Loading...
08-30-2016HOPKINS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA Tuesday, August 30, 2016 6:30 pm THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE UNTIL THE START OF PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING I. CALL TO ORDER II. ADOPT AGENDA III. OPEN AGENDA – PUBLIC COMMENTS/CONCERNS IV. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Minutes of the July 26, 2016, Planning & Zoning Commission V. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Planning & Zoning Commission Bylaws Update (Planning Application 16-12-TA) 2. Medical Cannabis (Planning Application 16-13-TA) VI. OLD BUSINESS VII. NEW BUSINESS VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS IX. ADJOURN UNOFFICIAL PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES July 26, 2016 A regular meeting of the Hopkins Planning & Zoning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 26, 2016, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Hopkins City Hall. Present were Commission Members Laura L. Daly, Kristin Hanneman, Brian Hunke, Mathew McNeil, Gary Newhouse, and Emily Wallace-Jackson. Absent was Commissioner James Warden. Also present were City Planner Jason Lindahl and Planning and Economic Development Intern Sarah Emmel. CALL TO ORDER Chair Hunke called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. Mr. Lindahl introduced and welcomed new Commissioners Laura L. Daly and Kristin Hanneman, each starting her first, two-year term on the Planning & Zoning Commission. ADOPT AGENDA Commissioner McNeil moved, Commissioner Newhouse seconded, to adopt the agenda. The motion was approved unanimously. OPEN AGENDA – PUBLIC COMMENTS/CONCERNS – none. CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Wallace-Jackson moved, Commissioner McNeil seconded, to approve the minutes of the June 28, 2016, regular meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Temporary Family Health Care Dwelling (16-15-TA) Planning and Economic Development Intern Sarah Emmel presented this item, highlighting some of the following aspects of the law passed in May 2016: • Cities may opt out by September 1, 2016, or will be required to allow the dwelling units, subject to provisions outlined in the law. • Public hearing requirement is waived, but affidavit stating that neighbors have been notified is required. • Certification from health care professional for physical or mental need is required. • Many cities including surrounding St. Louis Park, Minnetonka and Excelsior have opted out due to small lot sizes. • The law is broad with no ability to partially opt out. • Cities would possess non-public medical information about the resident. Chairman Hunke opened the public hearing. No one came forward to speak. Commissioner Newhouse moved, Commissioner McNeil seconded, to close the public hearing. The hearing was closed at 6:52 p.m. UNOFFICIAL Minutes of the Planning & Zoning Commission, July 26, 2016 – Page 2 The Commission then had general discussion about temporary health care dwellings. Commissioner McNeil asked if the City could approve parts but not all of this law. Ms. Emmel replied no, the City must either opt out of the law or accept all of its provisions. Commissioner Wallace-Jackson asked about the inspection process and how these units would connect to utilities. Staff replied that the law provided for a limited inspection process and that these units would connect to the host site’s utilities or be pumped out similar to other recreational vehicles. Commissioner McNeil asked if there was any way to accommodate this type of activity under the City’s existing code. Mr. Lindahl replied that Hopkins code does allow for a second permanent dwelling unit in R-1-A and R-2 districts. The code prohibits the use of temporary structures or recreational vehicles as dwelling units. Commissioner McNeil asked if anyone has ever applied for a health care dwelling and asked staff to create a handout for residents detailing what is allowed under the existing code. He also asked whether follow-up inspection is detailed in the law. Ms. Emmel responded that there is an allowance for the City to inspect and a stipulation that 60-day notice must be given to terminate. Mr. Lindahl stated the law was brought about by the industry and did not include the usual procedure with a work session, local comment and feedback, and public hearing, etc. No consideration of different zoning districts, lot sizes was included. The City Council requested staff to explore opting out of the law and consider using local standards to address a need for care of those unable to live alone. Commissioner McNeil moved, Commissioner Newhouse seconded, to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2016-11, recommending the City Council approve an ordinance opting out of the requirements of Minnesota Statute, Section 462.3593, related to temporary family health care dwellings. The motion was approved unanimously. OLD BUSINESS - Mr. Lindahl stated there is no old business. NEW BUSINESS - Mr. Lindahl stated there is no new business. ANNOUNCEMENTS During the announcements, Mr. Lindahl updated the Planning & Zoning Commission on the following items. 1. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update – Staff is making an effort to inform and get feedback from the all segments of the public and is using community events as one means. Engagement sessions have included a poetry wagon, chalkboards, and promotion of the Cultivate Hopkins web site at the Raspberry Festival City booth. The video for the Plan is now up on the Cultivate Hopkins web site. Staff and Council have plans to be present at Summerfest movies and the Farmers Market also. Commissioners can pick up promotional materials to hand out at their National Night Out parties. 2. NAPA Auto Store – NAPA submitted a site plan application one year ago, and has now completed the requirements. A permit will be issued soon for a building addition and parking lot improvement. UNOFFICIAL Minutes of the Planning & Zoning Commission, July 26, 2016 – Page 3 3. Mainstreet Economic Development Plan – The most recent task force meeting focused on uses and different activities on Mainstreet, and there was a strong consensus to move away from auto uses, improve the appearance of the buildings, add apparel and incubator businesses and consider an urban dog park on West Mainstreet. The speaker at the meeting was enthusiastic about retail because, he said, the Mainstreet feel is what people are looking for and Hopkins has a good start now. The Firestone business west of the HCA has closed, and the building is listed for sale. The City has had some questions about the property, primarily regarding auto uses. The site is in the B-3 district, right across the street from the border of the B-2 district. The next task force meeting will focus on ways to activate the street. 4. LRT – The record of decision from the federal government is done (a milestone); however, with the uncertainty at the state Legislature, the start date has been moved to 2021. ADJOURN Commissioner Newhouse moved, Commissioner Hanneman seconded, to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 7:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Shannon Smith August 30, 2016 Planning Application 16-12-TA Review and Update of Regulations Governing the Planning & Zoning Commission Proposed Action: Staff recommends the following motion: • Move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2016-12, recommending the City Council approve an amendment to the City of Hopkins Planning & Zoning Commission Bylaws. Overview This application was initiated by staff to update the regulations and Bylaws governing the Planning & Zoning Commission. The Planning & Zoning Commission is regulated by The City Charter, Section 325 of the City Code and the Bylaws. The Commission reviewed these items and provided comments to staff during the May 31, 2016, meeting. A summary of those comments is provided below. Based on these comments, and in consultation with the City Attorney, staff has prepared the attached revised Bylaws for review and approval by the Commission. Should the Commission recommend approval of the revised Bylaws, this item will move on to the City Council for final approval. Primary Issues to Consider • Legal Authority • Chapter 8 of the Hopkins City Charter – City Planning • City Code Section 325 – Planning & Zoning Commission • Planning & Zoning Commission Bylaws Revisions Supporting Documents • Planning & Zoning Commission Resolution 2016-12 • May 31, 2016, Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes • Chapter 8 of the Hopkins City Charter – City Planning • City Code Section 325 – Planning & Zoning Commission • Revised Planning & Zoning Commission Bylaws _____________________ Jason Lindahl, AICP City Planner Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N ____ Source: _____________ Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): _________________________________________ Notes: Planning Report 16-12-TA Page 2 Planning & Zoning Commission Action On May 31, 2016, the Zoning and Planning Commission reviewed Planning application 2016- 12-TA to consider updates to the regulations and Bylaws governing this board. After hearing a summary presentation from staff, the Commission held a public hearing that produced no comment. After some general discussion, staff was directed to revise and update the Bylaws to be consistent with state statute, the City Charter and the City Code (see attached minutes). Based on these comments, staff has prepared the attached revised Bylaws. Legal Authority. The formation, powers and duties of a planning commission are established in state law, the City Charter and City Code. Generally, the establishment and organization of a planning commission is left to the local government, while the powers and duties are detailed in state statute. Primary Issues to Consider Chapter 8 of the Hopkins City Charter. Staff has attached this chapter for your reference. It provides that City Council shall, with the assistance of the City Manager, and if desired, of an advisory City Planning Commission, prepare and adopt a complete plan for the future physical development and growth of the City and such surrounding areas as the state law may permit. This is the Charter’s only reference to the Planning Commission. As a result, staff recommends no changes to the Charter at this time; however, the Charter Commission may wish to review and update this language at its next meeting. City Code Section 325 – Planning & Zoning Commission. Section 325 of the City Code was last updated in 2003, and is attached for your reference. It refers to the Bylaws and summarizes many of its provisions. Based on the recommended changes to the Bylaws, staff recommends no changes to this text. Planning & Zoning Commission Bylaws. The current Planning & Zoning Commission Bylaws were adopted on January 26, 1988. The Bylaws may be amended by a two-thirds vote of the Commission at any regular meeting. Staff recommends changes to Sections 2 - Origins and Powers, 3 – Duties and Objectives, 6 – Election of Officers, 7 - Meetings, 8 – Pre-meeting Procedure, 13 - Amendments, and 14 – Effective Date. Staff’s specific recommendations for each section of the Bylaws are detailed below. Article 2 - Origins and Powers. Section 2.1 states the Commission has the authority to approve plats. This is inconsistent with the subdivision regulations which state the Planning & Zoning Commission reviews plats, holds a public hearing and makes a recommendation to the City Council but the City Council approves plat application. Staff recommends striking the language related to approving plats and adding language noting the Planning & Zoning Commission also serves as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Article 3 – Duties and Objectives. Section 3.2 lists the duties of the Planning & Zoning Commission. Item E states the Commission makes decisions relating to the acceptance of plats. Staff recommends amending this language to reflect the Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council regarding plat approval. Planning Report 16-12-TA Page 3 Article 6 - Election of Officers. Section 6.4 states newly elected officers shall take office immediately upon election. Staff recommends amending this language to state they shall take office at the first meeting in July to reflect the current practice of holding the annual meeting and election of officers in May, but having new officers begin their term in July. Article 7 – Meetings. Section 7.1 states an annual organizational meeting shall be held at the regular meeting in July of each year and shall include the election of officers. This is inconsistent with current practice, which is to hold the annual meeting and election of officers during the May meeting. Staff recommends amending this section to reflect current practice. Section 7.2 states regular meetings of the Commission shall be held the last Tuesday of each month. Given that the number of Tuesdays in a month varies and the City Council and other advisory boards meet on specific days, staff recommends amending this section to reschedule the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings to the fourth Tuesday of each month. Since the City has already published the meeting schedule for the Planning & Zoning Commission for 2016, staff recommends this change begin in 2017. Staff also recommends adding language to this section clarifying how regular meetings may be canceled. Section 7.4 details the procedure for providing notice of annual, regular and special meetings to Commissioners. Staff recommends amending this section to specify calendar days and that notices for regular or special meetings shall be sent four days prior to the meeting to correspond to the schedule for distributing the agenda packet (see Section 8.4 – Reports below). Article 8 Pre-Meeting Procedures. Section 8.2(a) details the application deadline for rezoning, special use permit and preliminary plat applications. Staff recommends amending this language to be more general and all-inclusive to address all applications which require a published notice. Section 8.4 states that the agenda packet shall be mailed to the Commissioners at least one week prior to the meeting. Staff recommends amending this language to allow for other methods (electronic, etc.) of delivering the agenda packet. Article 13 – Amendment Procedure. The powers and duties of the Planning & Zoning Commission originate with the City Council. Given that the Planning & Zoning Commission was created, appointed and serves as advisory to the City Council, staff recommends adding language to this stating all amendments to the Bylaws are subject to City Council review and approval. Article 14 – Effective Date Section 14.1 states the effective date of the current Bylaws. Staff recommends updating this section to reflect the changes detailed above. Alternatives 1. Recommend approval of the proposed Bylaws amendment. By recommending approval, the City Council will consider a recommendation of approval. Planning Report 16-12-TA Page 4 2. Recommend denial of the proposed Bylaws amendment. By recommending denial, the City Council will consider a recommendation of denial. If the Planning Commission considers this alternative, findings will have to be identified that support this alternative. 3. Continue for further information. If the Planning Commission indicates that further information is needed, the item should be continued. CITY OF HOPKINS Hennepin County, Minnesota PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2016-12 A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDING THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF HOPKINS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION BYLAWS WHEREAS, the City of Hopkins initiated an application to amend the City of Hopkins Planning & Zoning Commission Bylaws; and, WHEREAS, the procedural history of the application is as follows: 1. That an application to amend the City of Hopkins Planning & Zoning Commission Bylaws was initiated by the City of Hopkins on April 29, 2016; 2. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission, pursuant to published notice, held a public hearing on the application and reviewed such application on May 31, 2016: all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard; 3. That the written comments and analysis of City staff were considered and this item was tabled to the August 30, 2016, meeting; and, 4. That the Hopkins Zoning and Planning Commission reviewed additional information regarding this item on August 30, 2016, and all persons present were given an opportunity to be heard. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that an application to amend the City of Hopkins Planning & Zoning Commission Bylaws is hereby recommended for approval. Adopted this 30th day of August 2016. __________________ Brian Hunke, Chair PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES May 31, 2016 A regular meeting of the Hopkins Planning & Zoning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 31, 2016, at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Hopkins City Hall. Present were Commission Members Brian Hunke, Matt McNeil, Gary Newhouse, Mike Tait, Emily Wallace-Jackson and James Warden. Absent was Commissioner Scott Kerssen. Also present was City Planner Jason Lindahl. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Hunke called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. ADOPT AGENDA Commissioner Warden moved, Commissioner Newhouse seconded, to adopt the agenda. The motion was approved unanimously. CONSENT AGENDA Commissioner Warden moved, Commissioner McNeil seconded, to approve the minutes of the April 26, 2016, regular meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. NEW BUSINESS 1. Planning & Zoning Commission Bylaws Update (PR 16-12-TA) Mr. Lindahl stated that the Commission will discuss the bylaws at this and one other meeting, a formal draft will be written and brought to the City Manager and City Attorney, and the Commission will have a chance discuss that draft before it is adopted. He stated that there are several discrepancies among the bylaws, City Charter, City Code 325 and state law that should be resolved. Among the discrepancies are: the Commission has the power to approve plats; the Commission can amend the bylaws with a 2/3 vote; the Commission is referred to as “Planning & Zoning Commission; one business owner can/should be on the Commission; and, the Development & Planning director and a City Council liaison as ex officio are members of the Commission. Mr. Lindahl stated that the goal is to have the final draft by the end of summer. Following are some of the comments from Commissioners: McNeil: Keep “Planning and Zoning Commission” name as it’s more descriptive. Warden: Bylaws should be based on City Charter. Ms. Wallace-Jackson stated she is chair of the Charter Commission, and they did not have their regular annual meeting in April because the Assistant City Manager retired. She asked Mr. Lindahl to check on when the Charter Commission will meet next. Warden: Clarify articles membership, removal and absenteeism standards. They should be consistent with City Code. Hunke: Keep membership provision that includes Hopkins business owner. Minutes of the Planning & Zoning Commission, May 31, 2016 – Page 2 2. Shady Oak Station Area Zoning (PR 16-11-TA) Mr. Lindahl stated that staff’s vision for this station is that it be mobility-oriented, recognized as a trail head, include innovation district uses and build upon the authentic raw industrial character of the area. Generally the Commission was concerned about balancing implementation of this zoning district and its impact on existing businesses. Following are some of the comments from Commissioners: Warden: Concerned about auto-oriented uses and how they will fit in this transit-oriented district. Simplify the use table to be more like a Form Based code. Tait: Does the City have any redevelopment assistance available for this area? Mr. Lindahl responded that the City has not identified specific resources for individual businesses; however, the City will be making investments in trails, roads and storm water infrastructure with the expectation that these investments will spur private investment and redevelopment. Newhouse: Concerned about parking calculation methodology; 25% bicycle parking credit and reallocation of parking from the Blake Road station to the Shady Oak and Downtown stations. McNeil: If riders can’t find a parking spot they will move to the next station closer to their destination. He asked staff to provide parking information for the St. Louis Park stations. Hunke: Likes the minimum and maximum parking standards, and suggested Minnetonka rename 47th Street to fit in with the surrounding street names. 3. Election of 2016-2017 Planning Commission Officers Vice Chair Hunke requested nominations for the position of Chair. Commissioner Newhouse nominated Commissioner Warden, who declined. Commissioner Tait nominated Commissioner Hunke; Commissioner McNeil seconded the nomination. Commissioner Warden nominated Commissioner Wallace-Jackson, who declined. Commissioner Tait moved, Commissioner Newhouse seconded, to elect Commissioner Hunke to the position of Chair. The motion was approved unanimously. Vice Chair Hunke requested nominations for the position of Vice Chair. Commissioner Hunke nominated Commissioner Warden; Commissioner McNeil seconded the nomination. There were no other nominations. Commissioner Tait moved, Commissioner McNeil seconded, to elect Commissioner Warden to the position of Vice Chair. The motion was approved unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS During the announcements, Mr. Lindahl updated the Planning & Zoning Commission on the following items. 1. Planning & Zoning Commission Members Update: The Council will reappoint Commissioners Hunke and McNeil on June 7. Commissioner Tait is also up for reappointment but must meet the residency requirement by the end of his current term to be eligible for reappointment. Commissioner Kerssen’s second term ends in June, which will be his last meeting. The Commission welcomed his replacement, Kristin Hanneman, who was present. 2. Japs Olson Plat: City Council approved this plat on May 3. Minutes of the Planning & Zoning Commission, May 31, 2016 – Page 3 3. Moline Groundbreaking: Commissioners Kerssen and Hunke attended the groundbreaking for this project on May 16. 4. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update: Staff is working on an “elevator speech” video commercial for the Comprehensive Plan that will be part of the City’s social media public engagement process. 5. Mr. Lindahl provided an update on LRT, stating that the Legislature adjourned without funding this project but the Governor and Legislative leaders are suggesting that it could be addressed during a special session. 6. Commissioner McNeil provided an update to the Commission about his concerns with the Hopkins mobile phone app and suggested staff continue to work with City Center, the app developer, to fully implement it. ADJOURN Commissioner Tait moved, Commissioner Warden seconded, to adjourn the meeting. The motion was approved unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 8:03 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Shannon Smith City of Hopkins Charter CITY PLANNING Section 8.01. THE CITY PLAN. The City Council shall with the assistance of the City Manager, and if desired, of an advisory City Planning Commission, prepare and adopt a complete plan for the future physical development and growth of the City and such surrounding areas as the State law may permit. Such plan may be altered from time to time. It may include provisions for zoning, for the platting and development of new areas, for the planning and location of public buildings, parks, playgrounds, bridges, transportation lines and other public places, as well as for other matters which may seem essential to such a plan. Section 8.02. ENFORCEMENT OF CITY PLAN. The Council shall have all the necessary power to enforce complete adherence by all persons to the plan adopted as the City Plan. Hopkins City Code (Amended Jul 2003) 325 Section 325 Page 1 Section 325 - Zoning and Planning Commission 325.01. Subdivision 1. Zoning and planning commission established. The zoning and planning commission is created and continued. The commission shall consist of seven persons of which no less than six shall have been a resident of the city for one year or more on the date of appointment; one member may be a business owner or employee of a business that is located within the corporate city limits of the City of Hopkins, one staff liaison to be appointed by the City Manager. Each member except the staff liaison shall have the right to vote on all matters before the commission. Citizen member terms of office shall be for two years. Three citizen members of the commission shall be appointed on July 1st of each odd numbered year and four shall be appointed on July 1st of each even numbered year. Citizen members appointed to complete a current term of office shall be considered to have served a term of office if the appointment is to an office which is less than half completed. If the appointment is to an office which is more than half completed the appointment the appointment will not be considered a term of office. Citizen members shall serve no more than two consecutive terms of office (Amended Ord. No. 87-581, Sec. 1)(Amended Ord. 2003-899) (Amended Ord 2003-905) The commission shall serve without compensation other than such compensation as its members may receive for other services performed for the city. The appointments shall be made by the Mayor with the approval of the Council and any member of the Commission may be removed by a majority vote of the Council for misconduct or neglect of duties. The secretary of the Community Development Department shall act as secretary of the Commission and the City Attorney shall act as legal counsel for the Commission. (Amended Ord. No. 87-577) Subd. 2. Officers: by-laws. The commission shall elect a chairperson from among its members and such other officers as its by-laws may provide. The chairperson shall not be the business-owner or employee unless that member is also a resident of Hopkins. The commission shall adopt by laws governing its procedures. (Amended Ord 2003-905) Subd. 3. Other duties. The commission is the Board of Adjustment and Appeals as provided in the zoning code (Appendix I to this code) and has the powers and duties assigned to it by the zoning code and by law. Subd. 4. Advisory. The commission is advisory to the city council. CITY OF HOPKINS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION BY-LAWS CITY OF HOPKINS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION BY-LAWS ARTICLE I - IDENTITY 1.1 This organization shall be known as the City Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Hopkins. 1.2 The administrative offices and mailing address of the Commission shall be 1010 First Street South, City Hall, Hopkins, Minnesota. ARTICLE II - ORIGIN AND POWERS 2.1 The City Planning and Zoning Commission was created by Ordinance No. 269. The Commission serves in an advisory capacity, except with respect to the platting of lands in the City of Hopkins, over which it has plenary power pursuant to Laws of Minnesota, 1933, Chapter 93, and Section 325 of the Hopkins City Code to the City Council. The Commission is also the Board of Adjustments and Appeals as provided for in the zoning code and has the powers and duties assigned to it by the zoning code and by law. ARTICLE III - DUTIES AND OBJECTIVES 3.1 The Commission is designed to serve in an advisory capacity to the City Council and Administration and is further empowered to perform certain quasi-judicial functions. 3.2 The objectives of the Commission are to guide future development of land, services and facilities so as to ensure a safer, more pleasant and more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial and public activities and so as to promote the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare, including the aesthetic, social, economic, physical, and environmental quality of the entire City in the context of the metropolitan community. To bring about the achievement of these objectives the Commission shall: (a) Establish community development objectives and policies, (b) M ake development plans, (c) Increase public understanding and acceptance of planning practices, (d) Co-ordinate development actions affecting City growth, (e) Make decisions recommendations to the City Council relating to acceptance of subdivisions (Subdivision Code), (f) Make recommendations to the City Council regarding provisions of the Legislative Code (petitions and applications for rezoning, conditional use permits, variances, street and alley vacation, retention of tax forfeit land, etc.), (g) Review all matters relating to or affecting the physical development of the City, (h) D raft and recommend to the City Council for adoption, regulations and ordinances authorizing and empowering the enforcement of its findings and conclusions relating to the physical development of the City, and (i) S erve as a forum for citizen, business and community involvement and expression on the above mentioned elements. ARTICLE IV - MEMBERSHIP 4.1 Number. Said Commission shall consist of seven persons who have been a resident of the City for one year or m ore on the date of appointment, (ii) the Planning and Economic Development Director, and City Council member, as ex-officio members. Each member except the Planning and Economic Director and City Council member shall have the right to vote on all matters before the Commission. Citizen member terms of office shall be for two years. 4.2 Terms. Three citizen members shall be appointed on July 1st of each odd numbered year and four shall be appointed on July 1st of each even numbered year. Citizen members appointed to complete a current term of office shall be considered to have served a term of office if the appointment is to an office which is less than half completed. If the appointment is to an office which is more than half completed the appointment will not be considered a term of office. Citizen members shall serve no more than two consecutive terms of office. The Council member shall serve for a term of one year and may be eligible for a consecutive 1 year reappointment. 4.3 Removal. Members may be subject to removal by the Mayor,for cause, but only after Council approval, after notice and opportunity for a hearing before the Council. 4.4 Absenteeism. If any member fails to attend four regular meetings of the Commission per year, notice of such failure may be cause for removal and forwarded by the Chair to the Mayor and Council with the request for removal of such members from the Commission. 4.5 Expenses. Members shall serve without salary, but cost of sending notices, preparing and distributing minutes and other clerical expenses shall be paid by the City from the general fund together with such extraordinary expenses as are authorized by the City Council. ARTICLE V - OFFICERS AND DUTIES 5.1 Titles. The officers of this Commission shall be a Chair, Vice-Chair and Secretary. 5.2 Duties of the Chair. The chair shall preside at all meetings, appoint committees, rule on procedural questions subject to reversal by a two-thirds vote of members in attendance, exercise the same voting rights as the other commissioners, assist City Administration in preparing annual Commission budget, and carry out such other duties as are assigned by the Commission. 5.3 Duties of the Vice-Chair. The Vice-Chair shall act in the absence or inability of the Chair to act and in such instances shall have the powers and functions of the Chairman 5.4 Duties of the Secretary. The secretary shall oversee the notifying of all members of meetings, drafting and circulating agendas, keeping on file all official records and reports of the Commission, keeping written record of Commission meetings, transactions and actions, serving required notices of all public hearings and public meetings, maintaining and circulating information and carrying out such other duties as are assigned by the Commission. ARTICLE VI - ELECTION OF OFFICER 6.1 Term. Officers shall be elected by secret ballot at the annual meeting of the Commission. Terms of office shall be for one year and no member shall hold the office of Chair or Vice-Chair for more than two years consecutively. Officers shall serve until replaced by a duly elected officer in accord with these procedures. 6.2 Nominating Committee. The Chair may appoint a nominating committee to report to the Commission prior to election, but nomination of officers may also be made from the floor. 6.3 Majority Required. Candidates for office receiving a majority vote of the entire voting membership (four) shall be declared duly elected. 6.4 Date of Office. Newly elected officers shall take office immediately upon election at the regular meeting in July. 6.5 Vacancies. Vacancies occurring in offices of the Commission shall be filled forthwith by regular election procedure. ARTICLE VII - MEETINGS 7.1 Annual Meetings. An annual organizational meeting shall be held at the regular meeting in July May of each year. Election of officers shall be conducted and proposed amendments to by-laws may be acted upon. The annual meeting shall be devoted to the election of officer and may include amendments to the By-Laws, consideration of an annual work plan or other business as shall be scheduled by the Planning & Zoning Commission. 7.2 Regular Meetings. Regular meetings of the Commission shall be held on the last fourth Tuesday of each month at a time and place agreed upon by the Commission at a prior meeting. At such meetings, the Commission may consider all matters properly brought before the Commission. A regular meeting may be cancelled or rescheduled by the Commission at a prior meeting, or by the chairperson, the City Council or Mayor. In the event that the regular meeting date falls on a legal holiday, the meeting shall be held on the following day. 7.3 Special Meetings. Special meetings may be called at the discretion of the Chair, or by the written request of at least three members who shall convey such request to the secretary. 7.4 Notice of Meetings. Notice in writing of annual meetings setting forth the time and place thereof shall be delivered to all Commission members at least twenty calendar days in advance of such meetings; notice in writing of each regular meeting shall be sent to all Commission members at least five four calendar days in advance of such meeting and notice in writing of any special meeting shall be sent to all Commission members at least five four calendar days prior to such meeting and shall state the time, place and purpose and agenda of such meeting. ARTICLE VIII - PRE-MEETING PROCEDURES 8.1 Agenda. The agenda for each meeting of the Commission shall be developed in writing by the secretary of the Commission, subject to approval by the Zoning Administrator and Chair. 8.2 Application Deadlines. No matter shall be placed on the agenda unless written request or petition, along with necessary forms, legal descriptions, maps, drawing, etc., have been submitted to the Planning Department in proper and correct form and unless the following timetable has been observed: (a) Rezoning, Special Use Permit and Preliminary Plats: (matter requiring published newspaper notice). For rezoning, conditional use permits and preliminary plats, A ll applications and referrals, including required legal descriptions, certified sufficient petitions, maps, drawings, etc. shall be received at a date set by the Zoning Administrator each month. Applicants shall meet informally with the Zoning Administrator and other city staff as necessary prior to submittal of such application in order to preliminarily discuss required drawings and possible planning implications. (b) All other matters: F or all matters other than those mentioned in (a) above, all applications and referrals, including required legal descriptions, certified sufficient petitions, maps, drawings, etc., shall be received by the Planning Department prior to the Commission meeting at which action may be taken. 8.3 Reference to Committee. The Zoning Administrator and Chair may refer any matter to Commission committee before placing such matter on the agenda, and in such event the pertinent committee shall meet and consider said matter and report thereon before the Commission takes final action. Also, any three members of the Commission, may prior to or during full Commission discussion, require that a matter be considered by a Commission committee. 8.4 Reports. The Zoning Administrator shall prepare a technical study or report on all matters to be heard and shall mail provided such reports or findings to Commission members at least one week four calendar days before the Commission meeting at which action may be taken. 8.5 Withdrawal. If a petitioner or applicant desires to withdraw a matter from the agenda, such request must be submitted to the secretary in writing, and if any public notice has been given, any persons appearing at the noticed hearing on said petition or application shall be entitled to be heard at said hearing. ARTICLE IX - MEETING PROCEDURE 9.1 Rules of Order. Unless otherwise specifically designated, Roberts Rules of Order, as most recently revised, shall govern meeting procedures. However deliberative sessions of the Commission shall be conducted as informally as possible. 9.2 Quorum. A majority of the membership of the Commission (four) shall constitute a quorum for meeting purposes; however, no less than three affirmative or negative votes shall be required to transact business or make binding decisions on behalf of the Commission. Ex-officio members are eligible for the purpose of declaring a quorum but are non-voting members. 9.3 Conflict of Interest. Whenever a Commission member shall have a direct or indirect personal or financial interest in an application or petition before the Commission, such member shall declare such interest and shall not participate in any hearing on said matter; shall absent himself from all deliberative sessions or Commission discussion on said matter; and shall in no event vote upon said matter. When there is question as to the existence of a conflict of interest, the Chair shall make ruling thereon. The member with the conflict shall be required to leave the room during the voting. 9.4 Suspension of Rules. The Commission may temporarily suspend its rules by a three-fourths vote of members in attendance. 9.5 Appearance of Petitioner. No application or petition shall be given final approval unless the applicant or petitioner appears personally or by representative at hearing called thereon, or makes satisfactory explanation or presentation in lieu thereof. Such appearance shall not be required in matters regarding release of tax- forfeited "conservation" properties. 9.6 Agenda. Order of business at regular meetings shall be basically as follows: 1. Call to order. 2. Roll call or determination of quorum. 3. Public hearings. 4. Consideration of minutes. 5. Communications. 6. Report of final disposition of matters previously before the Commission. 7. Reports of officers and committees. 8. Consideration of matters regarding Commission action. 9. Other business. 10. Adjournment. 9.7 Dispensation. A motion must be made and voted upon in order to dispense with any item on the agenda. No binding or final action shall be taken on any agenda matter except at public, annual, regular, or special meetings. 9.8 Non-Agenda Matters. No binding or final action may be taken on any matter not on the written agenda except by unanimous vote of the members in attendance or two-thirds vote (five) of the entire membership. 9.9 Continuing. A continuing motion if passed has the effect of laying the matter over until the next regular meeting unless otherwise specified. 9.10 Tabling. A tabling motion if passed has the effect of laying the matter over indefinitely or until removed from the table. ARTICLE X - PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURE 10.1 Time Limits. The proponents and opponents of any petition or application shall be limited to a total presentation period of thirty minutes each. 10.2 Order of Appearance. The proponents shall proceed first, and no person shall speak more than once on a matter before the Commission unless in answer to a question by a Commission member or staff member or following suspension of the rules, except that petitioner or his representative may be granted not more than seven minutes to rebut the opposition presentation. 1 0.3 Termination of Hearing. Upon close of public hearing no further presentation shall be allowed except upon suspension of the rules. ARTICLE XI - SPECIALISTS 11.1 Special Committees & Observers. The Chair may appoint such special committees and chairpersons thereof as he/she may from time to time deem necessary. ARTICLE XII - POLICY 12.1 Policy Statement. A written statement of policy of the Commission shall be drafted and maintained at the administrative offices. 12.2 Policy Revision. Said policy may be revised, amended or added to at any regular or special meeting by a majority of the entire membership and shall be reviewed by the Commission or a committee thereof annually. 12.3 Policy Availability. The staff shall advise petitioners, applicants or other interested persons of applicable portions of said policy upon request. ARTICLE XIII - AMENDMENT OF BY-LAWS 13.1 Amendment Procedure. These by-laws and rules of procedure may be amended at any regular meeting by two- thirds vote of Commissioners in attendance and notice and copies of any proposed amendments shall be given all Commissioners along with meeting notice. Each Commissioner will receive at least thirty days written notice of intent to amend, including the date, time and place such amendment will be voted on, and an exact copy of the amendment as proposed. Amendments require two-thirds vote of the entire membership (five) of the Commission for passage; and in such instance only, Commission members will be allowed to vote by written proxy. All amendments are subject to City Council review and approval prior to taking effect. ARTICLE XIV - EFFECTIVE DATE 14.1 These by-laws shall take effect January 26, 1988 and shall supersede all by-laws which might have been earlier established for the City Planning and Zoning Commission of Hopkins. August 30, 2016 Planning Report 16-13-TA Zoning Code Text Amendment Related Medical Cannabis Businesses Proposed Action: After conducting a public hearing, staff recommends the following motion: • Move to direct staff to prepare a zoning code text amendment related to medical marijuana uses and bring this amendment back to the Commission for further review and action. Overview This application was initiated by the City Council after it adopted a one-year moratorium on Medical Cannabis (medical marijuana) manufacturing and distribution facilities and directed staff to study this issue. The Commission reviewed this item during the June 28 meeting and directed staff to further study this issue. This memo reviews the THC Therapeutic Research Act, Minnesota Statutes §§152.21 -152.37 (the “Act”), concerned with Medical Cannabis (medical marijuana), how other communities regulate these facilities and recommends options for the Commission to consider. Primary Issues to Consider • Planning & Zoning Commission action • Background information • Concerns about Medical Cannabis (medical marijuana) • Zoning standards and police experience from other communities • Legal authority • Proposed zoning standards Supporting Documents • Exhibit A - Zoning Standards and Police Experience from Other Communities • City Attorney memo dated 8-19-16 • Map of Parcels Eligible to Host Medical Marijuana Distribution Facilities • Medical Cannabis Overview Chart • Ordinance 2015-1092 – An Interim Ordinance Temporarily Prohibiting Medical Cannabis Manufacturing and Distribution Facilities _____________________ Jason Lindahl, AICP City Planner Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N ____ Source: _____________ Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.): _________________________________________ Notes: Planning Report 16-13-TA Page 2 Planning & Zoning Commission Action The Planning Commission reviewed this item during their regular meeting on June 28, 2016. After hearing a presentation from staff and holding a public hearing that produced no comments, the Commission voted to continue this item to August 30. Overall, the Commission did not reach a consensus as to how to regulate these facilities and directed staff to provide additional information. Specifically, the Commission requested zoning standards and police experience information from the other communities in Minnesota with medical marijuana facilities, a summary of the security regulations for pharmacies and a memo from the City Attorney regarding legal issues to consider. Staff has added the requested information to this memo. Background Information On April 30, 2015, the City Council adopted a one-year moratorium on medical marijuana manufacturing and distribution facilities so staff could study the need for amendments or additions to the City’s official controls to protect the public health, safety and welfare from the potential negative impacts of such land uses. Current state law and rules make locating one of these facilities in Hopkins unlikely in the near future. However, changes to these standards by the Commissioner of Health or State Legislature could bring new interest in Hopkins. The only manner in which the City can ensure that the state’s current limitations as to form of marijuana, security requirements, and other operational characteristics remain constant is to adopt its own standards to codify these requirements. Marijuana remains a controlled substance that is illegal under federal law. When the Minnesota Legislature approved the THC Therapeutic Research Act, Minnesota Statutes §§152.21 -152.37 (the “Act”), it recognized the many practical difficulties this status creates when opening the door to medical marijuana facilities. The Act and the state rules implementing the Act currently are very strict and only allow marijuana in a liquid, pill or vapor form for a limited number of qualified medical conditions. In December, the Commissioner of Health expanded the number of qualifying medical conditions to include chronic pain. Some predict this could greatly increase the number of patients qualified for medical marijuana and could require the authorization of additional distribution facilities. It is also predictable that other features in the Act may soften over time, potentially to include distribution of medical marijuana in other forms, some of which may also be more suitable for recreational use. Concerns About Medical Cannabis (medical marijuana) The federal prohibition on marijuana creates the following challenges for the state and its cities: • Physicians, nurse practitioners, and physicians’ assistants can only certify a qualifying medical condition, they cannot prescribe marijuana under their licensing restrictions; • The distribution facility functions as a stand-alone clinic where patients must be examined by a pharmacist, who then determines the type of medical marijuana and the dosage. Many patients will be vulnerable due to their medical conditions. • Credit card companies will not authorize transactions dealing in marijuana; hence the clinic operates as a “cash only” business. • Insurance companies will not cover medical marijuana, and it is expensive, ranging from $55 Planning Report 16-13-TA Page 3 to $85 per gram, totaling an average of $500 per cash transaction. • Due to the uncovered, high cost of medical marijuana, there has developed a black market for stolen medical marijuana, which is then sold to qualified patients and others at a lower cost. These factors result in serious security concerns for patients going to and from the distribution facility, an increased risk of employee theft of the product, an increased risk of burglary and non-employee theft from the building. Zoning Standards and Police Experience From Other Communities At present, the Act allows for two manufacturing facilities and eight distribution facilities across Minnesota. Zoning standards and police experience information are detailed in Exhibit A, attached. The state’s two medical marijuana manufacturing facilities opened in 2015 and are located in Cottage Grove and Otsego. City staff in both communities reported these facilities operate in compliance with all zoning standards and have generated no police issues. It should be noted that both communities found these sites do generate odors, but this has been minimized through their heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems. The City of Cottage Grove made no changes to their zoning regulations for this facility and considers it the same as any other pharmaceutical manufacturing use. As such, it’s allowed through a conditional use permit in any industrial district. Leafline Labs occupies a 50,000 square foot office/manufacturing facility that has the potential to expand to 108,000 square feet. By comparison, Otsego initially allowed their manufacturing facility as a permitted use within their Agricultural districts but has since amended their zoning regulations. Originally, Minnesota Medical Solutions’ manufacturing facility consisted of a greenhouse and small lab. Shortly after opening this facility, however, the company proposed a major expansion into a 300,000 square feet office/manufacturing building. This more intense use caused the City to amend their zoning regulations to specifically allow medical marijuana manufacturing facilities as a conditional use within their Agricultural districts. The state also has eight distribution facilities, one in each legislative district. Of the eight communities with medical marijuana distribution facilities, only Bloomington has decided to amend their code to create specific zoning and licensing standards for these uses. Vadnais Heights has also amended their zoning regulations to create specific standards for these uses, but does not have a facility in their community. The other seven communities consider distribution facilities the same as pharmacies or medical clinics and allow them as permitted uses in their commercial districts. Legal Authority Zoning Code amendments are legislative actions in that the City is creating new standards to regulate the development of certain types of uses and/or structures. Under the law, the City has wide flexibility to create standards that will ensure the type of development it desires; however, zoning regulations must be reasonable and supported by a rational basis relating to promoting the public health, safety and welfare of the community. Planning Report 16-13-TA Page 4 During the June 28 meeting, the Commission requested the City Attorney analyze the security measures included in state law for medical marijuana manufacturing facilities and provide an opinion as to whether the City could also apply these measures to distribution facilities (see attached). According to the City Attorney, state rules define “medical cannabis manufacturers” to include, among other uses, entities registered to “dispense medical cannabis.” Therefore, the security measures cited for manufacturing facilities also apply to distribution facilities. The City Attorney further stated that it is unclear whether the City has the authority to separately require these security measures through zoning or licensing standards. As a result, staff no longer recommends including security requirements as part of any zoning regulations. Proposed Zoning Standards There are three land use types associated with the medical marijuana industry, as stipulated by the State of Minnesota legislature in the THC Therapeutic Research Act, Minn. Stat. §§152.21. The definitions for each and staff’s recommended zoning changes are detailed below. Overall, staff recommends no zoning changes for manufacturing and laboratory uses and offers two options for regulating distribution facilities. • Manufacturing facilities: Where medical marijuana is cultivated, harvested, manufactured and packaged. As noted above, since the June meeting staff learned that both of the existing manufacturing facilities currently (or will soon) operate completely within traditional office/manufacturing buildings. These sites are in low density or agricultural areas and have been found to produce odors. Given the comparatively dense urban land use pattern in Hopkins, staff does not recommend allowing manufacturing activity in Hopkins. Since current state law would not allow additional manufacturing facilities at this time, staff believes the most prudent approach would be to monitor the experiences in both Cottage Grove and Otsego before allowing manufacturing uses. Staff recommends no changes to the City zoning regulations based on the finding Medical Marijuana manufacturing is already prohibited within Hopkins because it is not expressly allowed under the zoning regulations. • Laboratories: Where medical marijuana samples are tested to ensure compliance with state manufacturing standards. Staff recommends no changes related to Laboratories because the Minnesota Department of Health indicates that they will have only very small amounts of medical marijuana product on site for testing purposes, and therefore do not have the potential to create negative impacts on neighboring properties. Currently, Research Labs are a permitted use in the I-1 Industrial District and a conditional use in the B-3 General Business District. Dental – Med Labs are permitted uses in the B-2 Central Business and B-3 General Business Districts. • Distribution facilities: Where medical marijuana is sold and distributed to patients on the state’s medical marijuana register. For distribution facilities, staff offers the following two options. As noted in the City Attorney’s memo, under either option distribution facilities will be required to meet all Planning Report 16-13-TA Page 5 requirements of state law including a 1,000-foot buffer from public or private schools, 24- hour video monitoring, alarm systems, background checks for all employees and controlled access systems to limit access to restricted areas. A map illustrating the parcels eligible to host medical marijuana distribution facilities is attached for your reference. Option 1 (most restrictive) • Add “Medical Marijuana Distribution Facility” as a conditional use in all Business districts (B-1, B-2, B-3, & B-4), subject to the conditions listed below. 1. Prohibit: a. The sale of any products other than medical marijuana within a dispensary. b. The sale of non-medical marijuana. 2. Require all distribution facilities be sited at least 1,000 feet from any existing K-12 schools (also a state requirement). 3. Allow only one distribution facility per 15,000 Hopkins residents or fraction thereof. • Add the following definition of “Medical Marijuana” to the Definition section of the zoning ordinance: Any species of the genus cannabis plant, or any mixture or preparation of them, including whole plant extracts and resins and is delivered in the form of (1) liquid, but not limited to oil; (2) pill; (3) vaporized delivery method with use of liquid or oil but which does not require the use of dried leaves or plant form that has been approved by the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Health under Minnesota Statute 152.25. • Add the following definition of “Medical Marijuana Distribution Facility” to the Definition section of the zoning ordinance: An establishment engaged in the sale and distribution of medical marijuana that is validly registered and approved by the State of Minnesota. Option 2 (less restrictive) • Add “Medical Marijuana Distribution Facility” as a permitted use in all Business districts (B-1, B-2, B-3, & B-4) with no conditions of approval. This would allow distribution facilities in the same districts where clinics are currently allowed. This option is similar to how seven of the eight communities with distribution facilities chose to regulate these uses. Only Bloomington has decided to amend their code to create specific zoning and licensing standards for these uses. • Add the following definition of “Medical Marijuana” to the Definition section of the zoning ordinance: Any species of the genus cannabis plant, or any mixture or preparation of them, including whole plant extracts and resins and is delivered in the form of (1) liquid, but Planning Report 16-13-TA Page 6 not limited to oil; (2) pill; (3) vaporized delivery method with use of liquid or oil but which does not require the use of dried leaves or plant form that has been approved by the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Health under Minnesota Statute 152.25. • Add the following definition of “Medical Marijuana Distribution Facility” to the Definition section of the zoning ordinance: An establishment engaged in the sale and distribution of medical marijuana that is validly registered and approved by the State of Minnesota. Alternatives 1. Direct staff to prepare a zoning code text amendment related to medical marijuana uses and bring this amendment back to the Commission for further review and action. 2. Direct staff to continue to study this item and bring additional information back for further review at a future meeting. EXHIBIT A Zoning Standards & Police Experience for Other Communities with Medical Marijuana Facilities Community Standards Opening Date Notes Bloomington Manufacturing facilities prohibited Distribution facilities CUP & require city license July 1, 2016 No police issues Cottage Grove Pharmaceutical manufacturing is a conditional use in the industrial districts July 1, 2015 No police issues Eagan Distribution facilities considered a retail pharmacy (ex: CVS or Target) or clinical pharmacy use (ex: Allina or Park Nicollet) July 1, 2015 No police issues Hibbing Distribution facilities considered a retail pharmacy or clinical pharmacy use July 1, 2016 No police issues Minneapolis Distribution facilities considered a retail pharmacy or clinical pharmacy use July 1, 2015 No police issues Moorhead Distribution facilities considered medical facility, clinic or pharmacy July 1, 2016 No police issues Otsego Manufacturing facilities are a conditional use within the Agricultural district July 1, 2015 No police issues Rochester Distribution facilities considered medical office or clinic use July 23, 2015 No police issues St. Cloud Distribution facilities considered a retail/pharmacy use July 1, 2016 No police issues St. Paul Distribution facilities considered medical office or clinic use July 1, 2016 No police issues Vadnais Heights Manufacturing facilities allowed as a permitted use Distribution facilities are CUP in all commercial districts No facility planned N/A 1 484957v3 AMB HP145-9 Kennedy 470 U.S. Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402-1458 (612) 337-9300 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax sriggs@kennedy-graven.com http://www.kennedy-graven.com Affirmative Action, Equal Opportunity Employer & Graven C H A R T E R E D MEMORANDUM DATE: August 19, 2016 TO: Jason Lindahl, City Planner FROM: Scott J. Riggs, City Attorney Andrew M. Biggerstaff, Assistant City Attorney RE: Medical Cannabis This memorandum addresses various issues related to medical cannabis and land-use regulation within the city of Hopkins (the “City”). I. Security Measures Required for Manufacturing or Dispensing Sites State law regulates the requirements which apply to any medical cannabis manufacturing site in this state.1 Among those requirements, all manufacturing sites must develop “operating documents” which contain a certain number of items. One of those items is “procedures for the implementation of appropriate security measures to deter and prevent the theft of medical cannabis and unauthorized entrance into areas containing medial cannabis.”2 In furtherance of this mandate, the Commissioner of the Department of Health, who has oversight responsibility with respect to medical cannabis, has promulgated rules which further define the responsibilities of regulated entities. In particular, Minnesota Administrative Rules require manufacturers to comply with specific 24-hour video monitoring requirements.3 Additionally, manufacturers are required to comply with specific alarm system requirements.4 1 Minn. Stat. § 152.29. 2 Id. 3 Minn. R. 4770.0900. 4 Minn. R. 4770.1000. & 2 484957v3 AMB HP145-9 Some question has arisen regarding whether the City should (a) impose stricter security requirements on these facilities or (b) impose these security measures on distribution facilities as well. With respect to the first question, it is unclear whether the City possesses the authority to require additional security measures. Certainly, the City is entitled to pass laws which are within its general police powers, or as expressly provided by the state legislature. However, one concern may be whether the legislature has preempted local regulation by “occupying the field” in terms of creating a framework for regulation of these entities. Unlike other areas of state law, where the legislature has expressly provided that local ordinance may be as strict or stricter, the state statutes regarding medical cannabis are silent as to local government authority. Any imposition of additional restrictions or requirements may be met by a challenge from the regulated entities that such local action is not allowed. Secondly, it appears that there is no need for City action to require these same security measures at distribution sites. Under the relevant Minnesota Rules, a “medical cannabis manufacturer or manufacturer” is defined as “an entity registered by the commissioner to cultivate, acquire, manufacture, possess, prepare, transfer, transport, supply, or dispense medical cannabis, delivery devices, or related supplies and educational materials.”5 Because the security requirements in the relevant rules apply to “a medical cannabis manufacturer” which by statute includes an entity registered to “dispense medical cannabis” it seems clear that the security measures already apply to licensed dispensing facilities. As to a question of whether stricter or additional requirements may be imposed on those facilities, the answer would be identical to the analysis above. II. Application of Pharmacy Controls to Distribution Sites Questions have also been raised about whether medical cannabis distribution sites should be treated as pharmacies for the purpose of the City’s zoning code. Under state law, medical cannabis manufacturers (and distributors)6 are required to ensure that “employees licensed as pharmacists” be the only employees to distribute the medical cannabis to a patient.7 In comparison, state law also dictates that “a medical cannabis manufacturer is not subject to the Board of Pharmacy licensure or regulatory requirements” under state law.8 This appears to be clear for both actual manufacturing facilities, as well as distribution facilities run by manufacturers. This provision arguably limits the City’s authority to require a potential future distribution site from complying with any standards applicable to pharmacies as determined by state law. However, this does not appear to limit the City’s ability to treat these uses as “pharmacies” for purposes of the zoning code. For instance, the City allows, as a permitted use, a pharmacy or 5 Minn. R. 4770.0200, subp. 27 (citing Minn. Stat. § 152.22, subd. 7). 6 Under state law, each of the manufacturers of medical cannabis must operate four distribution facilities, one of which may be their main manufacturing location. Minn. Stat. § 152.29, subd. 1. 7 Minn. Stat. 152.29, subd. 3. 8 Minn. Stat. 152.29, subd. 1(h). 3 484957v3 AMB HP145-9 drug store in both the Business-1 and Business-2 zoning districts. If medical cannabis dispensaries were defined as pharmacies for the purposes of the City’s zoning code, they would also be allowed in those zoning districts. Of course, whatever limitation that is placed on medical cannabis distribution facilities may impact the likelihood that such a facility would seek to locate itself in the City, especially insofar as those regulations limit or restrict where such facilities may locate.9 III. Conclusion Because medical cannabis facilities are regulated by state law, the City may face some limitations in terms of the regulation that may be imposed. However, the City does retain the authority to impose some reasonable restrictions on these enterprises, as discussed herein. As the Minnesota Medical Cannabis Therapeutic Research Act is further amended by the state legislature, the City should ensure that any future action on this issue is in conformance with the applicable laws and rules that may be in effect at that time. 9 Under current law, only eight distribution facilities are allowed. Additionally, state law required that all eight facilities be up and running by July 1, 2016, and those facilities be located across the state. Currently, there are four locations in the Twin Cities Metropolitan area. It is unclear if, or when, additional locations might be authorized for this area. Minn. Stat. § 152.29, subd. 1. MEDICAL CANNABIS MAY NOW BE OBTAINED AT ANY OF EIGHT DISTRIBUTION CENTERSACROSS MINNESOTA *Care-giver may represent a patient by applying and meeting conditions including a background check. HEALTH CARE PRACTITIONER CERTIFIESCONDITION PATIENT HAS A QUALIFYING CONDITION APPROVEDPATIENT IS ADDED TOREGISTRY PATIENT* REGISTERS INFORMATION, PROOF OF I.D. & PAYMENT DID YOU KNOW THAT MINNESOTA IS THE FIRSTSTATE PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY TO OFFER ONLY SMOKE-FREE MEDICAL CANNABIS?2MANUFACTURERS AUTHORIZED REGULATED INSPECTED CITY OF HOPKINS HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE 2015-1092 AN INTERIM ORDINANCE TEMPORARILY PROHIBITING MEDICAL CANNABIS MANUFACTURING AND DISTRIBUTION FACILITIES THE CITY OF HOPKINS, MINNESOTA, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE: A. The City Council finds that it is necessary to temporarily preserve the status quo regarding the City's regulation of land uses through its official controls following the Minnesota Legislature's passage of the Medical Cannabis Therapeutic Research Act of 2014, Minnesota Session Laws, Chapter 311, §§ 1-22 (2014)(the "Act"). B. The City finds that medical cannabis manufacturing and distribution facilities represent new land uses not presently addressed in the City's official controls and never previously studied by the City. C. The City finds that such uses should be studied for the purpose of determining whether amendments or additions to the City's official controls may be necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. SECTION 2: DEFINITIONS: The following terms when used in this ordinance shall mean: Official controls. "Official controls" or "controls" means ordinances and regulations which control the physical development of the City or any part thereof or any detail thereof and implement the general objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Official controls include ordinances establishing zoning, subdivision controls, site plan regulations, sanitary codes, building codes and official maps. Medical Cannabis. Any species of the genus cannabis plant, or any mixture or preparation of them, including whole plant extracts and resins, which is delivered in the form of: 1) liquid, including, but not limited to, oil; 2) pill; 3) vaporized delivery method with use of liquid or oil, but which does not require the use of dried leaves or plant form; or 4) any other method, excluding smoking, approved by the Minnesota Commissioner of Health. Medical Cannabis Manufacturer. Any entity registered by the Minnesota Commissioner of Health to cultivate, acquire, manufacture, possess, prepare, transfer, transport, supply, or dispense medical cannabis, delivery devices, or related supplies and educational materials. Distribution Facility. A center for the distribution of medical cannabis operated by a medical cannabis manufacturer. SECTION 3. INTENT AND AUTHORIZATION: A. It is the intent of this ordinance to allow the City of Hopkins time to complete an in-depth study concerning adoption of revisions of the City's official controls for medical cannabis manufacturing and distribution facilities and in the interim to protect the planning process and health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the community. B. City staff is authorized to conduct a study of the City's official controls that may need to be adopted or amended to protect the public health, safety, and welfare as they relate to medical cannabis manufacturing and distribution facilities. SECTION 4. TEMPORARY PROHIBITION: Pending the completion of the above referenced study and the adoption of appropriate official controls, the following uses are prohibited within the City: Medical Cannabis Manufacturer Distribution Facility SECTION 5. EXEMPTIONS: The statutory exemption to this ordinance set forth in Minnesota Statutes § 462.355, Subd. 4 is incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall take effect on the date of publication and shall remain in effect for one year from the effective date of this ordinance or until the adoption of the official controls being studied, whichever occurs first. ADOPTED this 7th day of April, 2015, by the City Council of Hopkins, Minnesota. First Reading: April 7, 2015 Second Reading: April 21, 2015 Date of Publication: April 30, 2015 Date Ordinance Takes Effect: April 30, 2015 Eugene J. axwell, Mayor ATTEST: C/1 Amy Domeier, City Clerk APPROVED AS O FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attome ignature ate