Karen and Ted Bell, residents living near the proposed development, expressed their opposition to the short-term rental condition. They argued that the proliferation of short-term rentals contributes to inflated housing prices and does not address the local need for affordable housing. Ted Bell highlighted the demographic makeup of their neighborhood, noting the predominance of long-term residents and the absence of short-term rentals, which they felt preserved the area’s character.

On the other hand, the applicants, identified as Ryan and another individual, explained that the economic model for short-term rentals made more financial sense given the high costs of construction. They emphasized their intention to be full-time residents in Grand Marais. They also expressed a strong desire to integrate into the community, stating that the proposed arrangement was the only viable way for them to establish a family home in the area.

Commission members appeared divided on the issue. While some expressed a preference for long-term rentals, others acknowledged the zoning designation of the area as resort commercial, which permits such developments. A motion was eventually passed, allowing the short-term rental conditional use permit with a stipulation that it would not automatically transfer to future property owners—a compromise intended to address some community concerns.

The meeting also addressed a variance request by the Angry Trout Café. The café’s location within the vegetation line necessitated a variance for any expansions. The commission approved the request without significant opposition, noting the changes were minor extensions of the existing structure.