Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC December 1, 1981 - ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - DECEMBER 1, 1981 AGENDA 1. Call to Order - 7:30 P.M. 2. Resident Forum 3. Agenda Approval 4. Discussion Items a. Variance/Bankey b. Variance/Jirasek c. Lot Split/Jirasek d. Preliminary Plat/Lakeside Estates e. Special Use Permit/Mistelske f. Extension Final Plat/Hawk Ridge East g. MSA Streets h. 5. Non-Discussion Items a. Ordinance No. 8 Amendment/Delete Junkyards b. Ordinance No. 53 Amendment/Dog Holding Time c. Noise Control Ordinance d. City Insurance Renewal e. Date-Final Budget Meeting f. Date-Year End Meeting g. 6. Reports of Commissions, Committees 7. Approval of Minutes 8. Approval of Claims 9 . Adjournment CITY 01 ANDOVER M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL COPIES TO: ATTORNEY, STAFF ~ FROM: A. ADMINISTRATOR / ' \''''' // DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 1981 REFERENCE: AGENDA INFORMATION - DECEMBER 1, 1981 Item No. 3 - Agenda Approval Item No. 4a - Variance/C. Bankey Mr. Bankey has a parcel containing approximately 8 acres in Section 5; however, the frontage is only 290'. A variance from the provisions of Ordinance No. 8 (as amended), requiring 300'. Mr. Bankey does not own the property on either side of the parcel for which the variance is requested, therefore, it would not be possible for him to increase the width to meet the requirements. Planning and Zoning is recommending approval of the request. A resolution will be prepared granting approval, to include the p&Z reasons for their recommendation, and noting Mr. Bankey's inability to increase the width of his property. Item NO. 4b - Variance/J. Jirasek Mr. Jirasek is requesting a variance from the provisions of Ordinance 10, Section 14.01 and 16.03 to convey a piece of land approximately 5' in width and running the full length of his property (Parcel 2000) to the adjoining property owners. Also included in this variance request is the conveyance from the adjoining parcel (Parcel 30) to Mr. Jirasek of a triangular wedge for the purpose of "squaring off" the property. Inasmuch as this is an exchange of properties, only one variance to encompass both transfers was requested. A resolution will be prepared granting approval. The Planning and Zoning Commission is recommending approval; their reasons for the recommendation will be shown in the resolution. (Note: The attached map shows the property as it presently exists) Item No. 4c - Lot Split/J. Jirasek Mr. Jirasek is requesting approval to subdivide Parcel 2000 of:~ Auditors Subdivision 137 in Section 33. This is the parcel for which the variance is being requested under Item No. 4b. Both subdivided parcels meet the requirements of Ordinance No. 44. Inasmuch as this parcel has never paid a park dedication fee, and will not be subdivided again, it is recommended that the $100 _n. , Agenda Information December 1 , 1981 Page 2 Item No. 4c - LO~ Split/J. Jirasek (continued) per parcel fee shall apply. A resolution will be prepared to include the Planning and Zoning reasons for their recommendation. Item No. 4d - PreliminaEY Plat/Lakeside Estat£~ Attached is the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation for approval pursuant to the Pre-Plat, dated November 11, 1981. At the time the Sketch for this Plat was brought before the City Council for conceptual approval, the indication was made of the need to extend a north/south street from the Lake Ridge Plat. You will note that this has been done. You will further note the property proposed to be acquired by the Park Commission under the existing Grant, has been exempted from the Plat. It could not be included as a lot because of the frontage, width, etc. Two variances will be required and will be shown in the resolution for approval. Also included in this resolution will be the contingencies listed in the Planning and Zoning Commission recommendation of 11/16/81, Item No. 4e - Special Use Permit/Mistelske Attached is the Planning and Zoning recommendation for approval. The yard for which a Special Use Permit is requested is that which was formerly licensed to Northwest Auto Parts (G. Farrian). Attorney Hawkins is of the opinion that inasmuch as Ordinance 8 allows for a "junkyard", the permit must be approved; and a l~ccnse granted if all requirements of Ordinance No. 44 are met, with all uses contained in the definition of a "junkyard". A resolution will be prepared. Item No. 4f - Extension/Final Plat-Hawk Ridge East The Preliminary Plat of Hawk Ridge East was approved in June, 1980. Due to the economy over the past two-years, Mr. Carlson requested a "hold" on the plat in late 1980. A six-month extension was granted on filing the Final to July, 1981 ; another extension was given to January 3, 1982. Plans were to file the Final before the deadline, however, the roads are not completely finished. Ordinance NO. 10 does not set a limit on the number of extensions which can be granted. If the Council does not wish to grant another extension, the other solution would be the requirement of a development contract for the remaining street work. Item No. 4q - MSA Streets Attached is a memorandum from the City Engineer, covering MSA designations and authorization for release of MSA Funds. The Road Committee has reviewed the information, as well as discussed it with Bonestroo and Mr. Schrantz. Item No. Sa - Ordinance No. 8 Amendment You have received a memorandum from me, dated October 15, covering the inadvertent omission of deleting the "junkyard" provision from General Industrial Special Uses, at the time the ordinance was amended to delete the "Sale or storage of Used Auto Parts". Agenda Information December 1 , 1981 Page 3 Item No. 5a - Ordinance No. 8 Amendment (continued) A motion is needed to approve Ordinance No. 8N. Item No. 5b - Ordinance No. 53/Dog Holding Time As you no doubt have noticed, since this ordinance was adopted our animal control costs have increased; the reason being the ordinance requirement of holding a dog an extra day or two when the 6th day falls on a sunday or holiday. Inasmuch as Blaine/Midway All Pets is open on these days, it would not seem necessary. It is recommended that Ordinance No. 53 be amended per the attached. This could save the City up to $75.00 per month. Mr. Wax (Blaine/Midway Manager) also indicated he may have to increase his daily board fee to cover the additional record keeping for Andover animals. YOu will note I have also included cats in the amendment, as there are many months in which cats outnumber the dogs picked up. A motion is needed to approve Ordinance No. 53A. Item No. 5c - Noise Control Ordinance Attached is a letter and a proposed ordinance from Attorney Hawkins. He feels this ordinance is necessary for better enforcement and to aid in prosecutions. It would be my feeling that we need some language in the ordinance to exempt City Contractors in the case of emergencies or when they are performing a jOb that requires 24-hour duty, i.e. , dewatering. Item No. 5d - City Insurance Renewal/1982 I have a meeting with the insurance people on November 25. The information will be ready for the meeting. Item No. 5e - Date/Final Budget Meeting With the Agricultural Preserve Ordinance on the agenda for the December 3 Meeting, there will probably not be sufficient time to complete the Budget discussion and adopt a final, therefore, another meeting should be scheduled. Item No. 5f - Date/Year End Meeting A meeting should be scheduled for December 29 or December 30 to clear up year-end items, i.e., minutes, salaries. Item No. 6 - Reports of Committees, Commissions Planning and Zoning Commission Attached is a resignation from John Scherer. A motion is needed for acceptance. An ad will be placed in the Anoka Union and Shopper next weeR to run for three (3) weeks. Item No. 7 - Approval of Minutes If you wish to approve minutes at this meeting, please refer to the November 17 Agenda Packet. I would recommend this be deleted until year-end. --.. , · ~ 01 ANDOVER REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING - DECEMBER 1, 1981 MINUTES The Regular Bi-Month1y Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschitl on December 1, 1981, 7:30 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, Anoka, Minnesota. Councilmen present: Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Peach Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Attorney, William G. Hawkins; City Staff Engineer, Jim Schrantz; Planning and Zoning Chairman, d'Arcy Bose11; City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist; and others AGENDA APPROVAL MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Orttel, that the Council Agenda be approved as published wlth the addition of 5g, Appointment to Senior Citizen Advisory Committee. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, that we suspend the rules. Motion carried unanimously. 'yARIANCE/BANKEY Chuck Bankey - stated the variance is a request on the width on an 8-acre lot for which he has a prospective buyer. Discussion was on the request for additional road right of way. It was determined that an additional 27 feet of easement is desired, for a total of 60 feet. Attorney Hawkins stated that because the acreage is such that it could be required to be platted, the City can require additional easement dedication. The additional easement only affects the placement of the structures. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, introducing a Resolution approving a Variance request on lot width by Charles Bankey for an eight-acre parcel in Section 5-32-24 as written by the City Clerk with one change: The final paragraph, second to the last line be changed to: Claim deed for 60-foot easement from centerline along the easterly boundary of the subject's property. (See Resolution R94-81) Motion carried unanimously. VARIANCE AND LOT SPLIT/JIRASEK Jim Jirasek, 4618 165th Avenue NW, represented his mother, Carrie Jirasek, 13563 Crooked Lake Boulevard. He explained the next door neighbor possesses a wedge of land in his mother's property. The Davis' have agreed to take five feet of her road frontage for the wedge and other consideration, which is the reason for the variance request. Chairman Bose11 continued to explain the lot split transfers 85 feet on the southern portion of Lot 2 to the Junkers, property owner to the south. The Junker parcel plus the new parcel will both be served with sanitary sewer. It is Junker's intention to combine it into one parcel because the garages sit right on the property line at this time. Mr. Jirasek - asked for a clarification as to what is meant that it will not be subdivided agaln and asking for $200 park dedication fee. He felt that it places an undue restriction on the Junkers. Because the sanitary sewer stub exists there and an 85-foot lot meets the City codes, they may want to divide it in the future. Discussion was that there would be an ability to get a building permit on that subdivided lot, although the structure question would have to first be resolved privately. It was agreed to collect park dedication fees on the newly created southern lot only. - ~~.-_. , Regular City Council Meeting December 1, 1981 - Minutes Page 2 (Variance and Lot Sp1it/Jirasek, Continued) MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, a Resolution approving the Lot Split of Parcel 2000, Plat 66093 as requested by James and Carrie Jirasek as presented by the City Clerk with the change in the amount of the park dedication fee from $200 to $100 for park dedication fees on the newly created lot on the southern portion of the property. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, a Resolution approving a variance request to convey a parcel of land in violation of the provisions of Ordinance No. 10 as requested by James Jirasek. Motion dies for lack of a Second. Discussion was on the request by the County for an additional 17 feet of right of way along Crooked Lake Boulevard. Mr. Jirasek stated their attorney has been negotiating with the County on the road easement. They have recommended that Mr. Jirasek give an extra seven feet on the southern end of the property because the road on the north end infringes on his mother's house and buildings. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, for reconsideration of a Resolution approving a Lot Split of Parcel 2000, Plat 66093 as requested by James and Carrie Jirasek. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Jirasek stated the County has 33 feet of easement on the south end, and his attorney ìลก recommending they take an additional seven feet. And they have petitioned the County to give back some easement up on the north end of the lot. It is his mother's intent to divide her property on an RLS in the future. Discussion was on the County requirements for road easement, although it was noted that Crooked Lake Boulevard has been improved since the installation of sanitary sewer. It was suggested that no additional easement be required on Ms. Jirasek's property until such time as the RLS is filed which will then have more accurate dimensions, and it will allow the Jirasek's to continue their negotiations with the County. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, entering a Resolution approving the Lot Split of Parcel 2000, Plat 66093 as requested by James & Carrie Jirasek as presented by the City Clerk with the following changes: the terms for the park dedication fee be reduced from $200 to $100 on the newly created southerly lot; and under the Quit Claim Deed, have it read "Quit Claim Deed easement along the west property line subject to the requirements of the County." (See Resolution R95-81) Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, a Resolution approving a Variance request to convey a parcel of land in violation of the provisions of Ordinance No. 10 as requested by James Jirasek. (See Resolution R96-81) Motion carried unanimously. (Mayor Windschit1 stepped down to the audience; Acting Mayor Ortte1 chaired this portion of the meeting.) PRELIMINARY PLAT/LAKESIDE ESTATES Chairman Bose11 reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval of the preliminary plat. She also stated that all contingencies noted have been complied with at this time. Council discussion noted that the stub of Tulip Street outside of the plat to 153rd is not paved, and that it would be the City's responsibility to construct that portion of the road. Jerry Windschitl, developer - noted that the entire stub street is not constructed. The Englneers did not require it to be built when LakeRidge was accepted. He didn't believe he needed a variance on Lot 1, Block 3, as the restriction of two times the average size of the other lots applies only to sewered lots. The length between Tulip and 152nd Lane cu1 de sac is of some controversy. According to his surveyor, the - -.. . Regular City Council Meeting December 1, 1981 - Minutes Page 3 (Preliminary Plat/Lakeside Estates, Continued) length is 470 feet center to center. It is a matter of interpretation as to how the Council wants to address cu1 de sac lengths. Chairman Bose11 stated TKDA has always measured from the center of the road to the furthest extent when reviewing all plats. If that way is used, the cu1 de sac is 520 feet. Mr. Windschitl - stated he put the parkway to the proposed park acquisition land to proVlde access, although he would have no difficulty attaching it to Lot 1, Block 3, if the Council desired. Chairman Bose11 stated the Park Commission has made no recommenda- tion on the parkway because the acquisition of that land has not been complete. Councilman Peach suggested removing the word "Parkway" as shown on the plat. Counci 1man Lachinski preferred extending 152nd Lane to the west to provide access to the park at that location rather than the parkway strip proposed. Council discussion with Mr. Windschit1 was on possible alternatives for a through road from County Road 9 to Seventh Avenue in this vacinity. Mr. Windschit1 noted that there is a considerable amount of peat to go through if l52nd Lane were extended westward to connect in the Andover West plat. He showed other alternatives where 152nd Lane could be extended westerly to meet one of two proposed roads in the Andover West plat, feeling it is through better soils plus a shorter route across City parkland. Mr. Windschit1 also explained if the Park Commission does not acquire the property in the southwest corner, the land could stay the way it is as long as it remains in private hands. The City Clerk verified that no variance is needed on Lot 1, Block 3. Discussion was on the road elevations. Mr. Schrantz stated between the park area and the cu1 de sac on 152nd shows three feet of fill over the existing land and about four feet of peat. One of Mr. Schumacher's comments was that all street elevations be above 872 feet. Mr. Windschitl stated that the high water level on the lake is at 866.4 as calculated by the DNR. The basement elevations are 870 feet or above. Discussion was also on the Planning Commission's notation that the plat is subject to the Flood Plain Ordinance in that TKDA's Engineer, Mark Schumacher made the review and found no problems. Chairman Bosel1 stated the plat needs to comply with the Flood Plain Ordinance dealing with setbacks, etc., but does not need to be reviewed by the DNR. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, introducing a Resolution approving the Preliminary Plat of Lakeside Estates as presented by Jerry Windschit1, dated November 11, 1981. The City Council of the City of Andover hereby resolves: The Preliminary Plat of Lakeside Estates as presented by Jerry Windschitl is approved as presented, noting a variance on the length of the 152nd Lane cu1 de sac. Parkland pursuant to the Park and Recreation Commission recommended is hereby accepted. (See Resolution R97-81) DISCUSSION: It was the opinion of Councilman Peach that the word "Parkway" be removed but the boundaries for it be shown as is. Councilman Lachinski was concerned with the basement elevations and their relationship to the requirements of the Flood Plain Ordinance. Mr. Windschit1 explained that the minimum elevation of a drainfie1d has to be three feet above high water. Having a septic system at 870 feet is above the re- quirements for State septic systems. According to his surveyor, there is a minimum of 39,000 square feet above 870 feet in a 11 the lots proposed. The basement elevations are also at least three feet above the known high water table. Councilman Lachinski was also concerned with the amount of land dedicated for park. Mr. Windschit1 explained that the calculations were based only on the acreages within the plat itself. The proposed park acquisition is an exception to the plat and was not used for calculation of parkland dedication. He didn't feel that the City can purchase that property for park and still expect him to give a park dedication on it as well. The Clerk explained that exceptions are not included in the park dedication calculations on all plats. If that exception ever gets platted, parkland would be dedicated at that time. Discussion noted that this particular situation has never occurred before where the Park Commission is trying to obtain a grant to purchase parkland and that this is complying with the Park Commission's wishes. Mr. Windschit1 stated they redrafted the plat to allow for Regular City Council Meeting December 1, 1981 - Minutes Page 4 (Preliminary Plat/Lakeside Estates, Continued) this property to be acquired easily. If the Park Board doesn't want the land, he'd just as soon keep the property. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach; PRESENT BUT NOT VOTING-Windschit1 Motion carried. (Mayor Windschit1 chaired the remainder of the meeting.) SPECIAL USE PERMIT/MISTELSKE Irving Shaw was the attorney for the applicant, Charles Miste1ske, 1000 Lincoln Street, Anoka, Minnesota. Also present was Richard Ah1tous, 4048 Madlson Street NW. Chairman Bosell reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation for approval of the special use permit noting there was no public opposition to the application. Attorney Hawkins advised that the ordinance as amended eliminated the sale and storage of used auto parts in the General Industrial District; however, the junkyard or auto reduction yards section was inadvertently not deleted where it is allowed under the General Industrial district. Even though there is no junkyard on that parcel at this time and even though the intent was to eliminate that use, such a use is allowed by the ordinance at this time. He didn't feel a time limit could be placed on the special use permit after which time the junkyard would cease to exist unless the City would attempt to amortize all the junkyards in that area also. The use is clearly permitted under the ordinance as it now reads. Unless it can be shown that this operation will be in violation of some of the criteria used when considering special use permits, he didn't believe the permit could be denied or any limitations placed on it any differently than on other junkyard special use permits. It was also the Attorney's opinion that given the definitions of junkyard and auto reduction yard in the ordinance, that the applicants would be allowed to conduct all functions associated with the business, that is junking cars, sales, etc. The Clerk also noted that the ordinance does not require a permanent principal structure on a parcel before it is used. Mr. Shaw noted there is a house on the site which will be used as the office. The Mayor then noted the Council has been concerned with the appearance and condition of the fencing on this parcel, feeling that problem should be addressed in the special use permit. Mr. Shaw explained that Mr. Miste1ske is the fee owner at this time. But recently he has associated himself with Mr. Ah1tous, who will be a partner in the total business operation. Mayor Windschit1 felt that the special use permit should specify an annual review of the use as is done with other permits issued to allow the City to see that the use is being conducted according to the City ordinances. Councilman Ortte1 felt that this application is different from the rest because they were aware that it was the Council's intent to not allow the establishment of such uses in the City any more when the ordinance was changed. The reason the ordinance was changed was because the junkyards had grown to such an extent that they endangered the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City. He felt that if it was sincerely felt that was the case at that time, that another one can in no way be allowed in that area. Also, the parcel is 1.12 acres; and with the land coverage existing, the required parking lot, and the junk, he felt there would be no room for an on-site sewage system that would be required. And that is specifically a danger to the health, safety, and welfare to the people of the City and in no way should be allowed. It is also a threat to that area with all the pollution that already exists there. He felt the 39,000-square-foot requirement for on-site septic systems could be required since it is required anywhere else in the City as well. Councilman Ortte1 stated he has also been informed that there are giant rats living in that general area, which is also a health hazard there. - -.. . - Regular City Council Meeting December 1, 1981 - Minutes Page 5 (Special Use Permit/Miste1ske, Continued) Councilman Jacobson felt another question would be the potable water for the building. This area is in the general area of the Superfund area, and a plat only two miles away has not been approv=d for FHA loans because of the potential contamination of water. He felt that would be a health and safety consideration as well. The Attorney advised the Council it should be provided with some suitable documentation from the necessary authorities as to the potential sewer problems, how they could be handled, if possible, the water question, etc., to be used for a basis for granting of denying the special use permit. Mr. Shaw - stated that historically that particular parcel has been used for auto salvage for over 25 years continuously until it was discontinued by Galen Farrien. The existing structure will have a very limited use, possibly for some office use. It will not be occupied as a residence. There will be a very limited use of the sewer facilities, and there is an operable septic tank there now. There is also a working well there now. So this is not a change from what has been there. It is located in the area of other junkyards and auto salvation yards, this operation will not tip the scale as far as this type of use, they are complying with all the ordinance requirements, and they feel this is the only use this land is suitable for. Councilman Ortte1 disagreed with Mr. Shaw's last statement. MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Ortte1, that the City Staff be directed to research the question of the impact of health and safety of the sewer and water systems on the Charles Miste1ske Special Use Permit request, and that a statement be requested from the PCA on the impact of this request on the existing hazardous area in the vacinity. DISCUSSION: It was felt either a legal or engineering determination on the 39,000- square-foot requirement should be made. That requirement has been held to in all other unsewered areas of the City. It was also requested the item be researched as to a building not required to run a commercial business in the City, referring to the ordinance that junkyards can be open areas. It is also intended that this information be received and considered at the December 15 regular Council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Recess at 9:18; reconvene at 9:30 p.m. EXTENSION OF FINAL PLAT/HAWK RIDGE EAST Sylvia Britton represented the developer, Lawrence Carlson. She stated that all constructlon work is done except for the blacktopping. By the expiration of this extension, they will have completed all work and will finalize the plat. She felt they would need the full six months; but if it is done earlier, they would finalize earlier as well. She also presented a letter to the Clerk from H & S explaining the situation. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, a 6-month extension for the filing of the Flnal Plat for Hawk Ridge East until July 3, 1982. The extension is granted because the Council feels work is under way in the area and is almost complete; and the reason for the granting of the extension is because"of the continuing work. It is the intent of the Council to make this the final extension on this plat. This extension will allow the owners to blacktop the roads prior to the final plat being filed. VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Ortte1, Windschit1; NO-Peach. Motion carried. Councilman Peach stated his objection is the same as it was for the preliminary plat, feeling the road layout is hazardous and confusing. MSA STREETS MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Orttel, offer a Resolution establishing Municipal State Aid Streets as presented in the Resolution dated the First Day of December, 1981. (SeeReso1ution R98-81) Motion carried unanimously. -.. , · Regu 1 ar City Counc il Meet i ng December 1, 1981 - Minutes Page 6 (MSA Streets, Continued) MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Peach, enter a Resolution to appropriate Municipal State Aid Funds to CSAH No. 78 Right-Of-Way Acquisition as prepared by the City Engineer. (See Resolution R99-81) Motion carried unanimously. ORDINANCE NO.8 AMENOMENT/DELETE JUNKYARDS MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, an Ordinance amending Ordinance No.8, the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Andover. The City Council of the City of Andover hereby ordains: Ordinance No.8 is hereby amended as follows: Section 7.03 Special Uses, LI and GI Industrial Districts, Strike "Junkyard or auto reduction in GI only provided all outside storage is completely screened from adjacent streets and properties in accordánc.e~= with Section 8.03." DISCUSS ION: The Attorney and City Clerk felt that with this amendment, such uses are not allowed by City ordinance anywhere within the City limits. Motion carried unanimously. ORDINANCE NO. 53 AMENDMENT/DOG HOLDING TIME Discussion was on Section 11 - Disposition of Unclaimed Dogs and on the pros and cons of the poundmaster retaining the sums in excess of the City's costs incurred. Some felt that by allowing the poundmaster to retain the excess sums, it would be an incentive to sell the dogs and the City should be reimbursed only its costs. Others fe 1t the entire amount should be retained by the City in an attempt to offset the high costs the City pays overall for the impounding of dogs and cats. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, that an Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 53, adopted the 17th Day of February, 1981, commonly known as the Dog Ordinance, as pre- pared by the City Clerk with the following exception under Section 11, starting on the sixth line to read: "All sums recei ved for the sale of an ima 1 s sha 11 be depos ited to the general fund of the City", then continue to the end of the section as presented. Also, correct spellings on third to last line "licensed" and second to last line of the paragraph, "humane 1y" . VOTE ON MOTION: YES-Jacobson, Ortte1, Peach, Windschit1;NO-Lachinski Motion carried. Councilman Lachinski felt it should not cost the City any money and should be reimbursed their cost if there is any money made. But the poundmaster should be allowed the excess as an incentive to sell the animals. NOISE ORDINANCE There was some question as to the enforcibi1ity of some of the sections. It was felt the Planning Commission should hold the necessary public hearings and make a recommenda- tion to the Council. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, that we send to the Planning and Zoning Commission an ordinance relating to the noise as provided to the City Council by the City Attorney and ask for the P & Z to review and make recommendations and changes as they see fit, and send it back to us when they are done. Motion carried unanimously. CITY INSURANCE RENEWAL MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, that the City authorize the City Clerk to renew the self-insurance program with the League. Motion carried unanimously. DATE - YEAR-END MEETING MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Lachinski, that we set the year-end meeting for December 30 to clear up Minutes and year-end matters. Motion carried unanimously. - -.. . Regular City Council Meeting December 1, 1981 - Minutes Page 7 APPOINTMENTS - SENIOR CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE Mayor Windschit1 recommended Helen Franz be appointed. Councilman Lachinski recommended Mabel Erickson; Councilman Ortte1 recommended Mrs. Mary Sonterre; Councilman Peach recommended Dick Schneider. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, that the four members proposed for the Senior Citizen Advisory Committee be appointed to the committee and that they be so notified; and that the first meeting be at the City Hall, 7:30 on December 16. They will be directed to choose a Chairman at that time. Motion carried unanimously. It was suggested Councilman Jacobson's recommendation be Steve Nemeth on the Committee. MOTION by Lachinski, Seconded by Ortte1, that we add Steve Nemeth to the Senior Citizen Committee. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Windschit1 suggested the City attempt to trade some unfinished space in the back of the new building which could be used for a warming house for the existing garage area. The Mayor stated in talking with members of the Hockey Association, they are willing to come in and finish the warming house. The Clerk stated she has discussed the matter with the engineers. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Lachinski, that we accept the resignation of John Scherer subJect to the appointment of his successor. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Peach, that we authorize the City Clerk to write a letter to John expressing our appreciation for his work he has put on the Planning and Zoning Commission and have it available for us to sign after his successor is named. Motion carried unanimously. Chairman Bose11 explained they have established a sub-committee to deal with the fire- arms ordinance revision to be headed by Maynard Ape1. Council generally agreed to the concept. APPROVAL OF CLAIMS MOTION by Peach, Seconded by Jacobson, the approval of Checks numbered 4508 through 4532, with the exception of Check 4510, for a total of $10,432.91. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Lachinski, approval of Check Number 4510 in the amount of $11,786.95. VOTE ON MOT! ON: YES-Jacobson, Lachinski, Orttel, Windschit1 ; PRESENT-Peach Motion carried. MOTION by Jacobson, Seconded by Ortte1, approval of Check Number 531 to TKDA for $5,659.39. Motlon carried unanimously. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Jacobson, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, -~~~~ Mar 11a A. Peach Recording Secretary ".-.,