Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983 09-26 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA (� CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SEPTEMBER 26, 1983 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 September 12, 1983 *7. Performance Bond Release: a. Duane Enninga, 5435 Emerson Avenue North *8. Appointment of Election Judges for November 8, 1983 Municipal Election 9. Resolutions: *a. Adopting Housing Rehabilitation Guidelines -This item is an annual resolution considered by the Council and comprehends an amendment to the administrative guidelines of the housing rehabilitation program. b. Approving Agreement with Motorola to Provide a Maintenance Contract for the City' Radio Communication System The service agreement proposed by this resolution 'would include maintenance on radios in all City departments. c. Amending 1983 Employee Position and Classification Plan —This resolution provides for the establishment of the "Maintenance Worker" position as provided within the 1983 Budget for the Government Buildings Division. *d. Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Karen Duenow *e. Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Dedicated Public Service of Rev. Bob_Cilke e CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- September 26, 1983 10. Planning Commission Items (7:30 p.m.): a. Planning Commission Application No. 83048 submitted by Rose hillestol for a special use permit to conduct a dog grooming home occupation in the basement of the residence at 5218 Paul Drive. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 83048 at its September 15, 1983 meeting. b. Planning Commission Application No. 83049 submitted by Erland Shelley for a special use permit to engage in taxidermy as a home occupation in the garage of the residence at 5200 70th Avenue North. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 83049 at its September 15, 1983 meeting. c. Planning Commission Application No. 83050 submitted by Q Petroleum for a special use permit to rent trailers at the gasoline service station at 1505 69th Avenue North. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 83050 at its September 15, 1983 meeting. 11. Public Hearings (8:00 p.m.) a.. Hearing on Proposed Assessment for 1983 Diseased Shade Tree Removal Costs - Notices of the hearing have been sent to all affected property; owners and have been published in the official newspaper. 1. Resolution Certifying Diseased Shade Tree Removal Cost to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls b. Hearing on Proposed Assessment for Delinquent Public Utility Accounts Notices of the hearing have been sent to all affected property owners and have been published in the official newspaper. 1. 'Resolution Certifying Delinquent Public Utility Accounts to the Hennepin County Tax Rolls c. 'Hearing on Proposed Assessment for Delinquent Weed Destruction Accounts Notices of the hearing have been sent to all affected property owners and have been published in the official newspaper. I. Resolution Certifying Delinquent Weed Destruction Accounts to the - Hennepin County Tax Rolls d. Continuation of Hearing on Proposed Assessment for 51st Water Main Improvement Project No. 1982 -07 -On August 22, 1983 the City Council continued the hearing for Tri -State hand Company upon receipt of a letter protesting the proposed assessment' in the amount of $20,919.18. e. Continuation of Hearing on Proposed Assessment for Storm Sewer Improvement Project No. 1980 -24 (67th Avenue North Storm Sewer Extension) -On December 21 , 1981 the City Council continued the hearing for Brooklyn Center Development Company owner of Earle Brown Farm_ Apartments, upon receipt of a letter protesting the proposed assessment in the amount of $23,833.42 relating to the installation of storm sewer along the westerly extension of 67th Avenue from Shingle Creek to Shingle Creek Parkway. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA —3- September 26, 1983 12. Ordinances a. An Ordinance Granting Minnegasco, Inc., ,`a Minnesota Corporation, Its Successors and Assigns, a Nonexclusive Franchise to Construct, Operate, Repair and Maintain Facilities and Equipment for the Transportation, Distribution, Manufacture and Sale of Gas Energy for Public and Private Use and to Use the Public Ground of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota for Such Purposes; and Prescribing Certain Terms and Conditions Thereof -This ordinance was first read at the August 22, 1983 City Council meeting, published on September 1, 1983, and is recommended for a second reading this evening. A public hearing on the ordinance has been scheduled for 8:00 P.M. b. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding Special Uses in the C2 Zoning District -This ordinance was first read at the August 22, 1983 City Council:meeting, published on September 1, 1983, and is recommended for a second reading this evening. The ordinance amendment would make tennis clubs, racket and swim clubs, and other athletic clubs and health spas a special use in the C2 zoning district. A public hearing on the ordinance amendment has been scheduled for 8:00 p.m. C. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances to Allow how- Rise Office Uses in the R3 Zoning District by Special Use Permit -This ordinance was first read at the August 22, 1983 City Council meeting, published on September 1, 1983, and is recommended for a second reading this evening. The ordinance amendment was proposed in conjunction with Planning Commission Application No. 83037 submitted by Cramer Company for site and building plan and special use 'permit approval to construct an office park development on the R5 zoned property at the southwest quadrant of I -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard. A public hearing on the ordinance amendment is scheduled for 8:00 p.m. 13. Discussion Items: a. An Ordinance Amending the Brookl,vn Center City Charter -.This item was discussed at the September 12, 1983 City Council meeting, and consideration of the ordinance amendment was held over to this evening's meeting. The City Attorney will be prepared to discuss this item at the meeting. b. Sponsorship of Emergency Preparedness Explorer Post -If the Council approves the sponsorship, it is also recommended that a motion be made to authorize the City Treasurer to accept donations and keep them in a trust account until a treasury is established for the Explorer Poste c. Review of City Policy on Administrative Permits for Special Business Promotions under Section 35 -801 of the City Ordinances d.` Update on Liquor License Ordinance Revisions -The staff will be prepared to discuss this item at the meeting. *14. Licenses 15. Reconvene Public Hearing n 1 ng 984. Budget 16. Adjournment Y MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION i SEPTEMBER 12, 1 983 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:01 p.m. ROLL CALL roman Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Assistant City Engineer Jim Grube, and Administrative Assistants Brad Hoffman and Tom Bublitz. Mayor Nyquist noted that Councilmember Scott would be absent from this evening's meeting. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Councilmember Hawes. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted the Council had not received any requests to use the Open Forum session this evening. _ He inquired of the audience if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council. There being none, he proceeded with the regular agenda items. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired whether any Council members had any agenda items they wished removed from the Consent Agenda. The City Manager requested that the performance g Y Man � bond releases and reductions be added to the Consent Agenda. APPROVAL OF MINUTES — AUGUST 22, 1983 There was a motion by Councilmember Iiotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of August 22, 1983 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASES /REDUCTIONS There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the release of the following performance bonds: I. Big Wheel Auto Store, 6822 Brooklyn Boulevard Amount of guarantee $3,500 bond 2. Q Petroleum, 1505 69th Avenue North Amount of guarantee $10,000 bond 3. Meriwether's Restaurant, 2101 Freeway Boulevard Amount of guarantee $5,000 bond 9 -12 -83 -1- 4. Pontillo's (Davanni's) Pizzeria, 5937 Summit Drive Amount of guarantee $2,000 bond to be released upon one tree around the perimeter greenstrip being brought to an upright position. 5. ;Red Lobster, 7235 Brooklyn Boulevard Amount of guarantee $5,000 bond to be released upon completion of the repair of the fence along the south side of the off -site lot. 6. Earle Brown Farm Estates, First and Second Additions Amount of guarantee, Phase 1, Phase 2, $35,00 Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka,'Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the reduction of the performance guarantee- for Earle Brown Farm Estates, Third Addition from $25,000 to $15,000 to ensure that remaining landscaping is installed and viable through the winter, contingent upon receiving from °DeVries Builders, Inc., a letter acknowledging that the remaining improvements in the First and Second Additions must be completed prior to release of the bond for the Third Addition and the reduction of the performance guarantee for Shingle Creek Plaza II, 2700 Freeway Boulevard, from $80,000 to $5,000 to ensure eventual completion of remaining improvements. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPTa']BER 17 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 2 3 AS CONSTITUTION WEEK There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the Proclamation ;Declaring September 17 Through September 23 as Constitution Week. Voting in favor: Mayor hTyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 83 -131 Ze�ne — Mo i�a introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1983` -F (LIONS PARK TENNIS COURT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -20, PHASE II) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 0 83- 3- 3 2 em�G'ene introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1983 -H (51 ST AVENUE NORTH WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -07) The e motio for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was. duly seconded b member 0 ? y Y 9 -12 -$3 2 t ' Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted RESO LUTION NO. 83 -133 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1983 -C (WELL NO. 3 RECONDITIONING PROTECT NO. 1983 -03) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 83-134 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING EARLE BROWN FARM ESTATES SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1983 -13, ACCEPTING BID FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SIDEWALK IN EARLE BROWN FARM ESTATES TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPM]aIT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted' against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the following list of licenses: AMUSEMENT DEVICE LICENSE - OPERATOR WinchellIs Donuts 1912 57th Ave. N. COMME RCIAL KENNEL LICENSE Daisy Mae Dog Grooming 6830 Humboldt Ave. N. GAMBLING LICENSE - CLASS B yre rown School 77. 7. 5900 Humboldt Ave. N. ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Brooklyn Ctr. Lioness 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Knights of Columbus 7025 Halifax Ave. N. MECH ANICAL SYSTEMIS LICENSE Adel ity Air 7907 5th St. N.E. NONPERIS VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Coca Co Bottling Midwest Inc. 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd. Humboldt Sq. Cleaners 6824 Humboldt Ave. N. 9 -12 -83 -3- Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED) RESO LUTION NO. 83 -135 Member B 11 "Eies introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF $930,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS OF 1983 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene`Ihotka Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted RESOLUTION NO. 83-136 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT 1982 -G (WATER TOWER IMPROVEMFNT PROJECT NO. 1982-15) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene_Lhotka, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Accepting Bid and Approving Contract 1983- I (Park Shelter Improvement; Project No. 1983 -10) . He explained that the resolution provides for shelter building improvements at Kylawn, Bellvue, and Freeway Parks and construction of trash enclosures and comfort station screening at various parks. He reviewed for Council members M&C No. 83 -6, and indicated that the staff does not think a better bid on any of the items could be received if the bid were deferred until spring. The Council entered into a discussion of the specific bid items and types of materials bid, including various materials proposed for the toilet enclosures. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -137 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 1983 -I (PARK SHELTER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1983 -10) 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, Gene Lhotka, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Accepting Engineer's Report, Establishing Central Park Tennis Court Improvement Project No. °1983 -12, Phase I, Approving Plans and Specifications, and Directing Advertisement for Bids (Contract 1,983 -L). He 9 -12 -83 -4 explained the resolution provides for soil corrections for the Central Park tennis courts. Councilmember I,hotka requested the staff to give an estimated cost of the total project. The Assistant City Engineer stated that the estimated total cost of the project would be $140,000 for four tennis courts. Councilmember Lhotka then stated that in the future he would like to see the total cost of projects presented when approval of a portion of the project, such as soil corrections, is brought before the Council. RESOLUTION NO. 83-138 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING ENGINEER'S REPORT, ESTABLISHING CENTRAL PARK TENNIS COURT IMPROVIT PROJECT NO. 1983 -12, PHASE I, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND DIRECTING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (CONTRACT 1983 -L) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: Bill Hawes, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Amending 1983 Employee Position and, Classification Plan. He explained the resolution would provide for the establishment of a maintenance worker position as provided within the 1983 budget for the Government Buildings division. Councilmember Theis inquired as to how the salary range was determined for the position. The City Manager explained that the Director of Public Works, in conjunction with other City staff, determined a salary range on the basis of market and internal pay requirements and comparisons. Councilmember Lhotka inquired how the work of the proposed maintenance worker is being handled currently. The City Manager replied that the work is being handled in a contract basis, and that the maintenance worker position would provide more technical capability in the area of building maintenance and heating and air conditioning maintenance than is currently provided by existing staff positions. Councilmember Lhotka stated that he would like to see some cost comparisons between the contract work and the proposed maintenance worker position. The City Manager suggested that, since the proposal is from the Director of Public Works who is not present this evening, he would suggest that the item be tabled until the next Council meeting. -There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to table consideration of a Resolution Amending 1983 Employee Position and Classification Plan until the regularly scheduled Council meeting on September 26, 1983. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -139 Member r ne iFa introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE BROOKLYN CENTER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT TO USE THE HOUSE AT 5501 ALDRICH AVENUE NORTH IN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FOR TRAINING PURPOSES 9 -12 -83 -5- I 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, Gene Lhotka, gill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING ON PRIVATE - KENNEL LICENSE APPLICATION The City Manager stated that the private kennel license application was received from Ms. Ellaina Marie Isaac, 6325 Brooklyn Boulevard. The City Manager explained that a ublic hearing h p , as been scheduled for the private kennel license g P application for this evening, and that the notice of the hearing has been sent to all property owners within 150 feet of the applicant's property. Administrative Assistant Bublitz explained that the applicant had been issued three tags for violation of the City ordinance, related to the requirement that a private kennel license application be obtained for the keeping of more than two dogs'. He explained that the City's code enforcement officer issued three tags to Ms. Isaac, since she had five dogs on the premises, three more than the ordinance allows, without obtaining a private kennel license. The City Manager stated that the staff had received a telephone call this afternoon from an individual registering a complaint against the issuance of the private kennel license based on the noise that the dogs make. Mayor Nyquist inquired whether there was any procedure for monitoring the license after it had been issued The City Manager stated that a license can be withdrawn, if it is issued, but it is more difficult to withdraw the license as opposed to not issuing a license. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on a private kennel license application from Ellaina Marie Isaac, 6325 Brooklyn Boulevard. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Earl Holtz, 6319 Brooklyn Boulevard, who stated that he lives next door to the applicant and that the dogs are not excessively noisy. He added that he would support the applicant's application. Mayor Nyquist recognized the applicant who stated that her dogs do bark but that she makes it a point not to let them out in the morning or after 9:30 at night. Ms Isaac stated that she will be moving from 6325 Brooklyn Boulevard in November or January, and would be taking three of the dogs with her and pointed out that she would need the private kennel license only for this period of time until she moves. Councilmember Lhotka asked how old the dogs were. Ms. Isaac explained that the male and female were five years old and that there were two three -year old pups. She added that the fifth dog is a husky which is eight years old. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one appeared to speak and he entertained `a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing on the private kennel license application. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. 9 -12 -83 -6- There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember. Lhotka to approve the private kennel license for Ellaina Marie Isaac, 6325 Brooklyn Boulevard for a period not to exceed six months from September 12, 1 963. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council-members Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. DISCUSSION ITR , 1S RFQ U7T MR=TIONAL BUSINESS PROMOTIONS UNDER THE CITY ZONING ORDINANCE The Director of Planning & Inspection reviewed a letter from Mr. Walter Frances, store manager of the Goodyear Service Store, located at 5501 Xerxes Avenue North. He explained that Mr. Frances' letter was a request for additional administrative permits for his store, based on his belief that his type of retailing operation is unique, and requires additional promotions comprehended by the City ordinance which grants administrative permits for special promotions. The Director of Planning & Inspection explained that the Goodyear Service Store is entitled to two ten -day permits for special promotions, whereas, service stations under the ordinance are entitled to three thirty -day permits. Councilmember Theis inquired whether or not there was any rationale for the difference in the number of permits. The Director of Planning & Inspection explained that, the ordinance was changed approximately two years ago, at the request of service station owners who felt that they had unique businesses which required additional promotions.' Councilmember Theis commented that he didn't know whether three thirty -day permits or two ten -day permits were the best solution, but that he definitely believed that the difference in the number of permits was not right. Councilmember Lhotka reviewed the discussions held by the Council at the time the ordinance was revised, and stated that the ordinance was amended at the service, station owner's request He added that the staff, at that time, had a concern that the change in the ordinance would generate future requests, such as is being considered this evening. He added that he did not vote for the amendment the first time around and that he does believe there is an inequity in the ordinance. The City Manager stated that the special administrative permit essentially allows the business to suspend virtually all provisions of the existing sign ordinance for the period of the promotion. The Director of Planning & Inspection reviewed the types of typical requests received under the special administrative permits provision, and noted that about- the only type of display not permitted is flashing lights. The City Manager commented that, he believes the system. of issuing the administrative permits works well, but that an argument can be made as to the fairness of the length and number of promotions. He emphasized that the system of issuing the permits appears to work well. Councilmember Lhotka stated that the consensus opinion of the Council appears to be that there is an inequity in the ordinance, and that he would like to review the entire ordinance and process and deal with it in a comprehensive fashion. The City Manager stated that the staff would try to be back to the Council by September 26 with recommendations. Councilmember Theis stated that he would like to review past discussions regarding the changes in the ordinance. 9 -12 -83 -7- RECESS e Br ooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:05 p.m. and reconvened at 8:25 p.m. PLANNING COAM'IISSION ITEMS P MINING C TUSSI APPLICATION NOS. 83033 AND 83034 SM BY HILLTOP BUILDERS " T AND BUILDING PTA APPROTTLED VARIANCE TO CO SfiT J� CT AN APB G-f 'THE NORTH STT) M71 A - PARCPM 837 7A A E N TH _ _ — The D irector of Planning & Inspection reviewed his memorandum to the City Manager regarding Planning Commission Application Nos.. 83033 and 83034 dated September 8, 1983. He briefly reviewed the history of the request and noted that the City Council tabled consideration of Application Nos. 83033 and 83034 at its August 22, 1 983 meeting, at the request of the applicant, in order to provide the applicant time to submit anew site plan. He proceeded to review the location of the subject parcel and the size of the parcel which was 29, 311 square feet - He then reviewed the latest site and building plan submitted by the applicant for an eleven unit apartment building. He added that the new site plan contained different setbacks than were originally proposed by the applicant. He stated the applicant feels that the revised site plan minimizes the effect of the variance request. The Director of Planning & Inspection explained the Planning Commission recommended approval of the variance and site plan at their July 14, 1983 meeting. He added that the Planning Commission did not review the most current site plan submitted by the applicant. The Planning Director explained that notices of the Council's consideration of the applications have been sent to the appropriate property owners. Mayor Nyquist reopened the public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 83034, and inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. Mayor Nyquist recognized Ms. Evelyn Schmidt who stated that she was representing the purchaser and was in favor of the application.. She added that the Twin hake North residents adjoining the proposed site did not want a joint driveway and added that the alternative is to put the driveway on the parcel, since it is a legal parcel. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one else appeared to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to close the Public hearing on Planning Commission Application No. 83034• Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve Planning Commission Application No. 83033, .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 bermi plans are subject g� � t3' � p to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 9 -12 -83 -8- 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 6. Plan approval comprehends an 11 unit apartment building which is consistent with the density requirements of the ordinance. 7• Any construction within the county road 10 right -of -way shall be completed under a permit issued by Hennepin County. 8. The applicant shall enter into an easement agreement with the City for street and utility purposes, said easement to be over the southerly 7 feet of the easterly 15 feet of the property. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council-members Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. _ Voting, against: none. The motion passed. There was a motion by Council-member Theis and seconded by Council-member Hawes to approve Planning Commission Application No. 83034 on the grounds that the standards for a variance are met. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers I,hotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 83045 SUBMITTED BY RAMADA INN /AL BEISNER FOR SITE AND BUILDING PLAN AND SPECIAL — USE PER= APPROVAL TO C INSTRUCT A 13 STORY, 174 MGM ROT P SED TR CT OF AST D A NORT IHWESTCO OF M=Y AND SHINGL CREEK. PLANNING C01 A NO. 83046 SUBMITTED BY MIADA INN /AZ BEISNE FOR PPX L - IMITTA7 7 R. L. APPROVAL STT 17T77E EN TPJCTS TTIR PARCEI OF�TA D ST HE NORMT CORNER OF SH -TG C - - F ' FA AY AND PR B�ULI PLANTING C0114ISSION APPLICATION NO. 83047 SUBMITTED BY RAMADA INN /AL BEISNER FOR A SPECIAL USE PER FOR OFF -SITE ACCESSORY PARKING FOR 98 STALLS TO SERVE THE RAMADA NON HOTEL. — r Me lrec or of Planning & Inspection presented and reviewed for Council members pages three through seven of the August 11, 1983 Planning Commission meeting' minutes, and also the three Planning Commission information sheets prepared for the applications. He then reviewed the applicant's request in Application No. 83046 and reviewed the location of the subject parcel and noted that the zoning was I -1 . The Planning Director noted that the area of the entire subdivision proposed in Application No. 83046 is 24.1 acres, and that it was divided into seven tracts which he reviewed for Council members. He then reviewed the sewer and water requirements of the hotel, which included a lift station and sewer project which would be paid at the applicant's expense as detailed in the subdivision agreement. 9 -12 -83 -9- The Director of Planning &. Inspection reviewed the site and building plan submitted with Planning Commission Application No. 83045 and noted that the application comprehended a 174 room hotel, with a 200 seat night club, 90 seat dining area, and a 20 seat breakfast room. He also ;pointed out that the application included a ballroom with a seating capacity of 280 and meeting rooms with seating' capacity of 180. The Planning Director reviewed the parking requirements for the application, and the applicant's request for deferral of 98 parking spaces. He then briefly reviewed the landscaping proposed with the application. In review of Application No. 83047, the Director of Planning & Inspection noted that the applicant has requested special use permit approval for offsite parking to serve the hotel, and that both the site of the principal use and the site of the off -site accessory parking is a special accessory use in the I -1 zoning district. The Director of Planning pointed out that the Planning Commission recommended approval of all three applications, subject to conditions and findings which he reviewed for Council members. He then recommended a 13th condition to be added to the conditions of approval recommended by the Planning Commission for Application No. 83045. He stated that he would recommend that the following language be added as a 13th condition: The R.L.S. comprehended by Planning Commission Application No. 83046 shall be given final approval by the City Council and filed with the County prior to the issuance of building permits for the hotel project. The Director of Planning & Inspection noted that hearings are required on the preliminary plat proposal and the two special use permit requests. He noted that the proper notices of the public hearing scheduled for this evening had been sent. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning Commission Application Nos. 83045, 83046, and 83047. ` Mayor Nyquist recognized the applicant, Mr. Al Beisner, who reviewed the site plan drawings and hotel floor plans for Council members Mr. Beisner noted three major functional areas contained in the proposal, including the hotel, night club, and ballroom /meeting room assembly area. He then reviewed the color schemes proposed for various parts of the hotel. ` Councilmember Theis inquired of the applicant as to the construction timetable. Mr. Beisner replied that the target date for the beginning of the construction is in October, with a 14 to 16 month construction period. Mr. Beisner stated that there are certain tax advantages to be realized if the hotel is open in 1984 and that the target date for opening is in 1984. Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one appeared to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember hhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to close the public hearing on Planning Commission Application Nos. 83045, 83046, and 83047. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve Application No. 83045, subject to the following conditions: 9' -12 -83 -10 1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 2. Plan approval acknowledges deferral of 98 parking spaces to be located on the large, central parking lot serving the - commercial and industrial uses in this area. A separate Performance Agree- ment and supporting financial guarantee shall be secured by the City for improvements to the central parking lot prior to the issuance of permits for the hotel. 3. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 4. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 5. A site performance agreement and supporting financial ,guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 6. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from view. The building is to be equipped 7• � q pp ed 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. 8. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 9. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 10. 8612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 11. A flood plain use permit shall be obtained for earthwork within the flood fringe. 12. The landscape plan shall be revised to indicate sod in the 7' wide greenstrip areas adjacent to interior property lines. 13. The R.L.S. comprehended by Planning Commission Application No 83046 shall be given final approval by the City Council and filed with the County prior to the issuance of building permits for the hotel project. 9 -12 -83 -11- Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. There was a motion b Councilmember Lhotka and seconded b Councilmember Hawes to y Y approve Application No. 83046, subject to the following conditions: 1. The final R.L.S. is subject to review and approval by the - City Engineer. 2. The final R.L.S. is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. The preliminary R.L.S. shall be revised to include items noted in the Assistant City Engineer's memo of August 8, 1983, prior to final consideration by the City Council. 4• Preliminary R.L.S. approval acknowledges a master plan for grading and utilities for the area encompassed by this R.L.S. and the areas occupied by Specs. 10 and 11 and the central parking lot. Said master grading and utility plan shall be subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. However, review and approval of individual site development plans is not thereby implied. 5. The applicant shall enter a Subdivision Agreement with the City stipulating responsiblity for and assessment of costs for certain improvements to public facilities within the public right -of -way, including, but not limited to: a) the median opening in Shingle Creek Parkway b) potential installation of a traffic signal at the above median opening c) sanitary sewer improvements Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve Application No. 83047, subject to the following conditions: 1. At least 98 parking spaces to be constructed on Tract C of the R.L.S.; proposed under Application No. 83046 shall be legally encumbered to the sole use of the Ramada Inn on Tract B of the same R.L.S. The legal encumbrance shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney and shall be filed at the County prior to the issuance of building permits. 2. A separate performance guarantee provided by Shingle Creek Land Company shall be held to insure completion of site improvements to the large central, common parking lot on the master plan for the area bounded by Freeway Boulevard on the south, Shingle Creek Parkway on the east and north, and MTC and Shingle Creek on the west. 9 -12 -83 -12- 3. Special use permit approval acknowledges a proof -of- parking for the hotel. The applicant shall acknowledge in writing that he will install the deferred parking upon a determination by the City that the need exists. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers ILhotka, Hawes and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. DISCUSSION ITEMS (CONTIIRM) RECOt'S'l 1DATIONS FOR 011DP TI: TTS TO THE CITY CHARTER FRO14 THE CITY CHARTER COMMISSION e i y Manager introduced the d'mecussion item and expla ni edtHat Charter Commission had been working for some time on recommended amendments to the Charter. He briefly reviewed for Council members the proposed amendments, and noted that a good number of the proposed amendments deal with "housekeeping" type items. With regard to Section 7.16 of the existing Charter, the City Manager stated that the Charter Commission is recommending elimination of that section. The City Attorney commented that he is not certain that this section should be taken out, and that he would like to confer with Mr. Dave Kennedy regarding this section of the Charter: Mr. Michael Beauchane, Chairman of the Charter Commission, commented that the Charter Commission initiated an inquiry to the City Attorney's office regarding" Section 7.16, and that the issue was resolved for them which resulted in their recommendation to eliminate the section from the Charter. The City Manager stated that he would be meeting with the Charter Commission in October to discuss further changes in the Charter, particularly, ,amendments dealing with the budget process. The City Attorney commented that he would feel more comfortable if a unanimous vote were given by the Council for the first reading, and that since this was impossible with the absence of Councilmember Scott this evening, he would recommend tabling consideration of the first reading. Mayor Nyquist suggested that approval of the amendments for first reading be held" over until the next regular Monday meeting. The Director of Finance, along with the City Attorney, discussed the proposed amendment to Section 2.6 of the Charter, which would change the word "office" to "officer ". The Director of Finance stated that he believed the original intent of Section 2.06 was to include a wider scope of the department and that the term "officer" narrows the scope of the provision. Mr. Beauchane commented that this item was noted as a typographical error in the original Charter and that the original language in the Charter was "office" and not "officer ". The City Attorney also questioned the intent of the amendment to Section 5.09, and inquired whether the Charter Commission intends to maintain the language as "one through three" or to change to "one to three ". He noted that if the sentence in Section 5.09 is changed to "one to three," it excludes Section 3, and that if the sentence if left as "one through three," it includes Section 3. The City Attorney also commented on the recommended amendment to Section 8.04 regarding bonds required on public work projects, and noted that for public works projects on public property, a bond of public contractor is required since a lien 9 -12 -83 -13- cannot be filed on public property.. He noted that the bond is required for the protection of the workers on the project, not the City, since the workers would be paid out of the bond money if the contractor does not pay the workers. With regard to Section 5.09, Mr. Beauchane stated that the sentence proposed for amendment in Section 5.09 should remain as "one _through three" and not "one to three ". REQUEST FOR A GAMBLING LICENSE APPLICATION FROM BROWN P.T.A. fire was a motioby Councilmember Iotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the Class B gambling license for the Earle Brown P.T.A. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting, against: none. The motion passed. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded Councilmember Theis to approve the waiver of the $10,000 fidelity bond for the Earle Brown P.T.A. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. PUBLIC HEARING ON ANNUAL BUDGET AND FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUNDS The City Manager introduced the public hearing and noted 'that the Director of Finance would review the Budget and public hearing proceedings for the Council. Councilmember Hawes left the table at 9:57 p.m. The Director of Finance proceeded to review the proposed 1984 Budget and noted that the proposed Budget for 1984 totals $6,911,189. He added that the net operating budget of the City proposed for 1984 is $6,200,561, and that the capital outlay portion proposed for 1984 is $336,087. Councilmember Hawes returned to the table at 10:00 p.m. The Director of Finance pointed out for Council members that the debt retirement for 1984 for the City was $374,541. He then proceeded to review for Council members the proposed departmental appropriations, the estimated revenue for 1984, and the anticipated local government aids. The City Manager stated that the City was scheduled to receive $1,731,978 in local government aids which was calculated by the State from data which was three years old. He added that in its formula the State fell short by $3,500 ►00 -and the secondary formula in the law resulted in a reduction for some communities in State aids and an increase for others. He pointed out that 93% of the cuts came to suburban areas. The Director of Finance reviewed for Council members the amount of federal revenue sharing funds proposed for expenditure in 1984 which totaled $297,787. He then reviewed the minutes of the federal revenue sharing proposed use hearing held on July 20, ,1983, and also reviewed the Fiscal Assistance Act of 1972. He then reviewed the total revenue sharing entitlements for local governments under the Revenue Sharing Program, and the restrictions and qualifications regarding the use of funds by local governments. The Finance Director next reviewed the required hearings for federal revenue sharing, for City budget hearings, and also the City policy on the use of federal revenue sharing funds. He then reviewed the federal revenue sharing funds to be allocated to the City in 1984• 9 -12 -83 -14- Councilmember Hawes left the table at 10:16 p.m. The Director of Finance reviewed for Council members the property tax levy proposed for the City in 1984. Councilmember Hawes returned to the table at 10:20 p.m. The Director of Finance reviewed the assessable valuation in the City of Brooklyn, Center and reviewed the 1984 assessed value formula changes enacted by the legislature. He next reviewed the proposed mill rate for the City in 1984 and also reviewed the distribution of the total tax dollar in the City of Brooklyn Center of which the City's share is 16.5 %. The Director of Finance pointed out that, if the proposed Budget is adopted, the budget will result in a $9.69 increase in taxes on the average home in Brooklyn Center. The Director of Finance next reviewed the proposed budget tax impact on several assessed valuations of homes. He then reviewed the tax forgiveness feature of State Statute, and also reviewed major capital outlay items proposed for 1984 along with other budget highlights. After the completion of the budget presentation by the Director of Finance, there was a motion by Councilmember Ilhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to adjourn the Budget and Revenue Sharing Hearing to Monday, September 19, at 7:00 p.m. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council-members hhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against none. The motion passed. ADJOUR hfi ere e was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council-members Lhotka, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 10:36 p.m. Clerk Mayor 9 -12 -83 -15- TO: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection FROM: Gary Shallcross, Planning Assistant DATE: September 26, 1983 SUBJECT: Performance Guarantee The following performance guarantee is recommended for release: -1. Enninga Residence 5435 Emerson Avenue North Planning Commission Application No. 81037 Amount of Guarantee - $3,000 cash escrow Obligor - Duane Enninga This guarantee was to insure the demolition and removal of a small residence on the back of the lot at 5435 Emerson Avenue North upon completion of a - new residence at the front of the lot. The demolition has been completed. However, the debris has not been hauled away; nor has the basement been ,filled 'in. Recommend reduction of guarantee to $1,000 immediately and total release upon completion of the remaining work. Ij APprov d by Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection TO: - Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection FROM: Gary Shallcross Planning Assistant DATE: September 26, 1983 SUBJECT: Performance Guarantee The following performance guarantee is recommended for release: 1. Enninga Residence 5435 Emerson Avenue North Planning Commission Application No. 81037 Amount of Guarantee - $3,000 cash escrow Obligor - Duane Enninga This guarantee was to insure the demolition and removal of a small residence on the back of the lot at 5435 Emerson Avenue North upon completion of a new residence at the front of the lot. The demolition has been completed. However, the debris has not been hauled away; nor has the basement been filled in. Recommend reduction of guarantee to $1,000 immediately and total release upon completion of the remaining work. Appro Zdb y 1000 1J, Ronald Warren, Director 57 — Planning and Inspection TO: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection FROM: Gary Shallcross, Planning Assistant DATE: September 26, 1983 SUBJECT: Performance Guarantee The following performance guarantee is recommended for release: to Enninga`Residence 5435 Emerson Avenue North Planning Commission Application No. 81037 Amount of Guarantee $3,000 cash escrow Obligor Duane Enninga This guarantee was to insure the demolition and removal of a small residence on the back of the lot at 5435 Emerson Avenue North upon completion of a new residence at the front of the lot. The demol has been completed. However, the debris has not been hauled away; nor has the basement been filled in. Recommend reduction of guarantee to $1,000 immediately and total release upon completion of the remaining work. APProv d by v%.�O Ronald Warren, Director of arming and inspection The following pe rsons are recommended for a pp J g ointment as election judges es for the November 8, 193 Municipal Election: Precinct 1 Precinct 6 D:M ret tewig teary Tlartin R- 4arian Smith R- , Josephine Swart D- Ardyce Matson D-Beth Y�Vg R- 44ildred Egnell R- Joan Reavely D-Vi Peterson D Shirley Anderlie Precinct 2 Precinct D Adler Mona Hintzman R- Ethel Irving R-Susan Heisler D- Dolores Hastings D-Carol Benkofske R- Darlene Balken R- Katherine Commers D- Cheryl Jacobson D -Helen Julkowski Precinct 3 Precinct 8 onne Chatelle 3T Eileen Hannan D-Ann Wallerstedt R -Irene Thompson R- Lorene McKusick D -Anne Bergquist D- ,Jeanette Hildebrandt R- Jeanette Ulrich R- Kathy: Dziedzic D-- Dolores Seal PRECINCT 4 Precinct 9 ° diary Ineline NZ ice la it D-Joan Hagemann R- Delila Newman R- Elaine Ileac D -Tracy Tyler, Jr. D- Robert beach R-Jean Sullivan R Darlene Weeks ° STAt1DBY- ELECTION JUDGES Precinct 5 t ompson Geraldine ror#w R- Donna Bennett R- Gladys heerhoff. D- Alice VanMeerten R-Jean Lindstrom D- Joan icGonigal 9 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE HENNEPIN URBAN COUNTY HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT PROGRAM GUIDELINES WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center administers a housing rehabil- itation grant program; and WHEREAS, the Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program assists low and moderate homeowners with essential repairs; and WHEREAS, it is in the interest of the City to continue the Home Rehabilitation Grant Program in order to maintain the City's housing stock; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Brooklyn Center does adopt the Hennepin Urban County Home Rehabilitation Grant guidelines as amended. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Brooklyn Center does adopt the Section 8 income limits for the Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program.: Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager. FROM: Brad Hoffman, Administrative Assist t DATE: Spetember 21, 1983 ( SUBEJCr: Urban County Home Rehab Guidelines E The resolution before the Council adopting the rehab guidelines is a resolution brought before the Council annually. The administrative guidelines remain unchanged with the exception of unemployment. Previously, when determining income eligibility of an unemployed person, we based our determination for the first nine (9) months on their previous salary. In other words, an individual had to be unemployed at least nine (9) months before their income was based upon their current income level. However, a recent court ruling now mandates that we base income eligibility on current income sources, and not on previous employment earnings. While I do not feel that this new approach is equitable nor justified, I.don't believe it will have a significant impact upon our program. I can think of only -3 or 4 cases in Brooklyn Center that the new approach would affect. To date, we have completed 75 grants with 31 under construction. Also, we have approxi- mately a dozen currently being processed. It is my recommendation that we continue with the program. Its overall benefit to thei City is both immediate and long term and far outweighs any of its negative aspects. Member introduced the following resolution and moved F 8. its adoptions RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH MOTOROLA FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE CITY'S RADIO COAM2UNICATION SYSTEM WHEREAS, there is a need to provide for the maintenance of the City's C radio communication system; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has received quotations for the maintenance of the City's radio communication system, said quotations as follows: Bidden Quotations Air Comm $715 per month Motorola $1,090.50 per month Capital Electronics $1,265 per month' WHEREAS, the City Clerk has advised the City Council that it is in the best interest of the City to accept the quotation of Motorola in the amount of $1,090.50 per month. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the proposal of Motorola for the maintenance of the City's Radio Communication System in the amount of $1,090.50 per month is hereby accepted. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: rl i MEMORANDUM' TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager -FROM Brad Hoffman, Administrative Assistant DATE: September 23, 1983 SUBJECT: Radio System I am - recommending -that the contract for the maintenance of our radio system be awarded to Motorola in the amount of $1,090 per month. While Air Comm has ' given us -a quote of $715 per month it should be noted that 'they do not have the necessary test equipment to adequately service the DVP base station, or the Intrac Central Controller and its printer. Air Comm has stated that they would purchase the necessary equipment and provide the necessary training. However Motorola, the only source for the equipment as well as the training, is available now and would not be training in on our equipment. Also, Motorola is the source for parts, meaning we should experience less down time on our system. MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Ar .� OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION SEPTEMBER 15 1983 . CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called.to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Mary Simmons, Lowell Ainas, Carl Sandstrom and Donald Versteeg. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross. Chairman Lucht explained that Commissioner Manson had called to say she would be unable to attend the evening's meeting and was excused. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - August 11, 1983 Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to approve the Minutes of the August 11, 1983 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Simmons, Ainas and Sandstrom. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioners Malecki and Versteeg. APPLICATION N0. 83048 (Rose Lillestol) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, a request for special use permit conduct a dog - grooming home occupation in the basement in the residence at 5218 Paul Drive. The Secretary re- viewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 83048 attached). Commissioner Malecki asked•whether anyone in the neighborhood had called re ardin the application. The Secretary responded in the negative. 9 g PUBLIC HEARING (Application No 83048) Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting -for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Versteeg to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. The Secretary asked Mrs. Lillestol who picks up her garbage at the residence and if she had weekly service. Mrs Lillestol answered that Brooklyn n Dis osa 1 is r h refu hauler and that it is picked up weekly. She noted that she is aware of the concern regarding removal of refuse. ACTION RECOMME APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83048 (Rose Lillestol) Motion by Commissioner Ainas s- econded by Commissioner Sandstrom to recommend approval of Application No 8.3048, subject to the following condi 1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator of the business and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation.. 9 -15 -83 -1- Ilk 3. The hours of- operation shall be 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Services shall be provided on an appointment -only basis. 4. All park.ing associated with the home occupation shall be off- street on improved space provided by t-he applicant. 5. A 5 lb. fire-extinguisher shall be installed in the work area in the basement. 6. No overnight boarding of animals shall be permitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed, A PPLICATION NO. 83049 (Erland Shelley) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for special use permit approval to engage in taxidermy as a home occupation in the garage of the residence at 5200 -70th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 83049 attached) Commissioner Simmons asked whether the only reason the application was brought to the Planning Commission was because a car would be displaced from the garage. The Secretary responded in the negative. He explained that use of an accessory structure, whether a car is parked in the accessory structure or not, constitutes a special home occupation. Commissioner Simmons stated that one of the purposes of the limi- tation on use of accessory structures is to prevent cars from being parked all over a property because the garage is being used by a home occupation. The Secretary agreed somewhat. He explained that the main concern regarding tnis application was-the disposal of the carcasses to prevent any odor or disease from developing as a result of the home occupation. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether a condition regarding refuse disposal was necessary. The Secretary stated that such a condition could be added if the Commission felt that it was necessary. Commissioner Ainas stated that he felt existing ordinances already cover health concerns. Chairman Lucht asked the applicant whether he had anything to add. Mr. Shelley had nothing further to add to the Secretary's report. PUBLIC HEARING (Application No. 83049) Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing, CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously, ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83049 (Erland Shelley) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. _83049, subject to the following conditions: 1. The special permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is nontransferable. 2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. The home occupation may not occupy - more than 50% of the accessory structure, 9 -1 5 -83 -2- 4. A fire extinguisher of at least 5 lb. capacity shall be kept in the garage. 5. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be - off - street on space provided 'by the applicant. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 83050 ( Petroleum) The Secretary then introduced the last item of business, a request for special use permit approval to rent trailers at the gasoline service station at 1505 -69th Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Com- mission Information Sheet for Application No. 83050 attached). The Secretary also stated that the Planning Commission may wish to designate a specific area for the three trailers to be parked. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether the permit should be nontransferable. The Secretary answered that a change in ownership of this particular operation should not require a new special use permit. He•noted that special use permits granted to home occupations are treated differently so that a new resident is not auto- matically permitted to continue a home occupation. Chairman Lucht asked the applicant where the trailers would be parked. Mr. Chuck Brooks, the manager of the Q Petroleum station, - suggested that they should be parked on the west and north side of the site, since this would be less visible to most of the traffic going by the station and fewer people parked in that particular area. Commissioner Simmons asked about the size of the trailers. The Secretary explained that the trailers can fit into a normal parking stall. The Secretary asked the applicant whether he understood the - condition regarding written acceptance of a stipulation that if the City determines that additional parking is needed, that he will put it in. Mr. Brooks answered that that condition posed no problem for him. P UBLIC HEARING (Application No. 83050) Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 83050 (Q. Petroleum) Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 83050, subject to.the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. ' 2. Special use permit approval acknowledges the storage on site of not more than three trailers, none of which may exceed 20' in total length or.9' in total width. The trailers -shall not be stored along the Humboldt Avenue Qr 69th Avenue greenstrip. 3. Special use permit approval acknowledges the site plan approved under Application No. 83019 as providing. "proof -of- parking" with adequate parking space for up to three trailers. The applicant 9 -15 -83 -3- shall acknowledge in writing, prior to City Council consideration of this application, that he will install additional parking meeting all zoning ordinance requirements upon a determination by the City that congestion warrants the installation of all or part of the required parking for this use. 4. Trailer parking shall be.confined to existing parking spaces located along the west side of the' to the north of the main building. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. OTHER BUSINESS The Secretary explained that no applications had been received for the September 29, 1983 meeting and noted the first meeting in October would be on October 6th. He recommended that the Planning Commission cancel the September 29th meeting, unless it had study items it wished to address. By consensus it was agreed that the September 29th Planning Commission meeting would be cancelled. D ISCUSSION ITEMS .(Crystal Airport Zoning Ordinance) The Secretary then directed the Commission's attention to a draft zoning ordinance for Crystal Airport and a notice of public hearing which has been sent to some residents near the airport. The Secretary explained that the proposed zoning -ordi- nance would set up safety zones governing the land uses and the air space around the Crystal Airport. He stated that a public hearing to answer questions regarding this draft ordinance would be held on September 21st and that Planning Commission members could attend if they so wished. He explained that the ordinance would be an overlay ordinance for certain section of Brooklyn Center. He added, however, that the ordinance would not really change much of anything as far as land is concerned. He noted that the ordinance acknowledges "established residential neighborhoods" which are essentially exempted from the-provisions of the ordinance. Chairman Lucht asked whether a: nonconforming structure could be rebuilt if it were destroyed. The Secretary explained.that a residence could be rebuilt even though it was at a density greater than that normally permitted under the proposed zoning ordinance, but that it would be subject to the height restrictions imposed on air space. In answer to a question from Commissioner Simmons, the Secretary stated that he did not think there were any structures that intruded into the height limitations at present. Commissioner Simmons asked whether a structure which was above the height limit could be rebuilt at the same height. The Secretary responded in the negative. He pointed out that the most likely violations of the height limitations were presented by trees and that these would have to be marked or trimmed by the Metropolitan Airports Commission. The Secretary explained the height limitations in greater detail and again explained that there would be no real effect on land uses. He also pointed out that nothing should interfere with the communications of pilots with the airport. He stated that nothing at present does interfere. He noted that microwave ovens would not pose any electronic interference. He also noted that promotional searchlights for establishments in the area of Brooklyn Boulevard would be acceptable if they were not in the immediate approach zone. Commissioner Simmons asked whether people were afraid of the effect of the ordinance on the use of their property. The Secretary agreed that people probably had this fear. He pointed o-ut that the City had received few calls as a result of the notice of the public hearing. He pointed out that the height restrictions were based-on the elevation of the airport, not on the elevation where the structure was located. He explained that the Crystal*Ai-rport mean sea elevation is 869 ft. As an example, he noted that the Ramada Inn site was at about 845 ft. He explained that this gave the Ramada site an additional 24 ft. of height before it'would begin to be subject to the height limitations of the Airport Zoning Ordinance The Secretary also 9 -15 -83 -4- explained that the proposed Zoning Ordinance had nothing to do, with aircraft noise. -` He explained that Brooklyn Center would not really be affected by the proposed noise contours being considered by the Metropolitan*Council The Secretary went on to explain that the position of the City has been.that -the Crystal Airport should be phased out if another West Hennepin area airport is built. Commissioner Ainas stated that Greg Boone of the Metropolitan Airports Commission had told him that' Crystal Airport could nbt be phased out before 1995 to the year 2000. The Secretary stated that the regulations for.airport safety should also benefit area residents. He stated it wasn't fair for these regulations to simply protect flyers from intrusions of people on the ground. He stated that they should also seek to protect those on the ground from the aircraft. Commis- sioner Ainas pointed out that F.A.A. (Federal Aviation Administration) regulations required that the F.A.A. is supposed to issue a building permit for any structure built in the A.and B zones. The Secretary pointed out that that regulation is not in force because the law exempts a built -up neighborhood. He stated that the City should issue permits based on it's own ordinance; not on the basis of .regulations C that the F.A.A. must enforce. ADJOURNMENT Following further brief discussion of the Airport Zoning Ordinance and airport regulations generally, there was a motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Malecki to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at 8:34 p.m. l Chairman P 9 -15 -83 -5- ,Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83048 Applicant: Rose Lillestol Location: 5218 Paul Drive Request: Special Use /Home Occupation The applicant requests special use permit approval to conduct a <dog- groomin 9 business in the basement of the residence at 5218 Paul Drive. The property in question is zoned RI and is surrounded by other single - family homes. Staff regard dog- grooming as similar in nature to barber and beauty services which are specifi- cally listed in the definition of a special.home occupation. The applicant has submitted a letter (typed copy attached) in which she explains that the work area would occupy a 10' x 12' area in the basement of the home and that a fire extinguisher would be provided. She notes there will be no outside employees and that hours of operation will be 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday (she stresses that the business would be part -time, about 20 hours per week). Mrs. Lillestol states that equipment would include a small animal electric clippers, a blow dryer, a small vacuum cleaner, laundry tubs and miscellaneous hand tools.' Clients will enter the side of the house and bring pets only to the kitchen. Customers will not be allowed in the work area. Parking is available in a one -car driveway. Mrs. Lillestol does not expect more than one car to be present at a time. Appointments are normally long enough apart that it is very unlikely that two cars will be present at the same time. Therefore, any'on- street parking associated with the home occupation should be rare and brief. Dog- grooming operations, unlike barber and beauty shops, are not licensed by the State. The City Sanitarian has recommended that there be no overnight boarding of animals which would place the business in the category of a kennel. He has also recommended that the applicant have a contract with a licensed refuse hauler to insure that refuse will in fact be removed from the premises Staff see no conflict with the standards for a special use permit or the provisions_ of Section 35 -406 governing special home occupations. Approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: I. The special use permit is. issued to the applicant as operator of the business and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all.applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. The hours of.operation shall be 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 'Services shall be provided on an appointment -only basis. 4. All parking associated with the home occupation shall be off - street on improved space provided by the applicant. 5. A 5 lb. fire extinguisher shall be installed in the work area in the basement. 6. No overnight boarding of animals shall be permitted. 9 -15 -83 ` Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83049 -Applicant: Erland Shelley Location: 5200 -10th Avenue North Request: Special Use Permit /Name.Occupation The applicant requests special use permit approval to engage in taxidermy in the garage of the residence at 5200 -70th Avenue North. Home occupations which involve the use of an accessory structure are by definition in the special use category. The property in question is zoned R1 and is bounded by single- family homes on the east and west, by The Ponds Townhouses on the north, and by 70th Avenue North on the south. The applicant has submitted a brief letter (attached) describing the proposed home occupation Mr. Shelley explains that he has, a federal and a state license to do taxidermy and wishes to use his attached garage as a work shop. He states that he has weekly refuse disposal service by Brooklyn Disposal Company. Carcasses are frozen until disposed of. He states that the home occupation involves no chemicals other than those normally found in a home or garage. Mr. Shelley points out that he has a three car driveway and that customers would bring work on an appointment basis. He notes that 60% of his work is for himself and that he does no retail sale of his work. He also states that there is no noise involved in the work. In addition, the applicant has two fire extinguishers in the garage. Typically, home occupations involving garages are limited to no more than one half the floor space of the garage so that a car can still be parked in it or it may be used for storage, accessory to the residential use. The garage, in this case, is a single -car, 14' x 22' garage which cannot normally contain more than one car. The applicant has indicated that he will do the work on tables along the side of his garage and will still park his car or van in the garage. No set hours of operation have been proposed and staff feel it is unnecessary to set. them for what is essentially a hobby craft home occupation with no noise impact. In•general, we see no conflict with the standards for a special use permit, nor with the ordinance provisions relating to home occupations. Approval is, therefore recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as operator and is nontransferable. 2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. The home occupation may not occupy more than 50% of the accessory structure. 4. A fire extinguisher of at least 5 lb. capacity shall be kept in the garage. 5 All parking associated with the home occupation.shall be off - street on space provided by the applicant. 9 -15 -83 - Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83050 Applicant: Q Petroleum Location: 1505 -69th Avenue North Request: Special Use Permit The applicant requests.special use permit approval to rent up to.three U -Haul trailers at the gasoline service station at 1505 -69th Avenue North. Trailer rental in conjunction with a gasoline service-station or motor vehicle repair garage or auto wash is a special use in the C2 zoning district. The property in question is zoned C2 and is 'bounded by Humboldt Courts Apartments on the west and south,' by Humboldt Avenue North on the east and by 69th Avenue North on the north. The land across Humboldt and 69th is zoned C2. Trailer rental is a special use at this location, provided there is adequate trailer parking space. The site presently has 19 parking stalls, including four stalls along the outer edge of the paved area, two ,along Humboldt and two along 69th Avenue North. In addition, there is an open area behind the building where at least three trailer parking stalls could be accommodated with site modifications. The trailers will have interior dimensions 'of 4' x 8`, 5' x 8' and 5' x 10'. The longest trailer is 16' in .exterior length and should fit easily into a standard size parking space. There appears to be adequate parking space on the site for the three trailers re- quested, using the "proof -of- parking' concept. Because.most customers stop at the gas pumps rather than parking in the striped stalls, there is unused parking area on the site most of the time. Therefore, staff see no problem with parking the trailers in established parking stalls, so long as space is available on site to store the trailers when all the stalls are demanded by customers." It is rec- commended that the applicant acknowledge in writing that he will install additional parking stalls, meeting all ordinance requirements upon a determination by the City that congestion warrants their installation. The applicant has submitted no written matter regarding the standards for a special . use permit, but staff see no conflict with the standards presented by this use. Approval is, therefore, recommended subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 2. -Special use permit approval acknowledges the storage on site of not more than three trailers, none of which may exceed 20' in total length or 9' in total width. The trailers shall not E be stored along the Humboldt Avenue or 69th Avenue greenstrip. 3. Special use permit approval acknowledges the site plan approved under Application No. 83019 as providing "proof with adequate parking space for up to three trailers. The applicant shall acknowledge in writing, prior to City'Council consideration of this application, that he will install additional parking meeting all zoning ordinance requirements upon a determination by the City that congestion warrants the installation of all or part of the required parking for this use. 9 -15 -83 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. a RESOLUTION CERTIFYING DISEASED SHADE TREE REMOVAL COSTS TO THE'HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the Tree Inspector of the City of Brooklyn Center has caused the ;removal of diseased shade trees on certain property within the City during 1983 under the authority of Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.023 and by written agreement with the owners of such property; and WHEREAS, two assessment rolls, a copy of each of which is attached" hereto and made part hereof by reference, have been prepared by the City Clerk, one tabulating those properties where diseased shade tree removal costs are less than or equal to $300.00 and one tabulating those properties where diseased shade tree removal costs are greater than $300.00 together with the amounts proposed to be assessed to each property; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed assess- ment for Diseased Shade Tree Removal Costs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn.Center,. Minnesota, as follows: 1. Said assessment rolls of diseased shade tree removal costs are Lie hereby adopted and certified as the following levies: 1983 tree removal `costs less than or equal to $300.00 as Levy No. 9058 1983 tree removal costs greater than $300.00 as Levy No. 9059 _2. Such assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments extending over a period of years as listed below. The first of the installments shall be payable on or before the first Monday in January, 1984, and shall bear interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum from October 1, 1983, until the amounts have been paid in full. To the first installment shall be added interest on the entire assessment for fifteen months from October 1, 1983, until December 31, 1984. To each subsequent installment when due shall be added interest for one year on all unpaid installments. a. Assessments less than or equal to $300.00 are payable in three annual installments. b. Assessments greater than $300.00 are payable in five annual installments., i I RESOLUTION NO. ff 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no :interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before November 15, or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Date Mayor ATTEST: t. Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. PAGE i OF,,,_ CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No. N/A Levy No. 9058 Fund /Code No. Description: Cost of diseased shade tree removal to those tracts Levy Description: TREE REMOVAL 83 -3A k or parcels where trees were removed during 1983, by written agreement with the property owner or by order Levy runs three (3) years (from 1984 to 1986 ) of the City Tree Inspector, at a cost less than or equal to $300.00 with interest at the rate of twelve percent ( 12.0 xf, Locations First payment, with property taxes payable in 1984 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. i Improvement hearing date Date of Assessment Hearing September 26, 1983 Improvement ordered on Adopted on by Resolution No. by Resolution No, Assessment District (from Notice of Hearing): Corrections, Deletions or Deferments Method of Apportionment: Cost Summary (from Resolution No. ) Total Improvement Cost Less Direct City Share (Fund ) Less Other Payments Total Assessed to Property Assessed to City Owned Property. Assessed to Other Public Property Assessed to Private Property ''" �-- CiTY OF BROOKLYN CENTER -- PAGE OF MUM IC CODE No. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PROPERTY TOTAL PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER LEVY NO. PROJ. NO. ADON. NO. LOT BLOCK UNITS ADDRESS NAME IDENTIFICATION N0. PRINCIPAL DDITION/ ADDITION/LEGAL DESCRI TIO MAILING QDRESS ' 9058 02- 118 -21 -33 -0018 89535 $205.64 9 Lilac View Addition Richard F. Hadokowitz 5316 North Lilac Drive 5316 North Lilac Drive Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 9058 27- 119 -21 -43 -0045 89662 $154.36 15 3 Palmer Lake Terrace Robert T & Mary.H Tousignant 7001 Ewing Avenue North 7001 Ewing Avenue North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 9058 01- 118 -21 -21 -0013 89335 $ 64.24 4 1 Dahinden's 2nd Addition Michael J & Sandra L Johnson 6025 Colfax Avenue North 6025 Colfax Avenue,North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 9058 27- .119 -21 -42 -0107 89663* $118.31 1 4 Palmer Lake Terrace 2nd Addition Frank E Keisling 3625 Violet Avenue North 3625 Violet Avenue North Brooklyn. Center, Minnesota 55429 9058 10- 118 41 -12- 0072 90081 $115..60 4 2 Twin Lake Woods 2nd Addition Douglas 8 & Joanna L >Ferrari 5131 Ewing Avenue North 5131 Ewing Avenue North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429_, 9058 27- 119 -2143 -0084 89664 $ 54.28 14 1 Palmer Lake Terrace 3rd Addition Ernest A Lofgren Jr 3600 Violet Avenue North 3600 Violet Avenue North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 9058 03- 118 - - - 0052 89440 $ 64.24 3 3 Hipp's 3rd Addition Lu Ann M Falenczykowski 6000 Abbott Avenue North 6000 Abbott Avenue North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 NOTICE ALSO SENT TO: L'u Ann M Falenczykowski 14104 Lake Street Ext. Minnetonka, Minnesota 1 55343 9058 01- 118- 21 - 43 -0084 89225 $175.91 _16 2 Bellvue Acres Douglas J & Janine S Krone South 112 of Lot 16 5400 Camden Avenue North 5400 Camden Avenue North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 9058 01- 118 -21 -13 -0012 89405 $101.57 8/9 Mould's Riverview Addition Dean W Paurus W57 FT of N 140 FT of Lot 8 & 627 - 58th Avenue North E22 FT of N 140 FT of Lot'9 Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 697 - 5Pth Avenue North COUNCIL ACTION NOTES tk . .< PAGE 1 OF CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No. Levy No. 9059 Description: Cost of diseased shade tree removal to those tracts Levy Descriptions TREE REMOVAL 83 -5A or parcels where trees were removed during 1983, by five (5) written agreement with the property owner or by order- Levy runs years (from 1984 t 1988 ) of the City Tree Inspector, at a cost greater than with interest at the rate of twelve,dercent ( 12,0 $300.00. Location: First payment, with property taxes payable in 1984 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Improvement hearing date Date of Assessment Hearing September 26. 1983 } Improvement ordered on Adopted on- by Resolution No. by Resolution No. Assessment District (from Notice of Hearing): Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: Method of Apportionment: Cost Summary (from Resolution No. ) Total Improvement Cost Less Direct City Share (Fund ) E Less Other Payments . { Total Assessed to Property Assessed to City Ow ned Property. Assessed to Other Public Property Assessed to Private Property 3r'" y � y r -- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PAGg ,.,.._ oF,�. -.. MUNIC CODE NO. 222 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PROPERTY TOTAL PROPERTY ASSESSED NAME OWNER �- LEVY NO. PROJ. NO. AOON. NO. LOT BLOCK UNITS ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION NO. PRINCIPAL AD DITIO N /LEGA DESCRIPTION MAILING ADDRESS 9059 01- 118 -21 -34 -0062 89225 $ 311.01 5 4 Bellvue Acres Arnevwell Benifield 5400 Colfax Avenue North 5400 Colfax Avenue North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 a i I 1 COUNCIL ACTION NOT91 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING DELINQUENT PUBLIC UTILITY ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the records of the Public Utilities Department list certain accounts as delinquent as of July 1, 1983; and WHEREAS, the owner of the property served by each delinquent account has been notified of the delinquency according to legal requirements; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute, Section 444.075 and City Ordinances, Section 4 -105 authorize certification of such delinquent accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and WHEREAS, an assessment roll, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference, has been prepared by the City Clerk tabulating those properties where a delinquent public utility account is to be assessed with the amount, including interest and service charges, to be assessed; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to such proposed. assessments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Said assessment roll of delinquent public utility accounts is hereby adopted and certified as Levy No. 8884. 2. The assessments as adopted and confirmed shall be placed upon the 1983 payable 1984 tax rolls by the Director of Finance of Hennepin County to be paid in one annual installment with interest thereon ` at twelve percent per annum, for a period of fifteen months from October 1, 1983, through December 31,'1984. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the County Auditor, pay the whole of the assessment, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment remaining unpaid, with interest accrued to December 31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment; must be made before November 15, or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the County Auditor to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. f RESOLUTION NO Date Mayor ATTEST: ; Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. CITY OF BROO KLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL. PAGE 1 of EROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No. N/A Levy No. 8884 Fund /Code No. i Description: Delinquent Public Utility Charges Levy Description: "Delinquent Pub Util 83 Levy runs One (1) years (from 1984 to - - -- ) with interest at the rate of twelve percen 12.0 Location: First payment, with property taxes payable in 1984 j shall include fifteen whole months interest. Improvement hearing date Date of Assessment Hearing September'26, 1983 Improvement ordered on Adopted on by Resolution No: by Resolution No. Assessment District (from Notice of Nearing): Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: x 'Method of Apportionment: Cost Summary (from Resolution No. Total Improvement Cost Less Direct City Share (Fund Less Other Payments Total Assessed to Property $527.09 527-0 Assessed to City Ow ned Property. 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property 0.00 Assessed to Private Property $527.09 }� � re i i - �— CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PAGE OF muffle cooE Ho. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PROPERTY TOTAL PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER LEVY NO. PROD. N0. ADDN. NO. LOT BLOCK UNITS ADDRESS NAME - IDENTIFICATION NO. PRINCIPAL AD /LEGAL DESCRIPTION MAILING AODRE:S 8884 01- 118 -21 -33 -0075 89675 $109.68 1 N & E Perkins Addition to Mpls Fred 0 Persons 5447 Dupont Avenue North 5447 Dupont Avenue North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 8884 10- 118 -21 -12 -0041 89540 $109.68 16/17 3 Linden Shores on Twin Lake Lorraine A Buth . Lot 16 and S 1/2 of Lot 17 5120 Ewing Avenue North 5120 Ewing Avenue North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 8884 02- 118 -21 -44 -0133 89961 $109.68 2 1 Rockwell's Second Addition Lawrence Mickelson- 5419 Humboldt'Avenue North 5419 Humboldt Avenue North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 8884 34- 119 -21 -43 -0047 90064 $198.05 1 1 Arthur Treacher's Addition A Treachers Fish &•Chips, Inc. That Part of Lot 1 Lying within Tax Dept #225 Lot 17, Aud Sub No 25 5501 Tabor Road 6100 k1 Boule it d l i PA 19120 NOTICE ALSO SENT TO: A Treachers Fish & Chips Inca 6100 Brooklyn Boulevard Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 COUNCIL. ACTION NOTES /le � Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CERTIFYING DELINQUENT WEED DESTRUCTION ACCOUNTS TO THE HENNEPIN COUNTY TAX ROLLS WHEREAS, the Weed Inspector of the City of Brooklyn Center has caused noxious weeds to be cut down on certain properties within the City under . the authority of Minnesota Statutes, Section 18.271; and WHEREAS, the owners of record of such properties were notified in writing of the work done, and the costs and expenses involved, at least thirty days prior to September 26, 1983, in accordance with individual notice provisions of Subdivision 4 of Section 18.271; and WHEREAS, on September 26, 1983, there remained unpaid certain of these weed destruction accounts; and WHEREAS, assessment rolls for unpaid accounts from 1982 and 1983, copies of which are attached hereto and made part hereof by reference, have been prepared by the City Clerk tabulating those properties where a delinquent weed destruction account is to be assessed with the amount to be assessed; and WHEREAS, said statute authorizes the certification of delinquent weed destruction accounts to the County tax rolls for collection; and WHEREAS, pursuant to proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council has met and heard and passed upon all objections to such proposed assessments. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Said assessment rolls of delinquent weed destruction accounts are hereby adopted and certified as follows: Delinquent 1982 Accounts - Levy No. 8885 Delinquent 1983 Accounts - Levy No. 8886 2. The assessments as adopted and certified shall be placed upon the 1983 payable 1984 tax rolls by the Director of Finance of Hennepin County to be paid in one annual installment with interest thereon at twelve percent per annum, for a period of fifteen months from October 1, 1983, through December 31, 1984. 3. The owner of any property so assessed may at any time prior to certification of the assessment to the Director of Finance of Hennepin County pay the whole of the assessment, with interest accrued to the date of payment, to the City Treasurer, except that no interest shall be charged if the entire assessment is paid within 30 days from the adoption of this resolution; and he may, at any time thereafter, pay to the City Treasurer the entire amount of the assessment:remairiing unpaid, with interest accrued to December _31 of the year in which such payment is made. Such payment must be made before' November 15, or interest will be charged through December 31 of the succeeding year. RESOLUTION NO. 4. The City Clerk shall forthwith transmit a certified duplicate of this assessment to the Director of Finance of Hennepin County to be extended on the proper tax lists of the county, and such assessments shall be collected and paid over in the same manner as other municipal taxes. Date Mayor' f ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: r whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. I CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL PACE I OF_ i PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY INFORMATION Improvement Project No. Levy No. 8886 Fund /Code No. Description: Cost of noxious weed removal to those tracts or parcels where, Levy Description: WEED D ESTRUCTION 83B eed pursuant to City Ordinances, costtf Section 19-1601 through havin been billed Levy runs one (1) years (from 19 84 to ) Inspector 9 to the property owner, remains unpaid. (1983) with interest at the rate of twelve percent ( Location: First payment, with property taxes payable in 1984 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Improvement hearing date Date of Assessment Hearing September 26, 1983 Improvement ordered on Adopted on by Resolution No. by Resolution No. Assessment District (from Notice of Hearing): Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: 1 x 1 i Method of Apportionment: t Cost Summary (from Resolution No. ) , Total Improvement Cost Less Direct City Share (Fund j Less Other Payments Total Assessed to Property $892.50 Assessed to City Owned Property 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property 0.00 Assessed to Private Property $692.50 M 4 L -- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PAGE. ,_..OF�. MUNIC CODE No. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PROPERTY TOTAL PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER LEVY NO PROD. N0. ADDN. N0, LOT BLOCK UNITS ADDRESS NAME IDENTIFICATION NO. PRINCIPAL ADD11 DESCRIPTION MAILING ADDRESS 8886 01- 118 -21 -31 -0038 89385 $33.04 40 Garcelon's Addition to Mpls. Dolores A & Arthur E Kvamme Betty M & George R Haider West 1/2 of Lot 40 5501 Aldrich Avenue North 5601 Girard Avenue North Brooklyn Center Minnesota 55430 NOTICE ALSO SENT TO: Dolores A & Arthur Kvamme Betty ti & George Haider 8424 Riverview Lane Brookl n Park Minnesota 55444 8886 01- 118 -21 -31 -0043 89385 $33.00 41 Garcelon's Addition to Mpls. E P SJOBER� N75 FT of S 150 FT LYING W OF E % MRS RUDOLPH SJOBERG ! 150 FT EX STREET BOX 212 36 Bryant Avenue North WAUPACA WISCONSIN 54982 NOTICE ALSO SENT TO: Harmony Christian Ministries Box 265 Sapul Oklahoma 74066 8886 33- 119 -21 -11 -0068 90020 $33,00 3 2 Soderholm Addition Glenn R Weber 6825 Quail Avenue North 8126 Emerson Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55420 8886 01- 118 -Z1 -21 -0001 89001 $33.00 Unplatted 01 118 21 Bill D Graen That Part of E 47.55 FT of W 38865 Burns Parkway NW 406.85-FT of Govt Lot l Lyying Anoka, Minnesota 55303 N of the N Lune of Lot 3 Blk 2 A.J. Larsens 3rd Addition exten W, except street Vacant . 8886 28- 119 -21 -42 -0086 01059 $39 56 1 THE PONDS PLAT FIVE UD Contracting Inc. Common Area 3825 85th Avenue North Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 8886 28- 119 -21 -42 -0108 .90059 $39 THE PONDS The Ponds Partnership Outlot F THE PONDS Except that ` % H & Val J Rothschild a Part Platted as Piccadilly Pond Property Management Div. ~ I and the Ponds, Plat Five De ree.of Honor Buildin St, Paul, Minnesota 55101 E COUNCIL ACTION NOT98 � a- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER --► PAGE ..OF....... MUNIC CODE NO. 22 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PROPERTY TOTAL PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER LEVY NO. PROJ. NO. ADDN. NO. LOT BLOCK UNITS ADDRESS NAME - IDENTIFICATION NO. PRINCIPAL AD /LE L SCRIPTI MAILING ADDRESS 8886 28- 119 -21 -42 -0105 01059 $39.87 19 2 THE PONDS PLAT FIVE UD Contracting Inc Common Area 3825 85th Avenue North Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 8886 28- 119 -21 -42 -0043 01059 $39,87 13 1 THE PONDS PLAT FIVE UD Contracting Inc. Common Area 3825 85th Avenue North Brooklyn Park, Minnesota 55443 8886 35- 119 -21 -44 -0002 89780 $44.50 Registered Land Survey #1380 D Kenneth Lindgren, Trustee Tract D Except'Highway 1500 Northwestern Finance Center Vacant 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Minnea olis, Minnesota 55431 8886 03- 118 -21 -22 -0036 89611 $44.50 Moorwood Townhouses Wheelock Enterprises Inc Outlot D 6205 University Avenue NE Vacant Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432 f 8886 02- 118 -21 -34 -0051 89435 $21.50 4 2 R L Hansen's 1st Addition Park Metropolitan Investment Fund I N 1/2 of Lot 4 1595 Selby Avenue l Vacant St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 8886 35- 119 -21 -41 -0005 00261 $79.75 Registered Land Survey #1482 Shingle Creek Land Company Tract C 2200 First Bank Place Vacant Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 NOTICE ALSO SENT TO: Brooklyn Development Company 3250 West 66th Street' Edina, Minnesota 55435 8886 35- 119- 21 -41- 0007 00261 $79.75 Registered Land Survey #1482 Shingle Creek Land Company Tract E and Vacant Brooklyn Development Company (Address above) COUNCIL ACTION NOTES i. y 1 d i k CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PA6E OF MUNIC CODE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PROPERTY TOTAL PROPERTY ASSESSED 'OWNER LEVY N0. PROJ. N0. AOON. NO. LOT BLOCK UNITS ADDRESS NAME -- IDENTIFICATION NO. PRINCIPAL DD ITION /LE GA DESCRIPTI MAILING DDRESS 8886 35- 119 -21 -23 -0002 89779 $102.00 Registered Land Survey #1377 Shingle Creek Land Company Tract B 2200 First Bank Place East Vacant Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402` NOTICE ALSO SENT TO: Brooklyn Development Company 3250 West 66th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 8886 35- 119 -21 -24 -0003 89779 $113.50 Registered Land Survey #1377 Eberhardt Properties Inc Tract C 3250 West 66th Street Vacant Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440 8886 36- 119 -21 -21 -0002 89105 $ 33.00 31 Auditor's Subdivision #310 Aly Rezk Abu -Ria W 75 FT of E 150 FT 1515 - 4th Street South 707 - 69th Avenue North Minneapolis, Minnesota 55454 NOTICE ALSO SENT TO Omar A Anas P.O. Box 23173 Richfield, Minnesota 55423 8886 33- 119 -21 -43 -0074 89247 $ 21.50 Bergstrom's Lynside Manor 3rd Addn. Park Metro Investment Fund ( Outlot 1 1595 Selby Avenue. Vacant St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 8886 35- 119 -21 -11 -0026 01291 $ 2.55 1 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1537 Humboldt Place 6312 Tingdale Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55435 8886 35- 119 -21 -11 -0027 01291 $ 2.55 2 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs -1543 Humboldt Place 8886 35- 119 -21 -11 -0028 01291 $ 2.55 3 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1549 ,Humboldt Place 8886 35- 119 -21 -11 -0029 01291 $ 2.55 4 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1555 Humboldt Place COUNCIL ACTION NOTES L t � ° F 1 0 1 s w y 1 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER -- PAGE OF MUNIC CODE NO. 22 - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PROPERTY TOTAL PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER LEVY NQ PROD. NQ ADDN. N0. LOT BLOCK UNITS ADDRESS NAME IDENTIFICATION N0. PRINCIPAL AD DES RIPT ON MAILING ADDRESS 8886 35- 119 -21 -11 -0030 01291 $ 2.55 5 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1531 Humboldt Place 8886 35- 119 -21 -11 -0031 01291 $ 2.55 6 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1525 Humboldt Place 8886 35- 119 -21 -11 -0032 01291 $ 2.55 7 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1519 Humboldt Place 8886 35- 119 -21 -11 -0033 01291 $ 2.54 8 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1513 Humboldt Place 8886 35- 119 -21 -11 -0034 01291 $ 2.54 9 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1507 Humboldt Place 8886, 35. 119 -21 -0035 01291 $ 2.54 10 1 Rosemary Terrace Davi.d A & Rosemary Dederichs 1501 Humboldt Place 8886 35. 119 -21 -11 -0036 01291 $ 2.53 11 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs Common Area 8886 33- 119 -21 -11 -0050 89570 $ 33.00 6 3 Marstan Place Charles D & Patricia A Grammentz 6712 Perry Avenue North 6712 Perry Avenue North Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 COUNCIL ACTION NOTES t i CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT ROLL PAGE I'OF+ PROJECT INFORMATION LEVY 1NFORMAT10 Improvement Project No. Levy No. 8885 Fund /Code No. Description: Cost of noxious weed removal to those tracts or parcels where, Levy Description: WEED DESTRUCTION 83A pursuant to City Ordinances, Section 19 -1601 through 19 -1604, noxious weeds were destroyed by order of the City Weed Lev runs one (1) ear f 1984 to I. y s (f Y Inspector and the cost for such destruction, having been billed with interest at the rate of twelve percent 12.0 to the property owner, remains unpaid. (1982) ( %). Location: First payment, with property taxes payable in 1984 shall include fifteen (15) whole months interest. Improvement hearing date Date of Assessment Nearing September 26, 1983 Improvement ordered on Adopted on by Resolution No. by Resolution No. Assessment District (from Notice of Nearing): Corrections, Deletions or Deferments: Method of Apportionment: t Cost Summary (from Resolution No. Total Improvement Cost i Less Direct City Share (Fund _) Less Other Payments Total Assessed to Property $238.50 Assessed to City Owned Property 0.00 Assessed to Other Public Property 0.00 Assessed to Private Property $238.50 I � m a f �- CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER -- PAGE ...CF....._ MUNIC CODE NO. „?� : SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PROPERTY TOT PROPERTY ASSESSED OWNER AL LEVY NO. PROD. NO. ADDN. NO. LOT BLOCK UNITS ADDRESS NAME -- (OENTIFICATION N0 PRINCIPAL A DDI TION/ LEGAL DESCRIPTION MAILING ADDRESS 8885 34- 119 -21 -24 -0008 89635 $73.00 1 1 Northgate Addition J C & J Properties Vacant 8053 Bloomington Freeway Minneapolis, MN 55420 8885 02- 118 -21 -34 -0051 89435 $19.00 4 2 R.L. Hansen's 1st Addition Park Metropolitan Investment Fund Na of Lot 4 1595 Selby Avenue St. Paul, Minnesota 55104 8885 35- 119- 21 -11- 0015 00257 $28.00 Registered Land Survey #1486 Terry &Eileen Sonnack Tract A 6637 Humboldt Avenue North 6637 Humboldt Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 NOTICE ALSO SENT TO: Mike Sonnack 904 West County Road D, #228 New Brighton, 11N 55112 8885 35- 119 -21 -11 -0026 01291 $ 4.05 1 1 Rosemary Terrace David A &Rosemary Dederichs 1537 Humboldt Place 6312 Tingdale Avenue Edina, Minnesota 55435 8885 35- 119- 21 -11- 0027 01291 $ 4.05 2 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1543 Humboldt Place I 8885 35419 -21 -11 -0028 01291 $ 4.05 3 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1549 Humboldt Place 8885 35- 119 - 21.11 -0029 01291 $ 4.05 4 1 Rosemary Terrace David . A & Rosemary Dederichs 1555 Humboldt Place 8885 35- 119.21 -11 -0030 01291 $ 4.05 5 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs: 1531 Humboldt Place 8885 35- 119 -21 -11 -0031- 01291 4.05 6 1 Rosemary Terrace David A &Rosemary Dederichs 1525 Humboldt Place COUNCIL ACTION NOTES r — CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PAGE OF MUNIC CODE NO. —U — SPECIAL ASSESSMENT CERTIFICATION ROLLS PROPERTY ASSESSED PROPERTY TOTAL OWNER LEVY N0 PROJ. NO. IDENTIFICATION N0 ADDN. NO. PRINCIPAL LOT BLOCK UNITS ADDRESS NAME - I ; LI�A l N / ! = EGALDESCRIPTIQN MAILING ADDRESS 8885 35- 119 -21 -11 -0032- 01291 $ 4.05 7 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1519 Humboldt Place 8885 35- 119 -21 -11 -0033• 01291 $ 4.04 8 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1513 Humboldt Place 8885 35-119-21-11-0034- 01291 $ 4.04 9 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs j 1507 Humboldt Place 8885 35- 119- 21 -11- 0035•) 01291 4.04 10 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs 1501 Humboldt Place 8885 35- 119 -21 -11 -0036 , 01291 $ 4.03 11 1 Rosemary Terrace David A & Rosemary Dederichs ° Common Area 8885 34- 119 -21 -13 -0009 v 89100 $28.00 8 Auditor's Subdivision No. 25 Robert J. Plummer 6520 Brooklyn Boulevard 6520 Brooklyn Boulevard Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429 8885 35- 119 -21 -24 -0003 v 89779 $46.00 Registered Land Survey #1377 Eberhardt Properties Inc. Tract C 3250 West 66th Street Vacant Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440 COUNCIL ACTION NOTES _CITY OF 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY ROOBROOKLYN B K LY � CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 TE LEPHONE 561 -5440 EMERGENCY— POLICE -FIRE. CENTER 911 <a TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager p � Y FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: September 23, 1983 RE: Continuation of Hearing on Proposed Assessment for 51st Avenue Water Main Improvement Project No. 1982 -07 This hearing continuation was scheduled at the request of Dick Schieffer. Dick now advises that his office is attempting to negotiate a settlement with Tri -State Land Company. Accordingly, he recommends that the hearing again be continued. Respectfully submitted, SK:jn Or 04C 4e 5!7�44cf Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING 1983 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN �.._ BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center that Schedule D of the 1983 Employee Position and Classification Plan is hereby amended to add the position of Maintenance Worker with the following grade range schedule: Exempt Grade Range Monthly Wage Range From From Schedule D -1 From Schedule D - Overtime Going Going Position Minimum Rate Maximum Minimum Rate Maximum Maintenance Worker T24A T26C T28C $1526 $1768 $1857 NO Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. y CiTY OF 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY rBf Ja ROOK BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 L TELEPHONE 561 -5440 C ENmER EMERGENCY • 911 TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director'of Public Works DATE: August 31, 1983 RE: Establishment of "Maintenance Worker" Position in the Government Buildings Division The 1983 budget for the Government Buildings Division includes provision for establishment of a "Maintenance Worker" position. - However, this position has not yet been established and is not included in the 1983 Position and Classifi- cation Plan. I hereby request that this position now be established and that the Position and Classification Plan be amended to include the position. The primary reason for this request is to assure that one employee is made primarily responsible for maintaining the mechanical equipment in all City - owned buildings. Because our "Chief Custodian" does not have the knowledge, skills and abilities needed in this area, these responsibilities have been assigned to various "Custodians While some custodians accept such assignments willingly, others have been very reluctant to accept those responsibilities without salary recognition. In any event it is very difficult to hold these employees responsible when the work assigned is well outside their job description. It is my opinion that this change must be made to assure us of the ability to properly operate and maintai the complex mechanical equipment contained in the Civic Center and other City- owned buildings. R copy of the preliminary job description is attached. Selection of Employee It is my belief that one of our existing custodians will 'be able to qualify for this position through the promotional appointment procedures. And, as .indicated in the budget, it is our intent that the total number employees within the division will not increase, ie: We now have 1 Chief Custodian and 5 Custodians. With the change we would have I Chief Custodian, 1- Maintenance Worker and 4 Custodians. Monthly Wage Schedule The 1983 budget provided funding for this position on the basis.of the Going Rate = T23C $1,642 per month, "7�e �Gt I1 `Lam L� " August 31, 1983 - G.G. Splinter Page 2 After re- evaluation of the responsibilities involved, I believe that the responsibilities involved are equal to or greater than those for the "Light Equipment Operator" position within the Street and Park Divisions. The 1983 rate for tight Equipment Operators is.$10.25 per hour $1,777 per month; with a starting rate of $9.225 per hour = $1,599 per month. Accordingly, I recommend that the Maintenance Worker position be established with a Starting Rate of T24A = $ 1,526 per month, with a Going Rate of T26C = $1,768 per month, and with a Maximum Rate of T28C = $ 1,857 per month.. (See attached Schedule D and D -1 from the 1983 Pay Plan.) I believe this classification is fully compatible with existing classifications for-other positions within this division, ie: Grade Range Monthly Wage Rates Position Minimum Going Maximum Minimum Going Maximum Chief Custodian S14A S16C S18C $1648 $1909 -$2006 Maintenance Worker (Proposed) T24A - T26C T28C 1526 1768 1857 Custodian T20A. T20C .T21C 1383 1525 1563 Because the appointment will be made on a promotional basis and because there are 1 ` only 4 months remaining in the year, there is no problem in keeping 1983 expenses within the budget._ A resolution is submitted for consideration by the City Council. Respectfully submitted, f ` r SK: j n a C 1 1 7Y OF PRCC LIN CI 1T3 T.E.PTPIT. "7 PC::ImIC11 AI2� CI� 1'I,I T SC'1tI:1', IT'r. P TLCIU ICIL 'P-L CI.:`:tICAL PCL'J'i' 10t*:w 1,;:;;4: A: +D VON':ILLY RATAEO TECJU1ICtJ, -CL :f;Iro'.L PLAFI GRADE WIIGE MONTHLY WAGE MIGE FROM SCHEDULE D -1 FROM SCMUI,E D--1 MY PT GOI2.G GOING' FRW POSITION KMM 14 RATE MAMM4 MINIMUM RATE MAXIMUM OVERTIME Fgneering 'Technician N T31A T33C T37C 1814 2102 2324 No Engineering Technician III T25A T27C T31 1564 1812 2000 No Engineering Technician II T21A T23C T25C 1417 1642 1725 No Service Garage -Clerk T21 A T21 C T23C 1417 1563 1642 No Cusaod'ian T20A T20C T21 C 1383 1525 1563 No erk V T14A T14C T18C 1192 1315 1451 No erk IV T11 A T11 C T1 4C 1.107 1221 1315 No Code Enforcement Officer T12A T1 2C T1 3C 1135 1251 1283 No Clerk IIL T9A T9C -T10C' 1054 - 1162 1191 No Clerk II T5A T5C T6C 955 1053 1079 No • -6- ITIOr� nrlD CiJISSIFICATION pLAI1 SCHEDULE D -1 CITY OF CI7iTFR 1 M 11. i I�t} I.1. TW 4 TECI:t�ICAL AIM CS.:, ICAL FOSITIONS' VONTIMY WAGE CI ?1',NIA - PROGRESSION STEPS MERIT STEPS ' GRADES A D E B C Ti 865 908 954 1001 1051 1026 1078 T2 £87 954 10 1052 1105 T4 , 9.18 1027 l078 ` 1132 T5 •955 1002 1053 1105 1161 T6 979 1028 1079 1133 1190 1003 1053 1106 1161 1219 T 1028 1080 i 134 12� 1280 T9 1054 1 1162 x VO 1080 1134 1191 1' 250 1313 T11 1107 1163 1221 1282 1346 T12 1135 1192 1251 `1314 1379 T13 1163 1221 1283 1347 14t4 z T14 1192 1252 1315 143 1486 1222 1283 347 1523 T16 1253 1315 14186 ; 1561 r T17 1284 1348 T18 1316 1382 1451 524 1600 Tt9 1349 1416 1487 '1562 1640 T20 1383 .1452. _J525 1601: 1681 T21 1417< 1488 15631 1641 1723 T22 1453 1525 1602 1 � 18 T� 1489 ,1:564_ 164 T24 1526 1603 1683 1767 1855 T25 1564 1643 172 1811 1 T26 1604 1684 1768 1856 1949 T2? 1644 1726 1812 1903 1998 T28 .1685 1769 1857 1950 2048 T29 1727 1813 i904 1999 2099. 1?70 1859 1951 2049 2 1814 1905 2000 2100 2205 T32 1860 1953 2050 2153. 2260 i33 1906 2001 2102 2207 2317 T34 1954 2052 2154 2262 2375 T35 200 2103 2208 2318 2434 T36 2053 2155 '2253 2376 2495 T37 2104 2209 ' 23 8 2497 2621 Tag 2157 2264 237 T39 2211 • 2 32 1 2437 2559 2687 T40 2266 2379 2498 2623 2754 NORtIAL PRCGRL'SSICv: A is starting wage Advance t to Step F after six months probationary period. Advance to Step C after eighteen months eploymen. Additional _grade advances in Step C, within the city council authorized limits, shall be at the discretion of the City T. ,' advances, within the CITY t:AP• AGER' S DIOCRE -'Ion Starting grade and' �r�.de /step City Ccuncil authorized limits set for each position, shall be at the discretion of the City 1-an2ger. INTIRVALS: Grades 1 throw h •40,represent 2 1/2% advances. Steps A throw E represent approxinLately 5a; adv ances. MM IT S`lI'I'S: Merit steps shall only be awarded with express approval of the City Council. 'CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER` � POSITION DESCRIPTTON TITLE: Maintenance Worker DEPARTMENT: Public Works a DIVISION: Government Buildings and Grounds STATUS: Non Exempt SALARY LEVEL: T22A to T24C DATE WRITTEN: September 1, 1983 , Position Summary: Works under the direction of the maintenance supervisor. This position involves _labor associated with `the upkeep of the government buildings operated by the City of Brooklyn Center Duties and Responsibilities: 1. Maintains mechanical equipment including scheduled oil changes and, greasing, belt and filter changes, and trouble shooting to determine if professional maintenance is needed. The equipment includes air conditioners, compressors, boilers, pumps and motors, pool filtration systems, chemical feed equipment, weight room equipment, pool mainte - nance equipment and cleaning equipment. 2. Performs minor carpentry work as needed throughout the buildings. 3. Performs minor electrical duties, but only when it is determined that all power is off to the unit. 4. Performs various plumbing tasks. S.. Maintains the Civic Center pool. Analyzes the quality of the water to make determinations regarding chlorine feed, backwashing filters, pH and temperature adjustments. Makes any adjustments necessary to keep the swimming pool water within given quality limits. 6. Mows lawns, trims trees, lays sod, maintains lawn sprinkler systems, plants trees or flowers and picks weeds as determined by the .mainte- nance supervisor. 7. Shovels sidewalks and removes any ice from building walkways. S. Maintains all building fire extinguishers. :Runs quarterly checks to 'verify the condition of all building extinguishers. Leaves temporary extinguishers to replace those sent in for servicing. 9. Paints walls, floors, ceilings and equipment as needed. 10. Neatly maintains storage areas. 11. Maintains lights throughout the building,, keeping all lighting systems functional. 1.2. Maintains building components including windows, doors, baseboards, shelves, bathroom fixtures, etc. 13. Repairs small equipment including motors, pumps; vacuums and lawn mowers, 14. Performs any cleaning assignment necessary : to keep up all building appearances. 1S . Caulks and tuckpoirits brick, block, window and door 16. Mixes and lays cement. _ t i A Duties and Resnonsibilities: continued 17. Reports to the supervisor any equipment in need of further maintenance or professional service work. 18. other related work as required or instructed.' Knowledge, Skills and Abi lities 1 Working knowledge of boilers, motors, small pumps, chemical feed equipment, compressors, etc. 2. Working knowledge of cleaning methods, materials and equipment. 3, Ability to operate power tools, and mechanical cleaning equipment. I` 4. Ability to Perform minor electrical, plumbing, carpentry and ipasonry. work. S. Ability to distinguish between maintenance work capable of being performed in house and that which requires professional assistance. 6. Ability to follow oral and written instruction. 7. Ability to understand manuals and blueprints written for specific equipment. 8. Ability to establish and maintain working relationship with supervisors, and fellow workers. 9. Ability to work within the guidelines set up by the maintenance supervisor. Qualifications: 1. High school degree, GED or equivalent experience 2. possession of a vaild Minnesota Grade "C ", Second Class, Boiler Engineer's License. r qd Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF MS. KAREN DUENOW WHEREAS, Ms. Karen Duenow served as a`member of the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission from January 1979 through May 1983; and WHEREAS, her devotion to the tasks and responsibilities of the Commission contributed substantially to the sound progress and development of the City; and WHEREAS, her public service and 'civic effort for the betterment of the community' merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that her service to the community should be recognized and expressed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City, Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of Ms. Karen Duenow as a member of the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. q Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION EXPRESSING RECOGNITION OF AND APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVICE OF REVEREND ROBERT CILKE WHEREAS, Reverend Robert Cilke served as a member of the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission from August 1978 through April 1983; and WHEREAS, his devotion to the tasks and responsibilities of the Commission contributed substantially to the sound progress and development of the City; and WHEREAS, his public service and civic effort for the betterment of the community merit the gratitude of the citizens of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that his service to the community should be recognized and expressed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the dedicated public service of- Reverend Robert_Cilke as a member of the Brooklyn Center Housing Commission is hereby recognized and appreciated by the City of Brooklyn Center._ Date Mayor ATTEST Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: - whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. t CITY OF BROOKLYN CE14TER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 26th day of / September, 1983 at 8:00 p.m. in the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an ordinance granting a non - exclusive franchise to Minnegasco, Inc. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE GRANTING MINNEGASCO, INC.,'A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, A NONEXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, REPAIR AND 'MAINTAIN FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT FOR THE TRANSPORTATION, DISTRIBUTION, MANUFACTURE AND SALE OF GAS. ENERGY` FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE USE P14D TO USE THE PUBLIC OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA FOR SUCH PURPOSES; AND PRESCRIBING CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITONS THEREOF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. DEFINITIONS. The following terms shall mean: 1.1. Com an . Minnegasco, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, its successors and assigns. 1.2. Gas Natural gas, manufactured gas, mixture of natural aas and manufactured gas or other forms of gas energy. 1.3. Municipality Municipal Council Municipal Clerk These terms mean respectively, the City of Brooklyn Center, the Council of the City of Brooklyn Center and the Clerk of the City of Brooklyn Center. 1.4. Public Ground All streets, alleys, public ways, utility easements and public grounds of the Municipality as to which it has the right to grant the use to the Company. Section 2. FRANCHISE GENERALLY. 2.1. Grant of Franchise There is hereby granted to the Company, from the effective date hereof through June 30, 2003, the right to import, manufacture, transport, distribute and sell gas for public and private use in the Municipality, and for these purposes to construct, operate, repair and maintain in, on, over, under and across the Public Ground of the Municipality, all facilities and equip - ment used in connection therewith, and to do all things which are necessary or customary in the accomplishment of these objectives, subject to zoning ordinances, other applicable ordinances, permit procedures,, customary practices, and the provisions of this franchise. 2.2. Effective Date Written Acceptance This franchise shall be in force and effect from and after its passage and publication as required by law, and its acceptance by the Company in writing filed with the Municipal Clerk within 60 days after publication. 2.3. Nonexclusive Franchise This is not an exclusive franchise. 2.4. Franchise Fee The Company may be required to pay to the Municipality, in the manner and at a rate prescribed by a separate ordinance, a fee determined by collections from sales of Gas, but not to exceed 5% of the Company's gross revenues from the sale of Gas within the Municipality. Such ordinance may be adopted, amended, repealed or readopted at any time during the ORDINANCE NO. term of this franchise. The fee, if required, shall be effective 90 days after written 'notice of the ordinance to the Company. No such fee shall be effective as to sales made before January 1, 1984. The fee shall be separately stated on gas bills rendered to customers within the Municipality. 2.5. Publication Expense The expense of publication of this ordinance shall be paid by the Company. 2.6. Default If the Company is in default in the performance of any material part of this franchise for more than 90 days after receiving written notice from the Municipality of such default, the Municipal Council may, by ordinance, terminate all rights granted hereunder to the Company. The notice of default shall be in writing and shall specify the provisions of this franchise under which the default is claimed and state the basis therefor. Such notice shall be served on the Company by personally delivering it to an officer thereof at its principal place of business in Minnesota. If the Company is in default as to any part of this franchise, the Municipality may, after reasonable notice to the Company and the failure of the Company to cure the default within a reasonable time, take such action as may be reasonably necessary to abate the condition caused by the default, and the Company agrees to reimburse the Municipality for all its reasonable costs and for its costs of collection, including attorney fees. Nothing in this section shall bar the Company from challenging the Municipality's I the event of disagreement aim that n g cl h t a default has occurred. over the existence of a default, the burden of proving the default shall be on the Municipality. SECTION 3. CONDITIONS OF USE. 3.1. Use of Public Ground All utility facilities and equipment of the Company shall be located, constructed, installed and maintained so as not to endanger or unnecessarily, interfere with the usal and customary traffic,_ travel, and use of Public Ground, and shall be subject to permit conditions of the Municipality. The permit conditions may provide for the right of inspection by the Municipality, and the Company agrees to make its facilities and equipment available for inspection at all reasonable times and places. 3.2. Permit Required The Company shall not open or disturb the surface of any Public Ground for any purpose without first having obtained a permit from the Municipality, for which the Municipality may impose a reasonable fee to be paid by the Company. The permit conditions imposed on the Company shall not be more burdensome than those imposed on other utilities for similar facilities or work. , The mains, services and other property placed pursuant to such permit shall be located as shall be designated by the Municipality. The Company may, however, open and disturb the surface of any Public Ground without a permit where an emergency exists requiring the immediate repair of its facilities The Company in such event shall request a permit not later than the second working day thereafter. 3.3. Restoration Upon completion of any work requiring the opening of any Public Ground, the Company shall restore the same, including paving and its foundations, to as good condition as formerly, and shall exercise reasonable care to maintain the same for two years thereafter in good condition. Said work shall be completed as promptly as weather permits, and if the Company shall not promptly perform and complete the work, remove all dirt, rubbish, equipment and ORDINANCE NO. material, and put the Public Ground in good condition, the Municipality shall have the right to put it in good condition at the expense of the Company, and the Company shall, upon demand, pay to the Municipality the cost of such work done for or performed by the Municipality, including its administrative expense and overhead, together with ten percent additional as liquidated damages. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedy available to the Municipality. 3.4. Relocation of Utility Facilities The Company shall promptly, with due regard for seasonal working conditions, permanently relocate its facilities or equipment whenever the Municipality orders such relocation. If the relocation is a result of the 'proper exercise of the police power in grading, regrading, changing the location or shape of or otherwise improving any Public Ground or constructing or reconstructing any sewer or water system therein, the relocation shall be at the expense of the Company. If the relocation is not a result of the proper exercise of the police ,power, the relocation shall be at the expense of the Municipality. If such relocation is done without an agreement first being made as to who shall pay the relocation cost, such relocation of the facilities by the Company shall not be construed as a waiver of its right to be reimbursed for the relocation cost. If the Company claims that it should be reimbursed for such relocation costs, it shall notify the Municipality within thirty days after receipt of such order. The Municipality shall give the Company reasonable rictice of plans requiring such relocation. Nothing contained in this subsection shall require the to remove and replace its mains or to cut and reconnect its service pipe running from the main to a customer's premises at its own expense where the removal and replacement or cutting and reconnecting is made for the purpose of a more expeditious operation for the construction or reconstruction of underground facilities; nor shall anything contained herein relieve any person from liability arising out of the failure to exercise reasonable care to avoid damaging the Company's facilities while performing any work in any Public Ground. 3.5. Relocation When Public Ground Vacated The vacation of any Public Ground shall not operate to deprive the Company of the right to operate and maintain its facilities therein. Unless ordered under Section 3.4, the Company need not relocate until the reasonable cost of relocating and the loss and expense resulting from such relocation are first paid to the Company. When the vacation is for the benefit of the Municipality in the furtherance of a public purpose, the Company shall relocate at its own expense. 3.6. Street Improvements, Paving or Resurfacing The Municipality shall give the Company reasonable written notice of plans for street improvements where paving or resurfacing of a permanent nature is involved. The notice shall contain the nature and character of the improvements, the streets upon which the improvements are to be made, the extent of the improvements and the time when the Municipality will start the work, and, if more than one street is involved, the order in which this work is to proceed. The notice shall be given to the Company a sufficient length of time, considering seasonable working conditions, in advance of the actual commencement of the work to permit the Company to make any additions, alterations or repairs to its facilities the Company deems necessary. In cases where streets are at final width and grade, and the Municipality has installed underground sewer and water mains and.service connections to the ORDINANCE NO. property line abutting the streets prior to a permanent paving or resurfacing of such streets, and the Company's main is located under such street, the Company may be required to install gas service connections prior to such paving or resurfacing, whenever it is apparent that gas service will be required during the five years following the paving or resurfacing. SECTION 4. INDEMNIFICATION. The Company shall indemnify, keep and hold the Municipality, its elected officials, officers, employees, and agents free and harmless from any and all claims and ,actions on account of injury or death or persons or damage to property occasioned by the construction, maintenance, repair, removal, or operation of the Company's property located in, on, over, under, or across the Public Ground of the Municipality, unless such injury or damage is the result of the negligence of the Municipality, its elected officials, employees, officers, or agents. The Municipality shall not be entitled to reimbursement f ms or actions for its costs incurred prior to notification to the Company of claims P o P Y and a reasonable opportunity for the Company to accept and undertake the defense. If a claim or action shall be brought against the Municipality under circumstances where indemnification applies, the Company,- at its sole cost and expense, shall defend the Municipality if written notice of the claim or action is promptly given to the Company within a period wherein the Company is not prejudiced by lack of such notice. The Company shall have complete control of such claim or action, but it may not settle without the consent of the Municipality, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. This section is not, as to third parties, a waiver of any defense or immunity otherwise available to the Municipality, and the Company in defending any action on behalf of the Municipality shall be entitled to assert every defense or immunity that the Municipality could assert in its own behalf. Section 5. ASSIGNMENT. The Company, upon notice to the Municipality, shall have the right and authority to assign all rights conferred upon it by this franchise to any person. The assignee of such rights, by accepting such assignment, shall become subject to the terms and provisions of this franchise. SECTION 6. CHANGE IN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. Any change in the form of government of the Municipality shall not affect the validity of this franchise. Any governmental unit succeeding the Municipality shall, without the consent of the Company, automatically succeed to all of the rights and obligations of the Municipality; provided in this franchise SECTION 7. SEVERABILITY. If any portion of this franchise is found to be invalid for any reason whatsoever, the validity of the rest of this franchise shall not be affected. SECTION 8. NOTICES. Any notice required by this franchise shall be sufficient if, in the case of notice to the Company, it is delivered to Minnegasco, Inc-, attention Vice President, Minnesota Operations, 201 South Seventh Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55402, and, in the case of the Municipality, it is delivered to: City of Brooklyn Center, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430. ORDINANCE NO. SECTION 9. PREVIOUS FRANCHISES SUPERCEDED. This franchise supercedes all previous franchises granted to the Company or its predecessors. Adopted this day of 19 Mayor ATTEST. Clerk Date of Publication September 1, 1983 Effective Date E �a CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held an the 26th day of September, 1983 at 8s00 p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 ;Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance regarding the classification of tennis and 'swim clubs and health spas. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING SPECIAL USES IN THE C2 ZONING DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following runner: Section 35 - 322. C2 COMMERCE DISTRICT 3. Special Uses d. Eating establishments offering live entertainment; recreation and amusement places such as motion picture theaters and legitimate theater; sports arenas, bowling alleys, skating rinks; [recreation centers ;] gymnasiums and [athletic clubs;] suntan studios, [ and health spas,] all provided they do not abut an Rl, R2 or R3 district, including abutment at a street line. o. Tennis clubs, racket and swim clubs and other athletic chubs and health spas. Section 2. This ordinance shallbecome effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 M ayor ATTEST: Date of Publication September 1, 1983 Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted). k lae CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER i i herb i public hearing will be held on the 26th da Notice s hereby g iven that a p b g Y of September, 1983 at s:oo p.m. at the City Hall, 63G1 Shingle Creek Parkway,_ to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow low - rise offices in the R3 Zone by special use permit. ORDINANCE N0. AN ORDINANCE AMEN61NG CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES TO ALLOW LOW -RISE OFFICE USES IN THE R3 ZONING DISTRICT BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF -BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS; I Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 35 -312. R3 MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICT 3. S pecial Uses Office uses not more than 2 storeys in height and which are described in Section 5-320, Subsection I TST t rou'h d an j through s Such office uses shall be subject to the requirements set forth in Section 35 -4 Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 i Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication September 1, 1983 Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted). a I3 CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE BROOKLYN CENTER CITY CHARTER THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Sections 2.01, 2.05, 2.06, 3.02, 5.09, 6.02, 6.04, 7.09, 7.16, 8.03, 8.04, 11.01, 11.02, 12.12, and 12.13 of the Brooklyn Center City Charter are hereby amended as follows: Section 2.01. FORM OF GOVERNMENT. The form of government established by this charter is the "Council- Manager Plan ". The Council shall exercise the legislative power of the City and determine all matters of policy. The City Manager shall be the head of the administrative branch of the City [government] Government and shall be responsible to the Council for the proper administration of all affairs relating to the City. Section 2.05. VACANCIES IN THE COUNCIL. The office of Mayor or Councilmember shall become vacant upon death, resignation, removal from office in any manner authorized by law or forfeiture of the office. The Mayor or Councilmember shall forfeit the office for (1) lack at any time during the term of office of any qualification for the office prescribed by this charter or by law (2) violation of any express prohibition of this charter, (3) conviction of a crime involving ' moral turpitude, or (4) failure to 'attend three consecutive regular meetings of the Council without being excused by the Council. A vacancy in the Council shall be filled temporarily by the Council and then by the voters for the remainder of the term at the next regular election unless that election occurs within one hundred (100) days from the occurrence of the vacancy, this period being necessary to allow time for candidates to file. The Council by a majority vote of all its remaining members shall, appoint a qualified person to fill - the _vacancy until the person elected to serve the remainder of the unexpired term takes office. If the Council fails to fill a vacancy within thirty (30) days, the [election authorities] City Clerk shall call a special election to fill the vacancy. The election will be held not sooner than ninety (90) days and not later than one hundred and twenty _(120) days following the occurrence of the vacancy and to be otherwise governed by the provisions of Section 4.03, special elections. The quorum of the Council consists of three (3) members; if at any time the membership of the Council is reduced to less than three (3) the remaining members may be unanimous action appoint additional members to raise the membership to three (3) t Sec 2.06. THE MAYOR. The Mayor shall be the presiding officer of the Council, xcept that the Council shall choose from its members a president pro tem who all hold office at the pleasure of the Council and shall serve as president in t e Mayor's absence and as Mayor in case of the Mayor's disability or absence from th City. The Mayor shall have a vote as a member of the Council and shall exercise al powers and perform all duties conferred and imposed upon the Mayor by this cha ter, the ordinances of the City, and the laws of the State. The Mayor shall be rec nized as the official head of the City for all ceremonial purposes, by the -cour s for the purpose of serving civil process,, and by the Governor for the ` purpo es of martial law. The Mayor shall study the operations of the City government and sh 11 report to the Council any neglect, dereliction of duty, or waste on the part o any [office] officer or department of the City. In time of public danger or emergency the Mayor may, with the consent of the Council, take command of the Police, m4intain order and enforce the law. ORDINANCE NO. Section 3.02. SECRETARY OF COUNCIL. The City Clerk or the City Clerk's designee shall act as Secretary of the Council. The Clerk shall keep a journal of Council proceedings and such other records and perform such other duties as may be required by this charter or as the Council may require. The Council shall choose such other officers and `employees as may be necessary to serve at its meetings. In the absence of the City Clerk, the Council may designate any other official or employee of the City (except the City, Manager or a`member of the Council) to act as Secretary of the Council. Section 5.09. INITIATION OF CHARTER AMENDMENTS. Nothing in this charter shall be construed as in any affecting the right of the registered voters, under the constitution and statutes of Minnesota, to propose amendments to this charter. MINNESOTA STATUTES ANNOTATED Section 410.12 Subdivision 7 Charter Amendment by Ordinance Subd. 7. Amendment by ordinance. Upon recommendation of the charter commission the city council may enact a charter amendment by ordinance. Such an ordinance, if enacted, shall be adopted by the council by an affirmative vote of all its members after a public hearing upon two weeks' published notice containing the text of the proposed amendment and shall be approved by the mayor and published as in the case of other ordinances. An ordinance amending a city charter shall not become effective until 90 days after passage and publication or at such later date as is fixed in the ordinance. Within 60 days after passage and publication of such an ordinance, a petition requesting a referendum on the ordinance may be filed with the city clerk. Such petition shall be signed by qualified voters equal in number to two per cent of the total number of votes cast in the city at the last state general election or 2,000, whichever is less. If the city has a system of permanent registration of voters, only registered voters are eligible to sign the petition. If the requisite petition_is filed within the prescribed period, the ordinance shall not become effective until it is approved by the voters as in the case of charter amendments submitted by the charter commission, the council, or by petition of the voters, except that the council may submit the ordinance at any general or special election held at least 60 days after submission of the petition, or'it' may reconsider its action in adopting the ordinance. As far as practicable the requirements of (Minnesota Statutes 410.12) subdivisions l [ through] to -3 apply to petitions submitted under this section, to an ordinance amending a charter, and to filing of such ordinance when approved by the voters. Section 6.02. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE CITY MANAGER. Subdivision 5. The City Manager shall attend all meetings of the Council unless excused by the Mayor, with the right to take part in the discussion, but not to vote; but the Council may in its discretion exclude the City Manager from any meeting at which the removal of the City Manager is considered. ORDINANCE NO. Section 6.04. SUBORDINATE OFFICERS. There shall be a City Clerk, City Treasurer, and such other officers subordinate to the City Manager as the Council may create by ordinance. The City Clerk shall be subject to the direction of the City; Manager, and shall have duties in connection with the keeping of the public records and such other duties as may be assigned by the City Manager or by the provisions of this charter. The City Treasurer shall have such duties in connection with the receipt, disbursement and custody of public funds as may be assigned by the City Manager and other provisions of this charter. [The Clerk may be designated by the City Manager to act as Secretary of the Council.] The provisions of this charter shall not be construed so as to prevent the combining of the offices, of City Clerk and City Treasurer. The Council may by ordinance abolish offices which have been created by ,ordinance, and may combine the duties of various offices as it may see fit. Section 7.09. CONTINGENCY APPROPRIATION IN BUDGET. The Council may include a contingency appropriation as a part of the budget but not to exceed_[three -per centum (3%)] five percent (5%) of the total appropriation of the general fund made in the budget for that year. A transfer from the contingency appropriation to any other appropriation shall.be made only by a majority vote of the members of the Council. The funds thus appropriated shall be used only for the purposes designated by the Council. [ Section 7.16. BONDS OUTSIDE THE DEBT LIMIT. The Council may issue bonds for legal purposes outside of the debt limit as provided by- law.]; Section 8.03. LOCAL IMPROVEMENTS REGULATIONS. After this charter takes effect local improvements commenced prior thereto shall be completed and assessments may be levied and securities issued for the financing thereof as prescribed by the law applicable thereto. The Council may prepare and adopt a comprehensive ordinance prescribing the procedure which shall be followed thereafter in making all local improvements and levying assessments therefor. Such ordinances shall [supercede all other provisions of the law on the same subject and may] be amended only by an affirmative vote of at least four - fifths (4/5) of the members of the Council. In the absence of such ordinances all local improvements may be made and assessments levied therefor as prescribed by an applicable law. Section 8.04. PUBLIC WORKS: HOW PERFORMED. Public works, including all local improvements, may be constructed, extended, repaired, and maintained either directly by day labor or by contract. The City [ shall] may 'require ; contractors to give bonds for the protection of the City and all persons furnishing labor and materials pursuant to the laws of the State. Section 11.01. ACQUISITION AND OPERATION OF UTILITIES. The City may own and operate any gas, water, heat, power, light, telephone or other public utility for supplying its own needs for utility service or for supplying utility service to private consumers or both. It may construct all facilities reasonably needed for that purpose and may acquire any existing utility properties so needed; but such - acquisition action may only be taken by an ordinance, approved by a majority of the electors voting thereon, at a general or special election. The operation of all public utilities owned by the City shall be under' the supervision of the [Director of Public Works] City Manager c ORDINANCE NO. Section 11.02. RATES AND FINANCES. Upon recommendations made by the [Director of Public works] City Manager or upon its own motion, the Council may fix rates, fares and prices, for municipal utilities, but such rates, fares and prices, shall be just and reasonable. The Council shall endeavor to make each municipal utility financially self - sustaining and shall not use any municipal utility operation directly or indirectly as a general revenue producing agency for the City. Before any rates, fares or prices for municipal utilities shall be fixed by the Council, the Council shall hold a public hearing on the matter in accordance with Section 11.06. The Council shall prescribe the time and the manner in which payments for all such utility services shall be made, and may make such other regulations as may be necessary, and prescribe penalties for violations of such regulations. [ Section 12.12. DISPOSITION OF FINES AND PENALTIES. All fines, forfeitures, and penalties received for the violation of any ordinance shall be paid into the City Treasury. Every court or officer receiving such monies," within thirty (30) days thereafter, shall make return thereof under oath and shall be entitled to duplicate receipts for the amount paid. One of the receipts shall be filed with the City Clerk.] Section [12.13] 12.12. ORDINANCES TO MAKE CHARTER EFFECTIVE. The Council shall by ordinance make such regulations as may be necessary to carry out and make effective the provisions of this charter. Section 2. This ordinance shall became effective after publication and ninety (90) days following its adoption. Adopted this day of , 19 Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Published in the;, official newspaper Effective Date (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) (Published in the Brooklyn Center Post ) r /3 MEMORANDUM: TO: Gerald G. Splinter City Manager FROM: James P. Lindsay '�ii• Chief of Police DATE: September 22, 1983 SUBJECT: Explorer Post On September 17,'1983 thirteen individuals applied for membership on the Explorer Post. I would like to recommend that the Explorer Post be sponsored by the City of Brooklyn Center under the activity of Emergency Preparedness. (Because this will be included under Emergency Preparedness, both the Police Department and the Fire Department will share responsibility.) Attached please find the memorandum from Walter Filson outlining the responsibilities of sponsorship of the Explorer Post. Filson will act as advisor to the group on his own time. Please accept this recommendation with the understanding that the Explorer Post is for the benefit of the citizens of Brooklyn Center. t L To: Chief James Lindsay From: Walter T. Filson Re: Request for Sponsorship of Explorer Post As you are aware the plans for the Explorer Post are proceed- ing well and we hope to have the Post Chartered by November. Our organizational meeting is scheduled for September 17 at 9:00 a.m. At this time it is necessary to obtain a commitment for sponsor- ship of the Post and although we could possibly obtain a sponsor from outside the city government I feel that since the Unit will be serving the city and will be working directly with the Police and Fire Departments of this city it would be most appropriate for the City to sponsor the Unit. At this time there are 11 cities in the metropolitan area that spon- sor Posts of this nature(See attached list). These other Units are either Police /Law Enforcement or Fire Posts. The Post that we are proposing is the first of It's type in this area. Because of this it is a test project and from information that I have received there are other cities that will be watching how well this project works. I have attached to this request a list of responsibilities of the sponsor and also a list outlining what the Exploring Division will provide. As the Coordinator /Organisor of this Post i will make certain consessions to the City in regards to it's responsibilities to the Post in order to obtain a good working agreement between the City and the Post. I am very.commited to this project and wish to see it reach it's'ful- lest potential, which can only be done with an appropriate sponsor. I am therefore asking if you would approach the City of Brooklyn Cen- ter and request that they undertake sponsorship of this organization. Thank -you. Respectfully, Walter T. Filson Here is a list of the Cities in our area who are currently sponsor- ing Explorer Units similar to the type presently being organized. I do have a more comprehensive list giving the names and addresses of the advisors for these units.If you wish that information I will be more then happy to provide it to you. Law Enforcement St. Louis Park Police Dept. Bloomington Police Dept. Brooklyn Park Police Dept. Mound Police Dept. Minnetonka Police Dept. Fridley Police Dept. *Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. Fire New Hope Fire Dept. Minneapolis Fire Dept. Plymouth Fire Dept. Maple Grove Fire Dept. Columbia Heights Fire Dept. Hopkins Fire Dept. 1 The following is a list of the responsibilities of the sponsor and an outline of what the Exploring Division will provide pursuant to the Exploring Partnership Agreement. Responsibilities of the Sponsor shall be: I. Provide personnel to operate the group. a An Exploring Coordinator who serves as the manager of Exploring for the Sponsor. b. A committee of at least four, to guide the program and to serve as consultants. c. An Explorer Advisor, who works directly with 'the 'Young Adults. d. one or more Associate Advisors to assist the Advisor. 2. A place to meet regularly. 3. Program support and resources when needed. 4. Possible Financial assistance and /or guidance. *(This would not be a requirement of sponsorship and would be left solely to the discretion of the City as to wheather they wished to provide financial assistance or not.) The Exploring Division agrees to provide: 1. Liability insurance coverage protecting' the Sponsor and all Explorers and Adults. 2. Guidance and support to the Sponsor, Committee and Advisors, through its professional staff. 3. Assistance and guidance for your leaders through volunteer Division Personnel in such areas as Sales, Training, Program, Service, Public Relations and Finance 4. Training Seminars -both formal and informal -for all adults and youth officers. 5. Programs, literature, research guidance and facilities through a National Exploring Division. 6. Division wide activities to supplement the post program. 7. Annual Student Career Interest Survey results from area high schools This information was taken directly from an Exploring Partnership Agreement and if you have any questions or concerns about any of the points in it I would be glad to discuss them with you of any member of the City who desires further information *Not part of the original Exploring Partnership Agreement, but a consession that I am willing to make if it is a concern. 13 C MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspectionu DATE: September 23, 1983 SUBJECT: Administrative Permits At the September 12, 1983 City Council meeting, after discussing a request from Walter Francis of Goodyear Service Stores involving additional promotional permits, the staff was directed to provide information regarding a 1981 Ordi- nance Amendment that allowed gasoline service stations to have three such administrative permits per year not to exceed 30 days in duration. This Ordi- nance Amendment did not affect other commercial establishments which are limited to two such administrative permits per year not to exceed 10 days in duration. Attached is the record relating to the City Council's consideration and con- sists of Council minutes and various memos relating to review of other Cities' Sign Ordinances. I have also reviewed the number of administrative permits issued from 1978 through September 15, 1983. As you are aware, the permits comprehend a variety of activity primarily involving out -of -door retail sales or promotional events and have been utilized to allow banners, pennants, portable signs, searchlights and other things of this nature normally prohibited by either the Sign Ordinance or the Zoning Ordinance. Also attached is a copy of Section 35 -800 and 35-801 which relate to administrative permits. In 1978, 49 administrative permits were issued, 13 of which involved gasoline service stations. In 1979, 42 administrative permits were issued, 11 of which involved gasoline service stations. In 1980, 58 administrative permits were issued, 14 of which involved gasoline service stations. In 1981, 93 admini- strative permits were issued, 22 of which involved gasoline service stations. In 1982, 123 administrative permits were issued, 41 of which involved gasoline service stations. And, in 1983, (through September 15, 1983) 93 administrative permits have been issued, 34 of which involved gasoline service stations. 3. mlg 35 -711 , spaces shall be effectively screened from any abutting residential lots by a solid wall or opaque fence six feet high, or by such other device as may be approved by the City Council. The screening device shall extend within 10 feet of any street right -of -way. Such off - street parking and loading areas within any yards which abuts along a street which is residentially zoned on the side opposite shall be screened from street view by a screening device as approved by the City Council. See Section 35-400 for limitation on the size of such screening devices. Section 35 -712. LIGHTING. All exterior lighting shall be provided with lenses, reflectors, or shades, so as to concentrate illumination on the property of the owner or operator of said illumination devices. Rays of light shall not pass beyond the property lines of the premises utilizing such illumination at an intensity greater than three footcandles measured at property lines abutting residentially zoned property, or 10 footcandles measured at property lines abutting street right-of-way nonresidentially zoned property. No glare shall emanate from or be visible beyond the boundaries of the illuminated premises. "String lighting" as defined in Section 35 -900 is specifically prohibited. Section 35 -720. JOINT PARKING FACILITIES. With respect to development complexes, the required parking facilities to serve two or more uses may be located on the same lot or in the same structure, provided that the total number of parking spaces furnished shall not be less than the sum of the separate requirements for each use. -(See Section 35 -704:2 (c) regarding restaurant uses in multi -tenant retail centers.) With respect to separate individual establishments, the City Council may approve the joint use of common parking facilities under the following conditions: 1. The building or use for which application is made to utilize the off - street parking facilities provided by another building or use shall be located within 800 feet of such parking facilities and shall not be separated by a building* or use with which it does not share parking facilities in the manner prescribed by this ordinance. In no case will joint parking facilities be located across those streets listed in Section 35 -701, Subdivision 3 M- 2. The applicant shall show and the City Council must determine that there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours and parking demands of the two buildings or uses contemplating joint use of off- street parking facilities. 3. A properly drawn legal instrument providing for joint use of off - street parking facilities, duly approved by the City Council as to form and manner of execution shall be filed as an easement encumbrance upon the title of the property. Section 35 -800. ADUNISTRATIVE PFERMITS. No person shall use his property or and assist, countenance or allow the use of his or of anther's property located within the municipality for any of the following- purposes or uses without first having obtained a permit from the City zoning official. - The use shall not for the duration of the permit, considering the time of year, the parking layout for the principal use, the nature of the proposed use and other pertinent factors, substantially impair the parking capacity of the principal use or impair the safe 35 -800 • and efficient movement of pedestrian and vehicular traffic either on or off the premises. A waiver from certain provisions of the sign ordinance and from certain parking requirements of this ordinance is implied = by the 'granting of an administrative permit, but only for the duration of the permit and to the extent authorized by said permit. I. Tents, stands and other temporary structures for church functions, civic functions, charities, carnivals, and similar purposes for a period not exceeding 10 days. *The permit fee shall be $2. Certificates of insurance may be required to assure the public welfare. Off -site signs promoting or announcing civic functions or community events may be authorized by the City Council for a period not exceeding 10 days provided a.. The off -site signs are located on private property in the Commercial- (Cl , C1 A, and C2) or Industrial (I -1 and I -2) zoning districts. b. The off -site signs are limited to no more than five locations; and eo There are rio more than one sign per location: Permits for such signs will be considered independent of any other permits authorized by this section of the ordinance. The permit fee shall be $2 per sign location. 2. Out of door retail sale, storage and display of merchandise or offering of services when accesory to or promoting a permitted use or a special use within a nonresidential zoning district as follows: a. The out of door retail sale, display, and storage of nursery and garden merchandise including lawn furniture and equipment, for a period not to exceed 30 consecutive weeks in any one calendar year The permit fee shall be $5. b. Miscellaneous out of door retail sales or displays or promotional events for periods not to exceed 10 consecutive days. Two such 10 day permits may be allowed per premises per calendar year. The permit fee shall be $2. c. Gasoline service stations may have miscellaneous out of door ` retail sales, displays or promotional events for periods not to exceed 30 consecutive days. - Three such 30 day permits may be allowed per premises per calendar year. Car wash fund raisers which are not classified as being accessory to or promoting a service station activity are permitted for periods not to exceed 10 ` consecutive days. Four such 10 day permits may be allowed per premises per calendar year. Permit fees shall be $2. Section 35 -801. ADMINISTRATIVE PM1IT APPLICATION• Application for permission o end, a use set forth within Section 35-800 shall be made to the City. The applicant shall set forth his name, address, the location of the proposed use, the duration of the proposed use, the hours of the proposed use, the nature of f j M f F t t 35 -801 . s , the proposed use and shall submit a map or diagram describing the layout of the proposed use. The zoning official may require such further information as will enable him to determine whether the proposed use meets the standards of this -' ordinance. The zoning official may, subject to the appeal provisions of this ordinance, refuse to issue an administrative permit; provided, however, that the reasons for refusal shall be stated in writing to the applicant, and the applicant shall be notified of the appeal provision.' June 3, 1981 Honorable Mayor Dean A. N Y uist q Brooklyn Boulevard 63 Br 1 n 5 7 _ Y Brooklyn Center, MN. 55429 Dean Mayor Nyqui st: As'a follow up to our conversation in your office some weeks ago, I would like to bring to your attention in greater detail, the hardship and inequaties imposed upon Full Service Gasoline'Stations, by an overly restrictive sign ordinance. .The average service station has two, sometimes three bays, these service bays cannot produce the revenue to support the conventional advertising it takes keep hem bus , to P Y The average service station does not have large enough display, or sales area to handle the items normally handled by those stations. This makes it mandatory loo display outside the building. itself Under the present ordinance, such displays must be in close proximity to the building. This produces a cluttered unkept appearance and would be alleviated if such merchandise displays could be placed else where on the premises. In essence, I feel, we should be able to use the total properties to merchandise our products. -Oil companies make available to their stations metal frames, that in turn are attached to island poles as well as perimeter light poles. The purpose of this framework is to help dealer merchandising. At present, the ordinance only allows us to use the frame work for information or direction. However, they are so constructed that the messages can be changed very easily. I feel the square footage of these signs be increased and the use of these signs be changed to allow for advertising. I think, because of the engineering involved, one need not be too concerned about overly large signs going up as the poles are so constructed and mounted to withstand wind, an overly large sign would.cause t damage to the poles.. Most painted windows in Service Stations are of very poor quality, done by inexperienced persons. Professional sign painters_ increase their prices when they have to lay out a sign on the inside of the glass, as opposed to the outside. Thus I feel the need for that part of the ordinance.to'be changed, i Page 2. i I would like to make you aware of a survey by the E.K. Williams Company, a tional accounting firm, whose specialty is gasoline service stations. In eir survey, they found advertising in local newspapers a 29 day lead before the dealer felt any return on his ad. A 14 day lead time with a sign, such 'r t as an A frame sign an the boulevard, and 7 day lead with d � ec . mailin g Almost immediate result With flyers handed out across the service drive. Now it is obvious that in a promotion one wants to- attract as many people as: possible, both steady and irregular customers. As noted earlier., our limited facilities will not support length ly advertising via paper, radio or television. Thus there is a great need to change the three (3) a year, ten (10) day permit. I would feel three (3) a year, forty- five (45) day permits would not work an undue hardship on the city. This permit should also allow full service station dealers to use what ever it takes to make promotions successful, (semi - trailer, denoting truck load sale, flags or banners, portable signs, etc.). One of the very important items we have in drawing new customers to our locations is our free standing oulevard identification sign. n. 9 When road construction or freeway bridges interfere with the visability of this important sign, then, I feel the height restriction should be waived, a s 'it does create a hardship on a dealer, whose location was built to best sake advantage of that very road or freeway. '! I would feel that these proposals be inserted into the ordinance under Gasoline Service Station classification, so as to give a degree of control to the council over signage throughout the rest of the community. Respectively, esl�eyM. R$avely 4V 6t��ee c.c..!WWilliam Fignar Anthony Kuefler Gene Lhotka Celia Scott X MINUTES OP TI)E PROCEEDINGS OP TIE CITY COUNCIL OF T[]]' CITY OF BROOrLYN CEN'T'ER IN TILE COUNTY OF a HE'l1I]EP1N AND Till', STATE OL' I4IN14ESOTA c ILEGULAI2 SI:SSIOiI JUNE 22, 1.981 CITY BALL CALL TO ORD The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmcmbers Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of .Planning and Inspection Ron Warren, Assistant City Engineer Jim Grube, Building Official Will Dahn, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, and Administrative Assistant Tom Bublitz. INVOCATIO The invocation was offered by Councilmember Gene Lhotka. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 8, 1981 There was a,motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of June 8, 1981 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none,. the motion passed unanimously. OPEN FORU Mayor Nyquist noted that the Council had received a request to use the Open Forum session this evening from Mr. Duke Adelmann, 6501 Humboldt Avenue North. Mr. Adelmann addressed the Council and explained he and Mr. Wes Reavely were present this evening to discuss the City sign ordinance with regard to full service gas stations. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Wes Reavely who proceeded to read a letter he had sent to Mayor Nyquist regarding the City's sign ordinance in which he stated the ordinance was overly restrictive and created a hardship for full service gas stations, in that it interfered with dealer merchandising particularly in the area of signing on poles on the pump islands. He explained the ordinance is also restrictive on sale signs and also on the height of boulevard identification signs for full service stations. The City Manager explained the Chamber of Commerce had been discussing this issue but to his knowledge they have decided not to pursue it due to a lack of interest among the Chambers members with regard to changing the sign ordinance. Mr. Adelmann explained he was a member of the Committee reviewing the sign ordinance but that apparently he was the only one interested in pursuing it. Councilmember Fignar inquired how Brooklyn Center compares with neighboring _ cities with regard to regulating signs. The City Manager explained some neighboring areas are more restrictive and some less and that there is no uniformity among cities with regard to sign ordinances. tie explained there are several models upon which sign ordinances in various cities are based. Mr. Reavely stated signs are very imrortant to the visibility of his business and are very important to sales volume. Ile added signs are particularly important to aggressive merchandisers such as Standard Oil Company. 6 -22 -81 `1- Councilmomber Fignar made an inquiry as to what regulations must, be followed in developing a sign ordinance. The City Attorney explained the regulation of signs is completely up to local ordinance and that as he recalls the Chamber of Commercci was instrumental in drafting the City's sign ordinance. In response to the City Attorney's comments Mr. Reavely stated that at the time the ordinance was being drafted he recalls there was an attitude that the City had already had the ordinance worked out and that the Chamber Committee's input would not be able to influence the outcome of the ordinance. Councilmember Scott noted that she had reviewed other City sign ordinances and commented that they are very different in scope, noting that some ordinances do go along more with company merchandising policies and that most other City ordinances.do allow window signs. Mayor Nyquist inquired whether the staff could review the current sign ordinance. The City Manager explained the staff could review the ordinance and perhaps compare the regulations to a number of surrounding communities. Mr.. Adelmann stated he does not understand why the City of Brooklyn Center would have to survey other cities concerning sign ordinances and inquired what the rationale was for the City Manager's suggestion to survey other cities. - The City Manager explained that the City would not have to survey surrounding cities' at to make changes in the sign ordinance. Councilmember Fignar commented that he would not want Brooklyn Center to fall into a situation similar to surrounding communities that are experiencing problems with their .sign ordinances. Councilmember Kuefler inquired whether there would be any problems with providing relief to filling stations only and not to other businesses with regard to signage. The City Attorney explained once a distinction is made for one type of business, the City could open up a similar argument to other unique businesses in the area. He added making a distinction for one business with regard to sign regulations is not like setting a precedent since other businesses would have to show they are in a similar unique situation to receive similar treatment with regard to signing. Mr. Reavely stated that he recalls a recent situation where Jobs Daughters desired to have a car wash at his station, but were not able to since he did not secure the appropriate permit for the car wash. He stated this is not a realistic- requirement. Councilmember Scott stated she would like to see some work done in the area of reviewing the City sign ordinance. Mayor Nyquist suggested that the City staff might be able to work with Mr. Adelmann and Mr. Reavely with regard to reviewing the ordinance requirements. The City Manager stated the staff can address the requests made in Mr. Reavely's letter and explained the effects of those requests at an upcoming Council meeting. Councilmember Fignar inquired whether this could be accomplished at the next Council meeting. The City Manager explained the staff work load is rather tight and it would be dependent on how involved the staff becomes in other areas such as the cable TV franchise. Councilmember Kuefler stated he would like to the staff review sign regulations in other cities and also to involve the Brooklyn Center community and citizens, . including the Planning Commission, in reviewing the City sign regulations. Mayor Nyquist concluded the Open Forum session by noting that the staff will review the City's sign ordinance and report back to the City Council. 6 -22n8l -2- ". MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspection l/.0 DATE: August 6, 1981 SUBJECT: Sign Ordinance Review At the request of the City Council, we have obtained copies of Sign Ordinances from surrounding communities including the cities of Brooklyn Park, Crystal, Fridley, Golden Valley, Maple Grove, New Hope, Plymouth and Robbinsdale. The purpose of obtaining the ordinances was to compare them with- provisions in our Sign Ordinance. This request was made in response to a letter presented to the City Council during the "Open Forum" on June 22, 1981 by Mr. Wes Reavely and Mr. Duke' Adelmiann. Their main concerns were an overly restrictive Sign Ordinance; the - inability to utilize more of their premises for merchandise display; the desire for more and longer periods for promotional activities; higher freestanding signs when roadways or freeway bridges block sign visibility; and a separate classi- fication in the ordinance for gasoline service stations For comparative purposes, we have developed the attached table showing the allow- able signery in the nine communities (including Brooklyn Center). For comparative purposes we used the signery allowed for a general business zoning district in the communities because that is the district in which gasoline service stations are most often located. Also, the general business districts generally are, as in the case of Brooklyn Center, the least restrictive in terms of signery. ` With respect to identification signery among the communities reviewed, only Robbinsdale made a special consideration for service stations by allowing a 60 sq. ft. freestanding sign, rather a 50 sq. ft. freestanding sign for other businesses: However, other businesses could have two 50 sq. ft. wall signs while service stations are entitled to only one 50 sq. ft. wall sign. All other communities generally treat service stationsthe same as other businesses when it comes to allowable signs, the possible exception is price signs which some communities treat separately. Each Sign Ordinance seems to have its own peculiarities. But when reviewing the comparative information, it is safe to say that Brooklyn Center's Sign Ordinance, on the whole, is certainly not overly restrictive in terms of allowable signery in comparison to the other communities. Only Brooklyn Park's current -Sign Ordinance seems to, across the board, be more liberal than Brooklyn Center's. It should be pointed out that Brooklyn Park has considered, but has tabled, a revised Sign Ordinance that would possibly change its standing in this comparison. With respect to the number of freestanding identification signs permitted, our Sign Ordinance is comparative. Most cities allow only one while Crystal and Fridley permit one per street abuttment. It should be noted that our Sign . Ordinance also allows two freestanding signs, but only when there is at least 400 feet of property abuttment along two streets which are collector or arterial in character. Memo Page 2 August 6, 1981 The height of freestanding signs varies from community to community. A maximum of 25 ft. seems common, although two communities, Maple Grove and Robbinsdale, only allow freestanding signs to be 20 ft. in height. The maximum allowable height is the 36 ft. permitted in Plymouth. Our Sign Ordinance varies between 24 ft. and 32 ft. in height depending upon the size of a particular building. It also appears that the size of freestanding signs is comparable, or perhaps on the larger side, when viewing this table. In Brooklyn Center, the size of a sign is also dependent on the size of the building and can range from 90 sq. ft. to 250 sq. ft. The majority of communities have maximums less than what is permitted for the smallest building in a C -2 Zoning District in Brooklyn Center. As mentioned previously, some communities allow price signs in addition to the identification signs while in Brooklyn Center, a price sign, reader board, etc. is calculated into the allow- able square footage of the particular sign. With the possible exception of Brooklyn Park (whose formula is somewhat difficult to evaluate), Brooklyn Center is by far the most generous in allowable wall signery. Thirty percent of the wall area, of any wall, can be taken up in identification signs. Also attached is another table indicating the actual allowable signery in each community for a hypothetical service station with a corner lot of 130 ft. x 150 ft.; a building dimension of 30 ft. x 50 ft. and 16 ft. high; a building face on one wall of 800 sq. ft. and the other wall of 480 sq. ft.; a canopy over the pump island; three service bays; a building square footage of 1= ft.; and a setback of 50 ft. from the property lines. I'SO -0 This table also shows no glaring inequalities in allowable signery in Brooklyn Center. There are a number of options available regarding utilization of signs in Brooklyn Center. I do not feel additional freestanding or advertising signs need to be considered. Reader boards showing prices, car washes, specific sales, etc. can be incorporated into the allowable square footage of freestanding signs and, in most cases, are. Also, 30% of a wall area can be used for signs. A reader board affixed permanently to the wall could also be used to indicate a variety of messages relating to sales repair work, product, etc. Message changing on these reader boards does not require a permit from the City. Our Sign Ordinance also allows signs affixed to, or painted on the inside of a display window, again without a permit. This technique is often used not only by service stations, but other businesses as well. One reason for the distinction between the inside, rather than the outside of the window, is because signs are not permitted to be painted directly on walls. Also, by having signs affixed to the inside of a window, they are not calculated as part of the allowable wall signery for the building. I feel a liberal interpretation has also been given to on -site directional signs which can be either freestanding or on a wall. Signs indicating full service or self service can be considered directional if they are placed in such a manner as to give customer direction. However, signs indicating "lie Da Repairs ", "Car Wash Available "Free Oil ", etc. are not directional signs and cannot be permitted under that provision of the ordinance. Taken as a whole, there are a number of options available regarding signery and the provisions of the Sign Ordinance are certainly within the ordinance's state- ment of purpose which is "to provide for necessary visual communication, to preserve and promote a pleasant physical environment, to protect public and private property, and to encourage safety upon the streets within the City of Brooklyn Center by regulating the type, number, structure, size, location, Memo Page 3 . August 6, 1981 height, lighting and the erection and maintenance of all outdoor signs and sign structures within the City" (emphasis added). I feel further comment is also in order relating o other suggestions made b 9 99 Y Mr. Reavely and Mr. Adel_mann. With respect to a hardship where the visibility of signs are allegedly obscured because of roadway construction_ or'freeway bridges, it would seem more appropriate to handle the situation through the Sign Ordinance variance procedure rather than at this time changing the ordinance. The Standards for Variances comprehend unique situations and hardships and there may be some precedent for a variance based on past actions. Questions have been raised regarding promotional events and related signery. Currently our ordinance allows two Administrative Permits to be issued during any one calendar year for a period not to exceed 10 consecutive days. This permit, for all practical purposes, allows variances from certain provisions of both the Zoning and Sign Ordinances. Banners, pennants, stringers, flags, balloons, portable signs, temporary signs, etc. can be authorized under this Administrative Permit. The comparative table shows most communities allow these activities on a limited basis. Some communities, such as New Hope and Plymouth, only allow them for grand openings. Other communities limit them to 10 days (Fridley and Maple Grove), others to 7 days (Crystal, New Hope, and Robbinsdale) Also, the number of events per year might be limited to three such as in Crystal, Fridley and New Hope Golden Valley, on the other hand, allows them only on a case -by -case basis as approved by their City Council. Car washes, such as for local clubs, religious groups, etc. are, as in Brooklyn Center, generally counted.as one of the permits , allowed where a community has such a limitation. If the Council feels this area should be liberalized, the Zoning Ordinance (not the Sign Ordinance) will have to be amended. I certainly would not recommend liberalizing this to the three a year, 45 day, permits suggested. There seems to be no precedent in the communities review for such a consideration. Mr. Reaveiy's and Mr. Adelmann's contention that service stations should be viewed separately for purposes of the Sign Ordinance does not, in my opinion, seem' realistic. The Zoning Ordinance gives service stations a somewhat separate classi- fication, but not in the same vein as suggested by these gentlemen. The Zoning Ordinance states "automobile service stations pose particular problems in achieving compatibility with abutting and adjacent land uses because of potentially detrimental aspects of their operation. The problem is basically both functional and aesthetic, involving traffic hazards, noise, light glare at night, outdoor storage of merchan- dise, poor architectural design, indiscriminative advertising, etc., all of which contribute to less enjoyment and use of, and reduction of, property values in surrounding properties. It is hereby determined that the general welfare will be better served by minimizing adverse functional and aesthetic conditions which may result from operation of automobile service stations and that the use, enjoy- ment, and improvement of surrounding property will be enhanced... As such, the Zoning Ordinance tends to be more restrictive when it comes to gasoline service stations and it would seem contradictory to me to liberalize the Sign Ordinance In the,face of the above consideration. _Consideration of additional outside storage and display was also requested. The Zoning Ordinance limits merchandise display at service stations to the principal building except displays can be on the outside of a building within four feet of the structure or in pump islands. The Zoning Ordinance has been interpreted to allow temporary signs;as a part of such displays during the hours the station is in operation. This, I feel, is a loose interpretation, but has, nevertheless, been applied fairly consistently throughout the years. Memo Page 4 August 6, 1981 Finally, I do not feel any changes that might be made to beedonenoOnlyiforc service `1 the Zoning Ordinance regarding. promotional events should stations. Any changes should be made uniformly throughout the C -2 zoning classi- fication and affect all uses within that district. All in all this review has surprised me considerably, because 1 have always felt that our Sign Ordinance was more restrictive most. T hvefin ts do not, in nall cases, support this. Brooklyn Center may be more mentioned in this report such as with of ns s which l are no t permhtteds o Therefore, c in g s its ordinances with .respect . to other 9 suggested by Mr. Reavely and do not recommend any major changes along the lines Mr. Adelmann. FIE F TABLE I .' COMPARATIVE SIGNERY FOR GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICTS Freestanding Wall Roof Special Provisions Price Other Outside Promotions city No. Ht. Area Area No. Ht, Area; Signs Area - Signer Storage No, PerY'. D ration Brooklyn Cente 1 ' 24' 90 sq. ft. for 30% of wall area 1 6ft. In lieu Incorporated in Canopy sign On pump 2 10 days {2nd sign bldgs. under 2200 above of free freestanding sign in lieu of islands or fl owed if sq. ft. in area roof standing freestanding within 4' more than (includes most gas m X. sign sign. of bldg. 00' of stations) Area for frontage freestanding signs i on two is.based on sq. ft �treets) of bldg. Max. sign is 250 sq. ft., 32 E ft. high. Crystal per 20' 50 sq. ft plus 11 15% of wall area up In Same as free - Incor orated Projecting 3 7 days ptreet plus sq. ft. for every to maximum of 250 lieu standing sign. with other signs in y abutt +1 ft. one ft. over 10' sq. ft. if only one of signery, lieu of free- nt. 1for sign is set back wall sign is 20% of free- standing sign, tevery from r.o.w. max. wall. stand- but not roof e ft. H of 250 sq. ft. sign sign. Area up Z over to 15% of wall 10 ft. or 250 sq. ft. sign whichever is. '' less. placed from r.o.w. 35' max Fridley 1 per 25' 80 sq. ft. per 15 times the sq. In li u 80 sq.ft. 1 Part of Porta- panels 3 3 10 days frontage development. root of. the wall of free- freestand per yr. for 10 length on which standing ing sign. days each. the sign is to sign.) Window signs be placed. 40% of window t area l _ s r r l 5 TABLE I COMPARATIVE SIGNERY.FOR GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICTS Freestanding Wail Roof Special Provisions Price Other Outside Promoti City No. Flt. Area Area No. Ht. Area. Si ns i Area. Signer Storacie No.PerYr Duration golden Valley 25' 50 sq ft. for each + See freestanding 1 25' See area Allowed as an No other Not allowed - lineal foot of bldg. sign area. above for free informational advertising (can be approves frontage up to 175 roof standing sign. signs by Cit .Council) sq. ft. Limit signs. applies to all signery; wall free - standing and roof signery combined Maple Grove 1 20' 50 sq. ft. (if only 60 sq, ft, or 15% Prohibited 1 16 sq.ft. Canopy or 3 10 days one ~gall sign) or 15% of front or side 8' high (part of marquee 4 sq.. ft. of front wall area wall area whichever allowable signs (in maximum whichever is lesser. is lesser. (Only signery) lieu of one wail sign wall sign) allowed unless no - - -- — freestanding sign, in which case two wall signs are allowed. New rope ( 1 25' 60 sq. ft. or 1 sq. 15% of wall area Pro ibited Yes 16 sq. ft. Canopy signs 2 racks 7 days ft. per lineal ft. up to 200 sq. ft. with 12" for display For grand of frontage up to maximum letters (part of oil per ..openings 90 sq. ft. of allowable pump island. only. wall signery) Two open portable tire racks 7' high) 6' in length. Ply. -cuth 1 36' 64 sq. ft. 20% of wall area Prohibited 2 16 sq. ft. Canopy or 130 days marquee signs For grand openings. F�, 1 20' 60 sq. ft. One'only up to 50 Pro ibited 1 O sq. ft. �7 days sq. ft. Two wall (4 sq.ft. _ signs if no maximum freestanding sign. TABLE I _ f COMPARATIVE SIGNERY FOR GENERAL BUSINESS DISTRICTS k Freestanding Wall Roof � ciai P rovisions City No, Ht. Area Area Price Other uts� i d� a Promatiors No. Ht, Area. Si ns Area Signer Brooklyn Park* No 25' 4 sq. ft. front ft. of bldg. tory a No P r Yr Our_ ation ft. p plus 1 limit 20' 750 f t. Not Projecting signs limit. sq. per front foot of property limit a5ove ft. covered -not over 200 Not to not occupied by bldg., plus l sq. roof ft. ft. for each foot of public right- line sq. ft. Project 30 days. of -way fifty (50) feet or more in no more than 10 wi dth abutting the side of the feet. structure (over the entire lot). No individual sign surface 9 shall i exceed 100 sq. ft. Plus - sq. ft. for each foot that the sign is in excess of 60 ft. distance from the center of the street, not to ex- Geed 330 sq. ft. in area nor shall two smaller signs be so arranged and integrated as to cause advert- ising surface over such limitations. i * A revised sign Ordinance has been proposed, but has been tabled for some time, i' s ' i 1°AiiLL 11 PERMITTED SIGNERY (SIMILAR SITUATION) Freestanding Wall Roof Prise Sign city No. Ht. Area Area No. Ht. Area No. Ar rooklyn Center 1 24' 90 sq. ft. 240_sq. ft. front 1 24' 90 sq. ft. (in Incorporated into wall. lieu of free- freestanding sign. 144 sq. ft. side standing signs.) wall. rystal 2 20' 50 sq. ft. for 120 sq. ft. front 2 35' 250 sq. ft. ea. Incorporated with each sign. wall. (In lieu of freestanding 72 sq. ft side freestanding signs. wall. signs). f ridley 2 25' 80 sq. ft. 106 sq. ft. front 1 No 80 sq. ft. 1 16 sq.ft. between permitted wall. limit. 's signs. 82 sq. ft. side wall. olden Valley 1 25' 100 sq. ft. total '.for all wall, free - 1 41' 1 16 sq.ft. standing, and roof.signs. i laple Grove 1 20' 50 sq. ft. 60 sq. ft. on None 1 16 sq.ft. front or side part of allowable wall, not both. signery ew Hope 1 25' 90 sq. ft. 120 sq. ft. front Prohibited 1 16 sq.ft. wall. 72 sq. ft. side wall. I ( Plymouth 1 36' 64 sq. ft. 160 sq. ft. front Prohibited 2 16 sq.ft. wall. 96 sq. ft. side wall. { Robbinsdale 1 20' 60 sq. ft. 50 sq. ft. front Pro ibited 1 10 sq.ft. wall. No other wall sign. Brooklyn Park 2 25' 100 sq. ft. 140 sq. ft. front 2 20' 100 sq. ft. ea. within frees f on ea. street wall. above roof standing sign. 90 sq. ft. side (in lieu of wall. freestanding sign.) Limit of 430 sq. ft. of signery on proper residents when the flushing program begins. The Public Utility Superintendent stated that it would be possible to use a midnight flushing program where watermains are flushr from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Mayor Nyquist returned to the table at 11:06 p.m. SERVICE ST71`1. "ION SIGtIEPY The City Manager pointed out that the staff review and survey of requirements for service station signery in neighboring ct.ics showed that the ordinances in neighboring municipalities are similar to Brooklyn Center in many requirements. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Wes Reavely who stated that he believes a comparison of sign requirements in other cities is academic and that he believes we have to recognize that each city may have unique problems which must be faced. He proceeded to review several slides demonstrating the type of signery he would like to see permitted under Brooklyn Center's sign ordinance. He stated the City has total control and that he does not believe added signage would mean less control over businesses or result in damage to the aesthetics of the community. The Director of Planning & Inspecti.on pointed out that many of the signs shown by Mr. Reavely in his presentation are not prohibited by the existing ordinance and that the options for signery are left to the individual businesses as to how they distribute the square footage of permitted signs Councilmember Kuefler inquired if there is a problem in- combining directional and advertising signs under the ordinance. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated there is a problem under the current ordinance and that it would be necessary to alloy more free standing signs than are currently allowed since only one free standing sign is allowed now. He stated a pump island is considered a free standing sign. Councilmember Scott stated she would like to see industry standards used with regard to permitted signs. The City Manager stated that a problem occurs in that there are many standards used by various companies and there is no consistent standard used among the numerous companies. Mr. Reavely stated he would suggest that dealers be allowed to seek approval for individual promotions at various times throughout -the year plus be allowed additional pump island signs with directional information and inserts with advertising. Councilmember Kuefler questioned why car washes for civic groups such as Boy Scouts, etc. would be charged against the service station as one of their promotional events. He pointed out this policy seems to prevent them from advertising throughout the year. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated it is his recollection that -a number of years ago the number of car washes at various service stations got out of hand and that the permit was initiated as a means of controlling the numbers of car washes. Councilmember Lhotka stated he believes the sign ordinance provides for adequate signage for businesses, although the signs may not be in the exact shape or spot that individuals may desire. He stated he sees no problem with easing up on the promotional permits. He requested Mr. Reavely to show how he has 8 -10 -81 -13 prevented from advertising. He stated the problem is how to control signage across the board for all types of dealers and be fair to everyone. Mr. Reavely stated he does not think his proposals are detrimental to the community. Mr. Duke Adelmann stated that essentially what he and Mr. Reavely want is the use of the pole signs and the relaxing of the permit procedures. Mr. Reavely suggested allcwing a one year trial basis for pole signs, three 30 day permits for one year, and relaxing of the promotional permits for car washes. Mr. Adelmann stated that 30 days is the minimum amount of time necessary to conduct an effective promotion. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to direct the staff to prepare an ordinance amendment which would remove car washes from the allowed promotional permits for service stations, to allow service stations four car washes per year, to allow one permanently fixed gas pump island sign per island, the permitted size of such signs to be established with input from other station owners in the City, and to allow an extension of the 10 day promotion period to three 30 day promotions. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, and Scott. Voting against: Councilmember Lhotka. The motion passed. LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the following list of licenses: Licenses to be approved by the City Council on August 10, 1981. FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Don Zakeer 5521 France Ave. N. ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Citizens Band Serving People 4637 Winnetka Ave. N. Earle Brown PTA 5900 Humboldt Ave. N. MECHANICAL SY STEM'S LIC Ryan Air Conditioning 9240 Grand Ave. S. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none, the motion passed unanimously. ADJ0 There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to adjourn the meeting. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 12:15 a.m. Clerk Mayor 8 -10 -8I 14 MLMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager ROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspectio ATE: August 21, 1981 SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendments regarding Signery and Administrative Permits for Gasoline Service Stations As requested by the City Council, two ordinance amendments have been prepared relating to gasoline service stations. The first ordinance amendment is to Chapter 34 (Sign Ordinance) and would allow gasoline service stations to have a freestanding informational sign on each pump island. An informational sign is defined as any sign which conveys information and which cannot be classified as a directional, or identification sign. We have not as yet received any recommendations from Mr. Wes Reavely or Mr. Duke Adelmann regarding the allowable area of this proposed sign. The ordinance amend- ment, therefore, does not have a specific size and the allowable square footage has been left blank for determination by the City Council. I would recommend consideration of sixteen square feet which is the allowable area for directional Si It should be fluted that the ordinance amendment would establish these signs Under the classification of signs requiring a permit. This is recommended because in- formational signs have been classified in the past as either part p allowable freestanding signs or allowable wall signs, both of which - require permits. Also the requirement for a permit would allow better control of these signs. One f ther area that needs clarification with respect to this ordinance amendment involves combination directional and informational signs. It is arty feeling that combination informational and directional signs should be classified as inform - ational signs under this proposed ordinance. Strictly directional type signs would fall under another classification and are permitted without a permit. The other ordinance amends Chapter 35 (Zoning Ordinance) with respect to Qdmin istrative Permits for gasoline service stations`. This ordinance amendment would establish separate criteria for issuing administrative permits for miscellaneous out -of -door retail sales, displays or promotional events for gasoline service stations. Three permits could be issued annually for each service station for . up to thirty consecutive days. This would allow banners, search lights, ports - panel signs, etc. and outside sales and display during that period of time. Also gasoline service stations would be allowed to use their premises for car wash fund raisers which are not considered to be accessory to the service station or a promotion for that service station. Four car wash fund raiser permits could be issued annually for up to ten consecutive days. Administrative Permits for other businesses and activities would not be changed and two such permits could be issued annually for up to ten consecutive days. Questions have been raised regarding the "fairness" of such an ordinance amendment which would benefit only gasoline service stations.- If the City Council desires to have these promotional events be standardized for all businesses, I would suggest limiting the length of these permits considerably. If all businesses were allowed three thirty -day permits annually the result might well be a carnival atmosphere particularly along Brooklyn Boulevard and other areas of business - concentration. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ORDINANCE No. ��J lA` AN ORDINANCE AMEND114G CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING ADMINI STRATIVE PERMITS FOR GAS SERV STATIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 35 -800 of the City Ordinances i amended as follows: 2. Out of door retail sale, storage and display of merchandise or offering of services when accessory to or promoting, permitted use or a special use within a nonresidential zoning district as follows: a." The out of door retail sale, display, and storage of nursery and garden: merchandise including Lawn furniture and equi pment, Jor period not to exceed 30 consecutive weeks in any one calendar year. The permit fee shall be $5. b, Miscellaneous -out of door retail sales displays or ,' promotional events for periods not to exceed 10 consecutive days. Two such 10 day permits may be allowed per premises per calendar year. The permit fee shall be $2. c. Gasoline service stations may have miscel out of door retail sales, displays or pr omotional events fo periods not � exceed 30 consecutive days. Three such 30 day ermi may b e all owed per premis per ca Iendar year. Car wash f and raisers which are not cla as being accessory t o or promoting a service station activity are permitted for periods not to exceed 10 consecutive days. Faur such 10 day permits M a be allowed per premises per calendar year. Permit f ees s Ee Z. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty. days (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day. of '19 Mayor ATTEST: G er Date of Publication Effective Date : (Underline indi matter to be added) CITY OF aR00KLYN CENTER ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 34 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING . GASOLINE S ERVICE. STATION S►GNERY IF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS. Section 1. Section 34 -140 Subd. 3 of the City Ordinances is hereby amended — follows 34.140 Subd. 3. Permitted Signs Requi rinq a Permit. A. Commercial (C -2) and Industrial (I -1 and I -2) Districts. Gasoline Service Stations In addition to other signer p ermitted b � this se of the " ordinance, g s ervice stations shall be enti t a f informational si n on each pump is and: The size of the sin shall not exceed sq. ft. in area and hav a height no greater than 15 feet. Sectiorf Z. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 M ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication 'Effective Date _- (Underline indicates matter to be added). k A t - i s a RESOLUTION NO. 81 -173 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following resolution and moved its adoptions RESOLUTION APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TO CONDUCT AN INFILTRATION;INFLOW ANALYSIS OF THE SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. .ORDINANCES AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 34 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING GASOLINE SERVICE STATION SIGNERY The City Manager explained the ordinance proposed for gasoline service station signery is incomplete with regard to the size of the pump island signs since the staff did not receive input from the gasoline service station owners in the City as the Council had requested. There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar, to table consideration of an ordinance amending Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances regarding gasoline service station signery because the staff had not received the requested input from the service station owners with regard to the size of pump island signs. } AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS FOR GASOLINE SERVICE STATIONS There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve for first reading an ordinance amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances regarding administrative permits for gasoline service station signs'. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none, the motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEMS The City Manager explained that currently _the 'Senate is considering legislation which would de- regulate the Cable Television Industry and if Senate Bill 898 is passed it would prohibit cities from regulating or establishing rates for cable TV services. He explained the power to regulate local franchises through rate regulation has traditionally been assigned to local government and that any preemption of this local authority would diminish the City's ability to assure that adequate cable service is provided to subscribers and that the cable companies meet their franchising promises. He stated the staff is requesting that the Council approve the enclosed resolution opposing the federal legislation prohibiting cities from regulating or establishing rates for cable television services and to forward this resolution to the appropriate legislators. 8 -24 -81 -4- ORDINANCE NO 81-17 Member Tony Kuefler introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 17 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES RELATIVE TO PERSONNEL POLICIES The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler; Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 81 -18 Member Celia Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS FOR GASOLINE SERVICE STATIONS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same none, whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 34 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING GASOLINE SERVICE STATION SIGNERY Councilmember Lhotka commented he believes that if only two individuals are requesting a change in an ordinance this does not justify an ordinance amendment. On that basis he stated he believes the amendment regarding gasoline service station signery is not justified. _There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the first reading an Ordinance Amending Chapter 34 of the City' Ordinances Regarding Gasoline Service Station Signery. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler and Scott. Voting against: Councilmember Lhotka. The motion passed. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING A REMOTE STATION FIRE ALARM PROTECTIVE SIGNALING SYSTEM There was a,motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the first reading an Ordinance Amending Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances' Regarding A Remote Station Fire Alarm Protective Signaling System. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed. DISCUSSION ITEMS CONSENT AGENDA The City Manager stated the staff has prepared a proposed format for consent agenda as requested by the City Council. He noted the consent agenda is proposed as a 9- 14 -F31 -4- CPT M1rdtPLF:S nF' `:'HF: PI�OC.Ia;nxidG O'? Till' CITY COUNCIL OF Till" CITY OI' BROOKLYr•1 Cl;r1'1'1:It IN THE COUNTY OF 11I Ni1F :PIN htdD THE' STA11 01 r411111T SOTh REGULAR SESSION SI PTF; 4B1'R 28, 1981 CITY IIALL CALL TO_O PI)ER The Brooklyn Center City Council'rnct in regular_ session and was called to order by Mayor Dean 1,1yquist at 7:01. p.m. RO LL CA LL_ Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmcmbers Bill F'ignar, and Gene Lhotka. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter., Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Director of Finance Paul Iiolmlund, Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, Park & Recreation Director Gene Hagel, Building Official Will Dahn, and Administrative Assistants Brad Koffman and Tom Bublitz. Mayor Nyquist noted that Councilmembers Scott and Kuefler would be absent from .. thi nwnning's me eting and were excused. IN The inv- ation was offered by Father Shea of St. Alphonsus Church. A PPROV AL OF MINUTES SEPTEMB 14, 1981 :ayor Nyqu - st ncted a quorum of the Council members present at the September 14, 1981 meeting were not present this evening and he deferred approval of the minutes to the next regular City Council meeting. OPF,N• EOKIM Mayor Nyquist noted that he had received a request to use the Open Forum session from Mr. Russ Viska representing the Smoke Pit Restaurant at 5001 Drew Avenue North. Mr. Viska stated he would like to discuss the issue of signery for his restaurant. He stated he became aware of the changes in the sign ordinance with regard to service station signery and noted that he believes service stations are generally located in areas of high visibility and could not understand why they had to receive special treatment with regard to signage. He stated the Smoke Pit Restaurant conducted its two ten -day promotions as allowed by the sign ordinance and stated that the banners used in the promotions were helpful to people in finding the restaurant. He stated, he believes, he is as unique as service stations and added that his new business is in a location that is very difficult to find without proper signs. He stated that while the banners were up during the ten day promotion, people were able to find the restaurant which is blocked from view by trees along Highway 100. Mayor Nyquist pointed out that one reason the service stations were uniquely treated with regard to signery is that they are already in a unique position in the zoning ordinance. Councilmember Lhotka commented that because the service stations were allowed- special treatment with regard to signory, that Mr. Vi_ska's.reclucst is an example of what will be hailpening in the future with regard to other businesses requesting similar treatment. 9 -28 -81 -1 F Councilmember Fignar stated that he understands Mr.'Viska's concern and inquired whether it would -be possible to draft language to allow new businesses extra -- time with regard to signery so that they can get a proper start. The City Manager pointed out that many of the cities the Planning Department surveyed with regard to signery allow administrative permits for promotions for only new businesses. The City Attorney arrived at 7:15 p.m.' s The City Manager stated that the staff can present information with regard to what other cities allow for signery for new businesses at the next Council meeting. The City Manager noted that Mr. Viska can contact City Hall on the Friday before the next scheduled Council meeting to obtain the information the staff will be presenting to the Council with regard to the survey of signery allowed for new businesses in neighboring communities. SUBDIVISION BOND RELEASE - HAROLD L. GIES F OR GUNDERSON ADDITI There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to reduce the subdivision bond in the amount of $2,650 held for improvements in the Gunderson Addition Subdivision. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council- --members Fignar and Lhotka. Voting against: none. The motion passed. PERFORMANCE BOND RELEASES /REDUCT There was a motion by Councilmeniuer Fignar and seconded by Co uncilmember Lhotka to approve the release of the performance guarantees on Howe Fertilizer, 4821 Xerxes Avenue, North, Victoria Townhouses, 68th Avenue North & Grimes Place and to approve the reduction of the performance guarantee on Meriwethers Restaurant, 2101 Freeway Boulevard from $45,000 to $5,000. Vct in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Fignar and Lhotka. Voting against: none The motion passed. APPROVAL OF ELECTION JUDGES FOR NOVEMBER 3, 1981. MTJNI ELECTION' There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka' to approve the list of election fudges for the November 3, 1981 municipal election as submitted by the City Clerk. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Fignar and Lhotka. Voting against: 'none. The motion passed. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 81 -191 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved' its adoption: i RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROJECT NO. 1981 -26, AND ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT 1981 -M (ATHLETIC FIELD BACKSTOP CONSTRUCTION) The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Bill Fignar, and Gene Lhotka; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 81 -192 Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: �` MEMOUNDUtz T0: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning &. Inspection DATE: October 2, 1981 SUBJECT: Special Permi for Grand Openings in Other Communities Attached is a copy of my August 6, 1981 memo and report to you regarding our review of various Sign Ordinances in effect in neighboring communiti The City Council, at their September 28, 1981 meeting requested information regard � c{ what 9,ther cities dowith respect to signage allowed for new businesses for "Grand �Eni ngs . On page 3 (second full paragraph) of the August 6 rjxamo, the matter of promotional permits in Brooklyn Center and the other surveyed communities is reviewed and discussed. The last column on Table 1 of the memo lists the information obtained. Lyle are in the process developing a list containing the major Sign and Zoning Ordi nance amendments also requested by the Ci Council on Septembar 28. I hope to have this available by the October 5, 1981 Council meeting. • X94 ORDINANCE NO. 81 -19 Member Celia Scott introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 34 OF THE CITY ORDINANCE REGARDING GASOLINE SERVICE STATION SIGNERY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: Gene Lhotka, whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. Councilmember Lhotka noted that a change. in the Sign Ordinance has already brought additional requests for more changes and he believes the Sign Ordinance should remain in effect in its present form. ORDINANCE NO. 81 -20 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following ordinance and moved its adoption AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 5 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING A REMOTE STATION FIRE ALARM PROTECTIVE SIGNALING SYSTEM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing ordinance was duly seconded by member Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, .the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said ordinance was declared duly passed and adopted. c o There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to offer for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Of The City Ordinances Regarding Minimum Parking Spaces. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. In discussion of the next agenda item, An Ordinance Amending Chapters 34 and 35 Of The City Ordinances Regarding Home Occupations, Councilmember Lhotka stated that he was concerned over the effect this ordinance amendment would have on the neighborhood surrounding a given home occupation. The City Attorney noted that the language in the ordinance may create an impression that ten children in a day care operation or ten students in a class are automatic under the ordinance. He explained the City Council does have discretion in special use permits and the ordinance would allow up to ten children or students and would not automatically provide that ten be allowed in any special use permit. Councilmember Lhotka stated that if the City Council approves the home occupation ordinance amendment it appears that it would allow automatically, two on- street parking spaces. The City Attorney noted that the home occupation ordinance has been amended and expanded over the years and that the sections being amended by t this ordinance amendment are the definitions declaring when a special use permit a is required.. He explained the attempt here is to limit the on- street parking to two spaces. 10 -5 -83 ..5_ s Discussion ensued among Council members regarding the ordinance amendment and after considerable discussion, there was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to table the first reading of An Ordinance Amending Chapters 34 and 35 Regarding Home Occupations., to allow staff time to examine the entire home occupation section of the Zoning - ordinance. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Kuefler added that he would request that no on- street parking be allowed with home occupations. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:31 p.m. and reconvened at 8:50 P.M. DISCUSSION ITEMS r SURVEY OF CITIES WITH REGARD TO ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS FOR NEW BUSINESSES AND GRAND OPENINGS The City Manager reviewed the memorandum prepared by the Director of Planning & Inspection regarding special permits for grand openings use by other communities. The Director of Planning & Inpsection reviewed the changes made in the City Sign Ordinance since 1977. He stated that nine changes had been made in the ordinance since 1979. Councilmember Fignar inquired whether the staff could assist in solving Mr. Viska's problem with the visibility of his restaurant. The Director of Planning & Inspection noted that Mr. Viska is entitled to a temporary sign under the current ordinance. He also noted that a wall sign for Mr. Viska's operation would be permitted under the present Sign Ordinance. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Russ Viska of the Smoke Pit Restaurant who stated that he believes a wall sign could be a detraction to the building and that he believed he needs signs which would allow people to locate the restaurant, at least for a limited period of time, while the business is becoming established. He stated he believes that service stations have been treated differently with regard to signery and pointed out that service stations are already in highly visible areas unlike his restaurant. Councilmember Lhotka stated that he believes the Council will be receiving more requests of the nature of Mr. Viska's in the future which are a result of the change in the Sign Ordinance with regard to service station signery. Mr. Viska stated that his problem is due in part to the speed of the traffic on Highway 100 and the fact that the trees along Highway 100 block the view of his business. Councilmember Fignar inquired of Mr. Viska what type of sign would be most helpful. Mr. Viska replied that a banner type sign similar to the one that he used during his grand opening would perhaps be the most beneficial'. Councilmember Scott inquired about the possible removal of some of the trees along Highway 100. Mr. Viska noted that he had contacted the Department of Transportation and that they told him, since Highway 100 is not a designated freeway, they do not 10 -5 -81 -6- have complete control over the right -of -way. The City Manager stated that the staff will look into the possibility of this option and report back to the Council. Mr. Viska stated that signs are basically ugly and that he would request that only temporary signs be permitted for his business until people are generally aware of-the location of his business. Councilmember Lhotka stated that he believes Mr. Viska's request is no different than the request made by the service station owners. Councilmember Fignar commented that Mr. Viska has a rather unique location and believes he does need some assistance. Councilmember Lhotka noted that the most immediate solution appears for Mr. Viska to install a wall sign and noted that the Council must also resolve the issue of the Sign Ordinance. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated that Mr. Viska can accomplish what he wants under the existing Sign Ordinance and that he would not recommend in- creasing the number of promoticnal events under the administrative permits. The City Manager stated the staff will report back at the next meeting regarding' the possibility of the removal of some of the trees blocking Mr. Viska's restaurant from the view of traffic on Highway 100. Councilmember Lhotka commented that he believes the City Council must address the issue of changing the Sign Ordinance with regard to service stations and the implications of that change. REPORT ON CITY RADIO COMMUNICATIONS STUDY CONDUCTED BY W. H. MONTGOMERY & ASSOCIATES The City Manager introduced Mr. Ward Montgomery to the Council members and stated that he was present this evening to review his report on the City's radio communi- cations. Mr. Montgomery stated that he has examined the existing City radio system with the exception of the mobile equipment which is leased from Hennepin County. He noted that the current rental rates for county equipment is well below the market rate but that county equipment is coming to an end of its service life. He „explained that his company also conducted a study for Brooklyn Park and pointed - out that the Brooklyn Park police are dispatched by the Hennepin County Sheriff's office noting that this is really not a true dispatch service. He noted that Crystal and Robbinsdale are also dispatched by the Sheriff's office. He explained his report outlines the cost for a new radio system and for a central dispatch facility. He explained the cost for a central dispatch facility including the Cities of Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Crystal, and Robbinsdale would not be appreciably different than for Brooklyn Center alone. He added he is not attempting to sell this type of system but only to bring it to the Council's. attention. The City Manager stated he sees some advantages for Brooklyn Center in examining a joint dispatch system. He noted Brooklyn Park is perhaps the most seriously interested in this type of system. He stated he would like our system, no matter what we decide, to be up and running prior to the implementation of the 911 system which is scheduled for the end of 1982. Councilmember Kuefler, expressed ` concern over the size of a joint dispatch system and inquired at what point would such a system begin to lose efficiency. The City Manager explained that it is not .possible to answer that question now, but if and 10 -5 -81 -?- iC; G rald (. S,plinte -r, City P i►,;;r ►" F 0 P : i onald A. l'arr•en, Director of Planning and Inspoctiorf DITE: 0ctrik 2n, 1981 ' U3 �iFCT: i "ajar Ar,i rrd iierrts to the S i g n and Zoning Ordina ►ices S.i rice 1977 life follo i is a l ist of substantive aincndments to Chapter 34 (Sign Ordinance) and Chapter 35 (Zoning Ordinance) of tho City Ordinances' since 1977. This' list is in reverse order begi rrni ng !. th the iiast recent change. The l i st do s not i ricl ude si,ch th i nqs as amendmerit.s that reflect property descri changes due to re Zoning actions or chancjes related to periiiit and license lees or fi nes . The l i s t i ncl udes t -i, official ordinance number and in parenthesis the effective date of the orrainance. Also, there is a brief description of the ailiend ment and an explana -Jen as to how or why the amendment's were initiated. ORDT ! 1 DESCRIPTION 8i -19 AilENDING GAITER 34 REGARDING GASOLINE SERVICE STATION SIGNERY. (10- -1'-'4 81 ) This ordinance change allows 20 sq. ft. - freestanding infor- ri«tionil sig rs at each pump island which are in addition to - oth ,er• permi Ued signs. This amend1m nt was the result of an open orum inquiry .ley two local service station operators, a discussion i tern by the City Council at a City Council ,m -eeti ng and there direction by the City Council, Ito prepare the ordi nance change. 81 - Ai4ENDINIG CHAPTER 35 REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE PERPUTS FOR (10- 3 --81) GASOLINL SERVICE STATIONS This ordinance amendment a.l l oi- s - three 30 day permits per year for gasoline service stations to have miscellaneous - out• -of- door retail sales, displays or promotional events and also allows gasoline service stations to have four'tar wash fund raisers" each year for periods not to exceed TO consecutive days. The corresponding banners, pennants, etc. can be utilized during hese promotion i or "car wash fund raiser" events.' This ord na ncr. amendn ent was a result of an open forum inquiry by two local service station operators, a discussion itent at a City Co;mci i agenda and 'lien direction • by the City Council to prepare t,:e ordinance air;endment. 81--16 AMENDING CHAPTER 34 REGARDING CANOPY SIGNS. (10-3 --81) 'This amendirrent def ned a canopy sign and established criteria by which canopy si gns could be conside red wall si gns rather than freestanding signs. This ordinance amendment was the result of Planning Comi:rission Application i'o. 81050 submitted by Swenson 's Ethan Allen Galleries ror a vi3r ance from the Sign Ordinance. The City Council denied the variance request, but changod the ordinance to allots canopy signs under certain ci roams i:ances throughout the City. }ber 23, '1081 Oi "Di NANCC NO. DUSCRIPTION 81 - 15 AMENDIIIG CHAPTER 35 CO3NVEillEh!CE r00D RESTAURANTS. (10 -3.81) This ordinance d fined convenicnce food restaurants and established them as special uses - in the C -2 Zoning Di str'i ct provided they do not abut R -1 , R--2, or R -3 Zoning Di stricts i - ncl udi ng zjbuttment at a street line. This ordinance amendment was initiated by the staff and recom,,; by the Planning Coni!iiission.follo� li inquiries to establish convenience food restaurants in certain areas. It should be rioted that the recommiended Con i ve Plan established this criteria a -rid WOL"I d prolli bi t convenience food restaurants from being located adjacent to certain residential property. 81 -14 (8- 22 --81) AMENDING CHAPTER 35 REGARDING THE ASSEMBLY OF ELECTRIC POVIERED VEHICI -ILES IN THE I-1 AND I -2 DISTRICTS. This ordinance armendn: nt established the assembly of electric po icred vehicles as perijvi�L uses in both - lie I -1 and I -2 Zoning Districts. This ordinance was the result of the approval of Planning Co ;rmission Application No. 81.010 which was a request for determination that the assembly of electric - powered vehicles was similar in nature to uses permitted in the I--1 and I -2 zoni districts. Following the determination by the City Ccuncil that the use was similar in nature,tho Council requested that the Zoning Ordinance be amanded to li thi acti as a permitted use: 81 -13 (8- 2.2 -81) AMENDING CHAPTER 35 REGARDING ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN THE Rl and R2 DISTRICTS. This ordinance amendment deleted the then requirements regarding garages and accessory structures in the R1 and R2 districts to allow the ground coverage for any single accessory building to be no greater than 1,000 square feet; that there be no more than two accessory structures for any residential premises; and that ro ln, coverage o an accessor bui building rr or build d s i the total 1 � d f h O y y 9 9 shall not.exceed the total ground coverage of the principle building. This ordinance amendrent was the direct result of a variance request under Planning Commission Application No. 81036 submitted by Jacqueline Bateman This variance request was denied but the ordinance was changed so that it was effective on a uniform basis throughout the City. 81 -1 (1- 17 -81) AMENDING CHAPTER 34 REGARDING DIRECTIONAL SIGNS; CERTAIN REAL ESTATE SIGNS; AND IDENTIFICATION SIGNS FOR CHURCHES, SYNAGOGUES AND T EMPLES, This ordinance amendment increased substantial the size of temporary real estate signs for the purpose of leasing or selling dwelli uni contain two or more uni and the leasing or _ sell of portions of commercial or industrial bui i ai ngs . The ordinance also modified provisions for directional signs and standardized th si gn s per initted for chorche s, synagogues and temples. This ordinance amendment for the iiiost mart was directly related to Planning Commission Application No. 80033, submitted 3 October 28, 1 0('i)I('A110E N0. DESCRIPTION by A.F. I.A. Associate, requestinci a variance from the Sign Ord for thr. size of real estate signs. The variance request +.ras ultimately deni by the City .Council and the ordinanc( ad(jpiled so that the pro V4 si ()ris Cot 11 d kJe applied uniforrily throu the City. The directional sign amendments an(] the signs for churches, etc. were watters that had been discussed for somr? time by the Planning Commission and were i ncor porated wi th thi s ordi nance amendment as wel l . 8(l -& fi,(t1EP;DTNG CHAPTER 3A RtGARDI(vG REAL ESTATE SIGNS. ( 8 -2 -80 ) This ordinance amendment allo4 <ed temporary off - -site real estate signs announcing open house to be permitted on private resi- pro o ert owner. during dente al pt e,�� r �y with the consent of the property y g the time o; the open house provided the sign was no greater than 2z square feet in area. This ordinance amendment was the result of a request by a group of realtors at an open forum and a subscqucnt d i scu "si on item regarding al lovii ng off -site open house signs under certain conditions. Following the dis cussion the City Council directed the.ordinance change. 80 -7 APPENDING CHAPTER 35 REGARDING ACCESSORY OFF -SITE PARKING AND (8 -2 -80) JOINT PARKING FACILITIES. This ordnance amendment defined in the Zoning Ordinance accessory off - si te parking and also joint p lrk:i ng and tine a.mandment iilodi fied some of the requirei„ents for off -site accessory parking facilities within the Ci This was a staff and Planning Co, ssi on initiated ordinance amendment which had been discussed at the time that the barn-hippodrome conversion was being comprehended by Mleridpian Construction. The ordinance had a general effect throughout tile City and was considered a first step in loosening some of the requirements for off -site accessory parhing 80 -5 AMENDING CHAPTERS 34 AND 35 REGARDING ADMINISTRATIVE PERMITS FOR (6- 28 -80) SIGNS FOR CIVIC FUNCTIONS AND COMI>IUNITY EVENTS. This amendment allowed for off -site signs to be utilized for pro- moting or announcing civic functions and community events provided they %:ere authorized or declared to be such by the City Council. It limited these off -site signs to private property in the commercial and industrial zoning districts and at no more than five locations with no more than one s gn . per location. The amen6nent required that administrative permits be issued for each sign location and would not be considered against the two ten day promotional permits authorized per business location. This "ordinance amendment was the result of discussions with the City Council regarding this natter and direction to prepare the ordinance change. 80-4 AMENDING CHAPTER 35 REGARDING SCHOOL BUS GARAGES. (5- 30 -80) This ordinance amendment defined a school bus garage and authorized this use as a special use in the C2 zoning district provided all storage, including vehicles anKlin nor servicing and minor repair be conducted wholly within an enclosed building and further, that use d s not .' a residential Rl through R7 zoning f this - t, o� o abut y ( O ) district, including abuttttrent at a street line. This ordinance amendl was related to Planning Commission Application No. 80008, submitted by Bob Regan to dUthori ze a school bus garage facility Oc iWher 28, 1981 OR )I F NO DESCRIPI ION at 4435 -68th Avenue North. The Planning Comm fission had recoliilr,ended denial o i* the application on the basis that the use was not per viii tted as e i th(.r a pern;i is ted or special use in the C2 zoning district. The City Council, foi l owi nq discussion of the watter, tabled this item and suggested that consideration be given to amending the ordinance so that school hus garage facilities could be permitted by a special use and :r certain c.i rcumstances in the C2 Toning district. The ordinance amendment was the result of that review. 80 - :3 AMENDING CHAPTER 34 REGARDING COURTESY BENCH SIGNS. (3 -7 -80) This ordinance amendment t,as requested by the City Council and exempted courtesy bench signs frori the prohibitions against bill- boards in the Sian Ordinance provided the courtesy bench signs were installed arid maintained by a person, firm or corporation licensed by the City Council. 80 -2 AMENDING CHAPTER 35 REGARDING A DEFINITION FOR TRANSIENT LODGING (3 -7 -80) AND ALLOWING A LIFE -IN RESIDENT MANAGER. This ordinance defined transient lodging and allowed one dwelling unit for a live-in resident mamager. This was the direct result of requests by the Fudgetel Motel and the Thrifty Scot Motel to consider allowing l i v e -i n resident managers in their hotel accom modations. The matter r;as reviewed by the Planning Commission and the ord i nance change was recommended and adopted. 80 -1 AMENDING CHAPTER 35 REGARDING SETBACKS FROM hiAjOR THOROUGHFARES. (2- 15 -8.0) This ordinance amendment reconfirmed the 50 ft. setback from major thoroughfares but exempted accessory' structures in rear yards or where property abutted a marginal access street or abutted a noise wall or noise berm constructed by'`MN /DOT or where the City Council finds that excess right -of --way mitigates` the effects of traff1ic, noise, dust and_ fumes. This ordinance amendment was the result of much review and discussion by the Planning Commission regarding the affect of freeways and excess right -of -way on building setbacks with adjoining property. 79-16 AMENDING CHAPTER 35 REGARDING SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE I -1 (10- 27 -79) AND I -2 DISTRICTS. This ordinance amend,iient modified the buffer and setback requirements between industrial (I -1 and I -2) districts and residential (RI through 117) districts. It modified the then requirements to provide what was felt to be a better balance for buffer and setbacks when industrial abuts residential at a property line and also at a street line. This ordinance amendment was the result of a variance request which was denied under Planning Commission Application Rio. 79053 (submitted by Cass Screw Company) The ordinance was adopted to apply these buffer and setback requirements on a uniform basis throughout the City. 79 -I5 AMENDING CHAPTER 34 REGARDING FREESTANDING SIGNS FOR THE R3 (10 -6 -79) THROUGH 1 DISTRICTS. This ordinance amendment gave apartment complexes in the R3 through R7 districts the option of having either one freestanding sign no greater than 36 sq. ft. in area and r,o more than 10 ft. jr ORDINAINI E PLO. DESCRIPTIOi! -in fjei cht or two identical frcestand i ng signs at opposite sides of an entrance to such an establishri,en't each to be no greater than 1.8 sq. ft. in area nor h,,ve a height above 5 ft. This ordi r once anlend,,r -ant resulted from the denial of Planning Commission Application No. 73042, submitted by t.lel Gi ttl eman of Twin Lake North Ap,1rt*, r;hc had requested a variance from the Sign Ordinance. That variance was denied but the ordinance was amended so that these provisions could be applied uniformly throughout the Ci ty , 79 -14 Al °!EftDIiA!G CHhPTER 35 REQ1)IRING THE ABATEMENT AND DISCONTINUANCE (10- -6 -79) OF THE i;P,HUEitCTURE OF CHEH,ICAL FERTILIZERS IN INDUSTRIAL AREAS. This ordinance a.r,en Jmr-,nt was the direct result of the nonconformi nq status of the manufacturing of chemical fertilizers and established a phase -out time for Howe Fertilizer to discontinue their operation. 79 -11 AMENDING CHAPTERS 34 and 35 REGARDING RUMMAGE SALE SIGNS, (7-- 20 -79) Th is V r d I nance am tidii eiit ^1od is f1 ed ho th the Sign Ordi narice and Zoning Ordinance and allovied rummage sale signs 'to be displayed off -site on other residential property Provided the property owners per m scion had been obtained to display these kinds of signs . Th ese rug rrage sale signs still were required to conform with other provisions of the Sign Ordinance. This amendment was the result of a number of complaints regarding the unfairness of the City Sign Ordinance with respect to garage sale or rummage sale signs. 78-12 AMENDING CHAPTERS 15 AND 35 RELATIVE TO OUTLOTS (11-- 24 --78) This ordinance amendment defined in both the subdivision ordinance and the zoning ordinance an. "outlof" as an unbuildable parcel which was subject to future subdivision or as a parcel of land designated as a private roadway in a- townhouse development plat. This ordinance amendment was a clarification type of amendment following the Yesnes case in which the City's interpretation of an out'sot was upheld in court. 78 -10 AMIENDING CHAPTER 35 RELATIVE TO CANOPIES AND CARPORTS. (10- 21• -78) This ordinance amendment defined "canopies "which are allowable encroachments into established yard setbacks and°"carports•'which are classified as accessory structures and not permitted to encroach into established yard setbacks. This ordinance amendirtent was the direct result of a denied appeal .under Planning Commission No. 77064 and a denied variance request under Planning .Commission - Application No. 780,64, both submitted by fir. Gene Hamilton. The City Council accepted the rationale of a carport being an accessory structure Without a specific definition being in the Zoning Ordinance and denied itr. Hamilton's request for a variance to en- croach into that setback. The City Council felt that no ordinance amendmont was necessary other than to clarify further by defi- nition the distinction between carports and canopies. P October 28, 1901 011DIiiANCE NO DESCRIPTION (4- 8--78) AMENDING CHAPTER 35 REGARDING SPECIAL USES. IN THE C2 (GENERAL CtJRK RCE) DISTRICT. This ordinance established health spas as special uses in the C2 zoning district providing they did not abut R1, R2 or R3 district. The ordinance also defined massage and sauna and established sauna establishments and massage establishments as special uses in the C2 zoning district provided they do no abut any residential (RI through R7) district, including abuttment at a street line. This ordinance was adopted on the advice of the City Attorney that it would be best to control these establishments through zoning as well as licensing provisions for sauna and massage parlor establishments. A companion ordinance establishing licensing criteria and regulations was also adopted. 77 -20 (1- 8-78) AMENDING CHAPTER 35 RELATIVE TO RE'l_OWNG EVALUATION POLICY AND GUIDELINES. This ordinance amendment established in he Zoning ordinance a Rezoning Evaluation Policy and Review Guidelines for authorizing rezoning applications that would come before the City Council. This ordinance was recon;m2nded by both the staff and the Planning Commission as a tool for effectively maintaining the City's Comprehensive Plan and land use classifications and had previously been adopted by the City Council in the form of a resolution (Resolution No. 77 -167). 77 -14 AMENDING CHAPTER 35 RELATIVE TO MINIMUM BUILDING SEPARATIONS (10- -1-77) Its! THE R1 AND R2 DISTRICTS. This amendment established for the first time a 6 ft. minimum separation between any accessory buildings on the same lot as measured from wall to wall. There had been no previous standards and the 6 ft. was established. This was brought to the City Council's attention through Planning Commission Application No. 77042, submitted by Ronald Blake. This variance request was approved and direction was given to establish the ordinance criteria. 77 -8 AMENDING CHAPTER 35 RELATIVE TO SPECIAL SERVICE /OFFICE USES IN (6- 18-77) THE R5 ZONING DISTRICT. This ordinance amendment allowed certain service /office uses described in the permitted uses in the C1 district to be authorized by a special use permit in an R5 (multiple residential) zoning district. This ordinance amendment was the result of a rezoning request by Richard Rockstad under Planning Commission Application No. 77001. Mr. Rockstad proposed to rezone from R5 to C1 property located at 7000 through 7006 Brooklyn Boulevard. Much discussion over the proposed rezoning took place with the decision being ,made to allow certain service /office uses in the R5 district as a special use. Mr. Rockstad subsequently withdrew the rezoning request and this ordinance amendment was adopted. Ultimately, Mr. Rockstad; under Application No. 77035,received this special use permit sand site and building plan approval for his real estate office in an R5' zoning} district. He mo Page 7 October 28, 1981 OP.[iI CCflI'iCL NO. DESCRIPTION 77 -6 AMENDING CHAPTERS 15 AND 30 RELATIVE To SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED �: r. - U -77 C)t ;LLLIi1..� UNITS. 4 1 i C This ordinance amendment defined condominium single family attached dwelling units as two or more units horizontally attached and allowed condominium single family attached dwelling units as permitted uses in the R3 zoning district. This ordinance amendment was the result of a request and much discussion, deliberation and review on the part of the Planning Commission and City Council to allow two attached units rather than three or more attached units in the fonds residential development. I I i approve for first reading an Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 Regarding Buildings In R1 And R2 Districts Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed. DISCUSSION ITEMS STAFF REPORT ON MA AMENDM TO THE SIGN AND ZONING ORDINANCE SINCE 1977 amendmen o f the m a •or am The City Manager explained the Counc requested a review � to the Zoning Ordinance and that the memorandum from the Director of Planning & Inspection to the City Manager dated October 28, 1981 is a report reviewing the major amendments since 1977. He noted that rezoning amendments were not included in this report. SUNDAY BRUNCH LAW The City Manager er reviewed the new State law with regard to Sunday brunch noting that the revision in State law allows the serving of liquor at 10:00 a.m. on Sunday to accommodate restaurants serving Sunday brunch. - The City Attorney stated that no election is necessary to implement the statute and that an ordinance amendment would suffice. He also noted the Chamber of Commerce has supported the change in the law to allow the serving of liquor at a Sunday brunch. He added that the statute is ambiguous and that he spoke with Mr. Dan Sexton of the House Commerce Committee who informed him that the drafters of the legislation did not intend that municipalities hold an election to implement the statute. He also noted that he discussed the issue with Mr. Stan Peskar of the League of Minnesota Cities who stated that cities around the state are proceeding in implementation of the statute without elections Mayor Nyquist stated that his concern is that in the original election which allowed allot. The City Attorney stated Sunday liquor s Y S�. Y specific times were indicated on the b q p that his recommendation was based on discussions indicating that legislators did not intend that an election be necessary to implement the change in the law. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Gary Hennes, President of the Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce, who stated that the matter was referred to the Chamber for their comment ; and that the Sunday brunch law was supported by the Governmental Affairs Committee of the Chamber and by the full Board. He stated that the Chamber believes that failure to adopt the Sunday brunch law would be a competitive disadvantage to hospitality business in Brooklyn Center. He stated that most of the surrounding communities have already adopted the provision. He stated the Chamber would urge the Council to adopt the Sunday brunch law also. Councilmember Kuefler stated that he would request that the Council be presented with a specific formal request from the Chamber to adopt the statutory provision. Mayor Nyquist requested that the staff prepare information regarding how the original referendum was worded in other cities with regard to Sunday liquor. The City Attorney stated that it may be appropriate to seek an Attorney General's opinion on the statute to clear up any ambiguities in the legislation. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to authorize the City Attorney to seek an Attorney General's opinion regarding _ the 11 -9 -81 -11- Licenses to be approved by the City Council on September 26,*1983. CIGARETTE LICENSE ge a roe `- 6415 James Circle S Drug Emporium Brookdale Square " Sinclair Marketing 6601 Iyndale Ave. i Clerk WTIMCIAL KENNEL LICENSE Brookdale Pet Center Brookdale Ctr Northbrook Animal Hospital 413 66th Ave N. Snyder Brothers Brookdale Ctr . JYl 0. Sanitarian NP GASOLINE SER VICE STATION LICENSE Sinclair Fra eting 6601 Tyndale Ave. ity Cleft ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHKENT LICENSE arlle rownn 5900 Humboldt Ave. N. . Sanitarian MECHANICAL SYSTEM'S `LICENSE Carlson Refrigeration 133 West Island Ave. Ag& viron-Con, Inc. Box 1351 Lacy, Inc. 2124 West Broadway sett Mechanical Contractors 1322 Rice Street i ici NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE C oca C Bott ig_ 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd. Country Store 5425 Xerxes Ave. N. Sinclair Marketing 6601 Iyndale Ave. N�- a San itarian RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE nl itial: LuAnn Falenczykowski - 6000 Abbott Ave. N. C.C.,Hogen 5030 Brooklyn Blvd. Curtis & Audrey Cady 6915 Brooklyn Blvd. Richard Olson 5818 Humboldt Ave. N. Len Riley 6812 Perry Ave. N. Stanley J. Gibson 4734 Twin Lake Ave. Joseph Veidel 7104 Unity Ave. N. Ron VanKempen 3213 67th Ave. N. Renewal: Laura & Jeff Hanson 6933 Brooklyn Blvd. RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE - cont. Charles & Linda Sabatke 6306 Brooklyn, Dr. Paul Dorfman 5245, 47 Drew Ave. N. Gene M. Proctor 6006 Ewing Ave:. N. Helen Ebhardt 5637, 39 Girard Ave N. Michael L. Goodwin 5006 Howe Lane Harold & Sharon Schindele 5407 James Ave. N. P._Zawislak & B. Maloney 5543 Judy Lane Dennis & Eileen Brite 7201 Morgan Ave. N. Timothy & Nancy Phillips 6113 Quail Ave. N. Lewis & Vivian Hedlund 5316, 20 Russell Ave. N. Raymond & Arlene Breffle 5324, 28 Russell Ave. N Robert Nechal 5332, 36 Russell Ave. N. Fred & Judie Swenson 5340, 44 Russell Ave. N. Gregory & Reinette Raeker 5400, 02 Russell Ave. N. Henry Ulhorn 5207 E. Twin Lk. Blvd. Jack & Mary Jane Herrlin 4803 Wingard Place Thomas & Bill Howe 3135 49th Ave. N. Michael & Cecelia Cullen 806 53rd Ave. N. Donald Byram 3724 58th Ave. N. Gary W. Anderson 5413 70th Circle D irector of Planning Fe and Inspection SPECIAL FOOD HANDLING LICENSE F1 S Mnpori�um Brookdale Square San itarian GENERAL APPROVAL: ( n + Gerald G. SplinteiV City Clerk k M &C No 83 7 September 22 1 983 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER Subject. Update - 1984 Proposed Budget To the Honorable Mayor and City Council: At your special meeting last Monday evening you requested my office to review` certain items for your consideration at the next budget review session. The attached material and following information attempts to answer those questions and concerns. First of all,. the Council requested information regarding the licenses and fees for services in the 1984 Proposed Budget. Present estimates do not call for any increases in these fees and the following is a listing of the last time fees were changed in various categories. In 1978 license fees were changed and these fees involve food, vending and other miscellaneous licenses. In 1 981 permit fees such as' building, plumbing, electrical, etc were changed •, In 1 968 the original liquor license was passed and there has been no change in that license since then. There has been no change in the rental licenses since their inception in 1975. However, there are certain fees and permits which relate to such things as vending machines which have been updated in recent ordinance changes. With minor exceptions it has been at least two years since the last increase in any of the fees, and some of them have not been increased since 1 968. It would be my recommendation that the Council instruct the staff to prepare proposed fee changes in light of the age of the fees and to bring them up to the metro community current standards. I would anticipate that this would increase fees on an average of somewhere between 5% and 10%. However, as it relates to the revenue estimates of the 1984 Budget I would think it would be fiscally prudent not , to adjust those levels any higher until you have had some experience with the actual revenue generation. The Council should also understand that before they would consider increasing the revenue estimates in the 1 84 Budget, the liquor license portion of general license revenue is by far the largest portion of total license revenue. If the Council is not interested in increasing liquor license fees, 'it will have a significant impact o hypo n sable additional revenue for 1984. f � _ In the Council Budget there was a question with regard to the amount of 'the dues assessment for the Suburban Rate Authority, and that amount is $1,718. The Council z , asked questions regarding the specific benefits which would accrue to Brooklyn Center as a result of completing the proposed Year 2000 Study. From my perspective the chief benefit of completing the study would be to place the City Council, staff and commissions in a position where they are looking 10 to 15 years down the line on a more long term basis rather than on a year by year basis. There are significant trends such as population changes, aging housing and physical: facilities which will have profound effects on the City of Brooklyn Center in the next 10 to 15 years • I believe now is the time to look ahead and try and anticipate those concerns and problems. I would hope the completion of this study would provide us with a framework or document which could be used as a guideline to be reviewed every other year or every year as to any policy changes the community may want or need to institute. I would also believe this study would examine the administrative organization of the City and review the changes it,may need as the community changes from a growth to a maintenance posture. I believe the study`_ in this area is very timely because the effects of retirements under our Retirement Incentive Program will impact the '1 Budget M & C N0. 83 -7 -2— September 23,'1983 The Council had a`number of questions regarding legal costs. I have talked to Attorney Schieffer, and he will be prepared to discuss with you any questions you may have on Monday night. In the Government Buildings Budget we have requested $25,000 for rebuilding of boilers. I have reviewed this request with Mr. Knapp and he tells me that based on the information he currently has, he is recommending to removal of this item from the 1984 Budget. They haven't completed their review of the second boiler, but it appears to be in no worse condition than the first and if that is the case, then we will need no additional` appropriations to rebuild it in 1984. However, and the odds are substantially against - it, should we discover some additional problems, we could use either the 1983 or 1984 Contingency Appropriation to handle any surprises. The Fire Department questions were asked relating to the extent of usage of the rescue boat. Attached please find a memorandum from Fire Chief: Boman which indicates our experience with the boat over the last three years. I believe it is important to keep in perspective why I recommended an appropriation for a larger, safer piece of equipment for water rescue. Because we have bodies of water within our jurisdiction we are called out to do rescue and other work on them. From my perspective, when we are called upon to send personnel out on these bodies of water, we should have -a safe piece of equipment. I do not consider the current boat safe enough for the kinds of circumstances we are called upon to handle. This especially relates to the river and Twin hake — on the river when the current is fast and the water is high and on Twin hake when the winds are high the water is very cold. If we send personnel out with inadequate equipment, you simply would be better off not sending them at all._ Someone inadequately trained or improperly equipped in an emergency rescue situation, is always a liability and never an asset. From my perspective, even if we only go out once or twice a year, because we must go out, we should have the proper and safe emergency equipment. The particular piece of equipment recommended by the Fire Department and concurred in by my recommendation is apiece of equipment which will last at least 10years. While the expenditure for the initial purchase is high, I do believe it will have a good economic value over a 10 to 15 year period. A question was also asked regarding the future workload in the Engineering Department. In talking with Mr. Knapp he does anticipate the workload to be trailing off over the next few years. However, we are estimating revenue from work completed by this department and received in 1984 to be at the same level as the previous two years. Because we still have workloads to sustain the personnel in this department, we are recommending no reductions other than the one relating to the special assessments area. We estimate revenue from work in this department in 1985 to be $120,000 as it was the last couple of years. In the Public Works Street Construction Budget the question was raised relating to justification for the purchase of a replacement sidewalk plow. Since the inception of the sidewalk program in Brooklyn Center in the late 1 60's and early 1 70's the Street Maintenance Division has used first one and then a second bombardier track type snowplow for plowing all thoroughfare sidewalks. The unit requested in the '84 Budget is a replacement for the 1973 bombardier. bast year we replaced the earlier vintage bombardier, which I believe was approximately•1970, with an MT Trackless sidewalk plow and snowblower. The MT Trackless vehicle has proved to be as effective in serving as a sidewalk plow as the bombardier type unit and has the additional advantage of being able to have an attached snowblower. Without that snowblower type of attachment we simply would not have been 'able to plow the sidewalks during the winter of 1982 -83. Since 1973 the City has operated two sidewalk snowplows which we believe are needed to accomplish snowplowing tasks in a; " f M & C N0. 83-7 -3- September 23, 1983 reasonable period of time. Because the only sidewalks we have in our community are adjacent to major thoroughfares or along major walking routes to our schools and parks, it has become a system on which the community's children and adults have become heavily dependent . When these sidewalks are not plowed on a regular basis it forces people to walk in the streets and it creates dangerous situations on our busier roadways. The 1973 bombardier we are proposing to replace has been a good> machine from a cost standpoint. Its maintenance record was excellent up until 1979 and 1 80 when we had to do major rebuilding on the tracks and undercarriage of this piece of equipment. In 1981 we had transmission difficulty and ,found that parts were not available for repair. Because of its age, its approximately 10 years old, and the parts availability, its really become no longer an effective piece of equipment for us. It is for these reasons we are recommending its replacement and because of our experience with the MT Trackless machine 'last year, we are recommending a similar machine to replace the 1973 bombardier. The proposed replagement machine like the existing one will be equipped with a V snowplow and a snowblower. The recommended replacement machine will plow the same amount of sidewalk as the bombardier in any 8 -hour shift. The new type rubber tired vehicle will do less sod damage than the track type bombardier vehicle and as mentioned< before, will have the added advantage of a blower attachment We have also used the current MT Trackless machine during the summer as it can be used as a tractor in our parks and on our streets whereas the bombardier because of its "tank type" tracks is not suitable for this work. The Animal Control Budget represents no change in the funding levels from 1983 to 1984. The increase in the total budget for 1984 is the cost of purchasing a pickup truck for use by code enforcement officers. This vehicle will replace the current vehicle used by our code enforcement officers, and basically would cost about the same as the existing vehicle. Prom my perspective, I do not believe you can attribute the cost of this vehicle directly and wholly to the Animal Control budget as it is being used to replace a vehicle we already have on our fleet . In terms of operating expenses during 1983 we operated partly under the MAPSI contract and partly with our own personnel. You will note a figure in your Proposed Budget called an operating budget subtotal (which is basically total cost in any given year less capital outlay). You will note in 1981 the MAPSI contract cost us $10,352; in 1982 was $9,916; and in 1983 with an increase in contract rates the cost was $131000. In 1984 operating budget subtotal request was $12,292, virtually the same as what we expect our cost to be in 1983. We are not expending or proposing to expend any more funds on this function than we had in previous years. However, we are picking up virtually the same number of dogs and animals as MAPSI was, and our complaints relating to the handling of animals and the service level experienced by the police chief and myself is considerably reduced. We are also finding, for whatever the reason, since we took over responsibility for animal control and established the dog pound contract with Funk Animal Hospital, we are having more dogs claimed by owners. Because of this we expect decreased euthanasia charges for disposal of animals. In comparing a five month period- -April to August -in 1982 under the MAPSI contract and the same period in 1983 with the Brooklyn Center code enforcement officers handling the program, we find that for both periods of time 119 animals were picked up. We would expect to get "better at it as our personnel gets more experienced . In the first five months in 1983 we were able to impound at least the same number of animals as MAPSI was in a similar period in the previous year. The police chief and I both believe we are being far more effective in enforcing our animal ordinances under the current program than we were under the MAPSI contract. M 8e C N0. 83 -7 -4- September; 23, 1983 I should also bring to the Council's attention that prior to passage of the 1984 Proposed Budget you stated you would consider the request of the North Hennepin Community College relating to the North Hennepin Senior Choir. Their request was for an appropriation` of $300 to $400 for their program in the 1984 Budget. I have also attached corrected copies of the Planning and Inspection Budget. You will recall that Mr. Holmlund pointed out an error in the amount appropriated for the Director's 1984 salary. The correction resulted in an appropriation reduction of $2,022 in the Budget. I hope this memorandum and the attached materials give you sufficient background to address your questions at your meeting Monday evening. Should you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Res ctfully baited, Gerald G. Splinter City Manager encs. ! .J MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City. Manager FROM: Tom Bublitz, Administrative Assistant DATE: September 22, 1983 SUBJECT: License Fee Amendments The last comprehensive amendment to the City's license fee schedule was made in 1978. (see attached ordinance amendment No. 78 -1). The last comprehensive amendment to the City's 'zoning and inspection ` fee schedule was done in 1981 (see attached Resolution No. 81 -123). , CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ORDINANCE NO. 78 -1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY ORDINANCES OF BROOKLYN CENTER REGARDING VARIOUS LICENSE FEES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The following sections of the City Ordinances are amended as follows: Section 8 -103. LICENSE FEES. 8- 103.01. License Fees Fees for licenses issued hereunder shall be as follows A. Bakery food vehicle: $[15.00] 25.00 per annum for each vehicle.` B. Catering food vehicle: $[50.00] 100.00 per annum, plus $10.00 per annum for each additional vehicle. C. Food establishment: $[25.00] 100.00 per annum, plus $[5.00] 10.00 per annum for each additional facility on the same premises. D. Itinerant food establishment: $[10.00] 25.00 for the first day's operation, plus $[1.00] 10.00 for each additional day of operation in a continuous period. E. Readily- perishable food vehicle: $ [5.00] 30.00 per annum F. Readily- perishable food vehicle, fleet license $[25.00] 150.00 per annum. G. Vending Machine - Vendor 1. Bulk Vendor - [Ten] Twenty -five dollars per annum for operators of machines which vend gumballs, nuts, panned candies, etc. in unpackaged form 2. Nonperishable Vendor.- [Five] Eight dollars per annum for operators of machines which vend nonperishable products in a sealed container wrapped package, or open cup. 3. Perishable or Readily Perishable Vendors - [Fifteen] Twenty dollars per annum for operators of machines which vend perishable or readily perishable products. 4. Combination Nonperishable - Perishable Vendor [Twenty] Twenty -eight dollars per annum for operators of perishable and nonperishable product machines. 5. Machine Location Permits - In addition to the vendor license fees required herein, each licensed vending machine operator shall obtain a permit for each vending machine location at which he operates vending machines within the City. The fee for such permits shall be in accord with the following schedule: fi ORDINANCE NO. 78 -1 For each machine location: a. $[1.00] 4.00 for each machine vending bottled or canned soft drinks, prepackaged confections and similar dry, nonperishable items, or for each machine which manufactures and or vends packaged or unpackaged ice [, up to a maximum of $5.00] . b. $[1.50] 7.00 for each machine vending perishable or readily- perishable food [, up to a maximum of $12.00; provided, however, that in no case shall the combined permit fees for categories (a)_ and (b) exceed $15.00 for any one location] . As employed herein, the term "vending machine location" shall mean the room, enclosure, space, or area where one or more vending machines are installed and operated. H. Special food handling license: $[5.00] 30.00 per annum. U Section 11 -104. LICENSE FEES. Subdivision 3. The annual fee for an "on -sale" license [shall be two hundred fifty dollars ($250) The annual fee for] , an "off- sale" license [shall be thirty- five dollars ($35) .] and the daily fee for a "temporary on -sale" license shall be [ten dollars ($10).1 as set forth in Section 23 -010 of the City Ordinances. 1 Section 23-201.01. LICENSE REQUIRED. No person shall own or keep any pool, billiard or bumper pool table that is used by the public or for which a charge is made for the use thereof within the limits of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, without first obtaining from the City Council of said City a license therefor. [There shall be an annual license fee of five ($5.00) dollars per table payable on or before the beginning of each calendar year.] The annual license fee for a pool, billiar or bu mper pool table shall be as set forth in Section 23 -010 of th .City Ordina Section 23- 209.04. LICENSE FEE. The annual fee [for such license shall be five dollars ($5.00)] for each bowling alley or lane located in the property described in the application shall be as set forth in Section 23 -010 of the City Ordinances. Section 23 -301. LICENSE REQUIRED. No person shall conduct or permit public dancing in any public establishment within which intoxicating liquor or nonintoxica- ting malt liquor is licensed to be sold or consumed unless a public dance license shall have been issued by the City Council. Licenses shall be issued for one(1) year periods expiring December 31. The annual fee for a public dance license shall be [$25.00] as set forth in Section 23 -010 of the City Ordin ances. ORDINANCE NO. 78 -1 Section 23 -404. LICENSE FEE. The annual fee for each filling station license shall be as set forth in Section 23 -010 of the City Ordinances [five dollars ($5) for one pump plus three dollars ($3) for each additional pump) and shall be paid to the clerk with the application for the license . The annual fee for the storage of such liquids as described in Section 23 -401 including the selling and dispensing the same by any other method than by pumps, shall also be [five dollars ($5) .] as set forth in Section 23 -010 of the City Ordinances Section 23 -901. (d) If the application be granted, an additional license fee [of seven dollars ($7)] as set forth in Se 23 -010 of the City Ordinances shall be paid to the City of Brooklyn Center for each bench, at the time the license is issued. / Section 23 -1302. APPLICATION. The application for license for selling Christmas trees shall be made to the City Clerk and shall be accompanied by a seasonal fee (of $151 as set forth in Section 23 -010 of the City Ordinances The license will expire on January 5 of the year following its issuance. A separate license shall be required for each place of sale. Section 23- 1500. - MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS LICENSE REQUIRED. No person shall install, alter, reconstruct, or repair any portion of a building mechanical system consisting of heating, ventilating, comfort cooling, or refrigeration equipment, in- cluding any gas piping incidental thereto, without first having procured a license therefor from the City of Brooklyn Center. Licenses shall be issued only to individuals or contractors who demonstrate an understanding of the laws and regulations and techniques relating to the installation and maintenance of building _mechanical systems. The annual license fee [is hereby established at $251 shall be as set forth in Section 23 -010 of the City Ordinances. Licenses shall expire on the last day of April each year. J Section 23 -1501 HOUSE MOVING CONTRACTORS LICENSE REQUIRED. No person shall move, remove, or raze any building within Brooklyn Center without first having procured a license therefor from the City of Brooklyn Center., Licenses shall be issued only to individuals or contractors who demonstrate qualifications , and knowledge regarding such work and who can furnish proof of insurance relating to such work. The annual license fee [is hereby established at $251 shall be as set forth in Section 23 -010 of the City Ordinances Licenses shall expire on the last day of April each year. Section 34 -160. SIGN HANGER'S LICENSE 2. The [applicant] fee for a sign hanger's license shall [pay a $35 license fee) be as set forth in Section 23 -010 of the City Ordinances and the license shall run from May l to April 30 of the following year. I Section 23 -010. LICENSE FEES. The fees for the various licenses shall be as hereinafter stated, not withstanding other ordinance provisions regarding the specific fee. Fee, (annual, un- less otherwise Type of License Required by Section License Expires stated) Mechanicial System 23 -1500 April 30 $ [25. 001 36.00 ' Housemoving 23 -1501 April 30 [25.001 36.00 Sign Hanger's License 34- 160.2 April 30 [35.001 40.00 Indoor Swimming Pool (privately owned) 7 -201 April 30 [75.001 135.00 Outdoor Swimming Pool (privately owned) 7 -201 April 30 [35.001 75.00 Garbage and /or Rubbish Collection 7 -103 June 30 [10.00 /vehicle] 25.00 /company 15.00 /vehicle Courtesy Bench 23 -901 Dec. 31 [7.001 12.00 c Bowling Alley 23- 209.01 Dec. 31 [5.001 10.00 /alle= Public Dance Li 3 -3 Dec. 31 25.00 Pub c a ce cense 2 O1 [ 1 100.00 Christmas Tree Sales 23 -1301 Special [15.001 30.00 On Sale Malt 11 -102, Sub. 1 Dec. 31 [250.001 300.00 Pool & Billiards 23 -201 _Dec. 31 [5.001 25.00 /tab1c Service Station 23 -402 Dec. 31 First Pump [5.001 40.00 Each Additional Pump [3.001 5.00 Bakery Food Vehicle 8- 101.01 Feb. 15 _ [15.001 25.00 /veh- icle Catering Food Vehicle 8- 101.01 Feb. 15 First Vehicle [50.001 100.00 Each Additional Vehicle 10.00 Food Establishment 8- 101.01 Feb. 15 Basic License [25.001 100.00 Each Added Facility [5.001 10.00 Section 23 -010 (continued) Fee, (annual, un- less otherwise Type of License Reguired by Section License Expired stated) Itinerant Food Establishment 8- 101.01 Special First Day [10.00] 25.00 Each Additional Day [1.001 10.00 Readily Perishable Food Vehicle 8- 101.01 Feb. 15 [5.00] 30.00 Readily Perishable Food Fleet 8- 101..03 Feb., 15 [25.00] 150.00 Vending Machine - Vendor 8- 101.01 Feb. 15 Bulk Vendor [10.00] 25.00 Nonperishable Vendor [5.00] 8.00 plus [$1] 4.00 per machine location Perishable or Readily Perishable Vendor [15.00] 20.00 plus [$1.50] 7.00 per machine location, Combination Perishable Nonperishable Vendor [20.00) 28.00 `�■i plus appropriate fee for each machine location Special Food Handling 8- 101.04 Feb. 15 (5.00] 30.00 Section 2. This ordinance pertains to licenses and fees that expire after December 31 1977 Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon, thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this 9th day of January 1978. Ma ATTEST: C le'r Date Published December 29, 1977 Effective Date January 30, 1978 (Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.) Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. 81 -123 RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING A SCHEDULE FOR PLANNING AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT FEES WHEREAS, Chapters 3, 15, 34, and 35 of the City Ordinances establishes fees to be charged for building permits, plumbing permits, electrical system permits, mechanical system permits, sign permits, as well as various Planning Commission fees; and WHEREAS, these fees are collected by the Planning and Inspection Department as a part of the application process; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it would be less cumber- some and a better method of ensuring a uniform fee structure to set forth these fees in a single fee schedule; and WHEREAS Chapters 3, 15, 34, and 35 of the City Ordinances have been amended to authorize the setting of various fees by City Council resolution rather than by ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Resolution No. 80 -214, in part, to increase the fees charged for sewer or water connections and sewer or water disconnections. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of -, Brooklyn Center to adopt the following fee schedules; PLANNING AND INSPECTION DEPARTMENT FEE SCHEDULE 1 Building Permit Fees Building permit fees shall be based on the valuation of each building. The building valuation shall be computed using the up -to -date average construction cost per square foot established from time to time by the State Building Inspector. Valuation Fee $ 500.00 $ 10.00 1 17.50 2,000.00 32.50 10,000.00 80.50 25 000.00 170.50 50,000.00 283.00 75,000.00 358.00 100,000.00 433.00 500,000.00 1,433.00 1 2 683.00 Also, z the amount of permit fee is collected for ~ Plan -Check fee on all plans except one and two family residences (including townhouses as one family residences). RESOLUTION NO. 81 -12 2. Plumbing Permit Fees Plumbing permit fees shall be computed on the basis of the number of plumbing fixtures and devices and of the type of system or plumbing work as set forth below. A plumbing fixture is defined as a device intended to be connected to the plumbing system, such as any sink bath tub, or any other such devices. Fee (a) Minimum Fee $ 15.00 (b) Plumbing fixtures installed 7.50 (c) Plumbing fixture opening for future installation 5.00 (d) Catch basin installed 12.50 (e) Water heater installed 7.50 (f) Ground run to building 12.50 (g) Rainwater leader 7.50 (h) Installation of water treating or filter device 10.00 (i) Potable water well drilling 20.00 (j) Irrigation connection 20.00 (k) Sewer or Water connection * 25.00 /conn. (1) Sewer or Water disconnection * 25.00 /disconn. (m) Repair or alteration of existing plumbing or water 3% of estimated distribution system cost (n) New single family dwelling plumbing system (including 45.00 fixtures, devices, openings, and water piping) (o) Fire Suppression Systems Standpipes, 1 -3 floors 25.00 Each additional floor 3.00 Automatic Sprinklers, 1st floor 50.00 Each additional floor 15.00 (p) A plumbing permit shall be required for gas piping; the 'permit fees are set forth below. (Fees for gas fitting of appliances and heating systems are set forth under Mechanical System Permit Fees contained in this schedule. Fee Up to 2 -inch diameter pipe s 1 -3 openings 4.50 Each additional opening 2.00 Amends Resolution No. 80 -214 RESOLUTION NO. 81 -12 Plumbing Permit Fees continued Fee 2 -inch and over diameter pipe 1 -3 openings 12.50 Each additional opening 2.50 3. Electrical System Permit Fees Electrical system permit fees shall be ,calculated and paid according to the following: Fee (a) Minimum Permit 15.00 (b) Services, changes of services, temporary services additions, alterations or repairs on either primary or secondary services shall be computed separately as indicated below. In the case of services in excess of 230 volts, the following fee amounts shall be doubled. 0 to and including 60 amp capacity 6.00 61 to and including 100 amp capacity 7,50 101 to and including 200 amp capci ty 9.00 For each additional 100 amp capacity or fraction thereof 4.00 (c) The fee for circuits installation of, additions to, alterations of, or repairs of each circuit or sub - feeder shall be computed separately, including circuits fed from sub - feeders and in- cluding the equipment served, except as provided for in 'items (d) through (h). In the case of services in excess of 230 volts, the following fee amounts shall be doubled. 0 to and including 30 amp capacity (maximum number of 0 to 30 amp in any one cabinet) 2.00 31 to and including 100 amp capacity 4.00 For each additional 100 amp capacity or fraction thereof 1.50 (d) New single family dwelling electrical system (including service, feeders, circuits, fixtures and equipment) 45.00 (e) The fee on a new multiple family dwelling building shall be $20.00 per dwelling unit for the first 20 units and $10.00 per dwelling unit for the balance of the units. (f) In addition to other fees, all transformers and generators for light, heat, and power shall be computed separately at $5.00 per unit plus $..30 per KVA up to and including 100 KVA and $.30 per KVA for 101 ' KVA and over. The maximum fee for any transformer or generator in this category shall be $50.00. RCJULU 11U1V NU. 81-12 - Electrical Permit Fees continued (g) In addition to other fees,all transformers for signs and outline light- ing shall be computed at $7.50 for the first 500 KVA or fraction thereof per unit, plus $.25 for each 100 VA or fraction thereof in excess of 500 VA per unit. (h) In addition to other fees, (except dwellings) remote control signal circuits of less than 50 volts shall be computed at $6.00 per each ten openings or devices of each system plus $.75 for each additional ten or fraction thereof. (i) For special inspections or services, or for reinspections of improper work, the Building Official may impose such additional charges as are reasonably related to the cost of providing the service. 4. Mechanical System Permit Fees Mechanical system permit fees shall be calculated and collected according to the following: (a) Installation, alteration, reconstruction, or repair of any heating, ventilating, comfort cooling, or refrigeration equipment, shall be computed on the basis of the estimated cost of the proposed work except as herein provided. Fee Up to and including $500 $ 10.00 Over $500, but not over $50,000 2% of valuation Over $ 0 5 000 1% of valuation , (b) A mechanical permit shall be required for gas pipe fitting for connection to any gas burning device, except as herein provided; the fees are set forth below. (Fees for gas piping are additional and are set forth under Plumbing System Permit Fees contained in this schedule). The appropriate fee for gas water heaters shall be applied to the plumbing p lumbin permit rather than a mechanical permit. The permit fee for installing each gas stove, range, water heater, process burner, or similar gas burning device not used in connection with a heating system shall be: Input (B.T.U'S) Fee Not exceeding 99,999 $ 10.00 100,000 - 199,999 15.00 200,000 - 399,999 27.00 400,000 - 599,999 38.00 600,000 - 999,999 50.00 Over 999,999 - use gas burner /heating system schedule below: The permit fee for installing gas burners and fittings for use in con - _nection with a heating system shall be: t Mechanical System Permit Fees continued Input (B.T.U`S Fee Up to 999,999 - use gas appliance /nonheating schedule above. 1,000,000 - 2,499,999 $ 84.00 2,500,000 9,999,999 100.00 10,000,000 - 49,999,999 144.00 50,000,000 - 74,999,999 184.00 75,000,000 and over 244.00 (c) A mechanical permit shall be required for the installation, for the removal, and for the replacement of any in- ground or above - ground tanks or vessels and related piping used for the storage of gaseous or liquid fuels or chemicals. Permit fees shall be: Fee Above- ground new installation $ 30.00 In- ground new installation 40.00 Above- ground removal 20.00 In- ground removal 30.00 Replace like tank to existing system 30.00 (d) It is not intended that permits shall be required for portable heating, ventilating, comfort cooling, or refrigeration equipment, nor for the replacement of any component part or assembly of an appliance which does not alter its original approval and which complies with other applicable requirements of the Building Code. 5. Sign Permit fees Sign permit fees shall be collected before issuance of any sign permit required under the provisions of the Sign Ordinance and shall be calculated according to the following: (a) The fee for any permanent freestanding or non - freestanding sign shall be $25.00 for the first fifty (50) square feet of gross area,ior fraction thereof and $10.00 for each fifty (50) square feet of gross area or fraction thereof. (b) The fee for permits for the installation of any electrical wiring for any sign shall conform to the electrical system fee schedule contained herein. 6. Planning Commission Fees Planning Commission fees shall be submitted at the time applications are executed according to the following; ,.. (a) Rezonings Fee $ 175.00 (b) Site and Building Plans 100.00 (c) Preliminary Plat 50.00 plus 5.00 each iot (d) Variance 50.00 (e) Special Use Permit 50.00 (f) Extension of Special Use Permit 25.00 (9) Appeal 25.00 F RESOLUTION NO. 81 -123 Planning Commission Fees continued ( In addition to the above fees, the applicant shall sign an agreement, on forms provided by the City, to pay the cost of all engineering, planning and legal consulting expenses incurred by the City in processing the above applications. BE IF FURTHER RESOLVED that the above schedule of- Planning and Inspection Department Fees shall become effective on June 28, 1981. June 8, 1981 Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Fignar and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof; Mayor Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lohtka, and Celia" Scot; and the following voted against the same; none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. g p Y To: Mr Gerald Splinter City Manager Dater September 17, 1983 From: Ronald Boman Fire Chief Subject: Fire Department Rescue Boat During 1983 we have launched our boat 4 times, twice to assist the police once in the river and once in Twin Lake we also used it twice to try and rescue people that were reported to be in the water due to overturned canoes. Both times were in the spring of the year with high fast and cold water. In 1982 we launched the boat in the river 5 times, once for a t r once to assist Brooklyn k e body recovery in Broo 1 n Center, Y Y Park in a body recovery, twice to look for-people in the water due to overturned boats or canoes and once to recover a car in the river. In 1981 we launched our boat twice in Twin Lake to look for possiable drowning victims and three times in th e river twice to search for drowing victims and once to assist the police. We have used the present boat many times over the past years for rescue and body recovery, but due to the small size of boat and motor we have had to discontinue operation either j because we could not move the boat against the current when dragging or because of the danger to the men. There have been times in the past when we have been close to capsizing the boat when trying to bring someone on board due to the small size of the boat. It has been the concern of the officiers and myself over the past years that we could injur or worse yet lose a life of one of our firefighters while using our present boat. Its v and t' we have high small e makes it 'ffi t t time s z a es di cul o use any g fast water on the river.