Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012 01-17 HCPAGENDA BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING COMMISSION January 17, 2011 7:00 p.m. Council Commission Room Brooklyn Center City Hall 1. Call to Order: 7:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call 3. Approval of Agenda 4. Approval of Minutes- December 20, 2011 5. Chairperson's Report 6. Council Liaison Report 7. Development of Official Neighborhood Designations 8. Continued Discussion on a Community Garden Program: a) Happy Hollow Neighborhood Park 9. Other Business 10. Adjournment: 8:30 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION DECEMBER 20, 2011 COUNCIL COMMISSION ROOM CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission was called to order by Chairperson Lawrence - Anderson at 7:04 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairperson Kris Lawrence - Anderson, Commissioners Kathie Amdahl, Peggy Lynn, Chereen Norstrud, Ephraim Otani, and Judy Thorbus. Also present were Council Liaison Carol Kleven and Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel. Commissioner Tracy Groves was absent from the meeting. APPROVAL OF AGENDA There was a motion by Commissioner Amdahl and seconded by Commissioner Norstud to approve the agenda as amended. The motion passed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — November 15, 2011 There was a motion by Commissioner Amdahl and seconded by Commissioner Thorbus to approve the November 15, 2011 Housing Commission minutes as submitted. The motion passed. CHAIRPERSONS REPORT Chairperson Lawrence - Anderson reported on the following: The December 1 Domestic Violence Forum, The December 4 Holly Sunday activities, and - The December 6 Primary Election, noting that the two candidates that received the most votes were Lin Myszkowski with 266 votes and Mark Yelich with 113 votes. The Special Election for the vacant City Council seat will be held on January 24, 2012. COUNCIL LIAISON REPORT Councilmember Kleven informed Commission members of recent Council items, including: - Preliminary Plat Approval for Evans —Norby Funeral Home, which includes changes to the access driveway closest to the intersection Brooklyn Boulevard intersection for safety reasons. - The 2012 City Council - Commission liason appointments. The Commission expressed their most sincere appreciation to Councilmember Kleven for her active role in the New Resident Welcome /Outreach Program and participation in the 12 -20 -11 Page 1 Commission's 2011 Meetings. Continued Review & Discussion on Candidate Garden Sites and Establishing a Community Garden Program for 2012. Business & Development Director Gary Eitel provided a slide presentation and commented on the following information: Update on a Cooperative Agreement for Gardening Opp ortunities at the Brooklyn Park/Crystal Community Garden Site at the Crystal Airport: - The City of Brooklyn Park has discovered that they cannot expand their garden plot area at the Crystal Airport and consequently, they are not in a • position to consider a cooperative agreement with the City of Brooklyn Center to offer any garden plots at this location. Possible Alternative Site within the MAC airport property: 12 -20 -11 Page 2 An inquiry has been made to the Metropolitan Airport Commission (MAC) on the potential use of a vacant parcel in the Northeast corner of the Crystal Airport which adjoins the City of Brooklyn Center. This site has a security fence along the residential properties to the east and along 63` Ave. N. with approximately two acres of lawn area before the tree line, wetlands, and Twin Creek. MAC indicated that they have leased land for gardening, referencing both the Crystal and Flying Cloud airports, and would consider a proposal by the City. The typical agreement is for a 3 year period at a cost of $100 -$125 per acre. A call to the City of Brooklyn Park indicated that they were not interested in expanding their community gardening program at this time, but would not object to the City pursuing the potential lease with MAC for community garden plots at this location. The Commission discussed this alternative site, noting concerns with on- street parking on this major collector street and potential issues with the deer population in this immediate area. The consensus of the Commission was not to pursue this alternative site. Happy Hollow Neighborhood Park Site An aerial photo graph with a conceptual layout for 18 garden plots ( 20'x20') in the Northwest corner of the park/adjacent to Malmborg's Greenhouse & Nursery was prepared for the Commission's consideration. The consensus of the Commission was that this park site be pursued as the best location to begin a community garden program for the City and discussed the following items: 12 -20 -11 Page 3 Investigating a potential partnership (gardening expertise and cooperation) with Malmborg's Greenhouse & Nursery in developing a community gardening program at this location. Meeting with the adjoining neighbor and a future meeting with the neighborhood, The providing of water service line to the sites from either the City's line that serves a park drinking fountain or from an adjoining property owner ( Malmborg's), - Providing perimeter fencing that would provide a unified look and establish parameters for interior fencing of the individual plots, Preparing a program budget for 18 garden plots and limiting initial capital expenditures and operational costs within that budget framework. - The refinement of gardening policies and guidelines, including annual time lines for planting, garden care, interior fencing, harvesting, and year end clean -up. The consensus of the Commission was that an annual fee of $50 for a 20'x20' garden plot, consistent with the Brooklyn Park/Crystal fees and necessary to proceed with this initial garden program. The consensus of the Commission was to continue to prioritize its efforts towards developing its first community garden site at the Happy Hollow Neighborhood Park. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Norstrud and seconded by Commissioner Lynn to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center Housing Commission adjourned at 8:21 p.m. Chairperson MEMORANDUM TO: Chairperson Kris Lawrence — Anderson and Commission Members From: Gary Eitel, Director of Business & Development Date: January 17, 2012 Subject: Housing Commission Agenda Items Item # 7 Development of Official Neighborhood Designations On December 12, 2011, the City Council was requested to provide direction on the potential development of official neighborhood designations. The majority consensus of the City Council was to support the identifications of neighborhoods and directed staff to obtain feedback from the Housing Commission and Park & Recreation Commission. Attached for your consideration is a copy of the City Council Minutes and the staff memorandum with the preliminary neighborhood designations that were presented at the December 12 City Council Work Session. Item # 8 Continued Discussion on a Community Garden Program Update at the meeting. MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE: December 12, 2011 TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager FROM: Vickie Schleuning, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards SUBJECT: Neighborhood Designations Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff regarding the development of official neighborhood designations. Background: Staff informally developed neighborhood designations throughout the City to initially facilitate the neighborhood area meetings spearheaded by the Police Department. It has been a way to promote consistent communications about projects. The neighborhood designations are being brought forward to the City Council for consideration of formal adoption by the City Council. At this time, formal adoption of the neighborhoods could assist with broader communication strategies. In the future, other uses could be explored as part of policy decisions or targeted programs. Proposed neighborhood designations and some considerations are reviewed in this memo. The draft neighborhood designation map consists of seventeen different neighborhoods in areas of less than 900 single family properties. Staff from City departments met initially to discuss area characteristics, names and identifiers, and potential uses for neighborhood areas. The neighborhood names were derived from local neighborhood parks, positive identifiers and often natural focal points of a neighborhood area. The physical and neighborhood characteristics, such as streets and property types, were also considered when defining the proposed neighborhoods. Comparison: In order to best determine the neighborhood areas, it is important to know how the neighborhoods will be used. There are several factors that would influence the optimal size and geographic location of the neighborhoods. As part of the research, staff interviewed representatives from five different cities that currently have neighborhood designations to find out the successes and challenges of establishing and using neighborhoods areas. Some highlights of this research are provided below: • The size of neighborhoods varies significantly between cities. • The number of neighborhoods within a city can vary significantly depending on the overall size of the city and neighborhoods. Portland Oregon has the greatest number of neighborhoods at 95 and the City of Crystal has 14 being the fewest. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe community that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust Process: MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION • In general, cities have used the neighborhoods to improve communication between the city and the residents through targeted mailings and correspondence, and in certain cases through specific neighborhood programs. • One common challenge identified is citizen involvement. Although some cities have tried to invoke ongoing engagement through neighborhood programs, sustaining neighborhood involvement in the long -run was not always achieved. • Some cities have allocated resources such as staffing and dedicated funds to support neighborhood group programs. For more information, please see the attached City Neighborhood Comparison chart. Consideration: There are many aspects to consider when defining a neighborhood within the city. • Size: The first thing to consider is the size of the neighborhoods, which could vary from a block level to quadrant. The proposed neighborhoods vary from 200 to 1000 single family properties, or approximately 15 to 40 square blocks within each neighborhood. • Use: The use of the neighborhoods will influence the recommended size of a neighborhood. Neighborhoods can be used for communications purposes, for neighborhood meetings, grant appropriation, neighborhood groups, inspection areas, street maintenance areas, etc. • Resources: Depending on the development and use of neighborhoods, the resource needs vary. Staff time may be involved in the setup and monitoring of these neighborhoods, depending upon the level of neighborhood area involvement and initiatives. For example, if a neighborhood grant program is initiated, staff and funding resources would be greater than using the neighborhoods for communication only purposes. 'A neighborhood program could involve City staff coordinating neighborhood cleanups or garage sales. • Identification: Neighborhoods can be physically identified through various means such as on street signage or by monument type of signage. The costs vary depending on the number and type of signs. • Resident Involvement: One key factor of a successful, high level neighborhood designation is resident involvement and acceptance. When determining neighborhood areas, it is important to consider resident perceptions and potential involvement. • Property Types (Commercial/Residential): Should the neighborhoods include specific types of properties such as residential versus commercial, or should they be defined strictly on the basis of geography? There are advantages and disadvantages to both scenarios. Depending on the nature of the feedback from the City Council, staff could prepare a resolution to officially adopt the neighborhoods at a future Council Meeting. As an alternative, staff could seek feedback about the proposed neighborhood areas and potential uses from the Housing Commission and Parks Commission prior to official neighborhood designations. The feedback would be incorporated into a final report and a resolution drafted for Council consideration. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe comnnumity that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust Policy Issues: MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION • Is there benefit or drawback to officially identifying neighborhoods? • What is the most beneficial use of neighborhood designations? I.e. Communications, operations, community engagement, neighborhood improvements • What level of resources and timeline should be allocated toward neighborhood programs? I.e. Staffing, signage, grants Council Goals: Strategic: 3. We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods Ongoing: 5. We will improve the image of the City with citizens and those outside of the City's borders Attachments: Attachment I -City Neighborhood Comparisons Attachment II -Map of Proposed Neighborhoods Attachment III - Property Type Summary of Neighborhoods Mission: Ensuring an , , . _ - _ _ T _ . _ � _ _ _ attractive, clean, safe comrmmmity that enhances the quality of life and preserves the public trust Attachment I- City Neighborhood Comparison St. Louis Park, MN Pop: 44,302 & 10.8 sq. Mi. Iowa City, IA Pop: 67,862 25.2 Sq. Mi. Crystal, MN Pop: 23,000 5.9 Sq. Mi. Seattle, WA Pop: 608,660 142.5 Sq. Mi. Portland, OR Pop:583,776 145.4 Sq. M Size of Neighborhood How are they used? How long have they 1990's. existed? Range from 100 -1,000 households. 35 official neighborhoods. Public meetings are held at a neighborhood level. City staff works with neighborhood leaders to coordinate meetings and communicate with residents. Started in the early Boundary designation is , up to the residents. Boundaries can and do change. 33 neighborhood associations are in place. Main reason for associations is communication. Including: upcoming events, activities or actions (rezoning, capital projects, etc.) Started in 1990. To build a sense of identity to sub - areas. Reconstruction projects based of neighborhoods 4 and "sweeps" every 3 -4 years. Special neighborhood mailings. Neighborhoods based off of city parks, name of dominant plat or other points of interest or historical significance. 14 designated neighborhoods. Established in 1999. There are 13 Neighborhood Districts made up of multiple smaller neighborhoods based on proximity or similar attributes. The districts are the first line of contact /communication for neighborhoods. No new neighborhoods in 50 -60 years. The districts were established in 1989. Associations defined own boundaries, vary in size from a few people to 20,000. Ideal size would be 5,000 people. Portland has 95 neighborhood associations divided into seven districts. Communication with City government, pursuing activities to improve livability. City works with neighborhoods for feedback, host community events, clean ups, and advocacy efforts to shape policy. Since 1974. St. Louis Park, MN Pop: 44,302 & 10.8 sq. Mi. Iowa City, IA Pop: 67,862 25.2 Sq. Mi. Crystal, MN Seattle, WA Pop: Pop: 23,000 5.9 Sq. Mi. 608,660 142.5 Sq. Mi. Portland, OR Pop: 583,776 145.4 Sq. Mi. A full -time City Community Liaison is the main contact. Position started as part -time. Community Outreach Officer helps with neighborhood support. Challenges Requires resident support. Some neighborhoods much more active than others. Not all neighborhoods are organized; it is not mandatory. Organized neighborhoods have power which can make City decisions more complicated. Highlights/ It takes people wanting Notable items to do this in neighborhoods to be successful (leaders needed). Council members and commissioners were first involved in neighborhood boards. Without grant program, neighborhoods would likely fail. Staffing One Neighborhood Services Coordinator. Boundary lines of neighborhoods can become an issue. They didn't want specific neighborhoods to have by -laws. A total of $15,000 of grant money available for neighborhoods annually. Approval for grants by neighborhood council. City funding provided for association newsletters that are reviewed by city staff. City provided staff and mailing support early on but soon ended due to lack of self- sustaining neighborhood organizations. Citizen driven neighborhoods never materialized or those that were couldn't sustain themselves. The last neighborhood organization ceased to exist in 2004. Tried to revive interest in 2005 and 2007 by a city wide event and suggesting help from The Center for Neighborhoods. The Neighborhood Initiative was closed out in 2008. Nine District Coordinators for the 13 districts. Each district has a council that is non -paid positions comprised of residents or representatives from organizations. Council system has been accused of being too powerful. Need to find a way to better represent under represented citizens. Took a lot of work to get councils started. Boundaries based off natural and non - natural geographic features. Districts were modeled after St. Paul's. Neighborhood district office located in each district funded, funded by city. How to get more people involved. Not everyone identifies with their geographic community. i Making sure people have the resources and support they need. f I Almost every part of City government interacts with the association system, including land use planning and development. $200,000 to community groups through grants and $95,000 to associations for newsletters. Attachment II- Map of Proposed Neighborhoods W �t Palmer 1nio li :071k 1? 1 Shingle Creek .- I Firehouse _4 I NEIGHBORHOODS Bellvue - Centennial F T East Palmer ▪ Evergreen • Firehouse n Garden City i 14 Grandview Happy Hollow Kylawn ® Lions FT Middle Twin MI Orchard Riverwood Er Shingle Creek ME Upper Twin ® West Palmer IIIIg Willow Lane error BROOKLYN CENTER Tam, .err. Irra ronNnueeer.rmp 110e.4rrae ..910 *env ¶1 .n*$ vv:no•19as, worn.:a era eaae nnrtsrv. rt1V.raJ calm...tat ra are: w:w..pte -.r n. rn+ re,. 0.arser r rnwrfloN1ny. 3wr.e,.er,T11!.G town rbAen5rr (.t •xren■n:n+ env.sa.rr. 'cn ee,n ase nreerea 73 72 Cr :M N O � ar , r rz .rainerr(Clrj .AF NS!rra s-urma eren n m -:.oraran rl.2, 0 2. 7.M..17,2 • of anrn . O -0 **We 3.,S11Lb'1 5.11.15115 3. :ono ven a raatr. r 7e3; N )::. 1.1 >rr.r etawwaa3veev,ag^err es3 ..pe1.W. 00 21 501 1. ra tNa.rr"..let2aenfNZNCr(1121!7.31 wa1'Wn: Caw. Itlwlal.Mrr:N r'CS^N raCn 11011A0. ...In..," VC 411.141111.* CC(T w Ire rrCams0atr l e( UIV, • isaora;ev erg era u. no 0m.awn .aw N Mr .wu x.2,2..20. Attachment III Property Type Summary for Proposed Neighborhoods Total count of Commercial, Residential, Multi- Recidenlial, and Other Parcels per Neighborhood. Ile lghborhood Total Parcels Commercial Parcels lie aIdentlsIParcela Multi-Rea Parcels Other Parcel Eeihrue 634 4 607 16 7 Central 82 67 4 5 6 elst Palmer 431 2 427 2 0 eeargreen 313 8 236 8 1 Firehouse 504 19 464 14 7 Garden City S37 23 836 14 4 Grandrlew 777 12 756 5 4 Kann Hollow 187 20 147 14 6 Kylawn 788 19 755 10 10 Lions 627 8 555 20 14 Muddle Twin 317 19 260 31 7 Orchard 785 5 769 1 0 RJ'arwood 299 1 221 13 4 Shingle creels 54 52 0 0 2 Upper Twin 380 6 371 2 1 Weal Palmer 969 18 330 5 10 Y•ttlow Lane 857 15 659 31 172 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA STUDY SESSION DECEMBER 12, 2011 CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Mayor Tim Willson at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Carol Kleven, Kay Lasman, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Director of Fiscal and Support Services Dan Jordet, Public Works Director /City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel, Information Technology Director Patty Hartwig, Planning and Zoning Specialist Tim Benetti, Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, and Carla Wirth, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF AGENDA ITEMS AND QUESTIONS VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM Councilmember Lasman asked whether the video system would include surveillance of the community center and exercise area. Information Technology Director Patty Hartwig explained the positioning and orientation of the video cameras to record the entrance door into the exercise room and emergency access door. She indicated the cameras will be geared toward the exercise area and the receptionist/building manager will have the ability to view the areas at any time. Councilmember Lasman asked about the potential liability for the City should someone underage be in the exercise area. City Manager Curt Boganey indicated it is difficult to speculate on the potential risk or level of liability, but the general rule is that the City would have small liability unless it is deemed to be negligent. Councilmember Ryan commented on the liquor store surveillance system and noted the higher video resolution would help identify the perpetrator, should there be a theft. Ms. Hartwig indicated this is correct and advised of the key locations that will be upgraded with higher resolution cameras. Councilmember Kleven thanked staff for its recommendation to place cameras in the exercise area to enhance security for those using the exercise area. Ms. Hartwig explained the cameras will be networked to a core system so it is cost effective to expand, if desired. 12/12/11 -1- Councilmember Lasman requested the following correction to the Work Session minutes of November 28, 2011: Paae 3, 11 bullet: "Elected officials can acknowledge people for their random acts of kindness." It was the majority consensus of the City Council to accept the correction to the November 28, 2011, Work Session minutes. Councilmember Lasman requested discussion of Item 7a, Resolution Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of the Brooklyn Center Centennial Celebration Committee. She requested the resolution be revised to include an additional WHEREAS paragraph that specifically acknowledged the contribution of Keith Lester for chairing the Committee, as follows: "WHEREAS, the leadership of the chair of the Brooklyn Center Centennial Committee, Keith Lester, is to be commended and congratulated on the great success of the events during the Centennial Year; and" It was the majority consensus of the City Council to accept this resolution revision to add the above language as the eighth WHEREAS. Mr. Boganey requested the addition of the December 8, 2011, Special Session minutes to the Consent Agenda as Item 6a6. It was the majority consensus of the City Council to accept this addition to the regular meeting agenda. Mr. Boganey requested the removal of Consent Agenda Item 6i, Approval of Site Performance Guarantee Reduction for Shingle Creek Crossing Subdivision Agreement /Planning Application No. 2011 -008 and 009, to allow time for staff to review the request for a reduction to the letter of credit prior to Council action. He also requested the removal of Consent Agenda item 6k, Resolution Ordering the Abatement of Conditions Creating a Hazardous Property at 3119 62 °d Avenue North, since the hazardous condition has been removed from the subject property. It was the majority consensus of the City Council to accept these regular session agenda revisions. MISCELLANEOUS Mayor Willson commented on two recent articles in the Sunday edition of the StarTribune that were favorable to Brooklyn Center. One article pertained to the joint work of the Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park Police Departments with New Americans Academy and the second article cited Brooklyn Center as having one of the lowest tax rates in the metropolitan area. Councilmember Ryan advised there was also a StarTribune article on December 7, 2011, relating to the daylighting of Shingle Creek, a feature of Shingle Creek Crossing, that included an interview with Planning and Zoning Specialist Tim Benetti. 12/12/11 -2- Councilmember Lasman asked staff to provide her with information on the program starting in January to provide technical assistance grants for small businesses. Councilmember Ryan apologized for being unable to attend the December 15, 2011, Financial Commission meeting due to a family commitment. Councilmember Kleven asked what could be done to help someone who is living in his/her car. Mr. Boganey recommended they be referred to Hennepin County for assistance. DISCUSSION OF WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEMS AS TIME PERMITS NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGNATIONS Mr. Boganey introduced the item and stated it was initiated at the staff level more than a year ago to promote consistent communication amongst staff and the community to identify neighborhoods and boundaries. The action, if desired, to formally designate neighborhoods is a way to confirm these are reasonable descriptions. After that, the City can do as little or much as it wishes and it is not being proposed to consider neighborhood signs or organizations. Assistant City Manager /Director of Building & Community Standards Vickie Schleuning described the process used by staff to define neighborhood designations and research conducted of other cities. Staff found there was not one particular model but found in all cases the neighborhood identification was useful for internal and external communications. Ms. Schleuning presented a map of proposed neighborhoods that used the name of a local park to identify the neighborhood. She reviewed policy issues with establishing such designations and requested City Council feedback. Councilmember Kleven thanked staff for its research and stated support for using the park name since residents identify with their neighborhood park. Councilmember Ryan concurred and asked if consideration was given to the Police Department's designated boundaries for patrol sectors. Ms. Schleuning advised the Police Department was instrumental in creating these proposed boundaries so the boundaries are close if not the same, and the next step would be to verify the locations. Mr. Boganey explained that operationally the City creates boundaries to determine the most effective and efficient division of resources to serve the public; however, it may not be wise to make the neighborhood boundaries fit the operational needs of the City because they will change. The Council expressed its support to consider creating neighborhood boundaries and to use the names of parks since residents feel an attachment to their neighborhood park. It was noted that neighborhood boundaries may also be useful in the future should City -wide representation be desired to serve on a committee or task force. 12/12/11 -3- Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Kleven seconded to recess the Study Session at 6:45 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. RECESS STUDY SESSION RECONVENE STUDY SESSION Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to reconvene the Study Session at 6:47 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGNATIONS — CONTINUED The discussion continued on whether to create neighborhood designations. Mayor Willson suggested this matter be presented to the Housing Commission and Park and Recreation Commission for their feedback. Then the City Council can consider their comments before making a further determination. The majority consensus of the City Council was to support the identification of neighborhoods and direct staff to obtain feedback from the Housing Commission and Park and Recreation Commission. OPPORTUNITY TO ACQUIRE 6031 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD AS PART OF THE REIMAGING OF THE BROOKLYN BOULEVARD CORRIDOR Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel informed the City Council of the opportunity to acquire the home at 6031 Brooklyn Boulevard. He noted it is a single - family residence acquired by Rockwell Investment LLC on September 29, 2009, for $63,000. The owner pulled building permits, proceeded with rehabbing the home, obtained an $89,000 mortgage, and a rental license was issued in May of 2010. On November 16, 2011, there was a house fire at this residence and the property is currently vacant. The property owner is offering the property, as is, for $100,000. Mr. Eitel used a map to point out two lots to the north and one to the south of the subject parcel that the EDA already owns. He displayed pictures of the house and asked whether the Council thinks the purchase of this property and removal of the single family residence will have a positive effect on improving the image of Brooklyn Boulevard and if it is in the public interest to direct staff to pursue negotiations for purchase. Mr. Eitel advised this is not a foreclosed property and the dollar amount exceeds the limits directed by the Council. The Council indicated its support to move in a direction to negotiate purchase of the property due to its strategic location; however, the Council did not support purchase at the asking price. It was pointed out that the house was fire damaged so the property owner may have received an 12/12/11 -4- insurance payment. Mr. Eitel stated his understanding it was not a major fire and the structure can be repaired. Mr. Boganey clarified staff is not proposing a purchase price. If the Council supports proceeding, staff will negotiate in a manner to get the best price possible. The final decision whether to purchase the property will be with the EDA. The Council acknowledged the purchase of this property was within the long -range plan to remove single - family residences from Brooklyn Boulevard. Mayor Willson indicated he would need to know what the property owner received as an insurance payment and if that is not disclosed he may not support its purchase. The majority consensus of the City Council /EDA was to direct staff to proceed with the negotiation for acquisition of 6031 Brooklyn Boulevard as part of the reimaging of the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor. Motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Lasman moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to close the Study Session at 6:59 p.m. 12/12/11 -5-