[00:00:04]
[CALL TO ORDER AND ANNOUNCE A QUORUM]
I'LL START THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE P AND Z.WE'RE GOING TO BE GOING INTO A PUBLIC HEARING.
[ITEM 1: SI2024-02 Hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council regarding proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance including carports and mobile food units. (Staff Initiated Application 2024-02—City of Decatur)]
AND WHILE WE'RE IN A PUBLIC HEARING, THE COMMISSION IS NOT ALLOWED TO ASK QUESTIONS, RESPOND TO QUESTIONS, OR COMMENT DURING THE PUBLIC HEARING.SO GOING INTO THE PUBLIC HEARING, I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP.
DEDRA. GOOD AFTERNOON AND GOOD AFTERNOON TO YOU. GOOD EVENING.
WE WANTED TO REVIEW SOME ZONING AMENDMENTS THAT STAFF IS PROPOSING TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
WE THINK THESE AMENDMENTS WILL BENEFIT THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.
THE CONVERSION OF GARAGES, AWNINGS IN THE DOWNTOWN AREA, JUST THE A MYRIAD OF AMENDMENTS.
WE CAN CERTAINLY GO THROUGH EACH OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS, BUT WE DID HAVE SOME ITEMS THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS FOR CLARITY THAT WE NEED TO GET SOME CLARITY ON FROM YOU GUYS.
AND THOSE HAVE TO DO WITH GARAGE CONVERSIONS.
IN OTHER WORDS, PEOPLE CONVERTING THEIR GARAGES INTO LIVING SPACE.
WHAT YOUR THOUGHTS ARE ON THAT? DOES THERE NEED TO BE A RESTRICTION BASED ON WHEN THE HOUSE WAS BUILT OR, OR WHAT, YOU KNOW, ARE THERE OTHER RESTRICTIONS THAT WE NEED TO CONSIDER? IN TERMS OF CARPORTS? DO WE ALLOW THEM, REGARDLESS OF THE CURRENT ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENT, WHICH I BELIEVE CHERYL DOES HAVE THAT PROVIDED.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? CAN THEY GET A VARIANCE IF IT SAYS ONE CAR PART SHALL BE ALLOWED? DO WE WANT TO ALLOW VARIANCES FOR THAT.
SO ANYWAY WE'LL GO THROUGH THAT MORE IN MORE DETAIL.
THE FIRST ITEM THAT WE'RE WANTING TO LOOK AT ARE GARAGE CONVERSIONS.
THERE'S A DATE THAT WAS PUT IN THERE THAT FOR DWELLINGS IN EXISTENCE PRIOR TO JANUARY 1ST, 2010.
THE ELIMINATION OF A GARAGE SPACE BY REPLACING A GARAGE DOOR WITH THE BUILDING WALL SHALL BE PERMITTED AS LONG AS THERE ARE TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES PROVIDED. AND THAT'S ANOTHER POINT THAT WE WANT TO GET YOUR INPUT ON.
SHOULD IT BE TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES, OR SHOULD IT BE TWO ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING SPACES, WHICH IS A GARAGE? SO DO THEY NEED TO HAVE A GARAGE IN ADDITION TO THE GARAGE CONVERSION? OR ARE YOU OKAY WITH THEM JUST HAVING THE TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES? BECAUSE PART OF THE CONCERN WITH CARPORTS WAS PEOPLE PARKING ON THE STREETS, YOU KNOW, OR WITH, NOT WITH CARPORTS. I'M SORRY, WITH THE GARAGE CONVERSIONS.
PREVIOUSLY WE ALLOWED GARAGE CONVERSIONS, AND THEN THERE WAS SOME CONCERN THAT, WELL, NOW YOU'RE TAKING AWAY THE PARKING SPACES AND PEOPLE ARE PARKING IN THE STREET.
THEN GARAGE CONVERSIONS ARE NOT ALLOWED.
SO IS THERE A BEST OF BOTH WORLDS THAT WE CAN APPLY HERE OR NOT? AND THAT'S FOR SINGLE FAMILY ONE AND SINGLE FAMILY TWO.
SO THAT'S WHAT SHE'S SHOWING ON THIS SLIDE.
THEN THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT RV'S, RECREATIONAL VEHICLES, TRAVEL TRAILERS OR MOTORHOMES IN CERTAIN SECTIONS WE HAD THIS RESTRICTION, BUT IN TOWNHOMES, C0 AND C1 WE DID NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THESE VEHICLES NOT BEING ALLOWED FOR ONSITE DWELLING PURPOSES.
SO THIS THIS IS JUST A CLEANUP FOR THOSE DISTRICTS.
AND IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, I CAN ANSWER CERTAIN SECTIONS.
[00:05:01]
AND THEN WAYNE CAN ALSO RESPOND TO CERTAIN SECTIONS.AND THEN PAM CAN ALSO SHE WROTE THE ORDINANCE FOR US.
ARE WE IN THE PUBLIC HEARING? WE ARE. OKAY.
WELL, ACTUALLY, THIS ONE HAS TO DO WITH USES ALLOWED IN THE C-1A DISTRICT AND RECREATIONAL VEHICLES, TRAVEL TRAILERS OR MOTORHOMES IN THE C-1.
BUT WE ALSO WANTED TO INCLUDE IN THE C-1A ZONING DISTRICT THE ABILITY TO HAVE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED AND SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOMES.
THAT THAT'S WHAT IS INCLUDED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT ENCOURAGES THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE C-1A ZONING DISTRICT, BUT WE DIDN'T HAVE THE USES ALLOWED IN THAT DISTRICT. SO THAT'S JUST A CLEANUP AS WELL.
ALL RIGHT. THIS IS JUST FOR RECREATIONAL VEHICLES TRAVEL TRAILERS OR MOTOR MOTORHOMES.
IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
AGAIN, THIS IS ONE OF THOSE ZONING DISTRICTS THAT DIDN'T RESTRICT THESE USES.
FOR ON SITE DWELLING PURPOSES.
AND WHAT WE MEAN BY THAT, WE JUST DON'T WANT PEOPLE LIVING IN IN THE RVS IN THESE DISTRICTS.
AND THEN THIS IS JUST THE USE TABLE THAT REFERENCES BACK THE C-1 ZONING DISTRICT THAT WILL ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED AND SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED. THIS IS JUST A GRAPHIC DEPICTION IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE.
THIS HAS TO DO WITH AWNINGS OR CANOPIES.
WAYNE MET WITH THE MAIN STREET DISTRICT AND THEY EXPRESSED THEIR DESIRES AND WISHES WITH REGARDS TO AWNINGS AND CANOPIES. THE ORIGINAL ZONING ORDINANCE MANDATES AWNINGS OR CANOPIES.
THE BOARD MEMBERS SAID, WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE A MANDATE, BUT PEOPLE SHOULD HAVE THE OPTION.
AND SO WAYNE IDENTIFIED SOME DESIGN STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS FOR THEM WHICH THEY I BELIEVE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH.
AND THEN WE HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT ACCESSORY DWELLINGS.
RIGHT NOW WE ALLOW THEM, BUT WE DON'T LIMIT AN ACCESSORY DWELLING ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY.
SO HERE WE'RE JUST SAYING THERE'S ONLY ONE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT PER PLATTED LOT OR LOT OF RECORD JUST TO CLEAR THAT UP.
AND THESE REGULATIONS FOR THE CARPORTS CAME OUT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE MEETINGS THAT WE HAD WITH COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ZBA BACK IN MAY, I BELIEVE.
AND WAYNE REALLY IS THE EXPERT ON WITH REGARDS TO THESE REGULATIONS, BUT THEY WILL FALL IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR US TO WHEN WE REVIEW PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR CARPORTS.
SO IN THIS SCENARIO, WE'RE ALLOWING CARPORTS, BUT THEY HAVE TO MEET CERTAIN CONDITIONS.
SETBACK SIDE REAR YARD, FRONT YARD SETBACKS AND LOT COVERAGE.
THERE'S ALSO RESTRICTIONS ON THE LENGTH AND THE WIDTH.
IF THEY EXCEED THE LENGTH AND WIDTH THAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED, THERE IS AN SUP APPROVAL PROCESS.
CARPORTS IN EXCESS OF 12FT IN HEIGHT SHALL BE ALLOWED WITH AN SUP APPROVAL.
[00:10:01]
THE CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LOCAL ADOPTED BUILDING CODE.THERE'S NO MORE THAN ONE CARPORT SHALL BE ALLOWED ON A LEGALLY PLATTED LOT.
AND THAT'S WHERE THE QUESTION WITH REGARDS TO SHALL COME IN.
WHAT? WHAT DOES THAT REALLY MEAN? OR WHAT'S THE IMPACT ON A VARIANCE REQUEST IF SOMEONE SAYS, WELL, I WANT MORE THAN ONE CARPORT TO BE ALLOWED ON MY PROPERTY.
I HAVE TWO ACRES OR THREE ACRES.
WHY CAN'T I HAVE TWO? AND THEN WE SAID CARPORTS IN EXISTENCE IN THE CITY OF DECATUR ON.
AND WE DID NOT PROVIDE A DATE.
THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO ALSO DISCUSS.
ON SECOND READING SHALL BE CONSIDERED LEGALLY NONCONFORMING UNTIL ALTERED.
IN OTHER WORDS, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CARPORTS ALREADY IN DECATUR.
DO WE WANT TO PROVIDE A DATE FOR THE CONFORMANCE OR LEGAL NONCONFORMANCE? FOR NONRESIDENTIAL USES, IT'S NOT THAT MUCH OF AN ISSUE.
WE CURRENTLY DO ALLOW CARPORTS, BUT WE'RE PLACING SETBACK RESTRICTIONS JUST SO IT'S CLEAR IN THIS SECTION WHAT THOSE ARE.
WE TALK ABOUT FLOOR AREA RATIO WITH REGARDS.
EXCUSE ME. TO COMMERCIAL CARPORTS.
THAT CARPORT CANNOT VIOLATE OPEN STORAGE REGULATIONS FOR THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH IT'S LOCATED.
AND THEN THE LAST ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION IS MOBILE FOOD UNITS.
WE HAD TO CLARIFY WHERE THOSE ARE ALLOWED AND ARE NOT ALLOWED.
WE HAVE SEEN QUITE A FEW OF THOSE AS DEFINED IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
A MOBILE FOOD UNIT MAY OPERATE ON PROPERTIES IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT THAT ARE USED FOR NONRESIDENTIAL USES WHEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE ADMINISTRATOR. AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT SCHOOLS AND CHURCHES ARE ALLOWED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS IF THEY WANT TO HAVE A MOBILE FOOD UNIT.
AND SO WE'RE NOT WANTING TO PRECLUDE THAT.
WE WOULD LIKE TO ALLOW THAT, BECAUSE THAT THAT'S A MOVING TREND THAT'S BECOMING A VERY BIG DEAL.
AND SO WE WANT TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT.
SO THAT WAS A QUICK RUN THROUGH I HOPE IT MAKES SENSE.
AND WE CAN AGAIN GO BACK THROUGH WHAT OUR QUESTIONS ARE OR ACTUALLY LET YOU ASK US QUESTIONS.
MAYBE WE'LL GET THOSE ANSWERS.
ANYWHERE, ANY PLACE YOU WANT TO START.
YEAH. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ONLINE? HEARING NONE. THEN I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING MEETING.
IT IS NOW 5:49 COMMISSIONERS QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING AND I THINK WE DO THAT.
YES. JUST TO MAKE IT METHODICAL.
AND THE FIRST SHOULD BE EILEEN.
GO BACK TO THE FIRST SLIDE, PLEASE.
WELL, I WOULD MAKE THEM MAKE THIS CORRECTION.
THE FIRST CORRECTION ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS, THERE'S A MISSPELLED WORD THERE.
YEAH, IT SHOULD BE GROUND, BUT IT'S GROUND RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE.
[00:15:02]
THANK YOU.OKAY, COMMISSIONERS. ANY QUESTIONS? STARTING WITH THAT FIRST PAGE ABOUT CARPORTS AND OFF STREET PARKING.
WELL, AS I RECALL, THE QUESTION HERE WAS WHAT OUR COMMENTS WERE ABOUT.
TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES PROVIDED, ONE BEING MAYBE SHOULD THAT BE REQUIRED, AND THEN WHETHER OR NOT THOSE SHOULD BE ENCLOSED, IS THAT CORRECT? OKAY. SO I GUESS I'LL JUST LEAD US OFF AND SAY I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF HAVING TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES PROVIDED PER DWELLING UNIT.
FOR THE PURPOSES OF, YOU KNOW, ELIMINATING ON STREET PARKING FOR, YOU KNOW, MAKING IT EASIER FOR.
PER DWELLING UNIT OR PER PLATTED LOT.
YEAH. SO THANKS FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
SO I THINK I WOULD PERSONALLY BE IN FAVOR OF THAT.
I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THEY NEED TO BE ENCLOSED.
I THINK THAT'S MORE OF A CITY COUNCIL ISSUE.
AS I SAT AND LISTENED TO CITY COUNCIL DISCUSS THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE, IT WAS MORE IN TERMS OF CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE CLUTTER UNDERNEATH AN ENCLOSED OR UNDERNEATH SAY, A CARPORT WOULD BE VISIBLE FROM. AND SO IT BECOMES MORE OF A CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE.
SO TO ME, THAT'S MORE OF A CITY COUNCIL ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY THINK THEIR STAFF CAN ENFORCE THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE CODE IN TERMS OF TRASH AND THAT SORT OF THING.
THAT'S THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.
WELL, DOES IT HAVE TO HAVE A GARAGE DOOR.
RIGHT. WELL, THE INTERPRETATION HAS BEEN HAD BEEN THAT ENCLOSED MEANT GARAGE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THEM TO CLOSE THEIR GARAGE BY PUTTING A WALL UP.
AS LONG AS THERE ARE TWO OTHER OFF STREET SPACES.
YEAH. AND ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? BECAUSE IT'S NOT A GARAGE.
YES. I MEAN, MY POINT IS JUST GOING BACK TO WHAT WILLIE WAS TALKING ABOUT.
I THOUGHT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT CARPORTS.
WELL, I CAN SEE A REQUIREMENT, POSSIBLY, THAT IT BE COVERED, BUT IT MAKES NO SENSE TO ME TO SAY YOU CAN CLOSE YOUR OLD GARAGE AS LONG AS YOU BUILD A WHOLE NEW ENCLOSED GARAGE THAT THAT JUST DOESN'T.
SO YOU'RE IN FAVOR OF THE OFF STREET PARKING.
WE SHOULD BUILD A WHOLE OTHER GARAGE IN THE GARAGE, WHICH IS WHAT? AND THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE SAYING WITH THAT.
WE'RE JUST ASKING THE QUESTION, ARE YOU OKAY WITH JUST TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES BEING PROVIDED? DOES THAT ADDRESS THE ISSUE WITH PARKING ON THE STREET, BUT ALSO ALLOWING FOLKS TO CONVERT THEIR GARAGE? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CONVERT THEIR GARAGES INTO A SPACE, A LIVING SPACE.
I'M OKAY WITH ALLOWING THEM TO CLOSE THEIR GARAGE WITHOUT FORCING THEM TO BUILD A WHOLE NEW GARAGE.
OKAY, NOW I'M D'ARCY ON WHETHER WE SHOULD REQUIRE IT TO BE COVERED WITH A CARPORT.
CARPORTS CAN BE ATTRACTIVE, INCORPORATED, UNATTRACTIVE.
SO, IF WE SAY, WELL, YOU GONNA HAVE TO BUILD UP.
I HAVE NOT ONLY HAVE THE TWO SPACES, BUT COVER THEM AS A CARPORT.
WAS I NOT BEING HEARD? SO THE LONG STORY SHORT IS THAT YOU'RE OKAY WITH OFF STREET PARKING? I THINK SO, OKAY.
AND I GOT YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? SO WHERE ARE YOU ALL IN? I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT.
I THINK THAT THIS THIS LANGUAGE.
SHOULD THERE BE A DATE ESTABLISHED OR DOES IT MATTER TO YOU ON THE DATE? I WOULD SAY FROM THIS DATE FORWARD.
[00:20:02]
WORKING WITH THEM TO TRY AND GET IT CLEANED UP OR GET IT WHATEVER IT NEEDS.I WOULD KIND OF LIKE TO GO BACK AND SAY, OKAY, YOU WON.
DO YOU WANT TO. AND I'M NOT SURE I'M FOLLOWING IT, BUT I CAN'T DENY A PERMIT BASED ON OTHER VIOLATIONS OF BUILDING CODE AND STATE LAW DOES NOT ALLOW THAT TO PROVIDE A BUILDING PERMIT BASED ON EITHER IT'S ALLOWED TO HAVE A BUILDING PERMIT OR IT'S NOT.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE'S ANYTHING IN NEGOTIATION OR DISCUSSION NOW WITH ANYONE, BUT IF THEY HAD A CARPORT THAT YOU'VE BEEN DISCUSSING WITH THEM, NO, YOU CAN'T HAVE IT THERE.
THERE'S YOU'RE NOT FAR ENOUGH BACK FROM THE STREET.
YOU'RE NOT YOU'RE NOT MEETING ANY OF OUR CURRENT CODES.
AND THAT SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE NEGOTIATED.
WE DON'T JUST WAVE A WHITE FLAG AND SAY EVERYTHING IS OKAY.
AND I'M GOOD WITH THAT NOW BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT ZONING ORDINANCE, THEY'RE NO LONGER LEGAL THERE.
IS THAT LEGALLY NONCONFORMING? YEAH. THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED IN RESIDENTIAL.
YEAH. IF SOMETHING HAPPENED AND OUR CARPORT ORDINANCE ADDRESSES THAT, THAT AS LONG AS IT'S NOT MODIFIED IN ANY WAY, IF SOMETHING CAME THROUGH, THEY HAD A HIGH WIND EVENT.
IT WAS DAMAGED. THEY HAD TO TAKE IT DOWN.
IT CAN'T GO BACK IN THE SAME PLACE.
WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED NONCONFORMING? YEAH, IT WOULD HAVE TO PUT IT INTO A CONFORMING CONFIGURATION UNLESS CITY COUNCIL PROVIDED OTHERWISE.
YEAH. IF I DON'T WANT US TO GET CONFUSED, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT CARPORTS ON THIS SLIDE.
OKAY. ALL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS THE CONVERSION OF GARAGES.
AND THAT'S WHAT THAT DATE IS IN REFERENCE TO THE JANUARY 1ST, 2010.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE REFERENCE TO THAT DATE.
YOU'RE SAYING DWELLINGS IN EXISTENCE PRIOR TO.
WHY ARE WE PICKING THAT DATE? I WAS JUST ABOUT TO ASK.
IT'S NOT ARBITRARY. WAYNE HAD RATIONALE FOR THAT.
IT GOES BACK TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, YOU KNOW, SEEING WHEN DECATUR STARTED BUILDING NEWER, MODERN HOUSES AND REQUIRING THAT I THINK IT WAS IN 2015 THAT THE ZONING ORDINANCES WERE CHANGED ON THAT.
SO I KIND OF PICKED THAT DATE OUT OF THERE.
NOW, IT THERE'S NOT AN EXACT MOMENT IN TIME TO PINPOINT THAT.
IT COULD ALSO BE 2015 WHEN THE ZONING ORDINANCE WAS CHANGED.
WELL, DO WE HAVE TO HAVE A DATE IN THERE AT ALL? WHY CAN'T JUST BE.
OH, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. SO WHAT THE THOUGHT WAS ON THIS.
AND THIS IS WHY WE WANTED TO HAVE THIS DISCUSSION ON THIS.
IF YOU MOVE FORWARD AND YOU SAY YES, YOU CAN ELIMINATE A GARAGE AND BUILD A WALL AND ENCLOSE THAT SPACE AND TURN IT INTO HABITABLE SPACE, LIVING SPACE FOR THE HOUSE AND NO LONGER HAVE A GARAGE.
WE TALKED ABOUT THAT DURING THE MEETING FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.
YES, FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION.
SO IF WE DON'T PUT THAT DATE IN THERE, THEN ANY HOUSE THAT'S BEING BUILT, A NEW HOUSE THAT IS THAT FINISHED CONSTRUCTION TOMORROW, THEY COULD COME IN THE NEXT DAY AND PULL A PERMIT TO ENCLOSE THAT GARAGE.
NOW THEY NO LONGER HAVE TO MEET THAT.
AND IT'S LIVING SPACE, NOT GARAGE SPACE.
SO IT'S FROM THAT DATE BACKWARDS.
DWELLINGS IN EXISTENCE PRIOR TO THAT DATE DO NOT HAVE TO MEET THIS OR ARE ALLOWED TO USE THIS REQUIREMENT.
[00:25:01]
USING YOUR ANALOGY OKAY.SO IF A HOUSE THAT WAS BUILT YESTERDAY, YES.
YES. TOMORROW THEY COME IN WITH A PLAN TO CONVERT THAT GARAGE SPACE INTO LIVING SPACE SEEMS TO ME TO BE OKAY AS LONG AS THEY'RE THERE.
ADDING ON TO MORE CAR GARAGE, YOU KNOW, OFF STREET PARKING SPACES.
IT SEEMS TO ME TO BE OKAY, BUT THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO ADD IF YOU HAVE A DRIVEWAY, THOSE ARE PARKING SPACES, RIGHT? THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO ADD MORE PARKING SPACES TO THIS.
THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU CORRECTLY, REQUIRES THE NEW CONSTRUCTION TO CONTAIN TWO ENCLOSED PARKING SPACES IN THE FORM OF A GARAGE.
AND SO YOU SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO IMMEDIATELY COME IN THE NEXT WEEK AND GET RID OF THAT.
AND I MEAN, THEN YOU JUST WELL, I GUESS UNLESS YOU'RE PROVIDING TWO MORE ENCLOSED.
ABSOLUTELY. IN THAT CASE, IT WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE APPROVED.
THAT'S RIGHT. THAT WOULD BE OKAY.
I WOULD THINK HOWEVER THESE OKAY.
ALL RIGHT. BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS WORDING DOESN'T OR THE DATE DOESN'T PRECLUDE THAT THE DATE, WHAT BOTHERS ME ABOUT THE DATE IS THAT DATES FROM WHAT YOU'VE SAID SOUNDS TO ME LIKE IT'S JUST ARBITRARY.
AND ARBITRARINESS IS NOT GOOD IN THE EYES OF THE LAW GENERALLY.
SO THAT'S A DATE THAT I THINK WOULD MAKE SENSE.
PAM, DO YOU CONCUR WITH THAT ANALYSIS? AND THAT WAS I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT DATE TO CHOOSE.
IT WOULD DEFINITELY CORRELATE WITH THE PROGRESSION.
I COULD SEE THIS, BUT THIS DOES ALLOW FOR HOUSES THAT WERE BUILT PRIOR TO THAT DATE.
IN THIS CASE, IF IT'S 2015 SO THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE OLDER HOUSES AND THE DOWNTOWN AREA THAT HAVE SINGLE CAR SMALL GARAGES THAT GENERALLY WILL NOT EVEN FIT A VEHICLE ANYMORE FOR THEM TO CONVERT THAT SPACE AND NOT HAVE TO PROVIDE THOSE TWO ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING SPACES.
THEY WOULD JUST HAVE TO PROVIDE TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES.
EXACTLY. SO IT'S OKAY IF THEY CHANGE THEM.
AND THAT'S PER PLOT, NOT PER DWELLING PLANET OR PLANET.
ARE YOU OKAY? WHAT ARE YOU ASKING? I'M SORRY.
WELL, WE CAN PUT THAT PROVISION IN THERE, BUT IT JUST SAYS TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES.
I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE PER DWELLING.
IT WOULD BE I THINK IT WOULD BE PER DWELLING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE SOME WE HAVE OLD CITY MAPS.
IN SOME CASES, WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE PLATTING ON EACH OF THE LOCATIONS.
OKAY. SO IF WE GOT A DUPLEX INVOLVED.
NO, IT'S GOING TO BE FOR WE REQUIRE FOR.
EACH HALF OF A DUPLEX IS CONSIDERED A SEPARATE DWELLING.
IS THAT AM I CORRECT ABOUT THAT.
SO THIS WOULD STILL IT'S A SEPARATE LIVING UNIT.
YEAH. YEAH, IT SHOULD BE DWELLING, WHICH IS WHAT THIS SAYS.
ALL RIGHT. SO I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THIS WAS CARPORTS.
WHEN YOU SAID TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES, I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THAT WAS A GARAGE SPACE OR THIS IS JUST WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS, IF A HOUSE WAS BUILT PRIOR TO 2015, WHATEVER THAT DATE IS THAT ANYBODY CAN CONVERT THAT SPACE INTO LIVING SPACE AS LONG AS LONG AS THEY PROVIDE THOSE TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE ENCLOSED.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO BE COVERED.
THEY JUST HAVE TO PROVIDE TWO OFF STREET PARKING.
AND THAT COULD BE IN THE DRIVEWAY.
I MEAN, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE THE DRIVEWAY THAT WOULDN'T INCLUDE HOAS, WOULD IT? IT WOULD. I'M SORRY.
NO, NO, THAT WOULDN'T INCLUDE ANYTHING.
I BELIEVE THE HOA RESTRICTIONS SUPERSEDE THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS.
BUT WE ARE WE DO NOT ENFORCE HOA COVENANTS.
[00:30:05]
WELL, YEAH. AND YOU ALSO NEED TO BECAUSE I PLAY DEVIL'S ADVOCATE A LOT.DO YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH NOT HAVING A GARAGE OR WITH PEOPLE CONVERTING THEIR GARAGE INTO LIVING SPACE? IS THAT A CONCERN? IN SOME NEIGHBORHOODS, IT LOOKS LIKE A CONCERN, BECAUSE EVERYTHING THAT WAS IN THE GARAGE IS NOW OUTSIDE IN THE YARD, IN THE BACK BE COATED.
SO AND PLEASE UNDERSTAND, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE CARPORTS.
THIS IS A THIS IS PART OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE THAT IS COMPLETELY SEPARATE FROM THE CARPORTS.
SO I THINK WE'RE IN AGREEMENT IF WE MOVE THAT TO JANUARY 1ST, 2015 OR WHATEVER THE DATE.
WHATEVER THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS ADOPTED.
YEAH. AND I THINK IT WAS MID YEAR.
AND THE TWO OFF STREET SPACES FOR PARKING THAT'S PROVIDED IS OKAY.
WELL OKAY, SO LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
YOU'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, RIGHT? YOU COULD CHOOSE TO RECOMMEND THE CARPORT PROVISIONS AND NOT RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE ENCLOSED GARAGE SPACE PROVISION. OKAY.
SO, WE'LL AFTER THE 2015 DATE.
YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO CONVERT GARAGE SPACE UNLESS YOU ADD ANOTHER GARAGE SPACE.
AND I'M TRYING TO THINK, I DON'T GET THAT.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO IF YOU'RE GOING TO.
IF IT'S BEFORE 2015 AND IT HAS A GARAGE, YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW THAT CONVERSION WITHOUT THE ADDITION OF A GARAGE OR I GUESS, WHATEVER.
AND THAT DATE CAN BE I DON'T COMPLETELY FROM THIS AND ANY GARAGE CONVERSION WOULD BE ALLOWED.
I THINK IF IT'S GOT A I DON'T KNOW.
I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DATE HAS TO DO WITH.
OKAY. PLEASE EXPLAIN IT TO ME.
HOUSES THAT WERE BUILT PRIOR TO THAT DATE HAD NO SUCH MANDATE.
SO IF I BUILT A HOUSE IN 2010 WITHOUT THAT MANDATE, AT THE TIME I BUILT IT, I HAD EVERY REASON TO BELIEVE AT SOME POINT IN TIME I COULD COME IN AND CLOSE THE GARAGE WITHOUT REPLACEMENT.
AND SO FROM THAT PERSPECTIVE, IT'S A FAIRNESS QUESTION.
OKAY. WELL, I MEAN, I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, AND I DON'T THINK I MEAN, IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO AWAY WITH THE DATA ALTOGETHER, WE MAY AS WELL DO AWAY WITH THE MANDATE FROM 20, THE 2015 ORDINANCE, TO EVEN REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE A TWO CAR GARAGE, BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE TO.
THEY CAN COME IN SIX MONTHS LATER AND CLOSE IT OFF AND PARK IN THE GRASS, YOU KNOW.
BUT NO, I AGREE WITH I'M NOT I'M NOT SAYING THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AWAY WITH.
I JUST DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DATE HAD TO DO WITH IT, BUT NOW I DO.
I MEAN, I THINK I DO, I HAVE I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT.
ARE WE LIMITING INFILL WITH THE TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES PROVIDED? BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE OLDER HOMES, ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE A DRIVEWAY LONG ENOUGH OR THEY MAY.
WELL, THEY MAY NOT. AND IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN THEY DON'T GET TOO CLOSE TO WALL OFF THEIR GARAGE.
OKAY. FOR ME, AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE AND I DON'T REMEMBER THE DATES, I'M JUST USING IT AS AN EXAMPLE.
A LOT OF HOMES WERE FINISHED AT DIFFERENT DATES, AND THEY MAY HAVE BEEN BUILDING 2 OR 3 HOUSES AT ONE TIME IN ONE HOUSE OR TWO HOUSES MAY HAVE BEEN FINISHED JANUARY 30TH, 2015.
THE. THE THIRD ONE WAS FINISHED DECEMBER OF 15.
[00:35:01]
THESE TWO HOUSES, THEY CAN ENCLOSE THEIR GARAGES.THEY DON'T HAVE TO BUILD ANYTHING IN THE NEXT ONE DOWN.
THEY HAVE TO HAVE ENOUGH ROOM ON THEIR LOT TO BUILD ANOTHER ENCLOSED GARAGE DOWN THERE.
AND I POINT TO. THAT'S A GOOD POINT.
THERE'S NO THERE'S NO PERFECT SYSTEM.
SO THAT'S ALL I CAN ANSWER TO THAT.
I BUILT THE FIRST HOUSE IN EAST HARRIS AND MOVED IN IN 99.
SO, I GUESS I COULD CLOSE OFF MY GARAGE IF I WANTED TO.
I'VE GOT PLENTY OF DRIVEWAY TO HAVE THE TWO OUTSIDE PARKING SPACES.
I HAVE NO SUCH PLANS TO DO THAT.
BUT AND I THINK IT WOULD DEVALUE THE HOUSE, BUT THAT ALL I'M SAYING IS THAT IT EITHER GET RID OF THE REQUIREMENT AT ALL BECAUSE WE'RE NOT REALLY ENFORCING IT, OR IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT REQUIREMENT, MAKE THAT THE DATE THAT GOES INTO THIS.
AND IF TO YOUR POINT, IF YOU'VE GOT A REALLY OLD HOUSE ON A TINY LITTLE LOT THAT'S GOT A ONE CAR GARAGE OR WHATEVER IT'S GOT, AND REALLY, IT'S BARELY ENOUGH DRIVEWAY TO PULL INTO THE GARAGE, THEY CAN'T CREATE THOSE TWO OFF STREET SPACES AND THEREFORE THEY DON'T GET THE BENEFIT OF THIS CHANGE.
AND THEY COME IN AND THEY SAY, WELL, EVENTUALLY I'M GOING TO ENCLOSE THAT.
THEN IT OUGHT TO REMAIN, YOU KNOW, A HOUSE WITH A TWO CAR GARAGE.
SO TO ME, I'M IN FAVOR OF JUST STRIKING THE DATE.
I'M IN FAVOR OF EVERYTHING THAT'S WRITTEN HERE.
BUT STRIKING THE DATE, YOU STRIKE THE DATE.
WHAT THAT MEANS IS ANYBODY WITH A TWO CAR GARAGE, ANYBODY, INCLUDING SOMEBODY WHO JUST CAME IN AND BUILT THE HOUSE, CAN TURN RIGHT AROUND AND WALLED IT OFF AND HAVE PARKING IN THEIR DRIVEWAY FOR THE TWO SPACES.
IF THAT'S THE CASE, THEN THE LOGICAL THING TO DO IS DO AWAY WITH THE REQUIREMENT.
THAT'S IN THE NO. I GUESS WHAT I'M.
THAT'S THE, IT JUST IS LOGICAL TO ME.
THEN WE NEED TO NOT ADOPT ANY OF THIS.
THAT WOULD BE EXACTLY WHAT WE'VE GOT TODAY.
THAT YOU CAN CONVERT THAT SPACE AS LONG AS YOU PROVIDE TWO MORE ENCLOSED.
THAT'S WHAT WE THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING WE HAVE TODAY.
YEAH. THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TODAY.
I GUESS THAT WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THAT.
COULD IT, COULD IT BE AMENDED THAT THE DATE THE FINAL PLAT WAS APPROVED, LIKE FOR A SUBDIVISION? YOU KNOW, THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A VACANT LOT THERE FOR 20 YEARS, AND SOMEONE COMES IN AND BUILD ON IT.
THEY SHOULD KIND OF BE BOUND BY THE SAME REGULATIONS THAT THE OTHER HOMEOWNERS ARE SUBJECT.
YEAH. I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR ON RESEARCH.
THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO. SOMEONE HAS TO COME BACK AND PROVE THAT SITUATION ON THERE.
AND THAT WOULD BE A LOT OF RESEARCH.
YEAH. WELL, WE REALLY DON'T HAVE.
THAT MANY PLATTED SUBDIVISIONS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IN APPROXIMATELY 2015.
ANYTHING PLATTED? WELL, AROUND.
YEAH, THERE'S A FEW. A COMPROMISE.
AND OTHERS NEED MORE LIVING SPACE TO WITHOUT TRYING TO MAKE THE NEIGHBORHOOD LOOK.
WHO? WHO PROVES THAT? HOW IS THAT PROVEN THAT MY HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 2015.
IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN. WE DON'T KNOW THEM.
WE DON'T KNOW ALL THE DATES WILL BE.
THEY'LL BE PERMITTING HISTORY WITH THE CITY.
AND IN SOME CASES THERE IS THE HISTORY.
IN OTHER CASES THERE'S NOT SINCE 2015 OR A TAX RECORD, MAYBE PRIOR TO 2015.
WELL, THE POINT IS, WE'RE SAYING YOU CAN GO BACK AND LOOK AND SEE IF YOU HAD ANYTHING ISSUED TO BUILD A HOUSE ON THAT LOT SINCE 2015, AND IF THERE'S NOTHING THERE, THAT MEANS IT WAS BUILT BEFORE 2015.
SO THAT HISTORY EXISTS WITHIN THE RECORDS OF THE CITY.
I MEAN, THEY MAY BE ABLE TO PROVE WHEN IT WAS BUILT THROUGH, YOU KNOW, REAL ESTATE DOCUMENTS AND, YOU KNOW, CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS THAT WERE OF RECORD IN THE COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE OR LIKE, I'VE GOT THOSE, BUT THE CITY INDEPENDENTLY SHOULD HAVE THOSE RECORDS.
[00:40:07]
I MEAN, IT COMES TO ME DOWN TO EITHER WE DO THIS USING THE 2015 DATE OR WE JUST SCRAP ALL OF THAT.NOW, THE IF IF A PERSON, LET'S SAY THEY BUILT THE HOUSE IN 2017 AND THEY WANT TO ENCLOSE THEIR GARAGE AND PROVIDE THE TWO OFF-STREET SPACES WITHOUT ANOTHER ENCLOSED GARAGE, ISN'T THERE A VARIANCE MECHANISM BY WHICH THEY CAN? THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW IT SAYS SHALL BE PERMITTED AS LONG AS THERE ARE TWO OFF STREET PARKING SPACES PROVIDED.
ISN'T THAT A LEGAL QUESTION? WHICH THE ANSWER IS? THE SHALL IS A RULE THAT A VARIANCE COULD BE SOUGHT FROM IF THE CRITERIA IS MET.
THESE ARE SHELLS. THESE ARE RULES THAT CAN THE VARIANCE CAN BE GRANTED FROM OKAY OKAY.
SO SO THAT WOULD THAT'S THE WAY OUT FOR A PERSON ASSUMING THEY CAN GET THE VARIANCE.
AND IT'LL WORK. THE VARIANCE PROCESS.
YEAH. WHICH WOULD BE THE CBA, AM I CORRECT? YES OKAY.
SO. BUT ISN'T THERE A ARE WE SAYING THERE'S A SHELL RIGHT NOW.
RIGHT. FOR THE WAY IT EXISTS RIGHT NOW, THE WAY IT'S DRAFTED, THE WAY IT'S NOT.
I'M SAYING BEFORE THIS, NOT THE DRAFT, THE WAY IT EXISTS TODAY.
I IF SOMEONE COMES IN AND WANTS TO ENCLOSE THEIR GARAGE REGARDLESS OF WHEN THE.
WELL, LET'S SAY IT WAS THE HOUSE WAS BUILT BEFORE 2015, I'LL LOOK THAT UP.
I'M THINKING THAT THERE'S A SHELL THERE AND THEN THEY CAN ASK FOR A VARIANCE.
I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT IS THE CASE, BUT IF THAT'S HOW WE'RE DEFINING SHELL, THEN TO ME SHELL WAS MORE BLACK AND WHITE. BUT IF SHELL IS NOT BLACK AND WHITE, IF THERE'S A VARIANCE PROCESS IN THERE, THEN THEN I SAY WE JUST GET RID OF THIS ALTOGETHER AND AND LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS AND, AND EVALUATE EVERYTHING ON A THE ONLY THING ABOUT THAT IS THIS WOULD ALLOW ANYTHING PRIOR TO THAT DATE TO BE APPROVED AT A LOWER LEVEL, AT AT AT AT A STAFF LEVEL, I UNDERSTAND I UNDERSTAND THAT.
SO IF YOU TAKE A HOUSE THAT'S IN AN OLDER PART OF DECATUR THAT'S EXISTING, WE KNOW THAT THAT THAT HOUSE WAS BUILT PRIOR TO 2015, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO TO LOOK AT THAT AND SAY, YES, YOU CAN DO THIS.
YOU STILL HAVE TO PROVIDE THE TWO OFF STREET PARKING THAT ALLEVIATES PEOPLE PARKING ON THE STREET.
WE KNOW THAT THAT'S A THAT'S A PROBLEM INDICATOR.
AND SO THAT WOULD HELP TO ALLEVIATE THAT TO I JUST CAN'T IMAGINE THAT THAT THAT BACKLOG IS IS THAT BIG FOR THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE IN THE CITY.
AND ALL WE ARE GOING TO CHANGE ON THIS IS JUST THE DATE, AM I CORRECT? WELL, NO.
NO WANTS TO DO IS SCRAP WHAT I WOULD OFFER A MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT WITH THE DATE BEING CHANGED TO WHATEVER THAT DATE IS IN 2015. MARCH 23RD, 2015.
YEAH. THAT THAT THIS BE APPROVED.
IT CAN WIN OR LOSE AND LEAVE THE VERBIAGE THE WAY IT IS, EXCEPT FOR THE DATE CHANGE.
YES. AND WILL YOU'RE SAYING SO YOU HAVE A MOTION TODAY? THAT'S RIGHT. HE'S OFFERED A MOTION.
OKAY, SO I'VE GOT A MOTION FOR TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL CHANGING THE DATE TO WHATEVER IT IS.
2015. AND LEAVE THE VERBIAGE THE SAME.
DO I HEAR A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. I GOT A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER CROSS.
ALL IN FAVOR? AYE AYE AYE AYE.
[00:45:07]
WE HAVE RVS, TRAVEL TRAILERS, OUR MOTORHOMES BEING NOT USED FOR ON SITE DWELLING PURPOSES IN THE TH TOWNHOME RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT 2F2 FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT CO OFFICE DISTRICT C ONE RESTRICTED BUSINESS DISTRICT.ALSO THE C1A WHICH IS THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT.
THE LEIGH LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND HIGH HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
ARE THERE ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THAT? MONOPOLIZING MY MICROPHONE.
BUT THE ONLY PROBLEM I HAVE WITH ANY OF THOSE IS IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO ME THERE MIGHT NEED TO BE SOME EXCEPTION MADE FOR A SECURITY LIKE A WATCHMAN WHO MAY RESIDE ON IN SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON PREMISES ONLY.
I'M ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE TWO INDUSTRIALS IN 2.08 AND 2.09.
SO I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE, WE DO HAVE PLANS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH ALLOWING FOR LIMITED USE OF RVS, TRAVEL TRAILERS AND MOTORHOMES IN SEVERAL DISTRICTS, AND THEY'LL BE BASED ON ON DIFFERENT USES.
IF YOU HAVE A REMODEL AT A HOUSE.
BUT THOSE ARE THOSE ARE CHANGES THAT ARE COMING DOWN THE LINE.
IT MAY BE SEVERAL MONTHS BEFORE WE CAN ACTUALLY ADOPT THOSE.
THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE CAN ADD INTO THAT AT THAT TIME.
SPECIAL EVENTS THINGS LIKE THAT, THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, WE'RE CAPTURING THAT AND ALLOWING FOR PEOPLE TO USE THOSE MOTOR HOMES ON A LIMITED BASIS AND IN A SPECIFIC TIME PERIOD.
SURE. AND THEN IT'S JUST IN THOSE TWO DISTRICTS, IF THEY HAVE A USE LIKE THAT, THAT MAKES SENSE.
THEY CAN COME FORWARD, REQUEST AN SUP, AND IF IT MAKES SENSE, THEN WE CAN GRANT IT.
THE COUNCIL CAN GRANT IT OR A SECURITY OR I'M NOT SURE HOW TO PHRASE THAT, BUT THAT'S WHAT I HAVE IN MIND, IS LIKE A, YOU KNOW, A NIGHTWATCHMAN OR SOMEBODY LIKE THAT WHO LIVES ON SITE TO OR MAYBE EVEN, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY HAVE SHIFTS WHERE THEY WROTE ONE, YOU KNOW, TWO DAYS, THIS GUY'S THERE, THE NEXT TWO DAYS ANOTHER GUY'S THERE, BUT IT'S ON SITE SECURITY PURPOSES, RIGHT, WITH AN SUP.
AND THEN THE PROBLEM IS RESOLVED.
I HAVE NO OTHER CONCERNS ABOUT ANY OF THOSE OTHER SLIDES.
COMMISSIONERS, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? CAN I ASK WHY ARE WE SINGLING OUT THESE PARTICULAR DISTRICTS? BECAUSE THE OTHER DISTRICTS ALREADY HAVE THAT PROHIBITION IN IT AND OH, OKAY, THEY ARE ALREADY THERE.
BUT THESE DISTRICTS THAT PROHIBITION DID NOT GET IN THERE.
AND IT'S A IT'S A CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE.
IT DOES AFFECT PROPERTY VALUES.
WHENEVER YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT PULL UP AND RESIDE IN A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE ON PROPERTIES.
AND OF COURSE, IT'S A, IT'S A SAFETY CONCERN ALSO.
YEAH, THERE WAS SEVERAL OF THEM THAT WE HAD PROHIBITIONS THAT ARE IN THE ZONING DISTRICT, BUT WE DID NOT HAVE THEM IN THESE SO SF1 SF2 MANUFACTURED HOMES, C-2, PD AND CDD ALREADY PROHIBITED.
NOT CD. CD IS NOT NOT A ZONING DISTRICT.
YEAH IT IS. IT'S AN OVERLAY DISTRICT, RIGHT? NO, IT'S THE CONVENTION DISTRICT.
OKAY. IT'S A SPECIAL DISTRICT.
YES. AND NOW THE MANUFACTURED HOME DISTRICT DID NOT HAVE THAT.
AND WE HAVE DECIDED TO NOT ENFORCE THAT AT THIS TIME UNTIL WE CAN PROVIDE FURTHER LANGUAGE THAT WILL ACCOMMODATE PEOPLE FOR FUTURE EVENTS ON THAT.
WE'VE ALREADY GOT SOME SPACES THAT ARE BEING RENTED OUT IN THE MANUFACTURED HOME DISTRICT FOR RECREATIONAL VEHICLES, AND SO WE'VE JUST DECIDED WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND LEAVE THOSE IN PLACE SO THAT PEOPLE DO HAVE A PLACE, AN OPTION TO GO TO IF THEY NEED TO.
[00:50:04]
SO THIS DOESN'T ELIMINATE SOMEONE.LET'S TAKE HOSE OUT OF IT THAT HAVE RESTRICTIONS ON THIS TYPE OF THING.
IT DOESN'T ELIMINATE SOMEONE FROM PARKING THEIR THEIR RV IN A IN A IN A.
IT JUST ELIMINATES SOMEONE LIVING OUT OF IT, EVEN TEMPORARILY, EVEN FOR A DAY OR TWO.
AND LIKE I SAID, WE DO HAVE PLANS ON BRINGING FORTH SOME ORDINANCE THAT WILL ALLOW FOR THAT IN CERTAIN SITUATIONS. BUT WE'VE GOT TO COME UP WITH A PERMITTING PROCESS.
YOU'RE TALKING LIKE SOMEBODY COMING IN TO VISIT.
IF SOMEONE COMES TO VISIT, YOU KNOW, IF YOU HAVE A WEEKEND VISITOR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
YOU STILL NEED TO TO PULL A PERMIT WITH THE CITY SO THAT WE'RE WE RECOGNIZE WHERE THAT'S AT.
WE KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON THERE.
I GOT VISIONS OF CHRISTMAS VACATION.
YES. YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH YEAH.
SO THAT WAY THEY'RE RIGHT THERE.
THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO LEASE ANOTHER SPACE OR MOVE AWAY FROM FROM THEIR FROM THEIR HOME.
THAT'S THEIR THAT'S WHILE IT'S BEING REMODELED.
WE HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT BECAUSE IT'S IT'S PROHIBITED IN THE ORDINANCE.
OKAY. SO WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING IS WHERE EVERYBODY'S OKAY WITH THIS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, AND THAT'LL BE WITH AN SOP OR AN SEP. THAT TOO.
YES SIR. YEAH THAT'S MY YES THAT'S FINE.
I NEED A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL.
WITH THOSE EXCEPTIONS, I WOULD OFFER A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR ALL OF THESE ITEMS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW WITH REGARD TO THE RECREATIONAL USE VEHICLES, EXCEPT WITH REGARD TO 2.082.09 AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT, THAT ONE SUCH TRAILER SHOULD BE APPROVED WITH AN SUP FOR SECURITY PURPOSES.
OKAY, I'VE GOT A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
BASED ON WHAT? MASON JUST SAID.
I'VE GOT A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER LANIER.
AYE. THOSE OPPOSED? OKAY. DEDRA.
YOU SPEAKING FASTER THAN I CAN WRITE.
ALL RIGHT. NEXT SLIDE OR PREVIOUS SLIDE? YES. WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THE C ONE, A ZONING DISTRICT, WHICH IS THE DECATUR SQUARE BUSINESS DISTRICT.
AND RIGHT NOW THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS THAT WE SHOULD SUPPORT RESIDENTIAL USES IN OUR DOWNTOWN DISTRICT, WHILE RIGHT NOW THAT'S NOT PERMITTED.
SO THIS LANGUAGE WILL ALLOW SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED STRUCTURES AND SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED STRUCTURES TO BE LOCATED IN THE C-1A ZONING DISTRICT AND THE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED OR TOWNHOMES.
THEY CAN'T NECESSARILY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS IN THE ZONING DISTRICT.
SO WHAT IT SAYS IS THAT WITH ALL REGULATIONS FOR TOWNHOME STRUCTURES LOCATED IN THE TH DISTRICT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF SIZE OF YARD SIZE OF LOTS, MINIMUM FLOOR AREA AND PARKING, WHICH SHALL BE REGULATED BY THE C-1A REGULATION AND THE C-1A REGULATION.
THERE'S REALLY NOT ANY SETBACK REQUIREMENTS.
SO WE'RE SAYING THAT'S OKAY FOR RESIDENTIAL IN THE C-1A FOR ATTACHED, SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED AND SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED. BARREN APARTMENTS LIKE THE PLAN WHERE THEY BACKED OUT AND THEY'VE NEVER COME BACK TO US.
SO THERE WAS GOING TO BE A COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT HAD SOME NUMBER THAT'S STILL ALLOWED.
THAT'S NOT AFFECTED BY THIS AT ALL? NO. THANK YOU.
YOU'RE WELCOME. SO WITHIN C-1A, WE'RE ALL WE'RE JUST SAYING IS, IF THERE'S A LOT SOMEBODY WANTS TO BUILD A HOME, IT'S GOING TO BE GOVERNED BY.
[00:55:11]
THESE ALONG ALONG THE THE REGULATIONS IN THE C-1A.I'M GOING TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY HOME ON A LOT.
I CAN'T MEET THE 25 FOOT FRONT YARD SETBACK.
I CAN'T MEET THE 10% LOT WIDTH, BUT BECAUSE I'M IN THE C-1, A ZONING DISTRICT, I DON'T HAVE TO.
HOW FAR DOES C1-A EXTEND OUT? IT'S IT'S NOT A BIG AREA.
JUST. I MEAN, IS IT LIKE A LIKE A BLOCK? IT'S A COUPLE OF BLOCKS, A SQUARE.
YEAH, AND IT'S KIND OF A RECTANGULAR AREA, BUT THEN THERE'S KIND OF A JUT NORTH AND SOUTH, SO.
AND THE BUILDING CODE AND FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS WOULD STILL BE IN PLACE FOR THIS.
IT DOES NOT IMPACT BUILDING CODE OR FIRE CODE REQUIREMENTS.
CHERYL'S LOOKING FOR THE MAP RIGHT NOW.
SO I THINK WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE MAP.
YEAH, I SAID PEACH, BUT IT'S REALLY MORE MAUVE.
PEACH. PEACH IS TO THE WEST AND A LITTLE BIT TO THE EAST.
I DON'T THINK I IN THEORY I'M OF ANY.
DOES THIS COME UP BEFORE? I'M JUST CURIOUS. IS THIS COME UP BEFORE? DOES THIS COME UP BEFORE? NO, IT'S JUST THAT OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH, YOU KNOW, WE SPEND A LOT OF TIME AND A LOT OF EFFORT TO ADOPT, IS RECOMMENDING THIS.
I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEM WITH IT.
I'M JUST WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE, JUST TRYING TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS TO UNDERSTAND.
NO, NO, NO, YOU'RE YOU'RE YOU'RE FINE.
YOU'RE FINE. WE JUST WANT TO BE PROACTIVE.
SO. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? OKAY, HERE I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DENIAL TO CITY COUNCIL.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL AS WRITTEN.
I'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE BY COMMISSIONER BERUBE.
I'LL SECOND. I'VE GOT A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER JOHN LANIER.
DEDRA. RUN, RUN! ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT ITEM HAS TO DO WITH AWNINGS OR CANOPIES NO.
NO, BECAUSE THEY APPROVED THE PREVIOUS.
I'LL LET YOU TALK ABOUT THAT ONE.
ABSOLUTELY. SO SEVERAL MONTHS AGO THE I'M SORRY, THE MAIN STREET BOARD, MAIN STREET BOARD APPROACHED US WANTING TO KNOW ABOUT REMOVING CANOPIES FROM DOWNTOWN.
RIGHT NOW, IN OUR ZONING ORDINANCE, IF YOU BUILD SOMETHING DOWNTOWN AND AND SPECIFICALLY ON THE SQUARE, IT HAS TO HAVE A CANOPY OVER THE ENTRY.
I'M SURE YOU'RE ALL AWARE OF THE SITUATION THAT TOOK PLACE IN BRIDGEPORT SEVERAL YEARS AGO.
I WAS APPROACHED BY ONE OF THE BUILDING OWNERS DOWN THERE.
[01:00:03]
HE'S VERY LEERY ABOUT HIS CANOPIES AND WANTS TO REMOVE THEM, AND HE'S CONCERNED THAT THEY WILL MORE DETERIORATE MORE OVER THE NEXT FEW YEARS AND CAUSE PROBLEMS. RATHER THAN TAKE THEM DOWN COMPLETELY, RE-ENGINEER THE STRUCTURE AND PUT THEM BACK UP.WANTED TO SEE IF WE COULD ELIMINATE THAT REQUIREMENT.
GOING TAKING THAT BEFORE THE MAIN STREET BOARD.
THEY LOOKED AT IT AND THEY SAID, LOOK, WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO PROHIBIT THAT.
SO THAT IS WE REMOVED THE WORD SHALL IN THERE AND PUT MAY IN ITS PLACE.
SO THEY MAY PROVIDE AN AWNING OR A CANOPY.
AT THE SAME TIME, WE ADDED SOME MORE LANGUAGE IN THERE TO COVER AWNINGS AND CANOPIES THAT MAKE THEM MORE SAFE AS THEY GO IN. SOME OF THOSE THINGS INCLUDE THAT THE MINIMUM HEIGHT WILL BE SEVEN FEET.
NOW, THAT'S AN ADA REQUIREMENT ALSO THAT IT ALLOWS FOR THAT.
IT BRINGS IT INTO OUR CODE SO THAT WE ALREADY HAVE THAT IN THERE THAT THE CANDY CANOPIES SHALL NOT EXTEND OR OVERLAP THE SIDEWALK, BUT SHALL NOT EXTEND NOT MORE THAN FIVE FEET BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINE.
SO IT LIMITS THE SIZE ON THAT.
IF THEY DO PUT THIS UP, WE WANT AN ENGINEERED DESIGN ON THIS.
THESE ARE OLDER BUILDINGS DOWNTOWN.
YEAH. AND WE WENT AHEAD AND PUT IN A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT.
IF THEY EXTEND MORE THAN ONE FOOT FROM THE BUILDING, THEN WE WANT THAT ENGINEERED DESIGN ON THAT IF IT'S ONE FOOT OR LESS, IF IT'S ONE OF THE SMALL BROWS THAT GOES OVER THERE, I THINK WE CAN WE CAN IN-HOUSE LOOK AT THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN GOOD SHAPE ON THERE.
AND THEN GROUND SUPPORT IS NOT ALLOWED FOR CANOPIES.
SO WE JUST REMOVE THAT OFF THERE.
AND WITH THOSE THINGS WE TOOK THAT BACK TO THE MAIN STREET BOARD.
THEY UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THESE CHANGES ON THERE AND SAID, PLEASE TAKE THIS FORWARD.
SO BRINGING IT FORWARD TO PNC FOR THEIR APPROVAL OR RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.
DO WE CURRENTLY HAVE ANYTHING ON THE SQUARE THAT'S LOWER THAN SEVEN FOOT? NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.
OKAY. THERE ARE SEVERAL THAT ARE GONE THAT ARE MISSING COMPLETELY.
THEY'VE DONE SOME WORK ON AND TAKEN THEM DOWN AND NOT BEEN REPLACED CURRENTLY.
AND THERE'S SOME THAT EXTEND OUT MORE THAN FIVE FEET RIGHT NOW.
BUT THIS WOULD GIVE SOME UNIFORMITY TO IT.
AND ALSO SHOULD BE MORE STRUCTURALLY STABLE.
WERE THERE THAT MORNING. I FORGOT ABOUT THAT.
WAS THERE THERE WOULD DEFINITELY BE A LOT MORE STRUCTURALLY STABLE THAN THE SEVEN FOOT WOULD.
OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. HEARING NONE, I'LL GO AHEAD AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DENIAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
OKAY. I'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE FROM COMMISSIONER KLOSE.
I NEED A SECOND, I WILL SECOND.
WE'VE GOT A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER WOODRUFF.
AYE, AYE. THOSE OPPOSED? OKAY. DEDRA REPORTS.
NEXT ITEM HAS TO DO WITH THE ACCESSORY DWELLINGS.
AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, PRESENTLY WE DON'T HAVE A RESTRICTION, SO THERE CAN BE MORE THAN ONE ACCESSORY DWELLING ON A LOT.
OF COURSE, THERE WOULD BE DICTATED BY THE LOT COVERAGE, BUT YOU DO HAVE SOME LARGE LOTS THAT COULD ALLOW DEFINE ACCESSORY DWELLING.
IT'S JUST AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE THAT SOMEONE CAN LIVE IN, LIKE A WHAT DO THEY CALL IT? MOTHER IN LAW FLAT? YEAH. WHAT ABOUT THE DEFINITION OF A LOT? LIKE SEVERAL PROPERTIES.
THEY MAY BE DESCRIBED AS LOT ONE, TWO, THREE AND FOUR OF BLOCK FIVE.
[01:05:08]
LOT FOUR OWNED? MY THINKING IS IT REFERS TO THE INDIVIDUAL LOT, NOT THE.THAT'S WAS KIND OF MY CONCERN.
REMEMBER, WE ALSO HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT IF YOU'RE CHANGING THE FOOTPRINT ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY, WHICH THIS WOULD BE A CHANGE, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PLAT IT OR REPLAT IT SO THAT YOU WOULDN'T HAVE THOSE MULTIPLE LOTS.
YOU WOULD SPLIT THE THE BIG LOT INTO LOTS ONE AND TWO.
YEAH. NOW THERE MAY BE SOME OLD HOUSES THAT GOOD.
IT'S PRETTY GOOD TOO. BUT ALSO THE DEFINITION OF ACCESSORY DWELLING MIGHT BE HELPFUL.
A SUBORDINATE BUILDING THAT IS DETACHED FROM THE MAIN BUILDING, USED AS A RESIDENCE AND IS NOT INVOLVED IN THE CONDUCT OF A BUSINESS IS THAT IN THE ORDINANCE THE DEFINITION? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DENIAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
OKAY. I'VE GOT A MOTION FOR APPROVAL FROM.
OR TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FROM COMMISSIONER KLOSE.
I'LL SECOND THAT. I'VE GOT A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER BERUBE.
AND ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE, AYE.
THOSE OPPOSED? DEDRA. ALL RIGHT.
CARPORTS. DO YOU HAVE THE FLOOR? SO I THINK EVERYBODY IN HERE HAS BEEN INVOLVED WITH THE CARPORT DISCUSSION OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
IT'S STILL MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS FOR SETBACKS, FOR PLANNING LOT COVERAGE.
IT PROVIDED SOME INFORMATION ON MAXIMUM SIZES AS FAR AS LENGTH, WIDTH AND HEIGHT, BUT PROVIDED AN SUP TO EXCEED ANY OF THOSE DIMENSIONS.
AND WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF TRYING TO GET AN ENGINEER TO DESIGN A STANDARD DETAIL THAT RESIDENTS CAN USE IN LIEU OF PROVIDING AN ENGINEERED DESIGN.
THERE IS A VARIANCE PROCESS THAT CAN BE SOUGHT THROUGH THAT.
CAN WE CHANGE THAT TO AN SUP? I'M SORRY. CAN WE CHANGE THAT TO AN SUP? I'LL DO ANYTHING YOU GUYS WANT TO DO ON THAT.
THAT'S THE ONLY COMMENT I HAD ON ANY OF THESE PARTICULAR CARPORTS.
OR THE ONE MORE THAN ONE CARPORT.
THE ONE CARPORT IS PERMITTED, AND ANY ADDITIONAL CARPORT WOULD REQUIRE AN SUP.
I THINK GETTING AN SUP FROM US IS EASIER THAN GOING THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS.
PROBABLY, AND ALLOWS IT TO RUN ALL THE WAY UP TO THE COUNCIL, WHICH I THINK WOULD.
NOW, HERE'S THE OTHER LANGUAGE WE WEREN'T SURE ABOUT.
WE HAD A DISCUSSION ON THIS THIS AFTERNOON THAT WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE TWO ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING SPACES.
THAT'S ALREADY THERE. WE'VE ESTABLISHED THAT.
[01:10:06]
REGARDLESS OF A OF ANY REQUIREMENT, TO PROVIDE ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING.A CARPORT SHALL BE ALLOWED, REGARDLESS OF ANY REQUIREMENT, TO PROVIDE AND CLOSED OFF STREET PARKING.
WHICH ONE DO YOU HAVE TO? WHY DO WE HAVE TO SAY THAT? WHY ISN'T THAT UNDERSTOOD? IT'S NOT. IT'S NOT PROHIBITED BY ANYTHING, IS IT? WELL, AND I'M GOING TO LET DEDRA SPEAK TO THIS, BECAUSE THAT THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THAT THE ZONING ORDINANCE DOES.
IT PROHIBITS THAT WITHOUT THOSE TWO ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING SPOTS.
THAT THE ZONING ORDINANCE WOULD PROHIBIT THE CARPORTS.
BECAUSE OF THE TWO ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
IF WE DON'T ADD THE LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT SPECIFICALLY REFERENCES THAT.
I'M SAYING THAT IT COULD BE VIEWED AS A CONFLICT THAT THERE NEEDS.
WE WE PROBABLY NEED TO MAKE SOME KIND OF CLARIFICATION.
THERE COULD BE AN INTERPRETATION BY FUTURE STAFF TO INTERPRET THAT THE TWO ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING SPACES ARE REQUIRED PRIOR TO HAVING THE CARPORTS AND OKAY, THIS WOULD JUST ADD SOME PROVISION THAT SAYS NOTWITHSTANDING, NOTWITHSTANDING. ANYTHING ELSE HEREIN CONTAINED, WELL, YOU KNOW THAT NOTHING HEREIN SHALL PROHIBIT.
YES, SIR. THE CONSTRUCTION OF CARPORTS TO COVER ANY ADDITIONAL OFF STREET SPACES.
MY THOUGHTS ON IT WERE THAT THE CARPORT PORTION OF THIS ORDINANCE STANDS ALONE, AND YOU COULD YOU CAN PULL THAT OUT AND SAY CARPORTS ARE ALLOWED.
AND THESE CONDITIONS, HOWEVER, I CAN SEE DEIRDRE'S POINT THAT THERE COULD BE A POTENTIAL CONFLICT BETWEEN THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE CARPORT ORDINANCE.
LIKE SOMEONE COMES ALONG AND DOES THIS.
I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE CONFLICT IS.
SO IF NEW STAFF WERE IN PLACE, THE STAFF THAT'S IN PLACE NOW UNDERSTANDS THE INTENT BEHIND WHAT THIS WHAT THIS ORDINANCE IS SUPPOSED TO DO YEARS DOWN THE LINE AND EVERYBODY ELSE HAS MOVED ON.
LIVES ON A BEACH IN THE BAHAMAS, AND THIS STAFF HAS MOVED ON TO SOME OTHER PLACES TOO.
AND NOW YOU CAN HAVE A CARPORT, WHICH IS BASICALLY WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW.
THIS SEPARATES THOSE COMPLETELY AND SAYS REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS ARE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE, YOU CAN STILL ALLOW FOR A CARPORT.
AND I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AND I'M SORRY IF I'M NOT.
SO I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS IF A, IF THERE'S AN EXISTING HOUSE THAT DOESN'T HAVE A TWO ENCLOSED SPACES, THEY WOULD FIRST HAVE TO PROVIDE TWO ENCLOSED. IT COULD BE INTERPRETED THAT, THAT THEY WOULD FIRST HAVE TO HAVE TWO ENCLOSED SPACES BEFORE THEY HAVE.
OKAY. AND THIS WOULD PREVENT THAT FROM, FROM FROM US UNDOING THE WORK THAT WE'RE DOING HERE TODAY.
YES. AND I WOULD LEAN ON LEGAL TO CLEAN UP MY WORDING OKAY, OKAY.
BUT IT SAYS CARPORTS SHALL BE ALLOWED REGARDLESS OF ANY REQUIREMENT FOR ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING.
THERE IS A REQUIREMENT IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR ENCLOSED OFF STREET PARKING.
ISN'T THAT PERHAPS WHERE THIS LANGUAGE SHOULD GO? IS THERE FOR CARPORTS? I'M SORRY. WELL, WELL, YOU JUST SAID THE THE PROBLEM.
[01:15:04]
WHERE IS THE WHERE IS THE LANGUAGE LOCATED THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT INTERPRETING? IS IT HERE.WELL, THIS IS ALL IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
OKAY. BUT THE LOCATION OF THAT LANGUAGE IS WHERE IT SEEMS TO ME THERE SHOULD BE AN EXTRA SENTENCE ADDED OR A SUBSECTION OR WHATEVER WORKS TO THE THE ENCLOSED PARKING CONCESSION AND SAY, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY THE THE REQUIREMENTS ABOVE, NOTHING HEREIN SHALL BE DEEMED TO PROHIBIT I CAN ACCESS THE PARKING AFTER WE ADD IT TO THE CARPORTS WE ADDED IN ONE PLACE.
IF WE ADD IT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE WHERE ALL THAT'S AT, IT'S IN EACH ZONING DISTRICT.
WE WOULD HAVE TO ADD A SENTENCE TO EVERY ZONING DISTRICT.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING EITHER.
I JUST AND I WOULD LEAN ON LEGAL TO FIGURE OUT THE WORDING OF ALL OF THAT.
YES. THERE'S THERE'S PROBABLY A MORE ELOQUENT WAY TO PLACE.
I DO HAVE SOME OTHER COMMENTS, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS TO THAT.
I GOT A PEN. OKAY, SO THE THING THAT THERE'S ONE PROBLEM, OKAY, THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WOULD I WOULD SAY WE DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO LOOK AT THESE STANDARD DESIGNS.
AND I THINK THAT'S SOMEWHAT OF AN IMPORTANCE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, TO TO REALLY FULLY APPROVE THIS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THOSE STANDARD DESIGNS AND DESIGNS AND PUT MY BUILDER HAT AND SAY, IS THIS IS THIS REASONABLE? IS THIS DOES THIS SEEM LIKE, YOU KNOW, AVERAGE JOE HOMEOWNER WOULD BE ABLE TO USE THESE AVERAGE DESIGNS? SO THAT'S MY FIRST COMMENT.
MY SECOND COMMENT IS SOMETHING THAT I BROUGHT UP DURING THE DURING THE CARPORT ADVISORY COMMITTEE IS THAT YOU CAN HAVE WHAT WHAT YOU, WHAT YOU WERE TELLING ME AT THE TIME.
AND WHAT I'M STILL READING IN HERE IS TO, TO BUILD A CARPORT.
RIGHT. BUT I CAN HAVE THE SAME STRUCTURE IN THE BACKYARD AND CALL IT A PAVILION OR A PATIO COVER AND NOT HAVE TO HAVE IT ENGINEERED. AND THAT TO ME IS IS WRONG AS A BUILDER IF THEY'RE THE SAME STRUCTURE.
GIVEN, YOU KNOW THAT THEY'RE THEY HAVE THE SAME WIND FORCES.
THEY HAVE ALL OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, SUBJECTED TO.
THEY OUGHT TO HAVE THE SAME REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF BUILDING THOSE THINGS.
AND THAT'S MY THAT'S MY BIGGEST PROBLEM WITH THE ENGINEERING.
I'M NOT I ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT.
THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE TO BE ENGINEERED, I JUST THINK THAT IF THERE'S ANOTHER STRUCTURE OUT THERE, OUT THERE THAT THAT CAN LITERALLY BE BUILT OUT OF THE SAME MATERIALS, BE THE SAME SIZE, BE THE SAME EVERYTHING, AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ENGINEERED.
I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT AS A BUILDER, AND I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT COMPLETELY.
I HOWEVER, NOT ASKING YOU TO MAKE PAVILIONS BE ENGINEERED AS WELL.
I'M JUST SAYING THOSE TWO THINGS DON'T GO TOGETHER.
THERE IS A WAY TO GO COMPLETELY AROUND.
SO WE'RE PROVIDING TWO OPPORTUNITIES TO GO AROUND THE ENGINEERING REQUIREMENT.
ONE OF THEM IS TO USE THE STANDARD DESIGN.
YEAH, SURE. OF COURSE WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT.
THE SECOND WAY IS TO USE A PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD OUT OF THE BUILDING CODE.
SO ANYTHING IN THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDENTIAL CODE, IF YOU CAN BUILD IT STRAIGHT OUT OF THE BUILDING CODE WITH YOUR HEADER DIMENSIONS, OR IF YOU GO TO GET AN LVL THAT IS PRE-ENGINEERED AND YOU PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION, ABSOLUTELY.
YOU CAN GO AROUND THAT ENGINEERING REQUIREMENT ON THAT AT ANY TIME, AS LONG AS YOU'RE MEETING THOSE REQUIREMENTS FOR WHAT THAT PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD FOR DOING THAT IS.
WOULDN'T THAT BE EASIER? TO A POINT OF COURSE THERE IS NO THERE'S ONLY A LIMITED AMOUNT OF PRESCRIPTIVE METHODS THAT ARE IN THE RESIDENTIAL CODE.
SO IT DOES LIMIT THE LENGTH OF DIMENSIONED LUMBER THAT YOU WOULD USE ON THERE.
SO YOU CAN ONLY GO SO HIGH WITH A WITH A TWO BY 12, RIGHT? YOU COULD ONLY OR GO SO WIDE WITH A TWO BY 12 BEFORE YOU WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE ANOTHER SUPPORT IN BETWEEN THERE.
[01:20:07]
THAT. SO THERE'S, THERE'S SOME THERE'S SOME DISTANCES DIFFERENCES IN THAT WHERE WITH A ENGINEERED DESIGN YOU CAN GO IN, YOU CAN BUILD IT OUT OF METAL, YOU CAN GO TO SEA PEARL AND ZEPPELIN TUBING AND THINGS.WHY DON'T WE ALLOW BOTH? I'M SORRY. WHY DON'T WE ALLOW BOTH IN HERE? I'M SORRY. I'M NOT FOLLOWING YOU.
YOU'RE SAYING YOU CAN DO THE PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD? MATH? WE COULD ALLOW THE PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD AS PRESCRIPTIVE METHOD IS ALWAYS ALLOWED.
SO SOMEBODY DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO GET ENGINEERED.
LOADING REQUIREMENTS. ALL RIGHT.
IT HAS TO MEET THE LOCAL REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS AN INCREASED WIND LOAD WHICH CAN STILL BE MET THROUGH THE PRESCRIPTIVE METHODS WITH CERTAIN CLIPS AND ANCHORS RIGHT ON THAT.
BUT THEN THE NEXT STEP UP IS TO PROVIDE THAT PRE-ENGINEERED SYSTEM, AND THEN THE DISTANCE FROM FROM THAT YOU WOULD GO TO A FULLY ENGINEERED SYSTEM.
I THINK I THINK WE'RE SAYING THE SAME THING.
THEY DO. AND AND THAT STRUCTURE HAS TO BE AT THE SAME THING.
YOU'RE STILL LOOKING AT THE SAME KINDS OF REQUIREMENTS.
MOST OF THE TIME THOSE PERGOLAS THAT ARE GOING UP, THEY COME IN AS PRE-ENGINEERED SYSTEMS. SIMPSON HAS A SYSTEM THAT THEY CAN YOU CAN GO IN AND BUILD A PERGOLA OR AND I'M SORRY, WHAT WOULD YOU CALL THE OTHER PATIO COVER PAVILION? SIMPSON HAS A SYSTEM THAT YOU CAN GO IN AND BUILD THOSE OUT OF, AND YOU CAN PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION SHOWING WHAT THEY WILL SUPPORT.
ABSOLUTELY. BUT MOST PEOPLE THAT WE SEE BRING THESE IN, THEY COME AND THEY COME WITH A KIT THAT HAS BEEN ENGINEERED, AND WE ALREADY HAVE THAT INFORMATION WHENEVER THEY BRING IT IN.
BUT I DID HAVE ONE THAT WENT UP IN SOUTH MARTIN BRANCH JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO.
AND HE CAME IN, GAVE ME HIS LVLS WENT OUT THERE, WE PUT HIS POST IN THE GROUND, MADE SURE WE HAD BEARING SURFACES ON THAT.
AND THAT'S THE WAY I WOULD DO IT.
ALL RIGHT. SO I WITHDRAW THAT CONCERN THEN.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? OKAY. HEARING NONE.
I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO ACCEPT WITH THE HOW AM I GOING TO SAY THIS, PAM? THE WAY I'VE DRAFTED. WELL, I'VE GOT SOME LANGUAGE DRAFTED, BUT FOR LEGAL TO RESOLVE ANY POTENTIAL CONFLICT WITH OTHER, OTHER OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
YUP, THE SUP FOR ANY ADDITIONAL CARPORT BEYOND THE FIRST ONE.
OKAY, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
I'M GOING TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DENIAL TO CITY COUNCIL.
I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET THOSE YET.
I CAN BRING THEM BACK TO YOU AS SOON AS I HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET THOSE STANDARD DESIGNS.
I'VE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF AN ISSUE GETTING THOSE IN HERE.
MOTION STILL ON THE FLOOR TO APPROVE OR DENY RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.
I'LL RECOMMEND APPROVAL AS THE MOTION WAS AMENDED.
OKAY. I'VE GOT A MOTION TO APPROVE FROM COMMISSIONER LANIER.
SECOND. I GOT A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER CROSS.
AYE. THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES.
[01:25:04]
NO. THE ADMINISTRATOR IS DEFINED IN THE ORDINANCE AS THE PERSON THAT ADMINISTERS THE ORDINANCE IN THIS CASE.WE PUT THAT HEALTH ORDINANCE TOGETHER.
WE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO TAKE CARE OF THAT AT THE LOWEST LEVEL.
OKAY, SO WE PUT THAT IN AS THE HEALTH INSPECTOR IS THAT LOWEST LEVEL ADMINISTRATOR, IT MOVES UP THE CHAIN FROM THERE FROM TO DEPARTMENT HEAD, CITY MANAGER AND THEN ON TO COUNCIL, WHO IS OUR CURRENT HEALTH INSPECTOR, MR. JOHNNY CAHOON. OKAY.
I THINK WITHOUT TALKING THIS OUT, I THINK MY ONLY CONCERN ABOUT THIS IS.
I MEAN, IF I'M TRYING TO THINK OF A LARGE SCALE SUBDIVISION THAT HAS AN HOA, THAT HAS A HAS LOCAL PARK AREA SUITABLE FOR THIS, AND THEY WANT TO HAVE AN HOA FUNCTION AND HAVE, YOU KNOW, MOBILE FOOD TRUCKS THERE.
THEY SHOULD BE, IT SEEMS TO ME THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO DO THAT.
AND I THINK THIS PRECLUDES THEM FROM DOING THAT.
IT ACTUALLY IF THEY HAVE AN HOA, THERE IS THIS IS ONLY A SMALL PORTION OF THE HEALTH ORDINANCE.
OKAY. THERE IS ANOTHER SECTION IN THERE THAT SAYS IF A HO IF A NEIGHBORHOOD HAS AN HOA AND THEY THE FOOD TRUCK OBTAINS THE PERMISSION OF THE HOA, THEY CAN GO TO THAT LOCATION.
NOW, IT DOES PRECLUDE THEM FROM OPERATING IN A RESIDENTIAL ZONE THAT DOES NOT HAVE AN HOA BECAUSE THERE'S NO APPROVAL, RIGHT? RIGHT, EXACTLY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. HEARING NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OR DENIAL OF CITY COUNCIL.
I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.
OKAY. I'VE GOT A MOTION FOR APPROVAL TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FROM COMMISSIONER KLOSE.
I NEED A SECOND. CAN I INTERJECT ONE LAST QUESTION? WE GOT ONE LAST QUESTION.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN ABOUT IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, IF THE ICE CREAM TRUCK GUY COMES AROUND AND DRIVES THROUGH AND WANTS TO SELL ICE CREAM TO THE KIDS, IS THAT DOES THIS PROHIBIT THAT? IT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION.
AND I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT IT SAYS BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT HAD AN ICE CREAM TRUCK HERE.
AND I PROBABLY GO THROUGH THE TOWNHOME NEIGHBORHOOD TOO, I WOULD GUESS.
SO, SOMEBODY PLEASE, I HAVE NO PROBLEM.
I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS, BUT SOMEBODY PLEASE CHECK ON THAT.
AND IF YOU NEED TO COME BACK WITH SOMETHING ELSE FOR THAT LINE, ABSOLUTELY.
WE WILL CHECK THAT ORDINANCE BECAUSE THAT MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO, TO ALLOW ICE CREAM TRUCKS BECAUSE THEY ARE A SEPARATE SECTION IN THE HEALTH ORDINANCE FOR THAT THEY'RE NOT CONSIDERED MOBILE FOOD UNITS LIKE FOOD TRUCKS ARE.
OKAY, WE'VE GOT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR APPROVAL.
I'M SORRY, FOR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.
AND WE'VE GOT A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER BERUBE.
AYE. THOSE OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES.
[ITEM 2: Discussion of future agenda new business items, staff requests and potential special called meeting and/or workshop requests: a. Special meeting on Tuesday, July 30, 2024, at 5:30 p.m. b. As of agenda posting, the August 6, 2024, meeting currently has no (0) potential new Planning applications. Submittal deadline was July 8, 2024, at 5:00 p.m.]
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING FOR THE MEADOW CREEK PHASE ONE.YOU GUYS GAVE THEM A 30 DAY EXTENSION AT YOUR LAST MEETING, SO THAT PUSHES THEM TO JULY 30TH.
AND JUST KEEP IN MIND, THIS IS PROBABLY GOING TO HAPPEN EVERY TIME THERE'S A 30 DAY EXTENSION.
IS THAT STATUTORY, OR IS THAT IN OUR ORDINANCES THAT LIMITS THOSE EXTENSIONS TO 30 DAYS, THAT'S STATUTORY THEY HAVE THE, WE CAN'T CREATE A 40 DAY EXTENSION IN ORDER TO AVOID THIS PROBLEM.
THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME TO THAT ARE SCHEDULED FOR AUGUST 6TH.
COULD THEY COME EARLIER? I THINK THEY'RE PLATS, SO.
SO WE'LL STILL HAVE THE SAME ISSUE IF THEY DECIDE, YOU KNOW, IF THEY DON'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS.
CHERYL, CAN WE PUT THOSE TWO ON THE AUGUST I MEAN ON THE JULY AGENDA.
WHAT'S KEEPING US FROM DOING THAT?
[01:30:04]
I THINK WE CAN YEAH, I THINK WE CAN.DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR CONCERNS? GOOD. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE SPECIAL MEETING.
IT IS NOW 7:06.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.