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