HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL PACKET 10152024CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, October 15, 2024 at 7:00 PM
Members of the public who wish to attend the meeting may do so in person.
Call To Order
Pledge Of Allegiance
Roll Call
Approval Of Agenda
Approval Of Minutes
Approval Of PC Meeting Minutes
PC 08 -20 -2024.PDF
Public Hearing
Ordinance 2024 -06 - Amending The St. Anthony City Code, By Amending Section
154.141 Relating To Permitted Uses In The L -I, Light Industrial District
Steve Grittman, City Planner, presenting.
COVER MEMO.PDF
ORDINANCE 2024 -06 DRAFT.PDF
NOTICE -PUBLIC HEARING -10 -15 -24 -CLINICS IN L -I.PDF
Staff Reports
Other Business
Community Forum
Individuals may address the Planning Commission about any City business item not included on
the regular agenda. Speakers are requested to come to the podium, sign their name and
address on the form at the podium, state their name and address for the Clerk ’s record, and
limit their remarks to five minutes. Generally, the Planning Commission will not take official
action on items discussed at this time, but may typically refer the matter to staff for a future
report or direct the matter to be scheduled on an upcoming agenda. Those unable to attend the
meeting in person may submit comments via the City's PUBLIC COMMENTS FORM.
Information And Announcments
Adjournment
If you would like to request special accommodations or alternative formats, please contact the City
Clerk at 612 -782 -3313 or email city@savmn.com . People who are deaf or hard of hearing can
contact us by using 711 Relay.
Our mission is to promote a high quality of life to those we serve through
outstanding city services.
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
A.
Documents:
VI.
A.
Documents:
VII.
VIII.
IX.
X.
XI.
CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGEPLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDATuesday, October 15, 2024 at 7:00 PMMembers of the public who wish to attend the meeting may do so in person. Call To OrderPledge Of AllegianceRoll CallApproval Of AgendaApproval Of MinutesApproval Of PC Meeting MinutesPC 08 -20 -2024.PDFPublic HearingOrdinance 2024 -06 - Amending The St. Anthony City Code, By Amending Section 154.141 Relating To Permitted Uses In The L -I, Light Industrial DistrictSteve Grittman, City Planner, presenting.COVER MEMO.PDFORDINANCE 2024 -06 DRAFT.PDFNOTICE -PUBLIC HEARING -10 -15 -24 -CLINICS IN L -I.PDFStaff ReportsOther BusinessCommunity ForumIndividuals may address the Planning Commission about any City business item not included on the regular agenda. Speakers are requested to come to the podium, sign their name and address on the form at the podium, state their name and address for the Clerk ’s record, and limit their remarks to five minutes. Generally, the Planning Commission will not take official
action on items discussed at this time, but may typically refer the matter to staff for a future
report or direct the matter to be scheduled on an upcoming agenda. Those unable to attend the
meeting in person may submit comments via the City's PUBLIC COMMENTS FORM.
Information And Announcments
Adjournment
If you would like to request special accommodations or alternative formats, please contact the City
Clerk at 612 -782 -3313 or email city@savmn.com . People who are deaf or hard of hearing can
contact us by using 711 Relay.
Our mission is to promote a high quality of life to those we serve through
outstanding city services.
I.II.III.IV.V.A.Documents:VI.A.Documents:VII.VIII.IX.
X.
XI.
1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
3 AUGUST 20, 2024
4 7:00 p.m.
5
6 CALL TO ORDER.
7
8 Vice Chair Morita called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
9
10 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
11
12 Vice Chair Morita invited the Commission and the audience to join her in the Pledge of Allegiance.
13
14 ROLL CALL.
15
16 Commissioners Present:Vice Chair Morita, Commissioners Erickson, Hark, and Rude.
17
18 Absent:Chair Socha, Commissioners Anderson and Gaveske.
19
20 Also Present: City Planner Stephen Grittman and Assistant City Manager Ashley
21 Morello.
22
23
24 I.APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 20, 2024 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
25 AGENDA.
26
27 Motion by Commissioner Erickson, seconded by Commissioner Rude, to approve the August
28 20, 2024 Regular Planning Commission Meeting Agenda.
29
30 Motion carried 4-0.
31
32
33 II.APPROVAL OF JUNE 18, 2024, REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
34 MINUTES.
35
36 Motion by Commissioner Rude, seconded by Commissioner Hark, to approve the June 18,
37 2024, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented.
38
39 Motion carried 4-0.
40
41
42 III.PUBLIC HEARING.
43
A.44 Conditional Use Permit – 2401 Lowry Avenue NE
45
46 Vice Chair Morita opened the public hearing at 7:07 p.m.
47
48 City Planner Stephen Grittman reviewed the applicants are seeking an amendment to an
49 approved Planned Unit Development to modify the land use and site plan approvals that were
50
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 2
1 granted under the original PUD project. The site is the former Bremer Bank facility at the NE
2 corner of Kenzie Terrace and Stinson Parkway, with an address of 2401 Lowry. The parcel is
3 just under 2 acres in size.
4
5 The Planning Commission originally held a public hearing to consider the application on June
6 18, 2024. At the time, the applicants had described their request as consisting of the conduct
7 of after-school programming and office uses in the existing building. They indicated that the
8 building itself would not be remodeled on the exterior. Interior remodeling would consist
9 primarily of modifications to create an activity space in support of the after-school
10 programming. The applicants suggested that one floor of the building would remain unused at
11 the current time. No changes to the existing site plan were envisioned.
12
13 The proposed change would alter the approved PUD ordinance by replacing the expected 76-
14 unit multiple-family residential use with a proposed office use and after-school program for
15 school-aged children. The site plan approvals under the approved PUD would be altered to
16 retain the existing building and site improvements, which largely consist of paved parking lot
17 serving the original bank facility.
18
19 At the public hearing in June, the applicants expanded on their description of the uses of the
20 building, which included testimony that a variety of language and other academic classes
21 would be provided, as well as technical training in various disciplines.
22
23 The Planning Commission discussed the merits of the proposed use, and how it compared to
24 the Comprehensive Plan objectives for the site, as well as to the intent of the existing PUD
25 zoning, which anticipated housing that was designed to be affordable to low and moderate
26 income tenants. The rezoning ordinance recognized the change from commercial to residential
27 use, incorporating the approved site and development plans for the multi-family project, as
28 referenced the R-4 zoning district (the City’s multi-family zoning district) as the reference
29 district for performance standards not specifically identified in the approved PUD.
30
31 The 2040 Comprehensive Plan calls for mixed residential and commercial uses in the area.
32 The Land Use Plan expected a continuation of the commercial land use pattern on this site,
33 but included language that accommodates the conversion of commercial land to residential
34 when the specific site and other needs – including affordable housing goals – supported the
35 change. It was this set of policy considerations that led to the City’s participation in a multi-
36 site PUD approval that included this property.
37
38 That PUD shifted the Bremer Bank location to a site owned by the City, which was originally
39 acquired for redevelopment, with the goal being affordable housing. In turn, the housing
40 objective was shifted to the site currently under consideration, thus the multi-family project
41 approved there.
42
43 The Planning Commission voted against the proposed amendment in a split vote. Favorable
44 votes included comments that the use was a valuable one for the neighborhood and
45 community at large. Votes against the amendment cited concerns over an inadequate
46 description of the project plans, the loss of the opportunity for affordable housing on the site,
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 3
1 and concerns over the loss of taxable land, presuming that the new owner would put the
2 property to a tax-exempt land use.
3
4 After the Planning Commission’s June hearing, the applicants provided additional information
5 to staff, supplementing their request to more fully describe the proposed use, and address
6 certain concerns raised by the Commission. The applicants asked to delay the project’s
7 consideration by the City Council to allow this additional information to be reviewed. It was
8 determined that the additional information constituted a substantive change to the
9 understanding of the project proposal, and that the project is now understood was not fully
10 noticed in the initial hearing.
11
12 Staff notified the applicants that the project needed to return to a new public hearing before
13 the Planning Commission. The applicants provided additional written documentation on the
14 proposed amendment as a part of that new schedule.
15
16 The proposed application would reintroduce administrative offices for internal use, as well as
17 commercial office uses available to private tenants/lessees.
18
19 The use of the building would include community center uses of various types. Prominent
20 among these would be both the original after-school programming as previously proposed,
21 although other uses may include farmer’s markets, community fairs, or similar outdoor events.
22
23 The building will utilize the multi-purpose facility for religious institutional use, including
24 daily prayer and religious services open to the community throughout the day and week.
25
26 The applicants also supplemented their application with a new site plan drawing that indicated
27 the conversion of a portion of the property (previously used as a bank drive-through) to now
28 include an outdoor play/recreation space and reconfiguring the otherwise fully paved parking
29 area to add green space.
30
31 Mr. Grittman provided the zoning map and an aerial photo of the property and provided a
32 summary of the application compared to the City’s zoning Ordinance including Land Use,
33 Site and Building Improvements, and Tax Base Considerations.
34
35 While the applicants have added additional clarity to the proposed use and provided a concept
36 site plan that suggests additional green space on the mostly-impervious site, there are several
37 modifications or supplemental elements that should be incorporated into any recommendation
38 for the PUD amendment. Those modifications include the following:
39
1.40 Provide information on staffing during religious services in the multi-purpose
41 room and scale the capacity of the assembly to match the remaining available
42 parking on the site, at the rate of 2.5 persons per parking space.
43
2.44 Provide an interior floor plan schematic that shows the planned multi-purpose
45 space, and how assembly capacity will be controlled to meet the maximum
46 imposed by the parking supply.
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 4
1
3.2 Close the westerly of the two access driveways to Kenzie Terrace and add green
3 space and landscaping to replace the driveway removal.
4
4.5 Provide a more detailed landscaping plan that identifies the proposed planting
6 materials in the illustrated green spaces on the site, as well as the existing green
7 spaces at the perimeter of the site, including a maintenance plan for improving
8 those overgrown areas.
9
5.10 Provide information on the outdoor play area, including surfacing, amenities or
11 structures in the play area, and method of separation from the adjacent driveway
12 (fencing, etc.).
13
14 To recommend approval of the amendment, the Planning Commission should consider
15 findings such as the following, and others generated by the discussion and public hearing:
16
1.17 The land use plan chapter of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan identifies the site for
18 Commercial Uses.
19
2.20 The 2040 Comprehensive Plan includes a variety of mixed use opportunities on
21 Commercial property.
22
3.23 The current Kenzie Terrace PUD District references the R-4 District for
24 alternatives to the approved PUD plans.
25
4.26 The R-4 District includes religious assembly uses as an allowed use, and by
27 extension, these uses are allowable in the Kenzie Terrace PUD District.
28
5.29 The proposed use is a reasonable adaptive re-use of an existing vacant building and
30 property.
31
6.32 Religious Assembly uses are commonly found in residential areas of the City,
33 similar to the mixed residential neighborhoods near the proposed site.
34
7.35 The site is located on major roadways supporting traffic volumes generated by the
36 property.
37
8.38 The applicant’s proposal provides an important service to the community at large
39 and justifies the departure from the original PUD goals.
40
41
42 To recommend denial, the Planning Commission should consider these and other findings:
43
1.44 The PUD approved for the site incorporated City property that anticipates a
45 residential component for development on the subject property.
46
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 5
2.1 Opportunities for housing, and particularly affordable housing, are a key
2 component of the City’s compliance with Metropolitan Council housing goals, and
3 for the City’s compliance with these goals.
4
3.5 The proposed use retains the existing building and site conditions, the
6 improvement and/or replacement of which was an aspect of the City’s approval of
7 the original PUD.
8
4.9 The City entered into an agreement to remove the commercial use from this
10 property in exchange for the ability to relocate affordable housing objectives to
11 this parcel.
12
5.13 The proposed amendments to the PUD do not achieve the goals of the PUD for
14 creation of affordable housing as was anticipated.
15
6.16 The proposed site plan in the PUD amendment request reduces impervious surface
17 slightly, but leaves other paved surfaces in place, retaining more impervious than
18 the approved PUD.
19
7.20 The applicant has not provided adequate documentation to verify compliance with
21 the goals of the PUD, or the narrative descriptions of the amendment application.
22
8.23 Market conditions that disrupted the original PUD completion are constantly
24 changing and may reasonably be expected to change again in ways that help make
25 the previously approved residential use more feasible.
26
27 Mr. Grittman summarized stating staff believes there are adequate reasons to recommend
28 approval of the proposed amendment, given the expanded description of the proposed use on
29 the site. However, there are still details arising from that proposal that cannot be verified with
30 the material submitted as a part of the application submittal. The Commission should consider
31 the components of the application – both land use and development plans – and recommend
32 the policy that is most consistent with the City’s land use goals. If approval, staff has provided
33 a set of conditions that should accompany the approval recommendation. Regardless of the
34 Commission’s recommendation, the Planning Commission should consider findings
35 supporting its recommendation. The suggested findings above may serve as the basis for the
36 Commission’s decision and may be supplemented or amended based on the discussion during
37 and after the public hearing.
38
39 Also provided for Commission’s consideration were the Tibyan Center Application
40 Amendment Email, Site Plan Proposed – Landscaped, Application, Question-Answer
41 Application Supplement and Email Responses from Applicant to Staff’s Questions.
42
43 Commissioner Rude asked if currently this site could only be used for low-income affordable
44 housing. Mr. Grittman stated there is not a restriction that housing on the site be affordable.
45 Commissioner Rude asked how this impacts the Met Council’s requirements. Mr. Grittman
46 stated Met Council assigns the City an affordable housing goal which is adopted in the
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 6
1 Comprehensive Plan as policy. The Ruby meets the definition that Met Council applies to the
2 City’s count. The loss of this project to affordable housing does not affect the Met Council
3 issue. Commissioner Rude stated his understanding is there is not a lot of land available to
4 develop and the Met Council could restrict us in various ways if we don’t stick to their plan.
5 How will the City meet their requirements. Mr. Grittman stated other sites within the City
6 would have to be looked at for redevelopment. No other properties have been identified.
7
8 Commissioner Erickson stated it sounds like we have met the Met Council’s threshold. Mr.
9 Grittman stated we would report the number of multi-family housing units that were built
10 which qualify under the affordable housing requirement.
11
12 Vice Chair Morita noted at the last meeting Staff did not provide a recommendation but now
13 there is a recommendation. He asked for clarification as to why the switch. Mr. Grittman
14 stated the PUD District talked about multi-family housing. The applicant revised their
15 proposal with an opportunity to provide a youth center. This is moved to more of a religious
16 institution which is supported in R-4 zoning.
17
18 Commissioner Hark referred to the PUD and asked how binding that is. Mr. Grittman stated
19 there were development agreements that were being done. We are just dealing with the PUD.
20 Commissioner Hark asked about the specific conditions that apply to the revision. Mr.
21 Grittman stated the five listed along with any additional conditions the Planning Commission
22 wants. The City Council could also add conditions as they see fit. She stated generally there
23 are pages of conditions. She does not see it appropriate for the Planning Commission to add
24 more conditions.
25
26 Commissioner Erickson asked Commissioner Hark who she thinks should come up with
27 additional conditions and Commissioner Hark suggested Staff would add conditions. Mr.
28 Grittman stated Staff is used to more conditions also on PUD amendments. The applicants are
29 proposing not to change the building architecture.
30
31 Mr. Jaylani Hussein, Executive Director CAIR-Minnesota stated he is in support of the
32 Tibyan Center. He is a trained urban planner and provided support for other organizations.
33 Mr. Hussein presented a PowerPoint providing updates on the project. The Tibyan Center is a
34 world-renowned center for excellence. He reviewed some of the students’ accomplishments.
35 The center focuses on Excelling in Quranic Learning, Islamic Education, Youth Enrichment
36 Programing and Coding and Programing. The Center serves predominantly poor students in
37 the community. Mr. Hussein showed an article about one of the students from July 2018. The
38 building fits the center perfectly. Provided in the center will be classes for youth, an office for
39 the center, a mosque for prayer/multi-purpose space, and rental space to businesses to
40 generate a tax base. Mr. Hussein showed a proposed floor plan showing classrooms,
41 conference rooms, offices, storage, and the mosque/multi-purpose room. The mosque for
42 prayer and multipurpose space is 4,000 sf with 3,000 sf for the actual prayer area. There
43 would be 15 sf per worshipper with 200 worshippers. 80 parking stalls would be available and
44 most of the attendees will be at the center. The property now has 76 parking stalls identified
45 with the possibility of adding spaces. Phase 1 would use existing rooms as classrooms with
46 Phase 2 will be development of 17 classes with an estimate of 15 students in each class. The
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 7
1 rental space to business is proposed for the basement. This would be income generation for
2 the center to portion of the center including the basement to small businesses. Mr. Hussein
3 reviewed the City and Community Partnerships. The ways they would do that is:
4 Recognizing the needs expressed by the City and anticipating other needs by the
5 community, we aim to be great partners in finding ways to use our facility to enhance
6 community needs.
7 We are open to utilizing our oversized parking lot for St. Anthony Village community
8 events, such as fairs and farmers markets.
9 We also welcome the opportunity to work with the City to have City signage on the
10 property since we are at a key gateway entrance to the City.
11
12 Since May, there have been 9 attempts to vandalize the building and those crimes are under
13 investigation currently. Security protocols have been added and they are doing everything
14 they can to protect the building. The last incident was in July 2024. The damage was
15 estimated to exceed over $20,000. It appears to be a biased hate crime. The use is already
16 allowed in the PUD. The use changes but the building does not change. Mr. Hussein reviewed
17 the conditions proposed and the response from the applicants. The landscape plan they would
18 like to do but they do not have current plans. They would need to pay for that plan and the
19 Center doesn’t have the funds to do that currently. They requested the landscaping plan be
20 removed and when they are ready to do the plan, they will come back to the City. The same is
21 for the outdoor playground plan.
22
23 Mr. Stan Ross, original applicant for the project, architect for this project and also The Ruby,
24 was available to answer any questions.
25
26 Board Member Omar stated he supports the Center. He is a former student and now a teacher.
27 He reviewed the goals of the Center. He attended a center since he was 8 years old and will be
28 24 next week. He studied the Koran. The Center would be available for community events.
29 There are hundreds of students waiting to join the programs. Mr. Omar looks forward to the
30 Commission’s approval.
31
32 Commissioner Rude asked if there were bus stops nearby. He asked where the students would
33 be coming from. Mr. Hussein stated students and attendees would be coming from all over the
34 Twin Cities.
35
36 Commissioner Hark asked if Tibyan has acquired the property already and Mr. Hussein stated
37 they have.
38
39 Vice Chair Morita stated there were six comments received from the public with four in favor
40 of the project and two against.
41
42 Mr. Robert Wallin, developer of Hayden Grove, neighbor to this site stated this was the
43 former site of a dry cleaner and the site is contaminated. This site needs to be redeveloped and
44 needs to be rebuilt as a multi-family use. He is concerned about the fact that there is a
45 playground planned and when digging in the soil remediation is necessary and costly. He is
46 concerned with leaving the building the way it is when the ground is disturbed you need to go
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 8
1 all the way. He is also concerned about parking. 80 parking spaces are not sufficient for the
2 site. The only area to be landscaped is what is currently landscaped. When the second
3 entrance is removed, you will run into problems with peak hours. Parking on Stinson is not a
4 good option for the overflow. When it was a bank the parking lot was never full as it was
5 transactional. This site is part of a TIF District to help with affordable housing. He asks the
6 applicant to come back with a plan to build affordable housing along with a mosque. Using a
7 1979 building that is contaminated. He asked the Commission to deny this application. There
8 are many office buildings that are vacant and available.
9
10 Ms. Victoria Pervicks, Interstate Development, former owner of the building. They have been
11 involved with the property for three years. They had an agreement in the past for multi-family
12 housing. Interstate Development had to abandon that project. The TIF District was explored
13 but not available. The plan for a 76-unit multi-family building was using ground level and
14 surface parking which was also tight. There was a plan to mitigate the soils and ensure the
15 building was safe for family use. Bremer had done an environmental study which was also
16 redone by Interstate Development. The building will need a new environmental study. They
17 are under contract to sell the building to Tibyan. She is moved by their mission. The zoning
18 supports a mosque. This group has come to the table to give the City everything they want.
19 She supports the project.
20
21 Dr. Hassen Hassen, Director of New Century High School, stated this Center will bring a lot
22 of benefits to the community. His high school in Fridley is an asset to the community. This
23 would be a beacon for the City of St. Anthony. Fridays would be the big prayer day for the
24 Center. Parking would not be an issue. He supports the project.
25
26 Mohamed, representing Tibyan, stated he has lived in St. Anthony for the past 12 years. He is
27 in support of the project and as a long-term resident and graduate of Tibyan. He stated the
28 Center would be a great asset to the community. The youth would be a pillar for the
29 community.
30
31 Mr. Hamse D, student of Tibyan Center, stated he is from Fridley and will be starting at
32 University of MN in the fall. This Center would be convenient for he and his peers as it would
33 be closer to home. He is in support of the Center.
34
35 Ms. Pam Caplin, lived in St. Anthony for many years, stated the high-density housing in St.
36 Anthony will require some additional public schools within the City.
37
38 Ms. Grace G, supports the project.
39
40 Mr. Muctar B, resident of St. Anthony for three years, stated he supports the Tibyan Center
41 application, noting that having a youth center is home away from home for the youth. He
42 requested the Commission approve the application.
43
44 Mr. Robert Zacheim, Director of Hayden Grove, asked the Commission to consider the
45 change to a PUD, while there is a great need for affordable housing. The PUD requires some
46 additional considerations. There needs to be appropriate traffic studies. The pollution on the
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 9
1 property is a very important aspect. The environmental reports need to be studied before any
2 changes are made to the building, landscape, and property. He asked that all this be taken into
3 consideration before this is approved.
4
5 Vice Chair Morita clarified the Planning Commission only makes recommendations to the
6 City Council.
7
8 Vice Chair Morita closed the public hearing at 8:15 p.m.
9
10 Commissioner Erickson asked Mr. Grittman to confirm whether the site is in a TIF district.
11 Mr. Grittman stated he could not confirm that and does not know the status of the TIF
12 approvals for the site. Commissioner Erickson stated it sounds like a fabulous project. The
13 concerns mentioned are concerning and need more study. He is particularly concerned with
14 contamination on the site. That could perhaps be added as a condition. It seems like there is
15 enough capacity to handle 200 worshippers but may be short on parking for the offices.
16
17 Commissioner Hark stated she appreciates everyone’s comments. This use is much more
18 intense than what was there before. She noted some conditions such as in-depth parking and
19 traffic study and environmental condition.
20
21 Commissioner Rude stated he appreciates the input. The project has not been communicated
22 to the community to allow for more comments. There needs to be a vapor mitigation plan
23 which is costly at $5-8 sf to install the system. He does not know what regulatory committee
24 would require that testing. He does not have enough information to vote on this. There are
25 several questions that have not been answered.
26
27 Vice Chair Morita stated he was supportive of this project the last time it was presented. He
28 wants to be responsible for bringing back the points discussed previously, and the concerns
29 were affordable housing and tax income from that space. There was a strong feeling from the
30 Commission to not move forward. He does not believe there is a need for office rental space.
31 He does not know how to proceed at this point. Staff recommends approval with five
32 conditions. The applicant has asked the last two conditions be removed and additions being
33 environmental/contamination study and parking/traffic study be done.
34
35 Commissioner Rude stated when this decision was made before, his opinion was this property
36 should have stayed Commercial. There would be people working there. There are very few
37 jobs within St. Anthony. Met Council’s requirements will increase and unless the City tears
38 down buildings and redevelops, it will be lacking. The project would be good and there is
39 great support, but this may not be right for St. Anthony in this space.
40
41 Commissioner Erickson pointed out the Tibyan Center would be a regional draw which would
42 provide customers to businesses located in St. Anthony.
43
44 Commissioner Hark suggested there are three options available to the Commission. These
45 options are approval, denial, or approval with added conditions.
46
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 10
1 Motion by Commissioner Erickson, seconded by Vice Chair Morita, to recommend the City
2 Council approve Staff’s recommendation with the first three conditions noted and the addition
3 of in-depth traffic/parking and environmental studies take place.
4
5 Motion carried 3-1 (Rude against).
6
7 Mr. Grittman noted this will come before the City Council at their September 10, 2024
8 Meeting.
9
10
B.11 Ordinance 2024 Cannabis Zoning Ordinance Amendments
12
13 Vice Chair Morita opened the public hearing at 8:35 p.m.
14
15 Mr. Grittman reviewed the State of Minnesota has passed legislation during the 2023
16 legislative session legalizing various aspects of cannabis use, sales, agriculture, and
17 manufacturing. This legislation follows 2022 legalization of certain low-potency hemp-based
18 THC products. The City of St. Anthony subsequently adopted regulations for hemp-THC
19 products.
20
21 In August of 2023, the City adopted a moratorium on cannabis-related businesses (as
22 authorized by the legislation), in anticipation of the State’s establishment of agency and rule-
23 making activities. The State has created the Office of Cannabis Management (OCM) to carry
24 out the requirements of the legislation, with an originally-anticipated state date of January,
25 2025. While that date may shift some, the City is seeking to update its zoning regulations to
26 comply with the local land use impacts of the legislation.
27
28 OCM has now developed a model ordinance for local government use and fine-tuning. The
29 model was provided for Commission review with some updates related to aspects of the code
30 that have already been addressed, which include a prohibition on use in public places, and a
31 separation buffer from specific land uses (1,000 feet for schools, 500 feet for parks regularly
32 used by minors, and 300 feet for childcare facilities and substance-abuse treatment facilities.
33
34 The ordinance has a few areas of local choice, but generally, the State will handle all
35 licensing, with local governments reviewing the suitability of a location per its zoning district
36 and building code compliance. There are a few areas of additional consideration, including the
37 following:
38
1.39 Number of licensed retail establishments. The state requires that all jurisdictions
40 allow at least one license for every 12,500 residents – the second license kicking in
41 at a population of 12,501. This draft ordinance anticipates the City limiting its
42 licenses to the one required, although the City can choose to allow more if it
43 wishes to do so.
44
2.45 Hours of Operation. As a rule, it is expected that a retail cannabis facility will
46 maintain typical retail hours. The state legislation allows the City to set more
47
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 11
1 restrictive hours, however, staff is not recommending this level of regulation.
2 Since the zoning ordinance sites a retail facility in a standard commercial retail
3 district, it is expected that standard commercial hours will be followed. The City
4 could update this issue if it is found that specific concerns arise related to ours of
5 operation.
6
3.7 Odor. There is language in the statute that references an ability to regulate uses
8 based on odor, however, it is not clear at all how this would be accomplished or
9 enforced. The City’s adopted prohibition of smoking in public places is intended to
10 address the primary objection to odor, which is expected to be smoke. Whereas
11 some industries can create odor emissions, there are PCA limitations on particulate
12 matter and other emissions which would also apply. Staff does not recommend any
13 additional odor-related regulation.
14
4.15 Low Potency Hemp Products. The City may be able to further limit the low-
16 potency hemp sales currently allowed by law. St. Anthony has adopted a
17 regulation that limits sales to those businesses that maintain a tobacco sales
18 license. It is not expected that this will change as these products shift to State
19 licensing.
20
5.21 Cannabis Events. The legislation created a requirement that Cities permit
22 temporary “Cannabis Events”. These events would be located only where the City
23 authorizes any other type of temporary event. If in public places, smoking or other
24 consumption would not be allowed. If in indoor places, the Minnesota Clean
25 Indoor Air Act would continue to apply. No additional regulation is anticipated
26 currently.
27
6.28 Other. There are a few administrative options for the City to consider, including
29 how to “register” licensed establishments, enforcing compliance required by the
30 law, and addressing licensee reapplication, among a few others. These aspects of
31 the ordinance address clerical aspects of City operation rather than land use
32 decision-making.
33
34 Mr. Grittman summarized the cannabis topic is complex and has many facets that impact local
35 government. Prior decisions on cannabis regulation are incorporated into this comprehensive
36 ordinance, now that the State has created the model ordinance for local guidance. Municipal
37 sales, law enforcement, and other administrative or General Code aspects of the law are left
38 for separate consideration by the City Council.
39
40 Staff asks the Commission to discuss the various questions identified and provide
41 recommendations as to the various elements of City authority. Staff will update the draft
42 model reflecting staff and Commission comments for City Council consideration at upcoming
43 meetings. A draft ordinance based on the model was provided for Commission consideration.
44 The yellow highlights are those areas that are optional or reflect commentary only.
45
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 12
1 If the Planning Commission agrees, staff recommends approval of a draft zoning regulation
2 adopting the modified State OCM model ordinance on Cannabis sales, with the conditions and
3 modifications noted and the specific recommendations of the Planning Commission. Also
4 provided for Commission consideration were the Draft Ordinance Amendment and Minnesota
5 Statutes Chapter 342.13 (Local Control).
6
7 Vice Chair Morita referenced the process for renewal. Could the neighboring businesses be
8 polled to gain input if there are any issues. Mr. Grittman stated that would be a licensing
9 function of the State. If Codes are violated the City can refuse to renew the license.
10
11 Commissioner Rude asked if a license is granted, and a daycare is requested to be put in close.
12 Does the Montessori close to the liquor store prevent the liquor store from selling cannabis
13 products? Mr. Grittman stated the Council implemented a 300 feet distance from any school
14 or daycare which is the same for alcohol establishments. Mr. Grittman asked if the
15 Commission is interested in opening the registration process if someone is going to move or
16 are we interested in accepting OCM’s licensing/re-licensing of the business.
17
18 Vice Chair Morita suggested they would need to go through the licensing process again.
19
20 Commissioner Rude and Vice Chair Morita indicated they do not see an issue present.
21 Commissioner Hark suggested a new location requires a new application. Commissioner
22 Erickson agreed with Commissioner Hark regarding a new location. Mr. Grittman stated the
23 licensing application is $10,000.
24
25 Commissioners Erickson and Vice Chair Morita indicated they would go with Option B.
26 Commissioner Hark stated she would go with Option A. After discussion, the consensus was
27 to go with Option B.
28
29 The consensus of the Commission was to go with regular business hours. Mr. Grittman stated
30 the Statute says they cannot operate between 2:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m.
31
32 As far as events, they would occur on public property where use is not allowed. If space is
33 rented for an indoor event, the City would not have much concern over an indoor event.
34 Products could be put on display, but consumption would not be allowed and an event
35 application to the City would be required.
36
37 There was a discussion on Odor restrictions. Mr. Grittman stated Staff will continue research
38 on working used for Odor restrictions.
39
40 Current licensing protocols would be used for low potency hemp products.
41
42 Vice Chair Morita closed the public hearing at 8:58 p.m.
43
44 Motion by Vice Chair Morita, seconded by Commissioner Rude, to recommend the City
45 Council adopt Ordinance 2024-0x – Cannabis, as revised.
46
Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes
August 20, 2024
Page 13
1 Motion carried 4-0.
2
3 IV.STAFF REPORTS.
4
5 Mr. Grittman reported the City Council approved the CUP for digital sign at Boulevard Auto.
6 Amendments to the Beekeeping Ordinance were also approved. Staff has noted the City
7 Council needs to approve requests for farm animals. There is a long list of conditions for
8 beekeeping. The City Council did a first reading of the City Code amendments giving
9 American Legal the go-ahead to put the Code online.
10
11 There will be a joint session with the City Council on September 17, 2024 regarding rental
12 housing.
13
14 V.OTHER BUSINES - NONE.
15
16 VI.COMMUNITY FORUM - NONE.
17
18 No one appeared to address the Planning Commission.
19
20 VII.INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS - NONE.
21
22 VIII. ADJOURNMENT.
23
24 Motion by Commissioner Erickson, seconded by Commissioner Hark, to adjourn the meeting
25 at 9:15 p.m.
26
27 Motion carried 4-0.
28
29
30 Respectfully submitted,
31 Debbie Wolfe
32 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc.
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
MEMORANDUM
To:St. Anthony Village Planning Commission
From:Stephen Grittman, City Planner
Date:Planning Commission Meeting – October 15, 2024
GC Project No.140.10
Request:Zoning Ordinance Amendment – Clinic Office Uses in the L-I, Light
Industrial District
Applicant:Mike Mitchell
Property Address: NA
Property PID:NA
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant, a building owner/manager in the City’s Light-Industrial area, has applied for an
amendment to the City’s zoning ordinance related to principal uses in the L-I, Light Industrial
zoning district. The application is intended to expand the allowance for office uses in the L-I
District to include professional offices that include clinic uses, or more broadly, uses in which a
client or patient is seen by a health professional in either a group or individual setting. The
zoning ordinance specifically accommodates requests for zoning ordinance amendments from
property owners in the City.
Currently, the Zoning Ordinance creates separate use classifications for “Professional Offices”,
such as legal, real estate, or similar office-based personal services, “Commercial Offices”, which
are identified as offices with primarily administrative functions for commercial enterprises in a
wide variety of business categories, and “Medical, dental, veterinary, and related clinics, in
which customers receive such services in person, and which consist of offices, exam rooms,
laboratory and similar services, and related activities”. Each of these is permitted in the
Commercial zoning district.
In the L-I, Light Industrial District, only Commercial Offices for administrative purposes is listed
as an allowed use. The majority of Light Industrial uses are manufacturing in nature. It should
be noted that “Adult Daycare” uses are allowed in both the Commercial and Light Industrial
Districts.
October 15, 2024
Page 2
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
If acceptable to the Commission, the applicant seeks approval of an amendment asking that the
Commission make a recommendation on the proposed ordinance and send it to the City
Council for its consideration, including any recommended revisions to language or approach.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE SECTIONS
The proposed ordinance is relatively simple, in that it would add the language from the
Commercial District for the various office uses (including “Professional Offices” and “Medical
Offices” as noted above) into the Light Industrial District as permitted uses.
When considering amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, the code requires that the Planning
Commission hold a public hearing, and that the City Council finds the proposed amendment to
be consistent with the intent of the City’s regulations and land use goals as identified in the
Comprehensive Plan. There are no specific findings listed in the zoning ordinance, however,
any regulation should further either the general intent of the zoning ordinance overall, or some
specific goal or objective of the Comprehensive Plan.
The Comprehensive Plan identifies some objectives for the Industrial areas of the City. These
include opportunities for redevelopment of aging buildings and sites, and a strong focus on
office and office-showroom uses, in addition to the more traditional manufacturing uses in the
districts. Compatibility with existing and surrounding land uses is also an aspect of the
Comprehensive Plan goals for these areas.
While the Comp Plan does not break office uses down into separate classes as the zoning
ordinance does, the introduction of more “retail-friendly” uses (such as showrooms) indicates a
potential for business uses that are welcoming to customer traffic.
For additional guidance, the following community ordinances were reviewed for context as the
City considers this proposed amendment.
Roseville. Roseville permits all categories of office uses, including clinic-based office uses, in its
two “lightest” industrial districts, which it labels “Employment Districts”. In its “Industrial
District”, which is a heavy-industrial area of significant warehouse spaces, clinic-office uses are
not allowed.
New Brighton. The New Brighton zoning ordinance allows all commercial district uses
(including medical uses) in its Industrial district, with only limited exceptions.
Columbia Heights. This code is structured similar to St. Anthony’s, in that Clinic uses and other
“Office” uses are established as separate use categories. Both are allowed in the commercial
zoning districts, whereas only the “Office” use category is allowed in the industrial districts.
Staff believes that the City’s trend toward more commercial-orientation in the Industrial areas,
such as the introduction of Office-Showroom, as well as certain types of brewer-taproom uses,
and the dominance of general office uses in the L-I district areas, supports the amendment.
October 15, 2024
Page 3
While the surrounding community ordinances are mixed in this regard, the introduction of
these uses enlarges the marketplace for commercial tenants for building owners, without
significant drawbacks to the function of these land uses. As observed in the Roseville example,
distinction between the type of industrial district can lead to the compatibility of clinic-style
land uses in light industrial areas. The heavy industrial district would raise concerns, but St.
Anthony’s industrial area is dominated by lighter uses.
SUMMARY AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the amendment. While there can be concern with mixing
commercial and industrial uses, those concerns largely lie in heavy industrial areas. St.
Anthony’s district is dominated by lighter industrial activities, only small amounts of
warehousing, and other office uses that are already present. As such, staff finds that the
proposed amendment can be viewed as allowing an additional compatible use into the L-I
District.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A:Draft Ordinance
ORDINANCE 2024-06
1
CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
HENNEPIN AND RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. ANTHONY CITY CODE,
BY AMENDING SECTION 154.141 RELATING TO
PERMITTED USES IN THE L-I, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. ANTHONY HEREBY ORDAINS:
Section 1.Section §154.141is hereby amended to add the following:
154.141(F) Medical, dental, veterinary, and related clinics, in which customers receive such
services in person, and which consist of offices, exam rooms, laboratory and
similar services, and related activities.
Section 2.The City Clerk is hereby directed to make the changes required by this Ordinance
as part of the Official St. Anthony City Code, Title XV, Zoning Ordinance, and to
renumber the tables and chapters accordingly as necessary to provide the intended
effect of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is further directed to make necessary
corrections to any internal citations that result from said renumbering process,
provided that such changes retain the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance
as has been adopted.
Section 3.This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage
and publication. This ordinance may be published by summary publication,
per a duly adopted resolution of the City Council. The ordinance in its entirety
and any related map shall be posted on the City website after publication. Copies
of the complete Ordinance and map are available online and at St. Anthony
City Hall for examination upon request.
ADOPTED BY the St. Anthony City Council this ____ day of ______, 2024.
__________________________________
Wendy Webster, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Jennifer Doyle, City Clerk
ORDINANCE 2024-06
2
AYES:
NAYS:
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING
October 15, 2024, 7:00 p.m.
City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road, St. Anthony, MN 55418
Notice is hereby given that the City of Saint Anthony Village Planning Commission will hold a public
hearing to solicit public response to a proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance, City Code Section
154.141. The proposed amendment would add offices for medical clinics and related treatment as a
permitted use in the L-I, Light Industrial District, and other related language necessary to effectuate the
proposed change.
The City Council is expected to consider the Planning Commission’s recommendation of the proposed
PUD amendment at their regular meeting on November 12, 2024, pending Commission action.
The Planning Commission agenda and packet item relating to this application will be made available
prior to the meeting online at www.savmn.com.
Ways to Comment:
In Person
The public is welcome to attend in person at the City of Saint Anthony Community Center, 3301 Silver
Lake Road, in the Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m.
Written
Written comments may be taken at the St. Anthony Village City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road, St. Anthony
Village, Minnesota 55418 until the date of the public hearing.
Comments can also be conveyed via email, to planner@savmn.com until the date of the public hearing.
Questions?
Questions may be directed to the City Planner at 612-409-6503.
The Planning Commission will make a recommendation regarding the proposed request to the City
Council for consideration as a subsequent meeting date at City Hall.
Steve Grittman
City Planner