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
July 6, 1999

The Tuesday, July 6, 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. Oppermann, Ald. Wenzel, Ald. Stevens, Ald. Johann, Ald. Tennyson and Ald. Beyer. Also present were City Administrator Schornack, City Attorney Scheibel, City Engineer Ludwig, Police Chief Besel and City Clerk/Treasurer Parlow.

COMMUNICATIONS

Ald. Tennyson drew the Council's attention to a letter from Curtis Ambulance. It was noted that the letter addressed the concerns that the Ambulance Committee and Common Council were experiencing.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Will Larson, 135 South Fischer Avenue, addressed the Council on several issues. Mr. Larson was concerned about the number of people parking their vehicles across sidewalks. He asked that the police department look into this problem. Mr. Larson then addressed the recent work along County Highway N. He felt that the street does look nice, however, he adamantly disagreed with the Council's decision to not assess the adjacent property owners. He felt that the Council was setting a dangerous precedent and that the move wasn't fair for those individuals who had been assessed in the past.

Marge Soellner, 135 North Center Avenue, addressed the Council regarding the assessing procedure used on County Highway N. Ms. Soellner felt that the City should have assessed the property owners along Highway N regardless of the extenuating circumstances. She also stated that she owned property along Whitewater and Dane Streets and that although the lots were vacant, she had to pay for curb & gutter and sidewalk assessments for her properties.

Update on city streets and projects

City Engineer Ludwig outlined the proposed Projects for 1999/2000/2001. He noted that all streets are placed on a seal coating and reconstruction schedule. He noted that his schedule coincides with the five-year plan as approved by the Common Council.

Major projects for the year 2000 include the reconstruction of Dewey Avenue and Watertown Avenue.

Projects for 2001 include: Wisconsin Drive, Whitewater Avenue, Linden Drive and Jackson Avenue.

Ald. Coffman asked if the seal coating scheduled for Ryan Road needed to be completed this year. He felt that this would be inconvenient, since Ryan Road is used as the primary access the businesses formerly accessed by Highway 26.

City Engineer Ludwig said that it would not be a problem to push the seal coating project on Ryan Road back to the year 2000, per Ald. Coffman's request.

The North Street Bridge was then discussed. It was noted that money is in the 1999 budget to complete some minor repairs on the bridge. City Engineer Ludwig noted that the pylons will be repaired in fall of 2000 when the river is drawn down to work on the dam. Ald. Johann asked if the problem areas on the bridge could be marked with barricades.

Ald. Wagner stated that he is concerned about North Center Avenue. City Engineer Ludwig stated that this stretch of street will be reconstructed after the Water & Electric Department has installed the water main.

PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO REPEAL AND RECREATE SECTION 17.06 (8) OF THE ZONING CODE PERTAINING TO FENCES AND SECTION 17.07 (5) OF THE ZONING CODE PERTAINING TO DRIVEWAYS

Ald. Wagner, seconded by Ald. Johann moved to adjourn to a public hearing. Motion carried on a voice vote.

Mayor Brawders called the public hearing to order.

City Administrator Schornack read the Notice of Public Hearing.

Building Inspector Burlingame gave the Council background on the proposed Ordinance to repeal and recreate a portion of Section 17 of the Municipal Code pertaining to driveways and fences. He stated that the revised ordinance would allow fences, except in the front yard, to completely obstruct the view. He added that the current requirements for fences in the front yard would stay the same as it is now, i.e., solid material shall cover no more than 65% of the surface area of the front yard fences. However, on the side yard and rear yard the fences can be solid. The ordinance also changes the current requirement of keeping driveways at least three feet from the property line. The revised ordinance would allow driveways to be placed right up to the property line. Burlingame stated that these changes would make our ordinance enforcable. He feels that as our ordinance is currently written, he is unable to enforce the code. Burlingame stated that these changes would address the problems that he has encountered while acting as Zoning Administrator.

Ald. Johann asked about the City's liability for people who have applied for privacy fences and have been denied. City Attorney Scheibel stated that the City would not have liability because we were enforcing the code as it was written at the time of application.

Ald. Johann felt that the percentage of coverage was too vague.

Ald. Beyer commented that a homeowner, under the proposed plan would be able to have a four foot solid fence in the front yard.

Ald. Oppermann stated that, by looking around the City, you can find many ways people have circumvented the code. (Such as solid fence, open space, bushes, solid fence . . . etc.)

Marge Soellner, 135 North Center Avenue, asked for a clarification of the differences between the existing code and Proposed Ordinance #6-99.

Will Larson, 135 South Fischer Avenue, stated that he is in opposition to the changes. He felt that the solid fences would be used as "neighbor control" and would "box" a neighborhood in. He also felt that there is a need for clearer parameters.

Hearing from no one else, Mayor Brawders closed the public hearing.

Ald. Coffman, introduced Proposed Ordinance #6-99 for its second reading.

proposed ordinance #6-99

An ordinance to repeal Section 17.07(5)(b) and (c), and to recreate Section 17.07(5)(b) regarding Driveways. And, to amend Section 17.06(8)(c) and to create Section 17.06(8)(d) regarding Fences and Hedges on Residential Property.

The Common Council of the City of Jefferson does ordain as follows:

Section 1. Sections 17.07(5)(b) and (c) are hereby repealed.

Section 2. Section 17.07(5)(b) is hereby recreated to read as follows:

Vehicular traffic entrances and exits to drive-in theaters, banks and restaurants; motels; funeral homes; vehicular sales, service, washing and repair stations; garages; or public parking lots shall not be less than 200' from any pedestrian entrance or exit to a school, college, university, church, hospital, park, playground, library, public emergency shelter or other place of public assembly.

Section 3. Section 17.06(8)(c) is hereby amended to read as follows:

Fences in front yards shall not be constructed in such a manner to completely obstruct the view. Solid material shall cover no more than 65% of the surface area of a front yard fence.

Section 4. Section 17.07(8)(d) is hereby created to read as follows:

No fence shall create a safety hazard as determined by the Police Chief or the Building Inspector.

Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect upon passage and publication as required by law.

Ald. Johann stated that she still felt uncomfortable with the "65% surface area" and the front yard fencing.

Building Inspector Burlingame noted that he would be working on another ordinance to specifically address the front yard fence concerns.

Ald. Wagner stated that he would be unable to support the ordinance as written. His concerns centered upon the applicants denied in the past and the thought that houses would be "boxed in".

Ald. Oppermann stated that the Council could think of amending the ordinance, for front yard fences, to read 65% when viewed at a 90 degree angle.

Ald. Oppermann, seconded by Ald. Tennyson made an amendment to restrict front yard fences to a maximum of 3ft and that they would not be subject to the 65% clause.

After discussion, the amendment was withdrawn.

Ald. Wagner, seconded by Ald. Beyer made an amendment to amend SECTION 3 to read "fences in front or side yards …..surface area of a front or side yard fence.".

Building Inspector Burlingame then read the definition of "side yard" as printed in the City of Jefferson Municipal Code.

On call of the roll, motion was defeated by a vote of 6 to 2. Ald. Beyer and Wagner cast the dissenting votes.

Ald. Oppermann stated that many people have a greater need for privacy fences along the sides of their home.

Ald. Beyer asked how the Council would feel about abolishing shadow box fences.

Burlingame stated that he would address this issue in the near future.

Ald. Beyer stated that she could support the ordinance if Building Inspector Burlingame made further refinements addressing issues, such as shadow box fences and front yard fences.

Ald. Coffman, seconded by Ald. Tennyson moved to recommend Proposed Ordinance #6-99. On call of the roll, motion carried on a vote of 7 to 1, Ald. Wagner casting the dissenting vote.

Public hearing on the proposed ordinance to amend section 17.04(2)(B) OF THE mUNICIPAL CODE TO REZONE A PORTION OF pARCEL NO. 06-14-01-22-000, ADJACENT TO GENERAC CORPORATION FROM AGRICULTURE (ag) TO gENERAL INDUSTRY (mg).

Ald. Tennyson, seconded by Ald. Johann moved to adjourn to a public hearing. Motion carried on a voice vote.

Mayor Brawders called the public hearing to order.

City Administrator Schornack read the Notice of Public Hearing.

City Engineer Ludwig gave a short explanation of the proposed zoning change. He noted that the City must rezone the land recently purchased from Estella Ganser to accommodate the sale of the property to Generac. He provided the Council with an overhead outlining the proposed changes.

Hearing from no one, Mayor Brawders closed the public hearing.

Ald. Wenzel, introduced Proposed Ordinance #7-99 for its second reading.

ORDINANCE #7-99

An ordinance to amend Section 17.04 (2)(b) of the Municipal Code of the City of Jefferson related to rezoning.

The Common Council of the City of Jefferson, Wisconsin, do ordain as follows:

Section 1. Section 17.04(2)(b) of the zoning map, City of Jefferson, Wisconsin, which is herein made a part, is amended to change district boundaries by deleting the following area from the Agriculture (AG) District and adding said property to the General Industry (MG) District:

Description: N01^o40'31"W, A DISTANCE OF 2032.11' TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING BEING A POINT ON A CURVE; THENCE WITH SAID CURVE TO THE LEFT A LENGTH OF 229-53', SAID CURVE HAVING A RADIUS OF 634.75, A CHORD THAT BEARS N77^o57'56"E FOR A DISTANCE OF 228.28' TO A POINT; THENCE N67^o36'22'E, A DISTANCE OF 27.18' TO A POINT; THENCE N01^o40'31"W, A DISTANCE OF 1112-22' TO A POINT; THENCE S89^o02'19'W, A DISTANCE OF 250.00' TO A POINT; THENCE S0l^o40'31"E, A DISTANCE OF 1166-00' TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 6.59 ACRES MORE OR LESS.

Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force after passage and publication as provided by law and notification and attestation of the district boundary changes incorporated herein the zoning map, City of Jefferson.

Ald. Wenzel, seconded by Ald. Tennyson moved to recommend Proposed Ordinance #7-99. On call of the roll, motion carried unanimously.

Public hearing for a final resolution on proposed special assessments of sidewalk along the west side of hillside drive and the north side of east washington street.

Ald. Tennyson, seconded by Ald. Stevens moved to adjourn to a public hearing. Motion carried on a voice vote.

Mayor Brawders called the public hearing to order.

City Administrator Schornack read the Notice of Public Hearing.

City Engineer Ludwig then outlined the proposed sidewalk construction along Hillside Drive and Washington Street.

Dan Calloway, 1328/1330 Hillside Drive, asked why the sidewalk was being constructed on the west side of the street and not the east. Mr. Calloway felt that the City's decision to place the sidewalk on the west side of the street was political and not dictated by need. He felt that if the City is truly concerned about the safety of the neighborhood residents, the sidewalk should be placed on the east side of the street. In conclusion, Mr. Calloway felt that more people would use the sidewalk if it was placed on the east side of Hillside Drive.

Ald. Wenzel stated that placing sidewalk along the west side of Hillside Drive was the recommendation of the Streets Committee. He noted that several factors went into the their decision: the topography (retaining walls and tree removals would be necessary on the east side), Schweiger's inlet and outlet, and the safety issue of crossing by Parkwood Lane.

Delight Albrecht, 425 South Whitewater Avenue, asked why the sidewalk was being placed on the North side of Washington Street. She felt that the County personnel and children would not utilize the sidewalk. In addition, she felt that assessment procedures should be consistent with what was done along County Highway N.

Ald. Stevens said that he had personally witnessed kids walking and biking on Washington Street on their way to school.

Hearing from no one else, Mayor Brawders closed the public hearing.

Ald. Johann introduced Final Resolution No. 42.

Final Resolution authorizing sidewalk improvements and levying special assessments against benefited properties.

WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Jefferson, Wisconsin, held a public hearing at City Hall at 7:30 p.m. on the 6^th day of July, 1999, for the purpose of hearing all interested persons concerning the preliminary report on the following proposed improvements:

6,200 sq ft of Concrete Sidewalk along the West side of Hillside Drive and 1,300 sq ft of Concrete Sidewalk along the North side of East Washington Street

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Jefferson, as follows:

1. The report pertaining to the above-described public improvement is hereby adopted and approved.
1. That the City shall carry out the improvements in accordance with the report.
2. That payment for the improvements shall be made by assessing the costs to the properties benefited as indicated in the report.
3. That assessments shown in the report representing an exercise of police powers, have been determined on a reasonable basis and are hereby confirmed.
4. That any interested property owner may object to each assessment separately or all assessments jointly for any purpose.
5. That the assessments shall be paid in full within 30 days of invoicing (or in 4 annual installments) when arrangements have been made in advance with the City Clerk. The minimum principle payments which shall be allowed under the installment plan shall be $100 per year. Deferred payment shall bear interest at a rate of 9% per annum on the unpaid balance. Assessments not paid when due shall bear additional interest on the amount due at a rate of 12% per annum.

That the City Clerk shall publish this resolution as a Class One Notice and shall mail a copy of this resolution and a statement of final assessment against the benefited property to every property owner who's name appears on the assessment roll and whose post office address is known or can with reasonable diligence be ascertained.

Ald. Johann, seconded by Ald. Wenzel moved to recommend Final Resolution No. 42 for discussion.

Ald. Wenzel stated that he was in support of the sidewalk project, but felt the funds allocated for the sidewalk could be used better at this time to address an urgent drainage problem along East Puerner Avenue.

Ald. Oppermann stated that the Municipal Code states that the City of Jefferson would have sidewalk along any improved street within the City by the year 2000. Oppermann stated that he believes sidewalk belongs on both sides of Hillside Drive. He felt that the sidewalk project should proceed as presented. He also stated that he would like to see the east side of Hillside completed in the near future. Oppermann suggested "borrowing" from the Park Development Fund to fund the drainage project on Puerner Avenue.

Ald. Beyer felt that traffic along Washington Avenue does not warrant sidewalk.

Ald. Coffman stated that, at Streets Committee, the vote was unanimous to put the sidewalk project aside and use the funding to work on the Drainage problem on East Puerner Avenue.

City Administrator Schornack stated that the Council could delete one of the proposed street projects for 1999 to allocate funding for the drainage project.

Ald. Oppermann stated that he felt the $10,000 could be taken from the Park Development Fund. He feels that sidewalks are priorities, especially for schools.

The Council questioned what the cost would be to install sidewalk along the east side of Hillside Drive. City Engineer Ludwig was unable to provide the Council with a cost estimate. However, the cost would be considerably higher because retaining walls and tree removals would be involved.

Ald. Johann was against borrowing from other funds. She felt that a project needed to be deleted for another project to be added.

Ald. Beyer felt that Washington Street was not a priority and that it could be deleted.

Ald. Beyer, seconded by Ald. Oppermann made an amendment to delete the Washington Street portion of the proposed sidewalk project.

After discussion, the amendment was withdrawn.

Ald. Coffman felt that if the Council did not feel strongly about sidewalk on the east side or west side of Hillside that the project should be set aside and the funding allocated for the sidewalk should be used for the drainage project on the North side of the City. He was against taking funds from the Park Development Fund do to the urgent nature of the project and the time constraints the Council is working under.

Ald. Johann and Ald. Wenzel withdrew their original motion for discussion.

Final Resolution No. 42 was deleted from the agenda.

Do to the immediate danger to the health and safety of City of Jefferson citizens, the following resolution was added to the agenda.

Ald. Johann introduced Resolution No. 47.

RESOLUTION NO. 47

BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Jefferson that the Council has identified an emergency drainage problem, affecting the health safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Jefferson, on North Marion Avenue and East Puerner Avenue and hereby authorizes the City Engineer to immediately proceed with the drainage project for the above specified area.

Ald. Tennyson, seconded by Ald. Johann moved to approve emergency Resolution No. 47. On call of the roll, motion carried unanimously.

prohibition of truancy

Ald. Tennyson introduced Proposed Ordinance #8-99 for its first reading.

An ordinance to create Section 9.32.

The Common Council of the City of Jefferson, Wisconsin, do ordain as follows:

9.32 TRUANCY (1) DEFINITION.

A pupil is truant if he or she is absent from school without an acceptable excuse under Wisconsin Statutes 118.15 and Wisconsin Statutes 118.16(4) for part or all of any day on which school is held during a school semester.

(2) PROHIBITED.

No pupil under the age of eighteen shall be truant.

(3) COURT ACTION. The Court is hereby empowered to enter the following dispositions for a violation of (1):

(a) An order for the person to attend school;

(b) A forfeiture of not more than fifty dollars, plus costs, for the first violation, or forfeiture of not more than one hundred dollars, plus costs, for any second or subsequent violations committed within twelve months of a previous violation, subject to Wisconsin Statutes 938.37, and subject to a maximum cumulative forfeiture amount of not more than five hundred dollars for all violations committed during a school semester. All or part of the forfeiture, plus costs, may be assessed against the person, the parent or guardian of the person, or both, subject to 938.42, Wis. Stats.

9.32 TRUANCY. First Offense $50 plus (b)

Second Offense $100 plus (b)