Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-07-12 CC MIN. ;258 • COUNCIL CHAMBER Stillwater, Minnesota July 12, 1977 7:30 P. M. REGULAR MEETING The meeting was called to order by President Junker. The Invocation was given by the Acting City Clerk, Schnell Present: Councilwoman Bodlovick Councilmen enr Mahoney, Peterson, Powell and Mayor Absent: None Also Present: tendent Public Works, Shelton; APublicySafetyy Kimmel; Director, Abrahamson; Director of Parks and Recreation, Blekum; Consulting Engineer, Elliott; Planning Commission Chairman, Jeff Zoller Press: Stillwater Evening- Bob Liberty WAVN - John Hanvelt Citizens: Jack Hoeschler (Attorney for Mr. Aiple and Pillsbury), Frank Aiple, Vincent Turnblad, Charles Salmore, Arleta Drentlaw, Mr. Van Wormer (Minnesota Highway Dept.), Lyle Anderson, Owen Thomas, Wilbert Monson, Ron Christofferson, Monty Brine, Everett Hicks, Bud Kern, Harry Pererson, Representatives from Port of Sunnyside, Michael McGuire, Virgil Doerfler, James Lammers, Stan Fishman, James Simpson, Don Flynn, Russ Weitz, Graydon Thomp- son, Duane Nelson, Jack Hooley, Charles Hooley, Robert Thueson, Larry Hauge, Alvin Krueger, Croixgate Representatives, Dennis Sullivan. (About 100 people in attendance) INDIVIDUALS - DELEGATIONS 1. MR. RONALD VILMO was unable to appear regarding the liquor transfer for the Main - streeter and the New Annex, but the matter was considered since all of the necessary papers and police check had been completed. On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council granted the transfer for the liquor license for the Mainstteeter and the New Annex to Ronald Vilmo - effective date to be the closing date for the property. (all in favor) 2. CHARLES SALMORE, 716 West Laurel Street, appeared before the City Council regarding the condition of the City property across from the Harbor on Owen Street which is dusty and dirty and requested that the City blacktop same and add some grass and gravel and clean the area. He further questioned the equipment which is currently being parked there with diseased elm trees loaded on them. COUNCILMAN POWELL indicated that this matter was discussed at the Public Works Committee meeting this evening and Mr. John_on is to be asked to move his equipment from that location and to also remove the trees as it is a hazard and the matter will be taken care of. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 This was the day and time for the public hearing on the proposed traffic flow changes in downtown Stillwater. Notices were mailed to all the business places in the downtown area that would be affected by the removal of the parking meters. MRS. ARLETA DRENTLAW, spoke in behalf of the Community Volunteer Services, who would be handicapped if this parking were to be eliminated. MR. GLENN VAN WORMER, of the Minnesota Department of Transportation, explained the survey made by the department of the traffic pattern in the downtown area. He stated that the by -pass cost would be about one million dollars and the proposal that they submitted was something to possibly take care of the traffic flow on a temporary basis. One of the items would be the rebuilding of the Main and Myrtle signals, one -half of the cost which would be the City's responsibility. About 15 to 18 meters would have to be removed to make room for the various left turns proposed - all of these would be on the west side of Main Street. • • • r.‘ July 12, 1977 WILBERT MONSON felt that there should be more consideration for the pedestrian traffic and it will become a greater problem with the additional lanes. LYLE ANDERSON OF THE ST. CROIX CRUG felt it would keep epople from getting to his business and other businesses on Chestnut Street west of Main and that there must be a better solution to the problem. OWEN THOMAS stated that many of the businessmen park their cars on the street which eliminates availzble parking for the customers. RON CHRISTOFFERSON asked bhy we do not have police officers to direct traffic at Main and Chestnut during the rush hours, and the only reason given was that there is a shortage of manpower. MONTY BRINE, representing the Downtown Business Council, stated that there was not a nuanimous decision on this matter and said that police control is some- thing that could be looked into. He stated further that many people use Water Street and go through the stop sign at Chestnut Street. Seventy parking spaces would be lost if the by -pass were to be put in. JEFF ZOLLER, Planning Commission Chairman, stated that the Commission felt that this could be a possible temporary measure and if it did not work it could be reverted back to the way it was and come up with an alternate. EVERETT HICKS did not feel that there should be elimination of left turns onto to Chestnut Street. BUD KERN asked if the Council had considered buying buildings in the downtown area and tearing them down for parking lots. THE MAYOR CLOSED THE HEARING. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council agreed to meet with the Highway Engineering Department and certain people from the Downtown Council and review the parking plan and perhaps come up with something less drastic and more acceptable - this meeting would be held within the next thirty days. (all in favor) DELEGATIONS - INDIVIDUALS - (continued) 3. JACK HOESCHLER, representing the St. Croix Barge Terminal Co., appeared before the City Council requesting the sub -lease of the northerly half of the leased property to the Pillsbury Company for their operations for supplying coke to the Minnesota State Prison. The St. Croix Barge Terminal is currently leasing this property for ".d years and they are in their 19th year and intend to renew it for the next twenty years when it comes due. It is a simple clear iron clad lease. He felt that this is a better land use than if it were to be used for park purposes. They are now requesting the sub - leasing of a portion of this property to the Pillsbury Co. which has to be approved by the City Council. Instead of using the graduated percentages for the tonnage it would be figured on a streight 5c per ton, which should result in a return of nine to ten thousand dollars per year. This operation would also give four to five more jobs here in Stillwater. He felt that the use of the land for this purpose was appropriate and did not feel that there was anything bad about it. HARRY PETERSON, 210 East Laurel Street, requested that the Council reject the sub- lease - he was concerned with the use of the river frontage and would like to see it used for roadways,bike trials and parking for the downtown area. He cited the revenue figures since 1958 when the lease was signed with the total being $14,926.60. (continued next page) MRS. DRENTLAW continued that they now have one parking space and this would eliminate that. They do have a parking lot in the back, but in the winter months it is almost impossible to get out of it. Also people would have to be dropped off at the corner and then walk to the Drop -In Center and some of these people are handicapped and not too alert. COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that the only way to sove the problem is to build a new bridge and he felt the loss of the parking would be detrimental to the business community. MR. VAN WORMER stated that part of the delay was the alternatives for the bridge and this bridge was cut back due to the shortage of funds. The proposal they have submitted is one which will partially alleviate the situation with the minimum number of dollars. COUNCILMAN PETERSON questioned the removal of the meters on the west side of Main Street. • r.‘ July 12, 1977 WILBERT MONSON felt that there should be more consideration for the pedestrian traffic and it will become a greater problem with the additional lanes. LYLE ANDERSON OF THE ST. CROIX CRUG felt it would keep epople from getting to his business and other businesses on Chestnut Street west of Main and that there must be a better solution to the problem. OWEN THOMAS stated that many of the businessmen park their cars on the street which eliminates availzble parking for the customers. RON CHRISTOFFERSON asked bhy we do not have police officers to direct traffic at Main and Chestnut during the rush hours, and the only reason given was that there is a shortage of manpower. MONTY BRINE, representing the Downtown Business Council, stated that there was not a nuanimous decision on this matter and said that police control is some- thing that could be looked into. He stated further that many people use Water Street and go through the stop sign at Chestnut Street. Seventy parking spaces would be lost if the by -pass were to be put in. JEFF ZOLLER, Planning Commission Chairman, stated that the Commission felt that this could be a possible temporary measure and if it did not work it could be reverted back to the way it was and come up with an alternate. EVERETT HICKS did not feel that there should be elimination of left turns onto to Chestnut Street. BUD KERN asked if the Council had considered buying buildings in the downtown area and tearing them down for parking lots. THE MAYOR CLOSED THE HEARING. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilwoman Bodlovick, the Council agreed to meet with the Highway Engineering Department and certain people from the Downtown Council and review the parking plan and perhaps come up with something less drastic and more acceptable - this meeting would be held within the next thirty days. (all in favor) DELEGATIONS - INDIVIDUALS - (continued) 3. JACK HOESCHLER, representing the St. Croix Barge Terminal Co., appeared before the City Council requesting the sub -lease of the northerly half of the leased property to the Pillsbury Company for their operations for supplying coke to the Minnesota State Prison. The St. Croix Barge Terminal is currently leasing this property for ".d years and they are in their 19th year and intend to renew it for the next twenty years when it comes due. It is a simple clear iron clad lease. He felt that this is a better land use than if it were to be used for park purposes. They are now requesting the sub - leasing of a portion of this property to the Pillsbury Co. which has to be approved by the City Council. Instead of using the graduated percentages for the tonnage it would be figured on a streight 5c per ton, which should result in a return of nine to ten thousand dollars per year. This operation would also give four to five more jobs here in Stillwater. He felt that the use of the land for this purpose was appropriate and did not feel that there was anything bad about it. HARRY PETERSON, 210 East Laurel Street, requested that the Council reject the sub- lease - he was concerned with the use of the river frontage and would like to see it used for roadways,bike trials and parking for the downtown area. He cited the revenue figures since 1958 when the lease was signed with the total being $14,926.60. (continued next page) MRS. DRENTLAW continued that they now have one parking space and this would eliminate that. They do have a parking lot in the back, but in the winter months it is almost impossible to get out of it. Also people would have to be dropped off at the corner and then walk to the Drop -In Center and some of these people are handicapped and not too alert. COUNCILMAN POWELL stated that the only way to sove the problem is to build a new bridge and he felt the loss of the parking would be detrimental to the business community. MR. VAN WORMER stated that part of the delay was the alternatives for the bridge and this bridge was cut back due to the shortage of funds. The proposal they have submitted is one which will partially alleviate the situation with the minimum number of dollars. COUNCILMAN PETERSON questioned the removal of the meters on the west side of Main Street. !260 July 12, 1977 He questioned how long Pillsbury would be using the facility and this could be a sub -lease with no guarantee of the amount of return which would be denying the City the money that they are entitled to. He questioned why there has been no operation at this facility - there has been no flood in the first five years, or hazardous waters - there is no explana- tion tion as to why he chose not to use the terminal. He questioned the improve- ments made to the property and also stated that it is tax free as it is City property. A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE PART OF SUNNYSIDE stated he was concerned about water navigation if this is approved, and asked what happens to the pleasure craft and the pollution of our river. He would like to see it sub - leased for recreational purposes and he felt there should be an opportunity to lease or sub- lease it to make some money for the City. He said the Port of Sunnyside would like to talk to the Council and Mr. Aiple about sub - leasing this property. MICHALE MC GUIDE questioned the additional trucks that would be coming and going from this area and it was tated that they would not b e going through the down- town area, but rather to the south of the terminal. COUNCILMAN PETERSON said that Mr. Aiple was told at the last meeting that the Council would take action on this matter this evening - nine or ten thousand dollars is a lot of money and the City is always short of mo my, although four or five jobs would be a minor addition. He said these things have to be weighed as to what we are giving up and what we are getting. On motion of Councilman Person, seconded by Councilman Powell, the City Attorney was instructed to enter into action to break this lease now. COUNCILMAN MAHONEY said that the City does not have money available to develop this property for recreation and the use that we have there now is good for the City and additional business could be created. He felt that the City has an obligation or this Council should stand behind the agreement that they make or prior Councils have made. COUNCILMAN POWELL asekd the Attorney about breaking the lease and MR. KIMMEL said that the City has accepted the minimum payment for non - performance and the breaking of the lease is a decision of the Council - if the Council feels one way in a certain situation that my opinion'may Iein ode way or the other it is still-their decision to make. (Motion defeated) - - VOTE ON THE MOTION -- AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick and Councilman Peterson NAYS -- Councilmen Mahoney and Powell and Mayor Junker On motion of Councilman Mahoney, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council granted the sub -lease to the Pillsbury Company. On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the motion was amended requiring the sub - leasee (The Pillsbury Company) to supply an environmental impact statement to the City prior to the sub- lease, subject to a financial budget to the City and a statement as to the maintenance of the area for a pleasing appearance to the Barge Terminal. VOTE ON THE AMENDMENT -- AYES -- Councilmen Mahoney, Peterson and Powell NAYS -- Councilwoman Bodlovick (amendment carried) VOTE ON THE MOTION -- AYES -- Councilmen Mahoney and Powell and Mayor Junker NAYS -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilman Peterson (motion carried) THE MAYOR DECLARED A RECESS FROM 9:10 TO 9:20 P. M. 2. This was the day and time for the public hearing on Case No. 275, Special Use Permit from Doerfler Construction to construct a 40 unit apartment comples on South Greeley Street. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Evening Gazette, the official newspaper of the City on July 1, 1977, and copies were mailed to all property owners within 300 feet. The Mayor opened the hearing. JAMES LAMMERS, representing Doerfler Construction, stated that the plans had been revised to meet the requirements set forth in the letter from Mr. Schwab. It will be built on an 8.5 acre tract of land of which 4% acres are dry land and the balance is under water. It will be a three story building with underground parking for all of the units. It has been zoned RCM - Multiple Dwellings since 1963, and such dwellings are only permitted on a Special Use Permit. They eliminated the outside garages and freed up this land for more green area and the swimming pool and tennis courts have -een eliminated. An amount of $6,000 will be given to the City in lieu of the park areas. The project is acceptable to Mr. Schwab in accordance with his letters. The Planning Commission voted in favor of the project on July llth. There will be a dry well to catch part of the drainage from the area. There will be a $15,000 bond to assure that all aspects of the Special Use Permit will be met. It will contain forty units and there are no variances needed. • • • N • • • MR. STAN FISHMAN, added that the parking would be under the building and they have added an elevator. Of the fortu units sixteen are one beedroom and twenty - four are two bedroom and "wo will have provisions for the handicapped. There are 172,000 quare feet o. dry land and there will be forty parking spaces out- side of the building to the east, and they have removed all of the on -site garages COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked if there still are individual air conditioners for each unit and MR. FISHMAN said, "yes" but they have been screened. COUNCILMAN POWELL asked if the square footage was figured based on the high water mark and the response was "yes". MR. GRAYDON THOMPSON, 1316 South Everett Street, asked what date the survey was made and MR. SHELTON stated it was on February 18th. COUNCILMAN PETERSON said the Planning Commission indicated there will be twenty percent of the units subsidized and he asked if this was subject to change and that it could be more than that number, and also what the credit would be on the real estate taxes. He was informed that the percentate could be increased and MR. KIMMEL stated that they do receive a credit or refund on the real estate taxes for the units that are subsidized. MR. LAMMERS stated that if you qualify for federal funding you can be eligible for such a reduction - forty percent of the market value - the rents at this particular location is not low income rental. MR. FISHMAN stated that the original cost was fourteen to fifteen thousand dollars per unit - now they are looking at $20,000 per unit. GRAYDON THOMPSON asked about the height of the penthouse for the elevator and he was informed it would be nine feet above the roof. JAMES SIMPSON, 2108 South Everett Street, felt there was a lack of concern for the taxpayers - in 1958 this property was not multiple dwellings, but was in 1963. We have overcrowded schools in our community and we continue to vote down bond issues. He said it is about time that we should ask the developer to pay their share if they want to invest their money in an apartment on the property to improve and protect it. He felt there are better ways to spend the tax- payers dollars. DONALD FLYNN, 1214 South Everett Street, felt the area is overcrowded with the Lily Lake Recreational area, South Greeley Street is a major thorough -fare, our schools are overcrowded, plans should be made for future zoning, it will have an ecological effect on the area and due to the tax effect it should not be permitted. RUSS WEITZ, 813 South Everett Drive, stated that he had contact the Minnesota Finance Agency about this financing and they are eligible for low- moderate income rental units. They are entitled to 50% abatement of taxes by Minnesota law which extends for fifteen years. He cited figures relative to taxes on his home -- as compared to each unit of this complex which would be a net loss in taxes of $1,844 per year per unit or $300,000 over the next 15 years. Our education costs are $1,109 per student and Minnesota and Stillwater taxes are the highest in the nation. He asked where the money is coming from for education and other governmental costs. COUNCILMAN PETERSON CLARIFIED the amount that the City would lose in texes since the City of Stillwater would only receive a percentage of the $300,000 and not the full amount. MRS. ARLETTA DRENTLAW, 1204 South Everett Street, said that most of the property owners along the lake feel as she did - they have a quiet neighborhood and world like to remain that way. The addition of this complext would disturb the wild life on the pond; they enjoy the freshness of the country air; there would be a lot of noise from the playgrounds. DUANE NELSON owner of the four plexes, complained about the footage setbacks and the effect on the shoreline; to total impact to the area, the social changes. There are now 54 units in the area and this would make a total of 94 units. There will be 120 -140 people who will occupy the proposed building and the square footage per person would be less than the average. The Mayor closed the hearing at 10:10 P. M. July 12, 1977 • • • 1 4 • • July 12, 1977 COUNCILMAN PETERSON asked if the Council could require something less than the minimum and MR. KIMMEL said they could - they have the right to consider less units on a Special Use Permit with factual support for the conditions set forth in the Special Use Permit. COUNCILMAN POWELL said that the reason for the Special Use Permit for such develop- ment is so that the Council can decide on each project on its own merits. MR. KIMMEL said that they are dealing initially with a permitted use in the zone. It is his understanding that this places the burden on the other foot - in a sense it is a permitted special use - evidence is needed to sustain their decision in special circumstances. COUNCILMAN PETERSON said when the original proposal was turned down for the forty units, he had asked Mr. Fishman if they had considered a lesser number of units for this development. MR. FISHMAN said they did a study for 21 units of townhouses which were not feasible as the rents were too high and not flexible. The market is available for higher type of rents and 807 of the units on the open market are for over $300 for the two bedroom units. He indicated that they are not going to look shabby at $20,000 per unit costs. On motion of Councilwoman Bodlovick, seconded by Councilman Powell, the Council denied the Special Use Permit to Doerfler Construction for the forty unit apartment complext on South Greeley Street on that site. AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilman Peterson, Councilman Powell NAYS -- Councilman Mahoney (motion carried) The undersigned members of the City Council of the City of Stillwater base their motion to deny the application for the special use permit of Doerfler Construction Co., Inc. upon the following findings of fact: 1. That the area involved bdcause of its unusual physical characteristics is too small to support the number of units requested. That the unusual physical characteristics referred to are as follows: 1. A substantial portion of the property is covered by water and the exact amount which is at any given time covered by water is impossible to determine since the only drainage is into a landlocked lake and the only means of regulating the level of water is by pumping. 2. The boundaries of the property are irregular and a substantial portion of the property is required for what is in effect only a means of access. This situation is further complicated by the fact that the elevation of the property is much lower than the street grade at almost all of its frontage on the public street. 2. An inadequate amount of property has been allocated for recreational purposes as required by Section 1306 of the Zoning Ordinance. ac.4 L <. 7 Roger Peterson William Powell Ann Bodlovick - -- GRAYDON THOMPSON requested that this area be zoned for not more than 24 units. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilman Peterson, the matter of restricted use for this site was turned over to the Planning Commission for a possible 24 unit apartment building. (all in favor) 3. This was the day and time set for a public hearing on the proposed improvements for Local Improvement No. 129 -2 for utilities to service properties to the north of Highway 212 including the Croixgate Development. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette, the official newspaper of the City, on July 1 and July 8, 1977 and copies were mailed to all property owners proposed to be benefited from these improvements. The Mayor opened the hearing. • • 1 • • MR. ELLIOTT presented the following information to the petitioners, other property owners and the Council: Sanitary Sewer - Drawing No. 1 indicates the proposed sanitary sewer, lift station and forcemain facilities to serve the Croixgate property. Sanitary sewer laterals will benefit a limited area within the Hooley Development and will also benefit the property aubtting and north of Orleans Street easterly of Country Road 5. The proposed sanitary sewer lift station and forcemain will benefit the area outlined in red on Drawing No. 1. It has been reported to the City Council before, a limited area within Stillwater Township abutting and westerly of County Road 5 will be benefited by the lift station and lateral sanitary sewer construction. Either a joint public hearing with the township could be held or in the future a connection charge could be imposed in lieu of an assessment. Watermain - Drawing No. 2 indicates the proposed watermain facilities within the Croixgate Development. A connection to an existing watermain at Wildpines Lane easterly of C -unty Road 5 is proposed. This crossing was con- structed as a part of the Croixwood Development and paid for by the City. Therefore, the coat of this crossing is a benefit to the Croixgate property. Sixteen inch (16 ") watermins in the locations shown on Drawing No. 2 are orineted towards the potential of an elevated tank near Orleans Street about mid -point between County Road No. 5 and County Road No. 66. The twelve inch (12 ") watermain on County Road 5 north of Orleans Street is not necessary at this time to provide service. Also, if it can be shown that the Croixgate Development does not require the eight inch watermain on County Road 5 south of Orleans Street to provide proper service this main could be eliminated. Drainage -- Drawing No. 3 indicates drainage facilities necessary to serve Croixgate as well as upstream tributary facilities within the Hooley and adjacent areas to the north. The tributary area is sown in red on Drawing No. 3. Details of the drainage requirements, particularly as related to detention ponds, were covered in the August 24, 1976 report referred to earlier. Upstream facilities within the Hooley area were not previously reviewed in the improvement hearing for utility service to the Holley area because a downstream outlbt could not be made available until the Croixgate area moved to the preliminary study and report stage. It is recommended, therefore, that all of the facilities propsoed on Drawing No. 3 he constructed. S treets -- Drawing No. 4 indicates the proposed streets necessary to serve the Croixgate area. Also shown on the drawing are the rights -of -way that are recommended in order to provide adequate room for the proposed facilities. In locations where 80 fooet (80') rights -of -way are indicated it is recommended that roadway construction be four lane divided with a 16 foot median area to provide room for left and right turn lanes. In other locations 66 foot (66') right -of- way is required. In these locations 44 foot width streets are recommended. In all locations ine ton axle load streets are recommended to provide the necessary load carrying capacity in a commercial /industrial area. • re\ Facility Estimated Cost (1) Sanitary Sewer, Lift Station and Forcemain $205,700.00 t) Watermain 202,200.00 (3) Drainage (Storm Sewers) 734,100.00 (4) Streets 346,000.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST $1,488,000.00 (1) Indladms 10 percent for contingencies and 15 percent for legal, engineering, and administrative. (2) Includes $70,000 for lift station and forcemain. (3) Includes 2,950 lineal feet of 16 inch trunk watermain (4) Includes an estimated $40,100 for pond on Hooley property and $67,400 for pond on Croixgate property. We find that the project is feasible and best be constructed in conjunction with City Local Improvement No. 129 -1. JAMES LAMMERS, representing the Hooleys, questioned the fact that the greater portion of the Hooley Development would not be served through Greeley Street and that only the northwe•-t corner and the southwester corner could be included in this assessment, and this fact was verified by Mr. Elliott. Discussion follwed about tie removal of a portion of this project with the possibility of dedicating what land to the City to develop the grading in accord- ance with Mr. Elliott's plan as this property could not stand this type of assess- ment. Estimates of Cost July 12, 1977 26Th ■ • � • • (r 64 July 12, 1977 • COUNCILMAN POWELL asked how mahy acres would be served and the response was 181 acres. COUNCILMAN PETERSON questioned the figure for storm sewers and he was told it was 4c per square foot a few years ago and now it is 7k to 80 per square foot. ALVIN KRUEGER, resident of Baytown, asked if there were any assessmsents to Baytown and Mr. Elliott said that the 24 inch pipe shown on the drawing does drain an area in Baytown as well as a triangle of the Benson property to the north. The Mayor closed the hearing On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Powell, Mr. Elliott was directed to study the storm sewer portion of this project and come back with a recommendation. (all in favor) NEW BUSINESS 1. On motion of Councilman Powell, seconded by Councilnan Peterson, a resolution was introduced " DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF THE BILLS ". AYES -- Councilwoman Bodlovick, Councilmen ahy, Peterson and Powell and Mayor Junk NAYS - -None (see resolutions) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. On made Councilman of entitled o "AANNaOORDDINAANNCn�INGCITrk UNLAWFUL TO CONSUME OR HAVE IN POSSESSION IN AN OPEN CONTAINER INTOXICATING LIQUOR N-I XICATING MALT LIQU UPON PUBLIC SIDEWALKS AND ORBOIC PARKING AREAS IN THE LI OF STILLWATER". The ordinance was read section by section followed by roll call after each section and all members of the Council voted in the affirmative. The chair then put the questions, "Shall this ordinance pass?" and on roll call the ordinance was unanimously adopted. (see ordinances) ADJOURMENT On motion of Councilman Peterson, seconded by Councilman Mahoney, the meeting was adjourned at 3:00 P. M., July 13, 1977. Attest:_______ d .19- Actilg City Clerk Mayor • • • •