[1:15] Chair Kutes: Good evening. I call the September 18th, 2024 Apple Valley Planning Commission meeting to order. The first item of business is the approval of the agenda. Any changes from staff? [1:27] Alex Sharp: Madam chair, members of commission, we have no changes for you at this time. [1:31] Chair Kutes: Thank you. Any changes from the Commissioners? Can I have a move for approval? [1:42] Commissioner Scanland: Move. [1:43] Commissioner Sandal: Second. [1:44] Chair Kutes: Um, uh, moved by commissioner scanland and second by commissioner sandal. Any questions or comments? If not, signify by saying I if in favor. [1:52] Commissioners: I. I. [1:53] Chair Kutes: Oppose, nay. Motion carries. The next item of business is the approval of the consent agenda. The consent agenda items are considered routine and will be enacted with a single motion without discussion unless a commissioner or a citizen requests to have any item separately considered. It will then be moved to the land use action items for consideration. Can I get a motion of approval? [2:15] Commissioner Scanland: So moved. [2:16] Commissioner Sandal: Second. [2:17] Chair Kutes: Motion made by commissioner scanland and seconded by commissioner sandal. Any comments? If not, all those in favor say I. [2:25] Commissioners: I. I. [2:26] Chair Kutes: Oppose, nay. Motion carried. That brings us to tonight. We have one public hearing. We will now open the public hearing for agenda item four a on zoning ordinance amendments on cannabis business ordinance. The Affidavit of publication for the notice of public hearing is available for inspection in the planning department. Everyone wishing to speak at this public hearing should be sure to fill out the attendance roster. Please include your name and addresses so that the accurate records can be maintained. We will begin the procedure with a brief presentation by City staff followed by a presentation by the petitioner of the hearing. Upon the conclusion of the presentation, City staff will be asked to comment on the proposal's conformance with pertinent regulations and policies. After that, comments will be taken from the general public. Mr. Alex Sharp. [3:28] Alex Sharp: Thank you chair and members of the commission. As stated by the chair, we are not looking for Action this evening. This is a standard practice when we're dealing with larger ordinance amendments such as this one or ones that where we be seeking some additional public comment or anticipate the public comment could be coming in. So the only actions we are looking for this evening are for opening the public hearing, taking public comment, and closing the public hearing. I'm going to start tonight with kind of a brief presentation on on some of the history, some of the facts of the items that we've gone through, what the city can regulate, our tentative schedule, the initial policy direction from Council, and then we'll move to the kind of final where are we looking for planning commission's direction as we move and questions as we move into per perhaps amending the ordinance based upon comments received. The Planning Commission has received much of this background, uh, you should be familiar with it from not only this packet but the packet previously that we were trying to provide some of that background. I'm going to go through relatively quickly but if there is a point that you'd like me to pause on please feel free to interrupt and let me know. Uh, I also want to go through the some of this just for the public and for background and, uh, for the public record purposes so there will be a little bit of detail to it just because of that public record piece. So to start with, uh, the Cannabis ordinance is being initially drafted because in 2023 the state of Minnesota legalized the possession, use, and manufacturing, possession, use, manufacturing and sale of certain cannabis products. The city in turn adopted interim ordinances or a moratorium until January 1, 2025. These interim ordinances effectively ban the retail sale of or the manufacturing production, uh, other uses from the city of Apple Valley until the office of offic office of candidates management could be developed and the city could draft a ordinance for adoption. That's where we are right now. In June 2024 the office of candidates management was officially created or went through with their initial draft of a guide for local cities. This was attached to your last packet. They've actually updated it briefly since the draft that you previously had so we're now on version four since June. That being said, the, uh, changes are not pertinent as much to our draft ordinance. They more have to do with some of the licensing side of things. So the ordinance is being split into two different sides: one, the zoning ordinance which the Planning Commission reviews, and then there's going to be a registration and Licensing side. The licensing will be done through the state of Minnesota, registration will be done through the local city. You will see the license, I'm sorry, registration will be done through the local city. You will see the registration portion of the ordinance coming to city council concurrently with the land use sections, but the Planning Commission at this time is only reviewing the draft land use sections of the ordinance which is a standard practice when we're bringing forward an ordinance like this. On August 28th, on August 8th 2024, apologies, staff brought forward certain policy questions to our city council. The primary purpose for this was to help guide staff and the Planning Commission in some of those overarching policy items that could help craft this ordinance so that we didn't go down a perhaps incorrect direction. We want to make sure that when we're crafting this do this type time frame that we are getting it as accurate as we are able to the first time, and then we also want to make sure that we've met the expectations when we do get before Council so that we do have something in place for that January 2025 time frame. The three policy questions essentially were: should the number of cannabis retailers be capped, if so how should those licenses be determined; should the number of retail cannabis cannabis businesses be capped, if so how many; uh, how should those license, I'm sorry that's the same question I believe changed that earlier today and didn't catch it; uh, which zoning districts should be considered for each type of use; and then the third one would be buffers between the different uses. Briefly I'm going to go over some of the high-level facts. What the city's regulations can and cannot hit, um, or what where we can regulate and where we can. The essential piece of this is we can only regulate the time, place, and matter, and so that is a very, uh, stringent set of regulations that also helps guide us into those very specific items that we were asking Council. So the city is not able to regulate the possession of cannabis products, the sale of whether the sale of cannabis products can occur within the community or the establishment essentially of those businesses within the community. So we have to allow that. What we are able to do is place a number on the number of retail sales. So again I do want to emphasize the difference between that and I've got it later in the presentation as well. The cap would only apply to a retail sale, not to manufacturing of a product or to the production of a product, similar type of uses where a industrial use would be done. The city clerk has been doing a really good job of analogizing this to breweries. We essentially could limit where alcohol sales could occur but we can't limit the fact that they could produce it. One other key item of note is that the retail sale of the hemp based product, those that have been legal for a significantly longer period of time, is not something the city is able to regulate. Those have been legal for 2 years, um, the city the city may only regulate with those where they may be displayed within a store and that is going to occur more through that registration portion if it's going to occur than it would through the zoning side. Zoning typically does not dictate where within a store a product may be displayed or sold. Uh, that third point is that time, place, and manner, um, that's essentially the zoning, uh, side of which zones do we want to have the buffers between sensitive uses and do we want to have the buffers between each of between other retail sales, um, so the time would be hours of operation, that'll be done through that, uh, registration portion. The place is the zoning and the manner is kind of in that zoning as well. I'm not going to linger on this too long. Uh, the key item for the Planning Commission here is that if everything proceedes as planned, we would bring this back before the Planning Commission on October 16th, 2024. That's when we would be seeking that draft recommendation. Uh, we would make amendments prior to that based upon comments heard this evening but we are looking to try to keep that on a pretty tight schedule as you see I've only got one back update to get this on and be published because one of the other items that needs to occur for an ordinance to be active on January 1, 2025, that needs to be published so we do need that additional time frame that would be offered by the December 12th agenda that is not offered by that later meeting in December. So going into greater detail on the policy Direction and really where I'm going to stick to here so that, uh, we can move things along for your question is what the council's direction was. The city is able to limit the total number of retail licenses within the city. It's at a cap of 1 for 12,500 residents and the city council provided staff and the City attorney with the policy direction that yes we should limit the total number at least for now, we can evaluate whether that needs to go up in the future. This allows us to get a handle on an industry, get used to where that what that looks like and we should limit it to the minimum number that we must allow which is five at this time. I do have one note on here that may be of interest to the Planning Commission, um, even if we were to hit our 20 240 comp plan Max population, if we were to stay at that minimum that would only be a total of six licenses at that one for 12,500. Whether we decided to ever go over that would be at the discretion of the local jurisdiction or us as the city of Apple Valley. The next piece is the buffers between sensitive uses. We really wanted to ask Council this to see if there was going to be a yes with some sensitive uses, no with others. So some of the questions like uses that move around a little more like daycares: should we have those buffers more than we should say from a school or public park? City council at this point has directed us to try to find buffers between or to add the buffers between all of those uses at their maximum allowed by state statute. They're listed up there on the screen but they're basically a thousand foot from schools and 500 for all the others. The city also has the ability though there is not the direction on what the buffer should be between retail sale locations. City council during their discussions felt that an, uh, the Planning Commission and staff should evaluate a 500 to a thousand foot buffer because these were the buffers already provided by the state legislator so they were they had some precedent to them. Um, I've listed a couple of considerations on the, uh, slide here but I would welcome others that the Planning Commission may have. I've included a little bit more detail in the report but essentially what would be the difference between a 500,000 foot buffer? Should we be doing a buffer between the retail uses? What would those benefits or negatives be? An example that staff could come up with is does it potentially prevent any kind of clustering that would be problematic? Um, and then just the basic fact that Apple Valley does not have buffers between other types of businesses right now. So this would be a a new thing for us and it does require a pretty constant upkeep of where are they, but we already have to upkeep that map with the other buffers. With that I'm going to go a little bit more time into this map just to explain how to read it. You had it in a large format in your packet. For the members of the public, I suggest viewing it online, it's going to be difficult on a screen such as this. But the way to read this map is not that these are the only buffers that are there, but that the only buffers that were retained in the map for legibility are those that already intersected a commercial retail location. So as an example, from our golf course in the upper northeast side of the community, there would normally be a buffer on that, that's Park. There's no commercial within 500 ft of that, so to clean up the map and make it more legible to show you where those buffers actually lie around those commercial locations, we've removed those that just didn't have that intersection. You notice there's some loan Parcels over here on the east side of the community and on the far north that weren't touched by those buffers. That's why those Parcels still remain, but you'll also notice that there isn't a lot of commercial around them so they're a good example of where those buffers would or would not be displayed should they be, uh, applicable to the map. Additionally, questions been asked about uses within other communities, uh, so say if there's a daycare, park, things of that nature and surrounding communities. I've contacted the league of Minnesota cities on that very question and they advise, uh, keeping your buffers within your community rather than from an adjacent Community as you don't know what their zoning ordinance may be. So we've done that rather than include licensed locations for say daycare within Rosemount or Lakeville. I do want to pause if the Planning Commission has any questions on the map, uh, that way we don't have to come back to it, but there will be a little bit to follow as well. I also think that it would be a good time to have some initial discussion potentially on that 500 to a thousand foot buffer. Uh, one item was note as you begin that discussion, staff did find, uh, that no matter whether the commission and Council decided to place a 500,000 foot buffer we would not be in violation of the state legislature by overly limiting. Uh, we were able to place a number of locations within the community sampling different sites to ensure that we were able to hit that minimum of five retail locations no matter, uh, whether you did a 500 or thousand foot buffer. That's important because we cannot be more stringent than the state statute. Any questions? [16:42] Chair Kutes: Commissioner Hass. [16:43] Commissioner Hass: Um, couple questions here. Um, is the Office of Management, is it already established? Are there people in place and to deal with the ordinances once once they're set up? [17:03] Alex Sharp: Chair Kutes, commissioner Hass, uh, the Office of Cannabis Management is in place. It's not fully staffed and they would not be en enacting the local ordinances, uh, by all communities. That's part of the registration process. So I'll go high level how the process would work. If somebody was trying to apply for a license, they apply to the office of Canabis management. They've already done so for preliminary applications. Let's just say for example they are provided with a preliminary license. Now they can go out and start soliciting locations. Now they find a location they might be interested in, they check with their local zoning Authority about what might be needed and then they apply for an official license at that location with the office of cannabis management. The office of cannabis management reaches out to the city and requires that we reply within 30 days to an application stating whether it does in fact meet our zoning ordinances. If if we don't reply or if we reply that yes they do, they can operate within that location. Now that's just for the retail side of it. That is not for a another license type like say manufacturing of a product, they do not have those same buffer requirements. Does that answer the question a little more? [18:13] Commissioner Hass: It does, very detailed. um, follow-up question on that is if they put in for a license are they restricted to going within the commercial area, the red area that you've got on the map here if we're looking for retail space again? [18:32] Alex Sharp: Chair, commissioner Hass, the answer to that is somewhat nuanced. Yes, but there are two types, uh, meso business and micro business that can operate within industrial zones and have a retail component. Again think of that Brewery analogy with the tap room or abdala with their chocolates. They are still regulated as they are in the draft ordinance by having a percentage of their space can only retail, so they must be primarily manufacturing, not a retail use, but they would be able to have a retail component and their retail side of things would still be subject to all of the buffers noted on this and to the total Max licenses. [19:07] Commissioner Hass: Okay, thank you. [19:14] Chair Kutes: Commissioner Mahwald. [19:15] Commissioner Mahwald: Madam chair, thanks Alex. These might be more rhetorical questions but I'm just I've got some other things that'll come up I think in related to some of the other things in in the report. Um, why are there buffers? Are there are there particular risks that are, uh, or concerns or problems or issues that are attempted to be mitigated by buffers? [19:43] Alex Sharp: Chair, commissioner, this is going to be a somewhat speculative answer. I would assume that the legislature put the ability for buffers within the statue to try to deter them from the sale of those products from occurring around locations that could be deemed sensitive: daycares, uh, treatment houses, schools, etc. I believe that they're going off of some very old work done in tobacco law where tobacco stores specifically wanted to locate around some more sensitive uses to familiarize themselves with that clientele. Um, it's unclear whether that translates as this is a brand new venture so I couldn't say the complete intent of the Minnesota state legislature. There's a few of them, so doing our best to put it together, but the reason why the city of Apple Valley has enacted it, uh, the council was relatively clear that for the moment the statute allows it, uh, and we would be concerned about those products ending up in in those locations and so they directed that we begin with those buffers to start with at the very least. [21:07] Commissioner Mahwald: And certainly though the buffers are basically the only restrictions that a municipality can have. I mean this is this is basically a mandated... the state of Minnesota is saying you have to have retail cannabis businesses with the restriction on the number and also with these the buffers that are... these are really the buffers that are in in the statute. So the state of Minnesota, the governor and the legislature have said cities like Apple Valley you need this, you have to have this business, you don't have the discretion to decide not to have this business. [21:49] Alex Sharp: To clarify chair, commissioner, I don't... the state legislature was actually quite clear that they were not saying that we have to have this business. They are they were stating very clearly we cannot prohibit the use and sale of this business. So we don't have to have a business in Apple Valley. There is one progressional district that nobody can deny and then based upon populations and all of that that's split up also amongst, uh, cities and populations. It may be that the demand is not present for Rosemount to have seven and or eight and Burnsville to have six and Egan to have nine and Apple Valley to have five of these. They aren't saying we must have a minimum of five, they're saying that we can't prohibit anything more than that essentially was where that had come down. [22:45] Commissioner Mahwald: Okay and again the these may be just rhetorical questions, but all are there similar, um, buffers for... you've mentioned tobacco. Are are does Apple Valley have buffers in place for retailed tobacco establishments? [22:58] Alex Sharp: Chair, uh, commissioner, I I'm sorry that's no, we do not have that. I also want to respect the rhetorical side so... [23:07] Commissioner Mahwald: Sure sure and I'm and I'm not... all I'm saying is I'm not trying to play gotcha I'm just trying to get some ideas out there, some thoughts out there. For example one of the items that came up during Council was we have liquor stores across the street or kitty corner from middle schools and it's Municipal liquor. So that was a discussion point amongst Council on whether we should have the buffers. Ultimately the policy direction was yes we should still have them. No we don't have them for other uses. Adult uses is the only buffer that we have built into the ordinance right now that I'm aware of. [23:55] Commissioner Mahwald: Okay, thank you. [24:02] Chair Kutes: I have a question before I go on here. There's 13 different licenses for this. How are you going to determine which I I mean you wouldn't want all one license coming in wouldn't you want a variety of them? [24:09] Alex Sharp: Chair Kutes, uh, thankfully the city doesn't need to determine that's we're not the one issuing the license. Uh, there is a cap on several different types of licenses: uh, micro business, meso businesses, retail businesses, I think there's one more. Uh, I haven't focused as much on where the state and OCM must do their licensing, I've focused a lot more on where the city has been. We we would register the business. Uh, we are in charge of local enforcement of making sure that they are compliant with our registration, but issuing that license is up to the office of cannabis management, not this city of Apple Valley. [24:46] Chair Kutes: Um, commissioner scanland. [24:47] Commissioner Scanland: Madam chair, Alex, um, it's pretty foc... if I'm interpretating the the map correctly, it's pretty focused on the the area where possibly location of these five locations can be and, um, whether how do I want to say that, um, seemed like it would be quite condensed to have if there was actually five businesses, uh, in place that that they'd all be fairly close to each other, uh, based on this because that's they're really kind of Central Village orientated locations. [25:34] Alex Sharp: My chair Kutes, um, I wouldn't say they're Central Village. Central Village is a much smaller District. They're they're in our... the open areas are in the main commercial core okay of Apple Valley, but all of the red that you see on the screen that's all of the commercial allowed in Apple Valley in the entire community. So this map displays anywhere that we have any allowed retail use with the exception of gas stations because they are not considered a full ret retail use they're a motor fuel station by our code. Um, they have a retail sale component but they are generally considered separate. They're allowed within our retail business but there are some other zones that allow the use of a gas station outside of it. Otherwise you were looking at the extent of anywhere a retail sale can occur within the city of Apple Valley on this map. So if you see a colored area, whether that be the purple, the gray for industrial or the red for the commercial, that's anywhere that any retail can occur. So that's where all of your mattress stores are, that's where all of your coffee shops are, that's where all of all anywhere that you're going to be doing any kind of retail sales. The reason why the industrial and mixed business campus are on the map is because of that retail component such as the abdala, so they are not your general retail sale area, um, they're an ancillary retail too in manufacturer but the that is the extent in the CommunityWide area. Our retail is not a huge area but we're a pretty large force within the market right. [27:10] Commissioner Scanland: So for an example if we look down in the, um, northeast corner of the, um, retail district there, um, neighboring Cobblestone that that's an example based on the buffers that would be a area that would be an option open to a business. [27:32] Alex Sharp: Chair Kutes, commissioner scanlan, that is correct, yep. Those those smaller areas you'll notice one straight north of there as well along Pilot Knob, yep, tend to get, uh, knocked out by single nodes or a couple of nodes that locate closely together whereas our main retail core which is our downtown doesn't have that same issue. The periphery tends to, uh, have impacts with that but the core in itself doesn't as much because of the fact that it's our retail core. So you aren't as much around the parks or the... the one piece that actually sets them off the most if you look at the map enough is going to be your daycares because they're allowed there. [28:28] Commissioner Scanland: Thank you. [28:34] Chair Kutes: Commissioner Pruitt. [28:35] Commissioner Pruitt: Yeah thank you, uh, chair Kutes. Alex just a quick question. The higher potency, uh, retail cannabis, um, locations are capped at five and I was just curious if that includes, uh, medical cannabis retailers. That's included in that cap of the currently established cap of five? [28:56] Alex Sharp: Chair Kutes, commissioner Pruitt, yes that does include the medical cannabis. [28:59] Commissioner Pruitt: Okay. [29:01] Chair Kutes: Commissioner Mahwald. [29:02] Commissioner Mahwald: Madam chair, Alex, just, um, where where can now that it's been legalized, I I wish I knew this, um, but where where can cannabis products be consumed, um, now? Are there any can can they can they be smoked or ingested, um, pretty much anywhere now or are there restrictions on that? [29:16] Alex Sharp: I will bring our City attorney in. [29:18] Sharon Hills (City Attorney): Madam chair, currently under the state law a person can consume in their private residence period. Um, and we have an Apple Valley an ordinance that specifically prohibits any smoking... this is cannabis we're talking cannabis, not, um, the lower hemp lower potency hemp beverages, edibles, that thing. Um, and we have an ordinance in place that was in place in 20... when the moratorium went in so 2023 that prohibits, um, consuming cannabis in any public city public property. [30:08] Commissioner Mahwald: Okay and so that's similar to alcoholic beverages. Un unless you're in a licensed location you can't just st stand on the the public sidewalk and and and and drink? Or can you? I guess that's a... [30:16] Sharon Hills: Well I don't think that's true. Okay there's I don't think there's a law prohibiting open consumption of alcohol. You cannot drive with an open beer, sure, you know, but... okay and in our in our Park regulations and ordinance prohibits allows beer but it prohibits Spirits. Correct. [30:37] Commissioner Mahwald: Okay, thank you. [30:38] Chair Kutes: Commissioner Sandal. [30:39] Commissioner Sandal: Madam chair, Alex I apologize because I think you've probably answered this question a couple times possibly. Um, will is will there able to be retail business in the mixed business campus then or no? [30:57] Alex Sharp: Chair Kutes, uh, commissioner sandal, that's possible. Uh, industrial uses were intended as part of the mixed business campus. Mixed business campus may also include some commercial uses depending upon where the individual zones were to come out or things of that nature. We are still drafting that ordinance so it's difficult to say that with a 100% certainty however where it can be said with a little bit more certainty is if we had an industrial user such as a large manufacturer of a cannabis product they, uh, I shouldn't say the large the meso business of cannabis product product could potentially have that or would be allowed to have that retail sale so long as they were not subject to a buffer as well. [31:44] Commissioner Sandal: So I think this is where my confusion is because I maybe I'm like wrong about where things are here but I like a Scheels or something is selling there right like so I'm just I'm just curious about what the difference is. [31:54] Alex Sharp: So Scheels is not within the mixed business campus anymore. They went straight zoning, uh, when they were luns by Le, um, all of that so they were actually pulled out of that a couple of years ago. They were initially part of it, they are part of the original sand and gravel area, but as the mixed business campus had not yet been completed, uh, that zoning ordinance had not been completed they went with standard zoning districts so they're just a a zoning District down in this area here in this yellow buffer. I'm looking too far north I'm sorry that was my fault sorry. [32:30] Commissioner Sandal: Thank you. [32:32] Chair Kutes: Commissioner scanland. [32:33] Commissioner Scanland: You were asking, um, um Alex concerning locations retail locations and then having buffers around them and with the idea that we would, um, have a minimum of five locations open or available within Apple Valley based on the, um, the state. So if we put buffers around these with the exception of, um, the you know the west side and the Far East we might have difficulty finding five locations for people to have retail space. [33:04] Alex Sharp: Chair Kutes, commissioner scanlan, I'm glad you asked. We have a very talented GIS team here and he and I sat together and we didn't want to create a map on every potential spot MH as we don't know if those property owners are interested in this, we don't want to get into property rights, we wanted to Simply make sure that the city if we enacted either a 500 or thousand foot foot buffer would not be in violation of the state statute essentially effectively prohibiting them by placing this buffer in place. What we were able to find is, uh, that with a 500 foot buffer we could at least fit 19 different sites with a thousand foot buffer we could fit at least 13 different sites. Now could they get more prohibitive as the zoning districts for mixed business campus are enacted? Yes and it's something that would have to be considered as we move forward, but barring the mixed business campus which is where a couple of them had to be, we have some outlying sites within the community that offer us being able to immediately place them in one, two and three and so then we really only needed to find a couple more. If you're looking at the map you can see kind of the general areas that I'm talking about and that allowed us to feel some confidence that we weren't going to be in violation of that state statute. [34:25] Commissioner Scanland: Yeah that helps a lot so thank you for that added clarification. [34:30] Chair Kutes: Thank you. Commissioner sandal. [34:32] Commissioner Sandal: Madam chair Alex, um, hopefully this is a better question. Um, what happens if a, um, preschool wants to move in next door to a retail business for cannabis? [34:44] Alex Sharp: Chair, commissioner, I think I'm actually going to allow our City attorney to Aline on that one because that's been... I believe we're at legal non-conforming but that's not standing out right now so... [35:05] Sharon Hills: Madam chair, it's no, it would not be legal nonconformity has nothing to do with it. So if there is a existing cannabis retail business, they're registered and a pre preschool decides to come in next door then that is the preschool's decision. [35:18] Commissioner Sandal: Okay, thank you, good. [35:21] Chair Kutes: Okay, I think we're good to go. [35:22] Alex Sharp: Okay, uh, the point that staff is still looking for some direction on not necessarily from here, uh, but enough to be able to draft the ordinance. You'll notice in the draft ordinance we do have a 500 or 1,000 foot buffer so during your discussion period if not while I'm here, uh, please be sure to discuss that 500 or a thousand feet, uh, as we would need that to bring that forward for you the next meeting. The third and final question is which zoning districts should be permitted. You've seen a draft land use table and then you saw a slightly amended draft land use table and this happened in large part due to discussions with our City attorney. We were attempting to bring forward a conditional use permit for a lot of the manufacturing type uses, production and all of that. I'll go to the table here and specifically in the business park i1 I2 zones, we had placed a lot of conditional use permits in your original piece. The reason for that, uh, was to try to make sure that we could mitigate things such as smell or screening of trucks and upon discussion with the city we look at it and the state is requiring a lot of the regulations regarding smell and impacts to neighboring properties with that. Screening of trucks and other, um, machinery is done through our exterior storage cups so we already have in place a lot of the concerns for, uh, that we were seeking to address out of that. It sets us up where we probably needed to put them down as a permitted use so that we can ensure that we're not overstepping with that. Additionally would have needed to come up with performance standards with a conditional use permit that we don't with a permitted use. So one of the other key concerns, uh, that I'm sure Sharon is wanting me to mention is that if we put them down as a conditional use you have to remember that a conditional use is a generally permitted use. The city has to say you are in violation of a specific performance standard or we can't deny it. So we'd be bringing forward a public hearing with the public around a location for a type of business that the city effectively couldn't say no to because if they met the standards of the state and we wanted to be able to cite that back to the state saying they've mandated the use we must permit, we can't say no to this and that was a position that we didn't want to put the Planning Commission or city council to in and so that's the major change from this. The only other change that I want to note is that with the PDR we have that established on this table that you didn't see in your initial draft. Upon refinement it was our way of being able to make it for all of our plan developments which are the white sections on the zoning map so that where we allow those retail sales, such as the one that commissioner scanland noted and that Southeast portion of town, Target, all of that, that's a plan development. The reason why it was red on the map was because it's guided for commercial but we added that section of the table to make it very clear that the retail sale is permitted anywhere where any other General retail sale product is permitted. With that if there are concerns about the table we would love to hear about them so that we can potentially change that. Um, I can linger with that or you can ask any questions on it. [38:43] Chair Kutes: Commissioner Mahwald. [38:44] Commissioner Mahwald: Uh, just a a question with respect to permitted use and conditional use, um, would obviously in Apple Valley the liquor stores are owned and operated by the city. Are are they subject to a conditional use permit for that operation? [38:58] Alex Sharp: I believe off-sale liquor is subject to a conditional use permit. Okay. Uh, in some zones not all. Okay. Bars, um, or restaurants selling alcoholic bares are they typically only with outdoor patios? Okay, that's the only requirement generally. There are there's some PDs that require it, uh, simply due to adjacent uses. [39:23] Commissioner Mahwald: Um, just just again my own thought on it. I I know that the state has basically said a city cannot say no to this and that would make a permitted use consistent with that directive or mandate if you will. Um, I am wondering if it would make some sense to stick with a conditional use permit, um, as this initiative is enacted and goes forward. Um, I guess I I have to put my my my faith and trust in the governor and the legislature that they took into account all potential adverse consequences, all potential benefits of this new directive. But if there are issues and concerns that get raised later on about potential adverse consequences, unintended consequences, I'm wondering if making the the the the permit or the license or whatever subject to a conditional use permit, the city would therefore have some protections, um, down the road should there be findings, lessons learned, um, in Minnesota or elsewhere that would allow for, um, other restrictions similar to those that are imposed, uh, with regard to the sale of alcoholic beverages at a liquor store, if that makes it any sense. [41:00] Sharon Hills: Would you like me to? Yes, I thought that's what you were saying Madam chair. Um, to answer your question briefly, so the distinction between a permitted use and again now we're talking just about zoning right now: where can these businesses go? Where can the 11 or 12 different businesses that are each licensed separately by the state, where are they allowed, right? So for today we're only talking about zoning. Where? So is it going to be a permitted use or conditional use permit or conditional use? If it is if we say it's a conditional use requiring a conditional use permit then our code must set forth conditions of that use. If we don't have any conditions in our code saying these are the conditions that you must meet before you're permitted, then the city must permit it. If we did have a whole list of conditions... um trying to b I'm not going to try to think of an example but if if it's a conditional use in it in our code list all the conditions that must be me to be permitted. If if a business meets all the conditions, City must issue the permit. So we the city really doesn't have a lot of wiggle room or authority to say no if all those conditions are met by a business that is that needs a conditional use similar to, you know, probably a good example would be your outdoor dining at a, um, restaurant with an onsale liquor license. If they meet all the conditions of the proposed outdoor dining area, they get that conditional use permit. Now whether the state, you know, kind of learns lessons as they go through, those are regulatory issues not zoning, you know, so and then the state is is doing all the regulation. I mean the state is telling these, you know, setting regulations what they can... if if it's a dispensary, that's why I'm going to use is a retail s, you know, it's a dispensary they can only you cannot go into a gas station or a convenience store. It cannabis is not going to be there because the state is very clear if it's a cannabis retailer it is they can only sell certain things just like a liquor store can only sell certain things. They can't sell milk and eggs and you know so so you're not going to be worrying about as of right now retail sales in convenience stores or in the grocery store or in the, you know, wherever else. [44:11] Commissioner Mahwald: Okay, thank you. That helps or answers your question anecdotally. [44:16] Alex Sharp: Thank you. Um, where we have liquor stores as a conditional use within our code we have no performance standards. It's likely a hold over from quite some time ago. I don't want to say when that was exactly adopted because I didn't research that enough for the meeting. I know that it has been there for a significant period of time and that there it's listed as a conditional use within that zone without any standards beneath it. So we would be obligated to Grant ourselves the liquor license to go in a liquor store for example. As to what one would be it would be 500 ft from a school so we're kind of doing that through the buffering already on the Cannabis side. [45:01] Chair Kutes: Commissioner scanlin. [45:02] Commissioner Scanland: Madam chair, Alex, how many Municipal liquor stores does Apple Valley have? [45:11] Alex Sharp: Three officially. We always joke four for the one up at the golf course. [45:19] Commissioner Scanland: Okay and we have an option or not an option but a minimum for the set here in Apple Valley that we need to look at for the cap of five. And then based on what you were just discussing in my previous question, the number of retail sites that you probably have kind of scoped out initially here too that cover that number, that, um, it seems like to me based on what we've been talking about th so far, the thousand or, um, thousand square buffer would be appropriate especially with something new like this and, um, I question the need that there need to be closer to each other than that. [46:09] Alex Sharp: Understood, thank you. [46:12] Chair Kutes: Commissioner Hass. [46:13] Commissioner Hass: Madam chair, Alex, uh, just for clarification I'll use, uh, I guess I could use Apple Valley high school as an example. Quite a bit of property there. It buts up on the North side to 140th Street. That's the barrier that we're talking about 1,000 ft from that or not from the building that you're you're talking about right? [46:39] Alex Sharp: Chair Kutes, commissioner Hass, the reason why I decided to go back to this is yes thousand feet from schools is from the property line. There was the 500 foot from an attraction within a park that is regularly used by minors including a playground or Athletic Field. That was straight out of the state statute that required the city and we did evaluate this to place arbitrary squares around play apparatus, uh, baseball diamonds, things of that nature. We did go through that exercise and then the office of Canabis management released a released their initial draft of that guide for cities that you have and if you look in there I think at about page six on the very bottom it tells us that the cities should use our buffers where we have from any other type of use so and we should remain consistent with our existing zoning code. We have buffers essentially from two different types of uses: one is the adult uses that I already mentioned and the second you've seen before and granted variances for for things such as Popeye's, um, it's not a true buffer but it essentially says that retail, uh, class two restaurants fast food need to be a certain distance away from a residential use and we've always gone property line to property line. And so with the advice published by the office of cannabis management, we have then gone back to the property line for all of those types of uses as that is what their advice was. There is going to continue to be discussion for some time about that attraction within a park, uh, provision that's in the statute. So I don't want to answer as clearly on that one for the moment. We are doing it property line to property line. If that needs to be amended based upon a court case or further guidance from the state then that could be amended, but that's the only one. The others are very clear from a property line. [48:43] Commissioner Hass: Thank you. [48:45] Chair Kutes: Okay so do you want us to go forward with... [48:47] Alex Sharp: If you're done with questions, uh, then the final item here would be take any public comments that are present this evening, discuss amongst yourselves and help provide some of that policy direction for staff so that we can bring back a ordinance to you at the ne um, sorry not your next meeting, 16th, thank you. I was going to say September 16th and that's not accurate. [48:59] Chair Kutes: So we don't have to answer that tonight is what you're saying? [49:03] Alex Sharp: We would like some level of policy Direction, um, so that we have we have 500,000 in your draft ordinance at that meeting. We will 100% need to know which one if you want something different than that or if you have comments on different zoning districts or anything along those lines that would be a substantial change. Any of that you are able to provide this evening is certainly helpful but but not required. We will need all that direction for sure when you take action. [49:38] Chair Kutes: Okay so with that, uh, we will take public comments. Please come to the podium to speak and address all comments and questions to the chair not... unless Becky's mother wants to come up do we have any other comments? [49:57] Sharon Hills: [Inaudible comment] [50:00] Alex Sharp: Excuse me thank you, my City attorney is awesome. Uh, one other item of note and I had it in the very last, uh, item with that question slide and then Breeze through it really fast. You do have a public comment on the table before you that is part of the public record. It is something that I highlighted and starred and then we went into deeper discussions so that was probably please do, uh, take note of that and staff does consider that to be a relatively minor comment and is the only public comment we've received today. [50:34] Chair Kutes: Okay but I can close the public hearing correct? So if there are no further comments I will close this public hearing. It is the policy of the Planning Commission not to act on an item on the same night as its public hearing. The Planning Commission will weigh out comments and information received tonight in its deliberation at future meetings. This item will continue to appear on future Planning Commission agendas until a recommendation on the petition can be forward to the city. Good bringing us to number five land use action items my paperwork here that is Mr. Tim Benetti and we are looking at at Orchard Place Apartments comprehensive plan Amendment. [51:30] Tim Benetti: Good evening Madam chair members of commission. Um, this is a carryover from our discussion on the 21st of August. Uh, this is not a public hearing. You conducted a public hearing at the last meeting and we are simply continuing the discussion on this item. Again reminder, this is a comprehensive plan amendment, much different than his Zone... a little bit related to it but not the same. Uh, this is, uh, a request from Trident Development Group to re-u a certain parcel of land at this point we're at 5.62 Acres from SE commercial to high-density residential. As again reminder, public hearing is conducted and closed at the August 21st meeting. Uh, this is for follow-up consideration of comments. Uh, we do have a number of comments as noted in your packet. I'm going to go through those very quickly and briefly and but I'm I just want to give give opportunity for you to react to those, comment on those or anybody from the audience if if they necessary. So we're asking you for a give final consideration from this amendment from c-commercial to high density. Just a reminder of the site located right next door, uh, to the area we were just referring to off of 157th in English: Texas Roadhouse, Punch Pizza, Luns and Berly, Scheels shoes and the recently approved shoe, uh, Le Schwab Tires. Again the ponding area off to the west side or to the left, uh, and, uh, you're starting to see the the beginning elements of the North Creek Greenway trail system as well. Again 5.62 Acres this is going to be segmented off that original out lot D or place second so this is going to be separated off and the remainder will will be left in, uh, for future development as well. Again cop coinin just shows the coloring right now as, uh, commercial proposed to HD with the brown. Also just for note the zoning, uh, is consistent with the current commercial as RB. So the site plan is, again this is for luster the purposes only usually this is just to show you what a proposed plan Amendment could, uh, entail or encourage or allow or permit if you want with future entitlement. Right now they're looking at just an apartment building, uh, a large scale apartment building parking, some site amenities, Trail systems which we'll get into very quickly. Again example only, just a example of what they produce they being Trident for a typical housing project. Again these are not being approved or recommended for tonight. Again the site plan and we just want to show that there's also a proposed outla B system that would connect a trail system over to this, uh, gathering space which I have a nice image of later on. At your last meeting we had some, uh, some key issues or discussion points: have conditions change that impact the land use? Is multifamily residential and appropriate use of the site? Will multiple family residents be impacted by the nearby commercial development including the auto car auto oriented uses such as the car wash the new Le Schwab Tire Store? How can conflicts be mitigated? So we start off with, uh, number one: will change the HD negatively impacted the commercial areas to the east or the North? And in the report we provide some examples where we have Park Cabella, EOS, Nella, Remington Cove. These are clear examples where we have High and the residential in or nearby retail commercial uses and through thoughtful design we can help mitigate those potential negative impacts. Uh, sometimes those retail businesses there's sort of a symbiotic relationship between the the high density residential and those retail uses because they feed on each other so to speak. Uh, they like the, uh, impacts of of high density with the multiple, uh, with multiple people and those those residential units to feed into that retail or that commercial element and overall multiple family housing and retail does coexist fairly peacefully and with minimal complaints received by the city. Again this is a very busy slide but bear with me. What is the vision for this area? How will a proposed compant amendment fit with the overall Vision? So the approved current Vision right now is commercial and that was established by your 2040 comp plan which was adopted back in July 2020. Some or most of you were probably part of that adoption. Areas can be changed due to unforeseen economic forces such as you know changes in the real estate market demand for certain uses, in this case is housing a demand? The compant is not absolute, it can be changed for the discretion of its leaders and input from your residents and business owners and that's where we're here tonight. Under our chapter five housing we do allow, uh, the Apple Valley can accommodate its forecast of housing growth through infill and redevelopment. This is redevelopment on... under minimum density assumptions, Apple Valley can accommodate nearly 40% of its forecast housing growth in Orchard Place which is this area that we're referring to and other designated sites. The land chapter is an essential tool for meeting these housing needs. The city has successfully used the Lage plan with related policies and controls to produce livable desirable neighborhoods, diversified the housing supply and create affordable housing units. As housing needs change these approaches can be adopted or adapted to meet certain Community objectives so you can look at this change as being somewhat of an extreme however the change to high density land use is not over overly consistent or in conflict with the general goals of the 2040 plan and this is what we try to encourage on our housing opportunities is is there conflict and other areas where it can support this land use such as this commercial area surrounding uses, medical uses, the future light Industrial. We don't see that being, uh, a concern at this point. Uh, what is the current vac vacancy rate for retail development right now? Uh, the overall retail Market has softened a bit in the last few years, uh, anecdotally primarily due to the high cost of of building new stuff or or, uh, or getting financing for those type of retail activities but it it's not dead so it's it's slowed down a bit but the comp plan notes that high density residential neighbors benefit from the proximity commercial goods and services. Uh, our cting jors have confirmed that that site this site subject site adequately served is served with utilities in streets. There should be no signific changes needed, uh, to serve that site. The revised master plan that was proposed by the, uh, Rockport, uh, Fisher families does show that the proposed development maintains the high quality and vibrancy that it was envisioned for that area. Similarly the rates of of at or below 5% vacancy for multifamily is considered healthy in Area Housing markets. A vacancy level below that in the case of Market is not adequately met. Recently we we got, uh, we are updated with a market advisor, uh, that, uh, excuse me market advisor, uh, report that shows what kind of apartment levels, rental rates, vacancy rates, uh, are being, uh, shown throughout the metro area right now. Our vacancy rate adding up Apple Valley as of March 2024 is just under 3%. So when I say 5% or less that means you've got a really healthy, uh, active housing market and that there could be a demand for more of this type of housing. Orchard Place is a prime location for for commercial, uh, maybe needs more time to order to develop. Staff agrees the Orchard Place is a prime location and the plan was established a number of years ago for Hardy Mix commercial industrial, medical and offices and you're starting to see that develop right now. Uh, a number of those commercial uses include Texas Roadhouse, The Orchard strip center, Mr. Car Wash, L Chase, I know all of you have seen this you've been to some of those ribbon cutting. It's starting, you know that that that that gravel pit is going to someway someday go away and a lot of that area remains undeveloped but there's plans for that area and those are not going away. We intend to keep up the high density areas where they need be and the commercial retail and the, uh, added industrial and, uh, other supportive uses. So the retail commercial development is area development in this area can be a bit cyclical and it's not easily predicted, but the need for housing does seem to be in high demand and continually sought after in superim settings such as Apple Valley. What are the development goals? The community contact Section of the comp notes housing affordability and retail trends are two forces that will impact Apple Valley's future that will need to be monitored. The national retail trends: the current national retail bubble requires monitoring and repositioning given the significant amount of retail space currently available in Apple Valley. Housing affordability: while Apple Valley is affordable, there's a general lack of affordable housing for low-income earners. Um, Apple Valley is still committed to meeting its share of regional affordable goals and keeping, uh, local access to well paying head of household jobs. Now just for the record, the project that's being proposed by Trident development will not be an affordable Workforce type of housing but that doesn't mean that that's still an opportunity to provide for for the needs of the community. Um, so we are looking also at the other comments were light pollution. We have strict standards on light pollution. We have typically a downcast cut off type standard for any of our light standards outside like the parking lots so we can control that. That one foot per candle is easily measurable today. Before it was in the old days when I was growing up as a planner you had to go up there and make a a judgment call, now we have light meters we can figure this out and we usually require a photometric plan that goes with every lighting plan, uh, site plan. So we have experts tell us will this meet those certain requirements and that's something that we look at and present to you as part of a future site plan view. Any impacts of schools? Uh, ISC 196 indicated they have no concerns with the proposed project so very quick simple response. Uh, we're we're presenting it as such. Uh, the property north of orchard place is designated HD like the subject site is. There concern that this proposed might compete with the other developments? We don't feel it will. It will... this is different that was more of a town home development on the other side. So that town home development meets a certain element or desire, this is another market that they're they're shooting for. A four-story building would be an ice store or replace the three store development. The appearance of the four-story building may spark some negative perceptions of a hulking tall structure however it's separated by the pond area and also sit, uh, situated next to retail elements. We don't think there will be any type of impacts to the nearby residential uses, uh, to the South. You'll note that there's a Quarry Point Park, hopefully I got that name right. So there should be no impacts to that as well and we do have examples of where four store buildings are constructed in some high, uh, impact areas and we don't have any issues with those. Sidewalks around the ponds will have more traffic. We hope so because that's why we built them. That's why we want we want people to use our Trails. Uh, we are currently you may have seen that we I think they just completed the, uh, uh, the placement of the bridge over the North Creek, uh, Greenway Trail over there just to the west of the site I think this week so there's some things happy things going on over there. We hope to have a ribbon cutting on that trail system very soon and that is an important feature to bring our our residents from Farmington all the way up to the Minnesota Zoo so we're very excited on that. So the use of the private sidewalks in this development is not expect to be impacted. Uh, number 11: concerns about increase in crime, more riff-raff on the trails. Um, you know when I heard that term I I respect the rights of people to to make comments, it's their right. Uh, I I sort of took umbrage and, uh, a little taken back by the by the term riff-raff. Uh, you know the only riff-raff I know on these trails are unnamed City attorneys that love to use these Trails very well. Uh, she not she they are a very happy person on the trail so... but no in all seriousness we don't see a lot of riff-raff, we don't see a lot of, uh, criminal activity or elements on these trails. Uh, they're enjoyed by all all people so I think that's sort of a misstatement on a part. I understand that there's a perception that you bring Trails they're going to bring strangers into into the neighborhood. Well everybody has a right to use those Trails, those are those are your neighbors mostly are you using those trails in your community or they're nearby and I think most people that use our trails are are pretty decent people so, uh, we're not going to we're going to let that comment just ignore that one. Uh, concerns about the number of apartment developments have been constructed in the last 15 years. Very true we have built a lot of apartments in in this area and, uh, in the community however that's where the demand is and our single family areas are pretty well filled up. We don't have a lot of areas to provide for the typical detached single family homes but when you're looking at the population we have 51% majority is found in single family, 30% in town homes and only 16% in multi family apartments condos 3% in manufactured housing. So this is a good mix and that's what you want to see in your housing your housing percentages. Concern that reguiding the site will result in lost loss of jobs. Uh, staff response: the subject development is guided in res for retail and retail jobs tend to not meet the criteria for full-time head of household jobs. Some do some might not, but, uh, jobs will be created as a result of this development for ongoing management, leasing, and maintenance and the applicant did respond that there will be a full-time Community manager, leasing marketing manager, maintenance, part-time management. So there is a limited number of jobs being created with this with this use. So not all is loss on the apartments. Why aren't Apartments plan in another location north of the retail area with less traffic? The Planning Commission must respond to the application, it cannot direct a project to a different location, meaning you can't tell a developer that's before you, "Hey wouldn't you be easier or better over there or a little more appropriate?" We can't do that. This is where they would like to be and we have to react to where you know what they're presenting to you and based on past development we find apartment projects great will benefit benefit from proximity the rec trails, proximity Park, public parks and ballfields which this does, visibility from high traffic thorough fares, quick access convenient access to goods and services, ability to live close to employment and again the applicant did say we believe the Orchard Place site provides for all these local amenities. Apartments will will result in increased traffic and overcrowding. Uh, in my course as a planner, uh, this statement gets a lot of, uh, uh, this is one of the things that a lot of residents who are opposed to any type of apartment project I've been associated with they think that, uh, uh, the apartment was going to produce way more traffic than a retail commercial area. It's complete opposite. Uh, believe it or not the trips generated per unit are much less than the trips generated by a a full-time commercial retail activity. Um, but anyway it's just in most Traffic Engineers or traffic reports that I deal with or you will review will show that that there's a lot less traffic generated by even a large four-story apartment of this nature. Uh, the impacts are very very, uh, very less than a typical residential or excuse me commercial or retail use. Currently no pedestrian crossing signs at 157th in English. We did respond that there are with the still ongoing development in the area we do have ideas or suggestions for those Crossings. We did indicate that at the Le Schwab development when we presented that that that developer, uh, will be providing for a lot of cross crosswalk sections into the commercial areas to the East and to the north because that's what we asked for because we had planned for those all along. Again a lot of the original plan was for connected to Trails and pedestrian amenities. I think there was a concern about they're putting a lot of amenities but we don't have access to them and you shouldn't because the developer if they're putting those in for their tenants or they're they're paying customers, they're not offering to the general public. Now if can they do that? Sure but most of them don't. A lot of Apartments complexes that you you've ever seen they do have little private playgrounds, uh, sitting areas, uh, dog parks or maybe a a little athletic or recreational Court. Those are for their tenants and and that's what they're paying them you know they're paying for that that right to use that and not be have to wait for someone coming off the trail wanting to you know use their their amenities. So we feel that you know those are things that they can provide but we also are going to provide and we're going to show you real quick here. Uh, this is a community area... a little hard to see on this map but basically the apartments would be about here. This blue line represents, uh, approximate location of that North Creek, North Creek, North Creek Greenway Trail and right near the northwest corner of the apartment is this little gathering space. Uh, our city engineer has, uh, been designing this for the course of a few years. Uh, the original developer has provided for, uh, a contribution of funds to, uh, provide for this so this is for the General Public. Again this is part of the trail system and a connecting trail system we talked about that would go on the north side of the apartments so this is something that we want to encourage people to use or feel like it's their own because it will be it's it's for the public. Uh, a question was asked about how many, uh, units are we allowed or supposed to have for affordable based on the Met Council. Uh, we're supposed to have about 468 units planned for the next, uh, according to to to the plan 40 20 years. Right now these are these are numbers, these are goals, these are targets. They're not an absolute, we don't have to meet them but we we strive to and we encourage these and again based upon the area of median income this is from Fanny May website. So our our median income for Apple Valley, uh, is about 1237 and again that's typically based upon a family of four: 80% 98,960 and a 50% are media would be about 62,000 just to give you an idea of what they're talking about for for number of units. I can't tell you how many units we've provided up to this point. Uh, our Met Council sector rep was supposed to get us that information I think they they keep track of that number... Alex I don't think we ever got that number... so we're we're we can have that number to you later on if if if it's important to you. With that I'm sorry we had to I want to take some time on those questions but staff is still recommending approval of the compant amendment from c-commercial to HD high density of the 5.62 acre parcels on the northwest corner 157 in English. I can take your questions now otherwise I I know the applicant is behind us, uh, they have a little presentation that if you would permit them to make or, uh, uh, they can or you can defer it back to them for any of the other questions or concerns you might have. With that I'll stand for any questions. [1:13:28] Chair Kutes: Any questions for Tim? No. Commissioner scanland. [1:13:31] Commissioner Scanland: Madam chair, Tim, um, you mentioned and maybe the, uh, petitioner can confirm that these are going to be basically market rate Apartments as far as what they're we're going after here. Um, and I think one of the pitches for bringing this in and, um, with the zoning change is that we're going to kind of a adding a mixed use component to the commercial space that's here already. Um, and this was not part of that original design or thought process as we've been building out that area is that, um, the the the idea of more walkability, interconnection. My concern the way it's set up right now is there's going to be a lot of walking in the street or in the parking lot Drive areas and that it's not something we can solve tonight but that when they come back with the formal plan that we can look at that more on how that can be solved to you know when somebody wants to walk down to Luns byerlys or go down to the vet office or to the new, uh, medical office building they can do that easily without having the backtrack and because everybody wants to go straight line to wherever they want to go and, um, which is part of our comp plan is the livability the walkability within the community age and that be reexamined as we go forward with this. So if we approve it... [1:15:06] Tim Benetti: Mr. scanland that's a great observation and yes we want to encourage that walkability in this area in other areas. Yep, so yes and that's why we are encouraging making sure that the crosswalks are strategically placed at the appropriate locations. We want to make sure that any pedestrians using that area on both sides of that roadways they have at least a safe route to their objective and we don't want them going from point A to point B as straight as a crow flies, we want them to use those walking trails because that's what they're there for in those sidewalks. [1:15:37] Commissioner Scanland: Yeah I did drive by there today and I did see they're putting the, um, Trailway bridge in place so it's nice to see that coming forward. Thanks Tim. [1:15:52] Tim Benetti: Yep, by the way that that bridge will be named, uh, Sharon Hills. [1:16:01] Chair Kutes: Tim, there is a bus facility right in that area too isn't there? So they could use that also. Um, you know this is my opinion I'd rather see something going up like this and leaving it empty you know if they can't get retailers in there and stuff and I do agree I think it's needed for the community, I think it's good for retail business to bring people in. Um, so just wanted to State my opinion there. Commissioner Mahwald. [1:16:22] Commissioner Mahwald: Madam chair Tim, just a couple of questions. Um, I you had a slide up there with respect to the vacancy rate 2.9%... is that was that just for high density for apartments or was that for affordable housing too or is there any...? [1:16:43] Tim Benetti: That is for all apartments commission Mahal and that's, uh, it it we just we we met the developer me and my staff and, uh, this this afternoon and he remembers about a year ago it was down to almost 1% which is unbelievably low and again, um, that's some could look at that as a great thing and some could look at that as a bad thing because if if there's there's a demand you're probably going to be paying for a little bit more higher rents because if they know their demands met but you also want to make sure that if 1% tells you that, uh, those units are being used and people are living here, moving to this area and there's a there's a something's drawn to this area we want to keep them here and this is the beginning of their life cycle housing basically. I think most of us can remember starting off making about 12 bucks an hour... less maybe five bucks an hour our age so we we started off small, we we we started off in our Apartments, later moved to maybe a a bigger apartment, later to our housing and then we're going back to, you know, the smaller housing. So this is, you know, uh, so this this is just an opportunity to present that and when you bring up, uh, uh, you know you're changing this from the retail business or commercial, when you look at the proximity of that retail business, you know sort of inside the campus area, the orchard place area, you typically want to focus your retail elements along the the corridors of the roadways or the road systems. This is off that road system, it's still it's not far off but it's still inside and anytime you get farther away from your main thoroughfare traffic fair like Cedar Avenue, Pilot Knob in this case, uh, that tends to be a little bit of a drawback for because everybody wants to be seen when you're a retail business. When you're a commercial business apartment doesn't need to be seen, people it's it's a destination place for those residents that come and go they know where they live and the ones that want to be seen are the ones that on those high traffic corridors like Pilot Knob 42 Cedar Avenue. [1:19:02] Commissioner Mahwald: Okay. Um, the, uh, and you might have addressed this and I apologize if you did but the, um, with the, uh, the land uses map, uh, the existing and proposed, um, yeah um, with respect to the, uh, high density housing that's kind of north and west of the proposed site did you that that's still undeveloped there's nothing planned for that at this point in time correct? [1:19:15] Tim Benetti: Uh, commissioner Mah so what you're seeing here, um, I believe this is referred to as the shores, the py Home Development just on the other side. These ponds are a little bit more a little bit exaggerated on their color scheme but just to the north is guided for high density. Uh, this is intended to be a sort of a, uh, a holding place for py homes to take over that site once AVR or mcamera, uh, stops or doesn't need that site right now that's if there was an aerial photo I don't think we have one... yep you can kind of see what they refer to as their maintenance yard or the their Bone Yard. Uh, so eventually this area will turn into more than likely more town homes so that is still being left alone. This is again separated by those very large, uh, ponding systems that we ask to be provided to help with their storm water management for this area. [1:21:23] Commissioner Mahwald: Okay and then no one, uh, at least one more here. Um, you know I noticed on I think it was the last page of the, uh, of the report or the memorandum, um, it talks about you know what the 2019 plan for that space and I do remember it. I guess when we were talking about the the gathering space to the northwest of the property, um, where it talked about in the I guess it's the third to last paragraph where it talked about two medium box retail buildings are shown with two restaurant pads in between outdoor patios leading to a c concrete feature. Yes. Um, you know I I I guess that sounds nice to me. I mean that sounds like a a a completion of of that overall development and and obviously this would preclude that from happening, correct? So there would... so we're kind of at this point anyway at least with respect to this partiel, um, precluding any future development that would have those types of businesses, those types of, uh, connecting to those publicly available lands which I guess is a concern to me because I think that that that could really be a nice anchor, um, and allow those to be well utilized. Um, I'm not... I mean obviously this would bring a lot of people down there too it's just a different a different concept for that. [1:22:49] Chair Kutes: Anybody else? Commissioner Hass. [1:22:51] Commissioner Hass: Madam chair, Tim, um, I will say that, uh, based on where it sits, uh, the property sits and with the park to the to the west of it with multifamily dwelling, uh, to the west of that and, um, it does complement the area and, uh, yes it is going from commercial to high density but, um, you do have the park system just a west of that and the trails that they're they're working through there. Um, I I do complement them on coming up with the extra letters from the from the retailers from the area that say that this will help them and complement their business also which is a nice balance and keeps people out of their cars walking and and an easy walk home that they can do that with. What commissioner scanlan mentioned is good walkways and good directions so it's it's a safe easy area that they can get to and from where they're going. But I think, uh, they've done done their extras on here and shown that this can work and it does complement each other in this in this situation. So no no question there just a just a comment thank you. [1:24:02] Tim Benetti: Commissioner Hass I wanted to point out thank you for reminding me, uh, those letters that, uh, came in today, uh, they're letters of support. We'd like to have you accept those as part of the further public record which will will make it as part of this, uh, proceedings tonight. Uh, they weren't presented at the official public hearing but they can still accept them as part of the public record. So I think they do win some good, uh, support. Obviously these retail users love to have, uh, like like we refer to as butts in the seat kind of thing and this is where you got your people right next door and they can walk over to, you know, the punch pizza, the Lili Nails and, uh, the other businesses over there, get their groceries from Luns and Berly, get their shoes, everything banking, all that's right there within easily walking distance and we want to encourage that and less dependent upon the cars. We hope that most people do walk over there and visit and, uh, trade to th those those uses over there. [1:24:59] Chair Kutes: One more. Commissioner sandal. [1:25:00] Commissioner Sandal: Madam chair Tim, um, I'm just I have an echo comment basically because my my biggest concern after some of the other things had been kind of allayed was will the other businesses around there who expected something and now it's being changed will that impact them negatively? And so having this definitely just kind of cements that that nope that's not going to be a problem for them and so I appreciate that you all took the time to do that so thank you for that. [1:25:35] Chair Kutes: I think that's it Tim. [1:25:36] Tim Benetti: Okay, does the applicant want to still make there you said you had something to you... [1:25:40] Chair Kutes: Yeah we got they have a little presentation would you want... you can do you feel we need one or would you rather just bounce some questions off them? [1:25:48] Tim Benetti: Any presentation... [1:25:49] Chair Kutes: Yeah other presentation and we'll to put it together you worked hard at it we will watch it. [1:25:56] Chris Mo: Okay all right then, um, well Roger I think has the thumb drive that we're going to need to play the presentation... oh you you've got it all right never mind you got it in time. So good evening, uh, Chris Mo with HJ development 2425 Throwbred Lane in Orono. Um, where the master develop here in the project. Thanks for having us back tonight. Um, Roger Fink with Trident is here too, um, to also participate in any of this presentation should he need to. Um, thank you Tim for the thorough presentation, um, done very well. Uh, just some additional things that we put together to complement, um, what Tim and staff has done was first what you see here is really, um, putting a bunch of examples of other multifamily in close proximity to commercial that either Trident or other commercial property developers alongside residential developers, multifamily developers have done in various locations throughout the Metro just so you could say okay where is some of these locations that I could look at and get an idea of, um, where it's happened and how it's turned out. So this first one here and we have a number of them we can just kind of run through them and if you have questions or want to stop me just feel free to go ahead and do that. Um, this is a a Trident project, uh, Lake Jonathan Flats in Chaska. Um, this was this parcel and Roger can correct me if I'm wrong was originally zoned commercial, correct Roger? [1:27:51] Roger Fink: That's correct. It's originally a medical clinic that was zoned there that never came to fruition and, um, they worked with the city of Chaska in this instance to change the land use for that site, built a multi family project there. As you can see it's really in close proximity to a lot of other strip retail bigger box retail restaurants so, um, felt that was a good example. [1:28:12] Chris Mo: Can we go to the next slide? [1:28:13] Roger Fink: Can I I want... why don't you come on up. Not part of this presentation but because I was so involved with this particular development I thought it might be of some interest to note that immediately south of the yellow building you see there which is the apartment building is a inline what it call strip retail Center anchored by a, uh, Quick Trip at the South. The landowner that owns the retail Center became acquainted with us through the course of our construction and is the same land owner who owns the Kohl's, uh, retail Center just north of there about a quarter mile. When he saw the success we had with Lake Jonathan Flats in relationship to the retail and commercial uses that are there just to the south of us, he approached us about some vacant property that he still owns at the Kohl's department store retail center right there by the Hazel Te National Golf Course. He said I've had these extra lots available for 20 years, I cannot find a junior box retailer or a hotel and he went through a whole list of other uses he attempted to court and locate there next to the coal store, next to the McDonald's, next to the Chipotle, the Aldi and everything that's there. He approach just about doing an apartment building there. Uh, we just completed, um, the plaza at hazeline, uh, got our Co this month 112 units right there by the coal store. So not only did we have success in Chaska with Lake Jonathan Flats integrated with commercial uses, but we actually brought a apartment building to a shopping center and built it right on their parking lot essentially to complement the retail uses. The retailers love it. Uh, we've built a great relationship with them, we work very closely with Chaska City staff to make sure circulation, signage, pedestrian safety, segregation of parking lots and everything were well thought out and, uh, we're real proud of that project but I just wanted to add that little as a side note because you're Chaska... [1:30:25] Chris Mo: Yeah why don't you just stay up here you're am. Um, so this is another one that isn't one of Rogers projects but this is Arbor Lakes in Maple Grove. So everybody's familiar with Arbor Lakes, obviously a big bustling retail area and there's a lot of multifam, um, adjacent to that that has happened and continues to happen in Maple Grove. Um, The Reserve at Mendota Village, um, Tim's alma mater here, um, in in Mendota Heights. So, uh, did you work on this project? Yeah so this is one Tim could give you more detail than, uh, Roger or I could but again it's, uh, multifam adjacent in close proximity to retail. Uh, Gallery on Nicollet... so this is another HJ development property we have owned the Cub Foods and adjacent retail shopping center, um, since original development Circa 2005 I want to say and there's a vacant parcel of land here that's highlighted that now has an apartment building on it that, uh, uh, Chase properties built recently just finished it but that was a vacant parcel of land, um, that sat for 20 years as well, uh, until the city of Burnsville decided they wanted to see something happen there and allowed rental housing to happen there. We've had no complaints out of Cub Foods or any of our other retailers, it's all been sales have only gone up and they're happy to have it there. Um, this is in Egan, so not too far from you here in Apple Valley: City View Apartments off a Yankee Doodle prominade. Um, typical just run-of-the-mill apartment building again adjacent to a lot of retail. Um, this is in Ramsey off of Highway 10 in Armstrong Boulevard. This is a Coborn's anchor shopping center with the grocery store and a number of other retail uses. Um, this is actually a hotel here so this site isn't 100% accurate. Roger corrected me on that but if you move just a little bit to the east there is all kinds of Apartments, um, that are just would be kind of right where our screen cuts off here. Um, and then moving on to Eden Prairie adjacent to the Eden Prairie Center, uh, um, our firm just recently a week ago, uh, acquired the this shopping center that sits adjacent to all of this residential that just got built and what caused us to want to buy it was hearing from all the retailers that their sales had improved drastically after that stuff did get built. So it's a property we had previously looked at buying, heard bad news from all of the retailers in terms of sales adjacent retail built things have improved, um, and now we decided we would like to own it. Um, and then this is just another example in, uh, Eden Prairie, uh, kind of by the Opus Business Park where you've seen a lot of older outdated commercial uses, um, be actually torn down and now you have a lot of new apartments being built next to some newer retail in that Opus Business Park. Um, Exchange apartments in New Brighton again kind of same thing: got fitness centers, restaurants, retail next to a new apartment building. And I think last but not least this is Cottage Grove, um, off of 80th Street and Hemingway Avenue. Um, same kind of deal you've got a Hy-Vee grocery store, number of other smaller retail buildings and then multifamily adjacent to it. So just wanted to give you kind of a number of options that you could look at if you needed to kind of help process those thoughts. I apologize not getting it to you a little bit earlier, um, to take a look at it. Take blame for that, we had a little communication breakdown and I was traveling last week so, um, happy to answer any other questions about those if you have any thanks. [1:34:49] Chair Kutes: Chris, anybody have any questions? We've got more. Commissioner scanland. [1:34:51] Commissioner Scanland: Madam chair thank you. Um, I just wanted to follow up on my comments to, uh, Tim in that, um, you kind of reinforced it by what you showed here and then also with the references back from, uh, the retailers within the the area right now is that when you come back to us that, um, uh, that we could look at some ways of making that interaction better and accessibility walkability, um, that wasn't planned there previously. Sure. So if you could put some thought to that appreciate that and I think it's been kind of echoed amongst a few of us here too so, uh, put some thought to that so thank you again for the, um, added presentation here so... [1:35:28] Chris Mo: Yeah you're welcome. Um, and I do have next I've got a couple renderings. One of the questions a couple of you had last time was you know what could it look like to the north, um, and so we spent some time putting some additional renderings together that show, um, um, what could end up happening there although it's not you know set in stone. So we'll take a look at a couple options here, this being the first one: immediately north of the proposed Apartment project is, um, it's a little hard to see here it's a little blurry but that's a proposed, uh, larger format sit down restaurant which is something that you know we've heard from staff planning and council that they would like to see here and so that's still a goal of ours to bring something like you know the Copper Pint that was once, um, planned for here to here so we still have some room to do that. I think that location immediately north of the multifamily building, um, with the public amenity space could be a really neat space to do that, um, with some outdoor seating that plays off of it if there's you know live music events or other types of gatherings going on there I think that would be a nice, um, way to tie into that. Uh, north of that you've got the two retail, um, smaller strip centers that, um, you've seen in the past that we've been trying to get out of the ground and and have not been successful in securing tenants for but, um, are still hopeful that you know as things change from an interest rate perspective construction cost tenants adjust to the new normal paying rents we do feel like we'll be able to obtain some of those smaller shops strip retail type tenants that you see in the other smaller buildings where Punch Pizza is and Crisp and Green so we do have some activity for those types of users that would allow us to come back and build those buildings that we've been trying to build for a while and then the larger box behind it, um, could be a number of things: it could be some sort of an entertainment use, it could be a junior box retailer if we get to the point where you know we actually figure out how to make those work, um, we'll see. So that's that's one look at what could happen. And then the other one here is a big entertainment user but still having that restaurant so we are in active discussions with a group whose this plan is really reflective of their preliminary planning that would be, um, heavy entertainment Focus: so think outdoor volleyball, bocce ball, bean bags and indoor bowling, darts, duck pins, bing... preliminary conversations but it's obviously progressed to the point where they've spent some time on on planning and, uh, we think a use like this would be great if we can figure that out. Um, I think that it would just complement everything else that we have here and be a great traffic draw and something that the community really doesn't have now. Um, so if I were to choose between the two i' you know this is one that I really prefer, um, but you know we're still considering all options that we have for the area. [1:38:52] Chair Kutes: Well interest rates went down today didn't they? [1:38:55] Chris Mo: They did. [1:38:56] Chair Kutes: That should help us. [1:38:57] Chris Mo: Yeah we'll see. Um, so things are heading in the in the right direction from that standpoint which is good good. Any questions on those site plans before I I don't think so move on. Okay. The other question that we were asked of is you know what's available in terms of tenant space out there where where's the existing vacancy and where have tenants been moving. So this kind of gives you a summary of recent leasing activity that's happened in the city of Apple Valley and most if not all of these tenants we've been pursuing for Orchard Place and have lost to other existing you know buildings just because it's less expensive for them to go open up in an existing building and there's still remains, um, additional existing inventory out there especially in the Junior box space. Um, you've got the Bed Bath and Beyond space which as you all probably know Nordstrom Rack is taking but we, uh, we were pursuing them and when that option came up that was a much lower cost option for them they took that. Best Buy has now closed so you have the Best Buy space and, uh, Experienced Fitness has now closed recently so those are 30 to 40,000 foot boxes that are going to go for a quarter to half of what new construction would. So those are going to take a while to get absorbed I would assume, um, but it'll happen. It's just until that happens we're not going to be successful with any of the junior box stuff in our project. Um, like I said I'm more confident in the smaller shop things but as you can see if you look up and down here: Dave's Hot Chicken took the former Dairy Queen location; uh, X Golf took something in Times Square that I think was like a secondhand store Outlet... many different stores many different stores and they still have some space available in that shopping center as well; uh, Panera took a former Baker's Square; Qdoba took the former Panera. Um, so you see kind of the pattern that's there there there's a lot of existing inventory that has been built in the city and it does turn over and you constantly kind of see that. So I I think you've kind of reached a point where there's just enough space that needs can be met through a lot of what's already there but large entertainment is a great idea for... [1:41:35] Chair Kutes: Yeah, as long as they don't go to the Experienced Fitness space or something. [1:41:39] Chris Mo: We need a bigger we need bigger than that. Yeah. Um, so yeah we we feel good about that prospect right now but, um, time will tell so that's it for my part of the little presentation that I had yep. [1:41:45] Chair Kutes: Thank you that was very nice. Any questions for any either one of them? I don't think so. [1:41:48] Roger Fink: I think we're ready to make our motion maybe okay yeah all right I will just add by saying Madam chair and members of the commission, um, thank you for all your attention and your questions for this. Thank you Chris for that detailed presentation and Tim that was a very thorough, uh, staff report. We appreciate all the time and effort into that. I don't know that I have a lot that I could add on top of everything you've already heard. There's some more slides here but I think that the message has been pretty well delivered and we really appreciate your attention and, um, taking this application up again. Thank you very much. [1:42:29] Chair Kutes: Thank you. Okay do I hear a motion from anyone? [1:42:31] Commissioner Scanland: Madam chair I recommend approval of a comprehensive plan Amendment from c-commercial to HD High Dem high density residential of the 5.62 acre parcel on the northwest corner of 157th Street West in English Avenue. [1:43:03] Commissioner Sandal: Second. [1:43:04] Chair Kutes: Okay so that is made by commissioner scanland and seconded by commissioner sandal. Is there any discussion? If not all in favor say I. [1:43:14] Commissioners: I. I. I. [1:43:15] Chair Kutes: Oppose Nay. [1:43:16] Commissioner: N. [1:43:16] Chair Kutes: Okay motion carries thank you. Well do you want to stay up here Tim or do you want to sit it down and say it? Okay other business and we will have Tim Benetti finish that off. [1:43:31] Tim Benetti: Thank you ma, uh Madam mayor Madam mayor how about Madam chair? Sure I'll take it. We have our next meeting of Wednesday October 2nd, uh, also followed by our Wednesday October 16th. Our Council meetings are Thursday September 26 and the 10th. Uh, the item that was just acted on, uh, for tonight the the landuse amendment that will be probably placed on the, uh, October 10th it will be on the October 10th meeting. Uh, with that I have no other, uh, updates for you. [1:44:02] Chair Kutes: Okay thank you Tim. [1:44:03] Tim Benetti: You're welcome. [1:44:03] Chair Kutes: Motion to adjourn? [1:44:06] Commissioner Scanland: Move. [1:44:07] Commissioner Sandal: Second. [1:44:08] Chair Kutes: Second made by commissioner scanland I think I heard commissioner scanland or sandal second all in favor say I. [1:44:13] Commissioners: I. I. [1:44:15] Chair Kutes: This meeting has adjourned.