Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Animal Control Facility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Brooklyn Park staff outline $4.9–$6.3M animal control facility plan; officials press for faster schedule
Summary
Police and animal-control staff presented detailed designs for a new animal control facility attached to the North Precinct, reviewed programming (kennels, sally port, adoption space), estimated costs and funding requests, and said planning commission review and council approvals are planned this summer to meet an accelerated timeline.
City staff presented an addition to the North Precinct that would house Brooklyn Park's animal control operations and shared architectural concepts, estimated costs, and a near-term schedule.
Inspector Weinbeck (animal-control/police staff) described the layout: a corridor from the existing training-room entrance into a new admin area, multiple cat rooms, indoor/outdoor dog kennels with fenced play yards, a sally port for animal intake, secure staff parking, intake workrooms and a "get to know you" adoption area. The project seeks to mirror the police building's appearance while including sound- and disease-mitigation features (separate quarantine kennels and indoor-outdoor kennel doors).
Weinbeck said the earlier joint facility (Maple Grove PUPS) has faced overcrowding and aging infrastructure and that the budget under discussion ranged "between the range of $4.9 to $6,300,000." Staff reported they had submitted requests for congressionally directed spending for the project and said Representative Morrison had approved their request and submitted it, while Senator Klobuchar's office declined but offered a letter of support; the office of Senator Smith had indicated a submission would be made but staff had not confirmed it on the federal site.
Council members pressed staff on partner-city buy-in (Brooklyn Center's contribution has not been finalized) and on timing: staff noted the current JPA arrangement requires the city to plan for a transition, and council members urged moving planning and bidding quickly because the city expects to leave the shared facility by the end of the year. That schedule contributed to staff's request to take plans to the planning commission the following week, seek final council approval in June, advertise construction bids by July and aim to break ground in the fall so the facility could be fully functional by the next fall.
Design details drew local scrutiny. One council member said the south elevation "looks like a puppy prison," prompting staff to explain fencing materials and decorative-screen options, discuss turf versus natural grass for sanitary reasons, and confirm the architects had consulted animal-housing specialists about natural light, separation and other welfare considerations. The council suggested decorative fencing, murals or other screening to soften the appearance near 85th Avenue.
Staff said they will take the plans back to the planning commission, continue to refine cost-sharing with partner cities and return to council for formal action. No binding appropriation or final partner agreements were approved at the work session.
Next procedural steps listed by staff: planning commission review, revised cost‑sharing discussions with partner cities, preparation of bid documents by July, and council action to authorize construction (timing contingent on planning commission outcomes and final cost estimates).
