Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
10-24-16 Planning Commission Packet
3800 Laverne Avenue North Lake Elmo, MN 55042 (651) 747-3900 www.lakeelmo.org NOTICE OF MEETING The City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission will conduct a meeting on Monday October 24, 2016 at 7:00 p.m. AGENDA 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Approve Agenda 3. Approve Minutes a. October 10, 2016 4. Public Hearings a. SIGN VARIANCE – 4201 Manning Avenue: The Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing and consider a request from River Country Cooperative for a variance from the maximum surface area requirements of wall and canopy signs. b. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT REVIEW: The Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing and consider a comprehensive plan amendment to accommodate potential sewer extensions and sewered development within the area bounded by the Old Village to the North, Lake Elmo Avenue to the West and 10th Street to the South. c. ZONING TEXT AMNENDMENT – NON-CONFORMING USE ORDINANCE: The planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing and consider an amendment to City Code Section 154.150-154.151 as it pertains to nonconforming uses, buildings and structures. d. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT – VARIANCE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT: The Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing to consider a zoning text amendment to the City of Lake Elmo Code of Ordinances, Section 154.109 as it pertains to expirations of variances. 5. Business Items a. WILDFLOWER 2ND ADDITION FINAL PLAT AND FINAL PUD PLAN: - Postponed per developer request to the November 14, 2016 meeting. 6. Updates a. City Council Updates – October 18, 2016 Meeting i. Inwood 4th Addition Final Plat - Passed ii. Conditional Use Permit - 5699 Keats Ave - Passed iii. Conditional Use Permit Rock point Church – Passed b. Staff Updates i. Upcoming Meetings: 2 November 14, 2016 November 28, 2016 c. Commission Concerns 7. Adjourn ***Note: Every effort will be made to accommodate person or persons that need special considerations to attend this meeting due to a health condition or disability. Please contact the Lake Elmo City Clerk if you are in need of special accommodations. Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-10-16 City of Lake Elmo Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 10, 2016 Chairman Kreimer called to order the meeting of the Lake Elmo Planning Commission at 7:00 p.m. COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Fields, Dodson, Williams, Dunn, Kreimer, and Lundquist COMMISSIONERS ABSENT: Haggard, Larson & Griffin STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Wensman Approve Agenda: M/S/P: Lundquist/Dodson, move to approve the Agenda as amended, Vote: 6-0, motion carried Unanimously. Approve Minutes: September 26, 2016 M/S/P: Dodson/Fields, move to approve the September 26, 2016 minutes as amended, Vote: 6-0, motion carried Unanimously. Public Hearing – Inwood 4th Addition Final Plat Wenman started his presentation for Inwood 4th Addition Final Plat which includes 38 single family homes. Wensman went through some background regarding the development. There is parkland that is adjacent to this phase. This phase is 10.91 acres for 38 single family lots. The lot sizes vary from 8171 sq ft to 13,650 sq ft. and lot widths are 64.3 to 105 feet. The landscape plans are consistent with approved plans, the city still needs some information for the irrigation system. There are 3 conditions from the Preliminary Plat that are not met. Condition #1) the street naming policy changes, and staff is recommending that the new road be named to Ivywood Circle N condition # 10) there is no maintenance agreement for phase 4 which will be required before the release of building permits #18) the developer shall install a multi -purpose trail along 10th Street. This condition will be met in a future phase. There are 7 findings of fact for approval. Staff is recommending 7 conditions of approval which include complying with the engineers memo, landscape licensing agreement, a CIC Homeowners agreement, etc. 2 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-10-16 Kreimer asked if there would be water service in the park. The public works department and Engineering has been in communication with the developer to find the best location for the stub. John Rask, MI Homes, they are phasing south to north based on where the water and utilities are coming from. This phase will have full basements and larger lots, but will be part of the overall HOA. Kreimer asked if the same style homes will be built. Rask stated that some will be walk- outs, there will be 2 additional style homes, but many will be similar. Public Hearing opened at 7:21 pm Alan Stocker, 8680 Upper 7th Place, he is wondering about the completion of Island Trail through to 10th Street. All of the construction traffic comes right through their neighborhood. They were led to believe that Island Trail would go through to 10 th Street. Wensman stated that this phase was not platted to include that road. The road is intended to be platted in the next phase. Rask explained how the sewer and storm water works for this development and that to make the connection, the other loop needs to be made. It is more of a sequencing thing. Utilities and infrastruction are dictating the phasing. The road connection is anticipated to be opened up in the Spring. They have started to work with Washington County to work out the details. Lisa McGinn, 8756 Upper 7th Place N, they were all told that once the construction went through the first 4 cul-de-sacs, the construction traffic would come from the north for the next phase. There are children, buses, disabled, etc and there have been some circumstances where there have been some near misses. She is wondering why they can’t use the construction road coming off of Inwood where it would not affect any of their homes, or not to start construction until they can put that road through to give this neighborhood relief. Williams is wondering about where the construction access is located. Lisa McGinn stated that she believes it is 9th Street and there are currently construction trailers there. Mike McGinn, 8756 Upper 7th Place N, he understands that it may be inconvenient and expensive, but he feels construction access is separate from sewer access and is typical for large construction sites. They could fence off the area so that you would not have residential traffic or speculative traffic. He feels that it would be a reasonable accommodation for the residents living there. 3 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-10-16 There were no other written or electronic comments received Public hearing closed at 7:38 pm Williams is not sure how they can legally tie another construction access to this plat. Wensman stated that he would defer to the developer. He does not feel that they can tie it to this plat. M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move to recommend approval of the Inwood 4th Addition Final Plat and PUD with the findings and 7 conditions of approval drafted by staff and listed in the Staff Report, Vote: 6-0, motion carried. Fields would like to hear from the developer to see if they are willing to do anything to accommodate the traffic issues. Rask stated that they are not starting this addition this year. This addition will probably coincide with the Island Trail road access. They are working with the County to work through some issues regarding this. The construction access previously talked about is a restricted access that they were granted early on and was intended to be that in between access point before roads were built. Public Hearing – Wildflower 2nd Addition Final Plat and Final PUD Plan Wensman started his presentation for the Wildflower 2nd addition final plat and final PUD plans. Wensman gave the background regarding the development. The lot area is 4.4 acres for 20 residential lots (10 villa and 10 regular). Average garden villa lot is .16 acres and average single family lot is .29 acres. The landscape plans are not approved yet, but will be required before building permits are issued. Wensman brought up an issue that was discovered with the development. The PUD agreement was written that the sideyard setback is from a public street vs. from a property line. For this phase, he clarified the language to “from the property line”, but shrunk the setback to 10 feet, specifically for Lot 1 Block 3 and Lot 4, Block 3. Parking has been an issue for this development during construction, so the engineer is asking for designated allowed construction parking for this development. There is an unmet condition that there be a recorded landscape license agreement to include the public art. Wensman went through the findings for approval. There are 9 conditions of approval which include the CIC agreement, landscape/public art agreement, street B be to be named, 15’ setback, etc. Lundquist brought up the water problem at 43 rd Street and Lake Elmo Ave. She feels that it is because the landscaping for first addition was not done correctly. There is a berm that isn’t built high enough so that what used to be a marsh is now a lake and is 4 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-10-16 infringing on the Krueger property. She would like the landscaping looked at more closely. Wensman said he will follow up with the City Engineer to see if it isn’t functioning properly. Dodson had a question on the CIC agreement. Wensman stated that this new property needs to be incorporated into the agreement. Williams asked if this development met the street naming ordinance. Wensman stated that it would meet the current ordinance. M/S/P: Dunn/Williams, move to postpone consideration of the final plat and PUD development plans for the Wildflower at Lake Elmo 2nd Addition upon the completion of the next agenda item, Vote: 5-1, motion carried, with Dodson voting no. Public Hearing – Conditional Use Permit – 5699 Keats Ave – Additional Accessory Building in RR Zoning Wensman started his presentation regarding a Conditional Use Permit for an additional accessory building in the RR zone at 5699 Keats Ave. This is located in the North/Central section of the city in a rural residential zoning district. On lots 10-15 acres, you are allowed 2 buildings up to a combined 2500 square feet. The applicant is asking for this building for agricultural purposes. They are being taxed as an agricultural property. They have (6) 650 foot rows of raspberries, pumpkins, squash and vegetables. They desire to expand their farm to house chickens and goats and for the storage of agricultural equipment. Agricultural production is an allowed use. The setbacks are met and will be put in a lower elevation. Right now there is a lot of exterior storage of equipment on this property and this will alleviate the need for that. There currently are no development standards outlined in Article 7 which is referred to. Article 5 has standards for accessory buildings and structures generally. Notices were sent out and there was one public comment expressing concerns about drainage and if there was a need for storage on this property. A condition was added in response to this comment. Staff is recommending approval with 12 findings. Staff is recommending approval with 13 conditions of approval. Williams asked for clarification of the allowed building sizes and numbers and if it was a total aggregate area. Wensman pulled up code and it confirmed it is aggregate maximum size. Williams is also wondering about the last condition that if the property subdivides does that mean the building has to come down. He is also wondering about the condition referring to Home Based Business. Wensman stated that the request is for an agricultural building and should not be used for a home b ased business. There is already a lot of storage on the site and some kind of limit has to be placed for the building to be used appropriately. Williams feels that condition number 5, might not be applicable and number 10 seems to cover it. 5 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-10-16 Dodson is wondering if they need a finding stating why they need a conditional use permit. Wensman stated that there really aren’t standards so he thinks it would be based on implied need, but it is not really provided. Kreimer asked if there were standards that it has to be compatible with the house. Wensman referred to the code and accessory buildings have to be compatible with the principle structure, but pole buildings are an exception to that rule. Rod Sessing, 5699 Keats Ave, is asking for a conditional use permit to store his agricultural equipment inside as it deteriorates 10 times faster sitting outside. They would like to expand their farm to have organic chickens and eggs as well as milking goats. It bothers him that they talk about tearing down a building. When the variance went through for his neighbor, a tear down clause was talked about, but it was not approved that way. He would like the tear down clause to be removed. He agrees that it will only be used for AG, but to tear down a perfectly good building later on, doesn’t make sense. Sessing stated that drainage is not going to be an issue as water flows to the south and there is a pond to the south to collect water. Public Hearing opened at 8:35 pm There were no other written or electronic comments received Public Hearing closed at 8:35 pm Dodson asked for more clarification regarding the drainage issue. Wensman stated it was just a concern that this building might increase the water drainage to the area. This would be addressed through the building permit process if there were any issues. Dunn agrees with not needing the home occupation part in there and also with not tearing it down. Wensman stated that the Ziertman’s building was obtained through the variance process and variances run with the land. Therefore, there was no condition placed on the building to be torn down. A CUP runs with the land, but they can expire if conditions are not met. If you want to take out that clause, you would need to strike the condition that it only be used for agricultural purposes and they could use it for whatever they wanted. Fields does not feel that the condition should be struck. The request is for an additional building for an agricultural purpose and that is what it needs to be used for. If the agricultural use goes away, the building can be left vacant, but can’t just be used for any use. Dunn and Lundquist agreed. 6 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-10-16 M/S/P: Williams/Lundquist, move to recommend approval of the request for a conditional use permit for an additional accessory structure in the RR – Rural zoning district for the property located at 5699 Keats Avenue N, subject to the amended conditions of approval, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Public Hearing – Wildflower 2nd Addition Final Plat and Final PUD Plan The applicant is now in attendance so Wensman briefly summarized for him. The issue of the Stormwater was brought up. Mr. Engstrom stated that his understanding from his engineer is that there is less water going into the county culvert now than there was before. Lundquist stated that she lives in the area and drives the road every day and she stated that there used to be a marsh and now it is a lake. She stated that it has backed up across the road onto the Kruegers property. Lundquist stated that her and Commissioner Dunn drove the property and the house in the NW section of the first addition has a berm on the corner of that property that has washed out so that the water is running down the ditch into what is supposed to be a marsh. Engstrom stated that she must be talking about the Gonyea property. Lundquist stated the it could be the Gonyea property with that particular problem, but there is also a series of Lakes on the North end of the Wildflower property that do not seem to be draining properly. Wensman suggests that he meet with the Kruegers to determine exactly what the issue is so that he can bring that to the City Engineer to address if it is working properly. Dunn suggested that maybe the VBWD should look at it as well. Engstrom is opposed to 15’ setback from property line and would like it to be 10’. He says he doesn’t know of any small utilities going in there. Wensman stated that there is a 10’ utility easement there. There can be encroachments in setbacks, but not in the easement. Public Hearing opened at 8:46 pm Neil Krueger, 4452 Lake Elmo Ave, is concerned that the open space is fast becoming a lake and not usable open space. There are 2 problems from their perspective. The first is with Gonyea. The VBWD, Jack Griffin and someone from the County were out. The pond in the NW corner was not built according to design. It drains into the ditch along Lake Elmo Ave vs. draining to the East. It is water that was never going into the ditch before and it is causing that pond across the road to rise and is flooding into their ditch. It is somewhat tied to the Wildflower development as well. What used to be a basin to infiltrate the water is now a large berm. The other issue is that the trails on the Wildflower development are fast becoming waterlogged. That whole area does not have ponding that is working properly. VBWD is looking at the plan to see if it was designed and built properly. 7 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-10-16 Deb Krueger, 4452 Lake Elmo Ave, they are very concerned with this ponding situation. There is a very great system of trails in Wildflower, but they appear to be flooding. The water is running the wrong way. At Gonyea, there wasn’t enough room to handle the water, so culverts were put in and now the water is running down to Wildflower. This is a case of what looks good on paper, but she would like the Planning Commission to take the time and walk the property so that they really know what is going on. There were culverts put in on their side at their property and they don’t function property because they are installed too high. She wants to be sure that this is addressed before any more homes go in. They were told that another 3 feet, and their garage will flood. Richard Smith, 11456 Blazingstar Lane N, he thought that the Wildflower at Lake Elmo development would be done in 3 phases. If this is a step into phase 2, there were agreements with the surrounding neighbors of things that would be completed with phase 1 and those have not been met completely. He also wanted to say that a house can look really nice at 6 months old, but what happens at 5, 10, 15 and 20 years out. He feels if there is a problem with encroachments in easements, those need to be addressed. Wensman requested a copy of those conditions. Smith said they are part of the public record, but he can get him a copy. Fields wanted to know what conditions haven’t been met. Smith stated there was an agreement for underground services like sewer, water and small utilities. When they were putting those services in about 2 months ago for phase I, he called Mr. Engstrom and asked if this wouldn’t be a good time to do this for them. He said he didn’t think that was the kind of work that they did. He is not clear where that leaves him. If he needs to have the work done himself and send him the bill or what. There were no other written or electronic comments received Public Hearing closed at 9:03 pm Dodson is wondering how this plays out in terms of the phasing. Wensman stated this is phase 2. He is wondering if they can add a condition that the work agreed to be done for the neighbors be completed before phase 2 can be started. Wensman believes if they were required to be done with phase I, that can be a condition that it needs to be completed before recording of the plat. M/S/P: Dodson/Lundquist, move to add a condition that any conditions for the 3 adjacent properties that were required to be completed with phase 1 be completed before the plat for phase 2 is recorded, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Williams asked if these were conditions of approval from the City or were they part of a private agreement. Smith stated that they are part of the public record. They have been signed by both parties and part of the discussion at the City Council. He is not 8 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-10-16 sure about the legal part of it. Wensman stated that he will find out if it was part of the City conditions or if it is a private agreement. Williams is asking about the timeline for making a decision. Wensman stated that they are up against the 60 day timeline. The City however has the ability to ask for another 60 days. Williams would like more information about the drainage issue. Dunn said it is always hard to retrofit. She believes a large portion of this site is in the FEMA flood plain. She thinks it is imperative that the city be sensitive to water issues and get to the root of the problem an fix it up front rather than trying to retrofit it. Dunn would like to postpone this item. Williams would like to postpone until the stormwater drainage system has been constructed properly. M/S/P: Williams/Dunn, move to postpone consideration of the Wildflower 2nd addition Final Plat and PUD plans until the Planning Commission receives a report from the City Engineer that the stormwater drainage system on the Village Preserve Property and the Wildflower at Lake Elmo Property has been constructed properly as these 2 properties were set up as part of the same stormwater drainage system, Vote: 6-0, motion carried unanimously. Dunn is wondering if this issue can be expedited and the Planning Commission could possibly hold an additional meeting to resolve this issue. Wensman stated that by the next regularly scheduled meeting there should be some sort of resolution. Kreimer asked if a condition could be put on that no construction would commence until these issues are resolved. Williams said he would like more control than that. Once they recommend approval, they are out of the loop. Public Hearing – Conditional Use Permit Amendment – Rockpoint Church Parking Lot Wensman started his presentation regarding the Conditional Use Permit for Rockpoint Church parking lot expansion. They are poposing 124 spaces with a future additional 116 spaces. This property is a PF zone on 19.67 acres. There was a CUP for an expansion in 2011 that expired. This expansion is much larger. This meets the provisions for places of worship. One condition staff is suggesting is that there be no parking in the second phase until it is paved. Wensman stated that they would need a certificate of zoning compliance when the second phase is built, so they can make sure it is built to standards. They will need to meet the lighting, landscaping and tree preservation requirements. They meet the impervious surface requirements and a VBWD permit will be required. There are also some engineering and fire safety requirements. Staff feels they meet the 12 findings for approval and is recommending 15 conditions of approval. Dodson asked about the drainfield and pumphouse and where they were located. They are out in an outlot. Williams is asking about the landscape plans and why the City 9 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-10-16 contract landscape architect is not required to review them. Williams would like the condition to say approved by the City. Bill Bartolic, Rockpoint Church, they have a parking problem because their membership is growing. They want to phase the parking lot as they can’t afford to do the whole thing at once. They are parking in the street, which won’t be desirable once there are homes in Hidden Meadows 2nd. Kerimer asked if it was intentional that there is no curbing shown on the top. Bartolic said that was an oversight. They don’t intend to use any of the phase 2 parking lot. They will make some sort of a barr ier there. Bartolic is wondering if they can take responsibility for watering the trees without the irrigation system. The trees along Kelvin are not irrigated and they are flourishing. Wensman clarified that irrigation is not required, but if they choose to put it in, an agreement would be required. Public Hearing opened at 9:39 pm There were no other written or electronic comments received Public Hearing closed at 9:39 pm M/S/P: Williams/Dodson, move that all landscape plans be approved by the City prior to any building permits being issued, Vote:6 -0, motion carried unanimously. M/S/P: Williams/Lundquist, move to recommend approval of the request for a conditional use permit amendment to allow a parking lot expansion for the property located at 5825 Kelvin Avenue N, based on the findings of fact and the conditions as amended in the staff report, Vote:6-0, motion carried unanimously. Fields wanted to bring up the Wildflower setback issue so that it wasn’t left up in the air. Wensman stated that there is a condition in the staff report that it is a 15 foot setback from the property line. If the Commission wants something different, that would need to change. Dunn stated that is what she find s difficult with PUD’s that sometimes things deviate with unintended results. Fields would like it communicated to Mr. Engstrom that is what the intent of the City and Planning Commission is. Williams is wondering if the language could be very specific as something like there needs to be a 10 foot unencumbered utility easement. Wensman stated that regardless of the setback, there needs to be a 10 foot unencumbered utility easement. City Council Updates – October 4, 2016 Meeting i) OP Ordinance – Passed – with 4/5 vote back in ii) Horning Lot Size Variance – Passed iii) Fence Ordinance Amendment – Solid Wall Fences – Passed iv) Common Ground IUP – Passed 10 Lake Elmo Planning Commission Minutes; 10-10-16 v) Wasatch Storage Partners CUP - Passed Staff Updates 1. Upcoming Meetings a. October 24, 2016 b. November 14, 2016 Commission Concerns Dunn is concerned because they have been ripping up some of the concrete as the water isn’t draining properly. The surface water has always been a concern and how do people know that after something is approved, it is actually functioning properly. Wensman stated that there are requirements that they are inspected on a schedule. Dodson is concerned that some outlots are permanent and some are temporary. He is wondering if there is a way to change the terminology for the outlots so it is clear what is permanent. Wensman stated that it is really up to the developer to communicate to their customers what that is. Williams feels that Commissioners are reluctant to make amendments. He wants to encourage Commissioners to speak up and say what they really think. Kreimer is concerned that they are not getting the landscape plans with the packet. Dodson doesn’t feel they need as much as they do for a preliminary plat. Williams is in favor in keeping the system the way it is, but if an individual wants a copy, they can request it from staff. Williams feels that the landscape consultant is doing a great job at looking at these things and he is comfortable taking his recommendations. Dodson is wondering if it is sent to one person, if it should be sent to everyone. Fields thinks if it is sent electronically, that is easy enough to send to all. Dunn feels that the issues brought up for the Inwood development were valid from a safety standpoint and might be because of phasing. Wensman stated that this is part of the argument for multi access developments. Meeting adjourned at 10:02 pm Respectfully submitted, Joan Ziertman Planning Program Assistant PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 10/24/2016 AGENDA ITEM: 4A – PUBLIC HEARING CASE # 2016-47 ITEM: Sign Variance for 4201 Manning Avenue North SUBMITTED BY: Emily Becker, City Planner REVIEWED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission is being asked to hold a public hearing and consider a request from River Country Cooperative for a variance from the maximum surface area requirements of wall and canopy signs. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: River Country Cooperative Property Owners: River Country Cooperative Location: 4201 Manning Avenue North Request: Variance from maximum surface area requirements of wall and canopy signs Existing Land Use: Gas station and car wash Surrounding Land Use: Commercial to the West and Southeast, Rural Transitional to the Northeast, Limited Density Residential – Planned Unit Development to the North, and Hudson Boulevard and I-94 to the South Existing Zoning: Convenience Commercial Comprehensive Plan: Commercial History: The site plan for a gas station at this property was approved by City Council in 1999, along with a sign variance that permitted a 19’ tall, 96 square-foot pylon sign and 9’ X 11’monument sign. Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 9/26/2016 60 Day Deadline – 11/25/2016 Extension Letter Mailed – N/A 120 Day Deadline – N/A Applicable Regulations: Article III – Administration and Enforcement Article V – General Regulations 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM REQUEST DETAILS: The Manning Avenue corridor project will relocate the corridor from the west side of the subject property to the east side. The realignment project’s purpose is to improve operations and safety along the corridor to accommodate current and future traffic levels. The building currently faces the corner of Manning Avenue and Stillwater Boulevard (Highway 5), and the aforementioned project will change the configuration of the streets so that traffic will now travel behind the building. Reorientation of the building is obviously unfeasible, and so the applicant is requesting a variance that will increase visibility of the business. The property was granted a variance in 1999 that allowed the pylon and monument signs that are currently on the property. The locations of these signs will be moved. Additionally, the applicant would like to erect signs that display the name of the gas station, ‘Holiday,’ on the “short” ends of the canopy, as most of the “long” ends of the canopy no longer face traffic. Sign Regulations of the Zoning Code, however, only allow 15% sign coverage of the façade of a canopy and reduce the allotted amount of wall sign coverage of the building by 50%. Due to aforesaid circumstances, the applicant is a requesting a variance from these restricti ons. PLANNING AND ZONING ISSUES: Applicable Zoning Regulations. 154.212 Sign Regulations of the Zoning Code, Subdivision H.: Regulations Pertaining to Specific Sign Type 1. Wall Signs a. Number. No building occupant shall display more than one wall sign per street frontage except as provided below: ii. Up to three ancillary wall signs may be displayed on buildings measuring at least 100 feet in length along the front lot line. Any ancillary sign displayed under this paragraph shall not exceed 50% of the net area or 50% of the height of the largest permitted wall sign displayed on that façade, nor shall the aggregate area of the ancillary signs exceed 50% of the net area of such wall sign. b. Surface Area. The total permitted sign surface area of all wall signs on a façade shall not exceed one (1) square foot of signage for each lineal foot of building frontage that is coterminous with the occupancy to which the sign refers, unless a different amount allocated to the building occupant is identified in an approved Comprehensive Sign Plan pursuant to §154.212.I. In addition, no individual wall sign shall exceed one hundred (100) square feet in area. 5. Canopy and Awning Signs. The use of canopy and awning signs reduces the maximum area of any allowed wall sign by half. Canopy and awning signs are subject to the following provisions: a. Surface Area. The sign surface area of a canopy or awning sign shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the area of the vertical section of the canopies and awnings. The area of the vertical section of the canopies and awnings is calculated as the difference between the highest and lowest point on the canopy or awning multiplied by the length of the canopy or awning measured parallel to the façade upon which it is attached. 3 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM 7. Sign Illumination. e. Brightness Limitation. Cannot exceed 3 foot candles on the front lot line and one foot candle at all other lot lines, measured three feet above the surface of the ground or fifty foot candles measured perpendicular to the face of the sign from a distance equal to the narrowest dimension of the sign. f. Glare. All artificial illumination shall be so designed, located, shielded and directed so as to prevent the casting of glare or direct light up adjacent public right-of-way or surrounding property. Existing Signs (permitted in 2011) 46 square-foot signs on one long side of both canopies 10 square-foot signs on both short sides of both canopies 96 square-foot pylon sign 19 feet in height (allowed by variance granted in 1999) 55 square-foot (of sign area) monument sign nine feet in height and 11 feet wide (allowed by variance granted in 1999) Carwash exit and entrance signs on building Proposed Signs Canopy #1 (see Section 154.212 Subd. (H) (5) above for regulations) Side Area (sq. ft.) 15% Max. Allowed (sq. ft.) Requested Area (sq. ft.) Variance Amount (sq. ft.) North 280 42 47.51 5.51 West 91 13.65 47.51 33.86 South 280 42 0 None East 91 13.65 47.51 33.86 Canopy #2 (see Section 154.212 Subd. (H) (5) above for regulations) Side Area (sq. ft.) 15% Max. Allowed (sq. ft.) Requested Area (sq. ft.) Variance Amount (sq. ft.) North 280 42 0 None West 91 13.65 47.51 33.86 South 280 42 0 None East 91 13.65 47.51 33.86 Building (see Section 154.212 Subd. (H) (1) & (H) (5) above for regulations) Building Side Length (ft.) Allowed (reduced by ½ due to canopy signs) (sq. ft.) Requested Area (sq. ft.) Variance Amount (sq. ft.) North 86.66 43.33 80.13 36.8 South 86.66 43.33 80.13 36.78 Pylon & Monument Signs (see Section 154.212 Subd. (H) (7) above for regulations) Adding internal lighting and changing location. 4 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM Pylon Variance Height (ft.) Square Footage Allowed by Variance 19 96 Allowed at time of Variance 6 30 Allowed Today Pylon Signs Not allowed Monument Sign Height (ft.) Square Footage Allowed by Variance 9 55 Allowed at time of Variance 6 30 Allowed Today 10 72 REVIEW AND ANALYSIS/DRAFT FINDINGS An applicant must establish and demonstrate compliance with the variance criteria set forth in Lake Elmo City Code Section 154.017 before an exception or modification to city code requirements can be granted. These criteria are listed below, along with comments from Staff regarding applicability of these criteria to the applicant’s request. 1) Practical Difficulties. A variance to the provision of this chapter may be granted by the Board of Adjustment upon the application by the owner of the affected property where the strict enforcement of this chapter would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and then only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter. Definition of practical difficulties - “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 an official control. FINDINGS: The Applicant claims that the strict enforcement of the City’s sign regulations as it pertains to maximum canopy and wall sign surface area would cause practical difficulties, as Manning Avenue has been reconfigured and will abut the back side of the building and shorter sides of the canopies. The Applicant would like to retain visibility with this new configuration. The Applicant is not changing the current use of the property. 2) Unique Circumstances. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. FINDINGS: The Manning Avenue reconfiguration was not created by the landowner. 3) Character of Locality. The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is located. 5 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4A – ACTION ITEM FINDINGS: The proposed elements should not diminish or negatively affect the essential character of the neighborhood. The new or adjusted signage is intended to update and refresh the facility while solving visibility issues associated with pending road and access changes. 4) Adjacent Properties and Traffic. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to properties adjacent to the property in question or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. FINDINGS. Exceeding the maximum-allowed sign surface area of the canopy and wall will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent properties, increase congestion, or impair property values but will help the business remain viable. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request from River Country Cooperative for a variance from the City’s Sign Regulations pertaining to maximum canopy and wall sign area for the property located at 4201 Manning Avenue North, with the following conditions: Conditions: 1) The new locations of the ground sign and pylon sign shall be approved by the City and must adhere to all setback and other Code requirements. 2) All lighting must adhere to City’s Lighting, Glare Control, and Exterior Lighting Standards. 3) The erected signs shall not exceed the proposed square footage described herein. “Move to recommend approval of the request from River Country Cooperative for a variance from the City’s Sign Regulations pertaining to maximum canopy and wall sign area for the property located at 4201 Manning Avenue North, subject to outlined conditions.” ATTACHMENTS: 1) Variance application 2) Sign elevation drawings 3) Manning Avenue Realignment Concept 4) Previously-granted variance, Resolution No. PZ99-48 ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction ........................................................................................ Planning Staff - Report by Staff ................................................................................... Planning Staff - Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members - Open the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair - Close the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair - Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members - Action by the Commission ..................................... Chair & Commission Members File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOLIDAY STATION 150162 - LAKE ELMO, MN - SIGN PACKAGE - Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY LAKE ELMO, MN NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL 8/17/16 RM 1 1 1 1 2 33 4 5 4 5 1 NEW 27” LOGO & LETTERS 3 NEW 27” LOGO & LETTERS 4 NEW 22” CARWASH LETTERS 5 ENTER/ EXIT SIGNS ON BUILDING 2 EXISTING 27” LOGO & LETTERS EXISTING MONUMENT BEING MOVED TWO POLE SIGN File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOLIDAY STATION 150162 - LAKE ELMO, MN - SIGN PACKAGE - Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY LAKE ELMO, MN NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL EXISTING:PROPOSED GRAPHIC DETAIL SCALE: 3/8” = 1‘-0” 8/17/16 RM 71.1159 5’ -5 ” 7’-0” File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOLIDAY STATION 150162 - LAKE ELMO, MN - SIGN PACKAGE - Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY LAKE ELMO, MN NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL EXISTING:PROPOSED GRAPHIC DETAIL SCALE: 1/2” = 1‘-0” 8/17/16 RM 41.784 3’ -8 1 / 2 ” 5’-5 1/2” File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOLIDAY STATION 150162 - LAKE ELMO, MN - SIGN PACKAGE - Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY LAKE ELMO, MN NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL EXISTING:PROPOSED GRAPHIC DETAIL SCALE: 1/2” = 1‘-0” 8/17/16 RM 107.1429 2’ -9 3 / 4” 2’ -3 ” 27 " 16’-10 3/4” 3’-5 1/4” File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOLIDAY STATION 150162 - LAKE ELMO, MN - SIGN PACKAGE - Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY LAKE ELMO, MN NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL EXISTING:PROPOSED GRAPHIC DETAIL SCALE: 1/2” = 1‘-0” 8/17/16 RM 81.3953 2’ -9 3 / 4” 2’ -3 ” 27 " 16’-10 3/4” 3’-5 1/4” File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOLIDAY STATION 150162 - LAKE ELMO, MN - SIGN PACKAGE - Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY LAKE ELMO, MN NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL EXISTING:PROPOSED GRAPHIC DETAIL SCALE: 1/2” = 1‘-0” 8/17/16 RM 103.9604 building: 287.7698 2’ -9 3 / 4” 2’ -3 ” 27 " 16’-10 3/4” 3’-5 1/4” 1’ -3 ” 5’-0 3/8” 1’ -11 1 / 8 ” 13’-6 11/16” 22 " File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOLIDAY STATION 150162 - LAKE ELMO, MN - SIGN PACKAGE - Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY LAKE ELMO, MN NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL EXISTING:PROPOSED 8/17/16 RM 103.9604 building: 287.7698 File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOLIDAY STATION 150162 - LAKE ELMO, MN - SIGN PACKAGE - Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY LAKE ELMO, MN NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL EXISTING:PROPOSED 8/17/16 RM 176.4706 GRAPHIC DETAIL SCALE: 1/2” = 1‘-0” 2’ -9 3 / 4” 2’ -3 ” 27 " 16’-10 3/4” 3’-5 1/4” File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOLIDAY STATION 150162 - LAKE ELMO, MN - SIGN PACKAGE - Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY LAKE ELMO, MN NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL EXISTING:PROPOSED 8/17/16 RM 126.1261 GRAPHIC DETAIL SCALE: 1/2” = 1‘-0” 2’ -9 3 / 4” 2’ -3 ” 27 " 16’-10 3/4” 3’-5 1/4” File Name: Prepared By:Date: Eng: Customer: Location: HOLIDAY STATION 150162 - LAKE ELMO, MN - SIGN PACKAGE - Note: Color output may not be exact when viewing or printing this drawing. All colors used are PMS or the closest CMYK equivalent. If these colors are incorrect, please provide the correct PMS match and a revision to this drawing will be made.700 21st Street Southwest PO Box 210 Watertown, SD 57201-0210 1 .800.843.9888 • www.personasigns.com DISTRIBUTED BY SIGN UP COMPANY LAKE ELMO, MN NOTE: Elevation drawings are for customer approval only, drawings are not to be used as any installation guide, all dimensions must be verified before installation. CUSTOMER APPROVAL Date APPROVAL BOX - PLEASE INITIAL EXISTING:PROPOSED 8/17/16 RM 175 GRAPHIC DETAIL SCALE: 3/8” = 1‘-0” 2’ -9 3 / 4” 2’ -3 ” 27 " 16’-10 3/4” 3’-5 1/4” 1’ -3 ” 5’-0 3/8” 1’ -11 1 / 8 ” 13’-6 11/16” 22 " PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 10/24/2016 AGENDA ITEM: 4B__– PUBLIC HEAR ITEM CASE #2016-45 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review To: Planning Commission From: Ben Gozola, City Planner Meeting Date: October 24, 2016 Applicants: Reviewed By: HC Golf Course Development, LLC Stephen Wensman, Planning Director Deadline for Action: Application Complete – 09/12/2016 60 Day Deadline – 11/11/2016 Extension Letter Mailed – No 120 Day Deadline – 01/10/2017 Introductory Information Request: As a follow up to the recent concept plan review for the Royal Golf Club, the applicants have requested the City consider a comprehensive plan amendment to accommodate potential sewer extensions and sewered development within the area bounded by the Old Village to the north, Lake Elmo Avenue to the west, and 10th Street to the South. Council Direction: At their meeting on September 6th, 2016, the City Council weighed a number of questions regarding the proposed Royal Golf Club concept plan, and ultimately determined that consideration of potential ways to accommodate the proposed development to preserve the Golf Course was in the best interest of the City as a whole. Staff was specifically instructed to craft a “Village Transition Area” as opposed to creating a new land use classification and zoning district should the applicants apply for a change to the comprehensive plan. As such an application was received on 09/12/16, staff prepared the proposed language with the following Council direction as our guide: Craft an amendment that allows for utilization of the Village Urban Low Density land use classification within a “Village Transition Area” ONLY if specific criteria are met. Future development must be via PUD to ensure adherence to the 1.5 to 2.5 units per acre density range. Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Village Transition Area Planning Commission Report; 10-24-16 Page 2 Protection of Shoreland district land and/or wetlands within this area of the community should be a principle factor in determining when sewered development will be considered. Significant acreage should be required prior to consideration of a sewered development within the new Transition Area. Recognize that individual lots and/or neighborhoods (who are not seeking to develop) may also request sewer extensions if/when the extension of sewer service is economically feasible. Review Proposed Changes: To implement the requested comprehensive plan change, staff is suggesting amendments to two (2) areas of the City’s Land Use Plan: 1. Map 3-3, Planned Land Use, would be updated to show the boundaries of a “Village Transition Area” in the eastern portion of the community between the Old Village and 10th Street; and 2. The Land Use Plan language on “Buffering/Land Use Transitions” would be updated to acknowledge the Village Transition Area and the criteria that must be met prior to sewer being made available for existing properties or environmentally sensitive development. The specific changes being proposed can be seen on the draft language attached to this report. Staff comments within the margins of the draft ordinance explain why each of the various provisions were included. Conclusion The Planning Commission is asked to examine the proposed updates to the Comprehensive Plan, and provide guidance on changes or additions for Council to consider. Commission Options: Staff fully acknowledges that the Planning Commission (as part of Concept Plan review) did not support the City Council’s direction on a potential comprehensive plan change, and the Commission is certainly free to reiterate that position at this time. However, given that Council is already on record supporting a change, staff must also ask the Commission to honor Council’s decision by providing comment and feedback on the proposed changes in the event Council wishes to move forward with an amendment despite a Commission recommendation to the contrary. Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Village Transition Area Planning Commission Report; 10-24-16 Page 3 (cont.) The Planning Commission, therefore, is asked to follow these steps in making your recommendation: 1. Determine whether the Commission as a whole wishes to recommend denial of a comprehensive plan amendment in general. a. If YES, the Commission may choose to adopt such a recommendation with findings, but must still proceed to Step #2 of the recommendation process below. b. If NO, the Commission should proceed to Step #2 of the recommendation process below. 2. Given Council’s show of support for a potential comprehensive plan amendment during the Concept Plan review, determine what (if any) changes are needed to the proposed language currently under consideration. The dotted outline on the map would identify the new “Village Transition Area” within which the extension of sewer would be considered under a specific set of circumstances outlined on the following two pages. Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan Chapter III – Land Use Plan III – 13 Design Standards Following completion of the Comprehensive Plan, the City will adopt design standards to ensure the look and feel of future development is compatible with the community vision of a small town within a rural setting. Standards for building materials, building articulation, design variety and other requirements should be upheld to ensure the quality of the built environment is distinctly Lake Elmo. Preservation of Rural Character One of the main benefits of the official land use plan is that the long range planning objective to retain a permanent rural identity is achieved. Under the memorandum of understanding with the Metropolitan Council, a vast majority of the City will be allowed to maintain its rural character and existing land uses. Furthermore, concentrating urbanization adjacent to I-94 and within the Old Village will result in clear boundaries between the urban and rural portions of the community. Beyond that, the City’s desire to protect its sensitive park lands is also achieved. Both Lake Elmo Regional Park and Sunfish Lake Park will continue to be surrounded by agricultural lands and will not be impacted by encroaching urbanization. Future Land Use Boundaries The curved lines separating future land uses on Map 3-3 midway between I-94 and 10th Street indicate one possible alignment of a future east/west collector roadway envisioned to serve the new development in this area of the City. Future development proposals and their associated engineering studies will ultimately determine the exact alignment of this collector roadway. The final boundary between the proposed different land uses shall ultimately be set by the final location of the east/west collector roadway, whether or not this roadway deviates from the approximate location shown. Buffering/Land Use Transitions The City’s Land Use Plan calls for a diverse range of development types, from very low density agricultural and rural residential uses to high density urban residential and commercial development. In order to provide for a transition between the existing and planned rural development and future urban development, the Land Use Plan creates a lower density urban residential district. This low density urban district is planned for areas near existing rural development areas, and will provide for an area of transition between higher density residential development and either existing or planned rural development areas. Certain areas designated as Public/Park on the Future Land Use Map (Map 3-3) have been established to provide a green belt/buffer between areas developed under a previous Comprehensive Plan at rural development densities and areas planned for residential development at higher densities. This green belt will be incorporated as part of any development plans for new development with a minimum width of 100 feet. The green belt may be incorporated as part of the greenway envisioned in the Lake Elmo Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan (Chapter IX). And finally, it is recognized that land north of 10th Street, east of Lake Elmo Avenue, and south of the Old Village is uniquely situated between the City’s two main urban centers. This area has been identified as the Village Transition Area (see Map 3-3) in recognition of the area’s varied residential lot sizes (ranging from 0.31 acres to 57.22 acres), and the fact that all properties in this area have (or will likely have) Commented [BGA1]: This first paragraph identifies why the City is establishing a Village Transition District: it’s an area uniquely situated between the City’s two urbanizing areas that will, over time, have affordable and easy access to sewer. Accordingly, it is in the City’s best interest to acknowledge that hook up requests will be made, and to establish the criteria under which such extensions may be granted. Lake Elmo Comprehensive Plan Chapter III – Land Use Plan III – 14 direct access to municipal sewer services over time. Within the Village Transition Area, the City may treat a parcel (or grouping of parcels) as being guided for Village Urban Low Density if at least one of the following criteria are satisfied and no further development of the property is proposed: 1. The land in question is subject to a failing septic system, and extension of the sanitary sewer system is deemed necessary to protect the health, safety, or welfare of adjacent properties. 2. The parcel (or parcels) in question have petitioned the City requesting an extension of municipal services, and the extension project has been approved by the City Council. Additionally within the Village Transition Area, the City may treat a parcel (or group of contiguous parcels) as being guided for Village Urban Low Density for the purpose of development if ALL of the following criteria are satisfied: 1. A minimum of forty (40) contiguous acres is considered for development at one time or is planned for phased development; 2. A minimum of one-half of the gross acres proposed for residential development is within a Shoreland District; 3. All Shoreland district requirements for development can be successfully met without variances; 4. Development is completed as a Planned Unit Development that conforms with the allowable density range established for the Village Urban Low Density land use classification; 5. The development incurs all costs for the extension of municipal services, the cost for oversizing as may be needed for further extensions into the Village Transition Area, and/or for upgrades to the existing municipal system as may be needed to service the proposed development. Open Space Preservation The City will encourage the preservation of open space within new developments through the dedication of public parkland and the clustering of lots within urban residential districts. The specific zoning development standards for the City’s urban residential districts will allow the platting of smaller lots that will allow open space to be set aside in each development while still achieving the overall minimum density guidance for each land use area. Staging Plan/Memorandum of Understanding The City of Lake Elmo entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Metropolitan Council prior to the preparation of its 2005 Land Use Plan and this MOU remains in effect to ensure the City’s conformance to metropolitan system statements as required by state law. This MOU has since been revised; however, to take into account a severe downturn in the housing market and to grant the City of Lake Elmo additional flexibility in meeting the population, household, and employment targets from the original MOU. Table 3-C summarizes the updated development staging plan that will be used to measure conformance to the MOU. This table is broken down into five year increments starting in 2010 and continuing forward to the end of the planning period in 2030. Commented [BGA2]: This first component of the district recognizes that parcels (or neighborhoods) over time may be near existing sewer, and may request the ability to hook up to the municipal system. In such an event, the landowners would follow the City’s standard process to petition for (and pay for) improvements, and if approved, the City could complete the public improvements without having to amend the comprehensive plan to change the underlying land use guidance. The two criteria before sewer could be extended are the need to address health/safety/welfare concerns, OR addressing a legal petition brought forward by an individual land owner or neighborhood. Both of these scenarios WILL arise in the coming years as landowners and neighborhoods weigh the cost of replacing aging septic systems against the cost of municipal services. This language will ensure the City can consider their requests. Commented [BGA3]: The second component of the proposed language acknowledges that some land within the Transition Area is developable, and that sewered development is in the City’s best interest when certain criteria exists: -- Given the City’s history with communal septic systems, larger developments (i.e. in excess of 40 acres) should be considered for sewer if/when available; -- Protecting the City’s shorelands is a major priority of the City, so a minimum of one-half of the gross area proposed for residential development must be within the Shoreland district, and all Shoreland provisions must be met; -- Development could only occur via a PUD within the allowed density range established for the Village Urban Low Density land use category; -- All costs for extending municipal services would be born by the developer Suggested Royal Golf CPA Findings – submitted by Todd Williams, Planning Commissioner Findings for comp plan amendment to accommodate Royal Golf Club 1. The applicant has requested a change in the Lake Elmo Comp Plan to allow expansion of the MUSA north of 10th St to include his property between 10th St and 20th St, so that it may be developed into residential development served by Metro sewer and City water, along with a golf course. 2. Lake Elmo has approved for this property a concept of golf course surrounded by residential development, but at some unspecified lower density than was proposed by the applicant in the Concept Plan 3. The subject property is currently guided for Public/Park, which includes outdoor recreational uses, such as a golf course. Any residential development on this property will require a Comp Plan amendment. 4. All investments made to date by the applicant to purchase and modify the property are solely at the applicant’s risk. The city of Lake Elmo is under no obligation to assure any return to the applicant from these investments. 5. Lake Elmo city was required in 2005 to amend its Comp Plan to include installation of Metro public sewer to comply with the Metro Council mandates for total sewered units, total population, and total employment. These MUSA areas were limited to south of 10th St and to the Old Village. 6. The current Comp Plan guides sufficient MUSA without any expansion required to comply with the earlier mandates and current “targets” as provided by the Metro Council in 2016 for sewered units, population and employment. 7. Lake Elmo has a long-standing and continuing vision of unsewered, large lot, rural residential development outside the existing MUSA. From page III-1 of the Land Use Plan of 2013, “Lake Elmo’s land use plan is guided by its core vision of creating and maintaining a rural community within the Metropolitan region.” 8. Residential development of the applicant’s property utilizing Metro sewer would include small lots and high densities inconsistent with Lake Elmo’s vision of rural development outside the existing MUSA. From page III-7 of the Land Use Plan of 2013, “The remainder of the community north of 10th Street and surrounding the Old Village will continue Lake Elmo’s long tradition of providing rural living opportunities within the Metropolitan area.” 9. The surrounding communities of Afton, West Lakeland, Baytown and Grant allow residential development with large lots and on-site sewage disposal. There appears to be a continuing market for such development. 10. The applicant’s property borders on large lot residential development without public sewer in Lake Elmo and West Lakeland, including 1.5 acre lot, Rural Single Family and OP development in Lake Elmo. 11. Residential development at 18/40 units/acre with on-site sewage disposal is a legitimate use of the applicant’s property. Such development can be done under the OP (Open Space Preservation) section of the Lake Elmo zoning code. Some increase in density might be allowed per the inclusion of amenities, as listed in 154.754 of the City Zoning Code. 12. The primary reason provided in support of the Comp Plan amendment with MUSA extension (according to the applicant) is to enable the golf course by allowing dense, sewered residential development around the course. The golf course by itself does not require a comp plan amendment or sewer. Suggested Royal Golf CPA Findings – submitted by Todd Williams, Planning Commissioner 13. The applicant has claimed that dense residential development with Metro sewer connection is required in order for the golf course to be financially feasible. No evidence, other than the applicant’s words, has been presented to support this claim. 14. Stoneridge Golf Course in West Lakeland, Logger’s Trail in Grant and Stillwater Oaks in Grant, cited as nearby examples, are public courses surrounded by homes on 2.5 acre and larger lots with on-site septic systems. They seem to be successful businesses without sewered development around them. Mr. Cavner has stated, “Golf courses, if run properly, do very, very well.” 15. A large fraction of the proposed development is within the legislative “shoreland overlay district” and the entire development is subject to shoreland regulations from the state and from the City of Lake Elmo. 16. MN Rules 6120 regulates shoreland district development at the state level. 17. Section 154.800, Lake Elmo Shoreland Ordinance and MN Rules 6120 (6120.3800.subp 5.B.2A) require at least 50% of the entire area to be preserved as open space for a residential PUD in the shoreland district. 18. The golf course is an acceptable use of the 50% open space required under MN Rules 6120 and satisfies Lake Elmo’s OP and PUD zoning ordinances if the open space is preserved in a conservation easement per OP and MN Rules regulations. However, according to Dan Petrik, land use specialist with the DNR, the club house, parking lot and required setbacks (as if it were on a separate lot) are considered “commercial” uses and not permitted within the required open space. According to Petrik, the City has no choice in this. 19. MN Rules 6120-3800, Subp 5.B.3.a states: “Residential planned unit developments must be connected to publicly owned water supply and sewer systems, if available.” According to Dan Petrik, land use specialist with the DNR, the local governmental unit determines if the publicly owned systems are “available. 20. The same MN Rules section also states: “On-site water supply and sewage treatment systems must be centralized and designed and installed to meet or exceed applicable standards or rules of the Minnesota Department of Health and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.” According to Dan Petrik, land use specialist with the DNR, a City-owned, multi-unit, shared septic system in OP development and in the shoreland district is an acceptable “publicly owned sewer system.” Also, such an on-site disposal system is an acceptable use of the required open space. 21. Aaron Jensen of MN PCA says that if a system is properly designed, installed, managed and maintained, there is no known limit to the lifetime of individual residential septic systems or of multi-unit shared residential septic systems. 22. The City of Lake Elmo has experience with owning facilities (e.g., landscaped medians) but having an HOA maintain them. Such an arrangement could be used for the multi-unit on-site sewage disposal facilities in this development. 23. The City has experience owning, managing and maintaining multi-unit on-site sewage disposal facilities, such as the “201” system for Legion Ave and others. Such an arrangement could be used for the multi-unit on-site sewage disposal facilities in this development. 24. While a golf course in this location might be a nice amenity, its existence is not sufficient reason to violate Lake Elmo’s vision of large lot, rural residential development outside the existing MUSA boundaries. There are 18 public golf courses and at least 4 private courses within just 10 straight line miles of City Hall. See the attached map. There is no “need” for another course. 25. The applicant’s property may be developed into a golf course and residential development consistent with the City’s OP standards and density (18/40 units per acre plus possible bonuses Suggested Royal Golf CPA Findings – submitted by Todd Williams, Planning Commissioner for amenities) utilizing City-owned, multi-unit on-site sewage disposal. No evidence has been presented which says that such development is not possible under existing regulations. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4C PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 10/10/2016 AGENDA ITEM: 4C PUBLIC HEARING CASE # 2016-42 ITEM: Zoning Text Amendment: Non-conforming use ordinance SUBMITTED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director REVIEWED BY: Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney Emily Becker, City Planner SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission is being asked to consider an amendment to City Code Section 154.150- 154.151 as it pertains to nonconforming uses, buildings and structures. REVIEW: The City Attorney’s review of land use issues related to a nonconforming lot resulted in a determination that the City Code Section 154.150-154.151 as it pertains to nonconformities was not compliant with changes in state statute (Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.357, Subd. 1e). The City Attorney prepared an amendment addressing the changes. In the City Attorney’s review, the nonconforming section of the City’s Shoreland Ordinance, 154.800, and the existing buildable lot provisions, Section 154.080, were also reviewed and were found to be acceptable as written. FINDINGS: Staff is recommending approval of the zoning text amendment with the following finding: The amendment has been reviewed by the City Attorney and is in conformance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.357, Subd. 1e as it pertains to nonconformities. RECOMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the zoning text amendment amending City Code Section 154.150-154.151 as it pertains to nonconforming uses, buildings and structures with the following motion: “Move to recommend approval of ordinance __-__amending the lake Elmo Code of Ordinances regarding non-conforming uses, buildings and structures.” 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4C ATTACHMENTS: MN State Statute Section 462.357 Ordinance __-__ amending the lake Elmo Code of Ordinances regarding non-conforming uses, buildings and structures. ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction ........................................................................................ Planning Staff - Report by Staff ................................................................................... Planning Staff - Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members - Open the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair Close the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair - Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members 1 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 462.357 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 462.357 OFFICIAL CONTROLS: ZONING ORDINANCE. Subdivision 1. Authority for zoning. For the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare, a municipality may by ordinance regulate on the earth's surface, in the air space above the surface, and in subsurface areas, the location, height, width, bulk, type of foundation, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and other open spaces, the density and distribution of population, the uses of buildings and structures for trade, industry, residence, recreation, public activities, or other purposes, and the uses of land for trade, industry, residence, recreation, agriculture, forestry, soil conservation, water supply conservation, conservation of shorelands, as defined in sections 103F.201 to 103F.221, access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems as defined in section 216C.06, flood control or other purposes, and may establish standards and procedures regulating such uses. To accomplish these purposes, official controls may include provision for purchase of development rights by the governing body in the form of conservation easements under chapter 84C in areas where the governing body considers preservation desirable and the transfer of development rights from those areas to areas the governing body considers more appropriate for development. No regulation may prohibit earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 14, relocated residential buildings, or manufactured homes built in conformance with sections 327.31 to 327.35 that comply with all other zoning ordinances promulgated pursuant to this section. The regulations may divide the surface, above surface, and subsurface areas of the municipality into districts or zones of suitable numbers, shape, and area. The regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of buildings, structures, or land and for each class or kind of use throughout such district, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other districts. The ordinance embodying these regulations shall be known as the zoning ordinance and shall consist of text and maps. A city may by ordinance extend the application of its zoning regulations to unincorporated territory located within two miles of its limits in any direction, but not in a county or town which has adopted zoning regulations; provided that where two or more noncontiguous municipalities have boundaries less than four miles apart, each is authorized to control the zoning of land on its side of a line equidistant between the two noncontiguous municipalities unless a town or county in the affected area has adopted zoning regulations. Any city may thereafter enforce such regulations in the area to the same extent as if such property were situated within its corporate limits, until the county or town board adopts a comprehensive zoning regulation which includes the area. Subd. 1a. Certain zoning ordinances. A municipality must not enact, amend, or enforce a zoning ordinance that has the effect of altering the existing density, lot-size requirements, or manufactured home setback requirements in any manufactured home park constructed before January 1, 1995, if the manu- factured home park, when constructed, complied with the then existing density, lot-size and setback re- quirements. Subd. 1b. Conditional uses. A manufactured home park, as defined in section 327.14, subdivision 3, is a conditional use in a zoning district that allows the construction or placement of a building used or intended to be used by two or more families. Subd. 1c. Amortization prohibited. Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, a municipality must not enact, amend, or enforce an ordinance providing for the elimination or termination of a use by amortization which use was lawful at the time of its inception. This subdivision does not apply to adults- only bookstores, adults-only theaters, or similar adults-only businesses, as defined by ordinance. Subd. 1d. Nuisance. Subdivision 1c does not prohibit a municipality from enforcing an ordinance providing for the prevention or abatement of nuisances, as defined in section 561.01, or eliminating a use 462.357 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 2 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. determined to be a public nuisance, as defined in section 617.81, subdivision 2, paragraph (a), clauses (i) to (ix), without payment of compensation. Subd. 1e. Nonconformities. (a) Except as otherwise provided by law, 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 estimated market value, as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage, and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the property is damaged. In this case, a municipality may impose reasonable conditions upon a zoning or building permit in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent property or water body. When a nonconforming structure in the shoreland district with less than 50 percent of the required setback from the water is destroyed by fire or other peril to greater than 50 percent of its estimated market value, as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage, the structure setback may be increased if practicable and reasonable conditions are placed upon a zoning or building permit to mitigate created impacts on the adjacent property or water body. (b) Any subsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises shall be a conforming use or occupancy. A municipality may, by ordinance, permit an expansion or impose upon nonconformities reasonable reg- ulations to prevent and abate nuisances and to protect the public health, welfare, or safety. This subdivision does not prohibit a municipality 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), a municipality 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. (d) Paragraphs (d) to (j) apply to shoreland lots of record in the office of the county recorder on the date of adoption of local shoreland controls that do not meet the requirements for lot size or lot width. A municipality shall regulate the use of nonconforming lots of record and the repair, replacement, maintenance, improvement, or expansion of nonconforming uses and structures in shoreland areas according to paragraphs (d) to (j). (e) A nonconforming single lot of record located within a shoreland area may be allowed as a building site without variances from lot size requirements, provided that: (1) all structure and septic system setback distance requirements can be met; (2) a Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer; and (3) the impervious surface coverage does not exceed 25 percent of the lot. (f) In a group of two or more contiguous lots of record under a common ownership, an individual lot must be considered as a separate parcel of land for the purpose of sale or development, if it meets the following requirements: 3 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 462.357 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. (1) the lot must be at least 66 percent of the dimensional standard for lot width and lot size for the shoreland classification consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6120; (2) the lot must be connected to a public sewer, if available, or must be suitable for the installation of a Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, and local government controls; (3) impervious surface coverage must not exceed 25 percent of each lot; and (4) development of the lot must be consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan. (g) A lot subject to paragraph (f) not meeting the requirements of paragraph (f) must be combined with the one or more contiguous lots so they equal one or more conforming lots as much as possible. (h) Notwithstanding paragraph (f), contiguous nonconforming lots of record in shoreland areas under a common ownership must be able to be sold or purchased individually if each lot contained a habitable residential dwelling at the time the lots came under common ownership and the lots are suitable for, or served by, a sewage treatment system consistent with the requirements of section 115.55 and Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, or connected to a public sewer. (i) In evaluating all variances, zoning and building permit applications, or conditional use requests, the zoning authority shall require the property owner to address, when appropriate, storm water runoff management, reducing impervious surfaces, increasing setback, restoration of wetlands, vegetative buffers, sewage treatment and water supply capabilities, and other conservation-designed actions. (j) A portion of a conforming lot may be separated from an existing parcel as long as the remainder of the existing parcel meets the lot size and sewage treatment requirements of the zoning district for a new lot and the newly created parcel is combined with an adjacent parcel. Subd. 1f. Substandard structures. Notwithstanding subdivision 1e, Minnesota Rules, parts 6105.0351 to 6105.0550, may allow for the continuation and improvement of substandard structures, as defined in Minnesota Rules, part 6105.0354, subpart 30, in the Lower Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway. Subd. 1g. Feedlot zoning controls. (a) A municipality proposing to adopt a new feedlot zoning control or to amend an existing feedlot zoning control must notify the Pollution Control Agency and commissioner of agriculture at the beginning of the process, no later than the date notice is given of the first hearing proposing to adopt or amend a zoning control purporting to address feedlots. (b) Prior to final approval of a feedlot zoning control, the governing body of a municipality may submit a copy of the proposed zoning control to the Pollution Control Agency and to the commissioner of agriculture and request review, comment, and recommendations on the environmental and agricultural effects from specific provisions in the ordinance. (c) The agencies' response to the municipality may include: (1) any recommendations for improvements in the ordinance; and (2) the legal, social, economic, or scientific justification for each recommendation under clause (1). (d) At the request of the municipality's governing body, the municipality must prepare a report on the economic effects from specific provisions in the ordinance. Economic analysis must state whether the ordinance will affect the local economy and describe the kinds of businesses affected and the projected impact the proposal will have on those businesses. To assist the municipality, the commissioner of 462.357 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 4 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. agriculture, in cooperation with the Department of Employment and Economic Development, must develop a template for measuring local economic effects and make it available to the municipality. The report must be submitted to the commissioners of employment and economic development and agriculture along with the proposed ordinance. (e) A local ordinance that contains a setback for new feedlots from existing residences must also provide for a new residence setback from existing feedlots located in areas zoned agricultural at the same distances and conditions specified in the setback for new feedlots, unless the new residence is built to replace an existing residence. A municipality may grant a variance from this requirement under section 462.358, sub- division 6. Subd. 1h. Comprehensive plans in greater Minnesota; open spaces. When adopting or updating a comprehensive plan in a municipality located within a county that is not a greater than 80 percent area, as defined in section 103G.005, subdivision 10b, and that is located outside the metropolitan area, as defined by section 473.121, subdivision 2, the municipality shall consider adopting goals and objectives for the preservation of agricultural, forest, wildlife, and open space land and the minimization of development in sensitive shoreland areas. Within three years of updating the comprehensive plan, the municipality shall consider adopting ordinances as part of the municipality's official controls that encourage the imple- mentation of the goals and objectives. Subd. 2. General requirements. (a) At any time after the adoption of a land use plan for the mu- nicipality, the planning agency, for the purpose of carrying out the policies and goals of the land use plan, may prepare a proposed zoning ordinance and submit it to the governing body with its recommendations for adoption. (b) Subject to the requirements of subdivisions 3, 4, and 5, the governing body may adopt and amend a zoning ordinance by a majority vote of all its members. The adoption or amendment of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all or part of the existing classification of a zoning district from residential to either commercial or industrial requires a two-thirds majority vote of all members of the governing body. (c) The land use plan must provide guidelines for the timing and sequence of the adoption of official controls to ensure planned, orderly, and staged development and redevelopment consistent with the land use plan. Subd. 3. Public hearings. No zoning ordinance or amendment thereto shall be adopted until a public hearing has been held thereon by the planning agency or by the governing body. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing shall be published in the official newspaper of the municipality at least ten days prior to the day of the hearing. When an amendment involves changes in district boundaries affecting an area of five acres or less, a similar notice shall be mailed at least ten days before the day of the hearing to each owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the property to which the amendment relates. For the purpose of giving mailed notice, the person responsible for mailing the notice may use any appropriate records to determine the names and addresses of owners. A copy of the notice and a list of the owners and addresses to which the notice was sent shall be attested to by the responsible person and shall be made a part of the records of the proceedings. The failure to give mailed notice to individual property owners, or defects in the notice shall not invalidate the proceedings, provided a bona fide attempt to comply with this subdivision has been made. Subd. 4. Amendments. An amendment to a zoning ordinance may be initiated by the governing body, the planning agency, or by petition of affected property owners as defined in the zoning ordinance. An amendment not initiated by the planning agency shall be referred to the planning agency, if there is one, for 5 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 462.357 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. study and report and may not be acted upon by the governing body until it has received the recommendation of the planning agency on the proposed amendment or until 60 days have elapsed from the date of reference of the amendment without a report by the planning agency. Subd. 5. Amendment; certain cities of the first class. The provisions of this subdivision apply to the adoption or amendment of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all or part of the existing classification of a zoning district from residential to either commercial or industrial of a property located in a city of the first class, except a city of the first class in which a different process is provided through the operation of the city's home rule charter. In a city to which this subdivision applies, amendments to a zoning ordinance shall be made in conformance with this section but only after there shall have been filed in the office of the city clerk a written consent of the owners of two-thirds of the several descriptions of real estate situate within 100 feet of the total contiguous descriptions of real estate held by the same owner or any party purchasing any such contiguous property within one year preceding the request, and after the affirmative vote in favor thereof by a majority of the members of the governing body of any such city. The governing body of such city may, by a two-thirds vote of its members, after hearing, adopt a new zoning ordinance without such written consent whenever the planning commission or planning board of such city shall have made a survey of the whole area of the city or of an area of not less than 40 acres, within which the new ordinance or the amendments or alterations of the existing ordinance would take effect when adopted, and shall have considered whether the number of descriptions of real estate affected by such changes and alterations renders the obtaining of such written consent impractical, and such planning commission or planning board shall report in writing as to whether in its opinion the proposals of the governing body in any case are reasonably related to the overall needs of the community, to existing land use, or to a plan for future land use, and shall have conducted a public hearing on such proposed ordinance, changes or alterations, of which hearing published notice shall have been given in a daily newspaper of general circulation at least once each week for three successive weeks prior to such hearing, which notice shall state the time, place and purpose of such hearing, and shall have reported to the governing body of the city its findings and recommendations in writing. Subd. 6. Appeals and adjustments. Appeals to the board of appeals and adjustments may be taken by any affected person upon compliance with any reasonable conditions imposed by the zoning ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments has the following powers with respect to the zoning ordinance: (1) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an administrative officer in the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. (2) To hear requests for variances from the requirements of the zoning ordinance including restrictions placed on nonconformities. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning 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 zoning ordinance; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 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. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under the zoning ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or governing body as the case may be, may permit as a variance 462.357 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 6 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The board or governing body as the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. Subd. 6a. Normal residential surroundings for persons with disabilities. It is the policy of this state that persons with disabilities should not be excluded by municipal zoning ordinances or other land use regulations from the benefits of normal residential surroundings. For purposes of subdivisions 6a through 9, "person" has the meaning given in section 245A.02, subdivision 11. Subd. 7. Permitted single family use. A state licensed residential facility or a housing with services establishment registered under chapter 144D serving six or fewer persons, a licensed day care facility serving 12 or fewer persons, and a group family day care facility licensed under Minnesota Rules, parts 9502.0315 to 9502.0445 to serve 14 or fewer children shall be considered a permitted single family residential use of property for the purposes of zoning, except that a residential facility whose primary purpose is to treat juveniles who have violated criminal statutes relating to sex offenses or have been adjudicated delinquent on the basis of conduct in violation of criminal statutes relating to sex offenses shall not be considered a permitted use. Subd. 8. Permitted multifamily use. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 7 or in any town, municipal or county zoning regulation as authorized by this subdivision, a state licensed residential facility serving from 7 through 16 persons or a licensed day care facility serving from 13 through 16 persons shall be considered a permitted multifamily residential use of property for purposes of zoning. A township, municipal or county zoning authority may require a conditional use or special use permit in order to assure proper maintenance and operation of a facility, provided that no conditions shall be imposed on the facility which are more restrictive than those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the same zones, unless the additional conditions are necessary to protect the health and safety of the residents of the residential facility. Nothing herein shall be construed to exclude or prohibit residential or day care facilities from single family zones if otherwise permitted by a local zoning regulation. Subd. 9. Development goals and objectives. In adopting official controls after July 1, 2008, in a mu- nicipality outside the metropolitan area, as defined by section 473.121, subdivision 2, the municipality shall consider restricting new residential, commercial, and industrial development so that the new development takes place in areas subject to the following goals and objectives: (1) minimizing the fragmentation and development of agricultural, forest, wildlife, and open space lands, including consideration of appropriate minimum lot sizes; (2) minimizing further development in sensitive shoreland areas; (3) minimizing development near wildlife management areas, scientific and natural areas, and nature centers; (4) identification of areas of preference for higher density, including consideration of existing and necessary water and wastewater services, infrastructure, other services, and to the extent feasible, en- couraging full development of areas previously zoned for nonagricultural uses; (5) encouraging development close to places of employment, shopping centers, schools, mass transit, and other public and private service centers; (6) identification of areas where other developments are appropriate; and 7 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 462.357 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. (7) other goals and objectives a municipality may identify. History: 1965 c 670 s 7; 1969 c 259 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 379 s 4; 1973 c 539 s 1; 1973 c 559 s 1,2; 1975 c 60 s 2; 1978 c 786 s 14,15; Ex1979 c 2 s 42,43; 1981 c 356 s 248; 1982 c 490 s 2; 1982 c 507 s 22; 1984 c 617 s 6-8; 1985 c 62 s 3; 1985 c 194 s 23; 1986 c 444; 1987 c 333 s 22; 1989 c 82 s 2; 1990 c 391 art 8 s 47; 1990 c 568 art 2 s 66,67; 1994 c 473 s 3; 1995 c 224 s 95; 1997 c 113 s 20; 1997 c 200 art 4 s 5; 1997 c 202 art 4 s 11; 1997 c 216 s 138; 1999 c 96 s 3,4; 1999 c 211 s 1; 2001 c 174 s 1; 2001 c 207 s 13,14; 2002 c 366 s 6; 2004 c 258 s 2; 2005 c 56 s 1; 1Sp2005 c 1 art 1 s 92; art 2 s 146; 2007 c 140 art 12 s 14; 2008 c 297 art 1 s 60,61; 2009 c 149 s 3; 2011 c 19 s 2 1 484315v1 AMB LA515-4 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING NON-CONFORMING USES, BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Section 154.150 of the City Code by deleting the stricken language and inserting the double-underlined language as follows: ARTICLE IV. NON-CONFORMING USES, BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES § 154.150 APPLICATION. A. Application, Generally. Except as provided in this chapter, no building or structure shall be erected, moved, altered, or extended and no land, building, or structure or part of the building, shall be occupied or used unless in conformity with regulations specified in this chapter for the district in which it is located. B. Application to Existing Structures. This chapter shall not apply to existing buildings and structures, nor to the existing use of any structure, or land to the extent of the use on the effective date of this chapter. This chapter shall apply to any change in use, to any intensification of the non-conforming use, to any movement of a building or structure, or to any expansion of a structure which may result in the generation of additional sewage for on-site disposal. C. Use Defined. For the purpose of this chapter, the word USE shall mean: 1. Any purpose for which a building or other structure or a tract of land may be designed, arranged, intended, maintained, or occupied; or 2. Any activity, occupation, business, or operation carried on, or intended to be carried on, in a building or other structure, or on a tract of land. SECTION 2. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Section 154.151 of the City Code by deleting the stricken language and inserting the double-underlined language as follows: § 154.151 NON-CONFORMING USES, BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES. A. Definitions. For the purpose of this subchapter, the following definitions shall apply unless the context clearly indicates or requires a different meaning. 1. NON-CONFORMING USE. Any lawful use of land or any lawful use of a building or structure existing on the effective date of this chapter, or any amendment to this 2 484315v1 AMB LA515-4 chapter which use does not conform with the regulations for the district in which it is located after the effective date of this chapter or the amendment. 2. SUBSTANDARD NON-CONFORMING BUILDING or SUBSTANDARD NON- CONFORMING STRUCTURE. Any building or structure lawfully existing on the effective date of this chapter or any intendment amendment to this chapter, which building or structure does not conform with the regulations, including dimensional standards, for the district in which it is located after the effective date of this chapter or the amendment. B. Preservation of Non-Conforming Uses. Except as provided in this chapter, the lawful use of land or the lawful use of a building or structure existing on the effective date of this chapter or on the effective date of any amendment to this chapter may be continued through repair, replacement, restoration, maintenance, or improvement although the use does not conform to the provisions of this chapter, except as otherwise provided in this section. The continuation of the non-conforming use does not include expansion, except as otherwise permitted by this section. C. Preservation of Dimensionally Substandard Buildings or Structures. Except as provided in this chapter, buildings or structures lawfully existing on the effective date of this chapter or on the effective date of any amendment to this chapter may be maintained although the building or structure does not conform to the dimensional standards of this chapter. However, any such building or structure shall not be altered or improved beyond normal maintenance, except that any lawful dimensional substandard residential building, accessory building, or structure may be altered or improved if the existing substandard dimension relates only to setback requirements and does not exceed the 10% of the minimum setback requirements. Additionally, the alteration or improvement shall conform to all of the provisions of this chapter and shall not increase the existing substandard dimensions. D. Unlawful Uses, Buildings, and Structures. No unlawful use of property existing on the effective date of this chapter or any amendment to this chapter, nor any building or structure which is unlawfully existing on the effective date shall be deemed a non-conforming use or a non-conforming building or structure. E. Permit Holders and Permit Applicants. Any non-conforming structure that is ready for or under construction on the effective date of this chapter or any amendment to this chapter may be completed and occupied in accordance with the requirements of any valid building permit issued for the construction prior to the effective date. F. Change from One Non-Conforming Use to Another. A non-conforming use may be changed only to a use permitted in the district in which it is located; except that if no structural alterations are made, a non-conforming use of a building may be changed to another non-conforming use of the same or a more restrictive classification, and provided the change is approved by the Board of Adjustment and Appeals as provided in this chapter. 3 484315v1 AMB LA515-4 Once changed to a conforming use, no building or land shall be permitted to revert to a non-conforming use. G. Change of Use with Approval of the Board of Adjustment. A non-conforming use all or partially conducted in a building or buildings, may be changed to another non-conforming use only upon determination by the Board of Adjustment, after a public hearing, that the proposed new use will be no more detrimental to its neighborhood and surroundings than is the use it is to replace. In determining relative detriment, the Board of Adjustment shall take into consideration, among other things: traffic generated; nuisance characteristics, such as emission of noise, dust, and smoke; fire hazards; and hours and manner of operation. H. Restoration of Non-Conforming Building or Structure. A non-conforming building or use, building or structure which is damaged or destroyed by fire, flood, wind, earthquake, or other calamity peril to the extent of greater than 50 percent of its estimated market value, as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage, and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the property is damaged may be restored and the occupancy or use of the building, structure, or part of the structures which existed at the time of the partial destruction, may be continued or resumed, provided that the restoration is started within a period of 1 year and is diligently prosecuted to completion, unless the damage to the building or structure is equal to 50% or more of the replacement cost of the structure (as determined by the Building Official), in which case, the reconstruction shall conform to the provisions of this chapter. In this case, the city may impose reasonable conditions upon a building permit in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent property or water body. When a non-conforming structure in the shoreland district with less than 50 percent of the required setback from the water is destroyed by fire or other peril to greater than 50 percent of its its estimated market value, as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage, the structure setback may be increased if practicable and reasonable conditions are placed upon a building permit to mitigate created impacts on the adjacent property or water body. I. Abandonment of Use. When any non-conforming use of land or of a building or structure is abandoned discontinued for a period in excess of 1 year, the land, building, or structure shall, subsequently be used only as provided by this chapter not be allowed to continue as a non-conforming use and any subsequent use or occupancy of the land, building or structure shall be a conforming use or occupancy. SECTION 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 4. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-___ was adopted on this ______ day of ___ 2016, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL 4 484315v1 AMB LA515-4 ___________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance ____ was published on the ____ day of ___________________, 2016. PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4D PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: 10/10/16 AGENDA ITEM: 4D PUBLIC HEARING CASE # 2016-43 ITEM: Zoning Text Amendment – Variance Ordinance Amendment SUBMITTED BY: Stephen Wensman, Planning Director REVIEWED BY: Emily Becker, City Planner Kristina Handt, City Administrator Sarah Sonsalla, City Attorney SUMMARY AND ACTION REQUESTED: City Staff is requesting the Planning Commission consider a zoning text amendment to the City of Lake Elmo Code of Ordinances, Section 154.109 as it pertains to expirations of variances. Staff is recommending that Planning Commission recommend approval of the zoning text amendment. REVIEW: A review of a recent variance extension request by the City Attorney has resulted in a suggestion to amend the expiration section of the variance ordinance, Section 154.109, Subd. I. The requested changes are two-fold. First, the City Attorney believes the expiration of a variance for if a use ceases for more than six (6) consecutive months is of questionable legality because variances run with the land and therefore, should not be taken away for nonuse. The City Attorney recommends this clause be stricken from the ordinance. Second, Staff is recommending administrative extensions of variances for variances not initiated within twelve (12) months of an approval as long as the petition for extension is made in writing, the requested extension is for a year or less and that it is received at least 30 days prior to expiration, and that the applicant can demonstrate a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the variance. The suggested ordinance would allow Planning Director review and approval such requests and that appeals would follows existing code provisions identified in §154.108. Any petitions for an extension greater than one year would require the applicant to present the petition to the Planning Commission for recommendation to the City Council. The purpose of this second recommended amendment is to eliminate the need for an applicant to reapply for a variance with its associated application costs (application fee, certified address labels) and staff time preparing reports and holding public hearings as currently required, when requested extension are for a limited time, one year or less, or presented to the Planning Commission with recommendation to the City Council if for a period greater than a year without the need for a public hearing. 2 PUBLIC HEARING ITEM 4D FINDINGS: Staff is recommending approval of the zoning text amendment with the following suggested findings: The amendment has been reviewed by the City Attorney and is in conformance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.357, Subd. 6 as it pertains to variances. The administrative extension of variances of a year or less is appropriate if the applicant can demonstrate a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the variance is consistent with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. RECOMENDATION: Staff is recommending the Planning Commission recommend approval of the zoning text amendment amending City of Lake Elmo Code of Ordnances, Section 154.109 as it pertains to expirations of variances with the following motion: “Move to recommend the City Council approval Ordinance 08-__ amending City of Lake Elmo Code of Ordinances, Section 154.109 as it pertains to expirations of variances” ATTACHMENTS: Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.357 Comparison of other City’s Variance Ordinances Ordinance 08-__ amending City of Lake Elmo Code of Ordinances, Section 154.109 as it pertains to expirations of variances ORDER OF BUSINESS: - Introduction ........................................................................................ Planning Staff - Report by Staff ................................................................................... Planning Staff - Questions from the Commission ............................ Chair & Commission Members - Open the Public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair - Close the public Hearing .................................................................................. Chair - Discussion by the Commission .............................. Chair & Commission Members 1 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 462.357 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. 462.357 OFFICIAL CONTROLS: ZONING ORDINANCE. Subdivision 1. Authority for zoning. For the purpose of promoting the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare, a municipality may by ordinance regulate on the earth's surface, in the air space above the surface, and in subsurface areas, the location, height, width, bulk, type of foundation, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and other open spaces, the density and distribution of population, the uses of buildings and structures for trade, industry, residence, recreation, public activities, or other purposes, and the uses of land for trade, industry, residence, recreation, agriculture, forestry, soil conservation, water supply conservation, conservation of shorelands, as defined in sections 103F.201 to 103F.221, access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems as defined in section 216C.06, flood control or other purposes, and may establish standards and procedures regulating such uses. To accomplish these purposes, official controls may include provision for purchase of development rights by the governing body in the form of conservation easements under chapter 84C in areas where the governing body considers preservation desirable and the transfer of development rights from those areas to areas the governing body considers more appropriate for development. No regulation may prohibit earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 14, relocated residential buildings, or manufactured homes built in conformance with sections 327.31 to 327.35 that comply with all other zoning ordinances promulgated pursuant to this section. The regulations may divide the surface, above surface, and subsurface areas of the municipality into districts or zones of suitable numbers, shape, and area. The regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of buildings, structures, or land and for each class or kind of use throughout such district, but the regulations in one district may differ from those in other districts. The ordinance embodying these regulations shall be known as the zoning ordinance and shall consist of text and maps. A city may by ordinance extend the application of its zoning regulations to unincorporated territory located within two miles of its limits in any direction, but not in a county or town which has adopted zoning regulations; provided that where two or more noncontiguous municipalities have boundaries less than four miles apart, each is authorized to control the zoning of land on its side of a line equidistant between the two noncontiguous municipalities unless a town or county in the affected area has adopted zoning regulations. Any city may thereafter enforce such regulations in the area to the same extent as if such property were situated within its corporate limits, until the county or town board adopts a comprehensive zoning regulation which includes the area. Subd. 1a. Certain zoning ordinances. A municipality must not enact, amend, or enforce a zoning ordinance that has the effect of altering the existing density, lot-size requirements, or manufactured home setback requirements in any manufactured home park constructed before January 1, 1995, if the manu- factured home park, when constructed, complied with the then existing density, lot-size and setback re- quirements. Subd. 1b. Conditional uses. A manufactured home park, as defined in section 327.14, subdivision 3, is a conditional use in a zoning district that allows the construction or placement of a building used or intended to be used by two or more families. Subd. 1c. Amortization prohibited. Except as otherwise provided in this subdivision, a municipality must not enact, amend, or enforce an ordinance providing for the elimination or termination of a use by amortization which use was lawful at the time of its inception. This subdivision does not apply to adults- only bookstores, adults-only theaters, or similar adults-only businesses, as defined by ordinance. Subd. 1d. Nuisance. Subdivision 1c does not prohibit a municipality from enforcing an ordinance providing for the prevention or abatement of nuisances, as defined in section 561.01, or eliminating a use 462.357 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 2 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. determined to be a public nuisance, as defined in section 617.81, subdivision 2, paragraph (a), clauses (i) to (ix), without payment of compensation. Subd. 1e. Nonconformities. (a) Except as otherwise provided by law, 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 estimated market value, as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage, and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when the property is damaged. In this case, a municipality may impose reasonable conditions upon a zoning or building permit in order to mitigate any newly created impact on adjacent property or water body. When a nonconforming structure in the shoreland district with less than 50 percent of the required setback from the water is destroyed by fire or other peril to greater than 50 percent of its estimated market value, as indicated in the records of the county assessor at the time of damage, the structure setback may be increased if practicable and reasonable conditions are placed upon a zoning or building permit to mitigate created impacts on the adjacent property or water body. (b) Any subsequent use or occupancy of the land or premises shall be a conforming use or occupancy. A municipality may, by ordinance, permit an expansion or impose upon nonconformities reasonable reg- ulations to prevent and abate nuisances and to protect the public health, welfare, or safety. This subdivision does not prohibit a municipality 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), a municipality 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. (d) Paragraphs (d) to (j) apply to shoreland lots of record in the office of the county recorder on the date of adoption of local shoreland controls that do not meet the requirements for lot size or lot width. A municipality shall regulate the use of nonconforming lots of record and the repair, replacement, maintenance, improvement, or expansion of nonconforming uses and structures in shoreland areas according to paragraphs (d) to (j). (e) A nonconforming single lot of record located within a shoreland area may be allowed as a building site without variances from lot size requirements, provided that: (1) all structure and septic system setback distance requirements can be met; (2) a Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, can be installed or the lot is connected to a public sewer; and (3) the impervious surface coverage does not exceed 25 percent of the lot. (f) In a group of two or more contiguous lots of record under a common ownership, an individual lot must be considered as a separate parcel of land for the purpose of sale or development, if it meets the following requirements: 3 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 462.357 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. (1) the lot must be at least 66 percent of the dimensional standard for lot width and lot size for the shoreland classification consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 6120; (2) the lot must be connected to a public sewer, if available, or must be suitable for the installation of a Type 1 sewage treatment system consistent with Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, and local government controls; (3) impervious surface coverage must not exceed 25 percent of each lot; and (4) development of the lot must be consistent with an adopted comprehensive plan. (g) A lot subject to paragraph (f) not meeting the requirements of paragraph (f) must be combined with the one or more contiguous lots so they equal one or more conforming lots as much as possible. (h) Notwithstanding paragraph (f), contiguous nonconforming lots of record in shoreland areas under a common ownership must be able to be sold or purchased individually if each lot contained a habitable residential dwelling at the time the lots came under common ownership and the lots are suitable for, or served by, a sewage treatment system consistent with the requirements of section 115.55 and Minnesota Rules, chapter 7080, or connected to a public sewer. (i) In evaluating all variances, zoning and building permit applications, or conditional use requests, the zoning authority shall require the property owner to address, when appropriate, storm water runoff management, reducing impervious surfaces, increasing setback, restoration of wetlands, vegetative buffers, sewage treatment and water supply capabilities, and other conservation-designed actions. (j) A portion of a conforming lot may be separated from an existing parcel as long as the remainder of the existing parcel meets the lot size and sewage treatment requirements of the zoning district for a new lot and the newly created parcel is combined with an adjacent parcel. Subd. 1f. Substandard structures. Notwithstanding subdivision 1e, Minnesota Rules, parts 6105.0351 to 6105.0550, may allow for the continuation and improvement of substandard structures, as defined in Minnesota Rules, part 6105.0354, subpart 30, in the Lower Saint Croix National Scenic Riverway. Subd. 1g. Feedlot zoning controls. (a) A municipality proposing to adopt a new feedlot zoning control or to amend an existing feedlot zoning control must notify the Pollution Control Agency and commissioner of agriculture at the beginning of the process, no later than the date notice is given of the first hearing proposing to adopt or amend a zoning control purporting to address feedlots. (b) Prior to final approval of a feedlot zoning control, the governing body of a municipality may submit a copy of the proposed zoning control to the Pollution Control Agency and to the commissioner of agriculture and request review, comment, and recommendations on the environmental and agricultural effects from specific provisions in the ordinance. (c) The agencies' response to the municipality may include: (1) any recommendations for improvements in the ordinance; and (2) the legal, social, economic, or scientific justification for each recommendation under clause (1). (d) At the request of the municipality's governing body, the municipality must prepare a report on the economic effects from specific provisions in the ordinance. Economic analysis must state whether the ordinance will affect the local economy and describe the kinds of businesses affected and the projected impact the proposal will have on those businesses. To assist the municipality, the commissioner of 462.357 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 4 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. agriculture, in cooperation with the Department of Employment and Economic Development, must develop a template for measuring local economic effects and make it available to the municipality. The report must be submitted to the commissioners of employment and economic development and agriculture along with the proposed ordinance. (e) A local ordinance that contains a setback for new feedlots from existing residences must also provide for a new residence setback from existing feedlots located in areas zoned agricultural at the same distances and conditions specified in the setback for new feedlots, unless the new residence is built to replace an existing residence. A municipality may grant a variance from this requirement under section 462.358, sub- division 6. Subd. 1h. Comprehensive plans in greater Minnesota; open spaces. When adopting or updating a comprehensive plan in a municipality located within a county that is not a greater than 80 percent area, as defined in section 103G.005, subdivision 10b, and that is located outside the metropolitan area, as defined by section 473.121, subdivision 2, the municipality shall consider adopting goals and objectives for the preservation of agricultural, forest, wildlife, and open space land and the minimization of development in sensitive shoreland areas. Within three years of updating the comprehensive plan, the municipality shall consider adopting ordinances as part of the municipality's official controls that encourage the imple- mentation of the goals and objectives. Subd. 2. General requirements. (a) At any time after the adoption of a land use plan for the mu- nicipality, the planning agency, for the purpose of carrying out the policies and goals of the land use plan, may prepare a proposed zoning ordinance and submit it to the governing body with its recommendations for adoption. (b) Subject to the requirements of subdivisions 3, 4, and 5, the governing body may adopt and amend a zoning ordinance by a majority vote of all its members. The adoption or amendment of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all or part of the existing classification of a zoning district from residential to either commercial or industrial requires a two-thirds majority vote of all members of the governing body. (c) The land use plan must provide guidelines for the timing and sequence of the adoption of official controls to ensure planned, orderly, and staged development and redevelopment consistent with the land use plan. Subd. 3. Public hearings. No zoning ordinance or amendment thereto shall be adopted until a public hearing has been held thereon by the planning agency or by the governing body. A notice of the time, place and purpose of the hearing shall be published in the official newspaper of the municipality at least ten days prior to the day of the hearing. When an amendment involves changes in district boundaries affecting an area of five acres or less, a similar notice shall be mailed at least ten days before the day of the hearing to each owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the property to which the amendment relates. For the purpose of giving mailed notice, the person responsible for mailing the notice may use any appropriate records to determine the names and addresses of owners. A copy of the notice and a list of the owners and addresses to which the notice was sent shall be attested to by the responsible person and shall be made a part of the records of the proceedings. The failure to give mailed notice to individual property owners, or defects in the notice shall not invalidate the proceedings, provided a bona fide attempt to comply with this subdivision has been made. Subd. 4. Amendments. An amendment to a zoning ordinance may be initiated by the governing body, the planning agency, or by petition of affected property owners as defined in the zoning ordinance. An amendment not initiated by the planning agency shall be referred to the planning agency, if there is one, for 5 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 462.357 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. study and report and may not be acted upon by the governing body until it has received the recommendation of the planning agency on the proposed amendment or until 60 days have elapsed from the date of reference of the amendment without a report by the planning agency. Subd. 5. Amendment; certain cities of the first class. The provisions of this subdivision apply to the adoption or amendment of any portion of a zoning ordinance which changes all or part of the existing classification of a zoning district from residential to either commercial or industrial of a property located in a city of the first class, except a city of the first class in which a different process is provided through the operation of the city's home rule charter. In a city to which this subdivision applies, amendments to a zoning ordinance shall be made in conformance with this section but only after there shall have been filed in the office of the city clerk a written consent of the owners of two-thirds of the several descriptions of real estate situate within 100 feet of the total contiguous descriptions of real estate held by the same owner or any party purchasing any such contiguous property within one year preceding the request, and after the affirmative vote in favor thereof by a majority of the members of the governing body of any such city. The governing body of such city may, by a two-thirds vote of its members, after hearing, adopt a new zoning ordinance without such written consent whenever the planning commission or planning board of such city shall have made a survey of the whole area of the city or of an area of not less than 40 acres, within which the new ordinance or the amendments or alterations of the existing ordinance would take effect when adopted, and shall have considered whether the number of descriptions of real estate affected by such changes and alterations renders the obtaining of such written consent impractical, and such planning commission or planning board shall report in writing as to whether in its opinion the proposals of the governing body in any case are reasonably related to the overall needs of the community, to existing land use, or to a plan for future land use, and shall have conducted a public hearing on such proposed ordinance, changes or alterations, of which hearing published notice shall have been given in a daily newspaper of general circulation at least once each week for three successive weeks prior to such hearing, which notice shall state the time, place and purpose of such hearing, and shall have reported to the governing body of the city its findings and recommendations in writing. Subd. 6. Appeals and adjustments. Appeals to the board of appeals and adjustments may be taken by any affected person upon compliance with any reasonable conditions imposed by the zoning ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments has the following powers with respect to the zoning ordinance: (1) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an administrative officer in the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. (2) To hear requests for variances from the requirements of the zoning ordinance including restrictions placed on nonconformities. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning 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 zoning ordinance; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. 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. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not allowed under the zoning ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or governing body as the case may be, may permit as a variance 462.357 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 6 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The board or governing body as the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. Subd. 6a. Normal residential surroundings for persons with disabilities. It is the policy of this state that persons with disabilities should not be excluded by municipal zoning ordinances or other land use regulations from the benefits of normal residential surroundings. For purposes of subdivisions 6a through 9, "person" has the meaning given in section 245A.02, subdivision 11. Subd. 7. Permitted single family use. A state licensed residential facility or a housing with services establishment registered under chapter 144D serving six or fewer persons, a licensed day care facility serving 12 or fewer persons, and a group family day care facility licensed under Minnesota Rules, parts 9502.0315 to 9502.0445 to serve 14 or fewer children shall be considered a permitted single family residential use of property for the purposes of zoning, except that a residential facility whose primary purpose is to treat juveniles who have violated criminal statutes relating to sex offenses or have been adjudicated delinquent on the basis of conduct in violation of criminal statutes relating to sex offenses shall not be considered a permitted use. Subd. 8. Permitted multifamily use. Except as otherwise provided in subdivision 7 or in any town, municipal or county zoning regulation as authorized by this subdivision, a state licensed residential facility serving from 7 through 16 persons or a licensed day care facility serving from 13 through 16 persons shall be considered a permitted multifamily residential use of property for purposes of zoning. A township, municipal or county zoning authority may require a conditional use or special use permit in order to assure proper maintenance and operation of a facility, provided that no conditions shall be imposed on the facility which are more restrictive than those imposed on other conditional uses or special uses of residential property in the same zones, unless the additional conditions are necessary to protect the health and safety of the residents of the residential facility. Nothing herein shall be construed to exclude or prohibit residential or day care facilities from single family zones if otherwise permitted by a local zoning regulation. Subd. 9. Development goals and objectives. In adopting official controls after July 1, 2008, in a mu- nicipality outside the metropolitan area, as defined by section 473.121, subdivision 2, the municipality shall consider restricting new residential, commercial, and industrial development so that the new development takes place in areas subject to the following goals and objectives: (1) minimizing the fragmentation and development of agricultural, forest, wildlife, and open space lands, including consideration of appropriate minimum lot sizes; (2) minimizing further development in sensitive shoreland areas; (3) minimizing development near wildlife management areas, scientific and natural areas, and nature centers; (4) identification of areas of preference for higher density, including consideration of existing and necessary water and wastewater services, infrastructure, other services, and to the extent feasible, en- couraging full development of areas previously zoned for nonagricultural uses; (5) encouraging development close to places of employment, shopping centers, schools, mass transit, and other public and private service centers; (6) identification of areas where other developments are appropriate; and 7 MINNESOTA STATUTES 2015 462.357 Copyright © 2015 by the Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota. All Rights Reserved. (7) other goals and objectives a municipality may identify. History: 1965 c 670 s 7; 1969 c 259 s 1; 1973 c 123 art 5 s 7; 1973 c 379 s 4; 1973 c 539 s 1; 1973 c 559 s 1,2; 1975 c 60 s 2; 1978 c 786 s 14,15; Ex1979 c 2 s 42,43; 1981 c 356 s 248; 1982 c 490 s 2; 1982 c 507 s 22; 1984 c 617 s 6-8; 1985 c 62 s 3; 1985 c 194 s 23; 1986 c 444; 1987 c 333 s 22; 1989 c 82 s 2; 1990 c 391 art 8 s 47; 1990 c 568 art 2 s 66,67; 1994 c 473 s 3; 1995 c 224 s 95; 1997 c 113 s 20; 1997 c 200 art 4 s 5; 1997 c 202 art 4 s 11; 1997 c 216 s 138; 1999 c 96 s 3,4; 1999 c 211 s 1; 2001 c 174 s 1; 2001 c 207 s 13,14; 2002 c 366 s 6; 2004 c 258 s 2; 2005 c 56 s 1; 1Sp2005 c 1 art 1 s 92; art 2 s 146; 2007 c 140 art 12 s 14; 2008 c 297 art 1 s 60,61; 2009 c 149 s 3; 2011 c 19 s 2 City Variance Expiration? Renewal Option? St. Paul Variance is valid for two years unless a building permit is obtained within this time frame and construction is proceeding according to the terms of the permit. The zoning administrator may grant an extension not to exceed one additional year. Stillwater Does not specify that a variance will expire after a certain amount of time but does specify time limitations (24 months) on conditional and special use permits. A permit may be extended for an additional period not to exceed one year by the board of official that approved the permit. Woodbury Does not specify that a variance will expire after a certain amount of time but does specify that a conditional use permit expires if use ceases for more than 36 months. N/A Oakdale No expiration date given for variances. N/A Oak Park Heights Variances become null and void 12 months after the date of approval unless construction has started. The property owner or applicant may submit an extension at least 30 days of the variance expiration (no time for extension given). St. Paul Park Variances become null and void after one year if what was permitted has not been completed. An extension may be granted by City Council if request made in writing at least 60 days before expiration (no time for extension given). 1 484315v1 AMB LA515-4 CITY OF LAKE ELMO COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 08-______ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE LAKE ELMO CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES REGARDING VARIANCE EXPIRATIONS SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Lake Elmo hereby amends Section 154.1 09 of the City Code by deleting the stricken language and inserting the double-underlined language as follows: ARTICLE III. ZONING ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT § 154.109 VARIANCES. A. In General. The Board of Adjustment shall have the power to grant variances to the provisions of this chapter under the following procedures and standards. 1. A request for a variance from the literal provisions of this chapter may be granted in instances where their strict enforcement would cause practical difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and then only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter. All requests for variances shall be reviewed in accordance with the required findings listed in §154.109.F. B. Use Variances Prohibited. A variance shall not be granted for any use that is not a listed permitted or conditional use under this chapter for property in the zone where the property is located. C. Application Requirements. Variance applications shall be submitted to the Director of Planning on such form and accompanied by such information as required by §154.101.A of this Article and with the submission materials listed in §154.101.B of this Article. D. Hearing Requirements. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on each complete application for a variance as provided in §154.102 of this Article. After the close of the hearing on a proposed variance, the City Planning Commission shall consider findings and shall submit the same together with its recommendation to the Board of Adjustment. E. Board of Adjustment Action. The Board of Adjustment shall receive the recommendation of the Planning Commission and shall take final action on the variance request. All findings and decisions of the Board of Adjustments concerning variances shall be final. F. Required Findings. Any action taken by the Board of Adjustment to approve or deny a variance request shall include the following findings: 1. Practical Difficulties. A variance to the provision of this chapter may be granted by the Board of Adjustment upon the application by the owner of the affected property where the strict enforcement of this chapter would cause practical 2 484315v1 AMB LA515-4 difficulties because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and then only when it is demonstrated that such actions will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this chapter. a. Definition of Practical Difficulties. “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 an official control. 2. Unique Circumstances. The problem for the landowner/applicant which the proposed variance is intended to correct must be due to circumstances that are unique to the property in question and that were not created by the land owner/applicant. 3. Character of Locality. The proposed variance will not alter the essential character of the locality in which the property in question is located. a. Definition of Locality. For purposes of this subsection, “locality” shall be defined as all that property within 350 feet of the property proposed for the variance; however, in all events, it shall include all parcels abutting the affected parcel, including those immediately across a public street, alley of other public property. 4. Adjacent Properties and Traffic. The proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to property adjacent to the property in question or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. G. Conditions. The Planning Commission may recommend and the Board of Adjustment may impose such restrictions and conditions upon the property that is the subject of the variance as may be necessary to comply with the standards established by this chapter or to reduce or minimize the effect of such variance upon other properties in the neighborhood and to better carry out the intent of the variance. H. Effect of Denial. No application by a property owner for a variance shall be submitted to the Board of Adjustment within a six (6) months period following a denial of such a request unless, in the opinion of the Board, new evidence of change in circumstances warrant it. I. Expiration. A variance shall be deemed to authorize only one particular use and shall expire if work does not commence within twelve (12) months of the date of granting such variance or if that use ceases for more than six (6) consecutive months, except when: 1. A written petition for an extension of one (1) year or less, is received at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the initial variance request; and 2. The petition for the extension states facts demonstrating that a good faith attempt has been made to complete or utilize the variance that had been granted. 3. The fee for such a petition shall be set by resolution of the City Council. 4. The Planning Director shall review the petition to either approve or deny the extension. An appeal of a Planning Director’s decision shall follow the provisions set 3 484315v1 AMB LA515-4 forth in §154.108. Petitions for extension that are greater than one (1) year shall be presented to the planning commission for a recommendation and to the City Council for a decision. J. Revocation. The Board of Adjustment may revoke a variance if any conditions established by the Board as part of granting the variance request are violated. (Ord. 08-085, passed 7-2-2013) SECTION 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption and publication in the official newspaper of the City of Lake Elmo. SECTION 3. Adoption Date. This Ordinance 08-___ was adopted on this ______ day of ___ 2016, by a vote of ___ Ayes and ___ Nays. LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL ___________________________________ Mike Pearson, Mayor ATTEST: _________________________ Julie Johnson, City Clerk This Ordinance ____ was published on the ____ day of ___________________, 2016. Alliance for Sustainability Metro Workshop for Cities with the MN EQB & MN Compass Planning for Resilient Cities Monday October 24,2016 Wilder Foundation 451 Lexington Pkwy N, St Paul, MN 55104 1:00 to 4:00pm -City Staff Workshop 5:00 to 6:00pm -Networking Reception 6:00 to 8:30pm -Community Workshop www.allianceforsustainability.com/sustainablecommunities Meet with your peers from 40 metro cities to share practical strategies your city can include to get more out of your Comprehensive Plan Co-sponsored by the Alliance for Sustainability,MN Environmental Quality Board, MN Compass, Wilder Foundation, Headwaters, Bush &McKnight Foundations, EOR Inc., LHB Corp. and U of MN Energy Transition Lab & Resilient Communities Project Learn the steps to support your city to use new resources for Energy Planning Adaptation Planning Equity, Active living & food access Event Facilitator:Sean Gosiewski, Alliance for Sustainability, 612-250-0389 sean@afors.org Free Event Please RSVP at www.allianceforsustainability.com/sustainablecommunities 1:00 to 4:00pm -Workshop for City Staff –on how to get more out of your Comprehensive Plan for city planners,engineering, public works,public health staff 1:00pm –Welcome from MN Compass & how to access data sets on equity & health 1:30pm –Resource groups will share updates on their comp plan resources for cities 2:30 pm –Facilitated Small Group Conversations with your peers from other cities to share your approaches and draft comprehensive plan goals and strategies for -Highlights for Cities from the MN Climate Action Plan –Climate Solutions & Economic Opportunities –1pm -Will Seuffert, Executive Director,EQB 6pm -Ellen Andersen, U of MN Energy Transition Lab -Energy Planning -Tapping your communities’ energy resources to save residents &businesses money while meeting CO2 reduction goals. Brian Ross, GPI -Transportation & Land use for vital low-carbon communities,Jim Erkel, MCEA -Adaptation Planning –preparing your city’s infrastructure & residents to be ready for extreme weather –Laura Millberg, MPCA, with examples from Burnsville and St. Louis Park, using the MN GreenStep Cities Resilience Guide (best practice #29) -Planning for Health, Equity & Economic Vitality –to improve the health and economic well-being of all residents including active living, healthy food access & workforce development.One MN &Nadja Berneche,Healthy Comp Planner 5:00pm to 6pm –Reception and networking time with food sponsored by local businesses 6:00 pm to 8:30 pm –Community Workshop on how to get more out of your Comprehensive Plan -for commission & citizen volunteers and elected leaders 6:15pm –Welcome from MN Compass & how to access data sets on equity & health 6:30pm –Resource groups will share updates on their comp plan resources for cities 7:30 pm –Facilitated Small Group Conversations with your peers from other cities to share your approaches and draft comprehensive plan goals and strategies for -Energy Planning –tap your communities’ energy resources to meet climate goals -Adaptation Planning –preparing your city’s infrastructure for extreme weather -Transportation &Land use strategies –for vital low-carbon communities. -Planning for Health, Equity, Food Access & Economic Vitality –for all residents Fall 2016-Your City is invited to join a Resilient Cities Cluster To learn more and sign up to participate –Please visit www.allianceforsustainability.com/resilient-cities or contact Sean Gosiewski,Executive Director, Alliance for Sustainability,612-250-0389 sean@afors.org January 2017 to September 2017 –Resilient Cities Clusters –we will support 50 metro cities to share their draft comprehensive language in groups of 5 to 8 cities in Anoka,Carver,Dakota, Hennepin, Ramsey, Scott and Washington Counties.In 2017 The Alliance for Sustainability will work closely with our county and nonprofit resource partners, watershed districts and utilities to convene interested city staff &commission volunteers in each county to meet together two times in 2017 as they write their resilience sections of their comprehensive plans (including energy, adaptation and health/equity/economic vitality to Share and compare draft plan language, goals and strategies Connect with resources to map existing conditions,energy usage, climate vulnerabilities,health,etc. Learn from cities that have developed energy action plans & implementation strategies through Xcel’s Partners in Energy, LoGoPep the Mayors Compact,MN GreenSteps or to help meet our MN CO2 reduction goals. Develop implementation strategies for their comprehensive plans including identifying new funding sources, quality technical advisors, community and business engagement strategies, benchmarking and tracking results We will then contribute case studies that other cities can benefit from to the local planning handbook http://metrocouncil.org/Handbook/Plan-Elements/Resilience.aspx In July 2016 the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board released the updated MN Climate Action Plan -Climate solution and Economic Opportunities –to get our state back on track to achieve our goals to reduce CO2 economy wide 30% by 2025 and 80% by 2050. The EQB is co-hosting our October 24 workshop to give cities practical strategies they can include in their Comprehensive Plans to do their part to help Minnesota continue being a leader in achieving the ambitious CO2 reduction goals adopted by the State of MN and through the U.N. Paris Climate Accord in December 2015.www.eqb.state.mn.us/content/climate-change Our Anoka County Workshop, January 2016 Resilience & Sustainability Planning Resources Look for new resources on line at www.metrocouncil.org/Handbook/Plan-Elements/Resilience.aspx And on our web site at www.allianceforsustainability.com/resilienceplanningresources Local Planning Handbook -Resilience Planning –with great resources to get more out of your comprehensive plan Resilience Plan -Infrastructure and Environment, Energy Infrastructure and Resources, Healthy Communities and Economy & Society.http://www.metrocouncil.org/Handbook/Plan-Elements/Resilience.aspx Resource People Eric Wojchik,Met Council, , Resilience Lead 651.602.1330 eric.wojchik@metc.state.mn.us Laura Millberg, Climate Resilience Principal Planner,MPCA 651/757-2568,Laura.Millberg@state.mn.us Webinar -Comprehensive Planning for Solar Energy Systems Thursday, November 10, 2016 12:00 –1:30 PM Presented by Eric Wojchik and Brian Ross www.metrocouncil.org/Handbook/PlanIt/Files/2016-PlanIt-Schedule.aspx Planners can also mark your calendar to attend the Sustainability Workshop at the PlanIt Training Conference December 13, 2016, Earle Brown Center on Integrating Sustainability and Resilience in your Comp plan, with highlights from the Burnsville case study Presented by Eric Wojchik, Brian Ross Brett Emmons, & Burnsville staff http://metrocouncil.org/Handbook/Training/Conferences.aspx Your City can apply to join Xcel's Partners in Energy Program for 2017 -Cities can apply by October 14,2016.More and more communities are realizing energy planning plays a critical role in helping them reach their goals. The benefits of wise energy choices are diverse. By working with citizens, businesses, and even their own government facilities, a community can shave dollars off utility bills, promote renewables, drive resource conservation or contribute toward greenhouse gas reduction goals. We help you address the challenge of identifying local priorities and then structure a path that leverages all resources available.www.xcelenergy.com/partners/municipalities/partners_in_energy Xcel Energy Community Reports -Offer great data to any city or area served by Xcel Energy. They have a list of communities where reports are already assembled or your city can request a report if you submit a shapefile. www.xcelenergy.com/partners/municipalities/community_energy_reports Webinar -Comprehensive Planning for Solar Energy Systems Thursday, November 10,2016 12:00 –1:30 PM ,Presented by Eric Wojchik and Brian Ross www.metrocouncil.org/Handbook/PlanIt/Files/2016-PlanIt-Schedule.aspx Energy Planning Template for Cities -developed through the LOGOPEP Project This template will soon be posted at http://www.regionalindicatorsmn.com/energy-planning For more information, contact Maureen Colburn,Project Manager,at 612.752.6954 or maureen.colburn@lhbcorp.com or Brian Ross Senior Program Director, Great Plains Institute 612 501-1531 bross@gpisd.net Five Minnesota cities in the Twin Cities Metro have been selected as partners for the Local Government Project for Energy Planning (LoGoPEP), an initiative that is developing energy planning tools for local governments.The five selected partner cities include Oakdale, Eden Prairie, Falcon Heights, Maplewood, and Saint Louis Park. These cities will help pilot test the tools developed by the LoGoPEP team, including case studies of exemplar cities, a scenario planning or “wedge” tool that wil l quantify the level of action needed to meet reduction targets, and an energy planning template that can be incorporated into local government comprehensive plans.www.cleanenergyresourceteams.org/blog/five-cities- selected-partners-new-energy-planning-pilot-project Our MN State CO2 Reduction Goals and Progress -Minnesota’s Next Generation Energy Act of 2007 calls for cutting the state’s greenhouse gas emissions to 15 percent below 2005 base levels by 2015, 30 percent by 2025, and 80 percent by 2050. Despite reduction efforts, Minnesota missed the 2015 goal and will miss the 2025 goal without additional work. To support and augment statewide efforts, Minnesota needs its cities, townships, and counties to take targeted action to reduce emissions within their community and drive change at the local and state level.See Minnesota’s progress on achieving our C02 reduction goals at www.pca.state.mn.us/air/greenhouse-gas-emissions-minnesota-0 In July 2016 the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board released the updated MN Climate Action Plan -Climate solution and Economic Opportunities –to get our state back on track to achieve our goals to reduce CO2 economy wide 30% by 2025 and 80% by 2050. The EQB is co-hosting our Alliance October 24 workshop to give cities practical strategies they can include in their Comprehensive Plans to do their part to help Minnesota continue being a leader in achieving the ambitious CO2 reduction goals adopted by the State of MN and through the U.N.Paris Climate Accord in December 2015.www.eqb.state.mn.us/content/climate-change Learn how you can incorporate strategies from our MN Climate Action Plan in your City’s Comp plan through our Alliance for Sustainability Workshop with the MN EQB & MN Compass Planning for Resilient Cities Monday October 24,2016 Wilder Foundation 451 Lexington Pkwy N, St Paul, MN 55104 1:00 to 4:00pm -City Staff Workshop 6:00 to 8:30pm -Community Workshop Meet with your peers from 40 metro cities to share practical strategies your city can include to get more out of your Comprehensive Plan .Co-sponsored by the Alliance for Sustainability,MN Environmental Quality Board,MN Compass, Wilder Foundation, Headwaters, Bush &McKnight Foundations, EOR Inc., LHB Corp. and U of MN Energy Transition Lab & Resilient Communities Project www.allianceforsustainability.com/sustainablecommunities Best Practice 29:Climate Adaptation and Community Resilience http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPractices.cfm MN Compass –Resources for Cities to access their economic and health data http://www.mncompass.org/profiles Access the new MN Food Access Planning Guide Make sure healthy food access and equity are part of your community’s long-range plan by leveraging the new Minnesota Food Charter Food Access Planning Guide. This toolkit can help! Download the Food Access Planning Guide http://mnfoodcharter.com/planningguide/ Watch the Webinar -Working with MN Local Governments to Increase Access to Healthy Food: Part III –Integrating Questions? Call Nadja Berneche, Healthy Comprehensive Planning Terra Soma, LLC (651)-968-3899 nadja@terrasoma.com Metro Food Access Network Comprehensive Planning Action Team https://sites.google.com/a/umn.edu/mfan/work-groups/retail-food-access The Comprehensive Planning Action Team currently aligns with the following Minnesota Food Charter strategy: Include healthy food access as an important component of local governments’ overall infrastructure and transportation planning. Partners: The Comprehensive Planning Action Team consists of about 10-15 partners representing funding agencies, local public health, and various nonprofit and grassroots organizations.