|
TOWN OF ROCHESTER Link to Town Board Meetings
|
|
Link to Town Board Meetings |
October 1, 2003 SPECIAL BOARD MEETING 4:00 p.m.
Meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m. with Gary Beck, Paul Beere and Mike Weinkauf present.
Atty. Bill Phenicie and Betty Novy, Clerk, were also present.
Review of proposed amendment to Chapter 27 “Land Division Control”
Bill reported going through the proposed land division trying to retain as much as he could and only addressing changes specifically requested by the Town Board. In addition, special attention was paid to maintain the Plan Commission as a recommending body and the Town Board as the approving body. In the previously proposed version, the Plan Commission could make directions. In this version, the Plan Commission can recommend such items as cluster design subdivisions, but cannot require it. These revisions were made as requested by the Town Board. In conclusion, basics of the ordinance proposed by the Committee were kept. Only several items were changed so that final authority goes to the Town Board.
Paul questioned statement on page 8 as follows: “The Town Plan Commission may recommend that the developer submit a conservation subdivision development plan as an alternative to a conventional subdivision.” He thought previous direction from the Town Board was to remove any requirements for conservation development plans. Bill explained verbage is such that the Plan Commission may recommend, but they can not require presentation of that type of plan. The developer has a right to choose otherwise.
Mike questioned 27.203(b.) requiring posting of signs on properties advising of pending conditional use applications, zoning variation or land division reviews. Atty. Phenicie indicated many communities are going with this type of notification. Consensus was to leave the section as is.
Mike further questioned Section 27.603(b.) “Inventory of existing resources”. Concern was expressed over costs to provide the type of information requested. It was clarified these requirements only applied to minor land divisions creating three or more parcels. The splitting off of one parcel is exempt from the requirements. The information is readily available from community organizations.
It was pointed out that section 27.606(a.-m) represents the same requirements. The definition of qualified ecological service provider was discussed. Typical charges from such a service were stated as approximately $50.00 per hour. Mike stated opposition to this requirement for land divisions made by Certified Survey Map. Consensus of the Board was to make 27.606(c.) an optional requirement at the request of the Town Board.
Atty. Phenicie recommended revision to 27.104 “Arbrogation and Greater Restrictions”. He suggested statement be added to indicate that where provisions are inconsistent with provisions of the adopted Land Use Plan, provisions of this ordinance shall prevail. This would cover any conflicts without going through the time consuming process of amending the Land Use Plan, particularly since it is a Joint Town and Village plan. Consensus of the Board was to approve adding the language.
Paul moved, 2nd by Mike to adjourn at 4:59 p.m. Motion carried
October 13, 2003 REGULAR BOARD MEETING 7:30 p.m.
Meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. with Gary Beck, Paul Beere and Mike Weinkauf present.
Also present: Atty. Bill Phenicie, Sarah Wilfert, Engineer, Colleen Holder, Treasurer, and Betty Novy, Clerk.
Mike moved, 2nd by Paul to approve minutes of the September 2, 8, 23 and 29 meetings as printed. Motion carried.
Mike moved, 2nd by Gary to approve October disbursements as follows. Motion carried.
General Fund Disbursements:
Sewer Utility Disbursements:
Treasurer’s Report: Mike moved, 2nd by Paul to approve the report as read by Colleen. Motion carried.
Public Works Report: Gary Beck questioned Gary Chart and Sarah Wilfert on recent PASER ratings of Town roads. Sarah reported most of the roads previously recommended for seal coats have deteriorated to the point where this is no longer a good treatment. The pavement has crumbled. It is recommended they be reprocessed or overlayed before total reconstruction is needed. If done within the next few years, costs will be half. N. River Road (south of STH 36) was cited as needing to be resurfaced. Gary Chart indicated N. River Road does not have a good base to start with. It was questioned whether this road should be resurfaced before the Fox River Prairie Subdivision is complete. Consensus of the Board was to wait until Fox River Prairie is almost full. Mike indicated extension of sewer lines should be part of the considerations on this project. Since discussion of these items had begun, consensus of the Board was to consider agenda items six and seven at this time.
2004 road improvement plans/ options: Sarah Wilfert, Crispell-Snyder
Two five-year budget scenarios were presented as follows:
$100,000 Annual Budget (Option A)
Projects rated a 3 or below to be included for future consideration:
Projects rated a 3 or below to be included for future consideration:
The current overall rating of the roads is 6.58. The $100,000 budget drops the overall rating to 6.39 at year end 2009. The $125,000 budget option maintains the rating at 6.54 at year end 2009. It was noted N. River Road should be resurfaced within the next two to five years in order to avoid increased costs of total reconstruction. Vacation of Beguhl Road should also be considered. Consensus of the Board was to consider both options in 2004 budget preparations.
Selection of project for 2004-2005 Town Road Improvement Program application
Consensus of the Board was to name Langmaid Street, Fairview Street and Westwood Drive as projects in the 2004-2005 TRIP application.
Sheriff’s Department. Sergeant Kacmarcik reported the following statistics for September: four speeding citations, ten traffic citations and thirty-two warnings were issued. Complaint statistics were as follows: seventeen complaints were originated through calls directly to Sheriff’s Department; Deputy Prochaska assisted with twenty-four additional complaints, performed follow up on ten and originated twenty-two on his own. Twelve foot patrols were conducted.
Deputy Prochaska reported the Bicycle Safety course given during the “Day in the Country” event was not well attended. Next year, plans are to hold several courses in neighborhood subdivisions. Overall, September was a quiet month with kids going back to school. However, minor vandalism was reported. Bike patrol was performed on the new County bike trail. Users were receptive to police presence and positive comments were heard. There have been only minor issues with kids on the trail since it opened. Concern was expressed that Stop signs were not yet installed at intersections on the trail. It was assumed they will be before the project is completed. Several complaints were received of citizens driving on the trail with cars and trucks. The trail is being watched for violations of this type. Gary questioned how the speed limit on STH 36 and CTH W dropped to 45 m.p.h. when the intersection of State highways 36, 83, and 20 remains at 55 m.p.h. Gary requested Deputy Prochaska compile accident data on the intersection to back up request to the State to drop the speed limit in that area.
Ordinance #8-2003 to repeal and recreate Chapter 27 “Land Division Control”
Atty. Phenicie indicated a previous meeting with the Plan Commission revealed need for several technical revisions to the ordinance. It was determined the terms “wetlands” and “surface waters” retained intent of reference to “ephemeral ponds”, so this reference was deleted. The Plan Commission recommended approval of the ordinance with these revisions, but suggested the Board consider reinstating a 3:1 depth to width ratio requirement and requirement to retain 80% surface water on site. These requirements were previously removed by request of the Town Board. Mike indicated he would consider retaining the 3:1 average depth requirement to deter “piano key” development if the five-acre minimum lot requirement specified in the Land Use Plan was overwritten. He feels the five-acre requirement is what causes piano-key lots. He cited Schneider Lane as example of five-acre lots where property owners maintain three acres at most; with two acres almost always left unmanaged. He would like three-acre average density specified in the ordinance. Paul questioned when five-acre density requirements were established. It was clarified they were adopted with the Land Use Plan in 1999. Prior to that, zoning prevailed and the minimum lot size was one acre. Atty. Phenicie indicated the Land Division Control Ordinance can take precedence over the Land Use Plan when referring to land division procedures, but cannot amend the planning aspect of the document specifying overall densities. If this is desired, the Land Use Plan needs to be amended. The ordinance cannot make that change. Gary indicated the ordinance is a good working document. Issues brought up by the Plan Commission may become future considerations for amendment. He feels comfortable adopting the ordinance as it is realizing changes may be needed in the future. Mike continued he feels the five-acre density requirement is a mistake that is wasting land in the Town. Paul moved, 2nd by Gary to adopt Ordinance #8-2003 to repeal and recreate Chapter 27 “Land Division Control” in its final form as presented by Atty. Phenicie tonight. Motion carried. Gary expressed thanks to Land Division Ordinance committee members, Plan Commission members and Atty. Phenicie for all the work that went into revising the ordinance.
Maintenance of outlot and lift station easement area: Fox River Prairie Subdivision
It was explained the lift station serving Fox River Prairie Subdivision was constructed on Lot 1 of the subdivision. Soil problems on the outlot where it was originally supposed to be constructed caused relocation. The owner of Lot 1 recently came in asking what type of landscaping could occur in the easement area for the lift station. The Town had no knowledge of the situation or easement language recorded to allow placement of the lift station on Lot 1. Atty. Phenicie indicated this is contradictory to terms of the developer’s agreement. Language of the easement should be amended to include specifications as to care and maintenance. Consensus of the Board was to direct Atty. Phenicie to contact the developer and discover exact language of the easement. Measures should then be taken to assure Town concerns are addressed.
Westwood Avenue connection figures and settlement amount: Kathy Reeseman
Sarah Wilfert, Crispell-Snyder, indicated review and averaging of two bids for connection of Westwood Avenue and Way-Mar Lane found $6,000.00 to be an appropriate settlement amount for Reesmans’ to pay towards connection. Concerns expressed by Kathy Reesman (letter dated 10/6/2003) were discussed. She indicated concern over lost frontage when the road is newly configured. Atty. Phenicie explained no frontage is being lost because the cul-de-sac area is not being vacated. He noted vacation of a portion of the cul-de-sac area was offered as part of settlement negotiations, but the Reesmans’ refused offer of the extra land. Concern was expressed over placement of a street light which the Reesmans’ have paid for the past 26 years (amount stated: $3,000.00). Atty. Phenicie indicated the street light was there at their option and expense, it is not a town street light. They can move or relocate the light at their discretion. Gary moved, 2nd by Mike to accept the engineers recommendation of $6,000.00 to be contributed by the Reesmans towards reconstruction of Westwood Avenue. Motion carried.
Fairview Street extension cost adjustments: Leonard Arnouts
Recommendation was provided by Sarah Wilfert for the Arnouts to pay the Town $1,736.05 towards installation of the surface course and shoulder in 2004. Leonard indicated his current estimates on completion total only $1,800.00; $586.00 of which should be reimbursed by the Town. There was discrepancy between Sarah and Leonard’s cost figures. Consensus of the Board was to table the item until such time as cost figures are worked out. A preference was indicated to have the final surface installed in conjunction with next year’s road improvement projects.
Camelback Farms Subdivision completion issues: Pat Hurley
Pat reported their contractor is ready to pave, but three houses are still under construction requiring cement poured basements. This requires cement trucks being lined up on the street. They request road resurfacing be delayed until Spring of 2004 so that no damage is done to the new surface. Whole roads could be pulverized and replaced in Spring. Some patching will occur on the cul-de-sac before winter. It was verified there were no plowing problems reported last year. Additional request was made to use pulverized materials for shouldering. Sarah will check on whether this is acceptable. Gary moved, 2nd by Mike to extend the deadline for completion to June 30, 2004. Motion carried. As follow up, Sarah requested clarification of the Board’s wish to amend specifications for completion to three inch thickness of asphalt. Original specifications called for 2 ½” and that is all the developer is required to install. Costs to the Town would be approximately $9,000.00 to install the additional ½ inch. Consensus of the Board was to pay those costs. This figure should be included in 2004 budget figures.
Proposals to cut back overgrowth on N. River Road
It was reported a second bid from T-N-T Tree Service had not been received. A proposal from Complete Tree Service came in at $1,750.00 to include cut back of brush and trees 10 foot back (or to the fence line) and 14 feet high. Mike moved, 2nd by Paul to accept the proposal made by Complete Tree Service for $1,750.00. Motion carried.
Costs for cutting of Case Eagle football practice area and clarification of Racine County policy
It was clarified “On the Cutting Edge Lawn Care” spent approximately two hours cutting a football practice area in Case Eagle Park. Dialogue with Racine County since that time confirmed several areas meant to be left natural were cut. The Town was directed not to cut any areas in the park except the leased baseball diamond area. Consensus of the Board was to absorb the cost of cutting the football area this year with understanding that it is not to be cut by Town direction again. Any cutting of the area must be approved and/or performed by Racine County.
Resignation of Jane Babik, Plan Commissioner
Mike expressed sentiment that Jane has done a lot of good for the Town and expressed good luck to her and her family. Paul moved, 2nd by Mike to accept the resignation letter of Jane Babik and to direct the Clerk to draft a letter acknowledging her contributions to the Town, to be signed by all Board members. Motion carried.
Application for Operator’s License (renewal): Patrick J. Tenant
Gary moved, 2nd by Mike to approve renewal of an operator’s license to Patrick J. Tenant. Motion carried.
A special meeting date was set for Monday, October 20, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. to begin work on the 2004 budget.
Period for Public Comment: Mike questioned whether WE Energies had been contacted about reimbursing increased costs on the N. Honey Lake Road project caused by their failure to relocate electric poles on time. Sarah indicated WE Energies received plans way in advance of the project that showed correct placement of the utility poles. Gary requested the engineer look into what happened and who made the mistake. Sarah will check with Jeff Nipple and verify re-bidding possibilities.
Bill Monnin noted “No Hunting” signs were removed from Case/Eagle Park entrances east of CTH W. Clerk is to call Racine County Public Works and indicate they need replacing. Additional signage for the bike trail is also needed.
Paul moved, 2nd by Mike to adjourn at 9:58 p.m. Motion carried.
Submitted by:
Betty J. Novy Clerk
October 20, 2003 SPECIAL BOARD MEETING 7:00 P.M.
Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. with Gary Beck, Paul Beere and Mike Weinkauf present.
Betty Novy, Clerk, and Colleen Holder, Treasurer, were also present.
Fairview Street extension cost adjustments: Leonard Arnouts
Cost figures were adjusted to $1,167.25 by the engineer. This amount includes credit for the connection area the Town agreed to pay for. Concern was expressed by the Arnouts as to being charged for the extra time it took to recalculate the correct amount. According to conversations with Sarah Wilfert (engineer), a field person was sent out to verify thickness of the shoulder. Leonard indicated all that information was already on the plans created by Jim Schilling (previous engineer). He did not feel he should incur additional engineering charges for this. Board members agreed and indicated the Town should not have to bear costs for recalculations either. The engineer should be notified of this before issuing the final bill. Gary moved, 2nd by Paul to release the Arnouts letter of credit upon payment of $1,167.25 as cost sharing on the Langmaid and Fairview project, $451.11 as a cash deposit (road bond) and payment of engineering fees as determined. Motion carried.
Begin work on 2004 Budget
Budget figures were gone over line by line. A final figure of $473,470.91was arrived at, with modifications to clerk and treasurer payroll amounts to be calculated based on 2003 cost of living adjustment figures. Options should be presented at the public hearing to include a 25% reduction in the Law Enforcement Contract and $10,000 reduction in Town Road Repairs; and to contribute a monetary amount to the library for furnishing the remodeling project in $5,000 increments (in the form of costs for a $100,000 house).
Paul moved, 2nd by Mike to adjourn at 9:35 p.m. Motion carried
Submitted by:
Betty J. Novy Clerk
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||