Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019 03-25 CCPCouncil Study Session City Hall Council Chambers March 25, 2019 AGENDA 1.City Council Discussion of Agenda Items and Questions - 6 p.m. 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 entrance of the council chambers. 2.Miscellaneous 3.Discussion of Work Session Agenda Item as Time Permits 4.Adjourn CITY COUNCIL MEETING City Hall Council Chambers March 25, 2019 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 presenter. 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 presenter 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 entrance of the council chambers. 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 - Motion to approve the following minutes: March 11, 2019 Study Session March 11, 2019 Regular Session March 11, 2019 Work Session b.Approval of Licenses - Motion to approve licenses as presented c.Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 2018-14, 2018 Bridge Rehabilitation - Approve a resolution of the lowest responsible bid and award a contract to LS Black Constructors, Inc. for Improvement Project No. 2018-14, 2018 Bridge Rehabilitation d.Resolution Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final Payment, Improvement Project Nos. 2017-10 and 2017-11, 2017 Pavement, Traffic Signal System and Trail Rehabilitation Improvements (69th Avenue and France Avenue) - Motion to approve the resolution accepting work performed and authorizing final payment, Improvement Project Nos. 2017-10 and 2017-11, 2017 Pavement, Traffic Signal System and Trail Rehabilitation Improvements (69th Avenue and France Avenue) e.Resolution Establishing Improvement Project No. 2021-05, Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 Improvements (Bass Lake Road to Interstate 94) - Motion to approve the resolution establishing Improvement Project No. 2021-05, Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 Improvements (Bass Lake Road to Interstate 94) f.Resolution Authorizing the Community Activities, Recreation and Services Department to Apply For Grant Funding Through the Department of Natural Resources Outdoor Recreation Grant Program - Motion to approve a resolution supporting an application for a Department of Natural Resources Outdoor Recreation Grant g.A Resolution Approving an Agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc. for Professional Services Related to Zoning and Redevelopment Study - Motion to approve a resolution and authorizing the execution of an agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc. for Professional Services Related to Zoning and Redevelopment Study h.Resolution Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final Payment, Improvement Project No. 2016-05, 57th Avenue Street Improvements - Motion to approve the resolution accepting work performed and authorizing final payment, Improvement Project No. 2016-05, 57th Avenue Street Improvements 7.Presentations/Proclamations/Recognitions/Donations a.Hennepin County Library - Receive presentation from Hennepin County Library b.Center for Energy and Environment Housing Services Presentation - Receive presentation from Center for Energy and Environment regarding Home Energy Squad Visits and Construction Consultations 8.Public Hearings a.Proposed Special Assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs, Weed Removal Costs and Utility Service Line Repair Costs 1. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Property Tax Rolls - Notice was published in the official newspaper on February 21, 2019. Requested Council Action: - Motion to Open Public Hearing - Take public input - Motion to close Public Hearing - Motion to adopt Resolution 2. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Weed Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Property Tax Rolls - Notice was published in the official newspaper on February 21, 2019 Requested Council Action: - Motion to open Public Hearing - Take public input - Motion to close Public Hearing - Motion to adopt Resolution 3. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Utility Repairs to the Hennepin County Property Tax Rolls - Notice was published in the official newspaper on February 21, 2019 Requested Council Action: - Motion to open Public Hearing - Take public input - Motion to close Public Hearing - Motion to adopt Resolution 9.Planning Commission Items a.Resolution Approving Planning Commission Application No. 2019-004, for a Special Use Permit for an Autism Therapy Center and Ancillary Playground (Located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard) - Motion to approve a resolution approving a request for a Special Use Permit for an autism therapy center with ancillary outdoor playground, at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard, based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, as amended by the conditions in the resolution of approval 10.Council Consideration Items a.Appeal of Chapter 12 Compliance Order Submitted by Bradley J. Schumacher, rental property owner of 5240 Drew Avenue North - Resolution Acting on the Appeal of Certain Rental Inspection Compliance Order for 5240 Drew Ave N in Brooklyn Center Minnesota 11.Council Report 12.Adjournment COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Dr. Reggie Edwards, Deputy City Manager FROM:Barb Suciu, City Clerk SUBJECT:Approval of Minutes Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve the following minutes: March 11, 2019 Study Session March 11, 2019 Regular Session March 11, 2019 Work Session Background: Budget Issues: N/A Strategic Priorities and Values: Operational Excellence 03/11/19 -1- 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 STUDY SESSION MARCH 11, 2019 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Study Session called to order by Mayor Mike Elliott at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers, April Graves, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Councilmember Butler was absent and excused. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Deputy City Manager Reggie Edwards, Director of Public Works Doran Cote, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, City Attorney Troy Gilchrist, and Mary Mullen, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. MISCELLANEOUS City Manager Curt Boganey requested that the April 3, 2019 Joint City Council/Commission Meeting be rescheduled as the second City Development Workshop is also scheduled for that date, which is open to the community, and which City Councilmembers and Commissioners are encouraged to attend. Councilmember Ryan suggested April 2 or April 4, 2019 as alternative dates for the Joint City Council/Commission Meeting, at the same time and location. It was the majority consensus of the City Council to reschedule the Joint City Council/Commission Meeting from April 3, 2019 to April 2, 2019. Councilmember Ryan stated he will be out of town from April 9-14, 2019. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION OF AGENDA ITEMS AND QUESTIONS Mr. Boganey stated this item was first on the agenda but was not discussed. It was the majority consensus of the City Council that there were no agenda items or questions to discuss. DISCUSSION OF WORK SESSION AGENDA ITEMS AS TIME PERMITS 03/11/19 -2- DRAFT BUSINESS SUBSIDY AND CITY PUBLIC FINANCING POLICY DISCUSSION Community Development Director Meg Beekman reviewed the City’s Business Subsidy Policy, specifically language related to minimum wages and prevailing wage. She stated the City Council discussed potential changes to this policy at a recent Workshop. She added, in reviewing the Business Subsidy Policy, City Staff believes the policy is narrow in scope and should potentially be broadened to cover financial subsidies from a development perspective. She noted this will provide guidance and parameters for developers. Ms. Beekman stated this will be the first of three such discussions regarding a City-wide public financing policy. She added City Staff hopes that through discussion and consideration a draft policy will be adopted that provides more guidance for the development community or any applicant who might request subsidy from the City of Brooklyn Center. She welcomed Stacie Kvilvang, Ehlers & Associates, and invited her to address the City Council on this issue. Stacie Kvilvang presented a review of State Statute related to business subsidy and City public financing policy. She added a formal agreement is required, and most communities use a multiplier of the minimum wage as well as job creation goals. She reviewed policy basics and public financing assistance best practices, most notably no assistance for overpayment of land. Ms. Kvilvang stated the City Council will be given homework related to this issue, in the form of a survey of priorities for redevelopment goals due back to City Staff by March 25, 2019. She added the policy should be flexible so the City Council can decide how they want to move within the policy to create development opportunities. She noted the survey results will be reviewed by the City Council at their April 8, 2019, meeting to begin the process of setting a framework for a new policy. Mayor Elliott asked whether the City Council might be pigeonholing themselves by setting specific policy goals. Ms. Kvilvang stated the policy’s broad-based parameters for the community will typically encompass most projects. Councilmember Ryan stated the challenge is to understand this type of financing. He added going through this process will help City Staff as well as the City Council gain understanding of long-term consequences, basic financing, and ways to protect the City’s interests. Mayor Elliott thanked Ms. Kvilvang for her presentation. CITY SNOW PLOWING Mr. Boganey requested that the City Council address Work Session Agenda Item 4 as all parties are present. Mr. Boganey stated, at a recent Public Open Forum, a resident expressed concern regarding current snow removal on Metro Transit routes in Brooklyn Center. City Staff agreed to provide 03/11/19 -3- DRAFT the City Council with a review of current snow plowing policies and receive feedback and comment regarding existing policies and any potential modifications. Director of Public Works Doran Cote reviewed the City’s snow plowing priorities, which are a functional classification system based on type of roadway. He added streets that are local collectors are maintained by the City and provide neighborhood access to higher functioning streets. He noted within the priority map there are some anomalies, including the area of concern that was brought forward by the resident. Mr. Cote stated the resident indicated that his bus route is not plowed. City Staff contacted Metro Transit regarding this issue and was assured that all routes with concentrated populations are regularly maintained. Mr. Cote stated plowing schedules could be modified, but there would be implications, including interrupted driver familiarity with routes and schedules, and School District schedule changes. Councilmember Graves stated she understands the importance of driver familiarity. She asked how plowing of routes is addressed and which areas of the City are plowed first. Mr. Cote stated it depends upon the snow event. He added drivers plow their priority route, and then start on residential roads where they end up. Councilmember Ryan stated the men and women doing the plowing should be allowed to make their own decisions regarding execution. He asked whether drivers can adjust their plowing schedule to ensure that Dupont Avenue gets cleared, which is the road that was referred to in the resident complaint. Mayor Elliott stated the City Council has expressed transit accessibility as an important policy goal for the City, especially in certain neighborhoods. He added this could be an opportunity to increase accessibility for certain areas by ensuring that they are plowed. Mr. Boganey stated the system in place appears to be working well. He added he has heard repeatedly during his 20-year tenure in Brooklyn Center about the excellent quality snow removal that residents receive and have come to expect. He noted he does not recommend a change in policy unless the City Council feels that transit routes should be given a higher priority. ADJOURN STUDY SESSION TO INFORMAL OPEN FORUM WITH CITY COUNCIL Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Graves seconded to close the Study Session at 6:45 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 03/11/19 -1- 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 MARCH 11, 2019 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. 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 Mike Elliott at 6:45 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers, April Graves, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Councilmember Butler was absent and excused. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Deputy City Manager Reggie Edwards, Director of Fiscal & Support Services Nate Reinhardt, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, Business and Work Force Development Coordinator Brett Angel, City Attorney Troy Gilchrist, and Mary Mullen, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. Mayor Mike Elliott opened the meeting for the purpose of Informal Open Forum. Myrna Kragness Karth, 3401 63 rd Avenue N, stated she is a former City Councilmember and has been a resident of Brooklyn Center for over 50 years. She added there has never been a request for a private office at City Hall for the Mayor or City Council. She noted there was an article in the Minneapolis Star Tribune regarding this issue. Roger Kloster, 7223 Lee Avenue, stated he recently received a booklet from the City of Brooklyn Center about the curbside waste pick-up program, where residents can get rid of unwanted items. He requested that the program start on May 1 instead of April 1, because of all the snow. Mr. Kloster stated he suggests that the Mayor should take a little time to get used to his new role before requesting an office. Mr. Kloster requested that City Staff review the amount of traffic that will be generated by the new liquor store on Xerxes Avenue. He added additional traffic signs might be required. Protea Toles, 5640 Fremont Avenue North, stated, as a business woman, she understands Mayor Elliott’s need for an office at City Hall, to give him space and be productive with his time. She added the decision the City makes on this issue is a reflection on how the City views its 03/11/19 -2- DRAFT leadership, its level of importance to the community and respect for the work they are required to do. Ms. Toles stated, regarding the liquor store, she has patronized the City’s liquor store but she does not support the City taking on additional debt to purchase the new space. She added a new liquor store will not provide a benefit to the City’s residents in terms of beautification, safety, or growth and development. She noted she is a realtor, and many people have said that they have to leave Brooklyn Center to find things to do. Allan Hancock, 5520 Fremont Avenue N, stated he has been a resident of Brooklyn Center for 27 years. He added he opposes the new liquor store, as resources could be better spent on activities for residents. He added the location is not ideal as there is a lot of traffic congestion. Mr. Boganey stated, for purposes of clarification, the liquor store proposal does involve expenditure of City funds but not tax dollars. Revenue from liquor operations is net income for the City that can be used for several purposes. He added currently all profits go back into the capital plan mostly for park improvements. He reviewed the benefits of owning rather than leasing, which will ultimately result in additional funds to be used on City improvements. Ms. Toles asked how revenue from the current store is used, and when will the new store make a profit. Mr. Boganey stated revenue to pay for the bond is now used to pay the lease, and bonds for the new store will be paid off in 15 years. Profits are expected to occur in the first year of operations. Councilmember Graves moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to close the Informal Open Forum at 7:00 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. 2. INVOCATION Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson gave an Invocation recognizing April 2019 as National Donate Life Month, focusing attention on the gift of organ donation. She stated there are over 110,000 people who are currently on waiting lists for the lifesaving gift of a donated organ. She added her daughter received the gift of a new liver 10 years ago, and her husband has been waiting for three years for an organ donation. She requested a moment of silence and reflection in honor of those who are waiting for the gift of an organ, and those who have been donors. 3. CALL TO ORDER REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING The Brooklyn Center City Council met in Regular Session called to order by Mayor Mike Elliott at 7:03 p.m. 4. ROLL CALL 03/11/19 -3- DRAFT Mayor Mike Elliott and Councilmembers April Graves, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Councilmember Butler was absent and excused. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Deputy City Manager Reggie Edwards, Finance Director Nate Reinhardt, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, Business and Work Force Development Coordinator Brett Angell, City Attorney Troy Gilchrist, and Mary Mullen, 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 Lawrence-Anderson seconded to approve the Agenda and Consent Agenda, and the following consent items were approved: 6a. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. February 25, 2019 – Study Session 2. February 25, 2019 – Regular Session 6b. LICENSES MECHANICAL Jewelski Mechanical 1596 Countryside Drive Shakopee MN 55379 The Heating Guy 7100 Medicine Lake Road Minneapolis MN 55427 St. Marie Sheet Metal, Inc. 7940 Spring Lake Road NE Spring Lake Park MN 55432 RENTAL RENEWAL (TYPE IV– one-year license) 5620 Girard Avenue N Kevin & Mandy Schultz RENEWAL (TYPE III – one-year license) 3808 France Place IH2 Property IL LP RENEWAL (TYPE II – two-year license) 5400-02 Russell Avenue N Tai Pham (Met Action Plan) 7250 West River Road Paul Barli 1706 71 st Avenue N Patricia Sandeen 5943 Colfax Avenue N Juliana Koe 6436 Fremont Avenue N Neng Xi Zhang / Excel Properties RENEWAL (TYPE I – three-year license) 3907 65 th Avenue N / Granite Peaks Chris D. Kohler 03/11/19 -4- DRAFT 3412 62 nd Avenue N Neng Xi Zhang – Excel Properties 4512 65 th Avenue N Massih Sarim (Missing 8 hr Crime Free Housing Cert) 4703 68 th Avenue N Bernard McDonough 5425 70 th Circle Ali Sajjad / 786 Homes LLC 6615 Camden Drive Calvin Johnson/Johnson Organization 7217 Camden Avenue N IH2 Property IL LP 5906 Dupont Avenue Bruce Alan Goldberg 5821 Ewing Avenue N IH2 Property IL LP (Met Action Plan) 6037 June Avenue N Paul G. Miller 7157 Unity Avenue N Melissa Pickar SIGNHANGER Signminds Inc. 1400 Quincy Street NE Minneapolis MN 55413 TRANSIENT ACCOMMODATION Norwood Inn & Suites 6415 James Circle N Brooklyn Center MN 55430 G6 Hospitality Property LLC (Motel 6) 2741 Freeway Boulevard Brooklyn Center MN 55430 6c. RESOLUTION NO. 2019-045 ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY REPORT, DECLARING COSTS TO BE ASSESSED AND CALLING FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND ASSESSMENT PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2018-08 AND 2019-05, BELLVUE AND SOUTHEAST AREA M ILL AND OVERLAY 6d. ANNUAL REPORT ON FRANCHISE FEES Motion passed unanimously. 7. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/RECOGNITIONS/DONATIONS -None. 8. PUBLIC HEARINGS -None. 9. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS -None. 10. COUNCIL CONSIDERATION ITEMS 10a. RESOLUTION NO. 2019-046 APPROVING PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT OF PROPERTY AND ANY IMPROVEMENTS OF LOT 5, BLOCK 1, SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING 5 TH ADDITION, BROOKLYN 03/11/19 -5- DRAFT CENTER, MN (1350 SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING). Director of Fiscal & Support Services Nate Reinhardt reviewed the Purchase Agreement for 1350 Shingle Creek Crossing for Brooklyn Center Liquor Store #1. He stated the existing lease for Store #1 at its current location will expire June 2020. He added the Purchase Agreement incorporates terms specified in a Letter of Intent to Purchase that was approved by the City Council at their January 28, 2019 meeting. He noted the Civil Engineer will ensure that pedestrian safety and traffic calming components are included in the site plan. Mr. Reinhardt stated the existing internal traffic lane is considered a ring road, and any modifications would need to be approved by Sears. He added representatives of Sears have indicated they will not approve a site plan that impacts traffic flow. He added modifications to the turn lanes might be limited but stop signs or speed bumps could be considered. He noted, if approved, City Staff will provide an updated site plan and store design for City Council approval prior to bids. Mr. Reinhardt stated the Shingle Creek Crossing development has restrictions regarding what types of commercial use can be developed in this area. He reviewed the types of uses that would not be permitted. Councilmember Graves requested clarification regarding Shingle Creek Crossing’s development restrictions, which seem counter-intuitive. Mr. Reinhardt stated the developer restricted any uses that might be in direct competition with existing uses. Mr. Boganey agreed, adding such restrictions might not be a good thing in the long run, but from the developer’s perspective better than having empty space. He stated he will reinforce Councilmember Graves’ comments with the developer, which City Staff have discussed with them before. He added the concerns are well-founded and are also of concern to City Staff. Councilmember Graves stated she likes the idea of speed bumps and stop signs. She stated she would support doing some traffic calming measures before the liquor store is constructed, to address traffic and pedestrian safety. She requested additional information about the C-Line transit stop, where it will be located and how it will impact traffic flow, or the view of the store from Xerxes Avenue. Councilmember Graves stated the new location will be better than the current Liquor Store #1 location, and she supports the idea of creating more profit to be used for community-based development and owning rather than leasing the store. She added she is supports moving the Purchase Agreement forward if traffic and safety issues are addressed sooner rather than later. Councilmember Ryan stated he concurs with Councilmember Graves’ statements. He added municipal liquor operations limits the number of allowable liquor retailers in the City, providing a control on liquor sales. City Attorney Troy Gilchrist confirmed this. 03/11/19 -6- DRAFT Councilmember Ryan expressed his support of the Purchase Agreement, as it will benefit the City financially as it will generate revenue that will be used to improve the City’s parks. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she concurs with the statements of the other Councilmembers. She added Liquor Store #1 is not in a good location and its parking lot is bad. She noted the current location is just as close to the transit hub as the proposed new location. Mayor Elliott stated he has concerns regarding safety and the location of the liquor store and its proximity to the C-line hub. He added he had hoped to review additional information that would address safety concerns related to the location. He stressed the importance of having more information about these concerns before moving forward. Councilmember Graves asked whether the City has sufficient power or influence to put in safety measures before the property is purchased. Mr. Reinhardt stated it will not be possible to modify the number of lanes, but having the parking lot open and available, and a pedestrian walkway at the intersection, may alleviate the majority of those concerns. Councilmember Graves stated she thinks that the addition of a crosswalk and speedbumps to reduce traffic speeds will address pedestrian safety concerns. She asked how likely it is that they will be implemented. Mr. Boganey stated, based on his knowledge of the developer, that anything the City proposes that is within reason will probably be approved by the developer. Councilmember Ryan stated traffic flow and pedestrian safety concerns can be managed. He added the liquor store is not to be an on-sale liquor property where alcohol is served and has never been the focus of public safety concerns or disturbances. Councilmember Ryan asked whether the City will own the alternative expansion space. Mr. Reinhardt confirmed this, adding the City Council will be asked to consider authorizing construction of the additional shell if bids are favorable. Councilmember Ryan moved and Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 2019-046 Approving Purchase and Sale Agreement of Property and any Improvements of Lot 5, Block 1, Shingle Creek Crossing 5 th Addition, Brooklyn Center, MN (1350 Shingle Creek Crossing). Mayor Elliott voted against the same. Motion passed. 11. COUNCIL REPORT Councilmember Ryan reported on his attendance at the following and provided information on the following upcoming events: 03/11/19 -7- DRAFT • March 4, 2019 – Black History Month presentations at Brooklyn Center High School, his alma mater. Students gave presentations on the historical significance of great African Americans in U.S. history. • Councilmember Ryan stated the City’s bulk waste curb-side cleanup event is planned in April 2019. He added residents should receive a card in the mail with dates and information. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson stated she had nothing to report. Councilmember Graves reported on her attendance at the following: • February 18, 2019 - participated in CCX Media television interview with Sonia Gong in celebration of Black History Month • February 19, 2019 – met new City Staff member and attended Parks & Recreation meeting, at which the City’s parks plan was discussed, including parks that are due to be upgraded • February 21 – March 7, 2019 – visited countries in Africa for an amazing and unforgettable experience • March 11, 2019 - Participated in City Council Comprehensive Plan update Mayor Elliott reported on his attendance at the following events: • March 4, 2019 - Black History Month events at Brooklyn Center High School. He added the students did a great job of presenting the historical figures they had researched. • March 11, 2019 – testified at the State Capital along with Mr. Boganey on behalf of the City regarding Local Government Aid. They were joined by the Mayor of Lauderdale, Mary Gaasch. 12. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Graves moved and Councilmember Ryan seconded adjournment of the City Council meeting at 7:40 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. Sylvia Winkelman, 6337 Orchard Avenue North, approached the City Council to express her concern regarding the lack of a recycling program at St. Alphonsus Church. She stated she has tried to get information from Hennepin County but has not been able to contact anyone. She added she goes through the trash at St. Alphonsus and removes recycling herself. She asked for the City Council’s help in getting a response from St. Alphonsus about starting a recycling program. Mayor Elliott thanked Ms. Winkelman for her comments. He added the City Council is very concerned about recycling. He asked that the City Staff research this issue and potentially provide a recommendation. Councilmember Lawrence-Anderson asked Ms. Winkelman whether she has contacted the St Alphonsus Church Staff regarding this issue. Ms. Winkelman confirmed this, adding one Parish Councilmember is interested, but she is having difficulty making any progress. 03/11/19 -8- DRAFT Ms. Winkelman expressed concern about the speed of traffic and congestion at the intersection of Northway Drive and Xerxes Avenue. She added she goes to LA Fitness 3 times a week, and that is a very dangerous intersection. 03/11/19 -1- 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 MARCH 11, 2019 CITY HALL – COUNCIL CHAMBERS CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council/Economic Development Authority (EDA) met in Work Session called to order by Mayor/President Mike Elliott at 8:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor/President Mike Elliott and Councilmembers/Commissioners Marquita Butler, April Graves, Kris Lawrence-Anderson, and Dan Ryan. Also present were City Manager Curt Boganey, Deputy City Manager Reggie Edwards, Community Development Director Meg Beekman, City Attorney Troy Gilchrist, and Mary Mullen, TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. BROOKLYN CENTER BEAUTIFICATION AND PUBLIC ART Deputy City Manager Reggie Edwards reviewed a new initiative intended to continue to promote a sense of identity for the residents of Brooklyn Center, and provide a plan for beautification and public art. The intent is to coordinate efforts, enhance the community image, and promote targeted redevelopment, as well as engage residents and local businesses in economic development. City Staff has executed a contract with Forecast, a public art organization, to provide consultation and guidance services. Mr. Edwards introduced representatives of Forecast: Jack Becker, Principal and Founder; Ashlyn Crawford, Community Engagement; and Witt Siasoco, Consulting Associate , who has worked in the public realm on many civic art projects in the Twin Cities area. Mr. Becker stated he has been involved with Forecast since its inception in 1978. The mission of Forecast is to activate people and networks to promote public art. Forecast offers funding and training for artists who want to work in the public realm, and provides assistance for artists, arts residencies and arts master planning. Mr. Becker stated Forecast plans to design a pubic arts program for Brooklyn Center to support and enhance art in public spaces, beautifying neighborhoods, and advance art in public life. Mr. Siasoco stated he is working with Ms. Crawford on photo sessions with residents to create street banners. A postcard-making event was held so residents of Brooklyn Center could create 03/11/19 -2- DRAFT art rather than doing a survey. Residents were invited to write or draw a memory or idea about Brooklyn Center on a postcard. Ms. Crawford stated Forecast will work with City Staff to determine stakeholders, including schools and libraries, to ensure that every voice is heard in this process. Mr. Becker stated mapping exercises will be used to build interest and participation. This process will help determine where residents place their importance in terms of public space and social interaction. A stakeholder “constellation chart” will be created to structure a visual of all the partners who will be involved and review other City structures and existing programs. Mr. Becker stated public art can take many forms: murals, infrastructure amenities, benches and seating elements, playground structures, and lighting, as well as rituals like parades. Mayor/President Elliott thanked Mr. Becker for his presentation. He added the work of Forecast touches on what it takes to make a community livable, by increasing connectedness and getting residents involved. He noted Brooklyn Center has a richly diverse community, and he supports the idea of creating something that is unique and enriching. He stressed the importance of this type of community effort. Councilmember/Commissioner Graves stated she is excited about this public art project, as art is a big part of her life. She added it is a great way to bring out the City’s identity and increase public engagement. She noted many communities have acknowledged the concept of crime prevention through environmental design - creating spaces that are conducive to positive interactions between individuals. Councilmember/Commissioner Graves stated she thinks the street banners are helpful, and she likes the big blackboard with a compelling question, encouraging people to write their answer. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson stated a lot of information has been presented tonight, and the public art project is a big concept. She added she would like to see examples of other similar programs. Mr. Becker agreed to provide that. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated he would be interested in seeing comparisons as well. He added many residents are concerned about costs. He noted, however, he recognizes the transformative power of community art, and the creation of a backdrop that people can experience and appreciate. Councilmember/Commissioner Graves stated she likes the concept of a neighborhood engagement team to connect cultural components of the City. She added another area of focus is parks and trails, as the parks in Brooklyn Center are not connected like they are in other cities. She would like to see rental bikes available in Brooklyn Center, and have the parks connected 03/11/19 -3- DRAFT with trails, lights and art. She noted she is interested in getting involved in these efforts and finding out ways she can contribute her ideas and involve other residents who are artistic. Mr. Becker stated one of the challenges will be to identify residents and art groups within Brooklyn Center to include in this process. He added he is interested in inspiring connectivity in the city’s parks and open spaces. He noted he looks forward to a future session with the City Council/EDA to dig deeper into these ideas and issues. He agreed to follow up with additional information regarding public spaces in other cities in the region. SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR PROFESSIONAL PLANNING SERVICES WITH BOLTON & MENK AND PROVIDE DIRECTION Community Development Director Meg Beekman reviewed a request issued by City Staff for qualifications for professional planning services. City Staff and representatives from Alatus reviewed 9 qualifications that were received, and four teams were interviewed and evaluated based on experience, qualifications, and quality of proposal. The ultimate consensus was that Bolton & Menk was the preferred team. Ms. Beekman stated the elements included in the scope of work are as follows: re-writing the City’s Zoning Code; creation of mixed-use Zoning districts; creation of a Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District; development of Opportunity Site Master Plan which would include Alatus Phase 1 development; and development strategies for the former Sears site and 57 th Avenue N/Logan Avenue N site. Ms. Beekman stated planning for Alatus Phase 1 development has been on-going at the EDA- owned site for the past year, and Phase 2 development will begin in 2019. The preliminary development agreement will need to be renegotiated as it expires in April 2019. City Staff will focus on the master planning component. Ms. Beekman stated City Council/EDA feedback and consideration is requested regarding components of the Opportunity Site development: a high-level land use plan including infrastructure framework for the entire site; and a more detailed land use and street plan for 35 acres, including development phasing, entitlement and shared amenities. Ms. Beekman stated a Hennepin County funding grant is being sought for the Brooklyn Boulevard project, to enhance planning efforts and create more detailed design guidelines. Haila Maze, Project Manager with Bolton & Menk, reviewed the proposed Zoning and Redevelopment Study. She requested the City Council/EDA’s consideration of a communication plan for how they would like to stay informed about on-going development plans, projects and changes that could include community engagement and public involvement; a project website and online engagement; public meetings, workshops, and focus groups; and project newsletters and mailings. 03/11/19 -4- DRAFT Ms. Maze stated the Zoning Code update will be handled by a team that has experience identifying and implementing effective City Code. She added this process includes review of ordinances, zoning regulations and districts, and adoption of a new Code in a user-friendly format with City Staff training and support. Ms. Maze stated, in terms of time frame, existing conditions will be reviewed, as well as determination of specific goals and objectives by spring 2020 with implementation and adoption in fall 2020. Mayor/President Elliott thanked Ms. Maze for her presentation. He added this important work will have a big impact on the City, and he supports considerable community outreach regarding the project and potential outcomes. He stressed the importance of developing something that is unique to Brooklyn Center, and inclusion of local experts and resources throughout the process. He noted he supports the use of social media, websites and pop-up events, as well as civic organizations, congregations and religious centers, to connect with residents. Mayor/President Elliott stated the development planning process should be life-enriching and community-building, and inclusive of all residents, including the elderly, diverse cultural groups, and those new to Brooklyn Center. Councilmember/Commissioner Ryan stated he agrees this is very important work. He added the real challenge will be implementation, and experience and support are critically important to help the City further refine its vision. He noted he appreciates the foresight of the City’s redevelopment staff in recommending professional planning services. Mayor/President Elliott stressed the importance of the issue of housing affordability in terms of economic competitiveness for the City of Brooklyn Center. He added there is a distinction between affordable housing, and housing affordability. Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence-Anderson thanked Ms. Maze for her presentation. She added she looks forward to working with the team from Bolton & Menk. Councilmember/Commissioner Graves stated she is excited to see what unfolds and requested that the City Council/EDA be updated throughout the process. She stressed the importance of being aware and intentional about zoning changes and unintentional impacts. Mr. Boganey thanked Ms. Beekman and her staff for their efforts and hard work. He added Ms. Beekman’s vision and knowledge has brought tremendous value to this process, and to the City of Brooklyn Center and its residents. Mayor/President Elliott agreed, and thanked Ms. Beekman. 03/11/19 -5- DRAFT ADJOURNMENT Councilmember/Commissioner Graves moved and Councilmember/Commissioner Lawrence- Anderson seconded adjournment of the City Council/Economic Development Authority Work Session at 9:33 p.m. Motion passed unanimously. COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Reggie Edwards, Deputy City Manager FROM:Alix Bentrud, Deputy City Clerk SUBJECT:Approval of Licenses Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve licenses as presented 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. The liquor license renewals are based on past practices of distance requirements and may require an amendment in the future. MECHANICAL LICENSE BNC Heating & Cooling LLC 22600 County Rd 30 Rogers, MN 55374 Dependable Heating & Cooling Inc 2619 Coon Rapids Blvd NW Coon Rapids,MN 55433 Northland Mechanical Contractors, Inc 9001 Science Center Drive New Hope, 55428 RJ Mechanical Inc 901 N Industrial Park Road Box 373 Mora, MN 55051 Vector Services 712 Vista Blvd, Suite 102 Waconia, MN 55387 ON-SALE INTOXICATING AND SUNDAY SALES Minn Hotels LLC dba Radisson Hotel Brooklyn Center 2200 Freeway Blvd Brooklyn Center, 55430 TRANSIENT ACCOMMODATIONS LICENSE Extended Stay America 2701 Freeway Blvd Brooklyn Center, 55430 Minn Hotels LLC dba Radission Hotel Brooklyn Center 2200 Freeway Blvd Brooklyn Center, 55430 Strategic Priorities and Values: Safe, Secure, Stable Community COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM Our Vision: We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home, and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment Rental License Category Criteria Policy – Adopted by City Council 09-10-2018 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 0-2 3+ units 0-0.75 Type II – 2 Year 1-2 units Greater than 2 but not more than 5 3+ units Greater than 0.75 but not more than 1.5 Type III – 1 Year 1-2 units Greater than 5 but not more than 9 3+ units Greater than 1.5 but not more than 3 Type IV – 6 Months 1-2 units Greater than 9 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 units 0-0.25 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 1 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 Pr o p e r t y   A d d r e s s Dw e l l i n g Ty p e Re n e w a l or   I n i t i a l Ow n e r Pr o p e r t y Co d e Vi o l a t i o n s Li c e n s e Ty p e Po l i c e CF S   * Fi n a l   Lic e n s e   Ty p e   * * Pr e v i o u s   Li c e n s e   Ty p e   * * * 63 4 2   D u p o n t   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y I n i t i a l M a r k   T u s c a n o / C E R B E R U S   S F R   LP 2 7 I V 0 I V 68 1 2   Z e n i t h   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y I n i t i a l E l i z a b e t h   P a r e d e s   R o s a r i o 1 0I V 0 I V 67 4 0   G r i m e s   P L Vi c t o r i a   T o w n h o u s e s Mu l t i 8  B l d g s   48   U n i t s Re n e w a l G a u g h a n   C o m p a n i e s   (m e t   a c t i o n   p l a n ) 81 1. 7   p e r   u n i t II I 5 .1   p e r   u n i t II I I V 38 0 7   6 1 s t   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l I H 2   P r o p e r t y   I l l i n o i s   L P 9 I I I 0 I I I I I 54 2 2   7 2 n d     C i r S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l D e n i s e   M i c h a e l i d e s   1 I 0 I I I 59 4 2   A l d r i c h   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l B R P   I I 0 I 0 I I I 61 1 9   B e a r d   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l W a g n e r   P r o p e r t y   R e n t a l s   L L C 3 I I 0 I I I I 61 3 1   B r y a n t   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l J u n   W a n g   ( M e t   A c t i o n   P l a n ) 4 I I 0 I I I I I 23 0 1   E r i c o n   D r S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l D a n   M a t t i s o n 4 I I 0 I I I 63 0 0   F r a n c e   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l Wa d e   K l i c k (me t   a c t i o n   p la n ) 10 I V 0 I V I I I 70 1 8   F r a n c e   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l B r u m m e r   R e a l t y 7 I I I 0 I I I I I 68 0 9   F r e m o n t   P l   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l A l i   S a j j a d / 7 8 6   H o m e s 5 I I 0 I I I 68 2 8   F r e m o n t   P l   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a A l i   S a j j a d / 7 8 6   H o m e s 2 I 0 I I 69 0 7   G r i m e s   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l J a c k   Z h e n g 0 I 0 I I I 56 1 9   H i l l s v i e w   R d S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l J a m e s   K a u n 0 I 0 I I 57 1 3   H u m b o l d t   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l J a n i c e   B i o r n 4 I I 0 I I I I 53 2 2   L o g a n   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n w a l M a r y   J o   S c h w a n z 6 I I I 0 I I I I 72 2 5   M o r g a n   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l S h a s t a   F r a n d r u p / S R F F   L L C   3 II 0 I I I I 69 3 0   O l i v e r   A v e   N S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l R o b e r t   E   L i n d a h l 2 I 0 I I 54 0 6   S a i l o r   L A S i n g l e   F a m i l y R e n e w a l J a m e s   W a t e r s 4 I I 0 I I I I I * C F S   =   C a l l s   F o r   S e r v i c e   f o r   R e n e w a l   L i c e n s e s   O n l y   ( I n i t i a l   L i ce n s e s   a r e   n o t   a p p l i c a b l e   t o   c a l l s   f o r   s e r v i c e   a n d   w i l l   b e   l i s t ed   N / A . ) **   L i c e n s e   T y p e   B e i n g   I s s u e d ** *   I n i t i a l   l i c e n s e s   w i l l   n o t   s h o w   a   p r e v i o u s   l i c e n s e   t y p e Al l   p r o p e r t i e s   a r e   c u r r e n t   o n   C i t y   u t i l i t i e s   a n d   p r o p e r t y   t a x e s Ty p e   1   =   3   Y e a r         T y p e   I I   =   2   Y e a r             T y p e   I I I   =   1   Y e a r Re n t a l   L i c e n s e s   f o r   C o u n c i l   A p p r o v a l   o n   M a r c h   2 5 ,   2 0 1 9 COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:N/A FROM:Doran Cote, Public Works Director SUBJECT:Resolution Accepting Bid and Awarding a Contract, Improvement Project No. 2018-14, 2018 Bridge Rehabilitation Requested Council Action: - Approve a resolution of the lowest responsible bid and award a contract to LS Black Constructors, Inc. for Improvement Project No. 2018-14, 2018 Bridge Rehabilitation Background: Bids for the 2018 Bridge Rehabilitation, Project No. 2018-14, were first received and opened on January 17, 2019. The updated estimated project cost provided by the consulting engineer prior to bidding was $330,377.50. Both bids were considerably higher than the estimate and were rejected. It was recommended that staff bring forward a project to complete the rehabilitation of two bridges this year (Freeway Boulevard and 69th Avenue) and a separate project to rehabilitate two bridges next year (Shingle Creek Parkway) which will be bid later this year for construction in 2020. Bids for the 2018 Bridge Rehabilitation of two bridges, Project No. 2018-14, were received and opened on March 7, 2019. The bidding results are tabulated below: Bidder Total Base Bid Global Specialty Contractors, Inc. $199,777.00 LS Black Constructors, Inc. $164,411.19 PCI Roads, LLC $348,250.00 The updated estimated project cost for two bridges was $220,000.00. Of the three (3) bids, the lowest base bid of $164,411.19 was submitted by LS Black Constructors, Inc. LS Black Constructors, Inc. has the experience, equipment and capacity to qualify as the lowest responsible bidder for the project. Staff checked LS Black Constructors, Inc.’s references and those references were positive. The City’s design engineer, TKDA, has evaluated the bids and recommends that the bid be awarded to LS Black Constructors, Inc. Budget Issues: The low bid amount of $164,411.19 is 25 percent under the current estimated construction cost of $220,000. The total estimated budget in the Capital Improvement Program for rehabilitation of four bridges was $226,000. The total estimated cost including contingencies, administration, engineering and legal is $234,411.19 (see attached Resolution – Costs and Revenues tables). Strategic Priorities and Values: Key Transportation Investments Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2018-14, 2018 BRIDGE REHABILITATION WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 2018-14, three bids were received, opened and tabulated by the City Engineer on the 7th day of March, 2019. Said bids were as follows: Bidder Total Base Bid Global Specialty Contractors, Inc. $199,770.00 LS Black Constructors, Inc. $164,411.19 PCI Roads, LLC $348,250.00 WHEREAS, it appears that LS Black Constructors, Inc., of St. Paul, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with LS Black Constructors, Inc. of St. Paul, Minnesota, in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 2018-14, according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Engineer. 2. The estimated project costs and revenues are as follows: COSTS Estimated per Low Bid Construction Cost $ 226,000.00 $164,411.19 Engineering and Administrative $ 34,500.00 $ 50,000.00 Contingency $ 20,000.00 $ 20,000.00 TOTAL $280,500.00 $234,411.19 Amended REVENUES Estimated per Low Bid Street Reconstruction Fund $280,500.00 $234,411.19 RESOLUTION NO. _______________ March 25, 2019 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. COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Doran Cote, Public Works Director FROM:Mike Albers, City Engineer SUBJECT:Resolution Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final Payment, Improvement Project Nos. 2017-10 and 2017-11, 2017 Pavement, Traffic Signal System and Trail Rehabilitation Improvements (69th Avenue and France Avenue) Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve the resolution accepting work performed and authorizing final payment, Improvement Project Nos. 2017-10 and 2017-11, 2017 Pavement, Traffic Signal System and Trail Rehabilitation Improvements (69th Avenue and France Avenue) Background: On July 24, 2017, the City Council awarded Project Nos. 2017-10 and 2017-11 to C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. of Maple Grove, Minnesota for the construction of the 2017 Pavement, Traffic Signal System and Trail Rehabilitation Improvements on 69th Avenue and France Avenue. C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. has successfully completed the construction work and is requesting final payment for the project. Budget Issues: The original contract amount with C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. for project improvements was $1,056,711.10. The total value of work certified for final payment is $939,107.00. The total project cost including contingencies/administration/engineering/legal is $1,173,810.71 and was completed 20.3 percent under budget in the amount of $298,730.39. The attached resolution provides a summary of the final amended costs and funding sources for the project. Strategic Priorities and Values: Key Transportation Investments Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NOS. 2017-10 AND 2017-11, 2017 PAVEMENT, TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM AND TRAIL REHABILITATION IMPROVEMENTS (69TH AVENUE AND FRANCE AVENUE) WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. of Maple Grove, Minnesota has completed the following improvements in accordance with said contract: Improvement Project Nos. 2017-10 and 2017-11, 2017 Pavement, Traffic Signal System and Trail Rehabilitation Improvements (69 th Avenue and France Avenue) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that 1. Final payment shall be made on Improvement Project Nos. 2017-10 and 2017-11, 2017 Pavement, Traffic Signal System and Trail Rehabilitation Improvements (69 th Avenue and France Avenue), taking the contractor’s receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvements under said contract shall be $939,107.00. 2. The estimated project costs and revenues are hereby amended as follows: COSTS As Original Award As Final Contract $1,056,711.10 $ 939,107.00 Lighting $ 11,830.00 $ 11,830.00 Contingency $ 160,000.00 $ 20,824.60 Subtotal Construction Cost $1,228,541.10 $ 971,761.60 Admin/Legal/Engr. $ 244,000.00 $ 202,049.11 Total Estimated Project Cost $1,472,541.10 $1,173,810.71 RESOLUTION NO. _______________ REVENUES As Original Award As Final Street Assessment $ 219,584.76 $ 219,584.76 Sanitary Sewer Utility $ 17,965.00 $ 11,449.59 Water Utility Fund $ 28,175.00 $ 22,578.56 Storm Drainage Utility Fund $ 53,935.00 $ 24,764.14 Street Light Utility $ 17,830.00 $ 14,254.59 Capital Projects Fund $ 210,585.30 $ 170,977.82 Street Reconstruction Fund $ 55,000.00 $ 55,000.00 Municipal State Aid (MSA) Fund $ 869,076.04 $ 655,201.25 Miscellaneous $ 390.00 $ 0.00 Total Estimated Revenue $1,472,541.10 $1,173,810.71 March 25, 2019 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. COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Doran Cote, Public Works Director FROM:Mike Albers, City Engineer SUBJECT:Resolution Establishing Improvement Project No. 2021-05, Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 Improvements (Bass Lake Road to Interstate 94) Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve the resolution establishing Improvement Project No. 2021-05, Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 Improvements (Bass Lake Road to Interstate 94) Background: The City completed the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Study in 2013 to guide reconstruction and redevelopment of this corridor. Brooklyn Boulevard (CSAH 152) is a Hennepin County roadway under their jurisdiction. As identified in the City’s Capital Improvements Program (CIP), the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 Improvements (Bass Lake Road to Interstate 94) is programmed for improvements in 2021. The proposed street reconstruction and streetscape improvements will improve roadway safety, enhance traffic operations, reduce access points and provide improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities for a one-mile segment of corridor in Brooklyn Center between Bass Lake Road (CSAH 10) and Interstate 94. The project will enhance bicycle and pedestrian travel by adding a trail, improving sidewalks, transit stops, adding streetscaping and landscaping and improving the functionality of intersections with modified turn lanes and access control throughout the corridor. This project consists of Project Nos. 8, 9 and 10 from the Corridor Study. Typically, in order for a project with federal funds to be completed within a specified calendar year, preliminary design must commence almost two years in advance. This includes initiation of the public notification and participation process that consists of informing affected property owners; conducting field surveys; at least one public informational meeting; and an extensive amount of information and data collection. Initial design also includes detailed technical engineering work, underground infrastructure inspections and assessments and soil/geotechnical investigations. Upon authorization by the City Council, the following actions would take place: Prepare a Project Memorandum (PM) or Environmental Assessment (EA) as required by Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) regulations. Preliminary Design and Final Design. Easement Identification and Acquisition. At this time, staff requests that the City Council establish this roadway and streetscape improvement project and to proceed with the preliminary design, environmental documentation, easement acquisition and final design work. Budget Issues: The Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 Improvements is identified in the City’s CIP and the preliminary project cost estimate is approximately $14.8 million. Federal funding through the Surface Transportation Program (STP) has been awarded to the City and County for this project in the amount of $6,616,000 and the remaining project costs are to be funded from local funding as part of the required cost share. Hennepin County has budgeted up to $4.5 million in their Capital Improvement Program for this project. The final funding partnership and proportions are to be determined in the future but are anticipated to include federal funding, Hennepin County funding and City funding. The estimated cost for preliminary field work, preparation of a PM/EA and design is $1,000,000. City funding is programmed under the City’s Capital Projects Fund. Strategic Priorities and Values: Key Transportation Investments Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO._______________ RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2021-05, BROOKLYN BOULEVARD CORRIDOR PROJECT PHASE 2 IMPROVEMENTS (BASS LAKE ROAD TO INTERSTATE 94) WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center City Council approved the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Study as a planning and development guide for the corridor under Resolution 2013-60; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center (“City”) and Hennepin County (“County”) have been working cooperatively to advance the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 improvements to provide streetscape, trail, lighting and general roadway improvements on Brooklyn Boulevard (CSAH 152) from Bass Lake Road to Interstate 94; and WHEREAS, the City received a federal aid grant in the amount of $6,616,000 to participate in the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 Improvements, programmed for a 2021 construction; and WHEREAS, the County has designated $4,500,000 as part of the County’s Capital Improvement Program to participate in the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 Improvements; and WHEREAS, the City’s Capital Improvement Program identifies the Brooklyn Boulevard roadway and streetscape improvements from Bass Lake Road to Interstate 94 to be constructed in 2021; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to proceed with the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. Improvement Project No. 2021-05, Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Project Phase 2 (Bass Lake Road to Interstate 94) Improvements is hereby established. 2. Staff is directed to proceed with preliminary design, environmental documentation, easement acquisition and final design as required to meet the Federal Aid Project requirements. 3. Estimated project costs for preliminary field work, preliminary design and final design are as follows: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ COST AMOUNT Preliminary Design and Final Design $1,000,000 Estimated Costs Total $1,000,000 REVENUES AMOUNT Capital Projects Fund $1,000,000 Estimated Revenues Total $1,000,000 March 25, 2019 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. B r o o kly n B o ule v a rd 63rd Ave N 59th Ave N 66th Ave N 5Û152 Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS,FAO, NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, EsriJapan, METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, © OpenStreetMapcontributors, and the GIS User Community Public Works - EngineeringFebruary 11, 2019 0 500 1,000250 Feet ¯ Brooklyn Boulevard Phase 2 Project Area H :\ P r o j e c t s \75 8 9 \H I- M U \G r a p h i c s \7 5 8 9 _ P l a n I m p l e m e n t a ti o n L a y o u t _ I n d i v i d u a l P r o j e c t 6 .d g n 1/2/2013 Job #Brooklyn Center B E A R D AV E 6 5 T H A V E 6 3 R D AV E HA L I F AX D R 6 0 T H AV E 5 9 T H AV E AD M I R A L L N T H 94 Brooklyn Boulevard Implementation Plan 6 2 ND AV E 6 1 S T AV E Brooklyn Boulevard Concept - Bass Lake Rd to 65th Ave - Project #8 6 0 T H AV E B E A RD AV E H :\ P r o j e c t s \75 8 9 \H I- M U \G r a p h i c s \7 5 8 9 _ P l a n I m p l e m e n t a ti o n L a y o u t _ I n d i v i d u a l . d g n 1/2/2013 Job # AD M I R A L L N FARGO WELLS GLORY CHURCH CROSS OF Brooklyn Boulevard Implementation Plan Brooklyn Center POTENTIAL ROADWAY REALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE Brooklyn Boulevard Concept - 60th Ave - Project #9 COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:N/A FROM:Jim Glasoe, Director of Community Activities, Recreation & Services SUBJECT:Resolution Authorizing the Community Activities, Recreation and Services Department to Apply For Grant Funding Through the Department of Natural Resources Outdoor Recreation Grant Program Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve a resolution supporting an application for a Department of Natural Resources Outdoor Recreation Grant Background: The Department of Natural Resources is seeking local units of government interested in acquiring, developing, or upgrading facilities for outdoor recreation. Eligible projects include park acquisition and/or development/redevelopment including, internal park trails, picnic shelters, playgrounds, athletic facilities, boat accesses, fishing piers, swimming beaches and campgrounds. All park projects must meet requirements for perpetual outdoor recreation use. The City of Brooklyn Center and the Brooklyn Center Little League are continuing to update/improve the local Little League baseball fields. This grant would be used to renovate the current restroom to conform to current ADA standards and provide additional hard surface areas to improve access to the fields. The Outdoor Recreation Grant submission requirements call for the local governmental unit making the application to provide a resolution from its governing body authorizing the application submission. Accordingly, a resolution is attached for City Council consideration. Budget Issues: The anticipated total cost for the restroom renovation and site accessibility improvements is $100,000. Strategic Priorities and Values: Enhanced Community Image Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES, RECREATION AND SERVICES DEPARTMENT TO APPLY FOR GRANT FUNDING THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES OUTDOOR RECREATION GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center would act as legal sponsor for the project contained in the Outdoor Recreation grant application, submitted on March 31, 2019 and that the City Manager is hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Natural Resources for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has the legal authority to apply for financial assistance, and financial capability to meet the match requirement (if any) and ensure adequate construction, operation, maintenance and replacement of the proposed project for its design life; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has not incurred any development costs and has not entered into a written purchase agreement to acquire the property described in the Cost Breakdown section on this application; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has, or will acquire fee title or permanent easement over the land described in the site plan included in the application; and WHEREAS, that, upon approval of its application by the state, The City of Brooklyn Center may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above-referenced project, and that the City of Brooklyn Center certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement including dedicating the park property for uses consistent with the funding grant program into perpetuity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council, of the City of Brooklyn Center, the CITY MANAGER is hereby authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. March 25, 2019 Date Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. _______________ The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:N/A FROM:Meg Beekman, Community Development Director SUBJECT:A Resolution Approving an Agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc. for Professional Services Related to Zoning and Redevelopment Study Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve a resolution and authorizing the execution of an agreement with Bolton & Menk, Inc. for Professional Services Related to Zoning and Redevelopment Study Background: In November 2018, the City issued an RFQ for professional planning services to assist with a multi-faceted scope of work that would begin implementing the vision of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan as well as leverage current market forces occurring within the community. Staff felt that by combining multiple planning projects into a single scope of work the project vision could be accomplished more efficiently and with more broad reaching and meaningful community engagement. The scope of work includes: Re-writing the City's zoning code to make it more accessible, functional, and responsive to the current and future needs of the community Create new zoning districts that would conform to and implement the newly created land use categories in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Create a Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District that defines a regulatory framework and land use plan, addresses the transition of land uses along the corridor, and leverages the transportation improvements being made Update the 2006 Opportunity Site Master Plan; creating an implementation development strategy, focusing on the EDA-owned portion in cooperation with Alatus Complete a master development strategy for the former Sears site which includes development scenarios, a market feasibility analysis, and marketing materials Complete a master development strategy for the 57th and Logan site which includes development scenarios, a market feasibility analysis, and marketing materials This project represents a significant amount of planning work; however, it also moves the City forward on several major strategic initiatives in a short amount of time by combining these efforts together into a single effort. At their March 11, 2019, meeting the City Council reviewed the proposed scope of work and received a presentation by the preferred consultant. The City Council directed staff to move forward with entering into a contract with Bolton & Menk based on that discussion. Scope The project will be managed by a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of City staff from various departments, as well as outside agencies such as Three Rivers Park District, Hennepin County, and the watershed commissions. This group has been meeting every other week to lay out the schedule of work and develop a master community engagement plan as well as draft the scope of work. The scope of the work was designed to leverage grants from the Metropolitan Council and Hennepin County that were identified as good fits for the overall work that was needed. The City applied for and received a $60,000 grant from the Metropolitan Council to assist with funding the creation of new zoning districts portion of the project. Re-write Zoning Code The City's zoning code has not been updated since the 1960s. In its current form it does not respond to the needs of the community in many ways. This item was budgeted for in the 2019 budget and has been identified as an implementation strategy by the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. The new zoning code will be more accessible, user-friendly, and responsive to the changing community's needs. It will also be more legally defensible. Draft New Zoning Districts This element was discussed with the Council when they reviewed the draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan and is required as part of the adoption of the 2040 future land use plan, which introduces four new mixed use land use categories. These land use categories do not have zoning equivalents and as such new districts need to be drafted to conform to the Comprehensive Plan. The Metropolitan Council's $60,000 grant will support this work. Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District Originally this element was conceived of being a relatively small part of the overall scope; however, as discussions with the consultant team progressed it became clear that the corridor required additional attention given the very likely changes that will occur there over the next 20 years. In addition, Hennepin County's Corridor Development Initiative grant program became available, which would leverage additional funds to complete important work. The City applied for $50,000 from the program to help fund the Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District. Already market forces are pushing demand for vacant land, and the City-lead reconstruction of the roadway will bring additional changes that will lead to land use transitions. A scope of work that would allow for a more in-depth land use study, open space analysis, and regulatory framework with design standards was developed. If the Hennepin County grant is received, this will allow for greater community engagement and a health impact analysis that would look at health outcome disparities and how they are affected by various development scenarios along the corridor. If the grant is not received, this element of the scope of work will be reassessed. Opportunity Site Alatus is preparing a proposal for an initial phase of development on the Opportunity Site which they would like to begin constructing in 2019. A 2019 construction start would require that they receive land use approvals from the City by July. This also would require that their preliminary development agreement (PDA) with the City be extended. The current PDA provides Alatus with exclusive rights to the EDA-owned portion of the Opportunity Site while they master plan the property. They have been working for the past year on a plan to attract a major retailer which has not been successful, and would now like to move forward with an initial phase of residential. Because the City is already embarking on a significant planning effort on the Opportunity Site, staff has proposed to Alatus that the City lead the master planning efforts on the EDA-owned portion, in collaboration with Alatus, while they focus on their initial phase of construction, and that Alatus reimburse the City for the cost of that work. This would allow the City to have great control over the master planning efforts as they tie into the overall Opportunity Site area, as well as provide Alatus the opportunity to focus on their initial phase one project. Staff has been working with the consultant and Alatus to lay out a timeline that will allow the City to review Alatus' phase one project within the context of the overall Opportunity Site master plan and provide the City with enough information to confidently make a determination on Alatus' project. Staff will facilitate a more detailed discussion with the Council on this topic at a future work session. 57th and Logan and Sears These elements are relatively small compared to the overall scope; however, will allow for development scenarios to be developed, the completion of a market feasibility analysis, the creation of a regulatory framework, and marketing materials, as well as an implementation strategy for both sites. Budget Issues: The total cost of the contract is not to exceed $411,049. T his amount would be over two funding years, and includes both budgeted 2019 as well as future 2020 expenditures. In addition, staff will look at the final scope to determine that any eligible expenditures are attributed to the TIF #3 admin funds, as there is excess administrative pooling in this fund and planning activities are an eligible expense. At present the budget assumes the following budget breakdown: 2019 General Fund: $ 75,000 (budgeted) 2019 EDA Fund: $ 30,000 (budgeted) 2019 TIF #3: $ 55,000 (budgeted) 2020 General Fund: $ 15,000 (future request) 2020 TIF #3: $ 76,049 (future request) Outside funding: $ 160,000 Strategic Priorities and Values: Targeted Redevelopment Member _______________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 2019-____ A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH BOLTON & MENK, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RELATED TO ZONING AND REDEVELOPMENT STUDY WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center (the “City”) and Bolton & Menk, Inc. (the “Contractor”) wish to enter into a certain Agreement for Professional Services, a copy of which was provided to the City Council on March 25, 2019 (the “Agreement”); and WHEREAS, the Agreement pertains to the provision of certain professional planning services and ordinance drafting services by the Contractor, including a comprehensive zoning and redevelopment study and additional professional services, including the drafting of a new zoning chapter for the City’s code of ordinances; and WHEREAS, the Agreement sets out the hourly rates to be charged by the Contractor and has a do not exceed price for the identified services of $411,049. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota as follows: 1. The Agreement is hereby approved. 2. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Agreement. 3. The Mayor, City staff, and City consultants are hereby authorized and directed to take any and all additional steps and actions necessary or convenient in order to accomplish the intent of this Resolution and the Agreement. Passed and duly adopted this 25 th day of March 2019, by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. March 25, 2019 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. Public Agreement (Standard Form) 2018 (20151231) Page 1 of 9 (Excluding Exhibits) AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ZONING AND REDEVELOPMENT STUDY CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA This Agreement, made this _______ day of March 2019, by and between CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, MN 55430, hereinafter referred to as CLIENT, and BOLTON & MENK, INC., 12224 Nicollet Avenue, Burnsville, MN 55337, hereinafter referred to as CONSULTANT. WITNESS, whereas the CLIENT requires professional services in conjunction with a zoning and redevelopment study and whereas the CONSULTANT agrees to furnish the various professional services required by the CLIENT. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises between the parties hereto, it is agreed: SECTION I - CONSULTANT'S SERVICES A. The CONSULTANT agrees to perform the various Basic Services in connection with the proposed project as described in Exhibit I. B. Upon mutual agreement of the parties hereto, Additional Services may be authorized as described in Exhibit I or as described in Paragraph IV.B. SECTION II - THE CLIENT'S RESPONSIBILITIES A. The CLIENT shall promptly compensate the CONSULTANT in accordance with Section III of this Agreement. B. The CLIENT shall place any and all previously acquired information in its custody at the disposal of the CONSULTANT for its use. Such information shall include but shall not be limited boundary surveys, topographic surveys, preliminary sketch plan layouts, building plans, soil surveys, abstracts, deed descriptions, tile maps and layouts, aerial photos, utility agreements, environmental reviews, and zoning limitations. The CONSULTANT may rely upon the accuracy and sufficiency of all such information in performing services unless otherwise instructed, in writing, by CLIENT. C. The CLIENT will guarantee access to and make all provisions for entry upon both public and private portions of the project and pertinent adjoining properties. D. The CLIENT will give prompt notice to the CONSULTANT whenever the CLIENT observes or otherwise becomes aware of any defect in the proposed project. E. The CLIENT shall designate a liaison person to act as the CLIENT'S representative with respect to services to be rendered under this Agreement. Said representative shall have the authority to transmit instructions, receive instructions, receive information, interpret and define the CLIENT'S policies with respect to the project and CONSULTANT'S services. Public Agreement (Standard Form) 2018 (20151231) Page 2 of 9 (Excluding Exhibits) F. The CLIENT shall provide such legal, accounting, independent cost estimating and insurance counseling services as may be required for completion of the consultant services described in this agreement. G. The CLIENT will obtain any and all regulatory permits required for the proper and legal execution of the project. Public Agreement (Standard Form) 2018 (20151231) Page 3 of 9 (Excluding Exhibits) ** HOURLY - NOT-TO-EXCEED ** SECTION III - COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES A. FEES. 1. The CLIENT will compensate the CONSULTANT in accordance with the following schedule of fees for the time spent in performance of Agreement services. Schedule of Fees Classification Hourly Rates Senior Principal $150-270/Hour Principal Engineer/Surveyor/Planner/GIS/Landscape Architect $140-195 Senior Engineer/Surveyor/Planner/GIS/Landscape Architect $110-175 Project Manager (Inc. Survey, GIS, Landscape Architect) $100-190 Project Engineer/Surveyor/Planner/Landscape Architect $85-175 Design Engineer/Landscape Designer/Graduate Engineer/Surveyor $80-185 Specialist (Nat. Resources; GIS; Traffic; Graphics; Other) $60-165 Senior Technician (Inc. Construction, GIS, Survey) $85-175 Technician (Inc. Construction, GIS, Survey) $65-140 Administrative $45-100 Structural/Electrical/Mechanical/Architect $120-150 2. Total cost for the services itemized under Section I.A (Basic Fee) shall not exceed $411,049. 3. In addition to the foregoing, CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed at cost plus an overhead fee (not-to-exceed 15%) for the following Direct Expenses when incurred in the performance of the work. a. Travel and subsistence. b. CLIENT approved outside (facilities not owned by CONSULTANT) computer services. c. CLIENT approved outside professional and technical services. d. Identifiable reproduction and reprographic charges. e. Expendable field supplies and special field equipment rental. f. Other costs for such additional items and services that the CLIENT may require the CONSULTANT to provide to fulfill the terms of this Agreement. 4. Additional services as outlined in Section I.B will vary depending upon project conditions and will be billed on an hourly basis at the rate described in Section III.A.1. 5. The preceding Schedule of Fees shall apply for services provided through December 31, 2019. Hourly rates may be adjusted by CONSULTANT on an annual basis thereafter to reflect reasonable changes in its operating costs. Adjusted rates will become effective on January 1st of each subsequent year. B. The payment to the CONSULTANT will be made by the CLIENT upon billing at intervals not more often than monthly at the herein rates. Public Agreement (Standard Form) 2018 (20151231) Page 4 of 9 (Excluding Exhibits) SECTION IV - GENERAL A. STANDARD OF CARE Professional services provided under this Agreement will be conducted in a manner consistent with that level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the Consultant's profession currently practicing under similar conditions. No warranty, express or implied, is made. B. CHANGE IN PROJECT SCOPE In the event the CLIENT changes or is required to change the scope of the project from that described in Section I and/or the applicable addendum, and such changes require Additional Services by the CONSULTANT, the CONSULTANT shall be entitled to additional compensation at the applicable hourly rates. Any expansion in the scope of services must first be authorized in writing by CLIENT and CONSULTANT shall give notice to the CLIENT of any Additional Services, prior to furnishing such additional services. The CLIENT may request an estimate of additional cost from the CONSULTANT, and upon receipt of the request, the CONSULTANT shall furnish such, prior to authorization of the changed scope of work. C. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless CLIENT and its officials, agents and employees from any loss, claim, liability, and expense (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses of litigation) resulting from the negligent act or omission of CONSULTANT’S employees, agents, or subconsultants. In no event shall CONSULTANT be liable to CLIENT for consequential, incidental, indirect, special, or punitive damages. This indemnification requirement shall include defense of indemnified party, but only to the extent that defense is insurable under the indemnifying party’s liability insurance policies. CLIENT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless CONSULTANT and its employees from any loss, claim, liability, and expense (including reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses of litigation) resulting from the negligent act or omission of CLIENT’S employees, agents, or consultants. In no event shall CLIENT be liable to CONSULTANT for consequential, incidental, indirect, special, or punitive damages. This indemnification shall include defense of indemnified party, but only to the extent that defense is insurable under the indemnifying party’s liability insurance policies. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall create a contractual relationship with or a cause of action in favor of a third party against either the CLIENT or the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT'S services under this Agreement are being performed solely for the CLIENT'S benefit, and no other entity shall have any claim against the CONSULTANT because of this Agreement or the performance or nonperformance of services provided hereunder. The CLIENT agrees to include a provision in all contracts with contractors and other entities involved in this project to carry out the intent of the paragraph. D. INSURANCE The CONSULTANT agrees to maintain, at the CONSULTANT'S expense, statutory worker's compensation coverage. The CONSULTANT also agrees to maintain, at CONSULTANT’S expense, general liability insurance coverage insuring CONSULTANT against claims for bodily injury, death or property Public Agreement (Standard Form) 2018 (20151231) Page 5 of 9 (Excluding Exhibits) damage arising out of CONSULTANT’S general business activities (including automobile use). The liability insurance policy shall provide coverage for each occurrence in the minimum amount of $1,000,000. During the period of design and construction of the project, the CONSULTANT also agrees to maintain, at CONSULTANT’S expense, Professional Liability Insurance coverage insuring CONSULTANT against damages for legal liability arising from an error, omission or negligent act in the performance of professional services required by this agreement, providing that such coverage is reasonably available at commercially affordable premiums. For purposes of this agreement, “reasonably available” and “commercially affordable” shall mean that more than half of the design professionals practicing in this state in CONSULTANT’S discipline are able to obtain coverage. The professional liability insurance policy shall provide coverage for each occurrence in the amount of $1,000,000 and annual aggregate of $1,000,000 on a claims-made basis. Upon request of CLIENT, CONSULTANT shall provide CLIENT with certificates of insurance, showing evidence of required coverages. E. OPINIONS OR ESTIMATES OF CONSTRUCTION COST Where provided by the CONSULTANT as part of Exhibit I or otherwise, opinions or estimates of construction cost will generally be based upon public construction cost information. Since the CONSULTANT has no control over the cost of labor, materials, competitive bidding process, weather conditions and other factors affecting the cost of construction, all cost estimates are opinions for general information of the CLIENT and the CONSULTANT does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy of construction cost opinions or estimates. The CLIENT acknowledges that costs for project financing should be based upon contracted construction costs with appropriate contingencies. F. CONSTRUCTION SERVICES It is agreed that the CONSULTANT and its representatives shall not be responsible for the means, methods, techniques, schedules or procedures of construction selected by the contractor or the safety precautions or programs incident to the work of the contractor. G. USE OF ELECTRONIC/DIGITAL DATA Because of the potential instability of electronic/digital data and susceptibility to unauthorized changes, copies of documents that may be relied upon by CLIENT are limited to the printed copies (also known as hard copies) that are signed or sealed by CONSULTANT. Except for electronic/digital data which is specifically identified as a project deliverable by this AGREEMENT or except as otherwise explicitly provided in this AGREEMENT, all electronic/digital data developed by the CONSULTANT as part of the PROJECT is acknowledged to be an internal working document for the CONSULTANT’S purposes solely and any such information provided to the CLIENT shall be on an “AS IS” basis strictly for the convenience of the CLIENT without any warranties of any kind. As such, the CLIENT is advised and acknowledges that use of such information may require substantial modification and independent verification by the CLIENT (or its designees). Provision of electronic/digital data, whether required by this Agreement or provided as a convenience to the Client, does not include any license of software or other systems necessary to read, use or reproduce the information. It is the responsibility of the CLIENT to verify compatibility with its system and long-term stability of media. CLIENT shall indemnify and hold harmless CONSULTANT and its Subconsultants from Public Agreement (Standard Form) 2018 (20151231) Page 6 of 9 (Excluding Exhibits) all claims, damages, losses, and expenses, including attorneys' fees arising out of or resulting from third party use or any adaptation or distribution of electronic/digital data provided under this AGREEMENT, unless such third party use and adaptation or distribution is explicitly authorized by this AGREEMENT. H. REUSE OF DOCUMENTS Drawings and Specifications and all other documents (including electronic and digital versions of any documents) prepared or furnished by CONSULTANT pursuant to this AGREEMENT are instruments of service in respect to the Project and CONSULTANT shall retain an ownership interest therein. Upon payment of all fees owed to the CONSULTANT, the CLIENT shall acquire an ownership interest in all identified deliverables, including Plans and Specifications, for any reasonable use relative to the Project and the general operations of the CLIENT. CLIENT may make and disseminate copies for information and reference in connection with the use and maintenance of the Project by the CLIENT. However, such documents are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by CLIENT or others on extensions of the Project or on any other project and any reuse other than that specifically intended by this AGREEMENT will be at CLIENT'S sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to CONSULTANT. I. DATA PRACTICES CONSULTANT shall manage all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained, or disseminated by CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement in accordance with, and subject to the requirements of, the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 (“Act”). CONSULTANT shall immediately notify CLIENT if it receives a request for data related to the services and shall work with CLIENT to respond to the request in accordance with the Act. Any reports, information, or other data given to, prepared, or assembled by CONSULTANT under this Agreement which CLIENT requests be kept confidential must not be made available to any individual or organization without CLIENTS prior written approval unless disclosure is required by law or the information is already part of the public domain. J. PERIOD OF AGREEMENT This Agreement will remain in effect for the longer of a period of two years or such other explicitly identified completion period, after which time the Agreement may be extended upon mutual agreement of both parties. K. PAYMENTS If CLIENT fails to make any payment due CONSULTANT for services and expenses within thirty days after date of the CONSULTANT'S invoice, a service charge of one and one-half percent (1.5%) per month or the maximum rate permitted by law, whichever is less, will be charged on any unpaid balance. In addition after giving seven days' written notice to CLIENT, CONSULTANT may, without waiving any claim or right against the CLIENT and without incurring liability whatsoever to the CLIENT, suspend services and withhold project deliverables due under this Agreement until CONSULTANT has been paid in full all amounts due for services, expenses and charges. L. TERMINATION Public Agreement (Standard Form) 2018 (20151231) Page 7 of 9 (Excluding Exhibits) This Agreement may be terminated by either party for any reason or for convenience by either party upon seven (7) days written notice. In the event of termination, the CLIENT shall be obligated to the CONSULTANT for payment of amounts due and owing including payment for services performed or furnished to the date and time of termination, computed in accordance with Section III of this Agreement. M. CONTINGENT FEE The CONSULTANT warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the CONSULTANT to solicit or secure this Contract, and that it has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from award or making of this Agreement. N. NON-DISCRIMINATION The provisions of any applicable law or ordinance relating to civil rights and discrimination shall be considered part of this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. The CONSULTANT is an Equal Opportunity Employer and it is the policy of the CONSULTANT that all employees, persons seeking employment, subcontractors, subconsultants and vendors are treated without regard to their race, religion, sex, color, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status, public assistance status or any other characteristic protected by federal, state or local law. O. CONTROLLING LAW This Agreement is to be governed by the law of the State of Minnesota. P. DISPUTE RESOLUTION CLIENT and CONSULTANT agree to negotiate all disputes between them in good faith for a period of 30 days from the date of notice of dispute prior to proceeding to formal dispute resolution or exercising their rights under law. Any claims or disputes unresolved after good faith negotiations shall then be submitted to mediation using a neutral from the Minnesota District Court Rule 114 Roster, or if mutually agreed at time of dispute submittal, a neutral from the American Arbitration Association Construction Industry roster. If mediation is unsuccessful in resolving the dispute, then either party may seek to have the dispute resolved by bringing an action in a court of competent jurisdiction. Q. SURVIVAL All obligations, representations and provisions made in or given in Section IV of this Agreement will survive the completion of all services of the CONSULTANT under this Agreement or the termination of this Agreement for any reason. R. AUDIT CONSULTANT must allow CLIENT, or its duly authorized agents, and the state auditor or legislative auditor reasonable access to the Consultant's books, records, documents, and accounting Public Agreement (Standard Form) 2018 (20151231) Page 8 of 9 (Excluding Exhibits) procedures and practices that are pertinent to all Services provided under this agreement for a minimum of six years from the termination of this Agreement. S. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR CONSULTANT shall be deemed an independent contractor. CONSULTANT’S duties will be performed with the understanding that CONSULTANT has special expertise as to the services which CONSULTANT is to perform and is customarily engaged in the independent performance of the same or similar services for others. The manner in which the services are performed shall be controlled by CONSULTANT; however, the nature of the services and the results to be achieved shall be specified by CLIENT. CONSULTANT is not to be deemed an employee or agent of CLIENT and has no authority to make any binding commitments or obligations on behalf of CLIENT except to the extent expressly provided herein. All services provided by the CONSULTANT pursuant to this agreement shall be provided by the CONSULTANT as an independent contractor and not as an employee of CLIENT for any purpose including, but not limited to, income tax withholding, workers' compensation, unemployment compensation, FICA taxes, liability for torts, and eligibility for employee benefits. T. NOT EXCLUSIVE This agreement does not constitute an exclusive contract between CLIENT and the CONSULTANT. CLIENT remains free to contract for similar services from other consultants and the CONSULTANT remains free to contract to provide similar services to others, provided that any such contracts do not interfere with the delivery of services under this agreement. U. ASSIGNMENT Neither party will assign any part of this agreement, nor any interest arising herein, without the written consent of the other party. V. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This document, including the above recitals, the attached exhibits, and documents expressly incorporated herein by reference, constitute the entire agreement between the parties and it supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties regarding the subject matter of this agreement. W. SEVERABILITY Any provision or part of the Agreement held to be void or unenforceable under any law or regulation shall be deemed stricken, and all remaining provisions shall continue to be valid and binding upon CLIENT and CONSULTANT, who agree that the Agreement shall be reformed to replace such stricken provision or part thereof with a valid and enforceable provision that comes as close as possible to expressing the intention of the stricken provision. Public Agreement (Standard Form) 2018 (20151231) Page 9 of 9 (Excluding Exhibits) SECTION V - SIGNATURES THIS INSTRUMENT embodies the whole agreement of the parties, there being no promises, terms, conditions or obligation referring to the subject matter other than contained herein. This Agreement may only be amended, supplemented, modified or canceled by a duly executed written instrument signed by both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed in their behalf. CLIENT: CONSULTANT: Bolton & Menk, Inc. 1 EXHIBIT 1: PROJECT SCOPE Overview As part of a larger effort to revitalize its city center and refresh regulatory guidance citywide to meet community goals, the City of Brooklyn Center is undertaking a multi- part project starting in 2019. This initiative is a mix of planning, design, engagement, and implementation. With active development proposals coinciding with the planning phase of the project, the approach will need to be flexible to respond to opportunities. Major elements include: • A new zoning code that will supersede the existing zoning ordinance. This will include updated subdivision, sign, and shoreland ordinances, including the Mississippi River Critical Area requirements. • Creation of new zoning districts and design standards consistent with 2040 comprehensive plan guidance, including Transit Oriented Development (TOD), Neighborhood Mixed Use, Business Mixed Use, Commercial Mixed Use, and the Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District. • Site-specific development strategy plans, which position the City’s priority redevelopment properties for redevelopment and inform next steps. These include the 81-acre Opportunity Site, the former Sears, and the EDA-owned CR 10/57 th Avenue N & Logan Avenue N. • A more detailed plan for the EDA-owned 35-acre portion of the Opportunity Site, to be partially paid for and coordinated with Alatus, the developer which intends to proceed with partial development of this site starting in 2019. To keep up with the proposed entitlement process (approvals by July), this element will need to be fast- tracked. This will also include coordination with a separate development planning workshop series funded through the City and Alatus, and managed by LISC under a separate contract. • A coordinated public engagement process which will provide a wide range of opportunities for the community to engage with and influence the outcomes of the process. In addition, the City will be creating a redevelopment framework to correspond with the area covered by the Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District. This will provide guidance for City-owned properties along the corridor that are intended for redevelopment. It will address both city goals for the corridor and new access configurations resulting from the design of the Brooklyn Boulevard reconstruction project. While this may overlap with some other elements, it is scoped as a separate task. While this scope covers a basic approach to the Brooklyn Boulevard Redevelopment Framework, the City is in the process of pursuing additional funding to allow for an expanded scope. Subtasks covered by the expanded scope are included to allow for the City to continue with the project without an additional scope amendment, should the funding be awarded. 2 Task 1: Project Administration Task 1.1: Project Kickoff and Coordination Conduct a project kickoff with the City to launch the process. This will include finalizing the schedule, scope of work, goals, and overall approach to the project. This task also covers ongoing general project coordination with the City and partners throughout the project and related project management tasks. Task 1.2: Technical Advisory Committee Meetings Work with a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of City staff and others identified by the City that will provide technical expertise for the project. The TAC is expected to meet every two weeks during the fast track portion of the project (March- June 2019), and once a month during the remainder of the planning process. While there are an estimated 20 total TAC meetings planned, five of these are budgeted as part of the fast track work in Task 5. Task 1.3: Review of Existing Plans and Studies Review the new comprehensive plan and other existing city plans, studies, and technical reports that are relevant to all aspects of this project. Summarize goals, policies, and strategies that will guide development of the zoning code and redevelopment plans. Task 1 Deliverables: • Final project scope • Project schedule • Meeting agendas and notes for TAC • Summary of existing plans Task 2: Zoning Code and District Development Task 2.1: Ordinance Review Review existing code documents to understand what elements will need to be updated and replaced. Summarize findings and discuss with staff. This will include an identification of what updates should be highest priority, and what are the most desirable features of a new code. Task 2.2: Evaluation of Existing Conditions Review and map existing land use and property conditions to determine context- sensitive approaches for zoning and redevelopment. This will include an-depth look at redevelopment sites. Where possible, this will also include documentation of nonconforming uses. 3 Task 2.3: Drafting and Refining Zoning Regulations and Districts Draft new code and district language to implement comprehensive plan guidance, comply with state standards, reflect community character, incorporate innovative best practices for TOD and mixed use, and meet city staff expectations. The code will include the following elements: overview, processes, regulations within existing districts, sign code, shoreland ordinance, and platting chapter. Draft new zoning districts to correspond to 2040 comprehensive plan future land use categories for TOD, Neighborhood Mixed Use, Business Mixed Use, and Commercial Mixed Use. Each land use category may have several corresponding zoning districts, to accommodate variations in guidance within specific geographic areas. District guidance should incorporate permitted and accessory uses, performance standards, and TOD best practices. Work with the Planning Commission and City Council for up to four work sessions to refine drafts. The extent of revisions to the code (and the phasing in of these changes) will be determined during the process. Task 2.4: Rezoning Strategy For any rezoning made necessary through the new code and districts, develop an approach that best achieves city goals, manages transitions, and supports community character. This will include considerations of alternatives for the timing and phasing of rezoning. Task 2.5: Adoption of New Code Work with city staff on the review and adoption of the new code and districts, including the formal city approval process. Task 2.6: User-Friendly Format Ensure that final code document is user-friendly and accessible, including streamlined procedures, interactive mapping, and “cheat sheet” style guidance for the public. Task 2.7: Staff Training and Support Support city staff for a start-up period of up to one year. Be available and accessible during that time to respond to questions and meet with city staff, as well as to assist with future phases of work. Depending on the scope and scale of additional work, a contract amendment may be needed. Task 2 Deliverables: • Updated zoning code and related ordinance documents • New zoning districts for TOD, mixed use, and Brooklyn Boulevard • Supporting documents for education and information on code for the public 4 5 Task 3: Targeted Development Site Planning This task covers the development of master plans and implementation strategies for the three redevelopment sites at the level outlined in the Request for Proposals. These include the 81-acre Opportunity Site, the former Sears, and the EDA-owned CR 10/57 th Avenue N & Logan Avenue N. The development of a more detailed master plan for the 35-acre EDA portion of the Opportunity Site is covered in Task 5. This is an add-on to the scope in the original proposal. Task 3.1: Existing Conditions and Market Feasibility Review existing conditions and create base mapping for each site. Identify planning issues and considerations to be addressed on each site, including identification of project goals. Determine feasible development alternatives for the sites, based on market conditions and site characteristics. Identify gaps and public subsidy needs to support desired development scenarios. Task 3.2: Master Development and Land Use Plan Concepts Based on feasibility analysis and community goals, our team will identify the approach to development and land use for each site. In addition to identifying a feasible redevelopment scenario, address opportunities to include elements for public benefit, such as public spaces, facilities, and/or business development opportunities. This task will include the development of a systems framework as well as land use concepts, with evaluation of several alternatives in advance of selecting a preferred scenario. Illustrate concepts in a visual master plan. Based on preferred scenario, prepare materials that can used for marketing sites. Task 3.3: Infrastructure Assessment and Cost Estimates Assess multimodal transportation and stormwater conditions and needs associated with development scenarios. This will include high-level cost estimates for improvements and identifying potential funding and phasing strategies. Task 3.4: Development Implementation Framework Create an implementation strategy for each site, including proposed phasing, financing, zoning and entitlements, marketing, role of public subsidy, and potential development partners and resources. Work with City staff and agency partners on roles and responsibilities around implementation. Task 3 Deliverables: • Development master plan and implementation framework for Sears and 57 th & Logan sites. • High level development master plan and implementation framework for 81-acre Opportunity Site, with additional detailed work to be completed in Task 5. 6 Task 4: Public Engagement Task 4.1: Public Involvement Plan Develop a public involvement and communications plan to guide engagement efforts throughout the length of the project. This will include identification of key stakeholders, tools and strategies to be used, and overall timeline. Task 4.2: Project Website and Online Engagement Set up and maintain a project website to provide access to project information, upcoming events, opportunities to get involved, invitations for public comment, and materials from meetings. This website will be coordinated with other online tools and comment opportunities, including: • Polco online survey, with relevant survey questions posted throughout the project where appropriate. • InputID online comment mapping interface, to provide geographically-specific comments. • Content for posts on City social media accounts and sites such as Nextdoor, to correspond with project announcements and to provide another option for engagement. Task 4.3: Public Meetings and Workshops (up to 8) Work with City to schedule and prepare for public meetings and workshops throughout the process. This may include pop ups at planned community events, where there is an opportunity to connect with the public on key issues. Task 4.4: Focus Groups and Small Group Meetings (up to 8) Facilitate focus group meetings and discussions with stakeholders invested in the project. This may include neighborhood associations, jurisdictions within an interest in the area (e.g. watersheds, school districts, other governmental agencies) groups of development and real estate professionals, property owners, or others as needed. Results will be summarized and used to inform the process. Task 4.5: Project Newsletters and Mailings (up to 6) Periodic emailed newsletters will be developed at key times throughout the project to provide an update on project status. Work with the City regarding most effective method of distribution. Task 4 Deliverables: • Project website • Meeting presentation materials • Fact sheets and informational handouts • Project newsletters • Meeting and event notes and summaries 7 Task 5: EDA Opportunity Site Master Planning and Developer Coordination This planning process coincides with Alatus’ planned improvements to the city-owned portion of the Opportunity Site. The intent is for the developer to pursue land use approvals by around July 2019 for the first phase of development on the site. To be responsive to this opportunity, this task will address: • Fast tracking applicable elements of the work relevant to the development site, to coincide with the July timeframe. • Providing a more detailed master plan concept for the site than for others developed in this scope, based on needs to ensure fit for the first phase of development. • Coordinate with a concurrent public engagement process being run through LISC, supporting community involvement in visioning and prioritization for site improvements. • Recommending public improvements – such as public spaces and facilities and district stormwater management – which would need developer participation, and providing a level of detail to these plans to identify the appropriate level of developer participation. Task 5.1: Additional Technical Advisory Committee Meetings (up to 5) More frequent TAC meetings are being added to the scope to allow for more frequent check-ins on progress for the development of the master plan. These will be held prior to the July deadline, after which the TAC schedule will revert to monthly frequency. Task 5.2: Opportunity Site Meetings with Alatus (up to 8) Meetings will be held with City staff, Alatus, and the consultant team to facilitate discussions on elements of master plan development, the development applications, and public engagement. These will be working sessions, with the intent of discussing options and sharing information. To manage the amount of time spent in meetings, additional check-ins may be in the form of phone conference calls. Task 5.3: LISC CDI Coordination Coordinate with the City, developer, and LISC on the Corridor Development Initiative (CDI) workshops. This will include a consultant team member attending CDI workshops and advisory group meetings to ensure that public input received during the process is considered through master planning – as well as to inform the CDI workshop on the status of the master planning. Task 5.4: Site Investigation and Case Studies Complete more detailed site investigation, including review of past studies, plans, and technical reports generated for the Opportunity Site that are relevant to the current master planning effort. Research potential case studies to inform master plan development, based on comparable precedents. 8 Task 5.5: Development Framework Create development framework for 35-acre site that takes into consideration transportation, block patterns, stormwater and utilities, open space and parks, and development sites – including the location of the proposed Alatus development. Process will evaluate alternatives prior to selection of preferred alternative. Task 5.6 Master Plan Development Develop site master plan that incorporates the development framework, development subareas with identified land uses, opportunities for elements for public benefit, and recommendations for phasing and implementation. Public benefit elements may include new public spaces or facilities, opportunities for local business development, or other elements identified through the public planning process. Plan development will include consideration of alternatives prior to selection of preferred alternative. Task 5 Deliverables: • Preliminary and final development framework and master plan for 35-acre EDA owned portion of Opportunity Site. Task 6: Brooklyn Boulevard Redevelopment Framework This task covers a land use and redevelopment framework for the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor, including the creation of an overlay zoning district. Tasks identified as add-ons below represent ones that may be funded through a grant application recently submitted to Hennepin County. Task 6.1: Existing Conditions and Market Feasibility Review existing conditions and past planning for the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor. Create base mapping for the corridor, including all city-owned sites. Identify planning opportunities and considerations to be addressed along the corridor, including identification of project goals. Determine range of feasible development types for redevelopment sites, based on market conditions and site characteristics. Additional work will be needed in this task to support the add-on tasks below with more detailed information. Task 6.2: Development Site Infrastructure and Access Evaluation Evaluate access to redevelopment sites along the corridor, based on new configuration of Brooklyn Boulevard access points. Complete a high-level evaluation of any additional infrastructure improvements needed to service sites for redevelopment. Task 6.3: Scenario Planning Exercise (add-on) Conduct a scenario planning process, using public workshops and charrettes, to explore development alternatives along the corridor. Evaluate potential benefits and trade-offs of scenarios, including factors such as compatibility with adjacent uses, impact on traffic, 9 transit accessibility, potential tax base impact, contribution to citywide goals, and others. Use this to identify several potential development alternatives. Task 6.4: Health Impact Assessment (add-on) Conduct a health impact assessment on development alternatives identified through the scenario planning process to provide insight into how these alternatives will impact the surrounding community. This will include factors such as contribution to active living, access to employment opportunities, impacts on the natural environment, and other impacts on public health Use this analysis to further refine recommended options for corridor. Task 6.5: Illustrated Development Concepts and Design Guidelines Based on potential development opportunities and site evaluation (as well as add-on tasks above), illustrate development concepts, including both new development types and reconfiguration of infrastructure and public realm. Based on preferred scenarios, create design guidelines for development in this area, reflecting citywide guidance for infill development. Task 6.6: Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District Based on recommended development alternatives and existing conditions along the corridor, create a new Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District in the zoning code to provide guidance for development along Brooklyn Boulevard. Using the comprehensive plan’s guidance as a starting place, develop a more detailed approach, including direction for appropriate locations for mixed use development. Task 6.7: Redevelopment Framework Create an implementation framework for preferred scenario(s) that considers timing of property disposition, rezoning or changes to zoning districts, needed public improvements, potential funding sources for public contribution and investment, and key implementation partners. Task 6 Deliverables: • Illustrated development scenarios and design guidelines for corridor redevelopment • Redevelopment framework for Brooklyn Boulevard corridor. • Health impact assessment report, if completed. 10 Estimated Timeline The following timeline provides a general overview of the stages of work. A more detailed timeline will be developed during project kickoff to provide additional guidance for tasks, meetings, and deliverables. The fast track items refer to Task 5, which are being prioritized to coincide with the developer’s schedule. Phase Timing Phase 1: Existing Conditions and Fast Track Items February -April 2019 Phase 2: Framework and Approach and Fast Track Items April -June 2019 Phase 3: Alternatives Analysis July 2019 -February 2020 Phase 4: Draft Materials and Documents March -June 2020 Phase 5: Adoption and Implementation July 2020 - July 2021 Role of City Staff in the Project The consultant team will work closely with City staff on all aspects of the project It is anticipated that the City staff’s role will include: • Identification of key stakeholders • Provision of data and reports • Advice on outreach location and timing • Assistance with formal city review • Review of draft documents and plans Cl i e n t :  Cit y  of  Br o o k l y n  Ce n t e r Pr o j e c t :  Br o o k l y n  Ce n t e r  Zo n i n g  an d  Re d e v e l o p m Ta s k   No . Wo r k  Ta s k  De s c r i p t i o n H a i l a A n g i e D a n J a n e S a m N i c o l e S a r a h J o h n K e v i n D o n A n a l i e s e S u n g A n d r e w A n a J e n a Julie ErikaTotal HoursTotal Cost 1. 0 P r o j e c t  Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n 8 0 1 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 3 3 5 $ 5 0 , 9 3 5 2. 0 D r a f t i n g  th e  Zo n i n g  Re g u l a t i o n s 8 5 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 1 2 0 4 0 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 00 0 0 0 9 3 5 $110,205 3. 0 S i t e  Sp e c i f i c  De v e l o p m e n t  St r a t e g i e s 5 5 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 5 4 5 0 0 0 1 2 0 4 0 4 0 4 0 1 0 3 9 5 $ 6 1 , 5 7 0 4. 0 P u b l i c  En g a g e m e n t 6 0 0 0 2 0 0 9 5 0 2 0 0 4 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 0000 2 9 5 $38,490 5. 0 F a s t  Tr a c k  Op p o r t u n i t y  Sit e  Ma s t e r  Pla n n 6 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 5 2 5 1 6 0 3 5 1 $ 4 9 , 9 2 5 6. 0 B r o o k l y n  Bo u l e v a r d  Re d e v e l o p m e n t  Fr a m 14 0 4 4 6 0 7 0 8 5 9 0 4 0 6 0 2 0 2 0 0 5 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 1 0 7 4 3 $ 9 9 , 9 2 4 To t a l  Ho u r s 48 5 1 4 1 4 2 6 0 2 0 0 1 8 0 2 1 0 1 1 5 1 2 5 2 2 5 3 1 0 2 7 0 3 2 0 9 5 9 5 1 0 6 3 0 3 0 5 4 Su b t o t a l $6 5 , 4 7 5 $ 2 , 0 3 0 $ 2 , 4 6 4 $ 3 7 , 7 0 0 $ 2 3 , 6 0 0 $ 1 6 , 2 0 0 $ 1 7 , 8 5 0 $ 1 7 , 4 8 0 $ 2 1 , 8 7 5 $ 5 2 , 8 7 5 $ 2 6 , 3 5 0 $ 2 1 , 6 0 0 $ 5 1 , 2 0 0 $ 1 3 , 3 0 0 $ 1 0 , 4 5 0 $ 2 3 , 8 5 0 $ 6 , 7 5 0 $411,049 De t a i l e d  Co s t  Es t i m a t e To t a l  Fe e Cl a r i o n  As s o c i a t e s C u n i n g h a m  Gr o u p K i m b l e C o Bo l t o n  & Me n k ,  In c . Zo n i n g  an d  Re d e v e l o p m e n t  St u d y Cit y  of  Br o o k l y n  Ce n t e r ,  Min n e s o t a COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Doran Cote, Public Works Director FROM:Mike Albers, City Engineer SUBJECT:Resolution Accepting Work Performed and Authorizing Final Payment, Improvement Project No. 2016-05, 57th Avenue Street Improvements Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve the resolution accepting work performed and authorizing final payment, Improvement Project No. 2016-05, 57th Avenue Street Improvements Background: On August 14, 2017, the City Council awarded Project No. 2016-05 to C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. of Maple Grove, Minnesota for construction of the 57th Avenue Street Improvements. C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. has successfully completed the construction work and is requesting final payment for the project. Budget Issues: The original contract amount with C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. for the project improvements was $258,674.25. The total value of work certified for final payment is $239,904.58. The total project cost including contingencies/administration/engineering/legal is $322,351.41 and was completed 17.9 percent under budget in the amount of $70,139.84. The attached resolution provides a summary of the final amended costs and funding sources for the project. Strategic Priorities and Values: Key Transportation Investments Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED AND AUTHORIZING FINAL PAYMENT, IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 2016-05, 57 TH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. of Maple Grove, Minnesota has completed the following improvements in accordance with said contract: Improvement Project No. 2016-05, 57 th Avenue Street Improvements NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that 1. Final payment shall be made on Improvement Project No. 2016-05, 57 th Avenue Street Improvements, taking the contractor’s receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvements under said contract shall be $239,904.58. 2. The estimated project costs and revenues are hereby amended as follows: COSTS As Original Award As Final Contract $ 258,674.25 $ 239,904.58 Lighting $ 8,017.00 $ 8,017.00 Contingency $ 51,400.00 $ 1,902.22 Subtotal Construction Cost $ 318,091.25 $ 249,823.80 Admin/Legal/Engr. $ 74,400.00 $ 72,527.61 Total Estimated Project Cost $ 392,491.25 $ 322,351.41 REVENUES As Original Award As Final Street Assessment $ 32,987.33 $ 32,987.33 Sanitary Sewer Utility $ 2,000.00 $ 1,547.64 Water Utility Fund $ 2,000.00 $ 1,352.64 Storm Drainage Utility Fund $ 29,000.00 $ 24,000.00 Street Light Utility $ 8,017.00 $ 9,467.55 Municipal State Aid (MSA) Fund $ 318,316.92 $ 252,826.25 Miscellaneous $ 170.00 $ 170.00 Total Estimated Revenue $ 392,491.25 $ 322,351.41 RESOLUTION NO. _______________ March 25, 2019 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. COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:N/A FROM:Dr. Reggie Edwards, Deputy City Manager SUBJECT:Hennepin County Library Requested Council Action: - Receive presentation from Hennepin County Library Background: Hennepin County Library has been a partner with the City of projects such as the City Branding Project and Heritage Movie Series. Staff from Hennepin County Library will provide a presentation outlining all of the programs and opportunities it has to offer. Strategic Priorities and Values: Enhanced Community Image HENNEPIN COUNTY LIBRARY BROOKDALE 6125 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY BROOKLYN CENTER, MN 55430 651-543-5600 PRESENTERS: SUZI STEPHENSON AND PANG YANG WHAT DOES THE LIBRARY HAS TO OFFER? •Books, magazines, CDs, DVDs, book on CD, magazines, and newspapers and their electronic version •Public Computers: 124 •Scanners •Photo copiers •Printers •Play area for children and families •Meeting rooms •Databases for research •Library programs and resources •Homework Help •K-12 and Adults MONTHLY COFFEE AND CONVERSATION •Pilot Project •Every Third Tuesday •Allows us to know our community •Ask questions •Know more what we should be offering •Question of the day SOCIAL ASPECTS PAINT –A –LONGS TO MOVIE AFTERNOONS •Bob Ross Paint a longs •Themed Movie Series •MnSpin –Promoting Local Artist June 16th •Sun Post Monthly Book Reviews •Work of Art •Crafty MN SCORE: SMALL BUSINESS CONSULTATIONS •Thursday, Mar 28th 3-6pm •Thursday, Apr 25th 3-6pm •Thursday, May 23rd 3-6pm •Walk-ins welcome. Registration recommended. Meet with a business counselor to develop your business plan, discuss new idea or tackle a business problem. Consultations are free and confidential. Presented in collaboration with SCORE. HERITAGE MOVIE WITH THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER •BC Constitution Hall Saturdays ▪Feb 23 ▪March 30 ▪May 4 and/or May 18 ▪September 28 ▪November 23 •Brookdale room ABC Saturdays ▪April 20 ▪June 29 (Hold) ▪July 27 (Hold) ▪August 24 ▪October 26 CONTACT Pang Yang, Librarian 612-543-5618 pyang@hclib.org Suzi Stephenson, Librarian 612-543-5639 sstephenson@hclib.org COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Meg Beekman, Community Development Director FROM:Jesse Anderson, Deputy Director of Community Development SUBJECT:Center for Energy and Environment Housing Services Presentation Requested Council Action: - Receive presentation from Center for Energy and Environment regarding Home Energy Squad Visits and Construction Consultations Background: In 2018, the City of Brooklyn Center partnered with Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) for the Low Interest Fix-up Fund Program. through this program, the City uses TIF #3 Housing Funds to buy down the interest rates on fix-up fund loans which are available to residents for home renovation projects. The program has gone very well, and recently the City has expanded upon the services available to residents through CEE to include home construction consultation services and Home Energy Squad Visits. Home Energy Squad Enhanced Visits: CEE, through a partnership with Centerpoint Energy, provides in-home energy visits at a cost of $100 to anyone in the Twin Cities. Now, through their partnership with the City of Brooklyn Center however, those visits will be available to Brooklyn Center residents at a cost of $50. The contact between the City and CEE will have the City pay the remaining $50 cost of the visit, up to a total cost of $3,000. In addition, visits are free to income qualified residents. Home Energy Squad Enhanced visits are very comprehensive and offer a great value for the expense. As part of the visit, trained consultants will come to the residents home, provide a home energy audit, blower test, insulation inspection, evaluation of energy savings opportunities, and install energy-efficient devices while they are in site. These include: Door weather stripping A water heater blanket Programmable thermostat (for an additional cost) LED light bulbs High-efficiency shower heads Faucet aerators Pipe Wrapping The consultant will also: Perform a blower door test to measure your home for air leaks. Complete an insulation inspection of your attic and walls using an infrared camera. Safety check your home’s heating system and water heater Provide advice on next steps As part of the inspection, the resident will also get a report, which documents the results, provides an energy score, a list of improvements to increase the score, estimates on the cost of each improvement, and a calculation on the length of pay off for the energy cost savings. CEE also certifies contractors, who are experienced in the type of energy improvements which are typically recommended as a result of the visits; however, homeowners can use any contractor they prefer if they choose to move forward with improvements. CEE provides reduced interest rates on home improvement loans to homeowners who have received a Home Energy Squad visit in order to assist with implementing the recommended energy improvements as well. Attached is a generic flier about the program; however, CEE will craft one specific to Brooklyn Center which we will be able to market and push out. This program offers multiple benefits to residents, most notably being knowledge about the most effective ways to make energy improvements that will reduce their energy and utility consumption and cost. Construction Consultation This program provides expert remodeling advice to homeowners at no cost. Through the program, a resident can request a visit from an independent certified contractor from CEE. This person would not be available for hire by the resident, but is a contractor employed by CEE fo th epurpose of offering these services. The resident would receive assistance with planning any home improvements or remodeling. The cost to the City would be $225 per visit up to $3,000 annually. The visit would include: Complimentary home remodeling adviser visit Assistance with prioritizing potential improvements Assistance with bidding process Answers questions and provides feedback about project ideas Discusses energy-efficiency options Budget Issues: Funds for both contracts would come out of Professional Services from the Building and Community Standards account from the General Fund. Strategic Priorities and Values: Resident Economic Stability SCHEDULE A FREE HOME REMODELING ADVISOR VISIT Thinking of doing a home remodel? We can help you get started! The City of Brooklyn Center has partnered with the nonprofit Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) to offer homeowners a complimentary Home Remodeling Advisor Visit. An expert from CEE will come to your home and: • Prioritize your potential improvements • Compare bids you have received • Provide you answers to questions and feedback about your project ideas • Talk about energy-efficiency issues and more SCHEDULE YOUR COMPLIMENTARY VISIT TODAY! CALL 612-335-5856 Home Energy Squad is provided by CenterPoint Energy and Xcel Energy and delivered by the Center for Energy and Environment (CEE), a Minneapolis nonprofit. ENERGY SAVINGS CUSTOMIZED FOR YOUR HOME. TO SCHEDULE YOUR VISIT: Call 651-328-6220 HOME ENERGY SQUAD ENHANCED- $100 FREE VISITS AVAILABLE FOR INCOME-QUALIFIED RESIDENTS Our team of trusted energy consultants will come to your home, evaluate your energy savings opportunities, and install the energy-efficient materials of your choice: • Door weather stripping • A water heater blanket • Programmable thermostat • LED light bulbs • High-efficiency showerheads • Faucet aerators • Pipe Wrap Our team will also: • Perform a blower door test to measure your home for air leaks. • Complete an insulation inspection of your attic and walls using an infrared camera. • Safety check your home’s heating system and water heater. • Help with next steps. CUSTOMER: Matt Kempenich ADDRESS 1161 Mahtomedi Ave Mahtomedi, MN 55115- 1537 VISIT DATE Nov 6, 2018 ENERGY AUDITOR Anthony L. Beres COUNSELOR Stephanie M. Shimota PHONE 6512066329 ENERGY FITNESS PLAN The Home Energy Squad is provided by Xcel Energy and delivered by the Center for Energy and Environment, a Minnesota nonprofit. This Energy Fitness Plan report summarizes findings and prioritizes the recommendations made by the energy expert(s) during your visit. Contact your Energy Advisor at CEE with questions or for any help. 612-244-2484 or energyadvisor@mncee.org 6 energy efficiency installs TOP RECOMMENDATIONS See report for details ADDRESS COMBUSTION SAFETY ISSUES Your furnace did not pass our combustion safety tests AIR SEAL AND INSULATE YOUR ATTIC UPGRADE TO A HIGH- EFFICIENCY WATER HEATER WITH SEALED EXHAUST ▼ TODAY'S STEP ▼ ▼ ▼ Did you know that Mahtomedi has a goal to reduce energy consumption 19% by 2030, and to be carbon neutral by 2050? Learn more about how you can help you community achieve this goal here. ▼ ENERGY FITNESS SCORE HEALTHY & SAFETY EFFICIENT PRODUCTS 0 INEFFICIENT HOUSE 100 EFFICIENT HOUSE NEXT STEPS ACHIEVED 96% AFUE heating system efficiency Windows meet minimum efficiency standards Partial exterior wall insulation Partial attic insulation and air sealing NEXT STEPS by priority COST ($)REBATE ($) estimated Air seal and insulate your attic 2197 300 Insulate your exterior walls upon remodeling -- ACHIEVED Water heater passed combustion safety testing Adequate indoor ventilation NEXT STEPS COST ($)REBATE ($) estimated ACHIEVED Efficient lighting Programmable Thermostat NEXT STEPS Get Energy Fit Homes Certified when you improve your score to 96 points or more and complete the items listed in the Health and Safety, Energy Efficient and Action Needed categories above. Certified homes have energy efficiency upgrades that result in improved comfort, decreased impact on the environment, smaller utility bills and a higher resale value. Questions? 612-244-2484 energyadvisor@mncee.org www.mncee.org 128▼ 80 pointsachieved CURRENT SAFETY RISKS DURING YOUR ENERGY AUDIT, I FOUND A POTENTIAL HEALTH AND SAFETY RISK. These risks should be addressed before or in conjunction with your recommended energy projects. Any combustion safety issues should be addressed even if you do not plan to make any of the energy improvements. Your Energy Advisor can walk you through any of these projects. COMBUSTION SAFETY Address combustion safety issues. Your furnace did not pass our combustion safety tests. Hire a heating contractor to clean and tune your furnace in order to reduce carbon monixide (CO) levels. Your furnace contaminates your home with CO. This can lead to health issues and poor indoor air quality. ATTIC INSULATION Your attic is under-insulated. Your attic spaces are insulated to these levels: Floored Attic: R31.0 / R49 AIR SEALING Your blower door test result: 2619 cfm50 at 1976 SQ. FT. This is equivalent to having a 1.9-square-foot opening in your home. AIR SEAL AND INSULATE YOUR ATTIC to increase the durability of your home. This project makes your home more comfortable and prevents ice dams, while saving you money and energy. ATTIC INSULATION You may be eligible for rebates from your utility. This icon appears next to rebate eligible projects throughout the report. Reach out to your Advisor before you start your project or if you have questions. YOU NEED AN INSULATION ESTIMATE, AND YOUR ENERGY ADVISOR CAN SCHEDULE IT FOR YOU: I was not able to build an insulation estimate for you. However, additional insulation and/or air sealing work would help prevent ice dams, lower energy bills, and increase your home's durability and comfort. Your Energy Advisor can schedule an appointment for you with a rebate-eligible contractor and they can provide you with a comprehensive estimate. To get started, contact your Advisor at 612-244-2484 or energyadvisor@mncee.org. ATTIC INSULATION AND AIR SEALING 8 points WATER HEATER Type: Gas Venting: Natural Draft Age/Model Year: 1988. Your water heater is 30 years old. The average useful life of a water heater is 10-12 years. Combustion Safety Test Result: Passed tests REPLACE WITH AN ENERGY STAR POWER VENT OR DIRECT VENT MODEL that has an efficiency rating (UEF) of at least 0.68. Your water heater is old enough that you should start getting ready to replace it before it fails. Power vented or direct vent models have a sealed exhaust, so there is no potential for harmful combustion gases (which can contain carbon monoxide) spill back into your home. WATER HEATER SIDEWALL I was unable to access your walls to confirm insulation levels. Exterior walls should be insulated to at least R-11. CONTACT YOUR ENERGY ADVISOR to learn if there is way to have your insulation levels visually verified in order to qualify for the Energy Fit Homes certificate. I wasn't able to verify your insulation levels today. Contact your Energy Advisor at 612-244-2484 or energyadvisor@mncee.org. WALL INSULATION 12 points HEATING SYSTEM Type: Forced Air Furnace Assumed Efficiency: 96% Model Year: 2016. Your heating system is 2 years old. The average useful life of a furnace is 20 years. Venting: Sealed Combustion Safety Test Result: Failed test(s); refer to the Current Safety Risks section of this report for details and recommendations. WHEN IT'S TIME TO REPLACE YOUR FURNACE, choose a model that has an efficiency (AFUE) of at least 96% and an Electronically Commutated Motor (ECM). Your furnace safely removes gases like carbon monoxide from your home, which is an important safety feature. The venting on a 96% efficient model will accomplish the same thing. If you decide to replace it soon, be sure to take advantage of current rebates. HEATING SYSTEM WINDOWS Single Pane Windows: There were no single-pane windows without storms found in your home WINDOW REPLACEMENT IS NOT RECOMMENDED because this is not a cost effective upgrade based on energy savings alone. WINDOWS AIR CONDITIONER Type: Central Age/Model Year: 1999; average life is 10-20 years Efficiency: 10 SEER WHEN IT'S TIME TO REPLACE YOUR AIR CONDITIONER, REPLACE IT WITH A HIGH-EFFICIENCY MODEL. Ask a licensed contractor to install a model with a SEER (efficiency rating) of 16 or higher. ENROLL IN XCEL ENERGY'S SAVER'S SWITCH PROGRAM and you'll save 15% on your electric energy charges June thru September. If you have an electric water heater, you can enroll that as well, and save an additional 2%. Xcel Energy will install a switch on your AC that helps them manage the electric grid when demand for electricty is very high on extremely hot summer days. AIR CONDITIONER HEALTH AND SAFETY ASSESSMENT COMBUSTION SAFETY CARBON MONOXIDE (CO) TEST: Furnace: Failed Water Heater: Passed COMBUSTION SPILLAGE: Furnace: N/A Water Heater: Passed VENTILATION NATURAL DRAFT EQUIPMENT Continuous indoor ventilation is not required but may be considered. Ventilation is good for your home. All homes can benefit from having a controlled source of fresh air, like a continuously running bath fan. Adding continuous ventilation can be done during any insulation or air sealing projects and will remove pollutants and reduce access moisture, which can lead to durability issues for your home as well as health issues for its occupants. REPLACE YOUR NATURAL DRAFT EQUIPMENT. Your water heater has natural draft venting which can allow combustion gasses to spill back into your home. The potential for this increases after insulation and air sealing is completed. Replacing the equipment with a power vent or sealed combustion model is the safest way to reduce this risk. STOP HEAT LOSS AT YOUR CEILING JOINTS The space where your walls meet the ceiling does not appear to be well-insulated or air sealed. This means that heated or cooled air can easily escape through this area. To fix this, use caulk or low expansion spray foam to seal behind the trim. AIR SEAL AND INSULATE ATTIC HATCH A common weak point in the home’s thermal boundary is the attic access. Your access hatch let’s warm air from your home escape into your attic. To prevent this, an insulation contractor can air seal and insulate your hatch using rigid foam insulation board, caulk and other materials to create a tight seal. ENERGY EXPERT NOTES AND PHOTOS OF YOUR HOME CORRECT UNEVEN INSULATION (FOR ATTIC SPACES) Uneven insulation levels mean that warm air from your home can escape into your attic space. This wastes energy and money and can lead to durability issues when the warm moist air from your home settles (turns into frost on cold surfaces) in your attic. Insulating and air sealing this space can prevent this problem. ENERGY EXPERT NOTES AND PHOTOS OF YOUR HOME CONGRATS ON COMPLETING YOUR HOME ENERGY VISIT!NEXT STEPS▼01 At no cost, your Energy Advisor will connect you to money-saving utility rebates, great contractors and low-interest financing to get you the results you want. Contact the Energy Advisor Service. 612-244-2484 orenergyadvisor@mncee.org. ▼ 02 Work with your Energy Advisor to choose the right bundle of projects for you and your home. Whatever you choose, you are in charge. We are here to help. Pick an Energy Fitness Bundle ▼ 03 Hire rebate-eligible contractors to ensure that you will qualify for excellent rebates from your utility and are getting the job done right Complete Your Projects ENERGY FITNESS BUNDLES Air Seal and insulate your attic Install a power vented water heater with a UEF of 0.68 GOOD Estimated Total of Project and Quote Cost* $3,997 to $4,397 Potential Rebate Amount $400 Air Seal and insulate your attic Install a power vented water heater with a UEF of0.68 **Insulate your exterior walls upon remodeling BEST Estimated Total of Project and Quote Cost* $3,997 to $4,397 Potential Rebate Amount $400 Implement your Best Energy Fitness Bundle in order to earn the Energy Fit Homes Certification from CEE. * Calculated using your insulation quote and estimated project costs. ** Projects not included in the projected price ranges 88 score 100score REBATES REBATE AMOUNT NOTES Comprehensive Attic Air Sealing and Insulation 30% of project cost, up to $300 Air Leakage Reduction (25-29%) Air Leakage Reduction (30%and above) $150$200 Wall Insulation (interior or less than 75% if not chosen above) 30% of project cost, up to $300 0.90 EF Tankless / 0.70 EFStorage / 0.67 EF Storage Gas Water Heater $250, $175 or $100 Energy Star® Clothes Washer $10 Energy Star® Refrigerator $15 TOTAL REBATES:$725 Your Energy Advisor is here to help you earn the Whole Home Efficiency Rebate from Xcel Energy. Complete at least one Comprehensive Insulation project and two other rebate projects. Contact your Advisor with questions by phone or by email: 612-244-2484 or energyadvisor@mncee.org. STEP 1 Complete at least one comprehensive insulation project. 1 ▼ STEP 2 Complete at least two other qualifying projects. 2 ▼ STEP 3 Contact your Energy Advisor to schedule your free inspection. 3 ▼ See Xcel Energy's website for details. Be sure to use a rebate-eligible contractor for this work. LIMITED TIME BONUS: Complete your projects and your free inspection by November 30, 2018 and Xcel Energy will increase your entire Whole Home Efficiency Rebate by 25%! HOME ENERGY LOAN HOME ENERGY LOAN PROGRAM Eligible improvements include insulation, air sealing, heating, cooling, water heater and more! 2.99% fixed rate* (3.029% Annual Percentage Rate) This program is only available to HES program participants! Application must be submitted within 90 days of home visit. APR based on $10,000 for 5 years Terms up to 60 months $10,000 maximum loan amount Eligible projects include air sealing and insulation, heating, air conditioning, and water heating Heat pumps and solar excluded; subject to certain restrictions and efficiency ratings For larger projects a 4.99% fixed rate* (5.001% Annual Percentage Rate) loan is available APR based on $20,000 for 10 years Terms up to 120 months $20,000 maximum loan amount Eligible projects include air sealing and insulation, heating, air conditioning, water heating, heat pumps, solar, windows, exterior doors, and light fixtures Subject to certain restrictions and efficiency ratings * Rates, terms and conditions are current as of the date of publication and are subject to change without notice. Learn more about this loan or other lending options. Contact 612-335-5884or loaninfo@mncee.org. Visit mnlendingcenter.org. YOUR CITY IS WORKING ON THEIR ENERGY GOALS! This year, Mahtomedi invites residents to help reach its goal to triple participation in energy conservation over the next year. Do your part by following up on the recommendations outlined in your Energy Fitness Plan. In addition, consider subscribing to Xcel Energy's Windsource, a voluntary program that allows customers to pay a little extra every month to get some or all of their energy from renewable resources. ▼ CHANGE FURNACE FILTERS REGULARLY A furnace filter that is clogged with dirt and particles requires the furnace to work harder to keep air flowing. A furnace that does not work efficiently costs you more in energy bills. A clogged filter also loses its ability to remove more particles from the air. Be sure to install the correct filter for your heating system. If your furnace uses a 1 inch thick filter, use a filter with a MERV rating of 8 or less. When the MERV is higher than 8 for a 1 inch filter, it can negatively affect the flow of air through the furnace and cause stress to the furnace fan motor. ▼ CLEAN & TUNE HEATING SYSTEM Getting regular maintenance on your home heating system can help save 5% on your heating costs. A good tune up also reduces your heating system's output of flue gases, such as carbon monoxide. Cleaning the blower fan improves the distribution of heated and cooled air throughout the house. ▼ ADDITIONAL STEPS FOR SAVING ENERGY SEAL DUCTS Properly insulate and seal ducts in attics and crawl spaces in order to prevent heated and cooled air from escaping. Insulate ducts to R8 and cover with insulation when appropriate. Duct sealing can also improve the delivery of conditioned air to rooms. Seal the ducts, save money, and retain heated and cooled air. ▼ ADDITIONAL STEPS FOR SAVING ENERGY COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Meg Beekman, Community Development Director FROM:Jesse Anderson, Deputy Community Development Director SUBJECT:Proposed Special Assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs, Weed Removal Costs and Utility Service Line Repair Costs Requested Council Action: 1. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Diseased Tree Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Property Tax Rolls - Notice was published in the official newspaper on February 21, 2019. Requested Council Action: - Motion to Open Public Hearing - Take public input - Motion to close Public Hearing - Motion to adopt Resolution 2. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Weed Removal Costs to the Hennepin County Property Tax Rolls - Notice was published in the official newspaper on February 21, 2019 Requested Council Action: - Motion to open Public Hearing - Take public input - Motion to close Public Hearing - Motion to adopt Resolution 3. Resolution Certifying Special Assessments for Utility Repairs to the Hennepin County Property Tax Rolls - Notice was published in the official newspaper on February 21, 2019 Requested Council Action: - Motion to open Public Hearing - Take public input - Motion to close Public Hearing - Motion to adopt Resolution Background: Tonight three Public Hearings are bring held to consider certification of proposed special assessments. The property owners have been notified by mail of the date of the Public Hearings and the amount of the proposed special assessments. As of March 20, 2019, no formal appeals have been made to City staff. Grass/Tree Abatements In instances where properties are found to be in violation of the City's long grass or noxious weeds ordinance, or have a diseased or dead tree on their property as identified by the City Forester, the following process is followed: A written Compliance Notice is provided to the owner of record. In addition to notifying the owner of record, in certain cases, properties may be posted or other responsible parties may be notified. A follow-up inspection is conducted to verify compliance. Staff makes every effort to make in-person contact with residents in order to gain voluntary compliance and avoid abatement actions. If compliance is not achieved, the City will take corrective actions to remove the public nuisance or hazard. In certain cases, the property owner may provide written agreement to a City-facilitated abatement. The City bills the owner of record for the portion of costs the City has incurred directly related to the abatement action. A service charge is applied to help recover city costs associated with the entire abatement process- inspections, notifications, invoicing, administrative systems, etc. The direct costs of the abatement are recorded as pending special assessments and this information is available to the public. When a property is sold, agencies or parties often conduct property searches to determine the pending and levied special assessment amounts. Payments of any pending or levied special assessment should be determined by the sellers and buyers as part of the sales transactions. Utility Assessments The City Council approved an Emergency Private Utility Service Repair Assessment Policy last year that allows homeowners to enter into an agreement to have the cost of a service line repair assessed over five years through their property taxes. Last year, four service line repairs were completed with financial assistance from the City. The City was repaid in full for one repair and entered into special assessment agreements with the other two property owners. City staff anticipated entering into a special assessment agreement with the fourth property, but that remained incomplete as of March 20, 2019. Payment Options available to Property Owners Once an assessment roll is adopted by the Council, the owner of each property has the following options: 1. Pay the entire amount of the special assessment, without interest by April 25, 2019. 2. After April 25, 2019 through November 20, 2019, the property owner may pay the total special assessment plus accumulated interest (5 percent) through the date of payment. 3. If payments are made with property taxes, the first payment will be due with taxes in 2020. The total principal will be payable in annual installments for the period stated on the levy roll and as indicated below. Interest of 5 percent is accrued on the unpaid balance. Utility Repair Costs Five Years Tree Removal Costs Five Years Grass Removal Cost One Year Partial prepayments (such as paying half now and certifying the balance) are not allowed under current assessment policy. Budget Issues: The levy roll for weed removal costs totals $9,560. The levy roll for tree removal costs totals $13,536.50. The levy roll for utility repair costs total $3,081. However, the list will be updated as appropriate for the Council Meeting reflecting payments made by March 25, 2019. Strategic Priorities and Values: Safe, Secure, Stable Community Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR DISEASED TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has caused the removal of trees on certain properties within the City during 2018 under the authority of Minnesota Statutes, Section 18G.13, City Ordinance Section 20-301 through 20-306 and/or by written agreement with the owners of such property; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 2019, certain tree removal costs remained unpaid; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll for unpaid accounts during 2019, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where tree removal costs are to be assessed, together with the amounts proposed to be assessed to each property; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute authorizes the certification of delinquent tree removal costs to the County tax rolls for collection; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for tree removal costs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of tree removal costs incurred during the year 2018 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 20166. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable in equal annual installments with interest thereon at 5 percent per annum, extending over a period of five years. The first of the installments shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2020, and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from April 26, 2019 through December 31, 2020. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 25, 2019. After April 25, 2019, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from April 25, RESOLUTION NO. _______________ 2019 through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close of business November 21, 2019 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. March 25, 2019 __________________________________ 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: whereon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member introduced the following resolution and moves its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR WEED REMOVAL COSTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center has caused noxious weeds and tall grass to be cut down on properties within the City under the authority of Minnesota Statutes Section 18.78 and City Ordinance Section 19-1601 through 19-1604; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 2019, certain weed destruction accounts for removal of said weeds and tall grass costs remained unpaid; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll for unpaid accounts from 2019, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where unpaid weed destruction account costs are to be assessed to each property; and WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute authorizes the certification of delinquent weed destruction accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessment for weed destruction costs. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. The special assessment roll of unpaid weed destruction accounts incurred during the year 2018 is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 20167. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes in 2020, in one annual installment with interest thereon at 5 percent per annum and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from April 26, 2019 through December 31, 2020. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessment to the County Auditor pay the whole of the assessment, to the City Treasurer, without interest, if the entire assessment is paid on or before April 25, 2019. After April 25, 2019, he or she may pay the total special assessment, plus interest. Interest will accumulate from April 26, 2019 through the date of payment. Such payment must be made by the close of business November 21, 2019 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. RESOLUTION NO. _______________ 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplication of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. March 25, 2019 ________________________________________ 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: whereon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION CERTIFYING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR UTILITY SERVICE LINE REPAIRS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429, provides for a Public Hearing process to recover the costs through special assessments; and WHEREAS, the City has incurred costs to repair utility service lines, billed the property owners, and has not been reimbursed by certain property owners; and WHEREAS, a special assessment roll, a copy of which is attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk, tabulating those properties where a utility service line repair cost is to be assessed with the amount, including interest and service charges, to be assessed; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assessments for utility repairs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The special assessment roll of delinquent public utility accounts is hereby adopted and certified as Assessment Roll No. 20170. 2. The special assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be payable with ad valorem taxes levied in 2019, in five installments with interest thereon at five (5.0) percent per annum, and shall bear interest on the entire assessment from January 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to the certification of the assessments to the Hennepin County Auditor pay the entire assessment to the City, plus interest accumulated from January 1, 2019 through the date of payment. Such payments must be made by the close of business on November 20, 2019 or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the Hennepin County Auditor to be extended on the property tax lists of the County, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. RESOLUTION NO. _______________ March 25, 2019 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. Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Trees) 2018 Tree Removal Printed March 13, 2019 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs Five Years Levy No.Property ID Pending AmountProperty Address Capital Interest Charge Special Assessment Charge Total Amount Certified 20166 01-118-21-12-0031 3,550.00 6023 Lyndale Ave N 30.00 30.00 3,610.00 20166 01-118-21-31-0080 1,600.00 5532 Dupont Ave N 30.00 30.00 1,660.00 20166 01-118-21-33-0161 350.00 5335 Emerson Ave N 30.00 30.00 410.00 20166 02-118-21-31-0043 1,345.00 2301 Ericon Dr 30.00 30.00 1,405.00 20166 03-118-21-21-0005 725.00 6001 Admiral Pl 30.00 30.00 785.00 20166 03-118-21-21-0043 749.00 5908 Halifax Pl 30.00 30.00 809.00 20166 10-118-21-32-0063 449.50 4216 Lakebreeze Ave 30.00 30.00 509.50 20166 26-119-21-42-0100 400.00 7237 Oliver Ave N 30.00 30.00 460.00 20166 33-119-21-11-0060 1,750.00 6703 Perry Ave N 30.00 30.00 1,810.00 20166 33-119-21-14-0058 600.00 4913 Howe La 30.00 30.00 660.00 20166 34-119-21-34-0102 799.00 4019 Joyce La 30.00 30.00 859.00 20166 34-119-21-43-0019 200.00 6236 Chowen Ave N 30.00 30.00 260.00 20166 36-119-21-21-0116 239.00 6811 Colfax Ave N 30.00 30.00 299.00 Total:13,536.50 Page 1 of 1City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN 55430 Amended Special Assessment Certified Roll (Grass/Weeds) 2018 Weed Destruction Printed March 13, 2019 Municipal Code No. 22 Levy Runs One Year Levy No.Property ID Pending AmountProperty Address Capital Interest Charge Special Assessment Charge Total Amount Certified 20167 01-118-21-21-0010 251.25 6043 Colfax Ave N 10.00 30.00 291.25 20167 01-118-21-22-0058 262.50 6028 Fremont Ave N 10.00 30.00 302.50 20167 01-118-21-24-0066 363.75 816 57th Ave N 10.00 30.00 403.75 20167 01-118-21-31-0053 251.25 5513 Bryant Ave N 10.00 30.00 291.25 20167 02-118-21-14-0028 240.00 5800 Knox Ave N 10.00 30.00 280.00 20167 02-118-21-41-0119 240.00 5520 James Ave N 10.00 30.00 280.00 20167 02-118-21-43-0036 90.00 5301 Oliver Ave N 10.00 30.00 130.00 20167 02-118-21-43-0076 240.00 2012 55th Ave N 10.00 30.00 280.00 20167 02-118-21-44-0043 240.00 5328 Irving Ave N 10.00 30.00 280.00 20167 02-118-21-44-0084 240.00 5407 Humboldt Ave N 10.00 30.00 280.00 20167 03-118-21-24-0082 1,128.75 3812 58th Ave N 10.00 30.00 1,168.75 20167 25-119-21-31-0011 262.50 824 Woodbine La 10.00 30.00 302.50 20167 25-119-21-31-0083 240.00 7217 Camden Ave N 10.00 30.00 280.00 20167 25-119-21-41-0001 240.00 7243 Riverdale Rd 10.00 30.00 280.00 20167 28-119-21-43-0023 296.25 5024 71st Ave N 10.00 30.00 336.25 20167 33-119-21-14-0011 262.50 6500 Orchard Ave N 10.00 30.00 302.50 20167 33-119-21-41-0037 307.50 6407 Orchard Ave N 10.00 30.00 347.50 20167 33-119-21-41-0095 251.25 6340 Quail Ave N 10.00 30.00 291.25 20167 33-119-21-43-0018 240.00 6124 Scott Ave N 10.00 30.00 280.00 20167 34-119-21-12-0028 1,117.50 6842 Drew Ave N 10.00 30.00 1,157.50 20167 34-119-21-13-0036 262.50 6533 Drew Ave N 10.00 30.00 302.50 20167 34-119-21-32-0055 273.75 4521 Kathrene Dr 10.00 30.00 313.75 20167 34-119-21-34-0013 240.00 3906 Janet La 10.00 30.00 280.00 20167 34-119-21-34-0017 123.75 6121 France Ave N 10.00 30.00 163.75 20167 34-119-21-44-0091 240.00 3300 Lawrence Rd 10.00 30.00 280.00 20167 36-119-21-34-0086 615.00 6125 Camden Ave N 10.00 30.00 655.00 Total:9,560.00 Page 1 of 1City of Brooklyn Center - 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway - Brooklyn Center MN 55430 Special  Total  Property ID Property Address Original Amount Assessment Charge Pending Assessment 02‐118‐21‐41‐0121 5500 James Avenue N. 3,051.00$                   30.00$                                  3,081.00$                       Total Count: 1 3,051.00$                   Total Pending Amount: 3,081.00$                      Special Assessment Roll  Levy No. 20170 2018 Utility Repairs Report Date: March 20, 2019 COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Meg Beekman, Community Development Director FROM:Ginny McIntosh, City Planner / Zoning Administrator SUBJECT:Resolution Approving Planning Commission Application No. 2019-004, for a Special Use Permit for an Autism Therapy Center and Ancillary Playground (Located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard) Requested Council Action: - Motion to approve a resolution approving a request for a Special Use Permit for an autism therapy center with ancillary outdoor playground, at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard, based on the submitted plans and findings of fact, as amended by the conditions in the resolution of approval Background: Jane Sharkey of Helena Autism Therapy Center, Inc. (“the Applicant”) is requesting review and consideration of an application that would allow for the issuance of a Special Use Permit to operate an autism therapy center and ancillary outdoor playground at the property located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard (“the Subject Property”). The Subject Property is currently comprised of a three-story, multi-tenant building that was constructed in 1980 on approximately 1.06 acres. The Applicant previously submitted a Planning Commission Application (2019-002) for the same request but a different location (2800 Freeway Boulevard). This application received a unanimous recommendation from the Planning Commission on January 17, 2019; however, the Applicant ultimately withdrew her application prior to the scheduled City Council meeting after unforeseen building maintenance issues were identified, and given delays in accessing Small Business Administration (SBA) funding during the federal government shutdown. It was during this time that the Subject Property, located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard, was identified. Helena Autism Therapy Center provides therapy services to children aged approximately 30 months (2 ½ years) to seven (7) years in age who have a medical diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) or other diagnoses. Services are also provided to family members of children on the Autism Spectrum Disorder, which would occur either at the Center or within their homes. Children receiving services from the Helena Autism Therapy Center typically spend 20 hours per week at the clinic. As Helena Autism Therapy Center possesses CTSS (Children’s Therapeutic Services and Supports) certification from the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS), services are provided to “help children and families develop skills in areas such as anger, aggression, following directions and rules, relating to peers, anxiety, depression, family conflicts, and offer a spectrum of services, including: individual, family, and group psychotherapy and skills training, children’s day treatment, crisis assistance, behavioral health management, and mental health behavioral aides.” In reviewing the request, City staff determined that the use classification is similar in nature to that of a “group daycare facility,” which is allowed by Special Use only in the C1 (Service/Office) District. Requests for issuance of a Special Use Permit require that a public hearing be scheduled. An Affidavit of Publication was received, confirming publication of a public hearing notice in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post on February 28th, 2019. Mail notices were also sent out to property owners in accordance with Section 35-220 (Special Use Permits) of the Brooklyn Center Zoning Ordinance. On March 14, 2019, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the request for issuance of a Special Use Permit to allow for an autism therapy center with ancillary outdoor playground in the C1 (Service/Office) District. No comments were received prior to or during the public hearing; however, the Applicant was available to answer questions of the Planning Commission, which primarily related to the anticipated remodeling schedule and opening of the Center, should the application be approved. Following close of the public hearing, the Planning Commission elected to unanimously (6-0) recommend City Council approval of the requested issuance of a Special Use Permit for an autism therapy center with ancillary outdoor playground for the Subject Property located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard. This recommendation was also subject to the Applicant complying with the conditions as outlined in the Planning Commission Report dated March 14, 2019, and associated Planning Commission resolution. A copy of the Planning Commission Report for Planning Commission Application No. 2019-004, dated March 14, 2019, and the City Council resolution regarding the approval and issuance of a Special Use Permit for an autism therapy center and ancillary outdoor playground is included with this memorandum. Budget Issues: None to consider at this time. Strategic Priorities and Values: Safe, Secure, Stable Community Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING THE RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 2019-004 FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE AN AUTISM THERAPY CENTER WITH ANCILLARY OUTDOOR PLAYGROUND (5637 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD) WHEREAS, Planning Commission Application No. 2019-004 submitted by Jane Sharkey of Helena Autism Therapy Center, Inc. (“the Applicant”) requests review and consideration for the issuance of a Special Use Permit to operate an autism therapy center with ancillary outdoor playground within an existing three-story building located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard (“the Subject Property”); and WHEREAS, the Subject Property is situated in the C1 (Service/Office) District and pursuant to a determination by City staff, the closest type use given the day-to-day operations, clientele, and requests is that of a “Group Day Care Facility”; and WHEREAS, per City Code Section 35-320; Subpart 3, Group Day Care Facilities are only allowed by means of Special Use Permit in all C1 (Service/Office) Districts, and the Applicant has submitted such an application to the City of Brooklyn Center for official consideration under Planning Commission Application No. 2019-004; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, held a duly noticed and called public hearing on March 14th, 2019, whereby a planning staff report was presented and public testimony regarding the Special Use Permit were received; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, 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 (Special Use Permit ) 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 City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, to recommend that Planning Commission Application No. 2019-004, submitted by Jane Sharkey of Helena Autism Therapy Center, Inc. be approved based upon the following considerations: 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. RESOLUTION NO. 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. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, to recommend that Planning Commission Application No. 2019-004 be approved subject to the following conditions and considerations: 1. Building and Site Plan Review: a. Any major changes or modifications made to the Subject Property can only be made either through the City’s Building Permit process or through formal Site and Building Plan review by the City. b. The installation of the as-proposed eight (8) foot cedar fence and any alterations to the parking lot will require issuance of a City building permit and/or zoning approval. i. The proposed fence shall either be double sided or the panels shall face outward as per conditions outlined by the Planning Commission in their initial review of the originally submitted Planning Commission Application No. 2019-002 and previously approved Planning Commission Resolution No. 2019-002. 2. Agreements: a. The Applicant shall adhere to the maximum occupancies outlined by City staff and in accordance with any licensing or certification requirements (e.g., DHS) for the autism therapy center. b. Issuance of a Special Use Permit for the autism therapy center and ancillary outdoor playground is conditioned upon the Applicant obtaining any necessary certification or re-certification from the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) or other licensing authorities for the use or services provided. This information shall be provided to the City Planner for confirmation. c. The Special Use Permit for the autism therapy center and ancillary outdoor playground is subject to all applicable building codes, ordinances and regulations. Any violation thereof may be grounds for revocation. d. The Applicant shall comply with the review comments identified in Building Official Dan Grinsteinner’s memorandum dated March 7, 2019. The Applicant RESOLUTION NO. shall provide plans for any remodeling and submit building permit applications for any work to be conducted in the space. e. The Applicant shall comply with all comments outlined in the memorandum prepared by Assistant City Engineer Andrew Hogg on March 7, 2019. f. Children being dropped off or utilizing the autism therapy center/outdoor playground shall always be escorted by a parent or designated adults/guardians when entering or exiting the building or outdoor playground. Children are not to be left unattended in the outdoor playground area. 3. Facilities and Equipment: a. The Subject Property parking lot is to be re-striped to meet City Code and site plan approval requirements, and provide sufficient ADA parking in proximity to main entrances. Plans are to be submitted detailing the re-striping and alterations to accommodate the proposed outdoor playground. b. The Applicant shall conduct an inventory of existing landscaping to determine whether the existing landscaping is in conformance with the approved landscape plan under Planning Commission No. 79020 and as outlined in the construction set dated July 27, 1979. Should any deficiencies or removals be identified, the Applicant shall propose like replacements. All new landscaping is to meet the minimum standards noted under the City’s Landscape Point System Policy (e.g., caliper sizing). c. The Applicant shall obtain approval from the Hennepin County Health Department for any proposed kitchen facilities. d. The Applicant/Property Owner shall ensure the fire sprinkler system is maintained and monitored. e. No outdoor music or loud speakers will be allowed in and around the outdoor playground area; the playground shall be monitored by the required number of adult leaders per any certification or licensure requirements; and the playground must be well maintained and secured during off hours of operations. f. The Applicant must ensure that the playground area drains properly or provide measures or drainage devices that ensure positive drainage. g. Any playground curbing materials, play structures, fencing and/or concrete curb barricades damaged or destroyed due to accidents or natural events shall be replaced immediately. March 25, 2019 Date Mayor RESOLUTION NO. 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. ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 1 Planning Commission Report Meeting Date: March 14, 2019 Application No. 2019-004 Applicant: Jane Sharkey (Helena Autism Therapy Center, Inc.) Location: 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard Request: Special Use Permit for Autism Center and Outdoor Playground INTRODUCTION Jane Sharkey of Helena Autism Therapy Center, Inc, (“the Applicant”) is requesting review and consideration of an application that would allow for the issuance of a Special Use Permit to operate an autism therapy center and ancillary outdoor playground at the property located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard (“the Subject Property”). The Subject Property consists of a three-story, multi-tenant building that was constructed in 1980 on approximately 1.06 acres. The Subject Property originally received site and building plan approval in 1979 under Planning Commission Application No. 79020 for construction of an approximately 14,850-square foot, three story office building, with its intended primary use as a law office. Approval of the site and building plan also included approvals for a landscape plan, installation of an underground irrigation system, and automatic fire extinguishing system. Map 1. Subject Property Location (5637 Brooklyn Boulevard). • Application Filed: 02/12/2019 • Review Period (60-day) Deadline: 04/13/2019 • Extension Declared: N/A • Extended Review Period Deadline: N/A ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 2 Image 1. Exterior Images of Subject Property (5637 Brooklyn Boulevard). Photo Source: Joseph Hartmann (City of Brooklyn Center). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND ZONING STANDARDS 2030 Land Use Plan: OS– Office/Service Business Neighborhood: Northport Current Zoning: C1 (Service/Office) District Surrounding Zoning: North: R1 (Single Family Residence) District East: Brooklyn Boulevard and C2 (Commerce) District ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 3 South: C1 (Service/Office) District West: Northport Park and R1 (Single Family Residence) District Site Area: Approximately 1.06 Acres SPECIAL USE PERMIT REVIEW Background on Autism Therapy Center The Applicant has leased a space in Fridley since 2012 for the Helena Autism Therapy Center, but has been unable to obtain permission to construct an outdoor playground. As many of her clients are young children, it was felt that outdoor play should be provided in order “to address large motor deficiencies and enjoy fresh air and a fun setting.” The Applicant initially met with City staff to discuss their intent to purchase the property located at 2800 Freeway Boulevard and plans to construct an outdoor playground immediately adjacent to the building. However, the Applicant’s application for 2800 Freeway Boulevard (filed under Planning Commission Application No. 2019-002) was withdrawn prior to appearing before City Council. A new application has since been filed under Planning Commission Application No. 2019- 004 for the Helena Autism Therapy Center to relocate to the property located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard (Subject Property). Given discussions with the Applicant, the request for an outdoor playground, and the intended focus of the autism therapy center on serving clients primarily two (2) to seven (7) years in age, it was determined that the use classification would be similar in nature to that of a “group daycare facility,” which is allowed by Special Use only in the C1 (Service/Office) District. Requests for issuance of a Special Use Permit require that a public hearing be scheduled. An Affidavit of Publication was received, confirming publication of a public hearing notice in the Brooklyn Center Sun Post on February 28th, 2019 (Exhibit A). Mail notices were also sent out to property owners in accordance with Section 35-220 (Special Use Permits) of the Brooklyn Center Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant has provided supplemental information on the certification of the autism therapy center through the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) as well as the Center’s mission and operations, attached hereto as Exhibit B. Helena Autism Therapy Center provides therapy services to children aged approximately two (2) to seven (7) years in age who have a medical diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) or other diagnoses. Services are also provided to family members of children on the Autism Spectrum Disorder, which would occur either at the Center or within their homes. Children receiving services from the Helena Autism Therapy Center typically spend 20 hours per week at the clinic where group treatment modalities, including art and music classes, are provided to model typical academic settings. The Center also provides speech and occupational therapy. Helena Autism Therapy Center possesses CTSS (Children’s Therapeutic Services and Supports) certification, which requires adherence to certain Minnesota State Statute guidelines, including those relating to state and local coordination, day treatment services, and emotional disturbance. The Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) notes that CTSS are a “flexible package of rehabilitative mental health services to meet the needs of each individual child” and “provide varying degrees of care for children and youth who require more than psychotherapy alone to return lost capabilities and restore them to normal development.” CTSS is intended to “help children and families develop skills in areas such as anger, aggression, ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 4 following directions and rules, relating to peers, anxiety, depression, family conflicts, and offer a spectrum of services, including: individual, family, and group psychotherapy and skills training, children’s day treatment, crisis assistance, behavioral health management, and mental health behavioral aides.” The Center would employ approximately 32 on-site employees. An additional 10 staff and a manager are employed under a DBA (“Doing Business As”) called, “Helena Family Support.” While the manager would maintain an office at the Subject Property, the other 10 staff would provide services off-site with the exception of regular once per week meetings and other scheduled meetings as needed at the Subject Property. The Center typically hosts 20 children during the morning program, and another 20 children during the afternoon program, with proposed operating hours of 7:45 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. Children are either dropped off by their parents or guardians, or transported by Medical Assistance carriers. No transportation vehicles would be stored on site of the Subject Property. The C1 (Service/Office) District does not specifically outline “autism center” type uses as a permitted or Special Use, although “medical, dental, osteopathic, chiropractic, and optometric offices” are a permitted use under this zoning district designation. In consideration of the day-to-day operations, age of clientele, and request for construction of an outdoor playground, City staff determined that the “group day care facilities” use, allowable only through issuance of a Special Use Permit, would be the closest type use designation and requested that the Applicant submit an application for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council. Outdoor Playground Request The Applicant has indicated that the primary reason in relocating from Fridley to Brooklyn Center would be to offer an outdoor playground for their young clients to utilize. The Applicant identified an area just outside a side door on the west side of the Subject Property, facing Northport Drive. The approximate dimensions of the playground, as proposed, would be approximately 28 feet wide and 60 feet in length. The playground would be fully enclosed with a cedar fence. The western edge of the proposed playground area would be located approximately 71 feet to the edge of curb along Northport Drive, and approximately 45 feet from the northern property line, which contains single family residential. The Applicant intends to incorporate equipment per the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) recommendations and as indicated in treatment plans from Primary Care Physicians, physical therapists, and mental health providers. Image 2. Proposed Playground Area (5637 Brooklyn Boulevard). ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 5 Image 3. Site Plan Layout of Subject Property with Proposed Outdoor Playground (5637 Brooklyn Boulevard). In most cases, group daycare or child care centers are required to provide an outdoor play area for children. In the C1 District, outdoor recreational facilities (e.g., playgrounds) are regulated by certain special requirement standards under the City’s Zoning Code. Per Section 35-411 (Special Requirements in C1 and C1A Districts), “In the case of group day care facilities, outside recreational facilities shall be appropriately separated from the parking and driving areas by a wood fence not less than four feet in height; or a Council approved substitute; shall be located contiguous to the day care facility, shall not be located in any yard abutting a major thoroughfare unless buffered by a device set forth in Section 35-400; Footnote 10; shall not have an impervious surface for more than half the playground area; and shall extend at least 60 feet from the wall of the building or to an adjacent property line, whichever is less, or shall be bounded on not more than two sides by parking and driving areas.” Based on the information provided by the Applicant, the Applicant intends to install an eight (8) foot high cedar fence around the perimeter of the outdoor playground, not only as a safety mechanism, but to buffer noise that may come from the surrounding streets. Per conversations held with the Planning Commission at their review of the Applicant’s initial application for the autism therapy center under Planning Commission Application No. 2019-002 for a different location (2800 Freeway Boulevard), the Planning Commission stressed the importance of utilizing a double-sided fence in order to ensure the “nice side” faces out towards the neighboring properties and street. This conversation initiated as the Applicant had intended to face the fencing inward to prevent her young clients from trying to scale the fence while in the playground area. The playground area would be located just outside an egress door and feature an exit through the fence. As the proposed playground and fence would result in the loss of eight (8) parking spaces, Assistant City Engineer Andrew Hogg noted that the Applicant would need to provide sufficient spacing between the playground, parking lot curb, and drive aisle. Per his memorandum dated March 7, 2019 (Exhibit C), the proposed playground fencing shall be located a minimum of four (4) feet from parking lot curbing and ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 6 provide sufficient spacing to allow for adequate movements within the drive aisle. Additionally, all perimeters of driving and parking areas are to be bounded by cast-in-place concrete curb and gutter which conforms to Minnesota Highway Type “B6-12.” Based on a review of the submitted site plan (Exhibit B), sufficient spacing should be allowed for given the proposed configuration of the playground area. The Applicant will also want to ensure the Subject Property remains in compliance with the original site and building plan approvals, as noted under PC Application No. 79020. For instance, as a landscape plan was approved, the Applicant would need to verify by inventory that the existing landscaping is still in compliance. If trees or shrubs are to be removed to make way for the proposed playground or other improvements, the Applicant will need to propose replacement landscaping to make up for the deficiency that is in compliance with the originally approved landscape plan and the City’s Landscape Point System Policy standards (e.g., caliper sizing). Existing Tenants and Site Needs The Subject Property is currently home to existing tenants; however, it is to City staff’s understanding that should the Applicant receive issuance of a Special Use Permit and move into the building, Helena Therapy Autism Center would be the sole occupant. Assuming approximately 14,850-square feet of the building is utilized for “office use,” Section 35-704 (Minimum Parking Spaces Required) would require a minimum of 74 parking spaces to serve this use during the week. Per the Planning Commission meeting minutes on file for Planning Commission Application No. 79020, which approved the original site and building plans for the Subject Property, the Applicant noted at that time that they only required 59 parking spaces but proposed the construction of 60 off-street parking spaces with Proof of Parking for 14 additional spaces, if needed. The construction plans approved for the Subject Property in 1979 indicated a total of 60 off-street parking spaces. The Applicant indicated with their submitted site plan that 68 off-street parking spaces are currently available on site (refer to Exhibit B). Assuming eight (8) parking spaces are lost to accommodate the playground, the Applicant would be providing the minimum 60 spaces necessary for the use proposed. Upon a visit to the site, City staff noted that the existing trash dumpster is not currently enclosed. As part of any approval, and per City Code, the Applicant will be required to fully enclose the dumpster and relocate it out of the parking lot, where it is currently located. The Applicant has stated that they are currently obtaining quotes to enclose the dumpster. The Applicant will also need to address non-conforming ADA parking and re-stripe their parking lot to address any faded striping and ensure the appropriate number and widths for ADA parking and loading spaces are provided. Building Official Review Building Official Dan Grinsteinner provided comments regarding the occupancy classification, floor locations of occupants depending on the presence of an automatic fire sprinkler and/or fire alarm system, and the minimum egress requirements given the types of uses within the building. In addition, accessible ADA parking is to be located the shortest accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible building entrance. As there is no elevator or lift in existence at this location, ADA parking is required outside the lower (1st) and main (2nd) levels of the building. Please refer to his attached comments for more information (Exhibit D). ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 7 Special Use Permit Request The Applicant is requesting approval of a Special Use Permit to allow for the establishment of an autism therapy center and construction of an outdoor playground in an existing three-story building located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard. According to Section 35-220 (Special Use Permits) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance, “Special uses are those which may be required for the public welfare in a given district but which are, in some respects, incompatible with the permitted uses in the district. Before a building or premises is devoted to any use classified as a special use by this ordinance, a special use permit must be granted by the City Council.” As “group day care facilities” have been identified as the most closely related use, Section 35-320 (C1 Service/Office District), Subsection 3 (Special Uses), notes that: b. Group day care facilities provided that such developments, in each specific case, are demonstrated to be: 1) Compatible with existing adjacent land uses as well as with those uses permitted in the C1 district generally. 2) Complementary to existing adjacent land uses as well as those uses permitted in the C1 district generally. 3) Of comparable intensity to permitted C1 district land uses with respect to activity levels. 4) Planned and designed to assure that generated traffic will be within the capacity of available public facilities and will not have an adverse impact upon those facilities, the immediate neighborhood, or the community. 5) Traffic generated by other uses on the site will not pose a danger to children served by the daycare use. And further provided that the special requirements set forth in Section 35-411 (Special Requirements in C1 and C1A Districts) are adhered to. As indicated in the language above, the “group daycare facilities” use is typically geared towards the more traditionally seen child daycare model. However, as an example, Planning Commission Application No. 2018-019, which granted a Special Use Permit to an adult daycare facility, was reviewed at the end of 2018 utilizing the “group daycare facilities” determination as a guideline. Per the Standards of Special Use Permits, a Special Use Permit may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following are met: 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. The Applicant has noted that it is not their intent to endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort of their clients, existing tenants, or the general public. As the autism therapy center currently possesses CTSS certification through the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS), the Applicant would need to provide updated documentation noting the relocation or potential re-certification of the autism therapy center at the Subject Property and ensure all outstanding comments identified by City staff, including the City Building Official, Fire Inspector, and Assistant City Engineer, are addressed. ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 8 The Applicant did sit down to meet with City staff prior to submitting their initial application to the City (Planning Commission Application No. 2019-002) and prior to submitting their most recent application for the Subject Property located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard (Planning Commission Application No. 2019-004). Regarding the proposed outdoor playground, the Applicant intends to install an eight (8) foot high cedar fence to not only address safety concerns, but to buffer out any noise, dust, or fumes from the adjacent streets. An egress from within the playground area would be provided that would not only provide a continued path of egress from within the building, but also ensure young clients remain within the playground area. Considering the separation requirements between the playground fence and parking lot curbing, the Applicant will want to work with City staff to ensure sufficient safety measures are in place (e.g., overall separation, installation of barricades or bumpers). 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. The special use is not intended to be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, not substantially diminish and impair the property values within the neighborhood. The building is currently occupied by some tenants, however, it is to City staff’s understanding that should the Special Use Permit be approved and Helena Therapy Autism Center relocate onto the Subject Property, they would be the sole occupant. Other than the installation of a playground area on the west side of the Subject Property and corrections to parking and landscaping, etc. the Applicant has no plans to substantially alter the existing building’s exterior. The intent is to operate the autism therapy center during normal, weekday business hours. The Applicant has also indicated that they would construct a new enclosure for the trash dumpster currently located on-site. The Subject Property is bordered to the south by a multi-tenant office building located at 5615 Brooklyn Boulevard and Greater Minneapolis Girl Scouts Council (5601 Brooklyn Blvd), to the west by Northport Park (5600 France Avenue North), to the north by single family residential homes, and to the east by Brooklyn Boulevard with adjacent commercial retail. 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. The establishment of the special use should not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding properties for uses permitted in the district as the surrounding land is currently either fully developed or utilized as parkland. As the existing Helena Therapy Autism Center currently occupies a similarly sized space in Fridley, the Subject Property building would be fully occupied. ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 9 4. Adequate measurements have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress, and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. The Applicant met with City staff on a few occasions to discuss her proposal and identify potential issues as outlined by the Assistant City Engineer, City Planner, and Building Official. The Applicant is aware of the potential ingress and egress needs for the proposed autism therapy center, including the assurance that sufficient ADA parking is provided and adequate spacing is allotted for in the lower parking area closest to the proposed playground. There are no plans to create additional ingress or egress access points as part of the proposal. The Applicant will need to ultimately work with City staff to ensure all ingress, egress, and parking concerns are addressed 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. Per the submitted plans, the Applicant has no plans to alter the exterior of the building in such a way to render the building or site non-conforming. The only anticipated alterations include the incorporation of an outdoor playground with fencing, buffering of the playground area from the parking area, any required re-striping, the construction of a new trash enclosure, and any required landscaping to address deficiencies with the originally approved landscape plan. Based on staff findings, staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the requested Special Use Permit for an autism therapy center with ancillary outdoor playground for the property located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard (Subject Property); subject to the Applicant complying with the comments outlined in the Approval Conditions noted below. APPROVAL CONDITIONS: Staff recommends the following conditions be attached to any positive recommendation on the approval of Application No. 2019-004 for 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard (Subject Property): 1. Building and Site Plan Review: a. Any major changes or modifications made to the Subject Property can only be made either through the City’s Building Permit process or through formal Site and Building Plan review by the City. b. The installation of the as-proposed eight (8) foot cedar fence and any alterations to the parking lot will require issuance of a City building permit and/or zoning approval. i. The proposed fence shall be double sided as per conditions outlined by the Planning Commission in their initial review of the originally submitted Planning Commission Application No. 2019-002 and previously approved Planning Commission Resolution No. 2019-002. 2. Agreements: a. The Applicant shall adhere to the maximum occupancies outlined by City staff and in accordance with any licensing or certification requirements (e.g., DHS) for the autism therapy center. b. Issuance of a Special Use Permit for the autism therapy center and ancillary outdoor ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 10 playground is conditioned upon the Applicant obtaining any necessary certification or re-certification from the Minnesota Department of Human Services (DHS) or other licensing authorities for the use or services provided. This information shall be provided to the City Planner for confirmation. c. The Special Use Permit for the autism therapy center and ancillary outdoor playground is subject to all applicable building codes, ordinances and regulations. Any violation thereof may be grounds for revocation. d. The Applicant shall comply with the review comments identified in Building Official Dan Grinsteinner’s memorandum dated March 7, 2019 (Exhibit D). The Applicant shall provide plans for any remodeling and submit building permit applications for any work to be conducted in the space. e. The Applicant shall comply with all comments outlined in the memorandum prepared by Assistant City Engineer Andrew Hogg on March 7, 2019 (Exhibit C). f. Children being dropped off or utilizing the autism therapy center/outdoor playground shall always be escorted by a parent or designated adults/guardians when entering or exiting the building or outdoor playground. Children are not to be left unattended in the outdoor playground area. 3. Facilities and Equipment: a. The Subject Property parking lot is to be re-striped to meet City Code and site plan approval requirements, and provide sufficient ADA parking in proximity to main entrances. Plans are to be submitted detailing the re-striping and alterations to accommodate the proposed outdoor playground. b. The Applicant shall conduct an inventory of existing landscaping to determine whether the existing landscaping is in conformance with the approved landscape plan under Planning Commission No. 79020 and as outlined in the construction set dated July 27, 1979. Should any deficiencies or removals be identified, the Applicant shall propose like replacements. All new landscaping is to meet the minimum standards noted under the City’s Landscape Point System Policy (e.g., caliper sizing). c. The Applicant shall obtain approval from the Hennepin County Health Department for any proposed kitchen facilities. d. The Applicant/Property Owner shall ensure the fire sprinkler system is maintained and monitored. e. No outdoor music or loud speakers will be allowed in and around the outdoor playground area; the playground shall be monitored by the required number of adult leaders per any certification or licensure requirements; and the playground must be well maintained and secured during off hours of operations. f. The Applicant must ensure that the playground area drains properly or provide measures or drainage devices that ensure positive drainage. g. Any playground curbing materials, play structures, fencing and/or concrete curb barricades damaged or destroyed due to accidents or natural events shall be replaced immediately. RECOMMENDATION Based on the above-noted findings, Planning Staff recommends the Planning Commission recommends City Council approval of Planning Commission Application No. 2019-004, Special Use Permit for an autism therapy center with ancillary outdoor playground for the Subject Property located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard, subject to the Applicant complying with the Approval Conditions. ________________ App. No. 2019-004 PC 03/14/2019 Page 11 Should the Planning Commission accept this recommendation, the Commission may elect to adopt the resolution to be provided at the Planning Commission meeting on March 14th, 2019, which memorializes the findings in issuing a Special Use Permit approval, subject to the Applicant complying with the above- mentioned conditions of approval. Attachments Exhibit A- Affidavit of Publication for Notice of Hearing (5637 Brooklyn Boulevard), published February 28, 2019, in Brooklyn Center Sun Post. Exhibit B- Application, Memo, and Exhibits for Special Use Permit Request, prepared by Jane Sharkey (Helena Autism Therapy Center, Inc.), and dated February 11, 2019. Exhibit C- Memorandum, prepared by Assistant City Engineer Andrew Hogg, and dated March 7, 2019. Exhibit D- Memorandum, prepared by Building Official Dan Grinsteinner, and dated March 7, 2019. Exhibit A E x h i b i t B 1 February 11, 2019 Ms. Ginny McIntosh City Planner / Zoning Administrator 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Ginny, This letter is an application for approval of an outdoor playground at the following address: 5637 Brooklyn Ave, Brooklyn Center, MN 1. History of Helena Autism Therapy Center; DBA Helena Family Support: Website: www.hfsatc.com I am a licensed Marriage and Family therapist who established Helena Family Support, Inc. in 2002, an agency providing mental health services to troubled youth and families in the metro area at home, at school or in the community. In 2012 I expanded our services to include, specifically, children diagnosed with Autism. With the experience of providing in-home services to assist families, whose children were struggling with mental illness, with more intense support to families affected by Autism, I established an in- clinic service in Fridley. Helena Autism Therapy Center’s trademark is “The Missing Piece to the Puzzle” due to the fact that the services offered are detailed individual services for each child. I have leased a 14,000 square facility since 2012 in Fridley and have not been able to obtain permission from the neighbors to install an outdoor playground. At Helena Autism Therapy Center, we believe that in order to provide the most complete services, the children should have the option of outdoor play to address large motor deficiencies and enjoy fresh air and a fun setting. I have chosen to purchase the Brooklyn Blvd property so an outside playground could be added to our services and enhance each’s child’s experience and success with their individual and family treatment plan goals. 2 2. Certification with MN Department of Minnesota: Helena Autism Therapy Center has a CTSS (Children’s Support and Services) certification effective through September 30, 2021. If requested, I can provide the Certification Documentation provided MN DHS. The MN Statute guidelines for CTSS are: Section 245.4873; Subdivision 1.State and local coordination. Coordination of the development and delivery of mental health services for children shall occur on the state and local levels to assure the availability of services to meet the mental health needs of children in a cost-effective manner. Subd. 10.Day treatment services. "Day treatment," "day treatment services," or "day treatment program" means a structured program of treatment and care provided to a child in: (1) an outpatient hospital accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation ofHealth Organizations and licensed under sections 144.50 to 144.55; (2) a community mental health center under section 245.62; (3) an entity that is under contract with the county board to operate a program that meets the requirements of section 245.4884, subdivision 2, and Minnesota Rules, parts 9505.0170 to 9505.0475; or (4) an entity that operates a program that meets the requirements of section 245.4884, subdivision 2, and Minnesota Rules, parts 9505.0170 to 9505.0475, that is under contract with an entity that is under contract with a county board. Day treatment consists of group psychotherapy and other intensive therapeutic services that are provided for a minimum two-hour time block by a multidisciplinary staff under the clinical supervision of a mental health professional. Day treatment may include education and consultation provided to families and other individuals as an extension of the treatment process. The services are aimed at stabilizing the child's mental health status, and developing and improving the child's daily independent living and socialization skills. Day treatment services are distinguished from day care by their structured therapeutic program of psychotherapy services. Day treatment services are not a part of inpatient hospital or residential treatment services. Subd. 15.Emotional disturbance. "Emotional disturbance" means an organic disorder of the brain or a clinically significant disorder of thought, mood, perception, orientation, memory, or behavior that: (1) is detailed in a diagnostic codes list published by the commissioner; and 3 (2) seriously limits a child's capacity to function in primary aspects of daily living suchas personal relations, living arrangements, work, school, and recreation. "Emotional disturbance" is a generic term and is intended to reflect all categories of disorder described in the clinical code list published by the commissioner as "usually first evident in childhood or adolescence." Please review the highlighted area as that area best describes Helena Autism Therapy Center services according to DHS. We are contracted with most major insurance companies namely BCBS, UHC, Health Partners, Hennepin Health, among others. These companies contract services (how the contract terminology for the type of service provided) is written in a variety of ways. For example, the contract names our services as Day Treatment, or in-clinic mental health services, or Children’s Mental Health and Developmental disability. 3. Mission Statement of Helena Autism Therapy Center Helena Autism Therapy Center is a humble and courageous ally for our learners and their families. Employing a design to share expertise with a focus on results, we are passionate about creating a truly individualized, collaborative and transformative experience for our clients. Helena Autism Therapy Center Philosophy: Helena Autism Therapy Center provides therapy for children, approximately ages thirty months through age seven, who have a medical diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) or other diagnoses. Family members of children on the ASD will also receive services at the Center and at their home. With the diagnosis of ASD on the rise (2014 statistics from the United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention identified around 1 in 58 American children as on the Autism Spectrum, which is a 600% increase in prevalence over the past two decades), the need for Autism-specific mental health services is critical, in addition to other mental health diagnoses. Helena Autism Therapy Center ensures staff members are trained to provide mental health psychotherapy and/or skills training services to children with a diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder or other diagnoses. There is a strong focus on the individual needs of the child and family as well as best practices from a variety of effective treatment modalities. Children with an ASD diagnosis often struggle with communication, social interaction, play skills, emotional regulation, and other challenges such as sensory processing and digestive problems. Also prevalent may have restricted, repetitive and stereotypical patterns of negative behaviors and interests. The above challenges often impede ability to interact with others and master developmental milestones. Our staff strive to provide a warm and welcoming atmosphere. We are committed to coordinating with the helping professionals involved in the child’s life. We recognize the unique challenges families of children with an ASD diagnosis may face and we are dedicated to teaching, encouraging, empowering, engaging in play, and improving the lives of their clients. Success of the strategies used will be measured through achieved outcomes in consideration of the child’s identified goals. 4 4. What services provided by Helena Autism Therapy Center entail At Helena Autism Therapy Center, families and children with ASD diagnosis and other diagnoses receive high quality, unique, individualized treatment strategies specifically identified for the child’s needs. We are dedicated to the child’s success and believe families should see positive changes as well as long-term results in the overall satisfaction and healthy functioning of their child which should markedly affect the family. Helena Autism Therapy Center staff is trained to provide psychotherapy and skills training services to children with an ASD diagnosis. Helena staff will focus on the child and family’s individual needs with effective treatment approaches which can include relational, behavioral, client-centered play, and child development approaches based on theorists such as, Rogers and Dawson, Gutstein, Greenspan, Skinner, Piaget, Erikson, and Vygotsky. The child with an ASD diagnosis will attend 20 hours per week at the clinic on the Main floor. Morning schedule is 8:00 am to 12:00 noon and 1:00 pm to 5:00 pm. There are four therapy teams providing services with each team therapy room being approximately 450 square feet. The team therapy room will serve approximately ten children, with services provided by 8 to 9 floor staff and supervised by a Lead. The children will have their personal items in a “cubbie”, including food provided by family members. The children will have snack time and lunch within the treatment room. Group treatment modality is also part of services provide. The modalities include art classes, music, modeling academic settings and other types of group interaction. Additional services the child and family members receive will be family skills training and family psychotherapy. The majority of the time, these services are provided in the child’s residence. Some families choose to participate in these services at the facility. There will be several treatment rooms located on the Main floor. A twenty hour per week Speech Therapist will be located on the lower level floor of the facility. The 2019 business plan includes adding a second twenty hour Speech Therapist and full time Occupational Therapist – also located on the lower level floor. In addition to the Speech Therapist(s) and Occupational Therapists located on the lower level floor, the Receptionist will be located on the Main floor. The Director of Operations, Manager of Helena Family Support, Lead and staff offices and Billing Specialist will be located on the Top floor. 5. What does Helena Autism Therapy Center bring to the Economic Development of the city of Brooklyn Center: Historically, floor staff number approximately 25 with the management of these staff called Leads. Currently there are four Leads providing direction, supervision and direct one-on-one contact with the clients in the Center setting and their families via in-home services. In addition to the 29 employees, there is a Director of Operations, an office manager and billing specialist. Helena Family Support is the “DBA” for Helena Autism Therapy Center and primarily provides services to clients at home, at school or in the community. This company employs 5 approximately 10 staff and has a manager located in the Helena Autism Therapy Center facility. The 10 employees meet at the facility one time per week as a group and other times throughout the week for individual supervision. Helena Autism Therapy Center’s client population is approximately 20 children (approximately 24 months to seven years of age) in the AM program and 20 children in the afternoon program. Families will be driving from their homes in to the city of Brooklyn Center. The building located at 5637 Brooklyn Blvd, Brooklyn Center, has approximately 70 parking spaces. There will be no other tenants in this building. 6. How are Helena Autism Therapy Center clients transported to receive treatment at the facility: Most children are transported by Medical Assistance carriers and these companies generally transport one child per vehicle. Parents and other guardians deliver and pickup children by the family vehicle. The Medical Assistance drivers and family members will be encouraged to use the parking spaces on the south side of the building. Employees will be encouraged to use the parking spots west of the building. The number of full time Employees will be approximately 32 and the number of In-home Employees is approximately 8 who will be needing parking one morning per week between 9:30 AM and 11:30 AM. The morning schedule for drop off is Monday through Friday 8:00 am to 8:15 am and pick up at 12:00 noon to 12:15. The afternoon schedule is drop off is Monday through Friday at 1:00 pm to 1:15 pm to pick up at 5:00 pm to 5:15 pm. 7. Playground plan The projected plan for the outdoor playground would be located on the west side of the building using the lower level egress on the west side of the building. A fence will run from the west entrance sidewalk curb traveling west side, make a 90 degree turn and run south to the curb, continue traveling west on the grass, turn 00 degrees to the east and run east, make a 90 degree turn to the north and connect with the southwest corner of the building. A drawing has been submitted by HTG Architects with the dimensions of 28 feet X 60 feet. The fence will be eight feet high and constructed from cedar boards. There is an egress door from the playground at the northwest corner of the playground. The playground will use 7 parking spaces. Playground equipment will include a trampoline, a swingset, a climbing wall, stepping and crawling type and other large motor activities specific to children’s needs with an Autism diagnosis. Treatment plans developed with the child’s Primary Care Physician, physical therapist and mental health providers would be according to MN Department Human Services recommendations to best address the child’s needs. Examples of playground equipment is included. Helena currently has a trampoline, a climbing wall and other small equipment that has been used inside the facility located in Fridley. 9.Parking Requirements 6 There are 67 parking spaces in the west and south parking areas of 5637 Brooklyn Blvd. There is approximately 33 employee parking spaces required from 7:45 AM to 5:30 PM. The playground will use 7 parking spaces. 10.Enclosures Information pertaining to design and costs of the playground Construction plan and costs for interior Enclosures include a plot drawing of the projected playground, an elevation of the fence and Home Depot proposal for fencing costs and suggested outdoor playground equipment. Enclosure also includes three plans per floor with the first page being color coded for demolition and construction, the second page showing the existing plan, and the third page is the projection completed space plan and projected construction costs for the interior construction of the three floors. Closing date is expected to be on May 10, 2019. Construction for the interior and playground is expected to be completed by the end of May and the company will move in June 2019. If you need any additional information, please call 952-484-4885 or email janesharkey@yahoo.com Sincerely, Jane Sharkey Owner, Helena Autism Therapy Center M E M O R A N D U M DATE: March 7, 2019 TO: Ginny McIntosh, City Planner/Zoning Administrator FROM: Andrew Hogg, Assistant City Engineer SUBJECT: Site Plan Review - 5637 Brooklyn Blvd Public Works Department staff reviewed the following documents submitted for review on February 27, 2019, for the 5637 Brooklyn Blvd - Autism Center improvements: Site Plan dated February 27, 2019 Subject to final staff Site Plan approval, the referenced plans must be revised in accordance with the following comments/revisions and approved prior to issuance of Special Use Permit: C1.01 – Site Plan 1. Accessibility shall comply with ADA standards.2.The perimeters of all driving and parking areas shall be bounded by cast-in-place concrete curband gutter which confirms with the Minnesota Highway Type “B6-12”.3.Play area shall be shown on site plan with dimensioning. Playground shall be fenced in. Proposed fences shall be minimum of 4’ offset from curb. 4. Provide a striping plan. The aforementioned comments are provided based on the information submitted by the applicant at the time of this review. Other guarantees and site development conditions may be further prescribed throughout the project as warranted and determined by the City. Exhibit C MEMORANDUM Date: March 7, 2019 To: Ginny McIntosh, City Planner/Zoning Administrator From: Dan Grinsteinner, Building Official Subject: Preliminary Review –5637Brooklyn Boulevard (Special Use Permit) 1)Occupancy classification will be determined pending information submitted on the age of occupants. •MN State Fire Marshal Division: Child care centers will be classified as Group E occupancies with the exception of those providing care for more than five children 2 ½ years of age or less. Such facilities shall be classified as Group I-4. Classification as a Group E occupancies are a child day care facility that provides care for more than five but no more than 100 children 2 ½ years or less of age, where the rooms in which the children are cared for are located on a level of exit discharge serving such rooms and each of these child care rooms has an exit door directly to the exterior. 2)Floor locations of occupants with an Automatic Fire Sprinkler system or Fire Alarm system or Both. Child care rooms and areas may be located on any floor level below the fourth story if meeting the following conditions: •The building is protected throughout with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system and; •The building is protected throughout with an approved automatic fire alarm system having automatic smoke detection devices installed throughout the exiting system and within every room or area used for any purposes other than a classroom or office. Other provisions if met, will allow occupants to be located on floor levels other than the level of exit discharge if an automatic fire sprinkler or fire alarm system is installed. 3)Minimum Egress requirement of 2 exits from rooms, areas, floor levels for Group E & Group I-4 differ. Group E : Exceeds 50 occupants; 1750 Square ft/35 occupant factor Group I-4: Exceeds 10 occupants; 350 Square ft/35 occupant factor 1.All travel distances to an exit for sprinkler or non-sprinkler building shall be met. Exhibit D 4)Accessible parking: •Accessible parking spaces shall be located on the shortest accessible route of travel from adjacent parking to an accessible building entrance. Accessible parking stalls shall be calculated per MNBC Chapter 11 & ICC ANSI A117.1-2009 with MN amendments table 1106.1. This would require at least one parking space at each level of parking to the upper and lower entrance since there is no lift or elevator in the building. 5)Alterations to an area containing a primary fuction: •Priority for application of the 20 percent cost for the primary function area shall e as follows: o Accessible pat of travel to the primary function area, such as exterior route, building entrance interior route or elevator; o Accessible toilet facilities o Accessible parking o Accessible telephones and o Accessible drinking fountains 6)Multilevel buildings and facilities: •At least one accessible route shall connect each level, including mezzanines, in multilevel building and facilities; o Exception: and accessible route is not required to stories and mezzanines that have an occupant load of not more than 30 and are located above or below accessible levels. •Since the main and lower levels are accessible and the second floor is to be used as office; an elevator or lift will not be required do to occupant load calculations and technically infeasible. (Office area 3965 sq ft/100 sq.ft. per person = 39 occupants) (Proposed 2020 code has 150 sq. ft. per occupant which would equal 26 occupants) 7)A SAC Determination from Met Council will need to be provided for the new occupancy use. COUNCIL ITEM MEMORANDUM DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Meg Beekman, Community Development Director FROM:Xiong Thao, Housing & Community Standards Supervisor SUBJECT:Appeal of Chapter 12 Compliance Order Submitted by Bradley J. Schumacher, rental property owner of 5240 Drew Avenue North Requested Council Action: - Resolution Acting on the Appeal of Certain Rental Inspection Compliance Order for 5240 Drew Ave N in Brooklyn Center Minnesota Background: By ordinance, the City Council serves as the Board of Appeals and will hear the appeal and make a decision whether the interpretation of the City ordinance is erroneous. The board of appeals may reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or part the compliance order and may order return of all or part of the filing fee if the appeal is upheld. Two sample resolution has been included for convenience. Option 1 Approve Resolution adopting City Staff's Recommendations Options 2 Approve Resolution adoption Housing Commission Recommendations The Council may adopt or amend the resolution as it deems appropriate or the Council may direct staff to prepare a memo and bring it back to a future City Council Meeting. It is recommended that the City Council, serving as the Board of Appeals, consider adoption of a resolution addressing an appeal of rental compliance orders under Chapter 12 of the City Code by Mr. Schumacher and Mr. Miller. The property located at 5240 Drew Ave N was inspected on February 22, 2019 and found to have 24 property code violations. The property was determined to be in violation of several sections of Chapter 12. On February 27, 2019 Mr. Schumacher submitted an appeal and on February 28, 2019 Mr. Paul Miller paid the required $50.00 for the appeal. At the Housing Commission meeting on March 19, 2019, the Housing Commission reviewed the appeal. There was a lot of discussion from the Housing Commissioners on how the codes would apply and the interpretation of the code. Each property code violation was discussed individually and a vote was taken to affirm or nullify the property code violation. The Housing Commission made the following recommendation: Housing Commission recommends that the City Council affirms the following property code violations on the compliance order dated February 26, 2019 for City Ordinance violations in Chapter 12 Building Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. 1. Unit 1- MNMFGC 623.1 Manufacture of new oven requires the anti-tip bracket to be installed on the oven. 2. Unit 1- MNMFGC 408.4 Install sediment trap on gas line for a range. A sediment trap shall be installed before all automatically controlled gas appliances where a sediment trap is not incorporated as part of the appliance. 3. Unit 7- 12-303 Clean, sanitize, and repair as needed in bathroom. Appearance of mold in bathtub. 4. Unit 9- 12-405 Re-caulk around escutcheon rings for tub faucet handles where missing/deteriorated. Housing Commission recommends that the City Council nullify the following property code violations on the compliance order dated February 26, 2019 for City Ordinance violations in Chapter 12 Building Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. 1. Unit 1- 12-402 Repair or replace kitchen counter edging. Countertop shall be of sound construction furnished with surfaces that are easily cleanable. 2. Unit 9- 12-504 Remove electrical hazards. The extension cords that are being used as long term wiring in the living room is an electrical hazard. All equipment shall be plugged directly into an outlet, or with an approve power strip with a surge protector. 3. Unit 9- 12-504 Remove electrical hazards. The extension cords that are being used as long term wiring in bedroom #2 is an electrical hazard. All equipment shall be plugged directly into an outlet, or with an approve power strip with a surge protector. 4. Unit 10- 12-402 Repair or replace kitchen counter edging. Countertop shall be of sound construction furnished with surfaces that are easily cleanable. 5. Unit 10- 12-504 Remove electrical hazard(s) Extension cords and or power strips daisy chained together in the living room and used for long term wiring present an electrical hazard. 6. Common Area- 12-713 Removal electrical hazards. The extension cords that are being used as long term wiring from the 3rd floor to the roof is an electrical hazard. Summary of appeal: 1 . Appeal Reason: The MN Fuel Gas Code book section 408.4 does not require an appliance that is turned on and off by a human-being like a gas stove or dryer have a sediment drip trap. Yet an automatic controlled appliance such as a fireplace, water heater and furnace require the drip trap. Housing Commission Recommendation and reason: The Housing Commission voted 5-1 to affirm the property code violation citing that a range meets the definition of an automatically controlled appliance which require the installation of a sediment trap. City Response: Minnesota Fuel Gas Code 408.4 states that a sediment trap “shall be installed before all automatically controlled gas appliance…”. In the Minnesota Fuel Gas Code Chapter 2 the definition of an automatically controlled appliance states that it is an “appliances equipped with an automatic burner ignition and safety shutoff device and other automatic devices which accomplish complete turn-on and shutoff of the as to the main burner or burners, and graduate the gas supply to the burner or burners, but do not affect complete shutoff of the gas”. Staff believes that a range falls within the definition of an automatically controlled appliance which will require a sediment trap. Staff recommends that the City Council affirm the violation. 2 . Appeal Reason: No anti-tip bracket is included or optional on the stove. International building code book section states that it’s optional. Housing Commission Recommendation and reason: The Housing Commission voted 4-2 to affirm the property code violation citing that there are universal anti-tip brackets that can be purchased or an angle bracket could be used to prevent the range from tipping over and causing harm. City Response: 12-402.3 requires that appliances are properly installed with all necessary connections for safe, sanitary and efficient operation. Further, Minnesota Fuel Gas Code 623.1 states cooking appliances shall be installed in accordance with manufacture’s installation instructions. Staff have reviewed the owner’s manual for the major appliances manufacturers and anti-tip’s devices are required. Staff has not been provided with the manufacture installation requirements nor the owner’s manual. Staff recommends that the City Council affirm the violation. 3. Appeal Reason: Escutcheon rings from the manufacturer come with seals built in. Inspector did not test correctly. Housing Commission Recommendation and reason: The Housing Commission voted 6-0 to affirm the property code violation citing that the inspector was able to easily pull it away from the wall allowing water to seep into the wall and the escutcheon ring can overtime become loose requiring caulk to create a water tight seal. City Response: At the time of the inspection, staff pulled the escutcheon ring away from the shower wall and it was loose, not tight to the wall and missing caulk to prevent the water from going into the wall. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed that the escutcheon ring was loose allowing water to penetrate into the wall cavity. 12-405 requires that dwelling unit is “quipped with an approved bathtub or shower in good working condition”. Further Minnesota Residential Code 307.2 states that “bathtub and shower floors and walls above bathtubs with installed shower heads an in shower compartments shall be finished with a nonabsorbent surface. Such wall surfaces shall extend to a height of not less than 6 feet (1829 mm) above the floor”. Staff recommends that the Housing Commission affirm the violation. 4. Appeal Reason: Both counter top ends in the report have coats of clear coat just like the cabinet doors and frames do. Both of these items flagged Paul Miller showed the inspector during the inspection that they were sealed. Housing Commission Recommendation and reason: The Housing Commission voted 5-1 to nullify the property code violation based on the owner's testimony that the edging was solid wood with a lacquer protective layer on it and the Housing Commission did not have enough information to affirm the violation. City Response: At the time of inspection, staff did not witness nor feel that the counter edges were properly sealed. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed that edges were not sealed. Section 12-402.1 of the City Code states”… cabinets and/or shelves and counter or table shall be adequate for the permissible occupancy of the dwelling unit and shall be of sound construction furnished with surfaces that are easily cleanable and that will not impart any toxic or deleterious effect to food.” Staff recommends that the City Council affirm the violation. 5 . Appeal Reason: Common area extension cord was not in use. Is not plugged into anything. It was being stored as it has been since 2007 in the event that the mechanical contractor, plumbing contractor or the electrician may need a cord for service work on the building. Housing Commission Recommendation and reason: The Housing Commission voted 6-0 to nullify the property code violation based on the owner's testimony stating that the extension cords were not plugged into an outlet and it was being stored in the attic space. City Response: Staff witness an extension cord in the hallway hanging from the roof access panel and plugged into an outlet in the hallway. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed the extension cord. Minnesota Fire Code 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring. Staff recommends that the City Council affirm the violation. 6 . Appeal Reason: In unit 9 both cords are surge protected for the TV and Computer. Inspector did not pick up the units and review them. Housing Commission Recommendation and reason: The Housing Commission voted 5-1 to nullify the property code violation based on the owner's testimony stating that the power strips/surge protectors were not daisy chained and only had other appliances (tv, cable box, dvd player, etc.) plugged into the power strips. Further, the Housing Commission found the code to be confusing to understand and interpret. City Response: Staff witness the use of a power strip in the living room and the bedroom. Plugged into the power strip were additional power strips and extension cords. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed the use of multiple extension cords plugged into the power strip. Minnesota Fire Code 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring and 605.5.1 states that extension cords shall be plugged directly into an approved receptacle. Staff recommends that the City Council affirm the violation. 7 . Appeal Reason: In unit 10 both cords are also surge protected for the TV. Inspector did not pick up the units and review them. Housing Commission Recommendation and reason: The Housing Commission voted 5-1 to nullify the property code violation based on the owner's testimony stating that the power strips/surge protectors were not daisy chained and only had other appliances (tv, cable box, dvd player, etc.) plugged into the power strips. Further, the Housing Commission found the code to be confusing to understand and interpret. City Response: Staff witness the use of a power strip in the living room and the bedroom. Plugged into the power strip were additional power strips and extension cords. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed the use of multiple extension cords plugged into the power strip. Minnesota Fire Code 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring and 605.5.1 states that extension cords shall be plugged directly into an approved receptacle. Staff recommends that the City Council affirm the violation. 8 . Appeal Reason: In unit 7 the tub is made from American Steel produced in 1962 and mold does not grow on steel tubs that are finished. Please provide photo of mold on steel tub that inspector seen. Housing Commission Recommendation and reason: The Housing Commission voted 6-0 to affirm the property code violation citing that the appeal was in regards to the tub not the caulking. The Housing Commission found that the mold growing on the caulking is a violation of the code. City Response: Staff witnessed the caulking around the tub to have what appeared to be a mold like substance growing on it. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed the mold like substance on the caulk around the tub. Section 12-303 states that all occupants shall maintain areas that she/he occupies in a clean, sanitary, and safe condition. Staff recommends that the City Council affirm the violation. Budget Issues: There are no budget issues to consider. Strategic Priorities and Values: Safe, Secure, Stable Community DATE: March 19, 2019 TO: Housing Commission Member’s FROM: Jesse Anderson, Deputy Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Appeal of Chapter 12 Compliance Order Submitted by Bradley Schumacher, rental property owner of 5240 Drew Avenue North Recommendation: According the city ordinance 12-1203 the Housing Commission is required to make a recommendation for the City Council serving as the Board of Appeals. It is recommended that the Housing Commission make a recommendation to affirm the compliance orders issued for rental license inspection conducted on February 22, 2019. Possible options: 1. The City Council serving as the Board of Appeals affirms the compliance orders dated February 22, 2019 for Chapter 12 of the City Ordinance. 2. The City Council serving as the Board of Appeals nullify the compliance order dated February 22, 2019 for Chapter 12 of the City Ordinance and return to appeal fee back to the appellant. Background: The property located at 5240 Drew Ave N was inspected on February 22, 2019 and found to have 24 property code violations. The property was determined to be in violation of several section of Chapter 12. On February 27, 2019 Mr. Schumacher submitted an appeal and on February 28, 2019 Mr. Paul Miller paid the required $50.00 for the appeal. Summary of appeal: 1. Appeal Reason: The MN Fuel Gas Code book section 408.4 does not require an appliance that is turned on and off by a human-being like a gas stove or dryer have a sediment drip trap. Yet an automatic controlled appliance such as a fireplace, water heater and furnace require the drip trap. City Response: Minnesota Fuel Gas Code 408.4 states that a sediment trap “shall be installed before all automatically controlled gas appliance…”. In the Minnesota Fuel Gas Code Chapter 2 the definition of an automatically controlled appliance states that it is an “appliances equipped with an automatic burner ignition and safety shutoff device and other automatic devices which accomplish complete turn-on and shutoff of the as to the main burner or burners, and graduate the gas supply to the burner or burners, but do not affect complete shutoff of the gas”. Staff believes that a range falls within the definition of an automatically controlled appliance which will require a sediment trap. Staff recommends that the Housing Commission affirm the violation. 2. Appeal Reason: No anti-tip bracket is included or optional on the stove. International building code book section states that it’s optional. City Response: 12-402.3 requires that appliances are properly installed with all necessary connections for safe, sanitary and efficient operation. Further, Minnesota Fuel Gas Code 623.1 states cooking appliances shall be installed in accordance with manufacture’s installation instructions. Staff have reviewed the owner’s manual for the major appliances manufacturers and anti-tip’s devices are required. Staff has not been provided with the manufacture installation requirements nor the owner’s manual. Staff recommends that the Housing Commission affirm the violation. 3. Appeal Reason: Escutcheon rings from the manufacturer come with seals built in. Inspector did not test correctly. City Response: At the time of the inspection, staff pulled the escutcheon ring away from the shower wall and it was loose, not tight to the wall and missing caulk to prevent the water from going into the wall. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed that the escutcheon ring was loose allowing water to penetrate into the wall cavity. 12-405 requires that dwelling unit is “quipped with an approved bathtub or shower in good working condition”. Further Minnesota Residential Code 307.2 states that “bathtub and shower floors and walls above bathtubs with installed shower heads an in shower compartments shall be finished with a nonabsorbent surface. Such weal surfaces shall extend to a height of not less than 6 feet (1829 mm) above the floor”. Staff recommends that the Housing Commission affirm the violation. 4. Appeal Reason: Both counter top ends in the report have coats of clear coat just like the cabinet doors and frames do. Both of these items flagged Paul Miller showed the inspector during the inspection that they were sealed. City Response: At the time of inspection, staff did not witness nor feel that the counter edges were properly sealed. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed that edges were not sealed. Section 12-402.1 of the City Code states”… cabinets and/or shelves and counter or table shall be adequate for the permissible occupancy of the dwelling unit and shall be of sound construction furnished with surfaces that are easily cleanable and that will not impart any toxic or deleterious effect to food.” Staff recommends that the Housing Commission affirm the violation. 5. Appeal Reason: Common area extension cord was not in use. Is not plugged into anything. It was being stored as it has been since 2007 in the event that the mechanical contractor, plumbing contractor or the electrician may need a cord for service work on the building. City Response: Staff witness an extension cord in the hallway hanging from the roof access panel and plugged into an outlet in the hallway. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed the extension cord. Minnesota Fire Code 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring. Staff recommends that the Housing Commission affirm the violation. 6. Appeal Reason: In unit 9 both cords are surge protected for the TV and Computer. Inspector did not pick up the units and review them. City Response: Staff witness the use of a power strip in the living room and the bedroom. Plugged into the power strip were additional power strips and extension cords. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed the use of multiple extension cords plugged into the power strip. Minnesota Fire Code 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring and 605.5.1 states that extension cords shall be plugged directly into an approved receptacle. Staff recommends that the Housing Commission affirm the violation. 7. Appeal Reason: In unit 10 both cords are also surge protected for the TV. Inspector did not pick up the units and review them. City Response: Staff witness the use of a power strip in the living room and the bedroom. Plugged into the power strip were additional power strips and extension cords. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed the use of multiple extension cords plugged into the power strip. Minnesota Fire Code 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring and 605.5.1 states that extension cords shall be plugged directly into an approved receptacle. Staff recommends that the Housing Commission affirm the violation. 8. Appeal Reason: In unit 7 the tub is made from American Steel produced in 1962 and mold does not grow on steel tubs that are finished. Please provide photo of mold on steel tub that inspector seen. City Response: Staff witnessed the caulking around the tub to have what appeared to be a mold like substance growing on it. Mr. Miller was present and witnessed the mold like substance on the caulk around the tub. Section 12-303 states that all occupants shall maintain areas that she/he occupies in a clean, sanitary, and safe condition. Staff recommends that the Housing Commission affirm the violation. By ordinance, the City Council serves as the Board of Appeals and will hear the appeal and make a decision whether the interpretation of the City ordinance is erroneous. The board of appeals may reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or part the compliance order and may order return of all or part of the filing fee if the appeal is upheld. Strategic Priorities:  Safe, Secure, Stable Community Attachments: Draft Council Resolution Summary of Actions Ordinances Correction Order Ordinance: 1. Section 12-402. KITCHEN FACILITIES. Every dwelling unit shall have a room or portion of a room in which food may be prepared and/or cooked and which shall have adequate circulation area, and that shall be equipped with the following: 3. A stove or similar device for cooking food, and a refrigerator or similar device for the safe storage of food at or below 40 degrees Fahrenheit, that are properly installed with all necessary connections for safe, sanitary and efficient operation. Provided that such stove, refrigerator, or similar devices need not be installed when a dwelling unit is not occupied and when the occupant is expected to provide same on occupancy, in which case sufficient space and adequate connections for the installation and operation of said stove, refrigerator or similar device must be provided. MNFG 408.4 Sediment Trap. A sediment trap shall be installed before all automatically controlled gas appliance where a sediment trap is not incorporated as part of the appliance. The sediment trap shall be installed as close to the inlet of the appliance as practical, before any regulator or automatic valve, and ahead of all pounds-to-inches pressure regulators. MNFG 202. General Definitions. Appliance, Automatically controlled. Appliances equipped with an automatic burner ignition and safety shutoff device and other automatic devices which accomplish complete turn-on and shutoff of the as to the main burner or burners, and graduate the gas supply to the burner or burners, but do not affect complete shutoff of the gas. 2. Section 12-402. KITCHEN FACILITIES. Every dwelling unit shall have a room or portion of a room in which food may be prepared and/or cooked and which shall have adequate circulation area, and that shall be equipped with the following: 3. A stove or similar device for cooking food, and a refrigerator or similar device for the safe storage of food at or below 40 degrees Fahrenheit, that are properly installed with all necessary connections for safe, sanitary and efficient operation. Provided that such stove, refrigerator, or similar devices need not be installed when a dwelling unit is not occupied and when the occupant is expected to provide same on occupancy, in which case sufficient space and adequate connections for the installation and operation of said stove, refrigerator or similar device must be provided. MNFG 623.1 Cooking Appliances. Cooking appliances that are designed for permanent installation, including ranges, ovens, stoves, broilers, grills, fryers, griddles, hot plates and barbecues shall be tested in accordance with ANSI Z21.1, ANSI Z21.58 or ANSI Z83.11 and shall be installed in accordance with the manufacture’s installation instructions. 3. Section 12-405. BATHTUB OR SHOWER. Within every dwelling unit there shall be a nonhabitable room that is equipped with an approved bathtub or shower in good working condition. In a rental dwelling unit, such room shall have an entrance door that affords privacy. Said bathtub or shower may be in the same room as the flush water closet, or in another room, and shall be properly connected to an approved water supply system and shall provide at all times an adequate amount of heated and unheated water under pressure, and shall be connected to an approved sewer system. R307.2 Bathtub and shower spaces. Bathtub and shower floors and walls above bathtubs with installed shower heads an in shower compartments shall be finished with a nonabsorbent surface. Such weal surfaces shall extend to a height of not less than 6 feet (1829 mm) above the floor. 4. Section 12-402. KITCHEN FACILITIES. Every dwelling unit shall have a room or portion of a room in which food may be prepared and/or cooked and which shall have adequate circulation area, and that shall be equipped with the following: 1. Cabinets and/or shelves for the storage of eating, drinking, and cooking equipment, and utensils and of food that does not require refrigeration for safekeeping; and a counter or table for food preparation. Said cabinets and/or shelves and counter or table shall be adequate for the permissible occupancy of the dwelling unit and shall be of sound construction furnished with surfaces that are easily cleanable and that will not impart any toxic or deleterious effect to food. 5. Section 12-504. ELECTRIC SERVICE, OUTLETS AND FIXTURES. Every dwelling unit and all public and common areas shall be supplied with electric service, functioning overcurrent protection devices, electric outlets, and electric fixtures that are properly installed, maintained in good and safe working conditions, and connected to a source of electric power in a manner prescribed by the Ordinances, rules and regulations of the City of Brooklyn Center and by the laws of the State of Minnesota. MNFC 605.5 Extension cords. Extension cords and flexible cords shall not be a substitute for permanent wiring. MNFC 605.5.1 Power supply. Extension cords shall e plugged directly into an approved receptacle, power tap or multiplug adapter and, except or approved multiplug extension cords, shall serve only on portable appliance. 6. Section 12-504. ELECTRIC SERVICE, OUTLETS AND FIXTURES. Every dwelling unit and all public and common areas shall be supplied with electric service, functioning overcurrent protection devices, electric outlets, and electric fixtures that are properly installed, maintained in good and safe working conditions, and connected to a source of electric power in a manner prescribed by the Ordinances, rules and regulations of the City of Brooklyn Center and by the laws of the State of Minnesota. MNFC 605.5 Extension cords. Extension cords and flexible cords shall not be a substitute for permanent wiring. MNFC 605.5.1 Power supply. Extension cords shall e plugged directly into an approved receptacle, power tap or multiplug adapter and, except or approved multiplug extension cords, shall serve only on portable appliance. 7. Section 12-504. ELECTRIC SERVICE, OUTLETS AND FIXTURES. Every dwelling unit and all public and common areas shall be supplied with electric service, functioning overcurrent protection devices, electric outlets, and electric fixtures that are properly installed, maintained in good and safe working conditions, and connected to a source of electric power in a manner prescribed by the Ordinances, rules and regulations of the City of Brooklyn Center and by the laws of the State of Minnesota. MNFC 605.5 Extension cords. Extension cords and flexible cords shall not be a substitute for permanent wiring. MNFC 605.5.1 Power supply. Extension cords shall e plugged directly into an approved receptacle, power tap or multiplug adapter and, except or approved multiplug extension cords, shall serve only on portable appliance. 8. Section 12-303. MAINTENANCE OF OCCUPIED AREAS. All occupants of a building, shall maintain in a clean, sanitary and safe condition that part or those parts of the building, and premises thereof that she/he occupies and controls. Section 12-1202. RIGHT OF APPEAL. When it is alleged by any person to whom a compliance order is directed that such compliance order is based upon erroneous interpretation of this Chapter, such person may appeal the compliance order to the City Council sitting as a board of appeals. Such appeals must be in writing, must specify the grounds for the appeal, must be accompanied by a filing fee as set forth per council resolution, in cash or cashier's check, and must be filed with the department of planning and inspection within five (5) business days after service of the compliance order. The filing of an appeal shall stay all proceedings in furtherance of the action appealed from, unless such a stay would cause imminent peril to life, health, or property. Section 12-1203. BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION. Upon at least five (5) business days notice to the appellant of the time and place for hearing the appeal, and within thirty (30) days after said appeal is filed, the board of appeals shall hold a hearing thereon, taking into consideration any advice and recommendation from the advisory housing commission. The board of appeals may reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or in part, the compliance order and may order return of all or part of the filing fee if the appeal is upheld. Staff Report The inspection at 5240 Drew Ave was scheduled for February 22, 2019 at 1:00pm. The inspectors present were Damien Lien and Troy Okerlund. The inspectors arrived onsite and approached the property. After knocking on the door, Mr. Paul Miller opened the door and greeted Mr. Lien and Mr. Okerlund. Mr. Miller invited the inspectors to come into the building to start the inspection. Present for the inspection was Mr. Lien, Mr. Okerlund, and Mr. Miller. The inspection started in unit #10. While conducting the inspection in the unit with Mr. Miller, there were 2 property code violations that were cited. The first violation is the countertop edging. The edging was missing exposing the unprotected fiberboard. The violation was pointed out to Mr. Miller and he witnessed the violation. The second violation were the extension cords that were daisy chained together in the living room. The violation was pointed out to Mr. Miller and he witnessed the violation. In unit #9 there were 3 property code violations that were cited. The first violation is the caulking around the escutcheon rings in the bathtub. The violation was pointed out to Mr. Miller and he acknowledged the violation stating “I missed that”. The second violation were the extension cords daisy chained together in bedroom #2. The violation was pointed out to Mr. Miller and he witnessed the violation. The last violation were the extension cords in the living room daisy chained together. The violation was pointed out to Mr. Miller and he witnessed the violation. There is 1 code violation in the third floor hallway. There was an extension cord that was running from the 3rd floor hallway through the roof access panel. The extension cord was directly plugged into an outlet in the hallway. The violation was pointed out to Mr. Miller and he witnessed the violation. In unit #7 there were 2 property code violations cited. The first violation was the smoke gasket/tape missing in the side entry door. The violation was pointed out to Mr. Miller and he witnessed the violation. The second violation is the appearance of mold along the caulking and edging of the bathtub. The violation was pointed out to Mr. Miller and he witnessed the violation. Mr. Bradley Schumacher was present for the inspections starting in unit #3. All the other inspections were only conducted with Mr. Miller. In unit #1 there were 2 property code violations cited. During the inspection of the kitchen Mr. Schumacher and Mr. Miller stated that they installed a new gas range in the unit. The first violation involved the installation of a new gas range. The gas line did not have sediment trap and the range did not have anti-tip brackets installed. The violation was pointed out to Mr. Miller and he witnessed the violation. The second violation is the missing countertop edging. The edging was missing exposing the unprotected fiberboard. The violation was pointed out to Mr. Miller and he witnessed the violation. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING COMMISSION RULES FOR APPEAL HEARINGS REGARDING COMPLIANCE ORDERS UNDER BROOKLYN CENTER CITY CODE, SECTION 12-1202 Right to Appeal: A person whom receives a compliance order with respect to a rental property has a right under Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 12-1202 to submit a written appeal of the compliance order. The written appeal must specify the grounds for the appeal, be accompanied by the required filing fee, and be filed with the department of planning and inspection within five (5) business days after service of the compliance order. Procedure: Upon the proper filing of an appeal, the City provides the appellant at least five (5) business days’ notice of the time and place for hearing the appeal, which must be held within thirty (30) days of filing the appeal. The Housing Commission serves in an advisory capacity to hear the appeal and to issue a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council, sitting as the Board of Appeals, then hears the appeal, considers the recommendation from the Housing Commission, and then may act to reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or in part, the compliance order and may order the return of all or part of the filing fee if the appeal is upheld. Scope of Appeal: Brooklyn Center City Code, Section 12-1202 specifically limits the scope of an appeal to allegations that “the compliance order is based upon erroneous interpretation of [Chapter 12].” Any allegation not related to an alleged erroneous interpretation of the applicable standards is beyond the scope of an appeal and shall not be heard by the Housing Commission. Hearing Process: The hearing will be conducted in accordance with the following process: 1) When the agenda item is reached, the Commission Chairperson will review this hearing process and the hearing rules (below). 2) City staff will present the staff report, which the Commission received in its packet. 3) The Chairperson will call on the appellant to present (no more than 20 minutes) and the Commission will hold its questions until the end of the presentation. 4) The Commission will ask any questions it may have of the appellant. 5) The Commission will discuss the matter and act to make a recommendation to the City Council. Hearing Rules: The following rules shall apply and must be observed by the appellant and anyone attending or presenting on the appellant’s behalf at the hearing. If the appellant, or anyone testifying on appellant’s behalf, fails to comply with these rules the person may be ruled out of order and the appellant deemed to have forfeited any remaining time to present to the Housing Commission. The rules are as follows: 1) All comments must be directed to the Commission Chairperson, not to others in the room. 2) The appellant, and anyone speaking on the appellant’s behalf, must limit his or her comments to the inspector’s alleged erroneous interpretation of the applicable standards regarding the specific items of noncompliance identified in the compliance order. 3) Each person testifying must clearly state clearly his or her name and address before speaking. 4) The total time allotted to the appellant, and anyone speaking on the appellant’s behalf, to speak during the hearing is limited to 20 minutes (this is a combined total limit, not a per-person limit). 5) The appellant shall not attempt to engage anyone in a conversation or ask questions of the Housing Commission (other than procedural questions). 6) No shouting, cursing, or other disrespectful behavior is allowed. 7) Anyone disrupting the hearing may be asked to leave. Photo was taken on 3/20/19 at 3:15pm (time stamp is 1 hour off) in Unit #1 demonstrating that property code violation 12-402 counter edging was not properly sealed and missing edge trim. Photo was taken on 3/20/19 at 3:16pm (time stamp is 1 hour off). Photo was taken in the common area outside of unit #9. The extension cord was plugged into the outlet in the hallway leading up to the attic space. There were 2 power cords plugged into the extension cord going into the attic space. Staff was not able to verify what the black power cords were plugged into. The use of extension cords as permanent wiring is in violation of 12-504 and MN Fire Code 605.5. Housing Commission Recommended Affirming/Reversing Violations 560778v1 TJG BR291-16 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION ACTING ON THE APPEAL OF CERTAIN RENTAL INSPECTION COMPLIANCE ORDER FOR 5240 DREW AVENUE NORTH IN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a building maintenance and occupancy ordinance that is codified as Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 12 (collectively, the “Property Code”); and WHEREAS, the Property Code applies to rental properties, which are inspected by City staff as part of the rental license program, and if any items of noncompliance are observed the compliance official issues a compliance order as provided in City Code, Section 12-1201A; and WHEREAS, the City inspected the rental property located at 5240 Drew Ave. N. (“Property”) on February 22, 2019 and issued a compliance order regarding 24 Property Code violations; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2019, Bradley Schumacher (“Appellant”), the landlord of the Property, submitted a letter appealing eight of the Property Code violations identified in the compliance order related to the installation of range, escutcheon rings, countertops, usage of extension cords, and mold in the bathtub; and WHEREAS, City Code, Section 12-1202 provides an opportunity for a person who receives a compliance order to submit a written appeal to the order, which must specify the grounds for the appeal; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code, Section 12-1202, an appeal is limited to allegations that the compliance order was based upon an erroneous interpretation of the Property Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code, Sections 12-1202 and 12-1203, the Housing Commission is to hear the appeal and make a recommendation to the City Council, which serves as the Board of Appeals to hear and take final action on the appeal; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 2019, after notice having been provided to the Appellant, the Housing Commission heard the appeal and acted to recommend the City Council affirm four and reverse four of the challenged items in the compliance order as follows: a. The Housing Commission recommended the City Council uphold the compliance order with respect to Items 1 (sediment trap); 2 (anti-tip device); 3 (escutcheon rings);; and 8 (tub caulking); Housing Commission Recommended Affirming/Reversing Violations 560778v1 TJG BR291-16 b. The Housing Commission recommended the City Council overturn Items 4 (counter edges); 5 (hanging extension cord); 6 (power strips in Unit 9) and 7 (power strips in Unit 10); c. With respect to Item 4, the Housing Commission determined that the edges were solid wood with a protective layer of lacquer; and d. With respect to Item 5, the Housing Commission determined the identified violation reflected a misinterpretation of Minnesota Fire Code, Section 605.5 as the extension cord was not actually plugged into anything and so was not being used as a substitute for permanent wiring; and e. With respect to Items 6 and 7, which identified the same violation regarding the stacked use of power strips in two different units, the Housing Commission determined the identified violation reflected a misinterpretation of Minnesota Fire Code, Section 605.5.1 as the connection of power strips and extension cords to power TV and computer components did not constitute a daisy change of cords in violation of the Fire Code; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 2019, after providing the Appellant at least five business days’ notice, the City Council, sitting as the Board of Appeals, conducted a hearing on the appeal and finds and determines as follows: a. It is in the best interest of the City to ensure rental properties are maintained to minimum Property Code standards in order to protect the public’s health, safety and general welfare in accordance with the applicable codes; b. Item 1 (sediment trap): City Code, Section 12-402, MNFG 408.4, and MNFG 202 requires a range to be properly installed with a sediment trap; c. Item 2 (anti-tip device): City Code, Section 12-402 and MNFG 623.4 requires a range to be installed per manufacture requirements, which requires an anti-tip device; d. Item 3 (escutcheon rings): City Code, Section 12-405 and R307.2 requires that shower walls to be finished with an nonabsorbent surface; e. Item 4 (counter edges): City Code, Section 12-402 requires countertop surfaces to be easily cleanable and not impart any toxic or deleterious effect to food; f. Item 5 (hanging extension cord): Minnesota Fire Code, Section 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring. The City Council concurs with the Housing Commission’s findings that the fact the extension cord was not actually be used as a substitute for permanent wiring that it does not constitute a violation of Section 605.5. As such, this item of the compliance order needs to be reversed; Housing Commission Recommended Affirming/Reversing Violations 560778v1 TJG BR291-16 g. Item 6 (power strips in Unit 9): Minnesota Fire Code, Section 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring and Section 605.5.1 states that extension cords shall be plugged directly into an approved receptacle. The City Council agrees with the finding of the Housing Commission that the circumstances described as constituting a violation did not actually violate Section 605.5. As such, this item of the compliance order needs to be reversed; h. Item 7 (power strips in Unit 10): Minnesota Fire Code, Section 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring and Section 605.5.1 states that extension cords shall be plugged directly into an approved receptacle. The City Council agrees with the finding of the Housing Commission that the circumstances described as constituting a violation did not actually violate Section 605.5. As such, this item of the compliance order needs to be reversed; i. Item 8 (tub caulking): City Code, Section 12-303 requires that all occupied areas are maintained in a clean, sanitary, and safe condition; j. The City Staff memorandum to the Housing Commission dated March 19, 2019 and the City Staff memorandum to the City Council for this appeal (collectively, the “Staff Memos”) are incorporated in and made part of this Resolution by reference; k. While the Appellant may disagree with the eight items challenged in the compliance order, the Appellant failed to demonstrate that any of those items were based upon an erroneous interpretation of the Property Code; and l. Because none of the eight items challenged in the compliance order were based on an erroneous interpretation of the Property Code, the City Council is not in a position to waive those requirements through the requested reversal or modification of the order. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, sitting as the Board of Appeals, based on the Staff Memos, the record of this matter, and the findings and determinations contained herein, and after considering the recommendations of the Housing Commission, hereby decides and orders as follows: 1. The City Council reverses the following items in the compliance order and they shall not constitute violations resulting from the inspection: a. Item 4 (counter edges); b. Item 5 (hanging extension cord); c. Item 6 (power strips in Unit 9); and Housing Commission Recommended Affirming/Reversing Violations 560778v1 TJG BR291-16 d. Item 7 (power strips in Unit 10). 2. The City Council affirms and upholds the following remaining items in the compliance order challenged as part of this appeal: a. Item 1 (sediment trap); b. Item 2 (anti-tip device); c. Item 3 (escutcheon rings); d. ; and e. Item 8 (tub caulking). 3. As a majority of the violations in the compliance order were affirmed, no portion of the filing fee shall be returned to the Appellant. 4. The Appellant is required to bring the Property into compliance with each of the affirmed items in the compliance order within 30 days from the date of this Resolution. 5. Nothing in this Resolution delays or alters the requirement to bring the Property into compliance with the other items of noncompliance identified in the compliance order as provided in the Property Code. March 25, 2019 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. Staff Recommended Affirming All Violations 560552v2 TJG BR291-16 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. _______________ RESOLUTION ACTING ON THE APPEAL OF CERTAIN RENTAL INSPECTION COMPLIANCE ORDER FOR 5240 DREW AVENUE NORTH IN BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted a building maintenance and occupancy ordinance that is codified as Brooklyn Center City Code, Chapter 12 (collectively, the “Property Code”); and WHEREAS, the Property Code applies to rental properties, which are inspected by City staff as part of the rental license program, and if any items of noncompliance are observed the compliance official issues a compliance order as provided in City Code, Section 12-1201A; and WHEREAS, the City inspected the rental property located at 5240 Drew Ave. N. (“Property”) on February 22, 2019 and issued a compliance order regarding 24 Property Code violations; and WHEREAS, on February 27, 2019, Bradley Schumacher (“Appellant”), the landlord of the Property, submitted a letter appealing eight of the Property Code violations identified in the compliance order related to the installation of range, escutcheon rings, countertops, usage of extension cords, and mold in the bathtub; and WHEREAS, City Code, Section 12-1202 provides an opportunity for a person who receives a compliance order to submit a written appeal to the order, which must specify the grounds for the appeal; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code, Section 12-1202, an appeal is limited to allegations that the compliance order was based upon an erroneous interpretation of the Property Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to City Code, Sections 12-1202 and 12-1203, the Housing Commission is to hear the appeal and make a recommendation to the City Council, which serves as the Board of Appeals to hear and take final action on the appeal; and WHEREAS, on March 19, 2019, after notice having been provided to the Appellant, the Housing Commission heard the appeal and acted to recommend the City Council affirm four and reverse four of the challenged items in the compliance order as follows: a. The Housing Commission recommended the City Council uphold the compliance order with respect to Items 1 (sediment trap); 2 (anti-tip device); 3 (escutcheon rings); and 8 (tub caulking); Staff Recommended Affirming All Violations 560552v2 TJG BR291-16 b. The Housing Commission recommended the City Council overturn Items 4 (counter edges);5 (hanging extension cord); 6 (power strips in Unit 9) and 7 (power strips in Unit 10); c. With respect to Item 4, the Housing Commission determined that the edges were solid wood with a protective layer of lacquer; and d. With respect to Item 5, the Housing Commission determined the identified violation reflected a misinterpretation of Minnesota Fire Code, Section 605.5 as the extension cord was not actually plugged into anything and so was not being used as a substitute for permanent wiring; and e. With respect to Items 6 and 7, which identified the same violation regarding the stacked use of power strips in two different units, the Housing Commission determined the identified violation reflected a misinterpretation of Minnesota Fire Code, Section 605.5.1 as the connection of power strips and extension cords to power TV and computer components did not constitute a daisy change of cords in violation of the Fire Code; and WHEREAS, on March 25, 2019, after providing the Appellant at least five business days’ notice, the City Council, sitting as the Board of Appeals, conducted a hearing on the appeal and finds and determines as follows: a. It is in the best interest of the City to ensure rental properties are maintained to minimum Property Code standards in order to protect the public’s health, safety and general welfare in accordance with the applicable codes; b. Item 1 (sediment trap): City Code, Section 12-402, MNFG 408.4, and MNFG 202 requires a range to be properly installed with a sediment trap; c. Item 2 (anti-tip device): City Code, Section 12-402 and MNFG 623.4 requires a range to be installed per manufacture requirements, which requires an anti-tip device; d. Item 3 (escutcheon rings): City Code, Section 12-405 and R307.2 requires that shower walls to be finished with an nonabsorbent surface; e. Item 4 (counter edges): City Code, Section 12-402 requires countertop surfaces to be easily cleanable and not impart any toxic or deleterious effect to food; f. Item 5 (hanging extension cord): Minnesota Fire Code, Section 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring. Furthermore, it expressly indicates that extension cords shall not be “extended through walls, ceilings or floors, or under doors or floor coverings.” The extension cord was hanging down through a ceiling tile, in clear violation of Section 605.5. The fact it was not plugged into a device at the time of the inspection does not Staff Recommended Affirming All Violations 560552v2 TJG BR291-16 change the fact that it is an extension cord that extends through the ceiling in violation of the Fire Code; g. Item 6 (power strips in Unit 9): Minnesota Fire Code, Section 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring and Section 605.5.1 states that extension cords shall be plugged directly into an approved receptacle. The violation is based on an extension cord begin plugged into another extension cord rather than be plugged directly into an approved receptacle as required in Section 605.5.1. There was no misinterpretation of the Property Code; h. Item 7 (power strips in Unit 10): Minnesota Fire Code, Section 605.5 does not allow for extension cords to be used as a substitute for permanent wiring and Section 605.5.1 states that extension cords shall be plugged directly into an approved receptacle. As with Item 6, the violation is based on an extension cord begin plugged into another extension cord rather than be plugged directly into an approved receptacle as required in Section 605.5.1. There was no misinterpretation of the Property Code; i. Item 8 (tub caulking): City Code, Section 12-303 requires that all occupied areas are maintained in a clean, sanitary, and safe condition; j. The City Staff memorandum to the Housing Commission dated March 19, 2019 and the City Staff memorandum to the City Council for this appeal (collectively, the “Staff Memos”) are incorporated in and made part of this Resolution by reference; k. While the Appellant may disagree with the eight items challenged in the compliance order, the Appellant failed to demonstrate that any of those items were based upon an erroneous interpretation of the Property Code; and l. Because none of the eight items challenged in the compliance order were based on an erroneous interpretation of the Property Code, the City Council is not in a position to waive those requirements through the requested reversal or modification of the order. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, sitting as the Board of Appeals, based on the Staff Memos, the record of this matter, and the findings and determinations contained herein, and after considering the recommendations of the Housing Commission, hereby decides and orders as follows: 1. The City Council affirms and upholds each of the eight items in the compliance order challenged as part of this appeal. 2. The compliance order is upheld and no portion of the filing fee shall be returned to the Appellant. Staff Recommended Affirming All Violations 560552v2 TJG BR291-16 3. The Appellant is required to bring the Property into compliance with each of the eight items challenged in the compliance order within 30 days from the date of this Resolution. 4. Nothing in this Resolution delays or alters the requirement to bring the Property into compliance with the other items of noncompliance identified in the compliance order as provided in the Property Code. March 25, 2019 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. Council/EDA Work Session City Hall Council Chambers March 25, 2019 AGENDA 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 entrance of the council chambers. ACTIVE DISCUSSION ITEMS 1.CDBG Home Buyer Assistance Program 2.Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan Review and Discussion - Review the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the public comments, and Planning Commission discussion, and provide input and direction as the document is prepared for final adoption. 3.Centra Homes Revised Conceptual Plan Review for Eastbrook Estates 4.1601 James Circle Development Concept Proposal 5.On-Street Parking and Residential Parking Standards Discussion 6.Liquor License Violation Penality Policy Discussion PENDING LIST FOR FUT URE WORK SESSIONS 1.Pending Items Cities United Update Livable Wages - 4/22 Inclusionary Housing Recommendations Public Subsidy Policy discussion with Ehlers Consulting - 4/8, 5/13 Discussion on Ordinance process - 4/22 MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Meg Beekman, Community Development Director FROM:Jesse Anderson, Deputy Director of Community Development SUBJECT:CDBG Home Buyer Assistance Program Recommendation: - Consider the home buyer assistance program guidelines and provide direction to staff Background: The City Council allocated $50,000 of the City's 2019-2020 CDBG allocation to a home buyer assistance program that would provide down payment assistance. This item is being brought back to the City Council to review the program guidelines. The following are federal requirements relating to the funding source: Must be provided to low to moderate income households Funds can provide for up to 50 percent of the required down payment Funds can go towards paying reasonable closing costs Funds can provide principal write-down assistance In order to be eligible for funds, an individual or family would need to earn 80 percent of the area median income (AMI) or less. The table below indicates the 2019 AMI limits by household size in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. These amounts are adjusted annually. Household Size 2019 Income Limit 1 Person $50,350 2 Person $57,550 3 Person $64,750 4 Person $71,900 5 Person $77,700 Staff has researched similar programs in other communities, as well as looked at the strategic priorities and needs of Brooklyn Center. Based on that, staff has drafted the following guidelines for a down payment assistance program: The program would be set up as a deferred loan, with no payments and no interest. If the home is sold within the first five years, the full loan amount would need to be repaid to the City. Between year 5 and year 10 the loan amount would be forgiven 20 percent each year. After ten years, the loan would be fully forgiven. The property would be required to remain owner-occupied. Converting to a rental property would also trigger a repayment, just as if it were sold. The intention of setting up the loan this way is to encourage recipients to stay in the community and invest in their homes and neighborhoods. Applicants must be a current resident in the City of Brooklyn Center. Staff projects that there will be a high demand for the program, and with limited funds, recommends that for the time being, eligible applicants are limited to current Brooklyn Center residents. This also forwards the goal of Resident Economic Stability, as well as keeping existing Brooklyn Center residents in the community. This eligibility requirement could be removed if funds are not used fast enough. Applicants must not have owned a home in the past three years, or are being displaced due to divorce. While the program is called "First-time Home Buyer Program", it is typical to define a first-time home buyer as someone who has not owned a home for three years or more. Maximum loan amount of $7,500 per household. A cap helps ensure that as many families as possible have access to the funds. Minimum loan amount of $3,000. A minimum helps ensure that administrative time and efforts aren't being wasted if the need is not there. Minimum of $1,000 contributed by buyer. A minimum contribution by the buyer ensures that the recipient has brought some funds of their own to the table. CDBG funds can not be used towards administrative costs. Staff is recommending that the program be administered by Center for Energy and Environment at approximately $500 per loan closing. The cost of the loan administration would be funded from TIF #3 Housing Administrative Funds. In addition to the above listed guidelines, a full draft of the First Time Home Buyer Guidelines is attached to this report. Policy Issues: Does the City Council have any recommended changes to the program guidelines? Strategic Priorities and Values: Resident Economic Stability 1 City of Brooklyn Center First Time Homebuyer Program Guidelines Program Overview The City of Brooklyn Center offers a financial assistance program for homeownership funded by the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. The First Time Homebuyer Program provides financial assistance for low and moderate income households to become homeowners. Administration of the First Time Homebuyer Program and the functions and responsibilities shall be in compliance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), CDBG regulations as well as all Federal, State and local nondiscrimination laws and with the rules and regulations governing Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity in housing and employment. No family or individual shall be denied the equal opportunity to apply for or receive assistance under the First Time Homebuyer Program on the basis of race, color, gender, religion, creed, national origin, age, familial or marital status, handicap or disability, sexual orientation or reliance on public assistance. Program Goals The First Time Homebuyer Program has the following two goals: a. Assist low and moderate income families to purchase homes within the City of Brooklyn Center by providing assistance with down payment, closing costs and mortgage principle reduction. b. Promote responsible home ownership Program Administration The program will be administered through Center for Energy and Environment. Program Policies Financial Assistance The financial assistance is in the form of a loan of up to $7,500, but no more than 10% of the purchase price. There is no interest on the loan and no payments are required. The loan is forgiven after 10 years and is reduced by 20% each year after the 5th year. If the home is sold, the title transferred or no longer owner-occupied within the first 10 years after the purchase date, then the remaining pro-rated amount will be become due. The Financial Assistance may be used to: 1. Pay up to 50% of the amount the homebuyer is required to provide toward the down payment under the particular mortgage program they are utilizing. The homebuyer must contribute a minimum of $1,000 of their own funds towards the down payment. 2. Pay up to 100% of the homebuyer’s eligible closing costs. Borrowers are permitted to use program funds for interest rate buy downs if documentation is provided from the lender that shows the buy down is necessary to secure their primary mortgage. 2 3. Reduce the mortgage principal up to 10% of the purchase price, up to $7,500. The applicant(s) housing ratio must be at least 25%, but cannot exceed 35% of their gross monthly qualifying income. The housing ratio is calculated using the current year’s projected income. Under certain circumstances, the HRA Executive Director may allow the DTI to exceed 35%. The financial assistance will be provided at a minimum amount of $5,000 and a maximum amount of $7,500. In certain situations, the City may allow assistance in excess of the maximum at their discretion. The Center for Energy and Environment will review the applicant’s verified income and assets, estimated closing costs, purchase agreement and lender’s recommendations for financial assistance in compliance with uses described above. Lenders must provide a pre-approval letter indicating the maximum amount of financing the borrower would qualify for from the first mortgage lender. The Center for Energy and Environment will verify an applicant’s income and assets through written verifications as provided by either the lender or by the applicant. The City staff may re-verify income and asset information provided by the lender. The Center for Energy and Environment will calculate the applicant’s gross annual income using lender verification or paystubs and recent tax returns or other qualifying verification as determined by City staff to ensure the applicant(s) qualifies as a low or moderate income household as required by CDBG regulations and to determine the maximum amount of assistance. Financial assistance will be provided at the time of closing on the property with the following conditions: 1. Selected applicants must meet the requirements of the program and be eligible for the financial assistance throughout the entire application process. 2. The housing unit to be purchased and the purchase price must be accepted by the City as meeting the intent and requirements of the program. 3. The financial assistance provided by the program is in the form of a no-interest loan that is forgiven 10 years from the initial purchase date. If the house is sold, transferred or no longer the primary place of residence within that 10 year period, the loan will be repaid on a pro-rated basis. 4. The homebuyers must enter into a second mortgage and execute a Repayment Agreement with the City providing for repayment of the indebtedness 10 years from the initial purchase date or when the house is sold, transferred or no longer the primary place of residence, whichever occurs first. Responsibilities of the First Time Homebuyer The responsibilities of the prospective homebuyers are to: 1. Obtain mortgage pre-qualification for a 1st mortgage. 2. Submit a pre-application and mortgage pre-qualification to the HRA. 3. Complete, sign and return the full application packet, authorization for release of information form and other certification and verification forms within the time frame specified. 4. Register and attend the Home Stretch or Framework – Homebuyers workshop such as those offered by Community Action Partnership of Hennepin County (CAP-HC), Neighborhood Development Alliance (NeDA), NeighborWorks Home Partners, or PRG Inc. More information 3 about homebuyer education can be found online at: http://www.hocmn.org/buyingahome/homebuyer-education/. Classes must have been completed within 12 months prior to closing. The applicant will be provided with a certificate of attendance. A copy of this certificate should be forwarded to the lender and the CEE. 5. Select a real estate agent, if one is desired. 6. Select a dwelling in Brooklyn Center for purchase that is an eligible dwelling under the program. 7. Provide information throughout the process as required by the lender or the City staff. 8. Execute the purchase agreement that includes the Environmental Review addendum supplied by Hennepin County, and any subsequent Amendments. 9. Execute the lender’s mortgage and related documents. 10. Execute the City’s mortgage, loan agreement and promissory note. 11. Close on the property within the time frame specified in the purchase agreement. 12. Execute other required forms within the time frame specified or required. 13. Take occupancy of the dwelling within 30 days after closing, homestead the property and continue to occupy the dwelling as a principal place of residence. 14. Make principal, interest, property tax and insurance payments as required. 15. Reimburse the City in accordance with the City’s mortgage, loan agreement, and promissory note should the first time homebuyer trigger repayment through sale, moving, transfer of ownership or foreclosure within 10 years or default on any other terms of these documents. Responsibilities of the Lender The lender must: 1. Verify the prospective homebuyer’s income and assets to determine that they meet the requirements of the program and submit a copy of the verification to the CEE. These copies must be submitted to the CEE as part of a completed application. 2. Compute the mortgage, down payment, mortgage payments and closing costs of acceptable loans approved by the program to determine the most cost-effective and appropriate form of financing for the first time homebuyer to use. 3. Provide a title search and review the documents. 4. Provide CEE with a pre-approval letter stating the maximum mortgage amount the applicant is approved for. 5. Provide CEE other verification materials as requested by the City. 6. Process a mortgage consistent with the program. 4 7. Meet all deadlines in a timely fashion, especially those that relate to the closing. All documents must be completed at least 10 days prior to the closing and be delivered to CEE at least seven days before the closing. 8. Appraise property to determine the loan-to-value ratio. Provide copy to CEE. Responsibilities of the City: The responsibilities of the HRA for the program are to: 1. Establish Program requirements. 2. Modify or terminate the program as may be appropriate or required. 3. Reimburse CEE as needed throughout the program year. Responsibilities of the Center for Energy and Environment: The responsibilities of the HRA for the program are to: 1. Administer the program. 2. Send applicants the application form, the authorization for release of information form and other certification and verification forms. 3. Review the application and other material for eligibility. 4. Establish the initial eligibility of participants via the information provided in the pre-application process. Full approval will be determined upon completion and submission of a full application and supporting documents. 5. Notify applicants when ineligible. 6. Direct prospective buyers to register for the homebuyer workshops and provide information and forms related to the program. 7. Provide liaison services involving the prospective buyer, lender and any real estate agent that might be involved in the transaction. 8. Review appraisal, purchase agreement, eligibility and mortgage for consistency with the program requirements. 9. Prepare and execute the city mortgage, loan agreement, and promissory note. 10. Provide financial assistance according to program guidelines to the applicant at the time of closing. 11. Service the city mortgage, loan agreement, and promissory note. 12. Request reimbursement to the City as needed. 13. Provided income documentation relating to CDBG reporting requirements. 5 Pre-Application Process At the time of application, applicants must provide CEE with the following information and meet the eligibility requirements: 1. Names and ages of all household members who will occupy the purchased property. 2. Address and telephone numbers. 3. Total gross annual income documentation. 4. Lease start and end dates. 5. Letter from lender indicating the amount of a home loan for which applicant is pre-qualified. 6. Authorization for release of information/data privacy signed by all adults in the household. The information listed above will provide CEE sufficient information to determine if the applicant is eligible for the Program. The pre-application must be submitted prior to the execution of a purchase agreement. Applicants will be notified of their eligibility based on the information provided in the pre- application. It is the responsibility of each applicant to ensure that the information is correct and that CEE receives his or her application. Eligibility Requirements To be eligible to participate in the program, the applicant must meet the following requirements at the time of application and throughout the process up until closing. 1. Must be a current renter in Brooklyn Center with verifiable lease and proof of rent paid, showing at least 6 months tenancy in Brooklyn Center. 2. Must have no home ownership in the past 3 years (unless displaced due to divorce). 3. Must be a U.S. citizen or have legal immigration status. 4. Must be a First Time Homebuyer, as defined in Appendix A. 5. Must not have a gross annual Income that exceeds the maximum income limits which are revised annually to reflect the current year’s CDBG maximum income limits. Income is calculated using prior year tax returns and verified by most recent paystubs. For information on calculating income, please contact a Brooklyn Center Housing Specialist. FY 2018 CDBG Income Limits Calculated as 80% of the Area Median Income. Source: https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/5334/cdbg-income-limits/ Household Size Household Income Limit 1 Person Household $50,350 6 2 Person Household $57,550 3 Person Household $64,750 4 Person Household $71,900 5 Person Household $77,700 6 Person Household $83,450 7 Person Household $89,200 8 Person Household $94,950 6. Must not have gross assets exceeding $10,000, excluding retirement savings. 7. Borrowers are required to invest at least $1,000 of their own monies towards the purchase price of the home. 8. Must meet the requirements of a lender and qualify for a first mortgage. 9. Loan must be a fixed-rate, prime loan. No adjustable or balloon mortgages. 10. Must fulfill the program obligations in a timely manner and must remain eligible to participate based on the program requirements and those of the lender through the time of closing. 11. Must not have a previous loan through the City that ended in foreclosure or any other loan that ended in foreclosure within the previous five years. 12. Must not buy dwelling with a contract for deed. 13. Must meet the requirements as specified elsewhere in these First Time Homebuyer Program Guidelines. Denial of Eligibility CEE will review and verify all applications for eligibility. Those applicants not meeting the eligibility requirements will be sent a written notice explaining the reason(s) for denial of program participation. Appeals regarding interpretation of eligibility requirements may be made in writing, first to the Deputy Director of Community Development for the city of Brooklyn Center, then to the Director of Community Development and then to the City Manager. Appeals that clearly do not meet eligibility requirements will not be considered. Eligible Dwellings To be eligible, the property must meet the following requirements: 1. Be located within the City of Brooklyn Center. 7 2. Be a single-family dwelling, a townhouse unit, duplex or a condominium unit. 3. Be a conforming use property as defined by the Brooklyn Center Zoning Ordinance. Applicant Outreach The City and CEE will publicize and disseminate information to make known the availability of homeownership assistance on a regular basis through a variety of media and other suitable means. The availability of assistance will be communicated to other services providers, realtors and lenders in the community and advise them of the guidelines so that they can make proper referrals for the program. Realtors and lenders will be encouraged to provide additional services to eligible clients to ensure their successful utilization of the program. Applicant Pool The applicant pool for the program shall consist of all those who have completed and returned to CEE a pre-application form, written verification from their lender of pre-approval and who have acknowledged that they will meet the eligibility requirements. Funds will be available to the applicant pool on a first come, first serve basis. Eligible applicants will be approved for funding when they or their lender notify CEE of the applicant’s approved purchase agreement and the full application packet is completed and returned. If funding is limited, and more than one applicant is at the purchasing stage, CEE will provide funding to the applicant who qualifies for the most preference points. Preference points have been established to meet the goals of the City. Each preference category is worth one (1) point. The maximum points any one household could receive is five (5) points. Households with the highest point totals will be selected first. In the event of a tie, a drawing or lottery will be held to rank the applicants within each of the preference categories.  Applicant with dependents under age 18.  Applicant has lived in Brooklyn Center longer than 6 months prior to closing.  Head or co-head of household have primary, longer-term employment in Brooklyn Center.  Applicant has never owned a home (versus having owned a home over three years ago). Approval from the applicant pool is tentative and conditional. Families selected for participation must fulfill the program obligations in a timely manner and must remain eligible to participate based on the program requirements and those of the lender through the time of closing. Repayment of Assistance Repayment of the down payment assistance loan shall occur upon the earliest of: 1. Sale or transfer 2. The property ceases for any reason to be the homebuyer’s principal place of residence. 8 3. Default on the mortgage with the City or any superior mortgage on the property. Repayment of the loan shall be pro-rated, with the principal amount due reduced by 20% for each year after 5 years of the homeowner’s tenancy in their Brooklyn Center home, as established by the loan date on the filed mortgage with the HRA. AGE OF LOAN AMOUNT OF PRINCIPAL LOAN AMOUNT DUE 0 - 1 year 100 % of principal loan amount due 1 - 2 year 100 % of principal loan amount due 2 - 3 years 100 % of principal loan amount due 3 - 4 years 100 % of principal loan amount due 4 - 5 years 100 % of principal loan amount due 5 - 6 years 100 % of principal loan amount due 6 - 7 years 80% of principal loan amount due 7 - 8 years 60% of principal loan amount due 8 - 9 years 40% of principal loan amount due 9 - 10 years 20% of principal loan amount due 10+ years 0% due, Loan Fully forgiven When a loan made by the City is paid in full or forgiven, a document satisfying the lien will be prepared by CEE, executed by the City Manager or his or her delegate and delivered to the borrower for recording. The borrower is responsible for the cost of recording the satisfaction. Contact the Community Development Department for more information about repayment of a City loan. Subordination of Mortgages Brooklyn Center City loan recipients requesting subordination of the interest of the City in real property must submit a Subordination Request Form, the required supporting documentation, and a processing fee. Request should be made to CEE. The following information must be submitted with the Subordination Request Form: 1. A typed letter dated and signed by the mortgagor, stating the reason for the requested subordination and the use of any equity being removed as part of the loan transaction. 2. A copy of the current appraisal (dated within six months of application) or other evidence of market value of the property that is acceptable to the HRA. 3. A copy of current title work (must indicate all debt against the property). 4. Explanation of remaining debts or liens with supporting documentation (i.e. most recent mortgage bill). 5. Estimated closing costs/settlement statement, where applicable. 6. A copy of the mortgagor’s loan application. 7. Additional documentation may be required. The City will subordinate its mortgage interest if all of the following conditions are met, to the extent 9 that they are applicable: 1. Closing costs are reasonable. Generally this shall mean that the sum of all discount points, origination fees and lender ancillary fees shall not exceed 3% of the new first mortgage amount. 2. If the City believes that the payment terms of the refinance are within the financial means of the borrower. 3. The overall value of superior debt must not be increased by more than 50%. 4. Property taxes, if not escrowed by the superior mortgage holder, must be current. The City will not subordinate to reverse mortgages. In most cases, interest-only loans or loans with interest-only options, revolving lines of credits or debt consolidation will not be allowed unless the City determines that an acceptable reason warrants this type of loan. The City may approve other subordination requests not meeting the conditions above on a case-by-case basis that are clearly in the best interests of the City, where the security of the City loan remains acceptable and denial of the request will cause or contribute to a documented hardship on the part of the borrower. Subordination requests will be processed by CEE staff, who will submit the request with a recommendation for action, to the City. The City Manager has the authority to grant a subordination request when, based on his or her discretion, the subordination is reasonable based on the criteria set forth in this Policy. Targeted Funding At various times, the City may target program funding for purchases in specific developments. Applicants purchasing in those developments would receive program funding prior to all other applications. Modification and Termination of Program The City may modify or terminate the program as it deems appropriate or as required by HUD. Once the City has provided financial assistance and the mortgage executed, financial assistance shall not be rescinded except as provide for in the executed HRA mortgage, loan agreement, and promissory note. 10 APPENDIX A DEFINITIONS Acceptable Loans – Portfolio Products, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, FHA, VA and ARM’s that at a minimum are at a fixed rate for the first seven years. Applicant – an individual or household submitting an application for a loan. Application – The form used to request assistance for the City’s First Time Homebuyer funds. ARM or Adjustable Rate Mortgage – a mortgage that offers an initial rate that is fixed for a certain number of years of repayment; the rate then adjusts every year thereafter for the remaining life of the loan. CEE – The Center for Energy and Environment, which administers the City’s First Time Homebuyer Program. CDBG or Community Development Block Grant Program – an annual entitlement program provided to the City of Brooklyn Center through the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). City – The City of Brooklyn Center. Clearance – A lead based paint Certification that all lead issues have been remediated. Closing – The consummation of the real estate transaction. The closing includes the delivery of a deed, financial adjustments the signing of notes, mortgages, and the disbursement of funds necessary to complete the sale and loan transaction. Closing Costs – Those costs required by the lender to be paid by the buyer for various fees, credit report costs, insurance, etc., at the time of closing on a property. Conventional Mortgage – A type of residential mortgage loan, usually from a bank or savings and loan association, with a fixed rate and term. It is repayable in fixed monthly payments over a period usually 30 – 40 years or less, secured by real property, and not insured by the Federal Housing Administration or guaranteed by the Veterans Administration. Down Payment – A type of payment made by a homebuyer, indicating intention to purchase real estate offered for sale and obtain financing from a bank or mortgage company. Environmental Review – The process of verifying that a project meets Federal, State and Local environmental standards. The environmental review process is required for all HUD-assisted projects to ensure that the proposed project does not negatively impact the surrounding environment and that the property site itself will not have an adverse environmental or health effect on end users. Hennepin County staff is responsible for the completion of the environmental review. Environmental Review Addendum – An addendum to the purchase agreement that states an Environmental Review will be completed by Hennepin County prior to closing. The addendum must be a part of the original purchase agreement in order to be valid. Environmental Reviews take approximately 45 days to be completed by Hennepin County. 11 Fannie Mae or Federal National Mortgage Association – A privately owned and operated corporation that buys mortgages from such lenders as banks and savings and loans, packages and resells them on the open market. FHA or Federal Housing Administration – A Federal agency that administers many loan programs, loan guarantee programs, and loan insurance programs designed to make more housing available. First Time Homebuyer – A household who has not owned a dwelling of any kind within the preceding three years from the date of application or who has been displaced due to a divorce situation. Gross Annual Income – The gross annual Income of a household for the purposes of this program is defined for purposes of reporting under Internal Revenue Service Form 1040 for individual Federal annual income tax purposes as per 24 CFR 570.3 Income (1)(iii). Gross Assets – The current market value of the following minus existing indebtedness: (Typically, it does not include 401K funds, pensions or other deferred compensation funds.) 1. Cash on hand. 2. Cash in checking accounts. 3. Cash in savings accounts, including accounts held in trust. 4. Investment securities (government bonds, municipal bonds). 5. Stocks. 6. Certificate of deposits and annuities. Guidelines – The set of standards, criteria and specifications to be used in administering the program. Household – All persons residing in one housing unit; which may include one or more families, a single person, a married couple or two or more unrelated persons. Housing Counselor – A person who provides direct customer services, primarily to groups, individuals, households seeking information and assistance with housing issues. Housing Ratio - The percentage of income that goes toward housing costs including mortgage principal and interest, mortgage insurance premium, hazard insurance premium, property taxes, and homeowners association dues (when applicable). HUD or U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development – The principal federal agency responsible for implementing certain federal housing and community development programs. Income - The amount of money or its equivalent received during a period of time, in exchange for labor or services from the sale of goods or property, or as profit from financial investments. 12 Lead Risk Assessment – A report that describes the health risk assessment, management process, estimates of the costs of recovery and summaries of possible defensive measures required per HUD regulation CFR Part 35: Lead Based Paint Regulations. Lender – Individual or firm that extends money to a borrower with the expectation of being repaid, usually with interest. Loan Estimate – Document disclosing the approximate closing costs a mortgage applicant will pay at or before the mortgage settlement date. Low Income Household– A household whose annual income does not exceed the low income limit as established by HUD with adjustments for smaller and larger families. Minnesota Housing – The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency; a Minnesota State agency that administers a variety of first time homebuyer loan programs. Moderate Income Household – A household whose annual income does not exceed 80 percent of the median income for the area, as determine by HUD with adjustments for smaller and larger families. Mortgage – The conveyance of an interest in real property given as security for the payment of a loan. Principal Place of Residence – To occupy the home as the primary residence on a permanent basis. Program – The City’s First Time Homebuyer Program. Promissory Note – A written instrument containing a promise by the signer to pay and agreed amount. Purchase Agreement – An agreement between buyer and seller of real property, setting forth the price, and terms of the sale; Also known as a sales contract. Reducing the Mortgage Principal Amount – A method of benefitting the buyer through the use of a portion or all of the HRA provided financial assistance to lower the mortgage principle amount. In effect, this assistance acts as a larger down payment and helps to reduce the monthly mortgage payments. The available amount of assistance is up to 10% of the purchase price to a maximum of $7,500. The buyer’s housing ratio must be between 25% and 35%. Satisfaction of Mortgage – A document releasing a mortgage lien, indicating the borrower has paid the debt in full. Second Mortgage – A loan on a property that already has an existing mortgage (the first mortgage). The second mortgage is subordinate to the first. VA Loan – Department of Veterans Affairs, providing below-market financing with no down payment to veterans of the U.S. Armed Services. MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:N/A FROM:Meg Beekman, Community Development Director SUBJECT:Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan Review and Discussion Recommendation: - Consider the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan and any comments received as part of the March 21, 2019, public hearing, and provide direction to staff Background: At their March 21, 2019, meeting the Planning Commission held the official public hearing for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and took public comments on the document. At the time of the drafting of this report, the public hearing had not yet occurred, however, staff will provide a full report to the City Council as part of the work session presentation on March 25th. The purpose of the March 25th work session is to go over any public comments received at the March 21st public hearing, and as a follow-up to the March 11th City Council work session discussion. Attached is the most recent Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan, which has had a few slight modifications since the Council reviewed it on March 11th. The entire document was reviewed for grammatical errors and reformatted for printing and binding. Chapter 3 - Land Use Chapter Modifications The 2.8 acre parcel located at 800 - 69th Avenue N was re-guided from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. This parcel is currently vacant. The property to the east is an apartment complex and is guided high density residential. the property to the west is 8-plexes and is guided medium density residential. The owner would like to develop it, but has requested the medium density classification because single family residential would likely not be desirable given the proximity to higher density residential. Housing Chapter Modifications Based on the discussion with the Council at their last work session, a section to the Housing Chapter was added. The section is entitled Housing Challenges Inform Housing Needs, and it begins on page 4-17 and runs through page 4-19. The purpose of the new section is to capture the context of the affordable housing discussion and elevate the priority of preserving existing naturally occurring affordable housing. The section highlights some of the continuing conversations that are happening around housing in the City. The D-line was added to references to BRT. Table 4-5. Housing Resources, Strategies, and Tools was modified 4D for NOAH properties was added as a tool/resource Pooled TIF Funds were added as a tool/resource Housing Goal "Explore ways to match housing stock with changing demographics" was changed to "Identify ways to match housing stock with changing demographics". This change elevates the resources provided to this goal from low to medium. Existing programs such as the vacant building program, code enforcement, and the rental licensing program, were added as tools/strategies to continue to support The description for the Inclusionary Housing Policy language was modified to to state that the City would explore this policy in the future as market rents rise to levels of at least 80% AMI. Implementation Chapter Added detail and timing for implementation steps, including funding for certain more immediate items, such as the update of the Zoning Code. At the March 25th work session staff and the consultant will go over the modifications the Draft Plan to get direction from the City Council, review public comments received, facilitate a discussion, and explore with the Council implementation next steps specifically in terms of housing policy. Next Steps April 8th - City Council votes on whether to adopt the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and send it to the Metropolitan Council for final approval. A public hearing with the City Council is not required in order to adopt it. Policy Issues: As a follow-up from the March 11th City Council work session, there are a few specific policy questions that staff is requesting the Council consider prior to final adoption of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan on April 8th. Most notably, within the Housing Chapter, the language that has been included as part of the new section on page 4-17 through 4-19, staff is seeking confirmation from the Council on. In addition, the tools and strategies listed in table 4.5 of the document, along with the goals will become the basis for a future Housing Action Plan for the City. Over the course of discussions of the past year and a half, staff has felt that most of these items have been covered, with a few exceptions. The topic of inclusionary housing policy is not one that has been explored thoroughly. Inclusionary housing is typically thought of as the policy which requires a certain percentage of housing units to be set aside as affordable in market rate development which receive either public subsidy and/or discretionary land use consideration from the city. Generally speaking, inclusionary housing policies work well in strong markets where high rents offset the added burden of affordability in new projects. In weaker markets, where rents are not as strong, public subsidy is often needed to make market rate projects work, even without the added cost of reduced rents. Housing and market experts general recommend that in weaker markets putting scarce resources towards affordable housing preservation programs and tenant protection policies, which can be a more effective use of funds and staff time. Because of this, language in the Housing Chapter recommends reviewing inclusionary housing policies as market rents in Brooklyn Center increase, and places a greater focus on housing preservation programs. Staff is also seeking direction on other changes to the Draft Plan ahead of the April 8th meeting. Strategic Priorities and Values: Operational Excellence BROOKLYN CENTER Comprehensive Plan Update 2040 DRAFT March 21, 2019 Acknowledgments City of Brooklyn Center Mayor Mike Elliott Councilmember Marquita Butler Councilmember April Graves Councilmember Kris Lawrence-Anderson Councilmember Dan Ryan Former Mayor Tim Wilson (Term ended 12/31/2018) Planning Commission: Randall Christensen, Chair Alexander Koenig, Vice Chair John MacMillan Stephen Schonning Rochelle Sweeney Susan Tade Abraham Rizvi (Term ended 2018) City Staff: Curt Boganey, City Manager Reggie Edwards, Deputy City Manager Meg Beekman, Community Development Director Ginny McIntosh, City Planner and Zoning Administrator Doran Cote, Director of Public Works Brett Angell, Business and Workforce Development Specialist Prepared by: Swanson Haskamp Consulting, LLC Contributing Consultants: Perkins + Will, Inc. Sambatek, Inc. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. Rani Engineering Comprehensive Plan 2040This page is blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Community & Planning Context Chapter 2: Vision, Goals & Strategies Chapter 3: Land Use & Redevelopment Chapter 4: Housing & Neighborhood Chapter 5: Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability Chapter 6: Parks, Trails & Open Space Chapter 7: Transportation & Transit Chapter 8: Infrastructure & Utilities Chapter 9: Implementation APPENDIX A. Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) B. Glossary of Terms - Goals & Strategies C. Background Report D. Capital Improvement Plan Comprehensive Plan 2040This page is blank. DRAFT CHAPTER 1: Community & Planning Context. Comprehensive Plan 2040This page is blank. COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 1-1 INTRODUCTION The City of Brooklyn Center is a first-ring suburb of the Twin Cities metropolitan area and is one of the best positioned, and most accessible communities in the region. Most of the community’s neighborhoods were developed in the Post-World War II era between the 1950s and 1970s, with the community fully built-out by the 1980s. Once defined by the Brookdale Mall, the City was an active hub of regional retail activity for decades that provided a shopping destination for not only local residents but the northwest region of the Twin Cities. The presence of the mall played a significant role in shaping the physical development of the community as supporting retailers, service providers and offices soon began to co-locate near the mall creating a vibrant and active city center. Soon the ‘center city’ was bustling with activity, jobs, and eventually new residents in nearby multi-family developments. For decades the presence of an indoor mall was an important differentiator of cities in the region – there were not many of them, so if your city was lucky enough to have a mall it was as close to a guarantee of success, not only the mall, but for all of the supporting small shops, offices and other destinations in the City. No one would have suspected that retail would change so drastically over the course of such a short period of time, but that is exactly what happened over the past decade and Brooklyn Center experienced the worst decline of any other City with a regional mall in the region. Brooklyn Center’s core began to experience pressure and decline more than 15-years ago as adjacent communities like Brooklyn Park and Maple Grove began to develop. In conjunction with new residential development came new service and retail platforms that slowly replaced the demand for a regional, enclosed mall. The new, larger homes coupled with more modern retail environments in nearby communities would ultimately prove to be fatal to the success of Brookdale and the ‘center city’ that was once so vibrant. For the better part of the past decade the ‘center city’ has slowly evolved into what is now a large national big box store and other local retail destinations that have replaced the once regional retail hub. Though some new users have started to emerge, there remains significant areas of under-developed and underutilized properties which present opportunities to Brooklyn Center that are unparalleled at this time within the region. COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 1-31-2 Community Demographics and Socio-Economic Conditions The City of Brooklyn Center is a moderate size community comprising approximately 5,360-acres, and is bordered by the Cities of Minneapolis, Brooklyn Park, and Crystal. The full extent of the City’s eastern border is along the Mississippi River, with intermittent public access and views to the river corridor. Brooklyn Center is considered a first-ring suburb to the City of Minneapolis, and is geographically positioned just 10-minutes from downtown Minneapolis. The community is highly accessible by car to the larger region from I-94, Highway 252, and Highway 100, and within the City by an extensive network of county and local roadways. The City’s population in 2016 was estimated at 31,231 and approximately 11,300 households. Other key 2016 demographic statistics compiled from the American Community Survey and US Census that were used to inform Plan development include: • Age • Household tenure • Race • Median income Market Snapshot A critical component to planning for the City’s future is to understand the current market dynamics in the community and compare those to the larger region. This is an important aspect of the planning process because it provides context from which the City’s vision for it’s future can be derived. The purpose of this Plan is to be aspirational, but also to consider and be rooted within market reality so that the community can evolve and grow over this planning period. As shown in the following Figure 1-1 and Table 1-1 the City’s existing housing stock is diverse and includes single-family, condominium, townhome and multi-family products. While the housing stock is diverse, most of the product was developed more than 40-years ago, and much of the single-family housing was developed more than 50-years ago. As this area began to decline, the City slowly began to shift its focus from ‘saving Brookdale’ to looking for new opportunities to redefine the City through redevelopment. For the past decade the City has methodically and strategically acquired properties within the center city to assemble a larger, contiguous area of land that would be available for redevelopment. The City’s leaders and policy-makers have been proactive to support a new vision for the center city, one that once again will define Brooklyn Center as a resilient and vibrant community for generations to come. This 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update (Plan) is not just about redevelopment in the center city, but it is about redefining and reimagining the community as whole as change takes hold over this planning period. While redevelopment of the center city has the potential to physically impact and define the community, equally important is its relationship and connectivity to existing neighborhoods. This Plan works to establish strategies that integrate and connect new and established parts of the community together – the concept that existing areas can benefit by improvements and investments of new areas thereby contributing to the long-term sustainability and resiliency of the community as a whole. Like many other first-ring suburbs, the City’s early years were focused on single-family neighborhoods where residential uses dominated the landscape. That dominance remains today and as such housing continues to be at the forefront of the City’s planning efforts within this Plan. Whether existing or new, housing stability, affordability and diversity will continue to be central to any planning and redevelopment efforts in the community. However, before we can begin to develop the plan for the community’s future it is important to describe the City’s context within the region and understand the framework from which subsequent Chapters of this Plan are derived. The following sections of this Chapter provide a snapshot of the community’s context that summarizes a more detailed set of data which can be found in the Background Report Appendix C. This Chapter is intended to provide context regarding the following: • Summary of current demographic and socio-economic trends • Current market snapshot (local and regional) • Planning context: - Regional context and requirements - Metropolitan Council - Local context and objectives guiding Plan development COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 1-51-4 Figure 1-1. Year Housing Structure Built 2015 Page 32 of 41 Figure H-27: Year Housing Structure Built 2015 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Pre-1950 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010-Present Pe r c e n t o f H o u s i n g U n i t s Year Built BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY 7-COUNTY METRO AREA Source: US Census: 2011-2015 American Community Survey Table 1-1. Housing Structure Type 2000-2015 Page 33 of 41 Housing Structure Type The type housing structure can influence not only affordability but also overall livability. Having a range of housing structures can provide residents of a community options that best meet their needs as they shift from one life stage to another. For example, retirees often desire multifamily housing not only for the ease of maintenance, but also for security reasons. For those fortunate to travel south during the winter, multifamily residences are less susceptible to home maintenance issues or burglary concerns because of on-site management. For those with health concerns, multifamily residences often have neighbors that can also provide oversight should an acute health problem occur. The majority (63%) of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock consists of detached single-family homes. This is above the proportion found in Hennepin County (55%) or throughout the metropolitan area (59%). Nevertheless, the City’s housing stock is diversified, with many multifamily units in large structures, as well as a significant number of single family attached units. Table H-22: Housing Structure Type 2000-2015 Housing Type 2000 2010 2015 No.Pct.2000 2010 2015 BROOKLYN CENTER Single Family Detached 7,180 6,696 6,872 -308 -4.3%62.9%63.5%62.5% Single Family Attached 929 965 884 -45 -4.8%8.1%9.1%8.0% 2-Units 97 83 94 -3 -3.1%0.8%0.8%0.9% 3-4 Units 142 105 105 -37 -26.1%1.2%1.0%1.0% 5 or more Units 3,048 2,678 3,033 -15 -0.5%26.7%25.4%27.6% Other Unit Types 28 26 8 -20 -71.4%0.2%0.2%0.1% Total 11,424 10,553 10,996 -428 -3.7%100.0%100.0%100.0% HENNEPIN COUNTY Single Family Detached 260,349 265,319 271,200 10,851 4.2%57.1%56.0%55.3% Single Family Attached 32,477 41,925 42,701 10,224 31.5%7.1%8.8%8.7% 2-Units 20,555 17,579 16,841 -3,714 -18.1%4.5%3.7%3.4% 3-4 Units 11,816 10,795 11,554 -262 -2.2%2.6%2.3%2.4% 5 or more Units 129,411 136,607 146,411 17,000 13.1%28.4%28.8%29.9% Other Unit Types 1,521 1,631 1,489 -32 -2.1%0.3%0.3%0.3% Total 456,129 473,856 490,196 34,067 7.5%100.0%100.0%100.0% 7-COUNTY METRO AREA Single Family Detached 624,734 669,718 682,595 57,861 9.3%61.2%60.3%59.3% Single Family Attached 84,436 123,763 130,366 45,930 54.4%8.3%11.1%11.3% 2-Units 35,054 29,435 29,780 -5,274 -15.0%3.4%2.7%2.6% 3-4 Units 24,416 22,573 23,891 -525 -2.2%2.4%2.0%2.1% 5 or more Units 236,350 250,059 268,930 32,580 13.8%23.1%22.5%23.4% Other Unit Types 16,464 15,169 14,592 -1,872 -11.4%1.6%1.4%1.3% Total 1,021,454 1,110,717 1,150,154 128,700 12.6%100.0%100.0%100.0% Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey Change 2000-2015 Distribution Mis s i s s i p p i Tw i n T w i n Ryan Palmer Twin Twin 94 100 2 5 2 69th Du p o n t 63rd 81 Bry a n t 10 73rd 55th 6t h Ca m d e n Gir a r d J u n e 59th Kn o x 58th B e a r d Ne w t o n 65th Sc o t t 61st Hu m b o l d t Fra n c e Wil l o w 66th 64th Freeway 60th U n i t y Shin g l e C r e e k We s t R i v e r Lo g a n Re g e n t 78th 70th K y l e P e r r y 52nd Ja m e s 50th O s s e o Lilac 53rd Ald r i c h Gr i m e s L e e Howe Ohenry Mo r g a n 4t h L y n d a l e Ramp Qu e e n 77th 72nd 694 Xenia C o l f a x Twin L a k e 67th 54th Ru s s e l l Ericon Meadowwood Oli v e r Xe r x e s 62nd 76th Broo k l y n 5 t h Sh e r i d a n Up t o n Nash Vi o l e t Janet Irving 47th Summit Bernard 68th 75th MumfordJoyce Ew i n g Dr e w 51st 74th Estate Az e l i a Amy P a l m e r L a k e Oak Northwa y Ze n i t h N o b l e Ea s t L y n d a l e 49th Hal i f a x Q u a i l Yo r k 46th Lake b r e e z e 56th 48th 74 1/2 57th Ab b o t t Quarles Ju d y Joh n M a r t i n Winga r d T o l e d o Urban Poe Im p e r i a l Wilshire Thurber Th o m a s Corvallis N o r t h p o r t Bro o k v i e w Woodbine S a i l o r Winchester Eleanor Riv e r d a l e Pe a r s o n Ad m i r a l Brookda l e C e n t e r Brookdale Vin c e n t W e l c o m e Bellvue 71st In d i a n a Orc h a r d P e n n Paul Da l l a s Fairview Ve r a C r u z M a r l i n Sie r r a Byron E m e r s o n M a j o r Sh o r e s M i s s i s s i p p i Ea r l e B r o w n Wa s h b u r n Boulder B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e 46 1/2 Fr e m o n t Lawrence La k e v i e w Fa i r f i e l d Eckberg Burquest Parkway Chowen Ponds Lakeside Angeline La k e l a n d Kathren e Shari Ann 58 1/2 R i v e r w o o d 49 1/2 Al d r i c h 76th 2 5 2 Ir v i n g Pe r r y Co l f a x 73rd Ramp To l e d o C h o w e n Dr e w 67th 73rd C h o w e n 67th 75th Qu a i l A l d r i c h 81 Ram p B e a r d 61st Q u a i l Ramp 46th E m e r s o n Jam e s 66th Ramp Re g e n t Vin c e n t Ma j o r 65th 70th 76 t h Ramp 55th 62nd 56th 52nd 71st Ha l i f a x 48th Ald r i c h Perry Un i t y Ab b o t t O r c h a r d 74th Lilac 49th 69th Br y a n t 64th 100 Em e r s o n Da l l a s R a m p 76 t h Qua i l Xe r x e s Le e R e g e n t F r e m o n t 74th Woodbine 59th 57th 53rd R a m p 72ndLee Lilac Ram p Ha l i f a x U n i t y 76th Lo g a n Xe r x e s 10 0 Unity Ab b o t t Qu e e n 51st Pe n n S c o t t 56th Ja m e s 72nd 71st Du p o n t Ja m e s Pe r r y Fre m o n t V e r a C r u z Pe r r y 51st Jun e 72nd 56th Ramp We l c o m e 70th Twin L a k e 50th 71st C a m d e n Yo r k To l e d o 65th Co l f a x F r a n c e 58th Co l f a x Ky l e Ramp Ram p 56th P e r r y Fre m o n t Lilac F r a n c e Ha l i f a x Fr a n c e Wa s h b u r n G r i m e s 70th 58th 48th L e e N o b l e 694 72nd Ramp D r e w 66th Qu a i l Ne w t o n 73rd 50th 74th 69th Ju n e 67th Oli v e r Ma j o r 54th 51st Up t o n 52nd Yor k B e a r d Ma j o r Ma j o r 68th Br y a n t Lyn d a l e 74th D r e w C o l f a x 75th Up t o n D r e w 64th Dr e w Wa s h b u r n Xe r x e s 52nd O r c h a r d 61st Shingl e C r e e k 67th C a m d e n 69th E w i n g 60th Du p o n t Noble Gir a r d 47th 62nd 59th 73rd We l c o m e Em e r s o n Orchard P e r r y F r a n c e 67th 50th Ca m d e n Kn o x Ra m p 73rd Shingle Creek Sc o t t Re g e n t We s t R i v e r R e g e n t Ra m p 53rd 62nd R a m p Riv e r d a l e 66th Oliver Qu a i l 67th Un i t y 76th 67th 64th Shingle Creek X e r x e s M a j o r Ramp 74th 60th Ra m p 66th Ne w t o n Xer x e s Sco t t Grimes 49th 70th 77th 74th 61st 52nd M i s s i s s i p p i Ru s s e l l 48th 68th K y l e 54th Gir a r d 10 70th P e r r y 75th P e r r y I n d i a n a 4th Le e Lo g a n W i l l o w 56th 56th Lilac Ra m p Lilac Co l f a x Dupont Lyn d a l e 77th Ir v i n g Hu m b o l d t Yo r k Orc h a r d Lilac Ky l e Ramp N o b l e 47th R a m p S c o t t Em e r s o n Un i t y N o r t h p o r t Q u a i l 71st 47th 60th Lilac Gir a r d 74th 57th Tw i n L a k e 73rd Oli v e r 51st 70th 54th G r i m e s Ram p A d m i r a l Broo k l y n 56th Tw i n L a k e 73rd 4th Gi r a r d Bear d 72nd Mo r g a n We l c o m e Lilac Mo r g a n 50th 50th Kn o x Le e Winchester Aldrich 75th Hu m b o l d t Fre m o n t Pe n n Ew i n g Ram p Ew i n g We l c o m e B r y a n t Irv i n g 47th 70th 66th Fra n c e Un i t y 53rd Kn o x M o r g a n Ze n i t h Ramp 73rd Ald r i c h 72nd 70th 76th 53rd Qu a i l Pe n n BROOKLYN CENTER BROOKLYN PARK CRYSTAL MINNEAPOLIS ROBBINSDALE F YEAR_BUILT 1856 - 1913 1914 - 1935 1936- 1949 1950 - 1956 1957 - 1963 1964 - 1974 1975 - 1989 1990 - 2015 0 1,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800Feet Homestead Properties - Year Built Map 1-1. Homestead Properties - Year Built COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 1-71-6 Housing Market Trends The Brooklyn Center housing market was hit particularly hard in the housing bust of the late 2000s that resulted in a high number of foreclosures and declining median home values. The great recession was officially over by the late 2000s, but after-effects lasted far longer and impacted housing prices into the mid 2010s. By 2015 many communities within the region had recovered to pre-bust prices, but Brooklyn Center lagged slightly behind as indicated within the Background Report prepared in the fall of 2017. The market is slowly recovering, and finally in 2018 updated data indicates that the City has now surpassed pre-bust pricing for single-family homes. Despite the modest recovery, the City’s median home prices continue to be well below that of the metropolitan area. According to the Minneapolis Association of Realtors, the median sales price of homes in Brooklyn Center is $186,125 as compared to $247,900 in the metro area. As discussed in subsequent chapters, much of this price difference can be associated with the age of structures in the community, relatively small square-footage of structures (Map 1-2) and lack of neighborhood and structural diversity. Nearly a third of the City’s housing stock is renter occupied, and most is contained within larger multi-family structures and complexes. The majority of the multi-family housing is located adjacent to major roadway corridors and near the former regional mall site. The City’s rental product is considered to be affordable, but it is naturally occurring due to age of buildings, units, and level of finish of existing units. This is an important distinction because no new multi-family housing or large-scale apartment product has been developed in the community for more than 40-years which may signal potential issues with deferred maintenance, unwanted conversions or wanted conversions to higher market-rate product, deteriorating quality and lack of options that meet changing demographic demands of the City’s residents. The recent apartment boom in adjacent communities such as Saint Paul and Minneapolis bring new product to the market place that is renting at substantially higher rates, thus further contributing to the disparity between the region and the City. Part of this Plan is to evaluate and understand how pricing in new multi-family development will compare to the larger region, and to address affordability as a component of new development to ensure economic diversity within newer areas of the community is planned and strategies are developed to ensure a range of affordability into perpetuity. Map 1-2. Square Footage of Single-Family Homes INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AVE N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 51ST AVE N INTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetSize of Homesteaded Single Family Homes Finished Square Feet 0 - 1,019 1,019 - 1,196 1,196 - 1,462 1,462 - 1,948 1,948 - 3,323 COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 1-91-8 Planning Context The planning context of this Plan is also an important consideration to understand how and why the subsequent chapters of this planning document were created. While the City’s location in the regional and current market dynamics provide context to where and why certain characteristics are emphasized within this Plan, the Planning Context establishes the requirements of this planning effort that must be addressed and also describes who was involved at the local level in the creation of this Plan. The following sections will define the planning context of the following: 1. Regional context and requirements - Metropolitan Council 2. Local context and objectives guiding Plan development Regional context and requirements – Metropolitan Council Cities often wonder when, and why, they should prepare an update to their Comprehensive Plan. While cities are able to amend or update their Plans at any time, the Metropolitan Land Planning Act requires all cities and counties in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area (seven- county) to adopt a Comprehensive Plan, and to update and amend those plans on a minimum of a decennial basis for consistency with the regional systems. The Plan update may address a broad spectrum of issues and opportunities important to the City, but at a minimum the Plan must be updated for conformance with the Metropolitan Council’s regional system plans that include transportation (highways and transit), water resources (wastewater services), airports, parks and open space. To clearly define how a City must establish conformance with the Metropolitan Council’s requirements the Metropolitan Council issues a System Statement to each community in advance of the decennial Plan update period. Within the System Statement, the Metropolitan Council outlines and details the key areas that Brooklyn Center must update for compliance with the regional system. The following information provides a summary of the System Statement requirements that were considered and planned for within subsequent sections of this Plan update. Employment and Commercial Trends This Plan acknowledges and identifies the significant change in retail, office and employment that has occurred in the City since the 2030 Plan was prepared and adopted. Peak employment in the City occurred around 2000 when there approximately 16,700 jobs which then began to decline steeply as Brookdale closed leaving a little more than 11,000 jobs in the community by 2010. Since 2010, the City has slowly begun to add jobs back into the community and that trend is expected to continue through this planning period as redevelopment efforts take shape and come to fruition. Throughout this planning process residents, commissioners and policy-makers have emphasized that the City should capitalize on the entrepreneurial attitudes of new residents. Repeatedly this process revealed a passion, interest and commitment of residents and stakeholders to renew, reimagine and reinvigorate the city center with new business uses that could benefit from new nearby residences. From local restaurants, cafes, start-up business/office spaces to larger specialty shops and services residents are eager to create a more dynamic and mixed-use environment in the community. This objective is consistent with regional trends provided new residences are also planned for so that vibrant, mixed-use areas are developed. At both a regional and national level, market trends suggest that creating experienced-based places with diverse services, work opportunities and retailers in an accessible location is most desirable for redevelopment. As described in subsequent chapters of this Plan, Brooklyn Center is uniquely positioned to capitalize on this trend because underdeveloped and undeveloped land is available with key regional adjacencies such as the new C-Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) which will open in 2019. The presence of key infrastructure, coupled with proximity to the major employment centers, provides an exceptional opportunity for the City to not only add new households to the region but to add new jobs and create a new identity for employment in the City. COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 1-111-10 More detail regarding the community’s roles and responsibilities as an Urban designated community can be found in Chapter 3: Land Use and Redevelopment. Some of the key highlights of the City’s role are as follows: • The City should plan for any redevelopment, or new development, to achieve average densities of no less than 10 dwellings per acre. • Targeted redevelopment should be considered at key transportation corridors, or where regional transit investments are known. • Focus should be placed on local infrastructure needs of current and future development in the community – including sidewalks, roadways, sewer, water and surface water management. Forecasted Growth To plan for the City’s future the Metropolitan Council provided forecasted population and household projections that the City is required to consider as it prepared this Plan update. As stated within Chapter 3, the City believes it may grow beyond what is identified within the 2015 System Statement given current redevelopment expectations but is generally within the range of what the Metropolitan Council has forecasted. As the City contemplates redevelopment it is important that the City considers the following: • Allow development that is consistent with this Comprehensive Plan, which includes revised household and population projections based on redevelopment plans. • Promote redevelopment of key areas that provide the greatest access to existing transportation and transit lines. • Consider redevelopment that incorporates sustainable and resilient infrastructure design standards to ensure adequate infrastructure is available to new areas. If the areas identified for change and growth are redeveloped there is the potential to add more than 2,200 new households to this area of the region. While this represents a small portion of the overall expected growth, it would be first time the City has added that number of households and population since it first experienced its development boom in the 1950s and 1960s. The expected change is why this Plan emphasizes thoughtful and integrated planning of the redevelopment areas to ensure that new developments are interconnected with existing neighborhoods and that as areas are reimagined that they are seamlessly integrated into the City’s existing fabric. Community Designations The Metropolitan council groups cities and communities with similar characteristics into Community Designations for the application of regional policies. The entire community of Brooklyn Center is designated as an Urban community. This designation acknowledges and recognizes that the City is fully developed but may include redevelopment opportunities, and has been primarily developed with a fairly compact development pattern. It is also a recognition of the City’s proximity to both Saint Paul and Minneapolis and is a nod to the dominant time period in which the community was developed. One of the primary objectives in establishing Community Designations, is to ensure that communities plan for development and corresponding infrastructure in a sustainable and fiscally responsible way that will support the objectives of the designation. (See Map 1-3. Community Designation). Map 1-3. Community Designation INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AVE N S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVDINTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F Community Designation Urban 0 1,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800Feet COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 1-131-12 Engagement Process An important component of this Plan update process is to solicit public input to ensure that the Plan accurately reflects the goals and objectives of the residents and stakeholders. This public engagement process was specifically tailored to this Plan development and included: • Meeting the public where they were – this included booths at both Holly Sunday and Earle Brown Days to solicit feedback from a broad cross-section of residents and stakeholders of the community. • Regular Planning Commission Meetings – the Planning Commission held regular monthly work sessions (open to the public) to guide the plan development process. • Joint work sessions of the Planning Commission and City Council – The joint work sessions allowed for both bodies to work together to develop the contents of this Plan. • On-line public comment surveys to ‘check the plan’ – this included online surveys to ‘check’ the contents of the draft Plan to ensure it responds to the aspirations of the community through this planning period. The intent of the public engagement process was to create opportunities for meaningful feedback and to gain consensus on the direction for the future of Brooklyn Center over this planning period. Local Planning Context & Objectives Guiding Plan Development In part, the City has prepared this Comprehensive Plan Update to fulfill the requirements of the Metropolitan Council; however, the City also viewed this process as an opportunity to further refine its goals and aspirations for the future of Brooklyn Center. 2040 Plan Update Objectives The following objectives were established to help guide the Plan update process: 1. Update the Comprehensive Plan to meet the Metropolitan Council’s requirements for compliance with the four regional systems, while tailoring the Plan to meet the City’s long-term goals and aspirations. 2. Simplify this Plan to more clearly define the City’s aspirations so that residents, stakeholders, developers and policy-makers understand the objectives of the community through this planning period. 3. Create dimension within the Land Use Plan through incorporation of new land use designations that are clear, concise, and more responsive. 4. Establish an appropriate mix of uses that balance market realities with the aspirations and vision of the community. 5. Create a Plan that is easy to use and understand. The Plan should be helpful to staff, residents, stakeholders and policy-makers. 6. Engage the public, commissions, staff and policy-makers throughout the process to help guide Plan development. COMMUNITY & PLANNING CONTEXT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 1-14 Plan Development & Changes from the 2030 Plan This 2040 Plan is a re-write of the previously adopted Plan, however, it is still informed by previous planning studies which served as a foundation to this effort. Some of the key highlights of this Plan are as follows: • This Plan embraces transit, and introduces new land use designation that emphasizes compact and walkable redevelopment that capitalizes on the new Bus Rapid Transit C-Line which is planned to open in 2019. • The ‘center city’ was expanded to not only address redevelopment of the former Brookdale site, but to encompass a ‘central spine’ that bisects the community along highway 100. The expanded area of consideration leads to increased opportunities for larger scale redevelopment with a greater mix of uses. • Current market trends and projections were used to help inform the types of land use changes identified within this Plan. Integration of housing within the City’s redevelopment efforts is identified as a critical component to success. This Plan carefully balances market dynamics with the goals and aspirations of the community. This Plan identifies implementation strategies and steps to reinforce resilient, and sustainable redevelopment plans that focus on a more compact, connected system of transit, trails, and open spaces in City’s identified redevelopment areas. The Chapters that follow are the culmination of efforts of the Planning Commission, stakeholder and resident feedback, staff and the City Council. This Plan is intended to serve as a guide for the community’s land use, redevelopment, housing and infrastructure planning through this planning period. The City acknowledges that the community relies on this Plan to understand where and how things may change and evolve in Brooklyn Center over the next decade, and where things are projected to stay the same. This Plan is intended to clearly describe to potential developers where the City is interested in redevelopment, and how those areas can be reimagined to redefine the image of Brooklyn Center for future generations. While this Plan makes every effort to lay out a path forward for the next 20 years, it is also intended to be a living document that should be reviewed, updated, and changed when necessary. DRAFT CHAPTER 2: Vision, Goals & Strategies INTERSTATE 94 H IG HWA Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AVE N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 51ST AVE N INTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H IG HWA Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetSize of Homesteaded Single Family Homes Finished Square Feet 0 - 1,019 1,019 - 1,196 1,196 - 1,462 1,462 - 1,948 1,948 - 3,323 Comprehensive Plan 2040 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-1 INTRODUCTION Since the 2030 Comprehensive Plan was adopted Brooklyn Center has experienced significant changes in nearly all aspects of the community. Once known as the “City with Brookdale Mall” the loss of the regional retail destination left a large area of underutilized and vacant land at the core of the community. Suddenly Brooklyn Center’s residents were left without a firm identity as the heart of the City no longer pulsed with the vibrancy it had for so many decades before. No one could have predicted how significantly and quickly retail trends would change, and how the rise of e-commerce and experience-based retail would result in less demand for physical bricks and mortar storefronts and large-scale malls. The swift change left Brooklyn Center in a state of flux, leaving a large area of the community ripe for redevelopment…but what would it become? The loss of the regional retail destination had a significant impact on Brooklyn Center, but it is not the only change happening in the community. Over the past decade the City has become the most diverse community in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Brooklyn Center’s location in the region has made it a highly desirable place for new families to locate, and the population is younger with more families and kids than in the county and neighboring cities. The City has remained one of the most affordable and accessible places to live in the metro area, despite skyrocketing real estate prices in the region. All of these factors impact the City. They play a role in how the community thinks about what types of retailers, offices, services, houses, transit, and parks, trails and open spaces are needed to support the current and changing demographics of the community. The evolving dynamics of Brooklyn Center reveal an opportunity for the City to plan for its future and to capitalize on its strengths. This Chapter is intended to serve as a guide for the City through this planning period. It includes a vision for the City’s future as adopted and established through previous planning efforts and is further refined and supported through a set of goals and strategies for each topic area contained within this Comprehensive Plan (Plan). Sprinkled throughout subsequent chapters of this Plan goals are restated in call-out boxes to correlate how specific sections support the goal statements as a reminder of the community’s aspirations. This Chapter serves as the roadmap for this planning period, and it is intended to help residents, stakeholders, business owners, and policy-makers bring the City’s plan to fruition. VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-32-2 GOALS & STRATEGIES The Vision and Mission Statements provide the framework and high-level direction from which supporting goals, strategies and policies can be derived to help bring this Plan to fruition. Having a clear Vision and Mission Statement was invaluable to this planning process because it allowed the effort to focus on developing a set of core goals and strategies that would support the Vision for the City’s future. The City assigned the Planning Commission as the Plan’s primary working group, and the Planning Commission was responsible for establishing a set of goals and strategies from which subsequent chapters of this Plan were derived. The first step in establishing a set of draft goals was a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) exercise that required the Planning Commission to identify what specific characteristics and qualities of the community they hoped would either be addressed, maintained or enhanced. The Planning Commission was then asked to prioritize their SWOT exercise to determine which characteristics and qualities rose to the level of aspirations and goals for this Plan. The results of the SWOT and prioritization were then turned into goal statements using specific action-oriented works with a defined meaning. The draft goal statements became the foundation of the Planning Commission’s discussion that addressed topics such as Community Identity and Character, Land Use and Redevelopment, Housing, Transportation, and Infrastructure. The goal statements and themes became the foundation from which feedback and information were collected throughout the Plan planning process. These topics were used to structure and guide focused discussions with other city commissions, city staff, on-line surveys, and at public events. After collecting feedback through public engagement efforts and working with the Planning Commission and city staff, a set of supporting strategies were developed based on the input received. BROOKLYN CENTER VISION 2040 The City of Brooklyn Center’s policy makers and leadership have engaged in several visioning and strategic planning initiatives over the past few years. The various efforts resulted in the development of a Vision and Mission Statement for the community, as well as a set of short- term Strategic Priorities. Rather than recreate the wheel, this Plan process validated that the Vision and Mission Statements continue to reflect the aspirations of the community. The adopted Strategic Priorities correlate to various components of this Plan and are highlighted and integrated into the relevant section of this Chapter. The purpose of restating the Strategic Priorities, even though they may be short-term, is to show how they are supported and enhanced by the goals and strategies developed through this process. It became clear through various meetings and public engagement events that the City’s efforts to establish a Vision and Mission Statement were successful, and that these statements continue to reflect the aspirations of the community. The City’s adopted Vision and Mission statements are restated below and serve as guide for this Plan. Vision Statement “We envision Brooklyn Center as a thriving, diverse community with a full range of housing, business, cultural and recreational offerings. It is a safe and inclusive place that people of all ages love to call home and visitors enjoy due to its convenient location and commitment to a healthy environment.” Mission Statement “The mission of the City of Brooklyn Center is to ensure an attractive, clean, safe, and inclusive community that enhances the quality of life for all people and preserves the public trust.” VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-52-4 The following goals and strategies are categorized by topic area, and generally correspond to the individual Chapters that are contained within this Plan. Preceding the goals and strategies, if applicable, are the City’s adopted short-term Strategic Priorities. While these statements are identified as ‘short-term’ in many cases the priority is relevant and applicable to the long-term goal and strategy statements. Each Chapter should support, build upon, and incorporate these goals and strategies into the Plan component and develop implementation steps that will help achieve the goals and strategies as identified. The intent of these statements is to provide a roadmap for development in the City; to be aspirational; and to create a framework for policy- makers, commissions, city staff, developers, landowners, businesses and residents. Intergovernmental & Community Relationship Goals Adopted Strategic Priority: Inclusive Community Engagement “In order to provide effective and appropriate services, we must clearly understand and respond to community needs.  We will consistently seek 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, responsive, deliberately inclusive, and culturally sensitive.” Intergovernmental & Community Relationship Goal 1: Identify opportunities to improve communication and engagement with the community’s residents, business owners and stakeholders. Strategies • Recognize that the City’s demographics are changing quickly, and it is important to adapt and change engagement and communication methods on a regular basis to meet the needs of residents and business owners. • Work to maintain the City’s communication materials in a variety of platforms with various languages that match the cultural needs of the community. The following goals and strategies are a culmination and synthesis of information collected through the various efforts to engage the public, the Planning Commission, other city commissions, policy-makers and staff. This Chapter is the core of the Plan and establishes the priorities and initiatives the City has identified as essential during this planning period. Given the importance of this Chapter to the Plan, it is critical that definitions for certain terms and words are universally understood by the user of this Plan. For purposes of this document, the following definition of a goal and a strategy are provided: Goal A general statement of community aspirations and desired objectives indicating broad social, economic, or physical conditions to which the community officially agrees to try to achieve in various ways, one of which is the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. Strategy An officially adopted course of action or position to implement the community goals. In addition to properly defining a “Goal” and a “Strategy”, the definition of the action word contained within the goal and strategy statements must also hold a common definition that assigns various roles, commitments, and responsibilities to the City. A glossary of these terms is found in Appendix B of this Plan. The ‘action’ words used in the following goal and strategy statements are assigned the following levels of financial commitment: No commitment of financial investment, staff resources & policy directives May include financial investment, staff resources & policy directives Commitment to financial investment (if needed), staff resources & policy directives Continue Endorse Reserve Recognize Promote Work Create Encourage Enhance Explore Maintain Identify Protect Provide Strengthen Support Sustain VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-72-6 Land Use & Redevelopment Goals Adopted Strategic Priority: Targeted Redevelopment “Redeveloping properties to the highest value and best use will accomplish our goals regarding housing, job creation, and growth of the City’s tax base.  We will appropriately prepare sites and provide the necessary supporting infrastructure investments to guide redevelopment of publicly- and privately-owned properties.” Land Use & Redevelopment Goal 1: Support the Future Land Use Plan through the update or creation of relevant and market-based small area plans, redevelopment plans, and the zoning ordinance. Strategies • Identify and prioritize key redevelopment areas and develop a work plan and potential schedule/timeline for each area. • Provide staff and consultant resources to prepare a comprehensive update to the City’s zoning ordinance to support the Planned Land Uses. • Protect the Future Land Use Plan through development of clear, concise and descriptive policy documents and initiatives that support the City’s long-term vision. Land Use & Redevelopment Goal 2: Continue to support a proactive, integrated approach to redevelopment that clearly defines the City’s objectives for specific areas and sites within the community. Strategies • Strengthen the City’s vision for key redevelopment areas through preparation of master plans and small area studies to ensure thoughtful and responsive development. • Encourage developers, staff, and stakeholders to think-big and creatively about redevelopment to create an interesting, vibrant, and innovative city center and surrounding neighborhoods. Intergovernmental & Community Relationship Goal 2: Strengthen opportunities to collaborate with adjacent municipalities, agencies and the County on planning, marketing, transportation and infrastructure initiatives that may impact the City. Strategies • Recognize the importance of the City’s participation within the region and the importance of planning across borders (i.e. regional transit and bikeway planning, economic development, access to job centers, etc.) • Encourage City staff to work with staff members in adjacent communities to identify opportunities to coordinate efforts that are mutually beneficial. Intergovernmental & Community Relationship Goal 3: Explore ways to collaborate with the school districts, non-profits and the for-profit sectors to engage the City’s youth so that they are invested in the community. Strategies • Strengthen the City’s relationship with the schools to better understand the needs of the youth in the community (i.e. better access to jobs, transit, bikeways, etc.) • Explore opportunities to involve the City’s youth on advisory boards, in planning initiatives and on other engagement events to encourage their participation and feedback to help shape the future of the City. • Create a consistent presence of the City and its available opportunities, services and facilities in local schools, community gathering spaces and areas where Brooklyn Center’s youth congregate. VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-92-8 Land Use & Redevelopment Goal 4: Enhance and maintain existing neighborhoods through proper land use designations and clear supportive zoning that makes reinvestment and rehabilitation easy for residents. Strategies • Create and maintain a cheat-sheet for residents that explains in plain language the permitting and regulatory process. Provide this in multiple languages. • Explore opportunities to engage and communicate with residents to learn about their needs and identify ways the City may help, either through education, information, or direct assistance. • Create a policy and ordinance that describes expectations for home- based businesses and establishes a permitting process to ensure compatibility with existing single-family uses. • Explore opportunities to utilize technology to make it easier and more convenient for residents to interact with the City. • Create zoning regulations that reflect the demands of the current single-family housing market. • Support and encourage development concepts that incorporate flexibility for space and programming that could be used for start-ups, small companies, pop-ups, and local markets that provide opportunities to promote the City’s diverse residents. • Explore opportunities to increase the mix of uses on the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor, increasing densities, identifying key nodes for the concentration of commercial uses and providing opportunities for new housing types. Land Use & Redevelopment Goal 3: Strengthen opportunities for high-quality redevelopment through establishing clear planning and regulatory documents. Strategies • Provide clear ordinances that permit uses consistent with the City’s vision and minimize the number of uses required to obtain special or conditional use permits. • Create new zoning and overlay districts that are concise, directive and use graphics (pictures and/or diagrams) to explain the City’s requirements. • Explore opportunities to streamline the development process and utilize Brooklyn Center’s customer focus and nimble approach as a competitive advantage. k k k 75th L o g a n 56th 58th 70th 76th A l d r i c h 6 6 t h 73rd Wilshire 694694 61st L i l a c J o h n M a rt i n H a l i f a x Mumford Y o r k 4 0 t h B r o o k l y n B e a r d R a m p P a l m e r L a k e Parkway Freeway Quail Summit 1 0 0 48th Nash R a m p64th 47th Ohenry R a m p 51st R a m p H a l if a x F r e m o n t 4 0 t h 65th D r e w F r a n c e R a m p 70th Ramp 53rd R a m p L a k e 1 0 0 1 0 0 R a m p 63rd 53rd West Broadway 70th L e e M a j o rNoble 54th Ramp T o l e d o S c o t t Bro o kdale C e nter S h i n g l e C r e e k Shingle Creek 94 94 71st A b b o t tVera C r u z 47th Unity L i l a c W e l c o m e R a m p X e r x e s R a m p O l i v e r J a m e s X e n i a 7 4 t h K n o x I r v i n g 49th 74th M o r g a n H u m b o l d t Y a t e s Camden T o l e d o 4t h 52nd 4 t h N o b l e 40th K n o x R a m p 65th 5 t h V e r a C r u z 42nd Thurber 2 5 2 Q u a i l 41st 44th U p t o n W a s h b u r n Y o r k F r a n c e 67th V i n c e n t 58th Z e n i t h B e a r d W i l l o w A b b o t t S ailor Meadowwood K y l e 46th Q u a i l 61st 45th 44th 70th R i v e r d a l e 67th 46th 67th 52nd S h e r i d a n 39th Aldrich U n it y M o r g a n 7 6 t h R u s s e l l 41st 67th Shi n g leCreek Lakebreeze 58th 42nd 57th Oliver 41st 40th 7 1 s t X e r x e s Paul 60th Q u e e n U p t o n 55th R o b b i n s 59th 41st L i l a c 48th 8 1 74th 47th 50th W ashington India n a B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r C h o w e n T w i n O a k 44th H u m b o l d t 10 L e e Fremont R a m p Grimes B ro o k d ale C e nt e r 39th F r e m o n t Orchard R a m p 40th 50th 74th 56th R a m p W e l c o m e 75th 57th R o b i n Ramp 69th E w i n g 57th 40th R a m p ScottScott Howe D r e w R ailroad P e r r y 68th R e g e n t 56th Ramp 59th 10 F r a n c e D u s h a r m e S c o t t 57th C o l f a x 46th 55th N e w t o n Logan Wilshire E m e r s o n F r e m o n t 46th V e r a C r u z 57th 9 4 Eckberg P e n n 43rd PalmerLake Xerxes R e g e n t V e r a C r u z H a l i f a x 4 0 1 /2 Eleanor R a m p Ramp 4 5 t h F r e m o n t T o l e d o 73rd Q u a i l Webber R e g e n t Z e n i t h 69th Hillsview Commodore 6 7 t h 3 9 1 /2 D u p o n t R a m p B e a r d 71st Lakebreeze T o l e d o E w i n g Ramp V i n c e n t Madalyn X e n i a 67th F r a n c e 591/2 Woodbine W e l c o m e Mildred 68th 491/2 S h o r e s A l d r i c h Ramp 50th Eleanor 68th 60th 72ndB r y a n t D r e w 50th 61st G i r a r d Violet 56th C a m d e n 51st 73rd 57th A d m i r a l A l d r i c h73rd E m e r s o n 59th 39th 62nd Y o r k 47th A l d r i c h 42nd 68th W e l c o m e L i l a c 66th Fairview 70th N o b l e G r i m e s S c o t t J u n e 44th Woodbine L ake 40th W e s t R i v e r R i v e r d a l e 41st 52nd Ramp 4 t h 72nd 50th 43rd Q u a i l Urban 41st 65th Q u a i l 65th 45th 41st W i l l o w 54th 41st 53rd 64th 43rd 70th 47th 51st 8 1 Dowling 71st K y l e 68th W e l c o m e 62nd 70th 7 2nd72nd L a k e 46 1/2 67th B r o o k v i e w 53rd 56th 72nd 45th 51st 72nd 52nd 46th 54th 68th A l d r i c h 52nd 61st 39th N e w t o n 42nd 40th 71st 60th 46th 60th H u m b o l d t R a m p F r e m o n t 66th 50th 64th 56th R a m p B e a r d I n d i a n a 38th D u p o n t 48th X e r x e s 38th H a l i f a x F r a n c e 10Ramp 74th Shingle Creek X e r x e s 391/2 L i l a c 4 2 1 /2 Bro o kly n Ramp E w i n g A b b o t t 4 3 r dToledo C a m d e n 67th 401/2 R a m p Z e n i t h 70th 66th CrystalAirport U p t o n 421/2 C h o w e n R a m p G r i m e s M a j o r U n i t y 39th A z e l i a 75th 38th P e r r y S c o t t G ri m e s L a k ela n d 7 0 t h A b b o t t R a m p Q u e e n Aldrich S h e r i d a n Im perial R a m p L a k ela n d Brooklyn 74th M a j o r 6 5 t h 43rd Lakeside R u s s e l l W a s h b u r n P e n n O l i v e r OsseoRoadFrontage P a r k e r D r e w Brooklyn P e r r y 50th A d m i r a l D r e wXenia N o ble Y a t e s O r c h a r d P e n nRussell Quail P e r r y E w i n g 53rd Shoreview 74th F r a n c e I n d ia n a T o l e d o S c o t t T o l e d o D r e w F a irfi e l d T w i n L a k e U n i t y R a m p Hubbard R a m p V i c t o r y K y l e H ubbard Shoreline 76th H u m b o l d t Ramp U n i t y M a j o r 70th Robin B r y a n t 73rd 74th74th 71st E m e r s o n P e r r y L o g a n Ramp 69th M a j o r B r y a n t C o l f a x X e r x e s D a l l a s Q u e e n 74th H u m b o l d t P e r r y R a m p Ramp 73rd 69th 55th N o rt h p o rt T h o m a s R am p B e a r d Y a t e s Bellvue Ponds James 49th Ramp L akela n d Brooklyn I n d i a n a 47th L i l a c R a m p I n d i a n a 73rd 7 1 s t 49th 74th IrvingJames U n i t y 73rd X e n i a E r i c o n P e r r y R ailroad 6 t h Q u a i l R a m p A l d r i c h Y o r k R a m p R a m p Halifax 67th T o l e d o S h a r i A n n L e e N o b l e L a k ela n d G i r a r d X e r x e s E w i n g S c o t t U p t o n P e r r y F r e m o n t P e r r y P e n n K n o x M i s s i s s i p p i K n o x 72nd R u s s e l l Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t K a t h r e n e Angeline O l i v e r C o l f a x 6 t h A l d r i c h C o l f a x 4 t h K y l e J a m e s G r i m e s G i r a r d C h o w e n O r c h a r d O r c h a r d E m e r s o n U n i t y I r v i n g L o g a n Q u a i l H a l i f a x P e r r y A l d r i c h N e w t o n L y n d a l e A l d r i c h O l i v e r M o r g a n B r y a n t Winchester K n o x X e r x e s 66th M o r g a n V i n c e n t E w i n g Q u a i l M a j o r L o g a n Y a t e s W a s h b u r n M a j o r N e w t o n X e r x e s T h o m a s S h e r i d a n D r e w Q u a i l T o l e d o O r c h a r d G r e a t V i e w Emilie H u m b o l d t R i v e r w o o d E w i n g C a m d e n R e g e n t C o l f a x J u n e C o l f a x R e g e n t X e n i a 4 t h 48th B e a r d L akela n d U n i t y Lakeside L a k e C u r v e I r v i n g 54th J o s e p h i n e W e l c o m e B e a r d Dupont A b b o t t 47th Z a n e Byron F r e m o n t G r i m e s H u m b o l d t C r y s t a l L a k e L e e Northway F r a n c e 45th R u s s e l l W a s h b u r n V i n c e n t U p t o n Q u e e n S h e r i d a n 53rd Lakeview T h o m a s P e n n I s l e m o u n t 3 7 t h Lakeland E m e r s o n O l i v e r N e w t o n L o g a n M o r g a n M o r g a n K n o x J a m e s I r v i n g 6 6 t h G i r a r d S o o 65th 57th Lakeland C h o w e n Bernard S c o t t Corvallis 48th Poe P e n n U n i t y 56th Z e n i t hDrew U p t o n C h o w e n Burquest O r c h a r d R i v e r d a l e Boulder62nd 46th Y o r k C a m d e n Lilac Lakeland VillageCreek G i r a r d G i r a r d J u d y 51st Osseo Oak H a lif a x Ramp P e r r y Q u a i l B r o o kl y n M a r l i n L e e Lawrence Northway G r i m e s 73rd E a r l e B r o w n R a m p Abbott D a l l a s Amy72ndWoodbine 51st 6 3 r d 94 B r o o k ly n O r c h a r d J u n e I n d i a n a D r e w B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e P e r r y Q u a i l R e g e n t H a l i f a x V i n c e n t 1 st C a m d e n 68th 4 t h E w i n g E m e r s o n R a m p L i l a c 74 1/2 R a m p R e g e n t N o b l e M o r g a n G i r a r d Ramp V e r a C r u z J a m e s Lakeland L e e L y n d a l e L y n d a l e 67thRamp Joyce Janet D r e w E a s t L y n d a l e 62nd 66th Quarles J a m e s R a m p R a m p Winchester R a m p R a m p 72nd R a m p Woodbine 9 4 T w i n L a k e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c V i c t o r y M e m o r i a l Ramp 2 5 2 S c o t t Palmer T w i n Ryan T w i n C r y s t a l M i s s i s s i p p i T w i n Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn Center Minneapolis BrooklynPark Crystal B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y C r y s t a l R o b b i n s d a l e F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s R o b b i n s d a l e M i n n e a p o l i s 0 1,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetF Land Use Designations 2040 Planned Land Use LDR MDR HDR C Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Neighborhood Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Business Mixed Use Industrial/Utility o oo Airport PSP/Institutional Parks, Recreation, Open Space ROW RR ROW Brooklyn Blvd Overlay District k Planned C-Line Transit Stops 94 94 252 100 100 152 152 Potential Area of Change 1/4-mile VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-112-10 Land Use & Redevelopment Goal 7: Explore opportunities to create unified branding, connections, and visual cues to reinforce Brooklyn Center’s identity and relationship to existing neighborhoods. Strategies • Create a city-wide beautification strategy that includes a process for creating community identity and pride through the use of public art. • Work to develop a comprehensive list of design guidelines for residents, developers and stakeholders that provide a menu of Brooklyn Center “branding’ elements that can be incorporated into new and existing developments and neighborhoods. • Strengthen the City’s commitment to its designation as a Tree City USA by incorporating more trees and landscaping at the City’s main gateways and entrances. • Encourage residents, developers, and other stakeholders to use city authorized branding elements in marketing materials, streetscape improvements, and design elements. • Identify key pedestrian, bikeway, auto and transit corridors that should incorporate consistent branding elements and landscape themes. • Promote Brooklyn Center’s diversity through the development of flexible spaces, opportunities for pop-ups and other small business incubators. Land Use & Redevelopment Goal 8: Enhance the City’s economic position in the region through easy to navigate processes and creative land use designations. Strategies • Explore ways to improve the City’s ordinances so that the entitlement process is clear and easy to navigate. • Identify opportunities throughout the region to promote the City’s redevelopment areas as a great place for new businesses to locate (i.e. DEED, Hennepin County Business Associations, Chamber of Commerce, etc.) Land Use & Redevelopment Goal 5: Recognize that many areas in the community are aging and may require reinvestment, redevelopment, or reimagining and that all scales and sizes of opportunity have merit to further support the community’s future. Strategies • Explore opportunities to create neighborhood nodes that are integrated and support the needs of residents and encourage a more walkable community. • Identify opportunities and tools (that may include financial resources) that assist residents with regular maintenance, upkeep, and/or remodeling so that their homes meet their needs and are places they want to stay and contribute to a more stable neighborhood. • Continue to evaluate how redevelopment can further enhance and support the sustainability of individual properties, neighborhoods and the larger community. Land Use & Redevelopment Goal 6: Provide clear direction to developers, property owners, and residents about the City’s desires for each redevelopment area through this Plan, as well as small area studies, master plans and the zoning ordinance. Strategies • Support redevelopment initiatives through a coordinated Request for Proposal (RFP) process to solicit interest and responses from developers for city-owned properties. • Promote the City’s vision for each redevelopment area through various means including on-line, print, and media. • Explore opportunities to encourage redevelopment through site assembly, master planning, pre-development, and land preparation. VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-132-12 Housing & Neighborhood Goal 2: Identify ways to match Brooklyn Center’s housing with the City’s changing demographics. Strategies • Identify and inventory the City’s existing rental housing stock to understand the rental unit-mix and unit-type to determine where gaps in the supply exist. • Work to incorporate increased diversity of units within new redevelopment areas from micro-apartments to three- and four- bedroom units. • Encourage property owners to reinvest in existing properties to maintain owner-occupied and renter-occupied units to create a more sustainable and stable housing stock. • Strengthen outreach efforts to understand what housing needs exist for current and prospective Brooklyn Center residents. Housing & Neighborhood Goal 3: Explore opportunities to improve the City’s housing policies and ordinances to make them more responsive to current and future residents. Strategies • Identify and review existing housing policies to ensure that they support the needs of current Brooklyn Center residents. • Work with existing owners and renters to understand what challenges exist within current permitting and regulatory processes. • Enhance existing strategies and policies to better meet the needs of current and prospective residents. Housing & Neighborhood Goals Adopted Strategic Priority: Safe, Secure, and Stable Community “For residents and visitors to fully appreciate and enjoy a great quality of life, it is essential that all neighborhoods are safe, secure, and stable.  We will assure compliance with neighborhood condition and building safety standards, provide proactive and responsive public safety protection, wise stewardship of City resources and policies that promote safety, security, and a lasting stable environment.” Housing & Neighborhood Goal 1: Promote a diverse housing stock that provides safe, stable, and accessible housing options to all of Brooklyn Center’s residents. Strategies • Protect existing naturally occurring affordable housing options within the City through supportive land use designations and associated policies. • Explore opportunities within multi-family redevelopment areas to include market-rate and affordable housing options within each project. • Strengthen existing neighborhoods through focused efforts to assist with maintenance and preservation of the housing stock. • Continue to enforce the rental licensing program and update and refine applicable ordinances and processes to ensure the program supports the needs of local residents. VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-152-14 Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability Goals Adopted Strategic Priority: Enhanced Community Image “Our ability to attract and retain residents and businesses is influenced by the perception of the City. We will take specific actions to assure that Brooklyn Center is recognized by residents, businesses, stakeholders, and visitors as a high quality, attractive, and safe community.” Adopted Strategic Priority: Resident Economic Stability “The economic stability of residents is essential to vibrant neighborhoods and to retail, restaurant, and business growth.  We will lead by supporting collaborative efforts of education, business, and government sectors to improve income opportunities for residents.” Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability Goal 1: Promote Brooklyn Center as an exceptional place for businesses, visitors and residents, both existing and new, because of its locational advantage and accessibility within the region. Strategies • Continue to refine and enhance the City’s recent print and online rebranding efforts. • Strengthen the City’s identity through proactive communications that reach the larger region (e.g. develop marketing collateral to send to DEED, professional associations, press releases, etc.) • Support the development of a task force or working group of community stakeholders to provide on-going perspectives and feedback to improve and help guide the City’s marketing and branding initiatives. • Encourage further enhancement of the public realm through the development of a public art and beautification master plan with Forecast for Public Art that reflects the community, its residents and businesses. Housing & Neighborhood Goal 4: Maintain the existing housing stock in primarily single-family neighborhoods through proper ordinances, incentive programs and enforcement. Strategies • Protect existing neighborhoods through the refinement of existing ordinances to ensure compatible uses are permitted, or conditionally permitted. • Work with existing homeowners and renters to understand current challenges within existing neighborhoods. • Endorse the update of existing ordinances and regulations to match and address the challenges identified by residents to make neighborhoods more accessible, stable and sustainable long-term Housing & Neighborhood Goal 5: Explore opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas that promote safe, secure and economically diverse neighborhoods. Strategies • Recognize the importance of incorporating and integrating protected affordable housing in new projects. • Encourage developers to incorporate protected affordable housing units within projects through establishing incentives such as density bonuses or other tools. • Strengthen existing policies to promote the diversity of housing choices within a single project, and throughout all redevelopment areas. VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-172-16 Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability Goal 3: Explore meaningful ways to represent the community’s diversity through the City’s branding, marketing and visual communications. Strategies • Enhance City issued and sponsored communications by providing materials translated in multiple languages that are tailored to Brooklyn Center’s population. • Create a working group or task force with diverse representation to provide feedback and suggestions on major branding and marketing efforts. • Identify key marketing and branding initiatives, particularly of redevelopment areas, and engage Brooklyn Center’s residents and business owners on-line to solicit feedback early and often throughout development projects. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability Goal 4: Encourage and promote reinvestment in the City’s infrastructure including roadways, streetscapes, trails and utilities to signal Brooklyn Center’s commitment to the long-term success of its residents and businesses. Strategies • Maintain the City’s existing infrastructure through appropriate budgeting through the City’s Capital Improvement Plan process. • Identity areas that could be revitalized through targeted infrastructure reinvestment and include relevant inventory and analysis in applicable small area plans, redevelopment studies, etc. • Work to develop a comprehensive wayfinding and signage system for bikeways and trails throughout the City. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability Goal 2: Support the development of sustainable, resilient, and accessible neighborhoods in the city center that reinforce the City’s commitment to its diverse residents, neighborhoods, and businesses. Strategies • Promote redevelopment of the former regional retail center city site as a Transit Oriented Development site that plans for a mix of uses including diverse housing types. • Create a walkable and connected street, sidewalk and bikeway system throughout the city center that connects to surrounding neighborhoods. • Recognize the limitations of existing structures and land uses and allow for the reimagining and intensification of uses to further development of a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) city center. • Encourage developers to incorporate innovative and sustainable site design elements that reintroduces and reestablishes green space in the city center and adjacent redevelopment areas. • Identify opportunities to incorporate green infrastructure into existing and redevelopment areas in all types of development. • Provide incentives for redevelopment that incorporates housing at all levels of affordability from affordable to high-end market rate units, within a single project when feasible. • Promote the city center as a community gathering space with pop-up shops, open air markets, and flexible space to support local businesses. VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-192-18 Parks, Trails, & Open Space Goal 2: Encourage residents and stakeholders to participate in the park and recreation system planning process. Strategies • Continue to utilize a City Council appointed citizen Park and Recreation Commission that advises the Council on the park system and environmental planning initiatives in the community. • Encourage neighborhood groups to participate in the planning of all major park improvements. Parks, Trails, & Open Space Goal 3: Explore ways to incorporate design and preservation standards into the City’s ordinances and policies to improve and maintain a high-quality system. Strategies • Continue to explore ways to incorporate and plan for innovative park and recreation development as the system is maintained or expanded. • Maintain a classification system for the parks, trails and open spaces in the community to match needs and programming with appropriate park typologies. • Continue to design system improvements that balance function and aesthetics with the conservation of natural resource areas. • Protect surface water resources in parks, such as wetlands, for habitat and wildlife corridors where appropriate. • Explore ways to re-vegetate the opens space areas owned by the City where active recreational improvements have not been planned. • Encourage creative park design to develop a dynamic and diverse system. • Identify ways to use park design as a neighborhood improvement theme, or as a way to complement redevelopment. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability Goal 5: Recognize the opportunity and value of Brooklyn Center’s changing demographics and entrepreneurial attitudes to create an identity that embraces diversity as part of the City’s future. Strategies • Work to understand the needs of Brooklyn Center’s population for office, commercial, restaurant, retail and multi-use spaces. • Identify opportunities within redevelopment areas that could fulfill the needs of Brooklyn Center’s entrepreneurs and small business owners. Parks, Trails, & Open Space Goals Parks, Trails, & Open Space Goal 1: Provide a park and recreation system that is based on the needs of the City’s residents and stakeholders. Strategies • Enhance and maintain a mix of facilities throughout the City’s park and recreation system that is accessible to all ages and abilities. • Identify gaps within the City’s system and plan for improvements to match resident and stakeholder needs. • Explore opportunities to partner with local school districts and the private sector to improve, and in some areas complete, the park and recreation system. • Support the continued use of citizen surveys and interviews to understand the effectiveness of existing facilities and, programs and system deficiencies. • Maintain the system through prioritizing the highest-priority improvements which are those that address health or safety concerns, reduce maintenance costs, or address overall system deficiencies. • Maintain and improve the system on a regular and continuous basis through the operating budget and the Capital Improvements Program to avoid deferred maintenance of the system. VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-212-20 Transportation, Transit, Bikeways & Walkability Goals Adopted Strategic Priority: Key Transportation Investments “Proactively maintaining an efficient and effective infrastructure will meet the high level of community expectations.  We will plan for and invest in critical infrastructure improvements that enhance safety, improve life quality, and support opportunities for redevelopment, while sustaining the natural environment.”   Transportation, Transit, Bikeways & Walkability Goal 1: Provide a safe network of roadways, bikeways and pedestrian ways that connect residents in the City and to the larger region. Strategies • Continue to budget for needed improvements to the City’s transportation network through the Capital Improvement Plan process. • Support new roadway designs in redevelopment areas that incorporate bikeways and pedestrian ways, and that visually connect to transit stops and stations. • Work to understand the transportation needs of the City’s residents and match scheduled improvements to help fill identified gaps. • Create a plan to work with Metro Transit on a more balanced and equitable transit market area that matches the needs of residents. Parks, Trails, & Open Space Goal 4: Support efforts to maximize the use and accessibility of the system by local residents. • Identify ways to improve access to, signage for, and information about Central Park to drive increased awareness about the facility. • Create a connected system through bicycle/pedestrian trails and a collector sidewalk system to ensure the accessibility of the City’s parks. Volunteers and service organizations in the community will be afforded opportunities for service in the development and maintenance of the park and recreation system. • Promote the Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area and its park as an opportunity for further development and use in the community. • Provide an identification system of all park areas, facilities and programs that is consistent, functional and creative. • Identify locations to install signage, kiosks, and other forms of communication that establish an identity for the system and provides information about the system to the user. • There will be an ongoing information and education process to make residents knowledgeable about and aware of park and recreation facilities and programs. VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 VISION, GOALS & STRATEGIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2-232-22 Infrastructure & Utilities Goals Infrastructure & Utilities Goal 1: Provide adequate infrastructure including sewer, water, and facilities to serve existing residents and redevelopment areas. Strategies • Support redevelopment consistent with the Future Land Use Plan, Transportation and Transit Plan so that infrastructure is appropriately sized and planned for based on anticipated development patterns. • Sustain current city staff’s efforts to plan for and study needed improvements, as well as staying current with best practices and innovation. Infrastructure & Utilities Goal 2: Maintain the level of city services to existing neighborhoods and plan for improvements through appropriate capital expenditures. Strategies • Work with existing neighborhoods and community liaisons to plan for any needed improvements and where applicable, incorporate such improvements in the City’s Capital Improvement Plan. • Sustain development patterns consistent with the Future Land Use Plan to ensure appropriately designed and planned infrastructure. Infrastructure & Utilities Goal 3: Support opportunities to create resilience within the City’s infrastructure as redevelopment or reconstruction activities occur. Strategies • Explore and identify opportunities to incorporate best management practices or innovative practices in the city’s ordinances and policies to better respond to natural disasters and environmental degradation. • Strengthen existing infrastructure through incorporating innovative methods for system management and maintenance in conjunction with traditional engineering methodology. Transportation, Transit, Bikeways & Walkability Goal 2: Encourage residents to chose alternate transportation modes (other than automobile) by enhancing access to bikeways, transit, and pedestrian networks. Strategies • Enhance existing ordinances, and incorporate requirements into new zoning districts that make pedestrian and bike access more efficient (e.g. bike parking requirements, awnings, pedestrian shelters, etc.) • Work with Metro Transit to identity potential improvements to the transit station, bus stops and bus shelters that could improve the rider experience. • Explore ways to improve wayfinding through visual cues to make bike routes, walkways, and transit stops clearer to users. Transportation, Transit, Bikeways & Walkability Goal 3: Support the City’s commitment to creating a Complete Street Network in existing and redevelopment areas. Strategies • Identify opportunities to connect the existing bikeway and pedestrian network through redevelopment areas and a condition of development approval to incorporate prioritized connections. • Work to update necessary ordinances or policies within the City’s zoning ordinance and other official controls to support the development of a Complete Street Network. This page is blank. DRAFT CHAPTER 3: Land Use & Redevelopment Comprehensive Plan 2040 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-1 INTRODUCTION The City of Brooklyn Center is at a pivotal time in its history and is faced with the unique opportunity to reimagine and redefine its land use and development patterns for generations to come. For many decades the community’s land use and development was planned around a “core” retail area that served not only the local community but the greater region. Emanating out from the retail center were pockets of multi-family housing that transitioned quickly into single-family neighborhoods. Residents in those neighborhoods were offered the best of both worlds – they were connected to major freeways and highways with efficient routes to job centers - and once they were home they didn’t have to leave because every shop, restaurant or service they could ever need could be found in the bustling city center. Fast forward to the mid-2000s and change began. Slowly, or what may have felt rapid for some residents, the City’s “center” or “core” began to lose its share of the regional retail and service market place. As nearby communities increasingly welcomed new retailers, restaurants and service providers into their developing areas, Brooklyn Center began to see stores closing leading to the eventual end of the Brookdale Mall. While all of these changes were happening in the City’s “core” the change affected nearly 300-acres of the community, or nearly 6% of the City’s total land area. Exacerbating the loss of actual users and businesses was the concurrent loss of identity and image the community had established so many decades ago. This evolution in the City’s land use and development patterns affects the entire community, even if it the truly ‘vacant’ area is found only within its core. The impact can be seen in both multi-family and single-family neighborhoods, in the schools, parks, transportation, and public facilities. At its simplest level it was, and is, the ‘Center’ of the City. Residents, new and old, continue to identify the vacant and underutilized land in the City Center as an important area to ‘get right’, and to revitalize and reinvigorate. The success of this area will influence and impact the surrounding land uses, neighborhoods, and community and lead to a more sustainable and vibrant community long-term. LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-33-2 PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND The purpose of this Chapter is to establish and guide land use and redevelopment over this planning period. The intent is to create a clear, concise and responsive Future Land Use Plan that describes the City’s aspirations for the future. The specific details of zoning, small area plans, and other details are not contained within this Chapter but instead will be developed as implementation tools to bring this Plan to fruition. Though this Chapter does not describe individual properties or plans for specific areas, it clearly, and descriptively, defines the vision for each land use designation. This definition and policy will serve as the City’s guide or ‘brand’ for the future of its neighborhoods, redevelopment areas, business parks, offices, industrial areas, parks, trails and natural resource areas for the future. This Chapter was prepared with the help of the City’s residents, staff, commissions and policy-makers. It is a reflection and response to feedback and input heard throughout the Plan development process and should be thoughtfully considered and evaluated as redevelopment progresses throughout the community. In the following sections the existing land use, future land use and redevelopment focus areas are described, and corresponding maps are provided. Some of the more substantial changes in this Plan are discussed in subsequent sections to highlight the areas of this Plan that were intentionally updated to better reflect changes in Brooklyn Center, and in some cases to better respond to current and projected market conditions. As with any policy document this Chapter should be reviewed and contemplated often and should be thought of as a living document – it is important to use the Plan so it remains relevant. Changes in Land Use & Redevelopment Chapter from the 2030 Plan As a mostly-developed community much of the City’s existing land use pattern is anticipated to remain the same. The core of existing single-family neighborhoods will be maintained, with changes only projected to occur at specific neighborhood nodes or along edges, where the edges are adjacent to major roadways or other physical characteristics. However, though a large percentage of the City’s land is projected to remain largely unchanged, there are pockets of vacant, underdeveloped and redevelopment areas that are guided for change within this Plan (in a way similar to the 2030 Plan). The “Center City” was guided for change in the 2030 Plan, but this Plan contemplates a more diverse land use pattern and focus on housing in the redeveloping areas – which is different from what was contemplated in the last planning period. 2040 Land Use & Redevelopment Goals »Support the Future Land Use Plan through the update or creation of relevant and market-based small area plans, redevelopment plans, and the zoning ordinance. »Continue to support a proactive, integrated approach to redevelopment that clearly defines the City’s objectives for specific areas and sites within the community. »Strengthen opportunities for high-quality redevelopment through establishing clear planning and regulatory documents. »Enhance and maintain existing neighborhoods through proper land use designations and clear supportive zoning that makes reinvestment and rehabilitation easy for residents. »Recognize that many areas in the community are aging and may require reinvestment, redevelopment, or reimagining and that all scales and sizes of opportunity have merit to further support the community’s future. »Provide clear direction to developers, property owners, and residents about the City’s desires for each redevelopment area through this 2040 Plan, as well as small area studies, master plans and the zoning ordinance. * Supporting Strategies found in Chapter 2: Vision, Goals & Strategies LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-53-4 The following summary is provided to identify the substantive changes from the 2030 Plan, and to introduce new concepts: Rethinking the “Core” and Reorganizing Around Access The City has regularly studied and contemplated how to redevelop and reimagine its core hoping to bring back the vitality and vibrancy that once defined the community. Many studies and plans have been completed and those ideas and strategies will continue to be influential as the area redevelops. Building on previous efforts, this Plan introduces the idea of transit and accessibility as an overarching way to organize and guide land uses and redevelopment of the area. Though not a significant shift in thinking at the policy level, it does represent a subtle change in how new land uses and redevelopment might incorporate and respond to accessibility and transit as a central physical and design element in any development or redevelopment plan. Transit and accessibility has always been a consideration of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, but it has not served as a physical organizing feature of the Land Use Plan. Previous efforts simply addressed transit and mode choice such as walking or biking as part of its Transportation Chapter, but current trends suggest that transit and mode choice are one of the principal components of a desirable, amenity rich community. The City has the opportunity to capitalize on this trend given its current transit system and the availability of redevelopment land. The planned transit improvements in the community include the new C-Line Bus Rapid Transit that is scheduled to be operational in 2019, the potential D-Line BRT, coupled with the Opportunity Site, Shingle Creek and nearby redevelopment opportunities. This means the City can emphasize the importance of accessibility potentially resulting in a highly desirable new mixed-use neighborhood – right in the heart of the City. Emphasizing Competitiveness within the Region Through much of this planning process, residents, stakeholders, commissioners and policy makers repeatedly emphasized the desire to regain Brooklyn Center’s competitive edge in the market-place as a desirable and highly accessible community for residents and businesses alike. The desire to become a central player in the region once again and to be recognized as a great place to do business is supported through the City’s efforts within this Land Use Plan to be more flexible within its land use designations. This Chapter emphasizes an integrated land use and development approach to better match current expectations within the market-place for integrated, experience-based places where people can live, work, recreate, socialize and engage all within a compact walkable and interesting place. Future Land Use Plan – Land Use Designations are Consolidated This Plan consolidates the total number of Future Land Designations, which is intentional and purposeful in an effort to encourage more flexibility within the community. The Future Land Use Plan should be a guide that describes to the residents, business owners, developers and policy-makers the long-term goals and aspirations for land uses and development areas, rather than on a site-by-site basis. Site specific details should be contained in supporting, and consistent, documents such as Small Area Plans, Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Ordinance and other official controls. This Plan should function at the level of detail that it should – to guide the City’s future land use and development. Future Land Use Plan – New Designations are Added Even though this Plan consolidates the land use designations, it also introduces three new land use designation concepts that are focused on creating mixed-use, vibrant spaces in the community. These new designations are primarily associated with areas planned for redevelopment in the community. The purpose of creating the mixed-use designations is to encourage a more diverse, integrated and interesting land use pattern in the community in all areas – from residential enclaves to industrial parks. Existing Land Use and Future Land Use are Separated Though it may seem minor, separating the Existing Land Use (ELU) from the Future Land Use Plan (FLU) is an important update to this Chapter. Creating this distinction allows the City to monitor and follow its progress over this planning period. The ELU is a snapshot in time, it describes how the City’s land is being used today. It’s not a judgment of what it should be, it’s what is actually happening. The FLU is a representation of what the City hopes for, or what it’s planning for in the future. Because the two maps, and uses, are so different it is important to separate them so that the City can see its progress over time. The ELU in all likelihood, should look more like the FLU in 10-years, and that is a strong visual representation of the success and implementation of this Plan. LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-73-6 Forecasts As described in Chapter 1: Community & Planning Context the City is required to plan for its future land use pattern and development opportunities consistent with the Metropolitan Council’s projections and community designation which is provided for within the 2015 System Statement. The City’s Community Designation is “Urban,” and Thrive MSP 2040 identifies the following Community Role for orderly and efficient land use as: • Plan for forecasted population and household growth at average densities of at least 10 units per acre for new development and redevelopment. Target opportunities for more intensive development near regional transit investments at densities and in a manner articulated in the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan. • Identify areas for redevelopment, particularly areas that are well-served by transportation options and nearby amenities and that contribute to better proximity between jobs and housing. • In collaboration with other regional partners, lead major redevelopment efforts. • Lead detailed land use planning efforts around regional transit stations and other regional investments. • Plan for and program local infrastructure needs (for example, roads, sidewalks, sewer, water, and surface water), including those needed for future growth and to implement the local comprehensive plan. • Recognize opportunities for urban agriculture, and small-scale food production. The Metropolitan Council’s population, household and employment forecasts for the 2040 Plan as shown in the 2015 System Statement are provided in the following table: Table 3-1. Metropolitan Council Forecasts Forecast Year Population Households Employment201030,104 10,756 11,001 2020 31,400 11,300 13,000203033,000 12,300 13,800204035,400 13,300 14,600 Source: 2015 Metropolitan Council System Statement for Brooklyn Center As demonstrated in Table 3-1, the Metropolitan Council projects that the City will add nearly 2,000 new households to the community between 2020 and 2040. This is a significant increase in the number of households, an increase that has not occurred since many of its neighborhoods were initially developed between the 1950s to 1970s. The Metropolitan Council makes its projection based on several factors, but evaluates and considers characteristics such as proximity and location within the region, available land for development and/or redevelopment, current and expected market trends and proximity to transit and planned transit improvements. All of these factors considered collectively make Brooklyn Center a highly desirable place for people to want to locate and move to, provided new housing options become available. A key factor in this equation is the availability of land, and the City has a large, contiguous area of land available known as the “Center City” which is either vacant or underdeveloped which makes it a prime area for redevelopment. As shown and described in subsequent sections, the City is planning for the additional households to primarily located within these redevelopment areas, and if developed occurs at the densities projected and guided within this Plan, the City has the potential to add between 1,890 and 2,850 households by 2040. In the subsequent Future Land Use section of this Chapter specific areas are identified that are planned for and may be available for redevelopment in this planning period. Even though the City is supportive and planning for redevelopment it also possible that some of these areas will not redevelop within this planning period. Additionally, there are known development plans for a portion of the redevelopment areas that would result in an increase in households, but may fall short of the forecast. The calculations in the following sections demonstrate that the majority of forecasted growth is anticipated to occur within the major redevelopment areas guided primarily as Transit Oriented Development (TOD) and Commercial Mixed-Use. Some commercial and retail development has occurred in these areas within the last 10-years, and those areas are not likely to redevelop within this planning period. Because of these conditions, the City believes there is likely a range of the number of potential households that could be added, which are generally consistent with the Metropolitan Council’s System Statement forecasts. LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-93-8 EXISTING LAND USE Before the City can plan for its future, it must first understand how the existing land use and development pattern shapes the community. The City has diverse land uses but has a fairly organized land use pattern. The ‘core’ or ‘spine’ of the community west of Highway 100 was the retail core of the City and was once the home of Brookdale Mall, a regional indoor mall that served the northwest metropolitan area. After slow evolution, some new businesses and retailers have emerged, and some redevelopment activities continue to occur in the area. As shown on Map 3-1. Generalized Existing Land Use, these areas continue to be used for retail and service uses, but much of the land is now vacant or underutilized. Transitioning from the core, single-family neighborhoods dominate the residential landscape which are served by integrated public facilities, schools, and parks. Small pockets of multi- family housing can be found in nearly all areas of the community, with some concentration of higher-density found along major roadways surrounding commercial, light industrial and business areas. Generally, the City’s existing land use pattern is reflective of a suburban development pattern that was auto-centric and relied on the retail/service core for many decades. Understanding this pattern is an important part of the plan development process because it provides a foundation and baseline from which the City can plan for a more sustainable, accessible future – it helps to define the places to preserve and protect, and identify areas that have the opportunity to shape the community’s future. The Map 3-1 helps to visually describe where incompatible land uses may exist, and where patterns may benefit from interruption or new uses. Table 3-2 describes the acreages of existing uses and suggests what types of land uses may be deficient or needed over the next planning period. oooo oo oo 75th 48th L o g a n 1 0 0 47th 56th 58th H a l i f a x Wilshire 70th R a m p 76th A l d r i c h 6 6 t h 73rd T w i n L a k e 694694 61st L i l a c J o h n M a r ti n H a l i f a x Mumford Y ork 4 0 t h B r o o k l y n B e a r d R a m p P a l m e r L a k e Parkway Freeway Quail Summit W e s t R i v e r 1 0 0 48th Nash 38th R a m p64th 47th Ohenry R a m p 51st R a m p H alif ax 40th F r e m o n t 65th D r e w F r a n c e R a m p 70th Ramp 53rd Dowling R a m p Lake R a m p 53rd 56th 56th R a m p 70th 1 0 0 36th 57th 54th Ramp 58th S c o t t Brookdale C e nter S h i n g l e C r e e k Shingle Creek 9494 71st A b b o t t 47th 4 t h Unity L i l a c 38th R a m p R a m p O l i v e r J a m e s K n o x I r v i n g 49th 74th Y a t e s 3 7 t h Camden T o l e d o 4th52nd 4 t h N o b l e 40th K n o x Ra mp 65th 5 t h V e r a C r u z 42nd M a j o r Thurber 2 5 2 Q u a il 41st 44th U p t o n W a s h b u r n Y o r k F r a n c e 67th V i n c e n t 58th Z e n i t h B e a r d W i l l o w S ailor A b b o t t R a m p Meadowwood K y l e Q u a i l 61st 70th 67th 46th 67th 52nd S h e r i d a n 39th Aldrich U n it y M o r g a n 7 6 t h R u s s e l l 41st 67th Lakeside Sh i n gleCreek Lakebreeze 58th 42nd 57th 63rd Oliver 40th 7 1 s t X e r x e s Paul 60th Q u e e n U p t o n 55th R o b b i n s 4 1 s t Corvallis 59th 41st L i l a c 8 1 74th 50th B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r C h o w e n T w i n O a k 44th H u m b o l d t 2 n d 10 L e e 3 r d Ra m p Grimes Br o o k d ale C e nter 39th F r e m o n t Orchard 40th 50th 74th 56th Ra m p W e l c o m e 75th V e r a C r u z 57th X e n i a R o b i n Ramp 69th E w i n g 57th R a m p ScottScott R a m p Howe D r e w Railroad P e r r y R e g e n t 46th 37th Ramp 59th 10 F r a n c e 45th D u s h a r m e S c o t t C o l f a x 46th 3 9 t h 55th N e w t o n Logan Wilshire F r e m o n t 46th V e r a C r u z 57th 9 4 Eckberg P e n n 43rd PalmerLake H u m b o l d t Xerxes V e r a C r u z H a l i f a x Eleanor R a m p C o l f a x 4 5 t h F r e m o n t X e r x e s T o l e d o 73rd Q u a i l Webber R e g e n t Z e n it h 69th Commodore 6 7 t h D u p o n t R a m p B e a r d 71st Lakebreeze T o l e d o E w i n g Ramp V i n c e n t Madalyn X e n i a 67th F r a n c e 591/2 Woodbine W e l c o m e Mildred 68th 491/2 S h o r e s A l d r i c h Ramp 50th Eleanor 68th 60th 72ndB r y a nt D r e w 50th 61st G i r a r d Violet 56th C a m d e n 51st 73rd 57th R a m p A d m i r a l A l d r i c h73rd E m e r s o n 59th 39th 62nd Y o r k A l d r i c h 42nd 68th W e l c o m e L i l ac 66th Fairview 70th N o b l e G r i m e s S c o t t J u n e 44th Woodbine Lake 40th W e s t R i v e r R i v e r d a l e 41st 37th 52nd 4 t h 72nd 50th 43rd 37th Q u a i l Urban 41st 65th Q u a i l 65th Dowling 45th 41st W i l l o w 54th 41st 53rd 64th 43rd 70th 47th 51st 8 1 71st K y l e 68th W e l c o m e 62nd 37th 70th 72nd72nd L a k e 38th 46 1/2 67th B r o o k v i e w 53rd 56th 72nd 45th 51st 72nd 52nd 46th 54th 68th A l d r i c h 52nd 61st 39th N e w t o n 42nd 40th 581/2 71st 60th 46th 60th H u m b o l d t R a m p F r e m o n t 66th 50th 64th 56th R a m p B e a r d I n d i a n a D u p o n t Brooklyn 48th X e r x e s H a l i f a x F r a n c e 37th 10Ramp WestRiver Road 74th Shingle Creek X e r x e s 391/2 L i l a cB r o o kly n Ramp E w i n g A b b o t t 4 3 r dToledo C a m d e n 3 7 t h 4 0 t h 67th 401/2 J u n e R a m p Z e n i t h 36th 70th F r a n c e 66th 36th U p t o n 421/2 C h o w e n R a m p G r i m e s U n i t y 39th A z e l i a 75th P e r r y S c o t t G ri m e s L a k ela n d 70 t h A b b o t t R a m p Q u e e n Aldrich S h e r i d a n Brooklyn R a m p L ak elan d 74th M a j o r 6 5 t h 43rd Lakeside R u s s e l l W a s h b u r n P e n n O l i v e r OsseoRoadFrontage P a r k e r D r e w Brooklyn P e r r y 50th A d m i r a l D r e w W e l c o m e X e n i a Noble O r c h a r d P e n nRussell Quail P e r r y E w i n g 53rd X e n i a Shoreview 74th F r a n c e In di a n a T o l e d o S c o t t T o l e d o D r e w U n i t y R a mp M ajor R a m p Hubbard V i c t o r y K y l e Hubbard Shoreline 76th H u m b o l d t Ramp U n i t y M a j o r 70th Robin B r y a n t 73rd 74th74th 71st E m e r s o n P e rr y L o g a n Ramp R e g e n t 69th M a j o r B r y a n t C o l f a x X e r x e s D a l l a s S aint A nth o n y Q u e e n 74th H u m b o l d t P e r r y 73rd 69th 55th N o rth p o rt T h o m a s F r a n c e Ramp B e a r d Y a t e s Bellvue Ponds James 49th Ramp Lakeland I n d i a n a 47th L i l a c F r e m o n t R a m p I n d i a n a 73rd 71 st 49th 74th IrvingJames U n i t y VillageCreek 73rd X e n i a M o r g a n E m e r s o n N e w t o n E r i c o n P e r r y R ailroad 65th S c o t t Q u a i l Y o r k R a m p Halifax T o l e d o S h a r iAn n L e e N o b l e G i r a r d X e r x e s E w i n g S c o t t U p t o n P e r r y F r e m o n t P e r r y P e n n K n o x M i s s i s s i p p i K n o x 72nd 6 t h R u s s e l l Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t K a t h r e n e Angeline O l i v e r C o l f a x 6 t h A l d r i c h C o l f a x 4 t h K y l e J a m e s G r i m e s G i r a r d C h o w e n O r c h a r d O r c h a r d E m e r s o n N o b l e U n i t y I r v i n g L o g a n L o g a n M a j o r Q u a i l H a l i f a x P e r r y A l d r i c h N e w t o n L e e L y n d a l e A l d r i c h A l d r i c h O l i v e r M o r g a n B r y a n t Winchester K n o x M a r s h a l l K n o x X e r x e s 66th M o r g a nVincent E w i n g Q u a i l O l i v e r M a j o r L o g a n W a s h b u r n M a j o r N e w t o n X e r x e s T h o m a s S h e r i d a n D r e w Q u a i l T o l e d o O r c h a r d G r e a t V i e w Emilie H u m b o l d t R i v e r w o o d E w i n g C a m d e n R e g e n t C o l f a x J u n e C o l f a x T o l e d o R e g e n t X e n i a 4 t h 48th B e a r d Lakelan d U n i t y Lakeside L a k e C u r v e I r v i n g 54th W e l c o m e J o s e p h i n e B e a r d A b b o t t 47thByron G r i m e s H u m b o l d t C r y s t a l L a k e L e e Northway F r a n c e 45th R u s s e l l W a s h b u r n V i n c e n t U p t o n Q u e e n S h e r i d a n 53rd Lakeview T h o m a s P e n n I s l e m o u n t Lakeland O l i v e r N e w t o n L o g a n M o r g a n M o r g a n K n o x J a m e s I r v i n g 6 6 t h G i r a r d S o o 37th 57th 73rd C h o w e n Corvallis 48th Poe Pe nn U n i t y 56th Z e n i t h D r e w U p t o n C h o w e n Burquest O r c h a r d R i v e r d a l e Boulder62nd 46th Y o r k C a m d e n Lilac Lakeland G i r a r d G i r a r d J u d y India na 51st Osseo Oak H a l i f a x D r e w Ramp P e r r y Q u a il B r o o kly n M a r l i n H alifax Lakeland L e e Lawrence Northway G ri m e s E a r l e B r o w n R a m p D a l l a s Amy72ndWoodbine 51st 63rd 94 B r o o k ly n O r c h a r d J u n e I n d i a n a B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e P e r r y Q u a i l R e g e n t H a l i f a x V i n c e n t C a m d e n 68th 4 t h E w i n g E m e r s o n R a m p L i l a c E a s t R i v e r 74 1/2 1 s t R e g e n t N o b l e R a m p Ra m p M o r g a n G i r a r d R a m p V e r a C r u z J a m e s L e e B e a r d L y n d a l e L y n d a le 67thRamp Joyce Janet D r e w E a s t L y n d a l e 62nd 66th Quarles J a m e s R a m p R a m p Winchester R a m p R a m p Lakeland 72nd R a m p Woodbine 9 4 T w i n L a k e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c V i c t o r y M e m o r i a l Ramp 2 5 2 S c o t t Palmer T w i n Ryan T w i n C ry stal M i s s i s s i p p i T w i n Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn CenterMinneapolis B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y C r y s t a l R o b b i n s d a l e F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s R o b b i n s d a l e M i n n e a p o l i s 0 1,700 3,400 5,100 6,800850FeetF Existing Land Use ELU 2016 Generalized Land Use Single Family Detached Two or Three Family, Townhome Apartments Commercial Office Industrial and Utility Institutional ooooAirport Park,Recreational, or Preserve Open Water Undeveloped Major Railway Major Highway 152 152 94 94 252 100 100 Map 3-1. Generalized Existing Land Use LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-113-10 Table 3-2. Existing Land Use Existing Land Use Acres % of Total AcresSingle Family Residential 2,456.29 45.82%Two and Three Family or Townhome 160.06 2.99%Apartments 256.30 4.78%Commercial 391.20 7.30% Office 95.65 1.78%Industrial and Utility 285.51 5.33% Institutional 273.00 5.09%Airport 12.32 0.23%Park, Recreation or Preserve 609.86 11.38%Undeveloped 161.28 3.01%Major Highway (ROW)430.38 8.03%Major Railway 10.75 0.20%Open Water 218.15 4.07% TOTAL 5,360.75 100.00% Source: MnGEO, Metropolitan Council, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC Existing Land Use Definitions Single Family Residential: This land use designation identifies land that is primarily developed with detached single-family residential and accessory uses. This development pattern is generally found surrounding the retail/undeveloped core and business/light industrial spine. The use identifies existing neighborhoods that were developed in a fairly regular urban grid pattern mostly developed between the 1950s and 1970s. Two or Three Family Residential and Townhome: This land use designation identifies parcels throughout the community that are developed primarily with twin homes and double bungalows. This land use is found sprinkled throughout the community but is primarily integrated into the single-family land use designation. Townhome: This land use designation identifies land that was developed with attached single- family housing. Most areas developed with this land use are adjacent to public/semi-public and institutional land or serves as a transition from existing apartment or commercial uses. Apartments: Existing apartments are sprinkled throughout the community, but are primarily adjacent to major roadways and corridors, and commercial/business uses. The size of the apartment complex ranges in size from small-scale apartment buildings on the edges of the single-family neighborhoods to large-scale complexes. The apartments were primarily constructed from the 1960s to the 1980s. Commercial: The existing commercial uses are located throughout the community on major road corridors such as Brooklyn Boulevard, I-94 and Highway 252. Typical uses include small retailers, grocery, and auto sales. The most recent addition is Topgolf which is located at the I-94 and Highway 252 interchange and is scheduled to open in 2018. Office: This land use designation identifies existing office and professional buildings that are used for service based businesses such as attorneys, accountants, data processing, etc. Industrial and Utility: This land use designation identifies land that is used for light and heavier industrial uses as well as small pockets of utility uses that are owned by a private or public utility in the City. There are two pockets of industrial area one on the south end of the community where the SOO line railroad crosses, and the second on the north side of I-94 near the central core of the community. Institutional: The institutional and public/semi-public uses are parcels that are currently, or historically have been, used for religious institution, schools, city hall and other civic or municipal structures. These uses are spread throughout the community and are integrated in existing single-family neighborhoods, multi-family neighborhoods and commercial areas. Airport: The Airport land designation identifies a small parcel of land at the western edge of the City south of I-94 corridor that is part of the Crystal Airport. Parks, Recreation, or Preserve: This land use designation identifies all land that is publicly owned and used for active or passive recreational uses, or for natural areas. These areas are owned by the City, County, Regional agency or State. Airport: A portion of the Crystal Airport extends into the far southcentral-west corner of the community. The active runways and airport operations are located in the City of Crystal. Undeveloped: The undeveloped land use designation identifies land primarily within the City’s central core that are currently vacant. Major Railway: The railroad right-of-way is located west of Highway 280 and provides rail access to industrial properties in the City and to the adjacent industrial lands in the City of Minneapolis. Major Highway: The existing right-of-way includes state, county, and local roadways. Right-of- way is used for roadways, auto-traffic, transit and bike/trails. LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-133-12 FUTURE LAND USE The City’s Future Land Use Plan is compilation of efforts of the City’s residents, various commissions, staff and policy makers. Using Map 3-1 Existing Land Use as a foundation, the Future Land Use Plan shown on Map 3-2 was created to guide and demonstrate the City’s aspirations for the future with respect to land use and development. The purpose of the FLU is to show through mapping, definitions and acreages how the City intends to create a dynamic, sustainable and integrated community long-term. This section focuses on the Future Land Use designations and definitions, and Map 3-2 to spatially show how the City is contemplated to grow and change and to breakdown the acres associated with each land use to create a balanced, and well-integrated land use pattern. Descriptions about new land use designations and areas of change can be found in subsequent sections of this Chapter. The Future Land Use Plan was developed with three major principles: • Create a Land Use Plan for the “central spine” (see Map 3-2) that encourages a diverse, and integrated, mix of uses that promotes transit and walkability. • Develop land use designations that are broad, but descriptive, to allow the market place to respond and provide the best solution to development and redevelopment efforts. • Protect and enhance existing neighborhoods with connected parks, open spaces, natural areas and integration of neighborhood-based services. Table 3-3 shows a breakdown of the proposed Future Land Uses in the community and identifies associated residential densities where applicable. The Land Use categories reflected on the Table correspond to the designations shown on Map 3-2. Table 3-3. Future Land Uses by Decade and Density Future Land Use Density 2020 Acres % of Total Acres 2030 Acres % of Total Acres 2040 Acres % of Total Acres Low Density Residential 3.01 – 5 DU/A 1,888.43 35.23%1,888.43 35.23%1,888.43 35.23% Medium Density Residential 5.01– 15 DU/A 126.22 2.35%126.22 2.35%126.22 2.35% High Density Residential 15.01 – 31 DU/A 212.20 3.96%212.20 3.96%212.20 3.96% Transit Orient Development (TOD)31.01 - 130 DU/A 25 0.47%70 1.31%200.43 3.74% Neighborhood Mixed-Use 15.01-31 DU/A 50 0.93%75 1.40%92.59 1.73% Commercial Mixed Use 10.01 – 31 DU/A 30 0.56%60 1.12%88.06 1.64% Commercial (C)*NA 343.01 7.18%285.25 5.32%109.52 2.04%Business Mixed Use NA 50 0.93%150 2.80%269.15 5.02%Industrial/Utility NA 291.29 5.43%191.29 3.57%71.80 1.34%PSP/Institutional NA 215.10 4.01%215.10 4.01%215.10 4.01%Airport NA 12.16 0.23%12.16 0.23%12.16 0.23%Parks, Open Space, Recreation (PROS)NA 410.37 7.66%410.37 7.66%410.37 7.66% Rail Road ROW NA 28.36 0.53%28.36 0.53%28.36 0.53%ROW NA 1255.32 23.42%1255.32 23.42%1255.32 23.42%Open Water NA 218.15 4.07%218.15 4.07%218.15 4.07% Wetland NA 162.90 3.04%162.90 3.04%162.90 3.04% TOTAL 5,360.75 100.00 Source: Hennepin County, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC *Commercial land use designation includes currently vacant or underutilized land in the Center City. The Existing Land Use provides breakdown of existing vacant parcels. LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-153-14 Map 3-2. Future Land Use Future Land Use Designation Definitions The following definitions are provided to describe the planned land uses in the City of Brooklyn Center. Many of the existing land uses in the community are planned to remain consistent through this planning period, with new designations focused in areas that are currently underutilized or vacant. The following definitions support and correspond to Map 3-2 Future Land Use Plan. Residential Designations Map Designation Residential Density Description Low Density Residential (LDR)3.01 – 5 Dwelling Units per Acre This designation primarily identifies existing neighborhoods that are mostly developed with single-family detached and single-family attached uses and permitted accessory uses. Any redevelopment or development of LDR land is planned to be consistent with the designation and to be compatible with surrounding neighborhoods and uses. Medium Density Residential (MDR)5.01-15 Dwelling Units per Acre Land designated as MDR is planned for densities between 5 and 15 dwelling units per acre. This land use designation is mostly developed with two-family, three-family, town home and small multi-family uses. Accessory uses, including but not limited to, small open spaces and park areas are located within proximity or within the land use designation. Any redevelopment or development of MDR land is planned to be consistent with the designation and compatible with surrounding and adjacent uses. High Density Residential (HDR)15.01-31 Dwelling Units per Acre Land designated as HDR is planned for densities between 15 and 31 dwelling units per acre. This land use designation is mostly developed with townhomes, apartments, and condominiums. Accessory uses including, but not limited to, neighborhood amenities, parks and open spaces are a part of this designation. Future development or redevelopment of HDR land is planned to be consistent with this land use designation and compatible with surrounding and adjacent land uses. 75th L o g a n 56th 58th 42nd 70th 76th A l d r i c h 6 6 t h 73rd 44th 46th 45th T w i n L a k e 694694 61st L i l a c J o h n M a rt i n H a l i f a x Mumford Y o r k 4 0 t h B r o o k l y n B e a r d R a m p P a l m e r L a k e Parkway Freeway Quail Summit W e s t R i v e r 1 0 0 48th Nash R a m p64th 47th Ohenry R a m p 51st R a m p H a l i f a x 4 0 t h F r e m o n t 65th D r e w F r a n c e R a m p 70th Ramp 53rd R a m p L a k e 1 0 0 1 0 0 R a m p 53rd Wilshire 70th 54th Ramp L e e M a j o r S c o t t N o b l e Broo kdale C enter S h i n g l e C r e e k Shingle Creek 9494 71st A b b o t t 57th 47th Unity L i l a c M o r g a n H u m b o l d t R a m p R a m p T o l e d o O l i v e r J a m e s 74 th V e r a C r u z K n o x I r v i n g 49th 74th R a m p 3 7 t h Camden T o l e d o 4th52nd 4 t h N o b l e 40th K n o x 65th 5 t h V e r a C r u z 42nd Thurber 2 5 2 Q u a il 41st 44th U p t o n W a s h b u r n Y o r k R i v e r d a l e F r a n c e 67th V e r a C r u z V i n c e n t 58th Z e n i t h B e a r d W ill o w Brooklyn S ailor A b b o t t R a m p Meadowwood K y l e Q u a i l 61st 70th 67th 46th 67th 52nd S h e r i d a n 39th Aldrich U n it y M o r g a n 7 6 t h R u s s e l l 41st 67th Sh i ngleCreek Lakebreeze 58th 57th 63rd Oliver 39th 40th 7 1 s t 40th X e r x e s Paul 60th Q u e e n U p t o n 55th R o b b i n s 4 1 s t 59th 41st L i l a c 50th W ashin gton India na B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r C h o w e n 44th H u m b o l d t 10 L e e Fremont 3 r d R amp Grimes B ro o k d ale C e nte r F r e m o n t Orchard 40th 50th 74th 56th R a m p W e l c o m e 75th 57th R o b i n Ramp 69th E w i n g 57th 56th R a m p Scott Howe D r e w Railroad P e r r y 68th R e g e n t Ramp 59th 10 F r a n c e D u s h a r m e S c o t t C o l f a x 46th 55th N e w t o n Logan Wilshire E m e r s o n F r e m o n t 46th V e r a C r u z 57th 9 4 Eckberg P e n n 43rd PalmerLake Xerxes R e g e n t V e r a C r u z H a l i f a x 4 0 1 /2 Eleanor R a m p 4 5 t h F r e m o n t T o l e d o 73rd Q u a i l Webber R e g e n t Z e n i t h 69th Hillsview Commodore 6 7 t h 3 9 1 /2 D u p o n t R a m p B e a r d 71st Lakebreeze T o l e d o E w i n g Ramp V i n c e n t Madalyn 67th F r a n c e 591/2 Woodbine Mildred 68th 491/2 S h o r e s A l d r i c h Ramp 50th Eleanor 68th 60th 72ndB r y a n t D r e w 50th 61st G i r a r d Violet 56th C a m d e n 51st 73rd 57th A d m i r a l A l d r i c h73rd E m e r s o n 59th 39th 62nd Y o r k 47th A l d r i c h 42nd 68th L i l a c 66th Fairview 70th N o b l e G r i m e s V e r a C r u z S c o t t J u n e 44th Woodbine Lake 40th W e s t R i v e r R i v e r d a l e 41st 52nd Ramp 4 t h 72nd 50th 43rd Q u a i l Urban 41st 65th Q u a il 65th 45th 41st W i l l o w 54th 41st 53rd 64th 43rd 70th 47th 51st 81 Dowling 71st K y l e 68th 62nd 70th 72nd72nd L a k e 46 1/2 67th B r o o k v i e w 53rd 56th 72nd 45th 51st 72nd 52nd 46th 68th A l d r i c h 52nd 61st 39th N e w t o n 42nd 40th 581/2 71st 38th 60th 46th 60th H u m b o l d t R a m p F r e m o n t 66th 50th 64th 56th R a m p B e a r d I n d i a n a 4 3r d 38th D u p o n t 48th X e r x e s 38th H a l i f a x F r a n c e 10Ramp 74th Shingle Creek X e r x e s 391/2 L i l a c 4 2 1 /2 Bro o kly n Ramp E w i n g A b b o t t 4 3 r dToledo C a m d e n 67th 401/2 R a m p Z e n i t h 70th 66th U p t o n 421/2 C h o w e n R a m p G r i m e s M a j o r S aint A nth ony A z e l i a 75th P e r r y S c o t t G ri m e s L a k ela n d 7 0 t h A b b o t t R a m p Q u e e n Aldrich S h e r i d a n Imperial R a m p L ak ela n d Brooklyn 74th M a j o r 6 5 t h Lakeside R u s s e l l W a s h b u r n P e n n O l i v e r OsseoRoadFrontage P a r k e r Brooklyn P e r r y 50th 45th A d m i r a l D r e w N oble O r c h a r d P e n n F a irfi e l d R u s s e l l Quail W e l c o m e P e r r y E w i n g 53rd Shoreview 74th F r a n c e In d ia n a T o l e d o S c o t t T o l e d o D r e w T w i n L a k e U n i t y R a m p Hubbard Ra m p V i c t o r y K y l e Hubbard Shoreline 76th H u m b o l d t Ramp U n i t y M a j o r 70th Robin B r y a n t 73rd 74th74th 71st E m e r s o n P e rr y L o g a n Ramp 69th M a j o r B r y a n t C o l f a x X e r x e s D a l l a s Q u e e n 74th H u m b o l d t P e r r y R a m p Ramp 73rd 69th 55th N o rth p o rt T h o m a s Ramp B e a r d Bellvue Ponds James 49th Ramp Lakeland I n d i a n a 47th L i l a c R a m p I n d i a n a 73rd 71 s t 49th 74th IrvingJames U n i t y 73rd E r i c o n P e r r y R ailroad Q u a i l Y o r k R a m p 6 t h R a m p HalifaxRamp A l d r i c h 67th68th T o l e d o S h a r i A n n L e e N o b l e L a k ela n d G i r a r d X e r x e s E w i n g S c o t t U p t o n P e r r y F r e m o n t P e r r y P e n n K n o x M i s s i s s i p p i K n o x 72nd R u s s e l l Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t K a t h r e n e Angeline O l i v e r C o l f a x 6 t h A l d r i c h C o l f a x 4 t h K y l e J a m e s G r i m e s G i r a r d C h o w e n O r c h a r d O r c h a r d E m e r s o n U n i t y I r v i n g L o g a n Q u a i l H a l i f a x P e r r y A l d r i c h N e w t o n L y n d a l e A l d r i c h O l i v e r M o r g a n B r y a n t Winchester K n o x X e r x e s 66th M o r g a n V i n c e n t E w i n g Q u a i l M a j o r L o g a n W a s h b u r n M a j o r N e w t o n X e r x e s T h o m a s S h e r i d a n D r e w Q u a i l T o l e d o O r c h a r d G r e a t V i e w Emilie H u m b o l d t R i v e r w o o d E w i n g C a m d e n R e g e n t C o l f a x J u n e C o lf a x R e g e n t 4 t h 48th B e a r d U n i t y Lakeside Dupont L a k e C u r v e I r v i n g 54th J o s e p h i n e F r e m o n t B e a r d A b b o t t TwinOak 47thByron G r i m e s H u m b o l d t E m e r s o n C r y s t a l L a k e L e e Northway F r a n c e 45th R u s s e l l W a s h b u r n V i n c e n t U p t o n Q u e e n S h e r i d a n 53rd Lakeview T h o m a s P e n n I s l e m o u n t Lakeland O l i v e r N e w t o n L o g a n M o r g a n M o r g a n K n o x J a m e s I r v i n g 6 6 t h G i r a r d S o o S c o t t 57th C h o w e n Bernard Corvallis 48th Poe P enn U n i t y 56th Z e n i t hDrew U p t o n C h o w e n Burquest O r c h a r d R i v e r d a l e Boulder62nd 46th Y o r k C a m d e n Lilac Lakeland G i r a r d G i r a r d J u d y 51st Osseo Oak H a l i f a x Ramp P e r r y Q u a i l B r o o k ly n M a r l i n L e e Lawrence Northway G ri m e s E a r l e B r o w n R a m p Abbott D a l l a s Amy72ndWoodbine 51st 63r d 94 B ro o kl y n O r c h a r d J u n e I n d i a n a D r e w B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e P e r r y Q u a i l R e g e n t H a l i f a x V i n c e n t C a m d e n 1 st 68th 4t h E w i n g E m e r s o n R a m p L i l a c 74 1/2 R a m p R e g e n t N o b l e M a r s h a ll M o r g a n G i r a r d Ramp J a m e s L e e L y n d a l e Lakeland L y n d a l e 67thRamp Joyce Janet D r e w E a s t L y n d a l e 62nd 66th Quarles J a m e s R a m p R a m p Winchester R a m p R a m p 72nd R a m p Woodbine 9 4 T w i n L a k e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c V i c t o r y M e m o r i a l Ramp 2 5 2 S c o t t Palmer T w i n Ryan T w i n C r y s t a l M i s s i s s i p p i T w i n Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn Center Minneapolis B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y C r y s t a l R o b b i n s d a l e F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s R o b b i n s d a l e M i n n e a p o l i s 0 1,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetF Land Use Designations 2040 Planned Land UseLDR (3.01-5 DU/Ac.) MDR (5.01-15 DU/Ac.) HDR (15.01-31 DU/Ac.) C TOD (31.01-130 DU/Ac.) N-MU (15.01-31 DU/Ac.) C-MU (10.01-25 DU/Ac.) B-MU Industrial/Utilityo ooAirport PSP/Institutional Parks, Recreation, Open Space ROW RR ROW Brooklyn Blvd Overlay District Low Density Residential Medium Density Residential High Density Residential LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-173-16 Mixed-Use Designations Map Designation Residential Density Description Transit Oriented Development (TOD)31.01-130 Dwelling Units per Acre TOD is a new land use designation that is planned for a mix of residential, commercial, office and retail uses. Land is generally within a ½-mile of the Brooklyn Center Transit Station (Transit Station) is designated as TOD to capitalize on the proximity of redevelopment sites to the transit stops. The planned Bus Rapid Transit C-Line has two stops within the area designated as TOD (the Transit Station is last northerly stop) that will provide access to adjacent land uses with frequent, and efficient bus/transit services providing connections to the area and broader region. A minimum of 75% of the land within this designation is planned to be developed with high-density residential use and the remaining land developed with supporting retail, office and commercial uses. Redevelopment will focus on connecting to the Transit Station and C-Line stops, future D-Line stops, as well as creating a walkable, bikeable, vibrant core in the City. Neighborhood Mixed-Use (N-MU)15.01-31 Dwelling Units per Acre The N-MU is a new land use designation that guides land surrounding key neighborhood intersections for a mix of residential, retail and commercial/office uses. This designation plans for the redevelopment of existing uses and assumes a minimum of 50% of land within this designation would be used for residential purposes, and the remaining area would be developed with neighborhood scale retail, service and commercial uses. Commercial Mixed-Use (C-MU)10.01-31 Dwelling Units per Acre The C-MU is a new land use designation and guides land for a mix of commercial, office, retail, service and residential uses. This designation is guided for areas adjacent to the TOD and is planned to have a more significant proportion of the land use designated for commercial, office, retail, and service uses with supporting residential use. A minimum of 50% of the land use is planned for residential development at densities slightly lower than the adjacent TOD land use designation. This land use designation will focus on walkable and bikeable connections to adjacent TOD land uses and the Transit Station. Business Mixed-Use (B-MU)None The B-MU is a new land use designation and guides land for a mix of business, light industrial and supporting retail/service uses. This designation encourages redevelopment or development of commercial, office, general business and light industrial uses in coordination with supporting retail/commercial uses to encourage a more dynamic and connected experience for workers. This land use does not plan for residential uses but may include limited live-work opportunities as established through supporting official controls. Commercial, Business and Industrial Designations Map Designation Description Commercial (C)Planned commercial uses are generally located along the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor, on the frontage of I-94 and along Highway 252. Uses in these areas include hotels, restaurants, auto sales, and other small retail uses. Industrial and Utility (I/U) There are two areas planned for industrial uses located in the southwesterly corner of the City on the east and west side of Highway 100. Uses in this designation include manufacturing, storage, outdoor storage and other industrial uses. This land designation is not planned for expansion in this planning period. This designation also includes ares with existing or planned public or private utilities. Public/Semi-Public Designations Map Designation Description Public/Semi-Public and Institutional (PSP/Institutional) Land designated as I/SP is generally used for public or semi-public uses including schools, municipal and government uses, social and/or healthcare facilities excluding clinics, churches and other places of assembly. This land use designation also includes existing municipal utilities such as lift stations and pumphouses, as well as private utilities such as power substations and similar uses. There is no planned expansion of this land use, but it is acknowledged that an expansion of some of these uses may be necessary if and when redevelopment occurs throughout the City. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) Land designated as PROS is used for active and passive park uses, and natural preservation. Active park areas included playfields, athletic complexes, publicly owned golf courses, zoos and other similar uses. Passive park areas include nature areas, resource protection and buffer areas, trails, picnic areas, public fishing and similar uses. Natural preservation areas include the protection of important natural resources for environmental or aesthetic purposes. Railroad Right-of-Way (RR ROW) This land use designation identifies the SOO Line railroad in the southwestern corner of the City. The railroad is active and runs through the City’s existing industrial park. Right-of-Way (ROW)This land use designation identifies publicly dedicated land for vehicular, transit, bikeways, and/or pedestrian thoroughfares. The existing and planned right-of-way includes state, county and local roadways. Airport (AP) This land use designation identifies land used for public or private airport facilities, runways and ancillary airport uses. A small parcel of land in the central corner of the community is designate for this purpose and is adjacent to, and a part of, the Crystal airport. There is no planned expansion of this land use. Overlay Designation Map Designation Description Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay The Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay is a 1,200-foot (600-foot on each side of the centerline) corridor that calls attention to land adjacent to the roadway for special consideration at time of redevelopment. The designation functions as an overlay and parcels are designated with specific land uses. LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-193-18 AREAS PLANNED FOR CHANGE REIMAGINE, REDEVELOP & REINVIGORATE Introduction/Description The 2030 Plan was prepared as the City’s central retail core was experiencing significant change and stress as businesses, retailers and restaurants were slowly going out of business. The 2030 Plan focused heavily on previous planning efforts including the Calthorpe Plan, the Opportunity Site Master Plan and small areas studies the City had undertaken in an effort to revitalize the City’s central core. These plans became the foundation for the 2030 Plan in many respects and were incorporated by reference within the Future Land Use Plan and the narrative contained within this Chapter. A decade has passed and while some of the changes contemplated in the 2030 Plan have come to fruition, many areas of underutilized and vacant land remain. Over the past ten years the City has proactively acquired property through its Economic Development Authority (EDA) and Housing Redevelopment Authority (HRA) in an effort to assemble a critical mass of land within the City’s core to allow for a large-scale redevelopment inducing project in heart of the community. This effort is on the verge of success as the City has entered into a due diligence phase with a master developer to begin the redevelopment efforts in its core. It is an exciting time in Brooklyn Center, and this Plan is intended to help guide the City as it progresses through redevelopment efforts over the next decade. The following sections highlight at a broad level the areas of the community anticipated and planned for change over the next 10 – 20 years. The intent is to describe the direction and aspirations of the community with respect to physical land use and development of these critical areas of the community so that residents, developers, business owners and policy-makers have a roadmap to help guide them through the development and redevelopment review process. Transit Oriented Development (TOD) and Physical Organization Central to the success of the City’s redevelopment efforts is the ability to re-focus and reimagine the areas surround the Transit Hub or Transit Station in the community. Today, the Transit Station is located adjacent to and within the area guided as Transit Oriented Development (TOD) on the Future Land Use Plan. As previously described, this is a new land use designation that was developed as part of this planning effort to be proactive and promote the accessibility of the community through its transit and multi-modal network. Increasingly, access of neighborhoods, housing, services, and experience-based retail by efficient and frequent transit services is becoming a highly desirable and sought-after amenity within development and redevelopment areas. The City is perfectly positioned to capitalize on this amenity and advantage for two reasons: 1. The C-Line Bus Rapid Transit is scheduled to open in 2019 and its northern terminus is the Brooklyn Center Transit Station; and 2. The areas surrounding the Transit Station are prime for redevelopment and are guided for TOD and the future D-Line may also connect to the area in the future. These two conditions could not be more perfect, and the timing is optimal for the City to work with any developer on redevelopment that embraces, integrates and incorporates the Transit Station and C-Line stops into its development plan. To help facilitate that process the City created the TOD land use designation in this Plan. This is a significant departure from previous planning efforts that were silent on Transit and did not emphasize it as a way to organize redevelopment efforts. This Plan, and the TOD land use designation promote: • An introduction of high-density residential uses into the City’s core and purposefully locates it adjacent to the current Transit Station. • A TOD land use designation that is large enough, and encompasses enough acreage, to allow for consideration to move the Transit Station from its current location, if an agreement with Metro Transit Could be made. Currently the Transit Station is at the edge of the TOD area, but it could be more desirable if it were in the heart of the Opportunity Site and redevelopment areas. • Density preferred to start at 31.01 dwelling units per acre, up to a maximum of 130 dwelling units per acre. The City wants to encourage a vibrant, integrated mix of uses in this area which means that the City is willing to let the market help shape how the area is developed. Paramount to the success, regardless of density, is that the mix of uses includes more households of a variety of types, at various levels of affordability. • The land use designation envisions a high-quality, complete and connected network of pedestrian ways including sidewalks and trails. The area should be walkable, inviting and architecture must respond to and encourage a safe pedestrian environment that connects new residents with the transit hub, services and the City’s larger trail system. • Development in this area should encourage and create an experience for new residents. Amenities should be thoughtfully incorporated, and efficiencies and LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-213-20 adjacencies with current users should be explored. The City acknowledges that redevelopment will not happen overnight, so there should be thoughtful approaches to how new development can incorporate and integrate existing uses into redevelopment efforts to achieve incremental improvements. • The concept that if one user and area do better – than everyone does better. Within the TOD land use designation some areas of the Shingle Creek Crossing development have been redeveloped including a few national big-box sites and small strip retail within the last 10-years. These efforts have primarily continued to focus on an auto-centric typical suburban retail environment without much consideration of the potential to incorporate housing into a master plan. As a result of recent redevelopment efforts, it is unlikely that this entire area will redevelop within this planning period, but the City still believes that it is important to guide it for TOD so it is clear that as the area continues to evolve there is the potential to develop the area with a more compact and transit-minded development pattern. What is TOD? TOD, or transit-oriented development, means integrated urban places designed to bring people, activities, buildings, and public space together, with easy walking and cycling connection between them and near-excellent transit service to the rest of the city. It means inclusive access for all to local and citywide opportunities and resources by the most efficient and healthful combination of mobility modes, at the lowest financial and environmental cost, and with the highest resilience to disruptive events. Inclusive TOD is a necessary foundation for long-term sustainability, equity, shared prosperity, and civil peace in cities. - Institute for Transportation & Development Policy - Institute for Transportation & Development Policy Focus on Integrated Uses The concept that a vibrant, dynamic City Center requires activity was explored and discussed in the 2030 Plan. However, the previous Plan focused on bringing in new retail, commercial and business users to the area without including a residential component. This Plan shifts the direction and expands the vision from the “center” to the “spine.” This slight shift results in planning for change along the central spine of the community, and an integral component of this Plan is the incorporation of new households into the Future Land Use Plan. The City has moved past the vision that its core is limited to only retail opportunities, and instead this Plan builds on previous efforts with key changes. First, the community is focused on a creating a walkable, transit connected, experience-based place that brings the City forward and offers new opportunities to existing and future residents. The idea that the community will thrive with a more integrated land use pattern is fully accepted, and promoted through this Plan. The areas that are planned for this type of change are guided within this Plan for Neighborhood Mixed-Use, Commercial Mixed-Use, Business Mixed-Use and/or are designated in the Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District. The descriptions on the following pages provide additional detail about the planned changes, and vision for each designation. LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-233-22 Neighborhood Nodes (N-MU) Though the City does not formally organize itself through neighborhoods, it is clear from this process that different areas or ‘neighborhoods’ have distinct qualities. Residents naturally look for retail and services in their immediate area and would choose to shop locally if options were available. This Plan identifies several key nodes available for redevelopment, many of which are located within the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor that could provide smaller-scale retail, restaurant and service amenities to their surrounding neighborhoods. The idea that existing neighborhood residents could walk or bike to the corner store to pick up dinner or visit a local restaurant or hair salon was widely embraced during this process. Residents repeatedly requested a plan for more local services, restaurants and retail opportunities in more neighborhood locations. This Plan introduces the concept by designated land for “Neighborhood Mixed-Use” where the focus is on integrating small-scale commercial and retail uses into the neighborhood fabric. Vibrant Business Centers: Commercial Mixed-Use (C-MU) and Business Mixed-Use (B-MU) The Commercial Mixed-Use and Business Mixed Use land use designations focus more heavily on commercial, retail, office and light industrial uses while continuing to emphasize the concept of creating experiences for the users. The purpose is to promote and encourage businesses, commercial users, retailers, and in some cases households to plan for interconnected systems that result in a more active and vibrant center. Shifting away from the traditional office campus or big-box strip-mall concept, these designations encourage co-location and integration of users to find ways to create a more sustainable and resilient development pattern. Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor (Overlay) The Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor extends from the City’s southern border to its northern border and has traditionally functioned as major thoroughfare with a mix of single-family residential commercial uses. The 2030 Plan identified this Corridor as a concern due to the mismatch in function from a local and regional perspective. The roadway functions regionally to connect areas north, and west with Minneapolis, and functions locally to provide access to single-family homes, as well as small retail and service users that line the Corridor. This conflict has become increasingly more difficult as traffic continues to grow. Due to these factors, the City, in collaboration with the County, are in the process of a major road reconstruction project along the Corridor after many years of study. This effort will result in a much-improved roadway condition for automobile traffic but will also be upgraded for pedestrians, bicyclist and transit users. These improvement to the road and transportation system will change the way the Corridor functions, but equally important is the need to evaluate the land use and development patterns along the Corridor. This Plan acknowledges that there is a mismatch between the roadway, both in its existing and ultimately improved condition, and the land uses that in the surrounding area. To address this issue, and to ensure further study as redevelopment efforts in the Corridor are contemplated, the Land Use Plan incorporates the “Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Overlay” which is purposefully general, but is meant to alert land owners, residents, developers and policy makers that this Corridor deserves and warrants additional study as development and redevelopment progresses. Specific site standards and objectives should be developed as part of the implementation of this Plan through zoning and official controls, and such efforts should consider the following objectives; • Redevelopment of properties with primary frontage on Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor should consolidate accesses onto the roadway and identify opportunities for consolidation to make sites more efficient. 8/16/2018 173 MN-51 - Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9465548,-93.1670987,3a,75y,41.86h,79.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sxkmmyJHnZ3Z_hzBr85LGOQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 1/2 Image capture: Aug 2017 © 2018 Google Street View - Aug 2017 St Paul, Minnesota Google, Inc. 173 MN-51 8/16/2018 1544 Selby Ave - Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9466221,-93.1654557,3a,75y,30.11h,94.51t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1seIz8302bE6_OfrPReH_Inw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo2.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DeIz8302bE6_…1/2 Image capture: Aug 2017 © 2018 Google Street View - Aug 2017 St Paul, Minnesota Google, Inc. 1544 Selby Ave 8/16/2018 1578 W Dayton Ave - Google Maps https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9473581,-93.1668192,3a,75y,199.44h,93.19t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s4lbpO_FmwVzMKxXUe5u9iw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 1/2 Image capture: Aug 2017 © 2018 Google Street View - Aug 2017 St Paul, Minnesota Google, Inc. 1578 W Dayton Ave Integrated Uses Vintage on Selby, Saint Paul photo source: Google 2018 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-253-24 • Consideration should be given to create a set of design guidelines for the Corridor, to encourage a pedestrian scale at the street level. This should consider site design elements such as each building’s relationship with the street, architectural scale and massing, visual cues indicating pedestrian access points and crossing, vegetation, etc. • Properties along the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor that are within the overlay, but are without Corridor frontage may consider ‘joining’ a redevelopment effort with a property containing frontage, provided proper considerations are made for existing/adjacent street patterns and uses. ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS & EMPLOYMENT The City has experienced significant change in the past decade with respect to its changing demographics and land use pattern, but one thing that has not changed − is its exceptional accessibility and location within the region. As previously described, the City was once known as the northwest metro’s regional retail center with Brookdale Mall and numerous supporting retailers and service providers. As the landscape of retail shifted and changed, the City’s core economic engine fizzled out leaving a large contiguous area of vacant and underutilized land in the core of the City. This loss has been felt for over a decade as the City has studied, re-studied and studied again the opportunities for the area. After years of City acquisitions and land assembly, the City issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) in late 2017 to find a master developer to take on a portion of this prime redevelopment area. The City is confident, and excited, that this is just the first step in what is likely to be an exciting, albeit, long-term redevelopment process for this area. The opportunity to redevelop is finally becoming a reality as the City, like the region, has begun to recover from the economic downturn and housing bust of the late 2000s. Signs that the City is evolving are not only limited to its redevelopment area, in fact many of the City’s light-industrial and office spaces are experiencing new demand with new businesses and users that have decided to locate in Brooklyn Center. The following Table 3-4 identifies the 2040 land uses that are identified for places of new/ expected additional employment. For purposes of the calculations, the City used a Floor Area Ration and the SAC conversion for its estimates. Table 3-4. Employment Intensity by Land Use Future Land Use 2040 Acres Developed Area (FAR) % Commercial or Industrial 2040 S.F.SAC Rate Intensity Transit Orient Development (TOD)200.43 50%25%1,091,348 3,000 364 Neighborhood Mixed-Use 92.59 50%50%1,008,305 3,000 336 Commercial Mixed Use 88.06 50%50%958,943 3,000 319 Commercial (C)109.52 50%50%2,385,374 3,000 795 Business Mixed Use 269.15 50%100%5,861,981 4,500 1,303 TOTAL 3,117 STAGED REDEVELOPMENT & INFRASTRUCTURE The City acknowledges that redevelopment is likely to occur over time, and adequate infrastructure is available to serve the land use designations contemplated in this Chapter. As shown in Table 3-3, the City anticipates that approximately 180 acres will be redeveloped with a mix of uses over the next 10 years. The residential component within each of these mixed-use areas has a minimum density of 10 Dwelling Units per Acre, with the most density allocated to the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) designation which contemplates a minimum of 31.01 Dwelling Units per acre. The creation of the TOD designation is a direct response to the opening of the C-Line (and the future D-Line) and the land use designations specifically guide redevelopment within 1/4-mile of the planned station stops for the highest intensity. As demonstrated in Table 3-5 and 3-6 all redevelopment land east of Brooklyn Boulevard within 1/4-mile of the station is guided as TOD which requires a minimum of 31.01 dwelling units per acre, but the City anticipates density will be substantially higher in this designation. A small pocket of neighborhood commercial is guided on the west side of Brooklyn Boulevard which is guided for a minimum of 15-dwelling units per acre. Map 3-3 shows the areas contemplated for redevelopment over the next 20-years correlated to the 1/4-mile station stop buffer. Tables 3-5 and 3-6 provide the estimated residential acreage and potential households based on the guided densities and redevelopment areas assuming that approximately 50% of site is developed (remaining area for parking lot, stormwater management, landscaping, etc.) LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-273-26 Table 3-5. Density of Residential Redevelopment within 1/4-Mile of C-Line Stations Future Land Use Density 2040 Acres HH 2040 Net DensityTransit Orient Development (TOD)*31.01-130 DU/A 25 775 31 Neighborhood Mixed-Use 15.01-31 DU/A 5 75 15 TOTAL --30 850 28.3 Table 3-6. Future Land Use Densities and Estimated Households Future Land Use Density 2020 Acres HH 2020 Net Density 2030 Acres HH 2030 Net Density 2040 Acres HH 2040 Net Density Transit Orient Development (TOD)* 31.01-130 DU/A 9 279 26 814 53 1643 Neighborhood Mixed-Use 15.01-31 DU/A 13 195 19 285 23 345 Commercial Mixed-Use 10.01 – 25 DU/A 8 80 15 150 22 220 TOTAL --30 554 18.5 60 1,249 20.8 98 2,208 22.6 *Acreages assume that some recently redeveloped areas within these land use designations will not experience redevelopment until post-2040 and therefore households are not calculated. Please refer to Map 3-3 that identifies potential areas of change within this planning period. k k k 75th L o g a n 56th 58th 70th 76th A l d r i c h 6 6 t h 73rd Wilshire 694694 61st L i l a c J o h n M a rt i n H a l i f a x Mumford Y o r k 4 0 t h B r o o k l y n B e a r d R a m p P a l m e r L a k e Parkway Freeway Quail Summit 1 0 0 48th Nash R a m p64th 47th Ohenry R a m p 51st R a m p H al i f a x F r e m o n t 4 0 t h 65th D r e w F r a n c e R a m p 70th Ramp 53rd R a m p L a k e 1 0 0 1 0 0 R a m p 63rd 53rd West Broadway 70th L e eMajorNoble 54th Ramp T o l e d o S c o t t Broo kd ale C enter S h i n g l e C r e e k Shingle Creek 94 94 71st A b b o t tVera C r u z 47th Unity L i l a c W e l c o m e R a m p X e r x e s R a m p O l i v e r J a m e s X e n i a 7 4 t h K n o x I r v i n g 49th 74th M o r g a n H u m b o l d t Y a t e s Camden T o l e d o 4th 52nd 4 t h N o b l e 40th K n o x R a m p 65th 5 t h V e r a C r u z 42nd Thurber 2 5 2 Q u a i l 41st 44th U p t o n W a s h b u r n Y o r k F r a n c e 67th V i n c e n t 58th Z e n i t h B e a r d W il l o w A b b o t t S ailor Meadowwood K y l e 46th Q u a i l 61st 45th 44th 70th R i v e r d a l e 67th 46th 67th 52nd S h e r i d a n 39th Aldrich U n it y M o r g a n 7 6 t h R u s s e l l 41st 67th Sh in g l eCreek Lakebreeze 58th 42nd 57th Oliver 41st 40th 7 1 s t X e r x e s Paul 60th Q u e e n U p t o n 55th R o b b i n s 59th 41st L i l a c 48th 81 74th 47th 50th W ashington Indiana B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r C h o w e n T w i n O a k 44th H u m b o l d t 10 L e e Fremont R a m p Grimes B r o o k d ale C e nter 39th F r e m o n t Orchard R a m p 40th 50th 74th 56th R a m p W e l c o m e 75th 57th R o b i n Ramp 69th E w i n g 57th 40th R a m p ScottScott Howe D r e w R ailroad P e r r y 68th R e g e n t 56th Ramp 59th 10 F r a n c e D u s h a r m e S c o t t 57th C o l f a x 46th 55th N e w t o n Logan Wilshire E m e r s o n F r e m o n t 46th V e r a C r u z 57th 9 4 Eckberg P e n n 43rd PalmerLake Xerxes R e g e n t V e r a C r u z H a l i f a x 4 0 1 /2 Eleanor R a m p Ramp 4 5 t h F r e m o n t T o l e d o 73rd Q u a i l Webber R e g e n t Z e n i t h 69th Hillsview Commodore 6 7 t h 3 9 1 /2 D u p o n t R a m p B e a r d 71st Lakebreeze T o l e d o E w i n g Ramp V i n c e n t Madalyn X e n i a 67th F r a n c e 591/2 Woodbine W e l c o m e Mildred 68th 491/2 S h o r e s A l d r i c h Ramp 50th Eleanor 68th 60th 72ndB r y a nt D r e w 50th 61st G i r a r d Violet 56th C a m d e n 51st 73rd 57th A d m i r a l A l d r i c h73rd E m e r s o n 59th 39th 62nd Y o r k 47th A l d r i c h 42nd 68th W e l c o m e L i l a c 66th Fairview 70th N o b l e G r i m e s S c o t t J u n e 44th Woodbine Lake 40th W e s t R i v e r R i v e r d a l e 41st 52nd Ramp 4 t h 72nd 50th 43rd Q u a i l Urban 41st 65th Q u a i l 65th 45th 41st W i l l o w 54th 41st 53rd 64th 43rd 70th 47th 51st 8 1 Dowling 71st K y l e 68th W e l c o m e 62nd 70th 72 nd72nd L a k e 46 1/2 67th B r o o k v i e w 53rd 56th 72nd 45th 51st 72nd 52nd 46th 54th 68th A l d r i c h 52nd 61st 39th N e w t o n 42nd 40th 71st 60th 46th 60th H u m b o l d t R a m p F r e m o n t 66th 50th 64th 56th R a m p B e a r d I n d i a n a 38th D u p o n t 48th X e r x e s 38th H a l i f a x F r a n c e 10Ramp 74th Shingle Creek X e r x e s 391/2 L i l a c 4 2 1 /2 B ro o klyn Ramp E w i n g A b b o t t 4 3 r dToledo C a m d e n 67th 401/2 R a m p Z e n i t h 70th 66th CrystalAirport U p t o n 421/2 C h o w e n R a m p G r i m e s M a j o r U n i t y 39th A z e l i a 75th 38th P e r r y S c o t t G ri m e s L a k el a n d 7 0 t h A b b o t t R a m p Q u e e n Aldrich S h e r i d a n Imperial R a m p L ak ela n d Brooklyn 74th M a j o r 6 5 t h 43rd Lakeside R u s s e l l W a s h b u r n P e n n O l i v e r OsseoRoadFrontage P a r k e r D r e w Brooklyn P e r r y 50th A d m i r a l D r e wXenia Nob l e Y a t e s O r c h a r d P e n nRussell Quail P e r r y E w i n g 53rd Shoreview 74th F r a n c e I n d ia n a T o l e d o S c o t t T o l e d o D r e w F a irfi e l d T w i n L a k e U n i t y R a m p Hubbard R a m p V i c t o r y K y l e Hubbard Shoreline 76th H u m b o l d t Ramp U n i t y M a j o r 70th Robin B r y a n t 73rd 74th74th 71st E m e r s o n P e rr y L o g a n Ramp 69th M a j o r B r y a n t C o l f a x X e r x e s D a l l a s Q u e e n 74th H u m b o l d t P e r r y R a m p Ramp 73rd 69th 55th N o rt h p o rt T h o m a s R am p B e a r d Y a t e s Bellvue Ponds James 49th Ramp Lakelan d Brooklyn I n d i a n a 47th L i l a c R a m p I n d i a n a 73rd 7 1 st 49th 74th IrvingJames U n i t y 73rd X e n i a E r i c o n P e r r y R ailroad 6 t h Q u a i l R a m p A l d r i c h Y o r k R a m p R a m p Halifax 67th T o l e d o S h a r i A n n L e e N o b l e L ak ela n d G i r a r d X e r x e s E w i n g S c o t t U p t o n P e r r y F r e m o n t P e r r y P e n n K n o x M i s s i s s i p p i K n o x 72nd R u s s e l l Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t K a t h r e n e Angeline O l i v e r C o l f a x 6 t h A l d r i c h C o l f a x 4 t h K y l e J a m e s G r i m e s G i r a r d C h o w e n O r c h a r d O r c h a r d E m e r s o n U n i t y I r v i n g L o g a n Q u a i l H a l i f a x P e r r y A l d r i c h N e w t o n L y n d a l e A l d r i c h O l i v e r M o r g a n B r y a n t Winchester K n o x X e r x e s 66th M o r g a n V i n c e n t E w i n g Q u a i l M a j o r L o g a n Y a t e s W a s h b u r n M a j o r N e w t o n X e r x e s T h o m a s S h e r i d a n D r e w Q u a i l T o l e d o O r c h a r d G r e a t V i e w Emilie H u m b o l d t R i v e r w o o d E w i n g C a m d e n R e g e n t C o l f a x J u n e C o l f a x R e g e n t X e n i a 4 t h 48th B e a r d L akela nd U n i t y Lakeside L a k e C u r v e I r v i n g 54th J o s e p h i n e W e l c o m e B e a r d Dupont A b b o t t 47th Z a n e Byron F r e m o n t G r i m e s H u m b o l d t C r y s t a l L a k e L e e Northway F r a n c e 45th R u s s e l l W a s h b u r n V i n c e n t U p t o n Q u e e n S h e r i d a n 53rd Lakeview T h o m a s P e n n I s l e m o u n t 3 7 t h Lakeland E m e r s o n O l i v e r N e w t o n L o g a n M o r g a n M o r g a n K n o x J a m e s I r v i n g 6 6 t h G i r a r d S o o 65th 57th Lakeland C h o w e n Bernard S c o t t Corvallis 48th Poe P e n n U n i t y 56th Z e n i t hDrew U p t o n C h o w e n Burquest O r c h a r d R i v e r d a l e Boulder62nd 46th Y o r k C a m d e n Lilac Lakeland VillageCreek G i r a r d G i r a r d J u d y 51st Osseo Oak H a lif a x Ramp P e r r y Q u a i l B r o o k ly n M a r l i n L e e Lawrence Northway G r i m e s 73rd E a r l e B r o w n R a m p Abbott D a l l a s Amy72ndWoodbine 51st 63rd 94 B r o o kl y n O r c h a r d J u n e I n d i a n a D r e w B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e P e r r y Q u a i l R e g e n t H a l i f a x V i n c e n t 1 st C a m d e n 68th 4 th E w i n g E m e r s o n R a m p L i l a c 74 1/2 R a m p R e g e n t N o b l e M o r g a n G i r a r d Ramp V e r a C r u z J a m e s Lakeland L e e L y n d a l e L y n d al e 67thRamp Joyce Janet D r e w E a s t L y n d a l e 62nd 66th Quarles J a m e s R a m p R a m p Winchester R a m p R a m p 72nd R a m p Woodbine 9 4 T w i n L a k e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c V i c t o r y M e m o r i a l Ramp 2 5 2 S c o t t Palmer T w i n Ryan T w i n C r y s t a l M i s s i s s i p p i T w i n Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn Center Minneapolis BrooklynPark Crystal B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y C r y s t a l R o b b i n s d a l e F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s R o b b i n s d a l e M i n n e a p o l i s 0 1,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetF Land Use Designations 2040 Planned Land Use LDR MDR HDR C Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Neighborhood Mixed Use Commercial Mixed Use Business Mixed Use Industrial/Utility o oo Airport PSP/Institutional Parks, Recreation, Open Space ROW RR ROW Brooklyn Blvd Overlay District k Planned C-Line Transit Stops 94 94 252 100 100 152 152 Potential Area of Change 1/4-mile Map 3-3. Redevelopment Areas & 1/4-Mile C-Line Station Area LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 3-293-28 SPECIAL RESOURCE PROTECTION Historic Sites The Earle Brown Farm is listed on the State Register of Historic Places as “Brooklyn Farm.” To protect this important piece of the Brooklyn Center’s history, the site and several of the buildings were preserved and repurposed into the Earle Brown Conference Center. The Conference Center brings thousands of users to the City, who are able to enjoy a piece of the City’s history. The facility includes modern conference rooms, office towers and ample parking. Though many of the buildings have been repurposed and preserved little of the farm’s original setting remains. A 1988 reconnaissance survey of potential National Register sites in Hennepin Count found a scattering of older farmhouse-style buildings primarily in the City’s southeast neighborhood dating back to pre-World War II. These homes are now surrounded by typical post-war tract housing stock. Aggregate Resources Per the information contained in the Minnesota Geologic Survey Information Circular 46 there are no known aggregate resources available in the City of Brooklyn Center. Solar Access Policies Since mandated in 1978, the City’s Comprehensive Plan has addressed solar policies and protection to ensure residents and properties have adequate solar access. Information regarding solar suitability and solar resource potential is contained within Chapter 8: Infrastructure & Utilities in this Plan. IMPLEMENTATION Given the community and the community leadership’s optimism and desire for Brooklyn Center to thrive, transit investments, along with recent trends in the interest to redevelop within first-ring suburbs, the City is well poised for positive opportunities to grow and incorporate new services and housing types. The initial implementation steps of this Chapter will be included within Chapter 9 of this Plan and then subsequently developed with updates to the City’s Ordinances. Additionally, the Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area plan is attached in Appendix A, which incorporates various aspects of this Chapter including the Future Land Use Plan. DRAFT CHAPTER 4: Housing & Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan 2040 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-1 INTRODUCTION This Chapter evaluates Brooklyn Center’s existing housing stock and plans for future housing needs based on household projections, population projections, and identified needs communicated through this planning process. As required in the City’s 2015 System Statement prepared by the Metropolitan Council, understanding and planning for the City’s housing stock is a critical part of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan (Plan). The City’s planned land use includes three residential categories and residential components of new mixed-use designations which together account for approximately half of the City’s land use area. Residential land use will continue to be the largest land use in the community. A diverse housing stock that offers neighborhood stability combined with access to open space, goods and services is essential to a healthy, sustainable, and resilient community. It protects the community’s tax base against market fluctuations; it builds community pride and engagement of existing residents; it helps the community’s economic competitiveness by assisting Brooklyn Center businesses with employee attraction and retention; it provides options for existing residents to remain in the community should their life circumstances (e.g., aging-in-place) change; and it offers future residents access to amenities and levels of service that support a stable and supportive housing and neighborhood environment. The first part of this Chapter focuses on the existing housing stock. It summarizes important information regarding the overall number of housing units, the type of units, their affordability, and the profile of their residents. These sections are a summary of more detailed socio-economic data which is attached to this Plan as an Appendix and serves as a supporting resource to this Chapter. Understanding the existing housing stock is key to determining what types of housing products may be demanded over the next 10-20 years and where they should be located. In conjunction to the statistical or inventory information collected, this Chapter includes a summary of community, stakeholder and policy-maker feedback related to housing and neighborhoods heard throughout this planning process. Additionally, this Chapter addresses the projected housing needs during the planning period and presents some neighborhood and housing aspirations as identified by the City’s residents and policy-makers. The final section of this Chapter links projected housing need to practical implementation tools to help the City achieve its housing goals and identified strategies. The list contained in this Chapter is not exhaustive but provides a starting place from which the City can continue to expand and consider opportunities to meet current and future resident needs. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-34-2 ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING HOUSING SUPPLY Overview of Brooklyn Center’s Residential Neighborhoods The City of Brooklyn Center’s residential neighborhoods are diverse and include a variety of housing types from single-family neighborhoods to large-scale apartment complexes. Although the City originally incorporated as a village in 1911, it wasn’t until the Post-World War II era that the City began to develop on a large scale in which entire blocks and neighborhoods were constructed with tract housing, suburban streets, and neighborhood parks. Like much of the region’s first ring suburbs, Brooklyn Center took on the role of a typical bedroom community where residents could get to their jobs in the downtown, stop for groceries at the retail center, and go home and park their cars in their garages for the evening. This pattern of development can be seen throughout the region, but Brooklyn Center had one significant difference for many decades – the regional mall known as Brookdale. The prominence of the mall and its surrounding commercial district played a major role in how neighborhoods were built and developed, which influenced neighborhood patterns and housing types. Even though the mall is now gone, it continues to have lasting effects on the existing housing types and neighborhoods and will influence future housing as described in subsequent sections of this Chapter. For example, in the decades that the mall and regional retail center was operational much of Brooklyn Center’s multi-family and apartment development was concentrated near the mall and its surrounding commercial district and provided a transition to the surrounding single-family neighborhoods. Therefore, even though the mall no longer exists, the apartments developed around the periphery of its retail area in the 1960s continue to be in high demand and provide a critical source of housing for many households. 2040 Housing & Neighborhood Goals »Promote a diverse housing stock that provides safe, stable, and accessible housing options to all of Brooklyn Center’s residents. »Recognize and identify ways to match Brooklyn Center’s housing with the City’s changing demographics. »Explore opportunities to improve the City’s housing policies and ordinances to make them more responsive to current and future residents. »Maintain the existing housing stock in primarily single-family neighborhoods through proper ordinances, incentive programs and enforcement. »Explore opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas that promote safe, secure and economically diverse neighborhoods. * Supporting Strategies found in Chapter 2: Vision, Goals and Strategies HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-54-4 While related to housing age, the size or square footage of single-family homes also plays a significant role in the demographics of a community. Changes to family structure, technology, and other factors alter housing preferences over time, which can lead to functional obsolescence of homes and result in reduced home values because they no longer meet current buyers’ expectations. Brooklyn Center’s single-family housing stock is fairly homogeneous and the overwhelming majority of homes in every neighborhood are less than 1,500 square feet – and in many areas less than 1,000 square feet. This is a relatively modest single-family housing size, and, therefore, the single-family housing stock lacks diversity, which results in lack of choice for current and prospective residents. At the same time, these homes offer an option for small families, single and two-person households, and first time homebuyers. Because the majority of the City’s single-family housing stock is relatively small, older, and of a homogeneous type as compared to newer larger homes or neighborhoods with more housing variety, housing prices in Brooklyn Center tend to be affordable. Also, given the similar age, size and styles of many of the homes, housing in the community has a fairly consistent price-per- square foot. Affordability in the existing housing stock can be a positive attribute that has the potential to provide long-term stability to residents and neighborhoods. However, as shown in the Background Report residents of Brooklyn Center also tend to have lower median household incomes, which can mean residents may struggle to pay for large-scale capital investments in their homes such as replacing windows or a roof. Additionally, within the region some communities with similar single-family stock to Brooklyn Center have experienced pressure for tear-downs and major remodeling, and that market trend has yet to reach the City. While that trend may eventually impact the community, at the present time the change and growth impacting the single-family neighborhoods is mostly related to the evolving demographics within the community. This change presents different considerations and challenges because it is not necessarily physical growth or changes to homes and neighborhoods. Instead the community is challenged with how to manage larger numbers of people living within a household such as growing numbers of multi- generational households. The following sections identify and inventory the existing housing stock in the community including single-family, attached and apartment uses. Each of these housing types serve a different role in the community, but each type is an important part of the City’s neighborhoods. A summary of the City’s existing residential types and neighborhoods are as follows: Single-Family Residential Single-family residential neighborhoods are the dominant land use within the City and single- family detached homes comprise nearly 63 percent of the City’s housing stock. The City’s single-family detached neighborhoods were developed surrounding higher density and higher intensity land uses that included the former regional retail center and the major freeway corridors of I-94 and Highway 100. Most of the single-family neighborhoods are developed on a grid system with traditional ‘urban’ size lots. Exceptions of some larger lots are interspersed within the traditional block pattern and along the Mississippi River where a pocket of residents have views and/or frontage of the river corridor. The 1950s were the peak decade for housing construction in the City; a period in which owner- occupied housing predominated. While other housing types began to emerge post 1950s, the demand for single-family detached housing continued through 1980 as the remaining land in the community developed. Given the period in which the majority of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock was built, nearly the entire single-family detached housing stock is more than 40 years old. This is a major concern because at 40 years of age exterior components of a building including siding, windows, and roofs often need to be replaced to protect its structural integrity. Because the City became mostly built-out by the late 1970s, nearly all of the City’s housing stock falls into this category, which means the City must be cognizant of potential issues and proactively monitor the situation to ensure neighborhoods are sustainable into the future. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-74-6 Multi-family Residential Nearly one third (29 percent) of the City’s housing units are in multi-family residential buildings located throughout the community. Nearly all of these buildings were constructed in the 1960s and 1970s, and are primarily located on major roadways or corridors, and surrounding the former regional retail areas. This means these buildings are nearly 50 years old or older. Just as noted within the single-family neighborhoods, the potential for deterioration and need for significant investment in these aging buildings can pose a threat to the quality of the City’s housing stock if the buildings are not properly maintained, managed and updated. There has been some maintenance and management of the multi-family housing stock, and a few complexes have even incorporated modest upgrades to the interiors. In fact, the City has started one large-scale rehabilitation of a building that would bring higher-market rate rental options to the community once completed. However, this is one project and despite these improvements the City’s multi-family housing stock continues to be one of the most affordable in the region with some of the lowest rental rates in the metropolitan area. Many of the multi-family areas are near major corridors and are adjacent to high intensity uses that do not necessarily support or serve the residential use with the current development and land use patterns. As a result, many of the multi-family areas do not feel like an incorporated part of the City’s neighborhoods. As discussed in subsequent sections of this Chapter, the City is planning for redevelopment in or adjacent to many of the existing multi- family areas that will hopefully reinvigorate and reconnect the existing multi-family uses into a larger neighborhood context. Existing Single-family Neighborhood Perspectives Described in this Planning Process Throughout this planning process policy-makers and residents alike expressed the desire to maintain the affordability of the existing single-family neighborhoods but acknowledged the current challenges of helping residents maintain their structures, blocks and neighborhoods in the face of compounding maintenance due to the age of the City’s neighborhoods. In addition to the physical condition of the structures, residents and policy-makers also acknowledged that as the City’s population and demographics become increasingly more diverse new residents are changing how existing homes are being occupied and, therefore, it would be valuable for the City to evaluate it’s ordinances and policies to ensure they align with the needs of residents. The demographic considerations are identified in subsequent sections of this Chapter, but it is worth noting that the demographic changes can have a significant impact the character of existing single-family residential neighborhoods. Most recognized this as a positive change, but also acknowledged and stated that the City must figure out how to pro-actively address some of these changes to protect the existing neighborhood fabric. For example, multi-generational households are becoming increasingly more prevalent within the City’s single-family neighborhoods which can impact how rooms within a home are used, how many cars may be present at the home, and how outdoor spaces and yards may be used. Closely related to the demographic changes in the community is the City’s aspiration to promote and maintain neighborhood stability. This objective emerged repeatedly throughout this planning process as residents and policy-makers expressed the desire to identify strategies to help promote and encourage sustainability, resiliency and accessibility within the single-family neighborhoods. In part this objective is the result of several years of turnover within the single- family neighborhoods as long-term residents begin to age and move onto other housing options, new residents and families are moving into the neighborhoods. This life-cycle of housing is common, but the City wants to find ways to ensure new residents want to stay in their homes, their neighborhoods, and the community long-term and invest in making the City a better place for generations to come. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-94-8 Housing Stock Statistics The following existing housing stock characteristics support the previous neighborhood descriptions through more detail. This information, coupled with the previous description, provides a valuable baseline from which the City can evaluate and plan for the future of its housing stock. Total Housing Units According to data from the Metropolitan Council and the City of Brooklyn Center, there are 11,603 housing units in Brooklyn Center as of 2017. As a fully developed community, new residential development in Brooklyn Center has been limited since the late 1980s. According to the Metropolitan Council, around 100 new housing units have been built since 2000 and these homes were primarily small infill locations or small redevelopment opportunities. Housing Tenure (Owned and Rented Units) Nearly 40 percent of the community’s residents rent, and the majority of those renters live in apartment buildings which are integrated throughout the community. The Background Report in the Appendix includes maps illustrating the location of rental housing and demographics of renters. Given that a significant portion of the City’s population lives in apartments, the age of such structures becomes critically important to the overall health of the housing supply. The majority of the apartments were constructed prior to 1979 with the bulk of the units being constructed between 1966 and 1969. This means that the majority of the apartments is more than 50 years old, and that structural deficiencies and major capital improvements may be required in the relatively near term in order for the structures to remain marketable. Multifamily Neighborhood Perspectives Described in this Planning Process Throughout this planning process the City’s residents were vocal about the existing multi-family options available in the community and the lack of diversity within the multi-family housing stock. Without a full inventory of all available multi-family units it is difficult to confirm some of the anecdotal comments heard throughout the process, but nevertheless it is important to consider since residents’ testimony provides valuable insight into the existing housing stock. Several residents indicated that there are few options available for larger multi-family units with at least three (3) bedrooms, making it difficult to find stable living options for families with more than two (2) children. Residents also communicated a desire to have housing options that were closer to supportive retail, commercial and services so that they could walk, bike or easily use transit to meet their needs. Despite these challenges, the City’s parks, trails and open spaces were viewed as an integral and important part of their quality of life. Similarly, to the single-family neighborhoods, the community’s aspiration to create a stable, accessible, and economically diverse multi-family housing stock was established as a short and long-term priority. Though not discussed at length during this planning process, it is widely known and understood that resident turnover, including evictions, is a serious problem that is most concentrated within the multi-family neighborhoods of the City. While this Chapter does not attempt to fully evaluate the causes for turnover and eviction in these neighborhoods, it does acknowledge it as a significant challenge and issue which shapes the character of these areas of the community. Turnover, including evictions, changes how residents feel about the community whether the City is directly involved or not. It has lasting affects on how safe people feel within a community, how invested in an area they want to become and how willing they are to contribute and reinvest in the City. For these reasons, it is imperative that the City tackle these issues and create a more stable, and integrated living environment so all residents feel a part of a neighborhood, and the larger community. 11,603 Brooklyn Center housing units as of February 2017 - Sources: Metropolitan Council 40% of community residents are renters - Sources: Metropolitan Council; US Census; SHC HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-114-10 Approximately 86 percent of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock (over 10,000 units) is more than 40 years old. This is an overwhelming portion of the City’s housing, and it is therefore important to track the condition of these older homes as they are at-risk of deferred maintenance. This can rapidly result in critical structural problems. At the same time, well-maintained older housing can be an important source of entry-level housing because of its relative affordability when compared to newer construction. Table 4-1. Year Built Housing Type Related to housing tenure is housing type. Due to Brooklyn Center’s peak time of housing development in the 1950s, the housing type is predominantly single-family detached homes. As of 2017, there are 8,270 units (71 percent) of single-family housing (attached and detached) and 3,333 (29 percent) classified as multi-family housing. The type of housing structure can influence not only affordability but also overall livability. Having a range of housing structures can provide residents of a community options that best meet their needs as they shift from one life stage to another. For example, retirees often desire multi-family housing not only for the ease of maintenance, but also for security reasons. Multifamily residences are less susceptible to home maintenance issues or burglary concerns because of on-site management. For those with health concerns, multi-family residences often have neighbors that can also provide oversight should an acute health problem occur. The majority (63 percent) of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock consists of detached single-family homes. This is above the proportion found in Hennepin County (55 percent) or throughout the metropolitan area (59 percent). Nevertheless, the City’s housing stock is diversified, with many multi-family units in large structures, as well as a significant number of single-family attached units. More detailed data are included in the Background Report in the Appendix. Year Built The age of the housing stock is an important characteristic of the community particularly as it relates to potential structural obsolescence and other limiting factors which correlate to housing values. As described earlier, much of Brooklyn Center’s single-family housing stock was developed post-World War II between 1950 and 1963 and many of the homes in this age range were dominated by rambler architectural styles. As shown on Map 15, entire neighborhoods were all constructed in a relatively short period of time which strongly defines a neighborhood pattern. As shown, most of Brooklyn Center was developed on a fairly regular grid pattern and does not reflect a ‘suburban’ development pattern. This is positive from the perspective that transportation and transit connections should be easier to improve, where necessary, because of the relatively dense population of the neighborhoods. However, aging neighborhoods can present a challenge as major systems (i.e. roof, siding, windows, HVAC, etc.) reach the end of their useful life. This can be particularly difficult if residents are unable to reinvest and maintain their properties, which leads to deferred maintenance and the potential for more significant problems that would become widespread across entire neighborhoods. 71% of housing units are single-family - Sources: Metropolitan Council; US Census; SHC 86% of housing stock is more than 40 years old - Sources: US Census; SHC HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-134-12 Map 4-1. Estimated Market Value of Owner-Occupied Housing Housing Affordability The Metropolitan Council considers housing affordable when low-income households are spending no more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. Households are considered low-income if their income is at or below 80 percent of the metropolitan area’s median income (AMI). The housing stock in Brooklyn Center is affordable relative to other communities in the Twin Cities region. According to the Metropolitan Council, 93 percent of the housing units in 2017 in Brooklyn Center were considered affordable. Moreover, only a small portion (5 percent) of this housing is publicly subsidized. Therefore, most housing is privately-owned and pricing is set by the market. According to the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, there were 480 home sales in Brooklyn Center in 2017 with a median sales price of $186,125. This was roughly 25 percent lower than the Metro Area median sales price of $247,900. For rental housing, according to CoStar, a national provider of real estate data, the average monthly rent for a market rate apartment in Brooklyn Center in 2017 was $981 compared to the Metro Area average of $1,190.Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Columbia Heights Crystal Fridley Robbinsdale Minneapolis - Owner-Occupied Housing by Estimated Market Value 1/5/2018 .1 in = 0.55 miles Brooklyn Center County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries Streets Lakes and Rivers Owner-Occupied HousingEstimated Market Value, 2016 $243,500 or Less $243,501 to $350,000 $350,001 to $450,000 Over $450,000 Source: MetroGIS Regional Parcel Dataset, 2016 estimated market values for taxes payable in 2017. Note: Estimated Market Value includes only homesteaded units with a building on the parcel. $186,125 2017 median home sale price in Brooklyn Center $247,900 2017 median home sale price in the Metro Area - Source: Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-154-14 The high rate of affordability is largely due to the prevalence of smaller and older homes in the single-family neighborhoods, and the age and level of improvements within the multi-family rental neighborhoods. Such small sized properties are typically less expensive because they have significantly less living space than newer homes (average construction square footage has increased each decade since the 1950s). Age and level of update and improvements within the apartment stock, coupled with the average number of bedrooms in the rental units is impacting the relative affordability of the multi-family units. The condition in both the single-family and multi-family housing stock is what is known as Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH), because the physical characteristics of the properties are what makes them affordable rather than the affordability being established through a legally binding contract. Although there is a high rate of affordability for existing units, the Metropolitan Council identifies a need for additional affordable units in any new housing construction added to the community through 2040. This condition would most likely be achieved by a legally binding contract, or some other financing mechanism as new affordable housing product would be difficult to achieve without some assistance given construction and land costs. Of the 2,258 projected new housing units, the Metropolitan Council establishes a need of 238 units to be affordable to households at or below 80 percent AMI to satisfy the regional share of affordable housing. Although nearly all of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock essentially fits within the criteria as naturally occurring affordable housing, there are some observable trends that would suggest the price of housing in Brooklyn Center could rise in the coming years. Most recently in 2018 the City’s for-sale housing median home sales price surpassed the pre-bust pricing. While the median remains below the regional median, it does indicate growing demand and increased pricing. Significant areas of redevelopment identified on the Future Land Use Plan, including the former regional mall (Brookdale) location, present opportunities for higher-market rates for new housing added. These opportunities have the potential to create a more economically diverse housing stock within the City, which is relatively homogeneous at the time this Plan is written. Given these opportunities, it is important to continue to monitor the City’s NOAH stock, and to evaluate and establish policies to incorporate legally binding and protected affordable housing as redevelopment occurs. This is a careful balancing act that requires concerted and direct monitoring, study, and evaluation in order to ensure an economically diverse, sustainable and resilient housing stock for the long-term success of the community. Table 4-2. Existing Housing Assessment Total Housing Units1 11,608 Affordability2 Units affordable to households with income at or below 30% of AMI Units affordable to households with income 31% to 50% of AMI Units affordable to households with income 51% to 80% of AMI 460 4,451 6,029 Tenure3 Ownership Units Rental Units 6,911 4,697 Type1 Single-family Units Multifamily Units Manufactured Homes Other Housing Units 8,275 3,333 0 0 Publicly Subsidized Units4 All publicly subsidized units Publicly subsidized senior units Publicly subsidized units for people with disabilities Publicly subsidized units: all others 553 22 0 531 Housing Cost Burdened Households5 Income at or below 30% of AMI Income 31% to 50% of AMI Income 51% to 80% AMI 1,691 1,406 895 1 Metropolitan Council, 2016 housing sock estimate. Single-family units include single-family detached homes and townhomes. Multifamily units include units in duplex, triplex, and quadplex buildings as well as those in buildings with five or more units. 2 Metropolitan Council staff estimates for 2016 based on 2016 and 2017 MetroGIS Regional Parcel Datasets (ownership units), 2010-2014 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy data from HUD (rental units and household income), and the Council’s 2016 Manufactured Housing Parks Survey (manufactured homes). Counts from these datasets were adjusted to better match the Council’s estimates of housing units and households in 2016 as well as more current tenure, affordability, and income data from eh American Community Survey, home value data from the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and rents from HousingLink’s Twin Cities Rental Revue data. 3 US Census Bureau, 2012-2016 American Community Survey five-year estimates; counts adjusted to better match the Council’s 2016 housing stock estimates. 4 Source: HousingLink Streams data (covers projects whose financing closed by December 2016) 5 Housing cost burden refers to households whose housing costs are at least 30% of their income. Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2010- 2014 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, with counts adjusted to better match Metropolitan Council 2016 household estimates. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-174-16 Cost Burdened Households Cost burden is the proportion of household income spent toward housing and utilities. When lower income households spend more than 30 percent of their income toward housing and utilities this burden is considered excessive because it begins to limit the money available for other essentials such as food, clothing, transportation, and healthcare. According to data from the Metropolitan Council, 4,114 (35 percent) Brooklyn Center households at or below 80 percent average median income (AMI) are considered cost-burdened which means they spend more than 30 percent of household income on housing costs. This percentage is well above the metro area rate of 23 percent. Half of these Brooklyn Center households are lower income households who earn at or less than 30 percent AMI. The high incidence of cost burdened households is correlated with younger wage earners, lower-wage jobs, and a high proportion of older households, many of which are in retirement and no longer working. FUTURE HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES Projected Housing Need As referenced in Chapter 3: Land Use & Redevelopment and the following Table 4-4, the Metropolitan Council’s 2015 System Statement forecasts that Brooklyn Center will add approximately 4,169 new residents and 2,258 new households through 2040 and identifies the following affordable housing allocation to be accommodated between 2020 and 2030. Table 4-3. Affordable Housing Need Allocation At or below 30% AMI 103 31 to 50% AMI 0 51 to 80% AMI 135 Total Units 238 Source: 2015 System Statement - Metropolitan Council Housing Challenges inform Housing Needs The Metropolitan Council’s System Statement identifies approximately 10% of the planned housing units for some level of affordability as identified in Table 4-3. As described in other chapters of this Plan, for the first time since the post-World War II housing boom the City is expected to add a significant number of new households. These new households have the opportunity to provide a more diverse housing stock, and add to the options of available for existing and new residents in the community. Redevelopment can reinvigorate and revive KEY DEMOGRAPHICS Age Profile of the Population The age profile of a community has important ramifications on demand for housing, goods and services, and social cohesion. Tables and figures illustrating the City’s age distribution are presented in the Background Report in the Appendix. Unlike the broader region, in which the population continues to age rapidly, Brooklyn Center’s population grew younger between 2000 and 2010, and has stayed relatively stable since 2010. This is largely due to a significant increase in people age 25 to 34, many of which are starting families and having children. Increases in the number of young families place demands on schools, housing affordability, and the types of retail goods and services needed. The median age of residents in Brooklyn Center in 2016 was 32.8, which is consistent with the 2010 median age of 32.6. This is younger than 2000 when the median ages was 35.3. With such a young population, it is expected housing units may turn over more frequently. But, as of 2016, more than 60 percent all households have been living in their homes for more than five (5) years. More data about geographic mobility of households is found in the Background Report in the Appendix. Household & Family Type Changing family and household structures can also have a profound effect on housing and other community needs. For example, decreasing household size has a direct impact on the amount of housing a household needs. As mentioned, the presence of children not only impacts local schools and parks, but also the types of retailers that can be supported and the nature of housing demanded. Since 2010, the number of households with children in both single-parent and married couple households has been growing significantly. Meanwhile, the trend among households without children, especially married couples (i.e., empty-nesters) has been on the decline. The percentage of households with children is approaching 40 percent, which is well above the rate in the County and the metro area. 32.8 Median age of Brooklyn Center residents - Sources: US Census, SHC HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-194-18 • The City has discussed developing a more formal housing action plan to better understand the needs of its residents. The plan would work to better understand cost-burdened households, eviction rates and policies, home-ownership racial disparities, and gaps in the housing stock. • Continuing to revise, enhance and modify its policies and ordinance to respond to residents needs. This includes monitoring best-practices in the region, being agile and open to changes and enhancements. As an example of this type of ordinance or policy response the City recently adopted a Tenant Protection Ordinance that is aimed and protecting the City’s residents ability to maintain stable, safe housing. The City’s projected housing needs are complex, and are likely to become more complicated as redevelopment occurs. However, the City intends to continue to prioritize discussion and action around creating safe and stable housing throughout the City. The following sections specifically address the new housing expected to be develop in this planning period. The new and redevelopment areas should be considered collectively with the City’s existing neighborhoods to ensure an incorporated, integrated approach to the City’s neighborhoods is achieved to create a dynamic community for generations to come. areas of the community with vibrant, experience-rich areas that will benefit everyone in the community. The City is excited for redevelopment to create a dynamic central hub of activity in the community, but also acknowledges that it must be balanced with strong assessment, planning and appropriate protection of its existing housing stock to ensure neighborhood sustainability and stability in all areas of the community. New housing stock brings the possibility of adverse impacts to existing single-family and multi-family properties if proactive steps are not taken to protect existing naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH), single-family neighborhoods, and multi-family properties. The City’s policy makers throughout this process discussed and acknowledged that bringing new market-rate, amenity rich housing products could have deleterious affects specifically on existing naturally occurring affordable housing if a plan to protect affordability is not implemented. This is a huge concern as resident stability through access to safe and healthy housing is one of the City’s adopted strategic priorities. If proper tools are not in place there are no protections to keep rents reasonable for residents and to maintain reasonably priced for-sale housing as redevelopment takes holds. One of the positive aspects of the City’s identified redevelopment areas is that the land proposed for redevelopment does not contain existing housing. In a fully-development community this is unusual for a large redevelopment area, and is positive because no residents will be displaced as a result of the City’s redevelopment aspirations. However, even though residents will not be displaced directly, indirectly, redevelopment could increase the desirability of activities such as flipping single-family homes and converting NOAH multi-family properties for higher-rents. To address some of these concerns an extensive list of high-level tools have been outlined in Table 4-5 of this Chapter. The City recognizes that this chapter is only the start of an ongoing conversation, and it is the City’s policy-makers intent to continue to be proactive, and to collaborate with non-profits and advocate for a broader regional approach to housing affordability. In addition to the tools identified in Table 4-5, the City is also continuing conversations about: • Viability of a non-discrimination ordinance related to Section 8 acceptance. Adjacent Cities, including Minneapolis, have attempted to include ordinances in their tool-kit addressing this issue. While the issue is currently in court, Brooklyn Center will continue to monitor the process and may consider adoption of a similar ordinance depending on its outcome. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-214-20 Future Residential Uses in Planned [Re] Development Opportunity Areas Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) is a new land use and redevelopment concept in the City that focuses on existing and planned transit as a major amenity and catalyst for redevelopment. While previous planning efforts have acknowledged the presence of transit in the community, none have embraced it as an opportunity for redevelopment. As this portion of the City redevelops, the location of future transit enhancements has the potential to attract significant new housing development. Therefore, this is where guided densities are the highest. This is purposeful because the area has exceptional visibility and access from Highway 100 and I-94, and will be served by two transit stops (one being a transit hub) for the C-Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and the potential future D-Line BRT. The C-Line BRT is planned to open in 2019 and will mimic the operations of LRT (light rail transit), offering frequent transit service that will connect residents to the larger region. To best support the C-Line, and future D-Line, the City has planned to reinvigorate and re-imagine this central area of the community as a more livable, walkable, and connected neighborhood within the City. In addition, the potential for desirable views of Downtown Minneapolis could result in pressure to build taller structures in this area. Any development of this area should also be seen as an opportunity to support commercial users, improve multi-modal service and access, and allow safe, pleasant, and walkable connections to transit, parks, and other community destinations. As this area evolves, the desirability of this area as an amenity-rich livable area is likely to improve. As change occurs, the housing within the area is likely to be at market rates adding to a more economically diverse housing stock than is currently available in the community. This would add more housing choices in Brooklyn Center, and it could also support a mix of both market rate and affordable units; provided proper policies are developed to ensure legally binding affordable housing is incorporated into development plans. Communities oftentimes explore policies such as inclusionary zoning as redevelopment accelerates which may become an appropriate consideration in the future, but is likely not to be the best approach given current market conditions. However, in the future if significant increases in the market occur it may warrant further discussion in the City. Regardless of the policy tool (whether regulatory or incentive based) selected, consideration will need to be given to working with any future developer in a possible partnership with the City to help deliver affordable units as part of redevelopment. As described within the Chapter 9: Implementation, the City will continue to explore proper methodology and policies to ensure an economically diverse housing stock is created as housing continues to evolve in the community. New Housing Opportunities in this Planning Period Recognizing that the land use plan for Brooklyn Center identifies several key areas that are envisioned for new development or redevelopment, this will result in an opportunity to accommodate more housing and increase the City’s number of households. Based on guided residential densities in the development opportunity areas, the City can accommodate the Metropolitan Council’s forecasted households as well as meet the allocated affordable units as shown in Table 4-3 above. As indicated in the Land Use Chapter, depending on how the market responds to these redevelopment areas the City could accommodate anywhere between 2,658 and 3,836 new households by 2040 (Chapter 3: Table 3-5, repeated in the following Table 4-4). Table 4-4. Future Land Use Densities and Projected Acres, Households & Population Future Land Use Density (DU/A)2020 Acres (Res)b HH Popc 2030 Acres (Res)b HH Popc Transit Orient Development 31.01-130 DU/A 9 279 619 26 814 1,807 Neighborhood Mixed-Use 15.01-31 DU/A 13 195 433 19 285 632 Commercial Mixed Use 10.01 – 25 DU/A 8 80 178 15 150 333 High Density Residential 15.01-31 DU/A 212 3,180 7,060 212 3,180 7,060 TOTAL ----3,734 8,290 --4,429 9,832 Source: Metropolitan Council, Thrive 2040 Brooklyn Center 2015 System Statement, SHC. a Acreages assume that some recently redeveloped areas within these land use designations will not experience redevelopment until post-2040 and therefore households are not calculated. Please refer to Map 3-3 that identifies areas planned for change within this planning period. b Note, there are existing households in each of the designations today that would be re-guided for potential redevelopment in the future. This accounts for existing households and those that my potentially develop over the next two years. c Calculation multiplies households by 2.22 persons per household (According to the 2016 ACS (Census), for multi- family units (5+ units in structure) There are three large districts identified in the City with guided land use that allows for significant potential of new development and redevelopment through 2040. These areas have the potential to greatly expand Brooklyn Center’s current housing numbers and choices. Moreover, each opportunity area has the potential to not only provide new forms and types of housing but to catalyze or rejuvenate investment into the City resulting in stronger linkages between neighborhoods and districts that are currently isolated from one another. The following section discusses these areas further. HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-234-22 Commercial Mixed-Use Areas The Commercial Mixed-Use areas generally surround the TOD area and are contemplated for large- scale redevelopment but are equally as focused on supporting business and office users. These areas are generally within one mile of the transit station that serves as a major hub for regional and local transit services, and therefore new housing will still have opportunities to capitalize on this as an amenity. Slightly less dense than the TOD district, these areas may provide exceptional opportunities to introduce multi-family uses such as town homes, row homes, and small lot single-family uses that could cater to larger families and incorporate more units with three or more bedrooms. As indicated in previous sections of this Chapter, the City’s residents expressed a desire to have access to more rental units with more bedrooms and larger square footages. While a detailed market study would likely be needed to confirm the demand for these uses, if we can take the anecdotal information as true, this area has the potential to support those types of uses. As with the TOD district, affordability is likely to become a consideration in any redevelopment within these areas because new construction naturally costs more and as the area redevelops interest and demand is likely to escalate costs. It is therefore important, just as with the redevelopment of the TOD district, that the City evaluate and explore ways to incorporate a range of affordable and market rate opportunities in new developments. Neighborhood Mixed-Use Areas The Neighborhood Mixed-Use is a new land use designation that responds to resident and policy-makers desire to incorporate retail and services into the neighborhood fabric. One of the ways the City can accomplish that objective is to create ‘nodes’ of mixed-uses that include residential uses, but protect key corners for small retailers, shops, or restaurants that create a more vibrant streetscape. The City acknowledges that these areas are less likely to redevelop with any regularity. Therefore, the number of new housing units expected to come on-line in these areas is a little less tangible than in areas with large contiguous redevelopment acres. However, the nodes have the opportunity to provide yet another housing style and type, as these areas are not envisioned for large high-rises or extensive master plans. Instead, these areas are contemplated to have smaller footprints with living units above a small store front or restaurant for example. HOUSING RESOURCES, STRATEGIES & TOOLS Table 4-5 outlines a variety of resources, strategies, and tools to implement Brooklyn Center’s identified housing needs and stated housing goals. There is a wealth of resources available to assist communities in meeting their goals. The following table should be considered a starting point. As the City’s housing needs evolve or become clearer, this set of tools should expand with options. Table 4-5. Housing Resources, Strategies & Tools Housing Goal Tool/ Resource/ Strategy Description Affordability Target Promote a diverse stock that provides opportunities for all income levels Housing Demand Market Study Conduct a market study and gaps analysis to track housing demand. This study and report could double as a marketing and promotional piece about housing opportunities. <30% AMI51-80% AMI HRA/CDA/EDA Work with the County HRA and City EDA to protect and enhance existing NOAH in the City. Use Market Studies to help identify opportunities to meet housing needs in the City and evaluate ways to partner with the County and other program providers. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Site Assembly Consider strategies for assembling sites in high-density or mixed-use districts that would increase appeal to developers. <30% AMI51-80% AMI CDBG Work with Hennepin County to use CDBG funds to help low-and moderate-income homeowners with rehabilitation assistance. CDBG funds will also be explored for use to support redevelopment efforts that meet the City’s goals towards a diverse housing stock (units and market/affordable diversity). <30% AMI51-80% AMI Tax Abatement Consider tax abatement for large rental project proposals that provide unit and income-mix within a single project. The City is particularly interested in projects with market diversity and units of different size to cater to a larger market (singles, families, multi-generational, etc). <30% AMI51-80% AMI HOME and Affordable Housing Incentive Fund Consider application, and utilization, of HOME and Affordable Housing Incentive fund grants to support a diverse housing stock. The City will prioritize projects that include a unit size and income mix that meets the needs of single-person and families in the City. <30% AMI30-50% AMI Housing Bonds The City would consider issuing Housing Bonds for projects that include units for large families, particularly in projects with a mix of unit sizes and incomes. However, it should be noted that there are limitations to the city bonding authority and other programs may be more suitable <30% AMI51-80% AMI Brownfield Clean-up In potential redevelopment areas, explore EPA and MN DEED grant programs that provide funding and assistance with planning, assessment, and site clean-up. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% 4D for NOAH Properties The City will continue use of 4D classification for the purpose of protecting its Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) uses throughout the City. <30% AMI30-50% AMI Pooled TIF Funds Explore the use of TIF housing funds to create a revolving loan program to support the rehabilitation of existing single-family and multi-family NOAH properties. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-254-24 Housing Goal Tool/ Resource/ Strategy Description Affordability Target Identify ways to match housing stock with changing demographic Housing Coordinator Position The City would create a position that would serve as a liaison to existing landlords to help them respond to shifting demographics through training and access to city resources. The position could also serve as a resource for tenants to connect to support services in the event of eviction notices, discriminatory practices, and other issues related to housing access. The position would include coordinating housing programs, including home ownership programs, resident financial literacy programs, with the intent to convert Brooklyn Center renters to successful home owners. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Referrals Review and update reference procedures and training for applicable staff including a plan to maintain our ability to refer residents to any applicable housing programs outside the scope of local services. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Preserve LIHTC properties The City will monitor expiring LIHTC properties and work to find solutions to protect and preserve these affordable units to meet the needs and demands of the City’s residents. The City will approach owners with expiring properties to discuss the possibility of 4d program tax breaks <30% AMI30-50% AMI Explore opportunities to improve City housing policies and ordinance to make more responsive Expedited Application Process Streamline the pre-application process in order to minimize unnecessary delay for projects that address our stated housing needs, prior to a formal application submittal <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Fair Housing Policy The City will work to incorporate a Fair Housing policy into its ordinances and policies. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Existing ordinances The City will continue to operate its Rental Licensing Program, and will periodically review and make enhancements to support the City’s residents. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Update the City’s Zoning to support new land uses The City’s future land use plan provides opportunities to include high density residential uses in the areas identified for redevelopment. The City will update its zoning ordinance, including prepare new zoning districts, to support the housing needs identified in this Housing chapter. <30% AMI51-80% Maintain existing housing stock in single-family neighborhoods through proper ordinances, incentives and enforcement Foreclosure Prevention In established neighborhoods, a rash of foreclosures, especially in close proximity to one another, can have a deleterious effect on the surrounding neighborhood. Be aware of foreclosures and be able to direct homeowners at-risk of foreclosure to resources that can help prevent foreclosures. http://www.hocmn.org/ <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Low or No Cost Home Loans Providing low-or no-cost loans to help homeowners repair heating, plumbing, or electrical systems helps preserve existing housing. For example, Minnesota Housing’s Rehabilitation Loan and Emergency Loan programs make zero percent, deferred loans that are forgivable if the borrower lives in the home for 30 years. Minnesota Housing’s Community Fix Up Program offers lower-cost home improvement loans, often with discounted interest rates, remodeling advising, or home energy services, through a trained lender network. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Home Ownership Program Work with residents to provide education and programs to make home ownership possible, particularly converting existing renters to home owners through supporting down-payment assistance programs. 30-50% AMI51-80% Code Enforcement The City will continue to operate a robust code enforcement program that includes both complaint-based enforcement and proactive sweeps. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Vacant Building Program The City will continue to operate its Vacant Building Program that tracks and monitors vacant properties in the City to ensure adequate upkeep and maintenance. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Explore opportunities to incorporate new affordable housing into redevelopment areas Inclusionary Housing Ordinance If the market strengthens in redevelopment areas to the extent that policies would not deter investment, the City could consider an inclusionary housing ordinance to ensure that affordable housing is a component of any new housing development. Since current market conditions in the City are well below those of adjacent communities, an inclusionary policy may deter short-term investment. The City may want to explore this policy in the future if the market rents rise to levels of at least 80% AMI. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Livable Communities (LCA and LCA LCDA-TOD) Consider supporting/sponsoring an application to LCDA programs for multi-family rental proposals in areas guided for high density residential and targeted to households of all income levels. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% Tax Increment Financing (TIF) To help meet the need for low-income housing, the City will establish a TIF district in an area guided for TOD and mixed uses. <30% AMI30-50% AMI51-80% HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4-274-26 DRAFT CHAPTER 5: Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability Comprehensive Plan 2040 Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-1 INTRODUCTION In previous Chapters of this Plan the City’s commitment to redefining, reimagining and redeveloping key areas of the community are described; but this commitment is hollow without the City’s vision to elevate Brooklyn Center to an economically competitive City within the greater region. Economic competitiveness in the context of this Plan is the City’s ability to compete effectively for economic development that creates jobs, brings and retains corporations, successfully incubates new businesses and services on a local, regional, national and international scale. It also refers to the City’s ability to attract jobs and employment that serves its residents, and emphasizes opportunities and access to education, job skills matching and an improved quality of life for all of its residents – the idea that if we do better, we all do better together. 2040 Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability Goals »Promote Brooklyn Center as an exceptional place for businesses, visitors and residents, both existing and new, because of its locational advantage and accessibility within the region. »Support the development of sustainable, resilient, and accessible neighborhoods in the city center that reinforce the City’s commitment to its diverse residents, neighborhoods, and businesses. »Explore meaningful ways to represent the community’s diversity through the City’s »Encourage and promote reinvestment in the City’s infrastructure including roadways, streetscapes, trails and utilities to signal Brooklyn Center’s commitment to the long-term success of its residents and businesses. branding, marketing and visual communications. »Recognize the opportunity and value of Brooklyn Center’s changing demographics and entrepreneurial attitudes to create an identity that embraces diversity as part of the City’s future. * Supporting Strategies found in Chapter 2: Vision, Goals & Strategies Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-2 The vision that Brooklyn Center can and should compete on not only a regional scale, but on a national and international scale may seem daunting particularly if the City spends too much time looking in its rear-view mirror. However, in order to move forward it is important for the City to understand its past and present because it provides valuable context from which the City can prepare its guide and roadmap for the future. The purpose of this Chapter is to plan for economic development opportunities in the community that add refinement to Chapter 3: Land Use & Redevelopment and Chapter 4: Housing & Neighborhood contained in this Plan. As described throughout this Plan, the City is at a pivotal time and is faced with enormous opportunity to change and shape its future. The City recognizes that by working directly with the businesses and the community, we can create and maintain a strong economy and provide opportunities for all to be successful. The City is focused on capitalizing on this opportunity and is actively seeking ways to embrace the changes occurring in the community to make Brooklyn Center a great place to live, work, recreate and do business. Repeatedly throughout this planning process the City’s residents, stakeholders and policy- makers emphasized the need to nurture, support and grow local business. There is a common belief that the community is filled with an entrepreneurial spirit, residents who want the opportunity to work in Brooklyn Center with others who are passionate about making the City a great place to build and grow a business. The City is committed to finding ways to provide accessible, affordable and supportive opportunities for businesses to excel and thrive in the community – from small pop-up markets and kiosks to full-scale professional office buildings. This Chapter is structured differently than others within this Plan because it is intended to serve an additional function beyond simply being a Chapter within this Plan. Instead this Chapter has enough background, socio-economic and existing conditions information to establish the context from which the aspirations and opportunities are derived to allow this Chapter to ‘standalone’ when needed – while still functioning as an integral and important part of this Plan. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-3 EXISTING SOCIO-ECONOMIC SNAPSHOT OF RESIDENTS One of the components that affects the community’s ability to compete for economic development are the characteristics of the labor force available to new businesses and industries that may choose to relocate or grow in a region. Businesses need workers to prosper – and workers that have skills, education and characteristics that match their industry help make decisions to grow or locate in a community easier. The following information is a summary of more detailed information is contained in the Background Report Appendix C, with additional discussion about key characteristics that most directly impact the City’s economic development efforts. This information is a snapshot in time and should be used as a baseline – not as the future condition. For example, the City is expected to add more than 2,200 new households to the community over the next 20-years and those residents will add a new dynamic to the labor force that is not currently represented in the following data. Existing Labor Force Characteristics The following information was collected from a variety of resources including the US Census, DEED, ACS 2011 – 2016, the Metropolitan Council, Perkins+Will and SHC. More information regarding changes by decade and larger distribution trends can be found in the Background Report Appendix C. Age The age profile of the City plays an important role in economic development from the respect of what types of goods and services the population may demand, and also indicates the number of people that may be in the labor force now and in the future. As shown in Figure 5-1: Median Age 2000 – 2016, Brooklyn Center’s Median Age is well below that of Hennepin County and the metro area. Brooklyn Center is expected to add more than 2,200 new households over the next 20 years. - Sources: Metropolitan Council Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-4 Figure 5-1: Median Age 2000-2016 In addition to Brooklyn Center’s median age that is lower than that of Hennepin County and the 7-County metropolitan area, the City’s share of the population Under 5 and between 5 and 17 represents a higher distribution of this age cohort than that of the County and the 7-County metropolitan area. This means that the number of young people that are either just entering the labor force or that will enter the labor force in the next decade is a significant proportion of the City’s population. This has ramifications for the City’s economic development efforts and emphasizes the importance of the City proactively partnering with schools, post-secondary institutions and other job skills training efforts to make sure that young people’s skills are developed to match the needs of current and future employers. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-5 Racial & Ethnic Composition Brooklyn Center is a diverse community and is one of the only communities in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area with a majority-minority population. Additionally, the City’s population has the second highest percentage of foreign-born residents in the Twin Cities metropolitan area, with 21%, or 1 in 5 residents, born outside the United States. As shown in the Background Report, the City’s population is nearly 60% non-white, which is in contrast to Hennepin County (29.6%) and the 7-County Metro Area (25.2%). This difference means Brooklyn Center’s residents are more diverse and represent more racial/ethnic groups than the surrounding communities. When celebrated, this diversity is an opportunity to make the City a dynamic integrated community that can serve as a model for the greater region—a region that is expected to demographically evolve similarly to the Brooklyn Center over the next planning period. Throughout this planning process residents, stakeholders and policy-makers expressed their belief that the City’s diversity is a key differentiator in the region and that the opportunity to create a vibrant business community is inevitable as long as the right commitments and policies are put in place to foster economic development that benefits a range of business opportunities. While the diverse resident population offers an exceptional opportunity, it also represents a challenge to ensure the City is responsive, supportive and integrative of its efforts to meet the needs of the changing population. In 2017, the City of Brooklyn Center partnered with Everybody In to provide a comprehensive report on racial equality within the City. The report identified and confirmed some existing racial disparities in the City, which provides valuable insight into what types of changes the City could employ to create a more equitable community for the future of all Brooklyn Center residents. The City is committed to continuing efforts to evaluate ways to reduce racial disparities that exist as they relate the economic stability of its residents, including access to livable wage jobs, home ownership opportunities, financial literacy and wealth creation, and job pathways training. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-6 Education Educational attainment is an important characteristic of the labor force and is one of the considerations a business or company evaluates when choosing to grow or locate within a community. Unlike age or racial/ethnic characteristics, educational attainment has the potential to be directly changed and influenced through improved policies and objectives. That is, you can’t change someone’s age, but you can change and improve the accessibility and availability of education and job skills training to the population. As of 2016, 82% of Brooklyn Center residents have graduated high school and of those residents approximately 20% have a bachelor or graduate/professional degree. While the majority of the population over the age of 25 has a high school diploma, the percent of the population that did not graduate from high school is more than that of Hennepin County and the 7-County metro area. (See Figure 5-2. Change in the Population without a High School Diploma 2000-2016). Figure 5-2. Change in the Population without a High School Diploma 2000-2016 The good news is that after a spike between 2000 and 2010 in residents without a High School Diploma, the trend line appears to be decreasing between 2010 and 2016. Even with the slight recovery, the City’s percentage of the population without a diploma is still more than 10% higher than that of the County and the 7-County Metro Area. One of the most important efforts the City has identified in this planning process is the need to identify ways to get the City’s youth involved and committed to education. 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 2000 2010 2016 Pe r c e n t o f P o p u l a t i o n (A g e 2 5 o r O l d e r ) BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-7 Ensuring that the population has adequate educational opportunities and that education is accessible and attainable is a key component of the residents’ ability to obtain and maintain livable wage jobs. The City of Brooklyn Center has multiple post-secondary educational institutions within proximity to the City including North Hennepin Community College and Hennepin Technical College, the University of Minnesota and various private post-secondary universities and colleges located within Minneapolis and Saint Paul. While these campuses are not located in the City of Brooklyn Center, several are within 5-miles of the City and are accessible by car, transit and bikeways or trails. Income/Wages In 2016 the median household income was $46,400 which is a slight increase from the information contained within the Background Report from 2016 which identified median household income as $44,855. As shown in the Background Report, the City’s median household income is more than $20,000 less than that of Hennepin County and the 7-County Metropolitan Area. While there are many factors that contribute to why Brooklyn Center’s household incomes are less, it is most important to understand what it means for current residents. When household incomes are less it means that residents have less choice in meeting every day needs such as housing, goods, services and transportation. Additionally, residents likely have less disposable income to spend which directly affects businesses, particularly those in retail and commercial uses. Adding complexity to the evaluation is the number of residents in the City that are at or below the federal poverty level. In 2016 the poverty level was defined as $24,563 for a family of four, and generally a greater number of residents living in Brooklyn Center have incomes that place them below the poverty level and below 200% of the poverty level than in other neighboring cities. As shown in the Background Report, as of 2016 approximately 19.2% of Brooklyn Center residents had incomes below the poverty level, and over 44% were below 200% of the poverty level. Because of some of these statistics the City Council knew it was important to make efforts to try and reverse this trendline and to proactively identify ways to help the City’s residents gain greater economic stability. As part of this effort, in 2017 the Brooklyn Center City Council adopted strategic priorities for the City that focused on ways to improve the quality of life for the community. Given the high poverty rate relative to the region, the City Council identified Resident Economic Stability as one of the six strategic priorities. This priority, among other things, focuses on the creation and attraction of jobs with livable wages to the community. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-8 Unemployment The Great Recession in the late 2000s significantly impacted the nation, and hit Brooklyn Center’s residents particularly hard where the unemployment rate rose to 9.7%. Since that time, the unemployment rate has gradually declined and in 2018 was around 3.6% (See Figure 5-3 Average Annual Unemployment for Brooklyn Center Residents). The City’s overall unemployment rate is similar to that of the region, which is currently hovering between 3.0 and 3.5%. The unemployment rates are slightly higher among minority populations, in particular the African American and Eastern African populations that according to a report released by DEED in January 2018 was approximately 7.5% across the State. This disparity highlights the need for more focused attention on education and job skills training to help lessen the gap across all populations. Figure 5-3. Average Annual Unemployment for Brooklyn Center Residents 6.7% 9.7%9.2%8.2%7.2%6.1% 4.8%4.6%4.3%4.1%3.6% 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Source: DEED Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-9 Where Residents Work and Commute Understanding where current residents work and who holds the existing jobs are important characteristics to consider when promoting Brooklyn Center’s economic competitiveness within the region. Given that Brooklyn Center shares a border with Minneapolis, it is not surprising that the City of Minneapolis is the top workplace for people who live in Brooklyn Center, in fact of the City’s workers more than 4 times as many workers work in Minneapolis than Brooklyn Center. Residents of Minneapolis are, in turn, the top employed within the City outnumbering Brooklyn Center residents by more than 500. These trends are important to understand and consider as new businesses evaluate and consider the City. Not only is there potential to capitalize on more local residents returning to the City for work, but because the City is so accessible within the region businesses have a labor pool that extends far beyond the City’s borders into cities such as Minneapolis, Saint Paul, Brooklyn Park and other surrounding suburbs. Top 5 Workplaces of People Who Live in Brooklyn Center Top 5 Residences of People Who Work in Brooklyn Center Minneapolis 3,348 Minneapolis 1,367 Saint Paul 889 Brooklyn Park 1,161 Brooklyn Center 826 Brooklyn Center 826 Brooklyn Park 813 Saint Paul 673 Plymouth 771 Maple Grove 456 As described in the Background Report, commute time to work is an important factor in considering where to work because it directly impacts the amount of time spent away from other activities. As of 2015, the median travel time to work of Brooklyn Center’s residents was approximately 22.6 minutes, which was slightly above Hennepin County (22.2 minutes) and slightly below the 7-County Metro Area (23.1 minutes). This demonstrates that Brooklyn Center is well positioned within the region, but also signals opportunities to further reduce how much time residents spend in their cars if more jobs were to become available in the community. Today, a significant portion of Brooklyn Center residents drive alone in their own personal vehicles to their place of work which can be costly, and can also increase stress. This represents an opportunity if the City increases the number of jobs in Brooklyn Center, and residents are well suited and matched to the jobs, then Brooklyn Center residents have the chance to choose an alternate mode of transportation such as transit, walking or biking to work. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-10 PAST AND PRESENT INDUSTRY TRENDS IN BROOKLYN CENTER Since the Great Recession ended in the late 2000s, the City has experienced steady employment growth and as of 2017 has a total of 13,272 jobs which outpaces the most recent projections. To further understand how the jobs are distributed in the community the City prepared a Background Report in 2017 as part of this planning process. The following sections highlight the top four industries of the City’s past and present, which represents nearly 85% of the City’s jobs. This information provides valuable insight into the employment trends and types of jobs over the past 16-years and provides an indication of the types of jobs that the City may wish to target for future economic development. The information that follows is a compilation of information collected from staff, residents, businesses and stakeholders during this planning process as well as a synthesis of more detailed information contained in the Background Report Appendix C. Industry: Retail As described and introduced in Chapter 3: Land Use & Redevelopment the City’s past economic identity is heavily attached to the retail industry. Though many residents, stakeholders and policy makers consider this industry to be one of the most significant contributors to jobs in the City, it accounted for approximately 17% of the jobs in the City with approximately 2,228 jobs. While this is not a small percentage of jobs, it does represent a decrease in jobs available from 2010 when nearly 23% of the City’s jobs were within the retail industry, and there were approximately 3,767 jobs. This shift in retail employment was an important consideration for the community because it so heavily relied on being a regional retail destination for so many decades. The following sections provide background and context for this retail shift, and describes some recent trends occurring in the City’s redevelopment areas. Brookdale Mall and its Surroundings For decades the City of Brooklyn Center’s economy was anchored by Brookdale Mall and surrounding retail uses. Brookdale Mall was one of the first regional indoor fully climate- controlled retail centers in the state and as a result attracted shoppers from the larger north metropolitan region. Brookdale was truly a regional attraction, and Brooklyn Center’s residents benefited not only from accesses to shopping and services but from a significant number of retail jobs that were available due to the presence of the Mall. The retail focus of the City’s economic engine was a double-edged sword because while there were many more jobs per capita when Brookdale Mall was in operation, the jobs were not high-wage jobs and many were not livable wages. Regardless, Brookdale Mall and adjacent Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-11 retail users remained the dominant economic driver in the City through the 1990s and did not experience dramatic changes until the mid-2000’s when Brookdale lost its first anchor. Once the first anchor closed, Brookdale Mall began its steady and eventual full decline that led to its closing the late 2000s. The closure aligned with the housing bust and Great Recession that had vast impact at the National scale, but it impacted Brooklyn Center in ways that no one could have predicted with far reaching implications throughout the community. Between 2000 and 2010 the City lost more than 2,200 retail jobs which is equivalent to nearly a 60% reduction in the number of retail jobs available in the community. (See Background Report Appendix C). The decline was not only impactful because it eliminated jobs from the City that many of its residents were employed in, but because it signaled a massive change in the retail industry on a larger regional and national scale that we are still learning about. Once Brookdale Mall closed adjacent supporting users also began to close leaving behind a large contiguous core of available land for redevelopment in the ‘center’ of the City. This mass exodus occurred as the City was preparing the previous 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and policy-makers were faced with the overwhelming task of figuring out what to do with this now large underutilized area of the community that was once defined the central area and character of the community. As a first step in redeveloping the area, the City and its Economic Development Authority proactively purchased properties as they became available to ensure that a comprehensive approach to redevelopment could be implemented. After many years of acquisitions and process, the City was able to redevelop portions of the land into what is now Shingle Creek Crossing. Shingle Creek Crossing is a new retail destination with predominantly nation retailers and is anchored by big box stores. This area continues to evolve with new retailers being brought online with HOM Furniture being the most recent addition to the area. The efforts to revitalize this area are working and some recovery of the jobs lost between 2000 and 2010 has occurred, with more than 700 new retail jobs added between 2010 and 2016. While the City does not expect to recover all the retail jobs lost during the Great Recession because of industry-wide retail changes, it does anticipate some additional growth over the planning period particularly in areas such as Shingle Creek Crossing. Key Corridors In addition to the core retail center in the City, there are several major roadway corridors that provide additional opportunities for retail and commercial service users. For example Brooklyn Boulevard is a high-volume roadway corridor that carries cars, pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users. The corridor is an important connection through the City and is dotted with small retail, institutional and residential uses. The corridor is identified within this Plan as an important neighborhood and community roadway connection and is guided for redevelopment as Brooklyn Boulevard is reconstructed over the next five years. Retail users such as fast food, convenience, Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-12 auto repair and car sales dot the corridor and the City only expects the strength of this corridor to continue and evolve. Additionally, the City is bisected by both Highway 100 and I-94/I-694 which leads to exceptional regional access particularly near key interchanges. An example of a recent redevelopment effort is Topgolf which opened in the Fall of 2018. Topgolf is expected to be a regional entertainment/service destination that provides patrons opportunities to meet, play, eat and enjoy a drink. As the City continues to change and evolve, the City anticipates that new demand and pressure for similar types of retail and service destinations will be most prevalent along major roadway corridors. Industry: Production, Distribution, and Repair Though many residents and policy-makers often point to retail as the most prevalent industry and job provider in the City, the Production, Distribution, and Repair (PDR) industry sector provides the most employment opportunities in the community. Like the Retail sector, the PDR industry sector was heavily impacted by the Great Recession and the City lost approximately 1,100 jobs between 2000 and 2016; however, even with that decline the PDR industry still provides the most jobs in the community and accounts for over 3,100 jobs in the City. The City recognizes this as an important industry to maintain in the community now and into the future. The Future Land Use Plan specifically identifies, supports and plans for land uses that will continue to promote and maintain light industrial uses and business, light manufacturing and other similar businesses. Most recently some of the City’s industrial and light industrial users have expanded, remodeled and reinvested and it is the City’s desire to continue to ensure policies and regulations support the businesses’ ability to stay in the community for the long-term. Industry: Educational and Medical Services Trailing slightly behind the PDR industry, the Educational and Medical Services (Eds/Meds) industry is booming across the region and is slowly beginning to accelerate its presence in the City. Most notably Medtronic recently remodeled and added to its facility sending a message to the community of its long-term commitment to stay and grow. While the industry experienced a large loss of jobs between 2005 and 2010, it has rebounded significantly between 2010 and 2016 adding back nearly all the jobs it lost in the economic downturn. This industry is projected to continue to grow and gain momentum in the region and the City is well positioned to capitalize on that trend given its proximity to major roadways, post- secondary institutions and availability of land. As shown in the Future Land Use Plan, the City Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-13 has guided significant land area that would be supportive of these uses and could be integrated at a small or large scale within many of the City’s mixed-use land designations. Industry: Knowledge (Consists of ‘knowledge-based’ industry sectors, such as Information, Finance and Professional Management) The number of jobs available in the knowledge industry has stayed relatively flat over the last 10-years with modest increases, but it remains an important industry in the City comprising nearly 19% of the City’s jobs. These jobs will continue to play an important role in the City and opportunities to expand these uses will be available within the redevelopment areas of the City. It is difficult to anticipate what or if any major ‘knowledge’ based businesses will choose to locate in the community, but with the quantity of land available in the redevelopment areas it is possible given the City’s desire to create compact, walkable and experience-based development. All of these characteristics are becoming more desirable amenities to all workers, but particularly with office-based workers. Industry: Hospitality and Tourism (Worth Noting) Though not one of the top four industries in the community, this Chapter would be remiss if it did not highlight the hospitality and tourism industry in the community. The City’s proximity to downtown Minneapolis and Saint Paul, coupled with its accessibility to major highways and freeways throughout the west metro make Brooklyn Center a great place for hotels, conference centers and other hospitality uses. While the City’s employment in this industry has seen some decline over the past 16-years, it has remained relatively flat over the past 5-years and there is no indication further loss of employment in this industry is anticipated. In fact, when the C-Line becomes operational it will make the City even more accessible to both the Minneapolis and Saint Paul downtown business districts, as well as the MSP International Airport. This area is well connected and includes the Earle Brown Conference and Event Center as well as several hotels all within reasonable distance of the transit station, and is also highly accessible by car with ample on-site parking. Though tourism and hospitality are constantly evolving, there is potential for this industry to expand and grow in the City given the current market dynamics and availability of land for redevelopment. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-14 FUTURE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT The existing socio-economic characteristics of the community coupled with the City’s past and present industry trends provide the baseline from which a plan for economic development can be refined. The City has several systems, policies and objectives in place to help guide and facilitate economic development, and this Plan is intended to assist the City, policy-makers and prospective businesses in making thoughtful and proactive plans that make the City a great place for residents – and a great place to do business. The following table is taken directly from the Metropolitan Council’s 2015 System Statement for the City of Brooklyn Center. It highlights that within the region, Brooklyn Center is projected to grow – grow its population, its households and its jobs. Table 5-1. Metropolitan Council Forecasts - 2015 System Statement Forecast Year Population Households Employment 2010 30,104 10,756 11,001 2020 31,400 11,300 13,000 2030 33,000 12,300 13,800 2040 35,400 13,300 14,600 Source: Metropolitan Council If employment increases then there will be new businesses that choose to locate in the City, and residents will have opportunities to open new shops and business, and existing businesses will hopefully prosper and expand. But equally as important, is the hope that existing and new residents are afforded opportunities to work in those jobs, and that the jobs have livable wages, are accessible and exceptional places to work. Presented throughout this Chapter, and throughout this Plan, is the City’s demand to help create a more equitable environment for all of the City’s residents – that residents of every age, ethnicity and background have access to education, job training, transportation and livable wage jobs. This is a tall order, but one that the City is committed to working towards through implementation of policies, programs and engaging in key partnerships to help bring this objective to fruition. The City is on its way to improved economic competitiveness and intends to capitalize on the current momentum. Recently Brooklyn Center has seen an increase in redevelopment interest in the community and it is anticipated that this trend will continue into the foreseeable future. As touched on in previous sections of this Chapter, 2018 saw several new businesses come to the community such as Topgolf, Fairfield Inn and Suites, HOM Furniture, and Bank of America, which are recently opened or under construction. Existing businesses are also expanding; both Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-15 Luther Auto Dealerships and Medtronic underwent multi-million-dollar expansions in 2018. Building permit valuation has been steadily rising over the past several years, and 2018 saw the highest investment in these terms since 2012. As the City meets with business owners, consistently the City’s affordable land costs, proximity to Minneapolis, and access to regional freeways are attributed to the reason for their investment in the community. The following sections highlight some of the tools, programs, and organizations available to help the City reach its objectives. Specific implementation strategies are not included, but instead can be found in Chapter 9: Implementation. This is deliberate because the implementation of this Chapter is so closely integrated with the other sections of this Plan and cannot be considered independently if they are to be successful. Economic Tools Economic Development Authority (EDA) The Brooklyn Center Economic Development Authority (EDA) was established for the purposes of providing an impetus for economic development, increase employment opportunities, and to promote other public benefits as defined by the City. The EDA supports developments that would not otherwise occur if solely dependent on private investment in the near future. The EDA has the ability to purchase land for economic development purposes and to approve economic incentives, such as Tax Increment Financing, as defined later in this section. The City of Brooklyn Center utilizes or has the ability to utilize several financing tools to assist and support development and redevelopment consistent with the goals and strategies established by the City Council. The City has adopted a Business Subsidy Policy that outlines the conditions under which a project would receive subsidy. The City will evaluate this policy to ensure that it effectively prioritizes projects that forward the City’s goals as they relate to job creation, redevelopment, and housing. The EDA has the ability to implement the following incentives: • Tax Increment Financing The EDA can use Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and pooled TIF funds to cover eligible expenses related to redevelopment projects that have extraordinary costs that would make a project otherwise not feasible. TIF is used to catalyze redevelopment that the market may not yet be able to bear on its own. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-16 • Tax Abatement Minnesota law authorizes political subdivisions to grant property tax abatements for economic development. Abatements may be either permanent forgiveness or temporary deferral of property tax obligations. Abatements can be used for a broad range of projects and purposes, if the City finds that public benefits exceed the costs of the abatement. Permitted use of abatements include: general economic development, public infrastructure construction, redevelopment of blighted areas, providing access to services for residents, deferring or phasing in a large property tax increase, stabilizing the tax base resulting from the updated utility valuation administrative rules, and providing relief for businesses who have disrupted access due to public transportation projects. • Revolving Loan Fund The City has a revolving loan fund that is intended to incentivize new businesses and existing business expansion. The City will seek out ways to increase the funding available in the program, as well as explore other programs that incentivize investment and job growth in the City. • Other Business Resources and Support The City partners with the Metropolitan Consortium of Community Developers and Hennepin County to offer the Open to Business Program, which provides technical assistance to local businesses. The program provides unlimited consulting for prospective entrepreneurs in need of guidance to take their business from idea to operation. Existing businesses are also able to take advantage of Open to Business’s services as they expand or face operational challenges. Several local and regional organizations, including Neighborhood Development Center, Metropolitan Economic Development Association, African Career, Education and Resource, Inc. (ACER), and WomenVenture, provide additional technical assistance services in the City. Dedicated City Staff Support In addition to the various programs that the City offers, in 2018, the City created a new position, the Business and Workforce Development Specialist, tasked with provided support and services to the business community, including working with prospective businesses on site selection and relocation services. The position also provides direct project-related support and business engagement, such as one-on-one meetings with business owners, participation in the local Brooklyn Center Business Association, and reviewing City policies and regulations for opportunities to better support economic development. For businesses seeking State of Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-17 Minnesota financing via the Minnesota Investment Fund or the Job Creation Fund, the position facilitates the process, with the City serving as a conduit for contractual procedures and funds distribution. As it is a new position, the tools and resources continue to be developed and evolve. The position has been tasked with: • Developing a Business Retention and Expansion Program • Developing New Business Welcome Packets • Developing materials to educate businesses on property maintenance and nuisance ordinances • Seeking programs and partnerships to provide additional resources to new and existing businesses • Marketing EDA-owned property • Organizing the First Saturday Pop-up market to assist small local businesses with finding local customers Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-18 Partnerships Partnerships with other agencies and organizations bring additional resources to local businesses. Partnerships include two local Chambers of Commerce: North Hennepin Area Chamber of Commerce and Twin West Chamber of Commerce. Each Chamber of Commerce serves the business community with recurring programming, lobbying, networking, and advocacy. The Brooklyn Center Business Association represents local businesses and offers opportunities to share information and network. The Liberian Business Association provides similar culturally-specific support and connectedness. The State of Minnesota started offering workshops for small business owners and prospective entrepreneurs in 2017. Greater MSP provides global promotion of the region by staffing booths at tradeshows, publishing site selector magazines, and facilitating new business or relocation efforts. Hennepin County offers an Economic Gardening Program that provides mid-sized business owners with needed resources, mentoring, and knowledge to grow take their businesses to the next level. Minneapolis Northwest Tourism supports the hospitality industry and provides marketing and branding to the cities of Brooklyn Park, Maple Grove, and Brooklyn Center. Workforce Development Tools Minnesota is experiencing a labor shortage, expected to continue over the next ten years. According to the Minnesota State Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), Minnesota businesses will add 205,000 jobs to the economy over the next decade and the labor force is projected to increase by only 68,400 workers. Today, the State’s online job board has 80,000 position openings and the State’s unemployment rate is around 3.7 percent. Expected Baby Boomer retirements will also have an impact. According to DEED, one in every five jobs in Minnesota is now held by workers who are within 10 years of—or already at — retirement age. Moreover, these pending retirements will impact industry sectors differently. For example, 30% of the transportation and warehousing sector is within this retirement-ready group, along with 28% of the educational services sector, and 24% of manufacturing. Connecting residents, particularly underserved residents, in the community with available jobs presents one opportunity to begin to address the current labor shortage, and to forward the City’s Resident Economic Stability goals. Barriers exist, however, in connecting those in our community that are unemployed or underemployed and these available jobs. High- demand living-wage jobs require some level of post-secondary education. Lack of educational attainment and social networks represent prominent barriers to those in the community that are unemployed or underemployed. Community Image, Economic Competitiveness & Stability - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 5-19 The City of Brooklyn Center is proactively exploring solutions to support the local workforce. The City continues to build partnerships with secondary and post-secondary educational institutions and organizations including Hennepin Technical College, North Hennepin Community College, Hennepin-Carver Workforce Board, and the Hennepin North Workforce Center. Brooklyn Center also participated in the Hennepin County Workforce Leadership Council, which assembled leaders from the public and private sectors and philanthropic community to compare strategies and collaborate on creating industry-specific career pipelines. The City also continues to support workforce development efforts by the North Hennepin Area Chamber of Commerce and TwinWest Chamber of Commerce. Finally, since 2014 the City has partnered with the City of Brooklyn Park and the Brooklyn Bridge Alliance for Youth on the BrookLynk program. BrookLynk’s mission is to “coordinate partnerships that prepare employers to engage the next generation of workers and to connect young people in the cities of Brooklyn Center and Brooklyn Park facing barriers to employment with the skills, experience, and professional social networks needed to develop their pathway to college and career.” Since December 2017, BrookLynk is housed in the Economic Development and Housing Division of Brooklyn Park’s Community Development Department in partnership with the City of Brooklyn Center and with support from the Brooklyn Bridge Alliance for Youth and program funding partners. BLANK PAGE DRAFT CHAPTER 6: Parks, Trails & Open Space Comprehensive Plan 2040 PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-1 INTRODUCTION As a first-ring suburb and fully-developed City, Brooklyn Center benefits from a well- established park and trail system. Natural features in the community, including the Mississippi River, Single Creek, Palmer Lake, and Upper and Middle Twin Lakes, provide premier natural areas, open space, and amenities for popular urban recreation. A 21-mile trail system extends the recreational opportunities and connects residential neighborhoods with parks and other destinations. Parks and trails are a valued asset to community. High interest and participation from residents continues to justify the ongoing maintenance, management, and investment needed for high- quality recreation, trail use, and park facilities in the City. To thoughtfully plan for the parks and trails system, it is important to understand the changing characteristics of the City’s park and trail users, keep current on the existing system’s conditions, and identify gaps and opportunities for new parks, trails, or facilities that will benefit the City. The purpose of this Chapter will review these features and context and provide recommendations for Brooklyn Center’s parks and trails system through 2040. 2040 Parks, Trails & Open Space Goals »Provide a park and recreation system that is based on the needs of the City’s residents and stakeholders. »Encourage residents and stakeholders to participate in the park and recreation system planning process. »Explore ways to incorporate design and preservation standards into the City’s ordinances and policies to improve and maintain a high- quality system. »Support efforts to maximize the use and accessibility of the system by local residents. * Supporting Strategies found in Chapter 2: Vision, Goals & Strategies PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-2 Growth and Demographics The forecasted population in the community is expected to rise by approximately 2,250 households by 2040, which will alter the demands and needs from the City’s parks and trails system. Changing land use and redevelopment impacts areas of natural features and open space. Some redevelopment may enhance and improve the quality of those features, such as Shingle Creek which has been identified as having impaired waters. Chapter 3: Land Use & Redevelopment of this Plan discusses the anticipated changes in land use and related demographics of the community. Parks are indicated on Map 3-2. Future Land Use. Association of Recreation Type and Age A critical component to consider when planning for the future of parks and trails in Brooklyn Center is the socio-economic and demographic trends that will impact the types of improvements, development, and programming within the system that will best serve the community for generations to come. A high-quality parks and trails system provides for recreation and enjoyment of the outdoors with facilities and activities that appeal to all age groups. It is important to offer a diverse mix and to understand that some park activities are generally associated with specific age groups. Active recreation facilities, such as soccer fields and playgrounds, are typically used by younger people and children while passive recreation facilities, such as picnicking, walking, or fishing, are generally associated with adults and older people. The Background Report, contained in Appendix C, describes the City’s current demographic and socio-economic trends. Since 2010, the number of households with children in both single-parent and married couple households has been growing significantly. The percentage of households with children is now approaching 40%, which is well above the rate in Hennepin County and the metro area in general. The trend among households without children is conversely on the decline. The population is generally getting younger, likely due to a relatively homogeneous and affordable housing stock dominated by single-family residential uses. As the City’s residential make-up changes, it will be essential to understand who is moving into the community and what the target market of redevelopment is so the parks and trails system can expand and grow to meet needs of future residents. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-3 THE EXISTING PARK SYSTEM Brooklyn Center currently hosts 24 developed local parks, one regional park, and a municipal golf course, providing a variety of recreational opportunities for all segments of the population. In addition, considerable undeveloped public open space is held in the Twin Lakes area and along the Mississippi River. Recreation and leisure opportunities range from passive pursuits such as sitting, walking, picnicking, fishing, and enjoying music to more active pastimes such as organized sports, pick-up athletic games, bicycling, running, and in-line skating. Many of the City parks are adjacent to schools or other open space. Popular Centennial Park is adjacent to the Community Center and Civic Center and functions as a central hub for recreation amenities in the City. Parks are generally distributed evenly throughout all areas of the City, and the variety of recreational facilities available enable the park system to provide recreation access to all residents. There is excellent coordination of programs and facilities between parks and schools, and between parks, City and county facilities. The trail system links parks, schools, and other activity centers. Park and Open Space Classifications The City’s parks are classified according to a functional hierarchy that suggests the types of facilities and development that are appropriate to each park. However, specific improvements are individually tailored to each park based on neighborhood desires, historical presence of certain types of facilities, proximity to other uses, and resources available. The various types of parks are sited and designed to serve different needs and populations of residents. It is a policy of the City to locate at least one park in each neighborhood that is safely accessible to pedestrians—especially children—within a reasonable walking distance of approximately one-quarter to one-half mile. At the other end of the spectrum, one or two larger parks in the City aim to meet organized sports and specialized and community-wide recreation. The following classification system has been developed by City staff based on national standards. It is similar to the system the City has used for park and recreation planning for the past twenty years. However, the classification of parks within the system has been changed in order to make better use of park resources, meet neighborhood needs, and address issues of demographic and social change. This classification also incorporates regional parks, which are not specifically managed by the City but should be considered for coordinated access and related park and facility development. Map 6-1 illustrates the City’s park locations and classifications. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-4 Map 6-1. Existing Parks and Classifications 5 - 3 5 - 3 Source: City of Brooklyn Center 2030 Comprehensive Plan PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-5 The Brooklyn Center park system is therefore divided into the following broad categories, each described in more depth to follow: 1. Regional Parks 2. Neighborhood Parks 3. Community Destination Parks 4. Special Use Parks and Open Spaces Regional Parks Regional parks in the Twin Cities metropolitan area usually contain a diverse mix of nature- based resources, are typically 200-500 acres in size, and accommodate a variety of outdoor recreation activities. These parks are often owned and managed by larger parks districts or counties but coordination with local municipalities and local park systems is important to the success of the broader metro area park systems. The North Mississippi Regional Park (Regional Park) is the only regional park within Brooklyn Center city boundaries and is managed by the Three Rivers Parks District; most of the property is also owned by Three Rivers Park District. It is located east of the I-94/TH 252 alignment, extending along the west bank of the Mississippi River from the City’s south boundary at 53rd Avenue north to the I-694 crossing. The primary access to the Regional Park is at 57th Avenue where a park drive leads north and a trailhead and wayfinding structures mark the park’s main feature: the corridor for the Mississippi River Trail (MRT)—a regional trail—which runs north/ south through the park adjacent to the Mississippi River. (Further information about the MRT follows later in this Chapter.) Other amenities in the Regional Park include a picnic area, fishing pier, and parking. The park offers spectacular views of the Mississippi River and opportunities for watching wildlife. Trails connect with Webber Parkway and commuter routes into downtown Minneapolis. The park is adjacent to the North Mississippi Regional Park owned and operated by the Minneapolis Parks and Recreation Board just south of the City, seamlessly extending the recreational use of both jurisdiction’s regional parks. Map 6-2 shows the Regional Park Map developed by Three Rivers Park District. In addition, the Metropolitan Council provides information shown in Map 6-3 with relation to the provision of regional parks and trail accommodation in Brooklyn Center. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-6 Map 6-2. Map of North Mississippi Regional Park 1,000 Feet Coon Rapids DamRegional Park by local trails- approx. 5.7 miles M i s s i s s i p p i R i v e r PARKENTRANCE 694 94 94 57THAVE N 53RD AVE N South of 53rd Ave No isoperated by MinneapolisPark and Recreation Board.Follow the West MississippiRegional Trail south or drive to49th Ave No to Kroening InterpretiveCenter, Wading Pool, Play Areaand other amenities. 252 LEGEND: fishing pier parking picnic area water body park boundary rest area/bench paved hike, bike,leashed dog trail Updated: 2/9/2018 drinking water toilet NORTH MISSISSIPPI REGIONAL PARK threeriversparks.org Map 5-2: North Mississippi Regional Park (Three Rivers Park District) Source: Three Rivers Park District PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-7 Map 6-3. Regional Parks and Trails Page -37 |2015 SYSTEM STATEMENT –BROOKLYN CENTER REGIONAL PARKS Figure 2. Regional Parks System Facilities in and adjacent to Brooklyn Center Map 5-3. Regional Parks and Trails (System Statement) (Met Council) Source: Metropolitan Council PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-8 Neighborhood Parks Neighborhood Parks include the following three types: 1) Play Lot; 2) Playground; 3) Playfield. Play Lot Play lots are the smallest unit of the park system both in terms of size and area that they serve. The primary function of a play lot is to provide play facilities for pre-school children who are not conveniently served by larger parks or playgrounds. It may contain play equipment, sandboxes, paved areas for wheeled toys, walking and bike trails, and seating areas. • Service Area: The sub-neighborhood level of 500 to 2,000 persons within a ¼ mile radius • Desirable Size: .25 to 2 acres • Acres per person: No set standard; desirable in higher-density areas. • Site Characteristics: Should be located so that children do not have to cross major streets and include (or be combined with) an adult seating or gathering area; can be combined with a school. Playground Parks designed for use by children from pre-school to age 12. Often coincides with the service area for an elementary school and may adjoin and complement the school facility if intended to serve the same age group. Facilities and programs of a neighborhood playground should be designed to meet the particular requirements of each individual neighborhood. May include a larger play area with equipment for older children; an area for free play and organized games; minimum maintenance ball diamond, multi-purpose hard surface courts; walking and bike trails, pleasure skating rinks, and seating areas. Some parks may contain portable restrooms. • Service Area: A population of up to 4,000 with a ¼ to ½ mile radius. • Desirable Size: 5 to 10 acres. • Acres per 1,000 pop.: 2.0 • Site Characteristics: Geographically centered in neighborhood with safe walking and bike access. Suited for intense development. Helpful if located adjacent to a school. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-9 Playfield Larger parks designed to provide recreation opportunities for all ages. They may contain all the features of playgrounds, with groomed ball facilities suitable for adult play. Hockey and pleasure skating rinks are lighted. May include portable restrooms and sheltered picnic areas. • Service Area: Neighborhood-wide; serves entire population with special emphasis on organized adult sports, ideally within a 1½ to 2 miles biking distance. • Desirable Size: 20 acres or more. • Acres per 1,000 pop.: 1.0 to 2.0 • Site Characteristics: Direct access from all parts of the neighborhood or quadrant. Level terrain with few water bodies or other environmental constraints. Easily accessible by large numbers of vehicles. Physically separate from homes so as to minimize light and noise problems. Community Destination Parks Relatively large parks serving as a recreational focus for a neighborhood of the City. Community Destination Parks are noted for having a wide variety of leisure and recreational options and are fully accessible to persons of all abilities. Lighted areas for evening play are provided. Daytime recreational programming and playground supervision are provided in the summer months. Heated, enclosed park shelter buildings provide for recreational spaces and warming houses. Community Destination Parks are intended to include costlier types of facilities, and each has a distinct identity or theme. Central Park is the flagship park of the system, with substantial improvements that serve the entire community. Evergreen Park focuses on team sports; Kylawn/ Arboretum Park builds on its nature areas of the Arboretum and the Preserve; West Palmer Park is seen as a prime family picnic and outings area; and Grandview Park’s focus is on youth and winter recreation. • Service Area: A neighborhood or quadrant of the City • Desirable Size: 25 acres or more. • Acres per 1,000 pop.: 5.0 • Site Characteristics: Easily accessible from all parts of neighborhood or quadrant. Should be located on collector or arterial streets to provide adequate access for residents and should be well-buffered from adjacent residential areas. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-10 Special Use Parks and Open Space Special use parks and open spaces are areas providing specialized or single-purpose recreational or leisure activities. These parks generally do not provide extensive permanent facilities but may provide nature interpretation, trail and greenway corridors, and/or walking or biking paths. Trails or greenways should connect with other components of the recreation system, schools, community facilities, or neighborhoods. Existing Parks Inventory Existing parks are well-dispersed through the City of Brooklyn Center. Table 6-1. illustrates the location and classification of each park in the City’s system. In addition to parks, the City’s maintains several areas of open space, including the 65-acre Centerbrook Municipal Golf Course, Greenways along Shingle Creek Parkway, 69th Avenue, and 53rd Avenue, and several properties serving as natural areas around Twin Lakes. Parks Management Management of the local park system is the responsibility of the City’s Community Activities, Recreation, and Services (CARS) department. Bi-yearly citizen surveys help inform the CARS department on changing interests and requests from area residents related to programming, facilities, and park use. Input from these surveys is used to identify and prioritize projects in the Capital Improvements Program (CIP), see Appendix D. Also informing parks use, development, and management is the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission which meets monthly and advises the City Council on parks and recreation issues in Brooklyn Center. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-11 Table 6-1. Inventory of Park Amenities Source: City of Brooklyn Center PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-12 BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN TRAIL SYSTEM The City’s current bicycle and pedestrian trail system consists of a mix of sidewalks, paved off- street trails, and some on-road bicycle lanes. Connection between neighborhoods and parks, residents and city destinations, and local and regional facilities continues as a priority for the development of the system. Three regional trails extend through the City further providing connection within the community and to broader regional trail networks beyond. Map 6-4 illustrates the City’s extensive trail network. Regional Trails Three regional trails provide a backbone of trail system within and through the City. Local connection to these regional trails provides opportunity for extensive multi-modal transportation for area residents. These trails tend to be paved road-separated facilities; most are under the jurisdiction of Three Rivers Parks District with some portions managed by the City. The three regional trails include: 1) Shingle Creek Regional Trail, 2) Twin Lakes Regional Trail, and the Mississippi River Trail (MRT). Map 6-5 illustrates the regional trails in the City. Shingle Creek Regional Trail The City’s bicycle and pedestrian trail system is anchored by the Shingle Creek Regional Trail, an off-street separated trail which runs from the north to the south City limits along Shingle Creek. For much of its length, separate trails are provided for bicyclists and pedestrians. The north end of the trail circles Palmer Lake, and a portion of this trail section is maintained by the City. Beyond Brooklyn Center, the regional trail travels from Minneapolis in the south to Brooklyn Park in the north and connects to the Above the Falls Regional Park, Victory Memorial Parkway Regional Trail, Twin Lakes Regional Trail and Rush Creek Regional Trail. Twin Lakes Regional Trail This regional trail travels through Brooklyn Center and Robbinsdale as it connects the Mississippi River Trail (MRT), Shingle Creek Regional Trail, and Crystal Lake Regional Trail. Its alignment utilizes a combination of paved road-separated trail and sidewalk. The City of Brooklyn Center’s Pedestrian Bicycle and Trail Plan identifies proposed improvements to the trail to eventually complete a connection between the Crystal Lake Regional Trail and MRT. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-13 Map 6-4. Brooklyn Center Trails Source: City of Brooklyn Center Map 5-4: Brooklyn Center Trails (City) PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-14 Map 6-5. Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN), Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park ColumbiaHeights Crystal Fridley NewHope Robbinsdale Minneapolis 94 694 252 100 I-694 andShingle CreekParkway Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) 0 1 20.5 Miles City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County Regional Trails (Parks Policy Plan) Existing Planned County Boundaries City and Township Boundaries NCompass Street Centerlines Open Water Features Existing State Trails (DNR) Mississippi River Trail RBTN Alignments Tier 1 Alignment Tier 2 Alignment RBTN Corridors (AlignmentsUndefined) Tier 2 Corridor Tier 1 Priority Corridor Regional Destinations Metropolitan Job Centers Regional Job Centers Subregional Job Centers Large High Schools Colleges & Universities Highly Visited Regional Parks Major Sport & Entertainment Centers Map 5-5: Brooklyn Center Regional Trails (Metropolitan Council) Source: Metropolitan Council PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-15 Map 6-6. Twin Lakes Regional Trail Improvements Pedestrian & Bicycle PlanBROOKLYNCENTER City of Figure 10 - Twin Lakes Regional Trail and Proposed Improvements GRAPHIC SCALE 0 0.25 0.5 MILES Legend Existing Twin Lakes Regional Trail Proposed Twin Lakes Regional Trail Regional Trail N(Source: Three Rivers Park District) 24 Pedestrian & Bicycle PlanBROOKLYNCENTER City of Figure 10 - Twin Lakes Regional Trail and Proposed Improvements GRAPHIC SCALE 0 0.25 0.5 MILES Legend Existing Twin Lakes Regional Trail Proposed Twin Lakes Regional Trail Regional Trail N(Source: Three Rivers Park District)24 Pedestrian & Bicycle PlanBROOKLYNCENTER City of Figure 10 - Twin Lakes Regional Trail and Proposed Improvements GRAPHIC SCALE 0 0.25 0.5 MILES Legend Existing Twin Lakes Regional Trail Proposed Twin Lakes Regional Trail Regional Trail N(Source: Three Rivers Park District)24 Pedestrian & Bicycle PlanBROOKLYNCENTER City of Figure 10 - Twin Lakes Regional Trail and Proposed Improvements GRAPHIC SCALE 0 0.25 0.5 MILES Legend Existing Twin Lakes Regional Trail Proposed Twin Lakes Regional Trail Regional Trail N(Source: Three Rivers Park District) 24 M a p 5 - 6 . T w i n L a k e s R e g i o n a l T r a i l I m p r o v e m e n t s ( C i t y ) Source: Brooklyn Center Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan, 2014 PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-16 Mississippi River Trail and West Mississippi River Trail The Mississippi River Trail (MRT) through Brooklyn Center is just a small segment of the roughly 600-mile long trail that travels through the state adjacent or near to the Mississippi River, beginning at the headwaters in Itasca State Park. A portion of the trail in Brooklyn Center is complete as a paved road-separated trail located within the North Mississippi Regional Park. This segment—from 53rd Avenue to the I-694 crossing—is owned and managed by Three Rivers Park District. A trailhead marker and wayfinding information is located next to the MRT at 57th Avenue in the regional park. Map 5-7 shows the route of the MRT in Brooklyn Center and Fridley, provided by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). The trail portion managed by Three Rivers Park District currently travels east at I-694 to the east side of the river, connecting with the segment in Fridley. It is the intent and goal of the MRT and City to extend the trail along the west side of the river north in what will be known as the West Mississippi River Regional Trail. A short gap in the road-separated facility currently exists between I-694 and 66th Avenue. While this segment is signed with MRT markers, trail users must travel within the road or along the sidewalk along Willow Lane. At 66th Avenue, a paved road-separated trail travels north again; this segment is managed by the City. A regional trail search corridor for the West Mississippi River Regional Trail is included in the 2040 Regional Parks Policy Plan to travel through Dayton, Champlin, Brooklyn Park, and Brooklyn Center as it connects Crow River Regional Trail Search Corridor, Elm Creek Park Reserve, Rush Creek Regional Trail, Coon Rapids Dam Regional Park, Twin Lakes Regional Trail and North Mississippi Regional Park. Building on the planning process of the search corridor, the Three Rivers Park District Board of Commissioners is in the process of finalizing a master plan for the West Mississippi River Regional Trail at the time this Plan was complete. The trail route celebrates the Mississippi River’s significance within Hennepin County, traveling approximately 20 miles adjacent to or near the river through northeastern Hennepin County. It connects the communities of Dayton, Champlin, Brooklyn Park, and Brooklyn Center—with the confluence of the Crow/Mississippi Rivers and the Minneapolis Grand Rounds as bookends to the trail alignment. The West Mississippi River Regional Trail will link Coon Rapids Dam and North Mississippi regional parks, and the Rush Creek, Medicine Lake and Twin Lakes regional trails. Map 6-8 is excerpted from the regional trail master plan and illustrates the MRT/West Mississippi River Regional Trail alignment through Brooklyn Center. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-17 Map 6-7. MRT through Brooklyn Center and Fridley (MnDOT) Map 5-7: MRT through Brooklyn Center and Fridley (MnDOT) /. ¡ [¡[¡ [¡ [¡ [¡ [¡[¡[¡ [¡[¡ [¡ [¡[¡ [¡ [¡ [¡ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! !!!!!! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!! !!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!! !!!! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! !!!! S h i n g l e C r e e k R e g i o n a l T r a i l §¨¦94 §¨¦69 4 §¨¦69 4 ¬«47 ¬«25 2 ¬«65 ¬«10 0 ")1 ")35 ")10 2 ")57 ")6 ")4 ")2 ")10 ")10 4 ")8 ")10 2 W i l l ow La M i s s i s s i p p i R i v e r R e g i o n a l T r a i l An o k a R i v e r f r o n t R e g i o n a l P a r k No r t h M i s s i s s i p p i R e g i o n a l P a r k Fr i d l e y Br o o k l y n C e n t e r Br o o k l y n P a r k Co l u m b i a H e i g h t s Min n e a p o l i s Hil l t o p M i s s i s s i p p i N a t i o n a l R i v e r R e c r e a t i o n A r e a Mo o r e , W e s t Lo c k e San d y Pa l m e r Mo o r e , E a s t M i s s i s s i p p i R i v e r 7 t h S t N E M a i n S t N E D u p o n t A v e E R i v e r Rd 44 t h A v e N E 7 3 r d A v e 6 9 t h A v e C e n t r a l A v e N E 3 r d S t N E N e w t o n A v e H u m b o l d t A v e B r y a n t A v e M i s s i s s i p p i S t N E 5 2 n d A v e N 5 4 t h A v e 5 t h S t N E 45 t h A v e N E 5 9 t h A v e 5 1 s t A v e N 53 r d A v e N 5 8 t h A v e 43 r d A v e N E W i l l o w L a 50 t h A v e N E K n o x A v e W R i v e r R d W e s t R i v e r R d 6 t h S t N E L y ndale Ave N 6 1 s t A v e N E 5 0 t h A v e N 6 7 t h A v e 5 1 s t A v e N E G i r a r d A v e 6 t h S t N 5 7 t h A v e L o g a n A v e C S A H 5 7 F r e e w a y B l v d M a t t e r h o r n D r N E R i c e C r e e k T e r N E ColfaxAve M e a d o w W o o d D r 6 3 r d A v e N E 7 3 r d A v e N E 6 0 t h A v e I r v i n g A v e M o n r o e S t N E S h i n g l e C r e e k P k w y 7 9 t h A v e O l i v e r A v e 6 2 n d A v e 8 0 t h A v e J a m e s A v e 4 t h S t N E 2 n d S t N E M o r g a n A v e 5 3 r d A v e N E 46 t h A v e N E W M o o r e L a k e D r Su garl oaf Tr 4 7 t h A v e N E A b l e S t N E L y n d a l e A v e H i l l w i n d R d N E L a r a m i e T r G u n f l i n t T r 5 5 t h A v e B r y a n t A v e N H o r i z o n A v e N E 6 8 t h A v e N E 4th St S u n k i s t B l v d MississippiLa P e a r s o n P k w y F i l l m o r e S t N E P i e r c e T e r N E 2 n d 1 / 2 S t N E L y n d e D r N E 6 5 t h A v e 5 4 t h A v e N E B r o o k l y n D r P e n n A v e N X e r x e s A v e C a m d e n A v e F r e m o n t A v e L i n c o l n T e r N E 7 0 t h A v e E L y n d a l e A v e N 6 4 t h A v e N L i l a c D r T y l e r S t N E M e d r o n i c P k w y N E S u m m i t D r J o h n M a r t i n D r 6 6 t h A v e N E M a r s h a l l S t N E B r o o k v i e w D r N E H i c k o r y D r N E 4 6 t h 1 /2 A v e N E Wo o d b i n e L a A m y L a S t a r l i t e B l v d N E 7 4 t h A v e 8 1 s t A v e 6 3 r d L a 5 8 t h A v e N E P i e r c e S t N E A l d r i c h A v e M c L e o d S t N E 6 0 t h A v e N E R i v e r d a l e R d F a i r f i e l d R d 4 4 t h 1 /2 A v e N E I n d u s t r i a l B l v d N E 5 t h S t 43 r d 1 / 2 A v e N E 7 2 n d A v e N E 4 2 n d 1 /2 A v e N E 8 0 t h C t W o o d y L a N E R u s s e l l A v e 6 9 t h A v e N E R e g i s D r N E 7 1 s t A v e N E 7 8 t h A v e 7 5 t h A v e S e r v i c e R d O v e r t o n D r N E Johnson St NE V i n c e n t A v e Emerson Ave 5 2 n d A v e N E 7 3 r d C t 6 7 t h A v e N E L y r i c L a N E Hi c k or y St NE Buchanan St NE 62 n d W a y N E B r o o k d a l e D r 6 6 t h A v e F r e e m o n t A v e 7 7 t h W a y 6 3 r d W a y N E C o m m e r c e C i r E N o r t o n A v e N E 5 6 t h A v e N E C o m m e r c e C i r W P a n o r a m a R d N E J a c k s o n S t N E A n n a A v e N E A s h t o n A v e N E 7 1 s t 1 /2 W a y N E James Cir 4 8 t h A v e N E H a r t m a n C i r S a t e l l i t e L a N E A l d r i c h C i r G i r a r d C t 4 5 t h 1 /2 A v e N E L o g a n P k w y N E 5 9 t h A v e N E R i v e r s E d g e W a y N E 7 4 t h A v e L o g a n A v e H u m b o l d t A v e E R i v e r R d 3 r d S t N E N L i l a c D r I r v i n g A v e 48 t h A v e N E 6 t h S t N E 2 n d S t N E BryantAve 4 7 t h A v e N E J a m e s A v e S h i n g l e C r e e k P kw y C a m d e n A v e 5 0 t h A v e N BryantAve J a c k s o n S t N E 5 7 t h A v e 6 8 t h A v e N E 6 7 t h A v e 5 t h S t N E A l d r i c h A v e 7 0 t h A v e 6 5 t h A v e 6 9 t h A v e N E 5 7 t h A v e C o l f a x A v e 0 0. 2 5 0 . 5 M i l e s MR T I n f o o n M N D O T W e b s i t e : h t t p : / / w w w . d o t . s t a t e . m n . u s / b i k e / m r t / i n d e x . h t m l Alt e r n a t i v e F o r m a t : h t t p : / / w w w . d o t . s t a t e . m n . u s / b i k e / a d a . h t m l Dis c l a i m e r : h t t p : / / w w w . d o t . s t a t e . m n . u s / i n f o r m a t i o n / d i s c l a i m e r . h t m l ! !!!!!! ! !!!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! !! !!! !!! !!! !!!! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!! ! !!!!!!!! !! !!! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! !! ! !! !!!!!!! ! ! !! !!! !! !! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! !! !!!!! ! !! ! !!! !!! !!! ! !!!! ! ! ! ! !!! ! ! !! !!!! ! ! ! !! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!! !!!!! !! !!! ! %&f ( !"b $ %&h ( !"b $ !"`$ %&d ( %&c (!"`$ %&d ( %&c ( %&e ( Me t r o Sa i n t P a u l Da y t o n Ro s e m o u n t Min n e a p o l i s Ra m s e y Elk R i v e r Co t t a g e G r o v e Bro o k l y n P a r k Co o n R a p i d s Fri d l e y I.G . H . Ha s t i n g s An o k a Ch a m p l i n Me n d o t a H e i g h t s Br o o k l y n C e n t e r Ne w p o r t S.S . P Co a t e s 9 876 5 4 1 2 3 11 20 22 12 10 1615 21 13 19 18 17 14 µ Me t r o M a p I n s e t 7 Br o o k l y n C e n t e r / F r i d l e y Mis s i s s i p p i R i v e r T r a i l B i k e w a y U. S . B i c y c l e R o u t e ( U S B R ) 4 5 Ma r c h 2 0 1 5 De t a i l s o n M R T R o u t e : MR T R o u t e o n R o a d !! ! ! ! ! ! MR T R o u t e o n E x i s t i n g T r a i l s MR T R o u t e o n E x i s t i n g R o a d s w i t h L i m i t a t i o n s (s h o u l d e r w i d t h , s i g h t l i n e s , s u r f a c e ) Ex i s t i n g R e c r e a t i o n F a c i l i t i e s : Fis h i n g O p p o r t u n i t i e s Wat e r A c c e s s S i t e [¡/. Cit i e s Op e n W a t e r US H i g h w a y s St a t e H i g h w a y s Co u n t y R o a d s In t e r s t a t e H i g h w a y s !§¨¦90 Oth e r R o a d s £¤61 ¬«43 ")55 Ra i l r o a d Ba s e m a p F e a t u r e s : Ex i s t i n g F e d e r a l , S t a t e a n d R e g i o n a l B i k e a b l e T r a i l s Na t i o n a l W i l d l i f e R e f u g e Fe d e r a l a n d S t a t e F o r e s t s Sta t e a n d R e g i o n a l P a r k s Mis s i s s i p p i N a t i o n a l R i v e r a n d R e c r e a t i o n A r e a ( M N R R A ) Ma j o r R o a d w i t h 4 ' + B i k e a b l e S h o u l d e r s PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-18 Map 6-8. West Mississippi River Regional Trail Alignment (Three Rivers Parks District) Map 5-8: West Mississippi River Regional Trail Alignment DRAFT (Three Rivers Parks District) Three Rivers Park District38 SEGMENT D | BROOKLYN CENTER This 2.7 mile WMRRT segment consists of existing and planned subsegments (Maps 33 & 34 and Table 12). The WMRRT makes its final terminus point at North Mississippi Regional Park, south of I-694. Opportunity for river touchpoints north of I-694 are minimal, with sweeping river vistas available as the WMRRT reaches North Mississippi Regional Park, a narrow regional park located between I-94 and the river. Further regional trail connections are made to the Twin Lakes Regional Trail and Minneapolis Grand Rounds park and trail network. The character of the trail is generally defined by its physical location - a narrow strip between Highway 252 and I-94, and the Mississippi River. Highway 252 is undergoing a MnDOT study to improve safety and mobility between 610 and I-694. Additional highway corridor goals include providing connectivity, pedestrian accommodations, access to transit services and maintaining existing infrastructure investments. As a recommendation of the WMRRT Master Plan, off-street trail to replace or improve the existing trail must be accommodated for in future plans. Map 34: Segment D | Brooklyn Center Overview Source: Three Rivers Park District Table 12: Segment D | Brooklyn Center Subsegments Source: Three Rivers Park District D SEGMENT D #Municipality Status Length Notes Acquisition & Construction D1 Brooklyn Center Existing 0.91 Minor updates & maintenance $48,000 D2 Future construction 0.35 Minor updates & maintenance $676,000 D3 Existing 0.11 Minor updates & maintenance $86,000 D4 Existing 1.31 Minor updates & maintenance $486,000 Subtotal 2.7 miles $1,296,000 Map 33: Segment D | Brooklyn Center Context Source: Three Rivers Park District Source:: Draft West Mississippi River Regional Trail Master Plan, Three Rivers Park District PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-19 City Trail Network Beyond the largely north/south alignments of the City’s regional trails, the City manages east/ west trails to link trails providing a connected network. East-west links include the 69th Avenue greenway, the Freeway Boulevard/65th Avenue trail; and the 53rd Avenue greenway. Sidewalks and other neighborhood trails complete the finer grain of the network and local trail system. Map 6-9 illustrates existing trails in Brooklyn Center along with potential alignments of proposed connections. Map 6-9. Brooklyn Center Pedestrian & Bicycle Trail Network (City) Pedestrian & Bicycle PlanBROOKLYNCENTER City of Figure 7 - Existing and Planned Trail & Sidewalk Network GRAPHIC SCALE 0 1800 3600 FEET Legend Existing Regional Trails Planned Regional Trails Local Trails Planned Local Trails Sidewalks Railroad Parks City Boundary Mississippi River Trail * Mississippi River Trail (Planned) * Shingle Creek Regional Trail Twin Lakes Regional Trail Twin Lakes Regional Trail (Planned) N M S T M T * Multiple Jurisdictions 18 M a p 5 - 9 : B r o o k l y n C e n t e r P e d e s t r i a n & B i c y c l e T r a i l N e t w o r k ( C i t y ) Pedestrian & Bicycle PlanBROOKLYNCENTER City of Figure 7 - Existing and Planned Trail & Sidewalk Network GRAPHIC SCALE 0 1800 3600 FEET Legend Existing Regional Trails Planned Regional Trails Local Trails Planned Local Trails Sidewalks Railroad Parks City Boundary Mississippi River Trail * Mississippi River Trail (Planned) * Shingle Creek Regional Trail Twin Lakes Regional Trail Twin Lakes Regional Trail (Planned) N M S T M T * Multiple Jurisdictions 18 Pedestrian & Bicycle PlanBROOKLYNCENTER City of Figure 7 - Existing and Planned Trail & Sidewalk Network GRAPHIC SCALE 0 1800 3600 FEET Legend Existing Regional Trails Planned Regional Trails Local Trails Planned Local Trails Sidewalks Railroad Parks City Boundary Mississippi River Trail * Mississippi River Trail (Planned) * Shingle Creek Regional Trail Twin Lakes Regional Trail Twin Lakes Regional Trail (Planned) N M S T M T * Multiple Jurisdictions 18 Source:: Brooklyn Center Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan, 2014 PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-20 Trail Issues In 2014, the City conducted a thorough study of its pedestrian and bicycle system. The Brooklyn Center Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan is the resulting document that addresses the issues, gaps, and needs of the existing system. Through study and public engagement, the document identifies gaps in the City’s sidewalk, trail, and crossings systems for pedestrian and bicyclists. Map 6-10 is taken from the study and highlights the locations of gaps identified in the study process. The document also identifies other public needs for pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure, including requests for improved lighting, availability of bicycle racks, wider trails, better- maintained trail surfaces, winter snow removal, and added security. Information about ongoing management and implementation of identified projects is contained in the pedestrian and bicycle plan. Map 6-10. Brooklyn Center Pedestrian & Bicycle Trail Network Gaps Pedestrian & Bicycle PlanBROOKLYNCENTER City of Diffi cult Crossing Area Trail Gap Sidewalk Gap Trail Connection Search Area Figure 15 - Public Input on System Challenges Legend GRAPHIC SCALE 0 2,000 4,000 FEETN Identifi ed Issues Existing Regional Trails Planned Regional Trails Local Trail Planned Local Trail Sidewalks Railroad Tracks Parks City Boundary Existing Grade-Separated Pedestrian Crossing 42 Pedestrian & Bicycle PlanBROOKLYNCENTER City of Diffi cult Crossing Area Trail Gap Sidewalk Gap Trail Connection Search Area Figure 15 - Public Input on System Challenges Legend GRAPHIC SCALE 0 2,000 4,000 FEETN Identifi ed Issues Existing Regional Trails Planned Regional Trails Local Trail Planned Local Trail Sidewalks Railroad Tracks Parks City Boundary Existing Grade-Separated Pedestrian Crossing 42 Pedestrian & Bicycle PlanBROOKLYNCENTER City of Diffi cult Crossing Area Trail Gap Sidewalk Gap Trail Connection Search Area Figure 15 - Public Input on System Challenges Legend GRAPHIC SCALE 0 2,000 4,000 FEETN Identifi ed Issues Existing Regional Trails Planned Regional Trails Local Trail Planned Local Trail Sidewalks Railroad Tracks Parks City Boundary Existing Grade-Separated Pedestrian Crossing 42 M a p 5 - 1 0 : B r o o k l y n C e n t e r P e d e s t r i a n & B i c y c l e T r a i l N e t w o r k G a p s ( C i t y ) PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-21 PARKS & TRAILS – NEEDS, GOALS & POLICIES Identifying Needs In an effort stay current with the needs of a changing community, the City conducts a citizen survey to assess what residents want to see changed or improved with the area’s parks and recreation. These surveys are conducted every other year. Results influence projects the City includes in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for parks. Examples of projects include conversion of baseball fields to soccer fields, addition of nature trails, or replacement of playground equipment. The last survey was completed in 2017. Primary desires expressed in this survey include the addition of a splash pad, dog park, and indoor walking facility to the system. Goals and Policies In Chapter 2: Vision, Goals & Strategies of this Plan outlines the goals for parks and trails in Brooklyn Center. The City’s primary goal is to provide a robust system of parks and recreation that serves the diverse needs of community residents. Parks and trails are important amenities to the quality of life within a community, and focus on their development, enhancement, and integration with changing community environments is critical for the City’s future. Community input and engagement is a key piece of this focus. IMPLEMENTATION In Brooklyn Center, the City’s public parks and recreation are the responsibility of the Public Works department and under the direction of the Park & Recreation Commission. Together these groups manage the planning and development of a Parks and Trails System that addresses the ongoing management, maintenance, budgeting, programming and resourcing for parks and trails. Projects and improvements for the system should be updated regularly, respond to resident needs, and accommodate changing community demographics so all residents benefit from access to outdoor recreation and natural areas. Further detail about implementation is included in Chapter 9 of this Plan. PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6-22 Capital Improvements Park improvements included in the City’s CIP address the construction of trails, shelters, playground equipment, athletic field lighting and other facilities that enhance the general park aesthetics and attract park usage by providing recreational facilities that meet community needs. Funding of capital improvements to parks and trails comes from a combination of sources including public utility funds, special assessments, and capital projects funds. Until recently, capital improvements to parks followed a roughly 20-year cycle. In 1960 and in 1980, the citizens of Brooklyn Center approved bond referendums for financing the development and improvement of park facilities. This included acquiring land, installing new playgrounds, developing ball fields, tennis courts and other facilities. Following these improvements, for a time no formal plan was put in place for a systematic update. Following up on the City’s practice of programming for street reconstruction 15 years into the future, the City recently began developing a 15-year capital improvement program (CIP) for parks. The current CIP includes the following park and trail projects planned for implementation in the year listed. Further details can be found in the CIP Tables in Appendix D. • Centennial Park Tennis Courts Resurfacing, Basketball Court Project - 2018 • Bridge Rehabilitation (4 Bridges) - 2018 • Park Playground Equipment Replacement – 2019 through 2021 • Brooklyn Boulevard City Entrance Signs Rehabilitation - 2020 • West River Road, Arboretum, Freeway, Palmer Lake and Northport Trails Reconstruction – 2022 • Evergreen Park Scoreboard Improvements - 2023 • Centennial Park Softball Field Improvements - 2024 • Park Name Sign Replacement - 2025 • Hockey Rink Rehabilitation/Replacements - 2026 • Irrigation Systems Rehabilitation/Replacements - 2026 • Softball/Baseball Fence Replacement - 2027 • 69th Avenue Trail Reconstruction – 2027 • 69th Avenue Landscape Rehabilitation - 2027 • Park Trail and Parking Lot Lighting Improvements - 2028 • Park Bleacher Replacement - 2031 • Park Bleacher Replacement - 2032 DRAFT CHAPTER 7: Transportation & Transit Comprehensive Plan 2040 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-1 Transportation, Transit, Bikeways & Walkability Goals »Provide a safe network of roadways, bikeways and pedestrian ways that connect residents in the City and to the larger region. »Encourage residents to chose alternate transportation modes (other than automobile) by enhancing access to bikeways, transit, and pedestrian networks. »Support the City’s commitment to creating a Complete Street Network in existing and redevelopment areas. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this Chapter is to define and describe the City’s transportation system and how it supports residents and businesses within the community. The efficiency of the transportation system is an important consideration of any community because it moves people, goods and services into and out of a Brooklyn Center. This planning effort offers opportunities to evaluate the system for improvements and to continue to maintain the system in a way that will support its residents and businesses today and into the future. The following sections of this Chapter describe existing and planned roadways, traffic projections, and potential right-of-way needs, as well as existing and planned improvements to the transit and bikeway systems. Finally, heavy freight, rail and air systems are all addressed with varying levels of detail based on the role of the system today and the anticipated role in the future. This Chapter will examine ways to upgrade or maintain the existing transportation system, including transit, bicycling and walking, in order to accommodate changes in the City’s Future Land Use Plan described and shown in Chapter 3. While much of the information contained within this Chapter is simply an update from the City’s previous 2030 Plan, there are some changes in the City’s redevelopment areas and surrounding region that have the potential to impact the community’s transportation system. This Chapter is intended to provide an update, but also to identify opportunities to improve and support the City’s transportation system through 2040. This Chapter will function as a guide to: • Identify the City’s existing and proposed multi-modal transportation network; • Identify major investments to meet transportation needs; and • Support the City’s land use goals and objectives as detailed within this Plan. * Supporting Strategies found in Chapter 2: Vision, Goals & Strategies TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-37-2 STREET AND ROADWAY SYSTEM The City’s roadways play a significant role in the transportation system providing residents access within the community as well as the greater region. Brooklyn Center is a fully developed suburb with a well-established roadway network. No new major roads are planned as part of this Transportation Chapter, and the City plans to maintain its current functional classification of roadways. Today, there are existing bus transit options available, but the majority of residents and business owners continue to heavily rely on personal vehicles and the roadway system to move goods, people and access services in the community. The following sections identify and describe the existing roadway system and describe future growth and planned improvements to the roadways. Functional Classification System Functional classification is a tool used in transportation planning and traffic engineering to categorize streets by the type of transportation service they provide and the roadway’s relationship to surrounding land uses. A functional classification system establishes a hierarchy of roads that collects and distributes traffic from neighborhoods to the metropolitan highway system as efficiently as possible given topography and other physical constraints of the area. Functional classification also describes the role each roadway should perform before determining street widths, speed limits, intersection control or other design features. Functional classification ensures that non-transportation factors such as land use, development, and redevelopment are taken into account in the planning and design of streets and highways. Principal Arterial Principal Arterials are the highest roadway classification and in Brooklyn Center are considered part of the metropolitan highway system. These roads are intended to connect metropolitan centers with one another and connect major business concentrations, important transportation terminals, and large institutional facilities. Brooklyn Center is crossed by several of the region’s Principal Arterials, including I-94, I-694, TH 100, and TH 252. Some Principal Arterials are classified as “freeways” and designed with high capacity, grade-separated interchanges. “Other Principal Arterials” may be designed with high capacity, controlled, at-grade intersections rather than interchanges, such as TH 252 between 73rd Avenue North and I-94 within Brooklyn Center. All Principal Arterials are under MnDOT’s jurisdiction. Map 7-1 Existing Roadways and Functional Classification 75th L o g a n 56th 58th H a l i f a x 70th 76th A l d r i c h 6 6 t h T w i n L a k e 694 Y o r k 694 61st L i l a c 55th J o h n M a rt i n H a l i f a x Mumford Y o rk B r o o k l y n B e a r d R a m p P a l m e r L a k e Parkway Freeway Quail Summit 1 0 0 48th Nash R a m p 9 4 64thOhenry R a m p 51st R a m p H a lif a x 1 0 0 Fra n c e 65th D r e w F r a n c e R a m p 70th 53rd 7 5 t h R a m p 53rd 70th A b b o t t 45th 54th Ramp S c o t t Brookdale C enter S h i n g l e C r e e k Shingle Creek B e a r d 94 94 71st J a m e s 47th Unity L i l a c R a m p O l i v e r K n o x I r v i n g 49th 74th R a m p 7 5 t h Camden T o l e d o 4th52nd 4 t h N o b l e 45 1/2 K n o x R a m p 65th 5 t h V e r a C r u z Thurber 2 5 2 Q u a i l U p t o n W a s h b u r n 66t h Y o r k F r a n c e 67th V i n c e n t 58th 45th Z e n i t h B e a r d W i l l o w A b b o t t S ailor Meadowwood K y l e Q u a i l 61st 70th 67th 46th 67th 52nd S h e r i d a n Morgan Aldrich U n it y L e e M o r g a n 7 6 t h R u s s e l l 67th Lakeside S h i n g l eCreek Lakebreeze 58th 57th 63rd Oliver 7 1 s t X e r x e s Paul 60th Q u e e n U p t o n 55th 59th 73rd 4 8 t h Lee L i l a c 50th B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r C h o w e n H u m b o l d t 10 L e e Fremont R a m p B r o o k d ale C e nt e r F r e m o n t Orchard 50th 74th 56t h R a m p 75th 57th Fremont Ramp 69th E w i n g 57th 56th R a m p Howe 47th P e r r y D r e w 46th Ramp 59th 10 F r a n c e D u s h a r m e S c o t t C o l f a x 55th N e w t o n Logan Wilshire F r e m o n t 46th V e r a C r u z Eckberg 54th P e n n PalmerLake Xerxes Eleanor R a m p 4 5 t h F r e m o n t X e r x e s T o l e d o 73rd Q u a i l M a j o r R e g e n t 69th U n it y Commodore 6 7 t h R a m p B e a r d 71st T o l e d o Ramp V i n c e n t 67th F r a n c e 591/2 Woodbine W e l c o m e 68th 491/2 S h o r e s A l d r i c h Ramp 50th Eleanor 68th 60th 72ndB r y a nt D r e w 50th 61st G i r a r d Violet R a m p 56th C a m d e n 51st 73rd 57th A d m i r a l A l d r i c h73rd 76th E m e r s o n 59th 62nd Y o r k A l d r i c h U n i t y 68th W e l c o m e L i l a c 66th Fairview 70th N o b l e G r i m e s S c o t t J u n e Woodbine W e s t R i v e r 52nd 4 t h50th Abbott Q u a i l Urban 65th Q u a i l 65th W i l l o w 54th53rd 64th 70th 47th 51st 81 71st K y l e 68th 62nd 70th 72 n d72nd L a k e 46 1/2 67th B r o o k v i e w 53rd 56th 72nd 51st 72nd 52nd 46th 68th A l d r i c h 52nd 61st N e w t o n Lake 581/2 71st 60th 46th 60th H u m b o l d t C o l f a x R a m p F r e m o n t 66th 50th 75th 64th 56th R a m p B e a r d D u p o n t 48th X e r x e s H a l i f a x F r a n c e 10Ramp 74th H u m b o l d t Shingle Creek X e r x e s L i l a c Bro o kly n Ramp E w i n g A b b o t t 76t h T ole d o C a m d e n Oliver 67th L a k e v i e w R a m p Z e n i t h 45th 70th M o r g a n 66th C h o w e n G r i m e s U n i t y A z e l i a 7 5 t h 75th G ri m e s 7 0 t h A b b o t t B r o o k d a l e Q u e e n X e r x e s Aldrich Brooklyn Brooklyn Im perial R a m p 74th M a j o r 6 5 t h L y n d a l e Lakeside W a s h b u r n O l i v e r R i v e r d a l e OsseoRoadFrontage D r e w Brooklyn P e r r y 50th 45th A d m i r a l D r e w N oble P e n nRussell Quail P e r r y E w i n g 53rd 74th F r a n c e In d i a n a T o l e d o S c o t t T o l e d o D r e w U n i t y R a m p R a m p K y l e 76th 76th H u m b o l d t M a j o r 70th Aldric h 73rd 74th74th 71st P e rr y L o g a n Ramp R e g e n t Scott 69th B r y a n t C o l f a x X e r x e s D a l l a s Q u e e n 74th H u m b o l d t P e r r y R a m p Ramp 73rd 69th 55th N o rt h p o rt T h o m a s Ramp B e a r d Bellvue Ponds James 49th Ramp L a k ela n d I n d i a n a 47th L i l a c R a m p I n d i a n a 73rd 71 s t 49th 74th IrvingJames 73rd E r i c o n P e r r y 76th Ramp R a m p T o l e d o S h a r i A n n L e e N o b l e G i r a r d X e r x e s E w i n g U p t o n P e r r y F r e m o n t P e r r y P e n n K n o x M i s s i s s i p p i K n o x 72nd R u s s e l l Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t K a t h r e n e Angeline O l i v e r C o l f a x 6 t h A l d r i c h C o l f a x 4 t h K y l e J a m e s G r i m e s C h o w e n O r c h a r d E m e r s o n I r v i n g L o g a n H a l i f a x A l d r i c h N e w t o n A l d r i c h O l i v e r M o r g a n B r y a n t Winchester K n o x 66th M o r g a nVincent E w i n g M a j o r L o g a n W a s h b u r n M a j o r N e w t o n X e r x e s T h o m a s S h e r i d a n D r e w Q u a i l T o l e d o O r c h a r d G r e a t V i e w H u m b o l d t R i v e r w o o d E w i n g C a m d e n R e g e n t J u n e C o lf a x R e g e n t 48th La k elan d U n i t y Lakeside L a k e C u r v e I r v i n g 54th W e l c o m e 47th L e e Northway 45th 53rd M o r g a n 6 6 t h 57th Corvallis 48th Poe P e n n U n i t y 56th U p t o n C h o w e n Burquest O r c h a r d Boulder 46th 62nd Y o r k C a m d e n Lilac G i r a r d G i r a r d F r e m o n t J u d y D u po nt 51st Osseo Oak H a l i f a x Ramp P e r r y Q u a i l E m e r s o n B r o o kly n M a r l i n L e e Lawrence Northway G r i m e s E a r l e B r o w n 7 5 t h R a m p Abbott 63r d D a l l a s Amy72ndWoodbine 51st 94 B r o o kl y n O r c h a r d H a li f a x J u n e I n d i a n a D r e w B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e P e r r y Q u a i l R e g e n t V i n c e n t 1 0 0 C a m d e n 68th 4 t h E w i n g E m e r s o n R a m p J a m e s L i l a c 74 1/2 R e g e n t N o b l e 9 4 R a m p M o r g a n G i r a r d Ramp V e r a C r u z J a m e s W e l c o m e R a m p Humboldt L e e L y n d a l e L y n d a l e 67thRamp Joyce Janet D r e w E a s t L y n d a l e 62nd 66th Quarles R a m p Winchester R a m p R a m p 72nd R a m p Woodbine T w i n L a k e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c Ramp 2 5 2 S c o t t Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn Center Minneapolis B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y Crystal Robbinsdale F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles F Functional Classification Principal Arterial A-Minor Augmentor A-Minor Reliever Major Collector Minor Collector Source: MNGEO, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Map 7-1. Existing Roadways and Functional Classification Map 7-1 Existing Roadways and Functional Classification 75th L o g a n 56th 58th H a l i f a x 70th 76th A l d r i c h 6 6 t h T w i n L a k e 694 Y o r k 694 61st L i l a c 55th J o h n M a r ti n H a l i f a x Mumford Y ork B r o o k l y n B e a r d R a m p P a l m e r L a k e Parkway Freeway Quail Summit 1 0 0 48th Nash R a m p 9 4 64thOhenry R a m p 51st R a m p H a l i f a x 1 0 0 Fra n c e 65th D r e w F r a n c e R a m p 70th 53rd 7 5 t h R a m p 53rd 70 th A b b o t t 45th 54th Ramp S c o t t Bro okd ale C enter S h i n g l e C r e e k Shingle Creek B e a r d 94 94 71st J a m e s 47th Unity L i l a c R a m p O l i v e r K n o x I r v i n g 49th 74th R a m p 7 5 t h Camden T o l e d o 4t h52nd 4 t h N o b l e 45 1/2 K n o x R a m p 65th 5 t h V e r a C r u z Thurber 2 5 2 Q u a i l U p t o n W a s h b u r n 66 t h Y o r k F r a n c e 67th V i n c e n t 58th 45th Z e n i t h B e a r d W i ll o w A b b o t t S ailor Meadowwood K y l e Q u a i l 61st 70th 67th 46th 67th 52nd S h e r i d a n Morgan Aldrich U n it y L e e M o r g a n 7 6 t h R u s s e l l 67th Lakeside S h i n g l e C r e e k Lakebreeze 58th 57th 63rd Oliver 7 1 s t X e r x e s Paul 60th Q u e e n U p t o n 55th 59th 73rd 48 t h Lee L i l a c 50th B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r C h o w e n H u m b o l d t 10 L e e Fremont R a m p B ro o k d ale C e nte r F r e m o n t Orchard 50th 74th 56th R a m p 75th 57th Fremont Ramp 69th E w i n g 57th 56th R a m p Howe 47th P e r r y D r e w 46th Ramp 59th 10 F r a n c e D u s h a r m e S c o t t C o l f a x 55th N e w t o n Logan Wilshire F r e m o n t 46th V e r a C r u z Eckberg 54th P e n n PalmerLake Xerxes Eleanor R a m p 4 5 t h F r e m o n t X e r x e s T o l e d o 73rd Q u a i l M a j o r R e g e n t 69th U n i t y Commodore 6 7 t h R a m p B e a r d 71st T o l e d o Ramp V i n c e n t 67th F r a n c e 591/2 Woodbine W e l c o m e 68th 491/2 S h o r e s A l d r i c h Ramp 50th Eleanor 68th 60th 72ndB ry a n t D r e w 50th 61st G i r a r d Violet R a m p 56th C a m d e n 51st 73rd 57th A d m i r a l A l d r i c h73rd 76th E m e r s o n 59th 62nd Y o r k A l d r i c h U n i t y 68th W e l c o m e L i l a c 66th Fairview 70th N o b l e G r i m e s S c o t t J u n e Woodbine W e s t R i v e r 52nd 4 t h50th Abbott Q u a i l Urban 65th Q u a i l 65th W i l l o w 54th53rd 64th 70th 47th 51st 81 71st K y l e 68th 62nd 70th 72nd72nd L a k e 46 1/2 67th B r o o k v i e w 53rd 56th 72nd 51st 72nd 52nd 46th 68th A l d r i c h 52nd 61st N e w t o n Lake 581/2 71st 60th 46th 60th H u m b o l d t C o l f a x R a m p F r e m o n t 66th 50th 75th 64th 56th R a m p B e a r d D u p o n t 48th X e r x e s H a l i f a x F r a n c e 10Ramp 74th H u m b o l d t Shingle Creek X e r x e s L i l a c B ro o kly n Ramp E w i n g A b b o t t 76th T o l e d o C a m d e n Oliver 67th L a k e v i e w R a m p Z e n i t h 45th 70th M o r g a n 66th C h o w e n G r i m e s U n i t y A z e l i a 7 5 t h 75th G ri m e s 70 t h A b b o t t B r o o k d a l e Q u e e n X e r x e s Aldrich Brooklyn Brooklyn Im perial R a m p 74th M a j o r 6 5 t h L y n d a l e Lakeside W a s h b u r n O l i v e r R i v e r d a l e OsseoRoadFrontage D r e w Brooklyn P e r r y 50th 45th A d m i r a l D r e w N o bl e P e n nRussell Quail P e r r y E w i n g 53rd 74th F r a n c e I n d i a n a T o l e d o S c o t t T o l e d o D r e w U n i t y Ra mp R a m p K y l e 76th 76th H u m b o l d t M a j o r 70th Aldric h 73rd 74th74th 71st P e rr y L o g a n Ramp R e g e n t Scott 69th B r y a n t C o l f a x X e r x e s D a l l a s Q u e e n 74th H u m b o l d t P e r r y R a m p Ramp 73rd 69th 55th N o rth p o rt T h o m a s R a mp B e a r d Bellvue Ponds James 49th Ramp L a k ela n d I n d i a n a 47th L i l a c R a m p I n d i a n a 73rd 7 1 s t 49th 74th IrvingJames 73r d E r i c o n P e r r y 76th Ramp R a m p T o l e d o S h a r iAn n L e e N o b l e G i r a r d X e r x e s E w i n g U p t o n P e r r y F r e m o n t P e r r y P e n n K n o x M i s s i s s i p p i K n o x 72nd R u s s e l l Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t K a t h r e n e Angeline O l i v e r C o l f a x 6 t h A l d r i c h C o l f a x 4 t h K y l e J a m e s G r i m e s C h o w e n O r c h a r d E m e r s o n I r v i n g L o g a n H a l i f a x A l d r i c h N e w t o n A l d r i c h O l i v e r M o r g a n B r y a n t Winchester K n o x 66th M o r g a nVincent E w i n g M a j o r L o g a n W a s h b u r n M a j o r N e w t o n X e r x e s T h o m a s S h e r i d a n D r e w Q u a i l T o l e d o O r c h a r d G r e a t V i e w H u m b o l d t R i v e r w o o d E w i n g C a m d e n R e g e n t J u n e C o l f a x R e g e n t 48th L ak ela nd U n i t y Lakeside L a k e C u r v e I r v i n g 54th W e l c o m e 47th L e e Northway 45th 53rd M o r g a n 6 6 t h 57th Corvallis 48th Poe P en n U n i t y 56th U p t o n C h o w e n Burquest O r c h a r d Boulder 46th 62nd Y o r k C a m d e n Lilac G i r a r d G i r a r d F r e m o n t J u d y D u pont 51st Osseo Oak H a l i f a x Ramp P e r r y Q u a i l E m e r s o n B r o o kly n M a r l i n L e e Lawrence Northway G r i m e s E a r l e B r o w n 7 5 t h R a m p Abbott 63 r d D a l l a s Amy72ndWoodbine 51st 94 B r o o kl y n O r c h a r d H a li f a x J u n e I n d i a n a D r e w B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e P e r r y Q u a i l R e g e n t V i n c e n t 1 0 0 C a m d e n 68th 4 t h E w i n g E m e r s o n R a m p J a m e s L i l a c 74 1/2 R e g e n t N o b l e 9 4 R a m p M o r g a n G i r a r d Ramp V e r a C r u z J a m e s W e l c o m e R a m p Humboldt L e e L y n d a l e L y n d a l e 67thRamp Joyce Janet D r e w E a s t L y n d a l e 62nd 66th Quarles R a m p Winchester R a m p R a m p 72nd R a m p Woodbine T w i n L a k e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c Ramp 2 5 2 S c o t t Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn Center Minneapolis B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y Crystal Robbinsdale F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles F Functional Classification Principal Arterial A-Minor Augmentor A-Minor Reliever Major Collector Minor Collector Source: MNGEO, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-57-4 A-Minor Arterial A-Minor Arterials are intended to connect important locations within the city, have access to/ from the metropolitan highway system (Principal Arterials), and between important locations outside the city. These arterials are also intended to carry short to medium trips that would otherwise use the regional system. The Metropolitan Council, working cooperatively with MnDOT, Counties, and Cities, defined a network of A-Minor Arterials that are intended to either relieve traffic on the Principal Arterials or serve as substitutes for Principal Arterials. In Brooklyn Center, there are two roads classified as A-Minor arterials: • Brooklyn Boulevard (County Road 152) • Bass Lake Road (County Road 10) west of TH 100 The A-Minor arterials are subdivided into relievers, expanders, connectors, and augmenters. The Metropolitan Council classifies Brooklyn Boulevard as a reliever and Bass Lake Road as an augmenter. Relievers provide direct relief and support for congested Principal Arterials. They provide relief for long trips and accommodate medium length trips. Augmenters, literally, augment the capacity of Principal Arterials by serving higher-density areas and long-range trips. Both of the A-Minor Arterials are under the jurisdiction of Hennepin County. Urban Collectors Collector roadways are designed to serve shorter trips that occur entirely within the city and collect/distribute traffic from neighborhoods and commercial/industrial areas to the arterial system. Brooklyn Center has identified an extensive network of collector roads that links neighborhoods with each other, with neighboring cities, with the City Center, and with the regional highway system. Currently two of the collector roadways are under Hennepin County’s jurisdiction: • 69th Avenue North west of Brooklyn Boulevard • Humboldt Avenue/57th Avenue North located just east of TH 100 The remaining collector roadways are under the City’s jurisdiction. Map 7-1 shows it as part of the collector system. Local Streets Local streets connect blocks and land parcels and primarily function to provide access to adjacent properties. Local streets can also serve as important components of bicycle and pedestrian circulation systems. In most cases, local streets will connect to other local streets and collectors, although in some cases they may connect to minor arterials. All other streets within the City are classified as local streets. Table 7-1 lists the Functional Classifications of the primary roadway network in Brooklyn Center and the number of lanes for each roadway. Table 7-1. Street Classifications in Brooklyn Center Functional Classification Managing Jurisdiction Sub-class Lanes PRINCIPAL ARTERIALSI-94 State Freeway 6+I-94/I-694 State Freeway 6+TH 252 State Expressway 6TH 100 State Freeway 4 A-MINOR ARTERIALSBrooklyn Boulevard (CSAH 152)County Reliever 4/5 58th Avenue/CR 10 County Augmenter 3/4 COLLECTORS69th Avenue N (CR 130)County 269th Avenue N (east of B. Blvd.)City 4/2Humboldt Ave N/57th Ave N (CR 57)County 4/2Humboldt Ave N (north of I-94/694)City 4/257th Ave N (east of Humboldt Ave N)City 4Noble Ave N City City 2France Ave N (2 segments)City 2 June Ave N (58th Ave to 63rd Ave N)City 2Halifax Ave/Eckberg Dr/France Avenue/ 50thAve/Azelia Ave/Lakebreeze Avenue City 2 55th Ave N/56th Ave N (Xerxes Ave to CSAH 152)City 453rd Ave N/Brooklyn Blvd frontage (France Ave to 55th Ave N) City 2 John Martin Drive City City 4Earle Brown Drive (John Martin Drive to Summit Drive)City 4Summit Drive City 459th Ave N/Logan Ave N (Dupont Ave N to 53rd)City 2 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-77-6 Functional Classification Managing Jurisdiction Sub-class Lanes Lyndale Ave N City 267th Ave N (Humboldt to Dupont Ave N)City 263rd Ave N (west of Xerxes)City 4/2Shingle Creek Parkway City 4 Xerxes Ave N City 4/2Freeway Boulevard (65th-66th Ave N)City 2-5 Dupont Ave N City 273rd Ave N (east of Humboldt)City 253rd Ave N (east of Penn)City 251st Ave N (east of Brooklyn Blvd.)City 2 Traffic Counts and Patterns The most recent (2017) traffic counts are provided by MnDOT and are shown in Map 7-2. The forecasts are generally lower than the previous 2030 forecasts. This is a trend that has been observed across the metropolitan region. In general, it is a combination of lower growth expectations; the “dip” in travel that occurred during the recession, and the “new” travel behavior that indicates people do not travel by individual cars as much as they used to. Although changes in the current traffic pattern and volumes are expected, the anticipated land uses compared to the 2030 Plan are more residential than previously planned. As a result, the projections have been updated to reflect this planned land use change which is described in subsequent sections of this Chapter. The existing and forecast traffic volumes are compared to the size and capacity of each roadway in order to determine where capacity problems exist or are expected to occur in the future. Map 7-3 shows the number of lanes and general configuration of the City’s major roadways in order to help identify potential capacity problems. Roadway capacity problems arise when the roadway cannot efficiently handle the traffic using it, particularly at intersections. Efficient traffic movement is described in terms of “level of service” (LOS) which – according to MnDOT –“is a qualitative measure of the effect of traffic flow factors, such as speed and travel time, interruption, freedom to maneuver, driver comfort and convenience, and indirectly, safety and operating costs”. LOS is typically characterized using the letters “A” through “F”, illustrated in Table 7-2. Level “A” indicates a condition of free traffic flow with little to no restriction in speed or maneuverability. Level “F” indicates forced-flow operation at low speed with many stoppages. Map 7-2. 2017 Traffic Counts 75th L o g a n 56th 58th H a l i f a x 70th 76th A l d r i c h 6 6 t h T w i n L a k e 694694 61st L i l a c 55th J o h n M a r t i n H a l i f a x Mumford Y ork B r o o k l y n B e a r d P a l m e r L a k e Freeway Quail Sum mit 1 0 0 N a s h R a m p 9 4 64thOhenry 51st H a l i fax 1 0 0 65th D r e w F r a n c e 70th 53rd R a m p 7 0 t h A b b o t t 45th 54th R amp S c o t t ShingleCreek S h i n g l e C r e e k 94 94 71st J a m e s 47th Unity L i l a c O l i v e r K n o x I r v i n g 49th 74th R a m p 7 5 t h Camden T o l e d o 52nd 4 t h N o b l e K n o x R a mp 5 t h Thurber 2 5 2 O r c h a r d Q u a il U p t o n W a s h b u r n 6 6t h Y o r k F r a n c e 67th V i n c e n t 58th 45th Z e n i t h B e a r d W ill o w A b b o t t S ailor Meadowwood K y l e Q u a i l 61st 70th 67th 46th 67th 52nd S h e r i d a n Morgan Aldrich U n it y L e e 7 6 t h R u s s e l l 67th S h i n g l e C ree k Lakebreeze 58th 57th 63rd Oliver 7 1 s t X e r x e s Paul 60th Q u e e n U p t o n 55th 59th 73rd Lee L i l a c 81 50th B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r C h o w e n H u m b o l d t 10 L e e Fremont R am p F r e m o n t Orchard 74th 56th R a m p 75th 57th Fremont Ramp 69th E w i n g 57th 56th R a m p R e g e n t Howe P e r r y D r e w Ramp 59th 10 F r a n c e D u s h a r m e S c o t t C o l f a x 46th Logan F r e m o n t 46th V e r a C r u z Eckberg P e n n PalmerLake Xerxes R e g e n t Eleanor R a m p 4 5 t h F r e m o n t T o l e d o 73rd Q u a i l R e g e n t 69th U n it y Commodore 6 7 t h R a m p B e a r d 71st T o l e d o Ramp V i n c e n t 67th F r a n c e 591/2 Woodbine W e l c o m e 68th 491/2 Ramp 50th Eleanor 68th 60th 72ndB r y a n t D r e w 50th G i r a r d Violet 56th C a m d e n 51st 73rd 57th A d m i r a l A l d r i c h 73rd 76th E m e r s o n 59th 62nd Y o r k A l d r i c h U n i t y 68th W e l c o m e 66th Fairview 70th N o b l e G r i m e s S c o tt J u n e W e s t R i v e r 52nd Ramp 50th Abbott Q u a i l Urban 65th Q u a i l W i l l o w 54th53rd 64th 70th 51st 71st K y l e 68th 62nd 70th 7 2 n d L a k e 46 1/2 67th B r o o k v i e w 53rd 56th 72nd 51st 72nd 46th 68th A l d r i c h 52nd 61st N e w t o n Lake 581/2 71st 60th 46th 60th H u m b o l d t C o l f a x R a m p 66th 50th 75th 64th 56th R a m p B e a r d D u p o n t 48th X e r x e s H a l i f a x F r a n c e 10Ramp 74th H u m b o l d t Shingle Creek X e r x e s L i l a c B ro o kly n Ramp E w i n g A b b o t t 76th T ole d o C a m d e n Oliver 67th T w i n L a k e R a m p Z e n i t h 70th M o r g a n R a m p G r i m e s U n i t y A z e l i a 7 5 t h 75th 7 0 t h A b b o t t B r o o k d a l e Q u e e n X e r x e s AldrichBrooklyn Imperial 7 4 t h M a j o r 6 5 t h L y n d a l eWashburn O l i v e r R i v e r d a l e OsseoRoadFrontage D r e w Brooklyn P e r r y 50th 45th A d m i r a l D r e w N o bl e P e n n R u s s e l l Quail E w i n g 53rd 74th F r a n c e In dia n a T o l e d o S c o t t T o l e d o D r e w T w i n L a k e U n i t y R a m p K y l e 76th 76th H u m b o l d t M a j o r 70th Aldric h 73rd 74th74th 71st P e rry L o g a n Ramp Scott 69th B r y a n t C o l f a x X e r x e s D a l l a s Q u e e n 74th H u m b o l d t P e r r y R a m p Ramp 73rd 69th 55th N o rt h p o rt T h o m a s R a mp B e a r d Ponds James 49th Ramp 47th R a m p I n d i a n a 73rd 49th 74th IrvingJames 73rd E r i c o n Q u a i l 76th Ramp T o l e d o S h a r iAn n L e e N o b l e G i r a r d X e r x e s E w i n g U p t o n P e r r y F r e m o n t P e r r y P e n n K n o x M i s s i s s i p p i K n o x 72nd R u s s e l l Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t K a t h r e n e Angeline O l i v e r C o l f a x 6 t h A l d r i c h C o l f a x 4 t h K y l e J a m e s G r i m e s C h o w e n O r c h a r d E m e r s o n I r v i n g L o g a n H a l i f a x A l d r i c h N e w t o n A l d r i c h O l i v e r M o r g a n B r y a n t Winchester K n o x 66th M o r g a nVincent E w i n g M a j o r L o g a n W a s h b u r n M a j o r N e w t o n X e r x e s T h o m a s S h e r i d a n D r e w Q u a i l O r c h a r d G r e a t V i e w R i v e r w o o d E w i n g C a m d e n R e g e n t C o lf a x R e g e n t 48th L a k e C u r v e I r v i n g 54th W e l c o m e 47th L e e Northway 45th 53rd 6 6 t h 57th Bernard Corvallis 48th Poe P e n n U n i t y 56th C h o w e n Burquest O r c h a r d Boulder 46th 62nd Y o r k C a m d e n Lilac G i r a r d G i r a r d F r e m o n t J u d y D u po nt 51st Osseo Oak H a lif a x Ramp P e r r y Q u a i l E m e r s o n M a r l i n L e e Lawrence Northway E a r l e B r o w n 7 5 t h Abbott 63r d D a l l a s Amy72ndWoodbine 51st 94 B r o o kl y n O r c h a r d H a l i f a x J u n e I n d i a n a D r e w P e r r y Q u a i l V i n c e n t 1 0 0 C a m d e n 68th 4 t h E w i n g E m e r s o n R a m p J a m e s L i l a c 74 1/2 R e g e n t N o b l e 9 4 R a m p M o r g a n G i r a r d Ramp V e r a C r u z J a m e s W e l c o m e R a m p Humboldt L e e L y n d a l e 67thRamp Joyce Janet D r e w E a s t L y n d a l e 62nd 66th QuarlesWinchester R a m p 72nd R a m p Woodbine T w i n L a k e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c Ramp 2 5 2 S c o t t Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s 620 870 16000 4 0 0 0 52 0 0 6 0 9 5 0 0 3250 81 00 1600 2250 3 4 5 0 4700 370 9150 2 3 5 3 7 0 1200 7200 1 4 5 0 3 1 0 0 1900 7 2 0 0 2 5 0 0 5 6 0 0 1 6 3 0 0 6 6 0 0 8 9 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 9 5 0 0 5 3 0 0 4 5 0 0 2 8 5 0 0 16200 9200 4 9 5 1 5 0 0 1400 3700 5 2 0 0 5 4 0 0 6 8 0 0 53003500 7200 3400 4100 3350 3 1 0 0 7900 1 1 0 0 7500 950 7 9 0 0 1 2 5 0 11500 7 3 0 1 2 5 0 0 11500 8 6 0 415 20100 7300 18300 3 9 5 0 4600 1 1 0 011600 2950 3300 1 2 5 0 161000 720 1700 3950 2400 2 2 3 0 0 4 4 0 0 0 1850 2650 1600 1450 3650 3 7 0 0 51008800 7 2 0 0 5 7 0 0 0 5 1 0 0 5000 7000 5400 8 8 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 1 0 0 4 0 5 0 7 4 0 3 6 5 0 3 2 0 0 3 1 5 0 1 2 5 0 9 0 0 0 1300 6100 4200 8 5 0 0950 5500 1 4 9 00 3 8 0 0 2 6 0 0 0 3 5 0 0 0 1 4 5 0 4350 9500 6 9 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 9 6 0 0 9 5 0 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 115000 10700 134000 7 5 0 0 0 128000 4 9 0 0 4 9 0 0 2 4 5 4 2 0 0 1 9 5 0 6300 8 2 0 0 1 6 0 0 1 6 0 0 3 1 0 0 3 8 0 0 6 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 8 0 0 0 5 8 0 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 MilesF Function Classification Principal Arterial A-Minor Augmentor A-Minor Reliever Major Collector Minor Collector Source: MNGEO, MNDOT, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Map 7-2. 2017 Traffic Counts Table 7-1. Street Classifications in Brooklyn Center (continued) TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-97-8 Table 7-2. Typical Daily Roadway Capacities by Facility Type Facility Type Daily Capacity (Vehicles per day) LOS ETwo-lane collector/local 10,000Two-lane arterial 12,000Three-lane (two-way left-turn lane) collector/arterial 18,000Four-lane collector 20,000 Four-lane undivided arterial 27,000Five-lane collector 28,000 Five-lane arterial 34,000Four-lane divided (expressway)36,000Six-lane divided (expressway)54,000Four-lane unmetered freeway 74,000Four-lane metered freeway 85,000Six-lane unmetered freeway 111,000Six-lane metered freeway 127,000Eight-lane unmetered freeway 150,000Eight-lane metered freeway 184,000 The method used to determine roadway capacity deficiency divides the existing average annual daily traffic (AADT) by the acceptable daily capacity for the specific roadway type, a measure known as the volume to capacity (V/C) ratio. The acceptable design capacity is estimated based on the number of lanes, roadway type, functional classification, and traffic peaking characteristics (Table 7-2). The deficiency analysis defines “capacity deficiency” roadway segments as those with a V/C ratio above 1.0, which signifies that a segment of road has observed volumes or forecasts which exceed its design capacity. Roadway segments with a V/C ratio between 0.85 and 1.0 are designated “near capacity” and are shown as bold, yellow lines and are listed in Tables 3 and 4. A roadway with a V/C ratio of 0.85 means that on an average day, 85 percent of the road’s design capacity is utilized. Table 7-3. Existing Capacity Deficiencies Route Segment Volume Roadway Design Capacity V/C Ratio Approaching capacity (Volumes Meet or Exceed 85% of Design Capacity TH 100 France Avenue to Brooklyn Boulevard 75,000 85,000 0.88 69th Avenue Zane Avenue to Brooklyn Boulevard 9,500 10,000 0.95 Over Capacity (Volumes Meet or Exceed Design Capacity) TH 252 I-694 to 65th Avenue 67,000 54,000 1.24 65th Avenue to 70th Ave 60,000 54,000 1.11 Map 7-3. Traffic Lanes & Existing Roadways 75th H a l i f a x 70th D u p o n t 76th A l d r i c h 6 6 t h 73rd 2 5 2 T w i n L a k e 44th 2 5 2 S c ott 61st L i l a c R a m p 55th 63rd H a l i f a x Mumford Freeway 8 1 Y o r k B r o o k l y n B e a r d X e r x e s P a l m e r L a k e Parkway B r o o kl y n Ramp Quail Ramp 65th R a m p 1 0 0 R a m p 48th 10 Nash 65th 64th R a m p U n i t y 47th Ohenry 51st R a m p H alifax R a m p D r e w F r a n c e 70th Lake 53rd R a m p B r o o k l y n 53rd 56th 1 0 0 JohnMartin L a k eland 7 0 t h 57th 94 49th 53rd 73rd 54th 57th Ramp F r e m o n t S c o t t 67th Broo kd ale C enter 94 58th Unity L i l a c R a m p 43rd 66t h O l i v e r J a m e s 74th M o r g a n L o g a n Ra m p K n o x N e w t o n I r v i n g 49th W i n g a r d 74th 68th 7 4 th Y o r k Camden T o l e d o Angeline 694 4 th52nd N o b l e R a mp 45 1/2 K n o x 5 t h V e r a C r u z Thurber Y a t e s O r c h a r d 68th Q u a il 44th U p t o n 67th F r a n c e V e r a C r u z V e r a C r u z V i n c e n t 58th W ill o w D r e w 58th F r e m o n t 8 1 H a l i f a x India n a S ailor 7 5 t h Q u a i l K y l e 45th 52nd Q u a i l 61st Brooklyn U n i t y 70th 67th 67th Aldrich 7 4 t h 7 6 t h L a w r e n c e R u s s e l l Lakeside S h i n g l e C r e e k Oliver 7 1 s t X e r x e s Paul 60th 48th 50th N o r t h p o r t Corvallis 58th 73rd L i l a c I n d iana B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r C h o w e n 44th H u m b o l d t 10 E w i n g L e e Grimes 56thOrchard 56th56th 50th 74th W e s t R i v e r Ramp 69th 75th W a s h b u r n 57th R o b i n E w i n g 56th R a m p Howe R a m p 68th L o g a n P e r r y D r e w Ramp F r a n c e D u s h a r m e S c o t t C o l f a x 55th Lo g a n 55th 4 6th Bernard Wilshire F r e m o n t V e r a C r u z 57th Ra m p PalmerLake Q u a i l Eckberg R a m p 48th 6 6 t h Eleanor Ra m p Webber R a m p C o l f a x Fairview F r e m o n t X e r x e s Q u a i l R a m p 69th D u p o n t Ramp Commodore 6 7 t h69th F r a n c e 71st G i r a r d R a m p B e a r d Lakebreeze V i n c e n t 491/2 X e n i a 52nd 591/2 Woodbine W e l c o m e 68th S h o r e s A l d r i c h Ramp 56th 58th W estBroa d way Eleanor 68th Ra m p 72ndB ry ant D r e w 52nd 61st G i r a r d Violet R am p C a m d e n W e l c o m e L i l ac 73rd Ramp A d m i r a l A l d r i c h73rd E m e r s o n 62nd Y o r k A l d r i c h 50th 52nd 51st L a k e 68th 66th Fairview 70th N o b l e Grimes S c o t t J u n e 44th Woodbine W e s t R i v e r R i v e r d a l e R a m p R a m p 4 t h 72nd 50th Q u a i l Admiral U r ban 46th 65th R a m p W i l l o w 60th 60th 53rd 64th 70th 47th 54th 71st K y l e W e l c o m e 45th 70th 72nd72nd 69th 461/2 B r o o k v i e w 71st 64th 72nd 45th 56th 51st 72nd VictoryMemorial 61st 46th 54th 59th A l d r i c h 46th 51st 47th 50th 71st 60th 57th 62nd H u m b o l d t 50th 75th 59th 56th B e a r d I n d i a n a H a l i f a x F r a n c e S c o tt 59th ShingleCreek L i l a c 1 0 0 67th E w i n g A b b o t t T o l e d o G r i m e s C a m d e n T w i n L a k e R a m pZenith 47th 45th F r a n c e 46th 70th 66th N e w t o n M a j o r U p t o n C h o w e n G r i m e s 75th U n i t y R a m p A z e l i a 69th L a k el a n d 7 0 t h RampG r i m e s Q u e e n Aldrich R a mp Imperial M a j o r 6 5 t h L y n d a l e R u s s e l l W a s h b u r n O l i v e r P e n n Osseo Road Frontage Y o r k D r e w Z e n i t h P e r r y 50th A b b o t t Q u a il A d m iral R a m p W e l c o m e O l i v e r R u s s e l l N o b l e P e n n E w i n g 53rd F r a n c e I n d i a n a 74th Ramp T o l e d o S c o t t T o l e d o D r e w S u m m i t R a m p Ramp K y l e Lakeland M a j o r 3 7 t h P err y U n i t y H u m b o l d t 70th P e r r y B e a r d M o r g a n 73rd 74th74th 71st P e n n L o g a n X e r x e s R e g e n t E m e r s o n B r y a n t C o l f a x D a l l a s O r c h a r d L a k ela n d Q u e e n Brooklyn H u m b o l d t P e r r y Q u e e n 55th N orth p o r t T h o m a s B e a r d La keland Ramp Po n d s 49th Bellvue I n d i a n a James Ramp L i l a c 47th Shingle Creek I r v i n g 71s t I n d i a n a H u m b o l d t 73rd J a m e s K n o x L o g a n 74th M o r g a n N e w t o n O l i v e rTwinOak I r v i n g J a m e s Q u e e n P e n n S h e r i d a n T h o m a s U p t o n Ericon V i n c e n t W a s h b u r n X e r x e s 65th G r i m e s Lakebreeze O r c h a r d N e w t o n 67th68th S h ariAnn T o l e d o L e e N o b l e V e r a C r u z X e r x e s E w i n g U p t o n K a t h r e n e 72nd P e r r y P e n n C o l f a x K n o x M i s s i s s i p p i H u m b o l d t K n o x R u s s e l l Q u a il M a j o r S c o t t J a m e s R e g e n t K n o x I r v i n g Angeline O l i v e r 6 t h 4 t h K y l e G r i m e s A l d r i c h C h o w e n Y a t e s O r c h a r d R e g e n t H a l i f a x A l d r i c h M a j o r A l d r i c h 94 B r y a n t R i v e r w o o dWinchester66th M o r g a nVincent E w i n g F r e m o n t L o g a n M a j o r N e w t o nXerxes S h e r i d a n T h o m a sWashburn U p t o n D r e w X e n i a T o l e d o O r c h a r d G r e a t V i e w E w i n g C a m d e n R e g e n t J u n e C o l f a x 48th L ak ela n d B e a r d U n i t y I r v i n g F r a n c e 54th W e l c o m e A b b o t t 47th L e e Northway M o r g a n 45th 53rd R a m p 57th 48th Corvallis Poe P e n n 73rd Unity 56th Z e n i t h O r c h a r d U p t o n C h o w en Burquest R i v e r d a l e C a m d e n 46th Boulder62nd 10 Y o r k Lilac Meadowwood G i r a r d J u d y G i r a r d 51st H a l i f a x D r e w Osseo Oak P e r r y Q u a il B r o o kly n M a r l i n Lawre n c e L e e G ri m e s Ra m p E a r l e B r o w n D a l l a s 51st 63 r d Amy72ndWoodbine O r c h a r d I n d i a n a J u n e P e r r y Q u a i l R e g e n t H a l i f a x V i n c e n t C a m d e n E w i n g 68th 4 t h E m e r s o n R a m p L i l a c 74 1/2 R e g e n t N o b l e M o r g a n Ramp G i r a r d V e r a C r u z J a m e s L e e L y n d a l e L y n d al e 67th D r e w Ramp Joyce Janet E a s t L y n d a l e 62nd 66th Quarles J a m e s 66th R a m pRamp Winchester R a m p R a m p 72nd R a m p Woodbine 9 4 T w i n L a k e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c 9 4 S h i n g l e C r e e k S c o t t 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 MilesF Function Classification Principal Arterial A-Minor Augmentor A-Minor Reliever Major Collector Minor Collector I-94 2-U 2-U 2-U 2-U 2-U 2-U 2-U 2-U 2 Lane Undivided 2-U 2-U 2-D 2 Lane Divided (median with left turn lane) 2-D 2-D 3 3 Lane (center turn lane) 3 3 3 4-U 4 Lane Undivided 4-U 4-U 4-U4-U 4-D 4 Lane Divided 4-D 4-D 4-D 4-D 4-D 4-D 4-D 5 5 5 4-D 5 5 Lanes or More Source: MNGEO, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Map 7-3. Existing Roadways and Number of Lanes TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-117-10 Table 7-4. Population, Households, & Employment Growth by TAZ Map 7-4. Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZ)Map 7-4. Transportation Analysis Zones 74th 63rd Wilshire 58th Woodbine 49th 56th N e w t o n S h i n g l e C r e e k 694 O r c h a r d L i l a c 1 0 0 60th Brooklyn John M a r t i n Mumford 10 65th Nash 94 73rd 64thOhenry Osseo 69th 70th 57th 53rd 45 1 /2 67th Ramp 71stWingard T o l e d o Angeline K n o x 5 t hThurber 75th S h o r e s 44 1/2 Y o r k 77th V e r a C r u z Z e n i t h Meadowwood A b b o t t S ailor Q u a i l 45th 61st 52nd R u s s e l l Paul 66th L e e Lawrence Howe Victory Memorial Bernard Brookdale Eckberg 51st 48th81 Fairview Winchester R e g e n t E st a te Lak ela nd S h e r i d a n 6 t h Commodore F r a n c e 62nd 59 1/2 49 1/250th Eleanor 68th Violet 46th C a m d e n A d m i r a l 59th F a irfi e l d J u n e 54th 461/2 Urban 58 1/2 L a k e S i e r r a 76th H a l i f a x 47th E w i n g L a k e v i e w M i s s i s s i p p i C h o w e n A z e l i a N o rt h p o rt Im perial Lakeside A l d r i c h Bellvue K y l e Ericon P e r r y M o r g a n C o l f a x 55th Corvallis P e n n I r v i n g K a t h r e n e V i n c e n t W a s h b u r n T h o m a s G r e a t V i e w R i v e r w o o d R i v e r d a l e Burquest Boulder J u d y Oak M a r l i n Amy D a l l a s 74 1/2 E a s t L y n d a l e Joyce Janet Quarles 72nd D u p o n t 2 5 2 W e s t R i v e r F r e e w a y P a l m e r L a k e Parkway Summit U nity N o b l e F r e m o n t L y n d a l e M a j o r H u m b o l d t T w i n L a k e B e a r d E m e r s o n U p t o n B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r Northway W e l c o m e L o g a n G i r a r d X e r x e s O l i v e r I n d i a n a J a m e s W i l l o w B r o o k v i e w Q u e e n B r y a n tXenia B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e G r i m e s D r e w Poe E a r l e Brown P e a r s o n S c o t t 4 t h Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn Center Minneapolis B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y Crystal Robbinsdale F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s 1077 1078 10841085 1086 1087 10881089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1173 1174 1175 1176 11781179 269 270 281 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles FSource: MNGEO, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Map 7-4. Transportation Analysis Zones 74th 63rd Wilshire 58th Woodbine 49th 56th N e w t o n S h i n g l e C r e e k 694 O r c h a r d L i l a c 1 0 0 60th Brooklyn John M a r t i n Mumford 10 65th Nash 94 73rd 64thOhenry Osseo 69th 70th 57th 53rd 45 1 /2 67th Ramp 71stWingard T o l e d o Angeline K n o x 5 t hThurber 75th S h o r e s 44 1/2 Y o r k 77th V e r a C r u z Z e n i t h Meadowwood A b b o t t S ailor Q u a i l 45th 61st 52nd R u s s e l l Paul 66th L e e Lawrence Howe Victory Memorial Bernard Brookdale Eckberg 51st 48th8 1 Fairview Winchester R e g e n t E st a te L ak ela n d S h e r i d a n 6 t h Commodore F r a n c e 62nd 59 1/2 49 1/250th Eleanor 68th Violet 46th C a m d e n A d m i r a l 59th F a irfie l d J u n e 54th 461/2 Urban 58 1/2 L a k e S i e r r a 76th H a l i f a x 47th E w i n g L a k e v i e w M i s s i s s i p p i C h o w e n A z e l i a N o rt h p o rt Im perial Lakeside A l d r i c h Bellvue K y l e Ericon P e r r y M o r g a n C o l f a x 55th Corvallis P e n n I r v i n g K a t h r e n e V i n c e n t W a s h b u r n T h o m a s G r e a t V i e w R i v e r w o o d R i v e r d a l e Burquest Boulder J u d y Oak M a r l i n Amy D a l l a s 74 1/2 E a s t L y n d a l e Joyce Janet Quarles 72nd D u p o n t 2 5 2 W e s t R i v e r F r e e w a y P a l m e r L a k e Parkway Summit U nity N o b l e F r e m o n t L y n d a l e M a j o r H u m b o l d t T w i n L a k e B e a r d E m e r s o n U p t o n B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r Northway W e l c o m e L o g a n G i r a r d X e r x e s O l i v e r I n d i a n a J a m e s W i l l o w B r o o k v i e w Q u e e n B r y a n tXenia B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e G r i m e s D r e w Poe E a r l e Brown P e a r s o n S c o t t 4 t h Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn Center Minneapolis B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y Crystal Robbinsdale F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s 1077 1078 10841085 1086 1087 10881089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1173 1174 1175 1176 11781179 269 270 281 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 Miles FSource: MNGEO, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Transportation Analysis Zones (TAZ) For purposes of regional transportation planning, the Metropolitan Council divides the region into Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs). Map 7-4 shows the Metropolitan Council’s TAZ boundaries and Hennepin County’s further subdivision of these zones. Regional population, households, and employment forecasts are allocated to the TAZs as a means of forecasting traffic volumes. These forecasts are shown on Table 7-4. Because Brooklyn Center is a fully developed community, the trips generated within the TAZs are not expected to change significantly during this planning period, with the exception of the identified redevelopment areas shown and described in Chapter 3 of this Plan. TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-137-12 Future Land Use and Allocation of Growth As described in Chapter 3: Land Use & Redevelopment, the City’s vision for redevelopment and growth in this planning period focuses on a multi-modal, transit-oriented core with a mix of residential, business and retail use. The Future Land Use plan describes three new mixed-use land use designations, and includes a new Transit Oriented Development land use. The intent is to create a walkable, vibrant core that revitalizes this currently underdeveloped area of the community. With respect to the planned growth in the community, the Mixed-Use and TOD areas will accommodate nearly all of the City’s planned growth in this planning period. Table 7-5. Density Ranges of Planned Land Uses Land Use Designation DensityTransit Oriented Development (TOD)31+ Dwelling Units per Acre Neighborhood Mixed-Use (N-MU)15-31 Dwelling Units per AcreCommercial Mixed-Use (C-MU)10- 25 Dwelling Units per Acre This Plan will influence the access and operations of the local and regional roadways system. With growth and redevelopment anticipated, Brooklyn Center has the opportunity to capitalize on its location and establish a highly-accessible community with residential and business mixes supported by multi-modal transportation. 2040 Traffic Volumes The City of Brooklyn Center engaged SRF Consulting Group to prepare a 2040 Traffic Model consistent with the projected growth identified in Chapter 3 of this Plan. As demonstrated by the 2040 projections some traffic volume increases are anticipated particularly on the road network surrounding the redevelopment areas, or the ‘central spine’ of the community where there is the most potential for increased intensity of users including mixed-uses, residential and businesses. Capacity and Safety Issues In Brooklyn Center’s 2030 Plan, congestion and capacity issues were primarily experienced on the principal and minor arterial roadways, with peak hours causing most concern for backups on and off the regional highway system. The traffic forecasts indicated that the demand on these regional facilities continues to increase and worsening congestion continues. However, some recent and planned improvements to both Brooklyn Boulevard and TH 252 are expected to alleviate some of this congestion and provide safer and better access to the City’s redevelopment areas. Map 7-5. 2040 Traffic Model Projections 75th L o g a n 56th 58th H a l i f a x 70th 76th A l d r i c h 6 6 t h T w i n L a k e 694 Y o r k 694R a m p 61st L i l a c 55th J o h n M a r ti n H a l i f a x Mumford Y o rk B r o o k l y n B e a r d P a l m e r L a k e Parkway Freeway Quail Summit 1 0 0 48th Nash R a m p 9 4 64thOhenry R a m p 51st R a m p Hali f ax 1 0 0 65th D r e w F r a n c e R a m p 70th 53rd 7 5 t h R a m p 53rd 70th A b b o t t 45th 54th R amp S c o t t Broo kd ale C e nter S h i n g l e C r e e k Shingle Creek B e a r d 94 94 71st J a m e s 47th Unity L i l a c R a m p O l i v e r K n o x I r v i n g 49th 74th R a m p 7 5 t h Camden T o l e d o 4t h52nd 4 t h N o b l e 45 1/2 K n o x R a mp 65th 5 t h V e r a C r u z Thurber 2 5 2 Q u a i l U p t o n W a s h b u r n 66 th Y o r k F r a n c e 67th V i n c e n t 58th 45th Z e n i t h B e a r d W i l l o w A b b o t t S ailor Meadowwood K y l e Q u a i l 61st 70th 67th 46th 67th 52nd S h e r i d a n Morgan Aldrich U n it y L e e M o r g a n 7 6 t h R u s s e l l 67th Lakeside 58th 57th 63rd Oliver 7 1 s t X e r x e s Paul 60th Q u e e n U p t o n 55th 59th 73rd 4 8 t h Lee 50th B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r C h o w e n H u m b o l d t L e e Fremont R a m p F r e m o n t Orchard 50th 74th 56th 75th Fremont Ramp 69th 57th 56th R a m p Howe 47th P e r r y D r e w 46th Ramp 59th 10 F r a n c e D u s h a r m e S c o t t 55th N e w t o n Logan Wilshire 46th V e r a C r u z Eckberg 54th PalmerLake Xerxes Eleanor R a m p 4 5 t h F r e m o n t X e r x e s T o l e d o 73rd Q u a i l M a j o r R e g e n t 69th U n it y Hillsview Commodore R a m p B e a r d 71st T o l e d o V i n c e n t 67th F r a n c e 591/2 Woodbine W e l c o m e 491/2 S h o r e s Ramp 50th Eleanor 68th 60th 72ndB r y a n t D r e w 50th 61st G i r a r d Violet R a m p 56th C a m d e n 51st 73rd 57th A d m i r a l A l d r i c h73rd 76th E m e r s o n 59th 62nd Y o r k A l d r i c h U n i t y 68th W e l c o m e L i l a c 66th Fairview 70th N o b l e G r i m e s S c o t t J u n e W e s t R i v e r 52nd 4 t h50th Abbott Q u a i l Urban 65th Q u a i l 65th W i l l o w 54th53rd 64th 70th 47th 51st 81 71st K y l e 68th 62nd 70th 72 nd72nd L a k e 46 1/2 67th 53rd 56th 72nd 51st 72nd 52nd 46th 68th A l d r i c h 52nd 61st N e w t o n Lake 581/2 71st 60th 46th 60th H u m b o l d t C o l f a x R a m p 66th 50th 75th 64th 56th B e a r d D u p o n t 48th X e r x e s H a l i f a x F r a n c e 10 74th H u m b o l d t Shingle Creek X e r x e s L i l a c B r o o k l y n Ramp E w i n g A b b o t t 76t h T o l e d o C a m d e n Oliver 67th L a k e v i e w R a m p Z e n i t h 45th 70th M o r g a n 66th C h o w e n U n i t y A z e l i a 7 5 t h 75th G ri m e s 70 t h A b b o t t B r o o k d a l e Q u e e n X e r x e s Aldrich Brooklyn Brooklyn Im perial 74th M a j o r 6 5 t h L y n d a l e Lakeside W a s h b u r n O l i v e r R i v e r d a l e D r e w B r o o kly n P e r r y 50th 45th A d m i r a l D r e w Noble P e n nRussell Quail P e r r y E w i n g 53rd 74th F r a n c e In dia n a T o l e d o S c o t t T o l e d o D r e w U n i t y Ra m p R a m p K y l e 76th 76th M a j o r 70th Aldric h 73rd 74th74th 71st P e rr y L o g a n Ramp R e g e n t Scott 69th B r y a n t C o l f a x X e r x e s D a l l a s Q u e e n 74th H u m b o l d t P e r r y R a m p 73rd 69th 55th N o rt h p o rt T h o m a s Ramp B e a r d Bellvue Ponds James 49th Ramp L a k ela n d 47th L i l a c R a m p I n d i a n a 73rd 7 1 s t 49th 74th IrvingJames 73rd E r i c o n P e r r y 76th Ramp R a m p T o l e d o S h a r iAn n L e e N o b l e G i r a r d X e r x e s E w i n g U p t o n P e r r y F r e m o n t P e r r y P e n n K n o x M i s s i s s i p p i K n o x 72nd R u s s e l l Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t K a t h r e n e Angeline O l i v e r C o l f a x 6 t h A l d r i c h C o l f a x 4 t h K y l e J a m e s G r i m e s O r c h a r d E m e r s o n I r v i n g L o g a n H a l i f a x A l d r i c h N e w t o n A l d r i c h O l i v e r M o r g a n B r y a n t Winchester K n o x 66th M o r g a nVincent M a j o r L o g a n W a s h b u r n M a j o r N e w t o nXerxes T h o m a s S h e r i d a n D r e w Q u a i l T o l e d o O r c h a r d G r e a t V i e w E w i n g C a m d e n R e g e n t J u n e C o l f a x R e g e n t 48th La k ela n d U n i t y Lakeside L a k e C u r v e I r v i n g 54th W e l c o m e L e e Northway 45th 53rd M o r g a n 6 6 t h 57th Corvallis 48th Poe P e n n U n i t y 56th U p t o n C h o w e n Burquest O r c h a r d Boulder 46th 62nd Y o r k C a m d e n Lilac G i r a r d G i r a r d F r e m o n t J u d y D u po nt 51st Osseo Oak H a l i f a x Ramp P e r r y Q u a i l E m e r s o n M a r l i n L e e Lawrence Northway G ri m e s E a r l e B r o w n 7 5 t h R a m p Abbott 63 r d Amy72ndWoodbine 51st 94 B r o o k l y n O r c h a r d H a l i f a x J u n e I n d i a n a D r e w B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e P e r r y Q u a i l R e g e n t V i n c e n t 1 0 0 C a m d e n 68th 4t h E w i n g E m e r s o n R a m p J a m e s L i l a c 74 1/2 R e g e n t N o b l e 9 4 R a m p M o r g a n G i r a r d Ramp V e r a C r u z J a m e s W e l c o m e R a m p Humboldt L e e L y n d a l e L y n d a l e 67thRamp Joyce Janet D r e w E a s t L y n d a l e 62nd 66th Quarles R a m p Winchester R a m p R a m p 72nd R a m p Woodbine T w i n L a k e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c Ramp 2 5 2 S c o t t Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l Brooklyn Center Minneapolis B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y Crystal Robbinsdale 26000 17100 3600 1200 13002500 134000 3500 125000 8000 1000 5900 9300 4600 1500 1840021000 30000 15000083004200 120001800 8000 10200 13001600 25000 910011800 4400 45005800 7100 10000 76000 9900 7900 1900 1400 4000 7700 13900 5100 3700 34000 3900 18600 5400 4600 3600 1600 176000 71000 4800 3300 7200 3300 5200 9000 5800 9600 4000 1800 76000 1400 25000 82000 4000 25000 44000 69000 9800 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 MilesF Functional Classification Principal Arterial A-Minor Augmentor A-Minor Reliever Major Collector Minor Collector 2040 Traffic Projections XXX Source: MNGEO, City of Brooklyn Center, SRF, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Map 7-5. 2040 Traffic Volume Projections TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-157-14 To determine the roadway system capacity deficiencies based on the 2040 AADT forecasts the same methodology was used as in the existing conditions. The forecast model and volume-to- capacity analysis was conducted to determine volumes and assess congestion. The analysis based on the 2040 traffic model is reflected in Table 7-6 below. Table 7-6 Year 2040 Capacity Deficiencies Route Segment Volume Roadway Design Capacity V/C Ratio Approaching capacity (Volumes Meet or Exceed 85% of Design Capacity I-694 TH 252 to East River Road 176,000 184,000 0.96 TH 100 France Avenue to Brooklyn Blvd 82,000 85,000 0.96 Summit Drive to I-694 76,000 85,000 0.89 France Avenue 47th Avenue to TH 100 9,900 10,000 0.99 Over Capacity (Volumes Meet or Exceed Design Capacity) TH 252 I-694 to 65th Avenue 76,000 54,000 1.41 65th Avenue to 70th Ave 68,000 54,000 1.26 69th Avenue Zane Avenue to Brooklyn Blvd 10,200 10,000 1.02 Brooklyn Boulevard Brooklyn Boulevard was highlighted as a major concern with respect to capacity and safety within the 2030 Plan. In response the City, in coordination with Hennepin County, in 2013 the City commissioned the Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Study which defined a vision and future roadway concept for the corridor which would improve transportation for all modes; established a cohesive streetscape design to encourage pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users; and attract and retain businesses. Brooklyn Center and Hennepin County are currently working on an approximately 1.4-mile full reconstruction and streetscape improvement of the roadway that extends from 49th Avenue and Bass Lake Road. The improvements are anticipated to improve auto, transit, bike and pedestrian movements within this corridor. A similar project is programmed for Brooklyn Boulevard from Bass Lake Road to I-694 in 2021. These projects are critical to positioning the corridor and adjacent land uses for redevelopment as designated within the Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay shown on the Future Land Use Plan. MN 252 / I-94 Along the City’s eastern border, I-94 and TH 252 continue to be studied by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) for potential improvements and lane conversions. In 2016 Brooklyn Center commissioned the TH 252 Corridor Study to establish a long term vision for TH 252 to address safety, congestion and neighborhood connectivity issues on TH 252. The goal of the study was to identify the short and long term improvements on TH 252 that should be implemented within Brooklyn Center to accomplish the long term vision. MnDOT and Hennepin County continue to work with the cities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, and Minneapolis on appropriate improvements including entrance and exit ramp locations and lane conversions. Planned improvements for this corridor are identified in the Metropolitan Council’s 2040 Transportation Policy Plan (2040 TPP). As part of the Regional Mobility project on MN 252 and I-94, the 2040 TPP identifies freeway conversion of MN 252 and the addition of MnPASS from 610 to Dowling along I-94 (see Map 7-6) in the 2022-2027 Timeframe. These improvements are shown in both Tier I as part of the Current Revenue Scenario and Tier II as part of the Increased Revenue Scenario for Regional Mobility investment. Map 7-6. MnPASS System under Current Revenue Scenario near Brooklyn Center 2040 TRANSPORTATION POLICY PLAN | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL | October 2018 UPDATE Chapter 5: Highway Direction & Plan| Page 5.43 Figure 5-14: MnPASS System under Current Revenue Scenario 2040 TRANSPORTATION POLICY PLAN | METROPOLITAN COUNCIL | October 2018 UPDATE Chapter 5: Highway Direction & Plan| Page 5.43 Figure 5-14: MnPASS System under Current Revenue Scenario Source: MnDOT 2040 TPP TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-177-16 IMPROVEMENT STRATEGIES AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT Travel Demand Management Travel Demand Management (TDM) is a set of techniques to reduce peak period vehicle trips by 1) shifting travelers from driving alone into shared ride arrangements, such as ridesharing or transit, or 2) by encouraging alternative work arrangements, such as flextime and telecommuting that remove trips from the peak travel times. In this metropolitan area and throughout the nation our ability to build our way out of growing congestion and environmental problems is severely limited by the cost of roads and the environmental and social impacts of new and expanded roads. Brooklyn Center’s road system allows for very little expansion if any, due to constrained rights-of-way and established land uses. Therefore, the City supports travel demand management as a way to alleviate increasing traffic congestion. TDM techniques are best implemented through a partnership of cities, regional and state agencies, and employers to encourage travelers to change their behavior through incentives, enhanced services and high occupancy facilities. For example, employers can provide subsidized transit passes, allow staggered work hours to allow travel outside of peak hours, and encourage telecommuting. The state and region provide transit service and facilities such as high occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, metered ramps and meter bypasses to allow faster travel times for ride-sharers and transit users. These types of improvements are important for supporting drivers who choose alternatives to driving alone. As a developed City, Brooklyn Center has limited options for adding lanes and facilities to existing arterials and roadways. Increasing implementation of TDM techniques will fall to partnerships with transit services and employer-based incentives for rideshare, flextime, and telecommuting. In redevelopment areas, future transit facilities and their integration with the broader transportation system within the City will be likely offer prime opportunities for enhancing multi-modal travel and TDM. Planned Improvements to the Regional Highway System There are no Principal Arterials or interchanges within Brooklyn Center identified for improvements in the 2040 TPP. The most recent MnDOT highway project within the City was paving a portion of I-94, which was scheduled for completion in 2018. While a project is not identified in the 2040 TPP, a project to covert TH 252 to a freeway, add capacity and add MnPASS lanes on TH 252 and I-94 was funded by the state legislature in 2023 through the Corridors of Commerce funding program. Although not shown in the 2040 TPP, as previously noted, the TH 252 corridor continues to be studied and MnDOT is working collaboratively with the City of Brooklyn Center and the City of Brooklyn Park on potential future improvements in this corridor. Currently, MnDOT is exploring the potential conversion to a 6-lane grade-separated freeway with exit and entrance ramps from I-694 to TH 610 and is seeking input on locations and configurations of entrance and exit ramps from key stakeholders. Planned Improvements to the Local and County Roadway System To manage and plan for regular street maintenance and management the City has adopted the Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Plan which is implemented through the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The Neighborhood Street and Utility Improvement Plan identifies and plans for the systematic management and maintenance of the City’s roadways, and utility infrastructure and basis the improvements on the lifecycle of the infrastructure within a particular area or neighborhood. This Plan will continue to be updated and incorporated as part of the CIP efforts each year. Access Management Access to the regional highway system in the City of Brooklyn Center is primarily expected to remain the same through this planning period. Interstates I-94 and I-694 have access only at existing interchanges. These interchange locations are set, and the City does not expect these locations to change. Access to TH 100 was altered with improvements about a decade ago, however, certain movements between I-94 and TH 100 are left with challenges. Eastbound I-94 to southbound TH 100, and northbound 100 to west bound I-94 still require use of local streets to make these movements. The local streets impacted include Brooklyn Boulevard, Shingle Creek Parkway and 65th Avenue. Access to TH 252 continues to be studied by MnDOT in coordination with Brooklyn Center. While a project is not identified in the 2040 TPP, a project to covert TH 252 to a freeway, add capacity and add MnPASS lanes on TH 252 and I-94 was funded by the state legislature in 2023 through the Corridors of Commerce funding program. TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-197-18 Map 7-7. Planned Transit Routes/Improvements k k k k k !.!C !C !C 75th CrystalAirport 74th 63rd 56th 58th Woodbine 70th S c o t t 76th A l d r i c h 56th 6 6 t h 73rd N e w t o n 44th 45th S h i n g l e C r e e k 47th Brooklyn O r c h a r d S c ott 61st 55 th Brooklyn John M a r t i n H a l i f a x Mumford X e r x e s 59th Ramp Quail 10 67th 10 Ramp 1 0 0 58th R a m p 10 Nash 73rd 94 65th64th U n i t y 47th 48th Ohenry 51st R a m p Fra n ceW est Broad w ay R a m p 70th Lake 53rd R a m p 53rd 56th Osseo 74th 69th69th X e r x e s 69th 70th 57th B r o o kl y n 45th 53rd 57th F r e m o nt 67th 48th 94 71st 65th F r a n c e J a m e s K n o x I r v i n g 49th 74th T o l e d o 44th 52nd Angeline K n o x 5 t h Thurber O r c h a r d S h o r e s Q u a il Lakebreeze U p t o nWashburn 44 1/2 Y o r k V i n c e n t V e r a C r u z Z e n i t h W ill o w F r a n c e D r e w S ailor A b b o t t Q u a i l 61st 67th 67th 52nd 52nd R u s s e l l 67th S h i n g l e Cr e e k 57th B r o o k l y n 60th Perry 7 1 s t J a m e s N o r t h p o r t 59th 73rd 58th 75th 46th Lee 4 t h C h o w e n 44th L e e 57th D r e w 74th 5 6 t h 75th R a m p W e l c o m e Lawrenc e E w i n g 69th 67thHowe ShingleCreek A ldri c h D u s h a r m e B r y a n t C o l f a x 66th L o gan Bernard 46th Q u a i l Eckberg 54th 51st Xerxes 48th R a m p T o l e d o Q u a i l R a m p Fairview F r e m o n t U n i t y Winchester R e g e n t 69th Lakeland S h e r i d a n 6 t h 67th F r a n c e 62nd 68th 491/2 S c o ttEleanor 68th 50th G i r a r d 64th Viole t 46th 61st C a m d e n 51st A d m i r a l 73rd 56th 59th Y o r k 47th A l d r i c h E m e r s o n 76th 73rd 52nd 70th V e r a C r u z J u n e 54th 44th 64th Q u a i l 50th 60th L i l a c O r c h a r d 70th 53rd 47th 71st 70th 7 2 n d 461/2 Urban 61st K y l e A l d r i c h 50th 71st 60th C o l f a x L a k e 56th 75th 7 5th R a m p H u m b o l dt L o g a n H a l i f a x WestRiverRoad 47th 74th X e r x e s Brooklyn A b b o t t E w i n g Oliver M a j o r Z e n i t h Ramp 66th M a j o r N e w t o n U p t o n G r i m e s C h o w e n A z e l i a R a m p A b b o t t 74th 65th R a m p Aldrich N o rth p o r t I m perial M a j o r 6 5 t h 74th Lakeside R u s s e l l H u m b o l d t P e n n D r e w 50th A d m i ral A l d r i c h P e n n N oble E w i n g P e r r y 53rd 74th T o l e d o R e g e n t T o l e d o D r e w Tw i n L a k e K y l e Ericon 76th 70th M a j o r R obin P e r r y M o r g a n 73rd 74th74th 71st P e r r y Q u e e n 74th P e r r y 73rd Ra mp B e a r d Ramp I n d i a n a 47th P ond s 73r d 73rd 7 1 s t 73rd P e r r y Q u a i l Corvallis O r c h a r d 48th 67th T o l e d o E w i n g A b b o t t P e r r y C o l f a x K n o x Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t P e n n I r v i n g 72nd O l i v e r 4 t h Angeline K y l e C h o w e n O r c h a r d K a t h r e ne Winchester66th M o r g a n V i n c e n t B e a r d E w i n g L o g a n W a s h b u r n N e w t o n T h o m a s M a j o r M a j o r T o l e d o O r c h a r d J a m e s G r e a t V i e w E w i n g C a m d e n C o l f a x R e g e n t U n i t y Lakela n d I r v i n g 54th W e l c o m e N orthway 53rd 45th M o r g an 6 6 t h R i v e r d a l e L i l a c 57th 48th 56th U p t o n O r c h a r d F r e m o n t Boulder 46th 62nd Y o r k E m e r s o n Lilac C a m d e n G i r a r d G i r a r d J u d y 51st Oak B r o o k l yn M a r l i n G r i m e s Amy72ndWoodbine D a l l a s Abbott 51st 63r d 94 Q u a i l R e g e n t V i n c e n t C a m d e n 68th E m e r s o n 74 1/2 N o b l e M o r g a n E a s t L y n d a l e G i r a r d J a m e s V e r a C r u z L e e 67th Joyce Janet D r e w 62nd Quarles Ramp R a m p 72nd Woodbine R a m p R a m p L o g a n H a l i f a x D u p o n t 2 5 2 W e s t R i v e r W e s t R i v e r Shingle Creek 2 5 2 Freeway B r o o k l y n B e a r d P a l m e r L a k e P arkway Ramp Summit R e g e n t R a m p H a lifax V e r a C r u z D r e w F r a n c e F r a n c e 66th N o b l e L i l a c F r e m o n t R a m p H u m b o l d t X e r x e s RampRamp L y n d a l e R a m p R a m p R u s s e l l Victory Memorial V e r a C r u z H u m b o l d t H a l i f a x T w i n L a k e B e a r d K y l e E m e r s o n U p t o n V e r a C r u z L i l a c C a m d e nBrookdaleCenter Northway N o b l e Perr y L o g a n F r e m o n t P e n n Q u a i l C o l f a x C o l f a x G i r a r d G i r a r d Ramp R a m p X e r x e s O l i v e r I n d i a n a U n i t y W e l c o m e J a m e s J a m e s W i l l o w B r o o k v i e w W e l c o m e I r v i n g Irving E w i n g R a m p H a l i f a x Q u e e n P e r r y B r y a n t B r y a n t X e n i a Q uail R a m p R a m p Ram p B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e D a l l a s L y n d a l e J ames X e r x e s Z e n i t h N o b l e L e e L y n d a l e U p t o n S h ariAnn K n o x K n o x G r i m e s G r i m e s D r e w J u n e Byron Poe D r e w L e e E a r l e Brow n Ramp J u n e I n d i a n a 94 9 4 H a l i f a x B roo k d a l e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c S c o t t S c o t t R a m p P e r r y 4 t h Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn Center Minneapolis B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s R o b b i n s d a l e M i n n e a p o l i s 8 5 2 767 760 721 761 5 19 7 1 7 762 8 5 4 7 2 3 7 6 8 7 6 6 7 6 5 8 8 7 8 6 5 8 5 0 783782 781 780 7 6 3 801 722 2 2 724 785 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 MilesF Transit Routes Local Express !C Planned C-Line Transit Stops Planned C-Line BRT Route !.TransitCenters k Park and Ride Source: MNGEO, Metropolitan Council, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Map 7-6. Existing Transit Routes k k k k k !. ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿¿ ¿ ¿¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ 75th CrystalAirport 74th 63rd 56th 58th Woodbine 70th S c o t t 76th A l d r i c h 56th 6 6 t h 73rd N e w t o n 44th 45th S h i n g l e C r e e k 47th Brooklyn O r c h a r d S c ott 61st 55th Brooklyn John M a r t i n H a l i f a x Mumford X e r x e s 59th Ramp Quail 10 67th 10 Ramp 1 0 0 58th R a m p 10 Nash 73rd 94 65th64th U n i t y 47th 48th Ohenry 51st R a m p Fr an ceW est Broadw ay R a m p 70th Lake 53rd R a m p 53rd 56th Osseo 74th 69th69th X e r x e s 69th 70th 57th B r o o k ly n 45th 53rd 57th F r e m o nt 67th 48th 94 71st 65th F r a n c e J a m e s K n o x I r v i n g 49th 74th T o l e d o 44th 52nd Angeline K n o x 5 t h Thurber O r c h a r d S h o r e s Q u a il Lakebreeze U p t o nWashburn 44 1/2 Y o r k V i n c e n t V e r a C r u z Z e n i t h W ill o w F r a n c e D r e w S ailor A b b o t t Q u a i l 61st 67th 67th 52nd 52nd R u s s e l l 67th S h i n g le Cr e e k 57th B r o o k l y n 60th Perry 7 1 s t J a m e s N o r t h p o r t 59th 73rd 58th 75th 46th Lee 4 t h C h o w e n 44th L e e 57th D r e w 74th 5 6 t h 75th R a m p W e l c o m e Lawrenc e E w i n g 69th 67thHowe ShingleCreek A ldri c h D u s h a r m e B r y a n t C o l f a x 66th L o gan Bernard 46th Q u a i l Eckberg 54th 51st Xerxes 48th R a m p T o l e d o Q u a i l R a m p Fairview F r e m o n t U n it y Winchester R e g e n t 69th La k ela n d S h e r i d a n 6 t h 67th F r a n c e 62nd 68th 491/2 S c o ttEleanor 68th 50th G i r a r d 64th Violet 46th 61st C a m d e n 51st A d m i r a l 73rd 56th 59th Y o r k 47th A l d r i c h E m e r s o n 76th 73rd 52nd 70th V e r a C r u z J u n e 54th 44th 64th Q u a i l 50th 60th L i l a c O r c h a r d 70th 53rd 47th 71st 70th 7 2 n d 461/2 Urban 61st K y l e A l d r i c h 50th 71st 60th C o l f a x L a k e 56th 75th 7 5th R a m p H u m b o l dt L o g a n H a l i f a x WestRiverRoad 47th 74th X e r x e s Brooklyn A b b o t t E w i n g Oliver M a j o r Z e n i t h Ramp 66th M a j o r N e w t o n U p t o n G r i m e s C h o w e n A z e l i a R a m p A b b o tt 74th 65th R a m p Aldrich N o rth p o r t I m perial M a j o r 6 5 t h 74th Lakeside R u s s e l l H u m b o l d t P e n n D r e w 50th A d m i ral A l d r i c h P e n n Nob le E w i n g P e r r y 53rd 74th T o l e d o R e g e n t T o l e d o D r e w Tw i n L a k e K y l e Ericon 76th 70th M a j o r R obin P e r r y M o r g a n 73rd 74th74th 71st P e r r y Q u e e n 74th P e r r y 73rd Ram p B e a r d Ramp I n d i a n a 47th P ond s 73r d 73rd 71 s t 7 3rd P e r r y Q u a i l Corvallis O r c h a r d 48th 67th T o l e d o E w i n g A b b o t t P e r r y C o l f a x K n o x Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t P e n n I r v i n g 72nd O l i v e r 4 t hAngeline K y l e C h o w e n O r c h a r d K a t h r ene Winchester66th M o r g a n V i n c e n t B e a r d E w i n g L o g a n W a s h b u r n N e w t o n T h o m a s M a j o r M a j o r T o l e d o O r c h a r d J a m e s G r e a t V i e w E w i n g C a m d e n C o l f a x R e g e n t U n i t y Lakelan d I r v i n g 54th W e l c o m e N orthway 53rd 45th M o r g an 6 6 t h R i v e r d a l e L i l a c 57th 48th 56th U p t o n O r c h a r d F r e m o n t Boulder 46th 62nd Y o r k E m e r s o n Lilac C a m d e n G i r a r d G i r a r d J u d y 51st Oak B r o o k l yn M a r l i n G r i m e s Amy72ndWoodbine D a l l a s Abbott 51st 63 r d 94 Q u a i l R e g e n t V i n c e n t C a m d e n 68th E m e r s o n 74 1/2 N o b l e M o r g a n E a s t L y n d a l e G i r a r d J a m e s V e r a C r u z L e e 67th Joyce Janet D r e w 62nd Quarles Ramp R a m p 72nd Woodbine R a m p R a m p L o g a n H a l i f a x D u p o n t 2 5 2 W e s t R i v e r W e s t R i v e r S hingle Creek 2 5 2 Freeway B r o o k l y n B e a r d P a l m e r L a k e P arkway Ramp Summit R e g e n t R a m p H a lifax V e r a C r u z D r e w F r a n c e F r a n c e 66t h N o b l e L i l a c F r e m o n t R a m p H u m b o l d t X e r x e s RampRamp L y n d a l e R a m p R a m p R u s s e l l Victory Memorial V e r a C r u z H u m b o l d t H a l i f a x T w i n L a k e B e a r d K y l e E m e r s o n U p t o n V e r a C r u z L i l a c C a m d e nBrookdaleCenter Northway N o b l e Perr y L o g a n F r e m o n t P e n n Q u a i l C o l f a x C o l f a x G i r a r d G i r a r d Ramp R a m p X e r x e s O l i v e r I n d i a n a U n i t y W e l c o m e J a m e s J a m e s W i l l o w B r o o k v i e w W e l c o m e I r v i n g Irving E w i n g R a m p H a l i f a x Q u e e n P e r r y B r y a n t B r y a n t X e n i a Q uail R a m p R a m p Ram p B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e D a l l a s L y n d a l e J ames X e r x e s Z e n i t h N o b l e L e e L y n d a l e U p t o n S h ariAnn K n o x K n o x G r i m e s G r i m e s D r e w J u n e Byron Poe D r e w L e e E a r l e B ro w n Ramp J u n e I n d i a n a 94 9 4 H a l i f a x B roo k d a l e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c S c o t t S c o t t R a m p P e r r y 4 t h Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn Center Minneapolis B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s R o b b i n s d a l e M i n n e a p o l i s 8 5 2 767 760 721 761 5 19 7 1 7 762 8 5 4 7 2 3 7 6 8 7 6 6 7 6 5 8 8 7 8 6 5 8 5 0 783782 781 780 7 6 3 801 722 2 2 724 785 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 MilesF Transit Routes Local Express ¿Bus Shelter !.TransitCenters k Park and Ride Source: MNGEO, Metropolitan Council, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Map 7-8. Planned Transit Routes / ImprovementsMap 7-7. Existing Transit Routes TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-217-20 Recent Corridor Studies Access to the minor arterial system, including Brooklyn Boulevard and Bass Lake Road, requires ongoing management to maintain the capacity and safety of these roadways. The Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Study and the proposed Brooklyn Boulevard corridor overlay land use designation will impact the number of access improvements along this roadway and will be further evaluated and explored as part of the City’s zoning ordinance update process to implement this Plan. Hennepin County has guidelines for desirable access spacing on minor arterials and although it may not be possible to achieve the desired spacing with the current land use and development patterns on Bass Lake Road, the City will strive to consolidate access and match Hennepin County guidelines with future development opportunities where possible. TRANSIT The City of Brooklyn Center is currently well-served by local transit routes operating mostly on minor arterial and collector roadways. Several express routes also provide ridership to downtown via I-94 and TH 252. Map 7-7 illustrates the existing transit routes in Brooklyn Center. To service these routes, the City has several locations of park and ride lots: 1) at Brooklyn Boulevard, south of I-694, 2) on the west side of TH 252 at 73rd Avenue, and 3) at 65th Avenue and TH 252. Additionally, the Brooklyn Center Transit Station is a transit hub at Bass Lake Road (County Road 10) and Northway Drive providing local connections and opportunities to transfer between intersecting routes. The express routes in Brooklyn Center benefit from utilizing existing bus-only shoulders along I-94 and TH 252, bringing transit riders primarily in and out of Minneapolis. There are currently no new dedicated bus-only shoulder lanes proposed within the City in the 2040 TPP. There are also no corridors identified for the addition of MnPASS lanes in Brooklyn Center that would encourage ridesharing on these principal arterials. Currently there are no dedicated busways in Brooklyn Center, but the addition of this type of transit facility is underway with the construction of the C-Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) operated by Metro Transit. The C-Line will offer frequent bus service on dedicated bus lanes beginning in 2019. BRT service will run between the Brooklyn Center Transit Station and downtown Minneapolis via Brooklyn Boulevard and Xerxes Avenue within Brooklyn Center, and south via Penn Avenue and Olson Memorial Parkway. The C-Line will also offer connections to the Blue Line and Green Line of Light Rail Transit (LRT) service in Minneapolis. Map 7-8 illustrates the future C-Line BRT. Though not by the Metropolitan Council’s planned improvements, the D-Line BRT is in early stages of planning and will also provide increased connectivity to residents if constructed. Map 7-8. Transit Market Areas INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AVE N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 51ST AVE N INTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetMarket Area Transit Market Area II Transit Market Area III Source: MNGEO, Metropolitan Council, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Map 7-9. Transit Market Areas TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-237-22 Transit Market Area Research by the Metropolitan Council shows that three key factors greatly influence transit use in the metropolitan area: 1) density (population and employment); 2) interconnectedness of the local street system; and 3) the number of cars owned by residents. Based on these key factors, the Metropolitan Council defines five “Transit Market Areas” that indicate the likely cost effectiveness of various types of transit service investments. For example, high density in Market Area I contributes to high ridership which makes it more cost effective for transit investment. The Metropolitan Council’s 2040 TPP identifies the five transit markets in the metropolitan area and describes the related service characteristics and performance guidelines appropriate in each market. A portion of Brooklyn Center – largely along the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor – is within Transit Market Area II, defined as an area with “high to moderately high population and employment densities and typically has a traditional street grid comparable to Market Area I. Much of Market Area II is also categorized as an Urban Center and it can support many of the same types of fixed-route transit as Market Area I, although usually at lower frequencies or shorter service spans”. In Brooklyn Center this Market Area has transit service including regular-route local, all-day express, small vehicle circulators, special needs paratransit (ADA, seniors), and ridesharing. Metro Mobility serves the paratransit needs of the City, and Prism operates its dial-a-ride service. The rest of Brooklyn Center falls within the Transit Market Area III. The Metropolitan Council defines this as having “moderate density but tends to have a less traditional street grid that can limit the effectiveness of transit. It is typically Urban with large portions of Suburban and Suburban Edge communities. Transit service in this area is primarily commuter express bus service with some fixed-route local service providing basic coverage. General public dial- a-ride services are available where fixed-route service is not viable”. This description seems somewhat inconsistent with the City’s development pattern in the areas designated as Transit Market Area III. This is particularly true in the eastern half of the City where residential neighborhoods were developed primarily in an urban grid and densities are relatively consistent with the Minneapolis neighborhoods adjacent to the City’s southern border. This discrepancy is important to the City because the designated Transit Market Area is correlated to the types of transit investment and frequency of lines planned and maintained within the area. Some of the City’s lowest median household incomes are in neighborhoods designated as Transit Market Area III, and their current transit options are limited to express routes that may not meet their needs. The City would like to work with the Metropolitan Council to explore how transit services might better match the community’s needs in the future and look for ways to improve connections and access for all of the City’s residents. Transit Oriented Development The growth areas identified in Brooklyn Center offer a significant opportunity for implementing transit-oriented development (TOD) in the community. This type of development relies on close proximity to a transit station with regular and frequent service to bring people to and from its destinations. TOD typically includes vibrant public spaces and is pedestrian scale with an active mix of residential and commercial uses. TOD provides Brooklyn Center the opportunity to revitalize its underutilized properties with increased housing and economic development. The redevelopment close to the existing Brooklyn Center Transit Station is best suited for TOD implementation, especially with the addition of the C-Line BRT, and possible future D-Line BRT. Connections with other transit modes and trails can also bolster TOD along the Brooklyn Boulevard corridor. Transit Plan The most significant plan for transit in Brooklyn Center is the implementation of the C-Line BRT. With its connections to existing and future LRT and regular direct service to downtown Minneapolis, the BRT will provide the anticipated increase in transit demand for future residents in the City. With service terminating at the Brooklyn Center Transit Station, BRT will provide service in close proximity to Brooklyn Center’s primary redevelopment areas where increased higher-density residential and increased employment is expected to be located. (See Map 7-8 for Planned C-Line). It is also possible within this planning period that the D-Line BRT will be constructed, offering additional regional connections with the Transit Center. TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-257-24 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SYSTEM Although Brooklyn Center primarily developed in the suburban boom of auto-centric development, changes in the regional economy, City’s demographics, and personal attitudes of residents’ influence demand for comfortable, safe, and accessible bicycle and pedestrian system within the City. The desire for bicycle-friendly and walkable neighborhoods is on the rise and has been expressed by Brooklyn Center’s residents. To address these needs, the City took initiative to develop and adopt a policy for Complete Streets in 2013 to return focus on pedestrian-oriented streets and bicycle accommodation. Another step in these efforts was completed in 2014 with the adoption of the City of Brooklyn Center Pedestrian & Bicycle Plan that addresses maintenance and development of an integrated city-wide bicycle and pedestrian system. This plan recognizes that several jurisdictions and organizations manage and implement the bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the City but focuses on the importance of managing these facilities as an integrated and cohesive system. The system includes sidewalks, trails, and on-road facilities—managed by the City, Three-Rivers Park District, and Hennepin County—effectively linking its parks, schools, commercial areas, civic buildings, and transit services. As shown on Map 7-10, sidewalks provide pedestrian access along most minor arterial and collector streets and along an interconnected system of local streets. Map 7-11 illustrates the existing bicycle and pedestrian system – along with proposed connections – as it was mapped in 2014. Existing Conditions / Barriers / Gaps / Challenges As described and discussed in the Brooklyn Center Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (2014), the City utilizes a system of various facilities to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian traffic and connections to key destinations in the community. These facilities currently include a combination of sidewalks, trails, on-road bicycle lanes, regional trails, and county bikeways. Management of these facilities is shared between the City, Hennepin County, and Three Rivers Parks District. The 2014 Plan attempts to look at the various facilities under multiple jurisdictions as a complete system by identifying barriers, gaps, and challenges hat impeded the cohesive function of the broader system. In the 2014 plan, system challenges were identified through a number of efforts including staff review, community surveys, and through planning studies from the various jurisdictions. Studies also included information from completed “safe routes to school” planning completed jointly by the City and school districts. Information collected about system challenges was sorted into eight categories: 1. System Gaps 2. Crossings 3. Wayfinding 4. Infrastructure Condition and Maintenance 5. Security 6. Education/Enforcement 7. Equipment 8. Other Detailed information about challenged related to each of the eight categories can be found in the 2014 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. Map 7-12 illustrates the challenges currently identified in the system. TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-277-26 Map 7-10. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian System (2014)Map 7-11. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian System (2014) Source: Brooklyn Center Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan 2014 Map 7-9. Existing Sidewalks 57th 75th L o g a n 56th 58th H a l i f a x 70th O l i v e r 76thBrooklyn A l d r i c h 6 6 t h T w i n L a k e 694 45th 694 V er a C r u z 61st L i l a c J o h n M a r ti n H a l i f a x Mumford Y ork B r o o k l y n B e a r d R a m p P a l m e r L a k e Parkway Freeway Quail Summit 1 0 0 48th Nash R a m p 9 4 64thOhenry R a m p 51st R a m p H a l i f a x 2 5 2 Fra n c e 65th D r e w Wilshire F r a n c e R a m p 70th 53rd 7 5 t h R a m p 1 0 0 53rd 1 0 0 70th 54th Ramp S c o t t Broo kd ale C e nter S h i n g l e C r e e k Shingle Creek 9494 71st 47th Unity L i l a c X e r x e s R a m p N e w t o n I r v i n g J a m e s K n o x 49th 74th R a m p 7 5 t h Y o r k Camden T o l e d o 4t h52nd 4 t h N o b l e 45 1/2 K n o x R a mp 65th 5 t h V e r a C r u z 2 5 2 Q u a i l U p t o n W a s h b u r n Y o r k F r a n c e 67th V i n c e n t 58th Z e n i t h B e a r d W il l o w A b b o t t S ailor Meadowwood K y l e Q u a i l 61st 70th 67th 46th 67th 52nd S h e r i d a n Morgan Aldrich U n it y L e e M o r g a n 7 6 t h R u s s e l l 67th Lakeside S h i n g l e C r e e k 46th Lakebreeze 58th 57th 63rd Oliver 47th 7 1 s t X e r x e s Paul 60th Q u e e n 45th U p t o n 55th 59th 73rd Lee L i l a c 81 50th B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r C h o w e n H u m b o l d t 10 L e e Fremont R a mp B r o o k d ale C e nter F r e m o n t Orchard L a k ela n d 74th 56th R a m p W e l c o m e 75th 57th Fremont Ramp 69th E w i n g 57th 56th R a m p R e g e n t R a m p Howe P e r r y D r e w Ramp 59th 10 F r a n c e D u s h a r m e S c o t t C o l f a x 46th A l d r i c h 55th N e w t o n Logan Wilshire F r e m o n t 46th V e r a C r u z Eckberg P e n n PalmerLake Xerxes Eleanor R a m p Ramp 4 5 t h F r e m o n t X e r x e s Q u a i l Victory Memorial R e g e n t 69th U n it y Commodore 6 7 t h R a m p B e a r d 71st T o l e d o Ramp V i n c e n t X e n i a 67th F r a n c e 591/2 Woodbine W e l c o m e 68th 491/2 S h o r e s A l d r i c h Ramp 50th Eleanor 68th 60th 72ndB ry a n t D r e w 50th 61st G i r a r d Violet R a m p 56th C a m d e n 51st 73rd 57th A d m i r a l A l d r i c h73rd E m e r s o n 59th 62nd Y o r k A l d r i c h 73rd 68th W e l c o m e L i l a c 66th Fairview 70th N o b l e G r i m e s S c o t t J u n e Woodbine W e s t R i v e r R i v e r d a l e 52nd Ramp 4 t h 72nd 50th Abbott Q u a i l Urban 65th Q u a i l 65th W i l l o w 54th53rd 64th 70th 47th 51st 81 76th 71st K y l e 68th W e l c o m e 62nd 70th 72 n d72nd L a k e 46 1/2 67th B r o o k v i e w 53rd 56th 72nd 51st 72nd 52nd 46th 54th 68th A l d r i c h 52nd 61st Lake 581/2 71st 60th 46th 60th H u m b o l d t C o l f a x R a m p F r e m o n t 66th 50th 64th 56th R a m p B e a r d Shingle Creek D u p o n t 48th X e r x e s H a l i f a x F r a n c e 10Ramp West RiverRoad 74th X e r x e s L i l a c Ramp E w i n g A b b o t t 76th T ole d o C a m d e n Oliver 67th L a k e v i e w R a m p Z e n i t h 70th 66th M o r g a n C h o w e n G r i m e s U n i t y A z e l i a 7 5t h 75th Ramp G ri m e s 70 t h A b b o t t B r o o k d a l e Q u e e n Aldrich Brooklyn Im p erial R a m p 74th M a j o r 6 5 t h L y n d a l e Lakeside W a s h b u r n 45th O l i v e r R i v e r d a l e OsseoRoadFrontage D r e w Brooklyn P e r r y F r e m o n t 50th H u m b o l d t I r v i n g 45th A d m i r a l D r e w O r c h a r d X e n i a Noble P e n n R u s s e l l Quail P e r r y E w i n g 53rd 74th F r a n c e R a m p I n d i a n a T o l e d o S c o t t T o l e d o D r e w U n i t y Ra m p R a m p K y l e 76th 76th H u m b o l d t M a j o r 70th Aldric h 73rd 74th74th VillageCreek B r o o k d a l e 71st P e rry L o g a n Ramp 69th M a j o r B r y a n t C o l f a x X e r x e s D a l l a s Q u e e n 74th H u m b o l d t Scott P e r r y R a m p 65th Ramp 73rd 69th 55th N o rt h p o rt T h o m a s Ramp B e a r d Bellvue Ponds James 49th P e r r y Ramp La k ela n d I n d i a n a 47th L i l a c R a m p I n d i a n a 73rd 7 1 s t 49th 74th IrvingJames 73rd E r i c o n P e r r y Q u a i l 76th R a m p T o l e d o S h a r i A n n L e e N o b l e G i r a r d X e r x e s E w i n g U p t o n P e r r y F r e m o n t P e r r y P e n n K n o x M i s s i s s i p p i K n o x 72nd R u s s e l l Q u a i l M a j o r S c o t t R e g e n t K a t h r e n e Angeline O l i v e r C o l f a x 6 t h A l d r i c h C o l f a x 4 t h K y l e J a m e s G r i m e s C h o w e n O r c h a r d E m e r s o n I r v i n g L o g a n H a l i f a x A l d r i c h N e w t o n A l d r i c h O l i v e r M o r g a n B r y a n t Winchester K n o x 66th M o r g a nVincent E w i n g M a j o r L o g a n W a s h b u r n M a j o r N e w t o n X e r x e s T h o m a s S h e r i d a n D r e w Q u a i l T o l e d o O r c h a r d G r e a t V i e w H u m b o l d t R i v e r w o o d E w i n g C a m d e n R e g e n t J u n e C o lf a x R e g e n t X e n i a 48th B e a r d L ak elan d U n i t y Lakeside L a k e C u r v e I r v i n g 54th W e l c o m e 73rd 47thByron L e e Northway 45th 53rd M o r g a n 6 6 t h Z e n i t h 57th Bernard Corvallis 48th Poe P e nn U n i t y 56th U p t o n C h o w e n Burquest O r c h a r d Boulder 46th 62nd Y o r k Lilac G i r a r d G i r a r d J u d y D upont 51st Osseo Oak H a l i f a x H a li f a x Ramp P e r r y Q u a i l E m e r s o n B r o o kly n M a r l i n L e e Lawrence Northway G r i m e s E a r l e B r o w n 7 5 t h Abbott 63 r d D a l l a s Amy72ndWoodbine 51st 94 B r o o k ly n O r c h a r d J u n e I n d i a n a D r e w B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e P e r r y Q u a i l R e g e n t V i n c e n t C a m d e n 68th 4 t h E w i n g E m e r s o n R a m p L i l a c 74 1/2 R a m p R e g e n t R a m p N o b l e J a m e s 9 4 M o r g a n G i r a r d R a m p B r o o kly n V e r a C r u z J a m e s Humboldt L e e L y n d a l e L y n d a l e 67thRamp Joyce Janet D r e w E a s t L y n d a l e 62nd 66th Quarles R a m p Winchester R a m p R a m p 72nd R a m p Woodbine T w i n L a k e R a m p P e a r s o n L i l a c Ramp S c o t t Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park B r o o k l y n C e n t e r B r o o k l y n P a r k B r o o k l y n C e n t e r C r y s t a l B r o o k l y n C e n t e r F r i d l e y Brooklyn Center Minneapolis B r o o k l y n P a r k F r i d l e y F r i d l e y M i n n e a p o l i s 0 0.5 1 1.5 20.25 MilesF County and State Trails & Bikeways Off Street Trails Regional Trails State Trails Hennepin County Bikeway System Bikeway Off-Street Bikeway On-Street Source: MNGEO, Metropolitan Council, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Map 7-10. Existing Sidewalks TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-297-28 Map 7-13. Existing and Proposed Sidewalk and Trail System Map 7-12. Existing and Proposed Sidewalk and Trail System Source: Brooklyn Center Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan 2014 Map 7-11. Gaps and Challenges in the SystemMap 7-12. Gaps and Challenges in the System Source: Brooklyn Center Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan 2014 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-317-30 Plan for Bicycle and Pedestrian System The City of Brooklyn Center continues to work with other jurisdictions to manage and develop the system of facilities and corridors that contribute to the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian System. From the system challenges analysis, recommendations to improve the system are identified in the 2014 Plan and outline an overall vision for pedestrian and bicycle facilities within the community, providing broad recommendations for activities and practices that will encourage the long-term use of the system and a healthy lifestyle. The future of trail and sidewalk network in the City should follow direction in the 2014 Plan that reflects the input of residents and study participants to encourage connection along with opportunities for recreation and commuting/transport. The proposed vision for the trail and sidewalk network: • Creates linkages to existing and planned recreational facilities • Creates linkages to schools from residential areas • Creates linkages to community destinations (city hall, community center, mall, etc.) • Creates linkages along transit lines and to transit facilities (bus stops, park and rides, etc.) • Eliminates gaps in the existing network • Provides parallel/separated facilities on higher-volume and/or higher-speed roadways Map 7-12 illustrates the proposed sidewalk and trail system as envisioned in the 2040 Plan. On-Road Bicycle Facilities will broaden the multi-modal connections in the City. The 2040 Plan did not identify recommendations for specific implementation of on-road bicycle lanes or shoulders, but recommended study of specific corridors for appropriateness of future implementation. Opportunities as part of reconstruction or redevelopment projects was also recommended for exploration of on-road bicycle accommodation. Corridors for potential study/consideration include: • County Road 10 (58th Ave/Bass Lake Road): between western city limits and Xerxes Ave N • County Road 57 (Humboldt Avenue): from 57th Avenue to the southern city limits • County Road 130 (69th Ave): between western city limits and County Road 152 (Brooklyn Blvd) • 69th Avenue: between County Road 152 (Brooklyn Blvd) and West River Road • Shingle Creek Parkway: from 69th Avenue to Xerxes Ave N • West River Road: from northern city limits to I-694 crossing • Xerxes Ave North: from Shingle Creek Parkway to County Road 10 (Bass Lake Road) Map 7-13. Long-Term Bicycle and Pedestrian PlanMap 7-14. Long-Term Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Source: Brooklyn Center Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan 2014 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-337-32 Map 7-14. Regional Bicycle Transportation Network ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½¾¾½ ¾¾½¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ !. INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70 TH AVE N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 51ST AVE N INTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetRBTN !.RBTNDestinations ¾¾½RBTN Alignments <all other values> RBTN Corridor Planning Tier 1 Tier 2 Source: MNGEO, Metropolitan Council, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 Map 7-15. Regional Bicycle Transportation Network Map 7-14. Regional Bicycle Transportation Network ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½¾¾½ ¾¾½¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½¾¾½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾¾½ ¾¾½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ ¾ ¾ ½ !. INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AV E N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 51ST AVE N INTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetRBTN !.RBTNDestinations ¾¾½RBTN Alignments <all other values> RBTN Corridor Planning Tier 1 Tier 2 Source: MNGEO, Metropolitan Council, City of Brooklyn Center, SHC DRAFT: 1/9/2019 MINNEAPOLIS The 2014 Plan also recommends improvements at street crossings and signalized intersection, locations for improved wayfinding, improved maintenance, and specific policies, partnerships, and practices that will enhance the overall system. Map 7-14 illustrates the proposed recommendations system-wide. More descriptive information can be found in the 2014 Plan. Safe Routes to School MnDOT’s Safe Routes to School program funds grants each year for improving safe options for student to walk and bike to school. This program can directly influence bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the City that benefit both students and all City residents with planning and infrastructure implementation. The City should continue to access the Safe Routes to School program and work with MnDOT to utilize available benefits. Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) As demonstrated in the previous sections, the City has been planning proactively to develop an interconnected bicycle and pedestrian network that serves not only the City’s residents, but the larger region. Fortunately, many of the City’s planning efforts support and are consistent with the Metropolitan Council’s Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) objectives that are focused on connecting regional and sub-regional job centers with bikeways offer people commuter mode choice. As shown on Map 7-15, some opportunities remain particularly along the Brooklyn Boulevard and the Mississippi River corridors to improve connections. SPECIAL TRAFFIC SITUATIONS Brooklyn Center is not located in one of the four special traffic situation areas: downtown Minneapolis, downtown Saint Paul, University of Minnesota, and Airport South / Mall of America in Bloomington. TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 7-357-34 Subpart 3 and FAA form 7460-8). The FAA recommends that proposed structures be reviewed if they are located within two miles of the airfield and within five miles of a runway approach corridor. The Metropolitan Airports Commission recommends that any proposed structure within these parameters which may exceed 50-feet should be reviewed by the FAA, Mn/DOT Aeronautics and the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Map 7-16 illustrates the location of the Crystal Airport, its runways, and safety zones for the area. Map 7-15. Crystal Airport Location and Air Safety ZonesMap 7-16. Crystal Airport Location and Air Safety Zones AVIATION PLAN While the City does not directly host an airport, Crystal Airport is located adjacent to the Brooklyn Center’s west border south of 63rd Avenue and is therefore within the influence area of this airport. Crystal Airport is a designated reliever airport for the Minneapolis-St. Paul (MSP) Airport. Airspace over Brooklyn Center is also used by aircraft operating from Metropolitan Area airports and other airports. A small portion of the Crystal Airport is located within Brooklyn Center, largely within the Shingle Creek floodway; the land is controlled by the City’s floodplain zoning and not suitable for development. Brooklyn Center is a member (with Crystal and Brooklyn Park) of the joint Airport Zoning Board, which functions under a joint power agreement to regulate land use around the airport. In the early 1980s, the Zoning Board adopted airport zoning regulations which apply to each of the member cities. The airport zones are shown on the Brooklyn Center zoning map, but the text of the regulations has not been incorporated into the City’s zoning ordinance. Airspace zones are imaginary surfaces around the airport into which no structure or tree is permitted. The imaginary surfaces include approach surfaces, primary surfaces, horizontal surfaces and conical surfaces. Land use safety zones are established to control land uses near public airports for the safety of airport users and persons in the vicinity of airports. There are three safety zones: A, B and C. Safety zone A extends outward from the end of the runway for a distance equal to two-thirds of the length of the existing or planned runway. No buildings, transmission lines, or uses that would cause an assembly of persons are permitted. In Brooklyn Center, this area is partially airport-owned open space and partially in single-family residential use. Safety zone B extends outward from safety zone A, a distance equal to one-third the existing or planned runway length. It covers an additional single-family residential area. Safety zone C contains all land within an arc drawn with a 6,000-foot radius from the ends of all runways, excluding the areas in zones A and B. Uses are only subject to general restrictions regarding interference with electronic communications, airport lighting and the impairment of visibility in the vicinity of the airport. In Brooklyn Center, this zone extends as far as Brooklyn Boulevard, encompassing a wide range of land uses. Structures which are 150 feet or higher above ground level and within approximately two miles of the airport may be considered hazards to air navigation. Brooklyn Center has no existing structures of this height, does not permit such structures under its zoning ordinance, and has no plans to permit such structures in the future. Any applicant who proposes to construct such a structure shall notify the city, the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Federal Aviation Administration at least 30 days in advance as required by law (MCAR 8800.1200 This page is blank. DRAFT CHAPTER 8: Infrastructure & Utilities Comprehensive Plan 2040 INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-1 2040 Infrastructure & Utilities Goals »Provide adequate infrastructure including sewer, water, and facilities to serve existing residents and redevelopment areas. »Maintain the level of city services to existing neighborhoods and plan for improvements through appropriate capital expenditures. »Support opportunities to create resilience within the City’s infrastructure as redevelopment or reconstruction activities occur. INTRODUCTION This Chapter of the City of Brooklyn Center 2040 Comprehensive Plan addresses utilities infrastructure including stormwater management, water supply, and wastewater (sanitary sewer) systems and other utilities in the City. It is consistent with the Metropolitan Council’s Thrive MSP 2040 planning and 2040 Water Resources Policy Plan. This Plan Chapter primarily intends to highlight the ongoing management and operations the City uses to ensure quality water service to its residents and to assist the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) with continued operation of the Metropolitan Disposal System (MDS) for wastewater collection and treatment. * Supporting Strategies found in Chapter 2: Vision, Goals & Strategies INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-2 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT The City of Brooklyn Center adopts a Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) to help the City in conserving, protecting, and maintaining the quality of its surface waters, ground water, and natural resources in relation to stormwater runoff. The SWMP is a local management plan that meets the requirements of Minnesota Statutes 103B.235, Minnesota Rules 8410, the Shingle Creek and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commissions’ Third Generation Watershed Management Plan (dated April 11, 2013, as amended May 10, 2018), and Minnesota Statute 103B.201 states that the purposes of the water management programs are to: • Protect, preserve, and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems; • Minimize public capital expenditures needed to correct flooding and water quality problems; • Identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and groundwater quality; • Establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and groundwater management; • Prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems; • Promote groundwater recharge; • Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities; and • Secure the other benefits associated with the proper management of surface and groundwater. The Brooklyn Center Surface Water Management Plan addresses these purposes. Brooklyn Center is within two watershed districts: Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission (SCWMC) and West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission (WMWMC), as shown in Figure 8-1. The SWMP addresses the rules and regulations put forth by the SCWMC and the WMWMC. Surface water in Brooklyn Center generally drains into Shingle Creek which eventually drains into the Mississippi River. Areas on the east side of the City drain directly into the Mississippi River while areas in the south west side of the City drain to one of the Twin Lakes or Ryan Lake. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-3 Figure 8-1. Surface Water Resources INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-4 Surface Water Management Responsibilities and Agreements The City of Brooklyn Center is party to two separate joint powers agreements related to surface water management: 1. With the cities of Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Maple Grove, Minneapolis, New Hope, Osseo, Plymouth, and Robbinsdale establishing the Shingle Creek Watershed Management Commission (SCWMC). 2. With the cities of Brooklyn Park, Champlin, Maple Grove, and Osseo establishing the West Mississippi Watershed Management Commission (WMWMC). The City also has an agreement with both the SCWMC and WMWMC establishing the watersheds as the Local Government Unit (LGU) for administering WCA within the City. Upon approval of this SWMP by the two watersheds with jurisdiction over the City, it is the City’s intent to maintain its current permitting powers through its Permit for Land Disturbing Activities. Currently, neither the SCWMC nor the WMWMC issue permits, so no impact to these organizations would occur. The watersheds would continue in their role as project review agencies. The City of Brooklyn Center is responsible for construction, maintenance, and operation of the City’s stormwater management systems (i.e., ponds, BMPs, mechanical structures, sump, etc.). INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-5 Figure 8-2. Surface Water & Groundwater Interaction INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-6 SWMP Plan Summary The current Brooklyn Center Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) plans and guides for stormwater activities in the City for the next 10 years (2018-2027). An update of the plan will be needed in 2027, and periodic amendments will likely occur in the intervening years to keep the plan current with changing watershed district and Metropolitan Council requirements. The SWMP is divided into six sections: • Section 1 - Executive Summary provides background information and summarizes the plan contents. • Section 2 - Land and Water Resource Inventory presents information about the topography, geology, groundwater, soils, land use, public utilities, surface waters, hydrologic system and data, and the drainage system. • Section 3 - Agency Cooperation outlines other governmental controls and programs that affect stormwater management. • Section 4 - Assessment of Issues presents the City’s water management related problems and issues. • Section 5 - Goals and Policies outlines the City’s goals and policies pertaining to water management. • Section 6 - Implementation Program presents the implementation program for the City of Brooklyn Center, which includes defining responsibilities, prioritizing, and listing the program elements. Section 6 of the SWMP plan presents the implementation program for the City of Brooklyn Center, which includes defining responsibilities, prioritizing, and listing the program elements. Table 6.1 of the SWMP outlines the projects, programs, studies, and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) activities that have been identified as a priority to address water resource needs and problem areas within the City. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-7 Table 8-1. Projected Annual Water Demand - WSP Brooklyn Center 15 Use the water use trend information discussed above to complete Table 7 with projected annual demand for the next ten years. Communities in the seven-county Twin Cities metropolitan area must also include projections for 2030 and 2040 as part of their local comprehensive planning. Projected demand should be consistent with trends evident in the historical data in Table 2, as discussed above. Projected demand should also reflect state demographer population projections and/or other planning projections. Table 7. Projected annual water demand Year Projected Total Population Projected Population Served Projected Total Per Capita Water Demand (GPCD) Projected Average Daily Demand (MGD) Projected Maximum Daily Demand (MGD) 2016 31231 31201 97.3 3.0 7.3 2017 31077 31047 96.8 3.0 7.2 2018 31254 31224 96.3 3.0 7.2 2019 31431 31401 95.8 3.0 7.2 2020 31400 31370 95.4 3.0 7.2 2021 31785 31755 94.9 3.0 7.2 2022 31962 31932 94.4 3.0 7.2 2023 32139 32109 93.9 3.0 7.2 2024 32316 32286 93.5 3.0 7.2 2025 32492 32462 93.0 3.0 7.2 2030 33000 32970 92.5 3.1 7.3 2040 35400 35370 92.1 3.3 7.8 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.08.09.010.0 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 Variation in Average Day and Max Day Demands Average Daily Demand (MGD)Max. Daily Demand (MGD)Ratio of Max/Ave WATER SUPPLY The City of Brooklyn Center supplies its residents with water from its local municipal system owned and operated by the City and sourced from public water supply wells. The City maintains an updated Water Supply Plan (WSP) to manage the system. The goal of the WSP is to help the City: 1) implement long term water sustainability and conservation measures; and 2) develop critical emergency preparedness measures. It also fulfills requirements under Minnesota Statute 473.859 to complete a local comprehensive plan. The current WSP plans for water supply between 2016-2018, and will continue to updated on a bi-annual basis to maintain the City’s water supply quality. It includes Projected average daily water consumption and peak daily water consumption through the planning period 2040, as shown in Table 8-1. These projects are expected to remain the largely the same as current levels, and the City does not anticipate the need for a new water supply sources before 2040. The WSP also outlines the current emergency water supply agreement with Brooklyn Park. The City is currently updating its WSP, and will incorporate any necessary revisions or updates based on the assumptions and information contained within this Plan. As part of the implementation of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, the City will update its Water Appropriations Permit with the MnDNR based on the adopted Future Land Use plan contained in Chapter 3. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-8 SANITARY WASTEWATER SYSTEM All areas within the City are served by the Metropolitan Disposal System (MDS). The system collects wastewater within the City’s borders and isolated areas outside City limits and conveys it out of the City to the MDS. There are no above ground or subsurface sewage treatment systems located within City limits. The flow within the system is predominately produced within City limits and there are no intercommunity service agreements with an adjoining community after December 31, 2008. In addition, no new sanitary system connections are anticipated within the planning period. Brooklyn Center’s sanitary sewer service areas are shown in Map 8-3, and the full system is shown in Map 8-4. The system is divided into 4 sanitary sewer metered districts: M221, M100, M112, and M110. Growth Forecasts The following Table 8-2 (also Table 3-1 from Chapter 3 of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan) was utilized for sewer system capacity review. Table 8-3 shows this information related to Households and Jobs for each metered area. Table 8-2. Metropolitan Council Forecasts Forecast Year Population Households Employment 2010 30,104 10,756 11,001 2020 31,400 11,300 13,000 2030 33,000 12,300 13,800 2040 35,400 13,300 14,600 Table 8-3. Brooklyn Center Sanitary Sewer Forecasts by Metered Area Sewered District 2020 2030 2040 Est. Units Est. Jobs Avg Flow (MGD) Est. Units Est. Jobs Avg Flow (MGD) Est. Units Est. Jobs Avg Flow (MGD) M100 1,210 1,392 0.224 6310 7079 0.227 1259 1382 0.230 M110 4,103 4,720 0.760 4160 4667 0.765 4209 4,621 0.769 M112 5,798 6,670 1.074 6716 7535 1.235 7635 8,381 1.395 M221 189 218 0.035 190 214 0.035 197 216 0.036 TOTALS 11,300 13,000 2.093 12,300 13,800 2.262 13,300 14,600 2.43 INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-9 Map 8-3. MCES Sanitary Sewer Meter Service Areas - Brooklyn Center INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-10 "C ` "C ` ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä No 4 No . 6 No . 7 No . 1 No . 8 No . 3 No . 5 No . 9 No . 2 No . 1 0 ME T E R 1 1 0 ME T E R 1 1 2 5 Th i s m a p w a s c r e a t e d u s i n g S a m b a t e k ’ s G e o g r a p h i c In f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m s ( G I S ) , i t i s a c o m p i l a t i o n o f in f o r m a t i o n a n d d a t a f r o m v a r i o u s s o u r c e s . T h i s ma p i s n o t a s u r v e y e d o r l e g a l l y r e c o r d e d m a p an d i s i n t e n d e d t o b e u s e d a s a r e f e r e n c e . Sa m b a t e k i s n o t r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a n y i n a c c u r a c i e s co n t a i n e d h e r e i n . S a m b a t e k P r o j e c t 2 1 3 2 1 SO U R C E : C i t y o f B r o o k l y n C e n t e r , H e n n e p i n C o u n t y , M CE S , E s r i 0 1 , 9 0 0 3 , 8 0 0 5 , 7 0 0 7 , 6 0 0 95 0 Fe e t Un k n o w n 6 I n c h 8 I n c h 9 I n c h 10 I n c h 12 I n c h 15 I n c h 18 I n c h 21 I n c h 24 I n c h 27 I n c h ³ä Co m m e r c i a l L S ³ä Cit y L i f t S t a t i o n "C ` MC E S M e t e r s Fo r c e m a i n MC E S I n t e r c e p t o r s Fo r c e m a i n Gr a v i t y Me t e r s h e d M1 0 0 M1 1 0 M1 1 2 M2 2 1 Un a d j u s t e d I n f l o w Ex i s t i n g S a n i t a r y S e w e r Sy s t e m Fi g u r e 1 Ci t y o f B r o o k l y n C e n t e r Map 8-4. Existing Sanitary Sewer System - Brooklyn Center Source: Sambatek, 2019 INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-11 System Flows and Capacity An analysis of existing wastewater flows was completed in order to create an analytical model of the sanitary sewer collection system and determine appropriate capacity for future conditions. Wastewater flows were generated as a unit flow (gal/acre/day) for specific land use types and applied to the model per parcel. For this study, the estimated 2015 housing structure, as shown in Table 8-4 with a total count of 10,996 households, was used to develop and model flow inputs per residential housing unit type. Table 8-4. Housing Types, 2000-2015 System flows were therefore estimated for current (2018) conditions as well as 2040 projected land uses. The estimated average wastewater flow from each sanitary sewer district is summarized in Table 8-5. Table 8-5. City of Brooklyn Center Design Flows Meter Collection Area Existing Land Use 2040 Land Use 2017 Metropolitan Council Meters (MGD) Average Flow (MGD) Peak Flow (MGD) Average Flow (MGD) Peak Flow (MGD) M100 0.224 0.858 0.230 0.879 N/A M110 0.760 2.784 0.769 2.820 0.89 M112 1.074 4.134 1.395 5.417 1.29 M221 0.035 0.139 0.036 0.143 N/A Source: Metropolitan Council Estimated wastewater flows from the existing sewer system were based on several different estimation methods using the following data: • Winter water usage data (December 2017-March 2018) • Lift station pump down tests (August 28-August 31, 2018) • Lift station run times (December 2017-March 2018) • MCES flow meter readings (2016-2018) • Top water users and volumes (2015-2016) Page 5 4.0. GROWTH PROJECTIONS Table 3 below shows the historical and future population data for the City from the 2015 Metropolitan Council System Statement. For this study, the estimated 2015 housing structure in Table 4, with a total count of 10,996 households, was used to develop and model flow inputs per residential housing unit type. Table 3: Metropolitan Council Forecasts Forecast Year Population Households Employment 2010 30,104 10,756 11,001 2020 31,400 11,300 13,000 2030 33,000 12,300 13,800 2040 35,400 13,300 14,600 Source: 2015 Metropolitan Council System Statement for Brooklyn Center Table 4: Housing Structure Type 2000-2015 Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey 5.0. SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM 5.1. General All areas within the City are served by the Metropolitan Disposal System (MDS). The City’s sanitary sewer system, shown in Figure 1, collects wastewater within the City’s borders and isolated areas outside the City and conveys it out of the City to the MDS. There are no above ground or subsurface sewage treatment systems located within City limits. The flow within the system is produced predominately within City limits and there are no intercommunity service agreements with an adjoining community after December 31, 2008. 5.2. Wastewater Flows An analysis of existing wastewater flows was completed in order to create an analytical model of the sanitary sewer collection system. These wastewater flows were generated as a unit flow (gal/acre/day) for specific land use types and applied to the model per parcel. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-12 Water sales data, supplied by the City, included the volume of winter water supplied to three (3) categories (e.g. Residential, Commercial, and Institutional). Winter water usage (December through March) is typically assumed to be the base annual wastewater flow because it excludes lawn watering demand from the other seasons. Table 8-6. summarizes the winter water sales data for the three generalized land use categories for the analysis year 2017-2018. Table 8-6. Brooklyn Center Winter Water Flow Land Use Type Winter Water Sales 2017-2018 (gal)(gal / day) Total Residential 200,473,688 1,656,807 Total Commercial 42,529,976 351,487 Total Institutional 10,311,708 85,221 TOTAL 253,315,371 2,093,516 Source: Sambatek, City of Brooklyn Center Existing Wastewater Unit Flows Table 8-7 shows the estimated wastewater flows that calculated using the methods described above. It should be noted that medium density residential (MDR), based on the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan MDR density description of 10-15 unit/acre and the total residential winter water demand of 151 gal/day/unit, would typically have a unit flow of around 1,500- 2,250 gal/acre/day. The MDR flow shown in Table 8-7 below is less than this range because the greenspace and buffer areas surrounding individual units was included in the total acreage of each MDR land use type. A typical value in the range above should be used for any future development modeling. Table 8-7. Estimated Existing System Unit Flow Rates Existing Land Use Designation Flow (gal / day)Area (acres)Unit Flow (gal / acre / day) Single-Family Residential (LDR)1,168,625 1,869 625 2 or 3 Family Residential and Townhouse Residential (MDR)29,984 127 237* Multi-Family (HDR)458,199 251 1,827 Total Commercial 351,487 672 523 Total Institutional 85,221 211 404 *A unit flow of 1,500-2,250 gal/acre/day should be used for any future development calculations. Source: Sambatek INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-13 2040 Wastewater Unit Flows The 2040 wastewater flows were determined using the existing unit flows from Table 8-7 in combination with the 2040 land use plan included Chapter 3 of this Plan. For similar land use types, the existing system unit flows were used for the 2040 model. Table 8-8 lists estimated unit flows for 2040 land use designations. Table 8-8. Estimated 2040 System Unit Flow Rates 2040 Land Use Designation Flow (gal / day) Area (acres) Unit Flow (gal / acre / day) Low Density Residential (LDR)1,181,189 1,889 625 Medium Density Residential (MDR)29,248 124 237* High Density Residential (HDR)387,686 212 1827 Transit Oriented Development 325,204 200 1,623 Neighborhood Mixed Use 71,033 93 767 Commercial Mixed Use 92,604 88 1,052 Total Commercial 235,623 451 523 Total Institutional 86,850 215 404 *A unit flow of 1,500-2,250 gal/acre/day should be used for any future development calculations. Source: Sambatek Lift Station Pump Capacities The City of Brooklyn Center currently has ten (10) lift stations that are in service and operated by the City’s utility services, illustrated in Map 8-4, and one (1) additional commercially-owned lifted station. For modeling accuracy, lift station pump down tests were performed in August, 2018 by Sambatek, Inc. with the help of City staff to verify the capacity of each of the ten (10) City owned lift stations. Table 8-9 below shows the field-determined capacity of pumps at each lift station. Because the Lift Station 2 wet well is irregularly shaped, pump flow verification was not possible without a meter. Pump capacity for Lift Station 2 was based on flow meter testing conducted in 1992. In addition, access to the commercially-owned lift station was not provided and pump capacity was assumed based off of record drawing information. Lift station pump down testing results conducted in August 2018 can be obtained from the City. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-14 Table 8-9. 2018 Lift Station Pump Capacities Lift Station Dimensions (ft)Pump 1 Capacity (GPM) Pump 2 Capacity (GPM) Pump 3 Capacity (GPM) 1 30 x 15 3102 3141 3197 2*17.5 x 10 2250 1935 1950 3 6 424 455 None 4 6 251 228 None 5 6 95 212 None 6 8 392 387 429 7 6 99 115 None 8 6 272 326 None 9 8 1116 1098 None 10 6 263 293 None Commercial**5 220 220 None * Information based on field test in 1992. ** Information based on plans in 2011. Lift station run times indicate all existing lift stations have adequate capacity to convey existing peak wastewater flows as shown in Table 8-10. Peak day flows were determined by multiplying the maximum day run times by the pump flow capacity. Flows shown in Table 8-10 are represented by daily flow rates. Table 8-10. 2018 Lift Station Pump Capacities Lift Station Average Day Winter Water Flow Dec 2017 - Mar 2018 Peak Day Water Flow Jan 2016 - Oct2018 Estimated Lift Station Capacity Flow Percentage of Capacity (%)gal / day gal / day gal / min gal / day 1 1,268,192 2,553,797 4,673 6,728,400 38% 2*915,409 2,241,548 2,918 4,201,200 53% 3 35,774 137,501 424 610,560 23% 4 26,081 81,698 228 328,320 25% 5 2,762 7,236 95 136,800 5% 6 245,451 574,690 583 839,520 68% 7 5,638 27,618 99 142,560 19% 8 94,407 189,508 272 391,680 48% 9 104,839 232,524 1,098 1,581,120 15% 10 22,455 73,390 263 378,720 19% * Lift station pump capacity assumed from record drawings. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-15 Sanitary Sewer System Capacity The sanitary sewer system capacity analysis was completed by modeling the existing sewer system using SewerCAD software (SewerCAD CONNECT Edition). A SewerCAD model was developed for the existing and 2040 sanitary sewer system based on the City’s geographic information system (GIS) data and available record drawings. Average day wastewater flows (Table 8-7 and Table 8-8) were inputted into the models based on manholes nearest parcel within the City. The average flow model was then adjusted for peak flows, to account for inflow and infiltration by applying the Metropolitan Council standard peaking factors to the average daily flow in the pipes. Modeling results indicate the existing and 2040 sanitary sewer system’s infrastructure, including gravity mains, lift stations, and force mains, have adequate capacity to serve current and future system flows. To review model accuracy, available Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) meter readings were compared to model results. Table 8-11 compares the existing and 2040 modeled flows to average winter water MCES metered flows between 2017-2018 for each of the four (4) metersheds (e.g.M100, M221, M112, M110). Table 8-11. City of Brooklyn Center Design Flows MCES Metershed Collection Area* (%) Existing 2040 2017 Avg MCES Meter (MGD) Modeled Average Flow (MDG) Modeled Peak Flow * (MGD) Modeled Average Flow (MDG) Modeled Peak Flow * (MGD) M100 10.5%0.41 1.03 0.41 1.05 N/A M110 32.9%0.75 2.73 0.78 2.83 0.93 M112 55.0%1.13 4.23 1.46 5.52 1.27 M221 1.6%0.04 0.15 0.04 0.16 N/A *Collection area excludes land use types that do not supply wastewater to Brooklyn Center’s sanitary sewer collection system (e.g. parks, open water, wetland, railway, undeveloped land, and right-of-way). The model indicates that system capacity is capable of serving existing and 2040 sewer flow rates. Model results are illustrated in Map 8-5 and Map 8-6. If redevelopment includes sanitary collection system modifications, revaluation of existing facilities is recommended. Similarly, all proposed structures connecting to the sanitary sewer system within Brooklyn Park are required to apply for a building permit and follow the requirements of City Ordinance Chapter 4 – Public Utility and Service Districts. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-16 "C ` "C ` ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ME T E R 11 2 ME T E R 11 0No . 2 No . 9 No . 5 No . 3 No . 8 No . 1 No . 7 No . 6 No 4 No . 1 0 NO T E S : 1. P E R C E N T C A P A C I T Y I S C A L C U L A T E D U S I N G MA N N I N G ’ S E Q U A T I O N F O R O P E N C H A N N E L F L O W DIV I D E D B Y T H E P R O J E C T E D P E A K F L O W I N T H E PIP E . A S G R A V I T Y M A I N S R E A C H C A P A C I T Y F U L L , TH E P I P E W I L L B E C O M E P R E S S U R I Z E D A N D F L O W WIL L C O N T I N U E T O I N C R E A S E U N D E R P R E S S U R E CO N D I T I O N S . N O S E R V I C E F L O O D I N G R I S K C A U S E D BY O V E R C A P A C I T Y P I P E S D U R I N G P E A K F L O W CO N D I T I O N S I S A N T I C I P A T E D W I T H I N T H E C I T Y O F BR O O K L Y N C E N T E R S A N I T A R Y S E W E R C O L L E C T I O N SY S T E M . 20 4 0 P e a k D a y F l o w Pi p e C a p a c i t y Fi g u r e 5 Th i s m a p w a s c r e a t e d u s i n g S a m b a t e k ’ s G e o g r a p h i c In f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m s ( G I S ) , i t i s a c o m p i l a t i o n o f in f o r m a t i o n a n d d a t a f r o m v a r i o u s s o u r c e s . T h i s map i s n o t a s u r v e y e d o r l e g a l l y r e c o r d e d m a p an d i s i n t e n d e d t o b e u s e d a s a r e f e r e n c e . Sa m b a t e k i s n o t r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a n y i n a c c u r a c i e s co n t a i n e d h e r e i n . S a m b a t e k P r o j e c t 2 1 3 2 1 SO U R C E : C i t y o f B r o o k l y n C e n t e r , E s r i % C a p a c i t y Un d e r 9 5 % 95 - 1 0 0 % Ov e r 1 0 0 % Fo r c e M a i n s ³ä Lif t S t a t i o n s ³ä Co m m e r c i a l L S "C ` Me t e r s 5 0 1 , 3 0 0 2 , 6 0 0 3 , 9 0 0 5 , 2 0 0 65 0 Fe e t Ci t y o f B r o o k l y n C e n t e r Map 8-5. Existing Peak Day Flow Pipe Capacity INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-17 "C ` "C `³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ³ä ME T E R 11 2 ME T E R 11 0 No . 2 No . 9 No . 5 No . 3 No . 8 No . 1 No . 7 No . 6 No 4 No . 1 0 NO T E S : 1. P E R C E N T C A P A C I T Y I S C A L C U L A T E D U S I N G MA N N I N G ’ S E Q U A T I O N F O R O P E N C H A N N E L F L O W DI V I D E D B Y T H E P R O J E C T E D P E A K F L O W I N T H E PIP E . A S G R A V I T Y M A I N S R E A C H C A P A C I T Y F U L L , TH E P I P E W I L L B E C O M E P R E S S U R I Z E D A N D F L O W WI L L C O N T I N U E T O I N C R E A S E U N D E R P R E S S U R E CO N D I T I O N S . N O S E R V I C E F L O O D I N G R I S K C A U S E D BY O V E R C A P A C I T Y P I P E S D U R I N G P E A K F L O W CO N D I T I O N S I S A N T I C I P A T E D W I T H I N T H E C I T Y O F BR O O K L Y N C E N T E R S A N I T A R Y S E W E R C O L L E C T I O N SY S T E M . 20 4 0 P e a k D a y F l o w Pi p e C a p a c i t y Fi g u r e 5 Th i s m a p w a s c r e a t e d u s i n g S a m b a t e k ’ s G e o g r a p h i c In f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m s ( G I S ) , i t i s a c o m p i l a t i o n o f in f o r m a t i o n a n d d a t a f r o m v a r i o u s s o u r c e s . T h i s ma p i s n o t a s u r v e y e d o r l e g a l l y r e c o r d e d m a p an d i s i n t e n d e d t o b e u s e d a s a r e f e r e n c e . Sam b a t e k i s n o t r e s p o n s i b l e f o r a n y i n a c c u r a c i e s con t a i n e d h e r e i n . S a m b a t e k P r o j e c t 2 1 3 2 1 SO U R C E : C i t y o f B r o o k l y n C e n t e r , E s r i % C a p a c i t y Un d e r 9 5 % 95 - 1 0 0 % Ov e r 1 0 0 % Fo r c e M a i n s ³ä Li f t S t a t i o n s ³ä Co m m e r c i a l L S "C ` Me t e r s 5 0 1 , 3 0 0 2 , 6 0 0 3 , 9 0 0 5 , 2 0 0 65 0 Fe e t Ci t y o f B r o o k l y n C e n t e r Map 8-6. 2040 Peak Day Flow Pipe Capacity INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-18 Inflow and Infiltration Infiltration is water in the sanitary sewer system that enters through defects in the sewer pipes, joints, manholes, and service laterals, or by deliberate connection of building foundation drains. Water that enters the sewer system from cross connections with storm sewer, sump pumps, roof drains, or manhole covers is considered inflow. Water from inflow and infiltration (I/I) can consume available capacity in the wastewater collection system and increase the hydraulic load on the treatment facility. In extreme cases, the added hydraulic load can cause bypasses or overflows of raw wastewater. This extra hydraulic load also necessitates larger capacity collection and treatment components, which results in increased capital, operation and maintenance, and replacement costs. Therefore, it is imperative that I/I be reduced whenever it is cost effective to do so. Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) defines excessive I/I as I/I that causes the peak hourly flow to exceed the value determined by multiplying the average flow by the value of the peak to average ratio used by MCES to design interceptors and pump stations. The City is known to have one (1) source of clearwater inflow from the Joslyn Manufacturing & Supply Co. property—a groundwater remediation site where contaminated water is pumped from the aquifer directly to the sanitary collection system. The Joslyn site contributes a localized flow of 131 GPM per their 2017 Annual Operations and Monitoring Report provided by the City. The goal of the groundwater pumping is to reduce concentrations of PAHs and PCP to drinking water standards in the aquifer. Table 8-12 illustrates that from 2017 to 2018, the City’s peaking factors, measured at meters M110 and M112, are shown to be below the MCES standard peaking factors. Further analysis of each of the lift stations, in Table 8-13, indicates that the peaking factor at the lift stations is below MCES standard peaking factor. With review of the results from Tables 8-12 and 8-13, the City of Brooklyn Center is determined to have no excessive I/I per the MCES definition. However, I/I to some degree exists in virtually all municipal collection systems, and the City is recommended to continue system improvements as outlined in the Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) found in Appendix of this Plan. Currently, the City of Brooklyn Center does not have a policy for reducing inflow and infiltration. The City continues to improve and/or rehabilitate the sanitary sewer infrastructure by replacing or lining existing clay sewer piping, replacing or coating existing manholes and replacing existing manhole covers with sealed lids. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-19 Table 8-12. Metershed Inflow and Infiltration Analysis MCES Metershed Collection Area* (%) 2017-2018 Winter Avg MCES Meter (MGD) 2016-2018 Max MCES Meter (MGD) Calculated Peaking Factor MCES Standard Peaking Factor Excessive I/I Present M110 32.9%0.81 1.64 2.03 3.2 NO M112 55.0%1.23 1.85 1.50 3.0 NO Table 8-13. Calculated Peaking Factors for Lift Stations Lift Station Average Day Winter Water Flow Dec 2017 - Mar 2018 Peak Day Water Flow Jan 2016 - Oct2018 Calculated Peaking Factor MCES Standard Peaking Factor Excessive I/I Present gal / day gal / day 1 1,268,192 2,553,797 4,673 6,728,400 NO 2*915,409 2,241,548 2,918 4,201,200 NO 3 35,774 137,501 424 610,560 NO 4 26,081 81,698 228 328,320 NO 5 2,762 7,236 95 136,800 NO 6 245,451 574,690 583 839,520 NO 7 5,638 27,618 99 142,560 NO 8 94,407 189,508 272 391,680 NO 9 104,839 232,524 1,098 1,581,120 NO 10 22,455 73,390 263 378,720 NO * Lift station pump capacity assumed from record drawings. Goals for I/I Management The City of Brooklyn Center will continue its efforts to eliminate excess I/I with the following goals for system management: • Replace sewer linings • Repair cracks and joints in public system • Monitor sump pump drainage • Educate property owners about reducing I/I • Implement residential monitoring program for private sewer line maintenance Brooklyn Center will also work cooperatively with other agencies and property owners to educate residents and businesses about the importance of reducing I/I and promote ongoing maintenance of infrastructure on private property. It is particularly important to inspect and repair damaged sewer service lines connected to the MDS and replace older clay pipes that are beyond their useful life. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-20 Policies and Regulations for I/I Brooklyn Center regulates against inflow and infiltration to the sanitary system from surface water sources. City Ordinance Section 4-303. states “No person shall discharge or cause to be discharged any storm water, surface water, ground water, roof run-off, subsurface drainage, cooling water, or un polluted industrial process waters to any sanitary sewer.” The City will continue to monitor compliance with this ordinance through its permitting processes. SOLAR RESOURCES Solar resources are a growing opportunity for communities like Brooklyn Center to make use of renewable resources, increase sustainable energy use, and reduce reliance on fossil fuels. With future redevelopment potential in the City, the addition of capturing solar energy use should be considered. Gross and Rooftop Solar Resource Calculations The gross solar potential and gross solar rooftop potential are expressed in megawatt hours per year (Mwh/yr), and these estimates are based on the solar map for your community. These values represent gross totals; in other words, they are not intended to demonstrate the amount of solar likely to develop within the City. Instead, the calculations estimate the total potential resource before removing areas unsuitable for solar development or factors related to solar energy efficiency. The gross solar generation potential and the gross solar rooftop generation potential for Brooklyn Center are estimates of how much electricity could be generated using existing technology and assumptions on the efficiency of conversion. The conversion efficiency of 10% is based on benchmarking analyses for converting the Solar Suitability Map data to actual production, and solar industry standards used for site-level solar assessment. Table 8-6 summarizes the solar generation potential for the City. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-21 Table 8-14. Gross and Rooftop Solar Potential for Brooklyn Center Gross Potential (Mwh/yr) Rooftop Potential (Mwh/yr) Gross Generation Potential (Mwh/yr)1 Rooftop Generation Potential (Mwh/yr)1 11,541,682 1,406,373 1,154,168 140,637 1 In general, a conservative assumption for panel generation is to use 10% efficiency for conversion of total insolation into electric generation. These solar resource calculations provide an approximation of each community’s solar resource. This baseline information can provide the opportunity for a more extensive, community-specific analysis of solar development potential for both solar gardens and rooftop or accessory use installations. For most communities, the rooftop generation potential is equivalent to between 30% and 60% of the community’s total electric energy consumption. The rooftop generation potential does not consider ownership, financial barriers, or building-specific structural limitations. Solar Goals by Community Type Solar Goals 1. Balance between the benefits of urban forests and the benefits of enabling solar development. 2. Create local community solar garden opportunities for residents and businesses who have limited onsite solar resources or do not own land or buildings. 3. Redevelopment projects will evaluate on-site solar resources and incorporate solar development into designs. Solar Policies & Strategies 1. City encourages development of distributed solar energy systems that are in keeping with the community’s character and use community solar resources. 2. City supports the development of zero net energy buildings and use of local renewable and energy efficiency resources. 3. City sets a local renewable energy standard to meet 10% of community-wide electric energy use with on-site renewable energy. 4. Become certified as a “solar-ready” community under the Department of Energy’s SolSmart program. 5. Enable and promote PACE financing for local energy efficiency and solar energy projects on private buildings. INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8-22 Figure 8-7. Gross Solar Potential - Brooklyn Center DRAFT Chapter 9: Implementation Comprehensive Plan 2040 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 12 INTRODUCTION This Chapter is a critical part of the Comprehensive Plan Update process providing a roadmap for the City of next steps and implementation strategies to help bring this Plan to reality. The implementation strategies contained in subsequent sections of this Chapter are specific to the individual Chapters in this Plan, goals and strategies, and feedback heard throughout this planning process. Throughout this planning process consistent themes and messaging emerged that became the foundation for plan development, including the implementation strategies found in this Chapter. At key milestones in this process the City solicited targeted feedback from residents, stakeholders, commission members and the City Council in an effort to establish Brooklyn Center’s top priorities for the next 10–20 years. The following top priorities, including those characteristics of the community that are important to maintain, emerged from the planning process (unordered): • Our location is exceptional but a consistent brand for the community has yet to be recognizable in the region since Brookdale closed. We have an opportunity to reimagine and redevelop this area—we have to design and implement a plan that is innovative, forward thinking and creative. • Brooklyn Center’s population is diverse and will be into the future. The City should embrace its diversity and use it as a differentiator that makes the City a desirable, exciting and vibrant place to live, work, and recreate. • Creating an economically competitive, accessible and strong business climate is important to developing a stable, vibrant and sustainable community long-term. • Brooklyn Center’s accessible regional location in conjunction with the available redevelopment areas in the center city provide an opportunity to create a dynamic and vibrant sub-regional job center that provides employment opportunities to the City’s residents and the larger region. • Our youth is our future and we need to focus on their needs today, and in the future. We should partner with schools, work-programs, public and private post- secondary institutions to ensure kids have opportunities to work and live in the City as they become adults. • The City’s housing stock is aging and lacks economic diversity. We need to find ways to integrate a range of housing types, sizes, and prices (affordable and market) rate into redevelopment to expand the choices available to new and existing residents. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 9-39-2 • We need to establish clear standards and regulations for areas designated or identified for redevelopment. It is important to consider massing, setbacks, relationships with existing homes, open spaces, trails, and natural resources. • We should capitalize on the transit improvements, particularly the C-Line, that could be an amenity to any new development in the center city if designed and planned for appropriately. • The City should establish and enhance key relationships with partner agencies such as the Metropolitan Council, DEED, MnDNR, Three Rivers Park District and Hennepin County to create a more integrated region that provides improved connections within the City and to the region. • Safety of transit users was repeatedly mentioned particularly for users that would like to use the main transit station in the community. Community members identified concerns such as loitering, lighting, accessibility, and lack of consistency with routes as concerns. The transit ‘hub’ will likely become busier as the C-Line (and eventually the D-Line) opens, and it is important for the City to partner with Metro Transit to plan for and ensure residents feel comfortable and safe at the station. Based on these guiding priorities and principles the following implementation strategies were derived. Most chapters’ implementation strategies can be found in the following sections with the exception of some the Housing Implementation Strategies that are partially included within the individual chapter for consistency with the Metropolitan Council’s checklist. The following implementation strategies are meant to identify a set of high-level steps and considerations that will help guide the City to achieve the goals and objectives of this Plan. The strategies are not all encompassing, but instead are meant to serve as a guide and roadmap to describe the methods, steps and types of questions the City will tackle throughout this planning period. Just as this list may not include every strategy, Brooklyn Center may not complete every strategy on this list based on market dynamics or other external factors. But generally the City will use the following strategies as a guide to work towards implementing the Vision and Goals that this Plan has established for the City as it continues to evolve and change into 2040. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a flexible plan based upon long-range physical planning and financial projections, which schedules the major public improvements that may be incurred by the City over the next five years. Flexibility of the Capital Improvement Plan is established through annual review, and revision if necessary. The annual review assures that the program will become a continuing part of the budgetary process and that it will be consistent with changing demands as well as changing patterns in cost and financial resources. Funds are appropriated only for the first year of the program, which is then included in the annual budget. The Capital Improvement Plan serves as a tool for implementing certain aspects of the City’s Comprehensive Plan; therefore, the program describes the overall objectives of City development, the relationship between projects with respect to timing and need, and the City’s fiscal capabilities. The full Capital Improvement Plan is available at Brooklyn Center City Hall and on the City’s website. It is also included as in Appendix D to this Plan. Fiscal Devices, Public Programs and Timeline to Implement Major Zoning Update In addition to the City’s allocated department and general funding sources, the City intends to utilize a variety of fiscal devices and tools to implement this Plan. Some of the components of this Plan are longer-term initiatives and therefore it is unknown exactly how the efforts will be financed; however, generally the City will likely use similar methods and techniques in the future as planned with its short-term initiatives identified in the following sections. Fiscal Devices & Public Programs The City intends to use the following fiscal devices and public programs to implement this Plan. The City has identified the Zoning Ordinance update and overhaul as the most immediate short-term initative to accomplish as part of its official controls update. Concurrently, and subsequently, to the Zoning Ordinance update the City is actively working on a redevelopment initative with a developer partner that was selected through an RFP process. A summary of fiscal devices and programs related to each initiative is provided on the following page. It should be noted that these funding sources and tools are intended to be used on these two large short-term initiatives, and that future long-term initiatives would likely utilize similar tools, but the list is not exhaustive because new tools may enter the market and the City would explore available resources provided they support the vision, goals and strategies identified in this Plan. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 9-59-4 Zoning Ordinance Update The following funding sources have been identified to support the Zoning Ordinance update: • 2019 City Budget allocated $160,000 for implementation of this Plan, specifically related to zoning and master planning. • Acquired a $60,000 grant that will be used towards creating TOD zoning district to support the future Land Use Plan contained in Chapter 3. • Applied for a $50,000 grant from Hennepin County through their Corridor Initiative program for the creation of the Brooklyn Boulevard Overlay District. Key Milestones: • New zoning code and related ordinances (Shoreland, MRCCA, Platting, Sign) by July 2020 • Creation of new TOD and mixed-use zoning districts by July 2020 Redevelopment Funding Sources The following funding sources have been identified to support the redevelopment efforts: • Public-private partnership with selected developer for the Opportunity Site. Preliminary development agreement stipulates that the developer will reimburse the City for planning work on the EDA-owned portion of the site. This agreement allows for an additional $50,000 of master planning work on the site. • Plan to apply for LCA-TOD pre-development funds to assist with master planning work on the Opportunity Site. Key Milestones: • Brooklyn Boulevard redevelopment framework by May 2020 Other Funding Sources and Initiatives The Zoning Ordinance update, Master Planning and Redevelopment initiatives are the most significant components of this Plan. A few other initiatives of the City with respect to funding implementation of this Plan include the following: • City is in the process of creating a public subsidy policy and it should be adopted by mid-2019. • City will explore creating a housing coordinator position as part of the 2020 budgeting process for 2021. • The City will work to identify a funding source, and will conduct a housing study in 2020. Current Zoning Map & Districts As referenced, the existing zoning ordinance and map will be amended and updated through this process. The following map and summary of each zoning district is provided. Adopted Zoning Districts Residence R1 One Family Residence R2 Two Family Residence R3 Multiple Family Residence (Townhouse/Garden Apartment) R4 Multiple Family Residence (1-1/2 and 2 Story) R5 Multiple Family Residence (2 1/2 and 3 Story) R6 Multiple Family Residence (4 and 5 Story) R7 Multiple Family Residence (6 Stories or More) Commerce C1 Service/Office C1A Service/Office (Allows for Transient Lodging) C2 Commerce Industry I1 Industrial Park I2 General Industry Open Space O1 Public Open Space Reserved O2 Public and Private Open Space Reserved o o oo o oo oo oo oo o o oo o o o o o o o o o o o o o oo o o o o o oo o oo o o o o o o o o ooo o o oo oo o oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo oo oo oo o oo o oo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o LOCAL STREETINDEX ADMIRAL LANEADMIRAL PLACEALDRICH COURTALDRICH DRIVE N.AMY LANEAZELIA AVE. 4-B,C4-B1-F5-F1-E7-B 53RD AVE N 54TH AVE N 55TH AVE N 56TH AVE N 57TH AVE N 58TH AVE N 59TH AVE N 60TH AVE N 61ST AVE N 62ND AVE N 63RD AVE N 64TH AVE N 65TH AVE N 66TH AVE N 67TH AVE N 68TH AVE N 69TH AVE N 70TH AVE N 71ST AVE N 72ND AVE N 73RD AVE N W I L L O W L A N E RIVERDALE AVE N 200DALLAS AVE N 3 0 0W. RIVER ROAD M T H 2 5 2 5TH AVE N 600CAMDEN AVE N 7 0 0ALDRICH AVE 800BRYANT A V E N 900COLFAX AVE N 1000DUPONT AVE N 1 1 0 0EMERSON AVE N 1200 F R E M O N T A V E N 1300 GIRARD AVE N 1400 HUMBOLDT AVE N 1 5 0 0 IRVING AVE N 1600 J A M E S A V E N 1700 KNOX AVE N 1800 LOGAN AVE N 1 9 0 0MORGAN AVE N 2000NEWTON A V E N 2100OLIVER AVE N 2200PENN AVE N 2 3 0 0QUEEN AV E N 2400RUSSELL A V E N 2500SHERIDAN AVE N THOMAS AVE N UPTON A V E N 2700VINCENT A V E N 2800WASHBURN AVE N 2900XERXES AVE N 3 0 0 0YORK A V E N 3100ZENITH A V E N 3200ABBOTT AVE N 3300BEARD AVE N 3 4 0 0 CHOWE N A V E N 3500 D R E W A V E N 3600 EWING AVE N 3700 FRANCE AVE N 3 8 0 0GRIMES A V E N 4000HALIFAX A V E N 4100 INDIANA AVE N 4200 JUNE AVE N 4 3 0 0KYLE A V E N 4400LEE A V E N 4500MAJOR AVE N 4600NOBLE AVE N 4 7 0 0ORCHARD A V E N 4800PERRY A V E N 4900QUAIL AVE N 5000REGENT AVE N 5 1 0 0SCOTT A V E N 5200TOLEDO A V E N 5300UNITY AVE N 5400VERA CRUZ AVE N 5 5 0 0 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D E F G BOULDER LANEBROOKLYN BOULEVARDBROOKLYN DRIVEBROOKLYN PLACEBROOKVIEW DRIVEBURQUEST LANECAMDEN COURTCAMDEN DRIVECOMMODORE DRIVEDALLAS ROADDUSHARME DRIVEEARLE BROWN DRIVEEAST TWIN LAKE BLVD.ECKBERG DRIVEELEANOR LANEEMERSON LANEERICON DRIVEEWING LANEFRANCE PLACEFREEWAY BOULEVARDFREMONT PLACEGREAT VIEW AVE.GRIMES PLACEHALIFAX DRIVEHALIFAX PLACEHILLSVIEW ROADHOWE LANEHUMBOLDT PLACEIRVING LANEJAMES CIRCLEJANET LANEJOHN MARTIN DRIVEJOYCE LANEJUDY LANEKATHRENE DRIVELAKEBREEZE AVE.LAKE CURVE LANELAKESIDE AVE.LAKESIDE PLACELAKEVIEW AVE.LAWRENCE ROADLILAC DRIVEMARLIN DRIVEMUMFORD ROADNASH ROADNOBLE LANORTHPORT DRIVENORTHWAY DRIVEOAK STREETO'HENRY ROADOLIVER CIRCLEORCHARD LANEOSSEO ROAD 5300-5800PALMER LAKE CIRCLEPALMER LAKE DRIVEPAUL DRIVEPEARSON DRIVEPERRY COURT - EAST/WESTPERRY PLACEPOE ROADPONDS DRIVE N.QUAIL CIRCLE - EAST/WESTQUARLES ROAD SAILOR LANESHINGLE CREEK PARKWAYSHORES DRIVESUMMIT DRIVETHURBER ROADTWIN LAKE AVE.URBAN AVE.VIOLET AVE.WILLOW LANEWINCHESTER LANEWINGARD LANEWINGARD PLACEWOODBINE LANEXERXES PLACEYORK PLACE4TH STREET5TH STREET53RD PLACE58 1/2 AVE.59 1/2 AVE.63RD LANE67TH LANE68TH LANE69TH LANE70TH CIRCLE71ST CIRCLE72ND CIRCLE 3-A1-A,6-C3-D1-A5-D,E5-B3-G2-G4-C1-G7-C3,4-E5,6-B5-B3-A1-F5-D,E3-C4-B2-D,E2-F6-B2-B3-B4-B5-E2-A2-E1-E3-E3-B4-D,E3-B5-E3-B7-B4-B7-B6-B7-B3-C6-C,3-F3-B3-C,D3-C,D2-A,B4,5-C4-D6-B3-C,D1-F2-A5-C1-C1-C3-A4-B1-A1-A3-C1-A1-A2-C 5-C2E-4D4-B3,4-E2-C7-B1-C1-C1,3-G2-A,B1-A1-A1-B,C,F2-D2-C5-G2-G5-C4-C4-B3-F2-D,F2-D,F2-D1-A1-A1-A BELLVUE LA G-5 RIVERDALE ROAD 1-G2-GRIVERWOOD LANE ISLANDS OF PEACE PARK (ANOKA COUNTY) WEST FIRESTATION HENNEPIN CO.LIBRARY &GOVERNMENT SERVICE CENTER P A L M E R L A K E P R E S E R V E A R E A U .S. POST OFFIC E WATERTOWERNo. 2 EVERGREENPARK LAKESIDE PARK(TRIANGLE PARK) EVERGREENELEMENTARYSCHOOL RIVERDALE PARKEAST PALMERLAKE PARK WEST PALMERLAKE PARK PALMER LAKEELEMENTARYSCHOOL WILLOW LANE PARK ARBORETUM ORCHARD LANE PARK ODYSSEYCHARTERSCHOOL MOUND CEMETERY FREEWAYPARK GARDEN CITYELEMENTARYSCHOOL MARLINPARK WATERTOWERNo.1 EAST FIRESTATION FIREHOUSEPARKBROOKLYN CENTER HIGH SCHOOL EARLEBROWN ELEMENTARYSCHOOL BELLVU E PARK CENTENNIALPARK CityHall CENTERBROOKGOLFCOURSE WATERTOWERNo. 3 KYLAWNPARK NORTHPORTELEMENTARYSCHOOL NORTHPORTPARK HAPPY HOLLOWPARK EARLE BROWNHERITAGE CENTER GRANDVIEWPARK LIONSPARK N O R T H M I S S I S S I P P I R E G I O N A L P A R K CAHLANDERPARK WANGSTADPARK POLICESTATION TWIN LAKEPARK GARDENCITYPARK PALMER LAKEPARK CommunityCenter AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE - B AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE - A AIR P ORT SA FETY H ORIZONT AL ZON E - C R3 R3 R3 C1PUD/C2 R3 R5 C1 R4 C1 PUD/C2 PUD/C2 R4C2 R5 C2 R3R5PUD/R1 R4 R4 R4 R6 R3 R5 PUD/C2 PUD/R3 R5 C2 C2R3 R5 R5 R3C2 C2 C1A C1A C2 C2 C2 C2I1 PUD/I1 I1 PUD/I1 PUD/I1 I1 R5PUD/I1 R3 PUD/I1 R5I1 O1 R3 I1 I1C1 I1 O1 I1 R5I1 I1 PUD/I1 C2 PUD/C1A C1 C1PUD/C2 C2R4 C2 R5 C1 R5 C1C1/R5/R4 PUD/C2C2R3 R3C2C1PUD-MIXEDR5/R6 O1 R5 I2 O2I2 I2 R4 PUD/I1I2I2 R4R4 I2 I2I2 C1R4I2 I2 PUD/R1O1 PUD-MIXEDR2/R3 R5 R5 R5 C2 R7 C1A R4R4 R5 C2 C1 R4 R3 R4 O1 R4 R4C1 C1 R4R4PUD/C2C2 R4C2 C2 R3 C2 R4 C2C2C2PUD/C2 R5C1AR5 R3 C1 R4C1 C1 C2 C1 C2 C2 R3 C2 C1 O1 C2 R5 C2C1 R7 O1R5 C2 C2 PUDMIXEDC2 C1A C2 C1A C2 R5PUD/R1 PUD/C1 PUD/C2 R3 PUD/R1 O1 C2 C2 PUD/C2 PUD/C2 PUD/C2 PUD/C2PUD/C2 R5 R5 R3 PUD-MIXEDC2/I-1 R4 CRYSTALAIRPORT S HI N G L E C R E E K CREEK PALMER LAKE MIDDLE TWIN LAKE UPPER TWIN LAKE M I S S I S S I P P I R I V E R M I S S I S S I P P I R I V E R SHINGLE RYAN LAKE SHINGLE CREEK 63RD AVE BROOKLYN BLVD BRO O KLYN BLV D BROOKLYNDR OHENRY RD MUMFORDRD 64THAVE 65THAVE NASH RD 60TH AVE 59THAVE SHINGLE CR EEKP KWY J O H N M A R TIN DR HALIFAXAVE 55TH AVE SUMMITDR LILAC DR 69THAVE 56THAVE SHORESDR Z E NIT H A V E SHINGLECREEKPKWY FRANCE A VE XERXESAV E 65TH AVE D RE W A V E 67TH AVE 53RD AVE NORTHWAYDR 69THAVE 70TH AVE 53RD AVE 66THAVE IRVING PL 73RD AVE 58TH AVE 68THAVE HIGHWAY 100 TOLE D O AV E INTERSTATE694 65TH AVE KNOX AVE THURBERRD 67TH AVE 67TH AVE WINGARDPL 58TH PL 53RD AVE U NIT Y AV E WILLO W L N 58TH AVE 69THAVE 52NDAVE 55TH AVE U P T O N AVEYORK AV E SAILOR LN ZEN I T H A V E 71STAVE 67THLNBROOKLYNBLVD 50THAVE 67THLN NO R T H P ORT D R56TH AVE F RANC E AVE N O B LE A VE OLIVERCIR 71STAVE FREM O N T P L68THAVE ALDRICHCT DREW A VE C H O W EN A VE PAULDR GRIMES P L 68TH LN P E RRY PL S C O T T A V E LILACDR 57TH AVE 56TH AVE FRANCE DR 55THAVE B R YAN T AV E 57THAVE 66THAVEE W ING A VE 68THAVE ALDRICH AVE COUNTYROAD10 E M E R S ON A VE 56THAVE C O LFA X AV E FR E M O NT A VE HOWE LN ECKBERG DR 62NDAVE 67THLN HIGHWAY 100 LILAC DR G IRAR D AV E BROOKLYN BLVD FREMONTAVE 70TH AVE WINCHESTER LN 71STAVE 68THLN 70TH AVE 65THAVE 62NDAVE BEA R D AV E PALMERLAKE CIR FRONTAGERD MORGANAVE WOODBINE LN 68THLN 57THAVE 68THAVE 72ND AVE COMMODORE DR 64TH AVE 61ST AVE 61ST AVE 69THLN S C OTT AVE 59 1/2AVE ELEANOR LN 70TH AVE 68THAVE 70TH AVE C A M D E N AVE L E E A V E VINCENT AVE 73RD AVE 51ST AVE VIOLETAVE DREW A V E 67THAVE 65TH AVE 64TH AVE SC O T T AV E HUMBOLDTPL URBANAVE 72ND AVE HALIFAXDR 58 1/2AVE 71STAVE 72NDAVE WOODBINE LN 72NDAVE GIRARD AVE 61ST AVE 59TH AVE 56TH AVE 54TH AVE 61ST AVE O R C HAR D AVE 49THAVE ADMIRALLN 60THAVE 50TH AVE VERA CRUZ AVE EMERSONAVE 70TH AVE 66THAVE 71STAVE 56THAVE 72ND AVE 70THAVE 51STAVE 72NDAVENEWTON AVE X E RXES AVE 47TH AVE 53RD PL LOGAN A V E F R A N C E PL A B B O TT AVE ALDR ICH A VE ZENITHAVE IRVING AVE LAKESIDE PL TWINLAKEAVE BROOKVIEWDR A L D R I C H AVE 70TH AVE INTERSTATE694 G RIM E S A V E GRIM E S AVE ABB O T T AVE NORTHPO R T DR 67TH AVE BROOKLYNPL 70TH CIR M AJO R AVE LAKESIDEAVE DREW AVE PENN AVE D RE W AV E RE GENTAVE 70TH AVE ERICON DR MORGANAVE LAKE BREEZE AVE CA M D E N AV E 64THAVE QU AILAVE 71ST CIR WINGARDLN LILACDR COLFAX AVE INDIANA AVE 55THAVE XERX E SPL JAMES AVE 68TH AVE 67TH AVE N OBL E LN 48TH AVE Q U AIL AV E T OLE D O AV E E WIN G AV E ORC HAR D L N PER R Y AV E R E G ENT AVE SCO T T AV E BRYANT AVE JAMES AV E KATHRENEDR HUMBOLDTAVE N O BLE AVE K YLE AVE C H O W E N AV E CAMDEN AVE INTER STATE 94 MAJOR AVE BRYANT AVE MAJO R AV E NEWTONAVE DREW AVE WINCHESTER LN E W I N G A V E CO L FAX AVE MAJOR AVE GREATVIEW AVE O R C HARD AVE CA M D E N A V E I N DIANA AVE 72NDCIR LYND ALE AVE 5 T H ST REGENT AVE R I V ERWOODLN EWINGAVE C A MDEN DR 54THAVE RIVERDALERD NORTHWAYDR 57TH AVE POERD P ENN AVE BURQUEST LN BOULDER LN LILAC DR 63RDLN GIRARD AVE GIRARD AVE JUDY LN FRANCEPL LEE AVE WOODBINE LN 72ND AVE BASSLAKERD IRVING LN AMY LN INDIANA AVE JUN E AVE P E R RY AVE QU AIL AVE REGE N T AV E LILAC DR LAWRENCERD MORGAN AVE J A MES AVE JANETLN 67THAVE JOYCELN DREW AVE 62NDAVE QUARLESRD 72NDAVE 66TH AVE WOODBINELN BE A R D AV E FRANCE A V E PALMER LAKEDR FREEWAYBLVD LILACDR UNITYAV E U NIT Y A V E NOBLE AVE LILAC DR HUMBOLDT AVE XERXES AVE KYLE AVE V I N C E NT AVE INTERSTATE94 WASHBURN AVE A B BOTT AVE QUEEN AVE QUEEN AVE BEARD AVE B E ARD A VE 71ST AVE GRIMES A V E GRIMES AVE HIGHWAY 252 HIG H W AY 252 T WIN LAKE BLVD TWIN LAKEBLVD TOLEDO AVE 66TH AVE N OBLE AV E INTE RSTATE 9 4 C A M D E N A V E CAMDEN AVE H ALIFAX AVE F R A N C E A V E LOGAN AVE XERX E S AV E XERXESAVE XERXE S A VE XERX E S AV E OLIVERA V E B RYANTAVE IN DIA N A A V E INDIA N A A VE JUNEAVE WILLOWLN ADMIRALLN D U P O NT AVE H U M B OLDT AVE COLFAX AVE COLFAX AVE F RANC E AVE FREMONT A VE LAKEVIEWAVE E W I N G AVE E W INGAVE BRO OKLYN BLVD LN EWING AVE HALI F AXPL AZELIA AVE MAJOR AVE W EST RIV E R RD WEST RIVER RD PER R Y AV E PEAR S ONDR ADMIRAL P L YORKPL O L I V E R A V E PERRYCT HUMBOLDT AVE QUAILCIR RUSSELL AVE EMERSON A V E P E R R Y A V E BR Y ANT AVE BRYANT A V E LYNDALE A V E J A M ES CIR JAMESCIR PONDSDR PONDSDR BEARD AVE LEEAVE IRVING AVE I R V I N G AVELAKE CURVE LN K N O X A V E ALDRIC H A V E ALDRICHDR SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING INTERSTATE 94 LILAC DR ORCHARD AVE M A R LIN DR EARLEBROWN DR EARLEBROWNDR EM E R S O N A V E 51STAVE QUAIL AVE PARKWAYCIR PARKWAYCIR BELLVUE LN 66TH AVE 62ND AVE OAK ST 4T H ST EMERSONAVE FREMONTAVE GIRARD AVEHUMBOLDTAVE DUPONT AVE DUPONT AVE LOGAN AVE KNOX AVE JAMES AVE Brooklyn Center Zoning Map 0 0.5 10.25 Miles This Zoning Map reflects council-approved zoning changes up to its effective date of September 5, 2015. The zoning designations shown onthis map must be interpreted by the City's Zoning Code and policies. These zoning designations are subject to changeas part of the City's ongoing planning process. / oooAirport Safety Zones (refer to Minn. Rules 8800.2400) Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Boundary Line Private Roads ZONING DISTRICTS R1 One Family Residence R2 Two Family Residence R3 Multiple Family Residence R4 Multiple Family Residence R5 Multiple Family Residence R6 Multiple Family Residence R7 Multiple Family Residence C1 Service/Office C1A Sevice/Office C2 Commerce I-1 Industrial Park I-2 General Industry O1 Public Open Space O2 Public & Private Open Space C1/R5/R4 Office/Service & MultipleFamily Residence PUD/R1 Planned UnitDevelopment/One Family Res. PUD/R3 Planned UnitDevelopment/Multi-Family PUD/C1 Planned UnitDevelopment/Office-Service PUD/C1A Planned UnitDevelopment/Office-Service PUD/C2 Planned UnitDevelopment/Commerce PUD/I1 Planned UnitDevelopment/Industrial Park PUD-MIXED Central Commerce Overlay District ZONING DISTRICT NOTESALL DISTRICT BOUNDARIES EXTEND TO THE CENTERLINE OF STREETS 842846859816820856856 100 YEAR FLOOD ELEVATIONS AT SELECTED LOCATIONSWATERWAYLOCATIONELEVATION (FT. NGVD)SHINGLE CREEK MISSISSIPPI RIVER TWIN LAKESRYAN LAKE AT 53RD AVE N ..........................AT 69TH AVE N ...........................AT BROOKLYN BLVD .................AT 53RD AVE N ..........................AT 73RD AVE N ..........................SHORELINE ................................SHORELINE ................................ NOTE: SEE FEMA/FIA FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY DATED SEPT. 2004 AND FLOODWAY MAPS AND FIRM MAPS DATED SEPT 2004 FOR DETAILED INFORMATION ON FLOODWAY LIMITS AND PROFILES I-1 - INDUSTRIAL PARKI-2 - GENERAL INDUSTRY INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIALR1 - ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE (One Family Dwellings)R2 - TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE (One and Two-Family Dwellings)R3 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (Townhouse/Garden Apts./CondosR4 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (1-1/2 & 2-Story Dwellings)R5 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (2-1/2 & 3 Story Dwellings)R6 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (4 or 5 Story Dwellings)R7 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (6+ Story Dwellings) COMMERCIALC1 - SERVICE / OFFICE (Min. 1-ac. lots/3-story max.)C1A - SERVICE / OFFICE (Min. 1-ac. lots/No Height Limitations)C2 - COMMERCE OPEN SPACEO1 - PUBLIC OPEN SPACE O2 - PUBLIC AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTThe underlying zoning is designated afterthe "PUD/___" (e.g. "PUD/C2" equalsPlanned Unit Development/Commerce) (Refer to City Code Sect. 35-2240 for allowable uses and prohibited uses) CC - CENTRAL COMMERCE OVERLAY This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records,information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is tobe used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to preparethis map is error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purposerequiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepanciesare found please contact (763) 569-3335. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2013),and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees todefend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties whicharise out of the user's access or use of data provided. Document Path: L:\Users\ComDev\Zoning\Zoning Map 2015.mxd IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 9-79-6 CHAPTER 3: LAND USE & REDEVELOPMENT The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the goals and strategies identified in Chapter 2 of this Comprehensive Plan Update. Land Use 1. The City will complete a full update of its zoning ordinance to support the modified land use designations identified on the Future Land Use Plan. a. The update at a minimum will include a full review of all residential, commercial, and industrial zoning classifications that consider the following: i. Setbacks ii. Parking iii. Height Restrictions iv. Coverage v. Performance Standards vi. Permitted/Un-permitted Uses vii. Conditional Uses viii. Accessory Structures/Uses ix. Fencing/Screening b. To support the individual zoning district update process, a full review of the City Code as it may pertain to the administration of the Zoning Code will be completed. This process may result in changes and updates or may find that the existing ordinances are adequate. At a minimum, the review will consider the following: i. Sign Standards ii. Public Nuisances iii. Special Use Permit (SUP) will be brought into Compliance with Minnesota State Statute requirements for Conditional Use Permits. iv. Variance process and language will be updated and revised to reflect ‘Practical Difficulties’ if not already completed. v. Platting ordinance will be reviewed for platting process compliance and proper reference to the revised zoning ordinance. vi. PUD process and procedures will be reviewed for consistency with the City’s stated goals and objectives, particularly as it relates to redevelopment areas identified within this Plan. vii. Addition of a Shoreland Ordinance to comply with MRCCA requirements. c. The process to prepare the zoning ordinance update will be led by the City’s staff, with support and assistance from a Consultant and input and direction from the City Council. i. The City may establish a community engagement plan for the Zoning Code update process. This may include a sub-committee or task force to provide feedback and input on key issues throughout the update process to ensure a broad spectrum of perspectives is represented and addressed within the process. 2. The City will continue to support and explore incorporating policies within ordinance updates that address community resiliency and long-term sustainability. a. As Ordinances are updated, the City will explore opportunities to encourage through incentives or regulations energy efficiency in redevelopment and site design. b. Addressing resiliency with respect to the City infrastructure and PTOS systems can be cost-effective when incorporated into initial site design requirements. The City will explore opportunities to address and incorporate such site design standards into its ordinances, particularly within new zoning districts. Redevelopment 1. The City will create zoning districts to support the new land use designations identified on the Future Land Use Plan. a. At a minimum seven new zoning districts will be developed for consistency with the Transit Oriented Development (TOD), Neighborhood Mixed-Use (N-MU), Commercial Mixed-Use (C-MU), and Business Mixed Use (B-MU) land use designations. b. The process to prepare the new zoning districts will be led by Staff and a Consultant with direction from the City Council and City Commissions. The process should be initiated immediately upon adoption of this Comprehensive Plan and should be completed within nine (9) months of its adoption. Each zoning district will address, at a minimum: i. Massing and architectural design ii. Setbacks iii. Height restrictions iv. Site design/landscape standards v. Permitted, conditionally permitted and not permitted uses vi. Accessory structures/uses vii. Transition of uses viii. Mix of uses IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 9-99-8 ix. PUD process or other incentive process x. Establishment of how mixed-use will be applied (i.e. through a master plan approach, parcel-by-parcel basis, etc.) 2. The City will develop a process and methodology for tracking the mixed-use and redevelopment projects to achieve the mix of uses as contemplated within this Comprehensive Plan. The ordinances should be developed with graphic representations of the standards to be more user friendly. The process may include exploration of ghost-platting, development of a database/tracking spreadsheet, and the development of ‘cheat-sheet’ or development reference guides for developers and land owners that describe the mix of uses contemplated and the process to ensure compliance with the Ordinance and this Plan. 3. The City will establish guidelines and procedures for the sale of EDA-owned property. This may include creating marketing materials and promoting revised ordinances that highlight the ease of developing in the community. 4. The City will continue to evaluate opportunities for additional land acquisition particularly within proximity to land holdings in the center city that may offer larger redevelopment opportunities. 5. The City will participate as an active partner in any redevelopment effort that includes City financial participation as the land owner, or TIF, tax abatement, grant partner, etc. 6. What has historically been known as the “Opportunity Site” is re-guided in this Plan to allow for mixed-use development of the site. At the time of this Plan the City is working with a developer on a master plan for the redevelopment that will add a significant number of new households to the community. Understanding that this redevelopment effort is in-progress, the new zoning districts that are created to support the land use designation must be prepared for consistency with the anticipated development. In an effort to minimize duplication of the process, the City will create a minimum of one supporting zoning district that is consistent with the known redevelopment plans. The zoning district will address, at a minimum, the following: a. A minimum percentage of the project that must contain commercial, office or retail uses that support and are consistent with any developed housing. b. The ordinance development process should consider how to incorporate a range of housing types, including considering incentives and/or standards that encourage the construction of new affordable housing. c. The ordinance will incorporate architectural and landscape design standards that support the goals and strategies contained within Chapter 2 of this Plan. d. The ordinance will incorporate incentives, and where applicable standards, that are focus on sustainable site improvements and resilient infrastructure improvements such as: transit, trail and sidewalk connections, pervious pavers and other innovative landscape products, localized surface water management and other low impact development techniques. e. The ordinance will require development that incorporates best practices for creating transit oriented places, including density minimums, parking maximums, pedestrian-oriented design, and must accommodate a mix of uses. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 9-119-10 CHAPTER 4: HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD The Implementation Strategies that support the Metropolitan Council’s checklist to achieve the City’s Housing goals and objectives can be found in Chapter 4 of this Plan. The following implementation strategies support those contained within Chapter 4. 1. As part of the zoning ordinance update process the City will evaluate the rules and regulations to ensure that they allow existing and future residents to improve their homes in ways that add value and are desirable, and allow for infill housing that offers a range of housing types and products. a. Residential zoning districts should be written to allow for a mix of housing types, with various setbacks and massing standards to allow for diversity within an individual development. b. Ordinances should be written to define ‘family’ consistently with current demographics. This may require additional study to fully understand the greatest needs anticipated in the community over the next planning period. c. Setback requirements should reflect existing conditions and allow reasonable expansions and additions to homes. 2. The City will evaluate the housing stock for consistency with current and projected demographics. This includes understanding appropriate mix of bedrooms, unit types, etc., that match the changing needs of the City’s residents. The following examples may require additional study: a. Unit mix, such as studios, 1-bedrooms, 2-bedrooms, 3 and 3+ bedrooms. b. Private entry rental opportunities such as townhomes, row homes, etc., versus standard multi-family apartments and condominium development. 3. The City will continue to operate its Rental Licensing Program, which has proven to be highly effective in maintaining the City’s rental housing stock. 4. The City will continue to operate a robust code enforcement program that incorporates both complaint-based enforcement and proactive sweeps. The City will continue to engage residents and business owners to ensure code compliance and to provide information in a way that is understandable and clear. 5. The City will continue to operate its Vacant Building Program, which tracts and monitors vacant properties in the City, as well as ensuring adequate upkeep and maintenance. 6. The City will explore programs and policies that promote home ownership in the City. 7. The City will explore programs and policies that provide assistance with single-family housing rehabilitation and maintenance, including low and no-cost loans and grants, project consultation, and other resources. This may include partnerships with outside agencies as well as programs administered by the City. 8. The City will explore polices and ordinances, including incentives and standards, that encourage the construction of new affordable housing. 9. The City will explore partnerships that provide sources of financing and incentives to preserve existing multi-family housing, particularly ways to preserve naturally occurring affordable housing that maintains its affordability. 10. The City will explore programs and policies that encourage landlords to invest in their rental properties. 11. The City will consider creating a housing coordinator position to build relationships with existing landlords and tenants, administer programs, seek funding opportunities, and promote the City’s housing goals. 12. The City will consider adopting policies that promote further the goal of providing safe, secure, and stable housing for renters. This may include adopting ordinances and/or policies that protect the rights of renters. 13. The City will consider inclusionary housing policies that ensure that affordable housing is a component of new housing development when the market strengthens to the extent that it would not deter investment. a. For example, if market rents rise to levels that are affordable to those making 80% AMI then the City would consider adopting an inclusionary housing policy. 14. The City will consider adopting a public subsidy policy that gives greater consideration to projects that forward the City’s housing goals. This includes the option of TIF Housing Set-Aside funds or new TIF Districts that support mixed-income and affordable housing. The City will support grant applications to outside agencies to benefit projects that forward the City’s housing goals. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 9-139-12 CHAPTER 5: COMMUNITY IMAGE, ECONOMIC COMPETITIVENESS & STABILITY The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the goals and strategies identified in Chapter 2 of this Comprehensive Plan Update. 1. The City will work to create strategies and supporting resources to incorporate affordable commercial, retail and office space into new redevelopment areas. 2. The City will actively pursue a branding and marketing strategy that leverages the community’s diversity as a key asset from which new businesses can be developed. 3. To promote and support local businesses the City will explore the development of a local procurement policy. 4. The City will form a task force or steering committee to study local entrepreneurial needs, gaps and opportunities of residents. Study and research will focus on: a. Identification of barriers to growing or starting a business in the City. b. Review of existing ordinances and policies to ensure they support small, start-up and pop-up businesses. c. Understand what opportunities exist locally and regionally, and what strategies the City might employ to further support local entrepreneurs. 5. The City will explore the feasibility of a commercial land trust model that promotes perpetually affordable commercial space. 6. The City will review its existing business and industrial zoning district designations and revise and update, as necessary, language and policies to ensure regulations support and incentivize: a. Local businesses to stay and grow in the City b. New businesses to locate in the community c. A mix of land uses that reflect current market needs and desires 7. The City will explore opportunities to enhance partnerships with local secondary and post-secondary education institutions that support school-work opportunities, skills and job training, and matching local companies with young talent. 8. The City will partner with DEED and Hennepin County to offer entrepreneurial resource and support programs such as WomenVenture and Open to Business. 9. The City will create a Business Retention and Expansion Program to work directly with the businesses within the community to ensure that their needs are being met. 10. The City will amend its Business Subsidy Policy to prioritize the creation of livable and high wage jobs. 11. The City will create and fund a revolving loan/grant program to assist property and business owners with expansions, interior buildouts, equipment purchasing, and exterior enhancements. 12. The City will explore other economic development programs, including outside agencies, which would incentivize business expansion and attraction. 13. The City will explore job training and career pathways programs and policies that would benefit residents. 14. The City will explore options to connect the local workforce to employers. 15. The City will continue to support partnerships that promote workforce readiness and removing barriers for existing residents to access education and workforce training, such as the BrookLynk partnership with Brooklyn Park. 16. The City will explore partnerships and programs that promote financial literacy and wealth creation amongst residents. 17. The City will continue to explore ways to reduce racial disparities that exist as they relate the economic stability of its residents, including access to livable wage jobs, to home ownership opportunities, financial literacy and wealth creation, and job pathways training. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 9-159-14 CHAPTER 6: PARKS, TRAILS & OPEN SPACE (PTOS) The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the goals and strategies identified in Chapter 6 of this Comprehensive Plan Update. 1. The City will continue to prioritize the completion of the PTOS system within redevelopment areas and will work with developers to identify appropriate and reasonable opportunities to enhance and improve access to the system by all residents. 2. Redevelopment projects will be required to provide trail connections that align with the surrounding local and regional trail system that are existing or planned within this Plan. 3. Redevelopment projects will be required to plan for parks and open spaces consistent with this Plan, and the City will work with developers to identify and prioritize improvements to the PTOS system. 4. The City will continue to maintain and manage the existing parks, trails and open space plan consistent with past and current practices. Current management includes: a. Annual CIP budgeting and planning to support current park, trail, and open space function. b. Continue to support the City’s Community Activities, Recreation and Services (CARS) division through appropriate capital investments. c. Periodic survey of residents and stakeholders to understand appropriate and needed parks, trails, and open space programming within the system. d. Prepare and plan for system improvements that respond to the needs of the community. This includes improvements such as park system component conversions including transitioning baseball fields to multi-purpose fields. 5. Brooklyn Center will continue to support opportunities for community gatherings at each of its parks, including, but not limited to the summer markets, pavilion rentals, Brooklyn Center’s movie in the parks, and Central Park events that unite the community. 6. The City will continue to complete the sidewalk and trail network consistent with previous planning efforts. This plan acknowledges that trails and sidewalks are a critical component of the Park and Recreation system but are equally as important to the transportation system. CHAPTER 7: TRANSPORTATION & TRANSIT The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the goals and strategies identified in Chapter 2 of this Comprehensive Plan Update. 1. The City’s accessibility to the region, and within the region, is an important differentiator and asset to the community. The City will continue to prioritize roadways as an important part of the transportation network. 2. The City will continue to partner with Hennepin County and MnDOT on planned road reconstruction projects to ensure safety and accessibility of the road system within the City are prioritized. 3. Any roadway reconstruction or improvement will consider the incorporation of a stormwater assessment, and any plans should incorporate and implement the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Best Management Practices to improve stormwater quality, recharge local aquifers, and reuse and conserve stormwater where possible. 4. The City will continue to budget for regular maintenance of roadways approximately every five to eight years and include such plan within the City’s Capital Improvement Program. 5. Brooklyn Center will plan for completing the Regional Bicycle Transportation Network (RBTN) that is currently planned within the City to connect to other regional and sub- regional job centers. As redevelopment and reconstruction of roadways occurs RBTN segments or gaps will be constructed to help complete the system. 6. Many of the City’s residents use Transit, and many more could if service were improved in the City. Currently the City is divided into Transit Market II and Transit Market II, which provides varying levels of services. The following summary of considerations is provided: a. The City will work with Metro Transit over this planning period to evaluate the appropriate Transit Market areas for the City per the Metropolitan Council. i. The mapping completed for this Plan demonstrates that some of the residents that may benefit most from frequent and reliable transit may be underserved. ii. The City is developed with a similar urban grid pattern for the majority of its neighborhoods without much distinction. Therefore, it seems inaccurate to identify some areas as more typical “suburban” development. b. The City’s Future Land Use Plan has identified the ‘central spine’ for possible redevelopment in this planning period. The redevelopment pattern contemplated embraces the Transit Station and uses it as an organizing feature. IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 IMPLEMENTATION - DRAFT 03-21-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 9-179-16 CHAPTER 8: INFRASTRUCTURE & UTILITIES The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the goals and strategies identified in Chapter 2 of this Comprehensive Plan Update. 1. The City will continue to plan for water and sewer infrastructure improvements to occur concurrently with any planned roadway improvements and reconstruction projects. 2. The City prepared a full sanitary sewer plan and supportive modeling in conjunction with this Plan update. As redevelopment occurs, the sewer plan will be used to guide proper infrastructure improvements including sizing and capacity recommendations, timing and consideration for future phases of redevelopment. 3. The City prepared an update to its water plan and supportive modeling in conjunction with this Plan update. As redevelopment occurs the water plan will be used to guide proper/necessary infrastructure improvements. a. The water supply permit from the DNR will be updated once this Plan and Future Land Use Plan are adopted to reflect projected housing and employment forecasts contained in this Plan. 4. The LSWMP identifies several capital and administrative projects that are incorporated into this implementation plan by reference. The City will properly manage and schedule such improvements to be included within its CIP for on-going planning and action. 5. The City will continue to work with its regional partners, including the Metropolitan Council, on sewer and water infrastructure planning and development so that regional coordination is maintained throughout this planning period. 6. Consideration for how to incorporate sustainable and resilient infrastructure through new development will be addressed at the specific site redevelopment level. This will first be accomplished through the ordinance review, creation and update process and described within previous sections; and will then be implemented through site and redevelopment plan sets and engineering. a. The City’s Public Works Department and its staff will work collaboratively with the Community Development department to identify potential ordinance revisions that would support the development of an integrated green network that not only supports the PTOS system but the City’s infrastructure. APPENDIX: MISSISSIPPI RIVER CRITICAL CORRIDOR AREA PLAN The following list of Implementation Strategies is provided as a guide to implement the MRCCA Plan contained within Appendix A of this Plan. 1. The City will develop ordinances to support the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) requirements to regulate property contained within the MRCCA overlay designations. a. At a minimum the City will develop a shoreland ordinance for properties that abut the Mississippi River and will structure the ordinance to comply with MnDNR requirements. b. The City will work collaboratively with the MnDNR to establish appropriate setback and height standards based on specific parcel locations and potential redevelopment. i. The City may seek flexibility from the MnDNR’s standard requirements, particularly on sites identified for redevelopment. The City will work with the MnDNR to identify appropriate standards. c. The City will engage residents during the ordinance development to provide education about the MRCCA standard requirements and ordinance development process. i. The public engagement process will also solicit feedback regarding specific standards development include appropriate setbacks, height, coverage requirements, etc. APPENDIX A: Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Plan Comprehensive Plan 2040 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-3A-2 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 INTRODUCTION Overview of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Plan The state of Minnesota, pursuant to the Critical Areas Act of 1973 and Executive Orders in the 1970s, established the Minnesota River Corridor Critical Area Plan (MRCCA) to protect and preserve the natural, scenic, recreational, and transportation resources of Mississippi River as it travels through the Twin Cities. The MRCCA covers a 72-mile stretch of the Mississippi River through the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, comprising 54,000 acres of land in 30 local jurisdictions from Dayton in the north to Hastings in the south. The purpose of the MRCCA is to: • Protect and preserve a unique and valuable state and regional resource. • Prevent and mitigate irreversible damage to the resource. • Preserve and protect the river as an element in the national, state and regional transportation, sewer, water and recreational systems. • Protect and preserve biological and ecological functions of the corridor. Each city along the Mississippi River is required to prepare and adopt plans, capital improvement programs and special land planning regulations consistent with state standards and guidelines for the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. MRCCA regulations are implemented through local plans and ordinances and are required to be consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6106. These rules lay out the land planning and regulatory framework protecting MRCCA resources and came into effect on January 4, 2017, replacing Executive Order 79-19, which previously governed land use in the MRCCA. The rules require local governments to update their MRCCA plans (a chapter of the local comprehensive plan) and MRCCA ordinances for consistency with the rules. APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-5A-4 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 MRCCA in Brooklyn Center Generally, the boundaries of the MRCCA in Brooklyn Center extend approximately one-quarter mile or less back from City land bordering the Mississippi River. A majority of this land is used for single-family residential purposes or for public park land. Map A-1 illustrates the MRCCA boundaries for Brooklyn Center. Since the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, Brooklyn Center has not made any progress toward adopting rules and policies of a MRCCA Plan. As the start of the 2040 Comprehensive PLan Update was approach, the MnDNR was completing their updated rules. The City chose to postpone planning efforts in order to integrate goals and policies related to land use and protection of resources associated with the MRCCA. The City acknowledges the value in adopting rules and ordinances for the MRCCA and coordinating these efforts with local policies and implementation consistent with MnDNR’s direction. MRCCA DISTRICTS General Overview The Minnesota Rules define six districts within the MRCCA designation. These districts are characterized by the various natural and built features of the river corridor. Most standards and requirements outlined in the rules apply uniformly throughout the corridor. However, certain requirements such as structure setbacks from the ordinary high-water level (OHWL) and bluffs, building height limits, and the amount of open space required for development vary by district. There are two MRCCA districts present in Brooklyn Center: 1) River Neighborhoods, and 2) Separated from River. According to MR 6106.0100, Subp. 3 to Subp. 8. The descriptions and management purpose for each is district is as follows. Figure A-1 shows the two districts and the MRCCA boundary within the City. • CA-RN (River Neighborhood) DESCRIPTION: The river neighborhood district (CA-RN) is characterized by primarily residential neighborhoods that are riparian or readily visible from the river or that abut riparian parkland. The district includes parks and open space, limited commercial development, marinas, and related land uses. MANAGEMENT PURPOSE: The CA-RN district must be managed to maintain the character of the river corridor within the context of existing residential and related neighborhood development, and to protect and enhance habitat, parks and open space, public river corridor views, and scenic, natural, and historic areas. Minimizing erosion and the flow of untreated storm water into the river and enhancing habitat and shoreline vegetation are priorities in the district. The DNR Statement of Need and Reasonableness (SONAR) further outlines height limits for the CA-RN District. A 35-foot height limit is proposed for the predominantly residential “river neighborhood” district. The height limit is intended to allow a two-story single-family dwelling without breaking the top of the tree line. This height restriction is consistent with existing structure heights in residentially zoned neighborhoods and height restrictions in most of the local zoning standards that apply in these areas. APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-7A-6 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 • CA-SR (Separated from River) DESCRIPTION: The separated from river district (CA-SR) is characterized by its physical and visual distance from the Mississippi River. The district includes land separated from the river by distance, topography, development, or a transportation corridor. The land in this district is not readily visible from the Mississippi River. MANAGEMENT PURPOSE: The CA-SR district provides flexibility in managing development without negatively affecting the key resources and features of the river corridor. Minimizing negative impacts to primary conservation areas and minimizing erosion and flow of untreated storm water into the Mississippi River are priorities in the district. The DNR Statement of Need and Reasonableness (SONAR) further describes height restrictions for the CA-RN District. The “separated from river” district includes non- riparian land that is separated from the Mississippi River by distance, development, or transportation infrastructure. Because of this separation, underlying zoning standards govern height, with the stipulation that structure height must be compatible with the existing tree line, where present, and surrounding development. Map A-1. Brooklyn Center MRCCA District MRCCA with Future Land Use and Zoning APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-9A-8 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 MRCCA with Future Land Use and Zoning The existing planned land uses within the MRCCA districts are a mix of residential and public recreation/open space uses. The planned land uses guided a portion of existing low density residential (LDR) located within the River Neighborhood (CA-RN) for high density residential use. The strip of land is located south of the I-94 and Highway 252 split, and given the narrow depth of the existing lot configuration and presence of significant right-of-way due to I-94 the use of the property is limited and better suited for a high-density residential product. The proposed use would allow for a better site design and potential for relationship with the river. As an implementation step of this Plan, the City will fully evaluate its preferred dimensional requirements for the property for redevelopment and will work with the DNR on proper steps to incorporate flexibility within the MRCCA ordinance to address this particular area. With the exception of this area, the remining parcels within the City are guided for low density residential uses which are primarily developed with single-family uses. The City will work with property owners through the MRCCA ordinance preparation process to understand existing conditions of the property within the CA-RN district and identify any potential conflicts with the existing standards and how to address non-conforming uses within the district. Figure A-3. District Overlay on Zoning Map Figure A-2. District Overlay on Future Land Use Plan o o o o o o o o o o o oo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o oooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o LOCAL STREETINDEX ADMIRAL LANEADMIRAL PLACEALDRICH COURTALDRICH DRIVE N.AMY LANEAZELIA AVE. 4-B,C4-B1-F5-F1-E7-B 53RD AVE N 54TH AVE N 55TH AVE N 56TH AVE N 57TH AVE N 58TH AVE N 59TH AVE N 60TH AVE N 61ST AVE N 62ND AVE N 63RD AVE N 64TH AVE N 65TH AVE N 66TH AVE N 67TH AVE N 68TH AVE N 69TH AVE N 70TH AVE N 71ST AVE N 72ND AVE N 73RD AVE N W I L L O W L A N E R I V E R D A L E A V E N 2 0 0DALLAS A V E N 3 0 0W. R I V E R R O A D M T H 2 5 2 5 T H A V E N 6 0 0CAMDEN A V E N 7 0 0ALDRICH A V E 8 0 0BRYANT A V E N 9 0 0COLFAX A V E N 1 0 0 0DUPONT A V E N 1 1 0 0 E M E R S O N A V E N 1 2 0 0 F R E M O N T A V E N 1 3 0 0 G I R A R D A V E N 1 4 0 0 H U M B O L D T A V E N 1 5 0 0 I R V I N G A V E N 1 6 0 0 J A M E S A V E N 1 7 0 0 K N O X A V E N 1 8 0 0 L O G A N A V E N 1 9 0 0MORGAN A V E N 2 0 0 0 N E W T O N A V E N 2 1 0 0OLIVER A V E N 2 2 0 0 P E N N A V E N 2 3 0 0QUEEN A V E N 2 4 0 0RUSSELL A V E N 2 5 0 0SHERIDAN A V E N T H O M A S A V E N U P T O N A V E N 2 7 00 V I N C E N T A V E N 2 8 0 0 W A S H B U R N A V E N 2 900 X E R X E S A V E N 3 0 0 0 Y O R K A V E N 3100 Z E N I T H A V E N 3 2 0 0 A B B O T T A V E N 3300 B E A R D A V E N 3 4 0 0 C H O W E N AVE N 3500 D R E W A V E N 3 6 0 0 E W I N G A VE N 3700 F R A N C E A V E N 3 8 0 0GRIMES AVE N 400 0HALIFAX A V E N 4 1 0 0 I N D I A NA AVE N 4 2 0 0 J U N E A V E N 4 3 0 0 K Y L E AVE N 4 4 0 0 L E E A V E N 4 5 0 0 M AJOR AVE N 4 6 0 0 N O B L E A V E N 4 7 0 0 ORCHARD A V E N 4 8 0 0 P E R R Y A V E N 4 9 0 0 QUAIL A V E N 5 0 0 0 R E G E N T A V E N 5 1 0 0 SCOTT A V E N 5 2 0 0 T O L E D O A V E N 5 3 0 0 UN I T Y A V E N 5 4 0 0 V E R A C R U Z A V E N 5 5 0 0 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 A B C D E F G BOULDER LANEBROOKLYN BOULEVARDBROOKLYN DRIVEBROOKLYN PLACEBROOKVIEW DRIVEBURQUEST LANECAMDEN COURTCAMDEN DRIVECOMMODORE DRIVEDALLAS ROADDUSHARME DRIVEEARLE BROWN DRIVEEAST TWIN LAKE BLVD.ECKBERG DRIVEELEANOR LANEEMERSON LANEERICON DRIVEEWING LANEFRANCE PLACEFREEWAY BOULEVARDFREMONT PLACEGREAT VIEW AVE.GRIMES PLACEHALIFAX DRIVEHALIFAX PLACEHILLSVIEW ROADHOWE LANEHUMBOLDT PLACEIRVING LANEJAMES CIRCLEJANET LANEJOHN MARTIN DRIVEJOYCE LANEJUDY LANEKATHRENE DRIVELAKEBREEZE AVE.LAKE CURVE LANELAKESIDE AVE.LAKESIDE PLACELAKEVIEW AVE.LAWRENCE ROADLILAC DRIVEMARLIN DRIVEMUMFORD ROADNASH ROADNOBLE LANORTHPORT DRIVENORTHWAY DRIVEOAK STREETO'HENRY ROADOLIVER CIRCLEORCHARD LANEOSSEO ROAD 5300-5800PALMER LAKE CIRCLEPALMER LAKE DRIVEPAUL DRIVEPEARSON DRIVEPERRY COURT - EAST/WESTPERRY PLACEPOE ROADPONDS DRIVE N.QUAIL CIRCLE - EAST/WESTQUARLES ROAD SAILOR LANESHINGLE CREEK PARKWAYSHORES DRIVESUMMIT DRIVETHURBER ROADTWIN LAKE AVE.URBAN AVE.VIOLET AVE.WILLOW LANEWINCHESTER LANEWINGARD LANEWINGARD PLACEWOODBINE LANEXERXES PLACEYORK PLACE4TH STREET5TH STREET53RD PLACE58 1/2 AVE.59 1/2 AVE.63RD LANE67TH LANE68TH LANE69TH LANE70TH CIRCLE71ST CIRCLE72ND CIRCLE 3-A1-A,6-C3-D1-A5-D,E5-B3-G2-G4-C1-G7-C3,4-E5,6-B5-B3-A1-F5-D,E3-C4-B2-D,E2-F6-B2-B3-B4-B5-E2-A2-E1-E3-E3-B4-D,E3-B5-E3-B7-B4-B7-B6-B7-B3-C6-C,3-F3-B3-C,D3-C,D2-A,B4,5-C4-D6-B3-C,D1-F2-A5-C1-C1-C3-A4-B1-A1-A3-C1-A1-A2-C 5-C2E-4D4-B3,4-E2-C7-B1-C1-C1,3-G2-A,B1-A1-A1-B,C,F2-D 2-C5-G2-G5-C4-C4-B3-F2-D,F2-D,F2-D1-A1-A1-A BELLVUE LA G-5 RIVERDALE ROAD 1-G2-GRIVERWOOD LANE ISL ANDS OF PEACE PA RK (AN OKA C OUNTY ) WEST FIRESTATION HENNEPIN CO.LIBRARY &GOVERNMENT SERVICE CENTER P A L M E R L A K E P R E S E R V E A R E A U .S . P O S T O F F IC E WATERTOWERNo. 2 EVERGREENPARK LAKESIDE PARK(TRIANGLE PARK) EVERGREENELEMENTARYSCHOOL R IV E R DA L E P A R KEAST PALMERLAKE PARK WEST PALMERLAKE PARK PALMER LAKEELEMENTARYSCHOOL WILLOW LANE PARK ARB ORE T UM ORCHARD LANE PARK ODYSSEYCHARTERSCHOOL MOUND CEMETERY FREEWAYPARK GARDEN CITYELEMENTARYSCHOOL MARLINPARK WATERTOWERNo.1 EAST FIRESTATION FIREHOUSEPARKBROOKLYN CENTER HIGH SCHOOL EARLEBROWN ELEMENTARYSCHOOL B E LL VU E P A RK CENTENNIALPARK CityHall CENTERBROOKGOLFCOURSE WATERTOWERNo. 3 KYLAWNPARK NORTHPORTELEMENTARYSCHOOL NORTHPORTPARK HAPPY HOLLOWPARK EARLE BROWNHERITAGE CENTER GRANDVIEWPARK LIONSPARK N O R T H M I S S I S S I P P I R E G I O N A L P A R K CAHLANDERPARK WANGSTADPARK POLICESTATION TWIN LAKEPARK GARDENCITYPARK PALMER LAKEPARK CommunityCenter AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE - B AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE - A A I RP O R T S A F ET Y HO R I Z ON T A L Z O NE - C R3 R3 R3 C1PUD/C2 R3 R5 C1 R4 C1 PUD/C2 PUD/C2 R4 C2 R5 C2 R3R5PUD/R1 R4 R4 R4 R6 R3 R5 PUD/C2 PUD/R3 R5 C2 C2R3 R5 R5 R3C2 C2 C1A C1A C2 C2 C2 C2 I1 PUD/I1 I1 PUD/I1 PUD/I1 I1 R5PUD/I1 R3 PUD/I1 R5I1 O1 R3 I1 I1C1 I1 O1 I1 R5I1 I1 PUD/I1 C2 PUD/C1A C1 C1PUD/C2 C2R4 C2 R5 C1 R5 C1 C1/R5/R4 PUD/C2C2R3 R3 C2C1PUD-MIXEDR5/R6 O1 R5 I2 O2I2 I2 R4 PUD/I1I2I2 R4R4 I2 I2I2 C1R4 I2 I2 PUD/R1O1 PUD-MIXEDR2/R3 R5 R5 R5 C2 R7 C1A R4R4 R5 C2 C1 R4 R3 R4 O1 R4 R4C1 C1 R4R4PUD/C2C2 R4C2 C2 R3 C2 R4 C2C2C2 PUD/C2 R5C1AR5 R3 C1 R4C1 C1 C2 C1 C2 C2 R3 C2 C1 O1 C2 R5 C2C1 R7 O1R5 C2 C2 PUDMIXEDC2 C1A C2 C1A C2 R5PUD/R1 PUD/C1 PUD/C2 R3 PUD/R1 O1 C2 C2 PUD/C2 PUD/C2 PUD/C2 PUD/C2PUD/C2 R5 R5 R3 PUD-MIXEDC2/I-1 R4 CRYSTALAIRPORT S H I N G L E C R E E K CREEK PALMER LAKE MIDDLE TWIN LAKE UPPER TWIN LAKE M I S S I S S I P P I R I V E R M I S S I S S I P P I R I V E R S H I N G L E RYAN LAKE SHINGLE CREEK 63RD AVE B R O O KLY N B L V D B R O O K L Y N BLV D B R OO K L YN DR OHENRY RD MUMFORDRD 64THAVE 65THAVE NASH RD 60TH AVE 59TH AVE S HIN GL E CR E E K PK WY J O H N M A R TI N D R H A L I F A X A V E 55TH AVE SUMMITDR LILAC DR 69THAVE 56THAVE S HORESDR Z E N I T H A V E SHINGLECREEKPKWY FR ANCE A V E XE RX ES A V E 65TH AVE D R E W A V E 67TH AVE 53RD AVE NORTHWAYDR 69THAVE 70TH AVE 53RD AVE 66THAVE IR VI N G P L 73RD AVE 58TH AVE 68THAVE H IGHWAY 100 T O L E D O A V E INTERSTATE694 65TH AVE KNOX A V E THURBERRD 67TH AVE 67TH AVE WINGARD PL 58TH PL 53RD AVE U N IT Y A V E WILLO W L N 58TH AVE 69THAVE 52NDAVE 55TH AVE UPTON A V EYORK A V E SAIL O R LN ZENITH AVE 71STAVE 67THLNBRO O KLYN BLVD 50TH AVE 67THLN N O R T H P O R T D R 56TH AVE F R A N C E A V E N O B L E A V E OLIVERCIR 71STAVE FR E M O N T P L 68TH AVE ALDRICHCT D R E W A V E C H O W E N A V E PAULDR G RIM E S P L 68TH LN P ER R Y PL S C O T T A V E LILACDR 57TH AVE 56TH AVE FR A N C E D R 55THAVE B R Y A N T A V E 57THAVE 66TH AVEE W I N G A V E 68THAVE ALDRICH AVE COUNTYROAD10 E M E R S O N A V E 56THAVE C O L F A X A V E F R E M O N T A V E HOWE LN ECKBERG DR 62ND AVE 67THLN HIGHWA Y 1 00 LILAC DR G IR A R D A V E B R O O K LY N BLV D F R E MONTAVE 70TH AVE WINCHESTER LN 71STAVE 68THLN 70TH AVE 65THAVE 62NDAVE B E A R D A V E PALMERLAKE CIR FRONTAGERD MORGAN AVE WOODBINE LN 68THLN 57THAVE 68THAVE 72ND AVE COMMODORE DR 64TH AVE 61ST AVE 61ST AVE 69THLN S C O T T A V E 59 1/2AVE ELEANOR LN 70TH AVE 68THAVE 70TH AVE C A M D E N A V E L E E A V E V I N C E N T A V E 73RD AVE 51ST AVE VIOLETAVE D R E W A V E 67THAVE 65TH AVE 64TH AVE S C O T T A V E HUMBOLDTPL URBAN AVE 72ND AVE HALIFAXDR 58 1/2AVE 71STAVE 72ND AVE WOODBINE LN 72NDAVE GIRARD AVE 61ST AVE 59TH AVE 56TH AVE 54TH AVE 61ST AVE O R C H A R D A V E 49THAVE ADMIRALLN 60THAVE 50TH AVE VERA C R U Z A V E EMERSON AVE 70TH AVE 66THAVE 71STAVE 56THAVE 72ND AVE 70THAVE 51STAVE 72NDAVENEWTON A V E X E R X E S A V E 47TH AVE 53RD PL L O G A N A V E FRANCE PL A B B O T T A V E A L D R IC H A V E Z E N I T H A V E I R V I N G A V E L A K E S I D E P L T W I N L A K E A V E BROOKVIEW DR A L D R I C H A V E 70TH AVE INTERSTATE694 G R I M E S A V E GRIM E S A V E A B B O T T A V E N O RTHP O R T D R 67TH AVE BROOKLYN PL 70THCIR M A J O R A V E LAKESIDEAVE D R E W A V E PEN N A V E D R E W A V E R EG E N T A V E 70TH AVE ERICON DR M O R G A N A VE LAKE BREEZE AVE C A M D E N A V E 64THAVE Q UA I L A V E 71ST CIR W IN GARDLN L IL AC DR COLFAX AV E I N D I A N A A V E 55THAVE X E R X E S PL J A M E S A V E 68TH AVE 67TH AVE N O B L E L N 48TH AVE Q U A I L A V E T O L E D O A V E E W I N G A V E O R C H A R D LN P E R R Y A V E R E G E N T A V E S C O T T A V E BR Y AN T AV E J A M E S A V E K AT HRENEDR H U M B O L D T A V E N O B L E A V E K Y L E A V E C H O W E N A V E C A M D E N A V E I N T E R STATE 94 M A J O R A V E B R Y A N T A V E M A J O R A V E NEWTON AV E D R E W A V E WINCHESTER LN E W I N G A V E C O L F A X A V E M A J O R A V E G R E A T V I E W A V E O R C H A R D A V E C A M D E N A V E I N D I A N A A V E 72NDCIR LY N D A LE AVE 5 T H S T REGENT AVE R I V E R WOODLN E W I N G A V E C A M DEN D R 54THAVE R I V E R D A L E R D NORTHWAY DR 57TH AVE POERD P E N N AVE BURQUEST LN BOULDER LN LILAC DR 63RD LN G I R A R D AVE G I R A R D A V E JUDY LN FRANCEPL L EE AV E WOODBINE LN 72ND AVE BASS LAKERD IRVING LN AMY LN I N D IA N A A V E J UN E AV E P E R R Y A V E Q U AIL A V E R E G E N T A V E L IL AC D R LAWRENCERD MORGAN A V E J A MES AVE JANETLN 67THAVE JOYCELN D R E W A VE 62NDAVE QUARLESRD 72NDAVE 66TH AVE WOODBINELN B E A R D A V E F R A N C E A V E PA L M ER LA KE D R FREEWAYBLVD L I LACDR UNITY AV E U N I T Y A V E N O B L E A V E LILAC DR HUMBOLDT A V E XERXES AVE K Y L E A V E V I N C E N T A V E INTERSTATE94 W A S H B U R N A V E A B B O T T A V E Q U E E N A V E Q U E E N A V E B E A R D AVE B E A R D A V E 71ST AVE G R I M E S A V E G R I M E S A V E H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 H IG H W A Y 2 5 2 T W I N L A K E BLVD TWI N LA K E BLV D TOLEDO AVE 66TH AVE N O B L E A V E I N T ER S T A TE 9 4 C A M D E N A V E C A M D E N A V E H A L I F A X A V E FRANCE AVE L O G A N A V E X E R X E S A V E X E R X E S A V E XE RX ES A VE X E R X E S A V E O L I VER A V E B R YANT AVE I N DI A N A A V E I N DIA N A A V E J U N E A V E WILLOWLN ADMIRALLN D U P O N T A V E H U M B O L D T A V E C O L F A X A V E C O L F A X A V E F R A N C E A V E FREMO N T A V E L A K E V I E W A V E E W I N G AVE E W IN G AV E B R O O K L Y N BLV D L N E W I N G A V E HA L I F AX P L A Z E L I A A VE M A J O R A V E W E S T RI V E R R D W E S T R I V E R RD P E R R Y A V E P E A R S ON D R A D M I R A L P L YORKPL O L I V E R A V E PERRY CT HU M B O L D T A V E Q U AILCIR R U S S E L L A V E E M ERSO N A V E P E R R Y A V E B R Y A N T A V E BR Y A N T A V E L Y N D A L E AVE J A M E S C I R JAMESCIR PONDSD R PONDS DR B EA R D AVE L E E AVE I R V I N G A V E IRVING AV ELAKE C U R V E L N K N O X A V E A L D R I C H A V E ALDRICH DR SHINGLE CREEK CROSSING INTERSTATE 94 LI LAC DR O R CH ARD AVE M A R LIN D R EARLE BROWN DR EARLEBROWNDR E M E R S O N A V E 51ST AVE Q U AIL A V E PARKWAY CIR PARKWAY CIR BELLVUE LN 66TH AVE 62ND AVE OAK ST 4 T H ST EMER S O N A V E F R E M O N T AVE G I R A R D A V EHUMBOLDTAVE D U P O N T A V E D U P ONT AVE L O G A N A V E KNO X A V E J A M E S A V E Brooklyn Center Zoning Map 0 0.5 10.25 Miles This Zoning Map reflects council-approved zoning changes up to its effective date of September 5, 2015. The zoning designations shown onthis map must be interpreted by the City's Zoning Code and policies. These zoning designations are subject to changeas part of the City's ongoing planning process. / ooo Airport Safety Zones (refer to Minn. Rules 8800.2400) Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Boundary Line Private Roads ZONING DISTRICTS R1 One Family Residence R2 Two Family Residence R3 Multiple Family Residence R4 Multiple Family Residence R5 Multiple Family Residence R6 Multiple Family Residence R7 Multiple Family Residence C1 Service/Office C1A Sevice/Office C2 Commerce I-1 Industrial Park I-2 General Industry O1 Public Open Space O2 Public & Private Open Space C1/R5/R4 Office/Service & MultipleFamily Residence PUD/R1 Planned UnitDevelopment/One Family Res. PUD/R3 Planned UnitDevelopment/Multi-Family PUD/C1 Planned UnitDevelopment/Office-Service PUD/C1A Planned UnitDevelopment/Office-Service PUD/C2 Planned UnitDevelopment/Commerce PUD/I1 Planned UnitDevelopment/Industrial Park PUD-MIXED Central Commerce Overlay District ZONING DISTRICT NOTESALL DISTRICT BOUNDARIES EXTEND TO THE CENTERLINE OF STREETS 842846859816820856856 100 YEAR FLOOD ELEVATIONS AT SELECTED LOCATIONS WATERWAY LOCATION ELEVATION (FT. NGVD) SHINGLE CREEK MISSISSIPPI RIVER TWIN LAKESRYAN LAKE AT 53RD AVE N ..........................AT 69TH AVE N ...........................AT BROOKLYN BLVD .................AT 53RD AVE N ..........................AT 73RD AVE N ..........................SHORELINE ................................SHORELINE ................................ NOTE: SEE FEMA/FIA FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY DATED SEPT. 2004 AND FLOODWAY MAPS AND FIRM MAPS DATED SEPT 2004 FOR DETAILED INFORMATION ON FLOODWAY LIMITS AND PROFILES I-1 - INDUSTRIAL PARKI-2 - GENERAL INDUSTRY INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIALR1 - ONE FAMILY RESIDENCE (One Family Dwellings)R2 - TWO FAMILY RESIDENCE (One and Two-Family Dwellings)R3 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (Townhouse/Garden Apts./CondosR4 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (1-1/2 & 2-Story Dwellings)R5 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (2-1/2 & 3 Story Dwellings)R6 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (4 or 5 Story Dwellings)R7 - MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE (6+ Story Dwellings) COMMERCIALC1 - SERVICE / OFFICE (Min. 1-ac. lots/3-story max.)C1A - SERVICE / OFFICE (Min. 1-ac. lots/No Height Limitations)C2 - COMMERCE OPEN SPACEO1 - PUBLIC OPEN SPACE O2 - PUBLIC AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTThe underlying zoning is designated afterthe "PUD/___" (e.g. "PUD/C2" equalsPlanned Unit Development/Commerce) (Refer to City Code Sect. 35-2240 for allowable uses and prohibited uses) CC - CENTRAL COMMERCE OVERLAY This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records,information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is tobe used for reference purposes only. The City does not warrant that the Geographic Information System (GIS) Data used to preparethis map is error free, and the City does not represent that the GIS Data can be used for navigational, tracking or any other purposerequiring exacting measurement of distance or direction or precision in the depiction of geographic features. If errors or discrepanciesare found please contact (763) 569-3335. The preceding disclaimer is provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §466.03, Subd. 21 (2013),and the user of this map acknowledges that the City shall not be liable for any damages, and expressly waives all claims, and agrees todefend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City from any and all claims brought by User, its employees or agents, or third parties whicharise out of the user's access or use of data provided. Document Path: L:\Users\ComDev\Zoning\Zoning Map 2015.mxd Source: City of Brooklyn Center Note: the MRCCA boundary is incidcated by the green and black boundary line shown in the legend. APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-11A-10 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 Table A-1. Category Comparisons MRCCA District Future Land Use Map Categories Existing Land Uses CA-RN River Neighborhood District • Low Density Residential • Single Family Residential • Park / Open Space CA-SR Separated from River District • Low Density Residential • Medium Density Residential • Right of Way • Single Family Residential • Medium Density Residential • Park, Recreational or Preserve • Right of way District Policies • Guide land use and development and redevelopment activities consistent with the management purpose of each district. District Implementation Actions • Adopt a new MRCCA ordinance overlay district compliant with the goals and policies of the MRCCA plan, and with Minnesota Rules, part 6106.0070, Subp. 5 - Content of Ordinances; and work with the Minnesota DNR on flexibility with the ordinance as noted in previous sections of this Plan. • Update zoning map to reflect new MRCCA districts. • Ensure that information on the new MRCCA districts and zoning requirements is readily available to property owners to help them understand which ordinance requirements - such as setbacks and height requirements - apply to their property for project planning and permitting. • Allow flexibility for OHWL setback requirements where existing development encroaches prior to adoption of MRCCA ordinances and overlay zoning implementation. • Work with the MnDNR on height standards to determine appropriate height restrictions, particularly on redevelopment areas with existing site constraints. PRIMARY CONSERVATION AREAS (PCAS) General Overview As the DNR’s Statement of Needs and Reasonableness defines it, the term “primary conservation areas” (PCAs) addresses the key natural and cultural resources and features managed by MRCCA rules. These features are given priority consideration for protection with regard to proposed land development, subdivision, and related activity. PCAs include shore impact zones (SIZ), bluff impact zones (BIZ), floodplains, wetlands, gorges, areas of confluence with tributaries, natural drainage routes, unstable soils and bedrock, native plant communities, cultural and historic properties, significant existing vegetative stands, tree canopies and “other resources” identified in local government MRCCA plans. Shore Impact Zone Shore impact zones (SIZs) apply to the Mississippi and all of its backwaters, as well as to its four key tributaries, including the Crow, Rum, Minnesota, and Vermillion rivers. They include land along the river’s edge deemed to be environmentally sensitive and in need of special protection from development and vegetation removal. The shore impact zone (SIZ) is a “buffer” area between the water’s edge and the area where development is permitted (see Figure A-4) and is the focus of many of the MRCCA rule standards for land alteration and vegetation management. Defined boundaries for the shore impact zone (SIZ) are derived from the state shoreland rules. Minn. R. 6120.2500, subp. 14.c. (2015). The depth of the SIZ on these rivers varies by district. See Figure A-5 which illustrates the SIZs in Brooklyn Center. Figure A-4. Shoreland Impact Diagram APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-13A-12 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 Figure A-5. Shoreland Impact Zone Map Brooklyn Center’s zoning map delineates the boundary of the MRCCA, however, there is no additional shore impact zone or shoreland regulations currently identified or included in the City’s zoning ordinance. Recognizing a shore impact zone will highlight the importance of protecting the river shore from development and vegetative removal, maintaining a buffer area between the river banks and urban development. Adding ordinance requirements for the shore impact zone will be included by the City in the upcoming zoning ordinance update. Floodplains & Wetlands There are no known wetlands identified within he MRCCA boundary in Brooklyn Center. A small corridor of 100-year floodplain is mapped in several areas and contained along a narrow strip adjacent to the river’s edge. See Figure A-6. Figure A-6. MRCCA Floodplains & Wetlands Map APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-15A-14 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 Natural Drainage Ways Natural drainage ways are linear depressions that collect and drain surface water. They may be permanently or temporarily inundated. There are no natural drainageways that flow toward the Mississippi River within City boundaries. Interstate 94 acts as a significant barrier to natural drainage in this area. See Figure A-7. Figure A-7. MRCCA Natural Drainage Ways Bluffs & Bluff Impact Zones According to Minnesota Rules (Minn. R. 6106.0050, subp. 10) a “bluff” is defined as a natural topographic feature having either of the following characteristics: 1. A slope that rises at least 25 feet above the ordinary high water level or toe of the slope to the top of the slope; and the grade of the slope from the ordinary high water level or toe of the slope to the top of the slope averages 18 percent or greater, measured over a horizontal distance of 25 feet; or 2. A natural escarpment or cliff with a slope that rises at least 10 feet above the ordinary high water level or toe of the slope to the top of the slope with an average slope of 100% or greater. The development and land use standards tied to the bluff impact zone (BIZ) in the MRCCA rules are more restrictive than those in the shoreland rules. They prohibit the placement of structures, land alteration, vegetation clearing, stormwater management facilities, and most construction activities in the BIZ. However, some limited exceptions to these restrictions, such as for public utilities and recreational access to the river, are allowed. This greater degree of protection is necessitated by development pressures on bluffs throughout the river corridor and the susceptibility of these features to erosion and slope failure. Brooklyn Center has several small areas of BIZ within the MRCCA boundary along the river. See Figure A-8 which illustrates the BIZ within the City. Figure A-8. MRCCA BIZ Map APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-17A-16 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 Native Plant Communities & Significant Existing Vegetative Stands Native plant communities are There are no DNR native plant communities identified within Brooklyn Center. However, significant stand of vegetation within the MRCCA are mapped in Figure A-9. These stand are generally located right along the edge of the river bank and contribute ecological and scenic value to the MRCCA. Figure A-9. MRCCA Native Plant Communities & Vegetation Map Cultural & Historic Properties There are no known cultural or historic properties with the MRCCA in Brooklyn Center. Gorges (if applicable) Brooklyn Center is not located within the MRCCA associated with the Mississippi gorge. Unstable Soils & Bedrock The stability of soil can be attributed to the mix of sand, gravel, silts, clay, water, air and other attributes that contribute to how susceptible the soil is to frost action, high saturation, ponding, and high shrink-swell rates. Characteristics such as steep slopes and low soil strength also contribute to unstable soils. Figure A-10 illustrates areas in Brooklyn Center’s MRCCA that have higher erosion susceptibility. Unstable soils is not a significant concern in the Brooklyn Center portion of the MRCCA. In the last 10 years, efforts were completed to stabilize the riverbank in one location experiencing some erosion. This location was at private residential property along Willow Lane near 66th Avenue. The residential and park land uses in this area has generally remained unchanged between the river and interstate, limiting the likelihood of increased erosion. The City – in partnership with other agencies – continues to monitor locations of potential erosion along the riverbanks. Figure A-10. MRCCA Soil Erosion Susceptibility Map APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-19A-18 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 PCA Policies • Protect PCAs (shore impact zones (SIZ), bluff impact zones (BIZ), floodplains, wetlands, natural drainage routes, unstable soils and bedrock, native plant communities, significant existing vegetative stands) and minimize impact to PCAs from public and private development and land use activities (landscape maintenance, river use, walking/ hiking, etc.). • Support mitigation of impacts to PCAs through, subdivisions/PUDs, variances, CUPs, and other permits. • Make restoration of removed Native Plant Communities and natural vegetation in riparian areas a high priority during development. • Support alternative design standards that protect the LGU’s identified PCAs, such as conservation design, transfer of development density, or other zoning and site design techniques that achieve better protections or restoration of primary conservation areas. • Make permanent protection measures (such as public acquisition, conservation easement, deed restrictions, etc.) that protect PCAs a high priority. PCA Implementation Actions • Ensure that information on the location of PCAs is readily available to property owners to understand how PCA-relevant ordinance requirements, such as vegetation management and land alteration permits, apply to their property for project planning and permitting. • Establish procedures and criteria for processing applications with potential impacts to PCAs, including: o Identifying the information that must be submitted and how it will be evaluated, o determining appropriate mitigation procedures/methods for variances and CUPs, o establishing evaluation criteria for protecting PCAs when a development site contains multiple types of PCAs and the total area of PCAs exceed the required set aside percentages. • Developing administrative procedures for integrating DNR and local permitting of riprap, walls and other hard armoring. (Note: Application procedures are a required element of MRCCA ordinance review and approval.) PUBLIC RIVER CORRIDOR VIEWS (PRCVS) General Overview The MRCCA describes public river corridor views (PRCVs) as views toward the river from public parkland, historic properties, and public overlooks. Also included are views toward the bluffs from the ordinary high-water level (OHWL) of the opposite shore, as seen during the summer months. PRCVs are valuable to the MRCCA as they contribute to the aesthetic and scenic value of the river corridor. Views Toward River from Public Places As defined by the DNR’s Statement of Needs and Reasonableness (SONAR), the term “public river corridor views” was developed to assist local governments and other stakeholders to identify and protect scenic resources through their planning processes. It recognizes that many of the most highly valued views within the river corridor are “views toward the river from public parkland, historic properties, and public overlooks,” as well as views towards bluffs from the opposite shore (a subset of the “readily visible” definition below). The definition is intended to provide local governments with an opportunity to identify specific views deemed important to that community, and to protect such views through the development review process. Running parallel to the river, Interstate 94 and Highway 252 form a barrier between the river and most of the community of Brooklyn Park. East of the arterials is a narrow corridor of land which is most all in single-family residential land use with scattered properties of medium- density development. Other land use in this area is park, open space and trails. Public views of the river are really only seen from the park and open space land along Lyndale Avenue between 53rd Avenue and 57th Avenue and north within the North Mississippi Regional Park (managed by Three Rivers Park District).The regional park is located between 57th Avenue and the I-694 crossing and includes a fishing pier, parking, and picnic area. The Mississippi River Trail (MRT) runs through the park and is managed in this stretch by Three Rivers Park District. Heavy vegetation blocks much of the river views in leafy seasons, opening up more in the winter months. Breaks in the vegetation offer peaks at the river along the trail corridor. As part of the process for this MRCCA Plan, the City has identified 4 locations with significant public views of the river. All are located along the river’s edge between 53rd and the I-694 bridge. Scattered interrupted views are present along a portion of Lyndale Avenue and the MRT trail corridor. Figure A-11 maps the locations of these views. As part of the implementation process, the City will engage the public to identify additional PRCVs, if any, and prioritize the views for protection and/or improvement. APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-21A-20 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 BR O O K L Y N C E N T E R FR I D L E Y No r t h M i s s i s s i p p i R e g i o n a l P a r k - F i s h i n g P i e r No r t h M i s s i s s i p p i R e g i o n a l P a r k - E n t r a n c e & T r a i l h e a d No r t h M i s s i s s i p p i R e g i o n a l P a r k - P i c n i c A r e a Fr o m F i s h i n g P i e r Fro m F i s h i n g P i e r Fr o m F i s h i n g P i e r Pi e r a t s h o r e Ri v e r v i e w s t h r o u g h t r e e s In t e r m i t t e n t v i e w s o f r i v e r t h r o u g h tr e e s a l o n g t r a i l c o r r i d o r M i s s i s s i p p i R i v e r Vi e w a c r o s s t o F r i d l e y Vi e w s o u t h Vi e w n o r t h PU B L I C V I E W S O F T H E M I S S I S S I P P I R I V E R W I T H I N T H E M R C C A I N B R O O K L Y N C E N T E R 1 4 3 1 4 3 2a 2b 2c 2a 2b 2 c Figure A-11. Public Views of River Map Values of River Views Figure A-11 depicts key valued views of the river from public land. More information about each view location is listed below. 1. The photo is taken at the terminus of the park drive in North Mississippi REgional Park where a small parking lot provides ample parking for visitors to the site. From the parking lot, there are open views of the river and fishing pier at water level. This area benefits from some tree clearing for the parking lot. Proper maintenance of this site will preserve the strong scenic characteristics of this site. However, if poorly maintained, litter and shoreline pollution could negatively impact this view. 2. Views from the end of the fishing pier bring the visitor out over the river, providing a unique and valuable location to observe a secnic naturalized corridor of a major river in an urban setting. Very little urban development is visible from this location except for the bridge crossing of I-694. The crossing is a valuable view to remind visitors of the relationship between modern development and natural systems. The location also provides an accessible retreat to observe and interact with those natural systems and features. Poor maintenance of the fishing pier would negatively impact the open water views and experience of the fishing pier. 3. The location of the view is a picnic area within the North Mississippi Regional Park that sits higher than the water level of the river. Views are framed by large trees. Some tree removal may open the views more visible water, however, the trees also provide the natural vegetatted characteristic of the river corridor and provides shade, shelter, and enclosure to the picnic area. 4. The overlook is located at the trailhead of the MRT and entrance to the park drive of the North Mississippi Regional Park. Large trees are cleared between the overlook and river to provide wide vistas of the water. Proper vegetative management will preserve this open view. APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-23A-22 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 Views Toward Bluffs from River As defined by the DNR’s Statement of Needs and Reasonableness (SONAR), the term “readily visible” was developed to create a performance-based standard to clarify visual standards and replace the outdated and vague term “visual intrusion” from Executive Order 79-19. This clarification was requested by local governments and other stakeholders. The term refers to development that is easily seen from the ordinary high water level at the opposite shore of the Mississippi River. Proposed Minn. R. 6106.0050, subp. 60. This term is used throughout the proposed MRCCA rules, and the definition describes an appropriate level of visibility for structures from a specified vantage point and during specified conditions. The definition is not used to prohibit development, but to ensure that visual resources are considered in development review by local governments. Readily visible views of bluffs in Brooklyn Center are limited to non-existent. Topography change is gradual in this area of the river corridor and any bluffs have been interrupted by development of the interstate and other infrastructure. Roughly north of 57th Avenue, Durnham Island sits in the middle of the Mississippi between the shores of Brooklyn Center and Fridley. Accessible only by boat, the island is part of Anoka County’s Riverfront Regional Park and Islands of Peace Park and therefor has no development. Due to its size, the island nearly entirely blocks views between the two communities of Brooklyn Center and Fridley, instead providing natural views from each community of the island. South of 57th Avenue, Brooklyn Center is directly across from the Riverfront Regional Park in Fridley. Similar vegetation lines the river bank on the Fridley side providing some focused and occasional views of the natural riverfront in Brooklyn Center. PRCV Policies • Protect and minimize impacts to PRCVs from public and private development activities. • Protect and minimize impacts to PRCVs from public and private vegetation management activities. • Protect PRCVs located within the community and identified by other communities (adjacent or across the river). PRCV Implementation Actions • Conduct community engagement to confirm and identify public river view locations. • Ensure that information on the location of PRCVs is readily available to property owners to understand how PRCV-relevant ordinance requirements, such as vegetation management and land alteration permits, apply to their property for project planning and permitting. • Establish procedures for processing applications with potential impacts to PRCVs, including: o identifying the information that must be submitted and how it will be evaluated, o developing visual analysis approach for CUPs for additional height in the RTC and UM districts (if applicable), as well as for proposed PUDs and variances, and o determining appropriate mitigation procedures/methods for variances and CUPs. • Actively communicate with other communities to protect views other communities have identified in your community that are valuable, and vice versa. (Note: Application procedures will be a required element of MRCCA ordinance review and approval.) APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-25A-24 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 PRIORITIES FOR RESTORATION General Overview Natural vegetation is critical to the health of the ecosystem along the Mississippi River corridor, providing important habitat for area wildlife and natural function of plant and waterway systems. Areas of high priority for restoration of natural vegetation are identified in this plan. These areas were determined based on identifying existing significant stands of vegetation, areas of erosion, and areas of needed stabilization. MRCCA requires communities identify areas that are priorities for restoration due to poor quality natural vegetation or bank erosion issues. Much of the river bank in Brooklyn Center is vegetated open space and park or vegetated residential land. There are no identified locations for restoration at this time. If development or redevelopment occurs within MRCCA, protection of existing vegetation or restoration will be required in accordance with MRCCA ordinance requirements. Mapping for Brooklyn Center was completed by MnDNR and Metropolitan Council. See Figure A-12. Figure A-12. Priorities for Restoration Map Restoration Policies • Protect native and existing vegetation during the development process and require restoration if any is removed by development. Priorities for restoration shall include stabilization of erodible soils, riparian buffers and bluffs or steep slopes visible from the river. • Seek opportunities to restore vegetation to protect and enhance PRCVs identified in this plan. • Seek opportunities to restore vegetation in restoration priority areas identified in this plan through the CUP, variance, vegetation permit and subdivision/PUD processes. • Sustain and enhance ecological functions (habitat value) during vegetation restorations. • Evaluate proposed development sites for erosion prevention and bank and slope stabilization issues and require restoration as part of the development process. Restoration Implementation Actions • Ensure that information on the location of natural vegetation restoration priorities is readily available to property owners to understand how relevant ordinance requirements apply to their property for project planning and permitting. • Establish a vegetation permitting process that includes permit review procedures to ensure consideration of restoration priorities identified in this plan in permit issuance, as well as standard conditions requiring vegetation restoration for those priority areas. (Note: A vegetation permitting process is a required element of MRCCA ordinance review and approval.) • Establish process for evaluating priorities for natural vegetation restoration, erosion prevention and bank and slope stabilization, or other restoration priorities identified in this plan in CUP, variances and subdivision/PUD processes. (Note: A process for evaluating priorities is a required element of MRCCA ordinance review and approval.) APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-27A-26 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 SURFACE WATER USES Brooklyn Center has little surface water use in the MRCCA other than recreational motorboats and paddle craft such as canoes and kayaks. There are no public boat launches or marinas in Brooklyn Center. There is a public boat launch across the river in Fridley, just south of the I-694 crossing and part of Anoka County’s Riverfront Regional Park. A paddle share location is also located just south of Brooklyn Center in the North Mississippi Regional Park managed by the Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board. There is no barge traffic in this part of the Mississippi River corridor. There are no present conflicts or negative impacts to surface water use in Brooklyn Center. No additional policies or implementations actions are applicable for surface water use for MRCCA in the Brooklyn Center. The City is not regulating and does not plan to regulate surface water use under Minnesota Statute 86B. WATER-ORIENTED USES General Overview Water-oriented uses are limited within Brooklyn Center. Most of the land adjacent to the river is single-family residential land use, and many properties have docks for boating access. Other land use is public park and open space. One location with water-oriented use is in the North Mississippi Regional Park (Three Rivers Park District) where a fishing pier is located and picnic area overlooks the river; there is no boat access at this location. There are no proposed new water-oriented uses for the City in the 2040 planning period. Water-oriented Policies • Acknowledge existing and future water-oriented uses and provide for their protection. The only use in Brooklyn Center is the fishing pier within the North Mississippi Regional Park managed by Three Rivers Parks District. • Minimize potential conflict of water-oriented uses with other land uses. Water-oriented Implementation Actions • Provide for water-oriented uses in the ordinance. OPEN SPACE & RECREATIONAL FACILITIES General Overview Open space and recreational facilities, such as parks, trails, scenic overlooks, natural areas, islands, and wildlife areas add to the quality of a community and increase opportunities for the public to access the river. One purpose of a MRCCA plan is to promote the protection, creation, and maintenance of these features and locations in each community along the metropolitan Mississippi River corridor. Brooklyn Center benefits from the presence of the North Mississippi Regional Park and related open space along approximately half of the length of river bank in the City extending from 53rd Ave in the south to the I-694 river crossing. Within Brooklyn Center, this regional park runs between 57th Avenue north to the interstate crossing and is managed by Three Rivers Park District. Open space and trail corridor located south of 57th Avenue between Lyndale Avenue and the river, directly linking to – and functioning as an extension of – the North Mississippi Regional Park managed by the Minneapolis Park & Recreation Board just south of 53rd Avenue in Minneapolis. The Mississippi River Trail (MRT) runs as a road-separated paved trail along most of the river corridor in the City. From the south border at 53rd Avenue to the I-694 crossing, the trail is managed by Three Rivers Park District. North of I-694, there is a gap of separated trail where the route runs along Willow Lane within the roadway. North of 57th Avenue, a separated paved trail carries on to the north and is managed by the City. The trail in this section runs parallel to Highway 252 and is separated from the Mississippi River both physically and visually. Figure A-13 illustrates the park and recreation locations in relation to the MRCCA boundary and identifies the gap of separated trail for the MRT. As part of the implementation process of this plan, it is recommended the City identify actions to establish a continuous separated paved trail experience for users of the MRT through Brooklyn Center. In order to connect MRT trail users more to the river north of I-694, the City should look into opportunities for public access to the river. This area is directly across from Durnham Island with views of natural landscape and wildlife habitat. Public connection in this area of the City would help promote the goals of the MRCCA. Efforts should be taken to preserve these views and enhance the opportunity for the public to access these views. APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-29A-28 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 Open Space & Recreational Policies • Encourage creation, connection, and maintenance of open space, recreational facilities, including public access to the river. • Identify and encourage connection of CA-SR district land to existing and planned parks and trails, for LGUs with developable land in CA-SR districts. • Encourage that land dedication requirements be used to acquire land suitable for public river access. Open Space & Recreational Implementation Actions • Include facilities in the capital improvement program for parks and open space facilities. • Develop a system for reviewing, tracking, and monitoring open space required as part of the subdivision process. • Identify opportunities and budget for construction of road-separated paved trail between 57th Avenue and 66th Avenue along Willow Lane to complete the connection of the MRT along the west river bank. Figure A-13. MRCCA and Parks and Recreation Map [TO BE COMPLETED] APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-31A-30 APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 TRANSPORTATION & UTILTIES General Overview The MRCCA district in Brooklyn Center is generally segregated from the rest of the community by the I-94/Highway 252 corridor which runs north/south and parallel to the Mississippi River. Local residential streets provide access to the residential neighborhoods and park land immediately adjacent to the river. Public transportation facilities in Brooklyn Center, including roadways, transit facilities, railroads, and bikeways are discussed in Chapter 7 of the Comprehensive Plan 2040. Public utilities are discussed in Chapter 8. Summary details in relation to MRCCA also follow. Roadways and Transit The existing roadway network is not intended to experience much change in the coming planning period. At the time of this planning process, however, studies are underway to determine needs related to the conversion of Highway 252 to a freeway, which will likely impact several intersections and access in the MRCCA district within Brooklyn Center. New construction associated within the transportation project will follow MRCCA ordinance requirements for development. Figure A-14 shows the location of Highway 252 in relation to MRCCA boundaries. Transit within the MRCCA boundaries is limited to express routes on the primary arterial routes and the park and rides that serve them along Highway 252. No new transit service is proposed for this area. Bikeways Bikeways include the MRT route that parallels the Mississippi River through the entire north- south length in Borooklyn Center. The existing trail separated paved trail corridor is interupted in the center with a small portion of trail route that is currently on-road. The City identifies this stretch of trail as planned for future construction. A paved trail in this location would not be directly adjacent to the river or on public land adjacent to the river. Another planned trail will connect the Twin Lakes Regional Trail with the MRT along 57th Avenue. This trail connection is not expected to negatively impact resources within the MRCCA. Figure A-13 in the previous section illustrates the location of the proposed trail connections. Figure A-14. MRCCA and Transportation & Utilities Map [TO BE COMPLETED] APPENDIX A - MRCCA PLAN - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 A-32 Public Utilities Public utilities in Brooklyn Center (electric power facilities, essential services, and transmissions services) are established and not expected to change in a way that would negatively impact MRCCA PCAs or PRCVs. Public utility wires for electrical transmission currently cross over the Mississippi River near 57th Avenue. This aerial crossing has been in place for years and is not considered to negatively impact any existing PRCVs from valuable vista locations. There are otherwise currently no new public utilities planned for the MRCCA in Brooklyn Center at this time. No land within the MRCCA is currently zoned for public utilities. Transportation & Utilities Policies • Minimize impacts to PCAs and PRCVs from solar and wind generation facilities, public transportation facilities and public utilities. Transportation & Utilities Implementation Actions • Include transportation facilities in the capital improvement program. If applicable, identify which facilities, or portions of facilities, are in the MRCCA. • Incorporate specific design and placement conditions that minimize impacts to PCAs and PRCVs into local permits for solar and wind generation facilities and essential and transmission services (if allowed or within the community’s permitting authority). (Note: Permit conditions will be a required element of MRCCA ordinance review and approval.) APPENDIX B: Glossary of Terms - Goals & Strategies Comprehensive Plan 2040 APPENDIX B -GLOSSARY - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 B-3B-2 APPENDIX B - GLOSSARY - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 Vision & Goal Setting 1 VISION & GOAL SETTING Definitions & Glossary The terms Goal and Strategy can mean different things to people and may not always be viewed with the same level of importance or commitment. Throughout the Comprehensive Plan update Goal and Strategy will have the following meaning and definition: Goal: A general statement of community aspirations and desired objectives indicating broad social, economic or physical conditions to which the community officially agrees to try to achieve in various ways, one of which is the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. Strategy: An officially adopted course of action or position to implement the community goals. (To be developed and refined as plan components are developed) Goals and strategies assign various roles, commitments and responsibilities to the city of Brooklyn Center. To assist with defining the city’s role for each goal and strategy, the following key terms are defined and indicate the city’s corresponding responsibility: Create: Bring about the desired goal, with city staff involved in all levels, from planning to implementation, and which may involve city financial assistance. Continue: Follow past and present procedures to maintain the desired goal, usually with city staff involved in all levels, from planning to implementation. Encourage: Foster the desired goal through city policies, which may involve city financial assistance. Endorse: Subscribe to the desired goal by adopting supportive city policies. Enhance: Improve the current goal through the use of policies, which may include financial support, and the involvement of city staff at all levels of planning. Explore: Investigate the stated method of achieving the desired goal, which may involve city staff and financial resources to research and analyze such method. APPENDIX B -GLOSSARY - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 B-5B-4 APPENDIX B - GLOSSARY - DRAFT 03-15-2019 City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 Vision & Goal Setting 2 Identify: Catalogue and confirm resource(s) or desired item(s), which may involve city staff and may require financial resources. Maintain: Preserve the desired state of affairs through the use of city policies. Financial assistance should be provided if needed. Recognize: Acknowledge the identified state of affairs and take actions or implement policies to preserve or change them. Prevent: Stop described event through the use of appropriate city policies, staff, action and, if needed, finances. Promote: Advance the desired state through the use of city policies and staff activity at all levels of planning. Protect: Guard against a deterioration of the desired state through the use of city policies, staff and, if needed, financial assistance. Provide: Take the lead role in supplying the needed financial and staff support to achieve the desired goal. The city is typically involved in all aspects from planning to implementation to maintenance. Strengthen: Improve and reinforce the desired goal through the use of city policies, staff and financial assistance, if needed. Support: Supply the needed staff support, policies and financial assistance at all levels to achieve the desired goal. Sustain: Uphold the desired state through city policies, financial resources and staff action to achieve the goal. Work: Cooperate and act in a manner to create the desired goal through the use of city staff, actions and policies. Vision & Goal Setting 3 No commitment of financial investment, staff resources and policy directives May include financial investment, staff resources and policy directives Commitment to financial investment (if needed), staff resources and policy directives Continue Endorse Identify Reserve Recognize Promote Work Create Encourage Enhance Explore Maintain Prevent Protect Provide Strengthen Support Sustain City of Brooklyn Center 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Appendix C: Background Information 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS Metropolitan Council Forecasts 1 Age Distribution 2 Household & Family Type 5 Poverty Level 8 Racial & Ethnic Composition 1 1 English Proficiency 14 Geographic Mobility 15 Education Levels 17 Household Income Levels 19 Vehicle Access 22 Travel Time to Work 23 Mode of Transportation to Work 26 Employment 27 Jobs in Brooklyn Center 28 Jobs of Residents 31 HOUSING Metropolitan Council Housing Assessment 31 Year Housing Built 34 Housing Structure Type 36 MAPPING & BACKGROUND INFORMATION Introduction 37 Metropolitan Council Community Designation 39 2030 Future Land Use Plan 41 Community Dev. Activities & Projects 2016 42 Natural Resources 46 Metropolitan Council Transit Market Areas 48 Existing Transit/Bus Routes 50 Housing – Age of Homesteaded Structures 52 Housing – Age of Rental/Multi-Family Structures 54 Housing – Sq Ft of Single-Family Homes 56 Census Tracts with Concentrated Poverty 58 School District Boundaries 60 Parks, Park Classifications & Schools 61 Infrastructure (Water & Wastewater) 63 1 SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS The following section presents demographic and economic data for the City of Brooklyn Center. This data provides an understanding of key trends that influence land use and other important community systems. In many of the exhibits included in this section, additional data is also presented for Hennepin County and the 7-County Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. This additional data is intended to provide greater context to trends and patterns that likely extend well beyond Brooklyn Center’s border but nevertheless impact the community. Metropolitan Council Forecasts The Metropolitan Council prepares socio-economic forecasts for each community within the 7-County metropolitan area. These forecasts are meant to inform every element of the comprehensive plan. The table and chart present data on the historic and forecasted growth trends for Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, and metro area through 2040. In a departure from historic growth patterns, the Metropolitan Council anticipates Brooklyn Center will increase its number of persons and households by 4-7% each decade through 2040. Because Brooklyn Center is fully developed, new household growth will require a thoughtful approach as to where and how redevelopment will occur within the City. Table SE-1: Population and Household Growth Trends 1970-2040 Estimate Geography 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 2020 2030 2040 PopulationBrooklyn Center 35,173 31,230 28,886 29,172 30,104 31,231 31,400 33,000 35,400Hennepin County 960,080 941,411 1,032,431 1,116,200 1,152,425 1,237,560 1,255,220 1,329,580 1,406,6407-County Metro Area1 1,874,380 1,985,873 2,288,721 2,642,062 2,849,567 3,041,195 3,127,660 3,388,950 3,652,060 Percent Change Brooklyn Center ---11.2%-7.5%1.0%3.2%--4.3%5.1%7.3% Hennepin County ---1.9%9.7%8.1%3.2%--8.9%5.9%5.8% 7-County Metro Area1 --5.9%15.3%15.4%7.9%--9.8%8.4%7.8% HouseholdsBrooklyn Center 9,151 10,751 10,751 11,430 10,756 11,042 11,300 12,300 13,300Hennepin County 309,708 365,536 419,060 456,129 475,913 511,518 528,090 566,360 600,7307-County Metro Area1 573,582 721,444 875,504 1,021,456 1,117,749 1,192,364 1,256,580 1,378,470 1,491,780 Percent Change Brooklyn Center --17.5%0.0%6.3%-5.9%--5.1%8.8%8.1% Hennepin County --18.0%14.6%8.8%4.3%--11.0%7.2%6.1% 7-County Metro Area1 --25.8%21.4%16.7%9.4%--12.4%9.7%8.2% 1 7-County metro area, which includes the counties of Anoka, Carvery, Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott, and WashingtonSources: US Census; Metropolitan Council ---------- Met Council Forecast ----------- APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 2 Figure SE-1: Population Growth Rates 1970-2040 -12% -8% -4% 0% 4% 8% 12% 16% Brookyln Center Hennepin County Metro Area Po p u l a t o n G r o w t h R a t e 1970s 1980s 1990s2000s 2010s 2020s2030s Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council Age Distribution The age profile of a community has important ramifications on demand for housing, goods and services, and social cohesion. The following table and two figures present data on the age profile of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, and the metro area. Unlike the broader region, in which the population continues to age rapidly, Brooklyn Center’s population grew younger between 2000 and 2010, and has stayed relatively stable since 2010. This is largely due to a significant increase in people age 25 to 34, many of which are starting families and having children. Increases in the number of young families place demands on schools, housing affordability, and the types of retail goods and services needed. 3 Table SE-2: Age Distribution of the Population 2000-2016 Age Group 2000 2010 2016 No.Pct.2000 2010 2016 BROOKLYN CENTERUnder 5 1,957 2,674 2,552 595 30.4%6.7%8.9%8.2%5 to 17 5,353 5,628 6,011 658 12.3%18.3%18.7%19.2%18 to 24 2,805 3,056 2,657 -148 -5.3%9.6%10.2%8.5%25 to 34 4,330 4,768 5,244 914 21.1%14.8%15.8%16.8%35 to 44 4,451 3,681 4,336 -115 -2.6%15.3%12.2%13.9%45 to 54 3,395 3,817 3,669 274 8.1%11.6%12.7%11.7%55 to 64 2,374 2,822 3,149 775 32.7%8.1%9.4%10.1%65 to 74 2,428 1,653 1,718 -710 -29.2%8.3%5.5%5.5%75 to 84 1,569 1,377 1,222 -347 -22.1%5.4%4.6%3.9%85+510 628 673 163 31.9%1.7%2.1%2.2%Total 29,172 30,104 31,231 2,059 7.1%100.0%100.0%100.0% Median Age 35.3 32.6 32.8 -2.5 -------- HENNEPIN COUNTYUnder 5 73,261 76,236 81,745 8,484 11.6%6.6%6.6%6.6%5 to 17 194,241 185,109 194,733 492 0.3%17.4%16.1%15.7%18 to 24 108,767 113,551 112,439 3,672 3.4%9.7%9.9%9.1%25 to 34 183,860 187,523 209,948 26,088 14.2%16.5%16.3%17.0%35 to 44 191,872 154,304 162,590 -29,282 -15.3%17.2%13.4%13.1%45 to 54 156,068 171,130 172,004 15,936 10.2%14.0%14.8%13.9%55 to 64 85,773 133,758 153,315 67,542 78.7%7.7%11.6%12.4%65 to 74 59,737 66,516 82,421 22,684 38.0%5.4%5.8%6.7%75 to 84 44,942 42,476 44,595 -347 -0.8%4.0%3.7%3.6%85+17,679 21,822 23,771 6,092 34.5%1.6%1.9%1.9%Total 1,116,200 1,152,425 1,237,560 121,360 10.9%100.0%100.0%100.0% Median Age 34.9 35.9 36.1 1.2 -------- 7-COUNTY METRO AREAUnder 5 188,236 194,329 200,616 12,380 6.6%7.1%6.8%6.7%5 to 17 509,298 506,631 519,966 10,668 2.1%19.3%17.8%17.3%18 to 24 244,226 263,462 267,717 23,491 9.6%9.2%9.2%8.9%25 to 34 411,155 420,311 454,518 43,363 10.5%15.6%14.7%15.1%35 to 44 469,324 391,324 396,260 -73,064 -15.6%17.8%13.7%13.2%45 to 54 363,592 440,753 438,335 74,743 20.6%13.8%15.5%14.6%55 to 64 200,980 326,007 371,486 170,506 84.8%7.6%11.4%12.4%65 to 74 130,615 163,425 201,165 70,550 54.0%4.9%5.7%6.7%75 to 84 90,292 97,442 104,920 14,628 16.2%3.4%3.4%3.5%85+34,338 45,883 50,435 16,097 46.9%1.3%1.6%1.7%Total 2,642,056 2,849,567 3,005,419 363,363 13.8%100.0%100.0%100.0% Median Age 34.2 36.0 36.5 2.3 -------- Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Change 2000-2016 Distribution APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 4 Figure SE-2: Age Distribution of the Population 2015 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% Under 5 5 to 17 18 to 24 25 to 34 35 to 44 45 to 54 55 to 64 65 to 74 75 to 84 85+ Pe r c e n t o f P o p u l a t i o n Age Group BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY 7-COUNTY METRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council Figure SE-3: Median Age 2000-2016 28.0 29.0 30.0 31.0 32.0 33.0 34.0 35.0 36.0 37.0 38.0 2000 2010 2016 Me d i a n A g e BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will 5 Household & Family Type Changing family and household structures can also have a profound effect on housing and other community needs. For example, decreasing household size has a direct impact on the amount of housing a household needs. Also, the presence of children not only impacts local schools and parks, but also the types of retailers that can be supported and the nature of housing demanded. Since 2010, the number of households with children in both single-parent and married couple households has been growing significantly. Meanwhile, the trend among households without children, especially married couples (i.e., empty-nesters) has been on the decline. The percentage of households with children is approaching 40%, which well above the rate in the County and the metro area. Figure SE-4: Household and Family Types 2016 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Married w/oChild Married w/Child SingleParent, F SingleParent, M Other Family SinglePerson Roommates Pc t . o f H o u s e h o l d s BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY 7-COUNTY METRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metrolpolitan Council; Perkins+Will APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 6 Table 3: Household Type 2000-2016 Household Type 2000 2010 2016 Number Percent 2010 2016 Change BROOKLYN CENTERMarried, no children 3,149 2,487 2,176 -311 -12.5%23.1%19.7%-3.4%Married, children 2,148 1,861 2,312 451 24.2%17.3%20.9%3.6%Single Parent, F 963 1,181 1,336 155 13.1%11.0%12.1%1.1%Single Parent, M 280 362 514 152 42.0%3.4%4.7%1.3%Other family*842 1,119 882 -237 -21.2%10.4%8.0%-2.4%Single Person 3,218 2,978 3,174 196 6.6%27.7%28.7%1.1%Roommates 830 768 649 -119 -15.5%7.1%5.9%-1.3%Total Households 11,430 10,756 11,042 286 2.7%100%100%0% HENNEPIN COUNTYMarried, no children 111,018 116,099 125,713 9,614 8.3%24.4%24.6%0.2%Married, children 95,469 89,084 98,819 9,735 10.9%18.7%19.3%0.6%Single Parent, F 28,322 29,334 35,391 6,057 20.6%6.2%6.9%0.8%Single Parent, M 7,471 8,841 11,565 2,724 30.8%1.9%2.3%0.4%Other family*25,023 29,527 24,808 -4,719 -16.0%6.2%4.8%-1.4%Single Person 145,086 155,807 167,676 11,869 7.6%32.7%32.8%0.0%Roommates 43,740 47,221 47,545 324 0.7%9.9%9.3%-0.6%Total Households 456,129 475,913 511,518 35,605 7.5%100%100%0% 7-COUNTY METRO AREAMarried, no children 263,626 298,723 318,955 20,232 6.8%26.7%26.7%0.0%Married, children 256,655 244,687 265,418 20,731 8.5%21.9%22.3%0.4%Single Parent, F 65,606 71,417 85,260 13,843 19.4%6.4%7.2%0.8%Single Parent, M 18,640 23,710 28,905 5,195 21.9%2.1%2.4%0.3%Other family*53,632 68,959 59,035 -9,924 -14.4%6.2%5.0%-1.2%Single Person 281,086 319,030 343,158 24,128 7.6%28.5%28.8%0.2%Roommates 82,209 91,223 91,633 410 0.4%8.2%7.7%-0.5%Total Households 1,021,454 1,117,749 1,192,364 74,615 6.7%100%100%0% Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Change '10-'16 Distribution * Other Family households can consist of households with adult siblings, parents with adult children, or householders with parents 7 Figure SE-5: Households with Children 2000-2016 25% 30% 35% 40% 2000 2010 2016 Pe r c e n t o f H o u s e h o l d s BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 8 Poverty Level The number of persons living in poverty increased significantly between 2000 and 2016. Of those in poverty, over one-third are under 18. Over 19% of Brooklyn Center residents are below the poverty level and about 44% are below 200% of the poverty level. The poverty level was defined as $24,563 for a family of four in 2016. Generally, a greater number of persons living in Brooklyn Center have incomes that place them below the poverty level and below 200% of the poverty level than in other neighboring cities. Table SE-4: Poverty Level 2000-2016 Poverty Level No.Pct.No.Pct.No.Pct.'00-'10 '10-'16 BROOKLYN CENTERAll Persons below Poverty Level 2,170 7.4%4,915 16.3%6,009 19.2%126.5%22.3%Persons under 18 below Poverty Level 785 2.7%2,286 7.6%2,605 8.3%191.2%14.0%Person 65 and over below Poverty Level 246 0.8%466 1.5%344 1.1%89.3%-26.2%All Persons below 200% of Poverty Level 6,393 21.9%----13,758 44.1%----All Persons Regardless of Poverty Level 29,172 100.0%30,104 100.0%31,231 100.0%3.2%3.7% HENNEPIN COUNTYAll Persons below Poverty Level 92,339 8.3%138,881 12.1%154,117 12.5%50.4%11.0%Persons under 18 below Poverty Level 29,195 2.6%44,381 3.9%46,531 3.8%52.0%4.8%Person 65 and over below Poverty Level 6,894 0.6%9,219 0.8%11,473 0.9%33.7%24.4%All Persons below 200% of Poverty Level 221,254 19.8%----330,911 26.7%----All Persons Regardless of Poverty Level 1,116,200 100.0%1,152,425 100.0%1,237,560 100.0%3.2%7.4% 7-COUNTY METRO AREAAll Persons below Poverty Level 182,780 6.9%284,811 10.0%324,148 10.8%55.8%13.8%Persons under 18 below Poverty Level 63,276 2.4%96,120 3.4%104,468 3.5%51.9%8.7%Person 65 and over below Poverty Level 14,468 0.5%20,430 0.7%23,767 0.8%41.2%16.3%All Persons below 200% of Poverty Level 462,760 17.5%----733,205 24.4%----All Persons Regardless of Poverty Level 2,642,056 100.0%2,849,567 100.0%3,005,419 100.0%7.9%5.5% Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will % Change201620102000 9 Figure SE-6: Poverty Level 2016 19.2%12.5%10.8% 24.8% 14.3%13.6% 55.9% 73.3%75.6% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Pe r c e n t a g e o f P o p u l a t i o n Population wellabove povertylevel Population nearpoverty level* Population belowpoverty level * Near poverty level are persons living with incomes at or twice the level of povertySources:US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Figure SE-7: Change in Population in Poverty 2000-2016 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 2000 2010 2016 Pe r c e n t a g e o f P o p u l a t i o n BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Sources:US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 10 Table SE-5: Poverty Levels in Brooklyn Center and Neighboring Cities Geographic Area % in Poverty % Near Poverty*% in Poverty % Near Poverty*% in Poverty % Near Poverty*'00-'10 '10-'15 Brooklyn Center 7.4%14.5%16.3%---19.2%24.8%8.9%2.9%Brooklyn Park 5.1%11.1%11.4%---11.1%18.7%6.3%-0.3%Crystal 4.4%8.8%9.3%---10.1%15.8%4.9%0.8%Robbinsdale 4.7%12.8%6.5%---12.8%12.4%1.8%6.3%Columbia Heights 6.4%15.8%13.5%---16.8%24.9%7.1%3.3%Fridley 7.3%11.3%10.1%---13.0%19.3%2.8%2.9% Hennepin County 8.3%11.5%12.1%---12.5%14.3%3.8%0.4% Metro Area 6.9%10.6%10.0%---10.8%13.6%3.1%0.8% * Near poverty level are persons living with incomes at or twice the level of poverty Sources: US Census; Perkins+Will % Change200020162010 Figure SE-8: Change in Poverty Levels of Brooklyn Center and Neighboring Cities 2000-2016 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 2000 2010 2016 Pe r c e n t a g e o f P o p u l a t i o n Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Crystal Robbinsdale Fridley Columbia Heights Sources:US Census; Perkins+Will 11 Racial & Ethnic Composition The trend in the direction of more racial diversity accelerated during the 2000s and early 2010s as shown in the following tables and charts. As of 2016, nearly 60% of Brooklyn Center’s residents are people of color or non-white. This is in contrast to the metro area, which is far less diverse. The largest absolute increase between 2000 and 2016 occurred among African Americans, and the number of Hispanic residents realized the largest percentage increase — nearly 300%. Table SE-6: Racial Composition 2000-2016 Racial/Ethnic Group 2000 2010 2016 No.Pct.2000 2010 2016 BROOKLYN CENTERAmerican Indian or Alaska Native 229 182 125 -104 -45.3%0.8%0.6%0.4%Asian 2,549 4,291 5,177 2,628 103.1%8.7%14.3%16.6%Black or African American 4,088 7,744 8,374 4,286 104.8%14.0%25.7%26.8%Hispanic or Latino 823 2,889 3,145 2,322 282.1%2.8%9.6%10.1%Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander 4 11 0 -4 -100.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%Some Other Race 70 70 107 37 52.7%0.2%0.2%0.3%Two or More Races 879 1,102 1,050 171 19.5%3.0%3.7%3.4%White 20,530 13,815 13,253 -7,277 -35.4%70.4%45.9%42.4%Total 29,172 30,104 31,231 2,059 7.1%100.0%100.0%100.0% Non-White 8,642 16,289 17,978 9,336 108.0%29.6%54.1%57.6% HENNEPIN COUNTYAmerican Indian or Alaska Native 10,212 8,848 7,303 -2,909 -28.5%0.9%0.8%0.6%Asian 53,229 71,535 83,423 30,194 56.7%4.8%6.2%6.7%Black or African American 98,698 134,240 148,276 49,578 50.2%8.8%11.6%12.0%Hispanic or Latino 45,439 77,676 84,433 38,994 85.8%4.1%6.7%6.8%Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander 473 431 423 -50 -10.7%0.0%0.0%0.0%Some Other Race 2,115 2,321 3,309 1,194 56.5%0.2%0.2%0.3%Two or More Races 25,018 30,704 38,967 13,949 55.8%2.2%2.7%3.1%White 881,016 826,670 871,427 -9,589 -1.1%78.9%71.7%70.4%Total 1,116,200 1,152,425 1,237,560 121,360 10.9%100.0%100.0%100.0% Non-White 235,184 325,755 366,133 130,949 55.7%21.1%28.3%29.6% 7-COUNTY METRO AREAAmerican Indian or Alaska Native 18,592 17,452 14,978 -3,614 -19.4%0.7%0.6%0.5%Asian 120,384 182,496 212,306 91,922 76.4%4.6%6.4%7.0%Black or African American 154,113 234,334 260,063 105,950 68.7%5.8%8.2%8.6%Hispanic or Latino 95,902 167,558 184,784 88,882 92.7%3.6%5.9%6.1%Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander 1,041 1,091 884 -157 -15.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%Some Other Race 3,971 4,609 5,473 1,502 37.8%0.2%0.2%0.2%Two or More Races 50,427 68,809 89,301 38,874 77.1%1.9%2.4%2.9%White 2,197,626 2,173,218 2,273,407 75,781 3.4%83.2%76.3%74.8%Total 2,642,056 2,849,567 3,041,195 399,139 15.1%100.0%100.0%100.0% Non-White 444,430 676,349 767,788 323,358 72.8%16.8%23.7%25.2% Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Change 2000-2016 Distribution APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 12 Figure SE-9: Racial Composition 2016 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% AmericanIndian/AlaskaNative Asian Black orAfricanAmerican Hispanic orLatino NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander Some OtherRace Two or MoreRaces White Pe r c e n t o f P o p u l a t i o n BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY 7-COUNTY METRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Figure SE-10: Change in the Percentage of Persons of Color (Non-White Population) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 2000 2010 2016 Pe r c e n t o f P o p u l a t i o n BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will 13 Brooklyn Center is one of the most racially and ethnically diverse communities in the region and state. However, neighboring cities are becoming increasingly diverse as well. Brooklyn Park has a similar profile with over 50% of its population comprised of people of color or non-white. Although Crystal’s and Robbinsdale’s levels of racial and ethnic diversity mirror that of the region, Columbia Heights and Fridley have a non-white population that is 1/3 or more of their populations. Table SE-7: Racial Composition of Neighboring Cities 2016 Racial/Ethnic Group Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Crystal Robbins-dale Columbia Heights Fridley Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Crystal Robbins-dale Columbia Heights Fridley American Indian/Alaska Native 125 222 137 60 142 307 0.4%0.3%0.6%0.4%0.7%1.1%Asian 5,177 12,228 760 224 1,079 2,029 16.6%15.2%3.3%1.5%5.4%7.1%Black or African American 8,374 21,263 2,299 2,050 3,720 4,006 26.8%26.4%10.1%13.9%18.5%14.0%Hispanic or Latino 3,145 5,279 1,878 522 2,099 2,065 10.1%6.6%8.2%3.5%10.4%7.2%Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0 59 0 0 3 0 0.0%0.1%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%Some Other Race 107 362 78 82 170 7 0.3%0.4%0.3%0.6%0.8%0.0%Two or More Races 1,050 2,316 550 454 654 964 3.4%2.9%2.4%3.1%3.2%3.4%White 13,253 38,721 17,152 11,312 12,291 19,253 42.4%48.1%75.0%76.9%61.0%67.2%Total 31,231 80,450 22,855 14,704 20,158 28,631 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0% Non-White 17,978 41,729 5,703 3,392 7,867 9,378 57.6%51.9%25.0%23.1%39.0%32.8% Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will DistributionPopulation Figure SE-11: Racial Composition of Neighboring Cities 2016 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% BrooklynCenter BrooklynPark Crystal Robbinsdale ColumbiaHeights Fridley Pe r c e n t o f P o p u l a t i o n White Two or MoreRacesSome Other Race Hawaiian/Pac.Isldr.Hispanic/Latino Black/AfricanAmer.Asian American Indian Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 14 English Proficiency Changing levels of English proficiency not only indicate demographic change, but can also represent challenges for residents in accessing jobs and essential goods and services within a community. As of 2016, the percentage of Brooklyn Center resident who speak English “not well” or “not at all” is just over 6%. This is not a significantly high proportion, but it is over twice the metro area rate. Although the number of persons in which speaking English may be a barrier grew rapidly in Brooklyn Center from 2000 to 2010, it has actually appeared to have declined slightly from 2010 to 2016. Table SE-8: English Proficiency among Population Age 5 and Older 2000-2016 English Proficiency 2000 2010 2016 Number Percent 2000 2016 Change BROOKLYN CENTERNative English Speaker 22,830 19,548 20,365 -2,465 -10.8%84.1%71.0%-13.1%Speak another language - speak English "very well" or "well"3,489 5,746 6,495 3,006 86.1%12.9%22.6%9.8%Speak another language - speak English "not well" or "not at all"826 1,951 1,819 993 120.2%3.0%6.3%3.3%Population Age 5 Years and Older 27,145 27,245 28,679 1,534 5.7%100%100%0% HENNEPIN COUNTYSpeak only English 909,793 889,242 956,318 46,525 5.1%87.2%82.7%-4.4%Speak another language - speak English "very well" or "well"101,603 133,075 158,727 57,124 56.2%9.7%13.7%4.0%Speak another language - speak English "not well" or "not at all"32,413 38,345 40,771 8,358 25.8%3.1%3.5%0.4%Population Age 5 Years and Older 1,043,809 1,060,662 1,155,815 112,006 10.7%100%100%0% 7-COUNTY METRO AREASpeak only English 2,185,261 2,241,384 2,376,616 191,355 8.8%89.0%84.7%-4.3%Speak another language - speak English "very well" or "well"208,836 294,761 342,182 133,346 63.9%8.5%12.2%3.7%Speak another language - speak English "not well" or "not at all"61,050 78,101 86,005 24,955 40.9%2.5%3.1%0.6%Population Age 5 Years and Older 2,455,147 2,614,246 2,804,803 349,656 14.2%100%100%0% Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Change '00-'16 Distribution Figure SE-12: Change in the Population the Speaks English “Not Well” or “Not at All” 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 2000 2010 2015 Pe r c e n t o f P o p u l a t i o n A g e 5 o r O l d e r BROOKLYNCENTER RAMSEYCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will 15 Geographic Mobility The following table and charts present data on geographic mobility of households. Geographic stability can often be desirable because it represents more long-term residents in a community, which can lead to more civic involvement and investment. However, limited mobility can also signify challenges in the housing market due to limited options, both from a supply and financial affordability perspective. As of 2016, the geographic mobility of Brooklyn Center’s residents is similar to Hennepin County and the metro area, which indicates some stability. However, since 2010 the geographic mobility of households throughout the region has dropped sharply. This is likely due to the current condition of the housing market in which very few homes are for sale and very few apartment units are for rent. Table SE-9: Geographic Mobility of Households by Tenure 2000-2016 Geographic Mobility 2000 2010 2016 Number Percent 2000 2016 Change BROOKLYN CENTEROwn - moved within last year 683 745 134 -549 -80.4%6.0%1.2%-4.8%Own - moved within 1-4 years 1,649 436 1,044 -605 -36.7%14.4%9.5%-5.0%Own - moved 5+ years ago 5,542 5,711 5,642 100 1.8%48.5%51.1%2.6%Rent - moved within last year 1,409 1,466 879 -530 -37.6%12.3%8.0%-4.4%Rent - moved within 1-4 years 1,430 1,186 2,064 634 44.3%12.5%18.7%6.2%Rent - moved 5+ years ago 717 1,212 1,280 563 78.5%6.3%11.6%5.3%Total Households 11,430 10,756 11,042 -388 -3.4%100%100%0% HENNEPIN COUNTYOwn - moved within last year 29,743 22,809 7,044 -22,699 -76.3%6.5%1.4%-5.1%Own - moved within 1-4 years 78,848 36,820 44,950 -33,898 -43.0%17.3%8.8%-8.5%Own - moved 5+ years ago 193,244 250,526 268,771 75,527 39.1%42.4%52.5%10.2%Rent - moved within last year 64,204 66,401 37,343 -26,861 -41.8%14.1%7.3%-6.8%Rent - moved within 1-4 years 59,346 50,088 91,029 31,683 53.4%13.0%17.8%4.8%Rent - moved 5+ years ago 30,744 49,269 62,380 31,636 102.9%6.7%12.2%5.5%Total Households 456,129 475,913 511,518 55,389 12.1%100%100%0% 7-COUNTY METRO AREAOwn - moved within last year 75,863 55,884 17,572 -58,291 -76.8%7.4%1.5%-6.0%Own - moved within 1-4 years 196,852 98,341 112,979 -83,873 -42.6%19.3%9.5%-9.8%Own - moved 5+ years ago 456,402 641,602 683,686 227,284 49.8%44.7%57.3%12.7%Rent - moved within last year 120,217 122,935 72,987 -47,230 -39.3%11.8%6.1%-5.6%Rent - moved within 1-4 years 113,615 100,675 179,537 65,922 58.0%11.1%15.1%3.9%Rent - moved 5+ years ago 58,505 98,311 125,604 67,099 114.7%5.7%10.5%4.8%Total Households 1,021,454 1,117,749 1,192,364 170,910 16.7%100%100%0% Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Change '00-'16 Distribution APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 16 Figure SE-13: Geographic Mobility of Households 2016 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Own:moved withinlast year Own:moved within1-4 years Own:moved 5+years ago Rent:moved withinlast year Rent:moved within1-4 years Rent:moved 5+years ago Pe r c e n t o f H o u s e h o l d s BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY 7-COUNTY METRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Figure SE-14: Change in the Percentage of Households that moved within the Last Year 2000-2016 0% 5% 10% 15% 2000 2010 2016 Pe r c e n t o f H o u s e h o l d s Own - BROOKLYN CENTEROwn - HENNEPIN COUNTYOwn - METRO AREARent - BROOKLYN CENTERRent - HENNEPIN COUNTYRent - METRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will 17 Education Levels The educational level attained by Brooklyn Center residents decreased between 2000 and 2016. Of the 2016 population aged 25 and over, 82% were high school graduates, while 20% had a bachelor’s degree or higher. In comparison, in 2000 87% of the population aged 25 and over were high school graduates and 17% had a bachelor’s degree or higher. In Hennepin County in 2016, by contrast, 93% were high school graduates and 47% had a college degree. Table SE-10: Education Levels 2000-2016 Highest Level of Formal Education 2000 2010 2016 No.Pct.2000 2010 2016 BROOKLYN CENTERDid not graduate from high school 2,502 3,445 3,580 1,078 43.1%13.1%18.4%17.9%High school graduate 6,626 5,622 6,134 -492 -7.4%34.8%30.0%30.7%Some college, no degree 5,161 4,448 4,480 -681 -13.2%27.1%23.7%22.4%Associate degree 1,591 1,807 1,836 245 15.4%8.3%9.6%9.2%Bachelor degree 2,387 2,804 2,803 416 17.4%12.5%15.0%14.0%Graduate/professional degree 790 621 1,178 388 49.1%4.1%3.3%5.9%Total Population Age 25 or Older 19,057 18,746 20,011 954 5.0%100.0%100.0%100.0% HENNEPIN COUNTYDid not graduate from high school 69,200 61,184 62,513 -6,687 -9.7%9.4%7.9%7.4%High school graduate 156,838 154,155 151,171 -5,668 -3.6%21.2%19.8%17.8%Some college, no degree 172,879 159,417 165,471 -7,408 -4.3%23.4%20.5%19.5%Associate degree 51,809 60,572 70,641 18,832 36.3%7.0%7.8%8.3%Bachelor degree 199,602 228,229 257,329 57,728 28.9%27.0%29.4%30.3%Graduate/professional degree 89,603 113,971 141,518 51,915 57.9%12.1%14.7%16.7%Total Population Age 25 or Older 739,931 777,529 848,643 108,712 14.7%100.0%100.0%100.0% 7-COUNTY METRO AREADid not graduate from high school 157,481 139,930 141,508 -15,973 -10.1%9.3%7.4%7.0%High school graduate 412,472 430,008 422,994 10,523 2.6%24.3%22.8%21.0%Some college, no degree 409,177 405,772 414,844 5,666 1.4%24.1%21.5%20.6%Associate degree 128,740 165,537 194,146 65,406 50.8%7.6%8.8%9.6%Bachelor degree 411,153 499,465 553,885 142,732 34.7%24.2%26.5%27.5%Graduate/professional degree 181,273 244,434 289,742 108,469 59.8%10.7%13.0%14.4%Total Population Age 25 or Older 1,700,296 1,885,145 2,017,119 316,823 18.6%100.0%100.0%100.0% Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Change 2000-2016 Distribution APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 18 Figure SE-15: Education Levels 2016 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Did not graduatefrom high school High schoolgraduate Some college,no degree Associatedegree Bachelordegree Graduatedegree Pe r c e n t o f P o p u l a t i o n (A g e 2 5 o r O l d e r ) BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY 7-COUNTY METRO AREASources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Figure SE-16: Change in the Population without a High School Diploma 2000-2016 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20% 2000 2010 2016 Pe r c e n t o f P o p u l a t i o n (A g e 2 5 o r O l d e r ) BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will 19 Household Income Levels Household income is important to track because it is strongly correlated with age and also directly affects the spending power of area residents and their ability to support retail and afford new forms of housing. The following tables and charts present data on the median household income of Brooklyn Center and the surrounding region. Brooklyn Center has a very low median household income. As of 2015, it is just under $45,000. This is nearly one-third lower than Hennepin County’s median income. Much of this difference can be explained by a sharp decrease in Brooklyn Center’s median income between 2010 and 2015. Since 2010, the median income of Brooklyn Center declined by nearly 9% while Hennepin County’s median income continued to increase at a rate of almost 8%. Some of this decline can be explained by significant growth in the number of younger households who have yet to reach their peak earning years, and also the continued transitioning of older residents into retirement and are no longer working full time or at all. Table SE-11: Median Household Income 2000-2015 Household Age 2000 2010 2015 '00-'10 '10-'15 BROOKLYN CENTERHouseholds under 25 $25,729 $26,305 $24,510 2.2%-6.8%Households 25-44 $50,849 $51,385 $44,490 1.1%-13.4%Households 45-64 $56,775 $59,899 $57,848 5.5%-3.4%Households 65+$28,688 $32,791 $35,625 14.3%8.6%All Households $44,570 $49,226 $44,855 10.4%-8.9% HENNEPIN COUNTYHouseholds under 25 $27,324 $29,688 $29,998 8.7%1.0%Households 25-44 $55,706 $65,885 $71,364 18.3%8.3%Households 45-64 $66,917 $76,581 $81,948 14.4%7.0%Households 65+$32,114 $39,094 $42,827 21.7%9.5%All Households $51,711 $61,238 $65,834 18.4%7.5% 7-COUNTY METRO AREAHouseholds under 25 $29,818 $32,159 $31,434 7.9%-2.3%Households 25-44 $58,616 $69,652 $74,243 18.8%6.6%Households 45-64 $67,861 $77,813 $84,804 14.7%9.0%Households 65+$31,233 $38,589 $44,133 23.6%14.4%All Households $54,807 $64,471 $69,233 17.6%7.4%Sources: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey; Perkins+Will % Change APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 20 Figure SE-17: Median Household Income by Age of Householder 2015 $0 $10,000 $20,000 $30,000 $40,000 $50,000 $60,000 $70,000 $80,000 $90,000 Householdsunder 25 Households25-44 Households45-64 Households65+AllHouseholds An n u a l I n c o m e BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY 7-COUNTY METRO AREASourceS:US Census; Perkins+Will Figure SE-18: Change in Median Household Income 2000-2016 $35,000 $45,000 $55,000 $65,000 $75,000 2000 2010 2015 An n u a l I n c o m e BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETROAREA Sources:US Census; Perkins+Will 21 Table SE-12: Change in Median Household Income for Neighboring Cities 2000-2016 Geographic Area 2000 2010 2016 '00-'10 '10-'16 Brooklyn Center $44,570 $49,226 $44,855 10.4%-8.9%Brooklyn Park $56,572 $62,077 $62,974 9.7%1.4%Crystal $48,736 $60,032 $59,188 23.2%-1.4%Robbinsdale $48,271 $55,270 $58,155 14.5%5.2%Columbia Heights $40,562 $51,565 $47,717 27.1%-7.5%Fridley $48,372 $51,656 $54,652 6.8%5.8% Hennepin County $51,711 $61,238 $65,834 18.4%7.5% Metro Area $54,807 $64,471 $69,233 17.6%7.4% Sources: US Census; Perkins+Will % Change Figure SE-19: Change in Median Household Income for Neighboring Cities 2000-2016 $35,000 $40,000 $45,000 $50,000 $55,000 $60,000 $65,000 $70,000 2000 2010 2016 An n u a l I n c o m e Brooklyn Center Brooklyn Park Crystal Robbinsdale Fridley Columbia Heights Sources:US Census; Perkins+Will APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 22 Vehicle Access Limited access to vehicles can indicate a need for transit and a more walkable/bikeable built environment. The following table and charts present data on the number of vehicles available in each household in Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, and the metro area. Roughly 9% of Brooklyn Center households do not have access to a vehicle. This is below the Hennepin County rate and above the metro area rate. In 2010, the rate was much higher, which was likely due to the impact of the Great Recession. With an improving economy more households can afford automobile ownership. However, it underscores the point that in lower income communities, economic cycles can significantly impact lives by altering the ability of persons to access vehicles and thus employment opportunities. Table SE-13: Household Access to Motor Vehicles 2000-2016 Vehicle Access 2000 2010 2016 Number Percent 2000 2016 Change BROOKLYN CENTERHouseholds with no vehicle available 1,032 1,148 997 -35 -3.4%9.0%9.0%0.0%Households with 1 vehicle available 4,353 3,754 4,206 -148 -3.4%38.1%38.1%0.0%Households with 2+ vehicles available 6,045 5,854 5,839 -205 -3.4%52.9%52.9%0.0%Total 11,430 10,756 11,042 -388 -3.4%100%100%0% HENNEPIN COUNTYHouseholds with no vehicle available 48,930 49,713 52,675 3,745 7.7%10.7%10.3%-0.4%Households with 1 vehicle available 166,357 171,877 183,774 17,417 10.5%36.5%35.9%-0.5%Households with 2+ vehicles available 240,842 254,323 275,069 34,227 14.2%52.8%53.8%1.0%Total 456,129 475,913 511,518 55,389 12.1%100%100%0% 7-COUNTY METRO AREAHouseholds with no vehicle available 87,091 88,503 96,127 9,036 10.4%8.5%8.1%-0.5%Households with 1 vehicle available 334,299 362,373 385,083 50,784 15.2%32.7%32.3%-0.4%Households with 2+ vehicles available 600,064 666,873 711,154 111,090 18.5%58.7%59.6%0.9%Total 1,021,454 1,117,749 1,192,364 170,910 16.7%100%100%0% Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Change '00-'16 Distribution 23 Figure SE-20: Change in the Percentage of Households with no Vehicle Available 2000-2016 7% 8% 9% 10% 11% 2000 2010 2015 Pe r c e n t o f H o u s e h o l d s BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Sources: US Census; Metropolitan Council; Perkins+Will Travel Time to Work Being situated relatively close to the center of the metropolitan area, most Brooklyn Center residents that work have commute times that are consistent with other communities and the broader region. However, there are lower rates of workers with very short commute times (under 15 minutes). This suggests that there might not be a lot of jobs located in Brooklyn Center that are accessible to residents. APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 24 Table SE-14: Travel Times to Work 2000-2015 Travel Time to Work 2000 2010 2015 BROOKLYN CENTERLess than 10 minutes 10.1%8.4%7.5%10 to 14 minutes 11.8%11.3%10.1%15 to 19 minutes 19.4%18.6%19.8%20 to 24 minutes 22.9%22.2%24.2%25 to 29 minutes 8.7%9.7%8.8%30 to 34 minutes 14.8%15.1%16.6%35 to 44 minutes 4.7%6.8%5.0%45 to 59 minutes 4.8%5.3%4.5%60 or more minutes 2.9%2.7%3.5%Total 100.0%100.0%100.0% Median Travel Time in Minutes 21.9 22.7 22.6 HENNEPIN COUNTYLess than 10 minutes 10.9%10.4%9.6%10 to 14 minutes 15.3%14.9%13.7%15 to 19 minutes 18.7%18.2%18.2%20 to 24 minutes 19.8%19.4%19.3%25 to 29 minutes 8.1%8.7%8.9%30 to 34 minutes 14.2%14.8%15.1%35 to 44 minutes 5.7%5.8%6.4%45 to 59 minutes 4.4%4.6%5.2%60 or more minutes 3.1%3.1%3.5%Total 100.0%100.0%100.0% Median Travel Time in Minutes 21.3 21.6 22.2 7-COUNTY METRO AREALess than 10 minutes 11.6%11.2%10.1%10 to 14 minutes 14.5%13.6%12.9%15 to 19 minutes 16.9%16.5%16.1%20 to 24 minutes 18.3%17.8%17.7%25 to 29 minutes 8.1%8.3%8.7%30 to 34 minutes 14.5%14.8%15.4%35 to 44 minutes 6.9%7.3%7.8%45 to 59 minutes 5.8%6.5%6.9%60 or more minutes 3.4%3.9%4.4%Total 100.0%100.0%100.0% Median Travel Time in Minutes 21.9 22.4 23.1 Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey Percentage of Working Residents 25 Figure SE-21: Travel Times to Work 2015 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Less than10minutes 10 to 14minutes 15 to 19minutes 20 to 24minutes 25 to 29minutes 30 to 34minutes 35 to 44minutes 45 to 59minutes 60 ormoreminutes Pe r c e n t a g e o f W o r k e r s t h a t C o m m u t e Travel TimeBROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY 7-COUNTY METRO AREA Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey Figure SE-22: Change in Travel Times to Work 2000-2015 21.0 21.5 22.0 22.5 23.0 23.5 2000 2010 2015 Me d i a n T r a v e l T i m e i n M i n u t e s BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 26 Mode of Transportation to Work The following table and charts present data on the mode of transportation used by working residents in Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, and the metro area. Although Brooklyn Center residents do not have appreciably lower rates of vehicle accessibility, they do appear to use transit at higher rates than compared to Hennepin County and the metro area. This can be partially explained by the availability of transit in Brooklyn Center. However, the rate of transit use has increased significantly since 2000, which suggests some other dynamic. Previously, it was demonstrated that the population is getting younger and less affluent in Brooklyn Center, which may explain the rise in the use of transit. If transit use continues to rise, it will be important to consider how certain places within Brooklyn Center may be planned to accommodate this change in behavior. Table SE-15: Mode of Transportation to Work 2000-2015 Mode of Transportation to Work 2000 2010 2015 2000 2010 2015 BROOKLYN CENTERDrive alone 11,299 9,746 10,426 76.9%72.8%73.3%Carpool 1,701 1,680 1,728 11.6%12.5%12.2%Transit 745 1,017 1,371 5.1%7.6%9.6%Walk 32 80 93 0.2%0.6%0.7%Bicycle 304 347 182 2.1%2.6%1.3%Other modes 189 168 72 1.3%1.3%0.5%Work at home 416 354 349 2.8%2.6%2.5%Total 14,686 13,392 14,221 100.0%100.0%100.0% All modes other than driving alone 23.1%27.2%26.7% HENNEPIN COUNTYDrive alone 455,123 442,351 469,204 74.9%73.6%73.4%Carpool 57,684 50,214 52,029 9.5%8.4%8.1%Transit 43,058 44,321 46,756 7.1%7.4%7.3%Walk 4,735 9,388 11,486 0.8%1.6%1.8%Bicycle 19,116 19,892 21,460 3.1%3.3%3.4%Other modes 4,035 4,985 5,346 0.7%0.8%0.8%Work at home 23,816 29,810 33,176 3.9%5.0%5.2%Total 607,567 600,961 639,457 100.0%100.0%100.0% All modes other than driving alone 25.1%26.4%26.6% 7-COUNTY METRO AREADrive alone 1,111,210 1,138,275 1,200,250 78.1%77.5%77.3%Carpool 138,676 124,813 128,244 9.8%8.5%8.3%Transit 69,513 76,673 81,663 4.9%5.2%5.3%Walk 6,675 12,903 16,537 0.5%0.9%1.1%Bicycle 35,180 35,661 36,089 2.5%2.4%2.3%Other modes 8,289 11,941 12,004 0.6%0.8%0.8%Work at home 52,536 67,805 77,317 3.7%4.6%5.0%Total 1,422,079 1,468,071 1,552,104 100.0%100.0%100.0% All modes other than driving alone 21.9%22.5%22.7% Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey Percentage of Working Residents 27 Figure SE-23: Change in Transit Use 2000-2015 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10% 11% 2000 2010 2015 Pe r c e n t a g e o f W o r k i n g R e s i d e n t s th a t u s e T r a n s i t t o g e t t o W o r k BROOKLYNCENTER HENNEPINCOUNTY 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey Employment Of Brooklyn Center’s adult population (age 16+), 68% were in the labor force in 2015. This is below the rate for neighboring cities and Hennepin County as shown in the following table. The unemployment rate for persons in the labor force was 8.1%. (The “labor force” is defined as all persons 16 or over who are employed or unemployed — i.e., those who are actively seeking and available for work. It does not include persons in the military.) Low labor force participation is generally correlated to a high percentage of retired persons. However, it can also indicate a mismatch in the local economy between jobs available and worker skills or a high level of child care needs. Table SE-16: Employment Levels in Brooklyn Center and Neighboring Cities 2015 Community % in Labor Force % Unem- ployed Brooklyn Center 68.3%8.1%Brooklyn Park 73.5%7.2%Crystal 70.0%4.2%Robbinsdale 71.0%7.6%Coumbia Heights 69.3%10.7%Fridley 69.2%7.5% Hennepin County 72.3%6.0% 7-County Metro Area 72.3%5.9% Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 28 Jobs in Brooklyn Center The number of jobs based in Brooklyn Center decreased significantly during the 2000s, but has rebounded slightly in the 2010s according to the following table and chart. The Metropolitan Council has forecasted an 18% growth in jobs in Brooklyn Center during this decade, followed by 6% job growth in each of the next two decades. Based on a jobs-to-residents ratio, Brooklyn Center has a lower ratio (69 jobs per 100 “working age” residents age 18-64) than Hennepin County and the metro area. However, it has a higher ratio than several of its neighboring communities. Job growth in neighboring cities during the 2000s and early 2010s shows no consistent pattern. Of these cities, Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park and Fridley are significant centers of employment. With significant tracts of land available for development, only Brooklyn Park is experiencing significant job growth in recent years. As a fully developed community, job growth in Brooklyn Center is related closely to redevelopment. Table SE-17: Jobs in Brooklyn Center 2000-2040 Estimate Geography 2000 2010 2016 2020 2030 2040 '00-'10 '10-'20 '20-'30 '30-'40 '00-'10 '10-'20 '20-'30 '30-'40 Brookyln Center 16,698 11,001 12,871 13,000 13,800 14,600 -5,697 1,999 800 800 -34.1%18.2%6.2%5.8%68.8Brooklyn Park 23,558 24,084 29,208 32,100 36,100 40,200 526 8,016 4,000 4,100 2.2%33.3%12.5%11.4%59.7Crystal5,538 3,929 4,386 4,400 4,640 4,900 -1,609 471 240 260 -29.1%12.0%5.5%5.6%30.5Robbinsdale7,079 6,858 7,224 7,000 7,100 7,200 -221 142 100 100 -3.1%2.1%1.4%1.4%77.6Columbia Heights 6,345 3,484 4,134 4,280 4,440 4,600 -2,861 796 160 160 -45.1%22.8%3.7%3.6%32.6Fridley26,278 21,333 22,829 23,700 24,900 26,100 -4,945 2,367 1,200 1,200 -18.8%11.1%5.1%4.8%131.4 Hennepin County 874,882 805,089 899,951 924,710 981,800 1,038,140 -69,793 119,621 57,090 56,340 -8.0%14.9%6.2%5.7%114.8 Metro Area 1,414,024 1,543,872 1,701,785 1,791,080 1,913,050 2,032,660 129,848 247,208 121,970 119,610 9.2%16.0%6.8%6.3%89.8 Sources: Metropolitan Council; Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) Numeric Change Percent Change-------------- Forecast -------------2016 Jobs/100 residents 18-64 Figure SE-24: Number of Jobs per 100 Working Residents Age 18-64 2016 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 BrookylnCenter BrooklynPark Crystal Robbinsdale ColumbiaHeights Fridley HennepinCounty Metro Area Sources: MetropolitanCouncil; Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development 29 The following table and charts break down Brooklyn Center’s employment base by industry. Employment in a community can influence not only its tax base and use of land, but can also impact the types of housing demanded and support of certain types of retail. Between 2010 and 2016, Brooklyn Center’s employment base increased by roughly 2,000 jobs or 18%. Industries that have led this growth have been in the “Eds and Meds”, retail, and PDR (production, distribution, and repair) sectors. It is not surprising that the educational and medical services sector (Eds and Meds) has driven job growth in Brooklyn Center in recent years. It is the industry that has performed the best throughout the metropolitan region since 2000 and has accounted for nearly 120,000 new jobs. No other industry sector even comes close. Table SE-18: Employment by Industry 2000-2016 BROOKLYN CENTER Industry 2000 2005 2010 2016 2000 2005 2010 2016 '00-'05 '05-'10 '10-'16 '00-'05 '05-'10 '10-'16PDR**4,226 3,263 2,641 3,135 25.5%25.1%24.3%24.4%-963 -622 494 -22.8%-19.1%18.7%Retail 3,767 2,025 1,521 2,228 22.7%15.6%14.0%17.3%-1,742 -504 707 -46.2%-24.9%46.5%Knowledge*3,312 2,100 2,327 2,408 20.0%16.2%21.4%18.7%-1,212 227 81 -36.6%10.8%3.5%Eds/Meds 2,472 3,179 2,384 3,121 14.9%24.5%21.9%24.2%707 -795 737 28.6%-25.0%30.9%Hospitality 1,759 1,546 1,121 1,060 10.6%11.9%10.3%8.2%-213 -425 -61 -12.1%-27.5%-5.4%Gov't 505 473 418 401 3.0%3.6%3.8%3.1%-32 -55 -17 -6.3%-11.6%-4.1%Other 545 393 465 518 3.3%3.0%4.3%4.0%-152 72 53 -27.9%18.3%11.4%Total 16,586 12,979 10,877 12,871 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%-3,607 -2,102 1,994 -21.7%-16.2%18.3% 7-COUNTY METRO AREA Industry 2000 2005 2010 2016 2000 2005 2010 2016 '00-'05 '05-'10 '10-'16 '00-'05 '05-'10 '10-'16PDR**468,424 426,911 356,457 392,961 28.8%26.3%22.9%23.1%-41,513 -70,454 36,504 -8.9%-16.5%10.2%Retail 181,371 178,263 157,279 166,914 11.1%11.0%10.1%9.8%-3,108 -20,984 9,635 -1.7%-11.8%6.1%Knowledge*451,059 434,882 430,823 456,905 27.7%26.8%27.6%26.8%-16,177 -4,059 26,082 -3.6%-0.9%6.1%Eds/Meds 274,382 311,016 348,911 390,068 16.9%19.2%22.4%22.9%36,634 37,895 41,157 13.4%12.2%11.8%Hospitality 137,828 151,232 147,182 168,931 8.5%9.3%9.4%9.9%13,404 -4,050 21,749 9.7%-2.7%14.8%Gov't 58,384 63,200 65,974 69,475 3.6%3.9%4.2%4.1%4,816 2,774 3,501 8.2%4.4%5.3%Other 56,212 55,992 52,403 56,551 3.5%3.5%3.4%3.3%-220 -3,589 4,148 -0.4%-6.4%7.9%Total 1,627,660 1,621,496 1,559,029 1,701,805 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%-6,164 -62,467 142,776 -0.4%-3.9%9.2% UNITED STATES Industry 2000 2005 2010 2016 2000 2005 2010 2016 '00-'05 '05-'10 '10-'16 '00-'05 '05-'10 '10-'16PDR**37,900,038 35,194,199 30,226,593 32,787,642 29.3%26.8%23.7%23.8%-2,705,839 -4,967,606 2,561,048 -7.1%-14.1%8.5%Retail 15,344,488 15,321,421 14,547,773 15,459,457 11.8%11.7%11.4%11.2%-23,067 -773,647 911,683 -0.2%-5.0%6.3%Knowledge*28,238,310 28,385,876 27,236,236 30,212,264 21.8%21.6%21.3%21.9%147,566 -1,149,641 2,976,028 0.5%-4.1%10.9%Eds/Meds 24,788,001 27,691,167 30,235,490 32,782,750 19.1%21.1%23.7%23.7%2,903,166 2,544,323 2,547,261 11.7%9.2%8.4%Hospitality 12,127,146 13,187,637 13,479,279 15,297,094 9.4%10.0%10.6%11.1%1,060,491 291,642 1,817,815 8.7%2.2%13.5%Gov't 6,961,572 7,149,265 7,543,200 7,202,374 5.4%5.4%5.9%5.2%187,692 393,935 -340,826 2.7%5.5%-4.5%Other 4,200,335 4,379,841 4,404,848 4,305,658 3.2%3.3%3.5%3.1%179,506 25,007 -99,190 4.3%0.6%-2.3%Total 129,559,890 131,309,404 127,673,418 138,047,236 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%1,749,515 -3,635,986 10,373,818 1.4%-2.8%8.1% * Knowledge = Consists of "knowledge-based" industry sectors, such as Information, Finance, and Professional Services/ManagementSources: Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW); Perkins+Will Employment Counts Distribution Numeric Change Percentage Change ** PDR = Production, Distribution, and Repair industry sectors (i.e., Manufacturing, Construction, Transportaton, Utilities, etc.) Employment Counts Distribution Numeric Change Percentage Change Employment Counts Distribution Numeric Change Percentage Change APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 30 Figure 25: Brooklyn Center Employment Change by Industry 2000-2016 4,226 3,767 3,312 2,472 1,759 505 545 3,135 2,228 2,408 3,121 1,060 401 518 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 PDR**Retail Knowledge*Eds/Meds Hospitality Gov't Other Em p l o y m e n t Industry 2000 2016 * Knowledge = Consists of "knowledge-based" industry sectors, such as Information, Finance, and Professional Services/Managment** PDR = Production, Distribution,and Repair industry sectors (i.e., Manufacturing, Construction, Transportation, Utilities, etc.)Sources: Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, QCEW dataset;Perkins+Will Figure 26: Employment Profile by Industry 2016 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% BROOKLYNCENTER 7-COUNTYMETRO AREA UNITEDSTATES Pe r c e n t o f W o r k e r s Other Gov't Hospitality Eds/Meds Knowledge* Retail PDR** * Knowledge = Consists of "knowledge-based" industry sectors, such as Information, Finance, and Professional Services/Managment** PDR = Production, Distribution,and Repair industry sectors (i.e., Manufacturing, Construction, Transportation, Utilities, etc.)Sources: Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development, QCEW dataset;Perkins+Will 31 Jobs of Residents The jobs of city residents can also be categorized by occupational category and compared with jobs in the Twin Cities region as shown in the following table. Compared to the region, Brooklyn Center has higher percentages of production, skilled craft and administrative support jobs and considerably fewer professional/ technical jobs. The relatively high percentage of Brooklyn Center residents employed in a production, skilled craft occupation is related to the relatively high percentage of employed residents in the manufacturing industry. Table 19: Occupational Distribution of Employed Residents 2015 Occupational Group Brooklyn Center 7-County Metro Area Executive/Managerial 15.5%23.8%Professional/Technical 20.5%25.5%Sales 6.9%10.1%Administrative Support 14.1%13.2%Services 15.9%10.5%Production, Skilled Crafts 20.8%10.9%Farmers, Construction 6.3%5.9% Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey HOUSING Building on the previous socio-economic section, this section provides data specific to housing conditions in Brooklyn Center. It is intended to provide a better understanding of where important gaps in the supply of housing may exist. Metropolitan Council Housing Assessment In support of each community updating their comprehensive plan, the Metropolitan Council has prepared an existing housing assessment that provides specific housing data required for the plan and integral to determining the need for certain types of housing, especially affordably priced housing. The following table presents this data. APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 32 Table H-20: Metropolitan Council Existing Housing Assessment for the City of Brooklyn Center (February 2017) TOTAL HOUSING UNITS1 11,603 AFFORDABILITY2 TENURE3 TYPE1 PUBLICLY SUBSIDIZED UNITS4 HOUSING COST BURDENED HOUSEHOLDS5 Units affordable to households with income at or below 30% of AMI 539 Units affordable to households with income 31% to 50% of AMI Units affordable to households with income 51% to 80% of AMI 6,669 3,603 Ownership Units Rental Units 7,130 4,473 Single-family Units Multifamily Units Manufactured Homes Other Housing Units 0 All publicly subsidized units 602 Publicly subsidized senior units 0 Publicly subsidized units for people with disabilities 0 Publicly subsidized units: All others 602 8,270 3,333 0 4 Source: HousingLink Streams data (covers projects whose financing closed by December 2014), http://www.housinglink.org/streams 5 Housing cost burden refers to households whose housing costs are at least 30% of their income. Source: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2009-2013 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, with counts adjusted to better match Metropolitan Council 2015 household estimates. Income at or below 30% of AMI 2,005 Income 31% to 50% of AMI 1,423 Income 51% to 80% of AMI 686 AMI = Area Median Income; area in this definition refers to the 16-county Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan statistical area 1 Source: Metropolitan Council, 2015 housing stock estimates 2 Source: Metropolitan Council staff estimates for 2015 based on 2105 and 2016 MetroGIS Parcel Datasets (ownership units), 2009-2013 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy data from HUD (rental units and household income), and the Council's 2015 Manufactured Housing Parks Survey (manufactured homes). 3 Source: US Census Bureau, 2011-2015 American Community Survey five-year estimates; counts adjusted tobetter match the Council's 2015 housing stock estimates 33 Metropolitan Council Map of Estimated Market Value of Brooklyn Center Homes Map 1 below was produced by the Metropolitan Council in order to identify the location of affordably-priced owner-occupied homes in Brooklyn Center. Based on a set of assumptions, such as down payments, interest rates, etc., the Metropolitan Council considers an owner- occupied home to be affordable if it is valued at $236,000 or less. Almost all of the owned homes in Brooklyn Center meet this criteria. Map 1. Owner-Occupied Housing by Estimated Market Value Brooklyn Center APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 34 Year Housing Built The age of housing is often a good proxy for its overall condition and value; older homes require more-frequent and costlier repairs, and their size and design may not match current cultural preferences. Although older housing stock can many times have aesthetic and historic value, if the homes are not well-maintained they are at significant risk to deferred maintenance, which could result in declining values and neighborhood blight. Therefore, many communities closely track the condition of their older housing stock and support programs that aid homeowners in their upkeep and overall maintenance. The vast majority of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock is more than 40 years old. This is a major concern because at 40 years of age exterior components of a building including siding, windows and roofs often need to be replaced to protect its structural integrity. The following table and chart shows that while the 1950s were the peak decade for housing construction in the City, this was a period in which owner-occupied housing predominated. Most of the City’s rental housing -- i.e., most of its multifamily apartments -- were built in the 1960s and 70s. The lack of vacant land has limited housing construction since then, and new construction will mostly take place through redevelopment. Figure H-27: Year Housing Structure Built 2015 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Pre-1950 1950-1959 1960-1969 1970-1979 1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010-Present Pe r c e n t o f H o u s i n g U n i t s Year Built BROOKLYN CENTER HENNEPIN COUNTY 7-COUNTY METRO AREA Source: US Census: 2011-2015 American Community Survey 35 Table H-21: Housing by Year Built and Tenure 2015 Year Built Own Rent Vacant Total Own Rent Vacant Total Own Rent Vacant Total BROOKLYN CENTER2010-Present 0 0 0 0 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%--------2000-2009 93 27 0 120 1.4%0.6%0.0%1.0%77.5%22.5%0.0%100.0%1990-1999 90 451 34 575 1.3%10.7%4.3%4.9%15.7%78.4%5.9%100.0%1980-1989 319 577 80 976 4.7%13.7%10.0%8.3%32.7%59.1%8.2%100.0%1970-1979 687 1,500 219 2,406 10.1%35.7%27.5%20.4%28.6%62.3%9.1%100.0%1960-1969 1,485 1,085 132 2,702 21.9%25.8%16.6%22.9%55.0%40.2%4.9%100.0%1950-1959 3,311 466 286 4,063 48.8%11.1%35.9%34.5%81.5%11.5%7.0%100.0%Pre-1950 806 99 46 951 11.9%2.4%5.8%8.1%84.8%10.4%4.8%100.0%All Housing Units 6,791 4,205 797 11,793 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%57.6%35.7%6.8%100.0% HENNEPIN COUNTY2010-Present 2,863 2,923 65 5,851 0.9%1.6%0.2%1.1%48.9%50.0%1.1%100.0%2000-2009 28,552 17,116 4,273 49,941 9.3%9.4%15.2%9.6%57.2%34.3%8.6%100.0%1990-1999 30,348 15,328 1,609 47,285 9.9%8.4%5.7%9.1%64.2%32.4%3.4%100.0%1980-1989 43,979 26,723 3,519 74,221 14.3%14.6%12.5%14.3%59.3%36.0%4.7%100.0%1970-1979 38,821 37,714 3,834 80,369 12.6%20.6%13.6%15.5%48.3%46.9%4.8%100.0%1960-1969 31,070 25,179 3,119 59,368 10.1%13.8%11.1%11.5%52.3%42.4%5.3%100.0%1950-1959 51,676 15,373 3,612 70,661 16.8%8.4%12.8%13.6%73.1%21.8%5.1%100.0%Pre-1950 80,086 42,445 8,105 130,636 26.1%23.2%28.8%25.2%61.3%32.5%6.2%100.0%All Housing Units 307,395 182,801 28,136 518,332 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%59.3%35.3%5.4%100.0% 7-COUNTY METRO AREA2010-Present 9,570 6,027 115 15,712 1.2%1.7%0.2%1.3%60.9%38.4%0.7%100.0%2000-2009 109,222 42,555 8,342 160,119 13.9%11.7%14.7%13.3%68.2%26.6%5.2%100.0%1990-1999 123,747 39,311 5,225 168,283 15.8%10.8%9.2%13.9%73.5%23.4%3.1%100.0%1980-1989 119,915 56,336 6,637 182,888 15.3%15.4%11.7%15.2%65.6%30.8%3.6%100.0%1970-1979 105,139 72,799 8,535 186,473 13.4%20.0%15.1%15.5%56.4%39.0%4.6%100.0%1960-1969 76,288 46,570 6,228 129,086 9.7%12.8%11.0%10.7%59.1%36.1%4.8%100.0%1950-1959 96,299 28,556 6,136 130,991 12.3%7.8%10.8%10.9%73.5%21.8%4.7%100.0%Pre-1950 145,232 72,588 15,366 233,186 18.5%19.9%27.2%19.3%62.3%31.1%6.6%100.0%All Housing Units 785,412 364,742 56,584 1,206,738 100.0%100.0%100.0%100.0%65.1%30.2%4.7%100.0% Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey Number Distribution By Year Built Distribution by Occupancy APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 36 Housing Structure Type The type housing structure can influence not only affordability but also overall livability. Having a range of housing structures can provide residents of a community options that best meet their needs as they shift from one life stage to another. For example, retirees often desire multifamily housing not only for the ease of maintenance, but also for security reasons. For those fortunate to travel south during the winter, multifamily residences are less susceptible to home maintenance issues or burglary concerns because of on-site management. For those with health concerns, multifamily residences often have neighbors that can also provide oversight should an acute health problem occur. The majority (63%) of Brooklyn Center’s housing stock consists of detached single-family homes. This is above the proportion found in Hennepin County (55%) or throughout the metropolitan area (59%). Nevertheless, the City’s housing stock is diversified, with many multifamily units in large structures, as well as a significant number of single family attached units. Table H-22: Housing Structure Type 2000-2015 Housing Type 2000 2010 2015 No.Pct.2000 2010 2015 BROOKLYN CENTERSingle Family Detached 7,180 6,696 6,872 -308 -4.3%62.9%63.5%62.5%Single Family Attached 929 965 884 -45 -4.8%8.1%9.1%8.0%2-Units 97 83 94 -3 -3.1%0.8%0.8%0.9%3-4 Units 142 105 105 -37 -26.1%1.2%1.0%1.0%5 or more Units 3,048 2,678 3,033 -15 -0.5%26.7%25.4%27.6%Other Unit Types 28 26 8 -20 -71.4%0.2%0.2%0.1%Total 11,424 10,553 10,996 -428 -3.7%100.0%100.0%100.0% HENNEPIN COUNTYSingle Family Detached 260,349 265,319 271,200 10,851 4.2%57.1%56.0%55.3%Single Family Attached 32,477 41,925 42,701 10,224 31.5%7.1%8.8%8.7%2-Units 20,555 17,579 16,841 -3,714 -18.1%4.5%3.7%3.4%3-4 Units 11,816 10,795 11,554 -262 -2.2%2.6%2.3%2.4%5 or more Units 129,411 136,607 146,411 17,000 13.1%28.4%28.8%29.9%Other Unit Types 1,521 1,631 1,489 -32 -2.1%0.3%0.3%0.3%Total 456,129 473,856 490,196 34,067 7.5%100.0%100.0%100.0% 7-COUNTY METRO AREASingle Family Detached 624,734 669,718 682,595 57,861 9.3%61.2%60.3%59.3%Single Family Attached 84,436 123,763 130,366 45,930 54.4%8.3%11.1%11.3%2-Units 35,054 29,435 29,780 -5,274 -15.0%3.4%2.7%2.6%3-4 Units 24,416 22,573 23,891 -525 -2.2%2.4%2.0%2.1%5 or more Units 236,350 250,059 268,930 32,580 13.8%23.1%22.5%23.4%Other Unit Types 16,464 15,169 14,592 -1,872 -11.4%1.6%1.4%1.3%Total 1,021,454 1,110,717 1,150,154 128,700 12.6%100.0%100.0%100.0% Source: US Census, 2011-2015 American Community Survey Change 2000-2015 Distribution 37 MAPPING & BACKGROUND INFORMATION Introduction The purpose of the following report is to provide context to the corresponding attached maps that have been prepared for the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update (“2040 Plan”). This initial set of maps provides background context from which to begin the planning process, as well as checks off several of the Metropolitan Council’s required elements to be included within Brooklyn Center’s 2040 Plan. Some of the information attached to this report is provided for reference and background information and may not necessarily be included within the final Comprehensive Plan document; however, it is included in this report because of how clearly some of the community and neighborhood characteristics and patterns are demonstrated physically through the mapping analysis. Additionally, some of the information shown on the maps spatially describes and supports the information contained within Part 1 Demographics Update (“Demographics Update”) of the background analysis, which provides updated demographics and housing information and tables that will be included as part of the 2040 Plan. The following report is organized to correspond to the maps which follow this report. Each map description and summary includes the following information: • Data captured/contained within the map; and • Whether the map is required to be included within the 2040 Plan; and • Relationship to the Demographics Update; and Significance or relationship of information to the Planning Process and 2040 Plan. Community Snapshot Size 5,363.4 Acres County Hennepin County Adjacent Cities Robbinsdale, Crystal, Brooklyn Park, Minneapolis, Fridley Major Roadways I-94, Hwy 100, Hwy 252, Hwy 694 Population 2016 (est)31,231 School Districts ISD #11, ISD #279, ISD #281, ISD#286 Parks &Trails 458 Acres: Shingle Creek, Twin Lake Regional Trails & North Mississippi Regional Park Natural Resources Mississippi River, Twin Lakes, Shingle Creek APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 38 Map 2: Metropolitan Council Community Designation The Metropolitan Council created a uniform system of defining general development patterns across the region through the establishment of Community Designations. The 2015 System Statement issued to the City of Brooklyn Center included the City’s Community Designation per the Metropolitan Council. Each city is required to acknowledge their community’s designation(s), and to comply with intent and purpose of the designation in the 2040 Plan. The City of Brooklyn Center is designated entirely as “Urban” which is described as: “Urban communities experienced rapid development during the post-World War II era, and exhibit the transition toward the development stage dominated by the influence of the automobile. Urban communities are expected to plan for forecasted population and household growth at average densities of at least 10 units per acre for new development and redevelopment. In addition, Urban communities are expected to target opportunities for more intensive development near regional transit investments…” The community designation is consistent with the information provided in the Demographics Update which includes information regarding age of housing stock, which generally demonstrates that much of the community was developed in the post-World War II era. 39 Map 2: Metropolitan Council Community Designation DRAFT Date: 08.01.2017 Source: Metropolitan Council, MNGEO, Hennepin County INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AVE N S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVDINTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F Community Designation Urban 0 1,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800Feet APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 40 Map 3: Future Land Use Plan Map 3 is taken directly from the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan, and no changes have been made (GIS to be obtained from City). This map is simply a starting point from which the 2040 Plan is developed. The Future Land Use Plan will be updated to reflect any changes or modifications desired as determined through this 2040 Plan update process. The following background information supports the current plan, and should be modified as necessary. It should be noted that these designations can be changed, adjusted and/or modified as necessary to reflect the aspirations of this planning period, or they may stay exactly the same and unchanged. Map 3, in an updated form, is required to be submitted as part of the 2040 Plan. The Future Land Use Plan must be amended and adjusted, as necessary, for consistency with the population, households and employment projections as stated within the 2015 System Statement (see Demographics Update for numbers.) 41 Map 3: Future Land Use Plan (To be updated with City GIS) DRAFT Date: 08.01.2017 Source: Metropolitan Council, MNGEO, Hennepin County APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 42 Map 4: Community Development Activities & Projects 2016 Since the 2030 Plan Update was adopted the City has been working diligently on redevelopment and revitalization efforts throughout the community. The 2030 Plan focused planning and redevelopment efforts of the Opportunity Site and the “City Center” comprehensively. These efforts take significant time, resources and effort to bring to fruition and as a result many of the redevelopment areas targeted in the 2030 Plan continue to be worked on today. Acknowledging current redevelopment activities and projects is important to understand how such projects and work may influence the 2040 Plan process, and to account for how such developments will contribute to the anticipated population, household and employment growth. Several of the City’s redevelopment initiatives have been completed, or are in progress since adoption of the 2030 Plan. Successful projects include the Shingle Creek Crossing redevelopment project, the Joslyn Redevelopment Project and the FBI Regional Field Office. These projects are bringing new users to the community and helping to revitalize underutilized parcels in the City; however, opportunities for redevelopment remain and will likely be an integral part of the planning process and discussion moving forward in this planning process. Information regarding redevelopment and staging is required to be included within the 2040 Plan update; however, it does not necessarily need to be with a map or with the specificity identified below. The information contained in the report can be used as context and foundation from which the Future Land Use Plan can be refined and developed for inclusion within the 2040 Plan. Additionally, the land use pattern associated with redevelopment should be evaluated for compliance with the projected population, household and employment growth contained within the 2015 System Statement. This analysis should also be completed to identify what infrastructure and transportation improvements may be necessary to support the planned redevelopment and growth. Map 4 was produced in 2016 by the City to show and track community development and redevelopment activities. This map will be updated to reflect all current activities, and once updated, will remain current through the 2040 Plan process to ensure that the Future Land Use Plan, transportation and infrastructure plans account for current redevelopment activities in the community. The following list is identified within the margins of Map 4: 43 Current Development Activities 1. Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor – North Redevelopment Opportunities • NE corner of Brooklyn Boulevard and 70th Avenue • 4-6 lots north of Slim’s restaurant 2. Brooklyn Boulevard Market (6,700 SF commercial pad site)Brooklyn Boulevard Corridor Mid • Bridgeman’s/Boulevard Market Shopping Center • Senior Care Housing Project (former Cars w/Heart site) • Trail and Streetscape Improvements 3. Brooklyn Boulevard. Corridor – South • Commercial Redevelopment opportunities (5700 block of 58th Avenue/ Brooklyn Boulevard • Brooklyn Boulevard. & 55th Ave Intersection Improvements • C-Line Bus Rapid Transit Corridor • Phase I Brooklyn Boulevard. Improvements (Fed/County funded for Yr 2018) 4. Luther Auto Group 5. New Millennium Academy K-8 Charter School 6. Twin Lakes Regional Trail Connections and Extensions • Lakeside Avenue extension • Lake Point Apartments extension • 57th Avenue extension 7. Sears Store • Parking Lot Improvements • Store Front/Architectural Improvements 8. Shingle Creek Crossing PUD 9. Jerry’s Food Site 10. Opportunity Site • Brookdale Ford site APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 44 • Brookdale Square • Residential PUD – 800 Market Rate Units 11. 57th Avenue and Logan EDA/Redevelopment Site 12. Embassy Suites – Phase II 13. EDA Site (C2 Zone/5 Acres) 14. Former Mr. BBQ Site (C2 Zone/2.12 acres) 15. I-1 Industrial Park Study Area (Industrial Inventory Strategies of industrial uses and opportunities) 16. Humboldt Avenue Corridor (enhancement opportunities) 17. Earle Brown Lanes (C2 Zone/4-acre site) 18. Evergreen Villas (potential multi-family housing) 19. Eastbrook 2nd Addition 20. TH 252 Corridor Study 21. Brooklyn Center Storage 6330 Camden Avenue (4 Story/80,000 SF Facility) 21. Mississippi River Critical Corridor New Rules/Ordinance Update 45 Map 4: Redevelopment & Current Planning Activity APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 46 Map 5: Natural Resources As a fully developed community, most of the land has been developed with some type of residential, commercial or industrial uses and not many areas of the community remain in their natural, pre-settlement condition. However, there are several water bodies and water features in the community that provide critical natural resource connections to the region, and to the City’s park system. This map is a compilation of several data sets created by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) and the National Wetland Inventory. As demonstrated on the Map, in 2014 the MnDNR issued a draft list of impaired streams and lakes which identified Twin Lake and Shingle Creek in the City of Brooklyn Center. In addition, in 2008 the MnDNR in coordination with Hennepin County and the Metropolitan Council prepared a Natural Resources Inventory which was reflected in the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) which identified the wetland area around Palmer Lake as an area having Moderate Quality natural resources. The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) shows likely wetland areas in the community, with the most notable being the complex that runs north-south from Palmer Lake adjacent to and surrounds Shingle Creek through the City Center. These systems are important to consider when preparing the 2040 Plan update, particularly if any of the systems have the potential to be positively (or adversely) impacted at time of redevelopment. This is most relevant for Shingle Creek, which was listed in 2014 as impaired, and runs near the City Center and could be impacted or improved as redevelopment occurs in this area. 47 Map 5: Natural Resources INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AVE N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 51ST AVE N INTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetNatural Resources Impaired Lakes 2014 (Draft) Impaired Streams 2014 (Draft) National Wetland Inventory MLCCS Ecological Significance Moderate Quality DRAFT Date: 08.01.2017 Source: Metropolitan Council, MNGEO, Hennepin County APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 48 Map 6: Metropolitan Council Transit Market Areas The Metropolitan Council designates the City in Transit Market Area II and Transit Market Area III as shown on Map 6. The following definition of each market area are provided: Transit Market Area II (Metropolitan Council’s Definition): Transit Market Area II has high to moderately high population and employment densities and typically has a traditional street grid comparable to Market Area I. Much of Market Area II is also categorized as an Urban Center and it can support many of the same types of fixed-route transit as Market Area I, although usually at lower frequencies or short service spaces. Approximately 33% of Brooklyn Center is designated as Transit Market Area II, and much of the area within this Transit Market Area includes neighborhoods dominated by aging single-family residential uses and integrated multi-family uses. Most of these areas were developed post-World War II and were generally constructed between 1950 and 1965. Transit Market Area III (Metropolitan Council’s Definition): Transit Market Area III has moderate density but tends to have a less traditional street grid that can limit the effectiveness of transit. It is typically Urban with large portions of Suburban and Suburban Edge communities. Transit service in this area is primarily commuter express bus service with some fixed-route local service providing basic coverage. General public dial-a-ride services are available where fixed-route service is not viable. Approximately 67% (or two-thirds) of Brooklyn Center is designated as Transit Market Area III even though the entire extents of the City are designated Urban and there are no areas designated as ‘suburban’. There are some fixed- route options within this Market Area in the community; however, it should be noted that this designation as Transit Market Area III may not truly reflect the existing neighborhood patterns particularly in the northeast quadrant of the community. While neighborhoods in this area were developed primarily from 1964 to 1975 the development pattern is still dominated by a fairly regular grid and is densely populated. Further, this area is identified by the Metropolitan Council as an area of concentrated poverty which would suggest that it is critical to ensure transit services are frequent and easily accessible in this area. This relationship and designation should be explored/analyzed further particularly with respect to route access, stops and frequency during the planning process. 49 Map 6: Metropolitan Council Transit Market Areas INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AVE N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 51ST AVE N INTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetMarket Area Transit Market Area II Transit Market Area III DRAFT Date: 08.01.2017 Source: Metropolitan Council, MNGEO, Hennepin County APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 50 Map 7: Existing Transit/Bus Routes Mass Transit/Bus Routes: Residents of the City of Brooklyn Center rely on public transit, and it is imperative that the bus lines that serve the City continue to serve the population cost effectively and efficiently. This is supported through information collected in the Demographics Update, as well as exhibited on several of the maps contained within this report. As demonstrated on Map 7, most major east-west and north-south roadways have at least one bus route that provides connections to the greater region and within the community. However, as described in the analysis of Map 11, further review of accessibility should be completed as part of this process particularly in the northeast and southwest quadrants of the City. The following bus lines currently serve the residents and employees in Brooklyn Center: Route #Description 19 Olson Memorial Hwy – Penn Ave N 22 Brooklyn Center – Lyndale Ave North – Cedar-28th Av S – VA 5 Brooklyn Center – Fremont – 26th Ave – Chicago – MOA 717 Brooklyn Center – Robbinsdale – Plymouth 721 Ltd Stop – Brooklyn Center – New Hope – Mpls 722 Brooklyn center – Humboldt Ave N – Shingle Creek Pkwy 723 Starlite – North Henn Community College – Brooklyn Center 724 Ltd Stop – Target Campus – Sarlite – Brooklyn Center 760 Express – Zane Ave – 63rd Ave – 65th Ave P& R, Mpls 761 Express – Brooklyn Park – Xerxes – 49th Avenue – Mpls 762 Ltd Stop – Brooklyn Center – North Mpls – Mpls 763 Express – 85th Ave – Brookdale Dr – Humboldt – Mpls 765 Express – Target – Hwy 252 and 73rd Ave P&R – Mpls 766 Express – Champlin – Noble P&R – West River Rd 767 Express – 63rd Ave P&R – 65th Ave P& R - Mpls 768 Express – Noble P&R – Foley P&R – Mpls 801 Brooklyn Center – Columbia Heights - Rosedale 51 Map 7: Existing Transit/Bus Routes !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿!¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿!¿ !¿!¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ !¿ kj kj kj 2 2 785 783 780781782 8 8 7 7 6 5 7 6 6 8 5 0 7 6 8 8 6 5 760 767 5 7 6 3 1 9 7 2 3 8 5 4 8 5 2 761 8 0 1 724 7 6 2 721 7 2 2 7 1 7 716 INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AVE N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetTransit Service kj ParkAndRideLots !¿Bus Stops Bus Routes DRAFT Date: 08.01.2017 Source: Metropolitan Council, MNGEO, Hennepin County There are three Park and Ride lots in the City of Brooklyn Center, all of which are operated by Metro Transit. • Church of the Nazarene – located at Highway 252 and 73rd Avenue North (Bus Routes 765, 766) – Capacity of 115 Vehicles, no expansions planned. • Regal Cinemas20 – located at 6420 Camden Avenue North (Bus Routes 763, 765, 766) Capacity of 200 Vehicles, no expansions planned. • 65th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard – 6503 Brooklyn Boulevard (Bus Routes 723, 760, 767) – Capacity of 239 Vehicles, no expansion planned – bike parking available. This information is required to be addressed within the 2040 Plan update and further analysis, as well as future needs and demands should be projected. Preliminarily, the mapping analysis in conjunction with the information collected in the Demographics Update suggests that this portion of the Comprehensive Plan may need attention particularly as it relates to future transit needs and demands. APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 52 Map 8: Housing – Age of Homesteaded Structures The age of the housing stock is an important characteristic of the community particularly as it relates to potential structural obsolescence and other limiting factors which correlate to housing values. As described earlier, much of Brooklyn Center’s single-family housing stock was developed post-World War II between 1950 and 1963 and many of the homes in this age range were dominated by rambler architectural styles. As shown on Map 15, entire neighborhoods were all constructed in a relatively short period of time which strongly defines neighborhood pattern. As shown, most of Brooklyn Center was developed on a fairly regular grid pattern and does not reflect a ‘suburban’ development pattern. This is positive from the perspective that transportation and transit connections should be easier to improve, where necessary, because of the relatively dense population of the neighborhoods. However, aging neighborhoods can present a challenge as major systems (i.e. roof, siding, windows, HVAC, etc.) reach the end of their useful life. This can be particularly difficult if residents are unable to reinvest and maintain their properties, which leads to deferred maintenance and the potential for more significant problems that would become widespread across entire neighborhoods. This map is not required to be a part of the 2040 Plan update, but instead is provided to supplement the information contained within the Demographics Update. This map shows the geographic pattern of development, and may provide greater insight when considering the land use plan in conjunction with the transit and transportation plans. 53 Map 8: Housing - Age of Homesteaded Structures Mis s i s s i p p i Tw i n T w i n Ryan Palmer Twin Twin 94 100 2 5 2 69th Du p o n t 63rd 81 Br y a n t 10 73rd 55th 6th Ca m d e n Gi r a r d J u n e 59th Kn o x 58th B e a r d Ne w t o n 65th Sc o t t 61st Hu m b o l d t Fr a n c e Wil l o w 66th 64th Freeway 60th U n i t y Shin g l e C r e e k We s t R i v e r Lo g a n Re g e n t 78th 70th K y l e P e r r y 52nd Ja m e s 50th O s s e o Lilac 53rd Ald r i c h Gr i m e s L e e Howe Ohenry Mo r g a n 4 t h L y n d a l e Ramp Qu e e n 77th 72nd 694 Xeni a C o l f a x Twin L a k e 67th 54th Ru s s e l l Ericon Meadowwood Oli v e r Xe r x e s 62nd 76th Broo k l y n 5 t h Sh e r i d a n Up t o n Nash Vi o l e t Janet Irving 47th Summit Bernard 68th 75th MumfordJoyce Ew i n g Dre w 51st 74th Estate Az e l i a Amy P a l m e r L a k e Oak Northwa y Ze n i t h N o b l e Ea s t L y n d a l e 49th Hal i f a x Q u a i l Yo r k 46th Lake b r e e z e 56th 48th 74 1/2 57th Ab b o t t Quarles Jud y Joh n M a r t i n Wingar d T o l e d o Urban Poe Im p e r i a l Wilshire Thurber Th o m a s Corvallis N o r t h p o r t Bro o k v i e w Woodbine S a i l o r Winchester Eleanor Riv e r d a l e Pe a r s o n Ad m i r a l Brookda l e C e n t e r Brookdale Vin c e n t W e l c o m e Bellvue 71st Ind i a n a Orc h a r d P e n n Paul Da l l a s Fairview Ve r a C r u z M a r l i n Sie r r a Byron E m e r s o n M a j o r Sh o r e s M i s s i s s i p p i Ea r l e B r o w n Wa s h b u r n Boulder B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e 46 1/2 Fr e m o n t Lawrence La k e v i e w Fa i r f i e l d Eckberg Burquest Parkway Chowen Ponds Lakeside Angeline La k e l a n d Kathren e Shari Ann 58 1/2 R i v e r w o o d 49 1/2 Ald r i c h 76th 2 5 2 Ir v i n g Pe r r y Co l f a x 73rd Ramp To l e d o C h o w e n Dr e w 67th 73rd C h o w e n 67th 75th Qu a i l A l d r i c h 81 Ram p B e a r d 61st Q u a i l Ramp 46th E m e r s o n Jam e s 66th Ramp Re g e n t Vin c e n t Ma j o r 65th 70th 76 t h Ramp 55th 62nd 56th 52nd 71st Ha l i f a x 48th Ald r i c h Perry Un i t y Ab b o t t O r c h a r d 74th Lilac 49th 69th Br y a n t 64th 100 Em e r s o n Da l l a s R a m p 76 t h Qua i l Xe r x e s Le e R e g e n t F r e m o n t 74th Woodbine 59th 57th 53rd R a m p 72ndLee Lilac Ram p Ha l i f a x U n i t y 76th Lo g a n Xe r x e s 10 0 Unity Ab b o t t Qu e e n 51st Pe n n S c o t t 56th Ja m e s 72nd 71st Du p o n t Ja m e s Pe r r y Fr e m o n t V e r a C r u z Pe r r y 51st Jun e 72nd 56th Ramp We l c o m e 70th Twin L a k e 50th 71st C a m d e n Yo r k To l e d o 65th Co l f a x F r a n c e 58th Co l f a x Ky l e Ramp Ram p 56th P e r r y Fre m o n t Lilac F r a n c e Ha l i f a x Fr a n c e Wa s h b u r n G r i m e s 70th 58th 48th L e e N o b l e 694 72n d Ramp D r e w 66th Qu a i l Ne w t o n 73rd 50th 74th 69th Ju n e 67th Oli v e r Ma j o r 54th 51st Up t o n 52nd Yo r k B e a r d Ma j o r Ma j o r 68th Br y a n t Lyn d a l e 74th D r e w C o l f a x 75th Up t o n D r e w 64th Dr e w Wa s h b u r n Xe r x e s 52nd O r c h a r d 61st Shing l e C r e e k 67th C a m d e n 69th E w i n g 60th Du p o n t Noble Gir a r d 47th 62nd 59th 73rd We l c o m e Em e r s o n Orchard P e r r y F r a n c e 67th 50th Ca m d e n Kn o x Ra m p 73rd Shingle Creek Sc o t t Re g e n t We s t R i v e r R e g e n t Ra m p 53rd 62nd R a m p Riv e r d a l e 66th Oliver Qu a i l 67th Un i t y 76th 67th 64th Shingle Creek X e r x e s M a j o r Ramp 74th 60th Ra m p 66th Ne w t o n Xer x e s Sco t t Grimes 49th 70th 77th 74th 61st 52nd M i s s i s s i p p i Ru s s e l l 48th 68th K y l e 54th Gir a r d 10 70th P e r r y 75th P e r r y I n d i a n a 4th Le e Lo g a n W i l l o w 56th 56th Lilac Ra m p Lilac Co l f a x Dupont Lyn d a l e 77th Ir v i n g Hu m b o l d t Yo r k Orc h a r d Lilac Ky l e Ramp N o b l e 47th R a m p S c o t t Em e r s o n Un i t y N o r t h p o r t Q u a i l 71st 47th 60th Lilac Gir a r d 74th 57th Tw i n L a k e 73rd Ol i v e r 51st 70th 54th G r i m e s Ram p A d m i r a l Broo k l y n 56th Tw i n L a k e 73rd 4th Gir a r d Bear d 72nd Mo r g a n We l c o m e Lilac Mo r g a n 50th 50th Kn o x Le e Winchester Aldrich 75th Hu m b o l d t Fr e m o n t Pe n n Ew i n g Ra m p Ew i n g We l c o m e B r y a n t Ir v i n g 47th 70th 66th Fr a n c e Un i t y 53rd Kn o x M o r g a n Ze n i t h Ramp 73rd Ald r i c h 72nd 70th 76th 53rd Qu a i l Pe n n BROOKLYN CENTER BROOKLYN PARK CRYSTAL MINNEAPOLIS ROBBINSDALE F YEAR_BUILT 1856 - 1913 1914 - 1935 1936- 1949 1950 - 1956 1957 - 1963 1964 - 1974 1975 - 1989 1990 - 2015 0 1,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800Feet Homestead Properties - Year Built DRAFT Date: 08.01.2017 Source: Metropolitan Council, MNGEO, Hennepin County APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 54 Map 9: Housing – Age of Rental/Multi-Family Structures Nearly 40% of the community’s residents rent and the majority of those renters live in apartment buildings which are integrated throughout the community as shown on Map 16. (See Demographics Update for more information regarding rental breakdowns.) Given that a significant portion of the City’s population lives in apartments the age of such structures becomes critically important to the overall health of the housing supply. As demonstrated on the map, the majority of the apartments were constructed prior to 1979 with the bulk of the units being constructed between 1966 and 1969. This means that the majority of the apartment are more than 50-years old, and that structural deficiencies and major capital improvements may be required in the relatively near term in order for the structures to remain marketable. This map is not required to be included as part of the 2040 Plan update, however, it important to understand geographically the location of the multi-family structures so that the future land use plan can be developed to consider where there may be demand for additional units, or where there may be redevelopment potential. 55 Map 9: Housing - Age of Rental/Multi-Family Structures M i s s i s s i p p i T w i n T w i n T w i n R y a n Palmer 94 1 0 0 69th 81 2 5 2 D u p o n t 63rd B r y a n t 55th 10 C a m d e n 6 t h G i r a r d J u n e 59th K n o x 58th Lake S c o t t 65th 61st H u m b o l d t F r a n c e W i l l o w 66th Ramp 64th X e r x e s Freeway Osseo N e w t o n 60th S h i n g l e C r e e k W e s t R i v e r L o g a n U nity O l i v e r Y a t e s 70th K y l e P e r r y 52nd 50th L i l a c Victory Memorial 53rd A l d r i c h G r i m e s L e e Howe Ohenry M o r g a n 4 t h L y n d a l e Q u e e n W e st Bro a d w a y 72nd 694 X e n i a C o l f a x T w i n L a k e 67th 75th 54th R u s s e l l R e g e n t Ericon Meadowwood 62nd J a m e s B e a r d 5 t h S h e r i d a n Z e n i t h Nash V i o l e t Janet Irving A b b o t t 47th Summit C h o w e n Bernard 68th F r e m o n t MumfordJoyce E w i n g D r e w 51st 74th A z e l i a Amy P a l m e r L a k e Oak Northway Brooklyn N o b l e E a s t L y n d a l e 49th 73rd H a l i f a x Q u a i l Y o r k 44th 46th Lakebreeze 56th 48th 74 1/2 57th Quarles J u d y John Martin W i n g a r d T o l e d o 45th Urban Poe Wilshire Thurber T h o m a s Corvallis O r c h a r d N o r t h p o r t B r o o k v i e w Woodbine S ailo r Winchester Eleanor R i v e r d a l e P e a r s o n A d m i r a l B r o o k d a l e C e n t e r W a s h b u r n V i n c e n t W e l c o m e Bellvue 71st I n d i a n a 3 7 t h U p t o n P e n n Paul D a l l a s 45 1/2 Fairview V e r a C r u z M a r l i n Byron I m perial E m e r s o n M a j o r S h o r e s 76th W ebber E a r l e B r o w n Boulder B r o o k l y n B o u l e v a r d F r o n t a g e 46 1/2 Lawrence L a k e v i e w Eckberg Burquest Parkway Ponds Lakeside Angeline L a k e la n d Robin V i c t o r y K a t h r e n e S h a r i A n n M i s s i s s i p p i 58 1/2 R i v e r w o o d 49 1/2 Mildred Madalyn R a m p O r c h a r d 74th 70th 72nd 60th M o r g a n E w i n g P e n n 45th 71st 53rd L i l a c F r e m o n t 70th I n d i a n a U n i t y R a m p 65th V i n c e n t M o r g a n K n o x K y l e 65th Q u a i l 75th B ry a nt U p t o n Fairview H u m b o l d t 61st Q u a i l E w i n g Q u a i l U n i t y V e r a C r u z G ri m e s X e r x e s A l d r i c h 52nd F r e m o n t F r e m o n t R a m p W e l c o m e G i r a r d 56th 67th U p t o n A l d r i c h Ramp V e r a C r u z U n i t y 67th P e r r y A b b o t t R a m p Ramp 67th T o l e d o P e n n 69th 62nd Q u a i l 76th 54th G i r a r d B r o o k l y n 44th 6 7 t h 59th H a l i f a x 47th 66th X e r x e s S c o t t 56th K n o x 694 64th A b b o t t R a mp W i l l o w L e e 73rd 47th 51st O l i v e r 55th W a s h b u r n A b b o t t M a j o r J u n e 52nd 1 0 0 R a m p R e g e n t 58th U p t o n 73rd V e r a C r u z 56th L o g a n 56th 74th P e r r y Ramp R a m p D r e w 73rd 74th X e n i a 51st 46th 57th T w i n L a k e Ramp T w i n L a k e 48th 50th L a k e la n d 47th D u p o n t C a m d e n 69th E m e r s o n 46th M a j o r N e w t o n 74th Q u e e nToledo Y o r k N e w t o n J a m e s Shingle Creek B e a r d T o l e d o P e r r y 70th Winchester R e g e n t C o l f a x R a m p 52nd 8 1 D r e w M a j o r U n i t y Z e n i t h V i n c e n t 61st Y o r k R e g e n t R a m p U n i t y O l i v e r Lilac B e a r d I r v i n g Shingle Creek 70th L i l a c V e r a C r u z R e g e n t Ramp O r c h a r d 51st S c o t t 73rd 59th Ramp O r c h a r d L a k e N o b l e D r e w Y o r k X erx es G i r a r d W e l c o m e U n i t y Woodbine 54th L i l a c M o r g a n B r y a n t G r i m e s B e a r d 73rd 70th E w i n g Lakeland A d m i r a l F r a n c e W e l c o m e T w i n L a k e 56th 46th R e g e n t 46th 45th 10 75th S h e r i d a n 73rd 48th Q u a i l R a m p L y n d a l e 73rd G r i m e s F r a n c e B e a r d L o g a n L e e 61st P e n n 2 5 2 62nd Quail C h o w e n Z e n i t h R u s s e l l J a m e s U n i t y N o b l e 4 t h N o b l e K n o x 53rd N o rt h p o r t 68th 66th 56th 65th 50th H a l i f a x S h i n g l e C r e ek R a m p C o l f a x 49th 71st C o l f a x E m e r s o n E w i n g 62nd O l i v e r P e r r y Aldrich J u n e Q u e e n G i r a r d F r a n c e 50th 45th 68th 60th H a l i f a x I r v i n g R a m p K y l e L e e 70th C a m d e n 75th 74th C o l f a x 47th R a m p 44th K n o x 71st 70th 72nd 68th H u m b o l d t 72nd P e r r y 73rd P e n n 74th A l d r i c h L i l a c E m e r s o n D a l l a s R a m p U p t o n Q u a i l L i l a c D r e w Q u a il K y l e 49th 48th 66th 74th Xerxes J a m e s B e a r d 50th G r i m e s L y n d a l e Ramp 47th Q u a i l T o l e d o R u s s e l l F r a n c e A l d r i c h 10 I n d i a n a 67th 53rd 58th P e r r y 70th70th 51st L i l ac L o g a n 50th R a m p 72nd D r e w 66th M a j o r 51st X e n i a D r e w W a s h b u r n X e r x e s F r e m o n t R a m p I n d i a n a Corvallis Woodbine R a m p E w i n g 53rd 4 t h 73rd 52nd L e e C a m d e n S c o t t 50th 67th 46th R a m p 60th P e r r y Q u e e n H a l i f a x 66th 44th BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F Apartments Year Built 1954 - 1961 1962 - 1965 1966 - 1969 1970 - 1979 1980 - 1993 0 1,250 2,500 3,750 5,000625Feet DRAFT Date: 08.01.2017 Source: Metropolitan Council, MNGEO, Hennepin County APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 56 Map 10: Housing – Square Footage of Single-Family Homes While related to housing age, the square footage of single-family homes also plays a significant role in the demographics of a community. Changes to family structure, technology, and other factors have changed housing demands which contributes to functional obsolescence in a home that can subsequently reduce home values. Brooklyn Center’s single-family housing stock is pretty homogeneous and nearly all homes and neighborhoods are dominated with square footages between less than 1,000 square feet and 1,500 square feet. This is a relatively modest housing size, and the single-family housing stock lacks diversity. As a result of house size and type, housing prices tend to be relatively affordable which is demonstrated by information contained within the Demographics Update. This map is not required to be included within the 2040 Plan update. However, it is extremely important to consider as the City plans for the future. Increasingly these homes are being used multi-generationally and with modest square footages the City needs to plan appropriately for the neighborhoods and supporting infrastructure. 57 Map 10: Square Footage of Single-Family Homes INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70T H AV E N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 51ST AVE N INTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetSize of Homesteaded Single Family Homes Finished Square Feet 0 - 1,019 1,019 - 1,196 1,196 - 1,462 1,462 - 1,948 1,948 - 3,323 DRAFT Date: 08.01.2017 Source: Metropolitan Council, MNGEO, Hennepin County APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 58 Map 1 1: Census Tracts with Concentrated Poverty The Metropolitan Council collects and synthesizes information from the Census regarding income levels of population based on census tracts and has created two data sets which can be mapped to reflect household incomes. The data set shown on Map 18 shows census tracts where at least 40% of the households have family incomes at 185% of the federal poverty rate or less. This map is not required to be included within the 2040 Plan update, but is nevertheless important to consider because it can be used to identify potential gaps in relationships between land use pattern, incomes, transportation and transit access. As described and shown on other maps contained within this background report there appears to be a potential mismatch of services and neighborhood composition, and this map helps to geographically illustrate where further study and analysis may be warranted during this process. 59 Map 11: Census Tracts with Concentrated Poverty INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AV E N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 51ST AVE N INTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetFamily Incomes Less than 185% Federal Poverty Level Census tracts with concetrated poverty (40%+)DRAFT Date: 08.01.2017 Source: Metropolitan Council, MNGEO, Hennepin County APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 60 Map 12: School District Boundaries As shown on Map 18, the City of Brooklyn Center is served by four (4) school districts. Most interesting to note is the Brooklyn Center School District which is located entirely within the City and serves a very a small population. Since the school district is so small geographically even minor population and household changes could have a significant impact on the school district. While this is not necessary to include within the Comprehensive Plan, it is important to consider particularly with respect to location of facilities (existing and future) and planned growth and redevelopment areas. 61 INTERSTATE 94 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 63RD AVE N X E R X E S A V E N 69TH AVE N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 INTERSTATE 694 57TH AVE N B R O O K L Y N B L V D D U P O N T A V E N 58TH AVE N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y H U M B O L D T A V E N J U N E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N F R A N C E A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N 65TH AVE N COUNTY ROAD 10 FREEWAY BLVD 53RD AVE N H A L I F A X A V E N 70TH AVE N SB HWY252 TO WB I94 S B I 9 4 T O 5 3 R D A V E N N O B L E A V E N WB I94 TO BROOKLYN BLVD 51ST AVE N INTERSTATE 94 53RD AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N H I G H W A Y 2 5 2 F R A N C E A V E N H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 INTERSTATE 694 F R A N C E A V E N BROOKLYN CENTER MINNEAPOLIS CRYSTAL BROOKLYN PARK ROBBINSDALE F01,600 3,200 4,800 6,400800FeetSchool District Anoka-Hennepin (ISD 11) Brooklyn Center (ISD 286) Osseo (ISD 279) Robbinsdale (ISD 281) Map 12: School District Boundaries DRAFT Date: 08.01.2017 Source: Metropolitan Council, MNGEO, Hennepin County APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 62 Map 13: Parks, Park Classifications & Schools The City has an extensive network of parks and trails which are connected to (and often adjacent to) the existing schools in the community. As shown on previous trail planning maps, the City’s trail system includes the Shingle Creek Regional Trail and the Twin Lakes Regional Trail, which are required to be identified within the 2040 Plan update. The trail system provides not only recreational opportunities, but also portions of the system are part of the regional bikeway system that provides transportation mode choice. The City’s park system robust and neighborhood and community parks are integrated throughout the community. Many of the park areas are located adjacent to existing civic center uses as well as schools in the community. The following table identifies the park name, acreage and classifications that serve the community’s residents as shown on Map 20, from the 2030 Plan: Name Size (Acres)Park Type Arboretum 8 Special Use Bellvue 7 Neighborhood Park Bob Cahlander 5 Special Use Central 48 Community Destination Central West 20 Community Destination East Palmer 15 Neighborhood Park Evergreen 20 Community Destination Firehouse 10 Neighborhood Park Freeway 6 Neighborhood Park Garden City 1 Neighborhood Park Grandview 10 Community Destination Happy Hollow 6 Neighborhood Park Kylawn 22 Community Destination Lions 18 Neighborhood Park Marlin 2 Neighborhood Park Northport 25 Neighborhood Park North Mississippi Regional Park Special Use Orchard Lane 7 Neighborhood Park Palmer Lake 196 Neighborhood Park/SU Riverdale 4 Neighborhood Park Twin Lake 3 Neighborhood Park Wangstad 2 Neighborhood Park West Palmer 15 Community Destination Willow Lane 8 Neighborhood Park 63 Map 13: Parks, Park Classifications & Schools APPENDIX C: BACKGROUND INFORMATION City of Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 2040 64 Infrastructure (Water & Wastewater) While relevant to the planning process, the infrastructure maps are not included within this report. The water, both from a utility and groundwater perspective, will be included within the 2040 Plan update but should be updated once the Future Land Use plan has been developed to ensure appropriate and adequate infrastructure is available. Likewise, as a fully developed community, the entire City is located within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) and therefore much of the system will remain unchanged. However, once the Future Land Use Plan and redevelopment plans are developed the City’s sanitary sewer plan will need to be updated to reflect any needed infrastructure improvements. Any improvements to either the water or wastewater system will need to be addressed appropriately within the Implementation plan and incorporated in the 2040 Plan update. MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH: FROM:Meg Beekman, Community Development Director SUBJECT:Centra Homes Revised Conceptual Plan Review for Eastbrook Estates Recommendation: - Consider two revised conceptual layout plans for Eastbrook Estates from Centra Homes and provide direction on how to proceed Background: On December 10, 2018, the Economic Development Authority (EDA) adopted a resolution approving a Preliminary Development Agreement (PDA) with Centra Homes, LLC (City Council Resolution No. 2018-17) for the proposed development of land owned by the EDA for the creation of a final plat, construction of 35 single family homes, and associated public infrastructure improvements including utilities, new roads, and storm water ponding. The originally proposed purchase price for the 35 lots was $250,000. The current PDA expires on April 1, 2019. The purchase price, number of lots, and layout of the site assumed that Centra Home would acquire the back half of two adjacent private properties, as well as be able to acquire right of way which the City would vacate in order to accommodate the plat. Centra Homes has spent the past several months conducting due diligence on the site in the hopes of coming back to the City with a final layout, which would require plat approval for the new subdivision that would be created. In conducting their due diligence and negotiating with adjacent private property owners, Centra Homes determined that the originally proposed conceptual plan, which contemplated the construction of 35 two-story and multi-level homes with prices ranging between $315,000 and 350,000 and $300,000 and $325,000, is infeasible for the following reasons: 1 ) Loss of 4-6 proposed lots as there are underground utilities located in the existing City Right-of-Way (ROW) east of 68th Avenue North; 2) One of the property owners located along 69th Avenue North does not wish to have the southern portion of their lot developed; and 3 ) The cost of acquisition for the southern portions of the two adjacent lots located along 69th Avenue North is higher than initially projected. Based on the above information, Centra Homes went back and adjusted the original conceptual plan to offer two alternative options. Both concept layouts are attached to this report. 1) Option A: 30 to 32 lots (loss of 3 to 5 lots) Purchase price would be reduced from $250,000 to $115,000. Pricing, size, and style of homes would remain the same as in the original conceptual plan. Proposed additional acquisition of two currently vacant residential lots off 68th Lane North, which would allow for the addition of three new lots. This acquisition was not contemplated in the original conceptual plan. The overall layout would remain substantially consistent with the conceptual plan originally proposed and feature extensions to 68th Lane North, 5th Street North, and Camden Avenue North in a the grid street pattern seen throughout much of Brooklyn Center. Loss of Lots 27 and 28 due to a disinterest in the adjacent property owner in selling this portion of land for new housing. Loss of Lots 1, 2, 13, and 14 due to the presence of utilities and the nature of the ROW vacation. Potential loss of Lots 12 and 15 due to the need for placement of stormwater ponding 2) Option B: 26 Lots (loss of 9 lots) Purchase price would remain the same at $250,000. Pricing, size, and style of homes would remain the same as the original conceptual plan. Proposed acquisition of two (2) vacant residential lots off 68th Lane North, which would allow for the addition of three (3) lots. This acquisition was not contemplated in the original conceptual plan. T he overall layout would deviate substantially from the conceptual plan originally proposed by featuring the construction of two new cul-de-sac bulbs, eliminating the thru-street, grid pattern approach of Option A. City Staff met with representatives from Centra Homes to discuss the proposed changes. Centra Homes believes that either option is viable; however, they wanted to provide an option that fulfilled the original purchase price offer of $250,000 to the EDA. Option B is able to maintain this offer price by eliminating the cost of acquiring any additional private property and significantly reducing the amount of roadway that would need to be constructed. Staff conducted a review of the two new conceptual plan layouts. Following this review, City Engineering and Planning staff were both in agreement that Option A would allow for a more efficient use of land. Additionally, Option A allows for the potential expansion of the new subdivision in the future by maintaining a grid pattern (as opposed to the multiple cul-de-sacs noted in Option B), and, in general, allows for a greater number of new construction, move-up type housing product. The EDA acquired the property through the use of TIF #3 Housing Funds, which must be used for the creation of low and moderate income housing. The land was purchased for $250,000. If the land is not used for this purpose, the funds will need to be repaid to the TIF #3 Housing Fund. If the EDA does not receive the full $250,000 for the land, the rest would need to be repaid using funds from the sale of other property. Centra Homes has emphasized that they remain committed to closing on the EDA-owned land as soon as the preliminary and final plat is approved by Planning Commission and City Council. Should Centra Homes receive clear guidance from City Council as to which layout they prefer and the Preliminary Development Agreement is extended at the April 8, 2019, Economic Development Authority meeting, Centra Homes still hopes to begin construction by this summer. Policy Issues: Centra Homes is seeking direction on which option is preferred. If clear direction is provided, staff will prepare a PDA amendment and extension which will be presented for the EDA's consideration at their April 8th meeting. Strategic Priorities and Values: Targeted Redevelopment 50' LOT CONCEPT PLAN D Multi-Level Homes 65' lots 10' & 5' side yard setbacks Depth: 140' +/-□Two-Story Homes 50' lots 5' side yard setbacks Depth: 100'-150' +/- BROOKLYN CENTER REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL z 1------f l\ l-----+------1 ""' ;,!; Wlh�-!...t-;;:-----1 � 1----+------1 � 1-----1 J:,. ---------- U,.llllla•L_:_ _ _J CENTRA HOMES uc 3 OPTION A (30-32 LOTS) X X X X X X Purchase Price would be reduced from $250,000 to $115,000 X Lots not to be built Ad d i t i o n a l Lo t s ( 3 ) OF DateRevisions Designed Drawn 11Eastbrook Estates2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 (651) 681-1914 BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA I hereby certify that this plan was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS LAND SURVEYORS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS XXX Name XXXReg. No. Date XXX c 2012 Pioneer Engineering www.pioneereng.comFax: 681-9488 00-SURV-118389-BASE 2/26/19 NJK SITE PLANNJK Minneapolis, MN 5543311460 Robinson Dr. NWCentra Homes, LLC1)2/28/19 OPTION B (26 LOTS) Purchase price would remain the same ($250,000) MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:N/A FROM:Meg Beekman, Community Development Director SUBJECT:1601 James Circle Development Concept Proposal Recommendation: - Consider a development concept for EDA-owned property at 1601 James Circle, and provide feedback and direction to staff and the developer. Background: The concept review process is an opportunity for the City Council to review a development concept prior to a formal proposal from an applicant, and provide comments, ask questions, and indicate whether or not the City would be open to the project. Concept reviews are helpful for projects that would involve EDA-owned land or public subsidy, as it provides insight to staff and the developer as to the City Council’s level of interest, and any specific concerns, related to a project. A concept review is considered advisory and is nonbinding to the City and the applicant. No formal action can be taken at a work session, and the Council is not being asked to vote on the proposal. If the developer chooses to submit a formal application to the City to proceed, it would be subject to the full review process, as with any other development application. Project Concept Donate Properties is a mission-driven commercial real estate and investment company which is contemplating a project on an EDA-owned property at 1601 James Circle. As part of their proposal, they have partnered with Mr. Tufaa, the owner of the former Earle Brown Bowl to combine the two projects together in order to better leverage the site layout and land use as well as financials. As you may recall, Mr. Tufaa has approval from the City for a Special use Permit to convert the former bowling alley into an event center and restaurant. Financing challenges have led to a delay in the start of that project. Donate Properties is requesting a preliminary development agreement of one year to conduct due diligence, put together a financing package, submit land use approvals to the City, and negotiate a purchase agreement for the property. They propose to develop an 80,000 square foot business center, leveraging the Opportunity Zone status of the property, to create a tech business incubator for small businesses, with an anchor tenant taking up a portion of the building. They intend to focus the tech incubator on first-generation immigrant-owned start-up businesses, though acknowledge that all would be welcome. A narrative describing the proposal in more detail is attached to this report. Donate Properties proposes to work with Mr. Tufaa to develop the event center into a shared use space, which can be utilized by tenants of the business center. Most critically, they propose a shared parking concept, which would allow a higher intensity of use on the 1601 James Circle property, increasing the amount of square footage of building space, and number of jobs per acre. Their concept also proposes a partial vacation of James Circle, allowing stormwater to be pushed into existing road right of way, and converting the existing roadway back into a cul-de-sac. It must be noted, that the City Engineer has not had an opportunity to review this concept, and and request for a right of way vacation would require review and approval by the City Engineer. A concept plan is attached to this report, along with conceptual elevations of the building. Donate Properties has also reached out to other property owners in the vicinity, and is seeking opportunities to leverage additional partnerships. Financing The developer is having the building bid out by a construction company and intends to be able to present an early proforma on March 25th. Based on early conversations with the developer however, they do anticipate a request for Tax Increment Financing as part of their proposal. Next Steps If the Council wishes to proceed, the developer has requested to enter into a Preliminary Development Agreement, which staff can prepare and have at a future EDA meeting for the EDA to consider. Once the PDA is in place, the develop would have one year to complete their due diligence, obtain financing, land use approvals from the City, and negotiate a purchase agreement with the EDA; however, the PDA would require regular check-ins and milestones along the way. As part of their due diligence, the developer would need to complete an environmental assessment of the property as well; however, the City would be able to share any documents already on file which may pertain to the property that might be of assistance in this effort. Policy Issues: The property is zoned C2 and is guided in the Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan for Mixed Business. The land use concept is in conformance with both. The property has high visibility and excellent access from Highway 694/94 and is neighbored by the FBI Regional Office, hotels, restaurants, and similar uses. The property was previously discussed by the City Council/EDA at their February 11th work session. At that meeting the council expressed a desire to see a high value use on the site, including high quality jobs, a high density of jobs, and a use which leverages the Opportunity Zone designation on the site. The developer is seeking input from the Council on their proposed concept and layout, as well as indication on the Council's willingness to enter into a preliminary development agreement on the site. Strategic Priorities and Values: Targeted Redevelopment Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, Intermap, increment P Corp., GEBCO, USGS, FAO,NPS, NRCAN, GeoBase, IGN, Kadaster NL, Ordnance Survey, Esri Japan, METI,Esri China (Hong Kong), swisstopo, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GISUser Community Locational Map: 1601 James Circle North ResidentialLabels Highways Streets City Parks Parcels 3/3/2019, 1:09:23 PM 1 inch = 752 feet 1600 West End Tower, Utica Ave S, St Louis Park, MN 55416 612.327.2932 Brooklyn Center Business Tech Site Brooklyn Center owns a gem in the recently established world of Opportunity Zones, bar none. Now it's time to bring that site to its highest and best use. In drafting this OZ Legislation, Senator Tim Scott envisioned a bipartisan effort to support communities that may not organically attract real estate development and new businesses. He has realized his dream as this new incentive program, albeit awaiting the final reg's from the IRS, has overwhelming support from all parties and levels of government and investors. It is a creative solution to get dollars on the sideline back into action in what most say will be the most productive program ever. Your site next to the FBI headquarters, if developed and managed properly, will be a showpiece for the people and Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Tim Scott, and the nation. It will foster the rise of income and purpose for those participating in its mini business community. Living wage jobs and entrepreneurial wealth be created. But this will happen only by melding the cultures of those in Brooklyn Center and attracting start up tech firms outside Brooklyn Center, all succeeding together. Opportunity Zones coupled with other government incentives provide unique ways to attract investment and make this project viable. The business world is poised to embrace diversity in the workplace. Your site can be used to accomplish multi cultural business startup growth, success and even more than we can hope or imagine as people come together and collaborate in unseen ways to realize business success together. We have 8 OZ projects before us at the moment. Yours is our #1. To accomplish its success we need up to a year of exclusivity on the site to work out a development agreement, tenant attraction, and city/governmental approvals. The Qualified Opportunity Zone Fund, however, needs to be in place by Dec 31, 2019 to receive full benefit of the OZ incentives, which we have no doubt we will accomplish. The urgency built into the program is a good thing. We also like that maximum benefit comes from businesses and building owners that stay put for a minimum of 10 years. Rather than going on in many words for this initial presentation, below are bullet points and renderings summarizing the vision for your site. • Goals o Business Center - A model project of what is possible for Brooklyn Center, the State on MN, and the Opportunity Zone program Small Business success factory - First American focus, but all are welcome Tech company start ups Well known tech anchor tenant for a significant portion of the building Child care academy/center OZ Investor projections exceeded The remainder of the 20 acre site will benefit and change for the positive Mr. Tufaa, whom we are assisting, will build a thriving event center with whom our tenants can rent for larger presentations and conferences. The hotels - our goal is to convert at least one of the three to micro units as housing and lodging, benefitting contract and long term employees in our Center The existing restaurants will attract customers and perhaps a change in branding • Site Benefits o Easy site access from Interstate 94 and Highway 100 o 134,000 cars per day for tenant visibility and seeing this Brooklyn Center showpiece, many times twice a day o Dynamic signage, similar to HOM Furniture's, to maximize traffic benefits, attract visitors and telegraph success o Prominent site entrance at the end of the cul-de-sac o Expressive site lighting provides visibility and security • Building amenities o 3 story, high clear height ceilings, 80,000 square feet total, ample parking o Business Community Center o Tenants and guests will have well developed open and semi-private meeting spaces, indoors and outdoors, to conduct business o Strikingly beautiful common spaces o High Tech feel - (Not like a typical office building - go in, go to the elevator, go down the long hallway, go into an isolated office). The building has a presence that speaks to those that enter with more positive, cutting edge atmosphere through the architecture and tenant energy. o People use the modern designed common spaces for meetings and a place to get out of their office for a break o Large window areas provide passive energy, feed large plants and the soul o Energy efficiencies and partnerships with local utilities o Elevators situated so various configurations all work well: small units with hallways, 1/2 floors, and/or entire floor-plates all make sense, thus allowing flexibility in tenant demand, thereby shortening successful lease up of the building • Public Private Partnership o Critical because this building is a showpiece and thereby needs participation from all to include the amenities and the higher than typical percentage of common space. It will pass all the "but for" tests Opportunity Zone registration and compliance City participation through appropriate incentives Minnesota DEED (for the entrepreneur tenants) LISC participation Input and buy-in from Immigrant Cultural and Economic Development Organizations • Building Exterior o Exterior building character reflects companies within o Clean and contemporary building massing and details o Sleek and high tech exterior building finishes o Card entrance system to allow all hours access • Building Interior o Open and ample common spaces encourage interaction and collaboration o Flexible floor leasing arrangements serve nimble users o Vertical windows bring daylight deep into building o Polished concrete floors and open ceilings in key areas create a modern tech feel • Building Users o First American focused business center o Tech and life science oriented users o Major tech anchor to lend credibility o Optional co-working component o Potential childcare amenity serving users and community • Building Systems o State of the art data and communications systems o Energy efficient heating, cooling, and ventilation systems o Energy efficient lighting and controls o New technology elevators • Costs and Incentives o Benson-Orth Construction is currently bidding out the building and we will have those numbers by the 25th. However, the basis of this site development is to have a building that is strikingly modern and engaging from the highway and the same once you are inside. This means in this season of risen construction costs, we will need assistance to make the project work per this vision. Our goal is to have 1 or 2 major anchor tech spin off companies that understand and appreciate the value of your site and the amenities, paying market rent. But to engage the First American generation of entrepreneurs in Brooklyn Center, we will have to have a different rent structure and for that we need your help with TIF and land write down. There may also be a need for the detention pond on the site where the FBI HQ runoff empties into to be owned by the City. We believe that reasonable assistance will make up the gap and we will deliver a new community business building as described so the City's entrepreneurs can prosper. Julie Tanaka and Mike Brady, together, have over 55 years of commercial real estate development, property management and real estate financing experience. Julie and Mike have merged their companies, Compendium Capital and Brady Real Estate Development. Brooklyn Center will be our new headquarters, overseeing this site's management and ever seeking to see the success become the norm here. We believe in your city. We believe in your site. We believe in the viability of this ambitious project. We believe it will bring much good to people of Brooklyn Center and the country, thus fulfilling our Mission statement, "Transforming Communities" . Thank you for this opportunity. Julie Tanaka - http://www.compendiumbusinessstrategies.com/ Mike Brady - https://bradyred.com/ Tanaka Brady company - https://donateproperties.com/ Tanaka Brady joint development company name TBD Architect - Brian Lubben Building Foundry https://www.buildingfoundry.com/ Contractor - Benson Orth Mike Monson http://benson-orth.com/ Julie Tanaka Julie has 25 years experience in commercial real estate investment, structured finance, development and workout as an executive, investment advisor and loan officer. Through her leadership positions with banks, securities and big four accounting firms, Julie has a strong working knowledge of commercial real estate underwriting and workout, debt and equity placement, portfolio management, valuation and litigation support. Julie earned her BS in Finance & Marketing from the University of MN School of Management and her MBA from Columbia University, NY. A twice earned “Top 20 Women in Finance”, “Women to Watch” and "Minnesotans on the Move" award recipient, Julie is very active in the business community and is a board member and past President of the Minnesota Association for Corporate Growth (ACG MN). Julie Tanaka 612-670-5203 JulieTanaka@DonateProperties.com Mike Brady This year marks 30 years for Mike as a Commercial Real Estate Broker, Developer, Owner and Investor; gaining acumen in various commercial real estate skill-sets. He applies his expertise to help others fulfill their goals in real estate development as well as his own socially responsible real estate developments. His range of expertise includes: joint ventures, brokerage, land development, adaptive reuse, condo community development, historic redevelopment, city presentations and approvals, financing, equity raising, tax increment financing, management of 2.5 million s.f. real estate portfolio, tenant and landlord rep, tenant retention, property tax valuation challenges, due diligence process management, lease examination, all sides of deal negotiation, foreign land investment, deal structuring, consulting, and mentoring young commercial real estate up and comers. Mike is grateful for much in life, especially his wife of 36 years, 3 daughters and son in laws, 9 grandchildren and great granddaughter. None of this would be, except for the transforming Love of God Mike experienced 39 years ago and continues to walk in today. Mike Brady 612-327-2932 MikeBrady@DonateProperties.com 2 5 7 P A R K I N G S T A L L S FE D E R A L B U R E A U OF I N V E S T I G A T I O N H I G H W A Y 6 9 4 /9 4 HIGHWAY 100 P R O P O S E D O F F I C E B U I L D I N G 3 S T O R Y 8 1 ,0 0 0 G R O S S S Q F 3 0 0 ' - 0 " 9 0 ' - 0 " ST O R M W A T E R PO N D P L A Z A CE S I M A G I N G QU A L I T Y I N N MO N U M E N T S I G N BR A D Y R E A L E S T A T E DE V E L O P M E N T SITE SCHEME March 15, 2019 BC B u s i n e s s T e c h Br o o k l y n C e n t e r , M N CONCEPT PLAN ONLY FE D E R A L B U R E A U OF I N V E S T I G A T I O N H I G H W A Y 6 9 4 / 9 4 H I G H W A Y 1 0 0 BR A D Y R E A L E S T A T E DE V E L O P M E N T SITE AERIAL March 15, 2019 BC B u s i n e s s T e c h Br o o k l y n C e n t e r , M N CONCEPT PLAN ONLY BR A D Y R E A L E S T A T E DE V E L O P M E N T March 15, 2019 BC B u s i n e s s T e c h Br o o k l y n C e n t e r , M N PERSPECTIVE (FROM 694 EAST) BR A D Y R E A L E S T A T E DE V E L O P M E N T PERSPECTIVE (FROM 694 WEST) March 15, 2019 BC B u s i n e s s T e c h Br o o k l y n C e n t e r , M N CONCEPT PLAN ONLY BR A D Y R E A L E S T A T E DE V E L O P M E N T PERSPECTIVE(FROM NEW CUL -DE SAC) March 15, 2019 BC B u s i n e s s T e c h Br o o k l y n C e n t e r , M N MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH: FROM:Meg Beekman, Community Development Director SUBJECT:On-Street Parking and Residential Parking Standards Discussion Recommendation: - Consider information regarding off-street parking regulations and conditions in the City, and provide direction on current off-street parking regulations as well as overnight on-street parking restrictions Background: On January 22, 2018, the City Council discussed the topic of overnight parking restrictions on City streets. The City of Brooklyn Center restricts parking on any public right of way to six hours or less. The City also prohibits all on street parking from 2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. year-round. On-street parking restrictions are enforced by the police department. The discussion at that meeting was centered around the on-street parking restrictions, specifically their enforcement. Complaints regarding overnight parking have increased in the City, as has ticketing. At the meeting the City Council discussed several possible changes to the on-street parking restrictions; however, the Council did not come to a consensus to proceed with any changes to the ordinance. Based on the January 22, 2018 discussion, as well as several comments from Council members related to off- street parking requirements, staff have conducted a parking study aimed at identifying what conditions exist on private residential property (both in single family neighborhoods and on multi-family properties) which might be contributing to violations of the City's overnight parking ban. As part of that study, additional CSO staff was utilized at various times to increase overnight parking enforcement. Specifically the study asked the following questions: What is the average parking demand versus parking supply of multi-family properties in the City? Are there multi-family properties which are experiencing an inadequate supply versus demand for parking? If so, what are the causes of the disparity? Are there conditions occurring on private property in predominantly single family neighborhoods which may be contributing to violations of the overnight parking ban? Are there specific "hot spots" in the City where overnight parking violations are occurring in greater numbers? If so, what might be the causes of this? Multi-family Residential Existing Regulations The Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum parking standard of two stalls per unit for multi-family property in the City. It is not know when this particular provision was adopted; however, it is likely that it has been in place for the past several decades, if not longer. The last multi-family property in the City was constructed in 1971, with a majority of the apartment buildings constructed in the 1960s. It is possible that the requirement of two stalls per unit was adopted after most of the multi-family apartments were constructed in the City. Parking Study A survey of parking lots was conducted between September 7th and October 1st by city inspectors and Community Service Officers (CSOs). 22 apartment complexes were chosen at random to be included in the study. The complexes ranged in size from 11 units to 310 units. Inspectors performed counts of the apartment complexes’ parking lots and garages between 2 p.m. and 6 p.m. during the workweek. CSOs inspected the parking lots and garages between 2 a.m. and 6 a.m. throughout the week. In this survey, three key statistics were calculated; capacity, the ratio of total parking spaces per apartment unit; daytime parking, the ratio of cars parked in a lot during the day per total parking spots; and nighttime parking, the ratio of cars parked in a lot during the night per total parking spots. The number of apartment units within each complex was available to city staff as reported on the rental license application for each apartment complex. Other statistics that were considered were the size of the apartment complex in acres and the ratio of the number of parking spots per acre. A table with all of the findings from the study has been attached to this report. Of the 22 apartment complexes studied, capacity ranged from the low end of one stall per unit at the Crest, up to 2.36 stalls per unit at River Glen. The average capacity of all complexes is 1.63 stalls per unit. Of the 22 complexes studied only four provided 2 stalls of parking per unit or greater. Of the 22 parking complexes surveyed, none had day time parking demand that exceeded 90 percent. In fact, the highest parking demand during the day was at Humboldt Court with 71 percent of the stalls being utilized. For nighttime parking demand, six of the 22 complexes experienced a parking demand that exceeded 90 percent of the available parking; while two complexes (Humboldt Court and Beard Avenue) had parking lots that were completely full. Anecdotally, inspectors observed vehicles parking on the street overnight, even in cases where parking stalls were available. There are many reasons this might be the case. For buildings where parking stalls are assigned, there may be residents or guests who do not have an assigned parking stall. Also, for buildings that provided garages, inspectors counted each garage space as a parking stall; however, during rental licensing inspections it has been observed that some residents use their garage stalls as storage, thus negating the use of the garage for parking. In other instances convenience may be a factor. At both Unity Place and Gateway Commons, it has been observed that residents will park on the street in favor of being closer to primary entrances versus parking stalls which are farther away. Single-family Residential Regulations At present the City Code does not limit the number of vehicles that may be parked on a private residential property. Any number of vehicles may be parked on private property; however, the ordinance requires that they be parked on a driveway or other hard surface. The term "hard surface" however, is not defined, which can complicate enforcement. Gravel driveways are allowed, but maintenance standards for gravel are not uniform, leading to some trying to accommodate the ordinance by simply dumping rock or gravel on their lawns. Parking Study Staff looked at single family residential properties in the City to identify if there were patterns by neighborhood that might contribute to some areas having a greater number of parking restriction violations than others. Staff looked at lot size, driveway widths, number of garage stalls, and the number of vehicles owned to determine what, if any, patterns might contribute to on street parking violations. The map below shows vehicles owned by census block group, which is the smallest geographic area available for that statistic. Overall, vehicles per household are not higher in Brooklyn Center compared with other communities. Generally speaking, in Brooklyn Center residents who own their homes are more likely to own more vehicles than renters. Two pockets; one in the southeast and one on the west side of the City stood out as areas with on average 1.97-2.15 vehicles per household. Lot sizes in the southeast portion of the City tend to be smaller also; and single-stall garages, or properties with no garage, are more frequent than in other parts of the City.This may contribute to situations where there is is simply not enough room for all of the vehicles to park on private property, leading to increased overnight parking violations in this area. Between November 19, 2018 and December 3, 2018, CSOs out issuing parking citations were asked to indicate whether they were able to observe if the vehicle owner being issued the citation could have parked on private property, had no room to park on private property, or if they were unable to determine which property it was associated with. Of the 99 citations issued, CSOs indicated that 68 percent could have parked on private property, while 18 percent had no room to park on private property. In 14 percent of the cases they were not able to determine which property the vehicle belonged. Citation Study From August 19, 2018 through September 15, 2018, the Police Department executed a 28-day trial of having a second CSO officer scheduled over night with the sole focus on locating and issuing overnight parking citations. Due to staffing levels, ongoing CSO training, and some conflicting scheduling requirements, the City in actuality only had a second CSO on 15 of the 28 overnights; however, there was an increased focus by all CSOs on locating violations and issuing citations throughout the 28-day period, even when there was only one CSO working between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. The purpose of the study was to create a baseline to determine the actual number of overnight parking violations occurring in the City on any given night, and also to determine if there were specific areas where violations were occurring more frequently than others. During the 28-day period 513 parking citations were issued. This compares to 179 citations in the 28-days leading up to the study period, and 152 citations in the same 28-day period the previous year. For the 15 days an extra CSO was on duty issuing citations, 513 citations would equate to 34 citations on average per night. The actual number was likely less given that even when only one CSO was on duty they were focused on added enforcement of the overnight parking ban. The below map illustrates the areas in the City with the highest density of overnight parking violations during that time frame. The red area in the middle is around Gateway Commons. Gateway Commons has 252 units, and a parking ratio of 1.52 stalls per unit. The unit mix is efficiencies, one and two-bedroom units. During the parking study, inspectors did not observe the parking lot to ever be at 100 percent capacity; however, it did have a high overnight parking demand of 95 percent. Parking stalls at Gateway Commons are not assigned and are first-come, first-serve by residents. Parking permits are required however, preventing visitors and those not on the lease from parking overnight outside of the areas designated for guests. In addition, property management has stated that they do have vehicles towed from the property if they do not have a parking permit or if they have been posted by the City as inoperable. Management does not tow for parking on the street nor call the police if vehicles are parked on the street overnight. Northway Drive is posted No Parking 24 hours a day because it is a high traffic roadway. The orange circle in the far northwest corner of the City can most certainly be attributed to Unity Place, which is 112-unit townhouse development with a parking ratio of 1.69 stalls per unit. Units are two and three bedrooms in size and have their own garages. Overnight parking observations showed a parking use of 57 percent with open parking stalls, even when vehicles were observed to be parked on the street. A portion of the development is within private roadways and a portion is on city streets. This, in part, may lead to confusion by residents about where on street parking is allowed and where it is not. Rental Inspectors have also noted many garages being used for storage, rather than vehicle parking, which would have an adverse affect on the available parking. Other observations have shown on street parking to occur even when other, less conveniently located, off street parking was available. The orange circle in the middle of the northwest area, near 68th Avenue N, encompasses Victoria Townhomes. Victoria Townhomes is 48, three-bedroom townhouse units with 63 parking stalls. Victoria Townhomes was observed in the parking study to have an overnight parking demand of 91 percent, and while the parking lot appeared to have stalls available, inspectors observed cars parked on the street. Vehicles parked on the property are required to have a permit; however, overnight guests are able to get an overnight parking permit from management with advanced notice. According to the property manager, vehicles without a permit are towed. The orange circle to the northeast, near 69th Avenue N does not encompass any multi-family apartment buildings, though Brookdale Towers, which was not a part of the parking study, is adjacent to the area. Staff observed this area of the City and was not able to identify any factors which would contribute to a higher rate of overnight parking violations. It is possible that residents of Brookdale Towers are parking in the neighborhood and walking to their building, which has a convenient entrance immediately adjacent to Irving Avenue N, though staff was not able to confirm this with property management. Policy Issues: Based on the parking study, staff is seeking direction from the City Council on a number of policy issues related to parking regulations, both off-street and on-street. As staff works with the planning consultant to update the Zoning Code, it may be appropriate to update and make changes to parking regulations on private property. As such, staff is requesting the City Council consider the existing regulations pertaining to off-street parking requirements. Are the current regulations related to the number of spaces required per multi-family unit reasonable? Should new apartments be required to have greater or fewer parking stalls per unit than have been required in the past? Are the current off-street parking regulations sufficient to manage parking demand in single family neighborhoods? Should there be a limit to the number of vehicles allowed to be parked in a driveway? Should the definition for what constitutes an "approved hard surface" be clearer? In addition to off-street parking regulations, the parking study raises the question once again as to what ought to be done about on-street overnight parking regulations and enforcement, which the City continues to get complaints about. In some instances, it may be possible to work with individual apartment complexes through their rental license to deal with over flow parking issues as they occur. In other instances, it appears that the issues of compliance may be more of a neighborhood-based issue. Considering the results of the study, should any aspect of the overnight parking restrictions be reviewed, or lifted? Strategic Priorities and Values: Safe, Secure, Stable Community, Operational Excellence Co m p l e x Ga r a g e s Lo t S i z e To t a l S p o t s Pa r k i n g , D a y Ca p a c i t y , D a y Pa r k i n g , N i g h t Ca p a c i t y , N i g h t Units Ratio Gr a n i t e C i t y 12 0 58 0. 4 8 11 6 0.96 72 1.67 Br o o k s i d e M a n o r 41 14 9 19 0 66 0. 3 5 14 3 0.75 90 2.11 Gr a n i t e P e a k s 10 7 35 0. 3 3 73 0.68 72 1.49 Wi l l o w L a n e 10 4 43 0. 4 1 71 0.68 58 1.79 Ri v e r G l e n 12 8 17 4 30 2 86 0. 2 8 15 8 0.52 128 2.36 Pi n e s , T h e 40 14 8 18 8 66 0. 3 5 12 9 0.69 102 1.84 Ev e r g r e e n M a n o r 80 94 17 4 56 0. 3 2 85 0.49 80 2.18 Me l r o s e G a t e s 70 35 7 42 7 17 2 0. 4 8 32 6 0.91 217 1.65 Cr e s t , T h e 0 12 2 12 2 48 0. 3 9 85 0.70 122 1.00 Ea r l e B r o w n F a r m 40 16 2 20 2 47 0. 2 3 12 0 0.59 120 1.68 Hu m b o l d t C o u r t 63 45 0. 7 1 64 1.01 36 1.75 La k e P o i n t e 80 40 2 48 2 15 5 0. 3 2 24 6 0.51 310 1.55 Ga t e w a y C o m m o n s 70 31 4 38 4 21 6 0. 5 6 36 7 0.95 252 1.52 Av e n u e , T h e 46 15 0. 3 3 40 0.87 36 1.28 Ly n w o o d P o i n t e 34 41 75 31 0. 4 1 53 0.70 50 1.50 Ca r r i n g t o n D r i v e 0 18 9 18 9 73 0. 3 9 15 9 0.84 128 1.48 Be a r d A v e n u e 27 13 0. 4 8 36 1.33 24 1.13 Ge o r g e t o w n 92 12 0 21 2 78 0. 3 7 82 0.38 92 2.30 Em e r s o n C h a l e t 25 1 0. 0 4 7 0.26 18 1.39 Ba s s w o o d 0 12 12 7 0. 5 8 10 0.83 11 1.09 Un i t y P l a c e 18 9 67 0. 3 5 10 7 0.57 112 1.69 Vi c t o r i a T o w n h o m e s 63 28 0. 4 4 58 0.91 48 1.31 Av e r a g e 16 8 . 3 2 63 . 9 1 0. 3 9 11 4 . 9 9 0.73 99.00 1.63 St a n d a r d D e v 13 0 . 5 1 53 . 7 7 0. 1 3 92 . 7 8 0.24 75.96 0.37 Ga r a g e s d e n o t e t h e n u m b e r o f g a r a g e s a v a i l a b l e , r e g a r d l e s s o f w h e t h e r t h e y a r e u s e d f o r c a r s t o r a g e Lo t S i z e d e n o t e s t h e n u m b e r o f p a r k i n g s p a c e s a t t h e a p a r t m e n t c o m p l e x To t a l S p o t s d e n o t e s t h e n u m b e r o f s p a c e s a n d g a r a g e s c o m b i n e d ( G a r a g e s + L o t S i z e ) Pa r k i n g , D a y de n o t e s t h e n u m b e r o f c a r s c o u n t e d i n a c o m p l e x ' s p a r k i n g l o t d u r i n g t h e d a y Pa r k i n g , N i g h t de n o t e s t h e n u m b e r o f c a r s c o u n t e d i n a c o m p l e x ' s p a r k i n g l o t d u r i n g t h e n i g h t Ca p a c i t y , D a y de n o t e s t h e n u m b e r o f c a r s p a r k e d i n t h e d a y p e r t h e n u m b e r o f p a r k i n g s p a c e a t t h e c o m p l e x , ( P a r k i n g , D a y t i m e ) ÷ ( L o t S i z e ) Ca p a c i t y , N i g h t d e n o t e s t h e n u m b e r o f c a r s p a r k e d i n t h e n i g h t p e r t h e n u m b e r o f p a r k i n g s p a c e a t t h e c o m p l e x , ( P a r k i n g , N i g h t t i m e ) ÷ ( L o t S i z e ) Un i t s d e n o t e s t h e n u m b e r o f a p a r t m e n t u n i t s i n e a c h c o m p l e x , a s p e r t h e i r r e n t a l l i c e n s e Ra t i o d e n o t e s t h e n u m b e r o f p a r k i n g s p a c e s a t a n a p a r t m e n t c o m p l e x p e r t h e n u m b e r o f a p a r t m e n t u n i t s i n e a c h c o m p l e x , ( L o t s i z e ) ÷ ( U n i t s ) Ac r e s d e n o t e s t h e g e o g r a p h i c s i z e o f e a c h c o m p l e x a s p e r H e n n e p i n C o u n t y r e c o r d s Sp o t s / A c r e d e n o t e s t h e n u m b e r o f p a r k i n g s p a c e s c o m p a r e d t o t h e g e o g r a p h i c s i z e o f t h e c o m p l e x , ( L o t S i z e ) ÷ ( A c r e s ) Ac r e s Sp o t s / A c r e 3. 7 6 31 . 9 1 5. 9 6 31 . 8 8 3. 3 9 31 . 5 6 3. 4 4 30 . 2 3 10 . 0 8 29 . 9 6 6. 3 5 29 . 6 1 5. 8 8 29 . 5 9 12 . 2 1 29 . 2 4 4. 3 7 27 . 9 2 7. 4 4 27 . 1 5 2. 4 1 26 . 1 4 19 . 1 25 . 2 4 15 . 2 2 25 . 2 3 1. 8 3 25 . 1 4 3. 0 7 24 . 4 3 7. 8 6 24 . 0 5 1. 1 9 22 . 6 9 11 . 4 4 18 . 5 3 1. 3 7 18 . 2 5 0. 6 7 17 . 9 1 16 . 4 7 11 . 4 8 6. 5 4 9. 6 3 6. 8 2 24 . 9 0 5. 2 3 6. 2 8 Complex Garages Lot Size Total Spots Parking, Day Capacity, Day Parking, Night Granite City 120 58 0.48 116 Brookside Manor 41 149 190 66 0.35 143 Granite Peaks 107 35 0.33 73 Willow Lane 104 43 0.41 71 River Glen 128 174 302 86 0.28 158 Pines, The 40 148 188 66 0.35 129 Evergreen Manor 80 94 174 56 0.32 85 Melrose Gates 70 357 427 172 0.48 326 Crest, The 0 122 122 48 0.39 85 Earle Brown Farm 40 162 202 47 0.23 120 Humboldt Court 63 45 0.71 64 Lake Pointe 80 402 482 155 0.32 246 Gateway Commons 70 314 384 216 0.56 367 Avenue, The 46 15 0.33 40 Lynwood Pointe 34 41 75 31 0.41 53 Carrington Drive 0 189 189 73 0.39 159 Beard Avenue 27 13 0.48 36 Emerson Chalet 25 1 0.04 7 Basswood 0 12 12 7 0.58 10 Average 170.47 64.89 0.39 120.20 Standard Dev 138.27 57.35 0.14 98.81 Garages denote the number of garages available, regardless of whether they are used for car storage Lot Size denotes the number of parking spaces at the apartment complex Total Spots denotes the number of spaces and garages combined (Garages + Lot Size) Parking, Day denotes the number of cars counted in a complex's parking lot during the day Parking, Night denotes the number of cars counted in a complex's parking lot during the night Capacity, Day denotes the number of cars parked in the day per the number of parking space at the complex, (Parking, Daytime) ÷ (Lot Size) Capacity, Night denotes the number of cars parked in the night per the number of parking space at the complex, (Parking, Nighttime) ÷ (Lot Size) Units denotes the number of apartment units in each complex, as per their rental license Ratio denotes the number of parking spaces at an apartment complex per the number of apartment units in each complex, (Lot size) ÷ (Units) Acres denotes the geographic size of each complex as per Hennepin County records Spots/Acre denotes the number of parking spaces compared to the geographic size of the complex, (Lot Size) ÷ (Acres) Capacity, Night Units Ratio Acres Spots/Acre 0.96 72 1.67 3.76 31.91 0.75 90 2.11 5.96 31.88 0.68 72 1.49 3.39 31.56 0.68 58 1.79 3.44 30.23 0.52 128 2.36 10.08 29.96 0.69 102 1.84 6.35 29.61 0.49 80 2.18 5.88 29.59 0.91 217 1.65 12.21 29.24 0.70 122 1.00 4.37 27.92 0.59 120 1.68 7.44 27.15 1.01 36 1.75 2.41 26.14 0.51 310 1.55 19.1 25.24 0.95 252 1.52 15.22 25.23 0.87 36 1.28 1.83 25.14 0.70 50 1.50 3.07 24.43 0.84 128 1.48 7.86 24.05 1.33 24 1.13 1.19 22.69 0.26 18 1.39 1.37 18.25 0.83 11 1.09 0.67 17.91 0.75 101.37 1.60 6.08 26.74 0.24 81.05 0.36 5.00 4.15 denotes the number of cars parked in the day per the number of parking space at the complex, (Parking, Daytime) ÷ (Lot Size) denotes the number of cars parked in the night per the number of parking space at the complex, (Parking, Nighttime) ÷ (Lot Size) denotes the number of parking spaces at an apartment complex per the number of apartment units in each complex, (Lot size) ÷ (Units) Legend Cars per Household 1.01 1.01 - 1.45 1.45 - 1.75 1.75 - 1.97 1.97 - 2.15 Cars per Household by Census Block Group D U P O N T A V E N 63RD AVE N 69TH AVE N B R Y A N T A V E N 55TH AVE N C A M D E N A V E N J U N E A V E N K N O X A V E N I R V I N G A V E N 58TH AVE N B E A R D A V E N 59TH AVE N FREEWAY BLVD G I R A R D A V E N S H I N G L E C R E E K P K W Y L E E A V E N 65TH AVE N H U M B O L D T A V E N X E R X E S A V E N C O L F A X A V E N K Y L E A V E N W E S T R I V E R R D W I L L O W L N NFRANCE A V E N 61ST AVE N D A L L A S R D L Y N D A L E A V E N U N I T Y A V E N 60TH AVE N HOWE LN H A L I F A X A V E N L O G A N A V E N B R O O K L Y N B L V D A L D R I C H A V E N G R I M E S A V E N N E W T O N A V E N M O R G A N A V E N P E R R Y A V E N B R O O K L Y N D R 50TH AVE N JANET LN NORTHWAY DR 72ND AVE N S U M M I T D R N JOYCE LN 66TH AVE N AMY LN L I L A C D R N N O B L E A V E N 4 T H S T N 67TH AVE N F R E M O N T A V E N 62ND AVE N 53RD PL N A D M I R A L L N N WOODBINE LN 48TH AVE N E W I N G A V E N 70TH AVE N A Z E L I A A V E N J U D Y L N S C O T T A V E N Z E N I T H A V E N THURBER RD WOODBINE LN N J A M E S A V E N D R E W A V E N 47TH AVE N P E A R S O N D R OAK ST N N O R T H P O R T D R 51ST AVE N 68TH AVE N Q U A I L A V E N O R C H A R D A V E N T O L E D O A V E N 6 3R D LN N 5 T H S T N PAUL DR V I N C E N T A V E N R E G E N T A V E N I N D I A N A A V E N 57TH AVE N 71ST AVE N E M E R S O N A V E N 54TH AVE N C H O W E N A V E N N O B L E L N N M A J O R A V E N O R C H A R D L N N 53RD AVE N E W I N G A V E N LILAC DR N E W I N G A V E N E W I N G A V E N 61ST AVE N 65TH AVE N 66TH AVE N 60TH AVE N 70TH AVE N Q U A I L A V E N 68TH AVE N C O L F A X A V E N C A M D E N A V E N L I L A C D R N S C O T T A V E N L Y N D A L E A V E N B R Y A N T A V E N 67TH AVE N 61ST AVE N L O G A N A V E N 68TH AVE N 62ND AVE N C O L F A X A V E N 72ND AVE N 66TH AVE N W I L L O W L N N 54TH AVE N G I R A R D A V E N C O L F A X A V E N L E E A V E N D R E W A V E N 59TH AVE N A L D R I C H A V E N 6 6 T H AV E N F R A N C E A V E N D R E W A V E N §¨¦694 §¨¦94 §¨¦694 ³")100 ³")252 ¬«10OT Parking Citations Low Med Low Medium Med High High OT Parking Citations 8/20/18-9/16/18 Date: 10/15/2018 MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:Dr. Reggie Edwards, Deputy City Manager FROM:Barb Suciu, City Clerk SUBJECT:Liquor License Violation Penality Policy Discussion Recommendation: Consider the providing direction to staff regarding development of a uniform fee structure for establishments that violate the City liquor license ordinance. Background: The City Council held a public hearing for an establishment that had violated the City’s liquor license ordinance on January 14, 2019 for sale of alcohol to a person under the age of 21. The City Council directed staff and the City Attorney to provide information on the penalties the that City has previously imposed for liquor license violations (attached) and asked that two resolutions be prepared for its consideration –one imposing a civil penalty and the other not imposing any penalty. The City Council determined a fine for the establishment on January 28, 2019. On February 25, 2019, Study Session, the Council further discussed a uniform method for Liquor Compliance Check fines. Staff has gathered additional comparison information related to liquor compliance check fines comparisons, which is attached. Staff is seeking direction from the Council regarding establishment of uniform method of Liquor Compliance Check fines. Policy Issues: What is the Council’s direction regarding development of a uniform fee structure for establishments that violate the City liquor license ordinance? Strategic Priorities and Values: Safe, Secure, Stable Community Liquor Violations in Comparative Cities City 1st Violation 2nd Violation 3rd Violation 4th Violation 5th Violation Comments Crystal $750; 1 day suspension $1,500; 3 day suspension 24 months after 1st violation $2,000; 10 day suspension 35 months after 2nd violation Revocation 26 months after 3rd violation Fridley $250 $500 $750 Within a 12 month reporting period Golden Valley $500 plus 1 day suspension $1,000 plus 3 day suspension $2,000 plus 10 day suspension Revocation Maplewood $500 $1,000 $2,000 Within a 24 month reporting period New Hope $250 3 day suspension $750 15 day suspension $1,500 30 day suspension Revocation Within a 24 month reporting period Richfield $1,000 5 day suspension $1,750 plus 7 day suspension 12 months after 1st violation $2,000 plus 12 day suspension 24 months after 2nd violation $2,000 plus 24 months after 3rd violation* Brought before City Council for revocation hearing $2,000; If within 24 months of the fourth offense, the establishment's license will be revoked for the remainder of the license year An establishment whose license is revoked is ineligible for a license for a period of five (5) years from the date of revocation. Roseville $1,000 $2,000 $2,000 Revocation Shoreview $500 $500 with 3 day suspension $1,000 5 day suspension $1,500 10 day suspension License Revoked Each violation has one (1) additional compliance check. All consecutive violations are within a 36 month period. White Bear Lake Class A/$175 Class B/$275 Other Cities Brooklyn Park $500 $750 $1,000 $1,250 $1,500 and revoked Minneapolis $500 $1,000 $2,000 Each violation within a 24 month * If the offense occurs outside of two years of a thrid offense, it will be considered a third offense. Brooklyn Center Past Practices of Liquor Sale Violation Penalties Occurrence Violation License Penalty Imposed Resolution No. August 2014 Reporting Error Earle Browne Lanes $1,000 2014-173 October 2012 Underage Sun Foods $1,000 2012-133 October 2012 Underage Global Kitchen $1,000 2012-132 July 2011 Underage Scoreboard Pizza $500 / 3-Day Suspension 2011-100 January 2010 Underage Super America $1,000 2010-11 December 2009 Underage American Legion $1,000 2009-159 12 MEMORANDUM - COUNCIL WORK SESSION DATE:3/25/2019 TO:Curt Boganey, City Manager THROUGH:N/A FROM:Barb Suciu SUBJECT:Pending Items Recommendation: Cities United Update Livable Wages - 4/22 Inclusionary Housing Recommendations Public Subsidy Policy discussion with Ehlers Consulting - 4/8, 5/13 Discussion on Ordinance process - 4/22 Background: