012494 CC Reg Min
?
.
CITY OF SHOREWOOD
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 1994
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD
7:15 p.m.
MINUTES
1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Brancel at 7:15 p.m.
A.
Pledge of Allegiance
B.
Roll Call
Present:
Mayor Brancel; Councilmembers Benson, Daugherty, Lewis and Stover;
Administrator Hurm, Acting Engineer DeLaForest, Attorney Keane, Planning
Director Nielsen, and Financial Director Rolek.
c.
Review Agenda
Stover moved, Daugherty seconded to approve the Agenda for January 24, 1994, with
postponement of Agenda Items 4. and B.A.
. Motion passed 5/0.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. City Council Regular Meeting Minutes and Executive Session Minutes -
January 10, 1994.
Daugherty moved, Lewis seconded to approve the January 10, 1994 City Council Meeting
Minutes with a correction on page 8 (Policg) and Executive Session Minutes with a
correction on page 1 (negQtiating).
Motion passed 4/1. Stover abstained.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
Mayor Brancel read the Consent Agenda for January 24, 1994.
Lewis moved, Stover seconded to approve the Consent Agenda and to adopt the Motions
and Resolutions contained therein:
A.
RESOLUTION NO. 94-12 "A Resolution Revising the City of Shorewood's Wage and
Salary Range Chart for 1994 and Setting the Monthly Contribution toward the
Monthly Insurance Premium for City Employees."
.
1
.
.
.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 1994 - PAGE 2
B.
Motion to approve the permanent appointment of Theresa Naab as Executive
Secretary/Deputy Clerk upon completion of the probationary period with a favorable
evaluation; and thereupon approve a Step 3 designation in the pay plan.
C. RESOLUTION NO. 94-13 "A Resolution Approving a Preliminary Plat and Street
Construction Variance and Denying a Lot Width Variance for the Mott Addition."
D. ORDINANCE NO. 284 "An Ordinance Amending Section 904.09, Prohibiting
Discharges into the Sanitary Sewer System."
E. RESOLUTION NO. 94-14 "A Resolution Concerning the Concurrent Detachment and
Annexation of Land - 6200 Cardinal Drive."
F. Motion to Approve the Proposed Plan to Update Information System including
authorizing an expenditure not to exceed $2,730.
Motion passed 5/0.
4. REPORT - SENIOR HOUSING - POSTPONED.
5.
MOTION TO APPROVE THE METHOD OF CALCULATING FEES TO BE PAID
TO THE MWCC IN 1994
Rolek reviewed the proposed method of calculating payment of sewer service charges to
MWCC for 1994 (detailed in his January 20, 1994 memorandum). Using sanitary flow rates
collected from selected Shorewood lift stations during 1993, a weighted average daily use
per sewer connection of 388 gallons per day has been calculated by the City Engineer
(detailed in Dresel's January 19, 1994 memorandum). The sampling is based on 303 of the
estimated 2,357 connections in the City. Total annual sewage flow would be about 334
million gallons; therefore, the estimated sewer service charges for 1994 using the engineer's
estimated flows and the MWCC rate is calculated as follows: 334 million gallons x
$1,243.24jmillion = $415,242.
Rolek explained the estimated flow is considered high since the areas served by lift stations
are some of the lowest areas in the City and are usually near a lake; therefore a greater rate
of infiltration can be anticipated in these areas as opposed to the areas of the City at a
higher elevation. The method used for estimation of usage is based on accurate and
credible data substantiated by documentation and represents a reasonable responsible
method for calculating payment for 1994 sewer services.
Rolek stated that while this estimate is about 12.4% higher than the City's 1993 estimate,
it is based on more accurate data, and is lower than the MWCC's estimated 1994 sewer
service charge which is calculated on 360 million gallons for a total 1994 billing of $447,566.
He noted final charges for prior years still under dispute by the City are excluded.
2
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24,1994 - PAGE 3
.
Lewis inquired about the wide range of gallons used per connection per day shown on the
summary of lift station data and whether recent inspections of apparent high usage stations
have been conducted. DeLaForest stated the disparity is generally related to
inflow/infiltration amounts. Nielsen stated those with inordinate flows will be inspected and
televised. Rolek further clarified the MWCC's usage estimation and calculation methods.
Stover inquired whether the Council's action on this proposal would affect the current
litigation between the City and the MWCC. Keane stated that as the City presents its case
as evidentiary matter, use of the very conservative assumptions highlights the disparity
between the MWCC estimates and the worst case estimates. It establishes a base line for
the City's assumption in terms of the worst case from the City's perspective, but does not
establish for purposes of argument what the actual numbers are. Arguments will be drawn
on those specific examples, but for purposes of payment it's a conservative approach and
does not test the City's credibility but demonstrates a good faith position that the City will
accept the high end payment and does not concede anything.
It was noted the amount in dispute from last year is in the court's trust account and the City
will continue to internally escrow the difference between the City's payment and the amount
the MWCC is charging the City.
.
Stover inquired what effect approval of the proposal will have on residents' current and
future quarterly sewage costs. Rolek stated residents 1994 quarterly sewage billings will
remain about the same under this proposal and future costs depend largely on the outcome
of the City's dispute with the MWCC.
Daugherty stated that while the current status of the dispute with the MWCC reflects a
positive tone, it is prudent for the City to exhibit fiscal responsibility by calculating its
sewage charges on the high side and recommended approval of the proposal presented.
Rolek reiterated that the City will continue to escrow, on a monthly basis, funds from the
Utility Account representing the difference between the City's sewer service payment and
the amount the MWCC is billing. It was noted, however, that the account will be monitored
and evaluated at mid-year since continual escrow of funds will deplete the funds available
in the account. Keane stated expeditious resolution of the dispute could result in a Mayor
June decision.
Stover inquired about the cost of monitoring/televising/repair of lines related to suspect lift
stations. DeLaForest stated televising costs range from $1 to $3 a foot and pointed out that
although the gallons per day are high, there are only 25 connections and recommended that
the economic feasibility of such work be reviewed. Lewis nonetheless supported
investigation of any potential inflow/infiltration problems.
.
Lewis moved, Benson seconded to approve the method of calculating fees paid to the
MWCC in 1994 as outlined in Rolek's January 20, 1994 memorandum.
Motion passed 5/0.
3
.
.
.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 1994 - PAGE 4
6.
RECONSIDERATION OF STREET LIGHT INSTALLATION - BRENTRIDGE
DRIVE
Brancel read a letter received from some Brentridge Drive residents withdrawing their
request for additional street lights, asking for the City's support to change a bus stop
location on that street, and supporting installation of a light at Howard's Point Road and
Smithtown Road.
Nielsen stated that while some residents on Brentridge continue to support additional street
lights, there is a consensus for installation of a light at Howard's Point and Smithtown
Roads. He noted that some of the signers of the original petition appear satisfied with
relocation of the bus stop on Brentridge Drive. If the Council desires, procedures will be
followed to bring to the Council consideration of installation of the Howard's
Point/Smithtown lights.
Hurm stated the Minnetonka Schools' Transportation Director has committed to adding a
middle school bus stop next school year on Brentridge Drive. He reviewed the bus stop
chart for grades K-12.
Brancel opened a public forum.
Beverly Decker, 5815 Brentridge Drive, explained that students at the current bus stop
cannot be seen or heard by parents from their homes. The grade school bus stop has
already been moved based on a reported attempted abduction. 25 homes are located on
the half-circle residential street and the concern is that of safety of the children and
vandalism occurring in the area. Lights currently exist at the corners of Brentridge Drive,
but if the bus stop is not moved, Decker requested that additional lights be installed.
Hurm pointed out the City does not control location of bus stops but can consider
installation of additional street lights. Lewis encouraged the residents to appeal to the
school district for the bus stop relocation.
Richard Gay, 5695 Howard's Point Road, referred to the original petition presented several
years ago which resulted in a compromise allowing two street lights that were deemed
adequate yet preserved the natural rural atmosphere of the neighborhood. He indicated that
new residents are aware of the type of neighborhood into which they are moving. He stated
additional street lighting should not be necessary in the curve of Brentridge Road if the bus
stop is relocated and suggested parents may wish to tend the bus stop until it is relocated.
A streetlight at Howard's Point and Smithtown Roads would be acceptable. He suggested
the City may wish to review the criteria for street light installation in connection with the
new developments occurring in Shorewood. His conversations with residents in various parts
of Shorewood indicate that 70% do not want more street lights, but wish to retain the rural
atmosphere of the neighborhoods.
4
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 1994 - PAGE 5
.
Pete Holmberg, 5955 Cajed Lane, supported the statements made by Mr. Gay, supported
relocation of the bus stop on Brentridge Drive, opposed installation of additional street
lights and suggested that some lights could even be removed.
Ron Forneris, 5730 Brentridge Drive, stated that safety of residents should be the primary
concern and requested the Council's favorable consideration of the installation of additional
low voltage street lights in the subject community.
Becky Henderson, 5785 Brentridge, reported the DNR has indicated that additional light
would not harm the wildlife in the area. She requested additional lighting on Brentridge
Drive to deter vandalism occurring in the neighborhood.
Brancel closed the public forum.
.
Nielsen reviewed the City's current policy on the installation of street lights which states the
City will install street lights for traffic related reasons but not for security reasons. He
stated that four locations for additional lighting were identified under the current policy.
He reiterated that both the Howard's Point Road and Brentridge Road residents appear to
agree that additional lighting is needed at Howard's Point and Smithtown Roads for traffic
considerations. Nielsen described the proposed and current light fixtures and noted that if
power does not exist at a location, the residents would have to cover the costs of that
installation.
Stover inquired whether street lights or individual residential lights are more effective in
deterring vandalism. Lewis inquired whether the City's installation of street lights, whether
decorative or standard type, can prevent vandalism and whether lighting creates a false
sense of security. He reiterated that the residents contact the School District's
Transportation Director to request relocation of bus stops. Hurm suggested that an opinion
regarding effectiveness of various lights could be obtained from the police chief. Nielsen
indicated that decorative and standard lights are similar and use 100 watt sodium bulbs,
however the neighborhood residents must pay the extra cost for decorative lights.
Stover stated the Council should determine the reason for the neighborhood's request for
additional lights, whether it is for traffic safety or for deterring vandalism and review the
request in terms of the City's current policy. Lewis stated the area has been developed
according to the current policy for light installation for traffic safety.
.
During discussion, the Councilmembers noted the petition requested additional street lights,
then became a bus stop issue and agreed the request appears to be safety-related, which
does not fall under the City's current policy of installing street lights for traffic related
reasons. The Council did not wish to set a precedent that would allow lighting areas as a
deterrent to vandalism and suggested that residents call the police when problems arise.
They agreed that since the School District's Transportation Director has committed to
adding a bus stop next school year, the safety of children has been addressed and the
residents may wish to pursue this further with the School District, additional street lighting
should not be installed at this time.
5
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 1994 - PAGE 6
.
Daugherty moved, Lewis seconded to deny the request for additional street light installation
on Brentridge Drive since it did not fall within the guidelines of current City policy, but
encouraged the neighborhood residents to pursue the bus stop issue with the School District
and come back before the Council with the street light issue if necessary.
Motion passed 5/0.
It was agreed that the staff should proceed with the necessary procedures for consideration
of installation of street lights at Howard's Point Road and Smithtown Road.
7. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE
OPENING BURNING CODE
Hurm noted a revision to the proposed Ordinance relating to open burning on page 2, line
4, deleting the word "fluid."
.
Fire Marshal Cary Smith explained that the DNR has been designated as the sole authority
regulating open burning in the State. The DNR has suggested adoption of a uniform
ordinance to establish guidelines for burning within the City, require a permit for burning
and provide for payment of a fee for an open burning permit. The Fire Marshal has been
authorized to issue permits on behalf of the DNR and the City. The proposed ordinance
establishes guidelines for recreational/camp fires and requires an annual no-fee permit for
such fires. The Fire Marshal answered questions regarding provisions of the ordinance as
it relates to recreational burning. Smith stated the ordinance will clarify and allow uniform
administration of the rules for recreational burning.
Lewis moved, Daugherty seconded to adopt ORDINANCE NO. 285, "An Ordinance
Amending Section 501.03 of the Shorewood City Code Relating to Open Burning and
Amending Chapter 1301 by Adopting an Open Burning Permit Fee and Amending the Police
and Fire Alarm Permit Fee."
Motion passed 5/0.
8. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION RELATING TO
PARKING RESTRICTIONS
.
Hurm noted revisions in paragraph 6 of the proposed resolution to add the opinion of the
Fire Marshal and to change the deposit for each bag to $10.00. Hurm explained that the
proposed resolution will establish a parking by permit only zone for Christmas Lake Road.
Residents would apply for a parking permit for a maximum of 72 hours, pay a deposit of $10
for each bag to place over "No Parking Signs", cover the signs during the prescribed time,
and return the bags for a refund of the deposit payment. Parking would be allowed only
on the west side of the street. The Police Chief, Fire Marshal, and Director of Public
Works would determine whether bagging of no parking signs would cause a public safety
concern and City staff will be responsible for expeditiously obtaining the required approvals.
6
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 1994 - PAGE 7
.
Nielsen clarified that the Ordinance that authorizes the City to allow permit parking has
flexibility to regulate parking. The proposed resolution is within the scope of that authority,
is specific for Christmas Lake Road, does not set a precedent, and will provide for simpler
administration of permit parking.
Daugherty moved, Stover seconded to adopt RESOLUTION NO. 94-15, "A Resolution
Establishing a 'Parking by Permit Only' Zone on Christmas Lake Road," including revisions
to paragraph 6.
Motion passed 5/0.
9. CONSIDERATION OF REFUND REQUEST
Rolek reviewed the request of Mr. Ben Smith, 4690 Lakeway Terrace, for abatement of a
late penalty assessed to his utility account. Smith maintains a check for payment was mailed
on October 20, prior to the October 31 due date, however, the check was not received by
the City and did not clear his bank. Previous action by the Council to deny similar requests
is based on the fact that nonreceipt of the payment is a postal error beyond the control of
the Council and the petitioner should seek restitution from the Postal Service as the
responsible party. Rolek recommended denial of the request for abatement of the late
penalty.
.
The Council agreed that denial of the request was appropriate based on established policy.
Lewis moved, Stover seconded to deny the request to remove a late penalty assessed to the
utility account of Mr. Ben Smith, 4690 Lakeway Terrace.
Motion passed 5/0.
10. PARK - No Report.
11. PLANNING - No Report - Meeting/study session canceled.
A. Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare Findings of Fact Regarding a Simple
Subdivision/Lot Area Variance. Gregory Erickson. 5290 Howard's Point Road.
POSTPONED.
B. Motion to Direct Staff to Prepare Findings of Fact Regarding a Setback Variance.
John Einhorn. 5580 Howard's Point Road.
Nielsen stated the staff and Planning Commission unanimously recommend approval of the
setback variance requested by John Einhorn, 5580 Howard's Point Road.
. Lewis moved, Daugherty seconded to direct the staff to prepare findings of fact resolution
regarding a setback variance for John Einhorn, 5580 Howard's Point Road.
7
.
.
.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 1994 - PAGE 8
Motion passed 5/0.
C. Motion to Approve the Site Plan and Adopt a Resolution approving the Final Plan -
Waterford 6th Addition (Commercial P.D.D.). JMS Equities, Inc. Outlot C,
Waterford 4th Addition.
Nielsen explained that the applicant has complied with recommended revisions to the initial
site plan including meeting all setbacks and additional landscaping. Although the applicant
took issue with some of the restrictions placed on the commercial operations, the Planning
Commission recommended adherence to the restrictions and recommended approval of the
site plan as revised.
Nielsen stated the plans are for the first phase strip center to be located on the west end
of the Waterford commercial site. He eXplained that any changes to restrictions previously
recorded against the property require a public hearing. Nielsen stated the developer will
provide the City with a copy of the tenants' agreement. He described improvements made
by the developer to the original development stage plan and preliminary plat approved in
1990 and stated that six gas pumps are allowed under the previously approved plan. Keane
reiterated that any change to the existing P.D.D. requires a public hearing and 4/5 approval
of the Council of an amendment.
Daugherty stated that his acceptance of the proposal is with protest in that he was not a
member of the Council at the time of the original P.D.D. approval, therefore did not have
any input into the decision to accept the final plan for development of the commercial
portion of the Waterford site, and that any changes at this point would require a public
hearing and potential lawsuit. Lewis expressed concern that the project was not requested
by the area residents but has been forced upon the neighborhood and stated that in the
future strip malls should not be installed in residential neighborhoods. It was noted the
developer is not requesting amendments to the original commercial development P.D.D.
which was approved through the accepted process some time ago.
Stover moved, Benson seconded to approve the site plan and to adopt RESOLUTION NO.
94-16, "A Resolution Approving the Final Plat ofWaterford 6th Addition."
Motion passed 4/1. Lewis voted nay.
The meeting recessed at 8:58 p.m. and reconvened at 9:05 p.m.
12. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR - None.
13. DISCUSSION ON POLICY ISSUES
A.
Report on Rental Housing Code - Brad Nielsen
8
.
.
.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24,1994 - PAGE 9
Nielsen reported on the status of the Rental Housing Code. Notices have been sent to all
known owners of rental property advising them of the Code adopted by the Council. The
effective date of enforcement was delayed to January 1, 1994 to study the recommendations
of a task force. Nielsen reviewed the provisions and purpose of the Code which are
primarily concerned with safety/hazardous conditions. Based on a task force
recommendation, licensing and inspection has been changed from annual to an every three
years schedule. Owner complaints received include: Code is unfair and discriminatory and
should apply to all housing units. These arguments were considered by the task force and
the current Code resulted from those considerations. To date, 49 of the 95 rental property
owners have applied for licensing. Inspections will begin in the spring when outside features
such as sidewalks can be inspected. A trial inspection was conducted and it was found that
3 items needed correction. Nielsen indicated that a petition is apparently being circulated
among rental property owners objecting to the Code.
Stover stated that certain landlords have presented information that necessitate a review of
the Code. Stover expressed concern that a number of the standards in the Code, such as
requirements for snow removal, yard maintenance and livable square footage, are not
entirely safety related and that some items should be established between the owner and
tenant under a lease arrangement rather than be regulated and inspected by the City. In
addition, Stover expressed concern regarding the need for an additional inspector to enter
a "private" residence, whereas the fire marshal could routinely include inspections of safety
concerns such as electrical wiring, etc. Stover recommended that prior to beginning
inspections of rental housing, the Code be referred to the Planning Commission for review
with particular attention to safety, structural and aesthetic issues.
Lewis inquired how the ordinance compares with those of other communities. Nielsen
stated the ordinance was drafted based on those of other communities and input from local
landlords was taken after the ordinance was first adopted through the task force. He noted
that although the task force provided recommendations for changes to the ordinance, it did
recommend that a rental housing code not be adopted. Nielsen indicated the ordinance has
little to do with aesthetics, is intended to establish the owner's responsibilities, and that
inspection is intended to identify immediate hazards.
Lewis pointed out the policy has previously been considered by the Planning Commission,
the task force and approved by the Council. He stated it has not yet created any
enforcement problems and supported the ordinance until such time that concerns are
brought to the Council's attention under the appeal process. Daugherty supported the
ordinance as being reasonable and responsible regulation by the City in the interests of
safety. Brancel stated opposition to returning the ordinance to the Planning Commission
since appropriate procedures were followed in the Council's unanimous approval of the
ordinance and agreed that the Council may wish to re-consider the ordinance in the future
if concerns resulting from inspections are brought to its attention. Benson stated that
although he accepts most of the provisions of the ordinance, he agreed that it be returned
to the Planning Commission for review of the concerns expressed by Stover. He pointed
9
.
.
.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 1994 - PAGE 10
out that the inspection under this ordinance IS of a business and not that of a
private/personal home.
Brancel opened a public forum at 9:35 p.m.
John Dennis, owner of rental property at 5540 County Road 19, stated he owns 15% of the
City's rental housing units. He attended a meeting 2 years ago and volunteered to be a
member of the task force to review the proposed ordinance yet was not contacted to serve
on the committee. He appealed for his due process in establishing the ordinance. He
pointed out that rental property pays tax at a rate 3 times that of the homestead rate and
that in St. Louis Park the fire marshal inspects the property using the building code as a
guide. He characterized the City's rental housing code as being "poor."
Harvey Strohm, 5945 Christmas Lake Road, presented and read a petition signed by 110
persons objecting to the City's rental housing ordinance. Strohm (whose property was
recently trial-inspected) stated he will not ever make the repairs deemed necessary as a
result of the inspection nor will he pay the required licensing fee. He stated he did not
receive proper notification of the ordinance and that the City records show incorrect,
incomplete and inaccurate information with regard to his address and of the names of rental
property owners. He expressed strong opposition to the ordinance as being discriminatory
toward rental property owners because higher standards are set for rental properties than
for single-family houses; does not provide for grandfathering; is an invasion of privacy; is too
restrictive; makes it impossible for older properties to pass inspection and treats senior
citizens harshly. He was surprised his property did not pass the trial inspection after
spending a considerable amount of money to maintain it. He derided the suggested
remedies for correction of the violations. He stated that his property located in Minneapolis
was grandfathered in and he was required only to make a change in the electrical service.
He characterized the City as a bureaucratic police state. Strohm made reference to and
commented on statements made by City officials and Councilmembers in a January 19, 1994
newspaper article. He stated the ordinance duplicates published and accepted tenants rights
documents and increases costs to property owners. He suggested the City would need to
hire additional staff to process the appeals that will be generated by the ordinance.
Brancel closed the public forum at 10 p.m.
Benson stated that he participated in the trial inspection of Mr. Strohm's property and
explained that options are available for correcting the violations at a reasonable cost.
Benson described the property as a beautiful piece of property and reported that the
inspectors were courteous.
Stover reiterated concerns regarding requirements that were not safety related and noted
that owners of private homes are not generally held to similar standards. Lewis
acknowledged that from a cost standpoint, owners of multiple properties might face a
hardship, but pointed out that he failed to see where the ordinance has created a problem
for any landlord to date, and reconsideration of the policy should be conducted when the
10
.
.
.
.
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 1994 - PAGE 11
appeal process identifies a problem. Stover argued that it is umeasonable to have an
ordinance that may not be enforced or through an appeal process will be revised according
to those appeals. Daugherty stated that if a large number of appeals are made against
certain aspects of the ordinance by those who are regulated, then those provisions should
be reviewed.
Doug Malam, a member of the Planning Commission, stated it appears Shorewood has
become a code compliant City for rental housing only and agreed the fundamental issue of
code compliance should be addressed by the Planning Commission.
Stover pointed out the ordinance specifically states that the City will not arbitrate disputes
between a tenant and owner; however the City's position is unclear in a situation where a
owner does not comply with standards. Nielsen stated that if the problem created a health
hazard, the City would make an inspection and advise them to make the cleanup, and the
ultimate remedy would be through the court system.
Stover moved, Benson seconded to refer the Rental Housing Code to the Planning
Commission for its review, discussion and consideration.
Motion failed 2/3. Brancel, Daugherty and Lewis voted nay.
The Councilmembers agreed that the Planning Commission should address the issue of code
compliance in the City of Shorewood.
14. ADMINISTRATOR AND STAFF REPORTS
A. Staff Report on Liquor Store Management Plan - AI Rolek
Rolek informed the Council of plans to install an inventory control system to track and
monitor the movement of liquor store inventory. A recommendation for the plan will be
presented for the Council's consideration in the future.
B. Report on Beverly DrivejCajed Lane Traffic Situation - Jim Hurm
Hurm presented the results of a survey of Beverly DrivejCajed Lane residents designed to
obtain their input regarding solutions for traffic problems in the area. He reviewed actions
taken to date to alleviate the problems. The results show that the majority of residents
indicated that no further action need be taken. Hurm noted that the subject area would be
one which would be monitored by the part-time traffic enforcement specialist to be hired
by the City.
Brancel opened a public forum.
Pete Holmberg, 5955 Cajed Lane, stated the majority of the neighborhood prefers the cul-
de-sac solution to the problem and efforts will be made to organize the residents and
11
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JANUARY 24, 1994 - PAGE 12
.
prepare a petition to that effect. He stated the root cause of the problem was that of zoning
that allows a higher density which in turn creates additional traffic.
Kevin Stern, 26885 Beverly Drive, stated opposition to a no left/no right turn solution to
the problem because streets are basically for the public to use.
Julie Hines, 6045 Cajed Lane, stated the situation requires additional study in theinterests
of safety particularly for children in the neighborhood.
Brancel closed the public forum.
Following discussion, the Council noted that "no through traffic" signs have been erected,
traffic has been monitored for violations in the area, the part-time enforcement specialist
will monitor the area when hired, therefore no additional action by the Council is necessary
at this time.
The Council agreed the Board of Review meeting will be held on Wednesday, May 11, 1994.
The Council requested that the status of the LMCD be placed on its next meeting agenda.
15. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REPORTS - None.
.
16.
ADJOURN TO WORK SESSION SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF CLAIMS
Mayor Brancel announced the Work Session will be rescheduled and the Council agreed to
reschedule the Executive Session to the beginning of the February 14 Council meeting.
Lewis moved, Stover seconded to adjourn the City Council Meeting at 10:55 p.m. subject
to the approval of claims.
Motion passed 5/0.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,
Arlene H. Bergfalk
Recording Secretary
TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial
ATTEST:
G~
. J ES C. HURM, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
12