e e e e e goodness I will call the work session for Monday February 3rd to order uh first city manager report m m welcome hi guys um welcome thanks for coming yeah before we get into this this is a work session we're so happy you're here but during the work session we just kind of hash things out there's no opportunity for Community comment want take notes tell your friends to come next week might be better back there if you want to see the screen there but if you do have comments and want to share thoughts stay until the meeting at 7:00 and like right at the very top of the meeting perfect yes absolutely yes nope it's me you're here you are locked in until 10:00 okay sorry good evening mayor and Council so got a couple of items to give you updates on so a project that's going to be making its way to uh the city council is the and you've seen kind of the land use side uh an industrial development on the in the northwest corner of Levi Griffin Road and Jonathan carber Parkway and um as that project kind of gets gets off the ground you're going to start seeing some Finance related pieces to that this spring and in order to I would offer to understand kind of what you'll see as kind of a preview I think it would help to understand how Levi Griffin Road was constructed so in 2011 uh Levi Griffin Road was constructed uh through what we call chapter 429 or special assessment process for the city constructs the improvements and then assesses out uh the cost of that project to the jent property owners and so that was done uh but it was also kind of done in Partnership uh there was a What's called the tax increment financing District um so tax increment financing kind of a just a brief 101 on that is uh if a property is paying uh $10 in property taxes and it's vacant and then you put a building on it and all of a sudden it's paying $100 in property taxes that $90 that increment of difference can be collected over a certain amount of years in this case it's 10 years uh that Fleet Farm had so they were able to collect $90 of that new $100 um towards their project um connected with that though they got that increment uh but they paid their assessment that $2.3 million in full because they own the north and south side of Levi Griffin where they're at uh and then the remaining parts of the assessment were deferred uh to the three other properties all three of those properties are currently in Delran Township uh when they Annex into the city as the JCP Holdings property recently did uh that assessment can come due uh and so we're building this concept for city council consideration uh where there'd be a mix of payment of that assessment and um some tax increment financing uh one of the pieces that you'll hear as we we get into tax increment financing and the consideration of that is the term but for so could the development occur but for this uh tax increment or what a lot of folks call a business subsidy um we're confident as a staff and in communicating with the developer that the only way to get this kind of long dormant parcel you know as you can see it sat vacant um where we probably thought at the time in 2011 it was going to develop Within 5 years um that there's some impetus to get this project off the ground by providing some tax increment and so you'll get some of those details later uh but ultimately this is kind of the the Bedrock uh of that project we're also seeking to use some of this tax increment to construct a signal light um at the intersection of Commerce Drive and Levi Griffin Road so you can see right now we've been paying about uh 125,000 in annual Debt Service on that project and we have just under $2 million left till the the debt matures in 2034 so um more to come but I kind of since it's such a significant project I kind of wanted to break it up into little pieces so that when you get uh kind of some of the action items that it's uh not not fresh out of the gate we're also making arrangements for uh Tammy and amdall and Jessica Green from Northland who have been out here to to review the basics of tax CC financing with the city council so you can kind of go over that and then make your decisions as we go forward me abadan is the one south of mono on 212 right uh east of Lano oh so Lano doesn't go all the way up to 11 no no okay L op is about 8 to 10 acres uh just kind of straddling Jonathan Kev Parkway uh and then L was the next piece it's about 25 to 30 Acres okay um then a couple of updates uh Metropolitan mosquito control is offered to do kind of a presentation at your next work session um along with the Minnesota River Congress that's the group that connected with the mayor uh at your next work session we'll also be uh presenting the sheriff's office work plan that's not a item that you need uh to take action on uh but if there are suggestions for revising that plan it get S to you know areas you want look for speeding and kind of relationship building pieces uh we can take that feedback uh kind of a collection of work uh primarily from the engineers office uh but also uh the city attorney's office is working on this as well uh working with HUD so that's the group uh Housing and Urban Development with the the federal uh agent the federal agency so this is money that we got from congressman emmer and so they're kind of the the delivery system for those funds and so there's a memo of understanding to kind of get us through uh the process primarily related to uh historic preservation and the state historic preservations office visit of our uh project site that we will be taking uh to the Council on the 18th once we get through I would say i' call it kind of the alphabet soup of the federal approvals in the city can engage uh in uh the process to obtain uh permanent easements for the Pro project which will be a a major Milestone so we'll kind of walk you through each of those steps but this is a pretty big step coming up on the 18th and then uh I sent out a meeting invite and we can we'll put this on the consent agenda to verify the date and get the get Council approval but right now we have kind of penciled on Wednesday April 9th for an evening strategic plan and goal setting session with the city council uh Phil Kern uh would be facilitating that but a lot of the same things that you've seen previously where we get kind of an environmental scan from each of the department heads on their kind of area of expertise a review of our current strategic plan and then opportunity an opportunity for the council to make any changes and to establish some new goals and priorities for staff and the community uh for the next couple years and did you say evening evening okay right just anywhere from probably 3 to four hours so I was tentatively planning like a start at 5:36 type of time so and then kind one of the starting and kind of finishing with another pretty significant uh conversation that will be in front of the council throughout the year is uh delivering um on the space study that ortell is doing so we've been working as a committee Paul Schulz Eric Madigan Craig eldrid Lyn shudy and myself for uh several months updating the space study for the project and so I just wanted the council kind of had talked about this there'll be some more data in the actual study uh but we did this kind of work on our own but I I think it gives some line of sight to kind of what other communities are doing in the Metro uh there's kind of a mix of cities that are around our size some larger cities I think that one of the interesting pieces is looking at the 2040 population and seeing how that aligns um and talking to the folks from like Bonia and corkran uh aonia is needing more space and they disc constructed something in' 08 corpin thought uh when they built in 2013 that they'd have a building for 20 years um and they're full at 10 so you can see some of the inertia is and gravity is pulling us probably toward a larger number but again uh when you're presented with uh information on this space study it's a great opportunity for you to critique ask questions uh be critical uh one of the things that we're doing kind of in advance is Lynn shy and Paul Schultz are basically doing an audit of our equipment and vehicle inventory uh we sent up sent them our list and they've used that for their planning but um in order to kind of measure twice cut once we're kind of doing that physical audit you know are still using this piece of equipment do we still have it um how does it fit within our rotation and then some additional you know background as we start thinking about it the council starts looking at making decisions and we start trying to communicate this out um you know back in kind of the 60s the old Charlie Mack building was the the Public Services or Public Works building uh the fire department was in the building uh down on Broadway uh in the 80s uh that location uh was moved uh to Lions Park there's about 2,000 square ft right now the building inspection vehicles are housed and uh Lions Park Garage along with some other kind of Supply storage and then in 2003 was a pretty significant uh building and facility project that's when the new Fire Station uh and Public Works building was constructed on Jonathan Carver Parkway um and then the old fire station down here on Broadway was given to the what was called the public utilities department at the time you know my kind of editorial comment I think there was a big shift in kind of the trajectory of the community in 2008 as you can see the population was right around 1500 and 03 but uh expanding 212 to four four lane Expressway in 2008 certainly changed kind of how people think and plan about this community and so you can see um how our popul a has changed and I think I would offer that the area in yellow Carver in 2045 like that's the challenge for this conso and the community of you know if you're going to build a facility you know uh do we have the um capacity to plan for a 20-year building and what does that look like from a cost perspective from a space perspective and kind of looking at all the options kind of in between from there and um that's something that we're looking for to getting the council started on that conversation uh in March can I a question oh please go ahead um when they built the one in 2003 that was before our time here um how did how did they get the did they just purchase the land that it's buil on I know that was Mueller's property before yeah I don't have that level of detail at my fingertips and then do you know if they just bonded for it I mean how did they pay for it I from secondhand I understand there was a couple of referendums but then yes they bonded for it okay the bond is paid off on that project so that facility is paid in full okay does anyone have eyes on Trends and vehicle sizes that ortel Architects is really great at that so they've done enough buildings and one of the things frankly that uh they discovered in some of our past studies is they and I think I mentioned this at a previous work session but they you would think it' be um pretty easy to do but our previous projects just plann for like the vehicle footprint and they're looking at vehicle footprint press like the doors open and the plow on um but I could I can teed that question up yeah because I'm just wondering are like snow plows getting bigger so should we be factoring in if we want this to be a 20-year building should we be factoring in 20% additional space because snow plows are getting bigger or salt trucks are getting bigger right or are they shrinking or like what's the electric Fleet look like yeah yeah all all those big snow PS that be interesting um um anyways uh I was also going ask I saw on Cor that it said they didn't have room for locker rooms they didn't have they don't have they do not right but is that I mean is that something kind of standard and in bigger cities is that they have locker rooms for their staff I would say anecdotally yes but I don't no for certain I mean they I didn't include it on there but they he also put in his email like they have one toilet for their staff um they don't have break room or offices they do all kind of all that admin work at City Hall okay um but the reason I'm curious is if it if we are looking at a 20-year building again does if that's something that is kind of standard in the industry and I don't know why it is but I just if you noted on there that it wasn't part of it why isn't it part of it shouldn't be part of it is there a reason we have we don't have like a like a like our locker room is kind of like a space it's not like a dedicated locker room right now but um that's where they keep like extra uniforms there are times where they just get covered and stuff so like change out so right so maybe is that a question then for the group that's coming to ask them why that would be something that we would consider I'm not following um go back a slide sorry or another one when Who coming to speak to us about this there we go thank you so I mean is that something we should I guess I would like to have maybe some staff input from public works or from ortel about why or why not we would want to include Lo room they have that in oh it is in there we got there Brent it took a while the so the the space that you'll see is a complete build so it's the vehicle and Equipment storage the office space and like the I would to call it like the extra stuff or not extra but like the locker rooms the bathrooms uh dedicated maintenance Bay a wash bay like they you know some communities will put the wash bay you know right inside like their storage area but then you know the Architects mentioned that can create uh kind of a moisture environment that you want to keep away from your vehicles related to rust and um other corrosion pieces so but they can they'll really do a deep dive on all that but the I would say what you'll see is exactly what Paul Schulz Eric Madigan and kind of the others um have asked for okay call for Best Practices one of the things you'll note that a lot of folks on the committee are getting a kick kick out of is they kind of reinforce the idea of uh Brent can participate but doesn't get to make any decisions I knew You' appreciate um and so and rightly so like I can provide input but I'm not in that business I'm not in that industry so they're guiding uh best practices on how they would set up a facility the decision making on that ultimately comes down to you folks in the community okay thank you um and then just a you know we don't often do field trips down to the building so I just wanted to kind of give you some some perspectives you know we'll obviously kind of flush this out as our uh process goes but you know one of the things that you know I'll point out that is unique to car if you look at the bottom right hand picture you know our facility is constructed like a fire station but used for public works and that you see those multiple doors where typically you'd see you know one or two doors with kind of a an internal um flow system and what that creates is like the and this isn't kind of the full state but you know you'll see vehicles or a skid steer or more parked in between um or you'll have to kind of shimmy your way you know um beside a truck to get to another truck so you know our square footage of what we have is probably somewhat dictated by how efficient the team is and the use of our current space and probably not so I only say that because I you know when you start to see the numbers it's I think it's going to you know for for me when I first started to seeing some of the draft numbers it was I was surprised that the numbers were were there were were they're at uh before I start talking about what those were we want to make sure they're verified and look at our equipment and vehicle inventory uh but I do think that we have a a unique set of challenges every time we put a a plow on it's a process rather than jumping in the truck and D driving away with the and I can attest to that as staff back in the day when my office was up there even as Tiny as the city of Carver was all that happened was jockeying vehicles in and out in and out in and out to get what they needed so and then you can kind of see that F exp this is the the old fire station or Public Utilities building across from getaway motor Cafe on the left is the brine making machine that they use for uh ice control on the streets but you can see kind of how we got things kind of parked in there to to make it work and then uh there's frankly a process that probably takes the better part of a week uh at every season to kind of transfer vehicles from one spot to the other for by season you know for street sweepers and lawnmowers and moving snow plows around to kind of make sure they can be as efficient as possible again a big process we want to be uh patient um and precise with uh the community a but there are some pretty big steps for your consideration so we're going to about to take one of the first bigger steps in March so that's all I have for updates all right Council requests um I will start I mentioned two weeks ago about kind of figuring out talking about some of the upcoming legue of Minnesota cities programming and who wants to do what um Natalie beat me to the punch a little bit was sending out an email about day at the hill but first up is the elected leaders Institute there is the advanced program and then I know Kayla's already signed up for the um newly elected program but just wanted to that on anybody's radar the dates are February 21 and 22 in Plymouth there it's a Friday and a Saturday and then 28th February 28th and March 1 in Alexandria for them sorry Christie uh Capital day on the hill is March 6th that's a Thursday and then the annual conference is in Deluth again this year it was in Rochester last year it will be June 25th through the 27th and that's a Wednesday through a Friday and I just I did follow up with Dave this afternoon this understanding that there might be some interest from multiple council members and just asked them to share like how like what the mechanics of that would look like to try to get a quorum if you will of council members have da explain that to the council sure mayor and Council um so for the day at the hill you know I the way I understand it part of it is kind of programming and program with panels and presentations and I know the governor speaks and all that that um is something of course everyone can attend and I don't think there's any reason for us to notice that as a quorum I would just say if you go to those kinds of things where you're all sitting listening to a program or presentation that you don't sit by each other just to avoid any potential open meeting law issues if there's a quorum there um the second second piece of that is I know there's an opportunity to meet directly with your legislators um I would say if you do that you should not have a quorum there if you're going to be talking about City business City things with your legislators it's just like you know the same reason three of you can't meet with me or with Brent outside of an open meeting um because of the open meeting law so um if you're thinking about doing it um I would encourage just two people to do that P of it and if more than a quorum wants to attend the larger program that's fine um but just the one-on-one meetings or the smaller meetings avoid so there's really no way to do it the conference the conference is are okay too but again I would encourage just the best practice whenever you're at those kinds of things try not to be together as a quorum it's just natural for everybody to talk about what you have in common and you all have the city of Carver in common so um you want to be pretty careful about how we do that okay do we just say overtly don't sit next to me well I mean you can you can sit next to one another I just say it's it's such an easy thing to you know fall into as you can go out and have coffee and dinner all those things are okay as long as you're not talking about official City business um but this whole meeting with the legis I mean I assume the purpose of meeting with those legislators would be to talk about things that are important for the city of Carver um okay so with that um I am going to be going to city day on the hill and the annual conference and that sounds like I'm going to deal with it but I'm going there as as commor but also on the uh part of my role on the executive committee of the league Minnesota City so um who's the other person who wants to join me in St Paul on March 6th so I've already and I already both are svpd um Eric's welcome to take the other seat in the one-on-one meeting with the legislators if he wishes to do so because you got your name in first but well we can you know I we can decide that I declined the dinner afterwards I did too okay yeah I did as well okay um okay I'll leave it up to you guys okay to decide that on your own but let's do it before March 5th yep sounds good um and then who is interested in a conference so I'm interested but I don't want somebody else not to go I am interested okay and I don't know like look budget for this we yeah we'll figure it out okay and I've been to a number of these so I am happy to have maybe folks who haven't gone go so I'll kind of Pang back and see what I know the February things I can't go to okay so that is out for sure okay when is sign up for the June one when we have to have that done they won't have that's not even on their website yet so that won't be on their website until March so generally like they kind of launch it at day at the hill okay so March 6th is okay so who's going to March 6th the perfect okay all right well just get in touch with BR if anybody else is interested well Natalie's taking that Natalie's with that so I think the I think we can accommodate m council members is the same rules would apply yeah at the conferences let's not all let not have a Carver table if there's been a more than two council members sounds good look at my calendar go ahead um okay um let's see I think we're removing item number four from the agenda the HOA has kind of put that project on hold for the time me okay um all right item number five Municipal parking lot regulations Mr yeah thank you mayor and Council uh you've had a series of discussions related to parking regulations in Municipal Lots uh your current uh draft L then shows a restriction between the hours of 2: a.m. and 5:00 a.m. uh with the exception of the Broadway lot and Third Street West lot uh which would be used to accommodate uh snow emergency parking and then the Riverside lot for uh boat laune parking um during your meeting on the 21st you also asked the city engineer to look into kind of various parking requirements that are EX in the existing ordinance kind of related to primarily related to uh Broadway and um standards related to parking away from a hydrant or uh intersection Etc uh so Aon Schmidt has provided uh some clarity on that generally identify State statutes and best practice safety standards um I did ask uh Paul Schultz has a followup as well related to uh the maintenance that's occurring on Broadway primarily from forth to main um I would offer that uh something that I didn't think of at the time but the 2: a.m. to 6:00 a.m. primarily um help us during the winter months that's when uh the Public Services team does snow removal so we try to accommodate parking during the business day so when there is snow rather than doing the curb to curb that we do in the rest of the community uh we don't enforce that in the downtown and then after 2:00 a.m. that's when the team comes back in to do removals uh then we also uh at least try weather and resource dependent to do uh One Sweep of the downtown on a weekly basis so um again we're separating these issues out so a missile parking lot then culdesac reg regulations and then finally on street parking regulations related to time limits as independent agenda items uh so right right now you are looking at just the parking lot regulations so you have the draft ordinance and then also the the mark the memo from Aon Schmidt city engineer on uh just parking regulation so happy to answer questions or sit back and let the council discuss I'm happy with the way this turned out um we had a lot of discussion on this as we're still having on this but I think this um really outlines what we were looking for um and then also allowing for some of that snow emergency parking for some of our uh more parking challenged homes in the downtown area I think that's important I also think it's important um as I said the last me for people who may have chosen to enjoy their recreational evening in downtown Carver that they have chosen not to drive home um and then the boat launch I think is great so I'm for me I don't see any changes in this that I'm looking for um the only little note I want to but um on the side that if we are going to use these as parking for the snow emergency is that they are plowed out so that people can get in and out of them see sorry so we're using the parking lots for snow emergency down here that they're not that they're they're passible that people can get their vehicles off the main Dragon into those parking lots or snow events so it'll be a little bit of a um some moving some pieces around because if they're in there it might be more difficult but I'll pass that message but I mean if we know that snow is coming have it pass through so that people can get a sedan yes okay yes we can do that for sure okay that's all I have um I like this too you know the one thing that I did think about um after we talked last week CU I guess I wasn't thinking about all of the other parking downtown on kind of the side streets that aren't Broadway um for folks for the you've had too much drink to drink where do you leave your car so I was kind of rethinking the overnight parking being allowed just in general in the Broadway lot and the Third Street West lot because if that is a um if it's a big drinking night and a snowy night then it I feel like it could potentially be a little bit overloaded I counted and we have like I think it's nine parking spots in the Third Street lot and there are shoot I wrote it down it's like 20 spots in front of the getaway motor Cafe so I just I want to make sure that the folks who don't have anywhere else to go have priority and I don't and I don't necessarily Envision the Third Street either one of those lots hopefully being overrun with folks whove had too much to drink and decided to leave their car here for the night but I just want to point that out I think that again you guys hear me saying this all the time that's not the hill that I'm going to die on tonight but I think that's something that we should just kind of keep our feelers out there to kind of see how it goes um and maybe keep in mind that this isn't necessarily written in stone and it's something that we could end if it ends up being too much of an issue I will as a downtown visit um you live downtown I do um they um what I see is certainly cars are left on the side streets overnight again it doesn't bother to me they're usually gone you know by noon the next day um and but also I think if if someone is going to leave their car there and they get a ticket because they left it overnight during snow emergency because they were at one of the establishments I mean that's cheaper than the alternative right so I think that $50 is a lot better than 15 grand so to me I haven't seen that there's been a whole lot of trouble with them like overlapping and not being able to find a spot down by the getaway because there's been too many cars overnight um or that you know the street parking is taking over I don't see it as being a problem right now I mean certainly something we can kind of take keep an eye on I just I don't I don't think it's going to be that big of most people it's not a huge concern of mine I just wanted to point it out and Lord knows it hasn't snowed in the last two Winters maybe jinx us cuz I would love to see a little bit more snow no this is the one that I do want to jinx us snow snow no there's been no snow yeah that b the drinks so any other thoughts well this is sound like a cop up but I am happy that chrisy is Happy Well in in in that I think you have a really good beat on the needs of people downtown and what the parking situation is so I really did kind of look to you to have U um your assessment of this so I am happy if you are happy I think this will work nicely and I think it will alleviate some of the problems again of some of our parking challenge um we don't have a we have some have a ton but we do certainly have some um and I think being able to the snow emergency part of this is going to be really important for them to be able to move their cars to a place where they won't get a ticket and and then the plows can come through and once it's clear you're back um I am assuming that the uh snow emergency situation will be subsumed under the permission given ahead of time by the city manager language cuz 's nothing in here that specifically calls out the snow emergency allowance of parking can I take that um yeah it's more of a you question yeah we REM we removed that and just made overnight parking available at all times in those three lots including the Riverside L and those were the ones we were talking about for snow emergencies okay perfect y that's just what I wanted to clarify all right um I think we're good to go on that one all right look at us one red on CS let's talk about how how to appropriately Park in a c set yeah so this is an item that has come up since your last meeting we got some feedback from a resident and thought we had a gap in the ordinance so I connected with the city attorney um and so we have some language uh essentially um and it's depicted in the council packet or in the memo that this kind of reinforces uh for ease of enforcement for the sheriff's office that would in part in the cuac that the driver's side uh or excuse me passenger side tires need to be parked adjacent to the curb so that would prohibit uh parking in the center of the cuac bulb uh double parking next to a vehicle that's already parallel parked against the curb or parking at a 90 90° uh at the curb um and so um that's kind of how the ordinance is written so the draft was prepared by the city attorney um happy to answer any questions or um listen to council discussion on the matter I have a concern go ahead so Carver Creek Place has a center island in the culdesac if a car is parked with the wheels on the curb you would potentially make it not possible for a truck to get around that cuac is there some language in here that leaves a certain amount of distance a pass is it called out in a sign that says no parking right now or is it just n the neighbors just don't because they or they do park there they generally don't but occasionally they have and it's an inconvenience but it could be a real problem for a fighing TR because because of those Center islands that feels like an area that needs to be signed to me this wouldn't exacerbate that problem um I think the only way to address that issue is to have a separate that said says you know in the culdesac on Carver Creek Place For example there's no parking just like we have certain areas in the city where we already say there's no street parking um because of the how narrow those roadways if you are serious that if somebody Parks against the curb in that Colac you might not be able to get fire trucks in there that's a big deal yeah an articulated truck would be yeah you know with a 40 not that we get too many of them but they come down not knowing that they can't get around if there's a car park there but ambulances are more of a width too than a normal vehicle I mean we and especially in the winter if the road hasn't been plowed there's a problem there and there I think there may be one other culdesac in the neighborhood that has an island o does yeah uh Caro Creek Circle also has an island so that is an issue so we can have the city engineer do a review and if signage is appropriate it will follow our sign policy process to install signs do we have to include the language into the ordinance then no I think we already have a language about any areas that are signed as zone parking can't be it might require a resolution back to the council just to identify those areas there's no parking that might be what the ordinance is it's been a while since we looked at that but Brent maybe you adopted assign review process that essentially um delegates that authority to the city engineer after review we notify residents of the signage change it doesn't come back to the C so but I share out the the message to the the counil or the action so we've done that in a couple cases where we've added a stop we've added some stop signs and I think a couple locations throughout the community it's based on engineering standards so there's really not um a lot of U it's all based on I would say engineering standards so he there's no discretion in it other than but the numbers show Eric just out of curiosity how many driveways once you get into that call act would you say you have would be impacted 1 two three four four driveways um the question that I have is you have the state statutes in here why do we need to have an ordinance for it to here here's here's the issue with the statute um mayor it's a good question so Brent and I talked a little bit bit about that um the language in the statute here talks about uh parking on a two-way roadway um to me it's a little ambiguous how that applies to a culdesac I mean I understand to a culdesac is sort of its own thing right it's an area where a lot of people use it to turn around it's the bulb there's not really an identifiable two-way Lane within that and so um I think it would be hard or at least arguable for um it' be tough to have ISS a ticket for somebody who isn't appropriately parked under the statute and I think the sheriff's office would agree and so clarifying that in cuis Acts we have a rule where you have to have both those passenger side tires right up against the curb is the way to make it crystal clear for people and the sheriff would appreciate that and I think they would then be able to say well maybe we think there's a little bit of ambiguity with the statutory language let's just site them under the city ordinance okay so um I'll be honest I mean I didn't I didn't write this language and the ordinance um I found it because other communities have used it okay um and so I think they probably had the same issue come up or predicament where they wanted this language um and it's worked so and then my only other question is because we have the language in here that says the two passenger side wheels that solves the issue of if somebody is halfway in their driveway and halfway sticking out yes okay yes in a what do you mean by that in a couple seconds so if this is the driveway the front tires are here but the back of the truck oh hanging out okay I was thinking this is the driveway these are the front tires stop it this is the back of the truck yeah okay I thought you meant if they were hanging over to their own driveway I was like why would we care that draw a car okay thank you um questions comments I think it's a good ordinance I feel like this is an easy one guys let's go okay thank you Kayla Lori I think it's a good ordinance okay chy I have no comment okay all right so let's um all right I think we can move forward with this one okay next on street parking regulations Mr mer so again the council's had a series of conversations related to length of time a vehicle may be parked on a a public Street I did add language we haven't previously discussed it or at least recently we the city does have uh a global restriction related to campers camper trailers unhitch trailers uh that can't be parked on a city street for more than 48 consecutive hours so I just wanted to provide a line of sight uh the councils as you uh know you've had conversations along a spectrum of 72 hours or 3 Days To 168 hours in 7 Days um some additional uh research that we did we did an area view of Municipal parking regulation so uh chasa Chan Victoria and lonia um there's all sorts of different parking regulations uh that you can uh come up with um we did in Consulting with the city attorney did talk a little bit about some various pieces um there some parking I I can't remember if it's area or it was from another city but familial status I think it's a little this editorial comment get a little DIY of how to like verify someone's status and relationship and then uh work trucks I think the def definition again another editorial comment is critical there um CU what is a definition of a work truck if you put a logo on a truck or a ladder is that a work truck on a van or a pickup or a sedan um I only offer that and you know ordinances are somewhat easy to adopt they're you know abundantly harder to enforce and so just trying to put the sheriff's office in a position uh where they can enforce it and then hopefully meet expectations of uh the community or the neighborhoods that are impacted by these situations uh one of the things frankly that I learned uh just in the last week uh from the sheriff the sheriff's been very supportive but he offered an I'm sure Dave knows this already but there was a court case somewhat recently that made it uh illegal for the Sheriff's Office to chop tires um because they're essentially kind of touching uh someone's property so what they can do now is chalk around the tires but not actually the tire but it it no I get just it does show kind of the specificity that kind of goes along with this and um you know one of the things that we discussed was that you know routinely uh if you park on the street and you leave to go to work and the street is kind of where you typically Park you end up kind of parking in the same spot um and he used kind of a an anecdote from you know when he was younger and was visiting a friend and he he could tell where he parked because there was an oil spot in that same spot and so um I offer that that there are obviously some ordinances that you can adopt that will um likely motivate people to not park for whatever extended period you think is detrimental to the kind of the well-being of the community or a neighborhood but I would also offer that an ordinance like this if there's a specific issue will undoubtedly not probably solve all the way that specific issue that it will probably take a combination of ordinance language and conversations amongst Neighbors about hey you park this vehicle in my blind spot can you put it in the driveway you know um because after talking about it with colleagues the City attorney the sheriff's office um I'm not confident there's a you know the council used the term um kind of unintentionally but like is there a perfect solution to this like I don't know if there's like a way that remedies some of the example situations that I've seen uh personally in this community it probably involves a combination of things but I think I would offer again editorially that having some stop gap of like if you park your vehicle on the street and don't move it for this amount of time that constitutes an issue and and here's why and having that standard and right now we don't have a standard so I would offer that there's probably space to to do that with that I'll leave it open to questions uh and comil discussion do you want to start us off here last time sure uh so again I think my first reaction to this entire conversation was surprise that we did not have a city ordinance in place already I just assumed that the sheriff or the city could take action if needed was somebody parked for uh an inordinate amount of time or was causing a nuisance so I think there should be a time limit we're going to come to a decision on that I'm fine with 72 hours I was also uh amable to a longer period of time I think that folks we need to communicate that this is to give the city a mechanism of enforcement this is not the parking police uh with a charge to come after you at 73 hours I don't think that's anyone's intent or the desire of the city but we have no mechanism of enforcement now and that is a problem uh looking through some of the languages of the other cities uh it seems to get a little overly complex the familial uh connection and parking um as you said I don't know you would enforce that either so I'm for a timed enforcement uh I think 72 hours is sufficient we're not going to chase people we're not necessarily going to chase people at 73 hours it just is a mechanism to allow us to do so if we want to discuss up to a week I I think I'm immutable to that as well that's it um I don't know did you watch the meeting last time my concern with the time limit is and I said this two weeks ago is I am thinking that for whatever we decide it will effectively be twice that amount if we decide 24 hours it'll effectively be 24 hours if we decide 3 days it'll effectively be six or seven days and here's why I think if after I see Brent's car parked out in front of somebody's house for 3 days I'm going to call the sheriff's department the sheriff's department is not going to take my word for and be like we will Mr America ticket no problem we'll get that taken care of they're going to wait three more days to see if it moves so I think that whatever we decide we really have to keep that in mind um the other thing um and we talked about this two weeks ago too is this is not going to be something that I want to see our deputies proactively enforcing because there's other things that they should be doing nor do I think that they Patrol our streets with a level of detail of oh there are three houses or three cars in front of Courtney's house tonight and last night and the night before you know like that's just not something com back tomorrow their radar you know like I don't think they're keeping track of that kind of thing I share your opinion that the familial relationships and I think in some of the emails that we've received from residents the ideas to distinguish between owners and renters is just and I don't think that the city has a role in like how are we going to do that are we going to send somebody around with a clipboard and say like hi how many people are in your house and who drives what and okay who's going to be here tomorrow that just is so icky like big government no thank you um you know at our last meeting we also heard um a suggestion for parking permits on the street I think that would go over like a lead balloon with our residents to have to charge them to pay in their Suburban neighborhoods be it up on the hill or downtown or in the Bluffs I just don't think it's going to go over really well um and then the other thing that I read in some of the example ordinances which by the way thank you for turning around that so quickly I think we had that by noon for sure the next day um was um yeah the familial in the number of cars per house like just that like minutia level of ulation just feels like big government to me which feels really really gross so those are my thoughts for now so just to clarify then whatever you're not saying you're not proposing a time limit you're just saying consider that whatever time limit we propose is going to have an extension by way of the mechanism of enforcement yeah yeah and I would be with that kind of looking at our neighboring communities from the information that Brent sent Jan and chasa Jan and chasa look like they're 48 hours I couldn't tell from Victoria's um ordinance what they what their hour amount wasia was 24 hours and Shaka was 24 hours um I think that if we said 72 which I think we need to write out and have and say three days because that gets to be a little bit of math um but I think if we did 72 hours or 3 days I think that that is clearly more generous than L for examples I just excited I just go ahead okay um so I agree with the familial status originally I thought well that seems great right like that seems very typical it's my house I want to park in front of it but then that's only if you know the people so how do you who's a partner who's a sister who's an aunt who has a different last name are we family trees now how are we proving this you know and I I really really feel that if you are parked in front of your own house people are not going to have a huge issue with it right what it is is the issues I feel like we've heard have been um outside of someone parking in front of their own residents so I don't see that as being something that is going to you know the neighbors are going to be calling that their neighbor Pars in front of their own house um when looking at uh the summary of the regulations that you sent thank you for sending the surrounding communities because I think it was good to see what Chan chasa Victoria lonia had I find these to be incredibly restrictive and really in excess of of trying to go through them I mean trying to as a resident to look through this long ordinance of every single Nuance that's in them it seems Overkill to me um I do like that our ordinance is short and sweet and it says just what it is and I don't have as you were saying I don't have kind of any appetite to be running around you know asking status as of families and and having whether you have four cars because if you have that many kids who are driving and two adults I don't that's not my business um I also think parking permits for long term are not desirable this they are public streets so to issue someone I can understand short term if there's if you're having construction material materials dropped off off or whatever that might be but to have a long-term permit on a public Street you are now you are now laying claim to something that belongs to the community as a whole and I don't think that's appropriate either um I also see this ordinance as a reactive ordinance I have no want to spend our um police resources uh driving around checking cars that have not become a nuisance this is supposed to be the nuisance ordinance for cars and vehicles that they become a nuisance um we have a lot of correspondents from Lorraine Court um about some of their nuis nuisance issues there those are even outside of this so I'm not going to you know talk about that with this one because I think that lands outside of what this is about um this in no way says that you can't park in front of your house you can't park for multiple days um over the weekend I am also open to as Eric is amount of time I'm 72 seems fine again as Courtney was saying they're not just going to take your word for it the cop at the most would probably call the owner of the vehicle and talk to them and you know go down and make you know whatever notes they do about a car but again it was it's going to be that length of time after because they're not just going to take your word for it that Joe down the street called and said it was 3 days so it must have 3 days so I'm really good with the short and sweet ordinance that's written again I'm open to the rest of the Council on the time frame Brent could you clarify have we had complaints from people parking outside of their own property uh they have it the complaints that I received are probably in mix recently uh and I don't when I you know when I I've driven down like for example example like clarine Court I don't know whose vehicle is whose vehicle but I do know uh I used to live kind of adjacent to that neighborhood and I do know one of the families and the vehicles that they were talking to me about are not are parked on the other side of the street or not in like opposite their own property think the complainant the vehicles are prop parked opposite the complainant correct okay I do uh just kind of I would say offering to paraphrase not I would say the concern from them is the backing up and then that like vehicle is kind of always in like the spot that has their Turney like doing the backup that it's kind of like in the way um but I haven't received in quite a bit of time a complaint that someone is parking in front of their their property or their property adjacent it's it's primarily been related to you know across the street or uh parking some of the stuff related to like the cuac stuff that we previously uh discussed uh but nothing related to like someone's got their truck parked right in front of my picture window it hasn't come home okay um my concerns are I want to be governing in the assumption that this is going to be the exact amount of time that we say it's going to be because just like we assume that we're going to be good people and good neighbors and not report our neighbors until they've been parked outside our property for 3 days if you're having a beef with a neighbor you could report them immediately and so we can't build in this idea that we're going to have selective enforcement or delayed enforcement in these time periods in my opinion because of that um because we know that a lot of times these things come up in neighbor to neighbor disputes um so I'm kind of concerned about building in that buffer knowing you know it's going to take twice as long because we're going to have there are going to be cases of what I like to call malicious enforcement 100% yeah but I think my point in bringing that up is I think that it's I'm going to assume positive intent and not assume that the second you walk away from your car if it's parked in front of my house I'm going to be on the phone I think it's just something that we should consider when determining that time period because I think very likely if you go buy the book it will be and that's going to be part probably of a communication process of like I'm not going to be able to call after 3 days and expect immediate resolution no well in but in all due respect the arguments that have been made at toward the council about why we need this ordinance have been assuming malicious intent on the person that is parking can I can I ask you okay so I see what you're saying but let's say um Joe doesn't like Bob right so Joe calls and says Bob's been parked there for 3 days but Bob's only been parked there for one day well when the officer if the officer does come and has some he can say no I wasn't and then he would still even have three days though that would be the correct amount of time so even if it was called in maliciously and the officer was there to check it out Bob has the right to say no that is incorrect and the officer then would have to say well okay I'll be back in 3 days and if it's still there in 72 hours then they actually have broken the ordinance does that and that's what I'm and I agree with you but what I'm saying is that if we're building in if we're building our chosen time period based on the idea that it's going to be double what we pick we shouldn't be making that assumption because of the issue of malicious enforcement yes but the ordinance will be 72 hours or 3 days or however many days that's what the rule will be I'm saying Food For Thought okay and countering that food for thought with other food for thought so um just bringing that up as well I think that this ordinance is important in order to allow us to deal with abandoned vehicles in the city um uh to that end I would like to see it at a longer time period I'm comfortable with a minimum of 10 days um just because I don't and we've talked about this before and I'm kind of beating a dead horse at this point but I don't think that what we're trying to attempt to do with this ordinance is going to be addressed with in this way I think that what this ordinance is going to end up being good for is for the removal of abandoned vehicles and so I want to see it at a longer time period and that's my opinion um a couple questions can I kay can I just ask you yeah so when we're being asked to insert the limitation of time you would prefer 10 days yes okay um uh I thank you for getting the information fast and I really like the this or draft is one page almost less than one page so I have a like process question and knowing that um something like this would give us the tool to enforce it how would a resident do that like what is the best way do they call City Hall do they submit a form do they call the non-emergency member of the Sheriff's Office what will we educate them that would be the the best we would offer that they would uh report it via the Carver County not emergency funding dispatch um we like you know we'll likely get calls but that would be a message to our team is to do that okay right thanks for answering that um yeah I'm completely in favorite I um in what in pretty open on a range of the date frame um I can go and I am comfortable going anywhere from knowing that I'm just one Bo from 72 hours 3 days to 10 days um I wouldn't want to see less than three days but that's where I'm at can I interject one please so that this is a kind of a process question for the council so my initial intention was to put this on for the first meeting in March so that we whatever the ordinance you're proposing whatever that kind of essential language is we can put it in the newsletter to make sure that we're getting the most eyeballs on it you can either choose to say that you're considering and we can leave it blank I would offer that you know you provide you be providing although you would be taking a final vote if I or if we could say the proposed ordinance say this cuz that will I would say impact the amount of people and to what degree they advocate for their position whether it's 3 days 10 days or 30 days or somewhere in between um so um we'll you know we'll use our same kind of agenda guide and um city council rundown to inform but as you probably hopefully agree the newsletter is probably our most influential communication tool because everyone sees it you don't have to kind of go preemptively to the website or social media to find it where this is mailed to folks so um that that said you don't have to reach compromise or consensus tonight we'll just leave it blank and kind of say that there's a range that'll be considered but if you have consensus on a what you want in a proposed ordinance we can have it and you can still debate it um at your meeting I think it's March 3D is the first meeting in March I kind of think we need to say something so that we can get feedback on it even if we're all not 100% there and I mean it's it's my preference but I would advocate for it to be 3 days and I would go to seven so you know the the point about it taking a longer period of time boy if we went to 10 days and then we add 10 days on that's going to generate calls to the city hey why didn't you guys do anything about it's been three weeks why haven't you yeah so I I can't go as far as that I I agree that you know we are reactive in how we're going to enforce this and I I tend not to believe there's going to be a lot of malicious intent on our residents uh against another that may happen uh I think more than likely someone is only going to call when it's been a lot more than years yeah and we're it's not as that we're dealing with a a big problem I think we're dealing more with over side that we didn't have an ordinance to start with um I would I was I was actually leaning more to to go a few more days but knowing the response time and factoring that in you know I I'm I'm closer and also saying that other cities are 24 or 48 hours we're already being uh um more lenient at at 72 uh um but I'm not going to die on that so I just I agree I think tennis for me is just a hair too long um I can be just fine going out to to seven that works fine for me um but that's my that's my opinion I'd prefer 72 maybe I'd like to to publish that and see what the the result is but if there was a the pitch yeah if there's a ground swell it's got to be four days or five days uh it's it's not worth uh much more debate on it but uh uh 10 days is going to cause I think more of a problem and perception that we didn't do something about it do you have any thoughts I have a strong appetite for that seven it was up for a little compromise of five and again for what we publish of that we're considering to get feedback yeah are you willing to go down to seven though are you I know you did but we've got a seven seven we've got a three three oh no I'm I'm All About compromise five if we if we publish seven and see what feedback we have it's something that I would consider I think we we have a majority of seven I don't like it I think that's too long it almost feels like for an orance that we a little iffy on like the workarounds it just feels like there's no reason for seven days you didn't chrisy are you okay with five I don't know I'm okay well I don't you know I didn't consider five that's the first thing I mean I guess I didn't think of five even being uh I really do worry about the response time and perception because we're going to add extra days and then we're adding extra days for a sheriff to we've gotten to the point we have an angry resident and now we've got to engage somebody to measure five days you know we look unresponsive if we go too long and we are unresponsive if we go that long so you're considering five you're considering five I'm negotiating them right yeah I'm going from I I was happy with three now taking into account uh Courtney's argument for this extension I think five seems like a reasonable amount of time and if the council doesn't feel comfortable we can put you know 357 negotiating here this is our job we need to be able to come to an agreement we have this is the third time we've discussed this you guys it's just a number to go on the newsletter we don't have to be like this doesn't have to this is not the final number this is what we're going to use to solicit feedback and to get resident engagement so that folks can opine and share their opinions with us why are you doing that with your eyebrows no you have like are you thinking anything else no I I just like a soft number out there you know that we're considering and then get the feedback which is five I think I heard you say thank you five CU I know the strong arm six and a half okay this is silly and this is as the leaders in our community this is the third time we talked about it okay so we will print that we are considering five days you know have a majority of five so and that that will be the measuring stick that we use to get feedback from our residents to see what they think and to have them opine and that will take place at our next meeting which is March third two meetings oh right uh two meetings from now so that we can get it in the March newsletter we'll do social media on it are you going to bill it as a listening session or is it just going to be a come and we're going to be talking about it this is the time to go you can do it either way one point of clarification I'm sorry you did say we have an ordinance against like a large commercial vehicle already parked on the street so somebody Parks their 40 foot RV RV not a not a commercial but an a 40 foot RV on the street there's there's something for yeah self-propelled campers camper trailers unit trailers but I would offer I mean there have been any number of suggestions related to like you know parking with a pickup truck and a trailer attached and you know kind of computations after that of restrictions so you know it depends on how much you want to restrict into what degree I don't want to get into a multi-page ordinance like our neighbor said can we put a pan just not confident we're 100% of 5 days did you say five days yes and meant it I would say that you're yeah and and Eric did and you did and there's your majority okay if you're going to do a listing session I would offer that you don't need a time frame if you're going to consider taking action then you should I think we should take and respectfully I think we should take action I think we've had this on the agenda a number of times we've solicited feedback in a number of ways we've had residents who have come in um so I think that it should go to the next um council meeting not starting up March um and residents will get have the time then to comment and we can um discuss and consider feedback at that time too and if you're not ready to make a decision nothing that you for a fifth meeting but you could table it there's always op yeah okay might have S anything on this dat no well I I think the direction is that staff will have that ordinance ready to be adopted if the council three members of the it takes three to adopt an ordinance um wants to adopt it and um you know let the council decide mostly the mayor decide how feedback but one last question so if somebody and I know we don't need a public hearing but if somebody ask me well why wasn't there a public hearing Mrs S what do I say uh you would say I would offer that you'd say a public hearing is not required but effectively the the culture here in Carver is that the council takes feedback from residents on issues so then that effect is like other than like an official notice in a newspaper which goes to the won Patriot the result I guess maybe I should have asked it's not recorded because it's not a zoning change it's not I'm looking at a like it's okay but the the way that we're going to be publishing it the net effect is the same they're going to be we're giving time too and I would just because of kind of the bucket of ordinances that you're looking at we would put all that in the space for municipal parking call the second and on Street all in March 3rd meeting so that we can do kind of one okay uh notice got it we're all okay with that yes okay your question sorry I don't remember what it was anymore the truck of the trailer and been addressed okay all right um sign regulations do you want to start do you want to start you are the leader of this pack I half would feel like this is going to be requires more than seven minutes 30 P slides um let's talk about commission inter process if that's okay sorry good I think I'm okay thank you mayor and Council um we are approaching um the uh renewal for commission interviews and so I just wanted to come before you and ask um for your feedback regarding the process that we're following um I'm relatively new to the process but I think this um the series of questions that have been asked in the process has been followed for many years so I feel like it's a good opportunity to come here tonight and see if there's any feedback you have or if you're requesting any changes um so as you know the city has two commissions the Heritage preservation commission and the Planning Commission both of them are served by volunteer Carver residents and interested residents and current Commissioners with expiring terms are required to submit an application and a letter of interest appointments are then made to the threeyear terms following an interview with the city council so this year we have our commission interviews tentatively scheduled for February 24th and we're just looking for feedback regarding the questions that were asking on the interview during the interviews and then also going forward if there's any process changes you'd like made um for a little history our interview um time frames for the Heritage preservation commission have been 5 minutes in length and the Planning Commission have been 10 minutes in length for another perspective um we have three positions um I'm sorry three positions on the Heritage preservation commission this year we have three applicants for those three positions and then for the Planning Commission there are two board member positions that are open and we have nine applicants for that so for the HBC as Ladi up that I you know 5 minutes I feel like we're really rushing them now our questions aren't as um we don't have as many and it's not quite as in depth as the Planning Commission interview but I would like to allow up to 10 minutes for them knowing they could get done early but I really feel like we're just kind of like hey nice to meet you hustle and they're out the door I would I think five minutes is just a little bit short for that I'm fine with expanding that I don't know that I felt that stress but could we tell just in case that's too much time could we tell applicants to get here 15 minutes ahead of time so that we can potentially take folks earlier if we are able sure I'm fine with the questions yeah they've been very standard for what we've asked I think that they're fair and not like what does page seven of the longterm of the design car plan say like I think you think that the Planning Commission 10es is sufficient for you Aon I think there are too many questions okay nine questions in 10 minutes when they have like like tell us a little bit about yourself as a lot do you see any that and I'm also not the P Le aison for this so p leison and and you Aaron do you see any questions that you think might not be as relevant as others or we could combine a couple I think but yeah like seven and eight I think get to the same root so it's what uses would you not want to see in Carver and how many people or too many people in Carver I think the goal of both of those is seeing how comfortable they are with growth so I think that could so can we rework that because I think I think the question how many people is too many is I mean I know why we say it because I've heard the answers but I just it feels a little um it's a negative connotation for that question and I think there's a way that we can get to some what we're looking for by combining that into something that's a little bit better word it you just ask what the right siiz population is can we add five minutes if we don't have enough time for nine questions reminder that there are nine applicants plus the additional yeah but I get that but it's also our job to give everyone time and give us time to to make the best decision we can I'm not we only we don't do it very often so I'm okay with giving a more time I do remember feeling a little bit more time crunched for the Planning Commission interviews but you know like Dave has been really clear that we don't ask the question at the end like do have any other questions because we can't and we need to like keep this consistent for everybody um inevitably someone won't take the full 15 minutes right yeah so we'll save a little time there actually if we're going to change the wording I still want a question about population because it drives some important answers then when we look at at the questions what about five because it's talking about a larger review of city parks I think that was very I think that was very pointed to that time frame that we were in so maybe that is the one we remove if that is okay y because that's not quite as relevant as the last time we went through these interviews that's my sling Hill question you remember when I was on I do I do so I think that I really do think that the number five just isn't as relevant for right now and maybe the keeping the however the population has I think we could rework seven and eight to make them not seem negative too okay I I hear what you're saying about it being a snapshot in time when we kind of combine parks and planning I do like hearing the like opinion um I don't think it's relevant as relevant to the rest of the planning commission interview questions and what we're doing right now no but these are threee terms and if we're going to make them 15 minutes we can easily get through these in 15 minutes so I was not advocating to move into 15 minutes I was thinking that we would remain at 10 and that's why we would possibly take out a question and revamp that one into one I'm okay with I don't know I don't feel super strongly on that I but kind of you think 15 minutes sorry yeah no I do kind of feel like 15 minutes would be good and like tell people to get here early because for Brenda was it you last time there was somebody who cancelled and we had to do last minute shuffling and you know like I'm 15 minutes early maybe keep your cell phone on you because it can be a little fluid I mean if the rest of council thinks that if we go to 15 minutes and leaving five in there or is there more is there a different question that could go in its place that is maybe more relevant to today in the Parks I don't know well then we're just replacing the question but that's longer time I was making it 10 minutes though I like the questions I think we give ourselves the breathing room uh in the courtesy at 15 minutes not all we use it okay okay with 15 I'm okay with 15 okay 15 minutes we am I hearing this that we're going to keep question five yes but we are going to try to either merge seven and eight but either way make them a little bit more positive yeah not so like what are we going to Outlaw well yeah like who are we going to uninvite who have we close off to don't say the wrong number okay um all right well look at that we are right on time um I would entertain motion to adour I'll make a motion to adjourn thank you I'll second it a motion by pman second by mock all those in favor say I