HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013 08-26 CCP Regular SessionAGENDA
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
August 26, 2013
6:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers
A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is
located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary.
1.City Council Discussion of Agenda Items and Questions
2.Miscellaneous
3.Discussion of Work Session Agenda Items as Time Permits
4.Adjourn
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
City of Brooklyn Center
August 26, 2013 AGENDA
1.Informal Open Forum with City Council — 6:45 p.m.
—provides an opportunity for the public to address the Council on items which are not on
the agenda. Open Forum will be limited to 15 minutes, it is not televised, and it may not
be used to make personal attacks, to air personality grievances, to make political
endorsements, or for political campaign purposes. Council Members will not enter into a
dialogue with citizens. Questions from the Council will be for clarification only. Open
Forum will not be used as a time for problem solving or reacting to the comments made
but, rather, for hearing the citizen for informational purposes only.
2.Invocation — 7 p.m.
3.Call to Order Regular Business Meeting
—The City Council requests that attendees turn off cell phones and pagers during the
meeting. A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet
ring binder is located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary.
4.Roll Call
5.Pledge of Allegiance
6.Approval of Agenda and Consent Agenda
—The following items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be
enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a
Councilmember so requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent
agenda and considered at the end of Council Consideration Items.
a. Approval of Minutes
1.August 12,2013 — Study Session
2.August 12,2013 — Regular Session
3.August 12,2013 — Work Session
b.Licenses
c.Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Letter of Engagement for Professional
Services for Audit of the 2013 Fiscal Year
d. Application and Permit for Temporary On-Sale Liquor License Submitted by
National Maryland County Association of Liberia for an Event to be Held at
Brooklyn Performing Arts, 5801 John Martin Drive, Brooklyn Center, on
September 28, 2013
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- August 26, 2013
e.Resolution Authorizing the Execution of a Cooperative Construction Agreement
for Signing of the Mississippi River Trail between the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT) and the City of Brooklyn Center
f.Resolution Adopting the 2013 Strategic Priorities for the 2013-2015 Strategic
Plan
7.Presentations/Proclamations/Recognitions/Donations
—None.
8.Public Hearings
—None.
9. Planning Commission Items
a.Planning Commission Application No. 2013-013 Submitted by Odyssey
Academy School for a Special Use Permit to Allow a New Dynamic Message Sign
(DMS) with a Public Use in the R1-One Family Residence District, Located at 6201
Noble Avenue North. The Planning Commission recommended approval of this
application at its August 15, 2013, meeting.
1. Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application
No. 2013-013 Submitted By Odyssey Academy School for a Special Use
Permit to Install a New Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) with a Public Use in
the R1-One Family Residence District (6201 Noble Avenue North)
Requested Council Action:
—Motion to adopt resolution.
b.Planning Commission Application No. 2013-014 Submitted by Evergreen Park
Elementary School for a Special Use Permit to Allow a New Dynamic Message
Sign (DMS) with a Public Use in the R1-One-Family Residence District, Located at
7020 Dupont Avenue North. The Planning Commission recommended approval
of this application at its August 15, 2013, meeting.
1. Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application
No. 2013-014 Submitted by Evergreen Park Elementary School for a
Special Use Permit to Install a New Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) with a
Public Use in the R1-One Family Residence District (7020 Dupont Avenue
North)
Requested Council Action:
—Motion to adopt resolution.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- August 26, 2013
10. Council Consideration Items
a. Consideration of Type IV 6-Month Provisional Rental License for 6812 Scott
Avenue North
Requested Council Action:
—Receive staff report.
—Motion to open hearing.
—Receive testimony from applicant.
—Motion to close hearing.
—Take action on rental license application and mitigation plan.
11. Council Report
12. Adjournment
City Council Agenda Item No. 6a
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY
OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
STUDY SESSION
AUGUST 12, 2013
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, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, Lin
Myszkowski, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Public Works
Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and Development Gary Eitel,
Planning and Zoning Specialist Tim Benetti, Director of Community Activities, Recreation and
Services Jim Glasoe, 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
Councilmember Ryan requested discussion on Item 6.a.1., July 15, 2013, Joint Work Session
with Financial Commission minutes, in particular the percentages identified as 3.0 percent and
5.7 percent for the property tax levy. He noted the August 5, 2013, Joint Work Session with
Financial Commission minutes show it is 3.5 percent. He stated his understanding that the levy
limits allow a maximum increase of 3.0 percent with certain exceptions. City Manager Curt
Boganey explained the formula is designed to allow for increases above 3.0 percent because it
allows the City to include special levies.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson requested the following correction to the Study Session
minutes of July 22, 2013:
Page 4, Paragraph 2
"...he wants the basketball court restored, as having one court hoop is not game worthy."
It was the consensus of the City Council to accept the correction to the July 22, 2013, Study
Session minutes.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson requested the following correction to the Regular Session
minutes of July 22, 2013:
Page 7, Paragraph 3
08/12/13 -1- DRAFT
"Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she has served on the Odyssey Academy
Board since 2009 as an unpaid volunteer and has seen nothing but sound financial
direction."
It was the consensus of the City Council to accept the correction to the July 22, 2013 Regular
Session minutes.
MISCELLANEOUS
Youth in Government Day
Councilmember Myszkowski stated Rebecca Gilgen, Brooklyn Bridge Alliance for Youth, asked
her to inform the City Council about the opportunity to have a Youth in Government Day. This
involves having a youth "shadow" a Council Member or staff member. She noted the City of
Brooklyn Park is moving forward with their Youth in Government Day. Councilmember
Myszkowski explained that students who participate in Youth in Government Day will also be
eligible to participate in Youth in the State Capitol Day. She asked if the City Council would be
interested in considering this opportunity.
The City Council discussed its support of having a Youth in Government Day. Councilmember
Myszkowski stated Ms. Gilgen has offered to assist with spearheading this effort, and she
believed it would be a good opportunity for the Brooklyns Youth Council.
The consensus of the City Council was to support a Youth in Government Day in Brooklyn
Center. Mr. Boganey stated he will work with Ms. Gilgen to obtain additional information for
the City Council's consideration.
Interim Finance Director
Councilmember Kleven thanked Mr. Boganey and staff for acting quickly to bring on an Interim
Finance Director.
Manganese Presentation
Councilmember Kleven stated she had hoped the presentation on manganese would be made at
tonight's Work Session as mentioned during the Joint Work Session with the Financial
Commission. She stated she wants to know about potential large funding needs ahead of time.
Mr. Boganey stated tonight's Work Session discussion will be on Capital Improvement Plans,
and staff will make the presentation on manganese at the next Work Session.
DISCUSSION OF WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEMS AS TIME PERMITS
COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW OF CAPITAL NEEDS AND DEBT FUNDING PLANS
Mr. Boganey introduced the topic and stated the City has an outstanding set of policies and
among those are financial policies put together by the Financial Commission several years ago
and adopted by the City Council. He stated the policies indicated that all capital improvements
should be made in accordance with an adopted Capital Improvement Budget; the City will
08/12/13 -2- DRAFT
develop a multi-year plan that is updated at least biennially; an annual CIP budget that is based
on a multi-year plan; and, the CIP budget will be coordinated with the operating budget.
Mr. Boganey reviewed the CIP budget policies, noting the policy requires the City Council
identify a funding source for each capital project proposal before it is approved. He described
what is considered to be a capital improvement.
Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug presented the 2007 Capital Maintenance
Building Plan (CMBP), projects completed during 2008-2010, and projects deferred during
2011-2013. He explained that the City solicited consultants and hired McKinstry to conduct a
2012 Energy Performance Contracting Study with the expectation that energy savings would
fully fund identified improvements. McKinstry evaluated the Community Center/City Hall
campus and found there was $3+ Million of improvements needed but only $1 Million of energy
savings, resulting in a significant shortfall.
Mr. Lillehaug stated deferred improvements at the Community Center/City Hall campus were
reviewed and it was found that some improvements were needed including replacement of the
west wall, roof, pool circulation pumps, HVAC Systems 1 and 2, Pool HVAC system, energy
control upgrades, and campus parking lot and sidewalk improvements. Staff also looked at the
option of replacing the original outdated windows and doors but found while needed, it would
not result in a significant energy savings. Mr. Lillehaug stated staff updated the improvement
list and costs in 2013, included the 2014-2028 CIP, with funding undetermined for all CMBP
projects.
Mr. Boganey explained the purpose tonight is to provide the City Council with background
information about the projects so the City Council can prioritize those projects at the next Work
Session.
Councilmember Kleven asked if staff considered the option of starting over with the City Hall
rather than making repairs to the current facility. Mr. Boganey stated all projects presented
involve repairs to the existing building and later staff will address the alternative of starting over.
Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning
presented the City Hall and Community Center Space Needs Assessment including background,
status, and benefits.
ADJOURN STUDY SESSION TO INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL
Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Kleven seconded to close the Study Session at
6:45 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
08/12/13 -3- DRAFT
RECONVENE STUDY SESSION
Councilmember Kleven moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to reconvene the Study
Session at 6:46 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW OF CAPITAL NEEDS AND
DEBT FUNDING PLANS — CONTINUED
Ms. Schleuning presented the impacts of no action.
Director of Community Activities, Recreation and Services Jim Glasoe presented the
Community Center Space Needs Assessment including background, status, benefits, and impacts
of no actions.
Cindy McCleary, Principle with Leo A Daly, described their work with staff to identify who is
the customer that the Community Center/City Hall campus buildings need to represent, noting
the City's demographic shows some indicated growth. She presented information related to the
identification of the community's values/ambitions/perceptions, and what the Community
Center/City Hall campus "says" through its signage.
Discussion on this item continued during the August 12, 2013, Work Session.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Willson declared the Study Session adjourned at 6:57 p.m.
08/12/13 -4- DRAFT
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
AUGUST 12, 2013
CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS
. INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL
CALL TO ORDER INFORMAL OPEN FORUM
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Informal Open Forum called to order by Mayor Tim
Willson at 6:45 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Carol Kleven, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, Lin
Myszkowski, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Interim Finance
Director Greg Andrews, Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of
Business and Development Gary Eitel, Planning and Zoning Specialist Tim Benetti, Director of
Community Activities, Recreation and Services Jim Glasoe, Assistant City Manager/Director of
Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, and Carla Wirth, TimeSaver Off Site
Secretarial, Inc.
Mayor Tim Willson opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum.
No one wished to address the City Council.
Councilmember Kleven moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to close the
Informal Open Forum at 6:46 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
2.INVOCATION
As the Invocation, Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson recognized those who contributed to and
supported National Night Out.
3.CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session called to order by Mayor Tim Willson
at 7:02 p.m.
4. ROLL CALL
08/12/13 -1- DRAFT
Mayor Tim Willson and Councilmembers Carol Kleven, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, Lin
Myszkowski, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Interim Finance
Director Greg Andrews, Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of
Business and Development Gary Eitel, Planning and Zoning Specialist Tim Benetti, Director of
Community Activities, Recreation and Services Jim Glasoe, Assistant City Manager/Director of
Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, and
Carla Wirth, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
5.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
6.APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND CONSENT AGENDA
Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Myszkowski seconded to approve the Agenda
and Consent Agenda, as amended, with amendments to the Study Session and Regular Session
minutes of July 22, 2013, and the following consent items were approved:
6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.July 15, 2013 — Joint Work Session with Financial Commission
2.July 22, 2013 — Study Session
3.July 22, 2013 — Regular Session
4.August 5, 2013 — Joint Work Session with Financial Commission
6b. LICENSES
MECHANICAL
1 st Call Heating & Air Conditioning
B & B Plumbing
Forced Air One
Riccar Heating & Air Conditioning
Schwantes Heating
11585 272'1 Avenue, Zimmerman
25593 109 th NW, Zimmerman
6768 158 th Lane NW, Ramsey
2387 Station Parkway NW, Andover
6080 Oren Avenue N., Stillwater
RENTAL — CURRENT RENTAL STANDARDS
INITIAL (TYPE III— one-year license)
6116 Aldrich Avenue N. Ryan Whisenant
INITIAL (TYPE — two-year license)
2801 67 th Lane
4935 Abbott Avenue N.
6019 Halifax Place
5525 Logan Avenue N.
RENEWAL (TYPE — one-year license)
6114 Dupont Avenue N.
1519 Humboldt Place N.
Paul Carey
Robert Anderson
Kin Chew
Alan Sandeen
Doug Wahl
ShoeMiller Properties LLC
08/12/13 -2- DRAFT
5318 Irving Avenue N.
5813 June Avenue N.
RENEWAL (TYPE II— two-year license)
6742-44 France Avenue N.
3000 62 nd Avenue N.
5550 France Avenue N.
6757 Humboldt Avenue N.
6819 Humboldt Avenue N., A203
6325 Kyle Avenue N.
4213 Woodbine Lane
RENEWAL (TYPE I— three-year license)
5519-23 Lyndale Avenue N.
5300-04 Vincent Avenue N.
907 57 th Avenue N.
6538 Ewing Avenue N.
7036 Halifax Avenue N.
5319 Knox Avenue N.
5541 Morgan Avenue N.
SIGNHANGER
Leroy Signs
Nathaniel LoChe
Lena Lim
Donald Renelt
Dan Soffa
Belinda Gonzalez
Saleem Raza
New Concepts Management
Cuong Pham
Donald Stefanske and Betty Engelby
Dragon Property Management
Steven and Debra Elhardt
David LaFavor
TuUyen Tran
John Pham
Daniel Yesnes
Yang Yang Zheng
6325 Welcome Avenue N., Brooklyn Park
6c.APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR TEMPORARY ON-SALE LIQUOR
LICENSE SUBMITTED BY CITY OF LAKES NORDIC SKI
FOUNDATION FOR AN EVENT TO BE HELD AT SURLY BREWING
COMPANY, 4811 DUSHARME DRIVE, BROOKLYN CENTER, ON
SEPTEMBER 21 AND 22, 2013
6d.RESOLUTION NO. 2013-88 GRANTING CORPORATE AUTHORITY
FOR SIGNING OF CHECKS AND TRANSACTION OF FINANCIAL
BUSINESS MATTERS
6e.RESOLUTION NO. 2013-89 WITHDRAWING A "REQUEST FOR
PROPOSALS" DOCUMENT FOR PROVIDING PROFESSIONAL AUDIT
SERVICES
6f.FIBER OPTIC NETWORK EXPANSION AND PARTNERSHIPS
1. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-90 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT FOR DEVELOPMENT, OPERATIONS, AND
MAINTENANCE OF AN INSTITUTIONAL COMMUNICATION
NETWORK BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
AND LOGIS
08/12/13 -3- DRAFT
2. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-91 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A
FIBER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN
CENTER AND HENNEPIN COUNTY
6g.RESOLUTION NO. 2013-92 DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND
ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED TREES
6h.RESOLUTION NO. 2013-93 CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON
PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT NUISANCE
ABATEMENT COSTS, DELINQUENT ADMINISTRATIVE FINES/
CITATIONS, AND DELINQUENT ADMINISTRATIVE VACANT
BUILDING REGISTRATIONS
6i.RESOLUTION NO. 2013-94 APPROVING A LAND USE AMENDMENT
TO THE 2030 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FROM "SF-SINGLE FAMILY"
TO RB-RETAIL BUSINESS," RELATIVE TO THE R3-MULTIPLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONED LAND GENERALLY LOCATED AT
3955, 4001, AND 4007 69 T11 AVENUE NORTH
6j.RESOLUTION NO. 2013-95 CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON
PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DELINQUENT PUBLIC
UTILITY SERVICE ACCOUNTS
Motion passed unanimously.
7.PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS
City Manager Curt Boganey introduced newly appointed Interim Finance Director Greg
Andrews.
Interim Finance Director Greg Andrews reviewed his professional background and stated he
looks forward to working with the City Council during recruitment of a Finance Director.
Mayor Willson extended the City Council's welcome to Interim Finance Director Andrews.
Mayor Willson read in full a Mayoral Proclamation recognizing and expressing appreciation to
former Finance Director Daniel Jordet for his nine years of professional and exemplary service to
the City of Brooklyn Center.
8.PUBLIC HEARINGS
8a. ORDINANCE NO. 2013-03 AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY CODE OF
ORDINANCES REGARDING THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF CERTAIN
LAND GENERALLY LOCATED AT 3955, 4001, AND 4007 — 69 TH AVENUE
NORTH
08/12/13 -4- DRAFT
City Manager Curt Boganey introduced the item, discussed the history, and stated the purpose of
the proposed ordinance to change the zoning classification of property at 3955, 4001, and 4007 —
69 th Avenue North. It was noted this item was published in the official newspaper on August 1,
2013, and is offered this evening for Public Hearing and second reading.
Planning and Zoning Specialist Tim Benetti presented past consideration of the ordinance noting
it would provide for additional vehicle storage of the Luther Honda Toyota Dealership.
Councilmember Myszkowski moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to open the Public
Hearing.
Motion passed unanimously.
No one appeared to speak.
Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to close the
Public Hearing.
Motion passed unanimously.
Councilmember Kleven moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to adopt
ORDINANCE NO. 2013-03 Amending Chapter 35 of the City Code of Ordinances Regard4
the Zoning Classification of Certain Land Generally Located at 3955, 4001, and 4007 — 69'
Avenue North.
Motion passed unanimously.
9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
9a. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2013-012 SUBMITTED BY
RECREATION FIRE AND MIRACLE MINISTRIES FOR A SPECIAL USE
PERMIT TO OPERATE A PLACE OF RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY (CHURCH) IN
THE PUD/I-1 (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT/INDUSTRIAL PARK)
DISTRICT
Planning and Zoning Specialist Tim Benetti provided an overview of Planning Commission
Application No. 2013-012 and advised the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
applications at its July 25, 2013, meeting.
Mr. Benetti answered questions of the City Council regarding the request for a Special Use
Permit (SUP) to operate a church in the PUD/I-1, Planned Unit Development/Industrial Park
District.
Jessica Harstad, representing Recreation Fire and Miracle Ministries, introduced herself and
thanked City staff for its help through this process. She indicated the Church has been in
operation for three years and is currently renting a different space in Brooklyn Center.
08/12/13 -5- DRAFT
1. RESOLUTION NO. 2013-96 REGARDING THE DISPOSITION OF
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2013-012 SUBMITTED
BY RECREATION FIRE AND MIRACLES MINISTRIES CHURCH FOR
A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A PLACE OF RELIGIOUS
ASSEMBLY IN THE PUD/I-1 ZONE (6601 SHINGLE CREEK
PARKWAY)
Councilmember Myszkowski moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded to adopt Resolution
No. 2013-96 Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application No. 2013-012
Submitted by Recreation Fire and Miracles Ministries Church for a Special Use Permit to
Operate a Place of Religious Assembly in the PUD/I-1 Zone (6601 Shingle Creek Parkway).
Motion passed unanimously.
10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS
10a.CONSIDERATION OF TYPE IV 6-MONTH PROVISIONAL RENTAL LICENSE
FOR 7025 NEWTON AVENUE NORTH
Mayor Willson polled the audience and asked whether anyone was in attendance to provide
testimony on this rental license. Seeing no one coming forward, Mayor Willson called for a
motion.
Councilmember Kleven moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to approve
the issuance of a Type IV six-month provisional rental license and mitigation plan for 7025
Newton Avenue North, with the requirement that the mitigation plan and all applicable
ordinances must be strictly adhered to before a renewal rental license would be considered.
Motion passed unanimously.
10b.CONSIDERATION OF TYPE IV 6-MONTH PROVISIONAL RENTAL LICENSE
FOR 7009 UNITY AVENUE NORTH
Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning
advised that 7009 Unity Avenue North was inspected and ten property code violations were cited
and ultimately corrected. There have been zero validated police incidents/nuisance calls within
the last 12 months. This property qualifies for a Type IV six-month provisional rental license
based on the number of property code violations found during the initial rental license
inspection. The property owner is also required to submit a mitigation plan and report monthly
on the progress of that plan. Ms. Schleuning reviewed actions taken in regard to this rental
license application and indicated Staff has reviewed that mitigation plan and held discussion with
the property owner and recommends approval based on meeting standards in the mitigation plan
and all applicable ordinances.
Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Kleven seconded to open the hearing.
08/12/13 -6- DRAFT
Motion passed unanimously.
Bakary Fatty, owner of 7009 Unity Avenue North, stated he understands the rental licensing
process and noted there have been no police calls. He stated some of the violations were minor
in nature and he has followed all required of him. Mr. Fatty asked the City Council to consider
approval.
Mayor Willson explained the ordinance provides for continuity in Code enforcement to assure
adequate living conditions for renters. He thanked Mr. Fatty for coming forward tonight and
indicating that he will continue to support the maintenance of this property.
Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to close the
hearing.
Motion passed unanimously.
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson moved and Councilmember Myszkowski seconded to
approve the issuance of a Type IV six-month provisional rental license and mitigation plan for
7009 Unity Avenue North, with the requirement that the mitigation plan and all applicable
ordinances must be strictly adhered to before a renewal rental license would be considered.
Motion passed unanimously.
11. COUNCIL REPORT
Councilmember Ryan reported on his attendance at the following events:
•July 25, 2013, Metro Cities Seminar on New State Law and Changes in Regulations
•July 26, 2013, Liberian Independence Celebration
•August 5, 2013, National Night Out Kickoff Event
•August 5, 2013, Joint City Council / Financial Commission Work Session
•August 6, 2013, National Night Out Neighborhood Events
Councilmember Kleven reported on her attendance at the following and provided information on
the following upcoming events:
•August 1, 2013, Session at the Library with teaching artist from the Guthrie Theater
•August 1, 2013, Toured two remodeled homes that are part of the Brooklyn Center
Neighborhood Stabilization Program
•August 1, 2013, Joint meeting of NWCC and the ISAIAH Group
•August 5, 2013, United Methodist Church Lunch Program
•August 6, 2013, Day of Peace Event at the Minnesota School of Business
•August 6, 2013, National Night Out Neighborhood Events
•August 7, 2013, Teen Club at the Library
•August 8 and 9, 2013, Global Leadership Summit
•August 14, 2013, Blood Drive at Brown College
08/12/13 -7- DRAFT
•Farmers Market on Thursdays in the Brooklyn United Methodist Church parking lot and on
Fridays-Sundays behind Walgreens
•Bass Lake Road project delay and anticipated completion in late-August to early-September
Councilmember Myszkowski reported on her attendance at the following and provided
information on the following upcoming events:
•August 5, 2013, National Night Out Kickoff Event
•August 5, 2013, Joint City Council / Financial Commission Work Session
•August 6, 2013, National Night Out Neighborhood Events
•August 7, 2013, Parents United for Public Schools Meeting
•Brooklyns Youth Council Planning Retreat
Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson reported on her attendance at the following and provided
information on the following upcoming events:
•July 24, 2013, Odyssey Academy Board Meeting
•July 25, 2013, Brooklyn Center Business Association Luncheon
•July 25, 2013, VIP Screening of the movie "Boy's Cry"
•August 5, 2013, Brooklyn Center Business Association Board Meeting
•August 5, 2013, National Night Out Kickoff Event
•August 5, 2013, Joint City Council / Financial Commission Work Session
•August 6, 2013, National Night Out Neighborhood Events
•August 25, 2013, showing of "Boy's Cry" at the Brooklyn Center High School
•September 6, 2013 Annual Golf Fund raiser
Mayor Willson reported on his attendance at the following events:
•Aspen Institute Conference for Minnesota Legislators and Commissioners from the fields of
health, public safety, and human services regarding youth and a program addressing Drinking
in Excess (DIE) and the abuse of alcohol
•August 5, 2013, National Night Out Kickoff Event
•August 5, 2013, Joint City Council / Financial Commission Work Session
•August 6, 2013, Dangerous Dog Hearing
•August 6, 2013, National Night Out Neighborhood Events
•Conversation with Jimmy Longoria, the artist working with Mn/DOT on a sound wall mural
behind the Earle Brown Elementary School
12. ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Myszkowski seconded adjournment of the
City Council meeting at 7:50 p.m.
Motion passed unanimously.
08/12/13 -8- DRAFT
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND
THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
WORK SESSION
AUGUST 12, 2013
CITY HALL — COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDEg
The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Work
Session called to order by Mayor/President Tim Willson at 7:50 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor/President Tim Willson and Councilmembers/Commissioners Carol Kleven, Kris
Lawrence-Anderson, Lin Myszkowski, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt
Boganey, Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug, Director of Business and
Development Gary Eitel, Director of Community Activities, Recreation and Services Jim Glasoe,
Assistant City Manager/Director of Building & Community Standards Vickie Schleuning, and
Carla Wirth, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW OF CAPITAL NEEDS AND DEBT FUNDING PLANS
Cindy McCleary, Principle with Leo A Daly, continued presentation of their analysis of the
Community Center/City Hall Campus including current space conditions. She explained there
are a variety of considerations so they provided options along a scale that could be considered in
phases, noting they provide a range of choice. She suggested the absolute key elements to be
addressed are: introduction of an expanded lower level lobby; adequate public and meeting
overflow space; clarity of space, efficient space flow, navigation ease to stairs; and,
designate/separate public and staff spaces.
Ms. McCleary presented Options 1 and 2 and explained how each addresses key elements.
Mayor/President Willson referenced Option 2, upper floor, and asked if there is an elevator by
the front door. Ms. McCleary described the location of the two elevators in City Hall.
Mayor/President Willson asked how the front door area can be leveraged. He stated he likes the
plan for the lower level but thinks the upper level public space can be better utilized. Ms.
McCleary stated that is a good observation. She stated this was discussed but there is a concern
with parking by the upper level front door and need for a visual connection with a staff person at
the point of entry. In addition, the depth of the hallway is not much different than the lower
level.
08/12/13 -1- DRAFT
Mayor/President Willson stated the upper• floor conference room could be utilized as a
welcoming counter so it is more appealing to those entering the building in addition to increasing
security.
Ms. McCleary continued presentation of Option 2, upper floor, and described the
construction/reconstruction it would entail and modification to the Council Chambers Lobby
Commons. She advised staff had indicated there are not enough conference room spaces and
that copying/materials are not efficiently consolidated within the City Hall. In addition, Option 2
would resize office spaces and address work space inefficiency.
Mayor/President Willson asked about the lunch room location. Ms. McCleary stated it is not
currently located within a departmental zone and it had been mentioned that sometimes the
public is found in the lunch room.
Mayor/President Willson asked if an access would be opened from the courtyard garden in the
front to a public space. Ms. McCleary stated that is an option and they tried to address how to
create the existing green park into an amenity.
Mayor/President Willson noted Option 2 results in extensive relocation of the restroom and
counter spaces. Ms. McCleary stated that is correct but from a wayfinding standpoint, people
recognize the counters as a point to receive service.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated the reconfiguration options for the Council
Chambers appear to be at 1,325 square feet and the other at 2,250 square feet. Ms. McCleary
estimated the current Council Chambers at 2,500 square feet. She explained the space behind the
current Chambers is ill configured and used.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan noted some reconfigurations may impact load bearing
walls and result in significant costs. He asked about the square footage needs of staff. Ms.
McCleary reviewed square footage spaces from other City Halls.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated it seems the overall design of the building is
"developmentally challenged," resulting in the question of spending too much money and
"putting lipstick on a pig." Ms. McCleary agreed the building has challenges but following this
process provides the information needed to determine which path to take.
Mayor/President Willson noted in most of the options, the Council Chambers is not relocated.
Ms. McCleary stated in the first two options, the Council Chambers remains in about the same
space but the priorities of wayfinding, work flow, and security are addressed. She noted Option
3 utilizes a broader site and solves internal operational challenges to the best extent possible
given existing conditions. Ms. McCleary described Option 3 elements, noting it relocates the
Council Chambers into new space, addresses the current lack of connection between the
Community Center and City Hall, and consolidates staff spaces. She noted this plan also creates
a building within a park.
08/12/13 -2- DRAFT
Mayor/President Willson stated the City Hall is oddly shaped and asked if it would be possible to
add building to the eastern side rather than create new Council Chamber space on the other side
of the building. Ms. McCleary agreed that is an option and encouraged exploring all
opportunities. Mayor/President Willson noted that would also utilize the front entrance space.
He stated he is more inclined to not "hang pieces" giving the appearance of piecemeal but
preferred to consider how to increase the building's square footage, make it look better, and still
tie together the Community Center and City Hall. Ms. McCleary stated this option would allow
the opportunity to rebrand the entire front face elevation
Ms. McCleary continued presentation of a site master plan, noting it can provide greater identity
to the street and modify the travel path around the building by creating a more generous curve to
pull the drive aisle away from the building and provide a drop-off zone to address the safety
challenge at the Community Center's front door. She described the location of gardens,
landscaped areas, and walkways.
Ms. McCleary then presented basic, moderate, and enhanced construction cost estimates for
exterior wayfinding, site redevelopment, and City Hall options.
Mayor/President Willson asked about going down rather than out or up, noting the'Community
Center has a stairway that could be used to tie the two buildings together instead of adding new
space. Ms. McCleary stated they did not look at going below grade.
Mayor/President Willson stated support for providing more office space, improving customer
experience by leveraging the two entrance points, and squaring off the building to create more
space. Ms. McCleary stated if the Council supports a mid-scale effort, they can provide a variety
of options to capture priorities in the right order.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated true stewardship is to envision and anticipate future
needs of staff, the Council, and public. He stated the current building design has a lot of
constraints but given the City's other capital needs, it is difficult.
Mayor/President Willson stated this process will put that plan in place so options can be
considered. He agreed the City has other pressing capital needs that may put this on the "back
burner."
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated should the existing structure be modified, the City
may enjoy the same advantage as the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Plan where initial
improvements can be put into place in the interest of better financial planning, addressing the
issue of affordability.
Ms. McCleary stated typically, when at a point of investing 60-70% of the building's cost of
construction, you may find yourself outpricing the building at completion. At 30,000 square
feet, excluding site costs, a City hall could run $185/square foot to $250/square foot or more
depending on technology, putting it in the $6-7 Million range. She agreed that is a consideration
if the project reaches the $5 Million range.
08/12/13 3 DRAFT
Mayor/President Willson stated another option is to demolish the building and use the site in a
different fashion, such as a two-story building tied into the Community Center. That would also
provide a temporary building (existing City Hall) for staff to operate during construction of a
new City Hall.
Ms. McCleary described Community Center space conditions that resulted in issues with space
allocation and lack of visibility.
City Manager Curt Boganey stated the large community room space is the most intensively used
within the Community Center.
Director of Community Activities, Recreation and Services Jim Glasoe agreed it is used every
day and uses include 18-20 exercise classes per week plus rentals, special events, and weekly
church rental.
Ms. McCleary advised of issues with humidity and moisture that has resulted in corrosion. She
stated this is partly due to lack of air movement/recovery of heat, and use of chlorine chemicals
with the swimming pool. She noted the McInstry preliminary report Community Center Facility
Audit has been included, which addressed the significant maintenance needs in the short term
and upcoming years.
Mayor/President Willson stated if it is known the west wall needs to be replaced, he would ask if
it provides opportunity to provide more office space or an improved building entrance. Ms.
McCleary stated that is an option and conducting an assessment of programs to capture
additional revenue to offset infrastructure costs may be a valuable undertaking.
Ms. McCleary noted preliminary costs were estimated; however, Community Center costs range
widely depending on the amenities included. She stated the information provided addressed
what would be reasonable. Preliminary costs have been provided for the building envelope,
mechanical/electrical/building space, and wayfinding. It was noted that program revenues were
not defined.
Mayor/President Willson raised the option of expanding the building to encompass the space
between the City Hall and Community Center. He noted that would significantly change the
front door entrance so the south or west side may be an option for the front entrance. In addition,
this would not include a demolition, but a construction.
Ms. McCleary pointed out that the location of the parking lots will remain and wherever the
expansion occurs, the building needs to be secured appropriately.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated if such a plan comes forward, the City Council could
consider the investment breakpoint. He noted the City's residents have a healthy skepticism for
large expenditures and the City Council needs to be cognizant of that situation.
08/12/13 -4- DRAFT
Mayor/President Willson stated that is correct and occurred when the City Council considered
construction of a new Police Station and Fire Station, which resulted in significant debate on
whether they were needed and how they should be built.
Councilmember/Commissioner Myszkowski stated a Community Center market feasibility study
is important considering LA Fitness is coming to Brooklyn Center and offering lower
introductory rates and longer hours. She noted the demographic did not consider the City's
children, many of color and not American born. Councilmember/Commissioner Myszkowski
stated she is aware of the perception when entering City Hall and found the pictures to clearly
show the conditions.
Mayor/President Willson stated LA Fitness is coming to Brooklyn Center and will be more
convenient than Northwest Racquet and the Fridley LA Fitness.
Councilmember/Commissioner Myszkowski asked if the pool is used on occasion exclusively by
the Muslim community during a certain timeframe. Mr. Glasoe answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven asked what would be the cost difference to demolish and
construct a new Community Center and City Hall, with and without the swimming pool. Ms.
McCleary stated swimming pools rarely pay for themselves as they are an expensive mechanical
and maintenance endeavor. She stated looking at it from that view would yield a different
answer than when considering the community amenity it provides. Ms. McCleary noted zero
clearance pools are becoming attractive for children and seniors and the water temperature
becomes an issue as certain temperatures may not be conducive for some activities such as water
aerobics.
Mayor/President Willson stated a sheet of ice has the same sort of economic considerations. He
noted Brooklyn Park and others have sheets of ice; however in this area, only Brooklyn Center
has an Olympic-sized pool.
Ms. McCleary stated she will investigate the cost for swimming pool construction.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven noted the City's demographics have drastically changed
over the years and she does not know how much the pool is used. Mayor/President Willson
stated it is being utilized and an amenity.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan commented that since the City has made the Brooklyn
Bridge/Brooklyn Alliance a priority, it needs to align its amenities with Brooklyn Park. He
noted the City already has the swimming pool so the issue is preservation of the asset.
Mayor/President Willson commented on the evolution of the City's population as aging residents
move on and younger families move into the City.
Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug presented the Street and Utility
Reconstruction Plan and funding shortfall since the franchise fee does not generate enough to
08/12/13 -5- DRAFT
support street reconstruction. He advised of the impact should an alternate source of funding not
be identified.
Mr. Boganey presented the cash analysis, noting the bottom line indicates in 2014 the estimate is
$671,840 less than needed to pay for the City's share of the Street Reconstruction Program. That
deficit continues to increase and accumulates to $8.2 Million by 2021. He stated if the City
wants to continue the Street Reconstruction Program and avoid the impact of delaying projects, a
funding source for the shortfalls needs to be identified. Mr. Boganey stated options are to bond,
use cash, or levy and these issues will be discussed at the next Work Session.
Mayor/President Willson stated this is an important program so he would consider alternate
funding options including bonding. He stated another option is bonding earlier in the process
and to run larger projects to complete the program cycle earlier.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated the City typically bonds every other year to save on
bonding costs and maybe they could be dovetailed with other issues to address the cash shortfall
for annual projects.
Mayor/President Willson stated bonding requires spending on a specific project.
Mr. Boganey stated the City is able to bond without a referendum, in this case, because part of
the bond proceeds are being used to recover special assessment costs. However, there may be a
limit to how much the City can bond within that classification of bond sales. He stated staff will
research that option.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven asked if MSA funds are used in the Street Reconstruction
Program. Mr. Lillehaug stated MSA funds are used for certain streets.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven asked how much the City receives in one year from
special assessment payments. Mr. Lillehaug stated individually it is about $4,500. Mr. Boganey
stated staff will research that annual figure. He explained that the special assessments collected
pay off the bonds for the project.
Mr. Lillehaug advised of the gap in funding for the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor project. He
stated the next steps in the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Study are the implementation plan,
partnership building, and to seek funding. Mr. Lillehaug described the impact without the City's
leadership. He stated the City's participation, worse case, is estimated at approximately 20%, or
$3.7 Million. He stated these projects are within the CIP contingent upon funding.
Mr. Lillehaug explained if something is done with Highway 252, it is known that the City will
need to participate. He reviewed the background, status, and benefits of this project as well as
the impact of delays or taking no action. It was noted the project costs, funding, and schedule
are yet to be determined but the City will move forward with the study.
Mayor/President Willson stated if the City does not have a plan or participate in the process, the
project may not be done. Mr. Lillehaug stated it may also be that the project is done in a manner
08/12/13 -6- DRAFT
the City does not support. Mr. Boganey stated if a collective vision comes about, there will be a
funding gap.
Mr. Glasoe presented the status of the Memorial Amphitheater, benefits of this improvement,
and impact of delay. It was acknowledged the existing facility has exceeded its useful life.
Assistant City Manager/Director of Building & Community Standards Vickie Schleuning
described the status of the outdated Council Chambers audio/visual equipment.
Mayor/President Willson asked about the capability of adding subtitles. He indicated the State
of Minnesota just started working with a new vendor that puts in place, almost real time,
subtitling for the hearing impaired. Ms. Schleuning stated that option had been researched
several years ago and she will provide that information.
Ms. Schleuning stated there is a dedicated fund for Council Chambers audio visual of $130,000
and quarterly revenue of approximately $7,000. It was noted the estimated cost range is up to
$175,000. She described the benefits of equipment replacement and impact of delays or no
actions.
Mayor/President Willson stated he anticipates this process will result in identifying the highest
priorities so action can then be taken to identify funding.
Mr. Boganey agreed and stated staff will present funding alternatives at the next 'Work Session
so the most important projects can be identified as well as how each can be paid.
UPDATE REGARDING SISTER CITY VISIT TO VOINJAMA, LIBERIA
Mr. Boganey asked the Council to provide direction regarding participating in the Sister City
visit to Voinjama, Liberia. It was indicated that Mayor/President Willson,
Councilmember/Commissioner Myszkowski, City Manager Boganey, and Monique Dryer will
be participating.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor/President Willson declared the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work
Session adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
08/12/13 -7- DRAFT
City Council Agenda Item No. 6b
COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 20, 2013
TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager
FROM: Maria Rosenbaum, Deputy City Clerk g ,
SUBJECT: Licenses for City Council Approval
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the following licenses at its August 26,
2013.
Background:
The following businesses/persons have applied for City licenses as noted. Each business/person has
fulfilled the requirements of the City Ordinance governing respective licenses, submitted appropriate
applications, and paid proper fees. Applicants for rental dwelling licenses are in compliance with Chapter
12 of the City Code of Ordinances, unless comments are noted below the property address on the attached
rental report.
MECHANICAL
Larson Plumbing, Inc.
Market Mechanical, Inc.
Mechanical Air Systems, Inc.
R B Heating & Air
RENTAL
See attached report.
3095 162 nd Lane NW, Andover
8701 Wyoming Avenue N, Brooklyn Park
1650 99 th Lane NE, Blaine
20826 Austin Street NE, East Bethel
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM
Rental License Category Criteria Policy — Adopted by City Council 03-08-10
Property Code and Nuisance Violations Criteria
License Category
(Based on Property
Code Only)
Number of Units Property Code Violations per
Inspected Unit
Type I — 3 Year 1-2 units 0-1
3+ units 0-0.75
Type II — 2 Year 1-2 units Greater than 1 but not more than 4
3+ units Greater than 0.75 but not more than 1 5
Type III — 1 Year 1-2 units Greater than 4 but not more than 8
3+ units Greater than 1 5 but not more than 3
Type IV — 6 Months 1-2 units Greater than 8
3+ units Greater than 3
License
Category
Number of Units Validated Calls for Disorderly Conduct
Service & Part I Crimes
(Calls Per Unit/Year)
No Category
Impact
1-2 0-1
3-4 units0-0.25
5 or more units 0-0.35
Decrease 1
Category
1-2 Greater than 1 but not more than 3
3-4 units Greater than 0.25 but not more than
5 or more units Greater than 0 35 but not more than 0.50
Decrease 2
Categories
1-2 Greater than 3
3-4 units Greater than 1
5 or more units Greater than 0.50
Budget Issues:
There are no budget issues to consider.
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
■■•■
*a) *0 *c a)
>.1-
,....-"s"..9q
>>=
CCLI
-X-w
CL>.I-
========—===
<----Z <----Z <
I"---Z <"----Z <-----Z 000 0 0 0 0 000
CL>-•
======—==
VI
bo 1:1
>
rr)vs dt ,-I CO CO d•N .-1 CO N di-0 <-I cr)
CU
V
4—,(A'
'
>-,...Y0
.171°
- Ff)co
-5.-
c0
s_v)
c<
>--63.
-a)o_c
(13.Y
(12co
u
c)E
0
bi)
(1)-_aca)
cOC
=_L.,- c
NI
5
201P,auwEuzzo
•7--°ti
-cS'
Lic_L6'.a).47,5-
a)0_
i --'a.
c0
,-0
a)E
(1)F-
Ti.2
4-,E1:11)20
0-ScoU
w
4,Eb.020
Sco(..)
w
,._
CDo.-xctio
O'
za)
*En,
co'..-
,,,%"=0.0NJc
;•Li
..9
CIP,
vd0
.gtio2
>.4-,ct,
0.2a.c0,„14s....a
bA
w
..cNI'Sv)aoci=
"..-Eno
tap=oa
CUC0.)cc o
CO..47.;
_
CO:0
_—————
CO.117.,
_
CO
.47+
_
r0
..j..1
_
ra
a)C
(1)cc
a)C°'cc
CO
a)Ca)cc
as
a)C°'cc
as
a)C°'ct
CO
a.)C
(i)ct
C13
a)C°Icc
CO
a)Ca)cc
CO
a)Ca.)ct
CO
a)Ca)cc
QJ
,rOg
bfl
.,>'
1-
.>
coLL
CD
" TOC17)
.>
coLL
al
TOCi7)
.>
COLL
CI.)
-ti OC17)
.>.
coU-
C)ToCi.7)
.>
COLL
a)ToCi7i
:Li.
tCO
u-o
i-
.>..
coU-
a.)ToC17)
.>.
coLL
a)Tv)*Ci7i
.>.
COU-
cl)ToCI.7)
.>.
COLL.
a)ToC17)
7,,>...:
.>.
(13U-
a)ToC17)
.>.
COLL
a)ToC7)
.>.
COU.
a)boC17)
.>
COLL
a)toCDi
.>.
CO
a)boCi7)
•
-o
Tr->,-ta)
0s-0-
CO
.=
-0<
,--i
LrlCOCA
-0
w.A-2
0
co
LO
To"
dt<-1N
ca.)><0)
-o
(71w
li
oN.4
NNN
CU><w
-o
.17)a)
3
oN.4'
L
-(7)coZ
,-1CT)N
m000,--ihrouloor.crImoo
U.)
>coa)_,(13
.--i.c§1-.
v-i<-11,..VI
za)><
4-'
r)Cii.=0
<a-
Lrl
zw><
0
LAa)Ew
N0LD
C0
ro00NU
ZZw><4.,
o
-0E=i
0COLD
'-o<-1<
w><
4-,-oo
-°E=i
<-1CO1.0
Z
>
<a)
z'
dl•0LD
0)>
z
a)
<cmCf._1
Nr•-•is)
a)><
CL)CO-0c>.-JLf)0s.r)Ln
ZZ
><
o
4§'
Zr--.00I---
0)Z
C<
WC
(1)>__:i---;
D,--10CDLD
Eco‘..bo12CL
a)0C
--.- a).0<----Z co
-0 a01 01
...", 1-Caa) a).0 >.
F. N,
5 tn010 0Cco
0.1 P-p Cl.
2 a)..ca) 4-,V) L-5.- CU0 10Li- I.-
0
c0 ra 001ru >- coU (13c-I 2
4' ii01 = a.).0 r...)Ca a) c
> 00. I- cu0. a.Ca >-4_C 5- I-
0 CO 0C 0/ Z
CU ).-L. N 1./1CO a)II 4,La CO0.) = Ucnc a) 'Es-0) CL CU > '-
t.TO Z
iii criCUC D. X— > COC- 4, 4,
>- o:1 cv >.-C a) co +-'c40 ›- c a)
co CY) CU.0 sp_
a) i i 2.a v) 0.cu 0) =L.) 0. 0 -0•casI- a)c. 0Ca 0_ a)
a) raC 4:1010 DCICC - -C CC- co= 4, 0
A4-. co 0 Ccllcc) C a).0 s_.2 boC. 7-''- ‘...
a) a; . § =(..)V) co cn 01
tf)
0.)CU in L.(13LL CL C> 01 coco I-- u a)
ra a) • - EU 0 as a)a a.II a, 0v-, U c s_.U- •-■,--. 7-* 0-L) * =* * * <
City Council Agenda Item No. 6c
COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 15, 2013
TO: City Council
FROM: Curt Boganey, City Mana
SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing Execution of a Letter of Engagement for Professional
Audit Services for the 2013 Fiscal Year
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of a Resolution Authorizing
Execution of a Letter of Engagement for Professional Audit Services for the 2013 Fiscal Year.
Background:
At its August 12, 2013, meeting, the City Council approved a resolution withdrawing a Request
for Proposals for providing professional audit services and postponing for one year. The current
auditor, Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. (MMKR) has agreed to
continue for one more year and has submitted a letter of engagement to provide professional
audit services for the year ended December 31, 2013. The audit process includes review of the
financial statements, comparison of the actual results with budgeted allocations, review of the
internal control system of the City, compliance with state and federal accounting and reporting
procedures, and preparation and presentation of the audit report and a Management Letter.
Budget Issues:
The proposed fee for this service is $38,900 plus reasonable out-of-pocket expenses. If, in
addition, MMKR is required to perform an A-133 Federal Single Audit of federal assistance
funds because the City received more than $500,000 in federal funds in 2013, the project(s)
receiving those federal funds will be charged accordingly.
Council Goals:
We will ensure the financial stability of the City
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for people and preserves the public trust
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A LETTER OF
ENGAGEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES FOR AUDIT OF THE
2013 FISCAL YEAR
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center last solicited a Request for Proposals
(REPs) for auditing services in 2007; and
WHEREAS, the firm of Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A.
was the successful proposer in that process; and
WHEREAS, a Request for Proposals (RFPs) for auditing services was solicited
by the City on June 14, 2013, and withdrawn on August 12, 2013; and
WHEREAS, the firm of Malloy, Montague, Kamowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A.
has agreed to continue to provide audit services for one more year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that Malloy, Montague, Kamowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A. be
retained to perform and complete the audit of the 2013 Comprehensive Annual Financial
Statements and accompanying reports at a cost not to exceed $ 38,900 plus reasonable out-of-
pocket costs. Additional costs for an A-133 Federal Single Audit will be charged to the project
receiving the federal funds generating the audit requirement. The Mayor and City Manager are
hereby authorized to execute a Letter of Engagement for said services.
August 26, 2013
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
M KR
ERT IF IED PUBLIC
,ICCOUNTANTS
PRINCIPALS
Thomas M. Montague, CPA
Thomas A. Karnowski, CPA
Paul A. Radosevich, CPA
William J. Lauer, CPA
James H. Eichten, CPA
Aaron J. Nielsen, CPA
Victoria L. Holinka, CPA
August 2, 2013
To the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199
Dear Councilmembers:
We are pleased to confirm our understanding of the services we are to provide the City of Brooklyn
Center (the City) for the year ended December 31, 2013. We will audit the financial statements of the
governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund
information, including the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City's
basic financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2013. Accounting standards
generally accepted in the United States of -America provide for certain required supplementary
information (RSI), such as the Management's Discussion and Analysis (MD&A), to supplement the
City's basic financial .statements. Such information, although not a part of the basic financial statements,
is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) who considers it to be an essential
part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational,
economic, or historical context. As part of our engagement, we will apply certain limited procedures to
the City's RSI in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America.
These limited procedures will consist of inquiries of management regarding the methods of preparing the
information and comparing the information for consistency with management's responses to our
inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic
financial statements. We will not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because
the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any
assurance. The following RSI is required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
of America and will be subjected to certain limited procedures, but will not be audited:
1.MD&A
2.Required supplementary information
3. GASB-required other post-employment benefits information (as needed)
We have also been engaged to report on supplementary information other than RSI that accompanies the
City's financial statements. We will subject the following supplementary information to the auditing
procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements and certain additional procedures, including
comparing and reconciling such information directly to the underlying accounting and other records used
to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves, and other additional
procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America and
will provide an opinion on it in relation to the financial statements as a whole:
1.Combining and individual fund statements and schedules
2.Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (if required)
Malloy, Montague, Karnowski, Radosevich & Co., P.A.
5353 Wayzata Boulevard • Suite 410 • Minneapolis, MN 55416 • Telephone: 952-545-0424 • Telefax: 952-545-0569 • www.mmkr.com
City of Brooklyn Center Page 2
August 2, 2013
The following other information accompanying the financial statements will not be subjected to the
auditing procedures applied in our audit of the financial statements, and our auditor's report will not
provide an opinion or any assurance on that other information:
1.Statistical tables
2.Introductory section
We will perform the required State Legal Compliance Audit conducted in accordance with auditing
standards generally accepted in the United States of America and the provisions of the Legal Compliance
Audit Guide, promulgated by the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statute § 6.65, and will include
tests of the accounting records and other procedures we consider necessary to enable us to conclude that,
for the items tested, the City has complied with the material terms and conditions of applicable legal
provisions.
We will also prepare a management report for the City Council and administration. This report will
communicate such things as our concerns regarding accounting procedures or policies brought to our
attention during our audit, along with recommendations for improvements. The report will also contain
certain financial comparisons and analysis, and other information of interest.
Audit Objectives
The objective of our audit is the expression of opinions as to whether your basic financial statements are
fairly presented, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America and to report on the fairness of the supplementary information referred to in
the second paragraph when considered in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole. The
objective also includes reporting on:
•Internal control related to the financial statements and compliance with laws, regulations, and the
provisions of contracts or grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a material
effect on the financial statements in accordance with Government Auditing Standards.
•Internal control related to major programs and an opinion (or disclaimer of opinion) on
compliance with laws, regulations, and the provisions of contracts or grant agreements that could
have a direct and material effect on each major program in accordance with the Single Audit Act
Amendments of 1996 and OMB Circular A-133, Audits of States, Local Governments, and
Non-Profit Organizations.
The reports on internal control and compliance will each include a paragraph that states that the purpose
of the report is solely to describe (1) the scope of testing of internal control over financial reporting and
compliance and the result of that testing and not provide an opinion on the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting or on compliance, (2) the scope of testing internal control over
compliance for major programs and major program compliance and the result of that testing and to
provide an opinion on compliance but not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of internal control
over compliance, and (3) that the report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with
Government Auditing Standards in considering internal control over financial reporting and compliance
and OMB Circular A-0133 in considering internal control over compliance and major program
compliance. The paragraph will also state that the report is not suitable for any other purpose.
City of Brooklyn Center Page 3
August 2, 2013
Our audit will be conducted in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards established in the
United States of America; the standards for financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards,
issued by the 'Comptroller General of the United States; the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996; and
the provisions of OMB Circular A-133, and will include tests of accounting records, a determination of
major program(s) in accordance with OMB Circular A-133, and other procedures we consider necessary
to enable us to express such opinions and to render the required reports. We cannot provide assurance
that unmodified opinions will be expressed. Circumstances may arise in which it is necessary for us to
modify our opinions or add emphasis-of-matter or other-matter paragraphs. If our opinions on the
financial statements or the Single Audit compliance opinions are other than unmodified, we will discuss
the reasons with you in advance. If, for any reason, we are unable to complete the audit or are unable to
form or have not formed opinions, we may decline to express opinions or to issue a report as a result of
this engagement.
Management Responsibilities
Management is responsible for the basic financial statements, Schedule of Expenditures of Federal
Awards, and all accompanying information as well as all representations contained therein. Management
is also responsible for identifying government award programs and understanding and complying with the
compliance requirements, and for preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards in
accordance with the requirements of OMB Circular A-133. As part of the audit, we will assist in the
preparation of your financial statements, Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards, and related notes.
You will be required to acknowledge in the written representation letter our assistance with preparation of
the financial statements and Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards and that you have reviewed and
approved the financial statements, Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards, and related notes prior to
their issuance and have accepted responsibility for them. You agree to assume all management
responsibilities for any nonaudit services we provide; oversee the services by designating an individual,
preferably from senior management, who possesses suitable skill, knowledge, or experience; evaluate the
adequacy and results of the services; and accept responsibility for them.
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal controls, including internal
controls over compliance, and for evaluating and monitoring ongoing activities, to help ensure that
appropriate goals and objectives are met and that there is reasonable assurance that government programs
are administered in compliance with compliance requirements. You are also responsible for the selection
and application of accounting principles; for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial
statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America;
and for compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of contracts and grant
agreements.
Management is also responsible for making all financial records and related information available to us
and for ensuring that management and financial information is reliable and properly recorded. You are
also responsible for providing us with (1) access to all information of which you are aware that is relevant
to the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements, (2) additional information that we may
request for the purpose of the audit, and (3) unrestricted access to persons within the City from whom we
determine it necessary to obtain audit evidence.
Your responsibilities also include identifying significant vendor relationships in which the vendor has
responsibility for program compliance and for the accuracy and completeness of that information.
Management's responsibilities include adjusting the financial statements to correct material misstatements
and confirming to us in the representation letter that the effects of any uncorrected misstatements
aggregated by us during the current engagement and pertaining to the latest period presented are
immaterial, both individually and in the aggregate, to the financial statements taken as a whole.
City of Brooklyn Center Page 4
August 2, 2013
You are responsible for the design and implementation of programs and controls to prevent and detect
fraud, and for informing us about all known or suspected fraud or illegal acts affecting the City involving
(1) management, (2) employees who have significant roles in internal control, and (3) others where the
fraud or illegal acts could have a material effect on the financial statements. Your responsibilities include
informing us of your knowledge of any allegations of fraud or suspected fraud affecting the City received
in communications from employees, former employees, grantors, regulators, or others. In addition, you
are responsible for identifying and ensuring that the City complies with applicable laws, regulations,
contracts, agreements, and grants. Additionally, as required by OMB Circular A-133, it is management's
responsibility to follow up and take corrective action on reported audit findings and to prepare a summary
schedule of prior audit findings and a corrective action plan. The summary schedule of prior audit
findings should be available for our review at the conclusion of the engagement.
You are responsible for preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards in conformity
with OMB Circular A-133. You agree to include our report on the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal
Awards in any document that contains and indicates that we have reported on the Schedule of
Expenditures of Federal Awards. You also agree to include the audited financial statements with any
presentation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards that includes our report thereon OR make
the audited financial statements readily available to intended users of the Schedule of Expenditures of
Federal Awards no later than the date the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards is issued with our
report thereon. Your responsibilities include acknowledging to us in the written representation letter that
(1) you are responsible for presentation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards in accordance
with OMB Circular A-133; (2) that you believe the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards,
including its form and content, is fairly presented in accordance with OMB Circular A-133; (3) that the
methods of measurement or presentation have not changed from those used in the prior period (or, if they
have changed, the reasons for such changes); and (4) you have disclosed to us any significant assumptions
or interpretations underlying the measurement or presentation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal
Awards.
You are also responsible for the preparation of the other supplementary information, which we have
engaged to report on, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America. You agree to include our report on the supplementary information in any document that
contains and indicates that we have reported on the supplementary information. You also agree to include
the audited financial statements with any presentation of the supplementary information that includes our
report thereon OR make the audited financial statements readily available to users of the supplementary
information no later than the date the supplementary information is issued with our report thereon. Your
responsibilities include acknowledging to us in the written representation letter that (1) you are
responsible for presentation of the supplementary information in accordance with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America; (2) that you believe the supplementary information,
including its form and content, is fairly presented in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America; (3) that the methods of measurement or presentation have not
changed from those used in the prior period (or, if they have changed, the reasons for such changes); and
(4) you have disclosed to us any significant assumptions or interpretations underlying the measurement or
presentation of the supplementary information.
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining a process for tracking the status of audit
findings and recommendations. Management is also responsible for identifying for us previous financial
audits, attestation engagements, performance audits, or other studies related to the objectives discussed in
the Audit Objectives section of this letter. This responsibility includes relaying to us corrective actions
taken to address significant findings and recommendations resulting from those audits, attestation
engagements, performance audits, or other studies. You are also responsible for providing management's
views on our current findings, conclusions, and recommendations, as well as your planned corrective
actions, for the reports, and for the timing and format for providing that information.
City of Brooklyn Center Page 5
August 2, 2013
Audit Procedures — General
An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
financial statements; therefore, our audit will involve judgment about the number of transactions to be
examined and the areas to be tested. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting
policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management as well as
evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We will plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement, whether from (1) errors, (2) fraudulent financial reporting, (3) misappropriation of
assets, or (4) violations of laws or governmental regulations that are attributable to the City or to acts by
management or employees acting on behalf of the City. Because the determination of abuse is subjective,
Oovernment Auditing Standards do not expect auditors to provide reasonable assurance of detecting
abuse.
Because of the inherent limitations of an audit, combined with the inherent limitations of internal control s
and because we will not perform a detailed examination of all transactions, there is a risk that material
misstatements or noncompliance may exist and not be detected by us, even though the audit is properly
planned and performed in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of
America and Government Auditing Standards. In addition, an audit is not designed to detect immaterial
misstatements or violations of laws or governmental regulations that do not have a direct and material
effect on the financial statements or major programs. However, we will inform the appropriate level of
management of any material errors and any fraudulent financial reporting or misappropriation of assets
that come to our attention. We will also inform the appropriate level of management of any violations of
laws or governmental regulations that come to our attention, unless clearly inconsequential, and of any
material abuse that comes to our attention. We will include such matters in the reports required for a
Single Audit. Our responsibility as auditors is limited to the period covered by our audit and does not
extend to any later periods for which we are not engaged as auditors.
Our procedures will include tests of documentary evidence supporting the transactions recorded in the
accounts, and may include tests of the physical existence of inventories, and direct confirmation of
receivables and certain other assets and liabilities by correspondence with selected individuals, funding
sources, creditors, and financial institutions. We will request written representations from your attorneys
as part of the engagement, and they may bill you for responding to this inquiry. At the conclusion of our
audit, we will also require certain written representations from you about the financial statements and
related matters.
Audit Procedures — Internal Controls
Our audit will include obtaining an understanding of the City and its environment, including internal
control, sufficient to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements and to design the
nature, timing, and extent of further audit procedures. Tests of controls may be performed to test the
effectiveness of certain controls that we consider relevant to preventing and detecting errors and fraud
that are material to the financial statements and to preventing and detecting misstatements resulting from
illegal acts and other noncompliance matters that have a direct and material effect on the financial
statements. Our tests, if performed, will be less in scope than would be necessary to render an opinion on
internal control and, accordingly, no opinion will be expressed in our report on internal control issued
pursuant to Government Auditing Standards.
City of Brooklyn Center Page 6
August 2, 2013
As required by OMB Circular A-133, we will perform tests of controls over compliance to evaluate the
effectiveness of the design and operation of controls that we consider relevant to preventing or detecting
material noncompliance with compliance requirements applicable to each major federal award program.
However, our tests will be less in scope than would be necessary to render an opinion on those controls
and, accordingly, no opinion will be expressed in our report on internal control issued pursuant to OMB
Circular A-133.
An audit is not designed to provide assurance on internal control or to identify significant deficiencies or
material weaknesses. However, during the audit, we will communicate to management and those charged
with governance internal control related matters that are required to be communicated under AICPA
professional standards, Government Auditing Standards, and OMB Circular A-133.
Audit Procedures — Compliance
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement, we will perform tests of the City's compliance with applicable laws and regulations and the
provisions of contracts and agreements, including grant agreements. However, the objective of those
procedures will not be to provide an opinion on overall compliance and we will not express such an
opinion in our report on compliance issued pursuant to Government Auditing Standards.
OMB Circular A-133 requires that we also plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance
about whether the auditee has complied with applicable laws and regulations and the provisions of
contracts and grant agreements applicable to major programs. Our procedures will consist of tests of
transactions and other applicable procedures described in the OMB Circular A-133 Compliance
Supplement for the types of compliance requirements that could have a direct and material effect on each
of the City's major programs. The purpose of these procedures will be to express an opinion on the
City's compliance with requirements applicable to each of its major programs in our report on compliance
issued pursuant to OMB Circular A-133.
Audit Administration, Fees, and Other
We understand that your employees will prepare all cash, accounts receivable, or other confirmations we
request and will locate any documents selected by us for testing.
The assistance to be supplied by your personnel, including the preparation of schedules and analysis of
accounts, typing all cash or other confirmations we request, and locating any invoices select by us for
testing, will be discussed and coordinated with you.
We will provide copies of our reports to City; however, management is responsible for distribution of the
reports and the financial statements. Unless restricted by law or regulation, or containing privileged and
confidential information, copies of our reports are to be made available for public inspection.
At the conclusion of the engagement, we will complete the appropriate sections of and sign the Data
Collection Form that summarized our audit findings. We will provide copies of our reports to the City;
however, it is management's responsibility to submit the reporting package (including financial
statements, Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards, summary schedule of prior audit findings,
auditors' report, and corrective action plan) along with the Data Collection Form to the federal audit
clearinghouse and, if appropriate, to pass-through entities. We will coordinate with you the electronic
submission and certification. If applicable, we will provide copies of our report for you to include with
the reporting package you will submit to pass-through entities. The Data Collection Form and the
reporting package must be submitted within the earlier of 30 days after receipt of the auditors' reports or
nine months after the end of the audit period, unless a longer period is agreed to in advance by the
cognizant or oversight agency for audits. At the conclusion of the engagement, we will coordinate with
you the electronic submission and certification.
City of Brooklyn Center Page 7
August 2, 2013
The audit documentation for this engagement is the property of Malloy, Montague, Karnowski,
Radosevich & Co., P.A. (MMKR) and constitutes confidential information. However, pursuant to
authority given by law or regulation, we may be requested to make certain audit documentation available
to a regulatory agency or its designee, a federal agency providing direct or indirect funding, or the U.S.
Government Accountability Office for purposes of a quality review of the audit, to resolve audit findings,
or to carryout oversight responsibilities. We will notify you of any such request. If requested, access to
such audit documentation will be provided under the supervision of MMKR personnel. Furthermore,
upon request, we may provide copies of selected audit documentation to the aforementioned parties.
These parties may intend, or decide, to distribute the copies or information contained therein to others,
including other governmental agencies.
The audit documentation for this engagement will be retained for a minimum of five years after the report
release date or for any additional period requested by the regulatory agency. If we are aware that a
federal awarding agency, pass-through entity, or auditee is contesting an audit finding, we will contact the
party(ies) contesting the audit finding for guidance prior to destroying the audit documentation.
James H. Eichten, CPA is the engagement partner and is responsible for supervising the engagement and
signing the report. Our fees for these services will be based on the actual time spent at our standard
hourly rates. We will also bill you for travel and other out-of-pocket costs such as report production,
typing, postage, etc. Our standard hourly rates vary according to the degree of responsibility involved
and the experience level of the personnel assigned to your audit. Our invoices for these fees will be
rendered each month as work progresses and are payable upon presentation. Unless additional work is
requested, or circumstances require additional work, our fees will be as described in the Technical
Proposal for Professional Auditing Services, which outlined a total all-inclusive maximum price for the
audit of $38,900.
This price does not include an audit in accordance with the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 and
OMB Circular A-133, which would only be required if the City expended $500,000 or more in federal
assistance funds during the year. If the City is required to have a Single Audit of federal assistance funds,
the price would need to be modified.
The fee is based on anticipated cooperation from your personnel and the assumption that unexpected
circumstances will not be encountered during the audit. If we find that additional audit procedures are
required, or if additional services are requested by the City, those services will be billed at our standard
hourly rates. Additional audit procedures might be required for certain accounting issues or events such
as new contractual agreements, transactions and legal requirements of new bond issues, new funds, major
capital projects, new tax increment districts, if there is an indication of misappropriation or misuse of
public funds, or if significant difficulties are encountered due to the lack of accounting records,
incomplete records, or turnover in the City's staff
With regard to the electronic dissemination of audited financial statements, including financial statements
published electronically on your website, you understand that electronic sites are a means to distribute
information and, therefore, we are not required to read the information contained in these sites or to
consider the consistency of other information in the electronic site with the original document.
If you intend to publish or otherwise reproduce the financial statements, such as in a bond statement, and
make reference to our firm name, you agree to provide us with printers' proofs or masters for our review
and approval before printing. You also agree to provide us with a copy of the final reproduced material
for our approval before it is distributed.
City of Brooklyn Center Page 8
August 2, 2013
Government Auditing Standards require that we provide you with a copy of our most recent external peer
review report and any letter of comment, and any subsequent peer review reports and letters of comment
received during the period of the contract. Our most recent peer review accompanies this letter.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the City and believe this letter accurately summarizes
the significant terms of our engagement. If you have any questions, please let us know. If you agree with
the terms of our engagement as described in this letter, please sign the enclosed copy and return it to us.
Sincerely,
OY, MONTAGUE, KARNOWSKI, RADOSEVICH & CO., P.A.
Jam . Eichten, CPA
Pri sal
J iimb
Response:
This letter correctly sets forth the understanding of the City of Brooklyn Center.
By: By:
Title: Title:
Date: Date:
City Council Agenda Item No. 6d
COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 19, 2013
TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager
FROM: Sharon Knutson, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Application and Pennit for Temporary On-Sale Liquor License Submitted by
National Maryland County Association of Liberia for an Event to be Held at
Brooklyn Performing Arts, 5801 John Martin Drive, Brooklyn Center, on
September 28, 2013
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the application and permit for a
temporary on-sale liquor license submitted by National Maryland County Association of Liberia
for an event to be held at Brooklyn Performing Arts, 5801 John Martin Drive, Brooklyn Center,
on September 28, 2013.
Background:
National Maryland County Association of Liberia has submitted an application and permit for
temporary on-sale liquor license for an event to be held at Brooklyn Performing Arts, 5801 John
Martin Drive, Brooklyn Center, on September 28, 2013.
The applicant has satisfied the City's requirements, submitted the $25 fee for each day of the
license, along with a certificate of coverage for liquor liability insurance, and has existed as a
non-profit organization for at least three years. The Police Department has reviewed and
discussed with the applicant issues relating to parking, safety, and security. After Council
review, the application and peimit will be forwarded to the Minnesota Department of Public
Safety Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division for approval.
City Ordinance Section 11-107 (6)
Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License. This license may be issued only
upon receiving the approval from the Commissioner of Public Safety. The license may
be issued only in connection with a social event within the city that is sponsored by a
club or charitable, religious, or other nonprofit organization that has existed for at least
three years or to a brewer who manufactures fewer than 3,500 barrels of malt liquor in a
year. The license may authorize the sale of intoxicating liquor to be consumed on the
Premises for not more than three consecutive days, and the City shall issue no more than
twelve days' worth of temporary licenses to any one organization or for any one location
within a 12-month period. The temporary license may authorize the sale of intoxicating
liquor to be consumed on Premises other than Premises the licensee owns or permanently
occupies. The temporary license may provide that the licensee may contract for
intoxicating liquor catering services with the holder of an On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor
License issued by any municipality.
Budget Issues:
There are no budget issues to consider.
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for alipeople and preserves the public trust
Minnesota Depai talent of Public Safety
ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT DIVISION
444 Cedar Street Suite 222, St. Paul MN 55101-5133
(651) 201-7507 Fax (651) 297-5259 TTY (651) 282-6555
WWW.DPS.STATE.MN.US
APPLICATION AND PERIVIIT
FOR A 1104 DAY TEMPORARY ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE
TYPE OR PRINT INFORMATION
NAME OF ORGANIZATION
Pig5(X.■1,1A-00/vAL, MIKILANZ) it1/41 1.40.
DATE ORGANIZED
-1-"\-- -,. jarn 200_5
TAX EXEMPT NUMBER
414 At2- 33 1
STREET ADDRESS ei 0 /cog g&pF0A0
-7-6. A ivEcie..) ALT 0766 k.,
CITY
-it- A Ara 06
STATEau'ZIP CODE0-76 <6,6
NAME OF PERSON MAKING APPLICATION
I S A-AC A. S. g EL4._
BUSINESS PHONE( )HOME PHONE
(-NS 3* 576 a
DATES LIQUOR WILL BE SOLD (-1,9) 01 2)---/ di'LlOt I
TYPE OF ORGANIZATION (------)
CLUB CHARITABLE RELIGIOUS OTHE ONPROFIT i
ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME
i s Mc kugssa--
ADDRES576, UINC.LEATr
134662/42--thu pAygg. ON S524/4e7
ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME
FL/,A LA-fivly
ADDRESS / &e." 80 FoX.D ALS',
--rEA-AfEci-., Kro7664-,ORGANIZATION OFFICER'S NAME
az-t zi4-5e714-6-1,41,6
ADDRESS ---/ g -.), g) hanWL,LA)560/0C Aptn5 /0.
Az,174„,,,— -jjv "AxY-, mini ss--eg-/
Location licerue will beked. Ian outdoor area, describeTN poo 0.*) 5goi Jo R-N 77)447-iiv -D4.7 ex,o1Vc -0-pv) (--iwytw
ION ,.,.S 43O
Will the applicant contract for intoxicating liquor service? If so, give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service.
0
Will the applicant carry liquor liability insurance? If so, please provide the carrier's name and amount of coverage.
_ 3 74 Oilii I A, k A - I,: foc A IA
APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR COUNTY
CITY 0 UNTY Bc,up■ r 0-e nW
APPROVAL
ENFORCEMENT
BEFORE SUBMITTING
DA I E APPROVED
LICENSE DAIES
TO ALCOHOL & GAMBLING
CITY FEE AMOUNT 11 2-5 .co
DA FEE PAID 1-81-13
4
SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OFFICIAL APPROVED DIRECTOR ALCOHOL AND GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT
NOTE: Submit this form to the city or county 30 days prior to event. Forward application signed by city and/or county to the address
above. If the application is approved the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division will return this application to be used as the License for the event
PS-09079 (12/09)
MINNESOTA LIQUOR LIABILITY ASSIGNED RISK PLAN
MINNESOTA JOINT UNDERWRITING ASSOCIATION
445 MINNESOTA ST SUITE 514
SAINT PAUL, MN 55101-0760
(651) 222-0484 OR 1-800-552-0013
AMENDED EVENT DATE
CEIVED
AUG 0 9 2013
CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE FOR LIQUOR LIABILITY COVERAGE
THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE
CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THE CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE
AFFORDED BY THE CONTRACT LISTED BELOW.
POLICY NUMBER: 13-0367
CONTRACT PERIOD: 12:01 AM. 9/28/2013 TO 12:01 A.M. 9/29/2013 (or the time/hour the event license expires)
CONTRACT HOLDER & ADDRESS
ISAAC RUSSELL
NATIONAL MARYLAND COUNTY ASSOC. OF LIBERIA
9516 VINCENT AVE. N.
BROOKLYN PARK, MN 55444
SCHEDULED PREMISES: 5801 JOHN MARTIN DRIVE, BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE CONTRACT OF COVERAGE DESCRIBED HEREIN HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE
CONTRACT HOLDER NAMED ABOVE AND IS IN FORCE AT THIS TIME. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY
REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH
THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN TO THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE CONTRACT
DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH CONTRACT.
TYPE OF COVERAGE
LIMITS OF LIABILITY
BODILY INJURY $ 50,000 EACH PERSON
100,000 EACH OCCURRENCE
PROPERTY DAMAGE $ 10,000 EACH OCCURRENCE
LOSS OF MEANS OF SUPPORT $ 50,000 EACH PERSON
100,000 EACH OCCURRENCE
PECUNIARY LOSS $ 50,000 EACH PERSON
100,000 EACH OCCURRENCE
ANNUAL AGGREGATE $ 300,000 ANNUALLY
SHOULD THE ABOVE CONTRACT BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE PLAN WILL
MAIL 60 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE BELOW NAMED CERTIFICATE HOLDER, HOWEVER, IN THE EVENT
THE CANCELLATION IS FOR NON PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE PLAN WILL MAIL A 10 DAY WRITTEN NOTICE.
CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAME & ADDRESS
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430
DATE OF ISSUE: 08/06/2013
AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE
City Council Agenda Item No. 6e
COUNCIL ITEM MEMO NDUM
DATE: August 20, 2013
TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager
FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works/ S"
SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing the Execution of a Cooperative Construction Agreement
for Signing of the Mississippi River Trail between the Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT) and the City of Brooklyn Center
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of a Cooperative Construction
Agreement for the Mississippi River Trail signing project between MnDOT and the City of
Brooklyn Center.
Background:
On November 26, 2012, the City Council expressed support of the Minnesota Department of
Transportation's (MnDOT's) plan to determine and designate a U.S. Bicycle Route through the City
of Brooklyn Center along the Mississippi River (see attached memo and resolution). The route has
been determined and MnDOT is currently ready to proceed with the official signing of the national
trail (see the attached trail route map).
In order for MnDOT to proceed with this federally funded project, an agreement is required
between the City and the State to allow MnDOT the use of the City's right-of-way to install the
signs. Approximately eight trail and route signs will be installed at certain key locations within the
City. The signs will be standard roadway/trail signs. Upon completion of the signing project, the
City will assume the responsibility of the sign maintenance.
The City Attorney has reviewed the agreement and concurs with its form and content.
Budget Issues:
Future maintenance responsibility will be taken over by the City and will be maintained in
accordance with the City's practices that it uses for the other 5,000 signs within the City. Eight
additional signs added to the City's sign inventory is a minimal budget impact.
Council Goals:
Strategic:
4. We will improve the city's image
7. We will continue to maintain the city's infrastructure improvements
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive COMMIMily that enhances the quality of life
for people and preserves the public trust
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A COOPERATIVE
CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT FOR SIGNING OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER
TRAIL BETWEEN THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
(MNDOT) AND THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
WHEREAS, on November 26, 2012, the City Council of Brooklyn Center under
Resolution 2012-151expressed its approval and support for the development of the Mississippi River
Trail (USBR 45) and requested that appropriate government officials take action to officially
designate the route accordingly; and
WHEREAS, the State desires to sign the route of the Mississippi River Trail that
traverses the City of Brooklyn Center's roadways and trails; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center ("City") and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation ("MnDOT") have been working cooperatively to advance a federally aided project to
provide official signing of the trail through the City of Brooklyn Center, and
WHEREAS, the City and MnDOT desire to set forth their various construction and
maintenance responsibilities in an agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, authorizes the City Manager to enter into Mn/DOT Agreement No.
04432 with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes:
1. To provide for the State to enter upon City right-of-way to install Mississippi
River Trail signing along the designated Mississippi River Trail route on City
roadways and for the City to provide for proper maintenance of the route
signing. Such work will be conducted under State Project No. 8825-486.
August 26, 2013-
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Mn/DOT Contract No: 04432
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
And
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION
AGREEMENT
State Project Number (S.P.): 8825-486 Estimated Amount Receivable
Fed. Project Number (S.P.): SB1111/N(007) None
Trunk Highway Number (T.H.): Various Routes
State Aid Project Number (S.P.): 088-060-002
State Aid Project Number (S.P.): 091-060403
This Agreement is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Transportation ("State") and
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER acting through its City Council ("City").
Recitals
1.The State will perform Mississippi River Trail (MRT) sign installation construction and other associated
construction upon, along and adjacent to various Trunk Highways, County Roads, City Streets, Township
Roads, or trails according to State-prepared plans, specifications and special provisions designated by the
State as State Project No. 8825-486 ("Project"); and
2.The City has stated its support of the development of the Mississippi River Trail (MRT) which traverses City
roadways and trails in accordance with Resolution of Support dated November 26, 2012; and
3.The State wishes to sign the route and will do so through a construction contract; and
4.The State requests that the City grant the State and its contractor the right to enter upon City right of way or
property for the purpose of installing the MRT signs, including posts and hardware as needed, along the
designated routes; and
5.The State requests and the City agrees'to maintain the signs in accordance with City standard maintenance
practices; and
6.Minnesota Statutes § 160.266, subdivision 4 authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to make
arrangements with and cooperate with any governmental authority to establish, develop, maintain, and operate
the bikeway and to interpret associated natural and cultural resources.
Agreement
1. Term of Agreement; Survival of Terms; Plans; Incorporation of Exhibits
1.1. Effective date. This Agreement will be effective on the date the State obtains all signatures required by
Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 2.
1.2. Expiration date. This Agreement will expire when all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled.
1.3. Survival of terms. All clauses which impose obligations continuing in their nature and which must survive
in order to give effect to their meaning will survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement,
including, without limitation, the following clauses: 4. Maintenance by the City; 7. Liability; Worker
Compensation Claims; 9. State Audits; 10. Government Data Practices; 11. Governing Law; Jurisdiction;
Venue; and 13. Force Majeure.
1.4. Renewal of Contract. At the time the MRT sign panels require systematic renewal, the parties will review
this agreement.
Mn/DOT Contract No: 04432
1.5. Plans, Specifications, Special Provisions. Plans, specifications and special provisions designated by the
State as State Project No. 8825-486 are on file in the office of the Commissioner of Transportation at
St. Paul, Minnesota, and incorporated into this Agreement by reference. ("Project Plans")
1.6. Exhibits. Exhibits A (Resolution of Support) for MRT and a proposed route attached and incorporated into
this Agreement.
2. Construction by the State
2.1. Contract Award. The State will advertise for bids and award a construction contract to the lowest
responsible bidder according to the Project Plans, at no cost to the City. The State has obtained funding for
the fabrication of the panels and the installation of the signs from the Mississippi River Parkway
Commission of Minnesota agreement SB I 1MN(007).
2.2. Direction, Supervision and Inspection of Construction.
A.Supervision and Inspection by the State. The State will direct and supervise all construction activities
performed under the construction contract, and perform all construction engineering and inspection
functions in connection with the contract construction. All contract construction will be performed
according to the Project Plans.
B.Inspection by the City. The City sign installation construction covered under this Agreement will be
open to inspection by the City. If the City believes the City participation construction covered under this
Agreement has not been properly performed or that the construction is defective, the City will inform the
State District Engineer's authorized representative in writing of those defects. Any recommendations
made by the City are not binding on the State. The State will have the exclusive right to determine
whether the State's contractor has satisfactorily performed the City participation construction covered
under this Agreement.
3. Permit to Construct
The City, at no cost to the State, hereby grants to the State and its contractor, an immediate right of entry and
permit to perform the sign installation construction, the location of such work is available on the Project Plans.
4. Maintenance by the City.
A.Upon completion of the project, the City agrees to maintain the signs in accordance with City standard
maintenance practices.
B.The State will fabricate a limited number of additional sign panels to replace those panels that may
become damaged or destroyed. The City may request replacement of damaged or destroyed MRT sign
panels, and if available they will be provided at no cost.
5. Authorized Representatives
Each party's Authorized Representative is responsible for administering this Agreement and is authorized to give
and receive any notice or demand required or permitted by this Agreement.
5.1. The State's Authorized Representative will be:
Name/Title: Tim Mitchell, Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator, (or successor)
Address: 395 John Ireland Boulevard, Mailstop 315, St. Paul, MN 55155
Telephone: (651) -366-4162
E-Mail: tiin.mitchell@state.mn.us
Mn/DOT Contract No: 04432
5.2. The City's Authorized Representative will be:
Name/Title: Steven Lillehaug, City . Engineer/Director of Public Works
Address: 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Telephone: (763) 569-3340
E-Mail: publicworks@ci.brooklyn-center.mn.us
(or successor)
6.Assignment; Amendments; Waiver; Contract Complete
6.1. Assignment. Neither party may assign or transfer any rights or obligations under this Agreement without the
prior consent of the other party and a written assignment agreement, executed and approved by the same
parties who executed and approved this Agreement, or their successors in office.
6.2. Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has
been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original Agreement, or
their successors in office.
6.3. Waiver. If a party fails to enforce any provision of this Agreement, that failure does not waive the provision
or the party's right to subsequently enforce it.
6.4. Contract Complete. This Agreement contains all prior negotiations and agreements between the State and
the City. No other understanding regarding this Agreement, whether written or oral, may be used to bind
either party.
7.Liability; Worker Compensation Claims
7.1. Each party is responsible for its own acts, omissions and the results thereof to the extent authorized by law
and will not be responsible for the acts and omissions of others and the results thereof. Minnesota Statutes
§ 3.736 and other applicable law govern liability of the State. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466 and other
applicable law govern liability of the City.
7.2. Each party is responsible for its own employees for any claims arising under the Workers Compensation
Act.
8.Nondiscrimination
Provisions of Minnesota Statutes § 181.59 and of any applicable law relating to civil rights and discrimination are
considered part of this Agreement.
9.State Audits
Under Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 5, the City's books, records, documents, and accounting
procedures and practices relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the State and the State Auditor
or Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the end of this Agreement.
10.Government Data Practices
The City and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter
13, as it applies to all data provided under this Agreement, and as it applies to all data created, collected, received,
stored; used, maintained, Or disseminated by the City under this Agreement. The civil remedies of Minnesota
Statutes §13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by either the City or the State.
11.Governing Law; Jurisdiction; Venue
Minnesota law governs the validity, interpretation and enforcement of this Agreement. Venue for all legal
proceedings arising out of this Agreement, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with
competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
-3-
Mn/DOT Contract No: 04432
12.Termination; Suspension
12.1. By Illutua 1 Agreeinent. This Agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement of the parties.
12.2. Termination for Insufficient Funding. The State may immediately terminate this Agreement if it does not
obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source; or if funding cannot be continued at a
level sufficient to allow for the performance of contract construction under the Project. Termination must be
by written or fax notice to the City.
12.3. Suspension. In the event of a total or partial government shutdown, the State may suspend this Agreement
and all work, activities and performance of work authorized through this Agreement.
13.Force Majeure
Neither party will be responsible to the other for a failure to perform under this Agreement (or a delay in
performance), if such failure or delay is due to a force majeure event. A force majeure event is an event beyond a
party's reasonable control, including but not limited to, unusually severe weather, fire, floods, other acts of God,
labor disputes, acts of war or terrorism, or public health emergencies.
[The remainder of this page has been intentionally left blank]
Mn/DOT Contract No: 04432
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
The undersigned certify that they have lawfully
executed this contract on behalf of the Governmental
Unit as required by applicable charter provisions,
resolutions or ordinances.
By:
Title: 1 vact-e
Date:
By:
Title:
date:
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Recommended for Approval:
By:
(District Engineer)
Date:
Approved:
By:
(State Design Engineer)
Date:
COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION
By:
(With delegated authority)
Date:
INCLUDE COPY OF RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING ITS
EXECUTION.
Brooklyn Park
Fridley
e-
4. 1
•
I Columbia Heig ipts
. _
rOoklyn.CenteT ------,
MinneapOlis
sin svw,s
t,t
ciu-157
CO O a.s,
Mississippi River Trail (MRT)
Bicycle Route Map
City of Brooklyn Center
r--L...1 County Baum:far/ MRT Route on Mun'c,pal Street
C..ty Boundary MRT Route on MurPdpal
Open Water Rest of MRT Route
?.,PIDOT H:ghe.sysF 1111 Roads
LC:1U \\41 .1111efill A A Octoter 31, 21)12
N l Stntec
.EX 13311T
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) as
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER)
• I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified Deputy City Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Center,
Minnesota, do hereby certify as follows:
1.That attached hereto is an extract of minutes of a Regular Session of the City Council of said City
held on November 26, 2012.
2.That said meeting was held pursuant to due call and notice thereof and was duly held at City Hall
in said City.
3. That I have carefully compared the attached extract of minutes with the original thereof on file in
my office and the same is a fall, true and complete transcript there from insofar as the same
related to:
RESOLUTION NO. 2012-151
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER STATING ITS
SUPPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER
TRAIL (U.S. BICYCLE ROUTE 45)
WITNESS, my hand as such Clerk and the Corporate seal of the City this 27'h day of November 2012.
Deputy City Clerk
City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota
(Seal)
r It
adoption:
MOrither Kay L as man introduced the following resolution and moved its
RESOLUTION NO. 2012-151
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER STATING ITS
SUPPORT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE MISSISSIPPI RIVER TRAIL
(U.S. BICYCLE ROUTE 45)
. WHEREAS, bicycle tourism is a growing industry in North America, presently
_contributing approximately $47 billion dollars a year nationally to the economies of communities
that provide facilities for said tourism; and
WHEREAS, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) has designated a corridor along the Mississippi River to be developed as
United States Bike Route 45; and
. WHEREAS,. the Minnesota Department of Transportation has convened several
public meetings during the previous eighteen months locally and throughout the river's. corridor to
gather information, review route alternatives and to provide assistance; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation in cooperation with road
and trail authorities have proposed a specific route to be designated as the Mississippi River Trail
(USBR 45), a map of which is herein incorporated into this resolution by reference; and
WHEREAS; the proposed Mississippi River Trail (USBR 45) traverses through
Brooklyn Center and is expected to provide a benefit to local residents and businesses; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation will continue to maintain
statewide mapping and information regarding Mississippi River Trail (USBR 45), convene meetings
and facilitate the resolution of issues and future alignment revisions within the State; and
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has duly considered said proposed route
and determined it to be a suitable route throiigh Brooklyn Center and desire that the route be formally
designated so it can be appropriately mapped and signed, thereby promoting bicycle tourism locally
and throughout Minnesota along the Mississippi River.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council ofthe City of Brooklyn
Center, Minnesota, that it expresses its approval and support for the development of the Mississippi
River Trail (USBR 45) and requests that the appropriate government officials take action to officially
designate the route accordingly as soon as possible.
Mayor
RESOLUTION NO. 2012-151 •
November 26, 2012
' Date
ATTEST:Ait-PC
• City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Dan Ryan
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Tim Willson, Carol Kleven, Kay Leeman, Lin Myszkowsa, and DanRyan;
and the following voted against the same: none;
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
City Council Agenda Item No. 6f
COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 21, 2013
TO: City Council August 21, 2013
FROM: Curt Boganey, City Manal ;
SUBJECT: 2013 Strategic Priorities
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the attached resolution adopting
the 2013 Strategic Priorities for the 2013-15 Strategic Plan
Background:
April 5 th and 6 th the Council met in a facilitated retreat along with the Management Leadership
Team. During the retreat we collaboratively establish five draft strategic priorities to guide action
plans and success measures. The priorities agreed upon were, Civic Engagement, Focused
Development, Community Image, Financial Stability and Vibrant Neighborhoods. On June 24 th
The Council met in work session with the facilitator Craig Rapp and reached consensus on the
definition for each Strategic Priority (minute excerpt included).
The definitions are enclosed and are included within the body of the resolution. Remaining steps
in the planning process include revising the Mission statement, adopting the value proposition,
action steps and success measures.
Budget Issues:
There are no budget issues to consider.
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, sale, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for alipeople and preserves the public trust
Member introduced the following resolution and moved
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 2013 STRATEGIC PRIORITIES FOR THE 2013-
2015 STRATEGIC PLAN
its adoption:
WHEREAS, the City Council and Management Team met in a two-day retreat on
April 5 and 6, 2013, at the Earle Brown Heritage Center; and
WHEREAS, the Council in collaboration with Management Team identified five
Strategic Priorities to guide strategic outcomes over the next several years; and
WHEREAS, these priorities will govern the allocation of resources and facilitate the
development of Action Plans and Success Measures.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that the City Council adopt the following 2013 Strategic Priorities:
Civic Engagement
In order to clearly understand and effectively respond to community needs, the City will consistently
seek the input from a broad range of stakeholders from the general public, non-profit and for profit
sectors. Efforts to engage the community will be transparent and responsive. Our engagement efforts
will be deliberately inclusive and culturally sensitive.
Focused Redevelopment
Redevelopment and renewal of commercial, industrial and residential property is essential to the
health and vitality of the city. The City will lead efforts to maintain and increase the value of private
properties and will make the necessary supporting infrastructure investments. We will encourage
entrepreneurial investment and make strategic public investments to create jobs and grow the City's
tax base.
Community Image
Our ability to attract and retain citizens and businesses is directly influenced by the perception of the
City. We will take specific actions to assure that Brooklyn Center is recognized as a high quality,
attractive and safe community. We will accomplish this by providing exceptional customer
experience, vibrant neighborhoods and a sense of community thereby attracting private investment.
RESOLUTION NO.
Financial Stability
We will maintain a positive financial position with a long term perspective by diversifying revenue
sources, aligning fees to adequately reflect service costs, stabilizing property taxes while reducing
the City's reliance on State Shared Revenues, and ensuring that revenues are adequate to fund
services and infrastructure needs.
Vibrant Neighborhoods
Neighborhoods will be attractive, safe, inclusive of a diverse housing stock with owner occupied and
quality rental properties. Citizens will feel connected to each other and the natural environment will
be protected and preserved for the enjoyment of future generations.
August 26, 2013
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Brooklyn Center - Strategic Priorities
Civic Engagement
In order to clearly understand and effectively respond to community needs, the City
will consistently seek the input from a broad range of stakeholders from the general
public, non-profit and for profit sectors. Efforts to engage the community will be
transparent and responsive. Our engagement efforts will be deliberately inclusive
and culturally sensitive.
Focused Redevelopment
Redevelopment and renewal of commercial, industrial and residential property is
essential to the health and vitality of the city. The City will lead efforts to maintain
and increase the value of private properties and will make the necessary supporting
infrastructure investments. We will encourage entrepreneurial investment and
make strategic public investments to create jobs and grow the City's tax base.
Community Image
Our ability to attract and retain citizens and businesses is directly influenced by the
perception of the City. We will take specific actions to assure that Brooklyn Center is
recognized as a high quality, attractive and safe community. We will accomplish this
by providing exceptional customer experience, vibrant neighborhoods and a sense
of community thereby attracting private investment.
Financial Stability
We will maintain a positive financial position with a long term perspective by
diversifying revenue sources, aligning fees to adequately reflect service costs,
stabilizing property taxes while reducing the City's reliance on State Shared
Revenues, and ensuring that revenues are adequate to fund services and
infrastructure needs.
Vibrant Neighborhoods
Neighborhoods will be attractive, safe, inclusive of a diverse housing stock with
owner occupied and quality rental properties. Citizens will feel connected to each
other and the natural environment will be protected and preserved for the
enjoyment of future generations.
strategic priority final.06.24.14
STRATEGIC PLAN 2013 RETREAT FOLLOW UP — JUNE 24, 2013
A.VALUES AND MISSION
B.KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Craig Rapp, facilitator of the April 2013 City Council/EDA and Leadership Team two-day
retreat, stated the City Council/EDA and staff has done a lot of work to put together the details of
the Strategic Plan and identify five key priorities. Mr. Rapp reviewed the Key Performance
Indicator (KPI), measure, and target, noting this is a work plan for staff and provides details in
how it will get done. He asked if there are questions on the definitions.
The consensus of the City Council/EDA was to support the Strategic Priority Definitions.
Mr. Rapp noted the targets that remain to be identified and explained the need for a baseline and
follow up survey to create that target.
The City Council/EDA discussed how the target should be set, noting it should not be so high it
is unattainable, but some general assumptions can be made. Mr. Rapp suggested a 5-10%
increase would be reasonable. Mr. Boganey explained the percentage would be annually based.
The consensus of the City Council/EDA was to establish a 5% annual goal with a report back
each year and staff to indicate whether it thinks 5% would be unreasonable for some groups.
Mr. Rapp agreed the percentage can be adjusted once there are "more boots on the ground."
Mr. Rapp asked the City Council/EDA to address the KPI of blighted properties.
The City Council/EDA acknowledged this is a problematic measure because the City wants to
uphold and enforce community standards. Mr. Rapp explained the idea behind vagrant
neighborhoods is safety and the condition of properties. He noted in what the City Council/EDA
wants to monitor, the indicator would be blighted properties. What would be measured is
nuisance violations. Mr. Rapp asked if there is a different measure that should be considered,
noting the initiatives are on the positive side and the Maintenance Reduction Program is on the
enforcement side.
Mr. Boganey stated the target relates to the change in number of blighted properties, not code
violations and suggested working on the measure, the target, and to tie the target to a particular
condition instead of to the number of violations.
The City Council/EDA agreed this is an issue larger than rental properties and more focused on
neighborhoods of single-family houses. Mr. Rapp suggested a future discussion so that the
measure would be a blight condition index that is created and the target would be to reduce the
number of properties within the blight condition index. Then it would address all properties.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven stated another subdivision is vacant homes that are also
in a blighted condition. Mr. Rapp stated that could be one of the indexes that is scored.
Mr. Boganey stated staff will draft this information for the City Council's/EDA's review.
Mr. Rapp next addressed Secondary Value Propositions, noting operational excellence is the
value proposition but with more pronounced definition, that desired value was a customer
intimate approach.
The City Council/EDA indicated it remained comfortable with that Secondary Value
Proposition.
Mr. Rapp stated the City Council/EDA had a good list of values but a general realization was
reached that there may be too many value statements that should be further discussed. Similarly,
with the mission statement, it should be a separate discussion.
Mr. Boganey asked if the Mission Statement is a topic that the City Council/EDA wants to
address this year in another Work Session.
The majority consensus of the City Council/EDA was to request staff to schedule discussion of
the Mission Statement at a future Work Session.
City Council Agenda Item No. 9a
COUNCI EM MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 26, 2013
TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager
FROM: Tim Benetti, Planning and Zoning Specialist 6---
THROUGH: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development Aa •
SUBJECT: Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application No.
2013-013 Submitted by Odyssey Academy Charter School for a Special Use
Permit to Install a New Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) with a Public Use in the
R1 One Family Residence District (6201 Noble Avenue North)
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this planning application
item, adopt the Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application No.
2013-013 Submitted by Odyssey Academy Charter School for a Special Use Permit to Install a
New Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) with a Public Use in the R1 One Family Residence District
(6201 Noble Avenue North)
Background:
On August 15, 2013 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 2013-013 submitted by Odyssey Academy School for a Special
Use Permit to allow a new dynamic message sign (DMS) with a public use located in an R1 One
Family Residence District (6201 Noble Avenue N).
Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning
Commission Application No. 2013-013, an area map showing the location of the property under
consideration, the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of
this matter and other supporting documents included in this review.
Also attached for review is Planning Commission Resolution No. 2013-14, in which the
Commission provided a favorable and unanimous recommendation of the Special Use Permit
request.
Budget Issues:
There are no budget issues to consider.
Council Goals:
Strategic:
3. We will ensure a safe and secure community
6. We will increase the engagement of all segments of the community
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for al/people antl preserves the public trust
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION REGARDING THE DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION
APPLICATION NO. 2013-013 SUBMITTED BY ODYSSEY ACADEMY SCHOOL
FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO INSTALL A NEW DYNAMIC MESSAGE
SIGN (DMS) WITH A PUBLIC USE IN THE R1-ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE
DISTRICT (6201 NOBLE AVENUE NORTH)
WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 2013-013 submitted by Odyssey
Academy School, proposes a Special Use Permit to install a new Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) with a
Public Use in the R1-One Family Residence District, located at 6201 Noble Avenue North; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code Section 34140; Subpart 3.D, "A DMS owned or
operated by a Public Use in all districts where Public Uses are allowed may be approved by special
use permit"; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on August 15,
2013, whereby a planning staff report was presented and public testimony regarding the special use
permit were received; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission provided unanimous recommendation of
approval to Planning Application No. 2013-013 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No.
2013-14; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Special Use Permit as comprehended
under Planning Application No. 2013-013 at its regular meeting of August 26, 2013; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Special Use Permit request in light of all
testimony received, the guidelines and standards for evaluating this special use permit contained in
Section 35-220 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the general goals and objectives of the City's 2030
Comprehensive Plan, and the Planning Commission's recommendation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that Planning Commission Application No. 2013-013, submitted by
Odyssey Academy School for a Special Use Permit to install a new Dynamic Message Sign (DMS)
with a Public Use in the R1-One Family Residence District, located at 6201 Noble Avenue North, is
hereby approved based upon the following considerations:
1. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote
and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or
endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort.
2. The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
RESOLUTION NO.
property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor
substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood.
3.The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in
the district.
4.Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and
parking so. designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
5. The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable
regulations of the district in which it is located.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that Planning Application No.
2013-013 is hereby approved subject to the following conditions and considerations:
1.The new dynamic message sign (DMS) shall comply with and meet all
regulations and standards as set forth under Chapter 34 (SIGNS) and Chapter
35 (ZONING) of the City Code of Brooklyn Center.
2.The special use permit is issued only to Odyssey Academy and/or the current
landowners with the ability to install and maintain a new DMS at the subject
site of 6201 Noble Avenue North; and is limited to Odyssey Academy use
only or any other future public use that may occupy this site, as defmed under
City Code Section 35-900.
August 26, 2013
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
arty
BROOK L)IIROO 1,1 W
CENTER
Planning Commission Report
Meeting Date: August 15, 2013 •Application Filed: 07/26/13
•Review Period (60-day) Deadline: 09/25/13
•Extension Declared: N/A
•Extended Review Period Deadline: N/A
Application No. 2013-013
Applicant: Odyssey Academy School
Location: 6201 Noble Avenue North
Request: Special Use Permit to allow a new dynamic message sign (DMS) with a public use
located in the R1 One Family Residence District
INTRODUCTION
Signcrafters, a licensed sign hanger with the City of Brooklyn Center and acting on behalf of
Odyssey Academy School, is requesting a Special Use Permit to allow a new dynamic message
sign (DMS) with a public use located in the R1 One Family Residence District pursuant to City
Code Section 34-140; Subpart 3.D, "A DMS owned or operated by a Public Use in all districts
where Public Uses are allowed may be approved by special use permit."
This item is being presented for review under public hearing. Notices were mailed to all registered
surrounding property owners within 150-feet of the subject property.
BACKGROUND
The subject property consists of 12.7 acres and was originally built and opened as Orchard Lane
Elementary School. The site is still owned by ISD No. 279 (Osseo School District), which has
been leasing the former elementary school property to the Odyssey Academy for a number of
years. Odyssey Academy is a Minnesota State Board of Education approved non-profit charter
school. A separate non-profit corporation, ASG Brooklyn Center recently received approval
from the City Council to issue conduit revenue bonds in the amount of $5.3 million l to help in
the acquisition and renovation of the school property on behalf and for the expressed interest of
Odyssey Academy.
As part of Odyssey's continuing efforts to identify the school, attract new students and provide
notifications and messages to its students, parents and the general public, they , are seeking the
ability to place a new 6.5-ft. x 9-ft. (overall) monument style sign along the 63 d Avenue North
right of way line. This proposed sign is scheduled to have a 1.5' x 6.25' interior illuminated
(stationary) sign cabinet with "Odyssey Academy" sign face near the top, along with a 4' x 6.25'
electronic message board in the middle section, and a smaller additional sign copy underneath
the electronic board section.
Under City Code Chapter 34- Signs, a public use is allowed to have one freestanding sign not to
exceed 36 sq. ft. and no more than 10-ft. above ground level. Properties that have two or more
street frontages are entitled to a second sign of same size; or may elect to have one single
1.The bonds carry the City of Brooklyn Center's *name only; while full fiscal, legal and moral responsibility for
repayment of the debt rests solely with ASG. ASG's sole source of revenue will be Odyssey Academy and the
State Funded Lease Aid provided to Odyssey. The City faces no liability for repayment of the bonds using either
City reserves or any levy against the City's tax base. Neither positive nor negative activity with this bond will
affect the City's bond rating with Standard & Poor's.
r-11-,+ OD Y SSEYt .
MIWC-•••■..
HInn, •
educanonal <-1t
freestanding sign not to exceed 72 sq. ft. and 15 feet in height. Diagrams are noted below:
CITY ORDINANCE STANDARDS
With the recent adoption of the new sign ordinance amendment related to dynamic message
signs with public uses, these types of sign requests must be approved under the special use
permit process. This SUP process was a result of the City Council requesting certain measures
or means of notification to the surrounding residents where these signs were being proposed.
According to the new ordinance, all DMS' in residential districts must comply with the
following standards:
a.the DMS shall only be allowed on a freestanding sign aligned perpendicular to the
adjacent roadway system. This roadway must either be a collector or arterial
street as identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
b.the area of a DMS sign is limited to an area equal to 50% of the maximum
allowable size of the freestanding sign.
c.the DMS message must remain stationary or static for 8 seconds or more;
d.the DMS shall be located no closer than 50 feet from any residential dwelling.
e. the DMS must have dimming technology that automatically adjusts its brightness
in direct correlation with ambient light conditions. Brightness shall not exceed
0.3 foot-candles above ambient light as measured from a preset distance
App. No. 2013-013
PC 08/15/2013
Page 2
depending on the sign size.
In addition to these specific sign related standards, and pursuant to City Code Section 35-220,
Subdivision 2, the following standards must be met in order to satisfy the issuance of a special
use permit:
a.The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and
enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, morals or comfort.
b.The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in
the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially
diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood.
c.The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the
district.
d.Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and
parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
e. The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations
of the district in which it is located.
STAFF ANALYSIS
As far as the sign standards noted above, the sign will or must meet these requirements prior to
or after the sign is installed. The sign is a freestanding (monument type) sign aligned
perpendicular to 63 111 Avenue, which is also classified as a collector road system.
The overall size of the sign is 6.25' x 9', or 56.25 sq. ft. The combined area of the sign copy
(signage only) is approximately 38 sq. ft. A DMS at this location is allowed to have up to 72 sq.,
ft. of total signage, which would allow up to 36 sq. ft. dedicated to the electronic message board.
The proposed electronic message board is 41" (3.42') x 6.25' or 21.25 sq. ft. This proposed sign
therefore meets the 50% threshold required under this ordinance.
The sign appears to be well over 150 feet (as measured by City GIS mapping systems) from any
of the three adjacent residential dwellings, locally identified as 6300 and 6301 Orchard Avenue
North and 4701 — 63 111 Avenue North.
Staff will ensure the 8-second message duration standard is met once the DMS becomes
operational; and we possess the ability to measure the lighting and brightness levels if necessary.
App. No. 2013-013
PC 08/15/2013
Page 3
The analysis of this special use will provide responses to the five standards noted in 35-220,
Subdiv, 2.
a.The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance
the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety, morals or comfort.
The new DMS for Odyssey will not only provide a personal and unique means of
conveying multiple messages for the benefit of their students and parents, but also for the
general public as needed. The requirements that all messages must remain static for at
least 8-seconds is meant to avoid multiple changing messages every two seconds as seen
in the commercial DMS signs, and not cause too much of a distraction to the surrounding
residences. The brightness standards will be measured and determined after the sign
installation, and must be maintained according to the new City Sign Code standards.
Based on these standards, Staff does not believe this DMS will be a detriment or danger
to the public health, safety moral or comfort of the community, and may be acceptable.
b.The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the
immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the neighborhood.
The City has the ability to ensure the Applicant/Owner will maintain and continue to
meet the required standards as noted herein for this DMS in this residential area. Any
deviations or violations of these standards would result in immediate code enforcement
action or penalties, which could include the rescinding of the special use permit and
removal of the sign itself (that is if enforcement action is ignored, problems persist or the
sign becomes a public nuisance). Staff does not have any evidence this sign would be
injurious to the use and enjoyment of other properties in this neighborhood, nor do we
believe the sign would substantially diminish and impair property values within the
neighborhood. Staff therefore believes this DMS may be acceptable under this request.
c.The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development
and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district.
The sign will be fully contained and maintained on the Odyssey school property, which is
also located behind a chain-linked fenced area of the property. The sign location is well
over the 50-foot threshold from neighboring dwellings, and should have minimal effect
upon these dwellings once the sign is operational. The establishment of this sign will not
impede the normal and orderly development of the surrounding properties as long as said
sign is will maintained and meets the current sign ordinance requirements. This will be
ensured during the duration of its operation. Staff believes this DMS use may be
acceptable under this particular standard.
d.Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so
designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
This standard is not applicable or needs to be addressed under this specific DMS request.
App. No. 2013-013
PC 08/15/2013
Page 4
All parking is located on the east and south sides of the academy, and does not impact,
affect or relate to this DMS request.
e. The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the
district in which it is located.
The special use permit allowing this new DMS, and all other requirements needed to
approve said sign, such as the sign permit, will ensure the conformance to all regulations
applicable to these types of signs in these districts. City staff will ensure the sign meets
all building related requirements (such as footings, wind/snow loads, electrical hook-ups,
etc.) and will regulate brightness and message changing standards while this sign is
operational. Any deviations or violations of these standards may result in immediate
code enforcement action and/or penalties, which could include the rescinding of the
special use permit and removal of the sign. Staff believes the sign will easily meet and
maintain all regulations and standards as they apply to this new sign.
RECOMMENDATION
It is the opinion of Planning Staff that the standards for this special use permit and the criterion
used to measure or determine the appropriateness in allowing this new dynamic message sign
(DMS) to this public use, i.e. Odyssey Academy, which will be located in the R1 One Family
Residence District, have been satisfactorily addressed or will be met upon completion of
installation.
It is therefore further recommended that Planning Application No. 2013-013, which
comprehends the special use permit at the subject site, be approved and that the Planning
Commission adopt the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 2013-14 with the
following conditions:
1.The new dynamic message sign (DMS) shall comply with and meet all regulations and
standards as set forth under Chapter 34 (SIGNS) and Chapter 35 (ZONING) of the City
Code of Brooklyn Center.
2.The special use permit is issued only to Odyssey Academy and/or the current landowners
with the ability to install and maintain a new DMS at the subject site of 6201 Noble
Avenue North; and is limited to Odyssey Academy use only or any other future public
use that may occupy this site, as defined under City Code Section 35-900.
App. No. 2013-013
PC 08/15/2013
Page 5
'ZMERILA&ASSOCIATES
LtHO.H, 9,59.93
9 9 .9 91.19
ORCHARD LANE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
OSSEO SCHOOL DISTR.' LS 0 279
BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY
BROOKLYN BENTER NKNNESOLA
.
,
r/a I
.I ,`4 :4,_ i '„,:„-, ..,.' -,
a ,
E j- L',
, 2 .
g E ' g a
rtII111
LL-d
(■
7/23/13
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center MN 55430
Re: Special Use Permit for Odyssey Academy 6201 Noble Ave N
To whom it may concern:
Odyssey Academy is seeking a special use permit for the installation of one double faced monument sign
with an electronic message center. The sign will have an overall size of 6'3" wide x 9'1" tall. The overall
height of the sign shall be 9'1". The sign will identify the school and the message center will be used to
acknowledge student achievements and notify the general public of school events.
This sign will in no way be detrimental to the public health, safety, morals or comfort. This sign will not
be injurious to the use and enjoyment of the adjacent properties or the neighborhood in general. This
special use permit will not impede the normal orderly development and improvement of the
neighboring properties. The sign shall conform in all other respects to the applicable regulations for this
zoning district.
A print of the sign is attached along with a site plan showing the location of h sign on the property.
We thank you for your consideration of this application.
Thank you,„.1
47 / /
!Mike/Law ra nce
Account Executive
24135 ANNAPous LANE N. SUITE 200
MINNEAPOLIS MN 55441
P. (763) 571-2995 F. (763) 571-3588
1N1NVIASCOUTDOOR.COM
Commissioner Christensen introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2013-14
RESOLUTION REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2013-013 SUBMITTED BY
ODYSSEY ACADEMY CHARTER SCHOOL FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
TO INSTALL A NEW DYNAMIC MESSAGE SIGN (DMS) WITH A PUBLIC
USE IN THE R1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT (6201 NOBLE
AVENUE NORTH)
WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 2013-013 submitted by
Odyssey Academy Charter School for a Special Use Permit to install a new Dynamic Message Sign
(DMS) with a Public Use in the R1 One Family Residence District, located at 6201 Noble Avenue
North (the "Subject Property"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code Section 34-140; Subpart 3.D, "A DMS owned or
operated by a Public Use in all districts where Public Uses are allowed may be approved by special
use permit."; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on August
15, 2013, whereby a planning staff report and public testimony regarding the special use permit
were received; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Special Use Permit request in
light of all testimony received, the guidelines and standards for evaluating this special use permit
contained in Section 35-220 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, and the request complies with the
general goals and objectives of the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission
of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Planning Application No.
2013-013 submitted by Odyssey Academy be approved based upon the following considerations:
1.The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will
promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental
to or endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort.
2.The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor
substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood.
3. The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and
orderly development and improvement of sunounding property for uses
permitted in the district.
Res. 2013-14
1 of 2
4.Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress
and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public
streets.
5.The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable
regulations of the district in which it is located.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City
of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Planning Application No. 2013-013 be
approved subject to the following conditions and considerations:
1.The new dynamic message sign (DMS) shall comply with and meet all
regulations and standards as set forth under Chapter 34 (SIGNS) and
Chapter 35 (ZONING) of the City Code of Brooklyn Center.
2.The special use permit is issued only to Odyssey Academy and/or the
current landowners with the ability to install and maintain a new DMS at
the subject site of 6201 Noble Avenue North; and is limited to Odyssey
Academy use only or any other future public use that may occupy this site,
as defined under City Code Section 35-900.
August 15, 2013
ATTEST:
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner
Freedman
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Chair Burfeind, Commissioners Christensen, Freedman, Morgan, and Schonning.
and the following voted against the same: None
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Res. 2013-14
2 of 2
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
AUGUST 15, 2013
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Burfeind at 7:08 pin.
ROLL CALL
Chair Scott Burfeind, Commissioners Randall Christensen, Benjamin Freedman, Carlos Morgan,
and Stephen Schonning were present. Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission
Tim Benetti, Director of Business & Development Gary Eitel, and Planning Commission
Recording Secretary Rebecca Crass. Michael Parks was absent and excused.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES — JULY 25, 2013
There was a motion by Commissioner Christensen, seconded by Commissioner Schonning, to
approve the minutes of the July 25, 2013 meeting as submitted. The motion passed unanimously.
CHAIR'S EXPLANATION
Chair Burfeind explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the
Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings,
the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final
decisions in these matters.
APPLICATION NO. 2013-013 - ODYSSEY ACADEMY SCHOOL — SPECIAL USE
PERMIT FOR DYNAMIC MESSAGE SIGN
Chair Burfeind introduced Application No. 2013-013, a request for Special Use Permit approval
(pursuant to City Code Section 34-140; Subpart 3.D), to allow a new dynamic message sign (DMS)
with a public use located in an R1 One Family Residence District, located at 6201 Noble Avenue
North. (Refer to Planning Commission Report dated 8-15-13 on Application No. 2013-013.)
Mr. Benetti provided a history of the school site and explained a public use is allowed to have
one freestanding sign not to exceed 36 sq. ft. and no more than 10 ft. above ground level. He
added properties with two or more street frontages are entitled to a second sign of the same size
or may elect to have one single freestanding sign not to exceed 72 sq. ft. and 15 ft. in height. Mr.
Benetti provided an overview of the new ordinance standards and stated the proposed sign will
meet the required standards including size, distance from adjacent residential dwellings, and the
eight second message duration.
PUBLIC HEARING — APPLICATION NO. 2013-013
There was a motion by Commissioner Schonning, seconded by Commissioner Freedman, to
open the public hearing on Application No. 2013-013, at 7:13 p.m. The motion passed
unanimously.
PC Minutes 8-15-13
Page 1
Chair Burfeind called for comments from the public.
Ms. Elizabeth Muellner, 6124 Noble Avenue North asked for clarification on the location of the
sign since she is concerned about the sign blocking the view of oncoming traffic. Mr. Benetti
replied the sign will be located inside the fence and sidewalk and will not block the view of any
traffic.
Pastor Ezra J. FaggeTt, Sr. of Unity Temple Church, asked if the requirements for the school
district sign are the same as required for their church's existing sign. Mr. Benetti explained the
school district sign is required to meet the new standards recently established and the existing
sign at the church must meet the current, newly adopted sign ordinance especially regarding the
requirement that the sign message remain static for eight seconds and must also have dimming
technology. Mr. Benetti added the city has had no complaints about the sign at the church.
Commissioner Morgan arrived at 7:19 p.m.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
There was a motion by Commissioner Freedman, seconded by Commissioner Christensen, to
close the public hearing on Application No. 2013-013. The motion passed unanimously.
The Chair called for further discussion or questions from the Commissioners.
The Commissioners interposed no objections to the approval of the Application.
ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
NO. 2013-14 REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2013-013 SUBMITTED BY ODYSSEY ACADEMY
CHARTER SCHOOL FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO INSTALL A NEW DYNAMIC
MESSAGE SIGN (DMS) WITH A PUBLIC USE IN THE R-1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE
DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 6201 NOBLE AVENUE NORTH.
There was a motion by Commissioner Christensen, seconded by Commissioner Freedman, to
approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 2013-14.
Voting in favor: Chair Burfeind, Commissioners Christensen, Freedman, Morgan, and
S chorming
And the following voted against the same: None
The motion passed unanimously.
The Council will consider the application at its August 26, 2013 meeting. The applicant must be
present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Planning Commission will require
that the application be returned to the Commission for reconsideration.
PC Minutes 8-15-13
Page 2
APPLICATION NO. 2013-014 - EVERGREEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL — SPECIAL
USE PERMIT FOR DYNAMIC MESSAGE SIGN
Chair Burfeind introduced Application No. 2013-014, a request for Special Use Permit (pursuant
to City Code Section 34440; Subpart 3.D), to allow a new dynamic message sign (DMS) with a
public use located in an R1 One-Family Residence District, located at 7020 Dupont Avenue North.
(Refer to Planning Commission Report dated 8-15-13 on Application No. 2013-014.)
Mr. Benetti provided background information for the school and described existing signage on
the site and the applicant's desire to replace it with a new 4.6 ft. by 7.85 ft. monument style sign.
Mr. Benetti provided an overview of the new ordinance standards and stated the proposed sign
will meet the required standards including size, distance from adjacent residential dwellings, and
the eight second message duration.
Commissioner Freedman asked for clarification on the multi-colored sign as indicated in the
drawings provided. • Mr. Benetti responded that the submitted cut-sheet or diagram of the
proposed DMS is only illustrative of the possible colors that can be produced by the new sign.
Benetti further stated that even though multi-colored messages or text is possible with this sign,
no part of the message may flash, travel, twinkle or move, and he believes the sign will not be
multi-colored but rather one static color to emit messages. All requirements and standards of the
City's Sign Code will be enforced as part of this sign approval.
PUBLIC HEARING — APPLICATION NO. 2013-014
There was a motion by Commissioner Schonning, seconded by Commissioner Christensen, to
open the public hearing on Application No. 2013-014, at 7:25 p.m. The motion passed
unanimously.
Chair Burfeind called for comments from the public.
Ms. Jo Ellen Kloehn, 6927 Dupont Avenue N, asked if anyone knows why the school wants this
type of sign. Chair Burfeind stated these types of signs are the new trend and that more uses are
switching to this type of technology due to the lower costs and flexibility in providing additional
messages. Mr. Benetti added the school district indicated the electronic signs allow ease in
giving out multiple messaging and the letters do not have to be changed manually. He further
stated the messaging is regulated with strict standards. Chair Burfeind added the school district
provided information with their application stating the new sign is integral to their outreach
initiative which allows them to communicate to the entire school community. Chair Burfeind
also gave an explanation of the process involved in researching and studying these signs to allow
them in public areas neighboring residential neighborhoods.
Ms. Kloehn asked if there is any recourse if the signs become disruptive. Mr. Benetti replied the
city would like to know as soon as possible if there are any issues with the sign so they can
address it immediately with the school. He added the school district plans to turn the sign off at
certain times and plans to be a good neighbor with regards to the sign.
Mr. Greg Rendall, representing Sign Source, stated they started this process one year ago and are
looking forward to being able to provide messages to parents and students with an easier method
PC Minutes 8-15-13
Page 3
for changing and displaying the sign and he is confident the sign will not disrupt the residential
neighbors. He also confirmed Evergreen School's intent to be environmentally and energy
conscientious in reducing hours of operation or turning off the sign during certain hours and over
the summertime due to inactivity during these periods.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
There was a motion by Commissioner Freedman, seconded by Commissioner Christensen, to
close the public hearing on Application No. 2013-014. The motion passed unanimously.
The Chair called for further discussion or questions from the Commissioners.
The Commissioners interposed no objections to approval of the Application.
ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
NO. 2013-15 REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2013-014 SUBMITTED BY EVERGREEN PARK
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO INSTALL A NEW DYNAMIC
MESSAGE SIGN (DMS) WITH A PUBLIC USE IN THE R-1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE
DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 7020 DUPONT AVENUE NORTH.
There was a motion by Commissioner Freedman, seconded by Commissioner Christensen, to
approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 2013-15.
Voting in favor: Chair Burfeind, Commissioners Christensen, Freedman, Morgan, and
Schonning
And the following voted against the same: None
The motion passed unanimously.
The Council will consider the application at its August 26, 2013 meeting. The applicant must be
present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Planning Commission will require
that the application be returned to the Commission for reconsideration.
DISCUSSION ITEM - CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER'S PROPOSED ORDINANCE
AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 35 (ZONING)
i. Section 35-900 (DEFINITIONS) regarding the redefinitions of "Front Yards", "Rear
Yards" and "Side Yards"; and
Adding new Section 35-400.1 (LOT COVERAGE AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACES);
and
Consideration in allowing encroachments into front-yard setback areas in residential
zoned areas for steps, stoops, ramps, landings, porticos, ramps, open decks, open or
closed porches, and/or similar.
Mr. Benetti explained the information provided to the Commission related to proposed ordinance
amendments to Chapter 35 regarding defining yards, adding a new section regarding
PC Minutes 8-15-13
Page 4
requirements for lot coverage and impervious surfaces and also allowing encroachments in front
yard setbacks for steps, stoops, ramps, etc.
Commissioner Christensen asked if pools would count towards the statement that 'No more than
50 percent of the area of the front yard may be covered by an impervious surface' or 'Lot
coverage of Impervious Surfaces may not exceed 50 percent of the lot area.' Mr. Benetti replied
that he would check into that and respond back to the Commission.
Mr. Benetti further reviewed the proposed amendment regarding the placement of waste
containers, specifically the requirement that all garbage cans may not be located in the front yard
area, cannot be visible from any public street and cannot be out before 4 p.m. the day prior to
pick up. Commissioner Christensen asked about the requirement that garbage cans be in the
garage or in an enclosure at least 48 inches from the main structure. Mr. Benetti replied the city
ultimately wants garbage cans moved into garages and not be visible from the street.
Commissioner Christensen pointed out some numbers from the city survey taken regarding
garbage can requirements. Mr. Benetti replied these issues had been studied for almost two
years and part of that process involved input from the residents.
Commissioner Christensen stated he wanted the minutes to reflect he is against the 48-inch
setback requirement and the screening requirement for waste containers.
Mr. Benetti continued by reviewing driveway parking area requirements as well as what types of
vehicles (recreational) can be parked in a residential area. He also reviewed a proposal regarding
non-conforming driveways and parking areas that are gravel and how they must be maintained.
OTHER BUSINESS - STAFF UPDATES ON CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEMS FROM THE
AUGUST 12, 2013 MEETING
Mr. Benetti explained the Land Use Amendment for Luther and the PUD/Rezoning for Luther
were approved. He added the final site and building plan and final plat will be on the August 29,
2013 Planning Commission meeting.
There was no other business.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Morgan, seconded by Commissioner Christensen, to
adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 8:12 p.m.
Chair
Recorded and transcribed by:
Rebecca Crass
PC Minutes 8-15-13
Page 5
City Council Agenda Item No. 9b
COUNCI TEM YEIVORANDUIV
DATE: August 26, 2013
TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager
FROM: Tim Benetti, Planning and Zoning Specialist ATHROUGH: Gary Eitel, Director of Business and Development f'
SUBJECT: Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application No.
2013-014 Submitted by Evergreen Park Elementary School for a Special Use
Permit to Install a New Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) with a Public Use in the
R1 One Family Residence District (7020 Dupont Avenue North)
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council, following consideration of this planning application
item, adopt the Resolution Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commission Application No.
2013-014 Submitted by Evergreen Park Elementary School for a Special Use Permit to Install a
New Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) with a Public Use in the R1 One Family Residence District
(7020 Dupont Avenue North).
Background:
On August 15, 2013 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 2013-014 submitted by Evergreen Park Elementary School for a
Special Use Permit to allow a new dynamic message sign (DMS) with a public use located in an R1
One Family Residence District (7020 Noble Avenue N).
Attached for your review are copies of the Planning Commission Information Sheet for Planning
Commission Application No. 2013-014, an area map showing the location of the property under
consideration, the Planning Commission minutes relating to the Commission's consideration of
this matter and other supporting documents included in this review.
Also attached for review is Planning Commission Resolution No. 2013-15, in which the
Commission provided a favorable and unanimous recommendation of the Special Use Permit
request.
Budget Issues:
There are no budget issues to consider.
Council Goals:
Strategic:
3. We will ensure a safe and secure community
6. We will increase the engagement of all segments of the community
- Mission: Ensuring an attmctive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION REGARDING THE DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION
APPLICATION NO. 2013-014 SUBMITTED BY EVERGREEN PARK
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO INSTALL ANEW
DYNAMIC MESSAGE SIGN (DMS) WITH A PUBLIC USE IN THE R1-ONE
FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT (7020 DUPONT AVENUE NORTH)
WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 2013-014 submitted by Evergreen
Park Elementary School (with Independent School District No. 11), proposes a Special Use Permit to
install a new Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) with a Public Use in the R1-One Family Residence
District, located at 7020 Dupont Avenue North; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code Section 34-140; Subpart 3.D, "A DMS owned or
operated by a Public Use in all districts where Public Uses are allowed may be approved by special
use permit."; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on August 15,
2013, whereby a planning staff report was presented and public testimony regarding the special use
permit were received; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission provided unanimous recommendation of
approval to Planning Application No. 2013-014 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No.
2013-15; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Special Use Permit as comprehended
under Planning Application No. 2013-014 at its regular meeting of August 26, 2013; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the Special Use Permit request in light of all
testimony received, the guidelines and standards for evaluating this special use permit contained in
Section 35-220 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, the general goals and objectives of the City's 2030
Comprehensive Plan, and the Planning Commission's recommendation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that Planning Commission Application No. 2013-014, submitted by
Evergreen Park Elementary School (with Independent School District No. 11), proposes a Special Use
Permit to install a new Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) with a Public Use in the R1-One Family
Residence District, located at 7020 Dupont Avenue North, is hereby approved based upon the
following considerations:
1. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote
and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or
endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort.
RESOLUTION NO.
2.The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor
substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood.
3.The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in
the district.
Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and
parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
5. The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable
regulations of the district in which it is located.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that Planning Application No.
2013-014 is hereby approved subject to the following conditions and considerations:
1.The new dynamic message sign (DMS) shall comply with and meet all
regulations and standards as set forth under Chapter 34 (SIGNS) and Chapter
35 (ZONING) of the City Code of Brooklyn Center.
2.The special use permit is issued only to Evergreen Park Elementary School
and/or the current landowners with the ability to install and maintain a new
DMS at the subject site of 7020 Dupont Avenue North; and is limited to
Evergreen Park Elementary School use only or any other future public use that
may occupy this site, as defined under City Code Section 35-900.
August 26, 2013
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
The motion for the .adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
RESOLUTION NO.
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
°/T9/wikaitta7-34.-xe-taill '
FRU, rifi [Amu
vi-, iZ:04 - Z:45TO 10 YEARS OLE)
I v
KLYN
of
BROO
CENTER
Planning Commission Report
Meeting Date: August 15, 2013 •Application Filed: 07/25/13
•Review Period (60-day) Deadline: 09/24/13
•Extension Declared: N/A
•Extended Review Period Deadline: N/A
Application No. 2013-014
Applicant: Evergreen Park Elementary School (ISD No. 11)
Location: 7020 Dupont Avenue North
Request: Special Use Permit to allow a new dynamic message sign (DMS) with a public use
located in the R1 One Family Residence District
INTRODUCTION
Mr. Greg Rendall of Sign Source (a licensed sign hanger with the City of Brooklyn Center),
acting on behalf of Evergreen Park Elementary School (with Anoka-Hennepin School District
No. 11) is requesting a Special Use Permit to allow a new dynamic message sign (DMS) with a
public use located in the R1 One Family Residence District pursuant to City Code Section 34-140;
Subpart 3.D, "A DMS owned or operated by a Public Use in all districts where Public Uses are
allowed may be approved by special use permit"
This item is being presented for review under public hearing. Notices were mailed to all registered
surrounding property owners within 150-feet of the subject property.
BACKGROUND
Evergreen Park school is located at 7020 Dupont Avenue. The school currently has an existing 5' x
6' freestanding (monument style) sign located near the front walkway entry into the school building
(off Dupont Avenue). The sign consists of a 2' x 6' permanent identification sign copy face; along
with a 3' x 6' changeable (manual letters only) message board sign underneath this upper permanent
identification sign.
App. No. 2013-012
PC 07/25/2013
Page 1
MONUMENT OPTION: A - No Scrolling Text - Automated Dimming Used - No Flashing
*-0(Evergieeh Park
WORLD CULTURES COMMUNITY SCHOOL
2- Sided Monument Signtilessage Centel
Materials & Substrates:
trArtilirri:;0
141treth thr,f,h.qlur •
- 1R:6/A7 :OM xt: • N:r.ltt,
Cif 112 ,1rtil Is
FlapJkartan
POP, t
14.1,1k2srt ,tektrxfs
trlZ4 .1db folk 4,11
4.11114
—r.:-.771
-
As part of Evergreen Park's efforts to identify the school and provide notifications and messages
to the students, parents and general public, they are seeking the ability to place a new 4.6-ft. x
7.85-ft. monument style sign (as shown in the diagram below) along Dupont Avenue. This sign
would essentially replace the old 5' x 6' sign located at the school.
•
App. No. 2013-012
PC 07/25/2013
Page 2
This proposed sign is scheduled to have a 2.1-ft. by 7.85-ft. (16.35 sq. ft.) dynamic or electronic
message board sign, with a permanent "Evergreen Park" sign copy above the electronic board.
Under City Code Chapter 34- Signs, a public use is allowed to have one freestanding sign not to
exceed 36 sq. ft. and no more than 10-ft. above ground level. Properties that have two or more
street frontages are entitled to a second sign of same size; or may elect to have one single
freestanding sign not to exceed 72 sq. ft. and 15 feet in height.
CITY ORDINANCE STANDARDS
With the recent adoption of the new sign ordinance amendment related to dynamic message
signs with public uses, these types of sign requests must be approved under the special use
permit process. This SUP process was a result of the City Council requesting certain measures
or means of notification to the surrounding residents where these signs were being proposed.
According to the new ordinance, all DMS' in residential districts must comply with the
following standards:
a.the DMS shall only be allowed on a freestanding sign aligned perpendicular to the
adjacent roadway system. This roadway must either be a collector or arterial
street as identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
b.the area of a DMS sign is limited to an area equal to 50% of the maximum
allowable size of the freestanding sign.
c.the DMS message must remain stationary or static for 8 seconds or more;
d.the DMS shall be located no closer than 50 feet from any residential dwelling.
e. the DMS must have dimming technology that automatically adjusts its brightness
in direct correlation with ambient light conditions. Brightness shall not exceed
0.3 foot-candles above ambient light as measured from a preset distance
depending on the sign size.
In addition to these specific sign related standards, and pursuant to City Code Section 35-220,
Subdivision 2, the following standards must be met in order to satisfy the issuance of a special
use permit:
a. The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and
enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the
public health, safety, morals or comfort.
The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in
the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially
diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood.
App. No. 2013-012
PC 07/25/2013
Page 3
c.The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly
development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the
district.
d.Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and
parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
e. The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations
of the district in which it is located.
STAFF ANALYSIS
As far as the sign standards noted above, the sign will or must meet these requirements prior to
or after the sign is installed. The sign is a freestanding (monument type) sign aligned
perpendicular to Dupont Avenue, which is classified as a collector road system.
The overall size of the sign is 55" (4.58') x 94" (7.83') or 35.9 sq. ft., and sits 6.6 feet from
ground level. The proposed electronic message board is 25" (2.1') by 94" (7.83'), or 16.3 sq. ft.
This proposed sign would meet the 50% threshold required under this ordinance.
The sign location is well over 100 feet (as measured by City GIS mapping systems) from any of
the adjacent residential dwellings situated across the street from Dupont Avenue.
Staff will ensure the 8-second message duration standard is met once the DMS becomes
operational; and we possess the ability to measure the lighting and brightness levels if necessary.
The analysis of this special use will provide responses to the five standards noted in 35-220,
Subdiv. 2.
a.The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance
the general public welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health,
safety morals or comfort.
The new DMS for Evergreen Park school will not only provide a personal and unique
means of conveying multiple messages for the benefit of their students and parents, but
also for the general public as needed. The requirements that all messages must remain
static for at least 8-seconds is meant to avoid multiple changing messages every two
seconds as seen in the commercial DMS signs, and not cause too much of a distraction to
the surrounding residences. The brightness standards will be measured and determined
after the sign installation, and must be maintained according to the new City Sign Code
standards. Based on these standards, Staff does not believe this DMS will be a detriment
or danger to the public health, safety moral or comfort of the community, and may be
acceptable.
b.The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the
immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and
impair property values within the neighborhood.
App. No. 2013-012
PC 07/25/2013
Page 4
The City has the ability to ensure the Applicant/Owner will maintain and continue to
meet the required standards as noted herein for this DMS in this residential area. Any
deviations or violations of these standards would result in immediate code enforcement
action or penalties, which could include the rescinding of the special use permit and
removal of the sign itself (that is if action is ignored, problems persist or the sign
becomes a public nuisance). Staff does not have any evidence this sign would be
injurious to the use and enjoyment of other properties in this neighborhood, nor do we
believe the sign would substantially diminish and impair property values within the
neighborhood. Staff therefore believes this DMS may be acceptable under this request.
c.The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development
and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district.
The sign will be fully contained and maintained on the Evergreen Park school property,
and is replacing an existing and obsolete manual message changing sign. The sign
location is well over the 50-foot threshold from neighboring dwellings, and should have
minimal effect upon these dwellings once the sign is operational. The establishment of
this sign will not impede the normal and orderly development of the surrounding
properties as long as said sign is will maintained and meets the current sign ordinance
requirements. This will be ensured during the duration of its operation. Staff believes
this DMS use may be acceptable under this particular standard.
d.Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so
designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets.
This standard is not applicable or needs to be addressed under this specific DMS request.
All parking is located on the west and south sides of the school property, and does not
impact or affect this sign placement, and does not relate to this specific DMS request.
e. The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the
district in which it is located.
The special use permit allowing this new DMS, and all other requirements needed to
approve said sign, such as the sign permit, will ensure the conformance to all regulations
applicable to these types of signs in these districts. City staff will ensure the sign meets
all building related requirements (such as footings, wind/snow loads, electrical hook-ups,
etc.) and will regulate brightness and message changing standards while this sign is
operational. Any deviations or violations of these standards may result in immediate
code enforcement action and/or penalties, which could include the rescinding of the
special use permit and removal of the sign. Staff believes the sign will easily meet and
maintain all regulations and standards as they apply to this new sign.
RECOMMENDATION
It is the opinion of Planning Staff that the standards for this special use permit and the criterion
used to measure or determine the appropriateness in allowing this new dynamic message sign
(DMS) to this public use, i.e. Evergreen Park Elementary School, which is located in the R1 One
Family Residence District, have been satisfactorily addressed or will be met upon completion of
App. No. 2013-012
PC 07/25/2013
Page 5
installation.
It is therefore further recommended that Planning Application No. 2013-014, which
comprehends the special use permit at the subject site, may be approved, and the Planning
Commission should adopt the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 2013-15 with the
following conditions:
1.The new dynamic message sign (DMS) shall comply with and meet all regulations and
standards as set forth under Chapter 34 (SIGNS) and Chapter 35 (ZONING) of the City
Code of Brooklyn Center.
2.The special use permit is issued only to Evergreen Park Elementary School with the
ability to install and maintain a new DMS at the subject site of 7020 Dupont Avenue
North, and is limited to Evergreen Park school use only or any other future public use
that may occupy this site, as defined under City Code Section 35-900.
App. No. 2013-012
PC 07/25/2013
Page 6
12/27/12
To Brooklyn Center City Council Members,
This letter is in support of the request for an electronic sign at Evergreen
Park World Cultures Community School located in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota.
Evergreen Park is a Community School in the Anoka Hennepin School District.
This past September, Evergreen opened as a new Community themed school
for students in Pre K through grade five. There are five key components to our
community school initiative: High Quality Instruction, Mutual Respect and Effective
Collaboration Amongst Families, Community, and School Staff, Student Motivation
and Engagement, Community Engagement, and Family Support. This school
specialty is a very comprehensive approach to teaching and learning by involving all
stakeholders in the process.
The electronic sign is integral to this outreach initiative, because it offers us
an opportunity to communicate to all in the school community. The electronic sign
will allow us to communicate the services and events planned to the public.
Examples of services and events may include: food/clothing shelf hours, adult basic
education hours and classes, after school programming, summer school
programming, special events, summer food program to name some. As we
implement our five-year plan the hope is to offer medical, dental, and legal
assistance on site as well. Given the number of events and services offered an
electronic sign would greatly enhance our ability to communicate to the public we
serve.
We would also include the time, date, and temperature on the sign as an
added feature for those in the area. These services, programs, and communications
directly benefit families in the Brooklyn Center Community.
Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to your decision and hope
to work as a partner in serving the families in the Brooklyn Center Community.
Sincerely,
Sheryl D. Ray
Principal, Evergreen Park World Cultures Community School
=
i
. —
VI
10.1CD
.2 JLi
4. . . 0 E
el N E 1,1
>,,,,) 0 .7.: u 1 u ■ -
5-.1cu _„„n =
,_,. ' ' ' f
c= Fin3 t.,-c, 4
= 0
,,
=I-.0-
L
—
.=.,---,
=.E.._ ,-,OJ v+E gE'--,
ca,=
ro
ro=
Eoi—C lC)
. ;co ,
•-■
•,'c,T,
.5
IC e 1=,E
(.01
0 L n a ; r 1
oz2 ow
'-'„ e o, .
s ',,,,' . Loc,
a,--,,a'
gi. g
. n
CU ^^cc =7,0 ,;1 .--.
rn
ed
„..
i ,
..= ..=
tel oc,..0 4=01 r4 4 (....V
,t
,, . 0 rt , g En ra -
(11CS) .=CU '9
t„.,
.—
,,,
cr...4 '
,=.E0 1:ei
Q.,-a-l0
..,/-r--1 r-,
.4(cu,,....,.:4 6-■:Li ■,-,Ai Cr:..=''D "I, 0 U-1. EJL'ce ,a ,a ,a ,a ,a ,a ,a ,a a,
.- Iv
Commissioner Freedman introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2013-15
RESOLUTION REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2013-014 SUBMITTED BY
EVERGREEN PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT
TO INSTALL A NEW DYNAMIC MESSAGE SIGN (DMS) WITH A PUBLIC
USE IN THE R1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT (7020 DUPONT
AVENUE NORTH)
WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 2013-014 submitted by
Evergreen Park Elementary School (with Independent School District No. 11) for a Special Use
Permit to install a new Dynamic Message Sign (DMS) with a Public Use in the R1 One Family
Residence District, located at 7020 Dupont Avenue North (the "Subject Property"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code Section 34-140; Subpart 3.D, "A DMS owned or
operated by a Public Use in all districts where Public Uses are allowed may be approved by special
use permit."; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on August
15, 2013, whereby a planning staff report and public testimony regarding the special use permit
were received; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the Special Use Permit request in
light of all testimony received, the guidelines and standards for evaluating this special use permit
contained in Section 35-220 of the City's Zoning Ordinance, and the request complies with the
general goals and objectives of the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission
of the City of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Planning Application No.
2013-013 submitted by Evergreen Park Elementary School be approved based upon the following
considerations:
1.The establishment, maintenance or operation of the special use will
promote and enhance the general public welfare and will not be detrimental
to or endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfort.
2.The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other
property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor
substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood.
3. The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and
orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses
permitted in the district.
Res. 2013-15
1 of 2
August 15, 2013
ATTEST:
4.Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress
and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public
streets.
5.The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable
regulations of the district in which it is located.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Advisory Commission of the City
of Brooklyn Center to recommend to the City Council that Planning Application No. 2013-013 be
approved subject to the following conditions and considerations:
1.The new dynamic message sign (DMS) shall comply with and meet all
regulations and standards as set forth under Chapter 34 (SIGNS) and
Chapter 35 (ZONING) of the City Code of Brooklyn Center.
2.The special use permit is issued only to Evergreen Park Elementary School
with the ability to install and maintain a new DMS at the subject site of
7020 Dupont Avenue North, and is limited to Evergreen Park school use
only Or any other future public use that may occupy this site, as defined
under City Code Section 35-900.
Secretary
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Commissioner
Christensen
and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Chair Burfeind, Commissioners Christensen, Freedman, Morgan, and Schonning.
and the following voted against the same: None
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Res. 2013-15
2 of 2
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
AUGUST 15, 2013
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission meeting was called to order by Chair Burfeind at 7:08 pin.
ROLL CALL
Chair Scott Burfeind, Commissioners Randall Christensen, Benjamin Freedman, Carlos Morgan,
and Stephen Schonning were present. Also present were Secretary to the Planning Commission
Tim Benetti, Director of Business & Development Gary Eitel, and Planning Commission
Recording Secretary Rebecca Crass. Michael Parks was absent and excused.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES — JULY 25, 2013
There was a motion by Cominissioner Christensen, seconded by Commissioner Schonning, to
approve the minutes of the July 25, 2013 meeting as submitted. The motion passed unanimously.
CHAIR' S EXPLANATION
Chair Burfeind explained the Planning Commission's role as an advisory body. One of the
Commission's functions is to hold public hearings. In the matters concerned in these hearings,
the Commission makes recommendations to the City Council. The City Council makes all final
decisions in these matters.
APPLICATION NO. 2013-013 - ODYSSEY ACADEMY SCHOOL — SPECIAL USE
PERMIT FOR DYNAMIC MESSAGE SIGN
Chair Burfeind introduced Application No. 2013-013, a request for Special Use Permit approval
(pursuant to City Code Section 34-140; Subpart 3.D), to allow a new dynamic message sign (DMS)
with a public use located in an R1 One Family Residence District, located at 6201 Noble Avenue
North. (Refer to Planning Commission Report dated 8-15-13 on Application No. 2013-013.)
Mr. Benetti provided a history of the school site and explained a public use is allowed to have
one freestanding sign not to exceed 36 sq. ft. and no more than 10 ft. above ground level. He•
added properties with two or more street frontages are entitled to a second sign of the same size
or may elect to have one single freestanding sign not to exceed 72 sq. ft. and 15 ft. in height. Mr.
Benetti provided an overview of the new ordinance standards and stated the proposed sign will
meet the required standards including size, distance from adjacent residential dwellings, and the
eight second message duration.
PUBLIC HEARING — APPLICATION NO. 2013-013
There was a motion by Commissioner Schonning, seconded by Commissioner Freedman, to
open the public hearing on Application No. 2013-013, at 7:13 p.m. The motion passed
unanimously.
PC Minutes 8-15-13
Page 1
Chair Burfeind called for comments from the public.
Ms. Elizabeth Muellner, 6124 Noble Avenue North asked for clarification on the location of the
sign since she is concerned about the sign blocking the view of oncoming traffic. Mr. Benetti
replied the sign will be located inside the fence and sidewalk and will not block the view of any
traffic.
Pastor Ezra J. FaggaTt, Sr. of Unity Temple Church, asked if the requirements for the school
district sign are the same as required for their church's existing sign. Mr. Benetti explained the
school district sign is required to meet the new standards recently established and the existing
sign at the church must meet the current, newly adopted sign ordinance especially regarding the
requirement that the sign message remain static for eight seconds and must also have dimming
technology. Mr. Benetti added the city has had no complaints about the sign at the church.
Commissioner Morgan arrived at 7:19 p.m.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
There was a motion by Commissioner Freedman, seconded by Commissioner Christensen, to
close the public hearing on Application No. 2013-013. The motion passed unanimously.
The Chair called for further discussion or questions from the Commissioners.
The Commissioners interposed no objections to the approval of the Application.
ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
NO. 2013-14 REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2013-013 SUBMITTED BY ODYSSEY ACADEMY
CHARTER SCHOOL FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO INSTALL A NEW DYNAMIC
MESSAGE SIGN (DMS) WITH A PUBLIC USE IN THE R-1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE
DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 6201 NOBLE AVENUE NORTH.
There was a motion by Commissioner Christensen, seconded by Commissioner Freedman, to
approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 2013-14.
Voting in favor: Chair Burfeind, Commissioners Christensen, Freedman, Morgan, and
Schonning
And the following voted against the same: None
The motion passed unanimously.
The Council will consider the application at its August 26, 2013 meeting. The applicant must be
present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Planning Commission will require
that the application be returned to the Commission for reconsideration.
PC Minutes 8-15-13
Page 2
APPLICATION NO. 2013-014 - EVERGREEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL — SPECIAL
USE PERMIT FOR DYNAMIC MESSAGE SIGN
Chair Burfeind introduced Application No. 2013-014, a request for Special Use Permit (pursuant
to City Code Section 34-140; Subpart 3.D), to allow a new dynamic message sign (DMS) with a
public use located in an R1 One-Family Residence District, located at 7020 Dupont Avenue North.
(Refer to Planning Commission Report dated 8-15-13 on Application No. 2013-014.)
Mr. Benetti provided background information for the school and described existing signage on
the site and the applicant's desire to replace it with a new 4.6 ft. by 7:85 ft. monument style sign.
Mr. Benetti provided an overview of the new ordinance standards and stated the proposed sign
will meet the required standards including size, distance from adjacent residential dwellings, and
the eight second message duration.
Commissioner Freedman asked for clarification on the multi-colored sign as indicated in the
drawings provided. Mr. Benetti responded that the submitted cut-sheet or diagram of the
proposed DMS is only illustrative of the possible colors that can be produced by the new sign.
Benetti further stated that even though multi-colored messages or text is possible with this sign,
no part of the message may flash, travel, twinkle or move, and he believes the sign will not be
multi-colored but rather one static color to emit messages. All requirements and standards of the
City's Sign Code will be enforced as part of this sign approval.
PUBLIC HEARING — APPLICATION NO. 2013-014
There was a motion by Commissioner Schonning, seconded by Commissioner Christensen, to
open the public hearing on Application No. 2013-014, at 7:25 p.m. The Motion passed
unanimously.
Chair Burfeind called for comments from the public.
Ms. Jo Ellen Kloehn, 6927 Dupont Avenue N, asked if anyone knows why the school wants this
type of sign. Chair Burfeind stated these types of signs are the new trend and that more uses are
switching to this type of technology due to the lower costs and flexibility in providing additional
messages. Mr. Benetti added the school district indicated the electronic signs allow ease in
giving out multiple messaging and the letters do not have to be changed manually. He further
stated the messaging is regulated with strict standards. Chair Burfeind added the school district
provided information with their application stating the new sign is integral to their outreach
initiative which allows them to communicate to the entire school community. Chair Burfeind
also gave an explanation of the process involved in researching and studying these signs to allow
them in public areas neighboring residential neighborhoods.
Ms. Kloehn asked if there is any recourse if the signs become disruptive. Mr. Benetti replied the
city would like to know as soon as possible if there are any issues with the sign so they can
address it immediately with the school. He added the school district plans to turn the sign off at
certain times and plans to be a good neighbor with regards to the sign:
Mr. Greg Rendall, representing Sign Source, stated they started this process one year ago and are
looking forward to being able to provide messages to parents and students with an easier method
PC Minutes 8-15-13
Page 3
for changing and displaying the sign and he is confident the sign will not disrupt the residential
neighbors. He also confirmed Evergreen School's intent to be environmentally and energy
conscientious in reducing hours of operation or turning off the sign during certain hours and over
the summertime due to inactivity during these periods.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
There was a motion by Commissioner Freedman, seconded by Commissioner Christensen, to
close the public hearing on Application No. 2013-014. The motion passed unanimously.
The Chair called for further discussion or questions from the Commissioners.
The Commissioners interposed no objections to approval of the Application.
ACTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
NO. 2013-15 REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING
COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2013-014 SUBMITTED BY EVERGREEN PARK
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO INSTALL A NEW DYNAMIC
MESSAGE SIGN (DMS) WITH A PUBLIC USE IN THE R-1 ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE
DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 7020 DUPONT AVENUE NORTH.
There was a motion by Commissioner Freedman, -seconded by Commissioner Christensen, to
approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 2013-15.
Voting in favor: Chair Burfeind, Commissioners Christensen, Freedman, Morgan, and
S chonning
And the following voted against the same: None
The motion passed unanimously.
The Council will consider the application at its August 26, 2013 meeting. The applicant must be
present. Major changes to the application as reviewed by the Planning Commission will require
that the application be returned to the Commission for reconsideration.
DISCUSSION ITEM - CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER'S PROPOSED ORDINANCE
AMENDMENTS TO CITY CODE CHAPTER 35 (ZONING)
i. Section 35-900 (DEFINITIONS) regarding the redefinitions of "Front Yards", "Rear
Yards" and "Side Yards"; and
Adding new Section 35-400.1 (LOT COVERAGE AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACES);
and
Consideration in allowing encroachments into front-yard setback areas in residential
zoned areas for steps, stoops, ramps, landings, porticos, ramps, open decks, open or
closed porches, and/or similar.
Mr. Benetti explained the information provided to the Commission related to proposed ordinance
amendments to Chapter 35 regarding defining yards, adding a new section regarding
PC Minutes 8-15-13
Page 4
requirements for lot coverage and impervious surfaces and also allowing encroachments in front
yard setbacks for steps, stoops, ramps, etc.
Commissioner Christensen asked if pools would count towards the statement that 'No more than
50 percent of the area of the front yard may be covered by an impervious surface' or 'Lot
coverage of Impervious Surfaces may not exceed 50 percent of the lot area.' Mr. Benetti replied
that he would check into that and respond back to the Commission,
Mr. Benetti further reviewed the proposed amendment regarding the placement of waste
containers, specifically the requirement that all garbage cans may not be located in the front yard
area, cannot be visible from any public street and cannot be out before 4 p.m. the day prior to
pick up. Commissioner Christensen asked about the requirement that garbage cans be in the
garage or in an enclosure at least 48 inches from the main structure. Mr. Benetti replied the city
ultimately wants garbage cans moved into garages and not be visible from the street.
Commissioner Christensen pointed out some numbers from the city survey taken regarding
garbage can requirements. Mr. Benetti replied these issues had been studied for almost two
years and part of that process involved input from the residents.
Commissioner Christensen stated he wanted the minutes to reflect he is against the 48-inch
setback requirement and the screening requirement for waste containers.
Mr. Benetti continued by reviewing driveway parking area requirements as well as what types of
vehicles (recreational) can be parked in a residential area. He also reviewed a proposal regarding
non-conforming driveways and parking areas that are gravel and how they must be maintained.
OTHER BUSINESS - STAFF UPDATES ON CITY COUNCIL ACTION ITEMS FROM THE
AUGUST 12, 2013 MEETING
Mr. Benetti explained the Land Use Amendment for Luther and the PUD/Rezoning for Luther
were approved. He added the final site and building plan and final plat will be on the August 29,
2013 Planning Commission meeting.
There was no other business.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Commissioner Morgan, seconded by Commissioner Christensen, to
adjourn the Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The meeting
adjourned at 8:12 p.m.
Chair
Recorded and transcribed by:
Rebecca Crass
PC Minutes 8-15-13
Page 5
City Council Agenda Item No. 10a
COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
August 26, 2013
Curt Boganey, City Manager
Sharon Knutson, City Clerk
Type IV 6-Month Provisional Rental License for 6812 Scott Avenue N
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council consider approval of the Mitigation Plan and issuance of
a Type IV 6-Month Provisional Rental License for 6812 Scott Avenue N. The applicant or
representative has an opportunity to present evidence regarding the submitted Mitigation Plan. If
the Council chooses to modify or disapprove the Mitigation Plan, it is recommended that the
motion be to direct staff to prepare proposed findings for disapproval of the Mitigation Plan and
notify the license applicant of any pending license actions to be taken at a subsequent Council
Meeting.
Background:
This owner is applying for a new rental license. This property qualifies for a Type IV provisional
rental license, based on nine property code violations found during the initial rental license
inspection.
Staff from Administration, Building & Community Standards and Police Departments worked
with the property owner regarding a mitigation plan, which requires Phase I, II and III of the
Crime Free Housing Program, and other items included by City ordinance for a Type IV License.
A Mitigation Plan has been developed addressing the requirements of the ordinance and any
issues specific to the property.
Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the Type IV Rental License on condition of
adherence to the Mitigation Plan. Please refer to the attached copy of the Mitigation Plan for
more information.
The following is a brief history of the license process actions:
The Owner, Lankia Lartey, applied for an initial rental dwelling license for 6812
Scott Avenue N, a single-family residential property.
An initial rental inspection was conducted. (Nine property code violations were
cited, see attached rental criteria)
The rental license inspection was cancelled by owner due to construction
(basement finish, new water heater, etc.) and rental items not completed.
A follow up inspection was conducted and failed.
There was miscommunication about inspection date so inspection was
rescheduled.
The property was posted as unlicensed.
09-14-2012
10-29-2012
12-02-2012
01-17-2013
02-15-2013
04-11-2013
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves- the public &tut
COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM
05-23-2013
05-23-2013
06-19-2013
07-17-2013
07-18-2013
07-23-2013
07-25-2013
08-05-2013
08-16-2013
A follow up rental inspection was conducted and passed.
A $100 reinspection fee was charged to the property.
A letter was sent to the owner(s) notifying of qualification for Type IV 6-Month
Provisional Rental License, including additional requirements to obtain a rental
license. I.e. submit mitigation plan, completion of Phases I, II, and III of Crime
Free Housing Program, etc.
A second letter was sent to the owner(s) notifying of qualification for Type IV 6-
Month Provisional Rental License, including additional requirements to obtain a
rental license. I.e. submit mitigation plan, completion of Phases I, II, and III of
Crime Free Housing Program, etc.
The $100 reinspection fee was paid.
A Mitigation Plan was submitted.
Property taxes were paid.
The Mitigation Plan was finalized.
A letter was sent to the owner notifying that the hearing before the Council will
be held August 26, 2013
If approved, after six months, a new rental license is required. The license process will begin in
approximately four months. The new license will be based on the property code violations found
during the initial renewal license inspection and the number of validated police calls for services
for disorderly activities and nuisances as defined in 12-911. The terms of the mitigation plan
must also be met.
Excerpt from Chapter 12 of City Code of Ordinances:
Section 12-913. TYPE IV PROVISIONAL LICENSES.
1.Rental properties that meet the provisional licensing criteria as described in Section 12-
901 are eligible only for provisional licenses.
2.The City will provide by mail to each licensee a monthly report of any police and fire
calls and incidents and applicable property Code violations as described in Section 12-
901.
3.Mitigation Plan. The applicant for a provisional license must submit for Council review
a mitigation plan for the license period. The mitigation plan shall describe steps
proposed by the applicant to reduce the number of police and fire calls and/or the
property Code issues described in Section 12-901 and 12-911 to a level that qualifies for
a Type I, II, or III license. The mitigation plan may include such steps as changes in
tenant screening procedures, changes in lease terms, security measures, rules and
regulations for tenant conduct, security personnel, and time frame to implement all
phases of the Crime Free Housing Program.
4.Council Consideration. The application with a proposed mitigation plan will be
presented to the City Council together with a recommendation by the City Manager or the
Manager's designee as to the disposition thereof. After giving the applicant an
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive conununiO , that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM
opportunity to be heard and present evidence, the Council shall approve, disapprove, or
approve with conditions the application and the mitigation plan. If the Council
disapproves an application and mitigation plan or approves it with conditions, it shall
state its reasons for so doing in writing. In evaluating a mitigation plan, the Council will
consider, among other things, the facility, its management practices, the nature and
seriousness of causes for police and fire incidences and/or property Code issues and the
expected effectiveness of measures identified in the plan to reduce the number of police
and fire incidences and/or property Code violations. In evaluating a mitigation plan
submitted by an applicant already under a provisional license, the Council will also
consider the effectiveness of measures identified in the applicant's previous mitigation
plan and the need for different or additional measures to reduce police and fire incidences
and/or property Code violations.
5. Compliance with Mitigation Plan. The licensee shall comply with the mitigation plan as
approved or modified by the Council. No later than the tenth day after each calendar
month, the licensee shall mail or deliver to the City Manager a written report describing
all steps taken in furtherance of the mitigation plan during the preceding month.
Rental License Category Criteria Policy — Adopted by City Council 03-08-10
1.Determining License Categories.
License categories are based on property code and nuisance violations noted during the initial or
renewal license inspection or for a category verification inspection, along with excessive
validated police service calls occurring over a year. License categories are performance based
and more accurately depict the condition of the property and the City costs of service.
2.Fees.
Fee amounts are determined by the costs of the city to license, inspect, monitor and work with
the property to ensure category conditions are met. License fees do not include reinspection
fees, late fees, charges for criminal or civil enforcement actions, or other penalties.
3.Category Conditions.
The licensee or designated agent must meet the category conditions in the time period specified
by the City. A licensee must meet all original conditions required by the License Category, even
if a subsequent license category is achieved.
4.License Category Criteria.
a. Property Code and Nuisance Violations.
Property code violation rates will be based on the average number of property code
violations per unit identified during the licensing inspection or category verification
inspection. Property code violations for purposes of determining licensing categories
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM
shall include violations of property code and nuisances as defined in Chapter 12, 19, 7
and other applicable local ordinances. The City may, upon complaints or reasonable
concerns that the establishment no longer complies with the license category criteria,
perform a category verification inspection to the same standards as the license renewal
inspection as indicated below.
Inspections will be conducted in conjunction with established department policies. In
cases where 100% of the units are not inspected, the minimum inspection standards will
be established as follows:
* At least 75% of units will be inspected for properties with 15 or less units.
e At least 25% of units, to include a minimum of 12 units, will be inspected for
properties with 16 or more units.
Property Code and Nuisance Violations Criteria
License Category
(Based on Property
Code Only)
Number of Units Property Code Violations per
Inspected Unit
Type I —3 Year 1-2 units 0-1
3+ units 0-0.75 .
Type II — 2 Year 1-2 units Greater than 1 but not more than 4
3+ units Greater than 0.75 but not more than 1.5
Type III — 1 Year 1-2 units Greater than 4 but not more than 8
3+ units Greater than 1 5 but not more than 3
Type IV — 6 Months 1-2 units Greater than 8
3+ units Greater than 3
b. Police Service Calls.
Police call rates will be based on the average number of valid police calls per unit per
year. Police incidences for purposes of determining licensing categories shall include
disorderly activities and nuisances as defined in Section 12-911, and events categorized
as Part I crimes in the Uniform Crime Reporting System including homicide, rape,
robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, theft, auto theft and arson.
Calls will not be counted for purposes of determining licensing categories where the
victim and suspect are "Family or household members" as defined in the Domestic
Abuse Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 518B.01, Subd. 2 (b) and where there is a
. Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of
for all people and preserves the public trust
COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM
report of "Domestic Abuse" as defined in the Domestic Abuse Act, Minnesota Statutes,
Section 518B.01, Subd. 2 (a).
License Number of Units Validated Calls for Disorderly Conduct
Category Service & Part I Crimes
(Calls Per Unit/Year)
No Category 1-2 0-1
Impact 3-4 units 0-0.25
5 or more units 0-0.35
Decrease 1 1-2 Greater than 1 but not more than 3
Category 3-4 units Greater than 0.25 •but not more than 1
5 or more units Greater than 0.35 but not more than 0.50
Decrease 2 1-2
Greater than 3
Categories 3-4 units Greater than 1
5 or more units Greater than 0.50
Budget Issues:
There are no budget issues to consider.
Council Goals:
Strategic:
- We will ensure a safe and secure community
- We will stabilize and improve residential neighborhoods
Attachment
- Mitigation Plan
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
Ati3 1ICity of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430-2199
1 -_ 'TIT< 7:1.-- • 7 , , — _r•-=-_-.,-:---
Phone; 763-569-3300 7TY 711
Fox: 763-569-3360
www.cityofbrooklyncenterorg
Rental License Mitigation Plan--Type IV Rental License
Handwritten plans will not be accepted. Please type or use fillable form on City website.
Section A— Property Infoymatio .n,
Pro p erly Address: 6812 Scott Ave North, Brooklyn Center MN 55429
Owner Name: Lankia Lartey Local Agent:A i AINfrk
Owner Address:
10916 idaho circle north, Champlin MN b5316
Agent Address:
Owner Phone: 763-300-9040 Agent Phone: NA
Owner Ernail: warn 0@s _ ___rnumn.edu Agent Email: NA
Rental License: 10 New 1 1 Renewal: Current
*Pending
(Six months
License Expiration Date:
Type IV License Exp. Date:
from current license expiration)
Based on property conditions and/or validated police nuisance incidents, the above referenced property
qualifies for a Type IV Rental License. Before your license application can be considered by the City Council,
a Mitigation Plan must be completed and reviewed by City staff. A fully completed Mitigation Plan must be
submitted immediately to ensure timely completion of the license application process. The Mitigation Plan
should indicate the steps being taken to correct identified violations and the measures that will be taken to
ensure ongoine compliance with City Ordinances and applicable Codes. The Mitigation Plan provides an
opportunity to review property concerns and identify possible solutions to improve the overall conditions and
management of the property.
NOTICE: Time is Running Out--You must TAKE ACTION NOW in order to meet all the city ordinance
and Mitigation Plan requirements within this *pending license period and avoid legal actions.
Section'r Ill, Required Dncuinen'k
Submit the following documents with the Mitigation Plan for approval:
Ii Crime Free Housing Program Training Certificate (if completed, if not completed, please include
scheduled date in Section C.
2.Copy of Lease including Minnesota Crime Free Housing Lease Adde dam
3.Submit written report by 10 th of each month (after license approval).
1 1
1 _
Section .C-,-- Crime Pi-eerPlOnsitig-Progi4n oRectiiireinents
e I
I. Use written lease including Crime Free Housing Lease Addendum.
2. Conduct criminal background check for all prospective tenants. Provide documentation to City if
requested.
Pursue the eviction of tenants who violate the terms of the lease or any acIdendtuns.
1
1 1 I
1 1 13
Type IV Mitigation Plan Rev 11-16-11
I J 4. Attend City approved eight hour Crime Free Housing course.
Date Course Completed: • or Date Course Scheduled: 09/10/2013
Phase H
,,/ Complete Security Assessment and implement all security improvements recommended by the
Brooklyn Center Police Department. .
Date Scheduled:Scheduled: 08.02.2013 Improvements to be completed by: 61/P15
Phase LHII will attend a minimum of 50% of the ARM meetings (two).
I will attend the ARM meetings scheduled -for: sePtemLer 8:, Noverrber
Do these two meeting dates occur before the *Pending Type IV License expiration date? El Yes 1 I No
(*See Section A) If no, you will only be able to qualify for a Type IV Rental License upon renewal.
[ 1 I I will have no repeat code violations documented within the past year.previously
For properties with four or more units:
I training that includes techniques.will conduct resident annually crime preventionII I will hold regular resident meetings.
. . _.. ... _ . . _ . .
Section D — Long Term Cklpibil Improveni cuts Flap
Based on condition and age, estimated replacement dates are provided for common capital items. Funding
should be considered accordingly. However, items broken, worn or otherwise in violation prior to the estimated
replacement date will require earlier corrections.
Date Last Replaced Estimated
Replacement Date
Furnace/AC-2009 2029
Water Heater-1997 2017
Kitchen Appliances-2012 2022
Laundry Appliances-2012 2022
Exterior
-Paint/Siding, fascia, trim
2012 2022
2012 2022
-Windows 2012 2027
-Roof 1999 2020
-Fence NA NA
-Shed NA NA
-Garage 2012 2022
-Driveway 2013 2032
-Sidewalks 2013 2032
Smoke Alarms & Carbon Monoxide Alarms
Other(s)
:Se,609—ii E — Sfe-p.s.,:tiiinijpiOile.Management :11(1.:Conditioiis 4).f_Pricirieyiv
Implementing the following best practices may assist in the management of your property.
By checking the boxes below, you agree to:I V I 1. Check in with tenants every 30 days.I 1 2. Drive by property to check for violations twice a month.
Page 2 Type IV Mitigation Plan Rev 11-1641
4-29—I 3
DateOwnet,or Agent Signature
For Cit) Use—Mitigation Plan Approved By:
g/Y>
Date
Date
olice Department / Title
ulidi g mmt lity Standards Department (Title
111 5.
Ej 6.
3 Evict tenants in violation of the lease and all addendums.
4. Provide lawn/snow service.
Provide garbage service.
7. Provide maintenance service plan for appliances. Name of service co.:
Install security system. Home service plus
S. I am and will remain current on payment of utility fees, taxes, assessthents, fines, penalties and other
financial claims due to the City.
9. Other(s):
I
Il I
Please read thoroughly:
lithe Type IV Rental License is approved by the City Council, the Licensee must comply with the approved
Mitigation Plan and all applicable city codes. No later than the 10 th of each calendar Month, the licensee must
submit to the Building, and Community Standards Department a v,Titten report describing, all steps taken to
comply with the Mitigation Plan.
I verify that all information provided above is true and accurate. I understand that if I do not comply with an
approved Mitigation Plan, comply with all applicable ordinances within the license period, or operate beyond
the license expiration date; enforcement actions such as citations, formal complaint or license review may
result.
UOn1a1,a
Owner or Agent Name Title (Please Print)
Additional Owner or Agent Name and Title (ijapplicable) (Pleas' Prim)
Additional Owner or Agent Signature (ifapplicable) Date
Page 3 Type IV Mitigation Plan Rev 11-16-11
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL/ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WORK SESSION
August 26, 2013
Immediately Following Regular City Council and EDA Meetings Which Start at 7:00 P.M.
Council Chambers
City Hall
A copy of the full City Council packet is available to the public. The packet ring binder is
located at the front of the Council Chambers by the Secretary.
ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS
1.Discussion on an Opportunity to Acquire Lot 1, Block 1, Chrysler Addition,
Former Cars for Heart Auto Dealership, 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard
(Redevelopment within the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor)
2.City's Drinking Water Update — Manganese
3. Part II: Comprehensive Overview of Capital Needs and Debt Funding Plans
PENDING LIST FOR FUTURE WORK SESSIONS
Later/Ongoing
1.BC University
2.Assessment Hearing Policy
3.Strategic Plan Annual Report for Year Ending 2012
4.Inclusion and Diversity Follow Up — Community Engagement Strategies
5.Mission Statement Review
6.Consideration of Modifying Setback Requirements for Front Porches
Parking Lot Issues
1. Joint Meeting with Charter Commission
Work Session Agenda Item No. 1
MEMO NDUM - COUNCIL WO SESSION
DATE: August 26, 2013
TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager
FROM: Gary Eitel, Director of Business & Development
SUBJECT: Discussion on an Opportunity to Acquire Lot 1, Block 1, Chrysler Addition,
Former Cars with Heart Auto Dealership, 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard.
(Redevelopment within the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor)
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council consider providing direction to staff regarding the offer
by Kagel Acquisition Co. to sell the EDA Lot I, Block 1, Chrysler Addition, a 4.48 acre
commercial lot formerly used as the Cars with Heart Auto Dealership, 6121 Brooklyn
Boulevard.
Background:
Bob Kagel, Kagel Acquisition Co., acquired Lot 1, Blockl, Chrysler Addition in January of 2009
for $1,500,000 for the purpose of operating the Cars with Heart Auto Dealership. The Cars with
Heart Dealership opened in January, 2009 and for reasons not known by staff closed in the later
part of 2012. Mr. Kagel was aware of the City's planning for the reimaging and redevelopment
of the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor and contacted city staff to determine if the City/EDA had an
interest in acquiring this property for the amount of $1,500,000.
The EDA has used TIF 3 Housing funds to acquire the adjoining property at 6101 Brooklyn
Boulevard and several other properties in this general area as part of an overall redevelopment
vision for this corridor. Attached is a map identifying the location of these properties.
Additionally, the Planning Commission's review of the recent Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor
Study recognized the potential redevelopment of this property as a candidate site for independent
and assisted senior housing opportunities.
Zoning:
On September 28, 1998 the City Council rezoned this C-2 commercially zoned lot and the
adjacent C-1 service/office lot at 6107 Brooklyn Boulevard to PUD/C2. The Declaration and
Covenants and Restrictions for this PUD included provision that this lot shall be used only for
motor vehicle sales, leasing, service and sale of vehicle parts. The Declaration also included the
provision that it may be amended from time to time by a written amendment executed by the
City and the owner or owners of the lot or lots to be affected by said amendment.
In 2008, the City Council amended the ordinance pertaining to motor vehicle dealer licenses by
deleting the building to land valuation standard; adding a minimum lot size of two acres; and a
minimum building coverage of 15% to the Special Use provisions of the C2 Zoning District.
Alission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for people and preserves the public trust
MEMO NDUM - COUNCIL WO SESSION
Additionally, the Sale of Motor Vehicles License, Section 23-1201 was amended to include used
motor vehicles.
On December 2, 2008, the City Council approved a license to Cars with Heart to operate a car
sales lot at 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard. The effective date of the license was January 9, 2009 (the
effective date of the above referenced ordinance amendments).
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 3
Tax Increment District No. 3 was established in 1994 to provide assistance to various
commercial redevelopment and housing development projects within the District.
The District is a scattered site district with three sites, the Brooklyn Boulevard /69th Area,
the Brookdale Area, and the Willow Lane/ HVVY 252 area and included the following
objectives:
- To enhance the tax base of the City,
-To provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City for
development by private enterprise,
-To better utilize vacant or underdeveloped land,
To attract new businesses,
To acquire blighted or deteriorated residential property for rehabilitation or
clearance and redevelopment,
To develop housing opportunities for market segments underserved by the City
including housing for the disabled and elderly.
The special state legislation associated with the creation of this Tax Increment District
included provisions which required that 15% of the revenues generated from tax
increment in any year is deposited in the housing development account of the Authority
and expended according to the tax increment financing plan.
Springsted Financial, the City's financial consultant, has updated the City's Funds Flow
Analysis w/Cash Balance Comparison to reflect the additional tax increment revenue
received from the development of the FBI Regional Headquarters, the removal of the
Brookdale Mall properties from the District, and the new tax capacity added to the District
by the Luther Honda and Toyota Dealerships.
Attached is a draft spreadsheet which illustrates that the increased tax increment revenues
and resulting increases in the 15% Housing Fund would support a bond issue of sufficient
size to enable the EDA to accept Mr. Kagel's offer and acquire 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard.
Policy Issues:
Does the EDA feel that the acquisition of 6121 Brooklyn Boulevard meets the objectives of Tax
Increment District 3?
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
MEMO NDUM - COUNCIL WO SESSION
Does the EDA support the issuance of a Tax Increment Housing Bond to acquire 6121 Brooklyn
Boulevard?
Council Goals:
Strategic:
1. We will proceed aggressively with implementation of City's redevelopment plans
4. We will improve the city's image
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
4.
_r _62ND AVN
11 6:1071i4
—
3307•'
CARS-for-COURAGE SITE
Brooklyn Boulevard
6215
6211,
-
•
62 -0+1g
Ott
' 441 1_
91 .0206 , w•'it6207
4r-".111
'67200
`44 _
43 500
16 205 6207•g A
3318cL3312
.143807 ta3 .01
-
, L‘3E0,5:6 -12 -11.1 , Jr LL
6110
: NO"ALANT LN
380.7.
L 1
4 6 1071,,
1,31_3_18),
' 3608,2,4r. "10v
- 40 -145.
e • •
' • 1 .6009 „:rly . '
L.
. vorriviv-
--x—i .0 '' ---i .•i • . 60061 , 5937.15941i' •594-51" ,5949 5953-- I 60011 ---1
1.1.-
.1r, : - .210. , 11 , .1 i .1_ _, A1;,--,--
1061,< :--;:: I .4 e .; --,
•• .•6009 'A>Ay o ' i„,,,, 1,1 I 'I airTI-A1 ,,v .11 -- -- 7 ii, f't.iti6001 of, '1- < t
600 .0,B4t * .r, ,,-7,---,-------AoMIRAL LN NLAI; 4 :4111 : ...1 ' Jelika,rar i•-•
.
. 4 -,,' . 11P-,For i 0,--- 7 e" :
vstr., ■-,- 411 . %,-. if
rt -i&-;-3; tralbawo. 944 1:1 57:1-B".i7:11-544 r':64'595C9I-111
-F -
,, ‘5,...7.,....,,c99.2....H4_s1.:.4ri: .. f,6_0:481_...
;
i _oz.,..
11 .- if__I '.; . 47rati 7 . il..,,va.74. .1"1 1i 1, 6 Si-
- 1 eg , -;6043 , • 1 -- y . int
.3ii . I 77
- I-- `11.19,1"' -----‘1. ' r-L #i 10-1*- ''137071 • -...r.i 3 -:, 6032 '
3819, 3813 1-3 8074 43601 37,1,.3 - 6 0374
- -IraI • - frjt (60371 r'/
:.. '-.. 1 0 r 6037
7.: ----L "W‘
7 6036 ,
6'06
'3806 1,3-.0-0 -'1.3710' ''37.12 .37061134.y 3611 .36121 ft.16061t ' T*„1_1 .
602 4);':
1-- • le: 11 MI
0.
1:;fk ■•4a ;II At
6121 \\
1521 • -
Nt, 161-20tr'
Alt1 111 1-1.1-..
N
-VtVF_.,. ............1J--_it .r- 'ti 'l
1
61
1 1AA1479176, 6123
8,12114 1 1 67,37t!,/, ,
.\.,, ., :4..„
22 ..-7 1 !2 2-, 2 tli
.....111-.. =h,
I 61150.1i ____ - I r 1 .
t 6.136?
Cars w/ Heart -
Cars for Courage
6.25 ac. site
620-ft. frontage
...—„7311-'4.r•Tith;_t-iik
i Co te.,' '1
_.......;.. :mrif..:.:__mi ,-.."'" I- ,.•,......,-- 144 6012
---;,- i ■
, 141""T ., 17
,.., lilvtl r , f .600,6, _
15 0:6 .0t.6000 .....
k.-11IP4 _ ,-. 1r1.111-_' '42
—60TH AVE N
6:95,0
Ailli-0.-,i .,.. 1:133.11 ,33.121
,Illt '-'4411. 4 = ,
i 161 oi, , 2.1.- 04.-
1---41 4 - 40 * ...‘P-•islo.iiii , ot -
I 413312*
•' •}••
--tat*VREt4C*MF
33,18
3311
_33131
let
1
August 20, 2013
0 0.03
0 005
0.06
0.1
1 II ' • 1 L • 1 a -
r„..r...-' ri -
W. f ; fr: ' :11 A. ...err/ 'r,. , .:*... - - .. .i. •_ _alr Ir.ef ,--; --COMMODORE D6k-!----
-zR wiLl - -,,, .1.- ,-.• giv... - r - soi6.1. 0-1 ?,,41
j ,,,,,7 7.,:r-,3 77043,6p. - ,;38:13.1Q76-07, '1,:i601,3":" -poi --- :. I .
. '1 :6013 i i."1"114' 11.7)i., , ,,s t•Alk ' ' 4-,r ' e:4 fi r -1' t, .•-•k,
. '-'14 ' 1.'6-012' , ff:i • ` - . 'ir-.6007
0.12 mi
0.2 km =City Owned/Acquired Properties
Highway
County
City
Ramp •
Private
Addresses
Hydrology
City Parks
Parcels
Copyright@ 2013 Esri
Hennepin County
CLOG'S 2013
Information provided to Springsted Financial to update the Funds Flow Analysis and support the potential sales of a
Housing Bond and Potential TIF 3 Pooling Projects.
TIF #3 Revenue15% Housing Fund Account Bond Payments Annual Surplus
2012 ( actual )$2,388,702 $358,305 $1,578,350 452,047
2013 (estimated)$2,840,179 $426,027 $1,963,106 451,046
2014 (projected)$3,265,157 $489,773 $1,962,100 813,284
2015 ( * potential)$3,265,157 $489,773 $1,967,393 807,991
2016 $3,265,157 $489,773 $2,023,899 751,485
2017 $3,265,157 $489,773 $1,974,337 801,047
2018 $3,265,157 $489,773 $1,958,962 816,422
2019 $3,265,157 $489,773 $1,856,325 919,059
2020 $3,265.157 $489,773 $1,846,126 929,258
2021 final ear 3 265 157 489 773 2 775 384
$31,350,137 $4,702,516 $17,130,598 $9,517,023
Tax Increment Revenue (2012 thru 2021) minus (15% Housing Fund + 2004 &2008 Bond Debt Service) = $9,517,023 minus
$1,000,000 admin expenses for Housing & Economic Development = $8,517,023 available for eligible pooling projects.
Additional Tax Increment Revenue:
2015 ( * potential) $3,516,792 $527,519
o 2014 completion of the Volkswagen Dealership est. at 5/8 size of Honda Dealership ($11,850,000 x 0.62.5 =
7,406,250 — 2013 value of $2,575,000 = 4,831,250 x 2% = 96,624 tax capacity captured.
Frozen tax rate 1.3183 for Osseo School District times 96,624 = $127,380 new increment
o Dropping Brookdale Ford (1994 tax capacity of $60,250 included in TIF Frozen Base).
O Dropping 57 th & Logan (1994 tax capacity of $36,296 included in the TIF Frozen Base).
Frozen tax rate 1.28701 for BC School District times 96,546 = $124,255 savings
O 7 years (2015-2021) times $251,635 = an additional $1,761,445 TIF revenue generated.
($264,217 would be added to Housing Fund and $1,497,228 would be available for additional TIF eligible pooling
projects)
1-6
-17
4-•
•
a,•-o•n•E5 0_0 -0
0)
•
0)-o 0II)_a trt
5 'a'
en 0,•E•L- >._oot-)
:E
5E
SO
•
Ca. CU•ct- E
o toco a
LU
5-1 LU
t-1
>
00
•4-,1 0
•4E' -u-o 0
E
.E
tt,4, 4,
0 -0Ec-•
▪e,0
C3 J2If oso coLU-oN
13 7
▪LU
C
<CO 0LU N-■-■N C
M
5
.E
LUt-t
LU
a, to CJ
,..., ;2
cn s6 6'..,'
5I 0 ,-tn. -o -0c a)as 0
2 II)-
NLUCLULUOO
0 0 0 0 0410
S-C
N V) 0 0 0oi r4 tr; ci uit-t t-t 1--. VI 1,100 0 LO.5..., 0 ,UI °•1 -0.
NOOOONLO6 6 ,i' Do' t-i"o tr, •ct- m Cn
0 00 .-I v-4 r-I v-I
CO CD 0 000000CCU ,
cl- .-i r-I c-I ,--1 a-I ri cl ,-.1ai ai In tri In ui In cc; tri540-•li1000000000 CY •Or Cr `4" °O- 'Or CY CYL ..4',., ;FC S-Z 0. 0... O 6 6 ci 6 c,"c =o M cn rn no rn CO M MN Ill Ill, ill IQ VI LO 111, In
N LU C4.,Irsi. N. LULU
1:34040 03 0 c0 CO CO 00 CO CO COc ='2,_0Ni/1000000ni t-: ot 1---: t-: oi r--- N aiasE -a)
NOMMMLON01/1L/1`4. N 0 CO o to co LU
CO-- tn.' c-i- c," u-i ',C. ci' t-i' cricoo 000 0000CC
=MNNNOINNNN
CO0000000
.0 M0000000
1.2 L'.. .si N tri Lri 6 tri tri cirn co o o CO ,-I 01 01ID40LU
t-i .,-.M CO N 0 01 ID N 01t-i- cri tris t-i t-i t-i- ui" cti"lo- a)
trICI
If 'Or •ch ,I* •KY ,4- .4- .4-c ANN,INNNO4
,
g ,rn co . .3 co co 0.3 CO 0)0000000000 I.L. 4..0
ON bp tn N 0:1 NCVNNNNNN .4- ,f. ,1- .4- .4- .4- .4- .4-;2, 7.., g •.41- to to to in tr, tn to toCO tc■ tc■ to" cd" to" to' t.c■ Ili'ci=
co •,,- •ci- •cl- 71- •n- 'ct- 44,- ca-co 71- .1- .4- st sl- .,1- .4- cr
CO CO CO CO Cl) CO 00 CO CO0 5-1 I-I .--1 4-I T-I c-I 1-1 yl
...—0 N.: N: 1--: N' r-: f -: N: NZ00 CI' Cr Cr •O' .1- .4- .4- .4-If 01 0) COCO 01 CO COCOcri to' tc■ to" to" cc;" to" to- tc;
c`I' cT co r--- I, r. N. I--. r. r. 1---.lIl 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 01
01 Ns 44 4444 44 444444N. N. N 01 N
41 ii'■ "Y.' Y. Y Y '2-;...' Y. Y .',3■C(1)
.9.
NNNNNNNNN.-I .-I H .-I .-1 r-I ri ..-1 1-1
t-i t-1 t-icr, at O1 LU cn 01 01 01 cn
T,a
quptotototototo 0....c 44- 0 00 01 m no LU no moi oo o5 cd 06 oi oci o:i cki
10 0 N uo tn In 01 I/1 VI In tot-t t-t t-i .--1 .--1 t-t t-t t-, t-,E 6 tri' tr■ tri- tri' tri to" tn.' cri6 a
LI.
•1, LO tO ID 0 03 0 0 0CONNNNNNNN
P nt" to" cri cri cri no" co' tri cri
00o
LU M..'032N
,-Nr0.4-ln IDNCOCO 0.-ICO,01 c-I c-I 1-1 c-I .--1 v-I .-I ,-1 N N000000000 0rNNN 01 N 01 N N N 04
Work Session Agenda Item No. 2
MEMORANDUM COUNCIL WORK SESSION
DATE: August 20, 2013
TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager
FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: City's Drinking Water Update - Manganese
Recommendation:
ItIt is recommended that the City Council consider providing direction to staff regarding the
proposed action plan pertaining to manganese that is present in the City's drinking water.
Background:
On January 28, 2013, the City Council of Brooklyn Center directed staff to develop an action
plan pertaining to manganese in the City's drinking water. As discussed at that time, a new
potential health risk was identified in the City's drinking water by the Minnesota Department of
Health (MDH) pertaining to the naturally occurring concentrations of manganese present in the
ground water (see attached January 25, 2013 memorandum).
On March 7, 2013, the City commissioned a consultant, TKDA, to prepare a feasibility study
report to evaluate and prepare short- and long-term alternatives to consider in addressing the
potential manganese health risk in the City's•drinking water. This Water System Feasibility
Study Report dated August 2013 has been concluded and is attached for your reference and
consideration.
Action Plan
As discussed in the report, while the manganese levels in Brooklyn Center's water supply have
been historically high and the aesthetic issues have been well known and understood, the City
chose not to construct a water treatment plant in the past. Currently with the new guidance
provided by the MDH that suggests too much manganese from drinking water may be harmful to
our health, new consideration by the City is warranted to address the high levels of manganese in
our drinking water.
Considerations in the study included multiple approaches as follows: a "do nothing" approach,
selective well operation using only those wells with lower manganese concentrations, drill a new
well in a different aquifer, use treated drinking water supplied from surrounding cities, use the
Mississippi River as a new drinking water source, point-of-use devices for individual household
water filtering, use of bottled water and constructing a ground water treatment plant.
Understanding the benefit and ease of implementation of the selective well operation option, City
staff immediately evaluated and implemented selective well operation to lower the levels of
manganese in City water. Prior to implementation, the average manganese concentration within
the City was approximately 350 parts per billion (ppb). Upon determining the best blend of well
operation, we were able to reduce the concentration to slightly less than 300 ppb initially.
However, during the summer months when water usage is more in demand, we are less able to
rely on the single well (Well No. 6) with the lowest manganese concentrations and must pump
„
Mission: /Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
)(Ur people and preserves the public MINI
MEMO NDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION
more out of other wells to meet the water demand, thus increasing the blended manganese
concentration. The latest manganese concentration measurements taken in July 2013 resulted in
an average level of approximately 320 ppb, which exceeds guidance value levels for infants (100
ppb) and for children/adults (300 ppb)
Upon full evaluation and consideration of available options, staff believes the most feasible and
recommended long-term approach to address the manganese issue in the City's water supply is to
construct a water treatment plant. The following are the pros and considerations in
recommending this option:
•Very effective, reliable process in reducing manganese levels.
•Least impact on water. rates (as compared to other effective solutions).
•City would no longer be providing a potential drinking water source that exceeded
recommended guidance values for manganese. While other options could be considered,
there would still be the potential for consumers to drink the water with higher manganese
levels if remained untreated.
•Other collective benefits of treated water from a citywide water treatment plant
o High iron levels would be reduced.
o Easier and more timely to address and treat the potential threat of emergent
contaminants, should they ever become an issue.
o Addresses the historical aesthetic issues of hardness in Brooklyn Center's water.
o MDH classifies Brooklyn Center's well field vulnerability (risk to contaminants)
as being moderate to very high. A water treatment plant creates future options
that can mitigate this vulnerability.
•Brooklyn Center is one of the few metro cities that does not have a water treatment plant
that removes manganese and iron.
•Treated water would then meet the Environmental Protection Agency's Secondary
Maximum Contaminant Level for drinking water standard.
•Lowering the manganese levels would dispel any notion to the consumer that Brooklyn
Center's drinking water is unsafe or poses a health risk. ,
Should the City Council decide to proceed with the development and construction of a water
treatment plant, an updated Water Treatment Plant Feasibility Study has been prepared and
completed by SEH, Inc. dated July 31, 2013. A water treatment plant is estimated to cost
approximately $18 million. If funded through the City's water fund, this would have an
approximate $0.96 per 1,000 gallon increase to the current weighted average rate of $1.38 per
1,000 gallons of water, resulting in an approximate quarterly increase of $17.28 ($69.12 per year
increase) per household assuming consumption of 18,000 gallons per quarter per household.
Public Outreach
The City has prepared and made available informational sheets pertaining to the potential health
risk in the City's drinking water relative to manganese. The City is prepared to increase public
outreach efforts with a proactive and thorough approach once the course is determined. This
approach will include sending educational mailings with the utility billings, educational articles
in the City Watch publication, continued infotmation available on the City's website and other
educational opportunities that become available.
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION
Recommendation
While the manganese health risk issue has not been determined or defined with absolution by the
EPA or MDH, staff feels there is enough current professional and technical research and
guidance that warrants mitigation. The MDH is furthering this research and will be testing
drinking water supplies throughout the surrounding counties over the summer of 2013. Although
this research may not prove any further health risk, it may provide a better overview of "at risk"
communities, similar to Brooklyn Center.
As indicated, staff believes the best long term solution is to construct a water treatment plant, not
for the sole purpose of manganese level reduction, but also for the other collective benefits as
indicated above. The timing of constructing a water treatment plant project includes other
factors, most notably funding.. In anticipation of this potential course of action, it should be noted
that the City of Brooklyn Center applied for a Minnesota Public Facilities Authority low interest
grant/loan on June 6, 2013, to construct a water treatment plant — results of our application
should be available in September 2013.
Policy Issues:
Does the City Council support'. proceeding with the recommended action plan that includes
constructing a water treatment plant?
If the City determines to proceed with the ,construction, of a water treatment plant, staff
recommends consideration of the following factors and timeline options:
Immediate Timeline (1-2 year) — Under this option, immediate planning would commence to
construct a water treatment plant that would be up and running by 2015. If the City determines
that the potential health risk warrants immediate implementation based on the information we
know now, the City could move forward with potential project completion by the end of 2015,
understanding a funding package would need to be developed and determined.
Future Timeline (2+ years) — Under this option, continued evaluation would occur to plan for a
future water treatment plant that could be constructed in the future. Considerations that should be
given to this option include the following:
•The City's current well blending initiatives have resulted in a slight lowering of
the average manganese levels on the consumers' end. However, the sustainability
of operating Well No. 6 continuously is not fully known and has not produced
low enough levels to lower the manganese concentrations below the health risk
levels.
•Manganese has been classified as a "potential" health risk by the EPA and MDH
versus an absolute or "known" health risk There may be future studies that dispel
the current levels of manganese experienced in Brooklyn Center's drinking water
as being a health risk.
•MDH is currently performing further manganese studies in the surrounding
communities and counties. Future information from those studies could warrant
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public OW
MEMO NDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION
further consideration by the City of Brooklyn Center prior to determining its
course of action.
• Currently, the City of Brooklyn Center is in full compliance with all Primary
Drinking Water Regulation standards. The City is not required to address
anything pertaining to manganese in its drinking water.
Council Goals:
Ongoing:
5. We will ensure the City drinking water is high quality and that the storm water is
properly managed
_ .
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quirk of life
fir all people and preserves the public trust
MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION
DATE: January 25, 2013
TO: Curt Boganey, City Manager
FROM: Steve Lillehaug, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Report on City's Drinking Water
53 S-,
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council consider providing direction to staff regarding
manganese that is present in the City's drinking water.
Background:
The City of Brooklyn Center's drinking water supply comes from nine groundwater wells that
draw water from the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer. The City's water is minimally treated
including fluoride, disinfectant (chlorine and ammonium sulfate) and a corrosion inhibitor (zinc
orthophosphate). The City does not treat its water to remove other types of naturally occurring
elements, compounds and/or pollutants and does not treat for the hardness in the water, which is
relatively high.
Under strict regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Minnesota
Department of Health (MDH), the "watch dogs" pertaining to our City's drinking water, the
City's drinking water is rigorously and continually tested to ensure compliance with the federal
and state drinking Water standards. The City reports our testing results to consumers on an annual
basis through the City's drinking water Consumer Confidence Report. While we have
historically not exceeded the Primary Drinking Water Regulations (mandatory water quality
standards for contaminants in drinking water), Brooklyn Center's water is high in manganese
(Mn) concentration, which exceeds the Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels (SMCLs). The
SMCLs are a set of non-Mandatory water quality standards for 15 contaminants that have been
established by the EPA as a non-enforceable guideline to assist public water systems in
managing their drinking water for aesthetic considerations including taste, color and odor. The
SMCL for manganese is 50 ppb. These contaminants are not considered to present a risk to
human health, even if they exceed the SMCL. While the EPA and MDH have certain primary
and secondary drinking water standards, there are other emergent risks that are continually being
studied and evaluated by government agencies, non-government agencies and scientists.
Manganese is one such element.
Manganese is found naturally in water, food, air and soil and is required by our bodies to
maintain health. Manganese is commonly present and found in groundwater supplies throughout
Minnesota (and the world for that matter) as it is an element that naturally exists in rocks and
soils. However, too much manganese in the human body may be harmful. Recent guidance from
MDH and other authorities and studies indicates that higher levels of manganese experienced in
groundwater sources may be harmful to humans, most notably to infants.
In response, the MDH has recently issued a fact sheet pertaining to manganese in drinking water
and has provided guidance values pertaining to certain health risks (see attached). The MDH
Illission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
MEMO NDUM - COUNCIL WO SESSION
guidance values for infants and children/adults are 100 parts per billion (ppb) and 300 ppb,
respectively. As indicated, the City of Brooklyn Center has historically experienced high levels
of manganese (Mn) in its drinking water supply and has chosen to not treat at the City level the
experienced aesthetic issues caused by high iron, manganese and other elements. Brooklyn
Center's raw well water concentrations historically average about 350 ppb, the highest well
pumping water with a concentration of about 550 ppb.
While the presence and high levels of manganese in Brooklyn Center's water is not a new issue,
this new information and guidance warrants immediate attention. Staff recommends that the City
take action to reduce the manganese levels in the City's drinking water. Staff is currently
evaluating and preparing an action plan that will consider short and long term solutions,
immediate and continual public relations strategies to inform its customers, testing strategies,
maintenance strategies, operation strategies and other elements that will address this now known
potential health risk.
Policy Issues:
Does the City Council support developing an immediate action plan pertaining to manganese that
is present in the City's drinking water?
Council Goals:
Ongoing:
5. We will ensure the City drinking water is high quality and that the storm water is
properly managed
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
Health Risk Assessment Unit
625 Robert St. N, P.O. Box 64975
St. Paul, MN 55164-0975
www.health.state.mn.us
At a Glance...
Manganese is...
•Found naturally in water, food,
air, and soil.
•Required by our bodies in
small amounts to maintain
health.
Manganese enters your
body mainly from...
•Drinking water
•Food including formula or
breast milk (for infants)
Health risks from too much
manganese in drinking
water...
•Effects on learning and
behavior for infants and young
children
Formula-fed infants are at
greatest risk from
manganese in drinking
water because...
•They may get too much
manganese in their bodies
from the drinking water used
to mix formula.
Manganese in Drinking Water
Manganese is found in drinking water throughout Minnesota. New
information suggests that too much manganese from drinking water
may not be good for our health. This information sheet discusses
manganese in drinking water and its possible health effects.
What is manganese?
Manganese is an element that occurs naturally in drinking water across
Minnesota. Our bodies require small amounts of manganese to maintain
health. Adults and children get enough manganese from the foods we eat.
Infants and children younger than one year old get enough.manganese from
breast-milk, food or formula.
What are the health effects from manganese?
Even though our bodies need some manganese, too much manganese from
drinking water may be harmful. New research shows that too much
manganese in drinking water may affect learning and behavior in infants and
young children. Health effects in children will not usually be obvious and
have only been measured in large studies of school-aged children.
Where is manganese found in Minnesota and how do I know if it
is in my drinking water?
Manganese is found in groundwater throughout Minnesota because it is
naturally present in Minnesota rocks and soils. Levels in groundwater do not
change over time. Manganese in water may stain clothing and plumbing.
Public water supplies may test their water for manganese. People with private
wells need to have a laboratory test their well water. Bottled water could
contain manganese and should not be considered safer than tap water. The
only way to know if manganese is present at levels of health concern is to test
your water.
•To test your water, identify a laboratory that can test for manganese
visit: http://www.health.state.mn.us/hbsearch
•If you get your drinking water from a public utility, call them to find
out if they have tested for manganese and whether it has been found
at levels above MDH guidance values.
For more information:
MDH Health Risk Assessment Unit
Phone: (651) 201-4827
June 2012
E-mail: healthrisk@state.mn.us Manganese in Drinking Water/English
Manganese in Drinking Water — Page 2
What is the IVIDH guidance value for manganese in drinking
water?
The current guidance value for manganese in drinking water is 100 parts per
billion (ppb) for formula-fed infants and infants that drink tap water. The
manganese guidance value for children and adults (including nursing mothers)
is 300 ppb. For more information about MDH manganese guidance, visit:
hilp://wmv.health.state.mn.us/divs/ehfrisk/auidaricdpv/manganese.html.
Why is the MDH manganese guidance value for infants different
from the value for children and adults?
Infants are at greater risk from manganese in drinking water than children and
adults because:
•their brains are developing rapidly,
•they absorb more manganese and are less able to remove manganese
from their bodies, and
•they drink more water and eat more food based on body weight.
Formula-fed infants get enough manganese from formula to meet their dietary
needs. However, they may get too much manganese (above the recommended
amount for nutrition) in their bodies when formula is mixed with water that
contains manganese.
Breast-milk is best for infants and if contains healthy amounts of manganese.
According to the Institute of Medicine, breast-milk, food and formula should
be the only sources of manganese for newborns and infants younger than one-
year-old.
How do I know if I need to filter my drinking water to remove
manganese?
If infants will be regularly drinking formula mixed with tap water or plain tap
water, use a filter if manganese is detected above 100 ppb. If only children
and adults will be drinking tap water, filter the water if manganese is detected
above 300 ppb.
Carbon filters (that may also contain an ion exchange resin) used in common
pitcher or faucet filter systems (found at grocery and home stores) can remove
approximately 50 percent of manganese from drinking water. To identify a
filter that may remove more manganese from water, visit:
hhp://www.health.state.mmusidivs/eWwater/factsheet/com/pou.html,
Manganese in drinking
water is safe for everyone
if...
•The level of manganese is
lower than 100 ppb.
You can reduce manganese
in your drinking water by...
•Testing your drinking water to
find out how much manganese
it contains.
•Filtering your drinking water
using a proper filter.
You can get more
infomlation about
manganese at ...
•MDH manganese water
guidance:
http://www.heahhstate.mmusi
divsiehtrisk/guidance/gw/man
ganeseltml
•Find a lab to test your water
for manganese:
http://www.heahkstatemun.ust
labsearch
•Find a filter:
http://www.healthstateinn.usi
divsleWwater/factsheeticonil
you.html
For more information:
MDH Health Risk Assessment Unit
Phone: (651) 201-4827
E-mail: healthsisk@state.mn.us
June 2012
Manganese in Drinking Water/English
1E1
;.0
;.•Pio
FEAJIL,ILITY REPORT
WATER SYSTEM FEASIBILITY STUDY
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
444 cW,ar .,5Aieg.t,‘..s*ISci()
56)1iPuN 51O 1
.0,*,44 9()
tkda.com
Date: AUGUST 2013
TKDA Project No. 15278.003
4*
1.1
TKDA
444 Cedar Street, Suite1500
Saint Paul, MN 55101
651.292.4400
tkda.com
SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 2013
FEASIBILITY REPORT
WATER SYSTEM FEASIBILITY STUDY
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
TKDA PROJECT NO. 15278.003
I hereby certify that this Report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly
Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
,
•
Verne Edacobsen, PE
License No. 06988
I hereby certify that this Report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that l am a duly
Registered Engineer In Training under the laws of the State of Minnesota.
JCIn4e4ifer R. en nes, rit444121T
Enrollment No. E-10231
15278:003
WATER SYSTEM FEASIBILITY STUDY
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
TKDA PROJECT NO. 15278.003
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE NO.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
SECTION I.
SECTION II.
SECTION III.
SECTION IV.
SECTION V.
SECTION VI.
SECTION VII.
WATER SUPPLY HISTORY 2
MANGANESE STANDARD BACKGROUND 3
MANGANESE SAMPLING PLAN 4
ACTION PLAN 5
PUBLIC AWARENESS 15
FUNDING OPTIONS 15
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS 17
LIST OF TABLES
PAGE NO.
TABLE 1: WELL DATA 3
TABLE 2: MWW CONNECTION COSTS 9
TABLE 3: 10 MGD LIME SOFTENING WATER TREATMENT 11
TABLE 4: REVERSE OSMOSIS SYSTEMS FOR ALL RESIDENTIAL USERS 12
TABLE 5: ANNUAL COST OF BOTTLED WATER FOR RESIDENTIAL USERS 13
TABLE 6: IRON & MANGANESE REMOVAL PLANT CAPITAL COSTS 14
TABLE 7: IRON & MANGANESE REMOVAL PLANT OPERATING COSTS 14
TABLE 8: BROOKLYN CENTER WATER RATES 16
TABLE 9: WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS 20
TABLE 10: COST COMPARISON 21
15278.003
APPENDIX
PAGES
A.FACT SHEETS 6
B.MANGANESE SAMPLING PLAN AND RESULTS 4
C.WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES SITE MAP
D.WATER RATES 7
E.PUBLIC AWARENESS DOCUMENTS 6
F.MDH TESTING LOCATIONS FOR SUMMER 2013 1
iii 15278.003
WATER SYSTEM FEASIBILITY STUDY
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
An evalu,ation of the drinking water supply system for the City of Brooklyn Center has
been completed. The primary reason for the evaluation is the presence of manganese
in the water supply and the health concerns associated with high concentrations of the
metal. This study discusses the history of the City's drinking water supply and
distribution system, the health concerns associated with manganese in drinking water,
and the manganese regulations and health risk advisories from various agencies.
Potential short-term and long-term solutions and a cost estimate for each alternative are
presented. Public relation strategies and funding options are also presented. Finally an
approach for controlling manganese in the drinking water supply is recommended.
This study was completed for the following reasons:
1.There are high levels of naturally-Occurring manganese found in the raw
groundwater making up Brooklyn Center's drinking water supply.
2.There was a Health Advisory issued by the Minnesota Department of Health in
June 2012 which alerted the public of the potential health concerns associated
with manganese in drinking water.
3.. To explore the potential solutions to lower the concentration of manganese in
Brooklyn Center's drinking water supply.
4. To recommend an action plan pertaining to the manganese in drinking water
including public relation strategies and treatment solutions.
The solutions discussed in this study include doing nothing, operating wells selectively,
drilling a new well in a different aquifer, buying water from surrounding communities,
providing point-of-use devices or bottled water, and building a new water treatment
plant. The recommended short-term solution is to operate wells selectively so that the
wells with lower concentrations of manganese supply the majority of the water to the
City thus lowering the concentration of manganese in the distribution system. The
recommended long-term solution is to build a new water treatment plant to remove the
manganese in the existing groundwater supply.
1 15278.003
I. WATER SUPPLY HISTORY
The City of Brooklyn Center has historically experienced high levels of manganese (Mn)
in its drinking water supply. The City's drinking water supply comes from nine
groundwater wells which draw water from the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer. The
current average day water demand is 3.2 million gallons per day (MGD). Water
demand has decreased over the last 25 years and is affected by many factors. Water
demand projections were obtained from information from previous studies as well as
demand data from the last five years. An average day demand of 4 MGD and a
maximum day demand of 10 MGD were used to compare water supply alternatives.
Previous studies have been completed regarding the water quality in Brooklyn Center.
The Study of the Water Quality in the Water System dated February 13, 1987, was
completed in response to complaints received mainly from the western edge of the City.
Several recommendations regarding the operation of the system with the addition of
chemicals, proper flushing of the mains, selective well operation, and frequent water
quality monitoring were made. A Water Works Facility Study dated November of 1998
was completed to determine the feasibility of constructing an iron and manganese
removal plant. The study provided preliminary layouts and cost estimates for plants of
varying capacity using alternate filtration systems. The study estimated the water rates
at that time would need to be increased from $0.89 per thousand gallons to
approximately $1.50 per thousand gallons to finance a new water plant with Water
Utility revenue bonds. The City had once set aside money to construct a water
treatment plant, but the money ended up being used for general funds.
Water treatment in the City of Brooklyn Center consists of chemical addition at the well
houses. Zinc orthophosphate (Calgon C-9) is added to control iron, manganese, and
corrosion. Chlorine and ammonia are used to disinfect the water and provide a
combinedrchlorine residual in the distribution system. Fluoride is also added to the
water to comply with a Minnesota State Statute. Even with the addition of zinc
orthophosphate, the high manganese concentration is not completely controlled and
averages in the distribution system range from 0.25 to 0.50 milligrams per liter (mg/L)
depending on which wells are operating.
Raw water from the nine wells contains various levels of manganese which range from
concentrations of 0.23 to 0.59 mg/L. Different amounts of water from each well are
used to contribute to the total water supply. The use of each well was determined from
pumping records over the last five years. Table 1 summarizes the manganese
concentration in each well according to recent test results as well as the use of that well
in the system from 2008 to 2012.
2 15278.003
Table 1: Well Data
Well
2
Well
3
Well
4
Well
5
Well
6
Well
7
Well
8
Well
9
Well
10
Year Installed 1959 19611961 19661966 1971 1977 1983 1990
Well Capacity
(gpnn)1,200 8001,2001,500 1,500 1,500 1,000 1,500 1,500
Use in System
2008-2012 4%0%13%17%
•
21%23%0%12%10%
Manganese
Concentration
(mg/L)
0.48 0.380.59 0.36 0.23 0.43 0.47 0.43 0.41
. MANGANESE STANDARD BACKGROUND
Manganese is a naturally-occurring chemical component in groundwater that is strongly
spatially correlated. The IVIDH completed an initial assessment of the presence of
naturally-occurring manganese in Minnesota groundwater in October, 2012. The initial
assessment found that the manganese concentration in plastic-cased wells were twice
those in steel-cased wells which was determined to be due to the manganese removal
mechanism specific to steel-cased wells. Brooklyn Center's wells are steel-cased. The
MDH study also concluded that there was no correlation between manganese
concentration and screen placement below static water level. A summary page of this
study can be found in Appendix A.
MDH plans to perform further testing for manganese and other general water quality
•parameters on public water supply wells during the summer of 2013. Most of the public
water supply wells in Hennepin, Anoka, and Ramsey Counties, including those in
Brooklyn Center, will be tested. Some of these communities and the historical
concentrations of manganese found in the wells that will be tested by the MDH are
provided in Appendix F.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates contaminants in public water
systems by primary standards. Primary standards protect the public by limiting the
concentrations of contaminants that have been proven to adversely affect human
health, and they are enforceable by law. The EPA also has developed secondary
standards that are guidelines for limiting contaminants that cause cosmetic or aesthetic
effects in public water systems. Public water systems are not required by law to comply
with secondary standards.
Controlling manganese in drinking water is currently considered a secondary standard.
Manganese in excess of the secondary standard can cause black staining, a bitter
metallic taste, and water to be black or brown in color. Since manganese is a
secondary standard, it is a non-enforceable contaminant.
3 15278.003
There is additional guidance from the EPA, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH),
and the World Health Organization (WHO) for the effects of manganese on human
health. The EPA published a Drinking Water Health Advisory for Manganese in 2004
which advised a level of 0.3 mg/L in water supplies to protect against concerns of
potential neurological effects. Furthermore the Health Risk Assessment Unit of the
MDH has a current guidance value of 0.1 mg/L for formula-fed infants and infants that
drink lap water. The guidance value of 0.3 mg/L is for children and adults, including
nursing mothers. See the MDH fact sheet for manganese in drinking water in Appendix
A. According to the MDH, the guidance value is lower for infants because their brains
are developing quickly, they absorb more manganese and are less able to remove it
from their bodies, and they drink more water and eat more food based on body weight.
The WHO has periodically adjusted its manganese guidelines since 1958. In 2004, the
third edition of the Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality was published, and it
established a guideline value of 0.4 mg/L for manganese. The calculated health-based
value of 0.4 mg/L was established by the weight of evidence from actual daily intake
and toxicity studies in laboratory animals. The fourth edition of the Guidelines, which
was published in 2011, concluded that it was not necessary to derive a formal guideline
value since the calculated health-based value is well above concentrations normally
found in drinking water. The history of the WHO guideline is included in Appendix A.
The health risk manganese guidance values are not regulated by the MDH and will not
be enforceable until the EPA develops a primary standard for manganese. Manganese
in drinking water will not be considered a serious health risk until it becomes a primary
standard. However, the MPH fact sheet published in June 2012 and the interest by a
professor at the University of Minnesota to complete a study in BrOoklyn Center about
the health effects of manganese on humans has caused the City to be in the public eye
recently. This pressure has driven the City to explore solutions for lowering the
manganese concentration in its drinking water supply.
III. MANGANESE SAMPLING PLAN
Since historical data for the City of Brooklyn Center's water supply wells indicate
manganese concentrations higher than the health risk value for infants, a sampling plan
has been initiated to determine current levels of manganese in the wells. The purpose
of the sampling plan was to not only determine current concentrations of manganese in
the wells but also to determine the effect of well operation on the concentrations found
in the distribution system.
As shown in Table 1, Well 6 has the lowest concentration and Well 4 has the highest
concentration of manganese compared to the other wells in the system. If Well 6 were
to run continuously, it could produce over half (1.73 MGD) of the current average day
water demand in the City (3.20 MGD). Also if Well 4 were only to operate during peak
demands, the highest concentration of manganese would normally not influence the
total concentration in the system.
4 15278.003
It was hypothesized that the concentration of manganese in the distribution system,
would be directly affected by the concentrations from the wells in operation at the time.
Historical data indicated that Well 6 had the lowest concentration at 0.18 mg/L and Well
4 had the highest concentration at 0.54 mg/L. Wells with low manganese
concentrations were operated for at least a week and then samples were collected at
the wells and several locations in the distribution system. The same procedure was
completed for wells with high manganese concentrations. The complete sampling plan
and map of sampling locations are in Appendix B of this report.
Positive results were found in the sampling plan. When Well 6 was operating constantly
at its full capacity and wells with the next lowest concentrations were also in operation
to meet demand, the concentration of manganese in the distribution system samples
averaged about 0.3 mg/L. When wells with higher concentrations were in operation, the
manganese concentration in the distribution system averaged 0.46 mg/L. A table of
results is located in Appendix B.
IV. ACTION PLAN
Even though the City of Brooklyn Center is not in violation of any primary drinking water
standards, the City is considering its Options for reducing manganese in its public water
supply. Several alternatives were explored in this study including doing nothing, buying
water from surrounding communities, installing point-of-use devices for drinking water,
and building a new water treatment plant. The advantages, disadvantages, and
prelirninary cost estimates for each option are discussed in this report.
A. Do Nothing
The drinking water supply for the City of Brooklyn Center is in compliance with all
primary drinking water standards and is currently not required by MDH regulations to
provide any further treatment. The nine groundwater wells provide sufficient capacity to
meet current average and peak day demands. The potentially adverse effects of
manganese in drinking water have been known for over 60 years. There are several
other emerging contaminants that are of greater concern to regulators, and it is the
opinion of many water professionals that manganese in drinking water will not be
regulated by the EPA in the foreseeable future.
Maintaining current operations to the water supply system would require no additional
training for water operators and the City would not incur any additional costs or debt.
The City could delay taking action until current treatment does not comply with drinking
water regulations. At that time, there would be a greater likelihood of securing grant
funds for improvements to the drinking water system.
Taking no action to limit the manganese concentration in the drinking water system may
cause ongoing concerns from some citizens and ultimately may cause the City of
Brooklyn Center to be an undesirable place to live, for some people. Even though
5 15278.003
manganese is a non-enforceable contaminant, ignoring the health risk guidance values
completely may cause long-term harm to the public.
B. Selective Well Operation
Operating Well 6 in the lead has successfully kept the concentration of manganese in
the distribution system around the health risk guidance value for adults and children.
However, it has not achieved the limit recommended for infants under one-year-old.
This solution depends on the concentration of manganese in the raw water. Results
from recent testing indicated higher manganese concentrations than were noted in
historical data; however, the accuracy of the historic data cannot be verified.
There is no capital cost associated with this solution and therefore water rates could
remain the same as they are now. This is a simple solution for improving the
manganese concentrations in the distribution system currently, but it may not be a
sustainable solution. The wells are located in close vicinity of each other at the same
depth. It is difficult to predict and the use of Well 6 continuously from late February
through July of 2013 has not indicated this, but pulling more water from Well 6 may
increase the concentration of manganese over time. Apart from manganese, other
water quality characteristics have not been considered for the selective well operation.
There could be adverse effects from other contaminants as a result of running Well 6
continuously, although this has not yet been observed.
It is expected that higher concentrations of manganese would be found in the
distribution system during periods of high demand because more water would be
required from the wells with higher concentrations of manganese. Sampling at the wells
and throughout the distribution system should be continued to monitor the effect of
running Well 6 constantly. Additionally, Well 6 will eventually need to be shut down for
routine maintenance and/or could eventually fail.
C. Drill new well in different aquifer
The Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer system which makes up Brooklyn Center's water
supply is the most heavily used and most productive system in the area. Another
aquifer that would provide the City of Brooklyn Center with sufficient capacity is the
Mount Simon-Hinckley aquifer system. This aquifer can only be used when no other
practical source is available as mandated by the Minnesota Legislature. The quality of
water from this aquifer also may not be an improvement over the quality found in the
Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer. The water from the Mount Simon-Hinckley aquifer
typically contains more iron and manganese and is harder than Brooklyn Center's
current water supply.
The glacial drift aquifer consists of several complex bodies of sand and gravel glacial
deposits that yield moderate to large amounts of water. This supply is only reliable in
limited areas in the metropolitan region and unavailable in the rest. The amount of
water that would be available to Brooklyn Center cannot be predicted, and the quality of
6 15278.003
this water would likely not be an improvement over the City's current water supply.
Generally cities which use the glacial drift aquifers in the Metropolitan area have a water
treatment plant to process the raw water supply. Direct use of the glacial drift aquifer
would depend upon the water quality and may require treatment. A cost estimate has
been provided for constructing a new well but because of the aforementioned reasons,
drilling into a different aquifer is not a reasonable solution for the City of Brooklyn
Center.
D. Brooklyn Park Water Source
The City of Brooklyn Park has a water treatment plant that produces a very low
concentration of manganese in its system. There is an existing 14-inch connection
between the systems that could reasonably transport 2.9 MGD of water. The
connection was constructed to provide an emergency supply to either City in the event
of a shortage. The Brooklyn Park water treatment plant can produce 22 to 23 MGD.
Current average day demand is 9.2 MGD and maximum day demand is about 20 MGD.
The Brooklyn Park water system operates at a higher pressure (about 10 psi) than the
Brooklyn Center water system. Brooklyn Park has enough capacity to supply water to
Brooklyn Center for average day demands, but the plant does not have enough capacity
to meet maximum day demands for both Cities. In order to meet average day demand
in Brooklyn Center a larger pipe interconnecting the systems would need to be installed.
An 18-inch pipe could supply 2,800 gallons per minute (gpm) to meet a future average
day demand of 4 MGD in Brooklyn Center.
Since the water supply from Brooklyn Park would not meet maximum day demands,
Brooklyn Center's existing wells would still be needed. The different water supplies
should either be blended prior to sending to the distribution system or the system should
be split so that customers wouldn't be subjected to a mix of water quality. Brooklyn
Park has much harder water (about 10 grains per gallon higher) than Brooklyn Center
so splitting the systems would result in consumers having to spend different amounts of
money on salt use in their home softeners. This would likely generate some complaints.
Providing a blended water to the system would require the construction of an additional
tank and booster station. A buried ground storage reservoir could potentially be
constructed near the existing interconnection between the cities where there are
currently baseball fields or park areas. If these areas are not available, a new
interconnection by Brooklyn Center's existing wells could be explored. The reservoir
would need a capacity of 3 to 4 million gallons, and a booster station with a 24-inch
watermain would be necessary to pump the blended water into the existing system.
Connecting to the Brooklyn Park water supply would provide water with nearly no
manganese to consumers in Brooklyn Center during normal usage. The main
disadvantages to accepting water from Brooklyn Park are associated with the difference
in water quality between the cities and the fact that Brooklyn Park does not have
sufficient capacity to meet maximum day demands. There would also be an operational
7 15278.003
cost associated with purchasing water from Brooklyn Park. Based on current rates for
Brooklyn Park, construction costs, and an estimated surcharge of $1.00, the potential
impact on Brooklyn Center's water rates is an increase of $2.02 per 1,000 gallons (see
Appendix D for Brooklyn Park's water fees).
E. Minneapolis Water Source
Minneapolis Water Works (MWW) supplies softened surface water from the Mississippi
River to the Cities of Minneapolis, Golden Valley, Crystal, New Hope, Columbia
Heights, and Hilltop as well as to Edina Morningside and a portion of Bloomington's
demand. MWW has water treatment plants in Fridley and Columbia Heights and has a
firm capacity of 189 MGD. The maximum demand observed in the past 30 years was
171.1 MGD, and the average day demand is about 50 MGD. MWW has plenty of
capacity to provide water to the City of Brooklyn Center.
MWW desires to have a backup groundwater supply to meet average day demand in
the event of an emergency with the surface water supply. Constructing new wells to
provide 50 MGD is a large and difficult task so MWW is interested in finding existing
wells in the area to use. In exchange, MWW would provide water to those communities
with existing wells. The City of Brooklyn Center is relatively close to MWW water
treatment plants, and the eight wells located near each other (excludes Well 2) would
provide about a fourth of the capacity MWW is seeking.
There is a 48-inch distribution main from MWW that runs on 47 th Avenue and turns
south on Humboldt. The map in Appendix C shows the approximate location of the
water main and a potential route for connecting Brooklyn Center to MWW water supply.
The map also shows a route for a pipeline from Brooklyn Center's wellfield to the MWW
water treatment plant in Fridley which will require a river crossing. The pressure of the
48-inch distribution main is about 13 psi higher than the operating pressure of Brooklyn
Center's water system. This study assumes that the pressure from MWW would be
sufficient to supply Brooklyn Center without the addition of a reservoir or booster station
but would require properly sized watermains in order to limit headloss. Control or
altitude valves would be necessary to fill the water towers, and they have been included
in the cost of the pipelines in this study.
There are different water quality issues associated with surface water compared to
groundwater. There are typically more taste and odor complaints from consumers of
surface water. Surface water supplies have additional safe drinking water standards for
removal of viruses and microorganisms, such as Cryptosporidium and Giardia. The
MWW water supply and treatment processes must comply with all MDH regulations;
therefore, the biggest change Brooklyn Center's consumers would experience relates to
the taste and odor of the MWW supply. MWW is also in the process of planning to build
a Granular Activated Carbon system to address taste and odor complaints.
In the scenario where a community,buys water wholesale from MWW, that community is
still responsible for maintaining its distribution system and meeting drinking water
8 15278.003
TABLE 2: MWVV Connection Costs
Connecting to MWW Cost (Distribution to Brooklyn Center
Description Unit Cost .Quantity (ft)Total
24"$200 4,500 $900,000
30"$225 5,800 $1,305,000
Subtotal $2,205,000
Supplying to MWW Cost (Supply Raw Well Water from Brooklyn Center
Description Unit Cost Quantity (ft)Total
30"$225 19,300 $4,342,500
River Crossing $1,000,000 1 $1,000,000
Subtotal $5,342,500
Total Construction Costs $7,547,500
Contingencies (5%)$377,000
Total Estimated Capital Costs $7,925,000
standards. There have been systems that buy water from MWW that have had trouble
meeting standards for disinfection by-products and lead and copper. This is a difficult
situation because the City has to be responsible for the water quality in its system yet it
has no control over adjusting the water quality it receives from MWW.
The water rates for communities that buy water from MWW are included in Appendix D.
Brooklyn Center has a unique advantage over other Cities that buy water from MWW
because of the value of the existing wells. However, there is a capital cost associated
with constructing the watermains between MWW and Brooklyn Center. Even if MWW is
responsible for these capital costs, the debt that is incurred would likely affect the water
rates of users. The estimated construction cost for a new well is $1,000,000 so the
estimated value of the eight wells is $8,000,000. Table 2 shows estimated capital costs
for construction of the watermains between Brooklyn Center and MWW.
The specific negotiations for developing an agreement between Brooklyn Center and
MWW cannot be predicted, but it is likely that MWW will maintain similar wholesale
charges as have been set for other communities in which they sell water to so they do
not upset existing consumers. MWW has indicated to TKDA that if Brooklyn Center
were to connect to MWW, they would not have lower rates than the current charges
imposed on the Joint Water Commission (includes the Cities of New Hope, Crystal, and
Golden Valley). Also since the capital costs for constructing the watermains and the
value of the Brooklyn Center wells are nearly equal, it is assumed that the costs and
value essentially will cancel each other out.
9 15278.003
To estimate the water rate that Brooklyn Center may need to charge its residential
users, a weighted average of the City of Crystal's water rates per 1,000 gallons was
used. Both the City of Brooklyn Center's and City of Crystal's tiered water consumption
rates were averaged based on the following assumptions: 80% of water consumed will
fall in the 0 to 30,000 gallon range, 15% of the water consumed will fall in the 31,000 to
60,000 gallon range, and 5% of the water consumed will fall in the 61,000 gallons and
greater range. This resulted in a current average water rate of $1.38 per 1,000 gallons
in Brooklyn Center and $4.15 per 1,000 gallons in Crystal. Based on these
assumptions, there would be an increase of $2.77 per 1,000 gallons on current
residential rates in Brooklyn Center to purchase MWW water.
The main disadvantage to buying water from MWW is the large impact on water rates.
Other disadvantages include the lack of control the City of Brooklyn Center would have
on water quality and the different challenges associated with surface water. There may
be taste and odor complaints initially, but the addition of carbon treatment at MWW in
the next few years would alleviate that problem. The City would be responsible for
testing water within the distribution to ensure compliance with drinking water standards
for a surface water supply which have different requirements than groundwater
supplies. The City of Brooklyn Center could install methods to treat the water such as
adding chemicals to control disinfection by-products, but the infrastructure needed for
this ability would only have a greater impact on water rates. This additional
infrastructure has not been included in the cost estimate in this study.
The main advantage to buying water from MWW is zero capital cost anticipated
because of the value that Brooklyn Center's wells have to MWW. Brooklyn Center
would also receive softened water so users would save money on softening salt. The
savings on softening salt is estimated to be $26 per connection per year. This savings
is not significant compared to the increased water rate, and most users have probably
already made the capital investment in water softeners. Centralized water softening is
generally more economical if users do not have home softeners already, but if they
already have softeners the capital investment for softening would be duplicated.
F. River Water Source
The City of Brooklyn Center owns a parcel of land by the Mississippi River. This
location could be used for an intake structure for a surface water source. This intake
structure would consist of a bar screen and buried wet well with pumps. The water
would then be pumped to the City's existing wellfield location near Evergreen Park. A
lime softening plant consisting of rapid mix, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration,
disinfection, and a clearwell would be a typical surface water treatment plant
constructed to treat surface water.
The current costs for the construction and operation and maintenance of a lime
softening plant were extrapolated from a report TKDA completed for the Joint Water
Commission in 2003. The construction of a lime softening plant is estimated to increase
10 15278.003
TABLE 3: 10 MGD Lime Softening Water Treatment
Capital Costs
Intake Structure $2,500,000
30" Pipeline - 2,650 LF $600,000
Treatment Plant $24,300,000
Total Capital Costs $27,400,000
Annual Costs
Total Annual O&M Costs $1,90 0,000
the water rates to residential users by $2.32 per 1,000 gallons. The estimated capital
and operation and maintenance costs are shown in Table 3.
There would be many challenges associated with switching the water supply in Brooklyn
Center to surface water. There are different testing requirements for surface water
supplies, the temperature of the water system varies seasonally, there are disposal
considerations from the lime softening process, and the City would likely receive taste
and odor complaints especially initially. An advantage to this alternative is softened
water, but since the majority of homes and businesses in the City of Brooklyn Center
already have on-site softening systems, paying the additional cost for centralized
softening is unnecessary. Maintaining ownership of the parcel by the river is
recommended in case a surface water supply is ever needed in the future.
G. Point -Of-Use Devices
Point-of-use (POU) water treatment devices are used to remove one or more specific
contaminants at an individual tap or faucet. MDH has published a fact sheet about POU
devices and this is included in Appendix E. They can reduce exposure to a contaminant
in water used for cooking and drinking. The typical treatment methods used in POU
devices are activated carbon adsorption, reverse osmosis (RO), and ion exchange.
Normally RO treatment systems also include a carbon prefilter and carbon postfilter.
An example of ion exchange treatment is home water softeners which are point-of-entry
devices. In this type of treatment, hardness as well as iron and manganese ions are
exchanged with the sodium ions in salt. Ion exchange water softeners are effective at
removing manganese from water, but typically the plumbing to kitchen faucets is
purposely designed to not receive softened water because of the high sodium
concentration in the water which is a result of the ion exchange process.
Carbon adsorption alone is not effective at removing manganese from water, and when
the replacement of the filter is neglected, the filter can cause more harm than good as
bacteria can build up and contaminate the water. RO systems warn against treating
hard water over 10 grains per gallon because the membrane and filters get fouled up
quickly. This leads to more frequent replacement of the membrane and filters in the
system.
11 15278.003
TABLE 4: Reverse Osmosis Systems for all Residential Users
Ca ital Costs
Manufacturer Model Install Cost
Residential
Connections
Pentek RO-3500 $400 8,400
Total Capital Costs $3,360,000
Annual Costs
Item Unit Cost
Typical
Annual
Replacement
Annual
Replacement
for High
Hardness
Total
Annual
O&M/Unit
City-Wide
O&M Cost
Carbon
Prefilter $10 1 2 $20 $168,000
GAC Postfilter $10 4 8 $80 $672,000
RO Membrane $80 0.5 2 $160 $1,344,000
O&M for Current System $390,000
Total Annual Costs $2,574,000
While RO is not a good option for treating water in Brooklyn Center which has a
hardness of 21 to 22 grains per gallon, the costs were evaluated because it would be
effective at removing manganese from the drinking water. The frequent replacement of
membranes and filters were figured for the operation and maintenance costs in addition
to the costs for operating the current system since that would not change in this
scenario. Costs for providing RO systems to all residential users and the maintenance
for all of those systems were estimated and are shown in Table 4.
H. Bottled Water
The cost for providing bottled water to residents was found based on wholesale charges
for bottled water and the EPA's estimated daily ingestion per capita of community water
of 926 milliliters per person per day. The operation and maintenance cost for the
current system was also included since those costs would remain unchanged. This
alternative proved to be the most costly and would require an estimated increase of
$3.49 per 1,000 gallons of water consumed. Bottled water does not always guarantee
low manganese concentrations, and it should be tested prior to being recommended to
users. Table 5 shows the estimated annual cost of supplying bottled water to residents
of Brooklyn Center.
12 15278.003
TABLE 5: Annual Cost of Bottled Water for Residential Users
Typical Community Water Consumption 926
Population of Brooklyn Center 30,104
Cost/Pallet $400
Case/Pallet 72
Bottles/Case 24
Bottles/Pallet 1,728
Volume/Bottle (L)0.5
City Daily Consumption (L)27,876
Bottles of Water/Day 55,753
# of Pallets/Day 32.3
Cost/Day $12,906
Cost/Year $4,710,000
O&M for Current System $390,000
Total Annual Costs $5,100,000
mL/person/day
I. Groundwater Treatment Plant
•A water treatment plant could be constructed to remove manganese from the existing
well water. Iron and manganese removal plants generally oxidize iron and manganese
by aeration or chemical injection to form insoluble solids that can be removed on media
in a filtration system. The water is then disinfected and fluoridated before entering the
distribution system. The removal process can be achieved by gravity or pressure filter
systems.
A Water Works Facility Study was completed for the City of Brooklyn Center in 1998.
This study determined a suitable location on City-owned property for a water treatment
plant which is shown on the Site Map in Appendix C. The study compared pressure
and gravity filter systems of varying capacity and with options for additional department
facilities such as garage space. The capital costs were extrapolated to 2013 dollars and
are presented in Table 6. The estimated annual costs were determined by the cost per
MGD from an existing similar plant in addition to current maintenance costs for running
and maintaining the wells. The annual cost for chemicals is less for an iron and
manganese removal plant than Brooklyn Center's current chemical costs mostly
because the cost of zinc orthophosphate (Calgon C-9) is so high, and this chemical
would not be needed in an iron and manganese removal plant. There would need to be
an estimated increase of $0.76 per 1,000 gallons above current water rates:
13 15278.003
TABLE 6: Iron & Manganese Removal Plant Capital Costs
Pressure Filter - 2013 Costs
Option Construction
Cost
Total Project
Cost
10 MGD Plant with Garage and Shop $10,589,384 $13,395,572
10 MGD Plant without Garage and Shop $10,221,896 $12,930,699
6 MGD Plant with Garage and Shop $9,358,927 $11,839,044
6 MGD Plant without Garage and Shop $8,975,306 $11,353,762
Gravity Filter - 2013 Costs
Option Construction
Cost
Total Project
Cost
10 MGD Plant with Garage and Shop $11,426,539 $14,454,571
10 MGD Plant without Garage and Shop $10,976,591 $13,885,387
6 MGD Plant with Garage and Shop $9,764,777 $12,352,444
6 MGD Plant without Garage and Shop $9,305,866$11,771,921
TABLE 7: Iron & Manganese Removal Plant Operating Costs
Description
Cost per
Million Gal.Annual Cost
Wells Electrical $188,920
Repair & Maint Services $77,600
Plant Electrical $81 $118,260
Chemicals $47 $68,620
Miscellaneous $5 $7,300
One Plant Operator*$58,000
Total Annual Costs $518,700
*An additional plant operator is dependent on future operation and maintenance needs and
may not be necessary if current staffing is adequate.
J. Supply from Surrounding Cities
Purchasing water from the surrounding cities of Robbinsdale and Crystal was explored,
but both options were deemed to be unreasonable solutions, therefore a cost estimate
was not developed.
The City of Robbinsdale has three treatment plants than can easily produce 1 MGD
each, for a total capacity of 3 MGD. The average daily demand for the City of
Robbinsdale is about 1 MGD. The remaining capacity does not even meet average
14 15278.003
daily demands for the City of Brooklyn Center, and for this reason, purchasing water
from the City of Robbinsdale is not feasible.
The City of Crystal is part of the Joint Water Commission (JWC) which purchases water
from MVVW. The water the JWC receives from MWW enters storage reservoirs that
supply the cities of Crystal, New Hope, and Golden Valley. The funds required to
maintain these reservoirs are collected from all three cities which are part Of the JWC. If
Brooklyn Center were to purchase water from the City of Crystal, they will likely have to
negotiate with the JWC and contribute to the funds needed to maintain infrastructure
shared by the cities. There would potentially be another surcharge applied from the
JWC to the already high water rates required to purchase water from MWW.
Purchasing water from the City of Crystal is not a feasible solution.
V.PUBLIC AWARENESS
The City of Brooklyn Center has faced increased public concern regarding manganese
in drinking water recently. In response to the concern, the City has provided information
provided by the Minnesota Department of Health and other sources about the subject
on its website. There are links to point-of-use devices and additional resources for
educating the public about the potential health risk. See the informational sheets and
website in Appendix E.
The City plans to send mailings with utility billings to further educate the public about the
subject and has included information in its City Watch publication. The City Watch
reaches approximately 81 percent of the community. The City will provide ongoing
public awareness such as handouts at Earthfest that occurs once a year at the High
School and handouts at City Hall.
The conclusions and recommendations of this report should be shared with the public
so that citizens are made aware of the City's proactive and thorough approach at finding
the best solution for solving the manganese issue in Brooklyn Center's water supply.
VI.FUNDING OPTIONS
A. Local Funds
Current water rates for the City of Brooklyn Center are presented in Table 8. For the
purpose of comparing one water conservation rate throughout this study, a weighted
average was found based on the percentages for each tier presented in Table 8. The
revenue generated from water rates subsidizes the City's Water Utility Fund which
projects expenditures and revenues for 15 years. Any water system improvement
pertaining to manganese in the drinking water would need to be added to the City's
Capital Improvement Plan, and if funded out of the Water Utility Fund, an infusion such
as bonding or an internal fund loan would be necessary since there are no excess funds
for such improvements. This report used a 3.5 percent interest rate for a period of 20
15 15278.003
TABLE 8: Brooklyn Center Water Rates 2013
Residential Accounts
Base Rate = $7.75 quarterly charge
Water Conservation Rates
0-30,000 $1.28 per 1,000 gallons 80%
31,000 - 60,000 $1.60 per 1,000 gallons 15%
61,000 & up $2.40 per 1,000 gallons 5%
Weighted average rate = $1.3 8
Commercial Accounts
Meter Size
(in)
Min. Quarterly
Charge
1 $22.54
1 1/2 $29.98
2 $56.35
3 $112.70
4 $189.98
$434.70
8 $821.10
10 $1,094.80
$1.60 per 1,000 gallons
years when comparing costs and estimating potential impacts on water rates per 1,000
gallons. A conservative approach was taken to determine the worst-case-scenario
impact on water rates that the City may need to enforce when comparing alternatives.
B. Public Facilities Authority
The Minnesota Public Facilities Authority (PFA) offers low interest grants and loans for
select drinking water projects. The awarding of a loan is based on several factors, but
projects that eliminate a health risk are a priority. Unfortunately, since there is only a
secondary standard for manganese, the City would most likely not receive any health
risk points for the loan application. However, the City does meet the income
requirements set by the PFA which give it a higher chance at receiving low-interest loan
funding.
The PFA loan application is due by May 3, 2013, in order to receive funding in 2014. If
the City were to apply and be awarded the loan, a water treatment plant could be
designed in 2014 and potentially online in 2015. The PFA loan application requires a
feasibility study be submitted with the application. If a loan were awarded to the City,
the interest rate might be as low as 1.5 to 2.0 percent.
16 15278.003
C.State Source Water Protection Competitive Grant
The State Source Water Protection Competitive Grant is a funding opportunity offered
by the Minnesota Department of Health. The purpose of the grant is to prevent
contamination from entering public drinking water supplies that may be a health risk.
The maximum amount awarded by the grant is $10,000 and it requires an equal cost
share for each item.
A source water protection competitive grant is intended to support implementation of the
drinking water protection measures that address a potential source of contamination
exhibiting a high risk that is either 1) described in a source water protection plan or 2)
recognized by the Minnesota Department of Health through formal correspondence with
the public water supplier. Typically the grant is used to fund studies that present
solutions to a problem. No work can be completed until all signatures are obtained in
the grant agreement.
The City of Brooklyn Center does not meet the requirements for the Source Water
Protection Competitive Grant.
D.Legislative Funding
The City could potentially seek legislative funding through its local representatives or by
receiving the support of the League of Cities. Receiving funding from the legislature is a
cumbersome process and potentially requires hiring a lobbyist. Typically high costs are
incurred, and the chances for receiving.funding depend on many factors that are
unpredictable.
VII. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
A cost comparison among alternatives and a summary of advantages and
disadvantages for the alternatives discussed in this report are presented in Tables 9
and 10. The following conclusions and recommendations are offered for each
alternative discussed in this report:
1.The "do nothing" alternative may cause continued public concern with the high
manganese concentrations in the drinking water supply and ultimately public
distrust in City decision-makers.
0, This alternative is not a recommended approach for the City to take.
2.Selectively operating the wells is a reasonable short-term solution that has
proven to lower the manganese concentration in the distribution system to about
the health risk guidance level for children and adults. Running Well 6
continuously from late February through July has shown no increase in the
manganese concentration. Sampling at the wells in operation and in the
distribution system should be continued to ensure the City is aware of the
17 15278.003
manganese concentration in its distribution system and also to monitor if running
Well 6 constantly has an effect on its manganese concentration.
•It is recommended that the City continue to operate the wells
selectively until long term improvements are completed.
3. Drilling a new well in a different aquifer does not appear to be a reasonable
solution due to the uncertainty of water quality and unavailability of a reliable
aquifer.
•For these reasons, it is not recommended that the City pursue this
alternative.
4. The Brooklyn Park water supply is not adequate for meeting maximum day
demands in Brooklyn Center, and the water quality differences would require a
blending tank for meeting the peak demands. The capital costs and increased
water rate associated with buying water wholesale cause this alternative to be
unreasonable.
▪It is not recommended that the City pursue this option.
5. The MWW water supply alternative is estimated to have costly operation and
maintenance impacts that would be reflected in user water rates.
•This alternative is not recommended for the City.
6. The surface water source would present many challenges to the City because of
the different testing requirements and taste and odor complaints associated with
surface water. This alternative would also cause a significant increase on water
rates.
It is not recommended that this option be pursued at this time, but it
is recommended that the City maintain ownership of the parcel by
the river so that it could be used in the future for a water supply if
necessary.
7. A point-of-use treatment device that would be appropriate for removing
manganese was not found feasible because of the high hardness in the water
supply and the likelihood for scaling filters and membranes frequently. POU
devices require ongoing maintenance that would be difficult to enforce users to
keep up with. The potential health risks associated with unmaintained water
filters would be a risk to the City if it were an encouraged method of treatment
•Installing POU devices on consumers' taps is not a recommended
alternative.
8. Providing bottled water to users is an expensive solution with an ongoing cost.
•It is not recommended that the City pursue this option any further.
18 15278.003
9.Constructing a groundwater treatment plant is a long-term solution for addressing
the manganese issue in the drinking water supply that has the least impact on
water rates. The City could potentially receive a low-interest loan for constructing
a water treatment plant. A feasibility study for construction of a groundwater
treatment plant should be completed to evaluate treatment options and provide
cost estimates that will allow the City to develop a financial plan.
It is recommended that the City take action and start planning to
build a groundwater treatment plant.
10.Purchasing water from the City of Robbinsdale is not feasible because there is
not sufficient supply to meet average demand in Brooklyn Center. Purchasing
water from the City of Crystal is not reasonable because of the high costs
associated with purchasing water from the JWC which purchases water from
MWW.
It is not recommended that the City pursue this option any further.
19 15278.003
Table 9: Water System Alternatives Analysis
ALTERNATIVE PROS CONS RATE
IMPACT
RECOMMENDATION
1.Do Nothing - No capital cost - Concerned citizens $0.00 - Not recommended
2.Selective Well
Operation
- No capital cost
- Lowered
manganese
concentration
- Manganese may
increase in well over
time
- Limited benefit during
peak demands
$0.02 - Recommended short-
term solution
3.Drill New Well -Low impact on
water rate
- Unavailable aquifer
- Uncertain water quality $0.08 - Not recommended
4.Brooklyn Park
- Achieve low
manganese
concentration
- Water quality
differences
- Insufficient capacity to
meet maximum
demands
$2.02 - Not recommended
5.Minneapolis
Water Works
- Low capital cost
- Achieve low
manganese
concentration
- Receive softened
water
- Large impact on water
rates
- Water quality
differences & lack of
control over treatment
- Value of wells to MWW
is neutralized by capital
costs for pipelines
$2.77 - Not recommended
6.River Water
- Achieve low
manganese
concentration
- Provide softened
water
- Large impact on water
rates
- Water quality & testing
differences
$2.32 - Not recommended
7.Point-Of-Use
Devices
- Achieve low
manganese
concentration with
proper
maintenance
- No device specific for
manganese removal
-Frequent maintenance
- Potential health risks
with unmaintained
water filters
$1.92 - Not recommended
8.Bottled Water
- Achieve low
manganese
concentration
- High ongoing cost $3.49 - Not recommended
9. Groundwater
Plant
- Achieve low
manganese
concentration "
- Long-term solution
with least impact
on water rates
-Increased water rates $0.76
.
- Recommended long-
term solution
20 15278.003
-ioi )...., u) 1,_, u) of, )..,0 cna) 0 ,0 a) Cd 0 c5 0cf) 0 .--in cd 0 0 a)a) E 0 c-, 4-,0 CO ,,,_, -0 cis -0 .ti v, 4-' 0
CiO cCil
CD C4 H 4_, 0 C. 4,.?
31--■ 0 CD 4-)3
4-,-c m r., al %-, P.a)a)(..) CO 0 CD 0.1 CD ,61) 4,01 ;-, CD Cd ;-ca.) bti >0 bo 4-, 4-;a) 0 bacd .a 4 ci bn4-' a9 P '., .a)
o -w .,_, !.: 0 ,,/ co
tn0 (p () cr) 0 P., a \Z " fa,--. 71 t ,. C0 43OU u bp bt) 0 , 0 i4, CO N-14, 0 0 CD U) 0 'd —O 0., • '" 4 .-Et -- 04•b ,--, 0 C/1 03Ct a) in . -c-cs' 0 o 4-, g ›, 0 0 .--,
ti) ;__, u0 M --, 0 .,-, •,-, ,,,., 0 j.1-_,c 5C0 b.0CZ 0 4.-, v)
0 P. 0 .. Cd P4 ,,,g, t; -a a0 a),..,_.u i-i o i-,
cis o o to 0 "c't U)$-■ (1) 0., 23 E— ,--, ;._.
•L ,..„, 4-, 0 ,--1 •
4.,
▪T., 9.:, 4-4m tpi, ,..,c,z5 4cc:4 {9 4 _,(a 4 ,ow 4 - ,ci 4 _ ,0,4 1 :9
tn
u . )621 . , . . . ,,,,,,sci Da )
_,-14-' -, 0 0 --, 0
cn cn
U 075:0' •-zi U U , ,...., j, U U U C.,4
C.)0 ct a) 00 •^, 0 "CS 'd 0 0 0 'd "c5 TS 0-, uP au) 4.-i 0 4,*,-, r., cd .f1.5) 4.02 04-
4-,
0 0
O.) m Cd cd cp cd Cd cd tcl ° ',- cd
_Cji0 CD V) E E E Cr) 4-' Ea (-E 'd "c't u) in -r.r/' ,.0
•
'I's ii-) V) ..i, t ' 'ft .la1G 0 el0 ri.1 44 CO H0 41 Gml [LI C...) cov) cd
TO' V:5, C,: CCI CS'
•-■ a) 4, 0) 0▪co E 1:1c„?U) U) U.) r01ou,
-0 0 .44)
-0
a
C:
P-O
cn -.0 0
0 . 0
+4 .-4 bt)co ,.. c/)0 p.,
CD CO 'al Td Oo4-) t
N4
13-1 P V)1/40 a) a) •Eil)--,U
›-, ,.0 c_) 4-, 0
O 4-, ,4-, c/) CD gaEn 0 4,
0 0 0
C. 0c:'' 0 CD ,..‘ a) CO11) 4-, 4-,cd PC)
•
.,-. 4-, ...'-ii s-, ).., '. L3 CO P., el
0 a)(0 •4 CO 04-,Cd (0 ,4-, 4-, 0 0
S. 4,
li 4-,OD 5.. 0 a)U)iii a) a)
O s-, CO 4-4 o a)P . o, ti-, .o 0 1-4 al
...7:4 0 s-4 0 c.,) 0 0 i4-,
a.) a)
V)
a) 0 o nottu) -0 4-, :0 .w •-.,-, a) CCS (TS a) u) 4-,0 4, a) ;.., ..0 a) cd0 0 CD 5, . ,L, tDO04, 4_, ,-0 0-) 5, (0 ...6, -0 0 4_, 4-) o .-) 4-,O a) CO 4-,U)■.0 o „„ a)
7:1
•
0 .-
co) c0 o -c'd t ''' 'CICd ci)-,
co)0 o4-4 0 a) cn '0 ca' s.., 'di4 0 a) a.) S-4 cl) a) 0
-g0CO'r) 4-,
;-.1 CU tin c.)
O U .,-, 5-4 u) c23
4-,
4-, 0 Q.) al 0 - -47.1 0
CO a) -0 ,__, cr,
c'Z' (0 cn a) 4.40If) a) us a) S. v) a)..-i 4-i 0 0 iciii ''-
4-i
iii. .,....
(0(0) it -0
a) (0 P-, a)
o 0 -ci_i CO '-i r-1 0O.._,Cd c/) U) L.)
i'd "CS
IDA (0 .'-',/ (I) '"0 B ,--cd tlf)0 0 0 "CS a) cn 0
bLi g 4-4 0C) g .411-,7; CO 2;.-. cpC'. 4,-1 (f) Cl.) -, 2 gp ;--, Mc:i CO >4 ,-.4
CO P. '3)P. c:_i _s1 ,,,__, t5u) 1%) ,28
5-,cd
a.cu :-
0 — a. CO toCD
O ,.z:1 .,_,t 49. 4-, •rfU) O C)-) 0-'..) A
a) u) 0 cu u) '' .H•.., ,:u4-, 0 b4 U CC-CS 4-' j, C/)cT ct 0 0 Piz ,—, (I) o o
Table 10: Cost Comparison
a)g 4-4
42 al 0 CV CO C•1 N CV CV CINC.) .cD 0 0 CD t--.01 as d'.C--.
0 '8 ci 6 ci c\i cNi c-N-4 (Y.;6Oa 4-4 -69-69-69-49-4949 49.4-9-69-
E Ct1■1
O.) CK14.4 b.0CCI ,..,g •-•oo c)vo CD LC)CD r-i CO LOCD
cit CD..,4-4 rqal I...
co
1--14-U-
"c1-,1-74-9-
d''1-14-3-
•71,CO4-9-
NH
d-14-9-
N
CO-be-
CO
CO-4.09-
CO
4-ue-
,--1
c\i-E,9-
00.
—'--00 00 x-4MD .4,'.0 00 •,tCT 01N-I 00 LC)in,.,M 44', CO co
CD
c>„
1.0
ccs
CD
cv„MD
ci
Cr,
c0„N
.4
CD,cli
CD
t-,
00& T'Crs ri CO 't 1.11 C---.c--4 CDCD7.1. CD CO ,t LO ir)CD N CO r-I 140
,..-, ,.....,
4-145 W00
-64 4-4 64 64 649
cyj
44
c \j"
49.
14-j
69
\--1
49
C)o c)o CDCDCD 0 0roCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDCDN
0?0 4-)th
C)-a\co
ITS'x-))4,
6.c),t
(03"cmCO
6t.oc)toco
O.t.---.in cz)N-I
cci%-tinCO 0 69 49 69 4-9-k..6 r-i'csj ui 4-4
0 0gg
-64 69 69 69
4.4 CD40 CD4-9-x-1■0 <it,t.0 cD69 .4ON coc-I co-69-1.0Lr).0a) cuq u••-■
CONc,^N.vs
.st.
CO
r-.'NCO
"1-,
'.o'
0
Ilico
irs tri.CV69 Cr■1.4 CV69-C'49-0 CD0 rn T..S.
0
*t
C)c)c)c)c)c)c)c)c).4-9.49-0 0 49 CD 0 49 C)CD
O'
CD
czi CD
c:5'
CDc5 CD
O'C)C)CIS Le)C)
U)
C)
'4'
'.O
CO C)0
C4C...) 0 CO N,'cej 4',.. C...7 4-9--69-CV 49-N-I4549--69CE-1
0C
cti5-■a)4-;gP.CO
0
0,..-■
0
n...1ti.)
......,,..)aj,-1
,a)
,--,.
a)zP...-4
.czt
,x
°0
.4
ctia,
00,..,4.
;_,
;''CU›,
vi8
0
4:1,--,•-•
;••1.a.)al
.cs01.,.I-.I-.
CI(/..,4017.,
.00
0°..'I'
0
al
"a";
CI)
6.
g:);..,a0 a 00.1 CU)i:el tZ04
0 .
l""i
.rq .no •..:1.,•in •qo •N ■co •or)
21
.-
15278.003
APPENDIX A
MINNESOTAMPH
DEPARTMENTorHEALTH
Health Risk Assessment Unit
625 Robert St. N, P.O. Box 64975
St. Paul, MN 55164-0975
www.health.state.mn.us
At a Glance...
Manganese is...
•Found naturally in water, food,
air, and soil.
•Required by our bodies in
small amounts to maintain
health.
Manganese enters your
body mainly from...
•Drinking water
•Food including formula or
breast milk (for infants)
Health risks from too much
manganese in drinking
water...
•Effects on learning and
behavior for infants and young
children
Formula-fed infants are at
greatest risk from
manganese in drinking
water because...
•They may get too much
manganese in their bodies
from the drinking water used
to mix formula.
Manganese in Drinking Water
Manganese is found in drinking water throughout Minnesota. New
information suggests that too much manganese from drinking water
may not be good for our health. This information sheet discusses
manganese in drinking water and its possible health effects.
What is manganese?
Manganese is an element that occurs naturally in drinking water across
Minnesota. Our bodies require small amounts of manganese to maintain
health. Adults and children get enough manganese from the foods we eat.
Infants and children younger than one year old get enough manganese from
•breast-milk, food or formula.
What are the health effects from manganese?
Even though our bodies need some manganese, too much manganese from
drinking water may be harmful. New research shows that too much
manganese in drinking water may affect learning and behavior in infants and
young children. Health effects in children will not usually be obvious and
nave only been measured in large studies of school-aged children.
Where is manganese found in Minnesota and how do I know if it
is in my drinking water?
Manganese is found in groundwater throughout Minnesota because it is
naturally present in Minnesota rocks and soils. Levels in groundwater do not
change over time. Manganese in water may stain clothing and plumbing.
Public water supplies may test their water for manganese. People with private
wells need to have a laboratory test their well water. Bottled water could
contain manganese and should not be considered safer than tap water. The
only way to know if manganese is present at levels of health concern is to test
your water.
•To test your water, identify a laboratory that can test for manganese
visit: littp://www.health.state.mn.us/labsearch
o If you get your drinking water from a public utility, call them to find
out if they have tested for manganese and whether it has been found
at levels above MDH guidance values.
Thr more information:
_ADH Health Risk Assessment Unit
Phone: (651) 201-4827
June 2012
E -mail: healthsisk@state.mn.us
Manganese in Drinking Water/English
Manganese in Drinking Water — Page 2
What is the MDH guidance value for manganese in drinking
water?
, The current guidance value for manganese in drinking water is 100 parts per
billion (ppb) for formula-fed infants and infants that drink tap water. The
manganese guidance value for children and adults (including nursing mothers)
is 300 ppb. For more information about MDH manganese guidance, visit:
http://www.healthstate.mn.us/divs/eh/risk/guidance/m/manRanese.html.
Why is the MDH manganese guidance value for infants different
from the value for children and adults?
Infants are at greater risk from manganese in drinking water than children and
adults because:
•their brains are developing rapidly,
•they absorb more manganese and are less able to remove manganese
from their bodies, and
•they drink more water and eat more food based on body weight.
Formula-fed infants get enough manganese from formula to meet their dietary
needs. However, they may get too much manganese (above the recommended
amount for nutrition) in their bodies when formula is mixed with water that
contains manganese.
Breast-milk is best for infants and it contains healthy amounts of manganese.
According to the Institute of Medicine, breast-milk, food and formula should
be the only sources of manganese for newborns and infants younger than one-
year-old.
How do I know if I need to filter my drinking water to remove
manganese?
If infants will be regularly drinking formula mixed with tap water or plain tap
water, use a filter if manganese is detected above 100 ppb. If only children
and adults will be drinking tap water, filter the water if manganese is detected
above 300 ppb.
Carbon filters (that may also contain an ion exchange resin) used in common
pitcher or faucet filter systems (found at grocery and home stores) can remove
approximately 50 percent of manganese from drinking water. To identify a
filter that may remove more manganese from water, visit:
http://www.health.state.mmus/divsieh/water/factsheetkom/pou.html.
Manganese in drinking
water is safe for everyone
if...
•The level of manganese is
lower than 100 ppb.
You can reduce manganese
in your drinking water by...
•Testing your drinking water to
find out how much manganese
it contains.
•Filtering your drinking water
using a proper filter..
You can get more
information about
manganese at ...
•MDH manganese water
guidance:
http://www.health.state.mn.us/
divsiehirisk/guidance/gw/man
ganese.html
•Find a lab to test your water
for manganese:
http://wmv.health.state.mn.ust
labsearch
•Find a filter:
http://www.health.state.mn.us/
divsieh/water/factsheet/com/
pou.html
For more information:
1VIDH Health Risk Assessment Unit
Phone: (651) 201-4827
E-mail: health.risk@state.mn.us
June 2012
Manganese in Drinking Water/English
Clo)
CIDClg)
tkf0
01)
o f=1 cs1;=1
C?0
Colt CI
zu "It 0
(21
0
tit 1.)
0.)
"s■==>
0F=I
up) g
F=I
HISTORIES OF GUIDELINE DEVELOPMENT FOR THE FOURTH EDITION
12. Chemical fact sheets
12.1 Chemical contaminants in drinking-water
Manganese
History of guideline development
The 1958. WI-I0 International Standards for Drinking-water suggested that
concentrations of manganese greater than 0.5 mg/I would markedly impair the potability
of the water. The 1963 and 1971 International Standards retained this value as a
maximum allowable or permissible concentration. In the first edition of the Guidelines
for Drinking -water Quality, published in 1984, a guideline value of 0.1 mg/1 was
established for manganese, based on its staining properties. The 1993 Guidelines
concluded that although no single study is suitable for use in calculating a guideline value,
the weight of evidence from actual daily intake and toxicity studies in laboratory animals
given manganese in drinking-water supports the view that a provisional health-based
guideline value of 0.5 mg/1 should be adequate to protect public health. It was also noted
that concentrations below 0.1 mg/I are usually acceptable to consumers, although this
may vary with local circumstances. The third edition of the Guidelines, published in 2004,
established a guideline value of 0.4 mg/1 for manganese. The fourth edition of the
Guidelines, published in 2011, concluded that as the calculated health-based value is well
above concentrations of manganese normally found in drinking-water, it was not
necessary to derive a formal guideline value.
Source: http://www.vvho.int/water_sanitation health/dwq/chemicals/manganese/en/
World Health Organization 2013
Public Drinking Water Program
Minnesota Department of Health
The ate's Role in Administering end Enforcing the Safe Drinking Water Act
In Mimiesota, we have 4 safe, re.liable, and affordable supply of drinking water that is neeessary for health,
productivity, and our entire .standard of living. But sale drinking water is no-4'..lecident. It requires the efforts, and
teann,vork, of 'natty people—including government officials, water utility operators, and the puhlie—to make It
possibe to maintain the confidence We havein the water from our tapS,
Since 1977, the Minnesota Department in fflealth (Mb:V) has carried out the provisions of the federal Safe Drinking
Water Act (SDWA) in Minnesota. En easuring a safe drinking water supply, the Drinking Water - Program
• at MD1.1 administers and enforces the SD WA to the nearly 10,000 public water supplies in Minnesota.
Public Water Supplies
A Public Water Supply is -a water system which provides
drinking water to persons other than the supplier of the
water.
,VInre than 75 percent of Minnesotans get their primary
source of drinking water from a public supplier, Even
.those who have private wells in their home Val pe!), on
public suppliers for their drinkeng water at school, wr)rk,
church, or while traveling through the vtare.
Types of Public Water Supply Systems
There are many types of public water supplies, the most
prom inert being a municipal system, which is operated by a Qiiy
to provide water to its citizens, However, mobile home parks
and apaltment complexes may have their own water supply
system for their residents,
In addition to systans that serve residential populations, many
public supplies exist to provide water to peopleoutsidethehoine,
such as in their schools or businesses.
Another typo &public water supp:y is a transient system, such
as a resort or restaurant. Because transient systems serve a
constantly changing group of people, they are monitored only
for contaminants that pose art immediate health risk, such as
bacteria and nitrate.
The other public water supplies—those that provide water
to residents, students, or workers—are monitoreC for
contaminants that may cause problems if consumed over a
long period of time as well as those that may create
immediate health risks. .
Treatment of Drinking Water
The treatment and distribution of water to
CORMICTS is the responsibility of the individual
public water suppliers.
Threats to drinking water can come from a variety
ofplaces. Although pol lution from society is the most
obvious, there are also a number of naturally
occurring materials—ranging from bacteria and
viruses to metals to radioactive elements such as
radium tad fadon—presont in the enyironineat that
can-contaminate water sources.
The type of treatment needed for a water supply
depends on a variety offactors, including the
source oft-he water.
Surface water sources such as rivers and ::akes,.which
are more susceptible to.Contarn inatio a from. animal
or human activities -, require More complicated
treatment. In Minnesota, a LI surface water suPp I lets
are required to Inoluclefilh'ation and disinfection in
their treatment process as final barriers of defense
against contam i nan Is.
Groundwater in some ways is more insulated
from environmental hazards. Also, the ground
can serve as a natural filter as water percolates
through it to recharge an aquifer. Groundwater
can have its own problems, however; it may
contain more nitrates from ,fertilizers and
pesticides as well as radioactive elements that
occur naturally in the ground,
The Minnesota Department of Health Drinking Water Program
The Minnesota Department et-Health stresses assistance and working with water suppliers to assure compliance
with SDWA standards, although enforcement through fines and administrative penalty orders can be used
when necessary.
Major functions oftheMDH Drinking Water Program include:
Mnuitoriug Drinking Water Quality, which involves the celleetion and analyses or v,inter samples m
determine &disease-causing organisms and toxic chemicals are present, In the event that unaccepta7fle ievels •
'of contamination are found, MDLIworks with the supplier to alert the publicand to take corrective action,
EerforniugSanitaiy Surmys, on ,site inspection s of a water system 's facilities and operation.
Establishing Construction &audards t which_ are setfor any kind of water tfeatment project. MINTS.p Ian
review process ensures conformity with design standards that will enable water systems to meet and remain •in compliance with current and future SI) WA regulations,
Monitoring: Raw Often?
MDFIni ay test each public water supply for up to 118 different contaminants, The frequency of testing ranges from
monthly to once every nine years, and not all systems are tested for all contaminants. A testing schedule is tailored
for each system, based all its vulnerability to various types of contamination.
Factors that affect the .testing schedule for a
given system include potential.
contamination source.s, whether the
system uses wells or surface water, the depth
ofthe wells, geology, and past test results for
that system.
MDH coordinates with other state agencies to determine
what types of contaminants a particular water system May
be susceptible' to, MD14 has a working relationship with the
M innesota Pollution Control Agency and their programs which
relate to industrial contamination of water supplies. A similar
arrangement exists between MDFf and the Minnesota
Depamnem of -Agriculture concerning agricultural chemicals.
Such tiexihility in assessing individual
systems is both more cost effective as well
as just plain more effective.
Monitoring water quality, performing inspections, and establishing design criteria are among the ways MD1-1 works
to ensure the safety of drinking water from public suppliers In Minnesota. troi:vever, ills critical that both die
Minnesota Department of Health and individual public water suppliers remain vigilant in their work to nuthuain
a reliable suppl_v ofsafe drinking water to the residents oPlinnesota.
For a complete list of regulated contaminants and their maximum contaminant levels,
contact the Minnesota Department of Health Drinking Water Program at 651-201-4700.
Minneso re -Department offlealth
625 North Robert Street, P. 0. Box 64975
St. Paul ; Minnesota 55164-0975
http:/Avww.health.state.mn .usfdivsiehlwaier
September 2005
IC 141-0201
APPENDIX B
1.
TKDA
441 Cedm-Stred:5ult61566
SOO-NIA, MN WO
6Si:292.4400
tkdo.coni
Manganese Sampling Plan
Brooklyn Center, MN
1.Collect samples from the wells currently in operation—Wells 6 and 9. Existing data for
these wells indicate an average manganese concentration of 0.18 mg/L in Well 6 and
0.36 mg/L in Well 9.
2.Collect samples at routine testing locations throughout the distribution system plus two
additional locations. The manganese concentration in the distribution system is
anticipated to be lower than 0.3 mg/L based on the well operation. The manganese
testing throughout the distribution system will occur at the following locations:
a.City Garage, 6844 Shingle Creek Parkwayb.Fair Oaks Elementary, 5600 65 th Ave. N
c.Garden City Elementary, 3501 65 th Ave. Nd.Northport School, 5421 Brooklyn Blvd.
e.Earle Brown School, 1500 59 th Ave. Nf.Evergreen Elementary, 7020 Dupont Ave. N
g.City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkwayh.Caribou Coffee, 3900 Lake Breeze Ave.
i.West Fire Station, 6250 Brooklyn Blvd.j.CEAP, 7051 Brooklyn Blvd.
k. Christy's Auto, 5300 Dupont Ave. N
1, Odyssey School, 6201 Noble Ave. N
m.Tom Steffen, 7031 France Ave. N
n.William Vetter, 6736 Camden Aye. N
o.Nicholas Boehlke, 6110 Regent Ave. N
p.Joe Rupp, 5345 Newton Ave. N
q. Residential Location, 4020 51s t Ave.
3.Use the following procedure to collect samples:
a. Use unsoftened, unfiltered spigot only. Prior to taking the sample, run water until
the system chlorine residual has been met (0.8 ppm to 1.5 ppm). Refer to Pace
Analytical, PROCEDURE FOR COLLECTING WATER SAMPLES. Manganese
samples DO NOT require refrigeration.
4.Switch well operation to Wells 2, 4, and 7. Existing data for these wells indicate an
average manganese concentration of 0.43 mg/L in Well 2, 0.54 mg/L in Well 4, and 0.45
mg/L in Well 7.
5. After wells have been running for a week, collect samples from each well and from
locations in the distribution system listed in Step 2. The manganese concentration in the
distribution system is anticipated to be higher than 0.3 mg/L based on the well operation.
An employee owned company promoting affirmative action and equal opportunity
Manganese Action Plan Page 2 2/21/2013
6.Collect samples from Wells 3, 5, 8, and 10 as the City uses them normally. Allow well to
run for several days before collecting sample. These samples will be used to verify
existing data which indicate a manganese concentration of 0.36 mg/L in Well 3, 0.36
mg/L in Well 5, 0.42 mg/L in Well 8, and 0.39 mg/L in Well 10.
7.Evaluate the data and develop a well operating procedure that limits the concentration of
manganese in the distribution system.
Manganese samples will be collected by City personnel and tested by Pace Analytical
Laboratories.
•ME-H1-1111111p_ Fr_N411
cm
.. ..
1 — Well9
Hi I litt?.",,mai AWelli10-7=1.:=/We 1;4,
We 13 4II III P.— /DJWater, 11111Well Tower2
Well 5l
Kcer
. \
I I
',1)---\--
41:
n-L-31=,---/C C.,--1/
•----1,T -4,,'1::;:.''':41,41r.. „ --,.
1_15 r4 ,17W:*(7,=___9 LLL., .. • ' U1 417::;==i
i
..1aL-11.e.il WI III i ''',-Lrrjr,'"'"
_ Zp,',1_111T15,T7L1 : , . -'--..„.,:,■---„■ IliiT,-, 4,, I AtIJILL
is,',./• 01=FITIFIT,,,
gi 6._ j_itjL__L
'-'f-, \--I 1'1,11,1,11,1,1111 11,Ei _,_-.3 ,-,1a-----," x•. Ltill , i I , lii 1 AA
E=.11
5-dTower.1'
HI t8ft
tztjUS.- 1
Lilt"
)4,
21314
—
'
' /
ir ,.,, '1,11 i alir3 Li_l_clgi-,=',..,== LL,c/,,. i.1 f \I iII' I,--r.,_un, 1 .•,3=4 '4
. . .
41--,,--z t
,F-0-i ,-,,-----,-,--,--,-R--, t-R-4'rl I, '171 ,--T1'4P I ‘ \•tr---')1
fP 1kTwin'WA
—Eag:Age-e'
8 inn
h•.• UTfTJI III
& if
--C
11/
e--.----7--
""->100
LA,:\,,,y4VI/rajer t=.
N1-7, Tower 3 ILT_m_„
Legend
Residential (R1) Testing Location
Public Testing Locations
Low Flow Testing Locations
1.CEAP Site - 7051 Brooklyn Blvd
2.Tom Steffen -7031 France Ave N
3.Public Works Facility - 6844 Shingle
Creek Pkwy
4.Evergreen School - 7020 Dupont Ave N
5. William Vetter - 6736 Camden Ave N
6.Earle Brown School -1500 59th Ave N
7.City Hall - 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy
8.Garden City School - 3501 65th Ave N
9.West Fire Station -6500 Dupont Ave N
10.Odyssey School - 6201 Noble Ave N
11.Nicholas Boehlke -6110 Regent Ave N
12.Fair Oaks School -5600 65th Ave N
13.4020 51st Ave N
14.Caribou Coffee -3900 Lakebreeze Ave
15.Northport School - 5421 Brooklyn Blvd
16.Joe Rupp -5345 Newton Ave N
17.Christy's Auto -5300 Dupont Ave N
17110047.1W
Public Works Department
February 20, 2013Water Testing Location Map
u rt6ti-,tg;!
^4hlulaVp„ml-
Manganese Sampling Results
Mn Concentration, mg/L
TEST DATES
Sc,
r -1i's '
1.2c.,
‘-'
t
C Y)
2,,
'-'
c , '
1,2c,
‘- 106A
t - -0c,
r -I
43
; i ')
g._
'F.4c Z1
A
O'CD
C 1' V:. < "
gCD
eq
) =e ,
0
e q
c,
PCD
C\<T■
c.
P0
C\cr 'q'c.
p,,,,
"
,>)
PCD
Cq
PCD
C\R
P0
C\cA,>,
c,
",>. )„.. , '
P0
C\°`C'NI-] -
P0
Cq
E
c.' ' •Nt.
to
1 udi tV)H il+ - "1 J0 I ; .2 3 `I4
T
E
S
T
L
0
C
A
T
I
0
N
Well 2 0.24 0.42 0.47 0.48 0.48
Well 3 0.23 0.45 0.32 0.38 0.38
Well 4 0.23 0.54 0.55 0.59 0.59
Well 5 0.25 0.33 0.35 0.41 0.41 0.41
Well 6 0.06 0.15 0.18 0.22 0.22 0.230.23 0.22 0.20 0.23 0.22
Well 7 0.28 0.45 0.40 0.44 0.44 0.43
Well 8 0.33 0.39 0.48 0.47 0.47
Well 9 0.38 0.36 0.43 0.41 0.43 0.42
Well 10 0.38 0.39 0.43 0.41
1 CEAP Site - 7051 Brooklyn Blvd.0.32 0.46 0.40 0.31 0.310.31 0.26 0.32
2 Tom Steffen - 7031 France 0.32 0.47 0.40 0.340.33 0.33 0.29 0.34
3 PW Facility - 6844 Sh Crk. Pkwy 0.31 0.490.39 0.26 0.270.23 0.30 0.33
4 Evergreen School - 7020 Dupont 0.31 0.490.39 0.35 0.34 0.32 0.31 0.33
5 William Vetter - 6736 Camden 0.33 0.49 0.40 0.34 0.32 0.31 0.29 0.33
Earle Brown School - 1500-59th (treated)0.004 0.006 0.044 0.005 0.004 0.005 0.007 0.19
6A Earle Brown School - 1500-59th (raw)0.25 0.25 0.26 0.24 0.34
7 City Hall - 6301 Sh Crk. Pkwy 0.32 0.460.40 0.26 0.26 0.3 0.23 0.36
8 Garden City School - 3501-65th 0.32 0.48 0.39 0.29 0.30.3 0.27 0.35
9 West Fite Station - 6250 Brooklyn Blvd -0.32 0.40 0.29 0.26 0.28 0.27 0.34
10 Odyssey School - 6201 .Noble 0.34 0.48 0.40 0.31 0.3 0.28 0.28 0.36
11 Nicholas Boehlke - 6110 Regent 0.32 0.46 0.39 03 0.25 0.28 0.26 0.30
12 Fair Oaks School - 5600-65th 0.32 0.46 0.38 0.3 0.3 0.29 0.29 0.32
13 Kathy & Tom Kuusisto - 4020-51st 0.46 0.54 0.34 0.3 0.3 0.30 0.31
13A Hydrant -4020 - 51st 0.67 0.50 0.3 0.3 0.30
14 Caribou Coffee -3900 Lakebreeze 0.35 0.42 0.39 0.35 0.32 0.29 0.30 0.31
15 Northport School - 5421 Brooklyn Blvd 0.41 0.48 0.470.36 0.31 0.3 0.29 0.30
16 Joe Rupp - 5345 Newton 0.36 0.330.33 0.37 0.29 0.26 0.31 0.30
17 Christy's Auto - 5300 Dupont 0.31 0.48 0.39 0.290.31 0.28 0.28 0.31
oa)Aa)
5532 Logan 0.49 0.26 0.24 0.29
East Firestation 0.31 0.32 0.23
5818 Drew (R.aw)0.28 0.27
5818 Drew (Filtered)0.26
6013 Halifax 0.31
6401 Brooklyn Dr (Softened)0.005
5323 Dupont Ave 0.31
Average in Distribution System 0.35 0.460.40 0.31 0.29 0.29 0.28 0.32
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
Site1,10015
i p Lit
F-7
BROOKLYN CENTER V ESO1 A
A GREAT PLACE TO START. A GREAT PLACE TO STAY
OCIUTEnft
WElEril
LAM —
doingsu.sluess
i.RESIDENT
HELP:
CENTER
your cityGOVERNMENT SERVICES Dal aroundFACILITIES THE COMMUNITY
Ways To Pay Vem Li:
eLitillly Billing
Aulumolic Wily Oil. Paymonl
Eraorgimey Water Sowoe •
8orvico
NeW Rf,t Informalloi
Rec,gliug
Smut 8aciiups
k-'1■Le. !Ai 8imor Raia
infatuation
OiWt/r Repoi
S^aer 111:n3ItIclions
Vd'aya to Savo Wetor
Notify City
Report Co nem, ft-aback-
Notified
Stun Up far Upda*.us Aloft
It °ailment •Center
Ceuricii, Lily Cad*, Newsiattur
ext pits rnSriCCtiCiTig
eParets, App 4AiM.
Real Estate Locator
Citcatorvalai Laud, tiortc
Frequently &Iced
Fir cl'e.pur All -Wilr$
Employann ant
FiCautrontJc 4llsiin9a
141-1-5-leXø rey Online
FiEcteten Cl3. Utilily 81
Brooklyn Center, MN - Official Website - Water Sewer Rate Information Page 1 of 2
8 Caue5 E.lit 1 Yet tuattlict rieurs5iturftroannr.a 5 ns;5ruref.55 Fb.-at fgnirea 1/1 Itr in; 511.-Yle taKre-I nzte nk7ISSICII
11Vater & Sewer Rath Information
Water, sunlielse-vcc,mi l ti■zhts and racycl'ccd- ides in)WIkd quaricrly_ rcig bib are uone,-alod linos a month,pircpoly is sell tab tick paid ty hair alO ON sutjaCt to a Nance ctorgac4 10",4 ontw ottslandirtg araounl„ ct 83.20, vsilicheiir is
eisalor. Oar:twitUtg bi Erg certillW .9roon,i tEa5E E5 opepici Erg-way, A cotiill.mllen 131.-?-01014 le all llACWIJ
ltelt Itenefer
29t 211 .n City POLVIca I:111;110g elkt jankiar:/ 1, 10t3.11ased Zit hese rat, rninirutoo bill (orr...irteli0115551111tSb $187.12Fce quarter et 7562 it yea qs:olify for the seller sewer rate, TI --ieso rtlrinisra Vlaten5 n5 Water thaege
OEICIU the- WEtlef.
Water Utility [Resolution 2012-159)
ReAlentia ACCoUnts
WsIer ITIENTB D.5 Mad by the PtiPlin LI F tw41; prier t IFn Pilat.44thal-da. pc.:KOP a resdlogv4iba esitoalda-bsd
fl p■o7:isag_e-
I3a St,87-7 nauly &argil
1^,,atsit Cense rwercin RatasC le1.)800 $1,22 pc:ell:Ca okra
21 ,tti.0 tb 60,880 1.80 par 1,03e GAocit-
til,CCO and granter 1..--`k per -IMO tialsas
Meter Purchase Fe.e
so,C0 — tre,hoted lirsi b nut 0.1*-1; this ic c titoct en fit'a( NH* lye Mrp a11Itic)
Commercial Accounts
Wale' metors ic,:rnineretal r_exvtirlit era read at tlE. If Eau', tklsec rll-Ildontiirapters tif :ha Public UiIc priwM ttnimmc bPirc Isrcetlineecial texco.mts and basrdl cot met:7
reitir_sizelluctie9 trinjtcum Quarterly Cnarde /SI
1 22 5i1
26.93
2 e6
11270
4 dats.98
424.70
8 821-18
1C84,8,,
Wasech,-gges tor cm:raw:1.11 ac4atin'a are $1,05 Fig 1,e9i) salloas ■;4sed,
Sanitary Sewer Utility ilReselut(On 2012-160)
snrit:aiyiev,iw bled-au a tletten tof fa5thtuful otaesnia A sanbr irda a mailankite: tko,:o who rgiaktain.) 3IIy f rtnanteslcianfal aci-duailla is bawl untsal ans uf wator vatic! ;filing his ms:micir.
■91Vra Feffilly
ApnrialcrSenior rate
va 47
trit*8-,O75
Non.(tiistaAlist $2-R4ro4 l,to.
view senior
stotru Drainage LIthhhty(Resolution 2012-161)
Stem drainage taus are bill o fbt feu, based pi -Ici? mcrrtrctlthn2ltcu clamors arcl per mierDr ncorosiiertita arid multipb tarnlyres4sntlal.
Neverty Type _ tone
Ro5idential, per Sot:Saila. 4,45
O $57,23
Ct.:1147.6es airel Q011GrInfae$ $14.45
Penis $20-9*
http:111-vmv.ci.brooklyn-eenter.ran_ustindex.aspx?NID----526 3.0/9013
O "O ,F-.I
.,0 EP di 74 a t* Hi
.t.1 ..-4 i-i "CI (11
'0 0, q:-. 4-4 t4zo 0
g 01 ,W 0 ...o .-.. 114 g LC
4 v.: IA4.< H 001.1 VI 0 2 i —8 8 ',-=,' 0 g
i
g 4 b,..,c) --' WI ,i0 .4=i
-, VI 0 g g▪....- ,..,0 g0-r.•:4
..r4 w Tf)
w . .
n.
•
.. 45 U 9
V V
2 g .,,..) ,,,_ kr: 4---)(z om, ,,:z, --6- (-4 (---c-.,t---„'4_ si C----: 0 2'1 Gs 64e• '.-i OS trF
9
•
Hi .4 i. -r4 Ert.-4 ,--4-
4 r-f''' L.-!''
Fi g ed} ggL. - g '''' ra 2 aa,M ‘.
74 'al E 2 11, ,.z k.,do t6,
o p, o kv L.) -clp sa ko:...
g 0 .
P.,
ti
'4 71 , t-1 ,rq -z
0 ,0 I.1 g - tu 1.=-,
a.00 0 1
-44 e." ,61 ,o0 'az=4 c-. 1:4
.kt.).• -g ,.. 'pP. 1: P k:-.P ntf ?; m a a, Pi ,;.,-1,,5.: izi0
I. 0 MI r.; it g g g (75 2 f-L, 0
tet 4-,
zv.4
ozr c".1 Hi.0Hikr:
Er:1,
kr:
4,1
"?.0 0▪0 0 0
tI3
TA.
-1.50..
0
'*.0in a •44, w g>1 ..00 Z _
r."..r Cel CI ,,,, 4,
1,_ 4,. ,.. Cil
l-■ `..-' Of "
D. ,
';', .c. R c..* k'.' 84).a \-• Atf, la .v., 0 /4—... 4:4",
t , ‘'-' Q 2 v .--, -
1--- 0 v'S 4,1CD ti4L1 . n „..,.., 4., .9. ril xi t-- _L4
g
2 2s5
.--Q —J.._.., 0
. _..,- g
r.)
E4 ....,..
a) -,
g
1, 0
Z >,.
• 0. ;=1-. •0 Ai tl 1) PI-. a,e. t-j VI a 0 tt ,, In 0-f.-1 ... 0 AL1 -X. ' . ffI -
N.
tr, 0 —.. ,73. 0. •—■ Leitn1.0 'F.- ‘° in ,S,'0' !.. 1-'f"a "o o 0 1-: r-,o o ,n o o a a 67 et: a.,0-,.=. ,---, ,-I lal t—, I-, 0t aN Cr, 0,
City Of Crystal, Mti -- 2013 Crystal Utility Rates Pagel of 1
CITY OF
'ic*P fn,SrAL RYS TAL, MN
April I, 2011
So4
Print friendly vomion CiniCh Links for ResidentS eaSOnni Highlights Quitlu Links I rYr g the t et t
2018 Crystal Utility Rotas
Utility Billing
Tne city hls for wabPr, $-44-itary MiQr, eMrti dr.004Q, stf0.4 ttt erd recIrtg sori'i m.iIIjci is done tu; ai ymisvath
one third cf the eft), hIled each month. The month ole custarnees Wits, Nil Fa deletM nod by her locution In tee ey. Ctivorw$
OF/ t84$10(MtPct PA up al ao(4-mt griq o4s'krrw4 germ err mu A Cen4ad fiMy bllinci (0, DITalGe
fir a Vaal bit.
Pay teem Is nity he in ode in pemon ulGityl-tal, by mart ir. drop boxes al City H811,4141 LbuaLos Oriv,i5nd the Corm -wiry Conter,
48CC Dori es Brio. cc by au to malc prunient pion.
Cu$10Mer$ Who Op 141 ice th putoma pa." Kis thrgugh trectnAliz.trol tranafer form their cheCkirc or
smings account, They ealinue It raeofve a trinity hill will &onto inforirralion, iko9 arnamt due and the dated withdrotNti. Funds
vrittkitarri ito tr, the checking Ft $..;:vinga.attgunt on the waled date. Cu5ton -rersenn:1 in the anion:at:: payirmt
pturjttkrguulurrunrcirseni icem ancncupe witinhaw from parlideation at myth-sc.:1y notifying te hifIng department in
wit rig.
lidiy Ming coltact Intimation!
Uhlly ElAirtg
City of errItal
4141 Co.rLan WA,- North
Cryz-tai, WN.65422-15gd
FitOrt; 703-531-111+R
Residential Utility Chergcs milled Quarterly
Utility rater. are reotwKol anritaSy and set to provide the rundng neodad Ictfle opomtioa, rnainenance str4 p4 irrtroVierxertt ■L)
Put MIN sys:terfs
illater s■-ctf ea charco - _ _i 11,34.0t1 I
kfirnete4 Stale lisfatEx-__TE,sffnea Fes Itsf.sb - —1
Ikt_Mr_col]l_ _2 on Mon: _iTier#1: 0 010 eras__ -I 34.05, par wit. ______ATILI-02: 31 ,060 tolls Ip4.45 per orik 1
forila; Over 61 wits [34,85 per unit
anhay semnareharg_q____3 _ ._. , _ . _ l(Str6-.00
Sar-iiah_Cod satiVoyee:ver charge 4
Man drainage 4 isi 3.80 1
Street fiehts 1------- F.S.'4.-2: -- - — 1
Recrliv 4 _ 03,0 - 1
Commercial Utility Charger:, Billed Cleartcrly
coines141,iodtrtAplo tr14R.01 w.itover4 ir:_votArer flirtaA.er Water niuttrt earl rite ntore vraWr OA 0 the nice and
nature of their cpereen5, They pay the *an) charge per unit of water used ; but have a larger ourahars if of water in Ti.a *1
sed Tier riZ, rlepOrlding at the Crzo oT tie if Weer fotor. They 04) pay a hiqher vaterferiiW •ftp.oridinq on the=
;heir-water meter, SeWCE chargee fire based en the [mount of water uted and bled at the rale ct 32.01 per unit of water...Cleric
rtl nua am billed .4t the raw *ft275 CC pet AOre ti.Me$ ti-in acteag tithe pavet -ty of et the of *-,e( .00 p&:-
ceulvelency factor.
I-Io nic
Alaeut Crystal
City Departamnts
City Government
City Nninhborhoods
Communiiy Genitor
Empl9yrnont Velontenring
Parks §, Recreation
Public Shfet
City Mp2rtrilents:
Administrat;mn
/VI:lotting
Community tielepmer. t
Finance
Fire
Public Worka,
Police
http://www.ei.crystal.musleity departments/2010 annual ittility_rates.html 4/16/2013
Minimum water charge $6A-3
1,000-10,000 gallons $4.73/1,000 gal
10,001-20,000 gallons S5.15/1,000 gal
More than 20,001 gallons and
irrigation
Commercial $4.8511,000 gal
Separate metered lawn irrigation $5.79/1,000 gal
State testing fee $0.53
Minimum sewer charge (includes
1,000 gallons)
Each additional 1,000 gallons $3.99
Treatment surcharge $0.46/1,000 gal
Winier sewer charges are based on actual water used during
December, Janifilf_14 February and March. Sumner sewer charges
are based on the previous winter's, average or actual water used,
whichever is lower.
Street Non-decorative $1.05
Lights
Decorative $1.50
'Water
Sewer
$6.01
S5.7911,000 gal
Utility Billing I City of Now Hope, Minnesota Page 1 of 2
eRa City of New Hope, Minnesota
4401 Xylon 'Avenue North
Now Hope, IvENI 55428
Telephone: 763-531-5100v
Website: www.ci.new-hope,trinus
Home I Departments / Public Works /Utilities / Utility Billing / Current Rates
Utility Billing
Current Utility Rates
In December 2012, the Now Hope City Council approved utility rates
for calendar year 2013:
Contact
Utility Billing
Phone: 763-592-6760*,
Email
Recycling The cily requireg by state and
county lavv, to provide a recycling
program for its residents. This
service is a utility service and evety
$3.55
1t tp://www.ci.new-hopc.mmusidepartnients/p ublicworkslu till tie sibil lingteurtent_rates.shtml 4/16/2013
RESOLUTION 2010-15
BEING A RESOLUTION SETTING RATES ON PUBLIC UTILITIES, INCLUDING SEWAGE
DISPOSAL, WATER SUPPLY, STORM SEWER AND REFUSE IN THE CITY OF COLUMBIA
HEIGHTS
WHEREAS Minnesota State Statue 1030,29 and related administrative rules issued 13y the Minnesota
Department of Revenue impose a mandate on Minnesota cities to implement water utility conservation
rates that discourage nonessential water use on or after January I, 2010, and;
WHEREAS,..the City of Columbia Heights bills utility charges on 8 quarterly basis, and;
WHEREAS underthis billing system, charges for water consumption periods beginning on or after
January I, 2010, are customarily determined and billed on or after April 1, 2010, and;
WHEREAS under this billing system, charges for all other utility types Avith billing periods Nairn-ling on
or after January 1, 2010, are also customarily determined and billed on or after April L 2010,
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbialloiglits, that
In accordance M.S: 1030.29, and with the Operating costs and rates to be paid by the City of Columbia
Heights to the Metropolitan Council .Environmental Services and the Minneapolis Water Department and
other primary vendors of the City's utility funds, the following rates shall be effective for all billings
rendered on or after April 1,2010:
I. Water Supply Conservation Rates:
Second tier rates established in section 2 below, apply as folbws:
A Residential
Second tier rate is for water use geater than 25,000 gallons/quarter.
A Nonresidential Less than 1 inch Meter
Second tier rate is for water use greater than 25,000 gallons/quarter.
Non residentiaLi inch Meter or lather
Second tier rate is for water use greater than 250,000 gallensiqUarter,
trricration Meters: The Second Tier rate applies to all water run through sprinkler meter
2. Water Supply Rates:
Customer Classification year_ 2010 2011 2012 2013 24114
Residential
Fixed ke $19.81 $21.39 $22.89 $23.58 $24.28
Tier IROte per 1000 Gallons $ 3,17 3.30 5 3A3 $ 3.53 $ 3.64
Tier 2 Rate per 1000 Gallons $ 3.96 $ 4.12 $ 4.28 5 4.41 $ 4.55
Water Meter Surcharge
Soli&
$ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3,00
Fixed Fee $14,71 $1629 :517.79 518:32 M7
Tier 1Rate per 1000 Gallons $ 3.17 $ 3.30 $ 3.43 S 3.53 $ 3.64
Tier 2 Rate per 1000 Gallons $ 396 $ 4.12 $ 4.28 S 4.41 $ 4.55
Water Meier Surcharge •$ 3.00 S 3.00 $ 3,00 5 3,00 $ 3.00
No -Residential
Fixed Fee $19.81 $21:39 £22,89 $23.58 $24.28
Tier 1Rate per 1000 Gallons 3.17 $ 3.30 5 3,43 5 3.53 $ 3.64
Tier 2 Rate per 1000 Gallons $ 3.96 S 4.12 $ 4,28 5 4:41 5 4.55
WATER
By meter sizeGilt
2012 WATER RATES
81-Monthly Billing
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
WATER
GALLONS
COST
PIPOt.h-MLI1JI-FAMILIRESID,ENTIAL
Minimum—
Tier 1
4,000
$235
per 1,000 gallons
Minimum
Use/Churge
4,000
$9.40
Minimum
Use/Charge
$7,35
per 1,000 gallons
Tier 1_
4,001- 70,000
Tier 2
greater than 20,000
$3.52
per 1,000 gallons
Tier 11.
Mini nlurn to 6,000
5.00 gallons X I1 of gallons X U of
finished units finished units
$2.35
er 1000 gallons per 1,000 gallons
Tier 2
All usage above 5,000
gallons X the IL of
finished units
$3,52
per 1,000 gallons
GALLONS
Minimum
Tier 1.
Monthly Billing
CONIN1ERCIALA INDUSTRIAL
WATER
COST
Minimum
Use/Chuige
Miriimurn
her 1 Tier 1
deteminted by meter
size see
TABLE 1- Water
determined by meter
size see
TABLE 1 -WATER
$2.35 $2.35
per 1,000 gallons per 1,000 gallons
[victor minimum
'Monthly Billing
IRRIGAnON
WATER . .
GALLONS . -
COST flu
Minimum
her 1
no
no
Tier 2
actual gallons used -
$3.57
per 1000 gallons
Tier 1
Mintitturem:ky,64ezersie
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Maithly
8 inch Monthly
MinimunlGallons
2,000
2,000
84:00000
13,000
76,000
40,000
80,000
ina 000
2012 Rate per
thousand
2.35
235
2.35
135
235
TVIIrrimum
. Ilse/Charge
4.70
4.70
• $ 0.ifd
30.55
61.10
94.00
MAIO
30080
Billing Period _
Monthly
Monthly__
Monthly
2.35
2,35
2.35
114inimum
Use/Charge
net
TABLE 1-WATER
Minimums by Meter Size
5/8 inch
3 Inch
4 Inch
6 Inch
determined by it of
finished units
determined by It of
finished units
11/2 inch
2 inch
Kos kw 4- Ii3,taar,tvan tifrp
UTILITY BILLING DIVISIONCITY OF BLOOMINGTON_ RATES 2012
APPENDIX E
Brooklyn Center, MN - Official Website - Manganese in Drinking Water Page 1 of 1
BROOKLYN CENTER tvi I N 11 ES 0 TA itt( ti t 4
A GREAT PLACE TO START. A GREAT PLACE TO STAY
RESIDENT 11017DO I?yaur.city .local around doing HELP I WANT TO:
GOVERNMENT SERVICES FACILITIES THE COMMUNITY BUSINESS CENTER
Search -I
You are here: Homes Your Government > Departments > PubffeWorgs > Public Uttlies > Drinking Waters Manganese in Drinidng Water
Manganese in Drinking Water
Safe Drinking Water StandardsThe City of Brooklyn Center's water supply is tested throughout the year toensure it meets all safe drinking water standards established by theEnvironmental Protection Agency and State of Minnesota. VVhile the city watermeets the safe drinking water regulations, new information is emerging that •raises concerns about -the effects that high levels of manganese may have onhumans, especially infants. While the City has taken steps to reduce the level ofmanganese in the water, households with infants less than one year old whereinfants consume formula made from tap water or drink tap water should followMinnesota Department of Health (MDF) recommendations to further reduceconsumption of manganese.
New State Guidelines for ManganeseThere is no federal or state regulation for concentrations of manganese indrinking water for health reasons. Manganese has traditionally been consideredan aesthetic issue, where high concenfrations could cause staining or tasteconsiderations. Manganese occurs naturally and can be found in rock, soil, air, food and in drinkingwater across Minnesota. Humans require small amounts of manganese to maintain health. While moreresearch is needed to define the effects of manganese on the human body, too much manganese mayaffect learning and behavior. Therefore, the Minnesota Department of Health issued guidance values formanganese in drinking water of 100 parts per billion (ppb) for formula-fed infants and -infants thatregularly drink tap water. The manganese guidance value for children and adults (including nursingmothers) is 300 ppb.
City Manganese Levels and ActionsThe City's average level of manganese in water is 380 ppb. After learning of the MDH health advisory,the City took immediate steps to reduce the levels of manganese in the water. Since several of the Citywells have lower manganese levels, the City is reviewing ways to reduce manganese levels in city waferby reducing the amount of water flowingfrom wells with elevated manganese. Other options are beingexplored such as the feasibility of changing other operational practices or building a water treatmentplant. City staff are monitoring the water quality and working with the MDH and other experts as moreInformation about manganese becomes availa le.
RecommendationsFor households where infants less than one year old will be regularly drinking formula mixed with tapwater or drinking plain tap water, the MDH health advisory recommends the following:
•Use a proper filter. Carbon filters (that may also contain an ion exchange resin) used in commonpitcher or faucet filter systems .(found at grocery and home stores) can remove approximately 50percent of manganese from drinking water. To identify a filter that may remove manganese fromwater, visit hiltafftwa.haan.stlat'esuvLesAkkarisielikratertiadshicorninottiNlyrok
•Use bottled water only if the bottled water has been tested for manganese. Otherwise bottled watershould not be considered safer than tap water.
•Consult with your physician if you have health questions.
•If residents use well water for drinking, the water should be tested for levels of manganese at anaccredited laboratory.
Manganese Information on ropri Websfte- Manganese in Drinking Water athttpiAwwheatate.nin.usders/eh/nskmninfosleUidf- Home Water I reatment Units: Point-of-Use Devices athtitaikkww.health.state.intimusldigsfehAttaterifactsheetkornipoulatrrti - Manganese: ttered Health Based Guidance tor Water athtio:BNam.heaNkstate.mn.usfdivdehrfrisideuidance/ciw/mangasese.hhTil.
Additional Resources- View NWCT Channel 12 Video at httielkeuvai.tytrelve.tvinewsinetassitentaspx?newsW1431E.riewsterni21020 - View Pubkc Information Advisory 01-02-2012 Regarding Manganese in Drinking Water
Water Reorts
Wetttld Proctiors
Corrsarrier Coddence Report
AubgcWr ueer
Resirtg
Water Una FlhistIrca
tiarecjazese ra Orating Wear
Notify the City
Report Concern,
Feedback
Be Notified
Sign Up for Updates &
Alerts
-
Document Center
Council, City Code,
Newsletter
Persnits & la/sections
operetta, Applications,
Handouts
Real Estate LATCakor
Commercial Land,
Homes
Ereguently Asked
_ Find Your Answers Hen
Employzaeat
Find Current Job
Openings
Register or Pay Online
Recreation Class, Utility
Bill
ContactMark HartfielWater UtilitySupervisor6301 Shingle CreekPkwy.Brooklyn Center,MN 55430
Ph:(763) 585-7100 ,P
HoursMonday - Friday8:00 am - 4:30 pm
HCVTIE Sitermp i Abautthe See i is=assibfrly i MSS iPilpf Pagel Email Page 1 Copyfightfictices I Intastest iTosnstate I Powered by CMcPkis
COMITACY US Gel Shingle CMekr Ptaky.iBrookhr. Center, MN 55430 l Ph: (753j: sso-nooT),
•
http://www.cityofbrooklyneenter.org/index.aspx?NID=962 5/13/2013
Icity or
BROOKLYN PUBLIC INFORMATION ADVISORY
CENTER
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430-2199
Phone 763.569.3300 Fax 763.569.3494
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Updated February 4, 2013 Contact: Mark Hartfiel
Water Utilities Supervisor
763.585.7100
CITY OFFICIALS TAKE STEPS TO ADDRESS EMERGING CONCERNS REGARDING MANGANESE
IN WATER
The City of Brooklyn Center's water supply is tested throughout the year to ensure it meets all safe
drinking water standards established by the Environmental Protection Agency and State of Minnesota.
While the city water meets the safe drinking water regulations, new information is emerging that raises
concerns about the effects that high levels of manganese may have on humans, especially infants.
While the City has taken steps to reduce the level of manganese in the water, households with infants
less than one year old where infants consume formula made from tap water or drink tap water should
follow Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) recommendations to further reduce consumption of
manganese.
There is no federal or state regulation for concentrations of manganese in drinking water for health
reasons. Manganese has traditionally been considered an aesthetic issue, where high concentrations
could cause staining or taste considerations. Manganese occurs naturally and can be found in rock,
soil, air, food and in drinking water across Minnesota. Humans require small amounts of manganese to
maintain health. While more research is needed to define the effects of manganese on the human
body, too much manganese may affect learning and behavior. Therefore, the Minnesota Department of
Health issued guidance values for manganese in drinking water of 100 parts per billion (ppb) for
formula-fed infants and infants that regularly drink tap water. The manganese guidance value for
children and adults (including nursing mothers) is 300 ppb.
The city's average level of manganese in water is 380 ppb. After learning of the MDH health advisory,
the City took immediate steps to reduce the levels of manganese in the water. According to Steve
Lillehaug, City Engineer/Public Works Director, "Since several of the City wells have lower manganese
levels, we can reduce the amount of water flowing from wells with elevated manganese, which may
reduce the level of Manganese below 300 ppb". Other ways to reduce manganese are being explored
including changing other operational practices and the feasibility of building a water treatment plant.
City staff will continue to monitor the water quality and work with the MDH and other experts as more
information about manganese becomes available.
For households where infants less than one year old will be regularly drinking formula mixed with tap
water or drinking plain tap water, the MDH health advisory recommends the following:
0 Use a proper filter. Carbon filters (that may also contain an ion exchange resin) used in common
pitcher or faucet filter systems (found at grocery and home stores) can remove approximately
50 percent of manganese from drinking water. To identify a filter that may remove manganese
from water, visit http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/waterfiactsheet/com/pou.html.
•Use bottled water only if the bottled water has been tested for manganese. Otherwise bottled
water should not be considered safer than tap water.
•Consult with your physician if you have health questions.
* For nursing mothers, breast-milk is considered best for infants and it contains healthy amounts of
manganese.
If residents use well water for drinking, the water should be tested for levels of manganese at an
accredited laboratory.
More information about manganese is available on the MDH website:
•Manganese in Drinking Water at
htp://www.heatksta1emn
o Water Treatment Units: Point-of-Use Devices at
http://www.health.state_mn.usidivslehAvatert1adsheeticomipou.htrn1
o Manganese: Tiered Health Based Guidance for Water at
http://www.health_state.mn.usidivsleh/riskiquidanceiciw/manganese.hlml.
Jy fnformation about.Manattese in Brooklyn Center's Drinking Wate r
Is manganese (Mn) in drinking water regulated by law?
6 The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates contaminants in public water systems by:
0 Primary Standards—Enforceable—Limits concentrations to protect human health
O Secondary Standards—Non-Enforceable—Guidelines for aesthetic reasons
o Manganese has a secondary standard of 0.05 mg/L because it can cause black staining, a
bitter metallic taste, and water to be black or brown in color
_4re there any potential health qNcts from manganese? Yes
0 Health organizations advise that consuming high concentrations of manganese may cause
neurological effects especially in infants under i-year-old.
Are there guidance values established to avoid potential health risks?
6 Several organizations have established guidance values:
o EPA 0.3 mgit.
o World Health Organization 0.4 mg/L (informally)
o Minnesota Dep a rtrn en t of Health ( MDH),03 mg/L for children and adults
0.1 for infants under 1-year-old
O Public water supplies are not required by law to comply with the health risk guidance values.
•IVIDH provides this information to the local water producers to warn of possible health risk
The advisory is not based on conclusive studies and is meant to provIde guidance only. These
guidance values are not enforced by the EPA or mra
What Ls' the typical MI concentration in Brooklyn Center's water supply? ,„ 0,35 tngil,
•The City of Brooklyn Center currently does not have a water treatment plant. The City's water
is supplied by several wells, most of which have high concentrations of manganese, The City's
water supply is not in violation of any enforceable drinking water regulations. In other words,
the water is in compliance with all primary standards set by the EPA.
Is the City taking actiOn tO control Aln in the drinking water ,supply? Yes
•The City is adjusting the operation of the wells which is expected to lower the concentration to
about 0.28 mg/L. This concentration is less than the health risk value for children and adults,
O The City is evaluating other feasible strategies to reduce manganese in the drinking water (e,g.
building a water treatment plant)
Are there precautions that can he taken at home? Yes
•Families with formula-fed infants under 1-year-o4 may want tc. use bottled water or instal a
point-of-use treatment device in their home_ Please consult your physician for further
information.
*Information about point-of-use devices can be found at the following webs,te:
htto://www.health.state.mn.usidivsiehiwaterifactsheet/com/pou.html
City of Brooklyn Center Public Works Department January 2013
o: .4 g go .r. d . 4.) 1,,t)o .0 ....,_ o
)--. ++ co,.., 0 cc s-,
,- ■):)o > ...,
E 0 oa) .,.., • -, )-■ a.) •i- 0 0 0 0 cal ,-,
a.) Z ti tnI-, •.---..
co tcl 0 ÷., 44) on tat' X -..---
... . ■-.- t4:: 0 71- 00 ..- 4,..( '13 a \ 0o Cn o 0 a) 73 ....0 0 ''' kr) ac: E 2 E uo ...,.Z", tet . o 00
O 0 .-, ,_. ko0 E 0 071, on0 -," 00 ,-, ,--, - ai 0 co)In 0 +o 0 ca-■ 1- 0
4 tn 04 0 o 0. 0 o-
,.. ..p „2 ,h kr) -I-' 0
0 d ''' ..,0 11 CN
cna) 0 ,,., '0- g -2 A o P r./) ca ci 0 .,., t-.1 N 0E 0- o 8.5) 61)4p., .
co 41-.' In 4-0Ow 0 ... v) cn o ;•.•In d g ,4 O cij t. 0 t--. x -8 .,..,O "4 . o cd 00 0.
.— A 42-8 F,'N, p c, A +,
cd 4,1 V
14 ,,i on @) E
'G' N 1:3 .,.._, 4-3 E0
,— ti a o
,,, m c4 ,,c, — o 5 0) _„,1 V) C)'''-e C) • •-• C) . Z 0 ,—,
0-' +8 Th 0 ' >C) ti: C-I--IO 4..i ° ..e, 71 =8., c•H-c11o t g 0 0 /.... , ,z, 0 vp
E 0 Ck 0 cd 4 .• '4 -'D cl\ (J t' .5 0 al '5: o —
a 4,-,)
---... t%) , a.) vl ':.,-..; )--.■ .-'..., vD —.› d Z C • ,„0 p g t:C1 0^
Y " ,-■ 0+
•CC1 ,C4‘2 _ . -F3 to-) V 8
pa, C/) ■rD 4
.0 0 .:'2, ,--,
•
"
•
5' 9 4' `-' cn t4 ;-'2, #t) a d
5 ,_.,cd E4 ci P. ,- yl 4 P4 ''2, 4.1 41 0c) 01 410 -,--'00 0-4 O I40
.Cil -," a) . >-, bo cratll•-•,00 "Ct 'CS s.-+ 4-' ,A" 0 0 J. '0 +1 C'') ;. 4. gOc400go 0 '-' 'cl 0 '4-'' 0 0 ,p 2 ;„.., .0 t) 11 "Ft i) e) 6 '<73 rd-,), . ,L,c tl, .g :0 41; o -fO0 cd 9, 0 ...., ° 'ti ;15 -..5 w d -'-',, , „ , „' - i a' ' '>' g co) 0 0 A -8 tEl 0 .e.c4 0 ct) ).'13 u 0 bz 5 8 Lt. 4-, gt:11) 0 0 = 14 .--, ,d a) H. ). 1_, _, •.. ..13„,
;•-■ ;.-I P.1 0 V .0 a) 0 ,49, 0
•
0 0 0 0 ,...0 0 -
+, p, ita, 4-•• 0 •.° 0 u) .tcl cn 0 o 0 .0 0 1.-, t-t o 13 t-t (Kt 4. ° 4" 2 11 "45 '0 Q 0 >a.) . 0 0 !-0 0.-43...-. • ,-, 0 0 '''' 0 1a 0 0 -8 b) 4., a) c.,._,.)o 0 -0 4-, 0 o aa .7,, .p,
o r._, 0 .0 41 ■-•
bn 1:1) 7.44) -i-a -.1. CU2 o 0.) . 0.- - ,..,, , 0 ' 0 c„ A 8 -' - ' . 04 ) 18° , - -9 0° r1 - -g> ' -- 3 :-', -C2( - ) c5,E.,%' ;..,") -_-° ...6: = .x`uOo-00,•E = „, cd , 00 .. pi -0 Sa, g 0° &) '-1 Z d '-c:) --, •,-, g0 .4-' +.3 d *0 cr) 0 0 'a t 4, s `-0 0 cl.) r-, -,-) •'-' '''''' g "'' at
0 .1 0 1:"1 0.1 0
•
o a)P p, ..
' rii '8 > ' 'Fa ,-0, g c,i ,b cc3 0 ..,... cn d a) s. 0 (1-1 CI +, '''' ›-)
0 rn 0 P 0 a)
CD Q)0000t3
e +.)cc1r-r' ' -1 0 4 0
-1-' ca *'' >
0 a) .0 d 0 E 0 -,-.■ P 0 B .-- 1 7')1 .-g 'Id "'d T.; .r,„P ,-0 1 8 ,p ,, r' E ›.; co) 2 '51 .. 71 cc 0 0 0
0 .o 0 0 0 0 - -0 0 '-' -'-' ,,0 0 0 ›—c-5- 0 a) :i5 0 E ri) .4 }-,C■1 104
'1" 0 ..-1 C6 3'. $21 g +.3 4, ,_, cr3 0 a) u,5 mO o
d 0 8, • - .,..., 0 ".• • ,_, Cig 0 0
G)
4-4 ." t-0 CC) 0 "0 0 cS 0 — a) ,-0 '41 fij >, C.1 1■4 1.4 0 vr c.) 4,13 b.1)
d 0 4 rdt1 0° 48 o" 6') I 2.0 o qi c>4 a) co tj 0 ›. ›. o 0 0, a)O , , .. o — -,,,i
CI '-zi -■-' -0 • E •_0 42
'
• a) I I .'VE -Ogaicrl"' oaci.'7,44,1 a ,,-4 ,1 0 ).- 0 P 0 ,1:1
O s. 0Og 1..-3 ,._, S, 0 ° +4 +8
C6 ,3 , 0 11 og ii 4g cg,
C =
ti) A0
.....
>, d0 ' o 0 0 0 (,) ,. ,,,a 73 -4-, 0 0 ti t-, a.) 0(1.) 3-3 U) 0 ,.-I
3., -3.-, 0 0 P. '''' '-' 0 el 00°
Sal 1,1 C.) 4-'3.-1 °
0 q >-
0 a.) .a.t'A 'g +0 .11).4 trj .Qt 1,8 ill 4 'Pri' 7.4cn '9 i ! .1 .>,1 I
0 s••• 7:1 , ,0 0 0
li 44-' H -rd '' 0 (*"')
0 CD "0 0 0 4:01 -,..-.! 0 d "''' 0 0
CI 4 a)
a) tallc.) 0
C •••-1 0 p 0 ti--; 0 tzs 1:1 :t. gt4-1 ,-, .t.,' 0OCCI •-(' 0 0 ° .2 ° -'d cl-+a.) 0 0 0 cd '-'z -0 cd :A _",_.", E -`43 2 74' 2 7,t. .--. D., ; .44 a r„ - 0 ,., E.., cn c,.,PCS „ .1.:.,1 to ,t4Z-1 Cf) o) .--. ,0 8 Li) v 0 5 -o 6 ÷-'d '..',...;% 1.---1 0 E.-, 0 .0 -E 13 6 , . 0 oP a) 4
Mt at t•--i E cj --4 -.4 -t-t • -,-. 4 ° E it" bit 0 g . CI 1:1
CZ C 4 V-1
cd .--,-. c..) o 0 /4 -1", .,b fat '.. 0 ,t1■1 ai 1... s' cu El 2 ',::4uccd0000g
tu 0 o ›-, 0 r.•1 a.)
:0 rt5 g ''' t4 ::k' °'
t1)- 2 (7 0n ,,, ...-,° ,-=`'.' ,-." ,-0÷' __,cd c, ,(2 d „, — ,...., 41 'Cio ' 2 . , 1 i, 4 ' LI ', 69 § 4-°-'. 1 o .,-A -M :ci on
..6 ‘2" ! zs= .,,,,, i
7, ,,c .,., . ,,-, 0-' ,E 15 0._E to '473 -0a) . 0 -0 0 a.) ,y; ):.) (.1 2 _., ...,. cd.) vel.c)t ,...) ,icti ,-.g , cl), 0 ,,c3., a) cr,
, .9 > 0 .,.,t 0 E ,,_..t1-1 "0
''' 0 0 ...-, 0 0 ,-, ›., 0 a) up -0 ciid C 1_, t3 0 :9, 0 1-, .4`' . ... d cn -1-1 1"1Cc) ..--t 2 4 -8 ,1) v, 0 4- ,q ti ,,, § .c ,, 4, A 12 tz, .,t .> ., t, z›., .5 :. , 5, C. ) 14 '0 ,!..",0 = ,. ,(1) .0 '4) .9, 0 11)on u) ›.., -al 0 0, •,-, 0 •-, ÷.,
0 0 ..-- a) ..0 (7,. I.) t•-• 0 0 0 't-t al 0 1-,+-• 0,-10 0-
• , 0 d 0 cd g cl , •ct,-, ,..,4) Mo , dj cq
u.) ..5 -8 r'-'a, . ca Z •EE g -- E__ 0 <4 K 'al cd 2 E -E 'R ,2 2 ',,g 0,,,,, A 2 -, B r," ;=.4 t cr o ;8 -5
c/a • 0 at a) 0-7.3* ›' *8 ti (L) u)0 , cr, -0 -0 Ed U3
0 .-cti 0 (nu) g ••'t 0 ---' 4 0 -, 0 r0 a) 0 0
C/1 0 •,•-' 0 H ad FI-4 0
'-'
rzt '4-' • --'›- 0 - aa( En 0 E. p • . 4 ct
I) ''' 0 0 '-g g > -1-/..„, 0 i. ,-g 7.) g .ciE E r.n ;--4 4-' (I) a) s'-' g 0 1 , 4410 4a) og 0-■ a.) kla, ° 0-4-, 0 •-o; C) au a> "0 0 jo A tj fa, ',..
a V) ,u at
bA 0 g 0 -0,_, 0 . _..3 o 0 -, a po. ,0
.- 0 4-4 0 pi)0 ,...1, F-, 4 aa
a 0 0- a) g gr ;-■ 4 cd C..) '0a)0 d 0 $2'. E 8 o 0 ' -0,_, r+5, .„, g .9, 0 0 o 0 0 -0 bli,_, 0.., -.'") 0 o . o, rn 0 g .. 0 -•nc-,4,
,,-. 0 1--• -._, 0 tcl 0 'a' .--, m E4-. • ,.',' g
s.. I-, cd a.) ,- ,D ',6 Ed 2 "ti -,5 40), .(Ed.) .0 -1° ,-0 8 • ., ›,`-,- CDcn 0 0 -i-
-4- '73 g •--(2I 3-• 0 c' "0 ›-■fai 0 "-I E ,--4 0 4 .0 0 " PI "0 P
0 g-, • ,-4 0 En 0 m 0 a .c.- 0 0 /1-) ;(3 g 0 .2 a) 0174 13 0 §1 '' E ,_, a.... ... > E
a) .-■ •--' El '8 `'-' 7:i E 0 0...a 0 0 En d a) 0... .--■ 0 ED 0 0, 4E-/a r)CA > k ;-•• -,' (1) 4) a.,-, 0 ca/.3 ti3 •:-X PA ›, o . AFA 8 'Td 2-,, 83 ,.. 5 a) "0 .4 42 E E4-( C.) • ,--4 ad 0 ;-"P t3 t'a 0 k ›, '4) a) 7.; tzi "*" • m 73 •--4 . .4.„) 4 o 0 cn . (i) .0 0 En cdEn ,-E1 > 0
cl-i Ed ..,_°' 7--/ __,0 --+ tu) 2 ')-,-`4)ci. to up 0 ,1--,' .,t-2 ;-, o d(:)(0 '-d( ;.,a) „ 1-, ,-0 .( .0m1 '() a) .,-, ,-, 0 0 E/1 C) 0 to •--, t113 .9, o o 1.:: ..--( .._,`6 til
o E '8 - 0 0 , p., o .;-i 0 0.. .5 d •L4. .„,(13 0 la■ -a.") g tal00 g o E. a) ,.0 o ,r.i E .0 .1) _CI( 0-. a) g d '5 cd ,szi •
a) u) 41) a.) 41) 0 dp 0 ;-. 0 4., v) w 6a, 1:1,-, ,..9, .0 do 8-, o° a.) ›,
a)-0 a En a 9) +-, 0 g g ,0v) a
a) g ,L) V•- - .t.-.1 ""jd 0 E--, 0a (-■ , ::.-1 E. --.
•--, 0 1-3 - -E- En 0 '6'40 00> 8 0 0 .- c,) 0 -0 .. 0 0 0, 0 ,0.) •-4 cn 0 cn i-,
,_, • . 0 Sal CU 0 8 0 cn 4 rU) r.„ . •7zi 0 -0 ›. 0 ,., ;1- I)0 0 ojii) 41 : 0 0 > -4 - b p > - 4 - , • , - ( " bo-d 8 .,b - c.,,_,M • .-I 4_, a) di 0 0 0 0 0 2 .0 t E9 ° 0 d( g 0
4.!- P 0 <4 t -c `_,) 12 E-I Vill 0 I. '0 ,-0 CI o 0 •-ti4 a) Sp-, 4 4 d lio 0 bl) rg ° 'Zi0
9 a , 0 -., k g ...I . ›..,a _ an 4
■ s-• •E c0' ,L3
F.x.) 0 ''' 0 g 0 ,`-'2 IDA E. dli En ,-0 0 0 '6 '0 0 0 0 En a) cu a)6 . c.0 cl 0
g > 0_, ',.'a' '-' 0 0 _.0, 0 c.) › — 0 g •g -i- .-0 0 0 4d @ .51 0 5 -'-' f:o
o •. -i--0 ... ,E 'V _,--•---9 0- r., .r.,1 ° , „ "C71' 0 '-' rg 0 g
.,O
-.1 CD" ,.. a9 •-1 '''-'u) 4 c QIC ' ) 1:=1 . , V, b.0 cd o (-1-1 En 0 P +_,0 ''' 0 0 '1) g 4"'
bp 0
W
> '- ,-. '-' cH
"C9 ,-,8_, t
0 CS'-' P.,•," b0 '0 0
-., 0
0
,..., d . ,b
E ..1,.. .,A) x . . 0 13o ajo an 01 c6 (474 0 0 ....• 0 o oU) • a.) .a) Pr. -0 (L) 0•0 b ° ,- a o tig .,,, • pc 0 0 E 0 1 .E ›) ) 4CU , 0 •. >•., 0 •-,
0 0 cl t. o d( fo.. ›..,4 4 o -1-, -I-! .4- „, ca 9.? 0 L.) d3 0 0 '0 8---
▪
0 -0 0›, . cd • 0 .i__, cd 0 0 ., .-- _ .4..., 4=1 - cd .0 a) •74 °o o 0 . 0 T2, X c-1-1 R41.- 4-44 o 4 c..) - ,,,, cn • •-' 0 .-0
L' --r. . 1 4 c. 2 _ _ _ ,, , Da ) c 8
0 a) 0 fp, ..›. .0 4 .,.o ___, ° 0 8 c ,a) 0O 0 f-1 o 0 .e)g 0 o 0 0 o a) 0 0 .° 0 4 4 ;-• .•,„ . g • 0 0 0 F., .
f - h, bo a). ?elf( E -c'4En au.3 '8 4 ;.8 4 o -,-•`-) 1Ci El '' •-;) 0 a .tg •-• -d -c$a) 4-1 d 0
CI) 0 a, cd+-( ,-0"" c7( .412,„0 0 ,LD (-0 aa '6o0 0 d .5 H 2 -~
a o L. - 0 .,- -- . cn -. deal 4 •-o 0 - co e , a i g pi3 g g a ; _c ?. . ,)o 0 0 1 .>-'-' u9 -1-g d 4 .49, o o 4 0) .h) • ° 4 gzi I ;..; E ,,„0 bi) bli 4_1), 0 8 ,7 ,.(-)0 a.) Cn 0 0 0 +. ... rn = c„). ,, , F. 0,4 0 0 u) 0 4-( •--.., at 0 0 i--■ 0 .,,.,1.4 ■-cl cd 1---, 0 ad ,-,
0 1/4,- 0 c4-.... Ed do ›.., d 0 4 u) X 5 0
0 ›, +, • m . o u, c,./3c" I '-5 ''' 0 a) .0 10 o 4 0 g - . a›- cp.,, '0 8 0 5 -a . ••_, „., . ct - 0 „F . d g -t-,') 5 .0 0 o "0 cU u) a •44
g u, o) 0 ro ;111 0 • ,•-■,._, ;--■ e•-; 0 421 . 0 -C21 ca‘ 2 a -, >,,1 ) 2 0 0 0-(O , 0, -0 ,..., > ..,,:,, .17.: -0 t.1 ..8 q - 5 . . 5 0 „2 g d ›, 0 a.) a) a) 0 2 4::f 0 0 0" pi
, a) ,_, ..„ .4- CI) u) 0 CO ›. 0 .,_, cncn k 0 c„, f••••
O ,..0 r5, 0 ,-7) -0 o I -1-• cal "0 act '''' (-1-1 p mo c4.--0 ,--- to ...,- 4.1 .5 d,•_,a o •- 4 - .•i Tzt" 51 gb) 'ijrn8o r8 Z 0 rt-Z i b a;-I 0 .--, :-I 0 i(-:') 0 g a) 0 1 o 0 o -r_-4, ° „. '-2 •11
a) 0 0 4 0 *-0 rd,.._ ° '-ct *M u) 4 '0 0 .E., 0.0 0 0 0 -I- 0 E. 4° a) -0 >, o fa, ''.8 0 a) -t,' "c1 o +. 0 0 (4-1 .
.-,L-, d i... Cd 0.3 5 5 ,,, 0 -0 Cl-i C.-) 0 -.,-, fa, Cd ,C, '1;1 0
40 d (-> 0 cc( -. fa( c.) 5.', gi -,
(f) 0 0 4-. '..) ,11.) 0-0 0 o =-■ -0 0 -.a' .2 <1.) -0 -0 ,3 C) .a.,) .,E•2 0) 2 12, a.2 <1),••-■ g 0.) a) ;.., • .., ,--. Z0 ., 4, 7j.- ' ' /, - • + . . .> .0 .,...,00 - I - - 'b 1 )0 _ ,, . g, tc 3.4, i 7-, f-■ 0 (_) (L)
0 . r - ' 0 ; 5 - 0 a ) 0 5, ”a " . C) 0 '-i- -, "V- . :: S : 72, , k .: ; 0 17 l' t, i C d :8, -7 ia) g„, o.•,_. ,, _O .ul.E . 2 ',,,1 7d 5 .(0)1--4 .., ....s1 ••• bo .k-, ,A' 0 2 g cLd, 'CI d •••• 8 ‘„s,
'5 -8.2i,) ,›),•,,,,,, 0 0, ,40 .. 1 0 •-■ . V) o 2 -0 0 td' '5
d 0 4_, 0 .4 ,-, 0 0-, 4 *"" 0 -.-' 0 , --, 4 0 ..,.En •,-. •-■ ,_, -,-(
° 1 0) ` 1 ;6: P: ' ' 8 0 a. ,' - ' 4 0rd cn .(-, c) 8 .-! vd $1 8' 4- 0 d cl"""-I ° 'g -'P
4-( "0 ,2-
•
-,' d 0 ,,.,, • ,5,0 0 .--0 0 0 t•-• 0 0 -4, .4_, 0 $7:4 ua • d >., • •-■ > ,.0 - 0 --I
ra '6; 4_,'ai H '. E 4-4 0. -. 0 0 ct cat an .. ua •-• 0
0 ..._,03 g 0 ›...0 .0,..,O 0. 8 o, .74-•7a,cd g 0 ,g-71,43 boo .go:-.74
4- 0m 4.4 0 . .4 -ci 0 -ia ,,rt•od Vd f. , „ da 2 '89 t (?) 0'-' 'B -.9 •dd '19 .;..;CD -tj ClIc6 /-'P"' -'3 4' M '5 r.,1 1_, 44 ,g ■5 .40'' 0 ':,5,
O a) :--• 0 0 0
C P k-3 0 1 .2 .0 0 0 . 0 .. . . , -8 0 .(4) ,p _, 0 0 0 _ ,,, , y..,
•-• 4, an d •-0 0 ,-,Q/ g I' ° "g 0 .•_-••0 . .cli 0 77a .g, 0 0 0 ,,, ; c4-, 0 0 g a) ÷, c•) 4 -2 .2 0 g .9., 0 ''" . d (8 ',.:::4 -+c734--,E -8 . 0 0 0 o o 0 .. 0 4-' 0 M cd '6 00 d
0›.d.--000 al 0 d 0 • '-' -0 .,-., .,1 0 tj 0 ,C1 •-0 C/) 75 L-I .•-,-5, 0„ 0 0-4,••-,O a 0.4.--4.D.P.00a■c°13 ge0 E-4-d,S '-c;' •k.' 0 0 '4 0
0 0 0 .,_, 0V) ' . .a•48 -0 bn, 4'5 af,8 .4 .,. d cc/ ,.) T'I O ° C.•-• M ..0 VI '7:$ 0 -1-• 04 0 iz,cll .,74 0 0 b 0 .) V .• 0 >0°°,•,,:t01300o d .'g• 8 -,0 'P:a ,aH5: -ci tc." ' '' od)EL_) g rN -2 -8 •E -.5 ,c, 2 a .a ,4_, . 0 an 0 0 0..) 0 .4_, .0 -i, d ;--,, lol •,-I 0 0 0 0 4 .. 4.-4 0 - '-c-4 0 0 ,.. 0 ,_,
1-• 8 .r..-: .,,-,,, g ,--6- m .7, 0 5 cr, 0 0 d 0 4c73 o 0 .,,, •-0 0 cn 0 Ii1) . I. bii 0 0 I-, ,,s(-1 ±.■ ;..4° • 0 VA1 ."'
.1 0 ''S 2 "a 0 7,') 0 ,o, 0 '0, „0 <IO !.) 4 4 „9 _8 .5 ,_,_, -A rft 5..:1 .4.Es; A c,:t,.. ji -0 ,.., — . .,--4 -0 <,•_i .. 0.., - . d .-0 ;-■ g -0 •-0 Ea - 4-, H a - -.- - - .- •,-' =4..4 00 0 ,...-..;0 0a) r4-4 8 TY 4.1 .0 ED 1 i '0 0 74 d C 1 , E H r a) en .. ..(cA . 0 cn ›- 0 .,, 2 0 7,, - cv it • 0 -8 ,4 V) .--,5, 'D •-•' 4:4 .r.' •E, . • 4-' S',1) 4) 0Thp 11 .. >, ''' ° '-' -5 7.13 Ci E__,Ii) 8 4 •MI /7:3* ca 0 -c-•at 41-, . .... Bea.cr o0g b.,---• ..., 0 0 ,, 4'a. `1) rn ''' a .`4.) d ›- 0 • 0. Ei ›, t-1 °-, 0 - -0 ° g •'-' .- :.,, g ›,'73g .5,.) g 2 o -0 .5 0 0 ..0 '----' 5 , - - 4 0 ,...1 (6 0 , 0 - `IFJ a . ) FA 1) a' 3 .0 S . -c -'t ' /C) 0 "0 •E, a) .„.., 0 0
CD ° >a a. 0 0 -0 -•`-' ''' 0 VI 0 t•I) -•'' ,.0 .. -.' 0 a3 0
,--.") n' T:17'. d ' '-g /1) • d 70I/1.) 4.)'-' (DI' '-'5'cn .07 / c'''' 8 E.' 4a) t 0-8'" . 4L) .4' - ' t H° ,y8. 4' > 'CD 4 - 'C ) ...H ° 8,.., 5 2 . 2,-, E 0 071 . . -, - * - 4 -, .4;4 '-' 4
■P ,--; CD i-, '41i 45 *' 0 4- a) . . g g -8 0 0 )_, +0 4_9 4 --- d)cal>, 0v100„>-I-'a-3014- 0 -a' 2 ° c'aa P. 0(.. ca 0 d 0 --' ad S--,y., 0 bo 2 , o 0 ._ .›- „j 0 4-- E --, n- .,.. ca a) '' (0 0 0 (-, (-) 17.;
O 0 '0,• . '-r,,, -' 4c-4 ,-,P, 0 8 c04 en' 14 -(41 .5 *,- 0 , 0-• Li a a) 0 . 0 .... .... .•2, to g .4-, ,--, 00 U, -1->
.4...I (4 co c—,0o ,, 0 .
0
..a8 0 "-E 0 ,80g 0,, _0 +0 r.,, -o - ,t-4 0 - .5 Ea
c ? VI • „i0 g, 0 -' '''' d g ra. 0 0 0 0 2• >-n T•c$ ci 42( V) CA > 0 •P 0 0 g § .40, -a • + .-0 0 ,;1_•,) ,S..),. ›-• 'a c. . a)0 . g . . . 0 ,.., a c4 • •-•' (II c.). . - 0 0 4_1 E ,5, t, .,,, ,8 0 .,:s •., ,: t,- 0 cd d (-, r_a 0 0 o 0 0-,0 0 0 P.-■ -6, a) _,• b °'D. 4 - 0 4 --' '-'d Ltt 8 - 5 •'-' 0,o .5 In' 5-, id . - 4 0 - (4-( -0 o 0.. ÷-' a) d .,-, al 0 -0 7.") E. a ..)
C Is. 4 qD S 3 'h) , Pi g C '1 -`-+ 494 9; ?■ ;' -2.•T'D V, F,4 R -,g e, -8 ,b 8 ti 2 L4I '•V3 .71 PA .2
. p.Y ,.., 2 0 ›, 0 ,a, 0.
8 . ',., .8 3 ?, 2-,,) n
APPENDIX F
SYSTEM LOCAT1OJ 1v1PNESE
Brooklyn Center Well 2 470
Wel; '3 324
Well 5 413
Well 6 220
Well B 447
Lino Lakes Well 1 129
Well 2 316
. Well 3 374
Shoreview Weil 2 167
Well 4 256
Well 5 206
Well 6 139
Distribution System 150
Vadnais Heights Well 1 345
Well 2 58
Well 3 46
Well 4 36
Rogers Well 3 76
Well4 67
Well 5 280
Well 6 450
Work Session Agenda Item No. 3
MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION
DATE: August 23, 2013
TO: City Council
FROM: Curt Boganey, City Managet43
SUBJECT: Unfunded Capital Improvement Projects
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff regarding capital project
priorities so that limited funding may be allocated appropriately.
Background:
At the last Council meeting the Council engaged in fairly detailed discussion regarding potential
capital projects that currently have no clear identified funding source. To establish a Capital
Plan consistent Council Policy and for sound financial planning practice we seek to dramatically
reduce or eliminate projects form the plan where no funding can be identified.
When the staff develops the multi-year Capital Plan and the annual Capital Budget we consider
the following prioritization factors:
1.Health and Safety
2.Government Mandate
3.Council Strategic Priorities/Goals
4.Other Council Polices/Plans such the Comprehensive Plan, Park Development Plan, Bike
and Trail Plans, Sustainability goals. Etc.
When projects are selected they are subjected to informal or formal cost benefit considerations to
assure that the investment is the least cost or most cost effective solution.
The unfunded projects are as follows;
•Street Reconstruction Projects 2014- 2021
•Council Chambers Technology
•Centennial Park Amphitheater
•2014 Capital Maintenance Building Plan projects
•2015-20125 CMBP Projects
•City Hall Community Center — Doors and Windows
•Brooklyn Blvd Corridor Project
•City Hall Renovations
•Community Center Renovations
•Hwy 252 Improvements
. .
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for all people and preserves the public trust
MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION
On Monday we will provide an overview of funding options for each of these projects.
Most critical at this juncture in our decision making process is to receive feedback on the priority
for City Hall and CAC renovations because this decision has a direct impact on the CMBP
project for 2014.
Perhaps the next most critical decision relates to the Street Construction Projects and whether or
not bonding will be used to fund the deficits anticipated in 2014 and beyond.
Once direction is provided in these areas developing a funding plan for any remaining projects
will be rather straight forward.
Policy Issues:
What are the high priority unfunded capital projects?
How shall we fund the priority capital projects?
Council Goals:
4. We will improve the city's image
7. We will continue to maintain the city's infrastructure improvements
„
Mission: Ensuring an attractive, clean, safe, inclusive community that enhances the quality of life
for alipeople and preserves the public trust
Brooklyn Center - Strategic Priorities
Civic Engagement
In order to clearly understand and effectively respond to community needs, the City
will consistently seek the input from a broad range of stakeholders from the general
public, non-profit and for profit sectors. Efforts to engage the community will be
transparent and responsive. Our engagement efforts will be deliberately inclusive
and culturally sensitive.
Focused Redevelopment
Redevelopment and renewal of commercial, industrial and residential property is
essential to the health and vitality of the city. The City will lead efforts to maintain
and increase the value of private properties and will make the necessary supporting
infrastructure investments. We will encourage entrepreneurial investment and
make strategic public investments to create jobs and grow the City's tax base.
Community Image
Our ability to attract and retain citizens and businesses is directly influenced by the
perception of the City. We will take specific actions to assure that Brooklyn Center is
recognized as a high quality, attractive and safe community. We will accomplish this
by providing exceptional customer experience, vibrant neighborhoods and a sense
of community thereby attracting private investment.
Financial Stability
We will maintain a positive financial position with a long term perspective by
diversifying revenue sources, aligning fees to adequately reflect service costs,
stabilizing property taxes while reducing the City's reliance on State Shared
Revenues, and ensuring that revenues are adequate to fund services and
infrastructure needs.
Vibrant Neighborhoods
Neighborhoods will be attractive, safe, inclusive of a diverse housing stock with
owner occupied and quality rental properties. Citizens will feel connected to each
other and the natural environment will be protected and preserved for the
enjoyment of future generations.
strategic priority final.06.24.14
EXCERPTS FROM STUDY AND WORK SESSIONS 8/12/2013
DISCUSSION OF WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEMS AS TIME PERMITS
COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW OF CAPITAL NEEDS AND DEBT FUNDING PLANS
Mr. Boganey introduced the topic and stated the City has an outstanding set of policies and
among those are financial policies put together by the Financial Commission several years ago
and adopted by the City Council. He stated the policies indicated that all capital improvements
should be made in accordance with an adopted Capital Improvement Budget; the City will
develop a multi-year plan that is updated at least biennially; an annual CIP budget that is based
on a multi-year plan; and, the CIP budget will be coordinated with the operating budget.
Mr. Boganey reviewed the CIP budget policies, noting the policy requires the City Council
identify a funding source for each capital project proposal before it is approved. He described
what is considered to be a capital improvement.
Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug presented the 2007 Capital Maintenance
Building Plan (CMBP), projects completed during 2008-2010, and projects deferred during
2011-2013. He explained that the City solicited consultants and hired McKinstry to conduct a
2012 Energy Performance Contracting Study with the expectation that energy savings would
fully fund identified improvements. McKinstry evaluated the Community Center/City Hall
campus and found there was $3+ Million of improvements needed but only $1 Million of energy
savings, resulting in a significant shortfall.
Mr. Lillehaug stated deferred improvements at the Community Center/City Hall campus were
reviewed and it was found that some improvements were needed including replacement of the
west wall, roof, pool circulation pumps, HVAC Systems 1 and 2, Pool HVAC system, energy
control upgrades, and campus parking lot and sidewalk improvements. Staff also looked at the
option of replacing the original outdated windows and doors but found while needed, it would
not result in a significant energy savings. Mr. Lillehaug stated staff updated the improvement
list and costs in 2013, included the 2014-2028 CIP, with funding undetermined for all CMBP
projects.
Mr. Boganey explained the purpose tonight is to provide the City Council with background
information about the projects so the City Council can prioritize those projects at the next Work
Session.
Councilmember Kleven asked if staff considered the option of starting over with the City Hall
rather than making repairs to the current facility. Mr. Boganey stated all projects presented
involve repairs to the existing building and later staff will address the alternative of starting over.
Assistant City Manager/Director of Building and Community Standards Vickie Schleuning
presented the City Hall and Community Center Space Needs Assessment including background,
status, and benefits.
ADJOURN STUDY SESSION TO INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL
COMPREHENSIVE OVERVIEW OF CAPITAL NEEDS AND DEBT FUNDING PLANS
Cindy McCleary, Principle with Leo A Daly, continued presentation of their analysis of the
Community Center/City Hall Campus including current space conditions. She explained there
are a variety of considerations so they provided options along a scale that could be considered in
phases, noting they provide a range of choice. She suggested the absolute key elements to be
addressed are: introduction of an expanded lower level lobby; adequate public and meeting
overflow space; clarity of space, efficient space flow, navigation ease to stairs; and,
designate/separate public and staff spaces.
Ms. McCleary presented Options 1 and 2 and explained how each addresses key elements.
Mayor/President Willson referenced Option 2, upper floor, and asked if there is an elevator by
the front door. Ms. McCleary described the location of the two elevators in City Hall.
Mayor/President Willson asked how the front door area can be leveraged. He stated he likes the
plan for the lower level but thinks the upper level public space can be better utilized. Ms.
McCleary stated that is a good observation. She stated this was discussed but there is a concern
with parking by the upper level front door and need for a visual connection with a staff person at
the point of entry. In addition, the depth of the hallway is not much different than the lower
level.
Mayor/President Willson stated the upper floor conference room could be utilized as a
welcoming counter so it is more appealing to those entering the building in addition to increasing
security.
Ms. McCleary continued presentation of Option 2, upper floor, and described the
construction/reconstruction it would entail and modification to the Council Chambers Lobby
Commons. She advised staff had indicated there are not enough conference room spaces and
that copying/materials are not efficiently consolidated within the City Hall. In addition, Option 2
would resize office spaces and address work space inefficiency.
Mayor/President Willson asked about the lunch room location. Ms. McCleary stated it is not
currently located within a departmental zone and it had been mentioned that sometimes the
public is found in the lunch room.
Mayor/President Willson asked if an access would be opened from the courtyard garden in the
front to a public space. Ms. McCleary stated that is an option and they tried to address how to
create the existing green park into an amenity.
Mayor/President Willson noted Option 2 results in extensive relocation of the restroom and
counter spaces. Ms. McCleary stated that is correct but from a wayfinding standpoint, people
recognize the counters as a point to receive service.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated the reconfiguration options for the Council
Chambers appear to be at 1,325 square feet and the other at 2,250 square feet. Ms. McCleary
estimated the current Council Chambers at 2,500 square feet. She explained the space behind the
current Chambers is ill configured and used.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan noted some reconfigurations may impact load bearing
walls and result in significant costs. He asked about the square footage needs of staff Ms.
McCleary reviewed square footage spaces from other City Halls.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated it seems the overall design of the building is
"developmentally challenged," resulting in the question of spending too much money and
"putting lipstick on a pig." Ms. McCleary agreed the building has challenges but following this
process provides the information needed to determine which path to take.
Mayor/President Willson noted in most of the options, the Council Chambers is not relocated.
Ms. McCleary stated in the first two options, the Council Chambers remains in about the same
space but the priorities of wayfinding, work flow, and security are addressed. She noted Option
3 utilizes a broader site and solves internal operational challenges to the best extent possible
given existing conditions. Ms. McCleary described Option 3 elements, noting it relocates the
Council Chambers into new space, addresses the current lack of connection between the
Community Center and City Hall, and consolidates staff spaces. She noted this plan also creates
a building within a park.
Mayor/President Willson stated the City Hall is oddly shaped and asked if it would be possible to
add building to the eastern side rather than create new Council Chamber space on the other side
of the building. Ms. McCleary agreed that is an option and encouraged exploring all
opportunities. Mayor/President Willson noted that would also utilize the front entrance space.
He stated he is more inclined to not "hang pieces" giving the appearance of piecemeal but
preferred to consider how to increase the building's square footage, make it look better, and still
tie together the Community Center and City Hall. Ms. McCleary stated this option would allow
the opportunity to rebrand the entire front face elevation
Ms. McCleary continued presentation of a site master plan, noting it can provide greater identity
to the street and modify the travel path around the building by creating a more generous curve to
pull the drive aisle away from the building and provide a drop-off zone to address the safety
challenge at the Community Center's front door. She described the location of gardens,
landscaped areas, and walkways.
Ms. McCleary then presented basic, moderate, and enhanced construction cost estimates for
exterior wayfinding, site redevelopment, and City Hall options.
Mayor/President Willson asked about going down rather than out or up, noting the Community
Center has a stairway that could be used to tie the two buildings together instead of adding new
space. Ms. McCleary stated they did not look at going below grade.
Mayor/President Willson stated support for providing more office space, improving customer
experience by leveraging the two entrance points, and squaring off the building to create more
space. Ms. McCleary stated if the Council supports a mid-scale effort, they can provide a variety
of options to capture priorities in the right order.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated true stewardship is to envision and anticipate future
needs of staff, the Council, and public. He stated the current building design has a lot of
constraints but given the City's other capital needs, it is difficult.
Mayor/President Willson stated this process will put that plan in place so options can be
considered. He agreed the City has other pressing capital needs that may put this on the "back
burner."
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated should the existing structure be modified, the City
may enjoy the same advantage as the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Plan where initial
improvements can be put into place in the interest of better financial planning, addressing the
issue of affordability.
Ms. McCleary stated typically, when at a point of investing 60-70% of the building's cost of
construction, you may find yourself outpricing the building at completion. At 30,000 square
feet, excluding site costs, a City hall could run $185/square foot to $250/square foot or more
depending on technology, putting it in the $6-7 Million range. She agreed that is a consideration
if the project reaches the $5 Million range.
Mayor/President Willson stated another option is to demolish the building and use the site in a
different fashion, such as a two-story building tied into the Community Center. That would also
provide a temporary building (existing City Hall) for staff to operate during construction of a
new City Hall.
Ms. McCleary described Community Center space conditions that resulted in issues with space
allocation and lack of visibility.
City Manager Curt Boganey stated the large community room space is the most intensively used
within the Community Center.
Director of Community Activities, Recreation and Services Jim Glasoe agreed it is used every
day and uses include 18-20 exercise classes per week plus rentals, special events, and weekly
church rental.
Ms. McCleary advised of issues with humidity and moisture that has resulted in corrosion. She
stated this is partly due to lack of air movement/recovery of heat, and use of chlorine chemicals
with the swimming pool. She noted the McInstry preliminary report Community Center Facility
Audit has been included, which addressed the significant maintenance needs in the short term
and upcoming years.
Mayor/President Willson stated if it is known the west wall needs to be replaced, he would ask if
it provides opportunity to provide more office space or an improved building entrance. Ms.
McCleary stated that is an option and conducting an assessment of programs to capture
additional revenue to offset infrastructure costs may be a valuable undertaking.
Ms. McCleary noted preliminary costs were estimated; however, Community Center costs range
widely depending on the amenities included. She stated the infounation provided addressed
what would be reasonable. Preliminary costs have been provided for the building envelope,
mechanical/electrical/building space, and wayfinding. It was noted that program revenues were
not defined.
Mayor/President Willson raised the option of expanding the building to encompass the space
between the City Hall and Community Center. He noted that would significantly change the
front door entrance so the south or west side may be an option for the front entrance. In addition,
this would not include a demolition, but a construction.
Ms. McCleary pointed out that the location of the parking lots will remain and wherever the
expansion occurs, the building needs to be secured appropriately.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated if such a plan comes forward, the City Council could
consider the investment breakpoint. He noted the City's residents have a healthy skepticism for
large expenditures and the City Council needs to be cognizant of that situation.
Mayor/President Willson stated that is correct and occurred when the City Council considered
construction of a new Police Station and Fire Station, which resulted in significant debate on
whether they were needed and how they should be built.
Councilmember/Commissioner Myszkowski stated a Community Center market feasibility study
is important considering LA Fitness is coming to Brooklyn Center and offering lower
introductory rates and longer hours. She noted the demographic did not consider the City's
children, many of color and not American born. Councilmember/Commissioner Myszkowski
stated she is aware of the perception when entering City Hall and found the pictures to clearly
show the conditions.
Mayor/President Willson stated LA Fitness is coming to Brooklyn Center and will be more
convenient than Northwest Racquet and the Fridley LA Fitness.
Councilmember/Commissioner Myszkowski asked if the pool is used on occasion exclusively by
the Muslim community during a certain timeframe. Mr. Glasoe answered in the affirmative.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven asked what would be the cost difference to demolish and
construct a new Community Center and City Hall, with and without the swimming pool. Ms.
McCleary stated swimming pools rarely pay for themselves as they are an expensive mechanical
and maintenance endeavor. She stated looking at it from that view would yield a different
answer than when considering the community amenity it provides. Ms. McCleary noted zero
clearance pools are becoming attractive for children and seniors and the water temperature
becomes an issue as certain temperatures may not be conducive for some activities such as water
aerobics.
Mayor/President Willson stated a sheet of ice has the same sort of economic considerations. He
noted Brooklyn Park and others have sheets of ice; however in this area, only Brooklyn Center
has an Olympic-sized pool.
Ms. McCleary stated she will investigate the cost for swimming pool construction.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven noted the City's demographics have drastically changed
over the years and she does not know how much the pool is used. Mayor/President Willson
stated it is being utilized and an amenity.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan commented that since the City has made the Brooklyn
Bridge/Brooklyn Alliance a priority, it needs to align its amenities with Brooklyn Park. He
noted the City already has the swimming pool so the issue is preservation of the asset.
Mayor/President Willson commented on the evolution of the City's population as aging residents
move on and younger families move into the City.
Public Works Director/City Engineer Steve Lillehaug presented the Street and Utility
Reconstruction Plan and funding shortfall since the franchise fee does not generate enough to
support street reconstruction. He advised of the impact should an alternate source of funding not
be identified.
Mr. Boganey presented the cash analysis, noting the bottom line indicates in 2014 the estimate is
$671,840 less than needed to pay for the City's share of the Street Reconstruction Program. That
deficit continues to increase and accumulates to $8.2 Million by 2021. He stated if the City
wants to continue the Street Reconstruction Program and avoid the impact of delaying projects, a
funding source for the shortfalls needs to be identified. Mr. Boganey stated options are to bond,
use cash, or levy and these issues will be discussed at the next Work Session.
Mayor/President Willson stated this is an important program so he would consider alternate
funding options including bonding. He stated another option is bonding earlier in the process
and to run larger projects to complete the program cycle earlier.
Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated the City typically bonds every other year to save on
bonding costs and maybe they could be dovetailed with other issues to address the cash shortfall
for annual projects.
Mayor/President Willson stated bonding requires spending on a specific project.
Mr. Boganey stated the City is able to bond without a referendum, in this case, because part of
the bond proceeds are being used to recover special assessment costs. However, there may be a
limit to how much the City can bond within that classification of bond sales. He stated staff will
research that option.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven asked if MSA funds are used in the Street Reconstruction
Program. Mr. Lillehaug stated MSA funds are used for certain streets.
Councilmember/Commissioner Kleven asked how much the City receives in one year from
special assessment payments. Mr. Lillehaug stated individually it is about $4,500. Mr. Boganey
stated staff will research that annual figure. He explained that the special assessments collected
pay off the bonds for the project.
Mr. Lillehaug advised of the gap in funding for the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor project. He
stated the next steps in the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Study are the implementation plan,
partnership building, and to seek funding. Mr. Lillehaug described the impact without the City's
leadership. He stated the City's participation, worse case, is estimated at approximately 20%, or
$3.7 Million. He stated these projects are within the CIP contingent upon funding.
Mr. Lillehaug explained if something is done with Highway 252, it is known that the City will
need to participate. He reviewed the background, status, and benefits of this project as well as
the impact of delays or taking no action. It was noted the project costs, funding, and schedule
are yet to be determined but the City will move forward with the study.
Mayor/President Willson stated if the City does not have a plan or participate in the process, the
project may not be done. Mr. Lillehaug stated it may also be that the project is done in a manner
the City does not support. Mr. Boganey stated if a collective vision comes about, there will be a
funding gap.
Mr. Glasoe presented the status of the Memorial Amphitheater, benefits of this improvement,
and impact of delay. It was acknowledged the existing facility has exceeded its useful life.
Assistant City Manager/Director of Building & Community Standards Vickie Schleuning
described the status of the outdated Council Chambers audio/visual equipment.
Mayor/President Willson asked about the capability of adding subtitles. He indicated the State
of Minnesota just started working with a new vendor that puts in place, almost real time,
subtitling for the hearing impaired. Ms. Schleuning stated that option had been researched
several years ago and she will provide that information.
Ms. Schleuning stated there is a dedicated fund for Council Chambers audio visual of $130,000
and quarterly revenue of approximately $7,000. It was noted the estimated cost range is up to
$175,000. She described the benefits of equipment replacement and impact of delays or no
actions.
Mayor/President Willson stated he anticipates this process will result in identifying the highest
priorities so action can then be taken to identify funding.
Mr. Boganey agreed and stated staff will present funding alternatives at the next Work Session
so the most important projects can be identified as well as how each can be paid.
Project Priority Sheet
UPDATED 8/12/2013
Designated Gap Funding Non-City Funding not raised yet City Gap Funding
Project Cost Fundin_gjk._ Needed Sources Needed High Priority Priority Low Priority Not a Priority
Individual Projects:
Council Chambers Technology $175,000.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 45,000.00 $-$ 45,000.00
Centennial Park Amphitheater $335,000.00 $ 235,000.00 $184,735.00 $ 50,265.00 $ 100,000.00
2014 CMBP $4,106,000.00 $ -$ 4,106,000.00 $$ 4,106,000.00
CAC West Wall, CAC Roof, Pool Circulation Pumps, HVAC 1 and 2, Pool HVAC, Controls Upgrade and CAC/City Hall Campus parking lot and sidewalk improvements
2015-2025 CMBP $2,103,000.00 $ -$ 2,103,000.00 $ -$ 2,103,000.00
City Hall/Community Center-Doors/Windows $202,500.00 $ -$ 202,500.00 $ -$ 202,500.00
Subtotal: Building Projects $6,921,500.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 6,691,500.00 $ 184,735.00 $ 6,556,500.00
Stand Alone Major Projects:
Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor 2015 $598,000.00 $ -$ 598,000.00 $ 478,400.00 $ 119,600.00
2016 $3,152,000.00 $ -$ 3,152,000.00 $ 2,521,600.00 $ 630,400.00
2017 $10,890,000.00 $ -$ 10,890,000.00 $ 8,712,000.00 $ 2,178,000.00
2018 $3,729,000.00 $ -$ 3,729,000.00 $ 2,983,200.00 $ 745,800.00
Subtotal: Brooklyn Boulevard 18,369,000.00 $$ 18,369,000.00 $ 14,695,200.00 $ 3,673,800.00
TOTAL: ESTABLISHED FUNDING NEEDS 25,290,500.00 $ 130,000.00 $ 25,060,500.00 $ 14,879,935.00 $ 10,230,300.00
Street Reconstruction Fund Deficit $ 8,271,927.00
FUNDING NEEDS YET TO BE DETERMINED:
City Hall Renovation Options:
Option # 1 $ 2,511,502.00
Option #2 $ 4,258,629.00
Option #3 $ 8,296,130.00
Option #4 (demo and rebuild)$ 13,579,605.00
Community Center Renovation Options:
Options 1 through 3 to be developed $350,000 - $16,000,000
Highway 252 Improvements unknown
S:\City Hall Master Plan\Significant Community Projects Costs 05132013\Projects Capital Improvement Master Plan 05102013.curt.priority
Table 2
UNFUNDED Capital Improvement Program (2014 - 2028)
DRAFT Rev. August 22, 2013
Unfunded
Special Street MSA Storm Drainage Sanitary Sewer Water Street Light Capital Projects Other To Be Total Project
Project Assessments Reconst. Fund Fund Utility Utility Utility Utility Fund Funding Sources Determined Cost
2014
Council Chambers Technology
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
$45,000
$4,106,000Capital Maintenance Building Program 2014
City Hall/Community Center - Doors/Windows $202,500
Amphitheater $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $235,000 $100,000
City Share of Street Project $671,840
$671,840.002014 Subtotal $4,453,500 $5,125,340
2016
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2015 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $203,000
Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project 1 -49th to 51st Ave $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $478,400 $119,600
City Share of Street Project $1,011,680
$1,011,6802015 Subtotal $322,600 $1,334,280
2016
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2016 I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 $0 $0 $0 $4,000
Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project 2 - 51st Ave to Hwy 100 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 j $0 $0 $2,521,600 $6 30,400
1
City Share of Street Project $989,209
$989,209. 2016 Subtotal $634,400 $1,623,609 ..
CAUsers\cboganey\Desktop\Copy of 130702_Rev DRAFT 2014-15 CIP Table 2.hide.082213.2018
Table 2
UNFUNDED Capital Improvement Program (2014 - 2028)
DRAFT ev. Au ust 22 2013
Special
Project Assessments
Street
Reconst. Fund
MSA
Fund
Storm Drainage
Utility
Sanitary Sewer
Utility
Water
Utility
Street Light
Utility
Capital Projects
Fund
Other
Funding Sources
To Be
Determined
Unfunded
Total Project
Cost
2017
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2017 I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $273,000
Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Projects 7, 8, 9 and 10 - Bass Lk Rd to 65th $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $8,712,000 $2,178,000
City Share Street Project $1,036,682
2017 Subtotal $1,036,682 $2,451,000 $3,487,682
2018
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2018 I $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $396,000
Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Projects 4, 5, 6 and 6A - Hwy 100 to Bass Lk Rd $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,983,200 $745,800
City Share Street Project $1,879,274
2018 Subtotal $1,879,274 $1,141,800 $3,021,074
2019
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2019 I $0 I I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I I $434,000 I I
City Share Street Project $1,463,972
2019 Subtotal $1,463,972 $0 $434,000 $1,897,972
2020
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2020 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I I $144,000 I I
City Share Street Project $1,602,632
2020 Subtotal $1,602,632 $0 $144,000 $1,746,632
2021
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2021 I $0 I $0
-$383,362
I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I I $71,000 I I
City Share Street Project
2021 Subtotal -$383,362 $0 $71,000 -$312,362
2022
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2022 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $401,000 I I
City Share Street Project
2022 Subtotal $0 $401,000 $401,000
CAUsers\cboganey\Desktop\Copy of 130702_Rev DRAFT 2014-15 CIP Table 2.hide.082213.2018
Table 2
UNFUNDED Capital Improvement Program (2014 - 2028)
DRAFT Rev. August 22, 2013
Project
Special
Assessments
Street
Reconst. Fund
MSA
Fund
Storm Drainage
Utility
Sanitary Sewer
Utility
Water
Utility
Street Light
Utility
Capital Projects
Fund
Other
Funding Sources
To Be
Determined
Unfunded
Total Project
Cost
2023
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2023 $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 $0 I $0 $0 I I $85,000 I I
City Share Street Project
2023 Subtotal $0 $0 $85,000 $85,000
2024
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2024 $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I $0 I I $43,000 I I
City Share Street Project
2024 Subtotal $0 $0 $43,000 $43,000
2025
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2025 $01 $01 I I I $49,000 I I $49,000
City Share Street Project
2025 Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $49,000 $49,000
2026
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2026 I I I I
City Share Street Project
2026 Subtotal $0 $0
2027
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2027 I I I I
City Share Street Project
2027 Subtotal $0 $0
2028
Capital Maintenance Building Program 2028 I I
City Share Stree Project
2028 Subtotal $0
TOTALS $10,230,300 $18,502,227$8,271,927
CAUsers\cboganey\Desktop\Copy of 130702_Rev DRAFT 2014-15 CIP Table 2.hide.082213.2018