Russell through all the paper. >> All right, we're going to call to order tonight's uh September 4th, 2025 Corkran Planning Commission meeting. And we're going to begin with roll call. Uh Commissioner um Zachman >> here, >> Commissioner Lind >> here, >> Commissioner Hargreaves >> here, >> Commissioner Kaziki >> here, >> and Commissioner Bummond is here. And I'd like to invite those who would like to to stand and say the pledge of allegiance with us. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And the next thing that we're going to do is I'm going to ask staff and my fellow commissioners if anybody has um any amendments that they'd like to make to tonight's agenda. >> Staff has no changes. Madam Chair. >> Okay. And um I just want to double check with our um council liaison. Did you want to maintain the um order for tonight or would you prefer to uh give a council report prior to our new business item? Councilman Baron Camp, >> are you okay if we do our new business item first? >> The whole night. Thank you. >> Yep. And if that's the case, then I will uh make a motion to approve tonight's agenda. >> I'll second. >> All those in favor say I. I >> and anyone opposed? >> All right, we're going to move on to our uh open forum. So, this is an opportunity for members of the public to address the commission on any items not on tonight's agenda. Um it would just be an opportunity to bring something to our attention that's weighing on you or you'd like uh to be discussed or dealt with at a future time. um it wouldn't be an opportunity to debate but just to bring something to attention. So separate from the new business item tonight, this would be anything other than uh that new business. Is anyone here to bring something up during open forum? And for those who are joining online, there's no one here to speak at open forum. So, we're going to move on to the minutes from the August planning commission meeting. Is there any um it was a training session, so I did double check and make sure that the right number of council members are here listed on the minutes, but other than that, does anyone have any notes uh that need to be amended or would someone like to make a motion to approve those minutes? >> How about a motion to approve them? >> I'll second. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? Okay. And then that brings us to um our new business on the agenda tonight. And there is one item and that is the M andJ Creekide Vineyard site plan interim use permit and zoning ordinance amendment. And we are going to begin with a staff report. >> Sure. Thanks, Madam Chair. Uh yeah. So the only item under the new business tonight is the M&J Creek Side Vineyard. This is a request from Margaret and John Fernandez who are requesting approval of an introuse permit and site plan to allow the operation of a wine tasting processing business in the rural residential district as well as an amendment to the agrous ordinance to allow flexibility from the accessories structure limitations uh for agrous uses. Typical hours operation um provided in the applicant's narrative is u on Thursdays through Saturdays 12:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. and on Sundays uh 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. from u early spring to late fall. Uh the subject property is 23020 county road 30. Uh this is a 5.84 acre parcel. Um the property itself as well as the surrounding uh area is currently zoned rural residential and is guided rural egg residential in the uh 2040 future land use map. U the surrounding uses to the north and east are uh currently residential uses. Uh the property to the south is uh residential and agricultural use. And then the property to the west is a densely wooded parcel with Rush Creek flowing through it which is owned by the applicants themselves. Uh the property um again is in close proximity to Rush Creek which um creates some shorland overlay um regulations on the parcel itself. And then again there's a mature tree uh coverage over the north east and south or northwest and south sides of the parcel. Uh and then the property is located outside the musa. So it's currently served by a private septic and well system. Um so tonight there's three aspects being considered. A site plan for the um actual consistency with the zoning ordinance. um an interim use permit for the aggra business use itself. Uh since aggra businesses are identified as an interim use in the rural residential district. Um interim uses are allowed uses within the district that contain additional conditions to mitigate potential impacts to the surrounding uses. Uh and then a zoning ordinance amendments to provide flexibility from the accessory structure footprint limitation um specifically for agra business uses. Um, so going into the site plan analysis, uh, I apologize that the text here is kind of small. Um, the building the the property itself consists of a number of accessory buildings. Uh, the site plan submitted by the applicant u indicates that they would demolish an existing 726 foot garage in favor of a 1440t pool barn. Uh this would result in a cumul cumulative accessory structure footprint of 3,980 square feet. Um with this parcel being 5.84 acres. City code does allow for a maximum maximum accessory structure footprint of 2719 square ft. So um this proposal would exceed that allowance. Um the applicant does have the option to combine the two parcels that they own together and that would increase the accessory structure footprint to 3,100 3,313 square feet. Um, so it still wouldn't meet that requirement, but that is an option that they could consider. Um, so since this doesn't comply with the ordinance standards, staff recommends a condition of approval that the site plan uh be updated to remove any excess access any excess accessory structure footprint area unless their requested zoning ordinance amendment is approved. The building setbacks uh for the accessory structures are required to meet the minimum requirements outlined within the zoning ordinance itself. Uh, I created or labeled their site plan with different um names to make it easier to identify. And I realized now that it's on the screen, it's harder to tell. So, I I can use my laser pointer. Um, shed one uh this one in the southeastern uh corner of the site uh is uh located within the minimum uh front yard setback area uh and is non-compliant with the setback requirements. So, a condition of well, I'll touch on the conditions of approval at the end. Um, shed two uh is located within the minimum setback area from Rush Creek. Um, this shed looking through historical aerial aerial imagery appears to have been constructed prior to the establishment of these requirements. Uh, so it's considered a legal non-conforming structure. Um, oops. Shed three is located within the minimum uh sideyard setback as well as the minimum setback from uh Brush Creek as well. And this one also was constructed prior to the establishment of these requirements and is considered a legal non-conforming structure. Uh shed four is located within the minimum setback area from the side and rear property line. This one was uh placed after these after the current setback requirements were established and is considered a non-compliant structure. So three of the structures in their current standing are considered non-compliant. Uh so staff recommends a condition of approval uh for this application be that sheds one and two uh be relocated to meet the minimum setback requirements uh of the zoning ordinance or be removed from the property entirely. Uh and then the existing pool bar uh is uh within the uh minimum setback area from uh Rush Creek. So we recommend that that structure either be relocated to meet that minimum setback requirement, removed from the property or uh obtain an after the fact variance for that setback. Uh the building height for um structures within the Shoreline Overly District are limited to a maximum height of 25 ft. The proposed structure height is 20 ft and uh has proposed sidewall heights of 10 feet. Both of these comply with the district height requirements for accessory structures. Um the building materials consist of um a colored steel and Wayne's cing along um a couple of elevations. Um and so code does allow for um metal sighting through a certificate of compliance which is a administrative review and um staff has reviewed that and has found that it does comply with our requirements. Um and then with this structure being located within the shorine overlay district, uh it is required to um be constructed so that the lowest floor elevation is at least 2 feet above the regional flood elevation. So for this region zone AE uh the regional flood elevation is 973 feet and the first floor elevation for this structure is 976.3 ft. So it complies with that standard as well. Um, parking for the proposed use must be accommodated uh so that it can um it must be provided so they can accommodate the site's most intensive use uh and cannot rely on honest street parking on any of the surroundings streets. Um so based on the applicant's narrative, staff finds that event hosting would be the most intensive use on the site. So looking at the standards for event centers for parking at least. Uh those are required to have one stall per two guests. Uh so applicants proposed site plan is uh 40 parking stalls. So a recommended condition of approval would limit the guest count for all events to 80 occupants. Uh, additionally, the parking lot that is on the African site plan is uh showing to be constructed of a material that is uh identified as a grass build geo grid. Uh, this type of material is not an approved parking surface within the city code. So, a condition of approval would require that that site plan be revised to provide a compliant parking surface as either a defined gravel parking area or a hard surface with perimeter concrete cing. Uh the driveway was reviewed by uh planning staff, the engineering staff, and public safety. Uh currently they're um planning to or proposing to have a 16 foot wide driveway. Um but there are some concerns with uh having two-way access or two-way traffic coming through that driveway at that width as well as um providing enough space for emergency vehicles to access the site. So, a condition of approval would be that the driveway be widened at at least 24 ft to accommodate those concerns. Uh, the site is uh required to meet the landscape standards of the zoning ordinance. Um, so uh that would be one overstory tree per 10,00 area and one shrub per 300 square feet of building area. Um, historically the city has um calculated these requirements based on the new building area. So within this that would result in uh two overstory trees and five shrubs. Uh additionally, um parking areas of four stalls or more are required to have screening of at least 3 ft uh to screen vehicle headlights from uh surrounding residential properties and public right away. Um the applicants are requesting that the city accept their existing vegetation for this requirement and provided the uh landscaping uh exhibit shown on the screen now. and staff finds that a condition of approval for the landscaping requirements be that um some additional screening be provided along the south and east parking lot where there seem to be some gaps in screening um to to prevent um vehicle headlights from shining onto adjacent properties. Um uh one of the standards for uh agra businesses is that outdoor lighting cannot exceed a glare of.1 foot candle at the property line. Uh the applicants did provide a narrative explaining lighting needs of business. Uh and I apologize there seems to be a cut off in my text here but that is explained in the narrative that's printed out here today and maybe the applicants can speak more to what that lighting entails. Um but with that a condition of approval would be that the applicants provide um a phototric plan showing the location of these lights and the uh the glare that would be uh generated by it so that we can ensure compliance with these uh this ordinance uh standard. Uh applicants also plan to post a three 3 foot by three foot sign above the entrance of the new structure. Um currently sign signs aren't allowed within the rural residential district. However, um staff has added an amendment to the agra business standards at the end of this report that would um allow science within the real residential district and I can I can touch on that later on in this report. Um so going into the intram use permit analysis um aggra businesses since they are in uses they are required to meet the standards of the intram use permit as well as specific performance standards uh that were identified with when we adopted the agra business ordinance. Um and so staff has a full detailed analysis within the the report but um staff finds that the aggrav standards are satisfied or could be satisfied uh with the proposed application and the following conditions. Um the parking lot would need to be revised to include uh a material that can be accepted within the city codes, the gravel or the pavement. Uh, additionally, um, you know, capping that, uh, capacity to 80 patrons to the site. Um, so that way there's not overflow parking on the grass or in the street. Um, in the event that the requested zoning ordinance is denied, um, the applicant would be required to remove uh any area of accessory structure space that exceeds uh the allowed footprint for the size of their property. um if they end up using currently their plan shows that they're using a indoor bathroom facility, but in the event that there's a need for outdoor bathroom facilities, uh those would be required to be screened and located at least 400 ft from neighboring residential structures pursuant to that standard that adopted with the agra business ordinance. And then same thing with the outdoor activities. If there are some outdoor activities, the site plan itself needs to be revised to where these are located uh and be set back at least 100 ft from neighboring residential structures. Uh going into the ordinance amendment, the applicants are requesting that uh that the amendment that the ordinance be amended so that there is flexibility for aggra businesses to exceed what's allowed by uh by code for the a parcel of their size. Um currently the aggra business ordinance um refers to the maximum accessory structure footprint in uh in just the general standards of the zoning ordinance. Um so under this guidance um parcels that are 10 acres or larger would have the option to exceed the limit for their the size of their property through a conditional use permit. Uh whereas aggra businesses on parcels that are between four and 9.9 acres would be limited strictly to uh the accessory structure footprint that's identified within the general standards of the zoning ordinance. Um so the applicant has requested that that be amended uh and has uh detailed the needs of an additional accessory structure space for the functionality of their agra business themselves. Uh so staff has the following proposed amendment. Um so below 0.5 there's a point A is city council may grant flexibility as part of the interim use permit to exceed the maximum allowed accessory structure footprint for properties that are between four and less than 10 acres in size provided that uh the additional accessory structure space is reasonably necessary for the agro business to operate effectively. This is an attempt to um make sure that it uh is suitable for their use and not a workound for potential properties to use it as just extra storage space. Um, and then like I said about the signs earlier, um, the applicants are planning to post a 3x3 foot sign. Uh, that's a typo above the entrance of the proposed structure. Uh, typically again signs aren't permitted in the real residential district. However, they are uh, allowed in other residential districts. Um so to address this um staff proposes that the amendment for the agra business agra business be um added that signs up to 32 square feet be approved um in conjunction to the agra business operation uh subject to the residential sign standards outlined in chapter 84 just to have that consistency with other residential districts. So, at this point, staff recommends that the planning commission open the public hearing and take testimony. Uh, and then staff recommends that um recommends that you recommend approval of the site of the draft resolution for the site plan and interuse permit with the conditions that were mentioned throughout this presentation. Uh, the draft ordinance uh amending the uh ordinance for the aggra business and then the draft resolution approving finance effect for that ordinance. >> Thank you, Dwight. Okay, at this point in time, we are going to open the public hearing um regarding the M&J Creek Side Vineyard site plan. Um what we will do, public comments are going to be limited to in-person comments and we're going to begin with the speakers who filled out a card prior to the start of the meeting. So, uh Natalie or Dwight will call them to the podium one at a time. if you when your name is called, if you could come up to the podium and state your name and address. That's just for the record and meeting minutes. Um, and then go ahead and we're gonna just for the sake of time, just kind of general rule of thumb, keep it to about five minutes. And if someone shares what you uh had the indication that you were going to also comment on, you are welcome to uh indicate that you uh agree with or you also share in the sentiment and then um give your um new ideas or concerns as well. >> Madam Chair, a question. Are we going to have the applicant speak >> after the public hearing is completed? Yeah, >> got it. >> Um Madame Chair, so as far as public public comments. I did just want to point out on the dis there was a public comment letter um by Jeff Denise Lo that should be considered as part of the official um >> Did everybody up here all the commissioners get the opportunity to read through the letter? Okay, perfect. And then there was also one contained in our packet as well. So if those folks um just be reassured we did receive the letter that came before tonight's meeting as well. >> And then first up we have Diana Burch. I forgot to mention, I'm just going to say while you're walking, if you have questions, feel free to say them, but we don't engage in a back and forth during the public comment opportunity, but we will take your notes or questions and make sure that we're we address them if possible um as soon as the public um meeting portion is finished. >> I'm Diana. I live um When I got the letter, I was kind of surprised because we are rural. We are residential. We are not commercial. Nowhere in our area as a commercial and we're seeing more and more commercial trying to come in which is concerning and my concern is we are we are well we are well that is a big concern for the quality of life quality of water maintaining a safe environment so that's been my biggest concern with this project I think wine I like wine I like that I don't have a problem the winery. I have a problem with turning it into a business. We're going to be processing what happens to the waste, how much water is being used. That all affects my neighbors. It affects me affects too many things. And so that's my concern is turning having a business in our neighborhood. We are a neighborhood. We are not a business. We're not a commercial area. And that's what people that area. So that's my comments. >> Thank you so much. >> Next is Kevin Dale. >> Dale. Okay. >> Kevin Dale, 9820 Creek Circle. um my property, my whole back of my property is connected to theirs. And um uh if on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday I want to go out in my patio and have a quiet evening, I'm going to have 80 people, I don't know what it is, 300 feet away, uh having a good time. And supposed to be a winery but uh or an event center but I haven't been to an event center that didn't get a lot and didn't have a lot of lights and like Diana said this is a residential neighborhood we like it peace we like quiet um it just doesn't seem to fit the bacon wine over there isn't such a bad deal and a small tasty room. Not a bad deal. But an event center in this residential neighborhood just doesn't make sense to me at all. And it seems like your guys are I mean, he's talked about changing this, changing that, changing all kinds of stuff to make this acceptable to the city. Well, if you're going to make that many exceptions, hell, you might as well put a massive construction company right next door to me. Um, it just doesn't make sense. Uh, I guess that's really all I got to say. And I just hope that this is turned down the event center partery and the and growing the grapes and stuff. I think that's real cool, but not the event center. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I do not have any more Okay, so those were all the karma cards filled out. I I do want to give I know a couple people trickled in towards the end. So we will give you the opportunity um if there's anyone else who wants to come up to the podium um feel free sir and then just state your name and address for the record as well please. >> My name is David. >> Oh just wait till you get to the mic. Sorry that way we can hear you. Thank you so much. >> Again it seems like we're doing this once a year now. David Bethy 9733 Rush Creek Boulevard right adjacent to John's place. I'm not in favor of this. Um I'm weary of the uh all the amendments that have to be made. I'm concerned about fences for lights. I mean my property is right and all the other things that have been here to make this happen. And I know parking just I'm just not for this. I agree with what my neighbor said here and I've talked to other neighbors on the on the boulevard too and um they g me permission to say they're told for this and so there you have it. kind of like Kevin said, we're making changes to accommodate a commercial area, but again, like I said a year ago or when um we've got years here of living in this area, we want to kind of keep it rural and uh just retire our peace. >> Thank you so much, Mr. Becky. Is there anyone else? I don't want to pass over. So, giving you the opportunity and uh at this point in time then there's no one else who's indicating that they would like to come and um raise uh or make their comments. So, I will make a motion to close the public hearing. >> I'll second. >> All those in favor of closing the public hearing say I. >> I. Anyone opposed? No. Okay. So, at this point in time, we would like to invite the applicants who are here with us tonight to come up to the podium and address the commission. Um, and and then we'll move forward with the discussion after that. >> Sounds good. I'm Margaret Fernandez. Um, >> I'm John Fernandez. >> We live at 23020 County Road uh 30. Um we are here uh um and appreciate all of our neighbors coming and expressing their concern. Um we do agree with them. We are not trying to create an area um where there's this big event center. We actually are just trying to create a real space for people to come and be able to buy wine and enjoy a farm. Um there the idea is not at all to have lighting and loud noises and all that kind of stuff. There are a number of um uh what do you call it along the nurseries along the way or like an apple orchard. That's really what we're talking about doing, not about taking away your enjoyment. And quite frankly, I actually feel that county road through 30 takes away the enjoyment of all of us around. So, we're not looking to do anything commercial. This is just a small farm operation where we are able to sell our product um on our on our own land. we live there. I don't want to have big parties at night either. I agree 100%. So, um you know, we're here to to answer any questions. In terms of processing and the environment and all that type of thing, I we agree 100% with that as well. Um we were are worried about the land. That's why we bought the land. We wanted to use it in a in a manner so that people could still enjoy it instead of big developers. As you guys know, you can check out uh Parkr, Maple Grove. It's all We're not looking to change the septic system or anything like that. And actually processing grapes is a lot less costic to the area than a lot of the farms that have the their runoff going into the creek there. So we have to address that. We have to get approval through the the city, state, we have to get um uh notational >> from the feds. It's a very restricted business. Um and uh we've had many conversations with the city and with a number of different consultants to ensure that we're um complying with the wetland overlay and those types of things. Hence all of the changes and conversations about the land. Um there is so I don't know anything else you want to say about their comments. >> Well I I just to address the I get that we're trying to change the amendment to the city but business and that's what every farm is in the area. It's a business. Every one of those are are producing a product and and selling that product. We just happen to want to sell our product off of our land because it is such a restricted business. This is one way the state has developed a plan to make it accessible and economically feasible for a small winery to be able to produce. It's Yeah. I I mean, we do I'm just as upset with the construction. It's not construction. What we call >> the excavation >> excavation sites. I don't want a whole bunch of excavation businesses all around us. We're trying to keep the nature and the creek and that whole vibe there. We we are completely surrounded with trees. Um we Yeah. So, I there's no there will be no lights in anybody's yards, no cars or anything like that. We're just trying to comply with the the guidance that we have to have parking spaces. And um I have talked to the city u many times about come on out. Can we do a video? What do we need to do? What kind of screening do we have? We're pretty insulated right there. So um we are just as concerned as you are as keeping the uh what would you call agriculture vibe in the area. I like being on propane and septic and we're not looking change that. Well, um there are a couple things though that uh we wanted to address just from some of the um >> application >> the application. Yes. Um so in the report we reviewed it today and there are just some things that um are I think confusion or or misconception or um we are definitely adding both parcels together and we talked about that um through the guidance of the city. Uh we haven't done that yet. they we were told to go through this process. As you know, it's been very um fin our financial outlay on this has been significant. Um so that's one thing that we were waiting to do to try and get the uh full acreage there. Um we have to also talk to the city about the pole building. I don't know if you want to bring that up again, but we were originally just going to add on to the pole building, the existing pole building, and turn that room and not build another building um where the the proposed site is. And when we did that um we realized that um the people that lived there before us had built it. The city signed off on it um and it was approved. It was built, but now we're finding that they had built it in the wrong spot. So the agreement with the city at the time was they told us we could keep that building because it's a beautiful building. I mean, it's brand new. We could keep that building if we could move move our proposed site um to a different location. So, we did that based on um the recommendation from our site plan meeting last year. Um anything else you want to um also in terms of getting approval for additional um square footage. There are a number like shed one is a plastic shed that was put there long before us. We don't care about that. The the shed in the way back that is um we it actually was a horse shelter that we turned into a chicken coop. Um so we don't care about getting rid of that. There's a number of square footage that we're okay with uh removing at this point in time, but I I am kind of disappointed that the um proposal is for us to relocate the whole building. That would be very difficult and labor intensive. Um so I'm not that that wasn't that was not supposed to be part of this based on um past conversations that we had with the city and city council actually. Um, was there anything else there? Also, the driveway is now proposed for 24 ft. Um, I I don't know that that matters that much, but there's a lot of other businesses out there or that you can get an emergency vehicle in with a smaller span. We're fine with that. But if you look at the the 24, that's something we have to go with at the very where the parking lot opens up. There are two beautiful lynen trees that is kind of like you're coming into this beautiful um this beautiful area with a wine tasting room and the grapes and we would like to keep those those are 16 ft apart. So that's the only spot where we would like to still keep at least the 16 ft um is so that we can retain the trees and the beauty of the area. And I think that is it? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you so much. And I know that as the commission discussion uh proceeds, we may have a question or two and then we would give you the opportunity to answer as well. So, thank you so much. Um and at this point in time, uh I guess the two things that before we start discussion, um with regard to the amunableness to the removal of more sheds, does that change anything regarding what need the decisions that need to be made tonight? And then also with the with the history and I do recall that >> having been mentioned the building the existing pole building having not been constructed under their ownership. Does that do those two things before we begin our discussion? Is there anything that staff wants to >> I just want to add that when we when we do an analysis under an IUP or a an interim use permit or a conditional use permit part of the qualifications is that the site overall conforms with all the zoning district standards. So the reason why we had to call those out and propose a solution that would bring them into compliance such as relocation or removal um is because otherwise they don't fit that standard that the site overall complies. And so there were a couple buildings that didn't don't basically um meet the qualification as a legal non-conforming structure. So um where they did they do have a couple of legal non-conforming structures where we didn't recommend removal or relocation. Um the alternative to that uh is a variance. So it would be uh an after the fact variance. And so we could adjust the resolution to add that third option um and have it go back through the variance process. But uh we can't just wave it or ignore it. >> Sure. Uh what does the resident's responsibility in regards to that variance look like if that is an option in terms of cost? >> Yeah. So the they' have to pay the variance fee. There's a escrow they already have an escro account. So they would just look at the health of the escro account. There might need to be need to reup it. I don't know. They'd have to look at that. Um and then They have to provide a narrative explaining the practical difficulty as to why the site won't allow them to move the buildings essentially. Um >> and then it requires another opportunity to come before the commission and the council. So time is also what's impacted. Okay. >> All right. Um those were the things that I wanted to give you guys the opportunity to address. Did you feel like there was anything else you needed to speak to regarding questions? No. Um, happy to answer any questions the commissioner have. I I know that the drive by width was also something that was brought up. >> Um, if there's >> solution >> other solutions. I I don't know if I could come up with a solution on the fly, but I do know that that was a concern that was brought up by engineering and public safety. So, um, I I would have to defer to them on what the minimum was requirements would be. >> Just to clarify, it was to accommodate two-way traffic, not just emergency. >> Yes. Okay. May I ask a question? What staff said? Um, so maybe I'm not following. Why was a variance not recommended? >> We are responding to the application that was submitted. I believe the concept plan did call out different options and so and then at some point I think there may have been discussion of some buildings being removed. I don't think that's on the table at this point. >> So I think that yeah, at this point we're just responding to it. And also I think from staff's perspective I wouldn't recommend a variance. I the practical difficulty is simply that they are moving the building so that um that they don't want to move the building. There is a way for them to comply with code with there's not a constraint at the lot as to why that building must remain in that location. Um so that would be I wouldn't recommend a variance but that would be an option. >> Okay. Thank you. practical difficulty of moving an entire building, having to have another pad made, that's seems to be a huge expense. >> It can't the practical difficulty can't be based on money. >> Uh but but the fact that it was placed by someone else and in theory the city >> the city does not have a survey, >> right? The location that met setbacks and a building official who would have said the building's to be a building is not going to be a surveyor to confirm that. >> Okay. Okay. That's an interesting one. Um before we begin discussion, I feel like I would like to just address the concerns regarding amendments. So the Agra business ordinance is brand new to the city. uh meaning we wanted to find a way to uh to allow it and capture it and put some performance standards on it. Um so that's why the language was created so that so that there's sort of more of a partnership between agro businesses and the city rather than them just happening without. So, some of the um this is the first trial run under those that new section of code, which is why there's a little bit of like how does this work? What language might need to be in there that wasn't in originally? And that is not uh an uncommon thing. When you create language for something, you try your best to capture all of the possibilities and then when you get an application in front of you, um it sometimes reveals where you weren't as thorough as you wanted to be. So, I just wanted to um to address that is some of the reason for the um amendment language to the ordinance. At this point in time though, I'd like to open it up to the commission for discussion. Um I know based on we're supposed to kind of see where everybody sits, but I feel like my gut says there's some things we need to discuss before anybody is ready to make a recommendation for approval or denial. Um, and so does anyone want to go first with some of their questions or their comments and then we'll just see where we're at and uh what we need to tackle. >> I feel like I've done all the talking, but let's keep it going. Um I you know I love the agro business uh concept because I think many of us are in the position of wanting to keep Corkran rural. We also need to encourage people that love the rural lifestyle and want to foster that. So we got to figure out we got to figure this out. This is these are good healthy I think tensions. Um, so I agree with the It sounds like we're all on the same page that this is not meant to be an event venue. So my question is is that the parking lot is designed to be hold up to 80 people. Um is there have we explored like making that like an event not possible to be held um like up to you know can we can we make it smaller unless the parking lot doesn't need to be as big or is there any flexibility that we can explore there I just think my biggest concern is how do we um alleviate the concern on the size of amount of people the traffic concerns I can understand that 80 cars in a parking lot in a residence does seem big to me. Um it seems like >> it'd be 40. It's 80 people assuming that there's two people in each even. So 40 cars is that's a lot. Um so I can see that concern and I'm wondering if and maybe up for discussion is like how we handle the term event and and hosting events and the parameters around that. So that's the biggest question and thought I had on that. It's good that traffic is directly coming from 30. It's not driving through private roads. So, those things are great. Um, and I also, my own personal opinion on the driveway agree with keeping the trees. I don't know if there's any legal way we can allow it to stay at 16 ft, but I would rather keep a tree if we can. So, those are a couple of my thoughts to get us started. >> Great. Um, I guess in response to the concern about size is that we did just um um have the temple passed and it has to be passed at its maximum capacity like in terms of the in instead of limiting regular operation capacity versus a oneoff. >> Well, I would say um we're again we're responding to the applications. I believe the application is what's showing 40 stalls. And so then we were saying, okay, then the maximum based on the formula that we would use for parking, the maximum you could have on the site would be 80. So if they want if they're okay with lower threshold, then they lower parking. >> So that would be really that more of a question for the applicant. What exactly? Yeah, I was confused with that also >> narrative about how many >> but an event center is a an entirely different type of application. This is not an application nor is it an approval for an event center that needs to be like >> okay y >> this is wholly different that's why it's an aggra business intramuse permit um it is does not fall under any of the city code for event center. >> Yeah maybe there was some confusion because we used the event center parking formula but that's because it's the most similar formula that we have for this. >> Uh that's probably where that started going in the mind. Yep. >> Well, and I'm confused because it doesn't sound like you really want to be hosting large events, you know, three times a week. >> But I can see the concern. >> If you could uh if you want to respond to the number of requested parking sales that just come up to the >> Well, that isn't what we're looking for. Um however, this is a business and Just like a farm needs a tractor, we need patrons. And so, um, we will need to address that. Um, we we will need to find something if if maybe it's it's to well, first off, we're seasonal, so it won't be all the time. And then secondly, um, it it won't that's not our business model. Our business model is to move the grapes to customers. And this is the most again, we don't sell grapes because there's no selling gra we need to produce a product. So um so with that being said you know we will need that space to make this economic viable. We are a business and like any business we need to make a profit as much as I >> but and also the event thing um like you said it's it's um it's um seasonal but in an acre business if any of you have ever gone to a vineyard has here to do a vineyard. >> Um, people come, they have a glass of wine, they're, you know, just hanging out. Um, you could have like bags or something. So, it it's limiting it to like, well, you can only have four cars in the parking lot. We're not looking for that. It's an experience. So, then we're really changing the whole I mean, we paid all this money to get an auro tourism permit. Um, where we want to enjoy the vineyard to to see how like we'll have like different events where people will come we'll show them how to trim grapes how to cut grapes um how to farm how to take care of the space how to you know or you know that type of thing so to me limiting to can we limit it to 10 and then you know it just then it doesn't it doesn't it's not feasible I mean it's not a feasible business model I guess is what we're saying um we're not looking for a rowdy time I I live literally on the land. So, >> no, we can't. I'm sorry. It's not an opportunity for discussion. >> If you have follow-up questions or comments, those who are not the applicant or on the commission, you are welcome to reach out to staff um after the fact, but the comment beforehand is the opportunity. Um and then now it's just the opportunity for us to make a a discussion and a recommendation. it will show up before council again so members of the public would be able to weigh in at that point in time. Um, okay. I really thought the things that I had comments regarding this application were not the things that have floated to the top after being here. Um, so I guess the only thing from the staff report is I know that we're indicating that signs aren't allowed in the rural residential, but I was a little bit confused by that because there's quite a few properties that are advertising what they are. So, um, I guess that just accepting the amendment. It makes so much sense to me if it needs to be in there >> and we may want to look at our sign ordinance overall the amendment be specific to our business. But yes, there are examples of signs that >> and they are family farms most of them >> and we have no interest in taking them down. So I think it's it doesn't quite match how we're actually operating. So >> okay. So that's what I was going to say is that perhaps at a time when it's slow that's an opportunity for us to clean it up and make sure that it makes sense. Um, and then I was also going to talk or ask the city staff why they recommended or why they seem to be in favor of combining the two parcels, but then it seems like that is a that is what's being done. So then there's no need for me to necessarily understand that. Um, and then the parking space. So a geog grid with grass if I am understanding this correctly and I know that the agro um standards were just put in and originally even just getting gravel for a seasonal operation was uh something that took getting to the council level for because they did not leave here at that point. Um and I remember that because I had a conversation with you Dean after the fact. Um, so I'm just wondering if um because to me that is less um impervious than a gravel overall and I know we live on gravel roads and with the amount of rain this year how much upkeep that has required how many times our roads have had to be regraded because of the runoff. So um so I understand as it sits according to code it does not fit um and would need to be a gravel parking space whether that is were Yes. >> If I may I'm being camp I'm one of your city council members I've been out there I'm hearing everything. I also didn't don't live very far away. I'm down off of Beckold across from Sher Dairy farm an aggra business but it's a family farm. The thing that is confusing me and I think you guys may or may not remember about the temple. >> Those are 19 parking spots and there's 75 chairs that would be in the >> No, they were limited for except for the instances of four times up to four times a year. They might have larger events. Okay. >> But at that point most of the time my understanding is it's extended family members. So they still be coming in the same car and then any additional cars at that point would be over. >> I I just that was >> that was my question all >> that was going to be paved and all kinds of stuff but I just that's the only thing that I'm concerned about and again the the event center those kind of things all concerns of mine too but I've had conversations with uh the applicant and such so I've got stuff too but you're having a great conversation. Thank you. >> I'd like to continue. >> Go ahead. Go ahead. >> And then Peter >> talking about the parking or something similar >> parking too. I mean I >> spaces or material >> just in general we are trying to make it agricultural and keep a rural community outside the Musa area in Corkran. And I agree the only way to do that is bring in aggra businesses or we're going to end up with storage. We're going to end up with construction. outdoor storage, things like this. If we put so many restrictions on aggra businesses to me, and I'm not sure why, it seems like some of these codes for parking almost feels like we're doing this in anticipation of this becoming suburban space. Why do we need to pave a big parking lot? Why do we even need to put gravel down on a parking lot? I mean, as long as it passes code as far as drainage and things like this, and they may not use that as a large parking lot more than, you know, a few times a year and and the width of the driveway, you know, is it does it drop off after the driveway? I mean, two cars could kind of go on the grass and go around each other. I I think we just put so many restrictions on things. It It makes it silly. It makes you trying to start a familyowned business not a big deal into something that becomes this big huge parking lot with pvious imperous surfaces on them and wide wide streets and the signage I think I mean a sign like that out by the driveway on your building it's very tasteful. It's very nice. I don't think anybody could object to that. It's not a neon. It's not flashing. It's not We're making we're making things very difficult for what our goals as a city as what I interpret our goals as a city are. >> I had concerns regarding the parking requirements for agra business um code the language when it went to council. So I had a conversation with uh our councilman Baron Camp, but this is what council has decided. And so within the standards of how it exists, we can either um our options are to um to make a suggestion, I guess, but I mean it wouldn't fit with the current code, but I hear the concerns and I share them um as well as just um >> as what that does for resale in the future, assuming so. Yes, I I hear all of that. I guess I'm just not sure and maybe staff would like to give us direction, but as the code was adopted, it indicates that seasonal agro business has to have gravel parking. >> Yeah. So that was that was already the the compromise because originally it was pavement. >> Correct. Because when it left here, it was pavement >> and then when it went to council, we the reason why is because the co the city code as it's written states that the only district where a gravel parking lot allowed is the rural commercial and so that's why that's how that ended up and then coun we added language into the aggra business that that aggra businesses that are seasonal could also have a gravel parking lot of approved by city council. So these are these are the engineering standards to accommodate for things like drainage because I do think there are concerns when you are essentially using grass as a parking lot there can be there can be concerns I know that there what they're proposing might be a workaround I don't know that engineering would agree that it's a workound that's going to meet the standards that they have because we have a lot of we do have high standards and that's part of the the character that we've been able to retain as we've developed. So, um I would I would just say that's kind of where we're at. Um you could propose that they um request a variance for it, but I would say this is already the compromise. Um I don't know I don't know the appetite to change that part of the ordinance already. So >> could could I could I ask for uh for the plan commission if you guys could please define a geog grid so we're all >> grass geogrid. >> Yeah. So we all know what a geog grid is. >> So a geog grid you might have >> basically it reinforces the ground so you drive over it. So it's supposed to protect the grass. >> So the health of the grass remains keep it from sinking if it were. Yeah, I mean there's there's different geo grids you can employ and I just >> would like to have what the city thinks it is. >> So I mean so you're okay. Are you asking for us to clarify what it is that the applicant has requested? Oh, that's a slightly different question. I thought you were asking for a definition of the geograph. Can you pull up where that's explained in the site plan? >> Yes. While we do that, I just want to make a few other comments. And that is is that I appreciated from the applicant the directional visual images on the landscaping plan that was helpful. Um, and I also did want to make sure that we took the time um to thank the neighbors for coming out and participating in this bringing your comments and your concerns. Um, it is valuable feedback. Um, and we appreciate and need your perspectives. So, um I want you to feel I I know that it can be frustrating that it isn't a back and forth, but just for the sake of uh running smoothly, we can't do that. Um this is actually a relatively small um group compared to some of the feedbacks we've had. And so it it it's um it's important and we value it. And so I just want to make sure that you know that um and that this decision made by this body today is a recommendation or uh for either approval or denial that goes forward to council and it will have another opportunity um for written comments or public comments um to be brought forth as well. We're just trying to get at some of the um problems and if there's solutions that we can come up with before those make it to another body of individuals. Um, I always like to tell my kids that one of the best things about a democracy is how slow it goes. And I know that that's frustrating, but it is it is a strength. And so, um, in our frustration tonight, let's all just appreciate that as well. And then do you have a response? Awesome. Thank you. >> Yeah, this is it up on the screen here. This is the um geo grid that is being proposed by the um by the applicant. This was reviewed by our ing staff and um is explained in detail in the engineering report that I'm trying to pull up right now um as to why this isn't um an approved use or an approved service within uh the city here. There are some concerns with the longevity of using that geo grid consistently like multiple times a week for several months on end. It can create mud issues or tear up the grass and could source for the surrounding neighborhood. It could create problems with cars um getting out of the the lot itself and um public safety when I met with them on Wednesday. Um this was also brought up uh by them uh as to their concerns um with getting the emergency vehicles through because they have um specific rolloff tests for the um fire trucks, the fire engines to get through and they had some concerns with um this surface's ability to withhold that. So >> also just add geog grids um are not necessarily great for clay soils and we have a lot of clay soils in cork. So that's another reason why we wouldn't necessarily want them allowed across the board. >> Okay. So the uh top three things um that I know have been uh risen to the top and then I just want to hear if there's anything else that we're missing is the parking screening to the south and the east. uh that's recommended um by staff. The driveway issue and the um exceeding the accessory structure which is coupled with the um whether or not we would allow an after the fact variance or stick to our guns on the um existing pole barn needing to be moved. So, those are the things that uh if that I see we sort of need to present solutions to um or make uh decisions regarding, but is there anything that I've missed or anything else that somebody else wants to bring to the >> Can I ask a question about the existing pole barn? And I know it had it in here, but I can't find it real quickly. Um is it is it placed just a couple feet off or is it >> What is the main issue with the placement? It seems pretty far set back. >> Yeah, it's within the required front setback. >> Uh so it's it's within the minimum setback area from Rush Creek. So the shoreline overlay district requires a 100 foot setback from the creek whereas um the pole bar now looks to be um based on the survey about 42 feet away from uh from the uh east bank of the creek. >> And it's how far? >> 42. >> 42. It needs to be 100 to by quite a bit. >> Do we also want to address any any lighting concerns? I know that we >> in the report it requires one foot candle at the property. >> 10 foot candle at the propert. >> Is that is that how the code reads? >> That was Yeah, that was >> I thought one foot candle commission. >> That was your recommendation, Commissioner Harage, that we It is one for most uses but because of the uh residential and agricultural nature nature of this we had said 0.1 >> 0.1 was more appropriate to limit to limit light pollution. >> Okay good and what about sound? Do do we is there I presume there's a concern that there might be too much sound too much v um >> do we want to address that? >> So I I will It's we can clarify it in the resolution, but they would be subject to the noise pollution standards in a residential area by state law. Um, so if there were significant noise concerns, um, then there there is a way to enforce that without it necessarily being part of the IUP, but we can certainly reiterate that in the IUP. Um, there is a lot of a lot of vegetation particularly to the west and the north. Um, and but if there's other ideas, we can certainly discuss that. >> I think the building itself is insulated. I'm sure looks like it's going to be >> it will have to meet building codes. Yes, it will be information. >> Well, I'm talking about if people go outside and >> walking in the >> Well, they who knows what happens outside. So, >> I want to make a proposal for this driveway. I would really like to just be able to ask aut question to the applicant. >> Um, you have concerns about the parking lot size, the number of patrons. Can you speak to, you know, if if we're talking about 80 here, you said you need to be able to generate revenue to make your business sustainable. I really want to understand what that the number of patrons is that you're talking about coming through. I know we've talked about the parking and everybody come, but can can you speak to that for a second? like what your goals are to be sustainable. Is it 30 people you're anticipating on average? Is it 80? >> So, so we in our business plan, we have a a uh a number that they that they determine goes down county road 30. And so our idea is to capture some of that traffic going down. Um if you've been to a vineyard, it's not like they're ever really full unless an event is going on. We are just building space and the the the our goal with the the type of parking lot we have. there will be gravel underneath that the geo whatever stuff and so this is just an ability to get the grass to grow above that to maintain the rural >> the I really want to be specific about about my question though it it's not I don't um gravel geogrid I imagine engineering will figure that out my question is really more geared towards the the sound and the concern for the disturbance on total number of people there on a given day. If you're hosting a music event, are you anticip What are you hoping to accomplish there? >> We don't know what the number of people are. We're on County Road 30. And honestly, I'm just going to be totally frank with you guys. Um, come to our house and listen to County Road 30. If if you want to talk about noise, that is more of a disturbance than we ever plan to have from people hanging out, having a glass of wine, coming and buying a bottle of wine. I mean, that really is the disturbance in the area. Um, with the number of people, I I guess I we're really I feel like we're really getting hung up on this. If if we don't know, I mean, on one day we could have two people come in. Another day, um, it could be we could have, you know, 10 cars there. It's it's a seasonal thing. We have restricted hours. It's not meant We're not looking to have a big party, but we are trying to make it educational as well. vineyards have you know you know quiet spaces people play games they play bags they some of them have botchi ball it's it's not meant for >> with the agro tour or not the agurism but the farm winery license we will be producing the grapes >> on our property we currently have 750 vines that is roughly 4,000 bottles of wine that's that's currently our maximum capacity how you know, if if if every day we sold we sold four bottles or let's say, you know, that's a thousand days. If it's 10 bottles of wine, then it's 400 days. You know, we don't know. But that's we have a limit because we have we're not going out and buying we don't have the ability to go out and buy bottles of wine. We will be producing our product on our land. When that runs out, I mean, this might be moved. we could be open for two months and then we're done, you know. Um, so so it it's it's based on the amount of product that we can produce and currently our projections are $4,000. >> Yeah. Just trying to kind of close the gap on the you know the concerns of of that have been voiced and and your intentions relative to your business. So that was the the question about >> and the other thing we picked this spot spec I'm sorry didn't mean to interrupt you. We picked this spot specifically because it's on County Road 30. So, we're like, "Okay, we already have a road there, a very, very busy road and we're fully insulated." And, you know, I've asked people to come out and check it out. Um, fully insulated with trees all the way around. We're happy to we're we're really like no one will even be able to see the parking lot or the tasting room from the street or anywhere around. So, we're happy It's, you know, we want to maintain that that that um a grow. It's just like any other, you know, there's a bunch of farms out there now where you can go I don't know if you can go and buy the stuff on there, but we're just looking to have the ability to be able to sell our product, produce our product there. Like we said, um the grapes, you can't grapes don't make any money. I mean, we know if we don't change our model, And I don't know. I guess that's it. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So, uh, recommendation for park or the driveway. Um, I'm looking at the site plan. I don't know if you'd like to pull it up, um, from your staff report. Dwight, it's page three. And I'm wondering is it possible to go instead of having a straight driveway, which it looks like it is right now, to do um two little uh half circles. Do you know what I mean? Would that allow like around the trees, right? So we don't we leave the trees where they are or no. >> I'm just trying to think. um county would have. So if you're talking about like basically two driveways onto the county road splits off >> from to the parking lot. Yep. So if the concern is two-way traffic, >> right? So you've got one side that goes this is our in traffic. This is our out traffic to the driveway. But we're trying to save the trees. It's a thought. >> I don't I don't know. It doesn't need to be like >> can the emergency vehicle get through the trees? >> If it can, what's the problem? two traffic. >> It's not a long driveway. >> They can pull over. They can back up. >> I mean, yeah. >> They do it all the time. >> People do it all the time. >> 400 ft. >> I this this trying to make these big commercial driveways and parking lots in our rural area, I think, is silly. >> I'm sorry. It's probably based off public safety and engineering. That's what I'm saying is I hear you and I wouldn't necessarily but because what we have is the recommendation from public safety. I'm trying to see if there's an alternative solution that would get us through so that this this um makes our recommendation that much stronger for council. That's what I'm trying to do. So that's a thought. um I if the concern is and then going with the width or what have you the remainder part of the driveway but at that point um just creating that in-n-out traffic if that would allow you your two-way traffic um without having to remove the trees that's a recommendation that I have um I am stuck on the accessory structure I hear you and I am empathetic at the same time we cannot um have finances be the sole reason um why >> existing poleburn >> right for the existing pole barn and I feel like the thing that I keep getting stuck on is the is that the people who lived there prior to you being there are the are the ones who have um tied your hands on this um but I do know that moving forward because other folks in the rural area have put forth applications and it does require bringing the property into compliance um in order to be in order to move forward. So, I would at this point in time like I would stick with what the staff report has said, which is you either take it down or move it. Um, just because I don't think that it would be um I would not put your time and money into the variance. >> I I got an email from staff saying that if we proposed a new spot for that that was fine. They would not move forward and tell us we needed to move it. And the city did on the afterm when we purchased the property. I made sure I'm a realtor. I made sure that all permits were full. They were in the city signed off on it. So now we're being held and we're going to have to pay for another varant for something that we thought we dotted our eyes and crossed our tees on. Um and the city signed off on in advance and then when we brought this forward we going to add on to that and they I literally have an email where they say we will not go forward and if you move the site we will not go forward and pursue this building. Have an email from the city >> and there's no room to put that building. we'd be sacrificing crop land basically because we can't grow crops or we can't grow vines right next to >> so we we move the building based on um the original plan so I apologize for any miscommunication what you guys said I have it in writing >> I I believe you I'm not I'm just what I'm saying is I'm not no one on staff is able to approve that so obviously there was definitely miscommunication I take full responsibility that it was not worded in a way that reflects how we can operate, but staff is not able to administratively approve a variance. >> That we weren't that that's what you guys said that we wouldn't have to get a varisted. We were just going to leave it as is. We weren't changing anything to it. You guys take a new spot. At this point in time, it sounds like we are going to have to take what's presented to us in the staff report. And because a variance isn't a part of this uh application as it is, it isn't anything that we are going to be making a recommendation on tonight. And then that is something that is going to have to be um sorted out. >> Um just for you guys to know. Um so when what we will be making our uh recommendation on is the site plan, the interim use permit and the zoning ordinance amendment. And at this point in time, I with all of those things, unless there are major discussion points moving forward, um based on the fact that the applicant has said that they don't have a problem removing some of the unnecessary sheds on the property, they are combining the two parcels. That sounds like we're going to get within 300 feet of that additional accessory. And I'm and I am okay with the amendment language on both the sign and the accessory structure. Um >> the size of the new Yes. >> Yep. And so at that point in time, um unless there's anything else that I have missed in terms of taking notes regarding things that needed to come to come up, I am prepared to make a motion. I'd say go ahead. >> Okay. So, at this point in time, then I would um make a motion to um approve the site plan, the interim use permit, and the zoning ordinance amendment with a s suggestion that in order to save the trees uh and accommodate public safety's comments that we see if if some sort of a curvature off to either side is uh reasonable. And um I believe that that was the only additional or the only change. Um so that's my motion. >> Madam chair. >> Yes sir. >> Recommend approval, not approve. >> I said recommend approval. >> Oh, I just heard approve. >> Yeah. No, I I fully understand that my role >> you're only to make a recommendation for uh to council. I am not an elected individual. Are we also going to include in there the geog grid? >> We cannot because current code states so this is already the compromise and we can't make a recommendation that does not fit within code if I'm correct. >> Is that code or is that just city opinion? City engineer opinion. >> No, that's that's city code sir. And so we cannot make a recommendation to do something that's in violation of a city code uh unless >> correct be a variance or a zoning ordinance amendment. So I would say at this point we're not prepared for either of those. >> So the interim use permit is to operate an aggra business and to allow the size of the building the new building >> the correct the additional Yes. because the zoning ordinance amendment allows gives the city the opportunity to change the accessory structure. And not to be like nitpicking, but there is a motion live on the table. So, uh we do need to um >> pause. Okay. So, all those in favor, it's been seconded. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed say nay. >> How about a here? >> Does it have to be one or the other? present. >> Um, you can abstain, but you would have to have a a significant reason for abstaining. You're either for or against. Do you have to state your reason for abstaining? >> You don't have to state your reason, but it's just practice. Yeah. That you typically only abstain if you if there's a conflict of interest. >> No. Okay. >> Here. >> Yes. >> I >> Okay. Okay. So for clarification, the recommendation the motion for the recommendation of approval of the vineyard site plan intermuse permit and zoning ordinance amendment received an I from all five commissioners. Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I I did not. Um >> did you say nay? >> I'm I'm going to to say nay. >> Okay. >> All right. And so then we have the four yays and the one nay. And then that means that um and council will receive a synopsis. That's why we have a council member who sits with us um to receive some information on sort of the um discussion and the recommendation both sides. So that takes us to the end of our new business which brings us to our next item on the agenda which is the city council report from Councilman Baronamp. Is there anything you want to >> It's been a quiet couple of weeks. Not much has changed. So, >> quick reminder, we've got the demolition derby, the last event at the Lions Park on Saturday. Um, all the events have gone very, very well. Don't know if anybody's had the opportunity to be there. Um, the park is moving along the changes in the park. Um, I'm excited for that to to get through that first whole phase. We'll have a community room. We'll have a playground, a splash pad, a parking lot, all kinds of stuff. So, >> what do they anticipate having done this this year before winter? >> Hopefully, it gets done as soon as possible depending on the weather. So, >> I can't I can't get an end date on when it's all going to be done, but >> they're trying to get as much >> they're going like crazy. Yeah. Yeah. >> So, >> check it out. >> If I may, I have a follow-up question regarding a question that was asked by Commissioner Zachman at the last meeting, and that's in regards to the Quick Trip application. >> Yeah. I'm wondering um so there are other commercial businesses in residential areas that have hours of operation till 1 or 2 a.m. respectively, >> right? >> What were the findings of fact that um that council had that restricted or limited the hours on the Quick Trip? I know that the Quick Trip app like has Quick Trip has found out, but I'm curious why there was or what the findings of fact were that allowed that to be restricted to different hours than the other commercial businesses. >> Natalie, do you want me to feel that or what? We didn't have findings of fact. It was a recommendation and a motion made by one of the council members. Okay. We while we were doing everything, we specifically asked the applicant about limiting hours and if they had other establishments, other quick trips with limited hours. They said yes, they did. The motion was made to limit the hours from 6:00 am to 10 p.m. on that. We all agreed to that and then the applicant after the fact decided to not move forward with the application. >> And when the recommendation was made by the council member, they didn't indicate why they felt like they needed to make a recommendation. >> So I'll just clarify a little bit. So yeah, um when the hours discussion came up, they do have other that are open 5 to 11, but it's usually because of a a citywide ordinance or there's like a lot of crime in the area or something like that. So, they're so they just decide to close out of safety for their employees. And then the >> requirement that got added to the permit went a little further and limited instead of from 5 to 11 to 6 to 10. And so I that does especially that 5 a.m. a lot of construction workers are going to that they're going to go to quick shift for their breakfast. So, they do actually miss a lot of business by not being able to open till 6:00 a.m. I think. Um, now granted, um, once the motion got made to add 6 to 10, I don't think there was a lot of back and forth with the applicant after that point when it originally >> there was no comment. >> Yeah, I think at that point they they just kind of accepted that this was going to be the result and um made their decision from there. Sure. >> But the I think part of the reasoning was just Yeah. it was seen as a way to mitigate uh the impact of the gas station uh to the surrounding neighborhood so that it wasn't a 24-hour operation. Um, so so the idea of limiting potential uh negative side effects of a gas station, not to say that we have seen that so far in courtroom, but gas stations in other areas, again, usually a lot more urban areas, they they do have crime. So I I think and it tends to happen in the middle of the night. So I think there was trying a concern to try to avoid that all together by having clothes every night. >> Okay. So I guess I was just trying to get at because there isn't a citywide ordinance >> trying to get at some consistency. So, if a future applicant wanted to come to the city, they there was sort of a um objective uh like objective um standard that that felt known at the beginning of the application process. >> I Yeah, I I don't um I don't disagree. I think that's always ideal, but I think At the same time with conditional use permits, part of it is responding to the application in front of you and you might have additional stipulations about codes. That's always kind of a risk with >> you guys said it really well. The conditional use side of it if it was just a straight application with and everything fell in and they're they weren't asking for a conditional use and stuff. I don't know if we could do that. We don't limit it now on the current gas stations >> that are there. They're picking their own hours. >> Gas station by code are all conditional use permits though, are they not in the mixed? >> Correct. I I don't Yeah, but the way our code is currently written. It's just I don't I don't know. We'd have to look at the history of the two gas stations that we do have in town. I don't know if they have a CUP or if they were before it was required by CUP. I'd have to look at to look at more details before I could speak on that. I do know that Crossroads, they just decide to close early. That's just It's interesting because I feel like I when the Domino's came up and I was like that's open till midnight and it's takeout only >> and people are might be loitering around the park and like I don't know crime. So it's interesting that but that passed till midnight and then this didn't I just I'm I just found it interesting. So, someone had presented I think some like I believe some a member of the public had presented a report where it was talking about quick trip in specific unfortunately had been there were instances and they were ne weren't even necessarily in Minnesota but there were just instances in the middle of the night of the employee being harmed by someone coming in. So, I don't think that's necessarily a concern of a takeout pizza place as much as that was a documented concern of the gas station. Also, I just want to note that on Fridays and Saturdays, Domino's open till 1, >> not just 12. So, >> that was the only question I had by way of followup. So, I appreciate it. I just want to make sure that we're always uh doing our best to to um to be clear um about expectations or what have you. Um so, and it's disappointing. um to just in the sense that Mama G's was really uh relying on and that had been something that was in the works for a while. So, I just wanted to follow up and see if there was anything that we were missing in terms of standards or what have you um that we needed to be aware of for future planning issues that came um across our >> our desks. So, that was all I had. Did anybody else have any additional questions regarding city council? Okay. Okay. And then the uh planning project update. The only um well actually mine couples with the commissioner leazison on calendar. Do anybody have any questions for staff regarding the planning project update? >> No. >> And then the commissioner and leazison on calendar. We know it's still optional. Our question, a couple of us had it, was is that going to be something that is accessible in the granas or I I legislate because it's currently not in there at all and someone was asking about swapping and there's nothing beyond September 11th on paper or in the system. So, I didn't know if that was something that was going to continue. So, I know it was on the bottom of our reports and it was recommended because it's optional and not required like it once used to be, but if there was uh if there was still going to be a regular rotation, is that something we could find somewhere? >> Yeah, we can add that. The the way the Granica system works is when we attach files in the system when we're uploading it, it autogenerates that agenda page. Um, so I'll just have to add a new attachment that shows that calendar at the end. So, it won't it won't that agenda page anymore. It would be towards the back of the report. So that's something that was overlooked with this first. Okay. >> You know, run through with Granus, but >> it would actually be towards the end of that that under that commissioner liaison calendar to correct. >> All right. Does that answer and so we can decide how we want to do that? Maybe just after the fact. Um, Commissioner Zachman was wanting to um swap with someone and um so I I can take your September 11th if you want to. whatever mine is next. Um I'm not sure or we can just pause and wait for an update um before because I know you said you wanted to swap maybe for November >> October November just next Thursday. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Um Madam Chair, I do want to just add one more clarity. Um there is Okay. So basically we will be out of town at the end of September uh as part of the planning conference with the state and um as such we had intended for the M&J Creek Side Vineyard application to go to the September 11th council meeting. >> Okay. >> Um we'll have to take a look at that to see if that's still feasible. Um but as far I just want people to be paying attention if if they want to see this go to council take a look at the agenda packet that gets posted. um it could be as early as next week that it goes. >> So for members of the public, that packet will be um published and available on the website by 4 or 5:00 p.m. tomorrow. >> And so if you wanted to this uh this application may go before council at their next meeting, which is September 11th. So, just the recommendation would be to check the city's website for that agenda tomorrow evening or in the days following to just uh see if it makes it on to the September 11th agenda. Okay. Anything else from anyone? If not then we will adjourn. [Music]