amount of testing and analysis must be done in order,to properly plan the most effective way of utilizing this _source (ie. - 'location,of additional wells, etc.). More importantly however, my discussions with the Minnesota Department of Health have indicated that detailed consideration ® should be given to alternate sources (ie. use of other aquifers) on the basis of "not putting all your eggs in one basket". It is my understanding.that the Department of Health, the Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency all are developing information regarding` groundwater contamination. It does not appear practical to . conduct extensive "original research" to identify potential sources of contamination. However, there is a definite need to evaluate existing information and to apply it to the City of Brooklyn Center. The use of alternate aquifers could have dramatic' effects on the quality of water, on pumping costs, etc 2. We definitely agree with the need to add one additional well, and our goal is to have that well "on -line" before June 1, 1983. 3. We believe it is incumbent that a decision be made whether our ultimate system provide for 6 additional wells or 3 wells plus a reservoir. The location and design of all wells and of the distribution system is affected by this question. 4. A central control system cannot be justified on the basis of labor cost savings. However, it is my opinion that it can be Justified on the basis of overall efficiency in the use of the facilities. 4 Consultants Interviewed Following our preliminary discussion of this matter with the City Council on April 12, 1982 we prepared a "Request For Proposal" (RFP) and invited 4 consulting engineering firms to meet with us, reviewing the R.F.P. in detail. We then asked them to submit their proposal to us, defining in detail their approach to the task outlining their qualifications and estimating the number of personnel hours required to accomplish the work required. Proposals were received on June 17, 1982. Our review committee (Craig Hoffman, Jim Grube and I) then reviewed the proposals and developed the following summary evaluation: Barr Black & Veatch Donohue Short - Elliot Item Engineering (& Hickok) Engineering Hendrickson Strong Points - Strong in Familiarity - Good combina- -All work hydrology and with B.C. tion of done in one local geology System geologists office B & V strong and municipal - Familiarity on plant and design in with metro system design one office area Hickok strong on local geology -2- Barr Black & Veatch Donohue Short- Elliot Item Engineering (& Hickok) Engineering Hendrickson Weak or Plant & -Any problems -Very limited =How know- Questionable System design with joint experience ledgeable Areas capability? venture? in Minnesota in geology Overkill on and personnel contamination assigned to problems? project? Estimated Man -hours for: Study 817 680 to 1,040 1,400 460 Plans & Specs 236 720 to '960. 567 +277 • =.844 288 Total 1,053 400 to 2,000 •2,244 748 i It was our unanimous opinion that the proposal submitted by Black and Veatch (in which they propose to subcontract with E.A. Hickok Associates - Consulting Hydrologists for specialized hydrogeolo - gical studies) provided the expertise and the scope of services which best fills the City's needs. Accordingly, we contacted Black and Veatch and asked them to submit a proposed Contract For Engineering Services. A copy of that proposed contract is attached. You will note that the total cost for all basic services to be provided under the contract is $69,500. That amount represents $39,500 for the study portion of.the contract, plus $30,000 for design and contract administration of the one well (Task 10 as defined in the contract). While we recognize this is a very substantial cost, it is our opinion that the costs are justified when we recognize the importance of the decisions which must be made to assure an adequate water supply for the foreseeable future. Recommendation It is my recommendation that the City accept Black and Veatch's proposal and enter into the proposed contract. A resolution for • that purpose is provided for Council consideration. Respectfully submitted, Sy -3- Y BLACK & V E A T C H TEL. ( 913) 967 -2000 CONSULTING ENGINEERS TELEX 42 -6263 • p B C t,,( 1500 MEADOW LAKE PARKWAY .Brooklyn enter, Minnesota MAILING AODRtS3s P.O. BOX NO. 8403 Water System Study KANSAS CITY. MISSOURI 64114 June 22, 1982 Mr. Sy Knapp Director of Public Works 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 Dear Sy: Enclosed herewith are two copies of our proposed Contract for Engineering t Services in connection with your proposed water supply study and prepara— tion of plans and specifications for a new water supply well. The'Contract's Scope of Service covers the engineering tasks contained in the Work Plan section of our proposal that we submitted to you on June 14, 1982. We have added the reference to the "Hinckley Formation ",under Task 12 so as to identify a second aquifer to be investigated per your request. • We would like to point out that the work to be performed under Task 10 is limited to the design of one well and well house similar to your existing well facilities and does not include the cost of a standby engine driver for the well pump. Also, since the new well is not located at this time we have not provided for a lengthy well discharge main connection in our project fee determination. As discussed with you during our telephone conversation on June 22, 1982, our Task 2 includes only an organic scan and, should organic pollutants be identified, a more detailed analysis would be required which is beyond the scope of this Contract. If the proposed Contract meets your approval please sign and return one copy to our office. We appreciate the opportunity to work again with the City of Brooklyn Center and look forward to receiving, your authorization to_ proceed on this project. Very truly yours, BLACK & VEATCH K James L. Patton • is Enclosure BLACK & V E A T C H TEL: t °9•t8) 967-2000 CONSULTING ENGINEERS TELEX 42 -6263 - 1500 MEADOW LAKE PARKWAY MAILINO ADDRESS: P.O. DOX NO. SAOS KANSAS CITY. MISSOURI 64114 CONTRACT FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into this day of , 1982, by and between the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, hereinafter called the City, and Black & Veatch, Consulting Engineers, of Kansas City, Missouri hereinafter called the Engineers; WITNESSETH: That in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the City hereby agrees to employ the Engineers to perform engineering services hereinafter set forth in connection with a water supply study and preparation of plans and specifications for a water supply well and agrees to pay the Engineers for said engineering services according to the basis of fees herein specified: SECTION I. SCOPE OF SERVICES A. The services which the Engineers agree to perform are as follows: Task 1 Well Field Review This task will involve review of the present condition and hist*r- ical development of the exi g well field. Records of existing wells will be examined to gain background information and prepare trends of past performance. The review information will include` records of operation, water quality, and past quantitative testing. The general condition of each well will be determined. Consultant reports pertaining to the well field will be reviewed. This information will be supplemented with publications and data analysis from the State of Minnesota and the United States Geological. Survey relating to the hydrogeology o f the Jordan aquifer. Task 2 Quantitative Testing The primary task is to conduct quantitative. pumping tests at each of the existing wells. Water quality testing will also be conducted during the pumping to help assess the level of degradation of the existing aquifer. This information will determine: (1) aquifer Characteristics; (2).pumping efficiency and yield; (3) water quality trends; and (4) data for a comprehensive well field utilization program. This task will be accomplished by conducting quantitative pumping test measurements at the seven existing wells. Measurements will be taken in the pumping well and nearby wells during each 24 -hour test. Three water samples will be collected during each test and will be analyzed for iron, manganese, calcium, magnesium, alkalinity, nitrate, chloride, and total phosphorus.. Additionally, one water sample from each well will be analyzed for organic pollutants, using a gas chromatographic scan. It is anticipated that City employees will assist with well operation and data collection. Task ,3 Review of Ground Water Contamination and Its Effects This task will identify and locate known ground water contamination sources that may potentially impact the continued use of the Jordan aquifer in the Brooklyn Center area. This task will be accomplished by reviewing the known locations of ground water contamination with the Minnesota Department of Health and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and will evaluate these situations as they relate to the use of the Jordan aquifer within the Brooklyn Center area. Task 4 - Evaluation of Potential Changes in Ground dater Use Characteristics e This task involves evaluation of potential changes, in the long -term aquifer demands of the Jordan aquifer that may impact the continued use of aquifer for Brooklyn Center. '. Information from the Metropolitan Council and the U.S. Geological Survey, both on water consumption and population projections, will be assessed to determine the potential demand on this aquifer. In addition, a- number of scenarios will be developed, including the assumption that the Cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul will use ground water as supplemental water supply. Task 5 Preparation of Hydrogeologic Budget of the Jordan Aquifer This task includes the preparation of hydrogeologic budget of the present aquifer inflows:and outflows based on the regional use of the present Jordan aquifer supply and will. relate this information to the needs of Brooklyn Center. This task will be accomplished by the development of a hydrogeologic budget using the standard quantification of the inputs and outflows from the aquifer system. The budget will be developed based on exist - ing conditions. During the development`of this budget, areas where - the aquifer is under- utilized will be identified and will be considered as potential well sites. I .•r 2 Task 6 - Define Short -term Water Supply Demands of the Aquifer N. This task involves quantifying the (1) short -term water supply demands on the Jordan aquifer and (2) impacts on the existing well field. This task will be accomplished by reviewing the demands provided in the 1980 "Report on Water Works Improvements for Brooklyn Center., Minnesota," by Black & Veatch and the results of the hydrologic budget developed in Task 5. The demands will be verified and the impacts of additional supply facilities on the aquifer and the existing well field will be developed. Task 7 - Define Short -term Water Supply Needs This task will determine the (1) required capacity of additional well facilities; (2) optimum location of additional supply facilities; d referred timetable for the development of additional supply an (3) P P PP Y facilities to meet the short -term water supply needs of Brooklyn Center. This task will be accomplished by reviewing the data developed in Tasks 2, 5, and 6, and insertin g the information developed in Tasks 3 and 4. The location for the additional well and design parameters will be developed. Task 8 - Define Short -term Distribution System Needs This task will identify improvements to the distribution system that re required to incorporate int he stem the new su l facilities a o t s q Y supply identified in Task 7. The distribution system model used for the 1980 study has been retained on computer disc storage: The model will be updated to reflect any improvements made to the distribution system since 1980. With the well location determined in Task 7, the updated model will be run to determine the distribution system.improvements needed for the new well and the best location to tie the well into the existing system. Task 9 Interim Report / This task involves the preparation of an interim letter report to' define the short -term needs of Brooklyn Center and will serve as the .' basis for design of the new well to be. constructed by June 1983. The interim report will be prepared upon the completion of Tasks 1, 2 5, 6, 7, and 8. The report will identify the additional well capa- city that is required in the short -term, the preferred location, and a program to provide-. this additional water supply during. 1983. - Ten copies of the report will be furnished to the City. • g I ` Task 10 - Well Design and Contract Administration This task will provide the contract documents and contract adminis- tration required for construction of a well by June 1983. Upon completion of the City's review of the interim report, design will begin on the new well. The design will include preparation of the necessary drawings and specifications, review by the City and State, and assistance with bid solicitation and evaluation. During construction, contract administration c k would tasks oul include shop draw- ra w- P in review, a estimate evaluation, g pay change order preparation, inter - pretation of contract documents, and three periodic field inspections to assist the City resident project representative during construc- tion. The well will be housed in a brick or block structure and the pump will be driven by an electric motor. Task 11 - Develop a Long -Term Hydrogeologic Budget on the Jordan Aquifer This task will extend the hydrogeologic budget of the Jordan aquifer by identifying (1) the regional use of the aquifer by other communi- ties; (2) potential future uses of the aquifer; (3) the usable cap,c ities of the aquifer; (4) the effects on water quality; and (5) the cost- effectiveness of development scenarios. This task will be accomplished by reviewing the long -term projections which are available from the Metropolitan Council and the United States Geological Survey, and developing water supply use plans for 1990 and 2000. The effect on water quality of these increased uses will be identified and any additional treatment requirements assessed. Task 12 - Evaluate Alternative Aquifers and Well Site Locations to Meet Long -Term Needs This task includes the evaluation of alternative aquifers (including the inckley formation) and well site locations to meet long -term water supply demands. This task will identify the feasibility of using other water supply sources and will identify the regional uses of other aquifers, the potential capacities of alternative aquifers,.the anticipated water quality from the various aquifers, the treatment needs from each aquifer, and the cost- effectiveness of development of water supplies from other aquifers. The proposed method is to use techniques similar to those used by the USGS in the development of The Water Resources Outlook for the Metropolitan Area Various plans will be developed and resultant aquifer conditions will be defined for.each. It is anticipated that this work will be coordinated closely with the`USGS and that the assumptions which will be used in the development of the plans will conform to USGS projections. The cost - effectiveness of the new. supply, together with any treatmeait or distribution system improvements, will be provided. i 4 e Task 13 - Perform a Cost - Effectiveness Analysis of Additional Supply Versus Increased Ground Storage Capacity This task involves comparing development costs of either an additional water supply or increased ground storage capacity. The methods to be used for this task include an evaluation of the cost of developing new wells versus the use of ground storage and booster pumping to meet the long -term maximum hour demands. It is anticipated that the storage capacity could be used as the first stage of a treat- ment plant. In the event that the storage alternative is warranted, the plant site will be identified and land needs will be quantified. Task 14 - Central Control /Monitoring Evaluation An evaluation of alternative centralized control and monitoring tech- niques for Brooklyn Center will be performed under this task for the purpose of identifying the instrumentation and control equipment-neces- sary to efficiently operate the system. Based on the recommendations for meeting the long -term supply needs., alternative control systems will be developed. A cost- effectiveness analysis will be prepared and recommendations made for system control. Task 15 - Financial Planning k includes the preparation of opinions of probable cost a This task P P P P priority schedule for improvements, and the impact on water revenues. Opinions of probable cost for all improvements will be prepared based on experience with similar projects in the area. A priority schedule will be developed to ensure that improvements are operational when increased demands occur. A review of current expenses and revenues will be conducted to determine the financial impact of the scheduled improvements. Task 16 Final Report This task involves the preparation of a final report documenting data developed in this program. The final report will present recommendations for meet the Brooklyn Center long -term needs. It will summarize the investigation, as well °as identify the water system needs. These needs will include the recommended aquifer to use, the additional storage requirements, treatment needs, and the distribution system improvements required. Recommendations will be provided for the central control and monitor- ing system of the water supply and storage system. - A recommended program, together with opinions of cost, will be prepared for *all proposed improvements. An appendix containing pertinent references, work sheets and other design data will be included *as part of the report.. Twenty -five copies of the report will be furnished to the City. 5 B. Supplemental Services. Any additional work requested by. the City . that is not listed under one of the tasks under "A" above will be classified as Supplemental Services and will be included as part of this contract upon written request. • SECTION II. MP . SA CO EIQ TION A. For all services set forth in Section I, Part A, the City agrees to pay the Engineer a lump sum fee of Sixty -Nine Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($69,500). Payment for Section I work shall consist of six equal monthly payments of $10,425 until 90 per cent of the billing limit is paid. The remain- ing 10 per cent shall be paid when the final drawings, specifications and report are delivered to the City. 8 B. For Supplemental Services, Section I, Part / the City agrees to pay the Engineer a fee equal qual to twice payroll cost (salary .plus 25 per cent), plus direct reimbursement of actual out -of- pocket expenses. Each item of Supplemental Services shall be specifically authorized by the City and a billing limit shall be established before the is started. SECTION III - CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES It is mutually understood and agreed the City will provide, at its own expense, the following items: A. Property, boundary, easement, right -of -way, topographic, and utility surveys, and property descriptions in case such information is required. B. All maps, drawings, records, and other data that are available in the files of the City and which may be useful in the work involved under this contract. C. City employees who will be available to assist the Engineers with well operation and data collection during well field pumping test. SECTION IV OTHER MATTERS It is mutually understood and agreed: r M A. No field - drilling work is to be performed for this study. B. That the Engineers shall not be liable for delays resulting from ' causes beyond the control of the Engineers; that the Engineers have made no warranties, expressed or implied, which are not ex- pressly set forth in this contract; and,that under no circumstances will the Engineers be liable for indirect or consequential damages. C. That the billing limit stipulated herein is firm until August 1, 1982. If the start of the work is not authorized by that date, this contract shall be subject to renegotiation to provide for 'cost escalation and /or inflation, if requested by the Engineers. i 6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this agreement on the date first above written. • BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA By Attest: BLACK & VEATCH, Consulting Engineers By James t. Patton Minnesota P.E. 9890 j Member introduced the following resolution and ( EF moved its adoption; _. RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT NO. 58929 (REPLACEMENT OF TRAFFIC CONTROL AND STREET LIGHTING SYSTEM AT 58TH AVENUE NORTH AND T.H. 152 AND REVISION OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEMS AT 63RD AND 69TH AVENUES NORTH AND T.H. 152) WHEREAS, pursuant to written Agreement No. 58929 signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has satisfactorily completed the following improvements in accordance with said Agreement: Replacement of Traffic Control and Street Lighing System at 58th Avenue North and T.H. 152 Revision of Traffic Control Systems at 63rd and 69th Avenues North and T.H. 152 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said agreement is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: Previously Final Location Approved Amount 58th Avenue North and T.H. 152 Contract $2,125.00 $2,057.27 Engineering 127.50 123.44 63rd Avenue North and T.H. 152 Contract $1,250.00 $1,429.95 Engineering 75.00 85.80 69th Avenue North and T.H. 152 Contract $, 750.00 $ 864.10 Engineering 45.00 51.85 $4,372.50 $4,612.41 2. The value of the work performed is more than the original agreement amount by $239.91 due to a general underestimation in planned quantities. 3. There be appropriated the sum of $239.91 from State Aid Construction Account No. 2613 for the additional costs 4. It is hereby directed that final payment'be made on said agreement taking the Minnesota Department of Transportation's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvements under said agreement shall be $4,612.41. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adapted. . e MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald-G. Splinter, City Manager / FROM: Tom Bublitz, Administrative Assistant / DATE: June 25, 1982 SUBJECT: Employee Assistance Program BACKGROUND In 1977, the Brooklyn Center City Council adopted a "Statement of Policy for the Employee Assistance Program ". The policy (attached) established a program in Brooklyn Center and defines the purpose of the program. The policy established a procedure whereby employees experiencing--chemical, financial, marital or other problems which could affect job performance, could voluntarily seek professional diagnostic and referral services. When possible, employee benefits, such as sick leave, hospitalization, etc. can be used for treatment or counseling. All contact with the diagnostic -and referral service is confidential. One other option available under the program is a supervisory referral. In contrast to the self referral under which the employee voluntarily uses the service, under a supervisory referral, a supervisor may refer an employee to the diagnostic and referral service if job performance is affected. The City Council selected the Metropolitan Clinic of Counseling Inc. to provide diagnostic and referral services under the City's program. The service is provided through an annual contract paid by the City and there is no direct charge to employees. If an employee is referred to some form of treatment and the employee chooses to participate in the recommended treatment, such cost is assumed by the employee or his or her medical insurance coverage. COST Legislation adopted by the state in 1975 provided for state financial assistance two 2 s of the City's program. the first o ear ram. It was anticipated the for e irs O y y p g program would become completely locally funded by the third year. First year costs were reimbursed at 90% and second year costs were reimbursed.at 50 %. The first year cost to Brooklyn Center was $119, the second year cost was $605 and the third year cost was $1,020. The final billing for the third year.41979 -1980 contract) of the program was based on a utilization rate of 4.3 %. In other words, 4.3% of City employees used the program during the 1979 -1980 contract period. During the 1980 -1981 contract period employees utilized the program to a greater degree than the previous year and the final utilization rate was 7.3 %_. Based on the 7.3% utilization rate the cost per employee for the 1980 -1981 contract was $12 and with 123 full time employees the total cost of the program for the contract period was $1,476. The final billing for the 1981 -1982 contract period is $868. This is a decrease over the previous year since the utilization rate for the program was 2.4% for this period. The Metropolitan Clinic of Counseling offers a fee schedule to public sector employers which is based on a utilization rate and is not available to private employers. Public sector employers are able to receive reduced rates through this schedule since private employers are charged.a flat rate, not based on utilization of the program. The fee schedule for the 1982-1983 contract period remains the same as the previous years fee schedule with no cost increases. The fee schedule for the 1982 -1983 contract period based on 122 full time employees is as follows: BASE RETAINER FEE COST 0 - 3.00% utilization $7.00 x 122 $868.00 UTILIZATION FEE t' s; 3.01% - 4.0$ $2.33 x 122 = $284.26 4.01% - 5.0% $2.33 x 122 = $284.26 5.01% and over $2.34 -x 122 = $285.48 Maximum fee $14.00 x 122 = $1,708.00 Based on a maximum utilization rate and 122 full time employees for the 1982 -1983 contract period, the cost to the City would be $1,7Q8.00. RECOMMENDATION The measure of the effectiveness of the program is the use of the program by • employees.. The state and county have established a minimum 2% utilization rate which should be obtained to demonstrate their reasonable use of the program. The City's utilization rate has tended to fluctuate somewhat over the years of the program but has never gone below 2%. It should also be noted that some of the employees using the program have experienced rehabilitation directly related to the use of the Employee Assistance Program. It is.recommended the program be continued through the sixth year. It is further recommended that the program again be analyzed at the end of the sixth year with regard to its sucess. Should the Council approve this recommendation, funding will be provided in the 1983 budget. f _ Statement of Policy F Employee Assistance Program City of Brooklyn Center The City of Brooklyn Center recognizes that a wide range of problems not directly associated with an employee's job responsibilities, can affect job performance. In most cases, the employee will overcome such personal problems independently and the employee's job performance will not be affected. In other cases, usual supervisory assistance or discipline will serve to motivate or guide the employee to solve his or her problems and the employee's job performance will return'to an acceptable level. In some instances, neither the efforts and resources of the employee nor the guidance by the supervisor has the desired effect of resolving the employee's problems. In such cases, unsatisfactory job performance may persist over a period of time, either on a constant or intermittent basis. The City of Brooklyn Center believes it is in the best interest of the employee the employee's family and the City to provide an employee service which deals with such persistent problems. Beginning June 15, 1977 it is the policy of the City of Brooklyn Center to handle such employee problems within the following framework: 1. ' The City of Brooklyn Center is concerned with the health and well -being of its employees but it has no desire to interfere with employees' private lives. The administration will be concerned with an employee's personal problems only when job performance is adversely affected or when problems reflect dis- credit on the City. 2. This policy applies to all regular full -time employees of the City of Brooklyn Center regardless of their job title or responsibilities. - 3. The program is available - to families and dependents of employees as well as the employees themselves since it is recognized that problems at home can have an adverse effect on an employee's ability to function while at work. 4. If employees or their dependents. realize that they have personal problems that may benefit from the assistance provided by the Employee Assistance Prbgram, they are encouraged to seek assistance on their own and will be supported in efforts to do so. S. Participation in the program will not jeopardize an employee's job security, promotional opportunities, or reputation.. p Page 2 Statement of Policy Employee Assistance Program 6 All records and discussions of personal problems will be handled in a confidential manner as are other medical records Records will be kept by the diagnostic and referral agency and will not become part of the employee's personnel file. 7. Past experience shows that a significant portion of the problems encountered in such programs are related to problems involving the use of alcohol and /or other drugs. It will be a policy of the City of Brooklyn Center that chemical dependency is generally recognized as a treatable illness and assuming the cooperation of the employee in treatment, will be dealt with as such, 8. When performance problems are not corrected with normal super- visory attention, employees may be referred to assistance to - -- determine if personal problems are causing unsatisfactory per- formance. If performance problems are corrected, no further action will be taken. If performance problems persist, the employee will be subject to normal corrective procedures. 9. In cases where it is necessary, employees may be granted sick leave, vacation or unpaid leave of absence for time for treatment or rehabilitation on the same basis as it is granted for health or disability problems 10. Employee compliance with the program is strictly voluntary. If an employee is referred to the Employee ram in E p ee Assistance Program g lieu of other corrective or disciplinary measures and chooses not to participate in the Employee Assistance Program, then normal corrective measures will apply. Refusal to participate cannot be used as evidence to evaluate job performance. 11. There is no charge for the diagnostic and referral services, however, if costs are incurred for rehabilitation services that are not covered by insurance or other benefits, that cost will be the responsibility of the employee. 12. The program is not designed to provide ongoing treatment or counseling, but rather to provide early identification, motivation, and referral to appropriate care - giving resources in order to facilitate the resolution of any serious personal problems the employee might have. 13. This policy does not alter or replace existing administrative policy or contractual agreements, but serves as an adjunct to assist in their utilization. "CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 1 1 b PARKS AND RECREATION 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 ` 'Telephone 561 -5448 '11001ttvn Cl.tl11 MEM O. `• TO G. G. Splinter , FROM Gene Hagel, Director of Parks and Recreat DATE June 23, 1982 SUBJEC Freeway Park Shelter Building w For the past couple of years the shelter building at Freeway Park has suffered extensive damage due to vandalism. Shingles have been torn off the roof, siding and facia boards have been ripped off, doors and door frames have been kicked in, interior siding has been torn off the walls, and foul graffiti is spread over the building. Many dollars in time and materials have been spent by City maintenance crews in an effort to preserve the building - only to find that after a .few days the work has been in vain. We have discussed different options as.possible solutions to the 10 roblem: One, we could solicit the interest and concern of the neighborhood and, if such interest and concern warrant.. , we could . follow with one final effort to renovate and preserve the building. (I have attached a draft of a letter pertaining to this option.) The other option is to remove the building completely. The cost of renovating the buildii'g, including security exterior light ing is $10 It should be noted here that supervised program functions have diminished the last few years. For example, last winter the skating rink /shelter was open on a "weekend only" schedule; this coming season it will be closed all winter. Currently his summer the P Playhouse visits on a weekly sc Y PP Y Y hed- ule. Other activities, (crafts, stories, movies), are scheduled only twice during the summer. I am informed by the Program Supervisors that response to programmed activities is very poor. Improvements to Freeway Park to date have included surfacing, curb, and lighting "for the parking lots, construction of a hard - surface court for basketball and volleyball, bituminous pathways, and new playground equipment installed in sand - filled area with concyete perimeter curbing. To be instal t 's a receptacles, volleyball led late this year or earl 1983 are benches litter re t Y Y Y � P Otandards, and basketball backboards. TO NEIGF113ORS AT FREEWAY PARK: The purpose of this letter is to bring you up to date on present and Oroposed improvements to Freeway Park, and to ask for your help and cooperation in correcting a very serious vandalism problem. During the past couple of years, since the approval of a Bond Issue for parks in 1980, the city has been making improvements to all the parks in Brooklyn Center. Our first priority was to upgrade the neighborhood parks, which includes Freeway Park. Improvements to Freeway Park to date have included surfacing and curb for the p arking g arkin dots, lighting at the parking lots, const ruction of a hard- surface court for basketball and volleyball, path ways , - and new playground apparatus installed in a safe, sand- filled area with concrete perimeter curbing. To be installed late this year or early 1983 are benches, litter receptacles, volleyball standards, and basketball backboards. But now we must address the real problem: For the past two years, the shelter building at the park has suffered extensive damage due to" vandalism. Shingles have been torn off the roof, siding and facia boards have been ripped off, doors and door frames have been repeatedly kicked in, interior siding has been torn off the walls, and foul graffiti is I spread over the building. Thousands of dollars in time and materials have been spent by city `Maintenance crews in an effort to preserve the building - only to find that after a few days the work has been in vain. Here is where we need your help. The city cannot afford the con-- tinuing high costs of preserving the building. We are prepared to make one final effort to paint and repair it. If this effort fails, the only alternative will be the complete removal of the shelter building. �.� You can begin by keeping a watchful eye on the park and-reporting of vandalism promptly to the Police. If you see or hear anything sus - picious, report it. Your children can help by discouraging their friends from damaging.the building, and, more directly, you. can talk to your children about whether they.are involved. Finally, we ask that-you and your neighbors discuss the problem, and whether or not you want a shelter building in the park. We'are hopeful that with your help-we can save the building and preserve the integrity of the park. Only time will tell. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions..or suggestions, please contact us. Sincerely, Eugene H. Hagel, Director Parks and Recreation Department EHH /ch A Licenses to be approved by the City Council on June 28, 1982 , O k ARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION LICENSE osstown Sanitation Box 12, Excelsior G & H Sanitation, Inc. 12448 Pennsylvania Ave Galagher's Service, Inc. 1691 91st Ave. N.E. Hilger Transfer Company 8550 Zachary Lane Midwest Grease Buyers, Inc. P.O. Box 222 Minneapolis Hide &.Tallow, P.O. Box 12547 Robbinsdale Transfer Co., Inc. 5232 Hanson Court Walters' Disposal Service, Inc. 2830 191s N.E. Wast Control 95 West I Street Sanitarian MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Domestic Mechanical Contractors 9110 Grand Ave. S. Lloyd's Sheet Metal 6659 Vicksburg Lane Total Energy Heating & Cooling 5905 Lexington Ave. N. Build'n . Official RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE Initial: Gary and Sharon Hansen 6800 Perry Ave N., Reina Gagainis- Wilson 6912 Toledo Ave. N. • i Renewal: Ron Kranzler 5432 Dupont Ave. N. • John S. Tschohl 5416 Fremont Ave. N. Raymond & Ingeborg Fritz 5322 Irving Ave. N. Martha Lahti 5316 Knox Ave. N. Martha Lahti 5322 Knox Ave. N. r John S. Tschohl 6912 Morgan Ave. N. Gary Heck 5341, 43 Penn Ave. N. t� Director of Planning and Inspection TH 10/47 Coon Rapids Blvd � ( J I l i l l 11 N East River Road !4 /� TH 610 i Z ri _ BNI R/R I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I LI I i 111111111111111111111 1 A-- : IN, I �j ADAMS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL C. � i� West River Road N - I N. �� Osseo I °�llllll Illlllllllll1111111 !Ill�li � �N EV SPRING L WE lllllllli ll..• � 93rd Ave N FOAK i. \ - Rice Lal�. I / M N \ 85th Ave N 111 < : STAGE 1 CONSTRUCTION TH 6 10'/ TH 252 7 N 81st Ave N p ut Locat u d S y -1;0- Signalized Intersections Rt ::. i/ n • Grade Separations 40 Brookdale Drive Feet Acres Interchanges MONROE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL • .. (������������� ��f��������������� °° � A � 0 ,000. 2000 4000 8000.. - v NC R- _ bwe 7%0rd Ave N N 11111111IIILIII DEFERRED CONSTRUCTION - Meters Hectares (� ( m 69«P.N 70th Ave N PUBLIC HEARING SITES 0 1000 (� IT 25 i ,� 66th Ave N IMPACTS AND MITIGATION There are several unavoidable adverse impacts associated with this proposed project. Means of lessening these impacts are as follows: 1. Neighborhoods to be divided will receive adequate vehicular crossings; additional pedestrian /bicycle bridges may also be provided. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2. Compensation will be paid and relocation assistance provided to the owners of homes and businesses displaced by this project. Proposed TH 610 (North Crosstown) extends from I -94 in Maple Grove easterly to TH 10/47 in Coon Rapids and Blaine. TH 252 (old TH 169) extends from I -694 in 3. The roadway will be integrated into the landscape as much as possible. Brooklyn Center to TH 610 in Brooklyn Park, at about 93rd Avenue North (see map The river crossing and associated crossing of the Coon Rapids Dam Park on reverse side). expansion will be coordinated with the appropriate agencies. Because of funding onstraints the g , project will be constructed in at least two 4. Noise impacts will be analyzed to determine potential sites for noise stages. Stage 1, to be under construction in Spring 1985, consists of upgrading/ abatement measures such as walls and mounds. Final locations of such relocating TH 252 to a four -lane, at- grade, controlled access expressway between mitigation will be determined in coordination with the affected cities I -694 and proposed TH 610. Signalized intersections will be provided at: and residents. 66th Avenue North 81st Avenue North 5. Holding ponds will be utilized to reduce adverse impacts to water quality. 70th Avenue North 85th Avenue North 73rd Avenue North 93rd Avenue North 6. The single one -acre wetland impacted will be preserved to the best extent Brookdale Drive possible; additional wetland area will be provided by the holding ponds Also included in Stage 1, is the proposed construction of TH 610 from TH 252 to used to contain drainage. TH 10/47 as a four -lane, controlled access freeway; this segment includes a new PROJECT SCHEDULE crossing of the Mississippi River. Interchanges will be provided at East River Road, Coon Rapids Boulevard, and TH 10/47. Additional grade separations will be June 17 -28, 1982 Informational meetings and design public hearings provided at West River Road and the BNI R /R. July, 1982 FEIS approval The proposed construction of TH 610 west of TH 252 will be deferred until funding August, 1982 Design approval becomes available; limits of the next stage will be established at that time. If Fall, 1982 Begin Right -of -Way acquisition for bridge more than three years elapse from the time of distribution of the Draft Environ- Summer, 1983 Begin Right -of -way acquisition for remainder of Stage,l mental Impact Statement (DEIS P ) (April 28, 1981), until. a Final EIS is prepared on Spring, 1984 Begin bridge construction Spring, 1985 Begin construction of remainder of Stage 1 any future phase of this project, the DEIS will be reviewed and supplemental Fall, 1987 Stage l open to traffic. information added if there are significant changes in the social, economic, or environmental impacts of the project. Additionally, a new FEIS would be prepared PROJECT CONTACT to identify significant impacts and mitigation for the future construction. Further questions and comments can be referred to DESIGN PUBLIC HEARING Charles Hudrlik, P.E. Design Public Hearings for the proposed North Crosstown (TH 610) and upgrading/ Project Manager relocation of TH 252 will be held June 24, 1982, at 7:30 PM at Adams Elementary 5801 Duluth Street School (943 89th Avenue N.W., Coon Rapids), and June 28, 1982, at 7:30 PM, at Golden Valley, MN 55422 Monroe Elementary School (901 Brookdale Drive North, Brooklyn Park). Ph (612) 545 -3761 ext. 175 The design hearing will afford opportunity for all interested $ $ PP Y Persons, government Maps, drawings and supporting documents are available for public inspection and agencies, and public interest groups to state their views and concerns relative to copying by contacting the Project Manager, the design and social, economic and environmental effects of the proposed project. State and Federal relocation assistance programs for displaced persons and schedules for right -of -way acquisition_ and construction will be discussed. Written statements and other exhibits in place of, or in addition to, oral statements will be accepted at the hearing and a period following through July 12, 1982. These will become a part of the official hearing record if sent to: District Engineer, Minnesota Department of Transportation, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 554220 CITY OF 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY BR OOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 =5440 C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE -FIRE 561 -5720 TO: Richard D. Braun, Commissioner Minnesota Department of Transportation FROM: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager DATE: June 28, 1982 RE: Preliminary Layout For Proposed T.H. 610/252 Construction s . Please be advised that our staff and City Council have reviewed the preliminary layout plan for construction of T.H. 610 and T.H. 252 and we hereby.submit the following comments: 1. The Brooklyn Center City Council, by a 4 to 1 vote, supports this proposed project. It is noted that the one disentinq vote is based primarily on the desire to give priority consideration to the upgrading of Interstate Highway 694, including widening of the Mississippi'River bridge and it's Easterly extension through Fridley, New Brighton, etc. 2. The City Council, by unanimous vote, strongly urges that MN /DOT immediately proceed with development and construction of a second phase project - to extend T.H. 610 Westerly -at-least to C.R. 18/ T.H. 52 at the earliest possible date: 3. The City of Brooklyn Center offers the following comments regarding details shown on the preliminary design layout for T.H. 252. lst - Within the area South of 66th Avenue North, the City strongly recommends that every effort be made to eliminate or minimize the purchase of additional right of way. 2nd In the area between 66th and 68th Avenues North, the City strongly recommends that every effort be made to limit right of way acquisition to the first tier of residential dots on the West side of West River Road. 3rd - In the area between 68th and 69th Avenue North, the City requests an opportunity to work with MN /DOT to develop a plan for relocation opportunities for those residences displaced by the right of way acquisition process. z We.544aal: l NVie: 64 •• 4 June 28, 1982 letter to R.D. Braun Page 2 4th - The City Council has adopted a resolution requesting revo- cation of the current County State Aid Highway designation on 69th Avenue North and requesting the designation of 70th Avenue North as a Municipal State Aid Street. Accordingly, the City supports the plan to cul -de -sac 69th Avenue Westerly of T.H. 252, while providing for a signal- ized intersection at 70th Avenue North. The Hennepin County Board has also taken action to support these revisions to the State Aid system. Regarding the question of whether the intersection at 70th Avenue North should be a T- intersection or a full 4 way intersection as shown on "Alternate 70 -A ", the City Council, on June 14, 1982 expressed its support for the T- intersection as shown on the basic layout. .5th - Regarding the detailed geometrics of the 73rd Avenue intersection, the City of Brooklyn Center, at this time, tends to favor the configuration shown as Alternate "73 -77/A" which allows all - directional movement through the 73rd Avenue /West River Road intersection. However, we wish to review this matter in detail with the City of Brooklyn Park and with MN /DOT, during the process of developing detailed construction plans. In summary, the City of Brooklyn Center supports the proposed project. We thank you for the opportunity for presenting our input. And we Took forward to the opportunity to work with you to develop final plans for construction of this much needed improvement. i Sincerely, Gerald G Splinter City Manager P e GGS;jn