Loading...
Council Minutes 03/07/2002 CITY OF AMMON March 7, 2002 Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Mayor and City Council: The meeting was called to order by Mayor C. Bruce Ard at 7:30 P.M. in the City Building, 2135 South Ammon Road, Ammon, Idaho, with the following City Officials present: Mayor C. Bruce Ard Councilmember W. Lee Bean Councilmember Karen Y. Anderson Councilmember Leslie Folsom Councilmember Randy G. Waite Attorney Brian Tucker Engineer Bill Manwill Public Works Director David Wadsworth Fire Chief Clarence Nelson City Clerk Aleen C. Jensen Others Present: Teresa Sturm, Attorney for Todd and Terri Johnston Todd and Terri Johnston, 3760 Georgia Lane, Ammon Douglas Willden, 3633 Hidden Haven, Ammon T eri Anderson David and Dana Russell, 1730 Falcon Drive, Ammon Arlene Coon, 3635 Wanda Street, Ammon Maxine Hardy, 3745 Georgia Lane, Ammon Ray Berry, 3740 Georgia Lane, Ammon Mark Ball Chip and Robbie Schwarze Kyle Gotlob Shad Beard Brandon Moore Jeff Hansen Dallas Andrus Parker Davis Casey Ball JoEtta Buckhouse, 3015 Fennec Lane, Ammon George Watkins III, 2155 Midway Avenue, Ammon Jeff Metcalf and Scout Son, 2805 East Sapphire Drive, Ammon Stephanie Egbert and Two Daughters, 3785 Georgia Lane, Ammon Bob Hale, 3075 Devonwood, Ammon Stephanie Affleck, 3950 Wanda Street, Ammon Darlene Wenczel, 3720 Georgia Lane David and Moalee Wall, 2210 Bittern Drive, Ammon City Council Meeting, March 7,2002 - Page 2 Absent: Councilmember Randy G. Waite Attorney A. Joe Anderson Councilmember Folsom led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, and Council member Bean offered a prayer. Doug Willden reported on the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting held March 5, 2002. The first item of business was a public hearing to consider a request for annexation with an initial zone of RP for property owned by Mark and Amy Johnson and David and Shauna Chamberlain. The Commission unanimously voted against recommending approval of the annexation at this time. They had some concerns. One concern was that it would create a large County island. The second concern was that it was a cul-de-sac about 1500 feet long. The third concern was there were some land ownership questions. The property owners were encouraged to come back again after they work out some details. The second item of business was the Preliminary and Final Plat of Briarwood Division No.6. All voted in favor of recommending to the City Council approval of the plat. There were some concerns that came up among the members of the Commission. The first one was dealing with parks, and the second concern was too many cul-de- sacs. The developer was concerned about parks mainly because there seemed to be inconsistency between what the Planning and Zoning Commission is telling him and what the City Council is telling him. Some of the Planning and Zoning Commission members were in favor of smaller parks more local to the homes, which matched what the Comprehensive Plan says. The next item of business was the Final Site Plan for Eagles Landing apartment complex. There were no concerns. There was no vote. There was extensive discussion on R-3A zoning. According to the zoning ordinance, apartments can be built thirty (30) feet back. There are some limitations on the lot, but there are no rules about how far the apartment buildings can be apart. There was concern that, in the future, developments may come in that just line up rows of apartments, and there is nothing to stop them. It was agreed this probably should be looked at so there is no problem. The next thing the Commission discussed was changes to the requirements for parking, which Ron Folsom has been working on. It was decided to discuss the requirements in greater detail at another meeting and hopefully wrap up their recommendations in April. Councilmember Bean inquired about the Site Plan for Eagles Landing. The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Preliminary Site Plan, but the Final Site Plan was not completely ready. When the Final Site Plan comes in, two of the members of the City Council Meeting, March 7,2002 - Page 3 Commission will look at it. The Planning and Zoning Commission did not have any concerns. Public Works Director David Wadsworth explained the site plan would probably not come before the City Council. The developer is ready to get started, and the City Council has seen the conceptional plans. Councilmember Anderson asked if the City Council was supposed to do site plans. She thought the City Council did plats but not site plans. Council member Bean thought the City Council was doing site plans. Tom Hunsaker reviewed the policy adopted by the Planning and Zoning Commission regarding site plans. A Preliminary Site Plan is to be scheduled for review by the entire Planning and Zoning Commission because nine heads are better than two. As long as the developer is moving in the right direction, two members of the Commission will sign off the Final Site Plan. Councilmember Bean thought the City Council would be very remiss for not, at least, looking at site plans. He understands the importance of Planning and Zoning. He does not want to take away from them, but he thinks the City Council ought to have the ability to see site plans. He did not know whether or not the City Council has to approve them. Doug Willden recommended a review of the procedures. Council member Bean cited Wal-Mart as an example. He does not want to see that development go without significant input from the City Council. Maybe the City Council should limit their site plan review to commercial development. A discussion followed and a tentative procedure was agreed upon. The representative of the Planning and Zoning Commission, who comes to report their recommendations to City Council, will bring the Preliminary Site Plan, which has been voted upon by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Any input by the City Council on the Preliminary Site Plan can be taken back to Planning and Zoning for incorporation in the Final Site Plan. The Final Site Plan would not need to come back to City Council as long as there were no major changes. The Site Plan for the Bach Development Apartment Complex behind Edwards Theater was reviewed. Councilmember Anderson explained there was some question about the garage location regarding the rear yard and the side yard of the lot and whether to back up with a zero lot line. However, it was decided that it was okay. Neighboring property is zoned R-3A and there is a good chance that some day it may be developed with apartments. Council member Bean asked if there was any discussion relative to backing up to the school property with a buffer. Maxine Hardy said the developer was planning a fence. Our ordinance does not force the developer to provide a buffer, but the City Council can require a buffer. It was recommended that drainage off a garage does not go over onto someone else's property. The Building Code addresses that problem. The property drainage will go out to Eagle Drive. Engineer Manwill will review the development drawings and make sure the drainage is planned for. In the Ricks' Farm agreement the typical section was shown to include curb, gutter, City Council Meeting, March 7,2002 - Page 4 and sidewalk. They do not install these improvements until the property is developed because they can get damaged. DeRay Perry and his family operated the concession stand at the swimming pool last year. Mr. Perry proposed that they operate it again this year. Basically the contract is the same as before, except they want to extend the hours to be open some evenings. The rental fee is proposed to be $600, and they want exclusive rights by the pool. There are times when there are ball tournaments and other special activities when people come in with stands. That is all right. Last year Perrys provided the City of Ammon with a certificate of liability insurance, and they will continue the liability insurance coverage. Also, they carry workers compensation. Mrs. Perry and their three children are the employees. Council member Folsom moved to accept the proposal from DeRay and Carol Perry for the concession stand at the swimming pool. Council member Anderson seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Folsom - Yes; Anderson - Yes; Bean - Yes. The motion carried. Before they discussed or approved any more home occupation permits, the Council decided how to interpret the home occupation requirement C.C.10-7-8 (B) "No more floor space than the equivalent of twenty-five (25) percent of the ground floor area of the dwelling shall be used in the home occupation." The Council members each expressed ideas for an interpretation of the ground floor area. Engineer Manwill, Public Works Director Wadsworth, and Mayor Ard added input. It was decided to define the ground floor area of the dwelling as being the heated, enclosed shadow line of the building less the garage. David and Dana Russell, 1730 Falcon Drive requested changes to their existing home occupation permit. They want to supplement and eventually replace the day care with a fund raiser business for non-profit organizations, businesses, or individuals. They estimated it would take three to six months to replace the day care. Dana showed an example of the coupon books they would promote. Adding to the home occupation would generate no extra traffic. Basically the operation would involve the family and utilize a telephone, two computers, and a closet. The Russells order the coupon books from a company and distribute them to anyone interested in a fund raising project. Councilmember Folsom recommended setting a deadline for the transition to take place to discontinue the day care and only keep the fund raiser business. This is so two home occupations are not going on indefinitely. The concern is the Council maybe opening the door for multiple home occupation permits in a home. The Russells have a large room built on the back of their house that they use for their day care. It was estimated that 400 square feet of the house is used for the day care. The total ground floor area of the dwelling was estimated to be 2000 square feet. The second home occupation permit would take up a very small amount of space. The Council was interested in revisiting the permit after a period of operation, and the Russells did not object. City Council Meeting, March 7, 2002 - Page 5 Councilmember Folsom moved to grant a home occupation permit to David and Dana Russell for D and D marketing for six months from the date expirable at which time they will come back to the City to present their case. Council member Bean seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Folsom - Yes; Bean - Yes; Anderson - No. The motion carried. Council member Anderson voted no because she thought, if the City was going to let them have two home occupations, they ought to let them do it for a year. The Russells are to have two separate licenses. The next item of business was the proposed home occupation permit for Todd and Terri Johnston. A determination was made as to whether or not Terri Johnston has a current home occupation permit to teach gymnastics. Terri purchased a home occupation permit for 2001, which covered the period from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2001. Since her house was destroyed, a renewal permit for 2002 was not processed. Councilmember Bean was of the opinion that, if in good faith Terri Johnston came in to renew her home occupation permit, our typical policy is to collect the fee of $10 and renew the permit. She, in fact, does still maintain a home occupation permit. The home occupation permit needs to be utilized under the current ordinances. The Council is not here to determine the type of home Terri builds. The Johnstons have the opportunity to build the type of home they want. If Terri wants to use the home occupation permit, she needs to meet the requirements for the permit. When the home gets built, if it does not meet the requirements, the City Council pulls the home occupation permit. A discussion followed. Council member Anderson read from C.C. 1 0-7-8. "The term 'home occupation' shall mean any occupation or profession which may be conducted within a residential dwelling, or allowed appurtenant building, without in any way changing the appearance or condition of the structures and carried on by persons residing therein. Applications for home occupation permits maybe be granted in any residential zoning area of the City." Council member Anderson interpreted this to mean a home occupation goes with the person in the building the City Council granted it for. A home occupation permit ought to be issued to a person for that building, so she did not think Terri Johnston still has a home occupation permit. The permit is tied very closely to the dwelling. Councilmember Folsom believed Terri still has a permit, but the building is no longer there. However, with the new home the Johnson's permit has to be revisited because the structure is changed that the 25% rule was based upon. The City Council has to review that home occupation when the building is done to make sure Terri is obeying the rules. When the motion on the home occupation permit was made in January, Council member Folsom was basing it on what her knowledge of things were. The permit went along with Terri and the land it sat on. It was brought to attention by legal counsel that we have to look at the structure because it could change the percentage rule, which must be obeyed. In January, it was believed, since we were not changing the location of the property and Terri was still the owner, the Council did not have any right but to continue the home occupation permit. This was wrong. City Council Meeting, March 7,2002 - Page 6 Teresa Sturm, attorney, represented the Johnstons. She wanted to clarify that the Council is indicating that the Johnston's permit is in place. The Council will follow the ordinances regarding a review of operation of the premises to be sure it complies with the ordinance. In the event that it does or does not, they will take appropriate action. "Am I understanding it correctly? Is there a permit in place now?" Council member Anderson stated that she believed all the City Council was in agreement that there should be a review take place with a new building. Council member Bean asked the City Attorney to verify what he was saying. Council member Bean believed that our attorney's instructions are that he believes there is a home occupation permit in existence now. The home occupation permit has to comply with the statutes. At present, Terri can not comply with the statutes. She can not have a gymnastics place because there is no building. The home occupation permit is associated with the property at 3760 Georgia Lane. The home occupation permit does not follow Terri no matter where she goes. The physical address has not changed. The address of 3760 Georgia Lane still exists. Teresa Sturm said they would gladly come to the City Office to pay the $10 annual permit fee to renew the license for 2002. Teresa Sturm added that, with the understanding that the home occupation permit is still in effect and the understanding that the City Council is not going to entertain any further action on this agenda item, she would sit down or probably just go home. The Council did not plan any further action. Ray Berry, Stephanie Affleck, Darlene Wenczel, and Arlene Coon (neighbors of the Johnstons) remained at the meeting and discussed issues relative to the home occupation permit. There was concern about traffic. There are no sidewalks on Georgia Lane. It was contended that the traffic issue came up when it became necessary to build a new home. Others contended there has always been a traffic issue because of the Johnston's home occupation. The requirements are too vague on what is excessive traffic. Excessive traffic becomes a safety issue. When the original home occupation was issued to Terri Johnston, the neighbors did not express opposition. It is up to the residents to identify a violation and then the Council can address it. It is hard to prove excessive traffic in a residential neighborhood. Engineer Manwill agreed to do a traffic count on Georgia Lane. Council member Anderson stated she thought what the Council did at the meeting was the right thing. Terri was told that she needs to comply with the requirements of the home occupation permit at all times. The residents were of the opinion that the burden of proof was up to them. It is hard to prove before the permit is in operation. There was concern that a home occupation decreases the value of their homes, but the requirements do not address value. Traffic has not been an issue for two or more years, but now it is. It appears the neighbors do not want the home occupation. The neighbors are worried because it is proposed to be a bigger and better facility. The City Council Meeting, March 7, 2002 - Page 7 neighbors questioned if the City Council honestly believed Terri's operation is a home occupation. The answer was "Yes", if Terri complies with the requirements of the ordinance. Darlene Wenczel asked if the Council would read the letters, which the neighbors had written. She was asked to leave the letters. Engineer Manwill explained details of conducting a traffic study. He agreed to get traffic counts without the house being there. Other counts will be done when the house is rebuilt. Home occupations come under C.C. Title 10, Zoning. If the residents want to bring suggestions of changes to the Planning and Zoning Commission, they will listen. The neighbors would like notification of decisions that affect them. Councilmember Bean asked why the neighbors could not sit down with the Johnstons and negotiate with them as they develop their plans. Another avenue is for the neighbors to enforce the restrictive covenants. Craig and JoEtta Buckhouse, 3015 Fennec Lane, have a home occupation permit for retail sales of window treatments. JoEtta requested permission to add a second home occupation. They have had the window treatment home occupation for about four years. They have had no trouble in the neighborhood. The traffic is low. The home occupation occupies less than 25% of the home. The home occupation basically consists of one telephone and one computer, which occupy a desk in the basement. The Buckhouse residence is approximately 1500 square feet. The second home occupation, which Jo Etta would like to start, is a consulting firm for archeology. It will basically be a telephone line until the consulting firm is up, running, and bringing in enough income to relocate into a business area. The application lists two owners. Jo Etta has a business partner. The partner does not live here and will not be coming to the house. All business is done over the telephone. The window treatment business will be continued. For the consulting business, JoEtta will go to the site, and the sites are located out in the country unless a building issue requires a cultural resource inventory before the building starts. Council member Folsom moved to approve the home occupation permit for a six months time frame for JoEtta Buckhouse, 3015 Fennec Lane, dba Talons Archeology Consulting, due to two home occupation permits in one home. Councilmember Bean seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Folsom - Yes; Bean - Yes; Anderson - No. Council member Anderson voted no because the Council ought to either give or deny a permit but not review it after six months. The motion carried. Council member Folsom asked Attorney Anderson to review our home occupation permit requirements to determine if we should grant multiple home occupations for a residence. Jeff Freiberg of Harper Leavitt Engineering explained a problem with the First Amended Plat of Oak Ridge Division No.1. The City Council approved the Preliminary Plat on July 12, 2001, but the Final Plat was not recorded because it was approved contingent upon finalization of Wal-Mart's property acquisition. The Amended City Council Meeting, March 7, 2002 - Page 8 Plat vacates Emerald Drive and a portion of Chasewood Drive. Tom Arave, owner of Oak Ridge, wants to file the amended plat because he has divided three lots into four lots. He is ready to build or is now building on the four lots. The Title Company is requiring the amended plat to be recorded. It was decided that the plat could be divided. Part of it could be recorded now and part could wait for Wal-Mart. Jeff Freiberg attended a meeting in Boise with the Board of Education. The Wal-Mart project was presented to the Board of Education because Wal-Mart was asking the State of Idaho Department of Lands for an easement across their property, which is controlled by E.I.T.C. No formal action was taken. It was presented to the Board members so they could see it for the first time. The Wal-Mart project will be on the formal agenda of the meeting of the Board of Education in April, which is to be held in Idaho Falls. A formal application for easement was filed for the triangle piece of property in dispute. Also, a formal application for easement has been filed with City of Idaho Falls for the two driveways that will be moved into City of Idaho Falls if they go with the alternate driveway plan. The Idaho Falls application is to be on their City Council meeting agenda of March 14. Council member Folsom moved to approve the First Amended Final Plat of Oak Ridge Division No. 1 contingent upon dividing the plat to enable the plat to be recorded for the property east of Curlew Drive. This divides Block 2 on the north side of Chasewood Drive into four lots to be renumbered 16, 17, 18, and 19. The part of the plat west of Curlew Drive is to be held for approval until the Wal-Mart acquisition is finalized. Council member Anderson seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Folsom - Yes; Anderson - Yes; Bean - Yes. The motion carried. There was a discussion of the land ownership involved in the Wal-Mart project. The history of the land transfers and development was reviewed. Discussion also included working with the City of Idaho Falls to make Wal-Mart happen and what affect Wal-Mart will have on the City of Ammon. Mayor Ard proclaimed April 26, 2002, as the 130th anniversary celebration of Arbor Day in the City of Ammon and urged all citizens to celebrate Arbor Day and to support efforts to protect our trees and woodlands. Further, he urged all citizens to plant trees to gladden the heart and promote the well being of this and future generations. Council member Bean moved to confirm Mayor Ard's proclamation to designate April 26, 2002, as Arbor Day in the City of Ammon. Council member Folsom seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Bean - Yes; Folsom - Yes; Anderson - Yes. The motion carried. City of Ammon is applying for a grant for Arbor Day from the Idaho Department of Lands. The Convenience Store/LubeShop/Restaurant on the corner of 25th East (Hitt Road) and Sunnyside Road is making preparation to open for business. The owners City Council Meeting, March 7, 2002 - Page 9 would like to know if they are to apply for one business license or if they should have three. The Council decided that three licenses would be required. Tom Hunsaker, Doug Willden, Cindy Donovan, and Maxine Hardy plan to attend the Planning and Zoning Workshop in Pocatello on March 16, 2002. The members of the Planning and Zoning Commission asked Councilmember Anderson to discuss with the City Council the provisions for parks according to the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan recommends one neighborhood park centrally located in each one-mile block area so neighborhood kids can come to play and not have to cross the roads. Jay Johnson brought in Briarwood and the Planning and Zoning Commission asked what happened to the park in Briarwood. Jay responded that the City Council asked him to drop the park in Briarwood and participate in a larger community park. It was suggested that City Council and Planning and Zoning get together to be consistent. Council member Bean and Mayor Ard reviewed what happened. This was an isolated issue. Land was donated for a bigger park in Eagle Point, which requires funds to develop. If there is a neighborhood park, the developer will have to develop and donate it. Funds are required to develop and maintain parks. The City Council still wants neighborhood parks, but the funding needs to be worked out to make them happen. There was a discussion about the park in Eagle Pointe. Letters were mailed on February 28, 2002, to the property owners of the County Islands that the City Council has been considering for annexation. Reports: Fire Chief Clarence Nelson reported for the Fire Department. An incident report was distributed. Wal-Mart called to say their safety committee awarded the grant to the Ammon Fire Department. It is a different kind of grant for the Fire Department. The money they are granting Ammon is going to be used to apply back to Wal-Mart for some more money. It is a matching fund project. Throughout the summer they will plan activities to generate more funds. Other department activity has been quiet. Jerry Mitchell called the Mayor to say the service club, which he belongs to, wants to do a fund raising project with the Ammon Fire Department. An example would be a pancake breakfast on a Saturday morning. Jerry would like to know if the Department is interested and, if so, he would like some suggested dates. David Wadsworth reported for Public Works. He talked with Glen Pond of Utah Power to see why the electric meter was taken off Well NO.1. The meter was pulled out, and a plate was put over it. As a result, the pipes inside Well NO.1 froze and the water began spraying all over. The meter was removed because it was believed power was not being used. The meter has been replaced on Well NO.1. City Council Meeting, March 7,2002 - Page 10 Brian Tucker reported on prosecutions. There was a dog bite, and the dog was quarantined. According to the ordinance, a notice was sent to the owner to say that, if we do not get an order to show cause, in ten days the dog will be euthanized. The owner filed a lawsuit against the City to get their order to show cause to determine whether or not it is a vicious dog. Council member Anderson explained the background details. In January the dog was outside and a jogger came by on the opposite side of the road. The dog was chained and he broke chain to pursue the jogger. The dog tore the jogger's clothes. The dog was raised from a puppy in a crack house and was abused. He has burn marks all over him. The dog is four years old, and we were told he has not bit anyone before. He does have a history of abuse. The Animal Control Officer explained to the owners that they needed to make sure the dog did not attack again. However, in February the dog bit the second time. This time it was a guest in the owners' home. Attorney Tucker and Council member Anderson discussed vicious tendency and the ordinance definition of a vicious dog. It is going to be an interesting case, and the date for the hearing was not known. The owners' attorney did contact Brian Tucker before the lawsuit was filed to find out if the City would be willing to let them keep the dog if it went to obedience school or if they pursued other alternatives. Also, the Grandmother called Council member Anderson from California to see if the dog could be shipped out to her. Councilmember Anderson felt the City should support our Animal Control Officer because he is trying to do a good job. Animal Control Officer Jay Glick did not feel we should entertain any of the ideas to keep the dog. It is up to the court to make the judgement call. Councilmember Folsom asked about the dumpsters. She wondered why we did not build more dumpsters because we do not have enough to handle the need. The crew has built six dumpsters through the winter, and they have plans to build more. Public Works Director Wadsworth thought the needs were covered at this time. Councilmember Bean asked if we were collecting the fees for development costs for variances, rezones, conditional use permits, annexations, etc. The City Office is trying to do so. We have been collecting $75 up front and then billing for the rest when the publication costs are determined. Council member Bean asked that the fees be collected up front. There is a need to be consistent with the fees and to establish by resolution a more reasonable cost. The Council would like to review the fees charged and collected for the various developments. Council member Bean also asked about the billing for utilities on the Arave Apartment Complex in Oak Ridge. The apartments are being billed for services. Councilmember Anderson asked about the various fees to help her understand them. She recommended a fee schedule and to add an inflation adjustment to it each year. There was a discussion on fees and the need to have a work session to review and adjust them. City Council Meeting, March 7,2002 - Page 11 Engineer Manwill called attention to an update meeting on the Sunnyside Road project with representatives of Bonneville County, City of Idaho Falls, and City of Ammon scheduled for next Wednesday at 9:00 a.m. One item that will probably be discussed is the frontage road, which City of Idaho Falls has planned to eliminate some of the approaches in the middle of the federal aid project. The contract has been awarded to Chapple Construction for the two small bridges. Applewood Estates has come back to the Sewer District to request to be connected to lona Bonneville Sewer District. Engineer Manwill reviewed the history behind the request and explained IBSD's proposed plan of action. The Sewer District plans to request City of Idaho Falls to expand IBSD's service area to include Applewood Estates. The City of Idaho Falls Library Board is holding a public information meeting on March 19 at 7:00 P.M. to get input into the Bonneville County Library District contract with the City of Idaho Falls. It would be good to have input from the residents of Ammon. An ordinance needs to be adopted prior to April 1, 2002, to make the revisions to the flood plain effective. There is a chance that there will not be quorum for the last City Council meeting in March. As soon as the ordinance is ready, the City Clerk was asked to set up a Special Meeting with a quorum present to adopt it. If we have to hold a Special Meeting, the regular meeting may be cancelled. Mrs. Clarence Nelson has asked for a letter to acknowledge the donation of the tree to the Fire Department. She needs this for tax purposes. It was recommended that Spring Clean Up Week be designated as May 13 to May 18 with the special collection day to be Saturday, May 18. This week corresponds with the dates Idaho Falls has planned, which may help to make residents more aware. Claims were approved. Council member Folsom moved to adjourn the meeting, and Councilmember Bean seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned. Mayor Attest: City Clerk