Grand Marais City Council at their last meeting on Jan. 25 approved the second reading of Ordinance 2017-01 amending G.M. zoning limits and maximum square footage of allowed retail development in the C/I zone. This was approved with the “understanding that the visioning process would evaluate and determine what the regulations should be in the C/I zone district of these types of uses.”
Minnesota Statute 462.351 states, “Municipal planning will assist in developing lands more wisely to serve citizens more effectively, will make the provision of public services less costly, and will achieve a more secure tax base.”
In the Grand Marais city’s Comprehensive Plan, these four items are listed as goals for the commercial district:
1. To provide commercial facilities which meet needs of residents and visitors.
2. To provide commercial growth opportunities.
3. To ensure that new commercial activities are developed in harmony with the unique natural environment of Grand Marais and the North Shore.
4. To provide for commercial development that reflects the quality “northwoods” environment.
I’d like the following questions answered by our city representatives:
1. I understand that tourists (visitors) are necessary to our economy, but when did they become “citizens” of Grand Marais? According to the mayor, 38 percent of the “visioning” survey results include individuals who do not live in Grand Marais and the thought is those results should be filtered out. Will they be?
2. If you want to provide commercial growth opportunities, why are you limiting the size of retail businesses? There are 10 uses listed as acceptable in the C/I district, yet the retail use is the only one restricted in size.
3. Is the new city headquarters in the C/I area considered a “new commercial activity”? Will it be “in harmony with the unique natural environment of Grand Marais and the North Shore”? More importantly, how does it meet the rules of Minnesota Statute 462.351 in making the provision of public services less costly, and how will it achieve a more secure tax base?
4. Finally, what is the definition of “northwoods” environment? In the “League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: Zoning Guide for Cities” it states, “Traditionally, aesthetic zoning has been criticized as not adequately related to the protection of the health and safety of the public.”
It concerns me that faced with opposition, city council chooses to ignore Minnesota statute by arbitrarily deciding what businesses should be allowed. Only when Dollar General wanted to build did all this time, effort, and money spent on “visioning” come about. In my humble opinion, following existing Minnesota statutes should take precedent over public opinion, limiting competition, and aesthetics. An argument can be made that city council is hindering the growth and development of Grand Marais instead of protecting it.
Sandra Rude
Grand Marais
Leave a Reply