There you go. Okay, we will call this meeting of the Grand Murray Planning Commission to order. It is 5:31. Uh with us today, we have David Kelly and we have Ben and Kelly Swen and
myself, Mike. Um and we have an agenda before us and I take a motion to approve. >> Motion to approve the agenda. >> Thank you, Ben. Motion. Is there a second? >> We do not have minutes here to approve. So, do we need to amend the agenda?
>> Well, I see that. Uh yeah. Uh yes, let's uh let's do that agenda. You bringing that forward? >> I will. >> Uh just that we remove the approved minutes and they can be at next month's
meeting. >> Okay, sounds good. Okay. And then we'll need a motion for that. Would you like to make that part? Would you like to make that motion? >> Sure. >> Great. >> So, we've got a motion, a second. All those in favor? >> I.
>> Great. >> So, today we are going all the way down to D to our uh new business. We have a zoning request. You all have read it through. Um I
would ask that Howard, you can come forward. or you're heavy. I mean, you know, however you want to do it, but I think it makes sense. >> And uh turn on your microphone.
>> Turn on my microphone. >> Yeah. Press the button. >> Just tap it. >> There you go. Thank you. And introduce yourself. >> Okay. Hey, I'm Tim [snorts] Kennedy and I'm here uh assisting with uh the request for the resoning uh from the
Great Expectations Foundation. Um this is my understanding, you know, prior to the actual public hearing on this. It's more to bring to the attention of the planning commission kind of the dilemma of the situation. You know, the great expectations
foundation expanded the school last year. um created additional classroom space which is uh actually not needed right now and they wish to you know offer it available to uh compatible uh
type uh uses office uses uh that might benefit from that kind of space. Uh unfortunately the properties in the R1 zone district and office uses are not allowed uh as a permitted or conditional
use in that district. Uh but the surrounding properties around that uh area are in the mixed use district which does allow um offices but doesn't allow
schools. So kind of a strange situation that one of the districts that that the school is in allows the school but it doesn't allow the offices but the mixed use district doesn't allow the uh schools but it does allow the offices. So we're looking for for you know kind
of a feeling on from the planning commission on two different things. One is the potential to reszone the property to mixed use districts and to change then the allowable uses in the mixed district use use district to allow
schools uh and I think you'll see the the language um schools including daycare facilities and I I think the uh the language in the R1 district is uh schools and uh nurseries Now, you know,
I was hoping to help maybe clarify what what nurseries might be because there's no definition for nurseries and there's no definition for schools either in the in the ordinance, but uh >> well, there is I mean I mean we have definitions for schools. don't think there was a definition for
schools in at least the the the ordinance that I looked at but maybe >> I mean it points you well when you look for the definition of schools I mean it doesn't really have all that much but it does point you to the state's >> description that
>> it's essentially a school >> what does R1 say um public elementary or high schools or private schools with an equivalent curriculum. I don't think we need a definition beyond those words to understand. >> Yeah. >> No, no, for sure. >> Right.
>> And clearly great expectations meets those requirements. >> 12. >> And then the next line says churches, parish elms, convents, children's nurseries, and schools. And again, it we
could add a a definition for children's nurseries, but I think because it says children's nurseries, it's plain language and understood to mean a daycare. >> Yeah. And I would just suggest that the language that you use in the mixeduse
district just says schools and and daycare facilities, but uh you know, you can choose how how you want to uh characterize that uh language. Yeah. All right. So, so that's uh why why we're here tonight is to just uh ask for the
support of the planning commission to move this forward to bring it to a public hearing and you know involve you know the public in that process. Now, they've already offered their application for reszoning of the
property, which is to amend the map to say this piece that is now zoned residential, would they would like it to be zoned HMU Highway mixed use. Of course, that doesn't make any sense to actually do the resoning unless we change the list of what's allowed in
high mix use to include schools. Otherwise, we'd be creating a nonconformity and it just doesn't make any sense. Which is why we're doing this in two meetings rather than one. Because >> if we're tonight having a public hearing about the map amendment, but we hadn't
even considered whether we were interested in the language change than carbon for the horse. So, this isn't a question of you having to make a decision about either of them in a permanent way tonight, but it's a question of if the language change seems
like something you're willing to consider, we'll write the ordinance and then at your next meeting, we'll have a public hearing. We'll talk about the map amendment and then both of them can go to the council together right after that. An ordinance that changes the language in the code and also that
amends the map. The question I would have is how does reszoning this particular property affect adjoining properties? Right. As far as setbacks, as far as uses, right? >> We had that issue before. I remember on
the opposite side of the street. >> Yeah. And it's interesting the opposite side of the street um there the um growth property that they developed residentially. We changed that zoning from highway
mixuse to residential to allow for the the residential development that they're doing. And so there's a little uh extension of the residential zoning on the east side of of the Gunfund trail, >> right? >> It probably makes sense to contact them
and consider including them in the map amendment. That was before highway mixed use >> because highway mixed use now allows residential multifamily residential uses which is what they did and so the issue that was on that side was if you have a residential zone it creates a 50-foot
set back from commercial properties >> and that would have affected >> so the changing from residential back to commercial actually makes it easier for people to develop their property rather than adding that 50 foot buffer it would take it away from the the joining
properties, but it would create on their property a 50-ft setback from the neighbors residential property, which isn't a problem because their neighbors residential properties all across a 66 ft public rideway. So, it wouldn't create any new issues
and it would actually make it easier for adjoining properties to develop by switching this to the commercial. Okay? just put an additional burden on them that they will have no problem. >> Say that again. So, I'm thinking the
property to the west on Fifth Avenue West. >> Yep. So, the property to the west is is residentially zoned. >> Yep. >> Is currently being used as a single family residence. have >> they don't have any um setbacks from the neighboring
property that depend on what's going on there cuz the residential zone just says you need to be 25 ft from the front and back and 8 ft from the sides. >> Okay. >> The residential property right now that the school's on, so they're under those
same requirements. If they become a commercially zoned property, then commercial uses on their property will have a 50-foot setback from the neighbors. So, they won't be able to develop anything as close as 50 ft to the neighbor's existing residential
property, but there's a 66- ft rightway in between those two properties. And so, there isn't any issue at all because the 50oot setback is completely taken up by the street right away. And and that street rightway also exists
on the south side of the property between Lashinsky property and the Great Expectations property too. So there's no road or >> but they're already zoned commercial. >> So when Great Expectations went in, they had to have gotten some sort of amendment here then to put into
residential the school. They they were part of a zone that was res R2 residential >> and so they actually had larger setbacks than typical residential property. >> That zone since been dis dispensed with and changed all of it over to R1 zoning. >> Okay.
>> Even if they had been developed um in the commercial zone when they were new, the school itself wouldn't have triggered the requirement of the 50oot setback because it's only for commercial uses. We wouldn't consider a public school a commercial use.
We would consider what they're proposing now a commercial use, >> right? >> And that's probably more like 200 ft from the neighbor's property, so not an issue. Well, I um would be interested in going
back to the language and looking at what what we would mean by moving um schools into the mixed use. How do we mix? Um I I think when I'm looking at this
that it doesn't make sense for to for schools to live there. If if we look at our intention for that district. You know, it's all about cars and it's all about, you know, industrial
uses and what's all about, you know, lodging and that kind of thing. But it doesn't talk. Nothing in here speaks to children at all or families. But if you look at
the R1 very clearly it does and there's a lot you know clearly the R1 is the intended place for schools. So I feel like very strongly
that that is where the schools belong and they do not belong in an excuse. There's nothing when you read through these I mean automobile dealers, service stations, restaurants, truck and machinery sales. I mean all that none of
that speaks to me and says like oh schools. I think so many of these things when you at least when I read them, I feel like they get written long after things have happened, right? Things are already in a spot and then we kind of
go, "Oh, here's the box that they fit in." And I think our job is to figure out as things develop, what boxes do we want to put things in and where do they make sense? We already have a school and a building
in a place. We can't go say, "Well, now great expectations. You're going to have to go and pick this up and you're going to have to move it over here." >> And they don't have to. >> No, I get that. >> We're in our That's where we should be. >> So, is there if not if not HMU, and I'm not saying I disagree. I'm trying to
trying to figure all this out, right? If if not the HMU, is there another one >> that it fits with >> that we that we look at? And again, I'm not willing to say tonight, here's what I think. And this is the motion cuz if
we put it before openings for people to come in and talk to us, I want to hear what the public has to say, too, cuz there's people out there that know more and are smarter than me. >> Um, >> I don't know any of it. >> I'll give you a list. >> Okay. Um,
but if it doesn't fit in this and we don't like it as a planning commission in this necessarily, is there another spot that it might fit in better or where do we as the planning commission
want to put things and can we think ahead what other development what things are going to happen? Well, you know, could we hospital, clinic, nursing home? I mean, we're always in looking at do we keep the
nursing home? Do we cut it? Then what do we do with that part of the building if it goes away? Or are we going to expand? Are we going to shrink? What happens? Same thing. Schools start to grow. We have these great ideas, but all this happens and think,
how do we plan for the future? >> Right? That's where I'm coming from is if it's if it's not here and maybe it is here, but if it isn't, is there anything else? Because I was looking at the map myself going, "All right, what are these SC? Okay, well that's community service.
Well, how come?" Well, there wasn't property to buy, so great expectations [cough] to go there, but [clears throat] it certainly would fit there, but we can't just pick it up tomorrow and move it. So, does that corner need to be designated that? because this is what we have now.
Would it fit in in a community service versus an HMU? I don't know. >> I like the way you're thinking about it. Um the complication is that zoning map has to be somewhat contiguous logically. You can't pick one
parcel and say this is what we want this parcel to be zoned, but it's not related to anything that's next to it. And so where you'd think, yes, the school fits really nice into the SC zone, this property is not adjacent to the SC zone,
there's other uses in between the SC zone. If we were to just reszone this property SC, I don't think it would be proper or legal. >> So everything around it is a CI. Why would we want to go with commercial industrial?
>> Yeah, that's the old name for HMU is CI. So that's the that's the way you look at it. There's really three choices that make sense on the map without making really significant changes to the map. R1,
which currently is, and many of the neighboring properties are also R1 and were developed residentially. Highway mixed use, which they have neighboring properties that are and would be appropriate to think about on the Gunsland Trail. That's like highway
mixeduse type zone, or BDA, which is the property across the street, although that link seems a little more tenuous to me, and that doesn't actually help any of the issues that they brought in front of you anyway. So then it's more of a question of R1 or mixed use.
And before we even talk about the map, we have to deal with the question of is one of those zones appropriate for both schools and office spaces. >> Well, >> because that's really what they want to do is have schools and office spaces in
the same place. And we don't have any zones where that's possible right now. and those are the only two that we can really feasibly look at for their piece of property without making significant changes. So maybe we don't like that idea at all. Or maybe we would be open to it, but it doesn't fit with these
two. Or maybe one of these two it does fit with. >> Well, it's in the R1. >> Yeah. And as I said, as I believe that is that is proper and correct and that is where it should be. I think if we're talking about looking at the future, we
know we need housing. Is there a housing use that's possible? I don't know. I don't know the layout. I haven't been there. I don't know what's possible. Um but I would not like to see
R1 reduced in the city at all. And and you know, we don't know that gas is going to be here. You know, it's like you're here now. This is a great back to the origin story of the building. >> Yeah, exactly.
>> Because they didn't know they did not know >> is this going to work or not. >> I mean, that's the thing. >> And what was your backup plan when you built the building? You'd cut it into four or six >> condominiums. Housing, >> right? >> And >> which makes sense. And uh so to go along
that line of thinking, >> we've recently in the past few years said that we're interested in multifamily housing >> in the highway mixed use district. >> In fact, it's a permitted principal use. You don't even need special permission
for it. It's easier to do in this district than it is in the R1 district. So if you're thinking the backup plan for that building is housing, that's a case for making a high mix use zoning, not res. But if the issue is, is it compatible to
have schools in and amongst the other things going on in the Iowa mix district, that's a different story because it's not just about this lot. It's would you be would you want somebody to open a school in Shorter Electric's building down the corner? You want somebody to open a school
uh next to the equipment yard down the highway or next to the super eight or you know whatever else is in the highway mixed use zone right now. Does it make sense for a school to be somewhere else in that zone? I think it's the trickier question.
And then I look at the R1 district which yes it it does talk about families and but it seems like a total nonseword to me as you go from residential to schools. Well, no, but >> I mean, >> how do they >> But but that was the point of the
highways is to be a transition point and it has to transition to something. >> Yeah. >> It can't, you know, it can't be a perpetual gradient, right? It's going to be something. So yes, it it came to R1 which I think is is usable.
>> Well, and talking about the you know, we can't predict the future. One of the questions that I had written down in reading through this was um if if this wasn't to go through, is there a backup plan for the school or or is this sort
of we're going to cross that bridge depending on what the answer to this this hearing is right now? Is there a [laughter] potentially going to if that happens and and or enrollment
starts to go up again? >> Do you know what I'm saying? >> We hope the enrollment goes up, >> right? Obviously, we all do. >> This is a bridge. our board just, you know, the the with with reduced population in the school, they can't carry the mortgage
and and so uh in and in in Minnesota charter schools don't own their buildings, you know. So that's why the great expectation foundation great expectation foundation owns the building. The school
leases space from the foundation. Well, with their reduced needs, they're they're need to and they're they're compensated by the state per pupil uh if they have adequate space. So, they have a upper if they if they get beyond the
formula, then they're spending way more money than they need to and they can't spend they spending money on space that they should be spending on the students. So, uh, the foundation actually reduced their annual lease by $40,000 for next
year. So, it the board decided if, you know, to try to cover that loss in revenue, if we could lease some space is not occupied the school now. and and uh for some reason the demographics went
from we we had a waiting list and we're climbing to all of a sudden it's it's people stopped having babies co really took a bite out of births and and of course in a school you can you can look ahead five years because
six years you you got birth rates today I mean you know how many kids are born you can maybe add a few for inflow but Guess that's your what's available for starting school in five or 6 years. So, you know, we know that we got five or
six years at least of leasing that we need to cover. And we also have a whole upstairs that that, you know, we could build out. So, we we are we have the premier office space availability in this community. We got tons of space and
and we need renters. And I I was looking at advertising our space on a on a commercial site and I was going through the whole checklist and it said, "How is this zoned?" I called up Mike or Alyssa and said,
"What's our zoning there?" >> Mhm. >> So, as Mike was said, presenting that to me is I mean, we could have come in and said, "Okay, can we put offices in R1?" Well, that that's going to open up a way bigger discussion than than what we're
having here. So, you know, we kind of looked at, okay, let's go highway mixed use. Uh, it covers all the bases of the housing, the only thing that's missing is the education piece. So, that that's the genesis of why we came here and and this is good discussion and thank you.
It's uh you know our assessor comments are coming but [snorts] uh financially we really got to do something to to have this not uh you know cover the mortgage basically. So >> so Howard I don't know if it's
appropriate here or not. I'll ask question and you can tell me later. Um funding for the foundation I'm assuming grants individual donations and fundraising. Yeah, basically the the
uh two basic ways we're paying our our mortgage now is the lease of a school which we just cut by 40,000 and then we have uh a $50,000
$55,000 annual pledge. You know, we've got people that have pledged uh enough per annually for five years to cover $50,000, which covers the rest of our debt. Plus, we have some unsecured uh notes out there. They're just
floating there because we have no way to pay them. So, we've got some community members that have just have some money parked with us that that paid off the school. But, you know, really what you know, if we can lease some space, that's
probably our only avenue. And I and I had a good a good lead, but uh the guy wanted to set up a cannabis operation and he found out we was in a school. Wasn't wasn't wasn't near a school. It was in a school. He said, "Oh, okay. Again, not
explosion heads." [clears throat] I think >> might raise some uh you know concern be hard to get the permit. >> Hard to get the permit. Yeah. No. So uh so that's we're trying to you know before we uh put people in there and lease the space and and then come back
and ask your forgiveness of gee we forgot about the zoning. Um you know it just seemed to make sense to add it to the highway mixed use. and and I I don't disagree with you, Michael, but it's it's there's a long list of stuff in
there. Uh I guess our our ask is to add schools and nurseries u into that mix. If if you add bis add businesses to R1, there's a way bigger crowd of people that are going to move into R1 with
businesses than if you have schools in highway mixed use of schools coming to move into that zone. Just there's not that many of us out there. So, um we just ask for your help
on this, I guess. You know, I see it's similar to uh kind of what has transpired in the business park where residential uses have been allowed within a business industrial uh area that uh was based on the concerns and
of of people wanting to to put a business up there but also wanted to have a residence uh in relationship to those those and it's been seeming to be very successful. uh that people wanted to build their homes in the midst of a
business park uh industrial uh commercial setting. >> But but that's a financial equation too. I mean they couldn't afford a house and a business but they can afford their own business. So >> Right. >> Yeah. And and it really almost goes back to the original kind of Gunland Trail,
the old Gunland Trail area where it's, you know, a neighbor neighborhood uh commercial residential. What I can't remember the the >> Yeah, it's it's exactly what Kelly you were talking about, which is let's create a district that describes what's here rather than think about what we
want it to be. >> Right. >> Now, as crazy as that is, I'm not a huge fan of that strategy. It's an option for you here too is rather than try to solve this problem in a way that works universally, you can just legislate a solution that only
works for this spot by saying the lease of office space in an existing school and you know it's it's not very satisfying but it doesn't create any other problem. >> Is that is that variance process or conditional use or how does that mean you don't you would have to rewrite
>> it doesn't exist right now. Yeah. I mean, you can't do it as a variance. Variances can't be used for uses. >> So, you can't there's no special permission right now that exists for them to just say, "Hey, can we do this?" We have to actually create a way for them to ask this question.
>> And really, the mixed the mixeduse district does give you that opportunity because already the school exists within the the mix of uses, which are business and residential uses uh along this Gunland corridor. Um so whether it's in
the R1 district or in the mixeduse district doesn't change you know anything that's happening in this n this neighborhood uh at all other than maybe you would allow offices in the school property particularly uh doesn't change
anything for any of the other properties because offices are already allowed in on in their on their properties. So, uh, I mean, would another school want to be built, uh, in the mixeduse district? >> Um, I don't know if there's a lot more
capacity for more schools in the community, but but but I think the one thing I was uh kind of get trying to get at earlier with the definition of schools is it doesn't take on the the type of schools like North House or the Art Colony or other schools that are that are not your traditional uh
institutions uh that that we all think of. uh and and they're located in the residential district and in the commercial district, you know, so you have those kind of activities. I mean, higher ed is in the residential district. Uh the art colony has in the residential
district and in the commercial district. Uh so the the school the whole issue of schools, I mean, there could be another school built in the mixeduse district, but maybe it's not the traditional school that we're thinking about. It's a something something else that uh that we
haven't thought about that could potentially do what's already been done in the community. >> I guess I'm interested in exploring it and talking about it. Um I don't know what my vote would be when we came to it that you know I want to hear more. My
brain's still going to all right, five years from now, we don't have a population continuing to grow with young people. You don't have enough and great expectations as we can't do this anymore. Now the foundation has a
building that has to be sold. Now what? Now how how does that look? How does it become property? Who would want to buy that property? What would they do with it? because I can't imagine the foundation wants to get into
providing housing and support, you know, >> well, >> in theory, right? Just imagine >> to start with, uh, I don't want to promote the the the the thought that the school is failing. It's not. >> No, and I'm not saying that it's a population.
>> I'm trying to think in the future. You could also explode and you say, "Hey, we're going next door and trying to buy that property and want to bring it in because we need to expand. We have we have plenty of we can really expand. >> Yeah. >> I mean so as population goes up we you know we'll just end the lease with
whoever we have >> you know if it's in a business. So okay sorry things have changed you know find a new place next year. >> Um uh what else was I going to say? It it we have a lot of room to expand. I mean the the the building is designed for 150
students way is you know we're at about 100 right now. So, and then we have a hole upstairs. We we I lost the argument that we should keep it keep it affordable and said, "Well, we're building it. Let's build
bigger." So, we got a hole upstairs that's unfinished, but could be finished. So, there's another 4,000 square ft there. >> So, that we could add to the school easily or add to the business. But, >> but uh and say it all went away, kids
disappeared. I mean it it would make good condos. It would make good a facility like that. Uh could you put senior living in there? I don't know. But I mean that that it also >> right >> like Tim said really points to highway mixed use because all those are
contemplated in that zone. >> And that's what I want to think about. Not that I'm saying you're going away. I hope that's not the case. >> But if we if we did the highway mixed use would be the better zone because we could be either offices or um high higher density housing. Yeah.
>> How? Yeah. My thought is trying to think in the future, how would that affect and how do people then what would it look like for uses then? What would we look at putting in there? >> And tonight isn't the night for being decisive about that, but it is for
picking the question that we want to ask >> and this is the one that's being proposed. >> Is this the one that we want to get input on? Is this the one that we want to do the process and go through and make a decision about or is there something is there another creative way to solve this problem that that makes
sense to you? >> So you're saying bring it bring it back? >> Yeah, because the real process is still this it takes an ordinance to be passed by the city council. Two hearings this is >> we're ways off from being done. We're just we want to make sure that once
we've gone once we've started down it's the way direction you wanted us to go >> and it doesn't make sense to start with the map question before we fix this problem. So there's a lot of assumptions baked into this idea that we're going to change the language and then change the
map and it's all going to work out. We just want to make sure all those are the ones you want it. I guess for my money, I'd like to change the definition first and then and then apply for a zone change to
the other use. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> That seems to make the most sense. >> Yeah. Bring that forward and vote on that and then >> Okay. To me, they're the same question. >> Same question. >> Well, and we we can have a hearing on both questions
>> at the same time. >> Sure. Yeah. It's just >> so we don't need to stretch it out over two more months. Like I think we can if if this is the path you want the public to weigh in on, >> we'll come back. We'll have the language change the map change. One of the things
about this is the language change. There's not going to be a list of people we have to send a notice to because it's >> there isn't anybody, right? The map change there is like we're going to be sending a notice to people within 350 ft of there invited onto that public hearing.
So, you know, I [clears throat] think for the the R1 conversation, like, you know, I I'm not going to get too hung up on the details of whether or not it's for, you know, like you were talking about families and for kids and
like we understand we don't want to lose R1, right? But this is this to me is is nonconforming. This isn't what R1 the way that I look at that single family home. This isn't never going to be a single family home, right? Ever. So, I
think highway mixed use is exactly what this property looks like. I mean, that that's what we I mean, if it's GES, the foundation, if it's the school, if it's condos, if it's whatever, that's exactly why we created
that zone for multif family whenever. So, I mean, I support it. I think it's >> I would tend to agree with that as well. I mean, that's that's the first thing I thought when I read through this was that that seems to make the most sense when you read
through it and and think about short-term and long-term. It it just seems to make more sense to do it that way than >> have this sort of >> I think I think the danger the the things that the slippery slope of of highway mixed use is, hey, do we want to see a bunch of short-term rentals, which
that's everybody's fear, right? So, >> the school doesn't work out. We run a bunch of VBOS's, >> right? >> I don't think that's right. >> I I didn't read it for a while, but I don't think that's in the list as what you can do. >> Oh, is it?
>> And so, like that's the nuts and bolts of the like that's the slippery slope, the fear of of that zone >> encroaching into R1. >> Yeah, I got it. Yep. So, and I guess the only my response to that would probably be that because the building is already
the building already exists. It's not just a lot. It's not we're not asking that question about a piece of land without anything on it. That that building is already [clears throat] there. It's a new building. It's a substantial building. That that's not necessarily something that somebody's going to come in and knock down a good
existing building and then put up four tiny homes to to rent them short term. Um, if it was just a lot, I think that that's a valid, you know, right that would probably happen. >> People spend a lot of money to rehab, you know, properties to make short-term
rentals, right? >> We've got zones where people have to come in and get a conditional use permit. And the question that's before you is take an existing residence and turn it into a vacation rental. That's a really hard question. This is not an existing residence. Maybe it's a good
thing to create an outlet for vacation rentals that doesn't require the use of the existing housing. Maybe that helps the market. >> Then could we move them just to the HMU and not R1 or MU? >> There's my goal. [laughter] I've never
been. >> You like the the commercial residential mixeduse district. That was that what you're suggesting? What >> for a VBO? >> Oh, for VBO. Yeah. >> Different question. Gotcha. Just a different duck for a different day. >> You can bring that to the agenda anytime [laughter] you're ready.
>> But to be clear, the R1 you can have apartment buildings and we made it so you can have row houses and all that. So it's not like none of those large structures can exist in R1. We do permitted conditional use but still they
are used. So there's a little language in the highway mixed use zone that um beyond the permitted principal uses, we have permitted accessory uses in zones.
And so it says accessory uses customary to permitted uses. It's just that simple, right? Pretty broad in high use. We would not want that broad language in our residential zone because it would be widely abused. Um, and because we don't
allow schools in highway mixed use, we can't access that for this question, but we could potentially look at something like that. Um, back to the try to come up with a specific answer that doesn't create other problems. We could add to
the R1 accessory uses that are customary to schools, daycarees, such and such, not residences, but those as its own separate question. And then I think that
you can make a case that rental of commercial space or we could maybe they could try to make that case. This is backup plan here. If if this isn't the way it stays in the R1, but we change what we mean or what we're saying when you're saying accessory uses
>> in R1, our permitted accessory uses are accessory buildings and accessory dwelling units. >> Clearly not >> what they're talking about. And so you'd have to add another item that says accessory uses uh in you know I don't know how to say it yet but you know
specific to items four and five which are the public schools and churches and um it's another it's another idea that if this isn't if this one's too complicated and creates too many unintended consequences
that there are ways for us to come up with something that's very specific to this that don't do that it gets a little into what Kelly was talking about which feels awkward and I don't like a lot but maybe that's an alternative to consider. >> So still R1 we're just making it so that
there's some conditional what would be >> well basically if if you think this is an accessory use that's >> customary for >> I think it opens up a lot of other stuff. >> I was going to say I don't think I like that. I I would rather explore moving
forward the HMU. I don't like putting something like this into R1. I think that it leaves way too many. >> Yeah. Well, that's so that's three head knots to at least explore the >> trying to preserve R1 for what it is,
right? Like you wouldn't want to go and metal with it. >> Yeah. >> When I discussed this with Mike, you know, a few weeks ago, I mean, that was exactly where we came down, it's like, whoa, this this uh try to fit an office,
try to structure that really opens up the can of worms of how that could be misused down the road. So, um but here again, you know, yeah, you guys good decision makers, good conversation.
I think at this point the plan is to have a public hearing at your next meeting and we're going to talk about specific language change that's very similar to what they're proposing adding those uses to highway mixed use and also a zoning map amendment that takes this
property and potentially a couple of the neighboring properties and switches them to highway mixed use. So, in the meantime, I'll reach out to the um to the growths about their property, also Arrowhead Electric, about the garage on the corner, which is also our one right now,
>> and see if they're interested in participating in that zoning map amendment, too. Um they'll have to think about it. They may maybe they are, maybe they aren't, but as long as >> we do that. Can we have a zoning m map up then for people to see that? I think it's really helpful.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. And again, it's just to explore it. It's not to definitely make the change, but to go down that road and see where it takes us. >> Well, at your next meeting, you're going to be asked to make a decision about it. >> Yeah. >> So, to to recommend yes or no, and then
it'll go to the council where they'll have to consider an ordinance that takes two meetings to pass and so won't be done, but you're be you're going to be asked to make your recommendation at your next meeting. >> Yeah. I think our intent at this meeting
was to to to hear, you know, let you guys understand what it is that we're trying to do and kind of, as I said, the dilemma that we're in. The R1 district doesn't quite work and the M mixed juice district isn't quite adequate. So, we
better need >> some kind of some kind of >> I appreciate it and I like that we can look at it and kind of plan for the future. Again, I'm so tired in so many aspects, whether it's anywhere that I've been a part of. Everything is going back and asking for forgiveness or here,
we're just going to do it for what it is now. And we don't ever look forward. And I'm tired of being reactive. I'd rather be proactive. And I think this gives us that chance to really I mean, it's only basically 30 more days that we have to
think about it and gather information and do things. But I think that it gives us that opportunity to put some time into this and go what makes sense for that corridor. You know, when the gunflint got rerouted, the purpose was for the trucks that were coming down the
hill from a large industrial business to have a safe spot and keep the public safe. And what happened? Homes got built there and the people don't like the trucks. It was specifically built for that intention. So, I think we need to go back and make
sure that we're doing the right things looking to the future as much as we can. >> Thanks, Kelly. >> That's great. All right, I feel like we're ready. >> Great meeting. Yeah. >> Yeah. Appreciate your time and class.
Yeah. >> Great. All >> right.