HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCMinutes_2008_02_26 1
Brookings City Council
February 26, 2008
The Brookings City Council held a meeting on Tuesday, February 26, 2008 at 5:00 p.m., at Ciry Hall
with the following members present: Council Members Julie Whaley,Mike Bardey, Ryan Brunner,
Tim Reed and Tom Bezdichek. Scott Munstexman and Ginger Thomson were absent. City
Manager Jeffrey Weldon, City Attorney Steve Britzman, and City Clerk Shari Thornes were also
pxesent.
Pxior to the meeting, the City Council members and staff received training on the new televised
meeting system and AV equipment. Deputy Mayor Tim Reed called the meeting to order at 5:00
p.m. for the work session.
Code Enforcement. City Manager Jeff Weldon reviewed the following proposal that was prepared
to addxess code enfoxcement issues.
`The Brnoking.r City Council ha.r directed.rtaff to develop a modifacation to the rental in.rpectfon and propery maintenance
enforcement j�rogram with the ultimate goal of abating and mitigating proper[ie.r that fa!!into a condition that con.rtitute.r a
nui,rance or i.r othenvi.re un.rafe for occupancy puxruant to City Code. Thzr applie.r to all properly whether ft i.r�z.ridential or
commerczal pro�iery;�zntal or owner-occupied in u.re. The directive i.r aimed at more aggre.crive enforcement of violation,r.
Sco�e of In.r�ection.r-rental re,ridential lfcen.ring.•(Ch 22 Article VI�
Current policy i.r to licen.re all�zntal unit.r with.rcheduled in.rpection.r appmximately 2-4 year.r covering the following item.r
1) Iife-,rafety i.rrue.r of,rmoke detectoxr and,ri�e of e�re,r.r u�indow.r
2) Nsrmber of tenant�occupying rental unit.r
3) Zoning including parking regulation,r
More freguent in.rpection.r are done in re.rpon.re to complaintr or reque.rt.r far,ruch in.rpectron,r.
The Code Enforcement O�cer in the Engineering Dept. i.r re.rpon.rible for.rmaller re.ridential building.r of.reven unit.r orlerf The
Fire Mar.rhal i,r re.rpon.rible for larger rental complexe.r over.reven unit.r in.ri�e.
Sco�e of In.r�ec_ ti�_n.r-all�ro�ertie.r(Ch. 22.Article V and Ch 62 Article III�
All propertier are,rubject to property maintenance ordinancer for nui,rance abatement regardde.r.r of rue.
Current�ractice/.rtatu �,.r o{e�n orcement.• City.rta�'i.r cur�nt on licen,re renewal of.rmall renta!unit�and their in.rpection.c City
.rta�'i.r behind on licen.re reneu�al of large rental unit.r and their in,rpection.r.
Mo.rtlbropery nui,rance in.rpection,r are conducted on a complaint ba.ri,r or avhen avitne.r.red by.rtaff a.r being clearly vi.rible a.r a
nui.rance from thelbublic rzght-of-way.
The jiroce.r.r of mitigation i.r ta.rend a written notrce to the property orvner czting the code nui.rance violation andgiving the owner a
rea.ronable amaunt of time to remedy the nui.rance. The goal of the City i.r to achieve compliance with the code;not to
unnece.r.rarily purrue fine.r, litigation or urue any more citation.r than nece,r.rary. Apj�mximatedy 90 percent compliance a.r achieved
after the firrt letter to the property owner. Re-in.rpections are conducted and.recond noticer are given for frtilure to comply. In
extreme ca.re.r, litigation i.r nece.crary. It i.r the goal of the City to achieve compliance rxr quickly a.r poa.rible svith thc fzrrt notice fn
a.r amicable a manner a.r po,r.rible. Length of time given to remedy condition,rhall be at the di.rcretion of the enforcing o�'icer and
.rhall take into con,rideration the.reverity af the condition and any hr.rtory of prior o�en,re,r.
Revieav o a��licable Citv Code.r
A reviem of the above de,rcrzbed City Code.r indicate.r there u.ru�cient.rtatutory authority to au�i�iort the current ar well a.r more
aggre,rsive enforcement practice.r.
I�ecommendation.r for modification to code enforcement�rocedure,r
1) Re-organi�ation o dutze.r: Con.rolidate all rental in,rpection.r(large and.rmadl.rtructure.r)in the Engineering Department far
a uniform and.rtreamlined procedure.
2) Be-or�arailation o dutie.r/Fire: Having been relieved of large rental in.rpection.r, the Fire Marrhal.rhould concentrate on
commercial.rtructure,r and other Fire Code i.crue.r of property.
3) T�egetation/weed control code enforcement• The Engineerin�Department.rhould a,crume vegetation and weed mrtigation
from the Park Department a.r part of the overall pmperty maintenance in.rpection. The Park Department would.rtr!!be
re.rpon.rible for abaterrrent of�veec�r tvhen nece.r.rary. Croplandr and wetlanc�r are exempt.
4) Snow on.ridewalk code enforcement: The Street Department will continue to abate violator.r of the.rnott�removal frnm
.ridewalk ordinance by di,patching.rtreet crem.r to correct the defrciency and,rending a bild to the pmpery owner. It zr
anticYpated mo.rt complaint,r will come directdy to the Code Enforcement Officer.r. Thi.r 2vi11 maintain the current practice.
S) Increa.red level o�nforcement.• The Engineering Department�vould be re.rpon.rible for a more aggret.rive approach to code
enforcement pertaining to nui,rance abatement not merely redying on complaint.r but canva.cring the community for violation.r.
In addition,in.rpection.r thould include,rituation.r, that left unabated, could con.rtitute a j�ublfc health ha�ard including but
not limited to tho.re that harbor rodent.r.
6) Kecord-kee�ing The Engineering De�tiartment would develop a comprehen.rive record-keepin��y.rtem of rentad licen.ring
irr.rpection,r a,r svell a.r proper y maintenance in.rpectfon.r to quantify the in.rpectfon.r by type and compdiance an a monthly and
annual ba.ri.r. The Fire Mar.rhal avould do the,rame for commerczal in.rpection.r.
�
7) Public v �i.ribilitv: The Engineering Department°r Code Enforcement.rtaff rvould become more vi.rible by(a)avearing certain
item.r clearly ident�ing them a,r code enforcement per.ronnel ruch a.r po.rtibly rhirt.r,jackexr, coat,r, badge.r, ID card;(b)
driving a czty vehicle clearly marked a.r a code enforcement vehicle. In vi.riting with property olvner.r, hourr of avork may need
to be adju.rted to early evening during the,rNmmer month.r to ftnd more people at home where appointmentr may be nece.crary.
8) Public education: The Engineering Department r Code Enforcement staff.rhould undertake a com�rehen.rive public
education program abaut the rental licen,ring program and the properZy maintenance requirement.r in an�ort to proactively
achieve compliance before they become a nui.rance. Thi,r al.ro promote.rgood cu.rtomer.rervice. Activitie.r for additional public
education could be: PSA'.r in the new.rpaper, Shopper, and loca!radio.rtation.r information on the city u�ebrite, annual
mailing.r about the regulation.r to the rental licen.re-holder,r;information at the SDSU hou.ring o�ce;utility billing in,rert.r;
di.rcu.r.rion topicr for.rervic•e club.rpeakers'bureau, to name a few. A more formal communic•ation relation.rhip.rhould be
developed between the City and SDSU hou.ring o�ce to ident�/report hou.ring i.r.ruer. Prior to launching the neiv
enforcement procedsrre.r,an exten.rive public relation.r�ort.r.rhould be undertaken.
9J Lenal ace„ dion m9av be ured.• The Engineering Department°r Code Enforcement.rtaff, the Fire Mar.rhal(where applicable),
and the City Attorney need to be prepared to aggressively pmfecz�te o�f'enderr that do not comply or othenvi.re abate the
nui.rance after the City ha.r exhau.rted all rearonable mean.r to achieve compliance. Monetary fine.r to the maximum extent of
the law.rhould be pur.rued. The Police Department lvill enforce cer2ain code enforcement provi.rion.r under their.rtatutary
authority and there.rhould be a clear dirtinction in the type of violation.r enforced by civilian,rtaff a.r oppo.red to lau�
enforcement.
10) Other dutie.r a.r a.r.ri,gned.• The Engineering Department'.r Code Enforcement,rta�could a.r.ri.rt u�ith other enforcement item.r
tangentially related to property maintenance where in.rpectron.r currently are in.ru�cient. Some of the.re area.r including but
not limited to:.rignage, home occupation in,rpection.r, occupancy compliance, monitoring con.rtruction.rite.r, ,ridewalk.rafety
in.rpection.r,park playground.rafety in.rpectionr, illegal,rtorm.re�ver di.rcharge connection.r, illegal mobile home park
modifications,minor�oning issuef,minor building code i.r,rue.r.
Clearly,additional labor re.rource.r will be nece.r.rary to implement a more aggre.crive code enforcement and rental licen,ring program.
The City Council ha.r authori�ed�60,000 in additional frnancial re,rource,r in the 2008 budget to addrer.r thi.r i.r.rue and,rta�'f i.r
recommendin�one additional,rtaff per.ron be hired to a.r,rirt the current.rta�'with undertaking thi,r reui.red program. Thi.r amount
rvould be ured to hire a.rtaff per.ron and implement the mea.rure,r enumerated in Item.r 1-10.
Thi.r additional,rtaff po.rition would be cla.r,rified in the.rta�ing and compen.ration a.r Code Enforcement O„�"rcer at Pay Grade 8,
which i.r the rame a.r our current code enforcement po.ritron. Thi.r u�ould be a.recond identical po.rition and will provide for dual
coverage and cro,r,r-training bsrt.rome.rpecific dutie.r may be regregated for�ciencie.r. The City Engineer�vould.rupervi.re thir
additional po.rition.
The Brookingr City Council ha,r directed.rtaff to develop a modification to the rental in.rpection and pmper y maintenance
enforcement program with the ultimate goad of abating and mitigatirtg propertie.r that fall into a condition that con.rtitute.r a
nui.rance or i.r othenvi.re un.rafe for occupancy pur.ruant to City Code. Tbi.r applie.r to all pmpeny�vhether it i,r r�.ridential or
commercial pro�erly;rental or owner-occupied in u.re. The directive i.r aimed at more aggre.r.rive enforcement of violationr."
James Pedersen provided a brief history of this issue and commended the City Manager and City
Council on the proposed plan. He also noted that the proposed neighborhood watch pxogram
would be worthwhile to consider. Gary Wintexfeld also commended the Council and Manager on
the plan.
Weldon called attention to #5 of the plan noting it will be the major component of this program
being successful. Should the City carry through on these efforts,it will result in an increased level of
complaints on those who have been served code enforcement violation. He cautioned the Council
to expect calls from those individuals and asked for their support of him and city staff.
Batdey agreed that people will complain and feels it's unportant that staff be properly trained to
handle those complaints. Policy is the Council's job and it's the staff's job to enforce it.
Bezdichek asked when the position would be filled. Weldon said sometime in April or May.
Weldon said staff's other priorities will be public education and computerized tracking methods.
Reed was very complimentary of the plan and suggested the council review it in a year to evaluate
the results and take public feedback. He didn't see any further council action on this item,citing it
would be administrative at this point.
LTpdates from Senator Johnson's Office. Matt Astleford,a staff inember fxom the Senator's Sioux Falls
Office,provided a brief update on local issues.
Cteation of a Com�lete Count Committee. Council Member Tim Reed reviewed the following
proposal regarding the creation of a Complete Count Committee (CCC) and presented his proposal
for Council consideration.
�
� US Census Accuracv: Appropriation of Federal Funds,Accurate local statistical data (Retail
Attraction,Average Income),Data for the community (Housing needs), and How big is
Brookings &Bxookings County.
• What is a Com�lete Count Comtnittee (CCC): A major vehicle for planning and implementing
local, targeted efforts that will uniquely address the characteristics of our community.
• Why form a CCC?: To make everyone in the community aware of the 2010 Census; to motivate
the community to participate by filluig out the census form;and to utilize local knowledge,
expertise, and awareness campaign taxgeted to the community.
• What are the goals of a CCC?: Develop a community-specific 2010 Census awaxeness campaign;
provide leadership in the promotion of 2010 Census;and commit to ensuring that every resident
in our communiry is counted.
• S�ecific Activities of CCC's: Develop local theme for census participation;create and distribute
community-specific pYOmotional materials;work with local media to promote census;and
identify hard to enuinerate areas and create a taYgeted campaign fot those areas.
• Tuneline: Spring/Summex 2008—Form CCC, Fall 2008—Start creating plan,Summer 2009—
propose budget to Govexnments (City& County), Fall 2009—Finalize plan,January 2010—
Monthly meetings,April 2010—Implement plan for Census Day and Census Week.
• CCC Membershin: Council Member(s), City Manager / City Clerk, Community Members,
Media, SDSU Student Leadership, County Commissioners.
Britzman suggested a resolution to form this ad hoc committee.
Whaley suggested the Council recruit elderly/xetired citizens for this committee.
Dan Hanson,Planning&Zoning Administratox, said he has been the city's chief liaison with the
Census Buteau for 15 years. The City created a Complete Count Committee in 2000 with public
education as their top priority. Accuxate count of"group quarters" housing was stressed. Group
quarters consist of unYelated adults, such as dormitories. Theit biggest issue was to educate students
to consider themselves as xesidents rather than transients.
Reed asked if the city was in good shape xegaxding accuxate addressing. Hanson said there is a
problem with the addresses in that the post office can reassign address numbers and Post Office's
new software doesn't recognize '/a and 3/a street addresses (basement apartments,etc.). Getting the
Postmaster involved in the Committee would be a good idea.
Brunner asked what efforts weYe made in the 2000 process to list the people in the Yesident halls.
Hanson said their first attempt wasn't the best and a better effort could be made in this process.
Weldon said the struggle is how to count legal addresses. He asked if thexe are Federal guidelines on
how to consider the students.
No action was taken at this meeting. The Council will considex action to approve a resolution
creating a Complete Count Cominittee at a futuxe meeting.
Update on joint collaboration efforts with Count� Ciry Manager Weldon reviewed his memo
fxom the Council packet highlighting various options he's looked at.
`71i� The City and County each independently undertook.rpace needr,rtudie.r concluding the County needing 18,628 rquare
feet and the City projecting a need of 20,161 ,rquare feet. The County ha.r re,rponded by propo.ring con,rtrr�rction of a new county
admini.rtration building betiveen the Court Hou.re and the 1921 Buidding. The needr for the County appear to be more
imminent while the neeclr of the City appear to be more long-range. The gr�atert defiizency of.rpace needr in the City Hall i,r in
the police de�iartment.
The City and County havegenerally di.rcu.cred,a,r an adternative,acquiring more of the 1921 Building, continuing the renovation
of thzr hirtoric builddng to the balance of the fixrt f7oor and fnto the.recond floor�vith a combined joint city-county government
center. The properly oTVner ha.r offered a renovation package of,�'S2/.rf and buy-outpackage in 2010 of�3.1 million for the
entire building.
The County'.r architect ha,r p�njected renovation co.rt.r of the 1921 Building at�'190/.rf contra.rted with that of ne�v con.rttr�rction at
,�'172/.rf. The County further de.rire.r to keep county government o�'rce,r in or near the current Court Hou,re.rquare.
The County Board held a public input meeting on February 19 regarding the propored nerv con,rtrrsction of the county
admini,rtration building. They dercribed the space needr.chortage in the Court Hou,re and the propo.ra!a.r to move mo.rt other
county o�ce.r leaving the Court Hou,re almo.rt exclu.rivedy for court.rervice.r. They are leaning toward.riting a new county
4
admini.rtration building adjacent to the Court Houre. Aeaction from the few audience member.r who.rpoke wa.r mixed. The
County Board i.r leaving their optian.r open but are on record by a 4-1 vote of.rupporting thi.rpropo.red location.
Combined citv-ce ountv.rervice.r in one building
In my opinion, there are many advantage.r ofputting city arrd countygovernment o�ce.r in the.rame building There are many
economie.r-of-.rcade to be achieved af�iroperly planned from the out.ret. Taxpayer.r are more inter�.rted fn�ciency ofgovernment
rervice,r than in "turf'pmtection by bureaucratr. Fair and�ective co.rt-.rharing of combined facilitier can be achieved between
government.r. Thi.r can lead to "one-.rtop.rhopping"by the public. Such o�ce-.rharing can even be e.�anded to include rchool
di.rtrict admini.rtration o�cer and other ancillary agencier.ruch a.r chamber of commerce, economic development agencie.r, etc. The
.rharing of common,pace.ruch a.r conference room,r, board room.r, re.rtroom.r, and mechanical facilitie.r can re.rult in.rub.rtantial co.rt
.raving.r. Con.rolidation can go beyond,rimply.rharing the building to actually con.rolidating rervice,r.ruch ar data proce.cring, GIS,
property management recordr, �oning information, human,rervice.r, election.r, and payroll. The li.rtgoe.r on. But.rtriking the
correct time for all partie.r with the right building opportunity i,r the challenge to making any con.rolidation,whether phy.rical or
operational, �ective.
Analuri.r o crtv.r�ace neeclr.
The City i.r u,ring all of the available.rpace in the current City Hall with very little ability to effectively add any.rtaff to the current
building with regard to admini.rtration, engineering, and finance department.r. At current rta�ing level�, the current building
mee�r our needr with the exception of the Police Department. There are.rignificant.rpace and operational deftciencie.r in thi.r older
portion of the buildin�. There are, however,major advantager to retaining city operation,r,police,and a fzre rtation in the.rame
building.
Option.r for the city to addre.cr future.rpace neecdr include:
1) Con,rider adding a.recond floor to the exi.rting city hall(will require a rtructural analy.ri,r).
2) Con.rider acguiring the Sarvnee Hotel building, demoli.rhing it,and u.ring it for a city hall and parking lot expanrion.
3) Con.rider a joint city-county government center in the 1921 Building.
4� Conrrder a joint city-county government center in a neu�con.rtnrction project.
S) Con.rider con.rtructing a new czty hall building exclu.rively.
6) Con.rider acguiring the old Firrt Bank�'Tru.rt building for a new city hall.
If the city wer�to move fmm the current building,it could be ured for e.xpan.rion of the Police Department converting city hall into
a Municipal Public Safety Facility�vith the cu�rent fire.rtation. Alternatively,if city of�'ices rver�to move, the curr•ent building i.r
�vell-,ruited for otherpublic orprivate rector o�"zce.r and it har excellent adaptive re-u.re.
With regard to option 2,I have contacted the owner of the Sawnee Hotel. At the time of writing thu memo,the owner and I
haveyet to connect. Hop�lly,I will have an update at the meeting.
With regard to option S, con,rtructing a ne�v building doer not.reem fearible, or even necer.rary now but it may be a viable option
7-l0yeaxr from now ba.red on the projectron.r of the.rtudy. Today'a con.ttruction co.rt.r v�ould be approxlmately�'3.5 million for a
new city hald building. E.rcalating con.rtruction cor�r are.rur�to drive thi.r number up con.riderably.
With regard to option 6,I have toured the bank buildfng. It ha.r a main floor and a dou�er level�ith.rub.rtantiadly more,rquare
footage than the main floor a.r it extendr wert under the parking dot. The buidding i.r odder than it look,r, built in the late SO'r,
and ha.r appm.xYmately 20,000.rquare feet,ro it meetr our,rpace need,r reguirement in raw.rquare footage. The building i.r ideally
located do�vnto�vn near the Court Hou.re.rquare and ha.r the architectural appearance of a municipal building It ha,rgood on
and o�.rtreet parking acce.r.r. The building tvill take a conriderate amount of interior re-con.rtruction for interior o�dce,rpace,r
which can ea.rily be achieved if ive u�ir.rh to con,rider thi.r option,we�vi11 need to hire an architect for a profe.r.rional evaluation.
The building ha.r been e.xpanded, the roof replaced,and the HVAC(heating-ventilating-air condrtionin�.ry.rtem upgraded and
appearr to be well-maintained
The only.rignificant dmvn-.ride I can.ree to the bank buildfng i,r there a�pear.r no viable u�ay to con.rt�uct.ruitable council chambexr
withfn the building.Ideally, the council chamber.r.rhould be part af city hall on ground level u�ith ea y acce.r.r from both the interior
of the building a.r well a.r out.ride door.r. The main floor doe.r not appear large enough to hold the council chambexr plur the o�'ice.r
for city rervice.r mo.rt needed by the public forgood customer.rervice.
There are, hon�ever, t�vo option.r to re.rolve thi.r i,r,rue that could be e.xfilored
Fixrt,it appear.r a council chamber.r could be added to the.routh of the buidding into the parking!ot�vvrth out.ride public acce.r,r
from S�h Avenue. Thi.r�vould involve removing the drive-up canopy and lo.ring approximately,reven parking.rpace,r.
Second,Jve could leave the council chamber.r in it.r current location in the lorver level of the current city hall building. While it
�vould be ideal to have the council chamberr in the.rame building a,r city hall,it ir certaindy not necer.rary.
After touring both the 1921 Building and the former Firrt Bank d�'Tru.rt buildin�I am of the opinion the bank building i.r
better.ruited to meet our future need�:
More co.rt-benefit analyrir could be developed ba.red on identifying ather"what if...�".rcenarior"
5i
Weldon noted that he would be able to identify significant space needs pxoblems in City Hall, but
there are issues of note in the police department.
Per Council direction,he sent a letter to the County Commission requesting a follow-up meeting on
this issue. Reed agxeed that the Council should continue its discussion with the County Commission
on this issue to deternune if it makes financial sense to collaborate with the County.
Thexe was Council consensus to hold a joint meeting with the County Commission. That meeting is
tentatively scheduled for March 18``'
Sioux Falls tour invite by Mayor Munson. Weldon noted that it was brought to the Council's
attention at a previous meeting by Mayor Munstexman that Sio� Falls Mayor Dave Munson has
extended an invitation to the City Council for a tour of Sioux Falls to view the impact of private and
public paxtnership with regard to development. Specifically, the purpose of the trip would be to
pick up hints on how to plan for big picture growth development and how the City can position
itself to address those needs, stay ahead of the curve and respond to development. City Council,
some city staff and the media would be invited to participate.
Reed commented that the Ciry Council toured the Sioux Falls council chambers when they were
considering televised meetings and felt it was a very positive experience. He encouraged the Council
to accept this invitation.
There was council consensus to move ahead with a tour.
Legislative U�dates.
Tim Reed will be attending the National League of Cities Congressional Conference in Washington,
DC, from March 8-12 and asked for council action on its top priorities to review with our
congxessional delegation. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Bardey,to agxee the top
issues for Reed to report on would be the 34'''Avenue project,infrastructure financing for the
research park,railroad safety components for an in-town route,and the airport whichever track is
selected. All ptesent voted yes;motion carxied.
6:00�.m. Meeting Review. The City Managex xesponded to questions perta,inirig to the action
items on the agenda.
City Clerk Re�orts. Shari Thornes, Brookings City Clerk,provided a briefing on future agenda
items and upcoming invitations and obligations.
City Council member introduction of to�ics for future discussion
Bezdichek asked if thexe was a city ordinance prohibiting bricked mailboxes on the boulevard. Dan
Hanson said there is a permitting process. Bezdichek also expxessed concern that someone may be
feeding the birds downtown. He also asked if the 2 houx paYking downtown was enforced. Yes, on
a complaint basis.
G:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Consent Agenda: A motion was made by Bardey, seconded by Brunnex, to approve the consent
agenda which included:
A. Agenda.
B. Action to appoint Pam Merchant to the Brookings Historic Preservation
Commission, term expires 1/1/2010.
C. Action on a revised preliminary plat of the Windermere Pointe Addition in the SE '/a
of the SW 1/, of Section 36-T110N-R50W.
On the motion, all present voted yes; motion carried.
18`Reading—Ordinance No. 06-08—Rezonin� First reading was held on Ordinance No. 06-08,
rezoning the SE '/4 of the SW '/4 of Section 36-T110N-R50W fxom an Agricultural A and Residence
R-1B District to a Residence R-1B,R-2,and R-3 District (1500 Block 20th Street South). Public
Hearing: March 11, 2008
1$`Reading—Ordinance No. 07-08—Conditional Us� First reading was held on Ordinance No.
07-08 -An application for a Conditional Use to establish an apartment in the Business B-2 District
on Lot 6, excluding the S179.35'thereof, and Tract C of Lot 5,all in Southbrook Addition (1000
Block of Southland Lane). Public Hearing: March 11,2008
6
16L Reading—Ordinance No. 09-08—Rezonin� Fixst reading was held on Ordinance No. 09-08,
rezoning a portion of land in the NW'/4 of the SE '/a of Section 35-T110N-R50W from a Residence
R-1B District to a Residence R-2 District. Public Hearing: Marcb 11, 2008
1$`Reading—Ordinance No. 10-08—Building Code. First reading was held on Ordinance No.
10-08 -An Ordinance Amending Article II,Building Code, of Chapter 22 of the Code of
Ordinances of the Ciry of Brookings Pertaining to Drainage Plans. Public Hearing.• March 1>, 2008
2"d Reading—Ordinance No. 08-08—Campaign Finance. A motion was made by Bardey,
seconded by Brunner, to approve Ordinance No. 08-08-An Ordinance Establishing State Law
Requirements for Campaign Finance Disclosures for Municipal Ballot Questions in the City of
Brookings, South Dakota. All present voted yes;motion carried.
Public Hearing—Resolution No. 20-08—Sidewalk Assessment. A public hearing was held on
Resolution No. 20-08,Levying Assessment for 2007-01SWR, Sidewalk Assessment Pxoject. No
comments were made during the hearing. A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Brunnex, to
approve. All present voted yes;motion carried.
Resolution No.20-08
Levying Assessment for Sidewalk Assessment Project No.2007-OlSWR
WHEREAS,the City Council has provided for the following work to be completed under Pxoject No.
2007-01SWR. (2007 Sidewalk Repair Sites)
BE IT RESOLVED by the Ciry Council of the City of Brookings,South Dakota,as follows:
1. The City Conncil has made all investigation which it deems necessary and has found and
detexmined that the amount which each lot or tract will be benefited by the construction of the
sidewalk improvement heretofore designated as Sidewalk Assessment Project No. 2007-01SWR
is the amount stated in the proposed assessment roll.
2. The assessment for Sidewalk Assessment Project No. 2007-01SWR is hereby approved and the
assessment thereby specified are levied against each and every lot,piece or parcel of land thereby
described.
3. Such assessments,unless paid within thirty (30) days after the date of mailing of a statement of
account by the City,shall be collected by the City in accordance with the piocedure for Plan One
in Sections 9-43-30 to 9-43-41,South Dakota Compiled Laws of 1967,as amended with interest
of 10%on the unpaid balance.
4. Assessments amounting to less than$300.00 shall be paid in one payment.
Public Hearing—Resolution No. 21-08—Alley Assessment. A public hearing was held on
Resolution No. 21-08,Levying Assessment for 2007-07STA,Alley Assessment Project. No
comments were received from the audience. A letter from Carl Kline objecting to the project was
noted for the minutes and the Council. A motion was made by Bardey, seconded by Bezdichek, to
approve. All present voted yes;motion carried.
Resolution No.21-08
Levying Assessment fot Street Assessment Project No.2007-07STA
Whereas,the City Council has provided for the following work to be completed under Project
No.2007-07STA (Alley from 8�'Avenue to 9'"Avenue between 4�'Street and 5�'Street)
Be It Resolved by the City Council of the City of Brookings,South Dakota,as follows:
1. 'The City Council has made all investigation which it deems necessary and has found and
determined that the amount which each lot or tract will be benefited by the construction of the
sueet improvement heretofore designated as Street Assessment Project No.2007-07STA is the
amount stated in the pxoposed assessment roll.
2. The assessment for Street Assessment Pioject No.2007-07STA is hereby approved and the
assessment thereby specified are levied against each and every lot,piece or parcel of land thereby
described.
3. The assessment shall be divided into five(5)equal annual installments fox alleys.
4. Such assessments,unless paid within thirty(30)days aftex the date of mailing of a statement of
account by the City,shall be collected by the City in accoidance with the procedure for Plan One
in Sections to 9-43-51,South Dakota Compiled Laws of 1967,as amended.
5. Interest of ten(10)percent pez annum shall accrue on the unpaid balance of the assessment.
Fundin�to Transportation Providers. Weldon gave the following report to the Council on the
transportation issue.
At the last council work session,the Council heard a presentation from Bxookings Area Transit
Authority regarding funding and services for this year. BATA's service levels have experienced a
change due to the cessation of services from the taxi company. Previously, the City Council
provided supplemental funding to BATA in the amount of$25,000,the Safe Ride progtam for
$5,000,and the taxi service in the amount of$50,000.
7
For the 2008 budgets,BATA and Safe Ride made budget requests while the ta�service did not and
all transportation funding was lumped together in an amount of approxirriately$$5,000 to be
disbursed later. In addition, the Council appYOVed enabling legislation authorizing the
TYansportation Comnuttee to furthex study transpoxtation issues. It was, and remains,unknown as
to any transpoYtation initiatives this Committee may develop that would need funding. The
Committee's woxk is just beginning.
In the meantime, these two requesting service providers are two months into theix fiscal year
without their appropriation from the City. BATA's budgetary xequest was $50,000, double the
previous year's appropriation. In the absence of any necessary appropriation for the taxi service and
given the fact BATA is picking up service levels previously met by the ta�ci service, the question of
an additional appropriation fox BATA would be pnzdent. That was the purpose of the presentation
at the last meeting.
Weldon recommended the Council direct staff to make a budgetary appropriation to the Safe Ride
program in the amount of$5,000 and BATA in the amount of$25,000 for their continued levels of
service. He further requested the Council authorize an additional$25,000 for BATA for their
increased levels of service. This would leave appxoximately$30,000 unencumbexed in the
transportation line item for future issues.
A motion was made by Bardey, seconded by Bezdichek, to appxove a budgetary appropriation to the
Safe Ride program in the amount of$5,000 and BATA in the amount of$50,000 for their continued
and increased levels of service for 2008.All present voted yes;motion carried.
Engineering Services with HDR. Weldon outlined the proposal from HDR Engineering from
Sioux Falls for the traffic modeling study for the proposed 34`''Avenue/20�'Street South overpass
improvement project. He noted that this pzoject had gained considerable attention due to traffic
and safety concerns along 6`h Street between 32"d and 34`�Avenues. Many of the businesses in the
industrial park have also brought to our attention the need to develop an additional alternate route
for employees who work in the east I-29 industrial and commercial area. Discussions have revolved
around impxoving the surface of 34`h Avenue from Prince Drive south to 32°d Street South. In
addition, the project would include construction of an overpass at I-29 along 20`h Street South. This
would require the construction of 20`''Stteet South from 22°a Avenue South to 34�'Avenue South.
The latter section of this street extension goes outside the city limits along the alignment boundary
between Auroxa and Trenton townships.
According to the city engineer, such projects need a qualifying traffic rnodeling study to be eligible
for state and federal construction dollats in the future. The cost of the study is $119,602 plus $5,954
in reimbursable expenses. This cost estimate is reduced from an earlier proposal due to a revision in
the scope of services pertaining to the ramps at the 32°d Street South overpass as well as other
considerations.
Weldon noted that the Mayor sent letters to the Brookings County Comtnission and the East
Brookings Business and Industry Association asking fox cost participation in the study. The East
Brookings Business and Industry Assn. is a non-profit organization initiated by A1 Kurtenbach with
membership from businesses in this area for purpose of promoting additional economic
development.
Weldon recommended the Council approve 50 percent of the cost contingent upon favorable
responses from these two inquiries. If eithex of the funding partners do not materialize, staff would
bring the issue back to the council with further recommendations for options. He further
recommended funding the city's share of the project using the remauiing$30,000 of the
unencumbered transportation budgetary item and the balance of$32,778 from the sales tax reserve
fund.
ACTION: A motion was made by Whaley, seconded by Bezdichek, authorizing the city manager to
enter into a contract with HDR Engineering to conduct a traffic modeling study in the amount of
$119,602 plus $5,954 in xeimbursable expenses HDR contingent upon Bxookings County and East
Bxookings Business and Industry Association each participating in 25% of the total cost and the city
participating in 50% of the cost. The city will utilize$30,000 of the unencumbered transportation
budgetary item and the balance of$32,778 from the sales tax reserve fund. All present voted yes;
motion carried.
8
Building Upon the Public Right-of-Wa,y. Donna Ramsay, dba dhr Design Services LTD,made
application to the city of Brookings on February 19, 2008, to request permission to build in the
public right-of-way at 310 4`h Street, Brookings, South Dakota.
History: During October, 2004, the City Council discussed the issue of building in the public right-
of-way. The City Council approved Resolution No. 68-04 which established criteria for building in
the public right-of-way and Ordinance No. 24-04,which established exceptions to building in the
public right-of-way.
Ordinance No. 24-04 states that the City Engineer shall review the application and issue a
recommendation to the City Council.
The following is the City Engineer's report regarding the application and her comments
summarizing her position regarding each of the criteria in Resolution No. 68-04:
1. The applicant.rhall explore other alternative.r that might r�move the need for the u.re of public property.
"I�e have not been�imuided unth documentation.rho�ving how other alternative.c�vere e.�lored. Two example.r would
be e.xploring the po.r.ribility of converting a windorv into an acce.r.rible entrance or con.rtructing a rece.cred doonvay. An
example of the documentation of the.re or other alternative,r u�ould include `ivhy"a wlndo�v entrance couldn't be u.red or
u�hy the doonvay couldn't be rece.rsed. The applicant could al.ro de.rcribe rvhy the ramp couldn't be built at another
entrance or location, and why the ramp cosrldn't have been on the an�ide of the building.ro there u�as acce,r,r to the
re.rtmom.r. Mr. l�am.ray indicated verbally that the.riZe of the deck i.r nece.crary forADA purpo.re.r, but did not
provide any other documentation. Thi.r criterion ha.r not been met."
2. Applicant i.c r�quired to have the�imperty.rurveyed by a licen.red land.ruroeyor to determine the actual location of
pmpery line.r.
`The ap�licant pmvided a land.rrrrvey rvhich i.r included and the City's land survt.y by CDI if also included. There
are minor d�erence.r bet�veen the.ruryey.r, but the generad conclu.rion a,r that the deck doe.r encmach into the public right-
of-way."
3. Applicant shall apply for a permit and include an accurate rite plan.rho�ving exaction location of the propo.red
.rtructure and the.reverity of the lntended encmachment into the public right-of-svay.
`The afiplicant.rubmitted the drapving pmvided by their land.rurveyor, which i.r attached. However, we have reque.rted
additronal information about the deck including.• dimen�ions of the deck (height above gmund, length, width, rarrrp
dimen.rion), ri.re and run of the ram�, dimen�ion.r to the bottom and to�i rail helght and.rpacing bet2veen.rpindle.r. The
applicant indicated verbally that the height of the deck i,r 39 inche.r. Thi.c additional deck information i.r required on
any building�iermit for a deck to a.r.rure it conform.r to the building code. Thi.r deck i.c.rubject to the 2003
International Building Code because it i.r a commercial building. The reque.rted information ha.c not been received at
the time of thi.r memo,and I�r�ill update tbe City Council verbally as to the.rtatu.r of thi.c criterion. Thi.r criterion ha.r
not been met."
4. Ap�ilicant.rhall pmvide proof of liability fn.rurance policy�vith a hold harmle.r.r clau.re for the life of the.rtructure
located in the public right-of-u�ay. Thi.r requirement.rhall alro apply to.rucceeding orvnerr, .rpecifacally indemn�ing the
City of Brooking.r fmm any liability resulting fmnr the con.rtruction and location of the ftructure in the public right of
�vay. Prior to the tran.rfer of prolberly which include.r a.rtructure in the public right-of-rvay, the.reller.rhald notify the
b�yer of the liability policy requirement.
`Applicant has.rubmitted a Certificate of Liability Insurance, and ha.r indicated that they a�not able to obtain a
hold harmle,r,r clau.re. I do fee!there i.r a liability i.r.rue for the City regarding an ob.rtruction in the right-of-way, and it
i.r unkno2vn if the City could transfer thi.r liability to the o�vner of the structure. There i,r aLro a liabilaty cancern a.r to
�ho avould pay for repair cort.r if the deck wa.r damaged by a�hicle."
S. The encrnachment mu.rt not diminirh.right line.r at any.ride�valk and.rtr�et interrection.
`The rzght line.r to the south for jiede.rtrian.r traveling eart on the�ide�valk ar�diminr.rhed due to the pmpo.red location
and bulk of the deck."
6. The encmachment into the public right-of-u�ay wlll not begranted for more than 30%of the uridth of the.ridetvalk
mea.rur�d frnm the property line to the back of curb of the adjacent.rtreet. In no ca.re.rhall the encroachment into the
public right-of-way exceed a da:rtance of 36 inche,c.
9
`The deck encroaches apprnximately 14%into the public right-of-svay sidewalk, which ha.c a total u�idth of 11 S feet.
The encroachment i.r less than 36 inche.r."
7. Said encroachment in the public right-of-way.rhall be r�moved if the principal building i.r removed or de.rtroyed.
`Applicant.rtate.r they will com1bly�vith thi,r criterion."
8. Material.r u.red to build the,rtructure in the public right-of-way, a.r�vell a.r its height,proportion, and.rcale, .rhall be
architecturally compatible with the principal building and adjacent building.r. The Bmoking.c Hi.rtoric Pre.cervation
Commi,r,cion.rhall�iromptly revie�v the architectural compatibility of the propo.red.rtructure and prouide offzcial
.rtatement comment to the City Counczl(City of Brnoking.r Code of Ordinance.r Chaj�ter 46, 10-97(a) (b)).
`The material.r used to build the.rtructu�conform to the building code. The Brook,ing.r Hi,rtoric Pr�.reruation
Commi.r.rion urill�imvide comment.r regarding thi.r criterion."
9. If the,rtructure i.r not de.rigned to be permanent in nature, it,rhould be durable enough to function prnj�erly in its
intended,renrice to the principal building.
`Applicant intend.r to properly maintain the.rtructure."
10. The.rtructure in the public right-of-way.rha11 be attached to the principal rtructure or have it.r oum f%rt footing.
`Thi.r structure i.r not required to have a fro.rt footing according to the building code, and it conform.r to thi,r criterion."
11. Upon r�moval of the.rtructur�fmm the�iiublic right-of-ivay, the applicant.rhall r�apply for a new permit before
building a neiv.rtructur�fn the public right-of-u�ay.
`Applicattt.rtate.r they u�ill comply tvith thi.r criterion."
Based upon the lack of information for Criterion 1 and 4, diminished sight lines and the liability
issue of an unnecessary obstruction in the City right-of-way, the City Engineer recommended denial
of this application for the structure in the right-of-way. City Manager Weldon concurred with the
staff's recommendation and recommended denial of the application.
Deputy Mayor Reed asked the applicants to discuss their application.
Charlie Larson,Boyce Gteenfield Law Firm, spoke on behalf of Donna Ramsay. Larson said Mrs.
Rarnsay owns the old fire hall/city hall in downtown Brookings. Laxson said Mrs. Ramsay originally
appeared before the City Council in 2004, this issue went to court, she was convicted and now she's
back before the Council. He said Ramsay sought a building pernut in 2000 while doing renovations
and she claims was advised by city staff that her deck was included in the permit. She further
clauned that city staff advised that the building must be compliant with the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) and fire safery. She was okay with this requirement,wanting equal access, so
pxoceeded to construct a deck to provide access. The project was near completion in 2004 when the
building inspector xetired and Ramsay said other ciry staff infortned her that the deck wasn't
attached to the structure and needed a permit. Larson said Ramsay applied for a pexrnit and was
denied because the structure encroached on the sidewalk. She then came before the City Council
requesting a permit and the Council didn't take action. The Council instructed the city attorney to
form criteria for applying to build on the right-of-way. Larson said Mrs. Ramsay was prosecuted for
building the deck, fined, and the SD Supreme Court affixmed that conviction. However, the Couxt
said she wouldn't have to pay the fine if she applied for a variance and complied with the cxiteria.
Larson noted that Mrs. Ramsay's last recourse in the matter may be civil action through the ADA.
Larson said the deck as constructed,is ADA and life safery compliant. Ramsay has been asked to
remove the deck and if that is done the building would no longex be compliant. He noted that Mrs.
Ramsay wants to stick up for herself and people with disabilities. She is asking and wants to comply
with ADA and life safety,but is not allowed to because of slight encroachment on sidewalk.
Larson distributed a handout citing a particular article. He read the following: "Common Problem:
City governments fail to consider reasonable modifications in local laws, ordinances, and regutations
that would avoid discrunuiation against individuals with disabilities. Result-Laws, ordinances, and
regulations that appear to be neutral often adversely impact individuals with disabilities. For
example,where a municipal zoning ordinance requires a set-back of 12 people from the curb in the
10
central business district,installing a ramp to ensure access for people who use wheelchairs may be
impermissible without a variance from the city. People with disabilities are therefore unable to gain
access to businesses in the city. Requirement—City governments are required to make reasonable
modifications to policies,practices, or pxoceduxes to prevent discrimination on the basis of
disability. Reasonable modifications can include modifications to local laws, ordinances, and
regulations that adversely impact people with disabilities."...
Larson said the Fedexal government requires that cities make reasonable modifications to theiz
policies,practices and procedures and there is a method to enforce this provision.
Larson reviewed each of the criteria and the city engineer's statements and made the following
comments:
#1 —The applicant.rhall e.�cplore other alternative.c that might remove the need for the u.re ofpublicpmperty—
Larson said this has alteady been done and Ramsay worked with city staff. He said city staff told her
to make the building ADA compliant and this (deck)was the only way to do that. Due to the
historical nature of the building, other options were not feasible. He noted that Ramsay was
encouraged to get expert report. Larson handed out a report on the building from TSP, Inc. dated
June 27,2007. The report fxom the Sioux Falls architect which included a review of building codes
from the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation,National Preservation guidelines to
include the National Trust and State Historic Preservation Office. He read the last paragraph of the
report fox the Council: ... `�'harde.r Larson a.rked me `after revieunng the historical plans and conducting a
perronal.rite vi.rit, do you have an o�iinion a.r to whether there are any other alternative.r to make the Old City Hall
comply with federal lau�egre.r.r requirements?" My an,rzver i.r;any,rolution.rhould not impo.re undo hard.rh p of the
building owner(key rea.ron forgranting variance.r)and.rhould avoid modification to the.rtructure aa�heneverpo.r�ible.
The only fea�ible u�ay to accompli.nc�ompliance i.r through the use of an exterior ramp and.rtair.ry.rtem to allou�acce.r.r
through the front main entry, in keeping u�ith the original hi.rtoric intent of the.rtructure. Thi.r.rolution i.r the
configuration of the.rtairr and ramp a.r they are currently in.rtalled."
#2—Applicant i.r reguired to have the proper y.rurveyed by a licen.red land surveyor to determine the actual location of
pmperty dine.r—Larson said Ramsay has submitted a survey from Steve Kor. The city had one done
but denied Ramsay use of it,citing it was not public information ox property. She paid to have one
professionally done which shows a smaller encroachment than was noted in the city's survey.
#3—Applicant,rhadl apply for a permit and include an accurate�ite plan.rho�a�ing exact location of the pmpo.red
.rtructure and the.reverrty of the intended encroachment into the public right-of-way—Larson said he had no idea
this was an issue until yesterday. A site plan has been given. The survey shows the encroachment.
Walking by it will also show the encroachment. He referred to a photo in the study. Information
was not provided on the deck height and slope,but it's never been an issue before. Larson said
every time his client complies with one criteria another issue comes up. The deck is ADA complia.nt
and it clearly complies.
#4—Appdicant.rhall provide prnof of lfability in.rurance policy unth a hold harmle.r.r clau.re for the l'fe of the.rtructure
located in the j�ublic right-of-lvay. Thi,r r�quirement.rhall al.ro apply to.rucceeding ownerr, .►-pecifzcally indemn�ing the
City of Brnoking.r from any liability re.rulting from the con.rtruction and location of the.rtrzrctur�in the public right of
u�ay. Prior to the tran.rfer of proj�erty which include.r a structure in the�ublic right-of-rvay, the.reller.rhall not�the
buyer of the liability policy r�quirement-Larson said his client does not have a hold harmless clause and
has provided a lettex from their insurance company that says there is no such thing. However,her
insurance poliry covers the deck. If someone trips over the deck,Ramsay is covered up to$2
million. Ramsay has pxovided a copy of the liability policy to the city. If someone crashes into deck,
the person who crashed would be liable. There is not a liability issue on the deck. This cxiteria is
impossible to comply with.
#5— The encmachment mu.rt not dimini.rh.right line.r at any side�valk and.rtreet interrection—Larson said this
has never been an issue until yestexday. He suggested the Council walk by the deck to see that
there's no sight diminishment down the block. He said her plantexs sit farther out on the sidewalk
than the deck.
#6— The encroachment into the public right-of-rvay ua!!not be granted for more than 30%of the width of the
.rideavalk mea.rured frnm the properzy line to the back of curb of the adjacent.ctreet. In no ca.re,rhall the encroachment
into the public right-of-way exceed a di.rtance of 36 inche.r—Larson said the deck doesn't violate the 30%or
36"rule.
Larson cited no problems with items #7-11.
11
Larson said the City Council has the authority to provide this variance. He noted that other
business owners have obtained variances for items on the sidewalk. In 2004 Ramsay was treated
very formally with her request by city staff. However,when Robb Rasmussen from Sioux River
Cyclery sent a letter to Dan Hanson asking for a variance for ornamental reasons, Hanson
Yesponded with a lettex to go ahead. Ramsay asked two months later and her request was denied.
He agreed that his client has been a public figure and someone who is controversial. He felt his
client has been cleaxly treated differendy by the city than others. He said to the council that this was
an opportunity to protect its citizens. The codes and ordinances of the city axe in place to protect
people. He is asking to make her building safe by complying with the ADA. If the City Council
finds any one of the criteria axe not satisfied,it must return to ADA guidelines for direction. City
government is required to make accommodations to allow for equal access to businesses within
Bxookings.
Council discussion:
Whaley noted that the date of the xepoxt was eight months old, dated June 27,2007. When did we
staxt this project? Laxson said in 2000 and the deck was 2004. The report was completed after
receiving a letter from the city attorney stating they needed an architect. In order to appease the
city,Ramsay had the study done.
Whaley noted that the insurance cextificate is dated January 22,2008. She asked if none of this was
thought of before when building. Larson said there was insurance and renewed in January. His
client has no objection to keeping lnsurance on the project and it isn't an issue.
Weldon said the city council has a recommendation from staff to deny this request. The reason is
simply that thexe is no good reason to allow private use of public right-of-way. The issue may be
explored further on the ADA issues. However, there has to be a way to avoid the encxoachment
and made accessible. No one can just build on someone else's property and take control over it. As
for the liability on the deck, the reality is what lawyers will encourage a client is to sue everyone,
paxticularly if the party who crashed into the deck has no ability to pay for damages. They will sue
the city with deep pockets because we allowed an encroachment on a public right-of-way and the
city would not be unmune from liability.
City Attorney Steve Britzman said Ordinance No. 24-04 expanded the decision making process with
respect to building on a public right-of-way and was intended to be fitting within the ADA. The
ordinance contemplates modifications to zoning policies to evaluate requests for variances to satisfy
the ADA. The City has taken steps by these policies set in oxdinances to be receptive to ADA. One
pYOblem is if there axe other alternatives to pxovide access. With a public sidewalk,the City must
evaluate access to all people. An encroachtnent request must be balanced if it could pose a pxoblem
to those on the sidewalk. Those individuals with physical disabilities, there must be a balance,
because the city must also take all disabilities into account including sight impairments. The Council
must weigh whether or not encroaching on the sidewalk is better than the alternative. The report
handed out at the meeting is along the lines of what he suggested to the law firm one yeat ago.
Britzman had suggested Ramsay have an appropxiate expert look at building and allow city to
participate in the process to ask questions and evaluate the conclusions. This report is along those
lines;however, the city never heard any thing back from that discussion of Maxch 2007 and feels
there were some alternatives that had not been contemplated within the building. The question of if
additional accommodations axe legally required has not been researched. He said the city has taken
adequate steps to look at this issue and provided enough flexibility to accommodate the request.
That is why pxocedures were created. He exptessed concern that the city has not participated in any
degree to looking at other alternatives priox to installing the deck on the public sidewalk into
perpetuity.
Bardey said the City Council just received the axchitect's report and has not had a chance to review
it. He refexred to the conclusions in the report. The architect recommended the building's primary
entrance be the accessible entrance. Baxdey said that was the architect's opinion, citing other
buildings secondary entrances are accessible and not the primary. Bartley clarified that this report is
the finding of an architect and is only one opinion and is not a conclusion based on law. This report
doesn't look at the othex accessibility options.
Laxson said other alternatives have been researched. He noted the stairs inside the building
separating the fire hall from the city hall portions. His client purchase a lift to provide access inside
the building but it wouldn't work. The deck access is preferred because there's no other way to
12
ptovide access without spending considerable funds and without destroying the historical integriry
of the building. He apologized for the oversight of not getting the report to city staff earlier and
said it was his fault. Interior changes would cost too. She can't recess the door due to historic
issues.
Brunner asked if there was a way to ramp the inside of the building. No.
Bardey asked if it would be appropriate for the architect to state that (ramp option) and list all the
alternatives considered and why they weren't feasible. Larson said the repoxt does include a code
analysis and recommendations.
Bartley disagreed saying the report doesn't show the other alternatives explored along with
supporting docuxnentation. It's only the architect's opinion. Larson said his client was asked to get
an expert opinion on other ways to pxovide access and she has done that. Now the City wants a
supplemental report. He noted that the court order on the variance expires in 2 months and there
are things they'll need to do procedurally to file documents.
Bardey said the report was produced in June 2007 and there's been plenty of time to get it to the
City Council. He's not comfortable with making a decision and criteria#1 xegarding othex
alternatives is the toughest and doesn't see answers to that question in the architect's report and
documentation. Baxtley said if his client's architect has additional data on other alternatives
considered and rejected, that should be provided to the city staff and council for review. Then the
City Council can make their decision based on it.
Larson said other alternatives were explored and that's what is required. A report isn't specified.
His client can list why each entYance doesn't work.
Bardey asked for that information to be put into written form to review. Other options related to
historic pxeservation wexe not explored. He'd like to see documentation that those alternatives were.
explored and why they won't work (stairs, too naxrow,bearing wall,etc.). Larson offexed to review
each during the meeting in great detail. He also commented that he could get that information from
the architect. Bartley said that would be more appropriate.
Reed said the informarion must come through city staff before it goes to the City Council. He noted.
that this is a paid report done by the client's architect. The City must qualify the report's firidings '
through review by the city staff and ciry attorney.
Larson objected saying this has been going on for over three years,citing the city finds another
problem every time. The instructions given to his client were broad. He can give the architect these
instructions,but there could be additional information requested and be back in front of the council
again.
Batdey said the additional information should be provided to staff and they can make a
recommendation to the Council. He'd like to see the data provided to the ciry engineer and city
attorney as soon as possible and they make xecommendation to the City Council at the March 11`�
meeting based on that data.
It was noted that staff needs time to xeview and the issue won't come before the City Council unless
the staff feels the issues have been researched and ad�essed.
Bardey urged that the data be provided quickly and that the city staff review it quickly.
Bezdichek suggested labeling each entYance fxom the Yepoxt exhibits for a cleater understanding of
each area and accessibility options.
Larson clarified that the former fire hall is already compliant with the street level access,but there
axe interior stairs to old city hall. The old Fire Hall and old City Hall are separate structures.
Britzman asked if there would be any restriction from city staff contacting the atchitect. Larson said
no, that wouldn't be a problem and he would notify the architect.
There was Council consensus to require the applicant,Mrs. Ramsay,provide a written report from
hex axchitect addressing each alternative explored. City staff will prepare a report for council review
with the ability to contact the architect for clarification.
13
Reed e�ressed concern regarding an architect's report being presented at the meeting which doesn't
allow time fox thorough review. The City Council has a responsibility to weigh the considerations of
accessibility and public safety with this request fot encroachment on public land.
Larson said the City Manager brought up a number of points and cited there is no good reason to
allow an encroachment. Just two months prior to the city denying his client's request, the city
allowed an encroachment foY ornamental reasons. He said there are many lawsuits about this
(access and public right-of-way). The city manager said a person can't just take over public land.
Larson axgued that the Fedexal government says cities have to allow compliance with the ADA. As
for liability, everything is a potential liability and hopes $2 million would be enough coverage. He
urged that Federal law trumps city building codes. His client is only asking to be ADA compliant
for the protection of its citizens.
Larson asked if the city had issues with any of the other criteria.
Weldon said a scale drawing is still recjuired.
Reed said more discussion on liability insurance.
Jackie Lanning, City Engineer, clarified that even after the appxoval process is completed and if Mrs.
Ramsay is granted a variance, a building pernut would still be required for something that is
completed. Reed clarified that even if the Council approves the vaxiance, the project could still be
denied if done incoxxecdy.
Adjourn. A motion was made by Brunner, seconded by Whaley,to adjourn. All present voted yes;
motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:26 p.m.
CITY OF BROOKINGS
,.
Scott D. Munsterman,Mayor
c
O� • ORpp9^� � �
� '�1 0�G�
Z� .,� •�N ��
°�� �� :� J
• ornes,City Clexk �