Loading...
Council Minutes 11/01/2001 CITY OF AMMON November 1,2001 Minutes of the Public Hearing and 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, Mayor Councilmember Harvey L. Crandall Council member Leslie Folsom Councilmember Ira K. Hall Attorney W. Joe Anderson Engineer Bill Manwill Public Works Director David Wadsworth Fire Chief Clarence Nelson City Clerk Aleen C. Jensen Others Present: Trina and Tyson Murri, 2155 Cabellaro Drive, Ammon Eric Mittenthal Jerry Phillips, 1530 Falcon Drive, Ammon Spencer McDowell, 1456 Falcon Drive, Ammon David Nelson Wayne Turley, 2120 Cabellaro Drive, Ammon Lynn and Vickie Jones, 1472 Falcon Drive, Ammon Ruth Eddins, 1482 Falcon Drive, Ammon Fail Fielding Neihart Carroll Smith, 1805 Avocet Drive, Ammon Dean C. Brandsetter, 2865 Balboa, Idaho Falls, Idaho Brenda and Curtis Johnson, 2125 Cabellaro Drive, Ammon Dennis, Kristy and Derek Whitmill, 3460 Senoma Circle, Ammon Robin and William Umphlette, 1840 Heather Lane, Ammon Colene Flamm, 2935 Chasewood Drive, Ammon Sid Beattie, 1910 Avocet Drive, Ammon Cameron and Camille Clukey, 1850 Spencer Lane, Ammon Paul and Jean Byington, 1855 Sabin Drive, Ammon Vickie Salisbury, 1815 Sabin Drive, Ammon Garde and Beverly Bowman, 1960 Sunflower Circle, Ammon Orland Bailey, 2810 Salmon Street, Ammon Deone and Phillip Ball Gawn Reid, 3235 Ross Avenue, Ammon Mike DeVries, 1830 Heather Lane,Ammon David and Sarah Lenon, 2186 Eagle Point Drive, Ammon. Dan Ruddell, 4222 East Cochise Drive, Idaho Falls City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 2 Joseph G. Cabrera, 1905 Cabellaro Drive, Ammon Wendy Horman, 1860 Heather Lane, Ammon Ken Lembrich, 2640 Salmon Street, Ammon Absent: Council member W. Lee Bean Councilmember Folsom led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag, and Councilmember Bean offered a prayer. The first item on the agenda was a Public Hearing to consider repeal of and amendments to Title 10, Zoning ordinances, concerning liquor by the drink. Notice of the Hearing was published in the Post Register on October 17 and October 24, 2001. Mayor Ard opened the Public Hearing and swore in parties in interest who wanted to present testimony. Ron Folsom was asked to introduce the proposed changes and to report on the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission. Revisions were recommended for Chapters 20, 21, and 22. The change in Chapter 20 was to delete 10-20-2(E) "Beer parlors and taverns, as a secondary use only, when incidental to such uses as clubs and lodges." Item E was recommended for deletion because clubs and lodges are not an allowable use until Zone CC-1. In Chapter 21 a clarification of use was added. Item 10-21-2(J) is to read "To serve liquor by the drink, and beer and wine by the drink, at retail upon premises as a secondary use only wherein the primary operation of the premises is as a restauranUcafe in the business of preparing, serving and dispensing food and beverages wherein such premises do not have an age restriction imposed by any chapter within Title 23 of the Idaho State Code." Title 23 addresses whether or not a person needs to be 21 to go in the establishment. In Chapter 22, it was recommended that 10-22-2(A) reads, "Any use permitted in the RSC-1, C-1 and HC-1 zones." It was also recommended to delete 10-22-2(N) "Beer parlors, taverns." If the recommendations are approved, sale of liquor by the drink would be allowed only as a secondary use with restaurants and cafes. Another change proposed, which does not have anything to do with liquor, was to 10- 4-4 to amend our ordinance to require notification of property owners within five hundred (500) feet for public hearings. The Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing on October 2, 2001, to consider the proposed changes. All of the changes were discussed. There was some City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 3 public input. Dan Ruddell opposed the changes because he felt he was being limited in what he could use his liquor licenses for. After the hearing was closed and the Commission discussed the changes, Chairman Greg Maeser voiced a concern about whether or not we ere being too restrictive. Attorney Anderson believed that we were okay. The Commission then voted unanimously to recommend the changes. The hearing was opened for public testimony. Dean C. Brandsetter, an attorney in Idaho Falls, spoke against the resolution as it was drafted. His residential address is 2865 Balboa Drive. His office address in P. O. Box 51600, Idaho Falls, and the street address of the firm is 510 D Street. He had significant concerns. The concerns he had go back to 1999 when the City of Ammon, through Mayor Ard, sent a letter to the Idaho Department of Law Enforcement Alcohol Beverage Control. The letter stated "Pursuant to a request for information we have received, you are advised that since the adoption of the 'Idaho Liquor Act', there has been no action taken by the City Council of the City of Ammon, Bonneville County, Idaho, or by any vote and election held thereon, to restrict the issuance of a license to sell liquor by the drink or to refrain from considering an application. No petition was ever filed with the City of Ammon to call for an election to prohibit the sale of alcoholic beverages." It would appear that the City of Ammon, by engaging in the Planning and Zoning decision, is engaging not in a legislative action, but in an action that is appropriately before the voters of the City of Ammon. The City of Ammon through you is deciding you are not going to allow alcohol or beer establishments in the City of Ammon. The proposal relegates to only one particular area and then only regulates it as a secondary use. This is somewhat interesting because, at a meeting on August 2, Mayor Ard stated the City is concerned that the liquor licenses issued to Dan Ruddell, to Vicky Ruddell, and to Mindy Pratt were not being used. The quote says "it is unfair for businesses or individuals who want to use them." Yet the City is now engaged in the very action of prohibiting the use that these licenses were designed to facilitate. Another part of the quote that Mayor Ard identified is that the City of Ammon's economic development would be hindered by Mr. Ruddell sitting on the licenses and not using them. Now Mr. Ruddell and his family members have engaged in a variety of different actions designed to utilize these liquor licenses. In each step in these proceedings, the City of Ammon has put stumbling blocks in their way. Now the City has gone so far as to essentially place a prohibition. The action has the potential of being defined as arbitrary and capricious and invites litigation. The City of Ammon is going to put itself in a situation where they are going to guarantee that they will be sued. The City is essentially eliminating the ability to operate a variety of City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 4 different businesses, which are clearly legitimate under the laws of the State of Idaho. You are eliminating lodges, tearooms, dance halls, amusement establishments, entertainment entities, motels, hotels, clubs, bars, taverns, cocktail lounges, bowling alleys, billiard pools, and recreational facilities in City of Ammon. You are severely restricting the ability for such businesses to make money. The fact alcohol can be sold in an establishment is a significant draw. There are two establishments now operating in the City of Ammon, and they have not caused any problems. If the City is trying to promote economic development, this action does exactly the opposite. Specifically he suggested that the City Council has created some arbitrary classifications. It is going to be subject to different interpretations of what constitutes secondary use. There is language that is potentially conflicting between each of the zones. City of Ammon has authorized, by its ordinances, to allow liquor by the drink to be served in the City. Planning and Zoning is an inappropriate forum in which to make a decision. It should properly be before the vote of the people. He would much rather see it put to the vote of the people than to have an arbitrary standard by which we determine that the big businesses on Hitt Road are going to get it. He did not think it appropriate that we engage in Planning and Zoning solely for the purpose of providing a liquor license to Sol Rio. Robin Umphlete, 1840 Heather Circle, voiced the support of her family to adopt the zoning amendments recommended by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Businesses do not need to serve alcohol to be successful. The amendments to the zoning ordinances will enhance the existing business and residential properties yet will not deter principals of our small town. Camille Clukey, 1850 Spencer Lane, commended the Planning and Zoning Commission for recommending approval of the changes even though they did not have a lot of support at their meeting. She would like to see the changes made so the zones could be better classified and better qualified for the residents who would like to keep businesses, who have alcohol as their primary source of income, away from Ammon. The proposed changes would be well taken. She believes, if it were to go to a vote, the general public would probably support the change. David Lenon, 2186 Eagle Pointe Drive, questioned how the City is going to regulate secondary use. Will there be a section of our City government that will go to these establishments and look at numbers? Who is going to determine what is considered or classified secondary use? Do we have any plans going forward before making the zone change about how secondary use is regulated? City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 5 Attorney Anderson stated that he did not think it was appropriate that the City Council answer questions. Mr. Lenon can pose a question and leave it as a question. Mr. Lenon said he would leave it as a question, because who is to say it is a secondary use and why does it have to be only to food. For example, why can't an Ameritel Inn have a lounge? With all the promotion for tourism, City of Ammon is discouraging tourists to stop because they can't get a drink. It should be an individual choice whether or not they want to have a beer. He could put in a hotel, but there is no way that he could offer his clientele any sort of entertainment with an alcoholic beverage. He questioned if those in opposition are speaking for the general public. Let's put it to a vote and let everyone have a chance to vote. Let's give it to the people not just the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council to decide. There are plenty of businesses that survive without selling alcoholic beverages. However, it does give a business another chance to succeed. Running a small business now is extremely hard because of the high overhead. They are not asking anyone to come to the business, but they want to be able to offer it to those customers who are interested. He also had a problem with why change the ordinance to notify property owners within five hundred (500) feet rather than three hundred (300) feet. If you are public elected officials and you speak for the public, "let's let the public speak." Carroll Smith, 1805 Avocet Drive, expressed opposition to the change. Everyone talks about how this is going to affect our values. He would like to have the option to go have a beer. If somebody else does not want that option, that is his or her decision. He does not want to force his values on somebody else like this change is doing. He may not agree with someone holding liquor licenses, but that is up to the State to deal with. It is not an issue for Planning and Zoning. He would like it put to a vote. Ron Folsom asked to clarify some things. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended changing the notification area distance because, through the years, people have wondered why they did not get notified. It was usually because the individuals were outside the three hundred (300) feet notification area. It just broadens the notification area. The issue keeps coming up that the City Council is throwing roadblocks in front of Mr. Ruddell. Ron Folsom could not think of any roadblocks the City has put there. First, Mr. Ruddell came and requested a rezone or a variance on a parcel of land zoned C- 1. That issue was scheduled for a public hearing, and the day of the hearing the City Council received notice from the property owner that he did not want his property changed. The City cannot act if the property owner is against. Mr. Ruddell's request was for a sports grill. The changes recommended do preclude him from putting in a sports grill. It requires him to meet the restaurant definition in Title 23 of the Idaho State Code. It is reachable. The attorney said we were taking out clubs, fraternal orders, dance halls, and bowling alleys. It does not specify bowling alleys in our City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 6 ordinances so it is not known where they would be allowed. Clubs, fraternal societies, and dance halls are allowed in the CC-1 zone. The CC-1 zone would allow alcoholic beverages as a secondary use. Food plus alcohol is a better use than alcohol plus alcohol. This was not brought up because Sol Rio does not have a liquor license. This was brought up because, over the last several years, Planning and Zoning and the City Council have gone through the ordinances to make a number of changes. It was believed that the zoning pertaining to liquor licensing needed to be looked at. We are a residential community. Most of our commercial is close to residential. David Lenon asked if we were saying that City of Ammon could substantially support five restaurants with liquor licenses. He believes there is no way Ammon can support five, and we cannot rely on Idaho Falls for support. Who is to say that food and liquor is better than activity and liquor? Why can't there be any other activity than food? For clarification, the change from 300 feet to 500 feet is just a matter of who gets the notification. The change regarding liquor is an issue that needs to go before the general public. It is the only fair way to do it. Joe Cabrera, 1905 Cabellaro Drive, has been to a lot of meetings and he has experienced problems with bars. City of Ammon has plenty of time to grow. Once an establishment gets there it just keeps growing and you can not do anything about it. David Lenon added, if City of Ammon has plenty of time to grow, why did the State of Idaho determine that as a community we were capable of taking on five liquor licenses? Gamille Clukey added that she has learned that food will help to dilute the alcoholic effect. Also, she understands that the State of Idaho has the regulation over whether or not food or alcohol is the primary source of income. It is up to the City to decide if that is taking place. It might be difficult to audit the records. She proposed it might come about by a citizen going to the City Council to ask about a business and request an audit. The other option would be to have it on a mandatory basis that records are turned in at regular times for review. Carroll Smith stated we are in Idaho. We are not in Utah. We have a good tight knit community, and we are all responsible adults that can make our own decisions. "I want an alcoholic drink and I don't want food." He has been in emergency services for nine years, and he has seen the worst DUI accidents you can imagine. He has also seen more restraint from people than he has seen from accidents. He believes, as a community, it is our responsibility to take care of our actions not force our values on other people. We are hindering economic development for Ammon. He was excited that Mr. Ruddell was ready to put in a business to create jobs and to create income. City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 7 We are turning away money for our City. We are all adults. If we want a drink, we should be able to get one. "Let's put this to the public for a vote." Paul Byington, 1855 Sabin, stated he did not agree with the statement of Mr. Smith. We do not have to have alcohol. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council have not gone far enough. We are a residential community, and we are interested in maintaining a good community for families. He believes there are many successful businesses that do not serve alcohol that we can invite to Ammon. He encouraged the City Council to do what they feel best. You have been elected by citizens. You were supported at the last election, and you can make the proper decision. Dan Ruddell, 4222 Cochise Drive, stated the residents do not want liquor licenses, but the City Council allowed liquor by the drink. For the last five months he has been trying to open up an establishment with three liquor licenses. To add three more restaurants, they all are not going to make it. He had concerns on the secondary use only and restricting it to restaurants. There are a number of other activities that can be performed with alcohol being the secondary use. It is a personal preference whether you eat, drink, don't drink, dance or whatever. It needs to be left open for the businesses to thrive. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council have opposed him since day one. He is asking for help to get his licenses activated. The restaurant business is a tough business. He believed someone from the City Council got hold of the State to make sure his licenses were activated. Mr. Ruddell purchased his first license in December 2000, and the State of Idaho told him that it could be left inactive until he was ready to go into business. Seven months later he gets a letter that the licenses have to be activated. Council member Hall challenged the statement that the City Council required the licenses to be activated. Dan Ruddell discussed meeting with members of the City Council, and he questioned some of their references to him being an opportunist or unethical. Attorney Anderson told Mr. Ruddell that it was not appropriate to put such questions to the City Council. Certain individuals have pushed to have Mr. Ruddell activate. Now the same individuals are trying to close the door so he loses the licenses. Mayor Ard stated in the Post Register that it is unfair for businesses not to be able to use the licenses, but Mr. Ruddell believes the City Council is trying to handcuff him in every area. He asked for diversity and to not establish liquor as a secondary use only to a restaurant. It is not feasible to all be restaurants. City Council Meeting, November 1,2001 - Page 8 Garde Bowman, 1960 Sunflower Circle, stated that it sounded to him like we are dealing with a lot of unknowns. There is no harm in opening a business, but he does see a lot of harm in opening pubs. If the State says Ammon is qualified to have five, the State ought to take another look. He encouraged checking the statistics on the harm alcohol does. Robin Umphlette suggested statistically checking out liquor and food versus liquor. The Planning and Zoning Commission did not oppose the use of the license, but they did put some regulations on. This is a small town, and we have to have some sort of a box to put the businesses in if we give them carte blanche. She does not believe we have law enforcement to handle people just drinking. David Lenon asked who should be notified at taking a second look regarding liquor licenses for Ammon. Councilmember Hall suggested that we are trying to talk about whether or not we want to change the zones. We do not have a lot of experts on whether beer, wine, and food are going to cause accidents or not cause accidents. I'm not sure this is relevant to what we are trying to do. If there is not any new information, close the public hearing. David Lenon said every bit of information is some sort of new. He proposed that the City Council postpone its decision until someone can come forward and say this is what needs to happen. Wayne Turley, 2120 Cabellaro, stated the proposal has been made that the sale of liquor helps to pay the rent. He has a friend who has a very successful business that had a liquor and tobacco license. He went way out on a limb, and he cancelled the liquor license and quit selling tobacco. He is now doing extremely well. Ron Folsom asked to clarify about the City Council contacting the State. When Ron found out that the liquor licenses had been issued for businesses that were not operating, he knew that in July 1980 there were some changes to the State liquor laws. He went to check and, in fact, the State had told that within a reasonable amount of time the licenses had to be put into activity. He then contacted Legislator Lee Gagner. For the record, no one on the City Council, except for his wife, knew that he was doing it. He did not do it as a Planning and Zoning Commission member. He did not do it as someone involved with the City. He did it because he felt that, if those three licenses are going to be issued, they should be used. There are reasons behind it. One of them is economics. We do gain money off liquor that is sold in the City. In most cases, if licenses are purchased and then held, the holder expects to profit. It was believed that a quote in the Post Register mentioned Mr. Ruddell holding licenses and down the road he expected to make about $100,000 each. There is the $100,000 that a small business owner needs to open. That is according to Ron's logic. The City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 9 licenses definitely should never be issued until there is a business. Mr. Ruddell did nothing wrong in buying the licenses. He did exactly what the State told him he could do. When you go through Idaho Code Title 23, the State of Idaho violated over and over again items in their statutes that the legislature had written for them to follow. That is why Ron addressed it. That is why Ron has been talking to Legislator Gagner about revisions to the alcohol statutes. Ron started it and the City Council knew nothing about it for probably five weeks after he took it to Lee Gagner. Mayor Ard called for additional information. There was none so he closed the Public Hearing. He asked the City Council if they wanted to discuss the issue or if they wanted to take action. Council member Folsom asked to speak in rebuttal to statements made. A few people asked why the City Council had the right to make the changes. The Council has the right to make changes because they are elected officials. If in the future it is felt to be unjustly served, the citizens have the right to vote the officials out. The elected officials are there because the citizens can not vote on every law that is passed within our City. That is why the Council creates ordinances. That is why they try to make everything obedient and appropriate for the majority of the population. Zoning has always been and always will be protected through the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. We have to have laws governing the zone. Liquor is one of the items governed by zoning. We have restrictions. For example, the R-1 zone protects the resident from having businesses move in next door to them. We have different zones to protect citizens from whatever in different areas. For that same reason we will always protect you with beer or liquor or whatever else comes. The proposed change from three hundred (300) feet to five hundred (500) feet for the notification requirement is something the Council thought was needed. In Ammon three hundred (300) feet did not reach a lot of residents to let you know about public hearings. State law says we only have to go three hundred (300) feet. We felt Ammon residents deserved it to go further. So steps have been taken to make it five hundred (500) feet for notification for any public hearing. That is in the benefit of all our citizens so, when we are involved with something big, we are able to involve more homes. As to why we are looking at these ordinances now, we have always had and have been taking a stance. When we come against something that we are trying to make a ratification of or to make a change to an ordinance, we look at the whole ordinance to see if we have anything that needs to be clarified or revised. We have been doing that with the parking ordinance to correct a number of things that were inappropriate. We are trying to correct our ordinances to bring them up-to-date. Although Mr.Ruddell thinks that we are trying to pick on him, the changes have nothing to do with him. We City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 10 are looking at the ordinances, and we are making the adaptations that are needed for our City. As far as state legislation, Mr. Ruddell thinks we are putting up stumbling blocks. Again none of this is against Mr. Ruddell. The stumbling block started with the State Legislature. They created Title 23. If Title 23 were obeyed to the strictness of the rule, he would not have been able to get the liquor licenses that he got. However, they got issued because the State Director did that. What City of Ammon is protesting and taking a stand on is we are trying to ratify the law and to get the State Legislature and the State Director to obey the laws that the Legislature passed down. We have had opinions by the Attorney General who is backing the City up. We are trying to make the laws be obeyed properly. His stumbling block on the C-1, for the location he was trying to do by Kmart, was that the property owner never agreed to the rezone. Mr. Ruddell had no right to try and go in to do that. As far as availability, the Sourdough Pizza Place was available. He could have gone in there. That was in the proper zoning of HC-1. He has every right to do that. He has not gone there. That was his choice and not ours. The State law allows a liquor license for every 1500 of population. As we grow, we will get one extra license for the City of Ammon. Whether or not these licenses get issued depends on the businesses that come into the area. Mr. Ruddell talks about the ordinances being a stumbling block. He has never brought to the City Council a plain bar. He has always stated a sports bar. This would still be allowed with our new ordinances going into effect. Again we are not affecting Mr. Ruddell. Councilmember Folsom said she would like it to be stated that we are not trying to affect him. We are trying to take care of the ordinances best for the City of Ammon. Regarding drinking separate, Council member Folsom appreciated the comments about keeping the beer separate from the food. "I do drink. Put that on record. I do not have a problem putting that on record. I do believe in being able to have a drink when I want one. However, we are not restricting that. You can go into Texas Roadhouse and have a drink if you want. They just happen to have food as their main premise. We are not restricting you from going in and having liquor by the drink and walking out that door. We are just making it governed within a restaurant facility. I think that is very appropriate. That is mainly all I have to say on the situation. I wanted to clarify." City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 11 Council member Hall agreed with everything Council member Folsom said. Again he emphasized that the ordinances were being looked at before we knew who had the licenses or whether they were or were not available. This was because we were reviewing all of the licenses. The part about the liquor came up because of the practice that we had put in as we had given the two licenses to the establishments on Hitt Road. Rather than just having a policy of the City Council the way we were doing business, we thought we ought to solidify it in an ordinance. We asked the Planning and Zoning Commission to come up with some recommendations for changes to the ordinances. We have discussed it for sometime, and we are not rushing into anything. Also, we are not trying to block anybody. The establishments can still go in the City of Ammon. The zones have changed. We have zones where you can sell liquor by the drink. "I do not know why Mr. Ruddell thinks we are trying to block him. I have no animosity against him or against a sports bar in the City of Ammon if it meets the zoning requirements and the other requirements of the City." We are abiding by the laws. The Attorney General has interpreted the law. We have not done anything except change a couple of the zones where you can have liquor by the drink. Businesses can still go in. Councilmember Hall objects to Mr. Ruddell saying the City wants him to put the licenses into practice. The City Council has never encouraged anyone to put liquor by the drink into the City of Ammon, and we will not do so. It is up to the individual business owner to look at the opportunities in the City and decide he can or can not establish a certain type of business. Councilmember Folsom clarified that the State law says that a license has to be put into force and put into use within six months. Our protest, as far as the City of Ammon, is that Mr. Ruddell was getting up to that point and none of the licenses were being put into use. We were saying either obey the laws of the State or turn the licenses back. The licenses need to be put in force the way Idaho Code Title 23 reads, or they need to be released back. Mr. Ruddell has every right to release the three licenses, and then go to the State to make application to obtain them the official way that Title 23 has been written by the Legislature. "He has every right to go and do this the proper way. We are not stopping him. We will not stand in his way, but he has got to do it the way the law is written." Councilmember Crandall asked what the Council wanted to do. Mayor Ard said there are some options. The Council can act on the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Council can request that it be put to the vote of the people as suggested. Councilmember Hall stated his feelings are that the Council has discussed it enough, and the Council has a sense of the community so he would like to vote on the recommendations. All of the City Council agreed. Council member Crandall recommended that each chapter to be amended be considered separately. City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 12 Council member Crandall moved, in reference to Title 10, Chapter 20, C-1 Limited Business Zone, to delete paragraph 10-20-2(E). We have no clubs or lodges in the City of Ammon. Council member Hall seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Crandall - Yes; Hall- Yes; Folsom - Yes. The motion carried. Council member Folsom moved that in Title 10, Chapter 21, HC-1 Highway Commercial Zone, we add to 10-21-2 paragraph (J) 'To serve liquor by the drink, and beer and wine by the drink, at retail upon premises as a secondary use only wherein the primary operation of the premises is as a restauranVcafe in the business of preparing, serving and dispensing food and beverages wherein such premises do not have an age restriction imposed by any chapter within Title 233 of the Idaho State Code." Councilmember Hall seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Folsom - Yes; Hall- Yes; Crandall- Yes. The motion carried. Council member Hall moved that in Title 10, Chapter 22, CC-1 Central Commercial Zone, 10-22-2(A) Any use permitted in the RSC-1 to add "C-1 and HC-1 Zones" and to remove section (N) which states beer parlors and taverns. Council member Folsom seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Folsom - Yes; Hall - Yes; Crandall - Yes. The motion carried. Councilmember Folsom moved to accept the amendment to 10-4-4 to restate the base from three hundred (300) feet to five hundred (500) feet for notification of a public hearing. Council member Hall seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Folsom - Yes; Hall- Yes; Crandall- Yes. The motion carried. Attorney Anderson advised that the Council needs to adopt an ordinance to make the ordinance changes effective. Vickie Jones, 1472 Falcon Drive, represented the Pheasant Estates Homeowners Association. She is the treasurer. Pheasant Estates is a 47 -unit condominium development located north of 1 ih Street on Falcon Drive. They have been part of the City of Ammon for over twenty years. Their property is in the R-2A zone. On September 21, they received a letter from Council member Folsom, which stated that they would immediately be receiving their third increase in utility fees in a one-year time. The utility fees have increased from $29.36 per unit in September 2000 to $40.36 per unit in September 2001. This is an increase of 35%. They feel the final increase was levied in error. The condos are very small. They each are about 1000 square feet. They do not house large families. The majority of units are occupied by one or two people. They have concerns that they are paying virtually the same rate as a single family home with yards and weekly curbside trash pickup. The smallest buildings have three condo units and the largest buildings have eleven units. The common grounds contain no more landscaped area than four to five homes at the very most. They contend that they should pay the rate enacted in February 2001, which was $34.61 per unit. As a condominium homeowners' association they provide a number of economics for the City of Ammon. They have three dumpsters instead City Council Meeting, November 1,2001 - Page 13 47 individual pickups. The City sends one monthly utility bill instead of 47 individual bills. The City has no non-payment problems. The City does not have to keep track of move-ins and move-outs. They asked the Council to rectify the billing error. Councilmember Folsom said when she talked with the President of the Homeowners Association that she understood the units have 1-1/2 to 3 baths per unit. Every unit has individual laundry facilities. The units are three stories with a basement, a middle section, and upstairs rooms. Mrs. Jones commented that Palisades Park, which is across the street, has units with two and three bedrooms, 1-1/2 to 2 baths, and laundry facilities. They have eight units per building. She believes they are considered as apartment units according to the schedule of monthly charges for City services, which was effective January 2001, for apartment buildings of three are more units per building. Pheasant Estates residents do not think they are any different than Palisades Park residents. Councilmember Crandall asked if Pheasant Estates was asking for the apartment rate for utilities. They have always been billed at the apartment rate, and they are asking to continue with that rate rather than the homeowner rate. It was estimated the rates would be less then $6 different. The City can not make any distinction between sizes of residences, sizes of apartments, sizes of families, amount of garbage, or the amount of garbage usage. The only distinction the City makes is by class of unit. Ms. Jones says they have been in the apartment class, and they believe they should stay in the apartment class. They are not single family homes. They are very, very different from single family homes. There was a discussion about the difference between the Pheasant Estate condos and the two-unit townhouses being built by Jay Johnson. Ms. Jones could understand the rates for two units or less per building, but the other rate is for three units or more per building. Pheasant Estates has three or more units per building. Councilmember Folsom stated Pheasant Estates is classified as condominium units. Council member Crandall moved to have Attorney Anderson look at the issue. Discussion continued and action was not taken on the motion until later in the meeting. There are as few as three units per building and as many as eleven units per building. Out of seven buildings, there are two buildings with three units. The issue is, even though they are individually owned, they are handled as one. Councilmember Folsom pushed the importance of billing consistency throughout the City. The Council has done a complete review of all of the rates for water, sewer, and City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 14 garbage in the whole City of Ammon. Pheasant Estates is the only condo unit in the City. Spencer McDowell lives at 1456 Falcon Drive in the Pheasant Estates condos. He stated that they have received the last couple of bills with a late charge on. However they received the bill ten days after the late charge was due. If the attorney decides Pheasant Estates is to billed as separate units, they want to a separate bill sent to each unit. If the dumpsters are going to be used, then the City should fix them. They want lids on the dumpsters, They want them painted, and they want them put in the right place every time. Time is of an essence. The Homeowners Association needs to have a determination on the rate as soon as possible before their meeting on November 13. Councilmember Crandall moved to defer the decision on the rate for Pheasant Estates and to let Attorney Anderson look at the issue. Council member Hall seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Crandall - Yes; Hall - Yes; Folsom - Yes. The Homeowners' Association was promised an answer by Friday, November 9. The Council will meet on November 8 to canvass the election, and a decision can be made at that meeting. Gawn Reid, 3235 Ross Avenue, requested a home occupation permit to manufacture iron decorations for lawns or gardens. He showed a sample of his work. It is a hobby. He has read the home occupation requirements in C.C. 10-7-8, and he can comply with them. He explained the details of his occupation in his application. There will not be any employees. He does the work in his garage. He does not sell out of his house. He takes the finished products to craft shows and garden nurseries. The work is completed with hand tools, which will fit in a small toolbox. The welder is a quiet wire drive and welds cool. There is no fire hazard. The permit can be reviewed at any time if there are any problems. Councilmember Hall moved to approve the home occupation permit for Gawn Reid, 3235 Ross Avenue. Councilmember Crandall seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Hall- Yes; Hall- yes; Crandall- Yes; Folsom - Yes. The motion carried. Councilmember Crandall moved to approve the minutes of City Council Meeting held August 23, 2001. Councilmember Hall seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Crandall- Yes; Hall - Yes; Folsom - No. The motion carried. Councilmember Crandall moved to approve the minutes of City Council Meeting held September 6, 2001. Council member Hall seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Crandall- Yes; Hall- Yes; Folsom - No. The motion carried. City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 15 Councilmember Crandall moved to approve the minutes of City Council Meeting held September 13, 2001. Councilmember Folsom seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Crandall- Yes; Folsom - Yes; Hall- Yes. The motion carried. The General Municipal Election for the City of Ammon will be held Tuesday, November 6, 2001. The City Council is scheduled to meet Thursday, November 8, at 6:00 P.M. to canvass the election and declare the results final. The appeal period on the revisions to the Flood Plain is over and the proposed revisions become final on April 2, 2002. Basically the revisions take the Peterson Park area out of the Flood Plain. There was a question about whether or not the Council needs to adopt an ordinance to make the revisions effective. Attorney Anderson was asked to review the information and recommend if any action is necessary. Reports: Chief Nelson reported for the Fire Department. The repeater is up and running. They are going to start programming their radios. Within one week everything will be kicked over to the repeater. Chief Nelson has requested information on the Cobra training program. The volunteers handed out candy to the kids on Halloween. There were a lot of kids. The new fire truck should be in Ammon between November 9 and November 12. When Chief Nelson is notified the truck is in town, he tells Lake City who he wants to certify the pump. It has to have a certification, and a representative from Salt Lake will do the certification. A check in the amount of $134,882.00 will be ready to pay for the truck as soon as the certification is completed. David Wadsworth reported for Public Works. About half the dirt collected at Well No. 7 has been hauled to fill the hole at Well No.9. The topsoil that came out of the hole at Well No.9 can be used. The well head for No.9 is supposed to be out for bids. Attorney Anderson has drafted an ordinance on trees from the information Ron Folsom prepared. Copies were circulated for the Council to review. The ordinance should be scheduled for adoption at a future meeting. Council member Crandall had some concerns about arsenic in the water. He thought that perhaps we should be thinking about some action. However, he discussed the problem with David Wadsworth and Bill Manwill. Ammon's tests show we are below the recommended level so there should not be a problem at this time. Engineer Bill Manwill reported they are advertising for bids on the Sand Creek bridge on Sunnyside Road. Bids are scheduled to be opened December 5. That will be the first construction on the Sunnyside Road Project. He will not be here for the Planning and Zoning Meeting on November 13 or the City Council Meeting on City Council Meeting, November 1, 2001 - Page 16 November 15. Wal-Mart is on both agendas so he would like to sit down with Tom Hunsaker and Ron Folsom to review the traffic study. Mayor Ard reported on the Wal-Mart meeting with representatives of Wal-Mart and City of Idaho Falls. Wal-Mart brought in the conceptional drawings, and they brought in their traffic engineer. Some suggestions were given, and the Wal-Mart representatives planned to review them. It seems like they are doing everything that Idaho Falls wants. However, Ammon needs to be addressed. It is interesting to note that the traffic study was completed before the Sonic Drive In opened. A discussion followed. Claims were approved. Council member Crandall moved to adjourn the meeting to an Executive Session to discuss personnel matters. Councilmember Folsom seconded the motion. The regular meeting was adjourned. Mayor Attest City Clerk