I've got yeah I've got that too yeah I don't yeah I think we might as well if we have time let's see how we're doing let's give it a minute for clay yeah here it comes all right we will call this code review and land use committee meeting to order today is June 4th 2024 and it is 5:00 uh we will move on to the minutes for approval um I would actually like to ask that we table those minutes to the next meeting um the last minute I was made aware of some corrections that probably need to be made to that so if everyone else is okay with that do you does anybody else have any other changes to the minutes I got change on page six um committee priority list Mr asked that there Chang CH to work and then on five cod track sheet asked if there are how were and then um on on that same sentence I spelled Cod not code it's supposed to be code so I need to make that change as well okay and then I've got a couple others so we I'll get with you and then we'll just update them and have at the next meeting for approval is that sound okay yes sir clay do we need to officially table that or we just yeah let's take an official motion official motion to continue to the next meeting motion to continue the meeting minutes to the following meeting have a motion in a second any public comment seeing none all those in favor say I I I any opposed motion carries all right we will go to number 3A business district Mr Wallace yes sir take us away so before we start I'm sorry guys so sorry but I want to remind everybody that we're currently live on YouTube so whenever you speaking your microphone just remember to turn it on okay thank you yeah so after our last meeting I was asked to make a few minor changes and I apologize the pages are not numbered but if you go would be page number four um Mr beerbom had requested some changes to the prohibition of vinyl siding um I added that we should not allow vinyl sighing on the front facade uh which would enable people to use on the rear of their buildings and other areas that are not visible from the street um on the next page down under where we spoke about awnings uh you had commented on the we had had it at 6 feet you'd asked why we did a survey I shouldn't say we um Mr strong did survey of the awnings out on Baldin Avenue and within the district and there was a pretty good average of between six and 12 feet for some so I I did amend that 10 feet uh I will admit I failed as another reference to six feet three lines below I need to make that change in the final draft and then there was also a comment regarding um making the actual own owner of the building provide the insurance not just the renter M so I added the word building there to cover um so it's specific that the actual owner of the building or the AI has to provide that insurance to the city okay so that is the changes that were made based upon where we were last time um I don't know if our last meeting because it's been a few months the amendment to our conference of plan implementing or the downtown business district was approved so that is now in our conference of plan so I would hope that I can get a motion to bring this forward to the city council to initiate the text amendment to Our Land Development code so we can at least get this initiated and then if we have to make future changes um it's a lot easier to amend it once it's adopted obviously that is up to the pleasure of the board the amendment process if we were to move forward with this tonight and then we we have some minor tweaks and stuff that we want to change is that amendment process uh like an ordinance where it has to be read twice or yes y okay so what I would do I would take to the council to initiate and then once I had that permission I would prepare all the appropriate documents send that to the planning board get their recommendation then run it through Council for both readings okay so we're still probably looking at 60 days at a minimum just because of the notification timelines and all that it requires now this would not change anybody's designation as of yet that's going to be a much more arduous process um they will still remain Zone the same way they are now but once we have it on our books as an actual District then we can go through the process of figuring out what the size of the district is where we going to start and actually amending the zoning map and future Lanes map to reflect the downtown business district okay so the what we did with the state was just establishing at it but it didn't establish the boundaries it all we did the way that the comprehensive plan is laid out it lays out those districts that you are allowed to designate property as so you create the districts now you have to designate okay okay uh my only other question was um I see in here like on page one there's uh uses that are allowed without review what about specific uses that we would not want downtown in a in a business district um for example uh it's one thing to have a repair shop for a car but to have like a almost like a a salvage yard or something like that right you don't there's certain things you do want you do want retail but you don't want certain things that you know are going to bring in an occupy space typically the way that I and Mr Aton May um back me up on this or contradict me here is that generally you have a list of uses that are allowed which is what we've got here you are not required to list those uses that are prohibited because if it does not fall under your list of uses that are approved without review it basically means that they're not allowed so it's a little redundant in our code where we talk about prohibited uses you really don't need that because you really rely on this is what's allowed if it's not under the list of things that are allowed by virtue that means it's prohibited Mr ainson I don't disagree with that that's a common interpretation of how to do it what I would tell this committee is you need to understand that that is the logic and the implementation of The Code by your planning director and planning department I will say that sometimes the mere exclusion of something from a list creating it being seen as prohibited can call problems um typically we see that with advancing um development standards Norms Trends you know sign being allowed but no reference to digital sign being allowed creating situation where a digital sign is prohibited might take that to a logical fault rather than an extreme um but where's that line between the extreme the fault and that analysis that's going to be very dependent on the planner you have at the time and will create questions so what I would suggest to the count to this committee is the best thing you can do without trying to address all future scenarios and every possible scenario today make sure you have a list that's either very clear if it's prohibited it's prohibited it's not prohibited therefore it's allowed if what you want to do is prohibit things Define what's prohibited if you want to do is say well I want all these things allowed the implication being something is is prohibited because it's not allowed there's going to be some gray area there so use your time as committee to determine exactly what the form of Regulation you want is it defining what you want defining what you don't want or to do both and you have those three options but that's what this committee's discussion point would in my opinion best be served to engage them and if that's the case there is a I mean all of our districts contain both those categories right now um if if the committee would like I can take all those list of prohibited uses that are included in the C1 District which is kind of what the allowable uses here are based on um I can certainly add that back in because I know there are a lot of things in there that would be undesirable not only C1 but also our downtown um I could easily add that portion in if you wanted to read that way gentlemen what are your what are your thoughts um I think that the list that's provided is is sufficiently Broad uh as to allow the activities that we expect without being overly limiting I think if we get it I would caution against trying to prevent any one thing explicitly um because you could end up triggering another similar use being omitted which we would want I Mr GRE um I guess my main concern is you know when when triangle downtown that was a great thing you know having them downtown was fantastic but what I don't want to see is is a repair shop that then uh comes in and stores a bunch of vehicles out there that sit out there for months if not years on end and it's not what we're going for in a downtown business district where we're primarily focused on retail and mixed use and that sort of stuff so I'm just wondering are there certain uses that we do want to that that's kind of where I'm coming from with are there certain uses we want to just go ahead and preemptively say hey that that's not compatible with a downtown business I say the one thing that we have we have repair shops in here and this is probably Antiquated language I mean I don't know when the last time I saw a shoe or a hat repair shop um in the downtown area or a watching the clock but it specifically defines those six or seven uses that are allowed under that repair the fact that automobile repair is not included in that list would essentially mean that they're prohibited I would that's that one I would actually be explicit on because we say repair shop someone's going to come in and make the arguments clay don't you think that's a little a little bit too loose too close to the what is a repair shop I think that one gets a little bit too loose so I would either explicit exclude them well mean we could even get into that situation we end up with a Jiffy Lube just for service I mean it's a service what you know what's not they're replacing they replaced a filter that's a repair I mean that's I mean I'm not even stretching the bounds of the mere words we're using in that so I do think You' to be careful yeah that one I'd be cautious on we have a computer repair shop downtown I engage in computer repair and yet it's not listed right here right but I would exclude the one that we're concerned about which is Automotive I think that's a good point and we do have gas station you'll see this a lot other similar Enterprises excluding automobile repair yeah or something like that where I think one of the things that we can help us that will help us is to look at the things that are being stored on site uh which is what we have with the industrial zoning and the C1 and C2 differentiation but we get into you know having certain types of chemicals on the property and whether or not they can be outside the building um that one would eliminate um you know like a it could eliminate like a JY Loop why would you do a JY Loop in the downtown makes no sense we're trying to promote walkability you have to cross the sidewalk with vehicular traffic this is similar to the incident we had or west call it inst with the Take Five O change it is only allowed in the C1 District as a special approval which is why it came before the council and will come back before the council based on the council's comments most of ours seat two AR we see two for the downtown or we see one I believe all of the area on the North side too south of 90 okay um is certainly C1 and then I believe the frontage along 90 on the North side is also C1 and then you get into some residential as you proceed North up to SLO okay um I I think that we would have a nightmare trying to regul how a gas station or a service station of that type would interact with what we're trying to do as pedestrian friendly um if the district was bigger certainly we would begin to make accommodations but limited the limited scope you can you can drive a block and get gas you can drive a couple blocks and get gas if you can't get gas and get out of the historic district or or um or the downtown district you you got a bigger problem than just getting gas yeah I mean I would say if somebody came my office and said hey I want to put up a JY lbe on the corner of 90 and 8th Street I would say it's not a permitted use you're not allowed and I feel confident if that went if they took it to the point where I disagree on going pay reports that we would win that argument now we're not extending all the way down to the Firestone are we we're right up to it aren't we is that the street that divides it the street it goes the f goes right up toone is fiet so they all repair as long as we don't cross the street to get into that one I'm fine yeah because they're on the east side of the road yep it's outside so we want to keep that outside of it existing use it's on the edge it's on your way out of town it makes sense sure same thing on the other end of town as we get to the other end of Bott it starts to make sense as we get to the edges of town um so I'm fine I'm fine with that one but I I would again I I would hate to make it life easy just say excludes Automotive yeah that's easy I mean that's that's a simple change that way it's explicit now now dealerships can be done in these environments I mean you go to Miami you're gonna have a Ferrari and a forche dealer inside of a downtown building I mean a dealership is different than a repair shop have um they have some of the services depending on the type I mean you look at you look at someone like Tesla that typically has a dealer like a dealer U what do you call that like walk up retail space and that's completely separate from their service centers that are typically located in industrial areas that are out away from and so that's one way we can do it but I think we need to be explicit it's like you can have Automotive Sales especially with indoor display really is we we can't have enough room to have outdoor display and do what we're trying to do I mean I've seen is it po postar I think has one at what mall was that we were at that had one in in the mall I remember I think it was in Birmingham so there a place like that in Miami yeah but Miami has no big deal for that high-end stuff um yeah if we had Tesla cell center I think that'd be very very cool and appropriate but I think we're a long way off but I would just I would just be cautious to just exclude automotive services and repair or let's just say repair yeah maybe repair and service would be yeah auto repair and service but that mean they can't that mean they can't sell cars not going to have them out in front of the shop because we can't be more than 5 feet back from your property line so there's nowhere to keep it right so why why don't we because we've kind of had this in our Mr Greg did you have any other comments good yeah why don't we go ahead and make a motion to move this forward with you know the discussion the edits that we've discussed tonight and move this forward to the council what do you think about that um or do we wanted to come back one more time there's a couple little things uh just word how how do you intend things like bike racks and uh and some of those things to be addressed in here because it mentions it in terms of building placement orientation and I'm I'm just want to be senstive that but we also want to be cautious of that I just got a couple of items that I'm looking at yeah I mean typically I would prefer see and it's the city's obligations provide B racks on the public rideway agre and not require correct individual Property Owners to place them on their property so you know I don't think there's any bu ranks downtown right now but we have the land forth there's plenty of areas where you can place them okay um so I feel like that's outside of this where that's more of a city responsibility um I don't know that needs to be addressed in terms of who's responsible for that who's not then on the um so I think we just want to be cautious because we do mention it mentioning his items I just want to make sure that we're not we don't start to confuse people in terms of requiring versus just mentioning them and and saying that hey you can do it you can set back to accommodate it but I'd rather those things were yeah that's really are you speaking about um building placement and orientation yeah yeah which allows those things within their yeah their little public space that they have out front on correct five right yeah so they are allowed there but the other one I had a question about was the materials the three materials um are you including the windows in that because if we're trying to do three materials remember we're we're not a um we're not an we are an old city but we're not an old city that um That Grew over and over again on top of multiple layers and has has been changing we really have maintained a very uh simple character you know our our color palette was traditionally white that's actually a unique aspect of the Chaka campus here um that's not how Victorian happened in other places our downtown masonry is very is is auster and and um and very utilitarian in its application we're not doing a lot of stone cornes I mean yes some buildings do have stone and concrete elements for decorative aspects but we don't have a whole lot of decorative columns and and a whole lot of material changes I mean our brick our brick block is really just a brick block with Windows and if it wasn't for the windows and the wood on the windows we really wouldn't have two materials so I get if we're trying to force multiple materials I get a little concerned because then people are just going to arbitrarily change materials just because we told them to and that I don't want to create a bad precedent I want to permit it but I don't want to you like in Texas I was working a community rock wall Texas they like Stone they want to see Stone they require 60% Stone I had to sit there and do the square footage on the entire building take out the windows figure out what's columns to get to 60 because I didn't want 60 we weren't we were in a private neighborhood they didn't want Stone everywhere um but again I just don't want to [Music] be arbitrary and if it includes the glass and it includes the frames around that um and we're just trying to get 25% brick just be careful this is what I'm saying there right and I don't want to require three if we can do it with two because most of these buildings are really just two um I how especially if you don't include the glass is what I'm saying you include the glass we're really just talking about two materials sure but again if you're looking at that center block what's the second material because we wouldn't call call the roof the second material even though it has a roof yeah well and I wouldn't prohibit anybody from and we would encourage if you want to use entirely facade with storefront windows that would be acceptable so do we want to say a minimum of 25% brick to encourage to use of brick but not materials that are permitted under section c and not okay require a minimum of three because I I feel like no entirely bre fa is appropriate I think it would be as well I would just eliminate the requirement for three so just take that out and say Bren Stone 25% minimum and everything else and she be in accordance with section c yes which that's in section c as well it does name that okay so we just take out B under three well I'll leave B in there but take out the three the minimum of three toide materials that's fine it does remember it does repeat it again though for the 25% in the next uh in under C and then the only one I had a question on was the um the awnings I want to make sure that we allow them to the back of curb or up to 10 feet but we don't want to allow them to go past the curb do we I do not believe we do no so I think we could be very clear and just say they may extend to the back of curb or 10 ft at maximum why don't we just we just say they can extend no further than the curb and and eliminate the the foot requirement because I think about something like the theater awning that's got to be more than 10 feet and the theater is a different animal because that actually would have been a public space in front of it that really it's almost like a little Plaza in front and it was outdoor yeah I mean we can say under we're talking about section five onions and canopies under B Mak extend no further than the the back of the street Cur yeah and that elates it allows the people when you walk it through the rain it allow them to be shelter so that' be that' be a good thing even on the back side and that get the people chance to step off the street into the area I will say 10 feet tight yeah because 12 if you look at as we were looking at old pictures of downtown at one point all of downtown from what we could see in these pictures all had awnings so to your point you could pretty much walk downtown yes and be covered and not have to worry about the rain so yeah I'm I'm worried that if we say 10 feet it's going to be too narrow so why don't we just say back back curve that's good that protects us we don't want to hang it out over the street right garbage truck goes down off and on and with that they will have to you know as part of their review they'll have to coordinate for Street plantings and lighting Street lighting and Street plantings have to be coordinated with their awning they can't can't remove our trees to absolutely yeah so I would add that please may not interfere with existing or if you want to will have to be coordinated with with City uh plantings and lighting well any public accessory that's along the sideline yeah okay so do we do we want to send this as is or do with these changes or do we want it to come back to us one more time and here's what I could do um to eliminate that step is when I bring this to the council which I would anticipate at this point will be at our meeting on the 24th submit a draft of this so before you initiate the uh the change you'll have a chance to review this to make sure that all the comments that we have spoke about tonight are Incorporated in it so that what you are telling me to move forward with is in line with our discussion tonight and we'll have our map boundary we already have that one blessed we've got the boundary but again we're not approving the boundary as part of this that's something that we have to figure out once it's established how far do we want to take that when we go to actually resol the property because it's not an overlay District it's a separate zoning District just like any other C1 or C2 we want to go ahead and bring It Forward don't we yeah I thought I thought we'd already kind of discussed that well we've discussed the map and where we want to go but we can't initiate that till we have this adopted in Our Land Development code and then if we bring it back and Council says okay we're going to initiate a math Amendment and a rezoning for this defined area then we come back to the counsel and send out notices to the 150 people located within that boundary if you want to go to Sloss and that's still something that I think is up for debate on how far we want to go initially I guess what what am I missing here because I I understand what you're saying about we establish this district and then at some point we'll come back and we reone but I'm with Council M Valley why are we not going ahead and advancing the actual map mapped boundaries that we voted you can't you cannot reone property when there is no established District to reone it too our comp plan changed that that we didn't have a district now we're just providing the definition in LDC you're establishing the zoning District within our LDC yeah which we could have done the map as part of the comp plan Amendment and just defined it then because it is a district and is defining boundaries of that District now we didn't because we want to have some flexibility but we could have done it then even before we had this well Mr W what's your concern in ter I mean you I mean is it the notice element to the property owners well I I think for one I think that when we tell 100 people that we are going to rezone your property on you their future land use their future land use and their uh zoning map that we probably need to have some sort of forum where you're going to have to give formal notice well it's a city sponsored Amendment you're going to have to go through that part of the but what I would like to do is hold some sort of public Workshop outside of the council meeting so that we can eliminate a lot of the questions that may come up at at the council meeting to actually explain what this means for them rather than doing it in front of the entire Council because you're going to have to do to planning first off the plan right I'm fine with a workshop public Workshop to explain people that people show up we might eliminate that number down to three after they hear and they understand they say okay I was just I didn't know what this was all about but I would rather do that in a more informal setting or they just come in we can talk about it what your concerns and then you know if we've got to document what the concerns were obviously that can be included with our Council agenda item but I feel like that process is going to is going to require more public Outreach than the typical resoning typically what we see because it's not being initiated by the property owner it's the city enacting something on them that they didn't ask for well I want to be clear we are not doing anything that takes away an existing use we're expanding uses right right there is no in this District that would be disallowed if it just dis I mean let's say somebody's building is not operational for six months to a year we're not even this is not even saving them with non-conformity we're literally adding to the existing uses yeah I mean as an example we're giving them mix use which I've had downtown business owners approach me about adding mix use yeah I mean while we have to comply with the statute I would say I think that's very important what however this is couched I think that's the whole point is that there is nobody that is losing their use and know it's not just know you're now non-conform nobody becomes non-conforming in this so I I still fail to see where this ties back to requiring the map to not be moved forward at this point well but if I understand what y'all trying to do and I guess that's what I'm asking Mr Wallace what is concern is if all y'all are doing is saying we're done with it at our level Mr Wallace it to the next steps which they can be public workshops it can be planning board it can be city council but clear this board's docket and then the city council says we want to send it back the planning board can't send it back the city council could always at the council level say go back one more time and take another look at it or start over that's the council's discretion at that board level but at this level simply saying we passed thrown out of our I'm trying to figure out what the problem with passing it up and saying that this committee's done what it believes it wants to well I don't feel like that's that's what I'm saying okay maybe I'm misunderstanding too then so we are going to take this to the council for the first reading and the second reading but well you're going to have to go to the planning board first of course yeah but we can't do that concurrently with the m with the rezoning this only establishes the text in our code there's no reason you can't do them at the same time if you have to break you'd have to break them between first and second reading of course and that would be the whole key I'm happy to host a workshop if we need to do that in the during the process I'd do that between the meetings well I mean are you worried about going to the state for additional review again no no I'm just worried about adopting a text Amendment and on the same evening reson their property because it technically doesn't become effective until the mayor signed it correct what you would do is you'd be presenting it contingent on that no different than when we have annexations come in and we occasionally make exceptions to allow persons to update their Flume at the same time the annexation comes in to allow them to streamline development this is exactly the process we followed with the first and second reading break for State review that we did for the Eagles Crossing PDP when we adopted the PD yeah I mean if you're okay with that yeah I I mean it's condition little hesitation to do that but if you're legally you can do it I mean there's no reason legally you can't because you're going to be providing the persons all the notices that you that this would occur but worst case if you break the first and second readings as I said where the first readings occur concurrently and the second readings occur two meetings apart if you do that then you're fine you can certainly do that you know one concern would be that you you then have uh yeah it'll be easy to get this through if no one thinks they're part of it but if they don't have a map to look at to see that they're part of it right then they're not going to beay attention because well it's not me and to me somewhat that's what's driving my opinion here Mr Wallace is the concept that this gives a chance for anyone who is going to be necessarily affected by the text Amendment you have a chance to discuss the text Amendment and the answer not being well we just adopted this and I think that to me but again the remedy to your situation is like I said and perhaps the better way to say it I'm referring to as splitting the first and second reading is perhaps splitting the to State it differently the same point I'm trying to make though is you can do the first readings on the same day you can do Workshop planning board first readings all the same day and intentionally set the adoption of the text second reading at one meeting and then two weeks or 3 weeks depending on the calendar later do the actual resoning for everybody else if you want to split it that way you can run the process concurrently up to then so everything's the same but the only part that's broken is the second reading so you handle everything up through first reading concurrently and then split you could do that and that's a two week delay but everybody still knows what's happening um I don't think you have to do it but that would s that would be one way you could do that yeah okay and I'm I'm fine with that are we agreeable that when I run this and I will present this map to the city council when it comes up for initiation are we still good with the fifth through 11 and Baldwin up to Cha is that the area that we want the council to initiate can we see it again yeah it's in your packet you should have a cop it um is it the parking study yes okay so it's the under the parking study so that green that green outline is yeah the potential District that that this group has identified maybe already sent this James call um the plane board meeting could we have that plan board meeting downtown yeah wherever you want yeah except no just instead of having two separate things just have do it down there everybody's already I said make sure we give notice of the planning board meeting that this is Comin yeah and i' I'd be happy to to help with that I'm definitely going to be there we could even start that at hey we're going to sit we'll be here at 3:00 meeting doesn't start until 5:30 but if you want to come in early we can answer your questions there I think that'd be great and I think um as long as we know when this is I'd be happy to have a meet and greet just on my own if I have to just downtown or just go to the businesses on North Side 90 and talk to folks whatever it takes I'm I'm happy to do that yeah okay but let's coordinate that yeah I'm definitely doing that people can be very confused if they don't if they don't get the information they are going to be confused um if we were restricting their rights I would be very concerned we would be having lots of meetings yeah but when we're expanding I'm always happy to give people more options to do um now the only thing is there going to be there are some requirements in terms of they have to build up to a certain point but they don't have to build a 5,000 foot building they can build a small building it's just whatever they've got of it has to be on the front line and they can still even maintain their existing uses so they grandfathered in until they do a full redo or exceed 50% destroyed it was a natural disaster and then they'd still be subject to possible uh variance through the planning and council at that point because it was an LDC uh requirement so we could still allow someone to rebuild if we chose to sure yeah right so do we do I have a motion to advance this with with the edits that have been discussed tonight so moved second okay I have a motion in a second is there any public comment okay okay so I will have the text Amendment and the map with the edits on the June 24th council meeting okay all those in favor say I any opposed motion carries all right we will move right on into downtown parking analysis yeah so we'd already been over the parking counts at the last meeting I believe Mr had asked about the potential for additional parking between well halfway between the block uh between 9th and 10th all the way to 11th um and then he had mentioned that there was an existing concrete curb on the south side of the road just west of or yeah west of 11 so we went out there and measured the street Street and the potential for adding additional parallel parking spaces we don't feel like um and this was me out there with our street supervisor measured it in terms of the width of the road and how far that extends and what we came up with here the road itself between this little you can't see label of the street U but where the Blue Line ends it says 43 between that street and 11 um is 34 ft wide the roadway is parallel spaces are required to be 8 ft wide 22 ft long so using those numbers you have the potential to do 12 parallel spaces there on the existing concrete with the only improvements we would need to make is potentially a lane shift because on the north side of that stretch you have all the the curb Cuts so there's really no potential there so it would be on the south side of the street and you would probably have to restrike that lane to shift further to the north because right now I think it's offset more to the South the white line that we have there um so we calculated 12 spaces there the area west of 11 we measured that out that curb continued further than we thought it did a lot of it was buried that we dug out with a shovel to actually identify it we think at a minimum we could fit seven spaces in there um right now it is just gravel and grass but the curb does exist so he had suggested if we wanted to go that direction to you know pull out some of that gravel and throw down some asphalt stripe it and have that additional parking there so on city right away they'll provide 19 potential parking spots and then the only downside is that they're on the south side of Baldwin um seven of those are definitely on the South Side the other ones uh really there's no reason to have I me we're not unless we do a parking lot there's really not going to be the curb cuts and really they should use the alleys or um or 11 but it would avoid any cost in terms of adding curbing or modifying curbing so that at that point we're just talking about striping Lane striping and parallel spot striping what about the we' had discussion and I I believe that there was consensus on evaluating the additional parking there on Circle Drive and I don't I don't really see it on this map what about that there's a spot across from the church where there's there is grade but if grade was pulled back as long as we know where the railroad right away is the idea was to put it behind a curb or Island have a tree line and then have the parking behind that but I mean depending where the rideway for the railro is you basically have enough for a parking lot for two two lanes of parking potentially or at least a drive aisle and a parking aisle with pull in well not only that but even though people are already doing it could we go ahead and stripe on Circle Drive I've seen some resistance to that at the end of the day people are just doing it anyway so why want fight that battle just let people Park they're going to park anyway yeah I don't know that defining the 22t space on Circle Drive is I think it would be effective if you're were trying to slow people down the striping would help but something that had texture in other words if we went to something perious which actually eliminated runoff now you're talking about something that actually does improve water quality for the lake reduce runoff help with our storm water capture because we're diverting it from some of our storm water because it just perks through and because that has more texture to it it rumbles when you drive on it people don't drive on it and it's and it basically just defines it as a parking slot but you're not striping but that's much more invasive it's not just striping that's kind of a grant territory and there's some really good examples of that um from some um is more urban but it's becoming more of an issue uh especially in Florida because of King tides in some areas uh the need for more perious area um they're actually starting to create these small discharge areas which act to filter uh run off from the roads which will have oils on them it acts as a catch Basin before it gets into lakes and waterways because we're having some pollution issues and we're having some King Tides issues comment the parking TR parking spots for example from the library there West live o or live oest um you get bad bottom neck or another day right so people are parking you got to wait for somebody to come you got to come other way I drove out yesterday and somebody was out three foot off the curb in the middle of the road so mean if you strip it in front of the library and on one side of it you put you know you can block it off foot line people are identifying that's not where you park at I see the benefit in that but terms of we can stra city has TR that's no doubt about that um I mean I think that's up to the council Council wants to stra parking spaces we can do it I would ask a question in the parking regulations isn't there a distance off a curb requirement aren't you supposed to be a a maximum distance off a curb when you're parking I don't know I've got the documentation I have here I think I know some places they'll tiet you if you're too far off of a curb without having striping believe we have a specific ordinance that ever St no I don't know the do design manual I mean I try to be 6 in off when I but it's not a citable offense from the law enforcement currently but it could be could be if you pass yes again I I've received some negative feedback to to striping um I don't agree with it but that's the commentary I'm hearing and if people are already parking and we're not seeing a uh noticeable benefit to it I I mean I'm I'm receiving commentary from particularly downtown business owners that say if those are actually marked as parking spaces then my employees will park in them so to me that balances out the someone that doesn't like paint on the The Circle Drive right there it's only in a it's not like I'm saying go strike the entire lakeyard they're already parking that people are already parking there the church does it the library does it the people in the that that office complex right there across from the amphitheater does it so by striping it you bring attention to the fact that it's available for people and then it also is in the mechanism to say hey you're not in the correct parking Zone you need to correct this to me I don't see where that's a negative and you would have to box them these lines every where with L is do a line certain L time it could just be the corners the corners you don't have to do the whole thing actually you don't have to do Corners you can just do Stripes coming out from the inner curb it could just be the single line don't have to close it on the inside um all right so where do we stand with this someone someone refreshed my memory on what we were trying to accomplish with with the analysis anyway well I think we were yeah I mean I think we wanted to get an idea of what we had overall downtown which is what the initial uh count did we identified those initial and then what what potential where can we pick up more on the edges and that's where the N additional 19 came in the other one I think the easiest thing if you want to have an immediate impact whether it's got to go counts or not direct and it may direct C staff to go stripe these got go the authority we just we can make a recommendation say I have Council direct staff to make whatever improvements are required for those 12 and then maybe in the budget period we can talk about do we want to go further west and pay that seven spaces or are those is that an expense we don't need right now I think gravel is adequate as long as the curb's there and it's readable I think the gravel is fine that's what people were parking on before but the one question I had was we had some things down from uh Old King Hardware now last stop that were fairly flat open area of grass that might be available for additional parking down there because they're getting busy they're getting full and there are businesses that were adjacent to where we would be talking about adding Park and the veterinarian was there it's still zon that there another veterinarian could come in I believe um because it required a for some reason which was kind of weird so is there a reason I talking about parallel park on South as a reason we didn't we haven't discussed just putting in parking consistent with that between 10th and 9th extending it down so if you took out what are your calling that what you're calling those what are they what was that called there um well those are there's curb Cuts curve Cuts not take the curve cuts out back to to the sidewalk like the rest of downtown's parking and put par I I found it if somebody has a curve cut they do not like giving them up because curve Cuts we cut them yeah there's no building there well we might not we might not put them in there there's no building there right it's that the city can make but again I think I think it was Mr Valley's Point you're not replacing the cost you're adding additional cost that's what I'm looking at we con stra the other one for much lower cost and we can repair curbs that are already in place they there's no reason going to be there when you max out your building footprint you you certainly wouldn't have them there if you're going to max out your building footprint and do Downtown Development um the idea of putting in angle parking was looked at which would match the rest of our downtown but it [Music] requires uh 17 ft wide or 17 ft deep power I guess you want to say off the curb and that's at a 45° angle that only leavs deeper than the one I just did that would only 17t traveling which is not enough for vehicles so it seemed like parallel was the only way to get well nine would be completely adequate we were 18 and at 45 I thought I just did one that was less than that clay while he's looking that up at the expense of you throwing something at me um do we have enough in the way of a survey for downtown to be able to determine some of these areas that we've discussed tonight if whether we can place parking on there or do we need to recommend to the council that they I assure you we don't have an accurate complete survey of downtown we know that without me say without me having to even speculate but what I would say is you can go pay for a survey but the goal is to try to create a more functional Community from a Mobility standpoint there is absolutely nothing that stops the city from going out there and determining the appropriate Lane size of travel as we know it meets the proper code and the proper it manual and is not going to be a safety hazard we got to follow General regulations having Mr Townson send Public Works and streets out there there and pull a tape we're not trying to find Corners we're not trying to find a meets and Bounds description if they can't pull a tape to say there's an 8 foot wide travel Lane not going to disparage one of our employees but if they can't do that I think we have some problems Mr TS uh and so pull an 8 foot Lane pull an 8 foot lane and then let's see whether it's big enough to par vehicles in I mean if you look at you know I I call a seminar I sat through that dealt with a group that does community redevelopment and they talked about you know they'd go out there and they'd find ways to create bike cleans they you know do homemade planners they put them in streets that are too wide you know and they the example they gave was in the middle of their Community running right through downtown their roadway each lane was over 12 foot wide so it was 24 foot of roadway and then you have parking on shops on one side and parking on the other so they came in and they put planners and put bike Lanes on the inside of the Planters just went and got garbage cans spray painted them nice put plants and trees in them just went threw them out there and after a couple weeks nobody said anything they kept expecting code to come pick them up or the police to come pick up nobody ever did you know two years in the city put in permanent planners because everybody liked the way it looked um I laughed I don't know that I was the only attorney in the room I was probably the only local government attorney in the room and they asked him the challenge like the challenge we always gets the nasty letters of the city attorneys always end up send us to tell us to stop but lo and behold the code never goes out there does anything about it we just collect the letters and throw them away and I'm sitting here laughing and say this occurs to me to be the problem we get from a lot of our dog appli the code issues so we're not the only ones but the the con the concept that proposed there they said the problem they had is you know you have the manager tells the attorney send the letter we can't let these people do it where's it going to stop so they you know try to engage they said we reach out we try to engage and the may do it the right way it's fine we go talk to the planner and the planner's like well we can't do that why can't you well we can't go to the council Council appears they can't they don't do it but everybody likes it so I guess what I would suggest to you is some degree they are our city streets it's our downtown community to the extent that we are relatively certain we are not doing something on someone else's private property and to be clear the area that everybody knows we've talked about quite a bit is where does the railroads right away lie as opposed to their fee simple ownership of property unless you're going on to somebody's curb that they actually have a deed out to the edge of that sidewalker curb and trying to change change where their lot line is let's look at some areas tell us where you want to do it and let's figure out if we can make it work or not and do it and certain point in time that's how as I'm looking at Mr Town's iPad here that's how downtown and all its parking was set up to start with where' people Park all right we'll go stripe them I can assure you there was not an it manual that was promulgated in 1930 in this city and when the first coat of any kind of base was put on that street that is our main street we weren't looking at state regulations just didn't happen so there's a spot where I'm probably G have to say whoa guys we're you know we didn't just tow line we jumped way across it I'll do that what you're asking here though if all you're talking about is the width of the travel Lane to the roadway we can measure that without having form last survey I I think what I'm what I'm referencing is these grassy areas uh on the east and west side of Ballwin well I think the question is does that fall within the railroads right away and we know we have a dispute in some of those I don't believe we do from what I've seen um I think when you look at the property appraiser s site and what they show the rway line established many many years ago You' still got to look at the total area they take up and there is more land from right here which take from Circle Drive at the edge of the grass all the way to the grass at the edge of Main Street there's more land there than there is railroad rideway so no matter where you set their RightWay in it you got space to operate with it but I'd say let's find an area and figure it out and then at the end of the day where you park your car I will say there's always a little bit of BU beware GRE Greg's laughing me knows what I'm talking about there are parking spots up down our downtown on some our streets you won't pull into a park and I won't either because your rear end's hanging out there and you know you're likely to get clipped by somebody coming around a corner or not or you pull up on it and you're going to scrape your tire every time you back out because you can't do it because they payments on even it's just I mean if you part that close to the railroad track there's a risk but or if you don't get up on the carrier to get it there you go and I think with these 12 because it's already pain we're not making any additional we're not ching anything there adding paint okay so let's do this let's question is that yeah is most like it's rway but know they're not going to do anything they don't do nothing most they don't know exactly where the lineway line existed before the payment exist it's sold again so they don't they don't I maintain any for 30 years they a't did anything they sold it again okay so I don't think they know what this say land over there so let's do this let's have a motion to recommend to the city council that staff investigate uh designated areas for additional parking do we want to define the 19 potential sparts identified additionally yes east side where the South Side pulling spots end to give you a block at least the Fourth Street so do we have that I'll make that a motion yes there okay so we have a motion in a second to recommend to the councils to evaluate some areas for additional parking spaces any public comment we tell you do you can't let thisp all right yes ma'am slowing Kobe down you come getting ready to put put work out there yeah where 26 and 32 are across from the Presbyterian Church yes ma' it would be nice to have 45 degree parking there um I think what we're talking about there is on that area where there's there's those scrubs right now evaluating that to become some sort of additional parking that you can actually pull into well okay almost like a mini parking lot souths side of the trucks yes does that make sense Missy so rather than just pulling 45 they're talking about possibly two rows or more apart yeah and then we're also and just to be clear so everyone knows we're also talking about from um where the old King Hardware is actually the end of the block so all the way to fourth street so one block further P past where the um vet's office was can you pull Google Map pull in for both of those I'm not back there who's back there Michael Jesse can you pull up Google Map I can just walk it to the crowd no we got a TV up here if we can't do this if we can't figure out to put Google Maps up here we probably should all go home at this point there we go get yes and go and switch to the satellite view on the lower uh left there you go and you yeah right there Center there so so we're talking about you walk up there and point to it if you want Mr Val yeah so you can see where where the parking stops where it says Baldwin and it has the they're calling it Alfred construction alred constru yes Alf Al Al yes looking at the parking extending along here which replicate all these and then the potential here which will be a little bit more definitely get these and then we will have talked about the ones over here before trickier but those will be 45 so those will accommodate a lot more spots than the other one the other ones we're looking at are parallel on on the west side I haven't heard no objections to the parking there on that part of what we call it East Main okay any other public comment everybody good say done any more comments from the dice seeing none all those in favor say I I I right motion carries all right we will move on to code review chapter 4 animal ordinance we love that love it Ste crein I think Chris is a year the chief that is the final draft Chief Hurley has put his input and it's been changed so all right I I did speak with Chief Hurley yesterday and he said that all of his edits have been Incorporated so do we have any comments from the Das on the animal ordinance that's the [Music] noise let's do this while you're reviewing it can I have a motion to recommend to the city council that we adopt the animal ordinance is that the proper motion collect motion to recommend to the city council to adopt the chapter four The control I'll make that motion second all right have a motion at second do we have any public comment on the annual ordinance yes ma'am if you will state your name for the record Lisa Soros I've got um a few concerns with the animal ordinance um being changed from the old one um the first one um is the allowance of foul in within city limits we previously did not allow in the old animal ordinance but we are allowing it back in is there a reason why we actually didn't prohibit the foul before we it was allowed and we actually now created a restriction on not foul I meant swine I apologize sine we are allowing it back and previously we did not is there a reason no no we're not allowing it it has still has to be 300 feet away from anything which is how it was previously it was blocked completely I don't believe so can you clarify I'm pulling that up I think it was think it was blocked I think she's right yeah swine was generally prohibited person to possess or keep swine within the city was the rle is there a reason why we or was that just a Miss no I think I think in that particular instance there are certain areas of the city for example out on South 2 street where the keeping of those type of animals would not imp because there's very large land tracks absolutely um and so that's where we put the protection in the animal ordinance that it cannot be within 300 feet of someone's property or I'm sorry res residence so that we we kind of recognize that there are still sections of the city where having th those type of animals would be acceptable because there's enough buffer zone there yeah but then we're not allowing it and you know in a more condensed neighborhood say for example out there dead end of 11th Street sure I that I don't I'm not familiar with that area but yeah yeah um there's nothing um the other thing you have residential but you don't have anything listed regarding um restaurants Commercial things like that within so many feet again dead end of 11th Street behind tractor supply behind four SE barbecue I'm not following on the commercial 11th Street De is directly behind for seed barbecue and Tractor Supply you have nothing listed for commercial property you only have residential okay on the dead end of 11th Street you have sheep chicken and you will be getting Dexter cattle but the only thing is listed as commercial is the plaza over there which is Walton Plaza in Old Walmart and you with more than you more than 300 feet away from that plus that is private property all the way across on the other side end L Street which mullet used to own and you way more than 300 feet from the last house which Mr Abbott owns if you at the end of L street if I if I'm correct house past me yes yeah but that one isn't 300 feet from tractor supp plyer fored but that's what I'm saying there's nothing listed for residential or for commercial within this so that's where these could pop up anywhere as long as they're within 300 feet from residential not Fe more yeah yes it could be next we are not uh yeah our concern was residential yeah but you don't have anything listed for commercial no no um now you have nuisance animals however we don't have a noise ordinance how is that going to be enforced the way it's written in the ordinance now and it has been enforced there actually was a r to removed under the noise a nuisance complaint even though we don't have a noise ordinance the nuisance animal complain is separate item they're not measuring desable levels it's just a matter of frequency and and disturbance okay so it will be enforcable even though we don't have a noise ordinance under this ordinance not a standalone noise ordinance correct okay okay um and like I said the swine thing um are we going to require those to have their [Music] um the required vaccines like we do with dogs and cats how they're required to have rabies because there are vaccines pigs get Ries no no pigs absolutely can get spayed neutered microchip they can get hooving yeah but that's that's coming on the health department situation now it is it is Health Department that's why I'm asking it would have he department but it would not affect the city of ordinance because of the distance that would be from but even if did it's not our regulatory but that's because that's why I'm saying it wasn't in the old one and it's now included again so and enforcement it's now including code enforcement which is awesome who does the city contact do we continue to contact the County or do we contact PD it is animal control so this one has been set up to line up completely with the County's Animal Control ordinance because Animal Control handles the animals for us because the Marshall does not we're just adding code enforcement as code enforcement handling aspects of it for local complaints for noise and nuisance but in terms of actually getting any animals capturing any animals caging any animals or or seizing them that would be going to be an it be Animal Control okay awesome um now why did we take out the dog and heat section uh well that one uh we have a leash law so they can't be loose and they can't be wandering but they could cause major incidents with other dogs if they are in heat off their own property that is a behavioral concern again we're we're uh we are saying that someone can't take their animal out so again we really haven't seen a lot of that and I don't think anyone's really followed that so because we didn't have any enforcement on that before right I mean just being I mean I'm a foster mom that's why I'm ask animal must be under control of the owner at all times Absolut not then the county has the jurisdiction to remove the animal from the area and that's where we would go back on the Cod and that's both animals yes yeah I mean and animals are you know very they they turn on a dime unfortunately even the best ones um but that's why it was just a question um the tattoos does that include the spay neuter tattoo the simple line or is that a general tattoo that is an identification tattoo it's something that can be tracked and and recorded So that you can find who owns the animal so whether specific identific well microchips you get microchips whenever you're typically you get them when you adopt an animal but we don't have to register those with the shelter but a tattoo we're speaking of an identification tattoo not the Spain neuter tattoo correct okay um that is [Music] than okay that is everything I had in regard that thank you all right thank you any other public comment all right see none all those in favor say I I I all right motion carries that will go up to the city council all right now we will go to 4B Mr Clay you want to take us away sure this when I look back at this what we talked about doing on this one which is the Civic Center talk building council's or the the committee's direction I should say was to remove this 6.5 designation of the code and rather roll it in the six U merge it within the parks and relations that we would find under 16 into a more comprehensive chapter de the City properties uh for parks and buildings for instance the auditorium is already under 16 and much of the language that you find in 6.5 is mirrored in 16 so the discussion was we going have that merged into 16 and we would discuss what we want to do with those as part of chapter 16 so I think for the purposes of agenda moving forward we'll just look at this as chapter 16 and then discuss 6.5 at the same time so that was the discussion we can start talking about 6.5 now if you so desire about what changes you would want to make to that but in looking back at the minutes the minutes didn't quite reflect this but my recollection from our January board meeting which has been a while now was that uh we wanted to talk about some broad-based Citywide regulations that would apply whether you're in a park or in a building and then talk about the more specific level of regulations that would be what happen within those buildings and work in that way because there's going to be a hybrid of what happens that the EMP theater but so I'll defer to y'all how y'all want to address that obviously we've got a lot of discussion we need to have on chapter 16 so I'm jumping around on you a little bit but I see those two as merged what I did want to pass out because you have something to look at tonight before we have that open-ended discussion about chapter 16 if you'll pass those down for me Mr Townson is at the March second meeting in March of the city Council Council present a tobacco free park ordinance discussion um I said that would come up at the code lers viw committee meeting we have unfortunately not had um one of those can go to the clerk if you want um is I think that should be one for everybody up there um so what I did was I prepared that ordinance we haven't met since then so this is your first time seeing it but um ultimately the where as as are relatively straight forward the Florida House of Representatives staff analysis indicated that they their determination was a secondhand smoke caused numerous health problem and was causally linked to cancer and other fatal diseases um we would therefore as our requisite public necessity findings adopt the house bill 105 of 2022 staff reports and further find the horn for impact of second smoke in the Parks to be DET detrimental to park users and should be banned to the greatest extent Allowed by Florida law that is your public purpose and necessity finding that is then rolled into the general catch all below it and the regulations track the Florida clean clean air excuse me the Florida indoor the Florida Clean Air Act is the Florida indoor Clean Air Act Now um of chapter 386 which all those definitions everything you see under the third page over all the underline is what's going in the code that is absolutely verbatim under the definition out of the Florida statute um the prohibition language is pretty straightforward smoking or vaping in all parks located with the city is hereby prohibited I included it should wton County on any park and they don't have a conflicting ordinance that will ban it there as well statute specifically calls for cities to be able to do it enforcements by code enforcement and the police department we can enforce through code enforcement civil citation or other enforcement proceeding available to the city gives us full option and then maximum penalties provided by law right now code enforcement is not a crime but it does also allow trespassing for violating a park rules and things like that to be discharg so this is consistent um you will note this does not at all look like what y presented that night for the two council members uh I reached out with Florida Liga cities there are approximately 18 cities that have adopted a spec a specific no tobacco nooke smoking no vaping typee of policy for their Parks post July 1 of 2022 I have had somewhere between the pleasure and Misfortune of reading all of those finding that many that chose to upload those simply uploaded Park ordinances to the repository and I know more about Panama City Park and the few other parks in this area and the Panhandle that I chose to read first then I care to this is not modeled after one of those but is actually a relatively standard version that kept it as streamlined as possible because I did not wish WR to conflict with what is in in existence in our code now in any way which is very minimal when we get to talk about it but so we're just replacing one of the reserve section section 1612 with this so for discussion conversation we can make it a lot more robust don't know that you can make it a whole lot more lean though I went with a leaner of the few options I will say I did look at some 10-page documents I looked at some 29 page documents for the life of me still can't tell you why there was a 29 page document doing all this but there are three cities that happen I think the model we saw was fine I'm not going to suggest there's a problem with it other than say I don't think we needed eight to 10 pages of ORS on this no simpler is better uh do we have anything that defines Parks I I mean if we get into well that's well the reason you don't have it in this version of the ordinance is that it's going into your chapter 16 and if you look at chapter 16 of the city's code of regulations it simply States the city's parks and related facilities will be operated the city will adopt rules and regulations for the various public parks one of the issues that we jump out to is that is all our code of ordinances says we've talked about a variety of times doing a better asset inventory of the city and one of your asset inventories is your property's owned uh it is my recommendation we start talking about chapter 16 that we use some of those Reserve sections that nobody's ever used before 162 um listing of city park I'm perfectly fine if you want to list them all by ordinance I think that is an acceptable thing we get ready add to do and it's going to go through a formal public adoption um or you could simply say shall be identified in a resolution maintained in City Hall we can have a pretty map of a resolution I can give you two different ways to go about it but it needs to be in the ordinance um I would think if you ultimately make this public facilities type of a discussion you would need need a city buildings and then identify those specific City buildings one of the things you're going to hear me talk about and nobody may want to do it at 6:30 at night because I know he's to have the other one that's that is completed that Mr Wallace is going to talk to you about on the nuisance and insanitary conditions and things of that nature U is the discussion of City Hall is not listed in our code of ordinances we talk about City Hall all the time but it doesn't say where there is City should there be ordinances regulating things about City H most cities do have at least something so we need to talk about that um but ultimately um that's why it's not in this version of it because you're going to need to Define it in the chapter at large not in this one specific and we don't have to adopt this ordinance I just said I would bring you something back at this level before I brought it to the council frankly we can do this anytime the city council is ready to do it U and so if you want to pass that along and say if y'all want to go and adopt it now do it we can just change the numbering up or we can sit and hold on this until we do the entire park ordinates all together for me it is not going to make one bit of difference for you it makes the difference in paying paper to run two ordinances versus one I would I would say that we go ahead and push this one forward I think we can use common sense in addressing what a park is right now we will need to Define it and I'm sorry go ahead M can I make yeah I'm sorry to interrupt can we make a recommendation that you know our parks and master plan identified our Parks just to Simply reference those parks that are included as part of our Park master plan we've got to Define set of come back it won't be in this but yeah I mean I think let me say this once you adopt this the way the legislature operates it's Parks own by a city so either we own it or we don't or it's a county be continually updated that was a one time what I'm saying is right now we don't need to worry about how you define right now because we know what our parks are we go to your cover it's the notice that matters so I'd say I I would recommend to bring it forward using just common sense in terms of what parks are right now would recommend the map with the names of the individual Parks be listed as part of a City Hall Master list that's always available and I think we have beginnings of it on GIS um but we will when we come to the Park section we will have to come to some uh discussions on what is and isn't a park because once if and when we do the multimodal path along uh West defunc on on on liveo that's yeah it's a path but it's also a linear part so we're going to have some some gray areas to address but I would I would uh make a motion to bring this forward to council okay we have a motion to we on a second I would like to add to that you would also include the city hall in there is that not so well we're going to come to that later this just talking about the this all we're talking about now is no smoking or vaping in city parks uh the city buildings are already regulated by the state that's the Florida indoor clean a act we have no authority over that what happened Mr kwn for your historical knowledge going back to 85 the state preempted All Counties and City said we're the only entity in the state at the state level that can regulate smoking and that law has been amended under part 2 of 386 several times since then uh with that being said in 2022 they recognized that the state had no authority to regulate properties owned by local governments in the sense that home rule allows you that ability to do what you see fit with your own property so there was this Gap where no state parks allowed smoking but all these city parks did and all these other Parks did so what we up with was a discrepancy the legislature chose to fix by giving the city and the county limited authority to regulate smoking within its Parks should you adopt an ordinance so we were approached at the council in March to ask from the Tree of beautification committee for us to consider making such an adoption now that this was available to us so we will ultimately with City buildings that's still preempted in the state and know you cannot smoke or vape in a governmental building the same Florida so no we can't even comment on it unfortunately that's the state law I'm I'm going to take the uh the opposite Viewpoint here as as someone that believes in small government um Banning outdoor smoking just seems to be one step too far for me personally um not to mention there's a whole thing of of enforcement um are we going to have code enforcement are we going to have the PD run around and issue citations U every time someone Vapes in the middle of the lakeyard or or lights up a cigarette or some sort of tobacco I mean it you're outside at that point you know I mean the odds of you affecting somebody or knil this to me is one of those things where I've been a city council member for five years now there's plenty of things that I don't like personally but you don't see me coming up here to the diet every day and saying I saw somebody make a left turn when they shouldn't have we need to ride an ordinance against it or I saw somebody rid in the left lane when they should have gotten over we need to ride an ordinance against it that's my take on this is at what point do we stop when when we start making these type of laws and ordinances so I I agree smoking is bad and I you know I don't like it when someone stands right outside my my store and smokes and the smoke comes into my store I don't like it but I'm not up here demanding that we write an ordinance to prohibit people from doing that I if they're outside people can move at that point it's a big Park all of our parks are plenty big enough that you could smoke in one section that not affect somebody in another so that's my opinion I know I'm probably the the minority in this one but that's my opinion yes sir so I I agree with you at the lakeyard and so I had some reservations about including the lakeyard but but please do remember that it was the Marshall that brought this for originally and was requesting it um he he discussed it at an early meeting before about a year before we actually brought ended up bringing it back and um and because it really is about Playgrounds now we're saying parks in the general term but his Focus was really on playgrounds my concern was the lakeyard being a vast open area is there a way to split out the playground portion from from the rest of the lakeyard and I don't think that they're really is a practical way to do that but what's happening is we have limited playground equipment we're blessed to have a little bit more than we did before right now um but if I'm a parent and especially if I've got you know small children and someone just starts smoking because they they smoke in their house uh now I'm I'm being excluded from that Park I'm being pushed out of a park that I'm supposed to be able to use and be part of right but they can make the same argument that now they're being excluded from that Park just because they're want to smoke in in the outdoors now if they have prescription you can make that argument but if if it's not a prescription medication there is no need uh to smoke and it causes no harm to not smoke like I said I how how where where are the people beating down our doors saying that this is an epidemic that we we must we must address today like I I just I don't see it I don't see in five years I've never had anybody approach me in in any capacity and say was at a park and someone was smoking and I had to leave the park because I you know couldn't stand the smell of smoke I don't like it I don't like it myself and and a lot of times when someone's smoking I'll I'll go the other way but that's we're we're in the big open outd doors it's not that hard to move move away just my opin when it was brought to me the first thing I said is have you talked to the churches that are on the circle yet make sure that they're okay with that because they they might they I El like to smoke out yeah so um I I had that same concern uh but it was brought forward and so we were considering it but uh but we don't have a second right now so no I just I just wanted to clarify with City Hall that's all I didn't care about him smoking outside at the parks and all you going to do what he want to do if he in the cloth he in the clothes he G to do what he want to do ain't nothing you can stop B but I just talk about to see the hall that's all I was considering wasn't that and this would not eliminate cigars either because it's preemptive unfiltered cigars yeah is there another kind only concern I'm not a cigar smoker one way or the other but I just want to be clear the statute says unfiltered cigars so before we say cigars and somebody comes in and nobody here knows what a filtered cigar is it turns out it's the most obnoxious thing ever y'all pass this no we didn't say it was okay we're following the state statute city property particular City Hall what have employees who smoke we have the right tell them they can't smoke while work indoors indoors yeah indoors that's what I'm indoors they can't do it under the Florida law that's they're committing a crime there you can designate you allowed to yeah we're not do that so around City buildings you're allowed to designate specified areas adjacent to buildings to allow persons to go to as part of the Florida clean do that what about cated Vehicles that's a little mess that was my question just go outside the fence so what happens if they're in the parking lot of the par No One's Gonna say anything then then why then why have the law that that's my point is if nobody's going to enforce it and and it's it's somewhat laughable then why even have the law at that point we're just passing the law to pass the law sorry that's just where I'm at well we don't have a second so we're done motion motion dies for a lack of a second sorry sir there we go makes my life easy y'all will not be seeing that at the city kils meeting because y'all told me no y'all have taken no action so you didn't die yes took no action so it's stuck in limo there you go up in there that is my official position Mr C major when you're asked about it is in Lio all right we will move on to 4 A C nuisances hazards and insanitary conditions Mr Wallace actually Mr St Mr strong yeah so in your packet is the what's being recommended by code enforcement for chapter 14 can you can you kind of talk us through I know you've highlighted some what appears to be some changes here can you kind of talk us through those real quick all right so on page two the on section 14- to section highlighted basically gives me a guidelines to go by instead of um my interpretation what is wrong so this will actually give me something that's in black and white to declare with houses that are basically considered a nuisance or a blight okay on chap page 3 14-3 um I know we've been having some problems with people people doing open storage of things this was a possible solution um especially dealing with a fire or Life Safety situation deal by ordinance or for statue by the or by the fire marshal real quick on that I've I've kind of I know in the beginning I was opposed to it but I've kind of come back around to this idea of doing some sort of compelled registry for vacant buildings for for vacant buildings okay so is that any of that in in here no okay now do we want to consider that CL would that even go in the section under chapter 14 for vacant buildings registrations or would that go to another area it would be in another I believe you would put in another area of the code but I think you would reference it here in that if you have a vacant building that is not properly registered that you could fit it under the existing definition of your ordinance 857 of your unfit or unsafe dwelling or structure I believe you can make a requisite finding if the council so desires that vacant buildings pose potential hazards and that the failure to register and properly advise the city therefore transforms them into un unsafe because they're failing to give us notice potential fire hazards it's a process but yes we it would relate so that I do see them coming together on that point the idea of a of a registry and an escalating registration cost is one model that we've seen clay and and we were just trying to find the one that made the most sense in terms of what we're dealing with well over the past six years I've looked at a wide variety of them so we can talk through a bunch of different options but um ultimately it's what I think the answer that I would see when we talk about what makes the most sense You' got to decide what is the cheap it is not so let me back up you need to decide what what you want to have happen with a building that is being ped according a lot of places approach it from what is the chief Hill we're not wanting buildings that fall in on themselves or wanting buildings to stay in a usable shape or change hands but the cities that do that have these big wide unwieldly tools and I think we're going to be just as unmanageable as some of the stuff we're dealing with right now when you're looking at that because what is the chief ill with the chief ill in blight is a very amorous concept so what do you want to happen and what I would do is I would build out what the penalties are based on what we're trying to compel to happen is it remediation is it cleanup is it change over well that's focus on it from that angle first would be what I would say well my my other question for that will be then are we talking only about commercial properties are vacant or any structure that is vacant so if you have a house on the circle that is vacant do they have to register or if you have a house over what defenc that's vacant do they have to register so what guidelines would you like for something like that I think some some of the problem has been those vacant residential structures that eventually fall in on themselves yes and and become become blighted in numerous different ways whether it's you know vegetation growing up or whether it's why didn't know if we wanted to start off with commercial buildings first and then work out to residential or do you just want to jump in with both feet and I'm going jump in with both feet kind of guy yeah um I mean I'd been focusing on the commercial aspects because of its impact on other businesses and not just the property value because it's a it's a double-edged sword in that case it's it's doing multiple harms um once we get into the derc structures and and lack of Maintenance to a residential structure then uh creeps over into this section whereas I'm a little less concerned about a empty residence that's being properly maintained then I am a commercial property that's vacant and not being maintained but also being used for storage and also eliminating U you know from the business Community opportunities I I tend to see both you know even even if it's a residential property old house they could still be storing stuff in there that could be hazardous um you know there could be life safety issues um there could be fire hazards you so I guess my my thing on that is though we're creeping into that moves it into this section of the of the Der structures or nuisance structures versus the other one which is the economic impact that a building that's being uh it's also being neglected in in many of these cases but some of them aren't but again one one doesn't impact value around it the other one does because it's reducing commercial activity within a designated commercial area right so Comm commercials a double uh it's it's like double dipping because we we get the avalor taxes but then because it's a commercial structure in theory we should be getting the sales taxes on top of that that Mo this city mostly lives by in one form or another so on the residential side to me I see the same thing because if it's a vacant structure there's more than likely not water and sewer there if if it's available in the area and then at that point we're not collecting those those fees that help fund the system so I I see it on I see it on both sides the residential and the commercial so I would almost want it on both okay to to encourage people to have residents occupied just as much as we want our commercial buildings occupied so clay the ones I've seen have been focused on Commercial and especially in downtown districts what kind of challenges do we face when we start expanding that scope into residential districts well I think you're going to see a very very different model in terms of the fineing fee and structure and the way that works but ultimately the question is are we talking about just doing the registry for everybody we talking about the escalating fins I mean those are that's what I think we really need to what is the goal here or is the goal the same for commercial and residential because you can have separate aims with the same ordinance but if we're going to talk about let's go a and talk about it from that aspect what is the aim the models that I've seen when Mr mcnight was looking at someone doing this basically was a person would have to register their property with the city as being vacant and there is a fee they have to pay if the property stays vacant for so long the fee keeps going up at five years it stays at like $500 a year that they have to pay for being vacant it was to try try to promote people to not keep property vacant to go ahead and um release it back out to somebody by doing that though also they have to basically bring it up to compliance because for especially for a business they have to have a life safety inspection before they can open up so it does kind of kill two person one stone what you what you're wanting I guess I think a lot of these models have gone to the the registration and the registration fee escalation because imposing a penalty or a nonm assessment is is rought with with legal issues right whereas now we're talking about a registry which the purpose of has multiple purposes one it allows you to maintain a internal census of sorts where you actually are documenting the percentage of structures that are vacant within your community it speaks to the health it speaks to your marketability as a community there's there's legitimate business uh aspect to that uh also you're identifying structures which uh would be more hazardous uh for for police and for fire because they know it's not occupied they know it's not uh under constant supervision and so if something does happen it can get out of control and would be you know it can off the entire building before anyone even notices it so there are genuine life safety reasons there um also we know that there is a rise in crime with vacant buildings U because there's a lack of eyeballs on the street it's actually a part of the reason that we encourage porches or I encourage porches because and having living on the front because when you move the living to the back less eyes on the street less awareness of who's going around but when we have the vacant buildings it's it's just it's a black hole and it it creates opportunity yeah but uh I I I defer um in terms of which way to pursue but I think the the FI fines for vacant buildings and fees are are one element I'm not sure if it needs to be included in this one or if it's a separate item but I think um on the residential side I'm comfortable with this aspect is it takes care of a lot of what's in the what the other one's causing I mean if we're seeing residences we're seeing residents that aren't being taken care of and they'll fall into disrepair and so they fall into this more often than not is what I'm saying and then we're going to get into definitions of well we have a lot of part-time residents that are six months somewhere else six months here or even four months here um you know how often do they have to be here I it just it gets a little messy I mean no one's going to lease a commercial space for for three months or two months at a time so maybe for now we just as was mentioned at the the outset make a reference to it and we can work on it shape it in in the actual ordinance where it's intended to be I I I just really this is a little Mucky here because if you look at it do the math the um they already got tax against and we don't know what the situation is and I understand what we're trying to work towards but at the same time if we put a f on them I'm dealing with people right now can't can't pay toine and don't have the money to upgrade the house I'm trying to work with them to help them out with it as well as some other structures but I really have a problem with it it's Mucky because they got the taxes avalor and taxes city tax state they got taxes on them already and some of them just really can't afford it this that they're living in or not well no not they're not living in just C trying to hold on maintain because you got to think about loal bread is not the same price it was day before yesterday and and and I'm not look being self-inflicted here I'm I'm trying to reach out to the community as a whole because we do have a responsibility and I strong to tell you this is really mcky because you already got they already got the r of tax on them and then we're going to them and keep running up and up I just can't I can't go along with this I really can't I be honest with you it it put people in a bad predicament I and I won't want to hurt nobody just call you down I'm not going to kick you understood but at some point it's one thing if they're just hurting themselves but no one just hurts themselves when they're dealing with something that's in the public realm when you're dealing with something like a like a building a home structure something that you're putting out there a car you've got something that's now used in public streets it's it's in this within the city and it's got neighbors and what's it doing to the neighbors what's it doing to the neighborhood and at some point we have to say you I'm sorry if it's too much of a burden hey let's let's sell it let's move it off to someone else let's make sure it's getting used but but if it's hurting the neighbors how how can we justify that I got you let me come back on you then some of the structure that I'm dealing with is so tied up it take more than the feel death the Lord is straighten it up and and I'm sure you're aware of this and at the same time I really think we ought to just table this and work on it from a different angle and see what we can come up with but I'm not for it I'll be honest with you is on the vacant or on both on both on both and and I understand what you're saying but at the same time I just can't do it I really can't do it it's no way I would I would refuse it and I know there are structures that need to be brought up the Cod but I think we need to look at a different angle of it several different angles of it now and I like I say I do understand what you said I interpret what you said but I'm just not there with it I can't do it I just want to say one one more thing and it's something I mentioned before when when we're talking about you got a widow or widower and they're dealing with a bad sopit and maybe some landscape issues you know that's one thing that's manageable but but what's happened in the past is we said well we can't we can't make them fix that we can't force them to do that we got we we we feel bad for them and so we don't want to force them to make the repair but then five years later now that soft's turned into an inside water League that's taken out the whole wall and now we've gone to some from something that was solvable to something that's overwhelming and at some point our compassion is enabling them to harm themselves now I I would have felt much better if we could have just had a group and said hey you know we're gonna have some church volunteers we're GNA go over there we're just G to fix that soft we're just going to deal with it some of these are just so out of control because we've we've helped them to death so to speak um sometimes uh sometimes it's not doing them a favor it's just extending a bad situation and making it making it worse in some cases so I would you want just to have a vacant vacant building registration without doing the find where if you don't register this or if the building stays vacant period you get to find it's that if you do not register the building so that we know it's vacant it's fine so you have no reason to not register the building so that the police knows these buildings are vacant so that they can keep better Patrol in certain areas looking for squatters and if you refuse to register your building that's then that's when you're fined I wonder if we could even carve out some exemptions for hardship or Homestead or something like that and that could help address your concerns let me share something with you sir there a possibility but let me just share something personal with you right now I'm dealing with a family right now that I'm close to and it's very difficult very when I see difficult just like pulling your eye teeth up you got so many involved with the one little piece of property this one raising hell that one raising hell that one raising hell and nobody put nothing in the pot and the one that trying to keep the thread together doesn't have the means to upgrade the property want to agreed to but soon as that happen if it's happening then everybody want a piece of the pie and really it's not much of the P that can go around and while I say this and you know what I'm talking about in this neighborhood it is hell to get them to agree to something I mean it's very difficult it's just like P I mean it's it just it's hectic but I I pray that that they can get on the board with it you got some of them live in Panama City you got some of them Liv in Lou you got some live in California you got some of them live in New York some them live in Detroit everybody want a piece of the pie and it's not much how to go around because mama left it granddaddy left it and you're going to give me my part but after you get the lawyer's fees is not so after you get the lawyer fees hell you ain't got nothing left nothing left but you cannot get them to get the films off their eyes to see that you cannot get it and and I'm just tormented about him I'm trying to get you to understand I a't trying I see just let me do it and then y'all decide which way you want to go and all that one of the pieces over there in the historic distri you know where it's at Mr Valley they hadn't paid the tax I hav paid the taxes twice on just to try to keep it within the family but everybody want a piece of the pth and this is a big problem we have you wonder why I'm against because it's not going way yeah some decision going to be made somewhere down the road you may make a register that's fine Denny go ahead but you know for yourself Mr scr some of them had not moved off the potty at all is that not so some of them have not moved and I'm talking about some of them is in high places but they didn't move and some of them have the money and other don't have money can't even can't make one step and it's just a fight constant when you you try to contact them they going to cuss you out or talk crazy you going to give me my part and they don't have much to get and and and IAL one of the uh two judges I know person I been the war with one of them he's a general he retired J's not going to sign off on that he's not going to get in that situation to make them sell the property and only way it's going to come out if I quit paying the taxes the tax people going to get it I ain't seeing that's the answer and he put in a predicament right now I wouldn't have his job I really wouldn't you couldn't pay me $100 an hour for have a job why because of this situation right here you got one neighbor right there you can talk to him all day he goes around the circle tell him say come on let's let's fix that roof they had uh they had 32 squel she that lows here two weeks ago I'm going to get them the man going to let me have talk to him about he just talking he got a good sense I don't want nothing out of the house but he want Di and it's it's not it's not getting it better it's getting worse and worse now I met a few pieces of Propet that he had worked on he really got up the code and uh we got another piece coming up the Cod over that same area uh hoping the black caucus will work on one piece that I'm trying to get situated so it's just several pieces over there just really that's why I'm against it I'll be honest with you and it's hell to get them to do anything I'm sorry to use that word but it is what it is and when the lawyer get on it it ain't going to be nothing left so they be on auction B but they don't realize that's all they get that little good ey ey full that's it but you can't tell them nothing you know just because they educated still can't tell them nothing and some of them not educated still can't tell them nothing so we got problem and I'm really trying to F fill out a solution that would solve the problem because we already Des designated as a historic district right so we're hoping to bring it up snuff and it it's really difficult but I'm not a quitter a winner never quits and quitter never wins so I'm not a quit on it that's all I got to say and thank you for your time Bo would you like me to track this for the time being to register or not um I would say let's incorporate it into the other ordinance not into this one yes sir so we I think you covered this one on page three yes sir on page five um this one highlighted under I was brought in I think believe from sarasa um regarding people living in tents um this is to basically to stop that similar to what's happening nearby um it'll be something I can allow to enforce okay now that being said I mean truthfully we're not going to worry about the kids that want to pick the you know pitch the tent for the summer in the backyard we're not going to worry about those this is where you're actually living in the tent right on um page six um starting with a parking lot maintenance I know that we need one of those especially over near um 20th Street um this would allow us to go in and make people or incentivize people to do um enrichments on their property that are open to the public so they don't end up running their cars driving through hitting Boles everywhere um then we have the assign maintenance basically to help basically make people or encourage people to keep their signs up to date proper um safe and um stagnant water we have some of those in different areas gives you guideline what needs to be done and then with the storm water pond maintenance guidelines um bmps to so that people maintain the um storm Waters especially for mosquito control and different things keeping the mode and cut back and then on um the mandatory utilities basically if you are living in the structure you have to have at least water and electricity we got a house right now uh the the the previous city manag is in here we don't hold it right there we got a house right now there's no running water and uh they got the electricity turn on and I called um FL of power light and talk to One the head and U destruction need to be working and uh we just went to a legal Cal of it the people stay in the structures not own us you can't get the Lo lights so where do we stand with that I mean so I know for the water to get the water turned on here in the city you have to be the property owner um so like if the property I hate to say if the property is in the state the city will not turn the water on for you because we don't have proof of ownership um well one of the problem I have I I I talked to the Florida Power en light man and ask him how do they turn the light on and the people don't own the property and they don't have no matter of fact the city of f have better ordinance than the Florida P light Florida P light don't care we we we could not unfortunately regulate Power and Light for them because that's under their rules so if they have says that the box has to be a certain standard and so forth before they're willing to turn the lights on that is not in our control we could not force them to do something now the only way around of it is if they're working on the property and they have access to like a oral vehicle RV by ordinance if they have an active building permit they could live in the RV temporarily and probably have a have a Teeple placed in while they work on the property but actually having power to the structure itself that's going to be what they recommend and what what they what they were willing to do to have the power turned on yeah well we have we have a problem right now we have a squad living in a place that doesn't have no running water but they got the power and the power bill being paid that's one of the problem we got going on now but I know the own the property so we got the legal on it but I just don't see how to FL the power light with allow that because yes the city of the F does not allow you to turn what on lesson you have to owner there or some legal documentation of it correct that is a big plus for the city and this is some of the problem that's going on in the historic district that that I'm working with we got squaders in the house and can't get the power here now and that's a shame I think the rest of it was just ruming Mr strong yes sir that's is the changes that are to the um orces themselves just changing of the numbers a couple things yes sir um no person shall permit to remain upon any roof or any Courtyard vacant lot or open premises any accumulation of waste grass waste paper grass weeds litter combustible flammable waste or rubbish of any kind um I know it's an you're under 143 which which number is that uh h on under 4.3 okay so my only concern in here is that there are such a thing as green roofs now I just don't want this to be used to construe that you cannot have a green roof in other words no this is mostly if you when you drive around you see all those ferns growing up there and different little patches that's what we're referring to but if it's actually designed yeah for that then that would be a whole different story I just I know but it says can't have anything on I just get I hate to have and not uh I mean I we could put in there at the bottom you know at the very end um basically exception of green roof designed or something basically where it dictates that it was actually designed for that yeah and I would refer to Clay in terms of whether that should be a general thing at the beginning it's just a catchall like you know designed elements are not are excluded I think that should be part of the catch all yes have a general carve out of the start that makes it clear design elements or not yeah because zeroscape is the other one in terms of weeds and grass and stuff on the front I know that Chris when you go around you tell people say well if it's a design element it's fine but if it's just that you're letting your grass grow and not cutting it it's not I know you say that but again it says 12 inches if I'm going to zerc I had a person that off the sou 11th was letting their whole backyard grow up for bees yeah so I had explained to her look you know if you want to have Landscaping I said cut me paths so doesn't look like you're just letting your whole backyard grow actually do something well looks like you're actually doing it on purpose and I understand I just think a catchall is important to to deal with those because right now we're doing it as a common sense you know written in and then if somebody wants to make the argument they can come make the argument of magistrate right and that's actually my next question uh 149 D14 duties of the city council thought we were having magistrate deal with these are we dispensing duties to the city council to you said 14-9 14-9 yes it mandatary utilities no same duties and decisions of city council page page of 16 keep scrolling down it be the new 14 14 okay so I thought that we were using the magistrate for these I know that the council has some duties under the Magistrate but are these matched up to that um well right now we are taking the appeals to the magistrate so I will go and correct that um she is okay the ordinance still says that the city manager has the right to do certain things as appeals but we have been taking it to the magistrate at this point in time basically to throw it back on our Magistrate so it doesn't fall on city council doesn't fall on city manager um that way basically falls on magistrate and code enforcement themselves for certain things um so I can go back in and rechange that so that basically it's the magistrate doing the um the appeal section do we want to just make these changes and go and move this to the council or do we want to bring this back um well we're not going to have a second unless you pass the go so to speak I would think you probably should bring this back and take a look at it I would with Mr Cason's Indulgence perhaps Mr K rather than us write something for you to see let us bring you and we can send to you for the next meeting a couple of cities that have commercial vacant building registry scenarios starting there to see how that looks um not saying that the discussion for residential that's brought up is not a tool the city needs to possibly look at its toolkit the reason I would suggest the commercial ones is in my experience those are the most nearly tailored ordinances they are very well defined and what they're aiming to address they're not dealing with what I refer to as what ill are you addressing just generalized flight perhaps if you saw how some other ones are looking I don't know that it would change your philosophical opinion on this but I think it might give you an idea on how the city could Implement some of these things in ways that don't address it because as I listened to some of your comments I do recall a couple I of that that don't get anywhere near what you're talking about that are legitimately talking about commercial structures that could well be put into use and are not situations where a family is being divested of that property one way or the other so maybe let us give you a look at that before because I think there is some more discussion because whether it goes to the council or not it's a discussion that's going to keep coming up and I think that's what you did say you be willing to discuss it more in the future yeah yes so let's start with that and see if that gets us anywhere and I honestly I in terms of the vacant buildings and the registration my my biggest concern is commercial okay and I don't think that really impacts a lot of what you're talking about we're not dealing mostly not dealing with family situations yeah all right so we'll just bring this back at the next meeting thank you I'll be brief on chapter 16 because we've already talked about it what I would specifically call the attention to the chapter 16 does not take a lot of reading um 161 is just operation in public use it's the one I quoted to you earlier need to read that just look at what it says we're going to need to expand that section but 1611 of the code is what I'd ask the clerk to send out to everybody specifically it is a alpha numeric section 16-11 regulations a through k and L and bold those are all of your regulations to the park a through K so take a look at that um there's stuff about Chipley Park late and late defunc that we'll talk about when we have this discussion I would highly encourage Chipley Park should be treated broadly as a Park and Lake defunc should be treated as a body of water within a park so I think it makes a lot of sense to regulate the lake and the park in two separate sections U when that comes back um article four is the Chipley Park Amphitheater if you're break out the amphitheater why aren't you breaking out the lake so those are just some thoughts I'm not going to get into whether or not we need to change anything in there that'll save that for another day and we can talk about it tonight if you want but the biggest thing that I think we have to start with is the 1611 a through K regulations for all Parks let's talk about what are our fixed regulations for every city park smoking vaping we talk about but let's what are we going to do there and then let's figure that out as we go piece meal down the rest of the parks and the facilities and we can take a look at that so questions feedback or comment I'd ask for it this time but broadly where I need your guidance is a through K add delete expand reduce what do we do so that's my take on where we are with those um and I realize we're getting to one of my college professors used to say at the point where the mind can absorb no more than the ARs can endure an insightful fellow though uh you on 1611 I actually don't see much changes but we tell them what they can drink we tell them what they can say tell them what they can ride just don't tell them not to smoke that's all I'm saying regulate their speech but not their smoking all right moving on uh committee priority list do we have any changes to that anybody want to update that I think we know what we're going to bring back we not be bringing the animal well I guess are we bringing the animal Wars back one more time thought we we we took that one forward right I figure how to ask it seems like every time it comes back is not CW anymore take it out no take it out take it out Ro is not C all right so we will bring back for the next meeting our Focus will be on 16 for the corporation of 6.5 an additional discussion of 14 I believe that will probably be as far as you're able to get in one minut y based on what I'm reading in the Park section yeah I agree okay so that covers the tracking sheet as well as priority list anybody else have any other changes uh I don't know when we get the signage um I guess let's just finish these out just get these out okay then we'll come forward on the other ones signage is going to be much more unwieldly issue to deal with but it is going to and it may be as I'm looking at your priority list in your tracking sheet I think signage is going to be its own animal alog together probably going to be a whole meeting on just that part of the code and um candidly well I know Mr Wallace has stepped out I guess he's not here to throw something at me we probably really need to focus at the next meeting if y'all would please come with some ideas about things you want to address in the L development code I know our Planning Commission is eager to assist if possible but it does appear to me that we may need to start having some more robust discussions about the LDC see as a whole um I don't want to hijack away from the code review but we're making progress on the code when you look at how many sections we've ticked off and really cleared that's going about where I'd see but we are spending a lot of time in planning necessarily because it is what's for but we need to talk about that from more of a order of operation standpoint and how we're going to tackle those so okay all right all right uh we'll open the floor for Citizens comments I Can't Hardly Wait for number 18 I have a couple of questions I would like to ask you um we hope something that we did was helpful with where you are with the city and if not we'll try to help in other ways I mean with the downtown um when we get to our historic develop uh historic preservation code do you wish us to continue working on design standards also for residential should we start working on that now and are you thinking about including design review board in any ordinance changes because if you're not we don't want to spend a lot of time time on that and without that you don't get a c certified local government well that can be in the future that could be um McKenzie's working on a way to do it with that as a fill-in space at some future date I don't know if we'll get there but counc be ask about certify local government and the number one requirement yes design re board you have to have it to have become certifi government it's a prerequisite yeah have to have what it's a prerequisite if you will not be a certified local government if you do not have a drb you got to have the design review board it's one of the it's like three or four requirements you have to have to come it's not much but that's one of them yeah yeah there four yeah I think five total big ones in terms of advisory boards that's really the only required Advisory Board yeah well let me say this if you separate out the idea that you have to have a local planning AG you have to be in compliance with Florida Statutes relative to that for certified local government but separating that is the only non Florida SE I just look the only thing we don't have in terms of yeah body but that's also the most tenous to navigate well it gives you the most benefit in terms of Grants and that kind of thing but we don't have to do that right now um the the conversations we've had about design review uh is that we hope it will be more of an assist Ive rather than a punitive body um that's what we're talking about now that's why we got um Joe Johnson is one of our Consultants because he's on the property right side and we want it fair for the histor um preservation uh Enthusiast as well as the property rights Enthusiast it's so we would like for it to read something like they're there to assist uh the people who are applying for a certificate of appropriate and then they will make a recommendation to the planning board rather than to be a hammer thank you any other comments from any anyone else yes ma'am hi Lisa Sor I know that we have a noise ordinance on our priority list do we have any idea of how quickly that will be coming up we need one badly we we've talked about it pretty exens we can do to assist pushing that forward as Citizens with city council the problem is we've been advised that a noise ordinance correct me from wrong here gentlemen but a noise ordinance in just about any shape or form is going to end up being legally problematic for the city but see I literally I had a noise complaint a two weeks ago and the police Department answered and told me need to go to City Hall to city council because we don't have a noise ordinance there's nothing they could do to enforce it of course they've been doing that but so I mean we we have we have engaged on that particular topic several times in this committee and unfortunately no matter which way you write it we're gonna we're going to be in ultimately the key ultimately the key is the city's G if the city adopts an ordinance it won't it to be enforceable which I'm sure you do absolutely the challenge we have the challenge we've had is uh noise ordinances broadly in state of Florida back in circle 2011 2012 restricting as being broadly unconstitutional so then the attempts to rewrite them carried on for about 8 to 10 years since then and you're starting to see more have the ability to be enforced but there has to be objective versus subjective measurements so the distinction there is if you have deciel meter what's the line well now the decimal meter has to be calibrated and so when we talked to City police about that sure buy every one of us a deciel meter and well can we go get the one Radio Shack no it's got to be the big nice one that's $300 a handheld unit that has to be calibrated every time before they go out in the field and so I think what we have well yeah well we have tried to encourage and what I would continue to encourage the public and the local law enforcement do is address noise complaints through the avail Florida Statutes that may have criminal punitive measures attached to them because often times the initial noise complaint itself may not be something that can warrant action but the interjection of law enforcement can open the door to it I would like to see the city have the ability to dress noise and certain benefits um I sat through a seminar not too long ago that talked about um bedroom communities and quiet designations in terms of time location similar to the county and the short answer is I've yet to find one in the State of Florida that has pulled it off but other states are doing it so trying to find which one state Orin State statutes provide us the closest comp to the Florida statute so we are looking at it unfortunately it is not the easiest thing for a city to take on same reason the county has similar issues but they can do something some somewhat okay so no time soon basically the the thing we'd be lying to you if we gave you a time frame gotcha I think the thing that changed our calculus is on top of it being problematic as as he stated from a legal perspective this the state legislature a couple years ago changed the law on all of these ordinances so when we write an ordinance if someone decides to challenge that ordinance in the past it was they bore the cost of challenging it we bore our cost of of Defending it right now the legislature has changed it to where if they Prevail we're now on the hook for all of the expenses and damages and legal fees and and legal fees and everything else so now am now we we have to strongly consider every ordinance that we write because it gets challenged and we lose we're on the hook for a lot of money and then the other side is you now have the business damage to business element that was the newer ordinance to went in business says well this get shut down my business the number gets really big so yeah it's not something we're ignoring it's just something that we are grappling with well no it's just kind of hard being you know residents when you're getting told this by you know when you're making a call and a complaint but then there's nothing that we can do well I've had I've and I know PD's having a hard time with it too well I've ridden with Chief Earley and and we I've actually been out on some of these noise complaints and and the conversation that I've had with him is okay for example they're they're complaining about a particular business that's conducting business late late at night a nightclub and what there what the the person was complaining about would not register on a noise meter and if it did it would register below the threshold we set we would have to set the Threshold at something like 30 DB because it's the it's that lowend that this that's not what I yeah and in this case that would never register on a decimal meter so we would we would the noise the noise ordinance would not be applicable absolutely in that case yeah there's a lot of stuff we have to navigate and it's there's no easy there's no easy button no completely understandable thank y'all and your the Sunday afternoon no ours is Thursday a evenings and then we get Saturday nights Saturday night okay yeah we get Saturday night Thursday yeah yeah but it's usually like once a month okay but then we can't do anything about it and it's till one o'clock in the morning so yeah and you know for Seas doesn't even bother us the noise from them that you know is tolerable but it's when we get the non stop and then the blocking of the road because the cars and when it's you know not a block party just because we have traffic and yeah and it's unfortunately nothing we can do because just the noise so hopefully soon we're not we're not giving up yeah fingers crossed any other public comment seeing none we will call this meeting adjourned here