Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979 02-26 CCP Regular Session CITY COliNCIL AGENDA City of Brooklyn Center February 26, 1979 7 :00 p.m. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3 . Invocation 4. Approval of Minutes - February 12, 1979 5. Open Forum 6. Final Plat Approval - Final plat approval for registered land survey for property lying between Shingle Creek Parkway, County Road 130 and Shingle Creek. This is the site on which the Spec 8 is currently under construction . The City Council approved - the preliminary plat under Planning Application No. 78042 on July 24, 1978, submitted by Roy Hanson for - the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Inc. 7. Resolutions: a. Commending Public Works Director James Merila for His Dedicated Public Service. D. Accepting }sic and Approving Gun'Lrciui rus'iri (Sail. SLUia"Je BU116illg k-,usiu'ak -al 1978 -T). c. Authorising - the Metropolitan Council 'to Implement a Family Housing Program in the City of Brooklyn Center. d Authorizing Submission of - the City of Brooklyn Center Community Development Program to Hennepin County. e. Ordering Construction of Street_ Grading, Base and Surfacing Improvement Project No. 1978 -38. f. Ordering Construction of Curb and Gutter and Sidewalk Improvement Project No. 1978 -39. g. Ordering Construction of Water Main Improvement Project No. 19 h. Ordering Construction of Storm Sewer Improvement Project No. 1979 -2. i . Authorizing - the Mayor and City Manager to Execute a Supplemental Agreement to MN /DOT Agreement No. 59271, CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- February 26, 1979 J. Authorizing Payment for Emergency Water Hook -ups in - the Area of Howe Fertilizer Plant. k. Resolution Encouraging -the Minnesota Department of Transportation - to Eliminate - the Unsafe Conditions on U.S. 169 1. Establishing Disease Shade Tree Removal Improvement Project No. 1979-3 and Ordering Preparation of Bid. M. Approving Specifications for Disease Shade Tree Removal Improvement Project No. 1979 -3 and Directing Advertisement for Bids. 8. -Public Hearing (8:00 p.m.); S'tree't Grading, Base and Surfacing Improvement Project No. 1978 -38 and Curb and Gutter and Sidewalk Improvement Project No. 1978 -39 and Water Main Improvement Project No. 1979-1. 9. Ordinances: a. An Ordinance Authorizing -the Execution of a Temporary Easement from the City of Brooklyn Center to - the Minnesota Department of Transporta- tion in the Area Between Beard Avenue North and Ewing Avenue North. 1st reading. b t An Ordinance Amendina Chapter 23 Regarding - the Operation of Bingo Licenscu Gff 1d11izaLW,16. tat a , 3adiny. c. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 Regarding the Operation of Certain Gambling Devices by Licensed Organizations. 1st reading. 10 Planning Commission Items (9:00 p.m.): a. Application No. 79004 submitted by Korsunsky, Krank, Erickson Architects. Preliminary plat approval of property located at 5920 Brooklyn Boulevard. The application was recommended for approval at the February 15, 1979 Planning Commission meeting. b. Application No. 79005 submitted by Hodne /S'tagberg Architects. Site and building plan approval for Hennepin County Regional Library, Licenses Center, Social Service Office and County Court and Administrative Offices located on - the west side of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of Shingle Creek Towers high -rise apartment building. This application was rec- ommended for approval at the February 15, 1979 Planning Commission meeting. c. Application No. 79006 submitted by Arvid Elness Architects, Inc. for Dale Tile. Site and building plan approval for Dale Tile warehouse, S showroom and office on Lakebreeze Avenue westerly of' present Dale Tile site. This application was recommended for approval at the February 15, 1979 Planning Commission meeting. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- February 26, 1979 11. Discussion Items; a Kaleidoscope -Will discuss - the nature and extent of - the Council's participation at Kaleidoscope. - b. Emergency Preparedness Plan -We will be prepared , to discuss current staff preparations •to handle a emergency situations. c. Limited Values -We will be prepared to discuss - the implications in Brooklyn Center of a recent court decision. 12. Licenses 13 Adjournment I r , i CITY OF 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY !B ROOKLYN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 , C ENTER EMERGENCY- POLICE -FIRE 561 -5720 .Dear Property Owner: January 31, 1979 An informational meeting regarding the upgrading of 53rd Avenue North from Penn Avenue to 4th Street North is scheduled for Wednesday February 7 1979 at 7030 p.m. The meeting will be held in the Council Chambers of Brooklyn Center City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Partway The purpose of this informational meeting is to review the scope of and the Costs associated with the proposed project. Essentially, the proposed work involves reconstructing 53rd Avenue North to Municipal State Aid (M.S.A.) standards as a joint project with the City of Minneapolis. On the Brooklyn Center side the roadway is proposed to be widened from its present 15 foot width to a 22 foot width. This will provide for a roadway that is 44 feet ,wide in most areas with 1 travel lane and 1 parking lane in each direction. At the same time curb and gutter and sidewalk is proposed; to remain generally the same as it presently exists, and no major changes in grade are anticipated. In addition to the paving work, the proposed project includes reconstructing .storm sewer lines at various intersections along 53rd Avenue North and con- struction of new connecting lines to existing storm sewer lines along Oliver and Dupont Avenues North just northerly of 53rd Avenue North. It is also proposed that a segment of water main be constructed along 53rd Avenue North from Bryant Avenue to 4th Street North in order to provide Brooklyn Center water to 'abutting properties prior to upgrading the roadway. The cost of the above improvements is proposed to be assessed to the abutting property owners as follows: a) Street Grading, Base & Surfacing and Curb & Gutter.......... In accordance with the City's M.S.A. Street Construction Policy which provides fc1l uiaxiSTCum frOnt f00tage a88%ssmcnt of - .$7.60 for rtrcct work and.$8.00 for curb and gutter work, b) Sidewalk & Storm Sewer ...............No assessment. c) Water Main .............$1,564.00 per residential lot less the amount previously paid to the City of Minneapolis. A copy of the current M.S.A. assessment policy detailing the above is enclosed herewith. Also enclosed is a sketch of the assessment procedure for corner lots (Note: The assessment footages for the corner lots on 53rd Avenue appear to rangE from 59.3 ft. maximum to 16.5 ft, minimum). In accordance with current assessment policies, the levy period for street grading and paving improvements is seven (7) years, for curb &- .gutter ten (10) years, and for water main twenty (20) years. The current rate of interest charged against the unpaid balance is eight per cent (8 %) compounded annually. We would urge property owners with questions on this matter to be in attendance at the February 7 informational meeting. A public hearing on this work has been scheduled for the February 26, 1979 City Council meeting at 8:00 p.m. Questions or concerns unresolved during the course of the informational meeting may be addressed to again at the public hearing. , incerely, � James R. Mori.la, P.E. JRM :ml Director of Public Work Enc. C2TY OF S- 10OKLYN CENTER I Dear Residents of Brooklyn Center,Living along 53rd Ave; The city has proposed plans for up grading 53rd Ave. To accomodate the Increase in traffic for the new freeway. The 'proposal as it now stands would; A. Increase the width of 53rd 7 Ft on the Brooklyn' center >side. This would;, give one lane for travel and one for parking. B. Install new curb and gutter: C. Install new side walks Ir/09s (wihich is' against _home owners.) D. Connect city water to residents who are presently using a well or Mpls water. E. Up grading the storm sewers. Since many of our homes were built many years ago.no provisions were made for a four lane street. This would pur.many of our homes :closer to the street then is desirable and-thus lower the property values. It would also lessen the desirability of living along 53rd Ave. At an informational meeting at city hall on 2 -7 -79 alternatives to the Cities proposed plans were discussed. Basically two options were agreed upon; The lst would be to leave the street as is. The 2nd would be to modify the cities proposal and only widen the street 3 Ft more and post it for No Parking. (It is assumed you would still be able to park on the Hpls side.) I have placed these options in the form of a petition which is attached. Please mark the petition in order of your preference and sign you 6 your spouses along with your address,and either mail or drop the petition off to 5301 Emerson Ave. I will see that they are presented to.the city before the Feb.26th council meeting. If you have any questions or would like me to pick up the petition please feel free to call me at 566 -3219 between 6 -8 PM. Respectfully Yours, Steven Villas 5301 Emerson Ave No. Brooklyn Center,IM 55430 February 9 -19.79 PETITION We the citizens of Brooklyn Center living along 53rd Ave are,petitionino the city to make our opinions known concerning the proposed up grading cf 53rd Ave. As it appears there are basically 3 options open to the city. They are listed below. Please number them one through three. One being the most desired 3 the least desired. We would hope.the city would give careful consideration to our preferences. A. To leave 53rd Ave as it exists. B. To up grade the street as the city has proposed with the one exception being to widen it 3 Ft instead of 7 Ft on the Brooklyn Center side. And to post the street for No Parking. C. To go ahead with the proposed project as ..the city plans. _._.__Please check if you would like the No Parking restriction of obtion B to be enforced only during times of heavy traffic. (I.G. Rush Hour) Signature Signature ADDRESS J NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING FOR IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that the Council of the City of Brooklyn Center,' Minnesota will meet at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, on Monday, February 26, 1979; at 8 :00 o'clock, p.m., central standard time, foY a public hearing on the proposed improvements as follows: Estimated Project No Improvement Cost 1978-38 _ Street Grading, Base & Surfacing on.North 1/2 of 53rd Avenue North from 4th Street to Penn Avenue North. $261,000.00 1978 -39 Curb & Gutter $ Sidewalk on North side bf S3rd Avenue North from 4th Street North to Penn Avenue North. $134 9 000.00 19`79 -1 Water Main along 53rd Avenue North from Bryant Avenue North to 4th Street North. $31 3 ,500.00 The general nature of the improvements is above set forth. The area proposed to be assessed; for Grading, Base & Surfacing Improvement No 1978 -38,is as follows: ALL LOTS AND PARCELS ABUTTING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED STREETS ju ,'D OR TO BE BENEFITED BY THE !MPROVEMENTS. The area proposed to be assessed for Curb & Gutter and Sidewalk Improve - ment Project No. 1978 -39 is as follows: ALL LOTS AND PARCELS ABUTTING-THE ABOVE DESCRIBED STREETS AND /OR TO BE BENEFITED BY THE IMPROVEMENTS EXCEPT THAT NO ASSESSMENT FOR SIDEWALK WILL BE MADE. The area proposed to be assessed for Water Main Improvement Project No. 1979 -1 is -as follows: ALL LOTS AND PARCELS ABUTTING THE ABOVE DESCRIBED STREETS AND /OR TO BE BENEFITED BY THE IMPROVEMENTS. The Council proposes to proceed under authority granted by Chapter 429, Minnesota Statutes. Written or oral comments in regard to the above improvements will be considered at this meeting. Allen S. L_indman Dated: February 12, 1979 City Clerk BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 'Published in the Brooklyn Center Post February 15 and February 22, 1979. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 D A T A S H E E T for PUBLIC HEARING Public Hearing Date: February 26, 1979 1. PROJECT: Street Grading, Base $ Surfacing Improvement Project N o. 1978 -38 2. LOCATION: 53rd Ave. No. from Penn Ave. No. to 4th Street No. 3. DATE PETITION RECEIVED: No petition received. 4. ESTIMATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING: $261,000.00 S. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT RATE: $7.60 per assessable foot plus drivewa cost of approx. $75.0,07each 6. ASSESSMENT PERIOD: 7 years 7. NUMBER OF UNITS TO BE ASSESSED: 2,490.74 assessable feet 8. UNITS OWNED BY DEVELOPER: None 9. UNITS-OWNED BY PRIVATE PARTIES: 2,490.74 assessable teet 10. PROBABLE BID DATE: May 31, 1979 11. PROBABLE COMPLETION DATE October 31, 1979 REMARKS: Assessment rate in accordance with M. S. A. Street Construction Policy a CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 630E Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 PRELIMINARY D A T A S H E E T for PUBLIC HEARING Public Hearing Date: February 26, 1979 1. PROJECT: Curb & Gutter and Sidewalk improvement Project No. 1978 -39 2. LOCATION: 53rd Ave. No. from Penn Ave. No, to 4th Street No.' 3. DATE PETITION RECEIVED: No petition received. 4. ESTIMATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING: 134,000.00 S. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT RATE: *$8.00 /assessable foo 6. ASSESSMENT PERIOD: 10 years 7. NUMBER OF UNITS TO BE ASSESSED: 2,490.74 assessable feet 8. UNITS OWNED BY DEVELOPER: None 9. UNITS OWNED BY PRIVATE PARTIES: 2,490.71 assessable feet 10. PROBABLE BID DATE May 31, 1979 11. PROBABLE COMPLETION DATE: October 31, 1979 REMARKS: Assessment rate in accordance with "M. S. A. Street Construction Policy'' CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 D A T A S H E E T for Public Hearing Public Hearing Date: February 26, 1979 1. PROJECT: Water Main Improvement Project No. 1979 -1 2. LOCATION: 53rd Ave. No. from Bryant Ave. No. to 4th Street No. 3. DATE PETITION RECEIVED: No petition received 4. ESTIMATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING: $31,500.00 S. ESTIMATED ASSESSMENT RATE: *$1,564.00 per residential lot 15.95 per assessable foot 6. ASSESSMENT PERIOD: 20 years 7. NUMBER OF UNITS BE ASSESSED: 16 residential lots 199.32 assessable feet 8. UNITS OWNED BY DFVFZ.OPFR: None 9. UNITS OWNED BY PRIVATE PARTIES: 16 residential lots_ 199.32 assessable feet 10. BID DATE: May 31, 1979 11. PROBABLE COMPLETION DATE: October 31, 1979 REMARKS: *Credit given for the amount paid to the City of Minneapolis for a previous water hook -up DOUGLAS R. JORDAL ATTORNEY AT LAW 2800 105 TOWER MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 0121372-3074 February 12, 1979 , Mr. James R. Merila, P. E. Director of _Public Work City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Centex, MN 55430 Re: Proposed Improvements on 53rd Avenue North Dear Mr. Merila: I am writing this letter in behalf of my 82 year old mother, Lu M. Jordal., who resides at 516 53rd Avenue North. Mother supports herself on a widow's social security benefit plus a small amount of interest. Her frontage on 53rd is 74 feet and it is not a corner iota According to the information circulated at the Fc. 7 rneeting held at the Brooklyn Center City Hall, the total assessment against her property will be $2,718.40. If she elects to make the payments in installments, I have calculated that her real estate taxes, including the special assessments, will go up by about $460.03 per year. In mother's case a special assessment of this magnitude represents a stagger- ing economic burden. For some of the property owners it will be even worse. Victor G. Anderson who lives at 600 53rd Avenue North has 99 feet of frontage on 53rd and also does not have a corner lot. _ His total bill will be significantly higher than mother's. Many of the property owners on 53rd Avenue are elderly people living on fixed incomes who can ill afford to absorb these additional costs. The worst part of this situation is that most of the property owners on 53rd do not want or need the improvements which are being proposed. Vic Anderson already has city water and he certainly doesn't want to spend $1, 564 to have a new water main constructed so that he can get Brooklyn Center's water which is no better than Minneapolis', ` My mother has a perfectly adequate well, and because of her views on fluorides and other water additives, would continue to use her well water even if the proposed water main is put in. The $1,564 it would cost her to have this put in would be totally wasted. -2_ As I explained at the February 7 meeting, the real damage was done when it was decided to make the freeway access at 53rd. ' As you pointed out, at that point it was inevitable that increased traffic would be moving on 53rd. As I view it, the meeting on February 7 was much like calling a bunch of con - demned people together and giving them a choice of the gas chamber, the electric chair or hanging. There is no real choice - only less desirable alternatives. As you explained it, there are three basic possibilities. One is to increase the width to 22 feet on the Brooklyn enter side as ro oEied. The second Yn P P p ossibility is to increase it b on 18 feet and b parking on the Brooklyn P Y Y Y nP g n Y Center side. The third possibility is to do nothing and simply let the in- creased traffic do the best it can.. Presumably if the third alternative is adopted, persons exiting from the freeway at 53rd will seek to get off 53rd as soon as possible with the result that other secondary streets in the area will be absorbing more traffic. I believe that the majority of the property owners on 53rd favor alternative three. For some, this is the only way in which they can avoid the $1, 5 64 assessment for the water main. For others, they are very concerned that boulevard trees will be taken and that a widened street will simply mean more traffic with resulting noise and diminution _of property values. On this latter point, it is common knowledge that increased traffic in front of residential properties has an adverse impact on property values. The traffic situation will be particularly bad on those homes at the lower end of 53rd where it joins the freeway. If you have any question about the effect of in- creased traffic on property values, I suggest you contact any realtor and ask him or refer to some of the recent cases which have challenged special as- sessments of this kind. As an example, in Brill v. City of Grand Rapids 174 N.W. 2d 832 (1970), a case involving a street widening in a residential area, the Court noted that the property owners homes were now "... too close to a new major way and to a new noise problem, all of which is bound to impair livability and decrease the in- trinsic value of their homes. Superimposed upon all this is a new risk of personal safety in the operation of one's automobile. Going on, the Court stated: "The fact is, and this we judicially notice, that there can be some risk of damage or injury involved when one attempts to back out of his private driveway into a typically trafficked four lane highway, yet a majority of these plaintiffs must on occasion run such a risk or abandon for a time their legal -3- right of entry. That fact tends understandably to depress the pleasure of home life in such an area and, hence, the value of that one's home. " I think the same thing can be said here. I have no doubt that adding curb and gutter along 53rd in the places where it does not already exist, would benefit F the adjacent properties. I believe, however, that the detriment which will result to these properties from widening the road, would more than offset the benefit resulting from curb and gutter. Under the circumstances, it is illegal to assess the adjacent property owners, because no,net benefit has - been conferred upon their properties. _ In this connection I call your attention to Joint Independent School District v. City of Brooklyn Park, 256 N. W. 2d 512 (1977), in which the Minnesota Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle that the amount of a special assess - ment cannot exceed the increase in the market value of the property; resulting from the improvement. Going back to the earlier point about the effect on market values, I doubt very much if any qualified realtor would say that the properties along 53rd will increase in value as a result of the proposed changes. I think the reaction will be just the opposite. I realize that nothing can be done about changing the freeway access at 53rd. I believe, however, that it is adding insult to injury to ask the people along 53rd to pay for the alleged improvements to trcir property. They have suf fered a net ~detriment, not a benefit. I appreciate that they are paying only about $19, 000 out of a total cost of $261, 000, but they shouldn't be paying -. anything since this aspect of the proposed change is going to reduce the value of their property. I think you will find that the vast majority of the property owners on 53rd favor leaving the street at its present width. A petition asking for this result is being circulated at the present time and should be available for the meeting on February '26. I hope that you and your staff, along with the affected property owners, will be able to reach a solution which will be satisfactory to as many people as possible. Let me say, however, that if the appropriate authorities persist in making assessments for improvements which are not wanted or needed by a majority of the residents along 53rd, we will give serious consideration to bringing an action to enjoin the proposed assessment. I hope it will not come to that, because this is just expensive and time consuming for everyone. Very truly your, , N C Douglas R.' Jordal Attorney at Law DRJ:bar _..%'� z'7 "1 t Lindberg Pierce, Inc. architects James H. Lindberg p Robert L. Pierce February 20, 1979 Mr. Al Lindman City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Mn. 55430 Re: Proposed Elevator Additions City Hall and Community Center Building Dear Al I have reviewed the possibilities of installing elevators in the two buildings of the Civic Center complex. The two locations we discussed appear the best possible locations and are as follows: City Hall, locate in present stair in entry vestibule on North Community Center: Construct a elevator tower from North Parking Area. location to be directly North of present exit door on lower level. Upper level entry would be just South of crafts room in present exhibit area. Exterior materials would match existing. Estimated construction costs are as follows: City Hall - $57,175 (includes 10% contingency) A/E Fees 5,700 TOTAL $62,875 Community Center $85,315 (includes 10% contingency) A/E Fees 8,530 TOTAL $93,845 I am sure you'll have questions regarding this matter, so please call me. Sincerely, Robert L. Pierce RLP :ds 512 Nicollet Mall Suite 512 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 612/332 -3339 ' MEMORANDUM To City Manager From City Assessor SUBJECT: MARKET LIMITED VALUE ANALYSIS This analysis is intended to demonstrate what effect removing the limited value will have on property taxes in Brooklyn Center. Included in this analysis will be a study of the situation as it now exists and the ef- fect on properties by property type using a recalculated mill rate as will be needed if the limited value is removed. I have also included two cases of neighboring properties with different effects on each. Also included is an analysis of what changes could be effected to negate any shift in the tax burden between property classes in Brooklyn Center. it is my opinion that the property tax laws should be modified to elimi- nate the limited value provisions for many reasons, the most compelling of which is, equal treatment under the law. I also believe that this is the year to do it It is safe to say that residential values in r suburban Hennepin County have risen from 15 -20 from the 1978 assessment to the 1979 assessment. However a similar rise in Commercial- Industrial praret' 1�s 11O j !kv uCYl CXNciFii� cu. 'ice a �, 1 s,- ••r V r7 �i G Yin ail r spread between residential,limited and market values. Any further spread will complicate the analysis of a tax shift between property types if the 1979 assessment, taxes payable in 1980 is allowed to go into effect under the limited value provision. Analysis Table 1 Table 1 has five colums on it, Property Type Market Valuation Limited Valuation Amount to Increase and Assessed Value Increase The Limited Value column are the values used to compute the 1979 taxes; the Market Value column is what would be used if the limited value were eliminated. The Amount of Increase column really shows how close the limited is to the market by property type and the percent of increase. A small increase in this percent would probably mean a tax reduction. The Assessed Value Increase column is the amount the taxable assessed value would be increased by the market value increase in column 4. The total estimated increase in assessed value is $10,489,063. Table 2 - Tax Effect Analysis takes a sample school district (279) and shows what effect the added individual taxable values will have coupled with a mill rate decrease. The 1979 mill rate is 100.630 with an assessed, value of $126,968,242. If you add $10,489,063 in assessed value (8.26/0) you can reduce the mill rate by 8.26°; to 92.000 mills. City Manager -2- If you have a homestead residential property with a limited value of $40,000 the tax is $787.86. Increase the value to a market value of $43,232 or by 8.08°% from column 4 on Table 1 and use the new mill rate, the tax will be $791.42 or up about a half a percent (.45 %). Using the same techniques, apartments would go down on the average 8.09%, Commercial down 1.67% and industrial property up 7.04%. - Table 3 Case Studies, is an example of two different neighborhoods showing a newer home with no limited value and an older home with a limited value. In the first case a small difference between market and limited and in the second case, large difference s a arg In case one, the house built in 1973 would realize an 11.24% reduction in taxes if the limited were r a t d t i removed, and the house next door bull n 1960 a 3.25% decrease in taxes. In case two, the 1975 house will receive a 10.70°% reduction in taxes while the home built in 1946 a 42.86% increase in taxes. I wish to caution that the year built is not the determining factor in this analy- sis, but merely a convenient way to reference the properties. Table 4 - This table is simply a worksheet of, what effect will it have on the relationship between classes of property as it now exists if we removed the limited value and change the homestead percentages from their present 20% -33 -1j 3% to an 18 plan. Tire impor to l' thing to look for here is that the 18 -31 plan brings the residential percentage of total assessed value, even after removal of the limited value, below what it is as it now exists. Table 5 - Table 5 is a tax analysis of the effect by property type of the 18 -31,no limited plan. It correlates with Table 2, the no limited.analysis. Table 6 - Table 6 correlates the three approaches to property taxation, 1. The system as it now exists, 2. Removing the limited value, 3. Removing the limited value and changing the homestead percentages to 18 and 31 %. It appears that the 18 -31 plans will eliminate the limited value which is needed for fairness, and prevent the shift of the tax burden to resi- dential when the limited is removed, based'on the situation as it now exists in the City of Brooklyn Center. MARKET - LIMITED VALUE ANALYSIS (1978 Assessment Taxes Payable -1979) Property Type Market % of Total Limited % of Total Amount % of A.V. Valuation Valuat Increase Increase Amount to Market to Market Increase Apartment 34,423,600 8.08 34,240,400 8.63 183,200 .53 73,280 Blind 975,700 22 904,200 22 71,500 7.90 23,809 Commercial 76,364,760 17.93 72,015,280 18.15 4,349,480 6.03 1,870,276 Disabled 1,324,500 31 1,214,100 .30 110,400 9.09 36,763 Industrial 21,210,440 4.98 18,378,450 4.64 2,831,990 15.40 1,217,755 Land 2,039,600 .47 1,679,420 .42 360,180 21.44 154,877 Paraplegic 88,200 .02 85,600 .02 2,600 3.03 865 Residential 285,436,500 66.99 264,080,830 66.56 21,355,670 8.08 7,111,438 Title =Il- 1,692,300 .39 1,692,300 .42 0 0 0 Over 10,000 Utility 2,532,652 .59 2,520,952 .64 11,700 .46 5,031 426 088,252 100.00 1 396 811,532 100.00 10,489,063 n (Table l) TAX EFFECT ANALYSIS School District 279 1979 Mill Rate = 100.630 City Assessed Value = $126,968,242 Mill Rate Re- Calculation Assessed Value - $126,968,242 Added Assessed Value - $ 10,489,063 New Assessed Value $137,457,305 or 8.26/ Increase 100.630 mills minus 8.26/ = 92.000 mills Effect by Property Type Homestead Residential Apartment $40,000 Lmt. - $787.86 y"100,000 Lmt. -- $4,025.20 $43,232 Mkt. $791.42 $100,530 Mkt. $3,699.50 .45% Increase 8.09/ Decrease Commercial Industrial $100,000 Lmt. - $4,409.56 $100,000 Lmt. $4,409.56 $106,030 Mkt. $4,336.86 $115,400 Mkt.,- $4,720.20 1.67 Decrease 7.04/o Increase (Table 2 ) CASE STUDIES Year Built Value Used Value Tax. Difference Ihcr. or Decr. Mill Rate 1973 Limited 47,700 $1,079.30 (103.014) Market 47.700 $ 957.93 - $121.3.7 - 11.24/° (94.174) 1960 Limited 48,500 - $1,106. (103.014) Market 51,300 = $1,070.75 -$ 36.05 -3.25% (94.174) 1975 Limited 57,100 $1,362.16 (100.630) Market 57,100 _ $1,216.30 $145.86 10.70% (92.000) 1946 Limited 30,300 _ $463.22 ` (100.630) Market 39,000 - .$661.79 +198.57 +42.86/ (92.000) f (Table ; 3) Correcti Legislation 4 Market Property Limited / of Assessed Existing Assessed / of .18 -31 % of Type Valuation Total Value f of Total Value Total Formula Total Apartment. 34,240,400 8.63 13,668,960 10.77 13,742,240 10.05 13,742;240 10.52 Blind 904,200 .22 102,777 .08 126,586 .09 115,623 .09 (5 -28) Commercial 72,015,280 18.15 30,966,569 24.39 32,836,845 23.88 32,836,845 25.15 Disabled 1,214,100 .30 204,994 .16 241,757 .18 220,820 .17 (5 -28) Industrial 18,378,450 4.64 7,902,728 6.23 9,120,483 6.63 9,120,483 6.98 Land 1,679,420 .42 722,143 .56 877,020 .64 877,020 67 Paraplegic 85,600 .02. 12,666 .01 13,531 .01 12,359 .01 (5 -28) Residential 264,080,830 66.56 72,075,015 56.77 79,186,453 57.61 72,332,282 55.40 (18 -31) Title -Ii- 1,692,300 .42 375,060 .29 375,060 .27 375,060 .29L Over 10,000 `Utility 2,520,952 .64 937,330 .74 942,361 .69 942,361 .72 TOTALS 1396,811,532 100.00 ;126,968,242 100000 137,462,336 100.00 130,575,093 100.00 (Table 4) y 18 - 31 TAX ANALYSIS School District 279 1.979 Mill Rate 100.630 City Assessed Value = $126,968,242 Mill Rate Re- Calculation Assessed Value - $126,968,242 Added Assessed Value $ 3,606,851 New Assessed Value - $130,575,093 or 2.84% Increase 100.630 mills minus 2.84/ = 97.77 mills Effect by Property Type ; Homestead Residential Apartment. $40, 000 Lmt. $ ` /tf7.86 , 100,000 LwL. $4, 025.2G 1 $43,232 Mkt. - $769.23 $100,530 Mkt. - $3,931.52 2.36% Decrease 2.33% Decrease Commercial Industrial $100,000 Lmt. - $4,409.56 $100,000 Lmt. - $4,409.56 $106,130 Mkt. $4,567.49 $115,400 Mkt. $4,966.54 3.58%% Increase 12.63% Increase (Table 5) CORRELATION Effect by property type of three approaches to taxation, 1. As it exists, 2. Remove limited, 3. Remove limited and institute 18 -31 homestead class plan. Homestead Residential Apartment 1. As is $ 40,000 Lmt. - $787.86 $100,000 Lmt. - $4,025.20 2. No Lmt. $ 43,232 Mkt. - $791.42 + .45% $100,530 Mkt. - $3,699.50 - 8.09% 3. 18 -31 $ 43,232 Mkt. - $769.23 - 2.36% $100,530 Mkt. - $3,931.52 - 2.33% Commercial Industrial 1. As is $100,000 Lmt. - $4,409.56 $100,000 Lmt. - $4,409.56 2. No Lmt. $106,130 Mkt. - $4,336.,86 - 1.67% $115,400 Mkt. - $4,720.20 + 7.04% 3. 18 -31 $106,130 Mkt. - $4,567.49 + 3.58% $115,400 Mkt. - $4,966.54 + 12.63% i (Table 6) MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION FEBRUARY 12, 1973 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn - n Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:02 p.m, ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott. Also present was City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works James Merila, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren, Fire Chief Ron Boman, Superintendent of Engineering James Noska, Fire Marshal Linus Manderfeld, and Administrative Assistants Mary Harty and Brad Hoffman. INVOCATION I The invocation was offered by Father Lowry of St. Alphonsus Church, I, APPROVAL OF MINUTES JANUARY 18, 1979 (SPECIAL SESSION) There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of January 18, 1979 as submitted. C1 t In discussion of the muL i, Cuu c;ilutCifibe Kuelie asked &hu,, " v— � ..a-.y wording be made on page 5 of the January 18, 1979 minutes. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Fignar did not vote for approval of the minutes because he was not in attendance at the January 18 meeting. The City Attorney arrived at 7 :05 p.m, i - APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 22, 1979 (REGULAR SESS • There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Cou ncilmember ilmember Kuefler to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of January 22, 1979 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purposes of the Open Forum session. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Leo Hanson, 4903 Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Hanson asked several questions regarding Howe Fertilizer. He asked whether or not a new building was going to be permitted to be built at the Howe site. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that City staff had received a preliminary plan for a building on the Howe site. The Director of Plann and Inspection noted the preliminary plan was available for review. He further noted the staff had not had adequate time to review the plan and had not made a staff recom- mendation concerning the plan as yet. Mr. Hanson questioned if the Howe plan was a nonconforming use and if more than 50% of the building had been destroyed whether or not the ordinance allowed a building to be replaced. 2- 12 - -79 -1- f A The City Manager explained the meaning of the ordinance was being investigated as to whether or not a replacement building could be legally constructed under the terms of the ordinance. There is a question whether the ordinance speaks to 50% of one building or 50% of the entire site. Mr. Hanson also questioned the status of the dynamite permit for Howe Fertilizer. The City Manager explained . the dynamite permit question was being reviewed and it was expected to be ' scheduled for the Council meeting of February 26 or for the first Council meeting in March, Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else present who wished to address the Council as part of the Open Forum; there being none, Mayor Nyquist proceeded with the rest of the meeting. SUBDIVISION BOND RELEASE The City Manager recommended'a motion authorizing the release of the subdivision bond for Jessie's Addition located between Humboldt and Irving Avenues North from 70th to 71 st Avenues North. He explained a bond in the amount of $5, 000 was posted by John & Jessie Horbow in 1968 to guarantee the installation of certain subdivision improvements for Jessie's Addition. The bond amount had previously been reduced to $350. It is recommended the remaining $350 be released since all of the work has now been satisfactorily completed. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to approve the authorization to release the subdivision bond for Jessie's Addition. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: ,�,- ,.,., mt,., ri'i�ti; p;a...s�.0 w:.e...,.u..n..l.:,ly a.+.aal". 0 liav - o RES OLUTION NO'. 79 -43 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF MRS. MONA HINTZMAN The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -44 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved -its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF MR. FRANK KAMPMEYER 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, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 2-12-79 -2 RESOLUTION NO 79 -45 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF MR. JIM GILLEN The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, Wand upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -46 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF MR. FORREST CASTLE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly . passed aDd adopted RESOLUTION NO, 79 -47 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the follomKng resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF MRS. ELEANOR BRADWAY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken'thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none,' whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager noted a resolution expressing gratitude for a City employee, Mr, Carl Martin, was not listed on the agenda. The City Manager explained Mr. Martin had.been with the City Street Department for 20 years and was resigning effective in February. The City Manager asked the Council to consider a resolution of gratitude for Mr. Martino RESOLUTION NO. 79 -48 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:` RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF MR. CARL MARTIN The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and 2 -12 -79 -3- Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended endorsement of the listed home improvement grant applications as part of the MHFA Rehab Grant Program. The City Manager noted grant applications had been submitted by eligible homeowners and the applications have been reviewed and evaluated according to State criteria. Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman, in response to questions from the Council, explained originally there were nine applicants. Three applicants had incomes in excess of the program requirements and the status of another applicant changed in December making her no longer eligible to receive a grant. Mr. Hoffman further explained the total Brooklyn Center allocation of MHFA rehab grant money through the Metropolitan HRA was $19,602, less 75c' or $1,372.14 for administrative costs,' or $18,229.86 of actual grant money. The total eligible grant request is $11,290. leaving $6,939.89 in MHFA rehab money. Mi. Hoffman noted the City has again asked for additional applications and at this point there are three pending appli- cations. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -49 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ENDORSING HOME IMPROVEMENT GRANT REQUEST The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by n:cmber Gene Lhotka, and , y.non - trite being t ;;,kan tb. -reop the.. following Voted in favor thereof: Bean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended the resolution authorizing the purchase of printing of the spring recreation program and the City Manager's Newsletter. The City Manager recommended the quotation of Brooklyn Printing & Adv'. Co., Inc. in the amount of $2,220.70 be accepted. In discussion of the resolution, the City Manager noted that Brooklyn Printing has consistently been the low bidder. Although only two bids were received for the spring printing, in the past as many as five bids have been received. R ESOLUTION NO. 79 -50 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: •RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF PRINTING OF THE SPRING RECREATION PROGRAM AND CITY MANAGER'S NEWSLETTER. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being thereon the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended the resolution of participation in Minnesota Cities *Week. He noted the Governor has agreed to proclaim the week of February 26 2 -12 -79 -4- through March 2 as Minnesota Cities Week. In response to questions from the Council, the City Manager explained there were certain suggestions for activities for Minnesota Cities Week which the City Manager would disseminate to the Council. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -51 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION OF PARTICIPATION IN MINNESOTA CITIES WEEK 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, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended the resolution supporting the municipal self - insurance bill. He noted the resolution urges the legislature to pass general or special legisla- tion to authorize certain cities to cooperatively self - insure their risks. The City Manager explained a similar resolution had been passed last year but the bill had not been passed. Councilmember Kuefler asked what the dollar savings impact would be if Brooklyn Center was allowed to self - insure, The City Manager explained those figures could be provided to the Council. RESOLUTION NO. 79-52 _: Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION SUPPORTING MUNICIPAL SELF - INSURANCE BILL 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, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended a resolution amending the 1979 General Fund Budget to provide funds for one electric dryer for the Fire Department. The City Manager noted a dryer is a replacement electric dryer for the Fire Depart- ment for the west station and would be purchased through Federal Revenue Sharing Funds. The Fire Chief explained the dryer was approximately fifteen years old and was no longer functional. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -53 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: _ RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1979 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR ONE ELECTRIC DRYER FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT 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, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and 2-12-79 -$- Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager asked the Council tb review the following two resolutions concerning bids for the purchase of a fire truck concurrently, noting one was a rejection of bids and one was an acceptance of bids. The City Manager explained in December, 1978 bids were opened for an aerial apparatus of either 85 feet or 100 feet. In December, only one bid fora 100 foot aerial ladder from American LaFrance was received. Because there was only one bid on those specifications, the Council authorized the opening of bids and new specifications for a 75 foot aerial apparatus and American LaFrance agreed to hold open their bid on the 100 foot aerial ladder; On January 24, 1979, bids were opened on the 75 foot aerial apparatus and two bids were received, one from American LaFrance and one from General Fire Apparatus Company. Review of those two bids indicated that the General 75 foot bid did not meet the- specifications as related to the resistive bending force specifications on the frame, the size of the front axel, and further deleted two crown ladders. For this reason the General bid was not considered. At that point the choice was between the American LaFrance 75 foot or the American LaFrance 100 foot bid. The City Manager noted that both he and the Fire Chief recommended acceptance of the American LaFrance 100 foot bid: The City Manager noted he recommended the acceptance of the 100 foot bid because the additional 25 feet will undoubtedly be needed on many occasions. On other occasions when the full length is not needed, the piece of equipment will not be operating at its full maximum extension acid _GaNdGUy. ii Lie 75 : ov% NiCC of &.quipment a;as purchascd, the c1quip ment undoubtedly would have to operate at its maximum extension on most fires. The City Manager explained the Fire Chief believed the primary advan- tages offered by the 100 foot ladder are that it provides a more stable structure for resuce work due to higher side rail protection and easier rungs for victims and firefighters to utilize and it also provides an additional reach of 25 feet which will cover approximately 95% of all buildings currently built in the City of Brooklyn Center, In response to questions from the Council, the City Manager explained the cost differences. The Fire Chief explained that the 100 foot equipment could be stored in either fire station. The equipment can be acquired within 240 days of the order placement, RESOLUTION NO 79 -54 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption; RESOLUTION REJECTING BID'S FOR ONE (1) 75 FOOT REAR MOUNTED CUSTOM AERIAL TELESQUIRT PRECONNECTED WATERWAY AND 1500 GPM PUMP The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, 2 -12 -79 -6- RESOLUTION NO. 79 -55 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID FOR A 100 FOOT REAR MOUNTED CUSTOM AERIAL LADDER TRUCK WITH 100 FOOT PRECONNECTED WA'T'ERWAY AND 1500 GPM PUMP 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, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Cella Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended a resolution providing for a public hearing for Street Grading, Base & Surfacing Improvement Project No. 1978 -38, Curb & Gutter and Sidewalk Improvement Project No, 1978 -39, and Water Main Improve- ment Project No. 1979 -1. The City Manager explained the resolution provides for the establishment of a public hearing date for the improvements as listed` located along 53rd Avenue North from Penn Avenue to 4th Street, The public hearing is recommended to be scheduled at 8:00 p.m. on February 26, 1979, The Director of Public Works explained an informal meeting for the people along 53rd Avenue had been held on Wednesday evening, February 7, 1979 Approxi- mately 35 people representing 20 to 25 homes had attended the meeting and expressed concern with the upgrading of the roadway. to. 44 feet. The people at the meeting expressed concern over the possibility of:two lanes of traffic engendered by the 44 foot roadway. The Director of - Public Works explained d �.. _„ ., • ., n 1- n in a LuGal tY`, t Yroul uc room yr �Jnc I z:nc Of # F � •• pa " , , ; ,- t' The Director of Public Works explained an alternative would be a narrower roadway and signs posted for "No Parking He noted the City of Minneapolis wants to provide the full width in order that parking could be accommodated. The Director of Public Works explained the residents along 53rd Avenue were circulating a petition in which residents were asked to rate in order of preference - the following three alternatives: 1) Leave 53rd Avenue as it is., 2) Upgrade '53rd Avenue, widening the street to three feet rather than seven feet on the 'Brooklyn Center side and posting signs for "No Parking".. 3) Upgrade 53rd Avenue to seven feet. People are concerned with the increased traffic in the area but the Director of Public Works noted the issue of whether or not there will be an interchange located at 53rd Avenue is not in question. The decision for the interchange has already been made. The Director of Public Works next showed a transparency of a roadway in South St. Paulo He explained the South St. Paul design encompassed a 32 foot roadway at the neck of the intersection, widening to allow for parking and narrowing again at the intersection. The Director of Public Works presented this as a possible option for dealing with resident's concerns on 53rd Avenue. 2 -12 -79 _7_ The City Manager noted the street appears to be narrower and people tend to slow down if the street does appear to be narrower. The City Manager noted this type of configuration does create some problems with snow removal. The Council members questioned whether leaving the street as is is actually an option; The Director of Public Works explained it would be a Council decision but it would certainly be easier to upgrade the street now before heavier volumes of traffic are carried'on the street. In response to questions from the Council, the Director of Public Works explained that 53rd Avenue is designated as a State Aid street but Brooklyn Center is responsible for the maintenance of the street. The Director of Public Works explained the anticipated traffic volume is approximately 7,500 to 8,000 cars per day. In discussion of the maintenance question, the City Manager noted it would be important to keep in mind that plowing might occur 10 to 15 times per year and the maintenance function should be kept in the proper perspective, The Council members expressed a wish to explore this type of roadway. In further discussion, the Council reached a consensus that they wished the engineering department to study this option further. P- ESOLTTTION NO. 79 -56 Member Celia Scott introduced the followiny resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUT'IO"N PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED STREET GRADING, BASE & SURFACING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO, 1978 -38, CURB & GUTTER AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO, 1978 -39, AND WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO, 1979 -1 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, The City Manager introduced a resolution approving plans and specifications for the pedestrian /bicycle bridge portion of the Shingle Creek Trailways project and directing advertisement for bids. RESOLUTION NO, 79 -57 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption; RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PEDESTRIAN/ BICYCLE BRIDGE PORTION OF SHINGLE CREEK TRAILWAY PROJECT NO. 1978 -42, AND DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (CONTRACT 1979 -A) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and 2 -12 -79 -8- Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, The City Manager noted the Council had received a handout resolution which covered two items on the agenda. The City Manager explained in response to Council direction, proposals had been requested from consultants studying various aspects of the problem areas related to the operation at the Howe Fertilizer plant, Proposals have been received for - studying the problems related to chemicals, water quality and explosives. The City Manager noted it is his recommendation that the City retain the consulting firm of Eugene A Hickock and Associates, Inc. for conducting the water quality studies for an amount not to exceed $2,980 and a chemical study for an amount not to exceed $4,480. This company hays indicated the capability of starting the project immediately and having a report to the City within three weeks, assuming full cooperation by the City and Howe Fertilizer Company. The City Manager also noted the City has retained Mr. Robert Loofbourrow as a consultant to address the scope of work relative to the use of explosives at the Howe Fertilizer plant for an amount not to exceed $1, 000. The City Manager noted the City has also learned that the Eugene Hickock and Associates firm also has expertise in the area of explosives. The City may also desire additional use of the Hickock firm for consultation relative to the use of explosives. The City Manager called the Council's attention to information which had been included in the agenda packet which details the consultant's scope of work and il(;n thn nrofPssional qualifications of the consultinq firm of Eugene A. - Hickock and Associates, Inc. The City Manager explained the City has met with Howe and Mr. Howe has stated he will cooperate fully with the consultant. The City Manager. explained after results of the study have been received, a staff recommendation will be made to the Council concerning the Howe Fertilizer situation, The City Manager explained he wished to be able to report back to the'Council within a month. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -58 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH EUGENE A. HICKOCK AND ASSOCIATES FOR CONDUCTING ENGINEERING STUDIES AT THE HOWE FERTILIZER PLANT AND TO AMEND THE 1979 GENERAL FUND BUDGET 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, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. In review of a resolution to accept bids and approve the contract form for the salt storage project, the City Manager noted a few items had yet to be resolved 2 -12 -79 -9 in the contract and asked that the resolution be deferred until the next Council meeting., The Council agreed to defer the resolution, ORDINANCES The City Manager introduced an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of real 0 estate from the City of Brooklyn Center to the Minnesota Department of Transportation in the area of Shingle Creek Parkway. The City Manager noted the City of Brooklyn Center has previously indicated to the Minnesota Department of Transportation that it is in agreement to the selling of a .89 acre strip of land on the west side of Shingle Creek Parkway southerly of F.I. 94 to MN /DOT for highway purposes. MNT /DOT has offered the City of Brooklyn Center $97,100 for the said strip of land. It is recommended the City accept the offer and proceed towards convey- ance of the land to MN /DOT. In accordance with Section 12.05 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter, all sales of real property shall be disposed of by ordinance. The City Manager recommended that the first reading be made on the ordinance vacating the above described property. In response to questions from the Council, the Director of Public Works indicated the property has not been designated as part of the park system because if it were part of the park system 4F action would be required. In response to questions from the Council, the Finance' Director explained the money received from the'land will be used to retire outside indebtedness as required by the Charter. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to offer for first reading an ordinance authorizing a conveyance of real estate from t;::. City of Brooklyn Center to the Minnesota Department of Transportation in the area of Shingle Creek Parkway. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: -none. The motion passed unanimously, The City Manager introduced an ordinance vacating a drainage and utility easement existing on Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 of Block 5, Hipp's 3rd Addition, The City Manager explained the described property is in the process of being consolidated by a plat into one parcel described as the First Brookdale State Bank Addition. The property lies in the northeast quadrant of T.H. 152 and Beard Avenue North where the First - Brookdale State Bank is in the process of constructing a new drive -in bank building. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember - Kuefler to offer for first reading an ordinance vacating a drainage and utility .easement existing on Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 of Block 5, Hipp's 3rd Addition, Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers -Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEMS The first discussion item was cable television. The City Manager explained a representative of Northern Cablevision, Inc. was in attendance at the Council meeting to make a presentation concerning their intent to file with the State of Minnesota a proposal asking for. approval of a cable service territory consisting of the municipalities of Golden Valley, Robbinsdale, Crystal, New Hope, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Osseo, Plymouth, and Medicine Lake, 2-12-79 -10 Ms, Ember D. Reichgott of the firm Larking,. Hoffman, Daly, and Lindgren repre- senting Northern Cablevision, Inc, explained the legal aspects of Northern Cablevision, Inc's, intent to file with the State of Minnesota a proposal asking for the approval of a CST, She explained Northern Cablevision was a subsidiary of Storer Broadcasting which is presently operating cablevision in Bloomington, Fridley, and St. Louis Park, She explained one CST has already been approved for the southwest area. She explained the northwest area CST had been proposed .on February 1, 1979, She explained a proposal asking for approval of the CST is a first step in franchising for cablevision. She noted the CST is a step in organizing in order that franchising can occur. After the proposal has been made, there are 90 days _set aside for comment on the proposal; She noted the proposing group does not automatically receive the franchise in the area. She noted the Metropolitan Council reviews the proposal in order to ascertain if there is consistency with Met Council plans. The City Manager noted a joint powers group had been considering the cable television issue. If the joint powers group decided to work together on cable television, a joint powers agreement would have to be rewritten. The joint powers group could serve two possible functions: first, the joint powers group could served as the initiator of cable .television for the area and later cities could assume individual responsibility for cable television in their own city; second, the joint powers group could serve as the initiator and also as the regulating group for cable television in the area. Ms. Reichgott noted the next step in proceeding would be to form a cable advisory body consisting of citizens to further explore the cable television franc;hisc o Ms, Reichgott introduced a representative of Northern Cablevision, In response to questions from the Council, the representative explained that Northern - Cable- vision as well as other companies would present a proposal to the City or to the joint powers group as to what type of service and cost they would be willing to provide The City or the joint powers group would.then make a decision as to which company they wished to franchise with. She noted the company would set the rates and the City would thereafter regulate the rates. As part of the proposal, the company would indicate what kind of channels, services, and rates would be available through that company. She noted Northern Cablevision charges $8 a month and offers approximately 35 channels and charges an approximate $15 to $20 one time hookup. In explaining the grant franchise, the representative explained the initial grant franchise would be for a period of 15 years because of a tremendous up front capital investment made to get the operation started. The 15 year time period is regulated by the FCC and State law. In skeletal form the steps would be as follows: the advisory body would do a needs assessment as to whether cable television is desirable and would then recommend to proceed or not to proceed with the franchise. If the advisory body recommends proceeding with the franchising, the City or the joint powers group would ask for bids. Bids would be received and one bid would be accepted and the franchise would be awarded to a particular company. The City or the joint powers group would then become the franchise holder, 2 -12 -79 -11- Cable television picks up all metro signals, two independent TV stations, and also local programming. In response to questions from the Council, the representative explained there was an additional option of pay cable TV which was a premium service. With` this service, programs not available on TV such as nightclub acts, special movies, etc. are available. There is no advertisement on pay cable. Pay cable costs an additional $8 per month. The representative indicated there was no stipulation as to length of subscription, although every time a hookup is made there is the hookup charge, Councilmember Kuefler asked the representative of Northern Cablevision if a reference list of municipalities being served by Northern Cablevision could be Provided for the Council. The representative noted she would provide that information to the Council, The Council thanked the representative from Northern Cablevision and Ms. Reichgott for their presentation. RECESS The Council recessed at 8:55 p.m. and reconvened at 9:05 p.m, CITY PARTICIPATION IN METROPOLITAN COUNCIL LARGE FAMILY HOUSING _PROGRAM Tic - Mayo introduced Chairman Phyllis Plummer of the Housing Commission. Chairman Plummer noted the Housing Commission has recommended the City's participation in the Metropolitan Council Large Family'Housing Program. '- She-noted the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission has actively studied the housing needs and problems of the City of Brooklyn Center since October, 1978, She explained it is evident that the housing needs in Brooklyn Center are varied and include the need for housing rehabilitation, low interest mortgages and rent subsidies. She noted it was the consensus of the Housing Commission that the most pressing housing need in the metropolitan area and Brooklyn Center today is to accommodate the needs of low and moderate income large families requiring three or more bedroom apartments. She noted currently Brooklyn Center participates in the Section 8 existing housing program which provides rent subsidies to qualified households. At this time, there are 190 households in Brooklyn Center receiving rent subsidies. Through the application process with the Section 8 program, the Metro Council developed a waiting list of qualified applicants. She explained that applications for the program were no longer taken after January 1, 1979, Using the information generated from the applications, it has been determined that 34 families are currently in need of housing with three or more bedrooms in Brooklyn Center. The City Attorney returned from the recess break at 9:13 pm. The Council questioned whether or not there would be a need for large family housing in the future. Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman noted that by 1987, the need for large family housing will be in excess of 44,000 units in 2- 12 -79. -12- the metro area. This projection is above the units that will be provided by the private sector. The Metropolitan Council has received funding from HUD to construct - 50 single family, scattered site units for large. families. Based on this information, it is likely the need for this type of housing will exist in the future. In response to questions from the Council, .concerning the income impact of this type of housing, Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman explained the Metropolitan Council had provided an income impact statement for the City and adjoining school districts. The school district used in the revenue projection is the Osseo School District, Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman referred the Council to the income impact statement attached to the memorandum concerning large family housing. Mr. Hoffman noted it is apparent that if Brooklyn Center chooses to participate in this housing program, it will have to recognize it is accepting a negative fiscal impact upon the City, however, that impact would be slight. At the same time, this type of housing would have a positive fiscal impact upon the school districts because of the increased number of children in each of the units which would have a direct effect upon the school aids received from the State. Chairman Plummer explained at the January 9, 1979 Housing Commission meeting, the Commission recommended the City's participation in the Metro Council Large Family Housing Program. She noted it was their recommendation that the Council approve ten units to be constructed in Brooklyn Center on scattered sites. They further recommended that a minimum of one large family home be c^nstructed barrier free to rheet the needs of 1.araP families having handicapped members It was also their final recommendation that the City use Community Development funds and /or HRA funds when possible and appropriate to assure completion of this program in Brooklyn Center. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to authorize the City's participation in the Large Family Housing Program, Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Fignar thanked the Housing Commission and Chairman Plummer for the work which they had put in on this project. DISCUSSION OF NOMINATIONS FOR THE C. Co LUDWIG AWARD FOR DISTINGUISHED MUNICIPAL SERVICE The City Manager explained nominations can be made by the City Council. Municipal officials or employees of the City are eligible for nomination. The City Council did not nominate a person for the C. Co Ludwig award. DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED - POLICY ON INDUSTRIAL REVENUE AND TAX INCREMENT BONDS The City Manager noted the Council had received a. draft proposal for a policy covering the issuance of industrial revenue and tax increment bonds. He noted there had been a substantial increase in the amount of industrial revenue bonds financing, especially within the suburban metropolitan area in the recent past. 2 -12 -79 13 He noted this phenomena seems largely due to high interest rates charged by lending agencies to developers at this time. In explanation of the proposed policy, the City Manager noted the language constricts considerably the latitude in issuing this type of financing. He noted the policy as written could serve as an additional technique in implementing the community's already approved Comprehensive Guide Plan. It could also serve as a technique to assist in redeveloping certain areas of this City designated by the Guide Plan. He noted he saw the opportunity for the use of tax increment bonds and possibly industrial revenue bonds in the area of redevelopment along Brooklyn Boulevard The City Manager noted the policy draft is more conservative than the policies of other cities which issue industrial revenue bonds and tax increment bonds. In further explaining,the procedure, the City Manager noted a potential applicant would be given the policy guidelines The applicant would. then have to submit documentation to show how the applicant actually met the guidelines The staff would review the application and make a recommendation to the City Council, i The City Council would make final. approval. Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether the guidelines as broad as they were would enable the Council to be consistent in interpretation of the guidelines He .suggested it might be useful to write into the guidelines the specific types of problems the Council wished. to address. He suggested it might be helpful to start with a more specific intent rather than starting with the broader intent and later trying to narrow, in iur her discussion of Gounciimember Kuefler s point, the City Attorney explained the issue of interpretation of the policy as it applies to each individual applicant is an issue of equal protection and precedence would be applicable, however, projects might be so unique as to give considerable latitude in approving or denying the application. He further noted that when the State gets a history of dealing with these applications, they may give the Council more discretion in approving or denying the applications, Councilmember Kuefler suggested the policy might narrow potential applications into those which deal with nonconforming uses. There was further rt er discussion within the Council as to whether or not this type of policy would be too restrictive, The Director of Finance noted the bonds cause competition not only with the private sector but also competition with City bonds. Councilmember Kuefler again suggested it might be helpful to start out this project in a small way to see if actual gains are made for the City without setting an unworkable precedent. The City Attorney explained the Council would have the power to change the rules and could make the ordinance more restrictive if they found the adopted policy unworkable. The City Manager explained he would disseminate this information to various civic groups and business groups through the Chamber of Commerce in order to acquire feedback on the issuance of industrial revenue and tax increment 2 -12 -79 -14- bonds, He further indicated he would research more definitive and restrictive language as a possibility, RECRUITMENT OF DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS The City Manager explained he had accepted the resignation of the Director of Public Works, The resignation is effective February 28, 1979. The City Manager explained he had established a replacement procedure which will involve advertising for the position in the midwest region and an interview panel of appropriate personnel to assist in the screening, followed by a psychological evaluation. He explained that the recruitment coordination would be handled through the City Manager's office which will hold costs down in the recruitment. He noted a job description for the Director of Public Works position had been included for the Council's information. AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A UTILITY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT The Director of Public Works indicated.it is recommended the Mayor and City Manager be authorized to enter into a sanitary sewer, storm drainage system, water main fire hydrant inspection and maintenance agreement with the Ponds Association relative to the maintenance of utilities within the private property of the Ponds townhouse complex located along Unity Avenue North, The agreement provides for reimbursement of costs incurred by the City of Brooklyn Center for such maintenance, The City Manager recommended a motion authorizing the execution of a utility maintenance agreement. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to authorize the execution of a utility maintenance agreement. "`Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers • Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed AN AMENDMENT TO THE GA AND BINGO ORDINANCE The City Manager noted that two ordinances, one licensing gambling and one licensing bingo were passed by the City Council on December 18, 1978 to become effective December 22, 1978, At the time of passage, the City Council directed the City Manager to investigate a possible amendment to these ordinances which would reduce the license fee for small organizations. The license fee for 'bingo and gambling was set at $25 and the license investigation fee was set at $50 for a total cost of $75. Council members were concerned that the $75 cost would be prohibitive for certain small organizations whose gross profits for bingo and gambling are minimal. Since that time, Mr, Bill Clelland of the City Attorney's office, has prepared a draft of an amendment to the gambling and bingo ordinances which reflects the concept of class A and class B license as detailed in the memorandum provided for the Council, The gambling and bingo ordinances as passed at the December 18, 1978 Council meeting would ,remain the same except the language delineating a class A and class B license and a difference in fees would be added, The City Manager noted if the draft amend- ment meets with the approval of the Council, the amended ordinances will be presented for a first reading at the February 26, 1979 City Council meeting, 5 The amendment divides the licenses into class A and class B licenses. Licenses applied for are contingent on the gross receipts for similar functions held in the past or if the function is incipient, the license applied for is contingent on the anticipated gross receipts. The dollar limit on the gross receipts should be set 2 -12 -79 -15- by the Council as part of the amendment. In discussion of the dollar limit on the gross receipts, Councilmember Kuefler suggested a $1,500 amount on bingo. There was a consensus within the Council that the $1,500 limitation would be appropriate on bingo,, There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to set the dollar limitation on gross receipts in bingo at $1,500. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. In discussion of the dollar limit on the gross receipts from gambling, it was suggested a $1,500 limit also be placed on gambling licenses. Councilmember Kuefler stated he did not feel $1,500 was high enough because on most gambling type operations a significant part of the gross receipts would have to be spent for prizes. He suggested a $3,000 limitation on gambling. Councilmember Lhotka 'stated he did not see the difference between bingo and gambling and indicated he felt the gambling dollar limitation should also be set at $1,500. ; There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to set the dollar limitation on gambling at $1,500. In discussion of the motion, Councilmember Kuefler-again suggested a $3,000 limitation on gambling. There was a_motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to amend the motion on the floor to set the dollar limitation for the gambling license at $3,000. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: Councilmember Lhotka. The amended motion passed. The City Manager also called the Councii's atteiaiun to a letter which had been • received from Mary Jo Danielson as Orchard Lane PTA Treasurer. The letter explained that Orchard Lane School is planning a school carnival scheduled for' March 10, 1979. As part of the carnival Orchard Lane will be having a drawing and also bingo. She noted she had been in contact with the City and was aware the Council was considering an amendment to the bingo and gambling license ordinance which would set two different fees for a class A and class B license. She asked that Orchard Lane School be allowed to pay the lesser fee as stipulated in the amendment, if passed, even though the effective date would be after the . March 10 carnival. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to allow Orchard Lane PTA to be governed by the class A and class B regulations Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against : - none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney noted there was no problem with the Council's handling of this situation. SPECIAL DISCUSSION MEETING The City Manager suggested in the near future it might be helpful to set up a special Council meeting for the purpose of reviewing major problems, concerns, or projects which may be coming before the Council in 1979. The Council • concurred with that suggestion. The City Manager indicated he and the Mayor would set a date for a special discussion Council meeting. He noted no specific action would be taken on any issue at the discussion meeting. 2- 12-79 �1�_ LICENSES Motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to approve the following list of licenses: BULK VENDING MACHINES LICENSE K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Dr. CIGARETTE LICENSE Denny's Restaurant 3901 Lakebreeze Ave. No. FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE American Bakeries 4215 69th Ave. No. Big -Bi Service Station 5710 Xerxes Ave. No. Bridgeman's Creameries 6201 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center A & W 6837 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center Country Boy 4401 69th Ave. No. Brooklyn Plaza Cinema, Inc. 5801 John Martin Dr. Brooks Superette 6800 Humboldt Ave. No. Brother's Brookdale Restaurant ,1341 Brookdale Center Burger King 6110 Brooklyn Blvd. Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave No. Cicero's, Inc. Westbrook Mall Couiitry Clue Market 5715 ivorganfive. No. Dayton's 700 On The Mall Dayton's 1100 Brookdale Center Delmark Food Processing 5320 W. 23rd St. Delmark Food Processing 1600 67th Ave. No. Denny's Restaurant 3901 Lakebreeze Ave. No. Donaldson's 1200 Brookdale Center Duoos Bros. American Legion #630 4307 70th Ave. No. Evergreen Park Elementary School 7020 Dupont Ave No. Ground Round Restaurant 2545 County Rd. 10 Harron United Methodist Church 5452 Dupont •Ave . No Holiday Inn 1505 Freeway Blvd. House of Louie 6800 Humboldt Ave. No .Jerry's Brookdale Super Valu 5801 Xerxes Ave. No. K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Dr. Lemon Tree Restaurant 9448 Lyndale Ave.. So. Lemon Tree Restaurant 5540 Brooklyn Blvd. Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home 5401 69th Ave. No. Marc's Big Boy 5440 Brooklyn Blvd. McDonald's 5525 Xerxes Ave. No. 2 -12 -79 -17- Nature Food Center, Inc. 1 Nature Way Nature Food Center 1328 Brookdale Center Peking Place 5704 Morgan Ave. No. Plitt Brookdale Theater 2501 County Rd. 10 Sears, Roebuck & Co. 7447 Skokie Blvd Sears, Roebuck & Co. 1297 Brookdale Center Service Systems Corp. Soo Line Building N.W. Bell Telephone 5910 Shingle Creek: Pkwy. Servomation 4301 68th Ave. No. 7- Eleven 411 66th Ave. No Shopper's City 360063rd Ave. No. Shopper's City Bakery 3600 63rd Ave. No. Arthur Treacher's Fish & Chips 6100 Brooklyn Blvd. SuperAmerica Service Stations P. 0. Box 248 SuperAmerica 6545 West River Road SuperAmerica 1901 57th Ave. No. Taco Towne 6219 Brooklyn Blvd. GASOLINE SERVICE STATION LICENSE Humboldt Avenue Service 6840 Humboldt Ave. No. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHTNES LTCENSF A & J, Inc. 7540 SU11wdter Way No. Hiawatha Rubber - 1700 67th Ave . No. B & L Vending 248 105th Lane N.W. Anderson Automatics 4912 France Ave. No. Bill's Vending Service 7317 West Broadway Brooklyn Center Shell 6245 Brooklyn Blvd. Bonine Vending 125 River Edge Way Brookdale Towers 2810 County Rd. 10 Brooklyn Plaza Cinema, Inc. 5801 John Martin Dr. Lawrence Brown 8901 West River road Brookdale Shopping Center Canteen Company 6300 Penn Ave. So. Grayco 6820 Shingle Creek Pkwy. M.T.C. 6845 Shingle Creek Pkwy. McCulloch 1800 Freeway Blvd. N.W. Bell 6540 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Christy's Auto Service 5300 Dupont Ave. No. Coca -Cola Bottling Company 101 Central Ave. S.E. Lermel Smaby 6500 Brooklyn Blvd. Brookdale Car Wash 5500 Brooklyn Blvd. Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth 6121 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center Shell 6245 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn 76 Oil 6901 Brooklyn Blvd. • Firestone 5445 Xerxes Ave. No. John M. Frey Co. 6800 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Garden City School 3501 65th Ave. No. Goodyear 5500 Xerxes Ave. No. 2-12-79 18 K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Dr. Midwest Federal 5545 Xerxes Ave. No, Network Systems 6820 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Beach Apartments - 4207 Lakeside Ave. No. Coca -Cola Bottling Company 1189 Eagan Industrial Rd. Ault Corporation 1600 Freeway Blvd Earle Brown Apts. 1701 69th Ave. No. Holiday Inn 1501 Blvd. Sears Brookdale Shopping Ctr. Whirltronics 3401 48th Ave. No. Consumer Vending Company 2727 26th Ave. So Brookdale Pontiac 6801 Brooklyn Blvd. Federal Lumber 4810 N. Lilac Dr. Country Club Market 5715 Morgan Ave. No. First Brookdale State Bank 5620 Brooklyn Blvd. Frito Lay Company 6800 -D Shingle Crk. Pkwy. R. E. Fritz Company 8511 10th Ave. No. Ault Corporation _ 1600 Freeway Blvd. Bob Ryan Olds. 6700 Brooklyn Blvd Gold Medal Beverage Co. 553 No. Fairview Ave. Duane's OK Tire 6900 Brooklyn Blvd. Hi -Lo Manufacturing 6520 James Ave. No, Maranatha 5401 69th Ave. No. McCulloch 1800 Freeway Blvd. • North Star Dodge 6800 Brooklyn Blvd. Bob R y as, Olds v70 ^ u Biookl.yi Blvd. - Shopper's City 3600 63rd Ave. No Snyder Bros. Drug Brookdale Shopping Ctr. Tempo School of Dance 6914 Brooklyn Blvd. Vicker's Minnesota Oil 6830 Brooklyn Blvd. Warner Hardware 2105 57th Ave. No. Bill. West Union 76 2000 57th Ave. No. Northport School 5421 Brooklyn Blvd. Hames Vending, Inc. 1015 S. 6th St. Schmitt Music 2400 Freeway Blvd. Jimmy Jingle, Inc. 2601 2nd Ave. So. Johnson Control 1801 67th Ave. No. Johnny's, Inc. 6846 Brooklyn Blvd. Pilgrim Cleaner's 5748 Morgan Ave. No. K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Dr. Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home 5401 69th Ave. No. Midwest Bolt & Supply 6820 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Midwest Vending 2212 W. 94th St. Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth 6121 Brooklyn Blvd -. Northwest Microfilm, Inc. 1600 67th Ave. No. Plitt Brookdale Theater 2501 County Rd. 10 • Service Systems Corp. Soo Line Building N.W. Bell Telephone 5910 Shingle Creek Pkwy. 2 -12 -79 -19- r Servo mation 4301 68th Ave. No. Brooklyn Center Post Office 6848 Lee Ave. No. Dayton's Brookdale Shopping Ctr. Donaldson's Brookdale Shopping Ctr. Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Blvd, Medtronics 6120 Earle Brown Dr. Medtronics 6700 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Onan Tech Center 6120 Earle Brown Dr, J. C. Penney's Brookdale Shopping Ctr. Servomation 4301 68th Ave. No. State Farm Ins. 5930 Shingle Creek Pkwy. SuperAmerica Service Stations P. O. Box 248 SuperAmerica 6545 West River Road Theisen Vending Co. 3804 Nicollet Ave. Bill West 76 Service Center. 2000 57th Ave. No. Twin City Vending Co. 1065 E. Highway 36 Earle Brown Farm Ind. Park 6100 Summit Dr, PER ISHABLE VENDING MACHINES LICENSE A & J, Inc. 7548 Stillwater Way No. Hiawatha Rubber 1700 67th Ave. No. Apple -A -Day Vending Service 3428 Girard Ave. So. Brooklyn Center High School 6500 Humboldt Ave. No. Boni.n-e Vending Co. 19 -5 Edgo oy Brookdale Towers 2810 County Rd. 10 • Canteen Company 6300 Penn Ave. So. Grayco 6820 Shingle Creek Pkwy. M.T.C. 6845 Shingle Creek Pkwy. McCulloch 1800 Freeway Blvd. N.W. Bell 6540 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Consumer Vending Co. 2727 26th Ave, So. Brookdale Pontiac 6801 Brooklyn Blvd Federal Lumber 4810 No. Lilac Dr. Jimmy Jingle Inc. 26.01 2nd Ave. So Johnson Control 1801 67th Ave. No. Bob Ryan Olds 6700 Brooklyn Blvd. Northwest Microfilm, Inc. 1600 67th Ave. No t . Plitt Brookdale Theater 2501 County Rd. 10 Servoma tion 4301 68th Ave. No. Brooklyn Center Post Office 6848 Lee Ave. No. Dayton's Brookdale Shopping Ctr. Donaldson's Brookdale Shopping Ctr. - Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Blvd. Medtronics 6120 Earle Brown Dr. Medtronics 6700 Shingle Creek Pkwy. _Onan Tech Center 6120 Earle Brown Dr. J. C. Penney's Brookdale Shopping Ctr. • Schmitt Music 2400 Freeway Blvd. Servomation 4301 68th Ave. No. Skate Farm 5930 Shingle Creek Pkwy. 2 -12 -79 -20- READILY PERISHABLE FOOD VEHICLE LICENSE Servomation 4301 68th Ave. No. SPECIAL FOOD HANDLING ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE LaBelle's 5925 Earle Brown Dr. Snyder Bros. Drug Brookdale Shopping Ctr. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to adjourn the City Council meeting, , Voting, in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously- The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 10:30 p.m. • Clerk Mayon • 2 -12 -79 -21- resolution and Member introduced the following moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF MR -. JAMES MERILA WHEREAS, Mr. James Merila served as Superintendent of Engineering from August, 1968 through January, 1970 and as Director of Public Works from February, 1970 through February, 1979; and „ WHEREAS, his devotion to the tasks and responsibilities associated with his position contributed substantially to the sound progress and develop - ment of the City; and WHEREAS, his public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that: The dedicated public service of Mr. James Merila- is recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FORM SALT STORAGE BUILDING CONTRACT 1978 -T) WHEREAS, the City Clerk and the City Engineer have reported that on December 28, 1978, at 11;00 a.m., central standard time, they opened and tabulated bids received. for Contract 1978 -T, for Salt Storage Building Improvement Project No. 1978 -43; and that said bids were as follows: 1) Fabcon, Incorporated $37,671.00; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has reported to the City Council that the said bid amount is approximately equal to the Engineer's estimate for the proposed work to be performed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the bid of Fabcon, Incorporated in the amount of $37,671 .00 as to furnishing of all work, labor, and material in connection .with the above mentioned improvement project, according to the plans and specifications therefor now on file in the office of the City Clerk, is deemed to be the lowest and best bid submitted for said work by a responsible bidder, and said bid is hereby accepted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a contract with said bidder. 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; RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL TO IMPLEMENT A FAMILY HOUSING PROGRAM IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council and the City of Brooklyn Center hereby determine that within the metropolitan area there is a' need for low rent family housing not being adequately met by private enterprise; and . WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission has determined there is a significant need for large family housing in Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, under the provisions of the United States Housing Act of 1937, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development is authorized to provide financial assistance to public housing agencies for low rent housing; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council has been duly organized pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 1976, Section 473.123 and has all of the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 1976, Section 473.193 under the provisions of the Municipal Housing and Redevelop- ment Act, Minnesota Statutes 1976, Sections 462.411 to 462.711: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brookly "n Geider Lliat the LJLCLLVj✓Vllidll' VlJui,cil 15 hereby authorized to include the City of Brooklyn Center in its application for financial assistance for scattered site, low rent, family public housing to be provided by new construction BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City of Brooklyn Center that: 1. Up to ten (10) units be located in the City of Brooklyn Center. 2. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to enter into a cooperative agreement with the Metropolitan Council for operating the program within the City of Brooklyn Center provided: a. the City of Brooklyn Center retain site selection approval, b. the City of Brooklyn Center approves housing designs to be constructed in Brooklyn Center, c, a minimum of one (1) unit be constructed barrier free to accommodate the handicapped, and d. that, in accordance with State Statute, qualifying Brooklyn Center residents be given preference in renting of units constructed within the City. RESOLUTION NO. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. I Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM TO HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR CONSID- ERATION AS PART OF THE URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOP - MENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION, IN ACCORD WITH THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974, AS AMENDED WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has executed a Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County agreeing to participate in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and WHEREAS, a three year Community Development Program and Housing Assist ance Plan has been prepared consistent with the Comprehensive Urban Hennepin County Community Development strategy and the Community Development Program Regulations; and WHEREAS, the three year Community Development Program and Housing Assist- ' ance Plan has been subject to citizen review pursuant to the Urban Hennepin County Citizen Participation Plan: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City. Council of the City of Brooklyn Center approved the proposed three year Community Development Program and Housing Assistance Plan and authorizes the appropriate execution of the application material and hart flit it tO nfi in'C. Liiliy fG i:�iiS:iu I L a part Of the Year V Urban ��,nnepir, County Community Development Block Grant Application, Da te, Ma yor 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 fa vor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Brad Hoffman, Administrative Assistant DATE: February 23 , 1979 SUBJECT: Community Development Final Programs The Brooklyn Center City Council will be asked to formally adopt the Community Development Annual Three (3) Year Program as well as a Housing Assistance Plan. Preliminary approval of the program was obtained from the Council on January 8 of this year. Since that time, the City's Community Development Program has been submitted to Hennepin County for their review and for their citizen partici- pation review. At the time this memorandum is being written, formal review state- ments relative to our program have not been received from the citizens advisory group to Hennepin County. Comments in this memorandum attributed to the Hennepin County's citizens group are therefore unofficial and based upon my converstations with the County staff. The Brooklyn Center Community Development Program for both the annual program and the three (3) year program is divided into L (3) basic elements. First, are those activities directed towards- the identified housing problems in Brooklyn Cen- ter, Essentially two activities were given a preliminary recommendation by the Council to include a housing rehab grant /loan program and a housing incentive option. Second, is park development which includes an activity to provide the City's matching funds for a Central Park LAWCON grant. Third, were those acti- vities geared towards handicapped accessibility. Handicapped accessibility project activities include the installation of elevators in the City Hall /Civic Center complex, sidewalk curb cuts and park accessibility. Housing Rehab Grants/Loans A total of $66,000 has been allocated to this activity, of which $6,000 will be used for administrative purposes. Bather, Ringrose and Wolsfeld reported over two hur_dred (200) homes in the southeast section of the City alone in need of some degree of rehabilitation. They also noted five (5) homes in that area that they considered beyond rehabilitation. It should be noted that these figures were the result of a windshield survey only. It is the intent of the housing rehab grant /loan activity to maintain the City's housing stock and to assure a stable residential neighborhood. Unlike the MHFA rehab grants that the City currently makes use of, the Community Development Rehab Grant Program would be directed towards those neighborhoods having the greatest numbers of homes in need of rehabilitation. Because of the amounts of monies available through the Community Development Program, it is feasible for the City to impact those neighborhoods by rehabilitating greater concentrations Gerald G. Splinter -2- February 23, 1979 of homes as opposed to the MHFA program with its limited dollars and limited number of -homes that could be rehabilitated. Over a three (3) year period, the City anticipates rehabilitating approximately ninety -five (95) residential homes. Currently, the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission and the Community Develop - ment Citizens Participation Committee are, developing ranking criteria for grant applicants. There seems to be a consensus of thought that applications would be divided into two (2) sections. The first section would deal with the applicants . income and ability to perform the rehabilitation activities on their own. A minimum number of points would be required in this section before the application would be considered for a grant. Second, applications that have received at least the minimum number of points would then be considered and ranked according to the -City's objectives in this program. Given the City's philosophy to maintain the housing stock within the City and to preserve its neighborhoods, grants from eligible applicants would then be ranked according to their impact on the neigh- borhood and other criteria that would support that philosophy. Our experience with MHFA rehab grants indicates that the average rehab grant will be approximately $2,400. Assuming that remains true, the City would be processing approximately twenty -five (25) community development rehab grants next year. Under the Community Development Rehab Grant Program there would be a maximum grant of $7,500 and a .repayment clause if the property was sold within a given number of years. Housing Incentive Option The Brooklyn Center Community Development Citizens Participation Committee, in conjunction with the Housing Commission, asked that $23,000 be set aside in the form of a housing contingency fund. It was anticipated that the Housing Com- mission would recommend participation in other housing projects. Other projects include the Metro Council Large Family Housing Program to which the Council approved participation. However, it would be my •recommendation that this housing incentive contingency fund be changed to a simple contingency fund where funds could be diverted to any eligible activity at a. future date. While these monies could still be used for housing projects, they could also be used to guard against cost overruns due to inflation over a period of years. It should be noted that there is no specific time frame in which community development monies must be spent. Park Development It was the recommendation of the Brooklyn Center Citizens Participation Committee to allocate $40,000 of community development monies as part of the City's local match towards the LAWCON grant currently being applied for in Central Park. The Hennepin County citizens group and the County staff have expressed concern that the project does not meet the established criteria for benefiting low and moderate income people. Based upon that concern it is their recommendation that the City reconsider this project, The Brooklyn Center Citizens Participation Committee has reaffirmed its commitment to the project. It would be my recommendation that the City submit the project as is and require the Department of Housing and Urban Development to rule on the project. If the City receives an unfavorable ruling from HUD relative to this project, it would be my recommendation that the City Gerald G. Splinter -3- February 23, 1979 reallocate those monies to the elimination of physical barriers within the City's park system and include Central Park within the group of parks to receive such funding. Handicapped Accessibility Brooklyn Center is contemplating three (3) activities within this category. The categories include the installation of elevators in the City Hall /Civic Center complex, sidewalk curb cuts, and the elimination of physical barriers within the park system. All of the projects have received a favorable recommendation from Hennepin County with some reservations relative to the park project. The Hennepin County group has expressed some concern with paving 100% of the City's parking lots within the park system with community development funds on - the basis of eliminating physical barriers for the handicapped. They have ex- pressed their belief that funding for that project should be in a ratio equivalent to the number of parking spaces reserved for handicapped parking in comparison with the total number of spaces within the parking lot. It should be noted that other communities have used community development funds to finance 100% of the construction costs of parking lots in parks using the same justifications. It is the County's citizens group's contention that such parking lots would benefit handicapped individuals only to the percentage that parking spaces are available to them and, therefore, should be funded at that rate only. I would note that other capital improvement projects such as the elevators in the City Hall /Civic Center complex would benefit individuals other than handicapped individuals but the same recommendation does not follow through for those projects. Within the park accessibility activities, the City has not been asked to prorate the construc- tion of sidewalks which would be used by both handicapped individuals and non - handicapped individuals nor have they been asked to prorate the acquisition of playground equipment that could be used by either handicapped or nonhandicapped individuals. Other accessibility projects include the installation of two (2) elevators within the City Hall /Civic Center complex. The County's citizen group has supported this project and noted that it is an eligible project within the guidelines established by HUD. This project was given a top priority ranking from the Brooklyn Center Citizens Participation Committee. While $80,000 has been allocated to this acti- vity, that figure is based on a rough estimate. Also, $12,000 has been set aside for the elimination of physical barriers within our sidewalk system. A survey was conducted by the City Engineer's office which identified needed curb cuts within our sidewalk system. _Housing Assistance Plan In conjunction with our Community Development Program, the City is required to submit a Housing Assistance Plan indicating both one (1) and three (3) year housing goals. It should be noted that our goals are based on identified housing needs that have been established by the Metropolitan Council. It has been noted that to meet the needs of low and moderate income households, Brooklyn Center would need an additional four hundred, sixteen (416) units over the next three (3) years. Minimum goals under the Housing Assistance Plan are set at fifteen percent (15 %) or seventy (70) units over the next three (3) years. Brooklyn Center can meet that Gerald G. Splinter -4- February 23 , 1979 requirement through a variety of activities including the rehabilitation of private • homes. On Table III, line 5 of the Housing Assistance Plan, it indicates that the City intends to rehabilitate ninety -five (95) private homes. Line 6 and 8 reflect the division of those ninety -five (95) homes between community develop- ment monies and MHFA monies. Columns C, D and E of lines 5, 6 and 8 reflect the division between elderly and family for rehabilitation purposes. At best this only represents an estimate reflecting a recommended 60 -40 split between family and, elderly housing assistance as recommended by HUD. Line 15 indicates a goat of one hundred (100) new assisted rental construction. It should be noted that ten (10) of those units would be constructed under the Metropolitan Council Large Family Program. Essentially, this means that the City of Brooklyn Center would allow the construction of a rental complex similar to the Ponds in -that it Cry ,would be financed in whole or in part with Section 8 money. If contractors seek -A° such financing from HUD for construction of the units in Brooklyn Center and are denied that financing, it is the equivalent of our meeting that goal. _Line 23 indicates a goal of two hundred, thirty (230) units in existing rental units. This refers to the Section 8 Rental Assistance Program. Currently, the City has one hundred, ninety (190) units or families receiving rental assistance under this pro- gram. This figure is based on a rather extensive current waiting list of Brooklyn Center residents seeking this aid. This would not mean that the City could not accept more than this but that it just represents a minimum goal. Table V of the Housing Assistance Plan represents the annual goals or the goals for next year for each of the areas noted. ■ citizen advisory committee 2353 government center, minneapolis,mn 554.87 February 21, 1979 The Honorable Dean Nyquist, Mayor City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55431 Dear Mayor Nyquist: Re: Committee Response to Proposed Use of Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Funds by Brooklyn Center for Year V (1979) Dear Mayor Nyquist: Referenced response is a responsibility of the Planning Area One Citizen Advisory Committee as outlined in the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program "Citizen Participation Plan." Preparatory to developing the resr-onse, the Comrpiffpp has farmliarized itself with the nroaram and the Federal regulations and local policies and objectives which must be satisfied in program execution, and conducted public hearings on the proposed use of the Urban County CDBG entitlement for Year from Planning Area One community participants (Brooklyn Center, Crystal, Golden Valley, New Hope, Robbinsdale and St. Anthony) and Hennepin County. Relative to the Brooklyn Center proposal for.use of $300,000 in Year V community development funds, the Committee: disapproved the Park Development project ($40,000) for Central Park; gave conditional approval to the Handicapped Accessibility Improvements to the park system ($73,000); and approved all the other.projects for funding (Handicapped Accessibility Improvements to City hall, $80,000; Housing Rehabilitation Grant /Loan, $66,000; General Admininstration, $18,000; Housing Incentive as a Local Option activity, $23,000). The Central Park development project was not recommended for approval because the income characteristics of the service area as specified do not clearly demon- strate the benefit to low - and moderate- income persons. If a survey would likely demonstrate benefit, however, a conditional approval would be appropriate. Hennepin County would share survey responsibilities with the City. Alternatively, if the portion of the project using CDBG funds were to be designed specifically to benefit the adjacent assisted housing project, including the handicapped, the co►rwittee's approval would probably be uncondi l:ional Because it appeared that removal of architectural' barriers from the City Park system► may include the paving of an entire parking lot, conditional approval was given the lltrnc!icapped Accessibility pr•ojecL. Clarilying Lhis issue or pro- rating the cost: of the paving to actually provide handicapped accessibility would drop the condition. • A rather substantial amount of funds were gunera1ly proposed Ior handicapped accessibility improvements. This naturally raises questions relative to meeting the needs and priorities of this group of Urban 'County citizens. The Committee therefore feels obliged to stress the importance of involving the handicapped community in planning and implementing projects for their benefit. The Housing Incentive Option appears generally to represent a'n appropriate activity. More specificity will be required to change its status from an optional activity to one capable of implementation. The process to define a fundable activity within this project includes a program amendment and further review by the Committee. The Committee felt that perhaps the designation of the southeast neighborhood j as a "Neighborhood Strategy Area" and a clearer definition how the rehab activity targeted for the area will be coordinated with other community develop - ment activities would be helpful in understanding and strengthening the program. Another point raised by the Committee concerned the particular benefit -of parking lot paving to low- and moderate- income persons. Funding only that portion of the paving necessary for handicapped accessibility relieved the con - cern at this time, but general paving projects should not be funded from the community development grant. The Committee also felt the City might want to consider defraying one of the elevators for handicapped accessibility because of the high per unit cost by handicapped persons. Continuing and augmenting the rehab.and handicapped accessibility projects are appropriate for Years VI and VT II as would be the extension of clearly defined housing options and administration. L Sincerely, P B.Hatcher, Chairman cc: Brad Hoffman f 1" r• , 0PM7. 4 i d6CCK G RAN PAGGaAM C,,,i4tMU^+ {TY OE'dE .,� 2. APPLICATIC jr4; -N i NUTA8En HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN TABLE III • THREe YSAR HOUSIGNG PROGRAM THREE YEAR GOAL 3, RERICO Ci: APPLICAdI-ITY 4, ® ORIGINAL TO , ❑ REVISION, DATE r; ❑ AMENCIMENT.OATS N AS OF LC'rV;R -tNCC 1Ati rGt. c aOli S TO . SZ,S ELDERLY TYPES AND SOURCES OF HCUSING ASSISTANCE 11.2persons) S MALL i LARGE TOTAL AND FAMILY FAMILY ® HANOI. (4 or!¢s f5 or tore C"aPPEO J persons, personsi. I A. Total Eats "or reusing .sststanc? Por .".omeownerS flUm J; t 1 n aS ?rte �1 21 i. �.2.Y •..J1s:r aGa on r..S:5t2 ncE iCr . ^.Omeovvnor3 - ` ' I �f'Jrr7 Cf 3 anC JI ` i i 31 riUO Ass:stea ?rocrams 3 Otner • I 2- RenaDtl:taticn :SSiS t?T•7? 'or nCr' ; I s r' a 3 50 1 ,sum af.rn. o ". -a � 95 5 � ..m J t �we+rcr+'ent „lCCx ..r3n.5 • � r^ un v .._ s c� t Z g0 f 30 � 40 10 7 HUC Assisted Procram: 8) Omar • MHFA 1 15 5 10 9 S. Total Gcais Cr :or nctneovvners cy Percentace of "Cus ;�nr - d < /:2 100% I 3 6 : 8 52.6 11. " to C. To t Qoa+s -jr , cL ng - ,ss+s,ar.c= :or renters _ E fsum of l 1 r 1-s 1: "1 � � I i • Assistance ;Cr Pr Homeowners � ( sum of vines 12 +• t,;i f • -.... - u :w... .m..w:++rarvxcam . +n. n ++> -v.c.v .a.. w -.a,. ». ,, . 14' 2'. New Rental units : t _ fsum of fires 15 ^ 1 61 _ t F ? HUC Assisted 'rCgrams 5 7 63 10 - 100 2 17 3. Renaotiitat,on or =entai Units (sum of !ir, es 18. 19 18! Community Ceve'ooment 3iocx Grants i9 HUD Ass:s:eo P-Ccrams fsum or iines <o ^ 27) 201 Sucstanvai ;enao 0itatio t —� ! 2 1 Se 3 = x+sor.g w+tn :Mocerate Renao +ii -amen a 4. Existing 'emit grits fs nflimps 4 h . r 230 82 ' 138 10 2 ' 1 Huc A <SISTVJ ?rr;grams r s um of lr"nrs .2s -;91 ( 230 82 138 251 W itn Reoa+r t ' 1 ;1Jitnout Reca,r I 271 3 • - a$ 0 .. Total uCats '3r — cus:nq Asa+Stance * tia•tter5 CV 7 w y sr y loa.� 60 � ,4 r 6 3 5 .4 E. T rat Qoa;s cr -t:0 A.g s— - ;pnta1 Unrri cv 100 °0 33 6 0. 9 " 6.1 �or��nr�.;P ^t •••n Ucann,n vC? • N ARRATIVE (Atrxtl aodi:lonal sleets if necessary and io'enrify mm items 3oove) .�J t. Footnote units to ^e arovided coec:iically For tie handicamed. 2. Describe the orograims listen undor this c3tegorv. 3. Describe those 3r,r7ons necessary to facilitate the accomotisnrnPnt of the goals. CHECK IF APOLICANT'NISH TO REVIEW ALL STATE HFOA HOUSING PRCPCSALS. ►�•+wAa1 �1tr,pn ,s :,.t.cn,�r� NI 7(i ......� " iMM�1 NIM'� .I LVC..0 lL�..CX .. nAN7 HOUSiNGA:,Zji. 2.APP1_jC 7 N/rR= NT`J'via57 Tr`FLE IV • GENE LCC: 7 C`1S TOR ??CPCSci7 1 3 � � — � � E HOUSING _ ? =_ 100 10 uF .fie �L:CraIL - . 4 4 . O O t 3. _ -,. a1G1NaL. TO O RE CATS O AMEMCMENT, OA S i i - A. IDENTIFY jE NERAL LCCAT ',GNS CU .NA IN T)-i1S AFP LiCA tICN s' 1. New Constmc; ion: Census. Tree or Enumeration i✓istric: Nurncers, or other iocationat designation Community -wide I 2. Rehabilitation: Ce n sus T rz;C, ;.r cnumera District .Num. or ot icc3t:o ces' j Community -wide with special emphasis upon the southeast neighborhood and other }g r neighborhoods having a concentration of low and moderate income residents. I - } i S. EXPLANATION CF SZLcCTION Or GZIIF-*.AL LOCATIONS - 1. --New Construc;icn - -- Sites will be selected to promote greater choice in housing opportunities and to assure "~ a deconceritratiori o�ldw and moderate income housing opportunities in any one area of the City. i 2. Rehabilitation Rehabilitation of private homes will be tied to income, however, emphasis will be given to the southeast neighborhood because it has the greatest number of homes in need of rehab. - k PvUV•vb� p•.0 Aetsoscrs i arm MUG• ;UjS.t t, .vn,r.n ,s Cbsajrte ( - + U % vC ?:. sv Y1L �� �. '9uli Jl NS rA... -P ii ^� �, r/ . rv^i (:^,!A'AUNlTY 0EVELCP'AE?IT.3LLCK 3AANT )ROGRAM _ Z. A ?PLICA �'i :N ;'_� i+.,ld 7 ` A HOUSING A '.STANC_ of AN - TAaLE v - ANNUAL NouslraG ao: ION PR0t;r'i;,:r1 ANNUAL GCAL ---- 4 . C ORIGINAL 3. PERIOD Or A?O! ;CA81LlTY TO �`.. i M ❑ REVISION. CAT, ❑ AMENDMENT, :A NUMBER OF L ;'NE:;- , NCCME - iELDErILY Z.%CALL .�i1vc fl - 2Dersonsl FAMILY rAMILY TYPES AND SOURCES OF H OUSI N G ASSISTANCE TOTAL AND HANOI- td or ;ass f5 Cr more CAPPS0 1/ Certonsl oer:onsl !al (y1 1 c) 'A. T otal Ccais `or Housing .:systance for Homeowners (sum of lines 2 anrJ -i -� t 1, New Ccnstruc::en ;- zis23nce 'of riorteowners 2 � fsum of lines 3 and 41 � 3 1 H UD Assis-ea erc rare. s ' t -- 4 O tner � 5 I 2. Renauditation As stance for Hgrtwcwn¢r7 1 j I /su o r lines 5, 7 and =1 33 14 19 6 f Community Oeve+ccment 31cex ; ruts - _ e - 25 10 15 — j ! HUO A 5 7Oq ,, irT1S i Otter { B. Total Gcaes for cus;na mss s -,3nce ror =-enters _ 1 (sum og.'inet 10, 13, 16 and 21 { 1. Assistance +'or r c5 'Aecvve r".on'eownerS 1 [sum of fines r f H Assisted . l + � CCram - - -- 13 2. New Rental Units } ! fsum of lines 14 and 151 10 ! 10 14 i H Ass;sted+- Cgr3ms i0 1 0� i5 Gtner' 16 :' 3. Renabilitation of =ent3i Units i 1 (sum of lines 17, 13 an4 21) 1 17 Community Ce"iccr+ent aiccx :;rants S$ i HUD Assas,ed ?rccrams f sum o f lines 19 — 201 — — -- — 1 9 _ Su RPn -1011 atMon - 20 Scac 8 ::xrsttnq •.v,tn Reneailitatton 21� 22 1 a• Existing nanvu Units (sum of ;roes 23 Z61 200 71 ! 12 0 t 9 23 � .__ • HUD Assis q- ^,crams Isum of fir 24 +251 2 C '1 1 24 v With Reoair .S. W. mout Rpoair +�IARFATIVE ( A,:3C7 d sreem,i r ecessarr =nt.1 •ce.n.trfy wire Items anovel 1. Footnote snits to ::e arcvided soectfic3liy for 'ho handicance 4 2. Describe the - rogrms listed unner tnis C3teQory. 3. Describe r7CSe 3%;tr n5 necessary 1 0 iaciiitate the 3CComclish of the Coals. t Inirrementai Year or Suomiss:on 1 _ Tahles 1, it and IV of -he i ihrge Year HAP 3onroved ;ra �+ L•' . 3 f i n c oro orated bV reference and are nct C0nr3,nvd n thiS fsP.c:'nr11 'ftTflr y »r ,. ;• rn,cs ;rr � �'•vrWl �n.feell .f lltl�nlPtn - - , +� Y , , r <: r] : �; .. . fexm ADOroYe7 VS. CF H+ -;Si %G A%D 4 rN .^ VLF :% ::. f.i '. F iN L.Car.i CQ.Y.MU %ITY C£VELCPY =_%T ANN H-Z;;: NG PLAN SL/N..MAiiY C it y o I Brookly C enter • COMMUNITY PROFILE 3. a �P�i- a7,cN /3AAh; :.Nh 3. PERIOD OF APauC:.aiL1TY 4 •MQtiy:nal (Every Three Years! • From: 8 /7 9.. 'To: 8/82 � - C Revision = AmenCment ruauc/ areoi 1 S. COMM UNITY PROFILE: (arov a otter narnia" rn a=oraance .wm instracrionti Brooklyn Center, when it incorporated in 1911, had a population of 500 persons. In the 1950's, the City experienced a rapid population growth which peaked in 1976 with an estimated population of 35,278 persons. in the next few decades, a slight population decfease is predicted for Brooklyn Center. The population is expected to drop to approximately 33,500 persons by 1990 and stabilize at that level. Brooklyn Center has an estimated minority popu- lation of 365 persons. Because of Brooklyn Center's proximity to predorninant- ly black neighborhoods in north Minneapolis, it would bd anticipated that- the City's minority population woulu increase slightly in future years.. The mean income for Brooklyn Center was $12,7 Approximately 2. 9" of all persons residing in Brooklyn Center had incomes below the poverty level. An estimated 21.150 of all households had incomes defined as low or moderate income, however, nine (9) census tract block areas had cone- entrations of low or moderate income residents in excess of 24.366 of the population. Hone of Brooklyn Center's minority population was noted to be below the + " poverty level. As a group, the minority population had a median income of Brooklyn Center covers 8.5 square miles and features a large industrial park which is currently under development by manufacturers, retailers, wholesalers as well as various service orientated businesses. Within Brooklyn Center, approximately 346 acres are currently developed for industrial use and an approximate 383 acres are developed for commercial use including the regional shopping enter, Brookdale. There still exists 127 acres zoned for industrial development as well as 83 acres zoned for commerical developments �(C heak here f/conrinued on additional pso -ts) and ariachl S. DATA SOWICES: 1) 1970 U.S. Census of Population and Housing 2) Metropolitan Council of Twin Cities area, "Population, Employment, Household Forecasts for the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area," October, 1977. Pops I of 3 Ptree MuD•)G5.' to ":a! r Form A.)o . r0r.o P rY U.S. CL ?Ai• r .'.cNT CF tt :Stt :v AND L?%Att G: V:,Ga••_ NT t E O� i'L.0 .ti: . COS1f: UNITY CEVELOPY —ENT AND HOUSIN PLAN S:i:d:dARY COMMUNITY PROFILE 2.AYPLiCATJ'�iGRAhT vvn aca 3. PERIOD OF APPLICAEILITY 4. C] Original I Frery Three Yearsl From: To: n Revision r Amendment !Darr"') ":,a r:w S.CO:. PROFILE: (Pror,ca a ortr narrafac in j=crcance with instrucrions) Brooklyn Center is expected to have greater employment opportunities over the next two (2) decades. Brooklyn Center should experience an increase of ,about 3,000 jobs, for a total of 16,000 jobs by the year 2000. Brooklyn Center offers a variety of housing types, with just over 25% of its housing stock consisting of mid or high density housing and 23.3% of its housing available on a rental basis. There will, however, be a growing demand in future years for mid and high density housing in Brooklyn Center. Townhouses, two-family housing units, and apartments will serve to satisfy the needs of that segment of the population which cannot afford or does not need the space offered by single family detached houses. Rising housing costs and shrinking household sizes will increase that portion of the popula- tion which seeks such accommodations. It is evident that overcrowding of housing exists in Brooklyn Center. Approx- imately 11% of all households in Brooklyn Center had 1.01 persons per room or greater. An estimated 1.2% of all households in Brooklvn Center had I:15 or more persons per room. In 1978 Brooklyn Center issued building permits for 236 new housing units. Of that number, 135 of the units were subsidized units for low and moderate income families. Building permits were issued for 19 single family housing units, 198 townhouse units, 4 double bungalows, and 2 multi - family residence Housing stock in a deteriorating condition can be found in virtually all neigh - borhoods in Brooklyn Center but is most prevalent in the southeast neighbor- hood. Windshield surveys indicate in excess of 200 homes in the southeast • neighborhood that exhibit exterior deterioration which may require expenditures in most cases of $600 to $3,000 to correct. Judging from the age of these ®(Cr,ack here if continued On Pdditiona/ pare(s1 and.::ach) G. DATA SOURCES: Papa 2 of 3 Paycf 14UO•�Oy7lti•7G7 a corm tDn +ee� • U.C. U °ART :'Cr4 G` AND Ur ?JA . .s'__.:.iP`.:eh7 c Ci ;-, PL,....., COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING PLAN SUMMARY COMMUNITY PROFILE a.APi .TI-DW,,%kANT vtduE_R 3. PERIOD OF APPLICABILITY &.0 >J 0: is:naf (Every Tnree Years£ From: To: 0 Revision Amendment , �,ateCl lDa :ear 5. COMIMUNITY PROFILE: (Prencs a oriet narrative in accorcance nim m:uvcrronsl houses, there is probably also a need for electrical, plumbing and insulation • -work as well. Housing in the remainder of Brooklyn Center'is generally_ in good structural condition due to the relative youth and regular maintenance performed by its owners. However, because it is of such similar age (being built in the 50's and 60's for the most part) there is a probability that quite a number of similar rehabilitation needs could occur at about the same time. Extensive rehabilitation work similar to that required in the southeast neighborhood will not be warranted in most houses for at least another decade. However, individual houses throughout the City do warrant immediate rehabilitation work. Brooklyn Center has approximately 352 units that are vacant at all times. Of that number, approximately 20 of the units are for sale only and are vacant • less than six (6) months. The remaining units are rental units and are gener- ally vacant 'Less thAon t; o (2) months-. OA,h;, -.4 , ere W conrinved on additional p, ?;eW and emcch! L. DATA SOURCES: - Paw 3 of 3 Pabcs NUD•70::: tG•78 ) • _ FQrtn ApDrOvM �ia,�s �dn c.�,R;r,•o U.S. D- ?ART _ :. �jY H.3us AND URIBAN J= VEL`UF COMMUNITY HOUSING PLAN su :,,.,ARr' City of Brooklyn Center SUMIMARY OF DEEVELOP- -ENT 2.APPLICAT C, ANT NLMBER A14 I4OU NE: ECS 3. PERIOD OF APPLICACiLIT't MOrictna( t�Fvery ir:rre Yearsi From: 8/79 To- 8/82 �y ^ Revision JAmenoment _ -- i i S. COMMUNITY E)ZVELOPt: ch T AN, houU;jta f: alv: Ir'rovroe a Drrel aarra_re in aacoroarce wr;A •nstructrons) Community Development and Housing Needs ' The primary community development need of Brooklyn Center is the maintenanc of viable community neighborhoods. Neighborhoods are maintained and developed through the provision of adequate housing, which is affordable to low and moderate income groups economic opportunities within the community and public facilities including streets, water, sewer and parks. The right to use any or all public facilities provided by the municipality recognizes the special needs of handicapped and elderly persons in the community. Neighborhood Revitalization Needs The elimination of physical barriers in public facilities in each neighborhood is most recognized. In Census Tract 205 (Block Groups 100, 200 and 600) extensive housing rehab • ilitation is needed. Park improvements are identified in the City's Park n3 pvelopment. Plan. The sidewalk system needs to be surveyed for physical barriers to the handicapped and have such removed. In Census Tract 202 (Block Group 900) and Census Tract 203.04 (Block Group 300) there is a need for a park facility. These areas are isolated by major highway or streets -and are without a recreational facility to serve their needs. Community 'Wide Housing Needs Brooklyn Center has an inadequate housing supply to meet the needs of low and moderate income households. Over the next 3 years, 468 additional units will be required to provide for the handicapped, elderly, families and large families. There are in excess of 200 homes in Brooklyn. Center in need of some rehabil- itation. During the next 10 tJ ears, the number of homes in need of rehabilita- ERrChe.A hero if con tirued c r edCirion.l pj.: 1s1 and vt::.' :h) 6. DATA SOURCES: Rrplaces Forms HUD- ;015.2 and HUD•i0t5.2A. v%nicn aft QW01e:11 Page 1 of 3 Page; HUD -7Gu3 lc-"8; Form Arno roved U.S. DEPARTMIE NIT OF HC sV AND UrS� N 7,^. \ILL J/ _NT '. h:.lt L(' h•'t; a.l COMMUNITY CEV_LCPt.:_ .T AND HCU�,!%G PLAN SUI: :..RY SUMMARY OF CO "'UNITY DEVELOFaENT 2. APPLICAT rON1G RANT NUP.WER AND HOLISHIG NE!r. 3. P.ERIUP OF APPLICAaIU7 r a. ❑ Original /Every Three Nears/ From: To: ❑ Revision 0 " Amendment 5. WMAUNITY U EVE LOPtdENT AND HOUSING hEE:;S: (Provroe i oriei rarrauve rn accorcance with rnstr ✓cUOnSI tion will increase significantly. Programs are needed to encourage the development of new housing units. Inflation has limited the supply and location of affordable housing alterna- tives for low and moderate income groups. Incentives to developers should be provided to encourage construction of affordable housing. Rental rates are escalating forcing low and moderate income persons to spend disproportionate amounts of their income on housing. Rental assistance programs should be continued and the construction of subsidized rental units should be encouraged. Large family housing is the most pressing need Construction of rental units and the maintenance of existing units are necessary to address this need. • Community -Wide Needs for Public Facilities and Improvements Th^urc �nt• vcl a `s nrtn l for nark rlervmm 1 . b° 1 {nnca:n as "Cent .,. _ l Two a:: u at4. :. ..+ �.�i.� r vim., r ..a� _ . .. _. Perl W 't •(2) concentrations of low and moderate income+ residents who are currently W isolated by major highways from other parks would be served by this develop- ment. The proposed park is adjacent to a 115 unit subsidized apartment complex having elderly, families and handicapped residents. A major con- centration (in excess of 24.36 ercent of the service area for the ark would p ) p be low and moderate income persons Community -Wide Handicapped Needs Accessibility to public facilities by the handicapped is a recognized commun ity-wide need in Brooklyn Center. Pedestrian ramps and curb cuts allow individuals in wheelchairs and the elderly to more easily use the City's > sidewalk system. There is a need for two (2) elevators in the City Hall/ n Civic Center Comolex to allow building users who are handicapped access - fGheck here if continued on Fddir'o'nu! psc <fs) and aaacnl 6• DATA SOURCES: Flepiat:es Forms HUO.7015.2 and HUD-7015.2 vvh-ch are at:so!e ;e Page 2 of 3 Paves HUD -NO i:3-7Z) Fora r)u ?6�.y F�,Qif •O U.S. DEPAR i M, ENT DF HCU5;N AIND UR3A r D L C) !ENT • rc C FA: ?+ �Gh r7 ` COMMUNITY DEVELOP:'_4T AND H. U-Sm,., PL;,,4 S.. ,.r.1AAY SUMIMARY OF M 9UNITY DEVELO=' E.;T 2. APPLICATION /GnANT NUMBER AHD t{OU SIN G `•IE =_GS 3.FEitI0D 0? AYPLI:,AoILli Y <. CD Oricinal (Every rhree Years) From: To: -0 Revision 0 Amendment JJJ «:atedi r:�_ :�n S. COt. NWNITY DEVELGr :.1cNT AND HOUCING INEEGS: (Proeive a beef rarrauve In accorcance wn i rnsrrutaonsi ibility to both levels. Recreational opportunities in the City's park system are nonexistent for individuals confined to wheelchairs and limited for the elderly. Equipment, shelter buildings water fountains, and toilet facilities need to be modified to accommodate the handicapped. Parking lots need to be paved and walkways created to and from park facilities to allow access for the elderly and handicapped. i i • d(Chrck hare if ccntinued on rddirionaf pape(s) and atraclJ G. DATA SOURCES: ._. Replaces Forms HUD-7015 and HUD•7015.2A. w:ucn are obsolete Page 3 of 3 Pages HU04Ct 3 IG•76 ) Form A;t,row.d U.S. CEPART41ENT CF HOUCiNG AND L;= ' 3A'J • COMMUNITY DIVE_., ?'.:ENT ANDHDI.�^ PLANSU'.'..'.tLRY City of Brookly Center COMIPREHE`.SIVE STRATEGY 2.Ar ?L 3. PLAICE) OF APPt lC431LITY - c y - [JOfi ^ fEYtN Three Years) From: 8/79 To: 8/82 pevisiorl l�mendment - ;oa:eel :i:a:eDl 6.COt1PREHENSIVE STRATEGY: f?rov narrative inaccoroance with Instructions.; General Strategy It is the primary intent of the City of Brooklyn Center to provide decent housing expand housing opportunities, and create *a suitable living environment for -low and moderate income persons. It is also a major objective of the City to Identify and eliminate physical barriers for the handicapped which are present in the City's public facilities (City Hall, Civic Center, park- system, sidewalk and other municipal buildings) . Brooklyn Center's strategy is to make use of federal, state and local funding sources to meet its identified community development needs. The City will vigorously develop expanded housing opportunities with special emphasis being given to the rehabilitation.and maintenance of the City's existing housing stock. Special emphasis will be given to neighborhoods having the largest concentra- tion of low and moderate income persons. Neighborhood Revitalization it i riot within Brooklyn Cun ei's sL aLegy Lu evttc:enLiaLe ii.5 community development efforts within any defined neighborhood. However, neighborhoods having major concentration (24 percent or more) of low and moderate income persons and /or having extensive housing deterioration will be given special emphasis in housing programs and public facility improvements, Housing Strategy Brooklyn Center will emphasize the expansion 'of housing opportunities for low and moderate income individuals and the maintenance and rehabilitation of its current housing stock. Resources will be directed towards the needs of specific household types with emphasis being given to large family, elderly and family housing. Housing rehabilitation will be carried out through grants and /or loans to private residents. The rehab program will be carried out in conjunction with the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) rehab program. While rehab grants and /or loans will be available to low and moderate income households on a community -wide basis, neighborhoods having the largest concentration of such households will receive priority over other neighborhoods. In Wtycek if continued on additional pwefs/ and assachl Replaces Forms HUD•7015.3 and HUD-7015.4. wnlch are obsolete Page of 2 Pages HUD-7064 IG -78i Form Anrrovtd VS. DFPARTVE T'0: HOUSING A::D UPBA'J D_J G ?'.'cNT :•:` F ,; PL +CAr.T COMIMUNITY J. J_LOP ..Er.T AND HOU..•NG PLAN SL :!.'-MARY 2. AP PL , i7 ^4iGRAti T ..:u •aER COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY 3.P_rnIG0 GF APF•tiC C1 Orie,C2i lFvery Three Yean1 From: To: I El Revision :_: Amendment _ f�.:cat ; ✓r:e�i S.COYPREH_NSIVE ST RATE ;Y: hNrov,oea n.urarrve in ar_oroance wrtn insrrvctaansJ New housing development will be encouraged through a variety of measures ' which may include land write - downs., payment of S.A.C. (service area charge for sewer system) charges for rental assistance projects, payment of special -assessments or other eligible activities. Brooklyn Center recognizes the need for rent assistance to low and moderate income persons. The City will con tinue its involvement in the Section 8 (Existing) Rental Assistance Program or other programs to address this need. Public Facilities and Imn- rovements Strategies Priority will be given to projects having demonstrated benefit to low and mod- erate income persons. Public facilities and /or improvements are directed towards the removal of physical barriers for the handicapped or providing recreational facilities or improvements to areas lacking such amenities and having a large concentration of low and moderate income residents. Handicapped Needs Strategy It is the goal of Broolkl n Ccn ter to :Hake all of the City's facilities accessible to the elderly and handicapped (wheelchairs) individuals. uals. Curb cues 01' pedestrian ramps eliminate physical barriers in the sidewalk system. The City Hall /Civic Center complex is a two (2) Level complex requiring elevators for accessibility for elderly and handicapped users. The City's park system requires modification of playground equipment, shelter buildings, toilet facilities, drinking fountains and the paving of walkways and parking areas to and from the park facilities. i i © /Che. k i/ continued on additionst page and attach! Replaces forms HUD- 7015.3 and HUD•7015.4. whim are ceso,ete Page 2 Of 2 P`9es !#UO.70�4 tu•7S1 Form Approved OMn Nts 63 C V.S. DEPARTMENT OF ItOQSING AND VROAN DEVELOPMENT COMMVNITV 0EVELOPMEN AND /IOVSING PLAN SVMMARY THREE YEAR PROJECT SUMMARY 1, NAME OF APPLICANT 3. PERIOD OF APPLtCAUILITY 4. f{i�t1 E! J Ofiv;nat (Every three yearn a. APPLICATIONIGIIANTNUMUER 79 To: Ord nevision,tfated Frorn: V G • � nmrndu +art4,clated ti. PROJECT SUMMARY r $ 11 TIMING AND ESTIMA FUNUI°JG (1n drOU: : of $1 S Ft - - — - T E L �� PROGIIA BENEFIT OF ESrItlAT cov FUND R F O YE I YE 11 Y EAR UI UMPORTANTr . • See (ns m fctionsbeforff PROJECT A E W N _ ESTI• com17 /oting section.) tdUMS E E AA L T � MAT ( N LOW /f.100 OTHCR LOW /MUD OTHER LOW /MOD OTIIER OT11CR Y C D (i E BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT UENCFIT UENEFIT BENEFIT FUNDS E !� U (a) M (c) (d) (a) (t) (9) (h) W (i) (k) G) (m) Housing (City -wide) a. Rehab Grant /Loan x 66 84 96 36 Park Development (Central Park) x 40 Census Tracts 203.4 (B.G. 100,200,30)) 202 (B.G. 900 Handicapped Accessibility a. Elevators x 80 b, Sidewalk curb cut /ped. ramp City -wide x 12 c. Park accessibility x 73 180 180 G. SU11TOTAt S I s259 s $ 276 s $2 76 s ). T. CC1: T O n PAID N JfTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPM OLOCK GRANT F S , -11. E S'1• . tn T'_' D Eh. ,NDITURL", g C.NCFITTtNG LOW.A.'yb MODEnATE.INCOMt: PEF,SOn (,Sum &Colurnraq, 1 and k) S 0. 1.1:' +!2 C A7, n f'(:CSC£NT01= LINE 7 U U 4, ?awG Of paWB IIVD•70 (0.7C) Form AC -, U.S. DEPARTIVENT OF HCVSING A.-.z Ufi3 ;wN OEV.c L::FMENT 1. NAWE OF APPLICANT ANNVAL COMMUNITY OEVELOPMENTPROGAAM Clt of Brooklyn C1'nter 3. APPLICATION/GRANT NV'.t6ER PROJ ECT SUM.MARY . Y�r:ll D L.f i.i L+ r.•J I Li " y t rr��I W ORIGINAL (UCr: yCSr) FROM TO r • � REVtStON, CATER 8 /79 9 / 80 O AM.ENOMENT. DATED S. HAtdE O% PROJECT ( 6. PROJc CT NUtisBcR 7. ENVIkONMENTAL Housing Incentive Option Under Review S. ENTITY WITH RZSPVt+SiBIL: T" FOR CARRYING OUT THE PRC:cCT 8. TELcPnCNE Nt-; Z:1 City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 612- 561 -5440 • 10. DESCRIFT:ON Or FRO.'ECT • The primary intent of the Housing Incentive Program is to provide local flexibility or options for the provision of low and moderate income housing. Community Development Block Grant monies are intended for but not lim"i:ed to: land write - downs, rehabilitation of pi:ivate homes, acquisition, removal of architectural barriers, rehabilitation financing, relocation assistance or other activities appropriate to meet the housing needs of love and moderate income persons There are no component activities involved. 0 Check if continued on additionai pz (s) and a 11. CEt`SUS TRACTS) /ENU`.SEPAT I'JtJ DISTRICT(S) City -wid - i'�T /A [J Ch ock if continued on additional paces) and atra ^h, 13. MIG COMPONENT ACTIVITIES PROGRAM YE AH U'�L "5 iin G ^OO:�nCS J� Ji t CC3G 1 (L)siCOmponent activities usir.,r names a(actirhirs shown OTHER _..— InPartA. COST SUWMARY, f011tfUD•7057d LOW/MOO f OTHER I S i AMOUNT OUR: BENEFIT BE NEFIT s (a) M (b) i (C) I (dl { (e) -- • I� $ $ 1 14. Totals I5 15. Total Costs To Be Paid With Community Development ;lock Grant "Funds (Sure of Columns b and c! S 23 Replacts Form HUD,015.1, welch is absotEa YdsG 1 Of 1 pages M HUD-M6 tu- -,E) Form Aooroved Oil° f3G. $ ^•�,a,n US.DEPAP.TMENTOF VSING AND JRBAN DEVEL^,PMENT I. NAME OF APPLICANT ANNUAL C OMMUNITY DEVELOPmENT PROGRAM City of Brooklyn Center 2. APPLICATION /GRANT Ytii •i :ER L PROJECT Sll ' AARY 4. OaIGINAL_(tacn ycivl FROM TO I Q REVISION, DATED 8/79 9/80 1 Q AMENOMENT, DATED S. NAME OF PR �ECT 6. PROJECT NUMoER 7. ENVIkONM REVaewSTAT ;. � .. - - — THE PRC.;EC` 4. TELEPHCNii NLY==.R S. ENTITY WIT H ncS ?OhS :aI L:. rGR CARnY1tvG CU � City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota � � 612-561-5 • ID. DESCRIMON Or' FROJECT The purpose of the project is to remove physical barriers from -the City's park system in order to provide recreational opportunities. for physically handicapped individuals. The project includes: the modification of play- ground apparatus, buildings, toilet facilities and drinking fountains. It will also provide for paved walkways and parking lets to provide access to park facilities. The project will begin in the spring of 1980 and finish in September, 1980. Q Check if continued on additional paee(sl and attach. I . SS. CENSVS 'tR:.C7(S)(cNU :AER:.TIOt.i OISTRICTIS) Community wide c 1{2. ANTICiPAI1.L ) By. 1y80, three (.$) parks are LU i)e tG ilia alaerly and h a "' „a usz�.t lira l�i:.i +v �. -oNp �.�... individuals in wheelchairs. Q Chec if continued on a dditional pa,^e(s) and attach. 13. COBG CO. PRCGR.� M YEAR ;:S iin 'POrt =NY ACTIVITIES ^� UTr.c (List component octirities using names of activities shown CCSG { _ Jn PFrtA, COST SU,,fVARY, FormHUD•7A97.J LOsv /MCD OTHER SOURCE 6ENcF1T AMOJST . BENEFIT � � IC I - . !a1 { (bl 1 (c) 1 (d1 1 !tl is - 14. Totals i S i 15. Total Costs To Be Paid Y; i :n Community Development Block Grant Funds (Sum of Columns b and el $ FteplsCts Form HLa- :015.1, Y: EC ] of 1 pages NUCl•7Goo Ia - .cl Form Aoproved U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVE LCPM_N': 1. ; - '; , ,1 . 4E OF APP LICANT - ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM City of Brooklyn Center 2. APPLICATIGN,GR.>`yT t.Ur16ErZ PRO SUMMARY 3. PERIQu G� AFPLICAalLITY i d. (`� CRIGtNAL (racy. year! FAOM TO n REVISION, DATED -- - ., p /7 J /80 C� AMENOMENT, bA -D 5. NAAE O PRosOECT PROJECT N a E FL 1I 7. _NVIR:.`+r.t tTAL ncViEW STA.'-S i Centra Park De velopment 1 Certi F __ !! j 9. TELEPHS I._ til.'. :c oR [I. ENTI'iY LrSTN RESPCNS1 -1LfTY FOR CAFkRYl1dG CUT THE PRC :ECT !j C ity of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 61 "L- 5 61 - -5440 • 10. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT_ The project contemplates the development of -a park facility to be known as Central Park. The park will provide recreational facilities both active and passive for its primary service area which includes: Census Tract 202, _ Block Grant 900 and Census Tract 203.04 , Block Groups 100, 2M, 300 and i 400. Since the 1970 Census, a subsidized 122 unit high rise apartment building ha-s been erected adjacent to the park. With the inclusion of the apartment dwellers, all of whom are low and moderate income parsons the service area has a concentration (24.36%) of low and moderate income I persons.. 93 Che if cont inued on additional paga(s) and attach. 17. CEt45 USTRACT,SllENUt Y 202 and 2 03.04 _ - -- : <.F < "c ._•. •r ^�•�f;n )4 P1, 6 :�HAtE NTfi To provide a park facility to an isolated neighborhood having a major concen- tration of low and moderate income residents by the fall of 1980. 0 Che if continued on add : gcels! an attac _ 13. CDRG COM+ OtJEN T ACTIVITIES PROuF, : "• YEAR ^ (in tnc�a aCS of Oi'ricri (List component activities us CMG using names of activities show) I in Fart A, COS TSUhfMAr ?Y, formHUD•70.57,) LOMMOO OTHER SOURCE A . BENEFIT � BENEFIT MOUhT I . (a) lbl (rJ Park Development $ $ IS 285 LAWCON /LCMR Gra.Its _ Par Bon CDBG LAWCON Match 40 I I LAWCON/LCMR Grant I i E t � � • l , 14. Totals M S 40 i ! s 436 15, Total Costs To Ee Paid With Community Ceveioptment Stock Grant Funds isum of Cclumns b and c; S 40 HUD•1G6 Ib•i.P,l RetrlacesfLrmfiUU •Ju{�.I,wnc" va4c 1 of 3 P°tj form ACJrovew US. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 1. NAME OF APPLdCANT ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM 2. APPLICATIGN /GRANT NuniSEA PROJECT SU'fMARY 3. ?� ?.:Ci' v^ aFiLtC:.nlLf Y 1 6. CRIGINAL leJCn yea /) FROM TO [] REVISION. DATED • - Q AMENDMENT. CHAT ED S. NAME OF PROJECT r 6. PROJECT NU -M6EA o_N 9. TEL °_ ?H NUP.:BER S. ENTITY VJITH R SL ILITY FOR CARRYING OUT THE PROJ to. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Community Development Block Grant funds will be used to pay most of the local share of a, 191,257 L:WCON grant. The grant will complete two (2) softball fields, one (1) baseball field, a picnic shelter building and parking lot expansion. Total development of the park not using Community Develop ment Block Grant funds includes: walkways an amphitheater, passive game areas, horseshoe pits, an archery range, a vita trail and a playground apparatus area. Proposed Community Development Block Grant projects will start during the E) Check if continued on additional pa-ce(s and attach. 11, CbNSVSTRACT: } /ENUR'.ERA�iCNDISTRICT($) 12. ANl lGleAl Li ACCCN.r L!310. 0 Check if continued on additional cace(s) and attach. 1,. CDtl ^v COh1YONENT ACTIVITIES PROC'RAS \'.: n ° ? 2 vJ tin L)CusanCs of S% iLlst eomporent activities using names or ec.ivities shown its Part A, COST SUa,NARY, Forrrl HUD- 7067.1 Lowily 0Q OTNEa SOURCE A BENEFIT # 8E^IEFIT ) 1 lal { Ibl fcl 1 to) ! la i 1 I- � • . s is � 14. Totals is 15. Total Costs To Ee Paid With Community Development Block Grant Funds (Sure of co!urnns b and c; S NUCI.7: du 16-78) Repircet Form HUD- 7u15.1. wn,Cn is OZ;$Otete Pape 2 Of 3 Pe Form Atorcved U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND UR3.:,N OEVcLOPFA. `.T - 1, NAh +E OF APPLICANT _ ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM ' 3. APPLICA7JON /GRANT NU'fcSR PROJECT SUNI.MARY 3. PERICJ OF AF?LI-;AaiLiTY r d. Q ORIGINAL (eaCr yearJ. FROM TO Q REVISION, DATED f Q AMENDN!ENT. DATED 5. NAME OF PROJECT ( 6. PROJECT NUMBER 7. ENVIRONMENTAL REVitiv+ST S. ENTITY 1V TH RESPONSIBILITY FOR CARRYING OUT THE PRCJECT 9. TELEPhONE NUMBE., 10. DESCRIFT!ON Or PROJECT - - spring of 1980 and be completed by September, 1980. It should be noted that this area of Brooklyn Center is cut off from the rest of the. City by major highways and /or streets. The proposed development would be the only park facility available to these residents without crossing one of the streets noted. Q Checl, if continued on additional peas(s) and attach. 11. CENT - US TRACT(SVENUIMERASION DISTRtCTIS) - • - . ACCOI`'Pt..ISH44ENTS r and att i a. s.._h. Q Che;k if continued on additional n _ of 1 RAi�1 Y:AR FUN CS tin rn:US7n�s O'S' 13. CDBG CO MPONENT ACTIVITIES PR OD T (List component activities using names of activities shown { CCPG i QTHCR In Part A, COS, SULWARY, corm HUD. 7067.1 ( LOW/MOD OTHER. { { 1 BENEFIT � BENEFIT AMOUNT SOURCE (a) (bJ + (c) { (d) (ei I tt 14. Totals i i i ! t5. Total Costs To Be Paid With Community Development Block Grant Funds (Sum of Columns band c1 S NUO.7G�o la %�i iiePlaces Form HUD-7015A. wnicn is Oasolete Pagc 3 of 3 Pages Form A DOroved U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AN Uft$AN D.EVELOP'AENT L.NAM'= OF APPLICAN ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Cjtv of Brooklyn Center 2. APPLICATION /GRANT NU'•16 =a PROXECT SUN'.'AARY 3. P_P.IOD CF APPL;C, 1 a 1�' ORIGINAL (eaeh. YWJ FROM TO REVISICN, DATED Ci 8O 0 AMFNOb!ENT,SATBD pp 8/79 / S. NAVE OF PROJZCT � o. PROJcC7 t:VtA3£R � 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEVI6 STATt;3 • Housing Rehab Grants/toan Unde Review .- -. - OV' TH° PROJECT 9. TEL?Fr NL. MacR 'Y FCr3 C= �F.RYIhG - - ?.,ho164L: � N lTY WIT N R_S g, E T - City-of Br ooklyn Center, M 612- 561 -5440 10. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Brooklyn Center has in excess of 200 homes in need of rehabilitation. The proposed grant /loan program would make funds available on a City -wide basis to private homeowners with qualified incomes to make necessary re- pairs and maintenance for their respective homes. It is the intent of the program to maintain the existing housing stock in Brooklyn Center, Special attention will be given to those areas of -the City having the largest concen- tration of low and moderate income households and in the southeast neigh- borhood which has the largest concentration of homes in need of rehab work. The rehab p ro g ram will continue-over the next three (3) years. 0 Check if continued on addirional pace(sl and atrach. CENSUST1ACT(S);ENUrsERA71ON 0I5TMC7l5) City- wide /concentration in Census Tract 205 12. ANTICIPATED ACCOt.IPLISHMENIS Substantial rehabilitation of 30 housing units by 9/80. C) Check if continued on ed. age(s1 and arm ch. 13. CDbG CO4iFUN9NT ACTIVITIES ; GRAM YE AR c lin tncusa o / - OTHER ((.ist Com{sonent dCtivetics using nzmes of activities sho�m i _ + in Part A, CGSTSUf.!MARY, Form HUD-7067.) LOW/MOD T41Ert A4tOUNT SOURCE BENEFIT j �NEF:T 1 lai Ibl 10 1 t d! 1 ie! I Rehab Grant /Loa 60 - �S I Fdministration 6 1 181' A Q r t f I I ! I I i ff 14. Totals Is 66 is S 18 ! 15. Total Cosa To fie Paid With CommunitY Develoomen; Block Grant "Funds (Sum of Columns band c) S 66, 000 Replaces form HUO.705.1. wruch a Cv5010tc rage 1 of 1 paces kUO•iGoo id -i�Y 6orm AoOroVe� LIS. DEPART -MENT OF HCUSING AND URSAN DEVEL+P•AEyT 1. NAME OF APPLICANT ANNUAL COM MUNITY DEVELOP PROGRAM City of Brookl n Center 2. APPLICATION /GRANT NU :•cE PROJECT SU :I': ARY 3 . VL ii i G� "rift �ILiT'Y - — - <. El ORIGINAL red. ^ /: ytafl FROM TO O REVISION. DATED ° 8/79 9 /80 - 0 AMENDMENT. DATED r 5. NAME OF PROJECT O 6. PROJECT.NUIMEc_A { i. ENVIkONMENTAL AEVIENS :'.:5 8. ENTITY WIH RE.SP�,r :SIo1LITY FOR CARRYING OUT THE FRCJECT 9. 7ELEP nC.vE NUA'aE T City of Br ooklyn Center, Minnesota 612 - 561 -5440 r 10. DESCRIPTION Or PROD =CT - The Brooklyn Center City Hall /Civic Center complex is a two (2) level building constructed in the :side of a hill. Long term parking is located to the south and west of the building on the lower level. Short term parking is located on the north at the upper level. Brooklyn Center proposes to - install two (2) elevators within the complex. One serving the City Hall and the other in the Civic Center. The presence of elevators would make the building accessible to the handicapped on the interior. Presently,.a handicapped individual desiring to conduct business on each of the levels would have to leave the building and drive to the other side to enter another ® Check if continued on additional pacefs) and arra^h. 11. CENS DISTRICTISI . .20.3.04 12. ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS 21t:74t7 tS. t.jLion 'of iL:vu ' Mr] t`.G prvvk<.0 L. 0 0:>3iuiity t.:s' the CL"y J,r.:. , - Civic Center complex by June, 1980. Check if continued on additional cacefs) and atTa^h. _ 13. CDSG COMPONENT ACTIVITI=S FRCGR YEAR = U%[DS iin : ^Otr,JnCS o! .ii - ((.ist component activirtes us;n,• names of activities shown OTHER in Part A, COST SUS(.ttARY, FormHUD•7067.) LOWIMOD OTHER �. BENEFIT I 6EN'cFIT AMOUtiT SOURCE fat ( (b) ( icl (cJ 1 teJ N/A 14. ToWs i i 15. Total Casts To Be r' 3id With Community Development illock Grant Funcs (Sum of Columns b and c) S Rtplacts Form SiUQ•7Jt5.t.y +arch s UDSOtem Y 1 Of 2 F1ses HUU -X o (64E) Fo"n AOOro�e! Co t:o ci.: +•r. +n U.S. DEPARTMENT G: HCUSINS AN:) URSAN DEVF %:NT t. NAME OF APP LICANT ANNUAL COMMUNITY 0EVELOPMENT PROGRAM 2. APPLICATION /GRANT NV'•IC:a PROJECT SU .MIAR 3. PRIC„ G: +GiLiC .aill T Y i rr _ �. i�..I ORIGINAL (tact. year) FROM TO [Z) REVISION, DATED ❑ AMENDMENT.DAT 5. NAME OF PROJECT 16.PROJECT NV%1aER 7. ENVIinONMENTAL REVIE.NS:: TL= S. ENT)TY WITH RESPONSialLiY FOR CARRYING OUT THE PRC.:ECT 8. TELEPr+GNC NUN'c= 5 7 • 10. DESCRIPTION Or PROJECT ' level. Long term parking is on a lower level while a majority of the offices in City Hall are on the upper level. In the Civic Center, -individuals check In on the upper level but the pool, which is accessible, the sauna, e x ercise room and other facilities as well as parking are on the lower level. Construction would take place during th.e fall of 1979 or early 1980. Comple- tion would be less than one (1) year. The project will serve the entire community. There are no other component activities. ❑ Check if continued on additional pap efsl and attach. 11. CENSUS TRACTS) /ENUMERA T ION DISTRICT(S) • 12. ANTICIPATED ACCOMPLISHMENTS C7 Check if cont on add oaceN and atza-h. 13. C08G COMPONENT ACTIVITI S I PRGGRA I YEAR PU,":7S (in tnou.z`cs 0 f.S1 f Listeomponenta ctiviriesusingncncso lactiviticsshown F CC -3G OTHER in Part A. cosrSU.NMARY, Form NUO.704 LOw/MOD OTHF R 1 + I AMOUNT 1 SOURCE BENEFIT I BENEFIT I (ai (b) ( (r.J (d) ( (eJ S S S f I 14. Touts +S +S Is 15. Total Costs To Be Paid With Community Development Block Grant Fund's (SuM of Columns b and e) S NUD•70 -;,.6 (6- RePISCts Form HUC•I015.1, Page 2 of 2 pages Form Approved OM 3 NI 1 U.S. DEPARTMENT GP MOUSING AND UR_iAN CEIrELOFMENT 1. NAME OF PaLICANT F • ANNUAL COMMUNITY �CEVELOPMENT PROGRAM City of Brooklyn Center APPLICATIONiGRANT NUPABER COST SUM UMARY 3. P ERIO D OF APP FROM TO d. (� ORIGINAL (each year) o I [� D REVISION, DATEO 8/79 t 980 0 AMENOMENT, 0ATED Line PART A. SU'�' -MARY OF PROGRAM ACTIVITY FOR HL;:) AMOUNT (Important: Sc-- irstric: ions brine C!a :Tying cGSr `j USE G • f Acquisition of P,e3l Property $ 2 Disposition $ Public Facilities and Improvements a Senior Centers b Parks, Playgrounds and Other Recreational Facilities 40 c Centers for the Handicapped d Neighborhood Facilities e Solid Waste Disposal Facilities f Fire Protection Facilities and Equipment - t g Parking Facilities h Public Utilities, Other Than Water and Sewer Facilities i Street Improvements' # j Water and Sewer Facilities k Foundations and Platforms for Air Rights Sites Pedestrian Malls and Wzlkways ttt Flood and Drainage Facilities — n Specialty Authorized Public Facilities and Improvements (Lisa 7 (2) . , • (3) 4 Clearance Activities 5 Public Services 6 Interim Assistance 7 Completion of Previous'y Aoproved Urban Renewal Projects ReDtaces Ferrn r.UU - 7Gi 5.5, �.n:.� is QGSO rra I of 4 P _ ` t uu-M67 (U-1,11) Pa c aC�S i FOR HUD • AMOUNT (' USE ONLY $ Relocation Payments and Assistance S �S 9 Payments for Loss of Rental Income 10 Removal of Arcnitectural Barriers 153 11 Specially Authorized Assistance to Privately Owned Utilities 12 Rehabilita ;ion and Preservation Activities - a Rehabilitation of Public Residential Structures b Public Housing Modernization c Rehabilitation of Private Properties 66 d Code Enforcement e Historic Preservation 13 Specially Authorized Economic Development Activities a Acquisition for Economic Development b Public Facilities and Improvements for Economic Development c Commercial and Industrial Facilities , 14 t Special Activities By Local Development Corporations, Etc. (List) � f b C d 15 SUBTOTAL 25 9 16 Planning and Urban Environmental Design (See Part B of this form.) a Development of a Comprehensive Community Development Plan b Development of a Policy•Planning- 1 Capacity e Specially Authorized Comprehensive Planning Activities 17 General Administration (From Parr C, Line 6) t$ Continrenc:es and/or Local Option Activities (Not to exceed MY, of amount shown in 1$ I 18 Part D, Line 1) 19 TOTAL PROGRAM COSTS (Sum, of Lines 15 th,-ouyh 1S) $ 300 i $ Page 2 of 4 pages HUD -7067 (6-,3) PART S. DESCRIPTION OF PLANINING AND URBAN ENVIRC;:P.",ENTAL DESIGN CC:, T S N/A i f 4 I ❑ Check if continued on additional oace(s) and attach. PART C. GENERAL AD 1IMSTRATION COSTS • Linn FOR HU (See instructions for descript %ons of aom, %nlstr'afionr�tiv %t %es oefore A MOUNT USE ONLY classifying costs bNow.) 1 General Management, Oversight and Coordination $ 14 I s I 2 Indirect Costs (Allowable if charred pursuant to a cost allocation plan) 3 Citizen Participation 4 Environmental Studies Necessary to Comply With Environmental Regulations 4 1, v { Other (List) I C i e 6 ( Total General Administration Costs (Sum. of Lires 1 tfhrou, S) I S Page 3 of 4 paces KUC 4047 W-33) Line PART D. BLOCK GRANT RESOURCES FOR PROGRAM COST AMOUNT FOR HUD S I f USE ON Y Entitlement Amount S 300 I S 2 Less: Repayment of Urban Renewal /14DP Loans (Arra!h Schedule) S 3 Grant Withhe!d for Repayment of HUD•Guaranteed =Lc,,nS 4 Grant Amount For Program Activities (Line 1 minussum of Lines 2 and3) S 3 I $ . 6 Program income S N/A I S 6. Surplus From Urban Renewal /NDP Settlement S N/A S 7 Loan Proceeds S NSA ( S Reprogrammed Unobligated Funds From Prior Progr.r- ! ^ar(Arr�­_h Schedulel S NSA ( S g i TOTAL BLOCK GRANT RESOURCES FOR PROD ?,'__; COSTS (Sun) of lines 4 rhru P1 I S 300 � S Line PART E. SUIWMIARY OF PROGRA;.i 13E1'7EFIT AMOUNT � FOP, HUD USE ONLY 4 Costs Subject to Program Benefit Rules S 25 9 $ 2 Lxpenditures PrinCip liy 0ene itting Low- and trit,dera Persons S 259 3 Line 2 as a Percent of Line 1 100 ro oro 4 Other Expenditures S 0 I S F, Line 4 as a Percent of Line 1 0 , ( % ' Page 4 of pa;,es HUD•7067 lu•761 f� t I �i - The Mayor announced that the meeting was open for the con - sideration of proposed Street Grading, Base & Surfacing Improvement Project No. 1978 -38. The Clerk produced an affidavit of publication of notice of hearing on the proposed improvement showing two weeks' publication thereof in the official newspaper, the last publication being on February 22, 1979, which affidavit was examined and found satis- factory and ordered placed on file. The Mayor then called upon all property owners present to present arguments either for or against the proposed improvement.. After'hearing and considering all objections, and the property owners appearing in favor of said improvement, member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING STREET GRADING, BASE-& SURFACING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1978 -38 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that it is hereby determined that it is necessary and for the best interests of the City and the owners of property specially benefitted thereby, that the following improvement shall be constructed: Project No. 1978 -38 (M.S.A.P. 109- 113 -01) • trct ?di J cY on the north 1./2 of 53rd Avenue Nottli from 4th Street North to Perin Avenue North. The estimated cost is $261,000.00. Date Mayor ATTEST: C er 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. The Mayor announced that the meeting was open for the con- sideration of proposed Curb & Gutter & Sidewalk Improvement Project No. 1978 -39. The Clerk produced an affidavit of publication of notice of hearing on the proposed improvement showing two weeks' publication thereof in the official newspaper, the last publication being on February 22, 1979, which affidavit was examined and found satis- factory and ordered placed on file. The Mayor then called upon all property owners present to present arguments either for or against the proposed improvement.. After hearing and considering all objections, and the property owners appearing in favor.of said improvement, member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION 110. RESOLUTION ORDERING CURB & GUTTER & SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1978 -39 (M.S.A.P. 10 - 113 -01) BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that it is hereby determined that it is necessary and for the best interests of the City and the owners of property specially benefitted thereby, that the following improvement shall be constructed • Project No. 1978 -39 (M.S.A.P. 109- 113 -01) • CUtb & 'yfUt. eL be SLt,t&WA V'i cilril.ii S de of 53rd Avenue North from 4th Street North `to Penn Avenue North. The estimated cost is $134,000.00. 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. The Mayor announced that the meeting; was open for the con - sideration of proposed Water Main Improvement Project No. 1979 -1. The Clerk produced an affidavit of publication of notice of hearing on the proposed improvement showing two weeks' publication thereof in the official newspaper., the last publication being; on February 22, 1979, which affidavit was examined and found satis- factory and ordered placed on file. The Mayor then called upon all property owners present to present arguments either for or I against the proposed improvement'. After hearing and considering; all objections, and the property owners appearing in favor of said improvement, member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION ORDERING WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1979 --1 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that it is hereby determined that it is necessary and for - the best interests of the City and the owners of .property specially benefitted thereby, that the following improvement shall be constructed: Project 110. 1. 979 -1 r a t —. �,,� � tirt`�t,.C1. iiuxiia uGs_y .J...l.... v �;c..... ."3.:.tii f ,.�..�:,.i.�. s.. �..,.u..- North to 4th Street North. The estimated cost is $31,500.00. Date Mayor ATTEST: Cler 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 l //1 and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ORDERING . ORD RING STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1979 -2 (M.S.A.P 109- 113 -01) L WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center established Storm Sewer Improvement Project No. 1979 -2 by Resolution No. 79 -34 adopted on January 22, 1979; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED_by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center as follows: 1. it is hereby determined that it is necessary and for the best interests of the City that the following improvement shall be constructed: Project No. 1979 -2 (M.S.A.P. 109- 113 -01) Modification of existing storm sewer along 53rd 'Avenue North from Penn Avenue North to 4th Street North; and installation of new storm sewer along Oliver Avenue North from 53rd Avenue North northward approximately 300 feet and along Dupont Avenue North from 53rd Avenue North northward approximately 200 feet. The estimated cost of Brooklyn _Center's participation in said project is $50,000.00. 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: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT NO. 59271 REGARDING THE IMPROVEMENT OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS ON T.H. 152 AT 55TH AVENUE NORTH AND 71ST AVENUE NORTH. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center as follows; 1. That the City of Brooklyn Center enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota-Department of Transportation, for the following purposes, to wit:' To revise the existing Agreement No. 59271 dated November 2, 1978, in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Supplemental Agreement No. 1 to Agreement No. 59271, a copy of which was before the Council 2. That the Mayor and City Manager be and hereby are authorized to execute such agreement, and thereby assume for and on behalf of the City all of the contractual obligations contained in therein. 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 esolution g J and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. — � RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR INTERIM FINANCING FOR WATER ' CONNECTIONS IN THE AREA OF THE HOWE FERTIL PLANT WHEREAS, due to potential pollution of the ground water table in the area of the Howe Fertilizer plant during a fire of said plant, the Minnesota Department of Health has requested the City of Brooklyn Center to connect those homes using private wells in the area of said. plant to connect to the City of Brooklyn Center public water system; and WHEREAS, representatives of the Minnesota Health Department assured the City that it would be reimbursed for said connection costs from the Minnesota Department of Emergency Preparedness upon submittion of bills for said work; and WHEREAS, the LeVahn Bros., Inc., were contracted by the City on an emergency basis, with the prior approval of representatives of the Minnesota Health Department for making said connection; and P WHEREAS, LeVahn Bros., Inc., has submitted a bill in the amount of $7,561.59 for making said connections and it is estimated that the cost of restoring lawns and driveways will be an additional $1,500.00 . N UN , >:^ -., RE IT R— � 1-ay a-1-c ia .�..�,. a�.� �..VZ.in ... �i...�. a�.i'x "� ��.ty Nvvv, Tri�1�E'vni_,, y� .�i i..��..L 1�i� ,..Y a. x of Brooklyn Center that the City Treasurer be authorized to pay LeVahn Bros., Inc., the amount of $7,561.59 and future costs up to the amount of $1,500.00 for restoration costs from the City Council Contingency Fund for interim financing of the emergency water hookups in the area of the Howe Fertilizer plant. ]Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The notion 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: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ENCOURAGING THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ELIMINATE THE UNSAFE CONDITIONS ON PRESENT U.S. #169 WHEREAS, U.S. #169 commonly known as West River Road is under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Department of Transportation;and WHEREAS, the portion of said highway located within Brooklyn. Center, Brooklyn Park and Champlin southeast of U.S. #52 in Champlin and north of about 66th Avenue in Brooklyn Center is a two lane highway; and WHEREAS, said highway.is• very heavily travelled, has many curves, poor sight distances in many instances and for the most part narrow shoulders; and WHEREAS, said highway has had a high accident rate including many'fatalities and increasingly so in recent years; and WHEREAS, said highway carries not only auto and truck traffic but the Anoka District school busses as well as the Metropolitan Transit Commission. busses; and -. tRill_`eYC1:.tiS, 1 "t. 1J bilG:ty c. c..1.tu.l.r1 improvements have iJc oY°a - made along the above portion of highway in an attempt.to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the travelling public and ped- estrian traffic which use it, but whereas there remain serious deficiencies; and WHEREAS, it is acknowledged and appreciated that U.S. #169 between I -94 and the proposed North Crosstown is presently under study by a traffic consultant to the Minnesota Department of Transportation and _the preparation of an environmental impact study is under way and it appears construction will ultimately take place which will provide a safe and alternate route in some cases for the heavy traffic; but WHEREAS, said reconstruction, new construction and realignment of the said U.S. #169 and North Crosstown will probably not take place according to the best estimates for a period of time estimated to be between five and ten years; and WHEREAS, it is the City of Brooklyn Center's concern that during this intervening period of time there will be continuing increasing amount of vehicular and pedestrian accidents and fatalities Resolution No. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT F.ESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center: _ 1. The Minnesota Department of Transportation is hereby asked to take whatever measures are necessary to alleviate the unsafe conditions existing on U.S. #169 prior to total reconstruction of said highway. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this resolution to Mr. Richard Braun, Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Transportation Mr. Bill Schrieber, State Senator; Mr. Bill Luther, State Representative * ; and Mr. Bill Crawford, Golden i Valley District Engineer. Date Mayor ATTEST: Cleo "x 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: • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING DISEASED SHADE TREE REMOVAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1979-3 AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF SPECIFICATIONS WHEREAS, the City Council deems it necessary to initiate Diseased Shade Tree Removal Improvement Project No. 1979-3. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to direct the City Engineer to prepare specifications for said improvement project described as follows: 1979 -3 - Diseased Shade Tree Removal City wide program for removing diseased shade trees and stumps. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. i - Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS FOR DISEASED - SHADE TREE REMOVAL IMPROVEMENT' PROJECT NO 1979 -3 AND DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (CONTRACT 1979 -B) BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, as follows: 1 . The specifications for Diseased Shade Tree Removal Improve- ment Project No. 1979-3 are hereby approved and ordered filed with the Clerk. 2. The Clerk shall advertise for bids for such improvement by publication at least once in the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin, the date of first publication not less than ten (10) days prior to the date of receipt of bids. Said notice shall state that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed and accompanied by a cash deposit, bid bond, cashier's check or certified check payable to the City Clerk in the amount of not less than one thousand dollars ($1 , 000.00) ' 3. Bid date is set for Wednesday, March 21, 1979, at 11:00 a.m., central standard time. 4. The City Manaaer and the Director of Parks and Recreation shall be authorized to open and tabulate the bids 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. • ! f, CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ORDINANCE NO. j AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 REGARDING THE OPERATION OF BINGO BY LICENSED ORGANIZATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS - FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances of - the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended as follows: Section 23 -601. LICENSE REQUIRED. No person, except a fraternal, religious, veterans or nonprofit organization governed by Minnesota Statutes Section 290.05, which organization has been - -in existence for•at least three years, has at least 30 present, active members, who have been members for at least six months and whose conditions of membership are duly fulfilled, shall operate, conductor participate in bingo or bingo occasions nor have any interest in the operation, conductor participation in bingo or bingo occasions nor possess bingo cards, bingo numbers, bingo accouterments or bingo paraphernalia. No fraternal, religious, veterans or other nonprofit organization as described herein, shall operate, conductor participate in bingo or bingo occasions or have any in- terest in the operation, conduct or participation of or in bingo or bingo occasions or possess bingo cards, bingo numbers, bingo accouterments or bingo parapher- nalia wit-hout first being dul,T anri lawfully licensed as s et forth herein. Thcsrci _ shall_be_a class A bingo license and a class B bingo license, eligibil ty tor w shall be determined by the annual gross receipts, actual or pr of the _ ___ organization's bingo operation. A class A license must be obtained by organ Lions whose annual ross receipts, actual or projected, as deter by the City Coun are less than $1,500. A class B license must be obtained by organ whose annual gross receipts, actual or projected, as determined by the City: Coun are equal to or exceed $1,500. If the annual gross rece of an organizati hoid ink a class A license exceed the maximum permitted un said class A lic that organization m then apply for, pay the fees for and be issued a class B License in the future. Section 23 -603. LICENSE FEES, LICENSE INVESTIGATIONS AND LICENSE YEARS.. [The annual license fee is $25 and - the fee for investigation for the purposes of issuing a license is $50.] The annual license fee for a cl A license is $5 and the investigation for the pu rposes of issuing this license is $5. The annual licen fee for a class B license is�S and - the fee for investigation for the ,purposes of 'issuing this licens is ''50. The license fee and fee for the investigation of issuance of a license shall be paid when - the application is filed. In the event that the application is denied or in the event that the license, once issued, is revoked, canceled or surrendered, no part of the annual license fee or fee for the investiga- tion for - the issuance of a license shall be returned to - the- applicant unless by, ORDINANCE NO. expressed action of the City Council. Only one license shall be granted to each organization for each year. The Licensee shall display the license in a prominent place on the licensed premises at all times . Bingo games, bingo occasions, bingo numbers, cards, accouterments and paraphernalia shall be kept, maintained, operated or conducted by licensed organizations only upon the premises which it owns or leases. A license, unless revoked, suspended or canceled, is for the j calendar year or part thereof for which it has been issued. The fee for the investiga- Lion for issuance of a license must be tendered with each new application for a license and must also be paid at any time when there is a proposed change of ownership, change of bingo manager or reapplication for a license wherein addi- - tional or different parties other 'than 'the original licensee, parties and bingo manager are proposing to be licensed. All licenses granted herein are nontrans ferable. The City Council shall act upon a license application within. 180 days from - the date of application, but shall not issue a license until at least 30 days after -the date of application. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon 'thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1979. _ TAa.ynr ATTEST: Clerk I Date of Publication j Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 REGARDING THE OPERATION OF CERTAIN GAMBLING DEVICES BY LICENSED ORGANIZATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances of - the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended as follows: Section 23 -1901. LICENSE REQUIRED. No person, except a fraternal, religious, veterans or other nonprofit organization covered by Minnesota Statutes Section 290.OS, Subd. 1, Clause I or K, which organization has been in existence for at least three years and has at least 30 present, active members, all of whose membership dues are fully paid and who have been members for at least six months, shall possess, keep, use, control_ or operate any gambling device or have any - interest in the operation, possession, use or control of gambling devices or conduct or operate a raffle or have any interest in the operation or conduct of a raffle includ- ing possession of raffle apparatus or sale of tickets. No fraternal, religious, ve'terans•or other nonprofit organization as described herein, shall possess, keep, use, control or operate any gambling devices or conduct or operate a raffle or have any interest in the operation or conduct of a raffle including possession of raffle apparatus or - the sale of tickets without being duly grid lawfully lice ised as Se# forth herein. There shall be a class A gambling license and a class B gambling license, eligibility for which shall be determined by the annual gross receipts actual or projected of the organization's gambling op A class A license must be obtained by organizations whose an nual gross receipts, actual or projected, as determined by the City Council are less than $3,000. A class B license must by obtained by organizations whose annual gross receipts, actual or projecte as determined by - the City Council are equal to or exceed $3,000. If the annual gross receipts of an organization holding a class A license exceed t maximum permitted under sai c lass A license, that organization must then apply for, day the fees for, and be issued a class B license in the future. Section 23 -1903. LICENSE FEES, LICENSE INVESTIGATIONS &LICENSE YEARS. [The annual license fee is $25 and - the fee for the investigation for the purposes of issuing a license is $50.1 The annual license fee for a class A license is $S and the fee for investigation for the purposes of issuing this licen is $5. The annual license fee for a class B license is $25 a nd the fee for i g ation for 'the purposes o f issuing this license is $50. The license fee and fee for the investigation for issuance of a license shall be paid when the application is filed. In the event that -the application is denied or in - the event that - the license ORDINANCE NO. once issued is revoked, canceled or surrendered, no part of - the annual license fee. or fee for the investigation for the issuance of a license shall be returned 'to the applicant unless by express action of the City Council. Only one license shall be granted to each organization for each year. The licensee shall display the license in a prominent place on the licensed premises at all times. Gambling_ devices, raffles and all apparatus related to either shall be kept, maintained, operated or conducted by licensed organizations only upon the premises which it owns or leases except , that tickets for raffles may be sold off the premises. A license, unless revoked, suspended or canceled is for the calendar year or part thereof for which it has been issued. The fee for the investigation for issuance of a license must be - tendered with each new application for a license and must also be paid at any - time when - there is a proposed change of ownership, change of gambling manager or reapplication for a license wherein additional or different parties other - than the original licensee, parties and gambling manager are pro - posing - to be licensed. All licenses granted herein are nontransferable. The City Council shall act upon a license application within 180 days from the date of application, but shall not issue a license until at least 30 days after - the date of application. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption ;and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 1979. Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted underline indicates new matter.) PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REGULAR SESSION February 15, 1979 1. Call to Order: 8:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call ;1 3. Approval of Minutes: January 25, 1979 4. Chairman's - Explanation: The Planning Commission is an advisory body. One of the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings, the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final decisions on these matters. ° 5. ` Korsunsky- Krank- Erickson,Architects 79004 Preliminary Plat approval for the property located at 5920 Brooklyn Boulevard (the site for the First Brookdale State Bank remote banking facility) 6. Hodne /Stageberg Architects 79005 ..Site and Building Plan approval for the Hennepin , County regional library, license center, social services office and county court and administrative offices located on the west side of Shingle Creek fi�r scu t h e Sh ingle P r w, ..:.,.,, scut of .? Cr. Pk T owe r s hiahr se apartment building. 7. Arvid Elness Architects, Inc. for Dale Tile 79006 Site and Building Plan approval for a Dale Tile warehouse, showroom and office on Lakebreeze Avenue westerly of the present Dale Tile site. 8. Discussion Items: a) Draft Ordinance Amendment Regarding Directional Signs 9._ Other Business 10. Adjour r F Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 79004 Applicant: Robert Sheehy for Korsunsky- Krank- Erickson Architects, Inc. Location: 5920 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Preliminary Plat Approval On July 10, 1978, the City Council approved Application No. 78037 consisting of site and building plan for 'a remote banking facility for the First Brookdale Bank to be located on 59th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. One of the conditions of that approval was that the property be replatted by formal plat or registered land survey into a single tract or lot prior to occupancy of the building. This application is An response to that condition. The applicant has submitted a proposed plat combining Lots 1 through 6, Block 5, Hpp's 3rd Addition into a single parcel to be known as Lot 1, Block 1, First Brookdale Bank Addition. Presently there is a drainage and utili easement running north and south through the center of this parcel. The City is now in the process of formally vacating that easement. The Engineering Depart- ment is reviewing the plat and will be prepared to comment further. We will also be prepared to review, as a matter of information, various: revisions that have been made to the site, building and landscaping plans that are in keeping with the original approval of Application No. 78037. Notice of a public hearing has been publ ished. Approval of the application would be subject to the following conditions: Th t its s ubj ect o �i t o Cit Eng ineer. 1. .he fi plate .� subj....., to r ..v.ecs b, ..h.. .,qty - 9 2. The final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 2 -15 -79 I ' PARK oft T!. i #3RD AVER t , FIRE � l p STA.: XAPI . a i ` L No i = oz ND AVE M ' VF. e BROOKLY�t C' I T 42. i WANGSTAD ` x f +� r PARK - W : l E G2 -- x J Z t APPLICATION N0. 79004 u u 9YN AVE C l. ; LE < ` NORTH AY DR. i AVE. C 2 ANCE a � • o COUNTY - 14 AVL -14, TH C 2 E \ t L56T *vf. NORTHPORT ( ! \ PARK Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 79005 Applicant: Hodne /Stageberg Architects Location: West side of Shingle Creek Parkway,'south of the hingle Creek Towers Highrise Apartment Building Request: Site and Building Plan Approval The applicant is seeking site and building plan approval for he Hennepin County Regional Library, License Center, Social Services Office and ounty Court and it located westerly aces e 1 c i ffi it is an approximate 0 Administrative Offices. Thes a pp of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of the Shingle Creek Towers Highrise Apartment Building. It is bounded on the west by City park property an on the south by a large tract of land zoned R7. Access to the site on the north is provided through a common riveway with the Shingle Creek Towers Apartment complex at Summit Drive, while access on the south is through a common driveway at John Martin Drive. Appropria e driveway and pedestrian easements have been obtained. As a part of the easement agreement for the south drive, the County has agreed to maintain a small triangular piece of property which is not part of the County property located ortheasterly of the south driveway and this area will be landscaped as part of the entire site. The building is approximately 54,500 sq. ft., and the ordinance required parking has been provided. The layout of the building provides an access to the library area the license and the social services office through a co on entrance. The County Court and Administrative Offices, although part of the same building, has a separate entrance area and does not provide public access through the building to the other areas. The exterior of the building is a 4" by " glazed tile, buff its , color, with a contrasting 5" by 10" yellow glazed til band that extends around the building at window height. N different colored t i l e is proposed fur use on the court's area entrance. The architect will present colored renderings and materials to better illustrate the exterior decor. Walkways and pedestrian access to, and within the library site . are contemplated. A walkway is proposed along both the north and south driveway reas to provide pedestrian access to the main entry area. This walkway area ould also tie into the Central Park proposed walkway system between the parking 1 t and the regional library facility. In addition, a bikeway /walkway along the north property line would tie Central Park into the sidewalk system proposed for Summit Drive which would link up with a pedestrian bridge over. T. H._'100 at approximately 59th Avenue North. Additional easements may be necessary from the property to the north to provide the necessary width for such a concept. Much tine has been spent reviewing the landscape plan for the site, particularly with respect to a compatible treatment along the west property line and the area abutting Central Park. The treatment is felt to be compatible with the plans for the development of Central Park. The applicant has also proposed a somewhat different ground co er technique which envisions using a mixture of sod and prairie grass. Sod generally would` be installed around the parking and driving areas, along the w st and north side of the building and along Shingle Creek Parkway. 2 -15 -79 Application No 79005 Page 2 . Prairie grass would be planted in a large open area primarily on the east and southeasterly portions of the site. Prairie grass is a long grass containing wild flowers and is not maintained in the normal sense, being cut approximately once a year. It is looked upon by the applicant as part of the design concept for the entire site. The applicant will be prepared to elaborate further re- garding.this treatment. He also proposes to provide underground irrigation for only the sodded areas and not the area designed for prairie grass. The Zoning Ordinance requires an underground irrigation system to facilitate maintenance of site landscaping and green areas. it is the staff's feeling that the irri- gation system should be one that would provide irrigation to the area designed for prairie grass as well Further discussion and Commission direction regard- ing this matter is recommended. Another area of concern`to be reviewed is the feeling that consideration should be given to providing additional trees, at least on one large island area in the main parking lot to provide some visual breakup of the large blacktopped area. They also propose to_have exposed aggregate concrete islands in the parking area rather than the gravel indicated on the plan submitted. Finally, the applicant has requested (see attached letter) that an amphitheater be shown as an add alternate meaning that if the bid price is in excess of the building budget, this item would be deleted,-and the amphitheater would be re- placed with sod. They have also requested that a provision.be made to enable the County to make revisions to the building and landscaped -areas as necessary, bu t only after careful discussions with the City of Brooklyn Center. This, too, should be reviewed in greater detail with the applicant. Approval of the application should be subject to at least the following conditions: 1., B101 ding plans are sLAhject to review and approval by the Building- Official with respect to applicable codes prior to 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 sub- mitted to assure completion of site improvements. 4. The building shall be equipped with an automatic fire extingu ishing system to meet NFPA Standard No 13 and shall be connected to an approved central monitoring system in accord- ance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 5. Any outside trash disposal facilities and /or rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 6. All landscaped areas shall be equipped with an underground irrigation system. 7. Plan approval acknowledges the proposed amphitheater as an add - alternate meaning it could be deleted if the bid price is in excess of the building budget.provided the proposed area would be treated with sod and an irrigation system. 8. Any revisions to the building and landscaped areas are subject to review and approval by the City of Brooklyn Center. 2 -15 -9 IT - -- — - - >� FREEWAY TO BE CLOSED ,® ZIZ co co P 4j 11 P ! i ` P i _L. C E NTRAL /! � # F i a PROPOSED ROADWAYS X— ItgAD }--t PROPOSED BRIDGES z � GARDEN -- CITY PARK ° a c R z o 0, m < 1 SUM . MIT AP LICATI N0. �►P 79005 i Q. v M. G y E x = �PY K. LA C R *5 I� v �W.4Y �RIlsa architects / planners /envi ronmentalists 30 January 1979 hodne /Slageberg City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway inc. Brooklyn Center Minnesota 55430 116 east 22nd street 871 -1700 (612) Attention: Ron Warren minneapolis, minnesota 55404 Re: Brookdale Hennepin Area Library and Service Center. Dear Sir: I am pleased to attach the following documents for your use: 1. Three sets of civil architectural and mechanical drawings which meet the requirements for filing application for site and building plan approval. 2. Completed application form. 3. Check made payable to Brooklyn Center in the sum of $25.00. 4. Copies of all easement agreements. As we discussed, the County have requested that the amphitheatre be shown an add - alternate in the building contract. This would mean that sho the bid pr ice be in excess of the building budget, this i tew would be deleted. Should this deletion take place, the amphitheatre would be replaced with sod. In addition, we would ask that a provision be made to enable the county to make revisions to the building and land - scape areas as necessary but only after careful discussions with the City of Brooklyn Center. Should you require any further information, please feel free to contact me immediately. Yours sincerely, THE HodnejStageberg PARTNERS, Inc. �1 )eff ffScherer, Project Architect xc: Bill Schroeder Bob Rohlf JS Is Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No 79006 Applicant: Arvid Elness Architects, Inc. for Dale Tile Company Location: Lot 2 and a portion of Lot 1 of Block 1, Dale and Davies lst Addition Request: Site and Building Plan' Approval The applicant is seeking site and building plan approval for an approximate 32,000 sq. ft. warehouse, showroom,: and office on a site located on the north side of Lakebreeze Avenue, just west of the Dale Tile Company. The proposed plan comprehends utilizing a portion of the present Dale Tile Company site and a re- platting of this area to shift the present property lying easterly is required.. The applicant has been informed of this requirement and a replatting of the area will be forthcoming The proposed access to the site is via two curb cuts off Lakebreeze Avenue, the one to the east being a common entrance with Dale Tile. Common access and cross driving easement agreements are required along the easterly' portion of the proposed site to accommodate this plan. Approximately 2,400 sq. ft. of the building is designed for warehouse and approximately 10,900 sq. ft. for office and showroom area. The applicant shows parking in excess of the ordinance required 78 spaces. In reviewing the plans with the applicant we have noted some drainage problems on the west side of the site. Revisions have been ! requested to provide on site drainage. These revisions have some effect on the applicant's long range plans for expansion of the building to the west. We have indicated-that it may be possible to work out the drainage problem through some kind of common agreement with Davis Water Company located to the west of the site. One solution might be a drainage easement encompassing a portion of the Davies site and this site. It may be possible to obtain the necessary easements along wi h t1 he replattiPig or file araZ . Tic N wr- before the Commission, therefore, do not indicate any expansion possibilities and expansion could only be compre- hended upon resolution of this drainage problem. The applicant is proposing a scored concrete block building with a clear sealer and-a baked enamel roof_panel. The Commission may well wish to further review this treatment to determine if it is in keeping with past approvals. We have requested various plan revisions which we have not yet received. We will be prepared to review the plans in more detail Thursday evening. Approval would be subject to the following conditions: }. 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 approved site improvements._ - 4. - The building shall be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA`Standard No. 13 and shall be connected to an approved central monitoring system in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 2 -15 -79 Application No. 79006 Page 2 5. Any outside trash disposal facilities and /or rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 6. All landscaped areas shall be equipped with an underground irrigation system. 7. Joint access and cross driving easement agreements relating to the easterly portions of the site are subject to approval by the • City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 8. The property is'subject to replatting prior to the issuance of building permits. 3 • 2 -15 -79 Aj( """"Woo 51 sr AVE N. 1 L!�4 —..A-Q T APPLICATION NO 79006 40TH IN DAVIES DALE WATER TILE L A X E 8 R E E Z E I LE— — - -JU- i c LAKEME AVE wl A E� LAK BEACH 5 PARK .ROBBINSDALE 46 AVE AGENDA COMMENTS Item.No. 8a - Draft Ordinance Amendment Regarding Directional Signs We hope to have a draft ordinance amendment for the Commission's review regarding a size limitation for directional signs. r � 2 -15 -79 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION FEBRUARY 15, 1979 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called: -to order by Chairman Hal Pierce at 8:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Malecki, Hawes, Manson, Lucht, and Erickson. Also _ present were Director of Public Works James Merila, Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planning Aide Gary Shallcross. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FEBRUARY 15, 1979 Commissioner Malecki pointed out that the minutes did not note her arrival at 8.45 p.m. on January 25, 1979, and that it was she who moved that the Zoning Ordi- nance be amended to extend the 35 ft. greenstrip provision to P.5 zones. Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Manson to approve the minutes of the January 25, 1979 Planning Commission meeting as corrected. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Malecki, Hawes, Manson, Lucht and Erickson. The motion passed, Commissioner Theis arrived at 8:06 p.m. AP PLICATION NO. 79004 (Korsunsky- Krank- Erickson /First Brookdale Bank) Following the Chairman's explanation, the first item of consideration was Appli- cati No. 7 annn su bm itt ed b, R�hcrt Chor�{iv fnr l(nrci�nCkv- Krank- Frir. Architects. ,.a 41vn tJ .� be v �. lnc. The J ec:r° eLary ti trod uc: ed Lhe aNp aiiu cxplait,Ed t hat iii v ulp s.v, ✓� the City Council had approved Application No. 78037, consisting of site and build - ing plan review for a remote banking facility for the First Brookdale Bunk to oa located on 59th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary remarked that one of the conditions of approval was that the property be replatted by formal plat or registered land survey into a single tract or lot prior to occupancy of the bui ldina. The applicant has submitted a proposed plat combining Lots 1 through 6, Block 5, Hipp's 3rd Addition, into a single parcel to be known as Lot 1, Block 1, First Brookdale Bank Addition. The Secretary also _pointed out that presently there is a drainage and utility easement running north and south through the center of the parcel. He explained that with the development of this parcel there was no longer a need for the easement, and that the City was in the process of vaca -- ting the easement through an ordinance amendment, He further reported that there were various revisions that have been made to the site, building and landscaping plans that are in keeping with the original approval of Application No. 18037, and that the revisions would be reviewed as an informational item following the Com- mission's review of the preliminary plat. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Pierce opened the meeting for purposes of a public hearing. Noting that no one from the neighborhood was present, Chairman Pierce called for a motion to close the public hearing. ` CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Theis seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. 2 -15 -79 -1 In a discussion regarding the traffic engineering aspects of the plan, the m Secretary and the City Engineer pointed out that the proposed plat allows r entrance only from 59th Avenue North. It was pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan calls for the closing off of certain roadways on Brooklyn Boulevard, and .that 59th Avenue North was designated for eventual closing. The Secretary stated that because of the existence of a nonconforming single-family residential 0 structure with a driveway on 59th Avenue North, just south of this site, it was not feasible to close 59th Avenue North at this time. He added - that the approved layout for the bank facility does not preclude the possibility of a closing at a future date. It was noted that it might also be possible in the future to combine properties north and south of 59th Avenue North by creating a cul -de -sac on 59th Avenue North, just east of Brooklyn Boulevard. The City Engineer stated that there was a need for clearly delineating traffic patterns and that the cul- de-sac would accomplish this. He added that the level of traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard in this area would likely decline in the future as a result of the completion of the north- south Freeway into Minneapolis. The Secretary next reviewed various amendments to the site plan which were in keeping with the original approval. In response to a number of questions from Commissioner Hawes, Mr. Erickson, the architect for the project, explained that the plan envisioned four drive -up lanes to be in operation at the start, with three more to be added later upon approval by the City Council. He explained that the function of the new remote facility was not to generate a new market for the First Brookdale State Bank, but was rather a means of handling existing overflow demand. Commissioner Lucht asked whether only right turns would be allowed when exiting the site onto Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary replied that both right and left turns would be allowed. Chairman Pierce added that the plan does not allow any exiting toward Beard Avenue North through 59th Avenue North. In response to questions from Chairman Pierce, Mr. Erickson explained that ..hi l e the building had bP?n redesigned to ha somewhat larger,` the 'functi WdS YesSetl4ial ly he ,safJle, a nd v l at {i'ior pear �i,i ng .$�t'.�. i'r`�rW. provided Z in the., n%, plan as a counter th reduced stacking space for cars -wa,iting.in-the drive - lanes. He also pointed out that the screening along Beard Avenue North was changed to provide better screening of the site from the neighboring.residential area. The Commission then reviewed the landscape plan, which it found to be in keeping with the previous plan. Commissioner Hawes asked whether any expansion could be to the south by vacating 59th Avenue North. The Secretary and Mr. Erickson responded that this type of expansion was a possibility. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 79004 (Korsunsky- Krank- Erickson /First Brookdaie Bank) Motion by Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner Malecki to approve Planning Commission Application No. 79004 subject to the following conditions; ]. Final plat is subject to review by the City Engineer. 2. Final plat is subject'to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. Voting in favor: Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Pierce, Haves, Manson, Lucht and Erickson. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. ,; APPLICATION NO. 79005 (Hodne /Stageberg.Partners, Inc., Architects /Hennepin County Library the next item of consideration was ApplicaM.n No. 79005, site and building p an approval for the Hennepin County Regional Library Center, submitted by Hodne / Stageberg Partners, Inc., Architects on behalf of the Hennepin County Library Board. The Secretary introduced the proposal for the Library Center to be located on an approximate 10 acre site westerly of Shingle Creek Parkway, south of the Shingle Creek Towers Highrise Apartment Building. 2 -15 -79 -2- The Secretary indicated that the site is bounded on the west by City park - 'property and on the south by a large tract of land zoned R7. The regional library center will also contain a license center, social services office and county court and administrative offices. • The Secretary commented that access to the site is provided through a common driveway with the Shingle Creek Towers apartment complex at Summit Drive while access on the south is through a common driveway at John Martin Drive:. He added that appropriate driveway and pedestrian eA had been obtained and as part of the easement agreement for the south drive, the County has agreed to maintain a small triangular piece of property (which is not part of the County property) located northeasterly of the south drive and that this area will be landscaped as part of the entire site. The Secretary pointed out that the building is approximately 54,500 sq. ft. and that the proper amount of parking spaces has been provided, The 'layout of the building provides an access to the library area, the license and social services office through a common entrance. The county court and administrative offices, although a part of the same building, has a separate entrance area and does not provide, public access through the building to the other areas. The Secretary went on to discuss the exterior treatment of the building and the provisions for walkways and pedestrian access to and within the library site. He pointed out that a walkway is proposed along both the north and south driveway areas to pro- vide pedestrian access to the main entry area The walkway between the parking lot and the regional library facility would also tie into the Central Park pro- posed walkway system. In addition, a bikeway /walkway along the north property dine would tie Central Park into the sidewalk system proposed for Summit Drive which would link up with a pedestrian bridge over T.H . 100 at' approximately -59th Avenue North. The Secretary -then gave a lengthy explanation of the landscape plan for the bite. Fe 'discussed the proposal for a mixture of sod and prairie grass. Sod would genera i ly be i o;ata l ed a i , ciun - ' parn i iig and u� i , � isy ut e u , along u h side of the building and along Shingle Creek Parkway and the proposal is for prairie grass to be planted in a large open area primarily in the east and south -` easterly portions of the site. He explained that prairie grass is a long grass containing wild flowers and is not maintained in a normal sense, being cut approxi mately once a year. The applicant proposed to provide underground irrigation for the sodded areas only and not for the area designated for prairie grass. He stated that the Zoning Ordinance requires an underground irrigation system to facilitate site landscaping and green areas, and that the staff feels that the area designated for prairie grass should be irrigated as well Another concern the Secretary mentioned was the provision for additional trees in the main, parking lot to provide some visual breakup of the large blacktopped area. In conclusion, the Secretary discussed the applicant's proposal'of an amphitheater to be shown as an add - alternate, meaning that if the bid price is in excess of the building budget, this item would be deleted. The applicant has also indicated that other revisions to the site and building plan might be necessary as a result of budget constraints, but these revisions would only be made after careful discussions with the City of Brooklyn Center. The Commission then asked a number of questions concerning access to and traffic across and within the proposed library site. In response to questions from Com- missioner Hawes and Chairman Pierce, the City Engineer stated that the primary entrance to the site would be from Summit Drive and John Martin Drive as well. After Shingle Creek Parkway is extended across Interstate 694, signals will be. put in at Summit Drive. 2 -15 -79 -3- In response to a question from Commissioners Hawes, the City Engineer explained that the pond on the site will serve as a settling basin for run -off from the parking lot and that water would be piped from the pond to Shingle Creek. Com- missioner Erickson asked whether there would be a walkway from 63rd Avenue North through the park to the library site. The Secretary replied that such a walkway was planned. The City Engineer, in answer to questions from Commissioners Theis •{ and Erickson explained that the walkway s ystem through Central Park would be P Y Y 9 undergoing construction at the same time as the library and would be ready at the time the library was completed. He pointed out that the present bridge across Shingle Creek would be scrapped and that three new bridges were being designed. In response to Chairman Pierce, the City Engineer explained that Shingle Creek is being relocated, but that it would come within 100 feet of the library site after its redirection. The Commission then engaged the architects for Hodne/ Stageberg in a lengthy discussion of the landscape treatment. Commissioner Lucht asked whether anything could be done to break up the large blacktopped` parking lot. The Secretary responded that trees or additional plantings could be planted on one large island on the northwest corner of the lot. However, there is little that can be done with the lot as a whole because of space con- straints. Commissioner Erickson asked what percent of the landscaped area would be sod as opposed to prairie grass. The applicant's landscape architect respond- ed that three acres of the site would be prairie grass and the remainder (approxi- mately 4 acres) would be sod. At that point, Architect Jeff Scherer took issue with the.Secretary.'s condi for approval of the plan requiring.underground irrigation for the area treated with prairie grass. He explained that Minnesota prairie grass must not be irri- gated since that would destroy the 'prairie grass and lead to nothing but weeds. Irrigation is something that is appropriate, he went on, for sod and blue grass areas.. This is why most of the State has been taken over by blue grass as opposed to nr it a r S�. Prairie nrasc� he contintind, floe ishes in MinnPS ta 'c natural and has no n eed of arti f icial ilia i�eiteriance. Tice . r E3 .vi lieu the:Ci.ty - °s policy concerning irrigation is simply aimed at maihtai1RiT4,&1..1 landscaped areas. The Secretary went on to suggest the City could perhaps con - sider holding a performance bond until the prairie. grass took hold in lieu of waving the irrigation requirement. Chairman Pierce added that the ordinance ad -_ dressed sodded areas primarily. He also recalled that the City had not required an underground irrigation system for the Post Office because it was contended that such a system was not needed because the below grade area would contain a clay shelf which would retain moisture. He stated that this concept has not yet proved successful and the City is concerned about maintaining green areas. The applicant contended that prairie grass was appropriate for the site in question, and that the County Library System always does a thorough job regarding _ maintenance. - j The applicant then showed a number of slides which illustrated the types of flowers and grasses that grow in Minnesota prairie grass. The slides showed the sequence of growth which th prairie grass follows over a period o f three to _ four years as it takes hold`. In response to a question from Commissioner,Hawes regarding maintenance, the landscape architect replied that prairie grass re- quires no watering and need be mowed only once a year. In response to a concern voiced by Commissioner Erickson that the prairie grass is located right next to a ` playground, the landscape architect stated that the prairie grass would serve as an educational tool for young people to teach them about the - 'Minnesota prairies before settlement by farmers. Commissioner Theis asked how long it would be before the prairie grass reached maturity. He replied that by the third growing season the grass would reach maturity but would conti to grow. Commissioner Hawes asked how high the grass would get. The landscape architect answered that the type of prairie grass planted around the pond would grow to roughly waist height. while the prairie grass planted on the rest of the site would be mature at knee height. 2- ,15 -79 -4 .The Secretary recommended that the performance agreement with the County extend for a period sufficient to determine the viability of the prairie grass. Chair - .' man Pierce added that the intent of the Zoning Ordinance is to help maintain landscaped areas and should not be read as a rigid rule where it is not appropri- ate. Commissioner Lucht stated that he was in favor of the prairie grass and against requiring irrigation. He stated that he would favor holding a bond from three to five years,. Commissioner Lucht4briefly discussed the types of grasses and flowers proposed for the site with the architects Commissioner Theis inquired of the architects as to the point at which the success of the prairie grass would be determined.- The architects replied that their own professional judgment would be a(t the County's disposal to determine when the prairie grass had reached maturity. In response to questions from Chairman Pierce, the applicant stated that the amphitheater would not accommodate large gatherings, but would be a place for eating lunch and small informal gatherings. At that point, Flora Rogge, a member of the Library Board commented in favor of the Library plan, and commended the architects for their work on the project. She stated that the amphitheater was planned for small dramatic productions and was not intended to draw large crowds of people.' In response to further questions from Chairman Pierce, Mr. Scherer assured the Commission that any significant changes in the plan resulting from budget constraints would be brought before the Commission. Commissioner Hawes asked whether there was room for possible future expansion, to which Mr. Scherer responded that expansion was possible for the library and social services office to the extent of about 12,000 square feet which would re- quire a need for more parking area. He added that the large parking lotto the south; was a costly aspect of the project, and that the ability to store plowed snow on the site was an economical feature. The Secretary recommended that the irrigation requirements for the prairie grass be replaced with an extended performance agreement for three years after completion • of construction. .Commissioner Theis asked whether the bond would cover p the cost ' 7 Cn.. v��a -� 1 e b- of s odding ifthe prairie grass fuii��. The .�c�,�c�u�,� r�:�.�le.Ci t,�u�t t 'luq c�1c. - reduced only as progress is made in meeting the performance required': RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 79005 Motion by Commissioner Lucht seconded by Commissioner Manson to approve Appli cation No. 79005 submitted by HodnelStageberg.Partners, Inc., Architects subject to the following conditions: 1. The building plans are subject to review' and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to 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 approved site improvements. 4. The building shall be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA Standard No. 13 and shall be connected to an approved central monitoring system'in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 5. Any outside trash disposal facilities and /or rooftop mechanical • equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 6. All,landscaped areas shall be equipped with an underground irrigation system with the exception of prairie grass areas. 2 -15 -79 -5- M A portion of the Performance bond shall be held for four years after installation of the prairie grass to assure its viability. 7. Plan approval acknowledges the proposed amphitheater as an add alternate, meaning it could-be deleted if the bid price is in excess of the building budget, provided the proposed area would be treated with sod and an irrigation system. 8. Any revisions to the building and landscaped areas are subject to review and approval by the City of Brooklyn Center. 9. The large island in the northwest corner of the parking lot shall be given a landscaped treatment to include trees compatible with the proposed landscape plan and shall be 2 to 3" in diameter. Voting in favor: Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Pierce, Hawes, Manson, Lucht and Erickson. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Planning Commission recessed at 10:09 p.m. and resumed at 10:31 p.m. APPLICATION NO. 79006 (Arvid'Elness Architects for Dale Tile Company) The next item of consideration was Application No. 79006 su muted by Arvid Elness Architects,.Inc. for Dale Tile Company. The Secretary reviewed the site and building plan for an approximate 32`,000 square foot warehouse, showroom and office on "a "site located on the north side of Lakebreeze Avenue North, just west of the present Dale Tile Company. The Secretary stated that the proposed plan comprehends using a portion of the present Dale Tile Company site. Replatting of this area to shift the present pi v}c.i t y 1 , inc C3st:r l is i..q...•.C.s. hE .,..i.r�..3. ,,.;,:.air;ed that access to the cite is proposed to be via two curb cuts off Lakebreeze Avenue, the o ne lying to Lhe eas'� being common entrance with Dale Tile Company. Common access and cross driving easements are required along the easterly portion of the proposed site to accorNimodate this plan. Approximately 22,000 square feet of the building is designed for ware - house and approximately 9,900 square feet for office and showroom area. The Secretary noted some drainage problems on the west side of the site. Revisions have been re- quested to provide on -site drainage. These revisions have some effect on applicant's long -range plans for expansion of.the building to the west. The Secretary suggested that it might be possible to work out the drainage problem through a common agreement with Davies Water Company located to the west of the site. One,solution would be a drainage easement encompassing the portion of the Davies site and the proposed Dale Tile site. The necessary easements could be obtained along with the replatting of the area;. As a result, the Secretary added, expansion is not comprehended in the present plan, but could only take place upon resolution of t1e drainage problem. In conclusion, the Secretary mentioned that the applicant proposes a scored concrete block building with a clear sealer and baked enamel roof panel, and.added that the Commission may wish to review this treatment to determine if it is in keeping with past approvals. The Commission then discussed the subject of drainage for the site. The City Engineer reported that the problem was being examined and that some common arrangement with Davies Water Company could probably be worked out. The Commission went onto discuss the landscaping and exterior of the building. in response to a question from Chairman Pierce, the architect stated that the color fastness for the black enamel plates was guaranteed for 20 years. Concerning the operation on the site, the representative from Dale Tile explained that there would* be a very modest amount of retail sales carried on at the new location. As time progressed, he explained, the operations carried on in the existing building would be moved to the new building, and more space in the old building would gradually , be 2 -15 -79 -6- rented out. He pointed out that the showroom would be open two evenings a week and Saturday from 9:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Chairman Pierce and Commissioner Hawes voiced the concern. that unless the masonry on the outside of the building turned out,,right, there might be a need for a pigmented sealer to achieve uniformity of color on the building exterior. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 79006 (Arvid Elness- Architects /Dale Tile Co.) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Hawes to approve Application No. 79006 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 comp - letion of approved site improvements. 4. The building shall be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA Standard No. 13 and shall be connected to an approved central monitoring system in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 5. Arty outside trash disposal facilities and /or rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 6. All landscaped areas shall be equipped with an underground irrigation system. 7. Joint access and cross driving easement agreements relating to the easterly portions of the site are subject to approval by the City` Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 4 8. The property is subject to the submission of a preliminary plat prior to the issuance of building permits, and subject to final plat approval prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. 9. Where the plan submitted indicates seed, it shall be replaced with sod. 10. Major trees on the boulevard shall be 22 to 3 inches in diameter instead of the 2 inch diameter indicated on the submitted plans 11. The exterior of the building shall be treated in such a manner to provide a uniform color. Voting in favor: Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Pierce, Hawes, Manson, Lucht and Erickson. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. $HOP PERS CITY PROPOSAL FOR REPLAY The Secretary ten raised as an informational item a proposed replat by Shoppers City to allow the creation of two lots in the west parking lot. These two lots were proposed for development by two drive -up restaurants, a Wendy's Restaurant and a Rax Restaurant: 2- 1,5 -79 -7- The Secretary stated a,jiumber of concerns over the proposed site. Among them the 35 ft. greenstrip requirement, the adjustment of the existing chain link fence along the north property line and the flow of traffic within the area proposed for replat. Commissioners Malecki, Lucht and Erickson voiced concern over the crowded conditions they had experienced at similar operations in the past. Chairman Pierce voiced a general concern that driving lanes be delineated clearly so as to facilitate the flow of traffic. The Secretary commented on the need for parking for the three sites and stated that it seems that enough parking for the three sites could be provided. The City Engineer stated that it would be better from a traffic engineerind standpoint to separate the traffic from Shoppers City from the traffic entering the two restaurants, but that, on the basis of precedent, the City would have difficulty enforcing this requirement. Chairman Pierce stated that the "stacking" problem was the central issue. Com- missioner Theis suggested that the south curb cut along Brooklyn Boulevard could be moved further north and that one of the restaurants could be moved south of this south curb cut. The Secretary added that if the restaurant created a bad traffic situation, the City might be forced to extend the median on Brooklyn Boulevard further north. The Commission-continued to discuss the problem of traffic flow without reaching any definite conclusion. A DJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. Voting to adjourn: Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Pierce, Manson, Lucht and Erickson. noting against: none. The Planning Commission adjourned at 12:15 a.m. _ .Chairman 2 -15 -79 -8 M & C No. 79 -5 f February 23, 1979 / C FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Subject: Tax Court Ruling on Limited Value Law To the Honorable Mayor and City Council: Attached are 'tables prepared by Mr. Koole, our Assessor, indicating the potential impact of a - tax court ruling invalidating the Limited Value Law. First of all, the Limited Value Law as it relates - to assessing of properties took effect in 1973. Since that time Assessors have been restricted from raising property values more than 107. in any given year. Because inflation has driven up 'the value of property and houses in the metro area and-Brooklyn Center faster -than 10% annually, -the limited value on most properties in Brooklyn Center is less than that - true market value. The Assessor must base 'taxes on limited value. The current tax lawsuit involves property owners who say - that the 'law - treats properties unfairly by taxing some of - them at a rate below market and others at a rate at market. Basic principle behind their suit is 'that it is unequal - treatment under - the law. The major problem results from the fact , that new construction is valued at its cost while an identical house built prior - to 1973 carrying the same market value is carrying maybe 10% - 20% "lower limited value on which.the taxes are based. The result two identical houses in Brooklyn Center- -one built • t L .47�_ ;....1.•] 11 f bb.., t- i ...,1 rr +r.�:1�4•t •h1•+n -0r 5 U111C �/CCil�b CtI�V an d One u U Y 114 lc%Gi74ty vvvuiu 00 11 for 4aav iu�,.Z. �+s+.... ....a taxes are as much as 10% - 15 different. If 'the 'tax court ruling, which is currently being appealed to 'the Supreme Court, stands then •there will be some properties getting a 'tax break (lowered - taxes) and other properties getting a - tax increase The attached - tables show by class of property and by some examples' some of - the impact of - the elimination of - the Limited Value Law. Mr. Koole and I will be able to explain these tables in detail at the meeting. From an administrative point of view - the Limited Value Law is not equitable. However, conversely 'the immediate appeal of the law would not be "equitable" either. We are suggesting 'that 'the Council pass a resolution, which will be passed out at your desks Monday evening, requesting the State Legislature - to act during - this session to modify the Limited Value Law to the extent it relieves its inequities and make adjust- ments in - the assessing system which would compensate for - the shift in - tax burden created by 'the elimination of 'the Limited Value Law. Mr. Koole informs me if 'this is not done during - this session of - the Legislature because of the substantial increases in the value of properties, - the inequities and the problems of repairing those inequities created by - the limited value will increase geometrically. In short, we believe - the Legislature, must act during - this session to eliminate - the possibility of greater in equities next year. Respectfully subittd, Gerald G. "Splinter City Manager CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING MODIFICATION OF LIMITED VALUE LAW WHEREAS, the Limited Value Law as it relates to assessing of properties took effect in 1973 restricting the raising of property values more than 10% in any given year and WHEREAS, a tax lawsuit has been initiated involving affected property owners who say that the law treats properties unfairly by taxing them at a rate below market and others at a rate at market; and WHEREAS, the Limited Value Law is not equitable, however, the immediate repeal of the Limited Value Law would create a shift in the tax burden; and WHEREAS, it appears the most equitable solution at this time would be a f repeal of the Limited Value Law and corrective legislation which would relieve the inequities of the present law and make adjustments in the assessing system which would compensate for the shift in tax burden created by the elimination of the Limited Value Law; and WHEREAS, if the Limited Value Law is not repealed and corrective legislation passed during this session of the Legislature the inequities and h C f , -..f'�.a r ., .s' n + c r b; t he Liitc T alon Taw t,.c F= cblcr.:,, o.. �.:�:.z..:. �......,, .n;, aide u :: C �..� , .. d �. _„ _ ,: will increase dramatically NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to urgently request the Legislature to repeal the Limited Value Law and pass corrective legislation which would relieve the inequities created by the present law and make adjustments in the assessing system which would compensate for the shift in tax burden created by the elimination of the Limited Value Law. 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. MARKET - LIMITED VALUE ANALYSIS (1978 Assessment - Tzxes Payable - 1979) Property Type Market ° of T otal Limited J of Total Amount /° of A.V. Valuation Valuation Increase Increase Amount to Market to Market Increase Apartment 34,423,600 8.08 34,240,400 8.63 183,200 .53 73, Blind 975,700 .22 904,200 .22 71,500 7.90 23,809 f Commercial 76,364,760 17.93 72,015,280 18.15 4,349,480 6.03 1,870,276 Disabled 1,324,500 .31 1,214,10 30 110,400 9.09 36,763 Industrial 21,210,440 4.98 18,378,450 4.64 2,831,990 15.40 1,217,755 Land 2,039,600 .47 1,679,420 .42 360,180 21.44 154,877' Paraplegic - 88,200 .02 85,60C! .02 2,600 3.03 865 Residential 285,436,500 66.99 264,080,830 66.56 21,355,670 8.08 7,111,438 Title- 1,692,300 39 1,692,300 .42 0 0 0 over 10, 000 Utility 2,532,652 .59 2,520,95 .64 11,700 .46 5,031 426,088,252 100.00 396,811,532 100.00 10,489,063 • (T� 1) - TAX EFFECT ANALYSIS i School District 279 1979 Mill Rate = 100.630 City Assessed Value = $1.26,968,242 Mill Rate Re- Calculation Assessed Value - $126,968,242 Added Assessed Value $ 10,489,063 New Assessed Value $137,457,305 or 8.26/ Increase 100.630 mills minus 8.26/ 92.000 mills Effect by Property Type Homestead Residential Apartment $ _.0 000 Lmt, - 5797-86 $ 1On , 000 Lmt. _ c4, 0?5 ?(t $43,•232 - $791.42 $100,530 Mkt. $3,699.50 .45/ Increase 8.09 Decrease Commercial industrial $100,000 Lmt. - $4,409.56 $100,000 Lmt. - $4,409.56 $106,030 Mkt. - $4,336.86 $315,400 Mkt. - $4,720,20 1.67/ Decrease 7.04/ Increase (Table 2 ) CASE ST UDIES Year Built Value Used Value Tax Difference % Incr. or Decr. Mill Rate 1973 Limited 47,700 - $1,079.30 (103.014) Market 47,700 = $ 957.93 $121.37 - 11.24/ (94.174) 1960 Limited 48,500 =: $1,106.80 (103.014) Market 51,300 $1,070.75 -$ 36.05 -3.25/ (94.174) 1975 Limited 57,100 = $1,362.16 't (100.630) Market 57,100 _ $1,216.30 - $145.86 - 10.70% (92.000) 1946 Limited 30,300 = $463.22 (100.630) Market 39,000 $661.79 +198.57 +42.86% (92.000) (Table 3) 0 Licenses to be approved by the City Council on February 26, 1979 BULK VENDOR LICENSE Brooklyn Center Lions Box 29092 T �1 Sanitarian CIGARETTE LICENSE Acorn Vending 8433 Center Drive Brookdale 10 Office 2810 County Rd. 10 Q, - �• _ Happy Dragon 5532 Brooklyn Blvd. City Clerk FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Kymme Bautista 210 E. County Rd. B2 European Health Spa 2920 County Rd. 10 77 XllUt.1 Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave, No. Fanny Farmer Candy Shop #121 Brookdale Shopping Center Fanny Farmer Candy Shop #123 Brookdale Shopping Center Farrell's Ice Cream Parlor 5524 Brooklyn Blvd. Frito-Lay, Inc. P. 0. Box 35034 Frito -Lay 6800 -D Shingle Crk . Pkwy. 77 Happy Dragon 5532 Brooklyn Blvd, d� Kentucky Fried Chicken 5512 Brooklyn Blvd. 2 -ee McGlynn Bakery 7752 Mitchell Road . Dayton's Brookdale Shopping Center Maid of Scandinavia Co. 3244 Raleigh Avenue Maid of Scandinavia Westbrook Shopping Center Olive's 'Ea Broc)kdaie Suvp,N iiy Center, Poppin Fresh Pie Shop 5601 Xerxes Ave. No. Red Owl Stores 5425 Xerxes Ave. No. 9 -6L, Zantigo- American Mexican Rest. 6800 Shingle Creek Pkwy. T XbJ_ .1� Sanitarian MECHANICAL SYSTEM'S LICENSE L2. Modern Heating & Air Conditioning 2318 First Street N.E. Rouse Mechanical 11348 K -Tel Drive Building Official NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Beacon Bowl 6525 Lynda le Ave. No. 7 �� H. & L. Enterprises 11517 Yukon St. N.W. Whirltronics 3401 48th Ave. No. 7", K Minnesota Fabrics P. O. Box 1748 Minnesota Fabrics 5712 Morgan Ave. No. T. J Red Owl Stores 5425 Xerxes Ave. No. C. B. Schut 7536 Douglas Drive Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. No. T - Viking Pioneer Distributing Co. 5200 W. 74th St. LaBelle's 5925 Earle Brown Drive 7 Sanitarian Licenses to be approved by the City Council on February 26, 1979 BULK VENDOR LICENSE Brooklyn Center Lions Box 29092 II � Sanitarian. CIGARETTE LICENSE Acorn Vending 8433 Center Drive Brookdale 10 Office 2810 County Rd. 10 Q - d• Happy Dragon 5532 Brooklyn Blvd. fha_A_J City Clerk FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Kymme Bautista 210 E. County Rd. B2 European Health Spa 2920 County Rd. 10 T x Qn Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. No. Fanny .Farmer Candy Shop #121 Brookdale Shopping Center _ Fanny Farmer Candy Shop #123 Brookdale Shopping Center I le Farrell's Ice Cream Parlor 5524 Brooklyn Blvd. Frito -Lay, Inc. P. O. Box 35034 Frito -Lay 6800 -D Shingle Crk. Pkwy. �. J2�lLArtJ Happy Dragon 5532 Brooklyn Blvd. 7`. , e • _�, Kentucky Fried Chicken 5512 Brooklyn Blvd. __,% McGlynn Bakery 7752 Mitchell Road Dayton's Brookdale Shopping Center Maid of Scandinavia Co. 3244 Raleigh. Avenue Maid of Scandinavia Westbrook Shoppinq Center Olive's - East ulvvjtuc�iC �tivNN i1 1 t? qtr Poppin Fresh Pie Shop 5601 Xerxes Ave. No. Red Owl. Stores 5425 Xerxes Ave. No. Zantigo- American Mexican Rest. 6800 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Sanitarian MECHANICAL SYSTEM'S LICENSE Modern Heating & Air Conditioning 2318 First Street N.E. Rouse Mechanical 11348 K -Tel Drive Building Official NONPERISHABLE VENDING M ACHINE LICENSE IC1ll - Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. No. 7 H. & L. Enterprises 11517 Yukon St. N.W. Whirltronics 3401 48th Ave. No. Minnesota Fabrics P. O. Box 1748 Minnesota Fabrics 5712 Morgan Ave. No. Red Owl Stores 5425 Xerxes Ave. No. C. B. Schut 7536 Doudlas Drive Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. No. Viking Pioneer Distributing Co. 5200 W. 74th St. 0 LaBelle's 5925 Earle Brown Drive -� Sanitarian PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Coca -Cola Bottling Co. 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd. Arctic Metals 6530 James Ave. No. H. & L. Enterprises 11517 Yukon St, N.W. Whi.rltronics 3401 48th Ave. No: Red Owl Stores 5425 Xerxes Ave. No. Viking. Pioneer Distributing Co. 5200 W. 74th St. LaBelle's 5925 Earle Brown Drive �_�d -�l -i Sanitarian �- READILY PERISHABLE FOOD VEHICLE LICENSE Frito -Lay, Inc. P. O. Box 35034 / Frito -Lay 6800 -D Shingle Crk. Pkwy. Sanitarian RENTAL DWELLING, LICENSE ' Initials: D Ewing Square Associates Ewing Square Townhouses George & Judith Gottschalk 4700 -04 Lakeview Ave. No. Residential Alternatives, Inc. 5449 Lyndale Ave. No. Renewals: Village Properties Evergreen Park Apts. Harold Swanson 723'0 West River Road ,LI Harold Swanson 7250 West River Road Edward Sass 5101 -03 Xerxes Ave. No. a • WaAAj -AJ • TransfQrs: Gititil "t vvliipdtly, ti7c. Cioi.LliT1AUS Viita e ri `!.s. � lwv� . ✓ � Director of Planning and Inspection SPECIAL FOOD HANDLING ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Ideal Drug Store 6800 Humboldt Ave. No. 1 • - Toy City Store 6000 Earle Brown,Drive Sanitarian