|
Jefferson City Council - Minutes - 1999 |
This goJefferson.com Web presentation of these public documents is Copyright 1999 Syndesis Corporation.
MINUTES
city of jefferson common council MEETING
APRIL 20, 1999
The Tuesday, April 20, 1999, meeting of the City of Jefferson Common Council was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Brawders. Members present: Ald. Wagner, Ald. Coffman, Ald. Carnes, Ald. Wenzel, Ald. Stevens, Ald. Johann, Ald. Tennyson and Ald. Beyer. Also present were City Administrator Schornack, City Attorney Scheibel, Police Chief Besel, City Engineer Ludwig and City Clerk/Treasurer Parlow.
COMMUNICATIONS
Ald. Beyer read a letter from Richard and Dianne Sherratt supporting the reaappointment of Mr. Dan Ludwig.
Mayor Brawders then read a letter from Mr. Jeff Haas, County Highway Commissioner praising Mr. Dan Ludwig, Mr. Dave Haffelder, Mr. Dave Schornack and the City Public Works Crews for their ongoing support and cooperation with the joint City-County projects. He went on to say that the level of professionalism and cooperation had increased dramatically over the last couple of years.
Mayor Brawders then read a letter from the Ed and Mary (Acketz) Grayden family, formerly of Jefferson, supporting the reconstruction of the Armstrong Hamburger Stand.
Mayor Brawders read a letter from Alderperson Kevin Wenzel outlining his support for the Milwaukee Street Walk Bridge. Alderperson Wenzel stated that his family would donate $250, approximately the one month's salary for alderperson.
Mayor Brawders then read a short note from his wife and himself. Mayor Brawders and Jean pledged their financial support to the Milwaukee Street Walk Bridge.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Jim Van Lieshout of 229 Meadow Court, addressed the Council as Chamber of Commerce President. He stated that is was the Chamber's "Official Position" to support the Milwaukee Street Walk Bridge Project. A survey conducted by the Chamber of Commerce concerning the Pedestrian Bridge yielded a 48% return rate. Of those returning the survey, 60% were in favor of the bridge project, only 13 responses of the remaining 40% were opposed to the Pedestrian Bridge Project. He noted that the Chamber will begin fund raising efforts in support of the bridge.
Mr. Van Lieshout also thanked the members of the City Staff and Sign Committee for the efforts in developing the new proposed sign ordinance.
Kathy Miller of 921 South Dewey Avenue, then addressed the Council. Ms. Miller stated that golf balls are once again causing damage to her property. She asked the Council what the next step would be to resolve her problem. City Attorney Scott Scheibel stated that Ms. Miller's problem would be brought before the Council in Closed Session this evening.
Mr. Bob Giblin of 125 East Woolcock addressed the Council regarding the traffic problem on Woolcock Street. He stated that traffic was at an all time high due to the detour for the Highway 26 project. He also stated that some of the traffic using this route had been ignoring the stop signs. His concerns fall with the safety of the neighborhood's children. He further stated that the removal of parking on Woolcock Street has caused an inconvenience to the residents of the area and has made it easier for the traffic to move more quickly along the street. Ald. Stevens commented that he had witnessed people driving around the barricades and he was aware of the traffic problem Mr. Giblin was speaking about.
PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO REPEAL AND RECREATE SECTION 17.08 OF THE ZONING CODE PERTAINING TO SIGNS
Ald. Wagner, seconded by Ald. Tennyson moved to adjourn to a public hearing.
Mayor Brawders called the public hearing to order.
City Administrator Schornack read the Notice of Public Hearing.
Guy Burlingame (Building Inspector) then explained that the Proposed Ordinance in front of the Council this evening was the product of many individuals and a lot of compromise. He further stated that the ordinance had been recommended by the Chamber of Commerce, the Sign Committee and the Plan Commission. Burlingame said that he could generalize the new ordinance as being more restrictive in residential areas of the City and less restrictive for industrial properties.
Mr. Paul Essock of 1423 Highway 26 South, Sign Committee Member, stated that he felt the proposed ordinance was in the best interest of the community and that a lot of hard work had gone into its development.
Hearing from no one else, Mayor Brawders closed the public hearing.
Ald. Coffman introduced Ordinance #3-99 for its second reading.
CITY OF JEFFERSON
PROPOSED ORDINANCE #3-99
An Ordinance to Repeal and Recreate Section 17.08 of the Municipal Code Related to Signs.
The Common Council of the City of Jefferson do ordain as follows:
Section 1. Section 17.08 SIGNS is hereby repealed and recreated as follows:
Section 2. Section 17.08 SIGNS (1) SCOPE OF REGULATIONS: No sign shall hereafter be located, erected, moved, reconstructed, extended, enlarged, converted, or structurally altered without a building permit, except those signs excepted in subsection 2 and 4 below. The sign shall also meet all the structural requirements of the Building Code.
(b) Real estate signs not to exceed nine (9) square feet in area which advertise the sale, rental, or lease of the premises upon which said signs are temporarily located and not to project higher than ten feet (10') above the ground, nor be closer than eight feet (8') to any other zoning lot.
(c) Name, occupation, and warning signs not to exceed four (4) square feet located on the land parcel and not to be higher than one story or ten feet (10') above the ground.
(d) Bulletin boards for public, charitable or religious institutions not to exceed sixteen (16) square feet in area located on the premises and not to project higher than one story or ten feet (10') above the ground.
(e) Memorial signs, tablets, names of buildings, and date of erection when cut into any masonry surface or when constructed of metal and affixed flat against a structure.
(3) SIGNS IN MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. (a) Parking area signs, provided no sign shall project beyond the property line into the public way or higher than seven feet (7') above the ground and including:
1. Signs designating parking area entrances or exits, provided no more than one sign is located at each entrance or exit.
2. One sign per parking area per block front designating the conditions of use or identity of such parking area and limited to a maximum size of nine (9) square feet for each sign.
(b) Name, occupation, or announcement sign not to exceed thirty-two (32) square feet and not to be higher than twelve feet (12') above the ground, and further providing there are six or more living units on the parcel or multifamily development area.
(c) No sign facing within one hundred feet (100') of a Single Family Residential front property line or thirty (30') front a single family residential side or rear property shall exceed sixteen (16) square feet.
(4) TEMPORARY SIGNS INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING: (a) Signs advertising private sales or events and political candidates not to exceed sixteen (16) square feet for a period not to exceed sixty (60) days per year for any one lot.
(d) Other temporary signs when authorized by the Building Inspector for a period not to exceed thirty (30) consecutive days.
(5) SIGNS ON PUBLIC PROPERTY: Official signs approved by the Regulatory Committee, such as traffic-control, parking restrictions, information, and notices within the public right of way.
(a) Wall signs placed against the exterior walls of buildings shall not extend more than eight inches (8") outside of a building's wall surface, shall not exceed five hundred (500) square feet in area for any one premise, shall not exceed 25% of the building façade, and shall not exceed forty feet (40') in height above the mean centerline street grade.
(b) Projecting signs fastened to, suspended from, or supported by structures shall not exceed thirty-six (36) square feet in area in the Central Business District; shall not extend more than six feet (6') from the building, but in no case beyond the curb line into any public right of way; shall not be less than ten feet (10') from all side lot lines; shall not exceed a height of twenty feet (20') above the mean centerline street grade; and shall not be less than ten feet (10') above the sidewalk nor sixteen feet (16') above a driveway or an alley.
(c) Ground signs shall not exceed forty-five feet (45') in height above the mean centerline street grade, and shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet on any side.
(d) Roof signs shall not exceed ten feet (10') in height above the roof, shall meet all the yard and height requirements for the district in which they are located, and shall not exceed two hundred (200) square feet.
(e) All signs on private property shall advertise, promote, or represent only establishments, goods, or services located, sold, or manufactured within one hundred feet (100') of that property unless approved by the City Plan Commission.
(f) Signs facing Residential Districts: No sign except those permitted in subsection 2 or 3 above shall be permitted to face a residential district within eighty feet (80') of a residential front property line, or thirty feet (30') from a side or rear residential property line.
(8) SIGNS IN AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS: The total surface area of all signs on any parcel of land shall not exceed two hundred (200) square feet and shall not exceed twenty feet (20') in height above the mean centerline street grade.
(9) SIGNS ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE PUBLIC: (a) Signs shall not resemble, imitate, or approximate the shape, size, form, or color of railroad or traffic signs, signals or devices.
(b) Signs shall not obstruct or interfere with the effectiveness of railroad or traffic signs, signals, or devices as determined by the Building Inspector or Police Chief. Such obstructive signs would be flashing or animated signs.
(c) No sign shall be placed so as to obstruct or interfere with traffic visibility as determined by the City Building Inspector or Police Chief.
(d) No sign shall be erected, relocated, or maintained so as to prevent free ingress to or egress from any door, window, or fire escape; and no sign shall be attached to a standpipe or fire escape.
(e) Any sign allowed to deteriorate or is damaged to the point of being unsightly, a nuisance, or unsafe as determined by the Building Inspector may be ordered repaired or removed by the Building Inspector.
(f) Any sign considered by the Building Inspector as not conforming to minimum Community standards of decency or taste or negatively impact neighboring property values will require City Plan Commission approval prior to a permit being issued.
(g) No illuminated sign shall be installed such that will substantially annoy, injure or endanger the comfort, health, repose or safety of a resident living in a residential zone within one hundred feet (100') of the sign.
(10) All signs existing prior to the adoption of this Code not complying with any requirement of 1-8 above may be maintained but not replaced, moved, enlarged, or structurally altered without complete compliance of this code. Replacement of face plate the same size or smaller is not permitted if the cost of the face plate replacement exceeds 50% of the sign value. Further, if the use (as defined in Comm 51.01 (87)) of the property is changed, all existing signs must be brought into compliance with this code.
Section 3: This ordinance shall take effect upon passage and publication as required by law.
Ald. Coffman, seconded by Ald. Tennyson moved to recommend Ordinance #3-99 as read.
Ald. Johann then questioned the City Attorney's Proposed Amendments to the Ordinance. City Attorney Scheibel then gave an explanation of the items in his memo to the Council.
After a discussion regarding temporary signs, Guy Burlingame stated that if the ordinance, as proposed, was approved, he would be able to "guard the spirit" of the ordinance. The Mayor commented that this would leave a lot to the discretion of the Inspector.
Ald. Beyer then stated that she felt that section 6(c) should be amended to read "no more than two sides".
Mr. Burlingame reiterated that the Plan Commission had supported the plan with only minor verbiage changes. He further stated that by decreasing section 6(c) to "no more than two sides" reduced the industrial district signage to less than what is allowed in the downtown district.
Ald. Johann asked Mr. Burlingame questions about billboards and murals and how the new ordinance addressed these issues. Ald. Beyer questioned why we were including roof signs.
Ald. Johann then asked Mayor Brawders if a member of the public could speak. Mayor Brawders then asked Mr. Gagnon to address the Council if he wished.
Mr. Paul Gagnon of 633 Lucas Lane, then stated that he was in support of the original sign ordinance and he couldn't understand why the Council was entertaining the idea of changes. Mayor Brawders stated that the Council had the ultimate authority on the Ordinance and that they needed to consider the legal opinion presented by the City Attorney.
Mr. Steve Adams of 434 North Midway Avenue, member of the Plan Commission—stated that the Commission had accepted the proposal with the minor verbiage changes as presented by the City Attorney.
Ald. Beyer, seconded by Ald. Tennyson moved to amend Ordinance #3-99, section 6(c) to read "One ground sign, which shall not exceed 45 feet in height above the mean centerline street grade, and shall not exceed 100 square feet on any side, and no more than two sides." . On call of the roll, motion carried unanimously.
Ald. Beyer, seconded by Ald. Johann then made an amendment to the Amended Ordinance #3-99 to include the following verbiage changes as suggested by City Attorney Scheibel:
- Should read SIGNS IN BUSINESS DISTRICTS: Signs are prohibited except as provided under Paragraph (4) and as follows:"
(6)(e) insert "for good cause"
(9)(f) should read ". . . will require City Plan Commission approval for
good cause prior to the permit being issued."
(9)(f) the word "impact" should read "impacting"
(11) insertion of illustrations
On call of the roll, motion carried unanimously.
Ald. Beyer then made a motion to amend Section 7 of Ordinance #3-99 to read "200 ft from a residential district". Motion died for a lack of a second.
Ald. Beyer, seconded by Ald. Tennyson moved to amend Section 6(c) to read a "total of 100 sq. feet, maximum of two sides". After clarification from Building Inspector Burlingame and City Attorney Scheibel the motion was withdrawn.
Ald. Wenzel thanked the staff and committee members for the hard work and the time commitment they had put in to the creation of the Sign Ordinance.
consent agenda
Ald. Beyer introduced Resolution No. 163
CITY OF JEFFERSON
RESOLUTION nO. 163
BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Jefferson that the consent agenda for April 20, 1999 is hereby adopted.
The consent agenda for tonight includes:
Ald. Beyer questioned why the Finance Committee had only approved a $5,000 disbursement. Mayor Brawders stated that an itemized listing of expenses had not been submitted by the Association and that is was a good idea to hold the remainder of the funds until such documents were received. Ald. Carnes stated that it was the Finance Committee's opinion that another disbursement could be made in summer.
Ald. Beyer, seconded by Ald. Tennyson moved to recommend Resolution No. 163. On call of the roll the motion carried unanimously.
AUTHORIZING PURCHASE OF PICKUP TRUCK AND ONE TON DUMP TRUCK
Ald. Carnes introduced Resolution No. 164.
CITY OF JEFFERSON
RESOLUTION NO. 164
BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Jefferson that the City Administrator is hereby authorized to purchase a pickup truck from Smith Motors of Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin for $19,099, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Administrator is hereby authorized to purchase a one ton dump truck from Smith Motors of Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin for $22,266.
Ald. Carnes noted that the trucks were budgeted for and that Smith Motors was the low bidder.
Ald. Coffman, seconded by Ald. Wenzel moved to recommend Resolution No. 164. On call of the roll the motion carried unanimously.
bid opening for the retaining wall at the north main street parking lot
Ald. Johann introduced Resolution No. 165.
CITY OF JEFFERSON
RESOLUTION NO. 165
BE IS RESOLVED, by the Common Council of the City of Jefferson that all bids for the North Main Street parking lot retaining wall be rejected and the City re-bid the project in the year 2000.
Ald. Tennyson asked why the project had taken so long to be completed. The Mayor noted that it had simply been a lack of funding. Ald. Coffman noted that the wall hadn't moved in nearly three years and that with the construction, and therefore the lack of parking on North Main Street, this year would be a bad year to do the reconstruction. Ald. Carnes stated that it was the Finance Committees recommendation to increase the year 2000s budget to accommodate the reconstruction of the wall. City Engineer Ludwig stated that he could work on improving the drainage of the lot until reconstruction could be started.
Ald. Johann, seconded by Ald. Coffman moved to recommend Resolution No. 163. Resolution carried on a voice vote.
curb and gutter contract for south whitewater avenue
Ald. Stevens introduced Resolution No. 166.
CITY OF JEFFERSON
RESOLUTION NO. 166
BE IS RESOLVED, by the Common Council of the City of Jefferson that the City Administrator is hereby authorized to sign an agreement with R. L. Venske for $9,998 for 1015 lineal feet of curbing along the CTH N (south) project.
Ald. Wagner asked if a walking path would be included on CTH N. City Engineer Ludwig commented that the reconstruction plan calls for a 4ft paved shoulder on each side of the road. Ald. Carnes stated that the Finance Committee had concerns about the curbing along South Whitewater, he also stated that this would most likely become a two phase project.
Ald. Stevens seconded by Ald. Beyer moved to recommend Resolution No. 166. On call of the roll the motion carried unanimously.
Ald. Johann, seconded by Ald. Wenzel moved to adjourn to closed session pursuant to Sections 19.85(1)(g) and 19.85(1)(e) of the Wisconsin State Statutes related to Consulting with Legal Counsel with Respect to Litigation and Sale of Public Property.
On call of the roll the motion carried unanimously.
Ald. Tennyson, seconded by Ald. Stevens moved to reconvene to open session. The motion carried on a voice vote.
HIRE OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT SUPERVISOR
This item was removed from the agenda.
authorization to sign purchase agreement for a city parcel located at the southeast quadrant of the intersection of west puerner street and windsor terrace
Ald. Tennyson introduced Resolution No. 168.
CITY OF JEFFERSON
RESOLUTION NO. 168
BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Jefferson that the City Administrator is hereby authorized to sign an agreement dated 4-15-99 between the City of Jefferson and Thomas W. Vogel to sell the City owned parcel located at the southeast quadrant of the intersection of West Puerner Street and Windsor Terrace for $84,000.
Ald. Tennyson, seconded by Ald. Beyer moved to recommend Resolution No. 168. On call of the roll the motion carried unanimously.
Ald. Carnes, seconded by Ald. Stevens moved to adjourn the April 20, 1999, meeting of the City of Jefferson Common Council. The motion carried on a voice vote.
These minutes of the April 20, 1999, meeting of the Common Council are uncorrected. Any corrections made thereto will be noted in the proceedings at which time the minutes are approved.
Please Publish: by Monday
Need an affidavit
Not in the legal section