Parking Committee

Councilman Derrin Roberts and Shelby Police Chief Lance Combs sat down last Thursday and reviewed and discussed current Shelby parking ordinances and the Ohio Revised Code. During this Tuesday’s meeting, Roberts mentioned how thorough Chief Combs was with comparing the information. He also said that the problem they seem to be running into is the Ohio Revised Code changing but Shelby City ordinances did not reflect that change. Roberts told the Parking Committee that some of the ordinances have no available context to why they exist. As examples, he gave ordinances 452.09 (Selling, washing, or repairing vehicle upon roadway), 452.10 (Passenger zones and loading zones), and 452.11 (Bus stops and taxicab stands).

He said that they need to review why they have these ordinances and whether they need them now. “We didn’t make any decisions and we don’t have anything we can turn into legislation right now, but we got a really good start,” Roberts said. In addition, he mentioned the issues with yard parking, junk car parking, and right-of-way parking. Roberts said Chief Combs had some good ideas about how to deal with the right-of-way parking issue. He does not want to necessarily prohibit it but possibly put a time limit on it.

Roberts mentioned a specific issue at Ted &

Ali’s Café where patrons parking on the North side of the building and even some parking in the parking lot are parking in the right-of-way. He and Chief Combs are working on a way to fix the parking issue while keeping the patrons of the beloved Shelby staple satisfied. Roberts then mentioned that the parking “pucks” being installed in the future will be helpful in collecting parking information like what time a car pulls into the spot and how long they stay. This will help in the city parking spots with signs for 15-minute parking, 2-hour parking, snow street parking, etc.

Roberts said the pucks,

“are going to help us out a lot.” He thinks the cost for the pucks will be reasonable. Parking Committee member Charlie Roub said, “Parking enforcement is going to cost money. Either you put the pucks in the pavement and pay to maintain that system or you’re going to pay somebody to walk up and down the street and somehow record information.” The committee went on to discuss how putting parking meters back in would create a lot more work and require someone to monitor them. “I think the most reasonable expense is going to be having a system in place that reports to a computer at the police department,” Roub commented.

Roberts said about the ordinance research, “This is going to be a work in progress for a while. Chief and I are going to keep meeting.” He also mentioned that while Shelby does not have taxicab stands anymore, they must consider companies like Uber, Lyft, and Rideshare. The world is changing, and the Shelby City ordinances are on their way to reflecting that change. The Parking Committee has time to review and revise these changes due to the Downtown project. Roberts rounded out the meeting saying that they will have a whole new parking ordinance in the future.

Commission

Shelby’s Shade Tree Commission began their Tuesday afternoon meeting by approving the minutes from their last meeting as well as the financial statement. Following the regular business, Eric Cutlip updated the commission by letting them know that Alistair Reynolds, the Ohio State Urban Forester they have been working with, will pay a visit to next month’s meeting to help the commission work on revisions to their ordinance. The Shade Tree Commission then looked at the grant that Jessica Gribben prepared for them to potentially make changes.

A discussion regarding the funds being requested through the grant ensued as well as the overall budget for the Shade Tree Commission. Carol Mclaughlin mentioned a citizen who sent the Shade Tree Commission a bill for a chainsaw he bought and used to remove a tree. He was sent an application for said tree removal and was asked to provide the location of the tree and whether it was in the public right-of-way or in the tree lawn. He then sent back a statement claiming the tree had already been cut down and he wanted to be paid for doing the job. $150 is the maximum amount the Shade Tree Commission decided is appropriate to reimburse citizens for removing a tree on their own and the person is asking for approximately $256.

However, in this case, the person asking for reimbursement did not follow the proper protocols and did not ask permission from the Shade Tree Commission before removing the tree. Mclaughlin suggested adding language in the application reflecting this $150 cap. There is also a discrepancy on which tree was removed and whether it is the responsibility of the city. Cutlip said, “It was a ‘no’ from me from the get-go and it’s still a ‘no’ now. He didn’t follow protocol, I didn’t get to see the tree, I can’t verify any of it.” The Shade Commission agreed to send the citizen a letter explaining the proper procedure and detailing when the next meeting is so that he can share his side of the story with the Commission.