06/10/1996 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 10, 1996 perogative to close the public hearing at this time. Council Member Kuether suggested that the Council close the public hearing and approve the agreement subject to the developer installing a no sharp edge fence. Council Member Lyden said that means nothing to him. He said that if the Council requires a top rail on the fence and fence posts instead of stakes, that will mean something to him. Council Member Lyden said that he envisions someone bending over this proposed fence creating just as much of a hazard as the fence proposed by the developer. He said that the City Council should be very specific about the design of the fence. If not, the public hearing should be continued because everything else is "up for grabs". Voting on the motion. Council Members Bergeson and Neal and Mayor Landers voted yes. Council Members Kuether and Lyden voted no. There was a question regarding parliamentary procedure. Mr. Hawkins said that Mayor Landers had called for the question and therefore the voting had to proceed. Mayor Landers said that by closing the public hearing, the 60 day clock has started. (The City Council must order the improvement within 60 days.) Council Member Lyden said that the development was approved based on the premise that there be satisfactory agreements between the developer and the City. Mayor Landers said that this matter (the improvement of 12th Avenue/Holly Drive) should have been resolved three (3) years ago. However, what was done two (2) or three (3) years ago cannot be corrected today. Council Member Kuether moved to approve the First Amendment to the Development Contract subject to the City Council approval of the physical quality and safety of the fence. She felt that the actual physical material of the fence should be seen and approved by the City Council at a Council work session. Council Member Lyden suggested that the fence should be a standard cyclone fence, with poles and a top bar at $4.70 per foot. Council Member Kuether said that the developer agreed to put in the same fence that is in the Oaks of Lino. Council Member Lyden said that was unacceptable. Council Member Bergeson seconded the motion. Council Member Bergeson said that the language of the motion could be interpreted as vague. He asked Mr. Hawkins where this motion puts the City Council in terms of a legal position. Mr. Hawkins explained that the issue that has been the most difficult to interpret is the style of the fence. It has been the most contentious and has held this matter up this evening and caused the developer to come to City Hall this evening. If the City Council feels that the top wire should be rolled over instead of leaving points, that is not a substantial deviation from what is required in this First Amendment. Mr. Hawkins said that he feels that if the City Council does not make a decision or is talking about coming back again and bringing in fence styles and opening up the whole issue, there will be no "deal" with the developer. He said he senses that if the City Council does not come to some agreement tonight, the entire "deal" will be lost. Mr. Hawkins said that he along with Mr. Schumacher, Mr. Ahrens and Mr. Ballic, the developers attorney have spent hours and hours drafting the agreement. Not everyone is going to be happily, however, this is the best compromise that can be drafted. Mr. Hawkins said that there are other PAGE 22