CITY OF PARK RAPIDS



CITY OF PARK RAPIDS

REGULAR MEETING

PLANNING COMMISSION

JULY 27, 2020, 6:00 p.m.

Park Rapids City Hall, 212 Second Street West

Park Rapids, Minnesota

1. CALL TO ORDER: The July 27, 2020, Regular Meeting of the Park Rapids Planning Commission was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by Chair Bradow.

2. ROLL CALL: Present: Commissioners Dick Bradow, Nancy Newman, Scott Hocking, Robb Swanson and City Council Member Liz Stone. Present via phone: Bruce Johnson. Absent: None. Staff Present: City Planner Andrew Mack and Planning/Administrative Assistant Carmen L. Lockhart. Others Present: Intern Adam Herberg, T.J. Simon and Robin Fish of the Park Rapids Enterprise.

3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: A motion was made by Stone, seconded by Swanson to approve the agenda as presented.

The vote was called.

The following Commissioners voted in favor: Bradow, Newman, Swanson, Johnson, Hocking and Stone

The following Commissioners voted nay: None

The following Commissioners were absent: None

The motion passed.

4. APPROVAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 22, 2020: A motion was made Hocking, seconded by Swanson to approve the June 22, 2020 Meeting Minutes as presented.

The vote was called.

The following Commissioners voted in favor: Bradow, Newman, Swanson, Johnson, Hocking and Stone

The following Commissioners voted nay: None

The following Commissioners were absent: None

The motion passed.

5. INFORMATIONAL/DISCUSSION:

5A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE – ELECTRICAL VEHICLE (EV) READINESS SECTION: Adam Herberg read his report on page 11 of the packet that stated he has put together a draft for the EV readiness section for our new Comprehensive Plan that entails certain goals, steps, and policies to help ensure and promote sustainability in our community.

Mack indicated we will have discussion amongst the commission members tonight regarding the draft changes to the plan and then we will schedule a public hearing to modify the plan and then make a recommendation to the City Council as early as the August meeting.

Bradow inquired about goal 3, strategy 2 on page 14 regarding private parking lots and requiring businesses to add infrastructure for future EV stations if adding or remodeling parking lots, does that mean private parking lots as well? Herberg stated yes. Bradow asked if any findings were done on the cost to upgrade a parking lot for these EV stations? Herberg said he has the numbers but doesn’t have his notes in front of him but there is research and data he can provide for the next public hearing meeting regarding the installation and cost. Bradow asked if the private party would be responsible for the cost? Herberg said yes mostly, there are some grants and other avenues of funding they can find to help build infrastructure since EV charging is such a need going forward now as people are wanting this infrastructure put in and wanting this availability. A good portion of it will be relied upon the private sector. Bradow asked Herberg to define remodeling as he owns the building across the street and the parking lot behind it and what if I ripped up three sections of concrete and put down a replacement, is that remodeling? Herberg said yes, remodeling would be reconstructing or reshaping the parking lot and then we would want to require that infrastructure, not necessarily the entire EV station itself, but the infrastructure to put the EV station so that way if we decide we want to put it there, if it is a good area, we can or if the private sector wants to put it there themselves. Bradow said it is a private parking lot so what if I don’t want to put one in there?

Mack responded what we are looking to do is create a goal in the plan, but it is not a requirement. If the city decides it wants to pursue this further and create laws from the policies or goals identified in the plan then there would be subsequent steps that we would make as a Planning Commission, review the ordinance and make further requirements of law. However, if we have other things that come before us like conditional use permits, we have a finding that we need to make that assures the proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, this is something we can go back to and decide on a case by case basis during that specific project review as to whether or not we would want to encourage or make that a condition of approval for the particular project. It does give us some tools but it doesn’t give us a legal law mandate at this point. Bradow said well the goal says on strategy 2 requiring businesses? Herberg responded this is a rough draft so anything we want to change we can change going forward. Bradow said for example, mine is a private parking lot so the public is not invited to park there and are subject to towing if they do park there. Mack said other communities have made requirements with some standards as to how many parking spaces are at the private business for employees or customers or there might be other instances where laws are created where you may want to specify specific uses that would be most conducive where you would expect to perhaps provide that level of service for the travelling public that would take advantage of that at the private business.

Bradow said I think it would be helpful to know what the cost ranges are for the infrastructure all the way up to the putting the charging station in. Herberg said infrastructure itself is around the $1,500 to $3,000 for infrastructure itself and then the charging stations, depending on the level you receive, more than likely a level two, would cost you another $1,500 to $3,000 so all in all the whole project itself for a private business would be roughly around the $6,500 to $8,000 on the cheap end.

Mack advised some of the information presented to the City Council for the selection of the downtown charging location he did produce those numbers for the total cost. Herberg added his report has good numbers in it.

A motion was made by Swanson, seconded by Stone to bring the EV readiness draft to the Comprehensive Plan to a public hearing at our next meeting.

The vote was called.

The following Commissioners voted in favor: Bradow, Newman, Swanson, Johnson, Hocking and Stone

The following Commissioners voted nay: None

The following Commissioners were absent: None

The motion passed.

5B. ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 152 RENTALS OF THE PARK RAPIDS CITY CODE AUTHORIZING THE PERMITTING OF SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND PRESCRIBING STANDARDS:

Bradow provided a handout of a map showing the parcel count of the possibilities of short term rentals with a total of 275 plus some properties around Mud Lake so another six to ten properties to round it off at 280 parcels. Swanson said what we are basically looking at are parcels along the water and the Heartland Trail. Bradow said those are the most desirable, in my opinion, I think those are the obvious ones. Stone asked if the development created by Grover is included? Bradow advised we received a response from Ed Poitras, the Baywoods Condominium Owner’s President and their bylaws forbid that. There was further discussion concerning areas on the map that could theoretically go short term rental. Mack added anywhere that is licensed rental would be eligible to apply for the short term rental license.

Further discussion centered around the buffering controversy between the commissioners and their viewpoints as previously discussed and whether a compromise could be reached. These issues include the following:

• How to protect the R-1 Single Family neighborhoods and the character of the vicinity;

• The proposed distance of 500 feet from the boundary of the parcel and whether anything less could be considered as a compromise;

• How to measure the distance consistently;

• Increased traffic concerns in residential neighborhoods;

• Enforcement of noise concerns through the existing nuisance ordinance;

• Density control of short term rentals using an IUP public hearing procedure verses administrative approval;

• Short term rentals being a new and explosive use and how to have proper regulations in place;

• Tax rates;

• Methods of notification to the public for their input at a public hearing as to what the ordinance should allow;

• Short term rentals considered as businesses in an R-1 and should be treated like a business as to how each individual one affects its neighborhood, the size of the property, the number of rooms, etc.;

• Changing the proposed matrix to IUP for short term rentals;

• Modifying the proposed language to require an IUP;

A motion was made by Swanson, seconded by Newman to advise and direct staff to revise the language in the proposed short term rental ordinance removing the administrative section and insert language to an IUP and removing the buffering standard language.

The vote was called.

The following Commissioners voted in favor: Bradow, Newman, Swanson, Hocking and Stone

The following Commissioners voted nay: Johnson

The following Commissioners were absent: None

The motion passed 5 to 1.

Mack added he will make the proposed changes and advertise it for a public hearing at the next meeting.

6. ADJOURNMENT: A motion was made by Stone, seconded by Swanson, to adjourn the meeting at 6:48 p.m.

The vote was called.

The following Commissioners voted in favor: Bradow, Newman, Swanson, Johnson, Hocking and Stone

The following Commissioners voted nay: None

The following Commissioners were absent: None

The motion passed.

________________________________

Chair Richard Bradow

ATTEST:

__________________________

Carmen L. Lockhart

Planning/Administrative Assistant

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download