Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br />City Council Regular Meeting Minutes <br />June 25, 2024 <br />Page 3 <br />Two quotes were received ranging from $64,215.00 - $71,730.00. The low quote received from <br />Bituminous Roadways, Inc. with a quote amount of $64,215.00 was provided for Council <br />consideration. Two quotes were received ranging from $64,215.00 - $71,730.00. <br />Councilmember Doolan asked if it is just Highcrest north of 37' Street. Ms. Koscielak stated it <br />should not impact the road and just the portion of pipe will be replaced. <br />8 Motion by Councilmember Randle seconded by Councilmember Jenson, to approve Resolution <br />9 24-042 — Awarding a Quote for the Highcrest Road Storm Sewer Repair to Bituminous <br />10 Roadways, Inc. for $64,215.00. <br />11 <br />12 Motion carried 5-0. <br />13 <br />14 C. Ordinance 2024-02 — Amending the St. Anthony City Code by Amending Section 91 of <br />15 the City Code Relating to Animals. <br />16 <br />17 City Planner Stephen Grittman reviewed the proposed beekeeping ordinance changes are before <br />18 City Council for the second of three readings. At the June 11, 2024 meeting, the Council <br />19 forwarded the first reading with a request for additional information relating to questions around <br />20 whether notice of a neighboring bee -sting allergy should disqualify the application, or whether <br />21 such notice should merely inform the Council's consideration of an application. The Council also <br />22 sought information on how other communities treat this matter (neighbor allergies), and how that <br />23 issue might relate to general nuisance considerations. <br />24 <br />25 Staff has investigated these issues with the Code Compliance Officer who conducted the primary <br />26 research for the Parks and Environmental Commission's ordinance work. The Code Officer <br />27 indicated that other community ordinances were reviewed in summary, and the PEC's work <br />28 represents the dominant themes that arose from that review. <br />29 <br />30 Proposed changes to the second reading are collected in Subsection (G) and highlighted for the <br />31 Council's review. The changes create a clear disqualification for applications that elicited a <br />32 positive response from any abutting neighbor to the bee -sting allergy issue. The structure of the <br />33 ordinance would create a process as follows: <br />34 a. Application is made to City Staff. <br />35 b. Staff creates a notice to abutting neighbors of the application for beekeeping, including a <br />36 request for response to any medically -documented bee -sting allergies for current <br />37 residents. <br />38 c. Neighbors are notified of the upcoming Council meeting on the application and given the <br />39 opportunity to respond to staff. <br />40 d. Any responses that claim the presence of a bee -sting allergy would result in rejection of <br />41 the application by Staff. <br />42 e. Staff would notify Council of the application as an agenda item, and whether the <br />43 application was rejected, or if it is being brought forward for Council approval. <br />44 <br />45 The Council also questioned the aspects of the code related to nuisance concerns. The Code <br />46 Officer indicated that per the resource materials used by the PEC — including those from the <br />