HomeMy WebLinkAbout20090901P & Z MinutesPLAI~II~G Z~l~IIi~~ CQI~ZI4ZI~~If~I~i
'~TT~S OF THE GULAR M~E'I'IlrTG
SEI'TEMBER l, 2Q09
7:aa ~~
The meetulg ~uas called to order at 7:00 pm by Vice Chair-Do1u1a Schmitt.
Cominission Memhers present- Sclulutt, Peterson, and Thompson.
Cc~zn~nission IVtembers absent-Szurek, Fiorei~di~~o
A1so present were Gary Peterson (Cauncil Liaisoll), Jeff Sargent (~ity Plamler), aiid Shelley Hanso~~
(S~cretary).
Motiotz by Pete~son, seeonded by Thonzpsorz, to app~ove the rnirzutes~ o»i the ~~~eeting ofrlugzast ~, 2009.
All c~yes. MOTIDNPASSED.
F'ITI~~I~ I~~FLi~~~
~'E4SE I~~JMBEPZ: 20G9-0901
r~P~'L,ICAN'T: ~+~~i~iah R~sta~rant
L~~ATI~I~: 4301 Cea~tt-a~ Ave
~ QUES'~': Si~~ P~an Approv~t fc~r Sh~~-~~ I'arl~in~
II~"~~~3I~UC`TI~I~1
The Filfillal~ Restaurant ~d new g~ocery store will l~e opening at 4301 Cenfral Avenue. T~i order fo satisfy
thei~ pa~-king rEquirelzlents, the storeowners will need to share some of the parlci~g provided by tl~e
Laundrolilat to tlie nc~i-t11. Tlze City Code h~s a pravision to allow this, however, ~~fore tllis car~ occu~ t1~e
City Cotulcil needs to approve the request through a Site Plaiz Approval pracess.
The applicai~t submitted an application to get oilto the September l, 2009 Plannillg aild Laning
~onuzlissic~n agenda. ;~owever, c~;spite sevelal conversatioi~s with tlle a.pplicarlt, staff has been unable to
obtaill eilough itlfoi~natioi~ to formally process the iec~uest. Thus, the applicatioll is co~lsidered i~zcolnplete.
~'or t1~is reasoil, staff recoXnl~ends to table the ap~licatian_ to ~the October 6, 2~09 Pl~iu7iizg ai1c1 Z~zling
~o~~~issiol~ nzeeti~l~, to give #l1e a~~licallt ample iiine to sul~i~.i~t tlie i~ecessary i~zfori~alion.
Th_o~z~s~,~ asl~~d if ~he ino~u~nci~t sig~ v~eets t1~P se~b~cL iec~~~ir~l_~el~ts. Sargent responcled that t11e si~n
was already approvEd throuQll the site ~~l~~i-~ praccss.
llfotion l~y l~io»zl~sor~2, secondec~ I~y Petersol~, to tal~le Ccr.s~e No. 2009-0901 to t1~e Oet~ol~e~^ 6, 2{~(~9 Plan~~ing
arzd Zoning Co»zlnission l~ieeiing in ordel° to give tl~e cr~~licant a~nple time to subla~ait t72e yzecessal y
a~plieation rnczte3°ials. All Aye.~. MOTI~NP~SS'ED.
PLAIrTl"~IIrTG & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
PAGE 2
SEFTEMBER I, 2009
~A~~ I~dIJ1d~II3~R: 20(}9-Q902
r~PPLICAl~1'T: Ti~n Sullivaa~
LOCATI~ItiT: 1201 - 45t~ ~veuue I`~E
QUEST': 11-foc~t fro~t yard setbaek varaance ~ar a d~ck
TNT~O~}UC'TIE)1'~
At tlus time, tlze applicailt is requesting an Il-foot frant yard setback varialzce per Code Sectiaz~ 9.106
(S}(8}, i11 order to consti-uct a new declc. The Ci1.y's Zol~ilzg Code requires that the residential fiant yaid
setback sha11 be tl7e average deptli of all buildings witl~n 200 feet of the Iot in questioi~ and wit1u11 tlie satne
block frolzt, plus or minus 10% of the average depth. Tlie average setbaclc af all tlle hauses witl~i~1200 feet
of tlze subject pa~-ce1, and on the same blocl~ front, is 35.8 feet. Tlz~ IZOUSe at 1201 - 45`~' ~veilue is set back
32.$ feet froln t11e fr611t pro~erty liize. The applicant is requesting to colls~iuct a c~ecl~ that will extend 10
feet closer to t1~e front pioperty 1ll1e than where tlle cui~e~it house is situated. For tlus reasosl, ail 11-foot
front ya1-d setbaclc variailce is rec~L~ired.
~~~~II~G C3~~~~T~AIVTC~
Tlze property a~ 1201 - 4~t'' AvenLte is loeated uz the R-2A, arle ancl Two r a~nily Residential Disi~ict, as are
the prape~-i:i~s in the i1l~nediate vicuuty. The subjeet parcel is a conler lot on the cor~er of 45`~i' Ave~lue ai~d
Fillmore Street. Per Zon.iiz~ Code defilitiozls, flle front yard is tlzat yard abutting 45~' Avenue, aud any
pro~osed cozlstruetion in tlle fiont yard ~auld be suhject to the frollt yard averaguzg reqL~irelnelits
T11e cuz~-elzt dwe11i11g has two paints of erztry i11to the frolzt of tl~e house. Historically, the west doar had
conc~~ete steps ai~d t12e east ~iE}c~r l~ad woode~z steps witl~ a si~1aI11alz~Iilag for e~ess iz~to the 1~ouse. TI2e st~ps
a~~c~ 1a~lding fol~ the west entry were ii1 need of repair and have recently beeil remaved. The applicant ;vou~_d
like to construct t1~e deck for both aestlletic and functional pluposes. I~e stated that it would look betfer anci
make lnore selzse if tllere was o~~.e set of steps for both entrycs rather tlzan having two separate sets of stairs.
~t~l~I' I~~I~SI~E ~~
TIZe Coinprehei~sive 1'1an guides t1~is area as residentiaL f1 variance to allaw ail additiai2 ta a preexistillg
residential dwelling would be cc~nsistent ~~itlz tlle uzte~lt of t]se Compi~heilsive Plan guiding o~'the ar~a.
PL~NNING & Z4NING COMMISSIOhT MIl~TUTES
PAGE 3
SEPTEMBER 1, 2409
FINDII~tGS O~' FACT (Variance)
Sectioii 9.104 {G} af the Zoning Ordinal~ce outlines five findings of fact that zzlust he i~~et in order far tlle
City Cauncil to grallt a variance. They are as follows:
a} Because of the ~articular physical sun-aundings, or the slzape, configuratian., topograpliy, or
otlier conditians of the specific parcel of land invalved, strict adherence to the pravisfons of tlus
article would cause undue hardship.
The applicant ~vould like to add a deck io tlze house. Because of the situation of the house on the
ptro~erty and a steep grade differe~7tial to~vaYds the reat~ o. f the pral~eYty, placit~g a deck an the Yea~
of ~the 1~o~~se tivouZd I~e zr~~~~racticc!l. Placing the c~eck on tlie front af the liouse ~~~ould ~lso enable t7~e
l~o~neo~vr~e~ ta tie-in t1~e t~vo f~ont en~i~ances, ~nc~king the ~r°o~e7^ty ~~~~ore c~esthetically ~leasi~z~ and
functionc~l.
t~) The col~ditians upai~ which the varia~ice is based are tzi~ique to the speciiic p~~cel of Iand
involved and are generally Izat applic~ble to otller propez~ties witlun th~ saizle zalliug
classification.
The ~lace~nent of ~ t1~e house on the pro~er ty, along wit1~ the to~o~ •aphy of ~ the land rs c~ i~niqz~e
.srtzration.
c} 2~1ze diffic~ilty o~~ 1~ardship is ~~aused b;~ t11e provisioiis af tlus az-~icle a~1d has ~~ot bee1~ creztted by
~~y person currelltly hasTing a Ieba1 iizterest in tlle propet-~y.
The harc~sl~i~ ~vas ct~eatec~ by the original eonsh~c~c~zor~ of the %2ouse and plaee~nent of tize ~zouse on
the lot. :I he applicctnt did ~zot have ~ legal ii~tet~~st in tlze ~r~operty at tlze t~i~72e of its const~ucti~~z.
d) Tlle grantiz~~ o' the varia~~ce is in 1~.a~~zzoi~v ~~ith tlie ~e~~eral pur~os~ and ll~te~:zt of t~1e
co~zpreheilsive p1a11.
Th~e C`oin~~l°ehe~~siv~ Plc~~~ guides t;~zs area cz.s ~^e~szdentiaZ. A varic~nce to c~llo~v c~T2 adclit~ion to a
~~eexzs~~i~2g reside~~iic~l dwellin~ ~voz~ld be consi.~tent u~ith the intefzt of t7~e ~`~~7~pf°ehe~zsivc~ Plcriz
~uidirag of tTie at•ec~.
e) The ~ranting of the varia~ee will ilot b~ materially detrimen.fal to the ~~?blic welfare or
inaterially ii~jtz~ious to t1~e e~z~j~yment, use, developmerlt or value ~i property or ii~.provezl~enfs iiz
ti1~ vicinity.
I;r7e ~-r-al~tirz~; vf tlze iJczr•ic~nee ia~oxdlcl ;~~~.at be r77ce~~~r°ially c~'et~~iT77ental; ~c~tl~er it ~voulc~ ct°eate ~no~~e
value to t1~~ ~a~o~er°ty, t;7=.rs enh~rzci~~a~ th,e neigl2l~oT°T~ood.
Staff recoirllzlends a~~roval af t1~~ 11-foot fi~ot~i yard setl~aclc variance for t1~e const~-uctioiZ of a rlew cteck
lacated ~t 1201 - ~St~' Avenue N~E.
Ouestions froin 1~embers:
Peters<~zz aslced ~~vhat ~I~e size of tlle proposed clecl~ would be. Sargen~ explained it would b~ ~pproxunately
2Q feet Iong a~zci 10 feet out fro~zl tlie house. He thell asked what tl?e differellce is between a parcli aild a
deck and if tlus would set a~recedent for tlZe rest of t12e i2eighborllood if th7s was approved. Sarge~zt
explained 1he setbacks are ba5icall;~ tlle sa~n.e for a deck or ~ porcll. If tl~.is is approved, it would alter the
fro11~ ~r~~-d setbaek for tlze I1ei~111~ors by a sl~~?~11 a1l~ount l~ased on t11e average deptl~ calculatio~z used.
PLf1NNING & ZONING COMMISSION IVIINUTES
PAGE 4
SEpTEMBER l, 2009
Sargent painted out there is a uniquezless to this lot aizd that topo~raphy creates a hardsl~ip for tlus parcel
that is required i~~ arder to meet the criteria far a variance. Peterson thaught tlse deck would be
aestheticalty pleasing for the neighbarlload alid agreed that tl~e variance should be granted.
Sclunitt asked t11e ov~ler, Tiin Sull.ivan, ~~hat type of inaterial lze wauld be using to canstruct the deck. ~Ie
said he is co~isidering cedar or composite cieckia~g materials.
Public Hearin~ ~~ened.
No one ~uished to speak iurfher o1z tl~is ~atter.
~ul~lic ~Iearing ~Closed.
Motior~ Uy Peterso~~, seconded Z~y ~hor7z~sc~~~, tl2at the Plc~nning Con~al~2ission ~°eca»zrnends thcrt the Ci,ty
C'ouncil c~~p~°ave t~he 11 foot f~•ont yaNd setback va~icznee fat the c~nstruetion of a ne~v deek per^ Code
Secfio3~a 9.106 (B)(S) of the City Code, sirl~ject to ce~~tain condition~s of a~aprovczl thut have l~een founc~ to be
r2ecessa~y to ~~~otect~ tlze ~ublzc inte~°est and ensu7°e co2npZzance with t1~e ~1^ovisior~,s o~ tlze Zonzng c~nd
Develop~n~7~t Ordinance, includit7~~: ~
1. All a~a~Ziccrtion n~ctter•iaZs, rna~s, cl~awings~, crnd dese~~il~tive i~zfor°~~zatior~ subraaitted ~vith t/ze
a~~Zicc~ti~n slzcrll becon~e ~art of ~tTze ~erTnit.
2. The c~~pliccznt shctll~olataiYa a builc~irigper~rnit~rioN to tl~e constF•uction of the c'eck.
All ay~s. V14TI(~I~T I'r1SSED.
I2ES0~~1 ~Z~3I~T N~, ~Q~9-
{ ~~I~UTIOl~i ~'P~t~3 ~ A VA '~T~E
~R(J1VI ~~RT~ZN ~~}NF~ITI~}N~
O~' T~~~ CIT~' C~~+ ~(?L I~-~ IGKT~ ~~ I~G ~~I}E
F4~R 'I' ~~7LLIV~1~
~~A~, a p~-o~;osal {Case ~ 2049-0902} l~as been sub~litted by Tu11 Sullit~an to ihe City C~uneil requesting a
va~~iance frolzi tlle City of ColuillUia ~Teiglzfis Zo~iing Cocie at ttle follo~,~in~ si~e:
~DD~tBSS: 1201 -45`~' ~`3~r~;~iue N~
LEGAT DESCRIF'TION: C~n ~te at City ~-Ial1.
THC AI'PLIC~NT SEEI~S TFI~ FO~,LOWII`~G RELI~'T: ~1 11-foot fiant yard setback varial~ce for tt~e
coilst~-t~ction of a decl< ~er Code Sec~ion 9.106 (B)(8).
~tT~~~S, the Plaruling Coinlnlssion has helc~ a publie hearing as requ~ed by t7~e City Zonulg Cade an September
1, 2009;
+~ 1~~, tlze City Council has collsidered the advic~ aild t~eeolnmei~.dations of tlze P~aizning Caiiuvzssiall
regarding the effect of the pro~osed varia~ce upo71 the l~ealth, safety, ~nd welfal°e of the co117~nunity alld its
Comprelzensive Pla~z, as well as ai-~y concem related to fr~~ffic, property values, Iigllt, ~i~-, dan~~r of fue, and rislc to
~~zblic safefy, ii7 the sulzaunding area; ~ ~
FLI4NNII~IG & ZONII~TG COMMISSION M]NUTES
PAGE 5
SEI'TEMBER 1. 2Q09
NOW, TI~R.~FOR~, B~ IT ~2ESCILVED by the City Council of tlie City af Calumbia Heigl~ts that tlle City
Couucil accepts and adopts tize fallowing fiitdii~gs of the Planning Commission:
1. Because of the particular pllysical sur7 aundings, or t11e shape, canfiguratian, topagraphy, or ather
canditions ~f the specific parcel af land involved, where strict adherence to the provis'rolzs of tllis
Ordinal~ce would cause undue hardsl~ip.
2. The ca~ditio~~s t~~an «rhicli tlle variance is based are unique to the specific parceI of tand involved and
are genea-a11y iiot applicable to other ~~ro~erties wittlin tile same zo~ing classiilcation.
3. The difficulty or Ilardship is caused by t11e provis'rons of this Ordinailce and has not been created by any
person cui7•ently Ilavn~g legal lllterest ir~ tlie praperiy.
4. The gz-allti~~b a~ the variai~.ee is in haimol~y ~~ith the general purpose arld in~ent of tlle Caz~z~~rebensiv~
Pian.
5. The granting of the variance will nat be Inaterially deh-i~tzeiltal to tile pul~lic welfare ar u~aterially
itljurious to tlle enjoyn~ent, use, develo~~zent or value of ~t~opei-ty or il7~l~rovements izs the vrci~ity.
II~T~'~~~, BE I~ ~~C}LVED, ttiat tlze attaeEled pIans, ma~s, and of1~~r ~infoz~ation shaIl beeoilte part of this
vaa-iai~ee a~d approval; and iiz ~~ailting this varial~ce the city azicl the applicant agree t11at this variance s11a11 becoille
~lill arsd void if tlle project l~as iiot been completed witI~in one (1} calerlcEar year a~=ter tlie appr~val date, subject tc~
petition for re~zewal of the perrnit.
CONDITIONS' ~i TTACIZED _
i. ~i11 ~~~~~1iCc`7~IGll Iia3iei"i3iS~ i]1ajiS, C~i1"u'VJ111~S~ ~Lllf~ ~83C~1p~7V~ Il3f«1'111c.^t:^I1 StilJ:]11~~~ ~N?~l? f~l~ 3j3~~11C%?L1fl11 S~Ia~~
becol~le pal-t of tlze permit.
2. TI~~e a~~~licant s11a11 obtaill a buildi~~g pel~mit prior to tlle const~~uction of tlie decl:.
~r~ ~I+~ I~II~TTI;,~~3E~: 2~~9-fl903
~'`~'~~~~~NT: ~ity of C:a~~un~~ia ~~e:~;t~ts
~~7~5'I': Zoni~~ t~pnez~d~~~~~ fog Sn~o~~~ ~~ops
~3A~~~~~~~l~ ~
~~~rgeilt expl~ined ~iat ol~~ i"Vlay 26, 2Ci09, t1~e Cit~~ Coullcil issued a six-rl~onth emergency izzorator~lLUn on
smalce sho~~s ~vit1~ t1~P ~ity of Celuinbia l~ei~l~ts. Prior to tlze ~norato~~iui~z, the Cit~y of ~ol~imbia Heights
l~ad four (~} Iice~lsecl smolce slzo~~s, one (1) pezldi~g applicatioil, and ~Iuee (3) at11~:r applications for a sinalce
s1io~~ clistributed but not yet iol-Fnally applred for. This equaled a pote~ztial af zight (8} sniolce sl~ops ir~ the
~ity of Collub.~ia Heights' co~l2merci~al carridor, with the ~ossibility of additioizal stoies ~ased ~~n existing
vacancies. Tlie lnoratoriui~ llas giFTei1 staff tin~e to study t1~e effects oi multiple smolce shop ~~ses within a
small ~eographic co~lulzercial corridor.
TIZe State of Nliiulesata's Freedam to ~3rcatlle Act {FBA) was establisl1ed to prohibit people froi~z s~~loking
ulside buildings open ta the public. A provisi.on of t1~e FBA allows patrons of smoke shop establisl~iz.ents
to sa~nple tobacco prod~ucts inside t~ie buildissg prior ta purchasi~lg t11e- inerchandise for personal use. T11e
uitent af this pravisian was to give patrons ai~ oppartl~nity to ptuchase the type of tobacco tliey desi~ed, i~at
to give smokc ~ilops the cliscre~ion to operate a snzokiug parlor.
PLANNING & ZOI~TING C4MMISSION MII~UTES
PAGE 6
SEPTEMBER 1, 2009
City Staff feels strozigly about preserviilg tlze intent of the Freedoln to Breathe Act, which attempts ta
increase the quality of life and public welfare by ba~lning smaking in public places. The Freedom to
Breathe Act, Izowever, does nat implicitly define tlle tenn "saillpling". For tllis reaso~~, it becames
e~trernely di~cult to enfarce tl~e FBA when s~nake shops allow multiple pa~-ozzs to "sai~ple" tobacca
praducts in their stare for long periods of time.
For tla~s reas~n, staff recc~l~nr?~Pl~ds ~ aoiu~~~ aillelzd~~ent that would prohibit tlze sa~npling af tabacco and/or
tot~acco-related products withi~ sinoke sliaps and otl~er ~ublic huildii~gs. The State's Cleazi I~~daor Act at
Secfion 144.417 Subd. 4(a) allows Colu~nbia Heights to enact and enforce more striz~gent l~zeasures to
p~•atect i7idividLial.s fram seeal~d]~arid s~noke. Staff will also recommetzd a IVlunici~al Code anlend~nerlt that
would establish a new tabacco Iicense specific ta smol~e shol3s, tlzus differe»tiating theil~ from tobacco
licelzses gi~eil to gas statia7~.s, conveniEnce stores, etc. The al~zeildn~eizt would also 13mit the z~umber of
licenses issued iiz a year to sinolce shops to five (5).
Staff collducted a suz-~Tey of S otlier cities to deteizlzii~~ haw l~lany licei~ses eacll city Iias issued for sillolte
s11ap uses. A smake slzap is defined as a retail business in whic}z 110 less than 90% of t11e retail sales derive
from the sale of tobacca or tobacca related products. Tlze resu)ts are as i~ollo~vs:
City of Crystal : I
City of 1`dew Hope: 1
City of Robbinsdale: 1
City o~' F~illey: I
City af New Bri~hton: 0
Staff fe~Is that allowiug a higli i~ulnb~r c~f ~usiness~s t1~at pro~sote a~~ unl~eal.thy lifesfyle usually evidences
a]~ss viable economic ezlviro~~i2e~zt ar~d is not conducive to a~trong ecollo~~iic col~nmercial fufure.
CUME'~~HE~t~i~~~ F~~A
One ~3f tl~e go~Is of tlle Corn~rehensive P1~1 is to enhE~z~ce tlle ecalzo~zzic viability ofthe comnlunity. Tile
propascd an~eii~ment woiild be consistellt with the Compiehe~sive Plali because li.mitin~ the ntunber of
slnoke shop licenses ~,uould improve the ecanol~~ic viability of the City.
An ovcrarcl~iilb goal of the Comprelzensive I'lan is to e~sure the safety atld welfaie of the general public.
J3y adhering to tl~e iiltent az the Freedali~ ta Breathe ~lct aizd by disallowirz~ sal~lpling ar ai~y ty~e ol
slnoking i~l ~ public buil~iilg, colnpli~nce vvith th~: Compl~e~hensive Plan ~~i11 be n1et.
Z('~~T~i~~ ~IZ~~i~~<~N~~+
Cu~7enfly; tlze ioning Ordi11a~1c~ allo~~s si7zokc sh~~s as retail establistur~e,lts i~i the LR, ~.~i~zi.ted Lusi~a.ess,
GB, General Business, a~id CBD, C~ni~al Busilless Districts as a pei-~~itted use. TI~e propased a~lend~nezlt
would still allow for sm.oke slzops as a pei7ilitted use in all eal~~e~~cial districts, however more speci~ec~
regula~ions would be placed o~ smoke sliops by slibjecti~g thein ~to some Specitic Developslzent Staaldards.
These specific r~gulations include:
a. T11e smoke shop inust have an enfraizce door opel7i~zg direetly to the outdc~ors.
b. TIZe pril~lary revenue for the bi~siness is bene~~ated from the sale of tabacco, tc~vacco ~roducts or
sinoking related accessaries.
c. ~ to~acco depai-tinent ar section of atly iisdividual business estaUlishn~elzt witll any type of liquor,
food or restaurant lieense shall not be ca~zsidered a s~nolce sho~.
PLA:NhIING & ZONING COMMISSION Tv1INUTES
PAGE 7
SEPTEMBER 1, 2009
d. Sanl~ling of lighted tobacca praducts is prahibited at a11 times.
e. The total nuzl~ber af City-issued Snaoke Sho~ Licenses sha11 at no ti~~ze exceed five (5}.
f. Any existi~zg smake shops at the time of the passage of this ordilzalzce shall coillply fully with the
ordinas~ce by Decembei: 31, 2010.
TIi~ inte~2t of this o~dinance is to ensuYe that at no ~oint will tl~ere be »zore than fzve (.~) srnoke shop
dicenses issued tlzroughout t7ie City. 2 he exzsting four^ s~noke sliops ir~ the City at tlae tz~ne of the passage of
tliis oNdinance ~s~ill 7~e counted tou~ards t1~e five s»~oke shol~ f~~~axil~~ur~z.
~~~TI3~NG~ ~~ ~'A~T
Sectioii 9.104 (~'} af t11e Coluinbia ~-Ieights zoliiug code rec~tiiires thaf tlze City Coiu~cil znalce et ch of the
fallawing faur findings before approving a zoizing aznendment:
l. The ai~eildme~t is eallsistent ~~ith tlle Coz~prehellsive ~lan.
One of the gocrl,s of the Co~n~~~cTiensive Plcrn is to er~hc~l~ace t~he ecorzornic vzability af the co~n~Tnunity.
TI~e p~oposed arnendr~~ent tivould be consisten~t~vith tlze C`onz~a~~h~~~sive Plafz because lir~ziiing t~ie
nz,~~~aber^ of s1~2oke shop licenses ~vould i~sz~~~ove the econoinic viability of t7~e City.
Ai~ overarchiil~ goal of tlie Coinprehensive Plan is to ensure the safety and ~~relfare of the gcneral.
public. By adhering the to il~tent of the ~reedom to Breathe Act aiad by disallowing s~z~ ~~~lil~g ar ally
type of sinolcii~g in a public buildul~, coi~plia~_ce with the Conzprehensive Plan wili be i~et.
2. The ai7le~zdineizt is in the pul~lic interest a~id is ~7ot solely far the benefit of a si~~gle pro~erty
owl~er.
l~'he l~ro~osec~ anzend~ner~t ~vould czf`ect all eomrr~~e~°ciaZly zonec~ p~~o~er~ties thl^oughout the eit~~ and is
r2ot soZel.y jor th,e Uenefit of a sin~~le ~ro~erty o~~Jr~er.
3. i~~here the a11~ei1dment is to change tlle zosii~g classiftcatio~~ c~f a particul~ propel~ty, t3~e existing
use of thc pra~erty azid tlTe zoning classifi~,ation af p~•opei-ty within the general area of tlze
property in questioll are compatible with the prapasecl zoiling classiiication.
The a~~aendinerrt rv~irld not cha~2ge t1~e zo~~ing classificcr~~ion of a pa~~ticular p~^o~e~ty.
4. Wliere the amendiu~nt is to chai~~e the zoiv~g classif"ic~tio~ of a pat~icula~' pioperty, there l~~s
1~eei~ a chaz~ge in the characte.r or tre~d of developil~e~lzt in tl~e ~eizeral atea of the pro~eity in
c~tlestion, wl~icl~ has taken place sulce such ~~roperty was plaeecl in the cz~~~-~ent zo~ing
ciassificatialz. .
Tr~e af~aen~drT~ent ~vould not cha3zge tl~e zoning cZctssificat~ion of a~a~ ticul~r° p1^o~eYty.
Staf£recoin~~~e~ids approvai of the pi~o~3osed Zo~iilg ~nendnlezlt.
uestic~ns from n~elnbers:
Selu~~itt asl~ed what other types o~busuzesses we cul7ently ha~e limits on? Saigent stated that we liz~it tl~e
izulilber of Pawn Shops, and Consigi7rnent or Secondlland Merchants, ancl tllere are res~iictio~~s on Liquar
Licel~ses being issti~ed if they do not ~neet the n~nilnum distance requireinents fio~n a school.
PL~~NNING & ZONING COn~LMISSIC}I~ MINUTES
PAGE 8
SEPTEMBER l, 2009
Thompson asked if this matter is being addressed because of City Cou11ci1 direction or if staff is the drivulg
farce behind this. He agreed that five sinoke shops is probabty ellaugh in tl2e community, b~t that tkese
businesses draw people froin outside the calrumiiuuty to aurs and that may be advantageous to otl~er
businesses in town. He went on ta say there is a lot of vacant retail space, and that so~ne business is hetter
than na businesses at all. Tholl~pson also felt that it is a cantradiction for the City ta be concemed ahout
proznoting the g~neral health af its res'rdents alid the callvnuiuty in this case, whelz it owns and operates
Muni~i~a1 Liquc~r stor~,s. I-~v ~~sQ asked if +?~e !Czty h~s ?-eceived any co~nplaints from members in the
conulzulzity regarding the smoke shops we c~nently l~ave licel~sed. And Iastly, l~e asked wliy tlzere ~iad to
be a doorway directly ta the outside for these businesses.
~argei~t said tlze door to flze autside is a requirement far Smal~e Sl~a~~s in tlze State's I'reedoin to ~reathe
Act (FBA). This wot2ld n~ake our Ordinance cor2sistent witl~ the State's requireineilts. Sargent stated that
tlze City ~ouiacil voted unaniinously to ~tace a n?oratariuin ii1 effect o~i May 26, 2009, and directed staff to
do research and bring baclc a recomineiidatio~ to t1~E Couneil oiz how to bri~~g our local QrdinanceslCode
i71to cainplia~~ce with tlle Freedo~l~ to I3reathe Act al~d to add ~vlzatever lanpuage we needed to i~l order ta
co~i~ply with the intellt of t11e law. ~taff was ~irected to consider the econonuc issues as we11 as tl~e i~nage
or reputation of the ~ity it1 tlie process. Sargent stated t11e maiii reasor~ i~1 plaeilzg the mor~tol7u~ was t11e
alnous~t af time it would talce to enforee t11e F~3A by our Poliee Departlnent clue to tlze hi~h izuinber af
smoke sllops we have compared fo otlier surioundi.ilg coin~ntulities. It is ille Police Chief's alid Cai2u~unity
Develapmellt staff'.s opiluon tllat "sazz~pling" is veing a~used by so111e of tl~e licensed establisl~i31el1ts u1 the
city, a~1c~ tl~e City d~~sn't Izave ~the anal~~o~ver aild ineai7s to police ~I~is. The ultent a~the Iaw was to
provide an o~partunity for someolle to sa~lzple a certaii~ tobacco for purchase to be smalced elsewhere. Tlus
e~ception is llot being used as intended, and tl~erefore, creates polici~~g issues. It is staff's opiniolz that if
we elimii~a~~~ the "san~pling' provisioz~, we get rid of enforcement issnes aiid fiz11y coz~ply with the FBA.
TIZis would n.oti in~terfere witli t1~.~ smol~e shops al~ility tc~ sell tob~cco ~raducts, u=]~icli is w1~at tl~ey are
licensed for. Sargent remii~cl~.d t~ie melnt~ers that according to th~ State Law, 90% of the revellue for tllese
smol~e s~zc~ps is su~p~se~ i{~ be fr~~n tbe retail sale of tabacco, tl~ey are not suppased to l~e slnolcing launges.
Sargerzt said staff recamineilded limitin~ tlle nuinber of sii7oke shaps to 5 because we cuizelltly have 4
licei~sed and we Ilad one pel~cling at the ti~~~e the moratorium was put in place. fI'he four 1'rcei~sed shops
would have first option each year to reilew their license before ~liy z~ew oizcs would be considered..
T~ia~npson tlzou~ht that allowing iive shops was fair, and tliat the shops were ~1lowed one year to comply
with t1i~ listed restricfions was also fau. lIe was coilcez7ied that otller d~-L~g parapller~alia m~y be solcl at
~tl~ese establislv~ellts. Sar~ent said it i~ i~legal to do so, and th~t 2 couple sites i~~ towi7 (~lbeit, i~at li~ensed
sinolce sho~s) have beel~ cited fo1- ~~iolati~zg this.
Pete~-soi~ sfi~igbled with tnis issue becaz~se he recognized the intent of t11e new Ordi~lance is for t11e good of
the cainmunity, but also llated izlfringi~~g on sai7leone's freedam of chaice. He asked wh~ we I~ave to make
tlzese icstrictions if tlierv Ilaven't beell any coznplai~zts. Sar~ent explained it is because son2e of tl~e
busi~esses are violating the intel~t of the FBA act. The Sfate failed to de~ine ~`sal~pli~lg", but allowed cities
to further restlict and define rnat~ters ii~ order to protect i~~dividuals fiorn secorzdhalld sinoke as mandated in
tl~e FBA. Petersall also quesfioned whe~Iier otller cities were l~aving a difficult time with euforcel~~e3z1.
Sargent explained tl~at most of the other cities only have one sinoke sha~. Colulnbia Heigl2ts curreiztly has
4, whicl~ zneans ~~e have a mucll Izighel: cazlcentration of tlus type of busiliess tha11 ather surraunding cities.
Agau~, Sargelit said we are nat eliil~nating smolce sho~s, just the maxiznum iiumber a~1d the ability to
"sarzlple" uzside tlie slzops.
PL~NNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES
PAGE 9
SEPTEMBEIZ 1, 2009
Peterson doesn't thu-lk sznol~e shops ar liquor stores are gaad far the City's image. He also realizes the
coun~-y is moving taward a"na smoking" stalzce and that there are huge can~paigns ta encourage peo~le ta
quit and to prevent young people from starti~zg. He would like to table the inatter for fiu-ther thaught and
ii~put fiom t17e missing colnzlussion rnembers.
Sclunitt doesn't see a problem witlz lifniting the nzunber to 5. S11e IZas a problem with not allowg~ig
sampling. Peo~1e w11o frec~uent tl~ase places ae aver 1$, ale already smakers, and have made t~ieir choices.
Sl~e suggested veiitilatialz requirements as the aiiswer. Sargent said that aptioi~ was callsidered, but tile
expense alad velocity of tl~e systems that would be required for a smolcing lounge were not very worlcable.
He ~oir~ted out th~t if the bustnesses are operatiFlg as tlley are supposed to, by sellulg out the door, and 11ot
aper-atiilg as a si~~okiilg loiulge, air vei~tilation would ~Zat he a~a issue. Smol~ing Iouilges are not a pe~7~litted
use u~lder tlze FBA, sa to requue adclitia~lal veiltilatioz~ woulcl I~e dif~ic~lt.
There tivas a discussian o~ tlle possibility of a115 Iicenses beii~g issned to one ~v~~ner. Si~zce alI foiu Iicez~ses
are issued to di:fferezlt individuals r~ow, t;zat seeinec~ Lu~likely to l~a~~er~.
Public Hearin~ O~ened.
fliex 13audran (~p`~) a~ attomey represcnting ~iooicall i~ingdo111 asld riooicail Paradise ~~as pre~e~~i. rie
claimed I~is biggest concern was ilever beiizg colltacted ab~ut "sainpling", about la~u enforcemel~t cal~cerns,
and about l~aeing ~~roper l~atice c~~ tlie ~eeti~zg (although i~e adi~ittec~ to I~is clien:ts receiving a~otice lasf
weel~ about the a~l~eeting}. IHe said tliere seeins to be solne conf~is~c~~ with the Stafe's ~BA aild how
busi~iesses slzould aperate, a~d tlzat the state created a grey area_ Ii~ ~-espol~se ta Schlnitt's cam~e~~t eailier,
Baudion. ~believes tlie reqziirement for a separ~te door was to provide for ~,~entilatian for salizplulg purposes.
Scli~nitt respQnded that she thought sampl~~lg was very v~ell ex~~laii~ed~ at t1~c City Cou~cil i~z~eetiz~tg a u~l~ile
baclc, ~robably when the lnaraforiuln v~%as ~ut ii~ place.
Saxgent said that is o~1e of the re~sons tlzey ar~; ieconuizellcling a b~tt~r defii~itio~l o~ wl~at "Sa~pliug" is ~~ZCI
tl~at tlze State ~~Zade a~rovisi~~~ for cities to do that il~ order ta colnply witl~ t11e inteizt of tlzc FBA.
Jo1~11 K~-adilc-3932 Longfellow St, Mimlza~olis, warked wi~lz lobbyi~ts at flze State level atl this bill. He is
conce171~d witlz the col~~lnents tl~at enforcel~e~lt seelns to be tlie issu.e a~d foo initch tin2e ~s spent olz
enfo~~cil~g t~ze FBl~. ~Ie di:~~l't understa~~d ~r~~y tlze City is t~~yiilg tc~ be ~ro-active if tlzere haveil't t~eez~ ai~y
coinplaints.
Melnbers discussed thei~ options. Sargent e~plained that the Cais~nission is suppased to malce a
recc~~lzinendatiozl to the City Council, who i~iust hold two readings and tlien tl7ere is a 3Q day waitiizg periad
befare aiz Ordil~ance goes iilta effect. T1lerefore, if a recairune~ldation is made tonight, aily Orditlance
change waL~ld i2ot take azfect u~ztil t]1e ezld of October. We slzould have an Ord~2al~ce in place before tlle
illoratoritnn expues in Novelnber. The P]a~iu~g Comnlission stated that the City Council will review this
il~alter a~d ~nake tlle final decisiol~ re~ardless af the CoilZmissioll's reconvnendatioz~.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MII~UTES
PAGE 10
SEPTEMBER l, 2009
Mayor Petersoi~ said he reille~zlbers tl~e separate daor being a requireinent for Haokah K~ngdom to get their
license. Sargezlt stated tllat all the ~~reser~t license holders do meet the separate daor requiremelZts. Mayor
Peferson said he believes the general consensus is everyone is fine with limiting the nLUnber af licelzses ta
five. It see~ns the issuP witl~ the r.nel~~b~rs is "Item D'' of the Zanin~ Ordinance a~z~el~ded proposal (tc~ allow
saii~pling af lighted tabacco}. Thotilpson a.i1d Petersan a~ eed wi~Il Mayor Peterson.
Sargei~t said if the recainznendation af t11e coi~u~lissioll is ta allaw sampling t11en to izlalce a rl~otion ta leave
the current Ordill~~ce as is because it i~ee.ts F~A requuements, aiid to just lim.it the number of licenses for
sz~lalce shops to five.
Public Hearin~ Closed.
l~lotion by ,S~c1~~initt, secc~nded by Tho»rpson, to adopi~ the guidelines af tl7e FB~1 cznd 10 li~nzt~ the nutnber of
sr~2oke s~~op lzcenses to f ive. All ayes. MOTIC~I~I PASS~I~.
Sargent will piit language i~fo our prese~it Ordinallce to nleet FBA guidelines and tlus matter ~uill be
dis~usse~ ~y t1~e City Coui~eil Septelnber 14, 2009.
I~~~ ~~7~~IrT~~~
Noile at this tiine.
The l~leeting was adj~ui-ned at 8:30 pin.
Res~ectfully subnzitted,
~
~, ~ ~~~,,,~ ~-~,
Y ~~~~.~~. ~ ~
~
Shelle,y Hansoll
S ecretary