Abby looks at tightening occupancy ordinance

By Kevin O’Brien

After concerns were raised about overcrowded rental properties in Abbotsford, the city council agreed last week to look at tightening the restrictions on the number of people per household allowed by the city’s ordinance.

City administrator Josh Soyk said the issue was brought up by a focus group that met earlier this month to discuss the city’s housing needs as part of updating the comprehensive plan. Under the city’s current zoning code, no more than five people “not related by blood, marriage, adoption or legal guardianship” may live in a dwelling at one time. Soyk said he started looking around at what other cities allow, and he found that Milwaukee, for example, only allows up to three non-related people to live together in the same house.

In addition to reconsidering the maximum number of people allowed in a dwelling, Soyk said the council may want to look at other enforcement mechanisms beyond the $25 per day fine included for general ordinance violations.

When Ald. Kevin Flink asked about a family of six allowing others to stay in the house, Soyk confirmed that up to five more people could theoretically live there under the current wording of the ordinance.

The council also talked about how difficult it is to enforce the current ordinance, since it could be nearly impossible to prove whether or not people living the same house are related or not.

Soyk said the ordinance could be enforced by responding to complaints or tips from emergency responders.

“Central Fire and EMS has had situations where they go in and it’s mattress to mattress on the floor in every bedroom, so you know there’s a lot of people living in a single- family house,” he said.

DPW Craig Stuttgen said it may be simpler just to set a limit of two people per bed-

See ABBOTSFORD/ Page 5 Abbotsford

Continued from page 1

room. Flink suggested that it would make sense to only apply that limit to adults.

Ald. Jeremiah Zeiset said there could be situations where a friend or relative needs to stay with a family for awhile, so he would like to include some exceptions, but overall he liked the idea of changing the limits.

“That makes good common sense,” he said.

Ald. Sarah Diedrich said the council may want to remove the “related by blood” part of the ordinance, so it’s limited to immediate family, spouses and children, and not cousins, grandparents and other extended relatives.

Ald. Roger Weideman also suggested that the council look at creating separate limits for owner-occupied and rental properties, which is where most of the problems are.

Mayor Jim Weix said EMTs shouldn’t have to walk over multiple mattresses in order to get someone out of a house in an emergency. Local law enforcement may need to get involved if there is a pressing problem, he said.

“If we have to go to the police force with it, we’ll go to the police force with it,” he said.

Soyk said he would continue to research what ordinances municipalities have, and bring back some options at a future meeting.

Other business

■ ■ The council voted to name a soon-to-be-constructed road in the city’s new industrial park “Grube Drive,” after former mayors Henry “Bud” Grube and Duane Grube. The idea of naming new streets after former mayors came from Ald. Mason Rachu, and since there is already a Bezak Drive honoring the city’s first mayor, Steve Bezak, the council went with Grube as the next in line.

Grube Drive will intersect with the existing Opportunity Drive, going north and south, allowing for a new development west of STH 13.

■ ■ During his monthly report, DPW Stuttgen told the council that the city crew has temporarily stopped removing snow from the sidewalk in front of the properties owned by Hank Blazel along the west side of STH 13. Stuttgen said Blazel is supposed to keep the items on his property, considered “yard art,” far enough back so that the city has enough space to run a snowblower along the sidewalk. Those items have crept closer to the roadway, and some minor damage was done to the city’s sweeper, so the city is no longer removing snow on that stretch, he said.

“We did send him a letter telling him that’s he in charge of his own snow removal until his stuff is moved,” he said.

The city has traditionally removed snow from the sidewalks along STH 13 and Business 29, but a city ordinance requires landowners to remove snow from in front of their properties within 24 hours of a snowfall.