##VIDEO ID:21oNqPc8L2w## e e good evening I will now call this meeting to order first order of business tonight is to adopt the agenda for tonight's meeting Commissioners is there a motion to adopt the final agenda so move second a motion and second all those in favor oppos thank you the motion carries our next order of business is to adopt the minutes from our August 20th 2024 Planning Commission meeting Commissioners is there a motion to approve the minutes so moved second motion and second all those in favor I opposed thank you the motion carries we now move on to our discussion items first discussion item tonight is item 3.1 consider a final plat and final PUD for Victoria sa this item does include a public hearing I will now turn turn it over to city planner Brian McCain for a staff presentation I will then open the public hearing for those in the chambers this evening that wish to speak on this request thank you chair and uh plan Commissioners tonight we have a proposed final plat and PUD as you noted for V the first phase of Victoria South the applicant for this application is Golden Valley Land Company um and then as you are aware we had the sketch plat process at the beginning of this year for this development uh they presented two options at that meeting they were uh notified to move forward with option b as a potential proposal and they submitted a preliminary plat application back in May which was approved by the city council at their May 13th meeting and as you all aware as well the final plat process is where we look at the final details for development and finalize a development agreement to move forward with a development so that's the phase that we are at this evening for the location and existing conditions it's just south of the railroad and the marsh Hollow development is also located on the west side of County Road 11 the current site conditions include vacant farms uh Farm fields and uh removed Farm structures with some Wetlands on the west side of the site and few portions of trees to the North Central and South of the area a portion of the West chesca Creek also runs through the northeast corner um so for this final plat they did receive annexation approval as part of their preliminary plat approval so it automatically has an agricultural zoning classification they are proposing a PUD this evening with underlying R4 high density residential uh part of this PUD is for the 70 units for the town homes that they are proposing uh for the entire site it's just over 24 Acres the area that they're really focusing on here for these 70 Town Homes is about 7.4 Acres that puts the density at about 9 1 12 unit per Acres you might remember that this area is guided between 12 and 3 36 units per acre we did run this by the Metropolitan Council back through preliminary plat to verify that this wasn't going to require a comp plan Amendment for phase development they confirmed at that time that a comp plan Amendment would not be required so we don't expect one moving forward if they were to request a sewer extension permit so for the second part of their application the planned unit development or PUD as you all know the purpose is to allow innov creative and flexible development uh the process the initial input is applied at sketch plat then the details are approved during the preliminary plat and then at final plat we adopt the official ordinance resoning the property to PUD so just to reiterate some of the deviations proposed with this development I have them on the screen for you here they were also included in the report uh a typical core coridor for public Street the is 120 ft they're proposing 65 ft for the private Street Corridor in this area uh they also have an apartment parking requirement of two spaces per unit with one of those being enclosed their parking comes out to about 1.9 spaces per unit so a slight reduction in the number of enclosed stalls the front setbacks for the town homes and the clubhouse are proposed to be reduced down to 20 ft for each and then for the patio side and rear setbacks they're required 5T and 10 feet but they're proposing zero feet for both and for the town home impervious our code has it at 75% they're proposing 95% that and the patio reductions are fairly common for Town Home developments the lot typically only encompasses the building uh and any proposed patio improvements in the back and then our code also stipulates ax maximum number of apartment units at 100 they are proposing 144 units at their preliminary plat and then their landscape BMS uh are typically required to have a 3:1 SL slope but a 2 to one slope can be approved by the city council moving on to the architecture lighting and signage renderings and proposed materials for the town homes meet our requirements you may recall that some of the units on the ends will be single story living um they also did provide some lighting specifications at intersections and for the apartment building we have not received those but those will be required with the site plan application and they also have not provided sign renderings yet moving on to Landscaping they are required to have a minimum 25% they're showing just about 52% so they're well over that requirement they need one tree and one shrub for every th000 ft of open space they're also meeting that requirement uh they need to have 40ft buffers adjacent to County Road 11 for residential uses they do have them on the plan and as I noted in the last slide um they are proposing two to one unmaintained slopes for those BMS which is a deviation and then for Boulevard trees they're required to have them every 35 to 45 ft some of the plans show spacing that does not meet the requirements of that some of them are shown to be about 100 ft or more apart and then for foundation plantings they're required around town homes and the apartment building which those renderings were not provided for tree preservation they're proposing 29% removal which does require mitigation for that extra 9% which results in about 47 3-in replacement trees uh those will be filled in on the North adjacent to the railroad to act as an additional buffer no burm is proposed with that buffer for parking and pedestrian connections town homes are required two spaces with two of them enclosed for half the units and one enclosed for the other half uh the renderings that I showed that they provided at preliminary plat seem to meet those parking requirements and then the parking deviation for the apartment building that I talked about earlier they are showing some trail connections along the collector Road and along County Road 11 with future improvements for Park dedication the calculation for 70 Town Homes comes out to be uh 1.86 acres of land for dedication or $196,000 or some blend of land and cash dedication they're not proposing a park with this development so uh cash fee is anticipated with some reductions to the trails along the collector and the county road for Access and streets they're gaining their access mainly from County Road 11 with a proposed 3/4 access as I mentioned earlier they also have a minimum 65 ft wide Corridor uh for the private drives and the County Road 11 improvements aren't anticipated until 2027 so the city has had some preliminary discussions with the developer about a potential agreement to conduct these improvements prior to the County's reconstruction schedule for the site utilities they are proposed to come from the Marsh Hall development to the north now one of the conditions of the preliminary plat approval back in May stipulated that the well number six must be completed and permitted for pumping by the R prior to final plat approval to serve this development since it's outside of the current city boundaries uh as Cara mentioned at the last meeting there are some parts arriving this month for the well to complete the construction of it but we still don't know when it will be permitted for pumping by the DNR which could impact the construction schedule regarding the storm water management it's subject to the ccwo rules with review by Cara and then Wetland impacts are also subject to their rules buffers should be ploted as outlots and the pond access must meet City standards these were included in the case report these are the preliminary plat requirements back from their approval in May you can see a few of those items are still in process or have not been provided to us yet uh for approval and then I also included some staff proposed conditions for approval in case the Planning Commission does decide to recommend approval you can add or remove any of these conditions as you see fit for your recommendation to the city council and with that a public hearing is required for the ordinance resoning it this evening it was published in the Waconia Patriot on August 22nd and provided to Residents within 350 ft of the development boundaries was also posted on the city's website and a copy of it is on the monitor at City Hall the planing commission should hold a public hearing prior to make making a recommendation to the city council with that I have a few sample motions for you on the screen this evening uh the applicant is in the audience and staff can stand for any questions as well thank you Brian does the applicant wish to speak uh good evening my name is Matt pavic civil sitech group um uh I am here to stand for any questions that you have we concur with staff's report our final plans are consistent with the preliminary plat that was approved there's a couple of outstanding technical items that we're still working with staff to resolve but we we're confident we can work with staff to do those things um the the one question I had on the uh the tree Boulevard spacing um that was a comment that I had missed Our intention is to meet that requirement with the 35- foot spacing along the collector Road um this may be referring to spacing on the private drives uh where we only have the ability to put it every so often or we have space between the driveways so it could have something to do with that I don't know Brian wants to clarify uh that comment but we do meet it on the public road so um other than that um we are uh like I said confident we can work through any other technical items with staff as we proceed thank you thank you I will now open the public hearing is there anyone in the chambers this evening who wish to comment on this item seeing no one in the chambers this evening um did I get a motion to close the public hearing so Move Motion second motion a second all those in favor I I oppos thank you the motion carries the public hearing is closed I will now open the floor to the Planning Commission to discuss Commissioners any questions or comments mat I have one for you um I noted um and mentioned to commissioner  that there seem to be almost 50 open Loops yet to be completed did according to the staff memorandum uh before the the project can really go forward my question to you and and you know it's your Financial Risk do you see any significant showstoppers among those open Loops uh no we do not we've been reviewing those for the past couple of weeks most of them um are engineering related technical detailing items which were actually in the process of resubmitting to the city probably by the end of the day tomorrow so um we have reviewed them I don't see any showstoppers obviously the well needs to be working or we got to have water you know so that's something that we're waiting on some final details from carara which we expect I spoke with her today she said she should have some more information for us by Thursday this week um so we're we're aware of that and um understand that that that has to be satisfied to staff's uh satisfaction so we're we're comfortable with the conditions okay what's the likelihood of well number six not getting completed or capable to serve this area uh chair and commissioner pson in relation to this project specifically um I'm not quite sure how to answer that honestly uh it depends on their construction schedule as I mentioned in the report and the presentation to tonight it could slow their schedule it could delay it I don't anticipate that it would completely unravel their project but uh final plat approvals are good for two years I believe so if they were to receive approval from city council they have two years to complete their infrastructure so it provides a significant timeline for him okay I mean those are the two things that jumped out at me as well number six if you know we get the parts we build it it's all ready to go and the DNR says no you can't do this here or you've got to do something else different um you know at the end of the day you're probably going to be able to come up with an agreement and be able to work with them I guess my only thing is why wasn't or is it in progress for a traffic impact report to be done that was the one that kind of jumped out at me as being probably should get this done uh Commissioners on that topic we do have that in process there's a little bit of a hold because we're working with the county on the final design of the county road so that traffic study will be interlaced with that final design so again it's an item that we're aware of that we'll have uh completed uh to to finalize the design of that County Road in the intersections based on the traffic from our project and the project to our South that's uh was just in for sketch PL I think last week or week before okay this said one question Brian I think there's several items in here that are like the uh renderings appear to meet the requirement but how do we ensure that they meet the requirement versus just the renderings can that is that a I don't think it's a condition on because there's a lot of those items how do you address that sure uh chair and commissioner Sora so that will likely be evaluated with building permits for the units because the requirement for the town home parkings is just to make sure that they have two enclosed spaces as well as two driveway spaces is essentially what the code is trying to say so that would be up to staff's review at the building permit phase to verify that each unit has a two-y garage as well as driveway space to accommodate that so most of the streets in here are private streets correct uh just to highlight the streets again so this street a here that they've labeled with the red that is the only public road that is proposed in this development that will be the collector Road extending from Victoria Drive and going down south to the Future commercial area areas everything else they're showing is private drives and is there at one time you had a pathway by the railroad tracks did that go away to connect the two neighborhoods or uh Mr chairman yes uh we had shown that as a concept early on and as we explored the safety of that in proximity to the road crossing it was determined not to be advisable to put that there um we're ende ing to get a quiet Crossing approved as part of the County Road improvements through there and that surely wouldn't be a lot if there was a pedestrian crossing a couple hundred feet from it so uh we had to remove that connection uh we still do have obviously the connection along the county road uh to connect the two neighborhoods together guess I have one other question 2:1 burm versus 3:1 burm how many 2 to one BMS do we have in the city and does that just mean it's steeper and could erode faster or is that is it that big of a deal it's to to answer your question I'm I'm not sure how many we have existing in the city right now I would venture we have a few of them and then regarding the reduction in the slope it's less steep um 3 to one is less steep than a 2:1 uh but the the idea with a 3:1 slope is it's supposed to be maintainable with a riding lawnmower a 2 to one you cannot put a riding lawnmower on it but it's still uh so you consider it kind of unmaintained natural vegetation but not overly steep where it should rode um it's similar to any mot Bri Bridge abutment you'll see driving along any freeway those are all two to ones you know kind of coming into Bridge areas those are just natural vegetation um so it's a similar situation to that and I think there are several around town we've heard about I don't know how to name which ones they are but Cara uh was comfortable with our proposal there what's currently along County Road 11 like to the north um as part of the lak Town development I would guess that's also a 2 to one unmaintained Slope Drive past and notice it's it's a taller slope with um some more vegetative growth it's not frequently mowed similar to what the applicant is proposing here this evening I guess consistency is what you'd want it to look like I guess good point is there uh is there any concern on your part based on the the economy and some of the issues and whether that will delay uh any sort of progress at all um from our perspective actually it's a positive outlook interest rates are going down um which helps uh the projects um Financial feasibility um so that's a good thing um and there's just still a remaining high demand for rental and and uh for sale housing especially in Victoria so we're not we're not concerned about that any other questions hearing no more discussion can I get a motion I would move to recommend that the city council approve the requested application for V Victoria South with the with the consideration of the topics that we discussed this evening traffic trees well homeowners association signage and stuff like that's listed in there but we didn't touch on them but obviously well number six being is that a motion or is that just bad all all staff's recommendations right all staff's recommendations there we go I'll second a motion in a second all those in favor I I opposed thank you the motion carries our second and final item this evening is item 3.2 discuss local regulations on cannabis I will now turn it over to community and economic development director Jen Brewington and Associate planner Travis beerley for staff presentation good evening chair and commission uh tonight we're going uh we're to talk about the Cannabis ordinances just little background on them uh retail cannabis is projected to be going into effect January 1st of next year uh there's a few things that had to be done to get to that point including the state establishing the office of can management there's also a state statute which is 342 which regulates all of the Cannabis sales there's also a rul making process that had to go through um which the state is still or the office of Canabis management is still finalizing after receiving comments from uh cities and counties throughout the state uh what we need to look at is the local ordinance part of this entire process with that in there with our local ordinances we need to establish our ordinance which includes definitions um the administration piece which is also permanent enforcement currently staff is working with uh the county on having possibly having the county take over that role for us as well uh there'll be more information on that once a lot of that stuff gets settled a lot of that depending on the rules being finalized in addition uh we should be looking at regulations and restrictions uh the same we would with any other type of use in town as well as any type of special permits uh the big three things that staff is looking for feedback and discussion from the Planning Commission tonight include the zoning districts which right now staff is identified as our Central business district and our C1 and C2 zoning districts um we're looking at the hours of operation and those hours would align with um on and off sale liquor establishments so if you can go into a liquor store you'd be able to purchase these products if a permit's been issued the same thing with a bar and only during those hours which alcohol can be sold um in addition to that we also took a look at restricting distances for specific uses such as schools dayc carees public parks other cannabis retail um and the staff perspective is those restrictions don't really fit with needing to put them into our ordinance because of of how our non-residential districts are set up in addition to that we we looked at the final thing which is a residential treatment facility restriction which the state would give us a maximum of 500 ft as a minimum buffer so with that um I would staff would like to get some feedback from the Planning Commission on thoughts on cannabis regulations thank you go ahead um I know this is just really Broad and um now I'm trying to think what C1 and C2 chair uh C1 and C2 are the proposed non-residential uh zonings that uh city planner McAn has talked about and brought forward basically you have commercial districts which are abing up or near residential as which are more for your neighborhood small strip malls your mom and top typ mom and pop type shops and then you have your C2 which is more your large commercial so that's going to be where you'd have fast food restaurants or where you have a Target or some of the larger type of retailers now would you include residential in this ordinance that I can't sell it out of my house underneath the current reg or underneath the proposal uh this would be restricted just to the three non-commercial districts um I'm not sure if the state would issue a permit to sell out of your home uh that'd be part of the ru making procedure that hasn't been finalized at this point so chair and commissioner so really what we want is your feedback on where do you want a business where do you want this to be allowed so when you talk about your central business district it's our current downtown it's the future downtown west and then you're talking about your commercial areas which is more of your sth growth so we're talking today where meaning zoning where do you want to allow these businesses right and then the operation piece we want to restrict what time they can sell said product and then do we want to keep these business businesses these operations away from certain types of other businesses like noted on the screen so really we want feedback on these three bullets as we start continuing to basically develop our ordinance here let me make a recommendation so didn't we have we have under the central business district we have like allowed uses and then we have uses that are permitted under special permission and those are our conditional uses and if it fit under a conditional use but otherwise is restricted so for example I think in Denver there's several cities in Greater Metro that just don't allow it and so you'll be in a city through a pocket there'll be no dispensaries and those cities are happy with that decision because I don't know a it's not taking the retail space of some other business that all people want to use I mean kind of like a a liquor store I guess would be or a bar I think we had tattoo parlors fit under that and our conditional uses where we allowed it but we didn't want three of them lined up in downtown Victoria um so I think that would be appropriate there and then the neighborhood uh commercial and Community commercial um could they be conditional under those as well uh commissioner that uh some great questions underneath the statutes the city is required to allow at least one retail location for adult use cannabis for every 12 a half thousand residents so up to 24,999 we have to allow at least one um and that's kind of in place uh we're not mandated to open one but mandated to allow one in one of these three sections these are just the proposed sections whatever zones we wanted but yes we have to allow it somewhere in the city and if and if a retailer came in was able to get a permit from the state and they met our zoning regulations we would have to permit it so as a conditional use if we allowed it under a community commercial for example would that Force the applicant to apply for that correct in the community commercial commissioner yes I would right now one of the questions that have come up in in a lot of the meetings with the state with ocm is doing just just that doing a conditional use permit part of their permitting process makes it really short and so it's 30 days and it'll take staff and the Planning Commission and Council longer than 30 days to do a cup but that's something that we are having discuss and other communities are pushing to get those timelines extended for approvals so this has been a hornets nest of issues um and staff should be commended for thinking about this in advance one thing I would note is that minat 34213 spells out local control options and to some extent our hands are tied uh as Travis alluded to we can only uh we we must issue one permit for every 12,500 residents and I'm guessing we're getting close if not above that number of res over 10 right now soon um my input would be that we would probably a want to wait until ocm issues its model rules and regulations before we do anything but begin thinking through some of the tough issues and two think about the time place and manner restrictions that we want for example I would strongly recommend not on the on the waterfront that borders our beautiful downtown area because it attracts a lot of families and I don't know that that's the sort of business that we would want featured as people come to visit downtown Victoria not it's obviously a legal substance um but we wouldn't want a liquor store there necessarily either and so I think that we should be careful about um limiting the number of establishments to the extent we lawfully May and then thinking carefully through time place and Mana restrictions um one question I have is whether we could combine liquor licenses with cannabis licenses to minimize the number of establishments I don't know the answer to that question I don't believe that we can but we have we meaning myself and the other Community Development directors throughout the county have been discussing this on how that licensing will work um my thoughts are Council will feel the same way and wanting to hands off on that licensing process to exactly that point because we don't do liquor um so we're trying to figure out what is the best use of Staff time and also the enforcement piece right so we won't have that option really either we would like Carver County to take care of that so to your point commissioner you know the time place and manner is really what we're looking for on the feedback from you tonight um and again this is going to evolve a little bit more as we learn more um but we need a starting point and we have to allow it somewhere um and I know that this first year to two years they're doing Lottery system so we could have making this up 10 applicants from the city of Victoria and no one get a license because of the lottery systems they're only allowing certain amount of businesses to open this first year to two years to kind of see how it goes um so we may not even see anything this first year but we've got to be prepared when we get the green light to go and we've got people knocking on our door wanting to open businesses and we need to be fair and Equitable in how we prohibit these or allow these from uh from my standpoint um reviewing the U uh the packet for the meeting um a um C1 uh strip mall type of location would be um if you know we we will be doing this either sooner or or later but the the ideal location from my point of view would be a uh a strip mall type location versus certainly um in the uh Central business district and and certainly um to um um Community commercial that seems not you know maybe an ice cream shop would be would would be appropriate but uh but I think in and you know one can name any one of you know the the one on Highway five you know for for example would would be um would be where where I would Envision that something like that would go can I ask a cannabis question that I probably should know the answer to but can't companies sell cannabis right now I mean I can come up with four places I know that sell it in the city right now I I don't I don't use it so I'm not really sure yeah commissioner there are several varieties of cannabis and cannabis like products so this the statute more focuses at the flower version of cannabis so what you typically think about you think about people smoking cannabis and then there's also CBD and there's cannabis oids and there's low uh low potency hemp Edibles and all this other type of stuff so when you hear Delta 8 Delta 9 Gummy Bears or whatnot those are different types of products that have been regulated over the past several years underneath the Department of Health that all that regulatory stuff has now moved over to the office of cannabis management and it's being expanded to include flour and that type of product so this is for smoking more or less okay um if some if we have a conditional use under all three of those districts or those uh zoning districts is it possible that somebody applies under one as a conditional use and the Planning Commission could deny it and they could apply under one of the other two and they ultimately get would would get approval under one but we could deny it you know what I mean it gives you the ability to not decide really until you need to commissioner if we have a a conditional use permit required for the retail operation or for any of the other type of businesses which are included in this what happens that conditional use permit makes it a a permitted use and the commission will only be able to put um reasonable conditions for the operation on it such if the hours were restricted more or if location odors and traffic and things like that um however if they got denied in one district and chose to apply for a different District or different location as long as it was still permitted even under Cup in our ordinance we would have to entertain it I understand that but so for example if somebody applied under the central business district and we did not approve that conditional use and recommended that they apply under the neighborhood commercial uh district and then they could do that and then we would approve it under our requirement do you see how I'm restricting their ability to get it in a place we don't want it but maybe as the city grew we would want that flexibility and and commissioner that that's a good point um and that's kind of why we're looking at where do we want it if we wanted to not have the sale or the retail of it in our downtowns or we'd wanted someplace else or vice versa what we would do is we would set up our bulk standards um for where everything can be can be and we would say it's not permitted in the CBD but it's permitted in C1 or C2 or permitted with conditional use or or however that would look uh staff does plan to bring a draft of the ordinance back to the Planning Commission um probably within the next few weeks to month or so we're still going to have County regulations that we're going to have to adhere to as well State I think about the plat project just approved and all those 144 144 units if everybody decided to use cannabis uh and there were a handful of people that didn't like it it would really be a burden for those people so I'm guessing there will be more state regulations around use we're talking about basically zoning requirements talking about selling not using well I think um I think Jen's approach the uh earlier discussion was uh what are other municipalities in Carver County doing and and certainly my you know my Approach would be rather than Reinventing the wheel let's take a look at what other what other people are doing and either use you know use or delete you know things that they are doing and I think there's a lot to be learned uh from there I think you know I think the Gathering of information um we have we have some time to you know to truly get something firmed up but uh but gather the information from other you know I've heard you know from um a variety of other different states what what they're doing and you know they they asked me if it was a topic that that was going to come up and I said um yeah sooner rather than later I'm sure and um and you know certainly other other states have uh have some experience that we could utilize at the at the same time so Jen so you guys are staff's looking for do we want it in the CB Central business district C1 and C2 or do we just want it in the central business district or do that's what you're looking from us from tonight do you do we want it you know for hours of operation I think it should match on and off sale liquor MH um restricted distances from you know it should be restricted from schools daycares treatment centers um all that um you know it's just the zoning districts are where do you want to allow it and and where don't you and um and that's kind of the biggest question um but like right now in the central business district I know there's at least three that are already selling CBD products or there were more I don't know I know have three I can think of off the top of my head um but think of it as a dispensary right well I know there's no dispensaries here well I know there's one that wants to be or has applied to be um and he's in they're in the central business district um so that's I guess is the question for staff wants to know do we want it do we not and if we say no not in the central business district but in the community commercial or then it'll exclude some and and so forth and I guess that's what you're looking for um from us is you know when you're writing the Ordinance do we write it how do we write it and if it's and if we're not going to allow it in the central bu business district then let's not spend time writing that portion if if we were to do it in the uh in the form of a resolution um I would certainly make a resolution that we would do C1 and C1 only but describe again and C2 and C1 C1 would be more of your your smaller neighborhoods with smaller stores like your grocery store your hardware store right those smaller like You' mentioned Mom and Pop shops the C2 would be more where your Home Depot your larger big box stores are Boston Scientific like there's larger companies lot heavier traffic you know not like your downtown you're seeing so different What would would like uh you know there's there's the the place next to Cub that's a um like a vape shop and then there's an MGM right next to it and then there's uh the sporting used sporting goods store what would that be considered do you think CH and chasa C1 or C2 [Music] two a C2 C2 see I mean I think we're getting into an area where you don't want to kind of prevent a decision on the other one yeah I mean to me I we don't want to become the city of dispensaries and so my view is that we should limit the number of licenses to the minimum required by law and secondly um we should um be careful I I don't know if the right answer is C1 and C2 or both um but either should be conditional uses not permitted uses outright so that at least we have some say as to time place and manner with respect the resale can you treat the permit as collectively under C1 or C2 how about you could do that yeah right some way for us to make a good choice when something comes up that we can have some insight on the benefit to our community chair commission one thing that we will be doing is Staff will be bringing back the non-residential the C1 and C2 po standards believe CBD andal as um for review of public hearing and potential adoption so there'll be a little bit more insight with all the different type of uses that are there as well as it's in the previous packet from from the 20th so there it's not the easiest decision but there is information out there the biggest way to look at it is do we want it downtown do we want it near neighborhoods or do we want it away from the neighborhoods as much as possible so and I do want to remind everybody that this is just for the retail sale as far as consumption and things like that that's handled through different methods are there any other um permits that are absolutely required like this where the city has to approve at least one per X number of residents not that I'm aware of it's wild has a question about on and off sale to me those are two different things on would be open out 2 a.m. off sale shuts down at 10:00 right commission that's correct I would recommend offsale as opposed to on sale just from the standpoint of you know you want people going to dispensary at 1:30 a.m. because they can and the idea behind it is um and we can certainly set a 10:00 limit on it I believe that's within hours that the state's providing us for restrictions if um vix or Floyd or whoever wanted to be were able to obtain a permit for the sale of the Canabis products if their if their bars open till 1: or 2 in the morning and they have to stop sales at 10: it be it can become a regulatory challenge but it is it's a it's a good point of discussion and staff's had a lot of discussion about that just because it's a management piece um didn't the state say you can't sell both or am I wrong there there's no rule or statute that I've seen commissioner that say you can't sell both why why wouldn't we have it match liquor store hours not liquor sales hours we we could do that as is that more where you were going commission that's where I was going with it but then you threw the curveball in what if one of the exist establishments that is open till 2 a.m. gets a dispensary permit or capability then we just have to shut them down at 10 o'clock at night which just becomes a difficult thing to manage for sure I took it as a given that it would be no greater than the off sale liquor sales hours yeah liquor store yeah and then restricted distances I think schools is smart I think dayc carees is smart maybe a little bit more challenging city of lakes and Parks you might run into some situations there but [Music] um I think I think the rest are fine I think I would Redline public parks out of there just because there are so many of them and we aren't really sure what it's going to look like all over the place I think that would be probably to deter as much as possible and probably enforcement would be complete challenge we ran into this with some other thing we were talking about on smoking or not smoking and chewing and drinking and vaping and yeah and Commissioners just so you're aware uh Carver County as a whole I believe is heading down the path of not allowing in any other public spaces or Parks which I believe Council feels the same on that we would probably just copy paste that yeah be quite honest um which I think staff you know we support and we're fine with again that enforcement piece would be out of our hands but we would let the county and our CSO team deal with that when that time comes I mean that's for using I'm just thinking about where if we say see1 conditional use permit you can open up your dispensary and one of them opens up next to the new gas station going up in the southern growth district is that 500 feet from a park might be I don't know I'm just throwing it out there or you got 13 and a half acres I mean something goes in you know a strip mall or whatever retail area goes in there and what's your Park in the 13 and a half acres um for future you know and then course Band Shell down here you know that how close is the Band Shell to what distance you know uh to we just have a lot of parks and well I think lock I think this discussion highlights the importance of having local um control of the issue as opposed to devolving it even to the county level when it comes to um ordinances and Zoning code enforcement um I think you can you can probably share resources around enforcement but I think these zoning decisions are are really Comm Community Driven and it is important I think that Victoria retain the control of the zoning of businesses uh especially one that um carries as much controversy as perhaps cannabis does it may not in 20 years but right now it's it's a lightning ride I just think because we're throwing around proper names the new CBD store what is it called Min something or other that was the yeah I mean that's within 500 feet of kir locken Park they wouldn't be able to get a permit from US based on that just I think it is it's close if it's not but one thing that's not in here I like to point out there's an advertising piece for signage the sale of the product um in the in the draft that been working on we do have restrictions uh or we we put in restrictions for that reason of if there's minors and things like that to displaying the sale of the product um because we do have challenging with the number of parks that we have in town and and with where our districts are and we have a lot of open space recreational facilities does that help that definitely helps and again we'll be bringing this back to and we'll be looking at our Market cities as well to see what they're doing getting more feedback from just other colleagues and just paying attention to ocm and what they've got um working in the next few months here so thank you for the feedback I think this is a good start um and yeah you'll be seeing this again right sounds good that concludes our discussion items this evening moving on to the miscellaneous section of our agenda staff do you have any miscellaneous items yes thank you chair uh you'll notice we have a new face on the commission this evening we do have Jason Otto here he will be our alternate number two uh since Matt had to step down from the role at the last meeting I believe I mentioned in the miscellaneous uh section so plan to see Jason at Future meetings here make sure to stop and say hi to him get to know him a little bit after the meeting this evening uh secondly we are still planning on having our September 17th meeting we do have two items for that agenda uh the first one being as Travis mentioned we are officially moving forward with the public hearing hearing for our ordinances related to signs fences commercial districts uh all that stuff that we reviewed last time City Council uh reviewed that at their last meeting it didn't have any major concerns so we're moving forward with formal adoption and then secondly we have a variance to Carver County septics standards which Travis will be leading uh with some technical support from Carver County on that item and then if you watch the council meeting on Monday you'll know that the Victoria commercial proposal for the gas station is a quick trip I don't know if you all had heard that but I thought that would be notable notable information for you all to know and then lastly we have a second company in town starting their fiber installation uh midco you'll see them around town we do have another web page devoted to this so we have a separate Metronet page and a separate midco page under the streets projects portion of our website so uh that's all from staff thank you Commissioners any miscellaneous items any other uh comments on Highway 5 after the uh presentation SCH chair is here yes commissioner good question so um we had a great turnout at the open house over 300 people showed up so um we got to show a lot of the staging and just get feedback from more neighbors and um just show construction process things like that it is updated on the Carver County website so all of the meeting information will be on there so if you'd like we can send out a link to where that is located um but I highly recommend following their page following their social media get get the email updates um they do a good job of sending out information to Residents um along with myself I send out information to business owners um and Property Owners just on what's going on what's the updates um but I wouldn't say anything Earth shattering news anything new um I would just recommend following them page for for the updates on that uh but staging and construction dates are getting finalized shortly which is exciting thank you since there's no more items for tonight this evening can I ask for a motion to adjourn so moved motion you a second second motion a second all those in favor I oppos thank you the motion carries we are Jour football for