Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983 02-28 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER FEBRUARY 28, 1983 (Following adjournment of the Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting) 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 - February 14, 1983 - regular session - December 27, 1982 - special session 7. Resolutions: a. Rejecting Bids and Authorizing Advertisement for New Bids for Diseased Shade Tree Removal Project No. 1983 -01 ( Contract 1983 -A) b. Accepting Bid and Approving Contract for 1983 -B (Municipal Garage Remodeling and Storage Building;Project No. 1982 -28 Phase II) *c. Receiving City Engineer `•s Report, Establishing Well No. 3 Reconditioning Project No. 1983 -03, Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids (Contract 1983 -C) *d. Approving Plans and Specifications for 63rd Avenue North Water Main Improvement Project No. 1983 -02 and Ordering Advertisement for Bids CContract 1983 -D) e. Accepting Work Completed Under Shingle Creek Parkway Improvement Project No. 1979 -06 -This work included relocation of utilities and construction of bridge approaches to the Shingle Creek Parkway bridge over I -94. The work was completed by MN /DOT contracted forces through an interagency agreement with the City. f. Approving Agreement No. 61382 with the Minnesota Department of Transporta- tion and Authorizing Execution thereof -This agreement provides for the City to reimburse MN /DOT for the costs of adjusting manholes and gate valves on the Brooklyn Boulevard resurfacing project. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- February 28, 1983 *g. Revising City of Brooklyn Center Community Development Program -This resolution would delete the senior citizen building from the City's Community Development Funding Program. h. Approving Agreement for Exchange of Lands with the Minnesota Department of Transportation along I -94 between T. H. 152 and T.H. 100 S. Public Hearing Regarding the Designation of a Housing Development Project Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 462.411 et. seq., the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act and the Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.71 to 273.78 Inclusive, the Tax Increment Financing Act. (7:30 p.m.) 9. Planning Commission Items (8:00 p.m.) a. Planning Commission Application No. 83001 submitted by Howe, Inc. This application is an appeal from a determination by staff that acquisition of a right -of -way parcel at the southwest corner of 49th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard would constitute an expansion of a nonconforming use and is, therefore, contrary to Section 35 -111 of the zoning ordinance. This application was considered by the Planning Commission at its February 17, 1983 meeting. 10. Ordinances a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding Setbacks for Existing One or Two Family Dwellings -This ordinance was first read on January 24, 1983, published on February 3, 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 8 of the City Ordinances Regarding Food Establishments -This ordinance would provide for the quality assurance plan option for food handlers choosing to develop such - a plan. The City Council re- ferred the ordinance amendment to the Chamber of Commerce for review on October 25, 1982. The Chamber has issued a resolution of support for the ordinance. The ordinance was first read on January 24, 1983, published on February 3, 1983, and is recommended for a second reading this evening. A public hearing on the ordinance has been scheduled for 8:00 p.m. C. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regarding License Fees for Food Establishments -This ordinance amendment would establish the fee schedule for food establishments with and without an approved quality assurance plan. The ordinance was first read on January 24, 1983, published on February 3, 1983 and is recommended for a second reading this evening. A public hearing on the ordinance has been scheduled for 8:00 p.m. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- February 28, 1983 j d. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Classifying Certain Land as being within the C -1 Zoning District -The property addressed by this ordinance is the Northport Clinic property and the property located southwest of the intersection of Xerxes and Shingle Creek Parkway. The ordinance is offered for a first reading this evening. e. An Ordinance Vacating Fremont Avenue North from 52nd Avenue North to FAI -94 -This ordinance provides for vacation of public interest for Fremont_ Avenue North through Brookwood Addition, the housing redevelopment project area. The ordinance is offered for a first reading. 11. Discussion Items: a. Alternatives to Present Animal Control Contract -The staff will be prepared to discuss this item at the Council meeting. 12. Gambling Licenses: a. Knights of Columbus - Application for Class B gambling license (requires a majority vote of the City Council to pass) - Waiver of the $10,000 fidelity bond (requires a unanimous vote of the City Council to pass) b. Northport Parents Group - Application for Class A gambling license ,'(requires a majority vote of the City Council to pass) - Waiver of the $10,000 fidelity bond (requires a unanimous vote of the City Council to pass) *13. Licenses 14. Adjournment CORRECTED COPY } Boulevard., He again emphasized that the Chamber of Commerce Committee was opposed to the staff proposal for the change in geometries at the intersection. He explained the Chamber Committee recommended that the slip ramp be closed and that if additional improvements are needed at the intersection, they recommended the installation of a traffic signal instead of geometric changes. The Director of Public Works reviewed traffic counts obtained at the intersection on January 24, 1983. He explained the counts were obtained by City staff and that the time of day of the counts was between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. He . pointed out that after the staff reviewed the recommendations from the Chamber of Commerce the alternate resolution, which is before the Council this evening, was drafted. Mayor Nyquist suggested closing off all traffic from 56th across Brooklyn Boulevard. The City Manager explained the staff's original proposal had been - prepared because of the through movement across the intersection. The City Manager reviewed the past recommendation for making existing private road, east of Brooklyn Boulevard, a public roadway. He explained that objections were received from businesses in the area but that he believed the recommendation to make the road a public roadway was a sound recommendation. He added that,.by making the existing private road a public roadway it would have added to improve the circulation of traffic in the area. Councilmember Hawes discussed the intersection and stated that he believed it should be closed for traffic coming off of 56th Avenue and desiring to go south on Brooklyn Boulevard. The Director of public Works explained the south bound alternatives for this traffic would be 55th Avenue or south to the T.H. 100 exit ramp. Councilmember Hawes also recd: ^..mended that the left turn lane.for traffic proceeding south on Brooklyn Boulevard and desiring to turn onto 56th Avenue be extended. Mayor Nyquist inquired as to the time schedule for -the project and whether the Traffic Safety_ Committee could review the project. The Director of Public Works stated that MN /DOT has requested an immediate answer since they plan to send out the bids for the project in April of this year. Councilmember Hawes commented that he believes the proposal for changes in the geometries of the intersection would not reduce the traffic into the Brookdale area but could actually improve it. The Director of Public Works agreed with Councilmember Hawes and added that the City Manager has also indicated this. . Councilmember Scott stated that she believes the left turn onto Brooklyn Boulevard from 56th Avenue is a bad situation and should be eliminated. Councilmember Theis added that he would like to eliminate the left turn onto Brooklyn Boulevard from 56th Avenue North, and pointed out that he believes it,. is a hazardous traffic situation. Mayor Nyquist recognized Mr. Bill Pieper, President of First Brookdale State Bank. Mr. Pieper presented the Council with a resolution regarding the 56th Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard intersection and explained that it was approved by the Chamber Economic Development Committee On behalf 1-24-83 -5- R MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION FEBRUARY 14, 1983 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:04 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning &- Inspection Ron Warren, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Assistant City Engineer Jim Grube, and Administrative Assistants Brad Hoffman,' and Tom Bublitz. INVOCATION The invocation, was offered by Mayor Dean Nyquist. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted he had received a request to use the Open Forum from Ms. Debra Grams, 5601 Logan Avenue North regarding rezoning. Mayor Nyquist recognized Ms. Grams who stated that she would like to change the home at 5601 Logan Avenue North back to a duplex. She noted the house was a duplex when her father owned it. In response to Ms. Grams comments, the Director of Planning & Inspection explained to the Council, that a number of two - family homes were located in R- 1,.zones in the 1950's as a result of actions by past City Councils. He explained that Ms. Grams' home was a two - family home in an R -1 neighborhood in the 1950's and that a special provision was made for two - family homes in single- family neighborhoods during that time. He stated the possible action by the Council could be to change the existing ordinance to allow for two - family homes in single - family neighborhoods. The City Attorney explained that, at this point there would be nothing the Council can do since, apparently the previous owner discontinued the two - family use, and when this was done the owner lost the right to the two - family use. He explained to Ms. Grams that she has the right to submit a rezoning request and that this would be the only way the Council could cake formal action on her request. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any Council members wished any items removed from the Consent Agenda. Councilmember Scott requested item 10b be removed from the Consent Agenda, Councilmember Hawes requested items 9, 10c, and l0k be removed, Councilmember Lhotka requested item 10e be removed and Councilmember Theis requested item 10i be removed from the Consent Agenda. 2 -14 -83 -1- e � RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 83 - Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE DESIGNATION OF A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 462.411 ET. SEQ., THE MUNICIPAL HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT ACT AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 273.71 TO 273.78 INCLUSIVE, THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ACT 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, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 83 - 24 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF WATER MAINS GATE VALVE FOR INSTALLATION UNDER 63RD AVENUE NORTH WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1983 -02 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, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 83 - 25 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1983 GENERAL FUND BUDGET TO PROVIDE FOR WAGE AND SALARY ADJUSTMENTS 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, Celia Scott, 'Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 83 - Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoptions RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER AND SUBURBAN COMMUNITY SERVICES 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, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 4 2 -14 -83 -2- i LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the following list of licenses: AMUSEMENT DEVICE - OPERATOR'S LICENSE Green Mill Inn 5540 Brooklyn Blvd. BAKERY FOOD VEHICLE LICENSE Good Earth Restaurant 5717 Xerxes Ave. N. BOWLING ALLEY LICENSE Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 N. Lilac Dr. BULK VENDING LICENSE Brooklyn Center Lions 5712 Humboldt Ave. Folz Vending 3401 Lawson Blvd. Country Store 3600 63rd Ave. N. CIGARETTE LICENSE Beadles Market 6912 Brooklyn Blvd. Chuck's Q. 1505 69th Avenue N. Duane's OK Tire 6900 Brooklyn Blvd. Duke's 'Standard Service 6501 Humboldt Ave. Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 N. Lilac Dr. GASOLINE SERVICE STATION LICENSE Chuck's Q. 1505 69th Ave. N. Duane's OK Tire 6900 Brooklyn Blvd. Duke's Standard Service 6501 Humboldt Ave. N. Federal Lumber 4810 N. Lilac Dr. ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Community Emergency Assistant Program 7231 Brooklyn Blvd. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE American Vending Company P.O. Bxo 280 Sears Automotive Brookdale Center Bill's Juice Vending 3900 Beard Ave. S. Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. Spa Petite 5611 Xerxes Ave. N. Bill's Vending Service 7317 W. Braodway B.C. Skelly 6245 Brooklyn Blvd. Bond Tool & Die Co. 6840 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Brookdale E. Cinema 5801 John Martin Dr. B.C. Country Boy 4401 69th Ave. N. Canteen Co. 6300 Penn Ave. S. 2 -14 -83 -3- NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE (CONTINUED) FMC 1800 Freeway Blvd. Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Blvd. Medtronics 6700 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Medtronics 6860 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. MTC 6845 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Cass Screw Company 4748 France Ave. N. Christy's Auto 5300 Dupont Ave. N. Cook Paint 4800 N. Lilac Dr. Country Club Market 5715 Morgan Ave. N. D.L. Service 2516 83rd Ave. N. Lowell's Auto 6211 Brooklyn Blvd. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Evergreen Park Elementary 7020 Dupont Ave. N. First Brookdale State Bank 5620 Brooklyn Blvd. Jimmy Jingle, Inca 2601 2nd Ave. S. Johnson Control 1801 67th Ave. N. Life -Full Service Vending 4603 Folwell Dr. Library 6125 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. License Center 6125 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Social Services 6125 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Malmborg's Inc. 5120 N. Lilac Dr. Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home 5401 69th Ave. N. Marc's Budgetel 6415 James Circle N. Midwest Screw 3501 48th Ave. N. Midwest Vending Company 8900 Wentworth Ave. Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth 6121 Brooklyn Blvd. Minnesota Tile Supply 4825 France Ave. N. NSI /Griswold Co. 8300 10th Ave. N. Brookdale Pontiac 6801 Brooklyn Blvd. N.S.P. 4501 68th Ave. N. Northwest Microfilm, Inc. 1600 67th Ave. N. Pearl Manufacturing 6801 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Pilgrim Cleaners 5748 Morgan Ave. N. Plitt Brookdale Theater 2501 County Rd. 10 Servomation 7490 Central Ave. N.E. Dayton's Brookdale Center Condalson's Brookdale Center Graco 6820 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Super America 6545 W. River Road Twin City Vending 1065 E. Highway 36 Brooklyn Center Group Health 6845 Lee Ave. N. Earle Brown Farm Ind. 6100 Summit Drive Sears Brookdale Brookdale Center Viking Gym 6504 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Woodside Enterprises 2500 Nathan Lane City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy, OFF -SA NONINTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE Beadles Market 6912 Brooklyn Blvd. Chuck's Q. 1505 69th Ave. N. Country Club 5715 Morgan Ave. N. Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 N. Lilac Dr. 2 -14 -83 -4- PERI VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Ault Corporation 1600 H. Freeway Blvd. Canteen Company 8300 Penn Ave. S. FMC 1800 Freeway Blvd. Iten Chevrolet 67Q1 Brooklyn Blvd. I•I.T.C. 6845 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Earle Brown Bowl 6440 James Circle Jimmy Jingle, Inc. 2601 2nd Ave. S. Johnson Control 1801 67th Ave. N. Maranatha Conservative Baptist Home 5401 69th Ave. N. NSI /Griswold 8300 19th Ave. N. Brookdale Pontiac 6801 Brooklyn Blvd. Northwest Microfilm, Inc. 1600 67th Ave. N. Plitt Brookdale Theater 2501 County Rd. 10 Servomation 7490 Central Ave. N.E. Dayton's Brookdale Center Donaldson's Brookdale Center Graco 6820 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Onan Tech Center 6120 Earle Brown Dr. Twin City Vending 1065 E. Highway 36 Brooklyn Center Group Health 6845 Lee Ave. N. Earle Brown Farm Ind. 6100 Summit Dr. Sears Brookdale Brookdale Center POOL TABLE LICENSE Lynbrook Bowl, Inc. 6357 N. Lilac Dr. PERISHABLE FOOD VEHICLE LICENSE American Bakeries Co. 4215 69th Ave. N. Ted Burlingame 5919 June Ave. N. SPEICAL FOOD HANDLING LICENSE Brooklyn Center Liquor Store 41 6800 Humboldt Ave. Brooklyn Center Liquor Store #2 6250 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center Liquor Stroe #3 Northbrook Shopping Ctr. Fun Services, Inc. 3701 50th Ave. N. Ideal Drug Store 6800 Humboldt Ave. N. Marc's Budgetel 6415 James Circle Total Petroleum Inc. 6830 Brooklyn Blvd. Betty Varcoe 974 Rice St. Terrace - Holliday Inn Gift Shop 1501 65th Avenue North Viking Gym, Inc. 6504 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. 2r -14 -83 -5- APPROVAL OF MINUTES — JANUARY 24, 1983, OCTOBER 25, 198 Mayor Nyquist noted a correction.in the January 24, 1983 minutes and explained that on page 5, the minutes show that the Chamber Board reviewed the recommendati of the Chamber Economic Development Committee regarding the geometric changes at the 56th Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard intersection. He noted that the Chamber Board had not reviewed this request and that the minutes should be corrected. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of January 24, 1983 with the correction noted by Mayor Nyquist. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council- . members Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the minutes.of_ the City Council meeting of October 25, 1982 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Theis, and Hawes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Councilmember Scott abstained from the vote as she was not present at the October 25, 1982 meeting. COUNCIL PRESENTATIONS Mayor Nyquist presented Mrs. Dawn Kiefer with a resolution and plaque expressing recognition of the public service of Mrs. Kiefer as a past member of the Park & Recreation Commission. Mrs. stated she was happy to have had the oppor- tunity to serve on the commission, and that she was proud of the commission's work and the commission's efforts to develop good attitudes in the City which enabled the passage of the 1980 park bond issue. She added that, now that things are coming to a good conclusion in the park system, she requested the Council to please fund the appropriate amounts to maintain the parks. She added that she hopes the Council will use the commissions, and added that when the commissions bring a recommendation to the Council, they have generally thought it out very well prior to their submission of it to the Council. She thanked the City Council - for the plaque and for the opportunity to serve on the commission. Mayor Nyquist presented a resolution and plaque to State Senator Reichgott for her public service as a past member of the Human Rights Commission. Senator Reichgott thanked the City for the opportunity to serve on the commission and explained that she had learned much about City government from her service on the commission. She added that she believed this would serve her well in the State Legislature and the committees she now serves on. She added that she was particularly proud of the work the Commission did with regard to chemical dependency and handicap accessibility and encouraged the _commission to continue its excellent work. She added that she was sorry to have to leave Brooklyn Center and thanked the Council for its presentation to her. Mayor Nyquist presented Administrative Assistant Bublitz with a proclamation recognizing his efforts in preparing commendatory resolutions and proclamations for the City. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve the appointments of Mr. David Skeels, 6007 York Avenue North, to the Park and Recreation Commission, and Mrs. Ricky Blake, 3812 Janet Lane, to the Traffic Safety Advisory Committee, both for a term beginning immediately 2 -14 -83 -6- and expiring December 31, 1985. t APPROVAL OF FIRE DEPARTMENT RELIEF ASSOCIATION INVESTMENTS Councilmember Hawes inquired w et er t e correct yie ra es were shown for the investments and noted that he believed the yield of 4.78% for one of the investments was inordinately low. The Director of Finance explained that the secretary of the Fire Relief Association picked up the coupon rates which are not the correct rates for the investment yields. He stated he would determine the correct yield rates and added that the majority of the yield rates would approximate 11 %. There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to approve the purchase of the-following by the Fire Department Relief Associations $15,000 of Federal National Mortgage Association Funds, $15,000 of Federal Farm Credit Banks Bonds, $45,000 of Household Finance Bonds and $85,000 of Western. Pennsylvania Power Company Bonds. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Council members Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED The City Manager introduced a Resolution Accepting Bid and Approving Contract; 1982 -2 (Water Supply Well No. 9 Improvement Project No. 1982 -30). Councilmember Scott inquired why the unit prices of the various items in the bid were identical for each contractor. The Director of Public Works explained that the contractors all chose the same well contractor who supplied them with the same unit prices. He added that the overall bids of the contractors were different but the unit price of various items would be the same for each con- tractor. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -27 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 1982 -Q (WATER SUPPLY WELL NO. 9 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -30) 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 Scott Bill Hawes, and Rich of Dean Nyquist, , favor there D yq , Gene Lhotka, Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Pertaining to Consideration of Bids for Pedestrian /Bicycle Bridge Improvement Project No. 1980-06. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to recommend to the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Transportation that the contract for the Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge Improvement Project No. 1980 -06 be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. 2 -14 -83 -7- RESOLUTION NO. 83 -28 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR PAYMENT OF LOCAL SHARE OF COSTS FOR PEDESTRIAN /BIKEWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1980 -06 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following,voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -29 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1983 GENERAL FUND BUDGET AND THE 1983 EMPLOYEE POSITION AND CLASSIFICATION PLAN 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, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Councilmember Lhotka questioned why the category of unallocated departmental expense in the resolution was increased by $3,030. The City Manager explained that the $3,030 is not an expenditure but will be added to the unallocated departmental expense budget which is controlled by the City Council, and that this was done so that the auditor^ could track the funds. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Authorizing Execution of Agreement for Professional Services with BRW, Inc., for Development of a Redevelopment Land Use Plan for the Southwest Neighborhood. Councilmember Scott commented that she was not pleased with the last study of this type conducted by a consultant and she suggested that the Council hold off on approving the second half of the project. Councilmember Scott introduced the following resolution with a motion to amend the resolution by approving only one -half of the proposed study and to eliminate the optional market study. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -30 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES WITH B.R.W. INC. FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A REDEVELOPMENT LAND USE PLAN FOR THE SOUTHWEST NEIGHBORHOOD 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, Celia Scott, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: Bill Hawes, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 2 -14 -83 -8- Councilmember Lhotka inquired to what extent the consultant would be involved in developing data for the site inventory and expressed a concern that much of the data was already available. In response to Councilmember Lhotka's question, Mr. Wolsfeld, representing BRW, explained that the City staff has, and will continue to be included in the development of the project data. He added that BRW will not charge for the time to collect the data, and that they will not duplicate the existing data but will analyze the existing data. Councilmember Hawes stated that he is not in favor of spending money for surveys like this, particularly at this time of difficult budget constraints. He added that the City cannot be certain that the Joselyn Company has no plans for the site, and that anything the study would propose could be superceded by develop - ment plans proposed by Joselyn. The Director of Public Works stated that the staff has been in discussions with Joselyn in the past, and that they indicated a willingness to work with the City on redevelopment plans. He added that they have also indicated that the present use of the area is a temporary one. Council - member Hawes stated he believes that if the Joselyn Company could enjoy the benefits of such a study, the expense should be borne by Joselyn. He added that the study may propose a use that Joselyn may or may not go along with. He added that any pollution studies should be paid 100% by Joselyn. The City Manager stated that several communities have explored the feasibility of assessing the cost of studies, such as this, but that this type of assessment would be on shaky legal ground. He explained the pollution aspect of the study would be a compilation of existing data in such a way that it could be used by the City. Be added that the current data is available in only a very technical format, and that the study would translate much of the technical jargon so that it would be more useable. The Director of Public Works explained the primary emphasis of the study was not how to develop the Joselyn site alone, but the study was proposed as a benefit to the entire neighborhood by addressing the redevelopment of the entire area. Councilmember Theis requested Mr. Wolsfeld to clarify the implementation strategy for the study. Mr. Wolsfeld replied that the first key part of the study is to determine the City policies with regard to the project, and determine whether the City would be in a passive mode which would allow them to react to a proposal made by a developer or whether the City would be in a more active planning mode for the redevelopment of the project. He added that the study would lay -out what the City would do in this mode, and that the study would also lay -out what the City could do to actively initiate the project plan.. Councilmember Theis then inquired why the City should pay for the work for both modes if they only want one. Mr. Wolsfeld replied that the City should not if the mode had already been determined. He added that, perhaps the staff could be authorized to issue in- cremental work orders to BRW, and invoice for the price up to each approved phase. He added that a number of public agencies are now approaching consultant studies in this manner. Discussion continued among Council members, Mr. Wolsfeld and the City staff regarding the estimated person hours required for the study: The City Attorney noted that there is no formal contract before the Council this evening, and he recommended that he be allowed to review the contract with BRW 2 -34 -83 -9- i and the City Manager prior to formal Council approval. The City Manager stated that Councilmember Lhotka's question with regard to project hours and the hourly rates indicated by BRW would be clarified when the contract is written. With regard to the motion on the floor, the City Manager commented that the dollar amount in the resolution would change to $25,400 and the market study would be eliminated. He added that, if the Council approves the amended resolution, he would prepare a contract for review by the City Council, and that if there was any objection to the contract, the item would again be placed back on the agenda. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Lhotka. The City Attorney added that he would also like to amend certain words in the resolution before the Council. There was a motion by Councilmember Theis to amend the motion on the floor by deleting the implementation strategy of the study at a cost reduction of $8,400. Councilmember Lhotka seconded the motion for purposes of discussion.. The City Manager explained he would return to the Council with a contract for their review with the changes indicated by the Council, and that if the contract is not accepted, the item would go back on the agenda at a future meeting. After considering the City Manager's proposal, Councilmember Theis withdrew his amendment to the motion on the floor, and Councilmember Lhotka withdrew his second of Councilmember Theis' motion to amend. Upon a vote being taken on the motion for the adoption of the resolution as amended, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, and Rich Theis. The following voted against the same: Bill Hawes, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING ON INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BOND FOR BYERLY'S The City Manager explained that the Byerly's project was not prepared for the public hearing this evening, and that because of the complicated publication process, he recommended opening the public hearing and continuing it to the second meeting in March of this year. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on an industrial development revenue bond for Byerly's. No one appeared to speak at the public hearing. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to continue the public hearing for an industrial development revenue bond for Byerly's to March 28, 1983 at 8:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING ON TAX EXEMPT M ORTGAGE BOND FOR BRUTGER COMPANIES, INC Administrative Assistant Hoffman pointed out that item 6 on the HRA agenda should actually be a Council item and should go with item lla on the Council agenda. Iie added that the Council's action would grant preliminary approval for up to three million plus dollars for 65 elderly units. He added that two actions are 2 -14 -83 -10- required by the Council, one being to adopt the Bond Program, and the other to amend the Housing Program. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on a tax exempt mortgage bond for Brutger Companies, Inc. He inquired if there was anyone 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 Theis and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to close the public hearing on a tax exempt mortgage bond for Brutger Companies, Inc. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. 83 - 31 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AMENDING THE HOUSING PLAN FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462 C 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, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION MO. 83 -32 Member Rich Theis introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1983 MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT BOND PROGRAM 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, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS PLANNING CO MMISSION APPLICATION NO. 83002 SUBMITTED BY GARY EHDE (MARCON, INC.) FOR A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 34-140.21(2) TO ALLOW CONTINUANCE FOR TWO YEARS OF FREE - STANDING REAL ESTATE SIGN FOR THE ISLAND PONDS TOWNHOUSE PROJECT AT 69TH AVENUE NORTH AND UNITY AVENUE NORTH The Director of Planning & Inspection presented and reviewed for Council members pages 1 through 3 of the January 27, 1983 Planning Commission minutes and also the Planning Commission information sheet prepared for Application No. 83002. He proceeded to review the location of the sign and explained that when the applicant requested modification to the sign, the staff at that point realized the sign should have been removed. The Director of Planning & Inspection reviewed the applicant's letter requesting the variance, and explained the Planning Commission concluded that the applicant's arguments were within the standards for a sign variance. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Planning 2- -14 -83 -11- i Commission Application No. 83002. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one appeared to speak and he entertaine 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 Planning Commission.Application No. 83002. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve Application.No. 830012 to allow the continuation of the free - standing real estate sign at 69th and Unity Avenues North for a period of up to two years or until 900 of the remaining units are sold, whichever comes first. The action also acknowledges that the standards for a sign variance are met. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 8:42 p.m. and reconvened at 8:58 p.m. RESOLUTIONS (CONTINUED The City Manager introduced a Resolution Establishing Employee Incentive Retire- ment Program. He recommended an amendment to paragraph No. 4 in the resolution and noted the paragraph should read "positions vacated by employees retiring under this program will not be filled without prior City Council approval of the funds to be expended in filling the vacancy." Councilmember Lhotka stated he had discussed the retirement program with individu in the personnel department in his organization, and that they indicated it would be an acceptable program. Councilmember Theis stated he was concerned over the time period allowed for a decision to be made by an employee. The City Manager stated it is difficult for some persons, especially those eligible to retire in 1985, to decide on their retirement date and that he believes they may feel more comfortable in the decision if they are allowed a longer period of time. Councilmember Theis stated he was concerned that the City may be addressing a nonperformance problem by offering a reward to those employees. The City Manager stated that a number of people eligible for retirement will be sorely missed by the City and that he does not believe it is an issue of nonperformance. He added that some of the older employees may not be as physically adept but their knowledge of the City and their job balances this out. Councilmember Lhotka stated he has the same concern as Councilmember Theis regarding the time period. The Director of Finance explained that another reason for the time period allowed for the employee to make his or her decision is so that the employee could not rescind the resignation by saying that they did not have enough time to really think about it. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -33 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM 2 -14 -83 -12- 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, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Authorizing Participation in Modification of Joint Powers Agreement of the Minnesota Police Recruitment System. Council - member Theis requested the staff to clarify the process used by the SPRS for the selection of police officers. The City Manager explained the SPRS is the custodian of a validated police officer. test. He added that the Metropolitan Area Management Association Municipalities authorized a study several years ago to develop a validated test which would eliminate EEO challenges. He stated that the SPRS also maintains a list of eligible candidates for hire and that the SPRS program eliminates the $2,000 to $3,000 in recruitment cost to the City each time an officer must be recruited. In conclusion, he pointed out, the SPRS is the custodian of the test and maintains its validity. He pointed out to Council members that the resolution before the Council this evening, allows the current SPRS group to open up the process for outstate cities. Several members of the Council expressed a concern over the provision in the agreement which places no limit on dues for the organization. The City Manager explained that any City can opt out of the agreement annually, as the City budget is considered. RESOLUTION N O. 83 -34 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE MINNESOTA POLICE RECRUITMENT SYSTEM The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. MOTION ENCOURAGING THE APPOINTMENT OF MR. ROGER SCHERRER TO THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL There was a motion by Councilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Scott to encourage the reappointment of Mr. Roger Scherrer to the Metropolitan Council. DISCUSSION ITEMS REVIEW OF 1983 CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM The Director of Public Works introduced the 1983 Public Improvement Program Preliminary Review and explained that the purpose of the review is to advise the Council that the Public Works Department is working on preliminary reports, and designs covering various projects and that the department invites any and all comments and direction which the Council may wish to provide. He added that he hoped the document would be useful to the Council in tracking various projects throughout the year. 2-14-83 -13- I s 1 REDEVELOPMENT OF AREA BETWEEN 68TH AND 69TH AVENUES NORTH FROM WEST RIVER ROAD TO ALDRICH AVENUE NORTH The City Manager explained that a neighborhood meeting for proposed 68 -69th Ave. redevelopment was held on February 10, 1983 at 7:00 p.m. at the Evergreen elementary school. He stated he believes the meeting was successful and that he hopes to hold one more meeting and come up with a roadway design which could be reviewed by the neighborhood residents. The Director of Public Works reviewed the area and proposals for roadway layouts in the area, and noted that no objections were received to the roadway designs - at the February 10 meeting. He suggested that the staff could develop one or two alternate plans for redevelopment and then et the reaction of the neighborhood P A g to the plans. DISCUSSION OF HOUSE FILE NO_ 22 - LEGISLATIVE REDISTRICTING Mayor Nyquist stated he had become aware of a bill in the legislature which proposes to amend the reapportionment map. He added that the bill would affect the City of Brooklyn Center and would create a separate precinct for the City comprised of approximately 47 single - family homes. He added the area in question is in the western portion of the City extending from the City's corporate limits east along 61st Avenue to June, then south along June to 59� Avenue, then east along 59� Avenue to Halifax Avenue, and then finally west along 58th Avenue North from the intersection with Halifax and 58th. He added that the creation of such a small precinct does not make any sense, and that he would oppose the legislation and would suggest the Council pass a formal resolution opposing House File No. 22. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -35 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION OPPOSING LEGISLATIVE REDISTRICTING AMENDMENTS PROPOSED BY HOUSE FILE NO. 22 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, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Mayor Nyquist suggested sending a copy of the resolution to the author of the bill in the House. DRAM SHOP LIABILITY LAW The City Attorney commented that the Supreme Court has uncovered the fact that 3.2 beer establishments are not covered by the State Dram Shop Law. He added that the City's ordinance may, however, require it and suggested that this item be researched and addressed by the City staff. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 9:48 p.m. Clerk Mayor 2 -14 -83 -14- MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL SESSION FEBRUARY 14, 1 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center Housing & Redevelopment Authority met in special session and was called to order by Chairman Dean Nyquist at 9:48 p.m ROLL CALL Chairman Dean Nyquist, Commissioners Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were HRA Director Gerald Splinter, Director of Public Works Sy Knapp, Director of Finance Paul Holmlund, Director of Planning & Inspections Ron Warren, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, and Administrative Assistants Brad;. Hoffman and Tom Bublitz. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 24, 1983 There was a motion by Commissioner Scott and seconded by Commissioner Lhotka to- approve the minutes of the January 24, 1983 Housing & Redevelopment Authority meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Nyquist, Commissioners Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously..., RESOLUTION NO. 83 -4 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING DISPOSITION OF PROPERTY BY THE BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 462.525 OF THE MUNICIPAL HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ACT, MINNESOTA STATUTES CHAPTER 462.411 ET. SEQ. 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, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis;, and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 83 -5 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING FOUR (4) BROOKLYN CENTER HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANTS 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, Celia Scott,:Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 2 -14 -83 -1- Commissioner Hawes inquired whether any proceedings had been developed yet to ascertain whether persons receiving home rehabilitation grants are complying with the residency requirements. The City Manager explained that the staff is working with the property data system to develop a procedure and that he believes the staff will have an answer by the middle of this year. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Commissioner Hawes and seconded by Commissioner Theis to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Chairman Nyquist, Commissioners Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion ,passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center - Housing '& Redevelopment Authority adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Chairman 2 -14 -83 -2 MINUTES OF THE PROCF.ED.NGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF' THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA SPECIAL SESSION DECEMBER 27, 1982 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in special session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis. Also present were City Manager Gerald Splinter, Chief of Police James Lindsay, and Administrative Assistants Brad Hoffman and Tom Bublitz. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUT NO. 82 -258 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT NO. 61263M WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon_, the following vot.ed in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was.declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -259 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: - RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1982 AND 1983 GENERAL FUND BUDGETS 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, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Authorizing Joint Powers Agreement for a Single - Family housing Revenue Bond Program. He explained to the Council that by joining a joint powers group, the City can get a better interest rate on the Housing Revenue Bonds, than if the City would undertake the program alone. He added that the Joint Powers Agreement does not restrict the City with regard to administration of the program. _R ESOLUTION NO. 82 -260 Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR A SINGLE - FAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BOND PROGRAM 12 -27 -82 -1- 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, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The City Manager introduced a Resolution Authorizing the Issuance of Single- Family Mortgage Revenue Bonds. He explained the bond program has the same type of features found in industrial development revenue bonds, except that it is for housing and is issued under state authority. Administrative Assistant Hoffman explained the program allows the City to issue $8,250,000 in housing revenue bonds. He added that slightly more than $7,000,000 will be put out in the community for mortgage loans. He noted that the $7,000,000 will provide between 120 and 140 mortgages in Brooklyn Center for first time home buyers who meet the income criteria for the program. He added that the program is limited to the purchase of homes in Brooklyn Center. Administrative Assistant Hoffman explained that, because of federal statutes, if the project developer would pay the $70,000 of the origination fee, the City could not issue tax exempt bonds. He added that the developer will add the $70,000 to the cost of purchasing land from the City. He explained that the mortgage interest rate under the program is 11.65% and is an assumable mortgage. He also pointed out the mortgage involves only two points, one point to the seller, and one point paid by the buyer. He reviewed current FHA and GI mortgage interest rates which are at 12 plus six to seven points. Councilmember Theis inquired what would happen to the program if the interest rate went down another three points. Administrative Assistant Hoffman stated that at that point the bonds may have to be called in. Councilmember Lhotka is then inquired what the cost to the City would be if this would occur. Adminis- trative Assistant Hoffman replied that there would be no cost to the City and that the City's liability would be with the developer. He explained that the developer pays the 3% origination fee which is $75,000, and that $2,500,000 in mortgage revenue funds is reserved for the developer. He explained that the City adds $70,000 to this amount and the HRA indemnifies Brutger for this amount if the City is unable to deliver the land to the developer. The total maximum loss to the City would be the $70,000 plus $75,000 for a total of $145,000. He added that if the City delivers the land to the developer, then there would be no loss, even if the market rates go bad. Councilmember Theis inquired as to the bond rating for the mortgage revenue bonds. Administrative Assistant Hoffman stated that the bond rating for all the cities participating in the joint powers group would be AA +, and that if Brooklyn Center were to run the project alone, the rating would be BB +. Mayor Nyquist recognized Ms. Andrea Lubhou, the representative from Miller & Schroeder, who reviewed the bond summary sheet for Council members and explained that no FHA or VA loans would be made under the program, and that all loans would be privately insured. Councilmember Hawes inquired what the income limits would be for first -time 12 -27 -82 -2 home buyers. The representative from Miller & Schroeder explained that the funds would be reserved for the first six months of the program for persons with adjusted gross incomes of less than $25,168. She explained that 90% of the funds will be set aside for first- time.home buyers and 10% for persons other than first -time buyers. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -261 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF SINGLE - FAMILY MORTGAGE REVENUE BONDS, IN THE AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $31,758,000, WHICH BONDS AND THE INTEREST AND PREMIUM THEREON SHALL BE PAYABLE SOLELY FROM THE REVENUES OF THE PROGRAM; PRESCRIBING THE FORM OF AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN INDENTURE OF TRUST; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND SALE OF THE BONDS AND DIRECTING DELIVERY THEREOF, AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF THE B014D PURCHASE AGREEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THE BONDS; AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF MORTGAGE LOANS AND THE CONTRACTING FOR THE ORIGINATION THEREOF PURSUANT TO THE PROGRAM; AUTHORIZING THE CONTRACTING FOR SERVICING THE MORTGAGE LOANS AND FOR PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION SERVICES PURSUANT TO THE PROGRAM; AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THE BONDS, APPROVING A PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND A FORM OF FINAL OFFICIAL. STATEMENT AND PROVIDING FOR THE SECURITIES, RIGHTS, AND REMEDIES OF THE HOLDERS OF SAID REVENUE BONDS 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 Nvquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, an,:! Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Councilmember Lhotka left the table at 7:38 P .m. LELS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT The City Manager reviewed for Council members the language discussed between the City and LELS with regard to the Police Collective Bargaining Agreement. He explained the City staff has reviewed the language with the union but that they have not signed, and he is not sure where the problem is with regard to the contract language. Councilmember Lhotka returned to the table at 7:40 p.m.. The City Manager explained that apparently the problem with the contract is in a portion of the contract language, and that he recommends the Council take no action on the Collective Bargaining Agreement until it is signed by the union. The consensus of Council members was to defer action on the Collective Bargaining Agreement between the Law Enforcement Labor Services Local No. 82, and the City of Brooklyn Center until the contract language can be resolved with the union. ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Theis to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 7:41 p.m. Clerk Mayor 12 -27 -82 -3- Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR NEW BIDS FOR DISEASED SHADE TREE REMOVAL PROJECT NO. 1983 -01 (CONTRACT 1983 -A) WHEREAS, the following bids for Diseased Shade Tree Removal Project No. 1983 -01 were received by the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota on February 17, 1983 BIDDER BID AMOUNT Arp's Tree Service $33,315.00 Clark Landscaping $30,720.00 Midwest Stump Removal $31,210.00 WHEREAS, the low bidder, Clark Landscaping failed to submit a bid security with the proposal, in accordance with the provisions of the proposal documents; and WHEREAS, upon review of the qualifications of the second low bidder, Midwest Stump Removal, the City Council does not consider the bidder to be properly qualified to e7:ecute the work in satisfactory manner; and WHEREAS, all other bids exceeded tine Engineer's estimate of cost for the work comprehended. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. All bids received on February 17, 1983, for Diseased Shade Tree Removal Project No. 1983 -01 (Contract 1983 -A) are hereby rejected. 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least twice in the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for new bids for Project .1983 -01. The advertisement shall appear not less than seven (7) days prior to the date for receipt of bids, and specify the work to be done, state that said bids will be received by the City Clerk until 11:00 A.M. on March 24, 1983, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers at City Hall by the City Clerk and City Engineer, will then be tabulated and will be considered by the City Council at 7:00 P.M. on March 28, 1,983, in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check , bid bond or certified check payable to the City for the amount of not less than two thousand dollars ($2,000.00). 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. TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: February 25, 1983 RE: Consideration of Bids - Contract 1983 -A Diseased Shade Tree Removal Project No. 1983 -01 Pursuant to City Council authorization, bids were received and opened on February 17, 1983, for removal of diseased shade trees under Project No. 1983 -01. The apparent low bidder, Clark Landscaping, failed to submit a bid security with the proposal, as required by the proposal documents. In accordance with the ovisions of the proposal documents, it is recommended p the City Council reject the bid of Clark Landscaping for such an irregularity. The second low bidder, Midwest Stump Removal, has provided a list of references for whom work has been completed over the last three years. Based upon a review of the references the staff does not consider Midwest Stump Removal to be capable of providing dependable service under the requirements of the contract documents. A summary of the references follows: 1. City of St. Louis Park (Ray Vogtman, City Forester) Midwest Stump Removal had a contract to remove trees during 1982. The Contractor did acceptable work during the tree removal and clean up phases, with few instances of property damage. The difficulties experienced resulted from poor communication on the part of the Contractor, sometimes 'taking up to five days to return a call. The City was also critical of the Contractor's ability to meet scheduled deadlines, extending 20 working day projects to as much as 35 working days. This overrun of time was the result of working two weeks on the project, leaving St. Louis Park for a period to do work in another city, then returning to complete the job. Finally, and perhaps most disturbing, is the method the Contractor followed in the process of damage correction. On occasion, the employee responsible for property damage was made solely responsible for restitution, resulting in delay of damage repair. 2. City of Golden Valley (Tom Klatt, Superintendent of Parks) The Contractor worked on tree removal contracts in 1981 and 1982. As stated above, the Contractor -did acceptable work while on the job, but the major problem resulted from poor project management. It was not unusual to have scheduled deadlines be overrun because crews did not remain in the city to complete the work once it began. Again, as stated above, poor Contractor communication was a constant frustration. 3. City of Hopkins (Cliff Robinson, Street Superintendent) The Contractor worked for the City in 1980 and 1981. Work completed in 1980 was done in acceptable manner. During that time repair of damage was completed acceptably. Work completed under the 1981 contract was "dragged out ", again as described above. The 1981 contract was not completed until January, 1982, with the above- listed frustations experienced to a somewhat lesser degree. February 25, 1983 - G. Splinter Page 2 Section 3A of the General Conditions of Contract provides for rejection of a bid proposal based upon competency. An excerpt follows: "The competency and responsibility of bidders and their proposed subcontractors will be considered in making the award. The Owner reserves the right to make such investi- gations as necessary to assure him that the bidder is properly qualified to satisfactorily execute the contract. Failure on the part of any bidder to carry out previous contracts satisfactorily or his lack of the experience, equipment, or capital necessary for the satisfactory completion of the work may be deemed cause for his disqualification." Based upon the above references, rejection of the Midwest Stump Removal proposal is recommended. The third (and final) bid was submitted by Arps Tree Service, the Contractor who was awarded the tree removal contract in 1982. The Contractor did acceptable work in 1982; however, the 1983 proposal, based on the same number of trees in each size category, was $5,037.50 greater than the 1982 proposal (an 18% increase). The 1983 proposal of $33,315.0 exceeded the Engineer's estimate of $33,000.00; therefore, rejection of the proposal is recommended. Attached is a resolution which reflects the staff recommendation that all bids be rejected and that readvertisement for bids be made. If such action is taken, the staff is prepared to notify other firms involved in such work, in an effort to promote interest in the project. SK:jn Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: r RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 1983 -B (MUNICIPAL GARAGE AND STORAGE BUILDING PROJECT NO. 1982 -28, PHASE II) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project No. 1982 -28, Phase II were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and City Engineer on the 24th day of February, 1983. Said bids were as follows: BASE ALTERNATE ALTERNATE BIDDER BID NO. 1 NO. 2 Veit Construction, Inc. $333,333.33 $15,926.00 + $2,378.00 David N. Volkman Construction, Inca 337,827.00 18,402.00 + 2,000.00 Henry 0. Mikkelson Company 345,600.00 5,000.00 + 2,400.00 Construction General, Inc. 347,500.00 - 13,626.00 + 1,638.00 Falls & Nyhusmoen 348,033.00 12,000.00 + 1,878.00 Voronyak Construction, Inc. 349,400.00 - 19,800.00 + 1,900.00 Lund Martin Construction Company 349,800.00 - 16,000.00 + 2,000.00 James Steele Construction Company 349,900.00 + 7,900.00 + 2,100.00 Shaw Lundquist Associates, Inc. 350,000.00 + 2,000.00 + 2,000.00 George W. Olsen Construction Co., Inc. 353,102.00 - 6,021.00 + 1,853.00 M. Kloster Madsen, Inc. 353,900.00 - 2,650.00 + 2,410.00 Construction 70, Inc. 354,950.00 - 2,684.00 + 1,800.00 Trucker Sheehy Contractors 357,300.00 16,000.00 + 2,000.00 Superior 77, Inc. 366,989.00 17,280.00 + 1,840.00 ABJ Enterprises, Inc. 372,049.00 0.00 + 1,700.00 Olson Construction Company, Inc. 375,800.00 + 12,200,00 + 900.00 Glanton Construction Company, Inc. 381,478.00 4,400.00 + 2,400.00 C.F. Haglin 386,000.00 - 20,000.00 + 2,500.00 Sheehy Construction Company 388,000.00 + 2,000..00 + 2,000.00 Karlin Construction 418,730.00 - 15,000.00 + 3,500.00 WHEREAS, it appears that Veit Construction, Inc. of Rogers, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: f 1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to enter into the attached contract with Veit Construction, Inc. of Rogers, Minnesota in the name of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1982 -28, Phase II according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. RESOLUTION NO. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith 3 to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposit of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that: 1. The estimated total cost of Improvement Project No. 1982 -28, Phase II is amended according to the following schedule: As Ordered As Bid Construction Cost $402,980.00 $319,785.33 Engineering Cost City 4,270.00 4,270.00 Consultant 32,000.00 32,000.00 Administrative Cost 4,030.00 3,197.85 $443,280.00 $359,253.18 2. The accounting for Improvement Project No. 1982 -28, Phase II shall be done in the Capital Projects Fund (Division 40). 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. Lindberg Pierce, Inc. Architects Suite 710 6C.!� Minneapolis, Minnesota 55403 Jaynes H Lindberg (612( 332 -33:39 Robert L. Pierce L} L4 February 25, 1983 City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Attention: Mr. Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works RE: Construction Contract Award Municipal Garage Project Dear Mr. Knapp: Proposals for the Remodeling and Storage Building Addition at the Municipal Garage were received Thursday, February 24, 1983, from twenty (20) contractors. A complete bics tabulation of all proposals received is attached. The proposals were for base bid work to include precast concrete facing panels. An alternate was taken to provide textured concrete block in lieu of the precast panels. A second alternate was taken to provide for skylights in the Storage Building. Our firms estimate of probable construction costs for this work, dated January 13, 1983, was $395,980. In view of the substantial savings offered by the bidders for using textured concrete block exterior walls in lieu of precast concrete panels, we are recommending that the bids be considered accepting the deduct cost for concrete block. It is our further recommendation that the bids be reviewed accepting Alternate 2 for providing the natural light into the Storage Building. In keeping with these recommendations the three (3) lowest proposals are as follows: Deduct for Add for Net Contract Contractor Base Bid Conc. Blk. Skylights- Cost Veit Construction $333,333.33 $15,926 $2,378 $319,785.33 David N. Volkman Inca 337,827.00 18,402 2,000 321,425.00 Voronyak Const., Inc. 349,400.00 19,800 1,900 331,500.00 February 25, 1983 City of Brooklyn Center Mr. Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works RE: Construction Contract Award Municipal Garage Project Page 2 Based on these figures the Low Bidder is Veit Construction, Inc. The firm is headquartered with Veit Excavating Co., in Rogers, Minnesota. While the excavating company has been in business approximately forty (40) years, the construction company, which has Mrs. Gae Veit as it's President, has not completed a actual building project to date. Mr. Tom Godlewski is the Manager of the construction company. I contacted two architectural firms who have designed buildings for which Mr. Godlewski had responsibility in construction while with his former employer. Both firms spoke highly of his cooperation and ability to P 9 Y p Y prosecute the work. ork. I contacted the Manager of Northland Glass Company in Albertville, regarding their satisfaction with the finished building product, and he indicated he was very satisfied with Mr. Godlewski's efforts. I made another contact with McCombs- Knutson Engineers, regarding a project for which Veit Excavating Company has recently completed in Jordan, Minnesota. My information on this project indicated general satisfaction with the construction work, which was mainly earth moving, however the engineer in charge was not enthused over Veit's efforts to "knits pick" the construction documents. Based on the facts that general comments regarding Veit's abilities are acceptable, that the major building components are sub- contracted work and our belief that we have a good set of construction documents and the ability to properly administer the contract requirement, it would be our recommendation that the city award the construction contract to Veit Construction Company, pending compliance with all required submittals. Veit Construction Company has indicated a project completion date of approxi- mately 110 days after award of contract. Shop drawing work and approvals would,proceed immediately with work at the site starting approximately April 15, 1983. Si ncer;ly Robert L. Pierce Attachment: RLP /ces BROOKLYN CENTER MUNICIPAL GARAGE LINDBERG PIERCE, INC., ARCHITECTS REMODELING AND STORAGE BUILDING SUITE 710, 600 FIRST AVENUE NORTH BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55403 ALTERrd T CONCRETE ROOF COMPLETION CTOR BASE BID BLOCK WALLS SKYLIGHTS DATE REMARKS ABJ Enterprises, Inc. 372,049 NO CHANGE + 1,700 ,', onstruction General Inc. 347,500 - 13,626 + 1,638 Construction 70, Inc. 354,950 - 2,684 + 1 Fails & Nyhusmo C onst.,In . 348,033 - 12,000 + 1,878 Glanton Const:, Co.. Inc. 381,478 - 4,400 + 2,400 F. Haglin 386,000 - 20,000 + 2,500 James Steele Const., Co. 349,900 - 7,900 + 2,100 Karlen Construction 418,730 - 15,000 + 3,500 Lu Mart Const., Co. 349,800 - 16,000 + 2,000 11. Kloster Madsen Inc 353,900 - 2,650 +'2,410 henry 0. Mikkelson Co. 345,60 - 5,000 + 2,400 George W. Olsen Const.Co.,I c.353,102 6,021 + 1,853 Sheehy Construction Co. 388,800 + 2,000 + 2,000 -Shaw Lundquist Assoc., Inc. 350,000 + 2,000 + 2,000 Superior 77, Inc. 366,989 17,280 + 1,840 Trucker Sheehy Contractors 357,300 - 16,000 +;2,000 �. Veit Construction, Inc. 333,333.33 15,926 + 2,378 David N. Volkman Const,,In • 337,.827 - 18,402 + 2,000 Voronyak Const._, Inc. 349,400 - 19,800 + I,900 ON E Co ncrete Co., Inca 375,800 - 12,200 + 900 Member introduced the following resolution and C�J moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION RECEIVING CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT, ESTABLISHING WELL NO. 3 RECONDITIONING PROJECT NO. 1983 -03, APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (CONTRACT 1983 -C) WHEREAS, the City Engineer has reported to the City Council that it is necessary and in the best interests of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, to replace the deep well turbine pump and pump motor system, and provide necessary alterations to the chlorine chemical feed system at Well No. 3 as comprehended under an established well maintenance program; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared plans and specifications for' the proposed work; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has estimated the cost of said improvement to be NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that 1. The City Engineer's Report is hereby accepted. 2. The following project is herabv established: WELL NO. 3 RECONDITIONING PROJECT NO. 1983 -03 3. The plans and specifications for Contract 1983 -C for said improvement project prepared by the City Engineer are hereby approved and ordered filed with the City Clerk. 4. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least twice in the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvements under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall appear not less than ten (10) days prior to the date for receipt of bids, and specify the work to be done, state that said bids will be received by the City.Clerk until 11:00 A.M.,'local time, on March 24, 1983, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers at City Hall by the City Clerk and City Engineer, will then be tabulated and will be considered by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., local time, on March 28, 1983, in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless - sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City for Five percent of the amount of such bid. S. The accounting for Project No. 1983 -03 will be done in the Public `M1£ Utilities Fund. 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. 10 TO: Gerald G- Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: February 25, 1983 RE: Well No. 3 Reconstruction Project No. 1983 -03 In conjunction with the City's ongoing utility maintenance program, the staff has inspected the pump for Water Supply Well'No. 3 During the inspection, we found severe erosion of various pump elements (holes in column piping, wear of pump shaft, etc.) and determined that pump replacement is necessary (existing pump was installed in 1968). - Upon determination that a replacement pump was required, we further investigated the need to replace the existing 125 horsepower pump motor. (installed in 1961) with a larger motor. The existing motor has had a history of over heating. Also, it is evident that gradually increasing water demands result in higher "drawdown" of the water ,table during peak water demand periods thereby placing heavier loadings on the motor. Accordingly, we have determined that it is necessary to increase the pump motor size to 150 horsepower, and in addition, modify the existing electrical wiring system to accomodate the increased electrical load. In conjunction with the interior electrical system modifications, it will be necessary to modify the electrical service from Northern States Power from the present 230 volt to a more efficient 460 volt service. Additional improvements recommended at this time include the installation of an air exchange unit to assist in the proper circulation through, and within the pumphouse. The proposed construction consists of a thermostatically controlled louvered window unit and power fan to circulate and exhaust the air in t7he pumproom. Additional improvements also include the installation of a second air exchange unit in the chlorine chemical room that exhausts air to the atmosphere when the room light is turned on, and the installation of a viewing window between the pumproom and chlorine chemical room. (Both improve- ments are required by current standards of the Minnesota Department of Health to provide for increased operator safety.) Discharge piping modifications considered necessary at this time include: replacement of the original 8 inch check valve which has been worn beyond repair and installation of a surge eliminator tank,. considered necessary to eliminate the tremendous pressure surge that occurs at each pump start up. A summary of the estimated project costs follows Well pump and motor $24,400.00 Piping modifications 6,700.00 Electrical modifications 11,000.00 - Electrical service modifications 5,000.00 Air ventilation modifications 7,800,00 Subtotal $54,900.00 Contingencies 8,240.00 .TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $63,140.00 Engineering Cost (9a of Const. Cost) 5,680.00 Administrative Cost (1% of Const. Cost) 630.00 $69,450.00 February 25, 1983 - G.G. Splinter Page 2 Our specifications provide for a required completion date of June 3, 1983, to assure that this well will be back on -line for our peak summer demand period. Respectfully submitted, SPK:jn MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION FEBRUARY 17, 1983 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:32 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Mary Simmons, Nancy Manson, Lowell Ainas, Carl Sandstrom and Donald Versteeg. Also present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, Assistant City Engineer James Grube and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross, APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 27, 1983 Motion by Commissioner Manson seconde by Commissioner Malecki to approve the minutes of the January 27, 1983 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Ainas and Versteeg. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioners Simmons and Sandstrom. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 83001 (Howe, Inc.) Following the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first item of business, an appeal from a determination by staff that acquisition of a right -of -way parcel at the southwest corner of 49th_ Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard would constitute an expansion of a nonconforming use. This item had been tabled by the Planning Com- mission on January 13, 1983. The Secretary briefly reviewed the contents of the staff report and also reviewed a letter from the City Attorney which outlined conditions for accepting the acquisition of the right -of -way parcel without it constituting an expansion of a non- conforming use (see Planning Commission Information Sheet and a letter from the City Attorney dated February 10 1983 attached). The Secretary also explained that the parking to be provided on the acquired parcel would reduce the variance from the parking require - ment granted under Application No. 79069. He explained that that variance allowed only employee parking to the west of the middle building because the parking is in an area designated as buffer strip under the Zoning Ordinance. The Secretary stated that the area would still be used for access purposes though the applicant may choose not to use it for parking in the future. Commissioner Simmons asked if the parking to the west of the middle building were converted to buffer area, would the new parking offset this loss and the variance, therefore, have to be adjusted. The 'Secre- tary answered that the variance was from the overall parking re- quirement based on square footage of the respective buildings. He explained that the employee parking on the west side of the middle building is not used very much by employees at this time. He stated that any conversion of the area to buffer space would still keep part of the area paved for access by trucks around that side of the complex. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether Howe Fertilizer would have enough parking for themselves. The Secretary answered in the affirmative. He stated that, to his knowledge, there hasn't been 2 -17 -83 -l- a parking problem at Howe, Inc. Chairman Lucht then called on the applicant to speak. Mr. Tom Howe stated that the points made in the City Attorney's letter were agreeable to Howe, Inc. Chairman Lucht stated that he felt the stipulation agreement covered the concerns of the Planning Commission. Tom Howe stated that he felt the legal questions regarding the ex- pansion were dealt with by the agreement. The Secretary asked whether the Planning Commission.had any problems with the findings which the City Attorney's letter required the City to make in order to enter into the legal agreement with Howe, Inc. Chairman Lucht stated that he did not have problems with the findings. He stated that he felt the profitability of Howe, Inc. is not affected by the acquisition of the right -of -way parcel ACTION RECOMMENDING ACCEPTANCE OF THE STIPULATION AGREEMENT AND FORWARDING THE APPLICATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend acceptance of a stipulation agreement along the lines suggested by the City Attorney's letter of February 10, 1983 and to forward Application No. 83001 to the City Council without further recommendation. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Manson, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. APPLICATION NO. 83006 (Car -X Muffler Shop) The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request by Car -X Muffler Shop for site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a conveyor -type car wash on the south side of the parcel of land at 6810 Brooklyn Boulevard. He reviewed the con- tents of the staff report (See Manning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 83006 attac':ed). The Secretary also stated that the Engineering Department has received traffic counts from the Minnesota Department of Transportation indicating raw traffic counts in excess of 36,000 vehicles per day on the section of Brooklyn Boulevard between I -94 and 69th Avenue North. He added that this level of traffic was recorded prior to the opening of the freeway to Minneapolis and that traffic on that section of the boulevard has increased noticeably since that time. Commissioner Malecki asked whether there was any plan to have a median on this area of Brooklyn Boulevard. The Secretary answered that the idea of a median in this section of Brooklyn Boulevard had been dis- cussed for some time, but that no specific.plan exists to install a median. He added that the State intended to turn Brooklyn Boulevard over to the County and would probably not make such improvements before it did so.- Regarding the operation of the proposed car wash, Commissioner Simmons asked whether the employee would collect the money. The Secretary responded in the affirmative. Commissioner Simmons stated that she did not feel that stacking vehicles two wide in a 17' driving lane was realistic. In response to a question from Commissioner Versteeg, the Secretary explained that there is no explicit standard for parking or stacking for car washes He stated that a survey of other Hennepin County Municipalities indicated that a half -hour of stacking time is generally sought by a number of communities. Commissioner Versteeg 2 -17 -83 -2- ` asked whether car washes come to the Car Wash Association for approval before coming to the Planning Commission. The Secretary stated that he did not think so and that whatever the Association preferred, with respect to a' particular car wash, should not necessarily affect the judgment of the Planning Commission. Commissioner Sandstrom asked how someone would get out of the line if there were a breakdown. The Secretary answered that the site plan really does not provide space for such an eventuality. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he thought it would only be a single line of stacking, not a double line. Chairman Lucht asked whether a special use permit could be revoked if the standards were not met once the business was built. The Secretary stated that that might be a possibility, but that he did not recommend approving a use which did not appear to meet the standards for a special use permit to begin with. Chairman Lucht asked what would be done with the building if -the car wash didn't function. The Secretary answered that it would probably be put to an auto - related use. He stated that staff, in reaching its recommendation, did not make any economic judgments about what would work and what wouldn't. He stated that the staff simply feel that this particular use will not fit on the amount of land available and that it had not been demon strated by the applicant that the proposal would work without causing traffic congestion on Brooklyn Boulevard. Chairman Lucht then called on the applicant to speak. Mr. Brian Cook, Manager of the Car -X Muffler Shop at 6810 Brooklyn Boulevard pointed out that the narrow drive on the south side or the building (17' wide) could be widened by the elimination cf the sidewalk adjacent to the building to a width of 18' 8 ". He stated that he realized the space available for the car wash was small. He explained that he had re- viewed with the planning staff other potential uses and those did not seem to work either. He stated that he came across the Hanna Equipment Company, which produces car wash equipment and investigated the possibility of a car wash with the staff. Regarding the stacking problem, Mr. Cook stated that the conveyor inside the car wash`, could be speeded up to relieve the problems of stacking should they occur out on Brooklyn Boulevard. He added that there is not room for sale of gasoline or for vacuum cleaners which add to the stacking time. He also stated that he has not seen the car wash himself, but that his father has Commissioner Malecki asked where the employee would be stationed. Mr. Cook responded that the employee would be stationed at the en- trance to the car wash on the east side of the building. Chairman Lucht, noting that the equipment can handle up to 150 cars per hour, explained that this would be 2� cars per minute. He pointed out that left turns onto Brooklyn Boulevard in this location often take 2k minutes each. He questioned whether the site would have the ability to get cars off the property quick enough when stacking increased. Commissioner Sandstrom reiterated his question regarding the break- down of the equipment. Mr. Bob Childers, of Hanna Equipment Company, explained that there is no possibility of equipment breakdown unless the hydraulic system were to break down, in which case, the car wash 2 -17 -83 -3 would be out of business. He stated that the Planning Commission was comparing apples with oranges. Fie stated that the proposed car wash was different from other car washes surveyed in the Metro area, in that it would not offer gas or other services. He explained that, while the equipment has the capacity to wash 150 cars per hour, business would not normally be 150 cars per hour. He stated that this was a peak volume which was experienced for only five to ten minutes out of the year. He stated that the establishment would place a sign at the exiting point for right turns only. Com- missioner Malecki questioned whether left turns could be prevented. Commissioner Simmons added that requiring right turns would require more employees and that there is not enough land for additional parking for those employees or for the use altogether. Mr. Childers again stated that there might be a peak of 500 to 600 cars on a particular Saturday, but that the year round average would be 150 to 200 cars per day, Chairman Lucht stated that it has been his experience, at the Brookdale Car Wash, that the people waiting in line for both gas and a car wash have to wait to get their gas because stacking for the car wash is backed up. Therefore, he concluded, eliminating the gas pumps would not reduce stacking for the car wash. Commis- sioner Versteeg asked whether the car wash would be shut down if cars were not able to get out onto Brooklyn Boulevard and backed up onto the property. Mr. Childers stated that it could be a problem, but that he did not think stacking would be a problem. PUBLIC HEARING 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 Mo o by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to close the public hearing. he motion passed. ed. Chairman Luch P t then polled the Commissioners as to their feelings regarding the appli- cation. Commissioner Manson stated that she was concerned about traffic generally in the area and noted the Vickers gas station as a use causing problems. She stated that left turn movements are particularly a problem but did not feel left turns could be pre - vented effectively with the proposal. She also stated that she has noticed more traffic along Brooklyn Boulevard in this area, since the opening of I -94 and could not recommend a use that would add to the congestion in this area. Commissioner Versteeg stated that he did not feel the car wash would work because of the left turns out onto Brooklyn Boulevard. He noted that the insurance agency at 63rd and Brooklyn Boulevard is very difficult to get out of to make a left turn and explained that that business only generates a few left turns per day. He stated that the car wash would be a much worse problem at an even busier location on Brook- lyn Boulevard. Commissioner Sandstrom agreed with -these comments and noted the problems of making a left turn onto Brooklyn Boulevard from the Standard Station at 60th and Brooklyn Boulevard. Commis- sioner Ainas also noted the problems of making left turns out of the Big Wheel Auto Parts Store just north of the Car -X property. He stated that unless no left turns could be guaranteed, he did not feel the car wash could be allowed. Commissioner Simmons stated that there were sure to be customer 2 -17 -83 -4- problems (eg. people who are not satisfied with their car wash would want to talk to the employee and thus, :causing a backup in the stacking). Commissioner Malecki stated that she felt the site was simply not large enough for the business. Seeing that the Commission would recommend denial, Chairman Lucht asked whether a resolution had been prepared recommending denial. The Secretary recommended that the application be tabled until the March 3 meeting when a resolution would be brought before the Planning Commission to act upon. ACTION TABLING APPLICATION NO. 83006 (Car -X Muffler Shop) Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Versteeg to table Application No. 83006 and direct staff to prepare a reso- lution of denial for the March 3, 1983 meeting. Commissioner Malecki stated that the resolution should state that Standard (d) is not met. Commissioner Simmons stated that it should also be made clear that the space available is too small for the proposed use. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Manson, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed. RECESS The Planning Commission recessed at 9:10 p.m. and resumed at 9:29 p.m. The Assistant City Engineer left during the recess. OTHER BUSINESS (Tax Increment Financing 'Plan for Elderly Project) The Secretary then introduced Brad Hoffman to review the tax increment financing plan for the elderly housing project at the southeast quadrant of I -94 and Highway 1.00. The Secretary explained that State.law re- quires that the tax increment financing plan be reviewed by the Plan- ning Commission. He stated that the Planning Commission should make comments relative to the Comprehensive Plan, but that until the Com- prehensive Plan is amended, a conflict exists. He recommended looking at the tax increment plan on March 3 along with the other Planning Commission applications. Mr. Brad Hoffman, Administrative Assistant to the City Manager, ex- plained that a public hearing had been called by the City Council to review the tax increment financing plan at its February 28, 1983 meeting. He stated that the Planning Commission should ask the City Council to reserve judgment on the tax increment financing plan until its review of the tax increment plan and the proposed project is complete. Mr. Hoffman briefly reviewed the boundaries of the tax increment district. He explained that the present taxes on the property were $4,000.00 and that they would be $12,000.00 if the property owned by the State was in private ownership. He stated that the taxes after the project was completed would be $160,000.00 per year. This represents an increase of $148,000.00 per year in taxes which will go to finance the write -down on the land and other expenses. Com- missioner Simmons asked how long it would be before the debt was retired. Mr. Hoffman answered that it could be up to 15 years if a worst case scenario is assumed. He stated that this would be based on repayment of $130,000.00 per year, rather than $148,000.00 and that there would be no inflation to increase the taxes generated by the property. He stated that realistically the debt should be paid off in 10 to 12 years He then reviewed the statement of costs on page 12 of the tax increment financing plan. These included: 2 -17 -83 -5- acquisition, public inprovements, legal expenses, engineering and surveying costs, miscellaneous and capitalized interest. He stated that the costs are estimated conservatively= and may not amount to the $950,000.00 projected in the tax increment financing plan. Commissioner Simmons noted that the objectives of the project include providing housing for persons of low to moderate income. She asked whether people would be screened to determine whether they are, in fact, low to moderate income. Mr. Hoffman answered in the negative. He explained that low to moderate income means 80% of_ "immediate income in the Twin Cities area, which is 80% of approximately $27,000.00 per year, for a family of four. Commissioner. Simmons s t that the project i o stated that although the objectives state p J g J provide for low to moderate income housing, the fact that no screen- ing will take place makes that objective questionable. Mr. Hoffman stated that 20% of the rental units must be set aside for low to moderate income families under the requirements of State law. Chairman Lucht stated that one of the reasons the project is being undertaken by the City is that the City does not want to have the problems associated with HUD projects. Commissioner Simmons stated that she is concerned that the same thing would happen in Brooklyn Center as has scandalized Minneapolis, where high income persons were getting low income housing financed under a tax increment district. Commissioner Sandstrom agreed. He stated that tax increment financing should be used for lower income people if the rest of the taxpayers are footing the bill. Chairman Lucht stated that the project would be sold on a first -come, first- served basis. Commissioner Sandstrom and Commissioner Simmons both stated that screening would be needed in order to ensure that housing is provided for low to moderate income people. Commissioner Sandstrom questioned who would benefit from the 'tax increment financing plan: residents of the project or the developer. Commissioner Ainas stated that the tax increment plan does benefit the developer, but that without the TIF plan, the land r Hoffman also o would benefit. Mr. Ho explained would. sit vacant and .. one P that there are enough title problems surrounding the land that it would be difficult for any private developer to develop the property without any assistance from the City. There followed a discussion primarily between Commissioner Simmons and Mr. Hoffman as to how the project would accomplish benefits for the citizens of Brooklyn Center. Mr. Hoffman explained that the main benefit of the project would be that existinghousing, occupied by elderly residents, would be bought by first time home buyers who would take better care of the property and bring school age children into the school district. Commissioner Sandstrom expressed his concern regarding providing housing for low income people who have the least alternatives when it comes to housing. Mr. Hoffman stated that the project is not really geared to low income people, but rather to moderate income people. Chairman Lucht stated that he did not feel high income people would buy these units which would be in the $60,000.00 range. Commissioner Simmons stated that, as far as she could see, the pro - vision of low income housing is not really an objective of this project. Mr. Hoffman stated that he was sure there would be low income elderly persons moving into the project. Commissioner Simmons stated that she wanted honesty in the objectives. She also stated that if the City is going to be financing such a project, it should see that low and moderate income people do benefit from the project. Mr. Hoffman reviewed an example of a woman who has an 2 -17 -83 -6- income of $4,000.00 to $5,000.00 a year, but who lives in a home worth $90,000.00 and would like to buy a condominium in the project.- Commissioner Sandstrom stated that a $90,000.00 house would not be bought by a first -time 'home buyer. Mr. Hoffman stated that the majority of people moving into the project would be from the South- east Neighborhood where houses are not as expensive. He stated that one of the primary benefits from the project is that new families moving into this housing would maintain the housing better than elderly residents. Commissioner Simmons observed that the buyers were not limited to Brooklyn Center. There followed a discussion regarding the provision of housing for low income persons. Mr. Hoffman stated that low income people are not buying housing, but have to rent. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that rents are going up so that low income people cannot even afford to rent Chairman Lucht stated that the people in the neighborhood would not accept a low income housing project anyway. Commissioner Simmons asked why the tax increment financing plan then states that this is an objective. Chairman Lucht stated that there were multiple objectives of the project and that it was a complex matter of meeting the various objectives at the same time. Commissioner Simmons and Commissioner Sandstrom stated that Objective No. 1 (provision of housing for low and moderate income people) does not seem to have a very high priority and that this objective should be listed further down if it is not a high priority. Commissioner Ainas asked whether it would be necessary to prioritize the Bill of Rights. Commissioner Versteeg recommended protecting a number of the units_ for Brooklvn Center residents only. Mr. Hoffman answered that that was not legally possible, but that an effort is being made through the marketing of the units to appeal to Brooklyn Center residents first and, therefore, enhance the likelihood that Brooklyn Center residents will move into the project in greater numbers. The Planning Assistant pointed out that one of the benefits of the pro- ject would be that, as younger families bought homes in Brooklyn Center to replace those sold by Brooklyn Center residents, this would bring more students into the school district and would bring per pupil student aids from the State government into the City. He also stated that the elderly moving into the project would tend to be low income people since older people tend to have less of an income, at least after they are retired. Commissioner Simmons stated that the project would amount to donating 15 years worth of taxes to the developer. She questioned whether this was worthwhile. She asked whether taxes from the project might be declining after 15 years. Commissioner Sandstrom asked who would be maintaining the property. Mr. Hoffman answered that Brutger Company, the developer, would maintain the property. Chairman Lucht stated that he did not feel that it was up to the Planning Commission to review the statement of objectives, but simply to review the extent to which the project was consistent or inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Simmons stated that she felt the project would get off to the wrong "start if objectives were stated which were not really objectives. Com- missioner Ainas pointed out that low income people would -have less problem getting into an apartment because of the Section 8 Rent Assistance which assures the owner of the building -a rental payment. DISCUSSION ITEM (Manufactured Housing) The Secretary ten briefly reviewed with the 'Planning Commission 2 -17 -83 -7- changes in the State Statutes which require municipalities to allow manufactured housing on the same basis that it allows site - built housing. He pointed out, however, that communities may also regulate housing by width of structure, requiring foundations, and other possible regulations under the Zoning Ordinance. He stated that the Planning Commission has to look at whether it wants to apply new regulations to all single- family housing, being careful to take into account existing structures. In answer to a question from Commissioner Simmons regarding re- quiring foundations, the Secretary stated that staff have not thoroughly researched the matter, but he stated he would be some what surprised if there were any homes in Brooklyn Center without a foundation. He stated that if anyone wanted to put a mobile home on a single family parcel of land, the City would have to let them, but could require that it have a foundation, a certain width, and a minimum pitch of roof. There followed a brief discussion on some possible regulations which the City could adopt to limit the type of housing in the Rl district. Commissioner Simmons suggested that a minimum roof pitch be looked at. Commissioner Ainas suggested that a ratio of length to width be looked at. He stated that such a ratio has been used in other communities. Commissioner Manson asked whether an 18' wide house would fit on a -40' wide lot. The Secretary stated that such a house could fit on a 40' wide lot. He stated that the house could be as wide as 20' with two 10' side yard setbacks or 25' if one side of the house had only a 5' setback. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Commissioner Simmons seconded by Commissioner Manson to adjourn the meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Comrission adjourned at 10:47 p.m. Chairman 2 -17 -83 -8 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83001 Applicant: Howe., Inc. Location: 4821 Xerxes Avenue North Request: Appeal The applicant appeals a- determination by the City 'staff that acquisition and use of a parcel of excess right -of -way at the southwest corner of 49th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard for parking and landscaping would constitute an expansion of the nonconform- ing use at Howe, Inc. and is, therefore, prohibited by the Zoning Ordinance. The land in question is approximately 30,000_sq. ft. and is located northeast of the existing Howe, Inc. site. The parcel` was created in 1972 when MN /DOT acquired additional land for right -of -way to construct a bridge over the Soo _Line tracks. It is presently used primarily to provide access to Howe, Inc. off 49th Avenue North at an appropriate distance back from the intersection with Brooklyn Boulevard. The applicant wishes to use this area for additional parking adjacent to its office on the east side of the site and to landscape the entrance to the site. City staff, in a letter dated September 24, 1982 (attached) have informed the applicant that such an expansion is not permitted under Section 35- 111,Subsection (1) which reads: "no such nonconforming use of land shall be enlarged or increased or occupy a greater area of land than that occupied by such use at the time of the adoption of this ordinance." (The City Council has made a finding, based on a recommendation from the f Planning Commission that Howe, Inc. became a nonconforming use under the Zoning Ordinance in 1957). The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which he explains the background of the issue and sets forth a number of arg+iments summarized below: 1) The land is excess right -of -way which Howe, Inc. has been using for access since 1972 anyway. 2) To add the land to the existing site would not enlarge the area occupied by the nonconforming use in 1957, but would replace other land taken in 1972 for right-of-way. 3) Allowing the additional parking would be a greater convenience and would reduce the hardship cited when Howe, Inc. was granted a variance for parking in 1979. 4) Conforming uses at Howe, Inc. should be distinguished from the nonconforming use which is the manufacture of fertilizer. Parking is a, permitted accessory use for any business in Brooklyn Center. Howe, Inc. is not being allowed to fulfill parking needs because of a nonconforming aspect of its operation. 5) The proposed parking and landscaping on the land in question would enhance the appearance of the area, benefitting the City and the neighborhood as well as Howe, Inc. The applicant's arguments have some merit,though some are more relevant than others. The fact that Howe, Inc. has been using part of the land for access i,s not an issue here. It may continue to use the access drive whether the land is owned by the State or not. 1 -13 -83 -1- .r Application No. 83001 continued ' It may seem noteworthy as the applicant argues, that the land in question would replace land that was taken in 1972 (actually only about 15,700 sq. ft. was taken from Howe in 1972 compared to the potential gain of about 30,000 sq. ft. now). However, it must be understood that the land in question was owned and occupied by two other businesses at the time MN /DOT acquired the property and access to Howe has been provided over a portion of the area. The land area presently used for access is roughly equivalent to the amount of land acquired from Howe and damages have been awarded. We believe the intent of the City's nonconforming use ordinance, as with all such ordinances, is to eventually phase out nonconforming uses. Any diminution in the land area of a nonconforming use whatever the cause should serve to accomplish the ultimate goal of phasing out nonconformity and should not be reversible later on. This policy is evident in subsection (2) of Section 35 -111 which reads: "Such nonconforming use shall not be moved to any other part of the parcel of land upon which the same was conducted at the time of the adoption of this ordinance." and Subsection (4) of Section 35 -111 which states: "If a nonconforming use occupies a building and ceases for a continuous period of two years, any subsequent use of said building shall be in conformity to the use regulation specified by this ordinance for the district in which such building is located." Even though the present application deals with the use of land and not a building, it seems clear that the basic policy of the Zoning Ordinance is to phase out non- conformity and not allow re- expansion many years after a loss in building or land urea. Point No. 3 does point up some.irony in the City staff's position: that Howe, Inc. should not be allowed to expand even if the expansion serves to reduce one type of nonconformity (lack of parking). What the applicant's letter does not mention clearly, but which has been communicated to staff, is that the applicant does not wish to increase parking area so much as shift it from the area west of the middle building ld f to the a 's would free u e rea north of the office building. Thi u p the area 9 west of the middle building for storage of trailers and fertilizer ` spreaders, an area which the variance granted under Application No. 79069 reserved for employee parking only. Staff regard this as a clear expansion of the operation and not a reduction in the parking deficiency. The applicant cites the fact that parking and landscaping are permitted accessory uses and are not an expansion of the nonconforming aspect of the operation which is the manufacture of fertilizer. Actually the ordinance does not prohibit Howe, Inc. from providing more parking and landscaping on their site. What it prohibits is the enlargement of the site of - a nonconforming use. Any such expansion is likely to extend the life of the nonconforming use rather than lead to its phasing out and is, therefore, contrary to the intent of the ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance does not restrict or bar the expansion of conforming uses. The applicant also argues that the nonconforming manufacturing aspect is not expanding, that the new parking would serve the office and distribution aspects of the business rather than manufacturing. However, office and distribution functions, along with parking, are accessory to and supportive of the nonconforming activity of manufact- uring fertilizer. Any expansion of the existing site cannot be divorced from expansion 1-13-83 -2- .r of the nonconforming use. It should be noted that the Howe, Inc. operation was viewed as a whole when a determination was made that a building could be rebuilt on the site following the 1979 fire. The City, Council on May 14, 1979 made the following finding There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to recognize and concur with the Planning Commission action that the Howe building destroyed by fire on January 6, 1979 was part of the entire complex, that less than 60% of said complex was destroyed by the fire and that, therefore, the applicant is entitled to rebuild a similar warehouse on the site. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Finally, the applicant argues that the proposed parking and landscaping improvements would enhance the appearance of the area. We certainly don't disagree that the area would be enhanced by more landscaping; and, if Howe, Inc. wishes to plant more trees in the right -of -way at 49th and Brooklyn Boulevard, we see no reason why they should not be allowed to do so. Enhancing the appearance of public as well as private property is always a welcome improvement, provided lines ofsight are preserved for traffic safety. We see no need to expand parking into this area in order for neigh - borhood appearance to be enhanced. In general, we feel the applicant has made some good points and we acknowledge that there may be real practical benefits resulting - from the proposal. However, we believe that it is contrary to the provisions of Section 35 -111 of the Zoning Ordinance. The issue of expanding the Howe, Inc. site was thoroughly reviewed in 1977 when the company wished to rezone from RI to I -2 the two residential lots immediately west of the site. It should be noted that many of the same arguments were made at that time about how the expansion would improve appearances and would allow Howe, Inc. to conform to buffer, setback, and parking requirements. The expansion at that time was denied as being inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Although, the P 9 updated Comprehensive Plan does not recommend conversion of the industrial site to residential, it does recommend the phasing out of the Howe, Inc. fertilizer manufact- uring operation. Any expansion of the Howe site along the lines presently proposed would require replatting of the new parcel with the Howe site into a single parcel, site plan approval for parking and landscape improvements and a variance from the ordinance requirement for a 15' greenstrip adjacent to Brooklyn Boulevard. The Planning Commission should be aware that all these other matters would have to be considered (and ultimately given at least conditional approval) should the appeal be granted. Such an action we feel, would be inconsistent with the precedent established in 1977 by denial of Application Nos. 77037 and 77038. We do not believe the proposed expansion is consistent with either the City's Zoning Ordinance or its Comprehensive Plan. For that reason, we recommend that the appeal be denied. 1 -13 -83 -3- L' �7 tJ ' LeI i�vere Lefler r��`C.GIf d,3oc� t Kennedy 011r ie►r K. Drawt A Pioh,.imial astiuciauun 2000 Fist Bank Place West February 10, 1983 Minneapolis Minnesota 55402 Telephone 612- 333 -0543 Ronald Warren r Clayton L. LeFevere Director of Planning Herbert P Lefler J. Dennis O'Brien City of Brooklyn Center John E. Drawl 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway David J. Kennedy Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 John B. Dean Glenn E. Purdue Richard J. Schieffer Re: Response to Questions of Planning Commission Charles L. LeFevere Regarding Howe, Inc. Right -of -Way Acquisition Herbert P Lefler iH Jeffrey J. Strand Mary J. B}orklund Dear Ron' John G. Kressei Dayle Nolan Cindy L. Lavorato You have requested that I respond to questions put to Michael A. Nash you by the ]=Tanning Commission regarding any possible Luke R. Komarek legal disadvantages to a proposal by Howe, I to J Ericksen n D. Moran acquire a parcel of land from, the Minnesota Highway Department which lies adjacent to the Howe property at Brooklyn Boulevard and 49th Avenue. My understanding is that this small parcel of property was purchased by the Highway Department approximately ten years ago with the intention that the property would be used for right-of- way for T.H. 152 in the vicinity of the Howe fertilizer site. This property was at that time, and remains zoned for industrial purposes in the same classification as the Howe fertilizer site. The questions which I see arising are as follows: 1. The right -of -way parcel being acquired has never been used for the production of fertilizer and therefore has no status as a nonconforming use. If it is annexed to the Howe site, will it acquire status as a nonconforming use? 2. A related question is'whether or not the acquisi- tion and annexation of the parcel to the Howe site will constitute an expansion of a nonconforming use. 3 What means of analysis do we have to determine these questions? February 10, 1983 Page 2 Ronald Warren First, we must recognize that the Howe property and the proposed right-of-way acquisition parcel are zoned for industrial purposes and approximately 90% of the acti- vity which goes on at the Howe fertilizer site is per- mitted under our zoning ordinance. The only function which is not permitted, and is therefore a nonconforming use, is the production of ammoniated fertilizer. There- fore, our inquiry should be related directly to the ammoniation process which is basicly a mixing and heat- ing process which results in a chemical reaction to the product. (For our purposes here we can ignore the structural nonconformities as to setback, buffered areas, and other matters.) I have reviewed my research notes and have updated my research which was originally done in 1979 with respect to the expansion of a nonconforming use. There are additional cases but none of them deal with an expansion by acquisition Y of land. From those cases Freebo n vs. Claussen 203 N.W. 2nd 323 (1972) West Zoning Key Number 329, together with a couple of cases from other jurisdictions yields the following principals: 1 Any change in operation or function, and any con - struction which extends the useful life of the non- conforming use is considered to be an expansion and is prohibited. This is the Claussen case in which an excavator was using a parcel of land for the storage and repair of his equipment. Thereafter, the zoning ordinance restricted the land for resi- dential purposes which made his storage and repair operation a nonconforming use. He sought to build a building house the equipment while he was making repairs and the Court ruled that this was an expansion of his nonconforming use. 2 If there is an increase in the volume which is traceable to the additional land, this could be considered an expansion of the nonconforming use. There are no specific cases dealing with volume and this is a weaker argument than the previous one but it nonetheless does exist. 3. Changes which increase the profitability of the nonconformin g use may be considered to be an Y expansion, particularly where physical; changes are made for the purpose of meeting competitive advances of other installations in the same industry. February 10, 1983 Page 3 Ronald Warren One of the problems in dealing with this proposed acqui- sition is that without some prior agreement, it is very speculative as to what this additional land will be used for and it is even more speculative to try to determine what effect that might have on the production of ammoni- ated fertilizer. As you know, we have explored with Tom Howe the possibility of removing most of this specula- tion by entering into an agreement regarding the proposed use of the right -of -way parcel and the effect of that use on the question of expansion. Those discussions with Tom Howe are summarized as follows: Howe, Inc. will agree with the City as follows 1. The right -of -way parcel will be used exclusively for parking, landscaping, access and driveway purposes; 2. The size of the present parking variance (which we believe to be a reduction in'required parking spaces from 110 to 68) will be decreased by the number of additional parking spaces made available by the right -of -way parcel acquisition, .3. The area to the west of the so called middle building which is currently designated for employee parking will be used for setback, buffer or access road purposes in the event that parking is dis- continued at that location because of the addi- tional parking made available by the right -of -way parcel; 4 No additional storage, sales, storage of rental equipment or other active uses will be made of any of the Howe fertilizer site which is made available as a result of the increased parking facility being provided by the right-of-way parcel; 5. The right -of -way parcel would be platted and com- bined with the main Howe fertilizer plant site; 6. Howe, Inc. would discontinue its present appeal and waive the right to challenge the propriety, author- ity and reasonableness of the stipulation agreement, but would not waive its right to sue if the City were to violate the agreement. e February 10, 1983 Page 4 Ronald Warren The City, as its part of the bargain would do the following: 1. Make a finding that no expansion has occurred under the circumstances set out in the stipulation agree - ment; 2. Make a finding that the life of the nonconforming use (the ammoniated fertilizer process) has not been extended as a result of the right -of -way acquisition; 3. Make a finding that no increase in volume of ammoniated fertilizer is directly traceable to the right -of -way acquisition; 4. Make a finding that no increased profits from the ammoniated fertilizer are directly related to the right -of -way acquisition; s 5. Agree to process the acquisition of the right-of- way by Howe, the platting of the property and any. other ordinance required approvals in accordance with City ordinances. If both parties enter into these agreements it is my opinion that the acquisition and proposed use can be accomplished without violating our ordinances or jeo- pardizing the gains which we obtained in the previous lawsuit`. Please give me a call if you have any ques- tions or comments. Sincerely, LeFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, `BRIE & DRAWZ Ric and J. c ief RJS /cd -, Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 83006 Applicant: Car X Muffler Shop Location: 6810 Brooklyn Blvd. Request: Site and Building Plan, Special Use Permit The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a linear (one -bay.) car wash adjacent to the Car X Muffler Shop at 6810 Brooklyn Boulevard. The car wash would be on the same property as the muffler shop and would be owned and operated by the current proprietor. The property is zoned C2 and is bounded by North Star Dodge on the southeast and northeast, by Big Wheel Auto Parts on the northwest, and by Brooklyn Boulevard on the southwest. A car wash is a special use in the C -2 zoning district. The proposed car wash is a structure 25' 4" wide by 72' long. It is to be situated on an area of Land approximately 50' wide by 200' long (deep) on the south side of the Car X property. There is one 30' wide access to the property at present and no additional accesses are allowed pursuant to an agreement entered into by Car X when the property was platted into a single parcel in 1977. A second access is also made infeasible by the requirement that driveways in commercial and industrial areas be 50 feet apart (the North Star Dodge driveway is less than 100 feet from the Car X driveway) . = =' The primary difficulty of the site plan is with the provision of parking and of stacking space for waiting customers. The site plan provides only one additional parking stall on the grounds that there will allegedly be only one employee connected with the operation. We feel the ordinance requires at least four (4) parking spaces for this operation and possibly nine (9). If the car wash is con sidered similar to a one -bay auto service garage, the parking requirement would' be three spaces for each bay (and in this case, one bay holds three cars) plus one space for every two employees (this results in four spaces in this case). If no formula in the ordinance (Section 35 -704) is deemed to be comparable to the car wash use, then the use falls into the category of "other commercial uses" which requires one space per 200 sq. ft. of gross floor area (in this case, the result is nine spaces). The Planning Commission may also make a finding that the parking requirement is more or less than we have suggested here. Also of concern is the area provided for stacking. The site plan shows stacking for 27 cars. This is an optimistic total, assuming as it does, a double line of stacking within a 17' wide driving lane along the south side of the building. (In the winter time, snow may narrow this lane to one.car width and reduce stacking space to 18 cars). The City Ordinance lists no explicit stacking requirement. In the case of the Brookdale Car Wash, the Planning Commission and City Council ap- proved stacking space for 52 cars (in addition to 10 spaces for employee parking) where the maximum number of cars washed in an hour was 60 cars. One major difference between the Brookdale Car Wash and the proposed operation is that Brookdale Car Wash sells gasoline whereas this operation will simply be a car wash. We have checked with a number of other communities in Hennepin County to relate stacking requirements. Many of them require between 20 and 30 parking or stacking spaces or stacking for the number of cars that can be washed in one half - hour. The capacity of the proposed car ,wash is difficult to precisely define. The minimum speed would wash 40 cars in one hour. However, the equipment has the ability to be speeded up to wash up to 200 cars per hour. To some extent this would reduce the 2 -17 -83 -1- Application No. 83006 continued time customers would have to wait, but it also expands the capacity of the car wash to handle more cars and could lead to stacking of vehicles off the premises. This possibility is a definite concern of the staff since Brooklyn Boulevard is a major thoroughfare and traffic on this stretch of the Boulevard has increased noticeably since the opening of I -94 to Minneapolis. On the other hand, the peak hours for the car wash would likely be on weekends when traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard is .more moderate. Nevertheless, we feel the likelihood of cars stacking in Brooklyn Boulevard is fairly high which increases the possibility of accidents and has definite implications on whether the application meets the standards for a special use permit (ie. standard d). Apart from the questions of parking and stacking, the site plan has both pluses and minuses. Curb and gutter is provided around all parking and driving areas as re- quired by ordinance, but driving lanes are too narrow along the south side of the building (17') and west of the building where entrance and exit lanes are 10' wide separated by a one -foot wide concrete median. The Assistant City Engineer has recommended that the main driving lane be at least 18' wide and the entrance and exit lanes be separated by a 3' wide rather than a l' wide median. This may require the building to be moved back a few feet, reducing stacking space by perh4ps one car. Green areas on the site are to be sodded and underground irrigation is to be in- stalled in all landscaped areas. Seven (7) Norway Maples are scheduled within the peripheral green areas on the site. The front greenstrip has already been landscaped with seven (7) Pfitzer Junipers and one Russian Olive. The building ; exterior proposed is a dark brown brick to match the existing Car X Muffler Shop. Lighting is provided by three mercury -vapor pole lights at the southwest, southeast and northeast corners of the car wash portion of the site. As to whether the proposed use meets the Standards for a Special Use Permit, our judgment is that not all the standards are met. Section 35 =220 provides that: "A special use permit may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following are met: (a) The establishment`, maintenance or operation of the special use will promote and enhance the general welfare and will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals, or comfort. (b) The special use will not be injurious to the use and enjoyment of other property in the immediate vicinity for the purposes already permitted, nor substantially diminish and impair property values within the neighborhood. (c) The establishment of the special use will not impede the normal and orderly development and improvement of surrounding property for uses permitted in the district. (d) Adequate measures have been or will be taken to provide ingress, egress and parking so designed as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. (e) The special use shall, in all other respects, conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located." 2 -17 -83 -2- 4 Application No. 83006 continued The applicant has submitted a letter (attached) in which he argues that the proposed use meets the Standards for a Special Use Permit. The letter notes that the operation will be operated in accordance with state and local codes and con- ditions of special use permit approval. He points out that the proposed car wash will be constructed of materials similar tc the existing muffler shop and is compatible with other uses in the area. He explains that the proposed car wash is of a fully automated design requiring only one employee to operate, thus reducing the need for parking. He also explains that there will be no additional services (ie. vacuuming, hand detailing)or gasoline offered - to keep traffic moving as expediently as possible. Finally, he points out that the peak hours of the car wash are on weekends when other businesses in the area are closed for service. It is clear that in terms of land use compatibility, a car wash is a logical use at this location. The location is virtually surrounded by other automotive uses. The primary standard which is not met is standard (d). The applicant has done his best to provide parking and stacking space, given the constraints of the site. Staff conclude, however, that the amount of stacking space provided leaves an unacceptable risk of traffic congestion in the public streets. This traffic con- gestion may, in turn, have a detrimental effect on property values within the neighborhood. The root of the problem is not with the use or with the design, but with the parcel of land. It is simply too small and there are simply too many deficiencies to overlook and hope that the use will work on the site. After considerable design work, we are forced to conclude that everything that can be done has been done and the proposal_ simply just doesn't make it. Other conveyor-type car washes in the metro area have considerably more land and more stacking space. We have received . a partial list of these car washes (attached) from the legal representative of Brookdale Car Wash supplied by the Minnesota Automatic Car Wash Association. Although from an interested source, the survey includes no location with less than 15,000 sq. ft. of area or stacking for 35 cars. Most are 25,000 to 45,000 sq. ft. and have stacking for 45 to 60 cars. We feel this is at least an indication that the present site with only 10,000 sq. ft. and 27 stacking spaces does not come up to the general industry standard. (We wish to emphasize that our negative recommend- ation of the present application is not intended as a protection of the existing industry. Other sites exist in Brooklyn Center which would be suitable.) Staff are also concerned that the proposed use does not provide parking or stacking in a manner consistent with the only other conveyor -type car wash in town, the Brookdale Car Wash. That car wash provided 52 stacking spaces relative to a maximum capacity of 60 cars. per hour. Cars have, however, stacked up out onto the nonpublic roadway adjacent to this car wash. The proposed car wash has a maximum capacity of over 120 cars per hour (we have been told up to 200 cars per hour) and stacking for no more than 27 cars. If a standard of stacking for one half -hour maximum capacity were used, the proposed car wash would need stacking for at least 60 cars. Another comparison that can be made with the Brookdale Car Wash is regarding access. Brookdale Car Wash has no direct access onto a public street, but three accesses onto a private road. This allows for management of any off -site stacking without affecting traffic in public streets. The proposed car wash has only one access onto an undivided and heavily traveled major thoroughfare. Left turns into and out of the proposed car wash would be made extremely difficult if cars are stacked out to the entrance or onto the street. Nevertheless, they would undoubtedly be tried. 2 -17 -83 -3- Application No. 83006 continued The limited, - on -site stacking and high capacity of the car wash, combined with the high volume of traffic on undivided Brooklyn Boulevard, make for what staff feel is an unacceptable risk of congestion and accident and the applicant has not conclusively shown that this proposal will overcome that objection. Based on the foregoing, we must recommend denial of this application. If the Planning Commission agrees with this analysis, it may wish to adopt a resolution recommending denial. We will be prepared to offer such a resolution or conditions of approval at Thursday night's meeting. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent. 2 -17 -83 -4- 12/30/82 Planning nd Inspection Department g P P City of Brookyn Center, Minnesota 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway 5541 Sirs; I herby apply for a special use permit for the pro- posed carwash to be built at 6810 Brooklyn Blvd. Brooklyn Center, Minnesota having met the standards set forth by the city council in the following ways: A.) The proposed carwash will be built and operated in accordance with state and local codes as well as any provisions set forth by the city council as not to be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, morals or comfor• c. B.) The proposed carwash will be constructed of materials similar to and conducive with existing properties. The surrounding properties are all of a automotive related nature (i.e., Car -X MufflerShop, NorthStar Dodge Big Wheel Auto Parts, Brookdale Pontiac, Iten Chevrolet). C.) The proposed carwash will not negatively effect surrounding properties in any way as to impede the normal and orderly developement or improvement of said properties. D.) The proposed carwash will share a 30foot drive- way with Car -X Muffler Shop in order to limit the number of accesses to State Highway 152. The carwash is of a fully automated design requiring only one employee to operate and maintain the operation, thus reducing needed parking to a minimum. -2- No extra services (i.e. , vacuuming, hand detailing) or gasoline will be offered on this site so as to keep carwash traffic moving as expediantly as possible. The proposed carwash will employee the latest state of the art equipemen.t providing the cleanest,.driest car in the shortest time possible, again eliminating the need for hand detailing or hand drying. The surrounding; dealer service centers are all closed Saturday and Sunday. The Car -X Muffler Shop is closed Saturday afternoon and all day Sunday. Historically these are the peak load hours for any carwash. Moreover the carwash business is seasonally greater during winter and spring months while the Car -X Muffler Shop's highest volumes are during the months of late summer and early fall. The proposed carwash should not, for the reasons stated above, create any problems on Brooklyn Blvd. E.) The proposed carwash will be built and operated in accordance to any and all applicable Brooklyn Center regulations. Respectfully submitted, C� Thomas G. Cook Ba ±Dah D. Cook e A SIZE OF METROPOLITAN AREA CAR WASHES 43 car washes in metro area; 34 conveyorized full- service or exterior car washes. Car Wash Lot Size Stacking Spaces Apache Car Wash 100' x 225' 50 cars 3725 Stinson Blvd. St. Anthony Tel. No.: 788 -8689 Heights Car Wash 80' x 225' 45 cars 4423 Central Ave. Tel. No.: 781 -1631 Hopkins Car Wash 150' x 250' 60 cars 404 Excelsior Ave. Tel. No.: 935 -6611 Park Lake Car Wash 160' x 120' 45 cars 637 East Lake Street Tel. No.: 827 -3003 Nicollet Car Wash 125' x 225' 55 cars 5925 Nicollet Ave: S. Tel No.: 869 -5812 Rose Car Wash 80' x 220' 42 cars 1555 E. Co. Rd. B (plus 30' x 150') Roseville Tel. No.: 631 -0220 Typhoon Car Wash 153' x 153' 45 can 700 E River Road Tel. No.: 427 -1860 Bloomington Speedy Car Wash 135' x 405' 65 cars 920 Lyndale Avenue S. Tel. No.: 888 -5388 Central Car Wash 86' x 178' 36 cars 1814 Central Ave. NE Tel No.: 781 -6924 Riverside Car Wash 150' x 300' 60 cars 6520 E. River Road Tel. No.: 571 -2700 Page Two Rice Street Speedy Car Wash 100' x 200' 40 cars 1540 Rice Street St. Paul Tel. No.: 487 -2853 Octopus Car Wash 125' x 220' 45 cars 2910 University Ave., SE Tel. No.: 378 -1896 Golden Valley Typhoon 44,000 sq. ft. 60 cars 950 Florida Avenue Tel. No.: 544 -7661 Southtown Typhoon 50,000 sq. ft. 65 cars 2151 W: 80th Street Tel. No.: 884 -3095 Edina Typhoon. 32,000 sq. ft. 50 cars 5201 Vernon Ave. S. Tel. No 929 -2763 Brookdale Car Wash 165' x 220' 52 cars 5500 Brooklyn Boulevard Tel. No.: 561 -1123 Miracle Mile Car Wash 90' x 300' 45 cars 5000 Excelsior Boulevard Tel. No.: 920 -0590 CITY OF 31XJOKLY-4 MITER Notice is hereby given that a public "le ring will be held on the 28th day of February, 15$3 a 8 : p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an aTnendment to�the Zoning Ordinance Ito allow less - than the lainimm. setback in ce� instances for existing one- or-two- familj dwellings. ORDINANCE 140. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES MG PRDI14G SETI3AC' l; FOR E,�]:STING O ?�M- OR T O- FAi INvELLIN THE CITY CO(LIXIL OF THE CITY OF BRUOKLYN C=L R DOES ORDAIN AS FOLTUAS Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby am -nded by the addition of the followings Section 35 - 400. TAB OF MINTI UM DISTRICT REQUIIU U . . . Yard Setbacks (10) (12): C12) In instances where an existing one- or t<�v f : &uc in a residential zoning district is de ficient in its se tback from the front, side, or rear gro t , line - by nr.)t rare than 300 of the setback requirement, th str ucture m Y , b expanded along the existing building line p rovided there is no g rLate encroachT ent into the recruired yard area. Thi s ior in no .aay permits the expansion of a conformi struc res ultin g' in a setback less than established bv th is ordinance. Section 2. This ordinance shall becme effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days follo. , its legal public t ion. Adopted this day of 19 Mayor --- - - - -_. -=ST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new rkitter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) z CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be on the 28th day of February, 1983, at 8:00 p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the City Ordinances which would revise the license requirements for establishments. ORDINANCE NO, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 8 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL Or' THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS 'FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 8 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 8 -100. DEFINITIONS 8- 100.30 Quality Assurance Plan shall mean a written plan for the prevention of foodborne illness to include a self - inspection program. This plan shall meet the criteria of the University of Minnesota Extension Service Special Report 461 which is hereby incorporated in and made a part of this ordinance. Quality Assurance Plans must be filed with and approved by the City's Public Health Sanitarian as a condition of the license. Section 8 -103. LICENSE FEES. 8- 103.01. License Fees. Fees for licenses issued hereunder shall be as follows: C. Food establishment: $100 per annum plus $10 per annum for each additional facility on the same premises for food establishments with a Quality Assurance Plan as defined in Section 8- 103.30. $200 per annum, plus $20 per annum for each additional facility on the same remises for food establishments without a Quality Assurance Plan as defined in Section 8- 103.30. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 Mayor ATTEST: Clerk -- Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER' Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 28th day of February, 1983, at 8:00 p.m. at the City IIall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an amendment to the City Ordinances which would revise the license fee for food establishments. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING LICENSE FEES FOR FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: 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, unless other- wise stated) Type of License Required by Section License Expires Food Establishment 8- 101.01 [February 15] Basic License March 31 $100 $200 Each Added Facility All current $10 $20 food ( with an (without establishment approved a Quality licenses shall and im- Assurance be extended to plemented Plan) March 31, 1983. Qualm Assurance Plan as defined in Section 8- 100.30) Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of , 19 Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted.) December 17, 1982 To: Brooklyn Center City Council Lopor Dean Nyquist Councilmember bill hawes Councill;ienber Gene Lhotka Councilmenber Celia Scott Councilmember Rich Theis This letter is to inform you of the following, Chamber action. "Resolved that the Board of Directors of the Brooklyn Center Chamber of Commerce supports the proposed ordinance anending chapter 8 of the city ordinance regarding food establishments as recommended by a meeting of food handlers on December 16, 1982." We are very happy to have had the opportudity to meet with city representatives and food handlers to resolve the issue of the duality assurance plan. I',e also look forward to vurRing closely 1•-ith all of you in 1983. A very merry Christmas to 'all of you! Best regards, Paul DesVernine President IMPLEMENTATION STANDARDS QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN FOR FOOD ESTABLISHMENTS To qualify as an approved Quality Assurance Plan for licensing purposes, the plan must contain the minimum of 1. Self- inspection checklist 2. Cleaning Schedule - equipment or surfaces cleaned, chemicals and concentrations used and frequency of cleaning. (See attachment) 3. Menu analysis - a listing of perishable food types handled and the steps taken to protect the food during handling. (example attached) TLH:jt j' C NT1�C S�DJL= AND "'STRUCMNS FCR EMPMENT I EQUIm1 -- bu TO BE CIERh'ED 37 k'riEN SPECIAL INFCR ATION A2'D COMINTS i i M 1 Cleer.inc code Time code (i food prep. person h -- every # hours (2) service person a/r - as required (3) sanitation technician a/o - at opening of restaurant . —. (4) �cran:.str�tive peon a/c -- at closing of restaurant xk. -- weekly XII . ' Ti "'- �:.'di."•,r raa'�ax''�C i'`� r •u" '.'` .` �_' NBC• �i°_' �'` w �...... srar4. usa .,S;,M•,,..,,.e*� }�w'efs.a�' SjS�GyC.siRs^'t�ar�yw�t+}r 2 7" SERVICE DAILY FOOD " SAFETY " QA Your gja!i;y a surd + chc•ck for custorntr sa:isfaction znG prcfit, retQr.E unv..a :,e£' foo (,! 1`:aiterv:ai safety procec � ures (�) .... m��mum Date Time handling of food H an CS rC' tc tchint. }OOd CO'1i2Ct s 'face's (12) Loca tion b r Food contact surfaces kept safe i22) Rate your food service according to the. followino scale, and record Hrndling of disy_`sable utensi ! 2c problems on the self- inspection report. _. Storage and use of plates and utensils (24) 5 - Exc0ien;, couldn't be better - Ice sy .,terns (9, 10) 4 • Good, needs some imPrcvement f 3' Average, take action to improve Table condi. ;pert conta sa (22) 2 - fair, take action 1 - Poor, take action and improve immediately "SAFETY.. - ENIPLOYE ES S• SANITIZING AND CLEANING Infections /illness reported and controlled (11) A - ATTITUDES AND ACTION F.FOOD _..�_ Hands washed and clean (12) E • Er0PLOYEES Nail brushes used T • TINE AND T - h , PERATURE Good hygiene practices (12) ... nofi:igers in food, Y - YOUR PAYOFF no spitting in ke tles, no unauthorized tasting of food Clean uniform (12) SANITIZING AND CLEANING Hair controlled WASH — RINSE.- SANITIZE — AIR -DRY __. Nlo smoking in fcod preparation areas (12) CLEAN _... No eating in food preparation areas (12) Sinks/washbowls 123) Garbage areas (33, keep receptacles covered Dining area (36) • r TIME AND TEMPERATURE estrooms (32) PERATURE , Hood filers (23) Refricerato °s Tess than 40° F. (3, 4) .... cooling rate Floors (36) ... no dry sweeping of floors (3E; Freezers less than V F. (3, 4) SANITIZE Dispiays less than 45° F. (3, 4) Use sanitizing check kits. Prepare solutions accurately. Warm holding o evices more n ° � Discard solution and cloths after use •make fre sh befo d ,et a 150 F . (3, 4) s _ o e National temperature more than 140° F. i use (21). -_.— Room temperature sauces held only two hours Countertops (23, 24).... Sanitize food contact surfaces Thaw in refrigerator (6) Tabletops (23, 24) .. before starting job, j`:er each -_ Cool in shaGctiv pans two inches deept (4) Utensils (22) ......... meal, or every lour hours. _ Calibrated thermometer (5,17) Larec preparation equipment .... slicers, grinders, mixers Wash /.inse water temperatures (191 Dairy holding devices (22) _. Preflushed, scraped, soaked dishes, rots and pans (18) --- Single serviceariic(es (25, 26) ' .. .q,J�S.nw'[� sue;. •� � �' +y�r•+ �7�"iY'"'r `.s+.r2'c ` � � v � s +r.m.w- • +. - w•�w� ♦ Y _ + •v+n�.r 7.j ��E�A „`*'7"t ^ySr'R^�x 't�r{.�s�,�vrne�.r.,- _ ... -�. t , .,�.•• .. , r - .i •�*a+s' s t :" � sa - v l.f�� r`.��; -•--_ �.. Y'I . , t Yr :�ti � »'...'art -" � �.'r'+� �ytt? ;7�`•l= .:r'piL >y^.t�S. � .= � y'" x: ��� 'T.��`Ss`•._- i}'�R= 'M+�";"ria ash=" f :..1r..�'c. �......�F �?s{'. '�•rw+.ir: +.. ....� -,. ..,ter _. ` • ti..:.•.v,,... R ' MENU 11AZARD ANALYSIS AND CRITICAL CONTROL POINTS AND PROCEDURES MENU ITEM CRITICAL CONTROL POINTS CRITICAL CONTROL TURKEY AND .Thawing Turkey Thaw for 36 hours in'38 F. refrigrr.ator. DRESSING .Prepreparation cross contamination Use fresh cutting board & knife prepare on the raw meat table, .No stuffing in bird. Cook separately. Use hot stock from giblets, heart, etc., mix with bread & flavor ingredients, immediately pan in 2-�" steamtable pans and bake to an internal temperature of 165 F. }told covered at )150 F. .Holding and serving. Roast turkey to 1650 F. thigh temperature. Remove from oven, chill in 38 F. refrigerator. Slice. Put on hot plate with hot gravy to serve. Microwave if necessary.. N r .o ROAST BEEF .Preparation & cross contamination. .Be sure beef is solid without internal contamina— tion. .Cooking .Slow roast 210 F. for 6 hours, to internal 120 F. .Reduce oven to 150 F. holding. .Serving .Remove roast to cutting board as needed. .If the same roast has been on the cutting board for 2 hours, remove, slice -- pan 1" thick and chill rapidly for roast beef sandwiches. .Clean meat slicing area every 2 hours. LETTUCE Wash in a clean sink. .Clean sink before washing. Don't further contaminate in .Clean table and hands before handling. preparation. .Keep cold. i®ct CITY OF BR)9q YN CFITIT Z Notice is hereby given that a public hearing will be held on the 28th day of March, 1983 at p.m. at the City Ball, 6301 Shingle Creek Park to consider an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance.by classifying certain land as being within the C1 Zoning District. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AA ENDING CC- =R 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES CLASSIFYING CERTAIN L-M AS BEING WITHIN THE Cl ZONING DISTRICT '1IE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BR001EL,YN CF.= DOES ORDAIN AS FO=, 7S Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 35 -1170 SERVICE /OFFICE DIS1R �' (C -1) T hat part of the south 180 feet of the n o-th 450 feet of Lots 34 and 35, Auditor's Subdivision lio. 216, Hennepin County, li nnesota, lying south of the following described line: Commencing at the southeast corner of L 1, Block 3, Balfa Nor thport First Addition to the City of Brooklyn Ce M the nce northeasterly along the extensi of the sou line of said Lot 1, Block 3, a distance of 256.84 feet, thenc northeasterly along a tangential curve to the right h a radius of 4 38.97 feet, a distance of 196.64 feet, thence easterly along the tangent to said curve to the east line of said Lot 35, A Subdivis 14o 216, Lot 1, Block 1, Earle Brown Farm Estates First Addition Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 Mayor Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted)`. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER' Ordinance No. AN OPDINANCE VACATING A PORTTON OF FREMONT AVENUE NORTH FROM N ORTH ' L'LL�C D tTLF TO U—S. HIGH1 % NO. 94 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OP BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That portion of Fremont Avenue North bounded on the south by the northerly right -of -way line of N Lilac Drive and on the north by the sou righ -of -way line of United States Highway No. 94 as now located and established by Hennepin Count Doc No. 4562310, is hereby vacated as a public street Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective after adoption and thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication f Effective Date I L<<A :`1ARY FLAT WOO -; ) D ! T 1 O IU r¢ v, i "iG'.:G AND REDEVELOPMiTENT '.)THJ ` 'UK .YN ',ENTER, MINNESOTA -PROPOSED VACATION G �4 !u ! �\ o L O T i _ �- AV l a / W 4 �r. Member introduced the following resolution and - 7c.1 moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR 63RD AVENUE NORTH WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1983 -02 AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS (CONTRACT 1983 -D) WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 83 -19 adopted by the Council on the 24th day of January, 1983, the City Engineer prepared plans and specifications for Improvement Project No. 1983 -02 and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota: 1. The plans and specifications for the following improvement as prepared by the City Engineer are approved and ordered filed with the City Clerk: 63RD AVENUE NORTH WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1983 -02 (CONTRACT 1983 -D)_ 2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least twice in the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications.. The advertisement shall appear not less than ten (10) days prior to the date for receipt of bids, and specify the work to be done, state that said bids will be received by the City Clerk until 11:00 A.M. on March 31, 1983, at which time they will be publicly opened in the Council Chambers at City Hall by the City Clerk and City Engineer, will then be tabulated and will be considered by the City Council at 7:00 P.M. on April 11, 1983, in the Council Chambers, and that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit,' cashier's check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City for five (5) percent of the amount of such bid. 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. v { A� REMOVE b SAL,:�,;E 8 "6 V, r PLUG CROSS R N 1'.441N F 20 L F -8 "C lP. SAN \ W SEWER AT CROSSING ° 1 � •�� `o S'A 2t30 :.I�tITS CF } 1 � � ? •� r •�'>. - i 81TUM OVERLAY. IT I i 3 y J 1 ! r 1 I I � - D FtvD 6 G V RECGNNECT . I I f;� I •I I FROM 8 MAIN 6 D I r, ^ TO 16" MAIN ! t _ - i ! I _. 3501 - 7 F I R E L l TORE STATION - � I 1 N I 131.oS I,, TV" T i! L - - -� r - - ' - GE AIAIN 0 NOTATE BENT. Ir. - ALL SI-Ltn�E� U " GATE VALVE A CGNNFCT TO �6" z �+--- _, UANEA TO PhU t: 16 " u FOR - -- - -�`_. y,. `•,- "'CN 1 . VALVE M H NOTE - \ — 'q Member introduced the following resolution and / e moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. t RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1979-06 WHEREAS, pursuant to written Agreement No. 59356 signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has satisfactorily completed the following improvements in accordance with said agreement. SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1979 -06 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said agreement is accepted and approved according to the following schedule: Previously Final Approved Amount Agreement Amount $ 80,665.73 $ 92,798.38 2. The value of the work performed is more than the original .agreement £-. amount by $12,132.65 due to a general underestimation in planned quantities. 3. There is hereby appropriated the sum of $12,132.65 from State Aid Construction Account No. 2613 for the additional costs. 4. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said agreement taking the Minnesota Department of Transportation's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said agreement shall be $92,798.38., 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. TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: February 25 1983 RE: Acceptance of Work on Shingle Creek Parkway Approaches to Bridge Over I -94 In 1979 the City entered into Cooperative Agreement No. 59356 with the Minnesota Department of Transportation. This agreement provided for MN /DOT to construct the Shingle Creek Parkway bridge over I -94, and for City participation in the costs of constructing the bridge approaches. While the City's total share was estimated in the agreement to be $80,665.73, our final share is $92,798.38. The increase in costs is due primarily to the` fact that the final design substantially increased the 'depth of bituminous surfacing on the approaches. This additional depth of surfacing was determined to be necessary to accomodate the heavy volume of trips through this area by M.T.C. buses destined to and from the M.T.C. service garage. Special assessments totaling $63,116.01 have been levied to properties within the industrial park area. In addition, the entire project costs are eligible for reimbursement from our regular Municipal State Aid Street fund. Accordingly, the net gain will be reflected as a credit to our local Municipal State Aid fund 2611 (Restricted Keserve Account). A resolution providing for City Council approval of the final billing from `MN /DOT is submitted for consideration by the City Council. Respectfully submitted, SPK:jn Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. ( RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT NO. 61382 WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION THEREOF BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center that: 1. Agency Agreement No. 61382 with the Minnesota Department of Transportation, providing for adjustment of utility structures on Brooklyn Boulevard (T.H. 152) in conjunction with the proposed resurfacing of said street, is hereby approved. 2. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center. 3. There is hereby appropriated the sum of $3,717.70 from the Public Utility fund to provide payment for the costs incurred under said agreement. Date Mayor i 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. TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE : February 25, 1983 RE: Agreement No. 61382 with the Minnesota Department of Transportation In conjunction with the proposed resurfacing of Brooklyn Boulevard (T.H. 152) between T.H. 100 and 68th Avenue North, the.Minnesota Department of Transportation has determined that it will be necessary to adjust all manhole covers and water gate valve boxes, and have advised us that it is our responsibility to pay for these adjustments. Accordingly, they have prepared and submitted to us a proposed "Agency Agreement" (copy attached) wherein the cost of this work is estimated at $3,717.70. Because it seemed inappropriate for the City to be required to pay for the cost of these adjustments, I have reviewed this question in some detail. After investigation I find that: - MN /DOT designated this roadway as a Trunk Highway in 1934 all of our existing utilities on Brooklyn Boulevard are there by virtue of permits issued to us from MN /DOT. Each of these permits contains language in substantially the fullowing form: "If Department of Transportation shall make any improvements or change on all or any part of its R /W'upon, over, under or along the trunk highway, then and in every case the applicant herein named shall after notice from the Commissioner of Transportation or his authorized agents proceed to alter, P 9 P change, vacate or remove from trunk highway R/W said works necessary to conform with said changes without cost whatsoever to the State of Minnesota." - Discussions with other City Engineers indicates ghat, while in previous years MN /DOT frequently assumed the cost of this type of adjustments, it appears that MN /DOT is now consistently requiring that cities pay these costs. MN /DOT has advised us that we have the option of doing this work ourselves. However, because of the problems involved in coordinating this work with MN /DOT's contractor, and the hazards involved in working under the heavy traffic volumes on Brooklyn Boulevard, I strongly recommend against this option unless the bid prices greatly exceed MN /DOT's estimate. In that event, the agreement still allows us to reverse this decision (see page 6 of the agreement). Accordingly, I recommend approval of the attached agreement. A resolution for that purpose is provided for consideration by the City Council. Respectfully submitted, SPK: jn f S.P. 2742 -33 (T.H. 152 =129) Hennepin County T.H. 152, from 490 ft. N. of T.H. 100 to 68th Ave. N. in Brooklyn Center City of Brooklyn Center Agreement No. 61382 AGENCY AGREEMENT `THIS AGREEMENT made by and between the State of s .. Minnesota, acting by and through its Commissioner of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as the "State" and the City of Brooklyn Center, hereinafter referred to as the "Utility ". WITNESSETH THAT WHEREAS, the State is preparing plans and specifications and proposes to let a contract for the construction of Trunk Highway 152, from 490 feet North of Trunk Highway 100 to 68th Avenue North in Brooklyn Center, said project being identified in the Records of the State as S.P. 2742 -33; and WHEREAS, the Utility desires to adjust 13 watergate valve boxes and 14 sanitary manhole castings within the construction limits of S.P. 2742 -33; and Agreement No. 61.3%32 WHEREAS, the Utility is not staffed or equipped to perform such construction at this time, and a separate contract to be let by the Utility for the facility adjustments would result in interference with the operations of the State's Contractor and i would not be in the best interest of the State, the Utility has requested that the Commissioner of Transportation act as its agent for the purpose of constructing said adjustments and relocations; and WHEREAS, the Commissioner has determined that including said adjustments in the State's construction contract would eliminate possible duplication of services and would facilitate coordination of activities so as to generally simplify and expedite the supervision and construction of the trunk highway construction project and would be in the best interest of the State; and WHEREAS, State law requires a written Agreement between the State and the Utility setting' forth their separate l responsibilities in accomplishing the Agency adjustment and relocation work: NOW, THEREFORE, 'IT IS AGREED:. ARTICLE I - AGENCY APPOINTMENT AND CONSTRUCTION PLANS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 161.45, Subdivision 2, the Utility in connection with the construction of the aforesaid portion of Trunk Highway 152 does hereby appoint the Commissioner of Transportation as its agent to prepare final plans and 2- �3 t Agreement No. 613B2 cifica ' s e i tl t specifications, o advertise er _ e P is for bids, to award the contract and to adjust utility facilities in accordance with plans and specifications designated as State Project 2742 -33, which are on file in the Office of the Commissioner of 'Transportation at Saint Paul, Minnesota, and in the Office of the Utility at Brooklyn Center Minnesota. , Said id plans and specifications p p icatons are made a part hereof, with the same force and effect as though fully set forth herein. Before the State's contractor shall begin adjustments of such facilities, the plans, specifications and special provisions therefore shall be approved by the City of Brooklyn Center in writing. ULAN CHANGES If a change in plan or character of work is required to complete the adjustments satisfactorily, the Utility and the State or their authorized representatives shall agree to such change before entering into a supplement to the construction contract or the Agreement. A Supplemental Agreement between the State and the Utility will be entered into for both the agreed change and division of cost upon receipt of written.approval from the Utility to commence such work. ARTICLE II - AGENCY CONSTRUCTION __The adjustment of said utility facilities shall be under the supervision and direction of the State, but the work shall be inspected periodically by the Utility's authorized representative. -3- Elt j? Agreement No. 51382 If the Utility believes the work has not been properly constructed or that the work is defective, the Utility shall inform the State's Project, Engineer in writing of such defects. The State shall have the exclusive right to determine whether the Agency work has been satisfactorily performed by the State's contractor. All work shall be performed in substantial accordance with the approved plans. The State's Project Engineer shall make a final inspection with an Engineer designated by the Utility, and the State shall advise the Utility in writing when it has accepted the utility adjustment. Risk - of loss of partial or complete adjustment construction shall be on the State's contractor or the Utility as provided in Standard Specification 1716, Minnesota Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for Highway Construction, dated January 1, 1978. 11hen the State accepts the adjustment work, subsequent maintenance shall become the responsibililty of the Utility. The Utility shall furnish the Engineer with written acceptance of said facility adjustments. ARTICLE III AGENCY PAYMENT The actual cost of said adjustment shall be determined on a contract unit price basis. The Utility hereby authorizes the Commissioner, as it agent, to pay the State's contractor directly for said adjustment work. The Utility agrees to pay to the State the "Total Cost" incurred by the State in performing said utility adjustment work. "Total Cost" as referred to shall consist of: -4 Agreement No. 51382 1. Construction Cost: All bid item costs received from successful bidder involved to satisfactorily perform said utility's adjustment work according to the plans, specifications and special provisions hereinafter referred, to as "Total Construction Cost ". 2. Engineering Design, Construction Inspection and Supervision: A sum equal to 8.0% (percent) of the "Total Construction Cost ". 3.. Mobilization: A proportionate share of the bid item cost for mobilization incurred by the State in conncection with the aforesaid utility adjustments. Such prorata shame is estimated to be 5.0% of the "Total_ Construction Cost ". It is estimated that said cost of the utility adjustments share -of the work hereunder based on the Engineer's estimate, as shown on Exhibit "B ", will be Three Thousand Seven Hundred Seventeen and 70/1.00 Dollars ($3,717.70) It is contemplated that all of said work as provided for in said plans, specifications and special provisions in the aforesaid construction of Trunk Highway 152, S.P. 2742.33 is to be done by contract basis. -5- Agreement No. 61382 f .., Immediately following the State's bid opening procedures the Utility will be notified of the "Total Cost based upon the State contractor's bid prices. Upon receipt of written notification, the Utility has ten calendar days to accept or reject the "Total Cost as shown on the transmitted "Cost Schedule ". If written notice has not been received by the State within the prescribed ten calendar days, it shall constitute acceptance by the Utility and the State shall proceed in the same manner as.if 'having received the Utility's written acceptance of said "Total Cost ". If the Utility elects to delete the utility adjustments from the State's work, the Utility does hereby agree to pay to the State 1/3 of the aforesaid Engineering Design, Construction Inspection and Supervision costs. The Utility indemnifies, saves and holds harmless the State and all of its agents and employees of and from any claims, demands, actions- or causes of action of whatsoever nature or character arising out of or by reason of the deletion of the utility adjustment work and further agrees to defend as its own sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising hereunder by virtue 'of the deletion of the utility adjustment work. The Utility agrees to advance to the Commissioner of Transportation said sum as approved on the "Transmitted Cost Schedule" u forthwith upon the awarding ing of the .construction contract -6- Agreement r7o. 613f32 and upon receipt of a request from the State for such a merit. P g P Y Upon completion of the adjustment work provided for in said contract by the State, and the preparation by the State of a final computation determining the amount due the contractor performing the work, the Commissioner shall determine and compute the amount due the Trunk Hig}iway Fund of the State of Minnesota hereunder from the Utility. After the Commissioner has determined as aforesaid the actual amount due from the Utility, he shall apply on the payment thereof as much as may be necessary of the aforesaid funds advanced by the Utility. If the amount found due from the Utility shall be less than the amount of funds advanced, then, and in that event, the balance cf said advanced fund shall be returned to the Utility without interest. If the amount found due from the Utility shall exceed said amount of funds advanced, the Utility agrees to promptly pay the State the difference between the said amount due and said amount of funds. It is further agreed that the aforesaid computation and determination by the Commissioner of Transportation of the amount due from the Utility hereunder shall be final, binding and conclusive. It is further agreed that the acceptance by the State of the aforesaid completed work provided for in said plans, specifications and special provisions to be performed under contract as aforesaid shall be final, binding and conclusive upon the Utility as to the satisfactory completion of said work. -7- i Agreement No. 513£32 ARTICLE IV ' PLANS AND ESTIMATES Attached hereto, marker? Exhibit "A" and made a part hereof, are comprehensive and detailed plans identifying the Agency Work. Also attached, marked Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof is the Estimate of _Costs for the Agency portion of the State Project. The Agency work will be performed in accordance with Exhibit "A ARTICLE V - OWNERSHIP AND FUTURE MAINTENANCE Upon completion of adjustments, the Utility shall r thereafter maintain the utility systems at its own expense. Should any such maintenance require work on trunk highway right -of -way, the Utility shall first obtain a written permit from the proper authority, which application shall be acted upon promptly anti shall not be unreasonably refused. Said permit shall contain reasonable regulations relating to such maintenance._ The Utility may open and disturb the surface of the trunk highway right -of -way without a i permit only where an emergency exists that is dangerous to the life or safety of the public and requires immediate repair. The Utility upon knowledge of such emergency, shall immediately notify the State Highway Patrol. The Utility shall take all necessaary and reasonable safety measures to protect the traveling public, and shall cooperate fully with the Highway Patrol to that end. The Utility in such event shall request a permit from the proper authority not later than the second working day thereafter. Agreement - No. 61382 ARTICLE VI - MISCELLANEOUS The Utility indemnifies; saves and holds harmless the State and all of its agents and employees of and from any and all claims, demands, actions or causes of action of whatsoever nature or character arising out of or by reason of the performance or nonperformance of the inspection to be performed by the Utility and further agrees to defend at its own sole cost and expense any action or proceeding commenced for the purpose of asserting any claim of whatsoever character arising hereunder by virtue of the performance or nonperformance of the inspection to be performed by the Utility. ";_.: 11 �1 S.P. 2742-33 (T.H. 152 =129) Hennepin County Agency Agreement No. 61382 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed this Agr.eemcnt by their rlu1y authorized officers and caused their respective seals to he hereunto affixed. (CITY SEAL) CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER By Mayor By City DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE OF MINNESOTA Recommended for Approval: Commissioner of Transportation By District Engineer Director Right of Way Operations Utilities Engi,cer Apprcved: Approved as to form and Commissioner of Administration execution: By Special Assistant Authorized Signature Attorney General State of Minnesota STATE OF MINNESOTA )' ss COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) On this day of 19S # before me personally appeared to me known to be the Director of Right of Way Operations, acting for the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota, and the person who executed the foregoing instrument in behalf of the State of Minnesota, and the Commissioner of Transportation, and acknowledged that he executed the same as the free act and deed of the State of - Minnesota. . -10- Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION APPROVING AGREEMENT FOR EXCHANGE OF LANDS WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ALONG 1--94 BETWEEN T.H. 152 AND SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY WHEREAS, the City Council, by Resolution No. 74 -144 has given preliminary approval to a series of land exchanges between the City of Brooklyn Center and the Minnesota Department of Transportation; and WHEREAS, this concept agreement has now been formalized into a written agreement which is recommended for approval by the City Attorney. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that: 1. the "Agreement For Exchange of .Land ", a copy of which is attached hereto, is hereby approved. 2. the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Brooklyn Center. t 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: ^. d following an the voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works DATE: February 25, 1983 RE: Agreement for Exchange of Lands with MN /DOT Along I -94 Between T.H. 152 and Shingle Creek Parkway In 1974 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 74 -144 providing for a complex series of land exchanges between the City and MN /DOT. In effect, the agreement contemplated; by that resolution provided that, in exchange for the taking of City properties_at the Northerly edge of Central Park (which were needed to allow the widening and reconstruction of I- 94/694), MN /DOT would return to the City some surplus right -of -way which lies West of Central Park (between the private properties fronting on the North side of 65th Avenue and the noise wall) . An agreement (copy attached) providing for this exchange has now been agreed to between Dick Schieffer and the MN /DOT attorneys. Dick and I will be prepared to discuss this in detail at the February 28, 1983 Council meeting. A resolution approving the agreement and authorizing its execution is provided for consideration by the City Council. Respectfully qubmitted, SPK:jn t AGREEMENT .FOR EXCHANGE OF LAND THIS AGREEMENT is made this day of , 198_, by and between the City of Brooklyn Center, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter called the City, and the Minnesota Department of Transportation, hereinafter called Mn /DOT; WHEREAS, Mn /DOT has undertaken the improvement of Interstate Highway No. 94 within the City between its junction with Trunk Highway No. 152 and I -694; and WHEREAS, the said improvements will require the acquisition from the City by Mn /DOT of approximately three acres of land in fee simple, approximately two acres of land in temporary construction easements, and certain permanent easements for sound wall-maintenance and drainage purposes, said land including portions' of Freeway Park, Central Park, and the Shingle Creek green strip; and WHEREAS, the said improvements consist of highway construction, bridge construction, interchange construction, noise abatement mounds and wall's, and other appurtenant structures; and WHEREAS, the City, by the adoption of its resolution No. 74 -144 has approved the concept of exchanging excess Mn /DOT right -of -way for the real estate sought to be acquired by Mn /DOT from the City, a copy of said resolution being attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference; and WHEREAS, Mn /DOT has approved the concept of the land exchange through its District Engineer, W. M. Crawford, P.E., by letter dated November 28, 1979; and WHEREAS, the City is desirous that Mn /DOT construct certain sound barriers in the form of walls and /or earth mounds on and adjacent to Mn/DOT's right of way; and WHEREAS, the City and Mn /DOT wish to clarify, insofar as is possible, the nature, location, and the timing of the exchange of land; NOW, THEREFORE, parties hereto agree as follows: 1. The foregoing description of events accurately reflects the previous agreements and considerations existing between the parties. 2. All references to the descriptions and locations of real estate, proposed construction and other appurtenances shall be based upon Exhibit "A" prepared by Mn /DOT which is attached hereto and made a part hereof by reference. 3. Subject to the terms of the Agreement, the City agrees to convey to Mn /DOT the fee simple title to that portion of Parcel 39B which is colored yellow on attached Exhibit "A ", and further agrees to convey the fee simple title to that portion of Parcel 229 which is colored orange on the attached Exhibit "A ", 4. Subject to the terms of this Agreement and in consideration of the land exchange set out herein, the City shall convey to Mn /DOT a temporary easement for construction purposes, including the construction of the backslopes of earth mound sound barriers, over, under, and across that portion of Parcel 39B colored in blue on attached Exhibit "A ", and over, under, and across those portions of Parcels 231, 232, 233, 237 and 229 colored in brown on attached Exhibit "A ", which easements expire on December 1, 1983. 5. The parties agree that Mn /DOT shall construct noise barriers consisting of mounds and /or walls at various locations on its permanent right of way which walls are identified as Wall "A" and Wall "B" on attached Exhibit "A ". The parties further agree as follows: With respect to Parcel 239A which is to be conveyed by Mn /DOT to the City, Mn /DOT will, after completion of Wall "B" and right of way fencing where no wall is constructed, review the description of the permanent right of way line and establish and locate said right of way line adjacent to said Wall "B" or right of way fencing a sufficient distance outside of said Wall "B" or right of way fencing (estimated at one to three feet) to enable Mn /DOT'to maintain and keep said wall and fencing in a suitable state of repair. Mn /DOT will convey to City all lands shown colored in red lying outside of said established right of way line. With respect to Parcel 39B shown colored in yellow on Exhibit "A" to be conveyed by City to Ain /DOT, Mn /DOT will after the completion of Wall "B" review the description of the permanent right of way line adjacent to Wall "B" and establish and locate said right of way line adjacent to said Wall "B" a sufficient distance outside of said Wall "B" (estimated at one to three feet) to enable Mn /DOT to maintain and keep said wall in suitable repair. On those portions of Parcel 39B where no sound wall is to be constructed Mn /DOT will construct right of way fencing. The right of way line adjacent to the fencing -3- constructed on Parcel 39B will be as shown on Exhibit A. The City agrees to convey fee title to Mn /DOT to the said established right of way fine and to convey to Mn /DOT the temporary easement as shown in blue on Exhibit "A" which lies adjacent to and outside of said established right of way. The above conveyances by City and Mn /DOT will be for the consideration of the total land exchange as set out in this agreement. 6. The parties further agree that Mn /DOT or its agent shall reserve to itself with respect to Parcel 239A and receive from City with respect to Parcels 39B, 229, 231,'232, 233 and 237 a permanent easement for the sole purpose of maintaining and keeping Walls "A" and "B" in a suitable state of repa y, said easement to be a strip of band adjoining said walls and outside of the permanent highway right of w g y g ay, no .greater than thirteen feet in width measured from the highway side face of said walls. 7. The parties agree that the city will not undercut or cause to be undercut the lateral support of the earth mound sound barriers to be constructed by Mn /DOT partially inside and partially outside of Mn /DOT's permanent right of way on Parcels 39, 39B, 231, 232, 233, 237, 229, and 239A. 8. Subject to the terms of this Agreement and in consideration of the land exchange set out herein, the City shall convey to Mn /DOT a permanent easement for drainage purposes can that part of Parcel 39B which is shown crosshatched in yellow on attached Exhibit "A ". -4- 9. Subject to the terms of this Agreement and in consideration of the land exchange as set out herein, as replacement land for the foregoing conveyances, Mn /DOT will convey to the City the fee simple title to Parcel 239A which is shown in red on Exhibit "A" attached; retaining, however, a permanent drainage easement over that portion of Parcel 239A as shown crosshatched in red on the exhibit and a permanent easement for maintenance of the sound barriers as set forth in paragraph 6 above. 10. Subject to the terms of.this Agreement and in consideration for the land exchange as set out herein, as replacement land for the foregoing conveyances, Mn /DOT will review its need for that portion of Parcel 39 which is colored green on attached Exhibit "A" and will convey to the City any portion thereof no longer needed for highway purposes. 11. Subject to the terms of this Agreement, Mn /DOT shall release for purchase by the City all or a portion of, or any necessary interest in that portion of the right of way no longer needed for highway purposes lying easterly of Xerxes Avenue, southerly of the constructed roadway, and westerly of the westerly line of Parcel 239A, extended northerly, at a cost to be negotiated at a future date. 12. The parties agree that it is anticipated that the construction work to be performed by Mn /DOT will be completed on or about December 1, 1983, and the expiration of temporary easements and the exchanges of the fee simple title and permanent easements to -5- real estate set forth herein shall occur within a reasonable time thereafter or at such earlier time as all construction has been completed and Mn /DOT has had a reasonable opportunity to ascertain its needs for right of way and to make a final decision as to the lands which are to be conveyed. Pursuant to the foregoing, Hennepin County District Court condemnation cases C- 1580 -81, State of Minnesota, by Warren Spannaus, its Attorney General v Lockrem- Stark, "et al. shall be continued until such time as all conveyances of land hereunder have been completed, at which time the said condemnation proceeding as to those parcels heretofore listed, shall be dismissed and the performance of the terms of this Agreement shall be full compensation to the City and Mn /DOT of all issues raised therein. 13. Conveyance documents shall be prepared by Mn /DOT and approved by the City based upon land surveys and legal descriptions conducted and prepared by Mn /DOT. 14. In assessing its need for right of way, for the purpose of determining lands to be conveyed or released to the City under the terms of this Agreement, Mn /DOT shall convey or release all such lands which are not reasonably necessary for real and identifiable highway needs. 15. Mn /DOT agrees that it has examined the title to all lands and interests therein which it intends. to acquire from the City or is satisfied that the City's title therein is free, clear and marketable. 16. The City reserves the night, exercisable at the time of final conveyance from Mn /DOT, to examine the title to properties being acquired and Mn /DOT agrees that the title to all lands conveyed by it to the City shall be, at the time of conveyance, free, clear and marketable. STATE OF MINNESOTA CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION APPROVED _ By its Dist' ct ht Hof W y En leer r By f Its District Engineer APPROVED AS TO FORM AND Commissioner of Transportation AND EXECUTION: COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION Brooklyn Cents City Attorney By Date: COMMISSIONER OF FINANCE By Date: -7- APPROVED AS TO FORM: i /�� %ra Special Assistan �t�torney General APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: Special Assistant Attorney General Date': f. . -8- - MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald Splinter, City Manager FROM: James Lindsay, Chief of Polic � DATE: February 24, 1983 SUBJECT: Animal Control There has been a continuing problem with animals being kept at the Police Department awaiting transportation by MAPSI due to the noise and sanitation problems generated. MAPSI is closed at night and on weekends and, therefore, there is no where else to keep as many as three to four dogs, cats and assorted animals until the next open period when MAPSI is on duty. This creates a feeding, watering and sanitation problem in the garage area of the Police Department Lecause of the fact that officers must be detailed to take care of the basic needs of these animals such as feeding, watering and a certain amount of exercising. In addition, th,�3.. dogs chained in the garage are quite often afraid and confused by their new surroundings and bark almost continuously while penned or chained up in the garage. This barking problem is particularly acute in the summer time and during normal office hours from the noise which radiates outside and creates a problem for the high rise occupants who have their windows open and the office workers directly above the garage area who are attempting to carry on normal .business during the business day. At the present time, the MAPSI animal control service averages only y two (2) hours a day, five (5) days a week within the City of Brooklyn Center and will only pick up regular g animals on a basis during these patrol periods; although, for $16.50 an hour, they will come out on a special call to pick up animals which we deem necessary to be picked up and transported prior to the next patrol time. The police staff has reviewed the entire animal control situa- tion and recommends the transfer of duties from the contract service to an in -house code enforcement service and a contract with Dr. Funk of Brooklyn Park for kenneling and care service. This would be done by transferring the ten (10) hour per week MAPSI service to the code enforcement officers and adding _16 hours per week to the code enforcement schedule to total 96 MEMORANDUM, Page 2 hours per week of on -duty code enforcement patrol. The animal control would then be assigned as a regular on- going assign - ment by the code enforcement complement. This would be in addi- tion to their other duties which include fire lane and handicapped parking problems, junk car ordinance problems and other administra- tive assignments. This would all be accomplished without the necessity of adding any additional amounts in either Department 31 or 35 budgets for cal- endar year 1983. This proposal would eliminate the noise,.sanitation, feeding and exercise problems which have plagued the Department for many years by allowing code enforcement officers to pick up an animal and transport it immediately to Dr. Funk's kennel where it would be kept under excellent conditions until such time that the dog is claimed or disposed of by humane means The only aspect of the proposal which could deemed to be negative in nature would be the administrative fee collecting which must be handled entirely by the City, with Dr. Funk simply accepting our receipt as payment for all charges. It is felt that this aspect would be greatly outweighed by the increase in the.City's P g Y g direct supervision and control over animal control and the in- crease in the number of hours available as scheduled animal control, while handling other normal duties in the City of Brooklyn Center. ANIMAL CONTROL COST COMPARISON 1 82 Actual (Est)* 1 82 Actual (Est) Rate '83 BC Funk (Est) Numbers Rate Cost Rate 83 MAPSI (Est) Board of Animals 677 Days @ $ 4.00 $ 2,708.00 @ $ 5.00 $ 3,385.00 @ $4.40 $ 2,978.80 Euthanasia 67 Animals @ 6.00 402.00 @ $ 7.00 469.00 @ $9.50 636.50 Carcas Disposal' -- -- '- Special Calls 26 416.00 429.00 - 0 - Patrol Hours 472 @ $13.50 6,372.00 @ $16.50 7,788.00 @ $7.22 3,407.84 $ 9,898.00 $12,071.00 $ 7,023.14 Admin. Fee $150.00 /mo 1,800.00 1,800.00 @ $100.00 /mo 1,200.00 Subtotals $11,698.00 $13,871.00 $ 8,223.14 Weekly 16 Hr. 38 Weeks Addl. CEO Cover- Apr.l -Dec. 31 $ 4,389.71 age @ 7.22/Hr. TOTALS $11,698.00 $13,871.00 $12,612.85 *Based upon actual usage January - October, 1982 MEMO TO: Gerald G. Splinter City Manager FROM: James Lindsay Chief of Police DATE: January 20, 1983 SUBJECT: Knights of Columbus,Council 6772, an application for a Class B gambling license. - Attached please find the completed police investigation of Council 6772 of the Knights of Columbus, Lawrence Anthony - Stoner, executive officer, and W,-.ndall George Arndt, gambling manager, in application for a Class B gambling license. Investigator MONTEEN'S resume lists nothing which would preclude Council 6772, Stoner or Arndt, from receiving such a license. In addition to the application for a Class B gambling license, the Knights of Columbus have requested a waiver of the Fidelity Bond as provided in the City Ordinance. The City Council must act on the following two matters: 1. An application for a Class B gambling license; this requires a majority vote of the City Council to pass. 2. The waiver of a $10,000 Fidelity Bond; this requires the unanimous vote of the City Council to pass. The following is a resume of the investigation of Brooklyn Center Police Department Case 83- 00832, the application of Father Donald Schumaker, Council 6772, Knights of Columbus, an application for a Class B gambling license as issued by the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County Minne- sota. This investigation has been conducted by A. Paul MONTEEN and this resume transcribed and typewritten by Shirley SWARTOUT, Clerk- Typist for the Brooklyn Center Police Department. APPLICANT: Father Donald Schumaker, Council 6772, Knights of Columbus 7025 Halifax Ave. No., 4 Brooklyn Center, Mn. 55429 Phone: 561 -5100 Lawrence Anthony Stoner, Executive Officer 6517 75th Ave. No., Brooklyn Park, Mn. 55428 Phone: 561 -4315 Wendell George Arndt 5307 Winchester Lane Brooklyn Center, Mn. 55429 Phone 533 -9895 INVESTIGATION MATERIALS CONTAINED WITHIN FILE An application for a gambling license. An application for a gambling license, part 2, in"the name of Lawrence Anthony STONER. An application for a gambling license, part 2, in the name of Wendell George Arndt. An application for a gambling license, part 3, organizational infor- mation. A letter requesting the waiver of the $10,000.00 fidelity bond. The Father Doanld SCHUMAKER Council 6772, Knights of Columbus is operated under the auspices of the Knights of Columbus and is located in St. Alphonsus Catholic Church at 7025 Halifax Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, Henneping County, Minnesota. This property is the outright possession of St. Alphonsus Catholic Church and is available to the Nights of Columbus on a regular basis for any and all of their functions. The Council is operated under the auspices of its elected officials as follows Grand 'Knight. Deputy Grand Knight, Chancellor, Recorder, Treasurer, Advocate, Warden, Inside and Outside Guard, as well as a Board of Trustees. These officers are elected by the popular vote of the membership in good standing who have been initiated into the first three degrees of the order. Resume of Investigator MONTEEN Case #83 -00832 Page 2 According to the Treasury Department the Knights of Columbus operates as a bona fide religious fraternal organization and therefore is exempt from filing Form 900 or 900T. Likewise, the State of Minnesota Commerce Department states that a vona fide religious fraternal organi- zation of this nature is not required to file the annual charities re- port under Section 309.53 of the Statutes; of the State of . Minnesota. According to the application for a gambling license, part 3, the organi- zational information, Father Donald SCHUMAKER Council 6722, Knights of Columbus was incorporated on february 29, 1976 and has a current membership of approximately 325 members. Larence A. STONER is currently the Grand Knight and Executive Officer named in the application._ Mr. STONER us an employee of the Gresen Manufacturing Company located at 600 Hoover Ave. NE in Minneapolis. Mr. STONER has been so employed.since April of 1973 as a machine operator and middle management employee of the corporation. STONER and his wife reside at 6517 75th Ave. in Brooklyn Park and have lived there since 1973. In checking with the Brooklyn Park Police Department, Investigator MONTEEN could find no criminal history. The Brooklyn Park Police Department indicated that STONER did report a theft from his automobile in 1978. The Hennepin County Sheriffs Department, Warrant Division and Records Division, has no record of Lawrence A. STONER and likewise he is clear in the MINCIS files. He has no record with the Brooklyn Center Police Department of a:iy criminal activity. STONER holes a Class C Drivers license issued by the State of Minnesota and shows no violations. Wendell George ARNDT is listed as the Gambling Manager in the application for a Class B gambling license. ARNDT is employed as a Truck Driver with a business address of 640 McKinley Place, Minneapolis, Mn. ARNDT has been so employed since February of 1956. ARNDT has been a- residence of the City of Brooklyn Center at 5307 Winchester Lane from March of 1959 until the present." In checking the records of the Brooklyn Center Police Depart ment as well as the Hennepin County Sheriffs Office, the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, MINCIS files and NCIC, there is no criminal activity listed in the name of Wendell George ARNDT. During the course of the year, the Knights of Columbus hold two major fund raising raffles and participate in the St. Alphonsus Fun Fair operating games of skill and chance. The disbursements of the funds go to support various benevolent causes of the Knights of Columbus including youth sports, scholastic scholarships and functions of the church school. During the years of 1979, 1950 and 1981, the Kngihts of Columbus made application for and received a Class B gambling license from the City of Brooklyn Center. It should be noted that the Knights of Columbus complied with the reporting requirements of the City Ordinance and State Statute. In addition to the application for a Class B gambling license,the Grand Knight of the Knights of Columbus has made application for a waiver of the 10 000 0 $ 0 fidelity bond as allowed under the ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center. . Resume of Investigator MONTEEN Case #83 -00832 Page 3 Investigator MONTEEN finds nothing hich would preclude Council g p 6772 of the Knights of Columbus nor Lawrence A. STONER from.receiving a gambling license. The City Council must act on the following two matters 1. The application for a Class B gambling license, which requires the majority vote of the City Council to pass. 2. The waiver of a $10,000.00 fidelity bond, which requires the unanimous vote of the City Council to pass. 4 MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: James Lindsay, Chief of Police DATE: February 14, 1983 SUBJECT: Gambling License Application for Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association Attached please find the completed police investigation of the Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association in application for a Class A gambling license. Mary Frances Stebbins is named as the Gambling Manager in application for the license. Investigator Monteen has found nothing of a questionable nature during the course of this investigation to preclude the issuing of this gambling license. In addition to a Class A gambling license, the Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association has made applica *uion for a waiver of the $10,000.00 fidelity bond as allowed under the City Ordinance. The City Council must act on the following two matters: 1. The application for a Class A gambling license. This requires a majority vote of the City Council to pass. 2. The waiver of the $10,000.00 fidelity bond. This requires a unanimous vote of the City Council to pass. The following is the resume of the investigation of Case No. 83- 01897, the application of Northport School Parent - Teacher Association, Mary Frances STEBBINS,. Gambling Manager in the application for a Class A gambling license as issued by the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The investigation is conducted by A. Paul MONTEEN and transcribed and typewritten by Shirley SWARTOUT, Clerk - Typist for the Brooklyn Center Police Department. APPLICANT: The Parent- Teacher Association of Northport School 5421 Brooklyn Boulevard Brooklyn Center, MN. 55429 Telephone: 537 -3684 Mary Frances STEBBINS, Gambling Manager 5842 Washburn Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Telephone: 566 -7150 INVESTIGATION MATERIALS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FILE An application for a gambling license An application for a gambling license, part 2, personal information form in the name of Mary Frances STEBBENS An application for a gambling license, part 3, organizational information A letter addressed to the City Council requesting a waiver of the fidelity bond -------------------------------------------------- - - - - -- --------- - - - - -- The Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota is a local PTA unit organized under the authority of the Minnesota Congress of Parent, Teacher and Student Association, a branch of the National Congress of Parent; and Teachers. The Association exists as an unincorporated association of its membership. The Northport Elementary School Parent- Teacher Association is housed and holds its regular meetings at the Northport Elementary School located at 5421 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County Minnesota. The Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association was estab- lished in the fall of 1954 when Northport Elementary School opened its doors to the students of the Robbinsdale School District. Currently, the Northport Parent- Teacher Association has an active membership of approximately 200 persons who have paid their dues to the National Congress of Parents and Teachers. Mary Frances STEBBINS is listed as the Executive Officer in application-for and on behalf of the Northport Parent- Teacher Association. This application is for a Class A gambling license and therefore the following investigation was pursued by the Brooklyn Center Police Department The Executive Officer and Gambling Manager in this application is Mary Frances STEBBINS. Mrs. STEBBINS is a resident of the City of Brooklyn Center at 5842 Washburn Avenue North and has resided there Re.ume of Investigator MONTEEN Case No. 83- 01897 Page 2 since 1975. Prior to that time Mrs. STEBBINS was a resident of the City of Fridley, having lived at 5612 7th Street N.E. and 5720 East River Road. Mrs. STEBBINS is employed by the Hennepin County Court System as a Senior Deputy Clerk of Court and works in the Government Center in downtown Minneapolis. Mrs. STEBBINS has been so employed for the past ten years. According to the records of the Brooklyn Center Police Department Mrs. STEBBINS has no criminal record. Like- wise we checked with the NCIC and MINCIS computer and shows no criminal history. There is no history of Mary Frances STEBBINS with the Hennepin County Sheriffs Office, Record Division, nor are there any outstanding Warrants with the Hennepin County Warrant Office. Mrs. STEBBINS holds a valid Class C drivers license and it show no violations. Accompanying the application for a Class A gambling license for the Northport Elementary School Parent- Teacher Association is a letter re- questing that the City of Brooklyn Center waive the required $10,000.00 fidelity bond as allowed by the ordinance of the City of Brooklyn Center. It should be noted that the Northport Elementary School Parent- Teacher Association has applied for and has received a gambling license during the calendar years of 1979, 1980, 1981 and 1982. Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association has complied with the reporting re- quirements during those years. Investigator MONTEEN finds nothing which would preclude the Northport Parent- Teacher Association, or Mary Frances STEBBINS, Gambling Manager, from obtaining a Class A gambling license. The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center must act on the following two matters: 1. An application for a Class A gambling license which requires a majority vote of the City Council to pass. 2. The waiver of a $10,000.00 fidelity bond which requires a unanimous vote of the City Council to pass. MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: James Lindsay, Chief of Police DATE: February 14, 1983 SUBJECT. Gambling License Application for Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association Attached please find the completed police investigation of the Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association in application for a Class A gambling license. Mary Frances Stebbins is named as the Gambling Manager in application for the license. Investigator Monteen has found nothing of a questionable nature during the course of this investigation to preclude the issuing of this gambling license. In addition to a Class A gambling license, the Northport Elementary School Parent- Teacher Association has made application for a waiver of the $ 1 0,000.00 fidelity bond as allowed under the City Ordinance. The City Council must act on the following two matters 1. The application for a Class A gambling license. This requires a majority vote of the City Council to pass. 2. The waiver of the $10,000.00 fidelity bond. This requires a unanimous vote of the City Council to pass. The following is the resume of the investigation of Case No. 83- 01897, the application of Northport School Parent - Teacher Association, Mary Frances STEBBINS, Gambling Manager in the application for a Class A gambling license as issued by the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The investigation is conducted by A. Paul MONTEEN and transcribed and typewritten by Shirley SWARTOUT, Clerk- Typist for the Brooklyn Center Police Department. APPLICANT: The Parent- Teacher Association of Northport School 5421 Brooklyn Boulevard Brooklyn Center, MN. 55429 Telephone: 537 -3684. Mary Frances STEBBINS, Gambling Manager 5842 Washburn Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Telephone: 566 -7150 INVESTIGATION MATERIALS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FILE A n application for a gambling license An application for a gambling license, part 2, personal information form in the name of Mary Frances STEBBENS An application for a gambling license, part 3, organizational, information A letter addressed to the City Council requesting a waiver of the fidelity bond The Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota is a local PTA unit organized under the authority of the Minnesota Congress of Parent, Teacher and Student Association, a branch of the National Congress of Parents and Teachers. The Association exists as an unincorporated association of its membership. The Northport Elementary School Parent- Teacher Association is housed and holds its regular meetings at the Northport Elementary School located at 5421 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County Minnesota. The Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association was estab- lished in the fall of 1954 when Northport Elementary School opened its doors to the students of the Robbinsdale School District. Currently, the Northport Parent - Teacher Association has an active membership of approximately 200 persons who have paid their dues to the National Congress of Parents and Teachers. Mary Frances STEBBINS is listed as the Executive Officer in application for and on behalf of the Northport Parent- Teacher Association. This application is for a Class A gambling license and therefore the following investigation was pursued by the Brooklyn Center Police Department. The Executive Officer and Gambling Manager in this application is Mary Frances STEBBINS. Mrs. STEBBINS is a resident of the City of Brooklyn Center at 5842 Washburn Avenue North and has resided there Resume of Investigator MONTEEN Case No. 83- 01897 Page 2 since 1975. Prior to that time Mrs. STEBBINS was a resident of the City of Fridley, having lived at 5612 7th Street N.E. and 5720 East River Road. Mrs. STEBBINS is employed by the Hennepin County Court System as a Senior Deputy Clerk of Court and works in the Government Center in downtown Minneapolis. Mrs. STEBBINS has been so employed for the past ten years. According to the records of the Brooklyn Center Police Department Mrs. STEBBINS has no criminal record. Like- wise we checked with the NCIC and MINCIS_ computer and shows no criminal history. There is no history of Mary Frances STEBBINS with the Hennepin County Sheriffs Office, Record Division, nor.are there any outstanding Warrants with the Hennepin County Warrant Office. Mrs. STEBBINS holds a valid Class C drivers license and it show no violations. Accompanying the application for a Class A gambling license for the Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association is a letter re- questing that the City of Brooklyn Center waive the required $10,000.00 fidelity bond as allowed by the ordinance of the City of Brooklyn Center. It should be noted that the Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association has applied for and has received a gambling license during the calendar years of 1979, 1980, 1981 and 1982. Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association has complied with the reporting re- quirements during those years. Investigator MONTEEN finds nothing which would preclude the Northport Parent- Teacher Association, or Mary Frances STEBBINS, Gambling Manager, from obtaining a Class A gambling license. The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center must act on the following two matters: 1. An application for a Class A gambling license which requires a majority vote of the City Council to pass. 2. The waiver of a $10,000.00 fidelity bond which requires a unanimous vote of the City Council to_pass. Licenses to be approved by the City Council on February 28, 1983 A`,USEMENT DEVICE - OPERATOR' S LICENSE Plitt Theater 2501 County Road 10 nyder Brothers Drug Brookdale Center P , (. 1r ;1.�} caigf of Police , A4USEMENT DEVICE VENDOR'S LICENSE f, Carousel International Corporation 19 Zinzer Court 04f of Police BULK VENDING LICENSE K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Dr. K -Mart 3600 63rd Ave. N. Theisen Vending 3804 Nicollet Ave. Brooks Superette 6804 Humboldt Ave. N. c i City Clerk CIGARETTE LICENSE Miernik Vending 7258 Commerce Cir. E. Brookdale Towers 2810 County Rd. 10 Hiawatha Rubber 1700 67th Ave. N. Marc's Budgetel 6415 James Circle Pyramid Petroleum Corporation 2605 CountyRd. 10� Wes' Standard Service 6044 Brooklyn Blvd. City Clerk FOOD ESTABLISHMENT Chuck's Z. 1505 69th Ave. N.Q- Q _�lFty� 0 Sanitarian GAMBLING LICENSE CLASS A Northport School PTA 5421 Brooklyn Blvd. CL Ch' f of Police GAMBLING LICENSE - CLASS B Knights of Columbus 7025 Halifax Ave. N. L, i f of Police }% GASOLINE SERVICE STATION LICENSE Pyramid Petroleum Corporation 2605 County Rd. 10 Wes' Standard Service 6044 Brooklyn Blvd. ' LL City Clerk NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE A & J Enterprises 2367 University Ave. ._Bob Ryan Olds 6700 Brooklyn Blvd. Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave. N. Coca Cola Bottling Midwest 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd. Bermel Smaby 6500 Brooklyn Blvd. Books Plus 5717 Xerxes Ave. N. Brookdale Car Wash 5500 Brooklyn Blvd. Brookdale Chrysler Ply. 6121 Brooklyn Blvd. City Garage 6844 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACIII14E LICENSE cont. Darrels Dance Connection 6836 Humboldt Ave. N. Fisher Foods 6800 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Garden City School 3501 65th Ave. N. Hoffman Engineering 6530 James Ave. N. Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Blvd. K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Dr. Kar -Win Auto 6846 Humboldt Ave. N. Maranatha Nursing Home 5401 69th Ave. N. Minnesota Fabrics 5712 Morgan Ave. N. Razor Court 5740 Brooklyn Blvd. St. Paul Book & Stationery 5810 Xerxes Ave. N. Silent Knight Security Systems 1700 Freeway Blvd. State Farm Office 6415 Brooklyn Blvd. Summit Properties 6120 Earle Brown Dr. Willow Lane School 7030 Perry Ave. N. K -Mart 5930 Earle Brown Dr. K -Mart 3600 63rdcAve. N. F & M Marquette National Bank 5825 Xerxes Ave. N. Interstate United 1091 Pierce Butler Rte_ Ault Inc.. 1600 Freeway Blvd, State Farm 5930 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Lynbrook Bowl 6357 N. Lilac Dr. Miernik Vending 7258 Commerce Circle Brookdale Towers 2810 County Rd. 10 Hiawatha Rubber 1600 67th Ave. N. Marc's Budgetel 6415 James Circle Precision, Inc. 3415 48th Ave. N. Red Owl Country Store 5425 Xerxes Ave. N. Red Owl Country Store 3600 63rd Ave. N _ Royal Crown Beverage Co. P.O. Box 43466 Car -X Muffler Shope 6810 Brooklyn Blvd. Duke's Standard 6501 Humboldt Ave. j Hi -Lo Manufacturing 6520 James Ave. Ideal Drug 6800 Humboldt Ave. N. Northport School 5421 Brooklyn Blvd_ North Starodge 6800 Brooklyn Blvd. Warner Hardware 2105 57th Ave. N. Theisen Vending 3804 Nicollet Ave. Thrifty -Scot Motel 6445 James Circle Bill West 2000 57th Ave. N. Viking Pioneer Distributing Co. 5200 W. 74th St. LaBelle's 5925 Earle Brown Dr. Sanitarian a PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE A & J Enterprises 2367 University Ave. Bob Ryan Olds 6700 Brooklyn Blvd. Coca Cola Bottling Midwest 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd. Hoffman Engineering 6530 James Ave. N. Interstate United Corporation 1091 Pierce; Butler Rte. Ault Inca 1600 Freeway Blvd. State Farm 5930 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. PERISHABLE VENDING LICENSE Cont. Miernik Vending 7258 Commerce Circle Brookdale Towers 2810 County Rd. 10 Hiawatha Rubber 1700 67th Ave. N. Marc's Budgetel 6415 James Circle orcroftt, Inc. Rte. 1, Box 992 Brooklyn Center High School 6500 Humboldt Ave. N. Red Owl County Store 5425 Xerxes Ave. N. Viking Pioneer Distributing Co. 5200 W. 74th St. _ f LaBelles 5925 Earle Brown Dr. c,�VQ�hLC� Sanitarian READILY PERISHABLE FOOD VEHICLE Fisher Food Products 6800 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Sanitarian SIGNHANGER'S LICENSE CBS Sign Company 4820 W. 77th St. Y� k Bui fficiala SPECIAL FOOD HANDLING LICENSE Children's Palace Brookdale Square Snyder Brother's Brookdale Center Sanitarian RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE Initial: Invespro II Limited Partnership Columbsu Village Apts. James & Shirley A.iderson 4204 Lakebreeze Ave. N. Larry Pederson 5401 63rd Ave. N. John & Patty DeVries 2801 66th Ave. N. John & Patty DeVries 2936 69th Lane John & Patty DeVries 2937 69th Lane Renewal: Village Properties Evergreen Park Apts. Diane M. Butterfield 5926 Colfax Ave. N. Nelson Gregg Co. 6715 & 6721 Humboldt Ave. N. William F. & Bonnie L. Shutte 6717 & 6719 Humboldt Ave. N. Gary Scherber 4708 Lakeview Ave. N. William & Dorothy Goins 6331 Noble Ave. N. Edward C. Sass 5101 - 03 Xerxes Ave. N. David J. Richardson 7021 W. River Road Harold Swanson 7230 W. River Road Harold Swanson 7250 W. River Road Harold Dripps 3612 54th Ave'. N 1 Curtis H. Cady 1312 72nd Ave. N. Director of Planning VA, and Inspection GENERAL APPROVAL: Gera d'G. Splirt r, City Cl k