Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION <br />DRAFT <br /> 6 <br />6. 7831 Lake Drive, Variance for Roofing Materials – City Planner Larsen reviewed 213 <br />a PowerPoint presentation including information on the following: 214 <br />- Planning and Zoning Board will consider the matter after the council because the 215 <br />property owner would like to proceed quickly; staff will report back again after the 216 <br />advisor y board reviews; 217 <br />- Requesting metal roof with exposed fasteners; 218 <br />- Would duplicate another structure; 219 <br />- Property owners had purchased the materials previous to applying for a permit; 220 <br />- City code allows for metal roof but not exposed seams; 221 <br />- The materials were purchased as customized; 222 <br />- Pictures of metal roofs shown; 223 <br />- Staff recommends denial. 224 <br /> 225 <br />Councilmember Ruhland recalled the granting of a similar variance during his tenure on 226 <br />the Planning and Zoning Board. Staff pointed out that in that case the roof was already 227 <br />installed. Councilmember Lyden remarked that this situation exists in an area where it’s 228 <br />not aesthetically a problem even though in some situations he would prefer the allowed 229 <br />metal roof. The mayor remarked that the exposed vs. not exposed is distinctly different 230 <br />and he doesn’t think he can support a variance in this case. Councilmember Lyden 231 <br />remarked that to him it’s not a question of better or worse and there really is no impact on 232 <br />the neighborhood. Councilmember Ruhland added that a metal roof lasts a very long time 233 <br />so that’s another consideration. 234 <br /> 235 <br />The council recognizes that this will still go to the Planning & Zoning Board. The council 236 <br />has been informed and will await the advice of that board. Councilmember Ruhland asked 237 <br />that staff provide the minutes from the previous similar variance approval. Staff 238 <br />explained that the recommendation coming forward to the council will be the action of the 239 <br />Planning and Zoning Board. 240 <br />7. Election Judge Salary – City Clerk Bartell reviewed her written report. Staff has 241 <br />looked at salary levels in the area and is suggesting that the council consider raising the 242 <br />hourly wage for the election judge and head election judge positions. Ms. Bartell 243 <br />reviewed considerations such as the current state minimum wage, the difficulty of the job, 244 <br />and possible difficulties recruiting judges in a pandemic situation. She noted the proposed 245 <br />increase to $12 per hour for election judges and $14 per hour for head election judges 246 <br />Mayor Rafferty noted information indicating that special temporary workers in some areas 247 <br />are paid at a rate around $15 per hour; what are those positions. Ms. Bartell explained 248 <br />the prevalence of the Anoka County hiring temporary workers as well as most cities now 249 <br />hiring temporary workers to assist with pre-election duties and especially absentee voting 250 <br />which is partly administered at city halls and is becoming more and more popular; those 251 <br />positions are generally being paid in the $15 per hour range. 252 <br />Mayor Rafferty recalled his experience as an election judge. Understanding what the job 253 <br />entails is helpful. He is supportive of a salary increase and would propose also 254 <br />consideration of the difference between working at a municipal/primary election and 255