Loading...
PL 11/09/1977 - 30479CITY OF FRIDLEY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING . NOVEMBER 9a �977,., � ` CALL TO ORDER• Chairperson Harris called the regular �Tovember 9, 1977, Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:49 P.M. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Oquist� Harris, Schnabel, Langenfeld Ms. Suhrbier, sitting in for Mr. Peterson arrived at 8:43 P.M. Members Absent: Mr. Bergman (represented by Mr. Oquist) Mr. Peterson (represented by Ms. Suhrbier) Others Present: Jerrold Boardman, City Planner APPROVE PLAIVNING_COMMISSION MINUTES: OCTOBER 19 1977 MOTIOIV by Mr. I,angenfeld, seconded by Ms. Schnabel� to ap�rove the October 19, 1977, Planning Commission minutes. Mr. Langenfeld commented that the City Counci� was trying to repeal the 4/5 ruling vote on double bunc�alows being bui'lt in•an R-1 zone. He wanted to know why. Mr. Boardman said that the City Council was trying to repeal � the whole thing. They wanted to do away with the Special Use Permit provision. He said this would result in not allowing double bungalows/duplexes in an R-1 zone. , '�'! Chairperson Harris said that there was an alternative to that situation. He said they should leave the thing alone and just vote NO once in awhile, ,� UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye,: the motion carried unanimously. The Planning Commission minutes were approved at 7:51 P.mo MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Mr. Oquist, that the Planning Commission receive the Environmental Commission minutes of October 18, 1977� Mso Schnabel referred to page 9 of the minutes, fourth paragraph. She did not agree with Ms, Sporre statment that the government ought to get into the recycling program before private businesses dido Ms. Schnabel felt that the private businesses should t�e care of the business. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 9� 1977 Pa�e 2 Mr. Langenfeld explained that �hen the statement referred to 'i`_ "government" they were actually speaki�g of the possibility - that the City of Fridley could pick up garbage, etc. and then recycle it for a profit thereby dEfraying the cost of doing such a thing. He said that the money obtaiaed could be used for the betterment of the City of Fridley. He said that the statement had been made as a matter of discussion. Mr. Langenfeld asked the Commission to eliminate the Parks and Open Space Plan discussion from the minutes, and that he would bring the items to the attention of the Commission at the time they discussed the Parks and Open Space Plan Mr. Langenfelt referred to pages 10 & 11 of the minutes, the "Environmental Education Consortium��. He said that the Parks & Recreation Co�mission minutes also made reference to that subject. He pointed out that Mr. Peterson had made a statement that before they got totally ingolved in this item, �he Commission should make a commitment one way or another. Mr. Langenfeld said that he had reacl the book on the Consortium and. that it was most informative. He said basically what was trying to be done was to utilize the existing educational processes that exist in the City to press a better environmental education. ^- Mr. Lan.genfeld said that as a Commission they were only trying "° to approve such an idea and urge the proper bodies to implement that type of procedure as was being suggested by the Environmental Education Consortium. Chairpersor�.Fiarris suggested that if they wanied to contact somebody in the District about curriculurn, the Curriculum Coordinator was Tom Myra. UPON A VOICE VOTE, a11 voting aye� the motion carried unanimously. The minutes of the October 18, 1977, Environmental Commission minutes were received at 8:00 P,M. MOT y Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, `�hat the Planning Commission receive the Parks & Recreatioa Commission minutes of October 24, 1977. Mr. Langenfeld wan.ted to know what S.C.O�R.P. stood for, He said it was referred to on Page 10 oi the minutes. Mr. Boardman said it stood for State Conference Outdoor Recreation Plan. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVENIBER 9� 1977 P age 3 Mr. Langenfeld made reference to page 57 of the agenda. �""� He said that it was the first step on the ��Environmental Education Consortium��. � �� UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, the mation carried unanimously. The October 24, 1977, Parks & Recreation Commission minutes were received at 8;04 P.M� RECEIVE' AP'P�AI,S COMMISSION MINUTES; OCTOBER 2 1 MOTION by Ms. Schnabel, seconded by Mr. Oquist, that the Planning Commission receive the Appeals Commission minutes of October 25' 1977. Chairperson Harris asked about the item in the minutes regarding the reducing of a lot size from 7500 square feet to 7220 square feet. Ms. Schnabel said. that in the particular case the lot �as land locked. She said there was no opportunity for the person to purchase any adjacent land. She said that there were no objections from any of the affected neighbors. Ms. Schnabel said that the Commission had had no problems with the request. She said that the house he intended to put on the lot would have met all the required setbacks. She said that the only reason that a front yard varian.ce had been requested was because none of the other houses on the street were setback 35 feet. He wanted the five foot variance tn move his house up the five feet to be more ���sistent with the other houses. UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting aye, unanimously. The October 25� 1977, minutes were received at 8:10 P.M. the motion carried Appeals Commission �• R�CEIVE MEMO TO HUMAN RESOIIRCES COMMISSION FROM JERROLD BOARDMAN DATED OCTOBER 31, 1977; ADMINISTRATIVE ST.AFF REpRESIIV'TATIVE TO THE HUMAN RESOURCES COMMISSION MOTION by Mr. Oquist, seconded by Ms. Schnabel, to receive the memo to the Human Resources Commission from Jerrold Boardman, Mr. Boardman explained that soon after the Human Resources Com�ission started operating as a Commission they had requested that the Administration not send anyone from Staff. He pointed out that the Coffimission now had a different Chairperson and that it had been requested th.at a Staff person be proaided to the Comffiission. UPON A VOICE VOTE, all voting ayes the motion carried unanimously, The memo was receiged at 8:12 p�M� PLANNIIVG COMMISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER , 1977 Pa�e 4 2. RECEIVE MEMO TO PI,ANNING COMMISSION FROM JERROLD BOARDMAN �` DATED OCTOB�R 31s 1977; RE; WORK SCHEDULE FOR 197? and 1978, MOTION by Mr. Langenfelds seconded by Ms. Schnabel� to receive the memo from Jerrold Boardman. Mr. Boardman explained thai what was being attempted was that Staff would complete their regiew about a month prior to the indicated dates. He said that they had a liffiited amount of time because most of the items had to be completed by December 31� 1978� He explained that they would be working on a�adeadline�� basis. He said that Staff would attempt to get the issues into a workable form at least one month prior to the dates and get the information out to the Com�ission members. He said that member commissions would have approximately one meeting tiffie to discuss the items. He said that if they required more time they would have to have special meetings. Chairperson Harris felt that Staff was being very optimistic. Mr. Board�an said that the list was things that HAD TO BE �NE. Several of the member of the Commission questioned items � on the Work Schedule. Mr. Boardman explained what each of the questioned. items were about and what was to be accomplished. Mr. Langenfeld suggested that each Commission review the Work Schedule an.d decide which items they �►ish to have meetings scheduled for. Ms. Schnabel agreed that they only need to have meetings on the items that they �ould be concerned �uith; the one that would most effect each Commission. Mr. Board�an felt that each Commission should indicate which items of the Wor.k Schedule they would like to reveiw before the Plan.niag Co�mission. Mr. Oquist said that it would ��force�� the chairpersons to keep the meetings moving as far as the discussions keeping to the subjects being discu.ssed. UPON A VOICE VOTE� all votiag aye� the motion carried. unanimously. The Work Schedulsd was received at 8;42 p,M. � PZANTTING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVF��IBER , 1977 Pa�e 5 � 3. CONSIDERATION OF REPEALING SECTION 205.051� 3� D� OF THE FRIDI,EY CITY CODE: UNDER USES PERMITT�D WITH A SPECIIIZ USE PEl�NIIT IN R-1 �ONING: DOUBZE BUNGALOV�S� BUT ADDITIONAI�LY A CONCIIRRING VOTE OF 4/5th OF THE COUNCIL SHAZL BE RE�UIRED FOR THE COUNCIL TO TSSU� SIICH SPECIAL USE PE�IIT. � Mr. Boardman explained that the City Council realized that the Planning Commission was working on the Zoning Code; however, they wan.ted this item to go through immediatel�. Chairperson Flarris said that there may be certain instances where a double bungalow may nicely fit in an R-1 district. He said there were several along East River Road that were nicely done and they real�y did fit in. He felt that the easiest way to hanclle the item would be to vote N'0 on the double bungalow requests that wouldn't be acceptable in an R-1 district. Mr. Oquist felt that there were times when a double bungalow was probably most desirable for the lot a.nd location. He also said that the best control would be to vote NO on the requests that wouldn�t be acceptable. Mr. Boardman e�lained that if a double bungalow would go ^ into an R-1 area� then the City Council wants a rezonir�.g rather than a Special Use Permit. He said that there shouldn�t be a mixing of R-1� R-2 and R-3�s in the same area. He said that it �vas hard to encourage private investments in residential areas where there is this mix of zonings. Mr. Boardman also iaclicated that there were instances where double bungalows did fit nicely into residential R-1 areas. Chairperson Harris explained that in a rezoning and a variance the burden of proof falls upon th.e petitioner. He said that in a Special Use Permit the burden of proof for denial falls upon the City. Mr. Boardman said that the public hearing process is very similar fbr the rezoning and the Special Use Permit. He said that the City Council had the authority to call a public hearing at that level. He went on to explain that in most of the cases where the City Council clenied the Special IIse Permit request, the owner of the property has not challenged the decision and they have then constructed single family dwellings on the property. � PLANNING CONIMISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 9 19�'7 Pa�e 6 Ms. Schnabel felt that they would really be limiting things �� by cutting out the Special IIse Permit an.d go strictly to a rezoning. Mr. Langenfeld said that in the past six months they have seen this problem come up more frequently. He didn�t feel that it was going to occur that frequently in the future because of the availability of space. He said that he preferred the Special Use Permit because of the control they had. over it. Mr. Boardman said that space was a big problem. He said that in the near future a lot of the areas (such as downtown.) will be going into multiple use type.areas. Ms. Schnabel cited arn. example of NE Minneapolis where there is a r�sidential street on which you have a number of duplexes mixed in with the single family homes. She said that it provided alternative housing in residential areas for those people a�ho are unable to afford a single family house of their ov�n,� She said that all the housing appeared to be compatible. She said that there were probably a lot of good reasons why we should coasider putting duplexes into residential areas. She said that the most difficult problem would. be ��selling�� the idea to the adjacent single family residents. Ms. Suhrbier said that on France Avenue in Minneapolis, there was a nicely plan�.ed area of double bungalows, She said it was done attractively with very little opposition from the adjacent home owners. MOTION by Mr. Langenfeld� seconded by Ms. Schnabels that the Planning Commission recommend not repealing Section z05.051, 34 D� of the Fridley City Code: Under Uses Permitted with a Special Use Permit in R-1 Zoning: Double bungalows' but additionally a concurring vote of 4/5th of the Council shall be reguired for the Council to issue such Special Use Permits. Mr. Langenfeld said that the inflationary trends could put a definite burden on a property owner. He said that he liked the control they had by the Special Use Permit, He said that he was not in favor of the rezoning procedure. He also said that the public hearings would bring out the negative and positive elements of the given properties in which a proper review coulcl be held. UPON A VOICE VOTEa all voting aye the motion carried unanimously, � PLANIVING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVII�iBER 9s 1977 Pa�e 7 � 4. CONTINIIED: PROPOSED HOIISING MAINTENAlVCE CODE Mr. Boardman indicated that �he Housing Maintenance Code had been put into Ordinance form and had been sent to the City Attorney. He said that h.e had. talked to the City Attorney and had been told that there didn't appear to be any problems with the content of the Ordinance. The City Attorney had said that there were a few changes to be made in order to make the Housing Maintenance Code more acceptable in a Court of Law. Fie said that �he Ordinance would be clean.ed. up and put in fi�nal form before it went to City Council. -MOTI�N�by Mr. Langenfeld, seconded by Mr. Oquist, that the Planning Commission rec6mmend to City Council the approval of the proposed Hou.sing Maintenance �ode with the necessary Iegal-changes and that a reviewal pro�ess be set up to take place in December of �979. Ms. Schaabel said that before the proposed Housing Maintenance Cod.e went to City Councils she had been requested by the Human Resources Commission to relay to the Chairperson the fact that the Human Resources Commission had been promised an opportunity to review the Housing Maintenance Code before it �ent to Council. She said that the Human Resources Coffimission had been told that they would be able to re8iew the Housing Maintenance Code after the Planning Commission � and before it wer�.t to City Council. She said she was making that request for the Commission that they have the opportunity to review the Housing Maintenance Code. Chairperson Harris sai.d -that the Planning Commission could make their recommendation to the City Council and then the Human Resources Commission could review the proposed Housing Maintenance Code in the interi�. He said that the Plan�ing Commission would then only have to receive the minutes of the Human Resources� meeting and then City Council would have the proposed Housing Maintenance Code along with the recommendations from the Human Resource Commission. Mr. Oqu.ist asked what if City Council received the proposed Housing Maintenance Code before the Human Resources Commission had a chance to revie� it. Chairperson Harris said that they would make sure that the Human Resources Co�mission had an opportunity to review the proposed Housing Main�enance Code before it went to City Cou.ncil. � PZANNING COMMISSI�N MEETING - NOVEMBER , 1977 Pa�e 8 � Chairperson Harris felt that the proposed Housing Maintenance ' Code aaould be a good ordir�.ance to put a��self-destruct�� section in it. He suggested saying that this Ordinance is valid until December 31, 1g80' or something on that order. He said that at ihat tiffie it would automatically be repealed unless it was continued by either the City Council or Staff. He said that it would be nice to ��try" the ordinance to see how it worked. He said that if it didn�t work we119 then it would have to be changed. He said that there wasn�t anything that forced the changing of ordinances to be sure that they '�worke d" . Mr. Boardman said that they had the option at any time to change the ordinances. Chairperson Harris said that it seemed that charnges didn't occur unless there was an imminent disaster pending. Much discussion took place at this point regarding the puttiag of a��time period.�' on the proposed Housing Maiatenance Code. Chairperson Harris said that the proposed Housing Maintenance Code looked like a good code. He said it was an entirely different issue as to ii it would actually 19work". i�`` Chairperson Harris said that the Code treacied very closely on some constitutional rights. He wanted to be sure that they didn't get too far into �'left field'� on the Code. He said that the housing stock should be maintained. in the best manner possible; however he didn�t u�ant the people�s rights -to be abridged either. He said because of that, the proposed �ousing Maintenance Code had to be tried for a certai.n period of time and then it has to be reviewed. � Ms. Schnabel felt that a definition for ��Grad.e Levelro should be included in the proposed Housing Maintenance Code�s definitions section. Mr. Boardman said that there was a definition for Grade Level in the Building Code and he said that that would cover for the Housing Maintenance Code. Ms. Schnabel said that in Section 220.065' Iteffi 4 b) should be b) .,,��to prevent the ingress or egress of rodents to or from a building. Ms. Schnabel said that in Section 220.07, Item 1 C, should read, C. A stoae or similar device for cooking food, and a refrigerator or similar device for the safe storage of food, shall be properly maintained with all necessary connections for safe, sanitary, ancl efficient operation. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 9, 1977 Pa�e �•�, Ms. Schnabel questioned the legality of requiring that the owner ' or an authorized agent to be in the seven-county metro area. She was referring to Section 220.113 Resident A�ent Required. Mr. Boardman said that the City Attorney clidn't haee any probl ems with the ite�n. Chairperson Harris said that it could be made part of the stipulations since licensing was involved. Ms. Schnabel indicated that there were many sexist statements made throughout the Housing Maintenance Code. She hoped that they would be removed. Mr. Boardman indicated several items that had been taken out of the Housing Maintenance Code that Staff had re-added. Ms. Su.hrbier felt that Section 220.065, item 2 Minimum Heating Standards, should be changed. She suggested that ti�e item read, "...,Portable heating equipment employing flame or the use of liquid fuel does not meet the requirements of this section and is prohibited...,." Chairperson Harris said that the enactment of the Housin.g Maintenance Code would be based on the enforcement of the Code. He said that he was sure City Council would have to know how � the Code would be eaforced before they will act on the item. He asked Mr. Boardman how the proposed Housing Maintenance Code would be enforced. Mr. Boardman said that most likely the fire inspectors would be given the added responsibility of enforcing the Housing Maintenance Code. He said that it was felt that most likely one additional Inspector would be hired and they Would all be trained as to what to look for and consider when they make their inspections. Chairperson Harris requested that an.Enforcement Policy including the methods and costs should be v�orked out by Staff before the proposed Housing Maintenance Code goes to City Coun.cil. Chairperson Harris said that if the money couldn't be obtained to enforce the Housing Maintenance Code� then ii �Q�l.d�.'t be worth the paper it was written on. Mr. Boardman said. that Staff would work on a Policy of Enforce�ent including �ethods and cost. r� PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 9� 1 77 Pa�e 10 � UPON A VOICE VOTE' all voting aye� the motion carried unanimously. The Planning Commission recommended to City Couacil the approval of the proposed Housing Maintenance Code with the necessary � /", legal changes and that a reviewal process be set up to take place in December of �979. MOTION by Ms. Schnabels seconded by Mr. Langenfeld� that the Planning Commission requested staff to bring to the next Planning Commission meeting a Policy of Enforcement state�en� including the methods and costs for the implementation of the Housing Maintenance Code. Upon a voice vote, all voting aye' the motion carried unanimously. MOTION' by Ms. Schnabel' seconded by Mr. Langenfelds that the Housing Maintenan.ce Code in the Ordinance form be sent to the Human Resources Coffimission for their review. Mr. Boardman said that Staff bvould let the Human Resources Commission know wh.er�. the Housing Maintenance Code would be sent to the City Council and in that way they will know exactly how long the� have to do thei� review. UPON A VOIC� VOTE, all voting aye, the motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Harris declared a ten minute break at 10:2,5 P�M� 5. CQNTINUED: PARK & OPEN SPACE PLA.N Mr. Langenfeld began the discussion by indicating the changes that the Fridley Environmental Commission had proposed when they reviewed the Parks and Open Space Plan. Mr. Langenfeld indicated that on P age 1, 3rd paragraph, the second sentence could be cha�.ged to read, �QThis increase in participation and recreation has been especially noted in the areas of outdoor recreation.o� The Planning Commission members agreed with the change. Mr. Langenfeld suggested that on page 2, the first paragraph., that the sentence be added at the end of the first paragraph, "This demand will increase even further because of the energy crisis.o' Also he said that on page 2, the last paragraph, the first sentence should read� ��This plan is a supplement to the City�s Comprehensive Development Plan. and fulfills the Mandatory Planning Act requirements for a park and open space element in the cityTs comprehensive planning,�� The Planning Commission members concurred. PLANNING COM1�iISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 9� 1977 Pa�e 11 �"`',:�'' Mr. Langenfeld indicated that on page 3� the last sentence of the third paragraph should read� ��Finally' policies define the means that shall be used to achieve the objectives.�a He also indicated that on page 3, the last sentence of the fourth paragraph should read' �PIf followed, these goals and objectives should move the City of Fridley closer to a completely integrated system of parks and park d.evelopment.�� The members of the Planning Commission were in agreement. Mr. Langenfeld informed the Planning Commission of the changes that the Environmental Commission wanted to make on page 1�. After much discussion of the suggestion, it was decided that on page 1�, under the heading OPEN SPACE:' item #Z would be reword.ed to� ��2. Provide proper canservatioa management for natural open space areas.�� The Planni�g Com�ission was in agreemeat with the reworciing. Mr. Langenfeld indicated that on Page 5, the second sentence of the second paragrapha should read, ��Each of these neighborhoods has been designated on the basis of major traffic, r�atura�feature or land use barriers separating them.t� The me�bers of the Planning Commission agreed. The Environmental Commission wanted to change the wording of item 3, on page 17, The Planning Commission did not agree , A.lso� they war�.ted to change the wording on page 17, item 10. They wanted Item 10 to reads ��Some of Fridley�s parks lack attractiveness and character. T�ie ffiembers of the Planning Commission agreed with the changes to item 10. Mr. Langenfeld said that some of the Commissions wanted to take some of the negativis� out of the Plan. The Environmental Commission suggested the adding of an item under the 14Findings�� o f Ob j ective 2, in the t�Summary of Fimdings�� section of the Parks and Open Space Plan. After much discussion the Plan.ning Commission members decided to ffiake the '�Findiag19 suggested by the Environmental Commission into two separate ��Findings��: � Methods for conservation of energy are not beiag practiced. Methods ior the protection of facilities from vandalism are not presently being used. � PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVE�IBER 9� 1977 Pa�e 12 The Plan.ning Commission next discussed page 20 of the Parks �� and Open Space Plan. Mr. Boardman ind.icated that a general criteria had been set for the way that park systems would. be funded. He said that they would set policy th.at would be on a 1-100 point scale. He said that with the design of each of the park sysiems� they would develop the point scale and set it on the basis of acquisition and development. He said that there would be a break down a percentage of funding that would go to each acquisition and development based on that point scale and set a priority on it. Chairperson. Harris made mention of the chart on the bottom of page 20� He referenced the section on Neighborhood. areas and especially item 2 9/Acquisition of park land adjacent to existing facilities in order to increase overall useability��. He said that when one considered the neighborhood parks, he wanted to know what City planned to do - take someone�s house?! Mr. Boardman said that it was evident that there were definite problems in the neighborhoods, He said. that the only way to solve the problem at hand was to do something about it. He said that that could mean using some of the Federal monies for acquisition and relocaiion. �. Chairperson Harris said. that politically, the acquisition of park land through condemnation of private land� especially the taking of houses, would be ��dynamite�'. He said that it woul d. ao t �� swing►, � - . - . . . Mr. Boardman said that in some cases acquisition and relocation �ould give the people the opportunity to get out of their house and out of soffie of the areas. He said that the people r�uld. be given �15s000 to relocate in add.ition to the market value of the house. Discussion went to various areas of Fridley and h.ow the people are served by the park system. MOTION' by Ms. Schnabel� seconded by Ms. Suhrbier, to limit the d.iscussion on the Parks & Open Space Plan until 11:55P.M. IIpon a voice votea all voting aye the motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Harris suggested that Ite� 2 under Neighborhood areas on the Chart at the bottom of page 20 of the Parks and Open Space Plan be brought to the attention of the City Council at the next conference meeting in order to get � their feelings on the item. Mr. Boardman said that he �ould arrange it for the earliest possible Conference Meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION �EETING - NOVEMBER , 1977 Pa�e 1 The Planning Co�ission next discussed page 21 of the P arks and Open Space Plan. Mr. Boarclffian indicated that example type statements would be deleted from the PZan. After much discussion of items A and B under the Recommendations ol° Objective 1 of the Policy an.d Recommen.dations section of the P arks and Open Space Plan, it was decided to change the wording to, A. Special IIse: Provides specialized or single purpose recreational activities that should be located where needed and appropriate and are design.ed to standards appropriate to the particular use. . B. Linear Parks: Areas adequately developed for oae or more modes of recreational travel which provide maximum use for protection of resources and should be located where the trail resource occurs and link components of the City�s recreation systeffi and/or facilities. The discussion of the Parks and Open Space Plan was continued until the next Planning Com�ission meeting at 11:45 P.M. ��@Y` �`rom M_r_ .TE?rrnl rl Rnarr7m� Mr. Boardman explained that the purpose of the meeting was to let the neighbors know that City hadn't forgotten them. He sai.d that they would discuss the process that they would be going through in the nex-t couple of months ia the development of the neighborhood.. He said that they would also �uan.t to encourage the develop�ent of a neighborhood committee. He said that the Planning Commission didn�t necessarily haee to be at that meeting. IIPON A VOICE VOTE� all voting aye� the �otion carried unan.imously. The letter �ras received at 11;50 P.M. The Plannin ecision ma ze me� ers � Commis � e City Council re ardir� the Si n ommission were mos disappointed. PL�NNING C_0_MMISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 9. 197� p a�e 14 Ms. Schnabel said that she �as �ery disappointed. She said �'`"�' she felt very sorry for the number of citizens that worked on the Sign Ordinan.ce. She said that many hours had beea spent on the Ordinance and that all that time and effort had `"gone out the window�,. She felt it was rather tragic that ihose many people spent that much time for naught. She felt that at some point the City Council should have called a halt to the Ordinance work and not wasted all the time of the people. Mr. Langenfeld said that if the Commissions are going to spend time on such items and then just get �ashot down14� they may as we11 forget it. He made �ention of a previous statement that he made that said the if the �.eeded Commissions can't function the way they sh.ould, then why should they exist. Ms. Schnabel said that it was discouraging to the people that put a 1ot of time into it. She said that in the future it may be hard to find volunteers who will be willing to put ti�e and effort into a projects like that if they find that they aren�t goiag to get an.ywheres with it anyways. Mr. Langenfeld saiol that it was an insult if it was just given to the Planniag Commission for something to do. Chairperson. Harris said that the Sign Ord.inance was initiated by the Planning Commission to be reviewed. Ms. Schnabel said that the City Council should have told them not to bother. Mr. Oquist said that the City Council completely disregarded what the citizens wanted, which tivas really too bad' because that is �rho the Council was elected by. Chairperson Harris said that Mr. Sobiech and he had spent a considerable amount of time �rith the Chamber of Commerce explaining the Ordinance and aiding them in their deliberations. He said that ihey had agreement with them as far as Special Use Perffiits went and some other items. He said. that the Chamber had many different ideas than the Ordinance had. There was much discussion regarding the items that were granted by the City Couacil. This discussion mainly touched on the ��billboarci�� subject and the manner of handling the non-conforming signs� since the Special Use Permit was going to be dropped. It was decided by the members of the Coffimission that all signs would HAVE to meet all the requirements. Chairperson Harris said that he planned to go to �he second �"� _ reading of the Sign Ordinance and that he was going as a "private citizen�� and not as ihe Chairperson of the Planniag Commission. He ielt that there were items of the Sign Ordinance as passed by the City Council that treaded on his Constitutional rights. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING - NOVEMBER 9� 1977 Pa e 15 �`-'\,-�, ADJOURNNIII�TT . MOTION by Ms. Schnabel� seconded. by Mr. Langenfelda to adjourn the November 9� 1977, planning Commission meeting. IIpon a voice vote' all voting aye' the motion carried unanimously. Chairperson Harris declared the meeting adjourned at 1 Z; 07 A.M. Respectfully subffiitted� � Marylee Carhill Recording Secretary /"'`,� , � � - �� �� �