[0:28] e

[0:58] e

[1:28] e

[1:58] e

[2:28] e

[2:58] e

[3:28] e

[3:58] e

[4:28] e

[4:58] e

[5:28] e

[5:58] e e

[6:54] hello and welcome to the Monday November 4th 2024 meeting of the wetta Planning Commission

[7:00] I hereby call this meeting to order my name is Lissa Stockton and I'm

[7:05] the chair of the commission and I have a few words to share about how this evening's meeting will proceed first the

[7:11] hybrid meeting information we have meeting ID 874 3313 5133 passcode

[7:20] 64882 members of the public May attend this Planning Commission meeting in person or watch and listen remotely by

[7:26] viewing the meeting on Channel 8 WCTV and the city's website it at weta.org

[7:33] WCTV wetta sorry public comment during the public forum and or public hearing portions of the meeting may be provided

[7:39] in person at the meeting in advance or by logging into the zoom call raising your hand during the public hearing when

[7:46] your name is called in the meeting you will be seen and heard in our council chambers and the cable channel you'll be

[7:52] asked to unmute and then you may begin your comment all public comments must include your full name and address

[8:00] the city encourages comments or questions about items on the agenda and when possible requests that you submit them in advance by emailing public

[8:06] comment ata.org calling City staff at

[8:12] 952445 323 or mailing wetta City Hall at 600 uh Rice Street East wetta Minnesota

[8:20] 55391 attention public comment wonderful um next we'd like to take the roll

[8:26] call planers rer thank you chair um Vice

[8:31] chair planton here uh ch um sorry commissioner schwabie here chair

[8:38] Stockton here uh commissioner elg here commissioner Cameron here and

[8:45] commissioner Severson here wonderful thank you we can move on

[8:50] to item three which is the approval of the agenda tonight um on the agenda we

[8:55] do have a proposed change to the agenda as presented and that is to include um a

[9:02] update by our um uh by Jeff doll our city manager um and I'd therefore like

[9:07] to make a motion to amend this evening's agenda uh and um have that uh on our

[9:15] agenda uh I guess after the consent agenda item or at number four in replace

[9:22] of and shift them down U may I have a motion to make that approval so moved

[9:27] thank you may I have a second second a tie shalby commissioner SCH thank you um

[9:35] wonderful uh the motion is approved and the uh agenda is adjusted uh as follows

[9:42] Madam CH you had a first second there just ask for all those in favor oh sorry I just assumed we were all overo I don't

[9:49] think it's going to be controversial yeah um may I have a uh sorry all those in favor please say I I those opposed

[9:56] nay the eyes have it and the motion is improved and we are overwhelmingly uh joyful to have this change to our agenda

[10:03] this evening um so please

[10:08] welcome thank you so much chair Stockton thanks guys for uh amending the agenda

[10:14] Commissioners appreciate that um I'd just like to say say hello and thank you

[10:20] really that's why I'm here um I'm trying to make it to all of our commissions the the commissions do really important work

[10:26] for a community um and for our city uh city council City boards um the

[10:32] organization and um we're going to show our appreciation at our volunteer dinner

[10:38] which is this Thursday I hope to see you all there um the Planning Commission is

[10:44] unique in that it's a required uh commission that we have in our our

[10:49] organization a little bit different than some of the the the wants of our community like uh we're just starting a

[10:56] public art committee we have an energy environment commit we need the Planning Commission to go through you know

[11:02] certain legal processes and usually what that means is that there's more meetings

[11:09] uh there's more of a formality and um it's not always uh you know fun stuff it

[11:16] it's it's uh can be controversial at times it's it's really important so I

[11:21] say that just to get to the point is that I really appreciate your your work

[11:26] and your effort of trying to make the community and you are making the community a better place through

[11:31] thoughtful discourse your unique perspectives um thank you thank you

[11:38] thank you um and to that end I know that we have a couple of terms

[11:43] expiring um commissioner Sorenson who's now a city council member uh we left

[11:50] that um POS that V that seat unfilled and hopefully we'll have some good uh

[11:57] applicants uh over the next couple weeks weeks to apply and we'll interview applicants in December and I believe uh

[12:05] uh commissioner plattin seat um hopefully you can twist her arm and and uh uh try to get her to uh apply again

[12:13] I'll double check that but I think that's the case uh so think you Vice

[12:19] chair lot of arm twisting going on I think in the next uh few weeks

[12:26] um I think over the next year going to be pretty busy for the uh Planning Commission so all the more importance of

[12:33] of having such a great uh commission and uh and all the more importance to

[12:38] appreciate your work uh as we more than likely will have several development

[12:44] problems uh development projects I'm usually not on this side of

[12:49] the podium so not not on it tonight development projects um we're also

[12:55] moving forward with a lot of our strategic initiatives and an example of that is what you see tonight regarding

[13:01] cannabis we're exploring obviously additional regulations on cannabis

[13:07] within the city that does some of it pertain to zoning we're also exploring

[13:12] uh uh moving forward with our own Municipal dispensary for a variety of

[13:19] reasons uh that's a good example of one of our strategic initiatives another one

[13:26] uh which you're going to be dis you've already have discussed and you will be discussing uh in the near future is some

[13:32] tweaks amendments to the r3a zoning District um all of these initiatives are

[13:39] tied to our strategic plan our strategic goals in our strategic plan are to diversify Revenue sustain Community

[13:47] character and safety and Achieve and sustain operational excellence there are

[13:53] three there the first two is what usually kind of uh can make its way to the Planning Commission

[13:59] uh the municipal dispensary part um or that initiative that gets to diversify

[14:05] their revenue ultimately how do we come up with different ways to pay for the city services that everybody wants but

[14:12] not have it directly impact the property taxpayers which unfortunately right now

[14:19] uh because that is the there's very very limited other options to produce Revenue

[14:26] um that's who gets the burden so dispensary if it's profitable could lessen that burden so that's that's a

[14:33] example of of an initiative that we're looking at the other one I mentioned that really

[14:38] kind of goes through the Planning Commission is the uh sustained Community character and safety um tweaking our

[14:46] zoning code to um uh to mitigate issues that we're

[14:52] seeing with just neighborhood character and so that we're able to maintain what we all love about why Zetta um that's a

[15:01] tough thing because it's not black and white but that's why you're seeing this uh go to uh your body and then

[15:07] ultimately the plan uh city council as well so just wanted to highlight those

[15:12] because we are moving forward with a lot of our strategic plan initiatives and I'm thankful that we have such a a Great

[15:18] Commission here to provide uh good feedback and recommendations ultimately for uh the

[15:26] council um that's all I have uh so any I'm happy to answer any questions that

[15:31] you may have about anything that's going on in the city but um just wanted to say thank you so I'll stand for questions

[15:38] thank you chair thank you before anyone has any questions just want to thank you for coming this evening and uh acknowledging

[15:45] our time here it's uh very much appreciated and um I'm really thankful

[15:51] to be a part of this team um and I'm I'm glad we all get to contribute and then it's recognized so thanks for um thanks

[15:57] for sharing that I don't have any questions does anyone have any yes I'm

[16:03] curious Jeff I know this is new I've I'm shocked to hear a municipal

[16:10] dispensary are you aware of other communities considering such a thing I I

[16:15] can't even imagine how that works well commissioner good question um it is kind

[16:22] of uh a different a different uh business that

[16:27] we're deeping our toes in uh and Minnesota is really the only

[16:32] state that is allowing cities to do it so there's no other really like great

[16:38] examples throughout the country um I do know that a lot of other communities in Minnesota are considering it but given

[16:45] where we are in the process there aren't any uh other municipalities that are are

[16:50] running them yet but there's probably about 2030 or so that are considering it

[16:56] all kind of uh similar to why a smaller so they kind of have a better handle on

[17:03] the market and um ones that not all of them but a lot of them have um

[17:10] experience running Enterprises that are not traditionally governmental like um

[17:17] you know the liquor store and especially for us uh a bar and grill which most

[17:22] there's only a handful of those throughout the state and all of them are in um out of Greater Minnesota

[17:29] so um I think it makes sense for us to explore given the you know the the

[17:34] potential profit and the the fact that we're unique already but that doesn't mean we should do it and so that's why

[17:40] we're looking at it really closely recognizing that you're in the process of looking at it is there a comparison

[17:46] or contrast you can make for the distribution of alcohol since it's fall sort of in that same category of control

[17:54] um as a municipality um yeah yeah I think considerations that's part part of

[17:59] the the rationale to explore it from the city council's perspective is that we

[18:04] could have a better handle on where it's sold who's buying it things like that um

[18:11] so that is that go that plays into the decision similar to how it played into the decision to move forward with off

[18:18] sale liquor um the reality is that most cities aren't going to be doing it so

[18:24] there's limited control that we have uh but for our own Community there will be a degree of that and that's an

[18:30] attractive component of it thank you I feel like that was a softball I'm

[18:37] ready for more you anyone cool well thank you so much again

[18:44] I really appreciate it and I hope you have a good rest of the meeting thank you thank you Jeff doll

[18:49] for coming to tonight's meeting my pleasure all right um approval of the

[18:55] consent agenda um we have one item uh the regular meeting and

[19:03] workshop minutes from October 21st 2024 um does any commissioner have any

[19:08] questions or comments on any of the items on the consent agenda nope can I have a motion to

[19:15] approve the consent agenda as presented motion to approve the consent agenda thank you commissioner El may I have a

[19:22] second second oh it's another time um I'm going to go with seers this time

[19:27] thank you commissioner cus um further discussion all those in favor please say

[19:33] I I those oppos nay the eyes have it the motion passes and the consent agenda is

[19:39] approved next we move move to item number six as amended which is the

[19:46] public hearing item we have one public hearing item this evening and that is to consider uh as previously mentioned the

[19:52] zoning text amendments for cannabis business regulations um there's

[20:00] laer thank you chair and Planning Commission

[20:06] uh city manager do kind of introduced the issue a little bit uh I will uh make

[20:12] a couple clarifications tonight we are dealing with cannabis retail businesses we are

[20:18] not dealing exclusively with uh Municipal owned cannabis businesses uh

[20:24] so that's kind of a decision for a future date and the other thing I would

[20:30] like to um State at before we start the state still requires that we

[20:38] allow one at least one non Municipal

[20:43] cannabis retail so even if we allowed the municipal cannabis retail there still has to be the allowance for one

[20:51] non-municipal so hopefully that will set the stage but

[20:56] uh we're going to be talking about cannabis zoning today this would apply Citywide the applicant is the city of Y

[21:03] Zetta uh just for a little bit of background um we have uh a moratorium

[21:11] that will expire at the end of the year for cannabis businesses so we are

[21:16] looking to move forward with the zoning changes that we're discussing tonight to

[21:21] try to get them uh established before the end of the year uh ocm uh is an

[21:28] abbreviation for the office of cannabis management over the last year the office of cannabis management has uh uh come

[21:36] out with model ordinance that we will um is the background from what we uh

[21:43] prepared our presentation today and they are currently working on rule making uh

[21:48] for the businesses themselves that is anticipated to be adopted early in

[21:54] 2025 and no business can receive a license until that role making is

[21:59] complete by the office of cannabis management so working parallel but we want to get our regulations in place

[22:06] before the ru making by the office of cannabis management is complete and tonight we are talking uh

[22:14] exclusively about zoning so um we have to have this interaction

[22:22] between what the state statute allows us to uh regulate and and they will be

[22:29] issuing licenses uh versus the city will be registering the businesses based on

[22:37] not only the regulations in the zoning ordinance but some business regulations that would be placed in a different

[22:43] section of the code uh so the primary topic for tonight is to discuss the

[22:49] districts that uh cannabis retail businesses would be allowed in uh and

[22:56] how we'd address other types of cannabis business businesses and secondary topic

[23:02] uh will be the buffer Maps which are not a zoning tool so the buffer regulations

[23:07] will be in that business regulation section of the code but uh obviously the buffers will be informative of depending

[23:15] on what zoning District you choose the actual areas that would be available for

[23:20] businesses so to uh begin uh we are

[23:25] proposing to allow uh canab retail businesses

[23:32] uh but first we're going to start talking about where retail businesses are allowed um within the city itself

[23:39] now so um we have a c1a zoning District

[23:44] which is kind of in the bluff District uh very minor use of that but so our

[23:50] predominant retail districts are C2 C3 c3a and then the series is the C4

[23:59] C4 c4a and c4b and just in general C2 are the two

[24:07] mall or the two uh shopping centers in in town they're Colonial Square and the

[24:12] Village Shops down on Lake Street uh C3 is generally along wi Zetta Boulevard

[24:19] located east of Central Avenue uh and then um C4 c4a c4b are located downtown

[24:28] along Long Lake Street staff is proposing that the non-municipal Cannabis retail would only be allowed in

[24:35] the C2 C3 and c3a so not in the c1a

[24:41] districts that are kind of scattered a little bit within the bluff district and not downtown on the C4 c4a and c4b

[24:49] Zoning district and we'll get into that a little bit more here when we talk about the buffer

[24:55] Maps so the state allows the City to establish buffers uh which essentially

[25:02] create areas where uh retail Canabis businesses would not be allowed and so

[25:09] kind of in the upper right uh that's a list of the types of uses that uh we can

[25:15] create buffers for and these are the maximum buffers allowed so in blue those

[25:21] are schools and we're allowed to create buffers up to 1,000 ft uh residential

[25:27] treatments centers which uh for us is the retreat um we're proposing 500 ft uh

[25:35] then it is Parks that specifically have youth amenities and that's 500 ft

[25:43] playgrounds which would be 500 ft and daycare which would be 500 feet so we got the the blue the kind of gray blue

[25:51] green um kind of mauve and then yellow that show the uh buffers and you see

[25:58] that covers those buffers pretty much cover the entirety of downtown so the

[26:05] c4a uh covers uh The Village Shops so

[26:10] the C2 that is located on Lake Street it covers the C3 zoned um

[26:20] uh Boat Works um down on the lake next to the city marina and and Beach

[26:29] and so on Yetta Boulevard the biggest um setback is the The Retreat that uh

[26:37] residential treatment facility and I have a couple of of caveats there um we

[26:43] did have a work session with the uh the city council and we discussed the Big

[26:48] Woods and her Park uh which are along uh Wisa Boulevard and those two parks don't

[26:56] have amenities that are aimed at children so those we did not create the

[27:01] buffers uh because the state statute is addressing parks that have youth

[27:07] amenities uh so really on wisett a Boulevard the biggest uh buffer there is

[27:13] the retreat so you can see uh kind of the pinkish color is the C2 that's

[27:19] Colonial Square uh The Retreat does uh creep into some of that area um we have

[27:27] uh then the the C3 basically on the south side of Y Zetta Boulevard and my next

[27:34] slide I'll show that even the retreat does uh creep into some of those

[27:40] buildings uh that even though it doesn't cover the whole parcel kind of eliminates those the buildings on those

[27:46] Parcels from potentially being the businesses so uh where we are is

[27:55] um the former gas station and the dry cleaner or the dry cleaner photographic

[28:02] shop there located just east of Central Avenue that is Zone C3 so that's

[28:07] possibly a location uh you see the Western half of

[28:13] Colonial Square so essentially the luns and blees and that that strip of shops

[28:20] along the Far East Side uh those two locations would not allow with this

[28:26] proposed buffer map uh cannabis businesses but you have uh where's currently the TCF and the um bugers and

[28:35] and noodles and then basically the shops that are kind of on the north side of colonial square with this buffer map

[28:40] would allow those businesses on the south side of Yetta bouvard there would be the medical building next to Heritage

[28:48] uh Park uh the the the strip area where Bank and a

[28:55] number of a couple other businesses are located where uh the US Bank is

[29:02] located and then you'll see kind of in the middle of the block uh those buffers go and cross into a number of those

[29:10] businesses so um the funeral home um the strip retail where there is

[29:16] currently the Vape Shop um another uh strip commercial and Retail and then uh

[29:24] where my burger is uh those all would not uh be allowed to have uh cannabis

[29:31] because uh the buffer goes and touches those buildings so then it's the BP gas

[29:37] station the the McDonald's the uh dental office those all possibly could have a

[29:44] cannabis business and then off the map um it was shown on the map previously which I'll just go back to there's a

[29:51] couple businesses east of Gleason uh road that that are zoned R3

[29:57] in those are possible locations so

[30:04] uh maybe I'll pause here to see if you have any questions about how those

[30:11] buffers um you know in addition to the zoning districts themselves the buffers

[30:17] further limit the locations where cannabis retail businesses could be located I have a clarification question

[30:24] uh with regards to the buffer zone establishment the uh city has a recommended uh approach to how it

[30:31] creates buffers or a discretionary one uh I guess the city's discretion is

[30:38] they could go with smaller buffers than what are listed here uh they can't go

[30:44] with larger buffers uh State Statute uh sets the these these uh buffers that are

[30:52] listed there as the maximum buffer I guess the one I would uh say is um The

[30:59] Retreat is treated a little differently than the others that The Retreat on this map is shown from basically the

[31:06] footprint of the building where the other buffers are from the edge of the parcel line so the city's flexibility is

[31:15] we could choose smaller buffers and we have this the state

[31:21] doesn't Define where to measure the buffer from so we have some latitude on

[31:27] from the building from the uh youth uh activity facility in the Parks from the

[31:35] you know the partial boundary so our

[31:40] discretion is we could have buffers less than what's shown but not more but not

[31:48] more are there minimum buffers or could it be zero it could be zero

[31:55] okay yes chair just just to point a clarification planners Weber are are the

[32:01] maps here showing the maximums or are they the staff recommended uh lesser

[32:06] amounts the the amounts shown those numbers shown are the maximum allowed by the state the

[32:13] only flexibility we've added is we are measuring the treatment facility from

[32:20] the footprint of the building instead of the parcel line but those numbers listed

[32:26] on on that Legend are the ma maximums Allowed by this understand that on what

[32:31] the list is on the right there as we're looking at it the actual buffers shown on your Maps this one and the previous

[32:37] one reflect the numbers that are in that table that's correct gotcha thank so we

[32:42] so buffers only go smaller from here if if if at all yep that's correct can I

[32:48] ask a question yes do these have any impact on anything else is this like liquor licenses or is there any other

[32:55] this is just simply ocm requirements no the the only thing we

[33:01] haven't implemented and and I'll State the reason why is you could actually Implement Implement a buffer from

[33:09] another cannabis retail business but since we're below 12,500 people we only

[33:17] have to allow one business so there's no second business to buffer should we come

[33:22] at a future time and we wish to add min

[33:28] cannabis uh retail businesses we could choose when we review that U that

[33:35] potential zoning Amendment if we wanted to add a buffer from another cannabis

[33:41] retail business at that time but we're not currently proposing that just because we only need we're only required

[33:47] to have one in our community didn't you say earlier that the state allow requires us to have one

[33:55] non-municipal as well uh commissioner uh Cameron you are

[34:00] correct uh the state requires that we have one non-municipal canvas retail business the state does

[34:08] not require us to have a municipal that's that would be our choice if we wanted to but that would be in addition

[34:15] to the one now going back there is a possibility and we are

[34:21] we are looking at adding it to our ordinance that should there be the

[34:27] number number of cannabis retail businesses within henpen County that

[34:32] equal or is greater than the number required to meet one per 12,500 within

[34:39] hmma County then the city doesn't have to issue license the issue is starting

[34:44] off you know with this Ru making there are no licenses anywhere so somebody

[34:49] comes in day one we have to have regulations in place to address it

[34:55] should somebody choose not to come to Wi initially Han County hits that limit

[35:01] then somebody comes in we could say nope the County's fulfilled its obligation we're not going to consider any until

[35:08] such time that you know some businesses close and that number drops below that's that threshold but because there are

[35:16] none today and the ru making just started we need to start out with regulations that would allow one so

[35:23] should we include that in the ordinance and then would you want to include a buffer zone against if we did

[35:30] do a municipal cannabis dispensary that there is that language in there versus coming

[35:35] back again so this is the difference between the zoning ordinance and the the

[35:41] business regulations okay and the state statute has given us some guidance on that uh those are not zoning issues and

[35:49] I'm sure the attorney a City attorney could get into it but there's some benefits to to not having these

[35:55] regulations in the zoning ordinance in and I'm sure you've heard with many land

[36:00] use and Zoning issues you get into non-conforming uses when you're dealing

[36:06] with business licenses the rules are the rules so even if you change the rules all businesses

[36:12] need to follow the rules as they're adopted so we want to stay to

[36:20] zoning issues in the zoning ordinance so even the buffers themselves are not going to be in the zoning ordinance but

[36:27] we wanted illustrate what this looks like with what uh the city council is considering uh City attorney did you

[36:34] have anything you wanted to add uh chair and commissioner and planners Weber no I think that's a really good distinction

[36:39] to keep in mind because even though this is a very big issue with a lot of different questions and policy for the

[36:46] decisions for the city uh the Planning Commission is just looking at the land use piece or the zoning piece um and if

[36:53] you look at uh you if you look at any of the city council Workshop meeting minut or um packet materials from that you'll

[37:00] see that there really proposed changes and the model ordinance talks about changes to our licensing provision of

[37:07] city code which will deal with the buffer zone deal with uh you know how

[37:12] many licenses will allow in the city or will register in the city the zoning

[37:18] ordinance that's in your packet is rather short and it's just where could a

[37:24] business be located that's really your question tonight and I think the buffer zone I mean I'm glad that planning is

[37:30] bringing the buffer zone to your attention because it interfaces with that question of where but that'll

[37:36] actually be approved as part of uh council's decision on the licensing

[37:42] piece uh am I correct that there is some form of cannabis that is sold at at our

[37:49] city restaurant the mun yes and I will get to that in my next couple of slides

[37:55] so could I okay defer that question we'll get to we'll get to all the types of uh cannabis businesses including the

[38:02] ones that existed that could be a complication yeah uh so if we're okay kind of with

[38:08] the buffers and Zoning okay no I have a question um so the the Big Woods area

[38:14] where the treatment facility is is that that's part of our parks and trails correct well I know with this one maybe

[38:22] I'll go back to the the next slide uh The Retreat is privately owned so the ret is not public but you'll see green

[38:30] on both sides so Big Woods are both to the South and to the north so

[38:36] um you know the looking at the state statute and that

[38:42] Parks the parks to have the buffers are parks with youth amenities the city council looked at that and said Heritage

[38:49] Park Big Woods they're not they don't have amenities aimed at Youth and so

[38:54] we're not going to have a buffer for that but The Retreat which is in the middle of it that's a residential

[39:00] treatment facility and that would have a buffer is there a reason why we wouldn't treat this like our other Parks even

[39:06] though there isn't a physical amenity for children we encourage you know maple syrup tapping and everything what would

[39:13] this buffer zone look like if we did not do it from the footprint of the treatment facility but the property that

[39:19] is a um Park and amenity for families to go

[39:26] to uh well we we had a previous map that we

[39:31] showed the council but it it um it would go into the the um Colonial Square

[39:42] a little bit but it wouldn't change the Colonial Square a whole lot because you know that western boundary with the

[39:47] retreat is already address in Colonial Square um it would not much Big Woods

[39:53] but heritage heritage would eliminate both uh the the C3 on the the west and the C3

[40:03] on the East uh but the uh even with Big Woods uh it would still allow the the

[40:12] dentist uh McDonald's BP and then the businesses uh to the east of

[40:20] Gleason but again uh tonight we're not adopting the buffers correct we're

[40:26] adopting in what zoning District but they do interplay so that's why we want to show what staff has proposed as the

[40:34] C2 and C3 with the buffers that we discussed with the city council what do

[40:39] those buffers look like um and then could you also Define the c3a yes and why that was established and

[40:47] how that would impact these decisions uh c3a you'll see on the

[40:53] legend there are no properties that are currently zon c3a but we did adopt

[40:59] c3a uh when we did our uh zoning task force and then we did some zoning

[41:05] updates in 2022 uh we did that in anticipation of

[41:12] the um y Zetta uh Corridor study now it

[41:18] may end up being that the r3a you know might not have much

[41:24] difference and you know we may never use it but we anticipated in the discussion of the

[41:30] Yetta Corridor study that if uh you know if you remember one of

[41:35] the questions we asked was would it be appropriate along wisett a Boulevard to be more than three

[41:42] stories we wanted a zoning District that we could say okay this one would allow more than three stories but the existing

[41:49] R3 wouldn't and so we have that zoning

[41:55] District in our code but there are no properties within the city of Yetta that

[42:03] currently is zoned that and the way the zoning district is described in our zoning ordinance there isn't any benefit

[42:11] for anybody to uh request that zoning at this

[42:21] time complicated D yeah yeah that is a bit complicated

[42:28] um shall we proceed and see did did do yeah and then we'll come back to I'm sure we'll have more questions

[42:34] absolutely so talking about cannabis businesses you know we had previously and with that buffer map talked about

[42:41] cannabis retail businesses staff is proposing C2 and C3 and

[42:48] c3a um you know uh ultimately you're going to make uh the

[42:54] recommendation uh for that but there are a number of other businesses that are anticipated with in the state statute

[43:02] and they're listed there in those bullets uh cannabis cultivation which is a basically cannabis farming uh cannabis

[43:10] manufacturing which is taking the Cannabis flow and turning it into another product uh that um you would be

[43:18] for sale sometime you know uh commonly that could be like gummies or that could be processing the flowers uh hemp

[43:26] Manufacturing similarly taking hemp and turning it into a different product for sale uh wholesaling of cannabis that

[43:33] would basically be connecting the farming the cultivation with either the

[43:39] manufacturing or the the retail uh Transportation you know businesses that

[43:45] a business is focusing on moving cannabis from one location to another a business that would deliver cannabis to

[43:52] somebody's home and then the final one uh this is the one that uh commissioner

[43:58] sby had mentioned edible cannaboid product retail that's the existing

[44:04] businesses in town so that is the muni that is The Vape Shop on Yetta Boulevard

[44:12] they are allowed to uh sell low potency hemp products which fall under that

[44:18] edible cannaboid regulations and so they're now going to be licensed under

[44:24] the office of cannabis management but it's a business that exists

[44:29] today um and so what we are recommending or maybe better acknowledging that our

[44:37] code already addresses is that there is non-cannabis manufacturing currently

[44:43] allowed in the C3 and c3a as a conditional use um therefore cannabis manufacturers

[44:51] could apply for a condition conditional use under those same zoning districts and those same uh

[44:57] regulations the edible cannaboids we are already regulating them under chapter chapter 722 in the city ordinance and we

[45:06] are not proposing any changes to that chapter so the existing rules on the

[45:13] edible cannaboid products would stay in place the businesses that currently are

[45:18] allowed to sell those would continue to be allowed to sell those but only those

[45:24] products um and then finally those other

[45:30] businesses um the city doesn't allow agriculture in any of our zoning districts the city doesn't allow

[45:36] wholesaling or transportation in any of our zoning districts so the staff uh

[45:43] basically proposes to not add those to our zoning ordinance which essentially

[45:49] prohibits those businesses so cannabis cultivation cannabis wholesale cannabis

[45:55] Transportation cannabis delivery uh would be prohibited from the

[46:00] city now cannabis Transportation cannabis delivery I want to to uh kind

[46:06] of parse that out a bit that's the business that does the transportation or

[46:11] the business that does the delivery so this would be the offices that support

[46:16] that Transportation or delivery that is where those vehicles are stored or

[46:22] maintained or repaired nothing we there's no

[46:27] regulations we could do that would prevent a cannabis transportation

[46:32] business and their vehicle from moving throughout the city or stopping at a

[46:38] cannabis business within the city same with delivery we're just not allowing those businesses to be headquartered in

[46:45] our city but that doesn't mean that Transportation or delivery wouldn't occur within the city we can't prohibit

[46:52] the delivery we just can prohibit that business from being headquartered or

[46:57] officed in our community so door Dash or Uber or lift or any of those could

[47:06] yeah pick it up and deliver none of those businesses have an office in the city but many of them operate within the

[47:14] city are there further slides too I I have can we just a very basic you know

[47:20] nextsteps kind of slide this is the this is my presentation okay because I'm sensing questions on this slide and I I

[47:27] have a few clarification ones if it's okay uh the first is um so looks like of the list of possible business types we

[47:33] can really only do hemp manufacturing right or no manufacturing we uh we don't

[47:40] uh maybe let me back cannabis manufacturing hemp manufacturing

[47:46] manufacturing's allowed as a conditional use within the C3 and C3 okay so

[47:52] somebody could come in with either of those businesses and ask for a conditional use permit for manufacturing

[47:58] so it's a possibility yes it's Poss so cannabis manufacturing and hemp manufacturing are possibilities yep

[48:05] because they're manufacturing they would require the conditional use permit but right awesome but they're possibilities

[48:11] there's there's a process um but cultivation wholesale Transportation

[48:16] delivery headquartered here is not possible another company somewhere else

[48:23] could distribute via VIA Transportation modes that's what happens um but we're really

[48:30] just looking at strict sort of retail like as in sale um and does that include like um

[48:40] since um there is a edible category uh does that include like

[48:46] um I I sell coffee beans and coffee you can sit and eat coffee and drink Co

[48:52] drink coffee and have uh that include that kind of a retail layout the like

[48:59] you can purchase and enjoy yeah there there are regulations to that but like you could go down to

[49:06] the mun and you could buy a um a low potency uh you know

[49:14] cannaboid uh drink and you could drink it at the mun so conceptually it's not just sort of a store format it could

[49:21] potentially be an eery potentially just the scope isn't

[49:26] just like you know CU in my mind I'm initially thinking go to store buy product leave but that might not be the

[49:32] case but we would regulate it you know like that you know basically as multiple

[49:38] businesses then in that case like if it was like with a coffee shop they would

[49:44] have to meet all the regulations of the coffee shop as well so all the parking all you know all the same thing if it

[49:50] was a restaurant they would need to meet all the regulations of the restaurant in addition to the retail

[49:57] business right interesting so there you know the amount just for example the

[50:03] amount of parking we require for a retail business is three stalls per

[50:09] thousand square feet of the retail business the amount of parking we require for a restaurant is 15.2 stalls

[50:16] per thousand square foot of business so there's quite a bit more parking that's

[50:22] required with the restaurant than there is with the retail business

[50:31] itself okay is a car Caribou Coffee Shop considered a restaurant then we do have a a coffee shop as a is a separate

[50:39] business in our code okay and just like

[50:44] what's to say that a coffee shop that sells um cannabis products isn't a

[50:50] coffee shop like how does how does that work well so we still get into our other regulations so there's there's only one

[50:56] business business that's allowed in town yes so if it was if the business was located where

[51:03] there's also a coffee shop you know we would need to make sure that all the regulations amend it but then they they

[51:09] can't go anywhere else we're not going to have than a cannabis restaurant as well because there's only one right

[51:15] right right unless it's a um non-municipal well this is we're proposing the

[51:22] non-municipal okay there is the possibility that the city may choose in the future to allow a municipal and the

[51:30] city would have to abide by the same zoning that we're proposing for a business

[51:37] no we have what we're asking city council to

[51:42] adopt does not include Municipal cannabis so I see we would have to

[51:47] revisit the regulations should we um go down that route

[51:55] um how much of a change that is to zoning I'm not sure but uh we would need

[52:02] to address that at a future date if we chose to add that yes commissioner Schwab because the mun is down by Lake

[52:09] Street yep which would be outside of where these others the privately held

[52:15] ones would be allowed that's correct and we've been having that discussion with the city council chair question yes um

[52:22] is there a is there okay I'm sorry go ahead

[52:27] I was letting I was going to let you finish I I had a question similar Vin um plan Weber um but the city has to abide

[52:35] by land use correct yeah so as it sits today right if as this should this all

[52:42] go get approved and go forward um and we said that um cannabis was only allowed

[52:47] in C2 C3 and c3a the C decided they wanted to open a m Municipal operation

[52:53] they would have to open a municipal operation in one of those in C2 C3 or c3a is that

[52:59] correct if that gets adopted today th those are the

[53:04] regulations now um you know don't know what the city's

[53:10] going to do but those are the regulations that we're asking you to to recommend okay for for when the city

[53:17] looks to amend the regulations to add the municipal cannabis they could choose to look at

[53:24] the buffer maps and choose if they want modifi the buffer Maps they could choose

[53:30] to um ask the Planning Commission to consider changing the the zoning

[53:36] District that it's allowed particularly if they ask that they would have to come back to you and we'd have to have a new

[53:42] public hearing uh but uh you are correct that this a municipal cannabis retail

[53:51] would have to follow the r regulations that are adopted in the city code okay

[53:57] can even though we already have one exception to the rule at the mun we do

[54:03] not have an exception for the Cannabis retail business it's not an exception

[54:10] edible cannaboids is a separate type of business that is regulated by the city

[54:15] code today and the city has an edible cannaboid business which is they do not

[54:24] have a municipal cannabis retail business is it mostly the difference

[54:31] between what's edible and what's the other ways of delivery uh not only uh it it has to do

[54:38] with the potency the this the statute dealing with the the edible chids and

[54:46] the low potency hemp is that they're at a low level that do not cause

[54:52] intoxication I'm sure people will argue about that but there's a level in which those products can be cannabis retail

[54:59] businesses are much higher potency than those products oh thank you that's good

[55:04] clarification um so I was just going to ask if um if so the city would they be able to come back and ask for a variance

[55:11] can you give a variance on this or does it actually have to change you have to change city code there is uh State

[55:17] Statute says you cannot get a use variance okay you can get a variance for setback you can get a variance for

[55:24] height but you can't get a variance to allow a use that isn't otherwise allowed

[55:30] in that zoning District thank

[55:36] you is there more presentation the rest of the presentation is a process to complete the meeting but if anybody has

[55:43] any other questions and actually I can go to the next slide because we are essentially in that first of the next step we are which is you know uh the

[55:51] commission talking to the applicant at this point which is City staff the city is is the applicant following any of

[56:00] those questions we would conduct the public hearing and then following the public hearing week we return to

[56:06] discussion and and eventually a motion okay um I I have one oh I I have a

[56:14] summation type thing see if I'm summarizing it correctly and you can tell me if I'm doing so so it looks like

[56:21] we're not really looking at all at whether or not there's any safety that's all been covered by these zones it is

[56:27] what it is on the zones we're really looking strategically as to uh well if the city would like to shrink the zones

[56:33] later and do its own cannabis distribu or retail uh but now it works in the

[56:39] city's favor to maximize the zones uh limiting the locations uh and the

[56:44] desirability of them essentially by doing the larger buffers um and also in

[56:51] it pushes the sales uh the retail of the product further away from from our uh

[56:57] highest density Public Access area which is Lake Street um and in doing so uh for

[57:04] all we know the uh retail of cannabis is going to be Flawless and easy and un no

[57:09] no issue whatsoever but it allows by pushing that buffer out right and by it

[57:16] allows for sort of a slower adoption of the integration of this new area of

[57:24] sales are those fairly accurate kind of I guess I would make two

[57:30] clarifications uh first

[57:35] um the only way we could expand the buffers and therefore

[57:42] limit um the areas that we showed on the map is if we measured the um treatment

[57:50] facility from the parcel boundary not the building footprint um

[57:56] I guess I have three points second one would be you could choose to only uh

[58:03] pick one zoning District to allow cannabis businesses so you could just

[58:09] pick C2 which basically limit it to um

[58:15] Colonial Square uh you could choose it only to be C3 which essentially would be the gas

[58:23] station dry cleaner the the medical uh building in the two Banks and then kind

[58:29] of uh the dental McDonald's and and BP um but the city council met at a work

[58:38] session and um you know was trying to find that balance of as you say limiting

[58:47] locations but it isn't the the uh

[58:53] most the most restrictive limitation that the it is stat could afford US so

[58:59] it could there's there could be more but okay and then your last statement we we

[59:06] didn't address speed in any way we we you know the um the state statute

[59:14] requires that should we get an application for registration we need to

[59:19] respond to the office of cannabis management within 30 days so those are

[59:26] are completely separate chair if I can clarify I thought you said that these numbers on this slide were the maximum

[59:33] barriers they are the maximum number of feet maximum number of feet but how this

[59:40] the statute is silent on where you begin that measure oh border or building

[59:46] perimeter that's helpful clarification yeah so another question are you suggesting that the city council in

[59:52] their work session said it's in the city's best interest to maintain Ain the maximum no that was me well that's what

[59:59] I yeah well I wanted to clarify was that you or did the city I mean why are

[1:00:05] we seeing these numbers is it because that's what's established as the maximum by the state or is that what the council

[1:00:12] in their workshop suggested they'd like to see there was

[1:00:17] no consensus meaning all council members did not agree but the

[1:00:24] majority felt that this cor this part of the corridor uh on wetta

[1:00:32] Boulevard made sense with that there needs to be a reasonable

[1:00:39] buffer from The Retreat and so basically directed us how do you come up with a

[1:00:45] reasonable buffer from The Retreat that still allows locations more than one

[1:00:51] location along WIS but again only one business is allowed that's what it just

[1:00:58] allows kind of a free market on choice of where to locate right right so we

[1:01:03] could actually walk away

[1:01:08] establishing smaller buffers yeah yes you could well which would create sorry

[1:01:15] if I could address more spaces the city could yes the buffers is the jurisdiction of the city council yes not

[1:01:22] the not the zoning Comm or the Planning Commission but the city City could choose that yes okay

[1:01:29] okay question yes another one sorry um the I would so in the um

[1:01:37] proposed ordinance that's included in um the packet tonight yep

[1:01:44] um the amendment amends um SE zoning

[1:01:50] ordinance to say retail sales cannabis that underlying section right

[1:01:56] there at the bottom of the screen and my question is um the last six words and

[1:02:03] lower potency hemp edible retailers so does that then cause the mun and The

[1:02:10] Vape shop and these places that are currently governed by I think you said 722 in the city code um to be

[1:02:17] non-compliant and have to cease no um thank you for that question

[1:02:23] though commissioner Cameron what this is stating

[1:02:28] is basically this could be collocated with an existing business

[1:02:34] that deals with medical marijuana or an existing business that

[1:02:41] uh has low pocy hemp eligible retailers this is um the definition so

[1:02:51] this states that if you have one of those other businesses that are licensed

[1:02:57] by the office of cannabis management this could be on top of that gotcha okay

[1:03:02] when we look at our zoning districts and our buffer map as we stated like with the mun that wouldn't be able to overlap

[1:03:10] and even if we looked again at the buffer map where there's the current vape shop that has some uh edible

[1:03:17] cannaboids they would be in the buffer of the retreat they would not be allowed

[1:03:22] to have the retail business located there to but we you know this is the

[1:03:29] language from from the model ordinance and you know to the specific sections

[1:03:35] you're talking about it's it's to not it's to State openly that it's can be in

[1:03:41] combination with those other businesses that are currently licensed

[1:03:50] okay more questions question um

[1:03:56] since I guess cannabis is still illegal at the federal level MH and it's a cash

[1:04:02] only business is this after it's regulated at a federal level or is it going to remain a cashon business in

[1:04:09] Yetta in Minnesota you I apologize but you're outside my expertise there I I I

[1:04:16] do not understand the the interplay between state and federal regulations on

[1:04:21] cannabis right now it's a they only know what the state rules are and how they apply to min IP alties

[1:04:28] okay uh chair and commissioner I'll just say that that that's certainly a general

[1:04:33] topic that's discussed a lot and I think it is a challenge for cannabis

[1:04:39] businesses to do banking to get insurance to get uh lease uh leases for

[1:04:46] for uh retail location properties so much of what the city is doing is

[1:04:53] what the state requires the city to do because of the new law and as as

[1:04:59] planners weever said the the state is in the process the office of cannabis management is in the process of making

[1:05:07] rules so that uh businesses and and cities have more guidance so there are a

[1:05:13] lot of gray areas and you're touching upon one that maybe isn't gray but is is kind of a challenge and is in motion um

[1:05:20] and a lot of what you're doing what the council is doing is we want to be ready

[1:05:25] come January 2025 when the moratorium lifts we want to make sure we

[1:05:31] have regulations in place so that if someone comes to us with a a license

[1:05:37] from the state we tell them well here's where you can and cannot locate in the city and I would say that's really the

[1:05:44] primary question for you tonight when you look at this draft ordinance that staff has prepared when you consider

[1:05:50] everything I think a a lot of what the staff presentation has provided you with is

[1:05:56] is a larger context of what's going on for the city but it should really inform

[1:06:01] your decision okay we have to allow it somewhere and to planners Weber's

[1:06:07] earlier comments Council was sort of wrestling with that balance so where in the city does it make the most sense

[1:06:14] given the buffers that the state allows us to do I we can't limit it to you know

[1:06:20] one zone with no rentable property I mean you have to have reasonably have

[1:06:25] some places where these businesses could locate and so some of it is a balancing thing um I'm going Way Beyond your

[1:06:33] question commissioner plan but I those are some things I I wanted to mention anyway so yeah I think it I think it's

[1:06:39] just challenging to imagine what it is and then um the implications that could

[1:06:44] be so to then understand what a Zone it's appropriate for depending on of a

[1:06:51] sliding scale of what the buffers are and the intention of the buffers if the intention I'm sorry I'm moving

[1:06:57] into discussion um but if the intention of the buffers is to is for protection

[1:07:04] which sounds like it is um then then they should never change like right chair can I make a

[1:07:12] clarifying point just based on some of the items I was hearing in the discussion earlier yes thank you the the

[1:07:18] buffers as I understand it and based on my attendance at the council Workshop as well are not being set up with the idea

[1:07:23] of going back and revising them later and I think a big part of that is that

[1:07:28] you know when you consider uh you know the feasibility studies that the city has looked at particularly in regards to

[1:07:34] the municipal cannabis issue the mun is pretty full at this point in terms of what can be within that building there's

[1:07:41] a fully operating liquor store there's a fully operating restaurant and adding more space for a dispensary which would

[1:07:47] require some space because there's security requirements and parking required and you know you would impact

[1:07:54] things like the mun's loading zone actually adding a dispensary at that spot is not particularly feasible so

[1:08:00] when we're looking at all these buffers that overlap all over the mun there's not necessarily a discussion in the

[1:08:06] background that goes oh we'll relax those later so that it's easier at the mun later so I just want to make that

[1:08:11] point and make sure that the okay yeah it sounded like they're a bit of a sliding scale for a while there but now now it doesn't sound that way we've got

[1:08:18] what we're proposing which is the maximum that the state allows with the you know caveat that we'd be measuring

[1:08:24] from the building at the Tre instead of the property line to allow for that along wise at a Boulevard and that's based on the conversation that we had at

[1:08:31] the council Workshop was that a complete intal consensus no but that's the majority of what we heard from Council

[1:08:37] and what we're acting on and chair and I would just add um I

[1:08:42] appreciate that point too I I think it might be helpful to understand that a mun dispensary M Municipal cannabis

[1:08:50] dispensary does not necessarily need to be located where the current mun is

[1:08:56] um matter of fact to um planner qu's point I think Council was thinking more

[1:09:02] that it might go up on Yetta Boulevard if there were to be one so that might be helpful to think about it that way too

[1:09:09] thank you okay well um if there's are there

[1:09:14] any further questions of staff I just want to I think we've beaten this to death but we did have two

[1:09:21] public comments that came in so I just want to confirm for the record that we do not have an option here right so I

[1:09:27] think that's something that we want to make sure the public our community understands that we're not wrestling with whether or not we want to do this

[1:09:33] we really don't have an option if I could uh maybe respond to that we don't

[1:09:40] have an option we have a hope we have a hope that there will be enough

[1:09:45] businesses and enough other communities in Hada County that when somebody applies in

[1:09:50] wetta the Count's full is until that happens we have to be ready is that the

[1:09:56] stance of the city that they really don't want to do this or do you do you have an idea of of what the city

[1:10:02] believes like are they I mean obviously there are a number of

[1:10:08] options uh in the model ordinance of what language to to pick and you know

[1:10:13] one of them would be not to have any number uh limitation one of them is to

[1:10:18] just limit uh the number to our population and then there's a third and

[1:10:25] you could choose all of the well you could choose the last two if you want which is what the council gave us direction of

[1:10:32] adding but if the county has enough to fulfill the requirement of one per

[1:10:40] 12,500 within the county the city no longer has to issue any any registration

[1:10:47] so then who would make that decision and at what point when would we decide that that's

[1:10:53] the decision chair chair and commissioner I would say that this is what the city is studying

[1:10:59] right now so all of this is in process the city hasn't made any decisions with respect to the mun um but the city does

[1:11:08] need to pursue these regulations because that that is what's required unless and

[1:11:13] until the county meets that threshold that planners weever talked about so I

[1:11:19] think the way I would answer your question is say the city the city wants to be prepared for that contingency

[1:11:25] where at least one retailer needs to locate here and where that retailer should go so most of those decisions are

[1:11:34] in the process of being studied Council will ultimately make those decisions um

[1:11:40] the decision for the Planning Commission like I said earlier is if there if the city needs to locate

[1:11:48] a uh non-municipal retail business in the city where should it go and if the

[1:11:54] city wants to to operate a municipal cannabis business in the city where should it

[1:11:59] go okay thank you we should U probably open the public hearing yes we get into

[1:12:05] yeah yes chair if there are no more questions for staff um okay so are there I'm sorry did I cut anyone offer any

[1:12:11] more questions okay uh thank you for the presentation um at this time um I'd like

[1:12:20] to open the uh uh public hearing I lost my page

[1:12:31] um is there anyone here at this evening who would like to come and speak if you

[1:12:36] would please um come and state your name uh and your address in your uh

[1:12:42] affiliation um I didn't open the public hearing officially did I um I'm now

[1:12:48] opening the public hearing sorry for my premature walk up

[1:12:54] um so my name is Adam Hoffman grew up in Yetta and I own with my brother sweet

[1:13:01] leaves which is a edible cannaboid Premiere dispensary in the north loop

[1:13:06] feel free to look us up um I have a question about the buffer

[1:13:13] zone that you'd mentioned between a non-municipal dispensary and a municipal dispensary

[1:13:19] what is that buffer zone that you could put in place

[1:13:26] or did I understand that no that's okay I would have to look up what we could put in place but we're not proposing one

[1:13:31] right now okay having a buffer between cannabis businesses yeah the only reason I asked was I guess Jeff doll first said

[1:13:40] basically the intentions is to really upkeep and maintain the city aesthetic and feel and

[1:13:47] I believe very highly in that so what I was just thinking while looking at the

[1:13:54] zoning require re Ms if the city were to open up a City dispensary by picking the

[1:14:00] correct zoning position it could push out additional non-municipal

[1:14:08] dispensaries which the city would then have much more control in maintaining how the product

[1:14:15] is distributed how the city maintains the feel and flow of products so just

[1:14:21] something to keep in mind when thinking about where to put and choose the zoning

[1:14:27] District appropriately so I didn't know if there was a an actual if if I may chair yes

[1:14:36] please uh public hearings are not typically an open discussion between City staff and and the person giving the

[1:14:44] public hearing um you are addressing the Planning Commission we are taking down

[1:14:49] the questions and we will address them when the public hearing is closed sure

[1:14:58] cool okay um are there any other questions uh from the audience

[1:15:05] here great do we have anyone on Zoom no chair we do not all right wonderful um

[1:15:11] if that's it then I'm going to close the public hearing

[1:15:18] okay I think we have a moment for further questions if not we can move into discussion um we have had a lot

[1:15:24] unless there is another one we we could also address the questions raised at the yes are there any further

[1:15:31] questions no let's start talking um yes

[1:15:37] I'm sorry if I could the last question that was raised by the person at the public hearing I think uh there's a lot

[1:15:43] going on here yes the city council is only looking to

[1:15:49] allow one retail non-municipal retail business

[1:15:55] so we we're not looking for buffers between retail businesses because we're only looking at one so we're only

[1:16:03] considering where a business is allowed we're not considering where the next business after that right so we're so a

[1:16:12] business is coming and we're looking to see where this business is going given

[1:16:17] the current buffers as they are established the the non-municipal Cannabis retail business non Municipal

[1:16:25] can and given the buffers which are are the council has voted on those

[1:16:32] buffers no because I I would have a I would have

[1:16:38] a discussion on buffers the the buffers that were presented by staff are staff's best

[1:16:44] attempt at this point to create what council has indicated they would be

[1:16:50] interested in namely pushing those buffers Out close to the max but also

[1:16:56] allowing enough possible locations along um Yetta Boulevard yeah so that's what

[1:17:03] staff has attempted to do we believe that that's what council was asking for but until Council actually adopts those

[1:17:09] when they adopt the um the registration part licensing part of this the non-

[1:17:15] zoning part of this we won't really know right but I think it's again I think it's just good context for the

[1:17:22] commission to understand that even if you know you you direct us to

[1:17:27] prepare this draft ordinance and report and recommendation for you next time it's not that a business could

[1:17:34] locate anywhere in C2 C3 and c3a if it's within a buffer zone it

[1:17:41] couldn't um so it it's it's actually less than all of C2 and all of C3 and

[1:17:47] all of c3a because of those buffers and is it of our purview to discuss the buffer zones at all uh it's it's not not

[1:17:55] within your your uh charge uh I think um

[1:18:00] if the commission had some strong feelings like those buffer zones are too

[1:18:05] constraining they're they're too big I think uh the council might want to hear that um and it could be a comment in the

[1:18:14] minutes or we could incorporate it into the report and recommendation I mean if it doesn't change the it wouldn't change

[1:18:20] the ordinance though no yeah um and could we have the map um up

[1:18:26] thank you all right well would anyone like to begin the discussion sure um it sounds

[1:18:33] to me like the language is somewhat templated from the state on this

[1:18:38] ordinance is that correct um the

[1:18:44] the the scope of the ordinance is limited to what the state has given us

[1:18:50] Authority okay very good so we have sort of the Basics covered in that

[1:18:57] ordinance at a required level by the

[1:19:04] state so I think that gives us a great starting point I I mean I don't know why

[1:19:10] we would change it from where it is the city's given us some good direction here

[1:19:16] via what they've what what we've seen today um I'm willing to accept the

[1:19:22] buffer zones although I would personally Express that I think they're too

[1:19:28] limiting um but for for tonight's purposes I you

[1:19:35] know I'm fine to just uh accept what is shown here given it's the

[1:19:42] maximum that the state requires

[1:19:47] um I think what they've provided th far is fine to be precise chair and commissioner sorry to interrupt I I just

[1:19:54] want to make sure that it's it's what the state allows not what it requires yeah so so again these buffer zones

[1:20:00] could be much small they would allow less right yeah but but this is the what the state allows for

[1:20:06] yeah thank you commissioner elk yes what so just I mean

[1:20:14] random got it sorry thank you um just random thought right so what um what if

[1:20:21] we what we're here to discuss right is is

[1:20:26] where the city can put it right and what if we were more prescriptive even and

[1:20:33] just said C2 only right which then forces that to be

[1:20:39] pretty much located in the Village Center right instead of along WIS Ona

[1:20:44] Boulevard um you are correct you identifying this

[1:20:50] the The Authority that the zoning or the Planning Commission has you get get to pick what zoning districts and and

[1:20:58] possibly limit them just to clarify it is Colonial Square right that's fine but

[1:21:04] it's Colonial Square that's located there at the northeast corner of um

[1:21:10] Central Avenue in Yetta Boulevard and with the buffer that's proposed for the

[1:21:16] retreat it's not even the entire Colonials Square so um just to

[1:21:25] carry out what that impact would be you have a single landlord that would have all the control

[1:21:33] over where any cannabis retail business would be located but it is your

[1:21:39] authority to choose what zoning district is located and it could just be one

[1:21:45] zoning District if you wish but that doesn't mean this Council would necessarily accept that well that that's

[1:21:52] correct chair and Commissioners I mean you want to make a recommendation to council what zones I mean to put it put

[1:21:59] this all another way you're making a recommendation to council via this draft ordinance and your report and

[1:22:04] recommendation what zones you think it should be permitted with permitted in um

[1:22:10] given the fact that Council will probably adopt the buffers that you've been shown so yes so so I would agree

[1:22:18] with planners Weber that's exactly what you could recommend I think be good for us to hear some rationals as to why you

[1:22:25] think that CU we would want to put that in the report and recommendation you know what in in when you're thinking about a zoning ordinance Amendment

[1:22:31] you're thinking about possible adverse effects on on the

[1:22:37] area got it have some comments yes commissioner Schwab

[1:22:42] um so having read all this and heard the presentation tonight it seems to me that

[1:22:48] the city and city council has gone to Great length to think this through

[1:22:55] and figure out what would be workable for the city of wetta and not wanting to second guess

[1:23:02] them on anything I think they've done a great job and I would think that C2 C3

[1:23:08] and c3a are acceptable particularly given that we have big

[1:23:14] buffers um that it gives at least some options

[1:23:21] so I would go along with what their what their Laing what why are we not seeing

[1:23:26] the rest of C3 would that be under consideration it's really focused here is that because it's not usable I think

[1:23:33] it's because the only other C chair if I may the only other C3 zoned parcel is the

[1:23:39] Boat Works and that one is completely enveloped by buffers the other ones are

[1:23:45] uh on the east side off the map uh primarily because the large one is the Lexus deal Lexus mhm and then the other

[1:23:52] two are one is a dealership and then the other is a series of Office Buildings that um you actually looked at for a

[1:23:58] peut Amendment a couple of months ago at WIS Office Park and they uh they have not expressed any interest in cannabis

[1:24:04] retail at this time but could be on the table for them in the future if they wanted it but we should be really

[1:24:11] looking at it right I mean it's possible it's just one of those Parcels that there's really no buffer that would ever

[1:24:16] touch it so if you wanted to exclude that parcel for some reason you would have to look at removing C3 not from an

[1:24:23] exclusionary perspective but but one of the objectives is to make it possible to distribute so whether it's not on the

[1:24:28] map where it doesn't appear possible but who knows CH chair if I could it is on

[1:24:36] this map right right that's we just did this map to try to Overlay where the

[1:24:41] buildings are actually located and if we would have done it at a scale that would have included those three properties we

[1:24:48] wouldn't be able to see where the buffer and the m so we're not in we're not

[1:24:53] intentionally trying to warp where things are located we're trying to add

[1:24:58] some detail on where that the retreat buffer falls on some of these parts so

[1:25:05] this is a buffer focused map but the other map is actually all the possibilities that's all the possibilities right that that's that's

[1:25:11] helpful thank you all right I would just say commissioner Schwab you said that much more

[1:25:17] eloquently than I did so I agree yeah

[1:25:25] further

[1:25:33] thoughts commissioner planton yeah um I agree with my other uh Commissioners that um there has been a lot of thought

[1:25:38] into this and I can see the logic behind it I I'll still go back to my concern that we have a treatment facility and

[1:25:44] then we're um putting this cannabis retail so close to that um and and to

[1:25:50] the Big Woods but I understand um having these buffers it would limit by if we increase the

[1:25:56] buffer to the footprint of the property um that the retreat is on and the Big

[1:26:01] Woods as part of our parks and trails is on it would really limit the rest of wh that a Boulevard so um I reluctantly

[1:26:10] agree to where they've set the um buffers um in their

[1:26:15] decision further comment yeah I mean I would just say

[1:26:22] um I don't know this is appropriate to say but I don't know anybody that wants a cannabis dispenser

[1:26:28] and wi that I mean I don't hear that from residents so I would say I mean I I hate to say it but I mean put us where

[1:26:36] do we want it and then fit it into that I mean I feel like Colonial Square probably would be a good place for it um

[1:26:42] probably you know I also I don't love that it's across the street from the retreat um but I certainly don't think

[1:26:49] there's anywhere else in the city that would be a viable option so I mean I would would I would even say C2 and

[1:26:56] remove the buffer Al together and just open up all of colonial square of any one of [Music]

[1:27:01] those you know any one of those um retail locations and then take away everything else um

[1:27:09] but that would maybe that would be the only thing I would consider right because isn't C2

[1:27:15] the only that's the only property of C2 is colonial spare correct the other property that is C2 is the villages down

[1:27:23] on Lake street but with the buffers down there for the other uses that's

[1:27:32] eliminated I mean that's one way to keep it out because uh to planners wyers um comment

[1:27:39] it's one one landlord and they could make the rent so high that we would never have one but yeah to me that's I

[1:27:48] don't want to do it's not business friendly at all yeah and I don't I don't want to do that I want to you know work

[1:27:53] within the Spirit of what the state of Minnesota is requiring of us but at the same time I also don't want to you know

[1:28:00] just kind of anywhere any anywhere it wants to go I think the more we can protect and the more we can you know

[1:28:07] limit where it is to where where the city actually wants it to be and where our residents would find it palatable I

[1:28:13] would probably want to do that while balancing the requirements of the State of the

[1:28:21] State yeah I mean um it's clear a lot of work has gone into

[1:28:26] this and it's also clear that it's kind of a kind of goes around a whole block of thought right it's like well trying

[1:28:32] to understand the uh the requirement trying to understand the Buffer's

[1:28:39] intentions um the intentions of the buffers could have an adverse effect by

[1:28:45] uh limiting something to one specific area or causing business unfriendliness

[1:28:50] or something of the sort uh it may you know regard of your view as to whether

[1:28:55] it should or shouldn't be or it's desirable or not um it's going to be here so we're really looking at um one

[1:29:03] where should it be and then two the city has stated an intent that it's looking at it as a revenue stream so that

[1:29:09] there's a likelihood that there's going to be something and then the question is well how limiting do we want to be on

[1:29:14] the inevitable in a way that it could if we're too Li limiting on the inevitable

[1:29:20] we could have adverse consequences even though the intention would be to um adopt something more slowly or something

[1:29:27] like this through planning right so so to that end that's a and commissioner Al

[1:29:33] I think you mentioned it um the landlord can the landlord say no I mean if if we said it's allowed in Colonial Square and

[1:29:39] we we have it in our ordinance someone wants to come in and the landlord says no we don't want that particular

[1:29:44] business that's fine and good right that's not I'm going persp I'm going to make

[1:29:51] one brief comment and then turn it to the city attorney because um creating an

[1:29:57] ordinance when we believe the intent is no businesses could come

[1:30:04] in doesn't pass and I don't think that that's what we want to do and I'm not advocating for that at all I'm just

[1:30:09] wondering if we pass the ordinance and landlord has then an ultimate authority

[1:30:14] to say no is that is that fair fair to the businesses is that fair to the

[1:30:20] ordinance itself I'm going to turn it to the City Attorney at that point well chair and commissioner we I I've

[1:30:27] heard it said that we want to um follow state law right uh and we so we need to

[1:30:35] make sure that our ordinance is compliant with the policy decision made by the state legislature to legalize

[1:30:41] cannabis businesses and require cities to allow at least one and and so where

[1:30:49] we would get into trouble if we said oh okay you can locate in one property in

[1:30:55] the city where we know the landlord will never rent you that would set us up for a lawsuit right bad but I I think what

[1:31:03] planners Weber said earlier was was spe purely speculative we don't know what that landlord would or wouldn't do I

[1:31:09] mean presumably they're in it uh because it's a business and if it's a viable business they they'll they'll want

[1:31:15] to entertain that that business proposition so I I would focus Less on

[1:31:22] that and and think less about that and think about okay are we within the

[1:31:27] letter in spirit of state law which requires us to allow at least one

[1:31:32] cannabis retailer in the city could can we look at this map and say yeah there's not just one but many places within

[1:31:39] Colonial Square that they could locate not just one there but you know up and down wetta Boulevard within these three

[1:31:45] different zoning districts the city has I mean again when we looked at this as staff we were thinking that way you know

[1:31:52] what's the balance that we can strike that um you know works with the direction we've received from Council

[1:31:59] and what we need we know we need to do legally so I think based on that I think the work that you've all put in is I

[1:32:06] mean I think this is a a good and reasonable you know and fair it's within

[1:32:12] the spirit of the law what the state requires I think it's fair and Equitable and can be palatable to the residents of

[1:32:17] this is where it would go so comfortable with that question sort of related well

[1:32:26] directly related but kind of related to land use so City attorney one of the

[1:32:31] things you said was um one for every 12,500 citizens of henpen County right

[1:32:37] and just roughly there's that means there's would be 100

[1:32:43] dispensaries businesses sorry um in henpen county and at that point that

[1:32:49] that that that number is reached then what happens do you know well yeah under

[1:32:54] the language of the statute the city wouldn't be required to register any cannabis businesses at that point

[1:33:01] regardless of what our statute says or what or our ordinance says no we would have to follow our ordinance but we in

[1:33:07] the ordinance the the model ordinance that we're looking at has language that says if you ever reach that point we're

[1:33:13] not we don't have to issue a registration is what it's called okay

[1:33:18] yeah but I think it's like I mean we're highly desirable place to be people are coming here the city has made intention

[1:33:24] so that's why I think we're all looking at it so so closely no in in Our staff's

[1:33:29] advice is that the city should absolutely adopt regulations and be prepared the thing we don't want to do

[1:33:35] is have absolutely no regulations and have 10 businesses that want to locate anywhere in the city and work you know

[1:33:41] we haven't really thought through that where we want these businesses to be located so yeah Council wants you to

[1:33:47] make a recommendation about where and and they're going to make the policy decisions about how many they're going

[1:33:53] to you know obviously with public hearing and input look at whether or not to do the municipal uh dispensary so

[1:34:01] this this is a really key part of it though is is the wear yes it is chair

[1:34:06] may I ask uh yes and then we'll go back to umon I can wait okay commissioner

[1:34:12] Cameron no just so I you one of the things you just were we talking about

[1:34:17] from decisions a council gets to make right so thinking going back to the the whole notion of buffers right right um

[1:34:24] Council Council gets to set the buffers is that correct yes Council will be looking at

[1:34:30] that when they adopt the sort of Licensing side of the regulations and I think we've we've kind of we've gotten

[1:34:36] some guidance in terms of this is where what council this is kind of where council is leaning today but that hasn't

[1:34:43] been decided for sure right so I think my question would be if Council decides

[1:34:49] that the buffer just the buffers to minimize the buffers right to make them

[1:34:54] smaller than what we see on here right does that bring any of these other um C2

[1:35:00] and C3 properties into play yeah absolutely I mean I don't know if you saw in the news City of Minneapolis

[1:35:06] decided they weren't going to adopt any buffers so council could make that decision we don't hear that from them

[1:35:12] now um so I don't anticipate that but yeah it's a it's possible and I think

[1:35:18] planning staff can probably point out the other areas uh but basically anything that's C2 I'm sorry or yeah C2

[1:35:26] C3 and c3a and C4 could could be potentially a business if there were no

[1:35:32] buffers at all okay so to flesh that out

[1:35:38] going Beyond why that a Boulevard yep the two properties that are zoned either

[1:35:43] C2 or C3 or sorry yeah C2 or C3 that are

[1:35:49] currently within a buffer are the Boat Works down where six smouth is and the

[1:35:57] Village Shops you know uh what is it Baja Cafe and magies and and those so if

[1:36:04] the buffers went away those two spots would become

[1:36:11] available ex so the daycare kind of overlaps those doesn't it yes I I was just making the comment if

[1:36:18] all the buffers went oh oh oh even even okay

[1:36:24] but we we have as you can see there many overlapping buffers yeah you would have to make the decision to either shrink

[1:36:30] all the buffers to next nothing or or get rid of them all together for some reason I just

[1:36:36] assumed that school and daycare would just never go away

[1:36:41] but well just to give you a little insight on St Paul came up with a

[1:36:46] similar uh regulation they were looking at like their downtown where they have multiple you know floors so it's like if

[1:36:54] there's a daycare on the Skyway you know does that mean the first floor can't

[1:36:59] have it or you know they were really looking at both the you know the vertical and the horizontal uh buffers

[1:37:07] but as the City attorney stated none of the city council members

[1:37:14] are advocating for for the removal of buffers they want buffers it's just the

[1:37:22] balance as the City attorney St of buffers but also allowing some locations

[1:37:30] for a business to what's the process for changing a buffer in terms of difficulty versus changing the district that we

[1:37:36] ultimately um so for example like how much more discussion would there be

[1:37:42] because it's starting to sound a little bit like the buffers could change with Council as Council changes so we just want to be care we just want to know the

[1:37:48] buffers are a consideration for today but they're not

[1:37:54] yeah chair I I don't think that uh first of all the direct answer to your

[1:37:59] question is it would be easier to change the buffers than the uh zoning ordinance

[1:38:04] um designations because the former is just a change to the city code that council could do without a public

[1:38:11] hearing right um whereas changing the zoning ordinance requires Planning Commission report and recommendation

[1:38:16] public hearing much longer more involved process that said I I think I agree with

[1:38:22] what planners Weber said earlier it's unlikely that councils are going to play

[1:38:27] around with these buffer zones they're going to be set and forgotten about I think particularly when we're talking

[1:38:33] about um a a a policy decision of

[1:38:39] limiting the the number of licenses in the city or registrations in the city to

[1:38:44] one um it's not I think this would be a much bigger issue if we were a city like Minneapolis to St Paul where you might

[1:38:51] have dozens and dozens and dozens of businesses that want to all locate in the same areas or near schools or that

[1:38:58] sort of thing so um my my sense is that once these buffers are set they won't

[1:39:05] they won't change often if at all excellent thank you I I think we I think

[1:39:12] we have consensus um on on this and um I think it's a really helpful presentation

[1:39:19] thank you for taking on a myriad of deep questions some of which we don't have the answer to and we're hypothesizing

[1:39:25] but it it is really helpful to kind of understand the possibilities um in a new

[1:39:31] Venture um and uh and feel very confident with our uh our consensus and

[1:39:38] decision this evening so on that note U would anyone like to um make a

[1:39:45] motion uh to uh direct staff to prepare a draft report and recommendation for

[1:39:54] uh with appropriate findings uh uh I don't know as requested in the

[1:39:59] application for the for the for the allowance of C2 can we go back to the map or is it

[1:40:07] right is it right in front of me C2 yep yeah I don't see them listed there but we didn't list the um actual yeah chair

[1:40:14] I I think um I think you could just ask for

[1:40:20] the motion is on that screen I think the record F yeah consistent with staff's recommendation thanks draft wasn't sure

[1:40:27] if we had to list the actual um I don't back to that I don't think so uh chair

[1:40:33] uh the the draft uh is it the draft ordinance in your packet I would take that as the recommendation got it and

[1:40:41] then if you want to amend that that should be a part of the motion but no just make the motion we're going with

[1:40:48] what was included in your packet yes we don't want well would I like to make the motion to not make any changes as it was

[1:40:54] read there as it was I'd like to make a motion that the uh Planning Commission

[1:41:00] direct the city staff to move forward or or we accept

[1:41:06] the recommended ordinance in the Planning Commission

[1:41:12] packet that's you I've heard all the pieces we need to hear if I may chair

[1:41:17] just put it into a proposed motion for you to ask for a first yeah to direct staff to prepare draft planning report

[1:41:24] in recommendation reing recommending approval of the proposed ordinance prepared by staff with appropriate

[1:41:31] findings um for review and adoption at the next Planning Commission meeting so moved thank you commissioner

[1:41:39] I have a second thank you commissioner schi um any further

[1:41:45] discussion all those in favor I I any opposed the eyes have it and the motion

[1:41:52] passes the draft report and recommendation will be on the consent agenda at our next meeting and after adoption we'll go on

[1:41:58] to city council for consideration oh no we're not done yet

[1:42:04] okay thank you very much for um all of that detail and uh guidance in in this

[1:42:12] uh complex um consideration okay so next we have other items which is

[1:42:18] number uh seven uh we have two review of development activities and B uh a is

[1:42:24] review of development activities and B is a Planning Commission meeting schedule um thank you chair and Planning

[1:42:30] Commission um development activities probably the biggest one you've noticed is um I believe the address is now 310

[1:42:39] wi Zetta Boulevard the uh 910 910 Yetta Boulevard the um the retail building

[1:42:47] that goes along with the bank and the office building that's already been uh constructed they are currently

[1:42:54] demolish demolishing the uh the previous building the original building and uh

[1:43:02] we're working on the uh building permit uh review for that um two other items

[1:43:09] we're working on but not necessarily building permit related uh directly is

[1:43:15] uh we have approved the development agreement for uh 2011 Lake which is

[1:43:21] Westway condos and uh they are they are putting their um

[1:43:27] development construction team together so we haven't received a building permit from them yet we've re we've prepared a

[1:43:34] draft development agreement for moments Yetta and we'll be working with their uh

[1:43:40] legal and construction team move that forward we have received a building permit uh but that building permit is

[1:43:46] unhold until we get the development agreement uh addressed um planner corals

[1:43:53] did I miss any other important development activity uh I think the only other thing to mention that the Planning

[1:43:58] Commission would be interested in is obviously we had a wonderful Workshop talking about issues in the r3a district

[1:44:04] uh a couple of weeks ago we are putting together a community survey on those issues that'll be primarily directed

[1:44:09] towards residents of the entire r3a District but obviously we got a lot of feedback from you guys so we'll be

[1:44:16] engaging with residents and engaging with builders in the month of November we'll also be holding a uh community

[1:44:22] meeting around that as as well sort of an openhouse format in November and then from there you'll see those changes come

[1:44:27] back to you uh in the form of uh your regular public hearing process so just wanted to give an update on that

[1:44:33] item great thank you uh and the schedule is before us no changes UMES just to

[1:44:40] make you aware related to what uh planner quarrels had mentioned um on the

[1:44:46] 18th we will be bringing the uh Planning Commission report and recommendation on the Cannabis that we talked about

[1:44:52] tonight um in all likelihood we may be conducting one of those uh public meetings before the Planning Commission

[1:44:59] um you're not required to attend because of uh that schedule and the Thanksgiving

[1:45:06] holiday we probably wouldn't have the proposed regulations or the proposed

[1:45:11] ordinance in time for the December 2nd meeting so it's too early to do it for

[1:45:17] sure but we may be cancelling the December 2nd meeting but we will be

[1:45:23] holding the December 16th to review the r3a in some

[1:45:28] form wonderful that's the development count thanks for the heads up on that um

[1:45:34] if that's everything thank you everybody that concludes um our agenda can I have a motion to

[1:45:39] adjourn so thank you commissioner plon may have a second second thank you

[1:45:45] commissioner Cameron uh further discussion all those in favor say I I those oppose nay the eyes have it the

[1:45:51] motion passes and the Monday November 4th 2024 meeting of the Y Zetta Planning Commission is now aded