My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/04/2013
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Agendas
>
Planning Commission
>
2013
>
Agenda - Planning Commission - 04/04/2013
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2025 10:17:50 AM
Creation date
4/1/2013 8:35:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Agenda
Meeting Type
Planning Commission
Document Date
04/04/2013
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
163
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular Planning Commission 5.2. <br />Meeting Date: 04/04/2013 <br />By: Tim Gladhill, Community Development <br />Information <br />Title: <br />FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES: Review Status of 167th Retail Node <br />Background: <br />As the Planning Commission may recall, in January of this year, two proposals regarding potential new uses in the <br />retail node at 167th Ave and St. Francis Blvd were presented (specifically at 6001 167th Ave NW, the "Subject <br />Property "). This entire retail node has been struggling for some time now (pre- dating the recession), continues to <br />experience high vacancy rates, and concerns have also been raised regarding property maintenance as well. Neither <br />of the two proposals fully met the standards of the B -1 General Business District and therefore, Staff brought each <br />forward for review, consideration and direction from the Planning Commission. The case that was prepared for the <br />Planning Commission in January is attached for background information and more specific details. <br />Notification: <br />No notification is required. However, the Subject Property owner was notified to provide them an opportunity to <br />listen and /or participate in this discussion. <br />Observations /Alternatives: <br />Following is a brief recap of the two proposals previously reviewed and discussed by the Planning Commission: <br />Proposal 1 <br />Total Defense, a current Ramsey business (14031 St. Francis Blvd), had proposed to relocate its current operation <br />to the Subject Property. Their current location has the same underlying land use as the Subject Property. Total <br />Defense currently operates a retail store, gunsmithing (repair), and provides self - defense training courses. Total <br />Defense had proposed a similar operation on the Subject Property with the addition of an indoor shooting range. <br />The indoor shooting range component did not comply with the current permitted or conditional uses in the B -1 <br />General Business District. <br />Proposal 2 <br />Triangle Recycling, presently operating in the city ofNowthen, had proposed to relocate its operation to the Subject <br />Property. The business recycles clothing through a network of clothing collection boxes strategically placed <br />throughout the state. Clothing is collected from the boxes by a fleet of trucks and would be brought back to this site <br />for baling and transport to end markets. The business owner expressed an interest in expanding the recycling <br />program to accept electronics, small metals, mattresses, and plastics, which would be implemented as Phase II of its <br />operation. The proposal was primarily warehousing in nature, which isn't identified as a permitted or conditional <br />use in the B -1 General Business District. <br />Both proposals were also reviewed by the EDA, who also has a strong interest in seeing not only the Subject <br />Property but also this entire retail node to be evaluated. Both the Planning Commission and EDA expressed their <br />desire to see this area remain retail oriented rather than shifting to more of an employment type of setting. The <br />Planning Commission felt that an indoor shooting range would ultimately be more compatible with other permitted <br />uses in this zoning district and likely more compatible with the surrounding residential area while the <br />recycling /warehousing use was better suited for one of the employment districts. This information was forwarded <br />to the City Council for confirmation, which was confirmed at their February 12, 2013 meeting. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.