Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1984 06-11 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF' BROOKLYN CENTER JUNE 11, 1984 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 - May 21 1984 7. Board of Review (continuation) 8. Final Plat Approval �- a. Moorwood Townhouses, 2nd Addition -This subdivision provides for the second phase of the Moorwood Townhouse Development conditioned on the City Attorney. *9. Performance Bond Release and Reduction a. Joe Hamm, 4010 65th Avenue North b. Brooklyn Crossings, 3300 County Road 10 , 10. Resolutions: a. Relating to a Project Under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, Calling a Public Hearing Thereon - Public hearing on an application from Ryan Construction for an industrial development bond for a commercial retail building adjacent to Byerly's. 11. Planning Commission Items (7:30 p.m.): a. Planning Commission Application No. 84009 submitted by Lombard Properties for site and building plan approval. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 84009 at its May 24, 1984 meeting. b. Planning Commission Application No. 84010 submitted by Lombard Properties for a special use permit approval for off -site accessory parking for Spec 14. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 84010 at its May 14, 1984 meeting. c. Planning Commission Application No. 84014 submitted by hoary Ziebarth for a special use permit approval to conduct group dance and baton twirling lessons in the lower level of the residence at 532.9 4th Street North. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 8401 at its Pay 24, 1984 meeting. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- June 11, 1984 12. Public Hearing (7 :45 p.m.) - Public Tearing Regarding Contested Compliance Order Involving Chippewa Park Apartments 13. Ordinances: a. An Ordinance Authorizing the Conveyance of Real Estate in the City of Brooklyn Center -This ordinance is offered for a second reading and has been scheduled for 8:00 p.m. The ordinance provides for the sale of the "old city hall" site. Notice of the proposed ordinance has been published in the official newspaper on ifay 17, 1984. b. An Ordinance Repealing Chapter 8 of the City Ordinances Relating to Food Sanitation and Adopting a New Food Sanitation Code -This ordinance is offered for a first reading. 14. Gambling Licenses a. Knights of Columbus, Council 6772 - Application for a Class B license (requires majority vote of the City Council to pass) - Waiver of the $10,000 fidelity bond (requires unanimous vote of the City Council to pass) ^15. Licenses 16. Adjournment as p y w - f MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OL' BRO` 1 ? LYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN A14D THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION MAY 21, 1984 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The BFooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL I Dean fdyquist, Councilmembers Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, City Engineer Jim Grube, and Administrative Assistants Brad Hoffman and Tom Bublitz. Mayor Nyquist noted that Councilmember Lhotka would be absent from this evening's meeting. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Pastor John Peterson of the Lutheran Church of the Master. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted the Council had not received any requests to use the Open Forum session this evening. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. There being none, he continued with the regular agenda items. CONSENT A GENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Councilmembers requested any items removed from the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Theis requested item 7g be removed from the Consent Agenda, and the City Manager requested item 7i be removed from the Consent Agenda. APPROVAL OF MI NUTES - MAY 7, 198+ There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of May 7, 1984 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION RESOLUTION 84 -71 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF WARREN LINDQUIST 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. 5 -21 -84 -1- RESOLUTION NO. 84 -72 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 198 -D (LIFT STATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1983 -07, PHASE II) 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. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -73 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 1984 -E (WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1984 -02 AND WATER SERVICE REPAIR PROJECT NO. 1984 -06) 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 r declared d ass g e u on said resolution was duly e : p Y d and p adopted. RESOLUT NO. 84 -74 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 1984 -F (EVERGREEN PARK /AREA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1984 -07, PHASE I) The m r motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded b member P g g Y Y 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. RESOLUTION NO. 84 -75 ;ember Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: i RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH ANOKA- HENNIEPIN SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 11 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND P OF THE EXPANDED EVERGREEN PARK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PARKING LOT FACILITY 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 Thesis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOL NO. 8 -76 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK UNDER CONTRACT 1982 -0 (CHLORINE/STORAGE ROGIM IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -27) 5 -21 -84 -2- The motion for the adoption of the foregoinr, resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being tal, ',Ai Freon, the followinfj, voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill HoWs, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 84-77 Meaber Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING REPLACEMENT OF POLICE SERGEANT POSITION 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 f avor 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. RESOLUTION NO. 84-78 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL FOR ISSUANCE OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS UNDER THE 1 MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT AND AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF THE HEARING The notion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in f avor 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. RESOLUTION NO. 84-79 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF HAROLD ROSSOIW The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taker.) 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. RESOLUTION NO. 84-80 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF LLOYD HOLTHUS The notion 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 sane: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 5-21-84 -3- RESOLUTION NO. 8LI-81 Metnber Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION CI AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF JOHN THOMPSON 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. RESOLUTION NO. 84-82 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF GLENN LEITER 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: 4 Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and R Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 84-83 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF SERGEA14T RAYMOND BEACH 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 f avor thereof Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Haw.-s, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 814-84 tlernber�Clia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF TRUMAN A. NELSON 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 f avor thercof : Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and teach Them ; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 84-85 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY HANIIiGIER TO WRITE-OFF UNCOLLECTIELE CHECKS 5-21-84 -4- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member BiIIRawem, aodu nvotebeinQtakenCbereon,the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyqu1ot/ Celia Scott, Bill Howes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and ~- adopted. DE3OLOIIO@ 0O. 84-86 Menber Celia � 1otruduood the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY M&0&GEK TO WRITE-OFF D000LLECIIBLE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE The notion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member BiIlOewoo,ao0upoovntebeiogtakeotbereoo,thef011oyiugYottdiDfavorthmre0f: Dean UyqUiat, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Diob Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, BE30LUIZDQ @0 84-8 A li��!Sco�tt the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN &GD6G0ENI FOR LD&0 OF INIOXZLY%E8 5000 The notion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Dill Hawes, and upon vote being taken tborenu the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyguist, 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 amotioo by CouooiImember Scott and seconded by Oouooilmamber Hawes to approve the following list of licenses: AMUSEMEE7 DEVICE LICENSE - OPERATOR Lynbrook Bowl ----------------' 6357 N. Lilac Dr. CIGARETTE LICENSE �Pizza '9aTsce 5001 Drew Ave. N. FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Brooklyn Center Community Center 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Brooklyn Center National Little Lions Pork Dnnald000'o BrnokdaIe Center Pizza Factory 6816 Humboldt Ave. N. Show Biz Pizza 5039 John Martin Dr. ITINERANT FOOD �ST88LI�8��0T LICENSE 7rehard ------ 6223 Major Ave. N. 5-21-84 -5- MECH SYS TEMS LIC ENSE Floffmari's Inc. 135 E. Third Ave. Rassett Mechanical Contractors 1322 Rice St. NO NPERI S HABLE VENDING MACHINE LI CENSE Coca Cola 1189 Eagn Ind. Rd. Earle Brown School 5900 Humboldt Ave. N. POOL TABLE LICENSE Lynbrook Bowl 6357 N. Lilac Dr. REN TAL DWELLING LICENSE Initial: Elaine V. Nelson 7213 Bryant Ave. N. Dennis & Linda Benton 6601 Camden Dr. Darlene Dimitroff 6442 Indiana Ave. N. Hallard N. Corey 4201 Lakeside Ave. N. 1118 Michael E. Schultz 4207 Lakeside Ave. N. #127 Jonathan Cain 4207 Lakeside Ave. N. #135 Gregg G. Link 5106 Winchester Ln. Leonard Schollen 5305 4th St . N. Renewal: Brookdale Towers Program Brookdale Towers Apts. Brooklyn Center Development Co. Earle Brown Farm Apts. Ewing Square Associates Ewing Square Townhouses Patrick J. Gaughan Victoria Townhouses Thomas W. Leverenze 5600 Aldrich Ave. N. Manferd Rasmussen 7020 Brooklyn Blvd. Richard E. Moehrle 5817 Shores Drive Don Pfau 6913 Unity Ave. N. John S. Tschohl 2206 54th Ave. N. SIGN HA NGER S LICENSE Crosstown Satin Company 10166 Central Ave. NE Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilr:members Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Establishing City Hall/ CoYrr.;unity Center Landscaping Improvement Project No. 1984 -12, Phase I and Accepting Propo�3@1 for Construction Thereof. The Director of Public Works reviewed the landscaping proposals prepared for the City Hall and Comrmani.ty Center areas. The City I.1anager explained that the landscaping of the Cite ball and Comanunity Cen - er area was delayed until the new entrance of'f' Shingle Creek Parkway was CUnpleted. R ESOL UTIO N NO. 8 -88 Nl M — , r Bill fiawea introduced the following resolution and t„oved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING CITY HALL/COiv1 CENTER LANDSCAPINrG IIIPROVEMENT PRO.IECT NO. 1984 -12, PHASE I AND ACCEPTING PROPOSAL FOR CONSTRUC`I.'ION TIIERI_;OF I 5 -21 -84 -6- The motion for the adoption of the foregoi nt resolution was duly seconded by member Nich Tip :i-;, and upon vote belnt, taken tl »r eon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyg"uist, Celia Scott, Bill. �i e��, and R;i h Thais; and the following voted against 'c,he sarr:e: none, whereupon .sr,;d re;olution wus declared duly passed and adopted. EJESC)IJU T IO,d I11"0, 84 - •F?9 Celia Scoll - t introduced the fo1_lo�Vaing resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTTON ESTABLISHING CITY HALL /C "UI�IITY CE'N'TER LANDSCAPING Ih1PR0Vrt;ENT PROJECT NO. 1981 -12, PHASE II AND t CCI_;I'CIi G PPOPO"AL F'Olk CO;:ST13UCTION THEREOF The motion for the adoption of the fore; ,njng resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hanaes, 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. RES0LUTI01'x 1 84 - 90 Ireimber Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH STS CONSULTANTS, LTD. FOR SOILS ENGINEERING RELATING TO CENTRAL PARK I1 ROVEMENT PROJECT IO. 1984-10 The motion for the adoption of the .foregoi.ng resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the fallowing voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill H�rwes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESO LUTION NO. 8 r9eii]b rlia Scot introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1984 GENERAL F UND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR WAGE AND SALARY ADJUSTMENTS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member ' g thereon o n he following Rich Theis, and upon vote be.�x.�, taken thy. cu , t g voted in favor thereof : Dean Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the sale: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. APP ROVA L OF NONINTOX LIQUOR LICENSE FOR PIZZA FACTORY, 6816 mmiB0LDT AVENUE NORT The City Manager introduced an application for a nonintoxicating liquor license for the Pizza Factory located in the Humboldt Square Shopping Center at 6816 Humboldt Avenue North. He introduced the investigation report completed on the owners of the establishment and stated that the police department, in its investigation, has found nothing in the owner's background which would preclude issuance of the nonintoxicating liquor license and that staff is recommending approval of the license. There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Hak11es to 5- 21 -84 -7- approve the application for a nonintoxicating, liquor license for the Pizza Factory, 6816 Humboldt Avenue North. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Couricilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. PLANN'lNG COV,11ISSTON ITEMS A NO �S , INC. 1, . 84011 S�MPI BY NANKUNI EXURES, FOR _fffL BUILDING PLAN AN (,IE - ij - - DRIVE-UP LANE T�TD 5532 EIIU� The Director of Planning - esented and reviewed ' r Council members ion pi 1 pages 1 and 2 of the May 10, 1984 Planning Corm, minutes and also the Planning Commission information sheet prepared for Application No. 8 fie explained the request is for site and building plan and special use permit approval to allow a fast food chinese restaurant to be located at 5532 Brooklyn Boulevard, the current site of the Happy Dragon restaurant. He explained the present zoning of the property is C2. The Director of Planning & Inspection explained that a similar application (Planning Commission Application No, 83039) was approved by the City Council for a Zantigo restaurant at this location. He explained the remodeling comprehended in Application No. 83039 was similar to that contained in Application No. 84011. He rioted that the application requires a special use permit and that a public Bearing on the special use permit is required. The Planning Director then reviewed the site and building plan and landscaping plan submitted with Application No. 8401 fie explained the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the application at which no one spoke for or against the application except the applicant. He stated the Planning Commission recr.-j approval of Application No. 84011, subject to seven conditions which he reviewed for Council members. He noted that a public hearing has been scheduled for Application CD V 0 No. 84011 and that a representative of the applicant is present. Councilinember Scott suggested that an exit only sign be placed at the south entrance 10 to the private road servicing the businesses, between 55th and 56th Avenues. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Application No. 84 . He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing No one requested to speak at the public heal Mayor Nyquist noted he had received a letter fr( the First Frookdiale Bank indicating, that t' icy had no objections to Application No. 84011. trlayor 'N'Yquist then entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmeo.-ibor Thn-is and seconded by Councilmember Scott to close the public hearing on Application No. 8 34011. There was a motion by CouncilmoiNber Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve Application No. 8 subj--ct to the following conditions: 1. The special use pormit is subject to all. applicable codes, ordinances, and regulation, and any violation thereof may be grounds for revocation. 2. Building plans are subject to review -:ind approval by the P't'lilding Official with re, to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 0 5-21-84 -8- A site performance firu guarantee (in an a.mc . to bcsub prior to the issuance of permits to aspure e .tian of approved site improvements. 4. Any outside trash dispoxal 1 n&1405 and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately acroanco Cron vicw. 5. Plan approval is exclusive of 01 n ;nnnry which is s!,ibj(--'ct to Chapter 3 of the City Ordinances. 6� Cur b-i-rig, shall & provided ;zoo& PA 1 a,-,d driving areas im accordance with the recone s end ation of the Gity Engineer. 7. Colored flourescen'l, a.nd i rifts a 1 cqlg th(, 1 of the buJ'Iding sh be removed prior to the issuacon of permits. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Counnilmoybers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting, against: none. The action passed,, With re,,: to Counciln, Scott's; sugEeztlon, that an exit. only sign be added to the sout,h entrance to the site, the he iuelic-,Yed this was a good idea and thaL they would erect such a sign. RECESS T'ne Center City Council recessed it 7:50 p.m 4 and reconvened at 8:00 p.m. FUBLIC HEARING FOR WATER FAIN TEPTAITUT PPAOt-TECT 1-1 1984-08 AF , 'D STR'FET N550 - Quist stated that he would like to proceed with the public hearing this evening. He that it is gip,, , :�rcn" that work is nced in the area but that the question is how the work will be a5se3ypd. H�, stated i",� his peramal view to hold the hewing in an environ7itent of zip with the neighborhood and the City in order to provide input into the ducision making process. The City Ma, explained that the pub] is hcaKng is a legal requJi.rement and is the first step in a public improvemant procvss. He explained 'Uhat, after the project hearing is held the second step is Ul r7 1t hearing. He noted that on May 9, 198 an info-n,al informational meeting was hold at the Earle Brown elementary school to discuss the Lyndale Avenue improvemonts. He continued ,to review the hearing process and explained to the Council that a po tit on, received from residents in the area showed that virtually eve. in the Loighborhood is opposed to the proposed project. He explained t1he staf is rece unnKing that the Coinmil deny all parts of the project in 1984 and file the necessary docwwnt-s with the Hlinnesota Department of Transportation for turnback funding. The Director of Public Works reviewed for Council members the engineer's report prepared for Ly"Ole Avenue Tmprove p ,,t ot etas. 19811-08, 1984-09 and 1984-11. The Director of Public Works explained Qat on April 1, 1984 Lyndale Avenue was turned back to the City of Bincklyn Center fix the Minnesota Department of Transportation. He then reviewed briefly the projects under consideration for Lynd. Avenue whicli included water main improvement, street improvement, and 5-21-84 -9- sidewalk improvement. He explained in order to use the Lu fiends the project must be placed under contract within five years from April 1, 1984 and must be completed within ten years, He explainod the Minnesota Department of Transportation has advised the City that at the present 'i,, it adIo( turnback Funds are available. He added that these Curds tnay :iot be ._-,v -JLlable in Chia fi-iture du to the possible increase of roadways turned back to local units of government. The Director of Public Works then proce2ded to review the el e-nients of the improvement project and pDinted out that presently the area is served by private wells. He explained the water main project includes additional fire hydrants and services to undeveloped lots in the area. With regard to the street improvement project, he pointed out that it is proposed to remove the existing roadway and construct a roadway which is 28 feet curb to curb. He reviewed the two plans proposed for additional on-street parking, one allowing parallel parking,the other providing angle par` ping. He then reviewed the criteria with regard to the additional. on-street parking option,-, - )d ex,plainled that also included in the street project are concrete aprons on all driveways. The Director of Public Works then reviewed the sidewalk improvement project and explained that the sidewalk is proposed from 53rd to 57th Avenues an the west side of the street to serve as a pedestrian link to the twe bridges and to the River Ridge Park area. He then reviewed the propooed project construction schedule which containicd a completion date of ectober, 1934. The Director of Public Works reviewed the various project costs, and pointed out that the estimated grand to"G-1 of all projects was 1 He reviewed the schedule of estimated speci- a6se lt.} For tho proposed wz main pr and noted that the proposal is for a 20 yvar assessment. He then r` the estimated annual payments for the water main project Or the first four years. The Director of Public Warks then reNewed the assesnnent rates for the proposed street Onprovement project zNY also too for project. He then reviewed the terms of For the street p',­oject bea tan year assessment. He concluled his disamsimi (,q' •h­' n;3 sc,ssm sty '_ n h s �t -7 that the avera, assess ient or a reNdcatial lot in the project area is at $3,000 Or the streQ improvement portion of the project, He the City policy with regard to deferment of special aosesmnents based on hardship. Councilmember Scott requc t , d ten oa IDirector (of MAY works to imview the cn-streot parking policy rMted to the project. Me Director of FusJI-ic explained that the policy for parking in the additional on-stpent sp c" provif.Icd' with th�. proje'c't would be t same as the p,-)l; -1 _�cy t rest of the City meaning that cars would be allowed to par ,'k in a max6num Q six Murs cWring the day a!ld four hour, nI.,, time hours. H explained that the hours are deQTed to prohiloit long pairkcing Cor snow removal , Councilmember Men inquired as to 0o annsts of tur'rilbac', funds t the City , , ,, Ould he eligible to receive. The Ornotor of Public Orks explained that there are approximately e�nou,, 'to finance the entire streK construction except t additional on -street minor items. N" (��Yplr'�J'neJ tl."at the Ninncaota Qparhnent of Transportatiun has not given a deNston on whether turnback fund., cain, fund a side4alk. Councilmember Owes then requasted the Director of Public Works U) revini ON& process evuld be unc�ertalke'n to the Wciter project, alone. The Kireator u,. IPuJ)l-.i.(3 eqAainal UM the install2tion of water main would Q Tea3 expmw;ivr3 I ',, wouid c - i L )u ii. the vegetation in the area amd many trees would be lost. 1-1-, t'he ar( a lbetw en 5-21-84 _10- 5 and 55th has a particular prohli.-M with revard to drainage. lie added that no cost c t ilvates had bee -n prepared for in,- t the water r, alone, but he pointed out that the cost would b(_ sub start i"O and the restoration of' the roadway would not qualify for till r nba) c k fundcs_ The of "Public Works explained that the total estimated turnback fun(_,s ire $25� Council S ott stated she did t'or)lr feel I _, I S. 1 " ,ynlale Ave-aie is a typical residential street. She stated she believes the , ,,tatle lhis an obligation, since the street is a collector to the freeway, to fund o*L'the pro jpct. The Director of Public Works explained that currently the counts on Lyndale Avenue are between 2,000 to 2,500 vehicles per day. F (­, the majority of these vehicles are fru, outside the neighborhood and 'uhat, ti'le street performs a collector function. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on water main irfiprove, project No. 1934 and street ii project No. 198 Mayor Nyquist recognized Mir. Bob 5607 Lyndale Avenue North. Mr. Murphy inquiri Whether River Ridge Park is c, -d by 'Ghe City or the Minnesota Departri of Transport ation. Further, he q ues IL i oned that if it J - s owned by the Minnesota Departur,ri of Transportation why wo the City want to install a sidewalk? The City 1-'anlai explained that the P'ro )-.ert Ji:7 owrried by the Minnesota Departnient of Transportation but is leased to the DNIJ;a­id -:11n turn leased to the City. lie explained that V property was blocked off JCt was boing used as a dump site and that this was the only way it could be cont'rol1cd. He added that the City has also been working faith the 1-Jennepit'i County Park Re. District regarding the potential develop-ni of the site in hopes that the Park Reserve District would participate in the park development. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Gene Kasmarl, 5550 Lyndale Avenue North. Mr. Kasmar stated that he believes more effort should be taken to look for supplementary funding, since 83tl, of the project cost goes for the roadway. He added he would recommend supplementary funding for roads be obtained for the project, and stated that too much is being assessed to t residents as it now stands. Mayor N'yquist recognized Mr. Kenneth Kunz, Vlest 78th Avenue in Richfield. Mr. Kunz st he owns the property at 5601 Lyndale Avenue North. Mr. Kunz expressed his sui) for the water main project and stated, he would like an alternative for i he does not have ow. Curren he added, he is providing bottled water which h, e n t-ly, I water 'L()r the residents at his rental u,"iit. He explained there is a sulphur smell in the water from the well on the site.. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Tony Schmid, 5500 Lyndale Avenue North. Mr. Schmid stated that he circulated the petition along Lyndale Avenue against the project, and pointed out that 26 of the 28 residents sig ned the petition opposing the project. He stated his primary concern is the cost of the project. lie stated further that the State of 'i-linnesot a saw fit to send C to "0,000 cars down Lyndale Avenue before the road was turned back, and he believed that the turnback fund should be dedicated to Lyndale Avenue and not put into a City wide fund. He stated that if the Council chose alternative No. 4 this would oiily delay the project. Mir. Schmid then stated he believed the only standing; w, , .4ter in the ro, has been in places where trucks have worn a groove in the roadway during the construction of 1-94. He also stated he believes tha the curb and ry and po inted out that curb and L, � gu tter is not necessal gutter is not in place in most other oreas of the City. In conclusion, Mr. Sclinid stated that his present concern was the spood of the traffic along Lyndale. 5-21-84 Mayor Nyquist recognized Ik"Ir. Puvid Gee, 5449 Lyndale Avenue North. Mr, Gee stated he believes there is a definite need for water in the area but that he does not believe the residents should pay the bulk of the cost for the roadway. Tie explained the State has lot the road go into disrepair for years. Mayor Nyquist recognized 'Mr. Roger Gurley, 5 Lyndale Avenue North. Mr. Gurley expressed his opposition to the hookup to City water and termed City rater as unsafe water. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Frank Belatz, 5323 Lyndale Avenue North. Mr. -Relatz stated he has lived at his present address for 34 years and that the owners with property on both sides of Lyndale Avenue would be double assessed. He stated that some thought should be given to the senior citizens with fixed income who cannot afford the assessments. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else who wished to speak I-t the public hearing. No one appeared to speak and he eiitertoined a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilrn=: Scott and seconded by C( , unc _J lme rilber Hawes to close the public hearinig, on water main improvement project No. 1 and street improvement project 'i'ilo. 1984-09. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The City Manager reviewed the resolutions handed out to the City Council at the meeting, including a resolution which would tert th-e project and another resolution ,vhich would order the prepairation of plans and sp---- i f ioat. ions f'or Lyndale Avenue water main, street, o.nd sidewalk improvements for the purposes of submitting them to the Minnesota Departmcnat of ' L ran3portatioln for approval with the request that municipal turnback funds be encumbered for the project. Councilmember Theis inquired whether curb and gutter would be required to be placed on a street !there state aid funds are spent. The Director of Public Works stated he believes that elimination of the curb and -utter would be an option but, Unat he would research the statutes. ��TION NO. 84-92 RESOLU LI-I I Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: R_ESOLUTION TERHIINATING LOCAL Ii PROCEE]DRIGTS FOR PROJECTS HIOS. 1984-08 AND 1984-09 ?'he motion for the adoption of Unc foregoing �resolut.i on was duly seconded by mer)b--r Bill fllawe.), and upon vote being ta!den thercon, the L"(Jlowin voted in favor thercof: � 1 Dean Nyquist, Celia Scot mill Hr_iwe��, ,:d R ich i 1 and the following voted J agaitn'st the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. REISOLUTIOH NO. 84-93 'Ght foll-c resolution and rllov(. its adoption: RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATTON'S OF PLAINS -AND SPE,CTFICATIOi1S FOR LY ATENUE, STREET AND SIDEWALK INPIROVEIIENT PROJf?C'IS NO3. 198 & 1 984 -1 5-21-84 G - ),n was duly seconded by member Rte, motion for the adoption of the For u aj r f) n v o t e b i n g i ti Ri c h T1 i:�; the follo voted in favor thereof: J,ean Nyquist, Celia Scott, f"j-1-1 k and the following voted at'ains", the saule: none, where uplon L--J,al iul'on laas declared duly passed and adopted J J) j. 1- -1 PU H EPPCILA Ill EG' AIRDI NG COINTES"' ! U MICE 01 R INVOLVING C[JlPPEWA PARF, 'ihe- I )it for of P` rmin t', I m L i�)n 4- hc ,- - appeal receivcd 0' May 1, 198 from a compliance order <is Ly 1'r, Harold Liefcchultz, owner of the that required by Chippel-,-'; Pa, k Apartmcntt,-� in B Center 1, ord J-na 4 1 � )r1, e th- City's Housinlg thie appeal from Chapt-or 12 of the City ordinances. The DirC, of Plannin,-, &. Trispection then reviel,;cLo' for Co mer. the location of the Chiplp „ ,, , a Parf ie aap ' L and exT) a j. n e d t ha t N r . t1h,- appeal was , �n effo-"L tO QdQ, t erroneouls intc rpretat, ion under t'h,- City's 1-1ousing 'th Director of Planning & then revj.<� t1 variou. <.”. ni-,s of I Up, ; for Council me and e x p'j ain--d that the ap to t City by Mr. Paul C. Steffenson an • p,)eVja I I - Ic I a attorrj--y repres-crit. Chit Prc i 1jo explail ( th at point one allegelia that the Housin tiainiten,tro-- @nci 0-- oral np, )Coe required that notice be givu-". - i of the spc, ic s-eCtj.01113 Of O'C".1 viol a"C.ed , and that the colt o rde r i i } ed f a i I e I i, o c i t (,--, the r ,�nc-e he odin. lrii th r�.:%�, to the 13 violations noted. Point of the F,;, ion 2-1201 requires a ccmpliance officia,l to establish "i'me for Such o n o violations. Mr. 'iven w,�. Pa k, Aparti were g Warren C' XD'Lained �thQt the eppellantl that Chip;? . I , � -,., only 72 ho to correct foui �spe�oi fi tlt�iat the fire depart-morit had c the. samne fire door givet thr thirty days 'Go correct, cerLain in -L � Y 1 1 revs ev,-- the third point of the C i "" e d b Y ILI h e b u il (J i i i Sr i n s n e (3 t or . mr . ar u--d that 'C"'he Coi ia)noil- cl-cic t<. 3s a re�-jult, of an HRA inspection on aparti #1 i 6417 Ca Avc-iue and the ail le,:Yed violations had no relatic-Molhip to an 1 inspect 1011 of 'Orl 1 n, -1 i v i d u 1 unit. Finally, in point four, Mr. Wavren eyplaiined that th(, se --v -ral of the viol.at <i ons do not violate the Housing Nlaintena c�nd ordinance but rather were re-flect the housing inspector's own pm-oep� " - , k, n of how an apartment complex shoulld be ilflaintai!aed. Regardi.ng the 72 hour not ice the Director of Plemning &- Inspection stated that these items addressed life safety it,enls and were items that could be reasonably corrected in 72 hours and clearly owner's responsibility, such as fire doors, inoperable elevai� loose hand rail and replacement of a doorstop. Mr. Warren then res,poncc:. the apps , Ilaritls statement that the building inspector should only address requirciiienl of tlne !':et ro 1pol i ll - , an Housing and Redevelop Authority inspection. He noted that i t was the building inspector responsibility to note violations, and that it ��o uld not be appropriate for him to ignore violations even they a not specifically related to the HHA inspection. With regard to the fourth point of the appeal, Mr. Warren stated that the vio!,3tion citw;d did not reflect the personal idea of how property should 'o -maintained Y and I.I.irector P1a Inspection cited the sect of the Housin Maintenance Ordinance the viol--tions cited. The Director of Planning & 1ns that on May 15, 1084 the City's -13- Housing Commission rfict to he, ttle and C holding a public, hearing the of an appeal of a houlsin'T C oii�,-,J.s8io n passed a re.solutio ;) C.) f ­J c4 The Director of - m:intcn- 1 �r col order o Park Apa . -1, Planning & lnspecl. then reviewed 1 Ling Com!ariission Resolution No. 94-1 for Council memlbers. He noted t'r a representative of the olviner is present this evening. Mayor Nyquist inquired whether the violations had been corrected. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated that, except for the repair of the parking lot, tie believed that all other repairs were ceri.ipleted. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing, regarding the contested compliance order Involving Chippewm, Park Apartirients, Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Paul Steffens-on, attorney representing Chippewa Park properties. a t - M r. . Stefferison stated that the appeal was s for the reasons st by t he Director of Planning & lospection, but also for the reason of pending litigation between the owners oJ­ the procerty and the City, Hle adIded that he has rnet with the Director of Planning & Inspectilon ?.nd a rev preseni. of the City attorney I s of and that tie hopes that ar arre-el ieni, can be wor' -,ed out reg _�ardJng the pending litigation. He explained that tha m-illy (Drder not compliled , lith was the P arkiing lot repair and this was done to allow time to accept bids for repair of IChe entire lot. 'R coaimended that Mr. Steffenson noC'ed that rle!mbe�- s cif thle lHousing CO , -e exact citations should be set corth J*XI f orders. He added that it is not Plain by section 12. 0(,) by " , i 4- - egarding il-tic 11 to function. R, the conj�_' orders) of t fire �_-nd bu.J­Idin,­,� inspectors, h�e ,�Iated that both departments received Qopio, of oach otlh,`rs orders. In conclusion, he .stated that the app :'gal is a :see iouz one �?nd thallr, it is part, of a larg;er dispute with the City which lie 'hopes to recolve. Councilmerii Theis stated he believed it would have been convenient to have the section nui. stated on tho c(xr..pliarlice ordcr. There was a motion by Th,-As and �econded by CIounc*'LI-, tip 1TI`ber Scott to affi-fll t'he 'Housing, Com-nissicnIs fioc1ini- �- stipulaied in Housing Con'Tmission Resolution 'I'lo. 84-1 titl(- Di� ;posjAion or an appeal of Housing I'Aai ritlenanne Comp! Or(l g,_iven C'hip,-,ewa Park Apart.ments. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Soott, fllai, and' lheis. Voting against: none. The motion p =a s, Sod . G.UABUI LIC'EINISE AFPI-NATIONTS i".c;re was a mot by S and by Councilme '11heis to I apf'rGve 1 application for a A bling lJ I I S a 'DO 11'] � , icens(� fo- lvo ary Alt r " ciety of S Alphonsus Catlholi­ Church. Vot in fc Mayor Nyquist, Counlcilmerriberls Scott, Hawes, and Thei.s, Voting, n i e . T'lit'? m�.otion pa - i 3ed Tlhelre wai a mot Jon by I ur , UO _ I to -�, ­is �j.nd , � , .ec.orided by Counoi.b.n—lber we Ha!�, Liri Th, .-N, I- I waive the $10,000 1 - IdI,,-,Aitk / 7 bond for t1 Class A Ticon.se for Rosary Altar "yquJ st, Society of SIG. ill P', O nsu� Church, V'�Jj on- in f, Nayor N I ]; L St, 1 �.­nd VorJxig atTaJLn.sI, non The motion p,:is3ed. There was a Priotion by CounciL'r,� -, aind �e�conded by Councilmr-t� Scott to Z�), - L i(� pprove the applicntion for a Cla 11 1_ St. Alphonsu, Catholic 5-21-84 Church !-'Ion I s Club. Voting, in favor: Nyquist, Councilmcnibers Scott, Haw's, and Theis. Voting against: none. W motion passed, There was a motion by CounciWmter WK and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to @pprovethew,, the $10000 fldGity iond fbr the Class Bgambling license for St. A110onrAis Catholic C&wch Novi's Club, 7q , in favor: ;4 N, ui.st, Councilmembers Scott, - Thein. Voting, against: none. The motion passed. There was a motion by C00101100KY hWiS aOd sec-oncio, by to c ),,pprove the application ilor a Class 13 gawling license for St. Alphonsus Catholic Church Fun Fair. Voting in favor: Mayoz Nyquist, Councilmetubers Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. ihn notion passed. There was a motion by Councilmembur Theis and seconded by Council ember Scott to appove the waiver of tha $10,000 fidolity hond for the Glass D ga"�nbling licerse for St. Alonnsun CaWkic Chnmh Pbo thir. Voting W fAvor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembe Scoi and Thc-i . Voting against: none. The amtio'n passed. There was a motion by Councilmomber Hawes nnd seconded by Councilmember Theis to �.q)prove i,he application for a Class 11 oqpplitcation for the Brooklyn Center knerican Little League, incorporaked. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, H.'awco, and T. s. Voting against: none. The motion passed. There was a motion by Councilmomber Scott W seconded by Councilmember Theis to appnve the waiver of Wo $1 % 000 f ity for the Class, IF,, ganabling license for the (3roo kl yin, Ccrjt "ai �.ri.c an 1.,ittle itjcorpora'ied . Votirig in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Couricilmembars Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion p ass cd. RESOLUTION NO. S4-94 Ecin the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION C F APPRECIATIOIN FOR PARTICI T TON IN THE 1984 NORTH SUBURBAN FIRE MUSTER AND PARADE The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resWA&ion was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, airnd upon vo'cc-a being- taken thereon, the following voted in f`,avor thereof: Wan Nyquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, aid Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution Vas declared duly passed and adopted. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmembcr Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to ad the meeting. Voting in favor: Nayor Nyquist, Councibnembers Scott, Haines, and 'J.heis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 10:30 P.m. Deputy City Clerk Mayor 5-21-84 -15- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER S 198 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION Continued Meeti - J une 11, 1984 C ase No. 1 - Joslyn Mfg. Co. PID# 10- 11.8 -21 -23 -0004 Industrial - 4837 France Avenue North We have further researched the situation on this site with the M.P.C.A. and Mr. Luby from Joslyn. The appraisal of the property provided by Mr. Luby indicates a property value of $375,000, which we do not agree to. Two distinct pollution problems exist on the site, the surface soil and sludge that will have to be removed, and the potential ground wager contamination. Mr. Bob Dullinger of M.P.C.A. basically agrees with Joslyn that it will cost around $800,000 to take care of the surface pollution. The ground water problem can be solved by pumping and remo water for a period probably to exceed 15 years to clean the aquifer. This cost is estimated to run from $20,000 to $100,000 per year during the pumping period depending on how the water removed can be disposed of. Based upon the facts as they are able to be known at this • time, we will come up with a recommendation as follows: Estimated Market Valu $1.40 per sq. ft. X 1,632,193 OJ _ $ 2,285,000 (Less Surface Clean tip) _ - 800,000 Sub -Total = $1,485,000 Gro W Solut Assume Annual Cost $20 to $100 Thousand per year for 20 years Present worth factor ordinary annuity @ 120 20 years = 7.469444 @ $ 20,000 X 7.469444 = $149,000 Present worth of @ $100,000 X 7.469444 = $747,000 future costs. This gives us a i: of present value of $738,000 to $1,336,000 depending upon which ground water solution is found to be necessary. At this time no one knows the answer to that • question. 1 guess I would. lean toward the lower end of the Board of Equalization - Continued Meeting Page 2 range due to the fact that even after the clean up, based upon the principle of substitution, a developer would probably choose another site rather than risk potential future problems with this site if the price for the land is the same. We will discuss our specific recommendation on June 11, with the Board. Board Action: Case No 2 - William J. Dale PID# 10- 118 -21 -31 -0028 Vacant Land - Lakebreeze Avenue Please refer to your orange appraisal. The Assessor's Office is recommending adjusting the January 2, 1984 Market Value from $154,300 to $185,000. Board Action: • Case No. 3 - Irma Gawboy PID# 03- 118 -21 -23 -0026 5803 Shores Drive Petitioner requests reduction in value due to water intrusion problem. Assessor's Office is not recommending a reduction at this time and will continue to monitor the situation. Board Action: Case No. 4 - John M. Kulla PID# 02- 118 -21 -43 -0043 5315 Logan Avenue North This property was reappraised by Joe DaBruzzi on 6/5/84. We are recommending no change in the January 2, 1984 Market Value of $46,400. Mr. Kulla was to be out of town until June 11, therefore, we have been unable to discuss our finding with him at this writing. We will prepare a verbal report for Monday night. Board Action: Board of Equalization - Continued Meeting Page 3 Case No. 5 - George B. Morrow PID# 25- 119 -21 -41 - 0037 7212 Willow Lane This property was reappraised by Joe DaBruzzi on 6/5/84, and Joe is recommending an adjustment in the January 2, 1984 Market Value from $102,000 to $97,600. Mr. Morrow has indicated he is satisfied with this finding and most likely will not attend Monday's meeting. Board Action: Case No. 6 - Phyllis and Paul Linton PID# 27- 119 -21 -34 - 0005 6915 Indiana Avenue North This property was reappraised by Joe DaBruzzi on 6/5/84 and we are recommending the January 2, 1984 Market Value of $54,000 remain unchanged. Joe talked to lairs. Linton on 6/6/84, and she indicated they were satisfied with his review and explanation to them and would not appear before the Board on June 11. Board Action: Case No. 7 Roger L. Lundquist PID# 34- 119 -21 -31 - 0102 3910 - 65th Avenue North This is a four -plex that the owner had failed to provide the Assessor's Office with requested income and expense information. We now have that information and are recommending an adjustment in the January 2, 1984 Market Value from $134,400 to $127,400. Board Action: L KII TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works FROM: ,Jim Grube, City Engineer DATE: June 81% 1984 RE: Final Plait - Moorwood Townhouses 2nd Addition Subdivision of Two Lots Located Alon Shores Drive (Planning Commission Application No. 79028) Jim Boerhave, on behalf of the owner, has petitioned the City for approval of Moorwood Townhouses 2nd Addition, the second phase of townhouse development within the Moorwood Townhouse complex located along 58th Avenue by Shores Drive. The City Council approved the preliminary plat in June, 1979 under Planning Commission Application No. 79028, however, due to finanical considerations, development has been delayed until this tune. The following conditions were placed on the final plat by the City Council: 1. Final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. Final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. The applicant has met all the requirements, submitting Homeowner's Association documents and an updated registered property report to the City Attorney for review and approval. To date the City Attorney has not reviewed said documents, therefore, it is recommended the City Council approve the final plat contingent upon document approval by the City Attorney. JNG: jn /6 O. GG 92.0o y.co 2ycc ✓f.er £yoC 3�.cc as.z 2¢cv 2acc cc - y 2A.92 24 3o 20e 20.00 2 6- 5 /SLOG S / 5e i'* 1 RAMMIH 9 TO: Ro=nald A. Warren, Director of Pldnninq and Inspection FROM: Gary Shallcross, !Tanning Assistant SUBJECT: Performance Guarantees GATE: June 7, 1984 The following performance guarantees are recommended for release or reduction as specified. 1. Brooklyn Crossings 3300 County Road 10 Planning Commission Application No. 81017 Amount of Guarantee - $55,000 bond Obligor - C and G Transcontinental Developers All improvements have been installed for Phase I of the Brooklyn Crossings development. The entrance drive and the east side of the parking lot are bounded by bituminous curb in expectation that the second phase will be constructed in the foreseeable future and permanent curb will be unnecessary. The original period for the deferral of the permanent curb has recently expired. Recommend that the deferral be continued for up to two additional years and that the bond be reduced from $55,000 to $15,000 to cover cost of deferred curbing. 2. Four -plex 4010 65th Avenue North Planning Commission Application No. 82044 Amount of Guarantee - $1,000 Letter of Credit Obligor - Joe Hamm Original letter of credit for $5,000 was reduced to $1,000 in February to ensure the viability of plantings installed on the site late last year. These plantings are viable after the winter. Recommend total release. � q Approved �Y Ronald A. l;'ar r Urec�or of aid Inspection Member_ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO A PROJECT UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL, DEVELOPMENT ACT; CA1,LING A PUBLIC HEARING THEREON BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota (the City), as follows: Section 1. Recitals 1.01. The welfare of the State of Minnesota requires active promo- tion, attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce through governmental acts to prevent, insofar as possible, the emergence of blighted lands and areas of chronic unemployment, and the State has encouraged local governmental units to act to prevent such economic deterioration. 1.02. Byerly Village Center, a Minnesota limited partnership whose general partner will be Ryan Cons ruction Company of Minnesota, Inc. or a related entity, (the Applicant) have advised this Council of its desire to acquire land and construct and equip thereon a 33,000 square foot retail shopping center in the City (such acquisition, construction and equipping hereinafter is referred to as the Project). The estimated total cost of the Project is $2,900,000. 1.03. The City is authorized by the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, as amended (the Act), t p P to issue revenue bonds or notes (whether bonds or notes, hereinafter, the Bonds) to finance capital projects consisting of properties used or useful in connection with a revenue - producing enterprise. The Applicant has requested that the City issue its revenue bonds, to be issued in one or more series, in the approximate principal amount of $2,900,000 to finance the cost of the Project. Section 2. P ublic Hearing 2.01. Section 474.01, Subdivision 7b of the Act requires that prior to submission of an application to the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development Authority requesting approval of the Project as required by Section 474.01, Subdivision 7a of the Act, this Council shall conduct a public hearing on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project. Pursuant to that provision a public hearing on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project is called and shall be held on July 9, 1984, at 7:30 p.m., at the City Hall. 2.02. The City Manager shall cause notice of the public hearing to be published once in the official newspaper of the City and once in the M Star and 'Tribune a newspaper of general circulation throughout the Ci_y, at least once not less than fifteen (15) nor more than thrity (30) days prior to the date fixed for the hearing, such notice to be in substantially the following form: RESOLUTION NO. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Cad A PROPOSED PROJECT AND THE ISSUANCE OF INDUSTRIAL DEVE1_,aPs1_'T REVENUE BONDS UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUS "TRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT, MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 474, AS AMENDED CI`T'Y OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, will meet. on July 9, 1984, at 7:30 p.m., at the City Hall, in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, for the purpose of conducting a public hearing on a proposal that the City issue revenue bonds or notes (whether bonds or notes, hereinafter, the Bonds) under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, as amended, in order to finance the cost of a project on behalf of Byerly Village Center, a Minnesota limited partnership whose general partner will be Ryan Construc- tion Company of Minnesota, Inc., or a related party (the Borrower) . The proposed project will consist of the acquisition of land and the construction and equipping thereon of a 33,000 square foot retail shopping center in the City. The Project will be located at Shingle Creek Parkway and John Martin Drive in the City. The estimated total amount of the proposed bond issue is $2,900,000. The Bonds may be issued in one or more series, as deemed appropriate by the Borrower and the City. The Bonds shall be limited obligations of the City and the Bonds and interest thereon shall be payable solely from the revenue pledged to the payment thereof, except that the Bonds may be secured by a mortgage or other encumbrance on the Project or property of the Borrower. No holder of any Bond shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the Bonds, or the interest thereon, nor to enforce payment against any property of the City except the revenues pledged to the payment thereof. A draft copy of the proposed application to the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development Authority for approval of the Project, together with all attachments and exhibits thereto, is available for public inspection at the office of the City Manager, weekdays, during normal business hours. All persons interested may appear and express their views with respect to the proposal to undertake and finance the proposed Project, or may file written comments with the undersigned, which comments will be consid- ered at the hearing. Dated: June 11, 1984. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Gerald Splinter City Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 2.03. A draft copy of the proposed application to the Minnesota Energy and Economic Development Authority, together with all attachments and exhibits thereto, are hereby ordered placed on file in the office of the City Manager, and shall be available for public inspection, following the publication of the notice of public hearing, weekdays, during normal business hours. Section 3. Special Obligation. In all events, it is understood, however, that any bonds issued by the City pursuant to the Act to assist in the financing of the Project shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City except the revenues pledged to the payment of the Bonds; that each bond, when, as and if issued, shall be payable solely from the revenues received from the Project and property pledged to the payment thereof and shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional, statutory or charter limitation; and that the Borrower shall save and hold the City harmless with respect to any and all liabilities and expenses incurred by the City with respect to the Project and the Bonds. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution and 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. MINUTES OF TH[% OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF 1'f f: CITY OF' BKOKINN CENTER TN THE COUNTY OF' HENKEPIN hND III STAFE OF MINNESOTA SIUDY SESIT0 HAY 24 1984 QTY HALL CAQ TO L91T',:R T " T�i he 1 ," - cmimission met in study se:: zi.on and k-a�.i.s called to order by Chairman Gorge: Lucht at 7:34 p.m. ROIL CAIJ, , Lucht, Commissioners Polly Hal ecki , Nancy Manson, Carl Sandstrom and Mike Neloon. Also present were Dipector of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planning Assistant Gary Sh•licross. Chairman Lucht explained that CommisKoner, Shmnons and Ainas haci caj_i(_­_ to say they would be unable to attend and were excused. APPROVAL OF' NFUMTES )er Sandstrom secondt:d by Commissioner Manson to approve the minuites of the slay 10, 1984 Planning Coi meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Conrmissioners Vinson, Sandstrom, and Nelson. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Malecki. The motion passed. APPLICATTON NOS. 84009 AND 84010 (Larbary Properties) p anat i on, the first item of business, a request for site and building pl an and special use permit approval for a Jill 75,2 sq. ft. lo rise industrial buiidiDg at 6601 Shingle Creek Parkway and for special use permit approval for off-site accessory parking on the central parking lct to th; "ir; "Irthe Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (Sce Ell a.rin inn; infort Sheet for Application Nos. 84009 and 84010 attached). Cl­. Liicht asked r the plan proposed any landsoa)pingr for the parking ramp. The Secretary responded in the negative. Chairman Lucht asked whether the plan would be brought back for review before the ramp was constructed. The Secretary statcd that that could be stipulated. Com Sandstrom noiwe' , that the Spec; 11 building had already been built and that it re q0re-d 102 off-sitc parking _, stall s in the central parking lot w was not built. The Secretary explainer, that the 11 building is not entirely occupied at this time and that the parking for those tenants in the building has not exceeded the available parking. The PlDnning Assistant did add that the City has bonded for construction of the control parking lot and that if parking became a problem at this time, the City could require the lot to be installed., Chairman Lucht reco! a condition to brirC the site and landscaping plans for the parking ramp back to the Planning Comnission prior to construction. He asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. !Ir. Mike Mallon of Lombard Properties stated that he had nothing to add to thn report. PUBLIC HEARING (AP lication Nos. 81009 anj 84010) the special use peniit for the low-rise industrial building voi for the off site accessory Pa king arrangement, both of which are special unus. He osked whather anyone present, wished to speak to the npplications. nonO, lie called for a motion to close the public hearing. 5-24-2111 CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Comaiiss!Whr Malecki seconded by Ccmnissioner Nelson to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chairman Lucht also recommended a condition regarding sod around the parking lot perimeter. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 84009 (Lombard Prop erties) Motion by Coramissloner Sandstrom — se — co - nded by Comaii ss 1 tier TFflans n t recommend approval,of Application No. 84009 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 conipletion 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. Plan approval acknowledges proof-of-parking for 82 off-site parking stalls, at least 20 of which are to be located in the at- grade central, parking 1 and up to 62 of which may be located in a future parking ramp. The applicant shall enter into a written agreemr;nt with the City to WA�ll the p~ ).rking r;rI at th'-) request of the City and this agree,, shall be Cil d with ',,he prop,,rLy at Hennepin County. Site simi landscape 1)1, for the central parking rF. shall be revit, and approved by the (- Council prior to construction. 10. The Special Use flerctilt is, wubject to a]-1 applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocaLion. 5-24-84 -2- 11. Special Use Permit appruvnl acKowledges that up to 50 of the occupancy of the building may he devoted to office use whether related to an industrial use or not. office occupancy of more than bbl of the gross floor Nrea is subject to urtendment of the Use 1 he, cin :. to the appropriate parking formulas of the City Wning Ordinance. 12. The applicant shall submit a site performance agreement and supporting financial jq;w­,­! ( in a,'riount, to be dv_� termi tied by the City Nartager) prior to the issuance of building permits to assure the completion of the central parking lot. 13. The applicant shall suhiit mustcr plans for site grading and utility service to all tracts of W.L.S. -1572 for approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits for Spec. 14. 14. A floii, shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions of an excuted subdivision said flowageway to provide unobstructed overlandflow of excess storm water from the intersection of Shingle Crcok Parlkway and 67th Avenue, westerly to Shingle Creek. 15. Upon installation of lateral water mains and/or lateral sewers, the owners shall provide an as—built survey depicting the location of said utilities. 16. The owners shall execute a water and sewer main and fire hydrant maintenance and inspection a_rjreement upon installation of lateral water and/or sewer mains. 17. All landscaped areas more than 6 wide around the perimeter of the parking and driving areas shall be sodded. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Carmissioners Malecki, Hanson, Sandstrom and Nelson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLWAKON i NO. 80010 (Lombard Properties) V MS 101-W C 6_r eo i �i n e n d awdssioncr �nson Leconced wy ommissione 61"ICstrom, T approval of Application No. 8400, subject to the following condition: 1. Special Use Permit approval acknowledges up to 82 off-site accessory parking stalls on the central parking lot and future ramp to the west of the site. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Sandstrom and Nelson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO, 84013 (H. E. Homes) 'File ' _)e o -, FiE 6f3uc c T t J e no f b At item ousiness, a request to rezone from RI retary then 1' W to R3, a .87 acre parcel of land on the west edge of the St. Alphon.sus Church property and to rezone f rcxn R5 to R3 the Wo lots at 7020 and 7040 Brooklyn Boulevard. Ile Secretary reviewed the contents of the staCf report (See Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application PD. 84013 attached) . The Secretary noted that the 5-24-84 old City Hall property is not included in the rezoning application. He also explained that all three properties would love to be combined by plattin_ ,-, that g Ind the St. Alphonsus Church property would have to be included in that plat. Chairman Lucht then called on the applicant to speak. Mr. Rick Hartman of H. E. Homes briefly discussed the possibility of a 16,000 sq. ft. office building on the 7020 and 7040 Brooklyn Boulevard parcels. It stated that he intends to propose an office condominium development and showed a possible layout of that development to the Planning COMM i33ion. Commissioner Manson asked whether the development would have access to 71st Avenue North. Mr. Hartman responded in the negative stating that he would not seek such an access. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 84013) Chairman Lucht then opened_Ue meeting, for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. No one offered any comments although there were neighboring residents present. Chairman Lucht stated that if no one wished to comment, a motion would be in order to continue the public hearing to a later date when the rezoning application would be reconsidered. CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Manson to continue the public hearing on Application No. 84013 to a later date. The motion passed unanimously. There followed a brief discussion of the possibility of rezoning the City property also to R3. The Secretary explained that it is presently zoned R5 which allows a three storey office building by a special use permit, whereas the R3 zone allows only a two storey office building by a special use permit. He stated that the parties who had entered into a purchase agreement with the City to purchase that land would have to agree to the rezoning to R3 ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 84013 (H. E. Homes) Motion ley "DiumiSiGner Nelson to table Application No. u04013 and - refer the application to the Northliest N'ej., Advisory Group for review and com= Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, CC) mmissiorners Mialecki, Manson, Sandstrom and Nelson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The Secretary explained that the City would try to establish a Neighborhood Mleeting some place in the neighborhood a.nd tlhat notices would be �--,ent to those wn,'-) received a notice of the rezoning hearing. DISCUSSION ITEM (Zero Lot Line) The Secretary t5c ief-fjr J d the status of duplexes in the R2 Zoning District. He explained that the current ordinance allows dvielling uinits on a single lot that is at least 75' wide and 12, ",q ft. in area, lbu dloe,, not . a property line to separate the two MiLS. He stated that, under current a condominium declaration could be f iied describing the interior zpace of each of the imits as a Separate mmAetablo pi opt rty. 10 stated t0at a ntinbcn of other communities have allowed property lines between d0lbl.P '0UnL UniLS SO that each would have its own lot in addition to owning the structure. Chairman Lucht stated that the zero lot line solution would work for a double 5-24-84 -4- bungalo',-J not J'car a duplex. The Secretary p)Wted out that a chVlex could still be divided by the condominium declarwWri fv uccwjure. He stated that in either case, An so` ciati(xi Agreements would have ti con, I improvc ,rents to the exterior of the structure. Commissioner Sandstrum stated that it was difficult to condominiumize any structure. The Secretary explained that the IoW nrented by the zero lot line division would have to equal 1/2 of v!hat a normal two RuNily lot would be. The Secretary stated th"it hc fe'll, ihe 2uning of the property sQuIA riot control ownership, but that the R2 zoning irj, eff'c does reTtre that at le ,:;`.• one of the two units the rontal unless it is condariniumized. He stated that in? the zero lot line ordinance. could be a usefol device to allow own er-accupie! units in the R2 zone and suggested that perhaps certain controls on exterior improvements should be written into the ordinance. Chairsian Lucht Polled the aamission for ',.heir feelings on the subject. All the present agreed with tho Secretar "ys cammient.s and recoi that an ordinance aDendment be developed. DISCUSSION ITEM (132 one Adjacent to UppQr Twin Lake) The ission the next discussion itern which was consideration of creating an R2 zone adjacent to Upper Twin Lake where there are a number of older and larger horries that in many cases have been converted to duplexes. The Planning Assistant explained that the Zoning Ordinance, prior to 1968, allowed two-family dwellings in the R1 zone and that a. number of two-family dwellings ,% built prior to 1968 and have now become nonconforming- uses in the RI zone. He stated that the City b s aware of these two-family dwelling situations occasionally through the reqairement to license all rental dwelling units in the City. He stated that it is an administrative headache to try to determine whether a two-family dwelling was ever legally recognized as such and whether it has been continually used as a two-family dwelling since it became nonconforming in 1968. He explained that this would have been easier if rental units had ali been licensed, but that they have only been licensed since approximately 1976. The Planning Assistant explained that many of these nonconforming two-ftmilysitu._ exist in the neighborhood iminediately adjacent to Upper Twin Lake. lle stated that if the land were rezoned to R2 these two-f a-mily situations would become conforming uaes which could more readily be licensed, subject to meeting the requireinents of the I Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. Chairman Lucht and Cammissioner Sandstrom asked for further information on these nonconformirg dwellings and that it he brought back at a future meeting. APPLICATION NO. 84014 (Mary Zicbarth) y j 7L ,--- -- tfie T i e w% he lasF of business following the arrival of the applicant Marl Ziebarth. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (See Planning Commission Information Slid for Application No. 84014 attached) . Chairman Luoh�t then called on the applicant to speak. Ms. Ziebarth stated that she had no problems with the conditions of p=; oval. She stated that she I talked to the surrounding neigfTors and that one reigInbor next door had expressed some concern regarding the possibility or children walking on his lawn. She stated that she would keep the children eithor in hor houso or odthin her yard and would not allow fill trespassing on neigiloring property. 5-24-84 -5- Commissioner Manson asked for clarification as to Wether the students would attend class once a week. Ms. Ziebarth answered in the affirmative. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 84014 (Maly Ziebarth) Motion i S --- -, _- �& - m.mend , , 6 H e "< F F T_, and_sLr(x, y M, 'C' eco Jed by c ssione C6 - reco approval of Application No. 84014, subject to the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violations thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. Classes shall be at least one half hour apart on weekday evenings and shall conclude not later than 10:00 p.m. 4. Class size shall be limited to no more than 10 students at a time. 5. All work recommended in the Building Official's report shall be completed prior to the issuance of the special use permit. 6. On-street parking shall be limited to the area in front of the applicant's residence and on the east side of the street. 7. Special use permit approval acknowledges group instruction in the area of dance and baton twirling. Classes in other subjects are not acknowledged. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Sandstrom and Nelson. Voting against: none. The motion passed. ADJOURNMENT Following a brief discussion of upcoming business items, there was a motion by Commissioner Nelson seconded by Commis3ioner Malecki to ad Journ the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 9:14 p.m. Chairman 5-24-84 -6- Planning [OoNi5qiOk information Sheet Application No\, H4009, 84010 8ppliCanL: Lombard Properties Location: 6601 Shingle [reek Parkway Request: Site and Building Plan/Special Us2 Permit Special Use Permit for 8f[-5i19 Parking The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval t0 con- struct 3 75,251 sq. ft. office-industrial building at 6607 Shingle Creek Parkway. This application was reviewed by the Planniny [0N@iSsiOn at its May 10, 1984 meet- ing. It Was tabled with direction t0 the applicant to bring back J parking plan reflecting 5OZ office occupancy and submission of 8 special use permit t0 allow office tenants in the proposed building. The applicant has complied With these requests. The applicant has Submitted a new parking plan providing D ramp over the northerly portion Of the central parking lot with 185 parking stalls on the Upper level. The installation of the parking ramp would reduce parking on ground level by 28 St87]S. The net addition brought about by the ramp would, therefore, be 157 stalls. The Spec. 14 building, at SO% office occupancy, requires 227 parking stalls. The site plan calls for 145 parking spdCC3 to be provided on site, with the 82 remaining spaces t0 be provided in the Central parking |o1 and ramp. Commissioner Nelson asked at the last meeting what the parking shortfall for the overall development area would be. If Spec. 10, 12 and 14 are all SO/bO, low-rise buildings, the following parking could come about: � Pyr|iD S paces Building Total R� uir d Off-site ����� 3pec. 14 227 145 82 -�- Spec. lO 280 78 202 Spec. ll 152 50 102 � � Spec, 72 252 202+ 50 Ramada 489 428 61 ___ Total 1,400 003 497 *Not yet established in site design � These numbers indicate that Spec. 12 will only have 50 available stalls from the central lot, 45 on the southerly Tract C and S from the upper level of the ramp. It would seem appropriate that Spec. 14 take 20 stalls from the northerly Tract C, as proposed, and 62 stalls from the upper level of the potential parking ramp' In addition 10 the 112 spaces presently allocated t0 Sp2C, lO from the central parking � lot, 118 are needed from the upper level if Spec. lD is to be d 70w-rise building and t0 make up for the loss of 28 stalls which would occur With the construction of the ramp. The landscape plan has also been revised t0 provide shade trees (4 HJckh along the Shingle Creek Parkway 8reenstrip and to provide Sod in most landscaped areas immediately adjacent to the building. Based on the new plans submitted by the applicant, it i5 felt that the plans .are gener- ally in order and approval is recommended, subject t0 at least the following conditions: 5-24-84 -]- _� ~_' f . r , r l i t Appl Nos. �I40O� f31OlO cont 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 perm 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. 8612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. Plan approval acknowledges proof -of- parking for 82 off -site parking stalls, at least 20 of which are to be located in the at -grade central parking lot and up to 62 of which may be located in a potential parking ramp. The applicant shall enter into a written agreement with the City to install this parking ramp at the request of the City and this agreement shall be filed with the property at 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. Special Use Permit approval acknowledges that up to 50% of the occupancy of the building Nay be devoted to office use whether related to an - industrial use or not. Office occupancy of more than 50`io of the gross floor area subject to amendment of the Special Use Permit; Herein granted and to the appropriate parking formulasof the City Zoning Ordinance. 12. Issuance of building permits is subject to the filing of the R. L. S. approved under Application INN. 83046 being files at the County. 13. The applicant shall submit a site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to he determined by the City Manager) prior to the issuance of building permits to assure the completion of the central parking lot. 5 -24 -84 -2 -- Applicai, ion Nos. 84009, 84010 continued 4P Application f',c 8 ,� /EC,10 1. Spacial Use Permit approval ct;�:t'It;;rl ige s up ';�) <32. off -site accessory parking stalls or, the central parking lot to t crest of the site. i 5 ,2 8 q. -3- � � � � ^ ' Planning [0|0mi3SiOD Information Sheet Application N0. 84013 � Applicant: H. E. HOn|23 Location: 7020, 7040 Brooklyn Boulevard � ����� Request: Rezoning � ��, The applicant requests rezoning of the land at 7020 and 7040 Brooklyn Boulevard from K5 t0 R3 and the rezoning of a .87 acre area Of land at the west edge of the St. AlphUD3u3 Church property from R{ to R3. The land is bounded by Brooklyn Boulevard OD the West, by the old City Hall property on the north, by St. AlphVUSuS Church on the east, and by 8 7 Unit apartment building an the � south. The ` use of the property is an office condominium development � which is a special use in the R3 zoning district. No development plan or plat has yet been submitted. The applicant has submitted O written statement, prepared by his attorney, which addresses the guidelines for evaluating rez0ningS set forth in Section 35-208 of the Zoning Ordinance (Ie2 written statement and ordinance guidelines � attached). Staff agree in general that there i3 merit in the rezonina request and, therefore, we will not comment On each particular p0int. We would point Out that the rezoning request is for the properties at 7020 and 7040 Brooklyn Boulevard and the westerly portion Of the St' AlphonsuS property and does not include the Old City Hall site at 7100 Brooklyn Boulevard. The City's Comprehensive Plan generally recommends mid-density residential or Office Use in this area of Brooklyn Boulevard (north of 70th Avenue North) though � there is no specific recommendation for these particular parcels. The written statement of the applicant asserts, and we concur, that the existing single-family homes, 7020 and 7040 Brooklyn Boulevard are an inappropriate use of land along this ma 'Or thoroughfare. A more intense use, as comprehended in the R3 zoning classification, and with controlled access onto 8rn0k]yn Boulevard i3 an appropriate use, The minimum requirement of one acre for office developments Can be met by the combination of the three parcels involved. � The rezoning of these three parcels to R3 cannot b2C00e effective Until the � properLy is combined through platting into a Single lot, or at least d Single common area with interior lots for townhouses or offices. It dO2S not seem necessary to us that a specific development plan be approved for this property since either a townhouse development or x low-rise office development of the property is con- sistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. � AS with all rezoning applications, it is recommended that the application be tabled and referred t0 the appropriate Neighborhood Advisory Group (Northwest) for review and comment. We expect that further applications regarding this property Will be submitted by the time the rezoning returns for final consideration. � 5-24-84 � � ^ Planning C0oKi35ioD ]U[OrA|0tiOU \�2Vt ApPlic8tiOn MO. 8 40l4 App 7iCanL: Mary liebarth nCd1ion: 6329 4Lh �tre�t N0rth Re;u2St \peCi8l USg P2nmit/Hmne uV0tiOn The app iC3 � n� rgqU�St� �(�Cia l US t0 C0nduCt g-0 lessons in dance and LaLOn tv, in the h8s2m2nL of the rCsidenC9 at 5324 4th Street N0rth. The property in qUe\LiOn is Z8n�ld KZ and is hounded On the cast by CLh Street North (With I-94 on th� Oast side of 11 1 1 U.1h St.) �nj 0n 1h� �0Uth we3C, and north by other single- family h0me3. Offering gr0up l2'3ons is classified under the Zoning Ordinance as d specia l h0Nc 0CCupdtiOU in the RI and R2 Z0n��. Th2 applicant has Submitted a letter (a1LOched\ in which she describes the proposed home occup h� a1i0n' � expects opprUxi 2O students in the first season (note: CldS3 size should not exceed eight). Ms. Ziebarth states that she does not expect parking to b2 a, problem beCaus2: ' arCntS are �sk2d to 'limit visits to the first class of the month, Cor5 Can be parked across the sLre2t where there are no hoiu8s; parents are asked not to block drivev�ys; and classes ;.ire to be scheduled one-half 1 apart, Ms. Zi2barth plans to �e3Ch two clO5Se5 per evening /5:30 - 6:30 p.m, and 7:00-8:00 p.m.) Monday through Thursddy �nd one pr2-school CloSS On Friday from 1:00-2:00 D.M. She notes that entrance and exit are located at the side of the home a lcDd directly t0 the Itudiu. A fire extinguisher and 50Ok8 alarm are located in the s1udio. She also points Out that no non-resident employee will be engaged in the home occupation. M3. Zi8barth has also submitted 8 sample letter to parents discussing parking practices, etc. (attached). Th� Building Official has inspected the premises and reCOmmendS that d handrail be ­stalled on the outside stairS; that a projecting light on the stair wall be altered t0 8 reC2SS8d light; and that the f extinguisher be mounted on the wall - in th2 classroom area. Issuance of the spacial use permit should be conditioned On the completion of these item3. The primary concern of this application i3 parking. The applicant clearly expects t0 have some on-street parking. Section 35-400' subdivision 7 States: "No automobile parking related to tie. special home occupation shall be permitted on the Street provided, hOMever that upon 6 finding that the special home 0CCUp3ti0n is not feasible Kithout on-street parking, the City Council may authorize parking on the street based upon u consideration off Section 35-220.2 and of the following: a. The amount of the applicant's street frontage. b. The rights of adjacent residents to park on the Street. c, Preservation of the residential character of the neighborhood." ^ Section 35-220.2 is the Standards for J Special Use Permit (attached). MS. Ziebarth street frontage is 65 There is room in the driveway for Up to possibly five CJrs. In addition to five in the drivewav, there is room for two C0r5 t8 park in front of the house on the street. The applicant's direction t0 parents to park on the east side Of 4[11 Street where there are no hous8s is an appropriatP way t0 deal with cXcuSs parking. We, therefore, believe that a finding pursuant t0 Section 35- subdivision 7 can be m H o ad2. � recxxnend such a finding and approval of th8 appli- . cation, Subject t0 at, lea3L the - Following conditions: Application No. 84014 continued 1. The e spcc7al use permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violations thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. Classes shall be at least one half hour apart on weekday evenings and and shall conclude not later than 10:00 p.m. 4. Class size shall be limited to no more than 10 students at a time. 5. All work recommended in the Building Official's report shall be completed prior to the issuance of the special use permit. 6. On- street parking shall be limited to the area in front of the applicant's residence and on the east side of the street. 7. Special use permit approval acknowledges group instruction in the area of dance and baton twirling. Classes in other subjects are not acknowledged. 5 -24 -84 -2- MEMORANDUM TO: Housing Commission FROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection DATE: May 24, 1984 SUBJECT: Appeal of Housing Maintenance Compliance Order by Chippewa Park Apartments On May 10, 1984 the Planning and Inspection Department received an appeal pursuant to Section 12- 12.02 of the City Ordinances. The appeal was filed by Paul C. Steffenson, an attorney representing Chippewa Park Properties and Harold Liefschultz, owners of the Chippewa Park Apartments in Brooklyn Center. The appeal involves a Compliance Order issued by the City on May 3, 1984 and directed to Chippewa Park Apartmeh - ts and received United Realty on May 7, 1984. The Compliance Order was in writing, described the location and nature of various violations of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance, cited the specific ordinance section numbers of the violations, established specific times for correcting the violations and notified the recipient of appeal recourse. The violations were noted by the Building Inspector on April 30, 1984 while conducting a housing quality inspection for a Metro HRA Section 8 Rent Assistance participant living at 6325 Camden Avenue North. The Chippewa Park Apartments are a multiple- family rental dwelling complex containing six buildings and 216 units located southerly of 65th/66 Avenues North, between Bryant and Camden (see attached map for location). Section 12 -1202 of the City Ordinances provides for a right of appeal when it is alleged by any person to whom a Compliance Order is directed that the Compliance Order is based upon erroneous inte rpretation of the ordinance. The appeal is to be resolved by the City Council, sitting as a Board of Appeals. The Board of Appeals is required to hold a hearing on the matter within 30 days after the appeal is filed, taking into consideration any advice and recommendation from the Advisory Housing Commission. City Council Resolution No. 77 -22 also establishes the Housing Commission as the initial review and advisory body for the Board of Appeals regarding contested Compliance Orders. Pursuant to Section 12 -1203 of the City Ordinances the Board of Appeals may reverse, modify or affirm, in whole or in part, the Compliance Order and may order return of all or part of the filing fee if the appeal is upheld. The appeal filed in this situation is almost identical to the appeal filed by Chippewa Park Apartments on May 1, 1984 which was reviewed by the Housing Commission on May 15, 1984. At that meeting the Housing Commission adopted Housing Commission Resolution No. 84 -1 in which certain findings were made and the Housing Commission recommended to the City Council that the appeal in that situation be denied and that the Compliance Order be affirmed in its entirety. The Commission's attention is respectfully directed to my May 11, 1984 memo as many of the responses to that appeal apply as well to the current appeal before the Commission. A copy of the appeal submitted by Mr. Steffenson in this situation is attached for the Commission's review. In Point No. 1 tie states that Section 12 -1201 of the Ordinance requires the Compliance Official to "establish a reasonable time for the correction of such violation and notes that the Building Inspector gave Chippewa Park Apartments onl 72 hours to correct three specific violations. He contends that the 72 hours is unreasonable. Memo to Housing Commission Page 2 May 24, 1984 RES Again, the Commission's attention is directed to my May 11, 1984 memo for which a response to this specific point. applies. Although the Section 8 Rent Assistance recipient renewal was J!(ne 1, 1984, the Building In- spector considered these violations to be life - safety concerns which should be corrected immediately. The fact that these three specific violations were easily correctable in that they only involved various adjustments so that the facilities could function properly and do their proper function also led the Building Inspector to require the 72 hour or three day correction time period. In Point No. 2 the appellant draws the Commission's attention to Exhibit B which is Document No. 5757 issued by the Brooklyn Center Fire Department, Fire Prevention Bureau in which the Fire Department gave Chippewa Park Apartments 30 days to correct certain violations and deficiencies including the fire doors listed in the Building Inspector's May 3, 1984 Compliance Order. It is Chippewa Park Apartments' position that they should be subject to the 30 day notice which was given first by the Fire Department. RESPONSE Again, the Commission's attention is directed to revious correspondence p P regarding a previous appeal on the same grounds. As has been pointed out, the Fire Department is a volunteer organization and its abilities to follow up routine inspections is much more limited than is the Planning and Inspection Department's abilities. It is still our position that the circumstances surrounding the Building Inspector's inspection dictated the shorter time period for compliance. It is further our position that the fact the Fire Department had given 30 days does not negate the Building Inspector's 72 hour compliance notice in light of the facts. It should be noted that at the Commission's direction our department and the Fire Department will make greater effort to coordinate various Compliance Orders so that possible conflicting information can be avoided. In Point No. 3 the appellant argues that the Compliance Order was a result of an HRA inspection for Apartment No. 111 at 6325 Camden Avenue North and that the alleged violations had no relationship to an HRA inspection. RESPONSE Again, we feel this point is totally meritless. The HRA Section 8 Housing Quality Standards include all common areas as well as individual units. As noted previously, the Housing Quality Standards dovetail the City's Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. To imply that the Building Inspector should not acknowledge Housing Maintenance ordinance violations through the issuance of a Compliance Order only because he was on the premises for some other type of inspection is ridiculous. The Commission's attention is again directed to Section 12 -1201 which states that: "whenever the Compliance Official determines that any dwelling, dwelling units, or rooming unit or the premises surrounding these, fails to meet the provision of this ordinance, he may issue a Compliance Order . Memo to Housing Commission Page 3 May 24, 1984 The Building Inspector was certainly complying with his responsibilities under the ordinance as an inspector and to riot issue Compliance Orders and to ignore these violations would be a serious matter. The use of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance Compliance Order is the vehicle through which owners of apartments are notified of the violations. In Point No. 4 the appellant alleges that the faulty fire doors are not a violation of Section 12 -709 of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance and he cites the provision of the ordinance regarding "FACILITIES TO FUNCTION." He claims that nowhere in the ordinance is the term "facility" defined and that Chippewa Park Properties maintains that fire doors are not facilities within the meaning of Section 12 -709 or, if they are intended to be facilities, Section 12 -709 is void for vagueness. RESPONSE The appellant is correct that the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance does not specifically define the term "facilities." When terms are not defined by the ordinance, then the common meaning of the word is used. One of the definitions of the word "facility" in Webster's New Collegiate Dictiona is "something that is built, installed, or established to serve a particular purpose." A fire door is built or installed to serve a particular purpose, that being to close properly and tightly to avoid smoke and fire to be easily conveyed from one portion of a building to another. Fire doors are required by the State Fire Codes. Section 12 -709 has been interpreted to mean that facilities such as fire doors, elevators, door assemblies, etc. which the owner of a building provides or supplies must be installed, maintained, and function in a safe, sound and working condition. This provision of the Housing Main- tenance and Occupancy Ordinance has been utilized to require the maintenance of facilites that are not specifically listed elsewhere in the ordinance, but which are obviously the responsibility of the owner to maintain. That is the intent of Section 12 -709, and that is how this section of the ordinance has been consistently enforced throughout the years. In summary, it is felt that the Compliance Order was appropriate in all respects and was not based on an erroneous interpretation of the ordinance and that the appellant has not shown a basis for his appeal. Therefore, it is recommended that the Housing ommission take action to recommend that the Compliance Order issued to 9 p Chippewa Park Apartments on May 3, 1984 be affirmed in its affirmity. mlg SUITE 212 25+01 METRO DRIVE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55420 STEVEN Q. LIEFSCHULTZ TELEPHONE PAUL C. STEFFENSON (612) 854 -19 60 NOTI OF APP JAMES W. MEUNIER PURSUANT T - 0 — S- .CTION 12 - 1202 May 8, 1984 City of Brooklyn Center Inspection Department 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Attention: City Council - Board of Appeals Re: Housing Maintenance Compliance Order dated May 3, 1984 Directed to Chippewa Park Apartments and /or Harold Liefschultz, 6325 Camden Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Our File No. 84 -1508 Dear Sir /Madam: Please be advised that this office represents Chippewa Park Properties and Harold Liefschultz, owners of Chippewa Park Apartments. Chippewa Park Apartments received a copy of the above Compliance Order on May 4, 1984 by regular mail. A copy of said Order was further served by registered mail upon United Realty on May 7, 1984. A copy of that Order is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Chippewa Park Properties and Harold Liefschultz hereby appeal the following provisions of the Compliance order on the following grounds: 1. Section 12 -1201 of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance provides that the Compliance Official "establish a reasonable time for the correction of such violation and notify of appeal recourse." The instant Compliance Order gives Chippewa Park Apartments only 72 hours after receipt of notice to correct three specific alleged violations. Chippewa Park Properties contends that the time span of 72 hours is unreasonable. r .. l + x•11 .Y I -. r `° Page 2 City of Brooklyn Center May 8, 1984 2. Attached as Exhibit B is Document No. 5757 issued by the Brooklyn Center Fire Department, Fire Prevention Bureau and given to Chippewa Park Properties on April 20, 1984. In that request by the Fire Department, Chippewa Park Apartments was given 30 days to correct certain alleged deficiencies which include the fire door listed in No. 2 of the current Compliance Order. Chippewa Park Properties maintains that it should be subject to this 30 day notice which was first given. 3. The instant Compliance Order was a result of an HRA inspection carried out by the Housing Inspector regarding Apartment No. 111 at 6325 Camden Avenue North. Never- theless, the three alleged 72 -hour violations have -, absolutely no relationship to the HRA inspection. 4. Nos. 1 and 2 of the 72 -hour complaints, specifically ':rhe allegedly faulty fire doors, are not a violation of Section 12 -709 of the Housing Maintenance & Occupancy Ordinance which reads as follows: "FACILITIES TO FUNCTION, Every supplied facility, piece of equipment or utility required under City Ordinances and every chimney and flue shall be installed and maintained and shall function effectively in as safe, sound and working condition." Nowhere in the Ordinance is the term "facility" defined. Chippewa Park Properties maintains that fire doors are not "facilities" within the meaning of Section 12 -709 or, if they are intended to be "facilities ", Section 12 -709 is void for vagueness. Pursuant to the Ordinance, enclosed herewith please find the sum of $15.00 for the filing fee for this appeal. Very truly yours, r Paul C. Steffenson r r -•� PCs /j s `� _' �� %?•:� cc: Harold Liefschultz James F. Dunn, Esq. Enc . OF f3l ooyl lN Cf ;l 55120- '99 r .� Uep' rtmL ra of III annin and InSpeCt`, ,n (612) 5G•laC1I� HOUSING I'lAItITE C O3?i'L IA I Ut O RDER D Play 3, 198 COMPLIANCE DATE: 72 hours after receipt of order - --- --- - p `or as no ed tie16w. TO: Harold Liefschultz cc: Metro [IRA cc: R. Mikulak, Ten:. 790 South Cleveland _ cc :,! Barb Gilscud, Mgr. St. Paul, MN 55116 6507 Camden Ave. No. cc: Housing File LOCATION:_ 63 25 Canxl Ave. No. -!1111 (R Hikulak) COMPLIANCE OFFICIAL: Andrew J. Alberti The following violations of the H ousi n q "aint_ _ e n ance and OCC,1CdnCV Ordinance were cited during a recent inspection of the above premises. You are hereby informed that these violations must be corrected on or before the COIPLIANCE DATE indicated. The premises will be reinspected. Failure to correct or to make satisfactory arranaements to correct violations may result in suspension or revocation of a rental d1•,ellina license, if applicable, and, in any case, may result in issuance of a citation which, upon conviction, is punishable by fine and /or imprisonment. Section 12 -1202 of the Ordinance provides for Right of I Appeal, when that a Compliance i anc e Ord er 's 9 Pp e it is alleged ed P � _ based upon err interpretation erroneous Ordinance. Wh e Appeal must be submitted to the Inspection Department, in writing, specifying e grounds for Appeal, within five (5) business days after service of th . e order, and must be accompanied by a filing fee of $15.00 in cash or cashier's check. FIRST NOTICE DESCRIPTION'OF VIOLATIONS AND ORDINA S 1. Second floor fire door into the, corridor near the elevator does not close tight and latch. 12 -709 2. Second floor fire door near Apt.. T does not latch. 12 -709 3. Stairway on the southeast second floor, (near Apt. x`205) has a loose handrail. 12 -406 {air COMPLY BY MAY 18, 1934 ep ace itc en carpet which is filthy and scorched from a hot pan. 12 -704 Repair inoperable hallway security light near Apt. #304_. 12 -5Q4 _ x EX11113IT A `' /I Form 11-4 COOKLYN CENT[ R FIRES DEPARTNIL.. FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU ,✓ 561 -5+40 DRESS TEL. "T�IAMEQF6USINESS / / - /. -� /,./ , •'' /t TYPE Or OCCUPANCY °. � PERSON IN AUTHORITY ,� - 7 / ,�Ji7._• �: "/ �/ I �r, f,f TITLE An inspection of the above mentioned facility revealed the following fire hazards. You are hereby requested to correct these conditions before (' - �� ! " /.f Thank you for your cooperation. REMARKS ' /i C: /_/ / i• / L( ism f ��f' / ~ � : i �.'it - r../ ✓ / ?L� / ' `� 7 ` - - ^^tom �? ; i / .F . /C /7� r� t•� / 2 / , A * - r �� f I �--- inspection Conducted By _ a Date II ( r -° EXHIBIT B White —Chief Fink — Biding, Dept. Yellow—Inspector Goldenrod --Job Site 010AIyn fh 9. & A,N. Co. Inc. (61A fi61 -4470 _ _ r-r G �; .. • � _ - - .9 r a> a cJ ,y, / .. • ! �, �•t a d �J. d G V .7 r: .ww ,;r...,..•�..an+�r� � /� - ' �' I .,. _ '�Q L � "" "C... I� .� � � -- 3 r .. �'� �•sL'i =Y"' �f L LF � T Til i � U � " i � �Y•yys.. � � � � `' y� ,..; v`rc1✓.G -' :'- u:s -'- � :unc —=-=ri :. �k 1 i I � � � � . - -•—.—' i ,✓ i � 1 j '` —�� {` + t X LIJ Of - O o Ll •+ 1 , r- � 1 • _�_-- �- --t.,_ — .-� r * � �- �. - '_' ' \ �� 0.' • �j,.l' �.v / I X � � I l � . � � , � I � ��a ! 77 U J Ncm LO c� _ , m ?v� r - I T _ i4 ,� � Ls� b May 21, 1934 Mr. Paul C. Steffenson Liefschultz Lana Firm 2901 Metro Drive - Suite 212 Minneapolis, NN 55420 Re: Receipt of Appeal and ;notice of Housing Commission Review of Contested Compliance Order Involving Chipp`wa Park Apartments Dear Mr. Steffenson: This letter is to acknowledge receipt of your appeal filed on May 10, 1984 re- garding a Compliance Order sent to the owner of the Chippewa Park Apartments dated May 3, 1904 and received on May 7, 1934 by United Realty and also, to * infor;n you of the procedures under which the appeal will be processed. Section 12 -1202 of the City Ordinances authorizes an 1 f Co mplian ce �es appea o a Order when it is alleged that :a Compliance Order is based upon erroneous inter- pretation of W ordinance. The appeal is to the City Council sitting as a Board of Appeals. Section 12 -1203 requires the Board of Appeals (City Council) to hold a public hearing within 30 days after the appeal is filed and to take into consideration any advice and recommend tion on the ratter from the City's Housing Advisory Commission. The Board of Appeals may reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or in part, the Compliance Order issued. Pursuant to these provisoes and the Housing Cc,nission's enabling Resolution which establishes the Hcusiog Commission as th.e Witial review and advisory body regard - ing contested Compliance Orders, wo have est:hlished Tuesday, May 29, 1984 at 7:30 P.M. as the Cate and tl1':'.s of the :lousing Consisslon's review of the contested Com7 plianc, Order. The weeting will be held in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Par% ay. It is anticipated that the City Council, sitting as a Board of Appeals, will sold its hearing, curing the Council meeting on Monday, June 11, 1984. The City Council Poetinq ;;ill begin at 7:00 p.m. and will also be held in the Council Chambers at City Hall. T Mr. Paul C. Steffenson Page 2 May 21, 1984 If you have any questions or co;Timents regarding the appeal or the procedure to be used for responding to it, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Ronald A. Warren Director of Planning and Inspection RAPT : m l g cc: Harold Liefschultz Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager James Thomson, Attorney Brad Hoffman, Administrative Assistant ,f Member Dolores Hastings introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: HOUSING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 84 - RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING DISPOSITION OF AN APPEAL OF A HOUSING MAINTENANCE COMPLIANCE ORDER GIVEN CHI PPEWA P ARK APARTMENTS WHEREAS, on April 30, 1984 the Building Inspector• conducted a Housing Quality inspection at the Chippewa Park Apartments, specifically 6325 Camden Avenue North, Apartment No. 111, at which time certain violations of the Housing Main- tenance and Occupancy Ordinance were discovered; and WHEREAS, on May 3, 1984 the Building Inspector issued a Compliance Order listing five violations of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance found at 6325 Camden Avenue North and directed such Compliance Order.to Mr. Harold Liefschultz, one of the owners'-of the Chippewa Park Apartments, which was received on May 7, 1984 by United Realty; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 1984 pursuant to Section 12 -1202 of the City Ordin- ances the Planning and Inspection Department of the City of Brooklyn Center received an appeal filed by Paul C. Steffenson, an attorney representing Chippewa Park Properties and Harold Liefschultz, owners of the Chippewa Park Apartments in Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, said appeal set forth in writing four specific grounds on which the appeal was being based; and WHEREAS, Section 12 -1203 of the City Ordinances requires the City Council, sitting as a Board of Appeals, to hear the appeal within 30 days after said appeal • is filed, taking into consideration any advice and recommendation from the Advisory Housing Commission; and WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals may reverse, modify, or affirm, in whole or in part, the Compliance'Order based on an erroneous interpretation of the ordinance; and WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 77 -22 establishes the Housing Advisory Commission as the initial review and advisory body for the Board of Appeals regarding contested Compliance Orders; and WHEREAS, on May 29, 1984 the Housing Advisory Commission conducted a review of the contested Compliance Order and took comments from the City's Director of Planning and Inspection on behalf of the City and from a representative of Harold Liefschultz, owner of the Chippewa Park Apartments; and WHEREAS, the Housing Advisory Commission makes the following recommended findings: 1. The appeal received by the Planning and Inspection Department on May 10, 1984 ~,:gas a prop submitted appeal. 2. That the 72 hours given the owner of Chippewa Park Apartments to correct three specific violations was reasonable in that these violations are life- safety concerns which were easily correctable within that time. x RESOLUTION NO. 8 -2 3. The fact that the Fire Department had given the owner 30 days to correct some of the same violations does not negate the Building Inspector's 72 hour compliance notice in light of No. 2 above. 4. The fact that the Building Inspector was at the Chippewa Park Apartments on April 30, 1984 to conduct a Metro HRA Section 8 Rent Assistance Quality Standards Inspection does not negate the Building Inspector's responsibility to enforce the City's Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance and issue Compliance Orders for violations found at that time. 5. Although the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance does not specifically define the term "facility," the common definition of the term used for purposes of the ordinance is "something that is built, installed, or established to serve a particular purpose." 6. Fire doors are facilities within the meaning of Section 12 -709 and as such are subject to being maintained in a safe, sound and working condition. 7. Section 12 -709 includes a variety of elements that go into the makeup of a building that are not specifically mentioned else- where in the ordinance but, nevertheless, are expected to be maintained. 8. Section 12 -709 is not void due to vagueness. 9. The violations listed on the Compliance Order issued on May 3, 1984 are supported by a review of the provisions of the Housing Maintenance and Occupancy Ordinance. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED b the Housing Advisor Commission to recom- > Y 9 Y mend to the City Council, sitting as a Board of Appeals, that the appeal submitted on behalf of the owners of the Chippewa Park Apartments be denied and that the contested Compliance Order dated May 3, 1984, be affirmed in its entirety. May 29 198.4. 4DD te Chairman ATTES Secretary, The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Don Lawrence , and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in favor thereof: Chairman Phyllis Plummer, Commissioners Dolores Hastings, Ray Haroldson, Phil Cohen, Don Lawrence, and Barbara Sorenson and the following voted against the same: none whereupon said resolution was declared duly ;gassed and adopted. C - 1."J'13. 11('1d on t1le 11-U) day of 1.98 al 8,-,00 p.fii. at 1:1)"L CJJ_� 1, 1 - - 3'0 1 to confid(�- Al1 y of P Estzste -in ac City of P,, Cant , ORDINPJ No. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF REAL ESTATE IN THE CITY 0 0- THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRCGKJYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: PR WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center owns real estate described as follows: lot 7 and commencing at a point in West line of NW 1/4 of SW 1/4 o f -is n o"n fiiu 119, Range 21, North a distance of 5 rods North from the SW corner 4 chereof thence F:,:1F;t 561 feet thence South 0 49 minutes Eist distance of 82 5/10 feet to North line to a --pint in the North line of said Lot 4 distance 396 feet East from the :Past Line of I-ot 7 thence West to ',"!Fly line of State Highway 152 — thence Nally along said N to South line of Lot 7 thence East to SE corner of Lot 7 thenc- North to NE corner . thereof thence wrst T line of NW 114 n": SW 1/4 of said Section 7 thence North to beadnning except State Highway. WHEREAS, it is determined that the pr of - rt is not essenti ,. for public use; and MEREAS, _the property can best be uLilizedjIv_a1lowing the private development through the - 1( , - nvt . y1-- -,- ,� - --. , of said property consistent with Section 12.05 of the City Chart Section 2: Property Description in Terms of Conveyance That the Conveyance of City owned property (3e--cribed as follows: Lot 7 and commencing at a point in West line of NW 1/4 of SW 1/4 of Section 27, Township 11 n -9, Ranqe 21, a distance of 5 rods _ No _ rth from the C'm corner thereof thence 561 feet thence South 0 degrees, 49 , iiinutos East distance of 82 feet to North line of Lot 4 thence, P;est to a , J-n the North line of said Lot las from + Wast line of Lot 7 thence South 82 5/10 feet thence West to YFly line of State Ili -91 - 152 then:; N said NEly line to South line of Lot 7 thence Y;ast to SE corner oi - lot 7 "Torth to NE corner thereof thence West to West line of NW 114 of - : SW 1/ 4 of said Section - ction thence North to beginning except Sta — Pi ghway is hereby authorized to be sold; which salp shall be made in accordance with such^ terms and conditions as hereafter approved Council. OM INANCE' NO. Section 3: This ordinance shall. become effective after adoption and thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted thi.s day of 198 Ma ATTEST: Clerk Published in the official newspaper_ Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter.) /3,b CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES RELATING TO FOOD SANITATION AND ADOPTING A NEW FOOD SANITATION CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I: Section 1. Chapter 8, Food Sanitation Code, of the Brooklyn Center City Ordinances is hereby repealed. SECTION II: Chapter 8, Food Sanitation Code, is hereby adopted by adding the underlined material: Section 1. Hennepin County Ordinance No. 3, Food Protection Ordinance for Hennepin County, is hereby adopted by reference and shall be a part of this Ordinance as if set out in full, except Section II, Scope; Section _V, License and Administration; Section V, Administration and Inspection, Subdivision 1; and Section VI, Food Sources and Supplies, Subdivision 1 thereof. All references in Ordinance No. 3 to "County," "County Board," or "Health Authority" shall be read to refer to the City of Brooklyn Center., its City Council, and its Sanitarian, Health Department, or other designated agent. Section 2. For the purpose of this Ordinance, the following terms shall have the meanings given to them. Subd. 1. "Social or service agency" shall mean any organization not organized for profit and not part of the net earnings of which inures to the _benefit of any private shareholder or individual. Subd. 2. "Quality Assurance Plan" shall mean a written plan for the prevention of food borne illness which includes a self- inspection pro r am. This plan shall meet the criteria of The University of Minnesota Extension Service Special Report #61, which is hereby incorporated and made a part of this Ordinance as if set out in full. Section 3. Licenses. 0 Subd. 1. Licenses R equired. No person shall operate a food es tablishment or eneacae the business of operating any of the foll types of en within th corporate limits o this municipal ity unless a license for the current year of the p llc� +: le ap scribed lher(Ar, and listed below shall have obtained therefor pursua.nt to this or(linance from the Clerk: Bakery food vehicle Catering food vehicle Food esta 1 1 4 F; 1,, nt Itinerant food establishment Read i ly::_perisjjable food vehicle Vending machine vendor Special food handling. Subd. 2. Exemotion from Second License. Where the business consists only of a bakery food vehicle, catering food vehicle, itinerant food establishment, readily-perishable food vehicle, or vendina machine, a food establishment license shall not be required in addition. Subd. 3. Readily-perishable Food Vehicle Fleet License. When more than five readily-perishable food vehicles are operated by the same person in, the same business in the City, he may obtain a fleet license therefore in lieu of a separate license for each vehicle. If such fleet license is suspended or revoked, such suspension or revocation shall affect very vehicle licensed thereunder. Subd. 4. Special Food Handling License. When the only food sold or offered for sale i n a food establishment is wrapped or packaged candy, or bottled or canned - soft drinks, a food establishment license shall not be required; however, a spe cial food handling license shall be required Subd. 5. Display of License. Such license shall be conspicuously displayed at all times in all licensed food establishments. M food vehicles shall be identified with a decal, license plate or other means sup by the Clerk displayed in a conspicuous place thereon designated by the Clerk. Section 4. Fee Exemptions, License Required. Food service in or operated by _ governmental subdivisions, charitable insti- tutions, houses of worship, child-care homes, schools, charitable and non-profit hospitals, itinerant food establishments operated by a social or service agency and employee coffee rooms shall be required to apply for and obtain a license and shall be sub'ect to all requirements of this ordinance, but shall not be charged a fee for such license. Section 5. License Fee. Fees for licenses issued hereunder shall be in the amount set forth by the Council from time to time for Bakery Food Vehicles, Cat-erinq Food Vehicles, Food Estab- lishments, Itinerant Food Estl Readily- perishable Food Vehicles, Vending Machines and Special Food Handling Licenses. -2- Section 6. Administration. The application for such licenses shall be made on forms r by the Clerk and shall set forth the general nature of the business, the location and such other information as the Clerk shall reSuire. Section 7. Temporary_ Suspension of License. The Health Authority with jjl� of thn (7-Lt Manager shall immediatelv suspei the license of any food establishment for the violation of any terms of this section it such violations constitute an imminent public health hTz Ur..on notification by the Health Authority of a temporary suspension of license, the licensee shall forthwith cease operation. The licensee may appeal the temporary suspension in writing, to the City Council. Upon notification in writing by the licensee to the Health Authority that all violations have been corrected for which temporary suspension was invoked, the Health Authority shall reinspect the food establishment within a reasonable period of time. If all violations constituting the grounds for the temporary suspension have been corrected, the Health Authority shall immediately terminate the suspension. The Health Authority and the City Manager may not suspend a license if the violation or violations which constitute an imminent public health hazard can be eliminated or removed by embargo or condemnation. Section 8. Inspection and Correction. Transport or Sale, Noise Prohibited. No person licensed under this ordinance, shall call attention to his business or to his goods, wares or merchan- dise, by crying them out, by blowing a horn or by any loud or unusual noise. Section 9. Food. Sources. All food in all food establish- ments shall be clean, wholesome, free from spoilage, adulteration, and misbranding, and shall be prepared, processed, handled, 2ackaged, transported and stored so as to be protected from contamination and spoilage and shall. be safe for human consumption. No home prepared foods shall be kept or used in an food establishment except that horde r)reT)ared foods other than readily-perishable foods may be kept or used in schools and houses of worship and by social or service agencies at itinerant .food establishments. No more than three itinerant food estab- lishment licenses authorizing the sale of home prepared foods shall be issued to a social. or service agency in any calendar year. All food received or used in all food establishments shall be from sources approved by the Health Authority. Section 10. Machines. Subd. 1. Each vending machine licensed under this Ordinance shall be constructed and maintained as follows: a. Each machine shall be filled only with wholesome ingredients which have been manufactured and packaged under sanitary conditions and transported to the machine in sanitary containers or vehicles. -3- b. The owner. or — operator of all such vending machines shall, i7csted, make provision for the Health Aut h, T:? access, either in company with an employee or otherwise, to the interior of all vending machines Aerated by him. C. Every licensee shall keep and maintain each vending machine in a clean, wholesome and sanitary condition at all times. d. Each machine must be so designed as to protect against infestation o - I - insects, vermin, rodents, and to 2rotect against the entrance of dust, dirt, rain, overhead leakage, or other sources of contamination, and shall be so constructed and operated as not to create a rodent harborage. The machine location shall be such as to minimize the potential for contamination of the - food, shall be well lighted, easily cleanable, and the surroundings shall be so maintained as not to create an unsanitary or unsightly condition. e. Each machine shall be so designed that it may be readily cleaned. The walls, floors, ceiling, covers, lids and other physical features shall be of such construction as to withstand repeated cleaning. f. All interior surfaces and component parts of the vending machine shall be so designed and constructed as to be readily cleaned in place or removable for cleaning operations, and shall be Irlept clean. All food contact surfaces of the machine shall. be smooth, non-toxic in themselves or in combination with food, corrosion resistant, and relatively non-absorbent material, and shall be capable of withstanding repeated cleaning and sanitizing by normal procedures. g. Each vending machine shall be so constructed that it may be opened and all- parts thereof made available for inspection purposes by the Health Authority h. Each vending machine that vends a cup to receive food from such machine shall.. have the dispensing opening protected from dust and insect infestation by means of a manual or mechanical opening device. i. The temperature of all vending machines which dispense perishable unfrozen food shall be maintained at a temperature of 40 degrees, F., or below, or 150 degrees F., or above, whichever is applicable. Where frozen - - food is Lein2c vended, the temperature shall be maintained at 5 degrees F., or below at all times; provided that - exceptions may be made for (a) the actual time r0ffllired to load or otherwise service the machine and for a ma:-,-i-mui recovery period of 30 minutes following completion of loading or servicing o and (b) in the case of hot food venqLnli machines, a ii, of 120 minutes to heat food through the 40 degree F. to 150 degree F. temperature zone. -4- In hot f ood ven machinr::—, which are not equipped with refricerated storage, there shall be no time delay to preclude Beat food immediately after it, fro , beinq applied to , s h a, b I is loaded or - laced in the ipachi-ne. Perishable food once heated to, or hCld at, a a bove shall be E ,la ,-- in at such temperature until served or discarded. L — j. Vending machines dispensing perishable food shall he provided with adequate_ refrigeration or heating units, or both, and thermostatic controls which ensure the maintenance of applicable temperatures at all times. Such vending machines shall. also have controls which prevent the machine from vending perishable food until serviced by the operator, in the event of pourer failure or other condition which . results in non-compliance v, temperature requirements in the food storage compartment. Hot food vendinq machines designed to heat food through the 40 de_�jLe(,! F. to 15 ' degree F. temperature range shall also be equipped autc. controls which render the machine incapable of vending perishable food until. serviced by the operator in the event that heating through this temperature range is not accomplished in 120 minutes or less. Perishable food which has failed to conform to the time requirements of this section shall be removed from the vendina machine and not made available for sale unless inspected and approved by the Health Authority as safe for human consumption. Vending machines dispensinq perishable food shall be provided with one or more thermometers which, to an accuracy of plus or minus 2 degrees F., indicates the air ' food storage temperature of the warmest part f. o the ref compartment, or the coldest part of the heated food storage compartment, whichever is applicable. Subd. 2. Water Supply. All water used in vending macl shall be drawn from a safe water. supply._ Vending machines shall be so designed, constructed, installed and operated as to prevent the production of toxic substances in the water or the back-siphonage of liquids or gases into the SUT)PIL L ine- Subd. 3. Identification. Each vending machine shall have posted thereon a label or sign stating the name, address and telephone number of the person responsible for it s opera �ti o -5- SECTION III: Section 1. This Ordinance shill become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publica- tion. ORDINANCE NO. adopted this day of , 19 Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date I -6- M E M O R A N D U M TO: Gerald Splinter, City Manager �j FROM: Torn Heenan, Supervising Sanitarian f(1 RE: Proposed Food Ordinance Change DATE: June 4, 1984 The proposal to adopt the Hennepin County Food Code is not designed to change any of the food handling practices within the City. The difference between the existing code and the Hennepin County Code primarily relate to the changes in the food industry since the original code was adopted. Additionally, the revision is more specific on areas that have been brought into question. The most recent example of this type of problem would be that the interior walls, ceiling and floor finishes are specified in the ordinance. The Hennepin County Food Ordinance has been adopted by the City of Brooklyn Park as its food code and the adoption of this code would be beneficial for uniformity. It would allow operators of multiple food establishments to operate under a common set of rules anywhere in Hennepin County where the county ordinance has been adopted. TLH : j t MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: James Lindsay, Chief of Police DATE: May 24, 1984 SUBJECT: Knights of Columbus, Council 6772, in Application for a Class B Gambling License Attached please find the completed police investigation of Council 6772 of the Knights of Columbus, Lawrence Anthony Stoner, executive officer and gambling manager, in application for a class B gambling license. Investigator Monteen's resume lists nothing which would preclude Council 6772, or Stoner, from receiving such a license. In addi- tion to the application for a class B gambling license, the Knights of Columbus have requested a waiver of the fidelity bond as pro- vided in the City Ordinance. The City Council must act on the following two matters: 1. An application for a class B gambling license: This requires a majority vote of the City Council to pass. 2. The waiver of the $10,000 fidelity bond: This requires the unanimous vote of the City Council to pass. The following is a. resume of the investigation of Brooklyn Center Police Department Case File 84- 07379, the application of Council 6772 of the Knights 16 Columbus in application for a Class B Gambling License as issued by the ty of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota. This investigation has been conducted by A. Paul MONTEEN and this resume has been transcribed and typewritten by Lori NOVAK, clerk - typist for the Brooklyn Center Police Department. APPL IC_iNT : Father Donald SCHUMAKER, Council 6772, Knights of Columbus 7025 Halifax Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 phone - 561 -5100 Lawrence Anthony g g STONER, Executive Officer and Gambling Manager 6517 752' Avenue North Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 phone - 561 -4315 INVESTIGATION MATERIALS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FILE An application for a gambling license. An application for a gambling license, Part II, in the name of Lawrence Anthony STONER. An application for a gambling license, Part III, organizational information. A letter requesting he waiver of a $10 000 fidelity bond. g Y 0 - Father - Donald - SCHUMAKER - Council - 6772, - Knights - of - Columbus - is - operated ---- under the auspices of the Knights of Columbus and is located at St. Alphonsus Catholic Church, 7025 Halifax Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota. This property is the outright possession of St. Alphonsus Catholic Church and is available to the Knights of Columbus on a regular basis for any and all of their functions. The Council is operated under the auspices of its elected officials as follows: a rand knight, deputy rand knight, g g P Y g g chancellor, recorder, treasurer, advocate warden, in id outside guard, inside and ou g d, as well as a board of trustees. These officers are elected by the popular vote of the membership in good standing who have been initiated into the first three degrees of the order. According to the Treasury Department, the Knights of Columbus operates as a bonafide religious fraternal organization and is therefore exempt from filing form 990 or 990T. Likewise, the State of Minnesota Commerce Department rec- ognizes that a bonafide religious organization of this nature is not required to file annual charities reports under Section 309.53 of the State Statute. According to the application for a gambling license, Part III, the organiza- tional information, Father Donald SCHUMAKER Council 6772, Knights of Columbus was incorporated on February 29, 1976 and has a current membership of approxi- mately 325. Lawrence A. STONER is listed in the application as an executive officer and e gambling manager for the Council. Mr. STONER is an employee of the sen Manufacturing Company, located at 6000 Hoover Avenue Northeast. Mr. STONER has been so employed since April of 1973 and has worked his way up to a middle management position with the Gresen Company. Mr. STONER and his Resume by Investigator A. Paul MONTEEN Case mile 84 -07379 Page 2 4# e reside at 651.7 751 Avenue North in Brooklyn Park and have lived there n 1973. In checking ith the Brooklyn Park Police Department, g y Investi- gator MONTEEN can find no criminal history in the name of Lawrence Anthony STONF,R, however, Brooklyn Park indicated that he reported a theft from his automobile in 1978. The Hennepin County Sheriff's Warrant and Record Divisions have no record in the name of Lawrence Anthony STONER. Likewise, he is clear with the NCIC and '1INCIS files. Mr. STONER has no record with the Brooklyn Center Police Department other than his activities with the Knights of Columbus. STONER holds a valid Class C driver's license and shows no violations. During the course of the year, the Knights of Columbus holds two major fund raising drives and participates in the St. Al honsus Fun Fair P p operating games of skill and chance. The disbursement of the funds go to various benevolent causes of the Knights of Columbus, including youth sports, scholas- tic scholarships and functions of the church school. During the years 1979 through 1983, the Knights of Columbus made application for and received a Class B gambling license from the City of Brooklyn Center. It should be noted that the Knights of Columbus have complied with the reporting require- ments of the City Ordinance and State Statute. In addition to the application for the class B gambling license, the Knights of Columbus have made application for a waiver of the $10,000 fidelity bond as required by the Ordinance of the City of Brooklyn Center. i estigator MONTEEN finds nothing which would preclude Council 6772 of the ghts of Columbus, nor Lawrence Anthony STONER, from receiving the gambling license applied for. The City Council must act on the following two matters: the application for a class B gambling license which requires the majority vote of the City ouncil to ass; and Y n the waiver f A o the $10,000 fidelity bond which requires the unanimous vote of the City Council to pass. rte.. Licenses to be approved by the City Council on June 11, 1984 A BEN T I-l` JICE -- OPERATOR LICENS 1 ow Biz Pizza _ 5939 John Martin Dr. Ch'c f of Police —� CIGARE LICE Interstate United Corp. 1091 Pierce Butler Rte. Hoffman Engineering 6530 James Ave. N. '��� City Clerk FOOD ES TABLISHM ENT LICENSE Bridgeman's Brookdale Center Lutheran Church of the Master 1200 69th Ave. N. Sanitarian' GARBA AND RE FUSE VEHICI.,E LICENSE Bergstrom Trucking 5860 73rd Ave. N. G & H Sanitation, Inc. 12448 Pennsylvania Ave. S. Hilger Transfer Co. 8550 Zachary Ln. Midwest Grease Buyers, Inc. P.O. Box 222 Robbinsdale Transfer Co., Inc. 5332 Hanson Court Shobe and Sons 3621 85th Ave. N. _s Sanitarian } INERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMErIT LICENSE rooklyn Center Fire Dept. 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.. `�� 1'�`' - ?1� Sanitarian'? MECHAN SYSTEMS LI CENSE 1 n Total Energy Heating & Cooling 5905 Lexington Ave. N. C, L� , . l'_ -y �- �� Buildingjfficial NONP V MACHINE LICENSE Coca Cola Bottling 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd. Evergreen Park Manor 7224 Camden Ave. N. Interstate United 1091 Pierce Butler Rte. Hoffman Engineering 6530 James Ave. N. Iten Leasing 4301 68th Ave. N. Sanitarian PERISH VENDI MACHINE LICENSE Interstate United 1091 Pierce Butler Rte. Hoffman Engineering 6530 James Ave. N. Sanitarian 1' 11 PEER LICENSE ` Erc�oltlyn Center lre Deft. 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. �A ��� � � •�L ;'_� Cit r '> i GENERAL APPROVAL: ra �G: Sp -I'- e City C k Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLA JU AS ALTERNATIVES T L ITIGATION MONTH WHEREAS, Brooklyn Center citizens deserve speedy settlement of claims and disputes; and WHEREAS, the amount of litigation in Minnesota has resulted in crowded court calendars and delays in justice; and WHEREAS, many citizens can be helped through alternative programs, such as mediation and arbitration; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota State Bar Association, the Hennepin County Bar P.ssociation, the American Bar Association, and the Brooklyn Center Mediation Project have taken the lead in informing citizens of these alternatives; and WHEREAS Y 7 the Brooklyn Center Mediation Project and its many volunteers are successfully providing the alternative of mediation. NOka, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center does hereby commend the Brooklyn Center Mediation Project and its Executive Director, Barbara Jensen, for their efforts to improve the quality of justice in Brooklyn Center and bring to our citizens dispute settling programs which will save money, avoid further crowding of court calendars and inform citizens of alternatives to litigation. 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 sane: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.