HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979 05-14 CCP Regular Session CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
City of Brooklyn Center
May 14, 1979
7:00 p.m.
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Invocation
4. Approval of Minutes Regular Session 4/23/79
- Special Study Meeting - 4/30/79
5. Open Forum
6. Final Plat Approvals:
a. For Eisenbrand Addition located at the southeast quadrant of
73rd Avenue North and Dupont Avenue North.
-The City Council approved the preliminary plat on May 8, 1978
under Application No. 78022.
b. For Brooklyn Center Industrial Park R. L. S. (Spec 8)
-This plat is the replat requested by the property owner
(BCIP) for the property lying at the southeast quadrant of
Shingle Creek Parkway and County Road 130 - . (Spec 8)
It is recommended this plat be approved contingent upon
submission by the property owner of certain easements, utility
maintenance, street dedication, and other documents. The
t .�• . ..,a. ....'..2. _l — cf th Fir 4:^v- thA
iLL1�1 r�J6. i.�u...ay c..t.t.,`. a ..r __
i �:..1V y - -�
Brooklyn Center inaustriai varx regis iaiiu ..bux Vcy MILUUICA
be considered prior to this final plat approval.
7. Appointments:
-Park and Recreation Commission
8. Resolutions:
a. Rescinding Approval of the Final Plat for the Brooklyn Center
Industrial Park Registered Land Survey (Spec 8)
-The above plat is for property lying at the southeast quadrant of
Shingle Creek Parkway and County Road 130, identified by BCIP
as Spec 8. The City Council approved the final plat of this R.L.S.
at the February 26,_1979 meeting_ Preliminary plat was reviewed on
July 24, 1978 under Application No. 78042. Due to certain unforeseen
circumstances involving filing of this R.L.S. with the County, the
owner has revised the plat'for this area and is requesting that the
former plat approval be rescinded.
b. Authorizing the Rental of Tandem Trunks for Hauling of Materials in
Conjunction with Shingle Creek Trailway Improvement Project No. 1978 -42.
-It is recommended that the quotation of Steere and Boone Excavating
Company be accepted for the work comprehended.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -2- May 14, 1979
C. Authorizing the Rental of a Bulldozer for Grading Work in
Conjunction with Central Park Improvement Project No. 1978 -41
-It is recommended the quotation of Valley Equipment Company be
accepted for rental of one new John Deere JD. 750 crawler - dozer.
for performing grading work in Central Park.
d. Establishing Storm Sewer Project No. 1979 -5 and Ordering
Preparation of Plans and Specifications
-In conjunction with proposed Street Improvement Project Nos. ,
1978 -45 and 46 (Shingle Creek Parkway) established at the
December 4, 1978 City Council meeting, it is recommended the
storm sewer extensions and additions be accomplished with that
construction.
e. Establishing Street Improvement Project No. 1979 -6
-In conjunction with proposed Street Improvement Project Nos.
1978 -45 and 46 (.Shingle Creek Parkway) established at the
December 4, 1978 City Council meeting, and the State's proposed .
construction of Bridge No. 27910 over FI -94, plans for which
were approved at the March 30, 1979 Council meeting, it is
recommended a street improvement project be established to address
the work comprehended by the State in constructing approaches to
the aforementioned bridge.
f. Correcting Assessments for Parcels Involved in the Highway Taking
for Construction of FI -94 in the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park
-The assessments to be corrected are those involved with highway
takings in the Industr_a.l Park.
g. Proclaiming the Week of June 4 -10, 1979 as Handicap Scout Week
h. Declaring June 1 -10, 1979 as Brooklyn Center Early Bird Days
i. Proclaiming the Week of May 28 -June 3, 1979 as Vietnam Veterans Week
J. To Transfer Funds from the Federal Revenue Sharing Fund to the
General Fund
k. Authorizing the Purchase of One 6 -Yard Dump Box
-It is recommended the bid of MacQueen Equipment.in the amount of
$5,045 be accepted.
1. Rejecting Bids for Furnishing Bituminous Oil and Authorizing the
City Manager to Receive Quotations for Bituminous Oil Whenever
Necessary
M. Accepting Bid for Plant -Mixed Bituminous Material
-It is recommended the bid of C. S. McCrossan for furnishing plant -
mixed bituminous materials be accepted.
n. Accepting Bid for Stabilized Gravel and Fine Aggregate for Sealcoat
-It is recommended the bid of Barton Contracting Company for the
furnishing of class #5 gravel, FA -1 sand and buckshot be accepted.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -3- May 14, 1979
o. Accepting Quotations for Brick Work .
- Brick work related to remodeling for new conference work as
comprehended in the 1979 budget.
p. Accepting Quotations for Two Overhead Garage Doors for the East
Fire Station
Garage doors are replacements and were comprehended in the 1979
budget.
9. Planning Commission Items: (8:00 p.m.)
a. - Application No. 79016 submitted by Howe, Inc. for site and building
plan approval to construct an approximate 2 17' x 74' precast concrete
warehouse, garage and maintenance shop building to replace the building
destroyed by fire on January 6, 1979. The Planning Commission recommended
denial of Application No. 79016 at its 'April 19, 1979 special session.
b. Application No. 79017 submitted by Howe, Inc. for a variance from
Section 35 -111 to rebuild a nonconforming use at setback and buffer
requirements other than that contained in the current zoning ordinance.
Application No. 79017 was recommended for denial at the April 19 special
session of the Planning Commission.
C. Application No. 79020 submitted by James Speckman for site and building
plan approval for a 14,850 square foot law office on an approximate one
acre site at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard. Application No. 79020 was
recommended for approval at the April; 26, 1979 Planning .Corcaiission
meeting.
10. Ordinances:
a. Vacating that Portion Irving Avenue North Bounded on the South by
the Northerly Right -of -Way Line of 69th Avenue North and on the North
by the Westerly Extension of the Northerly Line of Lot 1, Block 1,
Horbal Addition.
- Ordinance was first read on April 23, 1979, published on May 5, 1979
and is presented this evening for a second reading.
b. Amending Chapter 3 of the City Ordinances Regarding Addressing of
Accessory Buildings.
- Ordinance was first read on April 23, 1979, published on May 3, 1979,
and is presented this evening for a second reading.
C. Amending Chapters 11 and 23 of the City Ordinances Relative to On Sale
Liquor and On Sale Wine Licenses
- Ordinance is presented for a first reading.
11. Discussion Items:
a. Industrial Revenue Bonds
r - Resolution Establishing the Policy for the Issuance of Industrial
Revenue Bonds or Mortgages or Tax Increment Financing (No. 1, No. 2`
and original policy draft)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA -4- May 14, 1979
- Resolution to Express Concern Over the Over Use by Municipalities
of the Authority to Issue Nontraditional Tax Exempt Bonds
b. Issuance of Dynamite Permit for Howe, Inc.
C. Discussion of Impending Construction of FI -94
-The City Engineer will be prepared to discuss routing of traffic
during construction of the bridge on Shingle Creek Parkway over
PI--94 and placing of fill materials for construction of bridges
at T.H. 100 and FI -94.
d. Discussion of T. H. 169 Environmental Impact Statement
The City Engineer will be prepared to discuss recent developments
with regard to the final alternatives to be studied in the
T.H. 169 Environmental Impact Statement.
12. Licenses
13. Bingo License Bond Waiver
Included in the license list for a license for bingo is the Brooklyn Center
Jaycees. The Brooklyn Center Jaycees have requested a bond waiver. A motion
to waive the bond and the unanimous -vote of the Council is needed to accomplish
the waiver.
14. Adjournment
B�
ERRLE BRown FFIRM 0 0
COMMERCIRL6 inDuSTRIRL PARK
6100 SUMMIT DRIVE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55430 PHONE 561 -7350
April 19, 1979
Gerald Splinter
City Manager
City of Brooklyn Center
6801 Shingle Creek Parkway
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
Re: Registered Land Survey
Palmer Lake Plaza
Earle Brown Farm Development
Dear Mr. Splinter.
Attached hereto please find the mylars of the Registered Land Survey for
Palmer Lake Plaza. Please execute them with your signature, and the Mayor's
signature at the next City Council Meeting so that we may file them with
the County as soon as possible.
Please contact me when they are signed so that I may pick them up. Thank
you for your cooperation
Sincerely,
Robin Jac b on
Earle Bro Farm Development
Enclosures
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT AGENDA ITEMS FOR THE MAY 14, 1979 MEETING
1. Final Plat Approval for Eisenbrand Addiiton located at the southeast
quadrant of 73rd Avenue North and Dupont Avenue North}.
Note The City Council approved the preliminary plat on May 8, 1978,
under Application No. 78022.
2. Resolution Rescinding Approval of the Final Plat for the Brooklyn
Center Industrial Park Registered Land. Survey (Spec 8).
Note The above plat-is for property lying at the southeast quadrant
of Shingle Creek Parkway and Freeway Blvd., identified by B.C.I.P
as Spec. 8. The City Council approved the final plat of this RLS at
the February 26, 1979 meeting. Preliminary plat was reviewed on
July 24, 1978 under Application No. 78042. Due to certain unforeseen
circumstances involving filing of this RLS with the County, the
owner has revised the plat for this area and is requesting that the
former plat approval be rescinded.
3. Final Plat Approval for Brooklyn Center Industrial Park Registered
Land. Survey- (Spec 8)
Note This plat is the replat requested by the property owner (BLIP)
for the property lying at the southeast quadrant of Shingle Creek
Parkway and Freeway Blvd. (Spec 8). it is recommended that this
plat be approved contingent upon submission by the property owner
of certain easements, utility maintenance, street dedication, and
other documents
4 Resolution Authorizina the Rental of Tandem Trucks for Hauling of
Materials in Conjunction with Shingle Creek Trailway Improvement
Project No. 1978 -42.
Note It is recommended that the quotation of Steere & Boone
Excavating Company be accepted for the work comprehended.
5. Resolution Authorizing the Rental of 'a Bulldozer for Grading Work
in Conjunction with Central Park Improvement Project No. 1978 -41.
Note It is recommended that the quotation of Valley Equipment
Company be accepted for rental of one new John Deere JD 750 crawler -
dozer for performing grading work in Central Park.
6. Resolution Establishing Storm Sewer Project No. 1979 -5 and Ordering
Preparation of Plans and Specifications.
Note: In conjunction with proposed Street Improvement Project Nos.
X978 -45 and 46 (Shingle Creek Parkway) established at the December
4, 1978 City Council meeting, it is recommended that storm sewer
extensions and additions be accomplished with that construction.
7. Resolution Establishing Street Improvement Project No. 1979 -6.
Note In conjunction with proposed Street Improvement Project Nos.
1978 -45 and 46 (Shingle Creek Parkwav) established at the December
4, 1978 City Council meeting, and the State's proposed construction
of Bridge No. 27910 over F.I. 94, plans for,,which were approved 'at
the March 30, 1979 City Council meeting, it is recommended that a
street improvement project be established to address the work
comprehended by the State in constructing approaches to the'afore
me ntioned bridc{t.
y
Resolution Correcting Assessments for Parcels Involved in the
Highway Taking for Construction of FI -94 in the Brooklyn Center
Industrial Park.
Note The assessments to be corrected. are those involved with
highway takings in the Industrial Park.
9. Discussion of Impending Construction of FI -94. "
Note The City Engineer will be prepared to discuss routing of traffic
during construction of the bridge on Shinale Creek Parkway over FI 94
and the placing of fill materials for construction of bridges at
T.H. 100 and F.I. 94,
10. Discussion,of T.H. 169 E.I.S.
Notes The City Engineer will be prepared to discuss recent develop-
ments with regard to the final alternatives to be studied in the
T.H. 169 E.I.S.
}
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
REGULAR SESSION
APRIL 23, 1979
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in regular session and was called to order by
Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Dean Nyquist, Councilmembers Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia
Scott. Also present was City Manager Gerald Splinter, City Attorney Richard Schieffer,
Director of Planning and Inspection Ron Warren, Director of Finance Paul Holm.lund,
Acting Director of Public Works James Noska, Fire Marshal Linus Manderfeld, and
Administrative Assistants Mary Harty and Brad Hoffman.
INVOCATION
The invocation was offered by Pastor Kamp of Brooklyn United Methodist Church.
.APPROVAL OF MINUTES APRIL 9, 1979
There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and 'seconded by Councilmember Fignar to
approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of April 9, 1979 as submitted. Voting
in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting
against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
Vl L:+LY ".I: 111 \VL'1
Mayor Nyquist opened the meeting for the purpose of the Open Forum 'session. The Mayor
recognized Mr. Leon Binger of 2800 Mumford Road, who wished to address the Council
concerning a decision made at the last Council meeting regarding the phone system:
Mr. Binger first'stated he was happy to have the Open as a channel to address
- the City Council. He stated he wished to protest the decision to keep the Northwestern
Bell present system rather than awarding the bid to the company Hauenstein & Burmeister.
He explained he had read the information as printed in the Post and had also read copies
of the minutes regarding the discussion on the phone system. According to the figures
he had reviewed, Mr. Binger noted the Northwestern Bell system over a ten year period
would cost approximately $172,000, whereas, the Hauenstein &- Burmeister system would
cost approximately $67,000 over a ten year period.
He explained it was his understanding that the Hauenstein & Burmeister company had been
in business for over 40 years and their equipment was manufactured by Simmons & IT &T.
He explained it was his information that the company had at least 45 twin city users
and several 'major installations in both Minnesota -and Wisconsin. Mr. Binger asked the
Council to consider the affect their decision to retain Northwestern Bell would have
on the taxpayers of Brooklyn Center.
He asked the Council to bear with a per capita comparison for the savings which would
accrue by using the Hauenstein & Burmeister system as compared to the Northwestern
Bell system. As noted earlier, the savings would be approximately $105,000 spread
over the 35,000 residents of Brooklyn Center resulting in a $3.00 per person savings
if the Hauenstein & Burmeister system was selected. He noted in this day of serious
inflation and rampant cost increases, that $3.00 per person or savings of $105,000
was significant. He stated he did believe Northwestern Bell was a good corporate
citizen and also employs people within the City of Brooklyn Center but the Northwestern
Bell company does not need subsidy from the City of Brooklyn Center.
4 -23 -79 -1
He stated it was most people's assumption that bureaucrats tend to attempt to expand
staff, expand office space and build empires but it appears that the staff in Brooklyn
Center is different and is recommending a cost conscious approach. Mr. Binger stated
he felt the staff recommendation to install the Hauenstein & Burmeister system was a
sensible recommendation and Mr. Binger urged the Council to reconsider their decision.
Mr. Binger thanked the Council for the opportunity to address them.
Councilmember.Lhotka stated the vote at the last Council meeting, in his estimation,.
did not necessarily mean that the Council wished to retain the Northwestern Bell
system. Councilmember Lhotka explained he did not vote to accept the bid of Hauenstein
& Burmeister because there was still a question in his mind as to service and a question
as to what system is best for the offices. Councilmember Lhotka stated, in his
estimation, it was not a dead issue.
Mayor Nyquist inquired if there was anyone else present who wished to address the Council
as part of the Open Forum; there being none, the Mayor proceeded with the rest of the
meeting.
PERFORMANCE BONDS RELEASE /REDUCTION
The City Manager noted the Meadow Corporation was requesting a release of a $13,500
bond for the Ponds Townhouses, Phase I, located at 6900 Unity Avenue North. The
City Manager noted the reference was Planning Commission Application No. 76041. The
City Manager noted all work has been completed in Phase I except for some final
shaping of ditch bank along the west property line abutting Brooklyn Park. He
explained this also ties into Phase II for which the City still holds a bond. Both.
Phases I and II..will be completed this spring or summer. He explained the developer
on Brooklyn Park's side is still working on the west side of the ditch., The City
Manager noted staff did recommend total release of the bond.
There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to
release the performance bond for the Ponds Townhouses. Voting in favor: Mayor "
Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none.
The motion passed unanimously.
The City Manager noted Mr. Bill Bjerke was requesting the release of a $1,000 cash
escrow bond for Happyville (Fun Services, Inc.) located at 3701 50th Avenue North.
He noted the reference was Planning Commission Application No. 76068.
The City Manager referred the Council to a memorandum from the Director of Planning
and Inspection which stated last fall the owner replaced two lilac bushes with two
seedling pines, approximately 16" x 18" in height, and sodded the yard area and .
requested release of the guarantee. The Director of Planning and Inspection advised
him that the two seedling pines were not in keeping with Council approved trees,
either decorative or otherwise. The Director of Planning and Inspection advised
him that the intent of decorative trees was usually I" to 1 diameter birch, red
maple, flowering crab, etc. or other trees such as an ash, maple, linden, locust,
etc. which were generally 2 to 3 ". The Director of Planning and Inspection noted
if pine trees were preferred, they should be at least 3' to 5' high. The memorandum
stated the Director of Planning and Inspection had advised Mr. Bjerke that he would
not recommend release of the bond because of a need to be assured that the sod would
grow and that the pine trees would be acceptable.
The City Manager explained Mr. Bjerke again requested release of the guarantee feeling
he had met his obligation for landscaping.
Councilmember Scott stated she felt the applicant should be informed that the trees
should be changed and the Council would keep the bond amount until that action was
taken. Councilmember Scott noted she did not wish to set a precedent of accepting
seedlings-for landscaping.
4 -23 -79 -2-
The City Manager suggested it would be advisable to hold a high enough dollar amount
in the bond rather than making the arrangements for the City to go in and replant.
Councilmember Fignar asked for a clarification of why the item was on the agenda,
noting it was his understanding that the Director of Planning and Inspection did not
recommend the release. The Director of Planning and Inspection replied he did not
recommend the release but Mr. Bjerke had requested the release of the guarantee be
placed on the agenda, bringing the request to the Council.
Councilmember Kuefler asked if the site and building plan stipulated the size of the
trees. The Director of Planning and Inspection replied the site plan was not a
formal site plan because it was not a new development, although Mr. Bjerke was
informed what the intent of the words "decorative trees" was. Staff suggested 1"
to 1V birch, red maple, etc. The Director of Planning and Inspection further
explained there is a precedent which has been set in past approval of new site
and building plans which require the trees as mentioned.
In response to questions from the Council as to Mr. Bjerke's cooperation in other
areas, the Director of Planning and Inspection explained Mr. Bjerke had seeded the
ground rather than sodding the ground and, therefore, that was not up to par until
the staff insisted on changes.
There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Fignar
not to release the-performance bond. The Council suggested staff should attempt to
negotiate with Mr. Bjerke indicating that the Council has set -a past precedent
involving new developments which requires certain size and type of trees and encourage
Mi. Bjerke to cooperate. The bond will be left at the $1,000 amount. Voting in
favor: Mayor Nyqust,- Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott., Voting
agaiast: YlOi "tc. ilte motion pei7v� a ....u..i....2 `,
RESOLUTIONS
The City Manager introduced a resolution accepting bids and approving contract form
(Well Maintenance Contract 1979 -C). He recommended the proposal of Keys Well Drilling
Company in the amount of $19,825 be accepted.
RESOLUTION NO. 79 -
Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID AND APPROVING CONTRACT FORM (WELL MAINTENANCE CONTRACT NO.
1979 - C)
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Celia Scott, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the
following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted.
The City Manager introduced a resolution authorizing the appropriation of the
remainder of the Community Development funds. He noted the resolution appropriates
.the remaining $25,483 of Community Development funds. He further noted the the
appropriations as listed in the resolution have been endorsed by the Brooklyn Center
Community Development Citizens Participation Committee. In response to questions
from the Council on item #3 in the resolution, the housing rehabilitation grant /loan
appropriation of $13,983, Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman responded the
$13,983 would be added to the present $66,000 already in the housing rehabilitation
grant /loan appropriation. Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman stated the City was
aware that there would be some additional money coming.. The money would be available
for use by approximately August.
4 -23 -79 -3
councilmember Kuefler questioned what the terminology "local option" meant. Admini-
strative Assistant Brad Hoffman responded it was a contingency fund. He replied there
presently is $23,000 in the local option.
RESOLUTION NO. 79-94
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ALLOCATING THE REMAINING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS ALLOCATED TO THE CITY
OF BROOKLYN CENTER TO HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR CONSIDERATION AS PART OF THE URBAN HENNEPIN
COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK 'GRANT APPLICATION, IN ACCORD WITH THE HOUSING
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974, AS AMENDED
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Tony Kuefler, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following
voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
The City Manager introduced a resolution authorizing the purchase of printing of the
summer recreation program and City Manager's newsletter. He recommended the quotation
of American Color Press in the ,amount of $1,966 be accepted.
RESOLUTION N0. 79 -95
Member Gene Lhotka introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF PRINTING OF THE SUMMER RECREATION PROGRAM
AND CITY MANAGER'S NEWSLETTER
The m otien for the adODtion of the foregoing resulucivil was utliy sCcoLldcd by member
Bill Fignar, and upon- vote -being taken the -neon, -:the following.V ted,in tavor c'rrereu :
Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the followin
voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
The City Manager introduced a resolution amending the 1979 Budget to provide for funds
for the continuation of use of its present phone system. The City Manager explained
if the Council contemplates staying with the present system, the Budget, must be
adjusted because the 1979 Budget was prepared,with the installation of a new system
at less cost comprehended. He explained the amount of money transferred could be
further adjusted at a later time if other changes were made at a later time.
The City Manager explained he also had prepared three other resolutions for the Council
if the Council decided on another action.
Councilmember Lhotka questioned whether or not the City could reduce the cost further
by eliminating the key phones. The City Manager explained the cost could be further
reduced by eliminating all of the key phones but in investigating the various phone
systems, the staff had analyzed many different types of systems with the various
companies which were interested in bidding for the system, and it was the staff's
best judgment that a reduced number of key phones were absolutely necessary.
The City Manager stated the resolution presented-to the Council was presented in a
hope of getting some direction as to what the Council wished to have done.
In further discussion of the key phones, the City Manager responded the key phones
had been reduced from 37 to 13 under the specs which had been written. Northwestern
Bell suggested the City should operate without key phones entirely. The City Manager
noted based on the staff's analysis of available information and on their best judg-
ment, the staff recommended the use of 13 key phones.
4 -23 - 79 -4-
Councilmember Kuefler referred to earlier discussions asking whether or not-the system
bid by the Norstan Company would be a more cost effective system after the second year.
The City Manager replied he would investigate that question.
There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
request the City Manager to prepare a comparison of all of the bids on a ten year
comparative basis including such items such as cost, maintenance, insurance, buy back`,
etc. showing the end dollar cost of each system. The comparison should be based on
the system as speced by the City.
In discussion of the motion, Councilmember Kuefler stated once the overall comparison "
was made, it was the City's responsibility to choose the system which would be
functional for the City and would be most cost effective for the City.
Councilmember Lhotka stated he would like to seethe companies come in and recommend
the system which they felt would be the best and the most econ omical system for the
City, in other words, start from ground zero to build the best system and the most
economical system for the City.
The City Manager responded that the City Clerk and staff had done this in originally
preparing the specifications. He explained the City Clerk had reviewed with the
bidding companies at great length before the specs were set. The City had started
from ground Zero to spec the system which would be most economical and the 'best
system for the City. The City. Manager questioned whether the Council wished to
bring in each company and go through the specs. Councilmember Lhotka responded he
did not wish the companies to come and go through the specs. Councilmember Lliotka
stated what was important to him was that the City knows exactly what it wants and
whether or not that is the most economical and the best system. He stated in his
earlier vote he was not convinced this wd§ "`true.
t
. , . L • ion of w :.cthcr Northwestern Bell rates
Councilmember Fignar asked fu d cla.r i,. ica
are controlled by the Public Service Commission. The city Manager replied th c? rates
are controlled by the Public Service Commission because it is a public utility unlike
some of the other bidders which are private utilities.
Councilmember Fignar asked for a clarification of whether Northwestern Bell can or
cannot sell equipment. The City Manager replied Northwestern Bell 'cannot sell their
equipment but they have not requested from the PSC:to be able to sell their equipment.
The City Manager explained the rates are proposed by Northwestern Bell and approved by
the Public Service Commission. In so doing, Northwestern Bell must demonstrate that
the rates would allow them to recover an equitable profit. The City Manager stated only
in recent years, has Northwestern Bell been subjected to this type of competition.
Councilmember Kuefler stated until the late 1960's phones were viewed much as computers.
In a very recent Supreme Court decision, Northwestern Bell's right to be the sole
provider of the inside instrumentation for a phone system was questioned and the
Supreme Court ruled that Northwestern Bell could not be the sole provider of inside
instrumentation. Councilmember Kuefler stated he felt that if Northwestern Bell was
going to compete, they would have to change their rate structure. Councilmember
Kuefler stated he anticipated that Northwestern Bell would be changing their rate
structure because it appears they are in the process of doing that presently.
Councilmember Kuefler stated he felt it was the City's responsibility'to look at the
best bargain for the money spent.
Councilmember Scott stated she concurred with comments made by Councilmember Kuefler.
She stated she ; felt Northwestern Bell was not forbidden from selling equipment but
rather it was their choice.
In vote on the motion, the following voted in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers
Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed
.4 -23 -79 -5-
unanimously.
It was the consensus of the Council to defer a decision on the resolution amending
the 1979 Budget to provide for funds for the continuation of the use of the present
phone system until the request as mentioned in the motion was fulfilled.
The City Manager introduced a resolution accepting quotations for the purchase of
125 dozen softballs. He recommended the quotation of Kokesh in the amount of $4,025
be accepted.
RESOLUTION NO. 79 -96
Member Bill Fignar introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE'OF_125 DOZEN SOFTBALLS
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, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following
voted against the same;' none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
The City Manager_ introduced a resolution accepting bids for the purchase of Community
Center carpeting. He recommended the bid of Carpet by Roberts in the amount of
$10,308.90 be accepted.
Councilmember Lhotka questioned where the= carpeting would be placid. The City Manager
explained the carpeting would be placed in the game room, the Social Hall, and the
area outside of the Social Hall but not on the steps. He noted it was the first
_r cat i^ +-7,0 rnmm-"41 - % 7 CerlteY
'- F,1_ encrt nf is
Councilmember Fignar questioned what the normal longevity.of a carpet such as this
was. The City Manager replied the same carpeting had been placed in both the City
Hall and the Community Center but that the Community Center carpet received harder
wear. He explained the carpeting had been in use for approximately eight years
and this exceeded the normal span of longevity for carpeting.
Mayor Nyquist questioned what the cost per yard of carpeting was. The City Manager
responded.the bid was .received in a lump sum but he would get the exact figures
for cost per yard.
RESOLUTION NO. 79 --97
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID FOR CARPETING FOR THE COMMUNITY CENTER
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by member
Bill Fignar, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the following
voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and
adopted.
The City Manager introduced a resolution establishing the policy for the issuance of
industrial revenue bonds or mortgages or tax increment financing. The City Manager
explained that the policy had been passed by motion at the last Council meeting.
He stated it was the practice to formalize policies by resolution. He also referred
the Council to some suggestions made by the Mayor in a memorandum.
Mayor Nyquist stated he had concern over item #2 in the policy because he felt it
encourages mediocrity rather than quality and would be potentially` hurtful to the
taxpayer. His other concern was than if other municipalities issue, the City of
4 -23 -79 -6-
of Brooklyn Center is not shielded from increases in interest due to the fact that
other municipalities are issuing industrial revenue bonds.
Councilmember Kuefler stated he too was concerned over the disadvantage that businesses
in our community might face if other communities continue to issue industrial revenue
bonds flagrantly. He stated he felt the City of Brooklyn Center should protest in some
way and suggested drafting a resolution indicating our concerns to the legislature.
He noted he did not'feel the intent_of the industrial revenue bond financing enabling
legislation was being met. He noted $5,000,000, was being spent for - industrial
revenue bond financing this year as compared to $600,000
Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether industrial revenue bonds weren't originally
intended to aid industry and not commercial or residential properties. The Director
of Finance responded that 'was ' his understanding. He stated part the problem has
arisen because municipalities can no longer issue refunding bonds and industrial
revenue bonds have been initiated in part in order to fill that void. He suggested
it was still a very gray area as to whether or not industrial revenue bonds should
be issued for residential property.
The City Manager noted our bonding attorney has stated he believes the law is being
stretched and that the law does not support many of the proposals that are being funded.
Councilmember Lhotka stated he also was concerned -with point #2 in the policy.
Mayor Nyquist stated he was concerned that the City of .Brooklyn Center does not lose
businesses to other municipalities although he is not suggesting, that the bonds should
be issued with extreme liberality,
Councilmember Lhotka said he did not wish to open the door and issue the bonds in
quaaLity particularly because _ 1 4- m -itin- bu aes would then be rer4ered meaningless.
Councilmember Kuefler said it appears legislation is on the horizon and, therefore,
this may not be the time to move in the direction of issuing_ industrial revenue _bonds
without compunction. He said he felt that the lender and the borrower win but all
else seem to lose. He felt it was important to hear from the citizens as to what they
think concerning the issuance of industrial revenue bonds since it will in the end
affect them. He referred to proposition 13 stating that tenet holds that government
- take a look at what its doing.. He suggested the Council should consider doing two
things, first, formulate a resolution to be forwarded to the legislature stating
concerns with the issuance of industrial revenue bonds and second, set up an advisory
commission to study the issuance of industrial revenue bonds, similar to the Community
Development Advisory Committee.
Councilmember Scott stated she wished the policy to be a limiting policy. She stated
two bills had been passed out of committee concerning industrial revenue bond financing
and she said it would be helpful to wait to see what happens to those bills because
they attempt to "deliberalize" issuance. of the bonds.
The City Manager stated the policy as written in the resolution was a- narrow policy.
Mayor Nyquist'stated he felt the policy seems to cater to the low end of quality. The
City Manager stated in writing item #2 he was relating it to development encouraged
in the Comprehensive Guide Plan., not intending the wording to be more expansive. There
was a question as to whether it would be interpreted this way.
Councilmember Fignar stated much of the legislation as he understands it, currently
being proposed,'would prohibit industrial revenue bonds financing in the area of
housing. The City Manager stated some of the legislation also restricts commercial
financing although the ones through committee deal strictly . with housing.
4 -23 -79 -7-
Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether we have lost any businesses as of yet because
of a reluctance to use industrial revenue bond financing. Mayor Nyquist responded
Anderson Automatics and possibly Dale Tile.
Responding to questions from the Council, the City Manager noted certain other munici-
palities have few limitations other than a $300,000 minimum for total cost of the proje
There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
draw up a resolution expressing the concerns of the Brooklyn Center City Council
relative to the abuse of issuance of industrial revenue bonds.
In discussion of the motion, Councilmember Kuefler referred to an article in the Wall
Street Journal which referenced the state of Louisiana and a quote which stated that
municipalities must learn to police themselves in order to maintain fiscal economy.
Councilmember Fignar stated it seems the biggest abuse is in the housing market'.
Mayor Nyquist stated there is no support from the Council for extending it to housing.
Councilmember Fignar stated he wished to see some of the Mayor's language incorporated
into the policy especially concerning redevelopment.
Councilmember Scott stated she was still confused as to how it will be determined who
gets industrial revenue bond financing and who does not get it. The Mayor responded
the availability of land in Brooklyn Center would be a factor.
Councilmember Kuefler stated he would like to see the issue studied further. He
suggested appointing two citizens per Council member to a committee to further study
the issue.
C , :.cil.;.c...ber Fibrar state that with ap roximatPly 160 acres of land left to ;ire
developed on the farm, all developers might be potential candidates.
Councilmember Lhotka suggested a rewriting or rephrasing of point #2 in the policy
is needed. Councilmember Lhotka stated he felt it was necessary that certain criteria
for demonstrating a fit with #2 was necessary in order that the City could evaluate
which proposal should be funded with industrial revenue bond financing and which
should not be.
The City Manager suggested it might be helpful if he would attempt to rewrite a
draft based on the comments and the discussion made at this Council meeting and based
on some of the suggestions made in the Mayor's memorandum. Councilmember Kuefler
stated he wished to withdraw the motion on the floor and as seconder, Councilmember
Scott stated she wished to withdraw the second.
There was a motion by Councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to
direct the City Manager to prepare another draft of a City policy on the issuance
of industrial revenue bond financing attempting to incorporate the concerns as
mentioned in the discussion. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler,
Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
There was a consensus to defer any action on the resolution establishing the policy
for the issuance of industrial revenue bonds or mortgages or tax increment financing
until after the City Manager had prepared another draft.
ORDINANCES
The City Manager introduced an ordinance vacating a portion of Irving Avenue North,
north of 69th Avenue North. He stated the area contemplated to be vacated is the
half street of Irving Avenue North adjacent to the Irving Estates Addition and the
proposed Mitchlitsch'Addition which is presently Lot 1, Block 1, Horbal Addition.
It is intended that easements for utility and drainage purposes as well as for the
4 -23 -79 -8-
future sidewalk construction will be retained and the portion of the street vacated.
It should also be pointed out that a portion of street right -of -way remains to be
vacated adjacent to the Brookdale Towers apartments. The developer and the staff
have been unable to obtain the consent of the.owners of Brookdale Towers apartments
for vacation of this remaining portion of Irving Avenue North. The City Manager .
explained the ordinance is recommended for a first reading.
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Fignar to
offer for first reading an ordinance vacating a portion of Irving Avenue North, north
of 69th Avenue North. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar,
Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
The City Manager introduced an ordinance amending Chapter 3 of the City Ordinances
regarding addressing of accessory buildings. The City Manager referred the Council
to a memorandum prepared by the Director of Planning and Inspection which explained
there could be a possible misinterpretation of the ordinance as presently written.
The amended ordinance alleviates the problem of a possible misinterpretation due to
wording. The City Manager explained the ordinance is presented for a first reading.
There was a motion by councilmember Lhotka and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler
to offer for first reading an ordinance amending Chapter 3 of the City Ordinances
regarding addressing of accessory buildings. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist,
Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none.
The motion passed unanimously.
DISCUSSION
The City Manager introduced the first discussion item which related to the status of
53rd Avenue North. The City Manager explained the Acting Director of Public Works
was prepared "to discuss recent events affecting the proposed reconstruction of 53rd
Avenue North. The Acting Director of Public Works first °provided the-Council-with
the background of t status of the 53rd Avenue North projcct b, war of verbal. time
-line and explanation of events to date. The Acting Director of Pubii� Woks stag:"
it appears there is a concern on the part of Minneapolis Alderman Alice Rainville and
Minneapolis staff as to Brooklyn Center's propoced design for the roadway along 53rd
Avenue. The concern centers mainly on the effect that a varying roadway and areas
posted for no parking might have on Minneapolis. The Acting Director of Public Works
stated that the delays presented to the City of Brooklyn Center by the City of
Minneapolis would probably result in construction not being able to proceed this
year. He informed the Council he had been in contact with the State and State people
had informed him that roadway construction costs were increasing at the rate of 201
per year and on a $700,000 project, which 53rd Avenue would be in aggregate, this
would amount to an increase of $140,000 in construction costs.
The Acting Director of Public Works - stated he had spoken with a Mr. Mary Hoshaw
of Minneapolis who had indicated that Minneapolis was concerned about the no parking
and that they would not be willing to approve plans for construction unless the City
of Brooklyn Center was willing to make concessions with respect to no parking areas.
Mr. Hoshaw stated he felt that construction could begin next year and a fall letting
could be arranged such that inflation costs would be minimized. In response to
Mr. Hoshaw's comments, the Acting Director of Public Works stated that unless a
decision were reached by Alderman Rainville and the Minneapolis staff on the matter,
the City of Brooklyn Center could not proceed with plans and, therefore, a fall
letting would not be possible without plans completed and approved by the State.
Mr. Hoshaw stated to the Acting Director of Public Works that the City of Minneapolis
would be discussing the matter over the next two weeks and would get back to the
City of Brooklyn Center. The Acting Director of Public Works stated to Mr. Hoshaw
that at that point there would be no use in proceeding with the construction during
this year and the City of Brooklyn Center would be forced into construction being
conducted in the spring.
4- Z3 -79 -9-
The Acting Director of Public Works had informed the City Manager of these discussions.
The City Manager noted Councilmember Lhotka had suggested he would be willing to speak
with Alderman Rainville in an attempt to understand her position and concerns.
The Acting Director of Public Works had contacted Councilmember Lhotka. Councilmember
Lhotka indicated at this time that he had been unable to schedule a meeting with
Alderman Rainville but would attempt to do so.
The Acting Director of Public Works stated it was his recommendation that the City
attempt to get a fall letting of the bid in order that the inflation increases could
be minimized. The City Manager stated a letter to the property owners in the area of
53rd informing them of the unforeseeable circumstances and explaining the delay of
the upgrading of 53rd Avenue would be prepared and sent. The letter would explain
that the work scheduled for 53rd Avenue for this year is anticipated to commence in
the spring or summer of 1980, with completion of the work in 1980.
In response to questions from the Council, the Acting Director of Public Works stated
it does not appear to be feasible to proceed with the 53rd Avenue project this year.
If the City did proceed, there would be only partial completion of the work and that
would lead to additional problems. The Acting Director of Public Works again stated
it was his feeling an attempt should be made to resolve the problems with Minneapolis
so as to enable the City to proceed with a fall letting.. He also suggested that
other MSA projects could be substituted for work at this time.
Mayor Nyquist asked for a clarification of the concerns of the City of Minneapolis.
The Acting Director of Public Works stated Minneapolis concerns seem to be in the
area of parking and a concern that Brooklyn Center residents would be parking on the
Minneapolis side.
The City Manager stated it was his reruumtendation ta.. ..• -, sh ^uld attempt to
proceed`for.a fall He noted it takes 30 days.mnimum for State approval
.and so'it would be.impossible to attempt a- spring letting.
Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether or not a fall letting would infer a spring
building. The Acting Director of Public Works stated it would.
Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether a meeting of the Mayor.'s or Manager's of
Minneapolis and Brooklyn Center would be appropriate. The City Manager stated that
might be necessary in the future but suggested proceeding with a letter to the residents
and a recommendation that additional funds for the project, due to delay, come from
MSA.
Councilmember Kuefler stated he was disappointed with the cooperation of the City of
Minneapolis.
The Acting Director of Public Works stated he would continue negotiations with the
City of Minneapolis in hopes of resolving the design even though it was an unfortunate
occurrence that this eleventh hour action and concern was raised bythe City of
Minneapolis.
DISCUSSION OF THE STATUS OF TWIN LAKES
The City Manager explained that the Council had received a copy of the preliminary
report, "A WATER SURFACE USE STUDY OF TWIN LAKES, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA, MAY 12 -
SEPTEMBER 24, 1978 ", as prepared by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources,
Division of Fish and Wildlife Section of Fisheries. He stated the Council had also
received a copy of a resolution passed by the Conservation Commission encouraging the
County to move ahead with a ban on motorized vehicles on Twin Lake,
Various Council members commented that the report was not a helpful resource.
4 -23 -79 -10-
RECESS
The Council recessed at 9:07 p.m. and returned at 9:40 p.m.
The Mayor.commented the next discussion item was a presentation by Mr. Roger Scherer
as District 12 representative of the Metropolitan Council but it had been scheduled
for 10 :00 p.m. and various other commissions and advisory group members had been
invited to attend at 10:00 p.m. Before the arrival of Mr. Scherer, the Acting
Director of Public Works briefly showed the Council diagrams of two alternate lighting
plans for the interstate. He briefly explained the two types of lighting proposed
- and stated most of the cost of the lighting would -.be paid for by the State. The
two types of lighting are a tower type lighting and a conventional type lighting.
The tower type lighting is more expensive initially but less expensive in energy
costs and maintenance costs, whereas, the conventional lighting is less expensive
initially and more expensive for energy costs and maintenance costs. A brief
discussion ensued as to possible problems with light diffusion from the lights.
Concern was expressed by the Council about the light diffusion problem because of the
proximity of certain parts of the interstate to residences.
By consensus, the City Council indicated a preference for the conventional type of
lighting. The Acting Director of Public Works indicated he would prepare a letter
to MN /DOT noting that preference.
In returning to a discussion on the status of Twin Lakes, the Mayor called the Council's
attention to the resolution passed by the Conservation Commission. The Council discussed
- passing a similar resolution.
RESOLUTION NO. 79 -
Member Celia Scott introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RFSQLUTTQN REQUESTING THE HENNEPiN CUUN Y BO ARD OF C91 �S. T.3 A ANT
AR
ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING WATER SURFACE USE REGULATIONS ON TWIN LAKE
The motion for the adoption of the foreging resolution was duly seconded by member
Bill Fignar, and vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
Dean Nyquist, Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar,'Gene Lhotka, and Celia Scott; and the
following voted against the same: none, whereupon said resolution was declared
duly passed and adopted:
Councilmember Scott further stated it is her belief the banning of motorized vehicles
on Twin Lake has taken too long a period of time. She noted the preliminary report is
noninformative and furthermore the data is erroneous and the conclusions poor.
LICENSES
There was a motion by Councilmember Kuefler and seconded by Councilmember Scott to
approve the following list of licenses:
Licenses to be approved by the City Council on April 23, 1979
FOOD `ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE
Brook Park Baptist Church 4801 63rd Ave. No.
Lutheran Church of the Triune God 5827 Humboldt Ave. No.,
GAMBLING LICENSE
Brooklyn Center American Legion
Post #630 7107 Grimes Ave. No.
4 -23 -79 -11
ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE
Mane Lachinski 7541 Edgewood Ave. No.
Knights of Columbus Auxiliary St. Alphonsus Flea Mkt.
MECHANICAL SYSTEM'S LICENSE
Rouse Mechanical 11348 K -Tel Drive
MOTOR VEHICLE DEALERSHIP LICENSE - CLASS A
Brookdale'Ford, Inc. 2500 County Road 10
NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE LICENSE
Wilson Enterprises 9972 Orleans Lane
The Ponds 73rd & Unity Ave. No.
RENTAL DWELLING LICENSE
Initial:
Richard E Moehrie 5817 Shores Drive
Thomas & Bill Howe 3135 49th Ave. No.
Renewal:
Charlotte LoBitz & Frieda Paro 5245,47 Drew Ave. No.
Nick H. Jagodzinski 3501 47th Ave. No.
Quality Investment Co. 3513 47th Ave. No.
vennis rsreKKe 601 ►7iii nve. : o.
Donald Wilson & Michael Boyle 3713 47th Ave. No.
Lucille H. Haftggi 3725 47th Ave. No.
SIGN HANGER'S LICENSE
Signcrafters Outdoor Display, Inc. 7775 Main St. N.E.
SWIMMING POOL LICENSE
Bergstrom Realty 3401 85th Ave. No.
Hi Crest Apts. 1300 67th Ave. No.
Spa Petite 5615 Xerxes Ave. No.
Village Properties P. 0. Box 991
Evergreen Park Manor 7200 Camden Ave. No.
Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and Scott.
Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
GAMBLING LICENSE BOND WAIVER
The City Manager noted State law requires the gambling manager to give a fidelity bond
of $10,000 in favor of the organization to insure that he /she will faithfully conduct
the duties of the office. The City Council can waive the requirement for the bond by
unanimous vote at the time the license is granted. The bond waiver can only be eliminated
if the Council votes unanimously to eliminate the $10,000 bond requirement. If the
Council so votes, the bond 'waiver is stipulated on the license itself. Included in
the license list for a license for gambling is the Brooklyn Center American Legion
Post #630. The Brooklyn Center American Legion Post has requested a bond waiver. A
motion to waive the bond and the unanimous vote of the Council is needed to accomplish
the waiver.
4 -23 -79 -12-
There was a motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Scott to waive
the bond requirement for the gambling license for Brooklyn Center American Legion Post
#630. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar, Lhotka, and
Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
The Mayor next introduced Mr. Roger Scherer, the District 12 representative to the
Metropolitan Council. Mr. Scherer explained when he had applied for the position with
the Metropolitan Council, he met with the Governor. At that time the Governor commented
there were 24 communities within District 12 and it was his expectation that whoever
was appointed as District 12 representative, that person would go out to those
communities and establish a rapport. Mr. Scherer stated he would be willing to do
that and was appointed as District 12 representative to the Metropolitan Council.
Mr. Scherer explained he felt there was a need for communication between the,Metro-
politan Council and the communities which are included in the'metropolitan area. He
stated he felt a cooperative relationship was necessary. Mr. Scherer further stated
he saw his job as representing local government.
By way of background, Mr. Scherer noted the Metropolitan Council had been formed in
1967 and given specific authority whereby the Metropolitan; Council would take certain
things out of the legislative process and deal with them as a Council.
Mr. Scherer explained'he' wished the Council and other commission members or advisory
body members to share with him any concerns or questions they might have.
The City Manager stated the Council had expressed concern over the upgrading of T.H.
169. The City Manager stated consultants were currently involved in completing the
environmental impact statement. The consulting firm BRW will present the plans as
developed thus far at an April 30 Special Council Study Meeting. The City Manager
noteu the stuff '.-,as becn -!cased rr the ?•Turk of the con. u1 Cant thus far.
Mr. Scherer commented he too was concerned with the project and also concerned that
the project would be delayed until it falls far enough in the priority listing for
State funds that it will not occur at all.
Mr. Scherer further stated he has attended a Brooklyn Park Council meeting and the
Brooklyn Park Council has indicated they wish the crosstown to be .put in even if it
is only a two lane roadway. Brooklyn Park is concerned that an over design of the
crosstown may prevent its inception entirely. Mr. Scherer also noted the Osseo
bypass is going ahead as a two lane bypass.
Mr. Scherer urged the Council to keep abreast of the progress of plans for T.H. 169
and not allow the project to be delayed to the point of not occurring at all. Mr.
Scherer further noted if the project goes beyond 1986 the money will no longer be
available.
Councilmember Kuefler asked whether or not the Met Council had the priority setting
authority for projects within the metro area. Mr. Scherer answered that was true
and the northern area has the first priority ranking. Mr. Scherer stated he would
do his best to retain that first priority ranking.
Mr. Scherer stated the Metropolitan Council members have often commended Brooklyn
Center for its high level of cooperation particularly in the area of the large
family Section 8 housing. Mr. Scherer explained the Metropolitan Council was
currently proposing a quota type of Section 8 plan. Mr. Scherer explained he was
not necessarily in favor of a quota type of plan but saw it as possibly a necessity
for dealing with housing needs all over the metropolitan area. Mr. Scherer noted
in speaking with many communities, it is his conclusion, that many communities favor
the quota type situation because it does spread housing all over the metropolitan!`
4 -23 -79 -13-
area
Councilmember Fignar explained he had heard Nancy Reeves of the Metropolitan Council
express opinions on this subject. Councilmember Fignar stated he thought that a quota
type system might be a workable system because it spreads the effort amongst many
communities. Councilmember Kuefler explained it appears there are two proposals
pending at this time which,would give Brooklyn Center possibly more Section 8 housing.
One of the proposals is for an area within the Osseo School District and one of the
proposals is for an area within the Brooklyn Center School District. Councilmember
Fignar suggested the Metropolitan Council might wish to approve the housing within
Brooklyn Center School District because of the declining school population within the
Brooklyn Center School District. Councilmember Fignar stated he was concerned that
the Brooklyn Center School District population might decline to such a point that the
school district would have to be disbanded. The Section 8 housing because it would
attract families would be helpful to the Brooklyn Center School District. Council-
member Fignar asked Mr. Scherer to suggest to the Metropolitan Council that consideration
for placing the housing within the Brooklyn Center School District should be given.
Councilmember Fignar made these suggestions because he stated he had doubts that both
projects would be built.
Mr. Scherer stated he would offer those comments to the Metropolitan Council but also
noted that certain other criteria such as availability of certain amenities were taken
into consideration also.
Councilmember Fignar stated it was important that housing be responsive to different
ages ad different income levels and it may take a quota tyPe„of system in order to
facilitate the accomplishment of that sort of flexible housing. He stated he felt
the City of Brooklyn Center has exercised leadership but it may take'the quota push
;^ order t encoLlrage others to also P7rarrise ]PqdPrshin in the housing area.
The City Manager stated one of his concerns was that the Metropolitan Council involves
community councils, commissions and staffs in the development of such plans in order
that the basic premise of such a plan could be tested before it was developed to such
a point that it would be difficult to go back to point zero. The City Manager stressed
the importance of communication and involvement prior to the development of plans
beyond a point of no return. Mr. Scherer concurred with the City Manager's comments.
The City Manager noted this concern was expressed particularly in relationship to the
Comprehensive Plan process. He stressed the importance of getting some input from
city staffs before the review of the plans takes place. Mr. Scherer concurred that
that review process was going to be difficult. He noted the example of Champlin
where there are so many unknowns that until certain variables are known, Champlin is
unable to proceed with the Comprehensive Plan. 'Mr. Scherer also stated it was his
concern that the Metropolitan Council avoid imposing possible burdens upon communities.
Councilmember Kuefler stated he felt the Metropolitan Council's willingness to be a
provider of HRA services as opposed to leaving that function entirely to the munici-
palities has been extremely helpful to the City of Brooklyn Center. Councilmember
Kuefler stated he was in favor of allowing the Metropolitan Council to continue HRA
- services and encouraged Mr. Scherer to share that information with the Metropolitan
Council. Mr. Scherer stated he would bring -that information to the Metropolitan
Council but also stated Chairman Weaver was concerned about assuming the position
of the landlord.
Mr. Scherer stated he was appreciative of the opportunity offered to him to appear
before the Council and explain his function as the District 12 representative to
the Metropolitan Council and hear the concerns of the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center.
4 -23 -79 -14-
Mayor Nyquist recognized Dolores Hastings from the audience who to comment.
Mrs. Hastings stated she was concerned with public bus transportation. She stated
she felt it would be helpful if more people would take the bus because it would
help in solving the energy situation. She expressed concern over buses in the
northern area being cancelled or scheduled buses not actually running. Mr. Scherer
suggested the Transit Commission representative for this area was Ruth Franklin and
she might be able to answer some of .those questions.
The Mayor noted that he had neglected to bring up one other item under the industrial'
revenue bond financing discussion. The City of Spring Lake Park was in the process
of issuing industrial revenue bonds for an addition to - certain Group Health buildings,
one of which is located in Brooklyn Center. Spring Lake Park stated, as a professional
courtesy, they would not issue the bonds if the City of Brooklyn Center disapproved.
Councilmember Kuefler stated the City of Brooklyn Center has no jurisdiction over
actions taken by the City of Spring Lake Park, although Councilmember Kuefler felt
it was important to remain consistent in philosophy. Councilmember Scott stated
she did not necessarily have a problem with the addition being financed along with
other additions through industrial revenue bonds issued by Spring Lake Park and did
appreciate the courtesy they extended to the City of Brooklyn Center,
Councilmember Lhotka stated he was concerned because it did appear to be a back
door approach.
Councilmember Kuefler stated he felt the City should share their draft policy with
the City of Spring Lake Park:
Councilmember Lhotka questioned how this proposal would fit into our presently discussed
guidelines for the issuance of industrial revenue bonds. Councilmember Lhotka'
questioned whether or not the City of Brooklyn CeaLer would issue 'industrial: revenue
bonds to Group Health if requested.
Councilmember Kuefler stated this type of situation demonstrates how far awry
industrial revenue bond issuance actually is.
Mayor Nyquist explained he would share this discussion with the City of Spring Lake Park.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Councilmember Fignar and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to adjourn the
City Council meeting. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler,, Fignar,
Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously. The Brooklyn
Center City Council adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
Clerk Mayor
4 -23 -79 -15
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF
HENNEPIN AND THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
SPECIAL SESSION
APRIL 30, 1979
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Brooklyn Center City Council met in a special study session and 'was ' called to
order by Mayor Dean Nyquist at 7:34 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Dean Nyquist, Counciimembers Tony Kuefler, Bill Fignar, Gene Lhotka, and Celia
Scott. Also present was City Manager Gerald Splinter, Director of Planning and
Inspection Ron Warren, Acting Director of Public Works James Noska, Director of
Finance Paul Holmlund, Building Inspector Andy Alberti, Fire Marshal Linus Manderfeld,
and Administrative Assistants Mary Harty and Brad Hoffman.
DISCUSSION
The City Manager er noted the Council had requested that a special study meeting be held
and, the Mayor and the'City Manager scheduled tha t special
meetin g for April 30 1979.
The City Manager explained the meeting was for the purposes of providing an update
provide a time
for questions and
e Council in several pertinent areas as well as q
to th c p P
discussion. The City Manager explained it was the consensus of the Council that the
meeting was not for the but for the of review, . purpose of taking formal action purpose
and discussion.
Before proceeding with the agenda items scheduled for diseusslon, t::c Ci
p g g ty Manager
asked the Council to review a housekeeping matter. The City Manager provided the
Council with a list of office equipment and asked that the office equipment listed
be declared surplus equipment. He also provided the Council with a list of items
which will be auctioned at the City auction. `There was a motion by Councilmember
Scott and seconded by Councilmember Kuefler to declare the listed office equipment
as surplus equipment. Voting in favor: Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler, Fignar,
Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
PLANNING PROCESS ON FUTURE HIGHWAY 169
The City Manager introduced Mr. Dick Wolsfeld, of the consulting firm BRW. Mr. Wolsfeld
explained the current study which has been undertaken by BRW is concerned with two
major items; first, the identification of various alternatives for major transportation
facilities in the T.H. 610 and T.H. 169 corridors and second, the documentation of
the environmental impacts of the alternative including the social, economic and
physical environments, in an environmental impact statement. Mr. Wolsfeld explained
in the last ten to fifteen years, studies have been conducted which have analyzed the
transportation problems in the area and documented the need for implementing major
transportation improvements He noted the current study effort will -draw from the
results of these past efforts. Mr. Wolsfeld explained the methodology used to
accomplish the ultimate identification and impact analysis of the several transportation
alternatives in the T.H. 610 and T.H. 169 corridors begins with a generalized "first
level" assessment of all potential facility location and design alternatives, and the
elimination of alternatives which are found to be unacceptable. He stated the
objectives of the first level analysis and evaluation are to: identify alternative
transportation facilities in the T.H. 610 corridor and the T.H. 169 corridor which
appear to offer potential transportation benefits; conduct a preliminary analysis and
evaluation of these alternatives to determine if there are significant negative
impacts which would preclude an alternative from further consideration; select for
4 -30 -79 -1-
,detailed evaluation and impact analysis those alternatives which survive this first
level evaluation. Mr. Wolsfeld next presented the pros and cons for the various
options to be studied for the T.H. 169. Mr. Wolsfeld explained various evaluation
criteria which were used in studying the alternatives. The evaluation criteria
include the level of service criterion, the safety criterion, and the air quality
criterion.
Following the'presentation, the Acting Director of Public Works explained a resolution
is currently being prepared which will document the BRW study and include alternatives
for location and recommendations for location. The Acting Director of Public Works
stated the City of Brooklyn Park has taken a lead in formulating the resolution and
the resolution will be considered by the Cities of Champlin, Brooklyn Park, and
Brooklyn Center for approval.
REVIEW OF PROPOSAL FOR NORTHWEST SUBURBAN CONVENTION CENTER
The Mayor introduced Mr. Lee Van and Mr. Chuck Rogers who were in attendance at the
Council meeting to explain a possible proposal for a northwest suburban convention
center. Mr. Rogers, President of the Brooklyn Park Chamber of Commerce, explained
members of Chambers within the northwest suburban area have been discussing the
feasibility of some sort of northwest suburban convention center. At this point
the center is in the discussion_ stages and the Chamber is interested in knowing
whether such a convention center is feasible. The Chambers of Commerce in the
northwest suburban area have decided it would be beneficial to raise money to fund
a feasibility study for a convention center in order to determine whether or not it
is a sound idea. The Chambers have decided they are willing to raise $20,000 in seed'
money to pay for such a feasibility study. Mr. Rogers reviewed some "of the predicted
dollar amounts in hard pledge money and soft pledge money which had already been
received. Mr.- Rogers explained the Chambers would raise the money and they would
li .c to turn the money over to a selected committee who would take care ui lta%li ig.
a feasibility:stily done. The Chambers have been_in touch with the Mayors from
Brooklyn Center, Brooklyn Park, Osseo and Maple Grove and the Mayors have expressed 0
interest. The Chambers would like to see a committee appointed by the Mayors of the
four communities in order to serve as a steering committee. Mr. Rogers commented
it may;bappen that the feasibility study determines that this sort of a convention
center is not feasible for the northwest suburban area and that would be an acceptable
conclusion but no action can really be taken until a study is conducted.
Mr. Van noted he was speaking as an interested citizen of Maple Grove but had also
been the Chairman of the committee for the Duluth Civic Arena. He explained the
process that the City of Duluth had gone through including a feasibility study
before the Duluth Convention Center was built. He explained this was definitely
in its very beginning stages and presently the Chambers and various other interested
citizens were looking for support from Councils and Mayors within the four communities.
The Council concurred that they would like to investigate the feasibility of a north-
west suburban convention center. Mr. Van stated this type of convention center, if
feasible for the area, would bring business to the communities and compared to the
situation in the south suburban area where the airport, the zoo, the sports center
and stadium were located.
The Mayor asked -the Council to make suggestions to him for appointment to a committee
for the northwest suburban convention center.
BROOKDALE TEN
The City Manager referred the *Council to a memorandum from the Building. Inspector. Th
memorandum explained on March 22, 1979 the Inspection and Fire Departments conducted
an inspection to review the progress performed on a.- priority list given to the City
Council October 30, 1978 by Mr. Rozman. A copy of the priority list was attached for
the Council's reference. The memorandum.states that performance on the priority list
4 -30 -79 -2- _-
is as follows: on the list of items for.fall 1978 completion, only item #2 has been
completed; on the list of items for winter 1979 completion, only -item #12 has been.`
completed. It was noted on the memorandum that on April 20, 1979, an inspection was
conducted at the request of the City Attorney and a list of violations as noted-in the
inspection was attached for the Council's review. ,
The City Manager explained currently the City is tagging on all violations. The City
Manager stated the Council should consider what they wished to do with regard to the
renewal of the rental license for Mr. Bennie Rozman.
Councilmember Scott stated she was very concerned with unused refrigerators which
have been left in the laundry room at Brookdale Ten with the doors still on.' She
stated she was concerned that a child might get inside and suffocate. The Building
Inspector stated Mr. Rozman had been tagged on March 24 concerning those refrigerators
but Mr. Rozman had not removed the doors or removed those refrigerators as of yet.
The Building Inspector stated he had spoken with the Police Department on this matter
and he was unsure whether or not the City could take additional action because additional
- tagging would be a show of harassment. Councilmember Scott said she was concerned for
the safety of children and was also concerned that the City might be sued if the City
does not take some preventative action.
Councilmember Fignar questioned the Building Inspector as to whether or not he had
had contact with Mr. Rozman personally. The Building Inspector stated he has spoken
with Mr. Rozman and Mr. Rozman -has informed him that he wished that the City would deal
with his personnel.
The Director of Planning and Inspection stated the City was presently requesting a
formal complaint on all violations at Brookdale Ten. Mr. Clelland from the City
Attorney's office -has stated he does not see a problem with the Council revoking
Mr. Rozman's rental license based on the fact that Mr. Rozman not met his perfor-
mance aereement.'
In discussion of the implication of revoking the rental license, the Building. Inspector
stated if the license was revoked no vacant apartments could be rented from the time
of the revocation of the license. Vacated apartments would be red tagged and could not
be rented. The Building Inspector stated he would have access to the rental list
and he would have to go through the buildings on a daily basis to make sure that red
tags had not been removed and that tagged apartments had not been rented.
Councilmember Fignar stated he felt the Council has been as sympathetic as they can be
and at this point it is necessary to take stronger action.
The'Fire Marshal stated he was concerned with the City's potential liability if the
City continued to cite Mr. Rozman for the same violations again and again and they
are never taken care of. The Fire Marshal stated he was concerned if one of the
safety violations turned into a bigger problem such as causing some sort of accident
or fire what the City's liability would be in this situation. He stated it appears
Mr. Rozman defies every order and does not take corrective measures until he is
absolutely forced into taking corrective measures.
It was the consensus of the Council that they wished to consider the revocation of
the rental license at the May 21 City Council meeting. Mr. Rozman will be informed
of that intention.
UPDATE ON HOUSING LEGISLATION
Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman explained the City Council had authorized the
staff to seek housing legislation. The City had engaged Mr. James Holmes to draft
housing legislation which would enable the City to spend HRA funds in a' particular
manner. Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman stated the bill had been carried
4- 30-79 -3-
r
Luther Humphrey and in the House b Representatives
the Senate b Senators L and H
through y P Y Y P
Ellingson and Carlson. As the bill passed through the legislative process it was
discovered that over 20 other municipalities were interested in the same type of
legislation so it was decided to change the bill from a local bill to a state wide
bill. Administrative Assistant Brad Hoffman stated the Senate bill differs slightly
from the House bill. The Senate bill is basically the same bill but does reflect
Minneapolis Special Legislation. He stated the Senate bill was workable but was
fairly cumbersome, whereas, the House version was a better bill.
UPDATE ON LOGIS .
The Director of Finance resented information on the history of LOGIS, its `origin and
P Y
an update on the current f Information Service. The
p c status o LOGIS or Local Government rma
Director of Finance explained how LOGIS was initiated and who the present members were.
as well as the various types of membership within LOGIS. He explained presently there
are five modules possible through LOGIS, a financial control module, a payroll/personnel
module, a utility billing module, a fixed asset management module, and an equipment
control module. The Director of Finance stated Brooklyn Center presently utilizes
all of the modules except the equipment control module and anticipates utilizing the
equipment control module within the very near future. The Director of Finance stated
a property data system module is presently under development. He stated it is antici-
pated future development in the LOGIS system may include a licensing and permit module,
a geographic mapping and analysis module, and a computer modeling, capabilities module.
The Director of Finance.explained the cost of LOGIS and how the charges to the.various
members were made. He explained LOGIS operates on an annual budget and the charges
are divided into administrative charges and capital costs which are shared equally
by all operating members and also an operating_charge which is based on the actual
use by members. ae expla nea zhe LOUIS annuai buaget for 1979 is $500,925. Of that
amount Brooklyn Center contributes $43,719.
The Director of Finance stated: it was his belief that the City gains a substantial
return on that investment even though the investment in dollar amount may seem large.
Without the LOGIS system, the City would more than likely need data processing
people within our own staff, but because of LOGIS, the data processing staff is with
LOGIS rather than with each individual city.
Referring again to the actual computer, the Director of Finance stated that LOGIS is
in the process of purchasing its own computer and converting to our own system. That
computer
operative
will be located n is expected to be erati
c d a 6 20 Shin r Parkway and t 8 Shingle Creek ay p p
prior to 1980.
DESIGNATION OF PROJECTS WHICH THE COUNCIL WISHES TO HAVE COSTED OUT FOR 1980 BUDGET
PURPOSES
The City Manager stated the Director of Finance and he would be beginning the budget
roc i
ess n the near future. The Council would not review the budget documents until
c 1
F g
September but the City Manager suggested if the Council wished any particular projects
costed it would be helpful to have those projects designated as soon as possible to
give additional lead time.
Councilmember Kuefler questioned whether or not a 5 year capital improvement schedule
could be designated. The City Manager responded a 5 year capital improvement schedule
is a requirement as art of the Land Planning Act and the City is in the process of
q P Y P
g
formulatin g year a 5 capital improvement schedule.
P P
The City Manager requested the.Council to let him know if there were any projects which
they wished to have costed out for 1980 budget purposes.
4 -30 -79 -4-
ADJOURNMENT
There was a motion by Councilmember Scott and seconded by Councilmember Lhotka to adjourn
the Special City Council meeting. Voting in favor Mayor Nyquist, Councilmembers Kuefler,
Fignar,. Lhotka, and Scott. Voting against: none. The motion passed unanimously.
The Brooklyn Center City Council adjourned at :10:35 p.m.
Clerk Mayor,
4 -30 -79 -5-
� tt ]*alp
1 t
i
1 l
from
TONY KUEFL6R
6ad ✓r✓
6A��
/ � 'A . r
7: -, 001
-Ooe��
Aoao�'
AUU
P
A P Uli ±Ti i'iiT iU T11� �'� ?Ov v � }. tTt�'c PAR �nt•,���;�i j
.
Name �� � Q Lt � L� �' 4 H T Age 33
I*Address Telephone ..�c��, : j _�
Occupation qS- (j ) '%G Years lived. in Brocklyn Center
1 am interested in serving on the: Park & Recreation Commission
Park Service Area Committee
Either
I.have read Council Resolution 7 /3 -25, which defines the purpose, authority and
responsibility of the Brooklyn Center Park and Recreation Commission and +he
Park Service Area Cotranictees. Yes Nu Corrunerits - -
I understand the importance of regular Commission /Comu vnetinn attendance and
participation,-and feel i have the time available to be an active participant
Yes Rio Comments
Additional comments on my interest, experience, background, ideas, etc. 4 4
A 6-a A nUm r4 4P. I �J'l��r�i6by (- 'crtnniLC�uD
0
,p
1 .�C�. -
_..i�SEA.�_ 'n - PIN _sn m0c. 0-S
�_ s c �Q rw-
--- f`
igna tJt'e Nate
Submit to: Mayor Dean .a yquisL
City of 2rockly n Center
630 "SOirgle Greek. Parkway
Brooklyn Center, MN 5:5430,
c/1
uAW t,64L t�-- 04aj e- 4ut,��
' � ►�, l
�M�, 0, qOD-6 -ttl b i��
�'a1,.iC87 LOS
FOR APP ) I P:''':F- f '1.Ci.!5UM MLT ;'3._LL Ey._ Ai Q._.'�E
.Name 1 -c Ural STRE/t Z _ A 2. /
Address zoo& ,( cMWFry b 1,41z; r
Telephone. S Ga - 003
/��az.R iYlp s • '
Occupat A/ IV E y W IC I t nV / ti rw cc Years lived. in Brooklyn Center -
I am interested in serving on the: ✓ Park & Recreation Commission
Park Service Area Committee
Either
I have read Council Resolution 73 -25, which defines the purpose, dLthority and
responsibility of the Brooklyn Center Park and Recreation Commission and the
Park Service Area Committees. Yes ✓ No Comments
I understand the importance of regular Commission / Committee meeting attendance and
participation, and feel I have the time available to be an active participant.
Yes ✓ No Comments
Additional comments on my interest, experience, background ideas etc. - V1 4 a
JU
er
C/
_�. ez
19ra;.u+ s ue
Submit to j
o r7
63$�•e--- C.rrk..� �r�•L•� a v
Eh 6bttV* 'fir MH��-- 4 3 0
Member introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. ,
RESOLUTION RESCINDING APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAT FOR
BROOKLYN CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK REGISTERED LAND
SURVEY (SPEC 8)
WHEREAS, on February 26, 1979, the Brooklyn Center City Council
approved a registered land survey submitted by Roy J Hansen.; and
WHEREAS, the property owner, Brooklyn Center Industrial Park
(B.C.'I.P.), has not filed said registered land survey with Hennepin
County; and
WHEREAS, said property owner has revised said registered land
survey to delete a portion of Tract G of said registered land survey,
said portion being a portion of Tract A of Registered Land Survey No.
1377; and
WHEREAS, the property owner has indicated that he will deliver
unto the City a Quit Claim Deed for that portion of Tract G so deleted
such that the City will have title to this portion of Tract A, Registered
Land Survey No. 1377, which is necessary to the construction of Shingle
Creek Parkway; and
WHEREAS, the property owner has requested that prior approval
of the registered land survey which included said portion of Tract A,
Rp istered Land Survey No. 1377 thereby be rescinded.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the
City of Brooklyn Center hereby rescindsits action of February 26, 1979
approving the registered land survey submitted b Roy J. Hansen on
Pp g g Y Y Y
behalf of B.C.I.P.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
y
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 AUTHORIZING THE RENTAL OF TANDEM TRUCKS FOR
HAULING OF MATERIALS IN CONJUNCTION WITH SHINGLE CREEK
TRAILWAYS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1978-•42.
WHEREAS, Chapter 471.345 of the Minnesota Statutes provides for
the purchase of merchandise, materials, or equipment, or any kind of
construction work by informal quotations when the amount of such contract
is less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00); and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has obtained quotations on the rental
of trucks for utilization on Shingle Creek Trailways Improvement Project.
No. 1978 -42 and has determined that the quotation of Steere & Boone
Excavating Company, in the amount of $25.00 per hour is the best quotation
submitted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Brooklyn Center that the City Manager is authorized to contract for
the rental of tandem trucks for utilization on Shingle Creek Trailways
Improvement Project No. 1978 -42 at the rate of $25.00 per hour from
Steere & Boone Excavating Company.
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 followinq voted in favor thereof:
and the followinq 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 AUTHORIZING THE RENTAL OF A BULLDOZER FOR
GRADING WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH CENTRAL PARK
IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO. 1978 -41
WHEREAS, Chapter 471.345 of Minnesota Statutes provides for the
purchase of merchandise, materials, or equipment, or any kind of con-
struction by informal quotations when the amount of such contract is
less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00); and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has obtained quotations on the rental_.
of a bulldozer for utilization on Central Park Imnrovement Pro-ect No.
1978 -41 and has determined that the auotation of Vallev Equipment Companv
in the amount of $2,650.00 per month is the best quotation submitted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Brooklyn Center that the City Manager is authorized to contract for
the rental of a bulldozer for utilization on Central Park Improvement
Project No. 1978 -41 at the rate of $2,650.00 per month from Valley
Equipment Company.
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.
a
Member introduced the following resolution
and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
NO. 1979 -5 AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
WHEREAS, on December 4, 1978, the Brooklyn Center City Council
adopted Resolution No. 78 -278 establishing Street Grading, Base and
Surfacing Improvement Project No. 1978 -45 and Curb and Gutter and
Sidewalk Improvement Project No. 1978 -46 and ordered preparation of
plans and specifications for the construction of Shingle Creek Parkway'
from Freeway Boulevard to County Road No. 130; and
WHEREAS,.the City'Council deems it necessary in conjunction
with said construction of Shingle Creek Parkway to initiate Storm Sewer
Improvement Project No. 1979 -5•
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Brooklyn Center to direct the City Engineer to prepare plans and
specifications for said improvement project described as follows:
1979 -5 - Storm Sewer
Extension of existing storm sewer on Shingle Creek Parkway
from Xerxes Avenue eastward approximately 400 feet to
Shingle Creek, and from the southeast corner of the City
garage site westward approximately 750 feet to Shingle Creek.
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 ESTABLISHING STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT NO 1979 -6
WHEREAS, on December 4, 1978, the Brooklyn Center City Council
adopted Resolution No. 78 -278 establishing Street Grading, Base &
Surfacing Improvement Project No. 1978 -45 and Curb and Gutter and
Sidewalk Improvement Project No. 1978 -46 and ordered preparation of
plans and specifications for the construction of Shingle Creek Parkway
from Freeway Boulevard to County Road No. 130; and
WHEREAS, on March 30, 1979, the Brooklyn Center City Council
adopted Resolution No, 79--87 approving plans and specifications for
the construction of Bridge No. 27910 on Shingle Creek Parkway over
F.I. 94; and
WHEREAS, the City Council deems it necessary in conjunction with
said construction of Shingle Creek Parkway and Bridge No. 27910 to
initiate Street Improvement Project No .1979 -6 for construction of the
approaches to said bridge.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Brooklyn Center that the following improvement project is established
'in accordance with the plans and specifications prepared by the State
of Minnesota Department of Transportation:
1979 -6 - Street
Extension or existing Shinyle Creek Parkway from CiLy
Hail northward approximately 200 feet to the south end
of Bridge No. 27910 and from Freeway Blvd. southward
approximately 250 feet to Bridge No. 27910.
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 N0.
RESOLUTION CORRECTING ASSESSMENTS FOR PARCELS INVOLVED
WITH HIGHWAY TAKING FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FI -94 IN THE
BROOKLYN CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has acquired
property in the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park for highway purposes; and
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation is taking
only a portion of certain parcels involvedand
WHEREAS,-there were special assessments assessed to these
properties and balances owing thereon: and
WHEREAS. the Citv of Brooklvn Center has received payment of
the special assessments from the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park on
the portion being taken by the Highway Department; and -
WHEREAS, there has been no division of property to parcels which
are being taken only in part.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Brooklyn Center to direct the Finance Director of Hennepin County
to accept the partial prepayments and correct the original amounts
reflecting the prepayments prior to a division of property as'follows:
Tract F, Regi stered: Land Survey u . 1380 (02- 118 -21 11 0002
Total Original Highway Corrected Original
Levy # Project # Assessment Portion Assessment
2418 0141 $ 2,061.90 $ 41.23 $ 2
2419 0145 1,096.16 21.92 1,074.24
3097 0154 419.21 8.38 410.83
4932 9,578.05 191.56 9,386.49
4934 5,568.30 111.36 5,456.94
5199 234.39 4.68 229.71
5465 4,684.04 93.68 4,590.36
5468 2,659.25 46.50 2,612.75
5470 4,502.42 90.04 4,412.38
5473 3,393.13 67.86 3,325.27
5474 581.02 11.62 569.40
5475 986:75 19.73 967.02
5726 326.34 6.52 319.82
6186 1,744.19 34.88 1,709.31
6196 1,352.5.0 27.05 1,325.45
$39,187.65 $777.01 $38,410.64
RESOLUTION NO.
Tract F, Registered Land Survey No. 1348 (35- 119 -21 42 0002
Total Original Highway Corrected Original
Levy # Project # Assessment Portion Assessment
2418 0141 $ 260.47 $182.32 $ 78.15
2419 0145 1,549.31 1,084.52 - 464.79
2537 0150 143.05 100.13 42.92
3097 0154 103.68 72.57 31.11
3139 0156 387.96 271.57 116.39
4689 4,398.96 3,079.27 1,319.69
4931 482.29 337.60 144.69
4932 338.21 236.74 101.47
4933 106.07 74.25 31.82
4934 9,786.20 6,850.34 2,935.86
4935 5,679.19 3,975.43 1,703.76
5197 1,475.38 1,032.76 442.62
5473 1,257.27 880.08 377.19
5474 1,216.11 851.27 364.84
5475 731.16 511.81 219.35
5945 903.70 632.59 271.11,
6186 10,582.80 7,407.96 3,174.84
6189 4,364.84 3,055.38 1,309.46
6191 4,901.75 3,431.22 1,470.53
6193 4,809.31 3,366.51 1,442.80
6196 3,018.94 2,113.25 905.69
6197 563.97 394.77 169.20
6198 726.15 508.30 217.85
vino 426.29 298 .4.0 ;.2 -9
6799 104.85 73.50 31.35
$58,317.91 $40,822.54, $17,495.37
Tract D, Registered Land Survey No. 1380 (35- 119 -21 44 002
Total Original Highway Corrected Original
Levy # Project # Assessment Portion Assessment
2418 0141 $ 2,910.36 $ 1,222.35 $ 1,688.01
2419 0145 1,547.22 649.93 897.29
3097 0154 591.71 248.51 343.20
4932 13,519.36 5,678.13 7,841.23
4934 .7, 859.63 3, 301.04 4,558.59
5199 330.84 138.95- 191.89
5473 4,789.38 2,011.53 2,777.85
5474 820.11 344.44 475.67
5475 1 584.97 807.83
.5726 460.62 193.46 267.16
6186 11,804.47 4,957.87 6,846.60
6189 3,211.88 1,348.98 1,862.90
6191 1,755.11 737.14 1,017.97
6196 1,909.05 801.80 1,107.25
$52,902.54 $22,219.10 $30,683.'44
RESOLUTION N0.
Tract E, Registered Land Survey No. 1380 (35- 119 -21 44 0003
Total Original Highway Corrected Original ,
Levy # Project # Assessment Portion Assessment
2418 0141 $ 3 $ 569.55 $ 2,990:`19
2419 0145 1,892.44 302.79 1,589.65
3097 0154 723.74 115.79 607.95
4932 16,535.89 2,645.74 •13,890.15
4934 9,613.33 1,538.13 8,075.20
5199 404.66 64.74 339.92
5465 1,664.51 266.32 1,398.19
5473 5,858.03 937.28 4,920.75
5474 1,003.11 160.49 842.62
5475 1,703.57 272.57 1,431.00
5726 563.45 90.15 473.30
6186 16,287.75 2,606.04 13,681.71
6189 5,750.17 920.02 4,830.15
6191 3,925.56 628.08 3,297.48
6196 2,335.01 373.60 1,961.41
$ 71,820.96 - $11,491.29 $60,329.67
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 PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF JUNE 4 THROUGH JUNE 10
AS HANDICAPPED SCOUT WEEK
WHEREAS, more than 1,000 physically, emotionally and mentally handi-
capped boys are enrolled in twenty Minneapolis metro area Cub Packs, Scout
Troops and Explorer Posts; and
WHEREAS, to obtain the money needed to support special program needs
for handicapped Scouts, a Minneapolis and Suburban paper drive has been
scheduled for June 8, 9, and 10; and
WHEREAS, the Viking Council Boy Scouts of America has asked the
support of communities by declaring the week of June 4 through June 10, 1979
as "Handicapped Scout Week ".
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center proclaims the week of June 4 through June 10, 1979 as "Handi-
capped Scout Week ".
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.
` VIKING COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA
*C0UT
A program for Cub Scouts, Scouts and Explorers
Ma 4, 1979
Dean Nyquist
3707 53rd Place
Brooklyn Center, MN 55429
Dear Mayor:
During the week of June 4th a very special event for some very special people
will be taking place. This is the week of "THE PAPER DRIVE FOR HANDICAPPED
SCOUTS ".
Currently, more than 1,000 physcially, emotionally and mentally handicapped
boys are enrolled in 20 Minneapolis Metro area Cub Packs, Scout Troops and
Explorer Posts. To obtain the money needed to support their special program
needs, a Minneapolis and Suburban paper drive has been scheduled for June 8,
9, and 10th.
Hundreds of Scouts from the Minneapolis and Suburban area will collect paper
and mau trailers. There will be trailers located at the Dales and at all
Minneapolis area Target Stores, 11 locations in all. Newspapers, radio and
television stations have generously agreed to make public service announce-
ments of the event. Many area businesses have lent their support by posting
signs reminding their employees to save their papers for "THE PAPER. DRIVE FOR
HANDICAPPED SCOUTS."
In all, it is a -big event, and we need the support of you and your community.
What better way to draw attention to the event than by declaring the week of
June 4th as "Handicapped Scout Week ". We at the Viking Council sincerely
- hope you will support our efforts in this way. It will certainly contribute
to our success.
Thank you for your cooperation.
Y Si ely,
nce _717
5amue B. Foust,
Scout Executive
5300 Glenwood Avenue
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55422
612- 540 -6700
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION DECLARING JUNE 1 THROUGH JUNE 10 AS
BROOKLYN CENTER EARLY BIRD DAYS
WHEREAS, the purpose of the City of Brooklyn Center Early Bird Days
is to promote the City of Brooklyn Center, its people and amenities ; - -and
WHEREAS, the Brooklyn Center Park and Recreation Department, the
Chamber of Commerce and other community groups participate in the annual
civic celebration to demonstrate the vitality of the City of ,Brooklyn
Center.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center to declare June 1 through June 10, 1979 as the dates for
Brooklyn Center Early Bird Days.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
f
- 0
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0. .
RESOLUTION PROCLAIMING THE WEEK OF MAY 28 THROUGH JUNE 3'
AS VIETNAM VETERANS WEEK
WHEREAS, 175,000 citizens of Minnesota are veterans of the Vietnam
Conflict; and
WHEREAS, they participated in the longest war the United States has
engaged in; and
WHEREAS, the nature of that service resulted in no mass enrollment
for service;' and
WHEREAS, there was no mass return from their military service; and
WHEREAS, the President of the United States has declared the week of
May 28 through June 3, 1979 as "Vietnam Veterans Week ".
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center declares the week of May 28 through June'3, 1979 as Vietnam
Veterans Week in Brooklyn Center urging citizens to honor the patriotism of
the Vietnam Veterans by the display of the American Flag on public and
private buildings.
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.
i
CT'he Am erican Legion
Department of Minnesota
STATE VETERANS SERVICE BUILDING - ST. PALL. MINNESOTA 55155 - PHONE 4612) 291 -1800
April —'1979
TO: Post Commanders
We want to share with you the enclosed information about Vietnam
- J 3 1979.
May 23
June Veterans Week this ,
Deter Y
Th I' a d to k . ^tram Era Veterans still rp..mainS
jiti� �+.v t. a,. i. G-aJ� '. � �.�
outstanding and The American Legion feels strongly about this matter.
Vietnam veterans served their country during a painful time in a
bitter war. They returned home to a country divided over the war. They
never received the welcome we showered upon returning veterans of past
wars. There are some who blame,the Vietnam veteran the war he
had nothin g to do with but serve his country in time of emergency. As
a nation, we have not yet fully recognized those who fought in Southeast
Asia for their service and sacrifice. Vietnam Veterans Week offers a
timely opportunity to convey our honor and appreciation.
I strongly urge your Post to join in recognizing Vietnam Era
Veterans for their service to Ai erica -- bath i the military .in, w
and in their communities as veterans. Z urge your active participation
and that of your Post in this observance.
Legion involvement will help insure that.we appropriately salute
.the veterans of the Vietnam War and let them know we are grateful and
proud of them.
Sincerely yours,
HARLAN BUCK
Department Co=ander'
cc: Membership Mailing List
' encis.
C1 he -✓Americ Legion
Department of Minnesota
j �'lSS
STATE VETERANS SERVICE BUILDING - ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55155 - PHONE (612) 291 -1800
V IETNAM VETERANS WEEY. - MAY 28 - JUNE 3, 1979
President Carter issued a proclamation declaring the week of May 28 through
June 3rd as Vietnam Veterans Week. This one time occurrence will provide the
opportunity to recognize those who served in Southeast Asia, and to honor them for
their sacrifices made during a most unconventional and controversial war.
• To implement this program of recognition, President Carter' -has provided
Presidential Certificates as follows:
1. Five Certificates to the Mayors of every City in the United States over
5,000 in population.
2. Five Certificates to the Chairman of the Board of every Board of County
Commissioners.
3. Ten Certificates to the Governor of each of the 50 States.
The Presidential Certificate program for Outstanding Community Achievement
of Vietnam Era Veterans is designed to allow joint National, State and local
recognition of Minnesota's Vietnam Era Veterans.
Nominations for the Presidential Certificates can be generated from several
sources: Veterans organi<^at;nrs, civic and church groups, professional associations
and community organizations as well as from the public in general.
j
The appropriate person, Mayor or Chairman of the County Board should be contacted'
now about participation in this program... The selection committee should be appointed
by the Mayor or Chairman of the County Board to be representative of those organ-
izations and persons concerned with the observance of this program. A selection
committee should be established using the following criteria for selection of the
recipients of the Presidential Certificates:
1.. Making fiignificant contributi^ns to the community, state or naticn i*_: civic
involvement, community projects or human assistance.
2. Overcoming obstacles, whether physical, social or economic to obtain
positions they now have.
3. Demonstrating personal involvement, such as volunteer service in civic,
religious, youth and other activities.
4. Helping other veterans through counseling and assistance.
5. Demonstrating outstanding character in civilian.life through an act of
bravery or heroism.
6. Representing general excellence or accomplishment in any civic, professional
or personal endeavor.
7. Representing those in combat who made a heroic sacrifice for their country.`
(more)
2
8. In recognition of the significant contribution to assist the family and
friends of those veterans who were prisoners of war or who were missing 1
in action.
A mailing address should be established and a deadline of about May 14'- 20
to give the committee time to make the selections, notify the winners and arrange
for their attendance at the awards program. There should be adequate publicity
in the news media on the Presidential Certificate Program to promote the receipt
of nominations for the committee to consider.
There should also be a commiittee. set up by the Mayor or Chairman of the County
Board to provide a proper method of awarding the Certificates.
It is requested that the Presidential Certificates be presented personally
by *the Mayor or County Commission Chairman. This presentation should take place
during Vietnam Veterans Week, May 28 - June 3, 1979
A formal presentation at the City Hall or County. Courthouse is appropriate.
Veterans organization leadership and key public and private officials might be
invited to attend.
Where possible, the awards might be presented at a banquet or other public
event during the observance week.
' 1. A community-wide banquet, with a proper speaker to present the awards
and also honor the Vict - am Vctcrars of t1:c community.
2. An evening presentation and honors program for Vietnam Veterans at your
local community hall or school or Legion Post Home.
Press coverage and press releases concerning the awards recipients and the
program should be handled by the committee.
A proclamation should be issued by the Mayor or Chairman of the County Board
and published recognizing the Vietnam Era Veterans Week.
American Legion Posts should join in this prograia by contacting their local
official concerned, Mayor or Chairman of the County Board to see that this program
is conducted in your cormunity or area recognizing the Vietnam Veteran. Your
participation in this program will be most appreciated - by the Vietnam Veteran and
by The American Legion, which is taking part in the event on a national scale.
Some general suggestions on what you can 'emphasize might be:
1. Contributions of the Vietnam. Era Veterans to their Nation, including
sacrifice, bravery.
2. Success of the Vietnam Era Veterans upon their return to civilian life.
3. Services available to Vietnam Era Veterans.
(over)
f
-3-
. 4 .. r
We encourage you to recognize the Vietnam Era Veterans in • your Post through
special letters, awards and observances of this special week for them. You should
provide information to theta so that they may be made aware of the benefits avail-
able to then: such as education rights, home and business', loans, and VA benefits.
While we are aware of the fact that the time element is short to make all of
these plans and do the job, we look forward to a full participation by The A- cerican
Legion in this recognition weep for Vietnam Veterans. There are 175,000 of them
in Minnesota and between 25 and 30 thousand are menbers of The American Legion.
Use your iraaginaticn and the facilities available to you in your cormiunity
to provide- :.- progzar. -and tom l: -a- part -emu -the- grogram of your -- City- -o -C - runty tcv
provide leadership in this Vietnam Era Veterans recognition week.
Bulletin sent to Post Corrwanders
Membership Mailing
4 -79
i
I
y
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION TO TRANSFER FUNDS FROM THE FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND '
TO THE GENERAL FUND
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
related covenants, the provisions of the City Charter, or State Statutes; and
WHEREAS, on October 3, 1977, the City Council adopted Resolution No.- 77 -178
which approved the 1978 Annual Budget for the City and encumbered FEDERAL REVENUE
SHARING FUNDS in the amount of $184,540 to be transferred to the GENERAL FUND sub-
sequent to the expenditure of funds by the GENERAL FUND for appropriations in said
1978 Annual Budget; and
WHEREAS, on October 30, 1978, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 78 -242
which authorized reimbursements of expenditures made through that date in the amount
of $63,977.34; and
WHEREAS, certain expenditures have been made from the GENERAL FUND since
those previously reimbursed, and they are as follows:
Date Voucher No. Amount Vendor Purpose
12 -11 -78 345672(21869) $ 129.00 National Camera Projector
9 -25 -78 268046(20435) 207.10 Business Furniture Drawer Filing Cabinet
10 -23 -78 296063 (20882) 521.56 Coyer & Associates 1Y" Nozzels
1C 23;.78 2:6063(20882) 398.40 Coyer & Associates 2Y' No ?zels
10 -23 -78 296063(20882): 784.00 Coyer & Associates Wall Scanners
11 -13 -78 317063(21029) 690.00 Coyer & Associates Fire Coats
11 -13 -78 177063(18949) 204.75 Coyer & Associates Fire Coats
10 -23 -78 296046(20876) 93.09 Business Furniture Secretarial Chair
12- 26 -78" 360063(22003) 793.60 Coyer & Associates Portable Hand Lights
12 -26 -78 360662(22091) 271.00 Grace Industries Gas Meter Tester
12 -11 -78 345672(21869) 120.00 National Camera Vido Tape for VTR Machine
3 -12 -79 071673(23350) 3,042.00 Motorola Inc. Pager /Receivers
2 -12 -79 043715(22988) 625.00 Motorola Inc. Encoder
10 -23 -78 296046(20876) 115.56 Business Furniture_ 30460 Table
1 -8 -79 008092(217398) 342.12 Clutch & U Joint Power Take -off
11 -27 -78 331750(21686) 3,999.96 Instant Shade Tree Large Plants — Trees
10 -2 -78 283165(20681) 93.93 Graingers Push Mowers
,12 -11 -78 345670(21867) 1,220.16 Peabody Enterprises Planter Window Ledge,
Community Center Insulatioi
11 -21 -78 331744(21680) 2,238.60 Insulation Sales Community Center Insulatioi
1 -17 -78 024683(16888) 567.36 Reed's Sales Service 1 - 7 H.P. Snoblower
2- 12 --79 143344(22871) 240.00 Medical Oxygen & Clear Face Masks (5)
Equipment
6 -26 -78 177664(19035) 3,500.00 Computer Election Used Election Machines (10;
System
11 -13 -78 317067(21033) 2,950.63 Cy's Mens Wear Uniforms
12 -11 -78 345067(21767) 339.99 Cy's Mens Wear Uniforms
12 -26 -78 360678(22107) 126.00 Chuck's Canvas Salvage Covers
1 -31 -78 058357(17307) 358.98 Northern Automotive Alternator /Pulley
5 -22 -78 142275(18558) 39.90 LaBelle's Distr. Camera /Flash.
$ 24,012.69
1
RESOLUTION N0.
Insulating City Hall
10 -23 -78 296692(20980) $ 432.00 James Biorn Labor for Insulation
11 -9 -78 313651(19728) 552.00 James Biorn Labor for Insulation
11 -27 -78 331787(21723) 459.00 James Biorn Labor for Insulation
12 -8 -78 342650(21321) 462.00 James Biorn Labor for Insulation
12 -26 -78 360710(22138) 351.00 James Biorn Labor for Insulation
1 -8 -79 008666(22313) 255.00 James Biorn Labor for Insulation
1 -2 -79 002650(21373) 229.50 David Johnson Labor for Insulation
10 -23 -78 296071(20883) 7.27 CBC Petty Cash Caulking Gun
10 -23 -78 296680(20968) 688.80 Wallboard Inc. Sheet-Rock
12 -26 -78 360656(22085) 29.00 Wallboard Inc. Control Joint Strips
10 -23 -78 296126(20888) 571.10 Federal Lumber Co. Lumber /Nails
11- 27 -78 331126(21534) 25.05 Federal Lumber Co. Lumber
12 -26 -78 3601'26(22014) 411.97 Federal Lumber Co. Insulation /Nails /Pine
10 -23 -78 296040(20875) 11.98 Budget Power Nails
1 -8 -79 008040(22211) 5.96 Budget Power Caulking
- 11 -27 -78 331744(21680) 3,221.40 Insulation Sales Styrofoam
12 -11 -78 345668(21865) 186.80 John Wall Taping Sheet Rock Taping
12 -11 -78 345670(21867) 1,755.84 Peabody Enterprises Plastic Window Ledge
12 -11 -78 345653 (21850) 98.00 Carciofini Foam Packing
12- 26 -78_ 360684(22112) 36.00 Sawyer - Cleator Styrofoam Insulation
1 -22 -79 022653(22412) 72.00 Sawyer - Cleator Styrofoam Insulation
1 -22 -79 022583(22406) 9.94 Warner Hardware Cement Sandpaper
1 -22 -79 022583(22406) 6.43 Warner Hardware Tape /Cement
1 -8 -79 008184(22239) 45.25 Hirshfields- Paint
$ 9,923.29
Street Seal Coating
7-24-78 205517(19454) $ 13,034.65 Sickles Co. Seal Coating
.8 -14 -78 226517(19454) 2,052,09 Sickles Co. Seal Coating
8 -28 -78 240482(24082) 6,442.07 Sickles Co. Seal Coating
9 -11 -78 254517(20333) 5,797.02 Sickles Co. Seal Coating
4 -24 -78 114028(18111) 402.27 Barton Contracting Seal Coating
7 -24 -78 205028(19391) 12.60 Barton - Contracting Seal Coating
8 -14 -78 229028(20062) 738.38 Barton Contracting Seal Coating ,
8 -28 -78 240028(20086) 2,458.23 Barton Contracting Seal Coating
9 -11 -78 254028(20233) 2,512.69 Barton Contracting Seal Coating
$ 33
Tile Swimming Pool
10 -10 -78 283711(20824) $ 18,450.00 Land 0' Lakes Tile Pool
11 -22 -78 331789(21725) 28,202.00 Land 0' Lakes Tile Pool
6 -26 -78 177661 (19032) 640.00 Lindberg - Pierce Architect
fi $'47,292.00
TOTAL $114
NOW,' THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center to transfer the amount of $114,727.98 from the FEDERAL REVENUE SHARING FUND
to the GENERAL FUND.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
RESOLUTION 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:
i whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted,
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ONE (1) 6 YARD
DUMP BOX
WHEREAS, the City of Brooklyn Center is authorized to participate in
the Hennepin County Purchasing Agreement; and
WHEREAS, on Wednesday, February 14, 1979 at 2:00 p.m. bids were
received for the furnishing and delivery of seventeen dump boxes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the bid of MacQueen Equipment
Company in the amount of $5,045.00 each in accordance with specifications is
deemed to be the best bid submitted by responsible bidders and said bid is
hereby accepted.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adopt Ior of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by
meriber , dlu upui 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.
2 -14 -79
BIDS FOR 6 YARD DUMP BOXES
Bidder Unit Price
MacQueen Equipment Company $5,045.00
Midland Equipment Company 5,419.00•
Crystal Distributing Company 5,196.19
Garwood Twin Cities Truck Equipment 5,778.00
i
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS FOR FURNISHING BITUMINOUS OIL
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO RECEIVE QUOTATIONS FOR
BITUMINOUS OIL WHENEVER NECESSARY
WHEREAS, the City Clerk and Street Superintendent have reported that on
May '8, 1979 at 11:00 a.m., they opened and tabulated bids received for the
furnishing of bituminous oil and said bids were as follows:
MC -800 RC -800 RC -800 CRS1 -CRS -2 CRSI -CRS2
Bidder P. U. Del. P. U. Del. P. U.
Koch $.4300 $.4758 $.4400 $.4158 $.4000
L. N. Sickels .4300 .4758 .4400 .4138 .4000
Ashland Petroleum .4500 .4853 .4504
WHEREAS, all bids for 'furnishing bituminous oil were only firm until the
date of the bid and that all future orders would be based on the price at the
time of delivery:
NOW, TH BE IT RF.S0TVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center that all bids fux bi'Liciminous oil be hereby rejected.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn Center
that the City Manager be authorized to obtain quotations for the furnishing and
delivery of bituminous oil whenever necessary.
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 BID FOR PLANT - MIXED BITUMINOUS MATERIAL
WHEREAS, the City Clerk and Street Superintendent have reported that on
May 8,_ 1979 at 11:00 a.m. they opened and tabulated bids received for the furnish-
ing of plant -mixed bituminous materials and said bids were as follows:
Coarse Aggregate Fine Aggregate 85 to 100 Winter Patch
Bidder Furn. & Load /ton Furn. & Load /ton Penetration /ton Mix /ton
Bury & Carlson $12.60. $13.10 $12.60 $13.10'
C.S. McCrossan 11.45 11.45 11.45 12.50
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center, that the bid of C. S. McCrossan 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.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clem
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
Y/
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BID FOR STABILIZED GRAVEL AND FINE AGGREGATE
FOR SEAL COAT
WHEREAS, the City Clerk and Street Superintendent have reported that on
May 8, 1979, at 11 :00 a.m. they opened and tabulated bids received for the
furnishing of stabilized gravel and fine aggregate for seal coat and that said
bids were as follows:
Class #5 Class #5 FA -1 'Buck-
Gravel Gravel Sand shot
Bidder Del. P. U. P. U. P. U.
C. S. McCrossan $3.25 $1.75
Barton Contracting 2.95 1.60 1.25 4.00
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn,
Center that the bid of Barton Contracting Company for the furnishing of Class #5
gravel, FA -1 sand and buckshot 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.
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF LABOR AND
MATERIAL TO BUILD 220 SQUARE FOOT BRICK WALL
WHEREAS, Chapter 471.345 of the Minnesota Statutes provides for the
purchase of merchandise, materials or equipment, or any kind of construction
work by informal quotations when the amount of such contract is less than
ten thousand dollars ($10,000); and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has obtained quotations on the purchase
of labor and material to build a 220 square foot brick wall and has determined
that the quotation of Denny Johnson Construction, 4705 Xenia Avenue North, in
the amount of $1,320.00 is the best quotation submitted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center that the City Manager be authorized to contract for the
purchase of labor and material to build a 220 square foot brick wall in
the amount of $1,320.00 from Denny Johnson Construction:
Date Mayor
AilES :
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.
QUOTATIONS FOR LABOR & MATERIAL TO
BUILD BRICK WALL IN CITY HALL VESTIBULE
FOR NEW CONFERENCE ROOM
Denny Johnson Construction Company $1,320.00
4705 Xenia Avenue North - 533 -3226
R.C. Dahlstrom Masonry Construction $2,400.00
5730 Duluth Street 475 -1476
I
I
i
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF TWO 13 x 13
OVERHEAD GARAGE DOORS
WHEREAS, Chapter 471.345 of the Minnesota Statutes provides for the
purchase of merchandise, materials or equipment, or any kind of construction
work by informal quotations when the amount of such contract is•less' than
ten thousand: dollars ($10,000); and
WHEREAS, the City Manager has obtained quotations on the purchase
of two steel insulated overhead doors, furnished and installed, and has
determined that the quotation of Twin City Garage Door Company in the amount
of $2,431.00 is the best quotation submitted.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center that the City Manager be authorized to contract for the
purchase of two steel insulated overhead doors, furnished and installed,
in the amount of'$2,431.00 from Twin City Garage Door Company.
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.
QUOTATIONS FOR TWO (2) OVERHEAD
GARAGE DOORS FOR EAST FIRE STATION
(Furnished & Installed)
Twin City Garage ;Door Company $2,431.00
Custom Door Sales $2,370.00
We recommend accepting the high bid because they have done
work for us in the last couple years and have always done a
good job.
t
M & C No. 79-=9
April 17, 1979
FROM THE OFFICE
OF THE CITY MANAGER
CITY OF BROOKLYN. CENTER
Subject: Howe, Inc. Variance, Non-Con-
forming Use,`Site'.and Building
Plan Approval
To the Honorable Mayor and City Council:
Zoning History of the Howe Fertilizer Site Ordinances of the City
of Brooklyn Center were investigated, commencing on the date of
incorporation in 1911 and continuing through the present date. The
first ordinance governing the use of land and the construction of
buildings was passed on July 10, 1926. It contained typical provi
sions regarding construction, requires a 25 -foot setback from any
street, and contained a provision which the city attorney interprets
�to be a forerunner of the Special Use Permit Provision. Such a
permit was required for boilers, fuel storage, foundaries and the
like. There is no mention of manufacturing or fertilizer production.
The information which we have from the applicant is that during the
period from 1926 until 1940 when the first comprehensive zoning plan
was adopted, the Howe site was used as a transfer point for organic
fertilizer (manure) and as a storage and transfer point for potatoes.
This use was not controlled or regulated by the 1926 ordinance and
the concept of permitted uses had not yet been established.
Brooklyn Center's first comprehensive zoning ordinance was 'passed on
April 4, 1940. The 1926 ordinance was not repealed but presumably
it ceased to be enforced. The 1940 ordinance carried the typical
provisions on non- conforming uses, defined accessory uses as a
subordinate building on_the same lot as the main building and clearly
incidental to the use of the main building, and specifically stated
that no industrial district was being created because the village
council found that the general welfare of the community does not
require any zoning for industry. However, the ordinance does contain
regulations for the industrial district to be used "when and if an
industrial district is hereafter described or delineated.
The regulations for the industrial district established the concept
of permitted uses and included such things as coal yards, truck
terminals, warehouses, feed mills, and "other enterprises which the
council would find no more obnoxious or detrimental." On June 19 1946
the village council established the first industrial zone- in
Brooklyn Center. This land consisted of lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 of
Brooklyn Manor Addition except the North 150 feet thereof. The village
council minutes state that it was being zoned for "heavy industry ".
We are informed by the applicant that Howe Inc commenced the
production of Chemical Fertilizer in 1946. The ordinance
existing at that time did not specifically permit the production
of commercial fertilizer. Council minutes and other city records
do not indicate the proposed use for the site when - the land was
rezoned. Commerical fertilizer production could have been
approved by the city council by making a finding that it was no
more obnoxious than other uses already permitted in the industrial
regulation. On the face of the city records the rezoning of the
property to heavy industry would permit those industrial uses
outlined in the 1940 ordinance only.
On August 14, 1946 Roy Howe was issued a building permit to erect
a building on lots 1 2, 3 and 4 of Brooklyn Manor. There is no
indication of the size of the building or its proposed use. Counsel
for Howe Inc. has informed the city attorney that the company
began to manufacture chemical fertilizer in 1946. Further information
should be obtained from the applicant, including any company records,
regarding the use and the building which was established in 1946.
.Also on August 14, 1946 the Northerly portion of;Lot- 1, Block 4 of
Brooklyn Manor Addition was rezoned to "heavy industry The counsel
minutes state that this lot contains a cement block building. It
appears to be unrelated to the Howe operation.
On August 31, 1950 a new comprehensive zoning ordinance was adopted.
This r i
o d Hance carried forward thepr principle 1e es ablished in the 1940
ordinance e 1 GP � s
a ce r gard�ng industrial is .s. Although n industrial district
was established, the ordinance further stated that "manufacturing and
processing or any other use within the industrial district may be
permitted upon approval by the village council following at least
one public hearing on the grant of the permit." The 1940 ordinance
was repealed.
This ordinance remained.in effect until :1957 when it was replaced by
• new comprehensive zoning ordinance. That zoning ordinance established
• Limited Industrial District and included the Howe Site within the
Limited Industrial District. A review of the permitted uses in the
Limited Industrial District indicates that it permitted only "clean"
industries such as food products, electrical appliances, metal
finishing and plating, stamping, rubber products and the like. It
also permitted offices, warehousing and storage. The manufacturing of
chemical fertilizer was not a permitted use. The procedure of special
use permits was established and special uses in the Limited Industrial
District included fuel storage, chemical research, and "other
manufacturing ". The records indicate that Howe Inc. did not apply for
a special use permit under the "other manufacturing" provision while
the 1957 ordinance was in effect.
- 2 -
The comprehensive zoning. ordinance which was adopted in 1968,
while it established other uses in the industrial districts
did not include chemical fertilizer manufacture as a permitted
use.
The city attorney's review of these various ordinance provisions
reveals that chemical fertilizer manufacturer has never been a
permitted use within the City of Brooklyn Center. Assuming that
the chemical fertilizer plant was established in 1946, in-order
to do so legally, Howe Inc. was required to obtain a permit from
the city council which was based on a finding that the production
of chemical fertilizer was no more obnoxious or detrimental to
the welfare of.the community than enterprises or businesses already
enumerated in the zoning ordinance. As previously stated, these
uses included coal yards, van and storage yards, warehouses, feed
mills, gasoline and oil storage, blacksmiths' shops, and the like
Although there is no formal recognition by the city council of
a fertilizer processing plant, the city has apparently acquiesced for
many years in the continued operation of the plant. The planning
commission should direct further inquiry to the applicant regarding
the establishment of the chemical fertilizer business' in 1946 and
specifically request any records the company I may have would indicate
that when the property was rezoned for heavy industry in 1946 the
city council was made aware of the fact that the manufacture of
chemical fertilizer was contemplated. Such information, coupled
with the city's long acquiescence in the operation of the plant,
would, in the opinion of the city attorney, be the legal equivalent
of a finding by the eity c oune that the production. of iiieiiiCal
fertilizer was no more obnoxious than the other uses whicn were
permitted under the 1940 and the 1950 zoning ordinances.
Assuming that the chemical fertilizer plant was established as a
lawful use in the 1940's, under the existing zoning regulations,
it became a non - conforming use when the 1957 ordinance was passed. ,
At that time, as previously stated, various light industrial uses
replaced the previous ordinance provisions. The section of the
ordinance permitting the city council to make a finding that a
particular use was no more obnoxious than other permitted uses was
eliminated. The operation of Howe fertilizer became a non - conforming
use at that time.
- 3 -
The status of the north building as a non - conforming use Assuming
that the planning commission finds that the production of chemical
fertilizer was lawfully established in the 1940's and early 50's,
since it appears that 'Lots 1 2 and 4 Block 4 Brooklyn Manor,
3
PP � Y
are being used as a single industrial complex for the production of
chemical fertilizer, the North Building falls into:the category
of an accessory use The 1940 , the 1950 and the 1957 ordinances
all defined accessory building and accessory use in the typical
fashion, with language to this effect; a subordinate building or use
which is incidental and customarily associated with the principle
use or building. This point is raised to squelch the argument that
the North Building is merely a warehouse and storage facility and
therefore a ermitted use in the zone. Building permits issued
P P
g
during he 1950's f he Howe' Fertilizer Plant
g
or several additions to t
site carried the description of "warehouse and storage ". Although
I
these building may be used for that purpose, the are accessory
g Y P P � Y Y
buildings o h fertilizer since ha is he
n t t o that t
g production on of chemical
principle use of on the site. The applicant cannot have it both
ways. The North Building must be viewed in one of the two following
y g t v g
ways:
(1) If the building in its reconstruction is to treated as
a storage and warehouse building, then it must be replatted and
separated by description from the remainder of the site. The site
for the warehouse building must meet all setback provisions for an
individual lot and house uses unrelated to the production of
chemical fertilizers.
(2) The North Building must be treated as an integral part
of the production of , fertilizer and thereby retain its non - conforming
use status as an integral part of a complex of buildings used for
the production of commercial fertilizer-.
If the - production of chemical fertilizer on the site is a valid
non- conforming use, and if the North Building is an accessory building
to that use, the building, as it existed -in 1957 when the zoning
ordinance was passed, will govern some of the issues which the
planning commission must address. Non - conforming uses which have
not been 6010 destroyed by casualty, may be rebuilt, but may not be
expanded beyond their size and use as of the date on which they
became non - conforming.
Building permit number 3443 was issued on September 22, 1955 for
the construction of the first portion of the North Building. Although
the building permit authorized a warehouse building to be constructed
of steel, one story in height and 60 feet by 100 feet in area,
area photographs taken thereafter indicate that the size of the
building as constructed was 62 feet by 138 feet. The building haTie
constructed also encroached into land which was zoned for residential
purposes. The building inspector, Mr. Edwin C. Peterson, notified
Howe Inc. and on October 17, 1955 Roy M. Howe wrote a letter to the
city stating that it was an oversight on the part of Howe Inc.that the
building was so placed and in the same letter requested rezoning of the.
northerly 150 feet of the Howe site to industrial purposes The city
council granted a portion of this request, by rezoning the south
50 feet of the north 150 feet of the site which was apparently just
enough to legalize the Final action was taken on this
- 4
rezoning on December 28, 1955. At that same meeting a "special permit"
was issued for the construction of a building approximately 60 feet
by 165 feet for warehouse purposes in connection with existing
operation, provided that suitable fencing be installed on the 100 foot
line between the residential and industrial property and this "buffer
strip fence" was to be completed within one year. Although the
dimensions of the building do not precisely square with the aerial
photograph, this provision appears to meet the ordinance requirement
for authorizing industrial uses. However, there is no indication
in the record describing what the "existing operation" really means.
As a practical matter, at the end of 1955, the North Building consisted
of a structure 62 by 138.feet to be used for warehouse purposes in
the existing operation on the site.
On September 1, 1956 Howe Inc. petitioned the village council for
a rezoning of Lot 5, Block 4, Brooklyn Manor, a lot which lies to
the west of the existing Howe site. The purpose of this rezoning
was apparently to expand the North Building in a westerly direction.
This rezoning proposal was either denied or withdrawn (the records'`
are not clear) and a substitute petition was submitted requesting a
Special Permit for an addition to the easterly end o.f_the North
Building to be used for warehouse purposes. This addition; consisted
of a 62 by 80 foot frame and steel warehouse. The planning commission
approved and the city council adopted the planning commission
recommendation on September 13, 1956 issuing an "industrial special
permit" for an addition to the present warehouse to be 62 by 80 foot
in size and to be used for warehouse purposes. This addition brought
the North Building to a size of 62 by 218 feet which was roughly
its size on the date of the fire.
There is an additional building permit number 9032 and dated October 30,
1961 which was issued to Howe Inc. The description in the permit
is for a building "attached to the north side (open) ". The size was
12 feet by 218 feet, one story in height, of frame construction with
a metal ,roof. A proposed use was for warehouse purposes
This permit was issued after the 1957 zoning ordinance declared the
production of chemical fertilizer be a non - conforming use. There is
no corresponding action by the city council authorizing the permit.
There is an indication of that such an addition could have been made
either to the South Building or to to North Building but there is
insufficient evidence to justify such a finding. Inquiries should
be directed to the applicant regarding any information or records
the company may have with respect to that permit.
In summary, in 1957 when the production of chemical fertilizer became
a non - conforming use, the North Building consisted of a one- story
steel building, 62 feet by 218 feet in size (13,516 square feet)
to be used for warehouse purposes in connection with the operations
existing on the site in - 1955, presumably the production of commercial
fertilizer. It is the recommendation of the city attorney that the
North Building be treated as a part of the total complex. The
planning commission is free to accept or reject that recommendation
based on all of the facts which it reviews as a result of this
application. Assuming that the North Building is part of the total
complex, Howe Inc. should have aright to rebuild the same kind of
_ 5 _
building for the same use subject to the following:
(1) Since the use is the warehousing of material used in ,
connection with fertilizer production, the size of the building
should be looked at on the basis of its volume in order to pro-
vide more flexibility to the applicant. The building inspector
i
will be prepared Thursday evening to discuss the size of -a building
of various configuration which does not exceed the volume for
storage purposes of a one -story building 62 by 218 feet in size.
(2) Because the purpose of non - conforming use provisions
is to eventually eliminate the use through obsolescence, it would
defeat the purpose of non- conforming use provision to permit the
construction of a building with a useful life longer than the
building as originally constructed. The building inspector indicates
that the concrete building proposed would have a useful life of at
least twice as long as the original building. The original building
appears to have been of wood frame construction covered with sheet"
metal. The foundation consisted of poles approximately 12 inches
in diameter set in the ground without concrete. The floor was
gravel in some places, asphalt and concrete in other places The
applicant appears to be entitled to a, building of that type or its
equal in useful life.
(3) The use of the building should be for the warehousing
and storage of materials used in connection with the production
g P
of h mi
c e cal fertilizer.
This does not include file storage, truck.
maintenance, garage space, and other uses uffilich may have been
introduced into the building after its construction in 1956 If the
City Council adopts an ordinance regulating the storage of toxic
materials as proposed in the Hickok Study, the applicant should be
made aware that all storage in all building, including the North
Building must conform to the requirements of that ordinance.
(4) The 1957 zoning ordinance distinquishes between non
conforming structures and non- conforming -uses. Although that
distinction was not carried forward in the 1968 code revisions,
the planning commission and city council have continued to permit
alterations in anon- conforming structure which contain permitted
uses. The vehicle to accomplish this result is the granting of a
variance. Assuming, that Howe Inc. is a valid non - conforming use,
it can be treated a a permitted use for the purpose of applying the
non- conforming structure requirements This means that to the
extent the standards for variance can be met, such issues as setback,
screening, landscaping, parking and other site review matters should
be considered for a variance Based upon the staff review of exist-
ing information, the standards for variance have met as to
screening, parking and setback. Staff review of landscaping requirements
must be deferred until the planning commission receives and deals with
a site plan showing screening, parking and setback which meet the
code.
I
It is clear that the expansion of the fertilizer business at the
site over the past 22-30 years has resulted in severe crowding
on the site. Howe Inc. has clearly grown beyond the dimensions
of its present site. If the plant were to be constructed today
the applicant would no doubt choose a larger area and the zoning
regulations would clearly dictate a much larger site for the
many operations which are contained within the fertilizer plant
and its accessory buildings. Therefore, in dealing with screening,
parking, setback, landscaping and the size of the building, the
applicant may wish to re- evaluate the plans submitted.
(5) The staff recommends that the plans as submitted not
be approved.
At this time, the staff is not persuaded that the production of
chemical fertilizer as it is conducted on the site of Howe Inc.,
can be modified to the extent that it should be treated as a permitted
use under the comprehensive zoning plan and under the zoning
ordinance. The intensity of use, and the variety of operations are
simple incompatible with a site of that size adjacent to a
residential area. Even without the complication provided by the
residential neighborhood, Howe Fertilizer has clearly outgrown its
present site.
Res e fu y` submitted,
Geral Splinter
City Mager
City of Brooklyn Center
I
Working Draft
Chronology of Events: Howe, Inca
1920 -1930
1926 First City Ordinance governing use of the land, construction
of buildings.
1930 -1940
1940 -1950
4 -4 -40 First Comprehensive Zoning Plan.
1941 Operation of presently existing Howe, Inc., began.
1946 Howe commenced production of chemical fertilizers'
6 -10 -46 Application submitted by Howe, Inc., for authority to construct
a glad for the storage and manufacture of commercial fertilizer
products (Howe states in letter that company has been mixing
fertilizer since 1939).
6 -18 -46 Council denied 6 -10 -46 request-
6-19-46 First industrial zone established in Brooklyn Center..
8 -14 -46 Northerly portion of Lot 1, Block 4 of Brooklyn Manor Addition
was rezoned to heavy industry.
8 -26 -46 Howe building started.
1950 -1960
8 -31 -50 New Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance was adopted (1940 Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance repealed).
9 -22 -55 Building permit no. 3443 issued for construction of the first
portion of the north building-
-2-
10 -31 -55 Petition by the people of Brooklyn Manor Addition against
rezoning of the north 150 feet of Lot 2, 3, 4, of Block 4 of
Brooklyn Manor from residential to industrial. Also petitioned
in favor of removing part of the building built in the residential
f zone.
11 -28 -55 Council granted rezoning of the south 50 feet of-the north
}; 150 feet of the site due to a request from Howe for rezoning
because building (no. 3443) was built larger than stated and
encroached on land zoned residential.
10 -17 -55 Letter from Howe to Village Council requesting zoning action to
bring building into compliance due to mistake (corner of new
building is on property not properly zoned). Letter also refers
to earlier request made by Howe to rezone that area industrial.
11 -28 -55 "Special permit" issued for construction of a building for
warehouse purposes in connection with existing operation.
12 -8 -55 Planning Commission public hearing for an amendment under the
Zoning Ordinance. Petitioner desires to rezone to industrial
the north 150 feet of Lot 2, 3, 4, of Block 4 of Brooklyn Manor
Addition or rezoning of sufficient portion of that described
area to encompass the new building being constructed thereon.
12 -28 -55 City Council took the following actions:
1. Rezoned to industrial the south 50 feet of the north 150
feet of Lot 2,.3, 4, of Block 4 of Brooklyn Manor Addition.
2. Granted special permit to construct on the industrial
portion of the south 50 feet of the north 150 feet of Lot
2 3, 4, of Block 4 of Brooklyn Manor Addition a building
60 feet by 165 feet for warehouse purposes. At that same
time Council stipulated that suitable fencing should be'_`
Working Draft inS -611th
-3-
on the 100 foot line between the residential and industrial
property and the buffer strip should be completed within'
one years time.
3. Passed an ordinance to regulate and control atmospheric
pollution.
9 -1 -56 Howe petitioned Village Council for a rezoning of Lot 5, Block 4
of Brooklyn Manor Addition (lot west of existing Howe site).
Proposal either denied or withdrawn. A substitute petition sub-
mitted requesting a special permit for an addition to the easterly
end of the north building.to be used for warehouse purposes.
9 -6 -56 Planning Commission public hearing on request for rezoning from
residential to industrial Lot 5, Block 4, Brooklyn Manor lying
south of the north 150 feet. Petitioner is Howe, Inc. Rezoning
requested for the purpose of permitting the construction of a
warehouse immediately adjacent to the building located on Lot 4.
The public hearing was continued at the 11 -1 -56 Planning Commis-
lion meeting.
9 -12 -56 Planning Commission public hearing for a special permit amendment
under the Zoning Ordinance requesting that part of Lot -1,.2, and
3 of Block 4, Brooklyn Manor Addition lying south of north 150
feet. Petitioner wants to construct a one story warehouse, 62 feet
by 80 feet immediately in front of existing warehouse,
9 -13 -56 City Council voted to issue an industrial special permit to Howe-
to build an addition to present warehouse, 62 feet by 80 feet
to be used as a warehouse.
2 -26 -57 Recommendation to Howe Fertilizer from Dr. MacGregor from the
University of Minnesota based on tests from Twin City Testing
Working Draft
-4-
and Engineering Laboratory. Recommends changes be made at Howe..`
(Prior to this date a Mr. Fredrick R. Hughes filed . a complaint
against Mr. Howe with the Brooklyn'Center Justice of Peace
regarding pollution caused by Howe Fertilizer.
4 -29 -57 Twin City Testing and Engineering Laboratory submitted a report
on pollution (fertilizer dust, fallout near Howe)
9 -9 -57 Temporary injunction and permanent relief hearing. City
attempted to show Howe was a public nuisance.
11 -19 -57 Case heard in District Court. Case instituted by Village against
Howe. Case was twelve days in court.
5 -6 -58 Tre findings of fact, conclusions of law and order for judgement
issued by Judge Anderson annoyance caused by the operation of
the fertilizer plant was not of such a magnitude as to constitute
a public nuisance under the law. (Howe, during the conflict and
trial, installed $25,000 worth of equipment to attempt to clear
up the problem) Case was originally submitted to Judge Dllan
but was transferred to Judge Anderson.
6 -27 -58 Petition presented by people of Brooklyn Manor against request
for a special use permit to the addition of the present warehouse.
7- 3Y -58,_ Public hearing at Planning Commission meeting on the special use
permit for the addition to present warehouse.
7 -22 -58 Council votes to allow Howe to build an additional warehouse
(for warehousing only).
1957 New Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance adopted. (1950 Comprehensive
Working Draft Zoning Ordinance repealed)
-5-
NOTE: Howe was not a permitted use under the 1957 Ordinance-
and did not apply for a special use permit; thus Howe became
a nonconforming use in 1957.
1960-1970
10 -30 -61 Building permit no. 9032 issued to Howe for a building "attached -
to -the north side (open)" proposed use is for warehouse purposes.
6 -29 -63 Council authorized $500, expenditure for investigation of air
pollution problem at Howe.
9 -9 -63 Council granted a building permit for a maximum 6,974 square
foot for "warehouse use only ". Motion to inspect improvements
which Howe promised (improvements to the manufacturing process
to abate air pollution) in conjunction with being granted the
building permit.
9 -13 -67 Council consideration of Planning Commission Application No. 67059
'(approval of site and building plans for an addition to an
existing industrial office building).
11 -13 -67 City Council approved plans for an addition to an industrial
.office building under Planning Commission Application No. 67059.
A 1968 New Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance adopted. (1957 Comprehensive
Zoning Ordinance repealed.)
1970 --1980
4 -14 -72 City letter to Howe requesting a reasonable, schedule of effective
remedial action relative to ground vibrations emitted from Howe,
Inc.
Working Draft
-6-
4 -14 -72 Notice from City stating schedule for remedial action must be
received by 4- 24 -72.
NOTE: Schedule not received from Howe, City initiated formal
complaint, took statement from complainant.
4 -25 -72 Letter from Russel stating work to solve problem.can only be
done after 7 -1 -72 also stated felt Ordinance relating to vibration
was impractical, unenforceable.
5 -1 -72 Letter from City to Russel stating a 7 -1 -72 remedial action date
is not a "reasonable and stated Ordinance was "cogent,
practical and enforceable" and would be enforced.
5 -4 -72 Statement taken from complainant.
9 -8 -76 Howe cited for "expanding industrial site use without City approval
by parking tank trailers and semi- trailers on unauthorized sp,ar..e"
(sod stripping, grading and gravel base applied at the southerly
portion of the properties commonly described as 3129 and 3135 49th
Avenue North constitute unauthorized and improper site work),.
5 -17 -77 Explosive permit issued.
.10 -13 -77 Letter from Howe to City explaining their steps "to improve our
pollution program by ordering a Venturi scrubber to be installed
by 7- 1 -78 ".
11 -12 -77 Planning Commission Application No. 77068 for site and building'
plan approval (contingent upon rezoning approval) denied by
Resolution No. 77 -239 of City Council.
11 -12 -77 Planning Commission Application No. 77037 requesting rezoning from
R -1 to I -2 the two parcels described as 3129 and ;3135 -`49th Avenue
Working Draft North denied by Resolution No. 77 -239 of the City 'Council.
a
-7-
11 -28 -77 Council directed staff to prepare a draft ordinance requiring
licensing for establishments emitting high levels of air pollutants.
5 -23 -78 Tom Heenan made noise tests. Tests results demonstrate compliance '
with NPC 2. In memorandum to Gerald Splinter, Tom Heenan states
it is his opinion "the noise complaints received cannot be
attributed to the blasting at _Howe."
6-5 -78 Explosive license issued to Howe through 3 -1 -79. NOTE: Subject
to a stipulation agreement signed on or before 8- 15 -78. (also
subject to Howe meeting certain other conditions)
7 -12 -78 Letter from Russel (Attorney for Howe) protesting Council action
placing conditions of explosive permit unrelated to subject being
regulated.
7 -20 -78 Stipulation agreement between Howe, Inc., and Minnesota Pollution
Control 7,&cncy for abating nuisances (odor, particulate matter,
dust).
8 -31 -78 MPCA issued Howe an installation permit #155- 78 -I =6 for modification'
to the packed bed scrubber (issued pursuant to air quality stipu-
lation agreement between Howe and MPCA, 7- 20 -78).
12 -23 -78 Letter to MPCA from Howe asking for an operating permit for plant
facilities (due to completion of stipulation agreement),
1 -6 -79 Fire at Howe.
1 -10 -79 Request made for construction of temporary building.
1 -11 -79 Demolition permit issued to Howe representative (Mr. William Kranz).
NOTE: Temporary structure can be permitted in conjunction with
P Y P J
salvage operation provided demolition permits have been obtained.
Working Draft
-8-
1 -16 -79 Request by Howe to build temporary structure authorized by City
staff.
1 -18 -79 Letter to City from Howe stating:
J. 8'.' screen fence along 49th Avenue North continuing behind
the 2 houses owned by Howe installed.
2. Blacktopping laid around plant.
3. Completed Phase I, II of stipulation agreement.
4. Compliance tests showed.operation in compliance.
3 -9 -79 Council approved a contract with Hickok '& Associates to complete
a study of agricultural chemical facility evaluation. (Prior
to this date, Mr. Loofbourow retained):
3 -22 -79 Planning Commission Application No. 79016 for site and building
plan approval and Planning Commission Application No. 79017
.:requesting a variance from Section 35 -111 to build a nonconforming
use at setback and buffer requirements other than that contained
in the Zoning Ordinance was tabled at the Planning Commission
meeting.
3 -26 -79 Prior to Council meeting on this date, Mayor wrote letter to
Governor concerning lack of action to resolve situation left
from Howe fire.
4 -6 -79 City staff met with Howe to discuss Loofbourow and Bruen reports.
4 -19 -79 Application No. 79016 and 79017 were denied by the Planning
Commission.
Working Draft
Working Draft
Complaints
Brooklyn Center files include numerous complaints against Howe made
by Brooklyn Center citizens to the City of Brooklyn Center. The `
complaints are generally for vibrations, dust, and /or fumes:
A review of Minneapolis files on Howe has not been made. Our-own files
include numerous copies of complaints against Howe made by Minneapolis
citizens to the City of Minneapolis. Our files also include copies of
citations issued to Howe by the City of Minneapolis for alleged ordinance
violation under Section 47.180 (prohibited emissions) of the Minneapolis
City Ordinances on the following dates: 3 -8 -78, 4- 19 -78, 6- 26 --78,
7 -1 -78 and 7 -6 -78.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency was established in 1967 and its rules
were promulgated in 1969. In reviewing the MPCA files, a record of over
50 complaints against Howe are found. In most of the complaints, action
taken by the MPCA concerning the complaint is noted. Action generally
includes investigation; of complaint, notification of Howe and a response
to the complainant.
;Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application Nos. 79016 and 79017
Applicant: Howe, Inc.
Location: 4821 Xerxes Avenue North
{ Request: Site and Building Plan Approval (7901.6) and a Variance from Section
35 -111 to build a Nonconforming Use at Setback and Buffer-Requirements
other than that contained in the Zoning Ordinance (79017)
Applications 79016 and 79017 were tabled by the Planning Commission on March 15,
1979 and continued to a special meeting to be held on March 22, 1979.to allow
further time for the preparation of various reports considered to be essential
in the Commission's review of these applications. The City Attorney is address -
ing a number of legal issues relating to the request to rebuild a structure
which was destroyed by fire on January 6, 1979 at the Howe Fertilizer plant.
This report is expected by Thursday evening's meeting: Consultants have also
been retained by the City to evaluate the current operations of the plant, in-
dicate the potential dangers involved with the operations, review current City
and State regulations relating to the operations and make recommendations to help
ensure the health, safety and general welfare of people on or near the site.
The staff has had an opportunity to review the preliminary report of Hickok and
Associates relating 'to chemicals and water quali The final re port is expected
by Friday of next week. A report from William H. Bruen, Fire Protection Consult -
ant, regarding a general fire safety inspection on the site and a report from
R. L. Loofbourow regarding blasting to loosen piles of fertilizer are included
with your agenda materials for your review.
The site and building plans submitted for review under Application No. 79016
r - t t.. tt_ _ 1 l _.. ..L l.. .. [..,� 7 .! nn.wn ..:w+-. *n - 71 7 1 v 7A
cot1SlSt lJi d TC y UGJ� U 1.11C Cifl�/lt4tltlt. W icVUttu wit u}�(�tvnnnuw t.�t
building constructed in similar design, runction and - location - To that or the
building destroyed by fire. The.building housed maintenance operations, chemicals,
and fertilizers - and was also used for storage of vehicles and equipment. He
proposes to construct a precast concrete building with fire -wall separations be
tween the warehouse area and th maintenance, and garage areas. The previous
building was a metal pole barn type building. The plan also shows an approximate
37' x 74' lower level located approximately in the middle of the building to be
used as a dead file storeroom. The plan indicates a 25' separation between the
new and the existing middle building, rather than an approximate ll' separation
which existed at the time of the fire.
The applicant is also seeking, under Application No. 79017, a variance from
Section 35 -111 of the City Ordinances to allow reconstruction of a nonconforming
use as well as variances from the setback and buffer requirements contained in
the current Zoning Ordinance. Presently, the Zoning Ordinance requires a 100'
buffer strip where I -2 abuts R -1, and this protective strip cannot be used fora
parking, driveways, off - street loading or storage and is required to be land -
scaped and contain an 8' high opaque fence or wall. It also requires a 50'
building setback from the property line where it abuts a major thoroughfare
(Brooklyn Boulevard). The building destroyed by fire was located approximately
85' from the R -1 zoned property at 3129 - 49th Avenue North and was 82 from
that property at the closest point. Because the applicant proposes a 25'
separation between the buildings, the new building would be located approxi-
mately 55' from the same residential property and.would be 50' at the closest
point. The proposed building would be set back 1' at the closest point from
the property line where it abuts a major thoroughfare. A 50' building setback
is required in this instance by the current ordinance.
-1- 3 -22 -79
Applications Nos. 79016 and 79017
The following are points that the staff feels have an affect on the consideration
of the variance questions related to this application. First of all, the Howe
Fertilizer operation is a nonconforming use because the manufacturing, wholesale
trade, warehousing and storage of fertilizers are not listed as 'either a permitted
or special use in the I -2 zoning district. This is consistent with the City's
Comprehensive Plan Policy Statement relating to the fertilizer plant which says
on page 67 "Recognize the existing fertilizer plant and other nonresidential uses
located just off Osseo Road next to the Soo line Railroad, but prohibit any
further expansion of their operations. If at all feasible, the eventual re-
location of these uses to more compatible sites - should -be undertaken thereby
permitting a rounding out of the existing residential area.
In reviewing the variance requests, particular attention must be given to the
Standards for Variances contained in the Zoning Ordinance Section 35 -240 states
that: "In instances where the strict enforcement of the literal provisions of this
Zoning Ordinance would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique and
distinctive to an individual property under consideration, the City Council shall
have the power to grant variances, in keeping with the spirit and intent of this
ordinance. The provisions of this ordinance, considered in conjunction with the -
unique and distinctive circumstances affecting the property must be the proximate
cause of the hardship; circumstances caused by the property owner or his prede-
cessor in title shall not constitute sufficient justification to grant a variance."
The ordinance goes on to state at Section 35 -240 2, that: "The Board of Adjustments
and Appeals may recommend, and the City Council may grant variances from the
literal provisions of this ordinance in instances where their strict enforcement
would cause undue hardship because of curcumstances unique and disti to the
individual property under consideration. However, the Board shall not recommend
.. ... .. I'-*--- .t.. r....._..21 ..L..7 .: ... ..........11 .. a ...l. nce • ihot .rr .1.
Qlld lV WIC V 1 Ly %,VUffl, I I jai, i I o il 110 �.u��: eCi ilsl t, a. u Hur ICai{- , _;ij• L c.:.u ':s no t L
permitted under this ordinance in the district where trie arrecteu per:,uns iana is
located. A variance may be granted by the City Council after demonstration by
evidence that all of the following qualifications:
(a) >,. Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical 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 person 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 neighborhood in which the parcel of land is located.
-2- 3 -22 -79
Application Nos. 79016 and 79017
It would seem inconsistent to recommend that the building be allowed to be re-
constructed in light of the Comprehensive Plan Policy which addresses the
eventual relocation of this use to a more compatible site. To allow reconstruct-
ion of the building in question, or any other building on the site following its
total destruction by fire, 'would seem to prolong the life of the nonconforming
use and, therefore, be contradictory to this relocation policy. It would also
seem that an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would have to be undertaken to
rectify this inconsistency.
The Standards for Variances -seem quite clear when addressing variances regarding
uses not permitted in a particular zoning district. The ordinance states:
The Board (Board of Adjustments and Appeals) shall not recommend and the Ci
Council shall in no case permit as a variance any use that is not permitted under
this ordinance in the district where the affected person's land is located." It
is also felt that all four of the standards cannot be met, particularly Standard
(d) which states: "The granting of the variance will n ot be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in
which the parcel of land is located.
Independent of the variance request to rebuild a nonconforming use, we have also '
looked at the applicant's request to rebuild the structure at setback and buffer
requirements other than that contained in the current Zoning Ordinance. Again,
the Standards for Variances must be applied to the situation and it is felt that
the current setback and buffer requirements should not be varied from. A hard-
ship in this case could not be demonstrated because the setbacks could be met as
a matter of design. The situation would not be looked at as being unique and to
build the building at other than these minimum requirements would be considered
detrimental to the public welfare and injurious to other land or improvements in
(hn ��'ff n�n4.f.nv.4nnr1 4- +k^ n-F lnvA it 1^-- +^A
YI I \. ♦..4 l y l l✓ V I I I V V U 1
41 .11 1 1 V I I w l t l+M. I V V I V I I M I 1V a J a Uf V.— M.
As r quested, I have supplied copies of the Planning Commission and City Council
minut relating to two Planning Commission Applications reviewed in the.fall of
1977 regarding a rezoning request and site and building plan.review.
We wil be prepared to review these matters in more detail at Thursday evening's
meeting at which time the City Attorney's report will be presented.
-3- 3 -22 -79
MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE
STATE OF MINNESOTA
SPECIAL SESSION
March 22, 1979
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission met in special. session and was.called to order, by Chairman
Hal Pierce at 8:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Hawes, Manson and Lucht. Also
present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Warren, City Manager Gerald
Splinter, City Attorney Richard Schieffer, Acting City Engineer James Noska and
Planning Aide Gary Shallcross.
APPLICATION -NOS. 79016 and 79017 (Howe, Inc.)
Fo the Chairman explanation, tihe Secretary introduced the Application by
Howe, Inc 'for site and building plan approval and a variance from Chapter 35 as
the only items of business for the evening's meeting. The Secretary explained the
various reports concerning Howe Fertilizer had been, or would soon be, received by
City staff. These reports included one from Hickok and Associates relating to
chemicals and water quality, the report of the fire prot'e consultant, and a
report regarding blasting at the site by R. L. Loofbourow.
The Secretary reviewed the applicant's plan to rebuild an approximate 217' x 74'
building constructed similar in design, function and location to that of the build -
ing destroyed by fire. The building, he said, housed maintenance operations,
chemicals and fertilizers and was also used for storage of vehicles and equipment.
U0 St,+-,4 -1-9.n �r.�linvnh 4n
nv.nr�nrc to n
n - recast � nr concrete h ilfilMfl with fire
LL {ilrV V.1i.,. LL t I itla I V pr opcsV V •s �r a -• v V • e •
wa i l separations between the warehouse ar'ed a iu Lile and ii .lell0l A: aiiu yal ayc ar'ca� :
The former building was a metal pole barn type building. In addition, he went on,
the plan also shows an approximate 37' x 74' lower level located approximately in,
the middle of the building to be used for dead file storage. The plan, he noted,
indicates a 25' separation between the new and the existing middle building, rather
than an approximately 11' separation which existed at the time of the fire.
The Secretary explained that the applicant is al seeking a variance: both for
the reconstruction of a nonconforming use and for an encroachment into setback and
buffer requirements. The Secretary pointed out that the proposed building would
encroach on the 100' buffer strip where I -2 abuts R1 and the setback requirements
from a major thoroughfare of 50 feet. He noted that these problems are exacerbated
by the applicant's proposal for a 25' separation between the new building and the
existing middle building.
In addressing the issue of expanding a nonconforming use, the Secretary stated
that Howe Fertilizer, Inc..is a nonconforming use, not listed as a permitted or a
special use in the I -2 zoning district. Moreover, he said, the City's Comprehensive
Policy Statement relating to the fertilizer plant advises the'City Council to pro-
hibit any further expansion of the operation and if it_all feasible, to relocate
the fertilizer operation to a more compatible site.
As to whether the City could allow a variance from the ordinance in permitting
a nonconforming use, the Secretary cited Section 35 -240, 2 of the Zoning Ordinance
which states:
3 -22 -79 -1-
The Board of Adjustments and Appeals may recommend and the City Council
may grant variances from the literal provisions of this ordinance in instances
where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances
unique and distinctive to the individual property under consideration However,
the Board shall not recommend and the City Council shall in no case permit as a
variance any use that is not permitted under this ordinance in the district where
the affected person's land is located. A variance may be granted by the City
Council after demonstration by evidence that all of the following qualifications'
are met:
(a) Because of the particular physical surroundings, shape, or
topographical 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 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 i njurious to other land or improvements
in the neighborhood in which the.parcel of land is located.
Tt woO d appear inconsistent, the Secretary argued, to recommend the building be
al lowed to , be- reconstructed ' i n l i gh;t 'of the 'pol'icy of 'eventU l `_relocation �Obtl i ned 0
in t Comprehen"si"ve Plan. To allow reconstruction of the building i quest or
any other building following its total destruction by fire, he argued,!'would seem
to` prolong the life of the nonconforming use and, therefore, be contradictory
to this relocation policy. An amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, he said, would
have to be undertaken to rectify this inconsistency.
As to the - variance from the existing setback and buffer requirements, the Secretary
again argued that applying the Standards for Variances to the situation at hand
would result in a recommendation to deny the ;variance request. Neither the
standards for hardship nor uniqueness can be demonstrated.he said, and to build
the building at other than these minimum requirements would be considered detr
mental to the public welfare and injurious to other land or improvements in the
neighborhood in which the parcel is located.
In response to questions from members of the Planning Commission, The Secretary
explained the proposed building was similar in size to the old one with the
exception of the additional underground storage area. It is of roughly the same
height, and that the new building would lie further to the north thereby aggrev
ating setback requirements. Commissioner Theis asked whether the previous building
had met the setback requirements in force at -the time °it was constructed. The
Secretary answered that he was not sure.
In response to a question from Commissioner Hawes the Secretary illustrated how
the proposed building could be built to meet present setback requirements. He
allowed that it would have to be set at an angle almost perpendicular to the
proposed location.
3 -22 -79 -2-
In answer to questions from Commissioner Theis, the Secretary explained the land
adjacent to the northeast of the Howe site was highway property, but that the
roadway for Brooklyn Boulevard is placed considerably east of the Howe property
line. Chairman Pierce asked whether the frontage road shown on the drawings was
maintained by the State. The Secretary responded that it was. Commissioner Hayes
asked whether consideration had been given to adding blacktopped area in the plan.
The Secretary replied it had not because staff had advised the applicant to keep
the initial proposal as simple as possible. He also stated that the area desig-
nated for greenstrip could not be used for driveway purposes.
Commissioner Malecki inquired why the building in the proposed plan was set north
of the previous building's, location. The Secretary replied that the separation
requirement for a temporary building approved following the fire was set by the
Fire Chief at 25 feet. The new separation requirement, he said, would depend on
the construction of the building and other factors. Chairman Pierce asked whether
a variance would be required to build the new building at the same location as
the previous building. The Secretary replied that such a variance would be
necessary. At that point the City Manager introduced the City Attorney for pur-
poses of reporting to the Commission on the legal status of nonconforming uses,
and to examine the Howe case in light of the legal principles involved. The City
Attorney;began by saying that he had not finished his investigation, but that he
wanted to go over the background of nonconforming uses. He reminded the Commiss-
ion that staff reports do not constitute the universe of facts to be considered
in a case, but that the Commission must seek out the facts through rigorous
questioning.
The City Attorney observed that zoning in the United States goes back to only
1926. He stated that while the primary function of .cities is for people to live
in them, often incompatible uses exist within cities and they possess property
rights. Under the Constitution, he pointed out, the only way to abridge these
property rights and eliminate incompatible uses` was by purchasing the property in
question This is ton rn-gtiv in most rcSeS, hnwpvpr, onp . wav to apt around the
expense of put - diaa i iv PfOP O" ty LO c 1 inlinia Lc was ....., "
forming use and thereby keep it from growing The purpose of the nonconforming
designation, therefore, lies between preserving property rights and phasing out
incompatible uses. In this way, he stated, the life of an incompatible use can
be ended "when the value of the property for that purpose has been used up. He
pointed out that the City's nonconforming use ordinance is common and.is not con-
sidered arbitrary. Nonconforming uses can be eliminated.
The City Attorney explained there are two types of nonconformity: nonconformity
as to structural aspects and nonconformity as to use. The courts, he said, do
not generally treat these two kinds of nonconformity differently. Moreover, he
pointed out, Howe is both a nonconforming use and a nonconforming structure.
The City Attorney first dealt with the issues relating to nonconforming structures
First of all, he stated, the proposed building is nonconforming as to setback. A
variance would -be needed to allow this violation and no precedent in Minnesota
law exists for allowing such a variance. He noted, Brooklyn Center does allow
variances if the Standards for a Variance in Chapter 35 are met..` Secondly, he
pointed out, the proposed building represents an _expansion of -a nonconforming
use. > He gave three instances where this was the case: 1) by the addition of
the basement storage area; 2) by changing the use of the building over 'time;
and 3) by improving the building and thereby extending the life of the nonconform-
ing use.
3 -22 -79 -3-
Working in the opposite direction of the issues pertaining to a nonconforming
structure, he said, were issues concerning safety. Normally, he stated, when a `
building is entirely destroyed, its use is over. Even if the issues of a noncon-
forming structure were resolved to allow the rebuilding of the same size and type
of building as existed previously, this new building would aggrevate safety con-
siderations. The City Attorney, therefore, stated that a- new_ sprinkling system
---which would pay for itself over time - - -and dykes to contain spillage could be
required with approval of site and building plans.,
Commissioner Theis inquired whether any of the additions for safety could be
outside of the proposed building. The City Attorney answered that he had not yet
considered the possibility of improvements outside the building. Chairman Pierce
asked whether any precedent existed for treating nonconforming structures separ-
ately .from nonconforming uses. The City Attorney responded this indeed was the
crux of the issue, but added that he was not convinced that Howe Fertilizer was,
in fact, a nonconforming use. A valid nonconforming use, he stated, is one which
was legal when it was constructed, but which became nonconforming at some point
later on. If it was never allowed, he explained, then it is simply a zoning
violation. Further research into the past history of Howe Fertilizer and the
City's Zoning Ordinances, he said, is necessary to determine the exact legal
status of Howe, Inc. If Howe, Inc. is simply a zoning violation, he added, then
any additions to the complex are simply more zoning violations.
The City Attorney went on to discuss conditions for rebuilding. If the building
is part of a complex, he said it must be a vital par ;of.the totai'operation' for
the Council to allow it to be reconstructed. In order to decide this the Commis -
sion must determine what went on in the destroyed buildinq, and how it fits into the
Howe operation. He also said that if the destroyed building were-originally built
to store equipment, but later was used to store chemicals, the new building must
be built only for the purpose of storing vehicles, the original use. Another
pratarit'ial violation of. tiic 111Gw: vparution'S nvYtcon - ming ..tat li
u:;, e said, would
be the change in the manufacturing process which would have a different
on, th.e neighborhood. He gave an example of.a man repairing- three cars week in
his garage and over time this became 103 cars per week, but added that the courts
have not dealt with the change in use issue. He concluded by saying the City's
Nonconforming Use Section conforms to rulings by the courts. _
Commissioner Manson.raised_ the case'of the motel in which a couple of rooms were
destroyed by fire and were not rebuilt. Since the motel was a nonconforming
use, she wondered whether there was any precedent for disallowing an expansion
of a nonconforming use. The City Attorney replied that no similarity could be
drawn to the Howe case since the City Council ruled in that case that less than
60% of the building was destroyed and allowed reconstruction; but the owner
chose not to rebuild. Commissioner Theis asked 'how great a change in the ' manu-
facturing process must take place for it to constitute an expansion of a noncon-
forming use. The City Attorney could not cite any cases on that point, but
offered the theory that if the Howe operation became nonconforming when it was
producing organic fertilizer, the change to chemical fertilizer would constitute
an expansion of a nonconforming use. A dramatic change in volume, he said, would
be similar. Commissioner Hawes asked for a clarification of the 60% rule (refer-
ring to the rule that if a nonconforming use is destroyed to the extent of 60%,
it may not be rebuilt) . The City Attorney responded that 60% rube always
applies The issue is whether it applies to the entire business or whether it
can be applied to a single'building. He ekplained that if the building in
question were inseparable, from the business, then the business would be the unit
of consideration when applying the 60Z rule. If the building were nonessential,
then the building alone would be the unit of consideration. Commissioner Lucht
voiced his concern about the inconsistency of allowing the storage of fertilizer
in C2 zones while prohibiting it in I -2 zones. If the proposed building were
only for storage, the City Attorney replied, then it'could likely be permitted.
3 -22 -79 -4-
At that point, the City Manager reported that reports -by the safety consult-
ant and by the explosives consultant had been received. A report by the engineer-
ing consultant on the storage of hazardous chemicals was expected the following
week. He stated that the initial findings of the explosives consultant were
that existing regulations pertaining to explosives are currently being met by
Howe Fertilizer. He added a dynamiting permit, which must be appproved by the
City Council, would likely be on the Council's agenda in April. The City Manager
also advised the Planning Commission not to be concerned with the possibility of
a law suit in deciding the case at hand since the likelihood of a lawsuit was
about equal regardless of what decision was made.
The City Manager framed the 'issue as being a decision whether the Howe operation
can be modified to approximate the level of annoyance of other 1-2 uses or
whether Howe cannot be so modified as to become a compatible use in the neighbor -
hood. For now, he said, City staff had reached the judgment that the building
cannot be rebuilt as proposed because it would extend the life of the facilities
on the site, and that a building meeting current setback requirements could be
proposed in place of the plan submitted.
Commissioner Lucht asked why the proposed building would not be a permitted use
if warehouses are permitted uses in I -2 zones. The City Attorney added that the
case at hand involved a site with a use and an accessory use to the main use.
The use of separate buildings could not be separated from the use of the site as
a whole.
Commissioner Malecki asked for a clarification from the City Manager on what
"making Howe more compatible" would mean. The City Manager answered that the
manufacturing processes might be changed to make it more like other I -2 uses,
the nature of a compatible manufacturing process would have to be determined,
he said, `and this process could potentially be tied to `the approval 'of the pro-
posed bUilAinq f.hairman Piarra ackad whathpr this meant Howe co0d become a
_ b . JC � i, . . i (- _ 1 J, l_ .. Ply ..... -r y. r !`.. ... -...: /` .^ Z. n r A f, J-
pel llli b=U U. 4l{C l y slallaycl l caw v Lllu t. wv:
}lluc i 10, - n ray v3m.m. s y �v r. v �J
Council must determine whether Howe Fertilizer can become comparable to other
I -2 uses which are permitted in its level of annoyance. He added to allow the
safe storage of the chemicals on the site could require significant upgrading of
the site. Commissioner Theis commented that to use the approval of the building
as a lever to force needed improvements would result in expanding a nonconforming
use. The City Manager suggested that a judgment would have to be made as to the
status of the nonconforming property when the proposed improvements were allowed.
Chairman Pierce then asked the applicant to speak on the issues raised. The
applicant's attorney, James Russell, complained that a comprehensive presentation
of the applicant -'s arguments could not be made at this time because they had not
received any of the reports pertaining to the case before the meeting. In con
nection with the report submitted by Secretary Ronald Warren, Mr. Russell stated
that there were three matters on which he differed: 1) that a variance is pro
hibited for a nonconforming use; 2) that the plan recommendation for phasing out
the Howe operation had any bearing on the case; and 3) that a 50' setback was
required from State owned property.
Concerning the setback from State owned property, Mr. Russell argued that since
that property contains the entrance road to the Howe site, and since the entrance
road is not a major thoroughfare, a 50 ft. setback was not required. He added
that the wider separation between the middle building and the north building
had been proposed because the Fire Chief indicated a wider separation was needed.
3 -22 -19 -5-
Mr. Russell explained that over the years, certain additions to the buildings on
the site have created traffic patterns which affect the operation of the business.
To encroach on the traffic attern b placing buildings in a different osition,
A Y P 9 9
P
he maintained, would create a hardship. Furthermore, he stated, the dust from
the site is not produced by the manufacturing process, but rather by the traffic.
Since the area of the traffic pattern has been blacktopped,° he said dust should
no longer be a problem.
He went on to question whether the building that was lost in the fire was, in
fact, a nonconforming use. He admitted that there were some things about the
Howe operation that were nonconforming, but maintained that others were conforming.
The amoniating process, he said, is where the controversy lies. The amoniating
process, he explai installed in 1957 and is the same today, but the per -
centage of product that is amoniated is decreasing in recent years. In referring
to the City's Zoning Ordinance, he pointed out that the manufacture of chemicals,
warehousing, and storage of vehicles were all permitted uses in the 1 -2 zone.
Since the lost building was used for storing chemicals, vehicles and dead files,
and for maintenance, it therefore, cannot be a nonconforming use according to the
ordinance, he argued.
The building in question, he went on, is part of a process. People that buy
fertilizers also buy chemicals, he explained, and it is important to have the
building for maintenance because of the varying demands of the seasons.
Mr. Russell said that he did not understand the Comprehensive Plan when it spoke
of rounding out the existing residential neighborhood. If this were really
intended, he asked, why was the property left with an I -2 zoning designation,
rather than rezoned to Rl?
Concerning the 60% rule, Mr. Russell maintained_ that the rule applies to the
whole complex because disallowing reconstructinn would be a taking of property.
He further stated that the rebuilding of a warehouse destroyed by fire was not''
the proper occasion to determine whether Howe Fertilizer could' remain on the site
- He added that attaching conditions to the approval of the site and building plan
may seem to have practical advantages to the staff, but that the merits of the
case stand apart - from'the conditions which might be attached. The building
should either be allowed or not.
Mr. Russell disagreed with the City Attorney that a 'change in the manufacturing
process could be grounds for disallowing the continuation of a nonconforming use;
He stated that this raises a constitutional question as to taking the property.
He expressed his feeling that binding Howe, Inc. to a certain dollar volume of
business would constitute a taking of property. He concluded by saying that he
assumed 1967 - the year of adoption of the Comprehensive Plan was.the beginning
of Howe's nonconforming status.
In response to questions from Commissioner Theis and Chairman Pierce, Mr. Bill
Howe stated that roughly 25% of the entire volume of fertilizer sold was subject
to the amoniating process, but that there was a possibility this process would
eventually come to an end.
Commissioner Hawes stated that it seemed Mr. Russell was including the building
as part of.the entire business when arguing against the 60% rule and yet spoke
of the proposed building as a separate entity when considering its use. Mr.
Russell answered that the'uses* proposed for the building are conforming and that
approval of reconstruction could be argued on either basis. Commenting on the
Comprehensive Plan, Mr. Russell stated that the residents of the area are misled
by it into thinking that the site'would be changed to Rl. The property is
presently zoned I -2, he said, and ought to remain that way.
3- 22 -79' -6-
Responding on behalf of the Comprehensive Plan, the City Attorney reminded the
Commission that rezonings are granted on a case -by -case basis as they are applied
for. He added that the Zoning Ordinance of Brooklyn Center has excluded ferti-
lizer manufacturing at least since 1957. Mr. Russell countered that to rezone
the property from I -2 to R -1 would be a taking of property since it would
diminish its value. The City Attorney responded that he did not agree with Mr.
Russell's conclusion.
A discussion then ensued in which Mr. Russell and Tom Howe answered a number of
questions put by Commissioner Hawes. Mr. Russell explained that the market for
Howe Fertilizer was mostly in Minnesota. He explained that all modes of trans
portion were utilized in transporting materials to and from the Howe site, and
that one of the advantages to the present site was its access to a number of
transport facilities. Commission Hawes remarked that other sites possessed
these advantage's and that relocating, therefore, was not impo ssible.
Mr. Al Breezer,of the Industrial Development Department of the Soo Line Railroad,
spoke in favor of the proposed rebuilding. He stated that industrial uses make
a good buffer zone between R1 development and the railroad. In response to
questions from Commissioner Hawes, Mr. Breezer stated that there would be certain
- problems in providing service to Howe, Inc. at another site relative to being
within the switching zone.
PUBLIC HEARING
Chairman Pierce then opened the meeting for a public hearing. Mr. Roy Pearson,
of 4950 Abbott Avenue North, disputed the claim of Mr. Breezer stating that the
proximity of the railroad was irrelevant since residential development exists
next to the railroad right now. He also pointed out that Howe, Inc. has changed
over ,time from _a potato bagging operation to the present,chemical fertilizer
�
., n , k .,t th ,. the today M no r. rnr ^ � 4 Qv.nn L� er
IINXIII.�fQI. I.UI IUt� V}JCI UI.IVII U{, 1.110 J 41 I VG 4VVQ�. 1'11 I LI:V IIU IIJVII, VI J U� vv(���'ll
Boulevara, gave a lengtny reminiscence OT Lne dangers associ with iiviny
near Howe Fertilizer over the past 25 years. He complained that many of the
vehicles that should have been stored in the old building were left outside,
that there was no cooperation between Howe, Inc. and the neighborhood, that the
amonia fumes were so bad that gardens were burned out as a result, and that areas
which were supposed to be sodded were now covered with weeds.
Mr. Paul Newton, of 4707 Washburn Avenue North, Minneapolis, stated that the con-
tractor for Howe Fertilizer told neighbors 30 years ago that the fertilizer
business would be moving out of the area. Mr. Newton related dangers experienced
during the recent fire and questioned what would be required of the neighborhood
in case of a full scale disaster. He concluded by pointing out that the Howe
Fertilizer Company had attempted to get into New Hope and Plymouth and were turned
down. Why, he asked, should they be allowed in Brooklyn Center?
Mr. Virgil Linn, of 3112 49th Avenue North, addressed the Commission with a
number of neighborhood concerns He first pointed out that moving the building
further north would move it closer to his property and would also cause truck
traffic to pass nearer to hi house. He argued that while the manufacturing
process may have changed as Mr. Russell pointed out earlier, the changes may bring
new potential problems. He cited fugitive dust, truck traffic, noise at odd hours
and dynamiting as problems which seem to be getting worse, rather than better.
Although changes may be coming, he argued, he had no obligation to wait for exist-
ing annoyances to go away. He also pointed out that the volume of chemicals at
the Howe site is much greater than the volume of such chemicals found in the
fertilizer at any hardware store.
3 -22 -79 -7-
Alice Rainville, 4th Ward Alderwoman from Minneapolis, addressed the Commission w
saying that her neigbborhood group had sent her.-to the Brooklyn Center Planning
Commission meeting to oppose any rebuilding of the Howe Fertilizer warehouse.
She characterized Mayor Dean Nyquist's attitude in a telephone conversation with
her earlier that day as "rude - and abrupt.' Her parting advice to the residents
gathered was that they should ask their elected officials to direct the City
Attorney to defend the people's position in court, if necessary, against Howe
Fertilizer.
The resident of 4706 Xerxes Avenue North commented on the January 6th fire and
the safety aspects of the chemical storage and added that dynamite should not be
stored on the site.
Mr. Mary Reich, of 3141 49th Avenue North, presented the Commission with - a bottle
of water gathered near the Howe site and asked that it be tested. He stated that
a drainage problem has-existed 'since the Soo Line moved the track servicing Howe,.,
Inc. Mrs. Eileen Scott, of 2704 - 44th Avenue North, complained that the smell
from Howe Fertilizer is so bad, four to five blocks away, that she cannot sit
out on her porch. She also stated that a sprinkling system would be worthless
in a chemical fire, and that Minneapolis residents must drink the water flowing
from Ryan Creek into the Mississippi River and are, therefore, very concerned
about drainage from the Howe site. Mr. Fred Fournier, of 4900 Zenith Avenue
North, argued that the case should be decided on the basis of the Comprehensive
Plan and the Zoning Ordinance which currently stipulated that the Howe Fertilizer
operation is to be phased out. Paul Newton stated a number of 'complaints. He
argued that whether the State paid the cleanup bill or whether Howe, Inc. paid
the cleanup bill and took it as a tax write -off, the taxpayers would wind up sub-
sidizing the company for its cleanup responsibilities. He said that the annoyance
moves around depending on which way the wind was blowing and concluded that the
area in - which Howe Fertilizer was located was simply wrong for that type of
Mr. Robert Wirth, of 4901 Zenith Avenue North, asked whether two 1 chemicals mixing
together could cause an explosion and `whether this might be the cause of the
recent fire. The City Manager answered that the State Fire Marshal had not yet
determined the cause of the fire. In answer to another_ question from Mr. Wirth,
the City Manager stated that tests taken along the smoke path indicate that no
contaminants were found at levels that would be harmful to human health. The
resident of 3205 - 49th Avenue North, asked about the well closings. The City
Manager responded that no contamination in wells had been found, but that some
had been closed as a precautionary measure:,
Mary Dodds, of 4730 Xerxes Avenue North, Minneapolis, reported that David Gray,
of the State Board of Health, says that there is contamination. At this point,
Mrs. Rainville voiced some lack of confidence in the S'tate's handling of the
matter and questioned whether the method currently being used to collect well
samples, would dilute the results. In response to Mary Dodds' concerns about the
Fire Department cleanup, the City Manager explained that run -off from the site
needed to be reduced to one part per million and that the timing of the cleanup
was in response to a request by the State PCA. Mrs. Dodds' argued that Howe, Inc.,
should be phased out because she receives amonia fumes from blocks away and is
worried that amonia scars lung tissue.
An unidentified person who had lost one leg as a result of a blood clot, talked
about the dangers of poisons and warned that poisons enter people's systems
through the food they eat as a result of such things as chemical fertilizers.
Mr. Murto, of 3205 - 49th Ave. North, asked the City Manager why the water
problem in the private wells had not been solved. The City Manager responded
that the problem was being addressed and that he would check on it. Mr. Newton
voiced his concern about the use of dynamite near tank cars on the railroad tracks.
3 -22 -79 -8-
a Chairman Pierce asked whether anyone else desired to speak.
Tom Howe rose to address the residents concerns. He perceived three basic
concerns:
1. Cencerns growing out of the fire.
2. Concerns over the oduction process at Howe, Inca
P
3. Problems related to industry. in general. ,
He stated that truck traffic is generally associated with any kind of industrial
use. He pointed out a number of safety concerns which Howe, Inc. has acted on.
The company, he said, does not use anhydrous amonia out of concern for safety;
it has blacktopped the driving area in order to reduce .the dust problem; and the
company has instal-led new technology in the area of pollution control as soon as
the technology was available. He stated that the. company's attitude was oriented
to production and problem solving, that they would like to stay in Brooklyn Center,
that he himself lives in the neighborhood, and that Howe, Inc. is in compliance
with all requirements of the PCA.
a ,
Agriculture, he argued, is suffering from the fire at Howe, Inc. because people
are afraid of the chemicals.- These chemicals stored at Howe Fertilizer, he said,
are designed to break up in the soil, are approved by the EPA, and are used widely
by farmers every day. He made the point that everything has a toxicity if you
get enough of it in one place, and that exact levels of toxicity have only recently
been established for many things because of the difficult measuring requirements
involved.
Mr. Wirth asked why it was necessary to send the snow to a special place if it
did not contain toxic contaminants. The City Manager responded that he had
earlier referred to snow in the nath of the s mke and tectS from air fallout were,
ffCyaclVe. hii. WI! l.il aJhcu QuVUU VIIC I.CJVYIYy vi {.IIL yivuiw rruoG:Y in i.uc uYCU. 161c:.
City Manager replied that Barr Engineering was still taking tests of ground water
in the area and that the greatest danger was felt to be near the railroad. A
final report on ground water was expected by May 1, 1979.
Mr. Cashin, of 3427 - 49th Avenue North, a chemist, warned City officials to read
the labels on.the chemicals stored at Howe Fertilizer. For his own part, he
stated, he would never use them on his own lawn although he would use them on a
farm. The chemicals at Howe Fertilizer, he maintained, are extremely dangerous
and EPA approval, he warned, is only applicable if the chemicals are used at safe
levels. He summed up the issue as a determination of where the constitutional
rights of one person ended and another began.
The City Manager asked the applicant whether he had any other site in mind for
expansion of his plant. Mr. Russell, the attorney for the applicant, answered
that the company was considering a site in Maple Grove in an industrial park.
Commissioner Hawes asked the railroad representative whether cars are labeled if
they are carrying toxic substances.
Commissioner Hawes asked whether Howe Fertilizer used amonium nitrate. Tom Howe
replied that they did.
CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING
Motion by Commissioner Malecki seconded by Commissioner Theis to close the public
hearing. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Hawes,
`Manson and Lucht. Voting against: none.. The motion passed.
3 -22 -79 -9-
Chairman Pierce outlined a procedure he felt was appropriate in deciding the
issue:
1. Will. the building be.allowed?
2. Will a variance be granted to allow construction at other than
present setback requirements?
3 Site and building plan approval.
Commissioner Hawes asked whether the matter needed to go to the neighborhood
advisory group. The Secretary responded that it would not be necessary,
Commissioner Theis advised that no decision should be made until the consultants'
reports are in, but added that-he did not think he could approve the building as
presently proposed. Chairman Pierce asked the Secretary what parking requirements
would be applied to the Howe application. The Secretary answered that parking
requirements depend on square footage plus the number of employees. The City
Manager gave the Commission the assurance that a parking analysis would be in-
cluded in the site and building plan,
MOTION TO TABLE APPLICATION NOS. 79 016 and 79017 (Howe, Inc.)
After a discussion of the Commissions upcoming schedu e, t ere was a motion by
Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner Manson to table Application Nos. 79016
and 79017 until April 19, 1979. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commissioners
Hawes, Manson,Lucht, Malecki and Theis. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
Mr. Virgil Linn inquired whether an open hearing would be held at the meeting on
April 19, 1979. Chairman Pierce stated that a hearing would be held for the new
yr N,u�I JULIMI t. t, iru VY ViiUb 1. Ii'Ja
^+ A 4
, ADJOURNMENT.
Motion by Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner- Malecki to adjourn the
meeting of the Planning Commission. Voting in 'favor: Chairman Pierce, Commis-
sioners Malecki, Theis, Hawes, Manson and Lucht. Voting against: none. The
motion passed. The Planning Commission adjourned at 12:03 p.m.
Chairman
3 -22 -79 -10=
"PLEASE NOTE THE EARLY STARTING TIME
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
STUDY SESSION
April 26, 1979
1. Call to Order: 7:30 p.m.
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes: April 12, 1979
4. Chairman's Explanation: The Planning Commission is an advisory body. One of
the Commission's functions is to hold public hearings.
In the matters concerned in these hearings, the
Commission makes recommendations to the City Council.
- The City Council makes all final decisions on these
matters.
5. James Speckman 79020
Site and Building plan approval for a 14,850
sq. ft. law office on an approximate 1 acre
site at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard.
6. Planning Consultant Presentation (8:00 p.m.)
Representations of B.R.W., the City's Planning
Consultant, will give a presentation regarding
various elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The
presentation will involve reports and recommendations
on the following:
a) Brooklyn Boulevard.
b) The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plana
c) The Park and Open Space Element of the Compre-
hensive Plan.
d) The Land Use Plan.
7. Other Business
8. Adjournment
Planning Commission Information Sheet
Application No. 79020
Applicant: James Speckman (Brooklyn Properties)
Location: 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard (Slaughterhouse Property)
Request: Site and Building Plan Approval
The applicant is seeking site and building plan approval to construct a 14,850
sq. ft. law office on the former slaughterhouse property located at 5637 Brooklyn
Boulevard. The site is bounded on the east by the Brooklyn Boulevard frontage
road; on the west by Northport Drive; on the north by two single family resi-
dential properties,(5643 Brooklyn Boulevard and 5642 Northport Drive) and on the
south by the Cl zoned property including the property and two single family homes
occupied temporarily by CEAP (5607 and 5625 Brooklyn Boulevard)
The site includes an approximate 167' x 291' parcel (the former slaughterhouse
parcel) and an approximate 28' x 165' area which is a part of the Library Terrace
Addition that includes the library property. The area in question was rezoned
to Cl under Application No. 78058 in December of 1978. The owner has indicated
that they have a purchase agreement for the 28' x 165` parcel and - replatting of
?the area is required.
The proposal comprehends having one entrance /exit point to the site, that being
along the Brooklyn Boulevard frontage road. Based on the ordinance required
formula of one space for every 200 feet of gross floor area, 74 parking spaces
are required. The applicant has calculated his parking needs for the site to be
approximately 59 spaces. He has provided six parking spaces on the plan and has
shown a Proof of Parking for 14 additional spaces. Concrete curb and gutter is
planned for installation where deferred parking is considered.. The applicant
their noQdc on the follnwincr balls:
1. Approximately 3,000 sq. ft. of tenant file storage and mechanical
room space at 1 space per 800 sq. ft. ` 3.7 spaces.
2. Approximately 2,000 sq. ft. of office -lunch room, corridors and
toilet areas at 1 space per 200 sq. ft. = 10 spaces.
3. Approximately 4,950 sq. ft. of rental office space for law
offices, accounting offices, etc. at 1 space per 200 sq. ft.
24.75 spaces.
4. Approximately 4, 950 sq. ft. for the applicant's law office
needs, estimated to be 21 spaces.
There is a 50 ft. setback from the property line abutting the Brooklyn Boulevard
frontage road which is highway department right -of -way. The ordinance requires
a 50 ft. building setback along major thoroughfares such as this. A 15 ft.
greenstrip and building setback is required where Cl and Rl abut at a property
line. The ordinance also requires a screening in this area and the plans indicate
a six f t..high opaque wood fence placed at staggered intervals to provide the
required screening along the north property line.
4 -26 -79 -1-
Application No. 70"x'
The landscape plan comprehends retaining as many trees and plantings on the site
as possible. A three ft. berm is proposed in an area along Northport Drive to
be fit in with existing trees and shrubs to provide further screening of the
site for the single family residential property located on the west side of
Northport Drive. A four ft. berm along the Brooklyn Boulevard frontage road is
also indicated. Three 22 diameter skyline Locusts and three 22" Green Ash,
as well as three 5 ft. high Norway pines are shown as additional trees to be
provided on the site. Spreading Junipers and Pyramidal Junipers are also
indicated.
We will be prepared to review the plans in more detail at Thursday evening's
meeting.
Plan approval should be 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 and utility plans are subject to review and
approval by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of permits.
3. A Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee (in
an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be submitted
to assure completion of approved site improvements
4. The building shall be equipped with an automatic fire extinguishing
system to meet NFPA Standard No. 13 and shall be connected to an
approved central monitoring system in accordance with Chapter 5
f the cftty '
5. All landscaped areas are to be treated with sod and shall be
equipped with an underground irrigation system to facilitate
site maintenance.
6. Any outside trash disposal facilities shall be appropriately
screened from view.
7. Plan approval acknowledges the deferral of 14 parking spaces
.based .on the applicant's parking plan which indicates that the
ordinance required parking spaces can be provided.
8. The property is subject to replatting as required by Chapter 15
bf the City Ordinances. The property is subject to final plat
approval prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
4 -12 -79 -2-
{ t
F_
......... .
4,-,. amp',
cl_
P7
k t 0
-ql 0
-s —� WTI..
r
c 2
" ..,....� „f�� f ��� � i a S y k � �� • 1 4 4 �C .// •+� /"� r µ �� raT � s p 't�
it
' A l,
�, � I �. �.-., f ad. � 4� � O A� J' l •P .:�. l 2 S 4 8 i 5 � ��
,+ .�„- , o�� . =..,, -� ;a /' yy ... F,. ww. �o .•a�a4,c<a�sa.l' in.a.np� -.e 1 s 1 7
i�
�l �i� � �. • .P' t 4. t t{ � V✓� e�ra�f � , 1�
��.« .� � �� �� °� f ^ � ? ,1 L s• .,..rte/ ,.- 'P� '����` \ ��`�.• ~a�
I fi ='
,� � r .mot � � �� � ` •- .- e^�...: -_• k�. ^.�.....,.._..., «=.;t.�
�s� � �°� c.r..s... •..®:....:�.i..�nJ.w....e..�.r �rA �rsa�..d.:.s..,. �'.a �� • s. t� �� I ;� ;c.__ �.1.,.. .e......a.r..- t r .......s
..�� 9 -� .�,.. »,� ` j ♦-,.`! 1< ] /!
� 6__.e....��... i � ' ^ „_¢ ( . �� � �1� �f� !`�f e* r� i t.:•Ausasar�•..� � f
7 b ?
a i ` A ;
A MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER IN THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE
STATE OF MINNESOTA
STUDY SESSION
'APRIL 26, 1979
CITY HALL
CALL TO ORDER
The Planning Commission met in study session and was cal led to order by Chairman
Hal Pierce at 7:35 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Hawes, Lucht and Erickson. Also
present were Director of Planning and Inspection Ronald Marren, and Planning
Assistant Gary Shallcross.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES (April 12, 1979
Motion by Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner Lucht to approve the minutes
as submitted. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Hawes; Lucht and
Erickson. Voting against none. The motion passed. Commissioners Malecki and
Theis abstained because they were not at that meeting.
APPLICATION NO. 79020 (James Speckmann)
Following the Chairman's explanation the first item to be considered was a
request for site and building plan approval by Mr. James Speckmann.on behalf of
Brooklyn Properties. The Secretary explained that the applicant intends to
construct a 14,850 sq.'ft. law office on the former slaughterhouse property
located at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard, He pointed out that the site is bounded on
the east by the Brcoklyn Boulevard frontage road; on the west by Northport Drive;
n
C y+ or . b\� two s y rcei rd —tial nv. per � and o the sct the
V11 Wit[. I�VI 411 by WYSIN /egle euNei i e.J .4V.eebeM. e+. �N... .. 1�., ueiv v C: u a ....... wv - .... �,} ..
rr -i zoned property i nciudaing the two single fami homes occupied• Lewpu ►y uj
LEAP. The site includes the former slaughterhouse parcel approximately 167' x
291', and an area approximately 25' x 165' which is part of the Library Terrace
Addition that includes the Library property. The Secretary noted that the area
in question was rezoned to Cl under Application No. 78058 in December of 1978.
He added that the owners have indicated they have a purchase agreement for the
28' x 165' parcel now belonging to the Library and that this would be part of
the area replatted.
The Secretary reviewed certain aspects of the site and building plan. He pointed
out that 74 parking spaces would be required based on the ordinance formula of
one space for every 200 feet of gross floor area. The applicant, however, has
calculated his parking needs for the site to be approximately 59 spaces. H
indicated that the plan submitted shows 60 parking spaces with a Proof of Parking
for 14 addition spaces. The building, he said, is required to be set back 50'
from the property line abutting Brooklyn Boulevard as per the ordinance. Also,
the required 15 ft. greenstrip and building setback where C -1 and R -1' -abut at
a property line is shown in the plans. He explained that the plans also indicate
a 6 ft. high opaque wood fence would be placed at staggered intervals to provide
the required screening along the north property Tine. The Secretary briefly
discussed the landscape plan which comprehends retaining as many trees and
plantings on the site as possible. He reviewed the various berms and plantings
proposed.:
4 -26 -79 —1
In response- to a question from Commissioner Theis, the Secretary indicated that
no screening from the homes across Northport Drive was required or indicated in -A
the plans. °Commissioner Theis inquired if parking had to be added to the site,
and whether there would be enough space available to provide sufficient berming
along with that parking. The Secretary responded that the plans as presently
drawn would seem to indicate that space was available.
Superintendent of Engineering James Noska arrived at 7:50 p.m.
Chairman Pierce asked whether the proposed site plan met all of the requirements
of the Zoning Ordinance. The Secretary answered that the proposed plan meets
the Zoning Ordinance Standards.
The Secretary next pointed out that the applicant =plans to retain as many plant-
ings on the site as possible, that handicapped parking stalls are indicated on
the south side of the building and reviewed the planned use of the various floors
in the building. Commissioner Theis asked why the amount of parking provided
was geared to the applicant's needs as opposed to the requirements for other Cl
uses. The Secretary responded that such a wavier of the parking requirement is
done often when the applicant can show that the parking requirement be reduced,
and as long as the potential exists for installing the required parking if the
City considers it necessary. In answer to Commissioner Hawes, the Secretary
pointed out that an underground sprinkling system has been provided on all sides
of the site.
The Commission then discussed with the Superintendent of Engineering the flow of
drainage on the site and the need for additional catch basins to handle drainage
to the southwest.
S c.,.. ^', a t� ans ered questions from the Commission, In response to Commis:
r .....,.., ... +.
sioner Hawes, Mr. Specktndnn s i.a L tiia t the antrance on the east -)O dc o f the
building was a.,regtrired fire exit. Chairman Pierce asked whether the applicant
felt the parking provided was adequate for the users' needs. Mr. ;Speckmann re-
plied that the attorneys who will be using the first floor of the building are
usually out on business and that both attorneys seldom have two clients in to
see them at the same.time. He added that certified public accountants were ex-
pected to occupy the upper floor and they were not expected to generate a great
deal of traffic. Commissioner Hawes asked whether a specific location on the
site had been designated for trash. Mr. Speckmann answered that this would be
placed at the northwest corner of the building.
MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION NO. 79020 (James Speckmann)
Motion by Commissioner Erickson seconded by Commissioner Lucht to recommend
approval of Application No. 79020 submitted by James Speckmann for an office
building at 5637 Brooklyn Boulevard subject to the following conditions:
1. Building plans are subject to review and approval by the Building
Official with respect to applicable codes, prior to the issuance
of permits.
2. Grading, drai and utility plans are subject to review and
approval by the City Engineer; prior to the issuance of permits.
3. A Performance Agreement and supporting financial guarantee
(in an amount to be determined by the City Manager) shall be
submitted to assure completion of approved site improvements.
4 - 26 -79 -2-
4. The building shall be equipped with an automatic fire exting-
uishing system to meet NFPA Standard No. 13 and shall be
connected to an approved central monitoring system in accord-
ance with Chapter 5 of the City Ordinances.
5, All landscaped areas are to be treated with sod and shall be
equipped with an underground irrigation system to facilitate
site maintenance.
6. Any outside trash disposal facilities shall be appropriately
screened from view.-
7. Plan approval acknowledges the deferral of 14 parking spaces
based on the applicant's parking plan which indicates that
the ordinance required parking spaces can be provided.
8. The property is subject to replatting as required by Chapter
15 of the City Ordinances. The property is subject to final
plat approval prior to the issuance of occupancy permits.
Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commissioners Malecki, Theis, Hawes, Lucht,
and Erickson. Voting against: none. The motion passed.
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 8:07 p.m. and resumed at 8:18 p.m.
Commissioner Manson arrived at 8:10 p.m.
REPORT BY THE PLANNING CONSULTANTS FROM BRW ON THE UPDATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN'
After the recess, the Secretary introduced Bill Weber and John McNamara of BRW
to make�a presentation to the Planning _'Commission and assembled.citizens on .
various aspects of the updated Comprehensive Plan. He emphas reed that the
purpose of the.meeting was to inform the Planning Commission, Neighborhood
Groups and other City Advisory Commissions as to the planning recommendations
being submitted. He added that all of the information presented by the Planning
Consultants at the meeting would be available to any in the Neighborhood Groups,
the City Advisory Commissions and any other interested citizens who desire it.
Brooklyn Boulevard Study
Bill Weber began the presentation by reviewing the Consultants' report on "
Brooklyn Boulevard. He stressed the importance of what he termed the "transition
zone", citing it as the most difficult problem in the study. Managing the
changes foreseen in the plan, he said, would be a most difficult problem for
the City. He proceeded to review the Brooklyn Boulevard study and stated that
there were three types of areas along Brooklyn Boulevard which presented varying
challenges.
1. Those areas where the permitted use should change;
2. Those areas which should be developed;
3. Those areas which should be maintained.
Mr. Weber reviewed the various uses in place along Brooklyn Boulevard as they
arranged themselves into general categories. He recommended that the area at
the extreme southern end of Brooklyn Boulevard remain for industrial use. Resi-
dential uses should predominate on both sides of Brooklyn Boulevard south of
Highway 100. North of Highway 100, residential use should continue on the west
side of Brooklyn Boulevard to 55th Avenue Nor t h w ith Brookdal on the east. He
4 -26 -79 -3-
recognized the area on the west side of Brooklyn from 55th to 58th.
Avenues North as a transition area which could go to service /office uses. He
cited the large tract of land available for highrise office use at the northeast
corner of 58th Avenue North and Brooklyn Boulevard. On the west side of Brooklyn
Boulevard north of 58th, he recommended mid- density residential use.
Howard Oien, of 6919 Oliver Avenue North, asked about the recommendation to leave
single family residential on the west side of Brooklyn Boulevard, just north of
Highway 100. Mr. Weber answered that he did not recommend removing Rl use from
that area because of the single family homes immediately west of the lots abut-
ting the Brooklyn Boulevard frontage road. He added that at the previous meet-
ing, the Planning Commission had recommended that this area be kept residential
Mr. Oien- explained that he owned a house in that area and wanted to convert it
to an office.
In returning to the discussion about the transition zone, Mr. Weber pointed out .
that the return on land investment is greatest with a townhouse development
next only to an office development. He recommended strengthening of the retail
area at 63rd, but also recommended that no further retail development be allowed
north of that point to the freeway. In that stretch he recommended more mid-
density, owner /occupied, residential use.
North of the freeway, he pointed out, the existing auto dealers are an appro-
priate use in this area. The service /office uses, however, should perhaps con-
vert`to retail uses, he ,said. North of 69th Avenue to the City limits, he
recommended more mid - density residential development. In response to an inquiry,
Mr. Weber stated that he did not recommend any apartments to be developed along
Brooklyn Boulevard, but rather encouraged owner /occupied units such as townhouses.
TRAFFIC OPERATI IMPROVEMENTS
Mr. Weber then `rreviewed various traffic control improvements which would improve
traffic. flows at £ve specific locations along -the Boulevard. In the retail area
surrounding 69th Avenue and Brooklyn Boulevard, he recommended that, wherever
possible, access to areas of commercial development be via local streets. He
recommended `a median to be constructed in the area north of the freeway to elimi-
nate left turns at intersections. He also recommended left turn lanes at the
intersection of 69th and `Brooklyn Boulevard.
At that point, Leo Hanson, 4911 Brooklyn Boulevard, complained about the level
of traffic on Brooklyn Boulevard and expressed concern about the future growth
of that traffic volume. Mr. Weber answered that the volume of traffic on Brook -
lyn Boulevard, south of Highway 100, is likely to go down in the future because
of the upgrading of Highway 94 and Highway 169 to the east. Mr. Hank Bogucki,
of 7000 Quai -1 Avenue North, asked about the suggestion that traffic signals be
installed at the intersections of 68th and 70th Avenues North. Mr., Weber re-
plied that these suggestions were based on traffic movements at these inter-
sections and that continuing studies should be made of these intersections to
determine whether such signals are, in fact, needed. Mr. Bogucki asked why
the consultants did not recommend a median for the full length of Brooklyn
Boulevard., Mr. Weber answered that such a'median would not be warranted at all
locations. The City Engineer pointed out that left turn signals do exist at
the intersection of 69th and Brooklyn Boulevard and that the State is consider -
ing the interphasing of signals all along the Boulevard for improved traffic
management. Mr. Bogucki cited the fact that some areas of the country require
driveway turn- arounds for residences on major thoroughfares. `The Superintendent
• of Engineering added that since Brooklyn Boulevard is actually a State road,
the City cannot do work on the highway itself, it can only suggest that things
such as medians be installed.
4 -26 -79 -4
Mr. Weber continued with various recommendations for other locations along
Brooklyn Boulevard. In general, he recommended that curb cuts onto Brooklyn
r Boulevard be eliminated wherever possible and that access be provided via cross
streets or common curb cuts whenever possible and that traffic movements along
the Boulevard be continually monitored in order to determine at what point
signalization of intersections is appropriate. He also recommended improved
lighting at retail nodes and suggested that a.program of low interest loans to
homeowners along Brooklyn Boulevard to subsidize landscaping improvements be
considered.
Chairman Pierce asked whether the lighting at retail centers was the City's
perogative or the State's. The Superintendent of Engineering said that lighting
was a City matter. In answer to a question from Commissioner Hawes, Weber
recommended that wherever feasible, access to Brooklyn Boulevard be channeled
via 69th or 63rd Avenue. The Secretary concurred in this recommendation citing
a number of complaints about the traffic impacts of new developments along
Brooklyn Boulevard as a result of the numerous curb cuts allowing many inter-
ruptions in the traffic flow. Chairman Pierce asked whether extending the
median to south of 59th Avenue would be a good way to control traffic. The
Secretary responded that it would improve traffic flow, but pointed out that
the access to many businesses and residences would be 'impacted. If a median
were extended, some median cuts might be necessary, but should only be allowed
where common access points are created.
The Planning Consultants then showed a number of slides depicting the aesthetic
characteristics of the Boulevard. They had praise for the ;fine homes along
Brooklyn Boulevard and for the quality. development at Westbrook Mall. However,
in the neighborhood of 69th Avenue North the Consultants found many distractions
and a cluttered appearance of the small shops in the area. They indicated a
need to develop some additional control of signs and recommended that overhead
wires be placed.underground whenever possible. At the -end of the presentation,
Cominssioiier i - vies aske - whe the.problems of signage resulted from the fact
that every busi has its own individual logo. Mr. Weber responded that this
was not necessarily the problem; that in Brookdale every tenant has its own
logo, but that they are all consistent in design and size and therefore have an
aesthetically pleasing effect. John McNamara pointed out that signage controls`
may vary, from neighborhood to neighborhood depending on local needs.
SPECIAL'DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Bill Weber disEussed a number of difficulties presented by the evolution of land
use along Brooklyn Boulevard between 58th Avenue and 61st Avenue North. If land
from the west side of Brooklyn Boulevard to the next north -south street to the
west were zoned for commercial use, he asked, what impact would office or town-
house development have on the traffic movements'on Brooklyn Boulevard and on
neighborhood streets to the west? Mr. Weber displayed two major scenarios
which contemplated on one hand, commercial developments in this stretch of
Brooklyn Boulevard, and on the other, townhouse developments.
Mr. Weber summed up his presentation by stating that the primary` objectives for
Brooklyn Boulevard were 1) to reduce curb cuts and 2) to control and unify
signage. The City, he said, has three options. It can do nothing and thereby
allow small developments to proliferate up and down the Boulevard with question-
able impact on aesthetic and traffic aspects.of the Boulevard. Two, it can
amend the Zoning Ordinance to require a minimum lot width of 150 feet in the Cl
zone when fronting a major thoroughfare, also a minimum lot size of one acre.
This, he stated, would encourage slightly larger developments and would make
traffic engineering a simpler task. The third alternative, he said, would be
for the City to buy critical tracts of land in order to control the nature and
scale of development. This option, however, would have the greatest monetary
and political impact.
4 -26 -79 -5-
Chairman Pierce asked whether smaller office uses could not share a common access.
Mr. Weber agreed that they certainly could. w
A person in the audience voiced his preference for rezoning of all property be-
tween Brooklyn Boulevard and the next street to the west to C1 use. Mr. Weber
stated that the problem was one of land assemblage. He commented that for .
economic reasons, townhouse developments must consist of at least 15 units before
a developer will undertake a project. Concern was expressed by a person in the
audience that townhouse developments would have access via residential streets
rather than Brooklyn Boulevard. Mr. Weber disagreed with that assumption.
Commissioner Theis asked whether the residences behind the C1A< zoned property at
the northeast corner of 58th and Brooklyn Boulevard should continue. John
McNamara answered that the lots in question were too large and represented too
great a residential investment to be converted to office use. Chairman Pierce
asked why the proposed land use plan showed the corner of 60th and Beard Avenues
to remain Rl. Mr. Weber stated that if it were zoned up to Cl or C2, the
resulting development would bring noise and traffic into the residential
neighborhood.
At the conclusion of the Brooklyn Boulevard Study, the Secretary reiterated his
invitation to various neighborhood groups and other interested citizens for in-
put on the items to be studied. -in the Comprehensive Plan.
HOUSING
John McNamara reviewed briefly some of the elements in the housing plan. He
cited an inventory of single family and multiple family units. He noted that
deterioration of some houses had begun in the southeast neighborhood. It was
not an insurmountable problem as yet, but should be addressed without delay.
He suggested that the local HRA could perhaps deal with the deterioration in
the southeast neighborhood. He stated that the City has almost reached the 1980
goals established �6y the Metropolitan Council for subsidized housing. Mr.
Mclamara -cc p!ai,ngd -there are various types of subsidized housing, chief
among_themi Section 8 Housing. Section 8 Housing, he explained, can consist of
either rent subsidies to individuals in existing housing units or as construct -
ion subsidies for particular buildings to be used for low and moderate income
housing. Mr. McNamara concluded his remarks by stating that the Housing Commis-
sion would study the Housing Plan as submitted and bring input back to the Plan-
ning Commission at the next meeting.
PARKS AND RECREATION PLAN
B ill Weber began his remarks about the Park Plan by stating that it is difficult
to improve on Brooklyn Center's Park System. He outlined five different types
of Park elements. 1) Neighborhood Parks 2) Community Parks 3) Nature
Interpretative Parks 4) Recreation Parks and 5) Bike and Pedestrian Path
System. The need at this point, he said, is not to acquire more land, but to
maintain the parks that are already in existence. He stated that he was in
complete agreement with the 1976 Parks and Recreation Plan and the 1978 Develop -
ment Schedule for the Park System. He noted that the priorities of these reports
placed neighborhood parks and the Central Park at the top of the list.
Gene Hagel, the Director of Parks and Recreation, stated that one reason the
amount of money anticipated for Central Park was so large was that the park was
being developed from the initial groundwork whereas neighborhood parks already
had some facilities and the money anticipated for those parks represents addi-
tional development.
4 -26 -79 -6-
' Mr. Bogucki asked how Mr. Hagel intended to place trai ways across the Brookdale
• Shopping Center. Mr. Hagel responded that easements were being sought. A dis-
cussion then ensued concerning the linking up of Shingle Creek trailway system
with the trail system in Minneapolis.
Weber recommended that the land by the water tower in.the - southeast neighbor-
hood be purchased by the City for park purposes. Mr. Hagel responded that the
City might acquire some of the land in that area as a result.of tax delinquency.
The Secretary expressed appreciation to all those who had come to the meeting
that night to hear the proposals for the revised Comprehensive Plan. He en-
couraged the Neighborhood Groups to consider the proposals laid before them at
the meeting and to return with input to be considered at the study session in
May.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Commissioner Hawes seconded by Commissioner.Lucht to adjourn the
meeting of the Planning Commission. Voting in favor: Chairman Pierce, Commis-
sioners Malecki, Theis, Hawes, Manson, Lucht and Erickson. Voting against:
none. The motion passed unanimously. The Planning Commission adjourned at
10:35 p.m.
Chairman
4 -26 -79 -7-
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
ORDINANCE NO. `
AN ORDINANCE VACATTING THAT PORTION OF'IRVING
AVENUE NORTH BOUNDED ON THE SOUTH BY THE NORTHERLY
RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE OF 69TH AVENUE NORTH AND ON THE
NORTH BY THE WESTERLY EXTENSION OF THE NORTHERLY
LINE OF LOT 1, BLOCK 1, HORBAL ADDITION
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1: That 'portion of Irving Avenue North bounded
on the south by the northerly right -of -way line of 69th Avenue
North and on the north by the westerly extension of the northerly
line of Lot 1, Block 1, Horbal Addition is hereby vacated as a
public street
Section 2: The City excepts from vacation of Irving
Avenue North as described above, and reserves to itself and its
assigns, an easement for public utilities, drainage, and sidewalk
purposes on, over, and under the above described parcel.
Section. 3: This ordinance shall be Pffect?-vP aft
dduptiun and thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of 1979.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Published in the Official Newspaper
Effective Date
•
i
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 3 OF THE CITY ORDINANCES_
REGARDING ADDRESSING OF ACCESSORY BUILDINGS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Section 3 -104 (D) is hereby amended in part - to read as
follows
(D) Exception. Accessory Buildings as defined in Chapter 35 -900
shall be exempt from - the requirements of [this chapter.]
Section 3 -104, Addressing of Building
Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and
upon 'thirty (30) days following its legal publication..
Adopted 'this day of 1979.
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
Date of Publication
Effective Date
(Brackets indicate matter -to be deleted, underline indicates new mafiter)
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 11• AND 23 OF THE CITY
ORDINANCES RELATIVE TO ON SALE LIQUOR AND ON SALE WINE
LICENSES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 11 of - the City Ordinances is hereby amended as
follows
Section 11 -501. DEFINITION OF TERMS
The • erm "on sale liquor means - the sale of intoxicating liquor b
4. T t Y the
glass, or b - the drink for consumption on -the premises only.
10. The term "restaurant" means any establishment, other than hotel,
a appropriate
under the control of a single ..proprietor or manager, having
• • o serve meals and for seating not less than 150 guests at
facilities t g
one time and where in consideration of payment therefor, meals are
regularly served at tables to - the general public`, and which employs an
adequate staff - to provide - the usual and suitable service - to its guests,
and the principal part of - the business of which is -the serving of food.
For purposes of an "on sale wine" license seating must be available fo
not less 'than 75 guests at one time with all other sections of definition
applicable as stated.
12 The term "wine means a vinous beverage containing not more - than
14 percent alcohol by volume
13. The term "on sale 'wine" means the sale of wine for consumption on
the premises only.
Section 11 -502. LICENSE REQUIRED.
1. No person except wholesalers or manufacturers to - the extent authorized
under State License, and except - the municipal liquor dispensary, shall
directly or indirectly deal in, sell, or keep for sale any intoxicating liquor
without first having received a license - to do so as provided in this
ordinance. Licenses shall be of [two] three kinds: "On Sale Liquor "
[and] "On Sale Club" and "On Sale Wine".
2. "On Sale Liquor licenses shall be issued only - to hotels and restaurants.
ORDINANCE NO.
4. "On Sale Wine" licenses shall be granted only - to restaurants and
only - the sale of wine not exceeding 14 percent alcohol by volume for
consumption on the licensed premises, in conjunction with the sale of
food shall be permitted.
Section 11 -503. NUMBER OF LICENSES ISSUED The number of private
"on sale liquor" licenses issued by - the City of Brooklyn Center shall conform to
provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 340.353 as amended by the Session
Laws of 1974, Chapter 268, (Senate File 919) State of Minnesota. The number of
"on sale wine" licenses shall be unlimited.
Section 11 -504. APPLICATIONS FOR LICENSE
5. . If -the applicant is a corporation or other organization and is applying
for an "on sale liquor" or an "on sale wine" license, 'the following:
8. An applicant for an "on sale liquor or an "on sale wine" license
shall submit a floor plan of - the dining room, or dining rooms, which shall
be open - to - the public, shall show dimensions and shall indicate - the number
of persons intended to be served in each of said rooms.
14 Whenever - the application for an "on sale liquor or an "on sale wine"
license [to sell intoxicating liquor, or for a `transfer 'thereof, is for
premises either planned or under construction or undergoing substantial
alteration, - the application shall be accompanied by a set of preliminary
plans showing the design of the proposed premises to be licensed. If
the plans or design are on file with - the Building Department, no plans need
be filed with - the City Clerk.
Section 11 =505. RENEWAL APPLICATIONS.
At - the earliest practicable time after application is made for a renewal of an "on
sale liquor" or an "on sale wine" license, and in any event prior to the - time that
the application is considered by the City Council, - the applicant shall file with the
City Clerk a statement prepared by a certified public accountant - that shows the
- total gross sales and the total food sales of - the restaurant for the 'twelve month
period immediately preceding the date for filing renewal applications. A foreign
corporation shall file a current Certificate of Authority.
Section 11 -50`7 LICENSE FEES.
1. The annual license fee for "on sale li uor ". an' "on sale wine" license
shall be in an amount as set forth in Section 23 -010 of •the City Ordinances. The
annual license fee for an "on sale club." license shall be $100.
ORDINANCE NO
3. The fee for an "on sale liquor" [or] L "on sale club" or an "on sale
wine" license granted after -the commencement of the license year shall `
be prorated on a daily basis. `
Section 11 -509 PERSONS INELIGIBLE FOR LICENSE.
6. Who is directly or indirectly interested in any other establishment in
the City of Brooklyn Center to which an "on sale liquor" or an "on sale
I Y
Y �—
wine" license has been issued under this ordinance.
9. An "on sale liquor" or an "on sale wine" license will not be renewed
if, in - the case of an individual, the licensee is not a resident of - the Twin
Cities Metropolitan Area at the - time of - the date for renewal; if,, in - the case
of a partnership, the managing partner is not a resident of the Twin Cities
Metropolitan Area at the time of the renewal; or in -the case of a corporation,
if - the manager is not a resident of 'the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area at the
time of -the date of renewal. The TWIN CITIES METROPOLITAN AREA is
defined as being comprised of the counties of Anoka, Carver, Dakota,
Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott and Washington.
10. No person shall own an interest in more - than one establishment or
business within Brooklyn Center for which an "on sale liquor" or an "on
sale wine" license has been granted. The 'term "interest" as used in - this
section includes any pecuniary interest in the ownership, operation,
managcment or profits of a ret -ail liquor hu•t sloes not include
I
bona fide loans; bona fide fixed sum rental agreements; bona fide open
accounts or other obligations held with or without security arising out of
the ordinary and regular course of business of selling or leasing merchandise,
.fixtures or supplies 'to such establishment; or an interest of 10 percent or
less in any corporation holding a license. A person who received monies
from time to time directly or indirectly from a licensee in the absence of
a bona fide consideration therefor and excluding bona fide gifts or donations,
shall be deemed to have a pecuniary interest in such retail license. In
determining "bona fide" - the reasonable value of - the goods or - things received
as consideration for any payment by the licensee and all other facts reason-
ably tending to prove or disprove the existence of any purposeful scheme or
arrangement to evade - the prohibitions of this section shall be considered.
Section_ 11 -510. PLACES INELIGIBLE FOR LICENSE.
3. No "on sale liquor" license shall be granted for a restaurant - that does
not have a dining area open to the general public, with a - total minimum
floor area of 1800 square feet or for a hotel - that does not have a dining
area, open - to the general public, with a - total minimum floor area of 1200
square feet.
Section 11 -511. CONDITIONS OF LICENSE.
5. No "on sale liquor" or "on sale wine" licenses shall sell
intoxicating liquor "off sale".
8. No person under 19 years of age shall be employed in any rooms
constituting the place in which "on sale liquor" is sold at retail
[intoxicating liquors are sold at retail "on sale except that persons
under :19 years of age may be employed - to perform - the duties of a bus-
boy or dishwashing services in places defined as a restaurant or hotel
or motel serving food in rooms in which "on sale liquor" is sold at reta il.
[ intoxica liquors are sold at retail "on sale"] Serving of any "on sale
wine" must be done by persons 19 years' of age or older.
Section 11 -515. LIABILITY INSURANCE.
1. Insurance Required.
At the - time of filing an application for either an "on sale liquor" [or an]
"on sale club " or an "on sale wine" [liquor] license, the applicant shall
file with -the City Clerk a liability insurance policy which shall be subject
to the approval of the City Council. The insurer on such liability insurance
P Y Y
policy shall be duly licensed - to do business in the State of Minnesota, and
the insurance policy shall be approved as - to form and execution by the City
Attorney. Such liability insurance policy shall be fn the amount of not less
than $10,000 coverage for one person and $20,000 coverage for more than
one person, and shall specifically provide for the payment by -the insurance
company on behalf of the insured of all sums which the insures shall be-
come obliged - to pay by reason of liability imposed upon him by law for
injuries or damages to persons other than employees, including - the liability
imposed upon 'the insured by reason of Section 340 95, Minnesota Statutes.
'Such liability insurance policy shall further provide that no cancellation for
any cause can be made either by - the insured or - the insurance company without
first giving 10 days' notice to the City in writing of intention - to cancel - the
same, addressed - to - the City Clerk. Further, it shall provide that no payment
of any claim by - the insurance company shall, in any manner, decrease the
coverage provided for in respect - to any other claim or claims brought against
the insured or company thereafter. Such policy shall be conditioned that the
insurer shall pays to the extent of the principal amount of the policy, any
damages for death or injury caused by, or resulting from the violation of any
law relating to - the business for which such license has been granted. The
licensee and the - City shall be named as joint insureds on - the liability n-
surance policy.
ORDINANCE NO
Section 11 -550. SUNDAY SALES AUTHORIZED. Notwithstanding the
provisions of Section 11 -512 of - the City Ordinances, establishments 'to which
"on sale li, uor" licenses have been issued for - the sale of intoxicating liquors
may, upon obtaining a special license, serve intoxicating liquors between the
hours of 12 :00 noon and 12 :00 midnight on Sundays in conjunction with the serving
of food. Wine may be sold without a special license under the authority of an "on
sale wine" license between the hours of 12:00 noon and 12:00 midnight in conjunction
with the serving of food
Section 11 -551. LICENSE REQUIRED. No person shall directly or indirectly
sell or serve intoxicating; liquors as authorized in Section 11 -550 without having
first obtained a special license from - the City Council, except under the authority
of an "on sale wine" license. Application for such a special Sunday license shall
be filed with - the City Clerk.
Section 11 -552 LICENSE FEES. The annual license fee for a special "on
sale liquor" Sunday license shall be in an amount as set forth in Section 23 -010 of_
the City Ordinances. The annual license fee shall be paid in full before 'the applica-
tion fora license is accepted. All licenses shall expire on the last day of December
of each year. Upon rejection of any application for a license, or upon withdrawal
of application before - the approval of issuance by the 'City Council, -the license
fee shall be refunded to the applicant. The fee for a license granted after the
commencement year shall be prorated on a monthly basis
Section 2. Chapter 23 of the City Crdinances is hcrcby amended as
follows
Section 23 -010. Fee (annual un-
less otherwise
Type of License Required by Section License Expires stated.
On Sale Wine 11 -507 Dec. 31 2,000.00
Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective after adoption and upon
thirty (30) days following its legal publication.
Adopted this day of 1979
Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
Date Published
Effective Date
(Brackets indicate matter to be deleted, underline indicates new matter.)
MEMORANDUM
TO: Gerald G. Splinter, City Ma
F � y .age.
FROM: Mary Harty, Administrative Assistant `
DATE: May 9, 1979
SUBJECT: "On -Sale Wine" License
Minnesota Statutes Section 340.11, Subdivision 20, enacted as Laws 1975;
Chapter 345, Section 4, authorizes any municipality to issue wine licenses
to restaurants if it maintains a municipal liquor store or is authorized
to issue on -sale liquor licenses. A wine license permits the sale of wine
not exceeding 14 percent alcohol by volume for consumption on the licensed
premises only, in conjunction with the sale of food. To qualify for a
wine license, a restaurant must be under the control of a single proprietor
or manager, have appropriate facilities for serving meals and seating at
least 25 guests at a time, regularly serve meals at tables to the general
public for pay, and employ an adequate staff to provide the usual and suit-
able service to its guests. The Liquor Control Division of the Department
of Public Safety, which must approve wine licenses, interprets the law as
precluding the issuance of a wine license to the holder of a special club
license, since a restaurant must serve meals to the general public but a
club may not sell intoxicating liquors except to members and guests.
A city is not required to provide for wine licenses merely because it pro-
.
vides for the sale of intoxicating liquor. Furthermore, if it does so, it
may impose restrictions beyond those contained in the state law, as in defin-
ing eligible restaurants more strictly, as long as its stricter requirements
are not in conflict with the state law; it may not, for example, provide for
a license fee higher than half that provided for on -sale liquor licenses or
$2,000, whichever is less.
The state law on wine licenses is not self- executing; if a city wishes to
issue wine licenses, it must adopt ordinance provisions to authorize them.
Since the City of Brooklyn Center currently has a general liquor licensing
ordinance, the wine license authority an be provided b amending the exist
Y P Y g
ing liquor licensing ordinance.
To date, the City has had inquiries from the Pizza Factory, Olive's East,
Happy Dragon, Denny's and Donaldson's concerning a wine license.
FEES CHARGED BY OTHER CITIES FOR "ON SALE" WINE LICENSES
NUMBER OF .
CITY LICENSES FEE
Falcon Heights 1 $1,750
Golden Valley 1 2,000
Minnetonka 2 2,000
Plymouth 1 2,000
Roseville 3 1,500
St. Louis Park 1 2,000
(information current as of August 21, 1978)
-
M & C No. 79 -11
May 10 1979
FROM THE OFFICE ,
OF THE CITY MANAGER
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Subject: Industrial Development Revenue
Bond Policy
To the Honorable Mayor and City Council:
Cities and schools have traditionally used tax exempt municipal bonds to
finance, at a lesser interest rate, such "traditional" public services as
streets, sewerage, water, park improvement projects, schools, hospitals,
and other public buildings. They have done this through the issuance of
"general obligation bonds" (in which the bonds are backed by the "full
faith and credit ", that is, the full taxing power of the issuing entity)
and through "revenue bonds" (which are backed by the revenues earned from
the revenue producing entity which is being financed) These bonds are
attractive to the buyer because the interest on the bonds are not taxed
by the federal or state government. Because of the tax exempt status,
and the soundness of the municipal bond, cities and schools have been
able to finance public projects at extremely low interest rates which
results in lower interest costs and subsequent tax savings to the taxpayer.
In recent years, two events have occurred which are disturbing to some
issuers of municipal bonds. First, the Internal Revenue service and the
Treasury Department have attempted to remove the tax exemption from
municipal bonds. These efforts were prompted by the loss of income tax
revenue to the federal government and by criticism from the public of
"tax loopholes" which enable so called "wealthy" bond buyers to escape
taxation on their interest earnings. Secondly, the authorization for
and the emergence on the bond market of other tax exempt bonds in addition
to the "traditional" bonds. Among these tax exempt bonds are the industrial
development revenue bonds (IDR), tax exempt mortgages and more recently
locally issued below market rate mortgage revenue bonds to finance single
family housing
Efforts have been made in the past to remove the tax exempt status from
municipal bonds by the U.S. Treasury Department and more recently, when
that approach had failed, an effort was made in Congress to authorize a
"municipal taxable bond option ". This law, if enacted, would have allowed
municipalities to issue either tax exempt or taxable bonds. The increased
interest cost to municipalities issuing taxable bonds would be subsidized'
by the federal government. This effort was opposed by most cities and
finance officers because they felt that they had the constitutional right
to issue tax exempt bonds for "traditional" purposes and that if the federal
government "got its foot in the door" and regulated the sale of municipal
bonds through any type of subsidization, that the next step would be the
total abolishment of tax exempt municipal bonds.
AM
In 1967, the State of Minnesota authorized Minnesota cities, through the
passage of the Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 474, to issue industrial revenue bonds (IDR) and tax exempt
• - mortgages The intent of the Municipal Industrial Development Act was
'to promote, attract and encourage economically sound industrial and
commercial development in order to: 1) discourage emergence of blight
and marginal lands; 2) prevent or alleviate chronic unemployment; 3) preserve
community and state investments in educational and public service facilities;
and 4) encourage more intensive development in use of land to provide an
adequate tax base to finance the cost of public services ". Other states had
previously taken similar action. More recently, the use of industrial
development revenue bond authorization has been expanded to include locally
issued below market rate mortgage revenue bonds for single family housing
and that use is being proposed extensively throughout the country, including
Minnesota. Bills are now before the Minnesota Legislature which would both
allow and prohibit single family housing bonds. For both types of bonds,
the city 'issues the bonds in the city's name, thereby making interest on
the bonds nontaxable to the buyer for both federal and state purposes. The
city does not pledge the full faith and credit of the community to guarantee.
the payment of the bond and has no direct obligation for the repayment of
the bonds. Both bonds are extremely attractive to companies wishing to
develop or expand as they ,provide a considerable savings in interest cosh
in the financing of their projects because of the tax exempt feature.
The City Council is now in the process of determining a policy on the
issuance of industrial development revenue :bonds, tax exempt mortgages, and
mortgage revenue bonds for single family housing. Before adopting the final
policy, the Council must consider wheth they want the City to issue these
A
ty q of bonds and ;i f so y to v- ,7hat. ?xt?nt does. the Council wi - to cont:7't? .. :
their issuance.
In the consideration of whether to issue the bonds, these questions should
be considered:
1) Generally (on a national level)
a. ��
Do these bonds compete with the "traditional bonds and
dilute the value of tax exemption and, thereby, cause
higher interest rates to be paid on "traditional" bonds?
(municipal proponents of the "taxable bond option" argued
that there was of ready m arket r their tax exempt
n a ea y ma ke f o th p t
bonds and they needed an alternate method of financing)
b. Will the overuse or misuse of tax exempt bonds cause
Congress to work for the abolishment of or stricter
i e
g
regulation of, tax exempt municipal bonds?
c. If there is wide spread default of these bonds, will
that have an effect on the credibility of municipal bonds?
d. Does the issuance of these bonds encourage competition
between communities which could result in the placement of
commerce and industry in cities which "make the best offer"
rather than an orderly placement of commerce and industry?
(the purpose of the Fiscal Disparities Law was to discourage
that type of development)
-2-
e. Should government be involved in the financing of private
business development? .
2) Specifically (on the local level)
a. Will the issuance of these bonds have an effect on the
city's bond rating?
b. Although, supposedly, there is no direct obligation to
the city for the repayment of these bonds, will default
result in any possible financial loss to the city, or at
least does the city incur a "moral obligation" in the
event of default? (the city's bond counsel has said
that it cannot be said that a default will have no
effect on the city's normal financing and that it is
almost certain that the city will be a party in any
litigation if there is a default)
c. Do the benefits derived to the community from the
issuance of these bonds offset any negative results?
If the Council decides to issue industrial development revenue bonds, con-
sideration should be given to what the extent the Council wishes to control
their issuance. Some of the questions to be considered should be as follows:
- 1) Should the issuance of industrial development revenue bonds
be granted to anyone upon request if they meet the "public
purpose" requiremenI of t:; ::'.:?
2) Should the Council limit issuance based on any of the following
criteria?
a. Type of development (i.e. industrial, commercial, retail,
housing, etc.)
b. New development only
c. Redevelopment of existing uses.
d. Establish a minimum project cost
= e. Expansion or remodeling of existing business.
3) Does an issuance policy based on any of the above criteria afford
an unfair business advantage to any business concern over another?
Submitted for your consideration are two resolutions. The first is a revised
staff recommendation and the second is a compromise resolution which attempts
to accommodate the various positions by Council members.
ApRr ed. Respectfully submitted,
L�
J era d . Splinter Paul W. Holmlund
City M ager Director of Finance
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
-3-
#1
May 10, 1979
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
I
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING POLICY FOR THE ISSUANCE OF
INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS OR MORTGAGES OR TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING
WHEREAS, for the purpose of promotion, attraction, encouragement and
development of economically sound commerce the preservation and development
of a tax base adequate to finance necessary public services, and the encour-
agement of employment opportunities for the citizens of the City, the City
is authorized by the Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 474 to acquire and lease real and personal property for use by a
revenue producing enterprise, or to loan funds directly to the enterprise,
or to loan funds directly to the enterprise to be used for such acquisition,
said funds to be raised through the issuance of revenue bonds of the City
the interest on which is exempt from federal and state income taxes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the following shall be the policy for the
City of Brooklyn Center for issuance of industrial revenue bonds or. mortgages
or tax increment financing and shall serve as guidelines for developers
seeking City approval;
1. Neither the property owner nor the applicants shall have
any outstanding taxes or assessment delinquencies within
the City of Brooklyn Center.
2. The applicant must be able to demonstrate that development
of similar type prc -er *_y under sii-J 1p�r - r,-iimgt gncP, is n ot
feasible without some governmentally assisted financing
system other than routine assessments for streets and
utilities
3. The applicant must demonstrate conclusively and the City
Council must concur that: (a) The proposed project is in
compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan and all other
existing codes; (b) Historic and current conditions indicate
the Comprehensive Guide Plan cannot be implemented on the
subject property without the use of some governmentally
assisted financing system (industrial revenue bonds -tax
increment bonds).
4. If authorized, industrial revenue bonds must be privately
placed and not offered for public sale. This approach is
used to insure that any buyer is fully informed and aware
that the industrial revenue bonds sold are not backed by
the full faith and credit of the City of Brooklyn Center.
Any authorized bonds must be placed within twelve (12)
months of City Council approval.
S. If the applicant is a governmental or governmentally sponsored
organization, the project proposed must: (a) Be in compliance
with the City's Comprehensive Plan and all other existing codes;
(b) The applicant must demonstrate and the Council concur that
the project has specific benefit to the citizens of Brooklyn
Center.
RESOLUTION NO.
6. The applicant must meet all requirements established in the
State Statutes for industrial revenue and /or tax increment
bonds. In addition, the project must be of a nature that
the City wishes to attract; or an existing business the City +
would desire to expand within the City. Desirability shall
be measured in terms of: (a) A significant number of new
" jobs for the City; (b) The project shall not contribute, in
the Council's opinion, to increased traffic volumes detri-
mental -to adjacent land uses or have other detrimental
side effects; (c) Retention of employment which might
otherwise leave the community.
7. An applicant must submit his request on forms.provided by
the City of Brooklyn Center and submit written documentation
of his compliance with these requirements. In addition, the
applicant must agree to pay for any fiscal, legal or other
City Council approved costs incurred in analyzing or processing
the application. The City Council, upon recommendation by the
City Manager, may require the deposit of an amount estimated
to cover these expenses prior to final application approval.
I
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.
#2
May 10, 1979
Member introduced the following resolution and
moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION N0.
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING POLICY FOR THE ISSUANCE OF INDUSTRIAL
REVENUE BONDS OR MORTGAGES OR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
WHEREAS, for the purpose of promotion, attraction,, encouragement and
development, of economically sound commerce the preservation and development
of a tax base adequate to finance necessary public services, and the encour-
agement of employment opportunities for the citizens of the City, the City
is authorized by the Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 474 to acquire and lease real and personal property for use by a
revenue producing enterprise, or to loan funds directly to the enterprise,
or to loan funds directly to the enterprise to be used for such acquisition,
said funds to be raised through the issuance of revenue bonds of the City
the interest on which is exempt from federal and state income taxes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota that the following shall be the policy for the
City of Brooklyn Center for issuance of industrial revenue bonds or mortgages
or tax increment finance and shall serve as guidelines for developers
seeking City approval:
1. Neither the property owner nor the applicants shall have
any outstanding taxes or assessment delinquencies within
the City of Brooklyn Center.
2. The applicant must demonstrate ccncl:sively and the - lit
y
Council must concur that the proposed project is in compliance
with the '
City s Comprehensive Plan and all other
existing t n
g
codes.
3. At no time shall the amount of industrial revenue bonds out-
standing be greater than five percent of the assessed valuation
of the City of Brooklyn Center. (Note to City Council - - five
percent of our current assessed valuation would be $6 million.
Currently for general full faith and credit bond limitation in
the State Statutes for the City is approximately $9 million).
4. If authorized, industrial revenue bonds must be privately placed
and offered for public sale. This approach is used to insure
that any buyers are fully informed and aware that industrial
revenue bonds sold are not backed by the full faith and credit
of the City of Brooklyn Center and the authorized bonds must be
placed within 12 months of City Council approval.
5. If the applicant is a governmental or governmentally sponsored'
i
organzation, the project proposed must: a Be i
i P n
P co
( ) compliance
P
with the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan and other existing
i
codes
(b) The applicant must demonstrate and the Council must
concur the ro ect has specific P J p c benefit to the ` citizens of
Brooklyn Center.
• RESOLUTION NO.
6. Applicants must meet all requirements established in the
State Statutes for industrial revenue and /or tax increment
bonds. In addition, the project must be of a nature that .
the City wishes to attract or an existing business the City
would desire to expand within the City. Desirability shall
be. measured in terms of: (a) Significant number of jobs for
the City; (b) The project shall not contribute, in the Council's
opinion, to increased traffic volumes detrimental to adjacent
land uses or have other detrimental side effects; (c) Retention
of employment which might otherwise leave the community.
7. An applicant must submit his request on forms provided by
the City of Brooklyn Center and submit written documentation
_.of his compliance with these requirements. In addition, the
applicant must agree to pay for any fiscal, legal or any other
City Council approved costs incurred in analyzing or processing
the application. The City Council, upon recommendation by
the City Manager, may require the deposit of an amount
estimated to cover these expenses prior to final application
approval.
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 N0. ,
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING THE POLICY FOR THE ISSUANCE OF
INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BONDS OR MORTGAGES OR TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING
WHEREAS, for the purpose of promotion, attraction, encouragement and
development of economically sound commerce the preservation and development
of a tax base adequate to finance necessary public services, and the encour-
agement of employment opportunities for the citizens of the City, the City
is authorized by the Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes,
Chapter 474 to acquire and lease real and personal property for use by a
revenue producing enterprise, or to loan funds directly to the enterprise,
or to loan funds ,directly to the enterprise to be used for such acquisition,
said funds to be raised through the issuance of revenue bonds of the City
the interest on which is exempt from federal and state income taxes.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn
Center, Minnesota that the following shall be the policy for the City of
Brooklyn Center for issuance of industrial revenue bonds or mortgages or
tax increment financing and shall serve as guidelines for developers seeking City approval:
1. Neither the property owner nor the applicants shall have any
outstanding taxes or assessment delinquencies within the City
of Brooklyn Center.
2. The applicant must be able to demonstrate that similar type
development under similar circumstances is not feasible without'
some governmentally assisted financing system other than routine
assessments for streets and utilities.
3. The applicant must demonstrate conclusively and the City Council
must concur that: (a) the proposed project is in compliance with
the City's Comprehensive Plan; (b) historic and current conditions
indicate the Comprehensive Guide Plan cannot be implemented on the
subject property without the use of some governmentally assisted
financing system (industrial revenue bonds -tax increment bonds).
4. If authorized, industrial revenue bonds must be privately placed
and not offered for public sale. This approach is used to insure
that any buyer is fully informed and aware that the industrial
revenue bonds sold are not backed by the full faith and credit
of the City of Brooklyn Center. Any authorized bonds must be
placed within twelve (12) months of City 'Council approval
5. An applicant must meet all requirements established within State
Statutes for industrial revenue and /or tax increment bonds.
6. An applicant must submit his request on forms provided by the
City of Brooklyn Center and submit written documentation of his
compliance with these requirements.
RESOLUTION NO.
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded
.by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in 'favor thereof
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
RESOLUTION NO.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Brooklyn'
Center to urge the State Legislature to act to more closely control the
issuance of nontraditional tax exempt: bonds.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this resolution be forwarded
to State Legislators representing Brooklyn Center.`
Date Mayor
ATTEST:
Clerk
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded
by member , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following
voted in favor thereof
and the following voted against the same:
whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
M & C No. 79 -8
April 6, 1979
FROM THE OFFICE
OF THE CITY MANAGER
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
Subject: Howe, Inc. Explosive Detonation
& Storage License Request
To the Honorable Mayor and City Council:
n li cense a
Howe, Inc.. is currently operating under an exte c ens e u th or iz
ing them to-store and detonate explosives on their site at 49th Avenue
and Brooklyn Boulevard. They have asked for a full year extension on
their current license. The City Council has extended the license Pend -
ing review of a staff recommendation and receipt of various studies of
activity on the Howe site. Council has received copies of the Hickok
engineering analysis, a copy of Mr. Loofbourow's report relating to
blasting and the use of explosives on the site and a copy of a report
by Mr. Bruen- covering various aspects of chemical and explosives storage.
Members of the City staff have visited the Howe site and discussed with
Howe, Inc. alternatives to blasting on the site as suggested by the
consultants. In reviewing these alternatives it appears that none of
the suggested alternative approaches by the various consultants and City
staff members is as efficient and as effective in handling the problem
of knocking down high piles of product stored at the Howe site as ex-
plosives. Attached are letters furnished by Howe, Inc. regarding some
of their research into alternative systems to blasting. The current
Y ....�, . ,. of Howe,, . Inc. i n e use of explosives r
..... at the facility y i p
L♦A.V 1- .�VViV a/i
safer than their practices prior to the January fire; however, this
does not mean its use on the site is safe per se. There is always
more risk using explosives than there is in not using them.' Our
inspections of the Howe site currently indicate that Howe, Inc. is
meeting all known Federal and State regulations relating to the use
and storage of explosives. This was not the case at the time of the
January fire. It is my understanding the Howe, Inc. storage facility
in the burned out building contained more than the allowable amount of
dynamite to be stored in such a facility and the facility itself did
not meet Federal regulations for a storage facility.
After reviewing the various studies, visiting the site and conducting
the discussions with representatives of Howe, Inc., and meeting with
consultants, it is my recommendation the City Council authorize a
limited extension of the requested explosive storage and detonation
license to a specific time in the fall of 1979. It is further
recommended after that date no further storage of explosives or their
detonation be allowed on the Howe site. It is.further recommended
during the extension of the license the following conditions be attached :_
1. ' Only Tovex or a fire chief approved equal substance
of similar or better safety features may be used or
stored on the site.
M & C No. 79 -8 -2- April 6, 1979
2. At no time shall more than 30 pounds of approved
explosives be stored on the site.
3. An outside storage facility is to be constructed in an
enclosed, secure bunker which would meet State; Federal,
and City requirements, regulations and ordinances.
4. That no explosives or blasting agents shall be used
to break up or loosen ammonium nitrate.
5. That the storage and use of explosives on the site shall
meet or 'exceed all Federal, State, and Brooklyn Center
regulations, requirements and ordinances.
I have made the above recommendations because, I believe, the need for
using explosives on the site is caused by the stockpiling of caking
material higher than available mechanical means can safely knock down -
the stacks of material. Presently on the site material is placed in
bins whose design allows for storage to heights of approximately 30
to 40 feet. The caking material at the top of these bins cannot be
"reached by mechanical equipment such as loaders to knock down over-
hangs. If the material is not stored any higher than can be safely
knocked down by mechanical equipment such as loaders, then the need
for blasting is eliminated. Limiting the height of storage of materials
formerly blasted in the bins of the south building on the Howe site may
work a hardship on Howe, Inc. However, it is our belief the overriding
concern is the health and safety of the overall community. The Howe
facility is located immediately adjacent to a major thoroughfare
carrying in excess of 20,000 cars per day. It is also located in close
proximity to a large number of residential dwellings. Knowing these
facts which place the storage and use of explosives in close proximity
to a heavy thoroughfare and residential dwellings and also knowing of
the environmental and safety spin -off impacts which occurred during
and after the January fire at Howe, Inc., no matter how safe you make
the storage and use of explosives on this site, it is not as safe as
not using them at all. The reason for extending the permit through
the summer of 1979 would be to allow Howe to rid itself of inventory
currently stored higher than their mechanical equipment _(loaders) can
loosen and dispose of the materials safely.
W aG submitted,
Cit y Ma
CITY OF BROOKLYN CENTER
GGScdkw
encs.
Licenses to be approved by the City Council on May 14, 1979
X;
BINGO LICENSE
Brooklyn Center Jaycees 7100 Dupont Ave. No.
(Jaycee .Carnival).. City Clerk
CIGARETTE LICENSE
Kenko Vending 7616 Logan Ave. So. ,
Humboldt Avenue Service 6840 Humboldt Ave. No. >>2lX
Twin City Novelty 9549 Penn Ave. So. Q
Chuck Wagon Inn 5720 Morgan Ave. No.
City Clerk
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE
Alan & Marie 4404 4th St. N.E.
European Health Spa 2920 County Road 10
Sanitarian
HOIJSEMOVER'S LICENSE
Dale Mover's, Inc. 7816 Central Ave.
Bui d g Official
ITINERANT FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSE
Brooklyn Center Jaycee Women 7100 Dupont Ave. No.
(Jaycee Carnival) Sanitarian
MECHANICAL SYSTEM'S LICENSE
Advanced Heating 7805 Beech St: N.E.
Bill's Sheet Metal 7991 Spring Lake Road N.E. � '
Central Air Conditioning 1971 Senca Road
Lyle's Heating & Air Conditioning 5502 Douglas Drive
Mill City Heating & Air Cond. 13005 -B 16th Ave. No.
Building Official ;
MOTOR VEHICLE DEALERSHIP LICENSE - - CLASS A
Bob Ryan Olds 6700 Brooklyn Blvd. ZZL, jr , d -�--
City Clerk
NONPERISHABLE VENDING MACHINE
Kenko Vending 7616 Logan Ave. So. _
Humboldt Avenue Service 6840 Humboldt Ave. No.
Osty's Vending 9321 5th St. N.E.
City of Brooklyn Center "6301 Shingle Creek Pkwy. �.h -�---
Sanitarian
SIGN HANGER'S LICENSE
LeRoy Signs, Inc. 6325 Welcome Ave. No.
Buildi g Official
SWIMMING POOL LICENSE
Norman Chazin -6950 Wayzata Blvd.
T f�
North Lyn Apartments 6511 Humboldt Ave. No.
Chippewa Park Properties 790 Cleveland Ave. So.
Chippewa Park Apartments 6507 Camden Ave. No. r -�--
Earle Brown Farm Apartments 6040 Earle Brown Dr.: _
Earle Brown Farm Apartments 1701 -07 69th Ave.. No. J.
Griffin Companies 8200 Humboldt Ave. So.
Columbus Village Apartments 507 70th Ave. No.
Moorwood Homeowners Associates 5811 Lake Curve Dr. 7
Riverwood Townhomes Association 6611 Camden Dr. No. - 7 —, , , <
Sanitarian
TEMPORARY ON -SALE NONINTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE
Brooklyn Center Jaycees .4101 61st Ave. No. 4 /j J r
(Jaycee Carnival) City Clerk
13
M IDRAIVDUM
To: Gerald G. Splinter, City Manager
From; James P. Lindsay, Chief of Police
Subject: Bingo License Application for the Brooklyn Center Jaycees
Date: May 7, 1979
Attached please find the complete police investigation of The Brooklyn
Center Jaycees' application for a Bind License. Carl L. Manson is named
as the executive officer and Keith D. Schmidt as the Gambling Manager in
this application. Investigator Monteen's report lists nothing of a ques-
tionable nature found in the course of the investigation.
In addition to the application for a Bind License, The Brooklyn Center
Jaycees have made application for a waiver of fidelity bond as provided
under the ordinance. The City Council must act on the following matters;
1. Application for a Bind License. This requires a.
majority vote of the City Council to pass
2. Waiver of $10,000.00 fidelity bond. This requires
the unanurous vote of the City Council to pass
h
The following is a resume of the investigation of case number 79- 06452, the Brooklyn
Center Jaycees, Carl L. MANSON, president, Keith D. SCH]MIDT, bingo manager, in appli-
cation for a Bingo License issued pursuant to the ordinances of the City of Brooklyn
Center, Hennepin County, Minnesota. This investigation was conducted by A. Paul
M q= and transcribed by Pat SVVVLiSW, clerk - typist for the Brooklyn Center Police
Department.
APPLICArtI'
Brooklyn Center Jaycees
P.O. Box 29371
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55429
Carl Leslie VZNSON
7100 Dupont Avenue North
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430
Keith Donald SCHMID2
OKl Avenue North
623 e en .
Y
Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55,429
INVESTIGATION IV AMPIALS CONTAIliTED T4ITHIN THE CASE FILE
Application for Bingo License.
Application for Bingo License, Part II, Carl Leslie MAP -SON.
Application for Bingo License, Part II, Keith Donald SCM -IlIT.
TA ± ±or rern ±;,xc waiver of a fidelity bond.
Certificate of Restated Articles of Incorporation of Brooklyn Center Junior
Chanter of Commrce.
Brooklyn Center Police Department application check, Carl Leslie MANSON.
Brooklyn Center Police Department application check, Keith Donald SCHMID.
Letter from Douglas REEDY to Al BEISNE_R outlining the terms and agreements for
use land.
e the d.
Form 990 Return of Organization eft fin income tax.
According to the Certificate of Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Brooklyn Center
Junior Chamber of Commerce, the organization was incorporated.pursuant to the provisions
of Minnesota State Statute Chapter 317, the Minnesota non -profit corporation act, and
filed articles of incorporation on February 8, 1956. This corporation is affiliated with
the Minnesota Jaycees and the United States Jaycees and the Junior Chanter International.
The purpose of the corporation is to act as a civil service and charitable organization
of its membership, to promote the welfare of the community and its citizens through active
constructive pro3ects, and provide individuals with training in leadership and civic con-
sciousness. The Brooklyn Center Jaycees, according to their constitution, operate under
the direction of a board comprised of not less than fourteen (14) nor mere than bwenty (20)
r nbers of the corporation. The registered ;naili.ng address of the corporation is The
Brooklyn Center Junior Chamber of C m —erce, P.O. Box 29371, Brooklyn Center, k1innesota,
0 s 55429.
f the Brooklyn Jaycees' annual carnival the Brooklyn Center
For the purpose o e mo lyn Center y Yn
Jaycees have entered into an agreement with the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Inc.
Resume by Investigator A. Paul MMIN Case File #79 -06452 Page 2
of 6100 Sum Drive North, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, 55430, as represented by Mr. Al
BEISNER. For the purpose of this agreement, Douglas A. REEDY is the representative of
the Brooklyn Center Jaycees and their Carnival chairman for 1979:. MOMF'EI, in talking
with Mr. BEISNER, found that an agreement had been made between the Brooklyn Center In
dustrial Park, Inc. and the Jaycees and the terms of this agreement were laid out in a
letter from REEDY to BEISDIER dated April 8, 1979. The terms of this agreement are for
site responsibility, preparation and clean up, compliance with _state statutes and city
ordinances, monetary responsibility and liability and certain other conditions for con-
sideration. The tract of land which the Jaycees are to be responsible for and operating
v w est
the carniv on i n so d o
s bounded on the north and east Shingle Creek o the south an
g
by Freeway Boulevard and on the northwest by Xerxes Avenue. These are legally described
as tract A, Band C, plat 89779 parcels 1000, 2000 and 3000. The Jaycees pay no rent to
the Brooklyn Center Industrial Park or Consolidated Finance Corporation for the facilities
on the site however, they do maintain at their own expense responsibility for providing
I� tY P g
necessary utilities, police traffic control and supervision, insurance for liability of
the Brooklyn Center Jaycees, the William D. Stanley Shows, the Brooklyn Center Industrial
Park, Inca and Consolidated Finances Corporation as well as insurance covering dramshop
liabilities for all the above named. For these conditions, the Brooklyn Center Industrial
Park, Inc. allows the use of the land afore described from May 22 through May 28, 1979, as
the carnival site.
According to Erwin HEISLER, the current treasurer for the Brooklyn Center Jaycees, the
Jaycees operate on a fiscal year beginning June 1st and ending Ma 31st of each ear.
ay � g g y Y
y g
According to Mr. HEISLER, the Jaycees are a non - profit corporation not a tax exempt cor-
poration in status. The Brooklyn Center Jaycees have filed the federal form 990 for 1977
and will nakc a copy of this form available to Mir r?i' -�I for the purpose of this investi ga-
raon. Ar. rElSLER states that the Jaycees have not filed the State Department of Coerce
Charitable Organizations Annual Report; they do, however, file a tax statement with the
State of Minnesota and do pay the 4% sales tax on all gross revenues from Bingo and other
sales within the state. According to HEISLER, the gross revenues of the Brooklyn Center
Jaycees bingo games at the annual carnival are approximately $5,000 with a net of approxi-
mately $2500. A substantiation of these figures should be available upon the receipt of
Form 990.
Named as the applicant for the Bingo License is one Carl Leslie MN.NSON, dob; 07- 28 -43,
a resident of 7100 Dupont Avenue North, Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, 55430. Mr. MANSCi is
currently the president of the Brooklyn Center Junior Chamber of Commerce. Mr. MANSON is
employed by the Anderson Iron _Works, Inc. of 5335 North County Road 18 and has been em
ployed there since February of 1965. MANSON has been a resident of the city of Brooklyn
Center and living at 7100 Dupont Avenue North since June of 1966. A Brooklyn Center Police
Department application check shows that there is no record of criminal activity with the
Brooklyn Center Police Department, the Hennepin County TKarrant office, the Bureau of
Criminal Apprehension, NCIC and that Mr. MANSON has no traffic violations.
Within the application for a Bingo License, Keith Donald samDT is named as the bingo
manager. �k. SCEIIM has been a member of the Jaycees for four and one half years and
has held positions on the Board of Directors as well as the position of vice- president,
president and Chairman of the Board of Directors for the Brooklyn Center Jaycees. 1+1r.
S(W has lived at 6230 Kyle Avenue North in the city of Brooklyn Center since October
-0 of 1971. Prior to that time, Mr. SCH1'= lived in Brooklyn Park and Crystal. SCI
is an employee of General Mills and has been employed by General Mills for the past
eighteen years. Currently, Mx. SCHMIDr is the assistant supervisor of Package Produc-
tions Service for the General Mills Corporation. A Brooklyn Center Police Department
Resune by Investigator A. Paul MJN E M Case File #79 -06452 Page 3
application check for the name of Keith Donald SCfiMII7I' revealed that on 09- 18 -78, Mx.
SCHWET was issued a citation for speeding by the Brooklyn Center Police Department.
Mr. SCHMWr has no record with the warrant office, Crime Bureau or NCIC, havever, this
traffic violation does appear on Mr. SC[MIDT's driving record. SCM=.L is a homeowner
at 6230 Kyle Avenue North. _MOB, on 05- 05-79, ,went -to the 6200 block, of Kyle Avenue
North and there intervieded two neighbors; the resident at 6224 Kyle Avenue North, who
stated that she knew Mr. SCHMIDT and stated that he was a likeable fellow, a good neighbor
and a very "nice person" and certainly capable of the job of Bingo Manager for the Jaycees.
The second neighbor who -TaN= had occasion to speak with resided at 6236 Kyle Avenue
North and she stated that she did not kncxa Mr. SCI-REDT •.%Tell, as they had just roved into
the neighborhood in February; however, she noted that SC MIDI was a quiet, clean neighbor
who was always friendly when they net in the yard.
Y Y eY Y
This application is made for a Bingo License. The Brooklyn Center Jaycees regularly hold
a carnival in the Spring of each year and a Bingo game held during this carnival is a
source of income for the Brooklyn Center Junior Chamber of Conrerce. The proceeds from
turned back into communi
n
other fund raisin events is normally turn tY z
this, as well as oth g _
jects such as the - restoration '.of Public buildings, a shopping spree for the under privi
leged,`Easter egg hunts and some self - improvement projects such as "Speaking up" which
benefit the 135 members of the Brooklyn Center Jaycees.
In addition to the application for a Bingo License, there is a letter attached requesting
the waiver of a fidelity bond in the amount of $10,000 for the Bingo manager, Keith D.
SCH = as allowed under the city ordinance.
This concludes the investigation of the Brooklyn Centcr Junior Cha*Yber of Cormrce in
application for a Bingo License:
56t3OUZ _qn[ozmafioxr
MEMORANDUM
To: Gerald: Splinter, City Manager
From: James Lindsay, Chief of Police _
Subj: Updating of Holiday Inn's Liquor License
Date: May 10, 1979
Ned Delk, who has been the manager of Holiday Inn,. has left
the organization and relocated in Wisconsin. Topeka Manage-
ment, Inc. has selected his replacement and named James William
Decker of Omaha, Nebraska as the manager. They have also named
Mark Laughlin of Roseville, Minnesota as assistant manager.
The Police Department has conducted the required investigations
of bath parties and find nothing in their . backgrounds to be
detrimental to their being added to the liquor license held by
Holiday Inn. The references of both parties have been nothing
but favorable.
Mr. Decker has extensive background qualifications and has re-
ceived experience at the Marriott Inn in Bloomington, Minnesota,
Sheraton -Ritz in Minneapolis and comes to Brooklyn Center from
the Ramada Inn in Omaha, where he was the manager.
Mr. Laughlin 'alcc has ext- cnsiic background in the restaurant
business with the Smuggler Inn Corporation Mr. Laughlin comes
to Brooklyn Center from the Smuggler's Inn, St. Paul.
The manager at Holiday Inn is.responsible for the over -all
operation of the entire motel. The assistant manager's primary
responsibility is to manage the food and beverage operation of
the motel.
The following is a resume concerning case file number 79 -06177 by Investigator Robert W.
IRKS, transcribed and typewritten by Pat & clerk typist for the Brooklyn Center
Police Department. This resume is dictated on 05-07-79 at 8:30 AM.
THE TWO APPLICANTS FOR IIM�EEPER AND ASSISTANT INNKEEPER OF THE HOLIDAY INN IN BROOKLYN
CRUER ARE:
James William DECOR DOB; 04- 09-40
6512 Sou-Ua 149th Avenue
Omaha, Nebraska 68137
Business telephone: 566 -4140
Home telephone: (402) 896 -0917
Assistant Innkeeper
Mark Dudley LAUQHLIN DOB: 06 -25-48
2835 Rice Street, #715
Roseville, d nnesota
Business telephone 566 -4140
Hame >telephonea 484 -3822
REASON FOR B AGROUND iNvESTIGATTON
Change of management in the form of Innkeeper and Assistant Innkeeper of the Holiday Inn
which holds a liquor license within the city of Brooklyn Center.
*NVESTIGATING OFFICER
Investigator Robert W DIRKS, Brooklyn Center Police Department
DATE AND TIME BACKGROLUD INVESTIGATION WAS STARTED
05 -01 -79 @ 1230 hours.
Investigator DIRKS was assigned on 05- -01 -79 the background investigation of the above listed
applicants who are employees of Topeka Management, Inc. which is the owner of the Holiday
Inn located within the city of Brooklyn Center at 1501 Freeway Boulevard, Brooklyn Center,
MAnnesota .
In checking, Investigator DIRKS did. talk with both applicants and first inquired as to any
financial involvement with the Holiday Inn in which both are employed and was advised by
both the applicants that they have no financial interest with the con any and are employees
only, operating one as the Innkeeper and the other as the Assistant Innkeeper. Investigator
DIRKS' next step in this background investigation did run criminal histories on both James
William DECOR and also .Mark Dudley LAUD MIN, along with their spouses. These criminal
checks were run on 05 -01 -79 and the results are as follows:
The first party check was James William DECOR, 04- 09 -40, and it was found that he has a
d Minnesota driver's license with no violations. In checking also warrants on this
MIndividual or wants, the counties of Hennepin, Dakota and Ramsey, Anoka and Sterns were all
checked as he had indicated living or working in these particular counties in the past and
Resume by Investigator Robert W. DIRKS Case File #79- 06177 - Page 2
was found that he was clear of any warrants or wants in'these counties. Investigator
DIRKS did also contact the Omaha, Nebraska, Police Department where Mr. DECKER had lived
most recently and a teletype was sent to them requesting information as far as police con-
tacts or any criminal history or wants. Investigator;DIPKS did receive teletype back from
Omaha, Nebraska Police Department indicating that there were no warrants for Mr. DECKER
and also indicating that there. was no contact card on a party by that name at all either.
The next checks to be run by this investigator were a BCA criminal history for the State
of Minnesota and also NCIC and MINCIS. In checking through these particular computer banks,
it was found that there were no NCIC or MINCIS wants on the above listed party and that he
had no criminal history with the State of Minnesota whatsoever.
Investigator DIRKS dial then run checks on the spouse of William DEKCXER, that being nla.ry Ann
DECKER, dcb: 08 08 - 45. Investigator DIRKS started the checks on Mrs. DECKER by running a
driver's license check also, Minnesota and Nebraska, and found that she has no license for
either of those states and never has. Warrants were also ran on Mrs. DECKER in the same
counties as Mr. DECKER, that being Hennepin Dakota, Ramsey, Anoka and Sterns, and found
that she was clear of any warrants or wants in those counties. Investigator DIRKS did also
contact the city of Cmha,in the state of Nebraska on'Mrs. DECKER, and found that they had
no wants or police contacts with a party by that name either. In running a BCA criminal
history for the State of Minnesota, an NCIC and MINCIS check on Mrs. DECKER, it came back
that she was clear. In fact, there was no file by a party by that name.
In running the criminal history end of it for the DECKER family then, I find that they have
police contacts whatsoever in regards to criminal contact with the police d artTent.
g �
Investigator DIEMS did then do the same checks on Mark Dudley LAUU-MIN, dob: 06- 24 - 48. The
first check to be run on Mr.. LAUG MIN was a driver's license check and it was found that he
has a valid driver's license and has listed on the license three previous violations, one
of them being on 10-05 -75 for Speed, another being 08 -07 -77 for Speed and the third being
12 -21 -77 for Speed. Investigator DIM did then check warrants in the counties of Anoka,
Hennepin, Ramsey and Blue Earth on Mr. LAUGHLIN as these were the 'counties he indicated he
had either worked in or lived in the last ten years and found that there were no warrants
or wants for Mr. LAUC�iLIj in any of these four counties. Investigator DIRK5 did also check
a BCA criminal history in the State of Minnesota along with NCIC and MINCIS wants and found
that Mr. LAUGHLIN was clear of any wants and showed no criminal history with the State of
Minnesota. either.
Investigator DIRKS did then run the spouse of Mr. LAUGHLIN, that being Cynthia Gene IAUGF 1N,
.dob: 04- 25-47 and also under her maiden name of Cynthia Gene DODGE for the same crrLunal checks
and driver's license checks. In running the driver's license first on Mss. DODGE, I found that
the only license that she had listed was under the name of Cynthia Gene LAUGHLIN and it shaaed
her to have a valid Minnesota driver's license with no violations. In running warrants on
Cynthia LAUGHLIN, they were run in Anoka, Hennepin, Ramsey and Blue Earth also and it was
found that they were all clear of any wants on the name of Cynthia LAUGHGIN. Investigator
DIRKS, after completing these checks, did run a BCA criminal history for the State of Minne-
sota, NCIC checks and MINCIS checks and found that. Mrs. LAUGHLIN came back dear of all these
checks and snowed no State of Minnesota crindnal history.
is then fund in the case of the LAUGHLIN Is that there is no history of any criminal con -
ct with the police departments where they have lived in the past or within the State of
Minnesota.
Resume by Investigator Robert W. DIRKS Case File #79 -06177 Page 3
W regards . gar to the Innkeeper then, r1r. DECKER and Mr. LALKHLIN, after completing these checks,.
there was nothing found that would cause any problems with their being the new management of
the Holiday Inn, located within the City of Brooklyn Center.
Investigator DIRKS, at this time, dial then continue the investigation by checking next with
the personal character references that each applicant had listed in their application. In-
vestigator DIRKS started this on 05 -02 -79 at 8:45 'AM where I contacted those personal refer-
ences of James DECOR. The first party to be contacted was one, Robert ALLISON, 11031 wash -
burn Avenue South, 881 -3946. Investigator DIRKS, in talking with Ms. ALLISON, was advised
that he had known Mr. DECKER since about 1971 when Mx. DECKER had been with the Marriott Inn
down in Bloomington,11i.nnesota. Mx. ALLISON indicated Enat he had first met Mr. DECKER, how -
ever, through baseball as Bob ALLISON is a former Minnesota Twin and Mr. DECKER had been in-
volved in making arrangements for the 'Rains in their lodging when he was with the Marriott
Inns. Mr. ALLISON indicated that Ms. DECKER., in his opinion, was a very good guy, (as he
Put it) and indicated that he conducted himself in a very professional manner and that he
is absolutely a. very fine business man.
Mr. ALLISON indicated that he knows of no problems that Mr. DECKER has in the area of drink-
ing indicating that he has socialized with him in the past and that he will take a drink,
but that he conducts himself always as a gentleman and does not drink to excess Mr. ALLISON,
when asked by this Investigator if he knew if Mr. DECKER was one to become involved in any
and that and Mr. ALLISON stated that he knows of no gambling that Mr. DECKER was involved in
in regards to sports to any other kind of gambling. Mr. ALLISON stated that he had dealt with
AjUr. DECKER since he finished with the Minnesota Twins in baseball, that being in a professional
r through Coca-Cola where he is a General Manager, and Mr. DECKER would be using pro
-
11 M from their company. Mr. ALLISON indicated that Mr. DECKER is definitely a very ener-
getic and capable businessman. Mr. ALL indicated to this investigator that if Ms. DECOR
is the one who is the new Innkeeper of our Holiday Inn, that we would absolutely have no
problems with that establishment and that he would make it one of the finest run hotels in
our city.
The next individual to be contacted by Investigator DIRKS was one Burt STARR, business
address of 443 Northeast Hoover, 331 -4660. Mr. STARR, when contacted; indicated that he
had dealt with Mr. DECKER in a business relationshib for a number of years and has dealt`
with him while he was at the Sheraton- -Ritz downtown and also while he was with the Marriott
Inns and the other businesses he has been involved with in the Minneapolis area. Mr. STARR
indicated that he deals in wholesale meats and that when he first became acquainted with
Mr. DECKER, Mr. DECOR was the head of catering at the Sheraton -Ritz and then at the Mariott
Inn. Mr. STARR indicated that Mr. DECKER, is an excellent businessman, that he is very honor
able, an honest person and is the type of manager who puts only competent people around him -
self. Mr. STARR indicated that this business that he is in is one in which you have to deal
In credit and he indicated that Mr. DECKER, was the type of person that made sure he got
people paid on his credit arrangements and that he made sure those things would be done be-
fore he ever considered taking his salary himself.
Mr. STARR indicated that Mr. DECOR is the type of man who started at the bottom, that being
a catering manager, and worked his way up to where he is the Innkeeper (or was the Innkeeper)
in the Ramada Inn in Omaha, Nebraska. Mr. STARR indicated that Mr. DECKER was, in fact,
Aftffered the job as one of the corporate officers with the Ramada Inn out of Denver, but that
Wb turned this position down due to the short life expectancy and the term of management
with a hotel -motel chain when you get into the corporate office area. Mr. STARR indicated
that he has socialized with Mr. DECKER on a few occasions and knows him not to have any
Resume by Investigator Robert W. DIRKS Case File #79 -06177 Page 4
6 oblem with drinking and stated that he is not involved in any kind of gambling, to Mr.
STARR's knowledge. Mr. STARR indicated that a very good indication of the type of person
W. DECKER is is the fact that the Bloomington Health Department In3spector,14r. MOOD, is
one of the toughest persons to satisfy as far as the cleanliness of an establishment and
Mr. STARR indicated that Mr. DECKER was always one to pass Mr. MOOD's inspections without,
any problems whatsoever.
Investigator DIRKS, in contacting the third party listed on the application, talked with one
Gil IANLSDALE of 2501 West 95th Street, 888 7101. Investigator DIRKS, in talking with Mr.
LANSDALE, did contact him at _his office which is the Minnesota Twins main office inhere he
is a manager within the main business office. Mr. LANSDALE indicated that he has known Mr.
LECO since he was with the Marriott Inn in Bloomington and indicated that he is a very
fine businessman and indicated that he has dealt with him in setting up arrangements for
the Twins while they have been on the road as far as accommodations. Mr. LANSDALE stated
that he is a vezy,fine businessman and that he is one to cover all areas of his business to
keep it running efficiently and knows how to do this by keeping`conrpetent help around himself.
W. LANS stated that he has socialized with Mr. DECKER on some occasions and indicated
that he is a very fine, polite gentleman who, as far as he knows, would do great credit to
our Holiday Inn within the City of Brooklyn Center.
Investigator DIRKS, after talking to these three individuals, found that there was a con:
sisient high regard for Mr. DECOR as a businessman and also as a fine gentleman and it was
indicated by all three that he would be a credit to the com mity of Brooklyn Center is he
were to work to live within this community.
W Vestigator DIR�:S did contact n_=t those references for Mark DLdley 1A_=-11N_ that he had '
listed as character references. The first par ty to be oont acted is a 24W-Lael T•PLTU vE, 1405
West Jessamine, 646- 7830. Mr. MAU= indicated that he has x-xorked - for Mark LAUGHLIN and
that he worked under him as Assistant Manager for six and one half months. Mr. MALIMTE in-
dicated that Mr. LAUG N knows all the tricks of the trade as far. as the restaurant business
went and indicated that he was able to learn these, as well as learn fine character and marr
agement capabilities from Mr. LAUGHLIN in dealing with help. Mr. MAURLNE indicated that
while Mr. LAUGHLIN was Manager of the Smuggler's Inn in 5t. Paul, that he made all enployees,
(and stressing the fact to him as Assistant Manager) be certain that all ID.'s were checked
on all parties appearing to be young in regards to the sale of liquor and also stressed that
closing is closing and there would be no liquor served after hours.
Mr. MPORINE stated that Mr. LAUGHLIN also made certain that no guests were allowed to stay
after hours and that under no circumstances (no matter how hard someone begged or wanted
to buy a bottle from the bar)would someone be allowed to do this and informed any employees
while he was Manager there that if anyone was to be caught in violation of these particular
rules that it would be grounds for them to lose their job. Mr. MAUMICE stated that Mr.
LAUGHLIN was definitely strict on these rules while he was manager there and while he worked
with him. Mr.' MAURINE indicated, however, that Mr. LAUGHLLq was a fair and just manager and
that he kept people around him, in regards to.help, that he felt were competent so his bus -
iness was run very efficiently. p4. MAURINE indicated that rs. LAUGHLIN did not drink at
work or would not take any drinks while he was off work within the business of the Smuggler's
Inn. Mr. MAU M indicated that Mr. LALUMIN would take a drink, but that he dial not drink
within the establishment he worked himself.
W e next reference Investigator DIRKS did have contact with was 'a Jack PARENT, 1922 Kingston,
777- -3314. Investigator DIRKS asked Mr. PAF]ENT in regards to how long he had worked for or
with Mr. LAUGHLIN or known him and he indicated that it had been for a period of six years
and that he had worked with him while Mr. LAUGHLIN was Manager of Smuggler's Inn. Mr. PAREM
Resume by Investigator Robert W. DIRKS Case File #79 -06177 Page 5
4dicated that he is a chef for the Smuggler ' I .
e ggler s nn and that. he knows that Mr. LAtX�IN,
while working as manager for the Smuggler's Inn, was a respected manager within the company.
He indicated that TMs. LA=IN was one to keep competent employees around him and stated
that this was proven because his particular restaurant had the least number of turnovers in
help. It was indicated that r. LAUGIMIN has had no problems with the police while he was
running the establishment in St. Paul and indicated, in fact, that they had been contacted
at one time by St. Paul vice in regards to some prostitutes soliciting prostitution out of
their particular restaurant and kt% IAUG2=4, after being made aware of it, did have con
tact with St. Paul vice where mug shots of those known prostitutes were left with his
restaurant and all employees were made aware of these particular people so that they would
not be served and would, in fact, be told to leave the particular building. Mr. PART?' in-
dicated that the city of St. Paul does have an ordinance against serving a convicted'prosti-
tute and for this reason, all employees were made aware of their presence after r�.x. IuLKM121
had had contact with St. Paul vice and Mr. LAUGHLIN cooperated conpletely with the St. Paul
Police Department, Vice Unit, in eliminating this problem. Mr. PARENT indicated that
he did not know Mr. LAUGHLIN to drink to excess, and stated that he only drank
socially, and knew him not to participate in any type of gambling.. Mr. PARENT
indicated that he did not know his wife well, that 'being LAUGHLIN's, but did
state that he knew as this investigator had been advised- previously, that they
were in the process of a divorce, which would be finalized soon.
Mr. PARENT indicated that .14r. LAUGHLIN had left the Smuggler's Corp`.' to move
up into a better job, that being to partake in management of the Holiday Inn
Brooklyn Center.
,*
e next party to be contacted as a character reference for Mr. LAUGHLIN was
a Cynthia GOMEZ, and she was also an employee at this same Smuggler's Inn_
where Mr. T and PARENT worked. It was indicated that she had known Mr.
LAUGHLIN for approximately one year and a hal that she worked under him
during that time. Ms. GOMEZ 'indicated that he was a very honest person to
work for and very fair, and that if a problem developed that he was one to
eliminate the problem immediately. itis. GOMEZ also made reference to the
incident involving the prostitutes attempting to work out of the Smuggler's
Inn, at which time she stated that this problem was eliminated immediately
by St. Paul Vice coming in and contacting Mr. LAUGHLIN, where he totally
cooperated in distributing photographs to the bartenders and also waitresses
within the Smuggler's Inn and did make certain that all employees knew who
these people were so that they would not be served and would be discouraged
from coming into the Smuggler's Inn. Ms. GOMEZ stated that after this
particular procedure was done with the assistance of St. Paul Police Dept.
the management, that being Mr. LAUGHLIN, did eliminate the problem that had
just barely got started within the business. GOMEZ indicated that the.reason
that these partieswere even frequenting the placewas due to them not being
recognized by the management and that no one was making the management aware
of any problem until one time they finially found out about it and then did
make contact with the St. Paul Police Dept. in an attempt to find out how
they could eliminate the problem. kiss GOMEZ indicated that Mr. LAUGHLIN
does not drink while he is working or does not drink while he is at his
W s
tablishment where he is working and indicated that he is a very good ;manager
d runs a tight ship, kee - ping competent employees around him. Ms. GOMEZ
indicated that while he is working he is all business, he is a very consciou-
ious person and that he does not fratrinize with the help. Airs GOMEZ indicate(
that she is not familiar with Tsar. LAUGHLIN's wife really as she has only met
her at one of the SMUGGLER's INN Christmas parties. Investigator DIRKS
Resume by InvestigZl.to. `Robert W. DIRKS Case File #79= 06177 Page 6
Transcribed and typewritten by Barbara FAST, dispatcher.
ter receving information from Mr. LAUGHLIN previously in regards to him
"Mein in the process of a divorce and having this confirmed by either
g P 9
character references did contact Mrs. LAUGHLIN in regards to this divorce
to find out if there was any particular problem surrounding this that might
affect his being a assistant manager of the Holiday Inn.
In 'talking to Mrs. LAUGHLIN, she indicated that she and her husband were
in the process of a divorce and that it was due to some personal things that
would not relate to him as far as his performance in his job. sirs. LAUGHLIN
indicated that her husband was not much of a drinker and that the entire
time she has known him, he has either been going to school or working. Ms.
LAUGHLIN indicated that he has not ever been abusive to her or the children
and that that was not at all the problem they.had between themselves. Mrs.
LAUGHLIN stated that her husband was a super father and indicated he got
along very well with all the neighbors where they resided in Coon Rapids
and inidcated that he is _a very hard worker and worked as many as 50 to
60 hours a week., Mrs. LAUGHLIN indicated that her husband has always been
a conscientous employee and has worked very hard for the conmpanies that he
has been employed by, and since working in a management position ,'as always
upgraded the particular place that he has managed for tne.comppany. Invest-
igator DIRKS in talking with Mrs. LAUGHLIN found that there was nothing
within the reason for their divorce that would cause Mr, LAUGHLIN not to
perform in an appropriate manner as the City of Brooklyn Center would expect
him to.-
0 vesti.gator DIRKS, after finishing this portion of the background invest -
gation could find no reason why Mr. DECKER or Mr. LAUGHLIN could not oper-
ate in the capacity of innkeeper and assistant innkeeper managing the
Holiday Inn within the city of Brooklyn Center and it appears from everything
this investigator has heard to this point, that Mr. DECKER and Mr. LAUGHLIN
would in fact, be very good at managing the holiday Inn within the city of
Brooklyn Center and would cooperate completely with any of the departments
within the city of Brooklyn Center in regards to Health inspections, Build-
frig inspections or problems that the police department may have in regards
to the Holiday Inn.
Investigator DIRKS contacted the most current employers of the applicants,
that being Mr. DECKER and Mr. LAUGHLIN in regards to the type of performance
these people as their immediate supervisors thought each would have displayed.
Investigator DIRKS first contacted James DURBIN who is with the Ramada Inn
Corporate office in Denver, phone number of 303- 373- -1786. investigator
DIRKS in talking with Mr. DURBIN found him to indicate that Mr. DECKER was
in fact, a very good employee and that he was a very capable and competent
manager while he was with the Ramada Inn. Mr. DURBIN indicated that he had
the area in which Mr. DECKER worked in at the Ramada Inn in Omaha, Nebraska.
Mr. DURBIN indicated that Mr. DECKER did run the Omaha, Nebraska Ramada Inn
very competently and that he had a very competent staff and was always making
improvements and staffing his establishment with very competent employees.
Mr. DURBIN indicated that he could see no reason why fir. DECKER could not
4fure competently run the Holiday Inn within the city o Brooklyn Center, and
It that the management that we had previously had been problems, that for
we would have no problems with Mr. DECKER as he was very cooperative
with the authorities while he worked at the Ramada Inn in Omaha, Nebraska
and would in fact do so with the authorities here in the city of Brooklyn
Center.
Resume by Investigator Robert W. DIRKS Case File #79 -06177 Page 7
The next party to be contacted in regards to Mr. LAUGHLIN, that being his
e st regional manager, the party's name being Donald KEEL who works at the
uggler's Inn in Blaine, Minnesota, and covered the Smugglers Inns within
this region. Investigator DIRKS in talking with Mr. KEEL was advised that
he thought Mr. ALAUGHLIN was in fact one of the best managers he has had
within the past few years and indicated he was a very respected employee.
Mr. KEEL indicated that when Mr. LAUGHLIN decided to move onto the Holiday
Inn in Brooklyn Center, that he was very sorry since he lost a very good
manager. Mr. KEEL indicated Mr. LAUGHLIN was in fact a respected employee
and in fact, he ran one of the tightest ships within the Smugglers Inn.
Mr. KEEL indicated that Mr. LAUGHLIN would cooperate with the Brooklyn
Center Police Depatment should the need arise for us to work on something
out of the Holiday Inn and indicated that he would be a very conscientous
manager in regards to the liquor ordinances as far as closing, checking of
I.Ds and whatever other ordinances Brooklyn Center had in regards to a liquor
establishment. Mr. KEEL indicated it would be difficult to find another
employee as conscientous in regards to his duties as the assistant manager
Mr. LAUGHLIN and indicated that the city of Brooklyn Center would definitely
have no problems with Mr. LAUGHLIN in regards to his duties and the function
of the Holiday Inn as a hotel, restaurant and liquor establishment.
Investigator DIRKS in checking on both the innkeeper, Mr..James DECKER
and the assistant innkeeper, Mr. Nark LAUGHLIN, could _'find nothing within
their criminal history, within the character reference listed or within the
remarks indicated by the past immediate supervisors of either of these
gentlemen that would indicate neither of them to be a problem in regards
e the Holiday Inn having a liquor license. Investigator DIRKS can only
e that both of these individuals as indicated by the parties that are
knowledgeable of them, are very hiahay respected men and that they are
in the words of their past employees and supervisors,along with friends
both capable, conscientous and hard working individuals who would cooperate
fully with the police department or any other department within the city
of Brooklyn Center, in regards to their positions at the Holiday Inn,
in the city'of Brooklyn Center.
End of resume
E .�GZeu� 7�la�c�' ��cac�'ucct� Ems•
4748 France Avenue North
` MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55429 c_ f c71 ouz �n ozmafio�
Telephones 588- 0501- 2 -3 -4 -5 'YOU
May 3, 1979
Mr. Splinter
City of Brooklyn Center
Dear Sir:
I would like to address this letter to you and all the concerned
people involved with the governing policies of the business future of
Brooklyn Center.
To start with, attached you will find a tribute article on
Lester E. Cass. This tribute appeared: in the April issue of the
Twin City Tool & Die magazine. T hope this article will help
acquaint you with Cass Screw Machine Products Company.
I will try to be as brief as possible and explain where we are
at, and,what we would like to do.
First of all if Les Cass iluu not died, wG wo at this time be
working very hard on getting approval and building an addition onto
our building. This plan was side tracked last spring when 'Les learned
that he had terminal cancer.
To'explain this, Les Cass was the sole stock holder of the corp-
oration and also the owner of the property and building.
On May 1st, the corporate stock was transferred to the people
who Les had setup a contract with several years ago. At this time the
estate stated that they would like to sell the building and property
to us, being that they have to satisfy the inheritance taxes by
October 20, 1979.
I have included an appraisal which we had done recently. What we
would like to do is buy the existing building and put on the add -
ition which we had planned to before Les got sick
We have had some rough plans and a rough estimate of the cost of
the addition. This figure is about $270,000. For a total of approx-
imately $700,000.
I have talked to several financial people and attorney's, and if
- two and two have to make four, about the only hope we have to accomplish
May 3, 1979
Page 2
this and be a progressive company in the future, is if the City Council
would give us approval on seeking Industrial Revenue Bonds.
I know this subject is not new to the Council and we would hope
that they would take a good look at Cass Screw Machine and consider
US.
We do not want to leave Brooklyn Center as this has been'our home
for many years and we have established many roots that we can identify
with and would hurt to leave behind.
Sincerely,
DALE GREENWAL'J
Vice President
Cass Screw Machine Prod. Co.
P.S. Attached is a very rough sketch of the addition we would like
to add. If we see any encouraging light of hope we are prepared to
submit some official plans.
I .
A tribute to Les Cass
"Did You Know The M a n ?"
e an.
Lester E. Cass died January learned machining. After about one machine, one man
20, 1979 at the age of 69 years. - 17 years he decided he wanted operation to many machines
When Les succumbed to cancer to work for himself. He rented and 60 plus employees. Les 'felt
he did not give up easily. - Just space in Minneapolis and that the reason for his success
as was his philosophy in began with one machine and was trying to be honest and
business he was tough right up his own labor in 1944, fair to his customers and his
to the end. From 1944 to 1979 Les Cass fellow competitors, and treating
Les left his home in South
and his Company, Cass Screw his employees as people rather
Dakota as a 'young boy and Machine, has grown from a than numbers. He often said,
"Nothing is impossible some
things just take longer."
y.
4 ` < Les was a man that knew his
people, "the people that
worked for him ", were very
important to him, and that a
feeling of involvement by
a everyone, regardless of the job,
meant that his business would
progress.
continue to row and ro
- g P g
With this feeling and the love
for his people, Les set up a
contract with his key people
` several years before his death
so that Cass Screw Machine
would remain in business and
his people would have the job
s ;r security, that meant so much
..
to him.
OV
Les was a man that often said
no one was indispensable, and
if a person feels they are, they
are doing something wrong at
their job. Although Les felt this
way, there is no way our
industry ever really replaces a
"Les Cass ".
The "old timers" that started
in business about the same
time as Les, will consider his
passing much like the passing
of a pioneer, for Les truly was
a pioneer in the screw machine
industry that we know of
today.
. + "
May we all hope that when
the time comes to hang up
our hats, we will have done
�. our job so well and left an
impact on the people we
know, so that someone may
p ask the question of us, "Did
you know the man?"
Signed,
His People' at
Cass Screw Machine
Tool &Die Journal 13
J
f
f�
;F1 `eR Z c
m Z to
� I
R A cn �
c a m
° Z <
�v 0 Z (.
-_ > Z
w A
�+ o � a
to t�
o O 5v• S/ X ? �' o
l u
nt ',