City doesn't want swimming pools in the front yard

By BROOKS TAYLOR

Mt. Pleasant News

No swimming in the front yard in Mt. Pleasant ? unless you?re a toddler.

Mt. Pleasant City Council members passed the first reading of a proposed ordinance amendment prohibiting any structure intended to be used for swimming or recreational bathing and having the capacity to contain water more than 24 inches deep from being located in front yards of residences.

Jack Swarm, city building and zoning administrator, said the amendment is being proposed after learning through a study of ordinances that putting a swimming pool in the front yard was not prohibited.

?In going through city ordinances, we learned that a swimming pool could be located in any yard, and we didn?t think it was appropriate (for a pool to be located in the front yard),? Swarm said. ?The ordinance also fits well with city code regulations on swimming pool.?

The ordinance amendment includes the following language change on general regulations concerning residential swimming pools.

?Swimming pools that are an accessory use to single-family or two-family dwelling units shall be located in any required yard other than a front yard, provided they comply with all applicable requirements of the building code adopted by the city, and provided they are located 10 feet or more from adjoining property lines, or, if they are placed in a side yard or rear yard that adjoins a public street or road, they are set back from property lines in accordance with the setback requirements for the principal structure.?

Swarm said defining swimming pools as structures more than 24 inches deep allows ?kiddie? pools, landscaping ponds and similar low-impact structures to be located in front yards.

The city also entered the property-ownership arena again, agreeing to purchase property located at 312 E. Vernon St. The city will pay $9,000 for the residence and lot. The city will close on the property after Aug. 15, allowing the current occupants of the dwelling to relocate.

?We?ve been trying to get this property remodeled for a long time,? noted Mayor Steve Brimhall.

City Administrator Brent Schleisman said the owners were trying to make improvements to meet city code, ?but it wasn?t going to happen.?

Brimhall said the city does not intend to be a residential property owner. ?The city has done a lot of this around town,? he said. ?We don?t want to own lots, but we want to create a better environment. Most of the time, we sell the lot to a neighbor or someone who wants to build a lot on it.?

Council members approved a preliminary official statement for refinancing $3.9 million in general obligation bonds and borrowing $2.19 million in general obligation notes. Schleisman said refinancing the existing debt will save the city ?a couple hundred thousand dollars? in interest costs.

Even though the city is borrowing over $2 million, Brimhall said city debt is low compared to other municipalities in Iowa.

?Our city debt will be 28 percent at the end of June. Even with borrowing the $2.19 million, our debt still will only be at between 40 and 50 percent. Some cities are at 80-85 percent, so I feel good about where we are at,? the mayor said.

During the various officer reports, Jim Warner of Warner Engineering Associates, Inc., said the firm ?will be gearing up during the next several weeks for Iris Street, but we have quite of gearing up to do.?

The North Iris Street project was to have been completed last summer but wet weather constantly hindered the process, forcing concrete to be poured in December. The area south of the railroad tracks to Washington Street is the area remains to be reconstructed.

Schleisman said activity will be seen on North Iris ?in the next couple of weeks.? Brimhall added that he hoped the work could begin April 6, but Warner said that date may not be realistic.

Rick Mullin, city public works director, informed the council that spring cleanup will be the week of April 20-24.

Swarm said his office has been handling a lot of building permits for both new construction and remodeling.

Finally, Brimhall reiterated the importance of the local option sales tax to the city. The city has had the tax for 20 years but a vote to extend the tax without a sunset clause failed during the November 2014 general election. The city will have another vote May 5 on continuing the tax which expires Dec. 31, 2015.

?Sales tax dollars are so important to us so that we can do a lot of work that needs to be done in Mt. Pleasant,? Brimhall said. ?If this doesn?t pass, we have some serious thinking to do on projects. All the dollars from the sales tax are used for capital projects.?

Mt. Pleasant receives over $900,000 in revenue from the local option tax and the recently enacted 10-cent per gallon gasoline tax, the mayor reported.

Council members meet again in regular session Wednesday, April 8, at 5:30 p.m.