Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979 05-14 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 MAY 14, 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott. Also present was City Manager Gerald Splinter, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren, Acting Director of Public Works James Noska, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, and Administrative Assistant Mary Harty. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Councilmember Fignar. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — APRIL 23, 1979 & APRIL 30, 1979. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of April 23, 1979 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers 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 approve the minutes of the April 30, 1979 Special Study Meeting of the City Council as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of the Open Forum session. _Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council as part of the Open Forum; there being none, the Mayor proceeded with the rest of the meeting. FINAL PLAT AP The City Manager recommended final plat approval for Eisenbrand Addition located at the southeast quadrant of 73rd Avenue North and Dupont Avenue North. He noted the City Council approved the preliminary plat on May 8, 1978 under Application No. 78022. The Acting Director of Public Works showed the "Council mylars of the final plat for Eisenbrand Addition. There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the final plat for Eisenbrand Addition. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Prior to considering the final plat approval for Brooklyn Center Industrial Park R.L.S. (Spec 8), the City Manager suggested the Council should consider a resolution rescinding approval of the final plat for the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park R.L.S. (Spec 8). Concerning the resolution, the City Manager explained the plat is for property lying at the southeast quadrant of Shingle Creek Parkway and County Road 130, identified by B.C.I.P. as Spec 8. The City Council approved the final plat of the R.L.S. at the February 26, 1979 meeting. The preliminary plat was reviewed 5 -14 -79 -1- on July 24, 1978 under Application No. 78042. Due to a certain unforeseen circum- stance involving filing of the R.L.S. with the County, the owner has revised the plat for the area and is requesting that the former plat approval be rescinded. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -99 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION RESCINDING APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR BROOKLYN CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK REGISTERED LAND SURVEY (SPEC 8) 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager asked the Council to return to a consideration of a final plat approval for Brooklyn Center Industrial Park R.L.S. (Spec 8). He noted the plat is a replat requested by the property owner (B.C.I.P.) for the property lying at the southeast quadrant of Shingle Creek Parkway and County Road 130. He recommended the plat be approved contingent upon submission by the property owner of certain easements, utility maintenance, street dedication, and other documents. He explained the plat would split the property under the building into three separate parts, thus, all an access to uninterrupted gas flow. A brief discussion ensued as to whether or not splitting the property into three separate parts in the plat would have an effect on the way the City would view the property as far as setbacks, etc. were concerned. The City Manager indicated it would not change the way the City viewed the property. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to approve the final plat for Brooklyn Center Industrial Park R.L.S. (Spec 8). Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. APPOINTMENTS The City Manager noted the Council had received applications for appointments to the Park and Recreation Commission. Councilmember Kuefler stated Commissioner Velasco had resigned from the Park and Recreation Commission. Councilmember Kuefler stated Chairman Johnson, Commissioner Velasco and he had interviewed the two appli- cants suggested for appointment, Jacqueline Albright and Michael Streitz. Council- member Kuefler recommended that Jacqueline Albright be appointed as Commissioner from Park Service Area I and .recommended that Michael Streitz be appointed as Park Commissioner at- large. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to accept the resignation of Vern Velasco from the Park and Recreation Commission. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to appoint Jacqueline Albright as Park and Recreation Commissioner from Park Service Area I. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar', Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to appoint Michael Streitz as Park and Recreation Commissioner at- large. Voting 'n favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council- members Kuefler, Fignar, i a Iv Lhotka, and Scott. Voting $ y Yq against: none. The motion passed unanimously. 5 -14 -79 -2- Councilmember Kuefler further noted there would be two additional vacancies on the Park and Recreation Commission. One from Park Service Area III, the northwest area, and one from Para: Seivlcc urea V, the southwest area. He encouraged interested citizens to apply for appointment to the Park and Recreation Commission. RESOLUTIONS The City Manager recommended a resolution authorizing the rental of tandem trucks for hauling of materials in conjunction with Shingle Creek Trailway Improvement Project No. 1978 -42. He recommended that the quotation of Steere & Boone Exca- vating Company be accepted for the work comprehended. Councilmember Fignar questioned what the total anticipated expenditure for the rental would be. The Acting Director of Public Works explained the total expenditure was approximately $8,000 for the rental of two trucks for approximately one month. He explained the tandems contemplated are ten yard rather than five yard in capacity and, additionally, City vehicles are presently heavily involved with ongoing maintenance and not avail- able for work in conjunction with hauling of materials for Shingle Creek Trailway. He further explained the use of a ten yard truck makes the bulldozer and loader more efficient.due to the size. In response to questions from the Council, the Acting Director of Public Works explained more stable material will be laid in the area for the trailways. Councilmember Lhotka expressed concern that Central Park would be too spongy and, therefore, unusable. The Acting Director of Public Works responded an attempt was being made, by hauling material and using it as fill in certain areas within Central Park, to alleviate this potential problem. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -100 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE RENTAL OF TANDEM TRUCKS FOR.HAULING OF MATERIALS IN CONJUNCTION WITH SHINGLE CREEK TRIALWAYS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1978 -42 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none,:;whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended a resolution authorizing the rental of a bulldozer for grading work in conjunction with the Central Park improvement project. He recommended the quotation of Valley Equipment Company be accepted for rental of one new John Deere J.D. 750 crawler -dozer for performing grading work in Central _Park.__ RESOLUTION NO. 79 -101 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE RENTAL OF A BULLDOZER FOR GRADING WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1978 -41 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended a resolution establishing a Storm Sewer Project No. 1979 -5 and ordering preparation of plans and specifications. He explained that the storm sewer was in conjunction with the proposed Street Improvement Project No. 1978 -45 and 1978 -46 (Shingle Creek Parkway) established at the December 4, 1978 5 -14 -79 -3- City Council meeting. He reconunended the storm sewer extensions and additions be accomplished with that construction. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -102 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1979 -5 AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended a resolution establishing Street Improvement Project No. 1979 -6. He explained that the street improvement project was in conjunction i, with the proposed Street Improvement Project No. 1978 -45 and (Shingle Creek Parkway) established at the December 4, 1978 City Council meeting, and the State's proposed construction of Bridge No. 27910 over FI 94, plans for which were approved at the March 30, 7.979 City Council meeting. He . recommended a street improvement project be established to address the work comprehended by the State in constructing approaches to the aforementioned bridge. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -103 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1979 -6 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended a resolution correcting assessments for parcels involved in the highway taking for construction of FI 94 in the Brooklyn. Center Industrial Park. He noted the assessments to be corrected are those involved with highway takings in the industrial park. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -104 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CORRECTING ASSESSMENTS FOR PARCELS INVOLVED WITH HIGHWAY TAKING FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FI 94 IN THE BROOKLYN CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same. none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended a resolution proclaiming the week of June 4 through June 10, 1979, as Handicapped Scout Week. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -105 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: 5 -14 -79 -4- RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF JUNE 4 THROUGH JUNE 10 AS HANDICAPPED SCOUT WEEK 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended a resolution declaring June 1 through June 10, 1979, as Brooklyn Center Early Bird Days. RESOLUTION NO 79 -106 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DECLARING JUNE 1 THROUGH JUNE 10 AS BROOKLYN CENTER EARLY BIRD DAYS. 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. The City Manager recommended a resolution proclaiming the week of May 28 through June 3, 1979, as Vietnam Veterans Week. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -107 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF MAY 28 THROUGH JUNE 3 AS VIETNAM VETERANS WEEK 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 sane: 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. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -108 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, Gene Lhotka, 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 one six yard dump box. He recommended the bid of MacQueen Equipment in the amount of $5,045 be accepted. 5 -14 -79 -5- RESOLUTION NO. 79 -109 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) G YARD DUMP BOX 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. The City Manager recommended a resolution rejecting bids for furnishing bituminous oil and authorizing the City Manager to receive quotations for bituminous oil whenever necessary. He explained the bids received were only valid until the day the bid was received, in other words, day by day quotes were comprehended. He stated that for this reason, it would be necessary to get the best price on the day on which the materials were ordered. The City Manager explained this - had happened a few - years ago due to shortage of supplies. A brief - discussion ensued as to the seal coating program within the City of Brooklyn Center. The City Manager explained some of the catch up work had been done last year and the City was now back on a program of seal coating the entire City within a period of five to seven years. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -110 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: "RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS FOR FURNISHING BITUMINOUS OIL AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO RECEIVE QUOTATIONS FOR BITUMINOUS OIL WHENEVER NECESSARY 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended a resolution accepting bids for plant -mixed bituminous material. He recommended the bid of C. S. McCrossan for furnishing plant -mixed bituminous materials be accepted. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -111 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTICrd , kCCEPTING BID FOR PLANT -MIXED BITUMINOUS 14ATERIAL 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. The City Manager recommended a resolution accepting bids for stabilized gravel and fine aggregate for seal coat. He recommended the bid of Barton Contracting Company for the furnishing of Class #5 gravel, FA-1 sand and buckshot be accepted. RE SOLUTION NO. 79 -112 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID FOR STABILIZED GRAVEL AND FINE AGGREGATE FOR SEAL COAT 5 -14 -79 -6- 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution I� was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended a resolution accepting quotations for brick work. He noted the brick work was related to the remodeling for a new conference center and was comprehended in the 1979 Budget. He recommended the bid of Denny Johnson Contruction Company in the amount of $1,320 be accepted. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -113 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF LABOR AND MATERIAL TO BUILD 220 SQUARE FOOT BRICK WALL 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. The City Manager recommended a resolution accepting quotations for two overhead garage doors for the East Fire Station. He noted the garage doors are replace - ments and were comprehended in the 1979 Budget. He recommended the bid of Twin City Garage Door Company in the amount of $2,431 be accepted. He noted the bid was slightly higher than the other bid but this particular company has done excellent work for the City in the past. RESOLUTION NO. 79 -114 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TWO 13 x 13 OVERHEAD GARAGE DOORS 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. BINGO LICENSE BOND WAIVER The Mayor asked the Council to consider the bingo license bond waiver for the Jaycees because he noted there were a number of interested people in the audience concerned about the bond waiver. The City Manager noted that included in the license list for a license for bingo is the Brooklyn Center Jaycees. The Brooklyn Center Jaycees have requested a bond waiver. A motion to waive the bond and the unanimous vote of the Council is needed to accomplish the waiver. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to waive the bond for the bingo license for the Brooklyn Center Jaycees. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager explained it was originally thought that by declaring the Jaycees Carnival a civic event, the Jaycees might be able to be exempted from several of the reporting requirements but a closer reading of the Statute indicates this is not the case. 5 -14 -79 -7- Councilmember Kuefler stated it had been discussed by the Council that the legisla- tion to control and license bingo and gambling was an example of overkill and that the Legislature is trying to control something that doesn't need that stringent a control. The City Manager explained the Police Department_ has been in contact with the author of the bill through Representative Ellingson. Brooklyn Center appears to be ahead of other communities in enforcing this Statute, therefore, the Legisla- ture has not received very many complaints about the legislation. The City Manager noted it is anticipated the Legislature will receive more complaints as different communities attempt to set up a mechanism to license bingo and gambling and enforce the Statute as it is written. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to direct the City Manager to prepare a resolution to be sent to various legislators indicating the City of Brooklyn Center's concern over the bingo and gambling licensing legislation. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager noted he would prepare that resolution - for - the - Council- consideration- in the near future. Councilmember Kuefler left the table at 7:56 p.m. O The City Manager recommended an ordinance vacating that portion of Irving Avenue North bounded on the south by the northerly right -of -way line of 69th Avenue North and on the north by the westerly extension of the northerly line of Lot 1, Block 1, Horbal Addition. He explained the ordinance was first read on April 23, 1979, published on May 3, 1979 and is presented this evening for a second reading. _O RDINANCE NO. 79 -8 Member Celia Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE VACATING THAT PORTION OF IRVING AVENUE NORTH BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY THE NORTHERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF 69TH AVENUE NORTH AND ON THE NORTH BY THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTERRLY LINE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, HORBAL ADDITION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon,.the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said ordinance was duly passed and adopted. The City Manager recommended an ordinance amending Chapter 3 of the City Ordinances regarding addressing of accessory buildings. He explained the ordinance was first read on April 23, 1979, published on May 3, 1979 and is presented this evening for a second reading. ORDINANCE NO. 79 -9 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING ADDRESSING OF ACCESSORY BUILDINGS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said ordinance was duly passed and adopted. 5 -14 -79 -8- The City Manager recommended an ordinance amending Chapters 11 and 23 of the City _ Ordinances relative to on -sale liquor and on -sale wine licenses. He noted the ordinance is presented for a first reading. 'He explained Minnesota Statutes authorize a municipality to issue wine licenses to restaurants if certain other considerations are met. A wine license permits the sale of wine not exceeding f 14% alcohol by volume for consumption on licensed premises in conjunction with the sale of food. He explained the State law on wine licenses is not self- executing and if a city wishes to issue wine licenses, it must adopt ordinance provisions to authorize them. He explained since the City of Brooklyn Center currently has a general liquor licensing ordinance, the wine license authority can be provided by amending the existing liquor licensing ordinance. He noted to date, the City has had inquiries from the Pizza Factory, Olive's East, Happy Dragon, Denny's and Donaldson's, concerning a wine license. There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to offer for first reading an ordinance amending Chapters 11 and 23 of the City Ordinances relative to on -sale liquor and on -sale wine licenses. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Councilmember Kuefler returned to the table at 8:01 p.m. At this time Mayor Nyquist mentioned an item not on the agenda indicating he was concerned with stores such as the Country Store which were strewing paper all over the City. Councilmember Scott noted she had called the President of Red Owl last year over the same type of problem and had gotten immediate action. The Council indicated they wished that their concerns be made known to violating stores. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS The City Manager introduced two Planning Commission items to be dealt with con- currently, Application No. 79016 and Application No. 79017 both submitted by Howe, Inc. Application No. 79016 was for site and building plan approval to construct an approximate 217' x 74' precast concrete warehouse, garage and maintenance shop building to replace the building destroyed by fire on January 6, 1979. He explained the Planning Commission recommended denial of Application No. 79016 at its April 19, 1979 Special Session. He explained Application No. 79017 was for a variance from Section 35 -111 to rebuild a nonconforming use at setback and buffer requirements other than that contained in the current Zoning Ordinance. He explained Application No. 79017 was recommended for denial at the April 19, 1979 Special Session of the Planning Commission. The Mayor stated it was his understanding that Howe, Inc. had submitted new plans for a building. The Mayor questioned the Howes as to whether or not they wished the City Council to consider Application Nos. 79016 and 79017. He emphasized this would not mean that positive action taken by the Planning Commission would be changed by the withdrawl of the present applications. He suggested he felt it might be redundant to consider these applications at this time due to the fact that Howe, Inc. intended the City to consider different applications. The City Manager stated if the applicant wished the Council to consider the present applications, the Council would be willing to do so. The City Attorney suggested it would be helpful if the Council would consider two additional recommendations made by the Planning Commission at their April 19, 1979 meeting. These two recommendations dealt with whether or not Howe was a noncon- forming use in 1957 and whether or not the building was considered part of an entire complex which has a direct bearing on the question of rebuilding a non - conforming use. 5 -14 -79 -9- Mr. Jim Russell, attorney for Howe, Inc., responded that he was not quite sure how to respond to the Mayor's question because he was unsure of the ramifications of a yes or no response. In response made to comments by the City Attorney, Mr. Russell stated the Howes did not wish to lose positive recommendations made by the Planning Commission and yet the Howes would be happy to withdraw the plans in order to eliminate unnecessary discussion. Mr. Russell stated the Howes did indeed intend to ask the City to go forth with consideration of a new building plan and therefore consideration of Application g P > > PP No. 79016 and 79017 was not necessary; however, Howe, Inc. did not want to lose what they had gained by way of the additional recommendations made by the Planning Commission. Mayor Nyquist stated it was his belief the action of the Planning Commission would stand on the other two issues, the nonconforming issue and the issue of whether or not the building was part of the entire complex. The City Manager explained the Planning Commission had not - dealt - with two - - other - questions that being size of building and type of construction materials. The Planning Commission had asked for additional research and information to help them in making a decision on size of building and type of materials to be used _ in the construction of the building. The City Manager noted these two issues were still outstanding. Mr. Russell again stated Howe, Inc. wished to withdraw Application No. 79016 and 79017 from consideration by the City Council. The City Council accepted the withdrawl of Application Nos. 79016 and 79017 by consensus. The Director of Planning and Inspection continued with an explanation of the other actions taken by the Planning Commission at the April 19, 1979 meeting concerning Howe, Inc. The Director of Planning and Inspection briefly reviewed the history from the point of the January 6, 1979 fire at which time an approximate 74' x 217' metal pole barn type building for warehouse and storage purposes was destroyed. He explained at the April 19, 1979 meeting the City Attorney suggested that the Planning Commission consider certain findings including: 1) whether Howe:, Inc. was a lawful use in 1946;.2) whether Howe, Inc. became a nonconforming use in 1957 when the Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance was passed; 3) what the size of the building was at the time it became nonconforming; 4) that the north building was part of an overall complex; 5) that the loss did not represent 60% destruction of a nonconforming use; and 6) that warehousing and storage of chemicals were uses permitted in the north building. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained ',- - -- the Planning Commission had made recommendations on certain of those findings but had not reached a consensus on the size of the building, the material type to be used in construction, or the uses permitted in the north building. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated the Planning Commission had passed a motion to recognize Howe Fertilizer as a valid nonconforming use. The Planning Commission in their motion found that Howe, Inc. was a valid use in 1946 and became a nonconforming use under the City's Zoning Ordinance in 1957. That motion passed unanimously in the Planning Commission. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that the Planning Commission also passed a motion that the Planning Commission find certain facts to be the case concerning Howe, Inc. These findings of fact were that the building destroyed by fire on January 6, 1979 was part of the entire complex, that less than 60% of said complex was destroyed by the fire and that, therefore, the applicant is entitled 5 -14 -79 -10- to rebuild a similar warehouse on the site. The City Manager explained that Howe, Inc. presented proof at the April 19, 1979 Planning Commission that they were producing chemical fertilizer in 1946. That proof was by way of a requisition slip requisitioning materials during war time and also articles of incorporation. That being the case, Howe, Inc. became a nonconforming use in 1957. Councilmember Kuefler asked for further clarification of the request by the City Attorney to the Planning Commission to make certain findings of fact. On the question of whether or not Howe, Inc. was a lawful use in 1946, the City Attorney responded the facts are very sketchy for this time period. He explained the minutes for the time surrounding 1946 are very sketchy. It does appear, in the City Attorney's opinion, that the Howes were producing chemical fertilizer in 1946. That being the case, in 1946 Howe, Inc. met City ordinance requirements and was a lawful use. If Howe, Inc. was a valid use in 1946 and a new Zoning Ordinance was passed in 1957, and said Zoning Ordinance did not permit chemical fertilizer production as a permitted use in the Zoning Ordinance of 1957, then Howe, Inc. became a nonconforming use in 1957. If it was not a nonconforming use in 1957, then it was a zoning violation so it is likely that Howe became a nonconforming use in 1957, according to the City Attorney. Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether, after the 1957 Zoning Ordinance, Howe applied for a special use permit. The City Attorney responded there was no way under the 1957 ordinance that fertilizer could be produced as a permitted or a special use under the Zoning Ordinance and, thus, that question plays no role. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained an attempt has been made by the staff to "rebuild the north building" through the City's records but the records are very sketchy and certain information was never noted. As to the question of whether or not the destroyed north building was part of the entire complex, that question is a fact question, noted the City Attorney. The City Attorney stated the applicant contends the building is an integral art of the entire ntire complex. The City Attorney explained that in case law, .there have been situations (a Wisconsin case) in which the issue was whether an individual building was part of a total complex. This raises a question of whether or not the percentage should be applied to the entire complex. If the building which was destroyed at Howe, Inc. is viewed as a separate entity distinct from the rest of the complex, then the building was 100% destroyed. Councilmember Kuefler questioned where the burden of proof was in this situation. The City Attorney responded the burden of proof was on the applicant, however, the records concerning Howe are for the most part City records. The question of what goes on on the site is a question only the applicant can answer. Councilmember Fignar questioned the facts concerning a building permit issued in 1961 which allowed the building to be expanded to approximately 217' x 74' as compared to a building size of 218' x 62' in 1957. The City Attorney responded the City Council did not act in 1961 but rather the Building Inspector issued the permit. The City Attorney further explained it would be unusual that a building permit for Howe, Inc. would be issued without Council approval because of the already noted citizen dismay with Howe. The City Attorney explained the City Council minutes do not show any action to issue the building permit. The City Attorney explained there is a high likelihood that action was approved by the City Council but that action cannot be proven one way or the other because there are no records that indicate such action. 5 -14 -79 -11 Because it was a nonconforming use, the Building Inspector should not have issued the building permit. It could be that the Council minutes are incomplete and that in actuality the Council did approve the issuance of the building permit. The Council questioned the issue of whether warehousing and storage of chemicals were uses permitted in the north building. The City Manager indicated a decision on this would be based on past use of the building. Past use of the building can be established from a letter from Howe as to what the proposed use was and such a letter was part of the record. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained the Planning Commission was not clear on all six questions raised by the City Attorney. The Planning Commission was unsure of whether the 1957 size building or the 1961 size building should be used as criteria. The Director of Planning and Inspection also noted the Planning Commission was concerned as to what type of material should be allowed for construc- tion of a building because of a fear of extending the life of the building beyond the life of the rest of the complex. The Director of Planning and Inspection further noted the Planning Commission was not clear on the issue raised as to whether or not warehousing and storage of chemicals were uses permitted in the north building. In response to questions from the Council, the Director of Planning and Inspection explained the Planning Commission was not clear as to whether a pole building or a concrete building should be allowed due to life expectancy. The Planning Com- mission was concerned that a concrete building might become a benchmark for other buildings. Councilmember Kuefler questioned a condition set out by the Council in 1955 that Howe must construct a fence, said condition not completed by Howe. The City Attorney responded it is likely the court would not agree that that was strong enough evidence to invalidate the permit and, furthermore, action should have been taken at a much earlier date if such action was appropriate. Councilmember Kuefler stated if the Council declared Howe as a valid nonconforming use and declared the north building was an integral part of the complex, such a declaration entitles Howe to build under the existing ordinance. The City Manager noted that was a correct assumption. Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether a legal end date can be placed on a non- conforming use. The City Attorney responded that Minnesota Case Law supports a phase out of nonconforming uses. He further explained the phase out has been applied to billboards but not to factories or residential buildings. The City Attorney suggested the Minnesota court might find placing a legal end date on a nonconforming use as a taking without due process unless the City conceded to buy the property.in question. Councilmember Kuefler stated it was his understanding that unless the City was prepared to buy out Howe, Inc., Howe, Inc. could operate indefinitely. The City Attorney answered that was a correct assumption. The City Manager stated if a time limit was set on the nonconforming use it would be a test case. In response to questions from the Council, the City Attorney responded that a nonconforming use is allowed to engage in regular maintenance of buildings but major structural alterations are prohibited. 5 -14 -79 -12- In response to questions a1 `' value of the property and how that would be determined, the City Attorney responded the value would be determined by a con- demnation procedure. The value would be the difference in value for chemical fertilizer production as compared to the value for a permitted use on the site. Councilmember Kuefler suggested the City should consider an action which would set an end date on this nonconforming use. The City Manager stated an action furthermore, e uire changes in the Zoning of this sort would r g Ordinance and q g the changes would have to deal with all similar types of property in the same manner. Such a zoning change would necessitate additional research. - - Councilmember Kuefler indicated he would like to pursue a consideration of setting an end date on the nonconforming use. The City Attorney responded an ordinance specifying a phase out date is a very speculative area. Such an ordinance might be written specifically for Howe, possibly for all heavy industrial nonconforming uses or possibly industrial nonconforming uses that are considered a nuisance. There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to recognize and concur with the Planning Commission action to recognize Howe Fertilizer as a valid nonconforming use, stating that Howe, Inc. was a valid use in 1946 and became a nonconforming use under the City's Zoning Ordinance in 1957. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to recognize and concur with the Planning Commission action that the Howe building destroyed by fire on January 6, 1979 was part of the entire complex, that less than 60% of said complex was destroyed by the fire and that, therefore, the appli- cant is entitled to rebuild a similar warehouse on the site. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to request the City Attorney and the City Manager_ to analyze options for a specified phase out of a nonconforming use and further analyze the impact of such action on other parcels within the City. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager introduced Planning Commission Application No. 79020 submitted by James Speckman for site and building plan approval for a 14,850 square foo t law office at an approximate one acre site at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard. Mayor Nyquist noted he had an interest in the application and would not participate in the consideration. Mayor Nyquist left the table during the consideration of Planning Commission Application No. 79020. The Director of Planning and Inspection pointed out the site is bounded on the east by Brooklyn Boulevard frontage road; on the west by Northport Drive; on the north by two single family residential properties and on the south by a C -1 zoned property including the two single family homes occupied temporarily by CEAP. The site includes the former slaughterhouse parcel, approximately 167' x 291', and an area approximately 25' x 165' which is part of the Library Terrace Addition and includes the library property. The Director of Planning and Inspection noted that the area in question was rezoned to C -l. under Application No. 78058 in December of 1978. He explained that the owners have indicated they have a purchase agreement 5 -14 -79 -13- for a 2$' x 165' parcel now belonging to the library and that this would be part of the area replatted. The Director of Planning and Inspection reviewed certain aspects of the site and the building plan pointing out that 74 parking spaces would be required based on the ordinance formula of one space for every 200 feet of gross floor area. He explained the applicant has indicated that a calculation as to parking needs for this site indicates a need for approximately 59 spaces. He noted the plans submitted show 60 parking spaces with a proof of parking for 14 additional spaces. The building is required to be setback 50 feet from the property line abutting Brooklyn Boulevard as per the ordinance. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that the required 15 foot greenstrip and building setback where C -1 and R -1 abut at a property line is shown on the plans. He explained that the plans also indicate a 6 foot high opaque wooden fence would be placed at staggered intervals to provide the required screening along the north property line. The Director of Planning and Inspection briefly discussed the landscape plan which comprehends retaining as many trees and plantings on the site as possible. He reviewed the various berms and plantings proposed. Councilmember Kuefler questioned if it is found additional parking is needed, how the City goes about requiring the applicant to provide additional parking. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained parking required in the ordinance can be required of the applicant if it is found that parking is necessary. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained the City would contact the applicant and ask them to put in the additional parking and if the applicant would refuse, the City could take them to court. The Director of Planning and Inspection further indicated that a bond would be held for a period of time in order that parking among other things could be reviewed. He further noted that if anew tenant came in, parking again would be reviewed. Councilmember Kuefler stated he would favor a deferral because of the residential area but if the parking was needed in the future it definitely should be put in. He noted the trade off for more green space is advantageous. . In response to questions from the Council, the City Manager explained as part of the site and building plan approval, the City Council has the option of deferring the parking. The City Attorney noted there was some concern that a new tenant would not be aware of these conditions because no agreements would be attached. The applicant, Mr. Speckman, stated he was in concurrence with all recommendations made by the Planning Commission. Ile stated if parking did become a problem, he would be very willing to add the rest of the parking because that sort of a problem would not be advantageous to his operation. Mr. Speckman's architect, Mr. Johnson, showed the Council conceptual drawings of the building indicating the building would be accessible to the handicapped. In response to questions about lighting, the architect responded there would be limited parking lighting which would conform to the ordinance and would not be a nuisance to the residential property in the area. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve Application No. 79020 submitted by Mr. James Speckman for site and building plan approval subject to the following conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes, prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and utility plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 5 -14 -79 -14- 3. A performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. The building shall be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA Standard No. 13 and shall be connected to an approved central monitoring system in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 5. All landscaped areas are to be treated with sod and shall be equipped with an underground irrigation system to facilitate site maintenance. 6. Any outside trash disposal facilities shall be appropriately screened from view. 7. Plan approval acknowledges the deferral of 14 parking spaces based on the applicant's parking plan which indicates that the ordinance required parking spaces can be provided. 8. The property is subject to replatting as required by Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. The property to final plat approval prior to the issuance of occupancy permits. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The City Council recessed at 9:30 p.m. and reconvened at 9:45 p.m. DISCUSSION The City Manager introduced a discussion of the issuance of the dynamite permit for Howe, Inc. The Mayor recognized Mr. Tom Howe who stated Howe, Inc. had investigated a number of means of bringing down the overhang of bulk materials including various mechanical means. He explained protection of the workers was of primary importance. Mr. Howe referred to reports prepared by consultants through the City which made suggestions as to alternate means for taking care of the overhang problem. Mr. Howe indicated Howe, Inc. has found an alternate means for dealing with the overhang problem which does not require storing the explosives on the site. Mr. Howe asked that the Council defer discussion on the issuance of the dynamite permit for Howe, In. until Howe, Inc. had the opportunity to discuss this alternate method with City staff. Mr. Howe noted he would like to have the staff review the proposal because it might make a difference as to a staff recommendation on the use of explosives by Howe, Inc. The Council indicated they would be willing to defer discussion on the issuance of the permit. The City Manager stated the staff would review the proposal with Howe, Inc. and analyze the proposal, coming back to the Council with conclusions based on the review. The City Manager suggested that the discussion of the issuance of the permit could be held at the same meeting when the site and building plan approvals were considered. The City Manager further indicated that the area residents would be notified when a discussion of the dynamite permit was to be held. The Council concurred that handling a consideration of the building plan approval and the issuance of the dynamite permit at the same meeting would be appropriate. The City Manager introduced the next discussion item. A discussion of industrial revenue bonds. The City Manager noted several resolutions had been prepared for review by the Council. The City Manager further stated in his review of the 5 -14 -79 -15- possible resolutions establishing a policy for the issuance of industrial revenue bonds or mortgages or tax increment financing, it became apparent to him that one policy should not cover tax increment financing as well as the issuance of industrial revenue bonds. He asked the Council to consider the resolutions at hand as resolu- tions dictating a policy for the issuance of industrial revenue bonds or mortgages Only. I The City Manager called the Council's attention to resolution #2 which he stated limited the issuance of industrial revenue bonds to 5% of the assessed valuation of the City of Brooklyn Center or approximately $6,000,000 at this point. The City Manager also explained he had met with a Chamber of Commerce committee concerning a policy on the issuance of industrial revenue bonds. The Chamber committee expressed several concerns with the draft resolutions. These concerns were that there was no mention Of a $500,000;minimum amount for a proposal, thereby eliminating a possible proliferation of small issues and further a concern with limiting the amount of industrial revenue bonds outstanding to 5% of the assessed valuation. Councilmember Fignar questioned whether the $6,000,000 could be changed. The City Manager responded the Council could decide to change that amount in the future. The City Manager explained he was not recommending the draft resolutions per se' because he feels strongly that revenue sources for the City should be protected. The draft resolutions were an attempt to compromise based on discussions held at , earlier Council meetings on industrial revenue bonds. Councilmember Lhotka questioned what type of financial information would be required of those applying for industrial revenue bonds. The City Manager responded informa- tion similar to what is required on a bond prospectus would be required. Council- member Lhotka then questioned how the Council would make comparisons on financial risk between and among the various proposals. Councilmember Kuefler suggested it might be appropriate to list what kind of develop- ments would be given priority. The City Manager stated, given the status of legislative indication and bond attorneys review, housing will not be considered for funding in the future. Councilmember Kuefler stated he concurred with the Mayor's earlier plea for citizen input. He stated he felt it would be a wise move on the part of the Council to solicit citizen input. He stated it was his knowledge that even within the Chamber there was a difference of opinion on the issuance of industrial revenue bonds. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to table action on the resolutions establishing a policy for the issuance of industrial revenue bonds and appoint an ad hoc citizens' committee including the business sector to study the issuance of industrial revenue bonds and come back to the Council with a recommendation on a policy for the issuance of industrial revenue bonds. Mr. Paul DesVernine of the Chamber stated financial institutions check out the applicants very carefully before they agree to lend them the money and this serves as an appropriate check. 5-14 -74 -16- Dolores Hastings, 5813 Aldrich Avenue North, asks that the Council give first consideration to proposals'rrom companies who have been in Brooklyn Center and would employ Brooklyn Center residents. Councilmember Fignar commented he felt it might be a good idea to get some citizen input although there are many companies who would like to get moving on building. Councilmember Scott commented she was concerned with how long it would take to find people to serve on such a committee and questioned whether such a committee would come up with anything which would be helpful to the Council. She stated many people are not familiar with industrial revenue bonds and would have a difficult time assessing the situation and giving input as to a policy. She suggested it might be more advantageous to set out a basic policy guideline and let the public respond to those guidelines. Councilmember Kuefler stated if the Council is asking for citizen input a form must be provided for that input. Councilmember Scott responded she felt the Council would be asking for citizen input on something that most citizens know very little about and, therefore, would be unable to provide very much assistance. Councilmember Kuefler stated he felt it was important to determine what the basic purpose of issuing the bonds is and, therefore, the Council would have a basis for any limitations which would be set. Councilmember Kuefler stated he felt it was important that the Council have a foundation from which to make decisions. He questioned how the Council would prioritize applications without a set goal and purpose for the issuance of the bonds. Mayor Nyquist commented prioritization could be done based on the jobs created and the expansion of the tax base. Councilmember Kuefler stated if proposals are funded to $6,000,000 limits and if other better proposals come in after the $6,000,000 limit has been reached, those proposals would have to be denied. For example, if a proposal to build in` an area which would eliminate a nonconforming use were submitted after the $6,000,000 limit had been reached, that proposal would be denied. In vote on the motion, the following voted in favor: Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: Mayor Nyquist and Councilmember Fignar. The motion passed. -- - There- was --a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Fignar.-to publish resolution #2 in the Brooklyn Center Post asking for citizen input. The resolution and citizen input will again be considered at the June 11, 1979 City Council meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: Councilmember Kuefler. The motion passed. The City Manager suggested the Council should attempt to expedite certain considera- tions occurring within the City at this point in this area of industrial revenue bond issuance as well as certain other areas because there are many factors hanging in balance awaiting decisions. The Director of Finance stated many City Councils have set up criteria with which to eliminate and qualify applicants. The Director of Finance read to the Council Brooklyn Park's qualifying criteria. He commented the City of Brooklyn Center would probably also have to submit the proposals to a financial analyst for recommendations as to approval but the City Council would make the final decision. 5 -14 -79 -17- DISCUSSION OF IM CON OF FI 94 The Acting Director of Public Works explained plans for traffic routing in conjunction with the construction of Shingle Creek Parkway over FI 94. He stated the constructio would probably be taking place in the fall. A detour has been planned using 152 and Highway 100 during the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. There is also a possibility that crews would work on only half of the freeway at one time. The Acting Director of Public Works explained crews would begin placing fill prior to the beginning of bridge construction so the fill would have time to settle. The Acting Director of Public Works stated he hoped to have a resolution approving plans and specifications at the upcoming Council meeting, DISCUSSION OF T.H. 169 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT The Acting Director of Public Works explained that the consultant firm of BRW was preparing the environmental impact statement for T.H. 169 and as BRW had explained at the earlier special study meeting of the City Council_, certain alternatives had been dropped from the first level study. At the special study meeting, Councilmember Lhotka had asked that further study be given to the upgrading of the 694 bridge: Other people have asked for the same thing and have asked for supplemental research on that. Based on these expressed concerns, supplemental research is being prepared on the upgrading of the 694 bridge. The Acting Director of Public Works further stated that a joint resolution to adopt,the alternatives to be studied is in the process of being worked out by the Cities of Champlin, Brooklyn Park, and Brooklyn Center. The Cities of Champlin and Brooklyn Park have not indicated an interest in the upgrading of 694. The Acting Director of Public Works asked for Council direction as to whether or not the Council was interested in pursuing further study of the 694 upgrading. The Council expressed concern that a 694 upgrading would diminish the possibility for other roadway work in the north suburban area. LICENSES Motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the following list of licenses: BINGO LICENSE Brooklyn Center Jaycees 7100 Dupont Ave. No. (Jaycee Carnival) CIGARETTE LICENSE Kenko Vending 7616 Logan Ave. So. Humboldt Avenue Service 6840 Humboldt Ave. No. Twin City Novelty 9549 Penn Ave. So. Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. No. FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Alan & Marie Heskowitz 4404 4th St. N.E. European Health Spa 2920 County Road 10 HOUSEMOVER'S LICENSE Dale Mover's, Inc. 7816 Central Ave. ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Brooklyn Center Jaycee Women 7100 Dupont Ave, No. (Jaycee Carnival) 5 -14 -79 -18- MECHANICAL SYSTEM'S LICENSE Advanced Heating 7805 Beech. St. N.E. Bill's Sheet Metal 7991 Spring Lake Road N.E. Central Air Conditioning 1971 Senca Road Lyle's Heating & Air Conditioning 5502 Douglas Drive Mill City Heating & Air Cond. 13005 -B 16th Ave. No. MOTOR VEHICLE DEALERSHIP LICENSE - CLASS A Bob Ryan Olds 6700 Brooklyn Blvd. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE -- Kenko Vending g 7616 Logan Ave. So. • Humboldt Avenue Service 6840 Humboldt Ave. No. Osty's Vending 9321 5th St. N.E. City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy. SIGN HANGER'S LICENSE LeRoy Signs, Inc. 6325 Welcome Ave. No. SWIMMING POOL LICENSE Norman Chazin 6950 Wayzata Blvd. North Lyn Apartments 6511 Humboldt Ave. No. Chippewa Park' Properties 790 Cleveland Ave. So. Chippewa Park Apartments 6507 Camden Ave. No. Earle Brown Farm Apartments 6040 Earle Brown Dr. - Earle Brown Farm Apartments 1701-07 69th Ave. No. Griffin Companies 8200 Humboldt Ave. So. Columbus Village Apartments 507 70th Ave. No. Moorwood Homeowners Associates 5811 Lake Curve Dr. Riverwood Townhomes Association 6611 Camden Dr. No. TEMPORARY ON -SALE NONINTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE Brooklyn Center Jaycees 4101 61st Ave. No. (Jaycee Carnival) - - -Voting in--favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. As part of the approval the bingo license for the Jaycees allows the Jaycees to hold bingo occasions lasting more than four consecutive hours during the Jaycee carnival in 1979. The Mayor asked the Council for suggestions for committee members for the Northwest Convention Center as discussed at the Council study meeting. Councilmember Lhotka volunteered to serve on the committee and Councilmember Scott volunteered to serve as an alternate. Councilmember Fignar suggested the Chamber might wish to appoint someone and the Council suggested a person at -large should also be appointed to the committee. The Council discussed appointing people from various civic organiza- tions such as the Jaycees, the Rotary and the League of Women Voters. ADJOUP, 2NIENT There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The Brooklyn Center City 5 -14 -79 -19- Council adjourned at 11:05 p.m. 1 Clerk 1 ` 1 5 -14 -79 -20-