My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PL PACKET 06182024
StAnthony
>
Parks & Planning Commission
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2024
>
PL PACKET 06182024
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/13/2024 3:09:11 PM
Creation date
6/13/2024 3:08:45 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes <br />May 21, 2024 <br />Page 8 <br />1 “mezzo-“ business which does some form of industrial processing and proposes to also <br />2 sell retail products as an aspect of the business. The number of parcels impacted will <br />3 depend on the separation distance chosen. <br />4 <br />5 · 2955 Pentagon Drive (Step by Step Montessori): This facility is located in the St. <br />6 Anthony Shopping Center, zoned Commercial. Much of the shopping center area <br />7 would be prohibited from retail sales, again depending on the size of the separation <br />8 distance adopted. <br />9 <br />10 As noted, the statute permits (but does not require) the City to create exclusion <br />11 distances from schools, parks, and childcare facilities to any cannabis facility that <br />12 includes retail sales. For St. Anthony, the proximity of schools and parks to any <br />13 potential Commercial or Industrial site is not applicable, given the geography and land <br />14 use pattern. The primary issue would be the location of childcare facilities in the south <br />15 portion of the city. There are three such facilities that would, if a separation distance is <br />16 adopted, create an exclusion area for surrounding property. <br />17 <br />18 At its April meeting, the Planning Commission discussed whether the exclusion area <br />19 was relevant to daycare, based on an assumption that unlike schools and parks, there is <br />20 less likely to be unsupervised child presence using daycare facilities. The zoning <br />21 action for the City would be an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that eliminates <br />22 the current total prohibition of cannabis businesses, and replacement with language <br />23 related to separation where applicable. <br />24 <br />25 Although no impacts are foreseen for Schools and Parks as noted, staff would <br />26 recommend adoption of the full State-allowed exclusion area for those uses (1,000 feet <br />27 for schools, and 500 feet for parks). There continue to be discussions at the State level <br />28 (both legislatively and agency-driven) that will continue to refine aspects of the law. <br />29 As such, these protections would be consistent with the allowances, and address any <br />30 unforeseen circumstances until additional guidance is provided. Guidance is likely to <br />31 come from a variety of sources, including both the League of Minnesota Cities and the <br />32 Office of Cannabis Management (in the form of a model ordinance). <br />33 <br />34 For childcare facilities, there is likely to be some pressure to adopt a limited separation <br />35 zone from retail cannabis outlets. As noted, the full 500 feet would significantly limit <br />36 retail outlets in the south area of the City. A distance of 250 feet would have a lesser <br />37 impact, but still affect some potential sales locations. In the alternative, the City could <br />38 create a limitation that prohibits retail sales on premises that abut a parcel with <br />39 childcare, rather than default to the distance allowance. This would be effectively the <br />40 same as a “1-foot” buffer. The attached draft ordinance incorporates alternative <br />41 language for Planning Commission review and discussion. The OCM has not <br />42 answered the question if licensed in-home daycares will need the buffer. <br />43 <br />44 The Planning Commission is requested to further discuss the separation distance <br />45 aspects of the potential regulations, and raise other issues as they may impact a final <br />46 ordinance adoption. With these comments, and if the proposed Ordinance amendments
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.