Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977 11-28 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 NOVEMBER 28, 1977 CITY HALL Call to Order The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Philip Cohen at 7:30 p.m. Roll Call Mayor Philip Cohen, Councilmen Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka. 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 Blair Tremere, and Administrative Assistants Ronald Warren, Brad Hoffman, and Mary Harty. Invocation An invocation was offered by Councilman Britts. Approval of Minutes Motion by Councilman Fignar and seconded by Councilman 11-14 -77 Lhotka to approve the minutes of the November 14, 1977 City Council meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Housing Commission Mayor Cohen announced he had received a letter of resigna- Resignation tion from Housing Commission Chairman Lou Howard effecti-r following the November 15, 1977 Housing Commission meet- _ ing. He stated Chairman Howard had served on the Housing Commission since its inception in 1973 and had served commendably. Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Council - man Fignar and seconded by Councilman Lhotka to accept the resignation of Lou Howard as Chairman of the Housing Commission effective immediately, and to direct the City Manager to prepare a resolution of commendation. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unarx mously. . Acknowledging Receipt of The City Manager introduced the next item of business, that Notice of Claim of acknowledging receipt of a notice of claim filed against the City. He stated that on November 21, 1977 the City received a notice of claim filed by Arnold Berg for his minor child Tommy, in an amount of $500,000 for injuries resulting from contact with uninsulated electrical wires. He recom- mended that the City Council acknowledge receipt of the notice of claim and refer it to the City's insurance carrier for disposition. Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Council- man Kuefler and seconded by Councilman Lhotka to acknowl- edge receipt of the notice of claim and to refer it to the City's insurance carrier for disposition. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unani- mously. -1- 11 -28 -77 Motion by Councilman Kuefler and seconded by Councilman Final Plat Approval Fignar to approve the final plat for the Berean Addition ( Berean Addition) located at 6625 Humboldt Avenue North. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting, against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Motion by Councilman Fignar and seconded by Councilman Performance Bond Kuefler to authorize reduction of a site performance financial Reduction (Lund guarantee posted by the Lund Martin Company for Speculative Martin Co.) Building No. 7, 1600 - 67th Avenue North, from $75,000 to $25,000 on the basis of corresponding obligations being satisfied. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Motion by Councilman Lhotka and seconded by Councilman Performance Bond Fignar to authorize reduction of a site performance financcal Reduction (First guarantee posted by the First Wisconsin Mortgage Company Wisconsin Mortgage .,) for the Moorwood Townhouses, County Road 10 and Shores Drive, from $50,000 to $25,000 on the basis of corresponding obligations being satisfied. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Motion by Councilman Britts and seconded by Councilman Performance Bond Fignar to authorize reduction of a site performance financial Reduction (Ed Sheehy guarantee posted by Ed Sheehy Construction Co. for the Construction Co.) Ground Round Restaurant, 2545 County Road 10, from $60,525 to $10,000 on the basis of corresponding obliga- tions being satisfied. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Motion by Councilman Lhotka and seconded by Councilman Performance Bond Kuefler to authorize reduction of a site performance financcal Reduction (Wetterau guarantee posted by Wetterau Builders for Toy City, 6000 Builders) Earle Brown Drive, from $100,000 to $25,000 on the basis of corresponding obligations being satisfied. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager reported the North Suburban Regional North Suburban Regior.�_ Mutual Aid Association has recommended Rogers, Minnesota Mutual Aid Association be added as a member of the Association. He explained the r ire Chief has reviewed the matter and has indicated that this will have little, if any, effect on Brooklyn Center. He stated it is recommended that this amendment to the mutual aid agreement be executed. A brief discussion ensued relative to the mutual aid agreement with the Fire Chief responding to a question by Councilman Kuefler by stating the majority of communities that participate in the North Suburban Mutual Aid Association are located in a contiguous . area and the addition of Rogers would have little effect on Brooklyn Center due to Rogers' geographic location. Following further discussion there was a motion by Council- Action Authorizing th- man Lhotka and seconded by Councilman Fignar to authorize Execution of an Agrer:., .._. the Mayor and the City Manager to execute an amendment to the North Suburban Regional Mutual Aid Association agreement to add Rogers, Minnesota as a member of that Association. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against none. The motion passed unanimously. 11 -28 -77 -2- Suburban Health Nursing The City Manager introduced the next item of business on Service the agenda, that of a resolution recommended for the purpose} of authorizing participation in the Suburban Health Nursing Service, directing the execution of a joint powers agree - ment, and designating a representative of the City as its member on the board of the Suburban Health Nursing Service. He stated this resolution was requested by the City Council at the November 14,, 1977 meeting. He explained the purpose of this agreement is to establish an organization to provide, to the extent permitted by law, community health nursing services and home health services in participating governmental units. He explained if no joint powers arrang---- ment is agreed to, Hennepin County could automatically take over control of public health nursing and the County Board will be responsible for determining service levels for Brooklyn Center as well as other Hennepin County communities not participating in a joint powers arrangement. A discussion ensued relative to Suburban Health Nursing Service with Councilman Lhotka inquiring as to the status of a study undertaken by the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council to determine service levels of various agencies operating in the northwest suburban area. The City Manager responded a preliminary study has been completed by that organization and the results of this survey should be available within the next month or two. Council- man Lhotka further inquired if the cost for providing nursing services would be approximately the same as in the past. The Director of Public Works responded the City had bud geted approximately 45� per capita for the purpose of public health nursing services and pointed out there would be State funding available for this service. Mayor Cohen noted the City participates in a joint powers arrangement for the Northwest Hennepin Human Services Council and voting by the board of directors is based on the population of the community the director represents. He stated he would like to see approval of the resolution under considers_. tion by the City Council contingent upon a modification of article VII, section 1 of the joint powers agreement to pro vide for voting on the board of directors based on a commu- nity's population. The City Manager stated he has been informed enough communities have decided to participate in the joint powers arrangement and that the organization could proceed without the inclusion of Brooklyn Center. Councilman Kuefler stated he too felt voting among the board of directors should be weighed or based on the community's population as it is in many other arrangements of this type the City participates in. Following a brief discussion it was the consensus of the City Council the resolution should be modified to show the Council's concern that article VII, section 1 be modified so that voting by the directors be bas(_,. on a community's population. It was also the consensus of the City Council that the City Manager be designated as director to the board of directors. RESOLUTION Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and NO. 77 -229 moved its adoption; -3- 11- 28--77 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE SUBURBAN IiEALTH NURSING SERVICE; DIRECTING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT; AND DESIGNATING A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY AS ITS MEMBER ON THE BOARD OF THE SUBURBAN HEALTH NURSING SERVICE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Philip Cohen, Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member Maurice Britts introduced the following resolution RESOLUTION and moved its adoption: NO. 77 -230 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1977 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE THE CITY'S SHARE FOR A COUNTY -WIDE ENGINEERING STUDY OF THE AREA'S POLICE, FIRE AND EMERGENCY COMMUNI- CATIONS SYSTEM 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: Philip Cohen, Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and RESOLUTION moved its adoption: NO. -77 -231 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1977 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS 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: Philip Cohen, Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and RESOLUTION moved its adoption: NO. 77 -232 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1977 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR CETA EMPLOYEES EXTENSION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Maurice Britts, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Philip Cohen, Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager reported the City Council had requested Open Forum a specific time on this evening's Council agenda to deliberate Deliberation vhe matter of instituting an open forum concept. He explained questionnaire had been distributed with the most recent City �Jlanager's Newsletter and the results of the questionnaire have been tabulated to date. Mr. Warren reported a tabulation of he questionnaires received as of this date show that 36 of the 11 -28 -77 -4 respondents favor an open forum to be held at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting between 6:45 p.m. and 7:15 p.m.; that 33 respondents favored the open forum being held at a regularly scheduled Council meeting between 9:00 p.m. and 9:30 p.m.; that 30 respondents favored a special meeting to be held on the first or third Monday of each month between 7:30 p.m. and 8:30 p.m.; and that 22 respondents favored holding the open forum on one Saturday morning each month between 9:00 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. He added 3 respondents had expressed no preference and that 20 respondents had expressed two opinions. He stated the City Council has been furnished with a copy of a sampling of comments received on the questionnaire. Councilman thotka stated the responses to the questionnaire indicate there is a diversity of opinions as to when the open forum should be held. He added that although there is a diversity, most seem to prefer the open forum be at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting. He suggested the Council consider starting regularly scheduled City Council meetings at 7:00 p.m. and conducting the open forum between 9:00 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. He pointed out this schedule would permit the City Council to address a number of business items prior to the time for the scheduled open forum. If there were no persons wishing to be heard at the open forum, the Council could then resume with the regularl_,r scheduled Council agenda. He added he favors conducting the open forum at every regularly scheduled City Council meeting. Mayor Cohen stated that his major concern with conducting the open forum between 9:00 p.m. and 9:30 p.m. at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting is this may well create scheduling problems for the Council agenda. He explained that generally Planning Commission items are scheduled for Council review at 8:00 p.m. and often the review of these Planning Commission items goes on well past 9:00 p.m. and could easily interfere with the open forum. He added in many cases Planning Commission items have required public hearings which could create some conflicts with the scheduling of the open forum. Mayor Cohen requested Mayor -elect Nyquist and Council Member- elect Scott offer their comments on the time to hold an open forum because, as new members of the City Council, this is a matter that they will deal with. Council Member -elect Scott stated the City Council meeting could begin at 2:00 p.m. with the open forum being schedul - from 8:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. and the Planning Commission items scheduled to begin at 8:30 p.m. which could eliminate: some of the possible conflicts between the open forum and scheduled public hearings on Planning Commission items Councilman Fignar stated he felt there were a number of alternatives the Council could consider to establish a proper time to hold the open forum. He further stated he favors convening the City Council meeting at 7 :00 p.m. and conduc conducting the open forum from 7:00 p.m. to 7:45 p.m. with regular Council business beginning at 7 :45 p.m. He pointer out that by having the open forum at the beginning of the Council agenda, there would be no conflicts with any scheduled public hearings. He added he did not feel a 7:00 p.m. starting time would be an unreasonable time to begin a Council meeting. -5- 11 -28 -77 ('ouncil Member -elect Scott stated she favored holding the open forum at every regularly scheduled Council meeting in order to see what the response to the open forum would be. She pointed out if the response to the open forum is not great, the Council could decide to hold the open forum at only one Council meeting during the month. Councilman Kuefler stated he supported conducting the open forum between 6:45 p.m. and 7 :15 p.m. and then starting the regular portion of the City Council meeting at 7:30 p.m, He added he too felt the open forum should be conducted at each regularly scheduled City Council meeting, and a fixed time should be established. He pointed out that often City Council meetings go beyond the hour of 12 midnight and that he would not favor moving back the starting time for a City Council meeting beyond the already established starting time of 7:30 p.m. Councilman Britts stated he favors having the open forum at a regularly scheduled City Council meeting but in all fairness ie feels the need for more input from Mayor -elect Nyquist and Council Member -elect Scott because these two new members of the City Council will have to participate in it. Mayor - elect Nyquist stated that he likes the idea of having the open forum conducted early during a City Council meeting and his main concern is whether or not agenda items scheduled for the City Council's consideration could be moved ahead if no one appears before the City Council to utilize the open forum. Mayor Cohen stated that there seems to be general agreement an open forum should be held on the evening of a regularly scheduled City Council meeting and it should also be held at each Council meeting. He suggested the Council consider deferring the establishment of a time period for the open forum until Mayor -elect Nyquist and Council Member -elect Scott Have more opportunity to provide input with regard to the Lime for scheduling an open forum. Following further discussion there was a motion by Council- Action Adopting an man Britts and seconded by Councilman Lhotka to establish an Open Forum open forum utilizing the guidelines contained in the August 17, 1977 Subcommittee minutes and to defer further consideration of establishing a time for the open forum until the December 12, 1977 meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Cohen requested the City Manager to provide Mayor elect Nyquist and Council Member -elect Scott the necessary documentation relating to the open forum for their review. Member Maurice Britts introduced the following resolution and RESOLUTION moved its adoption: NO. 77 -233 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1977 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR CETA EMPLOYEES EXTENSION IN THE DETACHED WORKER PROGRAM :I'he 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: Philip Cohen, Mlaurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resol.ution was declared duly passed and adopted. 11 -28 -77 -6- RESOLUTION Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and NO. 77 -234 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1978 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR THE OPENING OF ADDITIONAL SKATING RINKS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Maurice Britts and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Philip Cohen, Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, RESOLUTION Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and NO. 77 -235 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1978 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR CETA EMPLOYEES EXTENSION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Philip Cohen, Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION Member Maurice Britts introduced the following resolution NO. 77 -236 and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1977 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR THE ACQUISITION OF FIRE DEPARTMENT RESCUE EQUIPMENT THROUGH A STATE GRANT 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: Philip Cohen, Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION Member Maurice Britts introduced the following resolution NO. 77-237 and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1978 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR CETA EMPLOYEES EXTENSION IN THE DETACHED WORKER PROGRAM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhoka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Philip Cohen, Maurice Britts, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Recess The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:29 p.m. and resumed at 8:43 p.m. -7- 11 -28 -77 Mayor Cohen reported Planning Commission Application Planning Commission Nos. 77037 and 77038 submitted by Howe, Inc. had been Application No. 7703:x° continued by the City Council on November 14, 1977 to and No. 77038 (Howe, chive the applicant and the neighborhood an opportunity Inc.) to discuss matters of disagreement and for the staff to ` irther research and review a number of items that pertain to these applications. He explained a public . hearing had been held by the City Council on November 14 and the public hearing had been closed. He further explained representatives of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) are in attendance this evening to respond to various questions regarding MPCA air quality standards and the Howe operation. He stated a number of reports have been prepared which address other matters raised by the Council at the November 14 meeting. He further stated following the various presenta- tions the meeting will again be opened for various comments on new issues that might be raised but the public hearing would be limited to only new issues due to the already extensive comments received regarding old issues at the November 14 meeting. The City Manager reviewed a report relating to various :questions which were raised at the last City Council meeting regarding the two applications. He reported the Council had inquired if the Howe operation presently complies with MPCA air quality standards. He stated it s our understanding this operation currently does not comply with these air quality standards but is taking steps to add equipment which will bring them toward compliance. He explained only testing after installation of this equ p- ment will confirm whether or not they are in compliance and that the MPCA representatives present this evening will duress this matter in more detail. The City Manager explained the Council had also requested further research _o determine if "stack" monitoring devices could be installed at Howe, Inc . to monitor pollution from the site. He reported particulate matter detection is available and can be installed to monitor levels of pollution. However, no such device exists to monitor odors. He explained to monitor odors requires hand taken samples by experienced personnel with -Lhese samples analyzed and submitted to a panel of people for a smell test. Regarding the request for information pertaining to the desirability of permitting dynamiting at the Howe plant, the City Manager 'stated Howe, Inc. currently has a State dynamiting permit, approved by the Brooklyn Center police chief, which expires in May, 1978. He added while it might be possible to use this State permit process to place certain limitations on the use of dynamiting at the facility, it may not be possible through phis permit process to eliminate its use. He pointed out that it may be possible, through a licensing process, to control the deleterious effects of its use through control of noise and vibrations.from the facility. The City Manager also reported current noise and vibration requirements in the City ordinances do pertain to the Howe operation and have been used to address certain vibration problems from some of their equipment. He added the current regulations would be more effective if updated and a moniotoring system were established as part of the licensing of the Howe operation. He further reported a licensing procedure relating to industries emitting high levels of air 11-28-77 -8- pollution or discharge is feasible and is recommended. He explained that the MPCA has stated that the most effective way of enforcing MPCA regulations is for a City to adopt these regulations as part of a municipal ordinance. He pointed out that the City could not establish an ordinance that exceeds MPCA requirements and that it should also be understood that compliance with these regulations may not eliminate the odor in the air around the Howe operation to a level acceptable to the neighborhood. He added that he has submitted a copy of a licensing ordinance from the City of New Brighton which is of the type which would fit Brooklyn Center's needs as they relate to the Howe operation and othe offensive type uses. The City Manager stated it is recommended that the Howe rezoning request be denied. He explained although there are many reasons relating to the pollution issue which can enter into this recommendation, the recommendation is base: primarily on the Comprehensive Guide Plan and the zoning ordinance. He further explained the Comprehensive Plan calls specifically for "no expansion" and "if at all possible, eventual relocation" of the operation. He stated to approve the Howe request would allow expansion of the site and its physical facilities and also through approving of this invest - ment on the site, extend the economic life of the Howe facility at its present location. He pointed out air pollution concerns can be addressed separately through the enforce- ment of MPCA regulations, monitoring and the establishment. of licensing requirements. He added visual pollution, possibly some air pollution and traffic related pollution in the area can only be completely solved through the eventual relocation of the Howe facility and, thus, the recommendati for denial of the applications The City Manager stated a meeting had been held with MPC- . officials and that Mr. Jay Heffern, Assistant Executive Director of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and Robert Meyers of the Enforcement Section, Division of Air Quality, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency are present to discuss with the City Council the matter of Howe, Inc. and MPCA regulations Mayor Cohen recognized Jay Heffern, who stated basically there are two distinquishable issues relating to the Howe operation, one being the land use or zoning issue which the MPCA has no statutory or regulatory authority over and the other issue deals with MPCA criteria, rules and compli- ance. He stated that the MPCA issues two types of permits one an installation permit and the other an operating permit. He explained that with regards to the installation permit. an applicant requests permission to install various equip- ment to address certain pollution problems and that the MPC.% would review their plans. If the plans meet various require - ments an installation permit would be issued, and upon completion of the installation, the MPCA would require various testing and inspections to determine compliance wit:,. applicable MPCA regulations regarding odors, visible emis- sions, dust and particulate emissions and noise. Mr. Heffern stated at the time pollution control equipment was installed at the Howe operation approximately three to four years ago, the MPCA felt that Howe was in compliance with various regulations and an operating permit was issued. He pointed out that since that time there have been some questions as to whether or not they are still in compliance d • k -9- 11 -28 -77 j with current MPCA regulations and whether or not their present pollution control equipment is efficient. He pointed out that the enforcement section /surveillance group of the MPCA has been maintaining a surveillance program of unscheduled inspections and making observations of Howe, Inc. and its present operation. He added that their records indicate that since the installation of a scrubber system citizen complaints still are received regarding orders and particulate emissions. He explained that the MPCA has talked with company officials regarding these concerns and has requested that they investigate further modifications of their present pollution control equipment, as well as installing additional equipment. He added the company has applied for an.installation permit to install a fan to increase the control efficiency of the Venturi scrubber and that the company believes the proposed equipment and operational changes will be a further step in reducing emissions from the facility. He added MPCA feels there is a need for a test program upon the completion of the installation of the recommended equipment to see if the operation meets the standards prior to issuing an operating permit for Howe, Inc. He pointed out that the schedule indicates that the design and installation of the equipment for Howe will not be completed until July, 1978, and that their tests are scheduled to be completed by August 15, 1978. Mr. Heffern then commented regarding monitoring equipment for the Howe operation. He stated there is no unit capable of monitoring odor emissions on a continuous basis but that presently there is an opacity monitor that has been certified for use by the Federal Environmental Protection Agency. He indicated that this unit indicates when opacity levels are being exceeded and the cost of such a unit Is approximately $20,000. He added that the only installations of this type at the present time are in large power plant stacks, such as those currently being installed in NSF facilities. Mr. Heffern reported the MPCA, in dealing with compliance problems, depends heavily upon stipulation agreements with companies operating various plants that emit high levels of pollution. He pointed out the stipulation agreement is aasically an agreement which determines a schedule for an operation to come into compliance with MPCA regulations. He added the agreement involves a schedule for installing equipment, provisions for testing that equipment and determining whether or not the operation meets MPCA standards prior to issuing operating permits for the opera - tion. Mr. Heffern further stated MPCA is not the only agency in the State of Minnesota which can be involved in enforcing pollution control regulations. He pointed out that local governments should also be involved with this enforcing aspect and should work closely together with the MPCA to do a better job in a cooperative effort. Ile added licensing of such operations by local governments is an alternative way to deal with enforcement problems. He reiterated the importance of local government working closely with the MPCA in addressing various pollution problems and dealing with operations that cause these problems. Councilman Kuefler inquired as to what options the MPCA has if an operation does not meet current standards. Mr. Heffern responded that the MPCA has the statutory authority to go to court to gain compliance with its 11 -28 -77 -10- regulations but that they do not always utilize this tool. Rather, they consider a number of factors such as how severe the problem is, how cooperative the _company is in attempting to address these problems, the ability of the company to provide solutions for these problems and also the attitude of the company. He. pointed out that the MPCA prefers to use administrative tools such as the stipulation agreement to gain compliance with its regulations and generally does not seek court action unless it is the only alternative available. He added that if a stipulation agree- ment is executed, the MPCA agrees that it will not take a company to court over violation of MPCA regulations but rather will attempt to establish a schedule for installing new equipment to meet the problem, testing that equipment, monitoring the results and making an evaluation prior to considering whether or not an operating permit should be issued. Following further discussion between Mr. Heffern and the City Council, Mayor Cohen thanked Mr. Heffern for his appearance before the City Council. Mayor Cohen referred to a letter sent to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency from State Senator Edward G. Geart,;, who represents North Minneapolis, which urged the Minne- sota Pollution Control Agency to lend its good offices with respect to addressing the pollution control issues contained in the _Howe request and also requesting a representative of the MPCA attend the Brooklyn Center City Council meetin! on November 28, 1977. The Mayor requested a copy of the letter be submitted to the file. The City Manager commented he realizes the Howe proposal will make the area nicer looking but that there still would be various visual, air and traffic related pollution problems in the area. He added approval of the applications would extend the economic life of the Howe facility and would further the time of its existence which would be contrary to the Comprehensive Plan. He stated the recommendation to deny the applications is based primarily on land use princi- les and its relation to the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinance. He pointed out that he concurs with the recommendation of the MPCA that the Howe operation should be licensed. He explained that the Director of Planning and Inspection is prepared to review in more depth the land use considerations relating to the two applications in question. The Director of Planning and Inspection reported based on questions raised by the City Council at its last meeting, specific analysis in terms of the language of the 1966 Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance which was initially adopted in 1968 as an implementation of the Com- prehensive Plan was undertaken. He pointed out the importance of the zoning ordinance cannot be overlooked because it is an implementation tool for_the Comprehensive Plan. He stated the Comprehensive Plan at page 67 states, "recognize the existing fertilizer plant and other nonresi- dential uses located just off Osseo Road next to the Soo Line Railroad, but prohibit any further expansion of their operation. If at all feasible, the eventual relocation of the uses to more compatible sites should be undertaken thereby permitting a rounding out of the existing residential areas" He explained the other nonresidential uses referred -11- 11 -28 -77 R t to in the Comprehensive Plan were eliminated in the 1970 condemnation action by the Minnesota Highway Department in preparation for the construction of the now built Soo Line Railroad overpass. f The Director of Planning and Inspection stated the status of the zoning of the Howe property prior to 1968 has been inten- sively researched and that the language in the present zoning ordinance and its relationship to the quite explicit language of the 1966 Comprehensive Plan has also been carefully analyzed. He added in virtually all respects, the present zoning ordinance has been found to be compatible with the guide recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan,or, in other words, the Planning Commission and the City Council in 1968 were cognizant of the Comprehensive Plan guidelines as the zoning of the entire City was reviewed. He reported It is apparent from the research that the 1968 and present zoning ordinance treat the fertilizer manufacturing operation as a "nonconforming use". He stated that Section 35 -331 of the City Ordinances lists the permitted and special uses in the I -2 zoning districts and that none of the permitted or special uses include fertilizer manufacturing, warehousing, or distribu- tion and that none of the specifically listed uses appear to include such operations. He pointed out this section does include a sentence which appears in all .of the zoning district sections which permits "other uses similar in nature to the aforementioned uses, as determined by the City Council." He explained that there has been no specific finding by the City Council since 1968 that a fertilizer plant is similar in nature to the listed industrial activities in the City's zoning ordinance. The Director of Planning and Inspection reported Section 35 -111 of the City Ordinances which deals with "nonconforming uses" states that unless specifically provided otherwise by the ordi- nance the lawful use of any land or building existing at the time of the adoption of the ordinance (1968) may be continued even if such use does not conform to the regulations of this ordinance, provided certain conditions are met. He reported that the conditions which would apply to this particular appli- cation are as follows: 1 . No such nonconforming use of land shall be enlarged or increased or occupy a greater area of land than that occupied by such use at the time of the adoption of this ordinance; 2. Such nonconforming use shall not be moved to any other part of the parcel of land upon which the same was conducted at the time of the adoption of this ordinance; 3. A nonconforming use of a, building existing at the time of the adoption of this ordinance may ex- tended throughout the building provided no structural alterations except those required by ordinance, law or other regulation are made therein. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated there appears to be little question that Howe, Inc. represented a lawful use of land and buildings at the time of the adoption of the 1968 ordi'- nance. He added the 1966 Comprehensive hand Use Plan specifically treated this operation by recommending that 11 -28 -77 -12- expansion of the operation be prohibited and that, if at all feasible, it should be relocated. He noted the 1968 zoning ordinance was adopted as an implementation of the Compre- hensive Plan and did not, and does not, include fertilizer manufacturing or distribution as a permitted or special use in the I -2 zoning district. He stated the fertilizer manu- facturing operation constitutes a "nonconforming use" subject to restrictions which effectively prohibit expansion of the operation as recommended by the 1966 land use guide plan. The Director of Planning and Inspection concluded by stating that the research of the rezoning ordinance leads to the finding that unless the City Council determined Howe, Inc. to be a bona fide I -2 manufacturing activity similar in nature to other permitted uses in that zoning district, neither the rezoning proposal currently before the City Council or any subsequent proposal to construct buildings or substantially alter the existing buildings on the property could be per - mitted. He added that such a finding would necessitate an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan since, by law, zoning ordinances and decisions must be compatible with the established Comprehensive Plan. A brief discussion ensued relative to the Director of Planning and Inspection's report. In response to an inquiry by Councilman Lhotka , the Director of Planning and Inspection reviewed from the zoning ordinance, the permitted activities in the I -2 zoning district. The City Attorney next reported on the rezoning at the Howe fertilizer plant. He stated the current industrial operation at the Howe fertilizer site goes back as far as the 1940's and that although record keeping was somewhat haphazard, it appears that the site was an agriculture accessory use involving the warehousing and sale of organic fertilizer. He explained the subject property, along with a much larger area surrounding it, had been zoned for industrial purposes under preceding zoning ordinances of the City going back to the late 1940's and early 1950'x. He further explained that this larger industrial area had been gradually reduced in size by the construction of, and the rezoning to, single family dwellings apparently at the request of the then owners of Howe, Inc. He stated the present zoning status of Howe, Inc. is I -2, general industry, but the City's zoning ordi- nances does not permit fertilizer plants either as a permitted use or as a conditional or special use. He pointed out some special uses were granted in the 1950's during a time that City Councils operated under the philosophy that special uses could be granted as the Council saw fit. He added that in the 1960's this concept changed and special uses has: to be listed in the zoning ordinance before a City Council could permit them. The City Attorney reported the Howe fertilizer plant. -is a "nonconforming use" under our zoning ordinance and is recognized as such under the Comprehensive Plan. He explained that "nonconforming" does not mean it is an illegal use but that the Council recognizes it as nonconform- ina and that it will be eliminated at some time in accordance to certain rules. He further stated that the general policy of the law is to eliminate "nonconforming uses as rapidly as possible and that the generally accepted method for this elimination is to prohibit any change, alteration, or expan- sion of the "nonconforming use". -13- 11 -28 -77 The City Attorney noted the applicant's request is to rezone, r' from single family residential to general industry, two standard size lots. He explained the rezoning would not bring about the desired result since the general industry zone does not d permit fertilizer plant usage. He added if the Council desires to permit the request it would first of all have to amend the Comprehensive Plan, secondly, amend the zoning ordinance to permit fertilizer plants in the I -2 district, and thirdly, the property in question would also have to be rezoned. The City Attorney reported that a zoning ordinance, and amend- ments thereto, must be based upon and must follow the dictates of the Comprehensive Plan which has previously been adopted by the City. He pointed out when the Comprehensive Plan is being amended, along with the zoning ordinance, it is presumed the change in the ordinance will conform with the change in the Comprehensive Plan, thus, the need for a Comprehensive Plan amendment. He stated that there are a number of criteria which should be reviewed closely by the City Council when considering amendments to the Comprehensive Plan or the zoning ordinance. He listed the following as factors which the City Council should consider in reviewing the subject applications: 1 . In considering zoning changes, the Council should consider all possible uses within the zoning classifica- tion rather than the specific use which is contemplated by the current applicant. This recognizes that an applicant is not bound to construct what is proposed in the plans before the City Council. 2. The proposed zoning changes must serve the public at large, rather than the private interests of the applicant. 3. Zoning changes which permit uses which are incom- patible with and decrease the value of surrounding properties are subject to being overturned by the courts. 4. If the subject parcels have a reasonable value as presently zoned and the rezoning request would serve only to increase their value to the applicant, the validity of the rezoning may be called into , question. 5 If there have been changes in the general area which justify a general rezoning, such a general rezoning would have more apparent validity than a piecemeal zoning of one or two parcels where there have been no changes in the area. 6. The expansion of an existing zone generally has more - validity than the rezoning of isolated parcels; even though the courts state that the City Council can draw the zoning line whereever they reasonably choose, a history of piecemeal strip zoning to accommodate the expansion of particular uses sets a precedent for continued expansion, The City Attorney reported that with respect to No. 5 it is important for the Council to consider if this is a changing neighborhood. He stated that it doesn't appear that there has been a demand, or a pattern, that this area be zoned industrial. 11 -28 -77 -14- I Regarding piecemeal or strip zoning, the City Attorney stated that it seems that the City Council in 1966, with the adop- tion of the Comprehensive Plan, attempted to stop piecemeal zoning and that it would not be in the best interests of the r City to revert to such a policy. The City Attorney concluded his report by stating there are a number of factors which may be considered in evaluating the proposed rezoning request which were mentioned at the public hearings and which bear on the compatibility of the fertilizer plant with adjacent properties. He explained that these factors include noise, traffic congestion, traffic dust, fertilizer dust, the corrosive effect of fumes and discharges, ammonia and other objectionable odors, unsightly and unkept grounds, attractive nuisances to children, late night lights, noise and activity and the lack of management cooperation in alleviating these problems. In response to an inquiry by Councilman Kuefler both the City Attorney and the Director of Planning and Inspection concurred that there have been no rezonings in this area since the adoption of the City's Comprehensive Plan.. Councilman Kuefler expressed the opinion that if the City ; were to rezone this property and the matter was challenged in court, the court might look unfavorably upon the City's action since the City has acted consistently with its Comprehensive Plan since its adoption and that the action to approve the rezoning request might seem inconsistent with this action. The City Attorney added that it would be difficult to defend the City's action if it were to approve the rezoning request because it would, in essence, be reverting back to piecemeal or strip zoning. In response to an inquiry by Councilman Lhotka, the Directo_ of Planning and Inspection stated that additional buildings at the Howe location were made in the mid fifties to the mid sixties and that since 1968 there have been no additions He pointed out that there were some alterations or repairs and interior remodeling to the office but that no structural additions have been made to the property since 1968. In response to an inquiry by Councilman Fignar, the Director of Planning and Inspection stated that remodeling was per- mitted on the site but it was not a major expansion or additici of any building. Councilman Fignar stated that it seems tha4 the applicant claims that there have been additions to the property since 1968. The Director of Planning and Inspec- tion commented that according to the City's 'records a remodeling of the office space and a realignment of the lavatory was permitted since 1968 but that no permits have been issued by the City for major structural alterations since that time. Mayor Cohen suggested that the City Council reopen the public hearing to allow for a response from the applicant an'd various comments on the additional information that has been presented. Action to Reopen Closed Motion by Councilman Lhotka and seconded by Councilman Public Hearing Fignar to reopen the closed public hearing with regard to Planning Commission Application Nos. 77037 and 77038 limited to comments on the additional information that has been presented. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. -15_ 11 -28 -77 Mayor Cohen recognized Mr. James Russell, an attorney representing Howe, Inc. Mr. Russell stated that in reviewing the Planning Commission minutes and in particular the City Council minutes with respect to the Howe applications, he had concluded that there was a strong expression on the part of the City Council, with the possible exception of the Mayor, that the plan proposed had a number of good aspects which would have been of benefit to the neighborhood, He stated that the major concerns expressed at the last City Council meeting had to do with pollution problems generated by the plant, the Howe's efforts at addressing these problems, and the need for more and better communication between Howe, Inc. and the neighboring property owners. He further stated that a meeting was held with the neighborhood on November 22, 1977, . and that representatives of the City and the MPCA in attendance. He reported that there were a number of questions put forth relating to the Howe operation and its attempts at addressing various problems. Mr. Russell stated that the Howe operation has been in existence since the mid 1940's and did exist prior to the residential property surrounding it. He explained that the Howe plant has been in existence for quite sometime and it is their intention to be in the fertilizer business at this location for sometime in the future. He added that he is surprised and somewhat distressed with the tone of the City's presentation this evening that suggests that the Howe operation should cease to exist. He stated that he concedes that the Howe operation is a "nonconforming use" as far as the City's zoning ordinance is concerned but that he cannot agree that it is in the best interests of the City to take a position that there should be no improvements made at the site because of this designation. He explained that the rezoning request is made For the purpose of permitting Howe, Inc. to take measures to clean up the dust and pollutant problems associated with the site and that approximately 85% of the property requested for rezoning would be for the purpose of buffers that presently do not exist. Mr. Russell stated that if the City Council concurs with the assumption put forth by the City Manager that the Howe opera- Lion is going to cease to exist, then no changes should be allowed. He added that if the Council adopts the assumption that they will continue to exist, which the applicant has every intention of doing, it would be in the best interests of the City and to the people living in the surrounding area to make the site improvements. He pointed out that the rezoning proposal does ct represent an expansion of the operation but is intended to .permit the applicant to make various physical improvements, orovide buildings to store equipment and provide a greenstrip buffer for the neighborhood. Mr. Russell further stated that he is also surprised at the opposition to the Howe request presented this evening by the City staff in that they had been encouraged to make their presentation in such a way as to show the benefit of the improvements to the neighborhood. He added that prior to this evening, there had been no opposition to their proposal by the City. `Ar. Russell further stated that Howe does not have any plans to ~ove the plant from the present location and that they intend to illy- comply with MPCA regulations relating to air pollution. He . -dded that he feels that the applicant has addressed the concerns raised by the Planning Commission and the concerns expressed by file City Council at the last City Council meeting. He pointed out that the applicant has addressed pollution problems in the p ast and plans to further address these problems in the future and will participate in the tests previously described by MPCA representatives He concluded by stating that the most important 11 -28 -77 16 point is not whether Howe is a conforming or nonconforming use, but rather that it would be in the best interests of the City to work with Howe, Inc. to make it possible to make various improvements to the property because the operation has no plans to cease its existence on the site. Councilman Fignar inquired of Mr. Russell as to the number of employees employed at the Howe site and the amount of property taxes paid by Howe. Mr. Russell responded that there are 24 employees and that Howe, Inc. pays approxi- mately $15,000 to $20,000 a year in taxes. In response to an inquiry by Councilman Lhotka, Mr. Russell stated that the white cloud in the air alluded to at the last City Council meeting was a powdery substance which resulted from a bagging operation that Howe had undertaken for another company. He pointed out that they did not realize at the time that the operation would produce as much dust as it did. He explained that this was a one time operation and will not reoccur. Also in response to an inquiry by Councilman Lhotka, Mr. Russell stated that they were pleased with the results of the meeting held on November 22. He stated that the exchange mostly consisted of questions from neighboring; property owners which were responded to by Mr. Meyers of the MPCA. He stated that he felt that there was more under- - standing between the parties as a result of the meeting and that one of Howe, Inc's principal critics had stated that he would like to see the building built on 49th Avenue and also that Howe has made improvements in its operation over the last five years. Mayor Cohen pointed out that according to information sup - plied by the City Assessor, Howe, Inc. pays approximately $13,000 a year in property taxes. Mayor Cohen then recognized Mary Dodds, 4730 Xerxes Avenue North, Minneapolis, who stated that she was not asked to attend the meeting held on November 22, She stated further that the information presented this evening only adds to the facts already presented against approval of the application. She spoke in opposition to approval of the applications. Virgil Linn, 3112 - 49th Avenue North, stated that he has be one of the principal critics of the Howe operation and that if Mr. Russell was referring to comments he might have made, he would like to qualify his statement. He further stated' he is not certain that the advantages of the proposal out- weigh the possibility of further pollution problems and that he is not necessarily in favor of approval of the application:; He noted that there have been improvements to a truck scale located at the operation which has generated more truck traffic to the site and inquired if this improvement represent,- expansion of the site or remodeling. The Director of Planni: and Inspection responded that there is no permit involved with enlarging a truck scale. Mr. Reich, 3141 - 49th Avenue North, stated that in the pas. the Howes have put up buidlings on the site and then sought the permits after the fact. He inquired as to how close railroad tracks can be to residential property and noted that the Soo Line Railroad had moved a spur line after the Novem- ber 22, 1977 meeting. The Director of Planning and Inspec- tion responded that if a railroad track were laid today it would have to be built at least 100 feet away from residen- tial property. d -17- 11 -28 -77 Mr. Reich also commented on the pollution problems associated with the Howe operation and expressed the opinion that Howe has not paid attention to the problems associated with the neighborhood in the past. He also questioned why a repre- sentative of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency was at the November 22 meeting held between Howe and the neighborhood. Mayor Cohen recognized Robert Meyers ; of the Enforcement Section, Division of Air Quality, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, who stated that he had been invited by the Howes to the meeting held on November 22 to answer various questions which might be raised by neighboring property owners with regard to pollution problems associated with the Howe operation. Mayor Cohen recognized Mr. Robert Kuebelbeck, an architect retained by Howe, Inc. , who inquired if it was the City's intent, once the "nonconforming use" was phased out, to revert this property to a residential use. He further inquired as to why the City had zoned this property industrial if they wanted it eventually to be residential property. He added that it was his opinion that the property on which the Howe site is located would not make good residential property. Mayor Cohen responded that the City's comprehensive plan was adopted after numerous Planning Com- mission and neighborhood advisory group meetings and hearings and it was the decision at the time that the fertilizer plant should not be expanded but eventually relocated to a more compatible site, thus, its designation as a nonconforming use. He explained that the Comprehensive Plan addresses this matter by stating that phasing out the fertilizer plant operation would permit a rounding out of this area. He stated that this would not necessitate this area being all residential but rather a use that is more com - patible with the existing residential area. He pointed out that the record relating to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan and the City zoning ordinance is available for review. Bill Kranz, a general contractor retained by Howe, Inc, , stated that a permit was issued for a major addition to the existing office building which included a basement and that it was his recollection that this expansion occurred after 1968. Lawrence Butler, 3201 49th Avenue North, inquired if the _natter that comes from the Howe plant is detrimental to a oerson's health. Mayor Cohen responded that it was difficult to give a clearcut response to this question and added that the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has established - various standards to address this problem but that it cannot specifically say whether or not this matter is harmful to a person's health. Mayor Cohen responded to comments that had been made regarding the City Manager's recommendation. He stated that the City Council had directed the City Manager to research a number of items that related to the subject applications and o report this information to the City Council. He pointed out that the recommendation is not a matter e of the staff invoking personal opinions or preferences, but rather reporting to the City Council with. respect to the effect the City's Compre- I iensive Plan and zoning ordinance have on the applications, Mayor Cohen recognized Tom Howe of Howe, Inc. who com- mented on the question raised regarding the effects the Howe operation has on a person's health. He explained that he has talked to doctors and persons operating other fertilizer plants with respect to the effect these operations have on a person's i 11 -28 -77 -18- health. He pointed out that the Crystal Medical Clinic which takes care of employees working at the Howe operation, indicates that no employees have been treated for respiratory problems. He added that doctors have stated that there are no documented cases of health problems for people living near such operations. He explained that he lives in the neighborhood and that he is concerned about the pollution problems as well as any of the neighbors, and that he is convinced that it does not create health problems for people living in the vicinity or working at the operation. The Director of Planning and Inspection stated that in Novem- ber, 1967, with the approval of Planning Commission Appli- cation No. 67059, the Council had approved an addition to the office building at the Howe site. He explained that since that time only building permits for code, related bathroom remodeling improvements and roofing repairs have been issued. He pointed out that no permits for physical expan- sion of the Howe plant have been issued since that 1967 approval and that if any expansions were undertaken since that time, it was done so without the knowledge of the City. Dick Grones, 6100 Summit Drive, was ruled out of order by the Mayor because he had no interest in the applications. Mrs. Murto; 3205 - 49th Avenue North, cited various exam- ples of people living in the neighborhood who had health problems which she felt might be attirbutable to the pollution problems. Mr. Russell stated that the Howe's have been in the fertilize -' business at the present site since the mid 1940's and have done well with the operation. He added that there major neglect, if any, has really been one of public relations. He added that the site has always been an industrial location and that a Comprehensive Plan that says it should be resi- dential does not make sense. He pointed out that their request is not, in his opinion, strip zoning and that the ,request is for the purpose of making improvements to the property which will benefit the neighborhood. He concluded by stating that the Council should approve the applications in order that the improvements can be made, rather than to speculate that the Howe operation will some day cease to exist. In response to an inquiry by Mayor Cohen, Mr. Russ „' stated that Frank Howe had been the owner of the industrial property which had been rezoned residential and is the loca- tion of many of the single family homes in the area. Close Public Hearing Motion by Councilman Fignar and seconded by Councilman Kuefler to close the public hearing. - Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts , Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka . Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. A lengthy discussion ensued relative to the applications. Councilman Fignar inquired if at the time preceding the adoption of the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordi- nance, there had been public hearings with respect to the plan that the applicants would have been aware of. Mayor Cohen responded that public hearings were held:by neigh- borhood advisory groups, the Planning Commission, and the City Council in accordance to guidelines established for use of the Federal grant that the City had utilized in developing the Comprehensive Plan. He added that the zoning map was published prior to the adoption of the zoning ordinance and that the City had paid for a special edition _19- 11 -28 -77 relating to the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance which was distributed throughout the City. Councilman Lhotka inquired if the Howe operation was considered industrial or commercial. The Director of Planning and Inspection responded that the City Ordinance does not recognized the fertil- izer business in any zone but if it had it, in all likelihood, would have considered it an industrial use. In response to an inquiry by Councilman Kuefler the Director of Planning and Inspec- tion stated that zoning in Minnesota is "exclusionary zoning ". He stated that there are a number of homes on Brooklyn Bouelvard which are considered "nonconforming uses" and that expansions of these properties are also not permitted without modification to the Comprehensive Plan and the zoning ordinance. He commented that the Howe site, because of the location of the railroad, was deemed to be best suited for industrial type uses but that fertil- izer plants were specifically excluded from the zoning ordinance and, therefore, are not permitted uses in the industrial zones. The City Manager commented that the Comprehensive Plan speaks to "rounding out of the area" and at the time it might have been felt that some of this area would be residential but mostly industrial and that there are some industrial uses that could be developed on the site which would be compatible to the surrounding residential property. Mayor Cohen stated that he feels the issues are quite clear and that expanding the "nonconforming use" is prohibited. He added _ that to permit the rezoning would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and zoning ordinance. He stated that he reels licensing of this operation and similar operations that emit high levels of pollution should be undertaken. He further stated that a closer look as well should be given to the desir- ability of permitting dynamiting in industrial zones. The City Attorney stated that he did not feel that State statutes preclude the City from controlling the industrial use of dynamite. Councilman Kuefler stated that he had expressed the opinion at he last City Council meeting that the improvements proposed by the applicant could be of benefit to the neighborhood but that he felt approval of the rezoning request would constitute "spot zoning" unless, and until, persons living in that neighborhood supported the rezoning request. He explained to approve the application would only benefit the property owner if the neigh - borhood could not also support the rezoning. He further stated that the land use considerations and the fact that Howe, Inca is designated as a "nonconforming use" leads him to support denial of the two applications. Councilman Fignar stated that, as he had expressed at the November 14 City Council meeting, there are two issues with regard to these applications, one being the rezoning request and the other being the complaints registered by persons living in the immediate area of the Howe plant. He further stated that the information presented this evening indicates :hat to approve the applications would constitute piecemeal or strip zoning. He added that although he feels the improve - ments proposed to take place would be beneficial to the neighborhood, he cannot, because of the land use implications, speak in favor of the application. He commented that Howe, Inc. has brought much to the area and that it does not seem appropriate that a small business such as Howe, Inc. should be pushed into a corner. 1.1 -28 -77 -20- Action Directing the Following further discussion there was a motion by Council- Preparation of a Resolution man Lhotka and seconded by Councilman Kuefler to direct the City Manager to prepare a resolution denying Planning Commission Application Nos. 77037 and 77038 citing the history of the applications, the Planning Commission's recommendation, the points raised at the November 14, 1977 City Council meeting and the information presented at the November 28, 1977 City Council meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unani- mously. A brief discussion ensued relative to developing a licensing procedure for establishments emitting high levels of air pollutants. Action Directing Prepara- Motion by Councilman Fignar and seconded by Councilman Lion of a Draft Ordinance Lhotka to direct the City Manager to prepare a draft ordi- nance requiring licensing for establishments emitting high levels of air pollutants. Following the motion and second thereof a brief discussion ensued with Councilman Britts stating that such a' licensing procedure might be construed as an effort on the part of the City to unnecessarily penalize Howe, Inc. or force them out of the community through this procedure. Mayor Cohen commented that the the MPCA has indicated that the best way for enforcing air quality regulations is through coopera- tion with local units of government. He added that he considers a licensing procedure for such establishments as a means of gaining this cooperation. The City Manager commented that the monitoring aspect of the licensing pro- cedure is the basis for requiring such licensing. He noted that even without a licensing procedure operations such as Howe-, Inc. must meet the MPCA regulations and also the requirements of any stipulation agreement they execute with the MPCA. Following the discussion a vote was taken on the motion. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar; and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Action Directing Further Motion by Councilman Lhotka and seconded by Councilman Research on the Use of Kuefler to direct the City Manager to further explore and Explosives research the possibility of establishing a licensing pro - cedure for the industrial use of explosives for further City Council review. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilme-� Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none The motion passed unanimously. Recess The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 11:28 p.m. and resumed at 11:48 p.m. r S T affic Safety Advisory Mayor Cohen reported that Mr. Arnie. Foslien has submitted Committee an outline regarding the structuring of a Traffic Safety Ad- visory Committee which has recently been discussed by the City Council. Mayor Cohen further reported that Judge Johnston has agreed to serve as chairman of such a committer. Mayor Cohen recognized Mr. Arnie Foslien who commented that such committees operate in the communities of Cottage Grove, Coon Rapids, and Golden Valley, in addition to the City of Minneapolis. He stated that it is recommended that the membership be selected from present organizations with- -21- 11 -28 -77 in the City and include, but not be limited to, the following a high school student from each of the four school districts in lrooklyn Center selected by the administrators of each school; the chief of police or supervisor chosen by the chief; police department safety patrol officer; city manager of his representa- tive; city council member; judge of municipal court; chamber of commerce member; a member of the Jaycees; a member of the Brooklyn Center Women's Club; a senior citizen; a safety engineer or other representative of a casualty insurance firm; a commercial transportation representative; and a traffic or safety engineer from either the public or private sector. He added that this traffic safety advisory committee should be a progressive group which would develop a positive program to assist in saving lives and property on the streets and highways of this City. He further stated that the committee should not upsurp functions and responsibilities of City employees or school officials, but should serve as a citizens group to increase public awareness of traffic safety including safe driving, walking habits and elimination of traffic hazards. Mayor Cohen stated that he hoped a steering committee would be developed which would recommend various rules and regulations for the establishment of such a committee to make it both effective and productive. Councilman Lhotka thanked Mr. Foslien for his report and offered his services in the further development of such a committee. Mayor Cohen requested that Mr. Foslien keep the City council informed as to the progress in further developing criteria for the establishment of such a committee. The City Manager introduced the next item of business on Planning Commissio.a the agenda, that of Planning Commission Application Application Nos. 770 Nos. 77061 and 77062 submitted by Brooklyn Center Indus- and 77062 (B.C.1.p.) trial Park, Inc. Mayor Cohen left the table at 11:58 p.m. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Planning Commission Application Nos. 77061 and 77062 and the Planning Commission action at its November 17, 1977 meeting. He stated that Application No. 77061 repre- sented a proposal to rezone from R -7 to CI -A a new 10 acre site for the Regional Library located south of the high -rise apartments in the 6000 block on Shingle Creek Parkway, and to rezone from CI -A to R -7 the former 10 acre site in the 5900 block on Shingle Creek Parkway which was rezoned on December 6, 1976 under Application No, 76058. He further stated that Application No. 77062 represented a companion request for approval of a preliminary registered land survey of the area. He explained that following the rezoning action in 1976 it had been determined that the original site was not suitable for the library and that the County had negotiated with the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park for the proposed site located to the north of the original 10 acre site. He next Yeviewed a transparency showing the location and configuration u lf the original site and the new proposed library site, and i arious slides depicting the area. I Mayor Cohen returned to the table at 12:02 a.m. 11-28-77 -22- The Director of Planning and Inspection presented and briefly reviewed conceptual site plans for the library site developed by Hennepin County. He explained that these plans are not firm and are subject to modification. A brief discussion ensued relative to a remnant triangular shaped piece of property and a recommended maintenance agreement for a private drive. Public Hearing Mayor Cohen opened the meeting for purposes of a public hearing relating to Planning Commission Application Nos. 77061 and 77062. No one spoke relating to the applications. Action Approving Planning Following further discussion there was a motion by Council- Commission Application man Fignar and seconded by Councilman Kuefler to approve No. 77061 (B.C.I,P.) Planning Commission Application No. 77061 submitted by Brooklyn Center Industrial Park subject to replatting of the site by registered land survey. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Action Approving Planning Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Council- Commission Application man Kuefler and seconded by Councilman Lhotka to approve No. 77062 (B.C.I.P.) Planning Commission Application No. 77062 submitted by Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, as amended, subject to the following conditions: 1. Final plat is subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. Final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The final plat is subject to documentation of a maintenance agreement to the private drive and the isolated triangular piece indicated on the proposed site plan and the documentation should include a prohibition for using the triangular piece of property as parking for the property south of the library site. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen - Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion Passed unanimously. Planning Commission The City Manager introduced the next item of business on Application No. 77065 the agenda, that of Planning Commission Application No. (John Sheehan /Innco, Inc.) 77065 submitted by John Sheehan /Innco, Inc. The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Planning Commission Application No. 77065 and the Planning Commission action at its November 17, 1977 meeting. He explained that pursuant to one of the conditions of approval of Application No. 77024 for the Holiday Inn addition, the applicant was seeking approval of a preliminary- registered land survey which would combine and redivide the present Holiday Inn site and the larger I -1 zone tract to the west. He stated that the Holiday Inn addition would be taking 140 feet of the existing adjacent parcel and that the new vacant parcel would be approximately 405 feet wide at Freeway Boulevard and 7 acres in area. Public Hearing Mayor Cohen opened the meeting for purposes of a public hearing relating to Planning Commission g g g on No. 77065. No one spoke relating to the application. -23- 11 -28 -77 Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Council - Action Approving Plan;'.::; man Fignar and seconded by Councilman Kuefler to approve Commission Applicatiw Planning Commission Application No. 77065 submitted by No. 77065 (John Sheet'!,., John Sheehan subject to the following conditions: Innco, Inc.) 1 . Final registered land survey is subject to review by the City Engineer. 2. Final registered land survey is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen. Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka . Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager introduced the next item of business, Planning Commission that of Planning Commission Application No. 77066 submitted Application No. 77066 by Dr. William Mattison. (Dr, William Mattison) The Director of Planning and Inspection proceeded with a review of Application No. 77066 and the Planning Commission action at its November 17, 1977 meeting. He stated that the application represents a request for parking plan approval for a parking lot to be located at 5827 Brooklyn Boulevard. He explained that the entire strip south of the Cross of Glory Church to 58th Avenue along Brooklyn Boulevard was zoned C -1, but, except for an existing office building and the applicant's dental clinic at 5831 Brooklyn Boulevard, the area contained nonconforming single family homes. He reported that this application was significant because it represented a realization of the Comprehensive Plan goal for the area. He pointed out that during the Planning Commission review of this application there was discussion relative to the use of dense lilac bushes as screening along the rear of the property line from the R -1 property. He reported that the ordinance requires a 15 foot protective greenstrip with an opaque fence or wall or Council approved substitute when C -1 property borders R -1 property. He explained the Council had approved the lilac hedge as sufficient screening when the original site and building plans for the clinic were approved. He further reported that the Planning Commission has also recommended that a handi- capped ramp be added to provide accessibility to the site for handicapped persons which is required with major remodeling. He next reviewed a transparency showing the location and configuration of the property in question and various slides depicting the area. A brief discussion ensued relative to the application and the previously approved lilac screening along the rear of the property line. The Director of Planning and Inspec- on reported that to his knowledge there has never been a problem with respect to the screening of the parking lot from the residential property and that the applicant has stated that a fence could be installed but because of the denseness of the hedge, part of the hedge would have to be destroyed in order to locate a fence near the property line. Mayor Cohen recognized the applicant, Dr. William Mattison, who stated that he had nothing further to add to the application. 11 -28 -77 -24- It was the consensus of the Council that if the present lilac screening provided on the rear of the property proves to be inadequate, the application should be brought back for further - review with the possibility of requiring an opaque fence. Action Approving Planning Following further discussion there was a motion by Council Commission Application man Fignar and seconded by Councilman Kuefler to approve No. 77066 (Dr. William Planning Commission Application No. 77066 submitted by Mattison) Dr. William Mattison subject to the following conditions: 1. Grading, drainage, and utility .plans are subject to approval by the City Engineer. 2. 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. 3. Adequate handicapped accessibility to the building shall be provided, as approved by the Building Official. 4. If a problem develops with the previously approved plantings used for screening to the rear of the property, the matter will be reviewed as to pro- viding ordinance required screening. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka Voting against none The motion passed unanimously. Rezoning Evaluation The City Manager introduced, the next item of business on Policy and Guidelines the agenda, that of an ordinance recommended for the purpose of incorporating into the City Ordinances the rezoning evaluation policy and guidelines adopted by the City Council through Resolution No. 77 -167. He explained that the Planning Commission has reviewed this matter and recommends that the policy be embodied in the City Ordi:- nances. ORDINANCE Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Council- First Reading man Lhotka and seconded by Councilman Fignar to offer for first reading an ordinance amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances relative to rezoning evaluation policy and guide - lines. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Additional Manpower for The City Manager introduced the next item of business by Public Utilities Division stating that the Director of Public Works has recommended an increase in manpower for the Public Utilities Division. He explained that the Public Utilities Division is currently operated by the superintendent, foreman, lead man and three_ maintenance men classified as light equipment operators. He added that the request is being made so that the Division will be able to keep a reasonable preventative maintenance program on schedule. He stated that the preventative maintenance program has fallen behind schedule during the past few years because of an increased workload on the current personnel caused by the increase in the size of the system since 1968, increased annual maintenance as the the system gets older, and an increase in earned vacation time for current personnel. In addition, the Minnesota Health Department has recently promulgated rules and d regulations pursuant to the Federal Pure Water Act, which ..25- 11 -28 -77 r •oquire additional water analysis tests by the City which will take additional time to accomplish. He noted that the City .:council last authorized an additional labor classification in Lhe Public Utilities Division in December, 1968. He reported -that the additional position would be classified as a light equipment operator and recommended that the Council authorize the request. A discussion ensued relative to the request for additional man oower for the Public Utilities Division. Councilman Lhotka inquired if the CETA program could be used to create such a position in the Public Utilities Division. The Director of Public Works responded that because the position is considered a permanent position for a long period cf time, the CETA ;grogram was not considered. In response to an inquiry by Mayor Cohen, the Director of Public Works stated that the salary for the position would be $13,085 annually plus approxi- .nately 25% more for fringe benefits. In response to an inquiry by Councilman Kuefler, the City Manager explained that the Public Utilities Division is not part of the general fund budget process. Following further discussion there was a motion by Council- Action Authorizing Adr I"'k"i , man Lhotka and seconded by Councilman Fignar to authorize Manpower for Public the addition of one light equipment operator classification Utilities Division to the Public Utilities Division. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The City Manager reported that pursuant to the City Fire Department Council's direction during review of the 1978 Budget a. Uniforms survey was conducted of a number of suburban communi- ties to determine respective policies relating to uniforms and uniform allowances for volunteer firefighters. He sated that a copy of that survey has been presented to the City Council for their review. He explained that with the exception of the City of Fridley, which provides a new uniform for each firefighter annually, all of the communities surveyed provide uniforms which are replaced as needed He recommended that the City :council appropriate $3,516 through the use of Revenue Sharing Funds to provide uniforms for the volunteer fire ulepartment in 1978. He added that the cost to the City on an annual basis for providing replacement uniforms is estimated at between $1 ,200 and $1 ,500 per year and explained that the reason for the higher first year appropriation is due to the fact that present uniforms are approximately five years old. A brief discussion ensued relative to the City Manager's recommendation. Mayor Cohen, referring to the report, noted that six new firefighters will be brought on in 1978. He requested information relating to the progress of firefighting recruiting. The Fire Chief responded that applications were open for approximately four months and that 23 persons had applied. He further reported that the applicants were interviewed and that the number of candidates is now at eight. Also in response to an inquiry by Mayor Cohen, the Fire Chief stated that no women had applied for the position of fire- fighter. 11 -28 -77 -26- Action Directing the Following further discussion there was a motion by Council Preparation of a Resolution man Lhotka and seconded by Councilman Britts to direct the City Manager to prepare a resolution amending the 1978 Budget to provide $3,516 to the fire department appropriation for the purpose of providing uniforms for firefighters. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Licenses Motion by Councilman Kuefler and seconded by Councilman Fignar,to approve the following list of licenses: CHRISTMAS TREE SALES LICENSE P.Q.T. Company 3119 Thurber Road (2 locations) GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLE LICENSE Block Sanitation 1949 Teton Trail Pat's Disposal Service 3518 Lyndale Ave. N. NONPERI VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Midwest Bolt & Supply Co. 6820 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Coca -Cola Bottling Co. 1189 Egan Ind. Road Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE Initial: Gary D. Anakkala 5412 - 1/2 Fremont Ave. N. Roland Scherber 7212 Newton Ave. N. Manferd Rasmusson and John Christensen 7020 Brooklyn Blvd. Renewal: Ronald & Esther Anderson 5328,30 Queen Ave. N. Gene & Anna Gullord 5337,39 Queen Ave. N. Gordon Larson / Michael Spencer 5338,40 Queen Ave. N. Rafael Rocha 5324,26 James Ave. N. Carin Lee Rudolph 5318,20 Queen Ave. N. J. G. Strand 5327, 29 Penn Ave. N. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Adjournment Motion by Councilman Kuefler and seconded by Councilman Lhotka to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Britts, Kuefler, Fignar, and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 12 :45 a.m. I l v9 Clerk Mayor -27- 11 -28 -77