Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003/09/22 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session CITY OF ST. LOUIS OFFICIAL MINUTES PARK CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION September 22,2003 The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers John Basill, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Sally Velick, Jim Bnmeyer, Paul Omodt and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Staff present: Deputy City Manager(Mr. Harmening), Planning Manger(Ms. Jeremiah); Director of Information Technologies (Mr. Pires); Community TV Coordinator(Mr. McHugh); Director of Inspections (Mr. Hoffilian); Environmental Health Official (Mr. Camilon); and City Clerk(Ms. Reichert). 1. Time Warner TV Franchise Renewal Mr. Pires informed the council that the process for renewal of the Cable Television Franchise with Time Warner had begun and that negotiations could continue for up to two years. As a prelude to the negotiations a number of needs assessments were taking place, one of which involved the SLP Business Community. He introduced Bill Morris of Decision Resources, Inc. to present the results of a business survey on telecommunication needs. Following the presentation, Mr. Pires stated that there would be several checkpoints as we move forward in negotiations for council to be updated on the process. 2. Ornamental Features Mr. Jeremiah and Mr. Greg Ingraham, a consultant working with planning staff,brought forward the proposed amendments to the city's ornamental features ordinance currently being considered by the Planning Commission. Ms. Jeremiah gave a brief history of the issue and stated that the Planning Commission had held a public hearing and a subsequent study session to consider the issue. Mr. Ingraham also stated that an informal survey had been conducted of residents and staff had found that most were not aware of current ordinance provisions and that when they found out what the requirements were, were opposed to the restrictions already in place. The Planning Commission will soon be considering an ordinance which seeks to define permanent versus non-permanent structures and allows for some encroachments. Councilmember Sanger asked what the end result of what we are trying to achieve with the revisions. She was not sure that the current ordinance poses a problem and felt that residents should be able to work with their neighbors in terms of the desirability of ornamental features. Ms. Jeremiah stated that even if the proposed changes to the ordinance were not adopted, council still needed to address the issue of enforcement. Staff was currently enforcing on complaint,but was not proactive in looking for violations of the current ordinance. Study Session Minutes -2- September 22, 2003 Councilmember Basill asked to go through the proposed ordinance provisions to better understand the changes before moving to a discussion about enforcement. Councilmember Brimeyer suggested that the setback be revised to three feet and that any features resident chose to place in their yard would be acceptable. He did not believe that exceptions should be made within the 3 foot setback. Ms. Jeremiah that if a violation of the setback was made and a complaint was received we would need to enforce. We could suggest mediation as an alternative to the parties,but if that failed the city would become involved in an enforcement issue. She also pointed out that if there was a safety issue involved the city would have to step in to enforce. Mr. Hoffman raised the following question to council—If we do not intend to enforce the ordinance in any way, what would be the purpose of having the ordinance in the first place? Council agreed that if standards were set by ordinance the city would be obligated to do enforcement. Mr. Harmening recapped council direction received during the discussion: • Fence permits will continue to be issued • Staff will maintain the current policy of enforcement upon complaint • The ordinance should be simple and clear so that general residents are able to understand it • Council,for the most part, agreed with suggested revisions from the planning commission. However, there was general consensus not to allow anything over six feet of height within three feet of the property line. He stated that the Planning Commission would be considering results of the Planning Commission discussion held at their study session and that the Planning Commission will also provided with Council's observations from the Council study session. The Planning Commission will take both sets of comments into consideration and make a final recommendation to Council. 3. MN Department of Public Health Grant Proposal Status Mr. Hoffman and Mr. Camilon addressed the council providing an overview of the grant proposal and process. If the grant is received, the funds would be invested in more education regarding second-hand smoke, smoking prevention and our ordinance. Councilmember Sanger asked how we might engage the community in the program. Mr. Hoffman responded that there are a number of resources in the community, most notably the park Nicollet Foundation, and that these resources would be utilized to help prepare materials and design program components. She hoped that criteria for measurement of the success of our efforts would be included in the program components as well. Councilmember Brimeyer suggested that Park Nicollet Foundation be asked to participate in those measurements and establishing the criteria for measurement. Study Session Minutes -3- September 22, 2003 Mr. Hoffman stated that the grant funds would be used to reduce second hand smoke, educate our citizens and businesses about the dangers of smoking and to evaluate effectiveness of our programs. 4. Revisions to Board and Commission Procedures Ms. Reichert presented proposed changes to board and commission procedures adopted by council. Council agreed with proposed changes as presented. A letter from the Human Rights Commission was also presented to Council in which the HRC requested that Council consider allowing non-residents to serve as a member of that Commission. Ms. Reichert informed council that the Police Advisory Commission has made a similar request. Council discussed whether non-residents have the same degree of connection to our community as resident members. Councilmembers Sanger and Basill expressed their opinion that living in the community brings not only greater knowledge about the community,but also provides for more opportunities for interaction with other residents. Councilmember Santa believed that persons coming in to the community to work may be more connected that we might think and that seeking out leaders among minority populations may be a valid way to make stronger connections within SLP's minority populations. Councilmember Brimeyer did not believe there would be problems with allowing some members of certain commissions to be non-residents and felt that council could adequately screen applicants through the interview and selection process. He also felt that by excluding non- residents we may be missing an opportunity to make valuable connections to residents that might not otherwise come forward. Councilmember Sanger suggested that the Human Rights Commission may be able to provide the council and staff with assistance in recruiting residents which better reflect our diverse citizenry to serve on boards and commissions. 4. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:32 p.m. o _'�-^'� /L/ Clerk 'ayo