HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 10, 1988
,,)
~/
~J
.........'......'."(7\
'1'\
{,
7:30 P.M.
o
u
CITY of ANDOVER
REGULAR PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING - AGENDA
MAY 10, 1988
1. Call to Order
2. Approval of Minutes
3. Old Colony Estates preliminary Plat Public
Hearing, Continued
4. Ordinance 53 (Dog Ordinance) Amendment
Discussion, Continued
5. Creekhaven Preliminary Plat Public Hearing
6. Special Use Permit #88-04 (Bergeron) Public
Hearing'
7. Lot Split #88-04 (Orttel)
8. Variance #88-04 (Granstrom)
9. Slayton Sketch plan
10. Oleson Sketch Plan
11. Schedule Special Meeting
12. Adjournment
o
o
...'.;(j1
'1'\
CITY of ANDOVER
,-j
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
MAY 10, 1988
The regularly scheduled Andover Planning and Zoning
Commission meeting was called to order by Chairman Marjorie Perry
at 7:36 p.m., Tuesday, May 10, 1988, in the Council Chambers of
Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard N.W., Andover,
Minnesota.
Commissioners present included Chairman Marjorie Perry,
Becky Pease, Don Jacobson, Bill Bernard, Bev Jovanovich, Wayne
Vistad and d'Arcy Bosell. Also present were City Planner, Daryl
Morey and Assistant City Engineer, Todd Haas.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
As the minutes were just received this evening, Chairman
Perry asked the other Commissioners that we not hear this agenda
item tonight. All commissioners agreed not to approve the
minutes at this meeting until they have all had a chance to
properly review them.
OLD COLONY ESTATES PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC HEARING (CONT'D)
Chairman Perry reopened the Public Hearing.
Todd Haas explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission
is requested to review and approve the Old Colony Estates
preliminary plat and grading plan.
The proposed plat is currently zoned R-l single-family rural
and the developer is requesting that the property be rezoned to
R-4 single family urban. The proposed preliminary plat consists
of 140 single-family residential lots.
Wayne Vistad asked if 143rd Lane would need a turn around.
Todd Haas indicated that there is no need for a temporary cul-de-
sac.
Don Jacobson understood that we are only approving the first
Phase. Normally, he thought the plans are stamped "First Phase".
He would like the plan to show that it is Phase I. Also, Don
asked if "Outlot A" should be shown in Phase I. Todd Haas
responded that it could be shown on the preliminary plat by
moving the darkened line to include outlot A.
)
( \
,-)
u
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 10, 1988
Page Two
I
Don Jacobson also had a concern whether this was the area
that had some hazardous waste on it. Ai Hammel, developer of
Gaughan Companies, responded that the Building Inspection
Department did identify the area (waste from the old glue
factory) and they took 12 samples and there were no contaminants
found. They also did an extensive amount of testing in the site
where the old plant was located. What they found is that the
glue factory dealt with animal products rather than chemicals,
and, therefore, was organic in origin and those products have
dissipated.
Ms. Bosell stated that the property outside of the plat
should be identified as zone R-1. Mr. Haas indicated that this
item could be corrected.
Mr. Jacobson asked whatever happened to the question on the
EAW. Chairman Perry said after the Planning Commission's last
discussion, this item could be sent to the City Council with the
recommendation that its approval be subject to receipt of a
completed EAW.
Ai Hammel, of the Gaughan Companies, stated he contacted
Greg Downing and discussed the subdivision and what the Gaughan
companies were doing and how it fit into the EQB regulations.
Mr. Downing indicated that the EQB's rules are fairly vague as to
the timing of environmental requirements for development sites
like this. The Gaughan Companies would like to only develop the
first Phase and are not sure when and if they want to develop
Phase II. The EQB doesn't have a problem with that. Mr. Hammel
indicated to Mr. Downing and the Planning Commission, it was his
interest to have the first Phase approved; and before they would
come back to the Planning Commission with any other development
on the site, they would have the environment system completed and
reviewed by the City Council and Planning Commission.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Vistad, seconded by
Commissioner Jacobson to close the public hearing. All voted
yes. Motion carried.
Commission members further discussed the preliminary plat
plan.
Ms. Bosell asked if the number of lots was 55 in Phase I.
Mr. Hammell responded that there were 56 lots, including outlot
A.
J
i \
U
u
Planning and Zoning Commission
Hay 10, 1988
\ Page Three
/
HOT ION was made by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by
Commissioner Jovanovich that the Andover Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends to the City Council approval of a
preliminary plat called Old Colony Estates as part of the east
1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 26, Township 32, Range 24 (at CSAH
#16 - Andover Boulevard and Xeon Street) for the following
reasons.
A public hearing was held and there was discussion from the
public on various portions of the developments, and the Planning
Commission recommends that the following changes be made in the
plat:
1) That Outlot A be included In Phase I;
2) That the Holasek property located at Xeon and Andover
Boulevard be indicated as R-1 zoning;
3) Subject to park fees or dedication as
determined by the Park Commission;
4) And that an EAW be performed on this plat prior to the
final plat;
5) Commission finds that the plat is in compliance with
the ordinances with the City of Andover and recommends
its approval;
6) Commission recognizes that the property is presently
zoned R-1, and this is subject to the City Council's
rezoning of this parcel to an R-4 designation;
7) All lots will front onto interior streets.
Roll call vote:
Jovanovich, Jacobson,
carried.
Commissioners Bosell, Bernard, Pease,
Vistad and Perry voted yes. Hotion
This item will go to the City Council on June 7th.
ORDINANCE 53 (DOG ORDINANCE) AMENDMENT DISCUSSION. CONTINUED
City Planner Horey asked if this item could be tabled until
approximately 8:30 p.m. as one of the interested parties would
not be able to be here until then. Chairman Perry tabled this
item, with the concurrence of the other Commissioners.
)
( )
o
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 10, 1988
Page Four
CREEKHAVEN PRELIMINARY PLAT PUBLIC HEARING
Todd Haas stated that the preliminary plat consisted of 26
residential lots which are currently zoned R-4.
Chairman Perry opened the Public Hearing.
Ms. Bosell indicated that there should be a correction made
on Lot 1, Block 2 which shows a 40-foot setback rather than a 35-
foot setback.
Mr. Jacobson had a couple of questions regarding the lots 3,
4 and 5 on the side of the creek (Block 3). He was wondering if
the plan included fill behind lots 3, 4, and 5. The developer
indicated there would be some fill. Mr. Jacobson was concerned
about the slope and erosion possibilities. Developer, Herb
Blommel of RB Investments, plans to do a minimum grading until
actual construction.
Don also said on Lot 2, Block 2 we should have driveway as
far over to the west as possible because of the intersection. He
also had a concern regarding Outlot A - he has no problems with
it now but did not want to see it converted to commercial
property.
Ms. Bosell reiterated Mr. Jacobson's comments regarding lots
3, 4, and 5 on Block 3 and the fact that there should include
shading on the drawings to indicate fill.
Mr. Vistad stated he felt that as the Outlot A area further
developed, it would be a prime spot for commercial property.
Judy Thorson, 113 Northwoods Drive, questioned the location
of the Outlot A area.
Mr. Morey stated that the developer has indicated that the
Outlot A property is seen as a commercial development use.
Ms. Bosell suggested that the Planning Commission note in
our discussion that Outlot A is included in the preliminary plat
for the purpose of clearing the title thereto and that the use of
the lot has not been considered as to residential or non-
residential as it presently does not meet the ordinance
requirements for non-residential use.
/
, /
, )
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 10, 1988
Page Five
Mr. Donahue, 2733 Bunker Hill Lake, owner of the upholstery
shop had a concern about the developer coming in and building a
road and whether he would be assessed for the road. Todd Haas
explained that if in the future, if Mr. Donahue decides to
subdivide his property, he would be assessed; otherwise, the cost
of the road would be the developer's responsibility.
Todd Haas stated both lots 1 and 2 (Block 2) would have to
show 40-feet setbacks from Crosstown Boulevard.
Mr. Donahue asked what type of price range was the developer
anticipating house values to be on this site. Mr. Vistad
indicated that the Planning Commission could not answer that
question. Ms. Bosell stated it would be okay to ask the
developer directly. The developer indicated he anticipated a
price range of $85,000 to $95,000 for the houses on that site.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Vistad, seconded by
Commissioner Jovanovich to close the public hearing. All voted
yes. Motion carried.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Bosell, seconded by Bev
Jovanovich that the Andover Planning and Zoning Commission
recommends to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat
identified as Creekhaven on the property described as
approximately part of the southwest quarter of the northeast
quarter and southeast quarter of the northwest quarter of Section
33, Township 32, Range 24 (located on CR-18/Crosstown Boulevard
at 18th Avenue) for the following reasons: The preliminary plat
has been reviewed by the City Council in the sketch plan stage,
the Andover Review Committee in the preliminary plat stage, and
the Planning Commission in the preliminary plat stage, and finds
that the plat is consistent with Ordinance 10 and with Ordinance
50, the Flood Plain Ordinance. It is further found that the plat
meets or exceeds all the platting requirements as set out in
Ordinance 10, with the following exceptions: (1) that the grading
and filling shall be shown on lots 3, 4, 5 on Block 3 and (2)
that lots 1 and 2 of Block 2 shall have a 40-foot setback from
Crosstown Boulevard as Crosstown is an arterial street and
further that (3) lot 2 of Block 2 shall front on 138th Avenue and
the driveway shall be placed as far to the west as possible to
remove it from the intersection 4) further that the future of
Outlot A was discussed by the Planning Commission and it was the
consensus of the Planning Commission that because the Outlot was
included to clear title to that parcel, it was considered and
allowed as an acceptable lot within the plat; however, it is not
to be interpreted to imply that this lot would be used for
anything other than residential as it does not meet the non-
residential lot size criteria for any non-residential district in
the City of Andover.
, I
'--)
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 10, 1988
Page Six
A public hearing was held and there was input in regard to the
use of Outlot A and also to the construction time and the house
prices and these concerns were properly noted. Further, that Lot
1 of Block 2 shall be allowed to front on Crosstown Boulevard,
which is a variance from Ordinance 10, (Section 9.02(c). The
Park Dedication recommendation has not been received and this
plat will be subject to that recommendation. Roll call:
Commissioners Perry, Bernard, Bosell, Jacobson, Jovanovich,
Pease, Vistad all voted yes. Motion carried unanimously.
This item will go to City Council on June 7th.
ORDINANCE 53 (DOG ORDINANCE) AMENDMENT DISCUSSION CONTINUED
City Planner Morey presented the changes made during the May
3rd Special Planning Meeting to the existing Dog Ordinance.
Chairman Perry addressed Section 24 - Wild or Vicious Dogs
and suggested the wording "private" person be included in that
sentence.
Mr. Jacobson stated he would like to see more clarification
as to the definition of Wild or Vicious Animals under Section 24
of Ordinance 53. He thought a separate ordinance would be more
appropriate, rather than tacking this section on the end of the
Dog Ordinance.
Ms. Bosell stated that we should include Wild and Exotic in
a separate ordinance, but felt that we should keep the "Vicious
Animal" section in the Dog Ordinance - stating that the pitbull
breed is a prime example that "by character, habit or
disposition", it is a vicious animal and it also is a
domesticated breed.
Ms. Pease thought the City should address the situations
where people currently have "wild" animals at their homes. Ms.
Bosell stated there would have to be complaints before the City
could follow up on those types of cases.
Mr. Vistad agreed with Mr. Jacobson's idea to have a
separate ordinance for the Wild and Vicious Animals.
LeRoy Gramps, 3840 Grand Street, asked if the ordinance
would be including "wild and" or "wild or" vicious animals. The
commissioners stated it would be wild or vicious animals. He had
a concern as he raises wild turkeys and mallards.
(
\ J
, \
V
Planning and Zoning Commission
May la, 1988
Page Seven
Mr. Vistad also had a concern regarding Section 16 "threat
of an attack". He doesn't feel that this sentence should even be
included in the ordinance. Chairman Perry stated the Commission
felt it was necessary to include this sentence to take steps
before there was an attack.
Lynn Mars, 16453 Argon Street, thought it might be difficult
to prove a threat but she thought it was important to try to
address potential danger situations. It would give the Council a
little more leeway in acting in some dangerous situations. She
also investigated an ordinance Coon Rapids has regarding
insurance required, and the possibility of requiring proof of
insurance on any dog that's been declared a biting dog.
Mr. Jacobson did not agree with this idea. Mr. Vistad also
felt that the City should not be placed in the position of
demanding insurance of dog-owners especially in the area of civil
matters. Also the cost factors involved could be a burden to the
City.
Sharon Segan, owner of Animal Control and Management Agency
was hired by the City of Andover and she stated that she's here
to enforce the laws the City makes. Her concern is how she is to
enforce the laws and wondered if her agency could be given the
authority to issue citations. She would like to work together
with the City of Andover. A ticket would be written, with a fine
imposed, after an initial warning. A ticket would be written
only after an initial warning, and after she had worked with the
owners in trying to resolve this problem. Ms. Bosell asked if
the City recommends that Ms. Segan could issue citations, does it
require a change in the contract. Ms. Segan indicated it would
not.
Ms. Segan said the contract she has with the City would
allow her to write citations. Mr. Jacobson stated it was only a
matter of asking the Council to do this, so the ordinance doesn't
need to be changed.
Mr. Jacobson made a correction for Section 1 of the
ordinance under biting dog, line 4, take out the word of in the
phrase "threat of" and change it to or to read (threat or
attack) .
\
, J
, \
'J
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 10, 1988
; Page Eight
MOTION was made by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by
Commissioner Vistad that a public discussion was held, and
received a considerable amount of public input in the wording of
the ordinance and the Commission finds that changes in the
amendment will strengthen the existing ordinance, and will make
it easier to enforce and to take control of the dogs/cats within
the City, with the exception of the inclusion of Section 24 from
the ordinance.
Further discussion by Commissioner Jacobson followed
regarding the exclusion of Section 24 in the ordinance. He
didn't feel it was proper to tack it onto the end of the dog
ordinance and that a separate ordinance would be more proper.
Roll call: Commissioners Perry, Bernard, Bosell, Jacobson,
Jovanovich, Pease and Vistad voted yes. Motion carried
unanimously.
The Planning Commission also recommends to the City Council
that they consider advising the Animal Control and Management
Agency and enable them to issue citations. This item will also
be on the agenda of the June 7 City Council Meeting.
Chairman Perry recessed the meeting at 9:05 p.m. and
reconvened at 9:15 p.m.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT #88-04 (BERGERON) PUBLIC HEARING
Mr. Morey explained that the Bergerons, of 16422 Hanson
Boulevard NW, are requesting a special use permit to operate a
boarding and training kennel with an 80 dog capacity. Their
property is zoned R-1.
The Planning Department is concerned about the large
capacity of the kennel and its use as a boarding and training
facility. The request seems to exceed the intent of the special
use and to be more of a commercial use. Therefore, the Planning
Department recommends denial of this request at this scale.
Mr. Jeff Bergeron, 16422 Hanson Boulevard, stated he has
been a professional dog training for the last three years. He
would be using the land for training and also to build a kennel,
40' x 24' with 26 interior runs. The reason for the 80-dog
capacity is so he'd have room for a large amount of dogs on a
short-term basis for holidays, etc. As a trainer, he can handle
20-30 dogs. The interior runs are 8 feet long, 3 feet wide.
Exterior runs are 8 feet long and 3 feet wide also.
\
)
I
~ J
u
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 10, 1988
Page Nine
Mr. Vistad asked Mr. Bergeron how he would handle the waste
from the dogs. Mr. Bergeron stated there would be a septic
system, under the terms of what the City requires.
Mr. Vistad also had a concern regarding the noise level from
such a kennel. Mr. Bergeron stated he was planning to have a
fence to alleviate some of the noise. The closest neighbors are
the Aaness' and are across the road 600 feet.
Ms. Bosell stated that the Metropolitan Waste Commission
would set requirements -- and Mr. Bergeron would have to comply
with the Commission's criteria.
Mr. Bergeron stated he was trying to acquire as much of the
land surrounding his property as possible to keep noise level at
a minimum.
Chairman Perry opened the public hearing.
Dorothy Aaness, 16425 Hanson Boulevard, stated that she was
a landowner on the south side of Mr. Bergeron's property and that
she was very concerned about the noise level of the kennel.
Ms. Bosell stated the actual property would only be 3.86
acres. The additional property Mr. Bergeron is talking about is
on a contract-for-deed purchase mode. There must be the consent
of that fee owner to construct the kennel. Ms. Bosell feels that
the intensity with which this application implies violates what
our home occupation Ordinance 8 states. She also feels 80 dogs
is way too many for the size of land he has. She's not against
the request, but it would need to be scaled down considerably.
Mr. Jacobson stated he felt that the land would be used for
commercial use in a residential area and that Mr. Bergeron would
need to rezone his property.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by
Commissioner Vistad to close the public hearing.
MOTION to close the public hearing was withdrawn by
Commissioner Jacobson, with permission of the second.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by
Commissioner Bernard table this agenda item until the next
meeting on May 24th for the purpose of allowing applicant to look
at his plans and and to contact the property owner who has the
contract on the additional land he's looking for, and for the
City staff to look at existing kennels in the area to see what
their sizes are and report back.
-)
~~
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 10, 1988
) Page Ten
All voted yes. Motion carried unanimously.
This item will be continued at the public hearing to be held
on May 24th at the next Planning Commission.
Also, Mr. Bergeron needs to discuss with the City Staff the
location of the kennel building.
LOT SPLIT #88-04 (ORTTEL)
This item will be moved to the end of the agenda this
evening, as agreed by the Commissioners.
VARIANCE #88-04 (GRANSTROM)
Mr. Morey stated that Leroy Granstrom is requesting a
variance from Ordinance 52 (Scenic River). Because the existing
structure vastly predates the adoption of Ordinance 52, and
because the five requirements for granting a variance are met,
and because the encroachment of the addition would be less than
the encroachment of the existing dwelling, the Planning
Department recommends approval of this request.
Ms. Bosell questioned whether the variance would be needed
because of the substandard use in Section 10.02.03. Mr. Jacobson
and Chairman Perry felt that he would not need a variance from
Ordinance 52.
MOTION was made by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by
Commissioner Bernard that the Andover Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends to the City Council restitution of $50 fee
for a variance request for Mr. Leroy Granstrom, 4860 Marystone
Boulevard. The Commission finds that Mr. Granstrom's request for
a variance on his parcel of property at the above address for a
15' x 15' addition falls under the Scenic Rivers Ordinance
10.02.03 Substandard Uses Subsection 1 which defines that the
construction of the proposed addition to his home will not
increase the substandard setback, and is therefore an allowed
addition in the Scenic Rivers area on this property and the
Commission finds that there is no variance needed for this
request and therefore respectfully asks the Council for the
application. All voted yes. Motion carried unanimously.
This item will go to the City Council on June 7th.
SLAYTON SKETCH PLAN
Todd Haas stated that the Commission is requested to review
the sketch plan for the Slayton property located at 17139 Verdin
Street. The property is currently zoned R-1 single, family rural
and 2.5 acre minimum lot size.
\
~ )
\
~J
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 10, 1988
Page Eleven
Chairman Perry questioned the size of the cul-de-sac in that
it is very large. Todd Haas agreed to this. Todd Haas indicated
that Plan B does not require a variance request.
Plan B is recommended by the Andover Review
City Council did not have a problem with Plan C.
felt that 20 acres are difficult to develop.
Committee. The
The Council
Mr. Vistad likes Plan C. Mr.
variances would be required. He'd
through that require no variances.
as no variances would be required.
Jacobson likes Plan B as no
prefer to have more plats go
Ms. Bosell supports Plan B -
Todd Haas reiterated that the Planning Commission recommends
Plan B and the City Council prefers Plan C. The Planning
Commission felt that the Plan C requires 3 variances which aren't
necessary.
Mr. Slayton, the developer, stated that he felt it would
cost him $45,000 to go with Plan B.
It was suggested by the Planning Commission that Mr. Slayton
get together with Todd Haas and work out a drawing to come up
with some other configurations that would not require variances.
OLESON SKETCH PLAN
Todd Haas again explained this is a similar situation with
20 acre lot plan. The Planning Commission is requested to review
the sketch plan for the Oleson property located at 17361 Tulip
Street (County Road 58).
Mr. Vistad looked at the cost factor and thought Plan A has
a better flow, and no variances are needed. He thought Plan B
would be a plowing nightmare, which would include a few
variances. Plan C was the plan the Council directed Todd Haas to
draw up.
Mr. Oleson stated that the Council wanted to save all the
trees. They recommended a change to get lots east and good
traffic flow off of County 58.
Chairman Perry indicated that the Planning Commission has an
obligation to point out to the City Council where there have been
problems with what has been discussed.
Mr. Jacobson stated that if the City Council reviewed sketch
plans and okayed them, then there's no reason to have a Planning
Commission.
\
\ )
o
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 10, 1988
Page Twelve
Chairman Perry asked Mr. Oleson to continue working with
Todd to come up some additional configurations that would not
require variances.
Ms. Bosell also indicated that there's something wrong with
the order of these sketch plans going to the City Council first
and then to the Planning Commission as this is the third plat to
be handled this way. It only creates confusion between the City
Council and the Planning Commission.
LOT SPLIT #88-04 (ORTTEL)
Mr. Morey explained that Ken Orttel is requesting to split
his property located south of Bunker Lake Boulevard and west of
Coon Creek. The Planning Department recommends approval of this
lot split request. The lot is also subject to $200 park
dedication fee.
Ken Orttel, 2828 134th Avenue NW, stated that his reason for
splitting the lot is to obtain a mortgage for his own home, as
the lot line on the eastern part of the lot is considered
ambiguous by the mortgage companies because it is a waterway.
Mr. Vistad asked how much of the lot is considered flooded
and how much is actually buildable. Mr. Orttel said the newly-
created lot is not buildable.
Wayne Davis, 13607 Crooked Lake Boulevard has a concern that
this doesn't stay as park property, and that it would stay in Mr.
Orttel's ownership.
\
,
MOTION was made by Commissioner Jacobson, seconded by
Commissioner Pease that the Andover Planning and Zoning
Commission recommend to the City Council approval of this lot
split request for Mr. Ken Orttel at all that part of Lot 1,
Auditors Subdidvision Number 137, Anoka County, 27xx Bunker Lake
Boulevard under Ordinance 40. The Commission has reviewed the
application and find that each of the lots would meet the
criteria set forth in Ordinance 40 in the zoning district within
which it lies and this would be subject to the applicant
supplying to the City new legals when they're filed with the
County, and the appropriate payment of park fees and the giving
to the County an additional 27 feet of easement along Bunker Lake
Boulevard for road purposes. The Commission understands that the
smaller of the two parcels (easterly parcel) cannot access
directly onto Bunker Lake Boulevard under its present
configuration and should the owner request a building permit for
that parcel in the future, a service road would have to be
constructed pursuant to Ordinance 10 9.03 (h).
~
u
Planning and Zoning Commission
May 10, 1988
Page Thirteen
Roll call: Commissioners
Pease, Vistad voted yes.
this vote on motion as he
carried.
Perry, Bosell, Jacobson, Jovanovich,
Commissioner Bernard was absent for
left the meeting at 10:30. Motion
OTHER BUSINESS
Daryl Morey had some updated information regarding the
antenna from the Metropolitan Council.
Daryl stated this was sent on to Council. They stated the
antenna could move the antenna back 350 - 400 feet without any
problems. Daryl thought it would be a good idea to talk with the
County to make sure they had no problems also. The Commission
suggested that Daryl get the response in writing.
Ms. Bosell asked that Chairman Perry bring to the attention
of the City Council the problems encountered with the sketch
plans and promises made.
Chairman Perry agreed that this situation is not a good one
because the residents feel that they've been given
misinformation. Chairman Perry will carry this concern on to the
City Council.
Mr. Jacobson wondered if the two sketch plans were drawn by
staff. It seems that it should be up to the developer to prepare
the sketches. He doesn't feel it's Todd's job to prepare sketch
plans and it's inappropriate use of staff time.
Chairman Perry will talk to Mayor Windschitl regarding this
matter.
SCHEDULE SPECIAL MEETING
A special meeting is scheduled for Thursday, May 12 at 7:30
p.m. to discuss ATV's, the mining permits, and Ordinance 8.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further discussion, Chairman Perry declared
the meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
(Plan.1)