HomeMy WebLinkAbout1971 12-06 CCM Regular Session Minutes of the Proceedings of the
City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center in the County of Hennepin and
State of Mi nnesota
December 6, 1971
The City Council met in regular session and was called to order
by Mayor Philip Cohen at 7 :40 P.M.
Roll Call: Mayor Cohen, Councilman Ausen, Leary and Willard.
Also present were City Manager Donald Poss, City Attorney Rich a,r d
Schieffer, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Chief Building ns `actor
g P
Jean Murphey, Director of Public or
W ks James Merxla. Chief of Police
Thomas O'Hehir and Administrative Assistant Blair Tremere.
Motion by Councilman Willard and seconded by Councilman Ausen
to approve the minutes of the November 1, 1971 Council meeting as
submitted. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Ausen,
Leary and Willard. Voting against: none. Motion carried unani-
mously.
The first item of business was consideration of a proposed
resolution renewing the contract for 1972 with the Suburban Relief
Board. The City Manager recommended the City's continued membership
in the suburban Hennepin County Relief Association by the usual means
of an annual extension of the existing contract. He stated that the
required funds were contemplated in the 1972 budget.
Member Vernon Ausen introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 71 --230
RESOLUTION RENSWING AkM &TTEUDING CONTRACT WITH
SUBURBAN HENNEPIN C0TJNTY gMIEF BOAFM
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by John Leary and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof: Philip Cohen, John Leary,
Vernon Ausen and Theodore Willard; and the following voted against
the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed
and adopted.
The City Manager next introduced a proposed resolution declaring
a. dilapidated building and ordering removal. He explained the
resolution was intended to dispose of a hazardous .situation located
at 5338 Emerson Avenue North. He commented that the building has
been subject to the attention of the Building Inspector for a suffi-
cient period of time to permit other alternatives to be examined and
implemented.
Mayor Cohen commented that he had received several complaints
relative to the dilapidated condition of the building on the property
and that the owner, Mr. Gerald Brandvold, has been previously
informed of the situation and had been allowed a reasonable time to
make proposed improvements on the property. Councilman Ausen inquired
as to whether the owner was aware of the present resolution and that
if he were not, suggested he should be given an opportunity to
explain the situation.
Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Councilman
Ausen and seconded by Councilman Leary to table consideration of
the matter to the December 3
l 191 i
1 Council meeting le to enable Brand-
vold to appear. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary,
Ausen and Willard. Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
-1-
The City Manager next submitted for release the performance bond
held for Davies Water Equipment Company, He explained that a bond
in the amount of $3,000 was submitted in 1967 to assure site improve-
ments at the Davies Water Equipment Company on Lakebreeze Avenue.
He stated that the work has been satisfactorily completed.
Motion by Councilman Leary and seconded by Councilman Willard
to approve the release of the $3,000 bond held for the Davies Water
Equipment Company. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen,'Councilmen
Leary, Ausen and Willard. Voting against, none. Motion carried
unanimously.
The City Manager next presented for consideration a bond held
for the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park and he noted that the bond
was for $10,000 and was posted on March 18 1969 to guarantee site
improvements relating to the industrial buildings at 1600 and 1700 -
65th Avenue North. He stated that the work has been satisfactorily
completed and the bond release is recommended.
Motion by Councilman Ausen and seconded by Councilman Leary to
approve the release of the $10,000 bond held for the Brooklyn Center
Industrial Park. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen
Leary, Ausen and Willard. Voting against: none. Motion carried
unanimously.
The City Manager then presented for consideration a Cash escrow
in the amount of $6,000 which was posted on May 2, 1968 by the
Velie Motor Company to assure certain site improvements relative to
the then proposed Velie Motor Company project. He stated that the
.work comprehended by the guarantee has since been completed, He
noted, however, the matter of a deferred fence along a substantial
portion of the east property line remains nnrei3ol.ued.
Mayon Cohen recognized Mr. John E. Harris, an attorney repre-
senting the Velie Motor Company. Mr. Harris stated the Velie Motor
Company had fulfilled the terms of the improvement guarantee and that
the matter of the installation of a fence was an entirely separate
matter between the City and the present occupant, Velie Oldsmobile,
which rents the land from Velie Motor Company. Mr. Barris commented
that it was his understanding that Velie Oldsmobile intended to
install the fence in the future, but he reiterated that this was
not in the terms of the improvement guarantee filed with the City
by Velie Motor Company.
A discussion ensued relative to the terms of the guarantee and
Councilman Willard noted that the guarantee was essentially for
site improvements and that the fence should be considered as a
necessary site improvement, the corporate differences between Velie
Oldsmobile and Velie Motor Company notwithstanding.
Councilman Leary read the provisions of the improvement
guarantee and noted that a fence was not specifically mentioned, but
that Charles Velie Jr„ the owner of Velie Oldsmobile, had signed
the Velie Motor Company guarantee. Mr. Harris responded that
Charles Velie Jr. had signed the improvement guarantee since he was
an officer of the Velie Motor Company at the time, said company
owned by his father.
Motion by Councilman Willard to table consideration of the
release of the improvement guarantee for Velie Motor Company. The
motion failed for lack of a second.
-2-
Following further discussion there was a motion by Councilman
Leary and seconded by Councilman Ausen to table consideration of the
release of the Velie Motor Company bond until the December 20, 1971
meeting, and to instruct the City Attorney to review the bond agree-
ment, noting particularly that portion of the guarantee which refers
to "other landscaping ", in light of the ensuing discussion about the
installation of a fence, and to report his findings. Voting in
favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Ausen and Willard.
Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Manager next reviewed Planning Commission Application
No. 71041 submitted by White Advertising requesting a variance from
Section 34 -140 of the Sign Ordinance to permit the erection of a
temporary sign at the Holiday Inn Motel located at 1501 - 65th
Avenue North. He commented that the applicant's proposed sign is
approximately three times larger than that allowed as a temporary
sign by the Sign Ordinance.
The Mayor recognized Mr. George Ittel, who represented the
applicant. Mr. Ittel stated that the sign was a "site sign" and
will be taken down upon completion of the construction of the Holiday
Inn.
A lengthy discussion ensued concerning the size of the sign
.and Councilman Willard asked Mr. Ittel if he were aware of the
standards which must be met before a variance can be granted. The
representative of the applicant replied in the negative but stated
that he understood that a temporary site sign could be erected
for the duration of the construction. He stated that the proposed
sign would be approximately 8 feet by 20 feet in size.
Councilman Ausen inquired what area the ordinance allowed for
a temporary sign, and what area would be allowed for a permanent sign.
The City Manager responded that the ordinance permitted a 48 square
foot sign as a temporary sign and a 250 square foot sign as a perma-
nent sign. Councilman Ausen noted that the distinction in allowable
area seemed to be unwarranted solely on the grounds that one was
permanent and one was temporary and suggested that a temporary sign
the size of a permissible permanent sign should be allowable. He
stated that reconsideration should be given the provisions of the
Sign Ordinance relative to temporary signs.
The City Manager commented that the ordinance provision relating
to temporary site signs was most often implemented with respect to
vacant land parcels; further, in the case of development projects
it is common practice to erect the permanent business identification
sign early in the development and thus take advantage of both sign
provisions simultaneously.
Councilman Willard stated that the present issue was determining
whether the applicant adequately met the standards required in
seeking a variance from the Sign Ordinance and that it did not appear
that the applicant had addressed his request in terms of those
standards.
Councilman Heck arrived at 8 :20 P.M.
Motion by Councilman Willard and seconded by Councilman Leary
to table consideration of Planning Commission Application No. 71041
submitted by white Advertising until December 20, 1971 to permit
the applicant to address himself to the sign variance standards.
-3-
In further discussion Councilman Leary L, aired whether the
applicant had been thoroughly informed by the s�:aff as to the
requirement for meeting variance standards. The City Manager
responded that members of the staff had reviewed the application
extensively with the applicant and had emphasized the variance pro-
visions including the standards which must be met. Mr. Tremere
commented that persons other than Mr. Ittel had represented the
applicant in consultation with the staff and with the Planning
Commission. Councilman Willard stated that there remained an evident
need for the applicant to review the meaning of the ordinance,
Mayor Cohen then called for a vote. Voting in favor were:
Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary and Willard. Voting against: Council-
man Ausen. (Councilman deck abstained stating he had not been
present for the discussion of the application.) Motion carried.
The City Manager presented Planning Commission Application No.
71050 submitted by Topeka Inn Management. He explained that the
applicant had submitted a proposal which met the ordinance require-
ments relative to permitted size, but which would require height
variance. He noted that the applicant had contracted with an
engineering firm which performed extensive site- distance studies
since the last Planning Commission hearing,
The Director of Public Works discussed the photographs and other
materials submitted by the applicant. The City Manager noted that
the action taken by the Planning Commission was to recommend
approval of the application as amended, recommending a variance
which would permit construction of a sign 64 feet high.
Mayor Cohen then recognized Mr. Pringle, the representative
of the applicant, and a lengthy discussion ensued concerning the
standards which must be met for granting a variance.
Councilman Willard then stated that there appeared to be certain -
basic considerations relative to the present applicant's situation
which would encompass the requirements for granting a variance:
1. The potential patrons of the motel are comprised mainly
of itinerant, out of town motorists who are unfamiliar
with the area;
2. Primary patronage of the motel will be realized during
the evening and nighttime hours;
3. The identification of and the access to the motel merit
special consideration, given the danger of vehicles
weaving during rapid lane changes in freeway traffics
4. The location of the motel and topography of the area
present certain problems relative to the use of a
freestanding sign to identify the motel.
Councilman Willard further commented that while these points
could in the future apply to similar applications, consideration
should also be given to the uniqueness of the present application,
as evidenced by the extensive engineering studies that outline the
problems relative to the particular situation and that this data
should serve as the primary basis for granting a variance.
Councilman Heck commented that, in addition, there were the
precedents of previous variances which were granted for signs at
Iten Chevrolet and the Northbrook Shopping center. Councilman
-4-
i
i
I
Willard stated that while there were indeed certain past variances,
there were substantially different criteria involved with the
present application, particularly the evidence establishing unique -
ness
Mr. Pringle stated that based on the site - distance data
it
was the applicant's Pp feeling that a sign at least 80 feet in height
would be necessary, and he thus requested the Council to consider
a variance permitting 80 feet as opposed to the recommended 60 feet. 5
Councilman Ausen stated that since the applicant had verbally
altered the character of the application, and since the Planning
Commission had not viewed the new site - distance data, the matter
should be referred back to the Planning Commission for further
study. The City Manager stated that he agreed in that this requested
verbal amendment of the application by the representative of the
applicant reopens the matter to the degree of uniqueness involved.
Mayor Cohen then polled the Council and stated that it was
the consensus of the Council that based upon the evidence submitted
by the applicant a sign at least 60 feet in height would be per -
mitted given the hardship and uniqueness of the application.
Motion by Councilman Willard and seconded by Councilman Fleck
to table consideration of Planning Commission Application No. 71050
and refer it to the Planning Commission noting: the applicant's
.amended requested for a variance which would permit a sign at least
80 feet in height; the Council's consensus regarding the 60 foot
recommendation; and the hardship and uniqueness considerations
summarized before the Council. Voting n favor were Mayor M yor Cohen,
Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen and Willard. Voting against: none.
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Manager next reviewed Planning Commission Application
No. 71064 submitted by Viewcon, Inc. requesting a variance to permit
the use of a wet standpipe system in lieu of an automatic fire
sprinkling system, Ile commented that the applicant had requested
that the application be tabled since the State had not taken final
action to institute the new uniform State Building Code, and that a
final deterMination had not been made as to the issue of whether
the requirements of the State code would supercede those of the
City's ordinance requiring a sprinkling system.
Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Councilman
Heck and seconded by Councilman Leary to table indefinitely Planning
Commission Application No. 71064 submitted by Viewcon, Inc. Voting
in fav •
or. mayor Cohen, en, Councilmen Lea Heck, , H Ausen and Wil a
Leary, r 1 rd.
Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
The City - Manager next reviewed Planning Commission Application
No. 71065 submitted by Viewcon, Inc. requesting approval of a
plat of Twin Lake Beach Addition which is the property located
at 4201 Lakesi d
�. a Ave
nue North upon which �. h a 120 -unit apartment
building has been recently built.
Following comments- by the Director of Public Works there was
a motion made by Councilman Ausen and seconded by Councilman Willard
to approve Planning Commission Application No. 71065 submitted
by
Viewcon, Inc. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen
Leary, Heck, Ausen and Willard. Voting against: none. Motion
carried unanimously.
The meeting recessed at 9:20 P.M. and resumed at 9:40 p.m.
-5-
The City Manager next reviewed Planning Commission Application
No. 71071 submitted by Developers Diversified requesting a variance
from the Sign ordinance to allow the installation of a sign as
indicated on revised plans. He stated that the original site and
building plans were approved exclusive of any signs, and described
the proposed variance as consisting of a mansard panel along the
front of the building extending 5 feet above the parapet wall which
would serve as a background for a 405 square foot sign. He said
staff interpretation of the Sign Ordinance classifies such a
structure as a roof sign, and that under the provisions of the
ordinance, the K-Mart Store is eligible for a roof sign 250 square
feet in area and not over 6 feet above the roof.
Mayor Cohen then recognized Mr. James Karabec who represents
the developer and who reiterated the applicant's contention that the'
proposed sign is a wall sign, not a roof sign, and that a variance
should not even be required. He further commented that the revised
plan indicated that the portion of the original proposed sign,
which extended above the mansard panel, namely the staff of the
letter IIKII in K-Mart, had been shortened to be within the limits
of the sign backing. Mr. Karabec further stated that the proposed
405 square foot sign was a standard identification of X-Mart stores
and that, given the developer's interpretation of the ordinance,
making the sign a wall sign, the sign was relatively small con-
sidering the size wall sign K-Mart was eligible for under the
ordinance,
Councilman Willard asked the applicant whether he was seeking
a variance from the Sign ordinance or whether he was appealing the
staff's interpretation of the ordinance which makes the sign part
of the roof structure. Mr. Karabec responded that the applicant had
applied for a variance based upon the staff's interpretation, but
that the applicant also challenged the staff interpretation and
sought a clarification of the intent of the ordinance.
Councilman Leary stated that there was a genuine matter of
ordinance interpretation rpretation involved and that this as well as the
possible implications of a precedent upon future requests should be
considered before a variance is granted.
Councilman Willard stated that the main issue is a determination
of whether the applicant's proposal is a treatment of the wall
structure or a treatment of the roof structure and that a need for
a variance is not at the crux of the matter. Relative to the
variance application, he commented that the applicant had not pre-
sented evidence meeting the standards for granting a variance
other than basic disagreement with the interpretation of the
ordinance which is a separate consideration.
Following further discussion there was a motion by Councilman
Willard and seconded by Councilman Leary to deny Planning Commission
Application No. 71071 submitted by Developers Diversified because
the standards for granting a variance had not been met. Voting
in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen and
Willard. Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Cohen then requested an interpretation by the City
Attorney relative to the status of the Developers Diversified matter.
The Attorney responded that since the application for a variance
had been denied there was an entirely different issue, namely, the
staff interpretation of the Sign ordinance. He further commented
that there were procedures set for . th in Chapter 34 and Chapter 35
of the City ordinances through which the staff interpretation could
be appealed.
-6-
Motion by Councilman Willard and seconded by Councilman Heck
to advise the Planning Commission, that should the applicant appeal
the staff interpretation of the City Sign ordinance defining the
proposed building design and sign as being part of the roof structure,
it is the consensus of the City Council that the applicant's proposed
front wall design, including the sign, appears to be an integral
part of the wall, rather than a part of the roof structure.
Councilman Ausen stated that the Council was not providing the
Planning Commission with sufficient guidance, in that what was
needed was a definite clarification of the ordinance, rather than
merely an arbitrary ruling as to whether the applicant's proposal
was a treatment of the wall or a treatment of the roof structure.
Mayor Cohen then called for a vote. Voting in favor were:
Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck and Willard. Voting against:
Councilman Ausen. Motion carried.
The City Manager next reviewed Planning Commission Application
No. 71072 submitted by Developers Diversified requesting a variance
to allow greenstrip variance with a zero clearance to the property
line along T.H. 100. The Director of Public Works then explained
the applicant's request and stated that it was reasonable and was
consistent with the greenstrip clearance found in Brookdale and
Northbrook Centers.
Following a discussion of the application there was a motion
by Councilman Aus- en seconded by Councilman Leary to approve
Planning Commission Application No. 71072 submitted by Developers
Diversified recognizing that:
1. The variance is not uniform for the length of the property
line and the greenstrip will have a varying clearance
along Highway 100 for a distance of approximately
250 feet;
2. The variance is necessary for proper traffic movement;
3. There is approved fencing in place along the Highway
100 frontage;.
4. There is a green strip approximately 50 feet wide within
the State Highway right -of -way;
5. There is adequate snow storage capacity at either end
of the greenstrip encroachment area.
Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen
and Willard. Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Manager next reviewed Planning Commission Application
No. 71074 submitted by Developers Diversified requesting a variance
to allow a 40 foot driveway on the north and east drives. He
commented that Section 35 -703 requires that access to off street
areas shall be restricted to driveways 30 feet or less in width.
He noted that the Director of Public Works had reviewed the appli-
cation with the applicant, and that the anticipated high traffic
generation by the project substantiates the need for additional
driveway width to provide for left and right turn lanes for exiting
traffic.
Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Councilman
Heck and seconded by Councilman Leary to approved Planning Commission
Application No. 71074 submitted by Developers Diversified stipulating
that a report of the driveway design and traffic situation be
-7-
brought before the Council within two years for review, Noting
in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, deck, Ausen and
Willard. Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Cohen announced that two Councilmen had requested that
an item relative to snowmobile use in the City of Brooklyn Center
be placed on the agenda.
Councilman Willard stated that a'number of problems relative
to the use of snowmobiles and the enforcement of existing snowmobile
ordinance regulations had recently been brought to his attention.
He stated that members of the Conservation Commission had observed
damage by snowmobiles in areas where on -going wildlife programs
were being conducted and he showed photographs which had recently
been taken in the Kylawn environmental area.
Councilman Willard further stated that the Police Department
was having difficulty in enforcing the Snowmobile Ordinance in
response to citizen complaints claiming excessive noise from snow-
mobiles late at night, snowmobiles interferring with pedestrians
and children, and snowmobiles trespassing on private property.
He commented that compared to other metropolitan communities,
Brooklyn Center had a relatively liberal ordinance. He recognized
there had been a dispute as to what areas were posted for snowmo-
biling and that there was a need for clarification of the ordinance
provisions and the City's policy, Councilman Willard stated that
based on citizen complaints and his personal experiences, he was
convinced there is a potential hazard from those snowmobilers
who are not observing the provisions of the ordinance and that
immediate action is needed to protect the citizens of Brooklyn
Center.
in that regard, Councilman Willard stated that he had drafted
a resolution calling for the passage of an emergency ordinance andi
he asked that the Clerk read the resolution.
Member Theodore Willard introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 71 -15 AND
DETERMINING THAT A CONDITION EXISTS REQUIRING
THE PASSAGE OF AN EMERGENCY ORDINANCE WHICH
PROHIBITS THE OPERATION OF SNOWMOBILES IN THE
CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded for purposes of discussion by member John Leary. Mayor
Cohen commented that he had reviewed the hearing process relative
to the drafting of the original ordinance and that he felt additional
and more adequate input was needed to evaluate the present ordinance
and its companion Resolution No. 71 -15.
Councilman Willard stated that the proposed resolution in itself
is not an ordinance revision, but rather calls for the repeal. of
Council Resolution No. 71 -15 which defines certain areas and trails
within the City for snowmobiling, and further, directs the City
Manager to draft an emergency ordinance prohibiting snowmobile
operations on roadways and on private property without the written
consent of the owner.
Councilman Leary stated that he had not been aware of this
resolution prior to its reading, and that he had not been made
fully aware of the existing problems. He stated that the problems
-8-
appeared to be the results of a few irresponsible persons, but that
he was not sure the absolute prohibition of snowmobiles in Brooklyn
Center would be the answer to the problems.
Councilman Heck expressed concern at the lack of prior notice
regarding Councilman Willard's proposal and stated that if the
Council is to consider the situation in the context of an emergency
than more documentation is needed. He stated he was aware the
police had received complaints relative to snowmobile use, but
that further accurate data was required before an emergency could
be declared.
Councilman Ausen stated that he was not prepared to consider
this in the context of an emergency, in that he had not been aware
of the resolution or of all the facts prior to the meeting. He
noted that the issue of snowmobile use is brought to the attention
of the Council each year and that there was a need for a public
hearing so that the Council could determine a basis for taking
any action particularly a complete ban on snowmobile use. He
further stated that it was essential for citizens to realize that
snowmobiles are not toys, but rather are vehicles that can cause
damage and injury and that this realization is intensified as the
population density increases.
Mayor Cohen stated that he agreed that a public hearing was
necessary to determine the facts and the public's feeling on the
matter. He stated such a hearing should be well structured to
assure that both sides of the issue would have an equal chance to
be heard.
Councilman Willard stated that normal ordinance drafting and
hearing procedures were very lengthy and that he had submitted the
proposed resolution as a solution to an immediate problem which
could be handled faster via emergency action. He noted that
such action would be only for the duration of the stated emergency
period, and that permanent action could be considered and initiated
during that time.
Following a lengthy discussion relative to the need for the
declaration of an emergency and the immediacy of a need for a
public discussion meeting, there was a motion by Councilman Heck
and seconded by Councilman Leary to table the proposed resolution
in order that the Council miglit submit the matter of snowmobile
use in Brooklyn Center to a public discussion meeting and further
document the need for emergency action. Voting in favor were:
Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen and Willard. Voting
against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
Following further discussion there was a motion by Councilman
Heck and seconded by Councilman Leary to conduct a public
discussion meeting before the City Council for purposes of securing
further information relative to the problems of snowmobile use in
Brooklyn Center, on Tuesday, December 14, 1971 at 8:00 P.M., using
a format to be determined by the Mayor. Voting in favor were:
Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen and Willard. Voting
against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
Councilman Heck stated that the matter of posted snowmobile
trails had been brought to his attention and that it was an under -
standing of many snowmobilers that there should have a trail
authorized and posted along the east boulveard of Palmer Lake Drive
from Violet Avenue North extended to 69th Avenue North. He stated
that apparently this trail had not been included in the approved
draft of Resolution No. 71 -15 and that consequently it did not
appear on the map of authorized snowmobile trails utilized by the
Brooklyn Center police. He recalled that this area had been
approved as a posted snowmobile trail,
Mayor Cohen then recognized several residents of the neighbor-
hood who commented relative to the use of the boulevard as a snow-
mobile trail.
Mayor Cohen.stated that should the Council acknowledge that
the trail segment be used for snowmobiles, his primary concern was
that if there is evident conflict with pedestrians, and if there
are continued valid charges of abuses of the snowmobile ordinance,
then the agreement should be voided. He noted that the use of
snowmobiles in the entire Palmer Lake area could be discussed at the
announced public discussion meeting.
Councilman Willard stated that he could agree with implementing
this agreement until the entire issue of snowmobiling in the City
could be reviewed and resolved.
Following further discussion there was a motion by Councilman
Willard and seconded by Councilman Heck to amend Council Resolution
No. 71 -15 to permit snowmobiling on the eastern boulevard of Palmer
Lake Drive from Violet Avenue North extended to 69th Avenue North.
Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen
and Willard. Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Manager next explained that the Brooklyn Center Fire
Relief Association had requested City Council approval of certain
amendments to the by -laws of the Relief Association.` He stated
the amendments are chiefly housekeeping in nature consisting of
such things as changes in various terms of office and that no
financial benefit changes were proposed.
Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Councilman
Heck and seconded by Councilman Leary to approve the proposed
Fire Relief Association amendments as submitted. Voting in favor
were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen and Willard.
Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Manager next presented for first reading a proposed
ordinance vacating a portion of 67th Avenue North intended to
implement a City Council determination relative to Planning
Commission Application No. 71028 submitted by Zejdlik and Harmala.
He noted that the Council had previously vacated a portion of
Orchard Avenue North within the project.
Motion by Councilman Willard and seconded by Councilman Heck
to declare a first reading on the following ordinance:
AN ORDINANCE VACATING A PORTION OF 67TH AVENUE NORTH
Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Beck, Ausen
and Willard. Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Councilman Ausen and seconded by Councilman Willard
to approve the purchase of certain investments by the Brooklyn.
Center Fire Relief Association in the amounts of $1,639.81,
$2,493.40 and $4,139.65. Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen,
Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen and Willard. Voting against: none..
Motion carried unanimously.
The City Manager next explained that the City Council, on
November 1, 1971, tabled the Green Giant liquor license application
-10-
to this meeting to permit an evaluation of the ramifications of the
recently enacted omnibus tax bill. He said the state tax department
interpretations of the tax law are still forthcoming and consequently
recommended that the matter be tabled until the Council meeting of
January 17, 1972.
Motion by Councilman Willard and seconded by Councilman Ausen
to table the matter of the Green Giant liquor license application
to the January 17, 1972 Council meeting. Voting in favor were:
Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen and Willard. Voting
against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
The next item of business was consideration of the American
Legion liquor license application and the City Manager stated
that the application of Duoos Bros. American Legion Post #630 has
been reviewed by the Police Department and the administrative staff.
He noted no negative aspects regarding the operation nor the
supervisory personnel of the licensed premises were encountered.
Motion by Councilman Heck and seconded by Councilman Leary
to approve the American Legion liquor license application. Voting
in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen and
Willard. Voting against: none. Motion carried unanimously.
Motion by Councilman Leary and seconded by Councilman Ausen
to approve.the following licenses:
Cigarette License
Donaldson's Brookdale Center
Duoos Bros. American Legion 4307 - 70th Avenue No.
Master Engineering 3500 - 48th Ave. No.
Northern States Power 4501 - 68th Avenue No.
Prioneer Vending Machine 225 Border Avenue
Burger King 6110 Brooklyn Boulevard
Red Owl Store 5425 Xerxes Avenue No.
Snyder Bros. Drug 1296 Brookdale Center
Superamerica 1901 - 57th Avenue No.
Taco Towne 6219 Brooklyn Boulevard
Tabacco Land of Brookdale 1301 Brookdale Center
United Vending (Pilgrim) 9 North 11th Street
United Vending (Beach Apt.) 9 North,llth Street
Gasoline Service Station License
Allied Blacktop Co. 3601 - 48th Ave. No.
Howe, Inc. 4821 Xerxes Avenue North
Verle's Freeway Shell 6545 Lyndale Avenue North
Non - intoxicating Malt Liquor "Off- Sale" License
Red Owl Stores, Inc. 5425 Xerxes Ave. No. -
Snyder Bros. Drug 1296 Brookdale Center
Superamerican #58 1901 - 57th Avenue No
Voting in favor were: Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen
and Willard. Voting against none. Motion carried unanimously.
The City Manager next explained that the Brooklyn Center
Volunteer Fire Department planned to conduct fire drills at 3900
Lakebreeze Avenue North and at 5301 Russell Avenue North and had
made necessary arrangements with the property owners.
Following a brief discussion there was a motion by Councilman
Fleck and seconded by Councilman Willard to authorize the Brooklyn
Center Volunteer Fire Department to conduct fire drills at 3900
-11-
Lakebreeze Avenue North and 5301 Russell Avenue North. Voting
in favor were; Mayor Cohen, Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen and
Willard. Voting against; none. Notion carried unanimously.
Member Vernon Ausen introduced the following resolution
and moved its .
adoption.
RESOLUTION NO, 71 -231
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK
{CONTRACT BY CITY)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member John Leary and upon vote being taken thereon,
the following voted in favor thereof: Philip Cohen, John Leary,Vernoi
Ausen Howard Heck and Theodore Willard; and the following voted
against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
The City Manager commented relative to the City's animal
control servi s and said
that the staff was in the rocess
P of
preparing a ro os
P P al establishing a contract with a new agency.
A discussion ensued concerning the ramifications of the omnibus
tax bill and the possible courses of action available to the City
regarding the re- certification of the 1972 budget.
Motion by Councilman Willard and seconded by Councilman Heck
to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor were: ere-
. g g lea � Y or- Cohen
Councilmen Leary, Heck, Ausen and Willard. Voting against; none.
,Motion carried unanimously. The Council meeting adjourned at
12:45 A.M.
�2
Clerk
Mayo r
Il i
-12-