[00:00:01]
OKAY.[1. Call Meeting To Order/Roll Call]
EVENING, EVERYONE.UH, WE'RE HERE THIS EVENING FOR THE ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER 15TH, 2021.
UH, KAREN, WHO IS SITTING IN FOR, UH, TONY TONIGHT, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL, MR. ELLIS HERE, MR. FANNON.
MR. HENDRICKS HERE, MR. KITCHEN HERE.
MR. OTTO, MR. WAMSLEY AND MR. WEBB HERE.
I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY DID SOME MR. WAMSLEY ABOUT HE'S HAVING SOME FAMILY ISSUES THAT HE HAD TO TAKE CARE OF THIS EVENING, SO HE WON'T BE HERE.
[2. Approval of Minutes]
OKAY.UH, MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER TWO OF THE AGENDA APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES, THE MINUTES HAVE BEEN CIRCULATED TO MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, AS I UNDERSTAND IT.
UM, SO UNLESS THERE ARE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, THE MINUTES WILL STAND AND BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED, SEEING NOTHING, THEY WILL BE APPROVED.
[ Legislation Worksheets Review]
OKAY.MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, TOPICS OF DISCUSSION, UH, ITEM THREE, A THE LEGISLATION WORKSHEETS REVIEW.
UM, WE'VE DONE A PRETTY GOOD JOB.
I THINK IN, IN CLOSING OUT MOST OF THE ITEMS IN SECTIONS, A 1 0 1 THROUGH TITLE SEVEN, I BELIEVE IT WAS.
AND, UH, THERE ARE A FEW ITEMS I BELIEVE, UM, THAT WERE LEFT OPEN.
AND KAREN, AT ANY POINT IN TIME, I MISS SOMETHING OR, UM, I'M NOT STATING SOMETHING CORRECTLY OR CLEARLY JUST FEEL FREE TO JUMP IN.
AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE FIRST ITEM OPEN THAT WE NEEDED TO GET BACK TO IS, UH, CODE SECTION NINE, 20.07.
AND THAT DEALS WITH, UH, UH, WHAT APPEARED TO BE AN INCONSISTENCY IN THE APPEAL PROCEDURE.
UM, AND I BELIEVE EVERYBODY SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED SOME, UH, RECOMMENDATION FROM JERRY MCDONALD, THE CITY ATTORNEY AS TO THE LANGUAGE THAT HE WAS SUGGESTING BE ADDED OR NOT ADDED, BUT, UH, REPLACING SECTION NINE, 20.07 AND 9 21 0.04 10, WHICH CLARIFIES THE ISSUE OF WHO CAN MAKE AN APPEAL, THE TIMEFRAME, ET CETERA.
UH, HAS EVERYBODY HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW JERRY MCDONALD'S, UH, COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION? UM, IS EVERYONE OKAY WITH WHAT HE'S PROPOSING, SEEING NO OBJECTIONS THAT WILL BE, UH, THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE PASSED ON TO COUNCIL.
UH, THE NEXT OPEN ITEM IS IN SECTION 11 OR CODE SECTION 1180 5.02.
AND THAT DEALT WITH, UM, A QUESTION THAT, UH, DEALT WITH, UM, THE TERM AND THE PHRASE HARD SERVICE DRIVEWAY VERSUS, UM, OTHER SIMILAR BUT DIFFERENT TERMS. AND AGAIN, WE RECEIVED A EMAIL FROM JERRY MCDONALD AND, UM, HIS COMMENT WAS WITH RESPECT TO ACCESSORY STRUCTURE STRUCTURE, OR WITH RESPECT TO THE SURFACE PAVED SURFACE.
HE WAS RECOMMENDING THAT A THOROUGH REVIEW OF STAFF WOULD BE IN ORDER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE TERMS USED IN VARIOUS CONTEXTS WITHIN THE CODE ARE CONSISTENT AS THEY ARE NOT CURRENTLY.
SO, AS I READ HIS RECOMMENDATION, HE'S SUGGESTING THAT GO BACK TO STAFF FOR FURTHER REVIEW AND CLARIFICATION, ANYBODY READING IT DIFFERENTLY, THEN THEM, AND ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT? BECAUSE I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE DONE.
SO WE WILL KICK THAT ONE BACK TO STAFF.
AND THEN SCOTT HAD A RECOMMENDATION ALSO ON THAT ONE OUT THE, HOW THAT EMAIL TO ME, CAUSE HIS, HE WAS AFTER THAT WENT OUT FROM JERRY.
UM, THE SIMPLE DEFINITION CAN BE HARD SURFACE PAVEMENT THAT SHALL CONSIST OF CONTINUOUS CONCRETE
[00:05:01]
ASPHALT STONE OR BRICK PAVERS.YEAH, I, THAT, THAT, UM, YOU WANT TO KICK THAT BACK TO SEE WHICH ONE THEY WANT TO GO WITH? WELL, I'M OKAY WITH, I THINK SCOTT WITH SCOTT'S SUGGESTION AS LONG AS IT'S CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT.
SO I THINK, I THINK WHAT STAFF NEEDS TO DO IS, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS THEY, THEY, THEY PICK A DEFINITION AND STICK WITH IT, WHATEVER THE, WHATEVER THE DEFINITION THEY'RE COMFORTABLE WITH, I'M OKAY WITH AS LONG AS THEY JUST ARE CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT.
SO I'M, DON'T THINK THAT REALLY NEEDS TO COME BACK TO US AT THIS POINT, UNLESS SOMEBODY, MY SAME WAY WANTS TO REVIEW, REVISIT THAT, UM, THE NEXT OPEN ITEM IS SECTION OR ORDINANCE 1180 9.091.
AND THAT DEALT WITH IT WAS WHAT CAME UP AT THE LAST MEETING, UM, THAT DEALT WITH THE TIME LIMITATION FOR, UM, THE REAL ESTATE SIGNS, YOU KNOW, BEING LEFT UP, YOU KNOW, FOR AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME.
AND, UH, IN, UM, MR. MCDONALD'S EMAIL TO US, HE SAYS, IT'S QUICK RESPONSES WITH RESPECT TO THE SIGN CODE, NOT TO MAKE ANY CHANGES AT THIS TIME.
UM, HE DOESN'T REALLY, UH, ELABORATE IN TERMS OF WHY OR WHY NOT.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF I WANT TO SAY THAT WAS ONE THAT WE HAD DISCUSSED BEFORE, WHERE WE WERE GOING TO PUSH THAT TO COUNCIL FOR REVIEW, FOR THEM TO MAKE A CALL ON THAT ONE.
I THINK THERE WERE TWO TOPICS SCIENCE, THE SIGNS WAS ONE AND THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE IN PARTICULAR.
I REMEMBER FROM THAT PARTICULAR TIME, UH, YEAH, ACCORDING TO THE, UM, YEAH, IT SAYS AFTER LENGTHY DISCUSSION, THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THIS ITEM REGARDING SECTION 1180 9.091 GO BACK TO LAW DIRECTOR AND CITY STAFF FURTHER REVIEW AND CLARIFICATION.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF, IF WHAT WE GOT WAS BASICALLY, UH, EITHER OF THOSE, BUT, UM, IT'S COMMENT.
IT SAYS, I AGREE WITH PREVIOUS COMMENTS WE MADE FOR THE SIGN CODE AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, SO I CAN HAVE AND GET THAT BACK IF YOU WANT.
I THINK THAT ONE, WE MIGHT WANT TO SEND BACK TO THEM, JUST, YOU KNOW, CAUSE I THINK WE WERE PRETTY CLEAR IN OUR, THE CONCERNS AND QUESTIONS THAT WE HAD CONCERNING THAT.
SO I THINK THEY DO NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BEFORE WE PUT THAT PARTICULAR SECTION, UM, TO BED.
UM, THEN I THINK THE NEXT OPEN SECTION IS A SECTION 13, 13.05, WHICH DEALT WITH, UH, THERE WAS A QUESTION THAT I KIND OF HAD RAISED WAS THE FACT THAT THEY SEEM TO BE USING THE PHRASE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND ACCESS FOR REBUILDING AND SAY THE WORD ACCESSORY BUILDING, UM, KIND IN DIFFERENT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THEY, THEY KIND OF MEANT THE SAME THING OR IT SOUNDED LIKE, BUT THEY WERE REFERRING TO TWO DIFFERENT PHRASE AND JERRY RECOMMENDED THAT THE TERM THAT SHOULD BE USED THROUGHOUT THE COURT COURT COACH SHOULD BE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
AND JERRY CONCURS WITH THAT IN HIS EMAIL, HE SAID, UH, STAFF RECOMMENDS US USING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND RE MOVING ACCESSORY, BUILDING A STORAGE SHED.
SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION BACK WOULD BE JUST TO REPLACE ANY PLACES.
IT SAYS ACCESSORY BUILDING AND STORY SHED AND USING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.
AND UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THAT, I THINK THAT PRETTY MUCH THAT TAKES CARE OF THAT SECTION.
AND THEN ON MOVING ON TO PARK 15, UM, UH, ORDINANCE 15, 17 0 6, UM,
[00:10:01]
THERE WAS QUESTIONS THAT I RAISED ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL PROCESS AND WHO GOT NOTICE.AND MY, MY CONCERN THAT I HAD WAS THAT THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION COULD BE SENT TO SOMEBODY LIVING IN THE PROPERTY AND, OR, YOU KNOW, A BUSINESS OWNER OR BUSINESS, YOU KNOW, TENANT AND THE OWNER MAY NEVER KNOW ABOUT IT.
AND SO I HAD RECOMMENDED THAT THE WORD OR BE CHANGED AND, AND, UM, UH, JERRY RECOMMENDED, UH, SOME CHANGED LANGUAGE.
AND ACCORDING TO HIS, HIS EMAIL, HE SUGGESTED THAT, UM, THAT 15, 17 0 6, UM, UH, STATE IN THE EVENT SERVICES TO BE IS TO THE OCCUPANT OR OTHER PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONDITIONS UNDER VIOLATION.
COMMA NOTICE SHALL ALSO BE SENT TO THE OWNER SO THAT THE OWNER IS ALWAYS NOTIFIED OF ANY VIOLATION.
I THINK THAT SATISFIES MY CONCERN.
UM, SIMILARLY IN SECTION 15, 17.08, DEALING WITH A RIGHT OF APPEAL AND REMEDIAL WORK, WELL ACTUALLY, OH EIGHT AND OH NINE DEALING WITH STOP WORK AND REMEDIAL ORDERS AND THE RIGHT OF APPEAL.
UM, AGAIN, MY CONCERN WAS THAT THOUGH THE STOP WORK ORDER, ACCORDING TO THE WAY THE LANGUAGE IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN COULD BE TO, UM, SOMEONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER.
AND I THINK THE OWNER SHOULD BE NOTIFIED OF THE FACT THAT, UH, THERE WAS SOMETHING GOING ON WITH HIS OR HER PROPERTY.
AND AGAIN, JERRY MCDONALD RECOMMENDED THAT, UM, THE S THE SECTION B READ THE STOP WORK ORDER SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY INVOLVED OR TO THE OWNER'S AGENT AND TO THE PERSON DOING THE WORK.
SO IT'S ALWAYS GOING TO GO TO EITHER THE OWNER OR THE OWNER'S AGENT PLUS ALSO THE PERSON THAT'S DOING THE WORK.
SO ANY EVERYBODY ELSE HAS TO, OKAY.
AND THEN LASTLY, IN SECTION 15, 17.09, DID YOU HAVE KEITH NICELYS COMMENTS REGARDING THAT THOUGH? CAUSE HE RESPONDED BACK TO JERRY ON THAT.
UM, SO HE'D SEND IT TO TONY ASS PASS ON KEITH'S RECOMMENDATION.
HIS RECOMMENDATIONS WERE THAT THE LANGUAGE IS SIMILAR TO THE OHIO ADMINISTRATIVE CODE.
IT DEFINES THE RESPONSIBLE PERSON AS THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE FIRE CODE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED THE OWNER, LESSEE AGENT OPERATOR, OR OCCUPANT OF A BUILDING.
UM, IT GOES ON WITH DEFINITION OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON AND THEN IT GOES THE, UH, FIRE CODE.
BUT WHAT HE SAYS IS THAT SO OFTEN THAT YOU, THERE ARE TIMES THAT A VIOLATION IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE OCCUPANT, NOT THE OWNER.
LIKE IF IT'S A BLOCKED EGRESS DOOR, THEN HE COULD THINK OF JUST NOTIFIED THEM AND THEY CAN MOVE IT, OR THE OWNER WOULD NEED TO BE NOTIFIED.
SO HE SAID HE PREFER TO LEAVE THE LANGUAGE FOR THESE, THE SAME UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY RESEMBLE THE OIC FIRE CODE AND HAVE BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 1982, HE BELIEVES THERE WOULD BE NO HARM IN LEAVING THEM.
AND THEN ON THE 15, 1909 KEITH'S COMMENT WAS THAT THE SUBSTITUTION WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE.
HOWEVER, BASED ON THE OHIO FIRE CODE, SECTION 1 0 8, I WOULD BELIEVE THAT ANY APPEAL WOULD BE LIMITED TO THE INSTANCES WHERE THE HEBREW HIDES CODE IS MORE RESTRICTED THAN THE STATE OF OHIO CODE, WHERE VERY FEW AREAS, THIS IS THE CASE.
UM, SO THAT'S HIS RECOMMENDATION THEN? UM, AM JERRY'S EMAIL TO TONY REGARDING THIS? HE SAID THERE WAS NOT A CONFLICT BETWEEN HIS RECOMMENDATION AND KEYS AS HE FULLY DIFFERS TO HIS EXPERTISE AND EXPERIENCE WHILE HAS PROPOSED LANGUAGE MAKES SENSE TO ME AS AN EASY FIX, IT IS APPARENTLY A FIX FOR SOMETHING THAT IS NOT A PROBLEM.
LET'S GO AHEAD WITH THE CHANGE IN 15, 17 0 9 2 AGREED PARTY.
AND THAT'S PRETTY MUCH WHERE HE LEAVES IT.
SO JERRY IS RECOMMENDING 1509, ACCORDING TO HIS LANGUAGE.
SO 15, 17 0 6 SINCE TO KEEP IT AS IS FOR NOW.
AND THEN, THEN THE CHALLENGE CHANGE WOULD BE THE AGGRIEVED PARTY.
UM, THE STATEMENT OF THE AGGRIEVED PARTY, WHICH IS IT'S JUST A 15, 17 0 9.
I THINK THAT WAS OUR CONCERN WAS THAT WE WANTED TO ENSURE
[00:15:01]
THAT BOTH THE OWNER AND THE PARTY THERE WOULD BOTH BE NOTIFIED.AND I THINK THAT DOES COVER AS WELL.
AND IT DOESN'T ONE PARTY DOESN'T ALWAYS NEED TO.
SO YEAH, I, I THINK, YOU KNOW, I GUESS MY CONCERN IS, IS THAT I THINK THE OWNER ALWAYS SHOULD BE NOTIFIED ANY CIRCUMSTANCE.
THAT'S MY PERSONAL, YOU KNOW, IT ONLY BECAUSE IT'S ULTIMATELY THE OWNER'S PROPERTY AND THERE, THERE SHOULDN'T BE THINGS GOING ON IN HIS PROPERTY THAT HE, YOU KNOW, VIOLATIONS THAT HE'S NOT AWARE OF.
OR HE, SHE THOUGHT WHERE DON, I WAS JUST GOING TO, UH, IN CHIEF KNISELY IS A RESPONSE TO THAT.
HE REFERENCED A SPECIFIC INSTANCE OF, UM, THEY'RE GOING TO ASSIGN SOMEONE, UH, THE RESIDENT FOR HAVING A NEGRESS STORE BLOCKED, OR THE TENANT FROM AN EAT RESTAURANT BLOCK WOULDN'T NECESSARILY INVOLVE THE OWNER.
IT'S A SITUATION WHERE THEY'RE GOING OUT TO SITE THAT PARTICULAR PERSON AT THAT TIME FOR A VIOLATION.
UH, HE DID A NICE, I DID RECOMMEND THAT WE NOT, UH, CHANGE THE WAY HE CALLED.
IT WAS SUFFICIENT AS HAD, I GUESS, YOU KNOW, AND I'M OKAY WITH THAT.
THAT'S WHAT THE RECOMMENDATION IS, I GUESS, AS AN, AS A PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY.
AND I HAD A TENANT IN THERE THAT WAS COMMITTING VIOLATIONS OF THE FIRE CODE.
I WOULDN'T WANT TO KNOW IT, YOU KNOW, AND THE ONLY WAY I WOULD KNOW IT WOULD BE IS IF I GOT SERVED WITH A COPY OF THE VIOLATION AS WELL, AND THAT THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO FOR ME.
BUT, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IF THE STAFF IS OKAY WITH THE WAY THAT IT SEEMS TO BE WORKING, THEN I GUESS, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY COMPLAINTS THEN I GUESS IT'S OKAY.
YOU KNOW WHAT, LET ME GET THE PHONE TO THEM.
I MEAN, THEY GOT TO LIVE WITH IT AND WORK WITH IT.
HE DID SAY WHAT IN TALKING WITH REGINA SONG, THEIR FIRE PREVENTION MANAGER, SHE EVEN ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE CURRENTLY NOTIFY THE OCCUPANT OF THE VIOLATION AFTER FEW TRIES, THEN THEY SEND A CERTIFIED LETTER TO BOTH THE OCCUPANT AND THE OWNER.
SO I GUESS IF THE OCCUPANT DOESN'T TAKE CARE OF IT, THEN THEY WILL GO AHEAD AND BRING IT OUT.
OR IF IT'S SOMETHING BIGGER, YOU KNOW? OKAY.
I GUESS I JUST LIKE THE OWNER, YOU KNOW, THEY SHOULD AT LEAST MAKE AN EFFORT TO NOTIFY THE OWNER WHAT'S GOING ON AT THE CIRCLE PROPERTY.
UM, I DON'T KNOW, ON THE FLIP SIDE OF THAT, NOTIFY THE TENANT, THE WRONGDOER, THE TENANT MAY BE ABLE TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM, YOU KNOW? YEAH.
BECAUSE MY ONLY CONCERN WOULD BE OBVIOUSLY IS IF THERE'S A PROBLEM AND THE TENANT DOESN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT AND THE TENANT DOESN'T APPEAL AND THERE'S A LITTLE TIME LIMIT WITHIN WHICH THE TENANT WOULD HAVE TO APPEAL.
AND IF THE OWNERS NEVER MADE AWARE OF IT, NOW THERE'S A VIOLATION.
AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW, I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION IN TERMS OF WHO GETS PENALIZED.
YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S A VIOLATION, IS IT, ARE THEY GOING TO PENAL? ARE THEY GOING TO ISSUE A CITATION TO THE TENANT OR ARE THEY GOING TO ISSUE A CITATION TO THE OWNER? I THINK THE INTENT THERE READING YOUR RIDE WOULD BE THAT IF I'M AN OWNER, IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR FOR ME TO GET A CITATION.
AFTER A PERIOD OF LAW NOTIFICATION TO ME, MY TENANT HAS KIND OF GETTING THE NOTIFICATIONS.
I WANT TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YEAH.
AND THAT'S WHY I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THE OWNER BE NOTIFIED, ESPECIALLY IF IT'S THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.
THAT'S GONNA, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S A CITATION ISSUE AND A FINE OF SOME KIND OF, UH, FOR VIOLATING THE FIRE CODE, THEN IT SHOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE, UH, I SHOULDN'T HAVE TO PAY THE FINE IF I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT THE VIOLATION IN THE FIRST PLACE.
SO, SO, UM, I THINK I'D LIKE TO, I THINK I'D LIKE THIS TO GO BACK ONE, ONE MORE TIME TO THEM JUST WITH, WITH THAT CONCERN IN MIND, IS THAT OKAY IF THE TENANT IS THE VIOLATOR AND WHO GETS CITED, BECAUSE IF IT'S A TENANT THAT GETS CITED, THEN I'M OKAY.
THEN I GUESS I'M OKAY WITH, WITH THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN.
BUT IF IT'S THE OWNER THAT ENDS UP GETTING ZEISS CITATION AND ASKED TO SOME, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY PAY A FINE OR WHATEVER, THEN I DO HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.
AND I THINK IT OUGHT TO BE LOOKED AT AGAIN.
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WAS ON THE OPEN ITEMS. GLEN, YOU HAD MENTIONED, YOU HAD ANOTHER ITEM YOU WANTED TO GO BACK AND TALK TO, THEY KIND OF ROLL BACK, UM, BASED ON A CONVERSATION FROM MONDAY NIGHT'S MEETING CONCERNING NOISE ORDINANCE AND A DISTURBANCE OF THE PEACE.
UH, WE HAD HAD A STAFF RECOMMENDATION THAT WE EXTEND THE TIMEFRAME
[00:20:01]
FROM MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY AND INCLUDES SATURDAY IN THAT.UM, WELL, AFTER WHAT DON HAD BROUGHT UP THE MEETING THE OTHER NIGHT, UH, FOR WHAT'D YOU SAY ABOUT A YEAR, THERE'S BEEN A RESIDENT THAT HAS BEEN COMPLAINING OF, UH, VERY EARLY NOISE, UH, FROM CONSTRUCTION, UM, UH, ON, ON SATURDAYS EVEN.
SO WHEN, WHEN CURRENTLY IT'S NOT EVEN ALLOWED.
I WANT TO OPEN PANDORA'S BOX THERE AND SAY, YOU KNOW, AND ALLOW THAT SITUATION TO CONTINUE.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE SHOULD RE-LOOK AT THOSE TIMES AND MAYBE REVISIT THE THOUGHT OF A SATURDAY OR NOT.
UM, CAUSE I KNOW, LIKE I SAID, STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND RECOMMENDED PUSHING SATURDAY INTO THAT TIMEFRAME, BUT IF IT'S CAUSING BIG ISSUES, UM, MAYBE SOMETHING TO RETHINK, UM, TO, TO, UM, TAKE THE PART OF THE ROSEMONT AND BESPOKE, IF YOU CAN ENVISION GOING OUT TO YOUR, YOUR PATIO ON SUMMER SATURDAY MORNING AND UH, 7:00 AM, YOU'VE GOT CEMENT TRUCKS, BACKHOES, ROOFERS, UM, POUNDING AWAY STARTING AT 7:00 AM.
I KNOW WE WANT TO FACILITATE THINGS FOR DEVELOPMENT, BUT IN THIS CASE WHERE HE LOVES IT'S BEEN CONTINUAL DEVELOPMENT FOR BETTER THAN A YEAR BEHIND HIM WITH INFRASTRUCTURE, CEMENT, TRUCKS, BULLDOZERS, BACKHOES, UH, AND CONSTRUCTION CREWS.
SO JUST THAT AT FIRST BLUSH, WE'D READ THAT AND SATURDAY MORNINGS, THAT MAKES SENSE.
BUT THE MORE YOU DELVE INTO IT, YOU REALIZE THAT IT'S A MAJOR INCONVENIENCE AND IT, AS IT IS NOW, IT IS AN EXCEPTION THAT RUSS CAN GRANT ON A EMERGENCY TEMPORARY PERIOD.
HE CAN GRANT THAT SATURDAY MORNING.
I'M JUST NOT SURE IT'S THE RIGHT STEP FOR US AS A, UH, A RECOMMENDING BODY HERE TO SAY SATURDAY MORNINGS OF OPEN SEASON.
SO IF, IF I'M, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THE CURTAINS ORDINANCE ENDS AT MIDNIGHT ON FRIDAY, THEY ADORE NOISE ORDINANCE RESTRICTIONS AND PM AT THE 10 IT'S CURRENTLY 7:00 AM TO 10:00 PM, WHICH AGAIN, BASED ON CONVERSATION, IT MAY ALMOST BE WORTH A LATER TIME AND SEVEN IF THEY'RE COMING OUT THAT EARLY.
CAUSE I DIDN'T, YOU ALSO MENTIONED, HE HAD SAID THAT THEY ARE SOMETIMES THEY'RE AT SIX O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING.
UM, OBVIOUSLY IF WE'RE DEALING WITH A CONSTRUCTION COMPANY BUILDING THE NEW HOUSE NEXT TO ME, THAT'S A PERIOD OF TIME THAT I WOULD, I KNOW WITH EACH HOUSE WE'VE BUILT IN HUBER, WE'VE GONE THROUGH THAT, TO WHERE THEY THEY'RE BUILDING NEXT DOOR ON THE SIDE OR BEHIND US, OR WHAT HAVE YOU HEARD THIS VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, UM, WITH THE CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT OR SOON AS IN THIS RESIDENCE CASE, THIS HAS BEEN ONGOING FOR A YEAR, ALL AROUND HIM, INFRASTRUCTURE, UH, ALL THE SEWER AND WATER AND STREETS AND BACKHOES AND THE ROCK HOUND, UH, BACK THERE TILLING UP THE GROUND.
SO IT'S LITERALLY DESTROYED HIS ABILITY TO ENJOY THIS IS A RESIDENCE.
SO WOULD YOU, YOU, YOUR RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE TO, TO TAKE THAT BACK TO THE STAFF FOR FURTHER REVIEW OR DO YOU HAVE A, DO YOU GUYS HAVE A, YOU KNOW, A, A PROPOSED FIX OR A RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU WANT TO SEND BACK? I THINK THE LANGUAGE HAS, AS IT IS STANDS.
UH, I HAD NOT REALIZED THAT I KNOW THE NORD OR NOISE ORDINANCE 7:00 AM TO 10 AS PER UNIVERSALLY APPLIED FROM HEAVY EQUIPMENT ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO THE NEIGHBOR THUMPING HER STEREO.
BUT 7:00 AM IS AWFULLY EARLY FOR A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD TO BE AWAKENED TO CONSTRUCTION, NAIL GUNS AND CEMENT TRUCKS.
SO WOULD YOU LIKE JUST FOR ON SATURDAY AND SUNDAY OR JUST MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY OR, WELL, THE LANGUAGE CARLA IS MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, SATURDAY AS AN EXCEPTION, AN EXEMPTION THAT RUSS CAN GRANT PERIODICALLY, UM, AND NOT SPEAK BAD OF ANY DEVELOPERS, BUT IT IS A THING WHERE WE'VE GIVEN THEM A RANCH AND NOW THEY'RE TAKING A MILE OR SO THERE, UM, FOR SEEING THEM WHILE BEFORE 6:00 AM ON SOME CASES, UM, THERE IS, UH, ANOTHER ISSUE THAT GLEN WILL REMEMBER.
HE BROUGHT UP BECAUSE IT IS A SATURDAY, THE ONLY ENFORCEMENT IS TO CALL THE NON-EMERGENCY NUMBER, HUBER HEIGHTS AND REPORT IT TO HAVE AN OFFICER COME OUT AND SPEAK TO THE CREWS OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
AND OF COURSE THE OFFICER ISN'T AS FIRST AS, UH, MR. BERGMAN, OUR ENGINEER IS WHAT THEY SHOULD AND SHOULD NOT BE DOING.
SO THE WHOLE THING, I JUST THINK THAT OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS TO GO
[00:25:01]
AHEAD AND DO THAT PERMANENT MODIFICATION, I THINK TO A SATURDAY.I THINK AFTER HEARING THIS RESIDENT AND A FEW OTHERS HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT THE SAME THING, I DON'T THINK IT'S A SMART MOVE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, START TO TAKE A RE-LOOK AT THIS AND, UM, FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ABSOLUTELY SOMEHOW ENFORCE THAT 7:00 AM OR EVEN EVEN CONSIDER CHANGING THAT, YOU KNOW, TO SOMETHING THAT MAY BE A LITTLE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR A RESIDENTIAL SETTING.
I MEAN, WHAT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, APPROPRIATE FOR A GOOD LEVEL OF NOISE IN THE MORNING? I MEAN, I, I THINK EVERYBODY HAS THEIR OWN FEEL ON THAT.
I MEAN, I WON'T FIRE UP MY LAWNMOWER TILL MAYBE 10, 10:00 AM OR SO IT WOULD BE ABOUT THE EARLIEST FOR ME, CAUSE I DON'T WANT TO MESS WITH FOLKS, BUT, UM, I THINK THAT MAY BE TOO LATE, BUT I'M RETIRED, SO TEN-ISH IS FINE.
I MEAN, SO I'M SENDING IT BACK TO THE STAFF AND HAVE THEM RE-LOOK AT THAT AND PULL SATURDAYS BACK OFF THE TABLE.
CAUSE I HAD A QUICK CONVERSATION WITH RUSS JUST AS HE WAS WALKING OUT THE DOOR AND REGARDING THAT SATURDAY, THE GENTLEMAN THAT WAS IN, UM, IF THEY'RE STARTING BEFORE 9:00 AM, HE NEEDS SOMEBODY TO REPORT THAT TO HIM.
CAUSE HE COULD SHUT THAT DOWN AND HE HAS TOLD THE DEVELOPER, YOU CANNOT START TILL NINE.
SO IF SOMEBODY CAN GET SOME KIND OF CLARIFICATION OR PROOF THAT THEY HAVE STARTED BEFORE NINE, THEN HE CAN TAKE AND REPEAL THAT THE ONE HE GAVE THEM THAT MAKE SENSE.
BUT ACCORDING TO THE SAY 5 0 9 0 8 B 10, THEY CAN ACTUALLY START A 7:00 AM ON WEEKDAYS, RIGHT? YEAH.
BUT THE SATURDAY, THE GENTLEMEN THAT'S COMPLAINED ABOUT THE SATURDAYS WHERE THEY'RE WORKING.
AND HE SAID THAT THEY'RE PULLING ONTO THE LOT AS EARLY AS SIX 30 RUNNING THE TRUCKS.
SO IF THEY ARE DOING THAT, THEY CANNOT DO THAT.
SO THAT'S WHY RUSS SAID IF HE CAN STOP AND HE CAN PULL THAT PERMIT FROM THAT CONTRACTOR.
AND HE HAS TOLD THEM THAT IF THEY START BEFORE AND FAIRNESS, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PULLED BY.
NOW I HAVE AN EMAIL STRING THAT GOES BACK SEVEN MONTHS ABOUT THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE.
SO, AND EACH ONE OF THOSE BEEN FORWARDED TO THE INTERIM CITY MANAGER.
AND I'M ASSUMING FROM HIM TO ROSS, THE PROBLEM AS I'VE STATED IS IT'S UNENFORCEABLE ON A SATURDAY ROSS'S ON HERE.
SO THEY CALL THE HUBER HEIGHTS NON-EMERGENCY NUMBER.
HE'S HAD AN OFFICER COME OUT AND ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS IT.
THE OFFICER DOESN'T REALLY HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT HE'S DOING, UH, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF, HE PULLS UP OUR, UH, CODIFIED ORDINANCES AND SEES A 7:00 AM QUESTIONS TO PEOPLE AND, AND UH, TH AND THE SATURDAY IS THE QUESTIONS ON THE, GETS THE REBUTTAL THAT HE'S BEEN GIVEN PERMISSION TO START WORK ON SATURDAY.
SO THE OFFICER'S HANDS ARE BASICALLY TIED.
I JUST, UH, IF THE SITUATION NOW IS RUSS HAS THE OP THE AVAILABILITY OF GRANTING AN EXCEPTION FOR, AND, UH, I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME NOW, BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS THREE DAYS OR SOMETHING THAT HE'S PERMITTED TO.
FOR A PERIOD OF THREE DAYS OR LESS DURING AN EMERGENCY SITUATION EMERGENCY.
BUT THIS, THIS IS JUST CONTINUAL, UH, CONTRACTORS WORKING SATURDAYS OBVIOUSLY IS INTERESTED IN GETTING THE PRODUCT BUILT UP, BUT IT'S BECOME A REAL ISSUE FOR ALL RIGHT.
SO ARE WE DEALING WITH A PROBLEM WITH THE ORDINANCE? ARE WE DEALING ON PROBLEM WITH ENFORCEMENT OF THE EXISTING ORDINANCE FOR, AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS? REALLY IT'S A PROBLEM WITH ENFORCEMENT BECAUSE IT'S NOT BEEN CHANGED YET.
SO TECHNICALLY THEY SHOULDN'T BE THERE ON A SATURDAY.
SO, AND IN, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED WITH A POLICE RESPONSE TO THAT, UM, THEY COULD SIMPLY BE DIRECTED THAT THERE'S NO WORK ON THE WEEKENDS.
SO THERE'S NO ARGUMENT NOW LOOKING AT THE ORDINANCES.
NO, NONE OF THAT DIGGING, IT'S JUST STRAIGHT UP.
IF IT'S A SATURDAY NIGHT, I'M SUPPOSED TO BE DOING IT.
AND UNLESS THEY HAVE A PERMIT CLASS, THEY HAVE SUCH AN EXPECT EXCEPTION PERMIT THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE ON SITE.
SO BASICALLY WHAT, WHAT, AT THIS POINT, WE'RE JUST SAYING THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WE ORIGINALLY MADE TO ADD SATURDAYS TO THE, WE WANT THAT PULL BACK AND THEN TO LOOK FURTHER BY STAFF TO SEE IF THERE IS A WAY OF TIGHTENING UP THE ENFORCEMENT ASPECTS OF IT.
IS THAT ALL RIGHT? THAT'S FAIR.
I LIKE, I DON'T WANT TO SAY THAT, UM, I WON'T SPEAK FROM A STRADA, BUT, UM, I KNOW THAT IF THIS WERE TO COME BACK BEFORE COUNCIL TO BE DISCUSSED, UH, THAT'S WHERE I'D BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN IF ROSS OR SCOTT HAS, UH, UH, SOME REASONING BEHIND, UH, JUST GIVING A BLANKET SATURDAY,
[00:30:01]
UM, UH, ALLOWANCE FOR WORKING ON SATURDAYS AT THAT TIME.UH, I SAY THAT FOR COUNCIL, I'M SURE.
THEY'VE GOT A GOOD ENOUGH REASON WHAT'S HERE, BUT IN THE MEANTIME, I THINK WE MIGHT'VE AIRED IN RECOMMENDING JUST BLANKET SATURDAY.
'CAUSE I GUESS WHAT, FROM WHAT YOU SAID, KAREN, WHAT RUSS TOLD YOU WAS THAT THEY HAVE A PERMIT, BUT IT'S ONLY AFTER NINE O'CLOCK ON SATURDAYS.
SO, YEAH, SO I MEAN, THEY'RE, I THINK THEY'RE CURRENTLY UNDER THE CURRENT CODE IS TRYING TO, I THINK, ACCOMMODATE THE EARLY NOISE AND YOU'VE GOT A COMPANY, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S JUST PUSHING THE ENVELOPE EARLIER AND EARLIER.
WELL, YOU KNOW, AND HONESTLY, I I'M, I'M NOT TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, PUT THE THUMB ON ANYONE, BUT AGAIN, ACCORDING TO THIS, IT HAS TO BE AN EMERGENCY SITUATION THAT CAN ONLY BE THREE DAYS OR LESS.
IT CAN'T BE AN ONGOING EVERY SATURDAY KIND OF SITUATION IN A NON-EMERGENT DIET GUARANTEE, BUILDING A NEW HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
THEY RAN UNLESS THEY BUSTED AN EXISTING WATER LINE, GAS LINE, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE, AND JUST, UM, YOU KNOW, TO NOT DO ALL ON IT.
BUT THE ISSUE IS FOR THIS PARTICULAR RESIDENT AND HIS NEIGHBORS, THE ISSUE IS ONE OF, UH, FIRST WE WERE DEALING WITH THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR WHO, UH, BLAMED IT ON THE SUBCONTRACTORS IN THE SUBCONTRACTORS WHO SAID THAT THEY DIDN'T GET THAT INFORMATION FROM THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR THAT'S BEEN GOING BACK AND FORTH.
SO THEY'RE PUSHING THE LUMA AND THAT'S, THAT'S WHY WE'RE AT THE PLACE WE ARE NOW, IF THEY HAD BEEN LIKE, IF ROSS IT'S A, NOTHING BEFORE NINE AND THEY WERE BODY BY THAT, I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS RESTAURANT WOULD HAVE BEEN HERE BEFORE COUNCIL, BUT IT WAS 6:00 AM ON A SATURDAY THAT THEY WERE OUT THERE WITH A CEMENT TRUCK RUMBLING IN FRONT OF HIS HOUSE.
ANY OTHER ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO GO BACK AND, AND ADDRESS? UM, OKAY.
UH, SO THAT WOULD TAKE CARE OF THE, UH, LEGISLATION WORKSHEETS REVIEW.
[ City Ordinance/Resolution Logs - Review]
UH, THE NEXT ITEM IS THE CITY ORDINANCE RESOLUTION LOGS.UM, THEY WERE THE LAW, THE, BASICALLY THE LOGS, IT'S JUST, THIS IS A LIST OF ALL OF THE ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS.
AND I THINK MAYBE IN PROCLAMATIONS, MIGHT'VE BEEN INCLUDED IN THAT LIST, MAYBE NOT.
UM, BUT, UM, AND WE WERE ANYBODY THAT WANTED TO RAISE ANY SPECIFIC ISSUES ABOUT ANY OF THOSE PARTICULAR ORDINANCES OR RESOLUTIONS, UH, WAS, UH, TONY SUGGESTED THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.
AND, UH, AS OF YESTERDAY, WHEN I GOT AN EMAIL FROM TONY, HE HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY REQUESTS FROM ANYONE ON THE COMMISSION ABOUT ANY PARTICULAR ORDINANCES.
SO, UH, UNLESS ANYONE HERE HAS SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD WANT TO REVIEW AT THIS POINT IN TIME, UH, UM, SEEING, NOT THAT NOBODY RAISING THEIR HANDS.
SO I GUESS, UH, EVERYBODY'S LOOKED AT THOSE THAT LAW, THOSE LOGS, AND NOTHING JUMPED OUT AT THEM AS TO WHAT THEY WANT TO HAVE REVIEWED FURTHER.
SO SEEING NOTHING, WHEN I GUESS WE WILL, UH, CLOSE OUT THAT SECTION OF THE AGENDA.
[ Administrative/Process Issues]
ITEM C AND HIS ADMINISTRATIVE AND PROCESS ISSUES.UM, I THINK WE HAVE ONE MORE MEETING LEFT AND THAT WOULD BE IN THE MEETING IN OCTOBER, OCTOBER 20TH.
AND WE WILL GO BACK AND LOOK AT THOSE FEW, COUPLE ITEMS THAT ARE STILL LEFT OPEN, AND THEN WORK ON PRESENTING OR PUTTING TOGETHER OUR FINAL REPORT FOR COUNCIL THAT WILL INCLUDE ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE MADE UP TO THIS POINT ON IT AND WE'LL MAKE NEXT WEEK OR NEXT MONTH.
SO ANYTHING ELSE THAT COMMISSIONER WANTS TO BRING UP THIS EVENING? OKAY.
UM, IT IS 7 0 5 AND THIS MEETING IS A JOURNEY.