HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983 06-13 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
CITY OF BRCYJKLYN CENTER
JUNE 13, 1983
7:00 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Invocation
4. Open Forum
5. Approval of Consent Agenda
-All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine by the
City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no
separate discussion of these items unless a council member_ so
requests, in which event the item will be removed from the consent
agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda.
*6. Approval of Minutes - May 23, 1983
7. Continuation of Board of Equalization Meeting
*8. Performance Bond Reduction - Car X Muffler Shop, 6810 Brooklyn Boulevard
9. Resolutions:
*a. Accepting Bid and Approving Contract 1983 -G (Brookdale Trailway
Improvement Project No. 1983 -08)
-It is recommended the low bid of Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc.
in the amount of $32,691.50 be accepted.
b. Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for
Bids, 51st Avenue North Water Main improvement Project No. 1982 -07
(Contract 1983 -H)
-This project provides for extension of water main along 51st
Avenue North to allow for connection of the residence at 4100 - 51st
Avenue North to the municipal system.
*c. Adopting Records Retention Schedule
-This resolution would authorize the City to provide for the retention
and disposal of records according to the schedule developed by the
municipal clerks and finance officers.
d. Expressing Recognition of and Appreciation for the Public Service of
Participants in the Brooklyn Center Mediation Project
e. Regarding the Disposition of Planning Commmission Application
No. 83021, a Request for a Special Use Permit for a Board and Care
Facility at 4408 - 69th Avenue North
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- June 13, 1983
10. Ordinances:
a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances to Allow
Manufactured Housing in the R1. and R2 Zoning Districts
-The ordinance is offered for a first reading.
b. An Ordinance Amendin g p Y Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances to Classify
a Portion of 69th Avenue North as a Major Thoroughfare
-The ordinance is offered for a first reading.
11. Discussion Items:
a. Proposed Changes in Park Regulations
-Items for discussion include prohibition of glass containers in the parks,
prohibition against bringing refuse into City parks, and authorizing the
City Manager_ to post certain regulatory signs in City parks.
b. Resolution from Traffic Safety Advisory Committee Recommending the
Acceptance of Staff Recommendations on Traffic Matters in the Area of
T.H. 100 at 50th Avenue North
c. Appointments to Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission
-Under the terms of the existing joint powers agreement the terms of
all NWSCCC directors expire in June of each year.
12. Gambling License Application from Rosary Altar Society
*13. Licenses
14. Adjournment
O NORTHWESTERN FOR FAST EFFICIENT
O NORTHWESTERN FOR FAST EFFICIENT l INSTALLMENT FINANCING
BA
NATIONAL BANK INSTALLMENT FINANCING NATIONAL BA CALL US AT
Of Minneapolis CALL US AT Of Minneapolis f N
An Af 372 -€3670
(y An Affiliate of Northwest Bancorporation a_
filiate Northwest 8_t_ A, 372 - 867Q � rr___
rILtVO
Jp f q
��� - �,+- .../.:.� F �5 � „° "d � �� �_ . �.•,�
i
„ �✓
N 1167 NNV 1167
i
,
JUNE 10, 1983'
PETITION REGARDING CHANGE IN BUS ROUTE 8 -D
WE, THE UNDERSIGNED WA�T THE BUS SERVICE ON ROUTE 8 -D TO CONTINUE AS NOW
ROUTED, ACROSS 73rd. AVENUE NORTH TO NEWTON - FROM NEWTON NORTH TO BROOKDALE
DRIVE.
; I
NAME ADDRESS
PHONE
M f
�i
�I
I
Ij
I
I:
t { 3
i
,
i
JUNE 10, 1983
PAGE 3 OF PETITION PERTAINING TO BUS ROUTE 8 -D
NAME ADDRESS PHONE
v
A c e '
t l
CX- �5
.P� A
S 6
JUNE 10, 1983
PAGE 4 OF PETITION PERTAINING TO BUS ROUTE 8 -D
NAME ADDRESS PHONE
� t��
7yj g � � ss �W4
- 7q �S�f
` 1 1 `7 -7
cl
°�►`�` � �� � ,��. ` � SSG -� ?�
s�o -sSg�
a gay QA-r
73�� SSG,
alao `730�)CT. S�0 3oa'7
7
ave
$c,o -(783
JUNE 10, 1983
PAGE S OF PETITION PERTAINING TO BUS ROUTE 8 -D
> NAME ADDRESS PHONE
t C !
\ f
t
_ r
1
��
� L''�
�- / �'
,'
-. � � 7 �,n �
� �( ,�
�
r I l�j � j
�;
j�i
� ��
�
� _
i
r
�
0
�
�
t
}
,�
� _. � � �
l
1 � �-� �,
i � �� T
.._
/,
� ���
���
�
- �
�
L,s'
E
r
� jr�'V �
i, `.
4 t
..
g
.1 ��,-
� �
�- ' 1 ! � �
t
`v, ,�,
� 1 ��
_,:
�
-� r
i �.
�
_.., _,., � .
�/ - �, _�� �;
ice'
�, �- �� ✓��'
�'
f, ' �V
4-
�
.�
l
..
i
?
r'
's � �.
• � �
r T
� f
� `_
i �
�� �
r ,
E � t
- � � �
�� ��
, �., -� �-,
�� <
i
�
�,
.
�
>
� �
>
,�
fi'
L� i
�;�
. _
,r . ^,
�/ �
�� , �-
{
I ��V -�
�
< ,
� 1
c
� � �
/ �l� �
/`�" �
- �. // ..
� 1. (
„�._ ,..1
\
/ �.
-..
��
� '
� �
�. '
'
, _
,�� �
�
.�
�
,_ �
� ,
,,. ,
Jim vo, 19
PAGE 6 OF PETITION PERTAINING TO BUS ROUTE 8 -D
NAME ADDRESS PHONE
J
1
's
���'���� / /,, / t �7( l,•�, L <<.
�' � '�,,_A� .� "�� `'` %'` � acv! /� /✓ -���' ���_ ,�'. --
1 J �
( f
( C
r !
i
�x L
,
JUNE 10, 1983
PAGE 7 OF PETITION PERTAINING TO BUS ROUTE 8 -D
NAME ADDRESS PHONE
f
9
f
7 -71 . _ .,.. __
i
,(mi _
j/
C• _ ti� 1 _
r
OWN
sl� SIC
JUNE 10, 1983
; V
PAGE 8 OF PETITION PERTAINING TO BUS ROUTE 8 -D
NAME ADDRESS PHONE
YX
LC
0
'1Z
_
r
t '
J
�K
�
:
J v
-r .
t-
,
1, 7
IL
JUNE 10 1983
PAGE 2 OF PETITION PERTAINING TO BUS ROUE 8 -D
NAME ADDRESS PHONE
9 a �
ar
i
1
�J
1 `
i
FORM 70202
4
op
ff
i
�1IIN "'ES OF TIC' PROC� :? iT'CS 01 91PT' CITY COUNCIL
OI' T111? CITY OF . I ?C0;'I`'r' C?17;TIR Il THE COtTM1 `i'Y
OF II.f NNEPIi, A11L ,1 E ,_».t,`i'L Ol` r Ir 'A
RI?GULAT' i-; 'S1011
MAY 2 "', 1 983
CITY HALT,
CALL 70 ORDER
she F�roc.� Center City Counci 1. met i_n red >ula.r session and wa.s called. to order by
l °ayor Dean i ycluist at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
, 'ayor Dean ",yquict, Councilmembers Gene TJ- oi_,ka, Celi a Scott, ?'ill Hatiaes, and Ri -ch
'Theis. E,lso pros nt; We e City PTar�.f er Ger is Sp1.i.nter, Director of Nblic Works Sy
Knapp, Director of Finance Paul. Iiclr lv,r.d, Director of PI_anni.lg Inspection Ron
Warren, City A tterney Richard Schieft•er, �.nd Administrative Assistant Tom Publitz.
II IVOCATIO
The invocation was offered by Fayor ITy %quist.
0 PT11 FORUM
Nlayor I�yqui st noted he had received several. requests to use the O}�en Forum session
this evening, and sugfested that since tL ey pertained to a Pl,-:r.nin," Commission item
they would be addressed later in the agenda.
CONS AGT
1 "ayor ,'!yquist inquired whether any of the Council members requested any i_ ems
removed from the Consent Age.nda.. 1To one requested any items removed and the Consent
Agenda:, remained as proposed.
APPROVAL: OF 1711 - TFAY Q, 1 983
die ~E� g as a mot i on t;;T V Cc z ci.liren�er Lhotka and seconded by Cr- ,uncilmerr_ber Scott to
approve the minutes of the City Council Treeting of P =ay , 198 as submitted. Voting
in favor: 1'iayor Eyqui_st, Councilme.iibers 1,11c) Scott, aRves, and Theis. Voting
aCainst: none. The motion passed unanir.ously.
PI iRIUF°?t 1•iC OT- K FLT 'f'�S" - E UPO -1 T C"'I =L, 641 J ATIE'S CIRCLE
I'i' v S cott Ihere was a 1 notion �;y Ccurcilmei.iber I _�iot a and seconded by Gouncilmeirber to
approve the release of the performance ,iarantee fer the Eu.cigetel Inn, 6415 games
Circle in the amount of $5,000. Voting, in favor: r'ayor T Councilmembers
Iahotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting aEainst: none. The motion Passed
unanimously.
R.t?SOLUT IOI�TS _
i l.t raT,
Nember Gene Lnotka introduced the fol1oiWring resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOIIJTIOIV ACCEPTIIG P'} D AND APPROVIT:G CO
The notion for the adoption of the fore�;cinR resol.iition was iJuly seconded by member
Celia. Scott, and upon vote being- + 1r� thereon, ttie i'o�i_c;:i.n voted i.n favor
thereof'- mean I1�,%qui st, Gene lliotka. Celia �_ cott, PH 14 , es, acid R'.ch. Theis; and
the I o11.ow ng voted a the s,?ne: nosie, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly I ,ssed and adop
5 -23 -853 -1-
ember Gene Lhotka introduced the followinC. resolution and moved its adoption:
P1 SOLUTION CLOSIT G PROJECT CCS'1'S., ^d'D AffROPRIATIO" S Ii' ` 1fia' CAPITAL PROJFCTS l'L , D
The motion for the adoption of - the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the fbllowing voted in favor
thereof: -Dear Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Fill 11awes, and Rich Theis; and
the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution ,�. declared
duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION E0. 83 -83
• Tember Gene Ihotka introduced the follo��ring resolution and moved its adoption:
RIFSOLUTI01 COrIFIMf7111G EFCOI:LYl CFi'TER CITY COUYCIL IITTFS T TO VACATE STR. T RICET-
OF 1dAY UNDER ER001 Ci v'TER ORDIT Al� E - _ 4 - 7
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 L1 otka, Celia Scott, Fill Naves, and Rich Theis, and
the following voted against the sa me: none, whereupon said resolution vra5 declared
duly passed and adopted.
LICUNISES
There was a motion by Counci.lmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
approve the following list of _licenses:
FOOD ESTABLISH4ENT LICENSE
Arthur Treachers 6100 Brooklyn Blvd.
Beacon Bowl 6525 Lyndale Ave.
Michael Boylen, 6809 Humboldt Ave.
Brooks Superette 6809 Humboldt Ave.
Dukes Standard 6501 Humboldt Ave.
Grecian Health Spas 2920 County Rd.
Marc's Big Boy 5440 Brooklyn Blvd.
Pizza Factory 6816 Humboldt Ave.
Pontillo's Pizza 5937 Summit Ave.
Uncle Bob's Quik 6 6600 W. River Rd.
GAMBLING LICENSE - Class B
St. Alphonsus Men's Club 7025 Halifax Ave.
ITINEI2, FO ESTABLISTM
Brooklyn Center Fire Dept. 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
ME.'CH S Lla,NSE
O'Keefe Mechanical 7188 Shady Oak Rd.
5 -23 -83 -2-
FE ,,NTA L DWE LI CENSE
Initial:
Randall B. Cook 5347 Brooklyn Blvd.
James K.& Wanda K. Storie 5339 Emerson Ave. N.
Donald & Cora Noonan 3800 France P1.
Thomas & LaDonna Pfingsten 6706 Grimes Ave. N.
John W. Schroeder 5312 Oliver Ave. N.
Glen Marsh 910 55th Ave. N.
Riley Hirschberger 2809 * 67th Lane
Roger Williams 2318 67th Lane
L. A. & Jean Beisner 2837 67th Lane
Lawrence R. Florian 857 -861 70th Ave. N.
Robert W. Rode 869 70th Ave. N.
S. Richard Silverness 873 -877 70th Ave. N.
James R. Hokanson 881 -885 70th Ave. N.
Renewal:
Norman Chazin Brookdale Manor Apts.
Norman Chazin Four Courts Apts. .
Norman Chazin Northbrook Terrace Apts.
Norman Chazin Northlyn Apts.
Midwest Investment Co. Willow bane Apts.
Norman Chazin 6037 Brooklyn Blvd.
John S. Tschohl 5412 Colfax Ave. N.
Jon Lindman 1600 Irving Lane
Marcus Corporation 6415 James Circle
Virgil L. Hillstrom 5907, 09 June Ave. N.
Renewal:
Roland Scherber 5820 Logan 'Ave. N.
Ramond A. Rice 6907 Morgan Ave. N.
G & B Enterprises 3501 47th Ave. N.
SWIMMING POOL LICENSE
Brooklyn Center Community Center 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
Grecian Health Spa 2920 County Rd. 10
Voting; in favor: N kyor Iyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis.
Voting against: none." The motion passed unanimously.
RESO (CRITTE-LTED)
the City t annrer introduced a Res=olution Approving Agreement with Orr- Schelen-
Mayeron & Associates, Inc. to Provide Prc-Cc , i.onal F,ng r:eer~ ng Services Relating to
Alarm Telemetry and Standby Power Provi,�i.ons for Lift Stations.
5 -23 -83 -3-
I
Councilmember "'heir inquired how the nlar m system cnr, e into bei.n, . The Pirector of
Public Uor•ks explained that the. proCx, wnts, ini.ti rated :five years ago and focused on a.
concern over potential power i:ailt:,reo) at the various lift station.,. lie ' Lated that
the telemetry system sends an al��.rm to the police dc;r, -ent when any failure in the
system occurs. He, added that lie believes that the system should also h2ve standby
. power for any extended power failure and that is why on -site generators were
originally recommended for lift stations I~os. 1 and 2. lie noted that a standby
generator has been installed at lift station No. 2, located at Lyndale and 55th
Avenue North, and that the staff is recommending a portable generator rather than an
on -site generator be installed at lift station lJo. 1.
Councilmember Theis inquired what the cost difference would be betweer, the portable
and on -site generators. The Director of Public l�Torks replied - that the cost of an
on -site generator for lift station No. 1 would be 3 to 5 times greater than a portable
generator. Councilmember Theis then expressed a, concern over - the fact that a large
power outage in the area may deplete the rental market of portable generators.
RFSOLUTIOE' E0. 83-54
E;ember Celia Scot introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTIOI APPROVING AGREIT T_ T ,'sITII ORR- SCIu'LEN -1 AYFROE' &. ASSOCIATES, INC. TO
PROVIDE PROFESSIONAL i iGINTF RING S?tRVICES RELAliNG TO AI1F1 TFM- 11TTRY AI STANDBY
,, 7 - _ S ,� ti � FT I A T -
PO PROL ISIO.C:� FOR STGv LIFE S
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by meTrber
Bill Halves, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Cene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bi11 IT es, and Rich Theis; and the
following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
PLAT i ITG COirP `TSSIOTT I:`111 .
Pld"Jld iI CC .I'`:! M '7 T AP Cf�.TIOIT TTO. X3 01 (1I I LT T;P BY C B ROOKS (Q ' TR )
fi ' S
FOR A _-TJ ; . O' PECIA LS!:i i' _ c: 1 X10 f" ll!,(„ S 11 'i T'
7 ' 0 ;'; A�' riF. O Pi :�.OL UT
1 w C - I h
ST 7, A L 16 114' . A 15C5 5 - - 7 1 H r'.V N 1��i;�T;
'The Director o -f Plann_i.n- &.Inapecti.on prese'n'ted and reviewed for Corucci_1_ members
pages i and 2 of the T'ay 12, 1983 Planning Carr,Ti_ssicn minutes and also the Planning
Camrission i nformation sheet x)renared for A> licationNo. 8`.01 . He explained the
Ip 9 z
request was for the addition of a 1 , OCXD gallon propane tank at the 0 Petroleu-n store
located at 1 69th Avenue north. lie proceeded to revie;r the locetion of the
subject parcel and the zoning in the area. The Director of Planning & Inspection
pointed out that the sales of fuel is a special use in the C2 zone.
'The Director of Planning ?° Inspecti_�tic reviet;,ed the i_etter submittedb�r the applicant
requesting. the special use, and also reviewed the appli_cant's site plan for
installation and screening of the tank. Ile also reviewed the location of the
proposed tank at the northeast portion of the site, and also the construction
material proposed for the tank and the screening devices.
The Director of Planning &; Zns, action noted that the PIarnznzT Corr is, on held a
public hearinC! on Application 1 o. x:''019 at its Fay 12, 1 meeting. he reported
that no one spoke aC, nst the a r:rl ic.; a:tion at the public hearing and that the
applicant was p,: csent at this evr. rii n is meeti np. lie then. noted that the Planning
Corrumissi on recorirnrended <:x,prov<al of the ic"It.ion subject to rix condition., .
he reviewed for Council. members. In sum_r ary, the Pla ni.ng Di rector stated that a
5 -23 -83 -4-
public hearing an Application W. 8`01 9 required and that the proper notices of
the hearing had been sent to the appropri to property ocmers.
Cauncil.rnember Ihotka, inquired va'r,y the particular lac,sat_ion for the tare was chosen.
The Director of Planning explained thcit th( ap�plicapt chore the i) rticular location
for the ease of viewing by the store E f:l_cyo�;ti. The Council discussed the
application briefly and 1 ayor hyquist then opened the public hearing on Planning
Application No. 8,019.
P'ayor Pyquist recognised T , r. Charles Proof s, the applicant, who stated. that a. hedge
had been planted in front of the propoccd. location for the tank for screening
purposes and that it should cover most of the screening from the street side. he
added that all store personnel will go t'rrcugh trai fling to operate the propane tank.
Mayor Yyquist inquired if there was anyone else present who wished to speak at the
public hearing. No one appeared to spe, =k and he entertained a motion to close the
public hearing.
There was a motion by Councilnembsr Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
close the public hearing on Planning Com-,-,ission Application No. 8301 Voting in
favor: Y.ayor Nyquist, Councilmerbers Lhotk:a, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
There was a motion by Couricilrember Fawns and seconded by Councilmember Theis to
approve Application No. 83019 subject to the following conditions:
1. The special use permit is issued to the applicant as
operator and is nontransferable.
2. The special use permit is subject to all applicable codes,
ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall
be grounds for revocation.
3. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the
Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior
to the issuance of permits.
4. The provision ventilation around the tank as well as
safety procedures to be taken shall be reviewed by the
Fire Marshal prior to the issuance of permits.
5. The enclosure is for the purpose of screening the fuel
tank and shall not have any signs affixed to it other
than directional or warning signs specifically approved
by the Building Official.
6. The propane fuel tank shall be adequately protected
by concrete filled posts around the screening device.
Counci.lmember Lhotka then made a motion to amend the conditions of approval for
Planning Commission Application Vo. 8701 by including a requirement that a 5'
screep be placed completely around the tank and pumping station. The motion was
seconded by Councilmember Theis.
5 -23 -83 -5-
Upon a vote bein`, taken on the motion to imr E t:d the conditions of approval for
Planning Commission App:l.ication I F,01 () the foll owin,, voted in favor: Vnyor
Nyquist, Counc,ilr,,embers I1iot; ,-1, Scott, I .zWtiev, and ' hei.s. �'oti.ng, none.
The motion passed unanimously.
Upon a vote being taken on the motion to approve Planning Commission Application No.
5301 as amended, the following voted in favor: l ayor lvyquist, Councilmembers
Lhotka., Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed
unanimously.
PIAI''ll?ITvG C O111IcSIOTv APPLI 1M. 83 020 SUP1 I`.�TF'D BY U D CON POP A I_ Tr :D
c r n r c} , C ,, m
ST' E A 1 FTLIID ]G PIJJ APP F , ),O A C. l'0 } U21-LD C EI k Cr , r 1 O�or '.T Ov S i i� 72T;D CI� 1T01� I{
PI :A` �A lH1 Z TII�^ THE TU 17, LLB 1�1 UT i IS APF'1C v EU TI! I I' O RIGI AL API'I i7A TCI I
79031
r'hFe of Planning &: inspection presented and reviewed for Council members
pages 2 through 3 of the I ay 12, 1,9,83 Planning Commission meeting minutes, a.nd also
the Planning Co. imissi.on informat ion sheet prepared for Application No. 83020. The
Planning Director proceeded to review the location of the subject parcel pointing
out that it was phase 5 of the Island Ponds ii
ends evelopment . He also reviewed
the zoning of the subject parcel and pointed out that no site or grading changes are
anticipated by the application.
The Director of Planning 8-. Inspection reviewed the dimensions of the proposed new
tovnhouse units, and explained that the reason for - the applicant's request is that
more persons can qualify for the nc,- units and the project could be completod sooner
than could be anticipated witl: the original application. The Planning Director
next reviewed - the building elevations of the units.
The Director of Planning &. Inspection pointed out that the applicant has contacted
the Ponds Homeo7,mers' Association and ha informed them that phase 5 will be a
separate association. rTe noted that the Ponds Townhou se Association has submitted
a letter approving +he U D proposal with the message that the project be completed as
soon as possible.
The Director of Planning & Inspection explained that - the Planning Commission
reviewed the application at its ilay 12, 1981 meeting and recorur :ended approval
subject to three conditions, - which he reviel,�ed for Council members.
There was a motion by Councilmember Lhctke, and seconded by Counci l nember Scott to
approve Planning Commission Applicait %on 10. 83020 ;subject to the following
conditions:
1. Puilding plans are subject to review and approval by
the Luild n €" Of �i�c .aa :1- — op applic s
�i i .1 it re. ect to code
prior to the issuance of permits.
2. The new building plan is limj_tcd to lots abutting
72nd Circle.
3. Plain approval is. subject to all conditions pertaining
to the on � inal plaan ar.proval for Plat 5 under
Application Lo. 7901 1 .
Voting in favor: Ilayor "Nlyqulst, Councilr'erber; Lru t:ka, Scott, Ila�res, and 'iher_s.
Voting against: none. The motion pas-3ed unanimously.
5 -23 -83 -6-
FILIIJIIIIIJ�G CC1 I,PPUCATIM! IS e'021 !1J_F1 ;'Y" Fr. i WIUCUT FOR A S TFC:tPL
a ,t'� T 777 i , I1 . 1 E
The Director of t'laY K, i' anted and reviewed for Council members
pages 'T throutda 11 of the i' ,y 12, 198; P wi& n ;_ C cmmis. >ior rreet:ing r. inute ,, and also
the Planning ConinI scion. information s heet prepared for application No. 83021 . He
proceeded to review the location of the Fi d)ect parcel. for Council members and also
noted that the zoning of the parcel wao P4. He explained that board and care
facilities are special uses in R4 zones.
The Planning D_i.rector reviewed the applicant's letter requesting the special use
permit and pointed out that the proposal comprehends 16 residents in the facility.
He then reviewed the proposed remodeli.n{ ply for the four- -plex. The Director of
Planning: Inspection reviewed the target population of the facility as described by
the applicant and also the screening process used for the residents. He then
reported that the applicant had listed - the qualifications of various staff members,
and that they all meet; or exceed the requirements set forth by the Department of
Public Welfare.
The Director of Planning & Inspection stated that a lengthy public hearing was held
at the TIay 12, 1983 Planning Commission meeting and that numerous people spoke both
for and against the application. Be addcd that the City has three other similar
facilities and that none have received complaints once they had been in operation.
He pointed out, however, that none of the existing facilities in the City are for
mentally ill patients as proposed in this application.
In review of the public hearing held at the Planning Commission meeting, he noted
that comments were received from the existing tenants in the building.
The Planning Director reviewed the ordinance criteria for the issuance of special
use.perrnits and noted that the Planning Corri fission had found that the applicant had
met the criteria for a special use permit. He also reviewed the lot size of the
subject parcel_ and explained that it is a small lot, approximately the size of a
single family lo Be noted that the Planning Commission discussed a possible lack
of parking space and subsequently recommended that, if the application were
approved, parking for client vehicles should be limited to two spaces on the
premises. He added that the staff reviewed the modifications to the site proposed
by the applicant, and as a result, estimated. - that these modifications may limit the
number of residents to 16 or 17. Again, he pointed out, that at the public hearing
held at the Planning Commission meeting several people spoke against and in favor of
the application, and that a petition was submitted to the Planning Commission
opposing the special use permit. He noted that one of the residents at 4408 69th
Avenue North cautioned the Planning Commission to go slow in its consideration of
the application.
The Director of Planning & Inspection pointed out that the Planning Commission at
its Pray 12, 198j meeting recommended approval of Application Igo. 83021 .subject to
ten conditions which he reviewed for Council. members. The Director of Planning
also pointed out that the vote of the Planning Commission was four to two in favor of
the application.
The Director of Planning & Inspection explained that a public hearing had been
scheduled for the application this evening, and that the propor notices had been
sent.
5 -23 -83 -7-
T'ia 1`.yquist commented that he was in favor of the concept of the fnci.lity but
ex-pressed a concern that the appl ica It tor. h.-I cc e up rather r, Idly irld h, not had
appropriate time - to be considered 'ry the ne'i h1,or'r_ooa. IT(, n1so expreosed a concern
that there is an ex .st.n r ,t :,ate statute which r igt11, 1- rtrit the n rber of residents in
a group home of this type. In ro< >ions.e to 1 yor iyquist's concern, the City
Attorney conmlented that with r e� nr•d to the use of sink le family homes es for group
homes, the number of residents wood -d be limited to 6. He also commented that if
homes for hand :i_capped :individuals are not addressed in local ordinances the state
statute says that a Troup horse is a permitted - use in the zone, althouL7r i, the Council
carl place conditions on the use. Discussion continued regarding the state statute
limiting the number of mentally handicapped. individuals in a group setting to 16.
Discussi.cn also ensued regarding the statutes reference to mentally retarded
individuals and the City Attorney requested the applicant to comment on the
difference between mentally retarded i-rdividuals and persons with mental illness.
In response to the City Attorney's question T ;;riht stated that persons are
considered retarded if their I,Q. Is are 70 or less but - that the problems of persons
who are mentally ill are with regard to their thinking processes and not with their
mental capacities. The City Attorney then asked i rs. 1° ri &t whether she considers
the two types of disabilities the same for purposes of the state statute. P`.rs.
Wright replied that she does trot consi -der them the same for the purposes of the
statute. The CitJ- Attorney then asked Tirs. y,'right shat the factors were y led
her to a number of 18 residents. firs. ' �riL7ht explained that one of the
considerations was budgetary and noted that the cost of ease increases if there are
less than 18 and that another consideration vas that "a scnzare font analysis of the
site did meet the criteria for 18 residents. The City Attorney commented that the
T rookl-
,,rr Center ordinance, with regard to a boar-1 and care facility, does not deal
with a definition of menu.-_ retardation or physical handicap but that the state
statute seems to limit the number of indivia"U :l_s in a. facility to 16. Frs. 'Tr:ight
stated that if the number of residents in the facility . reduced to 16 she would
have to go back to the county to renegotiate her contract which may mean a reduction
in staff.
The City Attorney inquired of the -Pl inning Director what the definition of a family
was under the City ordinance. "'he D : ector of Planning (�_ Inspection expl.a:ined that
five 'unrelated persons in each unit would be permitted under the ordinance. In
light o ' the Planning Director's comments, the C_i ty 1,ttorney stated that this could
mean. that 20 individuals could be permitted in a four --plex or the site could be
looked at as similar to a 1 o ne for ment - ally rett T re ed persons and limited to 16. IIe
stated that his view favored a r^ore conservative approach :hi.ch would be to litrit the
number of individuals in the facility, . ; per the state statute, vh i_ch wcul a r 16
residents allowed in the facility. CoLrcilL,cmber. Theis th commented that the
state �,ta:tute a pearc to address r,.:ntally h_�! dicar r'ed =i. rid ividual.s., and inquired
r heit the difference between r- .ental ly retaarded and r.-c ntally ill individuals - Vrould
mean.. The City Attorney stated that it -ii', u_ be very diffi.ciilt to give it a
definitive answer to this question. tie pointed. out that rnenta_7_l�T retarded persons,
accordin to the applicant, regaire core care than mentally ill persons, and
therefore, it would seem thr-;t rent, - -telly i it T -cr cr. ;could require des s serv1c:es From
the comminity. e pointed out Llh t :a strict readin €' of the si;atute, acccrdin,__ to
the applicant, would not address the me nt:,a..1_ly ill individual.
5- -23 -83 __8-
Tiayor T;yquist cper) d the meeting for the - purpose of a public hearing an 'Planning
Cornml� inn Application Ta 8 . << }yor T`yquit requested eel that, since the
Pl.anri.'Lng Corrurrt.1_ssion publ.i c hear) n�� resulted in a very Ic ngthy detail of public
comment he requested persons sq etij,i-np at the public hearing to limit their remarks
to item,, that were not already contained in the Planning Commission minutes since
the City Council has already reviewed those comments.
Tiayor Tlyquist recognized NX. Don Lowry, 6914 Lee Avenue 1Iorth. Pir. Lowry stated
that he T;referred to address the Council after I "r. Grosshans spoke. P',ayor Nyquist
recognized I r. Grosshans who read a letter rubraitted to the City Council regarding
the concerns of the adjoining neighborhood over - the proposed special use. Tr.
Grosshans proceeded to read the letter and expressed the sentiment that the
residents are apposed to the facility, and that. he believed the applicant does not
meet the standards for a special use under the ordinance. Tie added that he believes
the risk to the public health, safety, end comfort of the neighborhood_ from the
proposed application is real and genuine. He added that he believes the use of the
property as proposed by - the applic�:ct .on would reduce the property value in the area.
lie explained that he also had questions of the Council, including, who will own the
facility, how it will be taxed, and lroti, it i%ould affect tax revenues. In summary,
Tr. Grosshans contended that the site is not desirable for the proposed use, and that
Council should be aware that the residents are considering legal action if the
Council approves the application, but added that the Council should not viers this a's
any type of threat. Tir. Grosshans then submitted his letter to the Clerk to be
included with the official meeting record.
TiIayor Eyquist inquired whether any information was available with regard to the
effects of similar facilities on adjoining neighborhoods. Eayor YTyquist
recognized. Ms. Farge 11herley from the Hennepin County human Services Division. She
explained that the PlannJ Commission i n Einneapolis did a comprehensive survey on
such facilities, and found that people who lived next to such licensed facilities
�
viewed the facilities as g ood neighbors. She added that the FinneapolI Planning
Commission did a national literature search on the subject, and that no evidence was
found to show any decrease in property values in adjoining neighborhoods unless
a - added that often
facilities „r block: Hs. ti�,herle , fears
there were five such p S
expressed at hearings of this type are those that many people have about mental
illness, but she added that at the point of a one year review of such facilities she
has not seen any complaints expressed by residents with regard to - the facilities.
Councilmember Hawes reviewed a history of the assessed value and sales of homes
located next to similar facilities in Brooklyn Center for mentally retarded
persons, and noted that no reduction in property values had been shown.
Mayor Nyquist commented that, in response to a previous question posed by T "r.
Grosshans, the owner of the facility would be Mrs. Diane Wright. The City 1.. onager
responded to the second and third parts of Eir. Grosshans question noting that the
facility vould be taxed as a multi - residential property, and that he did not think
the tax revenue for the City would increase or decrease if the facility were
established. The City Eanager commented that the Residential Alternatives
facility existing in Brooklyn Center was approved in 1978 and occupied in 1 979. He
proceeded to review the sales of' homes adjoining, the Residential Alternatives
facility.
Mayor ivyquist recognized T r. Clifford 11oude, 4416 69th Avenue Vorth, who stated that
5 -23 -83 -9-
he has lived at his present , I ddr(_ , ss for '70 years, and expressed feir over the
establishment of the proposed facility.
The next spetiker at the public hearing wLts 11'r. Don Lowry, Q 14 I. Avenue north fIr
Lowry recounted past zoning propo .als for the site arid explained that the original
rezoning proposal was for a cor.mercial zise which was later changed to the current
four-rlex usage. Ile pointed out that lie brourjit in a petition of 23 people opposed
to the facility and presented it at the He also suited
that the people speaking in favor of the facility are not loccil residents.
Nayor Nlyquist recognized Dr. Duane Orn, who stated he was a family doctor at the
TJorthport Tiedical Center Dr Orn stated that lie was in favor of the .issue and
reviewed the history of how mentally ill people have been treated in the past. He
explained that society did not take very Ecod care of mentally ill people and
centuries ago they were beaten and killed. He pointed out that because of this
treatment mentally ill persons were sequestered in institutions, He further
explained that mental health care outside an institution is the highest quality care
that can be given, and that his opinion is that the proposed facility provides agood
alternative for the care of mentally ill persons Dr Orn concluded his cc-Trments by
stating that he would remi that the Council consider the application
favorably.
Mayor Nyquist recognized the next speaker at the public hearing, NTS. Eartha
Love 6331 Bryant ,'venue Korth, Wh o stat that , she was the Director of Project
Overcome, a project designated to f ight off people fears of the mentally ill She
explained that she has been mentally ill for many years and that the Ln.ost help she got
was in a half � „ay house located in St. Paul. Firs. Lovejoy spoke favorably for the
application.
Mayor Fyquist stated that he had received a telephone call f rom P'T . George Olson, i
expressed support for the application, but could not be here this evening to
personally address the issue.
The next speaker at the public hearing
as T'T Vernel 1 1 1 �ys-tad, of Brooklyn Center, who
discussed his son, Bruce, who becaitie ment il in 1978, and committed himself to
the Anoka State Hospital. he explained a social worker .recommended a half-way
house for his son's treatment. ITe stated that IFr- Wright's program is what t
g e IT wl e a 11
coni, needs and it v, people released from institutions tc recover and
f ind employment. lie reiterated his staten ent re[ the need, for residential
41, -st area, and added that he could
treatment for mentally ill persons the northw”
s 11 red he the request could be
,/�rmathize with the residents in the area but wordei
denied considering how many people will be helped by the prog
1
Mayor ,, ,yqui,-,t recoEnized 1!1�s- Eileen Eore.n, executive Director cd' the 1� 7
orthwest
Hennepin human Services Council, , Jho explained - that she submitted testimony at t,he
last Planning CoTrannis-icn nn.eetin{ concerning the need for support services for
mentally ill in Ilennepin County. She explained ,,he has worked with service
providers in the area for the last four years and also with the farnily and friends of
mentally ill Persons. She observed that coamunities have been slow to essist
4 �; h the individuals and
I _ ),� -, been _ a(Jided burden for
men't ill people, and that th
th eir h _L families to experience the fear , _�_cld a of the recidel-Its regex('JnpproC�rars
such as E WriebtS. t ')he notc;d that there are
approximately 'l persons in
Brooklyn Center who are or have tcen rj-,entally ill and that only a sm,.3Il number are
getting appropriate care. Mayor l'yquJI. inqu of I'is. Loran how the figure of 350
5-23-83 -10-
person , wa.. obtained. F s. T"oran rE; , aonded. 1)�7 explainin , that the number '50 was
arrived ,.t bf takin.� n percentnEe of the City's polulationwl could be expected to
Le suffer:i n,7 from i rr cntt;.a i llne,;s, -ccord-_ri p to .Tiennepi.n County's information.
The next speaker at the public lioarinF', Fr. 'odd I umphr -y, 44CI9 69th Avenue T'.orth,
Apt. 2, who questioned what � harpen one year from now if the facility does not
work out. Tie added that lie does not think it is aii appropriate place for the
proposed facility.
1`•'iayor F'yauist again recog��izedlir. Don Iowry, 691 A, Tee Avenue Iiorth, who stated. that
he doe, not thing a. facility of this - type .should be put in an area inhere a special use
permit is required.
Hayor I ' yquist recoL7Tized the applicant, vrs. Diane Wright, who informed the Council
that se , the Dhector of the {group facility called Park ianor Residence in
Fii.nncapoa_is, and that the facility she is proposing in the appli_cati.on would be a
continuation of than program. She pointed out the oilers of the building in
Ninneapolis cancelled the contract and that in order to retain the Rule 36 money
allocated to'dennepin County for the prograr,�, she must find a new facility for the
program by June 1.
Fiayor Nyquist next recognized a representative from Y.E.S. and N.E.O.N., who
submitted a letter for the Council record, and explained that the purpose of the
letter is to clarify Y.E.S.' and N.E.O.T�;.'s position. on the proposed facility in
light of coriments made by certain staff members of Y.E.S. and N.E.O.N. at the last
Plannin ConiL ission meeting. She added she would like to apologize for the views
expressed by their staff members at the Planning Commission meeting and expressed
support for the application.
Frayor T yquist inquired if there was anyone else ` wished to speak at the public
hearing. No one else appeared to speak and he entertained a motion to close the
public hearing.
Where was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to
close the ublic hearin_, on Plannin z _ -; Commission Application No. 83021. Voting in
p g
favor: Eayor Nyquist, Council embf;rs Iirotka., Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
RECES
The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 9:14 p.m. and reconvened at 9:30 p.m.
COT3TTT2J� TIO OF l?IAi?RTT COF %T' °TSSIC; "i TiO. 83 021
Fiayor hyquist expressed a concern with the application regarding the limits on the
number of residents as set by statute. Councilmember Ihotka inquired of the City
Attorney whether the statute addressed the n r.ber of staff required on the premises
in such a facility. The City Attorney stated that the statute i.s silent oil the issue
of the number of staff but that the statute provides for 16 residents. Airs. Wright
explained that the staff make up i•;lll include 2 1 program staff, along with one
secretary. one art —time ._ec
rt ta.r She explained the cook would arrive at e
part—time cook �,n p 3 p
work «hen the secretary is leaving z She noted the secretary's hours would be
from 9:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m., and the cook's hours would be from 3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
CouncilrTleniber Theis inquired whether the v <n for the residents would be at the
residence at all times. F .rs. Wrigh responded in the affirmative to Councilmember
5 -23 -83 -11-
Theis' questi on Councili. evII)er The i,> st, tt'd .i t rit T e,_irs that F park: n T stn1lo would
be needed for al_l_ the vehicle1) n
and o; pre _ : >� d cc 1-hat tn.L, vny be ra problem.
' lie Director of :Manning c�' li1 �`� �', � on rei i_rliic d Counci 1 riembers of the ipiniirum,
requ:irer;ent for a '1 ' greenstrip in _front oC t Le building.nd noted tart there i?iay be
room for one parking stall in the front.
Couricilmember rilheic then inquired whether zany type of condition could be placed on
the approval of the perriit, :hereby, if a resident committed a iTisdeti:eanor or gross
misdemeanor, the permit would be revoked. `ihe City Attorney commented that he
could not think of what statute or ordinance i,,-dg t address this situation, and that
generally, this type of approach does; not sound applicable to the facility being
proposed. He further stated that, if the Council is trying to regulate the conduct
of the residents, the City Council ccu? d set up rules as long as they are related to
the safety of residents in the area. he added that the regulations should be based
on a course of conduct rather than focusinE_ on a, single incident. He explained that
it would be difficult to condition a perr_ it on a single act of violence and that this
approach would not seem to be related to the people _J n the facility ai> than any
other resident in a similar setting, such as a, townhouse or apartment. The City
Tanager noted that once a permit is granted it becer,,es quite difficult to revoke
because the burden of proof is then placed on the City, with reE-ard to the
revocation, rather than the issuance of a permit, where the burden is on the
applicant.
Councilmember Scott inquired ;whether Tars. I�Iilrightwas counting herself as a mertiber of
the staff in her previous ccru ilents. 1rs. irlriCht explained that she would be in
addition to the staff referred to e`i_rli er. Councilmember Scott then inquired
whether any medication monitoring, would be undertaken at the facility• Fro. Wright
explained that a physician must sign a stateTnen t that a person can self medicate and
that t'ne staff would assist the pat . ent i n re i zl_ling prescriptions and monitoring
their use. Coi:ncilmember Scott inquired how, 5.kith only 2 1 staff persons, could
adequate counseling be provided. !'Ts. Zirigt stated that the - people in the
facility are not considered in treatment 24 hour;; per day, and noted that the night
staff does not provide counseling but o be available to talk if a client, needs
it. Councilmember Scot t e n a.ddreE Ud the issue of the el_igibil__i ±y of clients for
the facility with regard to any history of violence within the past six months.
iirs. Wright explained that in order to quali-fy _for the facility there would have to
be no past history of violence in the client's background. She added that the six
month time limit referred to only suicidal incidents on the part of the client.
Counci.liTieriber Scott inquired of T rs. ,�Trielrt „hat world happen to the progr=,in if
Hennepin County' s fund ing were cut. i rs . iriri Chit, explained. Led. that the prcgrs_m would
be discontinued and the building would be converted back - to an apartment building.
n s , ,y expressing a concern that a. request
Councilmember U concluded her cor.- 1_,ent�. 1,y expressing
�� n' e mAe i.n the future. T rs. t riF-iit- stated that the
for additional patients r. i nt b
building would not support more thin 1 F persons and that this nur was the mDxi.mum
according to state licensure.
Councilmember Ihotka inquired if the - ptieintc ,% reduced to 1 would the staff be
reduced a,ccordinrly. Tir > ' V ri € explained that at tide day st ff • oulld probably be
cut by one but this would have to be negotiated with 1icnnepin County.
Councilmei. ber Theis as=ked if the funding frorl T'lennepi.n County were cut could the
%'acili ty be cupported by private r..n..n. or i r!suntnce. 1 z �s_ Viri , ht explain, d that
'J5% of the funding =for the Y'aci lity c cr.�(_ I'rcm the „t to nd that tlle f c7 lity would
receive no medicaid or medicare. Cor)nc.ilnember ` heis then aokf,d vinether Mirs.
5 -23 -83 -12-
Aright coi,1_d E nvisi on. any .si tu. . �.on }�E��rc �:n applic €zt:ion r_'or admi_ - si on zn. the
f<:cili.ty could be "lbmi.tted to staff :ior rc,vie�a to See if the -i.ndividuxa.l rret the
conditions. i rs. �'iriC ht exi ieined t;r t , �hc beliieves this procedure vould violate
the Data. Priv acy Act. 'She added thn,t to disclose a client's record would be a
v.iola.tion and that any history of vi_clerlce would be indicated in the client's
history. Iiayor T; inquired l;o,ar tr,c City could ire assured that the client's
record Is accurate. Tars. 11ri:t ht repl: ed ti -,ct - the only meanr'would be throu(fh her
eval�iation anc the client'-- record. ,''he City Attorney commented that the
siibrrl s=sion of a. ,t:.j;t.,ement by a psycv; i tri st,, reg<)rding the particular clients
history, and a t.a.rel eat that the person h( �- not commi. ttc d any violent acts would
probably ?i� ve to be relied on. tIe added that the City would have to rely on a
state n ^ent or afi'id sv it submitted by tjn appropriate 2.uthority.
Counci lrnember Theis commented on the physical layout of the neighborhood and
exp,ressed a ccncerr. that no s :idetiralk ac crs is i;rovided on bath leading to Brooklyn
Loulevard.
Councilmeraber Naves suggested that the issue could be submitted to mediation and
that the applicant, and the neighborhood could rredi.ate out a solution which may
result in an. acceptable answer for bot'r pa.,rti_es. Councilmember Lhotka stated that
he would %'avor tt - ie mediation concept but e. ,oreosed a concern over the short notice of
the application as a result of the funding deadlines.
Counci.lmerrbe:r- `!'heir stated that the timing on the application has beer: short and the
neighborhood has not had sufficient time to understand the proposal completely.
i r_ght commented that, the problem is, that if the Council is not a�fI. I _ �tive
with reearc to - tire plc'ect, there ti be no tune to relocate. She added that she
had also rret for three hours with the members of the neighborhood on Thursday night
and explained that ier eva lua is that the neiFl is not accepting of'che
proposal. T% ?r. Greschnns added - that 1 does not - think that submitting the issue to
rr?ediation would resolve anything. Councillr_enber stated that he believes
mediation would be vTorth a try and that there would be nothing to lose considering
there is a win no-vain situation at this point.
Firs. Wright stated that the deadline - the state has given her for the facility is June
1 , and that if she does not have a special use permit by TTay 31 she would lose the
building as per the ptizrchase agreement.
There was a motion by Coi cilmember Hawes to table consideration of the application
and submit the application to rredi_atior. if both parties would submit to mediation
within a reasonable time prior to June 1, 1as3. Councilmember Lhotka seconded
Counci.lmer:;ber k ? acres' notion for the purpose of discussion. Ile added that he
understands the residents concern, particularly with regard to the short notice
given on the application, but he also expressed disappointment that the residents
did not tike ,dvnnt n e of r,ediation. T'-_,yor I_ , cotrrrented that one of the things
that could possibly come out of n. medial i.on could be a Neighborhood Advisory Foard.
P -irs. V"rig}'it explained that DPW P',ile 36 requires a neighborhood Advisory Poard for
the facility.
5 -23 -83 -13-
Counci.lmenber Il of a requested a show of hands from the neighborhood residents
present who ,could ncc e�pt; mc i <;t i on. ' ..n. pero)ono, in tt nc niml I ence raised their hands
concerning Councilr tuber lY,oth n' S reguep t. Counci i_f ember l,hotka 'lien expressed
d=isappointment in the neighborhood for not taking advantage of a mediation
situation.
Upon a vote being taken on the motion on the table the following voted in favor:
Council.:nernber laves. Voting; againot: i'ayor l yquist, Counci.lmerbers Lhotl
Scott, and Theis. The motion failed.
'.there was a motion by Councilmember Theis to authorize the staff to prepare a
resolution for denial. of Planning Commi t ssion Application lb - Sj02 1 duo to the short
notice given to neighborhood residents with reg and to the proposed application, and
also because of the various site and physical plt problcins with the application,
including the parking problems pre canted by the number of staff vehicles, the
difficulty in enforcing condition !Jo. 4 of the recommended Planning Commission
conditions with regard to requirements of the pest history of resident's in the
facility, and also with regard to the number of individuals proposed for the
facility in light of the state statute concerning the limitation on residents in
such a facility. Upon a vote being taken on the notion, the following voted in
favor: Ec%. or i`syqu.i.st, iLber's 1hot.;a, Scott, Hawes d Doting
r Councilmc ? iat an heis. r
against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
P11 ; ?11,rs C z0-t 0 "•T _U 'f T1J G;; I FOR I TE t
, ���r ` `��� . `,_ `..
T Director C` t1Ci 7 %r `2 C � r v eF E d Council members
pages 1 2 and 13 of t'rre ily 12, 1983 Plt nnin, Gcmil. � �.ti,, on r. e;�_ �sng Ii nut���;, and also tlne
P anoint. Corr , ,issicn information sheet pre _gyred for tht� ac Be reviewed
the applicant's rec,uest and the location of the subject parcel. lie then discussed
Application Ea. 83017, the preliminary plat request, and pointed out that the
request is for a resubdivisicn. of the original plat to create 21 lots.
The Director of Planning & inspection painted out mother issue related to the
project, that being d of t ;he 'o p roposed rea_ rnm t- f S C
� , , p' t oli, O ��_112.�;1e C. ee.�
Park and bath held with 8 Properties, the ov ner of the property. He
continued to review the proposed rep l ._tting and the size of the; lots which would be
created. He noted tl7nt discussions have arisen it.'ca reCa.rd to whom the City should
t.
be neg otiating with for the acguisi t i on of right-of-way for the proposed roadwagy
project. lie explained that the City n /? s r, � letter : _, at ,
. tto �r � �ua it�c i � lei r t =,ti �� , trl��
according to Me existing a ssociation doc.i�' enit�� , the eiFht existing r t r bers th.e
association should be included in discussinns for the ri�_?iit --oaf 1 Ttay aeguis t:ton.
` egs.rding t preliminary plat, Kin explained ',I e .,ta1f'f ha dicc the gue3tion
I .
Over the City t s runt to approve a rep'_at of' ic`l.'i'lf [:ro Taxr_ `'ov.Thouses. briefly
with the City 0twn y, a.nd that be has assured the staff
t ae City Iraq a�i;prove a
replat of the common area and two exist i nll vacant ��? and �,,� e 20 ! - that
s t
C„ � :3, � Si al 3 �l.clno :'_i.FG� L "i_, �
a. privately pursued a.awou .t 'r ;y tl,u to ',IhOuce owners ma prever;t the
:filing of such a pl`3-t, hO :`r, he vdv i ,-,ed tlne s l f 'L;Yi<`;.t - the Plann't.n Commis . an
_ •ion d
City Council should not :i.ntervune in thdo civil d 0pute but ,should process the
rel;lat as though there were no d ispn t e t < red sol ely on the requirements of City .
ordinances.
The Plarn_inr; Director continued to di cr, >�� the ?.p };li.cation and reviEwcd the
5 -23 -83 -14-
i,rcpo.lecl ro r "dray real_i gr�ment nd its, affect on buildi ng al,i {-nr, ent i n the proposed
�apidic 't:ion. He pointcd out; that the roadway realigni would not create; a
problem wJ th regard to the pl at prope e d by the applicant. plic ant Iie then reviewed the
site conf Curdai.on, inclu lnC , access _crr En&U, building style, building,
dimenciona, and landscaping.
The Planni Director stated the Planning CormisaWn held a public hearin{=, on the
prelimi plat at i t„ I' "iay 12, 1 9 8 3 meeting and that the Planning Comnissi.on
reco mmended approval of both a "pplieati.onp n bject to conditions which he reviewed
for Council members.
The Director of Planning stated that the notice„ aof this evening's public hearing
had been sent and that the applicant N present this evening.
Councilrrember lhotka expressed a. concern over the density proposed by the
application. The Director of P_ annin €', inspection noted that the entire site is
incl ded when the density figures are cal rul aked . Counci l.m er ler Lnotka commented
that the eiE�rt har in the existinli develorrrent are es sentially on one -half of the
property on the site, and that ti i th the eTplication, 21 hoes will be built on the
rem,a i nd.er. Counci lmember Lhotka then inquired whether - the City should act on the
application even though there- is a le FA dispute with regard to the existing owners
and the ayplicant. ': City i'- ttorne� toted that the application before the
Cou nil is to approve a prelinaina.ry plat and t hat the applicant has met the ordinance
requirements. lie added that the City has responsibility to approve or disapprove a
preliminary plat based on ordinance requirements.
I layer )J u_ist opened the meetin g p� � public for the ?rnose of a hearing lication
g on � Ap p
A. 830'17. He recognized Its. Fetty .Anderson, 6828 Fork Place, who stated that she
purchased her townhouse in 1973 and at that time the project plat showed seven four- -
plexes. She stated that she t1dnks the ei -1at existing owners are u with regard
g s p
et �
to the change in density proposed by the new project, that she did not believe it was
fair to the owners, and that it would devalue their property.
The next sneaker was the resident at 6837 York Place who stated that the lots
proposed by the new project would lower the value of existing units in the
development by creating a higher density. He stated he believed the change was
unfair to the owners.
T
Mayor llyOT recognized Mr. lawrence Flhs, 6831 York Place, who stated that he
felt there were two issues with regard to the project, one being the decrease in the
lot size and one being the realignment of Shingle Creek Parkway. He stated he sees a
problem:- with the density of. the proposed project and that the existing units were well thought out but that lie thinks the new proposal with row houses would contribute
to 'urb dec2y. I,e added that he is concerned that the character of the area will
not be maintained.
The next speaker ins Q. Orion Sanders who introduced herself as the newest owner in
the Earle i'rown Farm Townhouses. She stated that she paid $81 ,000 for her unit and
that she wasn't impressed °with the many available townhouses in Frooklyn Center and
Brooklyn Park_ because of the cheap cons trueti on and high density. She added that
she believe: the row houses will devalue t1w exi ti.nr Emits. The next speaker at
the public: hearing wn 1 s. Irene A er, 019 York Place, who stated that she has
lived for six years in the Earle frown Arm Townhouse Project and that she is
concerned over the promise she was mado -hen she bought -the unit and what is
occurring: now. She nd:iad that; she is concerned over the devaluation of her unit.
5 -23-83 _15_
I :rs- rilley, the next 1 public he;�wing nrd m reuident el' the FroW711
Fnrm Townhouses, n2ked the City Attorney whelher he recommended approvAl of the
application. The City Attorney KnOd tPurt Lim City Council lias a
to approve a preliminary plat if the developer meets the code. T - Pil-ley then
stated that she believ
as ;are the City Council has a responsibility to the huners to-
, surethat the project is develop ed iccordjnCto the oriFinal plan. She also asked
why the association was not notified of the rieht-of-way acquisition.
-iyor Tyquist recopnized Mr. Al 'Seran who introduced 'himself as the attorney
representing the members of the 12arle Frovn Farm Townhouse Association. P-:r. Seran
reviewed the buildinE plans proposed by the applicant and referred to them as
garages with apartments on top. he added that no showinc- has been made that the
ori�7incil plat could not be sold and narketed at aprofit. lie stated that he believes
Er. Sheehy should be present to request the change in the plat.
Dir Seran also stated that he beli evc-s the rsplyttinE can only be done by the courts
and referred to Onnesota statute 50-14, which he stated, .requires the vanAion of
an existing plat by the courts. Be statedhedoes not believe the City Council has
authority to approve a replat and that he be!:,-eves the orijina.-I plat should stand.
He also stated that the association documents for the Iarle Froim Farm Tovinhouses
requires a 3/4 vote to land to a publi c egenc and that 1 r. Sheehy is one
vote short for - the transf, of land. He noted that, altnouc,h the Planning
Commission recommended approval of the application, he would ask that the City
Council deny - the application and require lir. Sheehy to develop the project according
to the original. plat.
The City Attorney commented that the City has no authority to force a deyeloper to
build a project.
Mayor iy(juist recognized the applicant Mr. Rod Bernu who stated that he has a
purchase agreement with IT. Sheehy contingent on the approval of the plat. He
stated that the original concept in 190 resulted in a loss to the developer of
110,000 per unit, I& added that the concept was akyod one for the buyer but not for
the developer. - 11 explained that It. Sheehy had asked him to buy the property and
replat it and emphasized that the 1973 concept for the tc)wrtihouse project did not
sell.
Fr- Seran asked the applicant what the price range of the proposed units would be.
At. Pernu replied that the price ranEe was in the mid 60's.
Councilmember Theis inquired of the City Attorney vAiether any regulation exists to
recuire- the same density i n the in 1,ilE on pi plat. The City 1
stated that the zoninr ordinance determines the donsity and that order the new
proposal the developer would beat the roxinno density for the parcel. Be added
that he does not believe any leapt lst,.n(_Jard exists to require that the density tae the
same as for the original plat. lie stoted thwt it is his view that the portion of the
property proposed for the re plat and owned by Mr. Sheehy, ailorqll' �,.;ith lot Yo. 29,
which is owned by the a.ssoc iati on, re, in a situation where both the assoclLation
members and rr. Sheehy must sign the plat to file it with the County. he also
pointc, out that if any land is to be conv(-eyed to the City it must be praed by the 21
owners and that he believes there tire problems) for 1,r. 'She(_ and ilr . _Pernu. th, must
be resolved by negotiation between 11r. Sheehy, 4r. Fernu, and the Four
Association.
5-23-83
T" ayor I yqui rt inquired if there was <.nyone else who wi -shed to speak at the public
he,;.ri np. l'o one appeared to ue a-' ' e, untc-�rtained a motion to close the public
hea.r7 nr.
There ti <as a motion by Councilmember Mott and seconded by Ceuncilmerrber Lhotka to
close the public hear in{ on Flannin Cow i si_on Application Yo. 81017. Voting in
favor: Payer hyqu.i_st, Councilmembers Thoth a, Scott, K a7wes, and Theis. Voting
against: none. The motion passed unanirously.
There was a motion by Councilmember Ihotka and seconded by Councilmernber Theis to
deny Application Ito. 8 017 due to the fact that the intense density on 51� of the
property could not be justified by using the entire property for the density
calculation.
The City Attorney advised the Council if the plat meets the code requirements the
City Council would have no discretion not to approve the plat. Er. Seran stated
that he does not believe the City Attorney's coEments apply to this replat.
Upon a vote being taken on the motion, the following voted in favor: Councilmembers
Lhotka, and hawes. Voting against: Layer lyquist, Councilmembers Scott, and
Theis. The motion failed.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Theis to
approve Application Teo. 0017 sub to the following conditions:
1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the
City Engineer.
2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15
of the City Ordinances.
3. The final plat shall_ be filed at the County prior to the
issuance of building permits-
4. Homeowners' Association documents, declarations, articles,
and bylaws shall be approved by the City Attorney prior
to final plat approval.
Voting in favor: Kyor ITyquist, Councilirembers Scott, and Theis. Voting against:
Councilmembers Ihotka, and Hawes. The motion passed.
There was a motion by Courcilmember Theis and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
approve Application No. 85010 subject to the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the
Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior
to the issuance of permits.
2. Grad=ing, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject
to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the
issuance of permits.
3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial
5 -23 -83 -17-
punrnntee (in an nmount to be determined by the City
hAwlyr) Wall be , -)ubmJAtcd prior to the issuance of
per nito to nssufo corldetion of npproved site Rprove-
ments in the nreaof tow coDstruction.
Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop
mechanical equipment shall be appropciately screened
from view.
5. Plan approval is exclusive of all si6nery which is
subject to Charter 14 of the City Ordinances.
6. 1612 curb and putter shall be provided around all
parking and driving areas.
7. The building plans shall be certified by a registered
Minnesota architect prior to the issuance of building
permits.
The landscape plan rhall be revised to provide landscape
screening to the west of the guest parking stalls, north
of the five unit building.
Voting in favor: 1'ayor Yyq Counciliriembers Scott, and Theis. Voting against:
CouncilneEbers Thotka, and Fawes. The motion passed.
OADALIEG LICINSE APPLICATION FBON ST. AMEGNSUS FIE 'S CLUB
7 G i 0 1 �-7C- Tr c - - 1 j k deb Scott to
r , 'Y cj -c-
fr
Vin 8) cut - , h T,�A' a and seconded
approve the clans B garbling licoze, - St Alrho 1 's Club Voting in favor:
Eayor n e tubers Thotka, Scott, Rawes, and Theis. Voting against:
, - �c
none. The notion pa soed ynanimou.sly-
There was a mr)tion by Courc-ilmember Theis and seconded by Counclimember Lhotka to
pq
- D-o-ve th e - u - ��J-ve r of the �� 0, OCX' , f i d el i ty bond A r th e A a3 o if gantl i ng 1 i c ens e for
tit 1 1 1:,)h c; rs i, -s gl e n I s Club. V o ti i n f av ar IT 4ay c i �rqu i t Cour c i I mi -2, 1,e r s Lh o t k a
Scott, hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The notior. 1 - ,insed
ANOMMET
, by CounclInsuber Scott and seconded by Councilmenter A= to
was
gad turn the meeting. Voting in favor: Kayor 11quist, Count liquabera Mtka,
Scott, Men, ard. Voting aEainot: hone. The motion �.jnonirously-
The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
Cier I 'Iyor
5-23-33
BROOKLYN CENTER
1983 Board of L-qualization.
(June 13, 1983 Continued Meeting)
Case No.
2 ) John Lescault 3507 - 62nd Avenue North
PID# 34- 119 -21 -43 -0036
1983 EMV - 57,300
Recommendation - Adjust 1983 Market Value to $54,200.
kwtfteff
3A) Texas Air Corporation Vacant Land
PID;` 02- 118 -21 -I1 -0001
1983 EMV - °$576,100
Recommendation - No change in value.
4A) Texas Air Corporation Vacant Land
PID# 02- 118 -21 -11 -0006
1983 EMU - $429,500
Recommendation - No change in value.
5A) Plitt Theaters, Incorporated 2501 County Road 10
PID,# 02- 118 -21 -24 -0013
1983 EMV - $716,000
Recommendation - Adjust 1983 Market Value to $707,900 which is
the same as the 1982 Market Value.
6A) Gabbert and Gabbert Company Westbrook Mall
PID# 03- 118 -21 -14 -0022
1983 EMV - $2,908,200
Recommendation - Adjust 1983 Market Value to $2,839,900, the
same as the 1982 Market Value.
7A) The Prudential Insurance Company 6820 Shingle Creek Parkway
PIN 35- 119 -21 -12 -0002
1983 EMV - $2,664,200
Recommendation - Adjust 1983 EHIV to $2,51 as a result of
an analysis of the income and expense statement.
8A) The Prudential Insurance Company 6840 Shingle Creek Parkway
p y y
PID# 35- 119 -21 -21 -0003
1983 UMV - $2,024,900
Recommendation - Adjust 1983 Et1V to $1,914,700 as a result of
an analysis of the income and expense statement.
9A) Raymond G. & Agnes L. Janssen 4 Plex - 142.5 - 55th Avenue North
PID# 01- 118 -21 -33 -0072
1983 EMV - $126,700
Recommendation - Adjust 1933 Market Value to $118,000 due to
excessive expense items due to water problems.
1983 Board of Equalization (Continued) Paqe 2
10A)- R. Z. Z_ych & J. F. Fahrenhoiz 4 Plex - 620 - 53rd Avenue North
PID# 01- 118 -21 -43 -0073
1983 EMV - $141,200
Recommendation - Adjust 1983'Market Value to $115,200 due to
analysis of 1982 income and expense statement.
11A) Dale M. Stone 4 Plex - 5500 Bryant Avenue North
PID# 01- 118 -21 -31 -0061
1983 EMV - $172,200
Recommendation - Adjust 1983 Market Value to $155,000 due to
recent purchase agreement and analysis of income data.
12A) William F. & Bonnie L. Shutte - & 4 -4 Plexes
Nelson S. Gregg Company
PID# 35- 119 -21 -11 -0007 - 6719 Humboldt - 83 EMV $126,700
PID# 35- 119 -21 -11 -0008 - 6721 Humboldt - 83 EMV $126,700
PID# 35- 119 -21 -11 -0009 - 6715 Humboldt - .83 EMV $126,700
PID# 35- 11.9 -21 -11 -0010 - 6717 Humboldt - 83 EMV $126,700
Recommendation - Adjust 1983 Market Value on each parcel to $120,000
due to analysis of submitted income and expense
statements.
1B) H. E. Eklund 5712 Irving Avenue North
PID# 02- 118 -21 -14 -0076
1983 EMV - $53,200
Recommendation - No change in value. Petitioner called 6/7/83 and
requested that their appointment for review be
cancelled and appeal terminated.
2B) Barbara J. Schopf 4201 Lakeside, #113
PID,'.# 10- 118 -21 -32 --0085
1983 EMV - $49,400
Recommendation - Adjust 1983 Market Value to $46,400 due to removal
of 75% of benefit of lakeside view.
3B) Richard & E. Diane Curylo 7243 North Willow Lane
PID# 25- 119 -21 -41 -0038
1983 EMV - $95,200
Recommendation - Adjust 1983 Market Value to $88,400 due to building
classification change.
T0: Peter Koole, City Assessor
FROM: Jim Grube, Assistant City Engineer 5z;-04—
DATE: June 7, 1983
RE: Estimated costs for potential connection of the property at 3507 62nd
Avenue North (P.I.N. 34- 119 -21 -43 -0036) to the municipal water supply
system
It is feasible to connect the subject property to the municipal water supply
system. The cost of extending a service from the water main in the street
to the property line has been estimated at $1,830.00, which includes permit
fees and meter cost but does not include the cost of running pipe from the
property line into the building. In addition, since the parcel has not been
assessed for water main improvements, a connection charge of $1,780.00 would be
required if connection were sought during 1983. The connection charge is adjusted
annually and would be determined at the time a permit to connect is applied for.
It has been reduced to allow for the circumstance that service is not available
at the property line.
To summarize, the cost to connect this property'to the municipal water supply
in 1983, excluding construction costs on private property, is estimated to be
$3,610.00.
cc: Tim Bezdek Special Assessment Clerk
p r
JNG: jn
e
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and d Inspection
FROM: Gary Shallcross, Planning Assistant
DATE June 8, 1983
SUBJECT: Performance Guarantee
The following performance guarantee is recommended for reduction:
1. Car-IN. Muffler Shop
6810 Brooklyn Blvd.
Planning Commission Application No. 81023
Amount of Guarantee: $15,000.00 bond
Obligor - York Development
Paving, . landscaping and utilities have been installed in accordance with
approved plan. Permanent B612 concrete curb has not been installed along
south edge of parking lot in anticipation of some accessory development
on the southern portion of the property. Recommend reduction of bond
amount from $15,000 to $5,000 with a new bond submitted by the property
owner.
Approved
Ronald-A. Warren Director rector of Planning nd Inspection
g ec P
t on
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT 1983 -G
( BROOKDALE TRAILWAY IMPROVEM PROJECT NO. 1983 -08)
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for Improvement Project
No. 1983 -08, bids were received, opened, and tabulated by the City Clerk and
City Engineer, on the 9th day of June, 1983. Said bids were as follows:
Bidder Bid Amount
Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. $ 32,691.50
Concrete Curb Company 35,159.75*
Standard Sidewalk, Inc. 36,529.25
Halvorson Construction Company 38,95 1.50
Edward Watson Construction Co., Inc. 40,752.50
Victor Carlson & Sons, Inc. 44,653.75
*Denotes Engineer's correction upon extension of unit prices.
WHEREAS, it appears that Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. of Osseo,
Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota:
1. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to
enter into the attached contract, in the amount of $32,691.50 with
Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. of Osseo, Minnesota in the name
of the City of Brooklyn Center, for Improvement Project No. 1983 -08
according to the plans and specifications therefor approved by the
City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith
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. 1.983 -08 is hereby
amended from $53,130.00 to $35,960.66. The estimated cost is
comprised of the following:
As Ordered As Bid
Contract $ 48,300.00 $ 32,691.50
Engineering 4,350.00 2,942.24
Administrative 480.00 326.92
TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $ 53,130.00 $ 35,960.66
RESOLUTION NO.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
CITY
OF 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
R T '` BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430
TELE=PHONE 561 -5440
E l 5 EMERGENCY— POLICE —FIRE
�.' 911
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of P u b l i c hlorks
DATE: June 10, 1983
RE: Consideration of Bids Received for Contract 1983 -G
(Brookdale Trailway Improvement Project No. 1983 -08)
Bids were received on June 9, 1983 for the referenced trailway project through
Brookdale Center. Upon review of the bids, it has been determined that the
proposal of Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. represents the lowest responsible
bid. 'The Contractor has acceptably completed a number of construction contracts
for the City within the last three years; therefore, the staff recommends the
City accept their bid. A resolution for this purpose is provided for consider-
ation by the City Council.
Respectfully submitted.
A
SK:jn
-
��.�
tE Saauc'F'siorf 7Woze
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
e � RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION APPROVING PIAN:, AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ORDERING
ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS, 51ST AVENUE NORTH WATER MAIN ITiPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. 1982 -07
WHEREAS, pursuant. to Resolution No. 82 -118 adopted by the Council on
the 28th day of June, 1982, the City Engineer prepared plans and specifications
for Improvement Project No. 1982 -07 and has presented such plans and specifica-
tions 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:
51ST AVENUE NORTH WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -07
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least
once 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.sai.d
bids will be received by the City Clerk until 11:00 A.M. on
June 27, 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 June 27, 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 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:
t whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Member introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTIO ADOPTING RECOR R ETE NTI ON SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, M.S. 1,38.163 reads as follows:
"It is the policy of the legislature that the disposal and
preservation of public records be controlled exclusively by
Chapter 138 and by Laws 1971, Chapter 529, thus, no prior,
special or general statute shall be construed to authorize
or prevent the disposal of public records at a time or in a
manner different than prescribed by such chapter or by Laws
1971, Chapter 529 and no general or special statute enacted
subsequent to Laws 1971, Chapter 529 shall be construed to
authorize or prevent the disposal of public records at a time
or in a manner different than prescribed in this chapter or
in Laws 1971, Chapter 529 unless it expressly exempts such
records from the provisions of such chapter and Laws 1971,
Chapter 529 by special reference to this section. "; and
WHEREAS the Minnesota Clerks and Finance Officers have developed
a standard records retention schedule for records common to most Minnesota
municipalities which has been approved by the Minnesota Department of Administra-
tion, the Minnesota Historical Society, the Minnesota State Auditor and the
Minnesota Attorney General; and
WHEREAS, the classification of records as herein described are
- included in the above mentioned Records Retention Schedule;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, as follows:
1. The Records Retention Schedule developed by the Minnesota
Clerks and Finance Officers as attached hereto is hereby
approved and made part of this resolution.
2. The Records Retention Schedule developed by the Brooklyn
Center Police Department and approved by the Minnesota
Historical Society on July 14, 1981, shall control the
retention of specified police department records and shall
supersede the retention schedule in paragraph 1 above.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be submitted
to the Minnesota Historical Society.
Date T Chairman
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: Tom Bublitz, Administrative Assistant
DATE: May 24, 1983
SUBJECT Preservation and Disposal of Public Records
Minnesota Statutes 138.17 governs the disposition-of virtually all records of
state and local governmental units in Minnesota, except the Supreme Court and
the University of Minnesota. The Attorney General, Legislative Auditor and
Director of the Minnesota State Historical Society, collectively referred to
as the Records Disposition Panel, have the power to direct the destruction,
the sale for salvage, or the disposition by gift to the Minnesota Historical
Society, of public records.
The Minnesota Historical Society provides forms on which to apply for the
disposition of governmental records and the m be obtained from the Division
P g Y Y
of Archives and Manuscripts. To avoid the periodic request to dispose of
records necessitated by the form, municipalities can consider adopting a records
retention schedule. The records retention schedule in use in Minnesota cities
was developed by the Minnesota Clerks and Finance Officers and has been approved
by the State Historical Society. An approved schedule permits the regular
. disposition of certain types of records without completing an "Application to
Dispose of Public Records" (PR -1 form).
After the record retention schedule is adopted it is then the municipality
responsibility to destroy the records if destruction is authorized under the
schedule. The schedule is quite detailed and covers virtually every category
of municipal record. The schedule stipulates the length of time the records
must be retained and also indicates if the record is permanent. Permanent
records cannot be destroyed and must be retained in some form either by main-
taining the original or producing a microfilm copy.
Microfilming of records does not automatically permit destruction of the originals.
Permission from the Division of Archives and Manuscripts is required before the
originals of microfilmed records can be destroyed. If the records to be filmed
are designated permanent and archival the file must meet technical standards
established by the Division of Archives and Manuscripts. The film must be tested
by the Division of Archives and Manuscripts before any permission to destroy the
originals will be granted.
For those records destroyed no specific method of destruction is prescribed and
local ordinance may dictate what procedures must be followed. The Historical
Society encourages recycling or incineration.
Records havin g permanent historical or. archival value will no t be authorized
for
disposal. These records may be transferred into the State Archives for permanent
preservation. Staff members from the Historical Society are available to consult
with municipalities about which records may be transferred to the archives.
Additionally, no records may be transferred to any local historical society,
-2- .
public library, museum or other agency without written permission of the State
Archivist.
No destruction of any municipal records may occur according to this schedule
until the Division of Archives and Manuscripts of the Minnesota Historical
Society has received a certified copy of the City Council resolution indicating
that the City has officially adopted this schedule.
Materials listed as permanent but not listed as eligible for transfer to the
State Archives cannot be destroyed without receiving approval of an amended
schedule or of an application for authority to dispose of records (PR -1 forms).
For all records destroyed according to the retention schedule the municipality
must submit an annual report to the State Archivist listing the types and
quantities of records destroyed.
The storage area for public records is filled to capacity and the need for the
selective disposal of records is evident to anyone working in this area. A good
deal of these existing records could be destroyed under the retention schedule.
Many of these records serve no prupose with regard to administrative use or
historical value.
•I would recommend that the Minnesota Records Retention Schedule developed by
the Municipal Clerks and Finance Officers and approved by the State Historical
Society be approved by a resolution of the City Council. The Brooklyn Center
Police Department has already received approval of a records retention schedule
pertaining to their records. I would recommend the Police Department's record
retention schedule be substituted for the portion of the master schedule dealing
with police records.
After the record retention schedule is adopted many of the existing records in
the store room could be purged. Additionally, the City could receive $40 per
ton for the paper if the records are recycled.
Member_ introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption:
E RI:SOLUT.T._O`d NO. _
RESOLUTION.EXP1 SSING R1:COGNITTON OF AN) APPILCIATION FOR TI1E
i
DEDICTT 'D 'Ut L iC c I :V.ICL OF 111E VOLUNTI ER MEDiATORS OF THE
BROOKLYN C ENTER 14EDI PRO
WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Mediation Project has been established
in the City of Brooklyn Center to provide alternatives for resolving disputes
occurring within the community; and
WHEREAS, the project is sponsored by the Mediation Center, a non -
profit corporation which provides professional mediation services; and
WHEREAS, the Mediation Project combines the skills of professional
and volunteer mediators to promote the resolution of conflicts and disputes
and has received support from numerous community organizations, including the
Community Partnership Task Force; and
WHEREAS, volunteers from the Mediation Project have been recruited
from the Brooklyn Center community and have undergone extensive training to
develop mediation skills; and
WHEREAS, Y
the volunteer mediators have devoted man hours of their
personal time to training and the development of the Mediation Project in
Brooklyn Center; and
WHEREAS, it is highly appropriate that the public service and dedication
of the volunteer mediators of the Brooklyn Center Mediation Project should be
recognized and expressed.
NOGG', THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the volunteer mediators of the Brooklyn Center
Mediation Project are hereby commended for their efforts in the development
of the Mediation Project in Brooklyn Center.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member and upon vote being taken thereon, the
following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
-. _ ': � * f�. w.,"`. '`c«.....•r� «.G.,�,....±+.�k• �s3, tax� .wa+,u- ro�1..a�.+tw:•x�iaaf' sag .�`','�.!'a'F.'w,.sm,.�+�*.✓ �,_.�.�..;+z... aa,.., ..,s„....r, ...
+
s r o u � p s ucm, C o s
prob
r, s a roblem. S Knapp l:u,es. The third stage in impr oving Several re,, opts who live in the said a meeting was held with neigh- rain,,s Kna Said z€ � .Id lr
c s4 ,t '7 3.:..0 iAF i(�N funding t p Y . p.
V r rc , c public wort s said 4,e best li e traffic flaw will be to widrn the area of Lyndzile between 5'.rd and 57i i txyrs April 26 aft lrive�s s ecilr off Both Ru' t
B, er l uld and c Lil
_a,t rc J �. o freeways dire nor r of pu
& ?, i, rtcr, tl A clo in l4.<g ..:.,e souut on would IM' the new Mi ssissippi River bridge and the were concerne w: sp �inbr s Higtzway 100 onto 59th failing to stop who `.ive on N. Lilac Drive, wa t the
Rr Jki% g
t' epee on ll >hwa irtt. ch3;tte at lane. TTe said rvTz DtYI rtiilroad >ridge. That will after Iverson, ore of the
c. th, f L t o..d k y I 19'6• A third lane is needed, ' La z concerned ahcuY the safely of cicitdsen at the sif n on Atybr tt and 50th. :Ie said inters ° an; e l ft as i ?. k 2S ;'. d s<. ,oral
1, d} , ; e d p e1 rn along is G rraig bock Br. ^.14 yn B to to cress the street. `Z? ire is there had been tyro personal injury others who s r..ke.
L ,,:1..:+ �- . h,er': a•,:.. u and 7rth were T.rrs :plan County and. added, "We said, it d stat ons would additional nothing to slow down drivers except accidents, on 50th in to years and other
t dr , ;ir.J by ta at the Highway NO entrance ramp, the s
x want to get as march v out of the .peter p, . � '
i : c , v e e z: before Yl iL n` ark." 1 3p sign at 49tb. There is a complaints were car c' :wing on R,cF tr l * +i rim v -s c , e fet �';of
Ce of
=.r acai: - A S�a.t, as t a dr'}tt ¢.r *' " Lry r.T i I�: i C.
x��ek. � uhing3e Creek entrance ramp and the natural tendency �o speed as drivers lawns. �`
a down the kill," Iverson said.
tr ng :o `
as r
D sci :sing TTighway 252 betwc n I- Eruoklyn Blvd. entrance ramp to I- g id pet,- Bates, who lives in the area '52 at the czr�ssv n o rs. r.s
t! ;r eetitu; were two i}4 ar, l a8t lave. N., r ziapp so ;d some 6`ll.
Rf=.• t y rg mark n will be inst,lc.l to Jim Lindsay, Brooklyn Center sand h i circtilated 3 petition after the s zia cl iveze t a a rm> n he
rr.:::e ,:t,yca from the .,•.,ne.,c to l .vt
n on vin short -term improvements. S'+'iLBi1I2. a Brooklyn (inter pollee chief, said that 7l riots checked city h; d a mr °etiztg w ish neighbors, Gy cros w ,ik s , a ^d �.�. TteG : vera
L t r at , - , p or to pr
scstar•t resident, pointed out another for spE�d during 5 3'.l and fi:30 p,rn. at find out ne g tborhood react to the entice did not Stop. : r - t.� Y_gq ohl, Ia, going south or. Highway 252. that location avc. agcy 33 miles per pz ulnb;eel closing, FZtes Sad 1:s2
fie s.e =�r, _xnd D c Yc trling the problems wit p? l
„ ate r VJilhur said, 'Wh i3; l
en traffic is backed tour and an a Friday iii ht, the p o3le said allay would Tile the in- L rn a said c r e rLe : cd
l °;, n:,; ,a,,,. , c.,t cerl �Zr, traf c ,tin to e«stbn „d T,> .owe
A. t a ,. e . -. sippi Rivet, ou i- said traffic Wi on the ramp, it creates a vtsityiity average, of 94 cars was 32.7 miles per .rchange to sea.; a zt e, said they for there w a <;.
-„ r an tree ed since 194 c, red problem for traffic corning off the exit hoaz. Revidutts were told the state wou':d like to incoming traffic ,t.., r: f. ,ca r.,.on r., .r n. l
...,, , -) L;, r roan;. 'The loop is dart emus." Lau cot mirsioner of highways has a traffic prohibited, tut the exit left Pflit E`J1li N, ct, t, - :e.
o, •a c..e :za ,- „ln t: "a.,h ..,roel.rym. ,..erike,r. tic, are t -
: �t?m Ye, adder; tl:. P,.nDE is n'ill be working on regttr st on his d : :.k to reduce tt':e ore..; four said the y Goo :,rd prefer the Bro 1 n t r T a �� . - -Y
id oar o. .fa c r g the metcnng, sy ti spe limit fro:: 35 to 30 mikes per exit and entrance clo:;ed. Corer ;tt c, n n,c t ne
e t e t r , - for a'i�.. t 'o cars to get G.ito the v ay signing and further metering thee. rr .re
ramp. He said with each b ER RESIDENTS cased the
ht as we are c ..g ur:
r r a
nv * ^;t be to w i h c Ave. and the fro way. A Discussing northbound ' -91 traffic OTlI Kr1pp estiaratcd ,lvo to 1,200 cars car m � o u. c e 2 The
a t ^tr? in�il¢ roam: faster metering rate should reduce exiting to ^westbound 1 -694, and street "adragstrap" and were worried alternative in
Center or �e•° s or
:e:'.t p
an.c rr( ify s g %a� time. the que time, bu not th length of the c cross over a use the a
h ngle 'reek who live sinetheoretarded hop
e e on would be to move traffic down N. inquiries r0 ting to traffic s ety,
quo” he added. Clue Drive and construct a new c iic Gerayn Bak adman amen
EY137F SAl.z fmini)CT has been Parkway exit, Eyler suggest d in - Lyndale.
park a` ut an Lau said next February acts stalling signs iadicatir:g the crossover Sliouad the 50th be closed? Knapp c onnecti on ti the existing B hand Pahc S Depa E Y +a n C atom
at 'mane and 1-594, but will be let to widen the ramp to two is prohibit3d daring peak hours. IIz�zw y
A.: .
...,. -.. . xa
GC;G townhouse ntti f:iiGR tSrUf$je C ., .R•- ,_...,.,
� � r• ° { Y 6�`ii n.� te a' � P . ° ••E4'.f/ �.�i e ': G. '•: , '� � r • f ^ + v� a rs o �
By MARtY JANE GUSTAFSON � funding is a problem. Sy Knapp, lanes. "The third stage in improving See f L ndale between a3rd and th bo d Apnl� after i resi�3ents necc�:;a �ta w de �N wL-"a t r ' be
ral residents who live in the B,.t k,r t>effic control on freeways director of public works, said the best the traffic Pow will be to widen the areao y
f n ° c Ccnt r the closing lone rans;e solution would be the new Mississippi River bridge and the were concerned with speeding, Glenn complained abrvat drivers speeding of Both D �uct and s u ' d,
g
i >. y nr , ;,'e at Z<ai;e. He said "InDOT railroad bride. That wit' b e after Iverson, one t the residents, is High loo onto t trth failing to stop wha Ixve ;n l L c i e s r :�
{ d .nt. an , x. or. H ighwa y a rr. cr r
spew' g along � turning c Brooklyn, . 31 vd. to 19._a. A th ir, hire is ne:,cled," l,au concerned ah�ut the safety of children at the sign on Abbott and 50th. He said inter c .ix.ge l eft a xt is H. . =id *c. .•. a.
r • r.r r eii n 73, d and 57<z: were llen..rpi , County and. adder , „ tide sa;d, and added additional ramp trying to crosst drivers except accidents on
5oth in 10 ye s and other
injury auhers w,ut s,�>,...
t',n itt, discus�eid by the want to get as much work out of the metering 6tatiozs would be nce ram d the stop i at 49th. Tbere is a complaints were cars driving on Richard Morris w .w � th
cc, - +,�� Center ' iraffic Advisory stateasv ,vecanbeforetheturnback." at the Highway 1W entry p, another rcrol a � of
B oo . v ee last week. Shingle Creek entrance ramp and the natural tendency to speed as drivers lawns. t p t 1-1. a
Dsscus�ir� Highway 252 between I- Broaklyn I31vd. entrance ram to I- go down the hill, Iverson said. pexac un try; w Y
p Pets Bates, who lives in the area, 252 at the csw •,.{ on z Ix. ^is
tl e M(N -ting were two €rl and ax.th Ave. iV. ,n..I p said some fi34. r i the
t Je.> * rn the lM!, .e ,uta 1,av ,g markings will he install " -A to
Jim Lindsay, Brooklyn Center said he cir ula`ed a I e ition alter the said dH x *'S puy r
on
p sh : ;rt -t rm im ruvearxents. 6 0 ° -3 " -LI Ulf, s Brooklyn Center police chief, said that 71 cars checked city held a meeting with reighbor s, to cro � I r any
O , rnnS exit_ pd' J de kj ,
i;er. Eyler, s,.,.stant resident, pointed out another for speed curing 5:30 and 6:30 p.m. at find oa. +t Pell zi xtrhoal reaeticn W the pullet did :lot stvi .
>er an:i Did R ga ding the Problems with I -94 problem, eoi=.:g south on Highway 252. that location averaged 33 miles per proposed closing. Bales said 132
is -
„ a Wilhur aid, "When traffic is backed hour and on a Friday night, the people said they would like the in- bird } sa o v } C'
i
tr of 4 r to tt cili I 6 over
tt.,.. �� :. i ;i Hive., i.au said traffic up on the ra *r_� it creates a vis t,iity average of cars was 32.7 miles per trrcrange to stay as it is; 1S said they for vzol� =s, h� w r
- - n. rob!cr *i £e +r tr cor : :% g o f the exit hour. R�idcnts were told the state would like. to see ircornir,g traffic .
. tr -' —fi .c ...._aloe on h. e �. �, since I , 1 own d p - highways has a traffic: prohi 'ted, but the exit 'eft V's it i�; r � )
^. aa6 t! , ; , �•. u� a 'n t ;liter . ' }; � are i a % T}.e lc< , C.; rr s." Lau co unissiorer of b e er Lhe
+- y ,.,t on his de k to reduce the o en; four said they would s � -. � "'. ue T 11 1
T w, it , e vror : :m =, on p
: of tlr• c� + �ti, the raet urs , system to aduc, tr At Ni+ l speed P
„o r,ght turn for al!o+, two cars to stet onto the freeway signing and further met
there. speed limit from 35 to 30 miles per exit and entrance cicsed. 1 C 'r - .
l - e ramp. He said wsth each light as we are doing on
hour. . back uri s e
1 , r,
Discussing V northbound I -94 traffic OTHER RESIDENTS called the Knapp estimated 1,100 to 1,200 cars corm tte to discuss . S n Th
t ft
i : +n mi lii be to Cen ral Ave. and the freeway. A >
vt.., :: e i €t,:4 ens t s he rata fasur metering rate should reduce exiting to westbound I 094, and street
' "a dragstrip" and wowed five to cl tPe interchanve Cen zr aty c nv�c ., { t t ( ,r. s ,r
p pr oblems with drivers at to about the safety of the young people
ar_ _). .y ,_. e1 time. Elie r =1e time, l ut not the length of the c
-- �i�, ' he added. cr°%�ss over and we the Shin Creek who live in the retarded Name an would be to move traffic down N. irxqu cis r� � to z e y,
Parkway exit, Eyler suggested in- Lyndala. Lilac Drive and constrilet a new con x tact Gera'y Bak dr.: t
6 v =il MaDOT has been Y Y
ti to sra>e� a4n park about an Lau said next February contracts stalling signs indicating the crossover Should the exit and entrance Knapp p on connection e existing inB change Police Dcp«rtmtnt, }'e,
interchange at Zane and 1-694, but will be let to widen the ramp to two is prohibited during peak hours. Highway 100 at 50th be clamed.
P
u'lu ..�YJ rt;tOUSe ^,{iV15 {Ori of i3rye Y >, �•..__. ,.
C17NTER TRAFFIC SAFETY ADVTSOPY COMMITT7ii
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING STAFF RECOMMRNOATJONS ON TRAFFIC MATTERS IN THE
AREA OF 171 1_:J(jT_k h A_v F:1'�Ti
WHEREAS, complaints from local Asidents related to the safety of
the area of T.H. 100 at 50th Avenue North have been brought to the
attention of City Administrative sLaff over the past several years; and
WHEREAS, this matter was first presented to and discussed by the
Traffic Safety Advisory Committee on February 24, 1983; and
WHEREAS, City staff held a neighborhood meeting on April 26, 1983
with residents of the T.H.100, Brooklyn Boulevard Ond 50th Avenue North
area to discuss traffic problems and the staff proposal to close the
connection at T.H. 100 and 50th Avenue North, along with adding an inter-
change at North Lilac Drive and Brooklyn Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, the Traffic Safety Advisory-Committee conducted a public
hearing on May 5, 1983 on this issue, receiving a petition from residents
of the area; and
WHEREAS, City staff has recommended in a memorandum that the exist-
ing T.H. 100 - 50M Avenue connection be left "as is", that the City
request MNDOT to review the feasibility of downgrading the existing
signage along northbound T.H. 100, so as to de-emphasize the 50th Avenue
exit, and that the City proceed to develop plans for future development
of the proposed new Lilac Drive connection to Brooklyn Boulevard,
opposite the southerly ramps of the T.H. 100 Brooklyn Boulevard inter-
change.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Traffic Safety Advisory Com-
mittee of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that:
1. The Traffic Safety - Advisory Committee concurs s-with the
recommendations in the memorandum from City staff.
2. The resolution findings should be forwarded on to the
City Council with supporting information.
DATE / ASA(2 CHATI 'AN
ATTEST:
tyunDING SECRETARY
x CITY
OF •6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY
d
BROOKLYN CENTER MINNESOTA 5543P
TELEPHONE 561 -5440
rP T EMERGENCY- POLICE - -FIRE
�
A 16
911
TO: Phil Cohen, Chairman
Traffic Safety Advisory Committee
FROM: Sy Knapp, Director Of Public works
DATE: May 27, 1983
RE: T.H. 100 -- 50th Avenue Connection and Lilac Drive -
Brooklyn Boulevard Connection.
Please be advised that the public input received at the April 26th neighborhood
informational meeting and at the May 5th TSAC meeting has been reviewed by the
administrative staff and that we submit the following recommendations for your
consideration:
I. That the existing T.H. 100. = 50th Avenue connection
be left "as is ".
2. That the City request MNDOT to review the feasability of
downgrading the existing signage along northbound T.H. 100,
so as to de- emphasize the 50th Avenue exit; and
3. That the City proceed to develop.-plans for future development
of the proposed new Lilac Drive connection to Brooklyn
Boulevard, opposite the southerly ramps of the T.H. 100 -
Brooklyn Boulevard interchange.
These recommendations are submitted in consideration of the fact that, while a
number of citizens along 50th Avenue continue to be concerned about the traffic
safety problems caused by traffic short cutting through the neighborhood via
50th Avenue, it is apparent that the loss of direct access to T.H. 100 is not
an acceptable trade -off for the majority of the residents. At the same time,
the recommendation to down grade the signage (as suggested by some of the
residents at the meetings) may have some effect in reducing the volume of thru
traffic using 50th Avenue. And finally, the development of a new connection
from hilac Drive to Brooklyn Boulevard will improve access to Brooklyn Boulevard.
Vie request that TSAC review these matters and submit your recommendations to the
City Council.
JO RCSPectlUl"Y submitted,
X ° a
Sy An "i! Director Of Public works
SK: E's
�tesnber introduced the following resolution and roved its
adoption:
RFSULUTION NO.
RESOLUCIOTI REC.1=NG THE DISPOSITION OF PUA�RUNG COPITUSSION
APPLICATION NU. 83021, A REQUEST I A SPECIZ\L USE PERP2IT
FOR A BOARD AMID CARE FACILITY AT 4408 69 TH AVENUE NOR`T'
WHEREAS, the applicant, Diane Wright has requested, under Planning
Commission Application No. 83021, a special use permit to operate a board and
care home for mentally ill adults in a four unit apartment building located at
4408 69th Avenue North within the City of Brooklyn Center; and
W11EREAS, extensive public hearings were held on this application before
the Planning Commissicnand before the City Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the information gathered at these meetings,
and upon caritten documents received from the applicant, from the City staff,.and
other interested persons, the City Council makes the following findings:
1. The property in question is a lot which is substandard in size,
consisting of approximately 9,400 square feet and containing an
apartment building with four two bedroom units, parking for six
automobiles, and approximately 2,600 square feet of recreation
area in the front yard.
2. The applicant's plan is to house 18 to 20 mentally ill persons
in the apartment building and to assign two patients to each
bedroom, to provide for a central kitchen and dining area, and
to convert the reimaimng rooms to offices, a recreation room and
two livi_ngrooms .
3. The prop rty fronts on 69th Avenue North which is a two-lane
heavily traveled county mad carrying.approximately 8,300 vehicles
per day; the property is not served by sidewalks and although it
is served by a bus line on Brooklyn Boulevard, the bus trips per
day are infrequent on 69th Avenue North.
4. The residents of the facility will require between two and four
staff members together with a cook /clerical person during the day
and one staff membar at night, resulting in two to four staff
vehicles on time site together with a van for resident transport- .
ation on the site during t1 daytime hours.
5. The applicant states that the target population %,mould consist of
chronically rmentally ill adults over the age of 21 years with
severe or persistent or en - otional disorders which severely limit
their functioning ca abilities. T'he proposed residents would come
from board and care facilities in the City of Pli.nneapolis, from the
Veteran's Administration Hospital at Fort Snelling and fry the
State Hospital for P•ientally 11.1 persons in Anoka. The objective of
the board and care facility , could be to assess a patient's problms
and needs, to establish goals, to provide counseling and group
therapy with the evea coal of it the patient to a facility
in which they, could oT.�_ n independQ . The patients would
be supervised while at the home, but would be unsupervised off site.
WSOLUTION NO.
Typical off site activities would be going to vocational training
outlets, working in volunteer activities and in sheltered wDrkshops
and for those who are aiiployed, going to.wurk. One of the goals
of the program, is to place these patients in the connnuni.ty where
they have better access to normally functioning lifestyles and can
be closer to their families from whom they can receive visitation,
social support and with whom they can occasionally visit for over
nights. Their transportation would be provided by bus service, by
the van, and to sane extent by automobiles owned by the residents
themselves, together with transportation provided by their families.
6. The Council finds that the proposal provides just enough parking for
staff needs and the van, and that no parking vould be available for
the residents' auto7obiles, for visitors' autombiles, or for service
and delivery vehicles.
7. The Council finds that outdoor recreation facilities at the site are
almost nonexistent due to lack of space and that pedestrian travel
to the nearest park would require the use of 69th Avenue since no
sidewalks exist and that such pedestrian traffic coupled with high
traffic volume on 69th Avenue and lack of parking at the site would
result in unsafe conditions for - the - residents, for people in the
neighborhood, and for the traffic users of 69th Avenue.
8. The Council finds that the plan to convert the building to board and
care for 18 to 20 adults would result in crowding and would not
provide a healthy and comfortable envirornuent for the residents of
the board and care facility.
9. The Council finds that the applicant has not had adequate opportunity
to review with residents of the neighborhood the problems that rmy
arise due to congestion, parking, noise, pedestrian and vehicular
traffic and that neighborhood meetings were proposed by the City
Council and were rejected by both the applicant and the spokesman
for people in the neighborhood.
10. The Council finds that the proposed residents of the building do not
fall within the definition of "mentally retarded or physically handi-
capped persons" contemplated by Minnesota Statute 402.357 sub-
division 8.
11. The Council finds that the proposal for 18 to 20 residents exceeds
the maxim m number for occupancy established by Minnesota Statute
462.357 subdivision 8.
12. The Council finds that the activity and congestion resulting from
the proposed use will diminish the use and enjoyment of the owners
of adjacent property in the immediate vicinity.
13. The Council finds that the proposed site is a nonconforming use in
that there is inadequate parking available on the site and the lot
is substandard in size, and the proposed use �•xvould be zu increase
in intensity and an exparision of such a. nonconforming use.
RESOLUTION 140.
Based on the foregoing findings, the minutes of the Planning CoraTti_ssion,
the written materials submitted, and the comments of all interested citizens;
NOW, T[EREFORE, BE 1T RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center that the special use permit for a board and care facility for mentally ill
persons at 4408 69th Avenue North, comprehended by Planning Commission Application
No. 83021, is hereby denied.
BE IT F=1ER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center
that the City of Brooklyn Center officially recognizes the need for the type of
facility proposed and hereby makes it the policy of the City to encourage such
facilities under conditions and at locations compatible with surrounding neighbor -
hoods and which provide the maximm in healthy environment for the residents of the
facility.
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 / l
FROM: Ronald A. Warren Director of Planning and Inspection
DATE: June 10, 1983
SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Amendments Regarding Manufactured Housing and
the Designation of a Portion of 69th Avenue as a Major Thoroughfare
Two ordinances amending the City's Zoning Ordinance are being offered to the
City Council on June 13, 1983 for first reading.
MANUFACTUR HOUSING
The first ordinance is in response to a 1982 State law amending MS 462.357 sub -
division 1 which provides that, "no regulation may prohibit... manufactured
homes built in conformance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 327.31 through 327.35
that comply with all other Zoning Ordinances promulgated pursuant to this section."
This statute requires amendments to local Zoning Ordinances which contain language
that specifically prohibits manufactured homes (or mobile homes) from locating
in single - residential districts and /or permits them only in certain districts or
in mobile home parks. The law does not prohibit mobile home (manufactured housing)
parks or local ordinances that regulate such parks, but it .does prohibit language
that would force all manufactured homes into such parks. The statute also does
not prohibit Zoning Ordinance rovisions which regulate manufactured housing
P g g
provided they affect similarly conventionally built housing
In our case, the traditionally thought of mobile home was not allowed in Brooklyn
Center due to provisions in our ordinance that prohibited the use of "trailers"
as a residence or dwelling -either temporarily or permanently. "Trailers" were
considered mobile homes brought in on a lot, left on wheels and tied down, without
a permanent foundation. Manufactured homes, prefabed homes, precut homes that
were assembled partially in a factory, however, were allowed provided they were
on permanent foundations and met Building Code requirements.
The proposed ordinance amendment adopts language from the State Statute defining
a manufactured home, deletes prohibitions against using trailers as dwellings
and establishes certain ordinance requirements for all buildings in the RI and
R2 zoning districts. The amendment requires all dwellings to have a permanent
foundation continuously around the dwelling except for accessory uses such as
porches, decks, stairs, etc.
The amendment also requires a minimum width and depth of 18 feet for all new
construction which will be effective with the adoption of the ordinance. This is
primarily to require double -wide mobile homes which would be in keeping with
the vast majority of single - family homes in Brooklyn Center. There are a few
existing homes that would not meet the 18' minimum and we are n ot proposing
that these structures be established as nonconforming, therefore, we have proposed
only new construction be required to meet the minimum width and depth requirements.
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER ! ��
Notice is hereby given that a public: hearing will be held on the 11th day of July,
1983 at I p.m. at the City hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow manufactured housing in the RI and
R2 zoning districts.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY
ORDINANCES TO ALLOW MANUFACTURED HOUSING IN THE
RI A ND R2 ZONING DI STRICTS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 35 -900 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn
Center is hereby amended in the following manner:
S 35 - 900
Dwelling - A building, or portion thereof, designed or used predominantly
for residential occupancy of nature, t including one-famil
dwelling, two - family dwellings and multiple family dwellings, includ
eart - s homes and manu homes; but not including hotels,
motels, commercial boarding or .rooming houses,tourist homes and
[trailers] re creati ona l v suc as tra trailers cam ping trailer
pick -up camper mo tor coac hes, moto h omes and buse
M anufa ctu red home - A s tra in one or more sections,
r n or mo re in w or 40
h in traveling - ode is ei l body fe et _ _
wh t t a mode,
sit
b _d r m ore in length or when erected on , is 320 or
_ o y feet , o __ - -_- o e ----- _ - - _ --
mo re seluare fe and whic is built on a p ermanent ch and designed
t o be us _ a s a dwelling with a Dermanent fou ndation wh c onnected to
required utilities, and in cludes t h -- � lu_m h ating , a ir co
f any) a nd elect s ystems c therein, exce that t he te
incl udes any structure which zrx a the re quirements, a n d w hi c h
ea
brs _ the I IU D seal of c ertili c. at i on of compliance with t Federal
stan dard s a s requ by St ate law.
Section 2. Section 35 -530 of the City Ordinances shall be amended in
the following manner:
S ection 35 - 530. Buildings in RI and R2 Districts.
4. No basement, cellar, garage, tent [trailer] or accessory building
shall at any time be used as a residence or dwelling, temporarily
or permanently.
5. All dwellings shall be on permanent fo w hich . c! «m with
the State. Building Code and which are solid for the complete
circumference of the clwcllin�f� , ekccpt t.l'iataccessory uses such
as screened or enclosed 1 >� c 1 ', callo� es, decks, balco - -�
star etc. may be 1'l_ c c d w a noncF , perman foun dation
as <�pproved� by the luilding Official
01-WINAhCE IVO.
6. The width and the dc!nth of the mai 1-lortion of an d welling ,
built after Julv 23 1983 shall _be ^no less than 18_°
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon
thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of 19
Wkayor i
ATTEST:
Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
( Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted) .
CITY OF i3 R0OKLYN CENTER /
Notice is hereby given that a public 3 caring will be h,:Aci on the 11th day of July,
1983 at _ p.m. at the City Ball, 6301 Shingle Cr.eck Parkway to consider
an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to classify a portion of 69th Avenue North
as a major thoroughfare.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINAi"CE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY
ORDINANCES TO CLASSIFY A PORTION OF 69TH AVENUE
NORTH AS A MAJO THOROUCHFAR
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS
FOT LOVdS:
Section 1. Section 35 -900 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn
Center is hereby amended in the following manner:
T�rC3' CLif;llfaYe , Mayor - For the purpose of this ordinance, mayor thoroughfares
include all state, county, and federal highways (including interstate freeways.
and the following municipal streets:
1. Xerxes Avenue Norte from T. H. 100 to 59th Avenue North
and from F.A.I. to Shingle Creek Parkway
Z. Shingle Creek Parkway from C . T H. 10 to `l G. T. H. 1301
59th Avenu North;
3. France Avenue North from T. H. 100 to 50th Avenue North;
4. Humboldt Avenue North from F. A. 1. 94 to 10th Avenue
North;
5. Freeway Boulevard from Xerxes. Avenue North to Humboldt
Avenue North;
6. 69 Avenu Nor f rom Shin C,;reek Pa to B
Boulev
Section Z. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon
thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of 19 &3.
Mayor
ATTEST: _
Cleerk
Pate of Publication
L£;'ectivt. Date
(Underl indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted) .
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF,
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
STUDY SESSION
MAY 26, 1983
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORD
The Planning Commission met in study session and was called to order by Chairman
George Lucht at 7:40 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Mary Simmons, Nancy Manson,
Carl Sandstrom and Donald Versteeg. Also present were Director of Planning and
Inspection Ronald Warren and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross. The Secretary
noted that Commissioner Ainas had called to say that he would be unable to attend
this evening's meeting because he was leaving town on a business trip.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 12, 1983
Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to approve the
minutes of the May 12, 1983 Planning Commission meeting as submitted. Voting in
favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Simmons, Sandstrom and Versteeg.
Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Manson.
DISCUSSION ITEMS
Man ufactured Housing
The Secretary then introduced the first discussion item, a draft ordinance amend-
ment to allow manufactured homes and earth sheltered homes in the R1 and R2
zoning districts. The Secretary briefly noted that the ordinance would require
all new homes to be a minimum of 18' wide and 18' deep. He explained that staff
had researched existing dwellings and found a few that were less than 18' in their
least dissension. Therefore, he explained, the ordinance would apply only to new
dwellings. o
Commissioner Simmons noted that the ordinance also allowed earth sheltered homes.
She asked why these needed to be included. The Secretary stated that earth
sheltered homes are not considered dwellings in some communities. Commissioner
Sandstrom asked whether, according to the ordinance language, air conditioning
systems would be required in new dwellings. The Secretary answered that the
language used in the definition of a manufactured home was taken from the state
law and that staff did not intend for air conditioning systems to be required
in single - family residences. He stated that staff would look at the language
again and perhaps revise it slightly to clarify the intent, but he asked that
the Planning Commission take action on the ordinance amendment.
ACTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF ORDI AMEN REGARDING MANUFACTURED HOUSING
Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Ccinmissioner Malecki to-recommend that the
City Council adopt an ordinance amendment to allow manufactured housing in the R1
and R2 zoning districts. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki,
Simmons, Manson, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
69th AVENUE AS MAJOR TH OROUGHFARE
The Secretary then introduced the second discussion item, the classification of
69th Avenue North as a major thoroughfare. He explained that the Hahn Addition
had brought to light the fact 'that 69th Avenue, east of Brooklyn Boulevard, is no
longer a County road and, therefore, no longer a major thoroughfare. He stated
that staff would recommend that the Planning Commission act on an ordinance amendment
classifying 69th Avenue between Brooklyn Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway as a
5 -26 -83 . -1-
major thoroughfare.
Commissioner Sandstrom noted that the ordinance designates France Avenue between
Highway 100 and 50th Avenue North as a major thoroughfare. He asked why France was
not considered a major thoroughfare up to 53rd Avenue. The Secretary explained that
France Avenue is a state -aid street in the industrial area and that it is only a
collector street north of 50th.
ACTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION Of ORDINANCE AMENDMENT ESTABLISHING 69TH AVENUE
NORTH AS A MAJOR THOROUGHFARE
[lotion by Commissioner Simmons seconded by Commissioner Manson to recommend
adoption of an ordinance amendment establishing 69th Avenue North between Brooklyn
Boulevard and Shingle Creek Parkway as a major thoroughfare. Voting in favor:
Chairman Lucht, Commissioners flalecki, Simmons, Manson, Sandstrom and Versteeg.
Voting against: none. The motion passed.
DEVELOPMENT AT I -94 AND BROOKLYN BOUL EVARD /COMPREH PLAN
The Secretary then read a memorandum from the Planning staff regarding the pro-
spective development at the southwest corner of I -94 and Brooklyn Boulevard and
the implications such a development would have for the Comprehensive Plan. He
showed the Planning Commission a site plan of the development and stated that
there would probably be an application sometime in June.
Commissioner Simmons noted that the plan looks like a residential development,
but asked whether the Planning could limit the office use to a one-
storey condominium arrangement. The Secretary pointed out that an office use
would be a special use permit in the R5 zone and that this might give the Planning
Commission greater latitude in deciding what to approve. He related the history
of the special use provision for offices in the R5 zone. He explained that the
office building at 70th and Brooklyn Boulevard was allowed by a special use permit
after the Council had decided not to rezone the land from R5 to C1, but to allow
office uses by special use permit in the R5 zone.
Chairman Lucht stated that the land in question has not been rezoned from R5 to
R3 in accordance with the recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan. The Secretary
explained that the general policy with regard to the new Comprehensive Plan was
to withhold any rezoning action until a development plan is proposed. Chairman
Lucht noted that there is more control over an office development in the R5 zone,
since it is a special use.
Commissioner Sandstrom stated that access to Brooklyn Boulevard in this location
was poor. The Secretary agreed, but stated that that problem would exist with
any type of development in this location. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether
it would be possible to allow access onto the exit ramp from I -94 to Brooklyn
Boulevard. The Secretary stated that the Highway Department would never permit
such an access to be gained onto their exit ramp.
Chairman Lucht asked whether it would be possible to .gain access to the site from
Indiana Avenue at the northwest corner of the site. The Secretary recommended
against allowing access in this location since it would bring commercial traffic
into a residential neighborhood. He also recommended against this kind of access
even if the property were developed residentially. Commissioner Sandstrom noted
that an office development would create mostly daytime traffic.
There followed a brief discussion regarding access to the property from Brooklyn
Boulevard. The Secretary stated that the City would wish to prohibit left turns
onto Brooklyn Boulevard. The Planning Assistant stated that the perspective
applicant had anticipated that it would be a right -in, right -out access only.
He stated that if it was necessary to extend the median, this could perhaps be
required as a condition of the special use permit.
5 -26 -83 -2-
Chairman Lucht asked about the covenant on the surrounding property. The
Secretary briefly explained that a covenant had been placed on all of the
property surrounding the lot at the southwest corner of I -94 and Brooklyn
Boulevard to prohibit any commercial development of those lots. He stated
that the covenant was recently renewed for an additional ten years. There
followed a brief discussion regarding the acceptance of an office development
relative to acceptance of townhouses. It was generally agreed that an office
development would probably be as acceptable as any other kind of development
in that location.
The Secretary asked the Commission whether the Comprehensive Plan should be
amended to allow for offices in areas which the Plan has designated for mid -
density residential. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he thought a good job
had been done on the Comprehensive Plan, but that that did not mean it could not
be changed. Commissioner Simmons stated that if the Comprehensive Plan were
amended, it should not allow just any type of office, but something that was low -
rise and compatible with a residential use. The Secretary stated that an ordinance
amendment could be drafted to allow office uses in the R3 zoning district by a
special use permit and only up to the height of the normal townhouse (two stories).
Commissioner Manson asked whether, if the Plan were changed, the commercial area
would eventually be affected by the change. The Secretary explained that most of
the other land along Brooklyn Boulevard is already developed and that redevelopment
pressures would have to build before a land use change would actually take place.
Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether offices are allowed now in the R3 zone. The
Secretary explained that offices are only allowed in the R5 zone by a special use
permit and in the C1 zone as permitted uses. Commissioner Simmons stated that the
height and bulk should be limited in the R3 zone if offices are allowed in that
zoning district. The Secretary stated that that was a possibility.
The Planning Assistant stated that
important questions to answer
one of the most q
p
with respect to a possible plan amendment was whether the various types of land
uses along the Boulevard should be strictly segregated or whether some mixing of
uses could be allowed. He stated that retail and service uses should probably be
separated from residential uses, but that office and townhouse uses are often
interchangeable in their impact on surrounding property. The Secretary stated
that single - family uses have a hard time existing along Brooklyn Boulevard with
the high traffic counts north of Highway 100. Commissioner Simmons questioned
the wisdom of trying to preserve single - family in that area with the noise and
other impacts of the traffic and commercial uses. The Planning Assistant pointed
out that Commissioner Ainas, when calling to say he was unable to attend the
evening's meeting, stated that he felt Brooklyn Boulevard should be primarily
commercial from Highway 100 to 71st Avenue North.
Chairman Lucht asked whether it would be possible to allow offices as part of a
planned residential development in the R3 zone. The Secretary stated that that
was a possibility. Commissioner Simmons stated that she did not want the Boulevard
to look like it does in Brooklyn Park. The Secretary agreed and stated that the
Plan allowed for a fair amount of service /office use along the Boulevard, but that
it confined commercial /retail development to certain nodes at Brookdale, 63rd
Avenue North and 69th Avenue North.
A APARTMENTS
the .secretary ten asked the Planning Commission to review a couple of publications
from the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities regarding accessory apartments
in single - family neighborhoods. C=niissioner r4alecki asked what the City's current
regulation-was. The Secretary stated that accessory apartments are not presently
permitted in single - family neighborhoods. He stated that it is possible to rent
up to two sleeping rooms without a separate kitchen unit. He stated that allowing
5 -26 -83 -3-
accessory apartments would amount to setting up a separate dwelling unit. Com -
missioner Simmons stated that she was interested in setting up a small unit within
her own home. The Secretary stated that accessory apartments have often been
accepted if they are owner- occupied:
Commissioner Sandstrom stated that land was getting shorter and shorter and it
was necessary for more housing to be available on less land. The Secretary
cautioned that the Planning Commission should
not take a short term view
of the
problem of housing. He stated that if an accessory apartment were approved in a
single- family dwelling, it was very likely that someone would want to use the
property as income property and rent it out essentially as a two - family dwelling.
Commissioner Simmons recalled that she had obtained a special use permit because
the renters that she had in her home were not members of her family. She stated
that at that time family members could have a separate kitchen within the dwelling
and not be considered a separate family. The Secretary stated that the exchange
of money is not always necessary for a rental situation to be in effect. He
stated that informal arrangements can sometimes be worked out, but that in essence,
a second dwelling unit sometimes exists. The Secretary also explained that the R2
zone was created to do away with the provision of the old Zoning Ordinance which
allowed a second dwelling unit on a lot by special use permit.
Commissioner Versteeg asked how many people are allowed in a single - family home.
The Secretary stated that occupancy is governed by the Housing Maintenance Ordi-
nance which allows one resident for the first 150 sq. ft. of habitable floor space
and one additional resident for each 100 sq. ft. of additional habitable floor
space. He also said that there is a limit of two residents per habitable room.
is provision in the ordinance for a
explained that there
ar also x
The Secret p p
Y
"family" of up to five unrelated persons in a single - family dwelling. Com missioner
Simmons pointed out that there are a great many needs for housing and at the same
time there are many homes with only a single occupant where an accessory apartment
would make sense.
should take the
long view
Secretary stated that the Planning Commission 9
The y 9
and concern itself with equal protection. He recommended not allowing the accessory
apartment by a special use permit since that could lead to some people being treated
differently. He stated that it would be better to license an additional housing
unit within the R1 zone as a matter of right. He stated that the accessory apart-
ment would really set up an R2 zone. He recommended allowing the license for only
one un i t in the R1 zone so that if there was an additional dwelling unit, at least
one of the units on the premises would have to be owner- occupied.
Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he felt accessory apartments could be controlled
through this type of licensing. The Secretary agreed that that might be possible,
but warned that some people would want to buy a house with an accessory apartment
for an investment to rent out both units. Commissioner Simmons stated that the
whole reason accessory apartments have come-about was to allow the existing resi-
dents to stay in their homes by gaining additional cash flow from renting out an
accessory unit. The Secretary stated that he did not think allowing accessory
apartments would increase school enrollment in the district. Commissioner Simmons
disagreed and stated that she thought it would help the school district.
The Secretary acknowledged that there were positive aspects to accessory apartments,
but pointed out there are negative impacts as well. He stated that it would tend
to erode the single- family character of the residential neighborhood and might
conceivably put greater pressure on the sewer system. He also stated that more
traffic would be generated.' Commissioner Sandstrom stated that the overall occu-
pancy of a dwelling would be the same. It would just be divided up into two units
rather than one. Commissioner Sandstrom also stated that he felt the accessory
apartment would have to be allowed eventually. Chairman Lucht noted that Commissioner
Sandstrom seemed to be changing his mind by arguing for greater density in this case,
5 -26 -83 -4-
whereas he voted against greater density in the Bernu Townhouse Project.
SERVOMATION BUIL
The Secretary then: reviewed with the Planning Commission a request by Iten Chevrolet
to use the Servomation building for truck rental and leasing. He explained that,
when Iten Chevrolet had previously brought a plan to use the building, they had
resisted improvements to the Iten Chevrolet site requested by the City. He ex-
plained that they now wish to rent the building to a separate corporate entity,
Iten Leasing. The Secretary explained that automobile and truck rental is not a
permitted use in the C2 zoning district, only in the I -1 and I -2 zones: He ex-
plained that rental of cars and trucks has been allowed as part of an automobile
dealership, but not as a separate use. He stated that the Itens argued that the
rental of trucks was only part of the operation and that it should be classified
as equipment rental. He stated that the staff recognized that there may be some
rental of equipment, but that the rental of trucks is listed as a separate use
in the Zoning Ordinance and should be treated as such. He concluded by saying
that he felt an ordinance amendment was necessary to allow automobile and truck
rental in the C2 zone.
Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he felt the leasing operation was really part
of the auto dealership. The Secretary pointed out that truck rental is allowed
in the I -1 zone, but that auto sales are not. He stated that outside storage is
not permitted in the I -1 zone and that this is probably why auto sales were not
permitted. He stated that he felt automobile and truck rental should be allowed
in the C2 zoning district. Commissioner Malecki asked why automobile and truck
rental had ever been excluded. The Secretary stated that automobile and truck
rental was never listed in the C2 zoning district and that he was not sure if
this was left out consciously or not. He did note that it was allowed specifically
in the I -1 zone. The Secretary stated that he felt automobile and truck rental was
not inappropriate in the C2 zoning district. Commissioners Malecki and Simmons
agreed. The Secretary stated that he would bring back ordinance language to allow
automobile and truck rental in the C2 zoning district.
CANCEL AUGUST 25, 1983 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
The Secretary explained that he and the Planning Assistant would be taking vacation
immediately prior to the August 25, 1983 study meeting and asked that the Planning
Commission cancel its August 25, 1983 study meeting. By consensus the cancellation
was agreed to.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Manson to adjourn the
meeting of the Planning Commission. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning
Commission adjourned at 9:25 p.m.
Chairman
5 -26 -83 -5-
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
'ARKS AN RECREATION
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Canter, Minnesota 55430
Telephone 561 -5448
j RRO9^1vM C! t[R
iRRNS MO R[CRl RTPR
N E V
TO G. G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM Gene Hagel, Director of Parks and Recreation Dep rt e �`�..%
DATE June 10, 1983
SUBJECT: Park Regulations
At the last meeting of the Park and Recreation Commission the subject of
changes to the Park Ordinance was discussed.
There was consensus among Commission members to amend the present Ordinance
to add a Section dealing with each of the following:
1) Prohibition of Glass Containers
2) Bringing Refuse to City Parks
3) Authorizing the City Manager to post certain regulatory signs.
gest.ed Language for (1) and (2) are shown here:
LASS CONTAINERS. No person shall have brought in, use, or be in possession
of any kind of glass, or breakable glass -like bottles or containers used for
the purpose of storing, transporting, mixing, or consuming soft drinks, non -
intoxicating malt beverages, or intoxicating liquor, except when a permit has
been issued by the Director of Parks and Recreation as provided in Section
13 -10 Nor shall any glass bottles or containers used for any other pur-
pose be placed in an waters in or continguous to any park or left on any park
grounds or in any receptacle within any park, including trash receptacles.
REFUSE. No person shall bring in or shall dump, deposit, or leave any bottles,
broken glass, ashes, paper, boxes, cans, dirt, rubbish, waste, garbage, or
refuse, or other trash in any city park or open space. No refuse or trash
shall be laced in any waters in or continC7uous to any park, or left. anywhere
P � b
on the grounds thereof, but shall be placed. in the proper receptacles where
these are provided; where receptacles are not provided, all such rubbish or
waste shall be carried away from the park by the persons responsible for its
presence, and properly disposed of elsei� here.
NOR7111VEST SUBURBS (ABLE COA1,11UNICATIONS COMMISSIO
6901 Winnetka Avenue North
Brookdyn Park, NIN 55428
(6 12) 536 -8355
May 23, 1983
Mayor Dean Nyquist
City of Brooklyn Center
6301 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 55430
Dear Mayor Nyquist:
According to the Cable Commission Joint Powers Agreement, the terms of
office of all NWSCCC- Directors is one year. The term begins and ends in
June of each year, and each member City is entitled to two representatives.
If you have not already done so, please notify the Commission Secretary
of your City's two appointments prior to the June 15, 1983 Commission
meeting. Thank you.
Sincerely,
J0111 T. Irving
Ch irman
AI /gh
�, cc: City Manager
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attention: Celia Scott, Commission Secretary
6901 Winnetka Avenue North
Brooklyn Park, TIN 55428
From: City of Brooklyn Center
Be advised that the Brooklyn Center City Council took the following action
on
(date)
MOTION , SECOND , TO
APPOINT AND _
.AS STAFF APPOINTEE ON _ THE CABLE T.V. COMMISSION. MOTION PASSED
UNANIMOUSLY.
Brooklyn Center e Brooklyn Park • Crystal • Golden Valley Gro% • New Ilope • Osseo • Plymouths Robbinsdale
Memo to Gerald G. Splinter
Page 2
June 10, 1983
The Planning Commission has reviewed the State Statute and relative information
on manufactured housing since February of this year and recommended approval
of the ordinance amendment at their May 26, 1983 meeting.
MAJOR THOROUGHFARE DESIGNATION
This amendment is the result of the City acquiring jurisdiction over 69th Avenue
between Brooklyn Boulevard and West. River. Road, formerly County Road 130. The
Zoning Ordinance defines all Federal, State and County highways as major thorough-
fares in addition to some local streets. The major thoroughfare designation requires,
among other things, greater, building setbacks. When the City acquired jurisdiction
over 69th Avenue North, technically the major thoroughfare designation ceased.
The Planning Commission and City Council reviewed this fact when considering a
preliminary plat for the Hahn Addition ( Planning Commission Application No. 83013 )
on 69th Avenue North between Grimes and Halifax. At that time it was determined
that the major thoroughfare designation should remain on 69th Avenue between Brooklyn
Boulevard and Shingle n le Creek Parkway. The proposed ordinance �
g } r pop nance would accomplish
this.
It should be noted that 69th Avenue, west. of Brooklyn Boulevard to the west corpo-
rate limits, remains a County road and will continue to carry a major thoroughfare
designation. 69th Avenue, east of Shingle Creek Parkway to West. River Road, will
not be a major thoroughfare. Traffic counts east of Shingle Creels Parkway are signif-
icantly less than those west of Shingle Creek Parkway, thus justifying the different
designation.
mlg
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
FROM: James Lindsay, Chief of Police
DATE: June 3, 1983
SUBJECT: Gambling License Application for the Rosary
and Altar Society of St. Alphonsus Catholic
Church
Investigator Monteen has completed his investigation into the
application of the Rosary and Altar Society, and its Gambling
Manager, Jerine Vivian Polack, in application for a Class A
Gambling License. Investigator Monteen finds nothing which
.would preclude the issuance of such a gambling license.
The City Council must act on the following two matters:
1. The application for the Class A Gambling
License. This requires the majority vote
of the City Council to pass.
2. The waiver of a $10,000.00 fidelity bond.
This requires the unanimous vote of the
City Council to pass.
The following is a resume of the investigation of St. Alphonsus Catholic
Church, Rosary & Altar Society, in Application for a Class A Gambling
License as issued by the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minn.
This resume is in reference to Brooklyn Center Police Department case
number 83- 07280.
Named in the Application: Jerine Vivian POLACI�,Gambling Manager
Investigation conducted by Investigator A. Paul Monteen, Transcribed
and typewritten by Kenneth Smith, Clerk /Dispatcher, Brooklyn Center
Police Department.
APPLICANT The Rosary and Altar Society of St Alphonsus Catholid Church,
7125 Halifax Ave. No., Brooklyn Center, MN, 55429, telephone
561 -2100
Jerine Vivian POLACK, dob 10/5/36, 4107 61st Ave. No.,
Brooklyn Center, MN, 55429, residence phone 533 -0824.
INVESTIGATING MATERIALS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS REPORT
An application for a Gambling License.
An application for a Gambling License, Part II, in the name of
Jerine Vivian POLACK.
An application for a Gamling License, Part II, Organizational Information.
A letter requesting a waiver of the $10,000.00 Fidelty Bond.
The Rosary and Altar Society of St. Alphonsus Catholic Church began
shortly after the congregation was formed in 1959. The Rosary and Altar
Society is made up of approximately 374 active members, all women of the
parish known as St. Alphonsus Catholic Church. Operating under the auspice::
of St. Alphonsus Church, the organization has been granted a
tax exempt status and holds an Internal Revenue tax exempt number of
41- 0846441, and a State of Minnesota, Department of Commerce and Taxation
tax exempt number of 9019199.
Because of their status as a tax exempt auxiliary of a bonafide religious
organization, the Rosary and Altar Society is exempt of filing the form
990 or 990T, as required by the Internal Revenue Service. Furthermore,
the State of Minnesota Department of Commerce, Charities Division,
grants an exempt status to all bonafide religious organizations and their
affiliate, therefore, they are exempt from filing the charitable organ-
izations annual report form as required by.Section 309.53 of the Minnesota
State Statutes.
The Rosary and Altar Society holds organizational meetings and their fund
raising activities at St. Alphonsus Catholic Church, which is located at
7125 Halifax Ave. No., within the City Of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County,
Minnesota. A legal description of the property is contained within the
.application for a Gambling License in 1979. The Rosary and Altar Society
also uses the mailing address of President, for daily correspondence.
Contained within the application for a Class A Gambling License is a Part 3
personal information form in the name of Jerine Vivian POLACK. Jerine
V. POLACK is a resident of the City of Brooklyn Center, residing at
4107 61st Ave. No., for the past 10 or more years. Mrs. POLACK is a house --
wife, and does not have any employement- outside the home.
V
Page 2
Investigator MONTEEN has found nothing of a criminal nature listed in
the name of Jerine Vivian POLACK, in the records of the Brooklyn Center
Police Department nor the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office. Likewise,
there is no criminal history with the State of Minnesota or the National
Crime Information Center. Mrs. POLACK holds a valid driver's license
with no violations.
Contained within the application for a Class A Gambling License, the
Rosary & Altar Society of St. Alphonsus Catholic Church has requested
a waiver of the $10,000.00 Fidelty Bond, as provided for in the City
Ordinance. It should be noted that the Rosary and Altar Society has
made application for and received Gambling Licenses in the years 1979,
1980, 1981 and 1982.
Pursuant to the Ordinances and Statues, the Rosary and Altar'Society
has reported the required information to the Brooklyn Center Police
Department.
Investigator MONTEEN could find nothing which would preclude the issuance
of a Class A Gambling License to the Rosary & Altar Society, and that
Gambling Manager Jerine Vivian POLACK. The City Council must act on
the following two matters: (1) On the Application for a Gambling License.
This ass. 2 The waiver
m h City Council o (
ha.s requires a majority vote of the y p
of the $10,000.00 Fidelity Bond. This requires the unanimous vote of the
City Council to pass.
a i l
i _.
Licenses to be approved by the City Council on June 13, 1983
AMUSE DE VICE LICENS - OP ERATOR 7 A
B ooklyn Center Community Center 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
01.�f of Police
AMUSEMENT DEVICE LICENSE - VENDOR �i t
Theisen Vending Co. 3804 Nicollet Ave.. S. �
Chf of Police
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE
Brooklyn Blvd. A & W 6837 Brooklyn Blvd.
Brooklyn Center Babe Ruth 6406 Noble Ave. N.
Evergreen Park 7112 Bryant,Ave. N.
Grandview Park 1600 59th Ave. N.
Sanitarian "
GAMBLING L ICENSE - CLASS B T
St. Alphonsus Rosary Altar Society 7125 Halifax Ave. N. V Police --
GARBAGE AND REFUSE HAULER'S LICENSE
Block Sanitation 6741 79th Ave. N.
Brooklyn Disposal, Inc. .7858 191st In. N.W.
Mengelkoch Co. 119 N.E. 14th St. —
Sanitarian
T . LI LIC -
ITI NE R ANT FOOD ES T ABLI SH MENT
Brooklyn Center Fire Dept. 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
oklyn Swim Club 8124 Toledo Ave. N.
P. f;
1 West's 76 2000 57th Ave. N.
Sanitarian V'3'
M ECHANIC A L SYSTEM'S LICENSE
_ 4� Rick`s Beating & Air Gond. 551 W. 78th St. ,�U� Builicial
1�5
NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE
Coca Cola Bottling 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd. P
Evergreen Park Manor 7224 Camden Ave. �f1
Sanitarian
SIGN I-LANGER' LICENSE
Universal Sign Company 1033 Thomas Ave. Build*no)
fficial
SWIM POOL LICENSE
Riverwood Townhouse Association 6611 Camden Drive C\1\ •`t �n.
Sanitarian
' TEMPORARY ON -SALE NONINTOXICATING LICENSE �\
Brooklyn Center Fire Dept. 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy.
City Clerk '
GENERAL APPROVAL:
�Gez��:?d`�.f er, City Clerk