e b b uh commissioner Alvarez here commissioner wise here and chair police here and our city council is on nordby here and also present is myself uh community development director Brandy how excellent Full House um we have a pretty basic agenda tonight um should be able to get through this pretty quickly uh can I have a motion to adopt the agenda I move I'll second move from muick commissioner muick uh second from commissioner gadb Point all in favor say I I all right um meeting minutes from March the 7th um does anybody have any comments about meeting minutes that being the case I would entertain a motion to approve the meeting minutes for March 7th I'll approve motion from commissioner RI second I'll second second from commissioner Weiss all in favor say I I I unanimous um meeting is open to the public there is nobody on Zoom there's no one online and no one in the room from the public we're just breathing through this so we are up to Brandy it's your turn Okay uh thank you in your packet is a draft staff report well the staff report plus the draft ordinance as it could be presented to city council if we were to move forward with it as proposed the um the changes that you see include it's just the clean version essentially on the staff report so I tried to summarize what the changes were um based on our last discussion at the March meeting and the first item was we clarified that a fence permit is required for for alterations um repair and maintenance as well as for brand new construction and also created an exception that would not require the city to pull a permit for putting an athletic field fence um at mcnight Park for example we clarified that fences are not allowed um sorry that they may be allowed in an easement but they would be placed at the owner's risk and they could not um if placed in the easement interrupt any drainage pattern so they would have to be reviewed by the engineer um in the utility we established rules to ensure access to U utility boxes and hydrants and those rules would have to be in compliance with the fire code and that was reviewed by the fire chief and our utility director and they've okayed the provision that we have related to that we established SE separate regulations for residential and non-residential fences um as we've discussed fencing is not currently permitted in our mixed use districts which is a conflict with the screening requirements that we have elsewhere in the code and we have in um increased the height of fences in front yards of Residential Properties from 3 and 1 12 ft to 4 feet and this was added I believe uh without conversation with this group um as long as it's 50% opaque as a relates to fences the front yard would extend there's a there's a graphic in here that describes this um the front yard would extend from the front of the house to to the front of the property line as opposed to just a standard 25 ft whatever this typical setback is and we increase the fence height in rear yards to 7 ft from 6 and 1/2 ft in residential areas and then in non-residential areas fence height can't exceed 8 ft without zoning administrator approval um and fences cannot be electric anywhere oh and then the fence regulations pertaining to swimming pools those were updated as well and that that now matches the state state administrative rules so that concludes the summarization of what has changed so I can open the floorida to the commission to talk about anything that you need to address can you clarify the 50% opaque part um if you wanted to put a a fence in the front yard we would require you to provide some demonstration of what the fence is going to be so that half of it is you can see through it okay so if it's over three and a half ft or is that total no that's just any fence in the front yard would have that opacity requirement so it says where is that there it is minimum opacity could have more than 50% now I'm getting confused by what opaque means opaque means you can't see through see through it can't see through it right if it's so max is what we would probably want you probably want maximum but I will ask this question why do we care that's a question for you do we care I I don't care so just imagine if you will um I I walked here from my house not today but yesterday and there's a fence um this brings up other questions too but there's a fence in what would be potentially considered a front yard that is a uh ornamental architectural ornamental fence so it's probably 10% opaque maybe a little bit more and then there's a new fence that just went in a couple of blocks down that's fully opaque and taller than 4T in a front yard well which brings the other question what about corners is the front yard only the address side or is the front yard is there two front yards there's there would be one front yard and it would be the address side it would be the side where the yeah where the number yep where the number addresses the property which means the fence that was more than 4T and fully opaque was not in the front yard it was just installed I mean like last week so it was on a side yard is what saying it was on the side yard yeah I think that you would want to allow a completely private fence on side and rear yards yeah and I don't I guess I don't see any I I don't see any reason why we care how opaque it is as long as it's not tall it's only if it's only 4 feet tall yeah there's not a a problem with safety or I mean could someone hide behind an opaque fence yes of course they could but they'd have to be crawling on the ground if it's 4T High yeah so my thought on that too was that that would completely rule rule out the picket fence which is an American traditional fence because you know most Picket Fences I have seen them that do have a space between the pickets but most are picket picket picket picket and even the ones have space between them are only like usually a half picket W wide so that would definitely be well more than 50% opaque but if you can see over it I don't see a problem I guess I don't I don't feel like we should have an opacity requirement at all for a front yard fence or for a backyard fence for that matter I don't think we do for the backyard yeah um but I I think that's easy enough to change so down that in in my feeling is there any disagreement with that that what was the reason why it was asked to be 50% it was something that I found that seemed like a reasonable um policy but it's not a requirement by any means yeah do you have any idea what the state might say on that topic I don't think the state regulates this particular thing so if we go to page two of three two of three of the ordinance uh sorry of the page 10 of the packet that's where the opacity shows up okay hold on regulation of residential fences right yes okay so we'll just take bi two and stop the sentence after four feet yes then I have a question to on that page uh under B2 two materials number two that the fence must be installed so that the Finish side is a faces adjacent property and that makes lots of sense if that's the only fence there but what if it's a double fence there what if your neighbors have a fence up already and you just don't like their style so you're putting up a fence on your property or maybe you feel like your fence needs to be taller than what they've got on theirs you know in that case then especially if it's a double fence you're putting the finished side up against another fence way MH one could go away okay that's the rationale for that but okay well I can there's also the concept of a fence that doesn't have a finished side yeah that's true too in in which case it doesn't really matter because you're you're talking about if the posts are on one side can I ask a question about opacity or I can't opacity um I personally I agree with getting rid of it like you've stated but I just want to bring up one thing for comment not being a parent myself are we creating a blind spot if a young child's playing in the driveway and now basically they could go from blocked view of a car into the street with no way for the car to see him because it was 100% blocked I suppose of the if the fence was right up to the street and there was no sidewalk there was no buffer that would look like a potential thing I mean for those of you that have had children if if you had a solid fence spting your driveway would you have concerns if they were playing in your driveway and then went to the street chasing a ball or anything does that create a safety hazard yeah I probably wouldn't put that kind of offence in if I had little kids but but leave it up to the owner and not worry about it yeah yeah I think so but your neighbor could and if your driveway BS up to their yard then that could well I mean could potentially but offset regulations there should be at least four sure so that should be okay yeah that's what I was thinking is that the fence line should be on your property and you know I I will admit I don't know all the zoning in the city well enough to know for sure but isn't there a buffer zone between the street and where your property begins so that it the fence shouldn't be right up against the street against the street that's true in almost every case yeah uh I think there are an awful lot of situations that you could look at where there's that kind of risk um even a parked car or a parked van or a parked truck or something like that has at least that much Danger associated with it it's it's things you can control and you can't control right that was the only reason I thought I was trying to think of reasons why there might be an opacity Rule and and that was the only reason I could reason right and we already have regulations for the view triangle at an intersection so I don't think it never hurts to bring them up because oh something considering and I think safety is one of the things that we should be paying attention to yeah all the time yeah that is one of the reasons that zoning ordinances exist is the exactly it's about welfare and safety Health welfare yeah exactly I think just aesthetically it seems nicer to me to give somebody the um chance to keep the same type of fence all the way around yes you're changing the height in the front but at least it would look nicer having the same style fence all the way around rather than having to switch in the front yard and so that makes sense to me I saw when I saw the one that was the architectural Ornamental Metal fence it's a very nice looking fence very professionally installed and and it's not in that case I think technically it's not front yard it's side yard but it's about a 4 foot high fence and it's right down by the beach and I I think they did a really good job with it so um you know that's the kind of fence I would like to see installed um I do have a question about I have to find it um this is in your report in the introduction to your report item one um but I did not look I did not look at the actual ordinance about about the about permitting okay where does it it where is it talking about permitting you page are you like on page 11 Patrick 11 of 13 yeah 12 I mean yeah I the staff report and the ordinance have the same information they're just presented in a different way I'm just trying to find where oh permit shall shall be required let's see erection construction alteration or moving a fence um yeah I guess it was your report that was confusing to me because it talked about maintenance and repair yeah which I think we specifically removed in our last discussion because I don't think maintenance and repair of a fence should require a permit because you're just you're keeping an existing Construction or you're making fixing it if it gets broken or you're painting it or you're you know that kind of thing if I was going to paint my fence that would be considered maintenance but I shouldn't have to get a permit for it okay got it so does that make sense but I think the ordinance the way it's written is okay my my top point should have had not required I think your top point is inaccurate relative to what you actually put in the ordinance I think the ordinance is correct got it sorry my apologies for getting confused oh that's fine I just I was kind of flipping back and forth and and I didn't have a lot of time to look at it I have a question about Cameron's question about the two fences right next to each other is that is that allowed like is that something we care about um like if someone says well I don't like how your fence looks so I'm going to put one 6 in so I had a family member in St Paul who put up a retaining wall type and the neighbor decided they were going to also and they left a gap that big right 3 ft deep mhm between two retaining walls now not a fence but I'm like well that's just like a hazard and now the fence wouldn't be the same Hazard but if something got in there I'm just like it just always stuck in my head like well if something gets in between those like a kid this one obviously you could walk and fall into two fences you're not going to but I'm just curious so that's an allowable thing like I don't think it's common uh I've never really seen it well and we and we've written into the ordinance that if you're going to connect to a neighbor's fence you have to you have to have an agreement to do that to connect but if I just don't like your fence and I'm going to put my own up 6 Ines from years that's just you can do that okay yeah right could yeah you could that might hopefully know that there's anything that we could do as staff to prevent that but we could certainly try to dissuade if we saw something that was going to be a hazard sure yeah and it does say in here that you are responsible for maintaining your property out outside the fence yeah yes so who's maintaining that 6 in I mean in your example it would turn into weeds and volunteer trees and it you know it would be your neighbors also being compelled to if they have their six Ines also so then you have 12 inches yeah might just be making your life very difficult yeah and people that do that they make their life and everyone else's difficult and so yeah okay no that's I'm just double checking I had a commercial project that was like that one time where there was retaining wall yeah that was six or eight feet high on the neighboring property and we wanted to grade a little bit you know bring the grade up a little bit for a parking lot so we wanted to fill against their retaining wall about 2 or 3 F feet he said no they wanted $330,000 for us to do that right so we ended up putting a second retaining wall in yeah with a swail in between you know it's like you just kind of have to shake your head sometimes where is the rationality but there isn't any some well that's that's one of the reasons that we write these regulations is because there's always an irrational person out there somewhere hopefully I'm not that person most of the time I do have one minor uh grammar Point uh on page 11 uh under section c regulations for nonresidential fences part uh or item two materials number two no fence shall conduct electricity or be designed to electrically shock as opposed to is designed but yeah but but you can't say it shall not conduct electricity because any metal will right well that's a point too so we probably need to change that yeah it maybe just say no fence shall be designed to electrically shock people yeah I I I think the no fence shell conduct electricity is inaccurate because we couldn't have a Cyclone Fence then but I think we want to say no fence can be designed to Electric electrically shot electrically shot what we're looking for in that right yes yes or depending on what you feel works better I believe if you said no offense they'll purposely conduct electricity the word purposely could also mitigate your concerns that's true that's there you go I don't have a problem with that what's contrary to that word purposefully Randy trying to purposefully I mean can can can go a lot of different ways well that's true uh how about no fence shell be designed to to electrically shock I think that covers all of our bases fairly well okay right in that same section right number three right below that um barbed wire may be installed on non-residential property in the mu3 district um I guess I have it's not really a question because I don't really know what the answer is but I guess the my My worry is saying the mu3 district that's that's a big it's a lot of property that's in the mu3 district and it's a lot of different uses some are residential but you're saying non-residential but um I guess what I would ask to everybody is does anybody else feel like that should be [Music] um what's the right term not as broaden area yeah yeah make it more I don't know there you know the mu3 district includes a lot of businesses right around here I I think the intent was to provide for the flexibility to those businesses like um our car repair one over on Cent Avenue to have the ability to have some extra security if they if they wanted it yeah so that's kind of the mu3 district does have pretty much everything under the sun yeah um non-residential also contains anything that's under the sun that's non-residential use so I'm struggling to figure out how you further narrow it down to really unless we put conditions in here or yeah with like a conditional permit by the Planning Commission we can give them an extra step and then you could determine if it's if it's appropriate for that land use or the surrounding land uses we could put some contingencies in it like that yeah your concern for that what's your thoughts on that well I I don't I wouldn't have any concern if it's you know the example that Brandy gave where it's I guess uses that are more like storage based seem that in my head makes sense and there's a lot of businesses around here that that that would apply to but any non-residential business in the mu3 district I mean you know um there a lot of people that could put up a barb wire fence in that in with that description that I wouldn't feel great about but would they I mean they could yeah they probably could and the fence the barb wire part has to be to the inside well and I and 8T above the ground I would wonder about that too because there's four ways to do barware fence mhm that that would be shall we say typical if you if you have a regular chain link fence you can do this or this or that or vertical they're specifically and I don't and I guess I'm thinking if we're allowing them to do barb wire why do we care so that a person walking by on the outside couldn't jump up 8T I mean if it's inside then it's a little more protected from the public but if I'm a criminal I'm still going to hit it I don't know I was assuming I made an assumption that that would be wi I mean it could be vertical too this is just language that I found that makes made sense like what you're talking about we want to keep it we want to protect the public in any way we can double layer it's 8 feet up and it's leaning in to me that feels like two areas separated from the public yeah but I I think to Andrew's point about um land use we are a redeveloping city you never going you never know what's going to go where that's true we've got we've got the Collision auto now we could we could have housing next to it tomorrow or a a daycare you know something yeah so given how how openly flexible our ordinances it really is difficult to know and Advance where the hazards lie yeah and I mean I'm not it's not something I'm you know going to die on here but I just it it was one of the things where I just was like oh that seems a little too broad but um I don't know is it is it Overkill to me is it an Aesthetics thing is it just idea of barb wire you don't like it's a very unfriendly look and you know you wouldn't want uh you know the new apartment building going up to decide hey we're going to put a barbwire fence around this portion of the you know or lot or something and I do think to your point that a lot of businesses want to look a certain you know what I mean they're only going to do that if they it's expensive they're only going to want to do it if they are having a need and they've been broken into probably true y so I would guess you know the auto place isn't going to put it in the front CU that isn't inviting you know but but we'd have to trust people to kind of self-regulate themselves that's and we are saying non-residential so you know yeah uh I don't know maybe do you we need to qualify that a little bit more and say something like non-residential and non-child care or something like that but you know I I don't know it's there's a point where we start getting down into so many details too yeah I don't I don't think we need to parse it I think uh you know a new Co coffee shop is not going to put Barb Bo or F you know so I mean there are there are uses that it just won't happen for many reasons but I I think like you're saying there are there are those uses around where there's they have exterior storage or something like that and they would for sure want that yeah or they may want it and that's probably an area that it would be acceptable yeah from an appearance standpoint can I can I just throw in Devil's advocacy statement I think that you're saying that there's very few that are going to want it so we may as well just leave it in the ordinance for flexibility purposes yeah but the counter there's so few that have it now I think yeah um that we we do want to protect the the Aesthetics of the community if they wanted it they should have maybe had it already yeah maybe it maybe we don't need to allow it at all which is the way you originally had it that's just how I'm used to you originally had no bar Boer but a lot of most communities do have the separation of industrial areas right and and we just don't have that here so we're kind of a unique animal I mean I I could imagine um shift ski for instance around their perimeter yep do they have any I don't believe they do think so I don't think so not unless it's on shop off of 120 I think they do if I recall in the might in the back I mean but that's legit I mean I would expect it yeah I guess I don't I don't feel strongly about it either way kind of feels like it's going to happen where it's going to happen but it's not going to happen very much yeah and the ones that do aren't they aren't the they aren't the long Barbed wires either and as long as it's not allowed in residential um you know then you can't get the um you know survivalist showing up and fencing off their compound kind of a thing so yeah do you feel um there is worthwhile for any language or discussion if someone does choose to have bar wire around their property is there any requirement for them to show proof to the city of insurance uh I don't know if it's county or city requirements but I know um on one of my proper previous employers we had to have a special rider for that um we could have I think we could have that requirement I'd have to double the insurance be four it was if someone got hurt on something you on the fence on the fence it's not really different from getting hurt on somebody's property anyway is it and there again th this property that I used to work at was in by Redwing um that they made them do a significant Rider I don't think umbrella is the right word um I I'm not an insurance expert but I I know we did have to get something additional because we put it in what did you put in what at Treasure Island no no what was it you were putting a fence in they put in a fence um with um security measures okay and they they were um they did have to show proof of Insurance to the city that was part but I don't know if it was city or county that they had to show proof of yeah well the other thing too is that based on what you just whispered a minute ago uh you know they have a crowd there that would be significantly more likely to get drunk and do foolish things so you know that maybe that that was why that was required was because of the clientele that they might be dealing with and you know I don't I just obviously people get drunk in town but I don't think that you know we don't have yeah a large clientele that's going to do that so I don't know that that would be such a concern as a business owner who's had my business broken into it's nice to know sometimes I can do things to help with that but it does seem like as a business we're a Target to have to pay more money for things because apparently we're business and making tons of money right and so it's like I don't know I think it's nice to have some things available um maybe verbiage at least they have to tell why I don't know I I I think that we tend would want to tend to lead more toward let people do reasonable things and address it then but I think the other thing too is that if this becomes a problem then that means that there's a need to look at the regulations again maybe then you change it but yeah you know unless it you know until it becomes a problem let's let them do it uh rather than restricting them from doing it and Trust to much as I kind of hate to say it but trust to people's good sense and you know normal operations yeah I'm I mean I'm I'm comfortable with that I just was interested to get other ideas and I think it makes sense and I there definitely are you know uses that for sure if I would be a business owner I would want that ability to be able to protect so um and like you said Brandy it's we're very unique here that there's no separation of zones really so yeah I just wanted to bring it up as a question but yeah I'm I'm okay with that I think now that we've addressed it like this if it comes up we'll be more able to Pivot and say yep we thought maybe and so we could pivot quicker y I think it's good that we had the conversation yeah so I I think I heard that it's going to remain as it's written yeah okay that's I'm I'm fine with that yeah does anybody want to discuss the proposal to change the placement of a front a fence on the lot what what do you what's changed well instead of saying you have the the front yard is the setback which would be 25 ft the front yard where your fence would go could be as far back as where your house begins so maybe it's 30t or maybe it's 15t yeah that makesense I think it's from the front of the house I think that's the way it should be way to go okay that's what we're proposing yep um I have one other minor thing on page 12 of 13 first line along the proper um it's oh let's see starting on the previous page offense adhering to which is at least Le 90% op shall be constructed this is for the automobile service stations or whatever shall be constructed along the property line when said use Ab buts property residentially used or in one of the residential districts instead of property residentially used can you say AB buts residential uses it just seems like the the language is a little clumsy is it is it section six sorry I got L um sorry it's section seven uh the third line okay very top of page very top of page 12 of 13 first line it's just a language question can you read the question um along along the property line when said use Ab buts residential uses okay along the property line when said use Ab buts instead of the words property residentially used say residential uses does that make sense if you're making that chain section 9A uses the same language yeah yeah the property residentially used just seems like a unusual that was just a carryover from our existing code but yeah that is a good change so I will do that we have the language that says when said used we've already kind of thrown great grammar out anyway where yeah where do you see that oh yeah when said use I mean when I mean you know we're already in Le legally is more language than than grammar anyway but used more words us was the other got 9A y I'm not finding the when when what you just said when said use a buts oh there right there okay yeah Y which is again written by MH well so how how should we word that then can you do it with fewer words you could say Val use but do we care about this 90% opaque business or yeah I suppose we do because it's a I like that for the for the screening purpose okay offense adhering to the provisions the defense ordinance because you're talking about an automotive service station or convenience right up against Residential mhm they be constructed along just so I'm clear along the property line is not the see-through part it's the non seethrough non seethrough part right gotcha you missed that discussion last month I did I did I'm sorry I did I know I was gone my fault that's all right we had that discussion clarify we were really clear on that word yes okay now I'm clear too or unclear we were very opaque I think W what what if we say along the property line if it abuts residential uses period will Jack be okay with that if we take set out I'm just kidding I'm just kidding well you could even just flip the words resti you're talking about you're not talking about the fence of buding the property the residential property you're talking about the use on that property AB buding residential property so you want to talk about the use the function on the property which is why you're talking about said use which use are we talking about the auto well they're both the same language um down by the daycare center is the same language basically so it's the it's the auto use that's Auto defense on the auto use being adjacent the residential use requires the fence so it's the uses so are you saying if it's not up against Residential they don't have to have the fence correct okay all right how how about I just reword all those because this is why don't you reward everything required to be constructed along the property it's not like you have enough to do yeah these are but it I don't know this is why it's so hard to do the the ordinance itself cuz want to demonstrate what's changed but you feel like limited in being able to just rewrite rewrite it um these These are really minor refinements we're talking about here this has really to understand though for it's ultimately making our lives easier to staff so we appreciate it I've just always said that unfortunately nobody may actually understand this analogy but uh that writing ordinances should be like writing Western Union telegrams you should specify what you're saying in as few words as possible and be as clear as possible as if every word were costing you pennies per word MH that's a good way to think about it good point it's like writing specs uses more exactly yeah you know I I remember turning in a uh uh ifb paper for a job that started as six pages and came out of the attorney's office as 53 yep anyway and it said exactly the same thing exactly I don't have anything else that I found that I can complain about nope I don't either wow this is going to be a short meeting then actually I wasn't complaining about anything I think it looks really good yeah it's clarify very well done yep great work yeah the biggest the biggest unknown that was in my mind was about Corners Corner Lots Corner Lots yeah but I think that that's the right answer is that there's one front yard there aren't two yeah yep cuz otherwise you're putting huge restrictions on that piece of property yeah I've learned this lesson already because we had a community that had um some houses that had Street facing on two sides of the of the property and then we eliminated their ability to put up a privacy fence by the way it was written yeah so you yeah you learn after doing I think this is pretty flexible too I mean I there's there are some requirements but for the backyards we're going up to 8 ft right no s 7t thank you the 8T maximum of seven for non-residential oh okay thank you I guess it does raise the possible question of what happens if a duplex is built on a corner and has facing on two different streets so it has two different street addresses but uh I don't think we've got any of those in town so well that's just a real wacky situation I think we would probably I think that have two front yards there is language in there in the ordinance that gives the author authorizes the zoning administrator to determine what the front yard is and I think in that case you would say there's two y but depending on how it's designed it could get really complicated I want to build it you know then you I I I have I am envisioning this floor plan in my mind and I'm saying oh yeah I could that could be a problem well we'll we'll cross that bridge when we come to it or build that bridge or build that fence okay are there any other comments on that document good Brandy yeah so yeah do I think the next step then if we are in agreement with how it's written is that it would come to you again as a public hearing and then we would make the recommendation it would go to council yes so you think that we're at that point Point okay yeah cuz the public hearing is required yep okie dokie what's next on the agenda after next other after this is reports no I mean I'm sorry I don't mean the today's agenda I mean the long-term agenda for for zoning specifically um I had next home occupations and so I started working on that I'm going to have to turn it over to Chris here to to start working on but beyond that I not sure I'm sorry that that was what was again oh beyond that I'm not really sure but no no I'm sorry what was next I occup home occupations okay thank you you're welcome so we would have the public Hearing in May yep I think we could do that I'm sure there will be a large crowd the will be packed they'll have to be fenced in we're we're actually going to have two public hearings in May so you better all be here what's the other one um the 17th in Delaware project that is going to be uh plat and as it turns out a rezoning and uh the Pud I I made a mistake in my original interpretation of the project because my training is that a a side by side on two different Lots is a twin home that's what I'm familiar with and everywhere that I've worked but apparently not here it's called a townhouse and so tow houses are not allowed in the R1 District so thus we have to rezone it so that's uh that's also coming I that differentiation is very difficult to understand yeah yeah because I would say a twin home is a two unit house and a tow houses would be three or more that are connected by a a wall you know but I think a twin home is on one property right no well what what I think is that a duplex is one two units on one on one property one lot the twin is two units twoed on two lots and that's zero lot line great but isn't that town isn't a townhouse the same thing as a to house is that is that an HOA then the ho is totally separate separ totally but I think that we don't have the word d Le in here but we have twin which is the duplex so I don't know if it's Wisconsin that's wacky or if it's Minnesota oh if it's Wisconsin yeah so it's it's my my my training is the his now you're digging deep but it sounds to me like we may need to you know take a look at what we're defining what as yeah because like I say you know I can see a twin home being two houses with a zero lot line on two different pieces of property and uh a duplex being you know two homes on the same property but then if you start having you know individual homes side by side in a row then I think that should be a different category altogether it may still have the same requirements I think that's a town be called something I would call those town houses y but a townhouse can be as small as two MH so I've learned right yeah see and that's what I'd say if it's as small as two that's a twin home that's what I would say you're going to have to go and read those definitions again yeah yes so and you just don't realize it until you're faced with an application right and um yeah I learn a lot and I think you're all going to be very um excited to see the staff report that I have for this PUD because it is a beast of an ordinance and it's very repetitive I think it's over regul over regulating a little bit perhaps I don't know there's definitely a lot of words so we didn't use the Western Union example when drafting our original PUD um so that that could be a future Amendment too but yeah so that's next next on uh on the in the MA's agenda okay yeah planning commissioner's lot is not a happy one no we'll get through it yes lean into the ch Alles all right so we are up to report staff reports uh or not staff reports um commissioner reports so do we have anything down there none for me okay nothing for me nothing for me all right how about this end nothing for me nothing here nothing wow that's easy yeah do we have any staff reports worth uh bringing to the table I suppose I should probably mention it I was debating whether or not I would but I submitted my resignation on Monday oh and my pH what's going on and my last day will be May 10th yeah I heard bad rumors in that regard yeah um so I'm I'm very sad to let this commission go I really enjoy working with with all of you it's been it's been a pleasure actually and I do mean that oh you've done an amazing job yeah since you've been here you youve I mean a lot of the things that we have now are thanks to you and Chris so yeah I really appreciate that y hope you're going on to bigger and better things agreed I hope so too greener pastures um uh Council on nordby do you have anything thank you as always you know the the heavy lifting that you do you do such a wonderful job makes it when these come before the council so easy so just thank you again um your work is truly appreciated the council could you easy stuff we'll we'll keep trying yes you got a lot of work to do on that end do you actually tell them all the discussion that we have on these items or I I tell them what we discuss absolutely yeah only thing I have is just a reminder about um things coming up um cleanup day happens I think that was yeah that was mentioned last month um what was the other thing that was mentioned last month that's event um it was cleanup day and it was Yard Service pickups begin the 15th was it something to do with the garage sale the garage sale yeah citywide garage sale which is early May 2: to 4: is that the weekend before the clean up yep yeah because of course after the garage sale you have to clean up we're already talking about getting our canoe and cleaning up the lake so wasn't there a Planning Commission talked about with the uh Community Center that wasn't that also talked about as well a Planning Commission yeah when they were bringing in front of the city council just talking about the the use cases that was we T did talk about that briefly that meeting was coming up I I don't know about that the city C Council has been talking about the community center for the past couple meetings and I think that's going to continue on for several more yeah to try to keep the keep the ball rolling on that yeah I think we started that convers at this meeting because that was in the early stages yeah the other thing that I would like to commend this commission for is that I went to two of the council workshops talking about the community center and I saw almost everybody from this commission at one of those meetings at least there were there were at least four or five um members of this group and that was just I mean I was really satisfied to see that we're serious about paying attention to what's going on and I think that's that's good and those are obviously it never works to go to all those meetings but um I appreciate the council for what they do um a lot of work being done there so yes that being the case I think we're to the end of our agenda I I would entertain a motion to adjourn I'll make it a motion from commissioner rothy second I'll second second from commissioner muick all in favor say I I hi we are adjourned