Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Oh, I have a little weight. Give him a minute to get situated.

Morning everyone. Welcome to the April 23rd, 2026 zoning board of adjustment meeting starting at 700 a.m. in the morning. If any member of the audience wes to speak to an item on the agenda today, there are speaker request forms to the left of the dis. Please fill out the request with the agenda number of the item you wish to speak to and hand it to the staff seated on that side of the room. Public hearing on item number one, the approval of the April 9th, 2026 zoning board of adjustment meeting minutes is hereby open.

All right. Karen made the motion to approve those minutes and Vince seconded that motion. Any discussion on the motion to approve. All those in favor, please say I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries.

So, good morning. Uh, this item is a variance request to reduce the parking requirement from 42 spaces down to 12 spaces to reduce the landscaping requirement from 12,366 points down to 500 points and to reduce the front yard setback for the detached storage shed from 25 ft to 0.7 7 ft. So, the properties are zoned general commercial district. Uh this entire development contains four properties. It contains a car dealership along with existing office uh in retail uses. Future land use is mixeduse commercial. Uh they're accessed off these properties are accessed off West Main Street which is classified as a principal arterial street on the city's major street plan. So this is the proposed floor plan of 1114 West Main Street. The applicant is proposing to redevelop this property from an antique shop to a coffee shop and flower shop with offices. The zoning code does require compliance uh with the parking and landscaping regulations when there's more than a 20% increase in occupancy. And then this is the proposed seating plan of that coffee shop. Uh the coffee shop will have an occupant load of 64 people, which is more than a 20% increase um from the antique shop. So therefore, parking and landscaping are required if this building were to continue to be used uh solely for offices. uh and retail as it was previously. Um no additional parking um would be triggered with it. So it's really the coffee shop that's triggering um compliance with the parking regulations. So the variance uh is intended to accommodate a more intensive land use than what was there previously and therefore doesn't appear to be the minimum adjustment necessary uh for the reasonable use of the land. And then this is what that antique shop looks like currently. Few pictures of that. And then this is the proposed site plan at 1212 West Main Street. Uh this is the car dealership out there. Um the applicant is proposing to restripe 12 parking spaces on this property and those 12 spaces are going to serve the entire development. So this entire

development requires 42 parking spaces. Uh so staff felt that these 12 spaces on uh or the car dealership property weren't sufficient to accommodate the parking demand um for the coffee and the flower shop along with all the existing offices and retail uses that exist among these four properties. So this variance didn't appear to meet the purpose and intent of the zoning requirement which which for parking is to ensure that there's a sufficient amount of on-site parking available. And then this is looking at uh that car dealership property. This is where some of these spaces are going to be restriped. There's already a few that you can kind of see to the left there. Just another image of that. And then this top site plan is the proposed site plan of 1114 West Main Street. Uh the one at the bottom is 11:04 West Main Street. Uh there's 11 parallel street parking spaces in front of this development and there's also six non-conforming parking spaces at 11:04. So required parking has to be located within the confines of the property lines. Uh that therefore these parking spaces couldn't be counted towards meeting the parking requirement. Uh that street parking could be removed by the city anytime in the future and it's not a dependable parking source uh for this development. And then this is looking at 11:04 West Main Street looking at those non-conforming stalls. They're partially located uh within the city rightway. And then the applicant is considering pursuing a lease uh with the railroad to pave an additional 14 parking spaces north of his development right behind right behind the development. But that lease has yet to be applied for and there's there's no guarantee that it it would be approved. But so this is the general area where he's considering uh pursuing that lease with the railroad. So the second variance being requested is reduce the landscaping requirement from 12,366 points down to 500 points. So this is the proposed landscaping plan. The applicant is proposing two shrubs which

equals 500 points. Uh those two shrubs are going to be located west of the antique shop. So the landscaping is a landscaping provided is going to be more than a 96% reduction from the landscaping requirement. And then this is looking at the existing site plan that's showing all the development out here. Uh except for the office building on 1212 it doesn't show. Um but there does appear to be room additional room out here for additional landscaping improvements beyond the 500 points or two shrubs that are being proposed. So this variance doesn't appear to be the minimum adjustment necessary for the reasonable use of the land. And then the last variance being requested is to reduce the front yard setback for a detached storage shed from 25 ft to 0.7 ft. And then that's an image of that partially constructed shed. Uh one of the purposes of the frontier setback requirements in the general commercial district generally is to allow room for landscaping and to enhance the street frontage. So staff felt with this one, since we're already at a landscaping um deficit here, that this space where the shed is located, could be used for additional landscaping. So therefore, this variance did not appear to meet the purpose and intent of the zoning requirement as well. And that's what that shed will look like uh when completed. So staff is recommending that these variances uh be denied. Uh the 12 parking spaces don't appear sufficient to accommodate the parking demand. Um as mentioned that antique shop if it were to be used for retail and offices would not trigger the parking requirements or this is these variances to allow a more intensive land use. Um and then the landscaping does not appear to be the minimum adjustment necessary. There appears to be room to add some additional landscaping. So with that I'll stand by for any questions and the applicant is in the audience as well.

Thank you. I want to note Alicia is going to abstain from this item. Uh, and I have a speaker request from Sam Papendic. Sam, if you'd like to come up and address the board and once you're up, if you could just note your connection to the project.

Yeah, thank you. Uh, Sam Papick. I'm one of the owners of the property. So, thank you for your time and consideration this morning. Um, you know, first, this is we reszoned this. I was in here maybe six or eight weeks ago and um I told you I'd be back, right? And so appreciate you putting me at the beginning of the agenda this time. Um but no, so uh really I want to start off by thanking the staff, Tanner and and the admin team. They've really helped us get through this and to this point so far. Uh it's been quite a lot of back and forth trying to figure out how to make this thing work. But I want to uh back up and you know start with our original goals for this whole development or this this block here. And one we wanted to bring everything up to modern safety code and modern safety and code standards. Um and then two uh beautify the front of these buildings or maximize curb appeal. And so, uh, especially the antique mart that was like a Russian doll of buildings where you had buildings built on top of other buildings. It was a structural mess and there were rotted floor joists. I mean, we've been really trying to clean that up and make it safe for anybody to use of any use. And then I think with the amount of traffic that goes in front of this property, uh, beautifying the front of that probably aligns with what the city would like to see. So, uh, that's really the two top goals here. Now, to talk about this project, uh, two things. One, I just wanted to say how we intend to use the project and then and then why. And so most of those those buildings out there uh the car dealership uh the office building and uh alter ego on the on the left and then on

the right the station those will all basically stay as conforming you know already used sorry excuse me those buildings uh don't have much of a change of use uh from from what they are uh but this is all trigger triggered from the center building where uh we have Flatlander Coffee here. They're going to be selling flowers and and doing coffee service as well as some office space there. Um that's really triggering all of this. And I think there's um the parking is is the biggest thing that I really want to get through here. And when you look at 42 spots being required, yeah, that that certainly looks like a big delta between 12 and 42, but uh there are the 11 parallel parking spots in front and then the seven additional in front of the station. And so um usable spots, I think there's a lot more. I think some comments were made that, you know, those 11 parallel spots are in the public right away, so they could go away someday, but I don't believe there are any plans right now to take those away, Todd.

Maybe we can ask him after to join in. I mean, it's up to you up to you, Todd, if you want to jump in. All right, Todd. Uh, that is correct. We do not have plans currently to have those removed and it would likely happen whenever we reconstructed or did any significant work on on the road. Okay. Thanks, Sam.

Yeah. And then um you know when when you look at the use of these properties I think I think the the mixed use uh combination of office, retail and coffee shop uh kind of reflects more of uh sort of a a downtown maybe a central business district or an east of fifth use. And so I I do want to respect the calculations for for requiring a certain amount of parking in general commercial space. But when you look at the practical use of these properties here, um I want to you and we did entertain or or we requested maybe reszoning this instead of from general commercial to the central business district that didn't that didn't go through or maybe even to zoning such as east of fifth. But um I think I think the the use of these properties is a little bit different than what you might expect at Turac Tower or or something like that. And so um my my closing point is I just would would like you to consider the the practical exception on this property because we really have have nothing else that we could do on here. there's there's no additional space for us to do anything. Even if we took the building off the dealership lot, I don't think we could get those 42 spots. And so, um, we're kind of at at your mercy now. And so, what's what's the alternative? I think that's something that the the planning group needs to discuss as well. I mean, if we can't use mixeduse property like this and and bring in additional buildings or additional businesses, it's going to have to be more parking lots here. So, do you want to see parking lots or do you want to see rejuvenated businesses and buildings along this this frontage road? And so, um yeah, I think that's my closing

statement. I did want uh either Brian or Lisa Simmonsma to come up and talk about how they plan to use their coffee shop as well. Okay. Uh, if you don't mind, maybe grab a speaker request form and walk it back to them. Oh, sure. I'm sorry. I don't have one from them. Um, we'll go to I should have put group on there. In the meantime, we'll go to Mr. Chair. Yeah. Um, Vicki,

I think number one, Sam's been great to work with, too. And we were in full support of reszoning this property to general commercial. It makes far more sense to have this to re uh be a commercial corridor than an industrial corridor in this very busy part of our city. West Maine is a an arterial street. If you've driven it, you know the volume of traffic that's on it. It is just a matter of time before the city does have to come forward and do some additional improvements. As Todd mentioned, we don't have anything in our CIP plan right now, but it's definitely one that is uh on the list knowing that as our city continues to grow, that traffic will continue to grow and we'll need to make additional expansions on West Main. Having said that, I think that um Tanner did an excellent job in the presentation sharing that there are other uses that could go in this property that would not trigger the parking if we stuck with the retail and office then that it does not the the parking that's there was legal non-conforming and light industrial. We do not lose it. It really is the coffee shop that puts it over the top. Thank you.

Do I can I speak in response to that? Uh, sure.

Yeah. Thanks. So, beautify the front of these properties, renovate them. That all costs money and it and and it's expensive to to rehabilitate these older buildings. You know, we we found Brian and Lisa because they had a business model that works in this property and and for us to to come in and renovate this and bring it back to life, they needed an economic business as well to work for them. And so, if it was just the flower shop or just the office space, that that doesn't quite pencil for them. So, I think having the mixed use there is is important um on that perspective as well. But, you know, the the other side is, you know, how many if how are you going to use the coffee shop? You know, you'll come down, have a coffee, maybe buy some flowers. Are you going to walk there? Anybody live on West Boulevard? When's the last time you walked through Halley Park? You know, this is this is a hub. This is an opportunity for you to more effectively use part of part of the city that's that's maybe underutilized as well. And so, um, I I think that's just another point.

Okay, we've got a few other lights up here. Um, Eric Hikus.

Well, thank you, Mr. Chair. This is interesting for sure. So Sam started to answer my question of you know since we are short on parking what nearby residential can we draw from you for this and what's walkable or what modal transportation do we have that would you know is there a bus stop there that sort of thing. Um, so those are the things that started firing in my brain was who can get to there, what peds can get to there and use the coffee shop. I do ride my bike through there or when I walk down to the creek, I I go uh across that crossing, but it's a little bit to the east of there. Um, I think there are some parallels to the urban commercial zoning that we see uh on the Fifth Street area. And I believe as a landscape architect that you could get a lot of landscape points through some maybe creative solutions there container plants or you know something other than the typical you know tree placed in the in the pavement. So I'm curious to hear um all that said I'm curious to hear about the release relationship with the railroad. Is is that a impossible or a is that a long shot or can can you allud on that one a little more for us?

Yeah. Yeah. We we contacted the railroad when we first got in here. Um when you I don't know if Let me see if down. Let me get that. I guess while you're while you're looking there um So go ahead. That's right.

Yeah, it this is a was really interesting property because a lot of these lots actually traversed to the other side of the railroad and when the railroad came through, they they cut them in half, took their eminent domain. Some of these some of these lots along here, I think, have small little slivers on the north side of the railroad even. And so it's kind of funny how that happened, but uh the gray area you see here would be outside of the the railroad standard 25 ft from the be from the middle of that rail line. And we we did ask them first the request was can we purchase that property from them? And they said there is no land sales going on and then the the other side of it is a land lease. something we get sent to a different department and then you have a you know a lease request that you have to send through. They said you can you can send in your lease request. It's you know 12 weeks for for a lease request and so I I am really interested in pursuing this because we want access to the property. this would open up a whole lot more space. But at the same time, you know, in the interest of time for Brian and Lisa, um, you know, we're we're trying to get this through. And and that's not guaranteed either. It's, you know, even to talk to their lease department. They can't give you an answer yes or no until you submit a non-refundable a non-refundable lease. you know, you got to throw in, you know, money for a lease request and then it's it's not even guaranteed theirs. But yeah, we we want to we want to pursue this ultimately. We want the businesses and the people that come to the business to enjoy their their visit. And so if there's a a problem with the parking, that's going to be a problem for us as well.

And I agree with Sorry, I do agree with the landscaping. Right. We we were originally going to keep this just for this property, the coffee shop, and and the so that's why that landscaping was there, those two shrubs, and then we expanded it to the the whole development lot agreement, which kind of skews that um the landscaping. I I could concede that we could definitely get a lot more points, if not even conform, to to the landscaping requirements on that. So, um, in in my mind, I think we have a plenty of space to get that. We were we're looking at doing things on the sidewalk as well, but that's public right away, and we can't count that either towards our landscaping points. I think 25% of our points from from the public rightway can can be counted towards our total, but we just don't have a whole lot of space outside of of where these buildings are. And so,

thank you, Sam. Yeah, good. These are good answers. Um, a central business district, you know, that would be appropriate for a non no parking, but we're not close enough to anything really, are we to consider this a central business district uh consideration? It's just too far away from those big hubs and apartment buildings and larger. So, we're kind of it's a unique situation. So, yeah. Um, some good stuff here. Thank you for answering my question. Thank you. Questions, Vicki?

Uh to that point, Eric, uh you are correct. Uh this is a significant distance from our central business district. And in the central business business district, we've got diagonal parking um set up for those customers uh and employees as needed. Uh, and in this situation, we're just a little tight. And unfortunately, uh, hoping that every one of these businesses is highly successful. And I believe Tanner identified that they need 42 spaces. Um, where do they park if they can't park on this lot? And then that can become a burden from for adjacent properties, too.

I've got a community development three kip. Thank you, Mr. Chair. To answer Commissioner Hikus' question of a transit stop, there is one located on the northwest corner of 11th in Maine. So, there is one basically on the property. So, that has a going for it. And also, uh, just for your information, there are approximately 16,000 vehicles per day pass by this location on West Main Street. Thanks, Kev Kelly. Thank you. Um, question for uh Vicki. So the the previous parallel parking on West Main that was in compliance that was that conformed prior uh when it was used as basically retail. Is that correct?

Mr. Chair, if I can defer to Todd. Okay, Todd.

I guess I can't speak as far as if it's compliant with zoning rules at the time. Um, but I can speak as far as compliance for public works. Um, public sidewalk in the rideway that does not meet any accessibility requirements. So, there is parking there, but um, currently it would be required to have an accessible space in front of there and there is no accessibility. So, that could be an issue if people um are using it and if there's any complaints um, from anyone who is has accessibility issues. I get that. Reason I ask is it's been used that way for years and years. We shop there with kids and park parallel park. So in the report it mentioned that you are proposing to tie all the lots together. Is that is that

Mr. Chair impact the whole parking scenario? So that's how we got to the 12 spaces because on this particular lot just for the flower shop and coffee shop um there aren't any parking spaces to speak of that do comply. Gotcha. And so in looking at it, um, uh, Tanner and Sam, I think they landed on the right solution, uh, enter into a developmental lot agreement so that those 12 spaces can be used in consideration for the whole complex.

Yeah, this is a tough one. I mean, you want to see repurposed buildings anytime you can, and it's such a cool location. So, let me ask you this, Sam. Let's say the the railroad lease goes through. um all the properties combined, where would you net out at total parking including the street parallel parking, those back lots and the ends? Like where what are we looking at like net total on the all four properties? Railroad, how many were back there? 14, but we'd be at 44. 44. Okay. Okay. Thanks.

This um I'm just hopping in with a question here. I apologize for jumping in front. Uh this picture on the screen right now and the earlier comment that part of these lots there's a portion north of the tracks. I see a whole bunch of cars parked in the what I would call the cornerstone lot along the railroad tracks, but there's a property line shown. Are these the cars on the south side of that actually parked in a lot associated with this on the north side of the tracks but south side of that lot often no place

I'm sorry to bring up something that I think that's another good point is you know how is the lot actually used as well. Um, I I only throw that out because if if that's owned parking that could be used for this development versus the cornerstone, it may be something to consider. It appears that the railroad probably owns the the spot where those cars are parked even though the cornerstone.

Is that right? Okay. I wasn't sure if there's a a property line in between, Mr. Chair, that one. Yeah. So throughout the railroad rightway, they have worked with property owners to allow parking leases. They're very restrictive. They can remove them immediately with little to no notice. Um I don't know. It could be that Cornerstone has secured something like that. Obviously the railroad is allowing the parking or they would probably put up a barrier of some sort and deny access to it. Um, for you to consider that there would need to be an an agreement in place.

Okay. Uh, Eric Hikus, back to you.

Thank you. Uh, thank you, Kip Harington. Um, long long-term planner. I appreciate the answer of the of the bus stop. Um, on that, thank you for allowing me to speak. So, let's continue with the modal discussion. Um there's a pretty big pedway across uh across that parkland and bikeway. Have we considered bike racks and and that sort of thing? Is there any implication on the bike user that wants to go to parking? I'm just I'm just exploring all considerations here. Can we put a bunch of bike racks and have this be a bike destination coffee place or you know that sort of thing. So,

I think the accessibility for a bike to get onto our own property would probably be a little bit easier than proving car parking spots. Do Do we get points for bike parking? No, I I agree. I love I love biking. Um Yeah. So, we could easily put bike racks down there. Okay. And then so Vicki makes I think she kind of brings this all thing to a head and that's it's the coffee shop that's triggering this. It's not the current use. Correct. It's this new use that we're considering and that's what we're that's why we're all here. Right. Because Right.

Yeah. Okay. I'm I have all the information I need. Thank you. So yeah, Karen.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. might as well throw my two cents in too. I I think this is exciting to see this area reconfigured into some things that can be good and I've been waiting to see what you are going to bring forward and and so I applaud you for the things that you're doing so far. I think for me as a consumer if I wanted to go to have coffee or you know and shop around at the flower shop I'd look and go where am I going to park? I I I would be concerned and I would be concerned for the people that have the coffee shop that it's not going to work because the public would go, "Uh, no. I I don't want to I don't want to go there." So, for me, it it's a tough situation, but if if you had the railroad right away and had that in place and had that extra parking, I' i'd think better of it. So, I just I worry about the fact that there's just not enough parking for that. And it's and it's hard for us as a body uh especially a zoning board of adjustment to say it doesn't meet all the qualifications, but in this case it's okay. It it's if it was a couple parking spaces, that'd be different. But if it's that many that are required, it's hard for us to to say we we'll we'll defer to what's we like and not what we should do as a as a the zoning board. So that's my comments. All right. Uh Brian Seammensma, if uh Brian, you'd like to come up and talk about the coffee shop plans, it' be great.

Well, thank you so much for your time, you guys. Um we've been at this project for uh since October. Um and uh really gracious of Sam and and um Cam as well to to be working with us in this project. Obviously, we're hearing all the points and we've been at this struggle for quite some time. Um, but what we're really trying to do is incorporate this community and we're trying to get um something new, something exciting um through part of this project. Um, of course, the our our model everything could be in a different location. With that being said, we we've heard all these points about the 16 I think you said 16,000 people are traveling by um there that's a significant number. We also know the uh those 11 parallel spaces obviously are in question here because of um you know possible additions all these types of things that we you know that that might happen. I think for us, we're trying to bring the community in. Um we're Lisa, my wife Lisa has owned a flower shop um previously in the Sierra Nevada is a successful one. Um we had a flower farm that we were operating on our property in WASA um for a couple of years successful having um a lot of people coming in and we we noticed a lot of our bases here in Rapid. Um, as far as coffee goes, my brother's was ranked as the third best coffee roaster in the world at one point and he is um, consistently giving us the different types of advice on on what to do as far as practicalitywise of this business. So, when it comes to the business, when it comes to the model, when it comes to the workspace rooms, all these things are coming together to know that we can we can really build a really successful and exciting business for this town and and for um the

visitors that are coming in. As far as this parking goes, we're more than willing to to work with the railroad. We just don't know if the railroad's willing to work with us at this point. Um, you know, we have the tourist season that's about to start and we're going to miss out on that likely unless we put up $4,000 to get a 7 to 14 day response from the railroad. If they deny that, now we're out another $4,000 and we put about $40,000 of our own money into this project. So, of course, that's not your fault. There's all these there's all these regulations and there's things that that are being accounted for. Um, with that said, um you know, with these 11 spaces and with um you know, we're trying to do whatever we can do, I guess, is is kind of my point. And, um lots of blood, sweat, and tears. And this is all part of it, right? You know, when you're starting a new business, um there's there are hoops to jump through, but what we would really appreciate the consideration for is um you know, maybe how we can if there's possibilities to work around this. Um I know Lisa and I have um been praying about it. We want this, our whole model is to um to be good neighbors and we're wanting to be able to incorporate this community um and really really um big and exciting ways with um a type of quality and experience through through these different avenues that I think are going to be a really big bonus for this um you know for this community. Our roster that we're going to be supplying coffee from is ranked in the top 50 in this in the country. Um, and so we're bringing a really quality product and we'd like to have it here for the purpose of not just the work we've already done and the work that's already been started in this building, but also um for that for that traffic that's coming through. So um I

think is there anything else that you'd add in that? Yeah. Okay. Well, we do really appreciate you guys taking the time and consideration um each one of you. We know you guys do a lot for this for this area and we're um really appreciative of that. Um, I can say that on behalf of all of us, but um, yeah, thank you for this time.

Thank you. I'm going to hop in with just my comments on this this despite the location because of those railroad tracks, because of I mean, those aren't going anywhere. We're since whatever the law in 1800s established those. Uh, we have to live with them as a community. Uh, I see this a little bit as a choice of almost making do with this very thin lot and use versus disrepair kind of a thing. I I think what we saw with this property over the years was it was attempted to be used but fell into disrepair. And so I I'm struggling with this like everybody else, but I I tend to go for taking a chance on getting it used again. Anything else from the commission? Haven,

thank you. Um there's a few moving parts here. I will want to uh commend Sam for the work he's done here at uh uh this could be a very big improvement to this property which I drive by most every day. It seems to me that the coffee shop could work over where the uh the the current uh uh car dealership is now and there would be plenty of room for parking and uh it seems like that would make it more successful for the coffee shop also. Uh, one question. There's a a few moving parts here, but for the parking, where are we with the setbacks and the landscaping points? Are they acceptable? If we would approve the uh parking issue, what about the other issues in this application?

Mr. Chair Vicki,

just to make sure that um all of you are uh understanding this clearly. So, as we mentioned before, Sam is going to enter into a developmental lot agreement. So, all the parking, including that in the car dealership, that's the 12 spaces that currently exist for all the uses. So, that's already being considered and and will be used in part by this coffee shop. Um Sam made some great comments about the landscaping and um he's indicated that he probably can make the points work. So do with that as you may. And then Tanner, if you would maybe just another point of clarification on the setback issues associated with the shed. Just the justification, Vicki,

just help people understand where the shed is and what that is. Yeah. So, that shed is located uh I'll pull that plan up that shows the shed. So, it's right there. Um it's a 25, we require 25 foot setback in that general commercial district. And that's shed was partially constructed with a 0.7T setback. So that's right by 1118 West Main Street is the address. So the setback issue doesn't uh apply to the other improvements on the property. I assume they've already been what? Grandfathered in with the current setback.

Yeah, those existing buildings have been grandfathered in. Yeah, Mr. Chair Vicki.

Um, this is a hard one and and I think Sam is doing an excellent job trying to revitalize this area and we want to see a reasonable use put back into this uh uh property. Um, just a point of consideration, the flower shop could take over that whole area and then that's retail and then a lot of these variances go away because retail is grandfathered in. All right. Uh, a lot of uh, thinking going on up here. I apologize about the silence. Karen

Vicki, I just want to uh, clarify what you're saying. So, you're saying if they didn't have the coffee shop, just did sold the flowers that they wouldn't they would meet a parking requirement, Mr. Chair, or close to it. Vicki.

So, uh, the retail and office use, those are legal non-conforming uses. So, as long as they maintain those on the property, it does not trigger that that uh, parking, uh, it doesn't put it over that 20% increase in occupancy. That takes away that conformity. Gotcha. Okay. To me, that would make sense. I mean, I I'm sure the coffee is the one, you know, it's part of the things that make you money and I mean, it's part of the business plan, but I'm trying to figure out a way that that they can still operate without us going you you just are too far from that parking requirement. At least that's for me. I'm speaking just for myself. So, it seems like there's an something that that could happen and maybe then down the road if they got the railroad right away and and came back and said, "Well, now we got more parking." That might make a difference to allow the coffee shop. But you look at that and you look at all those people that could sit in that coffee shop and go, "Where are they all going to park? I just can't see it." So, that's that's what I struggle with. So, I just wanted to clarify that. So, thanks, Vicki. Uh, Mr. Chair, and I know we don't like to design in the middle of a meeting, um, but I believe Tanner noted that the coffee shop has an occupancy of 64. Um if it is important to um these uh potential occupants that they be allowed to have a coffee shop and they be allowed to have the flower shop, maybe there's a consideration that the flower shop could be bigger and the coffee shop area could be a little smaller. Just trying to again we don't like to do this in the middle of a meeting. Maybe that's something they want to consider and come back with, but see if we can reduce that

number. May I speak very briefly? If you get up to the microphone, sure. And I get identify yourself for our records.

Yes. Sorry about that. Uh Brian Simmons, uh owner Flatlander Coffee and Flowers. We have already purchased, like I said, about $40,000 worth of coffee. Um espresso machines purchased. All of our products are purchased um ready to go. My wife has owned my wife and I I'm owner I was owner by that by marriage in that sense. We have done that before and we've we've seen that brick and mortar and it does enough to get by. It does not do enough to really bring um the economic boost that we know we need. The workspace rooms help with that obviously because we can do workshops, we can do things. When it comes to coffee, um it's a non-negotiable for us to be honest with you. Not trying to be difficult, but that is the model that we have seen that will work with our business model. Having the experience of already had a brickandmortar for for a flower shop in the past. Um there's already a Victoria's Gardens right down the road. There's already so many down the road. We're trying to bring something different to the community. And you know, in an ideal world, we haven't purchased any of our coffee sides of things. Um I of course I'm willing if we I'm not sure how much smaller we can make the the bar for the coffee stuff as it is. Um it's already pretty small. Um you know, to not have any food or not have anything like that kind of doesn't serve the purpose in my opinion. Um, but yeah, as far as that that goes, we already have that experience and we've already seen seen what that can do. We know we're going to make money in in flowers. We know we're going to make wedding from from, uh, weddings and funerals, all these different kinds of things that flowers do, you know, provide an income for. But, um, the

coffee side of things, I think, is going to draw people to do both. To have coffee, to get flowers, to come in the workspace rooms. It's the It's about the whole kind of picture of it. So, again, over the parking situation, at the end of the day, these this decision you guys are going to have to make, of course. But, um, yeah, it's it's as nice as that sounds, it takes away actually a massive part of the business. And again, we could wait, we could do this and go forward. If the railroad was a easy yes, sure, we do that. We do that today. But from everything that we've heard, the railroad is not willing to work very easily with um businesses. And so again, we like I mentioned, we put in three or $4,000 of our own money only to get denied. Now we're out300 or $4,000 plus a we're out another, you know, 30 30 plus thousand of our own money from um espresso machines and and all these kinds of things. So that's that's my um I know Lisa and I's point of view here is that um yeah, we don't want to just bank on a on a maybe, you know, with the with the um railroad. So

Okay. Yeah. Sam.

Yeah. Sam Papendic, um owner of the property. Uh for Karen's comments, I think, um parking, actual parking and getting into these properties is a thing. So, I don't know if you remember a year and a half ago when the antique mart was running there and they would be open on a weekend, there'd be a lot of people parking in those parallel spots, using that property in and out. Uh, the folks on the corner at the station, they had to cone off their parking lot because people would be using that as parking. I mean, there's seven spots. They're non-conforming because they sit over the top of the rideway, but they're technically grandfathered in and usable parking spots on the corner or the of 11th and Maine. Those with the developmental lot agreement get tied into this project. And so my argument is there is sufficient parking there. I'm I'm I'm guessing people will use the parking spaces that are in front of the building and on the corner. and if they have to, they'll pull into the car dealership lot and use the 12 down there. But I guess that's that's my comment on that.

Thank you, Kelly. Vicki, actually, that was going to be my question. She mentioned it about reducing the, you know, the headcount in the usable space if that would impact, you know, the parking. One element about this that I do like is there's no drive-thru. And you know, you look at the coffee shops around the area. I drive by Coyote Coyote Coffee on Sturgeis Road every day and without the drive-thru with actual people sitting inside. No offense to coffee shops, but I never see more than maybe eight or 10 cars max uh for sitdown service. So, I don't think that, you know, this would go beyond what the antique store did. Is the railroad deal a a dead deals application completely denied or you still is that still pending?

Pending. Okay. Is it I hate to say this. Is there a way to hinge this thing on that passing? If that passes, could we revisit this at a later date just to give a little safety net of extra parking in this uh property? And Mr. Chair Vicki, uh, it at that point would probably be they would either need to come back with a new variance at that time or you would need to suspend this one until that agreement is in place so the attorney's office can review it.

I mean, I I on best faith I I mean, we're going to be pursuing the parking because we want customers to enjoy their experience down there. So, we want to provide what's needed. It's just not a sure bet. So, yeah. I mean, I I wish I wish there was like a probation period or a re-review. Can we can we come back and prove in a year that we got the lease with the with the railroad? It just helps to have that additional parking in the back.

Yeah. And like Eric pointed out, people will still use that space. I I know we can't count it, but I mean people use it until the railroad blocks it off and comes in. Anyways, I appreciate it,

Jeff. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, Mr. Dr. Papendic, I'll I'll join the rest of the commissioners in applauding your efforts to uh to reach the two of the goals that you uh introduced when you when you first be began your presentation today. Code compliance and beautifification. Um the difficult thing is consistency when we are considering these variance requests and you hit the nail on the head in my estimation when you said the delta is too big. There are three primary factors. It's the parking. Yes. Uh huge delta there between what the ordinance reads and what you're offering today. This the second uh issue is the setback. Again, that's m huge delta between what the ordinance reads and and what you're offering us today. Um and and and so I I'm finding it difficult. I I I would just encourage you to maybe go back and we've taken what 50 minutes now trying to explore options and ask questions and see how this can be resolved or or made a little bit better in the application. But again, in the interest of consistency and not setting up for other people to bring similar variance requests and say but you made this exception for for this particular in I I'm just uncomfortable with it. And and so I would encourage you to go back and and explore other options. um and and and come back and and when we have a little bit more clear direction, for example, the lease opportunity with the with the railroad. So, Mr. Chair, if I might, I I am going to make a motion to uh uphold the uh staff recommendation in light of the uh the three broad areas that are non-compliant uh with this request and make a motion to deny the application.

Okay. Uh Jeff made the motion to deny the variance. Is there a second to that for? Okay. Karen seconded that motion. We've got a few lights still up. Um so Vince comments on the motion to deny. Um thank you Mr. Chair. And I just want to verify how many employees are is is expected to work at this location. Do we know, Mr. Pependic? That's probably more of a question. Are you talking I'm sorry. I missed the question specifically. Yeah, the coffee shops, flower shop.

Maybe uh Brian, if you would be willing to answer that. employees. So, for for the opening, um it's going to be my wife and I and then we're going to have um our sister-in-law is going to be doing the baking and then we'll have two um other part-time employees um to start. Um obviously, it's going to grow. Um we expect um to add a couple more um but not a crazy amount more um to begin with here. So, just to put numbers to that, five to seven, something like that.

Mr. Chair, I I think to Vince's point, the the real question is how many employees are on this whole complex because we've got 12 spaces for all the uses is I I don't mean to put words. No, that's my question, Vicki. Okay.

To the to the Yep. Sorry, Sam. Papendick. To the to the west of this property is is my office. Um uh the alter ego fashion and then the dealership. There would be four employees there between those those three businesses. And then to the east of this on at the station, this this is it's not locked in yet, but um Canfields are looking at that property and they have a uh they do high-end modular office um design work. And so they I can't speak to them, but I imagine they'll have maybe two or three employees in in that building while they're operating. So

Okay. So, if we're looking at more than a dozen employees that would normally need parking and obviously um you haven't secured the the any rights with the railroad for additional parking, but if all of those parking if all of those employees were to park off off location, that would free up four 12 spaces or more. Am I right? Right. Okay. Thank you. So, um, this is a question, yeah, on on how this moves forward.

Can I request a continuation and then be on next month's planning committee to be heard or if this gets denied, do I have to start this all over again? Vicki, Mr. Chair, if it's denied and you want to appeal, then you would appeal to a circuit court. Uh, if you want to revise your variance request, then you can submit a new one. Time is of the essence. So which approach is quickest? That's your choice. So they would be on You mean the continuation or resubmit? Yes, they can continue. Um did they sign the Did you sign your time waiver? Uh Tanner, did he sign his time waiver?

No, we'll get to sign. Okay, that would that's unfortunate. um that needs to be signed immediately uh because failure to sign that it automatically approves the variance. So um I'm very concerned that we don't have that signed coming into this meeting today. Um, but if you should continue it for two weeks and Kinsley, I believe, um, we could do just two weeks or do we need to have to republish and, uh, need a full month. Kinsley,

just two weeks would be fine, but and as for the waiver, it could be given at the meeting, I think, you know, if he signs it right afterwards. But the promise at the meeting. Okay. So, it sounds like the best option is to continue it for two weeks. I I'm sorry. That would be your better option, Sam, is if you think that there's some tweaking to this that you could do to try to gain more support. Just the comments that we've heard today, um, ask that it be continued for two weeks. Uh, and then immediately after this meeting, you and Tanner will go and get that time waiver signed.

Did you say this variance gets approved if I don't sign it? Well, that's the point is I don't know if we can continue it without that time waiver being signed. Um, I've got to run.

I'm joking. I believe Sam will sign the time waiver. So May 7th would be your next zoning board of adjustment meeting. All right. Well, the motion on the floor is to deny as of yet Eric Kikus comments. I can make a substitute motion. Sorry. All right, Vince. I'd like to make a substitute motion to uh to move this or continue this to two weeks from now at our next meeting. Okay, Vince made the substitute motion as he stated to continue till May 7th with the understanding Mr. Papadic will sign the document before we leave today. Fair. Is there a second to that motion? Second.

All right, Eric Hikis seconded the motion. Back to you, Eric. Oh, I'm sorry. Before we move, Kinsley, do you have comments? Yeah, my request is just that Mr. Papick state that on the record that he's willing to sign it. We'll stick around and sign that right after this meeting. Yeah. Thank you, Sam. And thank you for your time and thanks for everybody in the audience their patience. I'm just getting back to you guys for the Chick-fil-A comment last time. I think that one took an hour and a half. My goodness. Excuse my excuse my laughter. Eric.

Okay. So, um thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I like the continuence I think is the right answer. Um, I don't want to get into the weeds on this one a little, but I'm going to a little. So, um, is there shared parking to the east? How far away can we look at a shared parking agreement on that gravel lot over there uh to east of Copy Country? Uh, Mr. Chair, Vicki, so that is something that that Sam will need to be looking into and similar to a variance that you had last meeting. Yeah, they did park their employees offsite, but they secured a shared parking agreement to do that. What's the maximum distance for a shared They could ask for it's 300 ft.

Okay. By pedestrian measurement from the front door using sidewalk paths, but again, they could ask for a variance to extend that distance for the employees. Are you is this is this you getting this, Sam? Okay. Um, and then what we talked about with the landscaping, does this give you enough time to revise your plans to do container gardens and things that kind of align? It's two weeks enough time. Okay, cool. All right, then. Then I'm done talking. I I'm ready to vote. Thanks.

Okay. Motion on the floor is to continue to May 7th. Any further discussion from the commission, comments, questions? All right. All those in favor of continuence, please say I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. That takes us to the end of the zoning board of adjustment meeting. I'd look for a motion to adjurnn it. Motion to adjourn. All right. Vince made the motion. Uh Pat seconded that motion. All those in favor of adjournment of zoning board adjustment, please say I. I. I. Any opposed?

Motion carries. We will now start the Rapid City Planning Commission meeting for April 23rd, 2026 at 7:59 in the morning. If any member of the audience wishes to speak to an item on the planning commission agenda, there are speaker request forms located over on the left side of the room, please fill out the request with the agenda number of the item you wish to speak to and hand it to the staff seated on that side of the room. Items one and two have been placed on the consent calendar today and may be approved as a group. Action will be taken on all consent items in accordance with staff's recommendation by a single vote. Any item may be removed from the consent calendar by any planning commissioner, staff member, or audience member for separate consideration at this time. The findings of this planning commission are recommendations to the city council. The city council will make the final decision. Any items one or two that staff would like removed today from consent calendar?

No, thank you. Any items one or two that any planning commissioner would like removed for separate consideration? And any items one or two that any audience member would like removed for separate consideration? Chair would then entertain a motion to approve items one and two in accordance with the staff's recommendation. Motion to approve items one and two with Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Karen. Yeah, Karen made the motion to approve items one and two. Uh, I'm going to give Vince second. Yeah. All right. Vince seconded it.

Any discussion on the motion to approve one and two? All those in favor, please say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number three.

Bear with me. Good morning. Backwards. All right. Good morning, commission. Um, this is a project that's been continued a couple of meetings. Uh, Cassie has been working on it. She unfortunately could not be here today, so I'm going to bear with me while I present it. If you recall, we are on Campbell in Minnesota. This property currently just has an off- premises billboard on it. There was a PD placed on it because of that. Um, recently it used to be zoned general commercial. This is an older map. It's been reszoned to light industrial which is consistent with the future land use as well. Again, we're on Campbell in East Minnesota. This is showing kind of the drainage properties of the site. So you can see there are constraints on either um the north and the east portions. If you recall um from our March 23rd meeting, it was continued again at April 9th to get the applicant more time to reorient and provide alternative site plan modifications. So Cassie's been working diligently with them to come up with something that I think both planning and the applicant are okay with moving forward. So, I'll explain those changes to you here. It's still a outdoor storage yard with covered canopies. There's one canopy, I believe, here that does not meet the 25 ft set back to the rear. And so, they're asking for an exception to 16 ft. Since there is drainage, major drainage ement in this area, there's not going to be other development that comes near that proposed canopy. So staff is supportive of granting that exception

through this plan development. The other pieces you'll notice they didn't have um full plans for what this building was going to be and it was placed back here and the canopies were on this side. Since then they have provided some elevations I'll show you as well as some plans for what that building would be look like and be used for. and they've moved it this direction so that we can so that they can pave that entrance. So the purplish area here would be asphalt pavement. There's some concrete pavement here and then there is a sidewalk on the front edge of the building. And so we would get that paving on the entrance. So the coming in and out of the property would be paved as well as the parking associated with that building. The the kind of these are garage bays that would be drive up. the third oops and that I'll just show you now. That's the what the building generally would look like. Um there would be some office space as well as service bays for to serve some of the other anytime storage and dealership functions on separate properties to the south and east there. The third one that we were looking at was the landscaping. Originally they had landscaping in this area. There are constraints related to overhead power lines. Um, and there's a lot of rightaway frontage on this property. So, the light industrial district actually allows for an alternative way to landscape where you can put 100% uh non-errigated buffer along all rightway. And so, they're have changed to that standard as part of the request, but are asking to only do about 25% of the frontage and they've focused it on the areas where there is, you know, the most traffic development and things like that. So again, staff is supportive of that. There is limitations to where they can place landscaping on the site. They don't want to necessarily put it in drainage areas or near that overhead power lines.

They also were requesting that exception to paving the storage area itself where there would be things like RVs, you know, vehicles, boats, that type of storage. due to the lower volume, they've actually switched from gravel to asphalt millings. And so that was a compromise and staff recognizes that that is a preferred um way to you know rather than gravel between that and paving asphalt millings as long as there um is dust measures. So we do have a stipulation about dust paliotative and again staff is recommending approval on that as well. So, I'll just show for context um the canopies what they look like. So, that would be one where we would grant a setback reduction for if approved. This is just showing the this is the existing sign and a proposed signage. We do have a stipulation in the approvals that it cannot be an electronic message board. This is the site looking norththeast. So that's where the storage area primarily will be. And then over here is where that building would be located in the entrance with the paved. This is the other businesses nearby on the other side of East Minnesota. This is looking up Campbell to the north. Again, it's it's an industrial area. So that's why we've come to compromises on the paving versus asphalt millings as well as some of the setbacks. and um the landscaping as well. So, they were have been really great to work with and willing to try to make this work and get kind of compromises on both sides. Cassie left a note that she wanted me to share in regards to that. So, she noted the applicant has been very receptive and worked diligently with her to reach the current project design, which is a

practical and mutually beneficial compromise. She appreciates the discussion and diligence that has gone into this project and the way both the applicant and the consultant have continued to be kind, courteous and responsive in their communication to her. So I just wanted to do her right by sharing that and the the um applicants consultant is in the audience if you have any questions for them and I will stand for any questions. Again approval with the stipulations noted in the project report is the recommendation. Thank you. Thank you chair

Vicki. So, this is an example of um a work session at uh your last meeting that paid off and kudos to Cassie. Um she worked with the property owner to move that mixeduse building to the front of the lot and then u secure that pavement area so that it does have that same professional look walking onto the property. Uh and then I think all of you had indicated at the last meeting that you would support the asphalt millings. Um we did add a stipulation regarding air quality uh uh parking and storage permit that will need to be secured if this is approved and it will have to be renewed every three years. So I think it's just it was a working session that landed well and I think this is a much better design um for the applicant as well. Vicki, can you explain that permit, the the three-year renewal permit for air quality? Uh that that's a new one on me. I may have just missed it on previous applications.

So, uh I I think it's one that we probably haven't we've just inferred that it needed an air quality permit, but we do have a multitude of air quality permits that are required, and there is one that is referred to as parking and storage. Uh so and it's again on a three-year basis. Uh regardless on a daily basis if there is an air quality issue then we have the means to address that with the property owner as well if if the asphalt millings do start breaking down. Gota thank you Eric Hikis.

Thank you Mr. Chair. I don't have my readers. I'm sorry. The um the entire site would be asphalt millings. Is that correct? There's not a portion. It's just all the gray area shown here is asphalt millings. The purplish pink area is asphalt pavement. Okay. And then this y the yellowy is concrete pavement. That's very helpful. Thank you. Um that answers my question. I'm going to move approval uh with stipulations as noted. Um thank you. All right. Eric Hikis made the motion to approve with the stipulations. Was that Jeff that seconded?

Um, comments on the motion. Haven to clarify. Thank you. Uh, to clarify on the air quality permit and the three years, how is that then continued? Do does that come before us or can the staff continue that? Vicki, uh, those are administratively issued, monitored, and policed.

And at this point, uh, if I'm not mistaken, East Minnesota or Minnesota Street to the east doesn't go very far east of this property. Just to clarify, uh, presumably that will go through to the east at some point. Uh, that should not have any effect. uh when that when that does get completed that should not have any effect on this property, Mr. Chair. Vicki,

so yes, um you'll see Fairmont and Minnesota both extending to the east. Um one of the biggest deficits is we have to get over the rail. So we don't anticipate that happening in the near future or potentially far future. Uh but because this is uh an industrial area, we believe that this design would be appropriate adjacent to an arterial street, similar to other industrial uses that are currently already adjacent to Cample Street.

Kelly, yeah, Cassie, wherever you are, kudos and the applicant. I think this is a much more palatable layout and it just works so much better. So, good job everybody and uh good to see All right. I um is this uh used mainly as storage, intended to be used mainly as storage or show space, Vicki or

Mr. Chair, I the applicant has indicated that this will be storage. It will be where you drop your camper and boat. Um uh when you're not using it on on uh so usually it'll have long-term storage over the colder months and then shorter term storage over the summer months.

Okay. I I maintain just personally some reservation about using millings on the whole site, especially along Campbell Street, knowing that it is a low, low traffic lot. I mean, not um we knowing that there won't be people circling the lot looking at cars or or other things to purchase. Knowing that it's not a daily in-n-out for RV users or boat storage users. I that gives me some um comfort and also I mean again we always talk about setting precedents. I I think that this is a a precedent that I'm willing to set. Mr. Chair

Vicki, thank you for making that comment. Consistency does matter and we do get held our feet are held to the fire when we uh fall out of that fashion. So, thank you for making that statement. Um, we as staff try to be as consistent as we can and many times you'll hear us remind you of similar actions you've taken in hopes of maintaining that consistency. I for one need the reminders. Uh, so the motion on the floor is to approve with the stipulations. Any further comments on the motion?

All those in favor, please say I.

I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Item number four. Good morning. Item number four is a request to consider an ordinance amendment to allow vacation home use within accessory dwelling units. So, bit of background here. In 2019, accessory dwelling units were established as a legal use within residential areas. Primary benefits of accessory dwelling units are that they're an opportunity to encourage additional um housing units and that serve, you know, a smaller footprint, different um life stages. And they also offer an opportunity for homeowners to bring in a little bit of extra income which can you know improve housing affordability for property owners. Um the since at that time in 2019 we did not have vacation home rental regulations in place. So there were some concerns with potential impacts to neighborhood character with accessory dwelling units and given the fact that we did not have vacation home regulations in place at that time. Uh that ordinance was passed with the restriction that accessory dwelling units could not be used as vacation homes. So since then, as you all I'm sure, remember, we recently passed vacation home rental regulations for the entire community. And as operators, vacation home operators have been working over the last several months to come into compliance with those new regulations, there have been several

comments, inquiries, and requests to revisit the uh current prohibition of the use of vacation homes within accessory dwelling units. So, a couple of key questions and considerations that we had as staff as we were looking at this were um what is the current number of accessory dwelling units that have been registered with the city? So, total number today since 2019 is 19 accessory dwelling units that have been registered with the city. Uh, conversely, uh, our current number, we've got our, um, registration program, we're in the works of getting that stood up. Um, but we do have access to the backend data in term of in terms of current listings of vacation home units. So, for current vacation home units, individually listed, we have 692 active listings. So 85 to 90% of those are those single family homes where the entire home is being rented for the specific use of vacation homes. So um in looking at the total number of accessory dwelling units that have been uh approved since the passing of this ordinance and looking at the total volume of vacation homes that we currently have. Um, our main questions as staff were, what are potential negative impacts to adjacent property owners to with allowing vacation homes in accessory dwelling units? How can we provide people flexibility that they need with those spaces? Um, so where we landed and what's being proposed within this ordinance before you all today, registration. So all existing, new and accessory dwelling units must meet all maximum zoning criteria and be

registered with the city. That current requirement stands. Um, additionally, if they do choose to utilize the accessory dwelling unit as a vacation home, you're stacking that whole other layer of vacation home rental regulations on top of that. There is a slight difference between parking regulations for accessory dwelling units and vacation homes. But with zoning, when we look at these things, we always go with the more restrictive uh requirement. So, let's say you have a vacation home in an accessory dwelling unit. You have to meet all the area requirements to be able to construct that in the first place. And you have to provide the two parking spaces as you do with all other vacation homes. Um, and then owner occupied status, that is a current requirement within the accessory dwelling unit ordinance. So, in order to construct an accessory dwelling unit, the owner of the property does have to live on site. So, that would not change. And I think when you're looking at, you know, potential impacts to neighborhood character of the use of an accessory dwelling unit, the use of a vacation home, this would be so much more heavily restricted than these whole home rentals that we're seeing because you've got the owner on site um to, you know, be there if there's issues that come up. You know, be able to mitigate any potential nuisance, noise issues as they arise. and then enforcement. Uh all vacation homes in the ordinance that was passed at the end of last year uh that are not in compliance with the vacation home rental regulations are identified as nuisances and can be abated. So ultimately when we considered the total number of existing accessory dwelling units in comparison to those active vacation homes again 85 to 90% of those

being in standalone single family units today. Um we chose to support and are recommending approval of this ordinance today given the added level of oversight that comes with um the vacation home use within the accessory dwelling unit. But happy to answer any questions. All right. Thank you,

Mr. Chair. So, uh, while it is concerning that we're opening up additional opportunities for vacation homes, knowing that we have 692 already, which in visiting with the Secretary of Department of Health, she has shared that Rapid City has more vacation homes than the rest of the state put together. But what I like about the accessory dwelling unit, it has supervision. the owner of the property will be on site if they choose to rent an ADU as a short-term rental. And so that in and of itself to me should be where we are promoting vacation homes. Uh and and maybe that will it it really is a market-based industry. If someone has vacancies, they do convert to monthly rentals very quickly. So this this might actually help the situation.

Thanks Vicki Pat Rosland.

Thank you. Um being involved in earlier talks about the ADUs. I was definitely initially against them, but at this point I after all said and done, I am I can I can understand why they're there and I can support what was done in the past. um with also being a member of the short-term uh rental advisory commission that we spent months and months on to uh get this passed which is basically a bare minimum of what we wanted I think and uh and I and again I accepted what what we ended up with and uh and I think it's it is going to work fine. My question is, of the 692 um short-term rentals that we have in town, how many are licensed?

So, we are um as I said, the kind of the um impetus of this coming forward today is that um we have been working with operators for the last several months on uh getting registered. Some of them are choosing to wait until we have that online platform up and running. Um, additionally, when we were uh, you know, working through the draft regulations for vacation homes, only 30 of the units, 30 of the, you know, up to 692 and plus units that we knew existed were registered with the state. So that state licensing is, I would say, something that the majority of operators did not have in place and that's what they're working through. And having um gotten to assist with some of the um review of those and working with the state, you know, some operators are choosing the the biggest um barrier in terms of obtaining that license is making sure that your egress windows are large enough. Um sometimes that can be a simple fix. moving towards a casement window as opposed to a slider. But some people don't want to make that investment. So what we are seeing as we've worked through this is some people are choosing not to register their vacation homes, not to continue that use. Um but we have had uh I don't know the exact number. We've got the paper application available today for folks that do want to register before that online platform is stood up. um but I would say 20ish and then there's several people who have their applications in with the state and um as soon as we have that online software up and running we will be notifying property owners that platform is up and running. It's time to get your application submitted and get registered. So

yeah, thank you for that. Also, do you expect probably with the tourist season there'll be increase in short-term rentals at that time? Mr. Chair, so we anticipate there potentially could be but again we do have the software we can track that now.

Okay. Thank you. And also initially when we approved the ADUs they were basically um hopefully development of additional afford affordable and workforce homes that were not available prior to and I see we have a very much of a decrease and very little workforce homes available to our citizens at this point and I just see uh a decrease in the ADUs, which is not many. I think it's a 19 we have, correct?

Is is not going to help that problem at all. So, more or less I'm probably going to end up uh voting no on this. Thank you,

Eric Hikas. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Commissioner Rosland makes some interesting points. Um, it's kind of surprising the number of ADUs that have not registered. And maybe that's because it's such a small amount. Maybe that's why there's not a bunch of opposition from the hotel industry here. Um, I'm speculating, but my question I first let me make a statement. I have a house that has a ADU type, but I haven't registered it yet. This this could be interesting for me. So, selfishly, I think this is kind of exciting, but I have a son in there who's not moved out, and I don't think he ever will at this rate, but it's kind of that's another story alto together. So um question is is there a minimum stay? Is there a maximum is there like is it a week or three days or is there anything in the ordinance on that that uh limits the the the short term or the long-term stay of these

vacation rentals? The short answer is one is monthly, one is nightly or weekly. Okay. So ADU is monthly and then vacation is nightly. Okay. Nightly, weekly. That's a good answer. Thank you. All right. Any other questions, comments on this item? Perhaps a motion. We already had one. I make a motion to approve. All right. Vince made the motion to approve. And I heard a second. Second. Okay. Eric seconded that motion. Any discussion on the motion to approve? All those in favor, please say I.

I. Any opposed? No. All right. Uh, the motion carries with Pat Rosalyn voting no. That's our last agenda item uh of the regular variety. Anything for discussion from staff? Uh, not today. Thank you. Anything from the commission? Uh, a couple of public service announcements. I know there's football night in America is always big, but uh we're past football season. However, our two local high schools are putting on uh live entertainment. So, don't miss out on the Hunchback of Notre Dame at uh Stevens High School and to Kill Mockingberg at Central High School.

All right. Thanks, Ben. Eric Hikus. Thank you, Mr. Chair. It was really cute to see um you bringing your your uh partner or or protege this morning, Vicki. That was adorable. I hope that I hope that was rewarding for her, too. So, to see uh you in action, right? Our department is a family first department, and when the director sometimes walks in with her granddaughter, um it lets everyone else know that our families come first. Okay. All right. Anything else from the commission to

Okay. Karen made the motion to adjurnn. Vince seconded that motion. All those in favor, please say I. I.