The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1982 04-26 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER April 26, 1982 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 by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a councilmember 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 —April 12, 1982 *7. Final Plat - Red Lobster Addition *8. Subdivision Bond Release Philip Neese for Clinch Valley Addition at r 69th and West River Road f *9. Appointment to Community Access Corporation of the Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission 10. Resolutions: a. Authorizing the City Engineer to Petition the Commissioner of Transportation for the Approval of Advance Encumbrance of Municipal State Aid Construction Funds *b. Receiving City Engineer's Report, Establishing 69 -70th Street Improvement Project , 1982 -09 and Providing for a Public on Proposed Improvement Project 1982 -09 (May 24, 1982) *c._ Accepting Work Performed Under Contract 1980 -N (Trail & Park Improvements in the Civic Center /Central Park Area Project Completed in 1981) d. Accepting Work Performed Under Engineering-services Agreement with Merila & Associates, Inc. on Contract 1980 -N e. Declaring Certain city -owned Property as Surplus, Authorizing its Recon veyance to the State of Minnesota, and Approving its Classification as Nonconservation Land -This property (P.I.N. 25- 119 -21 -41 -0008) was acquired by the City as tax forfeited property "for street purposes in 1971. Mr. & Mrs. Arnold J. Foslien, the adjacent property owners, now desire to purchase this property so as to allow them to join it with their presont property. ,v CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- April 26, 1982 *f. Granting Final Approval to an Industrial Development Revenue Bond Proposal from Shingle Creek Development Company -The project comprehends construction of the 78,500 square foot office/ warehouse building at the intersection of'Freeway Boulevard and Xerxes Avenue North. g. Establishing Voting Precincts for the City of Brooklyn Center -This resolution comprehends the federal courts legislative re- districting plan. *h.` Authorizing Purchase of 1/4 Ton Truck --It is recommended the low bid of Brookdale Ford in the amount of $5,598 be accepted. The truck has been authorized in the 1982 Budget for the Street Department. i i. Accepting Bids for Fine Aggregate for Seal Coat j. Accepting Bids for:Plant -mixed Bituminous Mixtures k. Accepting Bids for - Bituminous Materials 1. Amending the;:1982 General Fund Budget This resolution provides for additional data communications equipment and decision not to replace appraiser position.' M. Authorizing Execution of Transfer of Funds Agreement -This resolution would authorize the City Treasurer to execute an agreement with the First Bank System for wire transfers of City Funds. n. Acknowledging Gift -This resolution acknowledges a gift of $200 to the City's Fire Department. *11. Declaration of Surplus Property -It is recommended a motion be made by the City Council declaring certain .= property of the City as surplus. The items will then be sold at public auction or advertised sale. 12. Planning Commission Items (8:00 p.m.) a. Planning, Commission Application No. 82008 submitted by Bergstrom Realty to rezone from C2 to R3 land within the 1300 block on the 'south side of 69th Avenue North. The'Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 82008 at its April 15, 1982 meeting. Planning Commission Application No. 82016 submitted by Ken 'Bergstrom for preliminary plat approval to subdivide the land in the 1300 block on the _south side of 69th into 28 townhouse lots, one common area, and six out lots. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No.' 82016 at its April 15, 1982 meeting. I CITY COUNCIL AGENDA 3- April 26 1982 The following resolutions are offered for City Council consideration. Similar resolutions have been adopted by the Planning Commission: 1. Resolution Amending Council Resolution No. 66 -295 (Comprehensive Plan) Relative to Commercial Zoned Land in' Southeast Quadrant of 69th and Humboldt Avenues North 2. Resolution Regarding.the Dispositi6h`of Application No. 82008 Submitted by Bergstrom Realty Company b. Planning' Commission Application.No. 82014 submitted by McDonald's for site and building plan approval to construct an order station, drive - up lane and window at the McDonald's Restaurant at 5525 Xerxes Avenue North. The Planning Commission recommended' approval of Application No. 82014 at its April 15, 1982 meeting. C. Planning Commission Application No. 82017 submitted by Robert Adelmann for a variance from the Sign Ordinance to allow for a 46' high, 204 square .foot freestanding sign in place of the sign currently at ordinance maximums -of 24' in height and 90 square feet at 6501 Humboldt Avenue North_ The Planning Commission recommended denial of Application-No- 82017 at its April 15, 1982 meeting. d. Planning Commission Application No. 82018 submitted by Blumentals Architecture /Summit Mortgage Company for site and building plan • approval to remodel the barn and hippodrome on the Earle Brown Farm for use as a TV studio. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 82018 at its April 15, 1982 meeting. Planning Commission Application No. 82021 submitted by Summit Mortgage Company for a variance from Section 35 -400 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow two reception antennae to be placed within the front setback at 6129 Earle Brown Drive. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 82021 at its April 15,`1982 meeting.< e. Planning Commission Application No. 82019 submitted by Martin Drinkwine for special use permit to conduct a Tidy Car operation in the garage.of the residence at 5632 James Avenue North. The Planning Commission recommended approval of Application No. 82019 at its April 15, 1982' meeting. 13. - Ordinances: a. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 23 of the City Ordinances Regulating and Licensing Amusement Devices This ordinance is offered for a.first reading this evening. b. An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding Amusement Centers -This ordinance is offered for a first reading this evening. I CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -4- April 26, 1982 14. Discussion 'Items: a. Volunteerism in Brooklyn Center 15. Consideration of Specified Licenses: -On Sale Nonintoxicating Liquor License at Showbiz Pizza Restaurant, 5939 John Martin Drive 16. Gambling Licenses: �. Northport PTA Application for a Class A Gambling License (requires a majority vote of the City Council to pass) waiver of the $10,000 fidelity bond _(requires a unanimous vote of the City Council to pass): 17. Licenses 18. Adjournment r t i� • t. MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF Mliv'NESOTA REGULAR SESSION APRIL 12, 1982 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:04 p.m. ROLL CALL - Mayor Dean Nyquist, Gouncilmembers Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis_ Also present were Director of Finance ' Paul Holmlund,,Di.rector of Public Works Sy Knapp,` Director of Planning & Inspection Ron Warren, Police Chief Jim Lindsay, Assistant City Engineer Jim Grube, Public Utility Superintendent Craig Hoffmann, and Administrative Assistants Brad Hoffman and Tom;Bublitz. INVOCATION The invocation was offered by Associate Pastor Paul Goodman of the Northbrook Alliance Church. OPEN FORUM Mayor Nyquist noted the had not received any requests to use the Open Forum session this evening. He inquired of the audience if there was anyone present who wished to address the Council, there being none, he proceeded with the regular agenda items. CONSENT AGENDA Mayor Nyquist inquired if any of the Council "members desired any items removed from the consent agenda., Councilmember Hawes requested that items 8d and 13 be removed from the consent agenda. Councilmember Lhotka requested that item 7 be removed from the consent agenda. SOLUTION NO. 82 -53 Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF A SOUND LEVEL METER' CUSTODY AGREEMENT The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis, and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 82 - Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR REPRESENTATION IN JOINT PUBLIC` WORKS NEGOTIATIONS FOR , A CONTRACT BEGINNING JANUARY, ,1983 WITH LOCAL 49 4- Al2�82 -1- The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon vote ,being taken thereon, the following voted: in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill.-Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. FIRE RELIEF INVESTMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the purchase of the following: 1.,- $40,000 of Associates Corporation of North America Bonds with a yield of 14 4 1% and matures February 'l, 1990. The cost is $39,013.60. 2. $30,000 of Pacific Power & Light Bonds with a yield of 15 5/8% and matures March 1, 1991. The cost is $31,050. 3. $35,000 of Commonwealth Edison Bonds with _a yield of 14% and matures January 1, 1991. The cost is $34,650. 4. $20,000 of GMAC Bonds with a yield of 11 5/8% and matures June 6,' 1990. The cost is $18,783. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, 'Scott, Hawes and Rich Theis. Voting against: none. The notion passed unanimously. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MARCH 22, 1982 There was a motion by Councilmember. Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of March 22, 1982 as submitted. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Scott, and Hawes. Voting against: none. The motion passed. Councilmembers Lhotka and Theis abstained from the vote as they were not present at the March 22„ 1982 meeting. FINAL PLAT - FIRST BROOKDALE STATE BANK The Director of Public Works reviewed the final plat submitted by the First Brookdale State Bank,and -noted that the plat was made necessary by the new drive -up facility constructed by the bank. He explained that the plat combines six previously existing, lots into one lot. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve the final plat of the First Brookdale State Bank. Voting in favor. Mayor. Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Rich Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS The Director of Finance introduced A Resolution Receiving City Engineer's Report, Establishing Central Park Water Main Improvement Project 1982 -05 and Ordering Improvement and Preparation of Plans and Specifications, A Resolution Receiving City Engineer's Report, Establishing Kylawn'Park Water Main Improvement Project 1982 -06 and Providing for Public Hearing on Proposed Improvement Project 1982 -06, and A Resolution Receiving City Engineer's Report, Establishing 51st Avenue Water Main Improvement Project 1982 -07 and Providing for a Public Hearing. 4 -12 -82 -2- The Director of Public Works 'reviewed the location of Water Main Improvement Project 1982 -05 and noted that the City Council approved a casing pipe installation in conjunction with the I -94 freeway construction. He explained that this project is part of the recommendation made by Black &Veatch in their Report on Water Works Improvements for the City. The Director of Public Works proceeded to review the Black &- Veatch report and pointed out that the.,first significant item in the report can be found on page 1, where it is indicated that the ultimate population for planning the City's water system is 44,000. He also noted that, for design purposes, the report assumes an 85 gallon per capita per day consumption rate, and that 13 million gallons per day is the maximum daily demand projected for the system. The Director of Public Works reviewed page 10 of the Black & Veatch report which reviewed the actual capacity of the existing well 'system. He pointed out that the term "firm capacity ", in the report, assumes that the largest well in the City is out of service for one day. He reviewed the recommendations on page 21 of the report which recommended the construction of one well if well No. 2 is placed on a stand -by basis. He stated that the staff recommends that one additional well be made available for the year 1983. He explained that if all forecasts hold true, the City may 'need five to six.additional wells or three additional wells with a 2' million gallon underground storage reservoir. He added that this is not recommended for the immediate future. The Director of Public Works reviewed pages 22 through 24 of the Black & Veatch report which discussed a potential water treatment plant for the City. He explained that the City staff, along with the Black & Veatch firm, recommend that the City, at this • time, cannot justify a water treatment plant, but that this would be a possible safety valve for the future. The Director of Public Works reviewed page 25 of the Black & Veatch report which summarized the distribution system improvements recommended for the water system. He explained that one of the top priorities is the construction - of a 16 inch transmission water main through Central Park and I -94 from the existing water main At 63rd Avenue to freeway Boulevard'. Y The Director of Public Works reviewed financial considerations related to the water system improvements and explained that the handout which the Council received this evening shows the historical customer usage in water sales volume and revenue, and also shows actual usage for 1981 and projected usage for 1982_ He pointed out that the table contained in the Black & Veatch report,'when - compared to- the - actual usage for 1981, shows that the projected estimates of revenue were very conservative. He pointed out that the Black & Veatch report assumed a rate increase in 1982 but that actual experience in 1980 and 1981 did not warrant 'a rate increase for 1982. Councilmember Hawes 'inquired whether all the City wells were at the'same depth. The Director of Public Works explained that a it - wells are i t same aquifer, a p 11 . 0 y e is e n he that being, the Jordan Aquifer and that they are generally close to the same depth. The Public - Utility - Superintendent pointed out that the depth of most of the wells is approximately 300 feet to the bottom of the well. He explained that the Hinckley Aquifer is 800 feet and that it is possible to tap into this aquifer also. He explained that most cities in the metropolitan area use the Jordan Aquifer. 4 -l?`8w -3- Councilmember Scott inquired where the first of the new wells would be built. The Director of Public Works explained that most wells are located in the northeast quadrant of the City. He explained that the advantages to having all the wells in one part of City is that the supply radiates out of one central point, and also in the event a. treatment plant is needed it is easier to pump into a plant if all the wells are located in one area. He explained that the recommendation would be to keep all the wells in the northeast quadrant. He added that :the first well would probably be constructed in the area of the tax delinquent property off Camden Avenue. Councilmember Theis inquired how much extra cost would be involved - .if'the City were to tap into the Hinckley Aquifer. The Director of Public Works stated that since the well would be twice as deep as the existing wells the cost would be considerable. The Public Utility Superintendent explained that, in using the Hinckley Aquifer, the energy to deliver the water would also have to be 'greater. Councilmember Theis requested additional information regarding the figures indicating the sale of water meters on page 30 of the report. The Director of Public Works explained that the City had purchased considerably more meters than were actually sold... RESOLUTION NO 82 -55 t Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION RECEIVING CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT, ESTABLISHING CENTRAL PARK WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -05, AND ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Gene Lhotka, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted • in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none .whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. The Director of Public Works explained that with regard to the eight inch water main Proposed through Kylawn':area, the staff is recommending that the entire cost be assessed, and that he believes the property will be benefited from the increased fire protection capability and system reliability. .f RESOLUTION NO. 82 -56 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION 'RECEIVING CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT, ESTABLISHING KYLAWN PARK WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. '1982 -06, AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT`` PROJECT NO. 1982 -06 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Bill Hawes, and upon: vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist, Gene Lhotka, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following ;voted ; against the same: none,,-whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 4 -12 -82 -4- The Director of Public Forks reviewed Water Main Improvement Project No. 1982 -07, and noted that this project proposes the construction of `a six inch water main along 51st Avenue North extension, west of East Twin Lake Boulevard. He explained that the installation has been requested by a property owner and pointed out that it is proposed to install a six inch water main to provide water service to 4100' 51st Avenue North in response to a petition submitted by the property owner. He explained that presently, the owner receives non-potable water from a shallow well, and uses the water for bathing and cleaning, purposes only. He noted that drinking water must be purchased from commercial water supply dealers. He noted that the petitioner has informed the staff that the parcel was originally served by a deep well until the water quality deteriorated to a point where the present shallow well was necessitated. According to the petitioner, he pointed out, well drillers and plumbers alike, feel future well drilling will not provide a potable water source. The Director of Public Works explained that because of the poor soil, conditions in the area it is proposed to "float" the water main on the peat soil:. He added that the staff is recommending that assessments be levied against the occupied property, and that they be deferred on the unoccupied land in the project. Councilmember Hawes 'inquired whether the land along the proposed project is buildable. The Director of Public Works stated that the -peat soil makes it difficult but that it is possible for 'three to four or even five sites on the north side of 51st to be built upon. He added that some construction may be possible on the other side of 51st also. He added that the staff recommends seeing how the area develops before deciding how to assess the other property in the area, and also to see if sewer and streets are needed.- He explained that the wells are contaminated at the occupied house and that only one house is in need currently. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -57 Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION RECEIVING CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT, ESTABLISHING 51ST AVENUE WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982-07, AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED y IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, NO. 1982 -07 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Rich Theis,:and' upon vote being take er the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nyquist,, Celia Scott lD11T and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same Bill Hawes, w ereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. co" ' ; #4,,, J OWAO., s ft,++e.. w• t .r 00.0 f-�a V .s � •t HIV � � S � .4 ell," RESOLUTION NO. "82 -58. S� r.. !1 ♦.r.• ` UP -%0,J «I+ • ✓ % & Member Bill Hawes introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption's a� (, C A. woo RESOLUTION RECEIVING CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT,' ESTABLISHING EARLE BROWN DRIVE STREET LIGHT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 1982 -08, AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 1982 -08 As V p�•b? The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by ftrr,�2 member Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: Dean Nvquist, Celia Scott, Bill Hawes, and Rich Theis; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 4 -12 -82 -5- VOLUNTEER RECOGNITION Mayor Nyquist explained that the Governor has proclaimed April 18 through 24 as Volunteer Recognition Week. He suggested that perhaps the Council could discuss volunteerism in more detail at the next Council meeting. He explained that in June of 1982 the U.S. Conference of Mayors will meet in Minneapolis and that the recognition of volunteers is on the agenda. t There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to designate April 18 through April 24, 1982 as Volunteer Week in Brooklyn. Center. Mayor Nyquist also noted that the Governor declared 'April 18 through 24 as Recycling in our Schools' Week, and April 24 through May 22 as Keep Minnesota Beautiful Month. RECESS The Brooklyn Center City Council recessed at 7:57 p.m. and reconvened at 8:20 pm. PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION NO. 820.15 SUBMITTED BY SEARS ROEBUCK & CO. FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT; APPROVAL TO OPERATE AN AMUSEMENT CENTER IN THE SEARS STORE AT 1297 BROOKDALE The Director of Planning -& Inspection presented and reviewed for Council members, 4ir pages 5 through 6 of the March 25,'1982 Planning Commission minutes, and also the Planning Commission information sheet prepared for Application No. 82015. He explained that in review of the application, neither the staff or the Planning Commission had any major problem with the proposal, since Sears has their own security personnel on the premises. He noted that after a public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the application subject to four conditions which he reviewed for Council members. He explained that the proper notices have been sent for this evening's public hearing on the application and than a representative of the applicant is present. Councilmember Lhotka inquired whether any _specific individual would be in charge of the amusement operation. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated that the sporting goods manager is the - ultimate authority for the amusement operation. Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on Applications No. 82015. He inquired if there was anyone present who wished to speak at the public hearing. No one appeared to speak and he entertained a motion to close the public hearing.- There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to close the public hearing on Application No. 82015 Voting in favor: mayor Nyquist, Counc.lmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. 'Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Councilmember Lhotka requested the representative of the applicant to comment on the supervision for the game room.- The applicant stated that the assistant store manager will have primary responsibility for the operation, and that the sporting goods manager will also have responsibility for the amusement center operation. There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Theis to approve Application No. 82015, subject to the following conditions: 4 -12 -82 -6- 1. The permit is issued to the applicant as operator of the facility and is nontransferable. • 2. The permit is subject to all applicable codes, ordinances, and regulations, and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. House rules governing conduct within the game room shall be posted in a conspicuous location and shall be rigorously enforced. A`copy of such rules shall be kept on file with the City. 4. Approval of the permit is subject to compliance with future licensing regulations regarding amusement devices. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. ORDINANCES The Director of Finance introduced an Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding Suntan Studios. He pointed out that this ordinance amendment is proposed in conjunction with Planning Commission Application No. 82013 which was approved at the March 22, 1982 City Council meeting. He explained that the ordinance amendment would add suntan studios to the special use category in the zoning ordinance,and that the ordinance is offered for a first reading this evening. He also pointed out it is recommended a public hearing on the ordinance be scheduled for 7:30 p.m. on May 10, 1982,. There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to approve for first reading An Ordinance Amending Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances Regarding Suntan Studios and to schedule a public hearing for the ordinance at 7:30 p.m. on May 10, 1982. < Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. DISCUSSION ITEMS The Director of Finance introduced the first discussion item, which was the Police Department Annual Report, and explained that the Chief of Police is present this evening to review the report and answer any questions the Council may have. Chief Lindsay pointed out that the budget for 1983 increased by 16% over 1980 and that personnel costs represent 90.67% of the budget. He explained that there were 43 full -time employees beginning in 1981 and that at the end of '1981 the department had been 'reduced to 41 full - time - employees. He proceeded to review the programs conducted in the Police, Department, noting that the department sponsors several seminars during the year for citizens and businesses,and also noted that during 1981 the ABC's Program trained over 200 people in CPR techniques. The Chief also reviewed the Telephone Assurance Program which is offered to senior citizens, handicapped persons, and others who live alone in the City. The Chief of Police noted that Part -I (major crimes) are down 16% from 1980 but that Part II crimes are up 2%. He added that the number of citations are down 14% and that the number of total arrests is down 1 %. He added that, because of 4 -12 -82 -7- injuries and illness in the department, each officer handled more calls in 1981 than in 1980. Councilmember Theis inquired whether there are any comparable response time figures available for other metropolitan cities. The Chief of Police stated that no other comparable figures are available from other communities. He noted that, for example. Brooklyn Park has a completely different dispatch system and response time could not be compared. Councilmember Hawes inquired how illnesses are covered in the Police Department.> The Chief replied that normally'there are five officers on a shift but that a minimum of three is required. He added that when it is necessary, overtime is paid to complete the shifts. Councilmember Hawes inquired whether the City compensates the injured officers. The Chief replied that sick leave is used for illnesses and that injured -on- duty pay is authorized under the union contract for 90 days. He pointed out that a portion of workers' compensation benefits received by the officer is deducted from the I.O.D. pay to equal the officer's regulate salary. He explained that in December of 1981 I.O.D. was ruled as not being in effect in Minnesota, but that the 1982 legislature made it retroactive to 1981. He added that there have been no instances where officers have been out ' for more than 90 days. COUNTY C OMMISSIONERS' DECISION ON RADIO COMMUNICATION SYSTEM; The Director of Finance explained that this discussion item was carried over from the last meeting because Councilmember. Lhotka was absent. Councilmember Lhotka noted that prior to the County Board voting on this issue, he and City Manager Gerald Splinter, and Chief of Police Jim Lindsay went to three board meetings, along with representatives from other cities with independent dispatch systems. He,explained that after the three meetings the County Board took a vote on the issue. He noted that prior to the meeting, the County 'Board came out with a revised resolution on the policy. He explained that he wrote a letter to the County Board with questions regarding the emergency communications and dispatch policy which were adopted by the Board. He noted that the response to his letter was received a week after the County Board's vote`and noted that the response, in his opinion, did not really answer his questions. He explained that the cities with independent dispatch systems are not satisfied with the resolution ,approved by the County Board, and that they will address the situation again. He stated that he will keep the Council informed as the situation develops. Councilmember Lhotka commented that, in his observation, City Council's in general, and Brooklyn Centers' in particular, make decisions on issues that come before them. He noted that the County Board appears to defer decisions on many issues. He stated that at least in the years he has served on the Council there have not been many items on which decisions were deferred for long periods of time. He ,added that the County Board appears to defer decisions for weeks and weeks. LICENSES Councilmember Hawes inquired whether the European Health Spa pool was inspected on a regular basis by the City. The Director of Planning & Inspection stated that the City Sanitarian inspects the commercial and public pools in the City on a regular basis and more frequently if there are problems noted. He added that the 4 -12 -82 -8- ph levels of the pools are required to be logged by the operators,and that if ph levels or chlorine levels are at improper levels the pools cannot operate. i LICENSES There was a motion by Councilmember Hawes and seconded by Councilmember Scott to approve the following list of licenses: CIGARETTE LICENSE Canteen Company 6300 Penn Ave. S. FMC 1800 Freeway Blvd. FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE Arthur "Treacher's Fish & Chips 6100 Brooklyn Blvd. Bernard Lynch 6804 Humboldt Ave. N. Brooks Superette (Meat'Counter) 6804 Humboldt Ave. N. Showbiz Pizza 5939 John Martin Dr. ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE , Earle Brown -PTA 5900 Humboldt Ave. N. Knights of Columbus 7025 Halifax Ave. N. MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE Berghorst Plumbing & Heating 10732 Hanson Blvd. Care Air Conditioning & Heating 1211 Old Highway 8 D & D "Anderson Heating R. R. #4 Box 254 Gas Supply,.Inc. 2238 Edgewood Ave. S. Gemmill Heating & Air Cond. 7044 167th Ave. N.E. Midwestern Mechanical 9175 Davenport St Minnesota Gas Company 733 Marquette Ave. s Northeast Sheet Metal, 'Inc 4347 Central Ave. N.E. Rouse Mechanical, Inc. 11348 K- Tel Dr. SBS Mechanical, Inc 7160 Madison Ave W. Sheridan Sheet Metal Co 4116 Quebec Ave. N. NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE f Canteen Company 6300 Penn Ave. S. FMC 1800 Freeway Blvd. Coca Cola Bottling Midwest 1189 Eagan Ind. Rd. City Garage 6844 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Fisher Foods 6800 Shingle Cr. Pkwy: Interstate United Corp. 1091 Pierce Butler Rte. State Farm Ins. 5930 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Midwest Screw 3501 49th Ave. N. PERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Canteen Company 6300 Penn Ave. S. FMC 1800 Freeway Blvd. Interstate United Corp 1091 Pierce Butler Rte, State Farm Ins. 5930 Shingle Cr. Pkwy 4 -12 -82 -9- i C SPECIAL FOOD HANDLING LICENSE Weight Loss Med. Ctr. 6040 Earle Brown- °Dr. SIGN HANGER'S LICENSE Suburban Lighting, Inc. 6077 .Lake'ElmoAve. SWIMMING POOL LICENSE Indoor: Brooklyn Center Community Center 6301 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Earle Brown Farm Apts. 1701 -07 69th Ave. N,. European Health Spa 2920 County Rd. 10 Holiday Inn 1501 Freeway Blvd. Outdoors Norman Chazin 5353 Wayzata Blvd.` 2 83 6 Northwa - Dr. F our Court A t s s. Y P Northbrook Apts. 1302 69 th A ve. N. North Lyn Apts. 6511 Humboldt Ave. N. Garden City Court Apts. 3407 65th Ave.; N. Griffin Companies 6200 Humboldt S. Columbus Village- Apts'. 507 70th Ave. N. Moorwood Homeowners Assoc. 5809 Lake Curve In. Bennie Rozman 400 Dakota Ave. S. • Brookdale Ten Apts. Hwy. 100 & 53rd Ave Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. Mayor Nyquist noted that at a past Council meeting representatives of the Creek. Villas Townhouses were present to discuss their contention that they are treated unfairly, with regard to taxes because they are a townhouse development. He pointed out that the City's response was that this is because the townhouses have opted for ,private streets and therefore are not part of the public street system system. He pointed out that this issue again came up at the "Eggs & Issues" breakfast with local legislators, and that the representatives from Creek Villas were told that it is the City's problem and not the legislature's problem. Mayor Nyquist pointed out that the problem is a state problem since a special type of property classification recognizing townhouses would have to be created by the legislature for tax purposes. COMMUNITY ACCESS CORPORATION Councilmember Scott stated that she was requesting suggestions from the Council for names of any persons interested in serving on the Community Access Corporation for the Northwest Suburban Cable System. She explained that each City recommends one person to be appointed to the CAC and that there is also one representative 4 -12 -82 -10- from Human Services, schools, arts, and senior citizens. She noted that if Council members know of any persons that are interested in serving on this Corporation they could contact her., ADJOURNMENT There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Hawes to adjourn the meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Lhotka, Scott, Hawes, and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at 8:55 p.m. Clerk Mayor I i, 4 -12 -82 -1I- T4: Sy Knapp, Director. of Public Works FRO,111: Jim Crube, Assistant City Fnqineer DATE: April 22, 1982 RE: Final Plat of Red Lobster Addition (Planning Commission Application No. 82010)' Mr. Robert Johnson has petitioned the Engineering Department to final the referenced plat. The City ,Council approved the preliminary plat at its March 22,1982 meeting subject to the following conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3. Lot 2 shall be encumbered to the sole use of the Red Lobster Restaurant on Lot 3, 1, Piccadilly Pond Addition for parking purposes, such encumbrance to be a perpetual covenant running with the land until released by the City. 4. Final approval of the plat constitutes' a waiver of the normal ordinance requirement for frontage on a public street for Lot . 2 of the proposed Red Lobster Addition in Tight of existing cross access easements allowing access to the private roadway in off the Piccadilly Pond Addition. 5. The applicant shall ,provide a restrictive covenant for each parcel in the plat, to which the City shall be a party and which shall be enforceable by the City. Said restrictive covenant shall provide that no structure be constructed within 15 feet and no parking' constructed within 10 feet of the lot line abutting the "common drive" of Lot 2, Block 1, Piccadilly Pond Addition. 6. The applicant shall provide a driveway access from the proposed Lot 1 to the "common drive" directly across from the Red Lobster driveway access established under Planning Commission Application No. 82011. Such access shall be constructed in conjunction with the "common drive improvements comprehended under Planning Commission Application No. 82011. 7. The applicant shall provide a financial guarantee (in an amount` to be determined by the City Manager) to ensure the installation of a fire Ii sgdrant alone T.H. 152 on the proposed Lot 1, said u financial aarantee to be submitted prior to final plat approval. April 22, 1982 memo to Sy Knapp Page 2 In addition to the conditions listed above, the applicant has pro - vided a; preliminary draft of restrictive covenants as required by the City Council under Planning Commission Application No 82411 (site and building plan approval for Red Lobster) The conditions are as follows: 10. The parcel of land located in Brooklyn.Park shall be legally encumbered to the sole.use of the restaurant for access off Brooklyn Boulevard and for parking accessory to'the restaurant, said encumbrance to be a permanent covenant running with the land until released by the City'of Brooklyn Center and filed with the property at the County prior to issuance of building permits. The document establishing this encumbrance shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney. 12. The applicant shall provide a restrictive covenant, to which the City of Brooklyn Center shall be -a party, and which shall be enforceable by the City. Said restrictive covenant shall provide that no structures will be placed within 15 feet of the common drive nor will any parking be allowed within 10 feet of the common drive. The final plat appears to be in order, meeting the provisions of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. The applicant has provided restrictive covenants as comprehended under items ,3, 5, 10, and 12. Upon review of the documents, the City Attorney has noted that minor amendments must be made and the applicant's legal repre- sentative is proceeding as directed. The applicant has been in contact with our office regarding the type and amount of financial guarantee comprehended under item 7 The applicant will include the cost of driveway apron construction required under item 6 in the financial guarantee required for item 7. It is the intent of.the applicant to provide the required documents prior to Monday's City Council meeting;. however,`at this writing, I cannot guarantee the applicant's ability to do so. I, therefore, recommend the City Council approve the final plat contingent upon: 1. The applicant must submit the required restrictive covenants listed under items ,3, 5, 10, and 12 to the City staff for approval. 2. The applicant shall provide a financial guarantee to insure installation of the hydrant as comprehended under item 7 above and the driveway access as compre- hended under item 6 above. 3. All conditions must be met prior to release of the plat for filing at the County. JN( ;: jn R e ffft Ktu L 4"' ',z N 89 ° r2'od' W 485.41 ORAINAGt \- ITT .,♦:': p \ ♦tea 4. . � - AND UZXITY 0 �Q_T 2 .� LOT i 1 � • .o � E "��_ _ r _ _ N \ _ o =r. b0 AGE ANO Ij r a h D0G �; •t '� , 52170 1 .;.'^ ' ' 60Uk `H' CE f 4CF P� Ere t , 4^ 4tL IE a Y.: K CREEK— '.u4 K p i _ 5 . 1. .•,.,. _ �� a •M1 . e,xa- a .. _... 1. !. £: ry ., • Si aH IN 83 °4T39'E 64301 -" ~ • b0 Yeae rpaa �pvul aiu d590 FT INC, '1C 14191 '� 111 1 +.•r�l.....r \ • �t•- - `Wofo, f1t, s 64944 FT. (NANO. ISM �r as of May 6, 19'7 t. BENCH MARK • T,o or tat rran a,�n,,rt.enl V 51/4. Csney set. 713, T I1 Y, A. jl Elev + 66:1'. FT. (NGYO. i91 KNOW ALL.MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That Robert L. loonson and Marcene S. Johnson, STATE OF MINNESOTA his wife, owners and proprietors, and Camden Northwestern State Bank of Minneapolis, COU41 Y OF a Minnesota corporation, mortgagee, of the following described property situate - in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit: The foregoing Instr'urent was ackeo.+ ?-,. of is Lot 1, Block 1, PICCADILLY POND, according to the plat thereof on file Carden Northwestern State 61n1, of r of of retold In the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin of t1 colporatlon. County. Minnesota. T " Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as RED LOBSTER ADDITION and do - helenr danate a � dp'ittzzlle to the pl,ntte, for the public use forever, the drainage �, ♦1 i,itrt r :.r c' I 1, Ni-t it elt�ii•t ,O U TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works y FROM: Jim Grube, Assistant City Engineer DATE: April 21 1982 RE: Subdivision Deposit Release Clinch Valley Addition (69th Avenue and T.H. 252) A performance bond, issued May 10, 1978, was provided by Aetna Life and Casualty in the name of Philip and Marlys Neese as a guarantee for improvements to the referenced addition. The bond, in the amount of $1,500.00, provided coverage for planting of boulevard trees, placement of sod and survey monuments, and driveway construction within the subdivision. Although two of the three driveway approaches have not been constructed, it is recommended the City Council waive the s r eaui.rement on the grounds that the parcels are scheduled for MN /DOT acquisition in conjunc- tion with the proposed 'T.H. 252 improvement. All other improve - ments have been acceptably completed. It is recommended the City Council release the bond as requested by the Developer. JNG :jn a i M & C No. 82 -5, April 23, 1982 PROM THE OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER a CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Subject: Appointment of Board Member of the Community Access Corporation To the Honorable Mayor and City Council:._. Celia Scott and I serve as your representatives on the Joint Powers Board governing the northwest area cable franchise. As a part of the joint powers agreement and franchise a" Community Access' Corporation has been established. This is a - nonprofit °corporation which will assist the Joint Powers Board in governing the rules, regulations, and promotion of the community access channels on the cable television system. Brooklyn Center is entitled to appoint -a member to that board, and Councilmember Scott and I are recommend- ing the appointment of Dr. Duane Orn. Dr. Orn has expressed a consistent interest in community affairs. He has also served ' in -a number of advisory capacities on City committees and projects. We believe he would be a most ' useful and welcome addition Community Access Corporation and recommend him for your appointment. Respectfully submitted, Gerald G. Splin!er City Manager CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER t f Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO PETITION THE COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION FOR THE APPROVAL OF ADVANCE ENCUMBRANCE OF MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREET CONSTRUCTION FUNDS WHEREAS, THE City of Brooklyn Center has obtained the Commissioner of Transportation's approval of the plans for the following Municipal State Aid Street Projects:' S.A.P. No 109- 110 -07 M.S.A.S. No. 110 -010 Located Xerxes Avenue T.H. 100 to C.S.A.H. 10 i Consisting of Street Reconstruction S.A.P. No. 109= 122 -01 M.S.A.S. No. 122 -010 Located 55th Avenue - T.H. 152 to Xerxes Avenue Consisting of Street Reconstruction and: S.A.P. No. 109- 123 -01 M.S.A.S. No.- 123 -010 Located 56th Avenue T.H. 152 to Xerxes Avenue Consisting of Street Reconstruction; and WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is prepared to proceed with the construction of said projects by providing local funds to supplement the available funds in its Municipal State Aid Street Account, and WHEREAS, repayment of the funds so advanced by the municipality is desired in accordance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes 162.14, Subdivision 6. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the 'City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the City Engineer is hereby authorized to petition the Commissioner of Transportation to approve this basis for financing said construction projects and to authorize repayment from the subsequent accrual to the Construction Account of the Municipal State Aid Street Fund for the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, within the limitations provided by law and at the time and in the amount as follows: On or after February 1, 1983 - $56,000.00 from 1983 Allotment. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk _ RESOL.U"T'ION NO. 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. i TO: Sy Knapp, Director of Public Works • FROM: Jim Grube, Assistant City Fngineer DATE: April ,21, 1982 RE: Advance Encumbrance of Municipal State Aid Construction Funds Based upon contract prices received for the Xerxes,.55th, and 56th Avenue reconstruction project, the City's regular M.S.A. construction fund account at the State will show a negative balance when the official report of contract is forwarded to MN /DOT. In cases such as this, MN /DOT will allow the`munici- pality to "Advance Encumber" a portion of its 1983 funds, to cover the deficit. Although the funds are reserved for the specific use of eliminating the deficit, the Cit# will not receive the funds until February 1, 1983. A brief summary of the`M.S.A.. construction fund regular account balance follows: Finances available this date. $242,658.18 Encumbrance for final payment on Freeway Boulevard turn lane at T.H. 100: - 1,023.36 Balance available for Xerxes,` 55th, 56th $241,634.82 Eligible costs (construction, engineering) for Xerxes, 55th, 56th $296,858.77 1983 fund encumbrance - required $ -55, 223.95 For purposes of reporting, the City may request an advance encumbrance of $56,000.00. JNG:jn • Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RECEIVING CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT ESTABLISHING 69TH AVENUE - 70TH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -09, SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 710, WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1982 -11 AND PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS NOS. 1982 -09,, 1982 -10, AND 1982 -11 WHEREAS, the City Council has received a report from the City` Engineer regarding the improvement of the Evergreen-Park area street system by construction of the 69th Avenue - 70th Avenue street connection .between Dupont and Camden Avenues at an estimated cost of $136,290.00; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has further reported that certain sanitary sewer and water main service extensions are required to adequately serve the adjacent areas as they develop, the cost of such extensions estimated at $13,560.00 and $5,970.00 respectively; and C WHEREAS, the City Council deems it necessary and in the best interests of the City of Brooklyn Center to complete said improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that said City Engineer's Report is hereby accepted and said improvements be established as follows: 69th - 70th Street Improvement Project No. 1982 -09 Sanitary-Sewer Improvement Project No. 1982 -10' Water; Main Improvement Project No. 1982 -11 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City. Council of the City of Brooklyn, Center, Minnesota, as follows: 4 1. The Council proposes to proceed under authority granted by Chapter 429, Minnesota Statutes. 2. A public hearing on the proposed improvements shall be held at the City Hall in the City on Monday, the 24th day of May, 1982, at 8 :00 O'clock P.M., and the Clerk shall publish notice of the time and place of hearing by two week's publication in the official newspaper of the City. 3. The area proposed to be assessed for said improvements is as follows; Improvement Project No. 1982 -09 Those properties between 69th and 70th Avenues and Dupont Avenue and Camden Avenue (extended) abutting) and benefited by, the improvement. Improvement Projects Nos. 1982 -10, 1982 -11 The benefited areas of Lot 50, Lot 51, and Lot 52 Auditor's Subdivision No. 309. RESOLUTION NO. 4. The Finance Director is hereby authorized to appropriate $5,000.00 from the Special Assessment Fund for subsurface soil exploration and testing purposes. Date Mayor ATTEST: y Y 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 vpted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. t x CITY OF 6301 SHINGLE CREEK PARKWAY BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 ._ 1 TELEPHONE 561 -5440 ., EY"ERM E�EFtGENCY -PO L!C E -F IRE 561-5720 ENGINEER'S REPORT Street Improvement Project No. 1982 -09 Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project No. 1982 -10 Water rain Improvement Project No. 1482 -11 Street Improvement Project No. 1982 -09 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Grading and Bitumipous Paving Sanitary Sewer Improvement Project No. 1982 -10 Water Main Improvement Project No. 1982 - 11 PROJECT LOCATION: 69th Avenue 70th `Avenue street connection between Dupont Avenue and Camden Avenue, including sanitary sewer and water main service extension to adjacent properties. DISCUSSION: Pursuant to the adoption of City Council Resolution No. 82 - 47, the staff ha developed a construction` plan fore street improvements within the Evergreen area in accordance; with "Evergreen Area Improvement Concept B ". As provided under this concept, the major east -west collector route in the neighborhood will follow 70th Avenue between T.H. 252 and Camden Avenue, along the proposed 69th Avenue - 70th Avenue connection to Dupont Avenue and along'69th Avenue west of Dupont Avenue. It is proposed_.to complete the street construction between T.F. 252 and Dupont Avenue in phases in conjunction with the T.H. 252 improvement. The ultimate goal is to provide a parkway environ- ment, constructed to Municipal State Aid Standards. Street Improvement Project No. 1982 -09 provides for the first phase of construction along the 69th Avenue -70th Avenue connection. It is proposed to excavate all poor soils within the roadway right of way, complete necessary grading, 4pd construct a 7 ton capacity street from Camden Avenue westerly and southerly to a point alone 69th Avenue midway between Colfax and Bryant Avenues. This roadway construction will provide access to the proposed Hussman development alone 70th Avenue and serve as an interim connection between 69th Avenue and 70th Avenue, thereby allowing 69th Avenue to continue to serve as a major collector route. All soil corrections required alone} the permanent route will be completed under this project. { A � 1, lO�t £'E rtCilc f/l d2L LJC6, Engineer's Report Projects 1982 -09, 10, & 11 Page 2 k The proposed street improvement project provides for a 32 foot street surface without curb and gutter. Such 'a proposal pro - vides flexibility in the ultimate' design of the street between T.H. 252 and Dupont Avenue. If, upon: closer review of the service provided by the interim facility, ,it is determined that protected parking bays are necessary adjacent to the park, such construction may be incorporated in the final design. Likewise, bicycle lanes may be constructed if it can be determined that such use of the roadway is feasible. ` Also proposed under this project is the installation of all storm sewer, sanitary sewer (Improvement Project No. 1982 -10), and water main (Improvement Project No. 1982- 11) -to adequately serve the area - during the interim period and upon final comple- tion of all street improvements SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS:``The City Council, by adopting Resolution 82 -48, has designated the proposed route between Dupont Avenue and T.H. 252 as part of its Municipal State Aid Street.' System, pending approval by the Commissioner of Transportation. In conjunction with this designation, the staff has approached Hennepin County with the request' that it revoke its "County State Aid Highway" designation on 69th Avenue between T.H. 152 and T.H. 252. Although no official action has been taken, the Hennepin County staff has informed us of its intent to recommend the revocation be approved by the County Commissioners at the next meeting (within 30 days). The Minnesota Department of Transportation will take formal action on our requests,; and those of the County,, only after formal action is taken by the County. As noted in earlier reports to the City Council, the City is providing street right of way for the 69th Avenue 70th Avenue connection from land presently owned by the City. Also required is the acquisition of street right of way from two property owners. The staff has begun negotiations for the land purchase, but as of this date, no purchase agreements have been reached. FUNDING SOURCES: It is recommended the City Council levy assessments against the benefited properties abutting the 69th Avenue - 70th Avenue connection in accordance with established assessment policies for Municipal State Aid street construction. As pro- vided in said policies, all assessable frontage may be assessed at $10.40 per foot for paving where no previous street improve- ment assessment has been levied. In those areas along 70th Avenue west of Camden Avenue where previous street assessments have been levied, the maximum allowable assessment rate, as established by the Municipal State Aid street construction equity schedule, is $5.18 for paving. Engineer's Report Projects 1982 -09, 10 & 11 • Page 3 " It is recommended that all street improvement costs no:recovered by the levy of special assessments be financed from the City's Municipal State Aid Restricted Account.; As reported earlier, sanitary sewer and water main service extensions are required to adequately serve the area. It -'is recommended the City Council levy assessments against the bene- fited properties to help finance the cost of construction. It is recommended the water assessment be based on those rates established by the City Council under Resolution 81 -243 *. It is also recommended the City Council establish a °sanitary sewer assessment rate based upon unit rate of $23.33 per foot for the properties benefited by sanitary sewer extensions. It is recom- mended that all utility installation costs in excess of the specially assessed amounts be borne by the Public Utilities Fund. FINANCING SUMMARY: A summary of the estimated project costs and funding sources is listed below. Street Improvement Cost Summary (Improvement Project No. 1982 -09) Street Construction Cost $ 75,210.00 • Land Acquisition Cost 19, 740.00 Electrical Utility Relocation 3,000..00 SUBTOTAL $ 97,950.00 Contingencies (15% of Construction Cost) 14,690.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $112,640.00 Engineering Cost (9% of Construction Cost) 10,140.00 Legal & Administrative Cost (2% of Construction Cost) 2 Capitalized ;Interest Cost. (10% of Construction Cost) 11,260.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST $136,290.00 Sanitary Sewer Cost Summary ( Improvement Project No. 1982 -10) Sanitary ,Sewer Cost $ 9,750.00 Contingencies (15% of Construction Cost) 1,460.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $ 11,210.00 Engineering Cost (9% of Construction Cost) 1,010.00 Legal & Administrative Cost WE of Construction Cost) 220.00 Capitalized Interest Cost (100 of Construction Cost) 1,120.00 TOTAT3 PROJECT COST $ 13,560, 00 Engineers Report Projects 1962 -09, 10, & 11 Page 4 .Y Water Main Cast S=ar (Improvement Project No. 1982 -11) Water rain Cost $ 4,290.00 Contingencies 640.00 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST' $ 4,930.00 Engineering Cost (9 % of Construction Cost) 440.00 Legal & Adminstrative Cost' (2% of:Construction Cost) 100.00 Capitalized Interest Cost (10% of Construction Cost) 500.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST $ 5,970.00 REVENUE SOURCES SUMMARY: For Street Construction (Improvement Project 'No. .1982 -09): Special Assessments Private Property $ 5,730.00 City Property r 10,060.00 M.S.A. Fund Account No 2611 (Restricted Reserve) 120,500.00 TOTAL $136,290.00 For Sanitary Sewer Construction (Improvement Project No. 1982 -10): Special Assessments Private Property $ 9,360.00 City Property 750.00 Public Utilities Fund 3,450.00 TOTAL $ 13,560.00 For Water Main Construction (Improvement Project NO 1382 -11): Special Assessments Private Property $ 17,560.00' City Property 310.00', Public Utilities Fund (system credit) (11,900.00 TOTAL $ 5,970.00 Engineer's Report Projects 1982 -09, 10, & 11 Page 5 A resolution accepting this report and calling for a public hearing .to be held by the City Council on this project is submitted for Council consideration: f: Respectfully submitted, Sy Ynap�p * Note: Mater assessment rates established under Resolution 81 -243 are: $22.60 per front foot $ 7.00 per 100 square foot area beyond 135 foot depth SK: j n i 73R WA Y Cr ! N00 f3INE L NE, v 1 cc > z — x�c cr x I W O - 72NQ•�/•X EVERGREEN }: RIPER ©AiE I PARK PAR w EVERGREEN W W SCHOOL�C' a .x ASSESSMENT DISTRI o EME W AT E R,' TOWElt r s Project Location And Assessment District Map M im rovemet Project 19 • 7�R- war WOODBINE LANE - -r - - t v N • it ----rte Ul .- x �, r: -- EVER EN RIY R ER KALE ` 2 r R j� _ ,_� � _ X �C. r -�- - -- EVERGREEN - -- - -* uw SCHOOL _ Y r ASSESSMEN' - -- DISTRICT -� E MERS ON _ 'LA w ~ g Q o - ATE Rl ,, J WH ' TOWE0 No , • , ojct _location k' And Assessment District Ida Improvement Project 1 982 0 Imp rovemen t Project 1 U"N82-1 1 Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER CONTRACT' 1980-N (SHINGLE CREEK TRAILWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO'. 1978 -42, CIVIC CENTER ACCESS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT N0.- 1980 -04, PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS NOS. 1980 -09, 1980 -22 AND 1980 -23) WHEREAS, pursuant to written Contract 1980-N signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. of Shafer, Minnesota has satisfactorily completed the following improvements in accordance with said contract: w` Shingle Creek Trailway Improvement Project No. 1978 -42 Civic Center Access Improvement Project No. _ 1980 -04 Park Improvement Project No. 1980 -09 Park Improvement Project No. 1980 -22 Park Improvement - Project No. 1980 -23 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said contract: and change orders is accepted, and approved according to the 'following schedule. II ' SHINGLE CREEK TRAILWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1978 -42 L (From County Road 10 to I -694) Previously Final Approved Amount _Original Contract Amount $73,070.00 $76,759.87 Change Order No. 1 357.50 357.50 a TOTAL $73,427.50 $77,117.37 CIVIC CENTER ACCESS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT No. 1980 -04 (Rear Access) Original Contract Amount $31,052.50 $34,521.72 Change Order No. 1 (752.80 (752.80 TOTAL $30 $33,768.92 CIVIC CENTER ACCESS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO 1980 -04 (Front Access) Original Contract Amount $125,336_50 $96,583.82 Change Order No. 1 (961.60) (961.60) 3 Change Order No. 2 437.50 437.50 Change Order No. 3 656.00 i _656.00 TOTAL $125,468.40 $96,715.72 RESOLUTION NO. PARK 324PROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1980 -09 (Central Park Facilities - Parking Lot) Previously Final Approved Amount Original Contract Amount $61,815.00 $63,912.80 Change Order No. l (283.60 (283.60 TOTAL $61,531.40 $63,629.20 PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1980 -09 (Central Park Facilities - Electrical Lighting) r Original Contract Amount $4,920.00' $4,920.00 PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1980 -22 (Lift Station No. 1 Access Drive) Original Contract Amount $9,544.00 $9,039.58 PARK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1980 -23 (Garden City Park - Parking Lot) Original Contract Amount $9,4.50.25 $8,950.60' 2. - The total value of the work performed, at a cost of $294,141.39 is less than the sum of the original contract and change orders ($314,641.25) by $20,499.86 due to a general over- estimation of the planned quantities. 3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said contract, taking the Contractor's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said improvement under said contract shall be $294,141.39. r- 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. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK PERFORMED UNDER ENGINEERING SERVICES AGREEMENT WHEREAS, pursuant to written Agreement for Engineering Services signed with the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, Merila and Associates, has satisfactorily completed the design, plans and"specifications, construction engineering and supervision of the following improvements in accordance with said agreement: Shingle Creek Trailway Improvement Project No. 1978-42 Civic Center Access Improvement Project No. 1980 -04 Park Improvement Projects Nos. 1980 -09, 1980 =22, 1980 -23 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The work completed under said agreement is accepted and approved. Original Agreement: Fob' Design, Plans & Specifications $11,900.00 For Construction, Engineering, and Supervision 9,300.00 TOTAL $21,200.00 2. The value of the work performed is more than the original agreement amount by $21,425.97 due to: a) Additional services requested by the 'City Engineer during the design phase, which were not included in the basic contract,, i.e.: Completion of engineering design of Improvement Project No. 1980 -04 $2,373.30` Additional contract administration necessitated by initial bid rejection and subsequent bid letting 1,363.29 Reproduction of plan sheets and distribution of plans and specifications to contractors 585.00 SUBTOTAL $4,321.59 b) additional construction engineering and supervision costs as follows: r Additional services requested by the City Engineer during the construction phase of Improvement Project No. 1980 -04 $9,090.00 Additional contract administration required to monitor construction progress under phase construction, utilizing a method of operation not initially contemplated 8,014.38 SUBTOTAL $17,104.38 TOTAL $21,425.97 RESOLUTION NO. 3. It is hereby directed that final payment be made on said agree - ment taking the consultant's receipt in full. The total amount to be paid for said services under said agreement shall be $42,625.97. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk r 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. x TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager - FROM: Sy Knapp, Director of Public forks DATE: ! April 23, 1982 RE: Final Payment For Engineering Services Agreement With Merila & Associates, Inc. on Contract 1980 -N Attached hereto is ;a letter from Mr. Merila explaining the reasons for the dramatic increase in cost-for services provided under the agreement for Engineering Services relating to Contract 1980 -N. In summary, the factors involved in that cost overrun,_ and my comments regarding those factors are: Design Phase Services At the time the agreement was signed, we planned to utilize - our Engineering staff to design the Civic Center Access project. As work progressed, however, it became apparent that our staff was seriously overloaded with other projects. Accordingly, we requested Mr. Merila to accomplish this work for _us. As Mr. Merila notes, we received only one bid at the first bid opening, and it became necessary to reject that bid, revise the plans and specifications, and readvertise for new bids. This resulted in $4,321.59 of additional engineering costs, but the City did receive much better bid prices on the second bid (i.e. Contract costs were reduced; by about $70,000). Construction Phase Services Again, the original agreement did not provide for engineering supervision of the City Hall access project. The addition of this work accounts.for more than $9,000 of the extra charges. The remaining $8,000 overrun is the result of stage construction (not originally contemplated) and the contractor's method of operation. As Mr. Merila notes, the contractor did "drag out" the project over a 59 day work period. The specified July lst completion date was intended to allow cleanup and sodding to occur during May and June. Unfortunately, the contractor utilized this specified completion date to allow _him to work this project "on the side" - i.e. - when he wasn't busy on his I -94 project. He, of course, argues that the City received the benefit of his low prices which were made possible only because he planned to work it that way. There is, of course, substantial - validity ;to that argument, as evidenced by the fact that their bid was more than $50,000 below the second low bidder. While this didn't help to reduce the f_rust:i;ation we experienced: in trying to get the job completed, we must recog- nize that the additional engineering costs are small compared to the contract cost savings which the City benefited from. April 23, 1982 memo to G.G. Splinter Page _ 2 Accordingly, I recommend acceptance and ap_ proval of the final invoice from Merila and Associates, Inc. A resolution for this purpose is provided for consideration by the City Council. Respectfully submitted Sy nape SK: jn i A MLRILA & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS, SUR S ITE PLANNERS j 1601 67th Avenue North - Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 554430 a Telephone: (612) 560 -2660 April 22, 1982 Mr. Sy Knapp Director of Public Works City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Re Brooklyn Center Contract 1980 -N Explanation of Engineering Costs Dear Mr. Knapp:: In response to your request, I reviewed the engineering fees for Contract No. 1980 -N and am providing the following information for explaining why our engineering costs have exceeded the estimated engineering costs in our proposal dated July 16, 1980. A_ comparison of :the costs is as follows: Phase Proposal Estimate Actual Amount Difference Design $ 11,900.00 '$ 16,221.59`. $ 4,321.59 Construction 9,300.00 26,404.38- 17 104.38 T 42,625.97 21,425.97 DESIGN PHASE The additional costs of $4,321.59 in the Design Phase is due to additional services requested by the City, which were not included in_ the -basic contract. A summary of these costs is as follows 1 Assisted in the preparation of plans and specifications for the front access driveway under Project No. 1980 -04, as follows: a. Prepared Quantity Sheets and Proposals; b. Prepared Specifications; c. Prepared Addendum No. 1' for dividing Civic Center Access Project No.. 1980 -04 into the following: 1. Section 1 "Rear Access" 2. Section 2 "Front Access" Alternate A Permanent Construction Alternate B - Part Temporary Construction $2,373.30 2. Preparation of revised plans and specifications for rebidding the contract after receiving only one bid with the first bid opening on September 18, 1980. ll� $1,363.29 3._ Reproduction of plan sheets and distribution of plans and specifications to the contractors for the two bid lettings in September and October 1980. $ 585.00 4,321.59 Mr. 'Sy Knapp City of Brooklyn Center Page 2 Re: Engineering Costs Contract 1980 -N CONSTRUCTION PHASE ` The additional cost of $17,104.38 in the Construction Phase is due to the following factors 1. Additional services requested by the City for construction supervision and survey for Project,.No. 1980 -04, "Front Access $ 9,090.00 2. Underestimation of costs for the following reasons: a. Stage construction of work. $2,382.50 b. Contractor's method of operation. 5,631.88 8,014.38 17,104.38 Further explanation relative to each of the above is as follows: 1. Additional Work Relative to 1980 -04 (Front Access'Road Unfortunately, a formal written agreement was not prepared for the additional work requested for surveying and construction supervision of the front access road. However, it was my understanding the work would be done as an extension to our original agreement, which was on a time and materials basis with an estimated total cost. Our original fee had been based on an estimated construction cost amount for Project No. 1980 -09, 22, 23, 1978 -42, and 1980 -04 (Rear Access) of $180,000.00. Based on that premise, the proportionate split for surveying and engineering for inspection and project administration is as follows: Surveying $4,800.00 2.670 of construction cost Inspection and Project Administration $4 2.50% of construction cost 9,300.00 5.17% Eased on that breakdown, the estimated surveying and enggineering fee for the front access drive based on a contract cost of $125,336.00 would have been as follows: Surveying 2..670 of $125,336.00 = $3,346.47 Inspection and Project Administration 2.50% of $125,336.00 $3,133.40 6,479.87 A' comparison of the actual costs versus the estimated costs is as follows: Estimated Actual Difference Surveying 3,346.47 $3,2TT.Z5 35.22) Inspection and Project Administration 3 5,878.75 2,745.35 X6,479.87 $9,09U.00 2,6 0.13 j Mr. Sy Knapp City of Brooklyn Center Page 3" Re: Engineering Costs - Contract 1980 -N The above comparison shows that the actual survey cost is slightly under the estimated survey cost for the front access drive, but the inspection and project administration is considerably higher creating a total difference of $2,610.13, primarily attributed to the increased amount of engineering for inspection and project administration. A portion of this cost can be attributed to the stage construction on the project, but the main reason 'is for the method of operation by the contractor as described below in Item No. 3. 2.. Stage Construction of Work At the time our proposal was prepared, it was anticipated that the $180,000 projects would be constructed in 1980 and would not be constructed under a stage construction concept. It is estimated that the stage construction process,caused an additional cost of approximately $2,082.50 attributed to construction staking, and $ 300.00 due to additional engineering costs. The additional costs in the stage construction process were caused by the following.: a. Rear Access Road - Our original proposal comprehended staking the concrete curb for the rear access road one time and that would provide the staking for construction of the roadway. However, due to the method of construction, which was determined after getting into detail design, i`t was determined that initial bituminous base roadway would be installed during the fall of 1981 and the curb and gutter and re- maining blacktop would be placed in 1981 Constructing it under this method required the ,additional construction staking consisting of the following: 1. Initial staking for grading; L Setting blue tops for the gutter Tine and center of roadway for top of granular material so that the bituminous base could be placed on it for matchup with future curb and gutter; 3. Restaking for curb and gutter construction in 1981; 4. Additional survey and engineering work to check the elevation of the bituminous surface for settlement and to redesign a new curb and gutter grade to minimize additional bituminous costs for the final lift of wearing course. b. Restaking of City Hall parking lot and portions of the trail because work started in the Fall of 1980 and was carried over into the Spring of 1981. Mr. Sy Knapp City of Brooklyn Center Page 4 Re: Engineering Costs - Contract 1980 -N 3. Contractor's Method of Operation The construction engineering fee was underestimated by $5,631.88 on our original construction projects and approximately $2,600.1`3 as stated under Item No. l above under the Front Access Drive, primarily due to the contractor's method of operation. In preparing our proposal, we had estimated the 'contract amount of $1.80,000.00 to be accomplished in about` 20 working days; we did not anticipate the contractor would drag out the work over a "59 day period. If you recall, we had discussed a; tighter completion date for the contractor at the time of preparation of plans and specifications. However, it was felt if the contract completion date was too tight, contractor's might put extra money into their contract because of the tight schedule. Therefore, it was decided to utilize the July 15,'1981 date as.a completion date .rather than some earlier one. Unfortunately, the contractor's method of operation on this project was just the opposite of the contractor's method of operation under Contract 1980 -K, in that Ahe contractor did not pursue the work any faster than was necessary for completing the work on schedule. For comparison purposes, we had originally estimated. the $180,000 contract would be constructed in 20 days for an estimated amount of $9,000 of work value per day. By dividing the final contract amount of $294,000 by $9,000, it shows the estimated work days necessary to be 33 days for the entire` project. In reality, the contractor utilized 59 workdays or 27 days in addition to what we had estimated as a reasonable time for accomplishing the work. In comparison, the Bury and Carlson contract amount of approximately $470,000 was accomplished in 44 days or at a value of work` amounting to $10,682 per day. Therefore, a comparison of the actual work days; versus the estimated work days _shows that the work was stretched out by approximately 79% of the original estimated amount. This in turn increases the inspection and contract supervision in a similar proportionate amount. By utilizing a 79% increase in inspection and project administration costs, it increases our original estimated amount for the $180,000 portion of the project from $4,500 to $8,055 and for the additional`, work on the front access road from $3,133 to $5,639. A- summary of the comparison between the revised estimated engineering inspection and project administration fee and the actual costs is as follows: Estimated Increase Due to Contractor's Difference Estimate Method of Operation Actual Rev. Est.- Actual Original $180,00 Project $ 4,500.00 $8,055.00 $5,631.80 ($2,423.20) 1930 -04 (Front) 3,13 5,639.00 5,878.7 239.75 7,633.40 $13,694.00 $11,510.55 2,183.45 Mr. Sy Knapp City of Brooklyn Center Page 5 Re: Engineering Costs - Contract 1980 -N Upon reviewing the City's Standard Specifications and the Minnesota Department of Transportation's Standard Specifications, I find that all liquidated damages are tied into completion of the work by the scheduled completion date or by the number of working days. The situation that has been encountered under this project demonstrates the merits in looking at setting up a contract with a working day completion schedule rather than a calendar date completion schedule. This would then >requ -re the contractor to have the work 'completed within the prescribed working days rather than stretching out the work and still complying with the calendar day completion date. -If you have any questions regarding the above, we would be happy to discuss them with you. We would like.to take this opportunity to thank you and the City of Brooklyn Center for the opportunity to provide.the engineering services for Contract 1980 -N.- Sincerely yours, jreside ames R. Mer'ila P.E. nt JRM:ml ERILA & ASSOCIATES, INC. Enclosures: Summary of Engineering Fees Invoice #443 r Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION DECLARING CERTAIN CITY -OWNED PROPERTY AS SURPLUS, AUTHORIZING ITS RECONVEYANCE TO THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, AND APPROVING ITS CLASSIFICATION AS NON CONSERVATION LAND WHEREAS, on March 26, 1971, the State of Minnesota conveyed to the City of Brooklyn Center, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 282.01, Subdivision 1, the following described land to be used.exclusvely for street purposes; Plat 89104, Parcel 865 The east 90 feet of the west 180 feet of that part of Lot 6, lying east of a line running north at right angles from a point in the south line distant 1095 5/10 feet east from the southwest corner thereof, Lot 6, Auditor's Subdivision Number' -309, Hennepin County, Minnesota (P.I.N. 25- 119- 23 -41- 0008). WHEREAS the City Council now determines that the City's only interest in said land is to retain the Easterly 25 feet thereof for street purposes and to retain a permanent easement for the installation and maintenance of underground utilities and appurtenances thereto across the Northerly 20 _feet thereof; and WHEREAS, the Director of Planning and Inspections has advised the City Council that the remaining portion of property, which is to be recon- veyed to the State of Minnesota is not a buildable site in accordance with applicable provisions of the Brooklyn Center City Code, unless a variance is granted; Y NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Councilof the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, that: 1. The following described land is hereby declared surplus land by the City of Brooklyn Center and shall be reconveyed to the State of Minnesota: The west 65 feet of the east 90 feet of the west 180 feet of that part of Lot lying east of a -' line running north at right angles from a point in the south line distant 1095.5 feet east from the southwest corner thereof. Lot 6, Auditor's Subdivision Number 309, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Subject to a permanent easement for the installation and maintenance of underground utilities and appurtenances thereto across the northerly 20 feet thereof. RESOLUTION'NO. 2. Said land is approved for classification as "Non- Conservation ", Land and 3. Said land is hereby approved for public sale to the adjacent property owners in accordance with Minnesota Statutes.- relating to the sale of unbuildable parcels of land. 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. . � r TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Sy Knapp, 'Director of Public Works DATE: April 23, 1982 RE: Mr. and Mrs. Arnold J. FosleinIs Request to Purchase City Property In answer to Mr. and Mrs. Foslein's April 16, 1982 letter (copy attached) please be 'advised of the following; Property History This 90' -x 205' parcel of land was conveyed to the City of Brooklyn Center in 1971, as tax - forfeited land to be used "for street purposes Prior to that, in 1962, the City had initiated condemnation proceedings, then negotiated an agreement for the puchase of an easement for street purposes across the easterly 25 feet of the parcel- (to provide right of way for Willow Lane) and "permanent easement for installation of underground utilities (a sanitary sewer was installed) across the north 20 feet of the parcel. Since acquisition of the entire parcel by tax- forfeit, the City has maintained this property (mowing, week removal, tree trimming, etc.) but no plan has been developed for active use of the property. Procedure For Sale of Property Because this property was acquired as tax- forfeited property for street purposes, the City cannot sell it.to any private individual Rather, we can only reconvey it to the State, for resale by Hennepin County (as an agent for the State). Under normal practice, Hennepin County would then, place the property on sale to the general public to the highest bidder. However, Mr. Gordon -Ramm, of the Hennepin County Tax Division, advises that, under a new provision of the law, adopted by the 1982 State Legislature, if the parcel is` "unbuildable" (i.e. cannot be built upon, in its present configuration, without the granting of a variance) then the City Council may declare that it is unbuildable and request that it be sold only to one of the adjoining property owners. If this is done, an appraisal is made, and a sale is helk, involving only the adjoining owners. The property is then sold to the highest bidder, so Tong as that bid at least equals the appraised value. e i April 23, 1982 memo to G.G. Splinter Page 2 I have ,reviewed this parcel with Ron Warren and he has.deter mined that, because of its narrow depth (i.e. - 65 feet, when the east 25 feet is retained for street purposes), it is unbuildable, according to the statutory definition. Accordingly, we recommend that the City reconvey,the'varcel to the State, with the declaration that it is non- conservation property, that it is an unbuildable site, and requesting that it be sold to one of the adjoining property owners in accor dance with the new provisions'of the State law. A resolution for that purpose is provided for consideration by the City Council. Foslein's Intent to Re -Plat Mr. and Mrs. Foslein have advised ghat, if they are able to purchase the City's property, they then intend to replat this property in conjunction with the property which they now own, so as to develop two lots, both with frontage on Willow Lane. That plan appears to be feasible. Mr. and Mrs. Foslein recognize, of course, that the respon- sibility for initiating this platting procedure is entirely theirs, and that they must comply to the City's Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance.; Respectfully submitted, Sy K pp cc: Mr. and Mrs. Foslein SK: jn: ARNOLD J. FOSLIEfV "`•* '7120 RIVERDALE ROAD 1.J BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA 55430 April 16, 1982 Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager, City of Brooklyn Center, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, 11innesota 55430 Dear Sir; My wife and I desire to purchase a strip of land adjacent to the easterly border of our property. We submitted to your office a Surveyors Certificate,dated August 27, 1975,as requested,preliminary to granting of per - mission to construction of a 10 foot addition on our garage. That Certificate,prepared by Lot Surveys Company,contains all measurements of our property( Parcel "A" } and of the piece we wish to purchase( Parcel "B ).. At that time we were advised that Parcel "B" had previously become city property by condemnation because of non- payment of taxes and assessments by a former owner. Please let us know if that land is sellable; also the actions 1 we must take to acquire the land and tojoin it with our present property. Thanking you in advance for your consideration of this request, 1 we remain, Respectfully Yours, Mr. nd Fire. A.J. Fbslien t Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO A $1,000,000 COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE NOTE (SHINGLE CREEK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY PROJECT ); AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE THEREOF PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 474 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota as follows: Section 1. Definitions 1.01. In this Resolution the following terms, when used with initial capital letters, have the following respective meanings unless the context hereof or use herein clearly requires otherwise Act the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, ; Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, as amended; Assignment the Assignment of Rents and Leases, to be given by the Partnership in favor of the Lender; Building the one story office /warehouse building containing approximately 78,800 square feet, .including g the :Fixtures, to be constructed on the Land by the Partnership; City the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, its successors and assigns; Construction Loan Agreement the Construction Loan Agreement to be executed g u b the City, the Y Y: Partnership and Lender; Financing Statement the Uniform Commercial Code Financing Statement to be executed by the City with respect to the Pledge Agreement; Fixtures: those items defined as such in Section 1 -1 0 - tie Mortgage; Guarantors Waycrosse, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Richardson Properties, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and Panis, Inc., a Minnesota corporation; Guaranty the Guaranty to be given by the Guarantors and accepted by the Lender; Holder the registered owner of the Note; Land the real estate described in Exhibit A -to the Mortgage; Lender the First National Bank of Minneapolis, in Minneapolis, Minnesota, a national banking association, its successors and assigns; Loan Agreement the Loan Agreement to be executed by the City and the Partnership; Mortgage the Combination Mortgage and Security" Agreement and Fixture Financing Statement to be given by _the Partnership in favor of the Lender; Note the $1,000,000 Commercial Development Revenue Note (Shingle Creek Development Company Project) to be issued by the City pursuant to this Resolution; Partnership Shingle Creek Development Company, a Minnesota general partnership, its successors and assigns; Pledge Agreement the Pledge Agreement to be executed by the City and the Lender; Project the Land, the Building and the Fixtures as they may at any time exist; Project Costs those costs defined as such in Section 1.01 of the Loan Agreement, Resolution this resolution of the City adopted April 26, 1992, authorizing the issuance of t`he Bonds and the Note. Section 2. Findings It is hereby found and declared that: (a) the real property and improvements described in the Loan Agreement and the Mortgage constitute a Project authorized by the Act; -2 (b) the purpose of the Project is, and the effect thereof will be to promote the public welfare by the attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce so as to prevent the emergence of or to rehabilitate, so far as possible, blighted and marginal lands and areas of chronic unemployment; the retention of industry to use the available resources of the community in order to retain the benefit of its existing investment in educational and public service facilities; halting the movement of talented, educated personnel of mature age to other areas and thus preserving the economic and human resources needed as a base for providing governmental services and facilities; (c) the Project has been approved by the Commissioner of Energy, Planning and Development of the State of Minnesota as tending to further the purposes and policies of the Act; (d) the financing of the Project, the execution and delivery of the Loan Agreement, the Financing Statement, the Construction Loan Agreement. and the Pledge Agreement and the performance of all covenants and agreements of the City contained in the Loan Agreement and the Pledge Agreement, the Construction Loan Agreement and of all other acts and things required under the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to make the Note, the Loan Agreement, the Financing Statement, the Construction Loan Agreement and the Pledge Agreement valid and binding obligations of the City enforceable in accordance with their terms, are authorized by the Act; (e) it is desirable that the Commercial Development Revenue Note in the amount of up to $1,000,000 be issued by the City upon the terms set forth herein, and that the City assign its interest in the Loan Agreement and grant a security for the payment of the principal of, interest on and premium, if any, on the Note; (f) the proceeds of the Note are to be used to provide temporary financing for a portion of the Project Costs and it is anticipated that at or before -3- the maturity of the Note the Partnership will arrange for permanent financing of the Project which may take the form of obligations issued under the Act; (g) the loan payments contained in the Loan Agreement are fixed, and required to be revised from time to time as necessary, so as to produce income and revenue sufficient to provide for prompt payment of principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Note issued under this Resolution when due, and the Loan Agreement also provides that the Partnership is required to pay all expenses of the operation and maintenance of the Project including, but without limitation, adequate insurance thereon and all taxes and special assessments levied upon or with respect to the Project payble during the term of the Loan Agreement and (h) under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.10,.and as to be provided in the Note, the Note is not to be payable from nor charged upon any funds of the City other than the revenue under the Loan Agreement pledged to the payment thereof; the City is not subject to any liability thereon; no Holder of the Note shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the Note or the interest or premium or late charges, if any, thereon, nor enforce payment thereof against any property of the City except the revenue under the Loan Agreement pledged to the payment thereof and the Project should the City ever acquire title to it; the Note issued hereunder shall recite that the Note, including interest and premium, if any, thereon, is payable solely from the revenue under the Loan Agreement pledged to the payment thereof; and the Note shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional, charter or statutory Limitation; provided, however, that nothing contained in this paragraph (h) shall impair the rights of the Holder or Holders of the Note to enforce covenants made for the security thereof as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.11. Section 3. Authorization, Sale and Approvals 3.01. Authority The City is authorized by the Act to issue revenue bonds, and loan the proceeds thereof to business enterprises to finance the acquisition and ,construction of "projects" as defined in the Act, and to make all contracts, execute all instruments and do all -4- things necessary or convenient in the exercise of such authority. 3.02. Preliminary City Approval The Council gave preliminary approval to the sale of its revenue bonds pursuant to the Act and the loan of the proceeds to the Partnership for the acquisition and improvement of the Project suitable for use as an office /warehouse building and authorized the preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to the Project by the following actions: (a) October 19, 1981, adoption of Resolution No. 81 -208, calling a public hearing on the Project; (b) November 5, 1981, publication in the Brooklyn Center Post the official newspaper of the City, of the Notice of Public Hearing; (c) November 5, 1981, publication in The Minneapolis Star and in the Minneapolis Tribune newpapers of general circulation throughout the City, of the Notice of Public Hearing; (d) November 23, 1981, public hearing held at the City Hall; and (e) November 23, 1981, adoption of Resolution No. 81 -242, giving preliminary approval to the Project, 3.03. Authorization of Note; Sale of Note The City hereby authorizes the issuance of the Note in the - principal amount of $1,000,000 and determines to issue the Note in the form and upon the terms,set forth in this Resolution. The Note is hereby sold to the Lender at the prices and upon the terms set forth in this Resolution and in the Construction Loan Agreement. It is acknowledged by the City that the proceeds of the Note are to be used to provide temporary financing for a portion of the Project Costs and that at or before the maturity of the Note the Partnership intends to arrange for permanent financing which may or may not take the form of obligations issued under the Act. 3.04. Approval of Documents Pursuant to the above, there have been prepared and presented to this Council copies of the following documents, all of which are now, or shall be, placed on file in the office of the City Clerk: (a) the Loan Agreement; -5- (b) the Assignment (not to be executed by City); (c) the Pledge Agreement; (d) the Mortgage (not to be executed by City); (e) the Guaranty (not to be executed by City); (f) the Construction Loan Agreement; and (g) the Financing Statement. The forms of the documents listed in (a) through (g) above are approved, with such variations, insertions and additions as are deemed appropriate by the parties and approved by the City Attorney and City Manager. Section 4. Execution of Documents Upon the completion of the Loan Agreement, the Construction Loan Agreement, the Financing Statement and the Pledge Agreement, approved in Section 3.03 hereof, and execution of the Loan Agreement, the Construction Loan Agreement and Pledge Agreement by the Partnership and the Lender, as the case may be, the Mayor and the City Manager shall execute the same on behalf of the City and shall execute the Note in substantially the form as the Form of Note set forth following Section 5.01 hereof on behalf of the City, and shall execute such other certifications, documents or instruments as bond counsel or counsel for the Lender shall require, q , to the approval of the City Attorney, all certifications, I, y, tifications, recitals and representations therein shall constitute the certificates, recitals and representations of the City. Execution of any instrument or document by one or more appropriate officers of the City shall constitute and be deemed the conclusive evidence of the approval and authorization by the City and the Council of the instrument or document so executed. In the absence or disability of the Mayor, any of the documents author' I'I ized by this resolution to be executed, shall be executed by the acting Mayor, and in the absence of the City Manager by such officer of the City who, in the opinion of the City Attorn may execute Y Y Y such documents. Section 5. The Note 5.01. Form and Authorized Amount The Note shall be issued substantially in the form hereinafter set forth, with such appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as are permitted or required by this Resolution, and in accordance with the further provisions of this Section, in the total principal amount of up to $1,000,000. -7- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Commercial Development Revenue Note (Shingle Creek Development Company Project) R -1 $11000,000 The City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, a municipal corporation of the State of Minnesota (the "City "), for value received, hereby promises to pay to the order of FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MINNEAPOLIS, or assigns (the "Holder"), at its principal office in Minneapolis, Minnesota, or at such other place as the Holder may designate in writing, from the source and in the manner, and with interest thereon as hereinafter provided, the principal sum of ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000), or so much thereof as has been advanced from time to time pursuant to the provisions of the Loan Agreement described below, on May 1, 1985, and to pay interest on the unpaid principal amount, from the date hereof until this Note is fully paid, at a rate per annum equal to 93% of the t one month certificate of deposit rate, as reported under the heading "Money Rates" in the Midwest Edition of the Wall Street Journal published on the first business day after the fourth day of each month (or if not so published, as released from time to time by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System [presently Federal Reserve Statistical Release, Form H..15 (519)], entitled "Selected Interest Rates ") for such first business day (the "Tax Exempt Rate ") or at such higher rate or lower rate as hereinafter provided, in any coin or currency which at the time or times of payment is legal tender for the payment of public or private debts in the United States of America, in accordance with the terms hereinafter set forth. The Tax Exempt Rate shall never be less than 2% per annum or exceed 30% per annum. The initial Tax Exempt Rate applicable hereto is percent ( %) per annum. The Tax Exempt Rate will be adjusted weekly, if necessary, effective as of the date of such release of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System specified above. Interest on this Note shall accrue from and after the date of each and every advance hereunder so made by the Holder and shall be payable on the first day of the month next succeeding the date of which the first advance is made and on the first day of each and every month thereafter, with a final payment of accrued interest to be -8- made on May 1, 1985. The principal of and interest on this Note is payable in lawful money of the United States of America. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that the interest on this Note becomes subject to federal income taxation pursuant to a Determination of Taxability as defined in the Loan Agreement of even date herewith (the "Loan Agreement ") between the City and Shingle Creek Development Company, a Minnesota general partnership (the "Partnership "), the interest rate on this Note shall be immediately adjusted, from the Date of Taxability as defined in the Loan Agreement, to a rate per annum which is equal to one and one -half percent in excess of the rate of interest publicly announced by First National Bank of Minneapolis, a national banking association (the "Lender "), as its prime rate (which rate shall change on the day of the effective date of any change in such rate), (the "Taxable Rate "); provided that the Taxable Rate shall never be less than 3% per annum or exceed 39% per annum. Each monthly installment thereafter payable shall be accordingly adjusted. In addition the City shall pay to the Holder of this Note and to any prior Holder the aggregate difference between (A) the amounts actually paid between the Date of Taxability and the date of such payment and (B) the amounts that would have been paid to the Holder and any prior Holder during such period at such increased interest rate. In the event the City shall fail to make when due any interest payments or principal and interest payments required under this Note, the interest payment or principal and interest payment so in default shall continue as an obligation of the City until the interest payment or principal and interest payment in default shall have been fully paid, and, to the extent permitted by law, the City agrees to pay interest thereon at the rate of interest per annum borne on this Note. The principal of this Note may be prepaid either in whole or in part, on any date upon payment of a price equal to principal being so prepaid plus accrued interest to the date of prepayment. This Note constitutes an issue in the total authorized face amount of $1,000,000._ This Note is issued by the City pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 474, as amended (the "Act "), for the purpose of providing funds for a Project, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.02, Subdivision la, -9- consisting of certain real estate and improvements thereon, and paying necessary expenses incidental thereto, such funds to be loaned by the City to the Partnership pursuant to a Resolution adopted by the City on April , 1982 (the "Resolution "), the Construction Loan Agreement and the Loan Agreement, thereby assisting activities in the public interest and for the public welfare of the - City. This Note is secured by a Pledge Agreement, of even date herewith (the "Pledge Agreement "), between the City and the Lender, a Mortgage and Security Agreement, of even date herewith (the "Mortgage "), given by the Partnership in favor of the Lender, an Assignment of Rents and Leases, of " even date t herewith the "Assignment"), given b e ( 9 )► g Y th 4 Partnership in favor of the Lender and a Guaranty of even date herewith (the "Guaranty ") given by Waycrosse, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Richardson Properties, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, and Panis, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, in favor of the Lender. As provided in the Resolution, the City will cause to be kept at the office of the City Clerk a Note Register in which subject to such reasonable regulations as it -ma prescribe, the City shall provide for the Y P ► Y P registration or transfer of ownership of this Note. This Note is transferable upon the books of the City at the P Y Il k office of the City Clerk, by the Holder hereof in person or by its attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the City Clerk, duly executed by the Holder or its duly authorized attorney. Upon such transfer the City Clerk will note the date of registration and the name and address of the new Holder upon the books of the City and in the registration blank appearing below. Alternatively, the City will at the request of the Holder issue new notes in an aggregate principal amount equal to the unpaid principal balance of this Note, and of like tenor except as to number, principal amount and the amount of the monthly installments payable thereunder, and registered in the name of the registered Holder or such transferee as may be designated by the Holder. The City may deem and treat the person in whose name this Note is last registered upon the books of the City with such registration noted on the Note as the absolute owner hereof, whether or not overdue, for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of the principal balance or interest and for all other purposes, and all such payments so made to the Holder or upon its order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon this Note to the extent of the sum or sums so paid, and the City shall not be affected by any notice to the contrary. -10- All of the agreements, conditions, covenants, provisions and stipulations contained in the Resolution, the Loan Agreement, the Construction Loan Agreement, the Mortgage, the Assignment, the Guaranty and the Pledge Agreement are hereby made a part of this Note to the same extent and with the same force and effect as if they were fully set forth herein. If the City should fail to make any monthly installment of interest or principal and interest when due, which failure shall continue for ten (10) days, or if an event of default occurs under the Loan Agreement, the Construction Loan Agreement, the Guaranty, the Mortgage or the Assignment, then the Holder may at its right and option, by written notice to the City and the Partnership, declare immediately due and payable the principal balance of this Note and interest accrued thereon to the date of declaration of such default, together with an attorney's fees incurred b the Holder Y Y Y in collecting or enforcing payment of interest or principal of this Note, without notice to or consent of any party. This Note shall not be payable from nor charged upon any funds of the City other than the revenue under the Loan Agreement pledged to the payment thereof, nor shall the City be subject to any liability thereon. No Holder of this Note shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay this Note or the interest thereon, nor to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City except revenue under the Loan Agreement pledged to the payment thereof, other than to the extent payable out of any proceeds received from the sale or other disposition of the property subject to the Mortgage and Assignment should the City ever acquire title to it. This Note shall not constitute a charge, lien, or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City, except the revenue under the Loan Agreement pledged ed to the payment 9 P g P Ym thereof and the property subject to the Mortgage and Assignment should the City ever acquire title to it. This Note, including interest thereon, is payable solely from the revenue under the Loan Agreement pledged to the payment thereon, other than to the extent payable out of the revenue bonds to be issued by the City pursuant to the Act and out of any proceeds received under the Guaranty or out of any proceeds received from the sale or other disposition of the property subject to the Mortgage and Assignment. This Note shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional, statutory or char- ter limitation. lowever, nothing contained in this paragraph -ll- shall impair the rights of the Holder of this Note to enforce covenants made for the security thereof as provided under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.11. The Holder shall not be deemed, by any act of omission or commission, to have waived any of its rights or remedies hereunder unless such waiver is in writing and signed by the Holder and then only to the extent specifically set forth in the writing. A waiver with reference to one event shall not be construed as continuing or as a bar to or waiver of any right or remedy as to a subsequent event. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all conditions, acts and things required to exist, happen, and be performed precedent to or in the issuance of this Note do exist, have happened and have been performed in regular and due form as required by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused this Note to be duly executed by its duly authorized officers and its corporate seal affixed all as of the day of , 1982. CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA By Mayor And City Manager (SEAL) -12- PROVISIONS AS TO REGISTRATION The ownership of the unpaid principal balance of this Note and the interest accruing thereon is registered on the books of the City in the name of the registered holder last noted below. Date of Name and Address of Signature of Registration Registered Holder City Clerk First National Bank of Minneapolis 120 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480 -13- 5.02. Note Terms The Note shall be "designated the Commercial Development Revenue Note (Shingle Creek Development Company I Project) , and shall (a) be dated as of the date of delivery thereof to the Lender. (b) be in the total principal amount of ' $1,000,000 or such lesser amount as may from time to time be advanced under the Loan Agreement and the Construction Loan Agreement. (c) mature on May 1, 1985 and bear interest on the unpaid principal balance advanced from time to time from date of issue until paid or discharged as herein provided payable on the first day of the month next succeeding the date of which the first advance is made under the Note and on the first day of each and every month thereafter, with a final payment of accrued interest to be made on May 1, 1985, at a rate per annum equal to 93% of the one month certificate of deposit rate, to as reported under the h '�� heading Money Rates in the Midwest Edition of the Wall Street Journal published on the first business day after the fourth day of each month (or if not so published, as released from time to time by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System [presently Federal Reserve Statistical Release, Form H.15 (519)], entitled "Selected Interest Rates" for such business day (the "Tax Exempt Rate ") or at such higher rate as herein, provided that the Tax Exempt Rate shall never be less than 2% per annum or exceed 30% per annum, and provided further that upon its initial issuance until the first business day after the fourth day of the following month the rate of interest on the Note shall be equal to the.one month certificate of deposit rate as reported under the heading "Money Rates" in the Midwest Edition of the Wall Street Journal published on the date of issuance of the Note (or if not so published, as most recently released by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System [presently Federal Reserve Statistical Release, Form H.15 (519)] entitled "Selected Interest Rates" as of such business day. Notwithstanding'` anything in this Resolution to the contrary in the event the interest on the Note becomes subject to federal income taxation pursuant to a "Determination of Taxability" as defined in the Loan I Agreement, the interest rate on the Note shall be immediately adjusted to a rate per annum which is equal to one and one -half percent in excess of the rate of interest publicly announced by First National Bank of Minneapolis, a national banking association (the "Lender "), as its prime rate (which rate shall change on the day of the effective date of any change in such rate), provided, that such increased rate shall never be less than 3% per annum or exceed 39$ per annum, . from the Date of Taxability, as defined in the Loan Agreement, all as provided in the form of the -14- Note contained in Section 5.01 hereof. The rate of interest borne on the Note prior to a Determination of Taxability will be adjusted weekly, if necessary, on the applicable day as of the date of such release by the Board of Govenors of the Federal Reserve System referred to herein. (d) be subject to redemption and prepayment in whole or in part on any date upon payment of a price equal to the principal being so prepaid plus accrued interest to the date of prepayment. 5.03 Execution The Note shall be executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Manager, and shall be sealed with its corporate seal. In case any officer whose signature shall appear on the Note shall cease to be such officer before the delivery thereof, such signature shall nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes. 5.04. Mutilated, Lost and Destroyed Note In case the Note shall become mutilated or be destroyed or lost, the City upon compliance by the Holder with any applicable provision of law shall cause to be executed and delivered a new Note of like outstanding principal amount and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Note, or in lieu of and in substitution for such Note destroyed or lost, upon the Holder's paying the reasonable expenses and charges of the City in connection therewith, and in case the Note is destroyed or lost, its filing with the City evidence satisfactory to it and compliance with any applicable provisions of law. 5.05. Registration of Transfer The City will cause to be kept at the office of the City Clerk a Note Register in which, subject to such reasonable regulations as it may prescribe, the City shall provide for the registration or transfer of ownership of the Note. The Note shall be transferable upon the books of the City by the Holder thereof in person or by its attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of the Note together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the City Clerk, duly executed by the Holder or its duly authorized attorney. Upon such transfer the City Clerk shall note the date of registration and the name and address of the new Holder on the books of the City and in the registration blank appearing on the Note. Alternatively, the City shall, at the request and expense of the Holder, issue new notes, in aggregate outstanding principal amount equal to that of the Note surrendered, and of like tenor except as to number, principal amount and the amount of the monthly installments payable thereunder, and registered in the name of the Holder or such transferee as may be designated by the Holder. The City may deem and treat the person in whose name each Note is last registered upon the books of.the City with such -15- registration noted on the Note as the absolute owner thereof, whether or not overdue, for the purpose of receiving payment of or on account of the principal balance, prepayment price or interest and for all other purposes, and all such payments so made to the Holder or upon its order shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon this Note to the extent of the sum or sums so paid, and the City shall not be affected by any notice to the contrary. 5.06. Delivery and Use of Proceeds Prior to delivery of the Note, the documents referred to below shall be completed and executed in form and substance as approved by the City Attorney. The City shall execute and deliver to the Lender the Note in the total principal amount of up to $1,000,000, together with the following: (a) a duly certified copy of this Resolution; (b) original, executed counterparts of the Loan Agreement, g ement, Construction Loan Agreement, Financing Statement and the Pledge Agreement; and (c) such closing certificates, opinions and related documents as are required by bond counsel. Upon delivery of the Note and the above items to the Lender, the Lender shall, on behalf of the City, disburse to the Partnership the P roceeds of the Note in reimbursement of Project Costs pursuant to the provisions of the Loan Agreement and the Construction Loan Agreement, and the proceeds so disbursed shall be deemed to have been disbursed for the benefit of the City. The Lender and the Partnership shall provide the City with a full accounting of all funds disbursed for Project Costs. Section 6. Limitations of the City's obligations Notwithstanding anything contained in the Note, the Loan Agreement, the Construction Loan Agreement, the Pledge Agreement, or any other documents referred to in Section 3.04 hereof, the Note shall not be payable from nor charged upon any funds of the City other than the revenue under the Loan Agreement pledged to the payment thereof, nor shall the City be subject to any liability thereon. No Holder or Holders of the Note shall ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the Note or the interest or any premium or late charges thereon, nor to enforce payment thereof against any property of the City, other than the property subject to the Mortgage and Assignment should the City ever acquire title to it. The Note shall not constitute a -16- charge, lien, or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City, other than the property subject to- the Mortgage and Assignment should the City ever acquire title to it. The Note, including interest and premium, if any, thereon, is payable solely from the revenue under the Loan Agreement pledged to the payment thereof, except to the extent payable out of the proceeds received under the Guaranty or out of any proceeds received from the sale or other disposition of the property subject to the Mortgage and Assignment. The Note shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional, charter or statutory limitation. However, nothing contained in this Section 6 shall impair the rights of the Holder or Holders of the Note to enforce covenants made for the security thereof as provided under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 474.11. Section 7. Registration and Certification of Proceedings 7.01 Registration The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Director of Property Taxation of Hennepin County, together with such other information as he shall require, and to obtain from the Director of Property Taxation a certificate that the Note has been entered in his bond register as required by law. 7.02. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the City and the Director of Property Taxation of Hennepin County are directed to prepare and furnish to the Lender, and to the attorneys rendering an opinion as to the legality of the issuance of the Note, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City, and such other affidavits, certificates and information as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality of the Note as the same appears from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed representatives of the City as to the facts stated therein. Adopted: 1982. Mayor Attest: City Clerk -17- 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: I whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. -18- r MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Brad Hoffman, Administrative Assistant DATE: April 22, 1982_. , SUBJECT: Shingle Creek Development IRB The resolution giving final approval to an Industrial Revenue Bond for the Shingle Creek Development Company represents one of the projects previously discussed with the Council in January. Preliminary approval was granted for an amount of $2,172,150 last ct Plaza II project Shingle Creek p 7 t November. The involves the construction of a 78,500 square foot office /warehouse building at the intersection of Freeway Boulevard and Xerxes. The documents necessary for granting final approval have been submitted and have also been reviewed by our Attorney (Dave Kennedy). He has assured me that such documents are in their proper order. { Lot Member introduced the following, resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PRESCRIBING VOTING PRECINCTS.FOR: THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is presently constituted into eight voting precincts described by a resolution adopted by the City Council on July 10, 1972; and WHEREAS, a' federal census was conducted for the year 1980 which indicated, among other things, the population distribution within the City of 'Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, on the basis of the 1980 census, a Federal District Court reapportioned Minnesota Legislative Districts; and WHEREAS, the Federal District Court, in March 1982, developed a reapportionment plan placing the entire City of Brooklyn Center within Senate District 47 and portions; of the City in House Districts 47A and 47B; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the factors of population distribution within Brooklyn Center, new legislative district lines, community neighborhoods, and various school district boundaries within the City; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows; 1. To rescind the resolution establishing voting precincts for the City of Brooklyn Center adopted by the City Council on July 10, 1972. 2. Voting precincts in the City of Brooklyn Center shall be numbered and described as follows; t Precinct One Bounded on the south by the south City limits; on the west by Shingle Creek; on the north by the centerline of County Road 10 to the centerline intersection of 57th Avenue North and Logan Avenue North, thence northerly along the centerline of Logan Avenue North to the f centerline of 58th Avenue North, thence easterly along the centerline of 58th Avenue North extended to the Mississippi River on the east by the Mississippi River. Precinct Two Bounded on the east by the Mississippi Rived on the south by the centerline of 58th Avenue North extended to the centerline of Logan Avenue North, thence southerly along the centerline of Logan Avenue North to the centerline of 57th Avenue North (also known as County Road 10), thence westerly along the centerline of County Road 10 to the centerline of Shingle Creek; on the west by Shingle Creek to the intersection with the centerline of F.A_I.'94, thence northwesterly along the centerline of F.A.I. 94 to the centerline of Xerxes Avenue North, thence northeasterly along the centerline of Xerxes Avenue North to the centerline of Shingle Creek Parkway, thence northwesterly y r ' RESOLUTION NO. ' along the centerline of Shingle Creek Parkway to the centerline of 69th Avenue North; on the north by the centerline of 69th Avenue North to the centerline of Dupont Avenue North, thence southerly along the centerline of Dupont Avenue North to the centerline of 65th Avenue North, thence easterly along, the centerline of 65th Avenue North to the intersection with the centerline of 66th Avenue North, thence northeasterly along the centerline of 56th Avenue North to the inter- section with the centerline of Camden Avenue North, thence southerly along the centerline of Camden Avenue North to the intersection with the south line of the north one -half of Section 36, Township 119, Range 21, thence easterly along said half- section line to the Mississippi Rivera Precinct Three Bounded on the south by the south line of the north one -half of Section 36, Township 119, Range 21 to the centerline of Camden Avenue North, thence northerly along the centerline of Camden Avenue North to the intersection with the centerline of 66th Avenue North, thence southwesterly along the centerline of 66th Avenue North to- the _inter- section with the centerline of 65th Avenue North, thence westerly along the centerline of 65th Avenue North to the intersection with the centerline of Dupont Avenue North, thence northerly along the centerline of Dupont Avenue North to the centerline of 59th Avenue North, thence westerly along the centerline of 69th Avenue North to the centerline of West Palmer Lake Drive; on the west by the centerline of West Palmer Lake Drive; on the north by the north City limits; on the east by the Mississippi River. Precinct Four: Bounded on the north by the north City limits; on the east by the, centerline of West Palmer Lake Drive; on the south by the south line of Section 27, Township 119, Range 21., to its intersection with the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard, thence southeasterly along the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard to the centerline of`F.A.I. 94, thence westerly along the centerline of F.A.I. -94 to the west City limits; on the west by the west City limits extended northerly to the centerline of 69th Avenue North, thence easterly along the centerline of 69th Avenue North to the centerline of Perry Avenue North, thence northerly along the centerline of Perry Avenue North to the centerline of 71st Avenue North, thence northeasterly albng'the centerline of 71st Avenue North to the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard, thence northwesterly along the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard to the north City limits Precinct Five Bounded on the north by the centerline of 94 to the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard; on the east by the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard; on the south by the centerline of 63rd Avenue North; on the. West by the west City limits. Precinct Six Bounded on the north by the centerline of 69th Avenue North; on the east by the centerline of Shingle Creek Parkway, thence southeasterly along the centerline of Shingle Creek Parkway to the centerline of Xerxes Avenue North, thence southwesterly along the centerline of Xerxes Avenue North to the centerline of F.A.I. 94, thence southeasterly along the centerline of F.A.T. 94 to the of Shingle Creel:, thence southerly along Shingle Creek to the centerline of County Road 10; on i RESOLUTION NO. the south by County Road 10; on the west by the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard. Precinct Seven Bounded on the north by the centerline of 63rd Avenue North; on the east by the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard; on the south by the centerline of County Road 10; on the west by the west City limits. Precinct Eight Bounded on the north by the centerline of County Road 10; on the east by Shingle Creek; on the south by the south City limits; on the west by the west City limits. Precinct Nine Bounded on the north by the north City limits; on the east by the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard to the intersection with the center- line of 71st Avenue North, thence southwesterly along the centerline of 71st 'Avenue North to the intersection with the centerline of Perry Avenue North, thence southerly along the centerline of Perry Avenue North to the intersection with the centerline of 69th Avenue North; on the south by the centerline of 69th Avenue North; on the west by the west City limits. Date Mayor ATTEST Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resoltuion 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. M 14ORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Tom Bublitz, ' Administrative Assistant DATE: April 22, 1982 SUBJECT: Legislative. Redistricting After each Federal Census, the states are required to develop plans to reapportion legislative and congressional voting districts to maintain a population equality within the districts. Historically, the primary reason for conducting a_ census was for congressional reapportionment. Since the Minnesota State Legislature failed to agree on a redistricting plan, a plan was submitted March 12 by a panel of Federal Judges. The courts redistricting plan places Brooklyn Center entirely within State Senate District 47 and splits the City into House District 47A and 47B (see attached map) With respect to congressional reapportionment, the plan moves the City from the 3rd to the 5th Congressional District. Brooklyn Center will be completely within Congressional District 5. The City Council has supported the policy of placing the City entirely within a single Legislative District and the City requested the court to place Brooklyn Center entirely within House District 47B, particularly since such a small portion of the City was assigned to District 47A. Other municipalities have made similar requests of the court regarding its redistricting plan. The courts response to these types of requests has been that only "errors and ommissions" will be considered as grounds for a change in the courts redistricting plan. Attached to this memo- randum you will also find the Federal Courts response to several cities that reported possible discrepancies in the courts reapportionment plan. The court did not notify each City individually and Brooklyn Center did not receive any individual notice fron the court regarding the City's comments and requests on the reapportionment plan. In its response to municipal requests the court has indicated that "the court has considered these comments only to the extent they identified mistakes or errors. All other comments, however thoughtful, were not considered for two reasons. First, they go beyond correcting clerical errors or mistakes. To address them would require reopening the courts decision. Second, an adoption of many of the suggestions would breach the courts criterion for population equlaity absent additional modifications in surrounding areas. Again, this would require the court to reopen its decision. That we decline to do. State law requires that no precinct can be split by a Legislative District boundary line, thus a new precinct must be created in Brooklyn Center to accomodate the portion of the City lying within House District 47A. Council action is required to designate the boundaries of the precinct. This can be accc_l,plished by a Council resolution. After the new precinct is established vote: in the affected area mist be notified in writing of the changes in their precinct and any change in voting location. The map accompanying this memorandum shows the proposed.new precinct. • According to the 1980 census the population of the newly created Preinct 9 is 1,125 Currently, this area is part of Precinct 4. For your infor- mation I have also provided information on the attached table which shows the 1980_ population in each precinct and the number of registered voters in each precinct as per current records. • a A3101ad Idd,55�55!W {, 1 � J 4} 3 �ra tl� ) f 4 . I 9 D ;a �[ ..' - � iii • • - t . �: .=t> ++t u• \ -'R76iQO5" ! L .- , —:._.. _�t .�L 1 . __... "Ymom _ .— ` -- JC 7 60 3C I ?113 I CC ' (,.,� ...- - _. I - ( ..... «. .... }�. -__i_b iOiNii � t - c,.qy.. A ' ?�► . _y�y.. -. �� {QMil1tl1 ` ._v_�. � � _y � dE .,.�l ...IC �i 4NIFYl %�_ �1 �... A �•t .1 a ( B3Y17 1� +Y'`_9 . F WR E...W �� !•� ._wa4ub`�,; \ '''+� F: }R i.0 f� �} �._\_ �[ tKrSa. wt�- Z W +.,,_ (' �M1Y _ �E P �� tIM3NY °r}�'ka.R.Y� S' � ��.•:, {, y{ t�� !i 11 iF. ,`'n Its_ I 7Ka 11 i`. ,4;. N • jCYf *'S �t __ ). •• q1' f�l �1i • ��' ok t o 1 \\ i It W /'r.7 1 Mr !"'-' }� ��, ��I J il � �/ � � t Q71 /j�� ) 1:. f n, li -�l' ` v � -.. } k � � ^' � � �•4 cf � �f r A LLJ �F N11 Tw3Y� , 4fiTi a, . _. / } '7:ll�JJJ t t � IIA } ��► f bYY ��`� it �L�d I. Q } i' OYY 1Y 1E "1 +'INA'S71V91+! J .r.>.+•' ,dt N �,1� 1'i I , +G ! t'. � f p - � /p /y •i tl: t ;N,ijlii M t "d �� if O : +: �� Y1• }�_ o �1Lf ,,. . It �) e t 5N.a• 4b: _ r. ,r awgL "o N.,i (t' n� - bY� }rh I N, A°if -,/, err- -- --- or . � 1�, _ iY42'Y i n� Y r !iY GAi / s! f J .._ .�(17i1' 7 t r. i + f a 'v ?•Y , r' tt• L - '.. l - 1 ( "� ,� •,t sl p -:ry r( -,- _-.—� ,i !' � 31 1, t r i )11 i 1�3 ' ( i IY � fie. _ _ t 1. ! __t yd1 ? ;L,.i fi, ,.,:,;; 4 a« ,t •I;Y.Y1 ! ?: :: ,� ,� _ ._.� � ,n �ti .. it :,._...._ � • aL't;lusi. i � �._ 4 , ,;,;: ,� t • :J ll �tfYt/p 1 J �'A - z• _ ,�'f?s�l ��_-'L�.. �! �x - . d, sfr ( '�� YCJ�YR' 1 i n1 S I �p J }• Bad? S � Noun � t y.l�� ) r �} ! a>a nY,,„: l.,y �1 , ' a *✓ ��isAaa s t _ JJ - } UP • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER PRECINCT POPULATION, INFORMATION POPULATION REGISTERED VOTERS PRECINCT BY PRECINCT q_ BY PRECINCT 1 4,107 2,741 2 3,980 2,047 3 5,331 2685 4 4,436 2,673 2 5 2,883 1,844 6 4,219 2,763 T 3,061 2,024 8 3,213 2,049 TOTAL 1 31 18,826 Total population 18 years or older (1980 census) =22,354. ,. - According to 1980 census figures 84% of the eligible voters in Brooklyn Center are registered. . k f e�o�+��rN PAP4 PROPOSED PRECINCT BOUNDARIES L BROOK! 'YN PARK i I ! I` 11 040 � 1V�-t �``r —�y�{r X I o n ¢+ i " q� '� �"`f C f Rg lj4r ,�.: a '7[ !"t a t ��t l fN� rf Ct4. s M-f t ,,,pppyyy +E Eas 'LA. J _ uw ; Ii Istord -FV m r k.�aa�a a �+ .. � - _, E '. �Y 7K a 6t � `-_ ��qy� 1 =•lI . M v� y JI Eh0 ; _ w�CNE a �W!�r I �� SI P 1.� a h � • N„ FA L 69r.. sl 6t - ILZ� olm AVE f Is�rri �I r AI L v ,y 79 .� .. t 91 E k. a o. I i yy > E Y � I @ 7( 3J 3a E�,BNaLiw kn VIE .a M p yr` _ �i. l �'' a �� - �( _ - if p E1= N AV tr �€ k � yyJ A na AVE @h Mf f_fs 1t J .:7 id 4w E' Y X12 2,w .1 J v . ROdS1NSD,AL.E 1 s:- a OFFICE OF THE SECRE"ARY OF STATE kM `� aII[ • ,� 180 STATE OFFICE 6UIl.C;t. .'; -RN ANDEF ON - GOWE CGJ/10r;a8Gf1 DYrSrOR. 612:25 rrtary of Starr UCC D s:on 15 1, t? � . PEP March 2d, 1982 o lmeSec,e r 6f? °�AROC7 vy Ft Et7DY Oltr,roltne Secrrtary�: 612 29; -, DrDuty Sscrrfs y of state Otncr of Deputy, Secy.. 6 12 .95 i I t To : Senator Robert Ashbach County of Hennepin Senator Otto Bang Counter of Olmsted Representative Mary Forsythe City of Blaine Senator Peter Stumpf City of Brooklyn Park Representative Paul McCarron City of Eden Prairie Representative Bill Dean City of Bloomington Represenvative David Jennings City of St. _Paul Representative Douglas Ewald City of Edina Representative James Metz-en John T. Koloske Representative Carolyn Rodriguez Nelson & Mike Karns 'et al From: Joan Anderson_drowe r Secretary of State On March 18 we submitted to the federal court your reports of L possible d in the court reapportionment plan March 11. Attached is a copy of the court's order correcting certain mistakes and errors in that plan. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER" r UNITED STA'L'ES DISTRICT COURT- DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA FOURTH DIVISION Sharon LaComb, 'James A. Woolley and. 4 -81 Civ. 152 Phillip R.:Krass, individually and on behalf of All Citizens and Voters of the State of Minnesota similarly situated, Plaintiffs, V. r , y Joan Growe, Secretary of State of Minnesota; Vernon T°: Hoppe, Hennepin Cdunty Auditor; Charles R. Lefebvre, Anoka County Auditor; Thomas F.ennen, Scott County Auditor; Carl D. Onischuk, Dakota County Auditor, on behalf of themselves and all County Auditors of the State of Minnesota, Defendants, Martin Johnson, William Savage, and Patricia Wirtanen, Intervenors, Michael A. Hatch and Mary Monahan, Intervenors, Seventy- Second Minnesota State Senate, Amicus Curiae. ORDER The Court's reapportionment plan, issued March 11 1982, contains certain clerical mistakes and errors arising from oversight. By this `Order, we correct those mistakes and errors on our own initiative pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil procedure'60 (a). Our single purpose is to make only those corrections necessary to rectify mistakes and errors. We have undertaken simply to accurately express the Court's original reapportionment decision and plan. The Court has not reopened its deliberations to recon- sider any aspects of its decision. To the extent the narrative description of the Court' s decision, Appendix A, is in error we make the corrections necessary to effectuate our intent and original decision. Similarly, we correct the various maps to the extent necessary to accurately display our decision. The more detailed and specific narrative description of the plan in corrected Appendix A continues to control over the more general and J3 maps. In addition to the Court's own review, we have received comments from the Secretary of State and various municipalities. Through the Secretary of State, we received comments from representatives of both political parties of both houses of the Legislature. The Court has considered these comments only to the extent they identified mistakes or errors. All other comments, however thoughtful, were not considered for two reasons. First, they go beyond correcting clerical errors or mistakes. To address them would require: reopening the Court's • decision. Second, an adoption of many of the suggestions would 1 breach the Court's criterion for population equality.absent additional modifications in surrounding areas. Again, this would i require the Court to reopen its decision. That we decline to do. The Court was limited in its ability to meet all of the desires of all municipalities because of the 'nature of the record before it. The population data available to the Court through stipulation of the parties was not, in every instance,` aggregated to current municipal wards and precincts. Also, the Court did not an precinct maps s that included block population data. ward d have P � P No party or other interested person objeoted to the stipulated record or suggested additions to that record. We repeat that the State of Minnesota is free to adopt a constitutional plan after this date. Suggested changes to the Court's plan should be addressed to the Legislature. We make the following corrections: District 7 1. Appendix A, District 8B, was mislabeled. It is correctly labeled District 7A. 2. Appendix A is corrected to show B440, CT 3, in District 7B rather_ than 7A. 3. Appendix G, Duluth map, is corrected to show Habor Precincts 28.99 and 32.99 in District 7B rather than District 7A. 4. Appendix G, Duluth map, is corrected to show B322, CT 5, in District 7B rather than District 8B.. _ District 8 5. Appendix A, District 7A, was mislabeled. It is correctly labeled District 8B. _ District 12 6. Appendix A is corrected to show Wadena City, Otter Tail County, in District 12A. Distric 1 3 7. Appendix B, State map, is corrected to shod all of Irondal.e Township in District 13B. District 14 8. Appendix A is corrected to show Kettle River City in District 14B rather than 14A. 9. Appendix A is corrected to show Kalvala Township in 14A rather than 14B. District 16 10. Appendix A is corrected to show.Sartell City in District 16A rather than 16B. 11. Appendix A is corrected to show Elmdale Township, Upsala City, Krain Township and St. Anthony City in District 16B rather I I I than 16A. I 12. Appendix B, State map, is correctedto show Elmdale Township, Upsala City, Krai.n Township and St. Anthony City in District 16B rather than 16A. 33 Appendix B, State map, is corrected to show Silver Creek in District 16B rather than 22A. District 17 14. Appendix A, District 17B, was mislabeled. It is correctly labeled District 17A. 15. Appendix A, District 17A, was mislabeled. It is correctly.labeled District 17B. 16. Appendix B, State map, is changed to show correct labels on Districts 17A and 17B. District 18 17. Appendix A is corrected to show Princeton City, Sherburne County, in District 18A rather than 18B. District 20 18. Appendix B,: State map, is corrected to show Hazel Run City in District 20A rather than 20B. District 23 19. Appendix A and Appendix B, State map, are corrected to show Cottoaiwc: Township in District 23A and Linden Township, Lake Hanska Township and Hanska'City in District 23B. District 23 y 20. Appendix A is corrected to show Comfrey City... County,. in District 23A rather than 28B. District 24 21. Appendix A is corrected to show Mankato City, Nicollet County, in District 24A rather than 23B. District 25 22. Appendix B, State map, is corrected to show New Prague City in District 25A rather than 36B. . District 26 23. Appendix A is corrected to show Pine Island City, Olmsted County, in District 26B rather than 32A. r District 33 .: e 24. Appendix A is corrected to show Rochester Ward '3, Precinct 4, in District 33A rather than 33B and Rochester Ward 5, Precinct 1,; in District 33B rather than 33A. 25. Appendix I, Rochester map, is corrected to show Ward 3, Precinct 4 in District 33A rather than 33B and Ward 5, Precinct 1, in District 33B rather than 33A. - District 34 26. Appendix B, State map, is corrected to show Saratoga Township in District 34A rather than 328. District 35 27. Appendix C, Twin Cities Metropolitan Area map; District 35A, was mislabeled. It is correctly labeled 35B. District 37 28. Appendix A`is corrected to show Apple Valley, Precinct 10 in - District 37A rather than 37B and Empire Township in District 37B rather than 37A. 29. Appendix C. Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, is corrected to show Empire Township in District 37B rather than 37A. District 39 30. Appendix C, Twin Cities Metropolitan Area map and Appendix D, Central Portion, Twin Cities Metropolitan Area map, is corrected. to show Mendota Heights Precincts 1 and 4 in District 39A rather than 38B D istrict 39 31. Appendix C, Twin Cities Metropolitan Area map, and Appendix D, Central Portion, Twin Cities Metropolitan Area map, are corrected to show South St. Paul, Ward 1, Precincts 1, 2 and 3 an District 39A rather than 39B. I District 43 32. Appendix A is corrected to show Eden Prairie., B409, CT 260.01, in District 43B rather than 42A. 33. Appendix -A is corrected to show Shorewood, B241 and B242,•CT 275.02, in District 43B rather than 43A. District 45 34. Appendix C, Twin Cities Metropolitan Area map, is corrected to show Plymouth, Precinct 5, in District 45A rather than 48A. District 48 35. Appendix A is corrected to show Maple Grove, B935, CT 267.03, in District 48B rattler than 48A. District 51 36. Appendix A is corrected to show Fridley, B201, CT 512.02 in I District 51A rather than 51B. District 52 - 37. Appendix C, Twin Cities Metropolitan Area map, is corrected to show all of Blaine except for Ward 1, Precinct 3 and portions of Precincts 2 and 4, in District 52A.. `` District 54 - 38. Appendix C, Twin Cities Metropolitan Area map, and Appendix D, Central Portion, Twin Cities Metropolitan Area map, are corrected to show portions of Maplewood, Precincts 1 and 12, in District 54A rather than 54B. - District 57 - 39. Appendix A is corrected to show Minneapolis, B101, CT 44, in District 57B rather than 59A. 40. Appendix A is corrected to delete Minneapolis, B215, B220, B221, CT 43, from District 57B. District 58 41. Appendix A is corrected to show Minneapolis, B120, CT 49, in District 58B. 42. Appendix E, Minneapolis map, is corrected to show all of B102 and B125, CT 10, in District 58A 43. Appendix A is corrected to show Minneapolis, B216 CT 12, in District 58B rather than 58A. District 59 44. Appendix A is corrected to show Minneapolis, B235, CT 51, in District 59A rather than 57B. District 60 A 's` corrected to�delet e M�.nnea of is 45. Appendix A � co e p , B106 and B119, CT 61, and B328, CT'74', from District 60A. 46. Appendix A is corrected to show Minneapolis B126 and B128, CT 58, in District - 60A', and to show B110, CT 61, in District 60A rather than 61A. r District 62 47. Appendix A is changed to show correct precinct designations in Districts 62A and B. P Mp ls 12 -10 & 13 -11 is,Mpls W13, P10 & 11. P Mpls pll -8 & 14 -14 is Mpls Wll, P8 & 14. 48. Appendix E, Minneapolis map, is corrected to show B406, CT 114.00, in District 62A. 49. Appendix E, Minneapolis , is corrected to show B220, CT 120-01, PP P map, in District 62B. District 64 50. Appendix A is corrected to show St. Paul,, B505, CT 364 in District 64B rather than 64A. District 65 51. Appendix A is corrected to show St. Paul, B104, CT 356, in District 65B rather than 64A. 52. Appendix A is corrected to show St. Paul, B102, CT 368, in District 65B rather than 65A. 53. Appendix A is corrected to show St. Paul, B115, CT_.313, in District 66A rather than 65A. The computer program provided by the State has, in some cases, resulted in dropping the last digit or digits of ward and precinct designations. These occur primarily in Bloomington, Minneapolis', St. Pau]., and Duluth. In Appendix A, efforts have been made to insert missing digits in all identifiable cases. At the request of the State, the Court is preparing a supplemental order describing each district by its legal description (metes and bounds). This supplemental order will be issued as soon as it has been prepared and reviewed by the State. As in the case with the ' maps Appendices B through _I, Appendix A w%il continue to be the con - trolling document. Copies of the corrected reapportionment plan will be available from the Clerk of Court. '(I b'-V A Ilk Gerald W. Heaney, Ju g United States Court of A peals Donald D. Alsop,.Judge United States District Court Harr H. MacLaughlin, Judge United States District Court March 25, 1982 MEMORANDUM TOz Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Brad Hoffman, Administrative Assistant DATE: April 21, 1982 SUBJECT: Purchase of a Pick -up I am recommending the purchase of the 1/4 ton pick -up truck approved in the budget for the Street Department be given to Brookdale Ford. I am recommending the purchase of a 1983 Ranger pick -up. Quotes received were as follows: Superior Ford $5, 795.00 Minar Ford 5,868.06 Brookdale Ford 5,598.00_ We previously took quotes on Chevy Luvs, STO's,.and Ford. Couriers and rejected them. ' i Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. ,. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS FOR FINE AGGREGATE FOR f SEAL COAT WHEREAS, the City Clerk and Director of Public Works have reported that on April 22, 1982, at 11:00 A.M. they opened and tabulated bids 'received for the furnishing of fine aggregate for seal coat and that said bids were as follows FA -1 Sand Buckshot FA -2 Rock Bidder picked up picked up; - ' delivered Barton Sand & Gravel Co. $1.92 /ton $4.25 /ton No bid J.L.,Shiely Go. $3.85 /ton $5.05 /ton $10.19 /ton NOW, THEREFORE, ..BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the -City of Brooklyn Center that the bid of'Barton Sand and Gravel Company for the furnishing of FA -1 sand (picked up), and buckshot (picked up) in accordance with the specifications 'is deemed to be the best bid submitted by a responsible bidder and said bid is hereby accepted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bid of J.L. Shiely Company for FA -2 rock (delivered) in accordance with the specifications is deemed to be the best bid submitted by a responsible bidder and said bid is hereby accepted. Date Mayon ` ATTEST: Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member . , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the'following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. t f { g Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION T BID OR PLANT- MIXED BITUMINOUS MIXTURES U ACCEPTING F WHEREAS, the City Clerk and Director of Public Works have reported that on April 22, 1982 at 11:00 A.M. they opened and tabulated bids received for the furnishing of plant- mixed bituminous mixtures and said bids were as follows: Coarse Aggregate Fine Aggregate Winter Patch Bidder Furn. & Load- Furn. & Load Mix Midwest Asphalt $21.00 /ton $22.50 /ton $26.50 /ton t C.S. McCrossan, Inc. $17.40 /ton $19.50 /ton __$24.00 /tan Bury & Carlson, Inc. $17.30 /ton $18.50 /ton $23.00 /ton .NOW, THEREFORE,' -BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the bid'of Bury and Carlson, Inc. for furnishing plant mixed bituminous materials in.accordance with the specifications is deemed to be the best bid submitted by a responsible bidder and said bid is hereby accepted. I 4 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 r following voted in favor thereof and the following voted against the same :` whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. � u i Member introduced the following resolution- 1 and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS FOR BITUMINOUS MATERIALS WHEREAS, the City Clerk and Director of Public Works have reported> that on April 22, 1982, at 11:00 A.M. they opened 'and tabulated bids-received- for the furnishing of bituminous materials and said bids were as follows: CRS -1 or CRS -2 CRS -1 or CRS -2 Bidder delivered 12icked up Koch Asphalt $ .5170 /gallon $ . 5004 /gallon Richards Asphalt $ .4940 /gallon $ '.4750 /gallong Ashland Petroleum $ .5900 /gallon No bid NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the bid,of Richards Asphalt Company for furnishing CRS -1 and CRS -2 (delivered and picked up) bituminous materials in accordance with the specifications is deemed to be the best bid submitted by a responsible bidder and said bid is hereby accepted. 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. M & C No. 82 -04 April 20, 1982 10 FROM TIE OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER > CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Subject: Appraiser's Unfilled`Position and Upgrade of Data Communications Equipment To the Honorable Mayor and City Council: The April 1, 1982, retirement of one of the two appraisers in theAssessor's Office has * us an opportunity to attempt to replace manpower with data processing and thereby reduce operating costs for the City. Peter Koole, the City Assessor, in his memorandum of March 17, 1982 to you (attached), recommended that we not fill the vacancy caused by the retirement of the appraiser with the appointment of a full -time permanent employee, but rather try to fill the vacancy with a combination of part -time assistance, the upgrading of the other appraiser position in his office, and the addition of _another terminal /printer dh his office to =make better use of the computer - ized property data system. The retirement came at o`time when we are considering upgrading our data communications equipment. We currently have a leased line to LOGIS with a four- channel multiplexor. That means that we can have four terminals - Conn -` ecteel to the LOGIS central processor. We are currently using all four of those channels. We have two ,terminals in Finance one in the Assessor's sessor s Office, and we recently installed one in the Police Department to be used for the Police Management Information System on an experimental basis. We recently acquired an HP 125 micro-computer which will', be used as a word processor, a' computer for small jobs,and as an "intelligent" terminal to the LOGIS central processor. The additional terminal in the Assessor's Office would be the sixth terminal in our system. In order to accomodate the additional terminals, we would have to upgrade our data communications equipment. Ted Willard, Executive i <x e rector, LOGIS has given me an estimate (attached) of the cost of upgrading our data communications system to. expand from four to eight channels. If we expand to eight channels.now, it i m P s understand g y that we could expand further to sixteen channels at a later date for a very slight additional cost. Mr. Willard also has informed me that we can reduce the cost of upgrading by selling the multiplexors that would be replaced to the City of Eden Prairie. The total cost to upgrade our data communications equipment and add the terminal /printer that Mr. Koole requested would be approximately °$12,000. The net cost would be reduced by the $3,470 which we will receive from Eden Prairie and $1;830 for a high -speed modem which was appropriated for in the 1982 budget, but which will now no longer be necessary. The net cost would be W.700 4 M & C_No. 82 -04 ` April 20, 1982 Page Two To offset the cost of equipment, there will be a projected net labor cost savings of $8,508 by not filling the appraiser's full -time position during 1982. The $8,508 saving represents the appraiser's salary an fringe beneats for nine months of the year in the amount of $17,730 less the cost of Mr. Koole's request for authorization of part -time appraisal services in the amount of $7,350 and the cost of upgrading the other appraiser position in the amount; of $1,872.4, .In conclusion, by investing $8,530 in new equipment, which will have a useful life of at least five years, we can realize a, first year (nine months) labor savings of $8,508. Recommendation I recommend that the City (1) acquire the equipment necessary to upgrade our data communications, (2) acquire the terminal /printer for the Assessor's Office, and (3) transfer the net labor savings, from the Assessor's Office Budget to the Unallocated Departmental Expense budget. It would be my, recommendation that the equipment be purchased out of federal revenue sharing funds, as all other equipment has been in the past. I have attached a resolution which if adopted by the City Council, would authorize this action: The Council will be asked at a-later date to amend the. Employee Position and Classification.Plan to recognize the upgrading of one appraiser position and''the" elimination of the other.. that time it will also be' necessary 'to transfer an appropriation back from the Unallocated Departmental Expense salaries budget to the Assessor's Office, salaries budget to provide `funds ` for the upgrading of the appraiser's position: Respectfully submitted, Paul W. Holmlund Director of Finance CITY OF BROOKLYN 'CENTER s Approved; t. Gera d in City Manag CITY OF"BROOKLYN CENTER PWH:pk t Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1982 GENERAL FUND BUDGET WHEREAS, an unfilled position of appraiser exists in the Assessor's Office because of a recent retirement; and WHEREAS, the Assessor has recommended that he be allowed to attempt to fulfill the duties of the position through the use of part -time personnel, the upgrading of the other appraiser position in his office, and the increased use of the automated property data system; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to add an additional terminal in the Assessor's Office to have quicker access to "the property data system if the system's use is to be increased; and WHEREAS, the City is considering adding two new data processing applications to the LOGIS Management Information System in the Departments of Administration and Police; and WHEREAS, it is necessary to add additional channels to the existing data communications system if additional applications and terminals are to be added; and WHEREAS, the acquisition of the above data processing hardware will result in a one -time 1982 net savings of approximately $2,000 and greater savings in future years by substituting data processing costs for manpower costs; and WHEREAS, Section 7.08 of the City Charter of the City of Brooklyn Center does provide that the City Council may by majority vote of its members, transfer unencumbered appropriation balances from one office, department, or agency to another within the same - fund; - and WHEREAS, Section 7.11 of the City Charter does provide the City Council with full authority to make permanent transfers between all funds which may be created, provided that such transfers are not inconsistent with the provisions of relevant covenants, the provisions of the City Charter or State Statute; and WHEREAS, funds are available in the FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND in the amount of at least $6,640 to be transferred for GENERAL FUND use: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota to amend the appropriation for Other Equipment in the Unallocated Departmental Expense Budget by deleting the amount of $1,830 appropriated for high speed modems - Assessor's Office and substituting an amount of $8,470 to be appropriated for upgrading data communications equip- ment and Assessor's terminal /printer; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the increased appropriation shall be financed by Federal Revenue Sharing Funds and that funds in the FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND shall be encumbered in the amount of $6,640; and RESOLUTION NO. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the actual transfer of funds will be made from the FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND to the GENERAL FUND on a reimburse - ment basis at such time, and by Council resolution when the ,GENERAL FUND has expended funds for the appropriation authorized,. and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED to transfer $17,730 from the following Assessor's office appropriations: Salaries, Regular Employees $15,000 PERA - Combined 800 Social Security 1,000 Hospitalization Insurance 900 " Life Insurance 30 $17,730 to the following departmental appropriations: Assessor's Office, Salaries, Temporary Employees �$ 7,350 Unallocated Departmental Expense, Salaries, Regular Employees 10,380 $17,730 Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk w 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. i s MEMO PAN DJ;. Date March, 17, 1982 To: Gerald Splinter t� From: Peter M. Koole Subject: Assessor's Offic Budget Adjustments As you knob, Gerald Ritter, an appraiser in our office will be retiring at the end of March. We would like to make a few deviations from our authorized` 1982'budaet in order to experiment with not filling that full - time position and yet accomplish the task of finishing our quarterly inspections and completing the loading of our residential properties in the computer. Consequences of not re- fi the position 1. Significant cost savings. 2. Scme of the less skilled appraisers' duties will have to be shifted to clerical or part- time'staff. A. Pictures,. -of properties B. Bui lding diagrams C. File maintenance D. Computer input and review and verification E. Land characteristics input F. Preparation of appraisal field cards 3. Less able to cater to the needs of citizens. A. Abil to schedule special appointment times . B. Personal attention and time that has been spent in the past. 4. Appraisal duties and workloads shifted to Assessor and remaining appraiser. A. Apartment valuations were done by appraiser leaving. B. Only one person to handle all residential reviews and appeals. S. Lack of coverage during vacations, illness, and educational absences and its effect on public service. 6-. Precipitates need for review of job descriptions and compensation for remai ning employees. 7. Effect on next phase of computerization, Commercial, Industrial and Apartment properties. :.fie Gerald Splint( -r - 3/17/82 Page 2 Assessor's Office (;; Adjustments 8. May or may not be the permanent staffing level. If the Legislature significantly adds work requirements, we may have to add the position again to the department, 9. May have an impact on our clerical plans we had projected for 1983 and beyond. The ability to attempt this significant (1/3) cutback in our professional appraisal staff has really been the result of implementing the Logis Property Data System. It appears to be a cost effective approach to substitute hardware for labor expenditures. After analyzing how we will operate at our new staffing level, I feel it will be necessary to add an additional terminal /work station. We found this year, really the first year we operated in a Computer Assisted Assess- ment mode, that much time was lost by log jams at the terminal We must Continue to service the public, while doing the heavy data entry and general file maintenance, _while at the same time allowing the Assessor and Appraiser time to do their tests and analysis! For the 1982 assessme nt, we substituted some labor for computer time. We may not be able to afford that in the future. Y It will also be necessary to authorize the hiring of part -time field `appraisers to complete the required quarterly reinspections and data collection for our computer loading:_ With the .addition of part -time field staff, Joe DaBruzzi will be required to assume duties and responsibilities as well as workload that are beyond the scope of his present job. Joe is well qualified to supervise our field staff of part -time appraisers as well as assume over -all responsibility for all aspects of the residential assessment. Recommendations: . 1. Object 4552 Dept. 15 " - Capital Outl Add one additional terminal /workstation to the Assessor's Office and authorize implementation of the high -speed modem to be installed on our present terminal /workstation as was authorized in the 1982 budget. Additional Estimated Cost $3,500.00 '2. Object 4100 Dept. 15 Salaries A. Authorize up to 1050 hours of part -time appraisal time with a maximum hourly rate of $7.00 per hour as is necessary to attract qualified personnel. Estimated Cost :$7,350.00 f t Gerald Splinter - 1 0/17182 Page 3 Assessor's Office Budget Adiustfricnts B. Create a position of Appraiser II, with duties responsibilities to administer the residential assessment and supervise the staff necessary to accomplish the job. Recommended Grade Range in the Employee Position and Classification Plan is S19A - S23C with Joe being adjusted to S21C upon approval of this recommendation. Estimated Additional 82 Cost - $1,872.00 Total Requested Unauthorized 1982 Expenditure $12,722.00 - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - -- - Anticipated 1982 Savings from Unfilled Full-Time Position (Salary $21,612 + fringes $4,322 X .75 of year) $19,450.00 Less Requested Unauthorized 1982 Expenditures- 12,722.00 Projected Savings in 1982=with adoption of this plan $ 6,728.00 It i expected that savings in 1983 and beyond could be greater than expected because of the capital expenditures this year and possible adjustments in the part -time requirements as we feel our way along. Even with the major revisions I am recommending for our department in the 1982 budget, we will realize a significant savings if thi plan is adopted this year. The opportunity also exists for even greater contributions to budget restraint in 1983 and beyond. I strongly support this experiment in new cheaper ways to get the job done, and our staff is committed to our best efforts to make it a success. Thank you for your consideration of this request. f � } IOCAI SMdarN+dYEltl •.. ptFt'iq#3RTS()!i SV3TIEMS ASSOCIATION 6820E Shingle Creek Parkway, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430, (612) 566 -0050 TO: Paul Holmlund Hoffman FROM: Ted L. Willard DATE: April 2, 1982 RE: DATA COMMUNICATIONS-EQUIPMENT UPGRADE Background Some time ago, Brooklyn Center changed its data communications configuration from dial -up with acoustic couplers or modems (see Figure A attached) to a leased line with a four - channel multi- plexor (see Figure B)., This change resulted in a reduction in cost, an increase in communication speed, a reduction in data errors and improved convenience. Current and future, plans indi- cate a need for increased communication capacity beyond the present four channels. In addition, the volume of data transmitted by the present terminals compared to the total communications capacity is causing a slow down. The bottleneck in speed is the modem to which the multiplexor connects. The purpose of this memo is to recommend equipment changes to provide adequate communications capacity to Brooklyn Center during the next year. Recommendation It is recommended that authorization be given to`LOGIS for purchase of the following equipment: 2 general data comm 124 statistical multiplexors with quad channel original module for 4 terminals- buffered, for 300 to ,2400 baud transmit speed for each terminal, with error correction - retransmit at $1,900 each (maintenance $17.00 per month each). $3,800.00 2 additional quad channel modules at $875 each (maintenance $8.00 per month each). 1,750.00 2 - general data Comm GSUl 9600 baud short haul modems at $695 each (maintenance $7.00 per month each) . 1,190-00 - TOTAL COST $6,940.00* Pricces'include, installation and 90 day on -site warranty. Memo to. Paul Holmltmd, Brad Hoffman April 2,, 1982 r Page 2 It is recommended further that authorization be given to sell the following equipment at the prices listed; 2 general data comm 1240 multiplexors 2 general data comet 2400 R modems $1,735.00 'F If these recommendations are accepted the net effect will be as follows: 1. Increase the equipment maintenance charges to Brooklyn Center by $14.00 per month. 2. Increase the terminal capacity of the data communications link from 4 to 8 terminals. 3. Increase the line speed from 240 cps to 960 cps The effect of this will be to allow more terminals to operate at higher speeds without each contending for line capacity. Even if terminal capacity is doubled again, it is. unlikely that sub - stantial degredation of speed will occur. (NOTE. Eden Prairie is planning installation of a leased line and 4- channel multiplexor and can use the Brooklyn Center equipment.) G cc: LOGIS Executive Committee w' MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter City Manager FROM: Paul W. Holmlund Director of Finance ,- DATE: April 22, 1982 , SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing Execution of Transfer of Funds Agreement From time to times I transfer.monies; from our account with the First Bank of Minneapolis to other banks the use of the wire transfer system. These requests are generally oral because of the lack of time to execute written authorizations. The First Bank has requested that we enter into a wire transfer agreement to formalize these arrangements. I have attached a Resolution authorizing execution of Transfer of Funds Agreement, which if adopted by the City Council, would authorize me as City Treasurer, to enter into such an agreement. I have also attached a copy of the Agreement itself. Respectfully submitted, Paul W. Holmlund PWH : pk Member introduced the following resolution and r . moved its adoption; RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF TRANSFER OF FUNDS AGREEMENT From time to time, the City of Brooklyn Center orally requests the First National Bank of Minneapolis to transfer funds to other banks for credit to persons designated by the City in a manner which makes it.inconvenient or impossible to execute the written authorizations, instructions, and releases required by said bank, so that the bank may have standing instructions upon which to act pursuant to oral requests for the transfer of funds, BE IT RESOLVED, that Paul W. Holmlund, the City Treasurer for the City of Brooklyn Center,is hereby authorized to execute the domestic and inter - national funds (wire) transfer agreement on behalf of this City with First National Bank of Minneapolis providing for telephonic requests for the trans - mission of funds belonging to this City, upon the terms and conditions set forth in said agreement. The authority conferred herein shall continue in full force and effect until written notice of, its revocation shall be received by said bank at its office. it - 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. First National Bank of Minneapolis ° First Bank Place R iii mawt , Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480 r 3"j4 G i 612 370-4141 March 23,;1982 Mr. Paul Holmlund Director of Finance City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, MN 55430' Dear Paul: To facilitate your use of our wire transfer system, I am enclosing Wire Transfer Resolution Agreement forms which are to be completed and returned to our Wire Transfer Department. If you have any questions about the completion of these forms, please phone me at 370- 4421. Cordially, Karen B. Jarvey Public Funds Officer Money Market Department ° KBJ /jdl Enclosures a — old > Member Form Bank SySlm i p WIRE TRANSFER AGREEMENT ATTACHMENT A Customer shall elect one of the following levels of security: X.__ Use of one security code for DDA account(s). Use of multiple security codes, one for each individual authorized by the Customer to initiate wire transfers. In either case, the Bank will accept and execute transfers from anyone representing himself /herself to be from the Customer and giving security code(s) and DDA account numbers assigned to the Customer. The bank will maintain a Listing of the security code(s) presently assigned to each Customer. The Customer has sole responsibility for distribution and use of the security code(s). The security code(s) maybe changed upon business days advance written notice of either the Customer or the Bank or, in the case of a change by Customer, upon acknowledgement of such change by the Bank. i Customer requests code(s) to be assigned for use with these DDA accounts: Account Number Account Name # of Codes 7002 -394 City of Brooklyn Center 1 Investment Trust Fund F Dated: April 26 ' 19 82 CITY O F BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA Customer By: QLJ. hC-w� (PAUL W. H OLMLUND) Title: CITY TREASURER (WHITE ORIGINAL) (YELLOW CUSTOMER COPY) (PINK IBO COPY) Fv It �hn' DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL FUNDS (WIRE) TRANSFER AGREEMENT ` • CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER This Customer (corporation; bank): _ ,_ ,�_ (the "Customer") from time to time requests by means of telephonic, telegraphic, oral or written requests or orders, the transfer of funds from the Customer's account(s) maintained at the FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MINNEAPOLIS, MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA ( "Bank ") to other banks for credit to persons /accounts designated by this Customer; and The Bank is unable to obtain from the Customer the usual required written instructions and authorization; THEREFORE, in consideration of the Bank's acting upon telegraphic and oral requests for the transfer of funds and forebearing its requirement of written instructions, commencing APRIL 26 198 , the Customer hereby agrees to the following terms and conditions (including those on Attachment A) and authorizes you to: 1. Honor, execute and charge to Customer's account(s) at the Bank, all telephonic; oral or written requests or orders for the transfer of funds, when such requests or orders are received from anyone giving the security code prescribed by the Bank (see Attachment A). - 2. Transfer funds from specific Customer account(s) with the Bank to any specified Customer bank account(s), whether such account(s) are with the Bank or other bank(s); and 3. Transfer funds from Customer account(s) with the Bank to any account(s) of a third' party, whether such third party account(s) are with the Bank or other bank(s). 4. Record all telephonic instructions received by the Bank's Wire Transfer Department from the Customer and retain the recordings for sixty -one (61) days following such requests. The Customer agrees to report any discrepancies between the Customer's records of these transactions and the Bank statement to you in writing within thirty days after the statement date. - 5. Act upon all transfer requests on the date received, when received prior to the deadlines required by the Bank, and to use any means for the transmission of funds the Bank may consider suitable. The Bank reserves the right to change the deadlines upon notice. It is further understood that this funds transfer service (including oral transfer request) is provided as a convenience to this Customer and in consideration of obligations of the Bank hereunder, the Customer; a. Releases the Bank from responsibility for any inaccuracy, interruption of delay in transmission and for claims occasioned in • whole or in part by any circumstances beyond the Bank's control. b. Assumes full responsibility for all transfers made by the Bank in good faith in accordance with these procedures and agrees that the Bank shall be conclusively deemed to have exercised ordinary care if it has followed these procedures or if the Customer has not followed them. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE BANK BE LIABLE FOR INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR LOSS OF PROFIT, NOTWITHSTANDING NOTICE TO BANK OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH 'DAMAGES OR LOSSES. c. Agrees to supply the Bank any information that the Bank may reasonably request including but not limited to: money amounts, accounts to be affected, date of transfers, supplemental instructions, and further evidence of any authorized representative's authority to transfer funds or to do any other act contemplated under these procedures. d. Agrees that the Bank' may change these procedures upon written notice to the Customer. e. Agrees to notity the Bank in writing when any employee authorized to transfer funds leaves the employment of the Customer. f. Agrees that the Bank reserves the right to refuse to execute transfer requests for the•foltowing reasons: (1) transfers against uncollected funds. (2) transfers in excess of transaction limits, if any. g. Understands that each transaction will generate a unique transaction number, which the Wire Transfer operator will read back to the Customer, and agrees that the transaction is not complete until the Customer receives and records the sequence number. This authority shall remain in force and effect until either party shall give five (5) business days written notice. This agreement supersedes any previous agreements. APR 26 82 C ITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA Dated: _ -, 19-- C tourer. _ By: r � V ` ) �Yr" (� PAUL W H OLMLUND) Title: C ITY TREASURER. S l Accepted: First Nat!onai Bank of Minneapolis Date: a KS (WHITE BANK COPY) (YELLOW CUSTOMER COPY) MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter City Manager_ FROM: Paul W. Holmlund Director of Finance DATE: April 22, 1982 SUBJECT: Resolution Acknowledging Gift In Tuesday's mail, I received a card and a very nice note of appreciation from Silas and Edith Peller, 6900 Willow Lane North, Brooklyn Center, addressed to the Brooklyn Center Fire Department. The note read as follows, "Last September we had a bad fire. Not only did your trucks arrive within about five minutes, but four men were so careful in water spillage that the carpeting was not hurt. I am sure that had there been a delay in response, that we might have lost our home. Today is our 42nd Anniversary and we have decided to celebrate it by sending you a check with our deep -felt, appreciation. • The Peller's enclosed a check for $200.00. 1 have deposited the check in the City's general checking account, When I brought this ,matter to the attention of Fire Chief Boman and yourself, you both recommended that the $200.00 be used to purchase training films which the department had 'requested in their 1982 budget but which were denied because of budget restraints. I have attached a resolution acknowledging the gift from the Peller's. The f Resolution also appropriates the money to the Fire Department budget to be used to purchase training films. Please present the Resolution to the Council for their meeting of April 26th. I have also attached the card received from the Peller's. Respectfully submitted, Paul W. Holmlund PW11: pk • cc: Ron lio:ran, I: Chief • ". First National Bank of Minneapolis First Bank Place Minneapolis, Minnesota 55480 I A3 ;3 612 370 -4141 The Resolution identifies the individual who has been authorized by your Board of Directors to enter into, or sign, the Wire Transfer.Agreement. The authorized individual, who is listed at the top of the resolution, should always be the person to sign the Agreement forma In the event that we have a question concerning your transfer request, please indicate below at least one individual as a "call back" person, This is the individual we will contact to v er ify any information in question. Name Title Phone Number • Paul W. Holmlund City Treasurer 561 --5440 Jean Champlin Deputy Treasurer 561 -5440 Authorized Signature - (Same as agreement) Companv /Bank City of Brooklyn Center Date April 26, 1982 P 35-10 NS �s�.r ., r fir. £ 3 •t `;: , . kr;, RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF TRANSFER OF FUNDS AGREEMENT From time to time, this Company (corporation /bank) orally requests the First National Bank of Minneapolis (Bank) to transfer funds to other banks for credit to persons designated by this Company in a manner which makes it inconvenient or impossible to execute the written authorizations, instructions, and releases required by said Bank, so that the Bank may have standing instructions upon which to act pursuant to oral requests for the transfer of funds; Be it resolved, that Paul W. Holmlund r the City Treasurer (official title) of Company is hereby authorized to execute the Domestic and International Funds (Wire) Transfer Agreement on behalf of this Company with First National Bank of Minneapolis providing for telephonic requests for the transmission of funds belonging to this Company upon the terms and conditions set forth in said agreement. The authority conferred herein shall continue in full force and effect until written notice of its revocation shall be received by said Bank at its office. • City Clerk 1 Gerald G. Splinter 4y&� of The City of Brooklyn Center hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Directors of said Company at a meeting of said Board duly and regularly called; noticed and held, and at which time was present a quorum of said Board on April 26 _19 82 and that said resolution is in full force and effect. I have hereunto subscribed my name and affixed the seal of said Company this 26 day of Apri 1 19 82 (Seal) $�sixy Gerald G. } Splinter City Clerk ., (W HITE BAND( COPY) (YELLOW CUSTOMER COPY) Member introduced the fallowing resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. WHEREAS, Silas and Edith Peller have presented the City a gift of two hundred dollars ($200) and have designated that it be used for the Fire Department,_ and WHEREAS, the City Council is appreciative of the gift and commends the Peller's for their civic efforts: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center to acknowledge the gift with gratitude, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the gift of $200 be appropriated to the Fire Department Training Budget to be used to purchase training films.,, 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. r t i � f 1 ...fir �, C 1 Have � ' ful Beason h f J a ... a 'o - filled ear! c j: J tee � ,..A..•+ Y u ,. rt4Wf,A1F.9�Ap�,'.u. � ... • .::"�„ Ana —.� ' rr e...�"`C r-c Avs*n4Yw .'.Y��e'a^A+n•, *f? "'-'..F� 1�"° „`tM' • BICYCLES FOR AUCTION • No. Description Case No. 070 2 wheels and seat 80- 07139` 071 Yellow Suzuki mini bike J81 -01713 072 Blue girls bicycle 8.1- 02046. 073 Blue boys bicycle 83 -03341 074 Pink All Pro girls bicycle r 81- 03345' 075 Yellow Murray 10 speed boys bicycle 81- 03462 076 White Huffy boys bicycle 81 -04210 077 Yellow and brown Huffy 10 speed boys bicycle ;`81 -04683 078 Gold and black 10 speed boys bicycle J81 -05207 079 Primer red 10 speed boys bicycle frame 81 -05310 080 Black Hedstrom boys bicycle 8L -05532 081 Blue Murray girls. bicycle 81 -07214 082 Green 10 speed boys bicycle 81- 07617` 083 Blue Sears girls- bicycle 81 -08140 084 Brown Holiday Huffy 3 speed boys bicycle 81 -08735 085 Red boys dirt bike 81 -08757 086 Silver Huffy 3 speed boys bicycle 81 -09040 087 Silver.AMF 3 speed girls bicycle 81- 09388 088 Red Holiday 10 speed boys bicycle 81-09507 089 Black ,3 speed boys bicycle 81 -09522 090 Green and white Savoy boys bicycle e. 81 -11007 091 Red mini bike frame ";'81 -11421 092 Blue 10 speed boys bicycle 81- 11515 093 Tan and brown Huffy 10 speed boys bicycle 81 -11642 094- Green Sears 10 speed boys bicycle 81 -12199 095 Green Motobecane 10.speed boys bicycle 81 -12203 096 Black Holiday Huffy boys bicycle 81 -12807 097 Blue Sears boys bicycle 81.- 1,3579 098 Yellow J.C.Penney 3 speed girls bicycle 81 -13904 099 Green Schwinn 10 speed boys bicycle 81- 13975 100 Blue Schwinn 10 speed boys bicycle 81 -14081 101 Blue Robin flood 3 speed girls bicycle 81 -14110 102 Purple Sears Free Spirit 3 speed girls bicycle X81 -14161 103 Red Schwinn >10 speed boys bicycle ,T81 -14298 104 Blue huffy 10 speed boys bicycl -e J81- 14298 105 Blue Holiday 10 speed girls bicycle _ 81 -14557 106 Black AMF boys bicycle 81-14737 107 White; Western Flyer 10 speed boys bicycle 81 -15002 108 Black and yellow iJ.C.Penney boys bicycle 81- 15104, 109 Blue Fuji 10 speed boys bicycle 81- 15197' 110 Brown Huffy 10 speed boys bicycle 1 -15251 ill Blue All Pro 10; speed boys bicycle `81 -1 -6270 112 Black boys bicycle 81- 16542 113 Red Wards 10 speed girls b- icycle 81 -16552 114 Red boys bicycle , - 81- 16838' 115 Green and yellow Schwinn 10 speed boys bicycle ' 81 -17214 116 Brown Schwinn 5 speed boys bicycle 81 -17309 117 Brown- J.C.Penney 5 speed girls bicycle 81 -17312 118 Blue Mikado 10 -speed boys bicycle 81 -17319 119 Blue 10 speed bays bicycle 81 -17558 120 Brown andwhite Huffy boys bicycle 81-17627, 121- - Blue Race, Inc. boys bicycle J81.717734' 122 Yellow Coast to Coast 10 speed boys bicycle 81 -17924 123 Blue All Pro 10 speed boys bicycle 81 -19114 124 Yellow Huffy boys bicycle -81 -19444 125 Blue boys bicycle 81 -19444 126 Red i.iongoose boys bicycle 81 -19444 127 Yellow and Black Huffy boys frame 81 -19444 128 Assorted bicycle parts 81 -19444 x' 129 Blue Rollfast boys bicycle -195 91 130 Black Huffy boys bicycle 81 -20086 131 White Schwinn,10 speed boys bicycle Unknown c 1 PROI'L'RTY FOR AUCTION No. Description n - Case No. 132 Speaker J77 -12181 133 8`track tape 79 -00574 134 Brown gape case with tapes J79 -03446 13S Black tape case with tapes J79- 03446 136 Craig 8 track tape player .J79 -03446 137 Digital Clock 79 -06275 138 2 Security locks 79 -06275 -9 -06581 J7 139 Baseball Bat x . 140 Car stereo and parts 79 -10228 141 Shotgun with case 79 - 14671 142 Pioneer car stereo 79- 15620 143 Lionel Wabash Cannonball train 80 -00300 144 Travelin' Time auto digital clock 80 -00300 r 145` Travelin' Time auto digital clock 80- 00300: 146 Bicycle seat 80 -02736 • - ,� 0 .147 Bicycle seat 80 2736 148 Challenger 23 channel CB with mike 80 -04495 149 Coleman Cooler 80 -06753 150 Motorcycle frame 80 -07131 \151 Garden -Fork 80 -07144 152 Small brown tape case with tapes 80- 08966- 153 Motorola CB with mike 80-08966 154 Gemtronics 23 Channel CB 80 -08966 155 2 Realistic CB Transceivers 80 -09917 i 156 Midland 23 channel CB with mike 80 157 Warmann mans watch 80- 10390` 158 Red fire extinguisher 80 -10599 159 Brown tape case with tapes 80- 1081S' 160 Red fire extinguisher 80 -13232 161 Car stereo J80 -16260 162 Pathcom'CB radio J80 -16260 163 Amplifier J80- 16260< 164 8 track player �J80- 16260- 165 Speakers ` J80 -16260 166 Wollensak -31NI- 'Tape recorder 80- 16829- 167 Speaker J80 -16840 t 168 Wrist watch 80- 17791 169 Wrist watch 80- 17791 170 Red fire ext- inguisher 80- 18992 171 Panasonic AM /FM radio 81- 01091 172 Pre Cor AM /FM clock radio 81- 01091 173 RCA television 8I - 01,091 174 Yellow Mat - 81- 01091 175 Baby car seat 81 -03240 176 Fishing rod 81 -03240 177 Reel 81 -03240 178 Tackle box with tackle 81- 03240 179 Playmate Cooler 81 -09844 180 Black Vinyl chair �, 81 -17362 181 Zenith stereo console 81 -17362 182 Thermos cooler Unknown 183 Shovel t', Unknown 184 1975 Ford stationwagon, VIN SP76S180242 81- 17764 185, Doro transcriber, serial no 16285 S t CORRECTION 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to :.ppl.icable codes-prior to the issuance of permits.' 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to -the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee r (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted priorrto the issuance of permits to assure com- pletion of approved site improvements. 4. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 5. The Special Use'Permit is issued to McDonald's and is subject to all codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 6. The one -way by -pass lane west of the drive -up lane shall be signed as such at both its entrance and exit points. Parallel parking stalls shall be signed for employee parking. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, S' , Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none, The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO. 82017 (Robert Adelmann The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request-for `a S' high,, 20 ft. free.- variance from the sign ordinance to erect a g , s standing sign at the Standard Oil Gas Station at 6501 Humboldt Avenue • North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission ,Information ,Sheet for Application 'No. 82017 tat - tached) The Secretary showed a drawing.depi;cti.ng the existing and proposed signs in relation to each other and also described the modi- fications to the freeway that have taken place since 1980. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman LLucht, after asking the Planning Commission if it had any questions for the Secretary`, opened a public hearing. Mr. Robert Adelmann, the applicant, addressed the Commission. Mr. Adelmann stated that people who used to exit the freeway at Humboldt Avenue North,,no g longer "can see his as station when they ;exit at.Shincrle Creek Parkway. He stated that he wishes to have the same visibility from the exit at Shingle Creek Parkway as he use to have at the ex.t'at Humboldt. He stated that he had contracted LeRoy signs to calculate the height and size of sign that would be needed to regain this visibility. He ex' plained to the Commission that he has rising expenses and cannot meet those expenses with declining gasoline sales. He pointed out that Standard Oil, as a company,, has lost 5.4% in volume.i.n the Twin Cities area over the year 1981, but that his station dropped in volume by. over 19% and is still dropping. Commissioner Simmons stated that Mr. Adelmann's contention that 1* had "visibility" applied only to those vehicles which were gcinq past his station anyway, since those people exiting at Humboldt who were going south, rather than north, world have paid no attention to the sign. Mr. Adelmann explained that a lot of traffic that gets off at Shingle Creek Parkway now takes Shingle Creek . Parkway north 4 -15 -82 -4- to final plat approti as. 4. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. 5. The plat must be given final approval by the City Council and filed at the County prig to the issuance of < building ` permits. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Simmons, Ai.nas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO. 82014 (McDonald's) The Secretary introduced the next item of business,, a >request for site and building plan and special use permit approval to construct a drive -up order station and pickup window at the McDonald's at 5525 Xerxes `Avenue North, The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission - Information Sheet for Application No. 82014 attached). Commissioner Malecki asked whether all three accesses to the site allowed for two -way traffic. The Secretary responded in the affirm- ative. In answer to 'a question regarding parking, the Secretary explained to Commissioner Malecki that the applicant will reduce the number of seats in the restaurant in order to meet the parking requirements. Commissioner Simmons expressed concern regarding; ;people entering the drive -up lane from both the east and west accesses The Secretary acknowledged that this could become a problem, but stated that once the construction work on Xerxes Avenue North is completed, the private road to the west of McDonald's will not carry a substantial amount of ,traffic. Commissioner Versteeg asked how high the median would be from the pavement. The Secretary answered that it would be curb height., or six inches. Commissioner Versteeg asked'abou.t.the route taken by delivery trucks. The Secretary stated that those trucks usually enter from the west access. Commissioner Simmons asked whether the ro corner for the bypass lane outside of the drive -up lane would be squared off. The Secretary stated that the squared off 'median would discourage traffic from going northbound on the bypass lane and to allow for signery denoting One -way traffic. The Assistant City Engineer stated that the corner could be rounded off somewhat, but that there 'should be enough room on the island to place an appropriate sign and to make patrons visually aware of the one- way bypass lane. Chairman Lucht called on the applicant to.speak. Mr. Richard Engstrom, representing McDonald's, stated that he wanted the median to have a 5' radius to allow for easier maintenance: He said that perfectly square corners tend to get broken off. He also explained that de- livery trucks arrive at 4:00 a.m. and should cause very little dis- ruption at the restaurant. AQTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO.' 82 014 (McDonald's) Motion by Commissioner San strom seconded by Commissioner Versteeg • to recommend approval of Application No. 82014, subject to the following conditions: 4 -15 -82 -3- Planning Co fission Information Sheet Application No. 32014 Applicant: McDonald's Location: 5525 Xerxes Ave. North Request: Site and Building Plan, Special Use Permit This application for site and building plan and special use permit approved to add a drive - up window at McDonald's was reviewed and tabled by the Planning Commission at its March 25, 1982 meeting. The matter was tabled to give staff and the applicant opportunity to rework the plans for the area immediately west of the building with respect to grade and traffic flow. Staff and the applicant have agreed on a new layoutwhich establishes a maximum grade of 3% '(rather than the 6% to 10% now in place) and also calls for al concrete delineator to separate the drive -up traffic from other traffic in the lot. Immedi- ately west of the drive -up lane will be a 12' wide one -:way, by -pass lane with parallel parking stalls at the west edge of the lot. We feel that this is a workable arrange - ment if the one -way lane is properly signed as such. Approval'is, therefore, recommended subject to at least the following conditions: I. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer,,prior to the issuance of permi is . 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the Ci Manager) shall.be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. S. The Special Use Permit is issued to McDonald's and is subject to all codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 6. The one -way by -pass lane west of the drive -up lane shall be signed as such at both its entrance and exit points. Parallel parking stalls shall be signed for employee parking. y � 4 -15-82 MI: UI ') (if ` IFE F Tx = PLIdiNING CC ISSICIN CSI' Try: Cl': � OF BR{ G Lz.L' C�:�iTE�2 IN THE COUNTY OF HErdr3EPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA REGULAR SESSION' APRIL 15 19 CITY HALL CALL TO ORDER The Planning Commission "met in regular session and was called to order by Chairman George Lucht at 7:33 p.m. ROLL CALL Chairman George Lucht, Commissioners Molly Malecki, Nancy Manson, Mary Simmons, Lowell Ainas, Carl Sandstrom and Donald Versteeg Also present were Director of Planning and Inspections Ronald Warren, Assistant City Engineer James Grube, and Planning Assistant Gary Shallcross. Chairman Lucht then presented Commissioner Ainas with a certificate of appreciation from the Rotary Club. Commissioner Ainas received it gratefully APPROVAL OF MINUTES March 25, 1982 Motion by Commissioner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Manson to approve the minutes of the March 25,`1982 Planning Commission meeting as submitted..` Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commis - sioners Malecki, Manson, Simmons, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. Not voting: Commissioner Ainas. The motion passed. APPLICATION NOS. 82008 and 82016 (Bergstrom Realty) Following _ the Chairman's explanation, the Secretary introduced the first two items of business, a request for rezoning of the land within the 1300 block on the south side of 69th Avenue North from C2 to R3, and a request for preliminary plat approval to subdivide the land in question into 28 townhouse lots, and one common area and 6 outlots. The Secretary reviewed the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheets for.Application Nos. 82008 and 82016). He also reviewed a draft resolution recommending amendment of the existing Nand proposed Comprehensive Plans and a resolution recommending approval of Application No 82008. The Assistant City Engineer briefly reviewed drainage aspects of the proposed plat and grading plan (see points 5, 6, 7 and 10 of memo from James Grube attached). Finally, the Secretary reviewed the conditions pertaining to the plat. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. He asked if anyone present wished to comment on the proposed amendment. Mr. James Merila of Merila and Associates, representing Bergstrom Realty, stated that the staff review of the application had been thorough and he added that the applicant would appreciate a favorable action on the rezoning. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Hear!n_q n0 of er comments regarding the Comprehensive Plan Amend- ment, Chairman Lucht called for a motion to close the public hearing. Notion by Co- rarzissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom 4 -15 -82 to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. RESOLUTIONS RESOLUTION NO. 82 -1 Member Nancy Manson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption. RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT OF COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 66 --295, (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) RELATIVE TO COMMERCIAL ZONED ,LAND IN SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF 69TH AND HUMBOLDT AVENUES 'NORTH The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Lowell Ainas, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof George Lucht, Molly Malecki, Nancy Manson, Mary Simmons, Lowell Ainas,Carl.Sandstrom,and Donald Versteeg and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. RESOLUTION NO. 82 -2 Member Molly Malecki introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF APPLICATION NO 8200$' SUBMITTED BY BERGSTROM REALTY COMPANY The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Carl Sandstrom, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof George Lucht, Molly Malecki, Nancy Manson, Mary Simmons, Lowell Ainas, Carl Sandstrom and Donald Versteeg; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Luc t then opened the meeting for a public hearing on Application No. 82016, the preliminary plat. He asked if anyone present wished to comment on the application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Motion by Commissioner Ainas seconded by Commissioner Malecki to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously.: Chairman. Lucht then asked whether there was any further discussion of the proposed plat. There being none, he called for a motion regarding Application No. '82016. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO.' 82016 (Bergstrom Realty) Motion by Commissioner Ainas secancled by Commissioner Sandstrom to recomrterd approval of Application No. 82016, subject to the follow- ing conditions: 1. The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City Engineer. 2. The final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3 Homeowner's association documents shall he subject to .review and approval by -he city 1._tc ,rr.ey pricor 4- -15 -82 -2- to f i na i p i a t apip rova.l . 4.' Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to re' *view and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. S. The plat must be given final approval by the City Council and filed at the County prior to the issuance of building permits 'doting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki., Manson, Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none'. The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO. 82014 (McDonald's) The Secretary inFroduced the next item of business, a request for site and `building plan and special use permit approval to construct a drive -up order station and pickup window at the McDonald's at 5525 Xerxes Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 82014 attached). Commissioner Malecki asked whether all three accesses to the site allowed for two -way traffic. The Secretary responded in the affirm- ative. In answer to a question regarding parking, the Secretary explained to Commissioner Malecki that the applicant will ,reduce the number of seats in the restaurant in order to meet the parking requirements. Commissioner Simmons: expressed concern regarding people entering the drive -up lane from both the east and west accesses. The Secretary acknowledged that this could become a problem, but stated that once the construction work on Xerxes Avenue North is completed, the private road to the west of McDonald's will not carry a substantial amount of traffic. Commissioner Versteeg asked how high the median would be from the pavement. The Secretary answered that it would be curb height, or six inches. Commissioner Versteeg asked about the route taken by delivery trucks. The Secretary stated that those trucks usually enter from the west access. Commissioner Simmons asked whether the corner for the bypass lane outside of the drive -up lane would be squared off. The Secretary stated that the squared off median would discourage traffic from going northbound on the bypass lane and to allow for si.gnery denoting one -way traffic. The Assistant City Engineer stated that the corner could be rounded off somewhat, but that there should be enough room on the island to place an appropriate sign and to make patrons visually aware of the one -way bypass lane. Chairman Lucht called on the applicant to speak. Mr. Richard Engstrom, representing McDonald's, stated that he wanted the median to have a 5' radius to allow for easier maintenance. He said that perfectly , square corners tend to get broken off. He also explained that de- livery trucks arrive at 4 :00 a.m. and should cause very little d.is- ruption at the restaurant. ACTION P.ECC3 MTENDIUG z.PPRON7.7,L OF APPLICATION NO. 82014 (McDon Motion it Commissa.one Sarastrom secon ed .by, Com- issionet Versteeg to recommend appl of Application. No: 82014, subject to the following conditions: 4- 15--82 3- 1. Building.plans are subject to review and approval d by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes_ prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of 'permits'. 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 5.` The Special Use Permit is issued to McDonald's and is subject to all codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. Voting in favor:` Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO. 82017 (Robert Adelmann ) , The Secretary then introduced the next item of business, a request for a variance from.the sign ordinance.to erect a 46' high, 20 sq. ft., freestanding sign at the Standard Oil Gas Station at 6501 Humboldt Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Application No. 82017 attached) The Secretary showed a drawing depicting the existing and proposed signs in relation to each other and also described the modifications to the freeway that have taken place since 1980. PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Luc t, after asking the Planning Commission if it had any questions for the Secretary, opened a public hearing. Mr. Robert Adelmann, the applicant, addressed the Commission. Mr. Adelmann stated that people who used to exit the freeway at Humboldt Avenue North, no longer can see his gas station when they exit at Shingle Creek Parkway. He stated that he wishes to have the same visibility from the exit at Shingle Creek Parkway as he use to have at the exit at Humboldt. He stated that he had contracted LeRoy Signs to calculate the height and size of sign that would be needed to regain this visibility. He explained to the Commission that he has rising expenses and cannot meet those expenses with declining gasoline sales. He pointed out that Standard Oil, as a company, has lost 5.4% in volume in the Twin Cities area over the year ,1981, but that his station dropped in volume by over 19% and is still dropping. Commissioner Simmons 'stated that ,err. Adel mann's contention that he had "Visibility"' applied only to those vehicles which were going past his station anyway, since those people exiting at Hurloldt who were going south, rather than north, would have paid no attention to the sign. Mr. Adelmann explained that a lot of traffic that gets off at Shingle Creek. Parkway now takes Shingle Creek Park,Vr y north 4 -15 -82 -4- to 69-1.1. A ,nuo and then comes back to Newl - .on to go to Brooklyn Park, wihereas before they exited F u:mboldt and went north past his statit n. bed "cr�� M into Brooklyn Park. Th Planning Assistant asked the applicant why a sign would make any difference to people who have changed their traffic patterns and probably already know that his station exists at the corner of 65th and Humboldt. Mr. Adel: -ann responded that the sign appeals to night traffic primarily. He stated that he wished to get new customers coming off the freeway. He admitted that he was not sure that a sign would necessarily in- crease his business, but he felt that he had to try something to get his volume back up to what it was. Commissioner Simmons stated that people would take the routes that they wanted to take and would pay little attention to stations that ate- visible from locations not on the routes that they intend to go. Mr. Adelmann again stated that he has experienced a great loss in volume of gasoline sold and that the sales are still dropping. He stated that he did not feel it would be a nuisance to allow the sig nor that other variances would be justified because he was g 7 ranted a variance C variance C hairman u a var g L cht stated that granting to Mr. - Adelmann would set a significant precedent. He 'cited the example of the Vickers Gasoline Station north of the freeway on Brooklyn Boulevard which w ch could also claim a need for freeway Y . Y visibility if its business was dropping off. He asked whether the Holiday Inn had lost business as a result of the freeway construction. Mr. Adelmann admitted that the Holiday Inn had lost business during the freeway construction, business on but. now that the bridge is "o open, Y, , g P is coming back. Mr. Adelmann insisted that his station had been visible from the Humboldt Avenue exit before the Holiday Inn had expanded. The Secretary disagreed with this contention and stated that the Standard oil Station at 65th and Humboldt had very little, if any, visibility from the freeway. Mr. Fred Harris, Territory Manager for Standard oil, explained that Mr. Adelmann is not requesting visibility from the freeway itself, but from;the Shingle Creek Parkway exit. He explained that credit card information shows 46% of Mr. Adelmann's business comes from non -local customers. He reiterated that the business at the station has dropped 20% over the last year and that the change in traffic patterns has been a significant factor. Chairman Lucht pointed out from information provided that Mr. Adelmann's entire business is not down 19.6% but only 12 %, suggesting that other aspects of the service station are improving, while gas sales are declin Commissioner Manson asked whether price competition might have something to do with declining sales at the Standard oil Station. She noted the 7 Eleven Store and Q Petroleum Station further north on Humboldt that have opened within the past two years offer gasoline. at lower prices than Standard. Mr. Fred Harris stated that there are other things factored into the price of gas, such as maintaining a repair garage and service vehicles which 7 Eleven and Q Petroleum do not have to keep up. Commissioner Simmons stated that people are not that loyal when it comes to buying gas. She stated that they will go wherever the price is best and that if Standard oil's price is not competitive, it can expect to lose sales. Mr. Adelmann stated that when his station at 66th and Lyndale was closed, he expected to pick up about 20% of the business that used to frequent that station. He stated that with the roadway work that has been done on Humboldt Avenue, he has experienced no net increase in 4 - -82 -5- sales. The closing of the Humboldt Avenue bride curing 1981 reduced his sales-significantly and these sales are still, dropping, he said. The Planning Assistant asked what the effect of Q Petroleum could have been over the past year, since most of the traffic that goes by the Standard Station also goes past Q Petroleum. Mr. Adelmann stated that Q has probably had some impact on his business. Chairman Lucht then asked whether anyone else wished to comment on the application. No one spoke. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING' Motion by Commissioner Manson seconded by Commissioner Sandstrom to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Commissioner Simmons stated that she could sympathize with the difficulty brought on by changing conditions, but felt that addi- tional signery over and above that allowed by the ordinance would not rectify the situation. Mr. Adelmann stated that no other business could claim the kind of hardship that he could from the highway changes and that, therefore, no other variances would have to be granted. He also stated that he did not feel the larger and higher sign would create a nuisance for anyone. Commissioner Versteeg asked how many cars per day would have to see the new sign to recoup the loss of business. Mr. Adelmann said that he was not sure, but stated that the sign was something he felt he had to do to try to get his business back. Commissioner Ainas noted that the Budgetel and Thrifty Scot Motels' opened up during the freeway construction. He asked whether there was any .gain in business when those two motels opened. Mr. Adelmann stated that all his information shows that the volume of his business has dropped. Commissioner Ainas stated that he felt price was probably a large factor in the loss of business to lower priced gasoline stations. Mr. Adelmann again stated that other factors enter into the price he charges for gasoline. ACTION RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF APPLICATION NO. 82017 (Robert Adelmann) Motion Ey Commissioner 14anson seconded y Commissioner Simmons to recommend denial of Application No. 82017 on the grounds -that the Sign Ordinance Standards for Variance are not met in that the situation is not unique and that to grant the variance would set a bad precedent which would undermine the Sign Ordinance. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Nalecki, Manson, Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none The motion passed unanimously. RECESS The Planning Commission recessed at 9:17 p.m. and resumed at 9 :44 p.m. APPLICATION NOS. 82018 and 82021 (Summit Mortgage Corporation) Following a recess, t e Secretary intro aced t e next two items of business: a request for site and building plan approval to re- model the barn and hippodrome on the Earle Brown Farm for use as a TV station, and a request for a variance from Section 35 -400 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow two receiving dishes to be located within the 50' front setback area off Earle Brown Drive. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff reports concerning the applications (see Planning Commission Information Sheets for Application Nos. 82018 and 82021 attached), T.ie Secretary stated 4- 15--82 --6- that the Planning Commission had found_ the proposed use to be accep-t�ble in the I -I zone and for historic preservation of the builds s. He stated that he did not anticipate the mall area being used for parking in the future, even though a proof-of- parking was shown in:that area. He stated that additional parking, if needed, could be obtained off- site. He also pointed out that curb and gutter should be continued along the southerly access drive to the hippodrome and link up with curb and gutter surrounding the Summit Bank Building. The Secretary also pointed out that the Holiday Inn has a receiving dish which meets the setback. The Secretary showed an elevation of the Earle Brown Office Tower and illustrated the height of the dishes if placed on top of the Office Tower. Commissioner Simmons asked how high the dishes would be. The Secretary answered that they would be approximately 32' if tipped up. Commissioner Sandstrom asked whether there would not be greater impact visually by putting the dishes on top of the building. He also noted that the winds would blow more strongly at the elevation of the top of the office building and that this could present a danger of the dishes being blown off the top of the building and onto the parking lot below. Commissioner Simmons stated that she was concerned that the dishes would be so huge that they dwarf the barn and hippodrome. Mr. Janis Blumentals, the architect for the project, showed site layouts, floor plans and building elevations in colored renderings to the Planning Commission. He stated that the receiving dishes would not overwhelm the farm buildings. Regarding the option of putting the dishes on the building, Mr. Blumentals stated that there would be structural difficulties supporting the dishes and that in order to test whether they could actually work on the roof, they would have to be taken up to the top and actually mounted, a very difficult and expensive procedure only for a test. He also expressed concern about the wind placing stress.on the anchoring of the dishes to the roof. He also stated.that the dishes have to be a certain distance apart and that this might not be feasible on top of the office building. Finally, he questioned the aesthetics of b putting the dishes on top of the Office Tower. Commissioner Simmons stated, that if the dishes were placed on top of the office building, they would not be very visible from the ground. Mr. Blumentals countered that it would be quite visible from the freeway, since the Earle Brown Office Tower is visible for some distance in either directions. The Planning`,, Assistant asked whether the northerly of the two dishes could be placed north of the barn so as to leave the barn and hippo - drome within the parenthesis of the two dishes. Mr. Blumentals stated that the-two 25' diameter dishes would not overpower a 400' long building, that the building would still be visible, for the most part, from Earle,Brown Drive. The Planning Assistant pointed out that it was somewhat a matter of perspective, that the closer the dishes are to the road the more of the building they will block out. Mr. Blumentals stated that, aside from any financial con- siderations, he would recommend that the dishes be left on the ground as a preferable design to placing them can the building. Mr. Kocher of the k'FBT Television Station stated that the dishes would actually work better on the ground than on top of the office 4- -15 -82 -7- building because of microwave disturbance, which is more intense at the elevation of the office building, PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing re- garding the variance application (Application No. 82021). No one present commented on the application. However, the Planning Com- mission took up the matter of the site plan during the public hearing, ACTION - RECOMMENDING - APPROVAL "OF APPLICATION NO. 82018 (Blumentals Architecture /Summit Mortgage Corporation) Motion by Commissioner Versteeg seconded by Commissioner Malecki to recommend approval `of ,Application No. 82018, subject to the follow- ing conditions: 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. , Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site performance and supporting financial guarantee` (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equipment shall be appropriately screened from .view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA Standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances. 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas including the area of shared access with the building to the south (current Summit Bank). 9. The preliminary R.L.S. approved under Application No. 81035 shall receive final approval by the City Council and be filed with the County prior to the issuance of building permits for the con- version of the barn and hippodrome 10. Improvements to the Summit Bank property approved under Application No. 78002, but deferred until plans were accepted for the burn and hippodrome shall be completed prior to October 1, 1982 in 4-15 -82 -8 .. 7,cnz required b y th" s aL A I ca Voting in .avcr: CI - ia`: ? man Lucht, Coirim3 ssi oners MIalecki, Manson Ainas, . S and's.:: o and 4erst-eeg. Noting against. none. . True motion passed unanimously. The Chairr.,r,n asked whether an-one present wished to comment further on the variance a-z -ilicaticn. Hearing none, he called for a motion to cl _ pul) c c-ar -erg. CL0IQE Flog C017T-1.21 SSiGrler Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Manson to cicse. the ; public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. Chairman Lucht then polled the Planning Commission as to its feelings on the variance application Commissioner Malecki stated that she felt the situation is entirely unique, involving as it does, the City's only historic district. She stated that she would prefer a less visible location, but would vote for the variance in light of the limited options. Commissioner Sandstrom stated that he felt the problem of putting the dishes on the roof is greater than the problem of leaving the dishes on the ground,, both from an aesthetic and an engineering standpoint. Commissioner Simmons stated that the Commission has only verbal assurances that the dishes could not feasibly be put on top of the office building. Commissioner Versteeg asked whether the applicants have looked' into all the possibilities. Mr. Kocher answered that an engineering firm had been hired to find the best location for the receiving antennae and that the proposed location is where they work best. Commissioner Ainas stated that he felt the Planning Commission should relieve the applicant of the task of looking at the roof location as a viable possibility for the receiving dishes. He stated that from his professional judgment, he did not think the dishes could work well on top of the building. Commissioner Manson stated that she felt the proposed location is the best location for the dishes on the property in question. Chairman Lucht stated that he felt the greenstrip along Earle Brown Drive really represented the back of the historical site as opposed to the front, which he 'considered to be the mall area. He concurred that the proposed location for the dishes was the best location on the site in question. Commissioner'Versteeg asked whether the north end of the barn could be considered a feasible location. Chairman Lucht stated that that location has been considered aesthetically and operationally difficult.' ACTION RECO11MENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 82021 (Summit Mortgage Corp oration) Motion by Corimisszoner Sandstrom seconded by Commissioner Ainas to recommend approval of Application No. 82021 on the following grounds: 1. The circumstances surrounding the application' are unique, involving an existing historic structure which cannot readily be moved without damage to its structural and historical integrity. • 2. Failure to grant the variance would cause either an undue hardship for the applicant or (by placing the r.ec Aviing dishes in the mall area) would seriously disturb the character of historic district established under Application No. 81041. 4 -15 -82 -9- 3. The circumstances affecting the application were q not created by the apj�licai t, but alci ti e �;c.c ruse of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, which were adopted after the farm Buildings were erected, 4. Proposed placement of the receiving dishes minimizes the variance and the impact on surrounding'deveiopment. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Simmons, Ainas,.Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. APPLICATION NO. 82019 (Martin Drinkwine) The Secretary introduced the last item of business, a request for a special home occupation to conduct °a Tidy Car business at 5632 James Avenue North. The Secretary reviewed the contents of the staff report (see Planning Commission Information Sheet for Appli -- cation -No. 82019 attached). The Secretary also referred to a memo from the Building Official recommending installation of a 5 lb chemical fire extinguisher in the garage. He also referred the i Commission to a letter from Mrs. Reva Tuttle of 5627 James Avenue North objecting the proposed home occupation. He noted that the staff have received information that the odors.complained of by Mrs. Tuttle apparently carne from another location. Commissioner Sandstrom noted the limit placed on the home occupation to 10 cars serviced per month. He asked whether it would mare any difference if the limit were set at 12 cars. The Secretary answered that the limit of 10 cars was based on the applicant's letter, which stated he would seek a commercial location if his business reached the point of 8 to 10 cars per month. Chairman Lucht called on the applicant to speak. Regarding the limit of 10 cars Ma stated e co o to 15 cars � r Mr. Marty Drinkwine h co uld r Y g per month before requiring a full. -time operation in a commercial location. He stated that he projected only 8 - -10 cars in the hope of not being required to obtain a special use permit. Chairman Lucht stated that the limit of 10 cars per month may seem somewhat arbitrary, but that some limit must be set. He explained that if anyone were to monitor the activity and find that over 10 cars per month were being serviced the special use permit could be considered for revocation. Mr. Drinkwine asked what the consequences would be if he happened to service 12 cars in a given month. He stated that he did not want to turn away business, but did not want to jeopardize his special use permit. The Secretary stated that it was basically a question of determining at what point the home occupation is no ' Longer secondary and incidental. He noted that servicing -more cars than authorized by the permit could lead to revocation or the applicant w ould have to seek an amendment to his Special Use Permit. Corw— issioner Versteeg asked Mr. Drinkwine whether he planned on having any employees. Per. Drinkwine answered tha - he did not plan on having any em loyees at the prese time, b-ut that: if business were good enough he might hire a. part- -time pers.on to help. He " added that by the tine he would seek part --time help he 4;ii ,d probably he in a position to look for a coivercial location. In response t 3 question from Commissioner the- Secretcary explained hawing an employee is one of the q �• �f'�c�.c�x�� .�.� uirig �r 4 -15 -82 -13- special use permit. He Mated that Per. Drinkwine had not requested approval of an employee in his letter to the staff. He added that M.r. Drinkwine would have to seek an amendment to his permit if he _decides in the future to have an employee. Mr. Drinkwine stated that he simply did not think of hiring one. PUBLIC ,HEARING Chairman Lucht then opened the meeting for a public hearing and asked whether anyone present wished to speak on the application. Mr. John Amundson of 5643 James Avenue North stated that since Mr. Drinkwine had lived at his current residence, he has not noticed any noise or odors in connection with the business. He stated that, in fact, he was unaware that he was conducting the business until he received an advertisement. Mr. Amundson stated that he saw no problem with what Mr. Drinkwine was doing and pointed out that the garage door is usually closed and people cannot hear the drill. Mrs. Julia Dussaul.t of 5642 James Avenue. North stated that she has never heard: any noise emanating from Mr. Drinkwine's garage and that she lives immediately next door and added that she did not object to the home occupation. CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING Chairman Lucht asked whether anyone else wished to speak on the application. Hearing none, he called for a motion to close the public hearing. Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Com- missioner Manson to close the public hearing. The motion passed unanimously. ACTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF APPLICATION N0. 82019 (Martin Drinkwine) Motion by Commissioner Malec i seconded by Commissioner Manson to recommend approval of Application No. 82019, subject to the follow - ing conditions 1. The permit is issued to the applicant as operator of the facility and is nontransferable. 2. The permit is subject to all codes, ordinances and an regulations and violation thereof shall g Y be grounds for revocation. '. 3. Service shall be on.an appointment only basis between 4:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 6x00 p.m. Friday and Saturday. However, the special use permit authorizes work on not more than 10 cars P er month. 4. All parking shall be off - street on improved °space 'provided ' by the applicant. 5. Service to automobiles or other power vehicles is limited to washing and application of the Tidy Car sealant; other repairs are expressly prohibited. 6. The permit is subject to completion of any work required by the Building Official. 4 -15 -82 -11- L T. Noise, odor, and vibration shall not be perceptible beyond the premises to the degree that a nuisance is created. Voting in favor: Chairman Lucht, Commissioners Malecki, Manson, Simmons, Ainas, Sandstrom and Versteeg. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. ADJOURNMENT Following a brief review of upcoming business items and a progress report on the licensing ordinance dealing with amusement devices, there was a motion by Commissioner Sandstrom - seconded _by Commissioner Malecki.to adjourn the meeting The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 11:11 p.m. Chairman a 4 -82 -12 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82016 • Applicant: Ken Bergstrom Location: 1300 block on south side of 69th Avenue North Request: Preliminary Plat The applicant seeks preliminary plat approval to subdivide the land in the 1300 block on the south side of 69th Avenue North into 11, blocks and 6 outlots. The purpose of the plat is to set up individual lots for location of townhouses The property is the subject of Application No. 82008 to rezone the property from C2 to R3. The plat creates a single large common area, to be described as Lot 1, Block 1, Hi Crest Square Estates. Blocks 2 through 11 contain 28 townhouse lots mostly along the east side of the development. Outiots A through F are more on the west side of the complex and will be replatted into 32 additional townhouse lots when construction is ready to begin on those units Submitted along with the preliminary plat are grading and utility plans for the proposed development. The Planning Commission is referred to a memo from Jim Grube on these aspects. Briefly, the grading plan calls for a large pond on the west side of the development to receive the majority of the drainage from the site. There will also be pockets along the east and south sides of the site which will collect drainage to be conveyed by storm sewer ultimately in the City storm sewer in 67th Avenue North. Water and sanitary sewer will be brought in from 69th Avenue North. The applicant also proposes to loop the water system to _a private water line serving the Humboldt Square Shopping Center. The proposed plat provides for 5' of additional right -of -way dedication along 69th Avenue North in line with the County's policy to bring the width of 69th Avenue North to 80'. No Homeowner's association documents have been submitted as yet. These must be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval. Altogether, the plat seems to be in order and approval is recommended, subject to at least the following conditions: 1) The final plat is subject to review and approval by the City 4 Engineer. 2) The final plat is subject to the requirements of Chapter 15 of the City Ordinances. 3) Homeowner's association documents shall be subject to review and approval by the City Attorney prior to final plat approval. 4) Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits. • 4 -15 -82 l TO: Ron Warren, Director of Planning and Inspections • FROM: James Grube, Assistant City Engineer DATE: April 9, 1982 RE: Preliminary Plat /Development Plan Review of Hi Crest Square Estates (Planning Commission Application No.: 82016) The referenced preliminary plat /development plan was reviewed by the Engineering Department staff and the following corinents are submitted for your review and consideration. 1. The development abuts C.S.A.H. 130 (69th Avenue North); therefore, Hennepin County approval is required for platting, street access, and utility installations. 2. The preliminary plat provides for dedication of an additional 5 feet of street width along C.S.A.H. 130 thereby meeting estab- lished policy of requiring a 40 foot centerline-to-right- of-way line width along C.S.A.H. 130 (present width is 35 feet),. 3. All interior streets will remain private roadways under this proposal. 4. The applicant proposes to connect the watermain to a private system at Humboldt Square and to the municipal system in C.S.A.H. 130. Utility agreements must be executed by the Humboldt Square Partner- ship and the applicant to provide such connection and insure continued water supply. 5. The proposed drainage plan does (with minor modification) provide for area drainage away from the homes along_ Emerson Avenue North. 6.- The applicant proposes to construct a pond for purposes of dowering the water table and providing for temporary holding of storm water runoff. Soil borings indicate the water table elevation is 842 -843. By placement of the outlet control structure at 840, the applicant anticipates lowering the water table -2 to 3 feet in the immediate vicinity. If heavy clay soil is present in the,devel opment, the pond's effect on the water table gray become less pro- nounced as the distance from the pond increases. 7. Slopes along the pond are 5:1, allowing for ease of maintenance and accessibility. The applicant proposes to continue the 5:1 slope below the waterline (at elevation 840) to a depth of 5 feet (at elevation 835). 8. The storm sewer system ties into an existing 27 inch storm sewer in 67th Avenue. The 67th Avenue system was not sized to accept storm water runoff from the development; however, it provides the only logical outlet for the runoff. The staff must work with the applicant in designing an adequate system that will not exceed the capacity of the existing system. 9. The City must enter into a Subdivision Agreement with the applicant to provide assurances that all aspects of the proposed development meet the requirements of City Ordinances 10. This comment has been general in nature and the Planning Commission and applicant are reminded that a thorough examination of all aspects of the proposal will be made by the staff. Planning rorr.ission Information Sheet Application No. 82014 Applicant: Mc Dona! d's Location: 5525 Xerxes Avenue North . Request: Site and Building Plan /Special Use Permit The applicant requests site and building plan and special use permit approval to add a drive -up order window and pick -up station to the Mc Donald's Restaurant at 5525 Xerxes Avenue North. The property in question is zoned C2 and is bounded by private roadwayson the west and south, by Xerxes Avenue North - on`the east and by the Green Mill Restaurant overflow lot on the north. McDonald's is classified as a convenience food restaurant which is a special use in the C2 zone that cannon abut Rl , R2, or R3 zoned property at either a property line or a street line. The existing use satisfies this requirement. In the process of adding the drive -up window and pick -up station, the restaurant is reducing its seating capacity from 108 to 100 seats. With 14 employees on the maximum shift, the total parking requirement for the use is 57 stalls. The proposed plan calls for 58 stalls. One access, onto the south private roadway at the south- west corner of the site, will be closed allowing for four new parking spaces. However, parking along the west side of the site will be changed from 90 to parallel parking, resulting in a loss of 10 stalls. Overall, parking is reduced from 74 spaces to 58. The proposed plan calls for landscape treatment in an island area surrounding the menu board and speakers on the west side of the building Plantings include Upright Arborvitae, Pygmy Barberry, and Andorra Junipers in .a rock mulch bed. Underground irrigation is not required in this location. The existing landscape treatment in the greenstrip abutting the private road on the south will be matched in the area of the access closing. At the time of the writing of this information sheet we had not received,a revised grading plan for the area and a revised floor plan. There may be some concerns re- garding grading along the west side of the site where the order station is to be located because of the slope in this area. We will be prepared to comment in more detail at Thursday's meeting. "A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent. Approval would be subjectto at least the following conditions: I. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building - Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming -plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits 3. A site performance agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be sub - mitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 5. The Special Use Permit is issued to'McDcnald's and is subject to all codes, ordinances, and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3 -25 -82 Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82017 Applicant: Robert L. Adelmann Location: 6501 Humboldt Avenue North Request: Sign Ordinance Variance The applicant is seeking a variance from THE TABLE OF PERMITTED FREESTANDING SIGN AREAS AND HEIGHTS contained in the Sign Ordinance to erect a sign at Duke's Standard that exceeds the allowable area in height for freestanding signs. 1he sign would be located at the southeast corner of the service station property in the same location as the current freestanding sign. The lot in question is zoned C2 and is bounded by Humboldt Avenue on the east; Freeway Boulevard on the south; and R5 zoned land on the north and west sides of the property. The proposed variance would allow the applicant to raise his current freestanding identification sign 22 feet from the permitted 24 feet in height to 46 feet in height. In addition, he proposes to mount a new 12' x 17' (204 sq. ft.) torch and oval at the top of the pole and leave the existing price sign /reader board in its present location. The maximum area permitted for freestanding signs for a building less than 2200 sq. ft. in area is 90 sq. ft. The Sign Ordinance formula for calculating sign area would require the calculation of the 12' x 17' torch and oval, the price sign and the area between the signs. The gross area of the proposed sign would be well beyond the 90 sq ft. allowed for even the 204 sq. ft. indicated for the new sign. The applicant has submitted a letter with his variance request (copy attached) indicating his reasons for needing the variance and outlining how he feels his proposal meets the Sign Ordinance Standards for Variances. He claims that the granting of this variance will correct conditions that came about solely due to the recent construction of I -694 and that these conditions have an adverse effect on his business and are unique to his business because. it is the only business of any type to be so effected. He also states that he is only requesting that the City allow his business the same level of visibility that he had prior to the recon- struction of I -694. Mr. Adelmann goes on to indicate how he feels his business has been adversely affected experiencing a 19.6% decrease in gasoline sales in 1981 which has required him to eliminate two jobs at the service station with a possi- `bility of eliminating two more positions if the trend continues. Under the Sign Ordinance, the Planning Commission may recommend and the City Council may grant variances from the literal provisions of the ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique and distinctive to the specific property or use under consideration. The provisions of this ordinance, considered in conjunction with the unique and distinctive circum- stances related to the property or uses must be the proximate cause of the hardship; circumstances caused by the property owner or the applicant or a predecessor in title shall not constitute sufficient justification to grant a variance. A variance may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following qualifications are met. 1. A particular hardship to the owner would result if the strict letter of the regulations were carried out. 2. The conditions upon which the application for a variance is based are unique to the parcel of land or the use thereof for which the variance is sought and are not common, generally,to other property or uses within the same zoning classification; 4.15 -82 -1 - Application No. 82017 continued 3. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property or improvements in the neighborhood. i Mr. Adelmann, in his letter, attributes his decline in gasoline sales solely to the !� recent construction on I -694 and the Humboldt Avenue bridge. The T.H. 100 /Humboldt Avenue bridge was closed in November, 1980 and was reopened in November, 1981. Con - struction on the freeway is still underway, but modifications have taken place. For instance, there is no longer a full interchange at the freeway and T. H. 100 /Humboldt Avenue area. The main interchange with the freeway has shifted to Shingle Creek Parkway. Also, the limited on /off access at Xerxes and the freeway has been elimi- nated. In terms of visibility, the gasoline station is much more visible now from the T. H. 100 /Humboldt Avenue overpass than it was with the old interchange /overpass. The northbound bridge from T: H. 100 to Humboldt is at a -'much higher elevation than the former bridge and the station can be readily seen from that bridge. The south - bound bridge from Humboldt to T. H. 100 is about at the same level as the old overpass. As indicated, T. H. 100 /Humboldt is no longer a main interchange with the freeway. The fact that the old interchange was in such close proximity -to the T. H. 252/ Freeway Interchange dictated the shift of the Interchange to Shingle Creek Parkway." Many of the same movements can still be made at T. H. lOO /Humboldt and the freeway through channelization of the roadways. However, the shift of the Interchange to Shingle Creek Parkway does not seem to have changed significantly the volume of traffic going by or through the Freeway Boulevard/Humboldt Avenue intersection (the intersection at which the Standard Station is located). Traffic wishing to get from the freeway to the north and northeast sections of Brooklyn Center still pass by and through the Freeway Boulevard /Humboldt intersection. The old T. H. 100 /Humboldt Interchange never drew great amounts of traffic off of the freeway to go north other than local traffic. This same local traffic still is required to go by or through the Freeway Boulevard /Humboldt Avenue intersection. Another fact that lends credence to the idea that traffic volumes at the Freeway Boulevard /Humboldt intersection are the same and will continue to be the same or greater is the installation of permanent traffic signals at that location. Warrants have been met and will continue to be met thus, dictating the permanent nature of the traffic signals in this location. It should also be pointed out that the Standard Station in question never had freeway visibility even before freeway con- struction was understaken. This was pointed out in a November 29, 1978 letter to the Standard Oil Territory Manager when a similar request for a higher, larger sign for this station was requested in 1978. (copy of letter attached) If Mr. Adelmann is indeed only requesting theltame level of visibility he had prior to freeway construction, no further visibility to the freeway would be required. His visibility has not been impaired at all nor does he have less visibility than he ever had. The applicant's claim that his gasoline sales are declining no doubt is a true statement and it is regrettable that he is faced with layoffs. However, gasoline sales statewide, according to the Minnesota Service Station Association, have been declining steadily between 1978 and 1981 (over 14J). The economic picture in the Twi Cities areas for most retailers is also one of decli ning sales and layoffs. Therefore, the staff do not feel that this service station's problem is one that is only a visibility problem that a higher and larger sign will correct. Furthermore, 0 the City is not in a position to guarantee freeway visibility to gas stations or any other business that feels a need to be seen from the freeway. Only businesses that are located directly along a freeway or highway can reasonably expect such visibility. 4 -15 -82 -2- Application fio. 82017 continued r It is, therefore, felt that the situation described by the applicant is certainly not a unique situation nor is the problem a hardship related directly to the Sign Ordinance., The problem is more akin to other circumstances which the Sign Ordinance has no ability to correct. The Planning Commission's attention is also directed to Planning Commission Appli- cation No. 81072 which was a similar variance request submitted by Russell Viska to have a higher and larger sign for the Smoke Pit Restaurant so that it would -be visible from T. H. 100. Many of the arguments presented on behalf of that applicant are the same as presented here. To allow a sign of the size and type requested would lead to similar requests from other service station operators and other businesses to raise signery so they too can be visible from the freeway. This would be contrary to the Sign Ordinance statement of purpose which indicates the intent of the ordinance to provide necessary visual communication. A rash of granted variances could be con - sidered to have a detrimental effect on the public welfare or be injurious to other property or improvements in the area. In conclusion, it is not felt that the applicant has met the Standards for Variance contained in the Sign Ordinance and, therefore, the application should be denied. The applicant's basic argument is that he wants a higher and larger sign (the same as Mr. Viska's arguement) and to accept this as a reason for granting a variance would establish an unwarranted precedent for variances which could not be ignored if similar requests were made. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent. 4 -15 -82 -3- `• Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82018 Applicant: Blumentals Architecture on behalf of Summit Mortgage Corporation Location: 6159 Earle Brown Drive Request: Site and Building Plan The applicant requests site and building plan approval to remodel and refurbish the horsebarn and hippodrome on the Earle Brown Farm for use as a television studio and transmitting facility. The property in question is zoned I -1 and is also designated a historic preservation area by approval of Application No. 81041. It is bounded on the east by Earle Brown Drive, on the south by the former Summit Bank building, and on the west and north by the other Earle Brown Farm buildings (the main residence and other accessory buildings and barns). The studio and transmitting facilities are considered, per Planning Commission review at its March 25, 1982 meeting, a permitted use similar in nature to other uses expressly permitted in the I -1 district. The site plan calls for 64 parking spaces. The applicant comprehends 25 stalls for 5.091 s R ft. of o ffice space s t e f ) , 33 spaces p p ace in the barn ( at fi space per p p 200 R for a 100 seat studio (at 1 space per 3 seats; and 5 spaces for 10 additional staff people, at 1 space per 2 employees), for a total parking requirement of 63 stalls, one less than provided on the plan. Staff do not accept the parking requirements as suggested by the applicant. The parking formula for industrial or warehouse space is one space /800 sq. ft. or one space per two employees, whichever is greater. The floor space in the hippodrome, excluding Studio A (which has a 100 seat capacity) is roughly 8,900 sq. ft. Only 4,300 sq. ft. of this space should be treated under the industrial formula (5 spaces). The other 4,600 sq. ft. are more properly considered office /service use. This would add 23 parking spaces to the 63 already comprehended by the applicant. Finally, the cook shed will be used for storage and represents 1 stall. The applicant has agreed to provide a proof -of- parking plan showing that the additional stalls can be placed in the well area between the main house and the barn and hippodrome. the landscape e plan approved Landscaping proposed for the site is ve ry p p pp L Y similar to ' p g p p under Application No. 81051, except that five Radiant Crabs are indicated in the greenstrip along Earle Brown Drive rather than five Marshall Seedless Ash. Ash . :trees are proposed along the central drive in the mall area west of the barn and ` hippodrome. Underground irrigation is noted in all landscaped areas . The northerly entrance to the site from Earle Brown Drive would be closed off by a wood gate during non - business hours. A wood fence would extend along the east property line and along the north side of the south entrance to the property. The main parking lot to the east of-the hippodrome will drain to a catch basin 55' due east of the southeast corner of the horsebarn, in the northwest corner of the main parking lot. The catch basin will be connected by a 12 "private storm sewer line to City storm sewer in Earle' Brown Drive The smaller parking area opposite the barn must drain to the north (see memo from Jim Grube).' The parking lot is bounded by B612 curb and gutter. The southerly drive, as it passes the hippodrome to the bank, will not be curbed. The building elevations will be changed only by replacing existing lattice windows with fixed single pane window frames. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA Standards and will also be retro- fitted to meet state energy codes Two 9 meter diameter receiving antennas will be placed within the front setback area, but outside the greenstrip. (See Application No. 82021. 4 -15 -82 -1- Application No. 82018 continued Altogether, the plan appears to be in order, with the exception of certain drainage revisions, and approval is recommended subject to at least the following conditions. 1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building Official with respect to applicable codes prior to the issuance of permits. 2. Grading, drainage, utility and berming plans are subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of permits. 3. A site erformance and supporting financial guarantee (in an amount P PP 9 9 to be determined by the City Manager) shall' be submitted prior to the issuance of permits to assure completion of approved site improvements. 4. Any outside trash disposal facilities and rooftop mechanical equip -. ment shall be appropriately screened from view. 5. The building is to be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing system to meet NFPA standards and shall be connected to a central monitoring device in accordance with Chapter 5 of the 'City Ordinances. 6. An underground irrigation system shall be installed in all landscaped areas to facilitate site maintenance. 7. Plan approval is exclusive of all signery which is subject to Chapter 34 of the City Ordinances 8. B612 curb and gutter shall be provided around all parking and driving areas. 9. The preliminary R.L.S. approved under Application No. 81035 shall receive final approval by the City Council and be filed with the County prior to the issuance of building permits for the conversion of the barn and hippodrome. 10. Improvements to the Summit Bank property approved under Application No. 78002, but deferred until plans were accepted for the barn and hippodrome shall be completed prior to October 1, 1982 in conjunction with the improvements required by approval of this application. 4 -15 -82 -2- Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82021 Applicant: Summit Mortgage Company Location: 6129 Earle Brown Drive Request: Variance The applicant requests a variance from Section 35 -400 of the Zoning Ordinance which requires principal and accessory structures in the I -1 Zoning District to be set back 50 feet from public right -of -way. The applicant wishes to place within the front yard setback area, two 9 meter diarreter receiving antennae for the Channel 29 VHF -TV Station :proposed for the horsebarn and hippodrome. The "dishes" (antennae) would be set back a miminum of 15' from Earle Brown Drive to allow for at least the customary greenstrip separation. The applicant has submitted a letter to address the standards for a variance (attached) . The; Zoning Ordinance at Section 35-240 :2 states that a variance from the literal provisions of the ordinance may be granted in cases where the strict enforcement of the ordinance would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique and distinctive to the individual property in question, and after demon- stration by evidence that all of the following qualifications are met: a) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or topo- graphical conditions of the specific parcels of land involved, a particular hardship to the owner would result, as distinguished from -a mere inconvenience, if the strict letter of the regulations were to be carried out. b) The conditions upon which the application for a variance is based • are unique to the parcel of land for which the variance is sought, and are not common, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. c) The alleged hardship is related to the requirements of this ordinance and has not been created by any persons presently or formerly having an interest in the parcel of land. d) The granting of the variance will not be detrimental'to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighbor- hood in which the parcel of land is located. The applicant contends in his letter that the variance is justified because: 1) The buildings exist in their present location and it is undesirable to place the receiving dishes in the mall area west of the building for aesthetic reasons. 2) The dishes must - be at least 70 feet .from any building. Since the hippodrome is 120' from Earle Brown Drive §: the dishes cannot fit between the building and the right -of -way and still allow for the required 50' setback, 3) The dishes have "been -kept away from the property line by a maximum feasible distance of 15' in one case, 2Q' in another. The variance is thereby minimized. 4 -15 -82 -1- Application No. 82021 continued 4) The variance is technical in nature since the antenna is not a building such as a garage. • Staff would agree with most points made by the applicant. However, we would stress that any structure, whether or not it is a "building" as such, must meet setback requirements, unless specifically exempted by the ordinance. We have also discussed with the applicant the possibility of placing the receiving dishes on the top of the Earle Brown Office Tower along with a smaller 8° diameter transmitting ish. We have ve been assured that this i will' opt on be looked at. If feasible, the Planning Commission should recommend as to which location has the most acceptable aesthetic impact, If placement of the receiving dishes on the office building is unfeasible or not preferable to the Planning Commission, staff would recommend the variance be granted on the following grounds: 1) The circumstances surrounding the application are unique, e involving 9 PP qu an an existing historic structure which cannot readily be moved without damage to its structural and historical integrity. 2) Failure to grant the variance would cause either an undue hardship for the applicant or (by placing the receiving dishes in the mall area) would seriously disturb the character of historic district established under Application No. 81041. 3) The circumstances affecting the application were not created by the applicant, but arise because of the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, which were - ado adopted ed after the farm bui3dings were erected.... 4) Proposed placement of the receiving dishes minimizes the variance and the impact on surrounding development. 4 -15 -82 -2_ •, Planning Commission Information Sheet Application No. 82019 Applicant: �lartin Drinkwine Location: 5632 James Ave. N. Request: Home Occupation /Special Use Permit The applicant requests special use permit approval to conduct a Tidy Car business on a part -time basis in the garage of his home at 5632 James Avenue North. Tidy Car is a treatment to a car's paint surface that seals the finish and protects it from deteriorating elements. The property is zoned Rl and is surrounded by other single- family homes Because the home occupation involves the use of all accessory structure, it falls into the category of home occupations requiring a special use permit. The applicant has submitted a Letter explaining the nature of the home occupation. The rocess involves washing the car, deoxidizing the paint with a nubbin co m p ound, p � p 9 P 9 9 applying a sealant, and buffing the sealant in to bring out a shine. The entire process takes 4 to 6 hours The process involves the use of a power tool in all phases which is about as loud as a 3/8" drill At present, Mr. Drinkwine averages approximately 2 cars per month and hopes to bring his volume up to 8 to 10 cars per month before looking for a commercial location. The garage is a 2Z car garage, insulated and sheetrocked in the walls and ceiling and heated with a 60,000 B.T.U. heater to al low for winter work. It is not expected that cars will be parked on the street since only 1 o at most, 2, would be on the premises at one time. There is a two -car driveway. finally, Mr. Drinkwine intends to engage in the home occup- ation during evenings and from 9:00 a.m. to 6 :00 p.m. Friday and Saturday. Staff became aware of the home occupation as _a result of a complaint regarding "toxic odors" from another resident in the neighborhood who felt the odors resulted from the Tidy ,Car business. The Building Official investigated thi complaint and was unable to substantiate any -link between the home occupation and the odors. Staff's primary concerns relate to 1) keeping parking off- street and 2) limiting any noise impact on surrounding properties by limiting the hours of operation. The Building Official has been unable, as of yet, to make an inspection of the remises. We recommend as usual a is use permit b subject P u 1 that any special u p e ect to com- u � pletion -of any work required by the Building Official Since the garage i s already sheetrocked, it is likely that only a fire extinguisher need be installed. A public hearing has been scheduled and notices have been sent. Based on the foregoing, staff recommend that the application be approved, subject to at least the following conditions: 1. The permit is issued to the applicant as..'operator of the facility and is nontransferable. - 2. The permit is subject < to all codes, on dnances and regulations and any violation thereof shall be grounds for revocation. 3. Service shall be on an appointment only basis between 4:00 p.m. and 9 :00 p.m. weekdays and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday. However, the special use permit authorizes work on not more than 10 cars per month. 4 -15 -82 -]- Application No. 82019 continued 4. All parking shall be off- street on improved space provided by the applicant. 5. Service to automobiles or other power vehicles is limited to washing and application of the Tidy Car ,sealant; other repairs are expressly prohibited. 6. The permit is subject to completion of any work required by the Building Official. 7. Noise, odor, and vibration shall not be perceptible beyond the premises to the degree that a nuisance is created. 4 -15 -82 -2 Member Nancy Manson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 82 -1 RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT OF COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 66 -295, (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) RELATIVE TO COMMERCIAL ZONED LAND IN SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF 69TH AND HUMBOLDT AVENUES NORTH WHEREAS, the Council on November 7, 1966 adopted Resolution No. 66 -295, establishing the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan, A Guide for Community Development; and WHEREAS, the Plan (at page 31) recommends, as a Goal for Commercial Development; that there be provided a centrally located neighborhood shopping center in each of the six residential neighborhoods, unless the residents are adequately served by community or regional shopping centers located nearby; and WHEREAS, the Plan (at pages 47 and 49) refers to and recommends the designation of land in the southeast quadrant of 69th and Humboldt Avenues North as the location of such a shopping center for the Northeast Neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the proposed Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 1980, which was given preliminary approval by the City Council on July 21, 1980 and was accepted by the Metropolitan Council on December 17, 1981, at page 98 and on Figure 15 ( "Land Use Plan Revisions °) recommends that the property immediately east of Humboldt Square Shopping Center be developed with single - family detached housing and WHEREAS, the Commission has considered the above Plan recommendations on February 11, 1982, March 25, 1982, and April 15, 1982, in conjunction with Application No. 82008, submitted by the owner of the remaining vacant land at the above location, requesting rezoning from C2 (General Commerce) to R3 (Townhouse); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 35 -202 of the City Ordinances, the Commission held a duly called public hearing on April 15, 1982 to consider the amendment of the Plan: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 35 -202 of the City Ordinances, that Council Resolution No. 66 -295 '(Comprehensive Plan) and the proposed Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan, 1980 be amended to provide for the development of mid- density single- family attached housi.ng (preferably owner - occupied) on the remaining developable land in the southeast quadrant of 69th and Humboldt Avenues North, based upon the following findings: 1 The Northeast Neighborhood is adequately served by shopping facilities both within and near the neighborhood. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designation of this area for future development as a neighborhood shopping center has been satisfied with the existing retail center. RESOLUTION 82 -1 3. There is substantial vacant commercial land elsewhere in the Northeast Neighborhood. 4. The owner has initiated a rezoning, from C2 `(General Commerce) to R3 (Townhouse), of the approximate 7.5 acre parcel described as that part of Lot 2, Block 1, Hi Crest Square Addition lying east of R.L.S. No. 1312. 5. The proposed use represents a reasonable use of the land and is consistent with the proposed Comprehensive Plan develop- - ment goals for the Northeast Neighborhood. 6. The subject property is unsuited for single - family detached housing, as recommended in the proposed Comprehensive Plan, because of high water table, drainage difficulties, and the intensity of most surrounding land uses 7. The proposed R3 zoning is consistent and compatible wi surrounding land use classificat' n '. D Chairman ATT Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Lowell Ainas and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof; George Lucht, Molly Malecki, Nancy Manson, Mary Simmons, Lowell Ainas; Carl Sandstrom and Donald Uersteeg; and the following voted against the same: none, whereupon said.resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Member Molly Malecki introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 82 -2 RESOLUTION REGARDING RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION OF APPLICATION NO. 82008 SUBMITTED BY BERGSTROM REALTY COMPANY WHEREAS, Application No. 82408 submitted by Bergstrom Realty Company proposes rezoning from C2 (General Commerce) to R3 (Townhouse) of property in the 1300 block on the south side of 69th Avenue North described as that part of Lot 2, Block 1, Hi Crest Square Addition lying east of Registered Land Survey No. 1312; and WHEREAS, the Commission held a duly called public hearing on February 11, 1982 when testimony regarding the request was taken; and WHEREAS, the item was referred to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group which, in minutes of a meeting on March 3, 1982 recommended the rezoning, subject to submittal of a plat to subdivide the property for owner- occupied townhouses; and WHEREAS, the Commission further considered the matter on March 25, 1982 and on April 15,' 1982 when a public hearing was held to consider appropriate amend- ments of the Comprehensive Plan (both current and proposed) goals for this area; and WHEREAS, an appropriate preliminary plat to subdivide the property for owner - occupied townhouses has been submitted and has been accepted by the Commission: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center Planning Advisory Commission to recommend to the City Council that Application No.. 82008 submitted by Bergstrom Realty Company be approved in consideration of the following: 1. The R3 zoning classification is the most appropriate land use classification for the location in question in that it is con- sistent and compatible with all surrounding land uses. 2. Development of the property for townhouses in the interest of the City, the Brooklyn Center School District, and the surrounding land uses, as well as the property owner, by adding 60 dwelling units to the northeast neighborhood. 3. ,Development of the property in question will ameliorate drainage difficulties both on the site and for the single - family homes to the east. 4. The proposed townhouse use of the land is not considered to be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan goal that the Northeast Neighborhood be predominantly single- family detached residential in character. f RESOLUTION NO. 82 -2 - 5. The property in question will bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning district, whereas the Rl zoning classification presented development problems which woul ave lead to an inefficient use of land. Ye Chairman ATT Secretary The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member Carl Sandstrom and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof; George Lucht, Molly Malecki, Nancy Manson, Mary Simmons, Lowell Ainas, Carl Sandstrom.and Donald Versteeg; and the following against the.same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. l MEMORANDUM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM Ronald A. Warren, Director of Planning and Inspecti .,(,& DATE: April 23, 1982 SUBJECT: Ordinance Amendment Regarding Regulating and Licensing Amusement Devices At the April 26, 1982 City Council meeting, two ordinance amendments relating to amusement devices will be considered for first reading by the City Council. The first amendment establishes licensing requirements and regulations for amusement devices. The other ordinance amends the Zoning Ordinance by defining It centers" and establishing them as special uses in the =C2 i-oning district provided the property on which they are located is not within 150' of any residentially zoned property. As you are well aware, these ordinance amendments are designed to provide regulation and control over the location and use of these games so that their - use does not become a public nuisance and have an adverse affect on surrounding property. Up until this time, the City has attempted to regulate and control amusement devices through the special use permit process. Problems relating to these games have been experienced in a number of places but particularly, in' two specific instances, at the Humboldt Square Shopping Center. In both situations the City Council was considering revoking the special use permits of the estab- lishments for failure to comply with the provisions of the 'permit. Both operations were abandoned prior to such revocation.. We have been advised by the City Attorney that a system of licensing amusement devices and their operation is a more streamlined method of control rather than the use of special use permits solely. Also the proliferation of games in a number of commercial establishments and enterprises where they have not customarily been found has lead to the recom- mendations in the ordinance. The ordinance amending Chapter 23 requires the licensing of operators and vendors of amusement devices. An operator is anyone -who owns or manages premises on which one or more amusement devices are made available to the public. A vendor, ' or supplier, is anyone who provides amusement devices to an amusement center operator or an operator of an establishment authorized to have amusement devices on their premises. The recommended ordinance' defines amusement devices and also "amusement centers ". "Amusement centers would still be required to obtain a special use permit in addition to obtaining a license for amusement devices The list of establishments contained in the proposed Section 23 -2109 Subdivision B (1 through 10) are not considered "amusement centers" by the ordinance and the location of amusement devices in these establishments as secondary or i uses can be permitted through issuance of a license` without a special use permit.` Generally, "amusement centers are any other operation where one or more amusement devices are located as either 'a principal or secondary use. "Amusement center.' would not be permitted within 150' of any residentially zoned property. The proposed ordinance prohibits the use of amusement devices for gambling and prohibits' payoffs other than free games. It also exempts certain devices from the licensing requirements such as games in people's hones, in recreation or party rooms in multiple- family dwellings, employee lounnes,lunch rooms, etc. Memo to Gerald G. Splinter April 23, 1982 Page 2 • provided they are not available for use by the general public. The proposed ordinance also establishes various restrictions designed to prevent problems in places having amusement devices and also prevent problems that may adversely affect adjacent property and property owners. The proposed ordinance is somewhat more restrictive in terms of gambling or payoffs in that it prohibits any payoffs other than free games. State Law does not consider games of skill as gambling devices and, therefore, prizes or other payoffs could be given for games of skill and not be considered gambling. Our reasoning for the more restrictive language is based solely on determining what are games of skill. Many current electronic games certainly are games of hand to eye skill and could potentially be allowed to have payoffs or other prizes.' To avoid con tinuously having to make these determinations we recommend no payoffs other than free games for amusement devices. The recommended ordinance is the fourth draft and `has , been reviewed and discussed by the Planning Commission on January 14th and 28th, February 11th, and March 11th and 25th of this year. The Commission directed most of its attention to land use related questions particularly with respect to the location of establishments authorized to have amusement devices through licensing and special use permits for "amusement centers The feeling is that the location of "amusement centers and retail establishments offering these devices is an important aspect of the proposed ordinance. Allowing these establishments in residential areas should be avoided and is as important, in our opinion, as management of the operation. The recommended ordinance, as noted previously, would require the licensing of amusement device vendors. The reason for this proposal is to get a'handle on where amusement devices are being provided and also for vendors to be familiar with and recognize authorized locations for amusement devices and other regula- tions. We want to avoid the placement of devices in prohibited locations rather than to ga through the problems of removing machines from these places after the fact. Vendors that ignore the regulations run the risk of license revocation and, thus, their ability to do business in this City. It should also be noted that the City Attorney and myself had'an opportunity to review the proposed ordinance with a number of vendors and an attorney repre- senting the industry on March 31, 1982. They offered some suggestions as to how the ordinance might be improved. Some suggestions have been incorporated into the ordinance, others have.not. Generally, their comments were favorable and they indicated that they thought they could support the ordinance. Finally, we are recommending the annual license fee of $75.00 per machine for an operator and $150.00 for a vendor. In addition, a $100.00 investigation fee is recommended to cover processing of license application investigations by the Police Department. It should be noted that the recommended fee per machine, when broken down on a monthly and daily basis, amounts to $5.25 per month and approximately $.21 per day. It is our opinion that these fees will appropriately cover the cost related to the administration and enforcement of the licensing provisions and regulations. Attached is a survey of the fees of fifteen various suburban comruni ties that license amusement devices. The proposed fees are certainly in line with those of other communities. Amusement Devi License Pee Survey 4 -21 -82 City Fee /Comments New Hope- -6 machines or less,; "' $100.00 /Machine -7 or more - $600.00 minimum -over 6 machines $50.00 /Machine Bloomington - - $39.00 each with City Council approval -over 6 machines an arcade, then must go thru P anning Commission and City Council (Special Use) Anoka - $50.00 /Machine -if arcade, license fee is $300.00/Yr. plus $150.00 for investigation fee (not more than 10 machines allowed). Require an officer to be on premises at all times; 300 from any church Crystal - $104.50 /Machine /Yr. (Workman's Comp. required) -if over 10 machines;- $3,000.00 for an amusement center license (must be in shopping center), $30.00 /Machine over 30 machines (30 machines for $3000.00) Columbia Heights - $50.00 /Machine for any number -9 or more is arcade $500.00 plus a $5,000`.00 bond for arcade license Minnetonka - - $11.00 /Machine Certificate of Insurance required Hopkins - - $75.00 /Machine approved by City Council Richfield - $65.00 /Machine /Yr. -no investigation fee - $1,000.00 bond; $200.00 for arcade White Bear Lake - - $85.00 /Machine /Yr.` - approved by ,City Council Roseville - - $50.00 /Machine /Yr. -Game room license is $100.00 (more than 50% receipts from games) - Amusement place $25.00` - $300.00 investigation fee Edina $25.00 /Mechanical amusement device (video) - $100.00 /Pinball require insurance Maplewood $10.00 per location plus $5.00 per device arcade is a Special Use - arcade -6 or more games if the primary use . -1- Amusement Device License Fee Survey 4 -21 -82 City Fee/'Comments Brooklyn Park $35.00 /Machine - arcade 'license is $400.00 Robbinsdale - - $50.00 /Machine /Yr. -kiddy rides - $ 25.00 minors can't use machines, unless meet a number of requirements approved by City Council Eden Prairie - $150.00 /Machine up to 10 machines over.10 machines - $1,504.00 plus $5.00 per machine Survey high $150.00 /Machine 36w,- .$5.00 /Machine avg. $59.63 z i 2 CITY Off' BROOI.L =fir CENTER 1 ti Noti is hereby given that a publ hearing will be held on the 24th day of May, 1982 at p.m. at the City Nall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, ta. c an amendment to the City Ordinances regulating and licensing amusement devices. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 23 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING REGULATING AND LICENSIN AMUSEMENT DEVICES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 23of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby'amended`in the following manner: Sec 23 -010. LICENSE FEES. The fees for the various licenses shall be as hereinafter stated, notwithstanding other ordinance provisions regarding the specific fee. Fee, (annual un less otherwise Type of License R equired by Section License Expire stated) Amusement Device 23 -2301 June 30 Operato $75 per machin O pe ra Vendor 150 Section 23 -2101. LICENSE REQUIRED. A. No operator as defined herein shall keep, operate, maintain or permit to b e operated or maintained upon premises within is Tirect or in- direct control within the City of Brooklyn C any amusement de vice, unless such person, firm, partnership or corporation shall have first procured a License as hereinafter provided. B " No vendor as defined herein shall provide an amusement device or devices to any operator or am usement center l within the City of Brooklyn Center unless such vendor shall have first rocured a License as here- inafter provided. Section 23 -2102. DEFINITIONS A. "Amuse Centers" The operation of one or more amusement devices exce �t, t hose designed f or and u sed exclu sively _ _ as rides for children) as a ri nci al or s econdar y use available for use by n on - empl oyees ayon. commercia Pre mises other than those l in Section 23 -2109 Subd. 2, subject. the Special Use Perm r of Section. 35 - 220 of it th Ci t Ordin B. "Ven - A< perso fir ar•tnershi or corRo ration w ich owns one or, mo amuse device a ncf whi orovi des such devices to an amus ement center op rato o r t t h e opera _manaeyr or owner of an establish- , merit za kit hori -e t o . have amusetient de vices onTis her remises for pub is u se. DI NANCE NO. C. "Amu sement Device " - - The term amusement device as used herein means any amusement - de ice o iTe oTlowing�ypes A mach o co n t rivance, in ludin "p inball" machines (1 } e r c p , i l miniature electronic or vi deo anjes m ca t bowling machines, shuffle b electric rife or gun ranges, miniature mechanical or el ectronic devices and g ames or amusements patterned afte basebal basketball, hockey and similar dames and like device m or games which may be playe solely for amusement and not as a gambling device and which devices or ga are p by the the._ insertion of a coins or tokens or at a f ee fixed and charged by e e stablishment i which such devices or machines are locate and which contain no automatic payoff d evices for the return of money, coins, merchandise, checks, tokens or any oth er thing or item of value; provided, however, that such machine may be equipped to permit a free play or game. 2) Amusement devices designed for and used exclu as rides for children such as, but not limited to, kiddie cars, miniature airplane rides, mechanical horses and other mi mechanical devices not operated as - a part of or in connectio with any carnival, circus, show, or other entertainment or exhibition. D. Operator" - A person, firm, partnership or corporation which manages and /or owns premises on which one or more amusement devices are avail a for use b persons not employed b the o perator. Y P Y p E. "Licensed Premise" - A premise upon which, licensed amusement devices are used or intended for use. Section 23 -2103. APPLICATION FOR LICENSE. A. Operator's License. The application for an operator's license shall contain the following information: Name, address, age, date and place of birth of the operator. (2) Prior misdemeanor or felony convictions of the operator, if any, but excluding traffic violations. Prior empioyment experience of a supervisory nature Address of premises where amusement dev is to be displayed or o erated and the primary business conducted at that remises. p P Y _p Owner of premises 5 If the interest of the op erator be t of a corporation or othe business Y Y entit , the names of an p ersons avin a five percent (5,,',) or more interest in said business entity shall be • listed. RO INANCE NO. 7 Name and address of amusement device vendor if applicable) and a copy of lease agreement. 8 Number and tape of amusement devic to be maintained on premises. B. Vendor's Li censes. .. The application for a vendor's license shall contain the following information: Name and address of vendor. 2} Location or locations where amusement devices will be used. P rior misdemeanor or felony convictions if any, but excluding traffic violations. If the interest of the vendor be that of a corporation or other business entity, the names of any pe rsons having a five % or more interest in said business entity shall be listed. Section 23 -2104. LICENSE FEE. A. The annual license fee for required li censes shall" be as set forth in Section 23-010 of th C ity Ordinances Licenses shall be issued for an annual period from, J uly 1st through June 30th for each year hereafter, provided, however, that the initial license fee for each applicant shall be prorated as of the date of the a pplication therefore. Said app lication for license shall then be presented to the City Council for consideration, and if approved, the City Clerk shall issue the license to the applicant. B. At the time of application for an op erator's license or vendor's icense the applicant shall pay in full an investi ation fee in the amount of $100. If at any time an additional investigation is re- quired because of a change of ownership or control of a corporation or partnership previously licensed, the licensee shall pay in full an additional investigation fee in the amount of $50. Investigation fees shall not be refunded Section 23 -2105. INSURANCE. The operator shall also submit with his application -a policy of liability insurance applicable to death or injury caused b the o eration.of: the P J � p i censed amusement device or the premises upo which it i located in the minimum amounts of $100,000.00 for injury to or death of any person o r 300,000.00 for one accident. Section 23-2106. INS PECTION. A. Application for license shal be made in duplicate and one copy shall b e referred tote City Manager or hisser designated inspector who shall investigate t e ocation wherein it is proposea to operate such amusement device, ascertain if t e; appl cant is a person of goo moral charac and recommen eit e ap pr'ov_al' or disapprovaT t e appli- ca tion N iTe nse shall be ap proved b y tTie Ci ty Cou6cil unto e reco nNnendation of shy Ci'ty�an has b een c onsidered. i ORDINANCE NO. B.. Eac amusemen device l in t h e C it y o Brookl Center shall be lnsp ected Y b� the Chief�of Police prior to app roval fo rliicensing, and an i report shall b e f to the City Mana ger. AMIN Upon notice by the Oper to the C hief of Police req uesting an inspection and stating t hat on am devic has been substituted f another u nder an existing l icense . pursuant to Section 23-2108 hereof, said substituted amusement device m ay be operated un ess license therefor has been de by the Ci C ouncil. An amusement device which is not being substituted for a pursuant 'to ection 23 -2102 hereof, shall not be operated,until notice has been givenEyy the Operator to the Chief of Police requesti an inspection, an inspection report has been forwarded to th City Manager, and a_ license issued Refusal by an Operator of the right of entry to the Chief of Police during business hours f or the purpos of a.sch eduled inspection, a` requested inspection, o an inspection made upon probable cause, shall ronstitote grounds fo revocation of aIT licenses for amusement devices held by the Ope Section 23 -2107. DISPLAY OF LICENSE. The license herein provi for shall be pos permanently and conspicuously at the location of the amusement device in the premises wherein the a evice i s to be operated or maintained to be oper Section 23 -2108. TRANSFERABILITY. '' one amusement device may be substituted for another similar amusement evice under a single license provided that the number of amusement devices shall not exceed the number approved under the license. } B.' Operator's licenses are issued for one location only and such licenses are nontransferable between locations. Section 23- 2109. LOCATION OF AMUSEMENT DEVI A. No amusement device shall be located, placed, maintained or operated o n any public street, avenue, boulevard, lane,'o; alb within the ' Ci ty. No amusement device shall ° be located on private property in such a manner as to biock or interfere with esta driving lanes, parking places, fire lanes, exitways -or wal nor shall an amusement device be located so that its operatio wil create a nuisance. B. Licensed amusement devices shall be allowed t o be located as secondary or incidental uses in the following commerc esta establishments holding an on non - n toxi catin 1 i quor license, an on - sale intoxicati l iquor licen an on -sale wine license or an on -sale club license: - ea ting e stablishments including eatin est ablis hme nts offering l ive entertainment, but excluding` convenience foo restaurants and drive-in eati ng establ ishments. L recreation centers. ' (4)_ m otion picture theaters. bowler establ ishm ents. ORDIN NO athletic clubs: hea l th� s pas. f 8) hotels and motels clubrooms and lodges. 10) other retail operations provided the p on whic the amusement device is to be located i not within 150 feet of any resi dentially zoned R1 through R7 property. C. Amusement centers shall be subject to the provisions of Section 35 -220 of the City Ordinances provided the property on which t e amusement center is to be located is not wi thin 150 feet of an residentially zoned R1 through R7 property. D. Licensed amusement devices designed for and used exclusively as ri des for children may be located in any place or upon any premises approved by the C ty Council . Section 23- 2110. US FOR GAMBLING. It shall be unlawful for the owner of any amusement device, or for the owner or operator of any establishment where it i ocate to knowingly permit the same to be used for gambling or f the making o bets or wagers. Section 23 -2111. PAY -OFFS, It shall be unlawful for the licensee or for the owner or operator of the establishment where any amusement device is located to give any money, Token, merchandise o r any other thin of value or any reward or prize in ieu of free games registered on such devic and all free games so regi stered shall be played on the device re such free game, and there shall be no mechanism on the amusement device whereby the operator . can cancel registered free games. Section 23 -2112. AUTOMATIC PAY -OFFS It shall be unlawful for any person to keep maintain, sell or permit to be operated any amusement device which has oeen converted into an automatic pay -off device which shall automatically award money, prizes, tokens, merchandise gifts or anything of value, othe than fr ee games to the operator or player of such amusement device t shall be un l a wful to convert any amusement device into an automatic pay -off device. Section 23 -2113 DESTRUCTION OF ILLEGALLY OPERATED M ACHINES. Any amusement device knowi ngly used by th e owner in violation of Section ' 0 TI or Z 2 o f this Ordina may b sei zed and destroyed in com liance wit t he provisions of the Statutes of the State of Min nesota r elating to ganibl i ng devices . - ORDINANCE NO. .Section 23 -2114, CE RTAIN ! .t ((JCt 'EtlT D EVICES NOT LICENSED. The lic _ensinq__pre vision s of this Or sha no a pply to any of the fol lows n ar, r t de vices : 1 e� en (] )� Any a musement dev h eld . or kept fo r sa or sto and which is n ot act - i n us o r d far u se. An a r;;useren t device use for pr i vate, no -c - rci al purposes such as home use`. A ny amusement device l o c omme r cial or industrial premises I in lunch rooms, break rooms, emlo ee cafe or recreation f rooms which.is provided for employees use and not available for use by the general public Any amusement device located in a recreation center or recreation room in a multiple - family or townhous resi dential complex which is provided for use by residents and their guests and is not available for use by the general public. _ Section 2 3 -2115. AMUSEMENT DEVICES RESTRICTIONS AND LICENSE REVOCATION. A. It shall be the responsibi of the operator: (1) To prevent the harassment of any person in or adjacent to the license premise b patrons of th 1 icensed premise; p (2) To provide adequate and unobstructed ingress, egress and parT ing areas -adjacent tote licensed premise; (3) To prevent the frequenting and the use of the licensed premise y. ou , boisteFous and dis persons; (4) To prevent the frequenti and the -use of the licensed premise b y persons who en gage in ac o van` TcaT sm and destruction o property 1n and about and adjacent to tTi`e I i cerise premi se; (5) To prevent co nduct by pat rons of the lic ensed premise which as an adverse e t e t on adjac pr operty; (6) To maintain order on the licen premis at all times; (7) To ensure that the licensed premise do not become overcrowded so a to con ti tuts a___iazar to tlie_ aI IF oir safe y- o persons, to exceed t: or so as t e maw nurtiber off per sons permi e _ ___ There i n by ara`er oT e: �ty`T� eager;' (3) To provide ful -time ad supervision upo the licensed premise uri ng-Tu ness fou rs; (9) To ensure that each amusement device on the licensed premise tFas been I i cons-e . srlar, to t,l s orc�1"narice an3 tha't"Ft to l icense i w s toTL t ip a cons = cu0uS p7 ace an the` - 1Tc - e se prei so , - ORDINANCE NO. (10) To coply with the provisions of Section 19 -305 of the City Ordi nances. B. I t shall be unTawfiJ for any operator to operate t he licensed premise so as to constitute a public nuisance under City Ordinances, Statutes of the State of Mlinnesota, or the Common Law. C. It shall be unlawful for a_ny operator to sell, offer for sale, knowingly Permit to be sold or offered for sale, to be dispensed or consumed, or to permit to be brought into the licensed premi any al coholic beverage or controlled substance defined in C hester 152 of Minnesota Statutes, or to knowingly permit any illegal a ctivity an the licensed pre mise without immediately notifying the Br Center Police Department of such illegal activity, provid however, that the P rohibit ions cans in this section regardanq alcoho beverages shall n ot apply to licensed liquor establishments as set forth in Section ' 23 -2109 D ) - D. Every Operator and Vendor, in makinq applicat for a license here- under, acknowledges that the license is a personal privilege and does not constitute property, and is not transferable E. Any violation of this Ordinance, or any failure to comps with any provisions of this Ordinance, or any failure to com-ly_ with any conditional restriction of any special use permit i ssue d w respect to the licensed premise, is hereby deemed to be ad equate grounds for I !F revocation of the license for all amusement devices on the licensed premise, or in the case of a vendor, on all amuseme d evices provided to l icensed premises within the City of Brooklyn Center. Section 23-2116. SEVERABILITY. If any part of this Ordinance shall be adjudged to be inva by a Court of competent 3urisdiction, such jud ment or decree s hall not affect or impair the remainder of this Ordinance Section 23 -2117. PENALTY. Any person who violates or fails to comply with any pro vision of this o r finance s a e gui ty o a misdemeanor and subje to a fine not to exceed . , or imprisonment for a peri not to" exceed n1 n�ety – 90 ays, — wi th costs of prosecution to Tee added. Su ch' enalt m be im os d P y Y P e in addi to revocation or suspension of license. .The licensee un er - t -s Or inane, whether or not he is in direct cont of a amusement evice described in Section Z3-2102 hereof, or the premi u pon which sai d amusement devi ce is located, may be charged under tTiis Ordinance Tr any v ia a t ergo' , y tue 617 nis ind irect con`trai`o sf"aid amusement cTevi ce and premises , resu I tin - '� g mom iii s bei rig 't Ti censee. ORDINANCE NO. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (3) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 _ yor ATTEST: Clerk I Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter, brackets indicate matter to be deleted). r I I ' L CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER Notice is hereby given that a public hearing evill be held on the 24th day of May, 1932 at p.m. at the City Hall, 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway, to consider an • amendment to the Zoning Ordinance defining amusement centers�'and establishing them as a special use in the C2 Zoning District. ORDINANCE NO AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 35 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES REGARDING AMUSEMENT CENTERS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS. Section 1. Chapter 35 of the City Ordinances of the City of Brooklyn Center is hereby amended in the following manner: Section 35- 322.3. Special Uses ( Amusement Centers provided the property on which the amusement center is to be l ocated i s not within 150 feet of any residentially zoned (RI . through R7 property, Section 35 -900. DEFINITIONS Amusement Center - The operation of one or mor amusement devices (except those designed for and used exclusively r ides for children a a principal or secondary use available for use by non-employees upon commercial premises other than those listed in Section 23-2109 Subd 2 of the City Ordi nances, Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon thirty (30) days following its legal publication. Adopted this day of 19 Mayor ATTEST: Clerk Date of Publication Effective Date (Underline indicates new matter,' brackets indicate matter to be deleted) l Member introduced the foll resolution and moved �� its adoption: RESOLUTION N0. RESOLUTION AMENDING COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 66 -295, (COMPREHENSIVE PLAN) RELATIVE TO COMMERCI ZONED LAMB IN SOUTHEAST QUADRANT OF 69TH AND HUMBOLDT AVENUES NORTH WHEREAS, the Council on November 7, 1966 adopted Resolution No 66 -295 establishing the Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan, A Guide for Community Develop- ment; and WHEREAS, the Plan (at page 31) recommends, as a Goal for Commercial Development; that there be provided a centrally located neighborhood shopping center in each of the six residential neighborhoods, unless the residents are adequately served by community or regional shopping centers located nearby; and WHEREAS, the Plan (at pages 47 and 49) refers to and recommends the designation of land in the southeast quadrant of 69th and Humboldt Avenues North as the location of such a shopping center for the Northeast Neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the proposed -Brooklyn Center Comprehensive Plan 7980 which was given 'preliminary approval by the City Council on July 21 1980 and was accepted by the Metropolitan Council on December 17, 1981, at page 98 and on Figure 15 ( "Land Use Plan Revisions") recommends that the property immediately east of Humboldt Square Shopping Center be developed with single- family detached housing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the above Plan recommendations on February 11, 1982, March 25, 1982, and April 15, 1982, in conjunction with Application No. 82008, submitted by the owner of the remaining vacant land at the above location, requesting rezoning from C2 (General Commerce) to R3 (Townhouse); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 35 -202 of the City Ordinances, the Planning. Commission held a duly called public hearing on April 15, 1982 to consider the amend - ment of the Plan and at that meeting adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 82 -1 recommending amendment of the existing and proposed Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council reviewed the proposed Comprehensive Plan amend- ment at its April 26, 1982 regular meeting in conjunction with its review of Planning Commission Application No. 82008: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council, pursuant to Chapter 35 -202 of the City Ordinances, that Council Resolution No. 66 -295 (Comprehensive Plan) and the proposed Brooklyn Center Comprehensi Plan, 1980 be amended to provide for the development of mid - density single- family attached housing (preferably owner - occupied) on the remaining developable land in the southeast quadrant of 69th and Humboldt Avenues North, based upon the following findings: 1. The Northeast Neighborhood is adequately served by shopping facilities both within and near the neighborhood. 2. The Comprehensi Plan designation of thi area for future development as a neighborhood shopping center has been satisfied with the existing retail center. RESOLUTION N0. 3. There is substantial vacant commercial land elsewhere in the Northeast Neighborhood, 4. The owner has initiated a rezoning from C2 (General Commerce) to R3 (Townhouse), of the approximate 7`.5 acre parcel described as that part of Lot 2, Block 1, Hi Crest Square Addition lying east of R.L.S. No.- 1312, 5. The proposed use represents a reasonable use of the land and is consistent with the proposed Comprehensive Plan development goals for - the `Northeast Neighborhood. 6. The subject property is unsuited for single - family detached housing, as recommended in the proposed Comprehensive Plan, because of high water table, drainage difficulties, and the intensity of most sur- rounding land uses. 7. The proposed R3 zoning is consistent and compatible with surround- ing land'use classifications. 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. E a Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: f ' RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION REGARDING THE DISPOSITION OF APPLICATION N O. 82008 SUBMITTED BY BERGSTROM REALTY COMPANY WHEREAS, Application No. 82008 submitted by Bergstrom Realty Company proposes rezoning from C -2 (General Commerce) to R3 (Townhouse) of property in the 1300 block on the south side of 69th Avenue North described as that part of Lot 2, Block 1, Hi Crest Square Addition lying east of Registered Land Survey No. 1312; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly called public hearing on February 11, 1982 when testimony regarding the request was taken; and WHEREAS, the item was referred to the Northeast Neighborhood Advisory Group which, in minutes of a meeting on March 3, .1982 recommended the rezoning, subject to submittal of a plat to subdivide the property for owner - occupied townhouses; and WHEREAS, the Planning-Commission _ furtherr considered the matter on March 25, 1`982 and on April 15, 1982 when'a. public hearing was held to consider appropriate amendments of the Comprehensive Plan (both current and proposed) goals, for this area; and WHEREAS, an appropriate preliminary plat to subdivide the property for owner a ccd upied townhouses has been submitted and has been accepted by the Planning Commission; WHEREAS, the City Council considered rezoning Application No. 82008 and the companion application for preliminary plat approval No. 82016 at its April 26, 1982 regular meeting: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Brooklyn Center City. Council that Application No. 82008 submitted by Bergstrom Realty Company be approved in consider- ation of the following: 1. The R3 zoning classification is the most appropriate land use classification for the location in question in that it is con- sistent and compatible with all surrounding laud uses,. 2. Development of the property for townhouses is in the interest of the City, the Brooklyn Center School District, and the surrounding land uses, as well as the property owner, by adding 60 dwelling units to the northeast neighborhood. 3 Development of the property in question will ameliorate drainage difficulties both on the site and for the single - family homes to the east 4. The proposed townhouse use of the land is not considered to be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan goal that the Northeast Neighborhood be predominantly single- family detached residential in character. RESOLUTION 110. S. The property in question will bear fully the ordinance development restrictions for the proposed zoning district, whereas the RI zoning classification presented development problenswhich would have lead to an inefficient use of land. 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. p �r s 1932-1982 psraadenty HFUN G. &Rr,AtIS - v Mayor of''rnmin Vice Pn.;dknt: March 17,, 1982 COLEMAN A. YOUNG •.. Mayor of Detma Pam Prasldems. LTw' ALEXANDER Mays of S, raalse RICHARD E. CARVER Mayor of Puma KENNETH A. GinsuN Mavor of Newark RICHARD G. HATCHER t l yor of Gary HENRY W. MAITn Mayor of Milwaukee WILLIAM H. McNicnnMJR. Mayor of Denver _ MARGARET T. HAN(2 F .. Mayor of Phoenix JANET GRAY HAYrs Mayor of San Jose Dear Mayor:, JAMES iNHOVE - - Mayor of Tulsa PMay fOkl h maaty Once again the United States Conference of Mayors L EV�S r of ueso T Mayor ALum n is ca- sponsoring a Mayors' Awards Program to recognize HLRNAN P.ADILLA outstanding leadership in th devel and sup Mayor of San Juan g P P PP L. TUMID Mayo of Erie of citizen volunteerism. This year:'s. co- sponsor is - Mano KEVIN H_WMTE Xerox Corporati through whose generosity. the Pro - Mayor of Bostor. T M ayor o f gram is made pos M sible. ayorof Sait Lake City Advisor• Board: RICHARD H. FLTDN, Chairman The focus of this year's awards i s Public- Privat Mayor of Nashville - - RIQLARD ARRINGTON Partnership Cities will have an opportun� i v__ ... Mayor of Birmingham RICHARD L..BERKLEY receive reco nition f uni ue artnershi efforts Mavor of Kansas City, Mo. TOM BRADLEY - which meet loca. nee s and. in various organiza- Mk vor of Los Angeles R t1OriS and in l vl ua S . uaiARDS. CAUGIDRI Mayor of Pittsburgh - WYLTH CHANDLEd M ayor A .0 0:11 is T he Awards will be presented at the 50th Annua ST ANL EY A . Mem Mavor of "Ca nton Conference of Mayors in M P au l. I u Dtn!G DE Goon Mav or Toledo you to participate in the Program -by completing t he JAM:_, It Rt.I`H >, Atayor of lrayn enclosed entry form and returning it to the U.S. Mavor of f Rtukiill e ockn1 Conference of Mayors by April 19, 1982. Mavor ARTHIIRJ. HOLLAND Mavor of Tremor CAa �+ Y R. r of AustmwN Sincerely Riat•or .'YDSitn - , • TDM MLRmY - Mavor of Columbus, Ohio - Mavor of New Orleans JOSEPH P. RILEY, JR. Mat•or of a.arlestori, S.G JoHl,P.Rm,S.Axls Helen Boosalls Aid of lararoah CHARl.yA:RPYER President Mai•nr of 4aitlr WILLI A%I Ck INALD N- HAErER Mayor of &dtilnutr - GEt:IM,1r V. VomoviC7t Mayor of Cleveidnd DANIEL B, WHITEllDRbT Mayor of Fresno - PETE WILSON Mayor of San DlegO AmN J GL!vrxrx UNITED ST.rVrES CONFERENCE OF MAYORS 162 EYr STREET, NOR 1 9 (WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 s (202)'293 -7330 OFFICIAL ENTRY FIFTH ANNUAL MAYORS` AWARDS In Recognition of Outstanding Leadership in the Development and Support of Citizen Volunteerism "PUBLIC- PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS" 50th Annual Conference of Mayors Minneapolis -St. Paul June, 1982 A Sponsored by Xerox Corporation and THE UNITED - STATES CONFERENCE OF MAYORS Mayor City F State Date Submitted (Deadline - April 19, 1982) Form of Government Median Family Income Population, Total % Minority %Black %Hispanic tasian % Other Contact Person for the City: NAME TITLE AGENCY ADDRESS TELEPHONE ( } CITY STATE ZIP -1- OVERVIEW OF PROGRAIM Xerox Corporation and the United States Conference of Mayors honor selected cities throughout the nation each year for outstanding. volunteer pro - grams. The purpose of these awards is to recognize and promote creative bonds between cities and those who enhance local government through volunteer service. p In 19$2, awards will be given to seven cities. Thirteen additional cities will be selected for special recognition. Mayors of the twenty cities honored will receive awards at the 50th Annual Conference of Mayors in Minneapolis -St. Paul.. In addition to recognition of cities, one Mayor will be the recipient of the Michael A. diNunzio Award, a tribute to outstanding personal commit ment to volunteerism. This award was established in 1979 in memory of Michael A. diNunzio, one of the Conference's most distinguished staff members and a person who was itstrumental in establishing the Mayors' Awards Program in Volunteerism. FOCUS The focus of the 1982 Mayors' Awards Program is a .ors have worked s. Mayors y Public _ Private Partnerships. over the years with businesses, industries, or- '' ganizations, and individuals, recognizing that some local needs can only be met through joint efforts of both the public and private sectors. Cities have structured their efforts differently;. some have task forces or committees to develop and oversee efforts, others proceed as opportu- nities arise_ Activities have taken place in a number of different areas -- human development, economic development, and governmental management. The 1982 Awards will recognize unique partner - ship efforts which meet local needs and involve various organizations and individuals in a city. The role of the Mayor will be of critical im- portance. HOW TO APPLY All cities are eligible to apply, regardless of whether they have applied before or have received awards in previous years- Steps in applying for an award are: (1) Prepare a written response to all questions posed in the entry form. Please type it directly on the form itself. Attach addi- tional sheets, if necessary- Entrants may elect to include one set of up to five supporting documents such as brochures, newsletters, photographs, news clippings, or city ordinances with the entry.. -2 (2) Send six copies of the completed application to the U.S. Conference of Mayors, 1620 Eye Street, N.W., Washington, D.G., 20006. Entries; must be ,postmarked no later than April 23, 1982. An independent panel of judges will review all entries and determine winners of awards and special recognition. Cities that apply will be grouped by population in the following categories: o 50,000 or less o 50,000 - 100,000' o 100,000 - 200,000 0 200,000 500,000 o 500,000 or more FURTHER INFORMATION For more information_, please contact Laura DeKoven' Waxman at the U.S. Conference of Mayors at 1620 Eye Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006, (202) 293- 7330. 1. -3- t STATE TE QF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF TITS GO } KH-NOR R ^ et;:RT H. QUIE aiOVERN�.1R 'T. l�t1UI. .55155 March, 1982 Dear Mayor: ,.,.. Minnesota's communities constitute one of our most valuable assets. They have been essential in providing the high ,quality ,of life in our state. We recognize that a healthy economy and a quality environment go hand in hand. However, if we are to maintain and improve our quality of life, we must recognize that the challenges of the 80`s require more effective, efficient management of our natural and human resources. I have issued an executive order establishing the Governor's Quali Z Environment P roject, dedicated to improving the ecological and economic environment of Minnesota. One of the maivr objectives of the Project is "to provide an opportuntiy for a of the ublic rivate and olunteer sectors in communities. We need to foster a network o communication etween. commun ities, volunteers, education, industry, and government agencies. The Quality Environment Project will be initially addressing issues of recycling, recycling education, tree planting, and community revitalization. To initiate a statewide effort of the Project, I have designated April 18 - 24 as "Rec clip in Our Schools Week," and Agri_ 1 24_ May 2 Keep Minnesota Beautiful Month," which will offer many opportunities f r the involvement of communities, volunteers, and Minnesotans to improve the environment o our state. I would like to extend an opportunity for your community to get involved with the work of the Quality Environment Project. Because of your deep concern for the environment of Minnesota, your community may want to be a visible part of this effort incorporating some of the Project ideas into your ongoing programs. I have enclosed a collection of "Project and program ideas which you can in turn distribute to citizens of your community. Please make t em aware of t ese opportunit es. It is the response i ity of each citizen to work to maintain and improve his community. if you have any questions, feel free to contact Martin Rieder, Project Director, 101 Capitol Square Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101, phone '(612)297-3190. The enthusiastic involvement and cooperation of your community can help to ensure success in the effort to maintain and improve Minnesota's quality environment. Sincerely, a ERT H. QUIE GOVERNOR enclosure AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER- Minnesota office on Volunteer Services 200 Administration Building S Sh esdusne Avenue 612/2.96 -4731 trnY os St. Paul, N innesota 55155 800/652 -9747 (non -rr �tsc Apri 1` 2, 1982 Dear Mayor: As in past years, I am writing to inform you that Governor Que has proclaimed the week of Aril 18 -24. 1982 nteer Reco niti k " - in Minnesota. T he iovernor has set aside these dates as a time to say "Thanks" to Minnesota's many fine volunteers and to focus on their contributions and accomplishments. These dates were chosen to coincide with "National Volunteer Week. We are hoping that you, in your role as a community leader, will contribute to this effort by recognizing individuals who volunteer in city services, by participating in the volunteer recognition events of other local organizations, and b proclaim Aril "18 -24, 1982 as "Volunteer Reco nition Week" in your g a ee it is very i mportant to volunteers to receive thi recogniti and visibility. r "Volunteer Recognition Week" not only provides a focal point to salute - volunteers, but an opportunity to carry the word of their achievements to the entire community. This, in turn, encourages greater citizen involvement to meet the community's needs by drawing attention to the opportunities and rewards of volunteer service. If you would like, the Minnesota Office on Volunteer Services can provide you with a sample "Volunteer Recognition Week" proclamation. We also have available a limited number of volunteer recognition posters to assist you with your recognition efforts. In addition we have developed two resources to assist in local recognition efforts. These are available through the State Documents Center. Enclosed is a list of those materials and an accompanying order form. .If you have any questions, or if -we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us by writing the Minnesota Office on Volunteer Services, 127 University Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55155 or calling us at 296 - 4731 - (outside of the Twin Cities, toll -free area, 1/800/652 - 9747 ). Sincerely, Laura Lee M. Gera t Di 4r e Minnesota Office on Volunteer Services LLG /ceh Enclosure .9 PS We would appreciate receiving a copy of your "Volunteer Recognition Week" proclamation for our files. Dep ar t ment o Adm ini s trati on .. State of Minnesota Orders should be sent to: ... 0. . rt Minnesota State Documents Center 117 University Avenue �. ater St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Please send me Amount This year, because of budget cutbacks, the Minnesota Office on Volunteer Services is unable to provide free, ' volunteer recognition materials. However, arrangements : Volunteer Recognition have been made with the state's Documents Section for Certificates at $2.0D per 25 $ the sale of two of the items; the "Volunteer Recognition Certificate" and the "Volunteer Recognition Packet" Volunteer Recognition Certificate. This certificate is Volunteer Recognition available in packets of 25 at a cost of $2.00. The certificate Packets at $1.50 each - $ Is printed on a natural colored, parchment stock. It has a blue border with the wording printed in black. The cer- tificate is signed by Governor Quie and has two additional Sub -Total $ spaces for local signature. it has been designed to be adaptable for use by most organizations to recognize Plus 5% tax $ their individual volunteers. r Volunteer Recognition Packet. The cost of -the packet : Total $ Is $1.50 per copy. It has been designed to assist volunteer leaders with their volunteer recognition activities. It con- tains how -to tips, ideas, sample public service announce- Name Title: meats and new releases.. -- Both items are subject to state sales tax. To avoid the Organization: Tax exempt tax, include your tax exempt number when ordering these materials. Address: Phone # All orders must be prepaid, purchase order cannot be a City: accepted. State: Zip: a 1 CASE STUDY i The following is a case study of one community's approach to implementing: community recycling as a landfill abatement measure. Delano, Minnesota Delano is an agricultural community that realized it's surrounding farms were threatened by landfills. The town took action to help solve their solid waste problem and to earn money as well. The townspeople set up a curbside recycling program in which different community groups picked up recyclables on a monthly basis. The program is effective, efficient and can be easily implemented'by other communities. Deland's residents save newspapers, glass, aluminium and. steel cans. The first Saturday of each month a different community group picks up the recyclables, following a preplanned route, and then bring the recyclables to one central location where the materials are sorted and prepared for sale. At the end of the year, Delano's groups will split the revenues. The curbside program is a convenient and efficient way for a community to recycle. It is cleaner and needs less maintenance - ..than. a, drop -:off center, t . and makes it easy for each household o recycle. If organized properly, the pick -up will only take a couple of hours each each month. Delano's volunteer program means there are virtually no start -up costs involved. Another area of landfill abatement measure is the recycling of yardwaste -- leaves, grass clippings, dead flowers and other organic components. These can be easily composted in backyards or in a central community location. The resulting compost is a valuable soil amendment for gardens that can be used by the entire community. Other materials that are sent to the landfill - old furniture, small appliances, and household items -- can be recycled by organizations like the Goodwill and Salvation Army. A brief outline of Delano's recycling program: Markets for recycled materials were ensured before the program began. Delano was fortunate to have a good central location for storage of materials. • Volunteer community groups were invited to join as a community fund- raiser, serving as coordinators and participatants of the curbside pick -up. • Community awareness was achieved through the community organizations, through door -to -door 'contact, flyers and posters throughout the community, and newspaper articles and radio exposure. s High participation guaranteed that the program would be more efficient and profitable -- and save landfill space in the long -run. Volunteers made the task simple, fun,, and a way to build community stewardship and pride! QUALITY ENVIRONMENT PROJECT PUBLICITY INFORMATION SHEET -" City County Organization Project Coordinator /Contact Persons Name Address Telephone City Event/ Project Date of Event/ Project Who? What? Where? Number of people involved Specific impact Any other comments? This is your master report form. Please matte copies and submit + a separate copy for each event to the person below: Contact your local newspaper, radio, or TV station! Don't forget to keep us informed. Contact: Martin Rieder, Executive Director Governor's Quality Environment Project 101 Capitol Square Building St. Paul, MN 55101 THE GOVERNOR'S QUALITY ENVIRONMENT PROJECT Fact Sheet The purpose of the Governor's Quality Environment project is to improve the ecological and economic environment of Minnesota' and to encourage more effective and efficient management of our natural and human resources. The Quality Environment Project isr' • A joint venture between the public, private and volunteer sectors. • An on -going project supported by private contributions. • An effort to identify existing resources and encourage exchange of information to further common objectives. • A partnership to coordinate and direct efforts and resources to accomplish positive change. : : Project Structure The Quality Environment Project is designed to encourage the involvement of all sectors at every level of participation. The structure couples -state leadership with a grass roots movement and provides opportunity for those who wish to accomplish positive change. The Quality Environment Project is headed by a Governor - appointed Council, which functions as the Project's "board of directors." The Council is made up of leaders from industry, education, labor and government and has been charged to provide leadership and inspiration for the 'Project. The Steering Committee is made up of representatives from all areas of interest, business, public sector and volunteer citizens. It coordinates and directs the work of the Project. The Project Areas are the action programs of the Quality Environment Project. The project areas roughly fall into three areas:' Recycling, Community Revitalization, and Keep Minnesota Beautiful Month. Members of the Steering Committee implement the work of the project, channel information. received from resources, provide motivation, and serve as the driving force behind the project areas. Project Areas RECYCLING The goal of recycling is to increase the level of awareness in schools, among consumers, and with community, industry and government leaders. This project area will promote recycling and the use of recycled products and materials for communities, government, business and industry. Recycling helps to improve our economic and ecological environment by saving energy, resources and tax dollars; by providing raw materials for industry, jobs for Minnesotans; and easing the cost of of environmental problems and improving economic productivity. Recycling projects underway: s Recycling In Our Schools Week, April 18 -24, 1982. o Teacher Education Program, University of Minnesota. • Market development information and handbook. • Business seminar. COMMUNITY REVITALIZATION The goal of community revitalization is to strive towards the enhancement of the aesthetic and economic environment of Minnesota's communities. This will`ber' accomplished by engendering community pride and strenghtening the ability of communities to work toward positive goals; attracting tourism and industry to communities, as well as highlighting innate historical interest. All of these objectives will strive to provide a better place for Minnesotans to live. Community revitalization projects underway Governor's.Intern Program. .• Community revitalization handbook. -KEEP MINNESOTA BEAUTIFUL MONTH Keep Minnesota Beautiful Month, April 24 through May 22, incorporates the goals of the Quality Environment Project and provides an active forum to emphasize environmental awareness. The many activities on the month's calendar have been brought together to create a unified and comprehensive focus on the various project areas. ' Calendar _April 24 Keep Minnesota Beautiful Day. Minnesota State 4 -H "Bag -In." April 25 -30 Recycling Week May 1 "The Great Resource Recycling Rally." Recycling Center Open House, statewide. May 2 -8 Litter Prevention Week May 8 Minnesota Tree Planting Day May 9 -15 Reforestation Week May 16 -22 Community Revitalization Week 100+ (3+'Chty Environment PROJECTS AND ACTIVITIES . Project m, To .� KEEP {t NtJQLA FA UTIFUL You have an opportunity to have a positive effect on Minnesota's environment. Projects and activities that increase awareness, disseminate information and improve environmental conditions are essential if we are to maintain and improve the quality of life in our state. Meet this "Challenge of the 80 which requires effective and efficient management of our human and natural resources. The projects listed can be used for varied ages and interests. Select one that meets the needs of your community or appeals to your group. Do some good and have some fun! * Anti- Litter e 1.. Mount a- Litter Prevention Campaign. Explain that - if people don't throw litter in the wrong places, someone else doesn't have to pick it up. Post anti - litter signs, combining directions to the nearest land- fill. 2. Learn about the seven sources of ,litter, then inform and educate others. 3. Clean up a vacant lot and keep it clean. 4. Clean up your own yard, -lakeshore,`river land, boulevard, etc. 5. Inspect the office areas of your organization or business. This should include parking lots and refuse disposal areas to ensure cleanliness and proper numbers and maintenance of litter receptacles. 6. Have your group clean up an illegal dump site, and also post signs with information about the nearest landfill. 7. Clean up around deserted or dilapidated buildings. Some communities may be able to arrange for the demolishing of dangerous abandoned buildings.` -8. If an area clean -up is done, have paper, metals and glass collected separately so they can be recycled. This will show what the greatest litter problem is. Then you can pursue suggestions on how to control x it. You may want to determine the percentages of paper, metal, glass or plastic litter in your neighborhood in a "recycling run." 9. Give an award for the individual or organizational unit that picks up' the largest amount of litter in a given area or a`given period of time. Local business may support such an award. 10. If you are involved in 4 -H, look into being a part of the "Minnesota 4 -H Bag -In." Check with your County Extension Office. 11. The Minnesota Arthritis Foundation is an organization which promotes anti- littei compaigns that raise funds for their organization. This is another opportunity for a combined effort. 12. Call appropriate offices and arrange for the pick up of large, junked items. 13. If you know of any abandoned vehicles arrange to have them removed. 14. Work with senior citizens and the handicapped to clean up their property and assist in keeping it clean. 15. Pass out car litter bags. Is there a local organization or business that would be willing to provide them? • 16. Paint steel drums to be used as litter receptacles. These can sometimes be obtained from gas stations. 17. Explain and encourage "cleaning up and throwing out" in state, county and corporate offices and businesses. Get rid of those boxes of papers and files stuck under tables, and in back rooms. Be sure to separate out what, is recyclable. 18. Designate a "Love Thy Neighborhood Day." Encourage and organize participat :ic}n to clean up an entire ne.ignbprhood. 19. Organize a "Post Event Pick-up Brigade." This group would go out after community events and assist with clean up of streets, parks, lawns, etc. Some of these events might include parades, fairs, picnics, sports events, etc. 20. Have a diving or scuba club work to cleanup a lake bottom. This might be done in conjunction with people in boats wearing life jackets. Remember safety on this one! 21. '_take plans for a Christmas tree pic }_-up campaign next winter. Coordinate and implement the effort. 22. Remember to give yourself credit! Post signs telling what group is responsible for keeping an area clean. Recycling 23. Study recycling. How is it done? What can be recycled? Tour plants which recycle such as Champion Paper Aluminum, National Can, MSD Recycle, Midland Glass, etc. 24. Learn about landfills. Tour a landfill operation. i 25 Study resource recovery (waste to energy). Discuss and illustrate how this would 'save money and energy. 26. Set up a recycling program and have a competition between those units for the greatest amount of material recycled each month. 27. Encourage and set up a curbside of recyclable materials. Delano, Minnesota has a system of pick -ups on the first Saturday of each month. Volunteers from community groups collect newspapers, glass jars and bottles, and aluminum and steel cans. The materials are then sold and revenues divided among the group. 28. Set up a recycling center to recycle that which is cleaned up. Maintain the center. 29. Your group may wish to begin by concentrating on one recyclable material. 3 This may be a paper drive and transfer or just collecting aluminum cans. x 30. Contact corporations dealing with the purchase of recyclable materials. Become informed of guidelines limits and information you can share. You may also be able to arrange a tour for your gropps g 31. Think about what we regularly throw away. Have a'`competition for creative ideas on how these things could be used. Or select some unusual or not so easily recycable objects and items and have your group concentrate on collecting them and thinking of useful ways in which they can be reused. Some ideas would be furnitures appliances, old tires, etc. 32. Work with your local gas station to set up a collection depot for used oil, if they do not already have one. 33. Study composting - learn the ecological advantages of composting instead of landfilling. Tour local composting areas. Build a miniature compost. 34. Many household items are somewhat difficult to recycle. A garage sale is a good way to get things into the hands of others who can use them and raise money too. (Remember the Goodwill on these items also). * Community Beautification 35. Is there a public facility such as a home, hospital, library or courthouse that could use some assistance in cleanup, painting, or planting and maintaining a garden? 36. Promote the revitalization of old store and building fronts. 37, Restore to a dignified state monuments, battle sites and other landmarks that reflect the history of the community. ti 38. Maintain a historical landmark. Tell the public its story and how it came to be an important part of community - history. ._ 39. Plant a herb garden at historic sites an other locations. 40. Establish 'Memorial Gardens dedicated to veterans, civic leaders, etc. t 41. Talk to your County Fair Board. See if they need assistance cleaning up, Painting stands, buildings, stalls, etc__, planting flower beds. 42. Houses of worship could promote an event where congregations would assemble to pick up, clean up, and beautify their grounds, lots, parking areas and play grounds. 43. Plant trees, shrubs, flowers and vines in public areas and make a commitment to maintain them. > Check with the Department of Natural Resources on ordering trees through our state nurseries. Your local nurserymen, flower clubs and horticulturists may have ideas. 44, 'Perhaps a local school would appreciate a "rainbow garden" or flower boxes. 45. Don't forget mowing, trimming and raking! 46. Clean up and repair playground equipment. 47. Remove old signs, g posters, and flyers that are outdated and unsightly from public posting areas. 48. Remove or aint over P graffiti. 49. Do you have a bus stop in your neighborhood that needs some improving? This might be a "spot to adopt." Pick up the litter, repair benches, and if it's glass enclosed - shine it! 50. Some airports in small towns could use assistance in maintenance of the terminal area. This might include a flower and shrubbery plot and a welcoming sign in addition to cleaning up. 51. Improve and repaint Marinas and replace rotten wood. 52. Promote the screening of areas holding junk cars, especially if on much traveled roadways. The screens might be of trees or built of other materials. 53. Locate abandoned automobiles and map their position, as the start of a c collection and disposal program. � Y Adopt -A- Spot 54, Have a group take responsibility for keeping a block, school yard, picnic are, etc. clean for a period of time. "One Shot" clean -ups are only temporary. But, adopting a space for an extended time builds a commitment and takes responsibility. Keep the neighorhood informed too! Be sure to check with the appropriate offices first. 55. There are 1000 public accesses to lakes in Minnesota. These are under the control of the Department of Natural Resources. Mike Markell at DNR has information on locations. Decide if your access is in need of attention a and check to see if you can help. r - 56. The Minnesota State Forest Campgrounds are under the care of the Department of Natural Resources. Caring for one of these rustic areas should be checked with DNR. They have a complete listing of locations. This might even be combined with some camping of your own! 57. Parks are another space that could benefit from continued care. Check' with your Park and Recreation Department for information. 58. The Minnesota Department of ransportation has many roadside areas that can become littered and need attention. Check with the department to see if it would be appropriate to care for one of these areas. 59. Maintain a hiking or bike trail. - v w * Nature and Wildlife 60. Check to see if the wildlife area in your vicinity needs assistance in making environmental improvements or cleaning up. 61. Plant trees from seeds or seedlings. Seedlings can be obtained through a state nursery which is part of the Department of Forestry, for a very small ,fee. Order forms are available. 62. Learn to identify trees from leaves,: bark and/or fruit. 63. 'Learn about trees as an energy resource. 64. Tour a wood processing plant, furniture manufacturer, retail outlets of 4 wood products, etc. f 65. Explore and study forestry in an urban setting. 66. Is there a State Park in your area? Some volunteer groups have assisted t by working in these parks. 67. If needed, make and install camp site markers for a tourist campgrounds. 68. Help stop erosion by planting shrubs, vines and grasses in eroded areas. 69. Stop erosion at stream banks by riprapping them with rocks or logs. 70. Give wildlife a home and food by planting' hedgerows and fencerows. 71, Some groups have had the.opportunity to assist the Department of Natural Resources with banding pheasants. Check with the DNR to see if this is a possibility for your group. 72. Construct bird houses and service a bird feeding area. 73. Create and maintain bird sanctuaries,:, with assistance from public or private agencies. 74. Bird watching? " 75. Study the varying levels of air pollution in your community. To do this t project you will need index cards, vaseline, and tape or pins. To conduct the test, spread vaseline on the index cards and tape or pin them in selected locations indoors and out. Leave them up for a week. After t taking them down, rank pollution' levels according to color and develop a shade guide. 76. Do a "nature walk." First walk through a park or natu spot and look at what is there. Then, take a three-foot long piece of string to help you focus on a small spot. Place the string in a,circle on the ground. ' What is in the circle? Can you identify everything? Are all the .materials natural? What does this finding ell ? g you about this spot. * Communicating the "Environment Story" i { €!. 77. Organize a "Keep Minnesota Beautiful" seminar or workshop. This could be a day -.long offering that might include some sessions for the entire group, but also smaller workshops in areas of special interest. Resource speakers could be involved from agencies, colleges, corporations, other communities, schools, etc., and printed and audio visual resources from the same sources. 78. Encourage awareness of and inform the public about environmental issues through the use of slide /tape sets, newsletters, demonstrations in public places, etc. The resources could be obtained from state agencies, corporations, schools, libraries, or you could develop your own. 79. ' Arrange to have the names and numbers of agencies and businesses with information regarding environmental issues and concerns listed in a prominent place in your local phone directory or paper. 80. Photographers can document historical sites, community architecure, or report on before and after efforts of anti- litter campaigns, etc., 81. Photographers can cover "Keep Minnesota Beautiful" activities throughout their communities. 82. Set up and man a "trash line" that can give the public litter, recycling, and other information. 83. These organizations and corporations having an in -house newsletter can publish information on litter control and quality environment project activities. 84. Does your local paper have a column that relates specifically to community concerns? Be sure to have them promote KMB activities. 85. Information on remaking and recycling clothes could appear in the home and family or sewing columns of your local paper. 86. Get individuals who are informed on environmental issues on local radio { and TV programs. t 87. Check with the "Speaker Bureau" at the University of Minnesota Campuses. Speakers relating to various subjects are available for presentations. Other colleges may have resource people also. 88. Arrange for the visit of an individual who is knowledgeable about environmental issues to your community. Have them speak at a dinner or banquet (perhaps a fundraiser ?), appear on local TV and radio, and.be interviewed by the print media. 89. There are many "futurists" who will speak to groups about the effects of y today's actions on tomorrow. Arrange such a session for your group or open it to the entire community. 90. Write a "letter to the editor" to your local' paper emphasizing the importance of actions to improve our'environment. Give some specific suggestions for your community. You might also include your senator or congressman on your mailing list. 91 Interview some of the senior citizens in your community and 'get a perspective on the state of your community today compared to years ago. Some of this - information and the interesting stories that come up may be appropriate to share with the community. 92 Compile a scrapbook of the positive and negative environments and waste situations in your community. Also keep track of progress and who is involved. The local media may find this information useful as story leads. 93 Prepare a speech on the definitions and differences between junk and scrap. Offer to present it to community organizations, schools, etc. You could also do a speech on the "4 -R's" of reduce, reuse, recycle and recover. 94 Increase public awareness of forest value by speaking and setting up exhibits and demonstrations of forest products and forest management. 95 Prepare an illustrated public presentation that portrays the state of our society.should polluting forces go unattended. 96 Go out into the community and survey the public on their ideas about the problems and solutions to local environmental concerns. Tape their responses.` Some of these might be used by your local radio station during IM month. 97 Contact agencies, and corporations to find out career opportunities that relate to the environment. Share this information with youth. 98 Research and develop a glossary of terms that relates to a specific area of environmental concern. You could have it published in a newsletter or news- paper. This could be an on -going project focusing on a different subject each time. 99 Research :a collection of songs the themes or Lyrics of which could relate to or lead into discussion on the environment, litter, etc. Suggest them to your local radio station. 100 Think up humorous radio commercials that relate to anti - litter and community revitalization, 1€11 Have a "litter jingle" contest. Tell the writers the maximum number of words that can be used. 102 Develop poems that are a parody of a famous poem, such as "The Raven" by Edgar Allen Poe. Instead of "ne,ermore" the raven could say "anti - litter -" 103 Develon a crossword puzzle using words relating to what "Keeps Minnesota Beautifii'." Use the puzzle at organizational events or have it printed In the local paper. Words could include: clean, recycle, pride, waste, trash, - garbage, scrap, cans, glass, etc. 104 Develop a one frame or several frame cartoon to be used in your local'news- paper'during "KAV month. If you are part of a group you could submit an entire collection: lay Be sure you document your own accomplishments and inform local media as well as the office of Minnesota's Quality Environment Project. * Performing Arts _Ideas "* z 106 Tales and legends of Native Americans often have a story that relates to respect, for and kinship with the land. Prepare a reading of some of these tales. Also research the speeches of some of America's -great Indian Chiefs, such as Chief Seattle. They carry inspiring messages about our environment. 107 Put together a play or presentation involving readers' theatre that promotes litter control, recycling and energy conservation You may want to research the quotes of some famous Americans to get material. The daily news- paper is also full of ideas. 108 Go back into history and study a litter or recycling problem of the past. Prepare a historical dramatization. 109 Prepare a presentation or demonstration on the life cycle of a recycl- able object. Make it creative: r 110 Develop a "unique way to communicate the litter recycling and energy stories. What about a talking pop can or light bulbT Ill Make puppets and develop a story for them to tell relating to an environ- mental issue. These could be hand bag or wax head puppets. You don't have to think small though, some puppets are life size! Shows could be put on throughout the community in public places, schools, malls, etc. 112 Learn some simple magic tricks that involve the disappearance of objects. Tie this in with telling about recycling and how our environmental problems won't just disappear. 113 Make a percussion instrument that can play "found sounds ". Use collectables and recycables. These might include cans, jars and bottles of varying sizes and weights. An entire string of cymbals could be created with pie pans. You may want to throw in an old toaster or water pitcher for effect. Hang or mount the "articles to make playing easy. 114 Obtain used steel drums from gas stations. Learn how to pound the notes on the heads to make music. You could be making music as heard in Trinidad, Tabago, the Virgin Islands. What about a steel drum band? 115 It's said, "You can tell what a person is like from their garbage." Have your group study a selected bunch of junk. They can then develop characters and "a story based on what they found. They may eventually want to perform! 115 Have .a "freaky fashion show" that uses recyclable material. What about a "can -can" skirt? A "box" hat ? * Visual Art Ideas 117 Is there a building or wall that needs improvement or attention? After checking with the appropriate parties, obtain materials, develop a pleasing design and paint a mural. 118 Trash cans are often an unsightly part of our streets and parks. Develop a pleasing design that is easily executed, get aporoval from the appropriate office, or department, gather supplies, and paint away! (This may be a possibility for local roadsigns, too.) 119 What about "junk sculpture "? Reuse some of the interesting materials available to create a new configuration. This may include small pieces using paper, glass, cans, and small objects. If you know a welder, think big' What about a sculpture of old farm machine parts? Use your imagination'. 120 Have a poster contest, the theme of which could be "reuse, recycle and recover," The posters could be flat or 3- dimensional. They could be displayed in businesses, banks, malls, schools, libraries, etc. 121 Do a take -off on the "heritage box" idea and develop•a "junk box" art project. This would involve completely reused materials. Each box could have a specific theme such as ribbon, jewelry, office supplies, etc., or relate to a specific location such as a bank, dump, basement, park, etc. 122 Create "touch and feel" pictures. These 3- dimensional collages will utilize interesting materials with texture. Save plastics, packing materials, foils, corrugated cardboard, carpet and wallpaper samples,' fabrics, wire, threads and yarn, etc. and see what creative scenes come alive. 123 Wonder what to do with those old baby food jars? They are great for arts and crafts materials. They are useful. for storing small items, and with holes punched in the lids make great shakers for colored sand, glitter, colored enamels, etc. * Novelty Ideas 124 Have a "Trash Bash" party. The price of admission could be 10 empty pop cans. People could wear hats or costumes of recycled materials. N . And, everyone would have to help with clean up: 125 Have the original "Scavenger Hunt." Have people pull specific objects } from the trash they collect. These might `be bottle tops, popsickle sticks, gum wrappers, aluminum cans, etc. You might also offer a prize for the largest or most unusual objects found. �. 126 Have a "Happy Earth Day" celebration. This could include costumes, art projects, games, movies and music along an environmental theme. You might also use.clown make -up to create an "earth face." 127 Have a "3 -Ring Environmental Circus." Each ring 'could show problems of . You could also suggest solutions. air, water and earth pollution 128 A "Clean Community Carnival" offers many opportunities for games, booths and activities using ,recycled materials. Proceeds might go toward the purchase of litter or garbage bags or the painting of local trash barrels. $ A Clown Club would attract at and make the day fun. 129 Start an ecology.club - that will plan and promote on -going environmental Y _ improvements. 130 Tie in "living clean" with ICMB. Involve your local health department. d produce "Keep Minnesota Beautiful" parade. The last 131 Plan, organize an unit should clean up: ORGANIZATION AND IMPLEMENTATION Identify the project your group will undertake and indicate short and long term goals. This could be done through a survey. Other organizations and agencies can assist with targeting needs as well as implementing ideas. Work with any group or organization involved as planning is being done.. Working together create a commitment to the project. In advance of K4B activities, groups could begin attending meetings of the Chambers of Commerce and merchants associations if the assistance of these groups is needed. List the manpower and materials necessary for the project. • Find the volunteer manpower for the project.` Locate sources of support forin kind donations or funds. Make all appropriate and necessary contacts with offices or agencies who are affected and involved to check on guidelines, details, etc. a Parr acrntion to any existing regulations or laws that may be in effect. Advertise your intentions. Plan your projects for maximum publicity value. Has the media been involved in planning? Have adequate supervision -of project sites. Because of the risk of accidental personal injury or property damage, project sponsors may want to obtain written releases from participants or secure insurance. Check with your organization's laHyer or the city /county attorney.' An emergency telephone number for ambulance and police should be on hand at all project sites. Project sponsors should help their workers by providing rest breaks and refreshments if the projects involve manual labor. # Recognize those involved and thank them. This may be through thank you notes, citations, awards, picnics, etc. Remember these participants are a future resource. Positive reinforcement is important. Keep the Quality Environment Project office informed of your projects and who is involved. Martin Rieder, Director, 101 Capital Square Office Building, 550 Cedar Street, St. Paul, MN. 55101. 'N, SOURCES OF SUPPORT (This may include planning assistance, manpower, in kind donations, services, funding) ` Mayor and City Governments Local Businesses Local offices of State and Federal Government Corporations Youth Organizations - 4 -H, FFA, FHA, Scouts, Service Stations YMCA, YWCA, etc. H.S. Classes Recycling & Reclamation Centers Colleges City & Citizen organizations for Community Universities Improvement Sororities Retired & Senior Citizen organizations Fraternities Conservation & Wildlife organizations Local media Department of Natural Resources Camera Clubs Department of Forestry Labor Unions Soil Conservation Service City Associations Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Religious organizations Minnesota Environmental Board Ecology Clubs Agricultural Extension Service Horticulturists League of Women Voters Athletic Boosters Park and Recreation Departments Goodwill Chambers of Commerce Jaycees City Corps of Engineers Women's Clubs City Public Works Department Garden Clubs City Roads Department Kiwanis Department of Transportation Lion's American Association of Nurserymen Sierra Club Extension Homemakers Audubon Societies American Legion Auxiliary Birdwatchers The Izaak Walton League of America Master Gardeners Volunteer Fire Department Little League The office of Minnesota's Quality Environment Project is 101 Capital Square Building, 550 Cedar street, St. Paul, 11N 55101. Martin Rieder is Director. r � A complete listing of organizations in the conservation field is available in the "Con- servation Directory" published by the National Wildlife Federation, 1412 16th Street, N.W.,- Washington, D.C. 20036. ($1.00 per copy.) "Keep America Beautiful, Inc." is a national non - profit, public service organization for the prevention of litter and for the enhancement of urban and rural scenic and man -made beauty. They publish helpful brochures and newsletters and have posters, bumper stickers, buttons, etc. Address: 99 Park Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10016.. Prepared by: Lianne M. Anderson Steering Cormnittee, Q €P /Co- Chair, "Keep Minnesota Beautiful" S MEMORANDUM i TO: Gerald Splinter, - City - Manager FROM: Jim Lindsay, Chief of Police DATE: April 22, 1982 SUBJECT: Nonintoxicating Liquor License Application for ShowBiz Pizza Place Attached is an investigation file by Investigator Spehn of� this department. You will note that there is some questionable information relating to Steve Langenberger, designated manager of ShowBiz Pizza Place restaurant. I have met with Norman Case, District Manager from ShowBiz Pizza,, and Mr. Dick Nowiin, local counsel for ShowBiz Pizza. It is their belief at this time that the information obtained in the police report is incomplete and possibly inaccurate. - They have agreed to temporarily transfer Langenberger to the St. Paul restaurant and replace him with a Steve Ketterhagen' until such time as the matter can be totally resolved to the . satisfaction of the City of Brooklyn Center and ShowBiz Pizza. In turn, I have agreed to recommend a nonintoxicating liquor license be conditionally granted effective Tuesday April 27, 1982. Due to the fact that Mr. Case had to leave town, no discussion was held as to how either party would proceed in the event the conflict was not resolved. He did agree that if Langenberger was not retained as an employee, they would submit a new manager for approval. Ketterhagen has not received a back- ground investigation by the Brooklyn Center Police Department, although St. Paul Police Department has not disapproved him as a manager at the St.' Paul restaurant.> I recommend the license be conditionally approved effective Tuesday, April 27, 1982 and for the staff to make a final report to the Council, upon a mutual resolution of this matter x or by August 1, 1982, whichever occurs first. • r - dtiv� ��9�iar�J � � T.��•us,�E,�i.��G c,�r'�E�/ ��.��u,�E��:f� DU% Q�' Tit�E E GJ.<'t.VifJ LE�/Ti ,Jif ZZf9 /f/GC .__ �QEST�}U�h'erl� .�•tf� �E �C/f �%tlG .�Y //iJ X11 / /.Y',�..t,�c�T.rf�r� _ � ,�,t�trC /�C-` F ©,� fl�t1 s/ 1AG �, o% �dD,<JE� �i /a•V �.cl T�YE / 0• 0 1-5 , r Z�Z o Ok l F4nt I) TD C ,v �•�i ,% 4 s � a /vEs c?,s ,c 27 A' g a C'e u,r/*w W15 ,/ASS /l 0�lF.t/r Kler 1 i The following will be a resume of Investigator Donald SPEHN concerning an application for a nonin.toxcating Liquor license. The case 4 is j 81- 20249. The resume is dictated on December 30, at 1300 houra. It is transcribed and typewritten by Barbara PIETRZAK, clerk- RtypjBt for the Brooklyn Center Police Department..- APPLICANT: >; A ShowBiz Pizza Place, Inc.- This:is a Kansas Corporation and is authorized to dobusin.ess in the State of Minnesota. The applicant is applying for a nonintoxicating liquor or beer license for an establishment to located on ; john Martin Drive in the City of Brooklyn Center. The esta:bli.shvent i5 one containing food, primarily pizza, and electronic games and animated three- diment onal animal characters. The corporation, ShowBiz Pizza Place, Inc. s� is a subsidiary of Brock Ho tel Coprt4n of Topeka, Kansas. The Brock Hotel Corporation owns and operates 50 -some Holiday Inns throughout the United States, including tI?e Holiday Inn in the City of Brooklyn Center. The company, ShowBiz Pizza Place, Inc., has at.the present time 31 ;locations throughout the 'United States in which they are operating establishns, The company has grown rapidly starting in 1979 and is opeeratin�g at- the present time 31 ShowBiz Pizza Place, Inc. establis menu. T11,ey have entered into an agreement with Creative Engineering, l,nc. fl Orlando, Florida in which Creative Engineering supplies the ,anii aced cartoon figures and produces shows put on by these end :ted.flgijrels i at each of the establishments OFFICERS OF THE CORPORATION: ° 1. President. Robert L. Brock D.O.B. 12- -27 -24 t 4 31 9 S.W. S W e 15 th Street Topeka, Kansas Mr. Brock is also the President and Chairman of the Ocart,of the Brock Hotel Corporation and is also an attorney.. :g 2. Vice - President: Harry J. RADFORD D.O.B. 11 -30 -25 , 3941 Worwick Town Road Topeka, Kansas Mr.:RADFORD background is in the restaurant amd .1 T U§t1rY.. 3. Vice- President and Secretary: James Wesley PARRISH D.O.B. 08 - -46 3632 S.E. Tomahawk Drive Topeka, Kansas e He is also an attorney and... former :State Senator in _ o-_ f Kansas. 4, Resume of Investigator SPEHN Case #81 20249 Page 2 RR 4. Vice - President and Treasurer: Michael Robert PHENIX:. D.O.B;. 06 -29 -47 3116 Saddlehorn Lawrence, Kansas His background is in accounting. t; 5. Member of Board of Directors: ; . -.Y Thomas.Price POWELL, jr. D.O.B. 08 -05 -43 024 -Belle Topeka, Kansas His background is in the hotel industry. 6. Member of Board of Directors: Melvin Arnold FECHTER D.O.B. 01 -08 -21 2627 Norfolk Road Orlando, Florida Mr. FECHTER is an attorney and is also co -owner of Creative Engineering_, Inc. of,_- Orlando, Florida. -' 7. Member of Board of Directors: Aaron N.M.N. FECHTER ,' D.O.B. 12 -22 -53 3623 South Rosalind Avenue Orlando, Florida He is also a co -owner of Creative Engineering,, Inc. of Orlando, Florida. He also has a 16% interest in ShowBiz Pizza Place, Inc. His father and mother, that being Melvin Arnold FECHTER and Essie FECHTER have 2%. interest in ShowBiz Pizza `Place, Inc. FINANCING: The Corporation has purchased and is building the establishment on John Martin Drive, the exact address is not available.at this time,' -however the establishment be located between State Farm Insurance and Burger - Brothers Sporting Goods. The building was purchased from Med Center,; Inc., 5000 Wes "t, 39th Street, St. Louis Park for a purchase price of $283,000.00. There is no mortgage or contract for deed. Apparently a, fully paid situation. It is estimated that the Brooklyn Center operation will cost approximately $1,150,000.00; all of which will be generated from corporate funds. BACKGROUND OF OFFICERS: 1. Robert Lee BROCK, D.O.B.- 12- 27 -24.. As previously indicated, Mr. BROCK is President and Chairman of the Board of the Brock Hotel Corporation. In that capacity, a background investigation had ,previously been conducted on him which indicated no record of any type. That he is a dell thought of business leader in the Topeka, ,Kansas area. 2. Harry Joseph FtADFORD, D.O.B. 11- 30 -25, Mr. RADFORD is married and living in Topeka, Kansas. He has been Resume of Investigator SPEHN Case #81 -20249 Page 3 employed by ShowBiz Pizza Place, Inc. as Director of Operations and Vice- President since 1979. ` His previous work experience is in ' the hotel - restaurant industry with the Marriott Corporation. Mr. RADFORD has no record with the NCIC or FBI. 3. James Wesley PARRISH,'D.OB. 08- 25 -46. r Mr. PARRISH is married_ He is a former State. Senator for the State of Kansas and is an attorney and is currently the Vice - President, Secretary and Director of Development for ShowBiz Pizza, Inc. He has no criminal record with the FBI or NCIC. 4. Michael Robert PHENIX, D.O.B. 06-- 29 -47. He also is married. He is currently the Vice - President and Treasurer of ShowBiz Pizza, Inc. His background is as a Certified Public Accountant_ He also has no record with the FBI or NCIC. 5. Thomas Price POWELL, ~ Jr., D.O.B. 08- 05 -43. He is divorced.., He is currently on the Board of Directors of ShowBiz Pizza. He is also employed by the Brock Hotel Corporation of Topeka; formerly was employed by Holiday. Inns of Tennesse and the Powell Company, another hotel, based in Arkansas. His entire background is in hotel operation and development. Mr. POWELL Has no record with the FBI or NCIC. 6. Melvin Arnold FECHTER D.O.B. 01- 08 -21. Mr. FECHTER is married. He is residing in Orlando, Ftorida. He is a licensed attorney in the State of Florida and he and his wife, Essie, each own a 2% interest in ShowBiz Pizza Place, Inc. Mr._ FECHTER has no record with the FBI or NCIC, however # on his application he does indicate that he was arrested in 1959 on _a charge-of Jude exposure'. He indicated the situation was a cane of mistaken identity and the matter was subsequently dropped. He has attached an affidavit to that effect to his application. 7. Aaron (no" middle name) < FE!CHTER, D.O.B. 12- 22 -53. He is single. He is a resident of Orlando, Florida He iq a co -owner of Creative Engineering, Inc. and a'`16% shareholder of ShowBiz Pizza Place, Inc. Mr..FECHTE.R has no record with the FBI or NCIC, REFERENCES; In lieu of checking character references as the organizata,on is primarily out of state, the investigator did send inquiries to the Kansas Department of Revenue, Division of Alcoholic Beverage concerning any contact they may have had with any of the subjects concerned in this operation. ` Resume of Investigator SPEHN Case #81-20249 Page 4 Their reply indicates that they have no records at all and the subjects; are unknown to them except for ,Tames Wesley PARRISH, who ,,.,has no record with their office, however is known by several of their investigators as he is an attorney and former State Senator for the State of Kans The investigator also checked with the Orlando, Florida Police Department and found they had no record of"'the FECHTFRS.. In addition, the investigator checked with eight other - cities of varying sizes mostly similar to Brooklyn Center in population in which ShowBiz Pizza has been operating establishments .for the -past several months to one year. The cities were: Salina Kansas; Shawnee, Kansas; Davenport, Iowa; Arlington Heights, Illinois; Greenfield, Wisconsin; West Des Moines, Iowa; Arvada, Colorado; Englewood, Colorado, All of the cities replied and all indicated they had not had any problems with the operation of ShowBiz Pizza in their city and several in fact indicated that they appeared to 'run a family type operation and are very pleased with their performance. Copies of these record checks and background checks are attached to the case file. SITl-MARY: ' In conducting this background investigation, the investigator has found nothing detrimental to the officers of the corporation and in fact has uncovered evidence that the organization is noted for running family type restaurant and entertainment centers and appears to be an efficiently run organization. Also attached to the case file are the articles of incorporation, the floor plan and other necessary documents. Based on this background investigation, the investigator would have to recommend that the application for °a nonintoxicating liquor license for ShowBiz Pizza be considered. � p fi.. The following is an additional resume of Investigator Donald SPEHN concerning Case #81 -20249 on an application for a. nonintoxicating liquor license. The applicant is the ShowBiz Pizza Place, Inc. This additional resume is concerning the background investigation of the proposed on` -site manager for the ShowBiz Pizza Place located in the City of Brooklyn Center. This resume is dictated on April 19, 1982 at 1400 hours, it is transcribed and typewritten by Barbara PIETRZAK, clerk - typist for the Brooklyn Center Police ,Department. PROPOSED MANAGER Steven Gerald LANGENBERGER D.O.B. 09 -20 -56 lyK 3421 :Kent Street, #615 Shoreview, MN Mr. LANGENBERGER is a single adult. He indicates that he has lived at the 3421 Kent Street address since October of 1980 to the present time. He lists a previous - address of 2896` Arona in Roseville from the time of his birth. until September of 1980. He lists previous employment as Ponderosa Steak House at 4811 Central Avenue, N.E. from.November of 1979 through November of 1981 and also Pizza Huts Northwest, 4620 West 77th in Edina from October of 1977 though October of 1979. He further indicates he worked for Masonic Hospital at the University of Minnesota from September 1976 through June 1977: and he had part -time employment with Interstate United Corporation of 1091 Pierce - Butler Route during the summers of 1974, 1975 and 1976 RECORD CHECKS Mr. LANGENBERGER has a valid Minnesota driver's license with no violations. He has no record with ta.e ECA NCIC or FBI. He is also clear of warrants in both Hennepin and Ramsey Counties. He also has "no record with the Roseville Police Department; CHARACTER REFERENCES The following character references were checked. As the applicant had lived most of his life in the Roseville area at 2896 Arona, the following neighbors were contacted and their responses indicated. Mrs. Marvin LUNDGREN of 2903 Arona indicates that they have known the LANGENBERGER family almost all of their lives and indicated that it is a good family and she felt that Steven was a fine young man. She indicated she knew of rlo; problems with Steven. . Mr. E. Z. KUNSE of 2895 Arona indicates that he has lived at that address for 32 years and has known the LANGENBERGERS for most of that time. He indicates that although he is not close to them that they are very fine neighbors and he knows of no problems with the family. He indicated that Steven has not lived at home for some time but that when he did he was not a problem as far as he knew. Resume of`Investigator SPEHN Case #81 -20249 Page 2 � Mrs. Charles PROPPS of 1501 County Road 2 indicated that she also knew the family and Steven for quite a number of years. She, too, indicated that the LANGENBERGERS are a very good family and that she felt Steven was a real nice boy and knew of 'no problems. This Investigator also spoke to the resident manager of the Lake Place: Condominiums at 3421 Kent Avenue in Shoreview. This is the Current address of Steven LANGENBERGER. The' resdent.manager is one Lorraine ANDERSON, Mrs'. ANDERSON indicated th at according to her records LANGENBERGER owns the condominium he is residing in and indicated that she is aware of no problems concerning him. She did indicate that she has -been the resident manager for only approximately six months, however had not heard anything detrimental to Mr` `LANGENBERGER. PREVIOUS EMPLOYMENT Investigator SPEHN contacted the following prev employers of Mr. LANGENBERGER with the following results. Pizza Huts of Northwest - Mr. LANGENBERGER indicated that he was the restaurant manage=r of the Pizza Hut at 4620`west 77th Street' in Edina from October of 1977 to October of 1979., SPEHN contacted one 'Rene BOER of Pizza Huts Northwest and inquired if they had experienced any problems with Mr. LANGENBERGER. Mr. BOER indicated that they had experienced problems and when questioned as to what ty indicated that the particular store in which LANGENBERGER was the manager had inventory problems. SPEHN inquired whether they terminated Mr. LANGENBERGER at which time Mr. BOER indicated that they did not have to, that he resigned after seeing the handwriting on the walla Mr. BOER further indicated that the investigator would do well to` contact ' representatives of Ponderosa Steak House employment with them a s was aware that LANGENBERGER o btained p to y m en after leaving Pizza Huts. Ponderosa Steak House Mr. LANGENBERGER indicated that he was employed by Ponderosa Steak House at 4811 Central Avenue N.E. from November of 1979 through November of 1981. It might be noted that{ LANGENBERGER indicated on his form 3, application that the address of the store he managed was 4811 Central Avenue N.E., St. Paul, MN. In reality this store is at 4811 Central Avenue N.E., in Minneapolis, MN. SPEHN contacted Mr. Richard 'MURPHY of the Ponderosa Steak Houses who indicated that Mr. LANGENBERGER had in fact been employed by them and that he was a`good manager with people. Mr. MURPHY did indicate, however, that they had terminated Mr. LANGENBERGER after investigation for misappropriation of funds. "Mr. MURPHY indicated that the investigator could contact Columbia Heights Police Depart - ment as the case had been investigated' by ,them. SPEHN did contact Sergeant JENDRO of the Columbia Heights Police Department who indicated that LANGENBERGER was suspect in „the theft of funds from the Ponderosa Steak House on Central Avenue. JENDRO indicated that this was an internal theft problem and amounted to approximately $1,200.00 over a period of time. The date of this Resume of Investigator SPEHN Case #81 -20249 Page 3 report was December 1 1981, Columbia Heights report #81- 99711. p . g ZTENDRC further indicated to Investigator SPEHN that the 'case apparently involved LANGENBERGER voiding sales on electronic registers. He indicated their case file indicated that the case was investigated by the Anoka County Major Crime Unit and that Investigator Gary KRYER worked on the case. JENDRO further Andicated that their records indicated that LANGENBERGER apparently agreed to repay the money on the advice of friends, however was not admitting to any guilt. He further indicated that LANGENBERGER apparently . paid off $600.00 and agreed to pay the balance of the amount on " time. He further stated that apparently an: executive of the Ponderosa Steak House's main office in Dayton, Ohio advised:.the local representative, 'Mr. :MURPHY, to return the '$600.00 and not accept it and attempt to prosecute. SPEHN contacted the Anoka County Major Crime Unit, .however the investigator who worked on the case, Gary- "KRYER', is ;currently on vacation. SPEHN ' was able ascertain that the case is still an active one, that is still.an open case with the Anoka County Major Crime Unit. SUMMARY The investigation has determined that although the,applicant, Steven Gerald LANGENBERGER, has no criminal record and appears to be highly thought of by neighbors, et cetera, he certainly has had problems with previous employers. It has determined that although his record is clear, there apparently is a > pending , open case concerning a criminal matter. It is the :investigator's opinion that because of the facts concerning the previous employ- ment, that the applicant, Steven Gerald LANGENBERGER, does not meet the requirements of being of ;good moral character as defined in Section 11 -103, subdivision 2; and Section 11 -106, paragraph `5 4 -of local Chapter 11, ordinance concerning nonintoxicating liquor °licensing under local ordinances for the City of Brooklyn Center. It is for these reasons that the investigator would recommend a denial of the liquor license with the proposed on -site manager, Steven Gerald LANGENBERGER. 4 The following will be an additional resume of Investigator Donald SPEHN concerning Case #81 -20249 regarding the background check for a nonntoxicating liquor license of the proposed manager of the ShowBiz Pizza Place, Inc. in the City of Brooklyn Center. This resume is dictated; on April 20, 1982 at 2130 hours. and transcribed and typewritten by Barbara'PIETRZAK, clerk - typist for the Brooklyn Center Police Department. Additional investigation was conducted concerning previous employ- went of Steven Gerald LANGENBERGER'. Pizza Huts Northwest, Inc. Investigator again contacted Mr. Rene BOER." Mr. BOER is the °vice - President and Director of Operations for Pizza Huts Northwest. Previously Mr. BOER had indicated that they had experienced some problems with Mr.- LANGENBERGER when he was in their employ. He indicated that those were inventory problems. In questioning Mr. BOER further, he indicated that these `inventory problems were primarily at the Stillwater - store. Investigator SPEHN asked Mr. BOER whether these problems included money at which time Mr. BOER indicated that to his knowledge the inventory problems concerned primarily products. Mr. BOER also indicated that Mr. LANGENBERGER had previously worked at the Pizza Hut stores in Egan and also Excelsior. Mr. BOER indicated that at the time LANGENBERGER worked at the Excelsior store he was the Assistant Manager while' Mr. BOER himself was the Manager of that store. Mr. BOER indicated that he had problems with LANGENBERGER, but would not specify as to what types of problems these were. He did indicate that the company felt it would be in the best interest to transfer Mr. LANGENBERGER to another store and did so and when he went to the Stillwater store was when the invetory problems showed up. Investigator SPEHN inquired as to whether there might still be other employees around who had worked with Mr. LANGENBERGER, at which time Mr. BOER indicated that he is certain that there was and that they would likely remember them as Mr. LANGENBERGER was pretty hard to forget. When SPEHN inquired as to what that meant he indicated that the employees did not seem to like him. BOER could not be specific as to what other employees might still be around as apparently they have.a sizable turnover rate and do also transfer employees around to the various stores =. He did indicate that he was sure that there were employees around who had worked'' with LANGENBERGER but he could not name who they were off -hand - or what stores they would be at. Mr. BOER did not - want'to` get very specific `as;to any other types of problems experienced. He did verify that - LANGENBERGER worked for them for approximately two years and that he had resigned, from the company. } Resume of Investigator SPEHN Case #81- 20`249 Page .2 X Ponderosa Steak Houses Investigator SPEHN had previously spoken with Mr. Richard MURPHY who is the area supervisor for Ponderosa Steak Houses. MURPHY had previously indicated that they had problems with Mr. LANGENBERGER for misappropriation of funds and referred the investigator to the Columbia Heights Police Department at which time SPEHN did verify. with Columbia Heights that the case had been reported to then and they in turn had turned it over to the Anoka County Major Crime Unit.`, It was also previously ascertained that Anoka County still has the ease as open. Investigator SPEHN also spoke to Robert NIMCHUK, who is the .. Executive Manager of the Ponderosa Steak House at 4811 Central Avenue N.E. Mr. NIMCHUK indicated that he was familiar with Mr. LANGENBERGER and indicated that Mr -. LANGENBERGER had worked for him for approximately two and one` -half years. He indicated that for terminating the official reason t g Mr. LANGENBERGER was for inaccurate bookkeeping. This relates back to the incident as reported to the Columbia Heights Police Department and the Anoka County Major Crime Unit. Mr. NIMCHUK indicated that LANGENBERGER's salary range during the time that he worked for them . was approximately, $15,000 to $21,000 per year. NIMCHUK did.indicate that the inaccurate bookkeeping involved not using proper procedure on voids on the cash registers. Mr. NIMCHUK indicated that he personally' liked Mr. LANGENBERGER but that they had a personality conflict. He went on to relate that Mr. LANGENBERGER was single and enjoyed the night life while he, Mr. NIMCHUK was married with three children and they really did not have much common ground. He indicated that there had been other problems with Mr. LANGENBERGER previous to the inaccurate bookkeeping. When questioned about those indicated that Mr. LANGENBERGER had some personal problems for a time which affected his job performance. He indicated he felt that this was due to a break -up between LANGENBERGER and hi s ��' - girlfriend. He indicated that the company felt Mr. LANGENBERGER had potential as a manager and felt that they had probably held onto him a little longer based on his personal problems and then the losses through the inaccurate bookkeeping showed up at which. time Mr. LANGENBERGER _was ' terminated. . Mr. NIMCHUK indicated that he did not want to say too much as he could be jeopardizing himself and the company for liable suits b furnishing nformation or suspicions that could not be verified. y g P .�. Masonic Hospital Investigator SPEHN contacted the Masonic Hospital and was advised that they would give no information on previous employment over the phone, but that the Investigator could come and speak with Personnel Director George HAGEMAN. SPEHN was advised, however that Mr. HAGEMAN was not available on April 20. He was arso advised, that it was unknown if in fact any information was available but that this would have to be answered by Mr. HAGEMAN. h Resume of Investigator SPEHN Case #81 -20249 Page 3 Interstate United Corporation , Investigator SPEHN contacted Interstate United Corporation and spoke to a party identifying herself as Doris, the Office Manager. When Investigator SPEHN advised' that he was checking on previous employ - ment of a former employee, he was advised by the Office Manager that the person to talk to would be Dick KLEIN, the route super- visor, however he also was not available on;'April 20 and SPEHN was advised that Mr. KLEIN works from 5:00 a.m. to 1:_00 p.m. and is out on the road a lot and very hard to reach. He was also advised that they did not know they had any records concerning this party but that certainly Mr. KLEIN should remember him as he had been a route supervisor for over fourteen years. 4' The following Sheriff's Offices and Police` Departments were also contacted to ascertain if any had any record on M.r. LANGENBERGER as he has worked in all of these jurisdictions, Washington County Sheriff's-Office No record. Stillwater Police Department No record'. Eagen Police Department No record. South Lake Minnetonka Police Department No record. " University of Minnesota Police Department No record. Anoka County Major Crime Unit The Anoka County, Major Crime Unit was again contacted concerning their investigation of the incident reported to the Columbia Heights Police Department regarding Mr. LANGENBERGER, however the Investigator, Gary KRYER, has been on vacation and will also be out of town over the next couple of days on a prisoner transport. Investigator SPEHN was referred to Investigator Willard JOHNSON, who did check on the case and indicated to Investigator SPEHN that the case had been presented to the County Attorney and the case was denied for prosecution. JOHNSON indicated that the County Attorney handling' the case was one Steve MUEHLBERG.' Investigator SPEHN spoke to Hennepin County Attorney MUEHLBERGwho indicated that he did recall the case. He indicated the case involved money taken out of the electronic till and that apparently adjustments Resume of Investigator SPEHN Case #81- 20249 Page 4 were made by phonying up pay out ships and/or making voids. He indicated that the amount as he recalled was 'a sizable amount and that Mr. LANGENBERGER had offered to make restitution and that he apparently paid the company some of the money, however the company refused to accept it. He indicated that this was one of the problems with the case and also indicated that he felt that the company had done their own investigation on the case and hadeput quite a bit of pressure on Mr. LANGENBERGER':until he offered 'to make the restitution. He indicated also that although company policy indicated that no other employees had access to the till, that contrary to that policy, it could not be proven that other employees did not have access to the till. MUEHLBERG indicated that it was for these reasons that he felt the case was not undisputable and therefore denied it. He did indicate, though, that from his recollection of the case that he was very close to issuing on it and that he felt that Mr. LANGENBERGER probably was the person responsible but that they likely would have had problems in prosecuting the case in front a jury due to the previously mentioned problems. A copy of the report from the Columbia Heights Police Department is attached to the cane file and the investigator will also attempt to obtain a copy of the case file from the Anoka County Major Crime Unit to attach to the case file. It is the investigator's opinion at this time that no further information can be obtained concerning this investigation, however the investigator will still stand by his recommendation that the applicant, Steven LANGENBERGER' does not meet the requirements of being of good moral character based on this investigation and as referred to in the previous resume.; i , t SUPERVI CC;If • COLUMBIA HEIGHTS APPROVED O F E N S E R E P 0 R T' t POL ICE DEPARTMENT DATE & TIME REPORT MADE A. M. FOR ALL CRIMES. ATTEMPTS i P.M. INVESTIGATIONS & INCIDENTS 12 -1 -81 ^i_a _ ! .. SE OR- INC1DENT COM4PLAiNT NO. FILE NO' t" !!DENY Felon 99711 ` ,,ATE .a TIME OCCURRED ❑.A.M. LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE !HOUSE OR BLOCK NO.) ,ever past months ❑P.M. 4811 Central Ave. N.E. .'xCTIM [IF FIRM, NAME OF FIRM 6 NAME OF PROPA BUSINESS ADDRESS $US1NE55 PMO1+E 4811 Central Ave.- 571- 8855' HOME ADDRESS r HOME PHONE 51 S stems Inc 251 PO Bx 578 Da ton' OH 890 -.6400 e RACE SEX AGE OCCUPATION IF SCHOOL GRADE' O.,O_.8. BARENTS' NAMES IF VICTIM IS ,. A PERSON !` JUVENILE V#"EN AVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEW: IS VICTIM IN OPERATION IDENTIFICATION i' .. PERSON REPORTING OFFENSE TO POLICE BUSINESS ADDRESS 41 V BUSINESS PHONE q B 578 a ton H 990 -6400 1.) Mi K. G OUs e :HOME PHONE HOME ADDRESS 22546 -Zea St., St.Francis 753 =3517 R ichard Murphy IM1 AVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEW' RELATIONSHIP TO VICTIM: (1) -Assets Protection Call for interview time 2 Area Supervisor "OW COMPLAINT RECEIVED: (CHECK ONE) FOUND BY POLICE ❑ RADIO ❑ CITIZEN ❑ STATION LETTER ❑ 4 DATEITIME COMPLAINT, RECEIVED ❑ A M. RECEIVED BY DETECTIVES ASSIGNED M. S. Vaughn OUANTITY COLOR BRAND ITEM IDENTIFYING CHARACTERISTICS TO INCLUDE VALUE MODEL, SERIAL AND OPERATION ID NUMBERS Cash _ $1,294 I PERSONS ARRESTED ADDRESS DOB RPR'D OR WHERE HELD DETAILS OF OFFENSE On 11 -25 -81 I received a long distance phone call from Michael Gouse - who works in the corporate headquarters of Ponderosa Systems Inc i�h Dayton Ohio. Mr. Gouse stated their firm had done an audit on the Col. Hgts. store and discovered a $1200 loss. Mr. Gouse` -.said he would be flying in to Mpls and would like to. meet with us and the area Supervisor in charge of the Heights Store. An arrangement s made with Inv. Gary Kreyer of MCIU to meet at the Col. Hgts P.D. on 12 -1 -81 1 at 1300 hrs. Cont'd. OF FENSE CLEARED EY ARREST ❑ EXCEPTIONALLY ❑ CASE UNFOUNDED ❑ SCORED ❑ INDEXED' ❑ OTHER PERSONS ARRESTED, SUSPECTS, WITNESSES A ADDITIONAL DETAILED.REPOR'T ON CONTINUATION SHEET w 1 ORM 3 SUPPLEMENTARY INVESTIGATION REPORT CASE NO 81-99711 1 OFFENSE Larcen COMPLAINANT .. I ADDRESS ADDITIONAL DE ht 5 CE OFFENSE PP ^ C= t * :v?L�_A %0%5 ETC. We met in the Col. fits P.D. conference room on 12 -1 -81 at 130 0''hrs. Mr. Gouse, Inv. Kreyer, Richard. Murphy area manager and myself were present. Mr. Murphy stated the store manager at the Columbia Heights Ponderosa at the 'times of the theft was Steve Langenberger DOB 9/20/56 SS #473 -70 -4656 ph 484-1603. Mr. Murphy said he did not have the full name and would have to call corporate headquarters on 12 -2 -81. He al was not sure of the cur - rent address of Langenberger. Murphy stated he was unaware of the thefts until the corporate office notified him. Langenberger allegedly used a system of voiding sales on the electronic cash register. He did not match the voids with the proper meal A ck number, and broke other company policies dealing with "void" procedures. Murphy stated that Langenberger was suspended with pay while they con ducted their private investigation. Murphy spoke to Langenberger•several times about the; matter and at no time did Langenberger confess to the thefts. He did say , he did not use proper procedure on the voids. Murphy stated he and Langenberger spoke of the missing money and during the course of their conversations the subject of restitution was brought up. Murphy stated that Langenberger told him that he'(Langenberger,) was admitting guilt but was willing to repay the money on the advice of friends. Murphy stated that he told Langenberger that if the money was "paid back Ponderosa probably would not prosecute. Cont `d . OFFENSE IS DECLARED: t U .dod v SIGNED Vaug hn_ _ _ —DATE_ 12 -1 -81 � Cleared by Arrest Invest�Qatmg 011,cer Q E^amficinally Cleared ❑ SIGNED— DATE— -- Inactive (Not Cleared) ❑ Chet or Command nQ O!f�cv a W ; T�rea`te•, Also to Renwt S Qn %!.Cent De.e op-ent+ This Form Is Used" by O'! ;cer Ass�n to a CSse to Reco P %owes, A"er Tt " a', s S"c' Oars ` ., s FORM 3 SUPPLEM. ENTARY INVESTIGATION ' REPORT s 1- 9971 l cnsE Na. OFFENSE Larceny COMPLA'NANT i ; j ADDRESS ADDITIONAL DETAILS OF OfFE PanSRESS C� ETC, ,M1 Murphy stated he received a check from Langenberger for $600,,7;'Murphy s tated Langenberger .told him he would pay off the rest in time'. Murphy said he then received instructions from a superior to return the M . to Langenberger. Murphy did so. " Inv. Kreyer took a taped statement from Murphy. Gouse left a sheet prepared by Ponderosa showing the.losses over a period of time. Ponderosa uses a 28 day cycle for 1 period and 13 periods to a fiscal gear. Their current fiscal year is 1982 and runs from Feb 27 1981 through Nov 5th, 1981. Ponderosa's void exception summary sheet was marked with the c ase number and added to the report'. _ Murphy stated Langenberger has since been terminated. f FFENSE IS DECLARED: Aed ❑ SIG u g h n DA T A -12-1 Cleared by Atrest 13 tn- eshgat Off, beeptranally Cleared ❑ ' SIGNED DATE_ lstaet ve.. (Not . Cleared). ❑ Ch.ef or Command Oif;eer� . Th Is Used by O ;f;ce. Ass,gned to a Cl +.e to Revolt P,owe�% A' T�,ec a i Se -n Dari . end wee.;r T-e•ea'fer, Alga to Reo"t S�gn�t De.e op-e'.'>• CEASE X81 -99711 ' - - ---__YfD��#- - r�,' t ors f�rl�tir� ,• _ ___ _ _ . AQ + 1 � ' I I - -- F— �,� l�' L I I.!l i + i , �, , ! -�=-�- � l ! I 1 i F IA TS 39 ' 21, '' L I - {r j FORM 3 SUPPLEMENTARY INVESTIGATION REPORT 81 -99711 . CASE NO. OFFENSE Larceny CCt+fPLA!NANT Ponderosa Systems Inc. I ADDRESS 4811 Central. Ave _ F f ADDITIONAL DETA'LS OF OFFENS'c DRCaRESS Cr '4VESTi5ATIONS ETC, i- 12/2/81 I received a phone call from Richard Murphy. Mr. Murphy stated that Langenberger's full name was; Steven Gerald Langenberger, DOB 9/20/56. •His last known address was, 3421 N. Kent St. #615 Shoreview., Inv. Steven Vaughn C WOFFENSE IS DECLARED: Unfounded ❑ SIGNED -DAT Cleared by Attest ❑ lnresfigahnq Off-er EnceloCanelly Cleared ❑ -DAT � _.. Inactive is {Not Cleared }: ❑ Chet or CommenuF„q O+Lce- This For,, It Used by 0Wcer Ass;nned to a Lase to Report P.oa•ess Mier T -rre anj Sower Da',s an,t Weesly TFe ter, Also to Reawt S ;gn1f,cant Deve'ooments. • ME "1ORA 4DLM TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager FROM: Jim Lindsay, Chief of Police`� .� U DATE: April 22, 1982 ,. SUBJECT: Gambling License Application Northport Elementary School Parent- Teacher Association r, Attached a t shed please find the completed police investigation of P P g the _ e orth ort Elementary School P arent - Teach er r P he Associat Y in application for a Class A gambling license. Barbara Jean Bird is named as the President and'Mary Frances Stebbins is named as the Gambling Manager in application for the license. Investigator Monteen -has found nothing of a questionable nature during the course of this investigation to preclude issuing this gambling license. In addition to a Class A gambling license, the Northport Elementary, School Parent- Teacher Association has made ap on for a waiver ai r PP e of the $10,000.04 'fidelity bond as allowed under the City Ordinance. The City Council must act.on the following two matters: 1. The application for a Class A gambling license. This requires a majority vote of the City Council to pass. 2. The waiver of the $10,000.00 fidelity bond. _ This requires a unanimous vote of the City Council to pass. • The following is the resume of the investigation of Case #82- 05481, the application of Northport School Parent- Teacher Association, Barbara Jean BIRD, President and Mary Frances STEBBINS, Gambling Manager in application for a Class A gambling license as issued by the City of Brooklyn Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The investigation is conducted by A. Paul MONTEEN and transcribed and typewritten by Barbara PIETRZAK, clerk- typist for the Brooklyn Center Police Department. - .. APPLICANT The Parent- Teacher'Association of Northport School 5421 Brooklyn Boulevard ' Brooklyn Center, MN 55429 Telephone 537 -3684 Barbara Jean BIRD, President 5214 53rd Avenue North s• Crystal, MN 55429 Telephone: 533 -1981 Mary Frances STEBBINS, Gambling Manager 5842 Washburn Avenue North Brooklyn Center, MN 55430 Telephone: 566 -7150 INVESTIGATION MATERIALS CONTAINED WITHIN THIS FILE An application for a gambling license An application for a gambling license, part 2 personal information form in the name of Mary Frances STEBBENS An application for a gambling license, part 3, organizational information a . A letter addressed to the City Council requesting a waiver of the fidelity bond The Northport Elementary School Parent Teacher Association of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota is- a local PTA unit organized under the authority of the Minnesota Congress of Parent, Teacher and Student "Association, a branch of the National Congress of Parents and Teachers. The Association exists as an unincorporated association of its membership. The Northport Elementary School Parent- Teacher Association is housed and holds its regular meetings at the Northport Elementary School located at 5421 Brooklyn Boulevard, Brooklyn Center,, Hennepin County, Minnesota. The Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association was established in the fall of 1954 when Northport Elementary�School • op ened its doors to the students of the Robbinsdale School District. Currently°, the Northport Parent- Teacher Association has an active meml --)ership of 175 persons who have paid - their dues to the National' Congress of Parents and Teachers. Barbara Jean BIRD is listed as Re. umc of Inve t`i.Erator MONTEEN Case #82- 05481 Page 2 the presi dent of the association in application for and on behalf Of the .,orthport Parent Teacher Association. This application is for a Class A gambling license and therefore the following in 7e stigat ion was pursued by the Brooklyn Center Police Department. A record check in the name of Barbara Jean BIRD revealed no incidents of criminal activity or traffic violations in the cities of Brooklyn Center or Crystal, Minnesota; nor outstanding warrants with the Hennepin County Sheriff's Office. Barbara Jean BIRD has been a resident of 5214 53rd Avenue North in Crystal since September 9 of 1967. Mrs. BIRD has served on the City Council of the City of Crystal since January 1,1981 and prior to that time had been a housewife part -time retail cashier with Target Stores Incorporated. Barbara BIRD was the gambling manager in application for a license for Northport School Parent - Teacher Association in the calendar year of 1979 and was listed as the Vice- President of the Parent- Teacher Association in 1981. The gambling manager in application for this license is Mary Frances STEBBINS. Mrs. STEBBINS is a resident of the City of Brooklyn Center at 5842 Washburn Avenue North and has lived there since 1975. Prior to that time Mrs. STEBBINS was a resident of the City of Fridley, having lived at 5612 7th Street N.E. and 5720 East River Road. Mrs._ STEBBINS is employed by the Hennepin County Court System as a Senior Deputy Clerk of Court and works in the government center in downtown Minneapolis. Mrs. STEBBINS has been so employed for the past ten years. Mrs. STEBBINS has no record with the Brooklyn Center Police Department, NCIC or MINCIS computer systems, has no outstanding warrants with the Sheriff's Office in Hennepin County and holds a valid, Class C driver's license which shows no violations. Accompanying the application for a Class A gambling license for Northport Elementary School Parent-Teacher Association is a letter requesting that the City of Brooklyn Center waive the required $10,000,.00 fidelity bond as allowed by the ordinance of the City of Brooklyn Center. It should be noted that the Northport Elementary School Parent - Teacher Association has applied for and has received a gambling license during the calendar years of 1979, 1980, and 1981. North - port School PTA has complied with the reporting requirements during those years. In-restigator D40NTEEN finds nothing which would preclude Northport Parent - Teacher Association, Barbara Jean BIRD, or Mary Frances STEBSI'NS from obtaining a Class A gambling license. The City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center must act on the following two .matters 1. An application for a Class A gambling license which rcqui_170 -3 a ma ority vol of t.�1E' City Council to pass. Th wa iv., : 0L a S_l0 0 �� . CO f iclol..ity band which requires a una,ni. ot'. s vo l - e a - tlit2 City Council to pass. Licenses to be approved by the City Council on April 26, 1982 FOOL? ESTABLISHMIENT LICENSE ' � � Kentucky Fried Chicken 5512 Brooklyn Blvd. 1, Sanitarian MECHANICAL SYSTEMS LICENSE -< Atkins Mechanical, Inc. 6550 W. River Rd. Axel Newman Heating & Plumbing 1608 Como Ave. W. Cronstrom's Heating & Air Cond. 4410 Excelsior Blvd. Dependable Heating & Air Cond. 2615 Coon Rapids Blvd. LSV Metals, Inc. 6800 Shingle Cr. Pkwy. Rainbow Mechanical 7241 County Rd. 116 Buildi g fficialj MOTORE VEHICLE DEALERSHIP LICENSE Brookdale Chrysler Plymouth 6121 Brooklyn Blvd. Brookdale Pontiac` 6801 Brooklyn Blvd. Iten Chevrolet 6701 Brooklyn Blvd. North Star Dodge 6740 Brooklyn Blvd. Bob Ryan Oldsmobile 6700 Brooklyn Blvd. ;111 L City Clerk NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE Evergreen Park Elementary 7020 Dupont Ave. N. Sanitarian RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE • Initial: Bob Dale 6612 Dupont Ave. N. Duane R. Lussier 6927 Dupont Ave. N. Paul Wilson & Brian Anderson 5100 Drew Ave. N. Larry Karkela 5455 Emerson Ave. N. Michael R. Eberle 4207 Lakeside Ave. #226 Jeff & Patti Stewart 5547 Lyndale Ave. N. Sherry A. Ronallo 819 -821 55th Ave. N. J. J. Barnett 2910 -22 68th Lane Renewal: Bennie Rozman Brookdale Ten Apartments Jerry Hall 3815 Oak Street Robert W. Johnson 6800 Toledo Ave. N. Gerald R. Broman 3601 47th Ave. N. Kenneth E. Patterson 3616 50th Ave. N. Kenneth Ready Jr. 1019 73rd Ave N. A Director of Planning and Inspection SIGN HANGERS LICENSE LeRoy Signs, Inc. 6325 Welcome Ave. N. Midway Sign Company 444 N. Prior Ave. \,, Buildi g fficial SWIMMING POOL LICENSE Indoor: Beach Apartments 4201 Lakeside Ave. M. Chippewa Park Apartments 6507 Camden Ave. N. Twin Lake North Apartments 4536 58th Ave. N. Outdoor: Beach Apartments 4201 Lakeside Ave. N. Hi Crest Apartments 1300 67th Ave. N. Evergreen Park Apartments 7200 Camden -Ave. N. Lyn River Apartments 201 65th Ave. N. 1 �� n Riverwood Townhomes 6605 Camden Dr._ .. :Sanitarian GENERAL APPROVAL: C' y C1 rk LAW OFFICES LEFEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O - BRIEN & DRAW2 CLAYTON L. LCFEV @RE A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION HERBERT R LCPLER 2000 FIRST BANK PLACE WEST BROOKLYN 'CENTER. OFFICE. J, DENNIS O'BRtEN 103 BROOKLYN LAW CENTER JOHN E. DRAWZ MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA SS402 5637 BROOKLYN BOULEVARD DAVID J. KENNEDY - ..BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA SS429 JOHN S. DEAN TELEPHONE (612) 333 -0543 <$12 }536 •HO37. GLENN E.PUROuE CHARLES L. LCFEVERE HERSCRT. P. LEFLER, LII - RICHARD J. SCHIEFFER i JEFFREY J. STRAND JAMES R O *MEARA. April MARY J. SJORKLUND April. 22, 17 JOHN G. KPESSEL DAYLE NOLAN CINDY L.LAVORATO - Mr, Brad Hoffman Administrative Assistant City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Re: $1,000,000 Commercial Development Revenue Note (Shingle Creek Development Company Project) City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota` Our File No B -2201 f - Dear Brad: I have reviewed the final resolution and all of the under- lying documents prepared by bond counsel in connection with the above financing and find that they are in proper form for consideration by the,City Council at its meeting on Monday, April 26th, The transaction is structured as a tax exempt mortgage and .the First National Bank of Minneapolis is purchasing the City's note in the amount of $1,000,000. The ,note is secured by a mortgage on the project which consists of a one story office/ warehouse building of approximately 78,000 square feet. The note is additionally ecured b an Y y assignment from the partnership g P to the bank of the rents it will be receiving from tenants in the structure, and by the personal guaranty of three separate corporations, Waycrosse, Inc, Richardson Properties, Inc., and Panis, Inc. The entire_ financing is in the amount of $2,180,000, and the partnership will be obtaining the balance of the project costs from the proceeds of a taxable mortgage loan from the First National Bank, which is secured in basically in the same way as the city's tax ,exempt note. Yours very truly, If David J. Kennedy DJK:caw LAW OFFICES 10 LI= FEVERE, LEFLER, KENNEDY, O'9RIEN Ck DRAWZ CLAYTON L. LEFEVERS A %PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION HEIQBta RT P. t. €FLER 2 - 000. FIRST BANK PLACE. WEST BROOKLYN CENTER OFFICE.. J. DENNIS O`BRIEN 103 BROOKLYN LAW CENTER ,. JOHN E.DPAWZ MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 5637 BROOKLYN. BOULEVARD DAMN J EDY JOHN B. DEAN H BROOKLYN CENTER. MINNESOTA 55428 DEAN TE.LEPHONE.(612)333. -d54s , GLENN E, PU.R QUE (812)536 -8037 CHARLES L. LEFEVERE- H €RBERT P. LEFLE:R. ` - RICHARD J. SCH IEFFER JEFFREY J. STRAND JAMES .P O'MEARA 7� (� MARY J. 8JORKL.UND April 22, 1982 JOHN G. KRESSEL DAYLENOLAN ' - - CINDY L.LAVORATO Mr. Brad Hoffman Administrative Assistant City of Brooklyn Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Re: $1,000,000. Commercial Development Revenue Dote (Shingle Creek Development Company Project City of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota Our File No. B -2201 Dear Brad: I have reviewed the final resolution and all of the under- lying documents prepared by bond counsel in connection with the above financing and find that they are in proper form for consideration by the City Council at its meeting on Monday, April, 26th. The transaction is structured as a tax exempt mortgage and the First National Bank of Minneapolis is purchasing the City's note in the amount of $1,000,000. The note is secured by a mortgage on the project which consists of a one story office/ warehouse building of approximately 78,000 square feet. The note is additionally secured by an assignment from the partnership to the bank of the rents it will be receiving from tenants in the structure, and by the personal guaranty of three separate corporations, Waycrosse, Inc, Richardson Properties, Inc., and Panis, Inc. The entire 'financing is in the amount of $2,180,000, and the partnership will be obtaining the balance of the project costs from the proceeds of a taxable mortgage loan from the First National Bank, which is secured in basically in the same way as the city's tax exempt note. Yours Very truly, David J. Kennedy DJK :caw,_ r `Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION PRESCRIBING VOTING PRECINCTS FOR THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is presently constituted into eight voting precincts described by a resolution adopted by the City Council on July, 10, 1972; and WHEREAS, a federal census was conducted for the year 1980 which indicated, among other things, the population distribution within the City, of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, on the basis, of the 1980 'census, a Federal District Court reapportioned Minnesota Legislative Districts; and WHEREAS, the Federal District Court, in March 1982, developed a reapportionment plan placing the entire City of Brooklyn Center within Senate District 47 and portions of the City in House Districts 47A and 47B; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the factors of population distribution within Brooklyn Center, new legislative district lines, community_ neighborhoods, and various school district boundaries within the City;_ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows; 1. To rescind the resolution establishing voting precincts for the City of Brooklyn Center adopted by the City Council on July 10, 1972. 2. Voting precincts in the City of Brooklyn Center shall be numbered and described as follows Precinct One Bounded on the south by the south City limits; on the west by Shingle Creek; on the north by the centerline of County Road 10 to the centerline intersection of 57th Avenue 'North and Logan Avenue North, thence northerly along the centerline of Logan Avenue North to the centerline of 58th Avenue North, thence easterly along the centerline of 58th Avenue North extended to the Mississippi River; on the east by the Mississippi River. Precinct Two Bounded on the east by the Mississippi River; on the south by the centerline of 58th Avenue North extended to the centerline of Logan Avenue North, thence southerly along the centerline of Logan Avenue North to the centerline of 57th Avenue North (also known as County Road 10), thence westerly along the centerline of County Road 10 to the centerline of Shingle Creek; on the west by Shingle Creek to the intersection with the centerline of F.A.I. 94. , thence northwesterly ` along the centerline of F.A.I. 94 to the centerline of Xerxes Avenue North, thence northeasterly along the centerline of Xerxes Avenue North to the centerline of Shingle Creek Parkway, thence northwesterly RESOLUTION NO. along the centerline of Shingle Creek Parkway to the centerline of 69th Avenue North; on the north by the centerline of 69th Avenue North to the centerline of Dupont Avenue North, thence southerly along the centerline of Dupont Avenue North to the centerline of 65th Avenue North, thence easterly along the centerline of 65th Avenue North to the intersection with the centerline of 66th Avenue North, thence northeasterly along the centerline of 66th Avenue North to the inter- section with the centerline of Camden Avenue North, thence southerly alon g the centerline of Camden Avenue North to the intersection with the south 'line of the north one -half of Section 36, Township 119, Range 21 thence easterly along said half- section line to the Mississippi River. Precinct Three Bounded on the south by the south line of the north one -half of Section 36, ,Township 119, Range 21 to the centerline of Camden Avenue North, thence northerly along the centerline of Camden Avenue North to the intersection with the centerline of 66th Avenue North, thence southwesterly along the centerline of 66th Avenue North to the inter- " section with the centerline of 65th Avenue North, 'thence westerly along the centerline of 65th Avenue North to the intersection with the centerline of Dupont Avenue North, thence northerly along the centerline of Dupont Avenue North to the centerline of 69th Avenue 'North, > thence ` westerly along the centerline of 69th Avenue North to the centerline of West Palmer Lake Drive; on the west by the centerline of West Palmer I Lake Drive; on the north by the north City limits; on the east by the I Mississippi River. Precinct Four Bounded on the north by the north City limits; on the east by the, centerline of West Palmer Lake Drive on the south by the south line of Section 27, Township 119, Range 21, to its intersection with the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard, thence southeasterly along the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard to the centerline of F.A.I. 94, thence westerly along the centerline of F.A.I., 94 to the west City limits; on the west b the west City limits extended northerly to the centerline of'69th Avenue North, thence easterly along the centerline s of 69th Avenue North to the centerline of Perry Avenue North, thence northerly along the centerline of Perry Avenue North to the centerline of 71st Avenue North, thence northeasterly albng the centerline of 71st Avenue North to the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard, thence northwesterly along the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard to the north City limits. Precinct Five Bounded on the north by the centerline of F.A.I. 94 to the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard; on the east by the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard; on the south by the centerline of 63rd Avenue North; on the Kest by the west City limits. Precinct Six Bounded on the north by the centerline of 69th Avenue North; on the east by the centerline of Shingle Creek Parkway, thence southeasterly along the centerline of Shingle Creek Parkway to the centerline of Xerxes Avenue North, thence southwesterly along the centerline of Xerxes Avenue North to the centerline of F.A.I. 9411 thence southeasterly along the centerline.of F.A.I. 94 to the centerline of Shingle Creek, thence southerly along Shingle Creek to the centerline of County Road 10; on PL-SOLUTION NO. the south by County Road 10; on the west by the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard. Precinct Seven Bounded on the north by the centerline of 63rd Avenue North; on the east by the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard; on the south by the centerline of County Road 10; on the west by the west City limits. Precinct Eight Bounded on the north by the centerline of County Road 10; on the east by Shingle Creek; on the south by the south City limits; on the west by the west _City limits. Precinct Nine Bounded on the north by the north City limits; on the east by the centerline of Brooklyn Boulevard to the intersection with the center- line of 71st Avenue North, thence southwesterly along the centerline of 71st Avenue North to the intersection with the centerline of Perry Avenue North, thence southerly along the centerline of Perry Avenue North to the intersection with the centerline of 69th Avenue North; on the south by the centerline of 69th Avenue North; on the west by the west City limits. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk ,. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resoltuion 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. j Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF 1/4 TON PICKUP TRUCK WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 81 -43 provides that contracts for purchases in the amount of $5,000 to $9,999 shall be awarded by the City Council upon recommendation of the City Manager, and WHEREAS the Cit y Manager has received quotations for the purchase _ of a 1/4 Ton Pickup Truck for use by the Street Construction and Maintenance Division of the Public Works Department and that said quotes were as follows: Superior Ford $5,795.00 Minar Ford 5,968.06 Brookdale Ford 5,598.00 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of f S59 8 is Brooklyn amount 0 . y Center that the .quote of Brookdale. Ford in the $ , deemed to be the best quote submitted and said quote is hereby accepted. Date Mayor ATTEST: Clerk I 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. I Al Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF 1/4 TON PICKUP TRUCK WHEREAS, City Council Resolution No. 81 -43 provides that contracts for purchases in the amount of $5,000 to $9,999 shall be awarded by the City Council upon recommendation of the City Manager; and WHEREAS, the City Manager has received quotations for the purchase of a 1/4 Ton Pickup Truck for use by the Street Construction and Maintenance Division of the Public Works Department and that said quotes were as follows: Superior Ford $5,795.00 Minar Ford 5,968.06 Brookdale Ford 5,598.00 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the.City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center that the quote of Brookdale Ford in the amount of $5,598. is deemed to be the best quote submitted and said quote is- hereby - accepted. 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. ORl3INAI!CE ( .Section 23 -2114. CEP Iil DPIICES NO T LICEE'ISED, The li censing p o this Ordinance sha no t =a to any of the foll ow in� af' %t (, devices , _ - - _(1) Any amusement device held or kept fo r sale or st and which is n actua in us e or di-,D] ayed for u se. 2) Any _ar, device use fo r private, no n - c omes- rcial purposes such as.home use. Any amus ement device loc on c omme r cial or industrial premises in lunch rooms, break: rooms, e mployee cafe or recreation rooms which is provided for employees use and not available for use by the general public 4) Any amu sement device located in a recreation center or recreation room in a multiple - family or townhouse resi dential complex which is provided for use by residents_ and their guests and is not -available for use by the general public. Section 2 3 -2115. AMUSEMENT DEVICES - RESTRICTIONS AND LICENSE REVOCATION. A. It shall.be the responsibility of the operator: (l ) To prevent the harassment of any person in or adjacent to the l ice — ns -- ed premi by patrons o t e ! cense premise; (2) To provide adequate and unobstructed ingress, egress and parking areas adjacent to the licensed premise; -(3) To prevent the frequenting and the use of the licensed premise y_ loud, boisterous an isruptive persons; (4) To prevent the frequenting and the use of the licensed premise b y pe rsons who engage in acts of van�caZism an e s ruc »n o property in and a out and adjacent e remi se; (5) To prevent conduct by patrons of the lic ensed premise which as an a verse et eci; on a dac pr operty; (6) To maintain order on the lic ensed premis at all times; (7) To ensure that the licensed premise do not become overcrowded so a to con ti tuts a t6 - tfi6 -- altF or she y o persons, or so as to exc the maT nui;iber oT' perso permi e '✓herein y offer of t tTie` "Nty - T anager ; -- --- (8) To provide ful -tine ad ult su pervi sion upon the licensed premi se duri na bu i ness Tou ; (9) To ensure that each amusement device on the licensed premise as been li consod to T Ts or "i'nance and that he lac_ nse, p osted to a conspicuo p�l ace r on� th ic p reriii so. — _ _ ORDINANCE NO. B. Ea amu se m ent device lo cate d in th C ity o f Brook C enter shall be ins e cted b�}r the Ch of _Police prior to approval for icT en ng, and an i report shall be f orwarded to the City Ma Upon notice by t h e op e r ator to the Chi of Police req uesting an inspection and s tating that on amuse dev has been s'ubsTituted f anothe unde an exist jcce pursuant to Section 23-2108 hereof, said substituted amusement device m y be operated unless license therefor has been deni by the Ci C ouncil. An amusement device which is n being su for a pursuant to Section, 23 -2102 hereof, shall not be operated until notice has been given by the Operator to the Chief of Police requesti an inspection, an i nspection report has been forwarded to the City Manager, and a license i ssued. Refusal by an Operator of the right of entry to the Chief of Police during business hours for the purpose of a sche u id inspection, a requested inspection, o an inspection ma upon probable- cause, shall constitute grounds fo revocation of alT licenses for`umusement devices held by the Operator. Section 23- 2 107. ` DISPLAY OF LICENSE. The license herein provided for shall be = pos permanently and conspicuously at the location of the amusement device in the premises wherein t e evice is to be operated or maintained to be oper Section 23-2108. ' TRANSFERABILITY. A. One amusement device may be substituted for another similar amusement device under a single license provided that the number of amusement devices shall not exceed the number approved under the license. B. Operator's licenses are issued for one location only an � y d such licenses v. . > are nontransferable between locations. Section 23 -2109. LOCATION OF AMUSEMENT DEVICES. A. No amusement device shall be located, placed, maintained or operated o n any public street, avenue, boulevard, lane or a lb within the City. No amusement device shall be located on private property in such a manner as to block or interfere with esta driving lanes, parking places, fire lanes, exitways or wal kways nor shall: an amusement device be located so that its operation will: create a nuisance. B. Licensed amusement devices shall be allowed t o be located as secondary or incidental uses in the following commercial establishments: M establishments holding an on -sale non - i liquor license, an on intoxicating liquor licen an on -sale �rrine license or an on -sale club license.; e ating establishments including eating est ablis hme nts offering live entertainr.�ent, but excluding food restaurants and drive -in eating establishments. 3 recreation centers. m o tion pi cture theaters. 5) bow ling establishment .''Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: s RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AGREEMENT FOR ARCHITECTURAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center authorized the ,expenditure of $40,OOQ for a solar demonstration project to be funded with Community Development Block Grant monies in Year VI; and WHEREAS, the project is deemed to be a home rehabilitation project administered by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Brooklyn Center; and WHEREAS, the objective of the project is to demonstrate the cost passive effectiveness of retro- filling existing structures to better use their P solar potential. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ,RESOLVED BY THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY in and for the City of Brooklyn Center to authorize the Executive provide Director to enter into an Agreement with Criteria Architects, Inc. to .. p technical and administrative assistance with the solar demonstration project- 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.