that one. All right. At 6:32, we are calling the meeting to order. The North St. Paul Planning Commission meeting of June 5th, 2025. Can we uh do a roll call? Yes, we may. Commissioner Alvarez here. Commissioner Israi. Yes, sir. I'm here. Elizabeth, you gota help me out. Last name. Gad boy. Cad Boy. Thank you. Commissioner Wise. Here. Commissioner Muk. Muick. Muick. Thank you. Like Buick but with an M. Yeah. Mick with Buick. That's right. And Kane Burbach here. And chair Biss. I am present. All present. Thank you. And our city council liaison and council member Norby. Excellent. Um I saw nothing on the agenda that uh looked out out of the ordinary to me. Um I would entertain a motion to adopt the agenda as written. I'll make a motion. A motion from Commissioner Rathy. A second. I'll second. Commissioner Weise. Uh all in favor say I. I. I. Approval of minutes. We did not approve minutes at the last meeting in May in May because we did not have a quorum. So we have the April 3rd meeting minutes to approve. Are there I would entertain a motion for that to approve as written. Oh. So move moved by Commissioner Muick. I'll make a second. Second from Commissioner Rothy. All in favor say I. I. I um meeting minutes of May 1st. I entertain a motion for approving those as written unless there is discussion. I'll move to approve. Moved by Commissioner Weise. Uh seconded. Second. Second by Commissioner Gadboy. All in favor say I. I I we are open to the public and there's no public here. You don't want to wait to see if they come rushing in. They might come rushing in, but I don't think we'll wait. We're we already started 2 minutes late. So, you know, they're they're really behind if they miss their opportunity. Technical difficulties, you know. Speak now or forever. Hold your peace. Yes. So, uh we have no public hearings on the agenda tonight. We have commission business action items and recommendations. Um, Mr. Roberts, would you like to begin with your Well, thank you, Mr. Chair, members of commission. The the first item is item A there at the bottom of the first page, which is page 10 in the packet in the uh online version or printed version. It's a request generated by city staff to look at the zoning and comprehensive plan designation for some properties if I can get pardon me because I hate these pads and my mouse doesn't work so I'm Oh, here we go. Pull this down. There we go. The two areas on the screen outliner red. Thank you very much. Uh they are well I'll back up a little bit. We have we as a staff uh myself and city manager identified these as areas that potentially the city should amend the comprehensive plan and the zoning map for them. Uh a little background history I included in the report I found from 2015. The city council at that time completed a rewrite of the zoning ordinance. And after that, then they they and the plane commission looked at several areas in the city that may have had the comprehensive plan, land use designation, and the zoning designations were inconsistent. And I included in the report what I what were called area 10 and area 11 at that time. And those are areas along the south side of 7th Avenue right in this same area. And I included those just for historical reference. If there were commissioners on back in 23 probably remember these. It's only hopefully been two years. Uh but in looking through the minutes uh from the plane commission for area 10, they recommended that that be recommended uh for potential resoning. And the difference was because the land use designation is the uh corridor mixed use in that area but the no excuse me is a medium density but it was own single family so they weren't consistent with each other. Similar with area 11 which is again right in this same area. I think that is that's right up in this area I believe if I'm reading my map right page 12 uh yes page 12 of the report same question the land use designation was uh high density but the zoning was medium density so they were not consistent with each other. commissioners agreed that that should be looked at for potential resoning. For whatever reason, I never found record that either one of those areas ever went through the process with the council for resoning. So, they still are the those designations from 2023. Similarly, the areas on the north side of 7th Avenue. Again, this area and the area on either side of Oak Place. I'm going to try to find a couple maps here. And this might be a struggle, but we'll see. Well, first of all, we're going to click. So this is the area along south the north side of south just south of the new town homes recently built town homes at the uh old Simstone or anchor block say excuse me single family area and actually all these I'm going to be switching around here. All these properties have single family homes except this is a vacant lot right here on the corner and this is a vacant lot right here on that corner. And all of these are in in the comprehensive plan are planned for corridor mixed use which is the same designation all the way up into downtown and it carries all the way to Mcnite Road on both sides. And that when the comp plan was done eight or nine years ago was thought certainly the downtown area look for the redevelopment we have mixed use hopefully some of it has occurred some of it hasn't that'll be a great thing we should just continue that all the way through out to Mcnite Road the zoning however in that same area is uh MU3 three, which is consistent with again the mixeduse land use designation. So that's a good thing. You want the comprehensive plan and the land use plan, the land use designation in the comprehensive plan and the zoning to be consistent and they are. However, the MU3 zoning uh does not allow for single family homes. So all these single family homes as I outlined in the report are now legal non-conforming uses and the currently they are currently they are because of the current zoning. Correct. Thank you. And because of that there are limits in the code which I again tried to explain and took the code language that limits the amount of change uh or expansion any one of those properties can do to uh no more than 10% of the gross floor area or no more than 10% a modification or expansion of no more than 10%. uh and when such expansion would eliminate an adverse effect or condition which is inconsistent with the M3 MU3 zoning district. My mind and reading that it's severely limiting and as I put in the report might even prevent somebody from replacing a twocar garage, a detached two-car garage if it's falling down or wanting to add one if there's not even one there. And I'm sure that was kind of an unintended consequence of the zoning align designation. And so with all that said, staff is proposing or we want to bring to you the idea of changing the language plan on the properties to something. What did I put here? Oh god. Instead of the corridor mixed use, it would be a medium density residential. I forgot the exact term and I apologize. And with that, the zoning district change would be to an R2 zoning, which allows for single family homes and town houses up to I think seven units per gross acre. That and that designation come off there would allow the single that would be make the single family homes permitted uses. So they would no longer be non-conform legal non-conforming uses and would allow a little more density if a developer was so inclined. The other thing to remember with any development or redevelopment, I guess it would be, is for a project to be successful, a developer, builder, whomever, would have to acquire several properties and put them together to do a project. And with all the existing single family homes, maybe that could happen. I have my doubts. Of course, you can never say never, but I think in the near future that doesn't seem very likely. So, all that said, we wanted to bring this to you as an a staff generated idea to change the zoning, change the future land use designation for these areas. uh again to the medium density and the comprehensive plan and the R2 zoning and the zoning code and want to have that discussion with the commission. If the commission is for or against, we'll if they're four, we'll schedule a public hearing and do a formal notice and all that kind of thing. But for now, we want to get some initial impressions from the commission. And with that, I will stop and take questions. So these changes are are just to kind of align with what reality is. Yes, that's how I would phrase it. Yeah. As far as the future is concerned, uh if a prop if a developer were to obtain several properties, uh what would he what would he be able to do by right and what would he be able to do with a uh you know by obtaining permission uh is if we change it. Yes, I'm sorry. Yes. uh if the if the designations are changed, for example, town the comprehensive plan would allow town homes at 6 to 12 units per acre and and the in the land use plan and the zoning is for both single family uh and and does allow uh town houses as well. So that would be minimal challenge on that front. If if somebody really I I don't know. I clearly I don't know the history of the city enough to say, but let's say hypothetically somebody wanted to acquire all these properties and try to build another large apartment building. Mhm. Then it would be back to changing the comprehensive plan, changing the zoning as part of the review process. I guess that's kind of what I'm trying to get at is let's say on a per acre basis, uh, you know, if they were allowed to do 12 12 units in that one acre, how high a building would we be looking at? Uh, three to four stories. Okay. So, very similar to the ones that are downtown. Okay. Uh, but for some developers do it, they buy up properties and they redevelop them. Yeah, certainly possible. But is it in the foreseeable future? I don't see it happening, but that's my crystal ball. Personally, I don't see a problem with that. Does anybody else have any objections that they want to raise at, you know, a different point that we might want to consider? Yeah, I think I would agree with you. Um, it would it would seem that I mean it's kind of the classic zoning dilemma. Do you change the zoning before somebody asks you to change the zoning as as the government? Do we do that? And what is the advantage of doing that? And I don't see any disadvantage. Yeah. I see the advantage being that you're giving the current property owners more flexibility. Yeah, that's my thought as well. So, I think it's it seems like a very positive move. It's not going I I don't see a negative impact because it's not like it's going to raise their taxes or anything based on the zoning. So, and if somebody wanted to go and acquire properties and build an apartment, they could basically go do that now. Yeah. Yes. Based on the current zoning. Yeah, I guess the one reason I was asking about the acre was I was just thinking about that one property that did it used to be a community theater or something like that where it's the vacant land that's uh there at Charles and 7th. Uh that's a fairly large piece. It was it was a Masonic temple. Masonic temple. Yeah. And that was the only thing I was thinking about, you know, is that that's the one piece that maybe if somebody bought that and possibly the property next to it, they could, you know, put up a reasonably large development there. Y, but I don't I don't see it as a problem. I That was just my curiosity. The vacant lot, if my memory serves correct, the vacant lot was studied. This one here or this one? Um, two of them. Yes. One of those vacant lots I believe was part of the study from HGA about possibly turning it into a small park. Yeah. And that is also this property too, Jason, along here. Yeah. Would the zoning change have any effect on uh those possible plans? I I don't believe so, but I I wasn't sure if parks fell into the same category in both zones. Uh, no. I don't foresee a impact on that. And for clarity, the city owns this lot on the corner and I think Burwald owns this lot on this corner. One of them. Yeah. I can't remember which one. I think I think Burwald owns the one over on second, don't they? Yes. So, if I may, Mr. here. Unless I'm hearing more or something different, I the general consensus is that yes, go ahead. We don't need a formal motion for that. No, it's just again kind of floating the idea. If I heard consensus is accurate. Yeah. If I heard a bunch of no heck no, don't do it. Then it would have been a different story. But seems fair for the 25 people that have homes in that. Yeah. Were they even aware that this I don't probably not. So, we will uh we'll keep pushing forward on that then. Okay. Thank you. Just one clarification. The So, it's currently zoned MU3, correct? And you're suggesting to go to R2. Yes. Okay. Which allows both single family and twin homes, I believe, and and I think even small developments with town houses. Okay. If like you said, if someone wanted to buy buy a property and put in an apartment building, there would be a a separate process that they have to go through as part of that approval. Yes. Once we've made this change, right? I think I would probably stick with what we have, but sounds like I'm in the minority, so that's fine with me. Well, I'm willing to be flexible. What what's your thoughts on that? I just I hesitate to lower the um the zoning to um you know, the 7th Avenue is a main corridor. [Music] Um the homes that are in those parcels we're talking about are, you know, they're older homes. It's not like any of them were recently built. So those types of things are would be attractive to somebody that would be looking to build a little bit more dense project. Um and you know if we make the change to R2 it's just adding a hurdle for them. But you know either way it's um I don't see it as like you know a huge deterrent. It's just one more thing. On the other hand, a development such as you're suggesting a more dense development is probably a PUD anyway. More more than likely it would be a PUD which gets treated differently anyway. So I I guess I don't I don't feel like we're putting significant restrictions on on a greater development because there that would have a different process anyway. So, I think I think that's good. Yeah. My impression is if it's a well-designed, well thoughtout project, the city would do whatever changes or approvals would be necessary to get it there. Yeah. Mhm. And if that means five years now, the maps are changing again. But, okay. In the meantime. Okay. All right. Thank you. Next item. is ordinance talk about home occupations unless I'm sorry I jumped ahead unless there was more on that. Well, not on that per se. And so this is probably a topic that needs to be addressed at a later time, but I'm just thinking in the downtown area, uh, you know, there is mention of allowing fourstory buildings in the downtown area, and I'm just would like to look at that a little bit more. What I'm kind of thinking about is do we want to kind of establish a a graduation of allowances uh in the future so that maybe the the two blocks that are on either side of Margaret Street are allow for four stories and the two blocks that are a little further out allow for three and things out further out from that are allow for two. that you have kind of a a gradual rise instead of having three and four, you know, fourstory buildings put up next to twotory buildings. Uh but like I say, I think that that's that's not on the agenda. And so I just was thinking about that as we're talking about all the the rest of this stuff. So it's probably something to be talked about at a later time. Well, if I may, Mr. Chair, item D on the agenda is a talk about the downtown design manual. Well, that's a good place to do it. Yeah. Anyway, sorry for throwing things off on the siding. That's fine. We're pretty informal here. I know. By choice. So, the next item I have in the packet is about the home occupation ordinance and ordinances. And this is actually information that I found that Brandy had started working on two or more years ago. So I picked it up and kept the ball rolling on it. And the first couple pages in the report, which are pages 23 and 24 25 in the packet, are the existing ordinance language and then some comments down the right hand side about the problems or issues or things that could be changed or should be changed with the ordinance. And so the first one is the definitions inconsistent in the different places in the code. There's questions about how the city should regulate home occupations in accessory buildings and then the actual the meat of the ordinance which is section three in that table. Some of the different uses, how should we categorize them, should we be more lenient, should we be more restrictive, all sorts of things. And so with all that, I ran through or didn't run through, but I prepared uh a draft amendment of the home occupation ordinance. Uh that starts on page 27 if you're reading along at home. And what it does is the one big change is currently now the city says we have two types of home occupation, a level one and a level two. What this is proposing to do is to break that into three levels where the level ones are those that have no visible neighborhood impacts which would include signage or customers or clients coming to the home and no exter external building changes. So the only two that I'm can think of are professionals working from home which I don't it's a little bit of an over overgineered maybe because if any of you or I am working from home who cares why yeah why does it even need to be in the zoning code but I think the thought is if it's not in the zoning code then maybe technically it's a violation of the zoning code because somebody's working and residing at home. We don't have the zoning police going out looking at windows to see who's working from home or not. But that's why that's there. It's also different. If I'm working at home, it's just me doing my work. Yes. If it's a business where you have customers visiting, different story and and that's in the level that's the level two. So, I think that's that's the important thing about it, I think. And then I I added in their foster care because again, I don't know that the city needs a regulator know about if a home has foster children or not. Would that even be classified as a business? I that was something Brandy had suggested. I don't know that I would even call that a business. It's It's certainly not a business. It's right. But does it certainly doesn't need to be regulated by the city. So I I'm fine striking that if that's the I think uh foster home is is plenty regulated by the state. County and the state. Yes. Yep. County and state. And I do like the moving of so many of those occupations into the level two because it's kind of like you know if you're doing dress making and tailoring it's very hard to do that without a client coming to your home. Absolutely right. So Yep. barber shops. Is it is it currently structured such that there's a a permit or a license or something like that required for any of these any or all of these businesses? Yes. The Well, okay. and the the current current or yeah, excuse me, current ordinance, all those that are now level two were level ones and level ones in the current ordinance we don't even license or issue permits for. And so the the old level ones are now becoming level twos, which need will need uh some kind of an approval through the staff and plane commission. The level threes are the ones that are the the new level threes are the ones that are the most potentially disruptive to neighbors and residences and those are the ones that will need city council approval and and so yeah the level two or the what I would have always traditionally thought as a home occupation. I'm I'm confused by the inclusion of an art studio. How does that require Well, I think what that's referring to is say if you're maybe even teaching art classes. Okay. Perhaps that put under tutoring. Yeah. So that would be under teaching. Yep. It certainly could be or so a professional like uh arts education. So that could also include music. arts education and and could it be even professional artists that gather and I do throw pottery or do work on a painting together or sculpture together? But one of the key elements of the home occupation is that you're you're in it to earn money. Yes. So there's revenue. It's a revenue. It's a profession. Yes. Yeah. As opposed to a hobby. if you're just volunteering to help people with things, right? You're donating your time. So, that does bring us up to the tutoring line. Uh I'd like to suggest that we put a little bit of a different spin on that and say that either consists of no more than two unrelated pupils or perhaps three or more, something like that. just because, you know, you may have a family of three or four or five that are bringing all their kids in for tutoring or voice lessons or whatever at one time. So, you know, my thought is probably more than two unrelated pupils or something like that. Uh just so that someone doesn't get called out by their neighbors because they've got a family coming in with four kids. Not that we would hope that would happen, but you know, you know, people get their knickers in a twist over some pretty petty things sometimes. And and with that, Cameron, if they are related, do we need an upper limit then of four or five or do we care? If they're related, I don't think so. Yeah, I I wouldn't think that they you'd care. If nothing else, they'd probably all be coming in the same vehicle or at least maybe two vehicles. So that's part of the Yeah, I come from a background of doing homeschool. I was just going to ask you a group of home school kids. It's a non-issue if unless you're getting paid for it, right? I mean, in our circumstance, we would we wouldn't have had uh considered it a home business under any circumstances. We could have had 12 kids there because it would have all been volunteer like child care. Yeah. it all would have been, you know, just interaction of kids essentially a play day except at school. Yeah. And then that brings up one other thing and it's not right there at that point, but we talked specifically about having to have driveway space to accommodate uh the people that are going to be using the business. And I can't think of any, but I'm sure that there are some homes in town that don't have driveways. So, we're going to say, you know, could we allow them to to, you know, some other allow for parking in front of the home that's being used as a business as long as it doesn't exceed something or create a neighborhood nuisance or something? Or we're just going to say, well, if you bought a house without a driveway, you're, you know, forever unable to have a home business if you want to see a client there. So, bring I guess my question about Do you have any issues in the town you know about? Not that I'm aware of, but I get to play the new card for a while. I don't I don't know of any. That's the reason why I'm inquiring. Yeah. I mean, if if there were if there was a home business and there were, you know, 10 cars parked in the street and just always crazy amounts of traffic, you probably need to act on it. But yeah, I mean it would take a lot to to set that up, I think. I mean, there's the guy over. Yeah, I took a slightly different spin on the art studio. Um, go going back, I thought more of like the crafters. Um, you know, I I I just because of my wife. Um, I know there's a lot of people that do the craft fairs and stuff like that. That is technically and that's what I was thinking. Home. Yeah. But they're not bringing customers necessarily to their home. They're taking it places. I mean, my my art studio is sitting on the couch. Yep. Right. Assembling stuff and Yeah. preparing stuff to go to the Yeah. Right. So, I mean, to make it perfectly legal, I might put slashcrafter or crafting. You say craft. I mean, would that go under business? Well, see, and that's why doesn't matter what you're making. It's a business in the art studio, right? Just stated that way as a level two because that is not something that needs a permit because that would be level one then. Yeah, I thought art studio was staying level one, is it? Am I looking at the wrong page? No, it's right now it's level two. Page 27. Yeah, it's on level two for the new version. Sorry, I was still on page two. It's page 27 and 28 right in the bottom. But it it you can think of an art studio when and to the tutoring and teaching where you give classes on how to paint or draw. But I think there needs to be that distinction versus making your own stuff to sell at a fair. I would agree. There's a difference between a potter working out of their garage just for their own personal right satisfaction as opposed to a potter that's teaching classes or conducting business in their garage and selling their product. So So if if you're crafting creating a product that you will take somewhere else to sell, I would think that would be treated differently. Yes. From if you were having customers come to your home. Yes. Yeah. For clients and it would be a lesser level. Well, then in that case, if it's if it's even considered a business, well, and that's the going back to the proposed level one professionals that work from home. Mhm. If they're crafting at home making their stuff, does that cover them? Yeah, probably. Probably. I just think there needs to be more clarification on what is meant by art studio because it's just the verbiage. So I'm understanding that Dart Studios is a question mark. So do we strike it or do we roll it into the tutoring musical dance? I think you roll it into the tutoring if you want to treat it that way. Is there a reason why we need to break it up other than breaking it down by the number of people coming to visit? It feels to me like the number one piece. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It sounds like there's two things. Whether people are coming and whether it's a business or not. Mhm. So if it's a business and no one's coming, I mean, if you Why isn't it level one? And if you're crafting and it's not a business and it's you So let's let's take it this way. Let's say you're creating something that you will take somewhere else to sell. Why can't that be level one? It should be. Nobody's coming. Yeah. Yeah. That's the same as I think that makes sense. And what you call that, I don't know. Well, that to me that's just another version of professional working at home. Yeah. Right. whether you're working on the but you have that identified under level two the issue more is people are coming to your home I think more the issue is people are coming to your home my question I I agree with barber shop and beauty shop being in there those are professions I assume that you need certification of some sort yeah a license you're supposed to have a license yes so do we want to be specific on cert professions that need that sort of licensing as opposed to just our casual small business working from our home. Well, it jumping ahead on line G in the ordinance, which is over on page two or page 28. The first item, it says a home occupation required to have a state license shall show proof of the license at city at time of permit application. Okay. The one other thing that I want to make sure that we have some out in this area is if it is a home occupation that creates a noise or noxious problem. I'm thinking about, you know, people that do metal working maybe for sale off or god forbid. Well, I don't mean that that that way. Uh but like a like a blacksmith, you know, I could see somebody saying, "I'm setting up my forge in my garage and the neighbor saying, you know, you're pounding on metal at the midnight, you know, or there is a sound ordinance that Yeah. takes care of that issue, burning coal, right? Well, you know, I just I just want to make sure that that is kind of mentioned somehow or another in the home occupation. If we jump to number seven, a G7, it says, "No home occupation shall produce light, glare, noise, odor, waste, smoke, gas, heat." Thank you. Just wanted to be sure. That's good. Y discernable will be on the property. Yeah. Could we clarify the art studio part just by I'm still not clear on that. So, I I kind of like the idea of removing those because it does say level two home home occupations may include but are not strictly limited to. Why do we need to write them out? Yeah. Yeah. Why do we can we take them away and instead focus on the people the amount of people clients coming? It just says it says has no potential neighborhood impacts except for signage, customer visits, and parking areas. Yeah. So, it's we've got the customers coming in covered. Could we grab all of these things and just call it like on-site retail because that it's the basically the opposite of what you're saying. If you're taking it, selling it somewhere else on client based. Yeah. On-site service, on-site retail, something like that. I think it's easier to to define the retail part at the home rather than saying Yeah. taking it somewhere else and yeah, it doesn't it has to do with do your customers come to you? Yes, that's what So, how we phrase that I think that's the key that keeps coming up. How do we phrase it? I don't know. Yeah. something for me to work on. Yeah. Something for staff to work on. Am I hearing there's not even really a need to call out art studio? I don't know that we need to call out any of these. It's just if people are coming or not. Well, because we we as a staff will get a question. Well, is this that or is this that or people coming? That's that's you plan on having people come to your house. And if you want to be specific, they're customers, clients are under contract customers or people you do business with. just verification and then as long as and then I believe there was a list of services that are not allowed so you can well if we if we can right that's specific to number two number yes feels to me Yeah. That's good. Do you do you think there's harm in either keeping the professional offices or the teaching the last one the tutoring musical people coming? Yeah. To Cameron's play to the unre unrelated folks. It it doesn't hurt I think to have the those few listed as long as we have opening for it may there may be others as it says not Right. Not strictly limited to includes but okay. So the two I think we fairly well figured out and remember to adopt this I'll have to put it in a formal ordinance form and bring it back. So you all have a second one more question and it's about level three and plumbing because I believe we have a resident that this might affect. Hypothetically, let's say I own a plumbing business, a sole proprietor, and I have a box truck for my business that I park in my driveway. Am I operating that business out of my house? What's the difference? If I work for a commercial, drive a not you're not you're not doing the work in your house. Well, unless you're officing out of there. Yeah. I've got a homebased office then you mean homebased office meaning people are coming to your home. No, because that's the issue is a homebased office doing the paperwork. So in that scenario that then someone working from their home, but this is my scenario. This is my exact scenario. in that in that scenario that that Jason brought up was um you're you have a vehicle in which you go out and you service homes somewhere or whatever and then you come back and you park your vehicle. So the only homebased business component of that is a vehicle in there in their yard and maybe they have a home office but they don't have customers coming and does that impact the neighbors? Well, there's a vehicle sitting there. Well, and there's rules about size of vehicles, right? Commercial vehicles. And that's elsewhere in the ordinance. Correct. Yes. So, that that I think where where those start morphing is well now my helper comes over to my house. They rides along with me. So, now we've got an extra vehicle coming to the home in the morning and staying there. And yeah, well now I got two helpers and now now I have materials delivered to my house and then where do I store them and you start going down that slippery slope and that's why level three I I even highlighted a couple of things there that that need discussion. There's also a caveat, right? So if you're starting to get two three people working for you and you're starting to have deliver your house are are you observation are you are my observation if I think about this whether you're in contracting trades whether you're literally that's literally most of the guys my experience and I've worked in that field generally that's the case it's not always the case but generally but if you're starting to have product delivered you're now having extra vehicles delivered on a regular basis. That's a different conversation to start. So the the point I think is yeah, it probably still belongs as a level three just because it has that potential of being that more complex scenario. Um, I think of the guy who's got a, you know, a small remodeling window replacement business or something and his workers come and meet him at his house and then they drive off and go service their residences that where they're installing windows and they come back. And so now you've got traffic. you potentially have, like you said, materials sitting in the garage that you're going to load up on a truck. You know, it has the potential of impacting the surrounding properties, I think. And the the people that run lawn care, home maintenance or home property maintenance. Yeah. They might have a pickup and then they have a flat trailer and they got three or four mowers or three or two or three skid steers and maybe they got two or three people to come at 4 in the morning when the snow flies and then they go out. Yeah. Us. Yeah. Okay. So that so in section E with the level three, that's why I flagged and those words are the the current words. I didn't propose many changes, but I just said both two and three need some clarification because small engine repair. Is that I'm working on chainsaws? Am I working on lawnmowers? Am I working on ATVs? Yes, potentially. And how much of that do we want in residential areas if it if it can all be done inside a garage? But sure as heck if he's doing an ATV or she or a snowmobile, they're going to get test drive in the neighborhood before they send them out. One thing I was wondering is there is there some way that we could put a I'm going to call it an escape clause that says like you know if they get complaints from their neighbors that these have to be looked at in greater depth and uh maybe the thing that occurs to me is maybe you get like two or three unrelated or two or three complaints from unrelated people because we all know that sometimes somebody gets something stuck in their craw and they do nothing but make complaints about the same location over over and over and over again, whereas it doesn't bother anybody else. But I think we're covered though with the the ongoing text where we're talking about not being disruptive in the the general provisions. The general provision. There's a lot in there. The We also have the opportunity for the zoning administrator, community development director, and council to all have a say in okay, is it a level two or is it a level three? There's there's opportunities there to look at the business and say, "We're going to license you, but here's what we think's and here's how we're going to here's how we're going to judge your your business." That kind of a thing. Well, we do say that the license has to be renewed every so often, right? I think is it annually or uh I was that was one thing I was thinking about was maybe we ask for renewal every other year or something like that rather than annually just to make it a little less arduous on city staff. I and I don't know the answer to that yet, Cameron, but I when when the current ordinance says contractors and small engine repair, those are so vague. I'm not sure what they mean. Is it a contractor? Again, it's a he's a home remodeler and he builds decks and porches. That's a contractor. Is it Is it I Contractors do a lot of different kinds of work. We do hopefully good work. Of course. And maybe it doesn't need to be clarified, but it didn't seem real clear to me. Mhm. And and what does that mean? of a contractor is it again all the scenarios we just talked about and if it's running a contracting business from a home depending on again and a contractor can mean a lot of things too just the word contractor you're you're thinking construction contractor correct but there's many other kinds of contractors so maybe we want to at least say that that we're talking about construction people who do construction related things. But then and then in the same breath we call out specifically heating, plumbing or air conditioning. Exactly. Services. Yeah. So general general construction is what you're talking about there. So well could we maybe specify and say offsite construction? Well, or some term like that indicates that it's not allowed at the house. Well, yeah. I don't I think if it's at the house, it's one of those craft crafty you're building things at your house elsewhere kind of things. I would group those into a couple. You got building trades. You've got maybe building trades. That's a good way to put Maybe building trades is a good way to do it. Building trades is listed right now. Yeah. Yeah. Because that covers all of it. Yeah. again. One and you don't have to list heating and plumbing in general contract construction because building trades covers it. There's a flooring guy down the road from me that has four vans every morning. They all come and they get in the van, they leave and they Yeah. They don't really disturb anybody. Y and they've been doing this for years. Yeah. And they get it done. They do. But I would say if it confuses you, you definitely need to bring it up because well, it's it may confuse other administrators in the future. Right. Well, and and yeah. So, is there a consensus on contractors? Do we even need it? I think you use building trades and you take all those others out of there. And if you Google building trades, it literally says carpenter, electrician, plumber, heavy equipment operator, like it gives. So, if you don't know and you're looking at this and you Google it, those are going to come up. Y um so I feel like that takes care of a lot of it. So would it be okay to with the So we got building trades to just to have somewhere say including but not limited to heating, plumbing, air conditioning, electrical, general contracting or could just make it all one thing. Yeah. Yeah. I also would switch the language for family daycare to say inhome daycare. That's the language that's used. That's a good idea. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Versus a facility. Yeah. Versus a it's a center. Typically it's center or in home is what And are we necessarily talking about child youth daycare? No. No, not necessarily. Okay. Can be adults. Any any kind of daycare? Okay. So, we're not having contractors. We're doing inhome daycarees. And then what about the small engine and small equipment repair? Leave those, I think. Yeah. I I think it can be vague. I don't I don't know that we need a whole lot of I think it could be vague, too. I don't want to necessarily overthink it, but I in my world, I have to think of the worst case scenario because I get the phone calls. Right. Right. Well, that's why I keep bringing up all this strange stuff is because, you know, I'm thinking worst case scenario, too, or trying to. Um, and I'll ask a question because apparently I'm in violation. You know, we try not to do that. You know, you're you're being recorded. Yeah, that's okay. Um, are we set on keeping single phase a requirement? Single phase power. Is that listed? That's required for a home occupation. So, if you've got multiple phase for personal use, it wouldn't have fall under that. At least that's how I'm reading it. But I did I did mention I did circle that one myself. Item nine. Yeah. Yeah, I guess I'd ask the question, why would you have Because I have a mill in my garage um that I needed threephase for. So, I have a really VFD. You have a converter that really So, technically you only have 240 going to your home and you have a converter that jumps it to three-phase. Correct. But it lists as no mechanical or electrical equipment requiring. Oh, yeah. In violation, but shall be home occupation or for your own personal use. If it's your home hobby, then you're I'm using it as a hobby and I get paid occasionally. Well, so I think by the IRS definition, that qualifies as a hobby since you're not doing it as your main occupation. True. And you'd be grandfathered in because that's that true, right? Because this is a new that's a new provision that's not in the current code. Now I do this brings us to uh item 12 though which I do have a problem with uh under G. Retail sales or distribution of products on the premises are prohibited. Well, okay. If you're a dress maker, a barber, tailor, you're providing your service there. You're saying that they can't charge for that if they're being allowed to do that service. No, I think that it's it's on products. So the what I think of is when the Mary Kay lady or the Well, but if you're if you're tailoring a suit, you're leaving with that suit, right? But you you're paying for the service to get the suit tailored, you're not paying for the suit itself. Not necessarily. If you get a bespoke suit, somebody is bringing in cloth, you know, that you're buying from scratch. And another example is the hair stylist. of like their shampoo and well occasional sales. Yeah, you read the second sentence. The second sentence says occasional sales of products. But if they have regular clients coming in, that's regular sales. Yeah. Yeah. And then the other thing, what's regular under under subletter I products are shipped to and from the premises? I think and or the premises would be a better because otherwise it makes it sound like you have to have products going both directions. How is that different than an Amazon or eBay seller? There is also the provision customers visit the premises by appointment only which is I think a key there. Okay, which would be the hairdressers. I I bring the I the dress maker thing hits home because that's what my wife did for like 20 years. And so she would have customers potentially a bridal party would show up along with their friends and their parents, the mothers. Do they drink champagne? No, there might be there might be six or eight people at a time. Rarely, but usually it was one or two, maybe three, but that's by appointment only. Okay. Which is an allowable component of this. So yeah, and that covers maker. Yeah. And she potentially made stuff from scratch and or was or was um altering, you know. So there's various components, but they but I I try and piece that together. Okay. What are we talking about here? Is it written right relative to what I know the facts to be in that kind of business? And it seems like it's okay. What would it be or was it disruptive to the neighbors? Never. I mean, neighbors probably didn't even know there was two extra cars in the parking lot for a while. You know, that kind of thing. Music construction. But we have a big driveway, too. So, if we can jump back a couple of lines to item 10, another one I highlighted there. So, that touches on again the lawn maintenance guy or the In the summer the snow plows sit outside that they take them off the trucks or hopefully the lawnmowers get put away because they don't do well in the winter sitting outside but 30 foot ladder that doesn't fit in the garage, right? Yuber driver that has three cars sitting in the driveway. Yeah. Well, it says except functioning personal motor vehicles are used, but it I've seen worst case scenario where these can be kind of dumping yards or junkyards related to the business. Well, I I use that plow or I use that skid steer. Yeah. On and off. What about the What about the people who just have a bunch of cars in there? Well, that that's a whole another problem. It's a nuisance ordinance thing. Who's the Who's the young woman? Mcken McKenzie. Mackenzie. She's on that. So that's pretty good. The ordinances for that that on that pretty good one Maplewood. Yeah. So anyway, does that do we need the item 10 language? Does it need changing? Um, again I'm I put on my worst case scenario hat, but then I I have to think about the realistically is it enforcable and do we want to enforce it is the other piece of that. Exactly. That's why that's why I bring these to the commission. I think it's I I my leaning is probably don't need it, but worst case scenario, could we have a problem? Yeah. But then then I think you're talking about the the enforcement of other the the nuisance ordinance. If you if you keep it in there, could we maybe say there will be no visible exterior storage? You know, if somebody if somebody wants to put up fence and qualifies to put up a fence, they can put and park it in their backyard kind of course or would it be visible from the public street? Yeah. What if your neighbors can see it? That's the Yeah, that's the that's the component there that cuz this Yeah, I'm on my second floor in my second floor bathroom and I can see your junk in their backyard. Yeah, I think we get to the point where we're trying to regulate everything. Right. We don't own We do not own an unregulated view from our an unmititigated view of our Right. Right. We don't own that view. Right. But they have to look at their stuff. Yeah, you do. Or god forbid you hear the kids playing basketball. Oh wait, that's a whole different Was it gonna say that? Park happy children. Exact kids are happy. Okay. If we change that to say v no exterior storage visible from the public street. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That I think could Okay. So they can have the sixoot fence. Yeah. Because they have to qualify for the fence and all that kind of and the fence has to be done, right? Yep. Yes. or if it's behind the home or in a garage. Then right raise the point. Do we need to put something specifically in here that allows for basketball hoops in the background under the home occupation ordinance? That's true. Teaching basketball. Yeah, there you go. Uh and then the page three of the ordinance, there's a whole bunch of things that are not allowed. Mhm. It's home occupations. Uh I did get a question via email from a resident asking for about the pet grooming and pet care saying that I was proposing that they not be allowed, but they asked, "Well, what about a pet sitting service in the home?" Now, that's a service or bringing a cat or dog and dropping it off potentially. I thought more pet service sitting was you would go to the home of the pet, not necessarily. And I'm wondering why pet groom pet grooming is on there on that list. You can do beauty. You can do you can do beauty on humans. Yeah, true. Is it just cuz you know, okay, if a dog gets loose or something and they bite someone. Yeah, but their kids could get loose. I I stole that from gonna bite anybody hopefully. Too bad. If if it's not a major concern, I'll just delete it. Hey, can I ask a question? And I hate to bring this up because this drives me crazy, but if you look at number I with cannabis businesses, there is in the cannabis rules that we were talking about last fall that is a piece that does surface on some of those businesses. Say, I'm sorry, but this is for residential. Yeah, for homeless, not residential only. Yes. Oh, got it. Not at all. Yeah. No problem base. And music construction. I thought that was allowable. Well, it says unless conducted in a single family in the backyard. Yeah. Or so you can do it in your house. Okay. Yeah. Like if you're a piano teacher, right? You can do that. But it also says only within a single family home. We don't want somebody in an apartment piano or guitar or trumpet. Okay. Gotcha. drums, right? Like, but single family it's allowed. Yes. Okay. All right. Cuz that seems That does I'm sorry, but that does bring up a question is what happens if the homeowner owns a duplex and they want to do instruction on their in their home. They own the duplex and they can tell the renter to calm them down. It's not single family. Technically, that would be a violation, but No. Yeah. Technically, it's not a single family residence. Well, but it Well, yeah, cuz it's attached. Cuz it's attached. Yes. Maybe you want to say single family. And it does say detached. So, you're good, doesn't it? There you go. You're covered. Okay. Uh, now that does bring up another question for me. Sorry. Uh, existing non-conforming home occupations. I just want to make sure. uh does an existing non-conforming if it is if let's say they're operating a beauty parlor there and the mother sells it to her daughter uh so it's staying within the family and they're still running the business does that transfer or does that because the property is being sold to somebody that didn't start the thing does does that mean it's now you know it can't be reestablished. If the daughter lives in the home, then it continues. Okay. Do we want to put any sort of review capability on that? Because, you know, we're changing we're changing owners even though the business itself isn't changing. And how would the city ever know the existing home occupation is continued? Well, they have to. Doesn't the city know when property is sold? Not necessarily. Not necessarily. No. Okay. All right. And that's too complicated. On number F, if you apply for your FFL, is the city notified for the firearms? Police department, I think, is I'm just wondering if you go through all the work and actually get your FFL to repair firearms, is there a reason we're not allowing it in a home? Again, the these were some examples I plagiarized from another city. If if it's not a concern would take it off the list, but some people, you know, some people get uncomfortable with firearms. They're a gunsmith and they work Yeah. on firearms, right, out of their home because it's a small homebased business. They usually do something else, too. I don't have an issue with it myself. No, I wouldn't I wouldn't think so. What's the flavor of the commission? Take it off. I would leave it on as long as it's not disruptive. You would leave it on. I would, but again, my opinion, I can't imagine we'd have more than two or three in the entire city. But yeah. Yeah. I think if you have the license requirements, I think that's okay. I think it's where people don't have licenses that it's concerning to licenses elsewhere. So, I I think that's like the biggest concern for me as a parent of a small child. If there was someone in my neighborhood doing that that didn't have a license, I would feel very concerned. I would agree with that. So, back have the license, you wouldn't be concerned. No, because I would know that they've gone through training and all of that. So, back under the general provisions, the first one, it said home occupation required to have a state license. I think I'll But it's state is it required to have a state license to be a blacksmith? State or federal. It's actually state or federal license. Okay. So, it's pretty high up. I'll I'll I'll add federal in there to make sure. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Yeah, I think that's the only concern about that for me. And if if somebody wanted to do that and not get properly licensed, they're going to do it anyway. It's true. It's true. Enforcement problem. That's different. Highly illegal and highly illegal anywhere. It's a police matter. That's Yeah. And unfortunately, they can print that on those damn 3D printers. 3D printers now. So, yeah. So, did I hear correctly the pet grooming and pet care we're going to take off as a to not worry about it? I don't have an issue with I don't I think you could I think you could take that off. Okay. The it'll go away. Yeah. And then with the firearm one, if they go through the proper licensing and Yeah. you put unlicensed Well, if they're unlicensed, it's already illegal. No, because we Correct. I'm just saying that's a pretty like firearms and that that's a pretty big thing for a lot of families. um gun safety act like guns in homes is a huge thing. And so taking it off completely could portray something different. Whereas leaving it on that list saying and just clearly saying unlicensed even though we know that it says it up there like that it has to be licensed. Gun safety is a it's a huge thing right now. Like it's just huge and parents talk about it all the time. Back to the pet grooming and pet care. Do we need to? If we're removing that, we're allowing it. We're not saying no. But do we need to Well, no. I was just going to say, what about veterinarians? But I don't think that's an issue because that's a whole another licensing scenario and that I can't imagine anybody would be doing that in their home anyway. So you could put in I for you could add that to the list of medical dental veterinary. There you go. Yeah, you could you could put veterinary in there. That's true. Add it right there. That's a good idea. In line C there. Yep. This the second C. Yep. One of the C's. The only concern with the pet grooming thing I think could be um you know somebody could have 50 dogs at one point. Yeah. hypothetically, you know. So, the grooming itself isn't the problem. I think it's more the reason it's probably on this list is because how many pets are in there? How many pets? Yeah. Yeah. But, and we don't want to become into a boarding, right? Could could you could we stip uh stipulate pet boarding like of over a certain amount of pets? I think the zoning code already touches on that. I'll check on that. Yeah, you can always a loophole if you want to. So, so to get back though to your concern, so for F, you would say unlicensed. Yeah. Firearm orient. Yeah, I think it just like really hits home like it just Yeah, it adds a level of clarification specific to firearms and ammunition that can be concerning to a lot of people right now. Good. Yeah, my my snarky side says the unlicensed people aren't going to be reading the city code. True. True. And that's I'm not even I'm talking about the people who are reading it and want that peace of mind as like an active citizen in their community. You want to do it the right way that are trying to do it the right way. Understood. I would ask one question and playing a little dove as advocate although I agree with you. I believe I legally could repair a firearm prior to a 19 or 1886 without being registered because it's considered an antique. So would that prevent people that collect antiques, firearms? Well, if they're doing if they're doing their own, that's okay. But if if they're then taking them to a gun show to sell separate issue separate issue it's getting awfully deep in here. I'm just saying I just that's a pretty narrow it is. But I I know some people Well, it's also not required that collect the antiques basically. A lot of them do repair. There's a lot of potentially harmful antiques that exist in the world that could be just as damaging as an antique gun. You mean like darts, right? Like lawn darts. The swords in people's homes that they collect. Okay. Actually, reading through this, I just realized I think that some of my family history would no longer be allowed in town. They would have kicked you out. You can't sell it. No, it's uh I come from a line of seven GPS. Uh my grandfather and six of his brothers were all general practitioners and surgeons that had their offices in their homes. Oh yeah. And so they were on call 24/7 and available for house calls and everything else. And I don't think we could let them. Not that anybody does that anymore, but you know. Well, they could have the home office. Could you do that in a work live live workspace? I'm sure they could. Yeah, I bet you could. Yeah, you could figure out a way if you want to cuz live work is another whole another animal. Well, that's that was the whole working professionals line. Yeah. Yeah. In the first level ones that work at home. Yeah. Under 14 currently says motor vehicle body repair and painting. Should that also include detailing? Usually that's a high I would say no but because it's a very common thing now and it's pretty low impact it is for sound it's like a vacuum. Yeah. So I don't know we killed this one I think just about we've killed him. Yeah. This horse is just about dead. So my my goal is thank you all again for the comments and feedback. I try to get this into ordinance format for the next meeting and then have it better words to maybe actually act on and make a motion to send it to the council. Thanks. Thank you. A lot of work. Thank you for doing all the work to get this started. Absolutely. That's part of why I'm here. Come on. All right. Next up is the subdivision ordinance. Uh, this one is not quite as far along as the last one because starting from scratch. Uh, in summary, the city attorney and I have both reviewed the subdivision ordinance and have found that it's out of date and lacking. Uh, last major changes were made in 1999, although there was one update in 2015 that I found. And I included some notes in the in the memo from the city attorney about what their concerns were. The first one talks about the the park dedication language and how we want to make sure the city's ordinance is consistent with recent Minnesota State Supreme Court case law. to make sure that when we say land dedication or park fees have to be paid that we're consistent with a 2022 ruling. So, there's language to tweak on that. I I think we're not that far off, but we don't want to risk it now that we know what the courts have said. Uh, and there's a whole bunch of language in there about how we can do it and why we can do it. Because remember all the zoning and subdivision regulations that are the powers that are granted to the city come from the state and so we have to be consistent with state law. And so I I copied and put in the report there a bunch of the state law that are relevant to the park dedication for those that love a little law reading for bedtime pleasure. the uh so we'll be working on that element of the uh the update. Then over on page three of their of my report, they talked about how current development any anytime a major project comes in, there's a development contract that's signed between the city and the developer. And what we have as the minimum requirements in the subdivision ordinance for those contracts is really severely lacking. And so that needs beefing up and we'll get more detail in what is who does what and when they have to do it and how they have to do it and all. It's a lot of lawyer stuff but needs to be done be especially to protect the city. And then related to that, the code now allows developers to post a security in the form of a performance bond and that's collected to ensure that if they're putting in a street or utilities that they do it right and then if they don't the city can try to collect on the bond. Collecting on bonds are notoriously difficult and shockingly banks make you jump through a whole bunch of hoops to get the money. So there are other ways to do it with uh either take a cash deposit or a letter of credit. So we'll be changing the language to reflect that. And then on the bottom of page three I added some points um that in my experience I think the ordinance should have. couple I want to point out is uh especially we'll start with number six want to I'm prop I would propose revising the code to allow city staff to approve simple lot splits or lot divisions. So let's say I'll give you an example. Let's say you have a 155 foot 150 foot wide lot with one house that's over on one side and you want to split off 75 ft to create a second lot. Right now the code says you have to platt it. You have to go through a preliminary plat and a final plat get all the drawings done and all that stuff with a a lot division or lot split. You would still have to get it surveyed and you have to show lot A and lot B, but then you it could be a staff approval. You don't have to go to the planning commission. You don't have to go to the council. Get deeds prepared reflecting lot A and lot B. Yeah. And that gets recorded at the county. It's less costly, more as long as it's as long as the recording and the surveys and such are done. Property definition. Yes. Yeah. And that's all stuff staff would check. If you go back far enough in this city, you'll find that that none of that stuff used to be done. Yeah. It was just build build on. Well, I own these three lots, so I can just build on it. Yeah. Closer. In fact, the home I live in used to be a corner lot, and when they divided it, they gave my house 59.75 ft and the other lot 60.5 ft. So they didn't even divide my lot to meet city code standards when they could have. Right. So that's one proposal I'll be adding in. Yeah. And then the second one, number five, is adding some language about the process for reviewing lot line adjustments and lot consolidation. So a lot line adjustment in my mind is if in Cameron's case, let's say he wants to buy three feet of the land from the neighbor and just shift that line. We don't need to be have it replatted. The same thing, get survey work done, get some deeds drawn up, staff approves it. Keep it simple and not overthink it. To me, we did that. I I personally had that experience. And so I want to make sure that that's in the code because it's not clear. It's good in the code that that can be done. Y. So that's a couple examples. Update the definitions. There's only about four definitions in there now and every ordinance has many more definitions. So that's where I'm going with the ordinance. I have started tackling the task and fortunately I have access to other ordinances to plagiarize from again because I'm not going to reinvent the wheel and I've had and I can pick pieces from past places of I've worked and do the word processing. So if if there's a general consensus on that, I will be bringing that back at the next meeting. Wow. Any questions? I do have one question in this. Are you going to get it all this done by the next meeting? Okay. And now that was a rhetorical question. Well, the whole take it step by step. Well, really the home occupation ordinance is mostly done. Yeah. And I've I've got a really good start on the subdivision ordinance. Good. Yes. Cameron, I do have one question and I suspect that this is in state legislation, but at the top of page three, cash payments may not be used for ongoing operation or maintenance of park, etc. Is that something that is required or could we drop that? because I could see, you know, we're a fairly well parked city and I could see that further down the road, uh, you know, we may not want to add extra parks, but we may want to use money from development to keep up what's here. So, it would be nice if we could do that, but like I say, I know that may be a legal opinion or it may be uh something that the state has in their rules and regs. It the bottom of page two, item G. That's the state language about what the park funds can be used. Okay. That's what I suspect. Improvement of Yeah. is allowed. So, maintenance means you can't use it for snow plowing or crack sealing, right? Yeah. Right. To improve a park. You can use it to make something better. Correct. Okay. Or redevelop it. That's good. Can Can I just have a So on on where you say the the one where you said the third the current code allows develop post security in the form of performance bond. Yes. But now you want to change that where it would only allow security in the form of irre irrevocable letter of credit from a bank. So I'm as a residential contractor we we're not allowed in the state of Minnesota to do bonding anymore. we ruined that for us and now we're required by the state to pay into a state fund. I don't do that personally, but would this here just just explain the irrevocable letter of credit from bank is that harder or easier to get than a bond and like are smaller companies are they going to be as accessible to get that or is this going to now limit to where only larger companies that can afford this irrevocable letter credit would do you know what I'm asking? Yeah. Uh, I don't think it my experience has been that it's not any more difficult to get than Okay. the bond. It's just a different vehicle. Correct. Okay. All right. That's all I have. And it's really a a performance bond if if they do the work and install whatever they're going to install and all passes inspection. Yeah. City signs off, the bond is released and there there is some cost to get a bond and there's some holding costs. And if it goes more than a year or 13 months, then they got to renew it. And there's some costs with that. But it what it really does is, and it's probably not going to happen very often in North St. Paul, let's say a developer gets halfway through a project and then walks away. Y or they go bankrupt. The city is hopefully holding enough money with that letter of credit to finish the project or at least stabilize the site so it's not a a big mess. I was just wondering how what the cost is to get this irrevocable letter. Yeah, there is some cost compared to a bond. Yeah. And I don't know the difference, but and if it would out smaller companies that can't afford Yeah. If they can't get a letter of credit, then I would question how they can even do the project. The letter to get a bond because those are more common. I was just wondering. Yeah. But the the city is if if the city has a good vetting system, if they can't get that letter, right? If the city can't get the money they need to finish a project, then that's a problem also. Yep. Is there any other questions on that? The the platting process, how would that work once if it's not part of the initial ask just would get recorded and platted at a later date. I'm sorry, Andrew. I'm not tracking what your example is. Um, maybe I'm not using the right term, but I thought the platting was the like official recording of the property. Mhm. And I thought you you had said in your the way it's done now, it has to be platted first, drawings, and it has to be surveyed first. Okay. And and so why I'm proposing with the lot divisions is all these would need surveys regardless because we got to know where where things are. The current process again if you wanted to buy the properties then get the survey worked then you have a plat which is a legal document on myar that gets recorded. The alternative to that is if the survey shows that the proposed lines and lots will meet our requirements that then the developer owner who applicant gets deeds prepared reflecting this is a legal description of lot A. this legal description of lot B, those get recorded at the county recorder's office versus the plat that takes council approval because the city staff can approve deeds and so it speeds up the process and then and then that would still be recorded with the county so all the county property maps are still up to date. Okay. Yeah. Yes. Got it. Are we on to downtown design manual? We are. And that's a whole big thing. It is. I'm sure we could be at it for a long time. Yes. What's your focus? Well, okay. So, doing some more. three of us talked about or three commissioners talked about the last meeting and I did some more digging in the files and I found a couple of things are there's a there was a staff memo from October 22nd of 2015 and I I don't even know who prepared it that outlined some comments that I think reflected many of the comments we talked about at the last meeting and that's on page 158 in the packet and then I went through and added in blue if you have color some of my comments based on what I've seen and our discussion at the last meeting of things that should be changed is where I'm going. There's it's 20 years old. There's a whole bunch of references that are no longer applicable and that kind of thing. One thing I want to point out and I lost my not even logged in. Well, hang on. I can log in here in a second. the area that is the current boundaries of the district. I question if the west end should still even be in. See if this works. Okay, so this is the current boundaries of the downtown design district down here in the west end. First of all, this North St. Paul Road was First Avenue and that got realigned. That changed a little bit. But uh along the north side, we've got the VFW. There's the Eminem Ragnes building. I think the Franklin building, Franklin Square are along here. Yeah. On the south side, there's the auto parts store. There's the Farmers Insurance, the Reflex Medical Building, and the River of God Church down in here. None of those are historic now. They're all recently built or remodeled buildings. When I jumping ahead, when I think of that, what this was probably intended for originally was for the area right right around Margaret and 7th primarily. And some of that's even changed now. We've got the the new uh Sentinel building here and the new apartment building here, which they're great, but they don't really fit the architectural character of the downtown. And none of these buildings, they look like they've been built in the last 20, 30 years or remodeled or remodeled. Yeah. They're not they're not historical in my opinion, and I don't think they will ever become historical like the true downtown. Mhm. So, something to ponder is, do we just drop this whole west end and take it out of the district? Don't need a decision now, but that's an idea I wanted to float by the group. And then so that that's but and then all the references to the design and historical review commission of course they no longer exist. All those would have to be taken out. Uh I know at the last meeting there was talk about with setbacks. The current code says or design center say all the buildings have to line up right with each other close to the sidewalk or the street. And you brought up Patrick about should we allow buildings to be set back to possibly allow a patio in front. Yeah. Or a plaza or gather. I personally think that has of it has merit and might be an appropriate application and again that's in the site design section there. The second point. So there's things like that. Uh the whole height discussion to Cameron's point. It's now says really everything's supposed to be two to three stories. Yeah. And and we have fourstory building. And the four stories kind of blown that out of the water. Y uh and it even talks about if you're next to a one-story building, you can't go higher than two stories and stepping and all that. Some of that again might be relevant. A lot of it doesn't seem I don't know that it's necessarily relevant, but I mean there are design complications to do that. If you want to put a three or four well even a two-story building immediately adjacent to one-story building y is very complicated to do potentially so actually build it. Yeah. So there just to meet building code. So there are other issues there that would impact that. I would say that we don't need to necessarily include such a restriction because I I just don't think it's applicable the way the way the downtown is developing. And then excuse me over the Well, there's several bullet points there again from the first memo from 2015 and then my updates uh points things to think about and then I found this memo from 2016 which talks about how how would we up how would the city update the ordinance or the manual and what would be involved and there's seven pages there. It was very thorough done and what it shows it could be a very lengthy process. Mhm. I'm not disagreeing that it needs work. I guess the question for the commission is and maybe we come back to it when we talk about the work plan is what's the priority here because there's parts of the zoning code I know need updating. Uh we'll be getting into the comprehensive plan update here in the next year. And if we really strongly think the downtown design manual should be updated and it again I'm not saying it isn't. Do we try to convince city council put money in the budget for next year and farm it out? I can pick at it piece by piece but the other items you mention are a priority. I and that's that's why I'm bringing all this up. I'm kind of wondering if we could maybe make the east end and the west end a little bit more of a formbbased code uh so that they we have a little bit more of a of a north St. Paul look to everything. You know, that's that was one of the reasons I was thinking about kind of the stepping of the heights and that type of thing because really, if you think about it, the only really historic parts of the town that are left are those two blocks on either side of Margaret Street. And you know, it's like that east end. The only building down there that I think has been there for any length of time is what is I think it's the insurance dealer now that's uh next to the VFW. That's the only one that at least looks like it's been there for more than 20 or 30 years. And we don't have an awful lot of really old buildings on the on the east end that aren't homes. So, well, it's something something to consider, but I think the the bigger question is what priority does this have? Yeah, that's the thing. That's the starting point. I um I I feel like it's important if it's going to be a meaningful document and we're going to keep it and utilize it for development and management of existing properties, then it's important to have it be right. But I think it's takes a backseat to the other item you mentioned. Yeah. So, your idea about potentially uh having a consultant do it next year, I think that's a really good idea. Okay. We would certainly be heavily involved. That's I'm just We're not just going to say here, right? Exactly. And I wonder if you could make it something that the Humphrey School might want to work on for us. You know, they've got certainly are a well-known planning organ uh planning school. Maybe we could help stretch our dollars a little bit if they could get involved. Of course, I'm sure they're, you know, a lot of other towns asking the same thing. Or would it be more the school of architecture? Yeah. Or the the urban planning group that part of the But it's to me it's more architectural design. It's more architectural. You're right. Yeah, that's true. It is. Ken, along those thoughts, um could you also check to see if there's any grants we can apply for with the Met Council if I am vaguely remembering something that they offered that might this might fit into. Good idea. Yeah. And it wouldn't even have to be the U of M. There may be architectural schools that Yeah. some of the other colleges might be a good option. Dun is doing a really good job with their school. I've been very impressed. All right. So yes, but not not so fast. Yeah, it's not it's not it's not on the front burner. Don't forget about it either. Yeah, fair enough. Agreed. Yeah, because we are going to have to start getting start work on the comp plan before too much longer. And that's going to take precedence over this probably unless unless we get things so well done before then that we don't have to worry about it. Yeah, we'll go with that. or unless we can farm that out, too. But that's it's just time and money. Oh, believe me, I've looked at an awful lot of the small town comp plans that have been farmed out. You'd be surprised at how exactly the same they are from one place to the next. Like I can I can take a look at some of them and I can say, "Yeah, H&TB wrote this one. I recognize their formatting." Yeah. Don't need to reinvent the wheel. All right. Then the last uh discussion item I had on item E is about the work plan. I have a one-page memo there with a list of many items. Uh I tried to put them in somewhat of an order, chronological order, but um thoughts, comments? I think your downtown design manual just slid down a few now. Yep. Other than that, it looks pretty good. Okay. Updates. And when when and the comp plan is on there. Okay. Yep. I appreciate your laying the Very great. Okay. Well, it helps me also because How many Post-it notes do I Yeah. You have one wall entirely filled now, don't you? Yeah. I don't see any I don't see anything else that would move there or not beyond. I got different pins that I don't see anything we would strike. That's for sure. Other than moving the design manual other than moving the design man down to probably number eight or somewhere down there. Okay. Off streetet parking standards. That's something we've been talking about for quite a while. So maybe that could move up to the top of that of number six just as you know number A or something. But yeah, that could And I I know that's a whole thing. Mhm. And not everyone's going to be happy probably. It's awfully It's awfully hard to develop a standard that where where we will have compliance. It's really hard to do. Our our city has too many strange variables and property shape and size and age. Setbacks and everything are all over the place. Yeah. I I'll never forget there's a place I walk routinely and the guy has a large, you know, well, you know how big pickup trucks are these days. It's a crew cab pickup truck that the only way he could park it in his driveway is to have it hanging over the the sidewalk. It It's he can't do anything different. So, what do you do? Say you can't own that truck. Can't do that. So, so that did he did he measure it before he bought it? Well, that particular ordinance I think about frequently and I think okay, what do we actually want to enforce and how do we enforce it? That's what should be in the ordinance and and there's just with all the variables, it's really hard to come up with it. Those damn homeowners associations will tell them that they have to get rid of their vehicles if they don't have one of those. Yes. Thank God. And thank God we don't have an awful lot of duly pickup trucks up here like we did down in Texas because they take up even more room. Yeah, but Texas is big. Everything's big in Texas. So we we've heard you don't like my duly. Well, it's just are you parking in in a compliant manner? That's the big question. Done. Could you fit it in the garage? Another rhetorical question on a finished surface. You know, it was just always funny in College Station. You'd be standing there at the access to the the divided highway and you'd watch like seven pickup trucks all go by and six of them were dulies and you knew that most of those were being driven by college students who had no no other need for a dy other than maybe dragging the boat out once a month. So, with the notes we've made on the work plan, the planning commission work plan, we're we're pretty much good. Yes. Okay. That's all I needed on that. Good. Last item. Well, under reports, then the next scheduled meeting is for July 3rd. My sense is that there will be several people that may not be available on the Thursday before the 4th of July. Uh Thursday is the 4th of July. What? No, Friday is the fourth. That's I'm sorry. You're right. I'm sorry. Yeah. Uh so I a wanted to know if there'd be a quorum on the third and or is there an interest in moving it to July 10th? It would agree. Either I will be here. So I'm traveling on the 1st and 2nd. I will be here on the third. I have to look at my calendar. So I'm not 100% sure. I my leaning is from my perspective leave it where it is just because just because then I don't have to try and figure out is the 10th going to work but if we don't have a quorum then are we not accomplishing a whole lot so what about I mean I will not be here on the third yeah I won't be here either we got two I will be so I will be don't think I will be okay so it sounds like quorum is going to be tough to achieve Yeah. Yeah. And most will have four and then if anybody gets sick or Yeah. something. So, well, a question while this comes up. Does the same requirements for a um commission special meeting is that the same for the council where is it has to be very limited scope. It can only be No, it' be just rescheduling. Okay. not calling a special meeting because we're got to hurry up and do one. Well, I I have an event late afternoon that day on the 10th, but could you send out a doodle poll with maybe some options and we can and not even necessarily on a Thursday. We have options to pick up. Maybe there's another day that would work. I'd have to look at what other meetings are. You have a council meeting on the 8th, right? No. Uh council meeting should be on the first I believe. Council meeting on the 1st. Yes, you're correct. So, well, I heard one person won't be here on the Tuesday, but Tuesday the 8th is a little better for me. But but the the 10th I could make it work. It's just it's an informal event. Are we saying the third is very doubtful? It sounds like it's doubtful to have a quorum. Like I say, send out send out a doodle poll. They're free and we can I can figure out how many but I'll try to get something out tomorrow or Monday. Getting ready to go to Hawaii, Tennessee. So, okay. Uh I don't know that I have any other reports of interest. I I do have one thing. We we me have started working with a developer who is looking at a property. See if I can get my map to open. It's down on County Road B right near Maplewood, which of course in North St. Paul it says south. Not going to be able to find it. So, if you go on B as you're going towards past McNight Road, past the Holiday, uh on the south side on the left, there's a little garage, a trucking company. Mhm. That that's in I think that's in Maplewood. But right before that, there's a little strip of land on the south side between B and the trail, the Gateway Trail. Uh, it's zoned for multiple family. He's got a proposal he's working on to put seven or eight town houses in there. It's a squeeze. Put them in sideways. Uh, no. Uh, he's it's Well, oh, I'll hand this out and you can all ponder this. Again, this is a preliminary rough draft official. something for us to contemplate. Yeah. Thank you for moderate. We Brian and I met with him on Tuesday and told I told him the very east unit, unit A. Well, yeah, it's a unit A. It's closest to the ponding area. If you look where the yellow is crosshatch there, there's a big chunk of that that's not meeting the rear setback. Three of the units. I strongly encourage him to drop that unit. The last one. Yes. Yeah. And then he's he's working with the wershed district on the design of the pond. It would be a PUD and it would be kind of negotiating everything through it. Mhm. I guess the question for the commission it's so the grant funding talk in the microphone. The way the livable communities grant works with the Met Council is actually it's a grant to the city and the city passes it through to the developer. So, we as a city have to agree that this is a good project and it's a good thing and we're supportive of it and because again, we get the grant and then we pass it on through to the developer. I don't necessarily need an answer now, but if there's anybody that has a lot of heartburn about this from a land use standard, I think zoning wise if he drops that one unit, he can probably make most everything else work. There might be some questions on setbacks, but well, and the the setback is a concern except the the right of way for the Gateway Trail is huge. Yes. So, there's a big piece of property there that isn't getting developed elsewhere. Well, right. And it's not backing up to other homes, right? But there that end unit there, there would be no backyard. It's a drainage swale. Yeah. And so that's why I said I don't think that's going to work. So if you have thoughts procon high level early on let me know please and then okay because there is a deadline coming up by the end of July for he and the city to put in an application if with them at council and we're going to have a discussion about that with him soon. I don't that's all the reports I can think of. big trucking or not, excuse me. Car show starts tomorrow night, first one of the season. We should get out out there and do that. Uh I know Jason, do you got a report? Um I do have one thing that I would like to share with you. Um I strongly encourage you. Um the city put out an email. Um that there will be a presentation on the future of the community center on June 17th at 5:15 at the city hall. The city of North St. Paul has been working with a consulting team to examine the future of the community center through a comprehensive feasibility study. The study has focused on two key areas. Whether the city can move forward with the project, including building plans and grant funding requirements, opportunities to partner with outside organizations that align with the grant criteria criteria and the city's goals for the facility. We invite you to attend a presentation of the study's initial findings at the C city council workshop on Tuesday, June 17th at 5:15 p.m. either in person at city hall here or online via our YouTube channel. That's Tuesday, June 17th. Tuesday, June Yeah. Yes. Uh Tuesday, June 17th. 5:15. 5:15. Yep. I I don't know what's in it, so I'm excited. 5:15. Yeah. 515 15 15 515 515 Thank you. Quarter after five quarter pass. You can think say it a lot of different ways. All right. Um do we have any other reports commissioners? None. So concerning just uh so 6B on your last where you go check definition of town halls of duplex twin homes to ensure they align with state law. So, I did go down to Spar the St. Paul Association Realtors because I thought maybe they could help us with that because we talked about this last month and they said you should check with your city to see what they're Everyone's just kicking the can. Yep. And so, but they also recommended that I go to there's a um National Association of Appraisers, which I think that might be a good thing. So, I'm still noodling and going down these roads, but they did give me a couple of options. So I did a little bit of work on that and sounds like one of their other recommendations was well let's see what what does Minneapolis say and what because they sounded like they thought it was a city by city thing which sounds a little too diver. I would think the building code would have something too but they I'm not sure I'm 100% certain what you're referring to. Um different definitions of townhouse duplex. Oh, duplex. We were talking about that last last month and so I did do a little search on that. But yeah, so is a dup is a twin home a duplex, right? And there's got to be some sort of more definitive sort of definition. So I'm still working on that. Great. Thank you. That's all I had. Thank you. I think that's it. Do we have a motion to adjurnn? Motion to adjurnn. Well, you you beat me to it because that's exactly what I was going to talk about was the June 17th presentation. So, I'm interested. I hope I can be there. Other than that, a motion to adjurnn. Yes. From Commissioner Rathy and the second. I'll second it. Second from Alvarez. Yes. All in favor say I. I. We are adjourned at 820. Thank you all. It clicked.