applicable to the property or use or facilities that do not generally apply to other properties in the same district and strict or literal interpretation of the ordinance would be applicant of the use and enjoyment of her prop of his or her property in a manner similar to others in the same district and granting
of the variance will not allow a use which is not otherwise permitted in the district. Um so with that being said there's a couple things here to talk about. Um, one that was just brought up before the meeting is the structure uh cannot be a pole construction type building. It does have to be like a
stick build with foundation. Um, that typically would go through building code standards and things like that. Uh, we do have a condition in there talking about building materials and this is out of the zoning ordinance, but it should be consistent with the uh principal structure and in character with the surrounding environment. Um, there's
also two small little sheds on the property that are quite small in nature. Uh the ordinance only allows for one detached accessory building if you have an attached garage. In this case, one of the conditions would be those two small sheds should be removed um to allow for the larger structure to be put in its
place. I mentioned earlier a building permit would required any engineering comments would also have to be reviewed. And there is an expiration. So if the variance is approved and nothing's done for a period of a year, it would expire. The applicant would have the ability to ask for an extension if needed. But if they move forward with their building
permit right away, no issue on that end. So what we're looking for here is a public hearing. U Mr. members in the audience from the applicant side and uh I can take any questions if you have anything specific. All right. Thank you.
Um do I need a motion to open the public hearing or we just do it? We just do it. Okay. So then we will open the public hearing for the variance and open to comment from anyone. What's the extra height for
ask you to come up to the podium? What was the question? What's the extra height for to get a 12T door? Okay. Just for Can you state your name and address for the too for everyone? Um 104 Ridgeway Road.
Now we're not like parking semis in there. No. Okay. Well, I've got to ask my neighborhood. I understand. No, I don't want to wreck the black top driveway. So, John, it we're everything checks the
boxes except for the height. That's That is correct. And then the uh pole construction design would not be allowed either. And that would be, you know, tonight we're only dealing with the height variance. So when the building permit would come, he would have to have that something that would meet standards for the city. So, and I would get that redone. Yeah. I was going to say, is
that kind of what you're you had in mind or what you were thinking is Yep. I'll I I didn't know that. So, I'll get that redone, which is fine. Okay. Does it My only my question is on that is does it have to be siding or can it
be tin or does it be sided? It would have to be sided. Siding. Okay. Match your house. Yes, that same color. We have a Stuckco house, so Yeah, same color. Same. Yep. Okay, we'd accept brick. Yeah, I'll catch you. You're going to do
a driveway to it and everything else, too? Yep. Off the existing driveway that's there. I was just going to keep just around. I guess I didn't put that in the drawing. I guess I shouldn't be asking that question because it's not part of the variance tonight.
Sorry. Just being nosy. Well, no. I mean, I'm kidding. No, no, it's No, I me for storage old cars and such. I don't have a problem if I Yeah. I I mean, are we voting on this
tonight or just to go to council? Council. Okay. We're still in the public hearing. So, if there's no comment from public, if you guys are the applicant, if no one is to comment, then we'll close the public hearing and then we can open up for discussion. You guys got anything to add?
We're in the process of purchasing. So, they're the owners. Yes. So they're in favor then. Are you forced your against your will? Oh boy.
On the front of it being on the front of the house there's like a um what is that? Like a stone. Do you want me to put the stone on the front also? Like a Wayne's coating stone? What would that be? I suppose. Yeah. I would have to kind of go with the existing structure.
That's why. Yeah. I don't know. Yeah. I mean, make it look the same. So, it's I don't know. It needs to be like that much of a sighting the same color. Yeah. You know, that'd be fine. I mean, it'd be different if it was seen, right? I was
going to say I'd feel differently too if it was like you drove past it all the time, but I don't think anybody's going to see this for like 30 years. So, yeah, keep it simple. Sounds good. Further discussion at all? All right.
Then I'll seek a motion to either approve table um deny or discuss. I'll make a motion to approve. I'll second it. Right. I have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. I. I. All oppose? Nay. The motion
passes. And this this is a recommendation to the city council and that meeting would be next uh Monday. Um that be final. It is next Monday. Two Mondays from I was going to say I didn't think I was my date. Did I take off? July 14th. 3 o' this morning.
Okay. Come back up there. What's the question? Do we all have to be there? No, you don't all have to. Okay. Just in case I got something going on. Next on the agenda, we have zoning ordinance update discussion regarding
the general regulation section. Here we go. Thank you. I've been waiting for Yeah, it looks so nice. I heard I do. Thanks.
All right. So, last couple meetings we've gone through title application, administration, enforcement, performance, standards. Now, we're getting into general regulations. We'll have a little bit more probably discussion on some of the items. And I've got a agenda for you or not agenda,
but table of contents for you. And you can see I've also included the balance of the zoning ordinance in there just to kind of see what's still coming. So I've got a list of uh the general regulations that we'll go through and then the next month we'll also go through the balance of them and some of those and I think
some tonight we'll have some different discussion on some things um as far as then we got after that a couple months worth going through zoning districts. Uh we're looking at a new industrial type district in there. Uh we can talk about lot sizes, setbacks, some of that of that stuff as well. But for tonight,
we'll kind of go through some of these general regulation items. And if you have any questions, you know, feel free. It's for discussion. Uh, but we'll start with the non-conforming building structures and uses. And if you remember, anything that's underlined is new text. Stuff that's strike through is
being removed or moved in some cases. And uh the stuff that has no strike through or underline is existing text that's just remaining. So um when you look at this section um uh basically we have some you know quite a few things here there is some stuff at the very end
of I think it's going to be similar in some of these where the you know it might be two or three four sentences that's kind of the current ordinance and really what we're trying to do is expand on that. So I just basically showed everything being deleted. Now, some of that text and some of the concepts that's existing in the current ordinance is built into the current stuff, but you
know, because we're adding a lot more detail and just more clarity on specifics and things like that because a lot of the ordinance right now is very vague. So, when stuff does come up, there's not always a clear answer one way or the other. And what we're trying to do is specify specifically what has to be done. So, there is no question
from a staff standpoint um and how it gets to be enforced or regulated or whatever. So basically non-conforming building structures and uses um the purpose it is to pro of this section is provide for the regulation of non-conforming building structures and uses and to specify those requirements,
circumstances and conditions uh which those uh uses will be operated and maintained. Um zoning chapters establishes separate districts uh which would be all your zoning districts and uh each of which is appropriate for those locations. Um and it's consist
necessary and consistent with the established of these districts that non-conforming building structure uses are not be permitted to continue without restriction. And it's the intent of this section that non-conforming uses shall eventually be brought into conformity. So really what we're dealing with here is you know if we have a zoning area and
it's zoned for residential but there may be a business in it or it's a a residential use in the downtown area which we have some of those. They're technically non-conforming and in most cases they're legal non-conforming. So, they're allowed to, you know, stay and and maintain and things like that, but expansion and things of that nature is
typically prohibited. Um, so if they wanted to double the size of it for a residential structure, you really can't do that. Um, so that's what we're going to talk about next here in this section is some of those items. So, general provisions basically uh it's it's a you know, conditional
uses, interterm uses, and administrative permit. You know that's the the legal non-conforming structure use that is here and classified as a condition use or those may be continued in like fashion and activity shall automatically be considered as having an applicable uh receive the applicable approval. Any change to such use including but not
limited to the building site alteration shall however require a new permit to be processed according to chapter. So if somebody does want to do something to it they do have to get a permit and the goal would be to try to upgrade it or um lessen the non-conformity as much as possible when they do those types of things. Um moving non-conforming
buildings. Uh this will be subject uh to the 152054 building relocation moving of the chapter. Uh no non-conforming building structure or use shall be moved onto another lot or to any part of a parcel of land upon which the same was constructed or was con conducted at the
time it became a legal non-conform conformity unless such movement reduced the nonconformity. uh no parcel of land or portion thereof shall be subdivided and such action results in buildings and or uses becoming non-conforming. Um that would be subdivisional land. We're not
going to create you know lots that don't meet the zoning requirements of that district for size and things. Uh continuence of an legal non-conforming. This is always an important one. um including you know the lawful use or occupation of land or premises existing at the time of the adoption of an
additional control under the section may be continued uh including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance or improvement but not including expansion except that specifically provided in the section uh unless there's a nonconformity or occupying and dis is discontinued for a period of more than
one year. um any non-conformity non-conforming uses destroyed by feral uh fire or other peril um greater than 50% of its market value and no building permit is supplied for them 180 days. So if they do have a fire or a tornado or wind or whatever they do have 180 days
and this is kind of based on a state statute of coming back and getting a building permit and kind of reconstructing what was there. So that has happened in a few cases and I've also seen a couple cases where they haven't got their building permit and the non-conformity then they had to now meet the new ordinance and that was in
that case it ended up going to court and that that owner lost because he didn't do it in 180 days. But um yeah, would you be able to file an extension say if you couldn't because you're dealing with an insurance company and they're not giving you money yet or something of that sort. I mean you're fighting with
the insurance company at the time. I don't know legality of that for sure how that operates. Um I guess I don't know that answer to be honest with you. I was just curious. I mean it's something that might come up, you know. I mean my understanding is no, but I guess I don't know that 100% for sure. In that case,
they just never applied for their permit. Yep. And just built it like eight months after the fact and once it was halfway up, they stopped it and caught them and said, "You can't build this because you never got your permit." And it was a non-conforming use. It was a commercial structure in a residential area too yet. So, so it was kind of one
of them deals. I think in this circumstance, the language in here says has been applied for. Yes. So, if you may not have insurance sorted out, but if you get your paperwork in, okay, then you're fine. Okay. Correct. 180day
window. And then you've got your 180 days on 178 79. You put the paperwork in and then if you're issued your permits, you go through that process, then you have the length of the permit in order to get it done. But really the triggering on this is the 180 days to
put your application in. Okay. If we don't hear from you for 180 days and you haven't put in an application, then I'm just making a point of there's procrastinators and they'll wait till last minute and not know that there's 180 days too. So yeah, I mean people
don't do their due diligence like they should. So just making this is based off state. So we're just kind of following that I guess. So um and then there's a few a couple other ones. The subsequent use or occupy the land or premises shall be
conforming use or an occupancy city may impose upon the non-conforming reasonable regulations to prevent and abate nuisances and protect the public health, safety and welfare. Uh and definitions, there's a couple definitions for the purpose of this section. Um expansion, enlargement,
intensification, improvement, and replace and reconstruction of restoration. And this just kind of gives an um clarification of what that would be. So if this comes up in a situation, we do have some definition stuff in there. Um non-conforming uses um changes
to them. Basically what we're talking about, uh if there's a legal non-conforming use and has been changed to a conforming use, it then has to stay conforming, can't go back to a non-conforming after the fact. Um the non-conforming use of a structure or parcel may be changed to reduce the
non-conformity of the use. Once a non-conforming structure or parcel has been changed, it still not be altered to increase the non-conformity. Um, normal maintenance, so maintenance of a building or whatever, you know, if it needs new roof or needs new siding or the windows need replacing, you can do that normal maintenance. You just can't
do that expansion stuff. So, um, non, you know, the next section D there basically, uh, proposed structure, any proposed structure that became non-conforming by amendment of this chapter. So, let's say in five years you have a conforming structure and the city decides they're going to change the zoning ordinance and it makes that, you
know, they're going to reexpand the downtown and change, you know, some more blocks into the the downtown district. Um, they become non-conforming potentially. Um, so if it was grant, if the permit is granted prior to that effective date, um the, you know, with
the approved plans provided construction, it started within 60 days of the effective date and is not abandoned more than 120. uh there basically that can there be be a legal non-conforming structure. So it just kind of gives a a date if some if there's that window. Now that doesn't happen very often but you know it could.
So um alterations and normal maintenance um you know to a legal non-conforming building or structure may be made through the building permit process and it's once again say alterations do not expand the foundation or the building side including deck conditions unless
specifically allowed by the chapter. Um the alterations do not increase the building occupancy capacity or parking demand. So if you have a commercial use and they want to expand something, it doesn't or change something. It doesn't, you know, increase parking requirements because, you know, if you had a residential property, you don't want a
bigger parking lot being put in. Um alteration does not increase the degree or non-conforming condition of a building site or use. Then expansion of legal non-conforming building and structures. This is regarding administrative approval. And if you remember, this is an approval that can take place at the staff level. Doesn't
need to come necessarily to the planning commission or city council. But the following legal uh excuse me, following expansions of legal non-conforming single and two family residential buildings may approve through administrative process by the city administrator, excuse me, administrator subject to the provisions of the
administrative permits of the chapter and shall make the determination that the building expansion will comply with the intent and purpose of the section and its expansion of principal buildings found to be non-conforming only by reason of height and yard set may be allowed providing the expansion uh complies with the performance standards
of the chapter. So, if you have a house for instance that was built 50 years ago or 100 years ago and and the setback's 15 feet and the now the current setback's 30, it's technically a non-conforming structure. But because the setback is there and it's a legal non-conforming use, they can have the
ability to expand that if it's in the correct zoning and all that sort of thing, even though the setback or the existing setback may not meet it. So, that's kind of what this is about. Um, and it says expansion of non-conforming detached accessory structures shall not
be allowed. Um, I guess that's really some of this stuff is kind of up to the city if you want to allow it on those as well, but um, typically we're not dealing with too much of that, I don't think. But, um, then a conditional use permit for non-conforming commercial, industrial, institutional, multifamily
type uses. Um so basically the expansion will not increase the non-conformity of the building or site. The new building expansion will conform to all applicable performance standards of the chapter and this could be like you know building materials, lighting, you know, you know different things of that nature which we do have some of that in the zoning
ordinance. A conditional use permit shall not be issued under this section for a deviation from other requirements of the chapter unless variances are also approved. And just so you know everyone knows when we talk about chapter that's a zoning ordinance chapter. So there are other sections that we're dealing with there. And then the C uh conditional use
per shall be evaluated based on standard set forth in that cup uh section. So that's the non-conforming use stuff. It just kind of got some expansion a little bit more detail to it. Uh the next section is the home occupation section. Before we jump Yes.
any questions, comments, observations on the non-conforming use section. Makes sense. Yep. Okay. So, the uh home occupation section um this is for uh somebody that runs like a
business out of their house or you know their residence and uh what we do have some language in there. It's um you know fairly vague. It it talks about a few things that are in there but doesn't really do a lot of specifics. And basically, you know, the purpose is to, you know, maintain the integrity of
these residential neighborhoods so we don't have home occupations that have five employees and, you know, trucks coming all day long delivering things, stuff of that nature, storage all over the place. So, it does it kind of limits some of that stuff. Um, you know, there's an administrative permit is how
these home occupations will be looked at. Um so you know if it's if it's a home occupation they can go through that process and then the city has a way to track where these things are because they would would be required to get that permit. Um the permit shall remain in full force in effect until such time
there's been a change in conditions or until such times the conditions have been breached. So you know if they start you know going against what their approval was and doing extra things and stuff they can have that revoked potentially. uh the declaration of conditions. The city administrator may
impose such conditions on the granting of an administrative permit as may be necessary to carry out these provisions. Uh the effect of the permit um it's issued for one year and it may be reissued for up to three years periods each. And that's where you know after this starts going the city is supposed
to check on these things just to make sure they're in in compliance. Sometimes you find that they issue a permit and you don't hear nothing for a couple years and you realize they're not even issuing the business anymore. or it's a different owner or whatever. So then the city has the ability to kind of, you know, we take away that permit or get
rid of it. Um like I said, it should be processed with the administrative permit um thing. Uh transferability, uh they shall not run with the land and shall not be transferable. So for instance, in a conditional use permit, if they get an approval, that will run with the land.
So if the change of ownership happens, the new owner still can use that conditional use permit. In this case, if the somebody's running a business and they sell that house, the new person could potentially run it, but they have to get a whole new permit again because it's a new person and you know, so all
that sort of stuff. So, uh, lapse of permit by non-use, I kind of just touched on this. So, within one year after granting it and nothing has been initiated, this permit will become null and void. Um, you know, kind of has a little bit more language about how that would work. Uh, renewal of permits. uh
they should have the vested right to renew an administrative permit by having attained a previous permit. So if you they move forward and there's violations, they don't have the right just to say I get that permit again for that next three-year period. They have to stay in compliance. Um and basically
each renewal will be kind of taken into its own consideration kind of like what we just talked about. Uh general provisions all home occupy uh occupation shall comply with the following general provisions in accordance with the um applicant or the applicable requirements. Um you know like the glare
noise order you know things like that at the property kind of big lights shining on stuff. Um no equipment shall be used in the home occupation which create an electrical interference surrounding properties should be incidental to the residential use. Um so the principal use
on this property is your residence or a home. So, you got to be incidental. It can't be the primary use of the property. Um, external alterations. It shall uh no home occupation shall require internal or external alterations or involve construction features not customally found in the dwelling. Uh,
one thing that might be something where you you'll go away is, you know, if you have somebody that cuts hair out of their house, they might have a sink specifically for that. Um, I don't think that's something different because you can have that in your house if you want. It's not like it's a building code issue or anything like that, but uh activities
conducted within the principal dwelling um shall be conducted entirely within the living quarters and may not be conducted any portion of attached private garage or with an accessory building. So they what we're saying is it should be in the house and they shouldn't be running out of a garage or something like that. Now in reality are
there people that probably store stuff in the garage or shed probably. um how big a deal that probably is. Probably not that big a deal, but you know, we just want to prevent it and have language in there so we don't have that where they got, you know, entire garages stacked with, you know, equipment or,
you know, supplies or whatever. So, uh there shall be no exterior storage of the prop uh stuff on the property needs to be in compliance with fire and building codes. Uh signs, there shall be no exterior display of signs, not do and this has got goes up to exceed four feet in area. Um, so you can have a small
little sign and that'd be it. Basically four square feet. Um, I've seen some people go with like six square feet. I think our current ordinance allows for the four right now if I recall correctly. Um, uh, hours shall be, uh, nothing conducted between 1000 p.m. and
7 a.m. So, it has to be, you know, daytime operation. Uh, they can have not more than one full-time employee and two part-time persons. So, they can have somebody else work there, you know. So if somebody runs like a home office or you know like you know maybe like a um accountant they make they could have a
secretary there that works you know help them out with paperwork and phone calls things like that. Uh parking shall not create a parking demand in excess of what can be accommodated on the existing driveway or guest parking area. Um then you got some allowed occupa home occupations and they're limited to kind
of what we have there. And this is kind of just a list of stuff. If there's something else you want to add or you want to take some of them out we can. And this is the one thing that I've noticed before and has come up in the past. There's really in your current ordinance. They don't really have any specific home occupations listed. So,
what's to limit certain home occupations from being in there and there was nothing really preventing that. So, these are pretty typical stuff that you see in most communities. You know, you might see some other things that get added in there. Um, I know one community um that I dealt with in the past, they
had a taxiderermy in there because they were kind of more of a rural community and one guy did have a taxiderermy business. He ran out of his house. So, so yeah. So, basically then inspection. A city has a right to inspect. So, um, so that's kind of the home occupation section. Um, also has in there, they
shall not involve any of the following. And that would be like repair, service, manufacturing, um, which requires equipment not normally found in a dwelling. Service that consists of more than one pupil, a client or customer at a time. Um, over- the-counter retail sales. So, you don't
want people coming in like a retail business at all hours of the day into a residential neighborhood and creating tra additional traffic, things like that. So, any questions on this home occupation section? the 12A the ones the included
occupations it is exhaustive. It's they are those and it's only limited to those. That's what it says. So that's why I said if you got some other thoughts on this and maybe there's something in town I'm not aware of that you got dog boarding. Dog boarding. That's my neighbor has a dog boarding
business that she runs out of her house. Okay. How many dogs at a time are they doing? Uh I've seen as many as from five to seven. They're running a kennel basically. Yeah, they're running a kennel. Yeah, kennels would shouldn't be allowed neighborhood. Shouldn't Should daycarees
be listed? I say should daycarees um Oh, yeah. That's pretty common. I remember looking at talking or thinking about that. I don't have it in there, do I? Yeah. List up north. I remember looking at it and okay, I'll I'll make sure that
with daycarees on dayare with daycarees on there. Would that would pupil be a vast enough word to cover? I got to think now. Um is that a that might be even a conditional use now? That's why it's not listed. I'm trying to remember.
I'll I'll double check on that. We'll make sure that gets covered one way or the other. Yeah. Electronic repair could be small appliance repair. Yep. You know, I know technically like a home office is to the point where, you know,
could you include that? But I mean, so many people just have one office, so they work for themselves at home and most people don't get a home occupation permit for that. Um, just because it's if I'm sitting on a computer doing work versus looking at who knows what, is that really a business? You know what
I'm saying? So, I there's kind of some gray areas in some of this stuff, but um yeah, I just want to look at one thing. Yeah, daycare facilities are a permitted use in the R1 district. So, they're not technically a home occupation. They're actually allowed directly through the district. So, that's that's why I didn't
have it in there, but I remember reading through that before when I wrote this up. So, this couldn't offer off the top of my head. So when you go back to saying one person offices, um those are just generally allowed. Generally allowed. That's just not Yeah.
So like an architect working out of his home. Yeah. If you the intent is not to have every person that does some work at an office in their house to get a home occupation permit because it gets that's almost overkill because I mean Yeah. I don't want any part of that. Yeah. Exactly. That's why it's not listed, but
it's not the intent to deny that either. So, as long as they don't have people coming and going and things like that, shouldn't be an issue. I'd like to have this language in there stating it to that effect. That not
general home office types of occupations are allowed. You talk telecommuting whether if somebody's telecommuting or if they work from home or things of that nature where it's just them. They're sitting at home in front of the computer doing work. It's not
drawing traffic leather and high. Just that that's generally allowed. We have staff look at and go, "Okay, yep, you're fine." If somebody's drawing up prints and they have uh house builders, future homeowners or whatever come every night, that'd be a lot like photography, too.
You're still going to have traffic. Yeah. See what I'm saying? It's like I mean if you have a if you're if you're an architect and you have customer come every other day or or you're a general contractor or whatever there's some foot traffic that's allowed. I mean like Right. Yeah. Yeah. That's what I'm
trying to say. It's like when is it too much when Yeah. If they pull into the driveway that's fine. It's no different than a guest coming over. They're lined up around the block then maybe. Yeah. There's four cars on the flatbed trucks and van bodies. I don't know who has all
that. Yeah, I'll get some language about the home office thing in there that it's not meant to, you know, permit that or, you know, something of that nature, I guess. And thought maybe I had something in there, but I guess I don't. So, but
yeah, it uh, you know, it's always like if somebody comes up with they got a special thing they want to do, they can always come in and ask for a text amendment, too, and add it to it or something of that nature. If it makes sense, you can always look at that down the road, too. I just think around town we have HVAC people who own their own
businesses, plumbers, they office out of their home now. They go to places and do that. I want to make sure we're calling out. Yeah. And I don't The intent is not to regulate that type thing. I mean, I have a home office myself and I don't have a home office. Yeah. Now, if you're a landscaper and you got three bobcats sitting in your
driveway and stuff like that, it's different. Okay. Um so if that's it we'll move on to the next section. Uh this is uh temporary structures and uh basically you know it's smaller section here but uh the
purpose is to provide for the erection of temporary structures not including model homes temporary real estate offices uh needed for emer this so if you have like a specific thing kind of given the ability to do some things for like uh for emergency purposes um disc
uh temporary use during construction of a you know permanent structure. Sometimes you see when a building gets constructed, they may have a camper or something on the site or not camper but like a trailer, you know, sales, not sales trailer, but like a shipping container. Yeah. So, you know,
technically that's structure and it doesn't technically fit the code, but we're trying to give some language that allows that legally without having, you know, somebody complain say, "Oh, they got to remove that site." Because legally, if you go by the code, yes, that was here, but this gives that ability. So basically it's allowing for
these some uh temporary structures uh shall be allowed in all zoning districts. Uh site plan review is required. So a site plan review does go through planning commission council. It's not a public hearing but we do look at it at this level and uh basically what it is more like a site plan where they show here's the location, here's a
setback. You know we may have lights on if it is next to a residential area. You want to make sure we're you know we're not shining lights on people's houses in the night, things of that nature. um you know those types of things tend to get broken into because nobody's there you know certain hours of the day so you want you know they want to keep it lit but yet you don't want to lighten up
residential neighborhood. So um termination of the permit uh so basically the permit shall expire uh 9 months um from the date of issuance or within 30 days of the CO issued for the building you know so if they construct the structure and it's ready to go it
doesn't they need to get the temporary structure off of there uh temporary structures may be placed in a required building setback area so it doesn't need to necessarily meet the uh setback requirements because it's temporary in nature so if you have a 30-foot set back you could potentially put it on the side of the yard there to, you know, get it
out of the way of the rest of the site or whatever. Um, does we don't uh needs to be within 30 feet of public rate or obstruct visibility of the street intersection. So, we got to watch the the visibility of it from that standpoint. Needs to make uh B uh excuse me, state building
code. Uh provisions for water and sewer servicing these shall be subject to the review of the approval of the building official. So depending on what we're dealing with here, you know, does does like a porta potty work or does it need to have temporary service, you know, through the city system? I've seen that done before where they've hooked things up to water, you know, just for a
temporary nature. Um, security measures such as lighting I kind of just talked about just shall be, you know, reviewed by the city. Uh, parking shall meet the parking provisions of the chapter and same with sign regulations. They have signs or parking that have to be dealt with. Um, so yeah, so that's kind of
what we're talking about and we're just uh basically trying to give some provisions there so it doesn't become an issue in the future. So uh the next one's essential services and essential services are basically your electric phone, cable, gas, fiber optic lines, um different things of that
nature. And this is basically giving some regulation to when those are installed. any new subdivision, you know, the residential ones you see like this cold water crossing and stuff, uh, that the developer has to, you know, work with those companies and get electric sewer gas installed after the
streets are built. And we need that for each of the residential lots. So, here's uh, it's an administrative permit that they need to do. So, the company would come to the city, get their permit, which is pretty standard procedures. And uh right now we have little one um you
know it says that one little sensor are subject to the provision of this chapter unless exempted by the provision of the chapter. These essential services are also subject to other ordinances. It doesn't really have any specifics. So we're just saying they need an administrative permit uh for a certain size and there's also these huge transmission power lines and we're
trying to in the 33 was that kilovote I think it is and upwards you know we don't want to be regulating that through the administrative that goes through like the um state the real massive lines that go places and transmission lines we don't want to get that kind of just
random things. So, we're trying to limit that from a size standpoint. We're trying to just keep this to the local, you know, stuff for the individual properties or a little neighborhood or something like that. So, the those larger lines would go through a process. And letter D down there actually talks about it be through a conditional use
permit. So, if there's a transmission line, for instance, that comes through the city, they would have to get that conditional use permit and that would go along contingent upon what the overall permitting of that transmission line, you know, through the state or the county and everybody else. So, um, at least it gives the ability some
oversight to at least, you know, maybe regulate where it goes within the city. So, you're not running it right through a neighborhood versus maybe to an industrial commercial area which is a little more compatible or, you know, something of that nature. So, usually those electric transmission lines when they're coming into small
distribution areas like ours, they tend to get a 60 kilo variety which fit a typical pole. But you get above that, you start getting the bigger gargantuan holes. Yeah. That'd be more of You wouldn't want
those in certain areas. Yeah. And I know when they do that big ones, um there was one south of where I lived a few years back and it was a pretty lengthy process. And I mean there were it went by a farm that was an organic farm and they end up suing and somehow won because it was going to the electric
waves or something affect the cow and the organic milk. So they end up moving it like a like a section south through that area. They kind of did a jog like this for like a mile or something. But um so there's all sorts of things that can come up with that stuff. So um
all right, the next section is the building relocation and moving section. And uh there was some of this language is uh existing already. So I didn't this one I kind of just amended a little bit. It didn't need a whole lot of changing, but talks about build existing building instructions be relocated or moved
anywhere within the city um within uh the city without a permit uh for the uh relocation of any building or structure. Shall not be issued without a site plan approval by the city um shall not be approved uh shall not approve a site plan without certifying the
following. Now, one thing I noticed is uh site plan approval by the planning commission is how it currently states. Technically, site plan approval is approved by the city council. the planning commission recommends. So there's a current ordinance has a you know it conflicts with other parts of the ordinance. So that's part of what we're doing here is making sure this
stuff all complies with each other and there's no conflicts. But uh basically compliance you know that it meets the site plan requirements. The use is allowed in the respective zoning district includes a lot of parcel to which the structure to be relocated. Uh the building structure maintains architectural aesthetic compatibility
and type grade quality exterior finish. And this is you know stuff we're kind of just touching on. already there, meets the building code, um, meets all the other requirements, the chapter and city ordinances. Um, and I took out letter E, but that's kind of addressed in letter C already, so it's kind of duplicate. So,
so that's basically that section. Pretty straightforward. Um, nothing too controversial there. Uh, screening. Um, so this section here, and then there's landscaping coming up next. Uh, and there's some things that, you know, I'll talk about as we get into, you know,
specifically the landscaping. But, uh, we've had, you know, we have a fairly, you know, substantial section. Uh, we're kind of doing a lot of that stuff there right now. But, uh, with the screening, uh, outdoor storage and, uh, one thing, uh, basically the screen of outdoor
storage is, this is existing language, by the way, shall be 100% not less than six feet or more than 8 feet in height. That's a fence or, you know, some sort of solid, you know, screening or whatever. And uh basically uh the screen planning may be substitute for a screen wall or
fence at the discretion. It was council. You know, a lot of this has been kind of going to the city administrator. I don't know if you guys have any thoughts on it should be the council, but for a lot of that little stuff if they want to switch out a fence, you know, or wall with a, you know, a fence with a tree or something of that nature, does it need
to go to the council every time? It's time consuming. Um, if you guys have any thoughts, I mean, want that all to go to council ignoring it. No. So, yeah, I was hoping you'd say it
first so I didn't seem power hungry. No, not at all. Uh, but the way I see it is if they want if they're doing an opaque fence and they want to switch it to an opaque uh green belt type of thing, as long as you're meeting that intent, the intent
is we want this to be blocked. We want this to be screened. So, as long as you're achieving that within the confines of what we have here, then you allow staff to go, "Yep, that makes sense. It falls within the intent." We're not diverting from that.
um the intent of the ordinance. So, typically when people do that, they're actually kind of upgrading the appearance in a lot of cases. I've seen I know of a like a brick wall going in right now, which why would they do it? But it's not cheap and it's it's pretty
big and it's expensive and it's really nice. So, which in this case, they would have to technically get that approval, but it's like I said, it's an upgrade from what could have been there. Um, so then letter B, uh, commercial and industrial screening. I also add an institutional on there. Um, you know,
that's one thing I noticed a lot of here. The institutional kind of got left out. You know, we got Mayor Lutheran and you know, the the school and um, church stuff over here. So that's technically institutional uses. City uses are that as well. Um, but when any commercial industrial institution should accept those within the C2 central business
district, so we are exempting out some of the central business district stuff because of the way that's designed. manually got the zero setbacks. It's hard to screen somebody when you have a zero setback right up the street or whatever. Um uh but when so when it butts a residential district that you shall provide screen along the property
line uh abuing any property in a residential district and it shall be specifically required by this chapter shall be subject to uh 152040 traffic control. So traffic control if you know what that section is that is where you have the sight triangle at the intersection. We don't want to put a
screen up in these districts right up to the corner. I know the downtown is like that, but you know, if you do that and people are coming up those intersections, that blocks your view. So that's why it referenced that. So that's what that section was. And in the end, we may have a section numbers adjusting depending on how this final comes
together. So those all be updated at the end. I think I mentioned that last time, but um and then it's uh shall be related to consists with a green belt strip as provided below. And this is kind of existing stuff um where it talks about uh evergreen trees, deciduous trees shall be of sufficient width and density
to provide a visual screen. Um and it says once again at the bottom it says approval of the city previously approval of the council. Here we're just going back to city administrator kind of keep it all consistent again. Uh the screening fence may be incorporating a green belt planning strip but not in lie of the green belt. Um so there can be
like a combination. I've seen people do like, you know, 12 foot sections of fence and a couple pine trees and shrubs and, you know, like a white white vinyl fence. That can look all right. They can use burms in there as well. Um, let's see here. Talks about the grade
for determining height of the grade. Um, that's kind of some new language we added just so they know how to calculate that. Existing landscaping material and good health uh may be used to satisfy the requirements of this section. Um, shall meet the requirement intent of this section. uh screen of mechanical
equipment. This is kind of something new. This is regarding rooftop ground mounted mechanical equipment of residential buildings having five or more units. So if you have say a you know five unit apartment building which you know sometimes can be adjacent to single family or duplexes and things
like that um if they've got large air conditioning units or things of that nature outside some of that should be screened. A lot of times you just see some sort of like cedar level fence around it like they screen a dumpster um or something of that nature. So, that's kind of what we're talking about here. And also, you don't want those sitting
up there on the roof, just sticking up above the roof that everyone can see. Um, typically they have some sort of like I don't want to say wall, but some sort of screen up there. Also prevents the noise from just kind of radiating out over the neighborhood. Um, so that's what these next couple items kind of talk about a little bit. It does limit
the height of the uh roof uh rooftop equipment to three feet. Um, less than three feet is exempt, excuse me, I should say. Um, so if it's just, you know, something short, they should be able to screen that. Um, so that's kind of a screening section. Um, and
landscaping kind of ties in with this a little bit. This is a separate section. Before we head into that for screening, I'm going to push back on institutional having to be screened. Okay. I think of Mayor Lutheran. I think it's
harmonious with its surrounding areas. Unless you live in that area. Would you disagree on that count? No. I mean, the football games get a little loud, but ain't nothing you nothing you can do about that.
Quiet. I even think about uh this the city and our uses as a we would be no we would be public not institutional well it's institutional is public semi-public
which is you know schools city churches I think Mayor Lutheran's back far enough that they don't really cause any problems I agree what about let me throw this out there though kind of devil's advocate you know they've got the parking on the kind of the west and south side. What if
uh you got people directly across the street and they're pulling in all over the night during, you know, winter basketball games, whatever, and their lights are shining right across the street in the people's Well, I mean, the like Fifth Street Apartments and all those houses, you know, next to the football stadium get that all night
long, you know. They've never said anything, you know. Um, I'm just thinking, you know, this is when you have existing situations, it's typically people are used to it and it just is what it is. Most of those people bought there knowing what's across the
street from them. But, you know, they just did another expansion. You know, the the the Lutheran elementary school over here has done a couple expansions over the years. And yeah, we told Zion they had screen, right? Yeah. They put a fence up or Yeah. fence up along that west property line with the one
neighbor. And if we take the screening out, that fence isn't required. We don't have to, you know, they can't they don't have to do it if they don't legally want to. So, it's up to you guys. I'm It's But it's there are cases where that could come
up. I don't know if we want to exempt out some certain things or That's where I'm getting at is I put in a city park that's an institutional use by code. We have to screen it.
So yeah, um just trying to think here real quick. If build if institutional buildings are such a distance from a residential use, screening isn't required.
Um yeah, the sense that it was kind of a property, you know, versus the line or this is in its own. I mean, you got the, you know, the city could put, you know, park. They could add a ball field with
big lights, you know. Do you want that right in your backyard every night, too? I don't know. I'm just Yeah, but a six foot fence ain't gonna No, not on that. But I'm just Yeah. So, I don't know. I mean, I get what you're saying on that. And frankly, most towns, their big ball
field of lights is in residential area. I mean, I can't think of one around us that's not really winter hockey ranks, too, are right in these little neighborhood parks all over the place and they got lights at night time. I don't think people have much problem
with with it most of the time. No, but I do think there are circumstances. I'll jump back in on John fence where you might have a situation like this where you going to have very close proximity
where you might want a some screening in between there. That fence made sense, right? Absolutely. So that's kind of a zoning screening. We build the let's say these fields don't exist and it's it's blank land. We build these fields or we acquire this land and build these
fields. You're telling me I got to put screening all the way around this around here to a Yeah. No, people would rather see across that, right? The golf course. I'd also bet though if those houses were there and you're building these fields after the fact and
you're putting lights up, they would be complaining too. Those people would. True. Yeah. Because it was something new. But if it's been existing and they moved in there with it there, it is what it is, right? So that's the the way the world kind of works. When everything something new comes along, it's an issue.
Um, I got something. Yeah. Do we Oh, go ahead. This is really nitpicky, but on C for screening, you drop down one line. It says five units. Is that five air conditioner units or five housing units? Um,
well, read either way. Yeah, it's it's it's supposed to be five units of uh, you know, residential dwelling units. So, maybe we have the dwelling units in there. It could be a good way. I'm trying to read it over and over. Is it mechanical units or is it residential units? Mechanical units on the roof.
Yeah. So, what we're trying to do is, you know, there are I think there's one on Fifth Street that's got like four units in it next to across from the school there. That's four. Do we really want to screen that from the neighborhood? Probably not. But five, you're starting to kind of get to that next level, you know, because typically
they they do the single, the duplex, the triplex, and the quad. Anything bigger than that, you know. So, um, I thought this was just a mechanical equipment. You're kind of talking about screening the whole property. Well, I think what it's saying is all rooftop and ground mounted mechanical equipment of
residential buildings having five units or more. I think what that's saying is res with five dwelling units or more. And it's talking about the rooftop or ground mounted mechanical equipment of those buildings because sometimes they'll have, you know, house will have an air conditioner unit and all this different stuff. when they start getting
bigger, sometimes they have one large, you know, a cooling unit for all the structures and it kind of runs the whole building. Yeah. Like on a on a strip mall, you may just have like fencing up on the correct on the roof. Correct. So, yeah. Okay. But so I I'll add that
dwelling units so it's clear. Yeah. Um because the headline is screening of mechanical equipment on rooftops. So I just don't think it's worth screening property. Yeah. It's not screening the property. It would just be the rooftop. Yeah. Or the ground unit
when it's large enough. Let me ask this. What about screening if it's adjacent to it, but if it's across the street? Not, you know, so like Zion would have been adjacent, but Lutheran's across the street, so it
wasn't required. Yeah. So then put a footage on it saying that. I mean, so I I know some cities I've seen they have that screening requirement and it's like the roads is busy, one of the busier roads in town. They got a screen across for the
residential uses, but those residential use got the traffic going by them. It's like what's the point, you know? So, I don't know. I'm just throwing an idea out there, I guess. Yeah. I think that still won't solve if you're saying like a park right in the I think Yeah,
recreational facilities should be exempted out. Although there's some days I wouldn't mind a screen between Westridge part. More of a sound barrier. But yeah, more of a sound barrier than a screen.
It does say a butts a residential district. So I could put some wording in there. Not across not across the street or whatever. All right, we're on land. Landscaping. your guys' thoughts
because right now commercial industrial uses require it currently and I kind of added some of that institutional stuff then because I know we've had some of that in the last you know however many years I think of well we can kind of take it
by a case by case basis right we'd have to write that in we'd have to write it in somebody want to do something just like this shed have to have what you Well, here's a so with Westridge and you
has those houses right there and kids were going through their yards all the time. If someone came in, can you put some arborites or something there, a fence or whatever to put kids just going through my yard all the time? I mean,
that's a case by case. I mean, when you say put it in, who would put it in the city or Well, well, that's also criminal activity. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, but they're little kids. They don't know any better. I know that. I guess gets back to how much government
regulation do you want and how much individual Yeah. I'm just throwing it out there with their kids. Yeah. Me personally, I wouldn't want if I live next to a park. It's just me personally. I don't want a six foot wall in front of
it or a bunch of this because I live next to park. I want to see it. If kids are running in my yard, I'm going to go find the parents and tell them to keep the kids off my lawn. As much as an as much of an old man as that makes me sound. Yep. It's kind of like if your neighbor's dog is in your yard, go have a conversation. You're going to go have
a conversation with your neighbor. Now, if you as a property owner would like to put up a fence, that would be perfectly fine fencing regulations, whether it's two foot with a bush behind it to keep kids off or up to whatever you want. Six feet. I guess the next example I'm thinking of is when we get
to the ninth edition here. I fully expect that we'll have a city park in thisish area as part of that because we're lacking a park within good distance of the west side of Cold Water. We won't because that's plumbary plat approved and there was no park. There
wasn't. Yeah. And it's still valid plary plat. If you look at the overall plumary plat, there's a park kind of in this north area that would have a trail connection and then longterm there is look. Okay, here we go. So, this would be the next
edition of Cold Water Crossing, the ninth, which is owned by Lumis. This road would extend to the north and uh you can kind of see there's a line right there. That would be this culde-sac. This road would extend up and become seventh. I don't know if you can get that whole area in. Yeah, there we go. So, this road would extend up and
connect into seventh. Yep. And if I remember right, there might have been a culde-sac here, too. Yeah. And there there's a pond area that will be expanded which is on Jude Lagoo's property. City has easements over that. So that's existing. And then there was some open space through here that would
be kind of like a I don't want to call it true active park, but there would be a trail connection that was to snake through all the way back over to this end of the side. And a bigger park over in this area was looked at because you already got this park here. We didn't want something so close. it was looked
at to have a bigger park over on the west side. Okay. So that like I said, not all that's 100% in stone, but this this phase and then what Jude still owns up here is technically under plumary plat approved. This area back in here,
there is no plary plat. So anything that would come forward on this area would have to go through that process and you could take the park line at that point. And we also were going to add a road connection somewhere along here because he now owns all this as well. And this park may end up being a part of this
wooded area. I think the flood plane kind of cuts through something like up in this area. I don't know the exact boundary. So, you know, a park makes sense here. Yeah, there you go. Cuts through like right there. So, you know, somewhere an extension in here and then snakes back out to 30 was what the
thought process is all developable land basically. And so yeah, I just say for no this if the park were up here with this enacted, we would have to fully screen that park away from that
residential area. Yeah, I think we need to exempt out. So I don't know if I call it park institutional though. I'll What is your land classified as? Well, it's not land. It's it's structures. You know, it's
it's meant to be talking about commercial industrial uses. Institutional uses. I don't know. Maybe we have an institutional definition in our I was just looking at we do not. So, um I just looked that up a second ago. So, if it's edited out, that's fine. I
just I see the word use and parks institutional use of a property. And we have the ability to add that definition, you know, we're at this stage. So, yeah. I just want to accidentally hamstring ourselves. Yeah. And one other thing we looked at, you can kind of see where
this would be a culde-sac. And you know, this would kind of come through this area. There'd be a little flood plane work that was looked at that could work and there's some usable land there. But if this would be, you know, developed and it have a trail system that would cut through all, you know, where it would go exactly, I'm not sure. It was
thought if it was over in this area, you could tie this into this other area up along the river that's in flood plane. A lot of it's upland, but it's flood plane. you could tie that whole trail, that park into a bigger, more open space natural area as well. And if you look at our comprehensive plan, there's actually
considered like I don't want to call it regional trail, but like a city trail that would come through this area and eventually tie into 30 down there and somewhere along this river all the way through there. So that was looked at in the comp plan process. What was that about six years ago or whatever that was? So So there there's some thought
there on that neighborhood. So, um, all right, back to what we were talking about. That's That's I'm That's all the dead horse beating. He did. Well, I'll come up with a definition.
We'll we'll make sure we get that language right and exempt out, you know, recreational park facilities. Um, and may and I'll have to think about that because a recreational facility could also be you know, like a stadium or, you know, a large hockey rink or,
you know, there's all sorts of recreational facilities that come into play. So, we got to make sure we're careful on that that we're screening the things we want to screen and allowing the things we don't want to screen to be okay. It comes once again it comes back you
know a lot of this is going to add you know more regulation that to me a lot of it's more clarity because over the years there's been a lot of stuff that comes up but we don't really have an ordinance that addresses it specifically and we're trying to get language in to address it but if you have it it's easy to follow but you want to make sure you do it
right and and I I'll almost put money on it that you know after if we've approved this as a city a year or two later something's going to come up and we're going to say god we should have done it that way and we'll have to amend one or two things I've done a couple of these over the years and you always come up with a few things within a couple years of it that you thought it was great when
you did it but then you realize in a real world application it maybe didn't work exactly how you thought and it's not a big deal to do that. It takes a little time and stuff but um okay well that's the screening section. We'll move on to the landscaping here. Um so we got a few pages to go with some of this
stuff. So uh landscaping um this is basically looking at what's going to be required and what isn't going to be required. So, we got some additional stuff in here. And basically what we're looking at is, you know, there's some language that exists about within wooded areas, um, development may be permitted,
you know, so they can come out, you know, on some of these properties like that piece, you know, north of the wastewater treatment ponds, all that woods. They could potentially come in there and clearcut that. We don't really have tree preservation wording in there. And this is one thing I want to discuss, too. Um, I put some stuff in there based
on, you know, what the planting should be, but does the city truly want to regulate tree clearing to an extent of if they clear clearcut that whole site? You know, it's got wording in there that, you know, it may be permitted as far as practical, but retention of these areas shall be encouraged and
incorporated. Well, doesn't really have a specific. They can kind of do what they want, and if they don't want to do it, there's nothing you can really do to stop them as long as their zoning meets what it meets. they're doing doing a plan unit development now you have some leverage to get that requirement but they come under a straight zoning district so you don't really have much
leverage and they could do what they want to do how much is it going to hinder a developer to buy that land or do something with the land if there's a regulation saying you can't clear cut it I mean it depends on what you guys would put in there and what the requirement is
so for instance a lot of cities have tree preservation you go out there you do a tree inventory to inventory that site that's probably, I don't know, 15 20 acres of woods back there. 15 acres of wood, something like that. You know, you're probably looking at 10 12 grand to do the tree inventory. Maybe maybe 14
in today's world on that a site that big. Okay? You know, so 10 grand in the overall scheme of things is probably a $2 million project or more. It's not a huge number, but it's still $10,000. Now, some cities will say you can remove up to, you know, 60% of the trees and
you don't have to replace anything extra. If as soon as you go over say 60% if they move in 65 there's some sort of calculation that says for that extra 5% you got to replace based on whatever it is. Some cities are 25%. I've seen all across the board anywhere from like 25
to 75% you can remove trees. Now I'm one of the guys that you know 25 is probably too high. You know 75 is maybe a little too low. like 60 60 55 70 somewhere in there is probably you know the right number if you don't want to hinder them
too bad and really what it is is if you remove you know 80% of the trees and you got to replace 20% you got to have a calculation how many trees is that going to cost the developer to put back in you know is it a one inch to one inch tree so if they replace or they remove you know 200 inches of trees and you got two
and a half inch trees you're putting in um what is that 20 25 trees you know that'd be 50 trees Well, 50 trees times $400 or $500 a piece, you know, it adds up. It's a cost. And you know, most cities have something like that, but not every city. Lakeville, for instance, one
of the biggest developing cities in the last 20 years, doesn't have a tree preservation ordinance, but they are actually in the process of looking to add one. Right now, after all this development, they're finally realizing that they want to save some tree stands here and there. So, I would say 50 at
least, if not a little bit more, but yeah, I would say at least 50 as well, if not more. So that's my that's my opinion. Yeah. I just know anything you do is going to be a extra cost to a developer. Yeah. And any any cost can you don't know what's going to push that developer over the edge. Is that extra
25,000 in tree planting going to be enough to say I'm going to kill the project? I don't know. The key is is how many of those little 25 grand are you going to have to add? Are you going to have five or six of them? So now everything added 150 or is it just a tree issue? Because trees aren't a bad thing for a developer. If they can save
them, they'll save them. Okay? You know, they're not just going to clear cut it for the fun of it. They're going to save what they can because it creates value for them lots. Yep. So, yeah, especially with old growth trees. Yeah, for sure. Correct. You know, you got the flood plane areas up there. You know, some of those areas would obviously have to be preserved because they can't really do
nothing in there, but it is possible to dig ponds in flood planes legally. So, you know, there could be clearing for a pond potentially to help save the other area. But I guess I don't really have any wording in here for that. That's why I wanted to bring that up right away
tonight because I don't know what the appetite is for something of that nature. And and then if it is, you know, it's it's a staff, you know, when they come in for say a plat, you know, it'd be myself and Nick and engineers would all look at that
stuff as part of their approval. It' be a tree preservation plan and just like a grading plan or whatever. Do we have So, I'll bring it to mayor specific. Are there areas in town that you see that we would want to enact tree preservation?
Yeah, right out right here would be an area. I mean, it's not in the city, but I could see this at annexing at some point. And that would be, you know, that's why we're looking at maybe a park in this general vicinity that you could add some of this flood plane area in. Yeah, because you could put a pond in
the blue area and put a trail around that or something like that in the trees. I mean, you're kind of hitting a lot of check marks there. Correct. You know, and you've kind of got, you know, these flood plane areas, there's there's ways to do it. You gota, if you dig a pond somewhere else, you got to add, you
know, you just can't dig ponds and add all the storage. And you just can't fill areas either. You kind of got to do a onetoone, you know, transfer or whatever you want to call it. But if we're expecting that to be residential, are we concerned about tree preservation or is or is it more I think that's where you want the tree preservation is
residential more so than say commercial personally. So that's a personal opinion again, but because you know neighborhoods that back into this stuff, you got a nice wooded backyard with privacy, that's value. Oh yeah. If you're looking right into somebody's backyard versus into this trees, there's
probably in mayor that's probably $10,000 $15,000 difference on the lot. Oh yeah. Most price it might be 100,000 more, you know. So So there is value to keeping as much as you can, but I also know developers will try to match things in as much and maximize their density as
much as they can. So that's where when we get into the future zoning district stuff and lot sizes, lot sizes is very important on this conversation as well because if you're, you know, right now R1's 85t wide. I don't think the city's ever done an R1 85 foot district wide district in this
city. It's never never done one. So if we're never done one, why is the 85 feet the number we're using? You know, it used to be 75, then it changed to 85 before I got here. and everything that's been done has been a PUD going back to a previous development where they were narrower. So that's you're right to do
what you want to do, but that's definitely something in my mind that I see from a discussion standpoint. And that also ties into the mech council force and density on everybody right now, too. So, and to get the density they want, big lots are very hard to do anymore. So, but yeah, that's that's one
of the areas there might, you know, south of 30. This is future development. Area is not annexed, but um you know where is it? I think this is the mayor Lutheran site right there. There's some trees in this area. This is actually annexed. You know, there's some more areas right there. You could see some
tree preservation at some point in time. Um you know, I mean there there's a few other spots throughout town where you might have a little stand here or there, but I don't know. I guess it's got to be decided. We can add language on it if we want to, but I'
I'd like to keep it as simple as possible personally just from a, you know, review and enforcement standpoint. Like I said, I'm 50 or 55% then. So, we should add some of that. I mean, I don't have the language in now. We
take a vote on it or I don't know what we need to do. We could look at just a neighboring like I know water counts got tree preservation. I don't know. I recommend they have tree preservation where it's replaced at a certain caliber bushes and so everyone's a little different. Um for instance, I know
Cottage Grove has one and it's so extreme that literally they're making people plant, you know, on a regular lot like six, seven trees in a lot that's already got some trees in the backyard that were existing and people as soon as the developer plants them, they go and cut them down like the next day because they don't want them. And it's almost
force them to have no yard space. You know, some people want a little bit of grass to throw a ball around or kids play or whatever. And Cottage Grove actually because they have, you know, a lot of development, they eventually change that and they realize we're overkill on requiring the trees. So the other thing that you do with that is you
exempt out trees like ash trees, cottonwoods, you know, the the nuisance trees, you know, box elders, you don't count them. So if you're taking down a cottonwood that's 50 inches across, you don't have to replace that because it's considered a nuisance. you're only replacing, you know, the good trees and anything over like four or six inches.
So, the little stuff doesn't really count. It's just you got to pick that size at 4 in 6 in. Um, you know, pine trees are a little bit different calculation, but probably not a lot of pines out here naturally, I don't think, and mayor if I remember right, but I don't know. So, I mean, I can come up
with some language. Natural. No. Yeah. I mean, like a little natural wooded area with pines. So but uh yeah I think it's you know you just come up with a calculation I can give a couple examples and you know normally if it's if you take down you know is it one is it two
to one I've seen five to one before and you know I'm saying inches caler inches so you know doing a tree preservation plan or inventory I should say they'll inventory every tree um whether it's um what do you call it a like a sapling to
a well up they won't do it like if it's four inches they anything under four in, you know, six. I like six personally. So, anything under six, I don't inventory. Okay? And uh so if it's 6 in or above, they'll inventory all the nuisance and the good trees. And then they'll mark in there. If you're taking
down, you know, 50 50% of the good trees, you just met the 50% number if that's the number. If it's 60 now that extra 10% if that's another like I said 100 inches and you got to replace it one to two or you know is it 50 inches of trees you got to replace and then you
you know you know some people I've seen people trim four 4 inch trees versus two and a half you know that's it all you know because they don't have as much room they'll do a bigger tree so it's less trees being planted so sometimes those are harder to survive depending on the weather and whatever but um
yeah and like I said you may not even want to preserve I mean you can just leave it alone as is because that's what it is right now and just not have that requirement. I think it'd be nice. I agree. I think it'd be a value to town like I said anything all this type of
stuff does I don't want to say hinder but it does add cost for a developer which you know when you're trying to lure a developer into town and do development which I know we've talked to a few people they want developers are looking for the easiest way possible.
So, let me swing it another direction. I'm not saying it's a good one. Um, if we have specific areas of town that we want to pres preserve the trees, you like that wooded area, do you simply zone that something where it cannot be
developed? Um, it is a tree preserve where you not having all this replacement this and that and I would recommend against that. Yeah, I think you're tying it down. Yeah, you're kind of it's almost like an undue taking or un what do they call it? Unfair taking.
Um you can in your areas if the city wants a park in a specific location, you put a park, you know, like in this the comprehensive plan, we have a parks plan map and that the location of those parks are kind of looked at as where were some areas that we wanted maybe a park to try
to preserve some trees or do some things like that. So there was some of that that was looked at when that comp plan was updated. Um, so they were kind of specifically put in areas for that, but you typically would zone that for what the district is and then you just kind of work through your ordinances, but when you try to go with a I know there's
a few cities I've seen that have these conservation areas and then people are like, "Why can't I develop my property, but my next door neighbor can?" And you kind of get into that conversation. So to me, it's more about if there's a park designated there and you have in your comprehensive plan, the city has every right in the world to put that park
there, which people feel like they're losing value, but that is something the city can do for the better good of the overall general public because as the city develops, you're going to need parks just like we said in Cold Water Crossing. And put one on the west side made sense because we already have
schoolhouse park on the east side. So, all right. Would it be uh Terry that much a bad thing to table this and do landscaping think about the trees and continue next time? Yeah. And we can if
you feel like whenever you want to stop I know we have a couple pages here left as I look at it throw some preservation language to look at. Yeah. We got fence section way to keep us going Tom.
So, the other thing I wanted good stuff and nothing to rush through it. I mean, yeah, think about it. I'm not one of I'll go through these last couple pages quick because they're kind of short on some things. And one of them I want to bring up is outdoor storage. That's 152.058. Says page 64 at the bottom, which is
zoning ordinance, page number, by the way. Um, basically this is outdoor storage and we we've got language in there. Uh the first one is under A number three, not more than two licensed or operable recreational vehicles. And I need to verify if you guys have an opinion on I
couldn't remember what the city's code says right now, but I that'll we'll just coordinate that so it matches what bunch of what's allowed. Was it five? I can't remember. I think it was five. Yeah. So I had two because I was just in the other the text I took. So I I'll make sure that that matches so there's no
conflict there. And then number eight, uh, we had this, you know, discussion what, a year ago, half a year ago, whatever it was, the outdoor, um, storage lanc containers. I actually got Oh, there we go. Yeah. So, I kind of just highlighted this and this was from
some language we had from a different community and I I it's not final, but I wanted to discuss this, too, because I know we never really had a consensus what direction to go with this when we had these previous talks. So, where do we want to go with this, I guess, is my
question. Not Oh, wait. C1. Yeah, I don't care if they're be C1 CI in the I1 districts. They'd be allowed. Yeah. I don't know. We added this land C container
language. Question is if we allow it, what needs to be screened? Right now, it would have to be screened 100% which we know there's existing ones out there that aren't. So, they'd be legal non-conforming technically. So, screen drawer painted. Well, that that's what
we talked about before. And I that's where we need to go. What do we want to do here? The other one was how many do we want to allow? Do we want to limit it to a certain number or do we want to allow them to do 10, 12, 15? And would stuff be grandfathered in? Well, anything that's there now is grandfathered in, I guess. But to me,
some of the guys there that have them now technically aren't in compliance and they're not grandfathered in because they put them in after our code, which does require 100% screening right now. So, do we want to actually try to enforce that, which was one of the issues why this kind of got tabled previously because we're hasn't really
been an issue, I guess. You know, I don't think I mind the containers so much, especially in the commercial district, as long as they're painted and screened off from any residential area or something. Yeah, as long as residential. So, yeah, that'd be that.
As long as the resident they're not bothering and the residential can't see them, I'm not opposed to them. But do we want to limit I think we should limit it, though. I don't think you should have a parking lot full of storage containers. For some of the people who weren't here at the time when we went
through this, we did draft some language. I've got it up here. Yeah, it was three. Yeah. Now, is there a size limit though? Because some of those Okay. Yeah. So, it was as an accessory use. Whoops. Thank you. I didn't want that. Three storage
containers on a lot. They can't be stacked. Uh, storage containers shall not be permitted to be rented or at least a third party. So, if you own the property, it's got to be storage containers for your own use. You can't just run a business of storage containers or or if you're renting the building on
the property, you can do one. It's Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Do we have to put on there? They can't live in there either. Well, if it's in a commercial or industrial district, that wouldn't be allowed anyways. Well, right. But we've seen strange enough things happen where they're living in the shop. Yeah. And I
would send the police over and have Yeah. One of the other I'll just for an example, one of the communities I work in center city up in Chicago Lakes area. Uh guy downtown who wanted to put a he had a wall with a road up on it. Went in. He bought a three-story building in
the downtown and refurbished it. Super nice. Put a ton of money into it. For whatever reason, he wanted to use a storage container as a retaining wall. And I thought he was crazy at first. And when we eventually got through it, it took us like six, eight months to get through the text amendments to allow the He put that in there and it looks I mean
unreal. It's really nice. It actually improved the downtown how and he did he put a lot of money in it, don't get me wrong. Yeah. Landscaped it, painted it super nice color. The back side of it had to be structurally engineered to work as a retaining wall. The front is a storage container. He actually wanted to open up the one end to be like a um in
the downtown like a food stand. um they didn't allow that um because of the building code you know stuff or whatever but with the um restaurant stuff but you know so it can be done because I've just seen this happen just last fall and he finished it you know it's just last year that went down and you know so living in
it I can see if somebody did it right now he had to meet all the building code stuff which he did and uh but it is I mean it is commercial so you can't you're not supposed to live in it but no but to me it would have been cheaper just to build like a retaining wall with boulders and put a little building in have been cheaper for what that way than
what he did, but whatever I guess. So, but yeah, so painted her screen and then this language here actually said they shall not be in the required front yard setback or the required sideyard setback area budding a residential district. Meaning they could potentially be in the rear yard abuing a residential district.
You know, this like said this from a different community, but you know, I know before we talked about they couldn't come forward in the building if the building was set back 100 feet. It's still to be back by the building. It could be even though the front yard's in front of it. So, the only place we'd have to really contend with that right
now would be Ash South, the little section of houses that ab butt to Shimcore. Um, yeah. Yeah, I'd be one. I guess going back hitting on this the dimensions you had asked about. Yeah,
that's on number four. Shall not exceed 40 ft in length, 8 1/2 ft width, and 10 ft in height. And that's typical size container. A location. Storage container shall meet all accessory building setback requirements and shall only be located
in the rear yard or in the sidey yard of the lot. And this we had some conversations on this because the great example was R&B up there. Yeah. Given the shape of its lot cuz it says,
"Well, put it in your rear yard. Put in the rear yard." Well, they don't have one. So, what would be acceptable in this sort of situation for an an R&B type of property right next to the building? So the discussion
was sideyard but no further forward than the building itself. Yeah. Right. So you could put it here up in front of here. You couldn't necessarily be out in front here because we could front yard but all the lot to the left or to the west of the building could be correct because the original
thought was only put in the rear. Right. We hadn't discussed side but then when we started looking at mayor specific properties well well some of these then could not have. So, could they run one perpendicular to the back of the building between the building right there? Yeah.
Uh, it would have to meet setback requirements basically accessory structure. I don't think we meet setback requirements there. Now, you see the guy to the left over there too. He has what? Three or four of them or whatever there too. Yeah. Rick Mo has had those for I think it's two
basically two of them. Yeah. two storage trailers, you know, and he kind of encroaches into that sideyard a little bit and that's where that was brought up as well, you know, which that's why the sideyard discussion came about, which I think when I looked at some other communities here recently, most of them do allow some sort of sideyard placement
depending on, you know, a little different in every city. But so my guess is if we want to regulate these, we can kind of go back and take that language which is up there and insert this into this section because it was something we definitely talked about recently in you know in the last year.
Yeah, I'm fine with the screening, the painting and the size and the limit of three that that should be just now the screening I think or excuse me the painting was only you could paint without screening. So if you didn't want to screen you could paint it.
Yeah. If the container the the idea was if the container was matching in color to the principal structure so it blended more in with it so you didn't have some rusted out. Oh, we have those provisions in there. Um but you didn't have a
purple container next to this. So if we would allow you to not have to screen it if it matched the principal structure and blended in with the principal structure so it wasn't some eyesore out there. And that one in center city, he painted it black with like a copper trim
on like the hinges and stuff. And you wouldn't need the screen that it looked perfectly fine. That's right in their downtown busy area where there's restaurants and stuff all around. Okay. I'm fine with either or then if it's done right. I'm If it's done right. Yes. Correct. So you have to make sure it's done right. Not somebody out there with
a freaking rattle can. Yeah. Yep. One strip at a time. Right. A lot of kryon. Okay. So, we'll that's one one of the things I wanted to bring up. So, that's kind of the outdoor storage section. You know, we just kind of left a lot of it alone. Um I think I added a
little bit of language about semi-tractor trailers, you know, in the industrial area. This is so the I1 that's the future industrial. We don't have that right now. So, we have some there clothesline poles and wire and play equipment are kind of exempt. Um and what we're saying is those items are
exempt. So, but it has regulations regulating those items. So, it's not prohibiting the outdoor storage. So, um lot provisions, maybe I'll go through these last couple pages here real quick. So, there's not a ton to them. The lot provision section, we're not really changing much there. That's kind of a
existing section there. We kind of just left that alone. Prop public property rights away. Um you know, basically this is we had a one-s sentence thing there right now. We added some stuff about coverage, liability, things of that. Uh
so basically it's you know we don't want things in the rightway but there's some exceptions like a news stand you know mailboxes you know essential services which is what we talked about earlier certain signs if it's like a a a sign in the downtown
district you can put like you know stuff there because it's right up against the public right away. So there's some things on that end you know liability stuff like that. And then uh what's this next section here? This next section I think was the last one is just general
um yard and lot regulations. So really a lot of this was from other areas like we got high water elevation, groundwater elevation, building height stuff and what this does it puts regulations in for new developments. So you're not you got to be three feet above groundwater so we're not building houses with
basement and they're flooding every single day. Um you know we got to be three feet above the highest known water level from a you know pond or a wetland or the river or whatever. Um the height, we just kind of did some specifics on height regulate that. We actually added that little table in to kind of show how
it's being calculated. Um there's some some items um that are exempt from it like churches, church spires, you know, flag poles, uh different things, poles, towers for essential services like a radio tower, you know, wind energy centers, which is the windmills. Uh dwelling below ground. This is your
earth sheltered buildings. Um I don't know, do we have any of those in town here? I don't even think we do, but we got language in there. Land slope, you can't build on 18% or steeper, you know, on a house standpoint. I don't think we have that in town either, if I'm not mistaken, but existing language. So, uh
yards, this would be like your uh encroachment into yards. So, uh basically when you look at the exceptions, you know, can lever on a can, you know, a can two foot canal lever, those are typically exempted out on some of this stuff because it's not part of the foundation. ramps, lifts,
um, you know, if you have the handicapped person, they can have a ramp to the front door, which can encroach into the setback, I think, by I don't know if it's state or federal on that one, but I think that's allowed. Uh, recreational laundry drying equipment, you know, things like that. Gazeos, there's some things that we allow in
there. And then triangular lots, just a little bit of language basically. Um, you know, where you have a lot with a point in the back. This kind of defines what that is, how that setback's determined. Um, that's about it. The next stuff is all stuff we were planning on for the next
meeting. So, so we got those couple sections that we didn't go over really, the landscaping, but we talked about the tree preservation and the uh what was the other section? Um, and the uh fence section, which obviously there's a lot of
existing language there as well. So, any other questions? And by the way, um, as we go forward, you know, I had a schedule, you know, put together that would get us done by roughly December of this year. You know, this we didn't get two sections done
tonight. And I know next month month would probably be even longer with some of those sections. So if it takes an extra month and it extends, I don't think there's any deadline on this. So if it takes us into January, February, March next year, it is what it is. So if you guys feel you need to go through stuff a little extra and
Yeah. I mean, it's you know, we kind of put an estimate together. So, it just depends on how that all works and um some of these are important new stuff. Yeah, sounds good. Great. Well, next item on the agenda is next meeting. You're saying we may have
a higher load next meeting, but next meeting also takes place during National Night Out. So, if you look at the uh um uh what do you call it? table of contents, everything that starts at the land excavation and mining and all the way down to 15072. That was all planned to be next meeting.
I know a couple of those sections will have like off- street parking is a fairly substantial section. The alternative energy systems and the the wire antennas and stuff. We have, you know, pretty good stuff in the code right now. There will be a few adjustments. Um accessory structures,
there'll be some language. Building design standards, we'll also talk about that. I don't know how restrictive we want to get, but that's more for the commercial, you know, industrial, you know, institutional type stuff just to make sure it has, you know, certain billing. I mean, some cities go crazy with that in my opinion, like overboard.
Um, you know, the last one is the what is it called the the DG DG market or whatever it's called. Um, we had some of that discussion there and you know, I feel that you know, we they did some things now. Could we legally required everything? Maybe. We just want to get a little more teeth and have a little more
clarity so the city has the right to do some things if they want to. So, okay. Signed regulations are also in there. That's a whole section of itself um in the current ordinance. So, that one probably alone is half of the meeting to be honest with you. So, so it
might take us an extra minute to get through all this last stuff here. Um, for next meeting on the 5th, could we have it a different date or skip August? That's National Night Out. And I'm not sure if you'll also have something going on in the parking lot here, but I know there's neighborhood
ones going on. Take a poll. How does it work for everybody? I won't be here. I was going to say I the date doesn't work for me, but I don't if we got a lot to go through. Obviously, you said it's okay to push it into, but do we want to skip a month or do we want to look at maybe a different date? We can look at a
different date. It'd be nice to keep going on this skip. So, we can certainly move the date. Yeah, I'd be more open to if if not the first Tuesday, then move it to the third Tuesday. I have council meetings on second and fourth.
That' be the 19th. I don't care. I'll shoot out an email to everybody. We don't have to do it right now. We'll coordinate that next day. Great. And then uh commissioner's report. Does anyone have anything to report?
Water's flowing in the right direction. You get any phone calls up? Usually they ring pretty good when the water's like that. Took my motion to I took my rake and went down the trail where the water flows and did some
motion to adjurnn. Second. All in favor? I opposed hearing none. Motion is accepted. We are journed.