All right, the March 6th meeting of the St.

Paul Planning Commission will now come to order.

The first item is roll call.

Commissioner Grill.

Present.

Commissioner Hackney.

Commissioner Holst.

Commissioner Johnson Becker.

Commissioner Martinson?

Here.

Commissioner Presley?

Here.

Commissioner Riley.

Commissioner Starling.

Here.

Commissioner Tagia.

Oh, he's a it's it's it's tacky off.

Um next up is approval of the February 20th, 2026 planning commission meeting minutes.

Do we have a motion?

So moved.

Moved by Commissioner Holtz.

Do you have a second?

Second.

Second by Commissioner Martinson.

Any discussion.

All those in favor?

Aye.

All those opposed.

Any abstentions?

All right, the item passes.

Um if folks are amenable, I'd like to pull item number five up to the front, training uh best practices for quasi-judicial decision making before we do a little quasi-judicial decision making.

Um I'm seeing nods all around.

Um if folks are comfortable with that, then we will have a presentation now from the county attorney's office.

Good morning, everyone.

Uh my name is Daniel Staley.

I think I've seen most of you around uh covering for Josh every once in a while.

So uh I'm assistant city attorney.

And uh this is a presentation that I've given now to city council and their staff.

Um it's uh our office had kind of some notes and some memorandums on what a quasi-judicial decision making is, but uh it was kind of lawyerly like, it was kind of difficult to understand.

Uh, I think I kind of want to just kind of, you know, people tended to not really get it.

And I I came across this presentation, it's not mine.

Uh a guy named Sam White out of Colorado.

He's kind of uh works for the equivalent of like the League of Minnesota Cities and Colorado.

Uh I saw it, it looks really good.

It's really easy to understand.

Um I I think you can get the the slides show a presentation uh to refer back to later.

It has a lot of good information in it.

Um and uh I I asked him if I could use his presentation, and he said under two conditions.

One that I give him credit for that, so that's what I'm doing right now, and two that I just don't accept money for it, and I only give it to the city and city departments and uh uh boards like this.

So uh that's uh also what I'm doing here.

So uh and it is about an hour long presentation, but I kind of with time constraints I'm gonna like fast forward it, so try to get it done in about 10 minutes.

Um the first thing is just uh we we kind of go through uh the differences between legislative and quasi-judicial functions.

I don't think that's quite as important for you guys because you don't have legislative duties, but just kind of going to uh the quasi-judicial matters.

Uh I I guess it's called quasi judicial because you're sitting really like a judge.

Um, you know, the the quasi is just like we're not in a courtroom.

We're we're in a a boardroom like this.

So try to think of yourselves all as judges where you you you plot apply the rules, uh the rules of uh uh your policies and procedures.

Uh you know, uh we we accept evidence that's given at the hearing.

We don't we don't go out and find our own evidence.

We you know the evidence is presented to you.

Uh you know, just try to be uh mindful of not talking to other litigants.

If you know people, you might have to recuse yourself.

But if you know something's coming before you, you don't go out and do your own investigation.

You just kind of the evidence will come to you, and that's the evidence that is presented.

So if there's an appeal later, uh we know what the record is because the only evidence is the the evidence that was presented at the hearing, and that can all go up and that can all be reviewed.

Um that's kind of just a sense of fairness.

I mean, imagine if you're if you're a judge if you're uh in a lawsuit and you you're going before uh you don't necessarily want to see the judge talking to the other party, kind of being chummy and uh friendly with the other party, even if it's just uh completely benign, it just it's kind of makes you feel like maybe you're not gonna get a fair shot.

We want to make sure that everybody that comes before us at least feels like the process was fair, that uh they they had a fair shot that everyone listened to them if they had an opportunity to say what they needed to say.

Okay.

Okay, and this is kind of like what what do you consider?

Uh and the the the record is what is elicited at the hearing.

Uh, and that kind of goes back to do the due process that that we're all required to uh to give uh the people that come before us.

Um because essentially what what what we're doing, like the the Duke Process Clause is we're not allowed to take life liberty or property without due process of law.

Uh no one here has the ability to take life or liberty, but we do have the the ability to regulate property, and that's uh uh that that's uh an obligation or kind of a power that you have to really be mindful of because uh we have to make sure that before we can do anything, the the default is everyone comes here, it's their property.

Uh generally we want people to do what they think they want to do with their property, that's their property, they should be able to do with it what they'd like.

Uh but we do have regulations and we do have rules.

So kind of the default should be we want to generally look to help people do what they want to do for their property.

Um if we're gonna put a regulation or we're gonna do something to restrict that, a condition, uh we we want to make sure that we we we uh have our policies and we follow all those and evidence comes in and uh the decision is made based on uh findings that relate to the factors that you must consider.

Um so um kind of going to like the findings that we have to make.

You know, you know, staff will always make findings and recommendations for you.

Uh those are all findings that have been uh prepared by people that have looked at the factors, considered them, they've all been approved by the city attorney's office.

So we know those are are gonna be those are gonna hold up.

Um we know that we we trust that those will be if you want to follow the recommendations the of staff, we know that uh we know that we'll be able to back those up because if it gets appealed and it goes to a court of appeals or a district court, a judge is not gonna look at the the decision making, it's not gonna look at the kind of like how how we came to our or the uh the basis for our decision, just kind of they're not gonna look at like what we consider the um you know, kind of like our reasoning, but they are gonna look at the process to make sure that everything is followed right.

So they're they're gonna wanna make sure that like all the factors were considered and that there were kind of legally sufficient reasons for that.

So we know that we're good if we follow that.

Uh if if you think that uh we're not gonna follow the staff recommendations, um, I think that's that's a situation where you know we we have to make a record of that, and that's something where I kind of if it looks like that's what the way it's gonna go after the vote comes out, we'd wanna consult with our the city attorney just to try to find uh findings that we know will hand up, and so and sometimes Josh will take a look at those and say, I don't really think there's anything I can find here.

Um so and that's that's something that we have to come back and consider.

But um, you know, I I think it to kind of protect us up on appeal, it always makes sense to have findings that you know if we're if we're gonna go against staff recommendations to at least consult with our attorney's office so we can get legally um permissible.

You know, we know things that okay, uh, this might not event what staff recommended, but we know that this is something that'll be held up.

Uh and it's better to do that through our office as opposed to staff because staff has kind of already made the recommendations, so kind of going back to them to ask them to change them, you're kind of asking them to you know go against what like they've already taken a position, they've already kind of said this is what we think should happen.

So you're you're kind of going to them and asking them to say, Well, even though we think this is what should happen, we're we're gonna do this other thing, it just kind of puts them in a tough bind.

Um, we'll do that.

Uh yeah, uh so kind of other rules of engagement.

Uh you know, we talked briefly about you know, not going out and doing your own investigation, waiting for the uh evidence to come to you.

But uh it's also important if you know something's coming to you, you know, don't go out onto social media or to talk to people, friends privately or make public statements, because we uh we we can't have our minds made up before the evidence comes in.

But there's really there's really not a place to you know pre-express your opinions if you think you know if you've looked at the the materials like the week before, and you kind of think you've already made up your mind.

Um, you know, I we ask you to always come in with not to do that, to come in with an open mind and just kind of wait for the evidence to be presented.

Because kind of making comments and making uh talking about a matter outside of this forum, it's it's an ex parte communication and it shows a bias because uh we're we're not supposed to make up our minds until we we've heard all the evidence.

Um also like afterwards, uh a decision will be made by this body.

Uh consider yourselves a body.

Um, you know, you might not disagree with the all the decisions that this body makes, but I I think it's helpful to respect the decision that's made.

Um so you know, while obviously during deliberations, you can all talk about what you think is right or wrong about a decision you're making, and that's totally fine.

But like once the decision kind of comes down, it's not really helpful to have uh uh you know someone who is maybe in the minority kind of talk about you know why they thought the decision was wrong.

It just to it just kind of makes it difficult if if an appeal does go up when you know we we like to have kind of like a unified board, so you it's it's totally great and finding disagree while you're talking about it, but once a decision comes out, it's not necessarily helpful to kind of talk down the the like a lawfully you know uh given determination.

Um uh next is to kind of run a good hearing.

Um I think we do a pretty good job of this, but uh uh I think it's important just to let uh because a lot of people who come here, they've never been to a forum like this before, they don't necessarily know what to expect, but just to kind of let everyone know at the outset that you know you'll come up, you'll have you know five minutes to talk or whatever, and then you know there's a public hearing and other people can come and limit them to two minutes and you know let them know that you know they have to limit their comments to the matter before them and just uh kind of uh I think if everyone has the their expectations set, I think we do a pretty good job of that generally of what what is gonna happen and uh kind of the the the procedure for coming up here and speaking, it just kind of makes everybody feel better about the process.

Um yeah, and here's kind of like the the problems with having like those ex parte communications or those comments that uh outside of the record.

It's just to I mean when we do what we're supposed to do and we make findings when we consider the factors that are supposed to be considered, um, when when everything comes in at the hearing, it it's almost impossible to get overturned.

I mean, a judge isn't gonna look at every anything we do and say, oh, I don't like the way you your decision.

Uh but a judge will absolutely overturn us if there's any kind of, you know, someone made a comment here outside the record or someone did an investigation here or um considered something like this, they said on the record that they considered something that oh well I my friend told me this.

Um well, you know, your friend's comments aren't aren't part of the record.

So those are things that'll absolutely get us overruled just because it's it's not part of the the fair due process standard.

Um you guys don't do this, you guys are pretty good at this.

So this is one comment I have for city council is like uh texting and sending emails during the hearing.

It's just to uh it's it's important just to kind of focus on the people that are giving their presentation.

One, it it could be something completely unrelated, so it might not even be related, but when they look up and they see people texting and sending emails, it just uh they think you know that we don't have the their full uh uh attention.

And also someone could say, well, are they texting the other person to say what they're gonna do, or they you know what is there some sort of nefarious act going on?

And usually it's not, but it's you know, some people you they can request those, they can request documents, they can say, Well, I want to see what those text messages are and kind of stuff that you're doing on computers during meetings and stuff like that.

That that can be something that that can be uh requested, so we don't we don't want to have have to even kind of go down that path.

Um I don't know if this happens to you guys a ton either, but you know, sometimes someone might try to reach out to you directly um you know with evidence or to give you things that I and uh uh if that does happen, there is kind of a script that I wrote for city council that I think you guys could use as well too, but it basically says, you know, thank you.

That I'm in a I'm sitting in a quasi-judicial role, so I cannot consider this material, but I've forwarded it on to staff and it'll become part of the record.

But I'm I'm not um basically I'm unable to talk to you about this uh uh outside of the hearing.

Um so it I don't know if that happens a ton with you guys, but if it does, just know it.

You you really shouldn't be have it does okay.

You should you shouldn't be having back and forths with people, you should basically just forward everything directly to Yasmin or I don't know who she wants you to send it to, Yasmin.

Okay.

Um and you can just let them know this is a quasi-judicial matter.

And it's kind of easy for you.

Like I know city council has like lots of questions about is this a judicial matter?

Is this a legislative?

Like for you, like anything that's gonna come to you is gonna be a quasi-judicial matter.

So it should be forwarded to her.

No comments given just saying, sorry, I can't talk to you about this because it's going to come before me.

And that's kind of that's kind of like how you would hope you know if someone tried to send something to a judge that you were the other side on too, you wouldn't want them to kind of have a back and forth.

You would just kind of want them to kind of draw that line.

Uh Mrs.

Saley.

Yeah, go ahead, Sah.

Um, I I've I've always understood that um rezonings, for example, on legislative matters, and that's why our opinions are advisory.

So I believe in that case, that is a legislative matter that comes before us.

Is that not correct?

Yeah, it's like a rezone.

Yeah, rezon, right?

Because that's a legislative matter that redraws the fair enough.

Yeah, a rezone is uh um that's legislative, at least for maybe Josh has something we can look into.

Yeah, that's it.

We've also combined the comprehensive neighborhood planning committee into this, and so we're not just zoning anymore.

So all of those formerly CNPC decisions would also be generally legisl legislative.

Which which items?

Uh comprehensive and neighborhood planning committee no longer exists, and it's now coming to the full body.

Okay.

So all those items would also generally be more legislative in nature.

So just as a clarifying note for everybody here.

Okay.

You will see a mix.

Okay.

I okay.

I was in order of that.

So yeah, if if that's the case, then uh, you know, if there's any uh a question, you can always uh come to Josh or I or um if they're if you're unsure of it.

But um look a question.

Yeah, you know, I'm actually I can kind of is it always zoning is always legislative?

Okay, no, it can be.

So specifically a rezoning is a legislative decision by the city council to redraw the legislative map the map of the city.

And so our opinions to city council in that case are only advisory.

Um so because of that nature, that is a legislative matter, but everything else, so CUPs or variances or that all those things, those are quasi-judicial.

Okay.

So it's kind of the exception.

Gotcha.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Uh I I think uh kind of in the interest of time, I know I've probably been gone for about 12 or so minutes now.

Uh I think that was uh uh I guess the prohibition ends like after um I I guess I I would wait until after a city council kind of takes action on it because there's a chance that they might they might get sent back to you guys for further findings.

But I think once the city council makes a final determination on the merit, the the kind of the ex parte uh hold goes off, and you know if you happen to know someone or you know you can talk about a matter again at that point.

But uh so that's uh that's probably the end of it.

If anybody has any questions, I can take questions.

Um I think I have one, but if folks are sort of formulating, um can we get a copy of this presentation?

Yes, okay.

Yes, would you send that around?

I know you have a copy of it, just send it to whoever needs it.

Yeah, wonderful.

Um other questions from the question.

Commissioner Presley.

I was just curious.

Um, you know, being from our own neighborhoods and um when issues do come up or things that are coming up for this body, and we might want to encourage uh folk in the neighborhood to come out or also a public hearing, especially when there's an opportunity to write letters or voice their opinions.

What are we supposed to do with that?

Can we encourage it?

Yeah, I mean, if someone comes to you and asks about you, you can say, yeah, it's coming on, you can come to the public hearing, but I I wouldn't I wouldn't like give them you know talk about like the merits of the case or the like you know if someone has questions like, oh I heard that this is happening, you can say, Oh yeah, that actually is coming before us.

Um here's the date, but I I wouldn't uh I wouldn't encourage them, you know, one way or the other to say anything, just kind of more like logistical.

You can confirm that yes, yes, that's coming on, you can come, but uh yeah.

And for legislative items, so say we were gonna do a uh a new T zoning study or something, things like that are different because they're not a zoning case.

So I think we've we've been in the past been encouraged to involve people in in items like that.

So I think it's just the clarification between those.

Yeah, it's a quasi-judicial.

Any other questions?

All right.

Thank you so much for your presentation.

We'll look forward to those slides.

Yeah, thank you very much.

All right.

Thanks, everyone.

All right, and thank you for taking new business out of order.

That brings us back to public hearings.

Um and I am going to read a little speech now.

I know.

All right, welcome to the zoning applications part of our agenda.

Planning commission decisions on most types of zoning applications, including conditional use permits, nonconforming use permits, site plans and variances are final decisions unless appealed to the city council.

Planning commission decisions on rezoning and master plan amendments are only recommendations to the city council who will make the final decision.

Planning commission findings must have a rational basis, be based upon the St.

Paul Zoning Code and applic applicable state and federal laws.

Today we are holding public hearings with the following rules and procedures.

After I read the item, staff will give an oral report, and then I will open up the floor for commissioners to ask questions of staff.

The applicant will then be given the opportunity to speak on their request and answer any questions from commissioners.

After that, I will open the public hearing on the item.

All testimony and questions will be addressed to the chair and must relate to the proposals before the commission.

If you are a member of the public that would like to speak during a specific item's public hearing, you may do so by using the center microphone, stating your name and home location for the record.

After you complete your testimony, please sign in on the sheet to your right.

Testimony will be limited to no more than two minutes.

You are allowed to speak only once, with the exception of the applicant who will be allowed an opportunity to respond to the testimony and answer commission questions.

All right, with that, we have our one zoning item, 928 7th Street West C U P.

And I believe we have Mr.

Hankerson here to speak with us.

Good morning, Chair and Commissioners.

Okay, so zoning application PED Cup 000310 2026 is an application for a conditional use permit for an assembly hall at 928 West 7th Street.

You might also know it as the Keg House.

The land use and zoning in the surrounding area includes uh mixed residential and commercial building to the north across the street, uh which is zone B2, uh multifamily residential to the east, T3, uh zone T3 in industrial warehouse to the south, zone T2, and another mixed residential commercial building to the west, zone T2.

So as I said, the application is for a conditional use permit for an assembly hall.

The previous use was a food hall at the Kegan Case Market, and the current zoning is T3.

Um the applicant intends to use the space to host athletic events and community gatherings such as boxing events, live music, and fundraising events, and the space will additionally be available to rent for private events.

And actually, I'll go into just a bit of background here since it's there's quite a bit of history to this one.

Um the Schmidt Kirkhouse was built in 1937 as an expansion of the Schmidt Brewery and was used as part of brewery operations until 2002.

Uh the site was rezoned from I1 to T3 in 2008, and the former brewery was locally designated as the Jacob Schmidt Brewing Company Historic District in 2011.

And in 2015, uh new ownership began the process of historic rehabilitation, and in 2018, the Kegan Case Market opened in the space as a food hall.

Um the building was vacated in 2025.

So zoning code section 65657 development standards and conditions for an assembly hall in traditional neighborhood districts.

Um the first being that a conditional use permit is required for a facility with total seating capacity over 500.

Um this standard triggers the conditional use permit, uh, which will be addressed in the next slide.

Um in T2 and T3 traditional neighborhood districts, total seating capacity shall not exceed 1,000, and facility, the facility shall not be divided into more than three separate theater/slash auditorium areas.

This standard is met, the maximum capacity is 607 people, and there will be one auditorium area.

There are five standards that conditional use permits must meet.

Um in this case, they've all been met, and I'd be happy to dig in further if there are questions at the end.

But they've been evaluated and all the standards have been met.

The staff recommendation is for approval of the conditional use permit for an assembly hall at 928 West 7th Street.

And the Fort Road Federation has not submitted a letter of recommendation, and I don't believe we've received any letters.

All right, thank you.

Um questions for Mr.

Hankerson.

Uh Commissioner Riley.

Thank you, Mr.

Hingerson.

That's really hot.

Um I have two questions.

Uh one, um, I didn't see I'm a little I'm a little concerned based on the prior use and the parking situation, that in the evenings, this might be a big create congestion in the public street.

So um wondering if that was discussed and if any approaches to that concern could be talked about with the applicant.

And then also I'm curious why there's no finding related to the economic benefit of retaining historic resources as stated in the comprehensive plan.

I think that that would be a really excellent um finding to include in that list.

Um it is a historic structure, it's designated, and there's value to that.

And I I think I I find it missing from the staff report.

So I just that's more of a comment, I guess.

But if I want to make sure that the HPC staff did get to review this and have an opportunity to say that, so I guess that's my question.

Sure.

Thank you.

Chair, Commissioner.

Um, I'll address the first question.

Um the applicant plans to have events with a standing capacity of 600 guests occasionally, it would occur monthly to quarterly.

Um they do have the parking stall parking lot in the rear with 72 stalls.

Um I believe they've also secured an agreement for overflow parking, but I'll let the applicant address that.

Um additionally, we analyzed the surrounding area, and there was a large amount of available off-street or on-street parking that is um south of West 7th Street, so not not even including the residential neighborhood.

Um there's also transit connections, so that was the rationale for meeting the ingress and egress standard there, and kind of on your second point.

I believe in the first standard for the conditional use permit, there's a policy LU6, one of the parts of that policy is integrating St.

Paul's historic resources into neighborhood-based economic development strategies.

Um, so there's that to support the findings there, but um, we did also consult with HPC staff and if there are any significant alterations to the site, um, they would be consulted further.

Thank you.

Of course.

Other questions?

Commissioner Starling.

Uh thank you, madam chair.

Um I have some questions that you may end up deferring to the applicant, so I'm open to that.

I'm interested in what we would have considered the capacity of the previous use of the food hall.

So, how many how much room was there for visitors when it was the previous usage?

Do you happen to know that?

Uh, Chair Commissioner, I I don't know that right now, but I can look into it and get you an answer later.

And then a second question.

Uh I'm understanding this application is for 50% of the floor space.

Is that 50% from the applicant or 50% for the assembly hall?

Sure.

The 50% is for the assembly hall.

The applicant is looking to purchase the whole building there.

But that doesn't require any zoning application.

That's permitted in the T3 district.

Thank you.

All right.

Thank you.

Any other questions from Commissioners?

All right.

Oh, just uh I believe uh Mr.

Germany has joined us.

If he can if he can perhaps add his his comments and then we could come to you.

Great.

Mr.

Germany.

Sure, uh Commissioner Starling, I happen to be familiar with this site.

So I could say that the previous use um when it was really booming and then full use as a food hall was almost completely open to the public.

Minus just you know back kitchen sorts of operations and that sort of thing.

It was mostly an open to the public uh building.

I think Commissioner Starling.

I'll let you answer for yourself.

Uh thank you, ma'am chair.

Uh Mr.

Germany, in the previous usage, I visited the site in its previous usage and I have visual memories of it.

What I'm trying to understand is in the what felt like crowded space, do we have a sense of how many people were actually there?

And I'm trying to kind of compare the number of visitors in the previous use to the number of visitors in the assembly hall use, just to get to a sense of how how many bodies in the space leading to Commissioner Riley's questions about parking.

And I'm trying to understand is this an actual difference in the number of visitors to the site or the configuration and usage of the site.

That's what I'm trying to understand.

Gotcha.

Thank you.

And I I'm sorry, I don't have an answer to the number, the capacity number of the previous establishment.

I'd like to let the app maybe leave this one for the applicant instead of uh us speculating on the particulars of it.

Um Commissioner Holtz is next, and then Commissioner Riley, if you've got a question.

Commissioner Holtz.

I guess I just wanted to understand two questions.

It's uh 607, I think was the number here.

That's just for a whole that's not including uh participants at the gym that you just mentioned.

Is that correct?

That's my first question.

And then the second one is is there a maximum capacity outdoors?

I know like one of the events that they listed here was car shows and uh lifestyle exhibitions.

Um so presumably that's a uh event that happened in the parking lot, and I know historically they've had you know events in the parking lot there.

I just wonder how that can that's part of what we're looking at as well.

Okay.

Uh Chair Commissioner.

Um I believe the 600 seven number is the capacity for the assembly hall use.

Um I'm not sure maybe the applicant can answer um whether the the gym hours and the events would overlap um that I'm not sure of.

And then would you would you mind repeating your second question?

Uh the other question was sort of uh I guess this sounds like interior capacity, but in theory it's like we have outdoor events that were be even a larger capacity.

Yeah.

Um is that permitted, or do we cap that in some way, shape, or form?

Do we look at that?

Is that something we can say?

Yeah.

Like I said, specifically mentioned, I think car shows assuming.

Sure.

I'm not sure right now, but I can consult with DSI staff.

It's fine for me too.

Sorry.

Um Commissioner Riley.

Uh thank you, Chair.

Um Mr.

Hingerson.

Okay, I'm gonna try and ask Commissioner Starling's question in a little different way.

Um not because I think it's gonna make you more able to answer it, but because I think it might lead you to a person who can, right?

So you just mentioned DSI, and I'll just start with by saying number one.

I don't have a problem with the number of like vehicles that might be here.

I'm not I'm not so concerned about who's gonna be here or when or why.

I'm more concerned about the potential impact on the neighborhood, just to be clear that that's where this is going based on as Commissioner Stelling said, sort of past experience.

But uh so on the architecture diagrams, it does identify the type of occupancy expected for each of the spaces.

That type of occupancy does relate directly to the number of people who can be there.

And so if there's someone here from DSI who can help with that, so that's a fire code thing.

Um that might get us to that answer of that question.

So if any of those types of occupancies are changing, that's where we get like who's allowed to be there and who wasn't.

So even if we don't have like understanding of the actual counts for events in the past use, um that occupancy information could help sort of back us into that.

Um so that's what so my question, my I guess my question is is the stated occupancy type um listed here on these forms substantially similar or different from the occupancy types allowed in the previous use.

So that's my concrete question, and I hope that helps.

Thank you.

Um chair commissioner.

I'm just gonna noodle on that for a second.

Um like Commissioner Starling, I don't need an answer right now.

Yeah, but not having an answer will help me decide how I want to go forward.

So thank you.

Yeah, that might be a follow-up.

Um but appreciate the question.

Um it does seem like the applicants are taking note of the the questions being asked.

So um I'm wondering if there aren't more specific questions for staff.

Um, if we can call the applicant up, have them give their their piece, and then if there are additional questions for staff, maybe at that point we could um after the public hearing uh refer to those questions if that if folks are comfortable with that.

That might give staff an opportunity um to regroup a little bit.

All right.

Uh seeing nods, um, thank you, Mr.

Hankerson.

Uh and we would invite the applicant to come up and tell us uh a little bit about their project.

Hi everyone.

Uh I'm Colin Obels Bay, uh project architect on that on it, representative DO architecture.

Um, this is our lead designer Tanner Elts and uh building owner Sean Devine.

Uh I'm here representing uh Outlaw Development as the vice president on the principal Dalton Outlaw, unfortunately had to attend to a family health issue this morning.

Um so he was unable to attend.

Um so we can think we have answers to most of your questions.

Um, in regards to parking, there are 72 spots in the lot.

There's uh a vacant paved inlined lot on Webster.

We're in discussions with that owner who just owns the parking lot, doesn't have an adjacent business, that's vacant 100% of the time.

Um, and that's an additional 40.

Um, and then if we need to, there's uh um the North Garden Theater um uh event space, which doesn't have any on-site parking, they contract with uh um St.

Francis Church for overflow in the in the event that we would need overflow, which I don't think we would going above the 11.

Um, yeah, 112 uh spaces we could contract with them.

Yeah, we're happy to take you through kind of the design because I know there were some historic building questions.

Um ultimately we're not modifying the exterior of the building.

We're you know, under the HPC rules and regulations there.

Our firm does a lot of historic preservation work here in St.

Paul even.

Um so in terms of that integrity, that's that's matched.

Um, we're we're essentially looking at bifurcating the space where the right half of the plan is ultimately going to be the kind of boxing and general gym use, uh, occupancy values for that.

There they're probably will not be most more overlapping of the two spaces.

Um, but when combined occupancy comes together from a life safety perspective, which is certainly not the layout of natural bank banquet and assembly use is about 1100.

Uh the previous occupancy was a thousand.

So the increase of occupancy is not significantly different.

Uh the banquet layouts and the seating layouts that we've designed are are really more in line with about 200 people.

So a larger event would be about a use of 200 people.

The gym probably is gonna be about 50 on a typical use pattern.

So you're looking at about a use of 250.

So parking capacity is when you assume that some people are traveling together, they they they level out pretty well.

So I don't think there'll be a huge amount of pressure put on the neighborhood from a parking perspective in general.

In fact, from a use perspective, it's probably gonna be a little quieter than the food hall was since the food hall had constant activity.

So I think that'll be that'll be an easy, easy solution from there.

And uh Tanner can take you through kind of specifics on the design if you want some orientation to what what this looks like, but do you want to show up through the deck?

Sure.

Um so I have the plans up of the proposed changes.

Um a lot of what we're doing to the space is actually removing stuff that the keg and case project put in the middle.

A lot of those center vendor kitchens and booths are being taken out to return that middle space to being an open event floor or gym floor, depending on the side.

Um on the far left side of the plans, uh, we're keeping a restaurant and what was the coffee shop in there, repurposing those as a catering kitchen and a service bar for events.

We're adding additional bathrooms to serve that uh event load in this portion of the space and adding a one-stop elevator for accessibility up to the mezzanine that was built under the keg and case remodel of the space.

Um on the gym side, we're building out the locker rooms for the gym, um, and then keeping what was an ice cream shop as a public juice bar for gonna during the day.

It'll it'll be full open to the public for people to come in, get grab and go food items, get smoothies, get juices, and uh there will be seating in there for them to hang out adjacent to the gym.

Um the dual purpose generally is Dalton and Sean have a strong community outreach presence.

They do affordable housing development, and in Dalton's kind of a community leader in general, but the the daytime uses and opportunities in the event space are really geared towards community related events.

They do a lot of volunteerism and have a nonprofit partner that's coming in to run foundation work within it.

So probably a lot of the daytime uses will most likely be kind of community-oriented events.

Um, and then evenings and weekends will probably be geared towards more typical event space use.

Uh these are just some views showing this is the event side showing six foot table rounds.

Um in the six foot table round seating pattern, uh banquets were only seating 192 people in this space.

So depending on the event itself, like Colin said, we're kind of around that 200-ish number for the events.

Um, and then we're obviously refacing some of those kitchens in there, building out bars and green rooms in this space for the event function.

And then on the gym side, building out a gym that's features a boxing ring because Dalton's main uh emphasis in there is boxing and boxing oriented uh athletics, but it does also feature all the traditional equipment in a gym for public gym use.

Any other questions we can answer for you?

Thank you.

I think I saw a few a few looks my way.

Um Commissioner Tag.

Yes, just want to get a sense of you know what we're talking about here, because obviously um we've mostly spoken about the event space, which I think is to the um the left of the diagram you provided, and obviously you've mentioned the gym.

I'm curious about there's this further event space to the right, which is listed as a 263 occupancy.

So I I like to get a sense of how the spaces might be used holistically, because I think that might be relevant to our discussion on kind of overall usage levels and sort of how you see these spaces playing together as a as a group.

Sure.

I mean, the the gym itself is a standalone gym.

Um the the adjacent space, and Sean could probably enumerate elaborate on this a little bit more, is under the plan an optional smaller gathering space for smaller you know events, um, and probably a little bit of overflow for some seating for the juice bar for daytime use.

The neighborhood's given a lot of feedback that they really would like to see the coffee shop feature come back, which the juice bar will service for that.

So there might be a little overflow capacity of seating in there, but you know, I think there's some longer term plans potentially.

Yeah, the the longer term plan would be to find uh a restaurant partner.

Um, unfortunately the economic situation surrounding restaurants right now, it's been extremely hard, uh, nearly impossible to find a restaurant partner that would come in to sign a lease that would actually um pay rent.

Um, people are looking for free rent and they'll come in and put their restaurant.

So for the financial long-term financial viability of the property, we do need to generate some revenue eventually.

So we're kind of holding that space open with the goal of a three um three meal restaurant, a breakfast, lunch, and dinner, which is again taking in some of the feedback we've gotten from uh district council and the community.

Um right now it would be.

I mean, is there a capacity?

What's the capacity on it?

As is total.

No, no, no, just the just the 263 is the life safety.

Okay, 263 on the life safety.

I mean, we're in the gates probably 40.

Yeah, it's just it's just not uh seated viable space for 263.

Um I don't know if that fully answers the question.

It does, thank you.

Other questions?

Commissioner Holtz.

I'd asked one earlier about car shows, et cetera, in the parking lot.

And and just I just can tell you I'm more interested in impact on the uh the community as far as like volume in and out as opposed to the user not parking space on it.

At least people not screwed about that, but sort of like traffic in and out and what that looks like.

Um I just wanted to hear you talk about the the how you might be using the parking lot for events as well.

Uh my partner, the principal Dalton Outlaw, he is a couple of collector cars, and I think he go and he goes to car shows.

Um so that was kind of the something he'd be interested in doing.

Um I would assume we'd utilize um the sum of the parking lot for those events.

Um, but we would also be cognizant about maintaining some for public parking.

Um, we don't have you know plans for monthly car shows.

Um as far as access and egress, um, I mean, there's gonna be gym traffic uh with people coming, which I mean the average stay is probably 60 to 90 minutes.

Um I think Colin mentioned about you know, 50 people in the gym at a time.

Uh Dalton's owned a gym owned and operated a gym for the last 15 years.

Um he's had a variety of spaces, one as large as 40,000 square feet in the midway.

Um I had office in that building, and there's the the largest class size they do is um I think about 30 people, and that's for um uh Rocksteady boxing.

It's a Parkinson's boxing class that goes on.

So if you have 30 in a in a class and then another 20-ish people working out using machines, um and then you know, events would be more set time, people would come park and then leave when they're done.

So I don't think the access egress is an issue for that.

Um I think we're you know, work obviously work on traffic plan right now.

The lots are controlled.

Um, and there would be we would remove the gates, but we would probably have some sort of camera control.

So uh we don't get um the residents parking in there, and we're gonna have to make sure that our customers don't park in the residential parking that's next to it.

Other questions?

Okay, seeing no further questions for the applicant at this point.

Um, we'll let you all sit down and then you'll have an opportunity to come back and speak.

Um so we will move on uh to the public hearing.

Um I guess I will make a motion to open the public hearing.

Or excuse me, I'll see a look for a motion to open the public hearing.

So moved.

Commissioner Holtz.

Seconded by Commissioner Riley.

Acne.

Motion by Commissioner Ackley, seconded by Commissioner Riley.

Is there any discussion on the motion?

Excuse me.

All right, seeing none, we'll move forward with the vote.

All those in favor.

All right.

Um motion passes and we'll open the public hearing.

Um sorry, I don't have the same, I think, suite of notes that some people might have had in the past.

Um first we'll go with those in favor.

Um so if you're here to speak in favor of this item, please come up to the center microphone.

All those in favor.

All those in favor.

All right.

Seeing none, we'll move to those in opposition.

Uh all those in opposition.

All those in opposition.

All those in opposition.

All right.

Uh so no one came up to speak during the public hearing.

Um we would invite normally invite the applicant back up to speak um to the comments that were made.

Uh there have not been any comments made.

Um so I think we're not required to bring the applicants back up.

Um we can close the public hearing.

Is there a motion to close the public hearing?

So moved.

Uh motion by Commissioner Taggyff.

Is there a second?

Second by Commissioner Thomas.

Uh is there any discussion on that motion?

Saying none.

Um we'll move forward with the vote.

All those in favor?

I need your position.

All right.

The motion passes and the public hearing closes.

Um it sounds like there were some questions that we were hoping maybe to get answers back from staff.

They may have been answered, in fact, by the applicants.

Um, and so I guess from the folks up here, were there still outlying things that you you needed information from staff?

Commissioner Riley.

Um, I'm satisfied and would like to make a motion that includes an amendment to the staff report.

So I just put it, I'm just alerting people to that.

Okay.

Um is there anyone else that had questions for staff before we sort of move further into discussion?

Okay.

Seeing none, um, so we're we'll move into discussion now.

Um, and it feels like Commissioner Riley may have an item.

Um yeah, I would I I would I would like to move the staff recommendation um, but amend the findings related to um conditional use permit standards zoning code 61.501A, um, which is related to substantial compliance with the St.

Paul comprehensive plan in the list of applied applicable policies.

I would like to add policy HP 5 and HP 16.

I am happy to read those if it would help the group.

Um, but those are the two primary heritage preservation chapter policies that relate to preserving and umoting the use and reuse of historic structures for economic and community benefit.

Um I just I think it's really important in a city like St.

St.

Paul, where we really do preserve our historic resources and look at what that means from an equity standpoint to have those in our land use decisions because the conference of plan is the foundational um uh policy document upon all others rest.

So that's I would want to add those findings.

Um I need a second, I guess I don't order discuss that however that works.

So that's that's my that's what I got.

So what were the policy numbers?

Policy HP 5 and 16 5 is very short.

Incorporate historic and cultural, nope.

Sorry.

HP.

Sorry.

It's under a different goal.

It's goal, good lord.

Why did I write this this way?

Somebody tell me that.

Um I'm so sorry.

Goal to HP six.

I misspoke.

HP six, maintain and preserve designated and determined eligible historic and cultural resources.

This has that effect.

Then HP 16 is 15.

It has a list.

I'm not gonna read the whole list, but it's balance the preservation of historic and or cultural resources and new development by considering.

Um and so I think the um the sub bullets there also are are relevant.

Um I I could be okay without HP 16, but yes, six and sixteen.

Thank you.

Commissioner Riley, can you restate your motion?

Yes.

Move the staff recommendation to approve the conditional use permit and amend the staff report to include policies HP six and HP sixteen in the list of policies that apply under finding A.

Related to the conference of planning.

Commissioner Tegan.

Sorry, um, in relation, I I think I'm on board with you on HP six.

I was confused by HP five, which relates to historical tourism.

But um it's 15, 6 and 15, not five and sixteen.

I am so sorry.

Um on the on the uh I'm disaster.

I'm I'm with I'm with you on and with you on six.

Um on 15.

Um that is a sub of um goal four, which relates to it would say states city investments in built cultural natural environments and in historic and cultural resources that reflect broad city priorities.

So I think if I'm reading this correctly, um you know the this this the 15 um would be under the would be related to city investments, is that how you read the plan?

There was an intent if I recall correctly to make sure that the city's dollars were being used appropriately.

Um think it might be important to include this in projects that may someday ask for help.

But I would be okay not including that.

I see so the ration the rationale is I the reason I mention it is because obviously I don't think there's any city funding now, so the question would be sort of in light of maybe future city request for funding kind of thing.

Okay, well, I'm with you on six.

Yeah.

All right, so Commissioner Riley has a motion.

Is that is there a second for Commissioner Riley's motion?

I will second Commissioner Riley's motion.

All right, so commissioners Commissioner Riley's motion has HP six and HP 15.

Uh it was seconded by Commissioner Starling.

Um we can move into discussion.

I do want to look at the city attorney and staff and make sure folks are comfortable with the additions.

Um I got two thumbs up from the city attorney and the director.

So wonderful.

Um so now we're moving to discussion.

Discussion on this item.

I mean, I'll say what I said kind of before that.

I I feel like I I would be very happy to vote for um for an amended motion on six.

I'm not necessarily convinced on the applicability of 15.

Sure.

Commissioner Happy.

Okay.

Commissioner Riley.

I would happily take a friendly amendment to remove 16 if that's the preference of the commenters.

I'm gonna look at your seconder.

Seconder would follow the lead of the motion maker.

Wonderful.

So we have a motion on the table.

That's the there was a motion and a second.

Commissioner Taylor.

Ask if the um make of the motion would accept a friendly amendment to strike uh 15 and and um keep everything except so keep six essentially, keep the addition of six.

So there's uh the friendly amendment has been accepted by the motion maker and the seconder.

Um so that is the motion on the floor now.

Uh is just six.

Adding six.

All right.

Is there any discussion on this item as it stands now?

All right.

Seeing none, we can move forward with uh a vote on the um approval.

Um actually, Commissioner Riley, just for the sake of everyone here who's been following along.

As we before we vote on this, can you just say the motion as it stands now?

Yes, although I'm not sure I'm following along with my own votion.

Yes.

I'd like to move the staff recommendation to approve the CUP and add to the finding A.

Policy HP six.

Thank you, Commissioner Riley.

All right.

Everyone's on board.

All right, we're gonna move forward with the vote now.

All those in favor?

I all those opposed.

Any abstentions?

Uh next up is old business.

Nominations and elections of planning commission officers.

Um in your packet, you should have a document that was also sent to you via email.

Um that would include those that have uh nominated, uh have been nominated or nominated themselves for the first vice chair, second vice chair, and secretary.

Um, because there were there's a lot of discussion and a lot of sort of feelings on this one last time around.

Um I'm not sure how the commission wants to move forward on this item.

Um, we could do it seat by seat, or if someone wants to nominate a slate, we could do that as well.

Um I am open to how folks would like to proceed.

Commissioner Holtz.

Uh Chair, uh I appreciate being nominated.

Thank you very much.

If no one else wants a position, I'd be happy to take it.

But judging from uh we've got two people that uh self-nominated, uh it sounds like there's some actual genuine interest there, at least in the uh, and I'm just talking about the first chair position at the moment.

Um and so I would uh remove myself if uh happy to serve, but uh it sounds like there's people that are are also very willing to do this.

So thank you for Commissioner Holtz.

Um other comments on the the first vice chair, Commissioner Riley.

Um I think I sent a very complicated email, and I think I also technically nominated Commissioner Starling for first vice chair.

So if that helps anybody, I just want to add that note.

Uh uh thank you, Commissioner Riley.

Um does anyone of you want to make a nomination?

Um, you know, we did this via email, they're not they're put forward, but we should make a nomination in the in the committee and move forward.

Does anyone make a nomination for the first vice chair?

Commissioner Riley.

Um can I can I just in the interest of time caused by me?

I would like to nominate a slate that includes the first row of each soy.

So yes, subject to those folks agreement, yes.

So first vice chair, Commissioner Starling, second vice chair, Commissioner Thomas, Secretary, Commissioner Riley.

Is there it's a nomination?

I guess is there a we'll get a sec.

Is there a second for the nomination?

I will second that nomination slate.

Okay, seconded by Commissioner Martinson.

Is there a discussion on the proposed slate?

Perhaps by those that have been indicated.

Okay.

Second.

All right, so Commissioner Thomas, you're comfortable with the role of second vice chair.

Commissioner Styling.

Are you comfortable with first vice chair?

I am comfortable with first race chair.

Thank you, Commissioner Starling.

And Commissioner Riley, are you comfortable with secretary?

Uh yes.

Yes.

Okay.

So we've had a sort of a an untraditional nominate.

Uh let's call it a motion by Commissioner Riley with a second by Commissioner Martins and of the slate.

Is there any other discussion on the proposed slate?

Chair.

Um, I know we're trying to avoid committees, but next year, I really hope we just put together a nominations committee.

This has felt a little bit awkward for commissioners uh and those that are interested in the position.

And I think it would be a lot more enjoyable to have this as either an executive meeting or a nominations committee like we've done in the past.

So it's just my two cents on this.

Um just so that everyone that is interested can you know discuss it probably amongst themselves, even to some degree, and and work something out.

So next year.

So perhaps a nominating task force exactly this will be.

I think it's a great idea.

I also think this will all be your problem this year.

Um, but with that, okay.

So we had the motion, we had a second, we had discussion on the item.

Um if there's no more discussion, we'll move forward with a vote.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

All those opposed?

Nay.

All right.

Uh because there's been enough.

Yes, and two nays.

I think we'll either have to go to a roll call or we can let the item die.

I am for the it's unclear to me if it would have passed or not based on the voice vote.

We can do a roll call.

Commissioner Hackney.

Nay.

Commissioner Holst.

Nay.

Commissioner Martinson.

Aye.

Commissioner Presley.

Approved.

Commissioner Riley.

I, yes.

Yes.

Commissioner Starler?

Aye.

Commissioner Kagia.

Nay, because um I'd like to hear why people nominated before voting aye.

Uh Commissioner Thomas.

Aye.

And Chair Grill?

Aye.

Six in favor, three opposed.

Um so the slate passes, they've gone forward.

Um for the commissioners that have concerns or that wanted additional discussion.

Um perhaps this is something that we can take offline.

Individually.

Yeah, trying to make sure how we do it so that it's part of the um that we're not having a group discussion.

All right.

Um, with that, the slate has passed.

That was the only item included in new business.

Next up is site plan review.

Sure.

From me, I just saw this part in here.

Is this a piece that we need to do as part of this process or not?

Okay.

I'm I'm seeing a uh head shake from uh uh Ms.

Robinson.

So we just include it.

Okay.

Very good.

Um so for site plan review, there were two meetings worth of information.

So I'm gonna share the first one was Tuesday, March 3rd, 2026.

On the agenda was 1488 Grand Avenue and 120 Plato Boulevard West.

And then for the Tuesday, March 10th meeting, there is one item, 1645 Energy Park Drive.

And those are the site plan review items.

Next up is announcements.

The planning commissioner chair's announcements this week are thank you everyone for bearing with us as we come through the new transition.

Um, there are definitely some things about the agenda and the agenda order that I have some thoughts on as we move forward.

If you have thoughts and feelings on the order that we're taking things, please send them to the director um so that she can compile feedback on on the order of the meetings as we learn how this all feels like when we're doing them in real life.

And then the next up is planning director announcements.

We have no announcements from the director.

Um can I ask a question about the the purpose of the site plan review?

Is so I see there are links to further information that are that are available on those documents.

Sometimes there's not much there depending on where it is, where that is in the process, but the purpose of bringing it here is um items that are up for site plan review could be pulled by commissioners into um what was formerly the zoning committee, now the planning commission, um, to hear those items.

Um historically, it's not been something used very frequently.

I think in all my time on the commission, I can think of one or two items that have been pulled.

So it's just a notification in case there's any commissioners that would like to have further discussion of it at this body.

Okay, also to the public.

Also to the public.

Okay, so then so then the if a public if some if a member of the public wanted to discuss the site plan review further, how would they signal that to this body and at what point?

Chair, Commissioner, um, they would reach out to DSI.

Uh the site plan review agenda is public and goes out in ENS.

So if a member of the public had a question about a site plan, they would go to DSI, not to the commission.

And then DSI could bring it here, or they would have the public hearing at BZA meeting.

Not clear.

So I'll just clarify there's no public hearing for site plans.

Site plans are a technical document that is uh reviewed by all of the city departments in one group.

So there's a meeting that occurs where this happens and the applicant usually comes and talks, you know, through a lot of very technical issues like sewer and water and you know, parking and traffic, um things like that.

Um so there's no public hearing, but it's open if somebody wants it.

It's not a well-attended meeting.

Um, you know, but if if there are questions about site plans, they go to DSI.

Uh site plan review is delegated from the planning commission to DSI.

And if if anyone wants uh like a presentation about that, we could arrange that so everyone's um familiar with how that works.

I'm seeing some nods.

It looks like there would be some interest in that.

Thank you.

If we're having a presentation, I'd love to understand kind of what the planning commission has historically done in that way.

If we've ever like pulled something, why we might consider pulling something, I think because you know everyone understands that we can, but why and when is I think the process?

Yeah, like yeah, that's that's exactly right.

Uh thank you, Commissioner Martinson and Tegiaff.

Um if there are no other items, we will adjourn.

We are adjourned.