Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978 08-28 CCM Regular Session M INUTES 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 AUGUST 28, 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 7:04 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott, Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works James Merila, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren, Superintendent of Engineering James Noska, Building Official Will Dahn, and Administrative Assistants Mary Harty and Brad Hoffman, INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Pastor Bailey. OPEN FORUM There was no one scheduled to appear on the Open Forum. Mayor Nyquist inquired if anyone in the audience wished to be recognized for the Open Forum; there being none, the Open Forum was closed. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF MINUTES OF THE REVENUE SHARING PROPOSED USE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING) The City Manager explained the minutes of the Revenue Sharing Proposed Use Administrative Hearing were presented to the Council for their approval. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to acknowledge receipt of the minutes of the August 14, 1978 Revenue Sharing Proposed Use Administrative Hearing. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. r; APPROVAL OF MINUTES (CITY COUNCIL) AUGUST 14_,1978 Motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of August 14, 1978 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. FINAL PLAT APPROVALS The City Manager recommended, final plat approval for Irving Estates Subdivision submitted by David Brandvold o The approval is for property lying north of 69th Avenue North and westerly of Irving Avenue North, The City Council approved the preliminary plat on May 22, 1978 under Application No. 78025. In presenting the documents for the final plat approval, the. Director of Public Works explained Hennepin County wAs using a new format to present the information. Transparencies are now being used by Hennepin County and the actual documents are being microfilmed. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to approve the final plat for Irving Estates Subdivision submitted by David Brandvold for property lying north of 69th Avenue North and westerly of Irving Avenue North. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager recommended the approval of the final plat for the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park registered land survey for property lying at the southeast quadrant of Shingle Creek Parkway and Freeway Boulevard. The City Council approved the preliminary plat on May 8, 1978 under Application No. 78021. There was a ? motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the final plat for the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park registered land survey for property lying at the southeast quadrant of the Shingle Creek Parkway - and Freeway Boulevard. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler., Fignar, Lhotka, - and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. AUTHORIZE SUBDIVISION BOND .REDUCTION The City Manager recommended the financial performance guarantee for Linder's 1st Addition be reduced from $8,100 to $7,250 on the basis that corresponding obligations have been satisfied. The financial performance guarantee had previously been reduced from $9,800 to $8,100 on April 24, 1978. In response to questions from the Council, the Director of Public Works responded the financial performance guarantee was for site improvements on eleven lots in the Linder's Addition at a cost of $850 per lot. Presently the work has been completed on four lots and therefore, the reduction in the amount so listed is A , recommended. Motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to approve subdivision bond reduction for Linder's 1 st Addition from $8,100 to $7,250. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION OF RE The City Manager introduced a resolution providing for a public hearing on proposed assessments for September 25, 1978. This is recommended for the purpose of establishing a public hearing on proposed special assessments for September 25, 1978. The Director of Public Works indicated a data sheet would be provided to Council members before the public hearing. He further explained two additional projects on Lyndale may be added to the list if those projects are finalized before the September 25 date. RESOLUTION NO. 78 -1 P2 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS ON SEPTEMBER 25, 1978 7 $=9g -2- 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 introduced a resolution placing on file and opening proposed assessments for public inspection. This is recommended for the purpose of officially opening the proposed special assessments for public inspection. RESOLUTION NO. 78 -183 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PLACING ON FILE AND OPENING PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION 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 the resolution accepting a quotation for Curb and Gutter Contract - 1978 -No The contract provides for Halvorson Construction Company to do the curb and gutter work on James Circle on a quotation basis. The Director of Public Works explained this poject would complete the construction on James Avenue. The City Manager explained that these resolutions accepting quotations for contract work seem technical but if bonding is necessary in the future, very detailed documentation is needed for the bonding and this type of technical resolution provides that documentation. RESOLUTION NO. 78 -184 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption RESOLUTION ACCEPTING QUOTATION FOR CURB AND GUTTER (CONTRACT 1978 -N) 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 seven resolutions accepting work for improvement projects for sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and /or water main. The work on these projects has been satisfactorily completed by Walhunt Construction Company. RESOLUTION NO. 78 -185 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK UNDER CONTRACT NO. 1978 -D (CONTRACTED BY (CITY) ) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the .following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 78 -186 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK UNDER CONTRACT NO. 1978 -D (CONTRACTED BY C ITY) 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. RESOLUTION NO. 78 -187 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK UNDER CONTRACT NO, 1978 -D (CONTRACTED BY CITY) 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, RESOLUTION NO. 78-188. Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK UNDER CONTRACT NO. 1978 -D (CONTRACTED BY CITY) 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, RESOLUTION NO. 78 -189 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK UNDER CONTRACT NO. 1978 -D (CONTRACTED BY CITY) ='T8" -4- 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. RESOLUTION NO. 78 -190 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK UNDER CONTRACT NO. 1978 -D (CONTRACTED BY CITY) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, RESOLUTION NO. 78 -19 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK UNDER CONTRACT - NO. 1978 -D ( CONTRACTED BY CITY) 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 recommends a resolution supporting the City of Richfield in a lawsuit contesting the compulsory binding arbitration provisions of the Minnesota Public Employees Labor Relations Act. The City Manager explained the City of Richfield feels the arbitration panel award issued for 1976 Labor Contract with Local #1215, International Association of Firefighters, is a capricious and arbitrary award. Additionally, the League of Minnesota Cities is supporting the City of Richfield in this lawsuit because the Board of Directors of the: League of Minnesota Cities believes there is a possibility with Ahis case to -test the scope of the arbitrator's award even if the arbitration itself is not declared unconstitutional. The City Manager further explained the lawsuit is contesting the constitutionality of the arbitration provision of the Minnesota Public Employees Labor Relations Act for essential employees which includes both fire an m d police employees. , In response to questions from the Council, the City Manager explained the resolution supporting the City of Richfield includes two parts, first, a resolution expressing support for the City of Richfield in the lawsuit and second, a contribution of $100 to the League of Minnesota Cities to help defray the cost of the Supreme Court appeal. The City Manager indicated the $100 could either 8 -2-78 -5- be drawn from the Council's Professional Services budget. RESOLUTION NO. 78 -192 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION SUPPORTING CITY OF RICHFIELD LAWSUIT CONTESTING PELRA COMPULSORY BINDING ARBITRATION PROVISIONS 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 introduced a resolution amending the 1978 budget to include additional ceramic tiling of the pool at the Brooklyn Center Community Center. In conjunction with the bid on the tiling of the swimming pool, the City also requested a price for any additional work which might be requested its the future. The contractor quoted a price of $3.30 per square foot for additional work. It is recommended the City proceed with the additional tiling projects because the areas in question are very difficult to maintain on a daily basis and annual renovations consume considerable time and money, The tiling would alleviate this problem. The City Manager further noted if the work was not done until 1979, there would be an approximate 20% increase in the cost to accomplish the work at that time. In response to questions from Council members, the Director of Finance responded there was approximately $800,000 to $900,000 in committed dollars in Federal Revenue Sharing funds (unallocated) and there was approximately $300,000 to $400,000 in received dollars in Federal Revenue Sharing funds (unallocated). The City Manager explained he wished to include in the resolution work on'the stairways of the Community Center at a cost of $1,950, for a total cost for the ceramic tiling of the Community Center areas of $13,286. RESOLUTION NO. 78 -193 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1978 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FUNDS FOR ADDITIONAL TILING IN THE COMMUNITY CENTER 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 introduced a resolution authorizing the issuance of temporary improvement notes. He explained there is a need for interim financing prior to the selling of bonds to finance certain improvement project costs which are to be assessed against benefited properties. The temporary improvement notes would 8 -� 78 -6- be in the amount of $80,000. RESOLUTION NO. 78 -194 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF 'TEMPORARY, IMPROVEMENT NOTES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member 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, DISCUSSION ITEM The City Manager presented the Council with a list of election judge replacements for the primary election on September 12, 1.978. Motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the election judge - replacements as submitted by the City Manager. Voting in Mayor N m favor: ayor yquist, Council embers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager explained the proposed Housing Commission Seminar Budget for the Housing Awareness Seminar to be held on September 16, '1978. He indicated he did not anticipate the need to underwrite the cost of this seminar as it was anticipated the registration fees would cover the cost of the seminar. The maximum dollar amount needed was $177.50 but again, it is anticipated this amount would be covered by registration fees. Councilmember Fignar as Council liaison to the Housing Commission invited and encouraged City Council members to attend the Housing Awareness Seminar. He explained the Commission had worked closely with Phil Cohen to put together the seminar. Councilmember Scott also encouraged the Planning Commissioners to attend the Housing Awareness Seminar. Councilmember Scott noted there was information on the Housing Awareness Seminar included in the Metro Council Newsletter. Registration for the seminar is $3.50 for advanced registration and $5.00 for registration at the door. Motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the Housing Commission Seminar Budget for the Housing Awareness Seminar to be held September 16, 1978. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager explained a discussion of Community Development Block Grants was for the purpose of consideration of participation in Urban County•through a joint cooperative agreement with Hennepin County. The joint cooperative agree- ment would allow Hennepin County to include Brooklyn Center as part of their application statistics in applying for the Urban County status. Approval of the 8 -4=7 8 -7- joint cooperative agreement does not commit Brooklyn Center irrevocably to the program. There would still be the opportunity to withdraw from the program at a future date. The City Manager indicated it was his recommendation the approach to Community Development Block Grants be handled conservatively so as not to establish an umbilical cord relationship with the Federal government. In response to questions from Council members, the City Manager explained some federal programs provide federal dollars for the initiation of certain programs which later have to be assumed by the local government. This is not necessarily the case with Community Development Block Grants if approached cautiously. The City Manager further indicated the City staff was thoroughly researching our participation in Community Development Block Grants and the ramifications .'of that participation, The City Manager does not propose hiring additional staff to handle Community Development Block Grant Programs. The City staff is looking at Community Development Block Grants as a way to carry out programs which would benefit the Community without unduly burdening' the City. Finally, the City Manager explained the Council would have the opportunity to provide additional input at the time program adoption was to be considered. Mayor Nyquist expressed concern over the use of federal money. Mayor Nyquist further suggested that the City Attorney review the joint cooperative agreement with Hennepin County before the City of Brooklyn Center entered into that agreement. Responding to Council members questions, the City Manager clarified the Urban County status available to Hennepin County. Hennepin County fits the require- ments of an Urban County. whereas, Ramsey County does not fit the requirements of an Urban County. Ramsey County, therefore, must apply for Community Development Block Grants as a small City which makes it very difficult to acquire the funds. As an applicant under Urban County, Hennepin County is virtually assured of receiving Community Development Block Grant Funds. Councilmember Fignar questioned the 5% administrative costs in the first year as explained in the contract and the 2% increase in administrative cost each year thereafter to a maximum of 10 %, The City Manager replied there are communities which feel this charge by Hennepin County for administrative costs is high. Councilmember Kuefler indicated the Urban County approach to applying for Community Development Block Grants was a common approach being used across the country as indicated in the National League of Cities Conference. The City Manager further indicated the administrative costs as listed in the joint cooperative agreement were the "going rate". The City Manager replied to questions from Council members by explaining Community Development Block Grant monies have been used in the past to _. provide housing rehabilitation loans and grants for low and moderate income groups, to acquire park lands, to eliminate barriers to handicapped individuals, to provide replacement trees on public lands, to establish code enforcement programs, to start water and sewer projects, and to create rent subsidy programs. 8 J.-4 78 -8- He explained the range of activities allowed under the Community Development Block Grant Program is generally quite broad but the emphasis of the programs have changed since the inception of Community Development Block Grants. For example, a stated objective as of 1977 for Community Development Block Grants was the alleviation of physical and economic distress through the stimulation of private investment and community revitalization in the areas where there is a stagnating or declining tax base. The City Manager indicated the Community Development Block Grant Program is narrower in scope than the Revenue Sharing Program but that it was necessary to meet certain requirements before the funds could be received. The City Manager explained the final application for Community Development Block Grants was due before November of 1978 and it was anticipated the City would not receive money from this program until approximately August of 1979. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to participate in Urban County through a joint cooperative agreement with Hennepin County after the City Attorney has reviewed the joint cooperative agreement. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The p City Council recessed -at 7 :55 .m. and reconvened at 8:10 • p.m. � PI \NNING C ITEMS The City Manager explained Mr. Dietrich, representative of Meadow Corporation, had requested an early hearing of the Planning Commission Applications concerning Meadow Corporation because Mr. Dietrich had to attend other meetings that evening. The City Manager introduced Planning Commission Application _Nos 78048, 78049, and 78050, submitted by the Meadow Corporation and recommended for approval at the Planning Commission meeting of August 10, 1978, The Director of Planning and Inspection indicated the above listed Planning Com- mission Applications submitted by Meadow Corporation could be dealt with concurrently, The Director of Planning and Inspection explained Application No. 78048 submitted by Meadow Corporation was for a special use, site and building plan approval for the 4th development Phase of the Ponds located at approximately 71 st and Unity Avenue North. The development comprehends 66 condbyrinium single family attached dwelling units. Application No, 78049 comprehends a preliminary plat approval for the Ponds Plat 3 consisting of outlot C and I of the Ponds Addition located at approximately 71 st and Unity Avenue North. Application No. 78050 comprehends preliminary plat approval for the Ponds Plat 4 consisting of outlot D of the Ponds Addition located at approximately 71st and Unity Avenue North. The Director of Planning and Inspection briefly explained each _application and directed Councilmembers to the minutes of the Planning. Commission meeting of August 10, 1978. He explained public hearings had been held at thai Planning Commission meeting. 8,;.x''7 8 -9- Concerning Application No. 78049, it was explained a sidewalk would give access to the people living there to the Zanewood Grade School. The Director of Public Works explained Mr. Harold Swenson, from the School District, had asked this accommodation be made and Meadow Corporation agreed. It was suggested by Councilmember Scott it would be helpful if Brooklyn Park would provide a walkway to connect with the Brooklyn Center walkway. The Director of Public Works indicated the suggestion could be discussed with Brooklyn Park. Councilmember Kuefler inquired whether or not it was the City's responsi- bility to plow that sidewalk. The Director of Public Works indicated it was not the City's responsibility because it was the Homeowner's Association property, although an easement does exist for that property. In final comments, the Director of Planning and Inspection explained one of the reasons for phasing within the Ponds Development was it was the intent of the developer to finish one phase before going on to the next. The phasing concept seems to be working well as all of the units in Phase I have been sold except for the models and the majority of the Phase II units have been sold, The Director of Planning and Inspection explained there was a provision for 'fencing the development as the phases were completed, Thus far, the applicant has installed fencing on Phase I and will be installing fencing in Phase_ II in the fall. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for a public hearing on Application No. 78048. There was no one to speak on the application. Mr. Dietrich commented briefly on the application. There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar. and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to approve Planning Commission Application No. 78048 submitted by Meadow Corporation 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, utility and berming 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. Development of this portion of the planned residential development shall also be subject to applicable conditions of the original develop- ment approval by the City Council on October 18, 1976 under Appli- cation No. 76041, including the provision for screen fencing along the R -1 (single family) zoning district boundary. 8-,k4-78 -10- 5 o Viable turf, such as sod or seed shall be provided for all open space areas in accordance with approval by the City. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for a public hearing on Application No. 78049. Mr. Dietrich commented briefly on the application. There was no one else to speak on the application. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to close the public hearing on Application No. 78049. 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 Fignar to approve Planning Commission Application No. 78049 submitted by Meadow Corporation subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2 Final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City .Ordinances. 3. A sidewalk easement as approved by the City shall be provided, 4. Modifications of the cul -de -sac westerly of Unity Avenue as approved by the City Engineer shall be submitted prior to City Council review. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Noting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for a public hearing on Application No. 78050. The applicant commented briefly on the application. There was no one else to speak on the application. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and ' i seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to close the public hearing on Application No. 78050. 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 approve Planning Commission Application No. 78050 submitted by Meadow Corporation subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2, The final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott Voting n Scott. g agar st: none® The motion passed unanimously. The Director of Planning and Inspection introduced Application No. 78055 also submitted by Meadow Corporation which comprehends a preliminary plat approval for the Ponds Plat 7 located in the vicinity of 73rd and Unity Avenue North, The 8 -, -78 -11- Planning Commission recommended approval of this application at its August 24, 1978 meeting. It was further explained the area comprehends 112 rental units. The developer indicated there may be"a desire in the future to sell the units individually. The Director of Planning and Inspection indicated there was discussion at the Planning Commission meeting of August 24, 1978 as to the need for a Homeowner's Association document that would meet with the City Attorney's approval if and when any unit was sold individually. It was the intent of the Planning Commission that a Homeowner's Association would be required before any units would be put up for sale. This item was taken care of as one of the conditions of approval for the application. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for purposes of a public hearing on Appli- cation No. 78055 In a response to a question from Councilmember Kuefler concerning water in the area, Mr. Dietrich responded it was a fact some people in the area had water problems but these problems were not caused by the Ponds Development. It is felt that the Ponds Development has probably improved the, problem rather than increasing the problem. There were no other people present to speak on the application. There was a motion by Council - s member Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing on Application No. 78055. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council - members Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. - .. There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to approve Planning Commission Application No. 78055 submitted by Meadow Corporation with the following conditions: 1 . Final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. z 2. Final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. An appropriate easement shall be provided adjacent to Shingle Creek for purposes of environmental protection and public recreational access such as trailways and bikeways as determined by the City Engineer. 4. Final plat is subject to the development of a Homeowner's Association document approved by the City Attorney, or insurance, satisfactory to the City Attorney, that a Homeowner's Association document will be put into effect when, and if, the development changes from a rental to a condominium ownership development. 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. 77064 submitted by Gene Hamilton comprehending an appeal from an administrative ruling regarding the structural addition at 6230 Lee Avenue North. Application No. 77064 was considered by the.City Council at its July 24, 1978 meeting and it was decided to defer action on the application, for 30 days until more information could be 8 -14 -78 -12- gathered and studied by the Council. The City Manager explained in clarification of the issue that the Building Official had ruled a carport structure at 6230 Lee Avenue North to be an accessory structure and, therefore, the structure must meet setback requirements. The City Manager indicated the staff was prepared to answer questions the Council might have on the application. In response to questions from Council members, the Director of Planning and Inspection explained the present ordinance does not clearly define carport, canopy, or awning, but, Mr. Hamilton's structure by use, is considered an accessory structure. - Mr. Hamilton explained his interpretation of the ordinance which he felt made his structure a canopy and, therefore, not subject to setback requirements. As a point of clarification, the City Attorney explained there are many terms in City Ordinances which are not defined. He further noted it is typical for City administrators, City Councils, and Planning Commissions to define terms within the City Ordinances by their function or size. This practice is legally defensible. The question at issue in this case is whether or not this particular use should be allowed to encroach on the setback. Councilmember Kuefler stated it was his belief the structure was a carport as determined by its use, as opposed to a canopy. Councilmember Kuefler indicated he concurred with, the Planning Commission recommendations. Mayor Nyquist stated he did not -find the structure at 6230 Lee Avenue North aesthetically objectionable but he was concerned with potentially objectionable similar structures in other areas if Mr. Hamilton's structure was allowed to stand. Mayor Nyquist was concerned about the precedent which would be set. Councilmember Lhotka indicated he also was concerned with the consequences , of easing the setback requirements. He found the appearance of Mr. Hamilton's structure acceptable but was fearful of what might happen if the setback require- ments were eased. He concurred with the Planning Commission's recommendations. Councilmember Fignar explained the design and structure of Mr. Hamilton's accessory structure does not deter from the aesthetics of the neighbothood possibly because of the setting of the site, nevertheless, he was concerned similar structures might not be as acceptable on other sites. He further elaborated that people had chosen to come to the suburbs for aesthetic reasons, for more light, air, safety, and less noise, and setback requirements helped keep these amenities available. Councilmember Fignar agreed with the Planning Commissioner's recommendation. Councilmember Scott concurred with other Council members and with the Planning Commissioner's recommendations She indicated the Council would be hardpressed to turn down future applications, regardless of whether or not they were objectionable. She further indicated the City of Brooklyn Center's setback requirements were similar to other suburban communities. Tangentially, Councilmember Scott explained she did not feel this application met the standards for a variance because there was not 8-L-78 -13- a question of a particular hardship to the owner nor was the ,parcel. of land of the situation unique. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to deny Planning Commission Application No. 77064 submitted by Gene Hamilton comprehending an appeal from an administrative ruling regarding the structural addition at 6230 Lee Avenue North and to uphold the Building Official's ruling that a carport accessory structure erected within the front yard setback cannot be permitted because the structure by its use is defined as a carport. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Mr. Hamilton. questioned whether or not his next option was to apply for a variance. Mayor Nyquist suggested Mr. Hamilton should check with the Planning and Inspection staff. The City Manager introduced Appl :.' a ion No. 78052 submitted by Delbert Holmin which comprehends a_ variance from Section 35 -400 to permit construc- tion of a single family home at 6315 Brooklyn Boulevard that encroaches on the 50 foot setback requirement along major thoroughfares. The Planning Commission recommended denial of Application No. 78052 at its August 10, 1978 meeting because it was their feeling the standards for a variance were not met. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained the setbacks on major thoroughfares are not established for the sole reason of facilitating street widening but the 50 foot setback on major thoroughfares' as opposed to a 35 foot setback on other streets was established because of the volume of traffic on major - thoroughfares and because a 50 foot setback provides for a possible turn around area which eases access to major thoroughfares. The Director of Planning and Inspection further explained there was a perpetual covenant on the properties in that area which recognize the properties as residential properties. For this reason, before commercial development could occur, 1 there would have to be public hearings, Councilmember Scott stated the issue at question was whether or not the 50 foot setback was reasonable and sensible. It was her feeling the need for safety, uniformity, light, air, and open space could best be met by the 50 foot setback. Furthermore, she indicated the lot was so close to the 63rd street intersection that backing out on Brooklyn Boulevard would be difficult. She indicated she felt the 50 foot setback was reasonable and also very necessary. She explained the 50 foot setback requirement did not create a hardship for the applicant as defined in the standards for a variance but that the 50 foot setback presented a mere inconvenience to the applicant. She further indicated the design of the house and the placement on the lot could be changed to meet the standards of the 50 foot setback. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained he and the Building Official had proposed the same house design with a different placement on the lot which would meet the 50 foot setback requirements but the applicant this was not 8 -' _78 -14- an acceptable arrangement to him. The Director of Planning and Inspection indicated the lot was not deficient in gross square footage and the design as proposed by the City staff would meet all setback requirements. The Mayor opened the meeting for a public hearing on Application No. 78052. The Mayor recognized Mr. Delbert Holmin. Mr. Holmin presented a copy of the perpetual covenant covering the property in question. The covenant required lots within the covenant to be used for residential purposes only and that all building types would be detached single family dwellings. Mr. Holmin explained he had attempted several years ago to get a release from the covenant but he was not successful at that time. Mr. Holmin also presented to the Council some photos of the area in question, Mr. Holmin explained the designs suggested by the City staff were not acceptable to him because it would comprehend only a very small back yard. Mr. Holmin .explained he needed more than 29 square feet for his back yard. He also explained he had driven along Brooklyn Boulevard looking for homes which had a 50 foot setback and could only find one. As a point of clarification, the Director of Planning and Inspection explained other homes on Brooklyn Boulevard built at different times fell under different ordinance requirements for setback. Councilmember Fignar inquired as to what precedent would be set if the Council allowed Mr. Holmin to construct his home on Brooklyn-Boulevard with less than a 50 foot setback. The Director of Planning and Inspection replied there would be a precedent set and furthermore, it would affect not only Brooklyn Boulevard but all other major thoroughfares within the City of Brooklyn Center. The City Attorney explained there were many situations where zoning ordinances changed and, therefore, different rules apply to different buildings. He indicated- this was not unusual but was very typical. Fut- hermore, it is legally defensible to uphold new ordinances for buildings consul ::acted after passage of the ordinance. In response to concerns raised by Mr. Holmin Lhat other vacant lots in the area might be commercially developed, the Director of Planning and Inspection explained the types of rezoning contemplated in the area by the Comprehensive .'Plan include service /office uses and multi- residential, not C -2 uses. Finally, Mr. Holmin explained he had first begun the application process in February and each month the cost of building his home was rising approximately $500. . He expressed dismay at the length of time it was taking to reach a decision on the application. In response to this concern, the Director of Planning and Inspection briefly outlined for the Council the history. of the application and its processing. He briefly explained the City staff's suggestions to Mr. Holmin and their correspondence with him. There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to close the public hearing on Application No. 78052. Voting in favor: Mayor'Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. 8 °7 H -15- Councilmember Kuefler asked whether the 50 foot setback applied to all types of buildings on major thoroughfares. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained that the 50 foot setback applies to all uses on major thoroughfares. He pointed out that certain uses are allowed to have parking within the 50 foot setback area. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to deny Application No. 78052 submitted by Mr. Delbert Holmin because the application does not meet the standards for a variance and furthermore, approving the application would set an irrevocable precedent on all other major thoroughfares within the City of Brooklyn Center concerning 50 foot setbacks. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Lhotka was excused at 9 :26 p.m. The City Manager introduced Application No. 78054 submitted by Lund Martin Company which comprehends site and building plan approval for the construction of a free standing lithium storage building at Medtronics, Inc, , 6700 Shingle Creek Parkway. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the appli- cation at its August 10, 1978 meeting. Councilmember Lhotka returned to the table at 9:30 p.m. The Director of Planning and Inspection explained lithium was used by Medtronics in making pacemakers and that lithium reacts violently when exposed to water and, therefore, must be stored in a temperature and humidity controlled environ- ment. He explained the building proposed would be located approximately 40 feet from the existing building and would,be constructed with 12 inch concrete block. He stated no fire sprinklers would be provided in the building but another fire detection system would be supplied. He stated the Fire Chief had reviewed the plans and had suggested heat and smoke detectors connected to a centrally monitored alarm system should be installed. The applicant concurred with these suggestions. Mr. Pete Wilkin from Medtronics and a representative from Lund Martin were present and they briefly commented on the appplication. They concurred it was necessary to handle lithium in a heat and humidity controlled environment.. They indicated it was safe as long as it was left in sealed containers and only opened in a dry room where there was no more than 0% to 5% humidity. In response to questions from Council members concerning the amount of lithium currently stored, Mr. Wilkin explained Medtronics receives the lithium in a 55 gallon barrel in which one gallon cans are securely nestled. Medtronics currently has approximately 4 barrels and this number might be expanded to 6 barrels an any one time. Mr. Wilkin further explained the type of reabtion which would occur if lithium came in contact with water. Councilmember Lhotka inquired whether it was in the best interests of the City to limit the amount of lithium stored at the Medtronics location. The City Manager suggested it might be more advantageous to stipulate that lithium be 8-1-4-78 -16- stroed only in the dry room as a condition of approval of the application rather than limiting the amount stored. There was a rnotion by Council - member Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to recommend approval of Planning Commission Application No. 78054 submitted by Lund Martin Company subject to the following conditions: °1 . The building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits, 2. Any grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 3. The proposed building will be equipped with a lithium type fire extinguisher inside the door of each section of the proposed storage building. 4. Heat and smoke detectors will be provided in each section of the building and will be connected to an approved fire monitoring system. 5. Any rooftop mechanical equipment exceeding the height of the proposed parapet shall be appropriately screened from view. 6 � The exterior of the storage building shall be compatible with the exterior of the existing building. 7. All lithium used by Medtronics will be stored in the new building with the exception of what is needed in production. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. LICENSES Motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded '';5 Councilmember Kuefler to approve the following list of licenses: GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLE LICENSE Tarco of Minnesota - MCS 10041 Polk St. N.E. 4 (third truck) ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Lenny DeMann 11740 Jefferson St. N.E. (Iten Chevrolet) 6701 Brooklyn Blvd. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Lawrence Brown 8901 West River Rd. Brookdale Shopping Ctr. 8 -,1-4 -78 -17- MECHANICAL SYSTEM'S LICENSE Petroleum Maint. Co. 1420 Old Hwy 8 RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE Initial: Charles & Linda Sabatke 6306 Brooklyn Dr, Jerry Harrington & Eugene Berg 1200 - 67th Ave. No. Renewal: Robert M igg:ins , William Koski and James Just 6451 Brooklyn Blvd. Transfer: Gary M. Olson 3715 - 69th Ave. No. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Mayor noted he had received an invitation from the City of Brooklyn Park to the City of .Brooklyn Center to participate in a softball game for the benefit of LEAP. The date is tentatively set as September 10 with a location yet to be decided. The Council accepted the invitation. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmeniber Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to adjourn the Council Meeting, Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council - members Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scotto Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:50 p.m. 1 J f Jerk M o 8 -7 8 -18'