Loading...
City Council Minutes 08-28-2006MINUTES REGULAR MEETING — MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday August 28, 2006 — 7 p.m. Members present: Clint Herbst, Wayne Mayer, Tom Perrault, Glen Posusta and Brian Stumpf Members absent: None 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance. Mayor Herbst called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. and declared a quorum present. The Pledge of Allegiance was said. 2A. Approve minutes of August 14, 2006 regular Council meeting. Tom Perrault noted clarifications affecting pages 8, 9, 10 and 12 of the minutes. He also stated that his reason for voting against the resolution supporting the constitutional amendment for dedicating MVST funds was because under the proposal at least 40% of the funds could go to public transportation and he felt all funds should go to the roads. WAYNE MAYER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 14, 2006 REGULAR COUNCIL MINUTES WITH THE CHANGES NOTED. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2B. Approve minutes of August 22, 2006 special Council meeting. WAYNE MAYER MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 22, 2006 SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. The following items were added to the agenda: 1) Trees along the streets; 2) Request from High School for Homecoming Parade route on September 22, 2006; 3) Service request form on City website; 4) Compensation for Mayor and Council and 5) A celebratory wish. 4. Citizen comments, petitions, requests and concerns. No one spoke under citizens comments. 5. Consent Agenda: A. Consideration of ratifying hires and departures MCC. Recommendation: Ratify hires and departures as identified. B. Consideration of approving temporary charitable gambling license for Ducks Unlimited for October 10, 2006 at the Vintage Grill. Recommendation: Adopt resolution recommending approval of temporary charitable gambling license for Ducks Unlimited. for October 10, 2006. C. Consideration of accepting a contribution for equipment/gear for the Monticello Fire Department. Recommendation: Adopt resolution accepting contribution and authorizing use of funds as specified. D. Consideration of a request for a conditional use permit for cross parking and cross access and a request for conditional use permit for a drive-through facility in a B-3 (Highway Business) District. Applicant: Steiner Development (Adjacent to O'Ryans) Recommendation: 1) Approve the Conditional Use Permit for a commercial strip center and joint access based on a finding that the proposed arrangement is consistent with the intent of the PZM District; 2) Approve a Conditional Use Permit for a drive through facility based on a finding that the proposed use is consistent with the intent of the PZM District, subject to the conditions outlined below; and 3) Approve a Conditional Use Permit for a joint parking arrangement based on a finding that the proposed arrangement would meet the requirements for off-street parking and no substantial conflict in hours of operation is expected subject to the conditions outlined below: 1. The applicant shall provide a legal agreement executed by all parties concerned for joint parking subject to the approval of the City Attorney. 2. The parking lot shall be modified to include an access lane to the west side of the parking lot and the drive through entrance. Said drive lane shall be delineated with curbed islands and contain directional signage. 3. The entire north side of the drive lane for the drive through shall be curbed to create stacking space for six vehicles. 4. The island south of the pre -menu board shall be removed to allow room for a passing lane around the drive through. 5. The applicant shall comply with any recommendations of the City Engineer. E. Consideration of authorizing approval to proceed with purchase of already budgeted expenditures for MCC improvements. Recommendation: Authorize the purchases for the resurfacing of the spas in the pool area; replacement of four pairs of doors plus one and an additional structure for the indoor play area which are budgeted for in the 2006 budget. F. Consideration of sponsoring Swan River Montessori Charter School in Safe Routes to School Grant Program for pedestrian facility improvements. Recommendation: Approve City sponsorship of the Swan River Montessori Charter School in the Safe Routes to School Program. G. Discussion of award of contract to Authority Fence for the ornamental fencing project for Riverside Cemetery, City Project No. 2006-17C. Recommendation: Review the bonding process with contractor and grant an additional one week extension to September 4, 2006 to provide the bond required. H. Consideration of adopting protocol for enforcement of regulations pertaining to off -premise real estate signs. Recommendation: Move to support the enforcement strategy relating to off -premise real estate signage and direct staff to research options for updating the Zoning Ordinance in this regard. Brian Stumpf added item #10, Approving Plans and Specifications and Advertising for bids for the extension of Dalton Avenue, Dalton Court and Dalton Way to the consent agenda. John Simola asked that item #5G, Award of contract on the ornamental fencing for Riverside Cemetery be removed from the agenda as the contractor had submitted the required bond. Glen Posusta felt agenda items #9, Award of bid for Monticello Business Center improvements and #13, Development of an ordinance regulating multi -family dwellings could be added to the agenda. Tom Perrault requested that Item # 13 not be on the consent agenda since there may be people attending the meeting to discuss the need for regulating rental units. Wayne Mayer asked that items #SD,Conditional Use Permit for Steiner Development and #5H, off -premise real estate signs be removed from the consent agenda for discussion. GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA WITH THE ADDITION OF ITEMS #9 AND #10, WITH THE REMOVAL OF #5G AND WITH ITEMS #51) AND #5H REMOVED FOR DISCUSSION. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Tom Perrault questioned why the actual application for the charitable gambling license was not included with the agenda item. 6. Consideration of items removed from the consent agenda for discussion #5D Conditional Use Permit — Broadway Market: Wayne Mayer asked Consulting Planner, Steve Grittman to explain #6 listed under the requirements for a conditional use permit relating to vehicular access points. Wayne Mayer questioned the drive through area and the location of the stacking space. He was concerned that cars in the stacking area could block the flow of traffic through the parking lot. The sketch submitted showed a "Do Not Stand" sign which is directed at vehicles so as to not block traffic flow. Wayne Mayer questioned what appeared to be two stacking areas separated by an open space. Steve Grittman said the design was not unreasonable. Glen Posusta asked why the window was not placed at the corner of the building then the whole area could be stacking area. Wayne Mayer questioned why they would want a set up that could impede someone from getting out of the parking lot. Clint Herbst stated the parking is all self contained and not affecting neighboring property so the property owner is the only one that has to deal with it. Since it does not affect any other site, he did not think the City should direct the developer to do anything else. Glen Posusta felt it should be designed for what takes place on the site 99% of the time. Glen Posusta felt the solution would be to move the window to the opposite corner of the building. Todd Johnson from Steiner Development addressed the Council stating they are working with staff on the plan. He stated they are willing to, and have made changes to the site plan to effect a well placed drive through. They are proposing broken stacking allowing for four cars from the window and additional space for two more cars. In addition there is ground signage directing them to queue. Staff had suggested closing the first opening but that was not the preferred option of Steiner Development. They are willing to work with staff to come up with something else or act on specific direction from the Council. Todd Johnson thought leaving the parking lanes open would be less circuitous and would not be sending the people away from the front of the building. Clint Herbst felt the parking lot layout was a movement thing and having it open would allow vehicle movement through the parking lot. Todd Johnson noted that the proposed use is a coffee house which has specific requirements on spaces needed for the drive through. Wayne Mayer stated that according to Section 3-9J one curb cut is allowed for every 125 feet but there is nothing in the ordinance that says how far apart the curb cuts should be. Wayne Mayer asked if on the east end of the building, after the customer has picked up his order is there any warning as far as pedestrian traffic along the back. Todd Johnson discussed signage options such as "Service Vehicles Only." Tom Perrault questioned the speed limit of 35 mph identified in the agenda item for CR 39 and CSAH 75stating those were not the posted speed limits. Clint Herbst asked if the City would see a change in the posted speed limits on these streets once the interchange was open. Bruce Westby indicated when CSAH 75 was turned back to the City the speed limit could be looked at then. There was some discussion on when the turn back of the road would take place. Tom Perrault asked if the speed limit changes anything as far as the pylon sign. Steve Grittman said the applicant would still be in compliance with the sign ordinance. Tom Perrault asked the capacity of the storm water system. Todd Johnson stated they have complied to what engineering standards are which is a 10 year storm event design. If there was a 100 year storm event there would be emergency overflows provided. Wayne Mayer asked about the parking stalls noting there were 23 stalls marked for liquor store use. Steve Grittman said the parking requirements were set to provide for the maximum of the usage allowed. Todd Johnson requested direction from the Council as to variation in design and whether the parking lanes can remain open or whether they will be required to close it off. Brian Stumpf felt that the owner knows what would work best on their site and he didn't feel comfortable telling them to do something else with the design unless it was a safety issue. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONDITONAL USE PERMIT FOR A COMMERCIAL STRIP CENTER AND JOINT ACCESS BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED ARRANGEMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE PZM DISTRICT. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH WAYNE MAYER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DRIVE THROUGH FACILITY BASED ON A FINDNG THAT THE PROPOSED USE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE PZM DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AS FOLLOWS: 1) PARKING LOT SHALL BE MODIFIED TO INCLUDE AN ACCESS LANE TO THE WEST SIDE OF THE PARKING LOT AND THE DRIVE THROUGH ENTRANCE. SAID DRIVE LANE SHALL BE DELINEATED WITH CURBED ISLANDS AND CONTAIN DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE; 2) THE ENTIRE NORTH SIDE OF THE DRIVE LANE FOR THE DRIVE THROUGH SHALL BE CURBED TO CREATE STACKING SPACE FOR SIX VEHICLES; 3) THE ISLAND SOUTH OF THE PRE -MENU BOARD SHALL BE REMOVED TO ALLOW ROOM FOR A PASSING LANE AROUND THE DRIVE THROUGH AND THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH ANY RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY ENGINEER.. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH WAYNE MAYER VOTING IN OPPOSITION. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A JOINT PARKING ARRANGEMENT BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED ARRANGEMENT WOULD MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR OFF-STREET PARKING AND NO SUBSTANTIAL CONFLICT IN HOURS OF OPERATION IS EXPECTED SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT PROVIDNG A LEGAL AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY ALL PARTIES CONCERNED FOR JOINT PARKING SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE CITY ATTORNEY. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. #SH Off -Premise Real Estate Signs: Jeff O'Neill provided background on this item noting that the present ordinance restricts signs from being placed in the boulevard. Staff was proposing a procedure to use for enforcing the ordinance as it relates to off -premise real estate signs. Jeff O'Neill stated with literal enforcement of the ordinance it creates hardship for the real estate companies that are promoting developments within the City. Staff was seeking direction from the Council on the level of enforcement that they wanted to apply. Clint Herbst felt the City should contact the real estate company and review with them what the regulations are and the changes being proposed. He felt by meeting with the real estate companies the City could come up with a solution. Glen Posusta felt the sign issue should be handled in a manner similar to what St. Michael did where they allowed the signs to be posted from Thursday through Sunday. Tom Perrault stated that one real estate company may have more than one office and each office could have a sign in the boulevard. Jeff O'Neill said it would take awhile to do research and get the ordinance adopted. What did the City want to do in the interim? Brian Stumpf felt the City should be following the ordinance. If something comes from the meeting then the City could look at interim application. Clint Herbst felt the ordinance should be done over a short period of time and not dragged out. Jeff O'Neill said the Planning Commission could not act on the ordinance until October at the earliest. He felt the City should go with an interim procedure until the ordinance is in place. CLINT HERBST MOVED TO CONTACT THE REAL ESTATE COMPANIES TO SET UP A MEETING RELATING TO OFF -PREMISE SIGNS AND COME BACK TO THE COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT. WAYNE MAYER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. In further discussion Tom Perrault asked if the notice would be given only to local realtors. Glen Posusta said there would be published notice given. Tom Scott cautioned that sign matters are complicated and the City must be careful about regulating signs based on the content of the sign. Clint Herbst agreed but stated his intent was that since real estate companies have the majority of off -premise signs the City could meet with them and come up with a recommendation that the City could apply to all off -premise signs. Brian Stumpf stated that once any ordinance is adopted then it is a matter of enforcement. 7. Public Hearing on appeal of a denial of variance to setback requirements for a drive- through lane within an existing Planned Unit Development. Applicant: Mielke Brothers, LLC/ Alan Loch. Steve Grittman provided background stating that agenda items #7 and #8 are related to the same site which is Chelsea Commons. The location of the proposed drive through would require a variance. The Planning Commission recommended against the conditional use permit and the denied the variance request. The applicant has appealed the denial of the variance. Approval of the conditional use permit relies on the approval of the variance. The site plan shows vehicle stacking located on the east side of the building on Cedar Street. The dashed line on the site plan is required to be green space. Under provisions of the ordinance the drive through cannot encroach into existing drainage and utility easements. Also the drive through lane is required to be curbed and per the ordinance curbing has a 6' perimeter setback. The proposed drive through would require a variance from both of these ordinance provisions. Glen Posusta stated that the 12' easement was a taking of land that the property owner could do nothing about. To grant a variance requires a hardship to the property. In this case, staff felt the property owner was able to have reasonable use of the property and therefore there was no hardship. If the variance is granted then a hardship needs to be identified Glen Posusta felt the increase of the easement 12' was a taking of land since the property owner was restricted from using the easement area and was not compensated for the loss of the land. He felt if the City wanted a 12' easement they should be compensating the property owner for it. He stated the easement demands by the City were excessive. He felt Mr. Mielke should be allowed to proceed as proposed but would have to sign an agreement that if work needed to be done in the easement area restoration would be at his expense. Wayne Mayer asked when the PUD was approved. The PUD was approved in 2001. Wayne Mayer asked what the easement requirement was at that time and stated he didn't know if the 12' easement requirement should apply to a PUD approved in 2001. Clint Herbst felt the City needed to be flexible. Glen Posusta reiterated that the property was too expensive for the City to be taking more easement area than what was needed. Tom Perrault noted the drive through comes off onto Cedar Street whereas on the Steiner development it was all contained within the parking lot. He also noted there is a right turn lane onto Chelsea Road. Wayne Mayer stated this drive through made more sense than the one proposed for the Steiner development. Brian Stumpf disagreed stating that in the Mielke case it is not contained within the site. There was additional discussion on the differences between the drive through lanes on the two sites. Mayor Herbst opened the public hearing. Dan Lemm, 113 Cameron Avenue NE stated he didn't believe the right turn lane on Chelsea Road started until after the driveway entrance. Dan and Lee Mielke were present. Dan Mielke reviewed an aerial of the site stating the PUD was approved in 2001 and the ordinance at that time was 10' for drainage and utility easements n and a 5' setback was allowed for driveway and parking. This was the case for all the other projects in the PUD that was approved. He felt the proposed development should be grandfathered in. He stated that a 15' easement was also taken along Chelsea Road. Bret Weiss indicated there was reason for this which he believed was that it was needed for the right turn lane. Dan Mielke reiterated that the City took 15' along Chelsea and 12' along Cedar Street. Bret Weiss stated the City also vacated 10' along Cedar Street. Dan Mielke showed the small area of the drive through lane that was being added to the PUD. He said the building is outside the drainage and utility easement and the only issue is the setback for curb and parking. The variance is needed for only a small area. There was additional discussion on structures placed in the easement area and who is responsible for them. John Simola stated the amount of right of way needed is determined by the amount of space the utility companies need for their lines and facilities. There are 5 utilities; gas, electric, cable, telephone and fiber optics that need to place lines in the right of way. Before it was 5' of protected easement was required and now it is 11' of protected easement. Wayne Mayer said this reinforces the need to be meeting together with the utility companies about what goes in the right of way. Wayne Mayer talked about stacking of utilities. John Simola stated although you could stack utilities you still need area for the placement of pedestals. Dan Mielke discussed landscaping for the area. The only difference from the original landscape plan was the removal of two trees which were replaced them with 4 planters. Clint Herbst said this was an example of where something was improved with a PUD such as a building fagade. Jeff O'Neill said the judgment call of the Planning Commission was that it was not a superior project. Tom Perrault said people have questioned whether there is adequate parking. Dan Mielke stated that their proposal exceeds the city's parking requirements. Steve Grittman explained that most cities are not using the stacking spaces as a credit towards the parking stall requirements. Steve Grittman said the site does exceed the parking requirement but the City had granted approval to reduce parking stall requirements because of the joint parking agreement. Glen Posusta said he felt if the City was paying for these easements the City would find a way to get the utilities located in less easement space. Glen Posusta felt the City should not make it so difficult for businesses to come to Monticello. Dan Mielke addressed concerns contained in the staff report. He stated Buffalo and Big Lake both have 10' and 5' easement requirements while Becker some time takes 12' and sometimes less than 12'. Dan Mielke said they are not requesting anything different from the original sign package. Staff had required placement of sign along the back building. They are requesting only additional drive through signage that they would like approved for location 5' off the property line. Dan Mielke said the original approval had a monument sign but that has been removed. Dan Mielke noted that Steve Grittman allowed 22' per vehicle for stacking space. He felt he had stacking space for 5 %2 cars. Dan Mielke didn't feel that stacking on Cedar Street would be a problem. There was discussion on what was needed for stacking spaces. Dan Mielke felt economics would determine that. Dan Mielke stated that item # 3 on Exhibit Z was ambiguous and should be spelled out more specifically and not require the developer to cater to whim of staff. Dan Mielke expressed his concern that the City engineer said they would have to add to more storm drains. Bruce Westby stated his recommendation was that the drainage should be collected before it empties into the street. Dan Mielke argued that all the water stay internally on the site. Bruce Westby stated that only %2 of the drive through lane would be draining into the street. Dan Mielke asked for approval authorizing the drive through, approving the landscaping plan, approving signage as proposed, drainage approved per the plan of Meyer Rohlin, granting of the variance and consideration of grandfathering in of the setback requirement that was in place when the PUD was approved.. Wayne Mayer asked if the Bruce Westby had a concern that was not being addressed or were there other issues on the design that he wanted to make the Council aware of. Bruce Westby said he did have a concern with the safety of the drive through because of the blind corner of the building. Dan Mielke also brought up his concern about the 12' easement and the setback for curb and parking. Bret Weiss said the utility companies are putting pressure on the City for adequate right of way space for utility placement. Clint Herbst didn't feel the City should put the easement requirement back to 10' and 5'. Wayne Mayer emphasized that this is why it is so important to get the right of way ordinance in place. Clint Herbst closed the public hearing. Wayne Mayer questioned how you could put a drive through without crossing the sidewalk. He felt the library was the most dangerous drive through in the City. GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE BASED ON A FINDING THAT AN UNDUE HARDSHIP EXISTS AND THE APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE REASONABLE USE OF THE PROPERTY. Wayne Mayer asked that the motion be amended as he had concerns with Exhibit Z which he felt was vague. Glen Posusta questioned the provision in Exhibit Z that all lighting shall be directed away from Cedar Street. Dan Mielke requested that the conditions contained Exhibit Z be omitted. GLEN POSUSTA AMENDED HIS MOTION TO ADD THAT ITEMS #1 AND #3 ON EXHIBIT Z BE DELETED. WAYNE MAYER SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH BRIAN STUMPF VOTING IN OPPOSITION. Clint Herbst questioned Tom Scott regarding the hardship. Tom Scott replied that not having reasonable use of the land was the hardship. 8. Consideration of a request for an amendment to a Conditional Use Permit for a Development Stage Planned Unit Development to accommodate a drive through facility in a B-3 (Highway Business) District. Applicant: Mielke Brothers, LLC Alan Loch. Steve Grittman explained that information submitted as part of item #7 applied to this item as well. Wayne Mayer stated the ambiguity on Exhibit Z was frustrating and he felt more thought process should go into the provisions spelled out in the Exhibit Z that accompanied the planning items WAYNE MAYER MOVED TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A PUD BASED ON A FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED USE SATISFIES ALL CONDITIONS OF ALLOWING SUCH A USE IN THE B-3 DISTRICT AND IS CONSISTENT WITH INTENT OF THE ORIGINAL PUD SUBJECT TO THE COMMENTS ON EXHIBIT Z WITH ITEM 41 AND #3 BEING DELETED. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH BRIAN STUMPF VOTING IN OPPOSITION. 9. Consideration of award of bid for Monticello Business Center (Otter Creek Crossing Plat) Grading and Drainage Grading Work, City Proiect No. 2006-18C. Included with the consent agenda with the recommendation to award the project to R.L. Larson Excavating, Inc. in the amount of $365,133.34. 10. Consideration of approving plans and specifications for the extension of Dalton Avenue, Dalton Court and Dalton Way and authorize advertisement for bids, City Proiect No _2006-1 -';C- Included with the consent agenda with the recommendation to approve the plans and specifications and authorize the advertisement of bids for the extension of Dalton Avenue, Dalton Court and Dalton Way with Dalton Way being bid as an alternate. 11. Review of prices for pavement mounted crosswalk signs and consideration of placing signs on a temporary basis. John Simola reviewed the information from the agenda item. Clint Herbst liked the idea that the crosswalk signs could be moved around fairly easily. John Simola noted this sign is on a 40 pound base which could be anchored. Signs can be removed and the base left in. Study has shown the signs are more effective if moved around every 4-6 weeks. The signs and the bases would be removed in the winter. Brian Stumpf asked if it is typical to put the signs at intersections where there are 4 way stops. Clint Herbst felt you had to train people that when someone is in the crosswalk area you have to stop. Brian Stumpf would like to see these signs spread out a little more. John Simola stated to saturate a corridor they put three more signs on street. GLEN POSUSTA MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF 12 "YIELD TO PEDESTRIAN" SIGNS AND BASES AND ADDITIONAL REPLACEMENT BASES AND ROTATE THEM AMONG THE BUSIEST INTERSECTIONS IN THE COMMUNITY AT SIX INTERSECTIONS A TIME AT AN ESTIMATED COST FOR MATERIAL S INCLUDING DELIVERY OF $3,317.20. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 12. Consideration of ordinance amendment enhancing ability of City to regulate use of street right of way for storage of materials. Wright County Sheriff's Department will not have items towed from the street unless it is specifically listed in the ordinance. Use of the boulevard for storage is occurring on a regular basis. The proposed amendment would not allow anything to be parked in the right that is not an operable vehicle. Any other type of object, inoperable vehicle or trailer could not be left sitting in the street. The Council was asked to consider applying the proposed amendment to public parking lots. John Simola noted that currently the time frame for a vehicle in the street right of way is 72 hour but the deputy has to observe that the vehicle has been there that length of time.. Clint Herbst suggested that on city parking lots maybe they should look at 24 hours instead of 72 hours. Brian Stumpf said the ordinance is consistent with what the state allows. John Simola stated he is not proposing to change the hours set forth in the ordinance just what object you can leave in the parking lot or on street right of way. Wayne Mayer asked about contractor dropping off a roll off or working out of a trailer.. John Simola said whatever objects are identified in the parking ordinance the Sheriff's Department can enforce. Wayne Mayer asked Tom Scott about having language in the ordinance addressing storm damage. Tom Scott noted there is a provision for temporary permits to be issued by designated staff. This would provide some discretion for the City BRIAN STUMPF MOVED TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 9-1-2 OF THE CITY CODE DEFINDING WHAT CAN BE PARKED IN STREET RIGHT OF WAY AND TO HAVE THE PROVISIONS OF THE ORDINANCE APPLIED TO PUBLIC PARKING LOTS. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 13. Consideration of authorizing City staff to conduct further research on development of ordinance regulating multi -family dwellings. Jeff O'Neill briefly explained the reason for considering development of this ordinance. He talked about benefits such as reducing fire calls, police calls and building code violations. Glen Posusta questioned what happens to a 50-80 year old house that is being converted to rental property. Do they have to be brought up to code? Brian Stumpf said that the fire code and building code are mandated by the state. Steve Joerg and Marc Simpson commented on what they have encountered thus far on their inspections for fire code violations. While the conditions they have encountered are not deplorable they are nonetheless violations of the code. Steve Joerg said since there never was a program in place they are trying to educate the landlord on existing codes. With an ordinance in place they could address problems right away because it would be part of the licensing agreement. Wayne Mayer asked if the cost for the inspections was covered in the budget. WAYNE MAYER MOVED TO DIRECT STAF TO FURTHER EXPLORE THE POTENTIAL OF ESTABLISHING AN ORDINANCE THAT CONTAINS A LICENSING REQUIREMENT FOR RENTAL PROPERITES AND PREPARE A DRAFT AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE THAT REDUCES THE NUMBER OF UNRELATED PEOPLE IN A RESIDENCE IN R-1 AND R-lA DISTRICTS FROM FIVE TO THREE. BRIAN STUMPF SECONDED THE MOTION WITH DISCUSSION. MOTION CARRIED. BRIAN STUMPF WANT TO KNOW IF A FEE STRUCTURE WOULD BE COVERED AS PART OF THE ORDINANCE. Added Items: Homecoming Parade — John Simola state he ad received a letter from the High School requesting the use of certain streets for the homecoming parade on September 22, 2006. CLINT HERBST MOVED TO ALLOW THE HOMECOMING PARADE ALONG DESIGNATED CITY STREETS ON SEPTEMBER 22, 2006. GLEN POSUSTA SECONDED THE MOTION MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Trees on 3rd Street - Glen Posusta noted the trees in this area are in bad shape and should be replaced. John Simola asked about the trees around the parking lot and indicated the City had held off doing anything because there maybe redevelopment taking place in the area. Discussion of the parking lot will be brought up at a later meeting. Service Desk — Jeff O'Neill updated the council on the on-line form for residents requesting service, voicing concerns or asking for information and encouraged the Council to try it. Compensation - Wayne Mayer brought up the issue of a pay increase for the Mayor and Council. The last increase was in 1994. Increase in compensation can only be given in election years It was noted that this Council is a hands on Council resulting in the Mayor and Council attending many more meetings. Brian Stumpf stated it was an individual's choice to attend extra meetings and felt the compensation the Mayor and Council receive are comparable to that of other communities. BRIAN STUMPF MOVED NOT TO APPROVE A PAY INCREASE FOR THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL. TOM PERRAULT SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED WITH WAYNE MAYER AND GLEN POSUSTA VOTING IN OPPOSITION. Celebratory Wish - Wayne Mayer announced that it was Councilmember Posusta's birthday and the announcement was accompanied by a rendition of Happy Birthday. 14. Approve payment of bills for August. TOM PERRAULT MOVED TO APPROVE PAYMENT OF THE BILLS. CLINT HERBST SECONDED THE MOTION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 15. Adjourn. The meeting was adjourned at 10 p.m. Recording Secretary