Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979 12-17 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 17, 1979 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 Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott. Also present was City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public works Sy Knapp, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Ron warren, Superintendent of Engineering Jim Noska, Building Official will Dahn, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, and Administrative Assistant Tom Bublitz. Mayor Nyquist noted that Councilmember Gene Lhotka had informed him he would be out of town and would not be able to attend this evening's meeting, and was therefore, excused. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Pastor Bailey of the Brooklyn Center United Methodist Church. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 3, 1979 Motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of December 3, 1979 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist 'noted the Council had not received any request to use the Open. Forum session this evening. Mayor Nyquist inquired of the audience if anyone was present who wished to address the Council. There being none, the Mayor proceeded with the regular agenda items. PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASES /REDUCTIONS The City Manager referred the Council to a memo from the City's Building Official to the Director of Planning and Inspection which recommended the release of a performance bond for Medtronic, located at 6700 Shingle Creek Parkway and the reduction of a performance bond for Michlitsch Builders, located at 1510 69th Avenue North. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the performance bond release for Medtronic, located at 6700 Shingle Creek Parkway, and to approve the performance bond reduction for Michlitsch Builders, located at 1510 69th Avenue North. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS The City Manager introduced a resolution amending Resolution No. 79 -258 pertaining to a supplemental agreement for Bridge and Roadway Contract 1979 -D (Shingle Creek Parkway). He explained that because of a mathematical error the amount of the supplemental agreement shown in the resolution was shown as 12 -1 7 - 79 -1- $305,032.40 instead of the correct amount of $308,182.20. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -284 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 79 -258 PERTAINING TO A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR BRIDGE AND ROADWAY CONTRACT 1979 -D (SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a resolution pertaining to supplemental agreements for Pedestrian /Bicycle Improvement Project No. 19 (S.P. 109- 115 -01, M590210). He noted. the Minnesota Department of Transportation has required the addition of a crash attenuation system around the center pier of this bridge located at T.H. 100 and 59th Avenue North. He stated federal and state funds will participate in the additional cost. The Director of Public Works explained this item should have been included in the original plans and specs prepared by the consultant and that the error was discovered after the contract was let. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -285 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENTS FOR PEDESTRIAN /BICYCLE BRIDGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1977 -10 (S.P. 109 - 115 -01, M5902 (10)). The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a resolution authorizing execution of agreement for traffic engineering services. He explained it is proposed to employ Short- Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. to provide specialized traffic engineering services relating to reconstruction of I -94 and intersection geometries for Shingle Creek Parkway. The Director of Public Works explained it is difficult to forecast traffic volumes in this area and that a detailed study is necessary to provide accurate traffic volume information. He noted a very heavy turning movement is anticipated at the intersections which will be studied. He also explained the study will add credibility to any City requests to the Minnesota Department of Transportation. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -286 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT FOR TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SERVICES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 12 -17 -79 -2- 1 , The City Manager introduced a resolution setting a final'date for the submittal of petitions for local improvements in 1980. He explained the staff has recommended that a time limit be established for the submittal of petitions for 1980 improvements, to allow better planning and coordina- tion of the 1980 improvement program. He referred the Council to a memorandum from the Director of Public Works which outlined the steps in implementing local improvements from the initial petition to the award of the contract. The Director of Public Works noted that with a January 31, 1980 deadline the contracts would be awarded in June or July of 1980. Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether April is the busiest month for bids. The Director of Public Works explained March or April is generally the best time to get projects under contract, especially contracts in the cost range of $20,000 to $250,000. Councilmember Fignar questioned whether the resolution might unfairly hamper some people with the January 31, 1980 deadline. In response to Councilmember Fignar's inquiry, the Director of Public Works explained he felt most people could assemble a petition within a month and that he feels a month is more than adequate time to prepare the petition. The City Manager noted that the implementation of the deadline is an attempt to arrange the engineering in a more manageable cycle to manage the flow of projects,. Councilmember Fignar stated he feels the resolution is a good idea but expressed a concern that it may put some individuals under a time constraint._ The Director of Public Works noted that, even with the deadline, the City will continue to receive petitions any time of year and present them to the Council. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -287 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION SETTING FINAL DATE FOR SUBMITTAL OF PETITIONS FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS 1980 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -288 Member Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR CITY HALL ELEVATOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN WORK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler., Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a resolution setting wages and salaries for the calendar year 1980. He explained the staff is recommending that employees not previously placed in a pay plan be included in a formal pay plan. He noted that the Stanton Survey and the Loren Law study were the two main documents used in preparing the proposed pay plan. 12 -17 -79 -3- The City Manager explained that an 8% cost of living adjustment is being requested as an across the board increase for nonorganized City employees He indicated that the 8% adjustment is typically the amount being used for adjusting salaries in most other metropolitan area municipalities, He also noted that the federal wage and price guidelines are now under review and that an 8% adjustment is being anticipated for these guidelines. He referred the Council to a letter from Labor Relations Associates, Inc. which stated that the proposed pay plan is consistent with current guidelines issued by the President's Council on wage and price stability. He stated the proposed pay plan will make salary administration more easy. The City Manager noted two corrections in the proposed pay plan, one being that the midpoint for the Director of Public Works should be changed from $35,509 to $35,775, and the other being that on page four of the plan the third sentence in the first paragraph which states, "The differential between grades is approximately 11 % ", should be deleted. Councilmember Kuefler stated he felt the proposed range for the Public Works Director does not track with the salaries as listed in the Stanton Survey and that only two cities are higher than Brooklyn Center's pay range for this position. The City Manager explained that this was due to the great number of new people in this position in other cities. Councilmember Kuefler indicated that the rate ranges for this position are not in line with the data from the Stanton survey. The City Manager stated the representatives from Stanton noted the rate ranges are the most unreliable part of their survey and that this is why the City staff used actual salaries when preparing the pay plan. Councilmember Kuefler emphasized the point that a salary range for a particular position is determined on the value of the job and that the specific pay is determined on the value of the individual in the job. The City Manager referred to the Loren Law study which established pay ranges for department head positions with a 20% range on either side of the midpoint. He explained the midpoint was set by what the market would pay for the job and the range was established by moving 20% above and 20% below the midpoint. Councilmember Kuefler noted that he felt the range should be'used to set the value of a particular job. The City Manager noted that the rate ranges in the Stanton Survey were the most unreliable part of the survey and that it was discovered that persons were being paid more than the ranges listed in the survey. He emphasized the fact that the range data in the Stanton Survey is not reliable. - -- At the request of Councilmember Kuefler the City Manager reviewed the present salaries of department heads noting the following salaries: City Manager $36,996, Citv Clerk - $23,544, Assessor- $24,588, Finance Director- $31,116, Police Chief - $30,336, Director of Planning and Inspection - $23,544, Liquor Store Manager- $22,944, Director of Parks and Recreation $28,512, and Director of Public .corks- $34,000. Councilmember Kuefler inquired whether he was correct in assuming that the resolution comprehends the approval of the pay plan and department head salaries. In response to Councilmember Kuefler's inquiry, the City Manager explained that, presently maximum salaries are based on the salary figures as presented in the budget. He explained that the authority is now being requested for the City Manager to set department heads' salaries in range one and two of the proposed pay plan. Councilmember Kuefler stated that he concurs with the City Manager in his request for the authority to set the pay of department heads in range one but not in range two. He explained he would like to amend the executive pay plan to reflect this. Councilmember Kuefler stated that he believes it is appropriate for the City Manager to set entry level salaries for department heads but that, above the entry level position he believes the Council should be involved in setting the salary as 12 -17 -79 -4- a normal part of the checks and balances system. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to amend the executive pay schedule to provide that the City Council must approve individual salary adjustments within merit ranges two and three. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to establish the Director of Public Works' maximum salary in range two to $37,564 and to provide that the Director of Parks and Recreation's maximum salary not exceed $35,565. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council- members Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Director of Finance noted that the Fire Department salaries have been inadvertently deleted from the proposed 1980 employee position and classifi- cation plan and should be included in the plan. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -289 Mier Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION SETTING WAGES AND SALARIES FOR THE CALENDAR YEAR 1980 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a resolution adjusting the 1979 general fund budget and noted that certain budget items have been approved by the Council through - out the year, and that the items must be reflected in a resolution. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -290 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1979 GENERAL FUND BUDGET The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a resolution to transfer funds from the Federal Revenue Sharing Fund to the -General Fund. He noted this transfer is `a reimbursement of funds previously authorized by the City Council. RESOLUTIONb NO. 79 -291 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption- RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND TO THE GENERAL FUND The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; 12 -17 -79 -5- and the. following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution a was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a resolution authorizing the issuance of temporary improvement notes. The Director of Finance explained it is City policy that the City internally finances improvement projects until long -term financing is obtained. He noted the rate is based on what the City would obtain for short -term financing in the outside market. He explained that, after the first of the year in 1980 the staff would probably recommend an increase from 6% to 6�% or 7% in the interest rate for the temporary improvement notes. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -292 Member Bill Fignar introduced the - following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF TEMPORARY IMPROVEMENT NOTES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a resolution renewing insurance contracts for 1980. The Director of Finance explained that two years ago, the City went out on bids for insurance and the only bid received was from the Home Insurance Company. He explained Home is generally the main company bidding on municipal insurance. The Director of Finance noted a 10% reduction in rates for 1980 and explained the total dollar amount will be similar to that paid in 1979 for the City's insurance. The Director of Finance explained that the Home Insurance Company will now extend the limits on liquor liability from $300,000 to $500,000 which means that the City will not have to make up the difference with an outside insurance company. He explained the $500,000 liquor liability amount is required by State law. The Director of Finance noted the following amendments to the resolution renewing insurance contracts: 1) The phrase, "and a renewal premium rate with Belefonte Underwriters at 1979 rates" should be deleted from the third paragraph in the resolution. 2) A fourth paragraph stating, "Whereas, the Horne Insurance Company has offered to provide the additional liquor liability coverage needed at the same renewal premium rate; and" should be added to the resolution. 3) The second to the last paragraph in the resolution should be amended to read, "Be it further resolved to accept the proposal of the Home Insurance Company to add excess liquor liability insurance at an estimated annual premium of $2, 072." The Director of Finance noted that the League of Cities is still pursuing the establishment of an insurance trust for self- insurance but he explained that he would not recommend that the City pursue this procedure as yet. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -293 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoptions RESOLUTION RENEWING INSURANCE CONTRACTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted 12 -17 -79 -6- in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted The City, Manager introduced a resolution approving the cable communications needs assessment report and approving continuation of the cable communications franchise process. Administrative Assistant Bublitz explained that the document received by the Council entitled "Report and Recommendations of the Brooklyn Center Needs Assessment Committee" is a compilation of data gathered from community representatives in the City and is intended to assess the cable communication needs of the City of Brooklyn Center. He explained the results of the Brooklyn Center needs assessment survey has been combined with those of the other eight cable commission member cities in the document entitled, "Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission - Statement of Corimunication Needs ". He noted that in order for the franchising process to continue, State law requires that a resolution be passed by the respective City Councils of the member cities in the Northwest Suburbs Cable Communica- tions Commission which accepts and approves the report and recommendations of the Needs Assessment Committee and statement of communication needs of _the Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission and also resolves that the franchising process should continue. Mayor Nyquist commented on one of the questions contained in the needs assess - ment questionnaire by suggesting that the survey question which stated, "Do you believe that cable television should be available to those who wish to subscribe in your community ?" is framed to suggest an affirmative answer. He explained that he felt the question could possibly contain some information relating to the possible fees attached to the cable service which would make, the question more realistic. He also indicated that if the needs assessment survey is intended to be a cross section of community opinion, then the sampling size, that being fourteen persons in Brooklyn Center, appears to be too small to obtain a significant sample of community opinion. He requested Administrative Assistant Bublitz to relay these concerns to the Cable Commission at its next meeting. Administrative Assistant Bublitz noted that apparently the Northwest Suburbs Cable Commission_ felt that by selecting a relatively small segment of community leaders within each of the member communities they could obtain a reliable sampling of how each community feels with regard to cable service. Councilmember Kuefler stated that he agreed with Mayor Nyquist's comments and also inquired how the franchise fee would be established and who controls the rate setting pro - cedures for the cable fee. The City Manager stated that he would research this matter and return to the Council with an explanation of how the franchise fee is established for cable service. RESOLUTION NO_ 79 -294 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING CABLE COMMUNICATIONS NEEDS ASSESSMENT REPORT AND APPROVING CONTINUATION OF CABLE COMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE PROCESS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fianar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a resolution authorizing the purchase of two compact pickup trucks. He explained that Brookdaie Ford was the low bidder 12 -17 -79 -7- on the trucks but they were not able to deliver the vehicles and he.was, therefore, recommending that the bid from Superior Ford which was the second lowest bid be accepted for the two compact pickup trucks.' RESOLUTION NO. 79 -295 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TWO (2) COMPACT PICKUP TRUCKS (1/4 TON) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -296 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) 3/4 TON FOUR -WHEEL DRIVE PICKUP TRUCK The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member 'Bil1 Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -297 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF 25 TONS OF 25 -5 -10 FERTILIZER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adapted. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -298 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption; RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF BUILDING MATERIALS NECESSARY FOR REMODELING THE EAST FIRE STATION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:30 p.m. and reconvened at 8:45 p.m.` PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS The 'City Manager introduced Planning Commission Application No. 79067 submitted by Marjorie Van Slyke for a special use permit to operate a photo studio in her home at 4925 Brooklyn Boulevard. He noted that the application was recom- mended for approval at the December 6, 1979 Planning Commission meeting. 12 -17 -79 -8- The Director of Planning and Inspection pointed out that the house is surrounded by single family homes on the north, west and south, with the Twin Lake Alano Society located across Brooklyn Boulevard to the east. He explained that photography studios are defined as special home occupations in Section 35 -900 of the Zoning Ordinance. He noted that the applicant has submitted a letter requesting the special use permit in which she explains that she has recently completed a commercial photography program at North Hennepin Technical Center and will be� photographing basically family portraits and weddings. He explained one room in the basement will be utilized for the business and she proposes hours of operation to be 12:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., Tuesday through Saturday. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that the premises have been reviewed by the Building Official who listed a number of items that he feels should be addressed such as: the need to keep the stairway area leading to the basement photography studio free of obstructions, the installation of a smoke detector, the need for a chemical fire extinguisher in the vicinity of the darkroom, and removal and installation of various doors to provide better access to and egress from the photography studio. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that it is also recommended that a turn around area be provided so that cars do not have to back directly out onto Brooklyn Boulevard. He noted that the applicant was in attendance at this evening's meeting. Noting that the application involves a special use permit, Mayor opened the meeting for a public hearing. There was no one to speak on the application. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to close the public hearing on Application No. 79067.. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to approve Application No. 79067 submitted by Marjorie 'Van Slyke subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator of the facility and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation, thereof, shall be grounds for revocation. 3. The hours of operation shall be 12:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., Tuesday through Saturday. 4. The operation of the special use shall be on appointment only basis and not require more than two parking spaces at one time. 5. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off- street on space provided by the applicant. 6. The stairway leading to the basement area shall be kept free of all obstructions to provide safe public access and egress and contain a smoke detector. 7. The applicant shall provide a turn around on her property so that cars will not have to back out directly onto 12 -17 -79 -9- Brooklyn Boulevard within one year following the approval of this application. 8. The applicant shall provide a wall mounted chemical - type fire extinguisher as approved by the Fire Chief in the immediate area of the darkroom. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager introduced the next two Planning Commission items and recom- mended that Application No. 79068 and Application No. 79069 be considered in conjunction with one another since they both related to Howe, Inc. He noted that Application No. 79068 had been submitted by Howe, Inc. for site and building plan approval for a 74' x 218' warehouse, garage, and equipment maintenance, facility at 4821 Xerxes Avenue North. He noted Application No. 79068 was recommended for approval at the December 6, 1979 Planning Commission meeting. He noted Application No. 79069 had beer. submitted by Howe, Inc. for a variance from numerous Zoning Ordinance requirements including: setbacks, buffers, parking, curbing, replatting and landscaping. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that a review of Application Nos. 79068 and 79069 was contained in the December 6, 1979 Planning Commission minutes on pages 2 through 14 and that since the Council had received a copy of the minutes he would not review all of the discussion contained in the Planning Commission minutes. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained Application No. 79068 was a request by Howe, Inc. for site and building plan approval to construct an approximate 74' x 218' insulated metal building to replace the building that was destroyed by fire on January 6, 1979 at the Howe Fertilizer site. He explained that the applicant proposes to place the building in the exact sane location as it existed prior to the fire, and that the building would be used for warehousing, storage of vehicles and equipment, and for maintenance operations (uses which were being conducted in the destroyed building at the time of the fire). He noted that the applicant proposes to equip the building with an automatic fire extinguishing system in accordance with ordinance requirements. He briefly reviewed the submitted site plan which indicates that a potential of 109 parking spaces can be provided on the site. He added that the landscape and drainage plans show only the existing conditions with no proposed alterations. The floor plans, show three principal activity areas for garage storage, warehousing and a maintenance shop, All divided with fire separations. He explained the building would have two loading docks, one on the north end and the other on the east end. He explained various overhead doors would be located around the building to provide vehicle access. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that the applicant proposes no site alterations in conjunction with the plan approval, but instead is seeking variances from all the existing Zoning Ordinance requirements as they relate to replatting, curbing and drainage requirements, landscaping, parking and lighting provisions, and buffer requirements from the residential district and setback requirements. The Director of Planning and Inspection rioted that Howe, Inc. is a nonconforming use in that they manufacture fertilizer which is not a permitted use in the zone.- He explained two types of nonconformity exist, one being that the use is non- conforming and the other being that Howe's building does not meet setback require- ments. Councilmember Kuefler expressed a concern over maintaining consistency as in his recollection the City has not allowed structures to expand in the past where the use is in conflict with current zoning. The City Attorney responded by explain- 12-17-79 _lp_ ing that this is not an expansion as the Planning Commission viewed it and that Howe would not be allowed to build a larger building than they had before. The Director of Planning and Inspection referred the City Council to page 5 of the December 6, 1979 Planning Commission minutes and noted that the City Council, based on the Planning Commission's recommendation, made the following two findings on May 14, 1979: 1) That Howe, Inc. was a valid use in ,1946 and became a nonconforming use under the City's Zoning Ordinance in 1957. 2) That the building destroyed by fire on January 6, 1979 was part of the entire complex, that less than 60% of the complex was destroyed by fire and that, therefore, the applicant is entitled to rebuild a similar warehouse on the site. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that two additional findings must be made concerning the size of the building that could be rebuilt and the types of uses permitted in the building. He explained that when Howe, Inc. became a nonconforming use under the Zoning Ordinance in 1957, the size of the building was approximately 62' x 218' (13,500 square feet and 189,200 cubic feet). He noted an addition., for which a building permit was issued with no supporting City Council approval, was made in 1961 which brought the building size to approxmately 74' x 218' (16,200 square feet and 225,800 cubic feet). He stated that the City Council should make a finding regarding the size of the building and the permitted use. He noted that the permits for the subject building issued prior to 1957 were approved for warehouse and storage only and did not include vehicle or equipment maintenance which was being conducted in the building at the time of the fire. The Director of Planning and Inspection noted that there has been a ten foot encroachment onto the residential area adjoining the Howe site by Howe, Inc. and he indicated that, regardless of whether the site plan is approved, the fence erected by Howe should be moved and the paved area rejuvenated. Councilmember Kuefler referred to page 12 of the December 6, 1979 Planning Com- mission minutes where the Planning Commission stated that a general condition of approval of all the variances is that the applicant shall be subject to the necessary drainage and water runoff provisions to be determined at -a future time. He inquired whether the City will assume that the appropriate drainage requirements be implemented and then require an appropriate bond to assure that they are implemented. The City Manager replied that this would be the procedure which would be followed in this case. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for a public hearing on Application No. 79069. Mr. James Russell, attorney for Howe, Inc., appeared to speak on the applica- tion and stated that the presentation given by the Director of Planning and Inspection gave a fair summary of Howe's request. He stated that he disagreed with the statement in the Planning Commission materials which he indicated stated that an economic hardship does not constitute' hardship within the meaning of the standards for variances. Mr Russell indicated that he feels an economic hardship is justification for hardship. He noted that the Howe site was legal when built and only became nonconforming when the new Zoning Ordinance was passed.. He noted that in his opinion, the new zoning requirements cumulatively create an economic hardship for Howe, Inc. He stated that the results of the fire have also created many economic hardships for Howe, Inc. Mr. Russell indicated that the requirement of replatting the property does not really do any practical good to anyone and there is a substantial cost for Howe to accomplish it. He also stated the 100 foot buffer strip proposed, along ' with delineated employee parking constitute a "taking away" of what we already have. He noted that, Section 35 -111 in the Zoning Ordinance, as originally understood by him, meant that Howe was exempt from the Zoning Ordinance. 1.2 -17 -79 -11- Mr. Russell indicated he feels Section 35 -111 permits the City Council to grant a variance from the buffer requirement. Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether the replatting of the property would be of any real benefit. The Director of Planning and Inspection replied that it would be, for example, the encroachment on the residential property by Howe would have been discovered through replatting. He also indicated that the replatting would result in a single description of the property rather than the numerous descriptions that now exist. Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether there was any specific determination on the fence which encroached the residential property by ten feet. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that the Building Inspector had reviewed the site and found a ten foot encroachment onto the residential area adjoining the Howe site. Mr. .Leo Hanson, 4903 Brooklyn Boulevard, addressed the Council and expressed a concern over the cost of replacing lawns in the neighborhood. He also stated that he felt the width of the proposed building should be 62 feet and not 74 feet. Mr. Hanson indicated that he fears that the encroachment by Howe will continue and that he would like to see the building used for warehouse and storage only and not for other uses. He stated that, in his opinion, the problem gets worse every year. Mr. Fred Fournier, 4900 Zenith Avenue North, addressed the Council and stated that the Howe building was originally built without a permit and he feels that Howe may not comply with the variances even if they are granted. He indicated that he would say "no" to all of the variances for Howe. Mr. Marvin Reich, 3141 49th Avenue North, addressed the Council and questioned how the Fire Marshal could approve the construction of _a building which would allow the storage of chemicals and welding in the same building.. He noted that the loading dock, in his opinion, would not be usable with cars parking in the surrounding area, and stated that he feels the whole neighborhood has experienced a hardship because of Howe, Inc. 4r. Larry Butler, 3201 49th Avenue North, addressed the Council and questioned why the temporary building on the Howe site had not been removed. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that removal of the building had been ordered' by the City but that it was now being appealed to the State Building Codes Division. Mary Dodds, 4730 Xerxes Avenue North, addressed the Council and stated that she feels the hardship experienced by Howe has never been clearly defined and feels that Howe cannot claim a hardship. She stated that she feels Howe should be required to follow City ordinances and should not be considered a special case. She noted that OSHA has recently closed many fertilizer plants across the country in past years and explained that she has been disturbed by noise from Howe, Inc. for a long time. There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to close the public hearing on Application No. 79069. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Fignar questioned whether this application had any connection with the phase out of Howe, Inc. The City Attorney stated that the phase out deals only with the manufacturing process and that the building could be used for 12 -17 -79 -12- storage of chemicals even after 1982. The City Attorney noted that the City issued a permit for the construction of a temporary building on the Howe site under Chapter 1601 of the State Building Code. He noted that the building was to be used for salvaging materials from the fire at the Howe site. He stated the lawsuit by Howe challenged the City's right to tear down the building. He explained that Howe must now exhaust all administrative appeals before it can go to court and noted it is now with the State Building Codes Division. He also noted that the district court has the final say in the matter. Councilmember Kuefler questioned what the status of the lawn problems in the area of the Howe site was. The City Manager stated that the State Department of Agriculture has indicated that dust with Atrazine particles is the likely cause of the dying lawns in the area and that an independent lab has also verified this. Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether the neighbors must file suit to force a determination of the cause of the dying lawns. The City Manager explained that this was not a part of any of the City's action related to the Howe site. Councilmember Kuefler inquired what the legal interpretation of the 62 foot versus 74 foot width of the proposed building would be The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that the dimensions of the building destroyed by fire were 74' x 218' and that the building was built in three stages, the first two being supported by Council action and the third stage built in 1961 with a permit issued administratively with no Council review. Councilmember Kuefler questioned which dimensions should be followed since the entire dimen- sions were not approved by the City Council. The City Attorney stated that the records are incomplete and that we can't be certain what existed in 1957. He rioted that the best information we have is that the building was '02 feet wide in 1957 and after 1957 it became wider. He explained it would be a judgment by the Council whether to go with the 1957 width or the width after 1957, which is the 1961 width when the permit was issued by administrative personnel. The City Attorney noted that he feels the Planning Commission recommendation in this instance should be followed. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott to approve the denial of variances from certain Zoning Ordinance requirements requested by Howe, Inc. subject to the Planning Commission's conditions. The City Attorney stated that he recommended the size determination of the structure should be considered separately prior to consideration of the application. Councilmember Scott withdrew her motion for approval of the denial of variances from certain Zoning Ordinance requirements by Howe, Inc. subject to the Planning Commission conditions. Mayor Nyquist requested the Council for a motion on a size determination for the proposed building. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to make the following finding concerning Howe Fertilizer: That the size of the building which Howe, Inc. is entitled to rebuild should be no greater than 16,200 square feet in area and no greater than 225,800 cubic feet in volume. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Mayor then asked the Council for a motion on the uses to be allowed in building which is to replace the building destroyed by fire on January'6, 1979 at the Howe Fertilizer site. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to find that Howe, Inc. is entitled to use the building which is to replace the building destroyed by fire on January 6, 12 -17 -79 -13- 1979 at the Howe Fertilizer site for warehousing, storage, and vehicle and equipment maintenance. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to deny the following variances requested by Howe, Inc. under Applica- tion No. 79069 as not meeting the Zoning Ordinance standards for variances: 1. A variance from Section 35 -540 regarding the combination of land parcels. 2. A variance from Section 35 -710 regarding drainage and curbing requirements noting that this matter is under further study by the City and certain require - ment may be forthcoming. 3. Variances from Section 35 -400 regarding building setback requirements. 4. A variance from Section 35 -413, Subsection 1, regarding landscaping requirements in the protective buffer strip. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to approve the following variances requested by Howe, Inc. under Application No. 79069 on the basis of meeting the standards for variances, subject to various conditions to minimize their impact: 1. A variance from Section 35 -413, Subdivision 1, to allow an encroachment into a 100 foot buffer area for a maximum 24 foot wide driving lane for on -site vehicle access pro- vided that the driving lane is bounded by B612 curb and gutter to prohibit encroachments into the buffer area. No storage of equipment or vehicles shall be allowed in this area. 2. A variance from Section 35 -413, Subdivision 1, to permit 21 parking stalls to encroach into the 100 foot buffer area along the west property line, westerly of the middle and south buildings, provided this parking area is delineated and is designated for employee parking only as designated on an approved site plan. No storage of vehicles or equipment shall be allowed in this area. 3. A variance from Section 35 -704, Subdivision 3, to permit a total of 65 parking stalls rather than the required 107 parking stalls provided that the approved parking is clearly delineated throughout the site as designated on an approved plan. 4. A general condition of approval of all the variances is that the applicant shall be subject to the necessary drainage and water runoff provisions to be determined at a future time. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Kuefler requested a clarification of the encroachment problem by Howe, Inc. on the adjoining residential area. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated the encroachment is a Zoning Ordinance violation which must be corrected immediately regardless of the approval or denial of any variances or the site and building plans. Councilmember Kuefler suggested that amore aesthetically pleasing exterior to the proposed metal building be found. The City Manager replied by indicating that this determination could be made at the time of the site and building plan review. Councilmember Scott stated that she would not vote for any site and building plan approval without revised site and building plans being submitted by Howe, Inc. indicating changes that reflect the approved variances. Councilmember Fignar agreed and stated that he feels that such plans should be submitted before any action is taken. The City Attorney indicated that it is typical to have plan revisions submitted before any approval is given. 12 -17 -79 -14- There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar to table Planning Commission Application No. 79068 pending submission of revised site and building plans by Howe, Inc. Mr. James Russell, attorney for Howe, Inc., requested the City Council to act on the plan as submitted. Councilmember Fignar withdrew his motion tabling Planning Commission Application No. 79068. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to deny Planning Commission Application No. 79068 submitted by Howe, Inc. on the basis that the plans submitted do' not reflect the variances authorized by the City Council. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist,- Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Attorney noted that Howe, Inc. can submit a new site and building plan for review. The City Manager introduced Application No. 79070 submitted by Brooklyn Center Industrial Park for subdivision approval to create a new RLS with four tracts (A, B, C, D) on the vacant tract of land between Shingle Creek Parkway, north of Freeway Boulevard (the large Spec 9 site). The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded to review Application No. 79070 and explained that the land is bounded by Shingle Creek Parkway on the east and north, the MTC and the Shingle Creek greenstrip on the west, and by Freeway Boulevard on the south. He noted the entire tract of land is roughly 40 acres, the largest single parcel of privately owned and undeveloped land in Brooklyn Center. He pointed out that the applicant wishes to divide the property into four tracts (A, B, C, D) according to the following sizes: tract A - 5.2 acres, tract B - 11.06 acres, tract C - 17.09 acres, tract D 6.57 acres. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that tract A will serve as the site for the approved Speculative Industrial Building No. 9 east ,of the MTC property. Tract B and tract C are tentatively to be used for a number of industrial buildings totaling up to 430,000 square feet in floor area. He noted that most of the parking for these tracts will be located on tract B. He stated that tract D is tentatively designated on the accompanying conceptual site plan for the area as the site for a motel with a restaurant. He emphasized that the site plan is conceptual only and is not considered a master plan for which the applicant is seeking approval. He explained that the platting pro- posal is primarily for the purpose of establishing legal parcels for sale. The Director of Planning and Inspection noted that the proposed RLS indicates a five foot wide'NSP Company easement adjacent to all public right -of -way. He stated a 20 foot wide drainage ditch easement is proposed to divide this subdivision through tracts B and C in a northeasterly fashion from the Shingle Creek walkway easement to Shingle Creek Parkway. He also pointed out a ten foot wide storm sewer easement in the southwestern tip of tract D adjacent to the Freeway Boulevard bridge over Shingle Creek. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that the configuration of the proposed tracts almost certainly require that a joint parking agreement and a joint access agreement between tracts B and C will have to be concluded if development of tract C is to be facilitated. He noted the applicant has indi- cated that he plans to file joint access and joint parking agreements with the RLS covering tracts B, C and D. He added that a joint access agreement between tracts A and B has already been filed according to the applicant. I2 -17 -79 -15- : Councilmember Fignar left the table at 10:40 p.m. Councilmember Kuefler inquired what the significance of the joint parking agreement would be. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that the City would not be approving a joint parking agreement with the approval of this plat as submitted. Councilmember Kuefler questioned what the City's options would be with regard to potential changes in any joint parking agreement. Councilmember Fignar returned to the table at 10:45 p.m. In response to Councilmember Kuefler's inquiry, the City Attorney stated that this could be a problem and that he would examine the agreement to assure the instruments of the joint parking agreement are permanent. Councilmember Fignar commented that if the joint access was allowed, he felt the MTC bus traffic would create a problem. Councilmember Kuefler also questioned whether Freeway Boulevard was the only access out of the area. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that Freeway Boulevard was the only access for this tract. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purposes of a public hearing on Application No. 79070. There was no one to speak on the application. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to close the public hearing on Application No. 79070. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against;.' none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to approve Application No. 79070, preliminary subdivision approval to create a new RLS with four tracts on tract B RLS 1405, subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The final plat approval is subject to joint access, joint parking, and joint maintenance agreements between tracts A, B, C, and D being filed with the RLS as a deed restric- tion upon all of the above tracts. 4. The final plat approval is subject to utility and drainage easement and a sidewalk easement through the site being filed with the RLS. 5. The final plat approval is subject to dedication of a portion of tracts B, C, and D for roadway purposes in conjunction with the construction of turn lanes necessary for potential traffic signal installations at the inter- section of Freeway Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway and of 67th Avenue North and Shingle Creek Parkway, the amount of said dedication to be determined by the City Engineer prior to final plat approval. 12 -17 -79 -16- t 6. Final plat approval is subject to drainage and utility easements of 15 feet in width, minimum, along both sides of private roads on the site, said areas to be unpaved boulevards properly landscaped. 7. The applicant acknowledges through final plat approval that access to a proposed private road as a westerly continuation of 67th Avenue North shall be restricted to points greater than 200 feet from the westerly right- of-way line of Shingle Creek Parkway; also that access, to a proposed private road between 67th Avenue North and Freeway Boulevard and westerly of Shingle Creek Parkway shall be restricted to points greater than 100 feet from the right -of -way line of Shingle Creek Parkway, or other acceptable alternatives determined at the time of site and building plan approval. 8. The applicant acknowledges through final plat approval that site approval is contingent upon the review of the Fire Marshal with regard to emergency access to all areas of the site. 9. The applicant acknowledges through final plat approval that should the owner (s) of tracts A, B, C, and D wish access to Shingle Creek Parkway at the west line of tract A, it will be the responsibility of said property owner (s) to negotiate a joint access agreement with the owner of the abutting property (tract A, RLS 1405) to the west of tract A. Votin g in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none.` The motion passed unanimously. ANNUAL 'WATER RATES ADJUSTMENT The City, Manager referred the Council to a memorandum from the Superintendent of Engineering regarding the proposed adjustments in the water assessment rates for 1980. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to adopt the proposed adjustments to the water assessment rates for 1980 as recommended and submitted by the City Engineering staff. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. -REVISION OF MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET CONSTRUCTION POLICY There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to amend the municipal state aid street construction policy to comprehend increasing the maximum street assessment for residential properties from $7.60 to $8.50 per assessable foot and the curb and gutter assessment be increased from $8.00 to $9.00 per assessable foot. voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. POLICE DEPARTMENT LIQUOR LICENSE ANNUAL REPORT The City Manager referred the Council to the Police Department liquor license annual report. The Police Department liquor license annual report was received and discussed by the City Council. 12 -17 -79 -17- 1980 CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATES The City Manager referred the Council to a memorandum concerning the 1980 City Council meeting dates. It was a general consensus of the Council that there were no problems with the schedule for the 1980 City Council meeting dates as submitted by the City Manager. REVIEW OF THE STATUS OF CITY PROSECUTOR APPOINTMENT The City Manager noted that this item was included on the agenda to determine if the Council was planning to review this item at its January 7, 1980 City Council meeting. Councilmember Kuefler stated that in the past the appointment of prosecutor .has not been on an annual basis. He noted that it is incumbent on the Council to determine the basis of the ground rules for the consideration of the development of evaluation and selection criteria for a City Prosecutor. He noted this procedure would be a departure from past policy. Councilmember Fignar noted that the basis for a review of the prosecutor selection appears to arise from a split in the law firm formerly holding both the City Attorney position and a City Prosecutor position. He noted it is a case where the City' has dealt with both individuals in the firm and now both individuals are with different firms. Councilmember Kuefler questioned what would be the basis for our review of the selection of the City Prosecutor now. Councilmember Fignar indicated that when the appointment was made in the summer of 1979, Mr. Clelland was not afforded an opportunity to present himself for consideration as a City Prosecutor. Councilmember Kuefler inquired whether it would be appropriate for the Council to open up the application process for the prosecutor position. Councilmember Fignar indicated that he feels comfortable with limiting the selection to two, meaning Mr. Schieffer and Mr. Clelland, and indicated he did not want to open it up to general application. Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether this meant we would ask the present prosecutor to present a proposal at the January 7, 1980 City Council meeting. Councilmember Fignar indicated that this would be his recommendation. Mayor Nyquist noted that in this review we are merely carrying out our decision for a six month review. Councilmember Kuefler questioned what the basis of that review might be. Mayor Nyquist indicated that cost and past performance would both be considera- tions for review. Councilmember Fignar stated that the decision made in the summer of 1979 for a City Prosecutor was based on a proposal from Mr. Schieffer and that Mr. Clelland was not considered at that time. He noted that both Mr. Clelland and Mr. Schieffer have proven successful records. Councilmember Kuefler indicated that he does not object to a review but that he felt that we are changing the precedent and that if we are, the Council should notify the present prosecutor that the Council is taking new consideration of the prosecutor position. Mayor Nyquist indicated that it might be advisable to request a written proposal from both Mr. Clelland and Mr. Schieffer prior to the January 7, 1980 City Council meeting. The City Attorney inquired whether the Council was intending to appoint a prosecutor on a yearly basis. He noted that this would affect long -term investments in his firm and that he would like to know what the Council would like the proposal to speak to. Mayor Nyquist indicated that he feels continuity is an important factor. Councilmember Fignar stated that he does not like the idea of a yearly bid basis for the prosecutor position and that he feels that if the Council is happy with the ' job performance, then the prosecutor position will be an ongoing basis. He added that he felt Mr. Clelland was not given a fair opportunity to present himself in this past summer's selection of City Prosecutor. Mr. William Clelland addressed the Council and noted that he would submit a written proposal to the Council and that he feels he can offer continuity of 12 -18 -79 -18- services at a reasonable cost. Councilmember Fignar indicated that he would like to receive the proposal by January 1, 1980. APPOINTMENT OF FIRE CHIEF AND ASSISTA14T FIRE CHIEF FOR 1980 TO 1984 The City Manager referred the Council to a memorandum concerning the appoint- ment of Fire Chief and Assistant Fire Chief for 1980 to 1984 and recommended that the Council confirm the appointments of Ronald Boman for Fire Chief and Robert Cahlander for Assistant Fire Chief for another four year term from January 1, 1980 to December 31, 1984. There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to appoint Ronald Boman as Fire Chief and appoint Robert Cahlander as Assistant Firer Chief of Brooklyn Center for another four year term from January 1, 1980 to December 31, 1984. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. LICENSES There was _a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to approve the following list of licenses: BOWLING ALLEY LICENSE Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. No. JEK Bowl, Inc. 104 E. 60th St. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Lynbrook Bowl 6357 N. Lilac Dr: e CIGARETTE LICENSE A. & J. Enterprises 2367 University Ave. Bob Ryan Olds 6700 Brooklyn Blvd. A. & J. Inc. 7548 Stillwater Way No. Hiawatha Rubber 1700 67th Ave. No. Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. No. Brooklyn Center Mobil 6849 Brooklyn Blvd.: Brooklyn` Center Shell 6245 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooks;Superette 6800 Humboldt Ave. No. Brother's Brookdale Restaurant Brookdale Shopping Ctr. Canteen Company 6300 Penn Ave. So. Gray Co. 6820 Shingle Creek Pkwy. K.T.C. Co. 6845 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Coca -Cola Bottling Co. 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd. Arctic Metal 6530 James Ave. No. Dean's Vending P. 0. Box 380 Brookdale Motel 6500 Lyndale Ave. No. Duane's OK Tire 6900 Brooklyn Blvd. Duoos Bros. American Legion #630 4307 70th Ave. No. JEM Bowl, 'Inc. 104 E. 60th St. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. Lynbrook Bowl 6357 No. Lilac Dr. Mares Big Boy 5440 Brooklyn Blvd. The Pipeseller - 1301 Brookdale Center Ralph's Super Service 6601 Lyndale Ave. No. Service Systems Corp. Soo Line Building Northwestern Bell 5910 Shingle Creek Pkwy. 12 -17 -79 -19- SuperAmerica Service Stations P. O. Box 248 SuperAmerica 6545 West River Road SuperAmerica 1901 57th Ave. No. Twin City Novelty 9549 Penn Ave. So. Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. No. Twin City. Vending 1065 E. Hwy 36 Earle Brown Farm Ind. Park 6100 Summit Dr. Viking Pioneer Dist. Co. 5200 W. 74th St. LaBelle's 5925 Earle Brown Dr. Wes' Standard Service 6044 Brooklyn Blvd. Woodside Enterprises 2500 Nathan Lane #209 Poppin Fresh Pie Shop 5601 Xerxes Ave. No. COMMERCIAL KENNEL LICENSE Brookdale Pet Center 1269 Brookdale Center Northbrook Animal Hospital 413 66th Ave. No. GASOLINE SERVICE STATION LICENSE American Bakeries Company 4215 69th Ave. No. Brookdale Car Wash 5500 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center Mobil 6849 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center Post Office 6848 Lee Ave. No. Brooklyn Center Shell Service 6245 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Service Center 6901 Brooklyn Blvd. Christy's Auto Service 5300 Dupont Ave No. City of Brooklyn Center - City Garage 1501 69th Ave. No Davies Water Equipment 4010 Lakebrezze Ave. No. Duane's OK Tire 6900 Brooklyn Blvd. Federal Lumber 4810 No. Lilac Dr. Howe, Inc. 4821 Xerxes Ave. No. Humboldt Avenue Service 6840 Humboldt Ave. No. Metropolitan Transit Commission 6845 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Munn Black Top, Inc. 3601 48th Ave. No. Northern States Power Co. 4501 68th Ave. No. Northwestern Bell 6540 Shingle Creek Pkwy. Ralph's Super Service 6601 Lyndale Ave. No. SuperAmerica Service Stations P. O. Box 248 SuperAmerica 6545 West River Road SuperAmerica 1901 57th Ave. No. Vicker's Minnesota Oil Co. 7645 Lyndale Ave. So. Vicker's 6830 Brooklyn Blvd. Wes' Standard Service 6044 Brooklyn Blvd. Bill West Service Center 2000 57th Ave. No. Zayre Shopper's City 3600 63rd Ave. No. HOUSEMOVER'S LICENSE Prodaer House Mover's 236 Cleveland Ave. S.W. ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE + Hennepin Technical Centers 9000 77th Ave. No. LODGING ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. 12 -17 -79 -20- MECHANICAL SYSTEM'S LICENSE Cool Air Mechanical 1441 Rice St. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE A. & J. Enterprises 2367 University Ave. Bob Ryan Olds 6700 Brooklyn Blvd. NURSING HOME LICENSE Maranatha Conservative Home 5401 69th Ave. No. OFF -SALE NONINTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE Lynbrook Bowl 6357 No. Lilac Dr. SuperAmerica Service Stations 1240 W. 98th St. SuperAmerica 6545 West River Rd. SuperAmerica 1901 57th Ave. No._ ON -SALE CLUB LICENSE Duoos Bros. American Legion #630 4307 70th Ave. No. ON -SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE JEM Bowl, Inc. 104 E. 60th St. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Ground Round Restaurant 2545 County Rd. 10 Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. J.W.A. Corporation 9448 Lyndale Ave. So. Jimmy's Lemon Tree 5540 Brooklyn Blvd. Nino's Steak Round -up 6040 Earle Brown Dr. ON -SALE NONINTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. No. Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. No. Denny's, Inc. 14256 E. Firestone Blvd. Denny's Restaurant 3901 Lakebreeze Ave. No. Donaldson's 1200 Brookdale Center Happy Dragon Restaurant 5532 Brooklyn Blvd. Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 No. Lilac Dr. OM Food Products, Inc. 910 Mayer Ave. Rocky Rococo Pan Style Pizza 1267 Brookdale Center Pizza Factory 6816 Humboldt Ave. No. Taco Towne 6219 Brooklyn Blvd. ON -SALE SUNDAY INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE JEM Bowl, Inc. 104 E. 60th St. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Ground Round Restaurant 2545 County Rd. 10 Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. J.W.A. Corporation 9448 Lyndale Ave. So. Jimmy's Lemon Tree 5540 Brooklyn Blvd. Nino's Steak Round -up 6040 Earle Brown Dr. 12 -17 -79 -21- ON -SALE WINE LICENSE Denny's, Inc. 14256 E. Firestone Blvd. Denny's Restaurant 3901 Lakebreeze Ave. No. PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE A. & J. Enterprises 2367 University Ave. Bob Ryan Olds 6700 Brooklyn Blvd. POOL AND BILLIARD TABLE LICENSE Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. .Lynbrook Bowl 6357 No. Lilac Dr. PUBLIC DANCE LICENSE JEM Bowl, Inc. 104 E. 60th St. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE Initial: Robert M. Lindblom 5538 Colfax Ave. No. Dietrich Homes, Inc. 7225 - 7273 Unity Ave. No. Dietrich Homes, Inc. 7240 - 7254 Unity Ave. No. Dietrich Homes, Inc. 7260 7274 Unity Ave. No. Renewal: George Lucht, R.H. Wood, Walter Clauson 5105 Brooklyn Blvd. Rudolph J. Olson 6505 Brooklyn Blvd. Richard Biggs 819,821 55th Ave. No. Jerry Harrington, Eugene Berg 1200 67th Ave. No. Transfer: Brian Torola 4708,12 Twin Lake Ave. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 11:27 p.m. Clerk Ma o 12 -17 -79 -22