Hello everyone. Welcome to the June 26 Planning Commission. Um, can we get a motion to approve the agenda? Motion to approve. Second. Motion carries. We get a motion to approve the April 17th Planning Commission minutes. So moved. Second. All those in favor? I I and opposed. So motion carries. Want quick here. Um, new business, United Properties, TIFF. Thanks. I think first I'm going to I don't think any of you have met Dave, the city attorney. So, I'm going to ask that Dave introduces himself quickly. Thanks, Aaron. And, uh, hi planning commissioners. Uh, my name is David Anderson. I'm the city attorney. Uh I I don't think I've been in front of the planning commission ever. I don't think so. Maybe once on Brookview via Zoom or Teams, but that was back when we were remote during, you know, COVID, I believe. But um I just wanted to introduce myself and it's great to see everybody in person. I oftentimes get to read your recommendations or talk to Erin about, you know, how different land use applications um are received by the planning commission. So, it's nice to put faces to all your names and um just a pleasure to be here tonight. So, thanks for having me. All right. So, Dave is going to back me up if you have really detailed TIFF questions or want to go in the weeds, which he's probably going to tell you not to do, but he's my backup for tiff questions. So tonight, okay, we are reviewing an application for United Properties, which is the industrial project that's developing directly east of Lake View. So the planning commission has seen a couple of renditions of their project, like the concept plan they're in right now for resoning, preliminary plat, and final plat. So we're anticipating an additional application to come before you either late this summer or early fall. So we're working through that process. Now, this is an interesting ask of the planning commission to think about tiff since this isn't typically something that you review, but as part of uh the tiff application, the planning commission is tasked with a role to make sure that the project conforms with our development plan. So, a little bit about tax increment finance financing or tiff. It's a financing tool that captures the taxes from a property that is developing. So, as a property develops, the taxable value goes up. That taxable value is then captured and applied towards the project. So the developer is able to use those funds captured with the difference in the taxes to uh build the building, do infrastructure, use it directly for the project. So instead of the taxes coming to the city, the school district, the county during the development of the project, it goes back to the developer to reinvest into the site. Uh the TIF application is really specific how funds can be used. It can't be used for the pool in the back. It has to be for infrastructure development costs. So the tiff district is established for a number of years. Once that term expires, the city, county, um, taxable jurisdictions then begin to capture the taxes back as we would have if tiff had not been in place during those years that the tiff was applicable. So the planning commission's role tonight is to uh find conformance of the project to the general plan for development of the city described in the comprehensive plan. So thinking about the United Properties project, does it meet the intent of our comprehensive plan? Is it consistent with our future land use map? The planning commission's role tonight is not to talk about the use of TIFF for the project. That's the city council's responsibility or the terms of the TIF district. Also, the city council. So the city council's next review of the TIFF plan will be at their July 7th meeting. We'll be holding a public hearing. So if you'd like to come and talk about TIFF as a resident, you're welcome to do that in that space. But tonight the planning commission's role is just to confi to find conformance of the project to the comprehensive plan. Let's get rid of that. Okay. So on the screen is the concept plan that you previously have reviewed. It's the United Properties piece directly adjacent to Lake View Industries Fleet Farm north of 212 adjacent to Levi Griffin and Jonathan Carver Parkway. You've seen this before. It's two buildings both at about 190,000 square feet with infrastructure of parking, landscape, ponding, etc. You'll see on the right is the comprehensive plan the future land use map and the circle is the site where the project is proposed. So the land use map shows this project to develop as commercial or industrial which the general intent of the United Properties project does meet the land use for the comprehensive plan. So, a comp plan amendment is not required for this project due to the use being consistent with the future land use map. So, there's a resolution in your packet which is not super typical for this group. It probably felt a little stuffy and maybe challenging to read. It's a pretty complex process, but again, your role is pretty minor in the TIFF application. The city council's been working on it for a while. They will continue, but your step tonight is to find conformance of the project to the development plan for the city. So, I'll open it up for questions. Members from the project development team from United Properties are here, too. So, questions, comments, let us know. Do we have any other tip? I'm just curious how other tiff properties in the city. We do. Yes. Fleet Farm was one. Uh Lake View Industries was Carver Ridge. What's the time frame? Typically 30 years. I think Fleet Farm is only 12. Yeah, it can be negotiated through the TIFF plan and and this is a an economic development district. So, it's actually a it'll be a probably a seven-year district. That's the maximum for this type on redevelopment um projects and housing projects, which we've done in the city. Um that's when it's up it's around 30 years, a little less than that. Um, but this one I would anticipate is going to be significantly less just because the maximum number of years on an economic development project is seven. So economic development meaning it brings jobs into our community and that's why we're giving them that we want them to come correct create those jobs. Yep. And one thing that you always have to prove and the council will have to find this before they can approve the use of tax increment is that they meet what's called the but four test. they can't they wouldn't be able to develop but for um the government subsidy that is being provided through the use of tax increments. So um what we would intend to be using here what the city has used in the past is what's called a pay as you go note. um they spend, you know, millions of dollars to develop their site and then the city will issue them a note which uh would provide them the ability to be paid back from tax increment, but it's very low risk to the city because they only get that money um if increment is received by the city in the form of increased tax base. So, um it's a great tool for development. A lot of cities use it. Not uncommon at all. Um, and you know, Aaron sort of alluded to this, but it's it's I don't want to minimize the planning commission's role or at least where we're at with the project today. There's going to be land use approvals and the planning commission is going to be very involved in those public hearings like you usually are, but um before a tax increment plan can be approved, the city council has to approve the actual development district. A lot of cities just have that district be co-terminous with your boundaries. The reason it has to be amended here is because this is newly annexed property. So the previous coterminus um development district that the city council had created um didn't include any land that has since been annexed. And so um pursuant to the tax increment statute, the council has to reestablish a new district boundary as you know the larger city now that it's it's a bit bigger than it was before. And as a condition precedent to doing that, they have to come to their planning planning agency, the planning commission, and just confirm that you're of the belief that this project and the new district is generally consistent with the city's comprehensive plan, if that makes sense. I think Aaron did a good job of of articulating that, but um I like to get a little more into the weeds on the stuff. So, just because I'm a nerd and I like tax increment financing. If Dave was here for the code stuff, we would be here for days. So I think I can't tell if that's a compromise. Are you leaving immediately after this discussion? I was told to. So yes, you you won't be here all night. I promise. I have a question. So if the city has to review the tiff, does the counties and schools, other people that are not going to get the taxes immediately doing the review? Also, yes, they do, but they don't have any uh approval authority. So, um, they the city gets to decide whether the use of tax increment is appropriate. Um, and it's it's it's actually really nice because cities sometimes use what's called tax abatement. It's another tool that developers can use as a as a local subsidy to their development. But in those situations, you're only getting abatement from the city taxes. Whereas in this case, the city is allowed to unilaterally make the decision and decide if tax increment is appropriate, in which case it gets to take that those taxes from not only the city's coffers, but also from other taxing authorities. Um, and so I think your quick yes was that that yes, they're informed about it, they're involved in it. Um, they don't typically object to it. It's it's they they understand that this is a very um you know common use of of um increased tax base. When I say they, I mean the school district or other taxing authorities including the county um but they don't get to decide or they don't have any veto authority um over the use of tax increment. So it's a good question. Any other questions for anyone? I was looking at the resolution that was written up and it's um It says district tiff district number 1 through 11. So what is the 1 through 11 reference? Uh that will be uh the name of I don't have the plan in front of me on the on my PC but I have it on my phone because I was looking at it earlier. So I'm going to try to take that and Dave you can tell me if I'm incorrect. Sure. But each time we've annexed property and done a TIFF application, it's added property to make it 1-9-10-11. So adding the additional property has increased it to a different version. Got it. Yeah. And I think this particular tiff district once it's approved will be 111 farms. I think flea farms 1-9 or 1-10. Yes. Um and this one is sort of the next in line if you will. So the district itself is district one and again the district the development district and that's the entire city um and each individual tiff district then will be the next number sequentially in line. So Fleet Farm was nine, Lake View is 10, Carver Ridge is would have been 11, but it's was in city limits. So the map didn't need to be adjusted for the boundary. So this would be 11 with a new annex property. And there's not a way to write it where we just say like as things get added into our city that they're tiff because we allow that as a city. No. So with each annexation we have to do the same application to apply the land use map to the new area for that was added to the city. They they've tightened the rules quite a bit in the last decade or so. Tiff, there's been some changes. Yes. Um, and I think to answer the the main question, could we just do like some catch-all approval where every time there's no new land annexed, could we just automatically bring that into the to the development district? Unfortunately, no, just because of how stringent the the statute is. But it's also not a huge under undertaking for the city because every new project is going to require a new tiff plan which will require council approval, land use approvals from the planning commission and all those sort of standard things. So when we go get those approvals, we can bootstrap this kind of a uh I would call it a housekeeping amendment um to the district itself and just create the the larger district. So it's nice to check all these boxes when you use tax increment. um you want to be very careful that you know every te is crossed and I is dotted and there's a lot of um auditing that happens with these and they just like to look at city records to make sure that everything is done correctly. Um just given the substantial amount of what really is public money being used for uh for these projects but in a perfectly you know legitimate and I think necessary uh way. That's another good question. All right, I got a dumb question. Bear with me on this one. Has to do since it has to do with us basically affirming that this plan conforms with the future use future line use plan. So if you go back to the map here, uh two-part question. The first question is as far as the United property. I'm going to stand to make it easier. What's like the northern border? Is it this line here where I got the two vertically orientated parcels or is the northern border of the United property a little further south? Nope, it is that the east west line. Okay. And then so the other question then I have relates to what is the current future land use plan that we're operating off of? Because I'm seeing two different plans. One in the design carver plan dated February 20. It shows basically from about hereish best I can guess north still it's agricultural. I don't know if that's been changed in the 2020 plan. It's so it's the property directly north. So any property that is in egg preserve at the time of our comprehensive plan has to be shown as an agricultural use on our future land use map and then the city uh typically goes through a comp plan amendment process to reguide the property. So our comp plan has a future land use map that shows the egg uses and then the secondary map. So the original uh the first version with the egg overlay I find to be misleading uh because then people believe that the property will be egg in perpetuity or through the life of the comprehensive plan. I've shared that feedback with them at council. Unfortunately I personally have not been able to make that change. Uh but this property specifically does not require a comp plan amendment. It's the Wikenhouser piece that's directly north. So as far as this map here, this being a 2018 map on the 2020 map two years later, this is a so that 2020 map is inaccurate or something changed. No. So you're looking at two different maps. This map had does not have the egg preserve overlay on it. Okay. So the version that you're thinking that has the egg preserve is a totally separate map. There's properties throughout the entire growth area that have that egg preserve overlay like the lensen property which will be the enclave has that egg designation. And so it's two separate maps, both in our comp plan. We found it important to do the two separate maps because we didn't want people to look at our future land use map and say, "Wow, that propertyy's egg. It's never going to develop. It's always going to be a farm." When we have intents of property developing differently. So we have two different maps. So it's the one you're looking at is the egg requirement that the Met Council requires. The second is our secondary map that shows the future land use, how we believe it will develop once the egg preserve portion is gone. Okay. It's just kind of confusing because both those maps have the exact same title, future land use. Okay. Any other questions? Can we get a motion to proceed with the tiff? Seeing with the tiff, are we? Just conf confirming that the Yep. the modification forms with the land use plan. Correct. That's my understanding. Yes. Whoever makes whoever wants to read it. Yeah, I'll read it. Uh I'd like to make a motion that the proposed development program modification and the tip plan conform to the gender plan for the development or redevelopment of the city as a whole. and that this commission recommends the development program modification and the tiff plan to the city council for approval. Second. And any further discussion? Just to clarify, not to be a stickler, but I assume that motion is intended to approve the resolution that's in the packet. Correct. Can can you just cl you just make that clear for the record? Um, tell her what to say. My recommendation. Say that again. Tell her what you want her to say. Okay. Maybe if you don't mind just amending the the motion to a motion to approve resolution number one-2025. Okay. I'm going to make an amendment. my motion um to go ahead and agree to the you could it could just be to approve approve resolution 1-2025. I make a motion to approve the resolution number one-2025. Seconded. Thank you. Any further discussion? Are we good? So, all in favor? And opposed? Motion carries. And I recognize that the planning commission never has resolutions, so it's new to you. So, forgive me for just making that clear, but I wanted the No, we want to get it right. I really have to sign. This is much shorter. Yeah. Thanks. It's about to get pretty boring if you want to leave. No, it's it really is. All right. Well, thank you. Yeah. Make them stay. Yeah, I'm ready. She already said it. Thank you. Really nice to meet you. Thank you. Thanks, Dave. Okay, on to old business. So, special regul I'm going to jump right in if that's okay with you all. Okay, so um special regulations is a really interesting section in our code. I think personally it's become a little bit of a catch-all I think for anything that's zoning related that people haven't known where to put it. I think they've put it in special regulations. I also think some sections of our code are pretty antiquated and things that we probably don't need to think about in Carver in 2025. We can have that discussion as we move through. I will say uh special regulations is kind of the last like really meaty section that we'll go through which I think feels pretty good that we're starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel. So I think we'll break this up over a couple of meetings um since there is a lot of information and then some additions that I think are appropriate and important. So, moving um through the list, it has been um just interesting to think about the past seven and a half years that I've been in Carver. The areas of the code that I use the most frequently that people call me the most that say, I was looking in the code and I couldn't understand this or I need more information about it. And fences is probably the one that we talk about the most. So, that's one of the biggest changes is pulling fences out of performance standards and making it its own standalone chapter. So it'll be easier to search, easier to find the information, which I'm looking forward to. I'm hopeful that people can find it quicker than they can right now. And then there's some removal of a couple sections and consolidation of a few, too. So things like off- streetet loading facilities is covered through planning and site plan review. So that's like where a truck bay could go. It's something we cover in planning. Um, underground utilities was removed as a standalone chapter. It goes into performance standards. agricultural operations was removed. We have an egg district. Um, one that I found to be uh specifically entertaining was dwelling below ground level as its own independent section in the code like an earth created home. Um, being in our code was interesting to me. Um, spaces between structures is covered in zoning code and building code with setbacks. I don't know what design by registered architect, engineer or land surveyor meant. It was its own section. It was about a sentence long. So removing that. Um and then two more that are uh removed. The license group home family daycare nonresidential program is covered in a residential chapter and then the landscape plan gets consolidated with a new section called landscaping buffering and tree preservation. So, new additions, fences coming out of performance standards, site planner review, accessory dwelling units, um, bluff protection gets moved up into special regulations, and then landscape buffering, tree preservation are a couple sections pulled together to one. So, I think most of those are pretty straightforward things that um we can talk through, but one that I wanted to talk through specifically is the site planner review, when it's appropriate, how we've been operating without a site planner review. So, uh, site plan review would be a different process outside of platting. So, someone bought a lot a lot that was already platted. We So, they could come in and apply for a permit. And it's just a building permit. So, we wouldn't have the opportunity to review things or require things like landscaping, parking, building materials like we would through a typical platting process. So, this has happened a couple of times recently. So, like Mizy's was an established lot, so that did not require platting. So there technically should not have been a planning commission and city council review at that point. They could have just come in for building permit. Uh we were able to create a process with a a builder's agreement for Miz and Lewab uh require things like landscaping. So if someone comes in for a building permit, it's just the building permit. So we wouldn't be able to say you need XYZ to happen uh outside of that. So it allows us a review outside of platting. So for an established lot and that review would happen by both the planning commission and the city council. So something that we have run into most cities have a site plan review if I'm being really honest. It is surprising that we haven't. So Dave has felt really strongly about getting a site plan review in our code. It allows us to also have a developer agreement to hold them accountable for things like landscaping, make sure making sure it meets a plan, making sure things stay alive, all that good stuff. So that is going to be a section that we'll go through tonight, but I wanted to give a little more information about when we would use it, why we think it's necessary. So we're not going to start with site plan review. We're going to start back from there, but just wanted to give you a heads up. My desktop is always really embarrassing, so I'm going to take that off for a second. All right. I thought we would go in order for the packet. So we would start with performance standards if that works for you. Can I just Can I just ask one question though that lists where you had current proposed? Yep. I was just curious. You had swimming pools and spas changed just to swimming pools. So, do we care about hot tubs? Uh, we have a swimming swimming pool requires a building permit. A hot tub does not. Okay. And it doesn't depend on the size. No. Uh, it it would, but it like the pool requirement. It's a large structure. It's like 5,000 gallons, I want to say. I don't know how many gallons are in a hot tub. Like what's a swim spot hold? Like a little pool. No. Yeah. Like one of those big rectangular things that you swim in and has like the current. So if it is a pool that is in the ground and it is hooked up to like heating, electricity, etc., it's going to get a permit. If it's a hot tub that you plug in is not going to get a permit above the ground. Above ground pools also require a permit because there's fencing requirements for a pool. My pond doesn't require truth. Are you swimming there? I'm a fisher. We're ready to go into performance standards. Yeah. Okay. Cool. Thank you. Yeah. I'm hoping it pops back up on the screen. It was like a second ago. And I can do the old millennial unplug. [Music] restart. Yeah. Yeah. So, while she's working on it, just a quick question as far as like the bullet numbering, formatting and stuff like that. This isn't the final. Okay. Once we have the content in place, I'm going to send it to Natalie to format the entire thing together, numbering. Okay. Natalie will be our formatting guru, which surprisingly she loves, which I find appalling. So, I went through the red line. We go. Did other people do red line or the clear copy? red line. All right. Okay. Sorry. It's okay. Just kidding. It's totally fine. So, just kind of going through the sections. Anything in section one? Yeah. I um so um 1 C. The trend is building something called a barnamanium. If you guys heard of that, which are whole structures turned into homes. So I I own a barnia. You do? I do in northern Minnesota and it's wonderful and I guess if I can understand We wouldn't want that structure in a typical neighborhood. But if we had somebody come in that purchased five or 10 acres, well, but they would be part of the township, right? Correct. They'd be in the egg district. Yep. Yeah. So then it's irrelevant because it's a city, correct? Okay. I just wanted to call I don't I'm not opposed to I think it's a great call out though because most of the places where you would have houses that you want to all look the same are going to be in an HOA which would limit it. So why would we limit it in here? I agree with that call out completely there. I think it's well I don't think it's cheaper anymore but it used to be like the cheaper way to build right. Yeah, it's not anymore. I don't think I will say the we don't want pole bill. I I can't think of a place where one could be located in Carver city limits. I think the reasonable locations would be in large acre lots. Correct. Not these. Okay. I just wanted to call that out for the sake of the What if we annex the area? We wouldn't annex without a development plan and that'd be grandfathered in because it's already there. Correct. Y like you have to take it down then. Yeah. My only question is some of these I mean it says that you know face materials such as metal will deteriorate quickly. I think metal will be around longer than some shingles. So, I don't know if that wording is correct. And it kind of limits the modern element of houses. Do you mean like metal siding? Well, like metal siding, metal roofs. I'm assuming there's something different on roofs because it doesn't really say anything on here about roofs. Yeah. And we we have a metal roofs have been approved here. Okay. So, I would say metal sheet metal is different than metal siding. Sheet metal would be something that is just flat metal with screws in it. I don't know. I guess for me, again, there's different types of homes, so some people might want to use metal. Like we have metal in our house. We're not trying to exclude the type of metal you have on your house. We've galvanized. Again, I think your house is a portion, correct? A portion of it is metal. It's used as an accent material. Yeah. What you're saying here, what you're implying is is you can't build a structure, a full structure made of sheet metal. Correct. Well, maybe we insert some verbiage of like greater than 51% material can't be sheet metal, you know. So, you can have majority metal accents or Yeah. Yeah. So that's where I kind of struggled because I remember the other code where we went through what you can and can't use and then does this conflict with that where we're calling out specific types of components that are used to finish a home. Yeah. So if we want to add something that it's a percentage I think that's in our industrial district there's a percentage that can be a different material. Um, but I would say Christa, if your house came in right now, this would not preclude it from happening. Yeah. But this is all districts also. So I mean, United Properties, what is the building is not going to be a tin building. It's going to be concrete. No. So there are ways that you can um like tip up panels are typically metal, but they look different than sheet metal. Okay? Okay. So, it's a different application of metal. Like Lake View is primarily a metal building, but there are some grooves in it. It's not flat sheet metal. [Music] All right, we got to move. Yeah. Um, and then the only I think this just might be a formatting thing, but and I don't mean to call it out, but you've got letter E seems like the same as letter C. Yeah, I was thinking that, too. So, I don't know if it's a formatting thing or if it's just a duplicate, but they could be cleaned up. Yeah, it is. Hey, I have nothing else. Yeah, I got a couple comments. So, looking at 1B, the talking about the storage facilities, those have a tendency to be metal buildings. Are we trying to exclude that kind of thing as far as industrial or commercial use? No. Okay. So, that something to think about. And then the other part was the in 1D talk about the hoop type. Mhm. Um, hoop type would have some application in an egg district. Um, unless I'd like to move that sentence into into C that would allow a hoop type buildings to be put in an egg. What's a hoop building? Uh, think of like a semicircle metal semicircle frame or like a temporary carport. Yeah. But they they make a lot bigger like giant green houses or I can use them for storing like farm equipment and keeping crops dry, that kind of thing. They can they can be hundreds of feet long. I also just want to mention there's not an application of egg property being in the city of Carver. So no new property will come in as egg and remain egg. So there are a few properties along Mount Hope that are a zone zoned agriculturally. It's not going to be a zone that's going to exist as we continue to move forward like they will stay agg but moving forward no property will come in to be an operational farm in the Carver city limits. So take that with at like with a grain of salt that our egg district is likely we should absolutely include this information but it's not going to be impactful to hundreds of people. It's going to be impactful to two maybe. You said two. Yeah. So, is it safe to assume in the future the whole egg references will just drop out of the city code? Correct. Uh once the properties along Mount Hope develop, there likely won't be an egg application in city limits. Okay. and they could apply for conditional use if they want to put up something or is that not the egg districts like the standalone district allows for some more flexibility. So like they can have larger accessory structures that's been a big one for people along that stretch. So beyond that, um it wouldn't be a conditional use. It would be a variance, but again, um like they would be able to put up a full structure because there's zoned egg. Okay, that would be the one district where you could. So if you want to buy that one property on Mount Hope and a barn dominium, that's probably your one spot right now. Anything else for one? Okay. Anything for two? Exterior lighting. Okay, there's a lot of red, but no changes. Um, anything for resid residual features? Three, four, three. Now, looks like most of was taken out and combined into one sentence. Correct. Okay. And then five screening and outdoor storage. So I just question of clarification. So 5A talks about units must be screened from VAS from the property lines using the following method. So is it really practical all property lines? Say more. Well, like take a take an average residential house. Their condenser is outside usually tucked behind the house somewhere. But it's going to be visible from a side view or right view. So this is just rooftop HVAC. So it's a it's a commercial application. Commercial or industrial. Sure. So the property lines you guys specify what property lines. I would say on a res uh commercial or industrial it would be all property lines. All property lines. Mhm. Right. If that's is that even practical? It's just when it's on the roof though. So you would screen it in on the roof and then have a place to enter on the roof. Right. Correct. That's how you do it. Yeah. They typically do. I've seen that where they put like a fence around it. Make it appealing on the roof. Okay. So, if it's not on the roof, it's on the ground and then it still has to be screened. Correct. What happens if it's not? Like I'm thinking of a place that's not screened. So, it exists now before the section of our code is in. Okay. So, it would be non-conforming. But if it were to be rebuilt after this code is adopted, there would be a requirement of fencing, a screen plan, or landscaping. So there's nothing in the plan now that says it has to be. Okay. Um architecturally, I think that's what that's a good one. Oh, yeah. Um y anything else on the section are we on screening and outdoor storage? So just with the five we're talking only commercial here correct where is the word commercial only mentioned commercial or industrial? Yeah, we can add that. So that's where I got the confusion because as written it can be applied to any district. Sure. And but we our little discussion was only focused on commercial. Yeah. I was a little confused there. I was just talking about recreational boats and vehicles outside. I'm like how do you screen those? Anything else in this section? Section five. Was that five? Oh, well section next. Section five. Next section five. Five 2.0. Five. Next one. So my question is this looked at in building permits. So it's basically saying that your house is not going to look like anyone else's house around you. But when we have plats come in, they say here's the five houses we're going to choose from. when they're building 200 houses. So when a building permit comes in, if I'm the first one to build, Billy wants to build two houses down, she her house can't look like my house. It can't be the exact same. No. So exact same meaning same layout, same colors, same landscaping. Yes. Or like what's the what does it mean by same? Yeah, that was my definition. If the color is different but the house is the same or the house is the same. Correct. or like the I also will mention most builders do this already. Okay. So they say like within three houses they won't sell the same house layout. Boom boom boom together. Okay. It's not the layout. I forget what they call it. It's like the you're talking about the elevation. Yes. There's elevations A, B, and C of a floor plan. And they won't sell two elevations of the same floor plan next to each other. Yeah. And it might be the addition of a couple dormers. Like it doesn't have to be a total house change. Got it. But it could be dormers, roof pitch, different porch. Okay. Okay. And it's just within two houses in either direction, too. So you could have the same house the regular repeat itself eight houses down or something to that effect. Okay. I don't feel strongly about this, but I'm just wondering why does the city care enough to put it in its code? Uh, I will say there are some older neighborhoods where it's five of the same houses directly next to each other all the way down. Yeah. But again, like why does the city care? I would say if you want to take it out, that's No, I I don't feel strongly about it. I'm just wondering like if I don't know. It's like little houses and I don't know. I like I I come from an area where wasn't five houses. It was hundreds. That's my dream actually. I would live for it, but I I I just wondering why it's a big enough deal that like developers in the city actually care about it. Like it does it lower property value or like why do we care? It just it looks a little spooky. If you drive past five houses, that all look the same. Okay. And that's a technical planning term is spooky. Okay, perfect. Put it in the I'm going to read that in here soon. I al like Lenar does this already. So yeah. No, I I'm sure there's a Yeah, I just read it and wondered why the city would care about something like that. Have Have you ever heard of Levittown? Yeah. No, that would be a fascinating planning commission meeting. So, is I lived I lived a few miles. In fact, my neighborhood wasn't much different. I mean, literally thousands of houses exactly the same. It was post World War II. Veterans came home. They all built the exact same house. And it was it's a little spooky. It's interesting. It's fascinating. I got it's like a security risk if you walk in the same like right house maybe. Like I was just wondering when I read it. I was like going through all the I mean every house is the same and I don't know it's almost a social sociological live for impact. Okay. That was just my curiosity. And and it was interesting that usually within a few years people were adding on and doing things to make them look different because it's spooky. Yes. 17 screening. So my only thought here is do we need a definition of screening? So like move this into the definition section. Is that what you're saying? Do we have a definition section? Yeah. Did I miss it? No. Our whole card does that one. I don't know if you can move it into the definition section because you're actually defining what it means to screen it. Yeah, you would define what screening is in the definition section, but this has got the rules of how you're screen it. And just for clarity, is this residential or commercial or industrial screening? Um, so anything that would have outdoor screening would be um commercial industrial. So thinking through um like Fleet Farm has some outdoor storage that's screened would be helpful to add commercial slice industrial screening to the title just for clarity. It'll be easier to read it more. Yeah, I think that first sentence still reads interesting though like the screening of outside areas required to be screened consist must consist of a solid fencer wall at least 75% opaque and will be at minimum six feet and 8 feet maximum. Like it just reads I don't know it's a little clunky. I had to read it like three times to like understand it. Yeah. a sentence for the height. Everyone started. Yeah. Height. It's at the very end. Yep. There's just a lot of red. So the planting doesn't need to be as tall if I mean obviously it's going to grow but if do you look at the maximum height the planting is going to be? No, it's typically when it's planted. Um any other se or next section I guess there's no more on screening to skip a couple pages here. fences becomes its own. So are we looking at underground utilities? Yes. So this was a standalone section previously. I'm adding it into performance standards to clean it up a little bit. I also will say um section one here I read through it and thought to myself there must be a really compelling reason why this information is in our code and I didn't feel confident enough to delete it. So this is a copy paste of what was in our code previously, but the specificity of it was what made me pause to say if they felt that strongly maybe we should keep it. So my questions relating to this is like if you get a new cable installed, is there any timelines of when how soon that needs to be buried, how deep it has to be buried? Because none of that is really discussed here. So I'm assuming it's discussed somewhere else. Do you have overhead utilities? No. Underground. So wouldn't it be buried? Like I'm thinking like whoever came through and put fiber cables in Metro and then they're like, "Oh, we're going to hook you up." So they hook you up and then they let your cord lay there for 6 months. Oh, I see. So it's not up. No, it's on the ground. Yes. That was a huge issue. So then they tape this little cord on it and literally you mow around it, above it, through it. Yes. Oh, I didn't know that. Oh, it sat there for so long. That's interesting. Um, I can I'm going to think about it in this location. My other thought with that is that Metronet had to get a right-of-way permit. So to do work in the city's right of way and that might be a more applicable spot based on what the utility is like if so the utilities though for metronet they were buried immediately in the rightway. Okay. She's talking not the private is the service line from the right of way to the house. I don't know. I can I'll talk to Dave about it. We'll think about it. I didn't realize that they were out for so long. So then I hit it with the airator again. It wasn't deep enough. Not deep enough. Yeah. Did it happen over the winter at all? No, I feel like it was in the spring. Okay. I know. Burying lines in my neighborhood a couple weeks ago still. Okay. I don't know the answer to that, but I'll think about it. So, I'm just a thing. Paragraph one here about how to underground placement requirements. I'm just wondering if there's a way we could kind of futureproof this passage a little bit. Okay. Obviously, Excel Energy is providing, but who knows? Many Minnesota Valley comes in in the future or something to that effect. Yeah, a portion of the city has valley. So, if things change, I obviously there's a they got their tariff on file off the utilities commission and all this other stuff, but I feel like this is kind of a snapshot in time right now. There's way we could massage this to make it a little bit more future proof if things service providers change or whatever. Sure. There is mention of in the last sentence. Oh yeah. So they must references like cell like cell energy or parentheses any other future future something to that effect you know. Yep. some changes. So with the subdivision of existing utility lines, I'm thinking of like the new development that we're going to talked about last time, the Enclave, Summerfield. Yes. Um those people I'm assuming have power lines like coming into their house above the ground, right? Well, new house, correct? But it says here that existing utilities So, if they're brought into the city, do they have to go underground then? They're the houses that are in the area going to be taken down. Okay. Cuz I just remember looking at the plot and there was like these little houses that weren't Oh, those exception pieces. Those won't be coming into the city. So, it's just the pieces that will be developing. They'll stay in the township. If someone does come in, the house gets taken down or they have to do underground utilities. So, if it comes in as as an exception piece, so if it's a property that's half an acre and it comes into city limits, it would be grandfathered in with their utilities. Okay. I would say if a utility is out there, like if they're directly adjacent to Somefield, I think we could encourage that they go to underground because I think that's more sustainable for everyone, but they wouldn't have to. No, it just says they have to play for it then, too. It's the expense of the property owner. Yeah. But the way I read that, it it almost sounds like it's contingent on the subdivision, correct, of the property. So if you have an acre that comes in with overhead power lines and they decide to divide that into four quarter acre plots, that's your subdivided pursuant to terms of city subdivision ordinance. So you break it down to smaller plots, then you would have to bury. Is that a correct interpretation? Yes. But if you just came in as one acre with overhead lines and you stayed one acre, your grandfather, you can leave your overhead lines up. Yes. I'll also say that those people typically don't want to come into the city. Correct. So all that happening is probably not going to happen, but you got to consider the whatifs. That's true. Well, Main Street, Mhm. It's all over. It is. Yes. We're trying to figure it out. We will someday. I tried to figure it out. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And then we version. Do you have comments on the clean version? No. Okay. I feel like we covered it in the red line. Correct. Correct. Okay. I was just making sure that my pages were in the right order. My pages aren't. So, you're fine because then Okay. Again, I'm a little bit confused because then we go into fences, which is red line, too. Yeah. Yeah, she just put the clean version and the red line version in case we wanted to read one or the other, I think. Okay. Because mine must not be in right order because now I have clean version halfway through offenses. I have like page 17 is updated performance standards. Page 18 is a clean copy and then I go into page 20 and it's a red line again. Yeah. So it's broken down by sections. Okay. So, we're good lines fences. Do you Okay, so it's I took it by section. I didn't do like one full red line, one full clean because that's when we start to get a little mumble, jumbled in here. So, I did a bisection. Sorry, I could have included that in the memo. So, let's go to fences. We'll work off the red line. All right, I'll start off. Uh, first word. So, we're trying to call this fences, but let me go fences. Period. Wall fence or hedge. So, we're probably talking about three things right off the bat. We may want to retitle this to wall fence hedge. Yeah, I don't like that though. We got to come up with something better. Okay. Obscurations or barrier. We're trying to make this more readable. Yeah. And I think I almost want to throw a fourth category of some kind of visual barrier. So, we got fence. We talk retaining walls later. Hedge and then just a plain old wall. I don't know. We can put a wall in our yard. You can put a retaining wall. Yeah. Well, and I'm I'm kind of using my reference from living multiple places in the southwest. Block walls are very very common as divi divisions between property. So basically your your lot is just a block wall around. Not that it's going to happen here. What not? But, you know, someone decides they want to put up a block wall around their their yard. I don't see a problem with that. Nothing preventing it. Yeah. Be costly. Called perimeter barriers. Yeah. There we go. I don't know if I like barriers. Buffering. [Laughter] We already did the screening up above though. boundary. Yeah, something like that. Boundaries. Visual barriers. I will say my one piece of feedback is like someone's going to search fences probably. So, I want that to pop up as the first thing. I don't mind it being called fences. Fences. I get it. Other I'd still call ironing. What? I'd still call other boundary. Yeah, if I did, I'd probably still call it a fence. There's my fence. Thanks. I'll work on that. Yes. Perfect. Build it. So, the fence has to be on the property line of the person constructing it, not on the line. It can be on the line. Do we specific like I'm assuming that's a question you get a lot. Does that need to be put here? It It does say that should be located on the pro private property of the person constructing, not on the line. Does it say that in here? Not. It doesn't say not on the line, but do you need to add it? Well, aren't the There are some situations where a fence could not be on a property line. They should never be on a line. Yeah, I thought they were all supposed to be on the person who owned it side. The line is shared, but it fences can be on the property line if they're tucked in at all. And then both people construct a fence. It can leave a weird little strip between the two fences which becomes pretty problematic. Do you know what I mean? I do know what you mean. Okay. Do both neighbors have to agree if one puts a fence up on the property line? No. Oh, it's probably good good technique to ask permission. Maybe before they put stakes in there. Yeah. Okay. But your name neighbors may change. Yeah. Correct. Yep. Which then would be your neighbor. That's true. Okay. Anything else on fences? I'm assuming there's going to be more. Um, I just had on J chain link fences. So, I just had a little bit of a reaction to allowing we're only allowing them to be in the sideyard and backyard. And I'm assuming that's because it's visual. Okay. But there are sideyards and backyards that are visible. Correct. And I would agree with you that they're they're not appealing to look at. So I mean this is hard, right? So, I'm inclined to say no chain link fences. That's a bold statement. It is a bold statement, but I don't unless you we want to caveat this. I don't like the visual appearance of a chainlink fence. And when we have it in situations, which we do in the city where you can visually see it like on a corner lot, corner lot, you've got backyards that back up to Maine. the real far street up by JCP. You go through there, you've got a chain couple chain link fences that are backyards. I agree. I think they're more spooky than multiple houses in a you have a large dog. You might want to change. You're going to have push back from cost prohibited based on was my thought too. Yeah, you throw up a vinyl fence versus a chain link fence. Me a chainling fence is wicked expensive. Now, what we're talking here is sounds like specific to the historic district. No. Anything that would like a butt uh So if the backyard abotss a street, Cherry's proposing that you couldn't have a chainlink fence in that backyard. Well, sorry for clarity. Like the examples that were brought up seem more to be historic district area. Okay. So when you leave tonight, drive up fourth. Okay. where people live on like Gillin and then their backyard is Fourth Street and there are chain link fences along that stretch where their backyard is adjacent to the street. Okay. Or JCP is another great example that stretch of backyards. Yeah. And I'm I'm not I guess if they were maintained then it wouldn't be bad, right? I mean, you can make the argument if you drive up Fourth Street, there are wood fences that look they're not appealing either because but it's because they're not maintained. Yeah, maybe maintained to my standards or the grass isn't cut, you know, at the base of the fence. So it appe from a you know eye peeing perspective it's just I think two chain link fences as a neighbor because in when we lived in Crystal our neighbor had a chain link fence and their landscaping overgrew through the chain link fence onto our it was super frustrating because we couldn't do anything about it but if it was a actual fence we I mean it just made our yard look really terrible. Um, so I'm very partial against chain link fences just because of that experience, but I totally agree with you. I think they look not right. Well, like so the concern is aesthetics and it sounds like most of the concern is aesthetics from the right away from street view tracking correctly. So do we want to mold this if we're going to go down this path? Mold this to basically just apply if you have chain link fence that are visible from right away then we need some kind of aesthetic treatment to it. Either some kind of landscape screening or you put a locating wood fence or vinyl fence in or something to that effect. I think going carb blanch no ching length fences across cities a path we want to go down. I can support that. That's why I asked the question, why is it only permitted in sideyard and backyard? And it's if it's because of the aesthetics, then we should note here that if the sideyard or backyard are visible or right, I don't know how you Yeah, I'm just making a note that's not adjacent to the rightways that they can't have. Collector Street. Don't we have things called Collector Streets? Yeah. My challenge to that would be my as somebody with a chamling fence. Uh oh. No shame. That uh did not fence. I've looked into replacing our fence and because I agree as well. I would love beautiful wood as my wife. Uh it has doubled the cost. The labor put it in has almost doubled the cost their yard very well and then neighbors who do not maintain their yard maybe at all. Uh I would want to say from the city standpoint, I think it's more important for us to harp on forcing people to maintain their stuff. And the some of these homes, like for mine, it's really clear. If you go to ours, you can't really see the back. Doesn't really But I'm still picky maybe like Sher where I want it to look beautiful because I want to be a representation of what us but that's financially not viable right now. So um you know my challenge would be like I wouldn't say we if we're going to write anything in we want to make it simpler and more complicated. That sounds complicated and I I would want personally if I'm someone having to go buy a fence and I'm like wait we can't do it because we're like on this one corner that's now this and that. We got a dog trying to put in because our neighbors are complaint. I just say like we need to force them to keep up their yard and their property over chain links versus wood because that cost is so different. We're going to force them to do anything. That would be my hope is to ask them. But how does that work if so if we put language in that's like you have to maintain it? I guess my questions are like one to whose standards and two so if they don't what do we like then the city attorney gets involved we have to tear it up I mean I feel like you you can file a complaint to the city which goes to the uh building official official and they would come out and do an inspection if it does not uh apply to those standards then they would issue um essentially like a that it gives them x amount of days to get it corrected and if it's not 15. So it's the building inspector's standards. So it's the nuisance section of our check of the code. It's really specific. Yeah. What it has to be like we can't it can't be arbitrary to say I think your property looks bad. We have to be able to site code and say your grass is taller than 6 in. You need to cut it within x number of days. If they don't our public services team goes and does it and we build them to act. Does anyone feel differently about vinyl coated fencing? Some examples on the screen now. I think like Lincoln said, I it's probably going to be a huge cost difference. Yeah, I feel like for the look it if we're going to have language around maintaining it, then that feels like okay, that's the path we're going to go down. The trouble is, you know, we're we're talking about what looks good for our standard. Mhm. But there are people that want to put up a chain link fence because they trying to keep their dogs in. Yeah. Even their kids. There are a lot of people want to protect their kids. And I think think if you a piece of property, you should have some rights doing certain things that within limits. And I think if you outlaw chain link fences, you're starting to interfere on property rights. So, let me res let me I can support chain link fences. I can support that, but I guess I am concerned if we're limiting it to sideyard and backyards for aesthetics, but then we have backyards that we can see. So, yeah. So, like why limit it at all or are we going to limit it more so that you can't do it in those cases? And that's another fair way to look at it. The height difference between a front yard fence and a backyard fence is pretty significant. So fences can't exceed three feet in the front yard. So I would say in general people don't do like a two-tiered fence height situation. So So looking at number one there, it talks about your three-foot fence. Mhm. Is there a reason we would allow front yard fences anyway? This says that chain link aren't allowed in the front yard, but you can have another three-foot fence in your front yard. Like, what are you going to keep out or in with 3 ft? Like those dainty little white fences that you've not seen those? Fourth Street is going to be another good example. There's a front yard fence on Fourth. Okay. So, I think some people like the way they look. Okay. The white picket fence. Yeah. The American dream. That Okay. I have a different visual in mind of trying to keep bunnies out of my yard with fences. I think game is four feet though. Yeah. 3T is really short. Okay. Anything else on reads I feel like you are prohibited in all zones and then a new sentence that says it can be used in the cultural district. I feel like I don't know all zones except agriculture. Yeah. Yeah. Or all residential. Yeah. And that's the residential it's point of clarity. We should circle back a little bit. All this defense discussion been residential so far. For clarity bullet 19. Do we Maybe it's worthwhile throwing residential fences or residential whatever term we use for these visual barriers are put on property lines because we have a separate set of standards for industrial. Yep. But then on number three it says commercial industrial zone fences must be 8 ft in height. Three. Yeah, you already went by it. Oh, here. Yeah. Yeah, that then you also has to have talking about you know barb wire, electric, whatever. Those are those can be in an egg district. Those can be in an egg district. Yes. Okay. And we're not commercial industrial. So this isn't really strictly a residential discussion. Yeah, that's what I'm kind of strike my previous comment. So, continuing to scroll down. Are we on to rec? Well, let me go back to the chain link fence. So, we added the it can't be seen adjacent to the rightways. Do you guys support that? That can be outvoted. I think when the zoning should we just leave it the way it is. If a permit hasn't come in, is it discussed then? I don't like prohibit someone from putting a fence up if they can't put shrubs on the other side of the fence to screen it. I would say at a staff level, I think it'd be a difficult conversation to have to say if you live on a corner lot, which is probably going to be larger that you have to have a vinyl fence. If someone has, then just go ahead and remove the stuff in yellow there and leave it as is. that yeah if it does anything can we add language to it that says something about like you can't have like overgrowth going through it or something do you know what I mean like because isn't that like the visual issue with chain link fences is like all that stuff that I bet. Okay, then never mind. And like see Well, I think that would be cool. I just mean like all the shrubbery and stuff like Yeah, I get it. In section C, can it be the fence and surrounding landscaping? Yeah, the roof be maintained not to become a hazard or public. Okay. Okay. Now we on to retain wheels. Is this known? Like if people are doing landscaping, do they know they need a building permit for a retaining wall? Because is the retaining wall is holding something up? So I'm assuming they know that. Yeah. So a anything under four feet doesn't require a permit. Anything 4T plus requires an engineered plan. So do people know that? Maybe. I don't know. Should they know that? Yeah. Should it be engineered? Absolutely. Maybe we should require studying the planning commission and taking a test before you move into the city. How do you feel about chain link fences? What are the approved colors? It's like an interview question. So, this is kind of the same kind of thing like your neighbors probably telling on you if you're building a deck without a permit. Yeah, probably telling on you if you're building a retaining wall permit or Paul Schultz is driving around. He calls us and tells us. He looks in people's backyards. Paul is the eyes and ears of the city. Okay. He's on our public services team. Well, I mean, I've gone through this with loss ordinances and we've had people take some of them down and they're not retaining walls. Okay, I think that's the end. I just want to go back to the wall discussion. So, we got retaining wall. Do we want to differentiate terms? As far as a fence and a wall are two separate things or just kind of wall and fence in the same kind of man-made barrier. We want wall in there at all. Yeah. But I see it coming up. Is a wall a fence? Is a fence a wall? So you're saying have a fence section and have a retaining wall section? Well, no. He means like a really but just if you built a wall around your yard. Yeah. Which would be spooky too. Yeah, that would be aative feel about the walls and their height. Yeah. Well, that that's option too, but I mean that's every every lot in the southwest, but just more kind of a catchall phrase like fences meaning walls, hedges for the rest of the section or something. Does this so on screen you have to have a opaque opaque, right? Do you want a fence? Oh, because now you're saying you can't have a wall. Well, retaining walls and a regular wall are two different. Okay. If you don't have a retaining wall, what's your application of a wall? You could have a stone wall. Cinder block wall. Some kind of barrier instead of fence that you can see through like a fence. Yeah, I don't think concrete brick wall. I don't think we want those. So then you would just take out the word walls probably because you have a retaining wall section. Yeah, I would just make it here retaining walls, fences, and hedges to cover. So we're not allow any kind of solid walls. Solid concrete wall, brick, stone, right? I mean, I I think that would be spooky. Yeah. Kind of basically walls in the city already with these split face walls on like a bridge out here and stuff. block. Yeah, but that's a bridge. Yeah, I know. But it's it's aesthetically acceptable to the city. Bridges and stuff like that. A bridge and a perimeter wall are really different things for me. I agree. If you have a cement wall, you're going to have a bunker in your house. Yeah. I feel like I'm in that. Not necessarily. Since this whole section applies, you could like we have with some of the commercial properties, they're going to have concrete walls. divide the fence off like um name escapes me the yes the bullpen entire thing is three concrete walls a fence or is that a I'd say in a residential application that's not something we should I don't see why someone they want to put a wall up, they want to put like a decorative brick wall. Why we should prevent them from doing that? That's just a personal they want to do that it looks nice. Cool. That's personal. I guess I can't picture a situation where it looks nice. That's my problem is I can't You decided it doesn't look nice, but they might. And it does look nice. I just take a retaining wall and just imagine with no dirt behind it. That's what it's going to look like. Yeah. Same. You're going to say the same. Do you have one of those? But the pretty block has to be facing the outside. Would that fall into factor here, too? Other thoughts? How do we feel about standing wall? It's retaining something. Correct. So, it's holding back. It's holding back something, right? So, well, if if it's just there, it's holding back the thunder and herds. I I mean, we can say we don't like walls. We should have a wall. I don't have the next thing is we don't like green colored houses and we don't want you know I don't really have a preference of if somebody wants to build a concrete wall would that require a permit I can in good faith let that happen and if you all want to overturn me and say yes we want that to happen then we should put in the put something in there because are they going to know if I'm building a stone fortress around my palace that I can't have that And it sounds like Eric would like to be open to that. So, I'm looking for some feedback from the rest of you. I I mean, I would I would not be happy if my neighbor decided to put a cylinder concrete block wall between our house and theirs. That wouldn't make me happy. I actually don't feel that strongly about it, but I get it. 100% I get it. I I think the great thing is now it's so expensive to put in the wall. Nobody's gonna chain. Yeah. And if you tell them they can do it, they will do. I think it's this all goes on just a regionality issue. So living in the Middle East, living in Europe, living in Arizona, living in New Mexico, living in Texas, block walls are ambiguous. They're everywhere. It's just not very common here. Is it because of the like dirt sand yard situation that flows? That's what you need to keep that I think it's just more I think it's just more accessibility and costability materials. I don't feel strongly about it. So I don't if on the permit for fences does it say what is this material composed of? So if someone came in and said I'm going to build a concrete wall, you would I would know that. But you have no say that they can do it. If it's not in our code, it's not permitted. Say that again. So if something is not in our code, it's not permitted. It's not permitted. Correct. It's not in our code. Correct. So, we don't have to put it in there. Then we can if it's something that we think will come up and we would like to be really direct and clear about it, we can absolutely add a section. I'd say leave it. It's not in there. It's not in there. So, let's just leave it that way. Okay. Wait for someone to build it. Tell me what the price is, then. Um, if you get a request for a concrete wall before we get done with this section, Mhm. Can we take a field trip as well? That will be the question. I also have a question. I think G and C are the same. So, fences and retaining walls must be in good repair and not pose a danger to people or property. But that seems the same as C to me. I'm in performance standards. The years are all separate. G I think it's already there. Okay. Yeah. So just delete. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So fences is done onto homebased businesses. So, I had a couple questions on this one. Are homebased businesses allowed signage or is that part of a different code? Because we had a sign. It doesn't say anything about that. You will you wouldn't be able to put a permanent sign in a residential district? No. No. The concrete Um, section E, only one vehicle at a time. If you feel strongly, let me know. I'm trying to think of what people have home businesses. I'm think of like Avon, Mary Kay, like you could have two dueling businesses at your house. Does it include inh home daycares? Uh, no. Because that's a separate call out in the residential chapter. Think about if like someone was a therapist and they did therapy out of their home or massage or a hairdresser. Okay. I was thinking in different businesses that I would think though. So if you're a therapist, if we back toback appointments, you're going to have more than one. You have couples therapy, you're going to have more than one. I feel like that language they're not driving. Yeah. Because they're Yeah. I feel like it should be like more so like just it shouldn't obstruct the traffic flow or something like I don't know. Well, you can get three or four cars in a driveway. Yeah. Some driveway some you can't get one car in a garage. Well, the question should be then how many allowing no no more than one car on the street forced to park on the street. Yeah, I agree that one is not super practical and I don't know if we want to require that they park in a driveway. Just No, you just limit number of cars that are allowed to park on the street. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know how we would track that. It should be coming and going continually there. I feel like the language should almost be like obstruct the flow of traffic on the street as opposed to how many vehicles can be parked. Agreed. Because it's going to be different depending on how big the street is. What the So, what happens if a husband and wife or whoever's living the house, they each have a homebased business? That's not um under which one? F. Yeah, one question was why are we limiting it? Yeah. Um, so then someone it's no more than one person other than those living in the residence may be employed by the homebased business. Oh, so that would be if you had a staff. How would we police that? Say your neighbors would probably know. Why do we care? I think the goal of it is to keep it truly something small that's not going to be disruptive to your neighbors. Since it's a residentially zoned property, you want to eliminate what would make it feel more commercial. So, one person can't be the president and the other person can't be the treasure. Like, no, they do. They live there. No, no more than one person other than those living. So you couldn't you and your husband couldn't have four employees that come work from your house every single day. But you could have husband and wife and five kids all working. So I'm thinking I used to work for a tax agent and he did taxes out of his house and two or three of us went there and worked for him. He didn't live in Carver. He did not live in Carver. Yeah, I agree that that one seems odd. I feel like we could cover it in parking, too, just to include that traffic can't be impaired on the street. Okay. Yeah. Do homebased business have to register with the city so you know. No. So, I think anything in this is going to be hard to enforce. Yes. But I think it's important. Correct. Okay. Can we go to Can we go to C? I want to know what's so magical about 18 feet for a delivery vehicle. They don't want a semi backing down the road to deliver your Well, for example, my truck is 19 and 12 feet long F-150. Average minivan is just a hair under 18 feet at like 17 feet 8 in. A Suburban A Suburban is 19 ft. Well, that's the whole point. Like what's so magical about 18 feet? Because I throw those out for comparisons. An 18 foot vehicle is very very common around here. Then the other part of that is generally, and this is quick Google search, so I know M's come off as an expert on this, but commercial vehicles are classified by gross vehicle weight instead of length. So if we have some kind of concern with certain types of commercial vehicles for consistency with state and federal code, we should switch the metric to gross vehicle weight instead of length. But would a commercial vehicle also be like a FedEx or UPS? Yes. Length is the one that's going to cause the big issue. Yeah, I agree. Other than tearing up the street, correct? I don't think a FedEx delivery truck is concurrent with a homebased business. It could be. So like FedEx Brown, those are contractors and they could theoretically have their own private van that they park at their house, but they're going to be out out of the neighborhood doing their routes. Is this to prevent a semitr and 18-wheeler going down the road? Yes. And parking and delivering correct stuff. You're getting delivery materials, which I think could be from anyone. I do like the comparison of the F150 though. This maybe is just outdated. That 18 ft is not keeping up with how big our vehicles are. Is yours a commercial vehicle? No, but I'm just saying like if an F150 is 19 ft, then why limit a commercial vehicle that's to 18 ft? That's smaller than a residential vehicle. And then you get into parts where your your daily driver is your company vehicle. if you're run LLC or whatever and now your LLC owns your F-150 is that now classified as a commercial vehicle and I think really what's obviously there's a concern with the length of blocking traffic but then also generally and I'm this is where I wish we had Erin here for engineering to speak and I'm reaching back to 25 years ago from civil engineering classes vehicles are or roads are stressed for certain vehicle weights and generally residential streets aren't stressed for commercial vehicles of certain gross weights that you talking like delivery vans and semitrs to handle that traffic repeatedly. So there is some concern that we'd be wearing out some of these residential roads maybe a little bit more quickly than planned if we're allowing a lot of commercial traffic going up and down these roads versus a mainline road. stress for commercial vehicles. Okay. So, it sounds like we're we're going to take the 18 ft out. Correct. Do you want to Can you bring this back to Aaron and see if he has any I'm not worried about Okay. We have road restrictions. Okay. In the spring, but our roads are built to handle traffic. We're not going to allow a semi doing daily delivery in a residential property. So, let's update the length and make it more specific of a commercial vehicle. Yeah. You know what? the biggest load on our residential streets garbage truck. And we have three of them every Well, actually not. We have about four and a half every week. We have three just coming to my house. All right. Do we have anything else for homebased businesses? Okay, parking and driveways. It's a regular Oh, I get it. So, part of there was a table in there. That is part of homebased businesses or that is part of what we're reviewing now. Parking and driveways has a table. Red line didn't start right away. So, okay. So, the red line really doesn't I don't think we got that red. We didn't get that red line. Okay. We got it on the table only. Oh, so you must have gotten just the accepted version. Yeah. I'll say in general, not a ton of the content changed in the parking and driveways. Generally, the section of our code operates pretty well. the table, the removal is of the maximum parking spaces, which has always puzzled me a little bit why we would max out max out, especially with how expensive parking lots are. Like a developer is not going to build us a target parking lot for a tiny store. So, I did have a question on the table. There's no minimum parking spot for a single family house. Like, you don't have to have a parking spot for one vehicle? Uh, no, you wouldn't have to. We do in Carver because everyone has a driveway typically, but like downtown there are some houses that don't have driveways. Got it. Okay. Just for context, how does these parking minimums and maximums compare to other municipalities in the area? I would say they're pretty typical like we don't get um like Next Steps was a really good example because they were building in Chesa or they just built in Chaska and then they were doing Shakape at the same time we were. So, we got a lot of comparison to the Chakapi code. In general, I would say uh for our minimum parking, I would say we're more flexible than some communities. We don't require as much parking. Our shared parking is also pretty unique. So, Carver Square or Carver Dental, Mizy's, OB Kids, has a different parking agreement than other locations, which I think is unique and helpful that you could share parking lots for different users for different times. So, I have a question about the shared parking. Um, and I had daycare and misses as my notes. So, what happens if the type of business changes? I have a handy dandy spreadsheet that I update. So when something changes, they have to they either come in for a building permit or a building code analysis that shows us the new type. And if they were to exceed the parking, they wouldn't be a permitted user there unless they could demonstrate more parking. So if you remember when MSY's came in, they added an additional like 18 stalls along the entrance of that development because they didn't meet the shared parking requirement. What if some of those are rentals though in that unit? Same. They still have to come in. Correct. Okay. And is that written somewhere in the code that if the purpose of the building changes that they have to meet these shared standards? It's like through the building code that it's a requirement that they have to come in. They usually have to do a sack determination to a sewer availability charge. So a change of use happens. Okay. So, I have a question on parking for bed and breakfast, motel, hotels. We don't have any, but we do have VRBOS's. Um, there is not specific park. I'm thinking of the one above getaway. There's not specific parking for them. Does there need to be? I like that call out. There is in front of Getaway like you can park overnight in those stalls. So, but as a guest, it doesn't say like reserved for guest because it's public parking. Correct. Yeah. As because those are becoming more popular. Do we want to add something around like I don't know what you'd call like a VRBR or an Airbnb, but like as a proof of one parking off- streetet parking location like an overnight parking. The tricky thing bed and I mean it's not like we could add it just to the bed and breakfast like bed and breakfast or we don't license Airbnbs or VBOs. So we don't keep an inventory beyond us seeing what's available on the sites. That makes sense. So, and I will say like locations downtown the I know of two downtown and they have to at least give their guests feedback about where they can park downtown. Do you know what I mean? Yep. So, the one Yeah. That's not considered like a homebased business. A person has to live in the space for it to be a homebased business. So in the maximum vehicle, all this red, you're just defining maximum. I'm just I want to get rid of maximum parking. So what does the red mean in here? Delete it. Oh, it does. It's just not struck through. Correct. I think the minimum like bicycle space is a little weird. Kind of weird. Okay. Like I understand for multiple, you know, family dwellings, you want to have one, but to say for a commercial building, you need to have a bike rack. I I kind of feel in general to get rid of all like min requirements. If a business wants to offer that was great on them, but we really need to dictate always. Well, it's funny you mentioned the bikes because I actually wrote on I wrote a note about what happens down here down downtown at like the ice cream shop in the summer when the kids ride their bikes. You can't even walk on the sidewalk having the bikes thing in there because of that. But they don't have any, do they? I don't know if they do, but that's what came to my mind when I was reading. Little one on the side. That's what I was when I was reading the bike section. That's what came to mind. I know that um Motor Cafe has one on the side of their building. I'll say just in general, the amount of trails that Carver provides, people do bike frequently. Yeah. And that was also my note with this trail getting completed across the river. We are a heavy biking town. Yeah, they love to stop. And I think that if you don't offer it, it's not that they don't stop, it's that they stop and they just put their bikes anywhere. And I think with electric bikes becoming more of a thing, you're going to see that pick up even more. But this is saying you have to have a bike rack. Yeah. For like the safety of like sidewalk users basically. I think that's the point of it, right? The bike rack is on the side. No, it can't obstruct a sidewalk. Okay. I think we should have the paper. We want to promote a healthy environment. I like it. Yeah, I like it. Is the for the um if you go up for the assisted living places, is the three per resident like that's enough? I guess I never see Carver Ridges like full, but yeah. Um, folks living in in an assisted living typically don't have a car. Um, Carver Ridge also has the underground parking facility where they each get a stall underground. So, but some feedback we've we got specific from Carver Ridge and then Carver Oaks is that their spaces are not full. People in assisted living typically don't independently drive. Okay. Yeah, I guess. Yeah. I never see it full. So, do you need a maximum then on that assisted living? Do you mean why it's there? It's because it's red. Because it's going away. Yeah. I thought when I read this that you were changing everything to what's in the red. Oh, no. When I just deleted it as a column, so instead of going through the text and striking them, the whole column would go Well, since we're going to keep the uh the bike minimums, does anybody else find it slightly ironic that there's no bike parking minimal for a bike shop? They're all inside so you can buy them. And the animal hospital doesn't have one. I mean, are you going to bike with a cat on your back? Yes. I'm Well, I'm going to bike and my dog's gonna run next to my bike. Yeah. No, I think you need some for the bank. Yeah, the bank should personally r my bike to the bank one time. We we should consider they've prepared the trail bike trail for the cities and now they're going to add section on the south side of the river that potentially we're going to see a lot more bike traffic in that trail. Yes, correct. I think you may eventually start having businesses. I mean the ice cream shop would be one right now and Harvey's and leases would be places that might attract a lot of ice for sure. Do you need that column there or can it just be in general? Bike racks are required with bike racks are required. Yeah. And it doesn't matter how many vehicle spaces you have because a lot of these are public like in the street parking. Yeah. And I don't think we ever want to get to the point of counting spaces in a bike rack because I think it's preference based too. Just provide one. Yeah. Okay. And then again, just note that it shouldn't be in walking areas. Anything else in parking? Yeah, I'm looking at arcade and mini golf and bowling. kind of switch metrics from GFA or headcounts to number of table games or number of lanes. Consistency switches back to a metric that's in line with everything else as far as GFA or headcount. Do you say arcades? Is that the first one? Yep. Arcade, mini golf, bowling. Am I scrolling past it? No, it's on page six of 13. Six of 13. Oh, public assembly. Yeah, right there. arcade. Okay. And mini golf. I just oneoff type example. I think like the burrow of Victoria, it's got it's got mini golf in there. It's got arcades. Starting you're not going to have these homogeneous arcades really much anymore. You are going to have some video games or table games. It's going to be a smaller portion of the business. know kind of which which metric applies here. So more per square foot. Yeah, just for consistency with the rest of the the rest of the measurements or rest of the requirements. We could here too. Anything on shared parking spaces? Excuse me. How do you me as far as funeral homes? How we know how many seats they're going to have? That's what I'm highlighting. I'm going to do them all the square footage. I don't know. This is might be weird, but is it is it by commercial or industrial that you can kind of lump them all together versus having to list them all out? That's how they are. There's just some wonky ones, I think. So, uh, like there's an industrial section. Okay. I just want to clean it up because I wouldn't I wouldn't look for an arcade under public assembly. I would go under a commercial use, I think. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. You fooled us on that one. What's that? You fooled us on that last one. So, anything on the shared parking nine of 13 starting? No, I just had a comment on the on those that grid seems out of place to the rest of because the definitions of shared parking. I had to go all the way back. It was on page two of 13 and we're on page nine of 13 to see the table. So, I don't know. Okay. So, start with text and then follow the table. I'm thinking This is another clarity point, but you we're talking vehicle parking. Is that to safe to assume also we're including vehicles, not just automobiles, but motorcycles as well? Correct. Was there any red line in the rest of that shared parking? No, I don't think so. I just I created that driveway section at the end, but that should be on your accepted version too. Yeah. Regarding compact vehicles, 20% required. How does that fall in line with other municipalities? It seems a little bit high, but I don't have any context. I had the same observation. Seemed high to me. in B. I think maybe 10% would be a little bit more appropriate. Okay. Do we have any language in here around requirements for like electrical vehicles or charging stations for any of that or not? That's not a thing we do. We uh we do like there's a public charging facility in Ironwood. The park has one that you can pay to use. Uh but beyond that, no. Okay. I didn't know that was there. It's there. Okay. Parking and driveways. Anything on the end where it was residential in the red Aaron showing on the screen? Residential driveways. I had some. I'm trying to find it. Something about 24 feet. Yeah, some res. Yeah. Okay. So, my driveway is 28 ft wide. A threec car garage is going to be probably close to 30 feet wide. What's magical about 24 feet. Is your driveway 28 feet at the right of way? It necks down to probably 24. and measure it. So 24, it's in our code right now. It's existing. Mhm. Um what it does is that we don't want three stall garage with driveways down to the right of way because if you have that at every single house, the entire block will be driveway. So there's nothing magical about the 24. I would be apprehensive to go larger. So it's just essentially aesthetic preference. Correct. It also allows for space for parking. So if everyone had a driveway at the right ofway that was 30 feet 32 feet, you probably wouldn't be able to fit a car between the two for on street parking. It's also less to plow when the the snow plow comes through. It's less buried. This one I think C is interesting too because driveways must be six feet from all All property lines. Sideyard easements are typically six feet. I bet you there's four feet between my driveway and the neighbor's driveway. Then you're probably in an easement, Christa, with your metal house. Our driveways look at though on plans. Yes. Okay. I will say the bluffs went in in a different era. Like don't feel bad about it at all in a different era than original. That's true too. My law lines are a little screwy over there. You're allowed to get get away with anything. Okay. On to the next section which would be parking and driveways. Oh, sorry. Duplicate. Yeah, it is. That's That was a duplicate. That must have been what happened. It's actually a duplicate of what we just went through. Hot dog. I think we're done then. No, we have two more. ADUs. They're new. Must be shortened because Yeah. And we reviewed this recently, didn't we? Site plan is new. Adus you did recently. Okay. We did do ADUs. Yeah, we've talked about them. You might not have been here yet. I don't think I was here. I can see that Chan is now allowing ADUs in backyards. Yes. So are we going to talk about ADUs? Yeah. After site plan. Oh. So in full transparency, Dave works for the city of Madina and this is completely based off Madina's site plan review section. So So this is entirely new. Yes. To our code. Okay. in general, not to developing cities, but to our code. Yes. Okay. I didn't have any I didn't have any questions when I read it. It's even more clear now that you explain the purpose and intent behind it. So, I don't have I don't have any questions. Does it say if it needs to be included in like preliminary or final or which plan we're reviewing it? So a site plan you either do the platting process or a site plan review. You wouldn't do both. Okay. So in one properties that are undergoing a platting process are not required to do the site plan review because we do it through platting. Okay. We do the same steps. Anyone else have any questions or concerns on site plan review? Dave is going to be so thrilled. We could add something. We could That's probably wonder why you wanted to stay. Does this meet your needs though? Yeah, it does. Okay. And then ADU. Yes. Yep. I have lots of questions on this one, but I believe that's because I wasn't here. It was before you started on planning commission. You talked about adus, correct? I think so. Yeah. In a while. I mean, I remember it. Go for it. Okay. So, when I read through this, um, I was a little concerned about how big these things could be. Um, and then I was concerned about um how people get to them. So, for example, we were just talking about parking and driveways, and there's a rule in here that says you cannot start a new driveway from the rightway. But I could take my current driveway and make a little dot off and around the house I go. And now I've got cars parking in the backyard. Miracle there's not a fence there. Um, so I like started to think like that, but I was surprised at how big these could be. I mean, we have homes here right on Main Street that are 800 square feet homes. And you think about taking a house like that and putting it in the backyard. So 800 square feet is the maximum size of our accessory you like accessory structures. That's big. It is. But if you ask some people, they want them far larger. But if you wanted to do a detached garage in your backyard, you could go up to 800 square feet. These are like in-law suites or like correct. Okay. So, are they required they're required to pull a permit? Yeah. For this? Yep. Um, it said here that they're going to connect to sewer and water that's established at the house. So, there's no new utility poles, but then my mind jumped to can our sewer and water systems handle this? So the sack determination would tell us it would be two instead of one. So every house does a requires a sewer availability charge. If you had two dwelling units, it would be two. I'll also say anecdotally from communities that have recently adopted ADU ordinances, I'd be surprised if any of them have three or more. So I don't think the addition of the ADU section is going to stress our system. I don't think almost anybody can as recently were dealing to build a shed in the backyard 200 square feet and I have half an acre that was like I'm barely because your lot size has to be fairly big something based on based on what the permit would require of me from all your things setbacks. I was like, man, I can't think of only a few properties except I hope they're building a big old thing that is way. They got a huge property. That's it. Yeah, that one has a story behind it, too. Can they can they So, could could I bring in a manufactured home under 800 ft? Uh, I would say so on wheels. It has to have a foundation. Yep. And it has to be compatible with the house. Okay. So, I'll make it look pretty with my house and they're okay. I think a lot of those like in-law houses are like pre-manufactured and like set back there. Are they also like for um like adults with disabilities that they want to live independent from their parents but they can't? Like that would be I'm not I'm not opposed to them. I think they're a fabulous idea and who knows maybe there's one in my future but I was just it's the It's the size like 800 square feet is big. So then I just, you know, is there a minimum lot size requirement? So in our conversations previously, I think we said that they were in the R1 zoning district, which would be the only lots that are probably large enough, but that's not articulated here. It's in the the residential section of the code. Okay. If except ADUs are allowed based on lots. Okay. And it also says somewhere that they can't be rented or correct. Yeah. Something that's in this one, I think, that it can't be short-term or long-term rented. I can see has to be like a primary. Yeah. So then um then my mind jumped to something. I don't know if you guys have heard this. It's called junior ADUs, which are ADUs, but they're contained within a residence. Oh, yeah. We have what? We have those now. Yeah. What? So, are we are they building those here in town? So, if you had uh like a fully built out apartment in your basement, that's not a duplex. It's often used for family members that share a home with it. Correct. Yeah. They don't have a full kitchen. They have an efficiency kitchen, right? So, like it's like an in-law suite. Correct. It has its own entrance or something. Sometimes. Sometimes. Not all the time. So, does that fall in Arizona? No. Oh, really? Should it? No. Because it's a separate structure. Correct. Take the dining room. Can they have a basement, sitting room and turn into like a small apartment? I think they could. Does that the 800 square ft. No, it's the foundation size, but it says it can't go over one and a half stories. So, I would say no basement. I mean, if it was like a full basement and you wanted to dig 16 ft into the ground, I think you could if you got a grading permit and it worked out. Have we seen any ADUs come in for permit? They're not allowed right now, so no. Oh, well, that was my Maybe I ask that question first. Where in the city are these things allowed? I will say there uh are some opportunities in the historic district where there is living space like above a garage that they have not been able to put a bathroom facility in because we don't that's kind of been our tipping point of making it an ADU as opposed to just like a separate living space. So, I'd say there is some demand in town to allow for those spaces to be retrofitted to be units. Wait, so if you had like that where it's above the garage, that's considered an ADU. It would be if it had a bathroom, a kitchen, a sleeping space. Yes. Then an HOA can say no. Yes. And that overrides the city. Correct. So, I think we're going to move forward with this in general. I'm going to be surprised if we get an ADU application, but there is enough interest of people looking for information about it that it needed to be part of the discussion. Yeah, I'm not opposed. I was, like I said, it's the first time I'd seen it. So, yeah, they're also they're so expensive to build. It's like building another single family home on your property. multiple fences. Yeah, that's been the feedback that many cities have gotten is like they passed the ordinance, they thought people would come running down for a permit, but they're really expensive to build. So, um, what I didn't see in here and the my only other comment was it has to be built to our building code. Correct. That's not in here. You'd come in for building permit. It would require a building permit which requires the building code. Okay. Okay. So, done discussing the special regulation zoning code part of it for tonight. There's more. Yeah, there's more sections, man. Like we didn't do uh bluff protection, landscaping, buffering. We got through a lot of it. We did get through a lot of it. I've been bluff double pages. No, just how many we've done versions of it. Yeah. I wish my hope is that I can create a diagram to make it more sense, make it make more sense because it's hard to understand right now. But maybe you all will get it and teach me a thing or two. Okay, starting with communications. Sherry, anything for you? Oops. Jim, no. I have three. I've been saving these up for a while. Um, motorized bikes, ebikes. Do we have any definitions in city code about what they are? What where they can go, what they can't do? I think so. You've been on Carver Life lately, haven't you? I almost got pegged off by a kid on one on a I was on the sidewalk. Like a huge thing right now. Classify them as mopeds. It's like, does it matter if it has a motor or pedals or Yeah, they're riding them on the sidewalks. Correct. And I think maybe just a little education would be good. Okay. Definition. I there's something in our code that says you can't use I think I want to say it says like motorized something. I don't know what it is right now though. Yeah. So just some education on that. Okay. Um and then I don't know what development backs up to 212 where bunch of dead trees. Uh the preserve. I was just out there. Um is it the Brand Anderson product? Yes. Yes. So, they're going, we did their walkthrough a couple weeks ago and we have asked them to replace all those trees. Okay. And then the pickle ball dog thing. Any timeline for that? Midsummer. We're hoping like late July. It's a lake right now. Did you see it? I have not seen it. My only concern is Okay, so the pickle ball fence I'm assuming butts up fairly close. You have that little path in between of a dog park. And if you have some not experienced pickle ball players, that fence might be too short. And then it's going to fly into the dog park. And we know that dogs like balls. So play fetch. Yeah. And how do you get that ball back in? So that's my only concern of the pickle ball court. Or Yeah. Bring bring several balls with you. Correct. But my playing abilities, they would all be ending up in the dog park. So I would go to the other court, too. But I'm just Well, then stop that annoying pickle ball. Probably shouldn't be playing, but you know, got to try it. It's close by. I have nothing. No. Nothing. Okay. Well, can we get a motion to adjurnn? Second. Okay, we're done. Great. No, we don't have to vote. That's correct. Actually, you don't even need a motion. All you have to do is say we've completed our follows. to wait.