Laserfiche WebLink
Assistant City Administrator Morello noted that this is a definition section and did not believe <br />enforcement language should be added to this section. <br />Mayor Webster stated that years ago, she wanted to add a three-season porch, but they could not <br />because they would have exceeded the maximum impervious surface for their lot. She understood that <br />the threshold exists to ensure there is a proper area for water drainage and infiltration, which most <br />people are not aware of. She recognized the misconception of whether the right-of-way is included in <br />the calculation and believed that the new language would help to clarify that situation. <br />City Planner Grittman explained that excluding the right-of-way actually assists most property owners, <br />as the driveway typically covers a large percentage of the right-of-way as well. <br />Councilmember Doolan commented that her lot, as designed, violates the threshold, but there is <br />nothing she can do about it. Mr. Sonterre explained that staff have never held a buyer accountable for <br />the work done by a previous homeowner. <br />Mr. Sonterre moved to scavengers, which is the existing language within the Code, and reviewed the <br />proposed changes to the language. <br />Councilmember Jenson provided the scenario where someone puts a shelf at the curb with a free sign <br />and asked if that would fall under this regulation or whether the language is specific to items within the <br />waste container. Mr. Sonterre replied that this language is specific to items in the waste container or <br />yard waste at the curb. He noted that items placed at the curb and marked free do not fall within this <br />language. <br />Councilmember Elnagdy asked if they should specifically permit those curb alert items as described by <br />Councilmember Jenson. She asked if there should be exceptions for City-sponsored collections. Mr. <br />Sonterre stated that the City has not done those types of events, as typically those items are brought to <br />public works. He stated that if there were a collection event, permission could be provided through a <br />resolution rather than a Code amendment. He stated that branches/yard waste would be allowed <br />under the language as proposed. He stated that there is language within the Code that specifies a <br />length of time household items can be left within the right-of-way. <br />Mr. Sonterre moved to the definition of rodents and reviewed the proposed changes. <br />Councilmember Elnagdy asked why two definitions are needed. Mr. Sonterre explained that each <br />section of the Code has its own definitions. Councilmember Elnagdy noted the reference to squirrels <br />and chipmunks and asked why they are being included. Mr. Sonterre replied that they are listed as <br />rodents by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and are common critters able to create <br />health issues based on severity and/or density. He stated that there is language within the Code that <br />prevents people from feeding them. <br />Councilmember Jenson stated that he likes that those animals are included. He noted that there was a <br />remodeled home in their neighborhood where two families of squirrels had invaded the attic. <br />Councilmember Randle noted additional damage that can be done to wiring. <br />Mr. Sonterre moved to amusement devices and recommended the removal of that section as it is no <br />longer relevant. <br />5