Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

It's a dirty one. It's a dirty one. It's a dirty one.

He has a problem. That'll be awesome. Road's fine.

They're really professional. Yeah. We're excited. We're done. We're getting there. You know, it's a journey, right? You're going to be freezing. Multi-season run.

The average is up.

Hello, everyone, I would like to call the meeting to order for the planning commission. Can I get a motion to approve the agenda? 2nd, um, all in favor. Hi, that was opposed motion carries. Our last meeting was June 18th. Can I get a motion to approve the June 18th meeting minutes?

So moved.

Second. Thank you. All in favor? Aye. And those opposed? Motion carries. First new business is the Enclave at Carver Creek Final Plats.

Erin? Thank you. Members of the Commission, tonight we are reviewing two final plats. So the two applications will look really similar. We're starting with the enclave because I went in alphabetical order. So reviewing phase one final plat for the enclave. Some context and location. So you've seen this map several times before, but this is now our westerly line for the city of Carver with the annexation of the property for the project. So you can see that we are west of current Carver neighborhood. So the preserve is on the north, Timber Creek on the south, with several streets entering the project, Old Oak Road, Monroe Drive, Balsam Drive. There's one more. Is it Timber Lane? It feels right. Coming into the project from the east, moving west into the property. On the superimposed portion, the comprehensive plan, you previously have reviewed a comprehensive plan amendment. So we went from high density to medium density on that property that's adjacent to 212. So that was a process that ran through Planning Commission, City Council, and Met Council. All have been completed. So some fast facts at full build. So this does not include information about Phase 1. Phase 1 is obviously included, but this is specific for the entire project. So it's proposed by Tamarack and D.R. Horton. D.R. Horton previously has built Meridian Fields and Hawthorne Ridge in Carver. It's 255 total acres that have been annexed into the city of Carver. 508 homes, 403 detached, 105 townhome. Again, that's a reminder of the comp plan amendment that we did, bringing it from high density to medium. That's that townhome product. on a portion of the property. Houses range from 1500 square feet to 3,100. Nearly six miles of public trail and sidewalk will be included at full build. And there is really minimal tree removal that will be required with this project. As you know, if you've lived in Carver for a while, this traditionally has been a farmed site, which leads it to have very few trees. But there are some interesting ravine old growth tree areas on the property that will be preserved through the development. And then as we've been working towards a large community scale park will be included in a future phase. So steps that have been completed for the enclave, we saw a concept plan and annexation. An EAW is completed due to the amount of units that the project has. So the environmental assessment worksheet, comprehensive plan amendment that I've mentioned a couple times, rezoning and preliminary plat were your most recent reviews in May, I think, was when we saw the preliminary plat for the enclave. The graphic on the screen now you've seen at several meetings, but it shows the general layout of the neighborhood as well as proposes a different housing types via color we start to get a feel of how the project lays out where those trails are the large scale park etc. Preliminary plat which you recently saw and approved the Council went on to also approve the preliminary plat so just a reminder of what that looks like for the full project. And then some details about Phase 1 specifically. So it's 91 single-family homes. The lots range from 45 feet wide to 65 feet wide, which is consistent with the R2 PRD zoning district that you reviewed. There are sidewalks throughout. And for this phase of the project specifically, we'll be doing cash in lieu of land, working towards that large-scale neighborhood park in a future phase. So again, just cash in this section. We're beginning work on the park. I have some ideas floated out to our team that will start to firm up as we move through additional phases for the enclave. Phase one of the final plot is consistent with the approved preliminary plot. So there are no significant changes that you need to know about between your review of prelim plot and final plot for this area. Overall, final plot is on the screen now. And then you'll get a little bit, this is like a Cindy Mineral flashback. She always hated when stuff was the wrong orientation. It's the way it should be, but flipping it so it's on the north-south access, you can see where phase one starts to play out. So on the farthest right in the red are the homes that will be included in phase one. There are other areas included in the phase one final plat that will allow for work to start in those areas. So utility construction, street construction, et cetera, can start in those outlot areas. But the red outline will be where the phase one homes will be constructed with this final plat application. So breaking it down a bit. So the pages of the final plot had the different areas broken into separate pages. So you can start to see where they fall in the development. So moving north to south in the buildable areas, this is the first off Old Oak Road. The center, Willow Terrace. And then the final is this location to the south.

This is where it hooks also into Timber Creek.

Landscape planning, you start to see what the monuments will look like coming into the development. So those will be off Monroe Drive as you enter the enclave. Again, final plot is on the screen now. It's consistent with the preliminary plot. Phase one includes 91 lots. The developer is here tonight if you have any questions for them. Otherwise, I'll open it up for discussion.

Anyone have questions?

I have none.

Okay, that was a little bit too easy. Can we get a motion to recommend the approval of the final flat phase one for the Enclave at Carver Creek? Second. We'll all second it. All those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? Motion carries. The next new business is the final flat phase one Summerfield. Okay.

Thank you. This is going to feel very similar. Thank you. We are now reviewing Summerfield Phase 1 Final Plot. The story is a little bit different, so I'll add some flavor where I can. Context of where we are in this project, we are south of our current city limits. So on the map on the left, Carver Elementary, Creekside Park are two areas of interest that might give you some bearings for the location. This is our southwest growth area. And then on the right is the comp plan. So you can start to see how this project falls. The three parcels that are contemplated in phase one are two low density pieces, one medium density piece. And the preliminary plot was consistent with the guidance for the comprehensive plan. And everything in the final plat is consistent with the rezoning that occurred at the time of preliminary plat that also that R2PRD So summer field facts, the overall development again is a project that is proposed by summer gate. The phase one area of the project was recently annexed into the city of carver it was not the entire project area so that's the change between the enclave and summer field is the annexation process for it so as additional phases come in there'll be annexed into the city. We'll review the rezoning at that time once it is under city jurisdiction as property owners are interested in joining the project area. So the phase one area is 113 acres. This was a really heavy lift for the alternative urban area wide review of the AUAR, which was completed as part of the project. We included a larger project scope than what the Summerfield project was including. just so we could make really sound and rational decisions about things like utilities, streets for this entire growth area, not limited to just the project space that was proposed by Summerfield or anyone beyond. So that process was about a year long with full environmental review. by the city outside organizations. So really, it was a great process to work through, learn a lot more about the site, learn a lot more about our development patterns as well. So that was prior to annexation and such for phase one, but that was completed. Again, like I mentioned, the property is guided for low density and medium density, which phase one meets. So they've been through a similar process, concept plan annexation, AOAR rezoning and prelim plat. I think you most recently saw the Summerfield prelim plat in June. So it feels like it was very recently for this group. On the screen now is the preliminary plat that was approved at that time. And some phase one details. So phase one is 276 single family homes. Lots range from 35 feet wide to 60 feet wide. This captures a portion of that medium density that we talked a lot about at the prelim plot. So those lot widths are pushed down to be able to increase the density. So thinking through that as we think about the guidance for the comprehensive plan. There's sidewalk throughout. Similar to the enclave, we're doing cash in lieu of land for phase one. There is, again, a large-scale community park that's contemplated with this project, but not part of phase one. We'll include that information in a future phase. We'll do some outreach. We'll figure out what that park is going to look like long-term. And then in phase one, there are two HOA-owned and maintained parks included. So thinking about that will not be part of this public city system, so we will not do maintenance of those properties. Again, phase one of the final plot is consistent with the approved preliminary plot. And here it is in all its glory as the final plot is on the screen now. So again, very consistent to the preliminary plot that you saw in June. Landscaping throughout, and then you can see, let me get my cursor, the two parks that are proposed. One is here, additional here in those two areas. So again, HOA owned and maintained. And then street names, I know that Commissioner Walsh has some feedback on that that we'll be looking forward to the conversation once we wrap up. So again, the developer is in the room if you have questions, otherwise I'll pass it to you for discussion and questions.

Sherry, do you want to start since you have questions?

Yeah, so I don't know if it's a question. It's more of a comment and concern. I'm concerned about how the streets are named. It's not the names themselves, but the way the street curves and it transitions. So, for example, we've got Bottle Brush Way. And then if you keep going straight and you go around the bend somewhere in there, it turns into Lacewood Drive. That is a nightmare for emergency services, especially if the house numbers, I'm not sure which way our house numbers go, east, west, north, south, but you do have a potential, and I'm just going to make it up, of having 612 on Bottle Brush and a 612 on Aster and a 612 on Lacewood. So... My recommendation or my thinking was let's make Bottle Brush Way or pick one, Lacewood Drive, but make it one road for continuity purposes. I'm fine with the Astor Drive, Astor Curve. And then the other concern I had was Astor Drive on the north side. There's no residential addresses right now that are there, and there isn't in the future plot because to the right of that is Township. Sorry, I was missing my word. Township. So I'm not real sure why we would have Astor Drive to the north and then an Astor Drive to the south. It feels a little, again, setting up emergency services for poor response, the way the roads are addressed.

So for some additional context to this street that comes in from the roundabout will be a collector. So it will operate similarly to the system of like Monroe. And if you think about driving on Jonathan Carver Parkway, when you get to the Monroe intersection, if you are coming north, To your left is Monroe drive to your right is spring Creek drive. So historically we've used a collector street as a differentiator to change the street name. So this wouldn't be inconsistent with other practices that we've done. We've done it both ways, frankly, like ironwood goes both ways. Um, but Monroe and spring Creek drive is an applicable section that would, you could think about this with the two splits between that. So with the potential of how large Astro drive also could go north. I think there's benefit to having some differentiation, just so it's not a street that goes on for a very long time when there's still property in phase one that has that same address. So open to feedback, but I think the comments are well heard and understood, especially with the curve, just not having a differentiation to know where that street changes, so. What is the main road called? That's TBD. We're working through, since it's a collector, the developer gave staff some space and counsel if they want to discuss what that collector might be called.

Anything else, Trey? No, that was it.

Jim? Total, this summer field was going to be 2,000 to 2,500 houses?

At full build out in several years, yes.

Are we going to be able to handle everything? I mean, that's going to probably add about three quarters of our population now.

So with the AUAR and the comp plan, yes, we're thinking about things like utilities, streets for full build out to ensure that we are creating pipes that are big enough for the additional housing and streets that are wide enough. So Yes, and also based on the phasing, they don't all come in at once. We have time to digest them phase by phase, one by one. So day one, Jonathan Carver Parkway won't see 2,500 additional cars. So as we continue to build the system, build additional accesses in and out of the neighborhood, I think it will feel similar to the type of development that we're seeing. But again, won't happen probably for several years, but you're right. It does add.

The one that worries me the most is water capacity.

Do you want to talk about like a future water tower? Yeah.

Yeah, so as Aaron alluded to, the nice piece about the AUAR was we really got to master plan this whole area to make sure that we had sufficient sewer and water capacity. We already have water system, water treatment improvements programmed within our 2040, just due to 2040 comp plan growth. So in our long-term financial plan, we actually already had water system improvements planned within the 10-year time horizon. So we're confident that this is going to be able to meet the demand of this development.

Aaron, I'm just, sorry, just one question on that. Who puts the cost for that water infrastructure build when something like this comes in?

So those are, I mean, those are overall system improvements. So we collect, you know, trunk fees and charges as the community builds out. And then those go towards future infrastructure improvements that are needed in the community.

And then if we know that for phase one, there's going to be additional property that develops west, we can ask the developer to put in a larger size pipe. The city then pays that cost difference of what their pipe would cost versus what the eventual pipe would cost. It's oversizing. So we pay that difference to be able to put in the larger pipe on the day one of construction instead of having phase one go in. Phase three comes in and we realize, oh, that pipe isn't big enough. We're planning for it already with the first phase to make sure that the pipe has capacity with the ability to pay for that oversizing cost.

But that doesn't apply to the water tower, does it?

Oversizing? Yeah. No.

So we, the users?

It's all part of our water system. Like it's not out of the realm of what we do for our comp plan.

I have a couple questions, so I know at the last meeting we talked about, and in the streets and access section, it talks about the city and cover county and the developers have been working on. Kind of 11, Jonathan cover quarter. Has there been any further. Timelines discussions, I'm just it's weird going from preliminary to final in, I mean, a month when it's like, they're moving dirt. Shouldn't there be a road there?

Yep, so probably since we met last as a commission and talked about this project, the, the city council actually, we've adopted a joint powers agreement with. Carver county, and the city is actually leading the county road 11 improvements project in coordination with the county. So it's a, it's a joint project that's led by the city of carver. for the roadway improvements in this area. So that design phase is underway right now. We're actively meeting with the county and we're doing coordination meetings. The plans are being developed for that project. And then the anticipation is that will be a 2027 construction project with a 2028 completion.

And when would houses start going in? I'm just concerned 276 houses. I mean, that could be 600 cars.

So when a developer gets preliminary plot approval, they can apply for a grading or an early start agreement, which Summergate did. That's how dirt is moving prior to full approval through final plot. They can do site work here. So they were installing utilities, doing grading work. After final plot in the developer's agreement, we limit the amount of houses that can be completed before the street's are in a safe condition for a passable condition. So it typically happens that models can be approved prior to the full street going in. So depending on how many housing types or builders are in the development usually sets how many models we allow. And then we work with the fire department to ensure that there's safe access to those models at all times, that there's addresses posted. That's often something that's missed. when the houses start, when street signs aren't in quite yet. So it's a coordination piece kind of with all of us together via the DA to figure out how many models there can be, where they're going to be located, and then how there can be safe access to those models. So like Erin said, 2027, it feels like it's far away, but it's August already. So all of it is probably going to start happening in conjunction with each other. So the streets in Summerfield might be ready day one, when the GCP project is completed. If they could match up that perfectly, that would be great. It's going to be our goal. So work will be happening on both projects at the same time.

Will there be any city feedback? So like when the long Jonathan Carver was started, there was open houses and opportunity for people to provide comments, questions.

Yep. So we're actually planning to have open houses this fall for that design project. So there'll be information going out. I think the first open house is scheduled for the end of September. I don't know the exact date, but. But we do have an open house that's being discussed right now, and there'll be communication sent out on that very shortly.

Thank you. And then 35 foot single family home. Is that the smallest, narrowest we have? Yes. And that still requires a seven and a half foot setback on each side?

Nope. With a rezoning request that was processed in June, it goes down to five feet.

That's all I have anything from the side.

Yeah, I got a couple of questions going back to the road discussion. I feel like there's probably a story between the name changes from the original to. I don't know the backstory of that.

Yeah. So our typical city process is that we avoid naming streets after people. Historically, we have done it like Levi Griffin is a good example of that. And we've just been we've changed our approach to it, not fully understanding like who those people may have been or what their impact might have been. So at a policy level, we are working towards not doing it. I know you likely all probably remember the Monroe, like how did Monroe Drive happen so recently? Staff had a different name. Council made that decision at the time of their meeting. So it's up to council discretion at final approval. But in general, we're moving away from naming streets after specific people.

Okay. Then going back to the road naming, so the red road naming. I had the same concerns. with the roads there. In addition to what she said initially, Aster Curve and Aster Drive right next to each other, I think that's another source of convention, not convention, sorry, confusion. Because people are always gonna say, hey, I live on Aster, or I live on Bottlebrook, or I live on Lacewood. So I don't know if there's a way with the renames so you don't have two similarly named roads where the only differentiator is drive versus curve.

Do you feel similarly about the summer suite area in the south?

Yes. Okay.

Aren't they both lane?

You got suite and court, or lane and court.

The cul-de-sac.

Yeah, it's cut off from yours. I mean, I'm not going to die on a hill over it, but I think it's... That kind of convention if we rename like the the bottom rush lace with that kind of area we're not an extra name of throw to ask to drive more of the the collector there looks up with lupine. The names that were to use. And then my last question is, in your presentation, you said the finals consistent with the preliminary. Was there any changes at all or is the final identical to the preliminary plat?

There were changes to the plans, but there were not changes to the plat.

Okay. What were the changes?

To the plans?

Yeah. Anything significant?

No, not anything significant. I'd say it was a typical review process between prelim and final. generated probably a page and a half of comments on their first final plat review so it's a lot of reminders um sharing final information about city standards but there was nothing that was substantial okay that's all my questions all right i have a couple i think they're all for you aaron so uh the first one uh when we

Reviewed the initial plot, there's a gentleman who had property, I believe above a lot G that was concerned about water. I think you guys were going to follow up. Do you know the outcome of that?

Yeah. Good question. Scott. So, after that meeting, we actually met with this gentleman. His name is Mr. Dean Stewie. and I personally met with him. We had Carver County Public Works staff involved with the conversation. We had the CCWMO staff at the meeting. We had the developer. We had the developer's contractor. So we all met out at his residence and we reviewed the issues that he's seen in person. So we have a good plan for how that's going to be handled and Um, kind of in summary is where the, where the storm water outlets in his direction. We're, we're basically going to only release the minimum amount that must be released, like, per the watersheds rules, because there's, there's wetland area in the back. So we can't like. Dehydrate the wetland, but then there's going to be an overflow or bypass pipe. That's going to take water. That's. Part of the roadway project, and then we'll be able to use the storm sewer along the county road to kind of take the access water. If there's a high rain event.

Do you feel like he was concerns were satisfied or at least he was?

Yeah, I think he was happy with. That we took it very seriously. He was happy to see that. We all went out there. So we're obviously going to keep in touch with him as the plans unfold. He's only had, I think 1 additional conversation with me, and it was related to he had an erosion control question about silt fence going in when they were doing clearing and grabbing work. So I got back to him on that. But basically when you clear the trees out, like to the line, you have to be able to clear the trees out and then you put the sill fence in. You can't like do it beforehand because you physically can't get to the line. So it's kind of a, you know, one after the other type operation. So he was just concerned about when the sill fence was going to go in. Yeah.

All right, thank you. Um, other questions is probably a question I should ask that the initial 1, but maybe it's in the, but. With this development, is that going to require it like a new natural gas compressor station around here or electrical substation? Or do you know if the utilities can handle that?

I don't I don't recall. The private utility component of the AUAR, maybe Erin does.

I don't off the top of my head, but we have quarterly meetings with MVEC, which would be served for power on this side. So we share any PLATS development projects that are happening so they can plan for future locations.

Okay, just wonder if there was where that may be, but maybe they don't.

Yeah. And maybe I'll just piggyback on that. I know that they are planning some, like, 3 phase power improvements to the area. Both. We're kind of looking ahead to future phases, because a future phase will require a lift station. So we let them know ahead of time that we'll need 3 phase power to power the lift station. And then we also let them know about the future public services facility on the South leg of 11. so they can have sufficient power supply for the public services facility. Okay.

And the last 1, I probably should ask this earlier too. Do you know when they're running the initial utilities to these? Are they running fiber as well? Um, for private utilities. Yeah. Well, when they run, when they build them, when they build them, when they run. Electricity and natural gas to the house and sewer. Are they running fiber or is that going to come in after the fact?

Um, typically what happens is, like, as the developer is, is building the phase, they'll be working with the private utility companies and the developer will, like, put in conduits and everything, like, right away with the road construction. And then the private utility companies will follow up right behind them and get their initial builds done within the development. Okay. All right, thank you. Yep.

Anyone else have questions.

What about the schools are they. Are they expecting a lot of children with these developments or.

We've had conversation with Eastern Carver County Schools about these projects, and we've worked with a developer just to say, this is a lot of houses, what will that do for the school system? So we've engaged with the school district, connected them with a developer, keeping everybody's eyes open that a school likely would be a complementary use in this space. Nothing is planned right now. I know that the district has a school location in Chaska, I think, identified as their next project. So depending on what their plan is next and where they're seeing the most growth, we'd be open to the conversation. Anyone else? If someone is going to make a motion, I would suggest that you make a motion to approve final plot, uh, with provision with, um. Allowing staff and the developer to revise street names prior to review by the city council.

So, can we get a motion to approve the final flat of phase 1 summer field with the revised street names as needed?

So move second.

All in favor? Aye. Those opposed? Motion carries. And I'm thinking if some people want to leave, they can.

I'm also going to ask that we move communications up in case you have questions for Aaron, so then he also can leave if he doesn't want to sit through our code stuff. Or do you want to start and just kick off some updates? Sure.

It's going to be riveting.

I know it is. Aaron said it's not an engineering issue, so I don't get input. No, I just wanted to give a quick update on the street project. So things are progressing on the Mount Hope Road piece up here. So that was paved recently. That's probably been a little over a week already. So that's paved. They're currently working on getting the trail prepared to pave that. So behind the curb, that includes a new trail extension from Lyons Park down to downtown as well. So they're getting that prep today. They think they might be in a position to even try to get that paved tomorrow or Saturday. So that's their goal. And then at that point, that piece of the project will be in a pretty good spot. There's a little bit of concrete curb and a few driveway infills to do yet on that piece. And then the work on getting the restoration done behind the new trail. And then the last thing that'll happen will be the final bituminous wearing course. So that'll be still a couple of weeks out. But here in the next couple of weeks, this is going to be looking really nice on Mount Hope Road. And then starting next week in the Carver Bluffs neighborhood. They're going to be working on doing spot repairs for the curb and gutter that's damaged along the project area. So we have a notice. I think Brenda might actually sent it out today to the, all the residents in the, in the Carver Bluffs area. So, like I said, they'll do, they'll basically take out the damaged curb pieces and then they'll pour those back in and they're not going to reclaim the road right now. So they're actually going to wait because of like labor day and then steamboat days coming up. They're planning to wait to do the reclamation of the road until after that time. So that the road won't be sitting with gravel for 2 weeks essentially. So. That is how they're going to approach the Carver Bluffs neighborhood. But then after Steamboat Days, it'll be the reclamation of the road and then basically just getting it paved pretty quickly thereafter. So I think it should be a pretty good way to approach this phase of the project.

Is the same company doing both Mount Hope and Carver Bluffs?

Correct. Same company. Yep.

And then the trails are getting repaved too?

On Mount Hope Road.

Isn't there signs on other trails? There's seal coating.

Oh, yeah. Sorry. We're seal coating all the trails along Jonathan Carver Parkway are being seal coated. So they got started on that today, but then we got rain this afternoon, so they had to stop. So they're going to be coming back actually next week to finish the seal coating on the trails.

So will the trails be closed during that time period? No.

No. Yep, the project. So there was a completion date of October 9th, which they're obviously going to beat. So. The project is on schedule. Yup. So we had, we've had a few things that have come up, but we do plan a kind of a construction contingency, like within kind of the construction budget. So like when city council sees the, the award of the project, we always kind of carry a contingency with it. So when stuff comes up, then we, yup, exactly. So, um, that's been able to accommodate the things that have come up to date.

I have a question. It shouldn't extend very much into our lawns, right?

No, it really shouldn't. When they remove the curb and gutter pieces that are damaged, you might get like a couple feet behind the curb that they have to fix up. But there's really, in the Carver Bluffs neighborhood, there's really not a whole lot of major lawn disturbance that's going to be happening.

Because it's amazing how much marking and flags I have on my lawn that's been marked by the utilities. Did they go crazy or they're just being super careful?

When they call in and locate me, I guess they're probably marking everything within the right of way to be safe. So that's probably why.

You didn't like those colors?

Well, it's a pain in the ass when you're mowing these grass.

We did archery last year. I'll say they did a nice job of going to the grass hardly at all. We did have a lot of flats.

Yeah, I bet.

So for those homes that are planning on having a garage sale over steamboat days and you've chosen to hold off on that rope construction, thank you.

You're welcome.

Except why did you put up signs that it starts 827? 827.

That's when the curb and gutter, when the concrete sub is planning to be in.

Do you have any work coming up on Spring Creek Drive?

Oh, that's a good question. So right now, There's the city of chaska development going in on the north side of spring creek drive is it's called Fulton wood. It's a, it's a city of chaska project, but we actually coordinated with the city of chaska to actually get mount or spring creek drive is going to get repaved as part of the project. So spring creek drive was planned for. Our street maintenance program in 2028. But as part of this Fulton Wood project, the contractor was already planning to tear up the road out to the center line of the road because they have to put in Water Main, the city of Chaska Water Main in the north side of the road. So then we were able to work with the city of Chaska and say, well, you guys already have time tearing up the north half. Can you have... The contractor do the South half at the same time and then we did a reimbursement agreement with the city of Chaska that will pay them for our half of the road. So, after the project done is going to be a new road from curb to curb.

Why did that never become Carver, like that little blob? That's a good question.

It's called a line road. So the north half of Spring Creek, which is Old 212, that is the city of Carver, and the south half is the city of Chaska. So it's just kind of a unique area.

It's because of the history of the road itself. That used to be the border because it was Old 212.

Yeah, I remember going down the hill.

Yeah, and so it was originally everything south of 212 was Carver and north of 212. And then the road moved, but the border didn't.

It's weird they're developing that blob, but the other part across the road isn't done yet.

Yeah, so they, the utilities are all coming from that way and then into the Fulton wood.

Interesting. Okay, more questions for you. I'll take offline. So that's my subdivision. Oh, and everybody's wondering what is going on with Spring Creek. Oh, some data from the offline.

Okay, we actually, what was that yesterday, the mailer? We sent out a mailer yesterday. So you should be getting a mailer in your mailbox here probably tomorrow. And we sent it out with the city of Carver's envelopes just so people will hopefully open them. But then once you open the letter, it's actually from the developer from Pulte Homes. And it's going to describe all the work that's going to happen, kind of like what I was just describing to you all. But yeah, you can feel free to contact me, Eric, if, yep. Any other construction questions for me?

Communications that you'd like from Aaron?

Okay, thank you.

Thanks, Aaron.

Yep.

Okay, so site plan and ADU section, code sections. Okay, let's do it.

So when we had the planning commission and city council workshop, we identified some sections of the code that were priority to get done. So there are two sections before you tonight that will discuss the ADU and then the site plan. There will be other reviews. So like the city attorney will go through everything. The city council will go through everything. You'll do a public hearing. City Council will do final approval. So we're kicking this back off for site plan and accessory dwelling units. And then other districts that were identified at that workshop were the Gateway Commercial Zoning District, Design Standards, and Fences. So more to come as we continue. Some questions you might have about a site plan. Why is it different than what we do now? When is this applicable? What does it look like? So this would be a review process if the lot already exists and the use is permitted by right. So a good example of that is Carver Square, which is where Mizzie's, Carver Dental, ODB Kids, the vet, Ivy Aesthetics, and the chiropractor are. So when those lots were developed, they all were platted at the same time, and then those lots were available for purchase. So everything was said already, the shared parking agreement, the access into the site, the drainage and utility easements all happened at once instead of happening piece by piece. So if someone bought one of the pieces of land that was available there and they wanted to propose something that was by right, there wouldn't be a city review required right now with our city code because it's not a plotting process. So there was not a replatting that was required. So you all are very familiar with that plotting process. When you have a chance to look at things like building material and screening and landscaping, if someone came in and it was a by right use in that space, they could apply for a building permit. which 90% of the time is probably going to be just fine with construction currently, how it looks, how people are investing in Carver. But there might be those one-off places where, this is a good example, there was an AC unit that went in behind the vet. So since that went in as a buy-write use, we didn't do a full review of that. So the AC unit on the back wasn't screened. I used a little bit of kindness with the vet, the owner of the building and the vet to say, could we at least get some landscaping around those units? It's not required by our code. There wasn't a site plan process. You didn't do it incorrectly. There just wasn't a process for us to catch that prior to it happening. So in good faith, they were able to do that. Those trees are growing. They're going to continue to grow, continue to build screening there. But it's a good example of a situation where something could happen without us having eyes on it fully. So through a site plan review, we're able to look at things like screening, parking, landscaping, adjacent uses. If things are permitted by right, we wouldn't be able to say like, hang on, you actually can't go there. But we could say that this is a shared parking agreement. How many parking spaces does your use need? Is that consistent with how many are available in the lot? So it essentially allows us to take a project that wouldn't require a planning process, but apply some of the information that we do right now to that project. Is everyone tracking with what that would look like? Okay, lots of nodding. So we're going to start with site plan review. It would be a process that would run through staff first, obviously, and then both planning commission and city council would review. Currently, as drafted right now, there would not be a public hearing required since it typically would be a by-right use. That typically isn't a place where someone could come in and say that they were against a use specifically, but they could say, like through the application, we could have some say about like landscaping and such.

Is this just property owned or if you lease or rent?

So in the section of the code, it says it does not apply to a leaseable space that changes. So if your ice cream shop goes into where my pizza place was, that typically doesn't require a site plan review because the exterior isn't changing. We typically do, we require... a SAC determination for a change of use. And then if there is shared parking, we do a parking analysis just to make sure it's still consistent with the code, but it wouldn't be a full site plan review. I'm going to do the classic plug in, plug out, as Mark Postolka would say. I'm going to give her a second. Otherwise, I'll do the millennial restart.

I'll gather around. One microphone.

Okay. I'm going to do a restart.

Do you want to start reading the entire thing? Sure.

I'm going to restart. Does anyone have communication that they want to share or questions about anything outside of what we talked about with Aaron?

Just want to warn everybody. Big plant sale. Oh, you are so right. At the skating rink. Saturday?

In the parking lot?

In the skating rink. In the skating rink. They're going to put the plants on skates.

It's pickleball right now. We have to do paddles.

Any other communication?

That's like very youngest child energy too, just to be like, I'm doing it. Yeah. Yeah. Yup, it is.

Does everybody struggle sharing or is it just you?

It's like most specifically me, but it is kind of across the board. Okay.

So with this part of it is that we switch computers out of here so often. So this formatting, does this go in as a

Like, does it get a number and the formatting get all updated?

Yes. Okay.

It just looks different than how it normally looks.

Okay.

So for tonight's review, this will be the final wording for this document, or are there going to be more versions?

There will be more versions. So in my head.

Sorry, my microphone was not on. In my head, this will be your review. Next will be the city attorney, just to make sure that I'm not proposing anything that he says, like, stop, don't do that. And then city council will see it at work session. They'll provide their feedback included in the document. We'll come back to you for a review again.

Should we start with page one?

How was this created? Like, do you pull from other cities and then put it all together? Okay.

So I'd say this is probably a combination of like four cities all at once. So I started with a city that the city attorney does other work for because I knew that he would generally go for some of that language. But then I used some information from... Chan was a big one. Victoria was a big one. And then Chaska. So trying to keep it kind of consistent in our realm of Carver County. This is totally off the wall, but White Bear Lake just did a huge zoning code reboot. So I've been looking at their information just in general, too, just to see what other folks are doing that have fully updated their code. Light readings. Yeah, but I think it's fun. So it's definitely, it's a, it's a mishmash of what feels right for a carver specifically. Um, and then stuff that would be consistent with our planning process. So I don't want to have anything in the site plan review that we wouldn't do during planning. I don't want it to be a more restrictive process because it should be more straightforward in general than the other, but also it's important to think about things that we think about when we're planning. If we're making developer a put in a landscape plan. Builder B should have the same requirement. So.

So we don't have anything right on the books for this.

No, we have, um, out of some kindness with some developers that have come in recently, we've done a quasi site plan review. Like Mizzis had that process. It wasn't required since it was a fully plotted lot. Um, so this would allow us to have a full process without having to say like, Hey, by the way, could we review X, Y, and Z?

If you had an existing property, what would trigger you to even notify the city that you want to have a site reviewer? Even though you may have to have it done, how would you know you had to have it done?

So it comes through in a couple different ways. So it wouldn't be applicable to a single family home or a two family home. So if someone was remodeling their house, a site plan wouldn't be required. But when someone is taking ownership of a different property, they have to get an updated SAC determination, which happens through the city. So it's called a change of use application. That's a way that we usually get notified of something. Another one, like people pulling permits. So if you bought a property and you wanted to take the building down, a demolition permit would be required through the city. So there are ways that if the developer doesn't think like, hey, I should check with the city about what I'm doing, what's going on. There are ways that we hear about them early enough in the process to be impactful.

And then people just tattle on each other.

Also true.

Well, yeah, market surveillance. Yeah.

Facebook. Yes. Also cover a small enough that, like, truly, if something were to happen in 1 of our commercial districts, we're going to know pretty quickly probably from. Each 1 of you and others. Thank you especially if it's a taco bell.

Correct.

um for me the first paragraph was completely confusing because it talked about commercial industrial in the first sentence and then the second sentence but then there's multi-family residential uses in there also i am oh i don't have my paper okay so you want to make those two separate ideas that's how you're thinking

Well, I'm looking at the first paragraph and, you know, don't ever accuse me of being a smart man, but we're reading this as you can modify a three plus family unit by growing it 11% and not have to do a site planner.

Correct. So if something was getting an addition, it wouldn't be the goal of a site planner review. It's truly, if some, if like an exterior is changing or if it's a new construction building.

Okay, but if you're going to expand or change commercial industrial, you still need a site plan review.

I think.

That second sentence. But multifamily, you're over that 10% cutoff. You have 11% or more expansion or change. The way this is written, since we don't identify multifamily, you wouldn't need a site plan review.

Because there's no definition of multifamily.

You get apartment complex and you grow it by 12%. You wouldn't need a site plan review. The way it's written. But like I said, no one's ever accused me of being smart. Maybe this is something.

Let me check that. I was just utterly confused.

Oh, I see. I see. I'm going to get rid of this. And I'm going to say all new. Don't take this to be what it will be. All new construction or additions over or. Modifications. Yeah. Modifications to any. Except call out exception.

Or I was just thinking the easier way is just leave that second sense as is and just add in multifamily.

Is that a lot of the same stuff, though, twice it felt like? Mm-hmm. No, I'm not going to do that. Add exception stuff below that would not trigger.

It's a modification the same as an expansion or change.

Any new construction. Whoops. What were the words I used?

Expansion or changes in building use.

I don't think I want building use because that could be a leaseable space. And that feels interior. So I'm going to do construction expansions or modifications to the exterior.

Say exterior modifications.

No.

So if there's an interior, I guess you can't expand the interior exceptions.

You could if it's a TARDIS.

If it's what?

If it's a TARDIS. There's one person here who got it. Yeah.

We need a definition of multifamily residential use.

I don't know. I would probably mirror this to whatever we have in our code now. Okay. Check what is in.

Like multifamily isn't like apartment or duplex or...

So in our code, a duplex is defined. We have a duplex definition.

So this is bigger than a duplex.

Correct. Okay. And also it gets really consistent with our zoning districts. So like the R1 district is single family. R2 district is single family or duplex. And then R3 is multifamily. So it's like a twofold way of multifamily that it's not allowed in several of our

Uh, residential districts 1 thing I found that was not here, but. Like, shouldn't landscaping be reviewed because you're talking about the 1 who didn't have the fence or the screening or the.

So, in yeah, we can add it because I know it's in a, an application requirement. landscape compliance with city code and is there any fencing requirements like for if they want to put a garbage can in the middle of the parking lot um i would call that screening in here textures colors screening And I think I might call that out down here. Location and screening details for rooftop equipment and trash. There has to be a different word for trash. I know. Then you're all going to say, what's the definition of refuse? I'm going to use trash. Waste. Municipal solid waste.

Well, since you're on six, I did one thing that's, I see the purpose of six, but that's obviously could get pretty subjective. And maybe it's too far down the road, but I mean, what's the dispute there? Someone says, well, I think that that is, you know, compatible with adjacent structures. And the city says, I don't think it is.

So with the upcoming sections of the code, it's design standards. So it's going to set the materials that you can use in each district. So ensure materials, yada, yada. And then we could say.

So there's some definitions coming for that.

Correct. And it's like percentages often. So it's like no more than 30% of the building can be like a flat steel panel. Okay.

Not neon?

What's that? Not neon colors? Depends on where you are.

We're going to do a meow wolf here.

I got that reference. To design standards.

Okay. Well, that'd be good. Yeah. As long as there's some type of objective thing. Yes.

And that's been something we've been talking a lot about at a staff level too. Um, it's just beefing up our design standards to make them more impactful because right now they're vague. And then asking a developer, like what percent of your building is stone is just a tricky conversation. So we're hoping to get in front of that conversation to say, this is what it needs to look like. Match these design standards.

I just want more question to kind of pick it up. So, what if what if what if there is a standard, but someone says, I, I want a variance with that and come to the. Commission, can they seek a variance from that standard?

I typically stop a variance application when I talk through the requirements to meet the variance criteria in the city code. So there's four criteria in the city code that you have to say the affirmative to. And several projects get stopped when I say, can you say yes to these four things? The person often says no pretty quickly. So they could talk about a variance, but I would say if we all are comfortable and feel good about our design standards, that likely would not be entertained.

Thank you. Are you the zoning administrator?

I sure am.

Okay.

Doesn't mean one of my questions, the zoning administrator that like intentionally making the document kind of future proof by using a generic term versus using your office's title.

Correct. And I think that's a, like an appointment level too. Like I sign stuff often as a zoning administrator. So.

So the goal would for this whatever to come to you so it would never come to us. Like this, whatever these people are going to give you when they're making this change.

So if someone was making this change, they would come to me. And they would say, I want to do a project next door to city hall. And I would say, great, before you apply for a building permit, you need to move through the site plan process. They would provide me an application with the information here. Staff would complete their review for compliance. We would bring it to the planning commission for your review and the city council for their review as well. So it's a three-step process. Okay.

But it wouldn't be like what we just reviewed, a preliminary and a final, and it's a one and done. Correct.

Okay.

Do we have an idea of how many we'd have?

Very few, but I would say they could be very impactful. typically because it's like an industrial or commercial project. So the scale of the building can often be larger or a multifamily building even. So yeah, I would say like Carver, Commons, where QuickDrip, Taco Bell, et cetera are, those will all be replatting processes. So those will come in, continue to come in on a planning basis. So I would say moving forward with our comp plan, if we're identifying more spaces for commercial, It could play a bigger role in the future, but examples would have been Mizzies would have been one. Anything in that development would have been. And then depending on if someone bought a very large lot in Carver Commons and plotted all of the lots at once and then they wanted to sell them off, this would come in instead of that plotting process.

I'm not one to like add process just for process. So I think it makes sense to add it. But my fear is it becomes too much and we're putting i don't know a ton of burden on the city the commission the council if you know depending on how minute this stuff gets so my only feedback where i was where my mind went was can we give some type of authority to the zoning administrator to approve stuff outside of this process so we don't have to an administrative review Yeah. Like, and if it's like, I just want to move the dumpster three feet to the left and put up a fence, I don't think that's worthy of our time, the city staff time, the council time. So like, is there... Put some thought into like, can you put some type of approval criteria where you can just do it? Sure. And not bring it here.

Like a project cost or something like that, like the lesser threshold of. I don't know.

I was just like, we want to rip out these 10 bushes and put eight over here. That does not need to come here.

I'm wondering if it's the differentiation between new construction, which would be a large project with more to review compared to an expansion or exterior modification.

Yeah, I didn't think it much further other than I don't want to be inundated with mundane stuff like moving a dumpster three feet to the left.

Yeah.

That doesn't do anybody justice for something like that.

I guess it is some kind of qualifier scope and scale of the project. I think it makes sense. The threshold stays administrative review at both certain thresholds goes to...

Yeah, something like that. Or the new construction would make sense. Empower you to.

You're right. I don't want to bring an application to you if it's everything meets the code. Just to say, great, thank you so much.

And then you got to bring it to council.

Right. And that should delay the people from moving forward.

Yeah, and I also think it might give the impression that the city's hard to work with for just the littlest things. And I don't think we want to be that either.

Yeah, I'll say, I'll give you my perspective is that when we've tried to have these conversations with people and it's not within a process, that typically I think makes us seem harder to work with because it's more arbitrary.

Yeah.

Where we're saying like, could you do these couple of things?

Yeah.

Like, and then we don't have anything to say, we're not going to approve a permit unless you do these things. So they have like... Les Schwab is a good example. They changed a lot of their building in good faith because we asked them to. So some of these things could be flushed out through the site plan process that instead of in good faith, it would say you have to meet the intent of our site plan review. Yeah, so.

That was my that was my only feedback.

Anyone else have any other feedback.

Yes, subdivision two, bullet six. Let's talk about stormwater. The very last sensor was talking about dust rain downstream pond is sufficient to accommodate additional to stormwater. Yep. The first thing came to my mind for that is are we talking storage for 10 year or 100 year storm events or just your normal additional stormwater?

So this would require several projects of like a regional pond system. And if something went in without a site plan review, we typically wouldn't get a stormwater plan to ensure that the pond can handle that amount of water. So it would be our typical review, which I think is 10 and 100 year. And then if it was through the permitting process, we would include that.

So I guess my point is just like when I say additional stormwater of magnitude, we're talking normal expected annual stormwater, the 10-year, the 100-year runoff. What's the magnitude of water that these downstream ponds need to be able to absorb?

So is it different than what is here? So the calculation for 10-year and 100-year storm events?

How would anyone know this? Engineering this isn't part of what they have to turn in this is what your review is so if if it were not through a planning process.

And a project wanted to go in and use regional ponding we wouldn't get this level of information to know that the pond could handle that level. runoff from a site we could say vaguely yes like Carver specifically we don't have an impervious surface maximum for houses so people can have a house driveway if it meets regulations for size they can have a 600 foot garage and then a shed and And in other cities, they will say you can only have 25% of your lot that is hard surface. Carver does not have that specification in our zoning code. So we plan for larger scale ponds to always accommodate more hard surface than what would be typical if our city had the impervious surface maximum. So we would plan for these sites to develop. We wouldn't suddenly say, oh, that green field is now... a commercial building, but this level of detail would allow us to do the review of the 10 year and a hundred year to make sure that the pond continues to function.

So what if they, what if they submitted a new review that you're like, oh, look, retention pond that we have is not capable of holding that through your flood. Would you then, would it be rejected, modified, or would you say, what would my option be? Well, we're going to expand the pond or dredge the pond or something.

I'd say all of the above. A lot of it depends on. like what the specific situation is and like who is feeding into a regional pond. So if it's a commercial development on a large scale site with 15 different users, it's probably those 15 users going into that pond. So we can understand that. But there are situations where it's 15 commercial users, it's the city, it's the county road, all going into a regional pond. So it would just depend on who the players are, what future we were tracking for that pond to take. So it would give us a more holistic view of what the situation is across the board. And if they weren't able to, if this pond was maxed out and this was a surprise building that was happening, they would have to manage stormwater independently on their site.

But this is under 6, which is part of the requirement that the applicant has to give you?

Correct.

Okay. Okay.

And I will say, if someone is hooking into city utilities for the 1st time, they're working with an engineer on those plans. So this is typical in an engineering packet of plans that could be provided.

I just thought that was under your review portion, not their submission.

They would submit it, we would review it. Okay.

For number 7, does this carver have a. Rtu, so I call them the rooftop that we have like a. Colors and this is after being covered up.

Not today. Again, a few of them have happened in good faith, like Taco Bell has some nice screening on their roof, but it's not required. Any other feedback. Okay, great. Let's give it a second run. And let's talk about accessory dwelling units. So this conversation I would say happens most frequently downtown where folks are looking to add an accessory dwelling unit to their properties. I think that it is wise we've had a conversation at this level previously to limit it to larger residential properties so it doesn't feel like you're getting like essentially two houses on a smaller lot. So if it could work, we're seeing some small lots in Carver. I'm hoping to not be deeply impactful to neighbors, but it would be our intent to allow for accessory dwelling units. A question that I think folks would ask is like, how many do you think you would see and what would that process look like? I don't think we would see many accessory dwelling unit applications because they're expensive to build. Construction is expensive right now no matter what, but adding something of this magnitude, like essentially a small-scale home on your property, is a significant undertaking. So I'd say the folks that are looking to add an ADU are typically people who are thinking about long-term construction. family that might need some additional care or a kid that needs some space so with the passing of an accessory dwelling unit i do not think that they will run rampant and be in everybody's backyard i think it will be pretty rare but i would say in the applications where someone can have an adu it likely would be deeply impactful for their situation specifically it's also a way um to provide additional housing in Carver. So we often talk about how families can't afford to live in Carver or their situation is changing. They want to live in Carver long-term, but their house is too big. Is there a situation where their kid moves into their house and then they can move into the ADU? It offers an additional housing type that I think could allow for some flexibility for folks looking for an ADU for a variety of reasons. But again, I don't think that they would be something that we would see every day. And also thinking through like not only construction, like utility connections, engineering for these, it would be pretty expensive. But again, I think a meaningful exercise for folks that it would work for.

What if it's a travel trailer? It's not allowed. It's not allowed. So if you take the wheels off. It has to be on a foundation.

So you can bring a prefab unit and put it on a foundation.

You could if it's on a foundation and if it's consistent with the principal structure on the lot and it meets the setbacks.

So they're matchy-matchy?

I would say not matchy-matchy, but general vibes.

In addition to cost, wasn't there an issue with the amount of space you need land in general? Yeah. Which we had already determined is like not a lot of places. Correct. In general.

So I'd say the R1 zoning district is one that would be usable. Also, there are a lot of lots downtown that are just kind of bizarre where a house is built on. Kira Rundel, Two lots or the property line goes directly through it, so there is some opportunity downtown I know there are some like existing garages that folks have asked if they could do a dwelling unit above, so this would give them that opportunity as well.

Kira Rundel, So it doesn't necessarily which. I always think of an ADU as a totally separate unit.

Sorry, a detached garage. So there's several detached garages downtown that are large enough that could potentially have an ADU above. If someone finished a space above their garage and it was attached to their house, it's just part of their dwelling unit. Okay.

So I'm supportive of it. Um, quick question and maybe it's in there. I apologize, but that'd read that. Does it limit them the total number of structures? So if they have a shed, can they put one of these in there too? Or is there a maximum?

So our zoning code allows for two accessory structures. I think, uh, but both would need to be 800 feet or less. So if someone wanted to have a 400 square foot ADU and a 400 square foot detached garage, they could, but it's a limit of two or 800 square feet total.

Okay.

That road that goes out from downtown to, like, Carver Bluffs?

Mm-hmm.

That city-owned road? Yes. Those are city people?

Yeah. Tell me where you're going with that.

There seems to be an ADU on wheels there that people live in.

That's been there for quite some time. If you give me an address, I would be happy to explore that temporary ADU that you believe is there.

Does anyone else know what I'm talking about? Yeah, Ashley out today. Okay.

I have some things I just, I'm on a theme. So. When we have an ADU in the backyard, does that structure then, is it required to have its own house number?

It would, yes. It would be addressed separately.

Okay. I didn't see that in here. Okay. It doesn't need to be. And then staying on the theme of emergency, should we be at some... We should make reference that they at all times have to have access to it for emergency services. So not necessarily a full-on driveway getting back there, but there has to be a path of a certain size. I don't know, but there's got to be some way to get equipment back there.

So are you thinking about if someone had a fence, would you want to gate on that fence?

Well, I'm just, yeah. If there's a fire, a medical emergency, whatever, and they have put up an eight foot fence and there's no access point to that, it delays response. And if these are going to be structures that are close to property lines, you know, you don't know what's on the other side of that property. So you've got, opportunity or you've got risk there so i'm thinking you got to have a number on the building and you have to have access emergency access to the structure at all times and i don't know if we have to define what that is but why can't i track changes in here

it's possible you're tracking changes and that you just have it set up so it's not showing because you have simple markup on yeah so you turn off simple markup and it'll turn it to more simple mark right up here oh yeah there you go show all my god

Erin, do you know how mail would work? If it's a separate address, would it be a separate?

It's a separate mailbox.

Like a half? Like 975 and a half?

Oh my gosh.

There you go. We're just trying to be helpful.

You are. If I hadn't figured that out, I would have just closed this and not saved any changes. And then I'd have to watch myself, which is not my favorite thing to do. Perpetual. That's some bad spelling.

Okay. And then I noticed... Oh, wait. Ready? Okay. The other thing that I noticed was we say it can't be a rental unit. And that either the house or the ADU has to be owner... occupied occupied thank you let's say owner owned owner occupied but are we okay if the owner um lives in the adu and they rent the house i don't know why did we decide it can't be a rental unit

I think a piece of it for me thinking about how this code application would work, we don't have regulations right now for rentals, so someone could Airbnb a house. But if someone was Airbnb-ing both a house and an ADU, I think there could be greater impact to the neighboring folks.

I'm just thinking if I... If I built an ADU for one of my kids to live in, I'm going to charge them rent.

Parenting choice. Yes.

Is that considered a rental then?

Yeah.

I guess you'd say one unit has to be owner-occupied.

Right, but could it be the ADU?

Sorry to jump on all your questions.

no it's just i thought the same thing sherry i had the same thought yeah so if we're not going to allow rental edu then would we allow them to live there and they can rent the house or is there if we're trying to avoid rental what are we trying to avoid i would say having two rental properties in a residential district so someone owning the property

and then renting the ADU and the house to two separate people. Correct. So one of the buildings has to be your house.

Yeah, and thinking through it now, I don't think I care if it's the ADU or the house because if you own your house forever and ever and then you and Tim move into the ADU and one of your kids moves into your house and you charge them rent, I don't think we care.

Okay, I just thought I'd... No, it's a good comment. ...ask the question. Does it say it has to be family?

I think I'm just going to say the property owner needs to live in one of the units.

Where is it?

The rental stuff will split over two of them.

Mm-hmm.

Is this in compliance with the proposed ADU language of the legislature?

So that was my other thing because I did a little bit of homework on that too and I think that there's some restrictions that are coming down from the state but I couldn't tell where they were in the... We've talked about it at the city level because it's a piece of legislation that's no longer being fought by the League of Minnesota Cities.

It's a Legislation that's been bought pretty tooth and nail by the League of Minnesota cities over the years And the League of Minnesota cities kind of saw the writing on the wall that it's gonna happen this legislation is gonna happen and it's so the League of Minnesota cities this came up last legislative session with a version of it that they Are not uncomfortable with yeah, I intentionally used to double negative there and so we are anticipating at the city level that that is going to become a I don't know if they have like the full information drafted, but it's supposed to be a buy right in low density residential districts, which the traditional residential and then our R1 would be.

So we would be establishing before them. And then if we need to update this to include other sections.

That's a general rule.

Correct. Yeah. And the other conversation that might feel relevant is a couple years ago, the housing legislation was for like granny flats is what they call them, which are more temporary structures in driveways. that did not pass, I think, for a variety of reasons, but I think led to ADUs coming into that space, a more permanent home on a property.

And again, you guys can shut me down because I'm not actually a voting member of this, but does this then fall under the site review process that we have by right ADUs? Would they have to go through the site review process?

It's not multi-family.

Oh, it doesn't make it multi-family. Okay. Maybe that's something that we would want.

In addition of an ADU, the ADU has to come through here.

Yes, it would go through the building permit process and without a survey is included. So I'm thinking through the requirements.

Because this seems like something that, yeah, I don't know, follows the intent of the site review, not the letter of the law, the site review. But if it has its own... process by which the same information would be obtained and reviewed?

So here it calls for a site plan. So a survey would show things like the existing house, the future ADU, easements. A site plan would include additional information that could be for the parking or driving areas, the removal of existing trees and significant vegetation to propose to remain or be removed. So that would come through with an ADU application to me as a zoning administrator in the building department for the permit.

So, yeah, it's got the same. We'll have the same.

Yeah.

Yep. Are we trying to say that the ADU should be lived in between a family and a family? Or like, it can be anyone.

It can be anyone.

Okay. Transient housing.

I would say that's a different word for temporary. Okay. But we can change that word if you don't like it.

Now, if you were building a structure, wouldn't that require review from the fire department?

Not at a building permit level, no.

you add that here to an ADU to have fire department review?

I don't know what they would review. It wouldn't be a sprinkled facility.

But more like access.

Access.

They'd have to have criteria.

I think the access is solved by it's got to be a path three feet wide or something. It's not going to be a driveway because the driveway length is limited within here. It's the existing. But there's got to be an access path.

I think I can hit the high notes for what accessibility is needed. If we had a full-time fire department and folks that were here in the office working full-time, I think I would have a different take of like, yeah, they could take a look at it. But until we get to that point with the amount that we're going to see, I think we'll be OK.

That can be a question when you're discussing with this, like, how do you expect people to get there? Right. Like through your house, through the side, through the top, over the whatever.

Okay. I have a couple other questions. So it requires owner occupancy. So have we given any thought of how we're going to validate owner occupancy? Is it, they have to, they get a permit for this every year? Yeah. For the ADU, or is there some kind of proof that someone knocks on the door every month and asks who's looking there? And then what happens when it sells?

I think in here is that it cannot be split. The lot can't be split. It has to stay consistently one lot. Again, I think that with the amount that we're going to see I think there could be a level of review of who is living there. I don't think it's going to be 100. I'd say it's probably going to be a handful. And I think it truly is going to be for a family situation. So we can think through that a little bit, but I'm not super worried about them becoming... a space that is problematic for others.

Okay. And then if there's a complaint, how are the, I don't even know how those are handled. Does that go to you?

It depends on what it is. So if we have this in our zoning code and we find them to be violating one of the provisions, depending on the level of it, like a good example is a grass letter. The city processes those, sends a letter, gives a property owner permission, 10 days, two weeks to mow their grass or else the city will come out and do it and we'll charge you back. If it's a life safety event, the city attorney steps in pretty quickly with the building official to determine what the life safety threat is. If the work was permitted, if the work has changed, and then if it's a violation of our zoning code, I think it is a misdemeanor. So we give time for correction or if someone is working with us on a life safety or work done without a permit. We navigate that space fairly frequently.

Okay. All right. So this is a fun one. So they have a detached garage and now they want an ADU. Well, they've got one structure. They can only have two. Is that what you said? Max of two? Two accessory structures. Two. So the detached garage would be one? Correct. Okay. Okay, so that would work. What if they came to you and said, I want to turn my detached garage into an ADU? That's okay as well.

If they can get it to meet the building code? Code, yes.

Okay. All right. And then the only the other one I had was it says height of one and a half feet or one and a half stories. Yeah, it's a small for my even for me. That's should we would we be just better off saying it can't be higher than 20 feet or and we go to midpoint of the roof pitch.

So

So that's even more because to me, one and a half stories is how tall the outside walls are, not the top of the roof.

So we go to roof pitch. Okay.

We should lay that clearly out.

It's somewhere in here. It's not in the section.

Okay. So I think rather than saying one and a half stories, we should just cap it at a number of feet. Okay. Because I think people would argue, well, I have, you know, standard in my house is nine foot ceilings, right? But in other homes, it's eight or seven.

So maybe just picking it. Could you have one of those little houses brought in as long as not on wheels? Yes.

Well, you could bring one on wheels and put it on a foundation.

Yeah. Just glue it down.

Well, now my house would be a two-story house.

except in the backyard it's three stories is it a walkout so it's at front foundation i mean the structure this new structure would be in the back would it be from ground level if you said 20 feet yes it would be from the foundation of the structure so i wouldn't go from your front yard trying to measure something in your backyard

So the structure itself can be 20 feet high.

Correct.

Regardless of where it's at.

One other question with the floor area. If they decide to put a basement in the ADU, does that support it? It's a fancy ADU.

No, we just go from foundation size. Okay. That is a fancy ADU. I'm already thinking.

I know. I'm just coming on wheels, man.

You're kids. That's going to be a high rent.

All right. And then the only other thing I saw was it has to go in the backyard or rear yard.

Correct.

And I know we had the same, it like haunted me with the chicken coop conversation we had about.

The corner lot. The corner lots. That came into play last week.

So I need, I want to make sure that we are addressing the corner lot situation and where it's appropriate. Cause that will surface as well.

Yeah. I would say an ADU is far more impactful. Then a chicken coop that I think we should go straight to rear yards only.

So if you have a corner lot, you can't have any of you.

You have a rear yard on a corner lot.

Okay.

Those side that's not on the street or you can still put it back.

Are you going to put it in the back far corner or street side?

The far back corner or behind the house. Okay.

Okay. But I just think that corner lot placement should be articulated. Otherwise, we're going to just fight it.

That's all. We have a collective trauma of chicken coops that exists in this group.

I learned a lot that week. I learned a lot about chickens. More than I ever wanted to know.

below the ground yeah there's something in our code that you can't have no no bunker it's like a mound something in our code mound home that is a wild what tell me where you got there well i mean i grew up in a different era like a cellar well bomb shelters

I would rather live in the basement.

But did you use it as an ADU?

No, we used it as a cell. Did your parents rent it out to you?

Oh, I had one more I forgot. Parking. So we said it has to use the existing driveway. So we don't want to say like... They can't park on the street. Like, is there any, like, parking restriction stuff? Or are we better off just saying that the addition of the ADU, the property still has to comply with our normal parking standards or whatever?

So I would say that is the better route, just because I don't ever want to be in the business of saying your person in the ADU is parked on the street, but Sherry's high schooler is parked there, too.

So... With the addition of an ADU, normal residential parking city code or whatever we call it, ordinance, applies.

Yes. Yeah, I think that's important to call out.

Does that look good where I'm adding notes because they don't make sense anymore?

I can summarize my comments.

No, it's okay. I'll send it to you, too.

That's all I have. That was enough.

Sorry. You are doing your job right now.

you have somebody review the 20 feet to make sure maybe it should be 25 or i think one one and a half story is 25 feet i could be wrong on that too but um more wondering because like if it's on top of a garage like if i i'm building my shed right now and i'm thinking the headache i'm going through just trying to get up to 120 inches and all the things to get there And then realizing, oh, I need now an additional, I have to stay under 15 feet, for example. So if I'm going to build this thing on top of my garage and then I go to put like a nine foot ceiling or whatever, and that gets me to 21 and a half feet, it's like, oh, the code doesn't let me do that. It's so dumb. It should just be like an intentional, if it's feet, just an intentional amount of feet that maybe Aaron or somebody goes, okay, if you built it, it would probably end up here.

Yeah, I think I'm going to ask the building official what they would consider like a typical one story and then do the addition on top of that.

Yeah, what would even be supported up at that height? You know, like from a building permit standpoint, maybe that would also justify how high that is.

Maybe you should hold off on that shed so you can ADU instead.

No, thank you. It would be expensive. I will confirm. The shed is just fine. It is also a lot.

Anything else?

Okay. So you said this one's going to come back eventually?

Yeah.

Thanks for letting me use your computer, Brenda. Anyone else have other communications?

No. Okay. Any motion to adjourn?

So moved.

Second? Second.

Aye.

We don't vote on that. Okay, who wants to vote? Who wants to go home? I'll motion. I'll motion. Approved.

It carries.

Okay, perfect. Aye.