This transcript appears to be from a City of Grant Town Board/City Council meeting. Please note that while your context list identifies Jeff Giefer as Mayor, the transcript itself explicitly identifies the presiding officer as **Mayor Huber** and includes a **Council Member Tufty**, who was not on your provided list. I have prioritized the speaker names used during the roll calls in the transcript to ensure accuracy. [0:02] **Mayor Huber:** Al please I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you all right you've all had a chance to take a look at our regular agenda and as you know it's been revised the audit has not in progress sorry about that can should I gave you some time you've all seen our regular agenda as you know it's been changed our audit is still not back from the auditor but I will entertain a motion to approve the regular agenda [0:45] **Council Member Geer:** I'll move to approve thank you [0:47] **Council Member Carr:** second [0:48] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** council member car I council member Rock I council member Geer I council member tuy I mayor Huber I thank you Cam uh consent agenda again we've had about a good week to take a look at that and go over it I would entertain a motion to approve our consent agenda please [1:07] **Mayor Huber:** motion for Mr Geer do I have a second please [1:09] **Council Member Tufty:** second [1:11] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** second Mr tufty council member Carr hi council member Rock hi council member Geer hi council member tufty hi mayor Huber hi thank you Kim no she's back she's coming in and out yeah can you hear us Jennifer she's muted right now not yet okay real good yeah yeah we can hear you oh great cuz we're going to I think is that one because this one it is that one yeah that's what they said so we might have to put up a little interference there but try not to look at it too much um [1:42] **Mayor Huber:** Brad ree our city engineer has no action items he is not with us this evening city planner Jennifer Swanson Jennifer if you'd like to launch into our amended cup application please [1:54] **Jennifer Swanson:** sure thank you m mayor MERS of the council uh so before you this evening we have a request for an amended conditional use permit going to go ahead and share my screen I have a short presentation to walk through all right so the press this evening is located at let's hope my screen is gonna shift I'm sorry just one second there we go uh is at 11490 Julian Avenue North uh the applicant is Jamie Benner uh the property is zoned A1 and it is guided in our comprehensive plan as rural residential agricultural the lot size is just shy of 35 Acres uh the request tonight is to amend an existing conditional use permit that was put in place in the 90s uh the current operation is a horse scorting operation uh the request tonight is to allow for the construction of an accessory building to support the horse B boarding and training operations uh we did have a public hearing on August 8th 23 so a couple months ago uh and we'll go through a little bit of the background and the history in that in just a moment uh but there were some secondary requests that were also included in the in the narrative in addition to that accessory building so the Planning Commission uh took a look at this application at both their August and September meeting uh between August and September they asked for some additional information to be provided by the applicant uh so in in light of that they tabled the request they did receive that information and then were able to take a uh a vote and make a recommendation at their last meeting uh the supplemental materials included a variety of things including a revised narrative uh there was a floor plan and Architectural plans that were relabeled there was a landscape plan and a site plan that were provided as well as uh an edited version of the existing conditional use permit that the applicant prepared as well as a grading permit uh I should note that those last two items were prepared and submitted by the applicant but those are not required uh so the Planning Commission didn't get into detail since they don't have perview over our grading permits so the main point or the main or primary objective of the conditional use permit amendment is to allow for the construction of an accessory building uh in the narrative it is described as approximately 720 Square fet it's an A-frame Construction building uh the proposed uses internal to that building are office space small office space uh private or semiu restroom I use that term just from the standpoint of they did say that clients would be able to use it uh if they're meeting with within the one-on-one conference room uh as you might note on the site plan or the floor plan it is noted as uh a conference room yoga space one-on-one training so sort of a multi-purpose room uh and then there is also a SAA that is proposed to be located in the structure the proposed location of the the accessory building uh is near the principal structure of the existing Farmhouse uh and there were no specific operational changes noted but uh there are some things uh like using the space for a supporting office that were described uh although they were described as also being on the site prior to uh the construction of this accessory building so in addition uh the The Narrative describes a couple other supplemental uses in addition to that accessory building the first one uh being the potential to update and expand the existing Farmhouse this is something that we wouldn't typically take a look at uh because usually uh you know housing additions remodels Etc are just permitted because we allow principal residential structures uh it is noted but nothing was reviewed since obviously there are no specific plans uh they also requested an equin uh and K9 hydrotherapy facility uh to be permitted uh that is provided on the site plan which we will look at in just one moment uh and then some clean energy improvements including solar wind and thermal opportunities and an EV charging station to be located near the existing parking area so these items were noted within the narrative they're generally not provided uh for on the site plan and no specific details were provided the majority of these things are actually things that would usually be permitted within our existing code they would just be required to obtain the proper permits at the time of of the application so in terms of the cup there really wasn't a lot of review because these items their detailed plans were not provided so just a brief overview on the dimensional standards uh our minimum lot size obviously is 5 Acres 300 feet of Frontage uh the big thing here is actually the accessory buildings where we do not have a uh limit because the size of the parcel exceeds 20 acres in this case so as it stands where they are proposing to construct the accessory building does meet all of our our dimensional standards and our setbacks uh as part of the application process between the August and the September meeting the Planning Commission did request that an ADA accessible ramp and parking area be provided uh adjacent to the new building if this is going to be something that supports the existing operations uh they also did ask that the AR cural floor plan to be updated to reflect what they were proposing to do with the structure uh and and we will take a look at both of those items in just one moment so just as a refresher when we get an amendment for our conditional use permits uh we process them much the same like uh it was a new conditional use permit from the standpoint and we follow the same part of the code uh the Amendments have to be consistent with the conditional use permit process uh and they must be identified on the table of uses so again we'll talk about that in just a moment so the proposal this evening is actually to leave the existing conditional use permit the operations generally as is uh and to allow for this new accessory building but to keep the horse boting and training operations as is so the existing operation is there the Idlewood Equestrian Center has been there for quite some time the original permit was given in the 1990s uh it is developed a horseboarding and Training Facility uh there's a principal structure on the site which is the old farmhouse there are five accessory buildings there's existing pasture riding areas Etc uh and uh which is unusual in this case one of the accessory buildings is permitted to be Apartments per the conditional use permit so just an overview of the site uh you can tell it's fairly large it obviously is bordered on the North by the railroad Corridor uh and then its access is on the south this is the exist the proposed site plan you can see I think you can see yep I can actually see my cursor on your screen this is the location of the proposed uh accessory building the new accessory building this is the existing home you can tell that they are obviously in proximity to each other and kind of clustered as opposed to uh when you look at the the larger scale drawing that uh they are sort of on the Eastern side of the property whereas the majority of the horse boarding and training facilities are actually on uh the west side of the property this is part of the reason why it was requested that an ADA compliance stall and ramp would need to be placed at this location uh since the operations are very split in terms of the location on the site this is the proposed uh landscape and site plan this is what was provided in between our August and our September Planning Commission meeting you can see here uh that there's an ADA ramp that's being proposed on the sketch uh that would bring you down via a walkway to the parking uh which would be located if you can see my C cursor what is on the drawing south of those ex of those trees existing trees uh so that was added to the plan you can see here there's the existing residence and then the relationship with the proposed accessory building uh and then obviously this long rectangular area is actually the proposed uh equin and hydrotherapy pool so just quickly the accessory building this is the structure it's an A-frame proposed A-frame structure it does have space in both uh the main floor and then also in the proposed Loft space uh you can tell on these drawings that there back areas denoted as the private office the central areas where the proposed bathroom and SAA are uh and then on the south side of this is where the proposed training facility or training room uh in yoga space are so just briefly in terms of the operations uh the existing cup activities would remain they do not propose any changes to those uh the main changes here are really related to the accessory building the existing conditional use permit expressly states that any additional structures on the site require an amendment to the conditional use permit uh thus why they're in front of us this evening uh the new accessory uh building narrative so the one that was updated between uh August and September describes this as a supporting private office private restroom for use by the office or other staff Personnel uh in a small conference yogar teaching area for client instruction spaces are proposed to support the equestrian center use uh and the applicant indicates that these uses were all located in an existing Barn structure that has since been demolished the number of employees on the site varies uh there are currently three employees including two who manage and reside on the property full-time uh the applicant indicates in the revised narrative so again this this latest narrative that uh the proposed structure will not be used as a living or dwelling quarter however narrative does specifically address this and state that they believe that they could use this for a living structure or an efficiency apartment because the existing conditional use permit says uh that up to four efficiency apartment or yes efficiency apartments on the site would be permitted uh and therefore they beli that this would fit under that but that they're not proposing that right now uh so just a couple notes staff does not believe that the proposed accessory building meets the common definition of an efficiency uh dwelling unit or efficiency apartment typically those mean that there are no walls internal to a structure it's usually just one large space in a bathroom uh that is not the case here we've got uh basically main floor and a loft so from that perspective we don't believe that it needs that definition uh and also if you look back at the conditional use permit from the 1990s it's unlikely that they were talking about accessory dwelling units which is kind of what this would fall into uh from the standpoint of they weren't just very common back in the 90s and they weren't really talked about so I I it seems that the conditional use permit as it stands was really geared at apartments you know one one large room Etc probably connected so again I touched on the fact that there are some other considerations that they were requesting uh most of these changes do not change the use of the facility staff does not believe that they're really necessary to to address within the conditional use permit because the majority of those things uh were absolutely associated with um exit like permitted things within uh the city's code uh so like EV charging facility locations for example are associated with the parking area that is already been approved as part of the prior conditional use permit therefore I don't think there's uh any changes that are necessary to the conditional use permit all of those supplemental things that are address though uh would be subject to whatever permitting exists uh so if they need a certificate of compliance for a solar panel installation for example then they would need to get that so the Planning Commission after receiving the second set of information did recommend approval this evening of the conditional use permit uh they had several conditions that is that are provided sorry all of a sudden I have a popup uh so they do have uh several conditions that were proposed as part of their recommendation uh so to that to that end the draft amended conditional use permit is provided in your packet this evening uh and a resolution of approval is also provided in terms of discussion tonight I do know that there was quite a bit of history that exists here since we went from essentially uh what was submitted in August to September as a result there's a lot of background and in fact in your packets this evening I think you received two stack report reports both of them from our Planning Commission meetings uh so from that I I think there's uh this is a little bit more complicated than our normal conditional use permits that we take a look at so if there's any questions or clarifications that you need on your end I'm certainly available to ask them I think that the applicant is likely here too and could also answer some of your questions uh given our timeline tonight we actually do need to take action uh from the standpoint of the Planning Commission actually reviewed this at two of their meetings uh and therefore as a result of our time clock we do need to take action this evening so with that uh I'm going to go ahead and stop sharing and send it back over to Mr Mayor and members of the council for questions [16:05] **Mayor Huber:** that was very helpful um let's go ahead and find out what the council wants to ask you in terms of clarification gentlemen Tom [16:15] **Council Member Carr:** I have excuse me I have a some frog in my throat excuse me I've got two uh conditional use permits in my packet both of them are highlighted faded you know whatever and so I don't know what was the original conditional use permit I'm looking back at the one that's dated from P pen mean an back in 1997 but even on this one there's stuff that's faded not faded and I I really don't know what's going on so the only thing I would say that if so I was just a real easy question so I didn't want to bring it up before but was there uh one three-bedroom apartment and four efficiency apartments allowed in the original is that correct [16:55] **Jennifer Swanson:** that's correct that's correct [16:57] **Council Member Carr:** okay all right so I I was just making sure that that wasn't added with for the new one because I didn't know because I couldn't tell so all right so that was a result all right so [17:11] **Jennifer Swanson:** so Mr Mayor members of the council just so I can clarify the two conditional use permit that are provided in your packet this evening so the first one uh is uh one that shows a strike through and an underline the underlined version is the one that staff put together anything that's not underlined is not a change uh so all of the existing conditions are there uh from the existing conditional use permit it has only been updated just to reflect our current code section for example um that is something that was prepared by staff uh the changes are just as we generally do them they show as striketh through and underline the second conditional use permit that Tom is uh uh referencing is actually what the applicant submitted as part of their package those were their proposed changes so uh this the they wanted that included therefore it is included in your packet but what staff prepared is the one that looks like what you usually review that has an underline for additions that was the 18:22 19971 that was a 1997 one is that what you're telling me [18:25] **Jennifer Swanson:** that's just I want to know the one from 1997 is the one that the staff prepared not the one dated 2023 no the one that's dated 2023 is the one staff prepared that is how we always do it where we've got underlined for the additions and the the things that are not underlined in your draft are things that are in the conditional use permit already the other one that has like well actually I don't know if your print is your copy is in color or or if it's in black and white but the one that you're saying is faded I'm assuming might be because they had made changes that were in red text the applicant had [19:09] **Council Member Carr:** well the one in 2023 has faded did you do that [19:12] **Jennifer Swanson:** I don't know why it's faded but it I did do the one that's dated 2023 and that says that has underline text in it does it not show underline in your text [19:22] **Mayor Huber:** I think it's good he's looking at the other one right now [19:24] **Council Member Carr:** I'm looking at 2023 and that's just faded [19:26] **Mayor Huber:** yeah but the 1997 has the underline so so I so the 1997 is the one W 19 she the the planner takes the original cup and then she changes it to reflect the changes that the applicant is looking for in this case the confusion is the applicant did all their own changes on a c and try to present it as their changes that they wanted us to do so that's that's the confusion and I I understand your confusion because when I first looked at this yeah a mess it's a mess all right so the original one to answer your other question Jennifer if I might very quick yes there was a three-bedroom apartment attached to Barn that still exists there were four efficiency apartments they have been de uh demolished by this applicant is my information other questions Tom you want to keep going on this one [20:25] **Council Member Carr:** no I just wanted to make sure I was I knew that that condition was in the original one that's all I'm right thank you Tom um [20:34] **Mayor Huber:** Bob and John please [20:35] **Council Member Rock:** I have no questions because I find this all very confusing [20:41] **Mayor Huber:** it it is very confusing and frankly by the time we're done with it here we're going to make this very clear but as to now it's about as clear as mud but we are going to clear this stuff up here pretty quick John [20:54] **Council Member Rock:** yeah it's it's difficult to ascertain what is ours what is theirs what is going on [21:00] **Mayor Huber:** I I totally agree with you if you read through the narrative from the applicant it becomes a little bit clearer the actual cups themselves I would leave those maybe for your last look because they're really not helpful in this case because they're they're they're documenting the proposed changes but they're not explaining to you how the applicant wants to change them through that narrative right so if you'd read The Narrative and she said oh we want to do this we want to do this and then you can look at the Cs and see how that relates to those changes right so and there's a lot of paper here okay a lot so understand the confusion Mr Geer questions or clerk first clerk first [21:40] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** I'll just not real quick I've never seen an applicant submit their own drafted revised cup never seen it I heard somebody giggle when I said it so that was probably appropriate in the context [21:52] **Mayor Huber:** Mr Geer do you have questions for our partner [21:54] **Council Member Geer:** yeah just just a question on on the four efficiency apartments Jennifer I kind of read through your comments on there it's still not 100% clear to me um if if um those apartments are original um cup would still apply because if conditions would changed I mean would that um render that null and void or or what can you say about you know that the force efficiency apartments [22:18] **Jennifer Swanson:** good question uh so Mr Mayor members of the council there's no proposed change to that so that would remain in the existing conditional use permit because that's not proposed to change so the four efficiency units stay there there's no remove of that as part of the request so just to be clear I went ahead and I popped open the shared version of the the staff's version of the conditional use permit just so I just want to make sure everybody's looking at the same thing uh so you can see it's revised October 3rd it was originally issued November 12th 1997 this is all the underlying changes that exist these are the striketh through so it was originally given to Pamela Mega Dan I believe was her name um so you can see that there are the anything that does not have an underline or a striketh through is from the existing conditional use permit so the only changes that that would occur and these are based on the applicant's submission and then also the recommendations of the Planning Commission so you'll see here residential living quarters on the property are as follows this is from the existing conditional use permit one single family residential home one three-bedroom apartment and four efficiency apartments so that is what's permitted in the current conditional use permit and there's no change proposed to to that so hopefully that clarifies it a little bit [23:48] **Council Member Geer:** so it's it's permitted but that's not what they're saying that they want to do at this time but they had said in their um application that they believed it was in their right still to do that [24:02] **Jennifer Swanson:** but correct okay [24:03] **Council Member Geer:** correct so they're saying we believe we have four available to US based on this the existing Cod or the existing conditional use permit says that we have four efficiency apartments that can be on the site so they believe that even though they're not proposing that right now that they believe that they could do that without an amendment to the code that they could use that new structure without the amendment without an amendment to the code because or Amendment to the permit excuse me because the existing permit allows for up to four efficiency apartments [24:35] **Council Member Geer:** I guess I guess my comment that would be it just seems a bit of an odd statement to make um in relation to what they're asking for but I I guess we can ask the applicant if they're are they online can is applicant online [24:49] **Mayor Huber:** Kim do we have people online for us [24:51] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** yes okay [24:52] **Mayor Huber:** well thank you very much for clarifying that are you done there yeah okay well let's let me do a little bit of clarifying on my own here for just a moment these four efficiency apartments that were on the original cup are gone they no longer exist on the property they were demolished along with two buildings that they were inside of they're gone they no longer exist so the applicant statement is that this building that they propose building is a replacement for those four efficiency apartments now just a thought experiment here if this building were then built the applicant wanted to go ahead and build four efficiency apartments as well they're on the cup aren't they not a lot anyone could do and and there's some of the confusion there gets a little confusing when they're already gone but they exist on the on the cup right so there's one thing to consider that those are gone they no longer or they do exist on the cop but physically they don't exist so good point to make Jeff thank you very much for that question that was insightful um Jennifer I have questions but not really from you I find your presentation to be succinct and accurate I really do not have anything for you however I would like to ask some questions if you people are you gentlemen done with with Jennifer and asking questions [26:38] **Council Member Carr:** Tom just a real quick question how they have 35 acres is that what I heard [26:44] **Jennifer Swanson:** yes okay [26:45] **Council Member Carr:** cuz they don't have at least 60 Acres nothing's changed since 1997 they didn't go and sell off any property because that seems like an awful lot of horses for thir be approved for I mean Victoria stations has 53 acres and they they only got approved for 60 and that was before that was in the 70s so how did they get I just just asking because that seems like really weird math to me that that I know a lot of people that around the city council back then and I can't imagine them passing that [27:14] **Jennifer Swanson:** so so to my knowledge it wasn't it hasn't changed but I also wasn't here in 1997 so I'm not not 100% sure and I didn't dig into the minutes of how they decided it but it's I don't believe it's changed or at least uh it's not something that we've flaged when we've done our conditional use permit reviews the only thing I I think that's kind of implied when you read through the existing permit the existing conditional use permit is that this is an operation that was in business for a very long time I think even before 1997 um just based on the way it was written so I don't know if it was based on like an existing operation and then they were able to get it put in place or what the history was [27:54] **Council Member Carr:** yeah it's just odd because the acreage is is not in the cup and usually they see acreage in the cup so I we didn't write it it was before a time but I'm just saying it wasn't in there so that's I was just curious [28:07] **Mayor Huber:** okay yeah I uh thanks the more I read through our ordinances and look at through a look at some of our cups I have lots of questions for the guys that were doing this in the 1990s tons of questions when I read some of these things they are interesting to say the least um gentlemen again if you have no further questions for Jennifer or clarifications I would uh ask him to bring our applicant online for us so that we can get to some questions with the applicant [28:28] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** I just brought in Mr Mayor so if you're here you should be able to unmute yourself there you go [28:38] **Jamie Benner:** hi it's Jamie hi Jamie sorry there's there's another name on the screen uhan stos is my partner he's well here as well [28:50] **Mayor Huber:** oh I see okay sorry I thought I was speaking with him and not with you uh couple of questions for you Jamie just after reviewing this talking to the planner um reviewing I have reviewed um every version of this from the first version at the Planning Commission to the retaing and then the second version at the Planning Commission and of course I reviewed the one that I have before me today whether or not that is completely the same as the Planning Commission or not I don't know and probably is not relevant um question for you just kind of off the bat and I'm trying to understand the construction of this um uh you've not you've noted that Mr stro I believe is there as well um and perhaps one of you can answer this I just looked at the drawing from Jennifer I've looked at it in detail myself uh how far apart are the two buildings the current home and this new construction in feed how far apart are they can't tell [29:54] **Jamie Benner:** about 20t yards excuse me about 20 yards M it's going to share a driveway with my home [30:03] **Mayor Huber:** you see on the map you can see it on the map too [30:05] **Council Member Rock:** yeah [30:06] **Mayor Huber:** I didn't you know the the map had probably been copied so many times that frankly I had a large lighted magnifying glass trying to read this plan so could you pull up the math yeah really hard to see [Music] please if you would like to keep going I can I'll get it up so just give me one second [30:26] **Mayor Huber:** sure yeah we'll just keep going so the uh the uh therapy po for the horses how long is that proposed to be [30:36] **Jamie Benner:** I'm not sure we haven't gotten any of the blueprints that's not what we're we're looking at today that's kind of in the future but our designer put everything on there [30:46] **Mayor Huber:** okay okay so I noticed that there are no details on it I look at the proposed therapy pool there and it's just interesting so I thought I would ask that question I've seen pictures of them I've never seen one Outdoors like that um normally in Minnesota I used to work with a buddy of mine who's a vet and the therapy pull to U is like inside obviously because you can't use it the winter so just wondering on that one um let me keep going here bear with me I got a lot of paper in front of me so [31:30] **Jennifer Swanson:** mror if I might just quickly while you're doing that uh the site plan is up and it should be on your screen up there and based on the drawing uh between so here's the if you can see my cursor here's the existing principal structure and here's the proposed building and it is shown at about 44t between the two structures based on the survey [31:54] **Mayor Huber:** 44t okay so basically about 12 and a half yards 13 yards okay all right well that answers that question and that was just that was just a supposed question um you know what I think I'm going to leave it there I think I know everything that I need to know from reviewing all three of the applications and watching the meeting so I'm going to call on some other uh some other folks here [32:19] **Council Member Carr:** Tom Jennifer and the in your report though you you you said you recommended we approve is that still correct or not is that what you had in your report it seemed to me I read that is that right [32:32] **Jennifer Swanson:** well yeah based on the Planning Commission made its recommendation and so we're passing that along with the conditions and the Planning Commission also recommended approval [32:41] **Council Member Carr:** right [32:42] **Jennifer Swanson:** well you did too yeah from the standpoint of it's from what we understand of it uh it is 720 Square fet uh if these operations were generally used or completed before you know in the other building a small office etc those are consistent with I think what what the operations have likely utilized in the past the question of the SAA the bathroom those are a little bit more questionable uh but the Planning Commission felt comfortable with it so staff went with it [33:14] **Mayor Huber:** right okay yeah well let's delve into that then um I wasn't going to go there but now I'm going to uh why was the first plan uh presented to the Planning Commission um labeled the way it was labeled why was the living room called the living room and why was it called the residents I I don't I don't understand that it looks as though the four efficiency apartments in that case were the reason for that and that our applicant may have thought that that was a direct replacement and that would seem to be a mistake [33:57] **Jamie Benner:** yeah that that's not how um I planned on um having it perceived that the A-frame that I'm purchasing it comes as a it's not custom you get a certain set of design uh and that's about it and so that I just sent that on I didn't think it was going to be a bigger problem but I think they thought I wanted to have a residence there or something I don't want to have anyone living on my property except for me and that's it so the efficiency to clear those up those were removed the building is still there um but inside the efficiency um those had to be removed they were just completely full of mold so the but the building is still there I have no desire and can't see in the future that I would ever be using um efficiency in having people live on my property or do an Airbnb that's not my interest [34:54] **Mayor Huber:** well don't you have a three-bedroom apartment in one of the barns right now [34:58] **Jamie Benner:** correct where people that was the only thing that wasn't ruined by um rain and just not kept right [35:05] **Mayor Huber:** but people live there right now [35:06] **Jamie Benner:** I have one person living there [35:08] **Mayor Huber:** yes you do have people living there okay real good um yeah other questions gentlemen [35:14] **Council Member Rock:** well just to touch on that point so would that make that Barna accessory ding unit then [35:19] **Mayor Huber:** well that's just not I'll let I'll let Jennifer answer that but that's in the original SE did you hear that question Jennifer [35:25] **Jennifer Swanson:** I did uh so that was what was expressly permitted by the 1997 conditional use permit so I mean technically by today's uh definition of what an accessory dwelling unit is it it may qualify as that but the city doesn't have actually or permit accessory dwelling units um and so every city describes them a little bit differently so it may or may not depending on what you would call an accessory building uh but generally speaking yes but that was what was expressly permitted by your cup in 1997 [36:06] **Mayor Huber:** Jennifer was it allowed because it existed [36:09] **Jennifer Swanson:** again I wasn't here in 1997 so I I don't know what the reasoning was behind it um why if it was you know living quarters that had been there for several decades we do have a couple of those that exist in the in the city uh that you know extend back to the 60s I don't I don't know if this was one of them um and I I don't know what the reasoning was in 1997 for for how they made that determination [36:39] **Mayor Huber:** and Jennifer just real quick [36:42] **Council Member Rock:** John accessory dwellings at that point had not been addressed by the city council correct [36:46] **Jennifer Swanson:** uh to my understanding no uh and accessory dwelling units like as a category of a use if you will is a relatively new uh thing probably in all likelihood because there are sort of these remnants out there of people using structures or Carriage Houses Etc so um it really wasn't something in a lot of codes so it's a it's a more current thing to address within your code uh so it's not overly surprising that back in the 90s we wouldn't have had something in place [37:21] **Mayor Huber:** yeah well the the the council now seems to be getting ahead of problems before they become problems and like then um so yeah that's it's good that we're doing things like that Tom [37:34] **Council Member Carr:** yeah okay so let me just get to the Crux of this because I think I think the question needs to be asked so and maybe this is illegal but as far as i' I've been up here a while and you know if it's in the C CS don't go away so right now they have three apartments or whatever they're called where they have people one person apparently still living there um that's in the CP so they can have those even though we don't want maybe right now we wouldn't approve anything like that but they're they're they're around they also have it in the cup that they can have four efficiency apartments which they don't have now but they could according to cup even though it's not something the city council may want to have now again I'm just stating these statements and then I can hear maybe hear from the attorneys see what they think so in this case it looks like they want to just have one even though they're not going to live in it but one sort of efficiency apartment we can get into the verbal uh bantering about what is what I I don't really care um I'd leave that for staff to you know figure out but it looks like if they wanted to have something like this they they could per the cup um we do also have places that are uh like different businesses and things that are allowed they're they non-conforming uses I don't know if these would fall into a non-conforming use um that's one other question rumbling around in my mind and then the other thing would be we've had issues where people have had sleeping quarters where they had no business having sleeping quarters even saying they're grandfathered in well no they're not and they were shut down basically because of safety which has nothing to do with us uh it has to do you know we we cannot maybe deny them having an apartment or any anything like that on the site but maybe another entity for safety would so these are things running through my head so I'd like to hear what the attorney thinks about this and get his view on the cup running with the land and being valid before we get into too much more minutia [39:35] **Mayor Huber:** uh I'm going to I'm going to say no on that uh we're going to have the attorney come in at the end it's way too early for that and the minutia is exactly our job the minutia is exactly where we make the decision staff does not figure out minutia for us that's our job that's why we're paid so that's what we're going to do here [39:56] **Council Member Carr:** yeah that's that's not my minutia my minutia is deciding if if we're talking about this can happen or not happen right we should have the attorney tell before we get into the minutia of how it can happen that's all [40:11] **Mayor Huber:** I have a statement before we go there the the cup very clearly States what is allowed on the property there's the main home there's the three-bedroom apartment that is noted there are four efficiency apartments that are noted what I do not see in their cup is a separate set of living quarters or commercial quarters for a yoga studio and or a training Studio an extremely extremely small one that only works for four hours a week that is what I do not see on the cup what I see on the materials that have been sent to us and through the statements of the applicant is that to me this looks like a house plan a single family residence laid out with a sauna living space and bedroom sized offices now the structure is placed right next to the primary residence with a propul pooled in between the two structures separated by a bridal path the structure will look right into the main H's windows I find that a strange place for a commercial building to be placed but that's me after the Planning Commission noted the conflict between the plan and the narrative they did not match up they relabeled the residents to indicate commercial use but the plan remains exactly the same just relabeled a commercial building applicant statement justifying the original plan as Jennifer has pointed out regarding the demolition of the four efficiency apartments and the replacement by this residents now labeled a commercial space is also of concern to me this is a residential home with a commercial use tacked on however the use is not in agreement with the original cup which we all should have read and noted that there's no commercial yoga training or other training allowed there because the cup already tells them what they can have and that's the four efficiencies a three-bedroom apartment and the main house to me that would be a completely different application and the narrative here just does not agree just does not agree with what has been planned here so you know for those reasons I would urge you guys to deny it at this time and perhaps the applicant could pursue a different path but none of this none of this adds up accessory dwellings are not allowed we know it and our density will suffer mark my words now any other comments or can we turn to Nick for an opinion on this [42:37] **Council Member Carr:** yeah I'm waiting for Nick [42:39] **Mayor Huber:** gentlemen Nick you're up [42:41] **Nick:** where would you like me to start Mr Mayor [42:44] **Mayor Huber:** well Nick I think that uh Tom's [Carr] comments excuse me go ahead [42:47] **Jamie Benner:** can we address [42:48] **Mayor Huber:** no not right now you can't we'll call on you after we're done here with our attorney please Nick [42:53] **Nick:** yeah so Tom's [Carr] comments um well I'm not sure what the question was Tom can you address your question [43:00] **Council Member Carr:** well first Nick we can go about one by one so the cup runs the land correct [43:07] **Nick:** correct [43:08] **Council Member Carr:** okay if they tore down for efficiency apartments can they rebuild them [43:11] **Nick:** yeah the cup runs with the the land until it it doesn't until it's abandoned or until the cup is is revoked so um that's you know that that doesn't seem to be an issue here okay from my perspective [43:26] **Council Member Carr:** so if they built them or they have three right now currently on site they still have to because they have people in them that's a separate issue that's a safety issue building inspector issue that keep them safe cuz that's not what we do with a cup right is that correct [43:39] **Nick:** okay [43:40] **Council Member Carr:** and if they wanted to build one small little A-frame and call it a residence or an apartment can we stop them from doing that based on the cup [43:51] **Nick:** well I mean uh anything that they do has to be consistent with the terms of the the conditional use permit right unless there's an amendment to the conditional use permit [44:02] **Council Member Carr:** what they're allowed for what if they were going to build one and called it an apartment [44:07] **Nick:** well if it's if it's cons yeah I don't want to speculate on what they could do um and I don't think we need to I don't think we need to do that if they're acting consistent with the conditional use permit they're they're permitted to to make those uses that are that are permitted and so long as there's consistency with the with the conditions you know that being said part of the question here is is this a dwelling or is it not a dwelling it it came in looking like a dwelling and then there was a revision to the plan uh that ultimately makes it look not like a dwelling um but you know that the question here if you go back to your your code the question regarding cups is is really a function of health safety and Welfare and so if you're going to deny a request for an amendment to the conditional use permit then your denial has to be based on health safety welfare uh type concerns and and considerations certainly you know you can take into account what came in in the form of the application you have the amended application um and so you you have the applicants narrative and and you have them here telling you that they're not going to make use as a as a dwelling uh but they had submitted as a as a as a dwelling so if you have health safety and Welfare related concerns uh that this is going to be used as a dwelling uh you either put conditions on it that indicate that it can't be used as a dwelling you know or you make findings that indicate uh that for health safety and and Welfare related purposes that the amended application uh needs needs to be rejected so that's that's really how you evaluate this particular application [45:49] **Council Member Carr:** okay well and the final question so I I mean I lived in an apartment I I called it my dwelling so I'm a little confused I mean as Bob said he was confused it's a lot of paperwork but an apartment is a dwelling is not a dwelling I don't know they they came in as a dwelling we don't we wouldn't allow that as new but we're not talking that we're talking existing cup that allowed apartments and if apartments are dwellings and they came in with an apartment a dwelling application okay you're are legal I I you have to tell me why isn't that okay if they were allowed for in their cup I'm not saying I'm for it I'm saying it's in the original cup and if it's in the original cup how can we not agree and that's what I'm asking your legal opinion on because you are our attorney and I'm just a council member so yeah go ahead I see Jennifer's got her hands [46:41] **Jennifer Swanson:** I know I'm I know I'm not an attorney but can I just say something and then Nick the attorney can tell me [46:48] **Council Member Carr:** absolutely please define the difference in different dwellings please [46:53] **Jennifer Swanson:** so what I was going to say though is it's actually less about dwelling or not dwelling to me it's about the definition of an efficiency apartment or an accessory dwelling unit so and making the clarification that they didn't apply for an accessory dwelling unit and they didn't apply for an efficiency apartment they've applied and said that this is a commercial structure that this is a com to support the commercial operation so like the findings that if you approve it or you deny it have to be based on they said in their narrative that this is a commercial building and then if we're looking at it from a a use perspective it let's pretend now that we're talking about residential an efficiency apartment because they've already said that the one three bedroom apartment is already on the site so that part of the cup has been taken okay they've said that the three or the four efficiency apartments have not this structure for by Common definition would not meet the definition of an efficiency apartment so to me it's it's sort of a two-part thing the first is they are applying for a commercial structure they're applying for this to be part of their commercial operation the second thing is if it were some kind of dwelling it does not from a common definition perspective meet the definition of an efficiency apartment [48:15] **Nick:** yeah and and let me let me add to that I mean the the fact here is that if they were applying for some sort of a of a dwelling efficiency apartment or whatnot and if they had the right to do it under their conditional use permit they wouldn't be here you wouldn't you wouldn't need an amendment the the amendment is for the commercial use and that's the point of my comments is that you have a revised narrative which speaks to the commercial use that they propose to make uh which requires your approval uh if you think that it fits with the character of the area and if you think that it it maintains all the health safety uh welfare type considerations um but if you have issues outside of of that then you make the findings that it's it doesn't it doesn't fit it's not appropriate uh for this particular spot it's not this use isn't appropriate or you know they they appear to be making some other use some other dwelling type use which is not consistent with with their application so those are the considerations uh that that you need to to make as you're considering whether or not to approve this application [49:49] **Council Member Carr:** yeah and I agree with that this is a commercial use application now but when the mayor was wrapping up he also then switched to but you know we don't want to have people living in you know apartments and sec I mean you switch to that so it's like and their original application was I think they wanted to it sounded like they wanted to do that and then somehow the planning commissioner somehow it happened and I'm I I did not watch all the tape so I don't know what's going on but we're told that well you you can't do that or we don't want you to do that you need to apply for something different and and so now it it looks like we told them to do something different and so they did no okay right no no I understand I didn't I didn't see all the tapes but that's what it kind of looks like so that's that's why I'm confused [50:38] **Jennifer Swanson:** yeah Mr Mayor memb of council I would like to clearify that for the record that that is not that is not an accurate depiction we received an application with a narrative that talked about this being a commercial building with a training facility with a public restroom uh Etc the original narrative described a commercial operation coming from the structure then they submitted the architectural plans and the architectural plans called it a residence [51:14] **Council Member Carr:** oh okay [51:15] **Jennifer Swanson:** so in the staff report staff noted those two don't match your narrative is describing a commercial operation and your architectural plan is a residence so we the Planning Commission staff did not tell them what to do we said what do you want to do because you've got plans that don't match your narrative [51:35] **Council Member Carr:** no that's awesome because I think with all this confusion I think it's good for the council for me to hear it for sure the council and to have the residents and everybody else understand kind of where we're coming from obviously if you're doing a commercial application you can't do that it sounds like if they wanted to build some efficiency apartments they could but but they can't do this so [51:56] **Nick:** and and let me just clarify from my perspective as well [52:00] **Mayor Huber:** the argument that I made earlier very clear cup has a main residence cup has a three bom apartment which still exists on the property and is currently occupied perfect perfect right there the four efficiencies have been removed for whatever reason does not concern me it's not my business okay that is what the cup calls out it also calls out a commercial horse operation so that's all I can go on all they can go on is the information that's presented to me the applications that are presented to me the documents that describe the uses okay so as I was saying to Mr rag earlier if the applicant does build this building then they can go ahead at some point in the future rebuild for efficiencies if they wish to it it the the narrative the plans with the sauna and the living room and then the office in the back it it does does not comport to be a commercial building the hours of operation are 2 hours per day on Saturday and Sunday th those are the commercial hours so you know it does not fit in my mind the narrative that I've seen the four the four efficiencies are hanging out there just hanging off there and we'll have very little to say about it as I think the attorney made very clear if they decide to build those four those four efficiency apartments they're in the cup they won't even come to us there'll be no application there'll be nothing they'll just build them with a permit and and we're done there's nothing we can do so at this point because of the inconsistencies in what we've seen because of the hanging issue of the four efficiency apartment sitting out there we're better off as a council going here's the cup here's what they can do these are the facts as we see them and deny for now that would be my recommendation gentlemen [54:14] **Council Member Geer:** just I just want to make a comment like please you know if it was intended to be a commercial uh facility why do we see no parking plan to support that um no no plans were submitted for the hydrotherapy facility um no plans were submitted for energy PR electric vehicle all this stuff so um you know I it's hard to gauge the seriousness of of those when we don't see any of that in the plans and granted it could be um something that a future cup could um entail but you know at this point if they're um trying to have a commercial operations and they don't have any of this this stuff presented to us we really don't have enough information to um Grant it anyway in my mind [55:04] **Mayor Huber:** yeah you're you're on a wing in a prayer there when you build something commercial and either your architect or your planner or your Builder doesn't realize that 8 a bathrooms are up front right there Ada parking paved as we did at the wedding Barn all that stuff was part of the plan as it came to us okay so at this point again gentlemen I would urge you to deny deny it based on health welfare and safety and the differing narratives that we're seeing where we cly can't make a good decision here it it's very difficult to make a good decision Jennifer do you want to add anything to that either well you're not a pro- negative person but do you have any other information that you can add to this so we can add that to our thoughts to process this [55:54] **Jennifer Swanson:** uh no Mr Mayor members of the council what I will tell you is in your packet obviously there was a resolution of approval as recommended by the Planning Commission we do have a draft resolution of denial also this evening considering that we knew we were up against a timeline um and so that you can weigh both of those options in terms of your review tonight I will say that uh obviously the findings draft findings that are put in front of you for the resolution of denial that you would need to also probably add some of the discussion you've had tonight so um for example council member geir was mentioning uh the fact that uh there were incomplete plans about the hydrotherapy pool etc those might be relevant uh findings to add to the list so um it was it's put in front of you for discussion uh so that you can consider it in coordination with also the resolution of approval based on whichever direction you'd like to go this evening [56:52] **Mayor Huber:** all right one moment please the council is going to read the findings of fact on this and then we will relaunch but first we're going to read these on the last second to last page three bullet points [56:55] **Council Member Carr:** Mr Mayor [57:04] **Mayor Huber:** yes [57:06] **Council Member Carr:** well the the only thing I would add is oh the back read the back [57:12] **Council Member Carr:** theor okay I just the one thing that's been bantered about up here is commercial use I don't see the word commercial in here at all would that be prudent to put that in here somewhere just seems like a commercial use not contiguous or not consistent consistent with the horse permit that we were you know the cup for the horse permit so do you get that Kim [57:42] **Mayor Huber:** Tom [Carr] makes a great point that the uses for the commercial building are not consistent with the cup that's outstanding yeah seems like another commercial use or something whatever verbage you want to add in there might be might be good as a to put in there as a reason for denial because we've been talking about that all [Music] evening [57:56] **Nick:** Mr Mayor I I would also uh have the the clerk administrator insert uh the lack of complete plans uh or the submission of incomplete plans uh if in in fact the council deems that the plans to the plans as submitted were incomplete I would also note that by the terms of your ordinance 32-45 the applicant Bears the burden of proving that the proposed use is suitable and that all of the standards set forth in the ordinance have have been met um it would it would appear that a finding that the applicant has not sustained its burden of proof uh in per in showing that the use is suitable in all respects um it would be the case if the council moves forward with denial [58:43] **Mayor Huber:** okay well that's almost for later on that does not add to our other list here Nick do you have anything other than incomplete plans that you think should be rep represented on this list of findings [58:56] **Nick:** um no it's it's the incomplete nature of of the plans you know certainly the council doesn't have sufficient information uh that would allow it to be comfortable uh in um finding that the health safety and general welfare of the of the community um are uh represented or reflected uh by the application um that there is obviously concern regarding the initial submission and the recharacterization of of the submission uh which is already in that resolution so uh from from what I've heard those are the primary findings the primary reasons uh that the council is considering denial at this 10 [1:00:01] **Mayor Huber:** yes go ahead Tom [1:00:03] **Council Member Carr:** um on the back page um you have some some bullet points some dots um and then um the second dot down talks about Accel Accel accessory dwelling units and living C your accessory buildings are not permitted uses in the city but I understand that but it's in their CP that they can so do we can leave that language in but not gerain [1:00:23] **Mayor Huber:** if you keep reading you'll see that the uh planner has actually broken down the uh definitions there um sort of the minutia is a proposed accessory building includes interior walls and room separations which is not a studio apartment and that is a vital difference accessory dwelling units and living quarters and accessory buildings are not permitted uses in the city so again that c is covered on those four those four efficiencies boy if they if they want to build four efficiencies okay go for it [1:00:54] **Council Member Carr:** well that says effic Okay so this says is not a studio apartment should that say efficiency apartment [1:01:00] **Jennifer Swanson:** uh Jennifer that's what I'm saying that doesn't make it's valid no it's no yeah I'm not sure that that studios are efficiencies efficiencies are Studios but to be consistent with the conditional use permit we can certainly switch it to the efficiency [1:01:21] **Mayor Huber:** okay I am uh I am comfortable where we are [1:01:27] **Council Member Geer:** Jeff one quick so Nick in the bullet point that we're suggesting to add regarding incomplete plans uh would it be worthy to call out like specifically the lack of 8 parking 8 bathrooms um or is it just sufficient to say incomplete plans [1:01:42] **Nick:** uh I I would say incomplete plans related to parking access um ADA Compliant restrooms whatever whatever it is that you're you're concerned about that they have not specifically provided the more specific you can be the the better as a basis for denial [1:02:00] **Mayor Huber:** that commercial thing I brought up you want to on the second page on that back page number the the third bullet point down it talks about the fact that that the uses such as yoga space on part are not part of the city's definition of a horse buring operation is that the spot to put the commercial language if we use the Comm say something commercial [1:02:26] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** Mr what I've got so far is three added findings of fact and I don't we would be Crossing out the others here and that would be the space where we would add these um I don't think the order is important but what I have so far and please clarify it for me and this isn't all the language but also uh for Jennifer and Nick to know but I've got commercial another an added finding effect would be the commercial use not consistent with the current cup uh submission it was submission of incomplete plans and then what Nick kind of referred to is the applicant has not sustained its burden of proof proof per a certain ordinance number which I would need that from you Nick that's what I have is three findings of factor [1:03:09] **Mayor Huber:** you're going to put under other then keep going with don't scratch the other ones off just keep keep those but make sure underneath there the incomplete plans regarding as Nick just stated regarding Ada plans parking bathroom other [1:03:20] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** yep just Ada bathrooms and other modifications as required by code [1:03:21] **Mayor Huber:** Ada bathrooms parking what else other modifications as required by code about the charging station is only proposed uses there that's Pie in the Sky there was no detail given to us we really can't rule on any of that so [1:03:41] **Council Member Geer:** no it's a good question good question [1:03:44] **Mayor Huber:** mentioned a few times but it's but it's but there are no plans yep there are no plans and that's not what they're asking for at this point you know with they're you know and and I will say I'll say this um before we move forward um you know those efficiencies are out there they can be used but I'd like to see perhaps the cup be used to its full purpose before we start amending cups right perhaps a full purpose of the cup could be used and then move forward Kim do you have something [1:04:14] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** uh Mr mayor council members uh nick uh kind of guide me through this but I think the appropriate approach if in fact you choose to go this way would be to deny the resolution that's in front of you for approval um and then go to the next resolution and approve that because that is denying the cup would that be correct [1:04:36] **Nick:** nck no so the the resolution that's been provided for approval was merely provided in the event that the council uh chose to to move in that direction that the council would just disregard that resolution and would move to deny the application based on the resolution uh that's in front of it with the findings uh as you have outlined Kim [1:04:54] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** okay Nick then one more question can we change that resolution if the council chooses to go that way to the number number that was in front of them for approval [1:05:07] **Mayor Huber:** so we actually have on file uh uh resolution 2023 uh 25 John's got a stand up go ahead John [1:05:17] **Council Member Rock:** um you know I I I look at the original cup and I and I you know wonder you know if if during transitions um I don't know who had it before how long it's been around if it's transitioned to somebody's relative or something do interim use permits ever help us out here [1:05:40] **Mayor Huber:** interim use permits are probably better discussed by the by the planner but interim use permits are incredibly useful because they do not run with the land for eternity right they stop when the owner ownership of the land changes hands now the new owner can say hey that interim use permit was very handy to have I'm going to go in and try to get another one and they're not that hard to get right but they're they're a useful tool for some people to use other than cups Cups Grant such broad-based rights and such longlasting rights John that Sometimes they come back to a city like we're seeing here and they bite [1:06:21] **Council Member Rock:** that's what I'm saying so if we had done that or or use it in the future more [1:06:26] **Mayor Huber:** yes we wouldn't see what we're seeing here now you are thinking in a forward manner to I'm going to be honest look forward in a for Manner and try to solve the problems of the councils that are 15 years out that's where we want to be we want to be thinking 15 years out to help them that's enough discussion I'm looking for a motion to deny 2023-24 Julian Avenue [1:06:54] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** Mr Mayor C members clarification the resolution is to deny so a motion would be made to approve [1:07:01] **Mayor Huber:** oh motion would what to you're right it has to be said in the positive again this is all very conf it is gentlemen I'll look for a motion to approve the denial [1:07:11] **Council Member Carr:** I will approve resolution 20232 thank you do I have a second [1:07:16] **Council Member Rock:** the amend I'll second as revised [1:07:19] **Mayor Huber:** as as revised of course sorry as revised [1:07:22] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** council member Carr hi council member Rock hi council member Geer hi council member tuy hi mayor Huber hi thank you [1:07:34] **Mayor Huber:** Cam I'm sorry that was so confusing everyone that was a very issue uh and it was it was a hard one um but there are certainly Avenues to move forward with Julian Avenue and I hope that our applicants will uh utilize those uh ways to move forward Jennifer we've got you up again for 23 20 23- 77 we're going to perhaps modify our outo storage just a bit are we still got Jennifer [1:07:56] **Jennifer Swanson:** yeah I just had to get my cursor back all right thank you thank you Mr Mayor members of the council so uh before you this evening is a draft uh ordinance to consider uh amending our current exterior storage uh ordinance language if you all recall we actually established a moratorium on this particular use within our code uh because we have had a couple applications that have come through and not a lot of Direction within our code currently about how to deal with outdoor storage so uh that moratorium was put into place part of that process was to go back and study uh and uh identify uh what types of amendments could improve our code uh and part of that process was to to look at other cities how are they dealing with it that are you know similarly positioned have similar types of land uses uh and then to go through that process with the Planning Commission so over the course of a couple Planning Commission meetings we actually did discuss the draft code uh language that's in front of you this evening uh however at the end of the day the Planning Commission recommended denial of the ordinance to you uh because they believed that the existing code albeit uh pretty loose and not very descriptive uh was adequate and they did not think that it needed to be changed so since it is a moratorium and it we were charged with studying it uh it is in front of you this evening and so I'm going to go ahead uh and just Breeze through it I know you've all had the chance to take a look at it so I'd like to walk through it uh as just a brief overview especially if anybody is watching the meeting uh and talk a little bit about it especially in light of the fact that the Planning Commission did ultimately recommend denial of the changes so um they did see this most current version uh a lot of their input actually went into this version uh to get it to where it's at uh it's certainly more robust than our current ordinances today uh it includes a definition for both outdoor storage personal and out outdoor storage commercial uh this is less about the zoning district and more about the use so the idea is that if it is a personal outdoor storage use uh even if you are storing for your friends for example that still is personal because there's not a commercial activity that's occurring with it as opposed to if you have a 10 or 15 acre parcel in the city and you would like to be able to uh store people's boats over the winter and charge them for that then you trip into a commercial type of outdoor storage so that's kind of the the distinction between the two in terms of the table of uses we would make some modifications that we would look at having outdoor storage being commercial or personal uh as a principal use that would not be permitted anywhere with the exception of General business uh outdoor storage commercial as an accessory use uh to a permitted principal use so this is where that whole what's the the property actually being used for today what's its principal use so long as it's accessory uh that would be permitted but uh with an interm use permit which we just talked about the value of those uh so in all zoning districts it would be an interim use permit uh for this code modification outdoor storage personal as an accessory use to a permitted principal use uh we'll walk through in just a moment the fact that there are several exceptions to this but if you do not meet the exception so this is really when you're taking your friends boats or you know uh have 30 RVs out there uh you would need a certificate of compliance so if you don't meet the exception you would need a certificate of compliance if you do meet the exception you can carry on uh and nobody would say anything uh and no permits are required so there are certain standards that were identified as being uh applicable to all outdoor storage whether principal or accessory whether commercial or personal uh some additional language was provided which is shown as the underline uh the existing code which is the stuff uh in this draft that is not underlined or not struck through uh that is what we currently have in our code uh you'll see here that the Planning Commission actually wanted to make sure that there was an exception also for agricultural uses so any farm equipment agriculture Cal equipment Etc does not trip the requirement um personal outdoor storage once again uh the majority of it would not trip any requirement for a certificate of compliance uh you'll see that the exceptions include any Vehicles parked on the driveway uh personal vehicles that are stored in a designated area as long as they're licensed and roadworthy essentially we're trying to prevent junkyards from occurring uh on miscellaneous properties uh recreational vehicles are actually already regulated person section 32339 uh and then all utility trailers horse trailers or similar uh would also be accepted so uh if if you are storing first somebody else then you would require a certificate of compliance if you are not meeting the recreational vehicle code you may need a certificate of compliance but in almost all cases the vast majority of personal property owners would not require any special permitting under this code so uh the the next section has to do with if you're a commercial outdoor storage use and you are uh needing to obtain an interm use permit for that use uh then there would be these performance standards that would trip in uh so those would include a minimum lot size uh maximum commercial exterior storage area allowed so uh right now there's 10% or you'll see X Acres because uh that X would and should probably have a number or it is a percent so whichever way the council uh would like to go uh and then the location of where that storage would have to be located so in most cases with with the exception of General business uh they would have to be behind the principal structure now the point of this again is that all commercial outdoor storage would be accessory except for in the general business where it could be a principal use otherwise it is an accessory use all over so uh for instance in our general business we have outdoor uh supplemental you know like our landscape businesses or whatever uh those would then be subject to those requirements and they would have to be behind the principal structure or or at least not visible from the public right of way so that's the intent behind those and then also uh some increased setbacks for where that outdoor designated storage areas are so um this as I said is the last draft that was presented to the Planning Commission um uh generally they expressed that they liked the changes that were made uh they just didn't believe that we needed any more requirement than is already in the current code so uh with that Mr Mayor members of the council I am happy to answer any questions you might have [11:51] **Mayor Huber:** uh yeah Jennifer a couple of things here there isn't a lot of changes here in terms of overall what's allowed especially residential there's one or two things I want to talk to you about um number one uh second page with the first use table uh outdoor storage general purpose yada yada y go down number one the items in the area designated for outdoor storage must be completely screened from view at ground level from adjacent public RightWay and adjacent residential uses at this point in the document Jennifer under a general purpose we are still talking about residential storage correct [12:35] **Jennifer Swanson:** that would be All Storage commercial or residential unless uh you are part of the exceptions so like if you need a certificate of compliance then that would be the requirement that would trip in [12:47] **Mayor Huber:** okay so let me just do a quick quick thought experiment so we can all understand this I'm a little lost myself here so the exceptions are the 2 RVs the licensed cars the personal cars that type of thing those are all exceptions right [13:00] **Jennifer Swanson:** yep [13:01] **Mayor Huber:** utility trailers forse trailers are similar agricultural agricultural all exceptions now if I say to my friend well I only have two RVs here right now I'd like to store three more for my friends this would kick in because we're beyond the exception range basically we're intruding upon our our neighbors if you ask me welfare because they have a right in Grant obviously with the size of our Lots not to see a bunch of trailers in somebody's yard is that the way the Pioneer commission [13:30] **Jennifer Swanson:** yeah so we've had situations in the past where we know uh folks are maybe storing for their buddies and their friends and all of a sudden they have 25 boats for instance over the winter um so the intent is that maybe you should screen that from your neighbors so they don't have to look at it right [13:46] **Mayor Huber:** moving down to storage area may not be used for the storage of junk Vehicles trash debris or other nuisance items as I remember when I first started on the council we had multiple enforcements uh against people unfortunately who just had trash Vehicles things in the yard so I really like that because we don't need to have any more of that um moving forward unlicensed passenger vehicles basically everywhere you have to put those inside if it's your unlicensed passenger vehicle um the other thing I wanted to comment this there's just not a lot of changes here um in the commercial Zone with the so we've got the 20 acre uh uh uh acreage requirements for commercial storage storage okay so the location the setbacks um everything there but that is still governed under an iup isn't that correct [14:48] **Jennifer Swanson:** yes Mr M and so just I want to make sure underneath uh it would be subsection d e d as in dog or no sorry e e as an elephant there's that table yep um in the A1 and A2 the minimum acres to have an outdoor storage use as an accessory use would be 10 acres and then you would be limited in how much area that that could be and that would require an interterm use permit so it's not just permitted you would be required to go through basically the public hearing process Etc and get an interim use permit right [15:23] **Mayor Huber:** all the other storage uh uh phases that you have here in the different ones uh the general business um for sure I want to talk about um those are all iups I just I I don't see it here normally you'll have a c or iup there are those all iups required in all of these districts [15:43] **Jennifer Swanson:** yes so that's under section two the table uh is noted where you've got the interim use permit so outdoor storage commercial or permissive or personal excuse me as a principal use is not permitted so those are ends all the way across except for in the general business where you could choose a a conditional use permit or an interm use permit I'm hearing interm use permit as the desired permitting tool then the second table item in the table is outdoor storage commercial accessory use to a permitted principal use that is an interim use permit across the board [16:21] **Mayor Huber:** got you okay great what I'm looking for here in this change and we have had this storage ordinance misconstrued misunderstood before the tables the iups the other things that we're doing here uh seem to clarify it um so basically junk would come under Health and Welfare and the screening once you start doing this for profit uh comes under welfare because I don't think anyone here in this audience in this city should have to to endure someone's for-profit business if it messes up everything that they can see from their very expensive property thank you Jennifer Kim can I ask you a question how many uh um storage uses have we had to enforce or take some sort of action against in the last five years and currently [17:08] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** uh 5 to 10 [17:10] **Mayor Huber:** 5 to 10 do we have any going currently [17:12] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** yes yes we do we're enforcing them currently [17:16] **Council Member Rock:** John question if I have lots of land and I have 30 junk cars of my property but no one can see them except if a drone flies over how do we enforce something like that [17:28] **Mayor Huber:** well I I'll tell you this and this is just my personal perspective John we have one building inspector okay he doesn't work for us he works for like five cities right um we don't go out and investigate things gentlemen this is for the overt people that's hey that's the way I see I look at these in junk cars and it says where are the junk cars that's the question and and how what do we do for enforcement I think we always need to be asking ourselves when we do these things well how does the enforcement piece fit in because you can pass all these laws pass all these ordinances how the ordinance piece fits in is vital to understanding how this will work and I don't want to say it too loudly but we don't have enforcement [18:13] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** Mr May council members I'm just going to add to that the city does it's based on a complaint basis so if you had a bunch of junk cars in the back or whatever and nobody can see it no we're who's going be an enforcement because there's no complaint [18:27] **Mayor Huber:** if a tree falls in the forest that's about it right there too if a tree falls in the forest John if people are flying drones over your property we need to talk about this um Bob first sorry and then Tom [18:41] **Council Member Tufty:** are we jumping the gun on doing this I mean it's you're saying it's to rescue and protect our citizens right but at the same time you're stepping on their toes how by Haven changed going on their property and telling them they can't have what they have [18:55] **Mayor Huber:** but you don't understand we haven't changed any of that those all those exceptions remain the same what you have in your property have my property time there's all those exceptions know on my right and I don't want to know but the point is all those exceptions that were there yesterday are still there so we're we're talking about conent storage here once you get past the exceptions again let's do it again you can have two RV let me let me finish my thought experiment then ask a question you can have two 35 foot RVs on your property right now all day long four cars whatever you want okay say you do now you come to do a third 35 ft RV okay then you're going to need to do a COC and screen it I my question that I would ask back to you is does your neighbor not deserve that [19:43] **Council Member Tufty:** not if he was shooting my house [19:45] **Mayor Huber:** I knew you were going to go there that's a personal thing we're not going to discuss that Tom you're up [19:54] **Council Member Carr:** um yeah well I think having stuff in acreage and stuff in Grant I mean I think that's part of why we gave up you know small Lots so people could have their stuff I mean that's kind of what Grant's all about [20:07] **Mayor Huber:** true but not to distur your neighbors because I've seen people cry when things happen uh and their neighbor does something that infringes on their property rights [20:17] **Council Member Carr:** but what I'm looking at is what the mayor brought up originally um is the language where where the heck did that go I lost it again oh no here it is all right 3 32 316 exterior storage you know outdoor storage exterior storage of the city blah blah blah doesn't really designate what kind of use but it says the items in the designated for storage for outdoor storage area well that's my whole lot so I don't understand that's after the exceptions [20:41] **Mayor Huber:** well after that doesn't doesn't say it there [20:44] **Council Member Carr:** I just asked the question I'm sorry I thought you heard Jennifer can you discuss that again let me finish this yeah please all right must be completely screened from view at ground level from adjacent RightWay in adjacent residence I mean it doesn't say does there's no exception there that just says that so if if somebody would read that they think now if to Bob's point that all and then it says the storage air may not be used for storage of junk Vehicles wait a minute that's a 1950 7 Chevy I just haven't finished working on it yet and trash what do you mean it's pile of bricks from my patio debris you know I mean one one man's debris is another man's treasure or other nuisance itties and again that's what Grant's all about so I have a I have a little problem with that language so I don't I I didn't know why this was such a big deal but then I read the ordinance and I'm going yeah there's we should probably clean it because the reason for enforcement we have to give our staff tools to be able to enforce and if the tools aren't there then they look at us and go what are we supposed to do so by doing this it'll tighten it up but I also do not want to alienate some residents and that's probably why the Planning Commission didn't so I that was that language wasn't changed from our old one was it I don't know but if we're changing it [21:44] **Mayor Huber:** hang on Kim's going to go [21:46] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** I'm asking Kim I I'm not sure exactly Jennifer could answer that but I will just note yet we have had complaints about debris and junk and I assure you the 1957 vehicle as long as it's current on its tabs is does not that does is not considered a junk vehicle and that's already in your ordinance that the cars have to be licensed and up to dat [22:09] **Mayor Huber:** besides who puts a 1957 on in the rain [22:12] **Council Member Carr:** oh yeah no I I put it up on blocks while I'm fixing it and put a tarp over it yeah in the garage well I don't know [22:20] **Mayor Huber:** Jennifer let's go back to a Corvette right Jennifer let's go back to that real quick I'll joking aside here for a moment um Tom [Carr] brings up some points I think that need to be addressed first is this language in 316 right now have you change that language and two where are the exceptions laid out just so people know [22:42] **Jennifer Swanson:** okay so I I'm going to start with a couple of things so first the language uh the storage area may not be used for the storage of junk Vehicles trash debris or other nuisance items is underlined because it's generally new but it's new because it's specifically about the storage area you already have language in your ordinance about junk vehicles trash debris Etc but we haven't defined a storage area outdoor storage area so it's new from that respect but you have language about nuisance council member car mentioned well what the hell is the storage area because my whole lot is a storage area and my statement would be that for your personal storage that is true but what we're talking about is if we scroll down in the ordinance or if you go onto your pages where the table is laid out of the performance standards we've designated that you can only have storage on a certain percentage of your lot and that is the storage area if you get an interm use permit we require a site plan and the site plan shows where the designated storage area will be so the storage area is tied to the table that is under e for elephant where we've got a minimum or a maximum number of the you know percentage of of the lot that can be used as a storage area in an interm use permit everything that is the exception does not count so that that's not the storage area because you've accepted it and you can have those things on your property in terms of the exceptions those are those are identified under c as in cat I'm just picking picking letters here but um so that shows that the exceptions for a personal use are any Vehicles parked on the primary driveway personal vehicles stored in a designated area because again this goes back to that not putting them all over your lot if you do and nobody can see it the forest the trees what you were talking about before no one's going to do anything but if you've got them strewn about in your front yard people might say things so this give the city and staff some tools to be able to do something if we get complaints as a opposed to right now where we don't have much description uh again recreational vehicles are accepted and so our utility trailers Force trailers or similar and a any agricultural equipment [25:01] **Mayor Huber:** yeah okay so the exceptions are there it gives it the staff tools to deal with some of this stuff we've talked about the enforcement and or discovery of problems uh I do [25:12] **Council Member Tufty:** you have your hand up here oh yeah I have questions when you're [25:14] **Mayor Huber:** okay um excuse me does this bring us closer to a system where welfare of our neighbors becomes almost equal in a in a certainly in small Lots where people can see this stuff um a little more equal yeah it does Bob I'll get you in a second Jeff my turn [25:40] **Council Member Geer:** yeah um so Jed for question for you um under the um performance standards for commercial exterior storage under section two why are the A1 and A2 minimum lot sizes set at 10 acres um when residential is 20 like why is A1 and A2 less than residential [26:01] **Jennifer Swanson:** so uh the Planning Commission we talked a little bit about what the right size was with the Planning Commission they didn't they didn't land on whether it was 10 or 20 um there was discussion that there's a lot of people in our A1 and A2 districts that you know have 10 acres that would have areas that are certainly you know away from their neighbors they're large enough Lots Etc so 10 acres might be suitable and adequate as opposed to in our R1 uh we've got much smaller lot sizes so all the houses are clustered a little bit closer together it's much harder to Shield them so you would need a much bigger lot to be able to keep those uses away so that was jumped up there's it went both ways and there wasn't really a conclusion it was kind of a half split Planning Commission so it's certainly something that the city council could say we believe it should all be 20 or we should it should all be 10 um either way is fine but the planning the Planning Commission discussed it they just were kind of split and didn't arrive at an answer [26:56] **Council Member Geer:** okay um and then my next question um under the regarding setbacks under section c where it says such storage area may not be placed within any required yard setback what are the definitions of these yard setbacks are they just the same as what's defined in in the chart for commercial storage [1:31:43] **Jennifer Swanson:** yeah yard setbacks are what are in the base zoning District as well so the the standards that are in subsection e are more restrictive than what are in our typical required yard setbacks which are the front side rear Etc that are in the base zoning District so if you're not tripping into uh this commercial exterior storage then if you are a personal storage use um then your typical zoning District standards for yard required yard setbacks trip into place [1:32:15] **Council Member Geer:** okay so that kind of leads to my next question is um the exceptions listed under c um those would also fall under those setbacks that you just just mentioned in other words you um you can't let's see what what is one of the uh you have a recreational vehicle that's an exception um could you park that right in your lot line then or or would that still be um uh subject to the exception or the I mean the setback the setbacks [1:32:51] **Jennifer Swanson:** so it's not subject to subsection e it's subject to our base zoning District standards so the E is only about commercial exterior storage so not the exceptions the exceptions are not subject to the table in subsection e [1:33:07] **Mayor Huber:** can you want okay um those exceptions so Jennifer to clarify those exceptions that we have discussed the trvs the automobiles the other things the the table regarding setbacks does not apply to those accepted storage pieces correct [1:33:28] **Jennifer Swanson:** correct those are personal storage exceptions [1:33:30] **Mayor Huber:** do what you like with them po Kim question what has changed down here from what we've been doing for years and what we want to do now is there are there many changes or is it pretty much the same [1:33:43] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** uh mayor and council members from my perspective uh number one and very important is it cleans up your storage ordinance um it's very confusing as written and number two to this the change is really to commercial storage Lots it's residents that are storing their uh friends boats and and even strangers boats and they're they're getting paid to do that that's what this change really really applies to those are the two things that really [1:34:11] **Mayor Huber:** and one more thing have you talked with Jack Kramer about this [1:34:15] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** oh yes jack prer is all in favor of this it'll help him [1:34:20] **Mayor Huber:** oh yes okay [1:34:21] **Council Member Carr:** so going back to those two items under 32316 which I can't remember I think Jennifer said they are new they're underlined um if this is about commercial I there's a lot of ordinances I'd like to change but I'm not I'm staying away from them because they're going to create unintended consequences and more issues than if we left them alone so what I don't want to do is pit neighbor after neighbor and now right now what we've been going after people what are we using to go after them [1:34:49] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** new I'd have to I'm not sure how it depends on what it is depends on [1:34:53] **Council Member Carr:** so we're we're trying to figure out and fit into the ordinance what they're doing so that we can say you're doing something wrong and then we go after them and this would help clear up that problem correct [1:35:01] **Mayor Huber:** basically what we're doing is going to help give you more tools and make it clear that what those people are doing is not what we want them to do is that correct [1:35:10] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** I mayor and council members I I would not phrase it that way whatsoever no but but what we are doing is cleaning up for example we have a current complaint right now and I have very little information on if the staff does not share that with me but I do know that this concurrent complaint is uh a a commercial storage complaint in a residential area where the owner was uh receiving fees for storage there is no way under this this current to really force that you can go in and say hey that one's not licensed that one's not licensed Pro that one do this it's a tedious and horrendous task whereas under this that guy kind of come in and said hey I want to do this give me an iup which is about the simplest thing in the world to get [1:35:56] **Mayor Huber:** right yeah so the the one that I'm describing I happen to have some friends up there who planted $20,000 wor the trees so they didn't have to see it so whose rights are being impeded again no right I I think on the commercial I agree I just don't want to get into the residential like like you brought it up like on this first one on that doesn't but remember that doesn't apply why because those are all all your exceptions only if you started bringing in you brought up two RVs where's two RVs right here Tom here come back come back to the second page here c c yep if we come back to or is it D the exceptions are under C thank you under C Jennifer read our exceptions again please [1:36:44] **Jennifer Swanson:** I can't even find it down here oh here we go up to personal vehicles provided such vehicles are licensed and Road worthy so there is no number [1:36:53] **Mayor Huber:** no you can't bring up a number recreational vehicles number three [1:36:58] **Council Member Carr:** but there's no number so I was just curious well [1:37:00] **Jennifer Swanson:** Jennifer it's interesting now Tom brings up a good point the up to two is struck so shouldn't we still have that up to two in there of two cuz that's struck there no that's because originally in the first draft to the Planning Commission I put a number in there to get them talking to get them to react the Planning Commission said we don't want to limit we don't want to everybody's got more than two or everybody so then that was removed so the two was from basically the first draft to get the Planning Commission to discuss [1:37:37] **Mayor Huber:** gotcha so this list though is as the Planning Commission was generally okay with it even though they then didn't recommended denial which once again we're confused again tonight because we didn't get straight recommendations at all for anything at my last meeting apparently um and so the exceptions that the Planning Commission was okay with if they were to recommend it which they didn't but if they did they were okay with any Vehicles parked on the primary driveway provided such vehicles are licensed and roadworthy number two personal vehicle stored in a designated area so if you have more and you're overflowing your Park as as long as they're in a in an area they're fine with those which must be in a side or a rear yard outside of all setbacks so you can't put 20 Vehicles even if you own them buted up to the property line with your neighbor for example recreational vehicles are already regulated by section 32339 in your code not to open Pandora's box but that's a very not descriptive section of your code but they are regulated there there uh and then utility trailers horse trailers are similar all of those were exceptions that the Planning Commission felt should be in there [1:38:58] **Council Member Geer:** okay and no limit there was no number that was associated with it as long as it's your personal stuff no you should be accepted and then and then Kim I'm I'm finally getting that Greyhound bus [1:39:13] **Mayor Huber:** go ahead Jeff [1:39:14] **Council Member Geer:** I agree with the not you know putting a limit on you know how many personal vehicles you own the one small risk I see is you know the um could see someone say well um these are my friends that I'm storing and really they're you know it's commercial operation so that would be kind of a force ability issue like how how do you prove that no they're not just your friends you're actually making money and I don't know if there's any performance standards we could set around that but I think that I'm just calling out that as a risk so I could see someone saying NOP don't they're my friends you proved that I'm making money [1:39:55] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** for Kim you got something council members the the Planning Commission did discuss that in terms of what is and is not in the draft ordinance has nothing to do with dollars in a sense the city is not going to be out looking for uh copies of checks that somebody paid you okay it's about the number it's about the permitting um this basically this ordinance doesn't stop outside storage whatsoever it it calls for some iups and it calls for the conditional use permits it does not disallow outside storage no [1:40:31] **Mayor Huber:** we're just trying to get a handle it doesn't include any of your personal storage [1:40:35] **Council Member Carr:** yeah I get it [1:40:36] **Mayor Huber:** we're trying to get is a way to prove if you're storing somebody else's vehicle [1:40:40] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** there there is a way to do that yeah run the plate [1:40:44] **Council Member Tufty:** Bob if there's anybody out here that can't figure out why we talking for so long over such a small issue it's because Grant is a place where you can do more things than you can anywhere else and nobody's going to say anything about it because they like to do that too [1:41:00] **Mayor Huber:** yep yeah we don't want to take away anybody's rights [1:41:03] **Council Member Tufty:** nope [1:41:04] **Mayor Huber:** nope that's not the business we're in and that's why I'm arguing with people a little bit because I don't want certain things done that I'm afraid they might do now Kim's the one who's kind of straightened me out now that's not what we're going to do it's not we're GNA not be harassing individual homeowners because they have a rock in their front yard that's not what this is if somebody has got a trash house and there's complaints that City gets we will send someone out that's simple we're not going to do anything of the sort and uh we don't have the Personnel but we're still trying to protect the rights of Grant citizens right and still trying to preserve deserve the rural Heritage Tom's up next guys [1:41:51] **Council Member Carr:** well and we keep talking about these exceptions and I still going back to that one on 3 316 any items that designated storage area must be completely screen that doesn't say commercial or residential okay it just doesn't so how how I'm fine with the commercial aspect I actually like the table I'm a little like outdoor storage personal you know CCC you whatever I don't know maybe but I I just think any items you can't store stuff on the setbacks commercial or residential that's pretty much screening anyway and most of us screen our property because we don't like to look at our neighbors that's just kind of how it is out here so I would see Bob's laughing because he I was going with what he said so I would as long as that that is just for commercial uh at ground level uh I would probably be okay with this but to leave that open-ended as personal and commercial on that one line I don't because I don't see the exception anywhere nope I got you good question [1:42:51] **Mayor Huber:** hey Jennifer do you want to reex re-explain the personal property and uh kind of wrap it up in a in a bow [1:42:58] **Jennifer Swanson:** so I'm just going to go straight to subsection C again where it's explicitly says the following shall be exempt from the location and screening requirements it specifically says that the screening and location requirements are exempt for those that are in that list [1:43:24] **Council Member Carr:** I see something that's got a lot of faded print on it's in there somewhere right here okay the following show okay at the very end okay here vehicles got you okay I'm on it now Vehicles park in the front driveway any storage provid worthy [1:43:44] **Jennifer Swanson:** so what is not exempt from a personal perspective is if you are storing stuff for other people and you require a certificate of compliance then you may be required to screen it in compliance with the ordinance [1:44:02] **Council Member Carr:** that's but anything that is yours that is an exception you are exempt from the location and screening requirements [1:44:13] **Mayor Huber:** changes nothing [1:44:15] **Council Member Carr:** yeah I mean I I don't care but I know a lot of people have a lot of cars in their yards that are not they're not roadworthy and they haven't had a permit on them for 20 years so I mean that's my only that's my only thing we haven't done anything with it for the last [1:44:27] **Mayor Huber:** what did you say 20 years [1:44:29] **Council Member Carr:** 20 years [1:44:30] **Mayor Huber:** I know but if we're going to change it we might as well change it right so I I would say any I would just say any vehicles and leave leave the road worthiness out yeah other than that that's fine I guess I don't know yeah I just don't want to open up a can of worms [1:44:48] **Mayor Huber:** I don't either but I do want the staff to be able to clean up some of these places and they can't uh on some of these they cannot do that and the impact on what we're what are we truly concerned about here guys are we sitting here I see we're not sitting here worried about commercial are we we're sitting here saying hey I own a house what can I do there what are the exceptions where is it going we know nothing has basically changed on the residential use of storage nothing has changed until you go over exceptions or until you start storing your buddies because somebody ran a plate and it's not yours it's your buddies so that might get some attention on it and then the only only attention that happens is a cooc and you got to designate where you're going to put it with some setbacks that makes perfect sense because your neighbor deserves not to stare at it if it's not his right yep that's all that's happening here guys it's not yeah this just isn't that complicated um small typo Jennifer and C1 um license Andro worth you just forgot a y on the worthy [1:45:51] **Jennifer Swanson:** okay [1:45:52] **Mayor Huber:** well let's uh let let's start moving on this guy are we going to have some motions with adjustments on this are we going to guys are we going to have motions with adjustments that you'd like to see Tom [Carr] has has noticed some things that he may wish to change so if we can get a motion either to approve or Tony obviously the approval may require some adjustments so I wait for you guys to propose [1:46:18] **Council Member Carr:** okay well I'll just have one then so if we do do this exterior storage we should we should say in here [1:46:25] **Mayor Huber:** yep [1:46:26] **Council Member Carr:** because I don't and I hate this I print this stuff I I just hate the way this looks but um um maybe we should put C exemptions under 3 32- 316 exterior storage maybe just add that to the language there that we put in so that people understand that cuz you got to remember people going to read this they're going to pick out of there what they want [1:46:50] **Mayor Huber:** exactly [1:46:51] **Council Member Carr:** and they're not going to go and read the rest of it [1:46:53] **Mayor Huber:** I know um mayor [1:46:57] **Council Member Carr:** yep go ahead council members y council member car was that a motion to app no I no he's just discussing changes the mayor has asked for changes changes [1:47:06] **Mayor Huber:** I then we're going to get a motion we have any other ones [1:47:09] **Council Member Carr:** it's been a long time I don't think so Tom that was what you were talking about and that's what you've kind of been on [1:47:15] **Council Member Rock:** yeah no that's fine [1:47:16] **Council Member Carr:** yeah I could remember so you want the exemptions laid out in a clear Manner and you want [1:47:20] **Mayor Huber:** well and they're here I guess [1:47:22] **Council Member Carr:** okay but here where it talks items designated for outdoor storage which is 32 it's on the first [1:47:26] **Mayor Huber:** yes I know I know what the one you're talking about where the table is okay just put C except exemptions C exemptions Jennifer can we just add a small line of parentheses there C exemptions and you can say C if you want item C or something like that and that way people know [1:47:48] **Jennifer Swanson:** yeah just to point it out so it's a little easier to read and easier to use [1:47:53] **Mayor Huber:** yeah that's a good point no problem Bob John [1:47:58] **Council Member Rock:** uh I'm in favor of it now and uh I'll accept that you accept that okay real good so Bob John how you feeling down there you're reading earnestly yeah it's it's it's it's cleaned up quite a bit I like this um I think there's probably a little bit more we could tighten it up in certain areas [1:48:21] **Council Member Carr:** you can't see how many horses you have anyway [1:48:23] **Council Member Rock:** well no no no that's not that's not the junk but you know I understand that John but perhaps the incrementalism of this might be a good way to start yeah oh absolutely no I I like it and I think we can tweak it up but we got to pass it to tweak it [1:48:38] **Mayor Huber:** you know got to pass it before I tell you what's in it see how it works and then start tweaking it [1:48:42] **Council Member Rock:** I wonder when you were going to do that [1:48:45] **Mayor Huber:** yeah can I make a motion [1:48:47] **Council Member Rock:** yes you can motions are here um I make a a motion that we as written with the addition of the um clarification on item e that's um calls out the C exemptions as as Tom mentioned [1:49:10] **Mayor Huber:** yeah Mr car's uh change do I have a second for that please Kim take your pick council member car hi council member Rock hi council member Geer hi council member tuy hi mayor hu hi I'm not sure who's going to take the preliminary plat extension at Stillwater Oak so Jennifer is Jennifer please but wa do we have oh wait a second you didn't even call you didn't call didn't call what did you call the vote yeah you did call the vote no we're good okay so we that's what we passed with our boat yeah okay we don't have to you don't have to realize you don't have to run the number right you don't have to okay it's not required go ahead Jen come on please [1:49:28] **Jennifer Swanson:** okay all right try to get this thing moving so um we have a preliminary plat that was approved about a year ago almost exactly a year ago tonight actually uh for a large lot subdivision the applicant has requested an extension to that preliminary plat I believe he wrote you a letter that was in your packets this evening uh they had some outstanding issues I did see today actually I think they've got preliminary approval or conditional approval from The Watershed District uh that they just got as well so they're planning on bringing the final plat before you uh before the end of the year and they're looking for an extension so that that preliminary plat does not expire [1:50:11] **Mayor Huber:** Jennifer can I ask a very quick question on this please do we know whether or not the purchase of the land and its title deed has transferred completely to the uh developer [1:50:23] **Jennifer Swanson:** uh Mr Mayor members of the council I do not know if the the title is transferred [1:50:28] **Mayor Huber:** okay well thank you for that questions gentlemen very good motion to approve the prelim preliminary plat extension for Stillwater Oaks please [1:50:39] **Council Member Geer:** so move second [1:50:41] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** council member car hi council member Rock hi council member Geer hi council member tuy hi mayor Huber hi thank you Kim uh no new business no unfinished business discussion items do we have any staff updates [1:51:01] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** no nope [1:51:02] **Mayor Huber:** city council reports future agenda items [1:51:05] **Council Member Rock:** I would like to put the Planning Commission Staffing on next month's agenda please [1:51:09] **Mayor Huber:** John S again [1:51:10] **Council Member Rock:** I would like to put the Planning Commission Staffing on next month's agenda to discuss that regularly scheduled meeting next regularly scheduled meeting [1:51:20] **Mayor Huber:** thank you for the clarification John are you in agreement with this I am okay Bob I'm in agreement sure Tom yes sir Jeff good there we go community calendar [1:51:41] **Mayor Huber:** Mr T is it Mr tuy is it Mr Rock who is it community calendar [1:51:46] **Council Member Tufty:** Mr tuy we we doing this we're going to do that close session as soon as we're done oh the audit's offi public school board meeting Thursday Wes October 12th and October 26th midi District Education Center 7 P.M Stillwater public school board meeting Thursday October 12th Stillwater City Hall 7 p.m. Washington County Commissioners meeting Tuesdays Government Center 9 a.m. happy Halloween Tuesday October 31st [1:52:21] **Mayor Huber:** thank you very much Mr tufty this uh Council will now go into close session oh we can have Nick introduce it [1:52:30] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** Mr council members I suggest taking a 10-minute recess do you want to take a recess well yes for people to leave and then we will go into a close session probably a good idea otherwise we'd be in a hurry thanks Kim Let's 10 hey take a 10-minute recess guys Ken you heard it [1:52:50] [Recess] [1:53:01] **Mayor Huber:** uh we just took a short break before we our uh decision to move into uh legal uh discussion with legal council under a closed session so we're back in here and I'm going to ask for a motion to go into closed session for the purpose of conferring with legal counsel gentlemen [1:53:23] **Council Member Tufty:** I will move to go into close session [1:53:26] **Mayor Huber:** and G for your second this isn't being taped but [1:53:32] **Kristina Handt (Kim):** council member Carr hi council member Rock hi council member Geer hi council member tuy hi mayor Huber hi go ahead [1:53:42] **Nick:** Nick