CC Minutes 12-13-04
o4-3Cj
¿
¡K.
"T:"
!;
~*--
!1
¡
I
if:'
City Council Meeting - December 13, 2004
Mayor Furlong: With this change.
Kate Aanenson: I don't believe it's, no it does say in the POO no single use can exceed 5,000
square feet.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, so.
Councilman Lundquist: Is that redundant to have it...
5
t
,
Mayor Furlong: Do we need to strike this on the health club?
Kate Aanenson: Yeah. It would be redundant.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. I'd make a motion to strike the words, up to 5,000 square feet. To
amend your motion to strike the words up to 5,000 square feet. Is there a second?
Councilman Peterson: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Any discussion on that motion?
Councilman Lundquist: On the amendment?
Mayor Furlong: On the amendment, thank you. If not, we'll vote on the amendment to strike
the words, up to 5,000 square feet in the motion.
Mayor Furlong moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to amend the motion to strike the
phrase, "up to 5,000 square feet" in the motion. All voted in favor and the motion carried
unanimously with a vote of 5 to O.
Mayor Furlong: That prevails so now we're dealing with the amended motion. Which reads,
health club, health and physical exercise clubs and off sale liquor store. Any other discussion?
On this. If not we'll proceed to the vote.
Councilman Lundquist moved, Councilman Peterson seconded to approve Planned Unit
Development Amendment #04-35 to include health and physical exercise clubs and off sale
liquor stores. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O.
Mayor Furlong: Next item on our agenda. How we doing for time? Take a 5 minute recess?
Well, let's just take a 5 minute recess. Okay, we're moving up to 9:00. We've been here fora
couple hours. Let's come back quickly.
(The City Council took a short recess at this point in the meeting.)
REQUEST FOR AN AFTER THE FACT VARIANCE FOR THE INTENSIFICATION
OF A LEGAL NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE BY BUILDING A CANOPY WITH
31
City Council Meeting - December 13, 2004
FOOTINGS WITHIN THE FRONT YARD SETBACK. 222 WEST 78m STREET.
THOMAS WILDER.
Kate Aanenson: Thank you. This is an after the fact variance request. This development did go
to the Planning Commission. It did not receive a super majority or 75 percent approval so it was
forwarded to the City Council. The subject site is located on West 78th. It's an existing home.
When the permit came in it was for siding and internal remodel, so those are ones that we try to
expedite through. Get them in and out and at the time that the staff, the planning staff looked at
it, there was an over sight missed that was later caught on inspection and that was the canopy on
the house. Because the permit as it came through, as the permit came through it was for siding
and remodeling. The canopy wasn't caught on the site plan itself. As the inspector noted, there
was a stop work order or noticed to get the variance, which the applicant did. Very pleased with
the remodel job. It looks very nice. An enhancement to the downtown. This was a case where
again we make decisions, discretionary decisions every day when a survey is required or not. In
this circumstance the survey wasn't required again because it came in as a remodel. In hind sight
we would have done that. At the time of the Planning Commission the two no votes were
specifically because they felt the encroachment was into the right-of-way which the Planning
Commission, two of the Planning Commissioners felt that they couldn't compromise on that so
Mr. Wilder did pursue a survey of the subject site. So as the original survey, the property line is
behind the sidewalk so actually it's 3 feet away so with that knowledge we believe that we
probably would have had the one more vote or the super majority and it wouldn't be before you
now but unfortunately didn't have the survey, and to expedite things at this point, he did invest in
that. So with that we are recommending approval of the adoption based on the fact that the
encroachment isn't into the right-of-way. Really the only problem was the steps were existing.
It's these additional, it's pretty minor. Again we felt it appropriate to ask some sort of coverage
there on the front street. Unfortunately there could have been other things but in the scheme of
things we are recommending approval of the variance again because it doesn't encroach into the
right-of-way. It's 3 feet behind. So with that we are recommending approval and I'd be happy
to answer any questions that you have.
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Questions for staff.
Councilman Lundquist: Kate. Just to clarify. When Mr. Wilder came in he showed a plan that
showed the footings and the canopy on it, is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: Very difficult to discern the porch and the canopy footings, and that was an
oversight so until you saw it physically then you understood the implication. The markings on
the footing site plan were misread. Difficult to see. So some fault on both sides. Take some
responsibility. The plans could have been clearer. I don't think anybody, and because there was
discretion on whether or not it was in the right-of-way, we felt we couldn't let it proceed.
Without the, with a negative recommendation.
Councilman Lundquist: Okay.
32
City Council Meeting - December 13, 2004
Kate Aanenson: Yes there is.
Councilman Peterson: Can you describe that, just to give us some sense.
Kate Aanenson: We had no records. Again when someone comes in where there's a discretion,
we ask. He didn't want to pay. You know I think there's fault on both sides. He admitted it. It
could have been clearly on there. Agreed. Again it was a decision to not burden him and require
the survey. When it went to Planning Commission we asked for the survey again to help
expedite it. To clarify that gray area, we used the best information we had which was road
construction plans for West 78th. Again it appeared it was in the right-of-way. We could have
solved it then. Probably would have the majority vote and we wouldn't be here today. Nobody
wants to force somebody to do a survey we didn't have to, but if we would have done it the first
time, when he first came in, because it was so close, which we had the right to do, you know.
And we did stop it when we noted it. He wanted to continue. Rightly so. It looks nice, so.
Councilman Peterson: Okay, with that being said I have a motion.
Mayor Furlong: Councilman Peterson.
Councilman Peterson: I'd move that we would pay equal parts of both the survey and the
variance fee at 50 percent.
Mayor Furlong: Okay, thank you. Is there a second?
Councilman Lundquist: Second.
Mayor Furlong: Any discussion on that motion? My concern is, in terms of refunding fees, I
don't know that had the, if the plan was clear and both parties recognized that at the beginning
when they came in for their building permit, would the fee for the variance have been paid at that
point in time?
Kate Aanenson: We would have never issued the permit. He would have had to get a variance
to proceed.
Mayor Furlong: So he would have paid for a variance before the fact.
Kate Aanenson: That's correct.
Mayor Furlong: Before the building permit was issued.
Kate Aanenson: That's correct.
Mayor Furlong: The issue with the survey is one where the question that needed to answered is
was this being built in the right-of-way.
Kate Aanenson: That's correct.
35
City Council Meeting - December 13,2004
Mayor Furlong: See to me, and I'll comment. Now to me that's an issue. If this, you know this
to me in terms of approving this variance makes a whole lot of sense and I'm ready to support it
100 percent. Had that been in the right-of-way I couldn't make that statement and so since the
purpose here was to verify that it was out of the right-of-way, I think those are fair costs so.
Councilman Peterson: It's interesting though, but it just seems so logical that if you walk out
there and it's 3 feet behind the sidewalk that it'd be reasonable to put it there. It wouldn't be in
the right-of-way. You know it's, I haven't got the picture in front of me now but it's what, 3 feet
out of the house? Or 4 feet. You're maybe a foot past the original steps.
Mayor Furlong: Well I guess, you're asking why they thought it wasn't in the right-of-way or?
Councilman Peterson: Well I mean it just seems, I don't like asking residents to spend $1,000
when it's, even if it was in, it doesn't seem logical to be in the right-of-way with the distance it
was from the house. If you go out there and look at it, it doesn't look like it's in the right-of-way
but yet we're asking him to spend $1,000 to make sure that it isn't. You know, it's one of those
things where it just didn't pass the test of reasonableness to me. For that expensive of a
undertaking.
Kate Aanenson: So the question then is, if he didn't have that information tonight, where would
we be sitting because the best information we have is that it's in the right-of-way based on the
plans so.
Councilman Lundquist: Well and my issue with it was that we should have done that in the
beginning when the thing came through. Yeah, we, he, Mr. Wilder may have had to go through
the variance process and the survey and all of that stuff, but he would have been able to make a
choice at that time. Once he's got the footings there and the work started and we say whoa, stop.
Hold on. Something's wrong here. He's committed. He's there. He's in. There's nothing, he
can't turn back now. He's got the place, so I think that as a show of good faith that's why you
know we need to be a party to that and look at that before hand. Allow the applicant to make a
financial decision before he's already committed and we've done that, so you know, people
make mistakes. You know the staff made a mistake. It's going to happen and it's an over sight
and.
Kate Aanenson: Well I think he also admitted that he didn't clarify. ..
Thomas Wilder: Well can I, am I done? Can I point something out on the permit?
Mayor Furlong: Just a second. Why don't you finish your thought.
Kate Aanenson: Well I'm not going to do a he said, he said. There's definitely blame on both
sides. Again, the mistake we could have made is a up front requirement to spend the $1,000 and
do the survey up front.
36
City Council Meeting - December 13,2004
Mayor Furlong: And the difference is not that he could have decide, but Councilman Lundquist
you're saying he would have had an option to decide if that cost made the difference between
going forward with the project or designing something different to avoid the survey, he could
have made that decision at that time.
Councilman Lundquist: Yep.
Kate Aanenson: So the message is, probably we should require anything close to require a
survey?
Councilman Lundquist: There's a lot of things that could be done differently. Could have, you
know required the survey. You know we could have, it's easy to look back now and say, and I
don't want to get into the blame staff. I'm not putting the staff on trial because you know
everybody makes mistakes. It's not that big of a deal. I just think that as representatives of the
city we need to say you know, when we make mistakes, we should be accountable for them and
not put the burden on that applicant because we made an oversight, and you know mistakes are
going to happen so, you know it happened. Oh well. Big deal. We'll learn our lesson and not
do that maybe the next time, or do it differently so that's okay. Not that big of a deal.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Any other discussion on this?
Councilman Labatt: So Craig, if I understand you wanted to refund half the variance fee and half
of the $1,000 survey but you would have needed the variance no matter what. Right? So you
would have had to pay for that whether the survey was there or not. Why don't you just refund
half of the cost for our mistake which would be the survey.
Councilman Peterson: Well and I'm comfortable with that. I'm with Brian that I think it's, as
representative of how we as a city are just handling a situation.
Councilman Labatt: I'm not disagreeing at all.
Councilman Peterson: ...with anybody. I just want to do something. Didn't want to do
everything. If somebody wants to do.
Councilman Labatt: Let's hear from Mr. Wilder because he wanted to say something.
Thomas Wilder; Is that okay?
Mayor Furlong: If Councilman Labatt said so, yes.
Councilman Labatt: Well I was just, because Bob was thinking it.
Thomas Wilder: No, I'm not trying to blame staff either. Ijust didn't want to, is that print
where.
Kate Aanenson: Which one?
37
City Council Meeting - December 13, 2004
Thomas Wilder: From the building permit available. I'd know it if I saw it. The thing I wanted
to point out is the little foot, we did have on the June 22nd building permit. It says install 6 by 6
poles. Check foundation. Add footings if necessary and you know.
Kate Aanenson: To me those are shown, it looks like they're on the top of that last stoop. See
that's.
Thomas Wilder: Yeah, no I see that.
Kate Aanenson: The decision that was made is that they're on the stoop. They got moved off
the stop and that's.
Thomas Wilder: Well, but that's true. The conversation with Doug was a little different but.
Kate Aanenson: So that's how we read it.
Thomas Wilder: Okay.
Todd Gerhardt: And the reason you probably moved them off this.
Thomas Wilder: They checked the stoop for footings and they don't have them put into footings.
Todd Gerhardt: Right, because you got to carry the weight of the porch.
Kate Aanenson: So he made a decision in the field that was different than the survey.
Councilman Peterson: So Kate in this situation, if it was 2 inches, if they were 2 inches into the
right-of-way, what would have been the process? How would the process revolved? I'm just
curious. I'm somewhat confused.
Kate Aanenson: When we looked at the survey they were in the exact spot of the existing stoop.
Someone made a field decision, the inspector told us they made a decision in the field. Then we
did the stop work order. We said oh, we've got a problem because we think it's already close.
We don't want to go further. Are there things that are off a freckle? Yeah. We make that
decision every day whether or not we're going to decide you know, is it that big a deal? That's a
discretionary decision. My staff asked me, is this something I need to worry about? How close
are we? You know we get that, we had one in today. A house that's at impervious surface at 30
percent. Came in at 29.9. I felt an obligation to tell the homeowner you know what, you cannot
add a deck. You cannot do anything and I want a disclosure statement on it so it comes back to
the City Council. I want the homeowner to know you're at the max. Because I think that's, it's
an obligation and we made a decision based on representation here. Somebody made a field
decision. I understand but then it's our obligation. Is it that big a deal? I don't know. At that
point we were concerned it was in the right-of-way and that's, if it wasn't in the right-of-way,
could we have maybe looked the other way? You know I don't want people thinking we just
38
City Council Meeting - December 13, 2004
ignore it but you know we have to make those decisions every day. What's critical? What's not
critical? Would have been in the back yard, you know.
Councilman Labatt: Then it wouldn't be a big deal.
Kate Aanenson: Probably not.
Councilman Labatt: But this is right on West 78th. I think we're trying to split a hair here over
$125 bucks. I think we all agree let's give him half the survey fee, $500 bucks but the variance
would have been needed anyways so.
Thomas Wilder: Actually only $450 by the way.
Councilman Labatt: Huh?
Thomas Wilder: $450. It was $900 exactly. . .
Councilman Labatt: Okay. Thanks Mr. Wilder.
Councilman Peterson: I want to clarify my previous motion and that was to reimburse half of the
survey fee. That's what I meant to say.
Mayor Furlong: As I understand it was half the survey and half the variance fees.
Councilman Peterson: Yeah, that's not what I really meant to say though.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Your motion was to refund half the survey fee?
Councilman Peterson: That's correct.
Councilman Lundquist: I will second that.
Mayor Furlong: And that was seconded by councilman, and the minutes will signal that. Is
there any additional?
Todd Gerhardt: Roger endorsed that.
Mayor Furlong: Roger endorsed that. Is there any additional discussion on the amendment?
Hearing none we'll proceed with the vote. The amendment is to add the language to the original
motion to reimburse half the survey fee of $450, would be the reimbursement amount.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve an amendment
to the motion to approve reimbursement of half the survey fee in the amount of $450.00 to
the applicant. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O.
39
City Council Meeting - December 13, 2004
Mayor Furlong: So that amendment prevails and the motion is amended. Is there any further
discussion on the motion to approve the variance as amended? Hearing none we'll proceed with
that vote.
Councilman Peterson moved, Councilman Lundquist seconded to approve Variance #04-39
for the intensification of a legal non-conforming structure by building a canopy with
footings within the front yard setback located 3.8 feet from the front property line, and to
reimburse the applicant half the survey fee in the amount of $450.00. All voted in favor and
the motion carried unanimously with a vote of 5 to O.
ADOPTION OF THE PROPOSED 2005 BUDGET AND CIP.
Todd Gerhardt: Mayor, City Council members. I just handed out to you a resolution
recommending adoption of the 2005 budget and establishing tax levies for collection in 2005.
And those amounts Bruce exactly that we would be establishing.
Bruce DeJong: Establishing a total tax levy as shown, when you open up those sheets, the final
levy certification, total tax levy of $9,439,754.00. Which is $22,912 lower than our published,
proposed tax levy certification that the Truth in Taxation notices were based on.
Mayor Furlong: And that's the second sheet here Bruce?
Bruce DeJong: Yes.
Mayor Furlong: Okay. Thank you. There are two motions here. One for the budget. One for
the CIP. Are there any questions for staff? If there are not, comments, discussion by council.
Councilman Labatt: Let's let Bob go first.
Councilman Ayotte: Well what we've done here, we've been able to secure a cost avoidance
dealing with the paying cash for the equipment. We've gone ahead and we've ensured that we
don't have to spend the additional money from year to year. We've addressed the infrastructure
issue with this, with the approach that we're taking. We've got $4 million bucks in the bank.
Does that pretty much surmise it?
Bruce DeJong: That's a very nice, concise summary. Yes.
Councilman Ayotte: Anybody else want to add anything?
Mayor Furlong: I'm sure somebody will.
Councilman Lundquist: Is that a challenge?
Mayor Furlong: Thank you. Any other comments? Discussion.
Councilman Labatt: I would agree with Bob.
40