HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/13/2015 P&Z PacketCITY OF LINO LAKES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MEETING
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
6:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
Please be courteous and turn off all electronic devices during the meeting.
AClUXT71A
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
3. SWEARING IN OF BOARD MEMBERS
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 8, 2015
5. OPEN MIKE
6. RE-ELECTION OF CHAIR & VICE CHAIR
7. ACTION ITEMS
A. None
8. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Watermark Presentation by Rick Packer, Mattamy Homes
B. Community Solar Gardens
C. Project Updates
9. 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
: April 8, 2015
TIME STARTED
: 6:30 P.M.
TIME ENDED
: 7:58 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT
: Neil Evenson, Perry Laden, Lou Masonick, Michael
Root, Paul Tralle (Chair)
MEMBERS ABSENT
: Michael Hyden
STAFF PRESENT
: Katie Larsen, Diane Hankee
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:
Chair Tralle called the Lino Lakes Planning and Zoning Board meeting to order at 6:30
p.m. on April 8, 2015.
IL APROVAL OF AGENDA y
The Agenda was approved as presented.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
March 11, 2015
Mr. Masonick made a MOTION to approve the March 11, 2015 Meeting Minutes.
Motion was supported by Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 3 - 0. (Laden and Tralle
abstained.)
IV. OPEN MIKE
Chair Tralle declared Open Mike at 6:32 p.m.
There was no one present for Open Mike.
Mr. Laden made a MOTION to close Open Mike at 6:33 p.m. Motion was supported by
Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 4 - 0. (Tralle abstained.)
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
April 8, 2015
Page 2
V. ACTION ITEMS
A. PUBLIC HEARING to consider amendment to PUD Development Stage
Plan/Preliminary Plat for Turnberry Crossing
Katie Larsen, City Planner, presented the staff report. Staff recommends approval of the
amendment to PUD Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat for Turnberry Crossing.
Ms. Larsen pointed out that after the staff report was written, she found that the original
plan that was approved only included the stone or brick coming up to the base of the
window, rather than the stone or brick coming up all along the top of the doorway. The
developer went above and beyond what was required by building the stone and brick up
to the roofline, so staff is comfortable with allowing stone or brick up to the base of the
window.
In response to questions by board members, City staff discussed street traffic and gave
detailed information about the porous pavers that will be used in the development.
Mr. Laden requested confirmation that the 3 detached units will be part of the association
and not Ms. Larsen stated the units will have the same requirements as the rest of the
development and will be part of the association, the only difference being that they are
pulled apart.
Chair Tralle stated his support for the pavers and parking stalls but preferred the
stone/brick rather than the white aluminum pillars.
Mr. Masonick questioned the consistency of the appearance of the units. The board
discussed their desire for more color variations. The Developer, Roger Hokanson,
commented that he could add more variation. Ms. Larsen remarked that she will have
staff review the color selections.
Chair Tralle declared the Public Hearing open at 7:00 p.m.
Developer Roger Hokanson with Hokanson Construction Development, 155 91st Ave,
Blaine, discussed his reasoning for choosing the white pillars over the stone/brick
columns and ensured that the one unit to be built alongside the existing units will be built
identical to the others. Mr. Hokanson also discussed the market and appraisals for the
townhomes.
Judy Domning, 418 Aqua Circle, spoke about her concerns that the amendments are
going to impact the value of the existing units. Areas of concern included:
• white pillars vs. stone/brick columns
• change in appearance with pavers
• unit colors
• park or picnic area in development
• construction schedule
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
April 8, 2015
Page 3
Trent Mastenbrook, 610 Aqua Circle, addressed concerns on behalf of the Marshan Lake
Condominiums HOA as a board member of the association. Their concerns included:
• pillar maintenance
• guest parking
• ownership of street
• mailboxes
Lynn Morrison, 403 Aqua Circle, discussed her thoughts and concerns. She is pleased
that the board is looking at maintaining the quality of the units and likes the idea of
having security mailboxes. Her concerns included pillars, the common area/park, and
drainage.
Mr. Hokanson approached the podium again to address some of the issues. He reassured
they are only re -platting half of the development, not whole thing, and they are going to
finish with the existing houses that all look identical. Mr. Hokanson explained there is no
information indicating the stoneibrick columns will raise the price of the houses over the
white pillars. He questioned whether or not the City could decide which type of
mailboxes he can use. Mr. Hokanson expressed that he is trying to keep the price down
for buyers.
Chair Tralle declared the white pillars seem to be an issue with everybody and asked Mr.
Hokanson if we could use the stoneibrick columns on the units rather than the white
pillars. Mr. Hokanson explained that it is a cost issue. Chair Tralle responded that as a
representative of the City, the board wants to see the best look. Mr. Masonick questioned
the sturdiness of the white pillars and is concerned about them being subject to dents and
damage. Mr. Hokanson offered a compromise by using half posts.
The board and Mr. Hokanson discussed mailboxes and received estimated pricing
information for security mailboxes from Mr. Mastenbrook. Mr. Mastenbrook indicated
the post office would prefer the security mailboxes and ultimately they are more secure.
While the board and staff recognized the desire for security mailboxes, they did not feel
that they were in a position to dictate which types of mailboxes are required.
Mr. Hokanson discussed the drainage at the end of the street. The drain was overgrown
with grass and weeds and that is the reason for the flooding. Diane Hankee, City
Engineer, commented that the homeowner's association is responsible for maintaining
the drains. Ms. Domning raised additional concerns about the homeowners association,
which the board conveyed they do not have the capacity to resolve. Ms. Domning
verified she is speaking on behalf of all of the neighbors in the existing units.
Mr. Masonick requested clarification on the common area and Ms. Domning responded a
picnic area was promised to the homeowners when they purchased their property. Ms.
Larsen stated the landscape plan has not changed and the original landscape plan did not
include a tot lot, but it did include a landscaped open space that could be used to add a
fire pit or a bench. She cited no specific park features are required by the City in the
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
April 8, 2015
Page 4
original plan. Mr. Laden asked if there is a timeframe for which the landscaping needs to
be done. Ms. Larsen said there is not a detailed timeframe. Chair Tralle asked Mr.
Hokanson if there is an estimated time for total build out. Mr. Hokanson responded he
does not have a specific timeframe but the units should sell quickly. Mr. Hokanson also
noted where the staging unit will be located.
Mr. Laden made a MOTION to close the Public Hearing at 7:42 p.m. Motion was
supported by Mr. Masonick. Motion carried 4 - 0. (Tralle abstained.)
The board members discussed their concerns and preferences regarding stoneibrick
columns vs. the white pillars. Ms. Larsen referred to the original plan and found it
included a wood support beam.
Mr. Laden made a MOTION to recommend approval of amendment to PUD
Development Stage Plan/Preliminary Plat based on the following conditions, which
includes two additional recommendations by the board:
I. All comments from City Engineer letter dated March 27, 2015 shall be addressed.
2. All comments from Environmental Coordinator letter dated April 3, 2015 shall be
addressed.
3. All comments from Anoka County Highway Department letter (to be provided) shall
be addressed.
4. A RCWD permit shall be required.
5. Sheet 1, Certificate of Survey:
a. There is an existing shared access easement over the north property and the
adjacent property. This easement and document # shall be shown.
b. Under Zoning and Setbacks, PDO shall be changed to CUP PUD. (This shall
be changed on all plan sheets).
c. Perimeter (North line) setback shall be changed from 29 feet to 25 feet. (This
shall be changed on all plan sheets).
d. Under Comprehensive Plan, "full build out" shall be omitted. (This shall be
changed on all plan sheets).
6. Sheet 2, Impervious Coverage Exhibit:
a. The guest parking stalls shall not be removed.
b. The guest parking stalls shall be replaced with porous pavers to meet
impervious coverage calculations. This shall be noted on the plans.
7. Sheet 3, Preliminary Plat:
a. The lot and block numbering shall be consistent with the Turnberry Crossing
final plat.
b. Building setback line along north perimeter shall be revised from 29 feet to 25
feet.
c. The detail for the townhomes proposed on Lots 6, 7, 10 and I 1 shall also be
included.
8. Sheet 4, Grading Plan:
a. See City Engineer Comments.
9. Sheet 5, Landscape/Planting Plan:
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning & Zoning Board
April 8, 2015
Page 5
a. See Environmental Coordinator comments.
b. The trees located on lot 3 shall be relocated.
c. An irrigation plan shall be submitted and noted on the plan.
d. Sod is required in the open space area and shall be noted on the plan.
e. Seed mix and planting details of stormwater management ponds shall be
provided.
10. Sheets C 1-C3.2:
a. See City Engineer and Environmental Coordinator comments.
11. Exterior Elevation House Plans
a. All exterior elevation house plans shall be revised to show full brick columns
on the front of the house vs. the white pillars.
b. Two additional color sidings shall be submitted and approved by City staff.
Motion was supported by Mr. Masonick. Motion carried 4 - 1. (Evenson voting nay.)
VI. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Project Updates
Ms. Larsen provided an update of current city projects.
VIL ADJOURNMENT
Mr. Laden made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 7:58 p.m. Motion was supported
by Mr. Evenson. Motion carried 4 - 0. (Tralle abstained.)
Respectfully submitted,
Nicole DeDeyn
Community Development Assistant
DRAFT MINUTES
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 7A
STAFF ORIGINATOR:
P & Z MEETING DATE
REQUEST:
CASE NUMBER:
Katie Larsen, City Planner
May 13, 2015
Watermark Presentation by Rick Packer,
Mattamy Homes
PC2014-001
APPLICANT: Mattamy Partnership
Attn: Rick Packer
7201 Washington Avenue S.
Edina, MN 55439
REVIEW DEADLINE: NA
BACKGROUND
Mattamy Homes continues to move forward on the design and development of their
master planned residential community called Watermark. The Planning & Zoning Board
reviewed the concept plan in October 2014. Rick Packer from Mattamy Homes will
present more general information regarding proposed architectural designs, development
process and schedule.
Watermark is located in the northwest quadrant of I-35E and CSAH 14/Main Street. It
contains 12 parcels totaling approximately 372 gross acres and consists of a residential
density mix of single family lots and townhomes totaling 876 housing units.
RECOMMENDATION
None. Discussion only.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Site Location Map
2. Watermark Concept Plan
1
35W
35W
35W
35E
5E
SOIL BORINGS
F —���-—
Iwl�,;
ICI
I I I
WETLANDS
BRAUN INTERTEC KJOLHAUG ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMPANY
11001 HAMPSHIRE AVE. S. 26105 WILD ROSE LANE
MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55438 SHOREWOOD, MINNESOTA 55331
(952)995-2000 (952)401-8757
WATERMARK
CONCEPT PLAN
INTERSTATE HIGHWAY NO. 35E
�UTH AVhINUE INUETH (U�SAH �Z1)
LEGEND SITE DATA
0
75'
SINGLE
FAMILY LOTS
0
65'
SINGLE
FAMILY/PREMIUM LOTS
0
65'
SINGLE
FAMILY LOTS
0
55'
SINGLE
FAMILY LOTS
0
42'
SINGLE
FAMILY LOTS
0
30'
TOWNHOME UNITS
153
—49
261
162
86
165
0
PARK
0
GREEN SPACE
0
BERMS
0
STORM POND (HWL)
0 EXISTING WETLAND
0 WETLAND REPLACEMENT
(MITIGATION)
TOTAL SITE AREA
±372.0
AC.
TOTAL ROW AREA
±51.11
AC.
20TH AVENUE NORTH
±3.92
AC.
INTERNAL ROW
±47.19
AC.
TOTAL OUTLOT AREA
f138.63
AC.
PUBLIC PARK
±5.58
AC.
PRIVATE PARK
±0.49
AC.
GREEN SPACE & BERMS
±49.53
AC.
WETLANDS, MITIGATION & PONDS—
±83.03
AC.
TOTAL LOT AREA
±182.26
AC.
65'-75' LOTS
±114.35
AC.
55' LOTS
±31.79
AC.
42' LOTS
±14.06
AC.
TOWNHOME LOTS
±22.06
AC.
TOTAL NUMBER OF LOTS/UNITS
876
SINGLE FAMILY LOTS
711
TOWNHOME UNITS
165
AVERAGE LOT SIZES:
75' LOTS
±10,125
S.F.
65' LOTS
±8,775
S.F.
55' LOTS
±7,425
S.F.
42' LOTS
±5,670
S.F.
MINIMUM HOUSE SETBACK DATA:
25
FT.
FRONT
SIDE (GARAGE)
FT.
5
SIDE (HOUSE)
10
FT.
SIDE CORNER
20 or 25
FT.
REAR SETBACK
25
FT.
OWNER CONTACT
RICK PACKER
(952)898-6108
O
2V�r
LO
o
Ke l�
v
Main St
7
'-'J35�
Co. Rd. 4A
170TH St N
Q
�R�a
SITE
sere
JI — J� VaKe�l
N
01
U
I
VAAe Co.Rd.14&21
K
Co. Rd.
N
�t
I e� e j I
Vj.\\ e
te
Ke
Ji
ReS�
--
Co. Rd.
a
34 Birch St U
UICCATION MAP
(NO SCALE)
0 100 200 400
( IN FEET )
248 Apollo Drive, Suite 100 I hereby certify that this plan, specification Print Name: Brian J. Krystofiak, P.E. Drawn: C# Revisions:
Carlson - environmental Lino Lakes, MN 55014 or report was prepared by me or under my
McCain • engineering Phone: (763) 489-7900 direct supervision and that I am a duly Signature: Designed: BJK
• surveying Fax: (763) 489-7959 Licensed Professional Engineer under
www.carlsonmccain.com the laws of the State of Minnesota Date: 09/05/14 License #: 25063 Date: 09/05/14
09 08 14 1 f:\jobs\4721 - 4740\4724 - lino lakes property\cad\survey\layouts\4724_layout 4 concept.dwg
MATTAMY HOMES
7201 Washington Avenue - Suite 201
Edina, MN 55439
WATERMARK
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
CONCEPT PLAN
H
of
3
roww
attamyHOM�s
Lino Lakes Planning
Commission Workshop
May 13, 2015
mattamyHOMES
�•An
1. Review Past Progress
2. Discuss Architectural Review
3. Discuss Image and Amenity Level
confidential
mProgress to Date
attamyHOMEs
confidential
• Renamed Project --Watermark
• Concept Review by all City Boards and Commissions
• Identified Wetland Impacts and Prepared Potential Mitigation
Plan
• Advancing through a Comprehensive Stormwater
Management Plan with RCWD for surrounding 1700 acres
• Added 9 new home products to Watermark lineup
• Completed Traffic Analysis and have agreed to improvements
to 2 0t" Ave .
www.mattamyhomes.com
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
The Site
Aerial
confidential
www.mattamyhomes.com
<W
Architecture
• City has specific architectural requirements
for homes
• Mattamy believes its homes meet the intent
of the ordinances, will be a positive addition
to the City and would like flexibility in
design.
• Entire line-up of homes to be reviewed and
approved along with a Monotony Code (5:1)
confidential
www.mattamyhomes.com
FM7
C2UaMYHOM]ES
Quick Review of Standard SF Product
confidential
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
55' Lot Product
confidential
www.mattamyhomes.com
mattamyHOMEs
NO
www.mattamyhomes.com
mattamyHOMEs
si ■ r [e.
www.mattamyhomes.com
mattamyHOMEs
9mur cxeYrau.E
f4521�6?
d
t
w +
_ n¢Idny
M
www.mattamyhomes.com
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
s-
confidential
11
mattamyHOMEs
www.mattamyhomes.com
mattamyHOMEs
so No so ONSOMEONE. ■■ ■i ■■ ■� ■1
orLIJ
ee �i
www.mattamyhomes.com
C2ftaMYHOM:E:S
44'Wide Lot Product
Home trent Luevation
WATERMARK
CD
Victorian A - MN 3201
Y.FBo,roes
confidential
14
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
le taMILY1ioMe t'1011t P—IeV0Li1ail
CraftEman4�." -MN 3201
WATERMARK
914, *CIES (!m
box u$ MU
confidential
15
e2ftaMyHOM]ES
Rode Front Elevation
WATERMARK
Cottage V -ITT 3201
N" LXk, iG Li
confidential
www.mattamyhomes.com •
e2ftaMyHOM]ES
Home Front Elevation
L r_i_,. Y� Iri �,��. �� J• W
WATERMARK
Prairie `F' - �)AN 3202
confidential
U" L3* 3D Li
17
a2ftaMyHOM]ES
Single Funi y Home Front Elevation
Cm
WATERMARK
Victa:rian W - MN 32.0
confidential
a"L3*MIS
www.mattamyhomes.com
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
Single Fanii v Hoene Front Elevation
%a 6.,. i. I..I.Y.
WATERMARK
Victorian W - MN 3204
confidential
M" L3dL. 2DLz
19
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
Simile FaMLIV Home Frmt Eeva#ian
WATERMARK
Prairie T - 2YN 32.04
confidential
KII
mattamyHOMEs
www.mattamyhomes.com
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
Townhomes
confidential
AM
!mafttaMYjHOMES
confidential
o
,Jv
_
www.mattamyhomes.c
23
mattamy
confidential
MI
mattamyHOMEs
n r rp.-;—
i -
1 � ■i
www. matta myhomes.co m
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
confidential
0
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
confidential
27
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
confidential
28
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
Site Amenities - Arrival Experience
confidential
we
C2ftaMYHOM]ES
Site Amenities - Arrival Experience
Fountain
Entry �, —r. ,
Landscaping z t, -
and
Monument -
5ignage
10.4
confidential
ui
F
m
N
m
0
w
w
M
Landscaped
Berm and
Trail
Landscaped
Berm and
Trail
30
e2ftwyH0MES
Ornamental Fence/Stone Columns Flanking
Central Monument Sign
confidential
Wildflower Natural
Pond Edge
4
Monument Sign in Cenhal Median
31
maftaMYHOMEs
0 X1. Ir
N'
U. E
ME Ill.
7
lillim MINIM
www.mattamyhomes.com
rm"atta�myffl"MEs
www.mattamyhomes.com
www.matiamp�s.com
F7
mattamy
— confidential
35
maftaMYHOMEs
14
4 4
Entrance Overlook
— confidential
4
■ 37
g2ftaMYHOM]ES
Berm Treatments
confidential
38
maftaMYHOMEs
Ar
www.mattamyhomes.com
maftaMYHOMEs
U r''
0
www.mattamyhomes.com
7
mattamy
Thank You'.
confidential
41
STAFF ORIGINATOR:
P & Z MEETING DATE:
REQUEST:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANTS:
OWNERS:
REVIEW SCHEDULE:
BACKGROUND
PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 7B
Katie Larsen, City Planner
May 11, 2015
Community Solar Gardens (Discussion Only)
None
City Initiated
NA
NA
Staff has received several phone calls from residents and private solar companies regarding the
installation of community solar gardens in Lino Lakes.
In 2013, the Minnesota Legislature enacted Minn. Stat. I I6C.7792 that requires Xcel Energy to
provide financial incentives to promote the installation of solar energy systems in Minnesota. A
community solar garden is a facility that generates electricity by means of a ground -mounted or
roof -mounted solar photovoltaic device. Subscribers receive a credit on their energy bill for the
electricity generated in proportion to the size of their subscription.
Solar gardens may vary in size. The inquiries we've received are for ground -mounted systems on
10-80 acre sites with 25 year lease cycles.
ANALYSIS
The city ordinance does not address community solar gardens; therefore they are not permitted.
We anticipate a land use application submission requesting a text amendment to allow for these
types of structures. Staff wanted to present the Planning & Zoning Board with the concept for
preliminary discussion and feedback.
Points to consider:
1. Type of zoning district?
a. Rural
b. Industrial
c. Public/Semi-public
2. Minimum lot size?
3. Setbacks?
4. Height?
5. Development Stage Plan?
a. Post 2030
6. Landscape screening?
7. Permits?
a. Conditional Use Permit
b. Interim Use Permit
RECOMMENDATION
No action. Discussion only.
ATTACHMENTS
1. August 2013 House Research article, "2013 Solar Energy Legislation in Minnesota"
2. Photo examples of community solar gardens
2
HOUSE RESEARCH Short Subjects
Bob Eleff August 2013
2013 Solar Energy Legislation in Minnesota
In 2013, the Minnesota Legislature enacted a bill that contained several provisions designed to promote the
growth of solar energy (Laws 2013, ch. 85). These provisions are summarized below.
1.5 Percent Solar Minn. Stat. § 216B.1691, subd. 2£ A new law requires Minnesota's public utilities
Energy Standard to generate or procure sufficient electricity from solar sources so that by the end of
for Public Utilities 2020, at least 1.5 percent of the utility's retail electricity sales in the state are
produced from solar energy. (In computing its standard, a utility must exclude
retail sales to iron mining and processing facilities, paper mills, sawmills, and
wood product manufacturers.) At least 10 percent of this energy must be generated
by facilities with a capacity of 20 kilowatts or less. Public utilities must comply
with this solar standard in addition to fulfilling the existing Renewable Energy
Standard, which requires that at least 20 percent of electricity sales originate from
renewable energy sources by 2020, and 25 percent by 2025 (for Xcel Energy, these
percentages are 25 and 30, respectively.).
The state's public utilities are Xcel Energy, Minnesota Power, Otter Tail Power,
Alliant Energy Interstate Power and Light, and Northwestern Wisconsin Electric
Company. These utilities collectively account for two-thirds of the state's retail
electricity sales.
Analysts estimate that compliance with the standard will increase solar capacity in
the state by a factor of 30 from 2013 levels.
Solar Energy May
Minn. Stat. § 216B.164, subd. 10. The 2013 legislation gives public utilities a new
Be Reimbursed at a
option for paying solar generators for electricity sold to the utility in excess of the
New "Value of
generator's consumption. Prior to the new law, generators were reimbursed at a
Solar" Rate
rate they selected, based on either the utility's avoided costs as set by the
Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) or the utility's average retail rate.
Under the new law, a utility may choose to pay generators a price that reflects the
value that solar energy represents to the utility, incorporating savings that accrue
from avoiding construction of new power plants and transmission lines, reducing
transmission and distribution line losses, etc. The PUC will establish a generic
method that public utilities must use to annually calculate this "value of solar" rate,
which, for the first three years, cannot be below the utility's average retail rate.
Xcel Energy's Solar
Minn. Stat. § 116C.7792. Beginning in 2014, Xcel Energy, which accounts for
Incentive Program
approximately half of Minnesota's retail electricity sales, must provide $5 million
in financial incentives annually for five years to promote the installation of solar
energy systems in its service area. Eligible systems must have a capacity of 20
kilowatts or less that generate no more than 120 percent of the customer's onsite
annual electricity consumption. The incentive is paid for a period of ten years.
Xcel Energy's Minn. Stat. § 216B.1641. A community solar garden sells electricity generated
Community Solar from solar energy to subscribers who purchase a given portion of its output. It
Garden Program allows access to solar energy by renters and property owners lacking sufficient
capital to install their own solar systems or whose property may be shaded or
otherwise unsuitable for a solar installation.
Xcel Energy must submit a plan to operate a community solar garden program to
the PUC by September 30, 2013. Programs are to begin operating no later than
180 days following the commission's approval of the plan. Other utilities may also
submit plans.
A community solar garden may be owned by a utility or any other entity. All
energy generated by the facility, whose capacity is limited to one megawatt, is sold
to the utility at the value of solar rate for distribution to subscribers. Subscriptions
must represent at least 200 watts of capacity and may not exceed 120 percent of a
subscriber's annual electricity consumption.
"Made in Photovoltaic (Minn. Stat. §§ 216C.41I to 216C.415). Beginning in 2014, $15
Minnesota"Solar million annually for a period of ten years is allocated to owners who install solar
Incentives photovoltaic devices with a capacity no greater than 40 kilowatts that have been
certified by the Department of Commerce as manufactured in Minnesota. The
incentive is financed from two sources: (1) each public utility annually contributes
5 percent of the minimum it is statutorily required to spend on energy conservation
programs; and (2) the balance comes from Xcel Energy's Renewable Development
Fund (Minn. Stat. § 116C.779, subd. 1).
The amount of the per -kilowatt -hour -generated incentive for each type of
Minnesota -made photovoltaic device is determined by the Department of
Commerce based on several factors, including the performance of the device, and
may be revised annually. Payments run for ten years and are to be split evenly
between residential and commercial properties.
Thermal (Minn. Stat. § 216C.416). Beginning in 2014, approximately $250,000
annually for a period of ten years is allocated by the Department of Commerce for
rebates to owners of residential and commercial buildings who install solar thermal
systems manufactured in Minnesota to heat or cool air or water. Maximum rebates
are the lesser of 25 percent of the installed cost of the system or $2,500, $5,000, or
$25,000, for single family, multifamily, and commercial properties, respectively.
Rebates are to be allocated evenly between projects heating or cooling air and
water. The rebates are funded from the incentive account established above for
"Made in Minnesota" photovoltaic projects.
For more information: Contact legislative analyst Bob Eleff at 651-296-8961.
The Research Department of the Minnesota House of Representatives is a nonpartisan office providing legislative,
legal, and information services to the entire House.
House Research Department I 600 State Office Building I St. Paul, MN 55155I 651-296-6753 I www.house.mn/hrd/
a
V
At
'.et.,
Ale
41 AV
�. �rF.: �, y;� 6 a�N`�+x .• "-+ham s 7r �`L -
its. ILI
.96
Pw&I7?!YQM
dt
I V!m