We will call this meeting to order. Um, we'll take roll call. Uh, Braum is not here. Har Greaves here. Kaziki here. Lind is here. And Yang is also absent. If anyone would like to join us for the pledge of allegiance. 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. Okay. So, I normally don't do this, so patience with me tonight as we're we're subbing in. Um so first we will go through the um agenda and looking at the agenda for this evening. Are there any amendments that staff or the commissioners would like to make to tonight's agenda? Madame Chair, staff has no changes. Okay. I'll entertain a motion to approve the agenda. Um yes, I'll I'll second that. You'll make it? Yes. I'll make the motion. You got I'll second it. We have a second. Okay, we're all set. Um, we need a vote real quick. Oh, and all in favor say I. I. All opposed. Okay. Next, we'll open the floor to anyone in the public to participate in the open forum. You can address the commission uh with any items not already on the agenda this evening. Um, are there any other items? Don't believe so. I believe this might be the applicant team. Okay, great. And we will then move on to the minutes. So, from the november 7th, 2024 meeting, are there any edits um or changes, reflections to the minutes that anyone saw? It all looks good for me. Motion to approve the minutes. Second. And all in favor say I. I. All oppose. Awesome. Okay. So now we will move on to new business. Um so all items tonight, new business are a public hearing. Uh public comments are limited to inperson only. um speakers if you can fill out a card um at the start of the meeting otherwise we will we have a small enough group we'll um welcome you to the podium and um we have a fivem minute time limit for those that come up to speak um at the podium. So with that first one hold farm ridge preliminary plat and variance city file number 24 034 staff report. Thank you madam chair. Yeah. The first item on tonight's new business is a public hearing for uh the Old Farm Ridge Preliminary Platinum and Variance. Uh the applicant, Michael Kelly, is requesting approval of a preliminary flat to create a lot at 6620 county road 116. The lot itself is currently zoned urban reserve and has guided existing residential. The request itself includes a preliminary plat and a variance to create a lot that is less than the minimum urban reserve lot size of 20 acres. So, a little background on on the site. Uh, the property was originally platted as an outlot in 1978 as part of the Country Seasons Estates subdivision. This outlot was unique in that it contained multiple agricultural buildings and the ex the original farmhouse. This subdivision predated the development rights program. So, the staff report from the um from the subdivision didn't explicitly say um that the parcel contained a development right on it. Uh however, staff is staff concludes that with the existing um residential structure on there, uh the development right was implied on u on the parcel once the development rights program was uh created and after it was establishment rights program was established. Uh the farmhouse had since been demolished and um the map should have been updated to uh include one development right on the parcel. analysis of uh of the request. The proposal uh the pro the proposed lot meets all the minimum dimensional standards of the urban reserve district except for one which is the minimum lot area. Uh the applicant is requesting uh approval of a lot area of 7.65 acres where a minimum lot area of 20 acres is required. Uh the this lot is in the urban reserve which is um designed to limit premature subdivision uh for any parcels that are within the Musa that don't currently have access to sewer and water. Uh and it does this through the minimum the large minimum lot size of 20 acres. Um the applicant does not request to divide the parcel only just to construct a single family home on the on the structure. Uh it's worth noting that outlots by definition city code cannot be developed prior to platting. So in order for him to construct on this on this parcel he needs to plat it and in order to platt it he needs approval of a variance. Um, the maximum allowed size for any attached accessory structure on this property is 4,281 square ft and the applicant is requesting an attached garage of 4,125 ft, which does comply with this requirement. The site itself contains um large amounts of wetlands and a county ditch that runs uh down the middle of it. Uh and due to these natural constraints, uh access to the site will be required to come off of County Road 116 and the applicant will um have to coordinate the proper permits with Henipin County since it is a county road to g gain that access. The site itself is in the fourth stage of the 2040 uh staging plan for uh municipal sanitary sewer and water. Uh currently we are in the first phase of that of that staging plan. So in the interim uh the applicant will be required to um have the um have the residents be served by a private septic and well system uh which they will also be responsible for obtaining the proper permits um for those as well. The variance uh is being requested from section 1040.020 subdivision 9 which requires a minimum lot size of 20 acres in the urban reserve district. Uh the proposed plat is 6 7.65 acres and staff believes that this application does meet the standards and practical difficulty threshold for the variance. Uh the practical difficulty the practical difficulty in this uh request is that the site itself in its entirety is less than 20 acres and cannot be enlarged to meet that minimum lot size requirement. Um the circumstances are unique to the site as it was an outlot that was created prior to the establishment of the zoning district uh and has an assumed development right which um most outlots um don't have that assumed development right and and didn't have an existing residential structure on it in in the past. uh staff believes that granting the variance aligns with the existing character of the locality and is consistent with the comprehensive plan as the surrounding locality is uh used primarily for um residential use. Um but to just to ensure that this use of the site continues to meet um the surrounding locality, uh staff proposes a condition requiring any commercial activity on the parcel at all to comply with the home occupation ordinance and follow the proper approval processes. So, at this point, staff recommends that you open the public hearing and take testimony. And we also recommend that uh you recommend approval of the preliminary plat and uh variance with the conditions of approval as outlined uh within the stat within the draft resolution in your packets. Uh the planning commission has the option to either recommend approval of the draft resolution without changes or you may um wish to add additional amendments if if you desire. Otherwise, um if the commission uh recommends denial of the of the uh variance, uh then you should probably also um recommend denial of the of the preliminary plat as they are in intertwined. A question for staff. Thank you. Right. Um should we ask the applicant to speak first or open public? Yeah, certainly. Would the applicant like to approach the podium and speak to any of these pieces? Hi, my name is Mike Kelly and I'm I'm the owner of the piece of property. Um, I don't have anything really to speak on, you know, been working with Dwight for a long time and we've got it to a point that we're pretty happy with. Yeah. Awesome. Well, there was no need to present. Just wanted to ask you in case you did some Okay. Sometimes I want to clarify further details from what staff reported. So, okay. You have any questions for me? Um, so we can always kind of press pause on that for now and open go through the motions of the public hearing. Okay. And then um can open it up for further discussion and Okay. Thank you so much. All right. And with that, we'll uh open the public hearing. Does anyone want to make any statements in the crowd? Anyone? Okay. So, with that, I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing. I'll make that motion. I'll second. Great. So, let's deliberate. Quick vote. Sorry. Oh, I'm sorry. All in favor say I. I opposed. I'm sorry. No, you're you're doing I'll get there. All right. Doing great. So, now we deliberate. Yes. Any initial thoughts? Um, I understand that you did talk to the neighbor to the north because that's the closest person impacted. Is he here today? Okay. And you're fine with this and Okay. I mean, nice to have you here. Yeah. Um um oh I do I do have one question. There's um a proposed on-road trail along County Road 116. I do believe pull up the parks and trails. I believe you're correct. Um, was there anything in the engineering memo about additional right ofway needed for that onroad trail? I don't believe so. I can certainly look into it a little bit further. I don't believe that the engineering report had any comment on the um on-road trail. You don't believe there is one? Well, it's more of that do we need additional right ofway to accommodate it? I don't know that that is um something that we are asking for at this time. Okay. Yeah. 116 says existing on road trail on 116. Okay. So if it's existing that would just mean that we have right of way for a painted shoulder and then along the um south border. What is that? Is that um I had to park. Yes. Yeah. Already there. Yep. That's a proposed onroad trail there. They're actually already It's already there. Oh, is it really? Okay. All right. Those are I know there's a lot of wetland on the site. That's why I was kind of wondering about that. But okay. Is there any, and maybe not so much for this one, but is there are there issues with access onto the county roads at all? Does the county have to approve that? And and that's been done also, I take it. Yeah, I've actually uh I've actually contacted them in the last couple of days and um they are in favor of me uh coming off of 116. Uh made the application and it's just a matter of them approaching it. Great. All right. Have nothing else. I have a couple of questions. Um on page four of eight where it talks about um attached accessory struct structure sidewall height. Um it says a proposed sidewall height of said structure is 16 ft. And this is the maximum sidewall height of the detached accessory structure in the front yard is 10 ft. So what exactly is the sidewall height requirement? So there really isn't one for an attached accessory structure because it's it's attached as part of the house. We have that restriction for detached structures and I believe it's is kind of a I don't I don't really understand it. I think it was something to do with just that the quality of pole barns being put up um and just making sure that if it was larger than that that we were kind of have a review mechanism. So we were allow them by CUP. Okay. But we don't have that process for an attached structure. Okay. So, does this structure need to abide by any of the um residential codes that are listed in the um um in a district design standards or we don't have any district design standards like we have a southeast district plan. There is nothing that would be applicable to this property. the architectural standards and our southeast district are much more recommendations and they are requirements. Um our northeast district standards are a bit more are more stringent. So but that so this is in an area where um they have a little bit more free reign to make those calls. So there wasn't anything required of them presumably. Then Dwight has already discussed the the aesthetics with the applicant then I would think. Yeah, that is correct. I've I've been in conversations with the applicant about their um proposed building materials. Do we know what materials this structure is going to consist of in terms of exterior materials? Uh off the top of my head, I don't have it. Um it typically gets reviewed with the building permit application for a single home like this. Okay. I'm curious though. Yeah. No, that's fair. Um, so the so the building permit is where we would get house detailed house plans that go over the materials. Understood. Can I ask the applicant what the materials are? Yeah. Uh, it's made out of, um, corrugated uh, steel, um, cedar beams and cultured stone as decorative stone around on the exterior. Yeah. And the I would think then if you that's the the siding material is the steel galvanized steel or whatever finish it is. Uh it's painted steel. It's painted steel. Okay. And I would presume that the roof is similar. Yes. Is the same thing. Yeah. As a matter of fact, I don't know if you have a slide of I sent in a picture of what Yeah. I think that's the that's the actual print of it, but I actually have a photograph of it's a rendition of a of a steel building that's a twotory. Mine would be a one story, but it's going to look very similar to it. Okay. It's a very nice building. Okay. Barn dominium, right? Yeah. You got some big Cadillacs you're going to store in that building, right? Maybe. Okay. I have no further questions. [Applause] Um just a comments are um appreciate the staff report. I think I agree with the conditions primarily of course the commercial activity needing to be approved or go through our process planting a tree. The wetland buffer I think they're all good conditions. um obviously appreciate that an unbuildable lot will become a nice large lot. We like to we of course like to see those things um that can be used. So that's great. The only question for staff and and if this is talked about later that's fine or later in 2025 but this type of situation of a plot being predating building rates and you know this is a seven acre lot not 20 it's more than 50%. So, does this create any sort of um precedents moving forward for other lots that might have been predating the building rights as well? Uh, so I would say for the most part lots that were created that have not been built upon that are less than 10 acres but were created to the best of our knowledge before the development rights program. We assume that they we air on the side of assuming that they have an assumed development, right? Okay. To be able they don't have we're not they couldn't subdivide further, but they could put a single family home on those properties. So, I don't believe it creates a precedent that we wouldn't treat similarly in other situations. I would say this is an unusual circumstance. Typically, we would um we don't see a lot of outlots in the city that had a pre-existing single family home and predate the development rights. Um, typically with an outlot, we're not going to see a structure on it. I can think of one other um outlot in the city that has a non-conforming structure on it. Um, but and that lot does have three development rate. That outlot has three development rates and that's the only other one that I'm aware of. Not to say that they're not out there, but I would say it is a fairly unique circumstance that we've come across so far. Okay. Um well with that any other comments from staff questions? My only other question again maybe it's for Natalie or Dwight um says uh this area um would get municipal services in the fourth and fifth stage of the 2040 staging plan. Are we in like the first or second stage? We're in the first phase. Yep. Yes. So is that in years? We don't really know. Well, so it's per comp plan because the comprehensive plan has a 20-year planning horizon. So it says 2035 to 2040 based on the staging plan of the comprehensive plan. I will say that um it likely will get pushed out extended further with the 2050 update. I'm not the one that actually makes that decision and so we could certainly take a look at it as part of the larger update. Uh but typically existing residential areas which is what's surrounding this outlot. Um we put them in the final stage to the idea being in the past that we don't want to force connection before residential neighborhoods are ready uh to petition for those uh services or at least push it out as far as we can. Is that what happens as a developer buys a property then he petitions to to No, not necessarily. We have so right now especially in the southeast area we have enough capacity for whatever is in our first phase. Additional infrastructure is going to be needed. So it's not as simple as they putting pulling something out the fourth phase and petitioning. Um I would say that we would consider a a small residential neighborhood needing to get those services. That might be treated a little different than a developer um looking to put new residential structures on several acres. Uh but everything in the first phase, they wouldn't need to have any kind of comprehensive plan amendment. That that's just something that they're allowed to do at this point. Now, if a developer wanted to move something up in the staging plan, that would be a comprehensive plan amendment that they would have to request. I'm just kind of curious to Sorry. So, it's a little different the process for a developer looking to subdivide versus an existing neighborhood asking to be a part of to get moved up. So these are all phase one. All these colored areas. Yeah. Everything in green is is not in the first phase. Looking at our correct. And then everything in white is not in the musa. Yeah. Yep. Because it's just they're they're disconnected, but I take it we're pulling utilities from Maple Grove. So that's why they're all over here in the east. And then we're going to have our water tower is looking very nice these days. Almost done. And our So the water's coming along. So Okay. All right. Just kind of curious how that whole phasing Yeah. and where they decide to, you know, bring the utilities in since they are kind of different areas. Okay. All right. Well, I will um make a motion to recommend approval of the draft revol resolution approving the preliminary platin variance for Old Rich Farm. Old Farm Rich. I'll second. All in favor say I. I. I and opposed. Okay. Thanks so much. Thank you. Good luck. All right. And with that, we'll move on to the next item on the public hearing, cannabis zoning ordinance amendment, city file number 24044. Thank you, Madam Chair. uh a little bit of background uh tonight the request if if we could just have excuse me step out that's okay just going to continue on if you want to talk cannabis you're feel free to stay um the item before you tonight is an update to the cannabis regulations uh so regulations pertaining to cannabis edible cannabonoids and drug paraphernalia um there is two components in front of you tonight for the public hearing. One is a repeal and replacement of chapter 119 which has to do with the business regulation and registration of businesses and then there's a zoning component which is what is under your purview. So the public hearing tonight is for both. Um and then the planning commission's asked to make a recommendation regarding the zoning elements. the um just a bit a little bit of background 2022 the Minnesota state legislature passed a bill permitting the sale and purchase of law uh low potency THC edibles and beverages. So last year we went through this exercise a very similar exercise but it was specific to low potency and then in 2023 uh so again 2023 we had adopted chapter 119 to address the low potency side and we allowed up to three licenses to be registered with the city uh within the city's three dedicated commercial districts which is our community commercial, neighborhood commercial and rural commercial. And then also in 2023, higher potency cannabis for adult recreational use was legalized by the state and the city adopted a moratorum to review the new regulations and study appropriate regulatory measures which does expire on January 1st. So that is why this is in front of us tonight to get this ready to go. Uh so the city attorney did mo did the drafting for chapter 19 and recommends a complete repeal and replacement of our existing section to fully capture all necessary changes related to licensing registration of cannabis related businesses. the current draft factors and feedback from council at the me last meeting on November 25th and the draft is as restrictive as recommended without creating a conflict with state law and licensing practices. Uh prior to this update, chapter 119 again allowed up to three licenses for lower potency products within the city. The update would allow for now two lower potency licenses and one higher potency retailer for a total of three retail businesses overall. Uh, additionally, buffers are proposed in the draft uh from all cannabis type businesses. So, not limited to the retailer. It is proposed for any um cannabis operation including cultivation and manufacturing. So that would be 1,000 feet from schools, 500 feet from daycarees, residential treatment facilities, and parks with amenities frequented by children. The state law does allow these buffers and the way the city attorney explained it is we can't be more restrictive. Um so the again the draft is proposing as restrictive as we feel without creating a conflict. So, the city uh has authority from a zoning perspective to regulate where certain operations are located, but the city must allow for each license type somewhere within the city. The current recommendation is for cannabis retail operations to be permitted in the rural commercial C1 and C2 as well as the lower potency hemp edible retailers. So, that is similar to what we currently have. And then um allow permitting cannabis cultivation with no retail component within the rural residential. And then cannabis state licensed businesses with no retail component or outside cultivation permitted use in the business park and light industrial. Um the but with that being permitted also clearly having performance standards for such businesses. Um, and so that's in a new section of city of the zoning ordinance being added that would uh so some specific uh performance standards would be cannabis retail establishments limiting hours from 10:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. And again, that's the maximum restriction that we can do as a city. The and then um requiring comprehensive security measures. So, security cameras covering all areas of the premises, both interior and exterior. An alarm system monitored 24 hours per day, seven days per week by licensed security company. Secure storage areas for all cannabis products. Outdoor cultivation areas as allowed in the rural residential district must be secured by a privacy fence of at least 6 feet tall and 80% opacity. Fences may not include razor or concertina wire. They can have barb wire, but these higher um razor or constant wire that really that my understanding is public safety would be more concerned with that with the public safety hazard that those can create. Um and then one thing I added since the draft went out was more discussion about the the gates to such fences. So that we they must be equipped with a locking device, be self-closing and have a self-latching device. This is similar language that we require for pool fences. So it seemed appropriate to add that in here as well. Um, adequate ventilation systems must be installed to ensure no odor is detectable from the exterior of the building or from adjacent properties. And then I also added in some clarification for outdoor cultivation areas because a ventilation system obviously is not going to be possible exterior. But uh they can take effective odor control measures to ensure that no detectable odor extends beyond the premises. So that might be that they are going to have to figure out how set back it needs to be that can't be smelt easily. Um, and I believe there's also some there are some measures in my brief research, and that was an interesting Google search to put it on my work computer, but there are some there are some measures that can be taken to u limit the smell. Um, establishments must have a plan for the disposal of cannabis waste that complies with state regulations and the operation of a cannabis business again is prohibited within 1,000 ft of school, 500 ft of daycare, treatment facilities or a public park regularly used by minors. I also added in accessory structures utilized for cultivation operations in the rural residential are subject to a minimum setback of 100 ft from all property lines. That's what we we require for agricultural structures. I wanted to specifically add this in under the assumption that there may be potentially a cultivation operation that doesn't meet the threshold for the structure to be considered an agricultural structure, but I think it makes sense to treat them have the same setback. Um Alzheimer's must comply with the city code and must not depict cannabis leaves, use slang terms for cannabis or appeal to minors. So those are the um we wanted to make these performance standards as objective as possible and make it um again make it keep it so that we aren't essentially adding an additional licensing requirement which would put us in conflict with state law but also making sure that we are being as restrictive as possible. Um we can always learn from it and adapt as we uh understand what's going to happen more. um we don't really have the greatest guidance for this. Uh but also trying to make sure that it's a it's a yes or a no. So it's very clear when someone doesn't comply and it's very clear when someone does comply. The recommendation tonight is to open the public hearing and take testimony on proposed amendments to the business regulations and zoning ordinance portions of the city code. Again, the preview of the commission is specific to the amendments made to the zoning ordinance and staff recommends approval of the draft ordinance amendment uh for title X and title I'm sorry, title 10 and title 11 of the city code. Thank you. Um we'll open the public hearing. No one is here, so I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing. A motion to close the hearing. I second it. Great. All in favor? Oh, all in favor? All oppose. Okay. Um and one thing I didn't forget to mention, if you wanted to see it, I do have um a map that was prepared for city council that provides the buffers. It may be a little difficult to to see, but I can certainly pull that up as well if it's desired. Well, I was going to ask for that with also like the zones we would allow these businesses. So, we could see like, okay, if you're driving from one end of the city to the other, could you be crossing it all the way across, right? Or up, down, sideways, like what is it? What does that touch point possibly look like? Yeah. So, um the rural commercial is one of the districts. So, it's this darker brown over here. The transitional rural commercial is more of a residential um district still uh until it's redeveloped for commercial. So, it's more of a holding zone similar to our urban reserve. So, it' just be this brown. Uh this is a daycare right here. So, this is a 500 foot buffer. Um, and so it's um these if these properties over here were to ever be transitional, I'm sorry, were to ever get reszoned commercial um then you wouldn't be able to put a cannabis retailer directly next to that uh daycare. But across the street, you probably could. Keep in mind this is these are mostly have active businesses. We have D and D right here. I don't think DND is going to be sell selling be a retailer. I could be wrong, but um the gas station's right here. So, it is possible that this gas station could um do the lower potency license. That's entirely possible. Uh so, it doesn't restrict I don't feel it over restricts, but we are restricting it to the to the extent that we can. Um and then I want to do the retailers first. So then this commercial C1 area right here is a potential place the nearest buffer zone is really city park. Uh and again that so there are some commercial properties right here that that excludes because of how close that is to fields and um a playground. Um and then we go up here we have some more commercial. There's not a uh the while there is a thousand foot buffer for the school right here and there is anticipated to be a playground over here, it does not conflict with the potential C2 properties over here. Um and then we have some more commercial down here. So that'd be where it goes. We only would allow three licenses in the city. So again, two for lower potency, only one retail like one dedicated high potency retailer. uh dispensary would be allowed throughout the entire city regardless of how many eligible properties there are. Um and then my with the way that it's drafted as well is we if the county were to exceed um one cannabis retailer for sorry the the maximum or the limit I forget how it's worded but it's one every 12,500 and so once the county has surpassed that limit uh the city can choose not to allow for additional license to be registered within the city. A lot. Yes. Yeah. No, that would be a lot. It'd be I think I tried to do the math. It's like 1.2 million. So, it was something like like 100 or 200. I can't remember how much it was, but it was definitely a lot. Um, but if we were to ever get that saturated, we do have some ability to say no if we haven't already received a a license to that point. So, our limiting it to three, two low and one high potency. Mhm. That was the the least that we could limit. That is the least the city attorney is is recommending. Yes. Can I I'm sorry. I was just going to So, I wasn't able to listen to the council meeting in November. Can you share just because I mean we are supposed to be reflecting the opinion of the public. They're not here at the moment, but what how many people were there? Did people have things to say? Okay. Um, what was council's feedback on this? Restricted to the extent as possible. Yeah. Yeah. So, this is where this is the draft that's Yeah. based on that. Okay. Okay. And the I remember when we had this conversation a year ago, the zones we chose were because we kind of looked at the types of businesses in the city and we chose those zones and that's kind of the same guidance as to why they're okay. Um, I did have a question about what the attorney's perspective was on these um what's the term the the the rules the um the performance operational performance standards compared to like liquor stores. We don't have any performance standards for liquor stores. So the there's licensing standards um and so yeah the these are above and beyond the licensing standards that would be with the state. So they so the way that it's worded is they have to be compliant with state that's allowed and then they also have to comply with our performance standards. So um I believe that there is more there is more regulation than a liquor license uh but it is being treated similarly. So if you want to get a retail license or if you want to open a retail establishment in the city, you have to have a registration with the state. Yeah. So there's a registration of the state. Exactly. Yes. Yeah. So he doesn't Oh, no. Sorry. And if you if you're just going to grow in the rural residential or the other areas where that's allowed, you just have to have a license from the state. There's a license with the state. Yeah. Yeah. Then it falls under like the agricultural rules that the city has in place. Similar. Yes. I think that in our city code, we say agriculture has to at least be 10 acres. I don't believe that we can restrict it from properties that are less than 10 acres. I think a lot of what we're going to see particularly for um the for commercial operations because obviously there's going to be personal operations that we have no ability to to circumvent. But for commercial operations, you're likely going to see indoor cultivation because of our climate. So I think that they're mostly going to be in people's basement or in a structure. So, I don't think it's necessary that we need to have a 10 acre parcel. Um, it's it's like I I think smaller would be better. So, um, but I think that it's just something to keep in mind that while we allow outdoor cultivation, we want to make sure that we have a place that we're allowing that. Um, I I think likelihood of that being a wide use, the outdoor component I think is probably not going to be as popular as indoor. So, and then as long as you have the odor regulations and things like that too, then the neighbors are not going to be affected by it. Yeah. Yeah. That was the intention of making sure that we're ventilating and that things are being securely stored. Yeah. Once we uh start moving down this path, um how easy or difficult is it to come back and change this ordinance as we learn more about this? I I don't it's is a matter of just making having the staff time and having direction to do that. I I think that at this point this is the this is the best draft that we can offer you based on the available guidance. I think there's going to be changes from the state level. I think there's going to be changes from the county level. So I think there's going to be a need to be reviewing this regularly over the next coming years. Yes. Cool. Um I didn't see is there a limitation to how many can be allowed to like um cultivate out outdoor cultivation. I asked because of this reason. Um, if we have six foot fences with 80% opacity and let's just say we haven't restricted it at all and we have 80 people that decide they want to create a conglomerate of growing this and we have fences all over the place. Is that I mean could that happen? I mean if we don't like the fence we can always we can always say we don't want the fence anymore. We could always remove that later if it before it got to that point. I doubt I I have spoken with people who are interested in having a cultivation operation. I think there's at least there's been one party. It's really small scale what they're talking about. So I don't at this time I'm not aware of an 80 farm conglomerate. Okay. I know I'm being dramatic. No, I know. But I'm just not even I'm not even aware of something that would be acres and acres. like the only party that has approach that is going through the licensing process with the state or is doing what they can to go through it because the lottery situation is something I don't even want to dive down. Um, but the only party that I'm aware of that has gone through the process of trying to navigate this, it is a very smallcale operation. What they're talking about it is it's something that would be in their basement very secured um that in that's not going to be like they wouldn't have a fence component. So I think that to to that extent I don't think that that is a uh well I wouldn't say it's not possible. I don't think that that is going that is a impending reality. Um, one thing I will say is there was a conversation with themes, our city attorney earlier this week about can we restrict cultivation. Um, yeah, and he um he recommends that that that is not something that we can that we should consider. State law only permits city caps on retail registrations. um we do need to make sure we allow it in one zone. Um and we could theoretically cap it in another as long as we allow it in one zone without capping it. So at this point um the outdoor cultivation component especially it to me it only makes sense in our agricultural area. It doesn't make sense to allow outdoor cultivation in our industrial area. So that's kind that's where we've kind of landed on these components. But to cultivate it you have to have a license though. Correct. Correct. And I will say I'm aware of um hemp cultivation already occurring in the city that's been licensed for years. So I I don't I think that um is to some extent is already happening and has not been an issue to this point. Okay. And the city controls how many licenses are issued for retail? Just for retail. Yeah. Not for cultivation. Not for cultivation. And we Yeah. So it's a registration component that happens on the retail. So we're the ability to license it itself we're not involved with as a city but we have some ability to register and then make sure it's going into the proper zoning code and meets our zoning performance standards. But if somebody wanted to a farmer wanted to take 80 acres or something and do an outdoor cultivation, there's nothing that would stop them from doing that other than just making sure they need all the license. Yeah. And the performance. Well, that's what I was saying is if every farmer decided I was just fences that we're conservative people in Corkran, though, so I don't think every farmer is going to be I I know. I know. I know. But we're supposed to think of these things, you know. No, I know. I And I I think that that's um I think that that is a fair consideration. I think it's also just the likelihood of it being acres and acres and acres and acres of outdoor cultivation where our growing season is very limited for a crop like this outside. I don't think that that is going to be a reality. There might be some, but I don't I think what would be more likely is we'll be seeing structures built for indoor cultivation and that's dictated by the size of the property and the size of the structure. So, so that's already has limitations built in. Yeah. And the setbacks and things like that. But again, we can always go back. Yeah. as we understand more as the state regulations change and then maybe city's authority changes to some degree then we'll be able to adjust as as as we can. So if if those cultivations uh areas were around Lindsay's house and she could bring something up and say I don't like that and we could some somebody could change it. We could go back and readress the I don't know that we can say that a cultivation area can't go anywhere in the city. So, we'd have to I don't I that part I don't know about. If there's a license already issued, it might be harder to revoke a license. Um I think that if there's like okay, we've learned from this and we need to add some performance standards that we can certainly do. Okay. Um and then again, if if something changes on the state level where either they're like, okay, this was too lenient and we need to we're going to allow some further restrictions, then I think we'd have some ability at that point. So maybe it's similar to what the moratorum that you guys put on um storage. What was the storage one that you put the moratorium on? Yeah, at this point we have exhausted the moratorum and the the state law will not allow for an additional moratorum at this time. Oh. So um so we might be getting more mini storage. Oh no no no for cannabis. No more storage. No more mini storage. Would it be similar to that if Yeah. So put a moratorum if there was a change if they started to become too many in the city just like you did with the mini storage. Uh so if there was a change in state law I think right now the way the state laws were no longer we we were given a year if we wanted to to put a moratorum um you guys already did the moratorum. Yeah. So so yeah it's unfortunately the the guidance from the state and county the county hen county had something in the works. We were told that that's now been delayed to 2025. So, unfortunately, we're we're kind of hanging by the edge of our seat. Unfortunately, we just have not gotten a great deal of guidance on how to implement this. Um, and what and I think our approach um from the staff level is we we don't want to be so restrictive that we gain a lot of attention and then we create problems on the legal side of things. Um but we do want to be restrictive to what um is compliant with state law. Does and again I'm going back to the how many of these might occur here. Is is there any way that you could say it could only occur every so many acres so that you can so you just can't have somebody come in and just start having all these cultivation that according to themes we can't restrict the number um in the zoning district that we ident that we allow the outdoor cultivation. Well, and I think that's an important distinction is outside cultivation is only allowed in certain areas of the city. So, we're already right. And then the likelihood that it grows in masses in those particular areas, I do agree the risk is probably low. And if the lawyer says we can't do it, I think um I have more questions, but I'll pause. It may not be very economically feasible anyways if you have to put up a big sixoot semiopaque fence, you know, and around acres and acres. I mean, when you have a corn or soybean farmer, they don't have to do that, right? But yeah, little higher value crop, but well, and then the security element because they have to have monitoring and so I think outdoor cultivation is going I don't like I'm not going to say that it's not going to happen. I just think that we've done what we can that that it might limit itself. Yeah. To the extent that we believe is possible. from uh did you have a if I if I could Natalie tell me to be quiet if I go too far. I'm not crazy about this at all. Everything has changed because there was 1,200 licenses originally and then that was reduced to 600 licenses. Was that in the county or state Natalie? I think that I I think that was the state lottery. I'm not I and and now it's all on hold. So that's number one good thing. Number two, the one group that is talking about doing it in our town wants it locked up. They want to grow 24/7 365 days a year. Can't do that outdoor. And they tell me that's the only way it would be profitable for them. Mhm. So, just I'm digging deep personally into this because and then for me and I think all of us up there, it's still a federal crime and we keep pounding our attorney that how can we do this when it's federal crime. Mhm. So, as you mentioned, this is how much attention we had at council and you got all of these people in the audience talking. We it's going to be as conservative as we possibly can if we have to. And that's my opinion, not the opinion of the whole council. So, doesn't look like there's that many licenses. That's right. Cannabis cultivator 13 licenses in the state. Yeah. I think there's other limitations at play. So, I I don't think But then a retailer there's 38. You'd almost think there'd be more cultivator licenses than a retailer. Yeah. I'm not quite certain what you're looking at, but I do know like the number of licenses being rolled out is already a limitation. Maybe this is social equity. Oh, this says social equity license. One um just a macro economic thought is I'm surprised that legal doesn't see an issue with these performance standards and not having any on liquor stores. Like could they come after I don't know maybe other cities are doing this but right because like not showing cannabis leaves like there's liquor stores with liquor bottles on the in the front right I mean so I'm just wondering are they going to come after the city for these performance standards and the hours being different than liquor stores and so the hours are the limits the the hours are called out in state law that we can we can limit it to those hours that we have to the system. So I I think the the way that the um guidance so far has read is that we do have zoning authority. Um still limited, but we do have some zoning capabilities to do some restrictions. Not to say I don't I honestly I haven't been very involved with liquor licenses and it's never really come up to this extent in my career. Could we do similar regulations? You have to look at it. I don't know that. Um I don't know. I'm not suggesting that. I just But um but yeah, I think it it's very possible that this could be too restrictive and we in to our best efforts, we have to go and adjust it per state order later on, but this is what uh themes was comfortable recommending based off of his um his knowledge looking into this over the last few months. Yep. Okay. It was more of just an observ like Yeah. No, we're all learning at the same time. It's all so unprecedented, right? Typically with signs, you do have to be careful with freedom of speech. So I was surprised to see that too. But but James taught me about sign ordinances. So if he says it's okay, then trust the lawyer. Okay. Um another question. Number four of the cannabis business types. What does number four mean? I'm sorry. Um cannabis state licensed businesses with no retail or outside cultivation component. Oh, so basically all the other types of licenses that don't have an outdoor cultivation or retail component. So there's a few different l there's like testing centers. There's some other licenses throughout the city. We're saying they can go in that industrial area. Got it. Okay. I was like, what type of business would that be? We're supposed to allow for each license type within some type of zone in the city. So that's kind of where we just So we are going to allow cultivation um rural residential. that takes care of the outdoor component, but we're going to limit cultivation and the industrial is just indoor only. And then industrial also is kind of the catchall for any of those other licenses that we didn't specifically call out. And then we only the retail component we only want to see in our commercial district. So, I think it looks pretty good. I agree. I think it looks good. Other questions or thoughts? Okay, let's see here. [Applause] I will entertain a motion to recommend approval of the draft ordinance amending chapter 19 and title X of the city code. Um I second. Can I change it to make a motion? Okay. And a second. Okay. All in favor? I I. All opposed. I'll say I. I'm not opposed. I'll go along. He's in favor. I'm in favor. Oh, okay. You do what you want to do. Whatever your vote you want. This No, I'm fine. I understand. I think the sentiment is very much. Um, okay. All right. Great. And now to other business. the giraffe 2024 annual report and 2025 priorities. Yes, I um thank you. I don't have really a presentation on this. What you have in front of you is the draft report uh reporting on everything that we worked on this past year. Uh feel free to let me know if you see any errors or if there's any clarification you think needs to be added. And then uh with this report, we also forward our our hopes and dreams for the next year. Um, I did hear back from Cher Braund. Um, and she said she wanted to add considering a tree preservation or replacement requirement particularly on agricultural land to priorities the priorities list and that was really the only comment I had from her. Okay. Um, I I included believe I did now I'm second guessing myself. I think I included your Did I not? No, I don't even know. Okay. What the reviewing the public hearing notes? Okay, good. Uh, so I included that one. And then, um, I know we've also have talked many times about reviewing our accessory structure ordinance to potentially make that a, um, figuring out where we could do an administrative approval process rather than continuously having cups that take less than two minutes to discuss and, um, cost time and money to process. Um, so that's what I have, I think, mostly for the uh, priorities, but please let me know if there's anything else that you would like to see. Sometimes we also uh provide priorities as to what we want our training session to look like in the new year. I have one question about the 2024 ones. Um so it looks like we held sessions on the role of and legislation surrounding the council break down the city code and comp plan state laws relevant to planning and the planning. When were those when were those held? The training session on the comp plan. We So that was the training session that we held earlier. So we did like a Jeopardy Jeopardy. That was the Jeopardy one. Was that the Jeopardy one? Yeah. Yep. Okay. That was the Jeopardy. And then the other ones state laws relevant to planning and the plan. Oh, that was in with two. Yeah, part of the two. That was all three of those were basically Oh, yeah. were a part of that training session. I see. Okay. Cuz that was the only training session I kind of remembered. So, I wasn't sure if it was three separate ones or Yeah, a training session was was was hold. Wow. Okay, I'll change that. Oh, yeah. It was was held. How did my word not catch that? Yeah. Oh, I didn't notice that either. Natalie isn't intelligent. You know that map that you showed um talking about where the um the areas could you send that to me? Could Could you the the one that I showed this meeting? Yeah, I will see what I can do. Right now it's not a published map. I have it. Um, this No, no. The one that showed the the radius the radius. I'll see what I can I'll see what I can do. I'll try to help me out. It's kind of on my computer though. He's actually our GIS expert. I would I just don't have to be dangerous with it. So, um I will ask him to help me figure out how to get to I have a few comments on the 2024 2025. Okay. Um, uh, is this like the recap to council of the impact we've made? Because if it is, I was thinking and you can shoot this down. Okay. But, um, does it make sense to report? These are just some ideas, but just I'm thinking about impact and I do sales as a professional, so this is kind of what I think about, right? But how many open forums were part of our work? How many I did see you mention the working session? Um, new ideas submitted or like things brought forth from this commission. Um, I don't think we ever keep track of how many people attend our meetings maybe, but no, we don't require people to Yeah. As far as the public, but like you know, there were some really well attended meetings that we had quite a bit of member of the public speak. I don't know if we ever keep track of how many members of the public speak in either any commissions meetings, but it might be interesting um to just show that impact. It might be interesting for a city to just know to show, hey, we're here and we're hearing from you and this is in what volume. Um, and then as far as our 2025 priorities, I just the way it was worded, I was like, hm, I wonder if there's a way that it should be broader in scope. Okay, let me find where this is now. Um, and this is just for you to consider. You don't have to do this, okay? I'm just thinking it out loud. Um, okay. In addition to the commission's role to review land use applications, the planning commission proposes the following priorities. I was just thinking about like we do more than reviewing land use applications, right? It's like guiding recommending to the council like the city the city direction, what what we're doing, what we're cultivating, what we want to see for our town. We're providing recommendations, guidance, and perspective. I just thought maybe that could be reflected maybe a little bit differently. Okay. So, land use application and provide recommendations on citydriven initiatives, something like that. Yeah, citydriven initiatives or however you want to state it. I just think, you know, the role that this commission plays is more than reviewing. No, fair enough. I was not trying to minimize the role. No, I'm not calling out the wording because that you are correct. That is um half the picture. Um so, I just want to be sure like council, you know, sees us as a partner. Yes. Um, the other thought I had, I know we talked about this forever ago, but for 2025 priorities, we talked about new businesses coming to town and the requirements to get access to services. We t um, okay, you might remember this, this was forever ago, but like getting sewer and water hooked up, the requirements, the investment, are there resources to help small business owners with those investments? those kind of just thinking about if I'm, you know, a new business owner looking to build a business in Corkrane, what do those resources look like? What are the requirements? It just can seem um like quite some challenges and hurdles. I don't know how we want to word that as a priority or if that's in capacity for 2025, but in the future as we are open and calling for developers to open businesses here in different areas of the city, we might want to make that barrier to entry a little bit more palatable. Okay. So, what I think we can say, so what you are talking about, yeah, uh starts to go into uh like an advisory body that you typically see for an economic development. So it's slightly different than the planning commission, but what we can do in the planning commission perview is reviewing our ordinances to reduce barriers of entry. I think that that's that's what I mean essentially. Yep. Cool. Um and the one other edit I would say and I appreciate that you included my suggestion around increasing the notice radius. I'd rather we rephrase it to be something along the lines of providing visibility. Maybe it's a brainstorm because I like how you said about the review landscaping standards. You, you know, posed it as a question like this is what we're solving for. I think my point is what we're solving for is development or large significant changes between well within the non-Musa area or in transition from Musa to non-Musa like those can be really impactful areas. posed the question, how can we um increase visibility of development proposals in the rural area and then example consider increasing by,000 ft. Okay. 500 to Yeah. Yes. Yeah. Do you know what I mean though? Because maybe we'll have other ideas. I don't know. Is there also some other way to put a notice out there or even on our website? We do. We do have notices on our website and we do have notice. We do a sign on the property. Is there a way for people to sign up for notices because you don't know when a notice is going to happen. You're not always looking. So, I believe you have to talk with Erin, but I believe there's a way to get the there's there's a subscribe option on the city's website for public notices. It's not very visible. Yeah, the the website that we use isn't the most and agenda packets for both council, mayor or council planning and parks. You can sign up and add all of those things. And so when those are uploaded, then everyone who subscribed gets an email saying that new items in the is it every new item or is it just certain ones? It's every new item. So I believe it's every agenda. the agenda and then um public hearing notices. It would be every public hearing notice. So it wouldn't just be zoning. It'd be you know we have public hearings for new liquor license and so there's other public hearings that we have too but it would include all the zoning um public hearings. So and it includes everything that's being brought before the commissions. Yes. To my knowledge, they asked that Facebook ton of ton of stuff that's out there that people got to sign up for. So, and then again, the the blue sign goes up. How long does that go up? That goes up uh typically after we get the Yeah, typically the same time that we were dealing with getting the public hearing notice published. We put up the sign. Yep. So, I mean, if you drive by, that's that's a good notice, too. the plan development that's happen is there. Oh, right. Right outside the Yeah. Yeah. On on whatever property. Yep. Yeah. There's there's certain small applications you won't see that with. So like um like the subdivision in front of us tonight, there's no sign for that. Our policy is more it has to be more than three lot subdivision. Um but for like the larger developments, you would see that. And then for like a conditional use permit uh in a near a residential area, things like that, you would see a development sign. What What are we doing? And and part of it's addressed in here as far as the community farms, agrees, things like that, but what are we doing or what could we do to promote the kind of development that we do want to see in this city and whether that's through creative financing options? I don't know if this Yeah. So again, that goes into economic development strategies, which isn't quite in our purview at this time. Um, there doesn't seem to be an appetite on city council to be financing development. Um so that would definitely be a much broader policy discussion before that that but what we can do from our perspective is again going back to what where can we reduce barriers of entry uh within our zoning ordinance and sometimes honestly even um time is money. So where can we streamline the review process? Do we need a site plan for a permitted business? Does that really need to go in front of the planning commission and city council? could that be approved in things like that can actually it can also drive um economic development and attract development more than not necessarily more but all in addition to um financing programs so we can look at where we can streamline our zoning ordinance. So making it as easy for a small developer to come in as as a big huge developer that can spend the time and have the attorney and you know jump through all the hoops and you know have this project on hold for however many months it takes to go through the process right for that doesn't require an EA like our downtown area from from what I look at the plan for the downtown area that sounds more like it would be more conducive to a number of small developers coming in and doing projects. You I don't know how are we planning on doing that. Is it being plotted out? Well, and then lots are being sold and the downtown the downtown area there's one landowner for the most part. I think there's a couple smaller. Yeah. So, there's one large land owner. So, he kind of holds the strings on that. Um but yeah, he could certainly work with different developers and parcel it out and um but until he's ready to move forward with something um the city is not uh really we're not able to force him to develop. So it's up to So that's on his timetable and you guys really don't have any idea when he plans on doing that. I haven't heard anything at this time. So I kind of I kind of poke at him every couple of weeks. That's the Hope development. There's a sign up there that they're like soliciting developers that want to come in and be part of that. So that sounds like it has been plotted out. I mean we have the plan first phase. Yes. So they would still have to come in for I I think it's a fourphase plan if four or five phase we can't remember. And are they soliciting for like one big developer? Uh I don't think so. I think it's going to be a combination. And so they have one developer for the villas and town homes. Um, so they're probably looking for another developer to do the apartments and it might be that they have they find a builder that wants to do one or all the apartment buildings. It's um I think that they're being flexible with it and um the commercial would likely be um it could be again it could be a situation where one commercial developer comes in and does it all. It could be that we someone wants to do this medical building, someone wants to do this retailer. It um it there's it's a dynamic situation at this point. Yeah. I'm just I mean what I've seen so far, it's it looks very similar to what other suburbs have done. you know, you get one big developer come in and they build a bunch of grade apartment buildings or town homes or it there doesn't seem to be a lot of character, a lot of, you know, variety to the developments that have gone in so far. And I don't know how, other than getting a lot of small developers to come in, how you get that type of variety. I mean, it sounds like we want our downtown area to look kind of like a main street of days gone by. Well, we don't have anything like that. I mean, we have no historical main street, no buildings existing. So, how do we keep it from looking like Arbor Lakes and Maple Grove? I mean, is is it just probably going to look like Arbor Lakes and Maple Grove? I don't know that it would look like Arbor Lakes and Maple Grove. Uh we do have that master plan for that area. So there's blocks and like on that that I I think just that alone would make it difficult to look um Arbor Lakes. Um but the the reality of uh encouraging small developers, it can be really challenging for small developers to pay for the infrastructure that's needed. So, I think that's we do have some small developers coming in. Um, a lot of them like I would say I I don't even want to say small, but like Woodland Hills is is a not necessarily a national developer to my understanding of their business model. Uh, but those are going to be very expensive homes to be able to offset the infrastructure that they're putting in. So I think that that again kind of goes back to the barriers of entry and with the current direction from council not wanting to facilitate any infrastructure investments other than what we have found absolutely necessary such as the water tower and water treatment plant and uh things like roads can be very limiting to a smaller developer. Um, so it's without having some kind of financing program to kind of offset that, it can be really difficult to have that level of control that you're looking for. Um, but I think what we do is we try to have that master plan so that when we do have a developer in the room, we try to stick as close to that vision as possible. So that's those are the strategies that we have there. So, the downtown area is a bit uh is a bit different than some of the other developments you're seeing um in that there is a a master plan for that downtown core uh in their southeast district plan. So, like St. Theres um really helped kick that off and I would say that that St. Terres development is there the um they have many amenities available to the public there. My understanding is there's the beastro. So, and there's supposed to be a um oh my god, I forgot the word. I never can say the word. the the deal outside. Thank you. I forget it too. The amphitheater like so that there can be connection to community. I think um that we have just that's really the first downtown component to start realizing that vision um that's come in and we think we did hold true to the zoning district and that southeast district plan and that um is aligning with like the road network that we anticipated for it and um the interaction between the community space and the private use. So, how closely does the city look at the aesthetics of some of these proposals when they come in? Is that pretty much just left up to the developer? So, we have building material standards that we look at um for our zoning code. And then again, the southeast district, it's recommended. That one was not really created with teeth. Uh the the downtown core is a bit different, but the larger southeast district, there is a recommended architectural and for like our planned unit development ordinance. I tried to do what I could to recommend that a bit further. Um but as far as like requiring a rural aesthetic um we don't that plan currently does not say you must. It's a recommended. The Northeast District has much higher level of building material standards. We have type one, type two, type two. We do look at it closely to the extent that our zoning ordinance has called out what is required of this district. Who ultimately then decides is that the when they issue the building permit does that when you say okay this meets our standards or so for like a single family home as part of a planned unit development. We require samples to go through the planning process and then we make sure that the building the building permits that come in are in compliance with those samples. Um the as far as like a commercial building or a multifamily building that requires site plan approval. So that does come in. Uh that's a little different than what was seen tonight where it's it was a plat and it doesn't require a site plan. So we don't we're not looking at the building materials for that level of a development. But for like multif family, we would be looking at the materials when it comes in for that site plan. Yeah. I think I'm talking a little bit more than just materials. I'm talking about the formal aspect of of whatever is being proposed. you know, terms. It's form, massing, architectural, it's articulation. Yeah. Yep. No. So, we look at that. That's all part of our building standards. Yeah. And that's you guys can input to that too on how on the whole design. It is usually part of our packets, you know. I'd like to see this. You guys have join. We look at it pretty closely. Um yeah, I would say that that's part of the analysis that we have to go through is just different districts require it to different extents and different uses require it to different extents. And one example, if I may, I'm sorry. Like Hope Church, they are going they are following Natalie, you guys can correct me if I'm wrong. They are following the Northeast standards. Mhm. Or better that. So, while there's a sign up there looking for these people, they're vetting out people that are trying to do it not well. They are that's they have they're the general contractor. They want stuff nice around the church and they want it very specific. They've got some very specific thoughts and ideas, but they'll also listen Yeah. to the planning planning group. I mean, we're listening. Everybody's listening. And when it gets in front of us, you guys made comments, we made comments, and sometimes they say, "Let's take it back and let's let's reach this let's redraw it." But you, you know, I'll just use the what came forward tonight as an example. I mean, it would have been nice to have a little bit more. I mean, I I looked at the elevations and I go, "Geez." Yeah. So what that's different in that single family homes do not require site plan approval. So if if our zoning ordinance said single family each single family home we had to go to a site plan approval. Um I think that that would be where that would come in. So we don't have I understand that. I understand that but I'm just trying to understand my role a little and I'm still relatively new. So well that's what I'm trying to say. That's why it's a difference. That's why I'm just trying to explain that's the difference. When I when I jumped on the plenty commission, I didn't like things and I said it and I think Natalie was just starting out and there has been a lot of things done to kind of get things coralled and stuff, but but you don't want to say it. You don't want to say it when it when it's time to act on it. Well, you don't want to Right. But you don't want to look like trash. I don't like it. You want to say, "I think this would be better." Say it and then make the suggestion on what you think would make it look better. Yeah. In comments like Maple Grove, it was brick, stone, glass. That was what things had to be done used. It couldn't be tipups. It couldn't be those kind of things. That's how much that improved in time. A lot of it looks the same and stuff, but it's still pretty. It's all done by one developer, so it's all going to be uniform and look the same. But as Natalie said, that's what we've got next door here. The whole corner here is owned by one and then the other corner is owned by the same. But you have to understand it is so much it's it's it's like an oxymoron. I mean on one hand we're we're trying to make it easier you know we to encourage and then on the other hand we say well I want to see more you know it's just but if but if you do have a standard set in place that they can take and look at that and then not have to get approval for every little thing. I think that's what we're trying to make a little easier. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I would like for me, you know, because I'm an architect, so I would like to see stuff, you know, before a a lot more detail before it gets to like what happened tonight where we have to approve it. I mean, but I but maybe that's not maybe that's not what this is this is this is as soon as we can bring it to. Yeah. So, we're responding to an application that within the review deadline. So, it's really the we have any we don't we are not seeing this months in advance to influence it. And then I'd also say again it goes back to what is the use what is the district and those standards. So we don't have discretion to require of a single family home more than what our zoning ordinance set. So if we don't like the way the single family homes are looking then that would be performance standards that we're changing in our district standards. Okay. Okay. And we we've done it on as council. We don't like this facade. We don't like garages on the same side. I would like them flipped. We say it. You guys can absolutely say it, too. And then these guys still sit here and say, "Well, I can't really do that." Or, "Yeah, well, it's a good idea. What do you think, develop?" I mean, say it. Have have a have a good It's why you guys have been chosen. You guys speak your piece. I like you guys don't let the garage be the main focal point of the front of the house. I mean, because you do see that in a lot of suburbs where is this a garage or Have you ever seen the Have you ever seen the homes where you don't even see the garage doors? The garage doors are off to the side. I know. I want one of those. I mean, they're sweet looking. The garage the windows in the garage look like it's another room and then they're a different side, but then we've got sideyard issues and just unless you record. Okay. So, any other edits to the uh 2024 report or 2025 prior priorities? Um, if we think of something later, can we add or it looks like a pretty good list already. It's a pretty lengthy list. What happens is these get forwarded to council and then in January we have a few strategic planning sessions with council to outline the priorities for staff and then so this list we try to we they consider that and incorporate it where it fits with the strategic planning and then I also refer to this later throughout the year like if something else comes up and it's just like hey we really need to do this now and this was a planning commission priority so it's something for me to refer back to. So yeah, we can we can it can be a living list. Um it's just there's also the matter of staff time also requires council direction. Sure. But okay, thanks for hearing us out on some of our thoughts. Um any the planning project update? Is there anything? I don't think so. Is there any questions on it? No. Yeah. I just noticed the one new thing on here. It's not coming before the commission yet, but it's the A+A tree and landscape for the Yes, that'll be a concept plan that I have scheduled for uh I have to finish the complete letter. I'm going to send out tomorrow, but I believe that would be the second meeting January going into council. And then quick trip is scheduled for January planning commission on the 7th. So the the landscape plan or the public works area is is he purchasing that entire property around the public works? Is that I believe so. Their plan seems to suggest they are would be purchasing it the entire thing for what they're hoping to do. It's a right now it's the combination it right now it's not none of what they're proposing is an allowed use in the district. So, it'd be a conversation with the city council to see if there's Oh, the the yard waste recycling. The yard waste recycling is not a allowed use. And that they also want to have an outdoor um parking component for other like not only for their equipment and vehicles, but other landscaper contractors to park and store their big outdoor storage. Yeah. So, there's going to be a discussion with council. That's all I can really say about it right now. It's going to look like the corner of 10 and 19 kind of. I don't know. I I I don't know. I would say that um the other thing too is what they're proposing. They're not proposing any type of a building and we don't allow a parking area without a building. So, I there's just a lot of lot of um barriers that would need to be removed with zoning ordinance amendments. So, it's a council discussion to see if there's desire. Beautiful piece of property there. kind of a shame that I mean it's zoned rural residential right now but it sounds like there public works. Yeah. Yeah. So there was discussion about reszoning it but there hasn't been a resoning. We haven't done that to be I thought there was four. There's four development rights on it. There's there's there are development rights on the property. I can't remember if it's three or four. It's four. Um, and then to the west it was a number of residentials on to the east. Yeah. To the east there's there's nine residential lots. Yeah. And so yeah, the original concept plan for that included three or four commercial lots. Uh on it would required resoning. So there was multiple discussions about that but there has been no reasonzoning application. Yeah. But they've put the for sale sign up on it as if it has been reszoned. Yep. making all kinds of suggestions. They know. They know. They know they have to resone it around the public works building. Oh, okay. Sorry. Yeah. I then had signed one up. I saw it and I'm like, "No, it's not." Well, that's the same guy that wanted to do 19 same group. I think he had seven development rights and 19 or something. No, we are grossly aware of what's the situation. Um, I'll ask you guys after. Um, okay. Mr. Bar, I don't have anything. This is I thank you for letting me talk and and say, but have at it, you guys. We're going to we're going to make this place to continue to be a great place to live, but let's get more creative. I I don't want it to be cork. I don't want to be the Maple Grove, too, or I don't want anything like that. That's a great place. This is better. Let's make it even better. I I I got enough and you guys got questions for me. Um, if we wanted to try to do some kind of engagement and maybe it doesn't even have to be official through the planning commission, some kind of engagement with neighbors and and the community uh to try to get I don't know. Do does C Park Carter ever do anything like a working group with community members? So I believe we did a uh we did a working group for the southeast district. We had like a a subcommittee that worked on the southeast district. So yeah, we we have had examples of that. Um sometimes we have a lot of difficulty attracting people to do like a formal board. We have a lot more interest in like open houses. Uh so we did for our northeast district planning uh initiative a couple years back we did several open houses and that attracted a lot of people but I think there's a time commitment issue where we run into with like a a separate subboard. Not to say we can't certainly try to see if there's a new desire for that. Yeah. Um but yeah we uh typically it's um it's a result of some type of city initiative such as like our southeast district plan or some kind of master planning session. Um, I do anticipate with the 2050 comprehensive plan once we have an understanding of what will be required of us as a city that there will be several opportunities for community engagement components. So, um, as far as what exactly that looks like, I don't think that I can speak to that at this point. I think, uh, it'd be a larger con larger conversation with council. Yeah. I'm thinking even engaging people like, you know, say the people that wanted to run for the city council. I mean, they're obviously engaged. They want to be on the council. And we had people coming. I think one was from Belleather. We had a couple others from We did. We did opening legal legal women voters conversation. there was 70 people in the but I mean maybe people like that would be interested in forming some kind of a a a group just to kind of discuss their visions for the city and or if we wanted to pick a specific topic that yeah again that's not something that's in our budget to do that anybody can have those conversations I think it would be more of a volunteer thing frankly Yeah, I I like the idea of like it, you know, I get it around an initiative. So like maybe I mean the 2050 comp plan absolutely will be a time that people are going to huge and we should absolutely put our effort to get people to come out say their perspectives define Corkran. Everyone should say their own definition of it and we or you know what I mean? But you know uh that would be the initiative to have a very upcoming initiative. Yeah. I mean that to your point like those types of people that ran care a lot. They should be out talking, you know, and providing input. So I totally agree. All right. Anything else? Okay. If you've got a way to get people here, let us know. I invite I'm always asking for volunteers for for everything we've got going on. National light out, the JC's, corporate lines, all of these things. I'm always trying, but I think when you're listening or when you're watching on on the live feed, there's 8 to 10 maybe. Usually, there's been a few times where it's been up 20 25. We've had those couple events where there both rooms are full and you guys have seen that. you guys had them full and they went home and told their friends and we had that many more at council. That's the stuff we I'd like again curbing and not repeating each other and and you know a spokesperson for a group might not necessarily be the right thing but if somebody says stuff we don't need those meetings to go till the we hours of the next day kind of deal but everybody's input is welcome and I would look at Facebook I do all these things there's a lot of people that critique the planning group council and stuff. Come on, Corkin. You can do better. I always send messages back. What are your suggestions? I would love to hear them. I love the comments and I don't get any replies. So, it's it's frustrating, but yeah, I know. I when when the surveys come out, I all I I live in Belleather. Yeah. And so, I send that out to to the civics group. Love it. And I I don't even know if they participate, but I So I will say we had uh the park remaster survey and I don't know what the ratio about other residents to other respondents, but it was the u most responses we've received to a survey since I've been here at least. Uh so that was really encouraging. I was like, well, apparently I need to do more park planning. I think with that it would be easy for people to get out there and I want all of it, you know. All sounds good. Yeah. Great. Well, and I don't I I have um Jessica Christensen Buck is our parks and trail or parks and recreation supervisor uh and she's leading the planning process on that. So, but she um she's the one that's going to be summarizing that information. So, if you're curious, it should be on the next parks and trails commission in December. Um, so I don't know exactly what the feedback was, but I'm assuming it a lot of people were had really some valuable insight. So cool. All right. So I will just highlight the suggested liaison calendar with 1212 being. Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up because I meant to. I cannot come on that date. So, I was hoping somebody could switch dates with me possibly. Is that a It's a recommended Thursday. Oh, no. Yes, it is next Thursday. Thursday. Next Thursday. Yeah. I can't. How about you, Peter? When is it? Next. Um, next Thursday, the 12th. Mhm. Yeah. And just Nope. It's okay. It's not required. Not able to. It's not required. It's just a recommended surgery. Um, I will say you have you had asked that we let you know about concept plans. So again, what we had just discussed a little bit, that would be the second meeting in January at the earliest. So um if that's a conversation that you want to be there for or listen to on Zoom, that was the city council meeting you're talking about. That'll be that the second city council meeting in January. Thank you. That's Oh, the 23rd. Yep. Maybe I'll try to make it to that one then. Okay. I will entertain a motion to adjourn the meeting. Um, I will second. Did I do that wrong? Yeah, that's okay. It's okay. You want to make it? I'll make I'll make the motion. Okay. I'll second it. Okay. All in favor? I Okay. All oppose.