Joint Meeting: Planning Commission and City Council

On Wednesday October 21st the Grand Marais City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission met to discuss what stance the City is going to take on the Vacation Rental question.

This meeting was opened at 6:00pm with a summary of the action that had been taken in the past. I have summarized here for your information:

-The City Council asked the P&Z Commission to look into whether Vacation Rentals were an allowable use in the Residential (R1 & R2) zones.  It was found that there is no language in the ordinance that would allow for such activity

-In response, the P&Z decided, via a split vote, on June 3rd to reaffirm the language in the zoning ordinance that there are not to be lodging properties (short-term stay) in the residential zones. The conversation covered what the purpose of the residential zones was. The ordinance labels these zones as "permanent residence" and explains its purpose as:

"The R-1 Permanent Residence District is intended to provide a healthy, safe and attractive residential environment, protect property values and the environment and provide a mix of residential options, both seasonal and year around." Section 19.04

-The Council, on June 10th, accepted the P&Z's recommendation that there were not to be Vacation Rentals in the residential zone. Letters were written to known residents in violation of the ordinance.

-At the P&Z meeting on July 1st, members of the public operating Vacation Rentals in the Residential zone attended the meeting and discussed the situation. The P&Z asked the City Administrator to compile a list of options for rules that could potentially allow Vacation Rentals without negatively effecting the Residential zone.

-At the July 8th City Council meeting these members of the public attended the meeting and spoke in both public comment and when the agenda item came up. The Council listened and chose to wait to hear the options compiled for the next P&Z meeting.

-On August 5th the P&Z got together again to discuss the options. A list of nearly 40 options was presented to the Commission and there was a great deal of conversation, at times heated, about the path forward. In the end, the P&Z decided in another split vote to continue with the ordinance as written, not being convinced that the options presented would be either legal or sufficient.

-The August 12th Council meeting recapped the conversations and conclusions of the P&Z and added additional comments from the Council. It was concluded that there needed to be more time to hear public sentiment about the issue and that this should be discussed at a later date in a joint meeting of the P&Z and the Council.

-On September 2nd the P&Z met and reviewed the ordinance for potential confusing areas. They reached loggerheads without Council direction and chose to defer action until the joint meeting.

**So here we are everyone! That is quite a conversation and a journey.  At the meeting on the 21st the agenda was to create a final decision on Vacation Rentals in the residential zone as well as give direction to the P&Z for their process of reviewing the ordinance... but much more than that happened.

After the intro, there was some discussion about each person's thoughts regarding the situation. Several members expressed concern that the allowance of Vacation Rentals in the residential zone would open Grand Marais up to the same problems that are happening in many other heavy tourism locations: homes are being bought up at startling rates and being converted to rentals instead of residences. The number quoted from Administrator Roth concerning how many times a year he gets a call asking if someone can operate a lodging business in the residential zone was about 20. That number added to the concern.

Additional conversation was had about the existence of other commercial activities in the residential zone, which brought up the conversation about past ordinance and policy work affirming grandfathering of certain activities and locations. Seeing that there was really nothing to be said about the activities already allowed in the residential zone via ordinance and conditional use, the conversation shifted to ask if a vacation rental could be considered a conditional use.

This was a troublesome idea in that there was no clear answer. The ordinance simply states that "Home Occupations" are allowed... Since there is currently no definition of "Vacation Rental" or "Rental by Owner" in the ordinance, nor any formal definition speaking against it, it was concluded that this may be a possibility. This would have to pass the conditional use permit process, which requires a public hearing, which would be the place for community members to object to a specific use. The stipulation here would be that the person who owns the property would have to live there and that the business would have to be clearly auxiliary and secondary to the primary use as a permanent residence.  There was no clear decision made concerning this at this meeting, but direction was given to the P&Z to look into this.

The conversation covered the same ground several times in slightly different ways with hypothetical situations being introduced and examples from other areas being used. There was also conversation about the City's upcoming Comprehensive Planning efforts in 2016 and how that would be an ideal time to do a full overhaul of the zoning ordinance. In the meantime, however, the consensus was that we shouldn't do significant changes to the ordinance without having significant public comment and process.

In the end the Council made a motion to uphold the ordinance as written and empowered Administrator Roth to create a few draft scenarios for informing and encouraging those in violation of the ordinance to get back into compliance. This motion also empowered the P&Z to address the terminology shortfalls of the zoning ordinance and work on updating the language in confusing parts of the ordinance in correlation with the Council's decision that Vacation Rentals are not to be allowed in the residential zone.

As in any decision, it is very important to consider all sides and weigh the pros and cons. There are definite pros and cons on both side of this issue and that is not something to take lightly. Any decision that impacts residents of the City should be thoroughly thought out and carefully made. I believe that the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council did a pretty good job of doing this, even if the result was not exactly what everyone would have wanted.

*Thank you to everyone who contacted me with opinions on this matter. I took all of them seriously and brought it all to the table for discussion. I received over 30 comments on this matter and appreciate your involvement!

As always, if you would like to discuss this further, please let me know and I will find some time to sit down with you.