Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987 10-05 CCM Regular Session 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 OCTOBER 5, 1987 CITY HALL ' CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:05 p.m. ! ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Finance Director Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere, HRA Coordinator Brad Hoffman, Personnel Coordinator Geralyn Barone, and Administrative Aid Patti Page. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Councilmember Scott. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted the Council had not received any requests to use the Open Forum session this evening. He inquired if there was anyone present in the audience who wished to address the Council. There being none, he continued with ! the regular agenda items. f CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist noted City staff had requested item 9d be removed from the consent agenda. He inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the consent agenda. No other requests were made. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 1 1987 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the minutes of the September 1, 1987, City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 9 1987 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the minutes of the September 9, 1987, City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 14 1987 - REGULAR SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the minutes of the September 14, 1987, City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 16 1987 - SPECIAL SESSION There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the minutes of the September 16, 1987, City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. 10 -5 -87 i RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 87 -185 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING A PUBLIC NUISANCE AND ORDERING THE REMOVAL OF DISEASED SHADE TREES (ORDER NO. DST10 /05/87) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -186 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO APPLY FOR AND EXECUTE A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION 87 -187 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE JOINT COOPERATION AGREEMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and the motion passed unanimously. LICENSES I There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the following list of licenses: AMUSEMENT DEVICE LICENSE - OPERATOR United Artists Communications, Inc. 5810 Shingle Creek Pkwy. COMMERCIAL KENNEL LICENSE Brooklyn Pet Hospital 4902 France Ave. N. FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Vincent's Chocolates 6030 Xerxes Ave, N. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Otto's, Inc. P. 0. Box 435 Viking Heating & Air Cond. Co. P. 0. Box 713 The motion passed unanimously. RECESS TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) MEETING There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to recess the City Council meeting to allow for an Economic Development Authority meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 7:08 p.m. 10 -5 -87 -2- i s f RECONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING The City Council reconvened at 7:21 p.m. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) i F RESOLUTION NO. 87 -188 I Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 0 RESOLUTION TO ADOPT THE 1988 BUDGET F The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by s member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -189 't Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE A TAX LEVY FOR 1988 BUDGET APPROPRIATIONS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. 'r RESOLUTION NO. 87 -190 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: P RESOLUTION APPROVING A ONE -THIRD MILL LEVY FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEFRAYING THE COST OF OPERATION, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF MSA 462.411 THROUGH 462.711, OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR THE YEAR 1988 r. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and the motion passed unanimously. 4 The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving Preliminary Layout Plan for Improvement of County Road 10 between Northway Drive and Shingle Creek Parkway. The Director of Public Works stated the City Council requested Hennepin County to consider this project as a high priority improvement for 1987. He noted the County recently contacted City staff regarding a layout plan and proposed improvement project. He noted this proposed plan was for the construction of a double turn lane beginning at Northway Drive eastward to Shingle Creek Parkway. He noted the County's current plan is to replace the existing bridge across Shingle Creek with a triple box culvert which would be continuous across the entire width of County Road 10, including the area where the City's existing pedestrian /water main bridge is located. He briefly reviewed the four reasons why staff feels it is desirable to use culverts to replace the bridge. The Director of Public Works went on to review some slides which showed the end wall and railing design alternative. He added the City would be working with Northern States Power for an estimate on moving the distribution line from the center median. He noted at this time it appears it may cost approximately $60,000. Councilmember Lhotka inquired if that would be a City cost or if NSP would pay for this. The Director of Public Works stated this cost would have to be paid by the City. Councilmember Lhotka inquired why the distribution lines would be put underground. The Director of Public Works stated it would be for aesthetic reasons only. ` 10 -5 -87 -3- The Director of Public Works went on to review the estimated costs to the City and the time requirements for construction. He stated staff believes it would be best to carry traffic through the project via a series of temporary bypasses, even though it would mean an additional cost and extended construction time. A brief discussion then ensued regarding the existing water main and its location beneath the pedestrian bridge. Other alternatives were reviewed for this portion of the project, and Councilmember Lhotka inquired as to the condition of the existing pedestrian bridge. The Director of Public Works noted that structurally the bridge is very sound but it creates a handicap obstruction. He noted the grade is too steep for it to be handicap accessible. Councilmember Lhotka inquired when this proposed improvement has to be approved by the City Council. The Director of Public Works stated it would be possible to hold this item over until the October 26, 1987, City Council meeting. He pointed out the fact that he has recently been notified there is some discussion about delaying this project to a later date due to a shortage of funding. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to table the Resolution Approving Preliminary Layout Plan for Improvement of County Road 10 between Northway Drive and Shingle Creek Parkway until the October 26, 1987, City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 87020 SUBMITTED BY LACASITA RESTAURANT REQUESTING SITE AND BUILDING PLAN AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO BUILD A SOLARIUM ADDITION TO THE RESTAURANT AT 2101 FREEWAY BOULEVARD The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 24, 1987, meeting. The Director of Planning and Inspection referred the Mayor and Councilmembers to pages one and two of the September 24, 1987, Planning Commission minutes and the attached informational sheet with those minutes. He noted the proposed remodeling would not result in any seating changes. He noted the building is now under renovation with the exception of the solarium addition." He stated the Planning Commission recommended approval of this application subject to six conditions which he reviewed for the Council. He stated a public hearing has been scheduled this evening and notices have been sent. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87020 submitted by LaCasita Restaurant. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87020 submitted by LaCasita Restaurant. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve Planning Commission Application No. 87020 submitted by LaCasita Restaurant requesting site and building plan and special use permit approval to 10 -5 -87 -4- build a solarium addition to the restaurant at 2101 Freeway Boulevard subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes, prior to the issuance of permits. 2. The addition shall be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 3. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 4. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 5. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits. 6. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 87021 SUBMITTED BY FIRESTONE CAR RENTAL, INC. REQUESTING SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO CONDUCT A CAR RENTAL OPERATION AT THE FIRESTONE SERVICE CENTER, 5445 XERXES AVENUE NORTH The City Manager noted this item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 24, 1987, meeting. The Director of Planning and Inspection referred the Mayor and Councilmembers to pages two and three of the September 24, 1987, Planning Commission minutes and the attached informational sheet with those minutes. He noted most of the rental cars would be delivered throughout the twin city metro area. He stated the applicant does not intend to have a large number of cars on site and noted most likely there would be between five and eight cars on the site. He went on to review the revised parking plan and noted staff foresees no major parking problem on the site with the retail operation within the building being discontinued. He noted the Planning Commission recommended approval of this item subject to three conditions which he reviewed for the Council. He stated a public hearing has been scheduled for this evening and the proper notices have been sent. Councilmember Scott inquired if a condition could be added regulating the number of rental cars allowed on the site. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated this would be possible. Councilmember Lhotka inquired as to the number of additional employees for the car rental operation. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated there would be one employee for the car rental operation He added if the Council so wished he would suggest amending condition No. 3 to state that no more than eight rental cars could be stored at one time at this location. 10-5-87 -5- Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87021 submitted by Firestone Car Rental Inc. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 87021 submitted by Firestone Car Rental, Inc. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve Planning Commission Application No. 87021 submitted by Firestone Car Rental, Inc. requesting special use permit approval to conduct a car rental operation at the Firestone Service Center, 5445 Xerxes Avenue North, subject to the following conditions: 1. The owner of the property shall agree in writing that the former retail area within the building may be used for the display of tires, batteries and accessories only and shall not resume its use as a retail store for appliances and equipment as long as the car rental business is in operation at the premises. 2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. E 3. The area for rental car storage shall be limited to the front of the former retail store and shall be signed for rental car storage. No more than eight rental cars shall be stored in this location at one r time. The motion passed unanimously. i RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:28 p.m. and reconvened at 8:43 p.m. The City Manager presented a Resolution Approving Proposal for Engineering Services Relating to Relocation of Storm Sewer between Lots 46 and 47, Block 6, Pearson's Northport 3rd Addition. He noted the house located at 5806 Halifax I Avenue North is located on top of the existing storm sewer. He stated it is staff's recommendation that a study be completed to evaluate the feasibility for relocating this facility and to develop a preliminary plan and cost estimate. The Director of Public Works stated he would like to point out in the proposed resolution there is an error on item No. 4. He noted it should state "there is appropriated the sum of $2,500 from the Municipal State Aid Fund No. 2600 fund balance to pay the cost of consulting services ". He went on to review the proposed procedure for correcting this problem. Councilmember Lhotka inquired what staff is doing at this point to prevent this problem from occurring again. The Director of Public Works stated he feels the procedures used by staff at this time have improved greatly since the time of this construction. The Director of Public Works stated he felt the City Council should consider the 10 -5 -87 _6_ r entire package at one meeting and would suggest doing so at the November 9, 6 1987, City Council meeting. RESOLUTION NO. 87 -191 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSAL FOR ENGINEERING SERVICE RELATING TO RELOCATION OF STORM SEWER BETWEEN LOTS 46 AND 47, BLOCK 6, PEARSON'S NORTHPORT 3RD ADDITION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and the motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCE The City Manager presented An Ordinance Vacating Portions of the Public Utility Easements Located on Lots 46 and 47, Block 6, Pearson's Northport 3rd Addition. He noted this ordinance also pertains to the resolution just passed by the Council. He stated this ordinance is being read for the first time and it is anticipated the second reading would be held on November 9, 1987. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve for first reading An Ordinance Vacating Portions of the Public Utility Easements Located on Lot 46 and 47, Block 6, Pearson's Northport 3rd Addition and setting a public hearing date for November 9, 1987, at 7:30 p.m. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS (CONTINUED) PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 87012 SUBMITTED BY BILL KELLY HOUSE REQUESTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT FACILITY FOR MENTALLY ILL AND CHEMICALLY DEPENDENT ADULTS AT 5240 DREW AVENUE NORTH E The City Manager noted this item was originally considered by the Planning Commission at its July 16, 1987, meeting and tabled. It was also considered and tabled by the Commission at their August 13, 1987, meeting. He added this item was recommended for denial by the Planning Commission at its September 3, 1987, meeting. A public hearing was then opened at the September 14, 1987, City Council meeting and continued to this evening's meeting. Mayor Nyquist noted that a number of questions and concerns had been raised by the City Council at the September 14, 1987, City Council meeting, and he asked the City Manager to review these questions and concerns and the answers he had received. The City Manager then gave a brief review of all the questions and concerns raised and the answers which he had received. Mayor Nyquist noted in the September 22, 1987, letter from Mr. Phillips to the City Attorney, there are several distortions, one of them being the statement that he flatly refused to meet with Mr. Phillips' clients. He noted there are other concerns with materials submitted by the applicant regarding the questions and concerns from the September 14, 1987, City Council meeting. He noted that Mr. Bamberry, manager of Rule 36 programs in the mental health division of the Department of Human Services, has stated that clients do not have to be chemically dependent to be involved in Rule 36 program. However, the applicants' admission requirements state that a client must have chemical dependency problems. He stated after reviewing all materials submitted, e 10 -5 -87 -7- especially with regard to the critical issues such as property values, there is actually no evidence regarding this particular application. He noted most studies regarding property values are for residences with less clients than the one being proposed and also for residences where there are no chemical dependency problems. He stated he does not see the relevance of these studies to this particular case. Councilmember Hawes inquired if the mentally ill are held legally responsible for their actions, and if they are not held responsible, who is. Councilmember Scott stated she has some concerns regarding the admission criteria especially with regard to item A where it states the applicant must have a dual diagnosis of mental illness and chemical dependency /chemical abuse. She noted under the discharge criteria it is noted residents may also be transferred for violence toward others, suicide attempts, physical health, etc. Councilmember Theis stated the intent of the legislature is very unclear in this matter. He noted the City is mandated to allow facilities for up to 16 residents without adding any conditions. He noted it leaves the City in a gray area when it comes to facilities for up to 23 residents. He stated he would like the staff and Bill Kelly House representatives to have negotiations working towards acceptable conditions for the special use permit. Councilmember Lhotka inquired of the applicant their opinion of the suggested conditions. The City Manager read the list of suggested conditions for the applicants and the audience. I Mayor Nyquist recognized Susan Lentz, attorney with the Legal Aid Society of Minneapolis. She stated some of the suggested conditions would be acceptable to the applicant, some suggested conditions need modifications, and other ones would be considered totally unacceptable. She went on to briefly review the conditions which the applicant would have problems agreeing to. Mayor Nyquist inquired if the Bill Kelly program can turn down referrals from the criminal justice system. Mr. Henry Norton stated these type of referrals can be turned down. Councilmember Theis stated he would like to place conditions on the special use permit which would tie the applicant to the program which they have presented to the City. He inquired of the City Manager what the time frame was for approval or denial of this application. The City Manager stated the deadline is approximately October 23 or October 24, 1987. Councilmember Lhotka inquired if the time period can be interrupted if it is agreed to by both parties. The City Manager stated the time period could be extended if both parties agree, or the other alternative would be to place a moratorium on the issue. A brief discussion then ensued regarding the moratorium issue, and the City Attorney stated it now appears the moratorium issue may need only a simple majority to pass instead of the four to one vote which was previously noted. He stated he would like to investigate this further. He noted the other alternative to a moratorium would be simply to not act on the issue at all before the time clock runs out. He stated in doing so the court could not compel the City to approve the application only to act upon the application. He added the moratorium resolution would become effective immediately and would stop the time clock. Ms. Lentz stated she and Mr. Phillips had contacted the City Attorney several times regarding meeting to discuss the suggested conditions. She noted no meeting was ever held but that she was willing to meet with the City Attorney 10 -5 -87 -8- r tonight, tomorrow, or whenever possible to discuss the suggested conditions. She added that she and the Bill Kelly House representatives would like to resolve this matter in an amicable fashion but are prepared to do whatever is necessary to resolve this issue in a timely fashion. Councilmember Theis stated there have been a number of conflicting statements regarding this application and noted he cannot act on something that is still up in the air. He stated he does not feel a moratorium is a denial of the application, but it would only be used to allow the Council more time to distinguish answers to all questions. He added that he is not advocating a moratorium at this time. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Felix Phillips, attorney for the applicant. Mr. Phillips stated he had two witnesses which he would like to speak before the City Council adjourned. Mayor Nyquist inquired what type of questions Mr. Phillips would be asking of these people. Mr. Phillips stated he would be asking their medical opinions regarding clients and the difference between mentally ill residents and other residents. Mr. Phillips then introduced Hillary Sandahl, staff psychiatrist for the Hennepin County Medical Center. She stated she has been referring clients to the Bill Kelly House since May of 1985. She noted she would state without hesitation there is no reason for anyone to be afraid of the Bill Kelly House residents. She noted most mentally ill people feel they are safer when they live in a supervised environment. She stated 20% of the mentally ill patients she sees are involved with chemical dependency. She added that generally chemical dependency is a sign of mental illness. Mr. Phillips pointed out the Northwest Residence also has residents who are chemically dependent. Councilmember Theis inquired why the admissions policy for Bill Kelly House states the clients must have a chemical dependency problem. Ms. Sandahl stated she was not the correct person to answer that question but that she would assume it is because they are a specialized facility. Councilmember Hawes inquired if the residents are held accountable for their actions. Councilmember Lhotka left the table at 10:02 p.m. Ms. Sandahl stated she would assume the residents would be held legally accountable for their actions. Councilmember Hawes inquired if the residents would be able to determine the appropriate type of behavior required of them when facing a situation of harassment. Councilmember Lhotka returned to the table at 10 :04 p.m. Ms. Sandahl stated she would assume they would be able to handle the situation properly. Mr. Phillips then introduced Martha Shipp, from Hennepin County, and noted that Ms. Shipp handles the funding for Rule 36 programs. Councilmember Scott inquired if this department actually investigates the facilities or if they only authorize the funding for the facilities. Ms. Shipp stated there are four site visits per year. She noted her department also receives reports from other licensing agencies such as the fire marshal, health department, and building inspector. Councilmember Scott inquired if the four site visits a year were announced visits. Ms. Shipp stated they make both announced and unannounced t 10 -5 -87 -9- G 6 visits to the facilities. Councilmember Lhotka inquired what her department would look for when going out to the facilities. Ms. Shipp stated her department monitors the contract requirements to ensure that the facility is running according to the contract. Councilmember Theis inquired if Ms. Shipp was involved with the decision regarding the number of residents for this facility. Ms. Shipp stated she was on staff but that Rule 36 states a facility may have 25 or less clients. A discussion then ensued regarding the conditions which could be placed on the special use permit, and it was noted the conditions would have to be consistent with State and County regulations and guidelines. Ms. Lentz stated payment of the attorney's fees were recently awarded in the Fridley case. She noted that r denial of this permit is also a denial of human, constitutional and statutory rights. Councilmember Theis stated he does not feel that a moratorium is a denial of constitutional or statutory rights. Mr. Phillips stated he believes he and his client have presented everything which is possible to allow the Council to make a decision. Councilmember Hawes inquired if this issue were to go to court, and the City were to win the case, could the City collect the attorney's fees from the applicant. The City Attorney stated it would be very extraordinary if the attorney's fees were awarded to the City and that he would not expect this to happen. Mayor Nyquist inquired if the Council votes on the moratorium issue, should the public hearing be closed. The City Attorney stated there are not any ground rules pertaining to the Mayor's question but added he could see little reason to close the public hearing. Councilmember Theis inquired if when the original ordinance was adopted did it address these types of uses. The City Attorney stated he was not with the City when the original ordinance was adopted, however, he noted the original ordinance does address boarding care facilities. Councilmember Theis inquired if the ordinance could be made clearer. The City Attorney stated the ordinance could be more clear, but all facilities would have to be reviewed in order to point to areas that need clarification. The City Manager stated there is no j doubt that there are inconsistencies within the original ordinance. He noted regardless of the action taken on this particular application, he would recommend review of this ordinance. Councilmember Theis stated unless there is more input from the audience he would like the applicant to work with City staff on conditions that are acceptable to all parties involved. He suggested the Council should also take the first step towards the moratorium in case an agreement cannot be reached. A brief discussion then ensued regarding the suggested conditions. There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka directing staff to work with the applicant regarding conditions for the proposed special use permit and to allow residents in the area to respond to the suggested conditions. Mayor Nyquist inquired if the applicant would be willing to extend the time period by four days. Mr. Phillips stated Mr. Norton will agree to the four day extension if it will allow for this issue to be completed. 10 -5 -87 -10- Upon vote being taken on the foregoing motion, the motion passed unanimously. Mayor Nyquist inquired what the Council's position was on the moratorium issue. Councilmember Theis inquired if it is necessary to pass the moratorium issue since a four'day extension has been agreed upon. The City Attorney stated it is not absolutely necessary to pass the moratorium issue this evening, but a first reading could be held on the moratorium ordinance to hold all options open for the City. Councilmember Theis stated he is not advocating a moratorium, but he would like to hold all options open for the City. There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve for first reading An Interim Ordinance for the Purpose of Protecting the Planning Process and the Health, Safety, and Welfare of the Residents of the Community, and Regulating and Restricting the Development of Adult Halfway Houses, Community -Based Residential Facilities, and Similar Uses within the City. The motion passed unanimously. REQUEST FOR AN EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO COVER LESCAULT VS CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER LAWSUIT AND LOCAL 49 LOCAL ISSUES NEGOTIATIONS The City Manager noted staff is requesting an executive session to discuss the Lescault lawsuit and the Local 49 issues negotiations. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to hold an executive session of the City Council to cover Lescault vs. City of Brooklyn Center lawsuit and Local 49 issues negotiations following adjournment of the City Council meeting. The motion passed unanimously. OTHER BUSINESS The City Manager stated the Council has before them a request to authorize vacation accrual of three weeks, and a 96 hour block of sick leave for the purposes of hiring a new engineering technician IV. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to authorize vacation accrual of three weeks for the first five years of the 1 employees em to employment with the City, P y y, and a 96 hour block of sick leave which can be used in the first year for the purposes of hiring a new engineering technician IV. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously. The Brookl n Center P Ci Council adJ ned at 10:55 p.m. City Clerk Mayo y 10 -5 -87 -11-