City Looks to Clarify Nuisances
The Haysville Times
By Patricia Barkley
The Haysville City Council discussed further clarification of the City’s nuisance codes at their October 11 meeting. Three nuisance abatement hearings were held, prompting the debate. Some explanation was offered in regard to a previous discussion about the difference between a nuisance violation and a zoning violation. Coordinator Angela Millspaugh stated that a nuisance violation dealt specifically with how a property was maintained and related to the health and welfare section of the City’s codes.
A representative for the owner of the first property under nuisance abatement was present at the meeting. Ron Cowhick came to the hearing in the place of Steve Dale, owner of 205 Cain Dr., which had been cited for storing inoperable vehicles and miscellaneous debris. The vehicles had been moved, but some of the debris, wood and mulch, was used during Dale Investments’ day-to-day business and could not easily be moved.
The relevant ordinance did not have specific rules for particular types of materials, so there was some debate over what needed to be done with the wood and mulch. Normal debris must be stored eighteen inches off the ground, but it made little sense to Cowhick to “put mulch on top of concrete. You’re gonna have dirt on it then.”
Both materials are processed by the company for sale, and the mulch is also used for landscaping on the property. Cowhick stated that it would take the entire winter season to process all of the wood currently piled on the property. Although Councilman Ken Hampton voiced some concern over the proximity of the woodpile to some local gas containers, the main point of the discussion was the lack of specific definitions in the ordinance itself.
“The point of the ordinance was to take care of junk, not items used in the day-to-day operation of a business,” said Councilman Bill Youngers. “Some of the things we deal with wouldn’t be code violations…There’s a gray area we’re not addressing.”
The issue of a conditional use permit was suggested, but the matter was finally tabled to give the City time to check on specific definitions and perhaps clarify the vagaries of the nuisance ordinance.
The second hearing was for the property at 427 E. 71st St. S. The code violations there included debris, weeds, and an unsafe structure. Most of the debris has been moved onto trailers or otherwise stored off the ground, and the inoperable vehicles, high weeds, and unsafe structure are now gone. However, there was still some question about the storage of the debris on a flat trailer, haphazardly stacked. Councilman Mike Streets suggested that since the owner had obviously made an effort to clean up, the Council should give him more time to fully comply. Youngers, however, felt that since the owner, Ronald Kohecny, had requested a hearing and then not attended, the Council should pass the resolution to finish cleaning up the property. Finally, the issue was tabled for another two weeks, with Youngers opposed.
The third hearing was for 7470 S. Broadway, and the owners, Alan and Alice Kissack were not in attendance. Code Enforcement Officer Cale Topinka had, however, been in touch with Alan, and subsequently, some of the high weeds had been removed. The inoperable vehicles remained, though, and there was some question about the operation of a business without a license. Topinka stated that there hadn’t been much of a change in the maintenance of the property, so the Council passed the abatement resolution unanimously.
A fourth hearing that had been scheduled for the first meeting in October but had been accidentally left off of the agenda for the evening was tabled for another two weeks. The property was 523 E. 71st St. S., owned by Arthur Pirner.
An annexation ordinance was unanimously approved by the Council, bringing a rough triangle of land into the city limits on the east side of 10th St., south of Grand Ave. and east of the railroad tracks. The area is referred to as the Timber Creek Estates Addition and will not include road right-of-way for the section of 10th St. that it borders.
The Council accepted the resignation of Community Development Director Rick Rekoske, effective October 19, 2005.
A consent for the annexation of Suncrest 2nd Addition was also approved, and the low bidder, Bryant and Bryant Construction, for the Old Oak-Nelson Hike/Bike Trail was accepted. Additionally, a workshop was set for 6 PM, November 14, to discuss trash hauler requirements.
Vern Lippoldt was appointed to the Planning Commission in an at-large position. The Commission is still looking for members in Wards I and II, and new members are also needed for the Park Board and the Tree Board.
A revision to the City’s zoning ordinance for an Historic District Overlay was discussed at the meeting. After approval from three different committees had been obtained, the overlay was sent on to the Council. The ordinance specifies the general appearance of the Historic District in order to maintain its old-fashioned atmosphere. Youngers suggested that it might be too restricting in its list of businesses that were not allowed in the area. However, Hampton suggested that it needed to be more specific in certain other matters. For instance, building paints are required to comply with standards used in the 1890-1910 era, but specific colors are not listed in the ordinance. Youngers agreed, “After the years of work that have gone into this, there shouldn’t be any vagaries. [A builder] should know what to do when he starts.”
Councilman Steve Crum disagreed, saying, “The Planning Commission weeds out these things for us and studies them. If they think this is good, I’m comfortable with that.”
The matter was put to a vote. The first motion was to send the ordinance back to the Planning Commission with requests for revisions. Crum, Keith Pierce, Joe Holub, and Pat Ewert voted against this motion, splitting the vote. Mayor Bruce Armstrong broke the tie by also voting against it. The next motion made was to pass the ordinance. Hampton, Youngers, Streets, and Rob Wilkerson were opposed to this motion, but Armstrong broke the tie again and voted in favor of it, passing the overlay.
Recent Comments