Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/14/2020 P&Z PacketHow to Join the Meeting Phone: Dial 1-312-626-6799 Meeting ID: 857 2355 3407 Weblink: hLtps://us02web.zoom.us/j/85723553407 A!'UXTTlA CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING Wednesday, October 14, 2020 6:30 p.m. Meeting to be held electronically Pursuant to MN Statute 13D. 021 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 9, 2020 5. OPEN MIKE 6. ACTION ITEMS A. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit for Commercial Stables at 426 Pine Street B. PUBLIC HEARING: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment -Roofing Materials C. 842 Lois Lane -Deck Setback Variance 7. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Next Planning & Zoning Board Meeting: Tuesday, November 10, 2020 B. Livable Communities Act Reenrollment C. Project Update 8. ADJOURN Meeting guidelines on reverse side. City of Lino Lakes Planning & Zoning Board MEETING GUIDELINES Open Mike — The purpose of a Board Meeting is to accomplish the business of the city. When presenting at a meeting please remember to be respectful, and follow these guidelines: • Please address the meeting chair. • State your name and address for the record. • Please observe a 4-minute limit. • The topic must relate to city business. • Open Mike is for items not on the agenda. • A spokesperson must represent a group of five or more — groups will have 8 minutes. • The Presiding Officer may limit duplicative presentations. • Remember, the meeting is to discuss city business only. Public Hearing - Held as a separate item of business on the agenda. The public hearing segment is your opportunity to tell the Board how you feel about issues scheduled to be heard. Typically, a hearing follows these steps: • The Presiding Officer (Chair or Vice -Chair) will announce the proposal to be reviewed and ask for the staff report. The presiding Officer shall maintain strict order and etiquette at all meetings. • Staff will present their report on the proposal. • Board members will then ask City Staff questions about the proposal. • The Presiding Officer will then open up the public hearing for anyone present who wishes to comment on the proposal. This is the time for the public to make comments or ask questions about the proposal. Comments should be limited to four (4) minutes unless further time is granted by the Presiding Officer. All comments should be directed to the Board as a body and not to any individual Board Member or City Staff Member unless permission is granted by the Presiding Officer. No person shall be permitted to enter into any discussion, either directly or through a member of the Board without the permission of the Presiding Officer. • After everyone in the audience wishing to speak has given his/her comments, the Presiding Officer shall close the public hearing. • The Board will then discuss the proposal. No further public comments are allowed. • The Board will then make a recommendation(s) and/or a decision. When you are called upon for your comments, please step to the microphone at the podium and state your name and address for the record. Occasionally, the Board may continue a hearing to another meeting before taking action. Meeting Etiquette The Planning & Zoning Board must preserve order and decorum while the meeting is in session. A resident shall not, by conversation or otherwise, delay or interrupt the proceedings or the business of the Board, nor disturb any resident or Board Member while speaking or refuse to obey the orders of the Board. CITY OF LINO LAKES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MINUTES DATE : September 9, 2020 TIME STARTED : 6:31 P.M. TIME ENDED : 8:03 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT : Paul Tralle (Chair), Neil Evenson, Michael Root Perry Laden, Sue Peacock, Jeff Reinert, Nathan Vojtech STAFF PRESENT : Michael Grochala, Katie Larsen, Diane Hankee, Janele Waterman, Jessica Eller I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Chair Tralle called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. on September 9, 2020. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The Agenda was approved as presented. IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Ms. Peacock made a MOTION to approve the August 12, 2020 Meeting Minutes. Motion was supported by Mr. Reinert. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. V. OPEN MIKE Chair Tralle declared Open Mike at 6:34 p.m. There was no one present for Open Mike. Mr. Evenson made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:34 p.m. Motion was supported by Mr. Laden. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 9, 2020 Page 2 VI. ACTION ITEMS A. Burgue Property PUD Concept Plan Ms. Larsen, City Planner, presented the staff report. The applicant has submitted a land use application for PUD Concept Plan review. The proposed development is a PUD residential community located south of NorthPointe and east of CSAH 54 (20th Avenue) and west of I-35E. It contains 4 parcels totaling approximately 63 gross acres. Staff requested feedback regarding the PUD Concept Plan for Burque Property. Board Comments Mr. Reinert reminded the applicant each type of zoning area has particular lot width requirements. He acknowledged the applicant's concept to transfer the senior housing density, which would allow them to create several 40 ft. wide lots; however, he further explained that was not the original intent when NorthPointe was developed. Moreover, Mr. Reinert explained the applicant will run into problems with changing the timeline for the development of the acreage as specified in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Laden agreed with staff s recommendation to change the half cul de sac to a full cul de sac. He preferred the cul de sac to the south be altered to create a loop instead of a cul de sac. He echoed Mr. Reinert's sentiment of not appreciating the applicant's concept of removing density from the high density housing complex in order to create a larger quantity of smaller lots. He said, if the board is going to permit small lots, the applicant will need to provide a public benefit. Mr. Laden asked Ms. Larsen if the high density building has an age restriction of 55+ years of age. Ms. Larsen stated the high density housing complex has an age limit restriction of 55 + years of age. She clarified the age limit restriction was a part of the resolution approving the NorthPointe development. Mr. Laden remarked the City does not have enough property for young adults and therefore, to have such age restricted housing within the City is not beneficial. Ms. Peacock agreed with Mr. Laden's comment regarding age restricted housing. She disapproved of the applicant's concept plan to reduce the lot widths. Mr. Evenson commented he did not believe the small groups of lots to the south would be functional, especially if a full cul de sac was developed. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 9, 2020 Page 3 Mr. Root explained he did not disagree with having a higher density, but he did not approve of the applicant's concept plan. Furthermore, he clarified, if the applicant wants a PUD and the development to be zoned for higher density, the applicant must provide a public benefit. He said, for any future development, Cypress Street ought to be connected to the development since the street was stubbed and planned accordingly. He suggested if the density is increased, the addition of a small neighborhood park should be considered as well. Furthermore, Mr. Root wondered if the density is increased, how would that impact the figures which were originally approved for the NorthPointe development and Met Council. Mr. Vojtech agreed with Mr. Root's comments. He did not approve of the proposed concept. He commented on the half cul de sac explaining he did not understand how the half cul de sac could even function properly with the number of lots the applicant is proposing to develop. He asked Ms. Larsen if the applicant provided price points for the homes. Ms. Larsen stated that particular information was not provided. Chair Tralle questioned if the developer of the proposed project is the same developer who developed NorthPointe. Ms. Larsen explained it is not the same developer. The applicant would be purchasing Outlot A from BL Holdings. Chair Tralle said he did not understand how NorthPointe could sell off Outlot A because, in the original agreement, they agreed to develop the outlot. Ms. Larsen clarified, in order for NorthPointe to be able to sell Outlot A, amendments would need to be made to the Comprehensive Plan and NorthPointe plan. Therefore, if NorthPointe does not sell the outlot, they would be obligated to develop it as it was originally approved. Mr. Grochala, Community Development Director, noted if Outlot A is developed, it is required to be developed at a specific density irrespective of the developer. Moreover, there is a covenant on the property which restricts the housing to individuals 55 years of age or older. Applicant's Comments Chair Tralle asked the applicant, Melvin Brown -Moore from Builders Lot Group, LLC., to respond to the board's comments. Mr. Brown -Moore said he did not agree with all of the board member's comments. He questioned if the connection from Birch Street to NorthPointe was considered during the development stage of NorthPointe since it runs through wetlands and a floodplain. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 9, 2020 Page 4 Ms. Larsen stated the City stubbed the roads in the best location possible. She specified, due to the location of the connection, wetland mitigation or floodplain mitigation would be required. Mr. Brown -Moore inquired, since they were not planning on connecting their development to Birch Street, why they would be required to develop the street. Diane Hankee, City Engineer, replied the developer would be required to develop the street for the benefit of the public. She further explained the City is required to provide roadways which link neighborhoods and this street has been identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a critical link. Ms. Larsen suggested there may be an additional opportunity for the developer to purchase some acreage from the owner at 6620 20th Ave and develop more housing units along the road between Cypress Street and NorthPointe. Mr. Brown -Moore asked Eric Luth, the Senior Project Manager at Sambatek, Inc., to address the half cul de sac and the connection between Cypress Street and NorthPointe. Mr. Luth explained his team performed a delineation in the field and determined at least two acres of land south of Cypress Street is wetland. He said since drainage will be cut off, two acres of impact would add approximately $300,000 to the project. He specified the increase in cost would then increase the price points of the homes in the development and would be in excess of the nearby comparables. He informed the board his team reviewed utilizing Cypress Street versus Chestnut Street and they determined all of the development on the south could be served through Chestnut Street. Mr. Reinert reminded the applicants their concept was reviewed, comments were made, and the details of the concept could be reviewed with City staff at a different time. Mr. Luth commented it was not their intention to be deceptive when shifting density between parcels. They recalled from a previous discussion with City staff, 88 units exceeded the requirement for the senior housing building and therefore, they believed they were resolving the issue by spreading out the density. Ms. Larsen said City staff held a few development meetings with the applicant, but she did not recall informing the applicant 88 units were excessive. She concluded, since the board did not express concern with the number of units, the original amount of units for the NorthPointe development would likely be accepted. Mr. Brown -Moore clarified he and his team were trying to solve a few problems which pre-exist the development and they wanted direction from the board so they could adjust their plan accordingly. He specified one of the issues they are trying to DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 9, 2020 Page 5 navigate is the wetland and floodplain at 6620 20th Ave which would be integrated into the development. He questioned how to address the wetland issue in order to connect Birch Street to the proposed development. He inferred, if they would not be able to develop the small lots off of 20th Ave, then they would not propose a connection to Cypress Street because they would not receive any benefit in doing so. Ms. Larsen explained the connection to Cypress Street is the public value component of the project and it would be required of the developer to establish the connection. Chair Tralle recommended the applicants review the board's comments and return with a revised plan. He reminded them the board would like to see a design with larger lot widths and a proposed public value component in order to receive a PUD. Mr. Brown -Moore thanked the board for their comments and said he and his team would adjust their plan. B. 7831 Lake Drive Variance Ms. Larsen, City Planner, presented the staff report. The property owner of 7831 Lake Drive, Kathy Thayer, submitted a Land Use Application for a variance for roofing materials. She is requesting a metal roof with exposed fasteners be allowed. City ordinance allows for metal roofs with standing seam (i.e. hidden fasteners). 1k 14 Staff recommended denial of the variance to allow for a metal roof with exposed fasteners at 7831 Lake Drive. Board Comments Ms. Peacock stated if the applicant did not research what the City requirements are for a metal roof, then a variance should not be granted. She explained if a variance is allowed, then likely other residents in the City will think they can utilize metal roofing with exposed fasteners. She commented rules and regulations are put in place for a reason and the residents of the City should adhere to them. Mr. Laden remarked the fasteners are not easily noticeable and in fact, upon reviewing a different property with exposed fasteners, binoculars were needed in order to see the fasteners. He reminded the board, in that particular instance, the decision was made to allow the fasteners if they were color matched to the roof. He explained, in this circumstance, he was in favor of the variance and he suggested the ordinance, which does not permit exposed fasteners, ought to be reviewed. He stated the metal roofing material is a viable product and it has a longer life span than shingles. He concluded the City has many neighborhoods with restrictive covenants which would prohibit the use of this material, but in the remaining areas of the City without such restrictions, this material should be allowed. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 9, 2020 Page 6 Mr. Evenson agreed with Mr. Laden stating the exposed fasteners are color matched, not easily visible and overall, the product is of good quality. He specified there are a number of buildings on Lake Drive with exposed fastener roofing. He explained, since the big box stores are making this product more readily available to customers and likely requests for variances will continue, consideration should be given to changing the ordinance. Mr. Root commented he was not concerned with the aesthetics of exposed fasteners. His apprehension was regarding the fact none of the criteria for the variance had been met. He suggested approving the variance with the stipulation the ordinance be revised to allow for color -matched fasteners. Mr. Reinert said there is good argument for the product in regards to its durability. However, he explained the requirements for granting a variance have not been met in this instance and because of this, he would have to vote no to deny approval of the variance. He recommended postponing a decision on the variance and having a special session to discuss the ordinance. He clarified if the ordinance is changed, then the board can allow Ms. Thayer's roofing material and a variance would not be needed. Mr. Vojtech stated the cost difference between exposed fasteners and non -exposed fasteners is minimal, close to 20 percent. He expressed concern with not being consistent by allowing a few individuals to install metal roofing while not permitting others. He suggested the board review the ordinance instead of granting the variance. Mr. Evenson was also concerned about being inconsistent if the variance is allowed for others, but not for the applicant. He concurred it would be best to proceed and change the ordinance, thereby eliminating the need of a variance. Chair Tralle appreciated Mr. Laden's comment to consider changing the ordinance. He recommended changing the ordinance and stipulating the fasteners be color coordinated. He commented, considering the financial impact COVID-19 has had on many families, 20 percent can be costly. Moreover, he remarked he struggled to expect Ms. Thayer to not be able to utilize the roofing materials she spent $2,000 on. He concluded he would vote to recommend approval of the variance. Ms. Larsen explained she was hoping the board would vote on the variance so it could then be discussed at the City Council meeting on Monday night. Then, if the variance is approved by the City Council, Ms. Thayer would be able to replace her roof before winter arrives. Ms. Larsen proposed, after City Council's decision has been made regarding the variance, the Planning and Zoning Board could then begin amending the ordinance. DRAFT MINUTES Planning & Zoning Board September 9, 2020 Page 7 Chair Tralle agreed with Ms. Larsen. He took a vote to determine who would be in favor of changing the ordinance to expose fasteners. The vote was 6 to 1 in favor to recommend changing the ordinance. Applicant's Comments Chair Tralle asked Ms. Thayer to share with the board why she obtained the roofing materials prior to purchasing the building permit. Ms. Thayer said she purchased the materials prior to purchasing the building permit because she did not want the permit to expire before she was able to install the roofing material. She explained the roofing materials were listed as residential material and therefore, she did not believe it was going to be an issue. She acknowledged she should have been more aware of the rules regarding exposed fasteners prior to purchasing the roofing material. However, she clarified the fasteners match the roofing as well as the trim on her house and garages. She hoped the board would recommend approval of the variance since she spent a lot of money on the roofing materials and on the application for a variance. Mr. Laden made a MOTION to recommend approval of the variance to allow for a metal roof with exposed fasteners on the single family dwelling and two (2) detached garages at 7831 Lake Drive. Motion was supported by Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 4 - 3. The Board also directed staff to draft a zoning ordinance text amendment for their consideration. VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Proiect Updates Staff provided verbal updates to the Board on current City projects. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Evenson made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 8:03 p.m. Motion was supported by Ms. Peacock. Motion carried 6 - 0. Chair Tralle abstained. Respectfully submitted, Janele Waterman, Administrative Assistant DRAFT MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD AGENDA ITEM 6A STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE Katie Larsen, City Planner October 14, 2020 REQUEST: PUBLIC HEARING Conditional Use Permit for Commercial Stables at 426 Pine Street CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: OWNER: REVIEW DEADLINE: CU2020-004 Christopher Stowe 426 Pine Street Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Same Complete Application Date: September 14, 2020 60-Day Review Deadline: November 13, 2020 120-Day Review Deadline: January 12, 2021 Environmental Board Meeting: N/A Park Board Meeting: N/A Planning & Zoning Board Meeting: October 14, 2020 City Council Work Session: November 2, 2020 City Council Meeting: November 9, 2020 BACKGROUND The applicant, Christopher Stowe, submitted a Land Use Application for a conditional use permit for Commercial Stables at 426 Pine Street to operate a horse riding club and increase the number of allowed animal units on site. ANALYSIS History The subject site has had the following uses: 1 • 1986-Conditional Use Permit for Riding Stable/Show Arena • 1997: Conditional Use Permit for BMX Track/Arena Both the 1986 and 1997 conditional use permits have expired because the uses have ceased for more than one (1) year (Section 1007.016(2)(k)). These CUP's shall be terminated and the applicant must apply for a new conditional use permit. In July 2020, City staff received a call concerning the number of horses on the property. Staff sent Mr. Stowe a letter offering the opportunity to learn about the horses and operations. Per Mr. Stowe's 10/5/2020 email correspondence, there is an average of 22 and a maximum 26 horses on site. Half of the horses are rescue horses and he has a group of 6 friends that are involved in the riding club. See Attachment #2 for email narrative. Due to the nature of the horse operations and the number of horses, a conditional use permit for Commercial Stables is required. Zoning and Land Use The subject site consists of 3 parcels. These parcels are zoned R-Rural and allow for Commercial Stables with a conditional use permit. Current Zoning R, Rural Current Land Use Rural Residential Future Land Use per CP Urban Reserve Utility Staging Area Post 2030 Surrounding Zoning and Land Use Direction Zoning Existing Land Use Future Land Use North R, Rural Rural Residential (City of Columbus) Urban Reserve East R, Rural Rural Residential Urban Reserve South R, Rural Rural Residential Urban Reserve West R, Rural Rural Residential Urban Reserve Site Plan Review Site Plan Existing Land Use Acres Rural Residential 05-31-22-22-0006 4.30 (Single Family House) Commercial 05-3 ]-22-22-0003 (Arena, Accessory Structure & Restrooms) 5.66 Vacant Rural Residential I-22-22-0005 15.09 j57-1 (Wetlands) 7TAL L 25.05 The applicant owns all 3 parcels and lives in the single family home located on PID # 05-31-22-22-0006. Smaller accessory structures related to the home also exist on this parcel. Driveways to PID #05-31-22-22-0003 exist from the house and Pine Street where the arena, large accessory structure and restrooms are located. Using the City's DatakLink GIS website, the arena is approximately 250ft x 120ft (30,000 sf) and the large accessory structure is approximately 110ft x 50 ft (5,500sf). The horse corrals and pasture area are located on PID #05-31-22-22-0005. Using the City's DataLink GIS website, wetlands and floodplain are indicated on all 3 parcels. Without the benefit of a certificate of survey and using GIS, there are approximately 22 acres of wetland and floodplain on the 25 acre site. The applicant is currently working with RCWD and City staff regarding potential wetland impacts, restoration requirements and other wetland and floodplain disputes. Pine Street and 4th Avenue are major collector roads and have capacity to serve a commercial stable operation. Animal Units Allowed Section 1007.001(2) defines Animal Unit as follows: ANIMAL UNIT. A unit of measure used to compare differences in the production of animal manure that employs as a standard the amount of manure produced on a regular basis by a slaughter steer or heifer for an animal feedlot or a manure storage area, calculated by multiplying the number of animals of each type by the respective multiplication factor and summing the resulting values for the total number of animal units. For purposes of this chapter, the following multiplication factors shall apply. For animals not listed, the number of animal units is the average weight of the animal in pounds divided by 1,000 pounds. Animal Animal Unit Dairy Cattle Mature Cow (1,000 pounds or over) 1.4 Mature Cow (Under 1,000 pounds) 1.0 Heifer .7 3 Calf .2 Beef Cattle Slaughter Steer or Stock Cow 1.0 Feeder Cattle or Heifer .7 Cow and Calf Pair 1.2 Calf .2 Swine Over 300 pounds 0.4 Between 55 and 300 pounds 0.3 Under 55 pounds 0.05 Horse 1.0 Sheep or Lamb .1 Chicken (Liquid Manure System) .0333 Chicken (Dry Manure System) 5 pounds or over .005 Less than 5 pounds .003 Turkey 5 pounds or over .018 Less than 5 pounds .005 Duck .01 # Animal Units Rounded Whole Parcel Acres Allowed Acres (2 units per 1 acre) 05-31-22-22-0006 4.30 4 2.0 05-31-22-22-0003 5.66 6 3.0 05-31-22-22-0005 15.09 15 7.5 TOTAL jL 25.05 It For parcels zoned R, Rural, Section 1007.080(5)(f) states, "Keeping of farm animals of up to three hundred (300) animal units in conformance with Chapter 503. No more than one (1) animal unit per two (2) acres." The applicant could have 12.5 animal units without a conditional use permit assuming all other regulatory agency requirements can be met. A conditional use permit for Commercial Stables is required because of the horse riding club being operated on site. With an approved conditional use permit, a maximum of 12.5 animal units are allowed on the three (3) parcels combined without a facility management and waste handling plan. al With an approved conditional use permit, Section 1007.058(3)(d) allows up to double the animal unit density with an approved facility management and waste handling plan. This would allow for a maximum of 25.0 animal units on the three (3) parcels combined. The applicant states the following numbers of farm animals are currently on site: # of Animals rAmnimal Unit Total # Animal Units Cow (500 pounds) 4 0.5 2 Horse 20 1.0 20 Chickens 20 .003 0.06 TOTAL 22.06 Currently, only 12.5 animal units are allowed. If the CUP and a waste management plan are approved, a maximum of 25.0 animal units would be allowed. Grading Plan and Stormwater Management Although a grading plan and stormwater management plan is not specifically required for the conditional use permit application, all efforts shall be made to prevent manure waste and runoff from draining into ditches and wetlands. Public Utilities The house and arena are served by private well and septic system. The applicant shall provide documentation that the septic system and drain field have been inspected and determined to be in compliance with state requirements and sized for intended use. It should also be noted that any future improvements required for restrooms shall be ADA compliant. Landscaping and Tree Preservation Plan Landscaping and tree preservation is not required for the commercial stables operation. Wetlands Wetlands are located on all three (3) parcels. An approved wetland delineation is not required for the conditional use permit application; however, Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) may require one. The applicant has been working with RCWD and the City regarding the potential need for restoration of the wetlands on the site that were previously filled. The subject site shall be in compliance with all City and other regulatory agency requirements or the conditional use permit may be revoked. Floodplain The 2015 DFIRM indicates Zone A floodplain on all three (3) parcels. It appears the existing house, smaller accessory structures and arena are not within the floodplain. 5 The larger accessory structure near the arena appears to be in the Zone A floodplain. The exact year of its construction is unknown; however, a CUP was approved in 1986 for the riding stable arena so it could be assumed the large accessory structure was constructed in that same time period and would have been subject to the 1982 FEMA floodplain requirements. The 1982 FEMA map shows the large accessory structure out of the floodplain. This structure would be considered legal non -conforming and subject to the Zoning and Floodplain Ordinance non -conformities regulations. Accessory Structures The applicant currently has three (3) outside horse shelters approximately 1 Oft x 20ft. Assuming each shelter can house 4 horses, the maximum numbers of shelters allowed should be limited to either 3 or 6 depending on the final CUP approval. The shelters are specific accessory structures associated with the operation of a commercial stable. A zoning or building permit is required for any accessory structure construction. All structures shall meet setback requirements and shall not be located in the front yards of either parcel. Signage Per Chapter 1010: Signs, one sign with a maximum size of 6 square feet placed at least 10 feet from the property line is allowed without a permit. Staff Concerns See Attachment #6, Environmental Coordinator letter dated October 7, 2020 for a detailed analysis. Staff identifies the following concerns: • Wetlands and Floodplain There are approximately 22 acres of wetlands and floodplain on the 25 acre site. This limits the amount of upland area to operate a commercial stable, pasture farm animals and properly manage manure waste. MN State rules state that for manure application, a minimum setback of 300 feet from protected wetlands is required. A 50 foot non-manured vegetated buffer can be used in place of the 300 foot setback during non -winter months. A 50 ft wide vegetated buffer from the wetland shall be maintained. Manure shall not be stored or spread in the floodplain. Manure bins and/or manure storage shall be located outside the floodplain. • Animal Health Con Given the limited amount of upland area, staff has concerns regarding the amount of pasture the animals have. Per the University of Minnesota Extension -Horse website, manure should not be spread on pastures with more than 1 horse per 2 acres. • Facility Management and Waste Handling Plan The average 1,000 pound horse produces 56 pounds of manure per day. Due to the large volume of manure potentially produced by 25 horses and the limited storage capacity on site due to wetlands and floodplain, a more detailed manure management plan approved by the MPCA is required. Lot Combination The commercial stable operates on PID #05-31-22-22-0003 (arena and large accessory structure) and RID #05-31-22-22-0005 (corral and pasture). These parcels shall be combined. The single family house and associated accessory structures located on PID #05-31-22- 22-0006 do not need to be combined and can function separately. Site Improvement Performance Agreement A Site Improvement Performance Agreement is not required. Conditional Use Permit -Findings of Fact The commercial stables ("subject site") are located on PID #05-31-22-22-0003 (arena and large accessory structure) and PID #05-31-22-22-0005 (corral and pasture). PID #05-31-22-22-0006 (single family house and associated accessory structure) is not part of the commercial stable operation. The subject site is zoned R, Rural and allows for Commercial Stables with a conditional use permit. Per Section 1007.016(2)(g): The Planning and Zoning Board shall recommend a conditional use permit and the Council shall order the issuance of such permit only if it finds the following criteria have been met: 1. The proposed development application has been found to be consistent with the policies and recommendations of the Lino Lakes Comprehensive Plan including: a. Land Use Plan. 7 The subject site is guided Urban Reserve and zoned R, Rural. Commercial Stables are allowed with a conditional use permit and are consistent with rural land uses. b. Transportation Plan. Pine Street is a major collector road. The existing road has structural design and capacity to accommodate traffic proposed by the commercial stables operation. c. Utility (Sewer and Water) Plans. The subject site is served by a restroom on a private septic system. The City's utility plans are not impacted. d. Local Water Management Plan. The City's Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP) is incorporated into Chapter 2: Resource Management System Plan of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The goal of the LSWMP is to improve of the quality of surface waters by delivering good quality stormwater runoff to lakes and wetlands. The subject site shall be compliant with the required facility management and waste handling plan and other regulatory agencies requirements. Regulations of Chapter 1011: Stormwater, Erosion and Sediment Control shall be met to ensure runoff will not increase and surface water (wetlands) will not be impacted. The subject site shall be in compliance with all City and other regulatory agencies requirements. e. Capital Improvement Plan. There will be no changes to the City's Capital Improvement Plan related to the commercial stables operation. f. Policy Plan. The commercial stables operation is consistent with the comprehensive plan (i.e. Policy Plan) in regards to land use, transportation, utilities, local water management and capital improvements. g. Natural Environment Plan. The City's Natural Environment Plan is incorporated into Chapter 2: Resource Management System Plan of the City's Comprehensive Plan. One goal of the Plan is to identify, protect and preserve the desirable natural areas and ecological and aquatic resources of the community. N. The subject site is part of the City's greenway corridor and shall be in compliance with all City and other regulatory agency requirements. 2. The proposed development application is compatible with present and future land uses of the area. The commercial stables are compatible with present and future land uses. The surrounding land uses are rural residential. 3. The proposed development application conforms to performance standards herein and other applicable City Codes. The commercial stables shall conform to the performance standards of the City Code. 4. Traffic generated by a proposed development application is within the capabilities of the City when: a. If the existing level of service (LOS) outside of the proposed subdivision is A or B, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service more than one grade. b. If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is C, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service below C. c. If the existing LOS outside of the proposed subdivision is D, traffic generated by a proposed subdivision will not degrade the level of service below D. d. The existing LOS must be D or better for all streets and intersections providing access to the subdivision. If the existing level of service is E or F, the subdivision developer must provide, as part of the proposed project, improvements needed to ensure a level of service D or better. e. Existing roads and intersections providing access to the subdivision must have the structural capacity to accommodate projected traffic from the proposed subdivision or the developer will pay to correct any structural deficiencies. f. The traffic generated from a proposed subdivision shall not require City street improvements that are inconsistent with the Lino Lakes Capital Improvement Plan. However, the City may, at its discretion, consider developer -financed improvements to correct any street deficiencies. g. The LOS requirements in paragraphs a. to d. above do not apply to the I- 35W/Lake Drive or I-35E/Main St. interchanges. At City discretion, interchange impacts must be evaluated in conjunction with Anoka County and the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation, and a plan must be prepared to determine improvements needed to resolve deficiencies. This plan must I determine traffic generated by the subdivision project, how this traffic contributes to the total traffic, and the time frame of the improvements. The plan also must examine financing options, including project contribution and cost sharing among other jurisdictions and other properties that contribute to traffic at the interchange. h. The City does not relinquish any rights of local determination. Pine Street is a major collector road. The existing road has structural design and capacity to accommodate traffic proposed by the commercial stables operation. 5. The proposed development shall be served with adequate and safe water supply. The site is served by a private well that can serve the commercial stables operation. 6. The proposed development shall be served with an adequate and safe sanitary sewer system. The site is currently served by a private septic system. The septic system shall be designed and sized to accommodate any future building modifications. 7. The proposed development shall not result in the premature expenditures of City funds on capital improvements necessary to accommodate the proposed development. There will be no premature expenditures of City funds. 8. The proposed development will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. The commercial stables do not involve uses and activities detrimental to persons or property. The subject site shall be in compliance with all City and other regulatory agencies requirements. A waste management plan shall be implemented at all times. 9. The proposed development will not result in the destruction, loss, or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. The natural features (wetlands) will not be impacted. There are no other known natural, scenic or historic features on the existing site. Specific Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Requirements In addition to the administrative requirements of a conditional use permit, the following specific performance standards of Section 1007.058(3) must also be met: 10 1007.058 COMMERCIAL STABLES (3) General Standards. The following standards shall apply to all commercial stables: (a) Commercial stables offering services to the public, and having the facilities to maintain or care for ten (10) or more horses, must have their principal entrance located on a state highway, county road, or city collector street. Pine Street is a major collector road. The existing road has structural design and capacity to accommodate traffic proposed by the commercial stables operation. (b) Commercial stables that offer boarding, training, or other services to the public shall provide sanitary facilities for the public's use. The sanitary facilities must be constructed in accordance with the state building code, and connected to an individual sewage treatment system or the municipal sanitary sewer system. The commercial stables have a restroom for the public's use that is connected to a private septic system. (c) Adjacent parcels of land under common ownership may be used to determine the maximum number of animal units allowed, if the parcels are operated as a single enterprise. a. In instances where a parcel of land consists of a fraction of an acre, the property size shall be rounded to the nearest whole number to determine the number of animal units allowed. # Animal Units Rounded Whole Parcel Acres Allowed Acres (2 units per 1 acre) 05-31-22-22-0006 4.30 4 2.0 05-31-22-22-0003 5.66 6 3.0 05-31-22-22-0005 15.09 15 7.5 TOTAL 25.05 The three (3) parcels of land are under common ownership and operate as a single enterprise. Ordinance 1007.080(5)()9, allows for no more than I animal unit per 2 acres; therefore, no more than 12.5 animal units would be allowed on all three (3) parcels combined. If PID# 05-31-22-22-0006 were to be sold and/or not remain under common ownership, the maximum number of allowed animal units on the subject site would be reduced to 10.5. 11 b. Adjacent parcels of land shall not be separated by public right-of-way. The three (3) parcels are not separated by public right-of-way. (d) Up to double the animal unit density may be allowed subject to an approved facility management and waste handling plan. The maximum number of animal units allowed on the three (3) combined parcels is 12.5. With an approved facility management and waste handling plan, a maximum of 25.0 animal units are allowed. If PID# 05-31-22-22-0006 were to be sold and/or not remain under common ownership, the maximum number of allowed animal units on the subject site would be reduced to 21.0. (e) Buildings housing domestic livestock, including barns, stables, sheds, and similar facilities shall be located no nearer than 100 feet from any inhabited, neighboring dwelling. Barns, stables and sheds on the property are located more than 300 feet away from the inhabited neighboring dwelling. RECOMMENDATION Staff offers the following three (3) options: 1. Approve a Conditional Use Permit for Commercial Stables to allow for a maximum of 12.5 animal units. a. A maximum of 12.5 animal units are allowed on the three (3) parcels combined without a facility management and waste handling plan. b. The Conditional Use Permit Council resolution shall be recorded against all three (3) parcels. c. The subject site shall be in compliance with all City and other regulatory agencies requirements. d. Compliance shall be required within one (1) year of the conditional use permit (CUP) approval or the CUP may be revoked. e. Future violations of the conditional use permit or other city, state or regional ordinances may result in revocation of the conditional use permit. f. No manure bins or manure storage shall be located in the wetlands or floodplain. g. No manure waste shall be stored or spread within 50 ft of a wetland. i. A 50 ft wide vegetated wetland buffer shall be maintained. h. The applicant shall provide documentation to the City that the septic system and drain field on the subject site have been inspected and 12 determined to be in compliance with state requirements and sized for intended use. i. Any future improvements required for restrooms shall be ADA compliant. j. The number of portable animal shelters shall be limited to three (3). k. The commercial stables are subject to Chapter 503, Animal Control Regulations and shall be in compliance at all times. 1. PID #05-31-22-22-0003 and PID #05-31-22-22-0005 shall be combined with Anoka County. i. Proof of combination shall be submitted to the City. ii. The newly combined parcel for the commercial stables shall be addressed 450 Pine Street. in. The commercial stable operations shall only occur on the newly combined parcel addressed 450 Pine Street. n. If in the event, PID #05-31-22-22-0006 (426 Pine Street -single family house) is sold and no longer under common ownership, the maximum number of animal units for the commercial stables shall be reduced to 10.5. o. The 1986-Conditional Use Permit for Riding Stable/Show Arena and 1997: Conditional Use Permit for BMX Track/Arena shall be terminated. i. City staff shall draft the Termination Agreements and shall be recorded. ii. Copies of the recorded Agreement shall be submitted to the City. 2. Approve Conditional Use Permit for Commercial Stables to allow for a maximum of 26 animal units with a MPCA approved facility management and waste handling plan. a. A maximum of twenty-five (25) animal units are allowed between the three (3) combined with a compliant facility management and waste handling plan. b. The applicant shall work with the MPCA in creating a feasible facility management and waste handling plan. i. The facility management and waste handling plan shall require off - site storage of manure waste. ii. A written and signed agreement with an off -site property owner shall be submitted to the City annually. The agreement shall detail the number of times manure waste will be removed from the site and how much waste will be removed. c. The Conditional Use Permit Council resolution shall be recorded against all three (3) parcels. d. The subject site shall be in compliance with all City and other regulatory agencies requirements. i. Compliance shall be required within one (1) year of the conditional use permit (CUP) approval or the CUP may be revoked. ii. Future violations of the conditional use permit or other city, state or regional ordinances may result in revocation of the conditional use permit. 13 e. No manure bins or manure storage shall be located in the wetlands or floodplain. f. No manure waste shall be stored or spread within 50 ft of a wetland. i. A 50 ft wide vegetated wetland buffer shall be maintained. g. The applicant shall provide documentation to the City that the septic system and drain field on the subject site have been inspected and determined to be in compliance with state requirements and sized for intended use. h. Any future improvements required for restrooms shall be ADA compliant. i. The number of portable animal shelters shall be limited to six (6). j. The commercial stables are subject to Chapter 503, Animal Control Regulations and shall be in compliance at all times. k. PID #05-31-22-22-0003 and PID #05-31-22-22-0005 shall be combined with Anoka County. i. Proof of combination shall be submitted to the City. ii. The newly combined parcel for the commercial stables shall be addressed 450 Pine Street. 1. The commercial stable operations shall only occur on the newly combined parcel addressed 450 Pine Street. m. If in the event, PID #05-31-22-22-0006 (426 Pine Street -single family house) is sold and no longer under common ownership, the maximum number of animal units for the commercial stables shall be reduced to twenty-one (21). n. The 1986-Conditional Use Permit for Riding Stable/Show Arena and 1997: Conditional Use Permit for BMX Track/Arena shall be terminated. i. City staff shall draft the Termination Agreements and shall be recorded. ii. Copies of the recorded Agreement shall be submitted to the City. 3. Deny Conditional Use Permit for Commercial Stables a. A maximum of 12.5 animal units are allowed on the three (3) parcels combined without a facility management and waste handling plan. b. The riding club operations shall cease. c. The subject site shall be in compliance with all City and other regulatory agencies requirements. d. No manure bins or manure storage shall be located in the wetlands or floodplain. a. No manure waste shall be stored or spread within 50 ft of a wetland. a. A 50 ft wide vegetated wetland buffer shall be maintained. Approval is also subject to the following: 1. A building permit or zoning permit is required for all future building construction. 14 ATTACHMENTS 1. Site Location & Aerial Map 2. Applicant Narrative Email Summary 3. Applicant Site Plans 4. Applicant Proposed Waste Management Plan 5. Wetland and Floodplain Map 6. Environmental Coordinator Letter dated October 7, 2020 15 N Site Location & Aerial Map W E 0 150 300 600 c�N KE s F 426 Pine Street Feet 426 Pine Street Conditional Use Permit for Commercial Stables Applicant Narrative Email Summary 10-5-2020: Per Chris Stowe: Average 22 horses. The maximum number would be 26. Half or so are rescues being too old to ride. (Over 20 years) or have health conditions that affect their abilities. The others are pleasure horses. Riden weekly or more. The indoor arena is a blessing because most horses arent ridden enough in the winter, which isnt good for them. Or their riders. I have 6 friends that are involved in my riding club. Sometimes they bring friends, mostly to help with chores. Everyone does their own chores and provides their own hay, grain, treats, ect. The building has over 30 original stalls and is being used as it's intended build. As is the haybarn. They are outside during the day. They sometimes come in at night, if theres storms, or in winter. Its mainly dependant on the weather, and the owner. A few of the paddocks have shelters that have been up a few years. They serve as a sunscreen and wind block. The auto traffic is minimal here and I have been doing this for over 2 years. I like it quiet, and I know my neighbors do to. Unfortunately, fixing up the place makes noise sometimes, but my closest neighbors ( Beck and Rick Glewwe) have thanked me for doing so. It definitely is starting to look better and they appreciate it. I have also met a few neighbors strictly because they have noticed my progress. I'm not open to the public but I was told by you the number of horses was a problem so that's why we are doing this process. The costs associated with horses is prohibitively expensive for most people but they can be a great tool for teaching children about responsibility, leadership, communication, as well as building relationships. My son has autism and that's the main reason I moved here. He does good around animals and most horse people seem to have good hearts. Owning horses is a year round operation. The temporary manure boxes are 8'X4'. Altho I dont have the one that was on the northside of the arena there anymore. I found it easier to haul the manure/woodchips with the bobcat to the one south of the haybarn. The permanent box ..... doesnt exist, yet. Due to the fact that people want the stuff for gardens, mulch, new lawns, ect. I was planning on making a pile where its denoted on the map for winter. During the summer it's easy to get rid of. Winter time ..... not so much. Ground is frozen, as are the gardens and what not. Hopefully that's what you were looking for. I will check my email tomorrow at 930 break to see if I missed something. Thanks and God bless Chris 10-6-2020: Per Chris Stowe 20 horses. 4 cows. 20 chickens. The temporary is 4 feet tall. Holds approx 10 yards I'm guessing. I will construct the permanent storage storage box within the next couple weeks. Manure in winter is left to compost. I currently have 3 outside horse shelters. They are all a little different. Their sizes are approximately IOx20 2 426 Pine St August 18, 2020 1:2,400 0 112.5 225 450 ft = jurv�cry .Sho^�ifit �n Lvcq�Frhs'Is 0 30 60 NM 120 m MgnwCc. s+draf/�rnPas+:� $fig D � � � � ltl �r SEP 1 4 2020 IUI ]isGaimer Map end parcel data ere believed to bB accurate, but acwracy Is not guaranleatl. This Is not a legal tlo<umenl end shwld nat ba subsliluletl for a title search,approisai, wrvay, ar for zonin8 vadlkatlon. 426 Pine St onjTN, If PA- A N t]@Iz1 7 A tI > AA: f- tioAy.i 4 'Fi P Y] `'I Or PAL A PA PAL �+ r ppA Aerr PC r�µ iVIA v R y �fi�i i 7 j. Ij V 1 l A 1 ,, �: Si 3 q i Vn AIA ,41 PC - 1 ot ^ e . PC A .4 PA 11 `{I A r<<1 At CA. r�so A C;< y \ 12 Nt_ ,y AN \`� Ato Or Y. . .F I yryA s.. ` . it X. s v.a, I nPIL t s�} k !. .S y CC,� �! i4� t�f e' Is i ., w rC r t i 1. riots 1. wI.: ,�� pp LL I; 1 -per, '"+ K 1 Lot ' A* J✓ . ra ^rnl?PC I/ y� August 18, 2020 wo Qr'<nc, 64 ✓r 'v c Pu1:�.;kA Anry P�r„�ti..y 1:600 0 25 50 100 fl 0 5 10 20 m Vfi SEP 14 2020 )isclalmer. Map entl parcel tlala are belleVetl to be accurate, but accuracy Is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be subslliuled far a Mlle saerch,appraisel, survey, or Por zoning verification. Manure Management Plan 426 Pine Street Lino Lakes and adjacent parcels We have printed out Cl" Aerial Map of the property, Cl"d have marked where the two temporary manure storage bin would be. I have also included a similar picture of the storage bins. The temporary storage bins will be cleaned when needed and brought up to the manure storage area composting site. The pile of manure will compost and will be used for fertilizer for pasture and hay fields, in the fall, we also have people come for the composted manure for their gardens. We have access to a manure spreader for spreading on the fields and we also have access to a dump truck to remove it from our property, as we have done in the past. Most of our horses are out on pasture Spring, Summer and Fall. We do have horses sometimes in the stalls, which when we clean the stalls it goes into the temporary storage bin. We have reviewed the Minnesota DNR recommendations for manure storage bins and their locations, requiring a 25 foot setback and vegetative buffer. These locations meet their requirements. Sincerely, Christopher Stowe SEP 14 2020 ay Composting Composting is managed, accelerated breakdown of organic materials by microbes (i.e. bacteria, fungus and molds). The goal of the composting process is to provide these microbes with a good environment that encourages quick and efficient manure breakdown. Effective composting does the following. • locks in nutrients • Speeds up the breakdown process • Reduces the size of the pile • Kills weed seeds and fly larvae � manure pile v✓ill eventually breakdown if left alone but will lose nutrients and become infested with unwanted organisms. Guidelines Start with a good compost site • Choose a convenient location Make sure the site won't flood with water Make sure the location meets the manure stockpile site requirements You may not be able to attain desired temperatures during winter in Minnesota, Stockpile manure over winter and resume composting in the spring. Let CQUI Compost curing occurs in the cast � to z months during which time the temperature will reduce to ambient levels. The finished product will look like something between potting soil and large, dar]< brown wood chips depending on the material size. Finer material composts more quickly. Use You tan use finished compost for the following. • ✓emending soli in a garden • Tree mulching Potting soil • Fertilizer for the yard, pasture or hay fields Never spread more than 'h inch of compost at one time when spreading compost on a yard, pasture or hay field. Using manure Whether composted or not, you will eventually need to move and use the manure. You can use manure onsite by spreading it as a fertilizer on an open area, pasture or field. You can also haul manure offsite for fertilizing or composting. Use caution when spreading manure on pastures grazed by horses. Don't spread manure on pastures if there are more than � horse per z acres. Spreading manure in heavily stocked pastures could result in increased parasite exposure, Spreading Spreading manure for fertilizer is a great way to use it. Spreading the manure for its fertilizer value is an excellent way to use it. 13ut, you must use caution to prevent excess nutrient buildup, To determine how much manure to spread on a field: Determine the nutrient content of the manure. 0 Several private labs can perform this test. Test the field's soil to determine now much manure the intended crop needs. o Only spread enough manure to produce a viable and maximum yielding crop. Benefits of Composting ® Creates valuable soil amendment Stabilizes nitrogen into a slow -release form a Avoids the problem of nitrogen immobilization Reduces manure volume by 50 percent Destroys weed seeds, fly larvae, and internal parasites Eliminates or reduces the cost of off -site disposal Storage Normally, manure storage consists of: Short-term stockpiling a Permanent stockpiling Composting Spreading the manure Stockpiling Stockpiling is making a pile of solid manure and leaving it alone. You may or may not add manure to it. Stockpiling can occur on a temporary or permanent site. Temporary site You must remove and use temporary stockpiles within a year of storage. This allows the site to recover and for plants to grow back. You can then start another temporary stockpile at a new site. Moving to new sites prevents excess nutrient build-up in the soil. Choose these sRes carefully and consider soil type and groundwater separation. Exmnple of mixing/storage area with black hall. Temporary manure storage bin used. for composting. Mdded stats in the front increases storage. Wetland & Floodplain Map-426 Pine St a "M .V. 46 C I T O F IN LAKE5 Wetlands FEMA Floodplain 0.2 PCT ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD HAZARD Zone A Zone AE Zone X 1 in = 200 ft N A October 7, 2020 Map Powered By Data Link wsb CITY'WK OF IN E Memo To: Katie Larsen From: Andy Nelson Environmental Date: October 7, 2020 Re: Environmental Comments on 426 Pine Street -Commercial Stable CUP Environmental staff has the following comments relating to 426 Pine Street Manure Management Plan: Background: The applicant keeps a number of farm animals on a 25 acre parcel. The current animal count provided by the owner, is 20 horses, 4 cows and 20 chickens. Assuming the cows are not fully grown and weigh an average of 500 pounds, the total existing animal unit count on the property is 22.06 animal units. The number of farm animals permitted on this site is one animal unit per 2 acres, which allows for 12.5 animal units on these three parcels. The landowner is applying for a Conditional Use Permit to operate a commercial stable, and an increase in the number of allowed animal units to 25, which would allow for up 25 horses if all other animals are removed. A manure management plan is required to obtain the increase in animal units with the CUP. Site The site is approximately 25 acres in size. Of this approximately 22 acres is covered by either wetland or floodplain. Storage The applicant's manure management plan proposes to store manure in 1-2 temporary storage bins and a permanent compost bin. The total holding capacity of a single temporary (8' x 4' x4') bin is 128 cubic.feet. No dimensions were provided for the permanent compost bin. 0 Page 1 The average 1,000 pound horse produces 56 pounds of manure per day (U of MN extension). 25 horses may produce 511,000 pounds of manure in a year. The volume of soiled stall bedding and manure for one horse can be estimated at 2.4 cubic feet/day (Penn State extension). 25 horses would produce approximately 21,900 cubic feet/year. The existing 8'X4'X4' box on site is 128 ft3. It would fill up 178 times in a year. Three such boxes on site would fill up about 60 times each in a year. Once the temporary bin(s) are filled the applicant is proposing to store the excess manure in a permanent storage box, spread it on site, or make it available to the public for private use. Analysis: In MN State rule 7020.2005, it is stated that a new manure storage area must not be constructed within a floodplain. Also, an existing manure storage area located in a floodplain may not be expanded. MN State rules state that for manure application, a minimum setback of 300 feet from protected wetlands is required. A 50 foot non-manured vegetated buffer can be used in place of the 300 foot setback during non -winter months. MPCA prohibits manure spreading on floodplains. U of MN extension guidelines recommend against spreading on pasture with more than one horse per two acres. No well location was noted on site plan. Manure storage should be located a minimum of 1 00'from a domestic well. Recommendation: There is very limited storage capacity on site, due to setback requirements from both the protected wetland and floodplain. Feasibility of spreading on site will also be quite limited for the same reasons. As noted by the applicant's narrative, disposal is more difficult during winter months. This leads to the need to provide for up to 6 months of storage on site or other permanent removal solution. The majority of the manure produced on this site will have to be removed. A more detailed plan for hauling that volume off site should be required before any expansion of animals units is considered. 0 Page 2 STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: REQUEST: APPLICANT: REVIEW DEADLINE: BACKGROUND PLANNING & ZONING BOARD AGENDA ITEM 6B Katie Larsen, City Planner October 14, 2020 PUBLIC HEARING: Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Regarding Metal Roofs City of Lino Lakes Not Applicable — City Initiated At the September 9, 2020 Planning & Zoning Board meeting, the Board directed staff to draft a zoning ordinance text amendment regarding metals roofs. ANALYSIS The City Zoning Ordinance currently states: § 1007.043 GENERAL BUILDING AND USE PROVISIONS. (2) Building Type and Construction. (a) Single Family Dwellings. All single family detached dwellings in the R, R- X, R-1, R-IX, R-EC, and R-2 Districts shall meet the following design criteria: 3. Single family dwellings shall have at least a four/twelve (4/12) roof pitch and shall be covered with shingles or tiles or a standing seam metal roof. The issue revolves around hidden fasteners (standing seam) vs. exposed fastener metal roofs. The City ordinance clearly states a standing seam metal roof is allowed on single family dwellings. The Planning & Zoning Board would like to consider both hidden and exposed fastener systems on single family dwellings. Staff researched neighboring community zoning ordinances and found varying requirements from not allowing any metal roofs on single family homes (e.g. Andover, Anoka, Forest Lake) to allowing only standing seam (e.g. Shoreview) to allowing standing seam with restrictions (e.g. Blaine). The City of Hugo does not address metal roofs at all. Some communities also differentiate between residential, commercial and industrial uses. The pros and cons of hidden fasteners vs. exposed fasteners differ. Planning staff discussed with Building Department staff, researched, and viewed several websites and online videos. Suggested online videos for Board members to watch include: • https://sheffieldmetaIs.com/learning-center/standing-seam-vs-exposed- fastener-metal-roofing/ • https://youtu.be/-4i8UZQ07X0 Attachment A shows a side by side visual comparison of hidden vs exposed fasteners. Attachment B shows a side by side comparison of pros and cons of each product. As you can see, there are pros and cons to each product. "M rExposed Hidden Fastener (i.e. Standing Seam) Fastener Weather Tightness X Easier to Install X Cost X Maintenance X Low Sloped Roof X Panel Strength X Aesthetics X Compatibility with solar panels and snow retention X X Credit to Metal Roofing Learning Channel August 31, 2020 Staff s opinion is that standing seam provides a higher aesthetic value with less maintenance. Exposed fastener systems require proper installation and more maintenance. Staff suggests the following amendment language if the Board decides to proceed with an amendment: § 1007.043 GENERAL BUILDING AND USE PROVISIONS. (3) Building Type and Construction. 2 (a) Single Family Dwellings. All single family detached dwellings in the R, R- X, R-1, R-1X, R-EC, and R-2 Districts shall meet the following design criteria: 4. Single family dwellings shall have at least a four/twelve (4/12) roof pitch and shall be covered with shingles, er tiles, of hidden fastener (i.e. standing _ seam) metal roof, or exposed fastener metal roof provided the exposed fasteners are the same color as the metal roofing material. Additional Considerations 1. The City zoning ordinance does not address commercial, industrial, or institutional roof material requirements. a. Should the text amendment also include metal roof requirements for these uses? 2. What is the Board's position on a future single family home owner installing a metal roof with different color fasteners? REQUESTED BOARD DIRECTION Staff is requesting Board input regarding the proposed zoning ordinance text amendment regarding metal roofs. ATTACHMENTS 1. Exposed vs. Standing Seam Visual Comparison 2. Hidden vs. Exposed Fastener Side by Side Comparison 3 do r * 41 ■ t 0 i Ii SEA 7I.- vlrruga#ed, P ilr� . Panel, U Panel, Aq Panel Weather Tightness • Easier To Install Cost Maintenance Low Sloped Roof 0 Panel Strength Aesthetics Compatibility With Solar Panels and Snow Retention Download A Copy Of This Wor sheet. Link In DescriptionBelow. ►I 1119112:39 • Compatibility with solar panels or snow retention systems M �. 0 r, LJ STAFF ORIGINATOR: P & Z MEETING DATE: REQUEST: CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: OWNER: REVIEW SCHEDULE: PLANNING & ZONING BOARD AGENDA ITEM 6C Katie Larsen, City Planner October 14, 2020 842 Lois Lane Deck Setback Variance VR2020-003 Brian A. Rydlund 842 Lois Lane Lino Lakes, MN 55014 Same Complete Application Date: September 14, 2020 60-Day Review Deadline: November 13, 2020 Environmental Board Meeting: N/A Park Board Meeting: N/A Planning & Zoning Board Meeting: October 14, 2020 City Council Work Session: November 2, 2020 City Council Meeting: November 9, 2020 BACKGROUND The applicant, Brian A. Rydlund, submitted a Land Use Application for setback variance for the purpose of constructing a deck at his property located at 842 Lois Lane. A 2.7 foot variance to reduce the side yard setback from 5 feet to 2.3 feet is requested. ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to reconstruct the existing deck along the east side of the house ("side deck") that will connect to a proposed new deck located in the rear yard ("rear deck"). Per the Certificate of Survey submitted with the application, the existing house is 10.0-10.6 ft from the east side lot line. The existing side deck is currently 7.7 ft wide and 2.3 ft from the east lot line. A portion of the new deck would also be 2.3 ft from the east lot line. Staff notes the Certificate of Survey should be dated by the surveyor. Zoning and Setback Requirements The house was constructed in 1987. The property was zoned RX, Executive Rural at that time. Per the 1983 Zoning Ordinance, the side yard setback for accessory structures was 5 ft. City Zoning Ordinance dating back to 1971 also required a 5 ft side yard setback. The property is currently zoned R-X, Rural Executive. Decks are considered accessory structures and subject to accessory building setback requirements. Per Section 1007.080(2)(c) Setbacks, the required side yard setback for an accessory building (i.e. deck) is five (5) feet. The variance request would be for 2.7 feet. The applicant states the existing side deck was constructed by the original property owners between 1987 and 1991 approximately one (1) foot from the side lot line. The City has no record of a building permit for the deck. In the late 1990's, the applicant remodeled the side deck to its current setback location of 2.3 ft from the east lot line. The City has no record of a building permit for the remodeled deck either. Unfortunately, neither the original deck nor remodeled deck was legally constructed because it did not meet the 5 ft side yard setback. The deck cannot be considered legal non -conforming and should not be repaired or replaced as is currently located. Option The applicant may construct a 5 ft wide deck "walkway" and stair case from the side of the house to access the rear deck. Staff appreciates the applicant's desire to keep the existing deck at its current setback location; however, it was not legally constructed and should not be continued, replaced or restored. The rear yard has ample space to construct the proposed deck. Staff also appreciates that the neighbor is not opposed to the proposed setback; unfortunately, neighbor approval is not a criteria of approving a variance. CRITERIA AND FINDINGS OF FACT No variance shall be granted unless it meets all the criteria in paragraphs 1. through 7. below. The City shall make findings regarding compliance with these criteria. 1. The variance shall be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. The general purpose and intent of the R-X, Rural Executive District is to provide areas for high value, rural residences. The general purpose and intent of the General Provisions section of the zoning ordinance is to assure compatibility of uses' to prevent urban blight, deterioration and decay; and to enhance the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the community. The side yard variance request for a deck is not in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinances. 2 2. The variance shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Per the Comprehensive Plan, the property is guided for Low Density Residential land use. The variance request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The applicant's property is intended for single family dwellings with houses and decks. 3. There shall be practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. There are no practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. The applicant has ample space to construct a deck in the rear yard with access along the side yard that meets the 5 ft setback requirements. 4. The plight of the landowner shall be due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. The plight of the landowners is due to the previous and current property owner not obtaining building permits for the original deck construction and 1990's remodel. There are no circumstances unique to the property that prevents compliance with side yard setback requirement. 5. The variance shall not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance will not alter the essential character of the locality which is a single family residential neighborhood with houses and decks. 6. A variance shall not be granted for any use that is not allowed under the ordinance for property in the zoning district where the subject site is located. The variance will not be granted for any use that is not allowed under the ordinance for property in the zoning district. The property is zoned R-X, Rural Executive and houses and decks are consistent with rural residential uses. 7. In accordance with MN Stat. 462.357, Subp. 6, variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in MN Stat. 216C.06, Subd. 14, when in harmony with the zoning ordinance. Not applicable. 3 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends denial of the following variance for 842 Lois Lane: • A 2.7 foot variance to reduce the side yard setback from 5 feet to 2.3 feet ATTACHMENTS 1. Site Location & Aerial Map 2. Applicant Narrative 3. Certificate of Survey prepared by Kurth Surveying, Inc. received by the City on September 14, 2020 4. Color Rendering of Proposed New Deck 0 21. Our Variance Narrative: 842 Lois Lane My wife Maggie & I purchased the property in the summer of 1991. The 15t owner built it in 1987. The 15t owner added 2 decks to the house, without pulling permits it appears, between 1987 & 1991. Both decks were present when we bought the house as 2►,d owners in 1991. The East deck (the one in question) was originally about 9' off the house, putting it about one foot off the property line towards the north side of the house. The property line moves away from the house as it moves South, towards the back of the property, as the house appears to have been built slightly off parallel to the property line. In addition, our neighbors house to the East, and our house are the two closest to each other houses on our street. Both said to have been built by the same builder, 1 year apart. I believe the neighbors house is closer to the property line than we are. Fwiw. Our current neighbor is fine with our existing deck dimensions and has never objected. Our previous 2 neighbors never objected. The current deck in question has existed since the late 801s with no issues or objections &has been used in a reasonable manner. Our ask® We seek a variance basically to allow us to reasonably keep what we currently have &have had. Which is less than what we started with in 1991 but does not comply with the 5' normal variance. We are asking for 2 % feet. The practical difficulty of anything less than current renders the deck much less useful than what we have known &enjoyed, to date. Respectfully submitted; Brian &Maggie Rydlund Variance Criteria. 21. The variance shall be in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance. §1007.090 R-1, Single Family Residential District Our property is in compliance with all provisions of this ordinance with the notable exception of the setback for our deck that is the subject of this application. § 1007.041 NON -CONFORMING USES AND STRUCTURES. in reading the Chapter on Non -conforming uses, the ordinance does not distinguish between those non -conforming uses that were lawfully established and those that were not. Based on Provision 2, that reads as follows: (a) Any nonconformity, including the lawful use or occupation of land or premises existing at the time of the adoption of an additional control under this chapter, may be continued, including through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement, but not including expansion, unless: 1. The nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a period of more than one year; or 2. Any nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the extent of greater than 50 percent of its market value, and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the property is damaged. In this case, the City may impose reasonable conditions upon a building permit in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent property. (b) Any subsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises shall be a conforming use or occupancy. The City may, by ordinance, permit an expansion or impose upon nonconformities reasonable regulations to prevent and abate nuisances and to protect the public health, welfare, or safety. This subdivision does not prohibit the City from enforcing an ordinance that applies to adults -only bookstores, adults -only theaters, or similar adults -only businesses, as defined by ordinance. (c) Notwithstanding paragraph (a), the City shall regulate the repair, replacement, maintenance, improvement, or expansion of nonconforming uses and structures in floodplain areas to the extent necessary to maintain eligibility in the National Flood Insurance Program and not increase flood damage potential or increase the degree of obstruction to flood flows in the floodway. Note: This language is also consistent with Minnesota Statutes Chapter 4U.357, Subd. 1e. 22.The variance shall be consistent with the comprehensive plan. In our review of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, we do not see any inconsistencies with our request and the plan's delineated objectives. 23. There shall be practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. "Practical difficulties" as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the ordinance. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties: Without the variance, our deck would only be five feet wide. It is not practical to replace our deck on that basis. Without the deck, we are not able to put the property to a reasonable use as has existed for about 30 years. 24. The plight of the landowner shall be due to circumstances unique to the property and not created by the landowner. The creation of the deck non -conformity was not our doing. The non -conformity has existed for around 30 years and we only became aware of the issue when applying for a permit to repair. It should be noted that the encroachment was worse (approximately 1' off the property line) and a repair we made over 15 years ago reduced the non -conformity to 2.5 feet. We are asking for the variance so we can continue to enjoy our property in the same manner as has existed since our purchase of this property. 25. The variance shall not alter the essential character of the locality. As a residential neighborhood, the continuation of our deck non -conformity will not alter the character of the neighborhood or the community. 26. A variance shall not be granted for any use that is not allowed under the ordinance for the property in the zoning district where the subject site is located. We are and will continue to use the property as asingle-family, residential property. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY F O R Brian R y l u n d (MEASUREMENTS SHOWN IN FEET AND DECIMALS OF A FOOT) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY. PLAN OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE Lw4*L OF THE SJA-LE.DF b I NNESOTA. Randy L. Kurth, L.L.S. No. 20270 Russell J. Kurth, L.L.S. No. 16113 0 30 SCALE IN FEET PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Lot 6, Block 2, LAKEVIEW WOODLANDS Anoka County, Minnesota. ,IT, pinched It 00 N N N v LO I S LANE 66s w� KURTH SURVEYING, INC. 4002 JEFFERSON ST. N.E. COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421 PHONE (763) 788-9769 FAX (763) 788-7602 E—MAIL: ksi@kurthsurveyinginc.com. DATE • = IRON PIPE MONUMENT FO X = SPIKE SET ON LINE anon PAP e BEARINGS SHOWN ARE ASSUMED = BLACKTOP AREA = CONCRETE AREA ln�hed iron P'Y" IRLK.... LINO LAKES\SEC 6\6-2 LAKEVIEW WOODLANDS cert.gxd N89°4210911W 99.75 (meas) — 100 (plat) 09-31-22-23-0019 uncle Ptn�hed Paver 6I.Ck5PIPe PLAT FOLDER i m•. iw, ' r %N Aep ' s Ip 'F III 'cxt I i I I PLANNING & ZONING BOARD AGENDA ITEM 7B STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director P & Z MEETING DATE: October 14, 2020 TOPIC: Livable Communities Act Reenrollment REQUEST: Discussion BACKGROUND The Livable Communities Act (LCA) was adopted by the Minnesota Legislature in 1995. The Metropolitan Council administers the Livable Communities program. The LCA provides funding for communities to invest in local economic revitalization, work force housing initiatives, and development or redevelopment that connects different land uses and transportation. The program is a voluntary, incentive -based approach to help communities grow and redevelop, and to address the region's affordable and lifecycle housing needs. From 1996 through 2018, the Metropolitan Council awarded 1,086 grants totaling about $401 million in Livable Community funds. To participate in the program, communities must agree to long-term affordable and lifecycle housing goals and develop a Housing Action Plan. Participation is also required for certain grant opportunities from the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development. The City of Lino Lakes has participated in this program since 1996 and has benefited from four grants totaling $1,645,000 in funding for past projects. Reenrollment is now necessary for participation in the program from 2021 through 2030. Participation has three primary requirements: 1. Establish a Housing Action Plan 2. Spend an affordable and life -cycle housing opportunity amount (ALHOA) 3. Adopt Affordable and life -cycle housing goals Additionally, the community must adopt its 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update to participate. Housing Action Plan The City currently has a Housing Action Plan, put in place with the last LCA reenrollment in 2011. The plan is based predominately on the goals, policies, and implementation strategies outlined in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. This plan would need to be updated to reflect policies outlined in the 2040 Comprehensive Plan which are nearly identical. Spend ALOHA Amount The City's ALHOA for 2021 is $75,979. This is the amount of your City budget that must be spent on affordable or life -cycle housing opportunities to participate in the LCA programs. At least 85% must be spent on activities that help to create, sustain, preserve, or advance affordable and/or life -cycle housing opportunities. Examples include direct housing expenses, debt service on affordable housing projects, and staff time administering programs that create affordable housing. The City has previously met this requirement through Tax Increment Financing payments for the Willow Ponds Senior rentals and the Legacy at Woods Edge projects. TIF currently proposed for the Lyngblomsten project would be an eligible expenditure. Adopt Affordable and Life Cycle Housing The 2030 Comprehensive Plan included an affordable housing goal for the City of 560 new affordable units between 2011 and 2020. The new 2040 Comprehensive Plan has land guided at densities that can accommodate our affordable housing need allocation of 515 units between 2021 and 2030. The forecasted growth between 2020 and 2030 is 1,700 new households. The affordable allocation amounts to approximately 30% of new household growth. As shown in Table 4-10 of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, approximately 50% of the City's existing households units were affordable (2017). Table 4-10. Units Affordable by Household Income Un its % of All Units Affordable to Households with Income at or below 30% of AN 1 (less than or equal to $27,120) 163 2 Affordable to Households with Income 31%to 50% ofANl 492 � (over $27 1fl0 and less than or equal to $45,2W) Affordable to Households with Income 51 to 00% ofAN1 2,696 41 % (over $45,20 and less than or equal to $72,320) Affordable to Households with Income Abave8 of AMI (over $7 ,320) 3,312 50° Total Housing Units B,M 100°% Source: Me+."olitan Caundl, No mh& 2d17, Lima Lakes 6usbFg Housing Assessment, Local Planning Handbook The LCA program establishes a goal range of 283 — 515 for affordable units and a goal of 790 for Life -cycle units. Affordable is defined as housing that is affordable to low and moderate income families making no more than 80% of the area median income (AMI). In 2020, the area median income (AMI) for a household of four is $103,400. An affordable home price for a family of four with a household income of 80% AMI ($78,500) is $293,500. Examples of both rental costs and home price at various income levels is attached. "Lifecycle" refers to housing, other than single family detached, which meets the needs of the community in all age ranges. This can include twin homes, townhomes, or multi -family for example. 2 EDAC reviewed the program at their October 1, 2020 regular meeting and recommended the City pursue reenrollment. P & Z CONSIDERATION Staff is seeking P & Z recommendation to pursue reenrollment in the Livable Communities Program. ATTACHMENTS 1. Affordability Rates (2020) 2. 2011 Housing Action Plan 3 Attachment 1 Affordable Housing Rates (2020) Rental housing Rents include tenant -paid utilities. We have not separated tenant -paid utilities from the rent value because we want to consider all housing costs to determine affordability, rather than just rent alone. # Bedrooms 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI 80% AMI Efficiency $543 $905 $1,086 $1,448 1 Bedroom $582 $970 $1,164 $1,552 2 Bedrooms $697 $1,163 $1,395 $1,860 3 Bedrooms $806 $1,344 $1,612 $2,150 4 Bedroom $900 $1,500 $1,800 $2,400 2020 Rental Housing Ownership housing For owner -occupied housing, the income limit includes principal, interest, property taxes and home insurance. Assumptions include: • Fixed -interest, 30-year home loan • Interest rate of 3.625% • A 29% housing debt -to -household income ratio • A 3.5% down payment • A property tax rate of 1.25% of the property sales price • Mortgage insurance at 0.85% of unpaid principal • $100/month for hazard insurance Household Income Level Affordable Home Price 80% AMI ($78,500) $293,500 60% AMI ($62,040) $228,500 50% AMI ($51,700) $187,500 30%AMI ($31,000) $106,000 2020 Home Ownership Applying an interest rate of 3.625% on a 30-year fixed-rate home loan for 2020 and other standard mortgage assumptions listed above to the 80% of AMI amount for a family of four ($78,500), yields an affordable purchase price of $293,500. With ongoing increases in HUD income limits and the recent decline in mortgage interest rates, the affordable purchase price has increased from the 2019 limit of $254,500 and the 2018 limit of $234,500. M City of Lino Lakes Livable Communities Act Housing Action Plan May 25, 2011 Introduction The Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan includes a chapter on housing. The housing chapter has several purposes. It establishes policies and programs to meet the existing and projected housing needs in Lino Lakes. It also develops new strategies to accommodate the development of low and moderate income housing. The policies, programs, and strategies will guide the community to integrate housing into land use, transportation, economic and other decisions. It also provides direction for the private sector to participate in the creation of affordable and life - cycle housing opportunities. This Livable Communities Act Housing Action Plan reiterates and supports the purposes and implementation strategies of the Comprehensive Plan. The condition, affordability, and availability of housing affects the social and economic health of every city. As a developing community, Lino Lakes has an excellent opportunity to provide a variety of housing options to meet the needs of all its current and future residents throughout their lives. Through Lino Lakes' Comprehensive Plan and Visioning processes, participants identified the need for a greater variety of housing options within the community, which currently consists mainly of single family detached homes. In response, the Comprehensive Plan Advisory Panel developed a Land Use Plan that identifies areas for high density housing, medium density housing, and low density housing, as well as mixed use areas that will incorporate a mix of commercial areas with higher density housing options. This can accommodate a wider variety of housing types including senior housing, live/work units, and multi -family in a variety of styles from rental, condo and townhomes. Single family options will range from entry-level single family, move -up for growing families and "executive housing" to meet the needs of a changing population. This shift to provide a more diverse housing supply supports future economic development objectives by retaining existing residents and attracting new residents from all social and economic backgrounds, and is an essential component for sustainable growth. The varied City of Lino Lakes Livable Communities Act Housing Action Plan page 2 residential areas will provide much needed housing options for the city's work force, young professionals, families, and senior residents. Future Affordable and Life -Cycle Housing To provide for affordable housing in the community, the City is taking the appropriate regulatory measures within its 2030 Comprehensive Plan by guiding areas for higher density housing and including policies to integrate affordable housing in residential land use districts. These regulatory measures represent one of the City's most effective tools for the development of affordable housing. To meet affordable housing goals, the City has planned for potential new growth with a variety of residential land use types and densities for the development of life -cycle and affordable housing across the city. As part of the 2030 Regional Development Framework, the Metropolitan Council conducted a study to determine the additional affordable housing units will be needed in the region between 2011-2020. The study included a method for allocating affordable housing to all communities within the region. The allocation for Lino Lakes was 560 High Density and Mixed Use units at a minimum density of 6 units per net acre by 2020. The city's 2030 Comprehensive Plan includes the city's future Land Use Plan, which accommodates that goal. After the preparation of the Land Use Plan, the City and the Metropolitan Council negotiated a more refined set of Livable Communities goals for 2011-2020: 364 to 560 affordable dwelling units, and 560 to 1860 life -cycle dwelling units. The Land Use Plan accommodates these goals as well. While the City is doing its part in creating a regulatory Land Use Plan to guide areas for higher density housing, which is where most affordable housing will likely occur, barriers to development of affordable housing still exist in Lino Lakes and the region. Some of these barriers are beyond the City's control, including the following: • Steady increases in land prices and construction costs. • Physical limitations of land —due to wetlands, poor access, and poor soils —that would increase the cost of land development or construction. • State, county and local tax structures. There are some significant barriers to construction of new affordable housing, and the above list includes just a few of these barriers. Despite these difficulties, the provision of affordable housing is an important effort that cities undertake. The most effective role Lino Lakes will have in the provision of affordable housing is its regulatory tools: including land use and zoning regulations that do not impede the construction of affordable housing. Many of these tools can be used to encourage developers. Flexibility, through the use of the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process, may be provided to encourage the construction of affordable housing. Acknowledging the regional housing goals established by the Metropolitan Council and adopting new Livable Communities goals does not commit the City of Lino Lakes to provide funding for City of Lino Lakes Livable Communities Act Housing Action Plan page 3 housing. The City will continue to investigate means to pursue the goals in its comprehensive plan. However, this should not be interpreted as a commitment to use City funds to overcome the financial obstacles to life -cycle and affordable housing. Housing Implementation Strategies and Recommendations The housing chapter in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan identifies efforts Lino Lakes will pursue to create opportunities to maintain the existing housing stock, and to provide increased housing options for future residents. This Housing Action Plan reiterates and supports those strategies. These strategies are based on goals and rationales for Community, Neighborhood and Residential development developed by the Citizen Vision Committee. Many of the strategies are designed as resource tools for specific measures the City can effectively undertake and enforce. Others are designed as tools to encourage developers to incorporate affordable housing into future development. As future subdivisions are proposed, the City will use these resources and implement the strategies in working with developers to create new affordable housing opportunities. Many of these items are things the City itself can do. Others will occur through partnerships the City will seek out in order to provide for and maintain housing quality and increase affordable housing opportunities. During the community's Visioning and Comprehensive Plan processes, participants developed new goals and strategies for housing development in the community. The complete set of goals and strategies, is listed in Chapter 3 of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the Land Use Plan. Several goals are particularly related to housing in Lino Lakes, and they form the bases for implementation of housing policies and thus for this Housing Action Plan. The following implementation strategies can be found in the housing chapter of the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. Several have been grouped together here with additional information describing actions that have been taken, are underway, or are planned. To ensure housing development is compatible with existing and adjacent land uses and provides accessibility to key community features and natural amenities (Goal 3), the City will: Offer incentives to developers who provide for affordable housing units while conserving environmentally sensitive sites, such as density bonuses, expedited permitting processes, or reduced fees. Encourage innovative low impact development to preserve open space or natural features. o To implement the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the City is conducting a major review of its official controls including zoning and subdivision regulations. The PUD is a tool providing discretionary flexibility that can promote many policy goals such as environmental protection and the provision of affordable and life -cycle housing. City of Lino Lakes Livable Communities Act Housing Action Plan page 4 o Fees can be reduced when it would be consistent with specific public values. For example, common open space within a development can reduce park dedication requirements. Ecologically sound stormwater management design can reduce stormwater management charges. • Pursue funding opportunities to increase the affordability of housing units within conservation subdivisions. • Pursue funding opportunities to incorporate green building techniques within affordable housing developments. • Ensure that all new housing, including high density, adheres to the highest possible standards of planning, design and construction feasible. • Promote development of neighborhoods that incorporate housing in a range of densities and affordability limits in close proximity to shopping, services, daycare, and medical services. Safe access to parks and schools, and the ability to walk, bike or have access to transit should be part of the design. o The Land Use Plan in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan reflects the relationship between housing and services. Commercial nodes are planned to provide services in proximity to neighborhoods of all types of housing styles. To improve the availability of affordable housing and enhance opportunities for senior housing (Goals 5 and 6), the City will: • Create an incentive based program or Residential Planned Unit Development (PUD) ordinance that includes density bonuses for construction of affordable housing. This allows an increase in density, beyond the underlying zoning, if the development includes affordable housing. • Allow the creative use of site planning or PUDs that provide flexibility for development containing affordable housing such as a reduction in lot size, setbacks, street width, floor area and parking requirements, and consideration of reduction in City fees. • Update the zoning ordinance and subdivision ordinance to reduce impediments to affordable housing. • Periodically review land use regulations to determine the effectiveness of current ordinances in encouraging additional affordable units as well as encouraging modifications to keep the existing housing stock desirable and livable. o To implement the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, the City is conducting a major review of its official controls including zoning and subdivision regulations. The PUD is a tool providing discretionary flexibility that can promote many policy goals such as environmental protection and the provision of affordable and life -cycle housing. City of Lino Lakes Livable Communities Act Housing Action Plan page 5 • Participate in the Livable Communities Act Local Housing Incentives Program. • Develop policies to use Tax Increment Financing to fund activities that increase new affordable housing. o On September 13, 2010, Lino Lakes adopted Resolution No. 10-73, electing to continue participation in the Local Housing Incentives Program. Participation in this program includes successfully negotiating and adopting new goals and spending the required Affordable and Life -Cycle Housing Opportunities Amount (ALHOA). Lino Lakes is meeting and will continue to meet the ALHOA primarily through Tax Increment Financing payments that are supporting two projects that include affordable and life -cycle housing. In 2009, these payments were $160,690 and $35,660 for the two projects. • Activate and utilize powers and tools of the City Economic Development Authority and/or a City Housing and Redevelopment Authority to make funds available for the creation of new affordable housing. • Utilize techniques, such as land trusts to maintain long-term affordability for any new affordable housing unit. • Support and actively promote Anoka County's I" Time Homebuyers programs to assist new homeowners entering the market for existing homes. • Work with the Anoka County HRA to meet the community's life-cyle and affordable housing needs. • Partner with, support and market programs offered by the County, State, MHFA, Federal Government and non -profits to fund the development of affordable housing. • Cooperate with developers or other agencies as appropriate to assess senior housing needs in the community. • Seek housing developers to work cooperatively with the City to construct affordable units. • Use the Land Use Plan as a tool to provide a variety of residential land uses in a range of densities, concentrating higher density opportunities along major transportation and transit corridors and around future job centers. o The Land Use Plan in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan reflects the relationship between land uses, transportation, housing needs, and employment. • Streamline permitting and development processes to ease the rehabilitation or improvement of existing homes and reduce unwarranted cost impacts on the price of entry-level homes. City of Lino Lakes Livable Communities Act Housing Action Plan page 6 o The City's review of its official controls is including consideration of timelines and processing costs. However, many elements of development review are required by state law, such as public hearings and minimum time for public notices. Other elements are out of the City's control: incomplete submittal information often delays review and approval. The goal is to reduce costs by collaborating with development interests early and working out design and other issues before significant expenditures in plans and other formal submittal requirements. To maintain existing housing stock to ensure a high -quality environment in all residential neighborhoods (Goal 11), the City will: • Support and actively promote housing rehabilitation programs for existing owner - occupied homes and rental buildings or units. This includes promotion of all county and state programs and non-profit programs. • Utilize the city's website, newsletter and other sources for promotion and advertising of housing programs. • Continue enforcement of the Housing Maintenance Code to maintain existing housing stock. • Study the feasibility of establishing a program to require a property inspection and disclosure report before residential property changes hands. • Maintain City rental licensing program and enforcement efforts. • Promote programs that encourage maintenance of existing house including a housing remodeling fair, neighborhood watch programs, city beautification programs, city wide clean up programs, etc. • Develop a list of available resources and providers of in -home services to older adults and those with special needs. For further information, contact: Jeff Smyser, AICP City Planner (651)982-2425 j eff. smerr&ci.lino-1akes.mn.us Appendix A Goals and Policies Related to Housing and Listed in the Housing Chapter of the Lino Lakes 2030 Comprehensive Plan Goal 3: Ensure housing development is compatible with existing and adjacent land uses and provides accessibility to key community features and natural amenities. Rationale: Accessibility to the most attractive features of Lino Lakes is important to the citizens of our community. Policies: 1. Link trails to parks, lakes, and schools. Ensure commercial development and mixed -use areas are appropriately dispersed throughout the city. Goal s: Improve availability of affordable and life -cycle housing. Rationale: Lino Lakes, as a developing city, is expected to accommodate the projected housing needs, entry level through retirement, of the community's population. Policies: 1. Work with developers to identify innovative strategies for providing entry-level and life -cycle housing. 2. Use redevelopment tools to revitalize aging residential properties, made possible by various federal, state, local government, and non-profit programs. 3. Provide expanded opportunities for housing ownership made available by various federal, state, local government and non-profit agencies. 4. Provide for and designate appropriate areas for high -density and mixed -use development. 5. Strive to integrate affordable housing in all residential land use districts. Goal 6: Enhance opportunities for senior housing. Rationale: As Lino Lakes continues to grow and develop, it must also accommodate the housing needs of a growing aging population. Policies: 1. Develop partnerships with non-profit and private sector groups who assist in the creation of senior housing. 2. Coordinate development of housing with retail accessibility (restaurants, shops, groceries). Goal 11: Maintain existing housing stock to insure a high -quality environment in all residential neighborhoods. Policies: 1. Promote the improvement of the existing housing stock, and to encourage the rehabilitation or redevelopment of substandard housing. 2. Encourage in -fill housing where appropriate.