The URL can be used to link to this page

Full Agenda Packet REVISED 5/20/10 CITY OF JANESVILLE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MONDAY, May 24, 2010 7:00 P.M. 1. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance. 2. Roll Call. 3. Regular meeting minutes of May 10, 2010 City Council meeting. “C” 4. Licenses; and Recommendations of the Alcohol License Advisory Committee including an appeal of the denial of an operator’s license for Sara Henning. (Refer to separate agenda.) “C” 5. Financial statement for the month of April, 2010. “C” OLD BUSINESS 1. Requests and comments from the public regarding items on the Agenda not requiring a public hearing. NEW BUSINESS 1. Presentation on the Janesville-Milton-Whitewater transportation project. 2. Action on a proposed resolution authorizing the Common Council to fund, accept ownership and allow placement of a “Westgate Corridor” entrance sign located in the median of West Court Street between North Washington Street and the 5-points intersection. (File Res. No. 2010-700) 3. Action on a request from city staff to publish property ownership information on the City’s website ----------------------- “C” – This designation indicates an item that the City Council will take up under a Consent Agenda. City Council Agenda – May 24, 2010 Page 2 NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED) 4. Award of contracts C 2010-7 (Sandhill Drive paving) and C2010-8 (storm sewer improvements) for Public Works Bid Schedule “C” – 2010. 5. Action on a proposed resolution authorizing the acquisition and demolition of property at 321 East Court Street. (File Res. No. 2010-709) 6. Action on a proposed resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement with the State of Wisconsin Division of Public Health for a Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Grant Program. (File Res. No. 2010-708) 7. Authorization for the Police Department to apply for the 2010 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. 8. Action on a proposed resolution acknowledging the review of the Wastewater Utility 2010 Compliance Maintenance Annual Report. (File Res. No. 2010-706) 9. Motion to waive notice of City Council special meeting (study session) with the Sustainable Janesville Committee scheduled for June 14 at 5:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building in the Council Chambers. 10. Introduce, refer to Plan Commission and schedule a public hearing on a proposed ordinance amending Section 18.36.050 (Industrial Districts) of the Code of General Ordinances. (File Ord. No. 2010-455) 11. Requests and comments from the public on matters which can be affected by Council action. 12. Matters not on the Agenda. 13. Consideration of a motion to convene into closed session, pursuant to Wisconsin Statute Section 19.85 (1)(e), for the purpose of deliberating and setting the negotiating and bargaining terms and conditions for the potential sale of 189 South High Street under the City’s Buy Rehab Resell Program since competitive and bargaining reasons require a closed session. The use of audible cell phone ringers and active use and response to cellular phone technology by the governing body, staff and members of the public is discouraged in the Council Chambers while the Council is in session. PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF JANESVILLE, WISCONSIN REGULAR MEETING MAY 10, 2010 VOL. 61 NO. 3 Regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Janesville held in the Municipal Building on May 10, 2010. The meeting was called to order by Council President Voskuil at 7:00 PM. Boy Scout Troop 595 led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance. Present: Council President Voskuil, Councilmembers Brunner, Perrotto, Rashkin, Steeber, and Truman. Absent: Councilmember McDonald. CONSENT AGENDA Minutes of the regular meeting of April 26, 2010. Licenses and Recommendations of the Alcohol License Advisory Committee. Council President Voskuil stated that all items on the consent agenda would be approved except for the renewal alcohol licenses which will be postponed until May 24, 2010, if there were no objections. There were none. Action on a proposed resolution recognizing the days of May 17-21 as “Bike to Work Week.” Councilmember Perrotto moved to adopt said resolution, seconded by Councilmember Rashkin and passed unanimously. Councilmember Perrotto presented the resolution to the Velo Club and Rock Trail Coalition representative Dan Hartung. (File Res. No. 2010-703) OLD BUSINESS 1. Requests and comments from the public regarding items on the agenda not requiring a public hearing. Kay Deupree, representing the League of Women Voters, spoke in favor of water conservation (NB #3) and “Bike to Work Week” resolution (Consent Agenda). Alfred Lembrich, 541 Miller Ave., opposed the proposed E. Milwaukee St. roundabout (NB #8). Burdette Erickson, 115 S. High St., and Kurt Lincks, 118 S. High St., spoke in favor of the 313 N. Pearl St. acquisition and demolition (NB #4). Andreah Briarmoon, 339 S. Locust St., spoke in favor of the acquisition and opposed to the demolition of 313 N. Pearl St. (NB #4). 2. A proposed ordinance rezoning property located at 4332 Milton Avenue from R1, Single Family District, to O1, Office/Residence District, received its second reading and public hearing. Applicant Don Kwarciany, 2601 O’Hara Dr., spoke in favor of said ordinance. The public hearing was closed. Councilmember Steeber moved to adopt said resolution, seconded by Councilmember Rashkin and passed unanimously. (Revised File Ord. No. 2010-454) NEW BUSINESS 1. Action on a proposed resolution granting a temporary limited easement for an encroachment of installation of ventilation equipment and façade construction for O’Riley & Conway’s Tavern, 214 West Milwaukee, affecting property at 200 West Milwaukee Street. Councilmember Truman moved to adopt said resolution, seconded by Councilmember Steeber and passed unanimously. (File Res. No. 2010- 699) 2. Action on a proposed resolution accepting the 2010 Safe Routes to School Plan for elementary and middle schools in Janesville. Councilmember Steeber moved to adopt said resolution, seconded by Councilmember Rashkin and passed unanimously. (File Res. No. 2010-705) 3. Presentation on Water Conservation Plan. In 2010, the Water Conservation plan includes an educational awareness program ($20,000), a residential rebate program ($40,000), and commercial water audit program ($15,000). Councilmember Perrotto requested that the educational program include residential customers. Councilmembers Perrotto and Brunner stated they would like to see an incentive program for commercial customers. Councilmember Brunner stated he would like a recycling program for toilets that are removed. No action taken. 4. Action on a proposed resolution authorizing the acquisition and demolition of 313 North Pearl Street. Councilmember Rashkin moved to adopt said resolution with funding not to exceed $18,000, seconded by Councilmember Steeber and passed unanimously. (File Res. No. 2010-704) 5. Motion to approve Council President recommended Councilmember committee appointments. Councilmember Steeber moved to approve the committee appointments as recommended in the Revised Memo Dated 5/10/2010 and to include Council President Voskuil’s verbal request to move Councilmember McDonald from the Ice Skating Arena Committee to the Community Development Authority and to move Councilmember Rashkin from the Community Development Authority to the Ice Skating Arena Committee. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Rashkin and passed unanimously. 6. Action on proposed Council Policy Statement #84 relating to identity theft prevention. Councilmember Steeber moved to adopt Council Policy Statement #84, seconded by Councilmember Truman and passed unanimously. 7. Action on proposed resolution supporting Rock County’s Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan. Councilmember Rashkin moved to adopt said resolution, seconded by Councilmember Steeber and passed unanimously. (File Res. No. 2010-707) 8. Motion to waive notice of City Council special meeting (study session) regarding the Milwaukee Street traffic corridor (Wuthering Hills roundabout and bike trail crossing) scheduled for June 24 at 5:30 PM at the Municipal Building in the Council Chambers. Councilmember Steeber moved to waive said notice, seconded by Councilmember Perrotto and passed unanimously. 9. Requests and comments from the public on matters which can be affected by Council action. Alfred Lembrich, 541 Miller Ave., suggested a public hearing on restoring the Tallman House and spoke in favor of its repair. Andreah Briarmoon, 339 S. Locust St., requested property at 313 N. Pearl St. be rehabilitated and to loan money to a Section 8 participant to buy the property. 10. Matters not on the agenda. Councilmembers Brunner, Perrotto, Rashkin and Voskuil expressed concerns over the article in the Janesville Gazette about the Janesville Farmers Market. They encouraged the Farmers Market Board to allow all vendors and not limit the number or type of vendors. Council President Voskuil asked for more information regarding the Farmers Market and their policies. Councilmember Truman stated that Rotary Gardens are charging fishermen to fish and was this allowable under our agreement. City Manager Levitt stated the fishermen are required to pay the fee. Councilmember Truman stated Rotary Gardens has removed trees on the northwest corner of the property and that this action may create erosion problems. Councilmember Steeber reminded everyone the local Wisconsin Law Enforcement Officers Week event will be held on May 12, 2010 at 6:00 PM at Blackhawk Technical College. 11. Councilmember Steeber moved to convene into closed session pursuant to Wisconsin Statute Section 19.85(1)(e) for the purpose of deliberating and setting the negotiating and bargaining terms, conditions, and strategies for potential TIF District 14, 22, and 28 TIF development agreements since bargaining and/or competitive reasons require a closed session, seconded by Councilmember Rashkin and passed unanimously. There being no further business, Council convened into closed session at 8:23 PM. These minutes are not official until approved by the City Council. Jean Ann Wulf, City Clerk-Treasurer JANESVILLE CITY COUNCIL LICENSE AGENDA 5/24/2010 RECOMMENDED A. ELECTRICIANS–ORIGINAL Richard M. Steiner 2323 Sylvan Way, West Bend, WI Michael A. Sullivan N7936 County Hwy. D, Watertown, WI B. AMUSEMENT DEVICE AND CENTER – ORIGINAL Ross & Monteros Enterprises, LLC d/b/a McstAggers 121 E. Milwaukee St. C. ALCOHOL LICENSE RENEWALS FOR THE 2010-2011 LICENSE YEAR (See Attached List) DENIED A. OPERATOR LICENSE - ORIGINAL Sara A. Henning 4886 Monarch Dr., Milton, WI POLICE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM May 18, 2010 TO: City Council FROM: David J. Moore, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Council Action on Application for Operator’s License by Sara A. Henning On February 25, 2010, Sara A. Henning applied for a City of Janesville Operator’s License. On March 1, 2010, Deputy Chief Davis denied the application based on her history of Operating While Intoxicated Arrests (OWI). Ms. Henning appealed the denial to the Alcohol License Advisory Committee (ALAC). On April 6, 2010, Ms. Henning appeared before the ALAC and pled her case. The ALAC voted unanimously to uphold the denial. Ms. Henning now appeals to the Common Council. The table below reflects Ms. Henning’s conviction records. March 16, 1998 Operating While Intoxicated April 5, 2001 Operating While Intoxicated October, 2006 Operating While Intoxicated David J. Moore Chief of Police ACCOUNTING DIVISION MEMORANDUM May 17, 2010 TO: City Council FROM: Patty Lynch, Comptroller SUBJECT: Financial Statement for the Month of April 2010 The City prepares its Financial Statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principals using the modified accrual method of accounting and is audited annually by Baker Tilly Virchow Krause, LLP. We prepare interim financial statements for the Council’s review on a monthly basis. Division and Department Heads are responsible for monetary expenditures to ensure budget compliance. Revenues and expenditures are projected to year-end in June and September. Key operating funds include the General Fund, Water and Wastewater Utilities, and Sanitation Fund. A summary of their performance to budget, as compared to a three-year average, is presented in the following graphs. EXPENDITURE SUMMARY The graph below indicates expenditures are being made according to budget. The General rd Fund expenditures are higher than trend because of the timing of the 3 payroll. City rd employees are paid every two weeks, or 26 payrolls per year. Twice a year there is a 3 payroll in a month. This year there were three payrolls in April, compared to the prior three rd years when the 3 payroll was in May or June. Year-To-Date April ExpendituresCompared to Three-Year Average Current YTD 3 Yr. Avg. 45% 40% Percent of Total Budget 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% General FundWater -Wastewater - OperatingOperatingSanitation April 2010 Financial Statement May 17, 2010 Page 2 REVENUE SUMMARY The graph below indicates revenue has been earned as anticipated, although the Sanitation fund continues to lag compared to it’s budgeted revenue. Year-To-Date April RevenuesCompared to Three-Year Average Current YTD 3 Yr. Avg. 50% 45% Percent of Total Budget 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% General FundWaterWastewaterSanitation Other items of interest in the Financial Statement are as follows: Proprietary Funds (page 4) ? The Stormwater Utility has a deficit operating cash balance of $501,355 at April 30, 2010. This is because revenue is billed on a quarterly basis (approximately $518,000) after expenditures have been made. ? Transit reports a negative cash balance of $616,603 due to the timing of grant reimbursements. Special Revenue Fund Balance (page 5) ? The Golf Courses fund has a negative fund balance of $108,246. This is due to the January transfer of its debt service payment ($53,803) to the debt service fund, and Riverside Golf Course tree damage ($43,938). ? TIF 3 has a positive balance of $244,631. The positive balance will be used to repay the general fund advance plus accrued interest. ? At April 30, 2010, the TIF districts have a combined deficit fund balance of $700,660. However, TIF projections indicate the districts will reach a positive fund balance before they expire. April 2010 Financial Statement May 17, 2010 Page 3 ? Landfill long-term care of site #3023 ($92,330) will be reimbursed by an insurance policy we have in place for post closure care. Capital Projects Fund (page 6) ? The City incurred expenditures in conjunction with road projects on Highway 11 from Wright Road to Highway 14 ($186,838). These costs will be funded with future special assessments or General Obligation note issue. A representative of the Administrative Services Department will be available at the Council Meeting on May 24, 2010 to respond to any questions Council may have relative to these reports. Once Council is satisfied, acceptance of the Financial Statement by consent and placing them on file would be in order. /Attachments cc: Jacob J, Winzenz, Director of Administrative Services/Assistant City Manager Eric J. Levitt, City Manager JANESVILLE TRANSIT SYSTEM MEMORANDUM May 14, 2010 TO: City Council FROM: Transit Director Report on Janesville-Milton-Whitewater Commuter Bus Service and SUBJECT: Authorization for the Administration to Continue Discussions with Stakeholders. Executive Summary: In the spring of 2008, meetings were held among municipal officials in northern Rock and northwest Walworth Counties at the instigation of State Representative Kim Hixson, to explore the need and interest in improving public transportation services in the region. As a result, a grant application was submitted to the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) and a grant was awarded later that year under the federal Supplemental Transit – Rural Assistance Program (STRAP) to study the need for a commuter bus service in the corridor from Janesville through Milton to Whitewater; as well as local shared ride taxi service within the City of Milton and improvements to the existing shared-ride service in the City of Whitewater. Under the supervision of the Janesville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), representatives of the cities, and the University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, a request for proposals was prepared and the international transportation and engineering consulting firm of AECOM was contracted to perform the study. Work on the study began in March, 2009 under the direction of Mr. David Sampson of AECOM as lead consultant. Work on the project has reached the point where presentations on the findings of the study and proposals for public transit services in the region resulting from those findings are being made to stakeholders and decision-makers in the region. Mr. Sampson and representatives from JTS and the MPO made presentations to the Whitewater City Council and the Milton City Council on Tuesday, May 4, 2010. Presentations were also made to the Chancellor of UW-Whitewater and his management team, and the UW-Whitewater Student Senate to review the study results and present potential transit service options. The presentation to the Janesville City Council will follow the same informational presentation format. The Council will not be asked to make any final decisions or financial commitments at this time. However, the Council will be asked to authorize City staff to continue discussions and negotiations with the University, the other cities and other interested or affected parties which could lead to a proposal to start some type of service in the fall of 2011. This is the earliest that funding from Segregated University Fees to cover UW-Whitewater’s share of the costs could be made available. The Council should be aware that a start-up of the proposed service at that time could have an impact on the City’s 2011 annual budget. Recommendation: After receiving theStaff report and having questions answered, the Council is requested to authorize the Administration to continue discussions and negotiations with the University, the other Cities and other stakeholders to further 1 explore and if possible, develop a consensus on an operational plan and funding for that plan to initiate public transit service between Janesville, Milton and Whitewater. When and if such a consensus is reached, the Administration will return to the Council with a further report and seek Council’s authorization for the necessary budgetary resources to fund the City’s share of the cost of the service and contractual authority to enter into an operating agreement. City Manager Recommendation: I recommend that the Council authorize staff to continue working with other stakeholders. I believe the service would not begin until the Fall 2011 at the earliest date. One issue that would be critical to start-up is any additional cost to the City. Suggested Motion: I move to authorize staff to continue working with other stakeholders to develop a service and financing plan for JMW Service. Discussion: Initial discussions regarding the extension of transit service to Milton date to 1999, while interest in public transit service between Janesville, Milton and Whitewater first formally surfaced during the 2006-2007 Transit Development Plan study for the Janesville Transit System. At that time, there was not sufficient budget to expand that study to formally investigate the service. Interest in service between the cities again surfaced as part of the South-Central Wisconsin Commuter Transportation Study, completed in 2008, which examined commuting needs throughout the region, but did not study any particular routes in detail. Following the meetings chaired by State Representative Hixson in early 2008, a formal proposal for a study of commuter bus service in the Janesville-Milton-Whitewater corridor was prepared by the MPO with collaboration from the Cities of Milton and Whitewater and the University. Director of Neighborhood Services Jennifer Petruzzello, Transit Director Dave Mumma, and then- MPO Coordinator Alexis Kuklenski served as the City’s representatives during this effort. The study proposal was submitted to WisDOT in September, 2008 and a notice of funding of the project by a grant under the STRAP program was received in December of that year in the amount of $44,160, or 75% of the $58,965 budget for the project. The balance of the study costs were covered by the three cities, with the City of Janesville contributing $4,317 in cash and in-kind services of city staff. The city of Whitewater’s share was $5,244, the city of Milton contributed $4,195, the University added $1,049 as well as in-kind services for on-campus surveys and demographic information. A request for proposals from a number of nationally recognized public transit consulting firms was circulated in January of 2009, with AECOM being hired to conduct the study in March, 2009. The spring and summer of 2009 were spent in gathering basic demographic data in the cities and on the university campus. Meetings were held with stakeholders and decision makers in all three cities and with members of the University administration and student government. Once students returned for the fall semester in 2009, on-campus surveys were taken, including an on-line survey through the campus intranet system which elicited 1,287 responses from students and staff. In- person interviews were also held with students and staff on two days in September, 2 2009. Armed with this data, the consultants determined that based on industry standards and the results of similar surveys conducted elsewhere that sufficient interest and potential existed for a service proposal to be developed. The results of the surveys and the consultants’ reasoning are summarized in the Executive Summary of the Final Report which is attached to this memo. The full report, which runs to 52 pages, and contains graphs and charts of the survey results, is also available upon request. The consultant’s proposal contains two possible service levels for commuter bus service in the Janesville-Milton-Whitewater corridor. A higher service level would provide up to 12 round-trips between the cities on weekdays with a lower service level on weekends. Annual cost for this proposal would be $369,706, based on 2010 operating costs for Janesville Transit System services, with 57% or about $210,732 covered by state and federal transit operating assistance, $110,000 contributed by Segregated University Fees by students at the UW-Whitewater, and the remaining $48,974 split between farebox revenue and contributions from the three cities. The lower service level would provide about 6 round trips on weekdays, with weekend service only when the University is in session, and would cost $198,670 per year with proportionally lower shares of funding from all sources. The farebox revenue estimates are based on annual ridership of at least 39,600 annual passenger trips for the higher service level and 21,280 trips at the lower service level. The numbers represent estimated patronage after 3-5 years of operation of the service, and are not likely to be achieved during the first several years of its operation. The Council should be aware that under the public transit funding policies of WisDOT, local governments sponsoring transit service have the obligation to make-up any shortfalls in cost recovery for such services if ridership and resulting farebox revenue does not meet expectations. Before service under this proposal could begin, the three cities and the University would have to reach agreement on a cost allocation plan to cover their shares. The consultant did provide several suggestions for such cost allocations in the report. th Following the presentation on May 24, MPO Coordinator Terry Nolan and I will be available to answer any questions that Councilmembers may have on the report or the proposed service. cc: Eric Levitt, City Manager Jay Winzenz, Director of Administration/Assistant City Manager Jennifer Petruzzello, Director of Neighborhood Services 3 Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² Ð®±¶»½¬ Û¨»½«¬·ª» Í«³³¿®§ Ð®»°¿®»¼ º±® Ý·¬§ ±º Ö¿²»ª·´´»ô É× Ö¿²»ª·´´» Ó»¬®±°±´·¬¿² Ð´¿²²·²¹ Ñ®¹¿²·¦¿¬·±² Ð®»°¿®»¼ ¾§ Ó¿®½¸ îðïð Û¨»½«¬·ª» Í«³³¿®§ Þ¿½µ¹®±«²¼ Ü«®·²¹ ¬¸» °®»°¿®¿¬·±² ±º ¬¸» Ö¿²»ª·´´» Ì®¿²·¬ Í§¬»³ øÖÌÍ÷ Ì®¿²·¬ Ü»ª»´±°³»²¬ Ð´¿² ·² îððêó îððéô ¿ ½±²½»°¬ º±® ¿² ·²¬»®½·¬§ ¾« ®±«¬» ¾»¬©»»² ¬¸» ËÉóÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® ¿²¼ ¬¸» ²±®¬¸ ·¼» ¿®»¿ ±º Ö¿²»ª·´´» ©¿ ¾®±«¹¸¬ ¬± ¬¸» ¿¬¬»²¬·±² ±º ¬¸» ¬«¼§ ¬»¿³ò Ì¸· °´¿²²·²¹ »ºº±®¬ ®»«´¬»¼ ·² ¿ ®»½±³³»²¼¿¬·±² ¬± ¬«¼§ ¬¸» ¾« ®±«¬» ½±²½»°¬ ·² ¼»¬¿·´ ¿²¼ ©±«´¼ ·²ª±´ª» ¬¸» ËÉó É¸·¬»©¿¬»®å ¬¸» ½±³³«²·¬·» ±º Ó·´¬±² ¿²¼ É¸·¬»©¿¬»®å Î±½µ ¿²¼ É¿´©±®¬¸ Ý±«²¬·»ò Ì¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Ö¿²»ª·´´» ¿²¼ Ö¿²»ª·´´» ß®»¿ Ó»¬®±°±´·¬¿² Ð´¿²²·²¹ Ñ®¹¿²·¦¿¬·±² ±¾¬¿·²»¼ ¿ °´¿²²·²¹ ¹®¿²¬ º®±³ ¬¸» É·½±²·² Ü»°¿®¬³»²¬ ±º Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² øÉ·ÜÑÌ÷ «²¼»® ¬¸» Í»½¬·±² ëíïì Í«°°´»³»²¬¿´ Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±²ô Î«®¿´ ß·¬¿²½» Ð®±¹®¿³ øÍÌÎßÐ÷ ·² îððç ¬± ¬«¼§ ¬¸» ¼»³¿²¼ º±® ¬®¿²·¬ »®ª·½» ·² ¬¸» ®»¹·±² ²±®¬¸ ±º Ö¿²»ª·´´» »¨¬»²¼·²¹ º®±³ ¬¸» ²±®¬¸»®² »²¼ ±º ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ¬± ¬¸» Ë²·ª»®·¬§ ±º É·½±²·²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® ½¿³°«ò Í»®ª·½» ß®»¿ Ð®±º·´»ô Û¨·¬·²¹ Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² Í»®ª·½» Ì¸» »®ª·½» ¿®»¿ °®±º·´» ·²½´«¼» ¿ ½±³³«²·¬§ °®±º·´» ¿²¼ ¿ ¼»½®·°¬·±² ±º ½«®®»²¬ ¬®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² »®ª·½»ò Ì¸» ½±³³«²·¬§ °®±º·´» ·²½´«¼» ·²º±®³¿¬·±² ±² °±°«´¿¬·±²ô »³°´±§³»²¬ô ¿²¼ ½±³³«¬·²¹ °¿¬¬»®² ·² ¬¸» ¬«¼§ ¿®»¿ ¿ ©»´´ ¿ ¿ »°¿®¿¬» °®±º·´» ±º ¬¸» Ë²·ª»®·¬§ ±º É·½±²·²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® øËÉóÉ÷ò Ö¿²»ª·´´» · ¬¸» ´¿®¹»¬ ½·¬§ ·² ¬¸» ¬«¼§ ¿®»¿ô ©·¬¸ ¿ îððè »¬·³¿¬»¼ °±°«´¿¬·±² ±º êîôëïêò Ó·´¬±² · ¬¸» ³¿´´»¬ ½·¬§ ©·¬¸ ëôëéç ®»·¼»²¬ò É¸·¬»©¿¬»® ¸¿ ¿ °±°«´¿¬·±² ±º ïìôîçïô íçû ±º ©¸·½¸ ¿®» ¿¹»¼ ïèóîï ¼«» ¬± ¬¸» ´±½¿¬·±² ±º ËÉóÉò ×² º¿´´ îððçô ¬¸»®» ©»®» ïïôðíð ¬«¼»²¬ ¿²¼ ïôîîë »³°´±§»» ±º ËÉóÉò ®»½»·ª» ¼·®»½¬ »®ª·½» º®±³ ¬¸» °®±°±»¼ ®±«¬»ò Ö±¾ ·² ±¬¸»® °¿®¬ ±º ¬¸» ½±³³«²·¬§ô ¿²¼ °»½·º·½¿´´§ ¬¸±» ¿¬ ¬¸» ²±©ó½´±»¼ Ù»²»®¿´ Ó±¬±® °´¿²¬ ¿²¼ ·¬ ¼·®»½¬ «°°´·»® ¿®» ²±¬ ·²½´«¼»¼ ·² ¬¸· ¿²¿´§·ò Ò±®¬¸ Ö¿²»ª·´´» ¸¿ ®±«¹¸´§ ìôððð ¶±¾ ·² ¬¸» ³¿²«º¿½¬«®·²¹ ¿²¼ ®»¬¿·´ »½¬±®ô ©¸·´» Ó·´¬±² ¿²¼ É¸·¬»©¿¬»® ¸¿ª» éðð ¿²¼ íôíðð ¶±¾ ®»°»½¬·ª»´§ò Ó¿²§ Ó·´¬±² ¿²¼ É¸·¬»©¿¬»® ®»·¼»²¬ ½±³³«¬» ¬± Ö¿²»ª·´´» º±® »³°´±§³»²¬ô ©·¬¸ ±³» ®»ª»®» ½±³³«¬·²¹ º®±³ Ö¿²»ª·´´» ¿²¼ Ó·´¬±² ¬± É¸·¬»©¿¬»®ò Ì¸» ª¿¬ ³¿¶±®·¬§ ±º ¬®·° ·² ¬¸» Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® ½±®®·¼±® ¿®» ¬¿µ»² ¾§ ·²¹´»ó±½½«°¿²¬ °®·ª¿¬» ª»¸·½´»ò Ý«®®»²¬ °«¾´·½ ¬®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² »®ª·½» ¿®» ½±²º·²»¼ ©·¬¸·² Ö¿²»ª·´´» ¿²¼ É¸·¬»©¿¬»®ô ¿²¼ ½±²·¬ ±º º·¨»¼ ®±«¬» ¿²¼ °¿®¿¬®¿²·¬ »®ª·½» ©·¬¸·² ¬¸» ½·¬§ ±º Ö¿²»ª·´´» ¿²¼ ¸¿®»¼ ®·¼» ¬¿¨· »®ª·½» ·² É¸·¬»©¿¬»®ò Ì¸» ½±«²¬·» ±º Î±½µ ¿²¼ É¿´©±®¬¸ °®±ª·¼» °¿®¿¬®¿²·¬ »®ª·½» º±® °»®±² ©·¬¸ ¼·¿¾·´·¬·» ¿²¼ ¬¸±» ±ª»® ¬¸» ¿¹» ±º ëë ¿²¼ êð ®»°»½¬·ª»´§å ¾«¬ ¬¸±» »®ª·½» ¿®» ²±¬ ¿ª¿·´¿¾´» ¬± ½·¬·¦»² ±«¬·¼» ¬¸±» °±°«´¿¬·±² ¹®±«°ô ¿²¼ ¼± ²±¬ ±°»®¿¬» ±² ¿ ®»¹«´¿®ô °®»¼·½¬¿¾´» ½¸»¼«´» ¾»¬©»»² ¬¸» ½·¬·»ò Ê¿² Ù¿´¼»® Þ« Ý±³°¿²§ °®±ª·¼» ¼¿·´§ ½¸»¼«´»¼ »®ª·½» º®±³ Ö¿²»ª·´´» ¬± Ó¿¼·±² ¿²¼ Ý¸·½¿¹±ô ¾«¬ ½«®®»²¬´§ ¸¿ ²± ½±²²»½¬·±² º®±³ Ö¿²»ª·´´» ¬± É¸·¬»©¿¬»®ò É·½±²·² Ý±¿½¸ Ô·²» °®±ª·¼» Ú®·¼¿§ó Í«²¼¿§ ±²´§ ·²¬»®½·¬§ »®ª·½» ¾»¬©»»² Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² Ð®±¶»½¬ ï É¸·¬»©¿¬»® ¿²¼ ¹®»¿¬»® Ó·´©¿«µ»»å °®·³¿®·´§ º±® ËÉóÉ ¬«¼»²¬ ¬®¿ª»´´·²¹ ¸±³» º±® ¬¸» ©»»µ»²¼ò Ñ«¬®»¿½¸ ¿¬ Ë²·ª»®·¬§ ±º É·½±²·²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® Ñ«¬®»¿½¸ ¿¬ Ë²·ª»®·¬§ ±º É·½±²·²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® »²½±³°¿»¼ ¬©± ¿½¬·ª·¬·»æ ¬©± ¼®±°ó·² »·±² ·² ¬¸» ´±¾¾§ ±º ¬¸» ËÉóÉ Í¬«¼»²¬ Ë²·±² ±² É»¼²»¼¿§ Í»°¬»³¾»® îí øîÐÓ ìÐÓ÷ ¿²¼ Ì¸«®¼¿§ Í»°¬»³¾»® îì øïî ÐÓ îÐÓ÷ ¿²¼ ¿² ±²ó½¿³°« «®ª»§ ½±²¼«½¬»¼ ±² ¬¸» ½¿³°« ·²¬®¿²»¬ §¬»³ò ß°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ îê ¬«¼»²¬ °®±ª·¼»¼ ½±³³»²¬ ·²ó °»®±²ò ß² ±²ó´·²» «®ª»§ ¼·¬®·¾«¬»¼ ¬± ¬«¼»²¬ ¿²¼ »³°´±§»»ô ¹¿®²»®»¼ ®»°±²» º®±³ ïôîéè ¬«¼»²¬ ¿²¼ ¬¿ººô º¿·®´§ ®»°®»»²¬·²¹ ¿ ¿³°´» ±º ¬¸» «²·ª»®·¬§ °±°«´¿¬·±²ò Ì¸· «®ª»§ ·²¼·½¿¬»¼ ±²»ó¬¸·®¼ ±º ®»°±²¼»²¬ ©±«´¼ «» ¬¸» »®ª·½» ±² ¿ ®»¹«´¿® ¾¿·ô ©·¬¸ ¿¾±«¬ ¸¿´º ±º ¬¸»»ô ïíòèû ¾»·²¹ º®»¯«»²¬ ®·¼»®ò Î»°±²» ¬± ¬¸» º®»¯«»²½§ ±º «» ¯«»¬·±² ¿®» ¾®±µ»² ±«¬ ¿ ¼¿·´§ øíòëû÷ô »ª»®¿´ ¬·³» ¿ ©»»µ øïðòîû÷ô ±²½» ±® ¬©·½» ¿ ©»»µ øïíòèû÷ ¿²¼ ©»»µ»²¼ ±²´§ øéòïû÷å ¿²±¬¸»® ±²»ó¬¸·®¼ ©±«´¼ ®·¼» ¬¸» ¾« ¿ º»© ¬·³» ¿ ³±²¬¸ øïëòîû÷ ±® ±½½¿·±²¿´´§ øîîòëû÷å ¿²¼ ¿¾±«¬ îè °»®½»²¬ ©±«´¼ ²»ª»® «» ¬¸» »®ª·½»ò Ì¸» °®·³¿®§ ®»¿±² ®»°±²¼»²¬ ¬®¿ª»´ ¬± Ö¿²»ª·´´» · º±® ¸±°°·²¹ øëëòçû÷å ¬¸· ®¿¬» · ½±²·¬»²¬ ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ¸·¹¸ ²«³¾»® ±º ®»°±²¼»²¬ ·²¼·½¿¬·²¹ ¬¸»§ ª··¬ ¬¸» ½·¬§ ±²½» ¿ ©»»µô ±²½» ¿ ³±²¬¸ô ±® ¬©·½» ¿ ³±²¬¸ øìîû÷ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´´§ô ®»°±²¼»²¬ ©»®» ¿´± ¿µ»¼ ¬± ·²¼·½¿¬» ¬¸»·® ´·µ»´·¸±±¼ ±º ®·¼·²¹ ¬¸» ¾« ¾¿»¼ ±² ¬¸» ½±¬ ±º ¿ ±²»ó©¿§ ¬®·°ò ß¾±«¬ ¬¸®»»ó¯«¿®¬»® ±º ®»°±²¼»²¬ ©±«´¼ «°°±®¬ °¿§®±´´ ¼»¼«½¬·±² ¿²¼ñ±® ¬«¼»²¬ »®ª·½» º»» ±º ¾»¬©»»² üîòëð ¿²¼ üéòëð °»® »³»¬»® ±® ¾»¬©»»² üëòðð ¿²¼ üïëòðð °»® §»¿® ·² »¨½¸¿²¹» º±® ¿²²«¿´ ¾« °¿» ±® ¾»·²¹ ¿¾´» ¬± «» ¬¸»·® ËÉóÉ ß¾±«¬ îðû ·²¼·½¿¬»¼ ¬¸»§ ©±«´¼ ®·¼» ·º ¿ ½¿¸ º¿®» ±º ¿°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ üîòëð ©»®» ½¸¿®¹»¼ °»® ®·¼» ·² ¿¼¼·¬·±² ¬± ¬¸» ¿²²«¿´ ¬«¼»²¬ »®ª·½» º»»ò Ò± º¿®» ´»ª»´ñ®·¼»®¸·° ¯«»¬·±² ©¿ ¿µ»¼ ±º °±¬»²¬·¿´ ¹»²»®¿´ °«¾´·½ ®·¼»®ò Ó·´¬±² Ñ«¬®»¿½¸ Ñ«¬®»¿½¸ º±® ¿ Ó·´¬±² ¸¿®»¼ ®·¼» ¬¿¨· ·²½´«¼»¼ ¬¿µ»¸±´¼»® ·²¬»®ª·»© ©·¬¸ ª¿®·±« ´±½¿´ ¬¸¬¸ ¬¿µ»¸±´¼»®ò Ì¸»» ·²¬»®ª·»© ±½½«®®»¼ º®±³ Ó¿§ îé ¬± Ó¿§ îè ¿²¼ ·²½´«¼»¼ Ó¿§±® Ì±³ Ý¸»³±®» ¿²¼ Ð¿«´¿ Í½¸«¬¬ô Ü·®»½¬±® ±º Ì¸» Ù¿¬¸»®·²¹ Ð´¿½»ò Í¬¿µ»¸±´¼»® ª±·½»¼ ¿ Ü®¿º¬ Í»®ª·½» Ð´¿² Ó·´¬±² Í¸¿®»¼ Î·¼» Ì¿¨· Í»®ª·½» Ü»½®·°¬·±² ß ¸¿®»¼ ®·¼» ¬¿¨· ·² Ó·´¬±²ô ·³·´¿® ¬± ¬¸¿¬ °®±ª·¼»¼ ·² ²»¿®¾§ ½±³³«²·¬·» «½¸ ¿ Û¼¹»®¬±²ô Ú¬ò ß¬µ·²±²ô Ö»ºº»®±² ¿²¼ É¸·¬»©¿¬»®å ©±«´¼ ¾» ¿ º»¿·¾´» ¿²¼ ½±¬ »ºº»½¬·ª» ³»¿² ¬± °®±ª·¼» ®»·¼»²¬ ©·¬¸ ³±¾·´·¬§ ©·¬¸·² ¬¸» ½±³³«²·¬§ò Ì¸» Ó·´¬±² ¸¿®»¼ó®·¼» ¬¿¨· »®ª·½» · ®»½±³³»²¼»¼ ¬± ±°»®¿¬» ©»»µ¼¿§ º®±³ éæðð ¿³ ¬± éæðð °³ ¿²¼ ±² Í¿¬«®¼¿§ º®±³ çæðð ¿³ «²¬·´ ìæíð °³ò Ì¸» »®ª·½» ¿®»¿ ©±«´¼ º±´´±© ¬¸» ¾±®¼»® ±º ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ±º Ó·´¬±²ô »¨¬»²¼·²¹ ±«¬ ¿°°®±¨·³¿¬»´§ ¿ ¸¿´º ³·´» º®±³ ¬¸» ½·¬§ ´·³·¬ ·² ¿´´ ¼·®»½¬·±²ò ß¼¼·¬·±²¿´´§ ®»½±³³»²¼»¼ · ´·³·¬»¼ ±½½¿·±²¿´ »®ª·½» º®±³ ©·¬¸·² Ó·´¬±² ¬± ¬¸» É¿´ó Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² Ð®±¶»½¬ î Ó¿®¬ ¬±®» ±² Ü»»®º·»´¼ Ü®·ª» ±² ¬¸» º¿® ²±®¬¸ ·¼» ±º Ö¿²»ª·´´» ¬± ¿´´±© ½±²²»½¬·±² ©·¬¸ Ö¿²»ª·´´» Ì®¿²·¬ Í§¬»³ º·¨»¼ ®±«¬» »®ª·½» ¿¬ ¬¸¿¬ °±·²¬ò Û¬·³¿¬»¼ ß²²«¿´ ®·¼»®¸·° º±® ¿ Ó·´¬±² Í¸¿®»¼ Î·¼» Ì¿¨· ©±«´¼ ¾» ïëôððð °¿»²¹»® ¬®·° °»® §»¿®å ©·¬¸ ¬¸±» ®·¼»®¸·° ´»ª»´ ¾»·²¹ ¿¬¬¿·²»¼ í ë §»¿® ¿º¬»® »®ª·½» ¬¿®¬ó«°ò Ø¿ª·²¹ ¼»½®·¾»¼ ¬¸» °¿®¿³»¬»® º±® ¬¸» Ó·´¬±² Í¸¿®»¼ Î·¼» Ì¿¨· ¿²¼ ¬¸» °®±¶»½¬»¼ ¿ª¿·´¿¾·´·¬§ ±º ¬¿¬» ¿²¼ º»¼»®¿´ º«²¼ô ¬¸» º·®¬ §»¿® º·²¿²½·²¹ · »¬·³¿¬»¼ ¿ º±´´±©æ Ñ°»®¿¬·²¹ Ý±¬ ü ïðëôððð Ú¿®» Î»ª»²«» ü íðôððð Ú»¼»®¿´ ¿²¼ Í¬¿¬» Ú«²¼ ü ëçôèëð øëé °»®½»²¬ ±º ¬¸» ¼»º·½·¬÷ Ô±½¿´ Ú«²¼ñÝ·¬§ ±º Ó·´¬±² ü ïëôïëð øïìòì °»®½»²¬ ±º ¬¸» ¼»º·½·¬÷ Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® Ý±³³«¬»® Í»®ª·½» Í»®ª·½» ¾»¬©»»² Ö¿²»ª·´´»ô Ó·´¬±² ¿²¼ É¸·¬»©¿¬»® ©±«´¼ °®±ª·¼» ¿ ½±²²»½¬·±² ¾»¬©»»² ¬¸» ½·¬·» º±® ¬«¼»²¬ ¿²¼ º¿½«´¬§ ¿¬ ¬¸» Ë²·ª»®·¬§ ±º É·½±²·²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»®ô ¿ ©»´´ ¿ °®±ª·¼» ·²¬»®½±³³«²·¬§ ³±ª»³»²¬ º±® ®»·¼»²¬ ±º Ö¿²»ª·´´»ô É¸·¬»©¿¬»®ô ¿²¼ Ó·´¬±² º±® »³°´±§³»²¬ô °»®±²¿´ ¾«·²»ô ¿½½» ¬± ¸»¿´¬¸ ½¿®»ô ¿²¼ ¬¸» ´·µ»ò ß ³¿° ±º ¬¸» ¾« ®±«¬» · °®±ª·¼»¼ ±² Ú·¹«®» ïò Ú·¹«®» ïæ Ð®±°±»¼ Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® Ì®¿²·¬ Î±«¬» Í»®ª·½» Ü»º·²·¬·±² Ì©± »®ª·½» ¿´¬»®²¿¬·ª» ¿®» °®±ª·¼»¼ ¾¿»¼ ±² ¬¸» °®±°±»¼ ½¸»¼«´»ò Ñ°¬·±² ï °®±ª·¼» »®ª·½» é ¼¿§ °»® ©»»µò Ñ°¬·±² î · ¿ ®»¼«½»¼ »®ª·½» °´¿² ©·¬¸ º»©»® ¬®·° ±² ©»»µ¼¿§ ¿²¼ Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² Ð®±¶»½¬ í ©»»µ»²¼ ©¸»² ËÉóÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® · ·² »·±²å ¿²¼ ²± ©»»µ»²¼ »®ª·½» ©¸»² ¬¸» Ë²·ª»®·¬§ · ±«¬ó±ºó»·±²ò Þ±¬¸ ¿´¬»®²¿¬·ª» °®±ª·¼» Í«²¼¿§ ¿º¬»®²±±² ¿²¼ »ª»²·²¹ »®ª·½» º±® ¬«¼»²¬ ©±®µ·²¹ ±® ¸±°°·²¹ ·² Ö¿²»ª·´´» ¿²¼ ®»¬«®²·²¹ ¬± ½¿³°« ¿º¬»® ¬¸» ©»»µ»²¼ô ¿ º·®¬ º±® ÖÌÍò Î·¼»®¸·° É·¬¸ ¿ »®ª·½» ´»ª»´ ¿¬ Ñ°¬·±² ï º±® ¬¸» Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® ®±«¬» ®·¼»®¸·° ©±«´¼ ¾» íçôêðð °¿»²¹»® °»® §»¿®ô ¿²¼ Ñ°¬·±² î ®·¼»®¸·° · »¨°»½¬»¼ ¬± ¾» îïôîèð °¿»²¹»® °»® §»¿®å ³¿¼» «° °®·³¿®·´§ ±º ËÉóÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® ¬«¼»²¬ ¿²¼ ¬¿ºº ¿¬ ¬¸» ±«¬»¬ô ©·¬¸ ¹»²»®¿´ °«¾´·½ ®·¼»® º®±³ ¿´´ ¬¸®»» ½±³³«²·¬·» ·²½®»¿·²¹ ±ª»® ¬·³» ¿ ¬¸»§ ´»¿®² ±º ¬¸» »®ª·½» ¿²¼ ¿¬¬¿·² ¿ ½±³º±®¬ ´»ª»´ ¬¸¿¬ ·¬ · ²±¬ ¶«¬ ¿ ¸±®¬óª»¼ ·º ²±¬ «½½»º«´ò ×¬ · ¿²¬·½·°¿¬»¼ ¬¸¿¬ ¿ ©·¬¸ ¿´´ ²»© »®ª·½»ô ®·¼»®¸·° ©·´´ ¾» ´±©»® ·² ¬¸» º·®¬ »ª»®¿´ §»¿® ±º ¬¸» »®ª·½»ô ©·¬¸ ¿ ¹®¿¼«¿´ ·²½®»¿» ¬± ¬¸» ²«³¾»® ¸±©² ¿¾±ª» ¾»·²¹ ¿¬¬¿·²»¼ ¿º¬»® í ë §»¿® ±º »®ª·½» ±°»®¿¬·±²ò Ú·²¿²½» Ì¿¾´» ï °®»»²¬ ¬¸» »¬·³¿¬»¼ ±°»®¿¬·²¹ ½±¬ ¿²¼ º·²¿²½·²¹ º±® ¬¸» º·²¿´ º±«® ³±²¬¸ ±º îðïð ø¬¸» »¿®´·»¬ °±·¾´» »®ª·½» ¬¿®¬ó«°÷ ¿²¼ Ì¿¾´» î °®»»²¬ º·²¿²½·²¹ º±® ¿´´ ±º îðïïò Ì¿¾´» ïæ Í»°¬»³¾»® ¬¸®±«¹¸ Ü»½»³¾»® Ñ°»®¿¬·²¹ Ý±¬ ¿²¼ Î»ª»²«» Ñ°¬·±² ï Ñ°¬·±² î ì Ó±²¬¸ Î»ª»²«» Ø±«® ïôíêì éèí ì Ó±²¬¸ Ý±¬ üïîéôíìí üéíôïðï ËÉóÉ Í¬«¼»²¬ Í»®ª·½» Ú«²¼·²¹ àüîòëðñÍ»³ò üîëôððð üîëôððð Î»³¿·²·²¹ ½±¬ ¬± ¾» º·²¿²½»¼ üïðîôíìí üìèôïðï Ú¿®»¾±¨ Î»ª»²«» üîðôìêð üïïôéìë ÍÌÎßÐ Ú«²¼·²¹ ß©¿®¼»¼ üêëôëðê üíêôíëê Ô±½¿´ Ú«²¼·²¹ Î»¯«·®»¼ üïêôíéé üð Ì¿¾´» îæ îðïï Ú·²¿²½·¿´ Ñ°¬·±² ï Ñ°¬·±² î ß²²«¿´ Î»ª»²«» Ø±«® íôçêð îôïîè ß²²«¿´ Ý±¬ üíêçôéðê üïçèôêéð ëíðéñèëòîð Ú«²¼·²¹ øëéû ±º ¹®± »®ª·½» ½±¬÷ üîïðôéíî üïïíôîìî ËÉóÉ Í¬«¼»²¬ Í»®ª·½» Ú«²¼·²¹ à üëòððñ Í»³ò üïïðôððð üëëôððð Ú¿®»¾±¨ Î»ª»²«» üìèôçéì üîçôíêð Ô±½¿´ Ú«²¼·²¹ Î»¯«·®»¼ üð üïôðêè Ý¿°·¬¿´ Ò»»¼ Ì¸» ½¿°·¬¿´ ²»»¼ º±® ¬¸» Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® »®ª·½» ·²½´«¼» ï ¾« º±® ®»ª»²«» »®ª·½» ¿²¼ ¾« ¬±°ñ¬¿¬·±² º¿½·´·¬·» ¿´±²¹ ¬¸» ®±«¬» ·²½´«¼·²¹ ¾« ¬±° ·¹²¿¹» ¿²¼ °¿»²¹»® ©¿·¬·²¹ ¸»´¬»® ¿¬ ³¿¶±® ¾±¿®¼·²¹ °±·²¬ò Ì¸» ·²·¬·¿´ ¬¿¨· ª»¸·½´» ©±«´¼ ¾» °®±ª·¼»¼ ¾§ ¬¸» »´»½¬»¼ ½±²¬®¿½¬±® ø©¸·½¸ ©±«´¼ ¾» °¿®¬ ±º ¬¸» ÎÚÐ÷ô ©¸± ©±«´¼ ¿´± ¾» ®»°±²·¾´» ·² ¬¸» ½±²¬®¿½¬ º±® °®±ª·¼·²¹ ¿ °¿®» ª»¸·½´» ¬± ¾» «»¼ ©¸»² ¬¸» ²±®³¿´ ¬¿¨· · ±«¬ ±º »®ª·½»ô ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ½±¬ ¿³±®¬·¦»¼ ·² ¬¸» ¸±«®´§ ®¿¬»ò ß² ·²¬»®³±¼¿´ ¬®¿²º»® ¬¿¬·±² º±® ½±²²»½¬·±² ¾»¬©»»² ¬¸» Ó·´¬±² Í¸¿®»¼ Î·¼» Ì¿¨· ¿²¼ ¬¸» Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® »®ª·½» ¸±«´¼ ¾» ·²½´«¼»¼ ·² ¬¸» ½¿°·¬¿´ °®±¹®¿³ò Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² Ð®±¶»½¬ ì Ú«²¼·²¹ ß´´±½¿¬·±² Î»½±³³»²¼¿¬·±² ß º±®³«´¿ ¾¿»¼ ¿°°®±¿½¸ · °®±°±»¼ô ©¸·½¸ ¿¬¬»³°¬ ¬± ¼·¬®·¾«¬» ¬¸» ´±½¿´ ¸¿®» ±º ¬¸» »®ª·½» ½±¬ »¯«·¬¿¾´§ ¿³±²¹ ¬¸» º·ª» ¶«®·¼·½¬·±² »®ª»¼æ Ö¿²»ª·´´»ô Ó·´¬±²ô É¸·¬»©¿¬»®ô Î±½µ Ý±«²¬§ ¿²¼ É¿´©±®¬¸ Ý±«²¬§ º±® ¬¸» Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® »®ª·½»ò Ì¸» °®±°±»¼ º«²¼·²¹ ¿´´±½¿¬·±² º±®³«´¿ º±® Ð¸¿» Ñ²» ©±«´¼ ¾» ¾¿»¼ ±² ¿ ©»·¹¸¬»¼ ½¿´» «·²¹ ²«³¾»® ±º ¾« ¬±°ò Í·¨ º«²¼·²¹ ½»²¿®·± ©»®» »¨¿³·²»¼ «·²¹ ¿ ½±³¾·²¿¬·±² ±º ®±«¬» ³·´» ±²´§ô ²«³¾»® ±º ¾« ¬±° ±²´§ ¿²¼ º±«® ½»²¿®·± «·²¹ ¿ ©»·¹¸¬»¼ º±®³«´¿ ±º ®±«¬» ³·´» ¿²¼ ¾« ¬±° ½±³¾·²»¼ ·² ª¿®·±« °®±°±®¬·±² º±® ¿´´±½¿¬·²¹ ½±¬ ¿³±²¹ ¬¸» ¶«®·¼·½¬·±²ò Ì¿¾´» í °®»»²¬ ©¸¿¬ ¬¸» º±«® ³±²¬¸ ´±½¿´ «¾·¼§ º±® »®ª·½» ©±«´¼ ¾» ¾§ ¶«®·¼·½¬·±²ò Ì¸· ©±«´¼ ®»°®»»²¬ ¬¿®¬·²¹ »®ª·½» ¿¬ ¬¸» ¾»¹·²²·²¹ ±º ¬¸» îðïðóîðïï ½¸±±´ §»¿®ô ©·¬¸ º«²¼·²¹ ¿ª¿·´¿¾´» ¬¸®±«¹¸ Ü»½»³¾»® îðïðò Ì¸· ¬¿¾´» ¸±© ¬¸» ®»¯«·®»¼ ´±½¿´ º«²¼·²¹ º±® ¾±¬¸ ±°¬·±² ï ¿²¼ îò Ù·ª»² ¬¸¿¬ ¬¸· »®ª·½» ©±«´¼ ¾»¹·² ·² ¬¸» ³·¼¼´» ±º ¿ ¾«¼¹»¬ §»¿®ô ·¬ · ¿²¬·½·°¿¬»¼ ¬¸¿¬ ²± º«²¼·²¹ º®±³ ¬¸» Ý±«²¬·» ±º Î±½µ ¿²¼ É¿´©±®¬¸ ©±«´¼ ¾» ±¾¬¿·²»¼ ·² îðïðò Ú«²¼·²¹ ·² Ö¿²»ª·´´» ©±«´¼ ¾» ¼®¿©² º®±³ ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ¿²¼ ¬¸±» ¾«·²»» ¾»²»º·¬·²¹ º®±³ ¬¸» »®ª·½»ò Ô·µ»©·» ·² É¸·¬»©¿¬»®ô º«²¼·²¹ ©±«´¼ ¾» °´·¬ ¾»¬©»»² ¬¸» Ë²·ª»®·¬§ ø²±²ó¬«¼»²¬ »®ª·½» º»»÷ô ¬¸» Ý·¬§ ¿²¼ ¬¸» ¾«·²» ½±³³«²·¬§ ©¸± ¾»²»º·¬ º®±³ ¿½½» ¬± ¬¸» Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÞ»´±·¬ ó®ª·½» ¬¿®¬ó«° ©±«´¼ ¾» ¬± ¾»¹·² ©·¬¸ ¬¸» ´±©»® Ñ°¬·±² î »®ª·½» ´»ª»´ ¿ ¿ ³»¿² ±º ¹»¬¬·²¹ ¿¬ ´»¿¬ ¿ ¾¿» ´»ª»´ ±º »®ª·½» ±² ¬¸» ®±¿¼ô ¿²¼ ¬¸»² ¾«¼¹»¬ º±® ¬¸» Ñ°¬·±² ï »®ª·½» ´»ª»´ ·² îðïï ±²½» ¬¸» »®ª·½» · «° ¿²¼ ®«²²·²¹ò Ì¿¾´» íæ ì Ó±²¬¸ Ô±½¿´ Í«¾·¼§ Î»¯«·®»¼ Ö«®·¼·½¬·±² Ð»®½»²¬ Ñ°¬·±² ï Ñ°¬·±² î Ö¿²»ª·´´» íèòèçû üêôíêèòèí üð Ó·´¬±² ëòëêû üçðçòèí üð É¸·¬»©¿¬»® ëëòëêû üçôðçèòíí üð Î±½µ Ý±«²¬§ ðòððû üðòðð üð É¿´©±®¬¸ Ý±«²¬§ ðòððû üðòðð üð Ì±¬¿´ ïððòððû üïêôíééòðð üð Ö¿²»ª·´´»óÓ·´¬±²óÉ¸·¬»©¿¬»® Ì®¿²°±®¬¿¬·±² Ð®±¶»½¬ ë Community Development Department Memorandum Date: May 10, 2010 Janesville City Council TO: FROM: Duane Cherek, Manager of Planning Services SUBJECT: Action on a proposed resolution authorizing the Common Council to fund, accept ownership and allow placement of a “Westgate Corridor” entrance sign located in the median of West Court Street between North Washington Street and the 5-points intersection (File Resolution No. 2010-700). _____________________________________________________________________ Summary Duke Kelly, on behalf of Westgate Group, has requested the placement of a monument style ground sign identifying the “Westgate Corridor” within the median portion of West Court Street, situated between North Washington Street and the 5-points intersection. The monument sign would symbolize the entryway to the west side business corridor and neighborhood. Final design plans for the project are completed and the Westgate Group requests that the City fund the purchase and installation of the sign, and allow for its placement in the public right-of-way near five points. Funding in the amount of $11,113 is requested. Upon installation, ownership of the sign would remain with the City while long- term maintenance would be the responsibility of the Westgate Group. Staff has determined that the proposed location for the sign is appropriate and would cause no adverse impact on traffic flow or visibility. In order to accommodate Westgate’s request, the City Council must authorize funding, accept ownership and placement of the sign in the public street right-of- way for West Court Street. Department Recommendation The Plan Commission and Community Development Department recommend that the City Council support a motion to approve Resolution 2010-700 authorizing the Council to fund, accept ownership of, and allow placement of a “Westgate Corridor” entrance sign located in the median of West Court Street between North Washington Street and the 5-points intersection. City Manager Recommendation While I am supportive of the sign in concept. I am concerned that currently we do not have a funding source and if the TIF did not receive additional increment in the long-term to cover the expense, it would result in a General Fund expense. Suggested Motion I move to approve file resolution 2010-700 authorizing to fund, accept ownership of, and allow placement of a “Westgate Corridor” entrance sign located in the median of West Court Street between North Washington Street and the 5-points intersection. ANALYSIS A. The Westgate Corridor is a “coalition of residents, businesses, property owners and community leaders who are interested in promoting a healthy and stable neighborhood through positive community interactions, strong neighborhood networks, education about neighborhood problems and opportunities and positive action”. The Westgate Group would like to install an entryway sign near the 5-points intersection within the median on West Court Street (see attached Exhibit A). The sign would identify an entry point to Janesville’s west side. This is the first request the City has received to install a “gateway” sign within a public right-of-way. The group is also requesting TIF District funding in the amount of $11,113 for the construction and installation of the sign. B. The proposed sign is one-sided and would be oriented to face east, viewable to westbound traffic only. The sign would be centered in the median and setback approximately ten feet from the curb on both the north and south sides. It is a monument style ground sign, constructed of two brick pillars, separated by a sign panel displaying the “Westgate Corridor” logo (see attached Exhibit B). The overall structure would be approximately 6 feet in height by 11.8 feet in width (70 square feet); however, the actual advertising area would be approximately 2.5 feet in height by 9 feet in width (22 square feet). The City’s Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposal and determined the location to be appropriate. The Engineering Department indicates the sign would cause no adverse impact on traffic flow or visibility. The sign face is designed to be reflective and therefore no lighting is proposed for the sign. The structure is also designed to be “maintenance-free” without any landscaping placed around the base of the sign. Instead, the proposal includes placement of horizontal brick pavers which form a rectangular shape around the base of the sign. The pavers would be installed flush with the ground to facilitate easy mowing around the sign. C. Staff has prepared Resolution No. 2010-700 which outlines accountabilities for the sign, such as authorization for funding, placement, installation and maintenance. Westgate has requested that TIF funding be utilized for this project. This portion of West Court Street is located in TIF 28. The proposed gateway sign represents an eligible TIF expenditure based on the approved Project Plan for TIF 28 which included decorative signage for the West Court Street entrance. However, TIF 28 currently has a negative fund balance and funding this improvement would result in additional borrowing. Staff estimates that the cost associated with incurring $11,113 of new debt would be approximately $2,750 (over a 10-year period). The desired location of the gateway sign is also located within ½ mile of TIF 31 (along W. Court Street) but such improvement costs do not qualify as an eligible expenditure in that district because signage was not identified in the project plan for TIF 31. D. The Sign Ordinance prohibits the installation of any privately owned signs to be installed in the public right-of-way; however, “public signs” such as those which welcome people to the city are allowed by ordinance standards. Accordingly, staff recommends that ownership of the sign should be held by the City and the City should be responsible for general maintenance around the sign, such as lawn care. Future replacement, repair or maintenance of the sign would be the responsibility of Westgate. Additionally, if the City determines that removal of the sign is necessary due to inadequate maintenance or if the sign conflicts with future use of the right-of- way, the resolution includes language that authorizes the City to do so. E. The Comprehensive Plan includes a section that addresses the West Court Street corridor. This consists of a focus area plan which serves to promote revitalization of the West Court Street commercial corridor and establish continuity of use, appearance and image. The plan identifies enhancement of the gateway to the west side. In this regard, the request to install a sign in the proposed location is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. F. The Community Development Department supports granting the request with those conditions listed in Resolution No. 2010-700 and as recommended by Plan Commission. Engineering’s review of the request identified no conflict to traffic, safety or visibility. Staff believes the sign would be an attractive and distinctive entry point to the west side and its proposed location within the median is appropriate. Since this is the first example of this type of signage request to come before the Council, staff anticipates it may prompt interest from other groups in the central city neighborhoods or downtown to make similar requests. IV. PLAN COMMISSION ACTION – APRIL 5, 2010 Duane Cherek, Planning Services Manager, presented the written staff report. Commissioner Zolidis asked if this is the first sign of this type that the city has approved, if it would be setting a precedent and if other neighborhoods may be requesting such a sign. Cherek stated that other than the Welcome to Janesville sign, this is the first gateway monument style sign that’s been proposed and that inner-city neighborhood or downtown groups may be interested in doing the same thing. Commissioner Zolidis stated that she wanted to make sure it would be available to other groups as well. There was a motion by Commissioner Voskuil with second by Commissioner Perrotto to approve the request to install a monument style sign identifying “Westgate Corridor” within a public right-of-way and forward a positive recommendation to the City Council noting that the Plan Commission has not considered the financial aspects of this transaction and subject to the following conditions: a. That the sign be constructed in accordance with the submitted design and the proposed site plan. b. That sign permits be obtained for the installation by a City of Janesville licensed sign erector. c. That the structure be sealed with an anti-graffiti agent to protect the sign from vandalism. The motion carried on a 5-0-0 vote. cc: Jay Winzenz Brad Cantrell RESOLUTION NO. 2010-700 A resolution authorizing the Common Council to fund, accept ownership of, and allow placement of a “Westgate Corridor” entrance sign located in the median of West Court Street between North Washington Street and the 5-points intersection. WHEREAS, Wis. Stat. § 66.0425 permits the Common Council to grant a privilege to place an obstruction within a highway within the City of Janesville; and WHEREAS, such privilege may be granted if the applicant assumes primary liability for damages to person or property by reason of the granting of the privilege, is obligated to remove an obstruction or excavation upon 10 days’ notice by the state or municipality, and waives the right to contest in any manner the validity of Wis. Stat. § 66.0425 or the amount of any compensation charged for such privilege; and WHEREAS , the City of Janesville, a Wisconsin Municipal Corporation located in Rock County, Wisconsin is the owner of property that consists of public street right-of-way for West Court Street located between North Washington Street and USH 51 (hereinafter 5-points intersection); and WHEREAS , the Westgate Group has requested that the City allow a gateway entrance sign to be constructed within the West Court Street median located between North Washington Street and the 5-points intersection, as more specifically identified on Exhibit A; and WHEREAS , the Westgate Group has requested that the Common Council authorize funding for the project in the amount of $11,113.00 as a TIF District 28 expenditure; and WHEREAS , the approved project plan for TIF 28 calls for installation of decorative signage along West Court Street to define a more visible entrance into this corridor; and WHEREAS , the City Community Development, Engineering, and Public Works Departments have determined that the location of the proposed sign does not conflict with the current or known future use of city-owned right-of way area in this area; and WHEREAS , the City Plan Commission reviewed this request at their April 5, 2010 meeting without considering the financial aspects of this transaction and recommended approval conditioned upon the sign being constructed in accordance with the submitted design and proposed site plan, sign permits be obtained for installation by a City of Janesville licensed sign erector, and that the structure be sealed with an anti-graffiti agent to protect the sign from vandalism; and WHEREAS , the City of Janesville is acting as the applicant on behalf of the Westgate Group for the privilege to allow placement of the sign in the public right-of-way; and WHEREAS , the Common Council of the City of Janesville accepts ownership of the gateway entrance sign to the City; and WHEREAS, the City of Janesville will provide ongoing general maintenance around the sign in accordance with typical maintenance standards (i.e. mowing) provided for median right-of-way areas. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JANESVILLE agrees to fund, accept ownership, and allow placement of the gateway entrance sign located in the median of West Court Street between North Washington Street and the 5-points intersection, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the sign be constructed in accordance with design plans submitted by the Westgate Group, acting as general contractor for the project. 2. That Westgate Group is responsible for locating all underground utility services in the construction area prior to any excavation or construction activity. 3. That Westgate Group shall comply with all City of Janesville general ordinances regarding the construction and installation of the sign within public right-of-way, including any and all applicable City of Janesville permits for excavation and installation. 4. That a sign permit be obtained for the installation by a City of Janesville licensed sign erector. 5. That the structure be sealed with an anti-graffiti agent to protect the sign from vandalism. 6. That Westgate Group is responsible for any damage and associated cost of repair to the sign. 7. That Westgate Group shall agree that the City shall not be held responsible for any damage to the sign that may be caused by the City, its employees, contractors, or others. 8. That the City may remove the sign for any reason deemed necessary, including but not limited to: unsatisfactory maintenance of the sign, planned street improvements, protection of public health and safety, or transportation purposes. 9. That the City assumes primary liability for damages to person or property by reason of the granting of the privilege. 10. That the City is obligated to remove the sign upon 10 days’ notice by the State of Wisconsin or City of Janesville. 11. That the City waives the right to contest in any manner the validity of Wis. Stat. § 66.0425 or the amount of any compensation charged for such privilege. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager and City Clerk of the City of Janesville are hereby authorized to negotiate, draft, enter into, and execute, on behalf of the City of Janesville, the proposed authorization between the City and Westgate Group, and prepare and file such other documents, forms, and papers pertaining to this transaction as may, from time to time, be necessary or desirable to effectuate the intent of this resolution. ADOPTED: Motion by: Second by: Councilmember Aye Nay Pass Absent APPROVED: Brunner McDonald Perrotto Eric J. Levitt, City Manager Rashkin Steeber ATTEST: Truman Voskuil Jean Ann Wulf, City Clerk-Treasurer APPROVED AS TO FORM: Assistant City Attorney Proposed by: Community Development Prepared by: Community Development & Assistant City Attorney CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE MEMORANDUM May 14, 2010 TO: City Council FROM: Maxwell Gagin, Administrative Intern SUBJECT: Action on a request from city staff to publish property ownership information on the City’s website Background In May 2002, the names of property owners were removed from the City’s online property database. The primary catalyst for considering the topic was requests for removal of online ownership information from property owners. The major factors considered when reevaluating this issue in 2003 were: requests for privacy, minimizing data management efforts, and data accuracy. Currently, the names of property owners are not published on the City’s online property database. Even though this information is not available via the City’s website, citizens may obtain this information through a computer terminal outside the Assessor’s office, or by contacting the Assessor’s office directly. The City Council is being asked to readdress this issue since the City has upgraded its property records software which will resolve some of the prior concerns. With the City now using the MSGovern application, it is an appropriate time to bring forth this issue. Staff Recommendations Staff recommends that property ownership information be listed in the online property search application accessed through the City website. Owners’ names should not be used as a search criterion in the online application. Assistant City Manager Recommendation The Assistant City Manager concurs with the staff recommendation. Requests for property ownership information continue to be one of the most frequent requests received by staff. Providing the ability to retrieve this information online is one additional way to provide 24 hour service to our customers. This is all public information, and concerns over residents safety can be mitigated by disabling the ability to search by owner name. Peer City Survey Staff conducted a survey of twelve comparable cities with online property search applications to determine if property ownership information is listed. Eight of the comparable cities surveyed list property owners’ names in their online property search application. Of those eight communities, three allow citizens to remove their name through an opt-out process. In addition, three of those eight communities allow users to search by owner’s name. Analysis Staff believes the major factors considered in 2002-2003 are moot concerns against publishing property ownership information on the City’s online property search application. 1 Property ownership information is public record and anyone can access this information either through a computer terminal outside the Assessor’s office or can request property ownership information through the Assessor’s office. Even if ownership information is removed through an opt-out process, ownership information remains public record and could still be found in these two locations. Also, property ownership information is already available and easily accessible online through the Rock County GIS website. Thus, removing property ownership information upon request creates a false sense of security and false expectation of privacy since names cannot be removed for the Rock County GIS website. In 2002-2003, it was noted that staff time spent on data management and maintaining data accuracy would increase if property ownership information is published online since home ownership changes frequently. The City’s old software did not live link the Assessor’s database to the online property search database. Thus, any updates to the Assessor’s database would need to be made manually to the online property search application. The new software live links the Assessor’s database to the online property search application, meaning online records are automatically updated when the Assessor’s database is updated. Currently, the Assessor’s database is updated monthly. Publishing names online would not increase staff time above current levels since the Assessor’s database is already updated monthly. Also, the online property ownership information would be accurate up to a month. Staff time managing data would increase if an opt-out process is adopted because staff will have to manually remove names from the online property search application. Lastly, staff feels it is inappropriate for users to search for property information by name. The purpose of the property search database is for users to find information about a specific property. If owner’s names are a searchable criterion, then the purpose of the online property search application shifts from finding information about a specific property to finding all property owned by an individual. Also, using owner’s names as a searchable criterion increases the potential for users to maliciously misuse owner’s personal information. Option 1 – Do not publish owners’ names Pros ? Maintain current staff time spent updating property ownership information. ? Creates digital obscurity, thus protecting misuses of personal information. ? Non-duplication of service (Owners’ names can currently be found on Rock County’s online GIS property search). Cons ? Maintain current staff time spent answering inquiries for property owner’s names ? Less accessibility to public record information. ? Exclusion of public record information. Option 2 – Publish owners’ names, but allow owner’s to opt-out upon request Pros ? Maintain current staff time spent updating property ownership information. ? Staff time decreases due to answering fewer inquiries for property owner’s names ? Greater accessibility to public record information. ? Citizens’ right to privacy. 2 Cons ? Staff time increases due to creating an opt-out process, handling opt-out requests, and manually updating property ownership information in the online property search application. ? Staff time may increase due to answering inquiries for property owner’s names that are not published on the City’s website. ? Duplication of service (Owners’ names can currently be found on Rock County’s online GIS property search). ? Exclusion of public record information. ? Potential increase in misuse of personal information. ? False sense of security and false expectation of privacy (Citizens who opt-out still have their information online through the Rock County GIS website, so their personal information is still accessible even if not included in the City of Janesville’s online property search application). Option 3 – Publish owners’ names, but do not allow owner’s to opt-out Pros ? Maintain current staff time spent updating property ownership information. ? Staff time decreases due to answering fewer inquiries for property owner’s names. ? Greater accessibility to public record information. ? Fully published public records with ownership information. Cons ? Duplication of service (Owners’ names can currently be found on Rock County’s online GIS property search). ? Potential increase in misuse of personal information. ? Perceived invasion of privacy. cc: Eric Levitt, City Manager Jacob J. Winzenz, Director of Administrative Services/Assistant City Manager 3 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM 24 May 2010 TO: City Council FROM: Mike Payne, Engineering Manager SUBJECT: AWARD OF BID SCHEDULE “C” – 2010 CONTRACT 2010-7, SANDHILL DRIVE PAVING CONTRACT 2010-8, STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS Summary Bids for Public Works Bid Schedule “C”, Contracts 2010-7, & -8 were opened on Wednesday, May 12, 2010. The Engineering Division is recommending award of these contracts to the low bidders, as shown on the tabulation of bids below, and that the City $300,000 Council express their intent to include in the 2010 Note Issue for Storm Sewer Improvements. Recommendation Following review by the Council, the Engineering Division recommends award of Contracts 2010-7 & -8 to the low bidders and that the City Council express their intent to include $300,000 in the 2010 Note Issue Storm Sewer Improvements. City Manager Recommendation The City Manager recommends approval. Suggested Motion I move to Award Contracts 2010-7 & -8 to the low bidders and that the City Council express their intent to include $300,000 in the 2010 Note Issue for Storm Sewer Improvements. Background Contract 2010-7, Sandhill Drive Paving This contract includes pavement repairs along Sandhill Drive and the roundabout at Sandhill Drive and Sandstone Drive. The asphalt binder pavement failure at this location will be repaired with base patching. The roundabout pavement will be reconstructed in concrete which will perform better under the stresses caused by loaded trucks using the roundabout. We received two (2) bids for this project with Rock Road Companies, Inc. providing the low bid. The Engineering Division is recommending award of this contract to Rock \\petey\cojhome\agenda review\approved agenda items\2010\5-24-2010\award of contracts bid schedule c - memo.doc AWARD OF BID SCHEDULE “C” – 2010 CONTRACT 2010-7, SANDHILL DRIVE PAVING CONTRACT 2010-8, STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS _ _______________ 24 MAY 2010 – PAGE 2. Road Companies, Inc., Janesville, WI, in the amount of $167,983.07. A summary of the bids received are below: 2010-7 SANDHILL DRIVE PAVING Rock Road Companies, Inc. Total Bid: $167,983.07 P.O. Box 1779 Janesville, WI 53547 Frank Bros., Inc. Total Bid: $172,117.64 2501 Morse Street Janesville, WI 53545 Funding for this contract is from two sources: 2010 operating budget and assessments paid by the developer benefitting from the final pavement surface. The assessments for the final surface were collected in 2007 when the streets within this subdivision were initially constructed. The 2010 operating budget included $829,654 for street resurfacing and reconstruction, of which $529,654 was previously committed to Contract 2010-1, Street Resurfacing. This contract includes approximately $53,000 related to final surface and $115,000 related to lower layer repair and concrete. Contract 2010-8, Storm Sewer Improvements This contract replaces storm sewer, storm manholes, storm inlets and includes associated street restoration on S. Fremont Street from St. Lawrence Avenue to Oakland Avenue and Laramie Lane from Audubon Avenue to Morningside Drive. We received four (4) bids for this project with R.T. Fox Contractors, Inc. providing the low bid. The Engineering Division is recommending award of this contract to R.T. Fox Contractors, Inc., Edgerton, WI, in the amount of $274,710. A summary of the bids received are below: 2010-8 STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS R. T. Fox Contractors, Inc. Total Bid: $274,710.00 5628 Highway M Edgerton, WI 53534 E & N Hughes Co., Inc. Total Bid: $279,986.50 AWARD OF BID SCHEDULE “C” – 2010 CONTRACT 2010-7, SANDHILL DRIVE PAVING CONTRACT 2010-8, STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS _ _______________ 24 MAY 2010 – PAGE 3. N2629 Coplien Road, P.O. Box 408 Monroe, WI 53566 Rock Road Companies, Inc. Total Bid: $317,331.67 P.O. Box 1779 Janesville, WI 53547 Globe Contractors, Inc. Total Bid: $318,930.00 N50 W23076 Betker Road Pewaukee, WI 53072 $274,710 Funding for this contract is 2010 Note Issue borrowing. The will be part of the $350,000 planned for storm sewer repairs. cc: Eric Levitt Jay Winzenz Carl Weber NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES MEMORANDUM May 17, 2010 TO: City Council FROM: Jennifer Petruzzello, Neighborhood Services Director SUBJECT: Action on a Proposed Resolution Authorizing the Acquisition and Demolition of Property at 321 E Court Street (File Resolution 2010- 709) Summary Five hundred Thousand ($500,000) dollars were included within the 2009 Note Issue for neighborhood and downtown property acquisitions. Funding for neighborhoods was included to acquire vacant and/or blighted properties in the central city residential neighborhoods and the downtown area. The property located at 321 E. Court Street is a vacant 4-5 unit rental property located at the corner of E. Court Street and Wisconsin Street. This property is located within Census Tract 1, downtown. The property was foreclosed on in December of 2009 and is currently owned by Blackhawk State Bank. The property has significant structural issues and staff recommends that the residences be demolished. An offer to purchase the property has been negotiated in the amount of $29,000, subject to City Council approval. The property would then be demolished at an estimated cost of $30,000. The site would be restored as green space and offered for sale to adjoining property owners. Department Recommendation Neighborhood Services Staff is recommending that the City acquire the residential property located at 321 E. Court Street under the Neighborhood and Downtown Blight Elimination Program for the purpose of blight elimination and neighborhood stabilization. City Manager Recommendation The City Manager recommends approval. Suggested Motion I move to approve File Resolution #2010-709 authorizing the purchase and demolition of real property located at 321 E Court Street for the purpose of blight elimination and neighborhood stabilization as consistent with the City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan and Look West and Old Fourth Ward Neighborhood Revitalization Plan. 1 Background The property located at 321 E. Court Street is a vacant 4-5 unit rental property located at the corner of E. Court Street and Wisconsin Street. This property is located within Census Tract 1, downtown. The property was foreclosed on in December of 2009 and is currently owned by Blackhawk State Bank. The property has significant structural issues and staff recommends that the residences be demolished. The property is zoned O2H, Central Office/Residential Historic Overlay District. The property is listed as a non-contributing residence within the Courthouse Hill Historic District. The property is currently in a blighted condition. The subject property includes a 4-5 unit home, classified as other vernacular style, and built in approximately 1900. The lot is 66 feet wide by 85 feet deep, totaling .129 acres. There is a 3,084 square foot, 2 story, 4-5 unit home located on a visible corner lot and a detached garage. Staff is recommending that the structure be demolished upon acquisition due to the poor interior and exterior condition of the building. Significant structural issues exist. The estimated cost for demolition is $30,000. Any salvageable materials will be offered to Habitat for Humanity. Following demolition, the property will be considered surplus and will be offered for sale to the adjoining property owners. The City has negotiated a purchase price of $29,000, subject to approval of the Plan Commission and City Council. The property has an appraised value of $48,000 and an assessed value of $96,800. Engineering staff has completed a phase I environmental review, including a review of past land uses and any documented dangerous or concerning past environmental uses. There are not any environmental concerns with this property. Funding for the acquisition and demolition of this property and relocation benefits is anticipated to cost approximately $59,000 and is proposed to be funded through the 2009 note issue funding. The 2009 note issue included $500,000 in funding for vacant and/or blighted projects. Funding is proposed in recognition of the major neighborhood planning effort underway and the insufficient funds that are available under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. This would be the fourth property funded under the 2009 note issue funding. (Other properties funded include: 404-406 Johnson St., 907 McKinley, and 1110 Hamilton St.) Analysis The proposed property acquisition is consistent with established City plans as described below: 2 The project is consistent with the City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, which calls for the revitalization of neighborhoods that have experienced decline. The subject property is a non-contributing building in the Courthouse Hill District. The structure is not historically or architecturally significant and based on its poor physical condition does not represent a critical use downtown. Removal of this structure would provide an opportunity to enhance the appearance of this block and offer potential redevelopment opportunities consistent with the character of traditional downtown development. The project is consistent with The Look West and Old Fourth Ward Neighborhood Revitalization Plan, which has been guiding redevelopment efforts in the surrounding neighborhoods. Specifically, this proposed purchase eliminates a nuisance property (25 police events over the past 5 years), increases the rate of home ownership by eliminating a 4-unit rental property, improves the neighborhood condition for surrounding property owners, and eliminates poor quality housing. This proposal addresses some critical issues of The Look West and Old Fourth Ward Neighborhood Revitalization Plan, including: Our recent experience indicates that many residential properties are being bought throughout Janesville and are being used as rental properties with no improvements or minimal improvement being made to the properties. Janesville does not currently have a shortage of affordable housing (we are hearing of a 15% vacancy rate); although it is arguable that we are experiencing a shortage of quality affordable housing. Plan Commission Action There was a motion by Adams with a second by Perrotto to forward the proposed acquisition to the City Council with a favorable recommendation noting that the Plan Commission has not reviewed the financial aspects of this transaction. The motion carried on a 6-0 vote. Attachments: Property Data Information Site Map Property Photos cc: Eric Levitt, City Manager Jay Winzenz, Assistant City Manager and Director of Administration 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2010-709 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION AND DEMOLITION OF REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 321 EAST COURT STREET WHEREAS , Wis. Stats. §§62.22 (1), 62.23 (17) (a), 62.23 (17) (b), 66.0101, 62.11(5) and Chapter 32 and other pertinent Wisconsin Statutes permit the City’s acquisition, development, ownership, protection, and conservation of parkland, open space, riverfront properties, and development properties; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) in the 2009 Note issue for neighborhood and downtown property acquisitions, in part to acquire vacant and/or blighted properties in the central city residential neighborhoods; and WHEREAS , the acquisition of 321 East Court Street for the purpose of blight elimination and neighborhood stabilization is consistent with the City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan and the City of Janesville Look West and Old Fourth Ward Neighborhood Revitalization Plan adopted December 8, 2008, which identifies home and property maintenance, home ownership and parks and open space among the critical issues for neighborhood improvement; and WHEREAS , the Janesville Plan Commission has reviewed this proposed acquisition on May 17, 2010 and found it to be consistent with long range City plans, but not commenting upon the financial aspects of the transaction; and WHEREAS , the City of Janesville Administration has negotiated an offer to purchase 321 East Court Street in the amount of Twenty-Nine Thousand dollars ($29,000); and WHEREAS , the demolition cost is estimated at Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000); and WHEREAS, the funding source for the acquisition and demolition is the 2009 Note Issue; and WHEREAS , the Common Council hereby find that the acquisition and demolition are in the best interest and for the benefit of the City and its residents and neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Janesville that they hereby approve and authorize the City Manager and/or his designee(s) to acquire and close upon the City’s purchase of the Properties described above from the owners on behalf of the City in the manner and for the amounts set forth in the above recitals; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the City Manager and/or his designee(s) on behalf of the City of Janesville is/are hereby authorized and empowered to negotiate, draft, modify, review, execute, and enter into additional agreements, record, file and/or make minor modifications and/or amendments to any and all documents, papers, forms, and agreements, and to take whatever other actions as the City Manager may determine, from time to time and at any time, necessary and/or desirable to effectuate the intent of this resolution and/or the public good. ADOPTED: Motion by: Second by: APPROVED: Councilmember Aye Nay Pass Absent Brunner McDonald Eric J. Levitt, City Manager Perrotto Rashkin ATTEST: Steeber Truman Voskuil Jean Ann Wulf, City Clerk-Treasurer APPROVED AS TO FORM: Wald Klimczyk, City Attorney Proposed by: Neighborhood Services Department Prepared by: Neighborhood Services Director ÍËÞÖÛÝÌ Í×ÌÛ q Ô»¹»²¼ ÍËÞÖÛÝÌ Í×ÌÛ Ü¿¬»æ ëñìñïð Í½¿´»æ ïþã ïððù Ó¿° Ý±±®¼·²¿¬»æ Óóïë ÔÑÝßÌ×ÑÒ ÓßÐ Ý×ÌÇ ÑÚ ÖßÒÛÍÊ×ÔÔÛ ÓßÐ ï ÐÔßÒÒ×ÒÙ ÍÛÎÊ×ÝÛÍ ßÝÏË×Í×Ì×ÑÒ ÑÚ íîï ÛßÍÌ ÝÑËÎÌ ÍÌ ÍæÐ®±¶»½¬ÄÐ´¿²²·²¹ÄÝ¿»ÄÝ¿»óîðïðÄÓóïëÁß½¯«··¬·±² íîï Û Ý±«®¬ 321 E. Court Street 1 321 E. Court Street 2 NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES MEMORANDUM May 15, 2010 TO: City Council FROM: Jennifer Petruzzello, Neighborhood Services Director SUBJECT: Action on a Proposed Resolution Authorizing an Agreement with the State of Wisconsin Division of Public Health for the Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Grant Program (File Resolution #2010-708) Summary The State of Wisconsin Division of Public Health applied for and received a Lead Hazard Reduction Grant offered through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to provide funding for lead hazard reduction activities throughout Rock and Dane Counties. At this time, the State is extending an invitation for the City of Janesville to participate in their program. The proposed agreement would include the City assisting 9 dwelling units between agreement approval and December 14, 2012 at an amount not to exceed $101,250. The number of units assisted, could be increased by mutual agreement. Housing staff is experienced in working to reduce lead hazards, and this new program would be administered in a very similar manner as our current lead hazard reduction grant. The program requires a 30% local match, which would be provided by including the lead work within CDBG funded housing improvement projects. Department Recommendation The Neighborhood Services Department recommends that the City Council approve File Resolution #2010-708 authorizing the City to enter into an Agreement with the State of Wisconsin Division of Public Health for the Lead Hazard Demonstration Grant Program. City Manager Recommendation The City Manager recommends approval. Suggested Motion I move to approve File Resolution #2010-708 authoring an Agreement with the State of Wisconsin Division of Public Health for the Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Grant Program. 1 Background In December 2009, the State of Wisconsin Division of Public Health applied for a Lead Hazard Reduction Grant offered through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The State applied for this grant to provide funding for lead hazard reduction activities throughout Rock and Dane Counties. While the City of Janesville was not a part of the original application process, the State has extended an invitation for us to participate in this grant program. The State has received funding to assist approximately 300 dwelling units throughout Dane and Rock Counties. An average of $10,250 is budgeted for each dwelling unit. At this time, the City’s participation would be set at 9 dwelling units between the date the contract is signed and December 14, 2012. This number may be increased by a mutual agreement. The contract amount would be not to exceed $101,250. The program requires a 30% local match, which would be covered through Community Development Block Grant Funds. Funding would be available to reduce or eliminate lead hazards in income eligible rental housing and owner occupied housing. Priority will be given to assist dwellings occupied by children under six years of age with documented lead poisoning to protect them from further lead exposure. Secondary priorities for assistance will include dwellings built before 1950 and vacant buildings. A copy of the proposed work plan is attached for those who are interested in the specific details of the program. Analysis: Participation in the Lead Hazard Reduction Grant would bring additional financial resources to the City of Janesville to address lead hazards in our housing stock. For the last 3 ½ years, the City has offered a lead hazard reduction program with funding through the Rock County Consortium. The City has received additional funding under the Rock County Lead Hazard Reduction Grant, which will allow us to complete 9 units per year for 2010, 2011, and 2012. Funding under the Lead Hazard Demonstration Grant would allow us to assist another 9 units during this time period, bringing the total number of units assisted to 12 per year. Housing staff is experienced in working to reduce lead hazards, and this new program would be administered in a very similar manner as our current grant. There are a few regulatory differences, including a higher local match, no Davis Bacon prevailing wage rate requirements, and no requirement that all minimum housing quality standards have been met. Funding for the local match would come from the CDBG revolving loan fund, which would be provided to the property owner in the form of a low interest loan using the same standards as our traditional Home Improvement Program loans. Davis Bacon prevailing wage rate requirements can limit the number of contractors interested in bidding for a project, and as a result sometimes drive up the cost of a construction project. Since this program does not require Davis Bacon wage rate compliance, we 2 would expect property owners to obtain favorable bids on their projects. It has always been the City’s desire to address all minimum housing quality (HQS) standards when we work with a landlord or a homeowner on a rehabilitation project, however, that is not a requirement for this program. We have had a few occasions over the past year, where we have not been able to assist a homeowner because the cost of addressing both lead hazards and HQS standards has been outside of our loan limits and/or outside of their ability to qualify for a loan. Addressing lead hazards is consistent with the CDBG and HOME Consolidated Plan and the 2010 Action Plan. The Community Development Authority will be reviewing this agreement at their May 19, 2010 meeting. Their recommendation will be presented to the City Council at your May 24, 2010 meeting. Attachments: Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Program – Work Plan Resolution #2010-708 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2010-708 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF WISCONSIN DIVISION OF PUBLIC HEALTH FOR A LEAD HAZARD REDUCTION DEMONSTRATION GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS , in 2009, the State of Wisconsin applied for and received grant funding under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Grant Program to identify, evaluate and reduce lead-based paint hazards in housing occupied by low to moderate income families throughout Rock and Dane Counties; and WHEREAS, through participation in this grant program, the City of Janesville will be able to assist in identifying and controlling lead-based paint hazards in eligible privately owned rental and owner-occupied housing units; and WHEREAS, housing build before 1978 is likely to have some level of lead paint hazards and the City of Janesville has over 15,000 housing units built prior to 1978; and WHEREAS , lead hazard control work is required for all of the housing rehabilitation programs offered by the City of Janesville and the receipt of Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration grant funds would supplement existing funding for housing rehabilitation activities; and WHEREAS, the State of Wisconsin is proposing an initial contract with the City of Janesville for the reduction of lead hazards in 9 dwelling units at an amount not to exceed $101,250; and WHEREAS, a minimum of 30% match of local funds is required for the grant and the Community Development Block Grant rehabilitation program funds are available and may be used to meet the match requirement; and WHEREAS , programs to reduce lead hazards are consistent with the City of Janesville 2010- 2014 Consolidated Plan and 2010 Action Plan, and specifically goals to improve the existing housing stock and promote decent affordable housing; and WHEREAS, the Common Council of the City of Janesville find that it is in the best interest of the City and of benefit to the community to participate in the Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Grant Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Janesville that they hereby authorize and direct the City Manager to enter into a contract on behalf of the City of Janesville with the State of Wisconsin Division of Public Health to participate in the Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Program; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Community Development Block Grant Program Revolving Loan funds are hereby committed to meet the minimum match requirement of Thirty Percent (30%) of the City of Janesville’s share of the Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Grant funding; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the City Manager and/or his designee(s), on behalf of the City of Janesville, is/are hereby authorized and empowered to negotiate, draft, amend, modify, review, execute, and enter into additional agreements; record, file, and/or make modifications and/or amendments to any and all documents, papers, forms, and agreements; and to take whatever take other actions as the City Manager may determine, from time to time and at any time, necessary and/or desirable to effectuate the intent of this Resolution and/or the public good. ADOPTED: Motion by: Second by: APPROVED: Councilmember Aye Nay Pass Absent Brunner McDonald Eric J. Levitt, City Manager Perrotto Rashkin ATTEST: Steeber Truman Voskuil Jean Ann Wulf, City Clerk-Treasurer APPROVED AS TO FORM: Wald Klimczyk, City Attorney Proposed by: Neighborhood Services Department Prepared by: Neighborhood Services Director POLICE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM May 12, 2010 TO: City Council FROM: David Moore, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Authorization for the Police Department to apply for the 2010 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program Executive Summary The police department is eligible to apply for the 2010 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program. Staff Recommendation The Police Chief recommends applying for the JAG grant for department equipment and software. The grant will reduce future financial burden to the City’s tax levy. Background The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) is a formula grant based upon population and crime statistics. The department is able to use grant funds to purchase law enforcement equipment. The department must apply for the JAG grant jointly with the Rock County Sheriff’s Department and the Beloit Police Department. The Sheriff’s Department will be the administering agency who will apply for the grant and will submit all required reports. The three agencies need to agree on the individual allocations. The total grant available for the three agencies is $56,309.00. Janesville’s agreed upon allocation is $21,700.00. The deadline to apply for the JAG grant is June 30, 2010. Analysis The police department has received JAG grant funding in previous years. The current requirements are the same as in previous years. The grants have been used to purchase police bicycles, less lethal weapons, SWAT rifles, squad equipment, digital recorders, and interview room recording equipment. The department received $12,000 in 2006, $24,000 in 2007, and $26,900 in 2009. The department was not eligible for funds in 2008. There is no cash match for the JAG grant program. 1 The department has tentatively identified the following objectives for equipment to purchase with the 2010 JAG grant funds: 1. Purchase LED flashlights for Patrol officers. 2. Purchase crime analysis software. 3. Purchase Patrol and Investigative equipment. cc: Eric Levitt, City Manager Jacob J. Winzenz, Director of Administrative Services 2 DIVISION OF PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM May 17, 2010 TO: City Council FROM: Daniel L. Lynch, Utility Director SUBJECT: Action on a Proposed Resolution Acknowledging Review of the Wastewater Utility 2009 Compliance Maintenance Annual Report (File Res. 2010-706) Summary All cities, villages, and sanitary districts in the State of Wisconsin that operate wastewater treatment facilities must prepare and submit Compliance Maintenance Annual Reports (CMAR) to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR). These reports evaluate the overall condition of a community’s treatment facility and may be used as a basis to recommend or require corrective actions to deficient facilities. Department Recommendation The Wastewater Utility staff prepared this report and recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed resolution. Suggest Motion Move to adopt Resolution Number 2010-706 acknowledging the Common Council’s review of the 2009 Compliance Maintenance Annual Report. Analysis The WDNR developed the CMAR Program to provide a uniform method to measure the overall condition of Wisconsin’s treatment facilities. The grading scale is similar to those used in many high schools and colleges. It is based on a 0.00 to 4.00 point scale with the final number converted to a letter grade (A through F). When communities receive low grades the WDNR can require those communities to improve their treatment facilities. Grade Corrective Actions Additional Actions A or B Voluntary None C Recommended Response to WNDR outlining community action to correct D or F Required deficiency. The City of Janesville received an A/B for the 2009 report. The higher than normal groundwater caused by the 2008 flooding remained above normal through much of 2009. This high groundwater caused the flow through the Wastewater Treatment Plant to be higher than normal resulting in the Influent Loading category losing points and receiving a grade of B. A second part of this process requires the passage of a supporting resolution by the City Council. This resolution (No. 2010-706) indicates that the Council has reviewed the Compliance Maintenance Annual Report. The resolution is similar to those used in past years and has been reviewed by the City Attorney. cc: Eric Levitt, City Manager Jay Winzenz, Director of Administrative Services Wald Klimczyk, City Attorney JANESVILLE WATER & WASTEWATER UTILITIES May 15, 2009 ______________________________________________________________________________ Compliance Maintenance Annual Reports History The following table summarizes the point totals generated for past years’ Compliance Maintenance Annual Reports. This report shows the results using two different scales. From 1992 through 2003, the Treatment Plant would have needed 71 points before the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) would recommend any modifications to the Wastewater Treatment Plant and 120 points before any modifications would be required. This grading system was based on a point system where points were added for undesirable aspects or features of a plant – low point totals indicated that the plant was operating properly. The current grading system (since 2004) is now similar to those used in many high schools and colleges. It is based on a 0.00 to 4.00 point scale with the final number converted to a letter grade (A through F). The WDNR will require action depending on the score received. COMPLIANCE MAINTENANCE ANNUAL REPORT SUMMARY POINT TOTAL YEAR YEAR POINT TOTAL 11 2001 15 1992 2002 16 1993 27 2003 17 1994 8 2004 3.78 1995 14 2005 4.00 1996 20 2006 4.00 1997 41 2007 4.00 1998 22 2008 3.68 1999 13 2000 29 RESOLUTION NO. 2010-706 A Resolution acknowledging the Common Council’s review of the 2010 Compliance Maintenance Annual Report of the Wastewater Treatment Plant. WHEREAS, the City of Janesville is required by State regulation to annually prepare a Compliance Maintenance Report that describes the physical conditions and performance of the City’s wastewater treatment and collection facilities; and, WHEREAS, as part of the report preparation process, the Department of Natural Resources of the State of Wisconsin (WDNR) requires the Common Council to adopt a resolution acknowledging that it has reviewed the Compliance Maintenance Report; and, WHEREAS, the Utility Director has submitted the Compliance Maintenance Annual Report of the City of Janesville Wastewater Treatment Plant, dated May 24, 2010, to the Common Council for their review. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of Janesville that they have reviewed the aforementioned Compliance Maintenance Annual Report and find that no action by the Common Council is necessary at this time to maintain compliance with current effluent limitations. ADOPTED: Motion by: Second by: APPROVED: Councilmember Aye Nay Pass Absent Brunner McDonald Eric J. Levitt, City Manager Perrotto Rashkin ATTEST: Steeber Truman Voskuil Jean Ann Wulf, City Clerk-Treasurer APPROVED AS TO FORM: Wald Klimczyk, City Attorney Proposed by: Utility Director Prepared by: Utility Director Community Development Department Memorandum Date: May 17, 2010 TO: Janesville City Council FROM: Duane Cherek, Planning Services Manager SUBJECT: Introduce, refer to Plan Commission and schedule a public hearing on a proposed ordinance amending Section 18.36.050 (Industrial Districts) of the Code of General Ordinances (File Ordinance No. 2010-455). The Community Development Department has prepared attached Ordinance No. 2010- 455 which amends Section 18.36.050 (Industrial Districts) of the Code of General Ordinance. Currently, the M1 (Light Industrial) District allows public recreation facilities as a permitted use; however, private recreation facilities are not permitted in the industrial zone district. The ordinance amendment proposes to combine both public and private recreation facilities into the same zoning classification and permit the activity as a conditional use in the M1 District. The ordinance amendment would also add gymnastics, dance schools, fitness centers and trade schools to the list of conditional uses within the M1 District. The Community Development Department recommends that following the first reading of Ordinance No. 2010-455, it be referred to the Plan Commission for review and recommendation and then scheduled for City Council public hearing on July 12, 2010. cc: Brad Cantrell ORDINANCE NO. 2010-455 An ordinance amending various provisions of Section 18.36.050 (Industrial Districts) of the Zoning Code of the City of Janesville, with penalties for violations thereof, together with injunctive relief and remedies upon default of forfeiture payment as set forth in JGO 18.28.010. THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF JANESVILLE DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section 18.36.050 B.1.b.xxv. of the Code of General Ordinances of the City of Janesville is hereby repealed: xxv. Public recreation facilities SECTION II. Sections 18.36.050 B.1.c.xi and xii. of the Code of General Ordinances of the City of Janesville are hereby created to read as follows: “xi. Trade schools. xii. Gymnastics, dance schools, fitness centers; public and private recreation facilities. SECTION III. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the Common Council, the public health, welfare, peace, tranquility, good order, public benefit, and police power so requiring.” ADOPTED: Motion by: Second by: APPROVED: Councilmember Aye Nay Pass Absent Brunner McDonald Eric J. Levitt, City Manager Perrotto Rashkin ATTEST: Steeber Truman Voskuil Jean Ann Wulf, City Clerk-Treasurer APPROVED AS TO FORM: Wald Klimczyk, City Attorney Proposed by: Community Development Department Prepared by: Community Development Department