[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