Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978 02-27 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 FEBRUARY 27, 1978 CITY HALL Call to Order The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:03 p.m. " Roll Call Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Tony Kuefler, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works James Merila, Assistant City Attorney Jeff Carson, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Blair Tremere and Administrative Assistant Ronald Warren. Mayor Nyquist reported that Councilmember Fignar had informed the Council that he would be unable to attend this evening's meeting and, therefore, was excused. Invocation The invocation was offered by Pastor Lindquist of the Brookdale Covenant Church Open Forum Mayor Nyquist introduced the first item of business on the agenda, that of the Open Forum. He explained that the Open Forum was instituted to give any citizen the opportunity to address the City Council as a whole and comment on any opinion, problem, concern or complaint they might have which is relevant to the affairs of this local government and its policies and practices. He noted that no one had registered in advance to speak at the Open Forum and inquired if anyone in the audience wished to be recognized for the Open Forum. Mayor Nyquist recognized Eugene B. Serfling, 6221 Shingle Creek Parkway, who inquired of the City Council if there was anything that could be done to prevent a rent increase at Shingle Creek Tower apartment building. He explained that there is a proposed $15 a month increase at the building and that this increase would cut into the subsidy that people such as himself are receiving. He explained that his rent would be increased from the present $173 a month to $188 a month when the increase goes into effect. He added that an increase such as this has a great effect on persons with fixed incomes The City Manager took Mr. Serfling's phone number and stated that he would check into the matter. Mayor Nyquist then recognized Pete Winkelhorn, 6221 Shingle Creek Parkway, who also complained about the rent increase at Shingle Creek Tower. apartment. He too noted that such an increase is very difficult for persons on fixed incomes. He stated that he has applied for further rent assistance through the Section 8 Rent Assistance Program but has not received information regarding when he might be able to receive this assistance, The City Manager also took Mr. Winkelhorn's phone number and said the matter would be looked into. -1 -m 2,27 -78 i Nyquist then recognized Emma Riley, 6221 Shingle Greek, Parkway. She stated that she too was concerned about the rent increase at Shingle Creek Tower but also wanted to bring two other matters to the Council's attention, She wondered if it would be possible to have a mail box located in the entrance, or close to the entrance, at Shingle Creek Tower to benefit many of the senior citizens that live at the apartment complex. She also questioned if it would be possible to erect a windbreak around the MTC bus stop located close to the apartment complex. Mayor Nyquist formally presented Brooklyn Center's Presentation of expression of appreciation to former Councilmember Commendation Maurice Britts for his service to the community, Councilmember Kuefler offered a correction to page 4 Approval of Minutes of the February 13, 1978 minutes. Regarding Joan 2 -13 -78 Skomra's appointment to the Park and Recreation Com -- mission, he stated that she had served on the Ways and Means Committee of the Northport Parent - Teacher Association rather than the Northport Citizens Association, Motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Council- member Lhotka to approve the minutes of the February 13, 1978 City Council meeting as corrected. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unani- mously. Motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Council- Subdivision Bond member Kuefler to authorize reduction of a subdivision Reduction financial guarantee for the Clarence Stein Addition located between Logan and Knox Avenues North, southerly of 73rd .Avenue North, from $7,000 to $3,000 on the basis of corresponding obligations being satisfied. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager reported that the final plat approval Final Plat Approval for the Hennepin County Regional Library site is not yet available for Council consideration. He noted that this matter had been on previous Council agendas and that it nopefully would be before the Council within the near future for final consideration. Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution RESOLUTION and moved its adoption: NO, 78 -36 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1978 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR WAGE AND SALARY ADJUSTMENTS 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and �e following voted against the same: none, whereupon ..aid resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. N4ember Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution RESOLUTION : nd moved its adoption: NO. 78 -37 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF GRASS SEED ' A ND FERTILIZER 27 -78 _2_ I The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution wars cialy seconded by member Celia Scott, and upon vote being talon thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott,, and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and NO. 78 -38 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF A DUMP TRUCK CAB AND CHASSIS 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and NO, 78 -39 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF` CHAIN LINK FENCING 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and NO. 78 -40 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DEMOLITION OF BUILDING AT 7100 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, Hennepin County The City Manager introduced the next item of business on Municipal Court the agenda, that of a resolution recommended for the purpose Facilities of supporting a bill before the Legislature that would authorize the establishment of three suburban municipal court locations. He explained that it is anticipated that these court facilities would be located in library facilities planned by Hennepin County which would roughly correspond to the locations of the Brookdale, Ridgedale, and Southdale shopping centers. He added that there is mixed emotions among municipalities in Hennepin County regarding this idea. He pointed out that presently regular terms of court are held in Minneapolis, Bloomington, St. Louis Park, Wayzata, and Crystal where all functions of the court may be discharged and that a number of other communities, such as Brooklyn Center, are designated for holding trials of traffic and criminal violations before the court without a jury. He reported that in Brooklyn Centr's case this means holding court approximately one day every two weeks. He further reported that the idea behind this resolution is to urge the State Legislature to adopt the neces- sary legislation that would permit municipal court to be held in the three proposed locations. He noted that Hennepin -3- 2- -27 -78 'Ti it In s planninc _T, proposed court facl unc tion with its expanded library proc- - ri. - the . Trai He further . L:Aerl that the designation of these 'three locations would P c,­ m - t court I 't centralized cot administrative facilities in suburban Fiennepin County rather than providing centralized court facilities for suburban municipalities in downtown Minneapolis. A discussion ensued relative to the resolution with Council- member Kuefler stating that he favors the resolution if it is primarily an attempt to avoid the centralization of court facilities in a downtown location. Councilmember Lhotka stated that personally he prefers seeing the situation stay as is which provides easy access to court facilities for citizens in suburban Hennepin County. Mayor Nyquis suggested deferring further consideration of the resolution until later in the meeting to provide wording that would clarify the Council's position in this matter. Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution RESOLUTION and moved its adoption: NO. 78-41 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING MUNICIPAL SELF-INSURANCE BILL 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Membe.- Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution RESOLUTION and moved its adoption: NO. 78-42 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE NORTMAIEST HENNEPIN HUMAN SERVICES COUNCIL 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 !Nlyquist, Tony Kuefler, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott, and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Councilmember Kuefler offered language for the proposed Hennepin County resolution which would indicate that the Council strongly Municipal Court supports the philosophy of holding court at decentralized Facilities locations and that for this reason it supports the resolution. 1- discussion ensued relative to the resolution with Councilmember Scott stating that she supports the resolu- - 0.on because of her perceived need for better court admini- strative facilities. She added that she sees a need to c-entralize these facilities in specific areas in an attempt to get away from holding court in approximately 16 different locations which may or may not have adequate facilities for the court. it was the consensus of the City Council to amend the resolution with Councilmember Kuefler's proposed wording. ,Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution RESOLUTION ,.Ind moved its adoption: NO. 78-43 27. -78 4 - RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE CONSTRUCTION OF COURT FACILITIES FOR HENNEPIN COUNTY MUNICIPAL COURT AT THREE LOCATIONS WITIIIN SUBURBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, RESOLUTION Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and NOa 78 -44 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING FIRE TRAINING EXERCISE 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and NO. 78 -45 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CONTESTING PORTIONS OF THE AMENDED METRO- POLITAN SYSTEM STATEMENT REGARDING AIRPORTS AND INITIATING RECONCILIATION PROCEDURES ESTABLISHED BY THE 1976 METROPOLITAN LAND PLANNING ACT 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and NO. 78 -46 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION DIRECTING READVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR DISEASED SHADE TREE REMOVAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO., 1978 -1 (CON - TRACT 1978 -A) 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, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Close Open Forum Mayor Nyquist again asked if anyone in the audience wished to be heard during the Open Forum, There being none the Open Forum was closed. Planning Commission The City Mal tiger introduced the next item of business on the Application No. 78002 agenda, that of consideration of Planning Commission Appli (Summit State Bank cation No. 78002 submitted by Summit State Bank of Richfield.. of Richfield) He stated that the application consists of a special use permit and site plan approval for a proposed commercial use in the 1 -1 district at 6100 Summit Drive. -5- 2- -27 -78 "'ho DirecWr of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of the a >plicat ion and the Pl:annim Commission action at its January 26 and February 9, 1978 meetings, He stated that the applicant is seeking a special use permit for a remote banking `facility, a C­2 (Commercial Use) in an 1 -1. (Industrial Park) zone. I-Ie reported that the facility was proposed to be located at 6100 Summit Drive on the Earle Brown farm in the nonconform- ing office building at that location. He showed transparencies OIL the area on the Earle Brown Farm in which the remote banking facility was proposed. He reported that the applicant has requested that certain site improvements be deferred because the location of the banking facility in the Earle Brown office building would be of a temporary nature. He explained that the applicant contends that it would not be beneficial to make the required site improvements at this time and then, at a later date when a new facility is proposed, tear out these permanent type improvements because of a potential realign - ment or other development in the area. The Director of Planning and Inspection next reviewed the site plans for the facility with the City Council and a brief discus - sion ensued. He stated that the Planning Commission has recommended that the site improvements be deferred for two years following which there would be City Council review of the matter. He added that basically the improvements to be deferred would be for a concrete curb and gutter in the area but that the applicant would be expected to install a rolled bituminous curb instead. He pointed out that a financial guarantee required of the applicant comprehends the total for the permanent type improvements which would be normally associated with this type protect. He reported that research had determined that there was precedent to allow the deferment of certain improvements for a definite .period, or until it becomes necessary to provide them. He next briefly reviewed the drainage plan for the area and noted that it was found to be in order and did not include storm sewers but rather on -site drainage. In response to an inquiry by Councilmember Scott, the Director of Planning and Inspection stated that the second floor of the Earle Brown office would be utilized by Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Inc. (B.C.I,P.) and that the lower level ,-could be used primarily by the bank with some BCIP offices also located on that level. He added that the site plan comprehends the need for accessibility for the handicapped. Councilmember Kuefler stated that he can understand the applicant's request to defer certain site improvements but questioned whether or riot it would be appropriate to defer these improvements without first seeing future plans for -this area. He explained that the bank might move out of the office building and that a new tenant might then want the same consideration. The City Manager responded that he. felt it would be appropriate to defer these site improve - ments because the condition of this approval specifies that she deferral is only for two years and that it will then be reviewed by the City Council. He added that at that time, regardless of whether or not the bank considers its location ro be temporary, the Council can require that permanent site improvements be installed. Councilmember Kuefler expressed his concern that the Council.might be setting an undesirable precedent for site improvement deferral at other locations in the future. The Director of Planning and Inspection responded that fthe Council has permitted deferral of site improvements the Humboldt Square developariea[i. and also at the 'v`Vestbrool. Mall because in these cases there were plans _ 1.7._76 -6 for .future development of the areas. He noted that in the case of the Humboldt Square, certain site improvements were; deferred because of the anticipated development of the property to the east of the shopping center. He reported that the development did not take place and the Council had required that permanent improvements be made. The Director of Public Works reviewed a transparency showing the location of the office building in the surrounding property and noted some of the considerations that would have to be made should the property be subdivided for future development. Following further discussion Councilmember Kuefler suggested adding wording to point 4c of the recommended conditions of approval which would require the permanent site improvements to be made if there is development of immediate or adjacent property. It was the consensus of the Council to include this as a condition of approval of the application. Mayor Nyquist inquired as to the status of delinquent taxes on the property. The City Manager responded there are considerable tax delinquencies on property in this area and that this property is presently tax delinquent. He stated that he has met with the developers and this concern has been expressed to them. He reported that he has been assured that this matter will be worked out and that it should be taken care of during March. The Director of Planning and Inspection pointed out that tax delinquencies would have to be paid at the time of platting, which is also a requirement of the approval of this application Public Hearing Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for purposes of a public hearing relating to Planning Commission Application No. 78002. No one spoke relating to the application. Mayor Nyquist recognized a representative of Summit State Bank who responded to an inquiry by Councilmember Lhotka by stating that a remote banking facility provides all of the services of a bank except that they are not allowed to make loans at this facility. Also in response to an inquiry by Councilmember Lhotka, the applicant stated that they were looking at this location as a temporary site in that they feel they will outgr:)w this facility within approximately two years and will move to another building in the area He stated that it is their intention to be located in this area permanently. Mayor Nyquist recognised Mr. Janis Blumentals , architect for the applicant who stated that they are not proposing to build a facility for the bank at this time because they are in need of other tenants for such a building. He added that it is their eventual plans to build a building that is larger than what is required for the bank and to lease office space in that building. A brief discussion ensued relative to a fire detection system for the building with Dr. Jenkins, a fire protection notification specialist and consultant for the bank, explaining the ioniza- tion detector system which he said would provide adequate protection with central notification. Close Public Hearing Motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Council- member Lhotka to close the public hearing on Planning Commis- sion Application No. 78002. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Scott stated that she favors an additional conch. -- tion of approval of this application which would require police department review of the general security and lighting for the buildings. 7... 2- 27--78 I ollowing further discussion there was a motion by Council- Action Approving Ptanri'lng mem0er Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to Commission Application L approve Planning Commission Application No. 78002 submitted No,, 78002 (Summit State by Summit State Bank of Richfield subject to the following Bank) conditions: 1 The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3 The subject property and adjacent parcels will be resubdivided, through platting or registered land survey, as approved by the City Engineer to assure that the commercial activity including the main building and all accessory uses are contained entirely within a single lot or tract; and. said resubdivision shall be completed within 90 days of the date of the issuance of the special use permit. 4. Installation of required site improvements including concrete curb and gutter around all driving and parking areas; ordinance standard paving of driving and parking areas; and underground lawn sprinkling system may be deferred for a period of up to two years from date of the issuance of the special use permit in consideration of the future development pending for this area and subject to the following: a. Notwithstanding the above, the City Council may require the installation of permanent improvements at any earlier time deemed necessary, based upon the observed levels of the intensity of the use and the maintenance of the temporary improvements described below. b., During the interim ' period, temporary bituminous rolled curbing will be installed as approved by the City Engineer and indicated on the approved plans. c. At the end of the two year deferral period, or upon the termination of the subject commercial special use at this location, or upon development of immedi- ate and adjacent properties, the need for such improvements will be reviewed by the City, taking into account the use of the property and the developments which may have occurred in the adjacent and immediate area. S. A performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the .City Manager) shall be submitted to assure completion of the required site improvements, both temporary and permanent; and this agree- ment shall be enforced until it is determined the improvements have been satisfactorily 27-7,9 completed, or deemed unnecessary as described above. 6. The building shall be equipped throughout with a smoke and heat detection system as approved by the City, and said system shall be connected to a central alarm system in a manner described in Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 7. Property shall be supplied prior to occupancy with available City utilities and utility plans and drainage plans shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 8. Building plans are subject to approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits . 9. Review by the police department of the general security and lighting for the area shall be conducted prior to the issuance of permits. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission The Mayor announced that the next item for Council considera- Application No. 78003 tion was Planning Commission Application No. 78003 submitted (Robert Putnam) by Robert Putnam. The City Manager introduced the application and stated that the applicant was seeking preliminary plat approval to subdivide a parcel in the 3900 block of 52nd Avenue North into two R -1 lots. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Planning Commission Application No. 78003 and the Planning Commission action at its February 9, 1978 meeting. He reviewer a transparency showing the location and configuration of the property in question and commented on the history of the parcel. He noted that the property had radical elevation difficulties which would require proper engineering improvements before it could be developed. He added that part of the parcel is very low and serves as a drainage area for the lots in the surrounding neighborhood. He reported that because of these physical characteristics, the property had never been built on and until recently had been held by the State since doing tax forfeit. He further reported that the applicant was seeking a preliminary plat to create two single family residential lots which would exceed the ordinance standards in width and in area. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that drainage in this area. was a major consideration of the application and noted that approximately three acres of land drained into the rear of the property. He pointed out that it is proposed that there be an approximate 150 foot easement for drainage purposes from the rear property line to note that the area serves as a holding pond for this water. He added that a possible alterna- tive to this drainage problem would be a storm sewer and because of this the Planning Commission has recommended that there be a 15 foot easement along the side of the property which would accommodate a storm sewer for the area if it were decided as necessary in the future. IIe commented that such a storm sewer would be expensive and it is not certain that it would completely solve the drainage problem for the area. He added that the present situation with the 150 foot easement for a holding pond is a viable solution to the area drainage problem. _cr_ 2 -27 -78 iA di<CLIISSi011 C�n. relative to drainage in the area with Councilmember Kuefler stating that the City Council had within the past few years or so addressed a similar problem where a number of properties drained into one property. Fle inquired if it would not be beneficial to address the storm sewer problem at this time rather than to wait to address it at sometime in the future. The Director of Planning and Inspection responded that the storm sewer problem heard by the Council a few years ago is somewhat different than this instance and also in this situation an casement would be filed with the property so that subsequent property owners would be aware of this drainage problem. He added that an easement of this nature was missing in the case referred to by Councilmember Kuefler,, Councilmember Kuefler further inquired as to who would be responsible for paying for a storm sewer should one be put in that area. The Director of Public Works responded by stating that properties in this area have not been assessed for a storm sewer in the past. He added that if it is neces- sary for a storm sewer to be put in, the property owners owning property that would be benefited by the storm sewer would be responsible for paying the bill. He commented that a 10 foot easement along the side of the property would be sufficient rather than the 15 foot easement recommended by the Planning Commission. Councilmember Lhotka left the table at 8:57 p.m. and returned at 8:58 p.m. Councilmember Kuefler inquired further about a prohibition for standing water contained in the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. The Director of Planning and Inspection responded that the provision in the Housing M aintenance Ordinance is concerned with the elimination 01 standing water as an environmental hazard and is appli- cable only during certain months of the year when standing water is not normally a problem. He added that it is not anticipated that this ponding area would be of the hazardous L ' prohibited by that ordinance. In response to an inquiry by Mayor Nyquist, the Director of Public Works stated that the proposed drainage for this area would not affect other property owners. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for purposes of a public Public Hearing hearing and recognized the applicant, Mr,, Robert Putnam. Mr. Putnam stated that it is not their intention to change any of the elevations on the site and will be using some fill from the Pondincr area to raise the elevation on the east side 01 one of the homes proposed. He added that it is his under - standing that their has never been a standing water problem in this neighborhood. Mayor Nyquist reported that there was a letter in the file from Mrs. E. J. McCaffrey, 3840 Oak Street, expressing concern about the drainage problems on the applicant's property. he Director of Public Works reported that A. Mrs. McCaffrey's property is approximately 5 feet above that of the applicant's and there should be no drainage problems that would affect her,, .' Nyquist then recognized Mr. Rick Ring, 3834 Oak `Stre6t, who stated that the back of his property abuts , of the applicant and that he is quite concerned about drainage of the property and also the quality of homes , .o be built. He inquired as to what the 150 foot easement on the applicant's property meant. The Director of Public Works responded that the easement is being required of 2­27-7.8 _10- the applicant so that the holding pond area on the property would be continued. He pointed out that such an easement means that the applicant would not be able to build permanent structures on that area in the future. He commented that the ponding area would remain in approximately the same location, Mr. Ring indicated that he would favor only one home being - built on the property rather than the two proposed by the appli- cant, The Director of Public Works responded that this would not have a great effect on the ponding area although if only one home were built on the property, a slightly larger ponding area could be required. Also in response to an inquiry by Mr. Ring, the Director of Public Works stated that there are no plans in the near future to put storm sewer in this area. Mr. Ring commented that he is aware that his property drains into the applicant's property but that he did not want to foot the bill for installing a storm sewer in that area. He inquired if the developer could be required to pay for a storm sewer or if the City could be required to pay for the storm sewer, The Director of Public Works responded that he doubted whether the City could be required to pay for storm sewer improvements to this area because other properties in that area would benefit by such an improvement. Mr. Ring inquired as to what the odds are that there would not have to be a storm sewer put into this area using the recom- mended holding pond concept. The Director of Public Works responded that public improvements such as storm sewer are generally done only at the request of benefited property owners. Mr. Putnam, the applicant, inquired if there would be any need for a variance because of the easement requirements if the application were approved by the City Council. The Director of Public Works stated that the easement required on the property would not affect the total area concerned or the setbacks and that the applicant could build the homes proposed but could not build on areas included as part of the easements. In response to an inquiry by Councilmember Lhotka, the Director of Public Works stated that to his knowledge there has never been a real problem with standing water in the area and that the only time there is likely to be standing water is when the ground is frozen and would not permit water to seep through, Close Public Hearing Motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 78003. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Kuefler briefly commented on Mr. Ring's desire that their only be one home on the property by stating that the applicant has proposed to build homes that are comparable in size and configuration to those surrounding it. Action Approving Planning Motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Council - Commission Application member Kuefler to approve Planning Commission Application No. 78003 (Robert Putnam) No. 78003 submitted by Robert Putnam subject to the follo conditions: 1 , Final Plat is subject to approval by the City Engineer. Z. Final Plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances, -lI �- 27--78 3. A I foot storm sewer easoment shall be provided along the west property line, and an easement for thc-� drainage and storage of surface waiter shall be provided along the rear of both new properties, as determined by the City Engineers Voting iii favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 9:25 p.m. Recess and resumed at 9 :40 p.m. The Mayor announced that the next item for Council considera- Planning Commission tion was that of Planning Commission Application No. 78004 Application No. 78004 submitted by Mobil Oii Corporation. The City Manager intro- (Mobil Oil Corporation) duced the item and stated that it consisted of a special use permit for a new operation and site modifications at the existing Mobil Oil premises, 5710 Xerxes Avenue North. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Planning Commission Application No. 78004 and -he Planning Commission action at its February 9, 1978 meeting. He stated that the special use permit was to reopen and operate the service station at 5710 Xerxes Avenue North. He reviewed a transparency showing the location and configuration of the property in question and stated that it was the intent of the applicant to change the nature of the operation in such a manner that the gasoline sales would be fully self- service and the use of the interior service bays would be on a rental basis to the public. He added that a snack vending area was also proposed for the existing office space. He noted that the operation would be owned and operated by Mobil Oil Corporation under the name of "Big -Bi ". He next reviewed site alterations including reducing the pump islands from 36 feet to 22 feet and the installing of a 22 foot diameter round canopy light on each island. He noted that the station was built in the late '60's and, therefore, did not have an underground sprinkler system for landscaped areas. He pointed out that the Installation of an underground sprinkler system is a recom- . ended condition of approval of this special use permit, lrayor Nyquist opened the meeting for purposes of a public Public Hearing hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 78004, No one spoke relating to the application. Mayor Nyquist then :recognized Mr, Allan Larson, repre- serAing the applicant, who stated that they have contacted o. contractor to handle the requested underground irrigation system for the property in question. In response to an inquiry by Councilmember Kuefler, Mr. Larson explained `the nature of the operation proposed for this location and noted that it would be owned and operated by the Mobil U Corporation and that the corporation would control the operation. He added that gasoline would be dispensed "ro.n this service station on a self - service basis and that r' -he service bays would be made available for rent to persons wishing to use them. He further stated that `Zt1ere would not be vending machines in the area but that , macks such as candy bars, potato chips, soda and other items would be offered for sale over the counter. 11otion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Council- Close Public Hearing }giber Scott to close the public hearing on Planning ommission Application Noe 78004. Voting in favor: ,Ayc}r jN- ist, C'ounc.ilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and 4 otto Voting against: none, The motion passed unanimously , "x -27 -78 _ -12- Counci.lmember Kuefl.er spoke in favor of the application %by stating that he felt this was a good concept that would provide the public with a desirable service. Action Approving Following further discussion there was a motion by Council - Planning Commission member Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve Application No. 78004 Planning Commission Application No. 78004 submitted by (Mobil Oil Corporation) Mobil Oil Corporation subject to the following conditions: 1 . The permit is issued to the operator of the facility and is nontransferable. 2p The permit is subject to all applicable ordinances, codes, and regulations including special licensing requirements and violation thereof shall be deemed grounds for revocation. 3. An underground lawn sprinkler system shall be installed in all landscaped areas including boulevard greenstrips . 4. Plan approval is exclusive of all plan si.gnery which shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 5. All outside trash disposal shall be appropriately screened from view. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Planning Commission Mayor Nyquist announced that the next item of business on the Application No. 78005 agenda was consideration of Planning Commission Application (Residential Alternatives, No. 78005 submitted by Residential Alternatives, Inc, The Inc,) City Manager introduced the item and stated that the applicant was seeking approval of a special use permit for a residential ' care facility for eight clients at 5449 Lyndale Avenue North. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Planning Commission Application No. 78005 and the Planning Commission action at its February 23, 1978 meeting. He stated that the applicant was seeking a special use permit for a residential group care facility for up to eight handicapped adult citizens, under the provisions of Section 35 -311 (h) of the City Ordinances which provides for "other noncommercial uses required for the public welfare in an R -2 district as determined by the City Council a He reported that the City Ordinances permit group care facilities for up to six wards or clients and a residential family per dwelling unit, He further reported that State law provides that such facilities involving six or fewer clients shall be deemed permitted single family residential uses for purposes of zoning. He next reviewed a transparency showing the location and configuration of the property in question and explained that the main considera tion was whether a permitted residential care facility with two additional clients above the permitted six, met the ordinance standards for special use; and that if it were the determination that the standards were. met,, then a special use hermit should be granted. He noted that the property was zoned R -2 (one and two famil.,7 dwellings) and that this type of special use was comprehended in the R -1 zoning district as well. He further reported that the area of the lot in question is sufficient in size to support a duplex. -13- 2 -27-78 a n hY disci:.ssion ensued relative to the drainage for the d)'(- oPc ti°47ith the Director of Public YNorks comme.ntincj that a wally at one time had been a major drainage way in tho area but that it was no longer needed due to an available storm sewer line across the westerly portion of the properties in the area. He stated that if the property is developed, the developer would be required to take necessary steps to insure positive drainage in the form of a Swale which would not impact upon neighboring properties, Mayor Nyquist, opened the meeting for purposes of a public Public Hearing hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 78005. He commented that the main consideration was whether a permitted residential care facility with eight rather than six clients met ordinance standards for a special use. He noted that if the applicant had proposed a group facility for only six clients a special use permit would not be required and there would then be no need for a public hearing on this matter, Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. David Gee and Peter Jacobson, who represented the applicant. Mr. Gee stated that since this area is zoned R -2 it could be possible for a two family home to be constructed and that a total of 12 clients could have been proposed. He pointed out that they feel a single family residential type facility is more conducive to this area and that because of the nature of the proposed clients to use this facility, eight is the desired amount. Mayor Nyquist then recognized Mr. Nick Warhol, 5429 Lyndale Avenue North, who stated that he understands that the hearing is based on whether or not there should be six or eight clients utilizing this building. He stated that he did not feel this type operation, or this type building, was compatible with the neighborhood surrounding it, He noted that all are single family homes occupied by families, He added that he also was not aware that this property and the surrounding property were zoned R -2. He stated that he has been informed that this property has been zoned R -2 since 1968. He commented that not one person living on Lyndale Avenue in this area knew that their property was zoned anything other than R -1, He stated that he felt that they were not given legal notice prior to the rezoning in 1968 and indicated that he might seek legal action in this matter. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Jackson, 5445 Lyndale Avenue - -North, who presented the Mayor with a letter that indicated he had paid taxes on the property in question. He stated ;:hat he had moved into the property at 5445 Lyndale Avenue worth on December 1, 1976 and he showed a copy of his tax. .record to the Mayor. The City Manager commented that the City is only responsible for assessing property for tax pur- poses and that this matter seems to be a private legal matter between Mr. Jackson and the former owner of the property. :ale suggested that Mr. Jackson contact the City Assessor to possibly clarify some misunderstandings. He noted that this question does not affect the application currently before the City Council. Mayor Nyquist inquired if anyone else wished to be heard Close Public Hearing regarding Planning Commission Application No. 78005; no one wished to be recognized, klotion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Council- ',.ember Scott to close the public hearing on Planning e ommission Application No® 78005. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembe;rs Iiuefler, Lhotka, and Scott Voting against: none. The motion passed. unanimously. Councilmember Scott inquired as to how the State, when setting up its criteria for group home facilities, had established the number of clients at six. The Director of Planning and Inspec- tion responded that until a recent amendment to State lays, the number of group home residents was limited to five. He noted' that it was recently changed to six and that to his understanding it was because of the feeling that six was a manageable number similar to what is normally found in a single family environ- ment. He added that it has also been indicated that six is a minimal amount, on the average, to make such an operation viable. Councilmember Lhotka inquired of the applicant as to why they preferred eight rather than six for this group home facility. Mr. Gee responded that six is an ideal number for a group home setting when dealing with lower functioning clients which need more time and understanding. He added that they are proposing that the group home in question be for higher func- tioning clients which do not need as much time and that eight such clients can be adequately handled in the proposed facility. Councilmember Kuefler inquired as to the notice given at the time the City's zoning ordinance was adopted. The City Manage responded by reviewing the notice procedure utilized at that time. He stated that in December, 1965 a legal notice was published in the Brooklyn Center Post regarding the City's Comprehensive Plan and proposed rezoning. He added that a number of public hearings were held on the Comprehensive Plan and that the zoning ordinance was adopted following normal ordinance notice and public hearing requirements Councilmember Kuefler also inquired as to the reaction of neighbors living by the group home facility on 69th Avenue North, The Director of Planning and Inspection responded that to his knowledge there were no neighborhood or environmental problems associated with the group home facility located on '69th Avenue North. Councilmember Lhotka stated that he has talked to some of the neighbors living by the group home on 69th Avenue North. He reported that one family had moved into the area approximately a year and a half ago and that they were aware of the type of home it was. He reported that these people had indicated to him that they have experienced no problems with the group home and that they do not feel their property value has been adversely affected. He further reported that a neighbor living on the other side of the group home has a different attitude regarding it. He stated that they indicated to him that they were not aware that the facility was going to be a group home before it was constructed. He noted that they had some problems with respect to erecting a fence along the property line and that the neighbor had done so himself. He stated that that neighbor indicated there had been no major problems but they feel the value of their property has been s adversely affected by the construction of the group home. A lengthy discussion ensued relative to Minnesota Statutes 462.357 regarding residential care facilities for the mentally retarded and physically handicapped and its affect on muni- cipalities. Councilmember Lhotka stated that he would like to see this matter tabled for further consideration by the City Council following review of this matter by the Southeast Neighborhood Advisory Group and also further clarification regarding the notice procedure utilized by the City at the time this property was rezoned. °l5- 2-27-78 Go,unc:ilmember Kuefler inquired as to what � , )rere the normal types of -things that were referred to the neighborhood advisory groups. The Director of Planning and Inspection responded that normally matters are referred to the neighborhood advisory groups from the Planning Commission which deal with rezonings and :amendments to the Comprehensive Plano He added that these are the only two types of items that had been referred to the neighborhood advisory groups in the past ten years Councilmember Lhotka inquired of the applicant if a tabling action presented any complications. Mr. Jacobson responded that they are 'interested in developing this home as soon as possible and that there are a number of things they must complete such as applying for various needed licenses and construction contracts. He noted that they could live with a delay of up to three weeks but inquired as to why the Council might wish to table the application. Councilmember Lhotka responded that he has personal reasons for requesting the tabling action and feels that this matter greatly affects the surrounding neighborhood and would like to see more contact with respect to the proposed plans for this group facility which might clear up some misunderstandings that seem to exist. Councilmember Scott stated that the neighborhood advisory groups have little or no experience with special use permits, and have no background information on this type of application and, therefore, would not have any expertise to respond to it. Councilmember Lhotka responded that he felt the information regarding this application could be provided to that group. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Gee who stated that they have plans to sit down with neighboring property owners to explain their plans for operating the group home. He noted that they also intend to develop a neighborhood advisory committee made up of persons living around the group home which would be used in an advisory capacity for cperating the home. Mayor Nyquist again recognized Mr. Jackson, 5445 Lyndale Avenue north, who stated that with the proposed 53rd Avenue North overpass over FI -94, buses will no longer go north on Lyndale Avenue to 57th Avenue North, which means this group home will not have adequate bus transportation to service its clients. Mr. Gee responded that most of the workshops attended by persons living in the group home provide trans- portation. He pointed out that he did not feel there would no a transportation problem even though the bus route will not go north on Lyndale to 57th Avenue. 'Following further discussion there was a motion by Council- Action Tabling Planning member Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to Commission Application table further consideration of Planning Commission Applica- No. 78005 (Residential tion No. 78005 submitted by Residential Alternatives, Inc. Alternatives, Inc.) until the March 20, 1978 City Council meeting to give time for the Southeast Neighborhood Advisory Group to review and comment on this matter. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: n -one The motion passed unanimously, Mayor Nyquist recognized Louie Sullivan, Chairman of the Southeast Neighborhood Advisory Group, who stated that they would be happy to address this matter and will have a full report back to the City Council prior to the Council's March 20 meeting. 2--27 - -78 -16- Plarin-ing Commission Nyquis.t announced that the next item of businesr� was Application No. 78006 consideration of Planning Commission Application Noa 71;006 (Richard Kruger) submitted by Richard Kruger. The City Manager introduced the item stating that the applicant was seeking site plan approval for improvements at 6045 Brooklyn Boulevard, The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a'review of Planning Commission Application No. 78006 and the Planning Commission action at its February 9, 1978 meeting. He stated that the applicant is seeking approval of a site plan for the indicated property and is proposing to use this building as a real estate closing office. He reviewed a transparency showing the location and configuration of the property in question and added that the subject property was zoned C-1 (service/office), that the property to the west is zoned R-1 (single family resi- dential) and contained a house, and that the property to the south was zoned R-5 (multi-family residential) and contained an 11 unit apartment building. He reported that houses cannot be converted to business uses without remodeling the structure to meet applicable commercial building and zoning codes. He stated that the applicant's architect has certified that the building is structurally sound, and can meet all code require- ments. He next reviewed various slides depicting the area and indicated that an almost total rejuvenation of the site is being recommended. He stated that the main entrance to the site would be via 61st Avenue North and that the major parking area would be on the north and west side of the property. The City Manager stated that because of traffic problems on Brooklyn Boulevard he felt the driveway to this site from Brooklyn Boulevard should be eliminated. He commented that since no parking was proposed along the south property line this driveway was unnecessary and was in effect a traffic hazard on Brooklyn Boulevard. A lengthy discussion ensued relative to the City Manager's recommendation and the Council's feeling that curb cuts on Brooklyn Boulevard should be eliminated wherever and whenever it is feasible. Mayor Nyquist recognized the applicant, Richard Kruger and his partner, Mr. Berwyn. Mr. Kruger stated that they would like to see the curb cut on the south side of the property left intact and be used as a one-way in only type of driveway.— He noted that the traffic using this curb cut would be minimal and they see a future need for parking on the south side of the property which could be accommodated by this curb cut, The City Manager responded that parking can be provided on this site without the need for the curb cut on Brooklyn Boulevard. He noted that the more this curb cut is utilized the more traffic problems it will cause on Brooklyn Boulevard. Further discussion ensued relative to Potential parking areas on the site and possible traffic Problems associated with the curb cut in question. Mr. Kruger stated that the deletion of the driveway on Brooklyn Boulevard will take access away from the front of the building which they have intended to be the main area for persons utilizing the building, He no that it would be more efficient to allow the driveway as a One-way in only type driveway which would Provide access to the front of the building for persons coming to this office for business purposes. --17- 2-27-78 Cuu- iicilznember Kuefler stated that he .felt the entize site plan might need more work and added that the applicant seems to indicate a future need for parking on the south side of the property while the staff seems to indicate that parking areas would be to the west and north sides of the property. He commented that the plan seems to be only an interim plan and if the applicant has future plans for using the driveway on the south side as parking, this should be indicated on the plans being considered by the City Council. Motion by Councilmember Kuefler to table further consideration Motion to Table of Planning Commission Application No. 78006 submitted by Planning Commission Richard Kruger for further. staff - review with the applicant in Application Nov 78006 terms of a long term master parking plan for the site. Council - member Lhotka seconded the motion for discussion purposes. A lengthy discussion ensued relative to the application and the concerns and considerations that had been raised`. Councilmember Lhotka stated that he did not see any need for parking along the south side of the property at anytime. With respect to the applicant's concern for customers using the front door of the building for business purposes, he stated that signs can be erected in the parking area to indicate that they use the front entrance only. He added that with or without an overall plan he is convinced that there should be no access to this property from Brooklyn Boulevard and that the access provided off of 61st Avenue North is more than adequate. Councilmember Scott concurred with Councilmember Lhotka and stated that she too is opposed to an access onto Brooklyn Boulevard. Councilmember Kuefler withdrew his motion to table the Action to Withdraw application and Councilmember Lhotka withdrew his Previous Motion second thereof. Further discussion ensued relative to the application with the applicant indicating that he would like an expres- sion of the City' Council's feelings so as to know in what direction to proceed. Following further discussion there was a motion by Action Approving Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Planning Commission Lhotka to approve Planning Commission Application Application No. 78006 1\To. 78006 submitted by Richard Kruger subject to the (Richard Kruger) following conditions; 1. Building plans are subject to review by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and traffic delineation plans are subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 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. A six foot opaque fence shall be provided along the west property line. 5. An underground lawn irrigation system shall be installed throughout the landscaped areas on the site. -27 -78 _18-- 6 o The driveway from Brooklyn Boulevard to the rear of the site shall be sodded, and access onto Brooklyn Boule- vard is not comprehended under this approval. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unani- mously. Planning Commission The Mayor announced that the next item of business on the Application Nos, 78009 agenda was consideration of Planning Commission Application and 78010 gohnny's, Nos, 78009 and 78010 submitted by Johnny's Inc, Inc.) Councilmember Lhotka left the table at 11:34 p.m, and returned at 11 :36 p.m. The City Manager introduced the applications by stating that Application No. 78009 consisted of a request for variances from Section 35 of the City Ordinances to permit existing and proposed parking within 15 feet of the lot line in lieu of a greenstrip at 6846 Brooklyn Boulevard and in line with existing greenstrip at 6 85 0 Brooklyn Boulevard.. He stated that Appli- cation No. 78010 consisted of site and building plan approval for improvements of property at 6846 - 6850 Brooklyn Boulevard The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Planning Commission Application Nos. 78009 and 78010 and the Planning Commission action at its February 23, 1978 meeting He reviewed a transparency showing the location and config- uration of the property in question and stated that the property involved was the southeast corner of the intersection of 69th Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard. He explained that the appli- cant was owner of the Pilgrim Cleaners and had acquired the vacant former serv..ce station to the north, proposing to remodel it and use it in conjunction with the dry cleaning business. He further stated that the properties must be combined through . replattir_g and that common site improvements involving curbing, parking and landscaping would be provided according to the submitted plans. He explained that the greenstrip requirements were related to those areas adjacent to Brooklyn Boulevard and commented that there are two parts to the variance, and that for convenience the Planning Commission had referred to them as part A and part B. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that part A involves the area at the main entrance of the present Pilgrim Cleaners facilities. Ile indicated that it is physically possible to obtain a 15 foot greenstrip as required by present ordinance between the property line and the interior parking. He noted that the parking lot paving now comes out to the prope ty line and that there is no curbing between the parking area and the existing sidewalk and highway right -of -way. He stated that the applicant contends that installation of the greenstrip would result in the loss of two parking stalls and possibly drainage' problems due to grade changes which the greenstrip installa- tion would involve. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that part B involves the area in front of the former service station. He stated that the existing greenstrip area is approximately 12 feet rather than 15 feet wide, and that the redesign of the parking lot involves closing an existing curb cut to the service station and installing a greenstrip. He stated that a 15 foot greenstrip is possible both at the location of the curb and through the widening of the existing greenstrip_, He indicated that the greenstrip could be provided at the ordinance minimum width and retain the parking and driving delineation and flow through the area. Flo added that the applicant contends that the existing curbing should not have -1c1._ 2 -. 7 7 it to bo r(,moved in onlor to v)iden the greenstrip and that the new greenstrip should bc, in line With the e :i_sting Cl_lrb cut to provide a driving and parking area which is as open as possible. The Director of Planning and Inspection reported that the Planning Commission had recommended denial of part A of Application No. 78009 and approval of part B of Application No. 78009. The Director of Planning and Inspection next reviewed slides depicting the area and also site plans with members of the City Council. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for purposes of a public Public Hearing hearing. No one spoke relating to the applications. Mayor Nyquist then recognized Mr. Don Rosen, owner of Pilgrim Cleaners, and his architect, Mr, Ron Erickson, who reviewed renderings of the proposed site improvements and the proposed exterior aesthetic modifications to the building. Mr. Rosen stressed that they are trying to provide their customers with the maximum amount of convenience, service and accessibility to these buildings. Mr. Erickson stated that he felt there were new arguments regarding the variance request at the main entrance to the present Pilgrim Cleaners facility. He noted that they do not meet the present ordinance parking requirement for parking needs at this site. He pointed out that there are only four parking sites at the location and that the present facility is pro - posed to include tailoring and tuxedo rental. He added that Pilgrim Cleaners is one of the only buildings on Brooklyn Boulevard that almost directly abuts the curb line. He also stated that there might be drainage problems if the greenstrip is required and the variance is not granted. He further commented that the fact that they are presently short of parking and the greenstrip requirement would take away two of the best parking spots available indeed makes this a hardship for the applicant. He added that lie did not feel this fact was stressed to the Planning Commission and, thus, they recommended denial of the variance request. He concluded by stating that the hardship in this case involves the loss of parking to a site which is already deficient and that the uniqueness in this case is the location of the building which almost abuts the curb line. Councilmerriber Kuefler stated that he likes the plans presented by the applicant with respect to this corner property. He added that he felt the plans indicate a vast improvement in this area. In response to an inquiry by Councilmember Scott, the Director of Public Works stated that a green area can be provided by the existing facility and that it could be sloped in such a way that it would drain away from the building and not cause the applicant any drainage j problems. A lengthy discussion ensued between the applicant's architect and the Director of Public Works regarding possible drainage problems if a greenstri.p were required. Councilmember Scott stated that if the Council allowed the applicant to park cars alongside the sidewalk, it Would makes a situation that is visually detracting to the surrounding improvements proposed by the applicant. 2 -27-78 -20- Close: Public Ilearing Motion by Cou,r)cilmember Kuefler and ,seconded by Council- member Lhotka to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application Nos. 78009 and 78010. Voting in favor.: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott, Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. A lengthy discussion ensued relative to the variance requests and the possibility of providing something other than a green -- strip to provide a delineation between the sidewalk and the parking area that would be visually aesthetic. It was suggested that the applicant install a planter and landscaping to delineate this area which would permit some parking in the area and also the delineation, Action Approving Following a lengthy discussion there was a motion by Council - Part A of Planning member Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to Commission Application approve the variance request from the installation of a greenstrip No. 78009 (Johnny's, at the entrance of the existing dry cleaning establishment in Inc.) that it is within the intent of the ordinance and the variance standards are met with respect to uniqueness and hardship, subject to the condition that the applicant will provide a de- lineator with plantings at the sidewalk and landscaping at the entryway. Voting in favor: Mayor 1\1yquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Action Approving Motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Council - Part B of Planning member Lhotka to approve the variance request, in that retention Commission Application of the existing curb line and greenstrip was within the intent No. 78009 (Johnny's, of the ordinance; removal of the existing curbing to widen the Inc.) greenstrip represented an undue requirement for the overall aesthetics of the area; and subject to the condition that the new proposed greenstrip would be no less in width than the existing greenstrip. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council- members Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Action Approving Motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Planning Commission Lhotka to approve Planning Commission Application No. 78010 Application No. 78010 submitted by Johnny's; Inc. subject to the following conditions: (Johnny's, Inc o ) 1, Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage and curbing plans are subject to approval by the City Engineer. 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 prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Property shall be combined through platting or registered land survey as required by Section 35 -540 of the City Ordinances. 5. All outside trash disposal facilities will be appropriately screened from view. 6. Appropriate signery, as approved by the City Engineer, shall be provided to facilitate traffic flow and traffic control at the designation points of ingress and egress, 21- 2-27 --78 RoquirC'd landscaping shill be installed in accordance with the provisions of the action taken under Application Igo. 78009 parts A and B� 8. The proposed screen fence sout of the former service station - building shall be properly bounded by a concrete island as approved by the City Engineer. 9. The existing underground storage tanks shall be removed or scaled as determined by the Building Official. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously, Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following ordinance and ORDINANCE further moved its adoption, provided, however, that for the NOa 78 -2 purposes of the minutes of the proceedings of the City Council the text of the ordinance shall be attached to the minutes and be a part thereof: AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING PROSTITUTION, NUDITY, AND OTHER ACTS WITHIN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced the next item of business on Ordinance Amending the agenda, by stating that on February 13, 1978 the City Chapter 35 Council had a first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 35 regarding special uses in the C -2 (general commerce) district. He explained that the ordinance would permit as special uses commercial saunas and sauna baths, and massage parlors provided they do not abut any resi- dential district including abutment at the street line. He noted that it has been determined that there are certain existing facilities such as the Community Center sauna and other commercial saunas that may be in conflict with these provisions. He noted that there has been a review of this matter and it is the staff's impression that the Council, through its licensing exceptions proposed in Section 23 -1612 of an ordinance requiring licensing for saunas which had a first reacting also on February 13, intended to except saunas that are incidental to commercial enterprises for the exclusive use of tenants and employees and not of the public generally. He stated that the pro- posed language in a draft which has been presented to the City Council resolves the conflict by the definition and reference to establishments offering saunas and massages. He explained that establishments are now defined as distinct business entities and, thus, saunas in office buildings, the Community Center, and apartments would not present conflicts since they are incidental and secondary amenities to those uses. He added that sauna establishments and massage establishments would be special uses in the C -2 (general commerce) district and would not be permitted where there is abutment, including at a street line, to any residential district. 2-27-78 -22- ORDINANCE Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Council Amended First Reading member Kuefler and seconded by Gouncilmember Scott ',o- offer for an amended first reading an ordinance amending Chapter 35 regarding special uses in the C-2 (general commerce) district and an ordinance regulating the operation and maintenance of businesses or commercial establishments offering saunas or sauna baths requiring a license to operate such facilities and establishing standards for the construction, operation and maintenance of these facilities. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none, The motion passed unanimously. Sanitary Sewer The City Manager introduced the next item of business on the Rates agenda, that of a discussion of a sanitary sewer rate study conducted by the Director of Public Works and the Director of Finance. He explained that the City Council had received a detailed report of the sanitary sewer rates study. He pointed out that the purpose of the report is to present findings relating to the adequacy of the present sanitary sewer rate schedule, He noted that the report reflects data regarding sewer section revenue, operation and maintenance expenses, estimated fut financial relationships, and recommends a new sewer rate . schedule, He reported that it is apparent from the report that the present sewer rate schedule must be increased to offset the increasing disposal costs He added that it is also recom- mended that a new rate schedule be set at a " break- even level which will avoid annual fluctuations in rates . He noted that it is further recommended that the Council establish March 27, 1978 as a date for a public hearing on proposed new sanitary sewer rates and that if the public hearing is favorable, the new rates would take effect on April I . He added that the new residential sanitary sewer rates would mean an increase from the present $8.75 per quarter to $16.50 per quarter. The City Manager directed the City Council's attention to page 7 of the report that shows Brooklyn Center to rank 12th of the 15 communities surveyed with respect to sanitary sewer rates. He explained that the sanitary sewer rates have not been adjusted in Brooklyn Center since 1971 and that the proposed increase would make up for deficits that have been realized within the past few years. A discussion ensued relative to the report and the recommenda- tion that the sanitary sewer rates be increased. Councilmembeer Kuefler stated that he understands the need to raise the sani� tary sewer rates but that he is apprehensive about almost doubling the cut sanitary sewer rate. He noted that the projected revenue needs contemplate that this $16.50 quarterly rate be charged through 1981. He wondered if the sewer rate could be adjusted in stages over that same period of time in such a way that the deficit could be made up and yet the rates not be doubled almost immediately. The Director of Public Works stated that the $16.50 quarterly rate represents a rate of -approximately 75 � per 1 , 000 gallons and that to adjust the sanitary sewer rate charge so that the City would not lose money this year, it would have to be raised to approximately 65� per I,000 gallons Further discussion ensued relative to the report and the recommended sewer rates. Councilmember Kuefler requested that an alternate plan for spreading out the sewer rate increase over the period through 1981 be developed for consideration at the public hearing proposed for March 27, 1978. 2-27-78 X()jlowI.nq further discussion the r(-, wl:Is a motion by Council- Action Establishing Public member Scott and seconded by Councilmomber Lhotka to Hearing for Sanitary Sewer establish Mlarch 27, 1978 as a date for a public hearing on Rates proposed sanitary sewer rates. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager reported that the Conservation Com- Conservation Commission - mission has recently recommended that the Cit y conduct Recommendation an energy efficiency audit of the Civic Center complex, especially the Community Center pool area, to develop ways of making the Civic Center more energy efficient. He noted that the Conservaticn Commission is quite concerned about conserving energy and that there already are attempts, on the part of the City, to improve the energy efficiency of the City buildings. He noted that this audit could be conducted by local staff, if appro- priate, and would be designed to look at ways of improving the energy efficiency of City buildings. Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Council- Action Accepting Conservation member Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to Commission Recommendation accept the Conservation Commission's recommendation that an energy efficiency audit of the Civic Center complex be conducted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Motion by CounCilmember Kuefler and seconded by Council- Licenses member Lhotka to approve the following list of licenses: BINGO LICENSE St. Alphonsus Church Men's Club 3825 58th Ave. No. T FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Brooks Superette 6800 Humboldt Ave. No. Ground Round Restaurant 2545 County Rd. 10 Happy Dragon Restaurant 5532 Brooklyn Blvd. Hickory Farms Store Brookdale Shopping Center Maid of Scandinavia Co. Westbrook Mall Mario's Speed Wagon 5742 Morgan Ave. No. Olive's Ea st Brookdale Shopping Center Pizza Factory 6816 Humboldt Ave. No. Rog & Jim's Superette 6912 Brooklyn Blvd. Service Systems Corp. Soo Line Bldg. N.W. Bell 5910 Shingle Creek Pkwy Super Sam's 1267 Brookdale Center Arthur Treacher's Fish & Chips 6100 Brooklyn Blvd. ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Brooklyn Center Mrs. Jaycees 5) 113 Eleanor Lane (Bunny Brea kfa st) Earle Brown School NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Allen Hairstyling 5708 Morgan Ave. No. H. & L. Enterprises 11517 Yukon St. N.W. Whirltronics 3401 48th Ave. No. Service Systems Corp. Soo Line Bldg. N.W. Bell 5910 Shingle Creek Pkwy. -24- PERISHABL VEN M LICENSE Apple -A -Day Vending Service 3536 Emerson Ave. So. Brooklyn Center High School. 6500 Humboldt Ave. No. H. & L. Enterprises 11517 Yukon St. N.W. Whirltronics 3401 48th Ave. No. RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE Initia 1: Manferd Rasmusson & John Christensen 7040 Brooklyn Blvd. Henry & Juanita Holm 5206 Drew Ave. No. Howard Coombs 6725 W. River Rd. Renewal: Egons Podnieks, Joseph McGilliduddy, Richard Thill & Sam Demou Garden City Court Apts. Multiplex Management Co. Unicorn Apts. Robert Willwerscheid, Fred Robbins & J.M. Rafter 6331,6401,6425 Beard No. Ralph C. Johnson 5440,5444 Bryant Ave. No. Richard Biggs 819, 820 55th Ave. No. Roger L. Lundquist 3910 65th Ave. No. Gladys Schwartz 4006 65th Ave. No. SPECIAL FOOD HANDLING ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Brooklyn Center Liquor Store #1 6800 Humboldt Ave . No. Brooklyn Center Liquor Store #2 6250 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center Liquor Store #3 Northbrook Center Fun Services, Inc. 3701 50th Ave. No. Ideal Drug Store 6800 Humboldt Ave. No. Toy City Store 6000 Earle Brown Dr. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment Motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Council- member Kuefler to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously, The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 12 :59 a.m. ler - Ma r -25- 2-27-78