Loading...
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - MINUTES - 6/12/2003 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - CITY OF MUSKEGO Approved 7/24/03 MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD JUNE 12, 2003 Mayor Slocomb called the meeting to order at 7:08 PM. Also present were Ald. Petfalski, Buckmaster, Damaske, Patterson, Salentine, Madden and Schroeder, and Clerk-Treasurer Marenda. Those present recited the Pledge of Allegiance. The Mayor noted the meeting was noticed in accordance with the open meeting law. Ald. Salentine moved for approval of minutes of the 5/8/2003 meeting. Ald. Patterson seconded. Motion carried. NEW BUSINESS Janesville Road Signs Atty. Jon Fredrickson appeared on behalf of the Salentine dealership on Janesville Rd. He said his understanding under section 6.09 of the Zoning Code is that there is some grandfathering of existing signs and asked if that was a correct interpretation. Mayor stated there are some signs that are currently grandfathered. Atty. Fredrickson said the dealership has been in Muskego since 1927 and has contributed to the community and is an employer of the community. With the economy now, businesses are struggling. What’s happening with the Janesville Road project is a great thing, bringing more business to the community and it’ll be safer. Unfortunately, the businesses are going to suffer, including the Salentine dealership. The Salentine sign has been there a long time and until now hasn’t caused any problem. When the road is widened they have been told they have to take the sign down. Currently the sign is grandfathered. Apparently 6.09 of the zoning code says they’ll have to move it and rebuild it. There are other businesses along the road that will be affected also. The dealership may lose business just due to the road construction. Now, they lease the sign from GM with a long term lease and low lease payments of about $211/month. If the sign is torn down and a new sign erected, they will have a new maintenance lease at an extra charge of at least $1,000 a month, which has a large economic impact. He felt it was not the intent of the City when enacting 6.09 to have grandfathered signs knocked out. He requested an exception to 6.09 as there currently are exemptions for political signs, holiday decorations, etc. and the grandfather clause. He asked that all businesses along Janesville Rd. affected by the road-widening have their grandfather clauses that are existing not be nullified if the sign needs to be moved purely for reasons of road expansion. Ald. Salentine asked for clarification of 6.09. She understood if the sign were damaged more than 50% of the value, or if they were building a new one, but asked where it said because of the road being widened and it had to be moved that that is a substantial change. Mayor read from 6.09 (2) which in part read “no sign shall be erected, re- erected at a new location, constructed, altered or maintained”. Ald. Salentine asked how far the sign needed to be moved. Ald. Petfalski said about 50 ft. since it’s in the right-of-way now, and he was given permission to put the sign in that location by the State when it was a State highway. E. J. Salentine stated a maximum of 50 ft. Ald. Petfalski said he would like to find an exclusion in the existing ordinance as whatever is done for this sign will affect other signs along Janesville Rd. including the downtown area. Mayor stated the purpose of having this issue on the agenda is to look at potential impacts and get a sense from COW if they wanted any changes to the ordinance. The Committee of the Whole Page 2 Minutes of Meeting Held June 12, 2003 issue is there are a lot of existing freestanding signs along Janesville Road out to Racine Ave. There’s nowhere you can put a 40 ft. sign under current regulations. All the signs will be issues. Do we want to come up with some way of addressing this because it is happening involuntarily? Ald. Patterson said it’s nice to have standard sizes and the new look. If someone chooses to move their sign they need to adapt, but he had a problem when they are being forced to lose their grandfather status. Ald. Schroeder asked the committee to bear in mind they have a nice looking sign, but there may be signs we don’t like. Ald. Patterson wants to be fair to the people even if it means a couple signs out of place. Ald. Petfalski said if we do make an exception for moving signs that are displaced due to road relocation, you’ll never replace any signs along Janesville Rd. and they won’t fall into our Design Guides. Ald. Petfalski said Planning staff is staunchly against making any exceptions. Ald. Buckmaster discussed other communities, like Greendale when revamping their downtown area had the businesses add a colonial frame around their existing signs so the architecture still flowed, but businesses with a history didn’t lose their original signs. He asked for staff research along that line to retain the historic affect in the Tess Corners area. Ald. Salentine suggested checking with the Mayor’s Task Force to see what their aspirations were for the design guide. Ald. Petfalski questioned if the County had given the Salentines' a timetable for removing the sign. Ald. Schroeder asked what part of the sign doesn’t conform to 6.09. Mayor said pole signs are really restricted – height and size issues. Ald. Schroeder asked Atty. Fredrickson if any part of the sign is changed, does it nullify the existing lease. Ald. Buckmaster asked he specifically check on adding a frame around it. The attorney said he would look into it and report back. Ald. Petfalski requested Planning staff to report to the committee on what other communities have done in similar situations, including Calhoun Dr. in Brookfield. Atty. Fredrickson stated under (2) of 6.09, it could be up to interpretation of “re-erected at a new location”. Is the sign in question really leaving its location, or is it just being moved back. Possibly the committee could take the position that re-erecting a sign on the same lot, would not be covered by the ordinance. Or it could be stated that signs over a certain height limit, could stay or be re-erected. Ald. Buckmaster asked if the attorney’s interpretation was taken on moving the sign, would that apply to just the height restriction or to the Design Guide as well. Ald. Petfalski said Dustin has to interpret the code. Mayor added if denied by staff, it could go to Board of Appeals. The Council could consider adding exceptions if desired. Atty. Fredrickson was requested to inform the committee of the date the County requires the sign to be moved. Ald. Salentine commented on the requirement of GM for a certain height sign and asked if the height of the sign could be lower because of the higher elevation when moved back? Atty. Fredrickson said he will ask GM. Mr. Salentine said that he believed his contract with GM required that sign to stay. Mr. Salentine said they cannot afford any more space for a broad-based sign, and need to stay at the perimeters of the existing sign. The inches to be moved are less than 10 inches. That’s all the sign needs to be moved. Ald. Petfalski said if that’s all it needs to be moved he had less concern about adding an exception, and would sponsor an ordinance. The committee stated previous discussion indicated it would have to be moved a maximum of 50 ft. Mr. Salentine said it’s already back over 39 ft. and only Committee of the Whole Page 3 Minutes of Meeting Held June 12, 2003 needs to be moved 10 inches. Mr. Salentine asked if the City would pay for moving the signs. Mayor indicated “no”. Ald. Petfalski suggested asking the County. Atty. Fredrickson stated he would report back to the committee the exact inches or feet that the sign needs to be moved. Mr. Salentine said when the gentlemen were putting in the water main and measured, they said the sign had to be moved less than one foot. The committee expressed interest in a potential change to the ordinance to allow relocation if one foot or under. Discuss Extension of Lease – Big Muskego Lake Boat Launch Ald. Petfalski asked if there was interest in an extension of the Big Muskego boat launch lease to add 99 years to the lease. The indication was “yes”. The Mayor stated he would request an opinion from Atty. Molter as to who must be approached to negotiate. He will also find out what impacts to the City this would have. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Status of High School Athletic Fields Ald. Petfalski reported the maintenance agreement is close to being finalized. The proposed building will be reviewed by Plan Commission next Tuesday. Discuss Status of Old Muskego Settlement Centre Ald. Schroeder presented and explained his proposed changes to the Facilities Agreement. Ald. Buckmaster had a procedural question about what is referred to Parks and Recreation Board and what authority they had. Mayor explained that the Board submits a budget for Council approval. Once that budget is approved, the Board can use the funds to manage the parks. The Parks Dedication Fund is separate from their budget. Ald. Schroeder moved that the proposed changes be submitted to the Parks and Recreation Board for their approval, and if they have concern about the above and beyond costs in the proposed changes they can discuss with the Muskego Historical Society. Ald. Patterson seconded; motion carried. Clerk-Treasurer Marenda presented a proposed change to the Facilities Agreement to address the sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages at the Old Town Hall. A number of amendments to Chapter 26 relating to this issue in all parks, including the Old Town Hall were also reviewed. The amendments to Chapter 26 have been approved by the Parks and Recreation Board. Ald. Schroeder moved to amend the Facilities Agreement to include the changes proposed by Clerk-Treasurer Marenda. Ald. Damaske seconded; motion carried. th Marenda noted the proposed amendments to Chapter 26 would be on the June 24 Council agenda for first reading. On the status of the Old Town Hall, Mayor stated a second opinion would be obtained on the structural condition. Ald. Damaske questioned the removal of the fascia and what would be done with the roof to prevent water from getting in. Mayor advised he would find out and inform the aldermen. Ald. Petfalski asked who was managing this project from the City. Mayor advised the Building inspection Department has been doing the inspections. Ald. Buckmaster asked how much it would cost to have a point man to get this building ready for occupancy. Mayor said the Building Inspection Department would not pass the safety of the walls and solicited an opinion and bid. Don Pionek is working with the Historical Society and the City to get this Old Town Hall project accomplished. Ald. Buckmaster felt someone who reports to the Mayor should Committee of the Whole Page 4 Minutes of Meeting Held June 12, 2003 manage this project with punch lists, etc., to get this project done for the Fall Parks and Recreation programs. Ald. Schroeder noted informally that person has been the Mayor. Mayor explained the need for a structural opinion after the Building Inspector would not sign off on the safety of the structure. Ald. Buckmaster said he supported the use of the Old Town Hall for use by Parks and Recreation. To date he has not seen an outline of what needs to be done, what has been done, a financial analysis and date to be completed. He wants to know what it will cost right now to use this facility this Fall, and a person in charge who will report to the Mayor. Ald. Petfalski said we have had many timelines and missed them all. The importance is keeping the cost as low as possible. He agreed with a point person, and could have the Mayor continue or someone from engineering. Mayor noted it would have to be subcontracted. Ald. Madden noted no one has done a serious analysis of what the outcome will be. It’s too late to start a full-blown methodology. Ald. Buckmaster felt it should be determined what we want to do, such as have it finished by a certain date, then manage it to get there. Mayor advised the ground rules were established to get it done at minimum cost. To do it as a full-blown City project will make it very expensive and require public bidding. It was started as a Historical Society project. After they started, we came up with other uses for the building. Ald. Petfalski noted the City originally committed a certain dollar amount and the Society was going to fund-raise. They approached the City last year and said they just couldn’t do it. The only way we supported the added City dollars is to use the facility for Parks and Recreation programs. Ald. Buckmaster requested a copy of the plan and financials and would like to see a timeline and costs. Ald. Schroeder moved to have Don Pionek meet with Dawn Gunderson to work out a spreadsheet and timeline, and have them attend a Finance Committee meeting on 6/24 at 6:30 PM. Ald. Petfalski seconded; motion carried. New Berlin Drainage and Storm Water Issues Nothing new to report. Mayor will find out if the soil borings have been done. Discuss Streetscape – Gateways to City of Muskego Nothing new. Discussion will continue after budget time. Continued Discussion on Durham Drive – McShane to OO The Common Council approved the alignment Tuesday night. This issue can be removed from the next COW agenda. Will be further reviewed at budget time. Lake Fees Study Committee Update Mayor reported one more session is needed with Mr. Erdmann. The report will then be ready for a joint presentation to the aldermen and the Lake District. Further Discussion Regarding Open Space Requirement on OLS Lots in Relation to Possible ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) Requirements Mayor advised City has done nothing further. The individual involved has applied for a building permit for a house and he believed it has been issued. Committee of the Whole Page 5 Minutes of Meeting Held June 12, 2003 Update on Creation of Wisconsin Municipalities Health Care Trust and Consider Membership The City has already taken action to consider. The Finance Director has reported RFP’s are being requested for a third party administrator. NEW BUSINES Review Customer Service Survey Reports – Planning and Parks & Rec Ald. Salentine stated they are working well. Committee asked that more surveys be sent out from Planning – at least 20, instead of the 6 sent out, to solicit comments from “Joe Citizen” contacts with the department. Good feedback was received on the Parks and Recreation surveys. It was noted they were also available at the P & R window, in addition to the mailings. Ald. Schroeder moved to further this process and have Planning have surveys also available at their counter. Ald. Buckmaster seconded; motion carried. Review Status of State Budget Deficit Relative to 2004 City Budget Mayor updated the committee on the State Joint Finance Committee action, which now includes a 3-year tax levy freeze. The motion made by that committee was distributed. MISCELLANEOUS Ald. Salentine asked about getting a Taco Bell in Muskego and what was restricting a franchise from locating here. Mayor said he would obtain that information. It was noted that Dr. Drury offered a group tour of Muskego High School and the committee expressed interest. Ald. Buckmaster moved to adjourn at 9:53 PM. Ald. Madden seconded; motion carried. Respectfully submitted, Jean K. Marenda, CMC Clerk-Treasurer