HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-03-29-Special MinutesWAUKEE CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING
March 29,2004
(1)Call to Order -The special meeting of the Waukee City Council was called to order
by Mayor Tony Oberman at 7:00 PM.
(2)Roll Call-The following members were present:Mayor Oberman,Council members
Nicholas Gruber,Don Bailey,Jr.,Jeff Mertz,Bill Pcard,and Darlene Stanton.
Guests at this meeting were:Mark A.Venard,Pam Venard,Stan Venard,Jayne Vernard,
Steven Venard,Daniel L.Manning,Jim Hermann,Carolyn Hermann,Kathy Michael,
Nancy Hines,Ron Olson,Iva Terry,Marvin Terry,Randy Allison,Terry Michael,Kurt
Brewer,William J.Lillis,Mark Siegfried,Tim Broderick
(3)Agenda Approval:Jeff Mertz moved to approve the agenda.Nick Gruber second.
Roll call:Ayes:Mertz,Gruber,Bailey,Peard,Stanton.Nays:None.Motion carried 5 -
O.
(4)Discussion:Of City's position on annexation issues with all property owners on
L.A.Grant Parkway and 312'"Street Planning Director Chad Weaver explained the
summary sheet,which gave sub totals and totals for different paving proj ects for 312 th
Street and L.A.Grant Parkway.The council decided to discuss animals first;paving
second.Council members Mertz,Stanton and Gruber spoke in favor of permitting the
current owner the right to have animals on the land being annexed.There was a
difference of opinion as to how long this would be permitted.Mr.Mertz was in favor of
a renewable agreement,which would come due every five years;Ms.Stanton -ten or
fifteen year renewable agreement;and Mr.Gruber -ten year renewable agreement.
Mayor Oberman spoke in favor of five years;so as to not burden or constrain future
councils.Questions were raised with respect to set backs and sound ordinances and the
animals currently being housed.Mr.Kurt Brewer,developer of the property to the east
ofL.A.Grant Parkway,indicated his development would consist of 119 homes.Mr.
Brewer indicated that animal noise and sounds,especially at night,could be a problem
for residents moving into the neighborhood.Bill Peard is willing to go either five or ten
years.William Lillis,317 6th Ave.Suite 300,assured the council that his clients Mr.and
Mrs.Stan Venard,Mr.and Mrs.Jim Hermann and Mr.and Mrs.Mark Venard all wished
to keep their animals for as long as they live there.Mayor Oberman asked City Attomey
Paul Huscher to explain the city's liability with respect to the animals.Mr.Huscher
indicated that the city is ordinarily exempt from liability;however,his concem is that of
being joined in a nuisance action that a new resident might bring against the owners of
the animals.Council member Bailey said he was in favor of permitting the animals for
the length of time the current owners reside at the property and was in favor of set-backs
and maintenance of property.Council member Stanton stressed that the reasons,
parameters and results of the review of a renewable agreement must be identified in the
pre-annexation agreement.City Attorney Paul Huscher is in agreement with council
member Stanton that the parameters of a renewable agreement must be identified and
stated.Ms.Iva Terry,who lives on 312'h Street,stated that we all wanted to ensure that
the properties with animals were well maintained.Mrs.Terry,instructing the council in
the fine art of maintenance,indicated that any property owner faced with a five year
renewal date wasn't likely to repair a chicken house two years before the five years were
up.Mrs.Terry was stating that the renewable agreement had to be for at least ten years
so that people would feel secure and be willing to invest in the care of their property and
their animals.Pam Venard informed the council of the noise emanating from the animals
on her property.Council members Stanton,Gruber and Peard continued the discussion
and basically identified the council's position in that (1)the property owners would
continue to have animals as they currently have for the next ten years;(2)at the end of
the ten year period,the agreement would be reviewed and extended,if warranted;(3)a
nuisance complaint concerning the animals involving items such as noise or odor -
especially from several different property owners -would be addressed at the time of the
occurrence just as a nuisance complaint involving cats or dogs is currently addressed
under the Code.
The discussion continued with a change in topic from animals to improvements.Council
member Jeff Mertz suggested a method by which all ofthe roads under consideration
could be paved and paid for by the developers.The extra feet width,curb,gutter and
storm sewer would be charged 100%to the developer whose property abutted the
pavement and existing developed lots would be charged 100%to each property owner for
the length of 80 linear feet,which is the size of most in town lots.Additional
developments coming in at a later date on the existing developed lots would be required
to reimburse the city or the developer for cost associated with each property owner's lot
beyond the 80 feet.City Attorney Paul Huscher said this agreement would be
permissible as long as all owners abutting the proj ect agreed prior to construction,
Attorney William Lillis spoke on behalf of his clients:Stan and Jayne Venard,Jim and
Carolyn Hermann and Mark and Pam Venard.After reviewing the methods of paying
and pavement presented as information from the city,Mr.Lillis indicated that his clients
were unprepared to pay the amounts that would be needed to complete anyone of the
possible projects.He also indicated that he felt the only way these projects -paving,
storm sewer,gutter,curb -would occur would be through a developer driven proj ect.
Mr.Lillis also agreed that this would probably not be done through a special assessment;
but through the pre-annexation agreement.In addition water and sewer improvements
were discussed.City Planning Director Chad Weaver indicated that he recommended
placing the responsibility for improvements more directly on developers by constructing
only those parts of the roadway which abut property being developed.This construction
would include curb,gutter,storm sewer and pavement [or one side and country cross
section on the other.Once development occurred on the other side of the road,the extra
feet,curb,gutter and storm sewer would be installed.This would lessen the burden on
anyone developer.Mr.Weaver was also in agreement with Mr.Lillis in favoring an
agreement;rather,than a special assessment.Kurt Brewer,3146 Ute Ave.,who is the
developer of a portion of the Kondes property,indicated he felt the only reasonable
responsibility of a developer would be to construct his half ofthe road.However,Mr.
Brewer would be willing to front black top for 24'for the entire road from Mark and Pam
Venard's comer where the gravel starts to Jim and Carolyn Hermann's comer and then
bond for his portion of a finished 31'pavement,curb,gutter,storm sewer to be finished
some time in the future.Also,as part of the agreement that portion of the cost,which
would have been attributed to other property owners would be credited as part of his
payment of the finished 31'pavement with curb,gutter,storm sewer.Council member
]
I
2
Mertz indicated that in his proposal he was suggesting city participation where the city
picks up x per cent of the total cost.Attorney Lillis indicated that city participation in the
cost of a street paving project is closer to what is common practice in other communities
than for a city expect to pay $0.00.Council member Bailey requested that City staff
prepare an analysis of cost for the various projects suggested in this and previous
meetings and distribute those to council and effected parties.Mr.Bailey also asked for a
clarification of how the area will be sewered.Mark Arentsen and John Gibson explained
the method of sewering these areas.A map will be provided for the proposed methods
for sewering the areas to be developed.Mr.Bailey would also like information on the
Kondes/Grubb property as to the type and size of development.Mr.Bailey would also
like cost benefit/analysis to the City for the development ofthe KondeslBrewer project.
Cost of24'rural cross section,Jeffs proposal,cost/benefit of black top versus paving,
cost attributable to gutter/curb and cost attributable to storm sewer.Cost of24'with
storm sewer versus doing the whole thing.Asphalt -life cycle,cost versus paving,
including labor as well as material.Mr.Brewer suggested a committee consisting of2
people from council,staff,himself and Mr.Lillis could meet between council meetings
so that the project would move forward quicker and smoother.Council members Gruber
and Meltz will serve on this committee.
(5)Resolution:Approvingform of pre-annexation agreement for L.A.Grant and 312'1.
St.properties of less than five (5)acres The council was not prepared to vote on this
resolution.No action was taken.
Mayor Oberman asked for a motion to adjourn.Nick Gruber moved;Jeff Mertz second.
Voice vote:Ayes:All.Nays:None.Motion carried 5 -O.
Meeting Adjoumed at 8:49 PM.
C.A.Paardekooper,Deputy City Clerk
Attest:
3