Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981 12-07 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 DECEMBER 7, 1981 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:08 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Director of Planning ,& Inspection Ron Warren and Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Pastor John Harris of the Brooklyn United Methodist Church. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - NOVEMBER ;9, 1981 There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to approve the minutes of the regular City Council meeting of November 9 1981 as sub- mitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted that the Council had not received any requests to use the Open Forum session this evening. He inquired of the audience if :there was anyone present who wished to use the Open Forum. There being none, he- proceeded 'with the regular agenda items. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 81 -243 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING WATER ASSESSMENT RATES EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1982 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the 5' following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 81 -244 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET CONSTRUCTION POLICY 12 -7 -81 -1- I� The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, s and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 81 -245 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION SETTING FINAL DATE FOR SUBMITTAL OF PETITIONS FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS - 198 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 81 -246 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1980 -P (67TH AVENUE NORTH STORM SEWER EXTENSION) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene.Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: "Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 81 -247 Member Bill Fignar, introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1981 - (WATER ;MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO -. 1981 -05, SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0. 1981 -06, STORM SEWER _ IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 - 07, STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1981 -08: EARLE BROWN DRIVE) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 81 -248 f Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1981 -F (63RD AVENUE NORTH x WATER MAIN) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. - { t 12 -7 -81 -2- } RESOLUTION NO. 81 -249 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1981 --I The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by' member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 81 -250 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1981 -M The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott, and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 81 -251 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF REV. C ROGER STACY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka acknowledging termination of the Joint Parking Agreement between Northwestern Bell and School District #286 in reference to Planning Application No. 75043. Voting in favor: - Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIED LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve a beer license for Pontillo Pizza at 5937 Summit Drive. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the following list of licenses: BOWLING ALLEY LICENSE JEM Bawl, Inc. 104 E. 60th St. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 5357 North Lilac Dr. 12 -7 -81 -3- CIGARETTE LICENSE `_. Advance-Carter Company 850 Decatur Ave. N B. C. Liquor Store #1 6800 Humboldt Ave. N. B. C. Liquor Store #2 6150 Brooklyn Blvd. B. C. Liquor Store #3 5711 Morgan Ave. N. r Denny's Restaurant 3901 Lakebreeze Ave. N. Farrell's Ice Cream Parlor 5524 Brooklyn Blvd. Woolworth's Brookdale Shopping Ctr.' Big -Bi Service Station 5710 Xerxes Ave. N. Brooklyn Center Country Boy 4401 69th Ave. N. Brooklyn Center Shell 6245 Brooklyn Blvd. Country Club Market 5715 Morgan Ave. N. JEM Bowl, Inc. 104 E. 69th St. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Jerry's Super Value 5801'Xerxes Ave. N. Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 N. Lilac Dr. Q. Petroleum Corp. 1505 69th -Ave. N., n Red Owl Stores 215 E. Excelsior Ave. Country Store 5425 Xerxes Ave. N. Country Store 3600 63rd Ave. N. Taco Towne Restaurant 6219 Brooklyn Blvd. i Thrifty -Scot Motel 6445 James Circle Twin City :Novelty 9449 Penn Ave. S. Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. N. Twin City Vending Co. 1065 E. Highway 36 Earle Brown Farm Ind. 'Park 6100 Summit Dr. r FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE <; Pontillo's Pizzerias, Inc. 5937 Summit Ave. N. NURSING HOME LICENSE Maranatha Conservative Home 5401 69th Ave. N. OFF -SALE NONINTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE Brooklyn Center Country Boy 4401 69th Ave. N. Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. N. Country Club Market 5715 Morgan Ave. N. Jerry's Super Valu 5801 Xerxes Ave. PI. I: Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 N. Lilac Dr. SuperAmerica Station 6545 W. River Rd. SuperAmerica Station 1901 57th Ave. N. 7- Eleven Food Stores 1500 69th Ave. N. Q. Petroleum Corp. 1505 69th Ave. N. j Rog & Jim's 6912 Brooklyn Blvd, OFF -SALE NONINTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE Red Owl Stores, Inc. 215 E. Excelsior Ave. Country Store 5425 Xerxes Ave. N. Country Store 3600 63rd Ave. N. 12 -7 -81 -4- I ON-SALE NONINTOXICATING LIPUOR LICENSE Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. N. Donaldson's 1200 Brookdale Shopping Ctr Pontillo's Pizza 5937 Summit Ave. N. Rocky Rococo Corp. 1267 Brookdale Shopping Ctr. Taco Towne Restaurant 6219 Brooklyn Blvd. POOL AND BILLIARD TABLE LICENSE Advance - Carter Company 850 Decatur Ave. N. B.C. Community Center 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 N. Lilac Dr. PUBLIC DANCE LICENSE JEM Bowl, Inc. 140 E. 60th St. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle SIGNHANGER'S LICENSE DeMars Signs ' 7911 Monroe St. N.E. Voting in .favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. i SUBDIVISION BOND REDUCTION The City Manager introduced the next agenda item that being a subdivision bond reduction for Meadow Corporation -The Ponds Plats III, IV & V. He noted that the item had been tabled at the November 23, 1981 meeting, and that the Developer had been notified that the i ' s t C Council uncil would consider r the matter at this evening's meeting. The Director of Public Works then reviewed the staff's recommendation for the City Council. He noted that the bond amount for Ponds Plats III and IV amounted to $62,000. The items of work covered by the bond included bituminous street, concrete curb and gutter, boulevard sod, required landscaping, street name signs, storm sewer, bituminous driveways and survey mounds. He noted that the work had been completed except for boulevard sod, driveways, some required landscaping on ten lots, and the'surveyors monuments. He recommended that the bond be reduced from $62,000 to $10,000. For the Ponds Plat V, he noted that the original bond was $40,000 and further stated that the work covered by the bond included: bituminous street, concrete curb and gutter, street names and survey mounds., He stated that the work remaining included survey monuments and boulevard sod. He recommended that the bond be reduced from $40,000 to $10,000. The Director of Public Works expressed the concerns of the City staff for the need of another dike in Plat V. He also indicated the need to develop turf and weed control in Plats III, IV, and V. The Director of Public Works then referred to a letter from Mr. Duane Dietrich, President of Meadow Corporation, written on December 1, 1981. k Councilmember Lhotka inquired if the work done in Plat III was performed by Meadow Corporation or another party. The Director of Public Works indicated the work was d performed by another party. Councilmember Lhotka then inquired if the City had been provided with "As- built plans "? The Director of Public Works indicated that we have not been provided with "As- builts" but rather had received pre. - construction plans. He further stated that he had several conversations with Mr. Dietrich and that the City has received information from them and feels that the problem can be d x s, 12 -7 -8`1 -5- resolved. Councilmember Fignar inquired if he was satisfied with the explanations for the problems being received by Meadow Corporation. The Director of Public Works indicated that they were making progress but would like some direction from the City Council relative to the turf problem. Mayor Nyquist then recognized Carole Blowers, 5018 71st Avenue North, who asked to comment on the issue before the Council. She indicated that she had lived at the present address for three years and that she was specifically concerned with the weeds. She noted that the area behind her house is filled with thistle and that it constantly spreads into her yard. She requested that the Council takes some action to rectify that matter. Councilmember Kuefler inquired if the land in question was part of Plat V. The City Manager indicated that it was The Mayor inquired if the staff was satisfied that the City retains sufficient leverage to accomplish the work to be completed under the bonds. The Director of Public Works indicated that he felt there was sufficient money to perform the work and suggested that the Council set completion deadlines. Councilmember Fignar inquired as to the leverage the City had on UD Construction.' The Director of Planning & Inspection indicated that the City had a $50,000 bond from the Meadow Corporation and not from UD Construction. Councilmember Fignar inquired if there was any attempt to reduce the performance bond. The Director of Public Works indicated that it was corrected there was no effort to reduce the performance bond. He indicated he was recommending setting 'a deadline of June 1, 1982 to allow foreclosure and completion of the project in the contruction season. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to reduce subdivision bond as.recommended by the staff. Councilmember Lhotka then inquired again if there was adequate converage for the remaining work. Counciimembe Scott indicated that she wants the staff to make the City's position clear to the Meadow Corporation on the matter. Following a brief discussion, Councilmember Kuefler amended his motion to reduce the subdivision bond on condition that the Developer agree in writing to a time extension on the performance bond and that the performance bond be agreed to include all remaining work including sod, driveways and all undeveloped lots to be graded and seeded to a condition to deter weed growth. All work to be completed on or before June 1, 1982. Subdivision Bond 680275 for Plat V is reduced to $10,000 provided the bond included boulevard sod, survey , monuments and the bonding company agrees to extend the Performance Bond (673099) in its full amount to cover all work items remaining under the bond and that the dike system shall be completed and the waterway developed to the proposed final grades adjacent to those properties abutting the easterly side of the plat. All work to be completed before June 1, 1982. All areas within the plat to be graded and seeded to deter weed growth. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed uanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to set the date for foreclosure on the performance bonds on June 1, 1982. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed uanimously. DISCUSSION IN CONSIDERATION OF NONRENEWAL OF LIQUOR LICENSE FOR EARLE BROWN BOWL The City Manager introduced the next agenda item, indicating that no action was 12 -7 -81 -6- was being requested on the Council's part for this evening. He noted that police reports indicate noncompliance on the part of liquor license holder with the City's liquor license ordinance. He specifically noted that liquor sales are greater than food sales. He briefly reviewed the history of Earle Brown Bowl liquor license situation and added that they had been cooperative in providing information and assistance to the staff. Following a brief discussion, Councilmember Kuefler inquired if the 50% requirement originated with the liquor license election. The City Manager confirmed that was one of the promises made by the City Council upon which the ordinance was originally approved. The City Manager then gave a, brief discussion of the history of the original intention of the ordinance. He noted that the food sales versus the liquor sales was intended to be used as a control device to eliminate corner bars. The Director of Planning & Inspection noted that liquor licenses can be issued only to restaurants. He noted that the license was based solely upon the restaurant use and not the bowling use. The City Attorney stated that the ordinance was patterned somewhat after the Bloomington ordinance. He stated the liquor license holder had never been in compliance with the City's ordinance and he did not foresee compliance in the future. He further indicated that they do not market food but `- rather bowling and liquor. He stated that if the City Council doesn't intend to revoke the license, then they must change the ordinance. Richard Forsler, Attorney for the Earle Brown Bowl, stated that Jim Madden, the owner, had 'projected that i with the proposed operation changes the best that can be expected would be a 60/40 split between food and liquor with liquor being 60% of the sales. He further stated that the only way he.could possibly achieve compliance would require some extensive j remodeling. In the addition, he indicated that they would be short on seating, approximately 35 seats. He also indicated that he felt he probably needs a variance on the City's parking requirements but that he would like to explore that concept. Councilmember Fi nar inquired if the 1982 g q projection for a 60/40 liquor food was based on adding spaces. Attorney, Richard Forsler, indicated that it was based solely on operational changes. Councilmember Fignar inquired if the Earle Brown Bowl, intended to continue to sub -lease the restaurant. Mr. Jim Madden, the owner, indicated that he did intend to continue the sub =lease agreement. Councilmember Lhotka inquired if the remodeling could be worked out, when would he start. Mr. Madden replied that he would start immediately, once approved. The Director of Planning & Inspection indicated this point in time he had not seen any plans relative to any remodeling of the Earle Brown Bowl. Councilmember - Kuefler` inquired of the possibility of researching other community ordinances. He further indicated that he would like to maintain the intent of the City's ordinances.' He stated that he would like to have the City consider a ratio that would include the principal part of a business in the liquor food ratio. Councilmember Lhotka indicated there are bowling alleys that have very good restaurants. He also felt that the owner will have to put more emphasis on food. The City Manager added that staff would research ; the ordinances in other communities and noted that Lynbrook Bowl would be coming in for a liquor license and have already indicated that they can comply with the food ratio. Further, we can see how other communities have faired with their ordinances. He further indicated the staff would not like to see any change in the City's ordinance because it has served the City well in keeping the corner bar - influence out of the City. Councilmember Lhotka stated that he felt that ordinance has worked well for the City and that he would like to see the staff work with Earle Brown Bowl on the restaurant remodeling. 12 -7 -8i -7 I Following a "brief discussion, Councilmember Kuefler indicated that he has some problem of revoking.a liquor license for business that has not been a police a problem. Mayor Nyquist indicated that he would like to proceed rather slowly with any ordinance changes due to the liquor license ordinance, ORDINANCES ORDINANCE NO. 81 -22 Member Celia Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING SEPARATION BETWEEN BUILDINGS IN THE Rl AND R2 DISTRICTS 9 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly .seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following' voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said ordinance was..declared duly passed and adopted. A public hearing had been scheduled for this ordinance amendment at 8:00 p.m. The ordinance was first read on November 9, 1981, published on November 19, 1981 and was recommended for a second reading. Mayor Nyquist opened the public hearing on the ordinance amendment. There being no one present to comment on the ordinance change, Mayor Nyquist asked for a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to accept the Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Regarding Buildings In 'R1 And R2 Districts. Voting in favor: Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Couneilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS APPLICATION NO. 81070 SUBMITTED BY SUMMIT MORTGAGE CORPORATION FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL TO ADD AN ENCLOSED PORCH TO THE MAIN HOUSE 'ON THE.EARLE BROWN FARM t 6150 SUMMIT DRIVE The Director of Planning & Inspection presented and reviewed for Council members pages 1 through 4 of the October 19, 1981 Planning Commission minutes and also the Planning Commission information sheet prepared for Application No. 81070. Following his remarks, Mayor Nyquist inquired what the long range plans for the ' Earle Brown farm were. The Director of Planning & Inspection indicated there was not a long -range plan. He further stated that preservation attempts for the farm have been piece mill at best. He added that the Planning Commission feels that the present application before the Council reflects the best possibility for preservation of some of the Earle Brown farm buildings.` Councilmember Lhotka indicated that he felt that the application was similar to the other house on Brooklyn Boulevard that was denied the addition of a porch. He stated that the Earle Brown farm was given a special zoning to retain or preserve the 3 building. He indicated_ that he could not support the addition as presented. Council- member Kuefler then inquired how the porch would add to the historical significance. Janis Blumentals, architect for the Earle Brown farm, indicated that the porch added no historical significance by itself but rather helped maintain the buildings by increasing there usage. Councilmember Lhotka emphasized his feelings that he would like to tie approval to the development of a master plan for the farm. The City '12 -7 -81 -8 Manager stated that while the Developer could submit a master plan it would be hard to hold them to it. Specifically, because he does not really know what he is going to do with the farm. He indicated that the Council will have to judge one piece at a time. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to deny Planning Application No. 81070. Councilmember Kuefler inquired of the City Attorney what would be required for the Council to deny the application. The City Attorney indicated the Council would have to set forth the reasons for denial. Further, he felt that it was the applicant's position that any alteration of the existing buildings that doesn't change the historical look would be acceptable. Following a brief discussion, Councilmember Kuefler spoke against the motion. He indicated he felt that it helped to preserve the building. Councilmember Lhotka indicated he felt that the preservation of the house was only incidental -to its expansion'. He felt that the house was expanded so it could meet the needs of the owner. Councilmember Fignar then spoke against the motion to deny. He indicated the building was moved originally at the urging of the City. He added that the porch was insignificant to preservation. He indicated that he thought the intent was there. Vote on the motion to deny Planning Application No. 81070 was held. Voting in favor: Councilmember Lhotka. Voting against; Mayor Nyquist, Council- members Kuefler; Scott, and Fignar. The motion failed. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to approve Planning Application No. 81070 with stipulations set forth by the Planning Commission at its November 19, 1981 meeting. Further, that the field house and the main house be brought into compliance with the City's maintenance code and that building permits not be issued until the plat has been filed. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: Council- member Lhotka. The motion passed. The City Council recessed from 9:30 p.m. to 9:40 p.m. APPLICATION NO. 81071 SUBMITTED BY VOLP CONSTRUCTION COMPANY /DALE TILE COMPANY FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL TO REMODEL SPACE INSIDE THE WAREHOUSE AND OFFICE BUILDINGS AT 4815 FRANCE AVENUE NORTH The Director of Planning & Inspection reviewed with the Council pages 4 through 6 of the Planning Commission minutes of November 19, 1981. Following his comments, Mayor Nyquist opened the 'public hearing. There being no public comment, there was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to approve Planning Application No. 81071 with the stipulations as set forth by the Planning Commission. Voting in .favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO. 81072 SUBMITTED BY MR. RUSSELL VISKA FOR A VARIANCE FROM THE SIGN ORDINANCE TO ALLOW THE ERECTION OF A 34' HIGH, 152 SQ. FT. FREESTANDING SIGN AT THE SMOKE PIT RESTAURANT AT 5001 DREW AVENUE NORTH The Director of Planning & Inspection reviewed with the Council members pages 6 through 9 of the November 19, 1981 Planning Commission minutes. 12 -7-81 -9- Following his review, Director of Planning & Inspection stated that J t was the recommendation of the Planning Commission as well as the staff's recommendation that the application be denied. Councilmember Kuefler inquired if the request ' was for both additional height and area. The Director of Planning & Inspection replied that it was. Councilmember Kuefler then inquired if the Holiday Inn variance was for height and area? Planning Director, Ron Warren, replied it was „ for height only. Having looked at drawings of the proposed sign, Councilmember Lhotka inquired if the reader board was deleted, would he need the variance for the sign height and ' could he put the reader board on the building ? The Director of Planning '& Inspection indicated that if he were to delete the reader board from the sign he would need a variance for the height only and that he would have the right to put the reader board' on the building. Councilmember Fignar inquired if the Smoke Pit part of the sign was lit. Planning Director, Ron Warren, indicated that it was. 'Councilmember Fignar then inquired if the lighting affected the neighbors. Mr. Viska replied that the major complaints that he received were from the building lights. Councilmember Lhotka asked Mr. Viska what would happen in five years if the sign doesn't work for him. Mr. Viska replied that he wasn't concerned about five years He indicated that in five years people will know about the restaurant and sign will not be a problem. Councilmember Lhotka inquired of Planning Director, Ron Warren, if they would have a problem if they got rid of the reader board. Planning Director, Ron Warren, replied that they would and that the main concern of the Planning Commission was the 'height. Councilmember Fignar inquired if he would be allowed to lite a roof sign. Planning Director,' Ron Warren, indicated that he would. Mr. Viska then emphasized that the location creates a unique problem for his restaurant. He feels that he has a significant need for the sign and that the sign would have little neighborhood impact Councilmember Lhotka then emphasized that he was concerned about setting a precedent and that he personally did not want to change the sign ordinance.' A Mr. - Roger,Byle indicated that he lives next to the restaurant and that he was opposed to the sign. 'i There being no further discussions, Mayor Nyquist requested a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Council- member Fignar to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist,,Council members Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to deny Planning Application No. 81072. Councilmember Lhotka then inquired if the applicant were to move his sign to a different location would there be a waiting' period for a variance because of this particular denial. The City Attorney indicated t there would not be. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. a DISCUSSION OF THE CITY'S RADIO COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM The City Manager noted that in early 1980, he had brought to the City's attention the need to review the City's police, fire, and public.work's radio system. He noted there were three major components of the City's radio system First, there is the base stations for the police, fire, and public works; second, the police mobile radio units; third, the police portable radio units. 12 -7 -81 -10- He added that Mr. Ward Montgomery, the consultant hired to review our radio system, had indicated that the police portable radios are past their useful life and that the radio counsel has reached a point in their effective operating life that they both need replacement. The consultant remarked that the police portable 'radios are unrealiabie and are particularly in need of replacement and rank along with the counsel and base station as the highest priority in need of replacement. The estimated cost for replacement and modification to the dispatching center was $205,250. The City Manager indicated that they were requesting authorization for the consultant to proceed with phase II- of his contract which would be to prepare specifications for replacement of our radio system. Councilmember Kuefler then inquired as to the average life expectancy for our radio system. The City Manager indicated the 10 to 15 years. Councilmember Kuefler then inquired if the total dollar cost was for a total system. The City Manager replied it was for everything except the public works mobile units. Councilmember- Lhotka inquired as to the number of portables in the fire department. The City Manager indicated there are four or five and that they were not reliable. He also indicated that the staff was looking at a closed circuit TV system in the back hallway of the City hall. He requested authorization to proceed with specs for such with the consultant. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar authorizing phase II to consultant's contract. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION OF THE REVIEW OF THE COSTS AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DATA FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS The City Manager introduced the next discussion item on the Review of the Costs and Special Assessment Data for Public Improvements. The Director of.Public Works noted that Project No. 1980 -24, Project Nos. 1979 -06, 1980 -02,, 1981-02, 1981 -07, 1981 -08, and 1981 -17 were all complete or near completion. The Assistant City Engineer, Jim_Grube, showed slides of the project and reviewed each in significant detail. Reference was made to a lengthy memorandum from Sy Knapp.relative to the assessment of each of the projects which also included Project No. 1981 -05, 1981 -06, and 1981 -07. Following the staff presentation,. Councilmember Kuefler inquired if any changes had been made in the assessment formula. The Director of Public Works indicated they had made no changes. STAFF UPDATE ON STATE BUDGET CUTBACKS The Director of Finance discussed with the Council details of the proposed state budget cutbacks. He noted that aids had already been reduced by $125,104 or 2.1% of the budget. He also indicated that we had taken care of that in our budget. He added that the state has withheld $652,023 in state aids and homestead credits or about 10.9% of our total budget. He added that he is not sure when that money would be coming. The effect on the 1982 budget was not known but it is anticipated that we would be losing approximately $337,115 or 5.29% of our budget. He also i added that federal revenue sharing had been cut about $25,000. He added that the total cut for 1982 budget at this time looks to be about an estimated $400,000. The Director of Finance then gave a brief review of the history of tax changes in the State of Minnesota along with.a number of state mandates on the local units, of government. 12 -7 -81 -11- # 1982 COUNCIL MEETING SCHEDULE The City Manager introduced the next agenda item, that being Proposed Council Meeting Dates for 1982. i Following a brief discussion,, there was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and ' seconded by Councilmember Fignar to accept the Proposed Dates for 1982 City Council meetings and to set the Board of Equalization meeting date for June 7, -1982 at 7:00 p.m. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT `. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The 'Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 11:50 p.m. Clerk Mayor i i R t { 12 -7 -81 -12-