HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985 10-21 CCP Regular Session f
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
OCTOBER 21, 1985
7:00 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Invocation
4. Open Forum
5. Approval of Consent Agenda
-All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the
City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no
separate discussion of these items unless a Council member so requests,
in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and
considered in its normal sequence on the agenda.
6. Approval of Minutes - October 7, 1985 - Regular Session
*7. Appointment of Election Judges for the November 5, 1985 General Election
8. Resolutions:
*a. Accepting Work under Project No. 1985 -24 (Humboldt Avenue Sidewalk
Construction -Amy Lane Southerly to 71st Avenue North)
is b. Setting Public Hearing on 1985 Single Family Revenue Bond Program
-This is similar to the 1981 first -time homebuyer bonds.
c. Authorizing the Notice of Public Sale General Obligation Tax
Increment Bonds
d. Authorizing the City Manager to Settle Lift Station Claims
*e. Approving Specifications for Purchase of a Street Sweeper
9. Planning Commission Items: (7:15 p.m.)
a. Planning Commission Application No. 85027 submitted by Foundation
Stone Ministries, Inc. requesting site and building plan and special
use permit approval to construct a church with seating capacity of
800 at the southwest corner of I -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard. This
item was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its
October 10, 1985 meeting.
b. Planning Commission Application No. 85032 submitted by Arby's
requesting a variance from Section 34 -140, Subsection 3.a.l.b of the
Sign Ordinance to allow a tenant identification wall sign on the
canopy above the northwest entrance to Brookdale Mall and not on
exterior wall space of the Arby's tenant space. This item was
recommended for approval by the Planning Commission at its October
10, 1985 meeting.
r
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- October 21, 1985
C. Planning Commission Application No. 85033 submitted by Zantigo's
requesting site and building plan and special use permit approval to
construct an 82 -seat Zantigo's Restaurant with drive -up window at
5532 Brooklyn Boulevard, the present site of Nankin Express.
10. Public Hearing: (7:30 p.m.)
a. Hearing on a proposed project and issuance of Industrial Development
Revenue Bonds
-This item relates to the proposed project for Ryan Construction
Company
11. Consideration of Specified Licenses:
a. Application for On -Sale Intoxicating Liquor License and Sale on
Sunday for the Ground Round
-This application is a result of a change in the corporate structure
of the Ground Round.
* 12. Licenses
13. Adjournment
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
OCTOBER 7, 1985
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by
Mayor Dean Nyquist at
Y Yq 7 p .m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also
present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp,
Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund,
City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Housing Coordinator Brad Hoffman, and Deputy City
Clerk Geralyn Barone.
Councilmember Gene Lhotka was absent from this evening's meeting.
INVOCATION
The invocation was offered by Councilmember Scott.
OPEN FORUM
Mayor N q st recognized Ms Carol Kleven, 5835 Zenith Avenue North, who stated she
is present at this evening's meeting to speak about Ordinance 35- 900'regarding
• garage sales. Ms Kleven stated she is in full agreement with the provisions of the
ordinance limiting a property owner to four sales per year, and she also agrees with
the provisions that do not allow signs to be posted on utility poles and other
property. Ms. Kleven proceeded to explain her experience at ,a garage sale at her
home last month in which other family members and neighbors participated in the
sale. As part of the sale, she and her neighbors decorated her yard with free
balloons, but a representative of the Police Department informed her that it would
be necessary for all the balloons to be removed from the property. Ms. Kleven
stated she received a letter from the officer and said the information in the letter
is not the ordinance, but rather an interpretation of the ordinance. She felt that
the officer was over zealous in enforcing the ordinance.
Ms. Kleven also complained that when a neighbor of hers posted a for "sale sign" in
the yard, the Police Department required that the sign be moved three inches to meet
compliance of the sign ordinance. She felt this was harassment on the part of the
Police Department. She also cited lenient enforcement of real estate sign
violations. Ms. Kleven requested the City Council to look into the situation.
Mayor Nyquist noted that an ordinance separate from the garage sale ordinance
addresses real estate signs. The City Manager said the City does collect real
estate signs when there are violations, and added that use of balloons is referenced
in the zoning ordinance. The City Manager stated the City will respond to Ms
Kleven's complaint. Councilmember Hawes noted for the record that the officer Ms.
Kleven had dealt with is a code enforcement officer and not a police officer.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Roger Kloster, 7223 Lee Avenue North, who stated he is
at this evening's meeting in an effort to determine why Wingard Lane has been closed
to through traffic onto Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Kloster felt that not enough
g
10 -7 -85 -1-
residents were notified by the City regarding the closure and recommended that the
City should have posted a notice prior to commencement of construction. Mr.
Kloster stated that Wingard Lane is a public street financially supported by every
citizen in Brooklyn Center, and, therefore, he demanded that Wingard Lane be
reopened immediately. Mr. Kloster stated he had been told by the City that a
November 1984 traffic count on Wingard Lane showed an average of 1,250 cars
traveling on the street per day. He felt this is an average amount of traffic for a
side street off of Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Kloster stated he felt his rights are
violated because he no longer is able to drive through on Wingard Lane to get to
Brooklyn Boulevard. He added that now there are 1,250 additional cars using the
intersection of Brooklyn Boulevard and Noble Avenue North. He stated this causes
problems with the church and the elementary school crossing at this intersection.,
He expressed concern over how emergency vehicles would gain access to the
neighborhood now that Brooklyn Boulevard at Wingard Lane is closed', particularly if
other major roads such as 69th Avenue North at Brooklyn Boulevard would be closed as
a result of another emergency. Mr. Kloster also disagreed with the present sign
posted on Wingard Lane which states "local traffic only ". Councilmember Theis
noted that Wingard Lane was being used as a short cut for vehicles avoiding the
Brooklyn Boulevard and Noble Avenue North intersection. Mr. Kloster responded
that the City is then responsible for upgrading Wingard Lane if it is heavily
traveled.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Lowell Rick, 7207 Lee Avenue North, who requested that
Wingard Lane be reopened. He noted that the 1,250 cars per day have been diverted
from Wingard Lane to Noble Avenue North, and he expressed concern for children using
the school crossing at 70th Avenue North. He also expressed concern for emergency
vehicles attempting to access the neighborhood in the area:
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Greg Osborn, 7206 Lee Avenue North, who also is
concerned about children crossing at Noble Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard._
Mr. Osborn questioned the sturdiness of the retaining wall installed at Wingard
Lane, expressing great concern over how the snow plows will be able to do their job in
the winter. He also stated that cars parked on the street during church services at
Brooklyn Methodist Church will make it almost impossible to turn from Woodbine Lane
onto Noble Avenue North. Mr. Osborn asked why other entries from side streets onto
Brooklyn Boulevard have not been closed, as the same situation exists in other parts
of the City. Mayor Nyquist noted that all the problems raised this evening by
residents have already been thoroughly discussed and reviewed at the public hearing
conducted prior to the commencement of construction. The City Manager stated the
f construction is a hammerhead turnaround which allows the most effective way for the
snow plows to work.
Mr. r
sbo n re-emphasized 0 -em asize
d his belief elief that the retaining wall will not be sturdy
enough during the winter
months g g mo hs to handle all the snow. The Director of Public
Works stated that there are no r
p oblems expected with the retaining wall,
because there have e
particularly v been no problems with others similar to it.. The
City Manager noted that the City's Comprehensive Plan addresses the possibility of
closing nonmajor thoroughfares, leading to Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Osborn stated
he felt that residents should have been notified, and the City Manager responded
saying a notice was published in the City's official newspaper. The Director of
Public Works said notices were also sent to residents living on Wingard Lane, and the
City is not required by state law to either publish a notice in the official
newspaper or send notices to residents. Mr. Osborn requested a copy of the notice.
10 -7 -85 -2
I .
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
OCTOBER 7, 1985
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by
Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:08 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor an Nyquist, Councilmembers Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also
present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp,
Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund,
City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Housing Coordinator Brad Hoffman, and Deputy City
Clerk Geralyn Barone.
Councilmember Gene Lhotka was absent from this evening's meeting.
INVOCATION
The invocation was offered by Councilmember Scott.
OPEN FORUM
Mayor Nyquist recognized Ms. Carol Kleven, 5835 Zenith Avenue North, who stated she
is present at this evening's meeting to speak about Ordinance 35 -900 regarding
garage sales. Ms. Kleven stated she is in full agreement with the provisions of the
ordinance limiting a property owner to four sales per month, and she also agrees with
the provisions that do not allow signs to be posted on utility poles and other
property. Ms. Kleven proceeded to explain her experience at a garage sale at her
home last month in which other family members and neighbors participated in the
sale. As part of the sale, she and her neighbors decorated her yard with free
balloons, but -a representative of the Police Department informed her that it would
be necessary for all the balloons to be removed from the property. Ms. Kleven
stated she received a letter from the officer and said the information in the letter
is not the ordinance, but rather an interpretation of the ordinance. She felt that
the officer was over zealous in enforcing the ordinance.
Ms. Kleven also complained that when a neighbor of hers posted a for "sale sign" in
the yard, the Police Department required that the sign be moved three inches to meet
compliance of the sign ordinance. She felt this was harassment on the part of the
Police Department. She also cited lenient enforcement of real estate sign
violations. Ms. Kleven requested the City Council to look into the situation.
Mayor Nyquist noted that an ordinance separate from the garage sale ordinance
addresses real estate signs. The City Manager said the City does collect real
estate signs when there are violations, and added that use of balloons is referenced
in the zoning ordinance. The City Manager stated the City will respond to Ms.
Kleven's complaint. Councilmember Hawes noted for the record that the officer Ms.
Kleven had dealt with is a code enforcement officer and not a police officer.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Roger Kloster, 7223 Lee Avenue North, who stated he is
at this evening's meeting in an effort to determine why Wingard Lane has been closed
to through traffic onto Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Kloster felt that not enough
10 -7 -85 -1-
residents were notified by the City regarding the closure and recommmended that the
City should have posted a notice prior to commencement of construction. Mr.
Kloster stated that Wingard Lane is a public street financially supported by every
citizen in Brooklyn Center, and, therefore, he demanded that Wingard Lane be
reopened immediately. Mr. Kloster stated he had been told by the City that a
November 1984 traffic count on Wingard Lane showed an average of 1,250 cars
traveling on the street per day. He felt this is an average amount of traffic for a
side street off of Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Kloster stated he felt his rights are
violated because he no longer is able to drive through on Wingard Lane to get to
Brooklyn Boulevard. He added that now there are 1,250 additional cars using the
intersection
of Brooklyn oulevard and. Noble Avenue North. t
Yn He stated this causes
problems with the church and the elementary school crossing at this intersection.
He expressed concern ncern over how emergency ,vehicles would gain access to the
neighborhood now that Brooklyn Boulevard at Wingard Lane is closed, particularly if
other major roads such as 69th Avenue North at Brooklyn Boulevard would be closed as
a result of another emergency. Mr. Kloster also disagreed with the present 'sign
posted on Wingard Lane which states "local traffic only ". Councilmember Theis
noted that Wingard Lane was being used as a short cut for vehicles avoiding the
Brooklyn Boulevard and Noble Avenue North intersection. Mr. Kloster responded
that the City is then responsible for upgrading Wingard Lane if it is heavily
traveled.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Lowell Rick, 7207 Lee Avenue North, who requested that
Wingard Lane be reopened. He noted that the 1,250 cars per day have been diverted
from Wingard Lane to Noble Avenue North, and he expressed concern for children using
the school crossing at 70th Avenue North. He also expressed concern for emergency
vehicles attempting to access the neighborhood in the area.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Greg Osborn, 7206 Lee Avenue North, who also is
concerned about children crossing at Noble Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard.
Mr. Osborn questioned the sturdiness of the retaining wall installed at Wingard
Lane, expressing great concern over how the snow plows will be able to do their job in
the winter. He also stated that cars parked on the street during church services at
Brooklyn Methodist Church will make it almost impossible to turn from Woodbine Lane
onto Noble Avenue North: Mr. Osborn asked why other entries from side streets onto
Brooklyn Boulevard have not been closed, as the same situation exists in other parts
of the City. Mayor Nyquist noted that all the problems raised this evening by
residents have already been thoroughly discussed and reviewed at the public hearing,
conducted prior to the commencement of construction. The City Manager stated the
construction is a hammerhead turnaround which allows the most effective way for the
snow plows to work.
Mr. Osborn re- emphasized his belief that the retaining wall will not be sturdy
enough during the winter months to handle all the snow. The Director of Public
Works stated that there are no problems expected with the retaining wall,
particularly because there have been no problems with others similar to it. The
City Manager noted that the City's Comprehensive Plan addresses the possibility of
closing nonmajor thoroughfares leading to Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Osborn stated
he felt that residents should have been notified, and the City Manager responded
saying a notice was published in the City's official newspaper. The Director of
Public Works said notices were also sent to residents living on Wingard Lane, and the
City is not required by state law to either publish a notice in the official
newspaper or send notices to residents. Mr. Osborn requested a copy of the notice.
10 -7 -85 -2-
t
Councilmember Scott asked /when the last traffic count was done on Noble Avenue
North, and the Director of Public Works responded that approximately 1983 was the
last date. Councilmember cott requested equested that another traffic count be conducted
and suggested that in similar situations neighborhood groups be involved in the
process.
Mayor Nyquist again recognized Mr. Kloster who questioned the number of people who
actually read the legal section in the newspaper, and demanded to know the reason for
closing Wingard Lane. Mayor Nyquist informed Mr. Kloster that this had been
discussed at the public hearing and the information can be forwarded to him by
letter:
CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the
Consent Agenda. Councilmember Hawes requested that item 10d be removed from the
Consent Agenda.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES — SEPTEMBER 9, 1985 - RE GULAR SESSION
There was 'a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded'by Councilmember Theis to
approve the minutes of the September 9, 1985 City Council meeting as submitted.
Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 16, 1985 - SPECIAL SESSION
There was 'a motion by Councllmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to
approve the minutes of the September 16, 1985 special session as submitted. Voting
in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against
none. The motion passed.
PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASE FOR QUICK LUBE, 6806 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to
release the performance guarantee in the amount of $6,500 for Quick Lube, 6806
Brooklyn Boulevard (Planning Commission Application No. 84038). Voting in favor:
Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none.
The motion passed.
SUBDIVISION BOND RELEASE FOR DALE AND DAVIES 1ST ADDITION
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to
release the subdivision bond in the amount of $1,900 for Dale and Davies 1st
Addition. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and
Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
PROCLAMATION
Councilmember Hawes introduced the following proclamation and moved its adoption:
PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE WEEK OF OCTOBER 20 -26, -1985 AS NATIONAL BUSINESS WOMEN'S
WEEK
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing proclamation was duly seconded by
member Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following
voted against: none, whereupon said proclamation was declared duly passed and
adopted.
10 -7 -85 -3-
RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -182
MBmber Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN FROM THE CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND TO THE
MUNICIPAL LIQUOR STORES FUND
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted
against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
LICENSES
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to
approve the following list of licenses:
CIGARETTE LICENSE
Jimmy Jingle 1304 E. Lake St.
Brookdale Corp. Ctr. II 6200 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
Brookdale Corp.'Ctr. 6300 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
COMMERCIAL FENNEL LICENSE
Northbrook Animal Hospital 413 66th Ave. N.
GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION VEHICLE LICENSE
Hilger Transfer 5H 50 Zachary Ln.
Waste Management 10050 Naples St. NE
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE
General Sheet Metal Corp. 2330 Louisiana Ave. N.
Metropolitan Mechanical 7340 Washington Ave. S.
L.S.V. Metals, Inc. 6800 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE
Coca Cola Bottling 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd.
Budgetel Inn 6415 James Circle
Jimmy Jingle 1304 E. Lake St,
Brookdale Corp. Ctr. II 6200 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
Brookdale Corp. Ctr. 6300 Shingle Cr. Pkwy,
PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE
Jimmy Jingle 1304 E. Lake St.
Brookdale Corp. Ctr. II 6200 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
Brookdale Corp. Ctr. 6300 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
SIGNHANGERS LICENSE
Cragg Inc. 9636 85th Ave. N.
Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES _ SEPTEMBER 23, 1985 _ REGULAR SESSION
There was s motion b Councilmember Theis n
y s a d seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
10 -7 -85 -4-
r
approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of September 23, 1985 as submitted.
. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Hawes and Theis. Voting against:
none. The motion passed.
Councilmember Scott abstained from voting as she was not present at the September
23, 1985 meeting.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 85026 SUBMITTED BY RYAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
REQUESTING PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE INTOO TWO LOTS THE PARCEL OF LAND
AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF JOHN MARTIN DRIVE AND SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY The City
manager explained this application was recommended for approval by the Planning_
Commission at its September 26, 1985 meeting. The Director of Planning &
Inspection referred the City Council to page one of the September 26, 1985 Planning
Commission meeting minutes and the informational sheet attached to those minutes.
He reviewed the application and noted the Planning Commission recommended approval
of the application subject to three conditions. He stated there is a public hearing
scheduled for this evening and the applicant is present.
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 85026 submitted by Ryan Construction Company requesting
preliminary plat approval to subdivide into two lots the parcel of land at the
northeast corner of John Martin Drive and Shingle Creek Parkway, and inquired if
there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one
requested to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to
close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 85026 submitted by
Ryan Construction Company requesting preliminary plat approval to subdivide into
two lots the parcel of land at the northeast corner of John Martin Drive and Shingle
Creek Parkway. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and
Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
approve Planning Commission Application No. 85026 subject to the following
conditions:
1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City
Engineer.
2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the
City Ordinances.
3. Agreements for cross access and parking between both lots in this
subdivision and:,the Target lot shall be filed with the plat at the "
County.
Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed.
- PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 85028 SUBMITTED BY GREGORY L'ALLIER REQUESTING
SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO CONDUCT A CHIROPRACTIC OFFICE HOME OCCUPATION IN THE
RESIDENCE AT b3'3b LEE AVENUE NORTH
The City Manager explained this item was recommended for approval by the Planning
10 -7 -85 -5-
Commission at its September 26, 1985 meeting. The Director of Planning &
Inspection referred the City Council to pages six through nine of the September 26,
1985 Planning Commission meeting minutes and the informational sheet attached with
those minutes. He reviewed the application and noted the Planning Commission
recommended approval of the application subject to eight conditions. He added
there is a public hearing scheduled this evening, notices have been sent, and the
applicant is present at this evening's meeting.
Mayor Nyquist inquired as to why a sunset provision was not pursued if the applicant
was agreeable to it. The Director of Planning & Inspection noted that it is
possible to place such a provision upon the application, and agreed that it was not
pursued. The City Attorney noted that if a sunset provision is pursued, it should
be done with the consent of the applicant. Councilmember Theis questioned
requirements for parking, and the Director of Public Works discussed the
requirements. Councilmember Theis asked what the average number of trips to a
residential unit are per day, and the Director of Public Works noted that any
movement in or out is at an average of ten trips per day.
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 85028 submitted by Gregory L'Allier requesting special
use permit approval to conduct a chiropractic office home occupation in the
residence at 6336 Lee Avenue North. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Marlow Pederson,
6330 Lee Avenue North, who asked what the benefits are to Brooklyn Center and the
neighborhood of having a chiropractic home operation. Mayor Nyquist stated the
request is an attempt by the applicant to get a start in his business, and said there
may not be any benefits to the residents. He added that the City of Brooklyn Center
does encourage people to locate their businesses in the City and this is a benefit to
the community. Mr. Pederson stated this is a residential neighborhood and there
should not be chiropractic practices in the neighborhood.
Mayor Nyquist recognized the applicant, Mr. Greg L'Allier, who stated there will be
a problem if he is required to widen his driveway towards his home rather than in any
direction he desires. Mr. L'Allier asked if this requirement had been stricken
from the conditions, and the Director of Planning & Inspection stated,that the
Planning Commission did not strike the requirement regarding widening the driveway
towards the house. Mayor Nyquist asked if there is a problem with widening toward
the house, and Mr. L'Allier said some of his shrubbery would have to be removed.
Councilmember Scott expressed concern with the applicant's statement in the
Planning Commission minutes that the applicant may see up to four patients per hour.
She calculated that in one eight hour day the applicant could see a maximum of 32
patients. She expressed concern over this high number and noted that such activity
belongs in a clinic rather than a home operation. Councilmember Scott also noted
there maybe a problem with too many cars in the driveway during office hours. Mr.
L'Allier stated he agreed with the possibility that he may see up to four patients
per hour, but he will see no more than twenty patients per day. He noted that the
four patients per hour is a maximum.
Councilmember Theis pointed out that with a maximum of twenty patients there will be
more intense use of the home than the normal residential home has. He expressed
concern that this activity will deviate from the normal home occupation use. Mr.
L'Allier again stated that he would see a maximum of 20 patients per day, and if he
does have that many patients he would look to practice elsewhere.
10 -7 -85 -6-
Mayor Nyquist asked L'Allier if he is willing to agree to a provision that when
the applicant sees more than 12 patients at least two days per week that the home
occupation permit would expire. Mr. L'Allier responded affirmatively. The City
Attorney noted that it is difficult to police the number of patients using a clinic
and it is preferable to use a sunset provision rather than set limits on the number of
patients. Mayor Nyquist asked the applicant if he would agree to terminate the
permit after a two year period, and Mr. L'Allier agreed to amend his application to
request a home occupation special use permit for a period of two years.
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 85028 submitted by
Gregory L'Allier requesting special use permit approval to conduct a chiropractic
office home occupation in the residence at 6336 Lee Avenue North. Voting< in favor:
Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none.
The motion passed.
Councilmember Scott stated she has some problems with interpreting this as a home
occupation use. She proposed that limitations be set on the hours of operation, the
number of patients per day, and that a sunset provision be placed in the conditions.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
approve Planning Commission Application No. 85028 subject to the following
conditions:
1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator and
is nontransferable.
2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be
grounds for revocation.
3. The hours of operation shall be from 9 :00 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. and
2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday on an appointment
only basis. The applicant as operator is limited to no more than
20 patients per day.
4. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off-
street on improved space provided by the applicant.
5• Special use permit approval acknowledges use of the living room
and one room approximately 11' x 10' for the home occupation. No
expansion to other rooms for the purpose of diagnosis or
treatment is acknowledged. No nonresident employee is
acknowledged by this approval.
6. The premises shall be inspected by a City Building Inspector
prior to the issuance of the special use permit. Any alterations
to the home recommended by the Building Inspector shall be
completed prior to issuance of the special use permit.
7. The applicant shall widen the driveway to at least 17' 4 in width
toward the house prior to the issuance of the special use permit
in order to accommodate at least two patient vehicles in the
driveway at one time.
10 -7 -85 -7-
a
8. Permit approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
the provisions of Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
9. This special use permit shall expire within two years after its
issuance and is subject to a review by the City Council after one
year of operation.
Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott and Hawes. Voting against:
Councilmember Theis. The motion passed.
Mayor Nyquist expressed his reservations with the home occupation ordinance, and
the City Manager stated staff will review the ordinance.
RECESS
The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:42 p.m. and reconvened at 8:56 p.m.
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS (CONTINUED)
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 85029 SUBMITTED BY LOMBARD PROPERTIES, INC.
REQUESTING SITE AND BUILDING PLAN AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A
TWO -PHASE OFFICE DEVELOPME NT, SOUTH OF FREEWAY BOULEVARD AND NORTH OF I -94 IN THE
I -1 ZONE, EAST OF EARLE BROWN BOWL r _
PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 85030 SUBMITTED BY LOMBARD PROPERTIES, INC.
REQUESTING PRELIMINARY R.L.S. APPROVAL TO RESUBDIVIDE INTO FIVE TRACTS THE THREE
TRACTS OF LAND SOUTH OF FREEWAY BOULEVARD'BETWEEN EARLE BROWN BOWL AND THE HOLIDAY
INN, AND VACATED HIGHWAY RIGHT -OF -WAY WHERE THE OLD HU14BOLDT INTERCHANGE TSffD TO BE
The City Manager noted that these related items were recommended for approval by the
Planning Commission at its September 26, 1985 meeting. The Director of Planning &
Inspection referred the City Council to pages 9 through 11 of the September 26, 1985
Planning Commission meeting minutes and the two informational sheets attached with
those minutes. He proceeded to review the applications and noted that notices have
been sent and a notice was published in the City's official newspaper regarding this
evening's public hearing.
Councilmember Scott requested to review building plans for these applications, and
the Director of Planning & Inspection presented the plans to her. The Council then
reviewed those plans with the Director of Planning & Inspection.
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning
Commission Application No. 85029 submitted by Lombard Properties, Inc. requesting
site and building plan and special use permit approval -to construct a two phase
office development, south of Freeway Boulevard and north of I -94 in the I -1 zone,
east of Earle Brown Bowl, and Planning Commission Application No. 85043 submitted by
Lombard Properties, Inc. requesting preliminary R.L.S. approval to resubdivide
into five tracts the three tracts of land south of Freeway Boulevard between Earle
Brown Bowl and the Holiday Inn, and vacated highway right -of -way where the old
Humboldt interchange used ed to be. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished
to speak at the public hearing. No one requested to speak and he entertained a
motion to close the public hearing.
Councilmember Scott asked if the City is receiving new landscaping plans including a
mix of trees, and Mr. Al Beisner, representing Lombard Properties, Inc., stated the
City will receive such plans.
10 -7 -85 -8-
t
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember
Theis to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application Nos.
85029 and 85030. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott,
Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember
Scott to approve Planning Commission Application No. 85029 subject to the
following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of
permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of
permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion
of approved site improvements.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with
Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all
landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
9. Storm sewer outlets into I -94 right -of -way are subject to permits
by MN /DOT prior to the issuance of building permits.
10. The new R.L.S. for the property shall receive final approval and
be filed at the County prior to the issuance of building permits.
11. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances and regulations and any violation shall be grounds for
revocation.
12. Approval acknowledges general office occupancy only. No
medical or dental tenants are comprehended because of the number
of parking and proof -of- parking spaces provided on the plan.
10 -7 -85 -9-
J
13. Sewer calculations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department prior
to issuance of the building plan to determine that the proposed use is
g A P P
within existing sewer capacities.
14. Plan approval acknowledges proof of parking for 87 additional parking
stalls. The applicant shall acknowledge in writing that he shall install
said stalls upon determination of the need by the City. Said
acknowledgement shall be filed with the title to the property as a deed
restriction.
15. The applicant shall revise his landscape plan prior to the issuance of
building permits to provide a variety of species of trees along the
nonpublic access to the property.
Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: : n
one. The'moti
g on passed.
There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
approve Planning Commission Application
A No. ject to the P g 850 0 sub
3
J following
conditions:
1. The final R.L.S. is subject to review and approval by the City
Engineer.
2. The final R.L.S. is subject to the provisions of the Chapter 15 of the City
Ordinances.
3. An easement agreement covering ract A and stipulating a minimum 10'
g g
parking setback and 25' building setback shall be executed and filed with
the R.L.S'. at the County.
4. Vacation of Irving Avenue North right -of -way over Tract D, R.L.S. 1482
shall be subject to an agreement stipulating peak sewer flow and payment of
utility hookup charges as drafted by the Director of Public Works. Said
agreement to be executed prior to final R.L.S. approval.
5. Tract B of the proposed R.L.S. shall be widened to accommodate an entrance
drive within Tract B with one entrance lane and two exit lanes as
recommended by the Director of Public Works. Tract B shall also be wide
enough so that a total of 15' of greenspace shall exist between the
entrance drive and adjacent parking lots.
6. Access to Tract A of the proposed R.L.S. shall be limited to the entrance
drive within Tract B of the proposed R.L.S. No access shall be permitted
from Freeway Boulevard directly to Tract A.
Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed.
ORDINANCES
The City Manager introduced An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances
to Allow Chapels, Churches, Synagogues, and Temples as a Special Use in the R5 Zoning
District. He stated this item was first read on September 9, 1985, Published in the
10 -7 -85 -10-
City's official newspaper yin September 19, 1985, and is offered this evening for a
. second reading. He added this item requires a 4/5 vote by the City Council
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance
Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances to Allow Chapels, Churches, Synagogues,
and Temples as a Special Use in the R5 Zoning District. He noted this is an
Ordinance Amendment which is general in nature and not specifically regarding the
property at Brooklyn Boulevard and I -94. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Willard
Bartos, 4106 -65th Avenue North, who asked if a special use permit expires after a one
year period, and the City Manager stated that an applicant has a one year period to
use a special permit. Mr. Bartos told the Council that in the City ordinances a
special use permit allows the raising of a tent and expressed concern that a tent
would be put up on the lot at Brooklyn Boulevard and I -94 creating additional noise
in the neighborhood. The Director of Planning & Inspection clarified the
difference between a special use and an administrative permit, noting that any
development on the property requires a permanent structure. There are provisions
in the zoning ordinance for administrative permits which allow tents and other
temporary structures to be put up for a limit of ten days. Mayor Nyquist asked that
the discussion be limited to the ordinance before the City Council this evening.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
close the public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances
to Allow Chapels, Churches, Synagogues, and Temples as a Special Use in the R5 Zoning
District. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers- Scott, Hawes, and
Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
Councilmember Theis asked if the water drainage problems in the area of Brooklyn
Boulevard and I -94 have been reviewed, and the Director of Public Works noted the
applicant is required to provide drainage proposals prior to approval of their
building and site plan applications.
ORDINANCE NO. 85 -15
Member Celia Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption:
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES TO ALLOW CHAPELS, CHURCHES,
SYNAGOGUES AND TEMPLES AS A SPECIAL USE IN THE R5 ZONING DISTRICT
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member
Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted
against the same: none, whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and
adopted.
The City Manager introduced An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances
to Allow Convenience Food Restaurants as Permitted Use in Shopping Centers over
250, 000 Sq. Ft. in Floor Area. He noted this ordinance was first read on September
9, 1985, published in the City's official newspaper on September 19, 1985, and is
offered this evening for a second reading. He added this item requires a 4/5 vote by
the City Council.
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on An Ordinance
Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances to Allow Convenience Food Restaurants as
Permitted Use in Shopping Centers over 250, 000 Sq. Ft. in Floor Area, and inquired if
there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one
10 -7 -85 -11-
f
requested to speak. -_znd he /entertained a motion to close the public hearing.
There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to i
close the public hearing on An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances
to Allow Convenience Food Restaurants as Permitted Use in Shopping Centers over
250,000 S . Ft
in Floor Area.
Sq. Voting n favor. Mayor
Nyquist, Councilme
Hawes, Y Yq , tubers
Scott, and Theis. , , s. Voting against. none. The motion passed.
ORDINANCE NO. 85 -16
Member Celia Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption:
AN ORDINANCE A14ENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES TO ALLOW CONVENIENCE FOOD
RESTAURANTS AS A PERMITTED USE IN SHOPPING CENTERS OVER 250, 000 SQ. FT. IN FLOOR AREA
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member
Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted
against the same: none, whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and
adopted.
DISCUSSION ITEM
SEWER LIFT CLAIMS
The City Manager referred the Council to information received from the City
Attorney. Councilmember Hawes expressed the concern that there has been some
misdirection on the part of the people involved and any action has been delayed
because of this. He requested the City Attorney to make a recommendation on how to
bring this issue to a swift close.
The City Attorney noted that most of the members of the City Council have expressed
the view that they would like the City to pay the claims and attempt to recover the
money. He recommended against this option because he sees it as improper
expenditure of public funds. He stated the City frequently receives requests
similar to that before the Council this evening, and in order to make an expenditure
the Council must follow statute or a rule of law. In order to follow a rule of law,
the City Attorney stated the City must pay when negligent, but no negligence has been
found by the City in this case. He pointed out that if the City pays the claims when
no public liability exists, then each of the City Council members could personally
be liable for replacing the money into City funds. He emphasized that the authority
does not exist for the City to expend the funds. The City Attorney noted that
possible remedies to those injured have been explained, and reviewed the two methods
of either filing a claim in conciliation court or having all of those injured hire
the same lawyer and have that lawyer bring the claims to court. The City Council,
the City Attorney, and staff discussed the situation, reviewing the City's role and
the options available to the injured parties.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mrs. James Woods, 5900 Upton Avenue North, who said she was
unaware that the sewer backup was occurring until the following morning. She
stated her husband is an electrician and asked the City Engineer for some
information. According to Mrs. Woods, the City Engineer told her husband that a
response to Mr. Woods' questions would not be available until October 9, 1985. The
Director of Public Works responded that he was unaware of the conversation between
Mr. Woods and the City Engineer and did not know the questions of the particular
situation. He added that the City crews responding to the sewer lift malfunction
10 -7 -85 -12-
made a sincere effort to contact all the property owners. Mrs. Woods expressed
dissatisfaction with this response, noting that a City truck was outside of her door
the evening of the malfunction and she was not contacted that night.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Vern Lindstrom, 2800 O'Henry Road, who suggested a
third alternative available to homeowners, that being for the City to admit
negligence in the case.
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mrs. Mark Johnson, 2712 0 Henry Road, who asked who gave
the City Engineer authority to tell her to contact a cleaning crew after the
malfunction. She added that she is unable to pursue the option of going to
conciliation court because she would lose time at work.
Mayor Nyquist recommended that the City pay for the claims of the residents and
pursue the parties at fault. He recognized Mrs. Woods who noted that some
homeowners have not yet filed claims and complained that not all residents were
notified of the meeting with the City Attorney.`
Mayor Nyquist recognized Mrs. Richard Schlavin, 5907 Upton Avenue North, who said
that although the City has said it acted in good faith, no one from the City had ever
sent her anything. The Director of Public Works said the City Engineer compiled a
list of addresses where a possibility existed for damages to occur, and these
residents were contacted.
Mayor Nyquist recognized the daughter of Mr. Gerald Van Tassel, 6268 Brooklyn Drive,
who stated her parents had not been contacted since the night of the incident.
i Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Gordon Peterson, 62 1 40 Brooklyn Drive, who stated he was
away from his home on the evening of the malfunction, but his son was and he spent a
great deal of time all night cleaning up his home. Mr. Peterson stated he was never
contacted by anyone from the City, but he did contact the City. He added neither of
his neigbors on either side of his residence suffered damage due to the speedy work
of the City crews.
Councilmember Hawes asked the City Attorney if the City admits it is at fault, would ,
the insurance company cover the claims. The City Attorney responded saying the
claims may not be covered. Councilmember Theis asked what the total dollar amount
from the damage is estimated at, and the City Attorney stated that claims in the
amount of 'about $7,500 had been filed, but the figure could go higher. Mayor
Nyquist asked if the City can pay the claims of the property owners and then attempt
to settle the claims with the contractor's insurance company. - The City Attorney
responded saying a substantial question of the proper expenditure of public, funds
still remained. Mayor Nyquist recommended that if the City is confident that it was
not negligent in this case then the City should settle the claims with the property,
owners. Councilmember Theis asked if a similar situation occurs in the future,
what obligation would the City have to act in the same manner. The City Attorney
stated there would be no legal obligation to act in this same way in the future.
There was a motion by Mayor Nyquist and seconded by Councilmember Theis to direct
staff to prepare a resolution to have the City purchase the claims caused by the
sewer lift malfunction and to have the City obtain reimbursement from the contractor
and all other responsible parties.
10 -7 -85 -13-
a
Councilmember Hawes stated he wants the residents to receive their money, but said
he cannot take on the personal financial responsibility if this action goes against
the City. Mayor Nyquist stated he suspects the possibility of that is remote.
Councilmembers Theis and Scott stated they could not afford the costs either.
Upon vote being taken on the foregoing motion, the following members voted in favor:
Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Theis and Scott. Voting against: Councilmember
Hawes. The motion passed. The City Manager stated that staff will attempt to
report
back t
P o the City ouncil at either the October
_ t y Oc b 21 1885 or November � T 8
C Council meet 5
y ng. He added the residents will be kept abreast of the situation.
RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED)
The City Manager introduced a Resolution Relating to a Project Under the Municipal
Industrial Development Act and Calling for a Public Hearing Thereon. He noted this
resolution relates to awarding industrial development bonds to Ryan Construction
Company. He noted that Councilmember Lhotka who is not in attendance at this
evening's meeting had requested clarification of the size of the building proposed
by Ryan Construction Company and expressed some discontent over the proposal.
The City Council and staff discussed the potential proposal related to Ryan
Construction Company.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -183
Member Rich is introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION RELATING TO A PROJECT UNDER THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT;
CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING THEREON 0
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following
voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed
and adopted.
The City Manager introduced a Resolution Approving and Authorizing the Execution of
a Negotiation Agreement. He noted that this item also appears on the agenda for the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority meeting. He added that the passage of this
resolution is necessary for Lombard Properties to prove that they are negotiating
with the City of Brooklyn Center when attempting to obtain quotations.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -184
Member Rich is introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A NEGOTIATION AGREEMENT
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted
against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
The City Manager introduced a Resolution Authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to
Execute an Agreement with the Shingle Creek Land Company Relating to Surplus MN /DOT
10 -7 -85 -14-
f `
Right -of -Way Adjacent to Tract B, Registered Land Survey No. 1377• Councilmember
Hawes asked what the City's interest is as stated in item 1 in the resolution, and the
City Manager said the City has the first right to take the property as public
property.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -185
Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE
SHINGLE CREEK LAND COMPANY RELATING TO SURPLUS MN /DOT RIGHT -OF -WAY ADJACENT TO
TRACT B, REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 1377
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor
thereof: Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following _
voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed
and adopted.
The City Manager introduced a Resolution Approving Agreement with Braun Engineering
for Geotechnical Design Services Relating to Design of Municipal Golf Course. The
Director of Public Works explained the process of obtaining the estimates.
Councilmember Theis asked if there is any difference in performance between the two
firms cited in the resolution, and the Director of Public Works said the City has had
excellent results from both companies.
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -186
Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH BRAUN ENGINEERING FOR GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN
SERVICE RELATING TO DESIGN OF MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted
against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
DISCUSSION ITEM (CONTINUED)
JOINT SCHOOL -CITY MEETING, NOVEMBER 25, 1985, 7:00 p.m.
The City Manager stated the school district has requested a joint meeting with the
City Council and the school board on
November. 25, 1985 at 7:OO p.m. He stated the
City will host the meeting at City Hall.
There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
schedule a Joint School -City Meeting on November 25, 1985, 7:00 p.m. at City Hall.
Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmember Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed.
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott,
Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The Brooklyn
Center City Council adjourned at 10:55 P.m.
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
10 -7 -85 -15-
i
The following persons are recommended for appointment as election judges
for the November 5, 1985 General Election:
Standby Judges
D- Alberta Ruf
D- Lorraine Halter
i
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER PROJECT
NO. 1985 -24 (HUMBOLDT AVENUE SIDEWALK)
WHEREAS, pursuant to written Contract for Project No. 1985 -24
signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Halvorson
Construction has satisfactorily completed the improvement in
accordance with said contract:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of
the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. The work completed under said contract is accepted
and approved according to the following schedule:
As Approved Final Amount
Original Contract $ 5,536.00 $ 3,991.90
2. The value of work performed is less than the
original contract amount by $1,544.10 due to a
general overestimation of planned quantities.
3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on
said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in
full. The total amount to be paid for said
improvement under said contract shall be
$3,991.90.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
F
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
9 b
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON 1985 SINGLE FAMILY
REVENUE BOND PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center (the "City ") wishes to develop
a single family housing program for the City and to issue housing revenue
bonds to finance the program; and
WHEREAS, in order to issue housing revenue bonds for a single
family housing program, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462C requires the adoption
of a Housing Program (the "Program ") after the holding of a public hearing,
after published notice at least 15 days prior to the date of the public hearing
and
WHEREAS, Section 103A(j)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954,
as amended, requires the adoption of a Housing Policy Statement after the
holding of a public hearing after reasonable public notice;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City
of Brooklyn Center:
1. That a public hearing on the proposed Program for the City
is set for November 18, 1985 at 7 :30 p.m. at the City Hall.
2. That the City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause the
publication of notice of the public hearing in a newspaper
of general circulation in the City at least 15 days prior to the
date of the Public Hearing.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded
by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Toll Free Minnesota (800) 862 -6002
d
Toll Free Other States (800) 328 -6122
MMer & Schroeder Fffianciai, Inc.
Northwestern Financial Center ■ P.O. Box 789. 7900 Xerxes Avenue South • Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431• (612) 831 -1500
October 7, 1985
Mr. Brad Hoffman
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
Dear Brad:
Enclosed please find a copy of a proposed Housing Program for the
City of Brooklyn Center. The Program is basically the same as last
year - it satisfies all the statutory requirements while being generic
enough to allow you to undertake virtually any type of housing program
if you receive an allocation. Please let me know if you have any
questions or comments on the Program, or if you feel there are changes
that should be made.
I have also enclosed a copy of a Policy Statement, which also has
to be adopted by the City following a public hearing. The public
hearing for both the Program and the Policy can be held at the same
time. The Policy Statement briefly describes the housing "policies"
of the City. The portions of the Policy Statement in brackets (r- 3)
must be completed by you. There are statements which relate to the
specific policies of your city. If you need help filling out the
Policy Statement, please feel free to call me. I have also included
a copy of the Policy that Dakota County adopted last year, for your
reference.
If you feel these documents are acceptable, than a date for the Public
Hearing should be determined. If your city requires the council to
set the date calling for a Public Hearing, that should be done as
soon as possible. Remember, a notice calling for the Public Hearing
must be published in the local newspaper at least 15 days prior to
the Hearing. Please let me know when you determine dates so that
the necessary resolutions can be prepared in plenty of time.
As far as the rest of the application is concerned, I believe that
I have all the additional information from last years application.
Please call me, should you have any questions or comments. In addition,
I would be happy to come out and meet with you to explain the documents
and procedures further, if you wish. Otherwise, I will wait to hear
from you!
Very truly yours,
^ 4
Laura C. Pioske \�'\
Underwriter
LCP /dlc
Enclosures Headquarters: Minneapolis, Minnesota
anch Offices: Solana Beach, California • Santa Monica, California • Northbrook, Illinois • St. Paul, Minnesota • Tallahassee, Florida • Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Member d dx Sam — Inwmr Ru• ,— Corponrwn
I
THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
[Issuer's Employer Identification Number]
Dated: November 1, 1985
POLICY REPORT UNDER SECTION 103A
(A) GENERAL
On July 18, 1984, Congress enacted into law the Tax Reform
Act of 1984. This Act imposes certain requirements on issuers
of qualified single family mortgage bonds and mortgage credit
certificates. One of these requirements is that issuers
publish a statement of their policies with respect to housing,
development, and low- income housing assistance and report on
their compliance, for the one -year period preceding the date of
the report, with the intent of Congress that qualified mortgage
bond issues and mortgage credit certificates assist lower
income families to afford home ownership before assisting
higher income families. In order to qualify for a federal tax
exemption for interest on qualified mortgage bonds to be issued
in 1986, this statement must be published prior to December 31,
1985 As The City of Brooklyn Center, (the "Issuer ") plans to
issue qualified single family mortgage bonds or mortgage credit
certificates in 1986, the following report is being published
in order to comply with the requirements of the Tax Reform Act
of 1984 and the Regulations thereunder.
(B) POLICIES AND GOALS
(1) Housing Policies and Goals
The Minnesota State Legislature has found and declared that
as a result of public actions involving highways, public
facilities and urban renewal activities, and as a result
of the spread of deteriorated housing and blight to
formerly sound urban and rural neighborhoods, and as a
result of the inability of private enterprise and
investment to produce without public assistance a
sufficient supply of decent, safe and sanitary residential
dwellings at prices and rentals which persons and families
of low and moderate income can afford, there exists within
the State of Minnesota a serious shortage of decent, safe
and sanitary housing at prices or rentals within the means
of- persons and families of low and moderate income.
Minnesota Statutes, Section 462A.02 Subdivision 1
The Minnesota State Legislature has additionally found and
declared that
this shortage of housing for low and moderate income
families is inimical to the safety, health, morals and
welfare of the residents of the state and to the sound
growth and development of its communities. An adequate
supply, of housing of a variety of housing types serving
persons and families of all income levels and properly
planned and related to public transportation, public
facilities, public utilities and sources of employment and
service is- ,essential to the orderly growth and prosperity
of the state and its communities. Present patterns of
providing housing unduly limit the housing options for
many people in the state's urban centers, smaller
communities and non- metropolitan areas.
Minnesota States, Section 462A.01 Subdivision 2
The shortage of safe and sanitary housing for low and
moderate income persons recognized by the Minnesota
legislature is exacerbated during periods of high interest
rates. It is the policy of the Issuer to promote the
development of safe and sanitary housing and to enable low
and moderate income persons to own their own homes by
providing long -term low income loans to low and moderate
income persons to finance the construction, rehabilitation
and acquisition of homes.
The Issuer plans to issue qualified single family
mortgage bonds or mortgage credit certificates (the
"Bonds /Certificates ") in 1986 in furtherance of the
above- stated policies and in conformance to the following
policies and goals:
( i) Use of Proceeds
The proceeds of the Bonds /Certificates will be used
to finance [the acquisition of residences].
[qualified home improvements] [qualified
rehabilitation loans]
( ii) Targeting of Proceeds to Housing Type
The proceeds of the Bonds /Certificates will [not] be
targeted to [new housing] [existing housing] [or
describe other class or type of housing].
(iii) Determination of need for Targeting
[Describe here how the need or absence of need to
target the Bond /Certificate proceeds to the type of
housing described in (ii) above was determined.]
( iv) Method of Targeting Proceeds
[Describe the method used to target the
Bond /Certificate proceeds to the type of housing
described in (ii) above.]
( v) Other Pertinent Information
[Describe here any other information pertinent to the
Issuer's housing policies with respect to the Bonds/
Certificate. If none, so state.]
-2-
3 ( vi) The need to provide decent and affordable
housing to /persons of low and moderate income is the
main goal of the Issuer. Through the methods of
targeting selected the Issuer hopes to achieve this
goal and at the same time to encourage development of
new housing and provide a variety of housing choices
for low and moderate income persons and families.
(2) Development Policies and Goals
The Minnesota State Legislature has found and declared that
as a result of public actions involving highways, public
facilities and urban renewal activities, and as a result
of the spread of deteriorated housing and blight to
formerly sound urban and rural neighborhoods, and as a
result of the inability of private enterprise and
investment to produce without public assistance a
sufficient supply of decent, safe and sanitary residential
dwellings at prices and rentals which persons and families
of low and moderate income can afford, there exists within
the state of Minnesota a serious shortage of decent, safe
and sanitary housing at prices or rentals within the means
of persons and families of low and moderate income.
Minnesota Statutes, Section 462A.02 Subdivision l
The Minnesota State Legislature has additionally found and
declared that
this shortage of housing for low and moderate income
families is inimical to the safety, health, morals and
welfare of the residents of the state and to the sound
growth and development of its communities._ An adequate
supply of housing of a variety of housing types serving
persons and families of all income levels and properly
planned and related to public transportation, public
facilities, public utilities and sources of employment and
service is essential to the orderly growth and prosperity
of the state and its communities. Present patterns of
providing housing unduly limit the housing options for
many people in the state's urban centers, smaller
communities and non- metropolitan areas.
Minnesota States, Section 462A.01 Subdivision 2
The shortage of safe and sanitary housing for low and
moderate income persons recognized by the Minnesota
legislature is exacerbated during periods of high interest
rates. It is the policy of the Issuer to promote the
development of safe and sanitary housing and to enable low
and moderate income persons to own their own homes by
providing long -term low income loans to low and moderate
-3-
income persons to finance the construction, rehabilitation
and acquisition .of homes.
The Issuer plans to issue the "Bonds / Certificates"
in 1986 in furtherance of the above - stated policies and in
conformance to the following policies and goals:
( i) Targeting of Proceeds
[ %] [None] of the lendable proceeds of the
Bonds /Certificates will be targeted to specific
areas. [Describe the amount of proceeds which must
go to "targeted areas' under Section 103A.1
( ii) Description of Target Areas
[Describe target areas. Include "103A targeted
areas." If not applicable, so indicate.]
(iii) Selection of Target Areas
[Describe the reasons for selecting the areas
described in (ii) above.. If not applicable, so
indicate.]
( iv) Use of Proceeds in Target Areas
The proceeds of the Bonds /Certificates which will be
targeted to the areas described in (ii) above will be
used to finance the redevelopment of [existing
housing] [new construction]
[If proceeds of the Bonds /Certificates were not
targeted to specific areas, insert here the following:
The proceeds of the Bonds /Certificates will not be
targeted to specific areas.]
( v) Other Pertinent Information
[Describe here any other information pertinent to the
Issuer's development policies with respect to he
Bonds /Certificates. If none, so state.]
( vi) [Describe how the Issuer's development
policies relate to its housing and low- income housing
assistance policies.]
(3) Low- Income Housing Assistance Policies and Goals
Minnesota law provides that issuers of single family
mortgage revenue bonds prepare a financing program which
establishes limits on the adjusted gross income of persons
and families to be served by the program. Adjusted gross
-4-
income is defined by Minnesota law as gross income less $750
for each adult - -in the family to a maximum of two adults and
less $500 for each other dependent in the family. The adjusted
gross income may not exceed the greater of (a) 110% of the
median family income as estimated by the United States
department of housing and urban development for the
non - metropolitan county or metropolitan statistical area in
which the Issuer is located, or (b) 100% of the income limits
established by the Minnsota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA) for
the geographical area in which the issuer is located. Up to
20% of all loans provided under all of an issuer's single
family housing programs may be provided to persons and families
without regard to income limits in certain circumstances.
Minnesota law also provides that in order to be eligible to
obtain an allocation of authority to issue qualified mortgage
revenue bonds a program must provide that all loans will be
reserved for at least six months for persons and families whose
adjusted � ed ncome is below elow 80% of the limits . on adjusted
gross income specified above.
The Issuer plans to issue the Bonds /Certificats in
1986 in furtherance of the policies of the Minnesota
Legislature evidenced by the above- stated statutory
limitations on the adjusted gross income of persons and
families served by single family housing programs and in
conformance to the following policies and goals:
( i) Targeting of Proceeds According to Income
None of the proceeds of the Bonds /Certificates will
be targeted to persons or families with income equal
to or lower than 50% of median income;
None of the proceeds of the Bonds /Certificates will
be targeted to persons or fimilies wth income equal
to or lower than 80% of median income;
All of the proceeds of the Bonds /Certificates will be
targeted to persons or families with incomes not
greater than 88% of median income for the first six
months during which proceeds are available to
purchase loans. Median income is determined by the
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and means
$32,800 for
the non- metropolitan county or metro-
politan statistical area including Issuer a the Issu s of
October 2, 1985.
The effective limits on adjusted gross income for
persons and families benefiting from the program
after the initial six -month period will be not
greater than the greater of 110% of median income
(currently $36,080), or the limits established by the
MHFA (assuming an 11% mortgage loan interest rate
currently $37,000 new construction, and $34,000
-5-
existing) All loans will be reserved for persons
and families with adjusted gross income less than 80%
of the program income limits for six months from the
time when mortgage lons will first be made available
from Bond proceeds. The City plans to use the
provision of state law permitting up to 20% of the
mortgage loans purchased with bond proceeds to be
made without limitation as to income for homes
located in targeted areas, as described in Minnesota
Statutes, Section 462C.02, Subdivision 9.
( ii) Method of Targeting Proceeds
In Brooklyn Center bond documents will permit the
purchase of loans only if such loans 'meet all
requirements of the bond program, including the
requirements that loans be made to finance the
acquisition of homes made only to households which
meet the income restrictions set forth above.
(iii) Other Pertinent Information
[Describe here any other information pertinent to the
Issuer's low income housing assistance policies with
respect to the Bonds /Certificates. If not, so state.]
( iv) [Describe how the Issuer's low income housing
assistance policies relate to its housing and
development policies.]
The need to provide decent and affordable housing to
persons of low and moderate income is the main goal
of the Issuer. By targeting a portion of the
proceeds to new construction and by imposing the
income limits set forth above on persons and families
obtaining financing under the program, the Issuer
hopes to achieve this goal and at the same time to
encourage development of new housing and provide a
variety of housing choices for low and moderate
income persons and families.
(C) COMPLIANCE WITH PREVIOUS REPORT
The Issuer has not published a Policy Report under
Section 103A prior to this Policy Report.
(D) COMPLIANCE WITH INTENT OF CONGRESS
On , 1984, the Issuer issued
Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of $
(the "1984 Bonds ") in an effort to assist lower - income
families to afford home ownership. The following informa-
tion is provided with respect to the 1984 Bonds;
-6-
(1) Method of Distributing 1984 Bond Proceeds
l
[Describe here the method the Issuer used or will use
distribute the proceeds of the 1984 Bonds.]
(2) Assistance to Lower Income Families
The proceeds of the 1984 Bonds [assisted] [will assist]
assist Tower income families before assisting higher
income families by:
[Describe the way in which the method described in (1)
above enabled the issuer to assist lower income families
before higher income families.]
(3) Income Levels
[Describe here the income levels as defined and used or to
be used by the issuer in distributing th proceeds of the
1984 Bonds.
On 19 , the Issuer issued
Bonds in the aggregate principal amount of $ (the
11 19 Bonds ") in an effort to assist lower- income families to
afford home ownership. As of November 30, 1985, $
of the bond proceeds remained available for use. The following
information is provided with respect to the 19 Bonds:
[Insert here the same information set forth in (D)(1)
through (D)(3) above for each bond issue prior to 1984 for
which bond proceeds are still available for use.]
[If the issuer had no previous bond issues, insert the
following language in place of paragraphs (D) (1) through
(D)(3);
The Issuer has not issued any qualified mortgage bonds nor
any mortgage credit certificates prior to the date of this
Policy Report.]
(E) SUMMARY OF HEARING COMMENTS
A public hearing on the proposed Policy Report was
duly held on , 19 , following
publication of notice of such hearing on ,
19 The following comments were received:
[Insert here a summary of the comments on the proposed
Policy Report which were received at the public hearing.
If none, insert the following sentence: No comments on
the proposed report were made at the public hearing.]
-7-
This report is submitted by the undersigned elected
representative- --o-f the Issuer [and the undersigned elected
representatives of the City of and the City
of ]
[Applicable Elected Representative]
[Title]
[SEAL]
ATTEST:
[Title]
0052E
-8-
THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
1985 SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BOND PROGRAM
October, 1985
SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BOND PROGRAM
FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended (the "Act "),
authorizes a city, or a housing and redevelopment authority
designated by and acting on behalf of a city to develop and
administer programs of making or purchasing mortgage loans to
finance the acquisition, by low and moderate income persons and
families, of single family housing located anywhere within its
boundaries. The City of Brooklyn Center (the "City ") will
exercise all powers conferred on the City pursuant to Minnesota
Statute, sections 462C.01 through 462C.07, provided that the
City holds public hearings required by the Act and to approve
any housing plan or program prior to submission to either the
Metropolitan Council or the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency.
In creating this single family housing finance program for
the City, the City. Council has,found and determined that the
preservation of the quality of life in the City is dependent
upon the maintenance and provision of adequate, decent, safe
and sanitary housing stock; that accomplishing the provision of
such housing stock is a public purpose and will benefit the
residents of the City; that a need exists within the City to
provide in a timely fashion additional affordable housing to
persons of low and moderate income residing and expected to
reside in the City that a need exists for mortgage credit to
be made available for both existing housing and for the new
construction of additional single family housing; and that many
owners of single family housing units are unable to sell such
units and would -be purchasers of single family housing units
either cannot afford mortgage credit at the market rate of
interest or cannot obtain mortgage credit because the mortgage
market is severely restricted.
The City Council, in establishing this'housing finance
program for the City has considered the information contained
in the Housing Plan, including particularly (i) the
availability and affordability of other government housing
programs; (ii) the availability and affordability of private
market financing for the acquisition of existing and newly
constructed single family housing units; (iii) an analysis of
population and employment trends and projections of population
and employment needs; (iv) recent housing trends and future
housing needs in the City; and (v) an analysis of how the
program will meet the needs of low and moderate income persons
and families residing and expected to reside in the City.
The City Council 1 has further considered (i) the amount,
timing and manner of sale of bonds to finance the estimated
amounts of mortgage loans to be made under the program, to fund
the appropriate reserves and to pay the costs of issuance;
(ii) the number and qualifications of lenders eligible to
participate in the program; (iii) the method for monitoring the
implementation by participants to insure that the program will
be consistent with the Housing Plan; (iv) the administrative
capacity of the City and other methods of administering,
-2-
servicing and supervising the program; (v) the cost of the
program to the City, including future administrative expenses;
(vi) the restrictions on the purchase prices of housing units
to be financed under the program; (vii) the limits on income of
persons or families receiving financing under the program; and
(viii) certain other limitations.
Section 1. Definitions
The following terms when used in this program shall have
the following meanings, respectively:
1) "Acquisition Fund" shall mean that fund to be created
under an indenture of trust or similar agreement
between the City and a Trustee for holders of the
Bonds into which shall be credited certain proceeds
of the Bonds and other funds, if any, and from which
the City shall purchase Mortgage Loans qualified for
purchase under the Program.
( 2) "Act" shall mean Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C as
currently in effect and as the same may be from time
to time amended.
( 3) "Adjusted Gross Income" shall mean Gross Family
Income, less $750 for each Adult in the family, to a
maximum of two Adults, and less $500 for each other
Dependent in the family.
( 4) "Adult shall mean anyone who has attained a legal
age of majority under Minnesota law but who is not a
Dependent.
-3-
( 5) "Affiliate of any specified Person shall mean any
other Person directly or indirectly controlling or
controlled by or under direct or indirect common
control with such specified Person. For purposes of
this definition, control, when used with respect to
any specified Person, shall mean the power to direct
the management and policies of such Person, directly
or indirectly whether through the ownership of voting
securities, by contract or otherwise.
( 6) "Agency" shall mean the Minnesota Housing Finance
Agency, or any successor to its functions under the
Act.
( 7) "Bonds" shall mean the revenue bonds to be issued by
the City to finance the Program.
( 8) "City" shall mean the City of Brooklyn Center, State
of Minnesota.
( 9) "City Council" shall mean the governing body of the
City.
(10) "Commencement Date" shall mean the later of (a) first
day on which the City has Bond proceeds available to
purchase Mortgage Loans under the Program, or (b) for
New Housing Units to be purchased with Mortgage Loan
proceeds, the date on which pre -sale efforts to
market New Housing Units has commenced.
(11) "Dependent" shall mean dependent, as defined in
Section 152 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as
amended, and the regulations thereunder.
-4-
(12) "Developer" shall mean any Person engaged in the
i construction for sale of Housing Units, and any
Affiliate of such Person.
(13) "FHA shall mean the Federal Housing Administration,
an agency of the United States of America within the
United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development, or any successor to its functions.
(14) "FHLMC" shall mean the Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation, or any successor to its functions.
(15) "FNMA" shall mean the Federal National Mortgage
Association, or any succcessor to its functions.
(16) "Gross Family Income" shall mean the current annual
income from all sourses of the Mortgagor, his or her
spouse, and any guarantor or co -owner of a fee
interest in the Housing ousing Unit to be financed with the
proceeds of a Mortgage Loan as determined in -
accordance with the then current loan origination
requirements of FHLMC, FNMA, FHA or VA as to Mortgage
Loans originated under programs regulated by FHLMC,
FNMA, FHA or VA, or as to a conventional Mortgage
Loan by the Qualified Mortgage Guaranty Insurer
insuring such Mortgage Loan, as the case may be, as
verified by an Originator in accordance with such
requirements and its customary underwriting practices.
(17) "Housing Plan shall mean the Housing Plan of the
City, as adopted by the City Council on September 20,
1982 and any amendment thereof.
-5-
(18) "Housing Unit" shall mean residential rear property
and facilities functionally related and subordinate
thereto securing a Mortgage. Loan, which shall be a
private detached or attached one- two - 'three- or
four -unit family dwelling, or a one - family apartment
under condominium ownership (as defined in Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 515A), not including a mobile home
or trailer even if attached to a permanent
foundation, including a New Housing.Unit, owned and
occupied by an individual or family as a principal
residence (or, if the Housing Unit contains more than
one dwelling unit, one of such dwelling units is
owned and occupied by an individual or family as a
principal residence), containing complete living
facilities and located within the geographical
boundaries of the City.
(19) "Lending Institution" shall mean any bank, trust
company, savings bank, national banking association,
savings and loan association, building and loan
association, mortgage bank or other mortgage lender
or governmental agency which customarily makes or
services mortgage loans on owner- occupied residential
housing, or any holding company for any of the
foregoing, provided, however, such Lending
Institution is approved by FHA, VA, FNMA or FHLMC or
is approved by the City.
(20) "Mortgage Insurer" shall mean the FHA, the VA or any
Qualified Mortgage Guaranty Insurer.
-6-
(21) "Mortgage Loan" shall mean an interest bearing loan
i to a Mortgagor for the purpose of purchasing a
Housing Unit, evidenced by a promissory note and
secured by a mortgage on such Housing Unit.
(22) "Mortgagor" shall mean an individual or individuals
who have received a Mortgage Loan.
(23) "New Housing Unit" shall mean a newly constructed
Housing Unit, to which the Mortgagor will be the
first owner occupant.
(24) "Origination Agreement" shall mean a written
agreement between an Originator and the City under
which the Originator agrees to originate and sell to
the City and the City agrees to purchase Mortgage
Loans pursuant to this Program.
(25) "Originator shall mean a Lendin g Institution which
executes an Origination Agreement as an originator.
(26) "Originator Commitment" shall mean a written
commitment by an Originator to the City, in a form
acceptable to the City, by which the Originator
agrees, upon certain terms and conditions, to enter
into an Origination Agreement.
(27) "Person" shall mean any individual, corporation,
partnership', joint venture, association, joint- stock
company, trust, unincorporated organization or
government or any agency or political subdivision
thereof.
-7-
(28) "Pledged Savings Account" shall mean a savings
account established in connection with a Pledged
Savings Account Mortgage Loan, which savings account
and the earnings thereon may be used to make payments
on the Mortgage Loan any time during the initial
years of its amortization period and which is pledged
as security for the Pledged Savings Account Mortgage
Loan.
(29) "Pledged Savings Account Mortgage Loan" shall mean a
Mortgage Loan originated pursuant to any plan
approved by the Program Administrator, for which a
portion of the principal and interest payments during
the initial years of such Mortgage Loan are expected
to be paid from a Pledged Savings Account.
(30) "Program shall mean this single family housing
finance program authorized and to be implemented by
the City pursuant to the Act.
(31) "Program Administrator" shall mean any Lending
Insitutution which agrees in writing with the City to
monitor the origination and servicing of Mortgage
Loans sold to the City under the Program or to
service all such Mortgage Loans, and to perform such
other functions as are agreed upon by such Program
Administrator and the City.
(32) "Project shall mean a development of New Housing
Units, including condominiums or townhouses
constructed by a Developer, and including
-8-
condominiums or townhouses constructed by a Developer
M for individuals who may sell their existing Housing
Units to persons who will finance the purchase of
such existing Housing Units with Mortgage Loans made
available by the Program.
(33) "Qualified Mortgage Guaranty Insurer" shall mean any
mortgage guaranty insurance company approved by FNMA
or FHLMC, which is licensed to do business in the
State of Minnesota and (i) whose insurance policies
would not adversely affect the rating on the Bonds
with the rating agency which initially rated the
Bonds or (ii) is rated by such agency on the basis of
claims payment ability at the highest rating then
given insurers issuing mortgage guaranty insurance
policies, so long as such agency rates such insurers
9 Y
on the basis of claims payment ability.
(34) "Target Area" shall mean a targeted area as defined
in Section 462C.02, Subdivision 9 of the Act, as such
Target Areas may exist on the Commencement Date, or
as may thereafter be established.
(36) "VA" shall mean the Veterans Administration, an
agency of the United States of America, or any
successor to its functions.
Section 2. Program for Acquisition of Mortgage Loans
The City hereby establishes a Program to acquire Mortgage
Loans by contracting with Originators to purchase Mortgage
-9-
Loans from Originators at such purchase prices and upon such
other terms and conditions described herein or as shall'be
determined by the City in Origination Agreements to be entered
into between the City and Originators. In establishing and
carrying out such Program the City may exercise, within the
corporate limits of the City, any of the .powers. the Minnesota
Housing Finance Agency may exercise under the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462A.
Insofar as the City has or will contract with
underwriters, financial advisors, legal counsel, a Program
Administrator and a trustee, all of .whom will be reimbursed
from Bond proceeds and continuing Program revenues, it is not
expected that additional staff will be necessary, to implement
the Program, nor is it expected that any additional staff costs
need be paid from the City's budget. The Program Administrator
will administer the performance of the Originators with respect
to the limitations set forth in this Program, and will monitor
the Originators' servicing of the Mortgage Loans or will itself
service the Mortgage Loans. The City will select a trustee for
the bondholders who will be required to be experienced in trust
management and has a large corporate trust portfolio. The
trustee will administer and maintain the Bonds sold to finance
the Program.
The City Council hereby authorizes and directs its City
Coordinator to monitor all negotiations between the various
parties taking part in the Program to insure that the Program
documents are consistent with the Housing Plan and the
-10-
Program. Prior to the adoption of the resolution authorizing
the sale of Bonds to finance the Program, the City Coordinator
shall report to the City Council his findings as to the
consistency of the Program documents with the Housing Plan and
the policies of the City contained in this Program.
Section 3. Non -Bond Proceeds to be Contributed to the Program
To assure the financial feasibility of the Program and to
assure that interest rates on the Mortgage Loans will be as
favorable as possible to purchasers of Housing Units, as well
as to assure the completion of Projects intended to be
benefited by the Program, the City may commit various revenues
and other resources to the Program.
Section 4. Standards and Requirements Relating to Mortgage
Loans Pursuant to the Program
The following standards and requirements shall apply with
respect to Mortgage Loans acquired by the City pursuant to the
Program:
( 1 A Mortgage Loan may be made only to finance the
purchase of a Housing Unit existing at the time such
Mortgage Loan is made. Construction loans shall no
be made, but an Originator may enter into an
agreement with a Mortgagor to make a Mortgage Loan to
him or her upon the completion of the construction of
a New Housing Unit to be financed by such Mortgage
Loan,- subject to the "first -come, first- served" and
-11-
nondiscrimination basis requirements of Section 4 (2)
hereof, and subject to the receipt of a certificate
of a City building inspector stating that the New
Housing Unit complies with the building code
requirements of the state building code, set forth
under Minnesota.Statutes, Sec. 16.83 et seq., as they
are then in effect.
( 2) Each Originator shall accept and process applications
for Mortgage Loans for the purchase or construction
of Housing Units on a nondiscriminatory "first -come,
first- served" basis, subject to the other provisions
of the Program, including any set asides and
restrictions imposed by Section 5 hereof, and will
not arbitrarily reject an application for a Mortgage
Loan for a Housing Unit within a- specified geographic
area because of the location and /or age of the
property, or, in the case of a proposed Mortgagor,
arbitrarily vary the terms of a loan or the
application procedures therefore because of race,
color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital
status, age or status with regard to public
assistance or disability.
( 3) The Mortgagor of each Housing Unit must be the fee
owner of such Housing Unit and must occupy such
Housing Unit or, if the Housing Unit contains more
than one dwelling unit, one of such dwelling units as
his or his principal place of residence.
-12-
( 4) At least ninety percent (90 %) of the moneys available
to make Mortgage Loans shall be used to purchase
Mortgage Loans made to first -time homebuyers,
including Mortgagors who have not owned a home during
any part of the three (3) years prior to the date of
closing of the mortgage Loan. Up to ten percent
(10 %) of the moneys available to make Mortgage Loans
may be used to purchase Mortgage Loans made to
persons or families who are not first -time homebuyers
including those who have owned a home during some
part of the three (3) years prior to the date of
closing of the Mortgage Loan, provided they meet all
other requirements of the Program.
( 5) Mobile homes and trailers are not Housing Units for
purpose of the Program, even if such mobile homes and
trailers are attached to permanent foundations.
( 6) Each Housing Unit must be located within the
corporate limits of the City.
( 7) Loans must be made only to finance homes that are
serviced by municipal water and sewer utilities.
( 8) The purchase price of a Housing Unit may not exceed
the lesser of (a) three times the limit on Adjusted
Gross Income of the Mortgagor set forth in Section 4
(12); (b) four times the Adjusted Gross Income of the
mortgagor if the Housing Unit is located within a
Target Area or (c) 110% of the average area purchase
price for residential housing in the Minneapolis -St.
-13-
Paul Standard Metropolitan Area computed as provided
under the Proposed Treasury Regulations or any final
regulations promulgated under Section 103A of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended.
( 9) Each Mortgage Loan must, at a minimum, be insured or
guaranteed if the original principal amount of the
Mortgage Loan exceeds (or is expected at any time to
exceed) 75% of the lesser of the purchase price or
appraised value of the property subject to the
related Mortgage , with either (i) FHA Insurance,
(ii) a VA Guaranty or (iii) a Mortgage Guaranty
Insurance Policy.
(10) The Adjusted Gross Income of a Mortgagor at the time
of application for a Mortgage Loan shall not exceed
the greater of:
( i) 110 percent of the median family income as
estimated by the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development for the
Minneapolis -St. Paul Standard Metropolitan
Area; or
( ii) 100 percent of the income limit established by
the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for the
City.
(iii) Provided that, beginning six (6) months after
the Commencement Date, up to twenty percent'
(20 %) of the amount of bond proceeds deposited
in the Acquisition Fund may be used to purchase
-14-
Mortgage Loans made to Mortgagors with Adjusted
Gross income in excess of the amount set forth
above who are purchasing Housing Units located
within -a Target Area.
(11) For the first six (6) months after the Commencement,
Date, 100% of the funds provided for the purchase of
Mortgage Loans may be made or committed only to
Mortgagors with Adjusted Gross Incomes at the time of
application of less than eighty percent (80%) of the
limit set forth in Section 4 (11).
(12) To the extent required by the Act or other applicable
laws or to preserve the exemption of interest on the
Bonds from federal or state income taxation, the
assumption of a Mortgage Loan from a Mortgagor by any
other person or persons shall be permitted only if
the requirements of Sections 4 (4) , 4 (8) , and 4_(3) are
met with respect to the assumption.
(13) An Originator may be' to retain from a
Mortgagor or seller an origination fee not exceeding
one and one -half percent (1 -1/2 %) (or such greater or
lesser amount as shall be specified by the City in
the Origination Agreements) of the principal amount
of the Mortgage Loan. In addition, each Mortgagor
may be charged a program participation fee of two
percent (2%) of the original principal amount of a
Mortgage Loan, or such greater or lesser amount as
shall be specified by the City, all or a portion
-15-
which may be deferred and made payable with (and in
addition to) the last installment of principal and
interest due on such Mortgage Loan, whether at the
scheduled final maturity of such Mortgage Loan or at
its prepayment in full prior to its final maturity.
A Developer and. /or Seller of a Housing Unit may also
be charged an additional origination fee, which fee
may be used to defray Program costs.
(14) The City hereby requests a waiver by MHFA of the
restrictions of Section 462C.03, Subdivision 5 of the
Act. Failure by the MHFA to reject this program will
be deemed to constitute approval of such waiver.
(15) The difference between the interest rate on Mortgage
Loans and the interest rates on the Bonds issued to
acquire such Mortgage Loans shall represent only the
costs of insurance premiums, amortized expenses of
issuing the Bonds, the City's ongoing costs for the
administration of the Program, fees of originating,
servicing, and administering the Mortgage Loans and
trustee and paying agent fees, computed so as to
provide that the Bonds shall not be deemed to be
"arbitrage bonds" under the Proposed Regulations or
any final regulations promulgated under Section 103A
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended.
(16) In the event that the City acquires any existing
residences in the City, with the intention of
demolishing such residences and making the cleared
-16-
sites available for the construction of New Housing
Units, the City will make available to qualified
residents of the residences so acquired any
relocation assistance and benefits required to be
provided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
117.52 et seq. .
(17) Sellers of existing homes will be required to pay to
have their homes inspected by a licensed truth in
housing evaluator in accordance with the City of
Brooklyn Center's regulations, as they exist at the
time of sale.
Section 5. Set Asides and Restrictions Relating to the
Acquisition of Mortgage Loans
Notwithstanding anything in Section 3 to the contrary, the
following restrictions shall apply with respect to Mortgage
Loans acquired by the City pursuant to the Program:
( 1) The City may permit commitments to be made by
Originators to (a) Developers to provide Mortgage
Loans on New Housing Units to be constructed by such
Developers, or (b) Developers who will provide
Mortgage Loans for homebuyers purchasing existing
Housing Units owned by the purchasers of Housing
Units in the Developer's Project. Developers and
Originators may be charged a commitment fee for such
set asides, which fee may be used to defray Program
costs. No more than seventy -five percent (75 %) of
-17-
the moneys deposited
y in the Acquisition Fund may be
used to purchase Mortgage Loans for New Housing Units
built or sold by any one Developer.
( 2) The City will enter into an Origination Agreement
with each Originator proposing to originate Mortgage
Loans pursuant to the Program. Each Origination
Agreement shall specify the dollar amount of the
Originator Commitment, provided that no more than
seventy -five percent (75 %) of the moneys deposited in
the Acquisition Fund may be used to purchase Mortgage
Loans from any one Originator, unless other eligible
Lending Institutions are not interested in
participating.
( 3) Any Financial institution, as defined in Minnesota
Statutes, Section 47.0151, doing business in the City
which is an FHA /VA approved or FNMA /FHLMC approved
lender shall be offered an opportunity to participate
in the Program as an,Originator.
( 4) For the first 12 months or such greater or lesser
time as ''shall be specified by the City after the
Commencement Date, ten percent (10 %) of the amounts
deposited in the Acquisition Fund may be reserved for
non -first -time homebuyers who purchase a Housing Unit
in a Project. If, after 12 months or such greater or
lesser time as shall be specified by the City, any
funds so set aside have not been used to purchase
Mortgage Loans, they may be used by non- first - time
ho
mebuyers purchasing any Housing Units in the City. -
-18-
Section 6. Evidence of Compliance
The City may require from each Originator, at or before
the time an agreement to originate Mortgage Loans is entered
into by such Originator, evidence satisfactory to the City of
the ability and intention of such Originator to make Mortgage
Loans and sell them to the City under such agreement, and, at
the time the City acquires a Mortgage Loan, evidence
satisfactory to the City of compliance with the standards and
requirements for the making of Mortgage Loans by
the City herein and in any agreement entered into between the
City and the Originator; and in connection therewith, the City
or its representatives, including the Program Administrator,
may inspect the relevant books and records of such Originator
in order to confirm such ability, intention and compliance.
Section 7. Issuance of Bonds
To finance the Program the City intends by resolution to
authorize, issue and sell by December 31, 1986 its Single
Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds in an aggregate principal amount
up to $10,000,000, of which approximately $9,000,000 will be
available to purchase Mortgage Loans. The balance of Bond
proceeds will be used to pay underwriting costs, to fund a
reserve fund for the Bonds and to pay Bond issuance costs.
Principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be payable solely
from the proceeds of the Bonds and the revenues of the
Program. The City shall enter into an indenture of trust with
an institution authorized to accept such trusts and which is
-19-
experienced in trust management and has a large corporate trust
portfolio, upon such terms and conditions as the City Council
shall determine, being advised thereon by bond counsel. In
issuing Bonds, the City may exercise, within the corporate
limits of the City, any and all of the powers the Minnesota
Housing Finance Agency is-authorized to exercise under the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462A, without
limitation under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
475.
Section 8. Severability
The provisions of this Program are severable, and if any
of its provisions, sentences, clauses or paragraphs shall be
held unconstitutional, contrary to statute, exceeding the
authority of the City or otherwise illegal or inoperative by
any court of competent jurisdiction, such defect shall not
affect or impair any of the remaining provisions.
0050E
-20-
L
HOLMES & GRAVEN
Attorneys at Law CHARTERED
.TAMES $. HOLMES 470 Pillsbury Center. Minneapolis. Minnesota 55402 DANIEL R. NELSON
� DAVID L. GRAVEN BARBARA L. PORTWOOD
J OHNR. LARSON 612338-1177 ROBERT J. DEIKE
CHARLES R. WEAVER MARK A. LINDGREN
ROBERT L. D AVIDSON 2200 Northwestern Financial Center, Bloomington. Minnesota 55431 LAURA K. M OLLET
ROBERT J. LINDALL 8 BRUCE A. KOHN
JOHN M. LEF EVRE.JR. 612893 -9400 STEWARTD. GREGG
JOHN C. . UTLF.Y
LARRY WERTHEIM CHRISTINE M.CHALE
STANLEY E. KEHL MARY G. DOOBINS
JONATHAN P. SCULL MARY J. BRENDEN STEVEN T. H ETLAND
JEFFREY R. BRAUCHLE
TIMOTHY P. FLAHERTY PATRICIA A. BLOODGOOD
STEFANIE N. GALEY TIMOTHY E. MARX
ERICA. SHORT
September 30, 1985
MORTGAGE REVENUE BOND INCOME AND ACQUISITION COSTS LIMITS
FOR THE METROPOLITAN AREA
Income Limits:
The greater of:
(a) 110% of Median Family Income determined by HUD ($36,080); or
(b) the limits determined by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, which
vary according to the mortgage loan interest rate as follows:
Loan Income Limits
Interest Rate New Existing
0 - 10.00% $34,000 $31,000
10.01 - 10.50 35,000 32,000
10.51 - 11.00 36,000 33,000
11,01 - 11.50 . 37,000 34,000
11.51 and over 38,000 35,000
Acquisiton Costs Limits:
The lesser of:
(a) Federal Safe Harbor limitations for the Minneapolis -St. Paul OLIN -WI)
MSA, which are $116,270 for new homes and $117,590 for existing homes; or
(b) Minnesota statutory limitations which are three times program income
limits generally and four times program income limits for home in target areas.
QQ
M & C NO. 85 -10 U
October 17, 1985
1 0 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment Bond Issue
To the Honorable Mayor and City Council:
The resolution for this item on our agenda will be delivered to you at your desk
Monday evening. It is being delivered late because we were waiting to make a
presentation to the Earle Brown Farm Committee and seek their recommendation and
guidance on this matter on the morning of the date of this memorandum. We
instructed our bond consultant later this date to prepare the resolution, and he
could not prepare it in time for the agenda packet.
The Earle Brown Farm Committee, after reviewing the various alternatives available,
recommends the City Council sell $5,250,000 in tax increment bonds for the Earle
Brown Farm development. The amount of this bond issue will not completely cover all
projected costs of the Farm redevelopment. At a later date it may be necessary to
sell additional bonds or use accumulating funds from the increment district to fund
remaining costs. The staff based its recommendation to the Committee on the fact
that the bond amount can be financed within the tax increment district plan as
approved by the City Council and concurred in by the School District. It also
represents an amount which can be financed by existing increment value within the
Earl Brown Farm tax increment district. We are recommending the bonds be sold
before the first of the year because after January 1, 1986 changes in federal
regulations and law will make the issuance of these bonds more difficult or on a
worst case, not possible.
It has been recommended to the Earle Brown Farm Committee that we no longer seek an
early start of the Ryan office development or the Beisner residential development to
assist us in financing this bond issue. Had either of these projects been able to be
finalized before the first of the year, we could have sold a bond issue in the area of
$7 million which would have covered all of our estimated projected costs. We
recommended, and the Committee concurred, that by rushing either of these projects
we could make some planning mistakes that we would regret in years to come. The
Committee believes both of these projects to be valuable. However, they do not want
to rush the planning process. The recommended bond alternative of $5,250,000 will
fund a significant percentage of our projected costs. We do have other
alternatives to finance the remaining amounts should they be needed at a later date.
We stand ready at the Council meeting to give you a further, more detailed
explanation. Should you have any questions in the interim, please do not hesitate
to call me.
Respectfully submitted,
Gerald G. Spli r
City Manager
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -190
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $5,250,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1985A
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota (City) as follows:
1. It is hereby determined:
(a) The City has duly approved the establishment of a
redevelopment project area (Project Area) by the
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of the City of
Brooklyn Center (HRA) pursuant to the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 to 462.716 (Housing
Act).
(b) The City has duly approved a redevelopment plan (Plan)
for the Project Area and a tax increment financing plan
(TIF Plan) for redevelopment project (Project) in the
Project Area- and established a tax increment financing
district (TIF District) within the Project Area, all
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to
273.77 (TIF Act).
(c) The TIF. Plan identifies certain public redevelopment
Project Costs (Costs) to be financed within the TIF
District which costs are presently estimated to be as
follows:
Project Designation & Description Total Project Cost
Acquisition
Redevelopment $2,920,000
Maintenance Fund 2,000,000
Administration 500,000
Consultant /Legal 239,000
Contingencies 30,000
Subtotal 501,900
Area -wide Streetscape $6,190,900
Area -wide Improvements 500,000
Subtotal 1,300,000
$7;990,900
'I
e
�+ RESOLUTION NO. 85 -190
w
Financing Costs:
Issuance 40,000
Discount @ $19 per $1,000 99,750
Capitalized Interest 509,617
Total Costs $8,640,267
Less:
Land Sales 650,000
CDBG 680,000
Assessments /MSA 1,300,000
Subtotal $6,010,267
Total Bond Financing $5,250,000
Investment Earnings /Other 760,267
TOTAL $8,640,267
(d) The HRA has requested the City to issue and sell its
general obligation bonds (Bonds) to finance all or a
portion of the Costs and has undertaken to enter into a
tax increment agreement (TIF Agreement) with the City
to provide revenue to pay debt service on the Bonds
pursuant to Section 273.77, Subdivision 1 of the TIF
Act.
(e) It is necessary and desirable for the sound financial
management of the City and the successful redevelopment
of the Project Area that the City issue and sell the
Bonds as requested by the HRA.
(f) That it is necessary and expedient to the sound finan-
cial management of the affairs of the City to issue
$5,250,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds,
Series 1985A (Bonds) to provide financing for the
Improvements.
2. In order to provide financing for the Improvements, the City
shall therefore issue and sell Bonds in the amount of
$5,150,250. In
order to provide in part the additional interest required to market
the Bonds at this time, additional Bonds shall be issued in the amount
of $99,750. Any excess of the purchase price of the Bonds over the
sum of $5,150,250 shall be credited to the debt service fund for the
Bonds for the purpose of paying interest first coming due on such
additional Bonds. The Bonds shall be issued and sold in accordance
with the terms of the following Official Terms of Offering:
R
t
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -190
3. The City Clerk- Manager is authorized and directed to advertise
the Bonds for sale in accordance with the foregoing Official Terms of Offering
and to cause the abbreviated notice of sale attached hereto as Exhibit A, to
be published in the manner required by law. The City Council shall meet
on Monday, November 18, 1985, at 7:30 o'clock p.m. for the purpose of considering
sealed bids on the Bonds and taking any other appropriate action
October 21, 1985
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
k
The motion for 7thadoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded
by member Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted
in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and
Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said
resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
e
f`
4 RESOLUTION NO. 85 -190
OFFICIAL TERMS OF OFFERING
$5,250,000
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA
GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1985A
Sealed bids for the Bonds will be opened by the City Manager or his designee on Monday,
November 18, 1985, at 12:00 Noon, Central Time, at the offices of SPRINGSTED Incorporated,
800 Osborn Building, St. Paul, Minnesota. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the
City Council at 7:.30 P.M., Central Time, of the some day.
DETAILS OF THE BONDS
The Bonds will be dated December I, 1985, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest
payable on February I and August I of each year, commencing August 1,_ 1986. Interest will be
computed upon the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30-day months and will be rounded pursuant
to rules of the MSRB. The Bonds will be issued in integral multiples of $5,000 of a single
maturity, as requested by the Purchaser, and fully registered as to principal and interest.
Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the Registrar and interest on each Bond
will be payable by check or draft of the Registrar mailed to the registered holder thereof at his
address as it appears on the books of the Registrar as of the 15th of the calendar month next
preceding the interest payment.
The Bonds will mature February I in the amounts and years as follows:
$ 50,000 1990 $185,000 1994 430,000 1998 690,000 2001
1 60,000 1991 240,000 1995 510,000 1999 795,000 2002
?100,000 1992 $295,000 1996 $595,000 2000 $800,000 2003
?140,000 1993 $360,000 1997
The City may elect on February I, 1996, and on any interest payment date thereafter, to prepay
Bonds due on or after February I, 1997. Redemption may be in whole or in part of the Bonds
subject to prepayment. If redemption is in part, those Bonds remaining unpaid which have the
latest maturity date will be prepaid first. If only part of the Bonds having a common maturity
date are called for prepayment the specific Bonds to be prepaid will be chosen by lot by the
Registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par and accrued interest.
SECURITY AND PURPOSE
The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and
credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will
pledge anticipated tax increment income from the City's Earle Brown Farm Tax Increment
Financing District. The proceeds will be used To finance the public costs associated with the
Earle Brown Farm Redevelopment Project.
TYPE OF BID
f
A sealed bid for not less than $S,150,250 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of
the Bonds shall be filed with the undersigned prior to the time set for the opening of bids.
Also prior to the time set for bid opening, a certified or cashier's check in the amount of
$52,500, payable to the order of the City, shall have been filed with the undersigned or
SPRINGSTED Incorporated, the City's Financial Advisor. No bid will be considered for which
aid check has not been filed. The check of the Purchaser will be retained by the City as
k iquidated damages in the event the Purchaser fails to comply with the accepted bid. The City
rill deposit the check of the Purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement. No
id shall be withdrawn after the time set for opening bids, unless the meeting of the City
scheduled for consideration of the bids is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -190
without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates offered by Bidders- shall be in
integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of l %. No rate for any maturity shall be more than 1.5%
lower than any prior rate. No rate nor the net effective rate for the entire Issue of the Bonds
shall exceed the maximum rate permitted by law. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a
single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity.
AWARD
The Bonds will be awarded to the Bidder offering the lowest dollar interest cost to be
determined by the deduction of the premium, if any, from, or the addition of any amount less
than par, to, the total dollar interest on the Bonds from their date to their final scheduled
maturity. The City's computation of the total net dollar interest cost of each bid, in
accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i)
waive non - substantive informalities of any bid or of matters relating to the receipt of bids and
award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all bids without cause, and, (iii) reject any bid which the .
City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein.
REGISTRAR
The City will name the Registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The
City will pay for the services of the Registrar.
CUSIP NUMBERS
If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the
Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with
respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the Purchaser to accept delivery
of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification
"umbers shall be paid by the Purchaser.
SETTLEMENT
ONithin 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost
to the Purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the Purchaser. Delivery will
be subject to receipt by the Purchaser of an approving legal opinion of LeFevere, Lefler,
Kennedy, Obrien & Drawz, a Professional Association of Minneapolis, which opinion will be
printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate.
On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent,
funds which shall be received at the offices of the City, or its designee, not later than 1:00
P.M., Central Time of the day of settlement. Except as compliance with the terms of payment
for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the Purchaser
shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the Purchaser's non-
compliance with said terms for payment.:
At settlement the Purchaser will be furnished with a certificate, signed by appropriate officers
of the City, to the effect that the Official Statement did not as of the date of the Official
Statement, and does not as of the date of settlement, contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements therein, in light
of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading.
OFFICIAL STATEMENT
Underwriters may obtain a copy of the Official Statement by request to the City's Financial
Advisor prior to the bid opening. The Purchaser will be provided with 50 copies of the Official
Atatement.
ated October 21, 1985 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Gerald G. Splinter
City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -190
EXHIBIT A
NOTICE OF BOND SALE
$5,250,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION
TAX INCREMENT BONDS,SERIES 1985A
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
These bonds will be offered for sale on sealed bids on Monday,
November 18, 1985.
Bids will be received by the City Manager until 12:00 noon at which
time they will be opened and tabulated for consideration and award by
the City Council at a regular meeting of the Council at 7:30 P.M. on
that date. The Bonds will be dated December 1, 1985, will bear
interest payable semiannually on each February 1 and August 1 to
maturity, commencing August 1, 1986, and will mature on February 1 in
the amounts and years as follows:
Year Amount Year Amount
1990 $ 50,000 1997 $360,000
1991 60,000 1998 430,000
1992 100,000 1999 510,000
1993 140,000 2000 595,000
1994 185,000 2001 690,000
1995 240,000 2002 795,000
1996 295,000 2003 800,000
Bonds maturing after February 1, 1996 will be subject to redemption on
that date at par. No rate of interest nor the net effective rate of
the issue may exceed the maximum rate permitted by law. Bidders must
specify a price of not less than $5,150,250 plus accrued interest. A
legal opinion on the Bonds will be furnished by LeFevere, Lefler,
Kennedy, O'Brien & Drawz, a Professional Association, Minneapolis,
Minnesota. The proceeds of the Bonds will be used to finance- a
portion of the public redevelopment costs in a redevelopment tax
increment financing district in the City.
Bidders should be aware that the Official Statement to be published
for the Bonds may contain additional bidding terms and information
relative to the Bonds. In the event of a variance between statements
in this Notice of Bond Sale and said Official Statement, the provi-
sions of the latter shall be those to be complied with.
BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL
/s/ Gerald G. Splinter
City Manager -Clerk
Dated: October 21, 1985. .
w
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -190
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
COUNTY OF HENNEPIh' )
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER )
I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City
Manager -Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, do hereby
certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing
extract of a special meeting of the City Council of said City held on
Monday, October 21, 1985, with the original thereof on file in my
office and the same is a.full, true and correct copy thereof, insofar
as the same relates to the issuance and sale of $5,250,000 General
Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1985A, of the City.
WITNESS My hand as such City Manager -Clerk and the corporate
seal of the City this 21 st day of October 1985.
ity anage
7 - p ierk
City of Brdoklyn Center, Minnesota
(SEAL)
fi
SPRINGSTED
INCORPORATED
PUBLIC FINANCE
ADVISORS
16 October 1985
Mr. Brad Hoffman, Administrative Assistant
City Hall
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
Re: Alternative Maturity Schedules
Dear Mr. Hoffman:
The enclosed maturity schedules are based on projected increment income
derived from the increment already in place and the projected increment from
the Target project. For your information, we have included a projection of
expected increment income through collection year 2007.
These maturity schedules are based on your request for "how much can the City
issue based on the projected increment." The schedules prepared take into
consideration a "cushion" of approximately $50,000 per year representing a
surplus between required debt service at 105% and projected increment income.
This is consistant with all past schedules prepared. The cushion will provide a
reserve should inflation of the district not increase at a level of 3% per year or
if the mill rates drop below 101 mills.
I believe each of the maturity schedules are self explanatory as we have gone
over similar schedules in the past. The net proceeds of each of the issues is
computed as follows:
Bond Issue $3,900,000 $5,250,000
Less: Capitalized Interest 204,117 509,617
Less: Discount 74,100 99, 750
Net Bond Proceeds $3 $4,640,633
The respective amounts would be available to pay all eligible costs pursuant to
the Tax Increment Plan. We note the net proceeds do not take into
consideration any investment earnings which must be estimated when the
arbitrage certificate is completed as part of the closing papers of the bond
issue. Therefore, it would be incumbent upon your staff to demonstrate an
expenditure need of $100,000 to $150,000 more than the net proceeds noted
above.
Should you need any further information, please contact me.
Sincerely, j
Gerard B. Shannon
Vice President
e
cc: Gerald Splinter, City Manager
Paul Holmlund, Finance Director
800 Osborn Building, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 (612) 222 -4241
250 North Sunnyslope Road, Brookfield, Wisconsin 53005 (414) 782 -8222 ,.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MN PREPARED OCTOBER 16, 1985
$5,250,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BY SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED
TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1985 A
DATED: 12/ 1/1985
MATURE: 2/ 1
9.000% ANNUAL
ANNUAL LEVY INCREMENT SURPLUS/ CUMULATIVE ANNUAL
LEVY MATURE PRINCIPAL INTEREST TOTAL (105 %) INCOME
(- DEFICIT) SURPLUS LEVY
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
1985 1987 0 551,250 551,250 563,553 563,553* 0 0 0
1986 1988 0 472,500 472,500 485,904 485,905* 1 1 0
1987 1989 0 472,500 472,500 496,125 545,710 49,585 49,586 0
1988 1990 50,000 472,500 522,500 548,625 577,463, 28,838 78,424 0
1989 1991 60,000 468,000 528,000 554,400 610,169 55,769 134,193 0
1990 1992 100,000 462,600 562,600 590,730 643,856 53,126 187,319 0
1991 1993 140,000 453,600 593,600 623,280 678,554 55,274 242,593 0
1992 1994 185,000 441,000 626,000 657,300 714,293 56,993 299,586 0
1993 1995 240,000 424,350 664,350 697,568 751,104 53,536 353,122 0
1994 1996 295,000 402,750 697,750 732,638 789,019 56,381 409,503. 0
1995 1997 360,000 376,200 736,200 773,010 828,071 55,061 464,564 0
1996 1998 430,000 343,800 773,800 812,490 868,296 55,806 520,370 0
1997 1999 510,000 305,100 815,100 855,855 909,727 53,872 574,242 0
1998 2000 595,000 259,200 854,200 896,910 952,401 55,491 629,733 0
1999 2001 690,000 205,650 895,650 940,433 996,355 55,922 685,655 0
2000 2002 795,000 143,550 938,550 985,478 1,041,627 56,149 741,804 0
2001 2003 800,000 72,000 872,000 915,600 1,088,258 172,658 914,462 0
2002 2004 0 0 0 0 1,136,288 1,136,288 2,050,750 0
2003 2005 0 0 0 0 1,185,759 1,185,759 3,236,509 0
2004 2006 0 0 0 0 1,236,714 1,236,714 4,473,223 0
2005 2007 0 0 0 0 1,289,197 1,289,197 5,762,420 0
2006 2008 0 0 0 0 1,343,255 1,343,255 7,105,675 0
TOTALS: $5,250,000 $6,326,550 $11,576,550 $12,129,899 $19,235,574 $7,105,675 $0
BOND YEARS: 70,295 ANNUAL INTEREST COST: $6,326,550 *INCLUDES CAPITALIZED
AVERAGE MATURITY: 13.39 DISCOUNT (PREMIUM): $99,750 INTEREST OF $509,617
AVG. ANNUAL RATE: 9.142$ TOTAL INTEREST COST: $6,426,300 (EXEMPT FROM OVERLEVY)
i
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MN PREPARED OCTOBER 16, 1985
$3,900,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BY SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED
TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1985 A
DATED: 12/ 1/1985
MATURE: 2/ 1
8.500% ANNUAL
ANNUAL LEVY INCREMENT SURPLUS/ CUMULATIVE ANNUAL
LEVY MATURE PRINCIPAL INTEREST TOTAL (105 %) INCOME (- DEFICIT) SURPLUS LEVY
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
1985 1987 0 386,750 386,750_ 399,053 399,053* 0 0 0
1986 1988 0 331,500 331,500 344,904 344,905* 1 1 0
1987 1989 140,000 331,500 471,500 495,075 545,710 50,635 50,636 0
1988 1990 180,000 319,600 499,600 524,580 577,463 52,883 103,519 0
1989 1991 225,000 304,300 529,300 555,765 610,169 54,404 157,923 0
1990 1992 280,000 285,175 565,175 593,434 643,856 50,422 208,345 0
1991 1993 335,000 261,375 596,375 626,194
678,559 52,360 260 70
r 5 0
1992 1994 395,000 232,900 627,900 659,295 714,293 54,998 315,703 0
1993 1995 465,000 199,325 664,325 697,541 751,104 53,563 369,266 0
1994 1996 540,000 159,800 699,800 734,790 789,019 •54,229 423,495 0
1995 1997 625,000 113,900 738,900 775,845 828,011 52,226 475,721 0
1996 1998 715,000 60,775 775,775 814,564 868,296 53,732 529,453 0
1997 1999 0 0 0 0 909,727 909,727 1,439,180 0
1998 2000 0 0 0 0 952,401 952,401 2,391,581 0
1999 2001 0 0 0 0 996,355 996,355 3,387,936 0
2000 2002 0 0 0 0 1,041,627 1,041,627 4,429,563 0
2001 2003 0 0 0 0 1,088,258 1,088,258 5,517,821 0
2002 2004 0 0 0 0 - - 1,136,288 1,136,288 6,654,109 0
2003 2005 0 0 0 0 1,185,759 1,185,759 7,839,868 0
2004 2006 0 0 0 0 1,236,714 1,236,714 9,076,582 0
2005 2007 0 0 0 0 1,289,197 1,289,197 10,365,779 0
2006 2008 0 0 0 0 1,343,255 1,343,255 11,709,034 0
TOTALS: $3,900,000 $2,986,900 $6,886,900 $7,221,040 $18,930,074
$11,709,034 $p
BOND YEARS: 35,140 ANNUAL INTEREST COST: $2,986,900 *INCLUDES CAPITALIZED
AVERAGE MATURITY: 9.01 DISCOUNT (PREMIUM): $74,100 INTEREST OF $204,117
AVG. ANNUAL RATE: 8.711% TOTAL INTEREST COST: $3,061,000 (EXEMPT FROM OVERLEVY)
U
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY
TO PURCHASE CLAIMS ARISING
FROM THE FAILURE OF LIFT STATION #1
AND OBTAINING REIMBURSEMENT FROM ALL RESPONSIBLE PARTIES
WHEREAS, on January 31, 1985, the City's Sanitary Sewer
Lift Station #1 failed to operate resulting in claims for
property damage by the owners of the fifteen single family
dwellings .listed on Exhibit A which is attached; and
WHEREAS, it appears that the failure or malfunction of
an electrical sensing device caused the failure, the
operation of which is highly technical in nature; and
WHEREAS, it will be difficult and expensive for
affected property owners to individually hire qualified
experts to assist them in proving causation;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOVLED by the City Council of
the City of Brooklyn Center, that the City obtain an
assignment of the damage claims from the affected property
owners and pursue reimbursement from any and all parties who
appear to be responsible, based upon existing and further
investigations by the City Manager or his designee.
Dated:
Dean Nyquist, Mayor ,
ATTEST:
Gerald C. Splinter, C.ler
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was
duly seconded by member and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof;
and the following voted against same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
(ASE4JLST) CLAIMANTS LISTING
FAILURE OF LIFT STATION NO. 1
ON JANUARY 30, 1985
AMOUNT OF AMOUNT OF
CLAIM PER CLAIM PER
CUSTOMER ADDRESS FILE (1) ADJUSTER (2)
vY. Anderson, Bertil .... 5912 Upton Avenue North 40.00 40.00
2. Eakins, John B. 6260 Brooklyn Drive 456.49 456.49
k3: Fischer, Mrs. William 5924 Upton Avenue North 842.26 842.26
4. Harris, Clyde 5836 Upton Avenue North UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED
" 1 5'. Johnson, Mrs. E.C. 5843 Upton Avenue North 160.00 160.00
V6. Johnson, Mark 2712 O'Henry Road 2,800.60 2,800.60
✓7. Lindstrom, Vernon K. 2800 O'Henry Road 256.09 256.09
8. Nelson, Mrs. A.W. 2806 O'Henry Road UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED
4. Nelson, Robert 5906 Upton Avenue North 405.37 405137
v10. Peterson, Gordon L. 6240 Brooklyn Drive 491.46 491.46
X11. Piekarczyk, Gary T. 5842 Upton Avenue North 63.93 63.93
12. Schlavin, Richard A. 5907 Upton Avenue North 505.44 505.44
13. Van Tassel, Gerald 6268 Brooklyn Drive UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED
✓14. Woods, James 5900 Upton Avenue North 1,574.73 1,574.73
15. Resident 5919 Upton Avenue North UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED
15 TOTAL CLAIMS 79596.37 7,596.37
(1) These were the claims as they were submitted to the City. Several claimants stated
that there were other losses upon which they had not yet set a value.
(2) The amount of claims as they are shown in the insurance adjusters' files as of
October 4, 1985 per telephone conversation on that date. These amounts are also as
submitted to the City and probably will increase when final claims are submitted to
adjustment.
n
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS FOR PURCHASE OF
STREET SWEEPER
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn
Center, Minnesota that:
1. the specifications prepared by the Director of Public
Works for the purchase of one vacuum street sweeper, as
provided for in the 1986 budget for the Street
Maintenance Division of the Public Works Department are
hereby approved.
2. the City Manager is hereby authorized and directed to
`advertise for bids in accordance with said
specifications, with bids to be opened at 11:00 a.m. on
November 26, 1985 and considered by the City Council on
December 9, 1985.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being taken
thereon,'the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
PROVISIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR
ONE VACUUM STREET SWEEPER
Provisions
General
All bids must be received at the office of the City Manager on or
before 11:00 a.m. on Thursday, November 26, 1985, and shall be
submitted in a sealed envelope, plainly marked "Bid for Street
Sweeper ".
Each bid shall be accompanied by a certified check or bidder's
bond, payable to the City Clerk in the amount of $2,000.
It is also understood that the City Council reserves the right to
reject any or all bids, to waive informalities and to award the
contract to the best interest of the City.
The street sweeper proposed and delivered to the City of Brooklyn
Center shall be complete in every respect and ready for operation
in accordance with these specifications, with certificates of
service and inspection submitted at the time of delivery.
Manufacturer's reference, trade name, brand or description
mentioned in this proposal are descriptive but not restrictive
and used only to indicate type and standard of material or
equipment desired.
The street sweeper the bidder proposes to furnish must be of a
current production. Obsolete equipment is not acceptable.
Catalog information showing make, model, and complete
specifications of the street sweeper the bidder proposes to
furnish shall accompany the vendor's bid. Insufficient
descriptive information shall be cause for rejection of the bid.-
The bidder must give assurance to the City of Brooklyn Center in
regard to patent infringements and in case of suits against the
City by other parties. He must defray all cost in connection
with such a suit and save the City harmless in all such actions.
Guarantee
The bidder shall guarantee this equipment as to the specified
capacity and satisfactory performance and to be free of defects
in design, material and workmanship. All defective parts and
material shall be replaced free of cost to the City of Brooklyn
Center, including labor, for a period of one year from date of
delivery.
Delivery
Delivery of the street sweeper shall be made by the bidder,
F.O.B. to the City Maintenance Garage, 6844 Shingle Creek
Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota.
Delivery Date
Each bidder shall specify in his proposal the date by which the
street sweeper will be delivered to the City.
The specified date of delivery is an important factor which the
City will consider in making the award of the contract.
In the event the street sweeper is not delivered on or before the
specified delivery date, the City of Brooklyn Center;
(1) will require forfeiture of the bid security, unless failure
to deliver can be clearly shown to be beyond the control of
the bidder; and
(2) may elect to cancel the contract for purchase of the street
sweeper. Such cancellation of contract may be made whether
or not the failure to deliver is within the control of the
bidder.
Trade -In
The City of Brooklyn Center shall trade -in the following
described vehicle:
One (1) Elgin Street Sweeper, 1974 Whirlwind.
This machine can be seen by appointment only at 6844
Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota by
calling 561 -5440, extension 177.
Transfer of this trade -in unit to the bidder will be made only
after delivery of the new unit by the bidder, and acceptance
thereof by the City.
Consideration of Bids
The availability and adequacy of parts and service, and the costs
of operation and maintenance of this equipment are all important
factors which the City of Brooklyn Center will consider in making
the award of contract.
No prequalification requirements are specified herein. However,
each bidder shall submit written statements with his bid which
provide the following information:
1. length of time this manufacturer has been manufacturing
street sweepers
2. length of time the dealer has been handling this product line
3. number, location and ownership of all comparable units in
service in Minnesota, or in dealer's service area; (for usage
by the City in checking references)
4. description of parts and service availability for this
machine from the dealer and from the manufacturer
Following opening of the bids, the City may require the bidder to
submit such additional information as may reasonably be required
in order to evaluate the proposed bid for the benefit of the
City.
In addition, the City of Brooklyn Center reserves the right to
consider the previous performance of both the dealer and the
manufacturer relating to the parts and service records to the
City of Brooklyn Center as related to other City -owned equipment.
Award
Award of contract by the City of Brooklyn Center will be based
on, but not necessarily limited to the factors of price, delivery
date, parts and service; as well as analysis and comparison of
specifications and performance.
The City of Brooklyn Center reserves the right to accept or
reject any or all bids, whatever is to the benefit of the City.
Objections To /Questions Regardinct Specifications
In the event a bidder has an objection to, or has a question
regarding any provisions of either these General Provisions or of
the technical specifications for the sweeper, he shall submit
such objection or question in writing, to the City Manager prior
to 12:00 Noon, November 14, 1985. In the event a modification or
clarification of the specification is issued, it will be issued
to all potential bidders in the form of an addendum, at least
five (5) days prior to the date for bid opening.
4
Specifications
General
The street sweeper required under these specifications shall be a
vacuum type, self - propelled truck type vehicle capable of
cleaning streets, parking lots, etc. of all types of litter,
dust, and heavy accumulations of dirt, stones, bottles, sand,
gravel and leaves. It shall have a sweeping swath of not less
than 96 inches, using nozzle, side brooms and extension broom.
It shall be complete with all necessary parts accessories and
tools regularly supplied as standard equipment and all the
attachments necessary to make a satisfactory operating unit. It
shall have all the safety devices and shall meet the requirements
of the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry, Division of
Accident Prevention, and the U.S. Department of Labor,
Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
Truck Specifications
Gross Vehicle Weight: 32,000 pounds minimum
Chassis: Cab -over engine type, with hydraulic tilt, and
reinforced frame; Front tow hooks; 50 gallon fuel
tank
Engine: Diesel driven, 500 cubic inch displacement minimum, full
flow oil filter, heavy duty air cleaner, fuel filter,
governor and hour meter
Transmission: Allison automatic transmission at 545 or equal, 5
speed, 5th direct
Axles: Front 10,000 minimum
Rear 22,000 minimum, 2 speed
Springs: Front 7,000 pound each minimum at pad
Rear 11,500 pound each minimum at pad
Brakes: Service - hydraulic, vacuum power assist all wheels
Parking - Orscheln lever, external expanding type with
on warning alarm
Steering: Dual operator control, right & left side, full power
hydraulic steering
Tires: First line, size 11:00 x 20, 14 ply standard tread front,
standard tread dual rear, two piece rims, size 8.0,
furnish spare rim
Batteries: 12 volt, 1,100 CCA
Alternator: 65 amp capacity minimum, high output at idle, heavy
duty regulator and transistor
Lights: Lights shall meet Minnesota Motor Vehicle Code, other
lights: back- up,.clearance, side broom, and instrument
panel
Cab: Standard cab shall include the following: air conditioner, f
deluxe fresh air heater and defroster, Bostrom "T" bar
seats with safety belts, dome light, hazard flasher, arm
rests, dual two speed electric wipers, windshield washers,
dual sun visors, dual exterior rear view mirrors "Retrac" 6
inch x 16 inch, back -up alarm, AM radio and bubble type
windows. All glass shall be tinted including lower door
see- through panels. Forward ground point visibility shall F
be 85 inches minimum.
Sweeper Specifications
Engine: Heavy duty diesel engine, 239 cubic inch displacement
minimum, full flow oil filter, heavy duty air filter,
fuel filter, and variable control for r.p.m. setting
with lock, emergency shut off, and hour meter
Blower: Heavy duty blower shall be as per manufacturer's
specifications and recommendations to accomplish maximum
performance at 3200 Rpm.
Side Brooms: single right hand side brooms, 28 inch diameter
minimum located at center of sweeper forward of vacuum
nozzle on right hand side and operated from control
panel in cab. Broom to be free floating to follow
street contours with shock absorber cushioned for
impact, manually adjusted for tilt. Broom segments to
be disposable wire type.
Extension Broom: Pneumatically raised and lowered, hydraulically
driven pneumatically raised and lowered by the operator
with switch controls located on the operator's control
panel. Steel broom core, reversible, with
polypropylene. Constant speed non - reversible,
hydraulically driven with relief valve.
Hydraulic Motors: Hydraulic motors shall be provided for each
broom drive.
Vacuum Nozzle: Vacuum pick -up nozzle 170 square inch minimum,
with automatic shutter, attached to hopper by flexible
hose, raise and lower operations to be controlled with
switches located on the operator's control panel.
Hopper: Vacuum chamber, 6.0 cubic yards minimum; Dumping by
raising body hydraulically with telescopic hoist to a 50
degree angle; Discharge door to be opened hydraulically
and latched mechanically
Water System: Water tank capacity 280 gallons minimum, with
relief valve and strainer installed, pump furnished to
have off -on switch located on operator's panel; three
circuit flow control with automatic cut -off switch when
water supply is exhausted; five spray nozzles located in
the vacuum nozzle and two on curb broom; four spray
nozzles located in the extension broom; one wash down
hose with quick disconnect, one handgun for washing out
catch basins, 25 foot length minimum; hydrant fill hose,
16 feet, with coupling; water level indicator in cab
Wonderhead: Wonderhead hose (12 foot long), 8 inch diameter
minimum to be used for catch basin cleaning, leaf pile
pick -up, etc., with up and down hydraulic power assist,
with two 4 foot extensions with tubes and clamps
Color: City of Brooklyn Center Yellow DA81657 with no lettering
Service Manuals: Repair manuals, shop type, lube chart,
operator's handbook and parts book shall be furnished_
options: (1) Left side vacuum nozzle and hose assembly side
broom, water system, and pivoting extension broom.
(2) Hopper chamber to be coated with urethane coating,
Senotex 7012 or approved equal
r
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENER IN THE COUNTY OF
. HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
OCTOBER 10, 1985
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman
Pro tem Nancy Manson at 7:34 p.m. -
ROLL CALL
Chairman Pro tem Nancy Manson, Commissioners Molly „Malecki, Lowell Ainas, Carl
Sandstrom, Mike Nelson and Wallace Bernards. Also present were Director of
Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, City Engineer Bo Spurrier and Planner Gary
Shallcross. Chairman Lucht had notified the Commission he would not be present and
was excused.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - September 26, 1985
Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to approve the
minutes of the September 26, 1985 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting
in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Sandstrom, Nelson and
Bernards. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Ainas. The motion
passed.
APPLICATION NO. 85027 (Foundation Stone Ministries, Inc.)
Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of
business, a request for site and building plan and special use permit approval to
construct a church with seating capacity of 800 at the southwest corner of I -94 and
Brooklyn Boulevard,. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see
Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 85027 attached).
Regarding the landscape plan, the Secretary noted that there are no quantative
standards in the ordinance for the number of plantings. The Secretary also
explained that a traffic counter had been put down in the southbound lane of Brooklyn
Boulevard over the last weekend. He stated that the traffic counts do show an
increase around Sunday noon. The Secretary concluded that he believed the
Standards for a Special Use Permit can be met in this case and that traffic is not a
reason to deny the application. The City Engineer then explained in further detail
the layout of the proposed drainage system and stated that it was designed according
to the City's standards. Regarding traffic, the City Engineer pointed out that,
although the traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard at noon on Sundays is fairly heavy, it is
still not as heavy as the weekday evening rush hour traffic. He stated that the
addition of the church at this period of time would still live within the capacity of
Brooklyn Boulevard.
PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 85027)
Chairman Pro tem Manson then reopened the public hearing on the special use permit
for Foundation Stone Ministries, Inc. She stated that the public hearing had
previously been closed and that only new information or questions should be
submitted at this time.
Esther Jensen of 4213 66th Avenue North inquired as to the sidewalk on the west side
of Brooklyn Boulevard and what would happen to it as a result of the plan. The Planner
pointed out that it was still indicated on the plan. Mr. Dennis Batty explained
that the sidewalk would be relocated westward with the installation of the
deceleration lane.
10 -10 -85 -1-
�y
Pat Johnson of 4207 66th Avenue North asked about the covenant on the houses in the
area south of the church site. The Secretary answered that the City has received
conflicting opinions from different attorneys as to whether the covenants effecting
the houses to the south are still in effect. (The covenants prohibit any use of the
property other than for single - family residential.) Mrs. Johnson stated that the
covenant should stay in effect until it is released by the owners of property in the
subdivision. She stated that no one in the area has signed a release of the
covenant. There followed a discussion of the effect of the covenants on
development of the church site. The Secretary pointed out that the covenant does
not apply to the church site itself and that the existence of the covenant does not
prevent the City from urging the church to acquire additional lots for improving
access, even if it means attempting to undo the covenant for those lots.
Chairman Pro tem Manson asked whether anyone else wished to speak regarding the
application. Hearing none, she called for a motion to close the public hearing.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the
public hearing. The motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Bernards asked how traffic would make its movement into the site if
cars were coming from the south. The Secretary responded that cars coming to the
site from the south would make a U turn at the signal at the intersection of the
freeway ramps and Brooklyn Boulevard.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85027 (Foundation Stone
' Ministries, Inc.) ._.
Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend
approval of Application No. 85027, subject to the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility =and .berming plans are subject to
review and and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the
issuance of permits.
3• A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion
of approved site improvements.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5• The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with the
requirements of the Uniform Building Code, Chapter 3802 b.
6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
7. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
10 -10 -85 -2-
8. Access to; the church site shall be right -in /right -out only. The
median in Brooklyn Boulevard shall be extended in accordance with
the recommendations of the City Engineer and Hennepin County.
Access to the site from 66th and Indiana shall be prohibited.
9. A deceleration lane on the outside of the southbound lane of
Brooklyn Boulevard shall be installed in accordance with the
recommendations of the City Engineer and Hennepin County.
10. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be
grounds for revocation.
11. The permit is issued to the applicant and is nontransferable.
12. Plan approval in no way commits the City to acceptance of the
conceptual master plan submitted with the development plans for
the church.. Future additions shall be subject to an amendment of
the Special Use Permit and conformance to City requirements
through the site and building plan process.
13. The site shall be bounded on all sides adjacent to single - family
residences and to Indiana Avenue North right -of -way with a
minimum 6' high wood fence for both screening and security
purposes.
14. An as -built survey of all site utilities shall be submitted to the
Engineering Department prior to release of the performance
guarantee.
15. The applicant is encouraged to acquire the lots adjacent to the
site to the south along Brooklyn Boulevard in order to move the
access as far from the intersection of I -94 and Brooklyn
Boulevard as possible.
16. Site lighting shall conform to the requirements of Section 35 -712
of the Zoning Ordinance.
17. The applicant shall obtain a temporary construction easement for
regrading of the north portion of the lots of 4024 and 4100 65th �k
Avenue North prior to the issuance of permits, or construct t
additional catch basins between 4Q24 and 4 00 65th Avenue or h U�
� i t ) > P ✓
18. The la scape plan shall be modifielto indicat g en areas � he�site ,iotheance of p W_ a�e & 4tW
Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Manson,
Sandstrom, Ainas and Nelson. The motion passed unanimously.
APPLICATION NO. 85032 (Arby's)
The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for a variance
from Section 34 -140, Subsection 3a:1b of the Sign Ordinance to allow a tenant
identification wall sign on the canopy above the northwest entrance to Brookdale
Mall and not on the exterior wall space of the Arby's tenant space. The Secretary
- to k V G4 �y
r <.
explained that individual tenant signs at Brookdale would have - to come down if a
collective identificatior'sign band were put up. He explained the collective
identification wall at Westbrook Mall which provides identification signery
for tenants not having exterior wall space.
Chairman Pro tem Manson asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr.
Chuck Nadler of Arby's stated that he felt the situation is unique and that a
variance is justified. He showed the Planning Commission a floor plan of tenant
spaces in the northwest area of Brookdale and a rendering of the proposed Arby's
sign. He stated that the sign would be the same size as the T. J. Applebee Is 'sign on
the same canopy. He explained that the sign would be lit while the Arby's
Restaurant was open and that this would have the effect of advertising the hours of
operation.
Commissioner Bernards asked what was the attitude of the Brookdale Center
Management. Mr. Nadler stated that the sign was acceptable to them and introduced
Mr. Chris Cummins of the Center Companies. Commissioner Nelson asked how many
tenants have exterior walls at Brookdale. Mr. Cummins stated that bout 30% of the
the tenants have exterior walls and that 70% do not. The Secretary asked about the
hours of other tenants. Mr. Cummins stated that because of lease renewal
agreements coming up at this time, it was unlikely that the hours of the operation
would change significantly for any of the other tenants for the foreseeable future.
Regarding a collective identification sign, Mr. Cummins stated that the center
would not pursue such a possibility. He stated that the Center Management and
ownership prefer to minimize the amount of signery on the exterior walls.
The Secretary asked about the possibility of another restaurant in the center. Mr.
Cummins stated that the center is close to 10% of the floor area devoted to
restaurants right now, excluding the department stores, and that there is no desire
to have another restaurant in the center. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked about the
possibility of a drug store perhaps wanting to have longer hours. Mr. Cummins
stated that there would be no other drug store tenants besides Snyder Brothers.
There followed a brief discussion in which the Secretary and Mr. Cummins discussed
the uniqueness of the Arby's situation relative to other tenants in Brookdale,
including Rocky Rococo's. The Secretary asked whether Arby's sign is intended to
appeal to Xerxes Avenue. Mr. Nadler responded in the negative and stated that the
sign would attempt to appeal to people on their way to McDonalds. The Secretary
pointed out that McDonalds is on Xerxes Avenue. Mr. Nadler showed the Planning
Commission a site plan of the Brookdale Shopping Center and stated that he wanted to
let people know that Arby's was open, which they would probably not realize if there
was no sign, he said. The Secretary stated that Arby's would receive a fair amount of
business simply from being located in the Brookdale Shopping Center.
There followed further discussion as to the merits of the Sign Variance request.
Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he felt the applicant's argument was valid and
that a lighted sign would indicate to the public when the restaurant would be open.
Commissioner Ainas agreed. He stated that, because of the unique hours of the
restaurant and the lack of wall exposure, the Arby's restaurant does experience a
legitimate hardship.
PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 85032)
Chairman Pro tem Manson then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked
whether anyone present wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing none,
she called for a motion to close the public hearing.
10 -10 -85 -4-
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Nelson to close the
public hearing. The motion passed unanimously.
Commissioner Sandstrom stated that restaurants are becoming a more common thing in
enclosed shopping malls. He noted that there is an Arby's Restaurant in Southdale_
and its location has a good view that can appeal to people outside the shopping mall.
The Planner noted that the primary reason for the uniqueness claimed in this case was
the hours of operation. He asked what would happen if the hours were to change back
to the normal center hours and the situation would, therefore, no longer be unique.
Mr. Doug Kennedy of Arby's stated that the hours of operation of Arby's Restaurant at
other shopping malls have not been reduced after some time in operation.
Chairman Pro tem Manson asked whether a sign indicating Arby's with the hours of the
mall entrance would be a permitted sign. The Secretary stated that such a sign
would be permitted if it was informational or directional in nature and not an
identification sign. He stated that the Arby's name would have to be incidental and
not the primary focus of such a sign. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked about the status
of the T. J. Applebee's sign. The Secretary explained that T. J. Applebee's does
have exterior wall space and can legally put an identification sign on the wall.
Commissioner Malecki asked whether the Commission should allow an exterior sign for
every tenant that has extra hours. Mx. Chris Cummins stated that the owners of the
shopping center do not want signs on the exterior at all. He stated that this
particular situation is unique. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked about the operating
agreements between the center and existing tenants that might change over time or
with new ownership. Yr. Cummins stated that the operating agreements would stay in
effect even with new owners.
Chairman Pro tem Manson stated that the Commission had to be concerned regarding the
possible precedent that would be set by granting the variance. Commissioner Ainas
stated that the hours of business are different for these restaurants which
typically have later hours than a retail business whether located in an enclosed
mall or not. He suggested that the Commission note the type of business involved
and the uniqueness of the hours of operation in action recommending approval. The
Secretary pointed out that Arby's could still stay open after hours if they did not
have a wall sign. Commissioner Ainas acknowledged this, but stated that he felt
that, because of the type of business involved and the particular location within an
enclosed mall, the applicants do have a legitimate hardship. Mr. Nadler of Arby's
stated that he would probably shrink the extraordinary hours of the restaurant if no
exterior sign were possible.
Chairman Pro tem Manson then reviewed the Standards for a Sign Variance.
Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he felt that all of the standards were met in this
case and that a variance can legitimately be granted. Chairman Pro tem Manson asked
whether there were any other comments from the Commission. Hearing none, she
called for a motion regarding the application.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85032 (Arby's)
Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to recommend
approval of Application No. 85032 on the grounds that the hours of operation are
unique and the type of business (a restaurant) within an enclosed shopping mall
creates a situation of hardship. Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson,
Commissioners Malecki, Ainas, Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against:
none. The motion passed.
10 -10 -85 -5-
APPLICATION NO. 85033 (Zantigo's)
The Secretary then introduced the last item of business, a request for site and
building plan and special use permit approval to construct an 82 seat Zantigo's
Restaurant with a drive -up window at 5532 Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary
reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information
Sheet for Application No. 85033 attached). The Secretary also noted that the
drive -up traffic leaving the site would be intermittent and that there would be
possibilities for other cars leaving the site to get out and make turns without major
conflict with the drive -up traffic. The Secretary also strongly recommended that
sod be provided in the interior sideyard greenstrips.
Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether the interior greenstrips had raised berms and
expressed concern that car bumpers would cut into such a berm and kill the grass.
The Secretary responded that the side interior green areas are flat.
Chairman Pro tem Manson asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. K.
C. George of Zantigo's Restaurant stated that he had nothing to add.
PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 85033)
Chairman Pro tem Manson then opened the public hearing and asked whether anyone
present wished to speak regarding the application. Hearing none, she called for a
motion to close the public hearing.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commissioner Ainas to close the public
hearing. The motion passed unanimously.
Chairman Pro tem Manson asked the applicant if he was aware of the conditions
regarding amending the plan to show sod in the interior greenstrips and a landscaped
parking delineator on the south side of the site. W. K. C. George stated that those
conditions would pose no problem.
ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 85033 (Zantigo's)
Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Nelson to recommend approval
of Application No. 85033 subject to the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. ' Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to
review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of
permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) to assure
completion of approved site improvements shall be submitted
prior to the issuance of permits.
14. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire
extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be
connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with
Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
10 -10 -85 -6-
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all
• Plan landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance.
approval
7• is exclusive of all signery which is subject to
Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and
driving areas.
9• The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be
grounds for revocation.
10. The plans shall be modified prior to
to provide the following:
a. A curbed and landscaped delineator between the 90 and
457 stalls on the south side of the parking lot.
b. Indication of sod rather than rock mulch in the interior
side yard greenstrips.
11. On -site traffic control signery shall be subject to review and
approval by the City Engineer.
12. A copy of an as -built utility survey shall be submitted to the
Engineering Department prior to release of the performance
guarantee.
Voting in favor: Chairman Pro tem Manson, Commissioners Malecki, Ainas,
Sandstrom, Nelson and Bernards. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
DISCUSSION ITEM (P.U.D. Ordinance)
The Secretary distributed copies of a draft Planned Unit Development Ordinance and
told the Commission that he had nothing to present on the ordinance this evening, but
encouraged the Commission to look into the ordinance for future discussion.
Commissioner Malecki noted some provisions regarding signery and approval of a sign
package with a Planned Unit Development proposal. She wondered whether this would
conflict with the Sign Ordinance. The Secretary stated that the Commission could
look at different restrictions on the signery with each Planned Unit Development or
it could simply follow the present ordinance. He stated a slight preference for
continuing with the present ordinance.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to adjourn the
meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning
Commission adjourned at 9:11 p.m.
Chairman
i
10 -10 -85 -7-
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 85027
Applicant: Foundation Stone/'Ministries, Inc.
Location: Southwest corner of I -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard
Request: Site and Building Plan /Special Use Permit
The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to
construct a church at the southwest corner of I -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard. The
property in question is zoned R5 and is bounded by I -94 on the north, by Brooklyn
Boulevard on the east, and by single- family homes on the south and west. This appli-
cation was tabled by the Commission at its September 26, 1985 study meeting to allow
for clarification of landscaping, drainage, and traffic elements of the proposed
plan.
A separate landscape plan has been submitted showing the plantings existing and
proposed for the church site and the proposed fencing. The latest landscape plan
has added two Maples, twenty (20) Radiant Crabs, and approximately 15 Pfitzer Juni-
pers in perimeter green areas and around the church. Since there are not quanti-
tative landscaping standards for this type of development in the Zoning Ordinance,
we cannot give either a passing or a failing grade. The proposed plantings may be
described as adequate, but not generous. A note should be added to the plan indi-
cating sod in all green areas of the site. It appears that virtually the entire
site will be disturbed by the construction and sodding is the only practical way of
insuring a viable turf in a timely manner. Proposed lighting fixtures direct light
downward and should present no serious problem.
An entirely new grading and drainage plan has been submitted. Instead of draining
the entire site to a single catch basin in the southwest corner of the site, the
new plan provides for a series of catch basins at higher elevations around the site,
connected by a network of storm sewer. The site is constrained by an existing storm
sewer service that is only 15" in diameter. It is also at an elevation which re-
quires that the church site be raised significantly to provide positive drainage
and adequate ground cover so the storm sewer lines do not freeze up during the winter
and impede spring runoff. The elevation of the existing storm sewer service means
that the site must be raised substantially which will cause some ponding of water
on the lots to the south which have, in the past, been draining onto this site.
Some grading modifications to the north end of these lots (4024 and 4100 65th Avenue
North) will almost certainly be necessary to drain them into a catch basin inlet
into the existing storm sewer line.
The other drainage problem confronting the site is the size of the existing storm
sewer service. Because it is only a 15" line and because it cannot be widened
(this would have far- reaching ramnifications for the City's storm sewer system in
the area), the site will drain more slowly and there will be more water in the
parking lot for a longer time than in other locations in the City. Some parking
spaces will probably not be usable for an hour or more during a major storm (5 yr.
storm). Nevertheless, because the church does not have the kind of continuous
operation that an office building or retail center would have, it is staff's judg
ment that the drainage system is adequate. No additional holding ponds other than
one indicated north of the church should be necessary. The City Engineer will be
prepared to discuss this matter in more detail at Thursday's meeting.
As to traffic concerns, staff would reiterate that the proposed church use will
generate less overall traffic than alternate uses for the site. Although the
traffic will be significant during services, it will occur at off -peak periods on
Brooklyn Boulevard. Staff's primary concern for this site is that access be gained
only off Brooklyn Boulevard and that it be a right -in /night -out access only. The
1.0 -10 -85 -1-
Application No. 85027 continued '
median will have to be extended within Brooklyn Boulevard to prevent attempts at
left turns to and frort site. It is the City's objective to eventually extend
the median all the way to 65th Avenue North. Nevertheless, we would encourage the
church to seek eventual acquisition of the lots immediately south of the site to
provide more space from the I -94 exit ramp.
Altogether, we feel that the plans are acceptable and approval is recommended, sub-
ject to at least the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building'
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review
and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial gu arantee (in
an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted
prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved
site improvements.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equip-
ment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing
system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central
monitoring device in accordance with the requirements of the uniform
Building Code, Chapter 3802 b.
6. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter
34 of the City Ordinances.
7. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving
areas.
8. Access to the church site shall be right -in /right -out only. The
median in Brooklyn Boulevard shall be extended in accordance with
the recommendations of the City Engineer and Hennepin County. Access
to the site from 66th and Indiana shall be prohibited.
9. A deceleration lane on the outside of the southbound lane of Brooklyn
Boulevard shall be installed in accordance,with the recommendations
of the City Engineer and Hennepin County.
10. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances
and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for
revocation.
11. The permit is issued to the applicant and is nontransferable.
12. Plan approval in no way commits the City to acceptance of the con-
ceptual master plan submitted with the development plans for the
church. Future additions shall be subject to an amendment of the
Special Use Permit and conformance to City requirements through the .
site and building plan process.
10 -10 -85 -2-
Application No. 85027 continued
13. The site sha-11 be bounded on all sides adjacent to single family resi-
dences and to Indiana Avenue North right -of -way with a minimum 6' high
wood fence for both screening and security purposes.
14. An as -built survey of all site utilities shall be submitted to the
Engineering Department prior to release of the performance guarantee.
15. The applicant is encouraged to acquire the lots adjacent to the site
to the south along Brooklyn Boulevard in order to move the access as
far from the intersection of I -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard as possible.
16. Site lighting shall conform to the requirements of Section 35 -712 of
the Zoning Ordinance.
17. The applicant shall obtain a temporary construction easement for re-
grading of the north portion of the lots at 4024 and 4100 65th Avenue
North prior to the issuance of permits.
The Planning Commission opened and closed the required public hearing for this appli-
cation at its September 26, 1985 meeting. Informational notices have been sent re_
garding this meeting, but no public hearing.has been scheduled.
10 -10 -85 -3_
i
r
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 85032
Applicant: Arby's
Location: 1341 Brookdale Center
Request: Sign Variance
The applicant requests a variance from Section 34 -140, 3a, 1.b of the Sign Ordinance
(attached) to allow a tenant wall sign for Arby's restaurant on wall space not abut -
ting the Arby's tenant space. Arby's is located in the northwest corner of Brookdale,
near T. J. Applebees. Under the Sign Ordinance, individual establishments within
Brookdale "may have such [wall] signs on each of its exterior walls, provided the
aggregate area of such signs does not exceed 30% of the wall supporting the signs ".
Alternately, a clustered establishment such as Brookdale may have a collective identi-
fication sign band for all tenants around the entire building. Brookdale has not
sought such a collective identification sign and, therefore, only major tenants with
exterior wall space have wall signs.
The applicant proposes a 3' x 7' sign on the canopy above the northwest entrance to
the center. -A letter has been submitted by Mr. Doug Kennedy (attached) addressing
the Standards for a Sign Variance (also attached). The letter argues that the Arby's
space is unique because it is the only operation open before and after normal center'
hours without any visible exterior wall for signery. Mr. Kennedy asserts that a
hardship would result without elaborating what it is. Finally, the letter argues
that the granting of the variance will in no way be detrimental to the public welfare
or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood.
Staff agree that the applicant's situation is somewhat unique. However, while the
main argument for uniqueness rests on the supra-normal hours of operation, h ro o
9 q p p the _p p sed
identification sign makes no reference to hours. The Arby's space is certainly not
unique in having no visible exterior wall. The adjacent Applebees restaurant also
has supra - normal hours of operation, but it was granted a sign permit under the
provisions of the Sign Ordinance because it has an exterior wall, not because of
abnormal hours. No tenant in Brookdale, in fact, has received extraordinary signery
because of the hours of its operation. Of course, that may be because the other
tenants with supra- normal hours also have exterior wall space.
We are concerned with the precedent that would be set by approval of this application
if it is considered to apply to all tenants with no exterior wall space, or to allow
identification signs on walls not abutting a tenant space. Such an action would
seem to throw open the possibility that every exterior wall would become a signboard
for any and every tenant within a multi - tenant building. This may actually be
possible if pursued by the center itself on a coordinated basis. But the proposal
is for a tenant sign unique in style to the tenant, not part of a center -wide effort
at collective identification signery.
One possibility not pursued until now would be an informational sign erected by the
center at any wall entrance open before and /or after normal hours. Such a sign could
specify the hours that entrance would be open and the tenants operating on the longer
hours. For such a sign not to be construed as an identification sign, the names of
the tenants would have to be fairly low -key and no larger in total area than the
informational portion of the message. This might ultimately lead to a form of col-
lective identification signery erected at mall entrances showing names of tenants
and hours for the respective entrances. Such collective signery would be under the
control of the center management.and could be allowed by the ordinance.
10 -10 -85 -1-
h
Application No. 85032 continued
These alternatives within the parameters of the Sign Ordinance may have a greater
visual impact than the proposed sign by itself. However, unless approval of the
application were to cite hours of operation only as a basis for uniqueness, the
potential effect of granting the variance would, in the long run, be quite uncon-
trollable. The Commission is urged to discuss whether hours of operation is a
proper basis for a variance. In genral, staff would recommend an alternate form of
signery erected by the center management to make known the supra- normal hours at
certain entrances and for certain businesses.
A public hearing has been scheduled.
10 -10 -85 -2-
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 85033 ,'
Applicant: Zantigo Mexican Restaurants
Location: 5532 Brooklyn Blvd.
Request: Site and Building Plan /Special Use Permit
The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to con -
struct a Zantigo Restaurant with drive -up window at the site of the existing Nankin
Express at 5532 Brooklyn Boulevard. The existing restaurant is to be demolished and
a -new building built. The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded on the north
by the Green Mill restaurant, on the east by a private service road, on the south by
the Fifties Grill restaurant, and on the west by Brooklyn Boulevard. Convenience
food restaurants and restaurants with drive -up windows are special uses in the C2
zoning district which are not permitted to abut Rl, R2, or R3 zoned property. Although
this site abuts RI zoned property across Brooklyn Boulevard, the City has not con -
sidered this abutment to apply when a frontage road or limited access road separates
the developments.
Access to the site is to be from the service road, as in the past. The northerly
access is to be an exit only. Stacking for the drive -up lane is proposed on the west
and south sides of the building. The lane is 10' wide, separated from the regular
driving lanes by a 3' wide median. Parking on the north and west sides of the site
is 90 On the south side, it is 45' angle parking. There are two driving lanes
leading to the southerly exit, one from the drive -up window and one from the parking area.
There is the possibility of conflict at this exit point if a car in the southerly lane
turns north while a car in the northerly lane turns south. Because of the location
of the proposed building, there is little that can be done to avoid this conflict. To
shorten the median to allow more room for drive -up customers to weave to the right
would open up the possibility of cars backing into the drive -up lane. Moving the
building westward would result in fewer parking spaces than required because of
shifting to angled spaces. Lastly, narrowing the throat of the exit would probably
lead to more conflicts than the proposed arrangement. Therefore, the proposed arrange -
ment does appear to be the best under circumstances.
The site plan provides for 44 parking spaces, enough for 82 seats and 6 employees
at a ratio of l per two of each. The plan provides a row of nine stalls adjacent to
the building with one being a handicapped stall. All other stalls are on the
perimeter. `
The site is to drain out to the service drive as it does at present. All parking and
driving areas are to be bounded by B612 curb and gutter. An additional island is
recommended, however, along the south side of the lot where the stalls change from
90° to 45 Berming is indicated in the greenstrip adjacent to Brooklyn Boulevard.
The landscape plan calls for two Red Maples and three Colorado Green Spruce in the
Brooklyn Boulevard greenstrip. Two Snow Crabs are indicated in the northwest corner
of the site. The plan also calls for generous use of Green Barberry Jackman Potentilla
and Gold Coast Junipers in the large parking delineators. Decorative rock is proposed
along the north and south edges of the site. The applicant feels that fronts of cars
hanging over this small green area will make grass nonviable. This may be an accurate
assessment, but it has been along- standing policy to require grass in these interior
lot line greenstrips. The policy was reaffirmed during review of the Ramada Hotel
site plans. Staff, therefore, recommend that the plans be altered to provide grass
unless the Commission is willing to recommend a change in policy to allow either sod
or rock mulch.
10 -10 -85 -1-
Application No. 85033 continued
The building exterior is to he stucco with dark bronze anodized aluminum windows.
Treated cedar boards, 8' wide, are to be placed above and below the windows and above
the doorways. The front portion of the building is to have a tile roof, the back a
flat roof. While this may be somewhat of a false facade, it is not unlike the Sal -
vation Army building and also reflects two valid expressions of Spanish-American
architecture.
In general, we feel the plans are in order and approval is recommended, subject to
at least the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of
permits.
2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review
and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee
an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted
prior to the issuance of permits.
4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical
equipment shall be appropriately screened from view.
5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing
system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central
monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped
areas to facilitate site maintenance.
7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter
34 of the City Ordinances.
8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving
areas.
9. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances,
and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for
revocation.
10. The plans shall be modified prior to consideration by the City
Council to provide the following:
a) A curbed and landscaped delineator between 90° and 45
stalls on the south side of the parking lot.
b) Indication of sod rather than rock mulch in the interior
side yard greenstrips.
11. On -site traffic control signery shall be subject to review and approval
by the City Engineer.
12. A copy of an as -built utility survey shall be submitted to the Engineer-
ing Department prior to release of the performance guarantee.
10 -10 -85 -2-
Av .
.
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved
its adoption: —
t
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -192
RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A PROJECT
AND ITS FINANCING UNDER THE MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL
DEVELOPMENT ACT (BROOKDALE CORPORATE CENTER III
PROJECT): REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO THE MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR
APPROVAL: AND AUTHORIZING PREPARATION OF NECESSARY
DOC
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the City), as follows:
SECTION 1
Recitals and Findinas
1.1. This Council has received a proposal that the
City finance a portion of all of the cost of a proposed project
under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474 (the Act), consisting of
the acquisition of certain land and the construction and
equipping thereon of an approximately 110,000 square foot
facility to be located at the northeast corner of the
intersection of Summit Drive and Earl Brown Drive in the City
(the Project) by Brookdale Corporate Center III Limited
Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership to be formed in
which Ryan Properties Inc. will be a general partner (the
Borrower), to be leased by the Borrower to various tenants for
use as a commercial office facility.
1.2. At a public hearing, duly noticed and held on
October 21 , 1985, in accordance with the Act and Section 103(k)
of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, on the
proposal to undertake and finance the Project, all parties who
appeared at the hearing were given an opportunity to express
their views with respect to the proposal to undertake and
finance the Project and interested persons were given the
opportunity to submit written comments to the City Manager
before the time of the hearing. Based on the public hearing,
such written comments (if any) and such other facts and
circumstances as this Council deems relevant, this Council
hereby finds, determines and declares as follows:
(a) The welfare of the State of Minnesota requires
active promotion, attraction, encouragement- and development of
economically sound industry and commerce through governmental
acts to prevent, so far as Possible, emergence of blighted
lands and areas of chronic unemployment, and the State of
Minnesota has encouraged local government units to act to
' prevent such economic deterioration.
f
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -192
(b) The Project would further the general-purposes
contemplated and described in Section 474.01 of the Act.
(c) The existence of the Project would add to the tax
base of the City, the County and the School District in which
the Project is located and would provide increased
opportunities for employment for residents of the City and
surrounding area.
(d) This Council has been advised by representatives
of the Borrower that conventional, commercial financing to pay
the cost of the Project is available only on a limited basis
and at such high costs of borrowing that the economic
feasibility of constructing and operating the Project would be
significantly reduced, but that with the aid of municipal
borrowing, and its resulting lower borrowing cost, the Project
is economically more feasible.
(e) This Council has been advised by representatives
of the Borrower that the Project would not be undertaken but
for the availability of industrial development bond financing.
(£) This Council has also been advised by
representatives of the Borrower that on the basis of their
discussions with potential buyers of tax - exempt bonds, revenue
bonds of the City (which may be in the form of a commercial
development revenue note or notes) could be issued and sold
upon favorable rates and terms to finance the Project.
(g) The City is authorized by the Act to issue its
revenue bonds to finance capital projects consisting of
properties used and useful in connection with a revenue
producing enterprise, such as that of the Borrower, and the
issuance of the bonds by the City would be a substantial
inducement to the Borrower to acquire, construct and equip the
Project.
SECTION 2
Determination To Proceed with
the Proiect and its Financing
2.1. On the basis of the information given the City
to date, it appears that it would be desirable for the City to
issue its revenue bonds under the provisions of the Act to
finance the Project in the maximum aggregate face amount of
a
$9,000,000.
r
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -192
2.2. It is hereby determined to proceed with the
Project and its financing and this Council hereby declares its
present intent to have the City issue its revenue bonds under
` the Act to finance the Project. Notwithstanding the foregoing,
however, the adoption of this resolution shall not be deemed to
establish a legal obligation on the part of the City or this
Council to issue or to cause the issuance of such revenue t
bonds. - A11 details of revenue bond issue and the
provisions for payment thereof shall be subject to final
approval of the Project by the Minnesota Department of Energy
and Economic Development and may be subject to such further
f
conditions as the City may specify. The revenue bonds, if
issued shall - not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance,
legal or equitable, upon any property of the City, except the
revenues specifically pledged to the payment thereof, and each
bond, when, as and if issued, shall recite in substance that
the bond, including interest thereon, is payable solely from
the revenues and property specifically pledged to the payment
thereof, and shall not constitute a debt of the City within the
meaning of any constitutional, statutory or charter limitation.
2.3. The Application to the Minnesota Department of
Energy and Economic Development, with attachments, is hereby
approved, and the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to
execute said documents on behalf of the City.
2.4. In accordance with Section 474.10, Subdivision
7a of the Act, the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized
and directed to cause the Application to be submitted to the
Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development for
approval of the Project. The Mayor, City Manager, City
Attorney and other officers, employees and agents of the City
are hereby authorized and directed to provide the Department
with any preliminary information needed for this purpose. The
City Attorney is authorized to initiate and assist in the
preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to the T
Project, if approved by the Department.
SECTION 3
General
3.1. If the bonds are issued and sold, the City will ,_ }
enter into a lease, sale or loan agreement or similar agreement
satisfying the requirements of the Act (the Revenue Agreement)
with the Borrower. The lease rentals, installment sale
payments, loan payments or other amounts payable by the
Borrower to the City under the Revenue Agreement shall be
sufficient to pay the principal of, and interest and redemption
premium, if any, on, the bonds as and when the same shall
become due and payable.
14
I
RESOLUTION NO. 85 -192
3.2. All commitments of the City expressed herein are subject
to the condition that within twelve months from the date of adoption of this
resolution the City and the Borrower shall have agreed to mutually acceptable
terms and conditions of the Revenue Agreement, the revenue bonds and of the
other instruments and proceedings relating o the revenue bonds, s and their
issuance and sale. If the events set forth herein do not take place within
the time set forth above or any extension thereof, this resolution _shall
expire and be of no further force or effect.
3.3. The Borrower has agreed and it is hereby determined that
any and all direct and indirect costs incurred by the City in connection
with the Project, whether or not the Project is carried to completion, and
whether or not approved by the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic
Development, and whether or not the City by resolution authorizes the issuance
of the bonds, will be paid by the Borrower upon request.
3.4. The Mayor and City Manager are directed, if the bonds are
issued and sold, thereafter to comply with the provisions of Section 474.01,
Subdivisions 8 and 11 of the Act.
3.5. It is the present intent of the City Council to issue the
Bonds for the Project hereby given preliminary approval subject to the rovisions
of `
paragraph p
p graph 2.2, provided, however, that in the event the Borrower and
the
City are unable to prepare and execute a satisfactory development agreement
for the development of the Project in the Earle Brown Redevelopment Project
Area prior to December 31, 1985 the City may at its sole discretion withdraw
the preliminary approval hereby given.
3.6. The Borrower has agreed to supply to the City the 1% deposit
required by the Energy and Economic Development Authority for the reservation
of an entitlement amount therefor under the Act prior to October 31, 1985.
Unless
such amount is timely received by City from Borrower the approval
hereby given shall lapse and be of no effect.
l
October 21, 1985
ATTEST:
lerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded
by member Bill Hawes and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes,
and Rich Theis;
and the following voted against the same: Gene Lhotka,
whereupon }
pon said resolution was declared dul y passed and adopted.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Jim Lindsay, Chief of Police
DATE: October 17, 1985
SUBJECT: New Liquor License for Ground Round Restaurant
Because of some total corporate restructuring, a new liquor
license for the Ground Round restaurant is on the agenda. The
license was previously in the.Howard Johnson Corporate name.
They are restructuring to separate Howard Johnsons and the
Ground Round restaurants. The new corporation will be Ground
Round, Inc. We have been working to meet their national deadline
of October 27, 1985. In order to - meet this, we would have to
have the license on the October 2 1 , 1985 agenda. 'We w i l l have
the background done on Friday, October 18, 1985 and so far
expect to recommend approval of the license. We will , therefore,
have the background ready for delivery to the Council on Friday
under separate cover from the agenda.
t
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Jim Lindsay, Chief of Police
DATE: October 18, 1985
SUBJECT: Ground Round Liquor License
Attached please find Investigator Spehn's background investi-
gation of the new Ground Round Corporation in application for an
on -sale intoxicating and on -sale Sunday liquor license. As I
informed you in my previous memo, this new license was
necessitated by the reorganization of corporation breaking the
Ground Round restaurants off from the Howard Johnson Corporation.
At this time we are recommending conditional approval of this
license effective upon the date the new Ground Round Corporation
papers are signed.
s
f
Ground Round Liquor License Update
Date: October 17, 1985
The following will be a resume of Investigator Donald SPEHN concerning
an update of the On Sale Intoxicating Liquor License held by the
Ground Round Restaurant located at 2545 County Road 10 in the City of
Brooklyn Center. This resume is transcribed and typewritten by Jean
GOULD, Clerk - Typist for the Brooklyn Center Police Department._
REAS
An update of the Liquor License Application for the Ground Round
Restaurant is required at this time because of the fact that the
parent corporation, Imperial Group Limited, is restructuring the
assets of their organization. It is noted that the parent
corporation, Imperial Group Limited, is a corporate structure
operating the Howard Johnson Company which the Ground Round
Incorporated was a subsidiary. Under the new reorganization, Imperial
Group Limited is splitting the companies, Howard Johnson Company, and
the Ground Round Incorporated into separate equities. This proposed
restructuring involves the transfer of all of the Ground Round
Restaurants and their respective liquor licenses owned by Howard
Johnson to the Ground Round Incorporated, a Delaware Corporation, and
an indirect totally owned subsidiary of Imperial Group Limited. The
reason learned for this reorganization is the fact that the financial
status of the Howard Johnson Corporation is _somewhat insecure while
the Ground Round Corporation is financially secure., It has been
learned that the company apparently is negotiating a sale of the
Howard Johnson Corporation to Mariott Inns Incorporated. The company
will then of course retain the Ground Round Company Incorporated. It
is the intention of the company that this reorganization will have no
effect on the day -to -day operation of the Ground Round Restaurant
located within the City of Brooklyn Center. It is indicated that the
present employees of the restaurant will be retained including the
present manager, Mr. Bela LAZAR, of whom a previous background
investigation was conducted. It is indicated that the restaurants
will be operated exactly as they are currently being run.
Because of the reorganization, new officers and directors have been
appointed for Ground Round Incorporated. The application and support
of a prospective application for On Sale or Club Intoxicating liquor
or wine license for the Ground Round Incorporated has been submitted
and is attached to the case file as well as part two, personal
applications concerning each of the directors and /or board members and
also Articles of Incorporation By Laws and correspondence from the
Ground Round Incorporated and the law firm representing them locally
concerning this reorganization are also attached to the background
investigation. This background will focus on the new officers of the
Ground Round Corporation, none of whom have any financial interest in
the company.
Ground Round Liquor License Update Page 2
OFFICERS AND DIRECT M
1. Eric BERNARD D.O.B. 02-06-32
aka: Eric Bernard VOSLINSKI
9 Lagomar Road
Palm Beach, Florida
Place of Birth: Paris, France
French citizen
Title: Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Ground Round Incorporated
I
2. Fereydoon NMN ZIA D.O.B. 05 -07 -45
aka: "Bob" ZIA
3 Boulder Glen
Hingham, MA
Place of Birth: Tehran, Iran
Naturalized United States Citizen
Title: President and Director, Ground Round Incorporated
3. David Lawrence GOEBEL D.O.B. 07 -29 -50
Two Ridge Hill Road
Hingham, MA
United States Citizen
Title: Vice President and Director
4. Robert Francis BRADY D.O.B. 12 -24 -50
Two Centennial Pond Circle
Kingston, Massachusetts
.United States Citizen
Place o Birth: h New York
Title: Secretary, Ground Round Incorporated
5. David"Leo HALLIGAN D.O.B. 09 -11 -42
30 Rogers Street
Quincy, Massachusetts
Place of Birth: Weymouth, MA
Title: Treasurer, Ground Round Incorporated
BACKGRO OF OFEIQER,g
1. Eric BERNARD, aka Eric Bernard VOSLINSKI, indicated that he had a
name change with the VOSLINSKI being dropped for ease in pronunciation
and spelling. Mr. BERNARD is not a United States citizen and is a
French citizen. He has an alien number A -23 -201 -834. A check was run
through the United States Immigration Department which has indicated
that Mr. BERNARD is currently a lawful permanent resident of the
Ground Round Liquor License Update Page 3
United States. All of the immigration records concerning Mr. BERNARD
were not immediately available, however immigration was able to advise
Investigator SPEHN that Mr. BERNARD apparently first entered the
United States as a visitor in 1965. It was indicated that he could
have received extensions on the visitor visa through work permits,
etc. The next indication they have is that he again reentered the
United States in 03- 23 -78, classified as H -1, which is a work permit
status having particular skills. Mr. BERNARD currently is classified
as 6- Preference. It was indicated that this classification indicates
that petitions have been filed by other persons indicating that Mr.
BERNARD possesses highly skilled employment needs, etc, and therefore
is currently a legal permanent resident. His complete records were
not available from immigration. Mr. BERNARD was asked to submit a
photocopy of his name card or alien card which is attached to the case
file. Mr. BERNARD was also asked to submit immigration statements for
the past five years, 1980 through 1985. These have not been received
at the time of this report. Mr. BERNARD is married. His wife's name
is Meilina BERNARD, D.Q.B. 03- 25 -43, place of birth is Singapore. Her
occupation is listed as housewife. Mr. BERNARD and his wife currently
live at 9 Lagomar Road, Palm Beach, Florida. Mr. BERNARD'S current
occupation is President of Bernard Hotels, Palm Beach, Florida and he
has held this position since July of 1980. Bernard Hotels is a
Delaware Corporation and is a hotel consulting and development
company. Mr. BERNARD is currently serving as a consultant to Howard
Johnson Corporation. His prior employment was as President of Holiday
Inn, Memphis, Tennessee, from September of 1975 to July of 1980.
The following checks were also run on Mr. BERNARD.
A drivers license check was run in the State of Florida which
indicated no record of a drivers license. A drivers license check was
then run in the State of Tennessee which indicated that Mr. BERNARD
has a valid Tennessee license which expires on February 6, 1988. Mr.
BERNARD is clear, having no record in NCIC. A record check was also
run in the State of Tennessee, however no response had been received
at the writing of this report. A record check was also run with Palm
Beach, Florida Police Department in which the investigator spoke with
an Officer BURROWS of the Identification Division who verified Mr.
BERNARD'S home address and indicated that they have no record of any
criminal activity under the name of Eric BERNARD or Eric Bernard
VOSLINSKI. BURROWS indicated that they have had calls to the BERNARD
residence concerning alarm calls and a vandalism report. When
questioned, Officer BURROWS indicated that the address of 9 Lagomar
Road is a very exclusive residential area with the residences valued
at $750,000 to one million dollars.
2. Fereydoon ZIA is a naturalized United States citizen and was
naturalized on 11 -18 -77 in Memphis, Tennessee. His naturalization
number is 1025 -04 -04 and his alien registration number is A- 19 -572-
544. His status is a naturalized citizen and has been verified by the
United States Immigration Department. Mr. ZIA is married and his
Ground Round Liquor License Update Page 4
wife's name is Barbara Ann, who is listed as a housewife, however has
prior employment as an instructor at Memphis State University,
_Memphis, Tennessee. Mr. ZIA and his wife currently reside at 3"
Boulder Glen, Hingham, Massachusetts. Mr. ZIA has been employed by
Howard Johnson Company and /or Ground Round since March of 1984 as a
group Vice President. His prior employment consisted of Vice
President of Perkin's Restaurant, Memphis, Tennessee, from March 1980
through March of 1984. Perkin's Restaurant, Memphis, Tennessee, was a
subsidiary of Holiday Inn, Memphis, Tennessee. Prior to that, Mr. ZIA
was Executive Vice President of Margus Corporation, Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, from March of 1978 to April of 1980. Margus'Corporation is
the parent company of Marc's Big Boy Restaurants. From May of 1976 to
March of 1978 Mr. ZIA was director of business development for Massey
Ferguson Company in Lucerne, Switzerland. Mr. ZIA currently has a
valid Massachusetts drivers license, drivers license # 453 -82 -8910.
Date of origin is 02- 02 -85. Mr. ZIA is clear in.NCIC and has no
criminal record with the State of Massachusetts. An inquiry was sent
to the State of Tennessee, however no response received and a check
was also run with the Brookfield, Wisconsin Police Department where he
was a prior resident and he has no criminal record with the Brookfield
Police Department. Mr. ZIA also indicated two personal references, a
John BARNS of Perkin's Restaurant, Memphis, Tennessee, and an Allen
LENZMEIER of the Best Buy Company in Bloomington, Minnesota. The
0 investigator attempted to contact Mr. LENZMEIER, however he was
currently on a business trip in Boston. The investigator did speak to
Mr. BARNS who indicated that Mr. ZIA was formerly BARNS supervisor at
Perkin's Restaurant. He verified that Mr. ZIA was President of
Perkin's Restaurants which are a subsidiary of the Holiday _Inn,
Memphis. He indicated that Mr. ZIA is a very professional person and
he knows of no problems or criminal activities involving Mr. ZIA. Mr.
BARNS was also familiar with Mr. BERNARD from Mr. BERNARD'S former
position with Holiday Inn and indicated that he too is a very
professional person and the association between ZIA and BARNS would
have occurred from their respective positions with the Holiday Inn
Corporation.
3. David Lawrence GOEBEL is a United States Citizen, is married, his
wife's name is M. Janet GOEBEL who is listed as a housewife with a
prior employment as a dietician. Mr. GOEBEL and his wife presently
reside at Two Ridge Hill Road, Hingham, Massachusetts. He has been
employed by Ground Round since May of 1985. His previous employment
is that he was a Managing Partner of R. Tapley's, a restaurant in
Cincinnati, Ohio from October of 1981 to March of 1985. He was also
employed by Winegarden & Hammons Inn in Cincinnati, Ohio, a restaurant
and lodge from March of 1978 to September of 1981 and prior to that he
was employed by Dobbs House in a hotel or motel in Memphis, Tennessee,
from January 1975 to February of 1978. He is also a 25 percent
shareholder in Tyler's on the Square in Cincinnati, Ohio, also a
restaurant. Mr. GOEBEL has a valid Massachusetts drivers license #
272 -50 -8510 with the origin date of 07- 23 -85.
Ground Round Liquor License Update Page 5
The following criminal history checks were also run.
NCIC was clear, the State of Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigation, no
record; Cincinnati Ohio Police Department, no record; Fairfield Ohio
Police Department, no record; and the State of Tennessee, no record;
the State of Massachusetts, no record.
4. Robert Francis BRADY is a United States Citizen, is married, his
wife's name is Christine M. BRADY who is listed as a housewife. Mr. &
Mrs. BRADY currently reside at Two Centennial Pond Circle, Kingston,
Massachusetts. Mr. BRADY is employed as Director of Personnel of -
Howard Johnson Company and has been in that position since July of
1978. His prior employment was as Personnel Representative for Burger
King Corporation, Woodbury, New York, from October of 1975 to August
of 1978. Mr. BRADY and his wife formerly lived in Selden, New York
and Holbrook, New York. Mr. BRADY has a valid Massachusetts drivers
license # 124 -42- 2993, date of origin is 12- 20 -84.
The following record checks were conducted.
NCIC was clear, inquiries were sent to both the State of Massachusetts
and the State of New York. Mr. BRADY has no record in Massachusetts
and the State of New York has responded by stating that their files do
not contain information for dissemination in response to an inquiry to
• be utilized for employment or licensing purposes.
5. David Leo HALLIGAN is single, he has lived at his current address
of 30 Rogers Street, Quincy, Massachusetts for over 10 years. Mr.
HALLIGAN has been employed by Howard Johnson Company since March 30,
1967 until the present time as an accountant. Mr. HALLIGAN has no
record of a drivers license in the State of Massachusetts and is clear
in NCIC and he also is clear of criminal history in the State of
Massachusetts.
SUMMARY
This background investigation has indicated that the applicant, Ground
Round Incorporated, is currently undergoing a reorganization
apparently for financial reasons and that a new Board of Directors has
been named for the company. It is indicated that none of the Board
Members will have a financial interest in the company and it would
appear that the board is formed of three members who have considerable
experience and expertise in the hotel and /or restaurant business and
management of same and that the other two board members have been long
term employees of a related company, Howard Johnson Incorporated. In
the case of the two foreign born officers, it has been verified that
both are legal residents of the United States. None of the applicants
have any criminal history that could be determined at this time. As
it is indicated that the reorganization of the company will have no
effect on the day -to -day operation of the Ground Round located within
the City of Brooklyn Center, the investigator can find no reason in
Ground Round Liquor License Update Page 6
terms of
this background investigation that the company should not.
retain its intoxicating or nonintoxicating liquor or wine license at
this time.
Licenses to be approved by the City Council on October 21, 1985 1
CHRISTMAS TREE SALES LOT
P.Q.T. Company' 4007 58th Ave. N. 'it -lkJl
City Clerk
COMMERCIAL KENNEL LICENSE
Snyder Brothers' Brookdale Center.
Sanitarian FY
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE
Arby's Brookdale Center
Sanitarian
GASOLINE SERVICE STATION LICENSE
Brooklyn Center Service Inc. 6849 Brooklyn Blvd.
CIL
City Clerk
ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE
Brooklyn Center Women of Today 6500 Humboldt Ave. N. yt.
Sanitarian (�
RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE
Initial:
Kelly 3900 56 th Ave. N.
Bobby & Sally Robson 1107 57th Ave. N.
Renewal:
Gale W. Pierce 6213 Beard Ave. N.
Donald P. Foster 5100 Brooklyn Blvd.
C & V Management Consultant 6501 Brooklyn Blvd.
Wilfird & Lillian Hollenbeck 5406 Bryant Ave. N.
Ralph C. Johnson 5440, 44 Bryant Ave. N.
George Shimshock 5900 Colfax Ave. N.
Dale C. Wegner 5935 Dupont Ave. N.
Jon & Elaine Rask 4201 Lakeside Ave. #105
Jeff & Patti Stewart 5547 Lyndale Ave. N.
Lewis & Vivian Hedlund 5316 Russell Ave. N.
Ro N. Ey e 33 g
2 Morg Ave. N.
5
M. Dietrich & T. Schultz 6831 Toledo Ave. N.
J. J. Barnett 2910 68th Lane F
J. J. Barnett 2914 68th Lane
J. J. Barnett 2918 68th Lane
Director of Planning
and Inspection
GENERAL APPROVAL:
�g rclrld G. S,61inter, City Clerk
Member introduced the following
resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING LAND SURVEYORS CERTIFICATE OF
CORRECTION TO PLAT OF BROOKLYN MOBIL
WHEREAS, the plat of BROOKLYN MOBIL was approved by the City
Council on November 5, 1984; and
WHEREAS, James H. Parker, Registered Land Surveyor, has
submitted the following "Certificate of Correction" for approval:
Pursuant to the provisions of M.S.A., Section 505 174, James
H. Parker, the undersigned, a Registered Land Surveyor in and
for the State of Minnesota, declares as follows:
1. That I prepared the plat of BROOKLYN MOBIL dated
September 19, 1984 and filed on November 8, 1984 in the
office of County Recorder, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as per
Document No. 4941570.
2. That said plat contains errors, omissions, or defects in
the following particulars, to wit: A distance call in the
dedication portion of the plat was indicated as being 821.54
feet in the 4th line down in the property description and was
indicated as 821.51 feet on the pictorial portion of the
plat.
3. That said lat is hereby corrected in the following
P Y g
particulars, to wit: that the above described distance will
read 821.51 in the description of the property as opposed to
821.54 feet as shown.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the
City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. said certificate of correction is hereby approved.
2. the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
certify approval of said certificate to Hennepin County,
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly
seconded by member , and upon vote being
taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: ,
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.