Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
PL PACKET 01172023
CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, January 17, 2023 at 7:00 PM Join Meeting via Zoom There is also a dial -in option available. Members of the public who wish to attend the meeting may do so in person. Call To Order Pledge Of Allegiance Roll Call Approval Of Agenda Approval Of Minutes Approval Of PC Meeting Minutes PC 11 -15 -2022.PDF Public Hearing Staff Reports Agenda Cover Memo COVER MEMO.PDF Work Plan Discussion Steve Grittman, City Planner, presenting. PC WORK PLAN - 2023.PDF Goal Setting Report Steve Grittman, City Planner, presenting. 2022 ACCOMPLISHMENTS.PDF EMERGING ISSUES 2023.PDF MATRIX.PDF Planning Commission Training Documents Steve Grittman, City Planner, presenting. PLANNING AND ZONING BASICS.PDF PRESENTATION.PDF Other Business Community Forum Individuals may address the Planning Commission about any City business item not included on the regular agenda. Speakers are requested to come to the podium, sign their name and address on the form at the podium, state their name and address for the Clerk ’s record, and limit their remarks to five minutes. Generally, the Planning Commission will not take official action on items discussed at this time, but may typically refer the matter to staff for a future report or direct the matter to be scheduled on an upcoming agenda. Information And Announcments Next Meeting: February 21 Adjournment If you would like to request special accommodations or alternative formats, please contact the City Clerk at 612 -782 -3313 or email city@savmn.com . People who are deaf or hard of hearing can contact us by using 711 Relay. Our Mission is to be a progressive and welcoming Village that is walkable, sustainable and safe. I. II. III. IV. V. A. Documents: VI. VII. A. Documents: B. Documents: C. Documents: D. Documents: VIII. IX. X. XI. CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGEPLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDATuesday, January 17, 2023 at 7:00 PMJoin Meeting via ZoomThere is also a dial -in option available. Members of the public who wish to attend the meeting may do so in person. Call To OrderPledge Of AllegianceRoll CallApproval Of AgendaApproval Of MinutesApproval Of PC Meeting MinutesPC 11 -15 -2022.PDFPublic HearingStaff ReportsAgenda Cover MemoCOVER MEMO.PDFWork Plan DiscussionSteve Grittman, City Planner, presenting. PC WORK PLAN - 2023.PDF Goal Setting Report Steve Grittman, City Planner, presenting. 2022 ACCOMPLISHMENTS.PDF EMERGING ISSUES 2023.PDF MATRIX.PDF Planning Commission Training Documents Steve Grittman, City Planner, presenting. PLANNING AND ZONING BASICS.PDF PRESENTATION.PDF Other Business Community Forum Individuals may address the Planning Commission about any City business item not included on the regular agenda. Speakers are requested to come to the podium, sign their name and address on the form at the podium, state their name and address for the Clerk ’s record, and limit their remarks to five minutes. Generally, the Planning Commission will not take official action on items discussed at this time, but may typically refer the matter to staff for a future report or direct the matter to be scheduled on an upcoming agenda. Information And Announcments Next Meeting: February 21 Adjournment If you would like to request special accommodations or alternative formats, please contact the City Clerk at 612 -782 -3313 or email city@savmn.com . People who are deaf or hard of hearing can contact us by using 711 Relay. Our Mission is to be a progressive and welcoming Village that is walkable, sustainable and safe. I.II.III.IV.V.A.Documents:VI.VII.A.Documents:B.Documents: C. Documents: D. Documents: VIII. IX. X. XI. 1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 3 NOVEMBER 15, 2022 4 7:00 p.m. 5 6 CALL TO ORDER. 7 8 Chair Socha called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 9 10 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 11 12 Chair Socha invited the Commission and the audience to join her in the Pledge of Allegiance. 13 14 ROLL CALL. 15 16 Commissioners Present:Chair Socha, Commissioners Erickson, Gaveske, Hendrickson 17 (arrived at 7:08 p.m.), Kukendall, and Morita. 18 19 Absent:Commissioners Rude. 20 21 Also Present: City Planner Stephen Grittman and Assistant to the City Manager 22 Nicole Miller. 23 24 25 I.APPROVAL OF THE NOVEMBER 15, 2022 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 26 AGENDA. 27 28 Motion by Commissioner Morita, seconded by Commissioner Gaveske, to approve the 29 November 15, 2022, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Agenda. 30 31 Motion carried 5-0. 32 33 II.APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 20, 2022, REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION 34 MEETING MINUTES. 35 36 Motion by Commissioner Erickson, seconded by Commissioner Morita, to approve the 37 September 20, 2022, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. 38 39 Motion carried 5-0. 40 41 Commissioner Hendrickson arrived at 7:08 p.m. 42 43 III.PUBLIC HEARING. 44 A.45 2919 Silver Lane Variance – Side/Back Yard Setback 46 47 Chair Socha opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. 48 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 15, 2022 Page 2 1 City Planner Grittman reviewed the applicant proposes to construct an additional shop/garage 2 to the northwest side of an existing home at 2919 Silver Lane NE. The proposed garage would 3 be an additional 20 by 27 feet in size, adjoining the north property line. Because of the north 4 property line is defined by the zoning ordinance as the rear lot line, the required setback 5 would be 25 feet. The applicant is seeking a variance to this aspect of the Zoning Ordinance, 6 redefining the rear yard as the west property line, and the subject north line as a side yard. A 7 site location map was provided for Commission review. An aerial photo and county mapping 8 was also shown. 9 10 A complicating factor in this request is that the applicant has provided a hand-drawn site plan 11 that projects a 14-foot setback from the corner of the new garage to the north property line, 12 consistent with the zoning ordinance’s requirement for a 5-foot side yard setback. However, 13 the applicant’s plan varies significantly from Ramsey County GIS mapping, which shows 14 only about 20 feet of space between the existing building and the actual boundary. With a 5- 15 foot building separation, and even if approved, a 5-foot side yard setback requirement, only 10 16 feet of garage width would be possible. 17 18 Staff has notified the applicant that he will need to provide additional evidence of property 19 description – presumably by a survey. Even with the variance redescribing the side yard, the 20 proposed 20-foot-wide building would appear to encroach onto the neighbor’s property by 5 21 feet, more than merely violating the side setback. 22 23 Without this additional evidence, staff recommends denial of the North property line setback 24 encroachment as proposed. Staff has reviewed for height, use, other setbacks and impervious 25 surface; and the request appears to meet all other code requirements. The proposed impervious 26 surface would be just under 26.5%, within the allowance for up to 35% coverage. 27 28 The Planning Commission was asked to consider two staff recommendations. Motion to 29 recommend denial of the request for side yard/setback variance at 2919 Silver Lane, based on 30 the following finding: This recommendation is based on a finding that the proposed addition 31 is based on a site plan that appears to overstate the available buildable area, compared to 32 Ramsey County mapping records. As such, the building would be unable to meet the required 33 setbacks (even if the variance were to be approved) and may encroach onto neighboring 34 property. 35 36 The other option would be a motion to recommend tabling of the request for side yard/setback 37 variance at 2919 Silver Lane, based on the following finding. Provide the applicant time to 38 supplement the record with property size information, such as a survey, documenting the lot 39 lines and layout as proposed. 40 41 Commissioner Gaveske asked if this falls within Ramsey County and Mr. Grittman stated it 42 does. 43 44 Chair Socha asked if the mailbox is on Silver Lane. Mr. Grittman stated it is irrelevant where 45 the mailbox is and it is the front door that indicates the front of the lot. The front door and 46 primary entrance is off Silver Lane. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 15, 2022 Page 3 1 2 Commissioner Morita asked if staff’s concern is the property line and Mr. Grittman stated that 3 is true. 4 5 Commissioner Erickson asked about the test of approving a variance – giving owner 6 reasonable use of the property. Mr. Grittman stated it would be possible to construct a garage 7 on the west side of the property (side yard). 8 9 Chair Socha asked what percentage of the property would be impervious and Mr. Grittman 10 stated the applicant would be in compliance as far as impervious. 11 12 Mr. Chad Olson, 2917 Silver Lane, St. Anthony stated he read in the code that the mailbox 13 defines the front of the yard. His neighbor recently had a survey done and Mr. Olson has that 14 information. Staff’s description of the request was very good. He will ask his neighbor for 15 the information on the survey and submit to the City. 16 17 Chair Socha closed the public hearing at 7:19 p.m. 18 19 Mr. Grittman stated the survey would be accepted as evidence as to the property line. 20 21 Commissioner Morita asked if it could move forward if the survey information is provided 22 and in compliance upon Staff’s review. 23 24 Motion by Commissioner Morita, seconded by Commissioner Hendrickson, to recommend 25 the City Council approve the request contingent upon staff’s receipt and review of a survey. If 26 not acceptable the request will be tabled and brought back to the Planning Commission within 27 one year. 28 29 Motion carried 6-0. 30 31 IV.STAFF REPORT - NONE. 32 33 V.OTHER BUSINESS. 34 A.35 2023 Planning Commission Workplan. 36 37 City Planner Grittman reviewed the proposed 2023 Work Plan for the St. Anthony Village 38 Planning Commission. The 2022 Accomplishments were also reviewed. There will be a joint 39 meeting with the City Council Tuesday, November 29, 2022. Mr. Grittman also included a list 40 of Emerging Trends and Issues that may come up as options on how to respond and/or set 41 policy. 42 43 Chair Socha brought up the gas station location behind Cub Foods and requested it be added 44 to the list. Mr. Grittman stated that will be a topic at the joint meeting with Council. Staff will 45 provide an agenda and report for that meeting. Commissioner Erickson suggested ideas for 46 attracting businesses to St. Anthony be included. Chair Socha stated one idea would be for Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes November 15, 2022 Page 4 1 Mr. Grittman to go through the City Code to see if there are items that may not be as friendly 2 to businesses as it could be. Commissioner Erickson suggested exploring some of those areas. 3 Mr. Grittman stated it would be a joint effort between Planning Commission and the City 4 Council. Commissioner Morita suggested the code relating to tap rooms, taverns, distilleries 5 be reviewed. Commissioner Gaveske asked if there could be some collaboration between the 6 Planning Commission and the Chamber of Commerce. 7 8 VI.COMMUNITY FORUM. 9 10 No one appeared to address the Planning Commission. 11 12 VII.INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. 13 14 The next Planning Commission Meeting will be held on December 20, 2022. 15 16 VIII. ADJOURNMENT. 17 18 Motion by Commissioner Morita, seconded by Commissioner Erickson, to adjourn the 19 meeting at 7:50 p.m. 20 21 Motion carried 6-0. 22 23 24 Respectfully submitted, 25 Debbie Wolfe 26 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. N O R T H W E S T A S S O C I A T E D C O N S U L T A N T S , I N C . __________________________________________________________________ 4 1 5 0 O l s o n M e m o r i a l H i g h w a y , S t e . 3 2 0 , G o l d e n V a l l e y , M N 5 5 4 2 2 T e l e p h o n e : 7 6 3 . 9 5 7 . 1 1 0 0 W e b s i t e : w w w . n a c p l a n n i n g . c o m MEMORANDUM TO:St. Anthony Village Planning Commission FROM:Stephen Grittman DATE:January 12, 2023 MEETING DATE:January 17, 2023 RE:January Planning Commission Agenda FILE NO:323.02 For January’s Planning Commission agenda, there are no pending applications for hearing or review. The Code Review Committee is working on additional code amendments that will come to the Commission as part of an upcoming hearing date. For the January meeting, you will find three sets of documents. The first is a copy of the 2023 Planning Commission work plan reviewed in draft form last November. The second is a collection of draft materials that will be incorporated into the City’s Goal Setting activities later in the month. There are three components to the Goal-Setting materials: (1) a Powerpoint that summarizes 2022 accomplishments, and ongoing or upcoming activities; (2) an “Emerging Issues” chart that identifies planning-related elements the City is likely to encounter in the next few years; and (3) an Implementation Matrix for tasks that were directed by the adoption of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, along with my notes as to status for the planning-related activities. The Matrix includes a long list of activities for other departments. This version does not include the status of those elements – they are being completed by other staff in preparation for the Goal Setting packet materials. For discussion at the Commission meeting, I would welcome your comments and questions related to these or other items. The Commission chair is also invited to participate in the Goal Setting sessions, and we can raise your suggestions or questions as appropriate. Finally, the third set of documents is a collection of Planning Commission training materials, many of which you may have seen. Because the current Commissioners are returning for 2023, I have not planned any particular orientation time, but thought I would provide these materials, and we can discuss any of the parts you would like at the upcoming meeting. If the 1 Commission’s preference is for a more structured presentation, I would be happy to prepare that for a future meeting. In the meantime, feel free to review the attached material and we will discuss as desired. 3301 Silver Lake Road, St. Anthony, Minnesota 55418-1699 Office: (612) 782-3301 • Fax: (612) 782-3302 • www.savmn.com Our Mission is to be a progressive and welcoming Village that is walkable, sustainable and safe. St. Anthony Village Planning Commission Proposed 2023 Work Plan General Items 1.Review and Recommend Actions on Land Use and Development Applications 2.Monitor Common Planning and Zoning Issues for Follow-up 3.Maintain Training Opportunities on Land Use Issues 4.Maintain Communications with City Council as to Land Use Policy Specific Tasks for 2023; 2022 Recap 1.Reconcile conflicts between proposed land use plan map and zoning map. (Underway) 2.Update Zoning Districts, where needed, to better address contemporary development patterns and demand. a.Industrial District – Land Uses, Architectural Standards, Site Planning (Complete in 2022) b.Commercial District – Land Uses, Architectural Standards, Site Planning (Complete in 2022) c.Update Zoning Regulations, where needed, to implement specific Comp Plan goals, as well as common zoning issues. (Ongoing) d.Review dimensional and use standards in R-1 Districts to maintain intended neighborhood character, and promote existing residential reinvestment (Partial - Holding for SF Rental discussion in 2023) e.Others as identified throughout year. (Various City Code Updates completed, including Fencing, Swimming Pools, Natural Landscapes, Bus Bench Regulations, Dumpsters, Right of Way usage, etc.) 3.Address Sign Regulations, including Temporary Signs (Underway) 4.Research and Review Lighting Regulations (To do) 5.Research and Review Tobacco Regulations (Underway) 6.Hemp/THC Retailing (2023) 7.Single Family Rental Research (Underway, and 2023) 8.Temporary Buildings (2023) 9.Others as Identified Monitor Emerging Planning Issues and Address as Needed 1/12/2023 1 City of St. Anthony Village 2021 Planner’s Report A Village Within the City Year In Review – Private Applications The Planning Commission held meetings/hearings on the following applications: a. CUP for digital sign (High School) b. Consideration of Comprehensive Plan Land Use Amendment for the Urban Grove property (denied) c. Fence Variance for Boulevard Auto e. Plat for Bremer/City/Interstate Project (New Bank Site) f. Fence Height Code Amendment g. Chase Bank PUD Permit h. Reviews and Work Session Participation related to Single Family Rental, 3803 Stinson Property, other code-related topics i. Setback Variances at 2910 Silver Lane 1/12/2023 2 Year In Review – City-Initiated Projects The Planning Commission held meetings/hearings on the following Amendments to the following Ordinance sections: A. Swimming Pool Regulations and Safety B. Refuse and Dumpster Requirements C. Updates to the Commercial and Industrial Zoning Districts per Comprehensive Plan policies D. City Code Updates related to Pavements, Driveways, Administrative Fees, Non-Commercial Signs E. Natural Landscapes (per Sustainability policies) F. Review of Options for R-1 Residential regulations G. Feeding of Wild Animals H. Residential Fencing regulations I. Residential Rubbish Container amendments J. Regulations for Brewery/Taprooms K. Bus Bench Licensing/Regulations L. Public Right of Way Maintenance and Use Looking Forward Implementing the Comprehensive Plan 1. Comprehensive Plan implementation over the next 5-10 years. •Establish priority work activities for staff and Planning Commission •Establish priorities for the annual city budget. •Establish priorities for the 5-year capital improvement expense plans. 2. The Planning Commission will continue undertaking priority work program activities in 2022. 1/12/2023 3 Examples of Upcoming Planning Commission Activity Near term activities for the Planning Commission will likely include Comprehensive Plan implementation, and the following: 1. Prioritization of Zoning ordinance amendments (Including Commercial and Industrial Uses) 2. Review of recent City zoning decisions and ordinance issues/gaps. 3. Monitoring and processing development applications Potential Planning Applications and Review •Interstate Development requests related to feasibility of 2401 Lowry (former Bremer Bank site). •City Gas Station redevelopment/zoning – pending interest. •Development inquiries at St. Anthony Shopping Center •Ongoing Code Updates: Residential Parking and Storage; Commercial and Temporary Sign Regulations; Food Truck Regulations; R-1 Zoning Regulations; Single Family Rental Regulations; Others arising from City Code re-codification •Consideration of Hemp and Legalization of Marijuana 1/12/2023 4 Emerging Issues Land Use and Zoning Topics Single Family Residential – Property Use, Growth and Long-term site usage, Home Office pressure; Housing maintenance code issues, esp. for single-family rental housing; Non-exclusive residential density (e.g., Minneapolis elimination of single-family zoning); Residential Solar installations – visual impacts Immediate Blending of commercial and industrial enterprises (e.g. small scale: brewery taprooms, and similar “maker” spaces that encourage both manufacturing and storefront retailing in the same space. 0-2 years Future reconversion of overbuilt senior housing units following baby-boom generation. 5-10+ years General Hemp and Marijuana Regulation – Options; Current state of regulations in other jurisdictions; Immediate Conflicts between public engagement efforts and declining civil discourse. Ongoing Expanding impacts of religious land use and assembly use – especially religious land uses in traditional residential settings. Ongoing “Amazon Effect” – variable pressures on existing commercial spaces due to online e-commerce; and/or related pressure to replace underused commercial and industrial areas with multi-family residential 0-2 years+ Transportation Topics Bicycle/Scooter rentals, and other commercial uses of the public right of way 0-2 years Autonomous and Electric vehicles – changes foreseen due to automobile storage and remote garage storage; changes due to need for charging station 2-5 years Car-sharing – long term impacts on possible reduction in overall automobiles-per-household in high car- sharing areas. 2-5 years For more information contact: Stephen Grittman City Planner NAC 651.726.7293 planner@savmn.com Questions? Item Time Frame Land Use and Zoning Topics • Single Family Residential – Property Use, Growth and Long-term site usage, Home Office pressure; Housing maintenance code issues, esp. for single-family rental housing; Non-exclusive residential density (e.g., Minneapolis elimination of single- family zoning); Residential Solar installations – visual impacts Immediate • Blending of commercial and industrial enterprises (e.g. small scale: brewery taprooms, and similar “maker” spaces that encourage both manufacturing and storefront retailing in the same space. 0-2 years • Future reconversion of overbuilt senior housing units following baby-boom generation. 5-10+ years • Affordable Housing Development – Regulations, Financing, Owner v. Rental aspects Immediate General • Hemp and Marijuana Regulation – Options; Current state of regulations in other jurisdictions; Immediate • Conflicts between public engagement efforts and declining civil discourse. Ongoing • Expanding impacts of religious land use and assembly use – especially religious land uses in traditional residential settings. Ongoing • “Amazon Effect” – variable pressures on existing commercial spaces due to online e- commerce; and/or related pressure to replace underused commercial and industrial areas with multi-family residential 0-2 years+ Transportation Topics • Bicycle/Scooter rentals, and other commercial uses of the public right of way 0-2 years • Autonomous and Electric vehicles – changes foreseen due to automobile storage and remote garage storage; changes due to need for charging station 2-5 years • Car-sharing – long term impacts on possible reduction in overall automobiles-per- household in high car-sharing areas. 2-5 years St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 1 IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX The implementation work plan outlined in the following table expands upon the Strategies and Action Items addressed in all preceding chapters of this plan by assigning a responsible body or actor (who), a timeframe for action (when), and a suggestion of where the funding that will enable the action will come from (how). While the following lays out a work plan for the next 5 to 10 years, it is to be expected that the task list will change from year to year. As time goes on, some tasks will take longer than expected and will shift into the next year’s list. Priorities will change, and tasks will be moved up to be accomplished earlier. New ideas will be presented to accomplish the goals and vision citied here and will be added to the task list. This is all part of the cyclical process of implementation. Implementation actions and strategies are arranged in the Implementation Matrix by plan chapter, which has the following color scheme: Land Use Housing Transportation Sanitary Sewer Water Supply Surface Water Sustainability St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 2 Comprehensive Plan Action or Strategy Who Progress Coordinate with school district and community education to plan for changing programming and spatial needs at the community center. City staff Utilize the Planned Unit Development re-zoning as a tool at key locations to promote market flexibility and integrated land uses. City staff, Planning Commission, City Council Ongoing with 2022 projects and future Explore available grants and funding opportunities to promote the type of desired development. City staff Conduct further study and planning on the re-development or better utilization of the current industrial park. City staff, Planning Commission Ongoing – monitoring land use requests by permit and/or redevelopment inquiries Monitor the interest in teardowns and large expansions of single-family homes and examine the zoning code to ensure opportunities for investment are maximized. City staff Single Family Residential standards currently under study. Review and revise the purpose statement, allowed uses and dimensional standards of the R-4 Residential district as necessary to support the higher density residential uses guided in this Comprehensive Plan update. City staff, Planning Commission, City Council Modified and adopted Plan for the re-development of underutilized commercial properties, especially those on higher volume streets and transit routes, for higher-density, multi-family and senior housing. City staff, Planning Commission Considered and some projects approved – further consideration paused to allow completion of current projects Explore options that revise the zoning code to allow for residential uses in commercial districts, in order to better meet anticipated market and transportation trends. City staff, Planning Commission, City Council This would occur through PUD zoning St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 3 Identify areas in the community for the development of new, higher end office space. City staff Currently this would occur as redevelopment in Commercial or Industrial Districts Identify areas in the city for co-operative senior housing at medium density. City staff Utilize available financing techniques to encourage multi- family housing developments to include a component of affordable housing. City staff, developers Explore the potential for affordable housing development at the city-owned site on Kenzie Terrace (former bowling alley site). City staff, affordable housing developers This project has shifted the housing component to the former Bremer Bank site per the Bank’s redevelopment plan Allow housing churn of single-family homes by continuing to plan for senior housing options at all affordability levels. City staff, senior housing project developers Some Senior Housing approved and under development Evaluate the appropriateness for ordinances that encourage smaller apartment units. City staff, Planning Commission, City Council Accommodated through PUD Anticipate and meet increased rental demand at all affordability levels. (Refer to Tools Matrix in the Housing Plan Chapter) City staff; affordable housing developers; Country HRAs; current rental property owners Reduce overall community housing cost burden, particularly by supporting those projects that provide affordability for households in the <50% AMI categories. (Refer to Tools Matrix in the Housing Plan Chapter) City staff, Planning Commission, City Council St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 4 Anticipate the need for preservation of naturally-occurring affordable housing within all affordability bands. (Refer to Tools Matrix in the Housing Plan Chapter) City staff Single Family housing regulations currently being reviewed in this regard Support housing maintenance assistance programs, particularly for lower-income households. (Refer to Tools Matrix in the Housing Plan Chapter) City staff Code amendments in process related to maintenance and safety Encourage increased bicycle and pedestrian movement to both local and regional destinations City staff Bicycle trail planning in process Provide facilities and develop land use patterns that encourage transit use City staff Bus stop regulations revised; City has worked with Metro Transit on Silver Lake Road stop updates Monitor for potential future safety and traffic operations needs at: • Silver Lake Rd & Silver Lane • 39th Ave & Silver Lake Rd • 39th Ave & Stinson Blvd • 37th Ave & Stinson Blvd • 37th Ave & Silver Lake Rd • 37th Ave & Highcrest Rd 2017 programmed improvements include upgrades to the existing signalized intersection including new APS push buttons, countdown timers and ADA reconstructs. City Staff, Hennepin and Ramsey Counties, Minneapolis Park Board, City of Columbia Heights St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 5 Optimize signal time and coordination between St. Anthony Blvd. intersections at New Brighton Blvd. (CR 88) and Silver Lake Rd./Kenzie Terrace (CR 153) City staff, Hennepin County Lengthen the northeast bound right turn lane from Kenzie Terrace (CR 153) to southeast St. Anthony Blvd. from 170 feet to 200 feet. City staff, Hennepin County Lengthen the westbound left turn lane from Kenzie Terrace (CR 153) to southbound Stinson Parkway by shortening or removing the existing left turn lane from Kenzie Terrace to the Bremer Bank Building. City staff, Hennepin County Lengthen the northbound left turn lane from Stinson Parkway to westbound Lowry Avenue from 150 feet to 300 feet. City staff, Minneapolis Park Board, Hennepin County Evaluate solutions to improve intersection safety and traffic operations at: • 29th Avenue & Stinson Blvd. • 29th Avenue & Silver Lake Rd. • 29th Avenue & New Brighton Blvd. City staff, Minneapolis Park Board, Hennepin County Programmed reconstruction of County Road C/County Road 94, including right-of-way acquisition, drainage and utility work. Ramsey County, Hennepin County, St. Anthony Village St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 6 Evaluate solutions to improve crossing safety and conditions at the following intersections: 1. Kenzie Terrace/Silver Lake Road and St. Anthony Blvd. 2. New Brighton Blvd. and St. Anthony Blvd. 3. 29th Avenue and New Brighton Blvd. 4. 33rd Avenue and Highway 8/Highcrest Road Ramsey County, Hennepin County, St. Anthony Village, City of Roseville Evaluate solutions to improve pedestrian connections to St. Anthony Village High School, Central School Park, and Wilshere Park Elementary School City staff Explore solutions to deter or eliminate unwanted through traffic on the following neighborhood local streets: 1. 39th Avenue/Fordham Drive NE between Silver Lake Road and Silver Lane 2. Parking lot between New Brighton Blvd./Kenzie Terrace and along 27th Avenue to Stinson Blvd. 3. 36th Avenue between Silver Lake Road and Highcrest Road 4. 36th Avenue/Coolidge Street between Silver Lake Road and 37th Avenue 5. Belden Drive west of Silver Lake Road City Staff, Hennepin County St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 7 Proposed functional classification change from local street to Minor Collector on the roadways identified in the Transportation Chapter of this Plan (Figure 6-14). City staff Evaluate potential to add on-road bike lanes on 29th Ave from Stinson Blvd to New Brighton Blvd. City staff Evaluate potential for adding an on-road bicycle facility on St. Anthony Boulevard between Stinson and Ridgway Pkwy. City staff Evaluate adequacy of transit service in redevelopment areas and support planned increased frequency on bus routes 15 (formerly route 4), 25, 32, 801 within the City Metro Transit, City staff Evaluate the potential to adjust Route 25 to remain on Stinson Parkway and Stinson Blvd. between Kenzie Terrace and 29th Street Metro Transit, City staff Coordinate with Hennepin County and City of Minneapolis regarding planned bikeway and sidewalk (on east side of roadway between St. Anthony Blvd. and 37th Avenue). Designate as RBTN alignment. City staff, Hennepin County, City of Minneapolis Coordinate with Ramsey County regarding planned bikeway along Silver Lake Road from Silver Lane to County Road E; evaluate potential for multiuse trail connection to Silverwood Park. City staff, Ramsey County At railroad crossings on Stinson Blvd, coordinate with Canadian Pacific Railroad to improve safety and operations City staff St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 8 while minimizing effects on other transportation system uses and adjacent land uses Coordinate with Metro Transit and Minneapolis regarding potential arterial bus rapid transit on Central Avenue (Increased Revenue Scenario – unfunded project) Metro Transit, City staff Consider planning for potential long-term reconstruction to tie into Corridor Study and preliminary design plans to the east from Marshall St. to Johnson Ave. Hennepin County, City of Minneapolis Consider a roundabout or other intersection control improvements at St. Anthony Blvd./Silver Lake Rd./Kenzie Terrace (CR 153). City staff, Hennepin County Consider a roundabout or other intersection control improvements at the intersection of Kenzie Terrace (CR 153)/Lowry Avenue and Stinson Parkway. City staff, Minneapolis Park Board, Hennepin County Zoning updates, per “Suggested Zoning Code Updates” on p. 198 City staff Complete and in process Foss Road Lift Station Pump Replacement/Rehab City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff Harding Lift Station Pump Replacement/Rehab City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 9 Lift Station SCADA System City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff Foss Road Lift Station Pump Replacement/Rehab City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff Harding Lift Station Pump Replacement/Rehab City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff Continue to rehabilitate sanitary sewer system in an effort to reduce inflow and infiltration, completing budgeted improvements through 2025 that include upgrades along Skycroft and Maplewood drive in 2017. City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff The City has implemented, or plans to implement, the following education and outreach programs related to water supply: • Billing inserts include educational information • Consumer Confidence Reports prepared annually • Staff training includes awareness of conservation goals • Facility tours are available on request • Sustainability Fair to educate about everyday sustainability • Rain barrel seminar and rebate program • Village Notes community newsletter quarterly • Information available at the water reuse facility City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 10 • Information available on City website (http://www.ci.saint-anthony.mn.us/) WTP and Well SCADA Systems City of St. Anthony Ground Storage Repair City of St. Anthony High Service Pump Upgrades and Piping City of St. Anthony Well 3 Casing City of St. Anthony Well 4 Pump Restoration City of St. Anthony Well 5 Pump Restoration City of St. Anthony Tower Painting City of St. Anthony Well 4 Permanent Generator City of St. Anthony See Appendix 1 Continue to implement effective and innovative stormwater management practices and rain gardens. City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff, City Engineer Adopt and report on measurable, publicly announced surface water improvement targets for water bodies. City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff, City Engineer Select key locations for the addition of on-road, protected, and off-road bicycle trails, as shown on the transportation map. City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff, City Engineer St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 11 Dedicate key pedestrian infrastructure gaps as identified on the map as priority projects in the Capital Improvement Program. City of St. Anthony Public Works Staff, City Engineer Reduce chemical use citywide by engaging with public works and the school district in a conversation about best practices. City Staff Encourage installation of renewable energy generation capacity by re-evaluating and expanding existing city ordinances related to solar. City Staff Facilitate creation of community gardens: defining them and addressing them as an allowed use in particular zoning districts in City Code. City Staff Write an ordinance that more clearly allows and regulates urban agriculture, specifically bees and chickens. City Staff Create incentives and programming to increase tree plantings on private lots and in public right of way. City Staff Collaborate with the Parks Commission to create park/city land management standards/practices that maximize native landscaping and low-maintenance management. City Staff Conserve drinking/groundwater resources by strengthening a watering ordinance, water-wise City Staff Natural landscape ordinance adopted, opening up additional natural landscape cover St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 12 landscaping ordinance/guidance, and/or guidance on rainwater harvesting. Develop a policy, grounded in City data, best practices and specific local benchmarks, related to CO2 emission reduction. City Staff Develop an Energy Action Plan that audits current city facilities and identifies areas of energy reduction for city fleet, and city-owned buildings. City Staff Consider development of an Energy Action Plan that outlines community education, outreach, and financing/incentives for private households and businesses to invest in energy efficient appliances, vehicles, and other efforts. City Staff Grow a robust urban tree canopy by develop a street tree strategy that capitalizes on street reconstruction as an opportunity to budget for and achieve urban canopy/tree planting goals. City Staff St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 13 City of St. Anthony Implementation Spreadsheet Action Description Timeframe ongoing annually 1‐3 yrs 1‐5 yrs 3‐6 yrs Review city ordinances/codes To encourage or require water efficient landscaping. Review city ordinance/codes To permit water reuse options, especially for non‐ potable purposes like irrigation, groundwater recharge, and industrial use. Review ordinances to limit irrigation Review outdoor irrigation installations codes to require high efficiency systems (e.g. those with soil moisture sensors or programmable watering areas) in new installations or system replacements Make water system infrastructure improvements Conduct audience‐appropriate water conservation education and outreach Conduct a facility water use audit For both indoor and outdoor use, including system components Install enhanced meters Capable of automated readings to detect spikes in consumption Install water conservation fixtures and appliances or change processes to conserve water Toilets, facets, etc. Repair leaking system components (e.g., pipes, valves) Investigate the reuse of reclaimed water (e.g., stormwater, wastewater effluent, process wastewater, etc.) Reduce outdoor water use (e.g., turf replacement/reduction, rain gardens, rain barrels, smart irrigation, outdoor water use meters, etc.) Train employees how to conserve water Include for new employee training Increasing block rates billing strategy Rate structure for Residential, Commercial, Industrial, and Institutional customers St. Anthony 2040 Comprehensive Plan Chapter 10: Implementation 14 Continue to participate in the GreenStep Cities Program Voluntary program to aid cities in achieving their sustainability and quality‐of‐life goals Rainfall sensors required on landscape irrigation systems Conserve water and reduce utility bill when there is a sufficient moisture for landscape area. Watering restriction requirements Odd/Even day watering Billing inserts or tips printed on the actual bill Educational information supplied as billing insert Consumer Confidence Reports Report of City’s water quality Direct mailings (water audit/retrofit kits, showerheads, brochures) City is looking into using direct mailings to further educate residents on the benefits of water conservation. K‐12 Education programs (Project Wet, Drinking Water Institute, presentations) Making programs to educate school age children on water resources. ✓ Sustainability Report 1 Planning and Zoning Basics Information for Planning Commissioners and others interested in the regulation of land use in Minnesota Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. © 2022 2 Table of Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Meeting Conduct and Robert’s Rules of Order . . . . . . 4 Comprehensive Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Rezoning and Zoning Amendments. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 Conditional Use Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9 Interim Use Permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Variances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Findings of Fact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 “60 Day Rule” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Subdivisions and Plats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 Planned Unit Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Nonconformities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 Annexation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 3 Introduction This material has been assembled as a “primer” on planning and zoning for Planning Commission members and City Council members, as well as interested City staff and members of the public. Our intent is to provide a usable background for typical planning and zoning issues faced by the City’s Planning Commission. Public Health, Safety , and Welfare . Planning and zoning activities are conducted as a part of the “police powers” – protection of public health, safety, and general welfare. Because the way land is used by private property owners can affect other property owners and the public, courts have interpreted the “police power” to include the regulation of land use. The City’s authority to regulate land use is a power granted by the State government. The Legislature determines what powers the City has, and does not have. All of this power exists within the context of the U.S. Constitution which defines and restricts governmental authority. Some of the most evident ways that land uses affect the public is through the need for clean water supply, sanitary waste systems, stormwater drainage, and the need for public street systems. In addition, private land use creates the need for fire protection and law enforcement. In short, private land development creates a significant demand on the public for services. As a result, the public has a significant interest in ensuring that land is used in a responsible and efficient manner. Land use regulation is part planning theory and part property rights law. To help both public officials and citizens in understanding the complexities of land use regulation, we have compiled this material covering some of the most common planning issues that are faced by growing communities. This material does not cover everything, nor does it cover all aspects of each issue. Moreover, each community has its own set of specific regulations and requirements. Nonetheless, we hope that it provides a solid underpinning so City officials will feel comfortable addressing the situations faced on a monthly basis. 4 Mee ting Conduct and “Robert ’s Rules of O rder ” Public meetings are conducted generally under “Robert’s Rules of Order”, usually modified somewhat for convenience to allow a less formal meeting environment. The purpose of these rules are to create an orderly process for information gathering, public participation, and ultimately, decision-making. In most communities, the chair assumes a significant amount of latitude in modifying the strict rules, but should be ready to submit to a more formal process when preferred by the group, or at any time when better information will possibly result. A simple rule of thumb is to err on the side of better information, or more information, in determining the amount of formal process to apply to a given situation. A typical meeting agenda will consist of some or all of the following elements: A.Chair’s announcement that the meeting is open – a “Call to Order” B.Approval of Minutes of previous meeting(s) C.Announcements, if any D.Adoption of the Agenda (members have the opportunity to recommend the addition of items to the published agenda) E.Consideration of Agenda Items a.Chair announces the agenda item b.Chair asks for a presentation of the Staff Report c.Chair asks for a presentation from the Applicant d.Chair opens the public hearing (this may be done on the initiative of the Chair (some jurisdictions hold a formal vote to open the hearing, but this is not required) e.Chair announces the format for public comment, including the following: i.Public comments must germane to the issue. ii.Speakers must address their comments and questions to the Chair and Commission, not to the applicant or other individuals at the meeting. iii.Speakers are directed to focus on new information relevant to the issue and avoid repetitive comments. iv.Audience must not interrupt the speaker with comments, applause, or other disruptions. v.Speakers must identify themselves by name and address, including representation of any interested party. vi.Speakers must speak from the microphone/podium to ensure that they are heard by Commission members, recording equipment, and those observing the meeting electronically. vii.Planning Commission members may ask questions of speakers while they are at the podium. viii.Answers to speakers’ questions are typically held until all speakers have been heard. This rule is often modified to avoid many speakers asking identical questions. f.Speaker testimony is taken as called on by the Chair – the City may require speakers to have signed in to speak, although this is often waived in smaller hearings. g.Chair closes the public hearing at the end of public testimony (see item d. above). In the alternative, the Chair may ask for a motion to continue the 5 hearing to a future specific time and date when additional information is required prior to Planning Commission action. h.Discussion. Once the hearing is closed, the Chair invites members to discuss the issue. The purpose of discussion is to ensure that adequate information has been gathered to formulate a motion. The Commission may ask staff, applicant, or members of the public for clarification of specific points. F.Following discussion, a motion for action on the item should be made. Motion may be to recommend approval, recommend denial, or to table action. If the hearing was continued (see g. above), a motion to table action would be in order. The Planning Commission should be aware of any “60-Day Rule” issues relating to the amount of time for a decision. a.A motion for action must be seconded. Occasionally, a member may request that a specific motion be amended to include additional language, such as a new condition or to refer to certain findings. For most circumstances, this is done by requesting that the motion-maker and the second accept a “friendly amendment”, without separate votes on the amendment. b.If the motion-maker and/or second do not accept the “friendly amendment”, a member may make a motion to have a formal vote to amend the original motion – this is a rare occurrence in informal meeting settings such as a Planning Commission. c.Once the language of the motion is agreed to, the Chair calls for a vote. For most zoning-related items, a simple majority of members present carries the item. d.Special situations: i.If a motion to deny or approve fails to receive a simple majority (either gains only a minority or ends in a tie vote), the Chair should declare that the motion fails, and ask those who voted against the motion to state their reasons on the record. Under this scenario, the item goes to the City Council without a recommendation from Planning Commission, with the stated reasons servings as the “findings”. ii.In the alternative, a member may make a substitute motion and the Commission may consider it separately. G.After all items on the adopted agenda have been disposed of, the Chair may entertain a motion to adjourn. This is considered a non-debatable motion, and should proceed directly to a vote after it has been seconded. Comprehensive Plan The City’s Comprehensive Plan is a document that describes the community’s vision of itself in the future. The enabling planning statutes (found in Minn. Stat. §462.351 through §462.364) give a community the authority to plan and manage land use and related facilities (such as transportation, utilities, and other functions) to accomplish specific objectives. These objectives are quoted as follows: The legislature finds that municipalities are face with mounting problems in providing means of guiding future development of land so as to insure a safer, 6 more pleasant and more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial and public activities, to preserve agricultural and open lands, and to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare. This statute recognizes that the development of land is not merely a private venture. Instead, private landowners create a partnership with the public to develop the land - the landowner provides the private land (as well as the capital to develop it) and public agrees to provide access to properly maintained roads, highways, sanitary sewer treatment, water supply, stormwater management systems, parks and recreation, police and fire protection, and other public functions. Because the public has such a great stake in the ongoing cost of serving private land uses, the legislature has granted communities the ability to plan for development and make sure that the public’s costs will be manageable in the future. In the seven county Twin Cities Metropolitan Area, the legislature has established an overarching set of requirements for local Comprehensive Plans. The purpose of these additional requirements, found in Minn. Stat. Minn. Stat. §473, especially §473.175, is to help ensure that development in the various metropolitan communities is consistent with abutting municipalities, and to ensure that local plans are consistent with metro-wide systems and goals, such as regional highways, transit, parks, wastewater systems, water supply, and housing. A municipality’s Comprehensive Plan, and requests for its amendment, are routinely reviewed by the Metropolitan Council in this regard. Me tro or Non-Metro ? The primary difference between metro and non-metro counties in Comprehensive Plan impact relates to priority of Plan or Zoning. In the seven county area, the Comprehensive Plan is considered primary in the event there is a conflict between the Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. For instance, if the Comprehensive Plan calls for an area to be guided commercial in the land use plan, but the City has designated the area as a residential zoning district, courts will give deference to the Comprehensive Plan land use designation over the zoning. In contrast, in the communities not in the Twin Cities seven county area have the reverse condition – Zoning regulations (and map) are prioritized over the Comprehensive Plan. In these localities, the Comprehensive Plan serves more as a guide plan, but land use disputes rely on the zoning to determine the actual effective regulations. However, most zoning actions include reference to consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, so there is some force in the Plan that filters down into individual planning and zoning decisions. Land Us e P lan . The most recognizable component of the Comprehensive Plan is the Land Use Plan. This plan identifies various areas of the community as being guided for various types of land use, including land needed for public uses. However, the Comprehensive Plan is usually made up of many other important sections, including transportation and community facilities plans, housing plans, and natural resources plans, to name just a few. Goals and Policies . Perhaps the most important (although often overlooked) chapter of the Comprehensive Plan is the statements of Goals and Policies of the community. This section really defines what is meant by all of the rest of the text and maps that comprise the Plan document. The Comprehensive Plan, at its essence, is a policy document relating to land use and community development, although the maps and pictures usually get the most attention. 7 In considering various development proposals, the Planning Commission and City Council should be able to identify specific goal or policy statements that they believe are accomplished by the project being presented. If a project cannot meet the goals and policies, it is a clear indication that the project is not consistent with the community’s Comprehensive Plan (even if the land use is proper). At this point, the City needs to decide how the project should be changed to be consistent, or sometimes, whether the Comprehensive Plan needs to be considered for an amendment. Rezoning and Zoning Amendments Zoning Amendme nt - A change to either the text or the map of the Zoning Ordinance. Zoning is the most commonly used technique in implementing the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The Zoning Ordinance is not a goal in itself - it should be thought of as the legal means of ensuring that the goals of the Comprehensive Plan are carried out by private landowners. Together with the Subdivision Ordinance, the Zoning Ordinance works to regulate almost all forms of land use and development. Whereas the Subdivision Ordinance regulates the conversion of raw land to a condition in which it is ready to be built upon, the Zoning Ordinance regulates the physical occupation of the land by a building or use. Types of Amend ments . Zoning Amendments are made in one of two categories: (1) Amendments to the text of the City’s Zoning Ordinance, which apply generally; and (2) Amendments to the map, which apply to specific property. The City’s Zoning Ordinance includes a section which establishes the process for adopting a zoning amendment, including the process and the standard for evaluating the merits of the proposed change. The standards for considering the rezoning are generalized, and do not include details of a particular development scheme. It is not permissible to approve rezonings with conditions. Common rezoning criteria are as follows: i.Traffic levels capable of being handled on existing roadways. ii.Utility demands capable of being served with existing utility capacity. iii.Land Use compatibility with adjoining property. iv.Consistency with Land Use guide plan. v.Environmental concerns (air, soil, water) and potential hazards to the public. vi.Impacts on Schools, Parks or Open Space. Rezoning land from commercial or industrial to residential requires a simple majority of the City Council. On the other hand, rezoning land from residential to commercial or industrial requires the “super-majority” – technically two-thirds of the eligible voters. In most communities, a super-majority consists of a 4/5 vote of the City Council. Vot ing on a n Amendm ent . Where a member is absent, but otherwise eligible to vote, the super-majority requirements would remain 2/3 of the full council. Where the City Council has been reduced to four members by a vacancy on the Council, or a member who is considered ineligible due to a conflict of interest, the requirement is 2/3 of the remaining eligible members. The rules relating to “super-majority” can be complicated when members are 8 missing, or are ineligible due to conflict of interest. The City’s Attorney should be consulted in these cases to ensure that the proper voting requirements have been met. It should be noted that for the Planning Commission, no super-majority vote comes into play. As an advisory board, the Commission passes on its recommendation by simple majority vote. It is important to remember that zoning amendments are adopted by enactment of a new ordinance. This includes both text amendments and rezonings of property. The City needs to put the proposed amendment in the form of an ordinance, adopt it by the required vote, then publish it as with any other ordinance before it becomes effective. Challenges . Zoning amendments are occasionally litigated. The standard of review is “rational basis”, and the basis Cities should rely on is direction from the Comprehensive Plan. The factors listed above, and the quality of the record documenting the proposal’s consistency with those factors, will often be determinative in legal disputes involving rezoning requests. As a rule, the City has broad discretion to consider zoning patterns, and their relationship to the Comprehensive Plan. Conditional Use Permits Conditional Use - A type of land use in a particular district which is presumed to be allowed, but requires special, additional standards and review due to the existence of some aspect of the use which may create a nuisance or place an extraordinary burden on public services. Conditional Use Permits, once granted, are considered to be permanent, without need for renewal, so long as the conditions applied to the permit are maintained. A Conditional Use Permit may be transferred to other persons, again as long as they continue to meet the original conditions. The exception to this “permanence” is when the use lapses for more than one year. In that case, the property must apply for a new CUP if they wish to reinstate the use. Disputes . Conditional Use Permits are, by far, the most commonly litigated zoning matter. Whereas the development of Comprehensive Plans allows the City to exercise the most discretion, Conditional Use Permits allow, typically, the least. The general standard for the City is that if the conditions are met by the permittee, the City has very little discretion to deny the CUP request. Moreover, conditions must be rationally related to the impacts created by the proposed use. Basis of R eview . The Zoning Ordinance applies two sets of conditions in the review of any Conditional Use Permit application - general conditions applying to all CUPs which serve as the basis for findings of approval or denial, and specific conditions listed with each individual use in the Zoning Ordinance district section. The first set of conditions is as follows: 9 i.The proposed action has been considered in relation to the specific policies and provisions of and has been found to be consistent with the official Comprehensive Land Use Plan. ii.The proposed use is or will be compatible with present and future land uses of the area. iii.The proposed use conforms with all performance standards contained herein. iv.The proposed use will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed. v.The proposed use can be accommodated with existing public services and will not overburden the City’s service capacity. vi.Traffic generation by the proposed use is within the capabilities of streets serving the property. The second set of conditions is listed with the use in each district. The typical review will be whether the specific standards are met, then whether the general conditions are met. It is with this set of general conditions where the City may exercise some discretion, but only in the context of the neighborhood and the Comprehensive Plan. In addition to the stated conditions listed in the Zoning Ordinance, the City can impose other conditions on the use, so long as those conditions are intended to correct a specific deficiency of the project that is within the City’s regulatory authority. For instance, the City might choose to require specific landscaping requirements on a proposed use that creates an identified visual conflict with a neighboring use. However, the City could not arbitrarily decide to require a new business to restrict its hours of operation, unless the restriction was directly related to a specific public health, safety, or welfare issue. In summary, Conditional Uses need to be addressed carefully, and the City uses most of its discretion in establishing the use in the ordinance. Additional conditions placed on such uses must be specific, and tied to a quantifiable issue. Vague Conditional Use Permits create confusion for users, as well as for future City Councils in trying to fairly apply the regulations. Interim Use Permits Whereas Conditional Use Permits are considered to “run with the land” when all of the conditions are complied with, Interim Use Permits may be granted for a specified period of time. The municipality must be able to ascertain a specific date or event that will result in the termination of the IUP. The statutes require that the applicant must agree to any conditions deemed necessary by the municipality. As such, it is good practice to have a signed development agreement that specifies those conditions, including the termination date and/or event that memorializes the applicant’s required consent. Variances Va riance - An approved departure from the standard imposed by a (usually) dimensional zoning regulation, such as size, area, length, or bulk. 10 Variances are somewhat less likely than Conditional Use Permits to be the subject of litigation, because the City has more latitude to determine the meaning of the standard for variance approval, namely, the existence of “special conditions”, and “reasonable use”. It is important to keep in mind that the City’s standard zoning regulations are presumed to allow reasonable use of property. Only special, unique conditions that interfere with reasonable use can impel the City to depart from its standard regulations. The most common concern related to variance decisions is based on “precedent” - whether the applicant is being treated similarly to like properties in like situations. To ensure that people are being treated similarly, variance approval just because something seems like a nice idea should be avoided. Uniqueness . Variances are intentionally made to be difficult to obtain, based on the premise that the City establishes zoning standards for the protection of public health, safety, and welfare. Therefore, a departure from the regulations should be considered rarely, only where unique, special conditions are apparent which would deny the applicant reasonable use of the land in question. Amendment Rather Than Variance . If the circumstances that generate a variance request are common, the City should enact a regulation which applies to all properties rather than regulate by variance. If the regulations allow a reasonable use, the purposes of the ordinance are realized without the need for a variance. Practical Difficulties and Reasonable Use . Probably the most routine aspect of variance consideration is the focus on a non-economic basis for the request. The ordinance states that a variance may be considered where application of the regulations creates practical difficulties in putting the property to reasonable use. This standard is typically applied by considering whether a fully conforming use can be made of the property without the variance. For instance, can a conforming house with a two car garage be located on a residential property without the need for a variance? If it can, then a variance request from something outside the typical requirements might be viewed as a matter of convenience rather than reasonable use. The practical difficulties that interfere with the proposed use must be “non- economic”. This requirement is made since virtually everyone may make an economic claim - the application of the standards regulations are too costly to comply with. Standard s of Review . The primary considerations for variance review are as follows: (a)The practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance are due to the existence of special conditions and circumstances which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved. (1)Special conditions may include exceptional topographic or water conditions or, in the case of an existing lot or parcel of record, narrowness, shallowness, insufficient area or shape of the property. (2)Practical difficulties caused by the special conditions and circumstances may not be solely economic in nature, if a reasonable use of the property exists under the terms of this Chapter. 11 (3)Special conditions and circumstances causing practical difficulties shall not be a result of lot size or building location when the lot qualifies as a buildable parcel. (b)Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of this Chapter, or deny the applicant of the ability to put the property in question to a reasonable use. (c)The special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. (d)Granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Chapter to other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. (e)The request is not a use variance. (f)Variance requested is the minimum variance necessary to accomplish the intended purpose of the applicant. It is important to notice that each of these standards must be met in order to qualify for variance consideration. Variances should be put to this test rigorously in order that the City applies its ordinances equitably. Finally, the City may still deny a variance if despite these conditions, the result would be contrary to the Comprehensive Plan. However, where the refusal to grant a variance results in a situation which makes it impossible to use the land under the ordinance, the City may be found liable for a “regulatory taking”, effectively requiring the City to compensate the property owner for the fair market value of the property. Findings of Fact Findings of Fact - The legal, written substantiation for a land use decision. One of the most critical factors in making land use decisions, whether rezonings, variances, conditional use permits, or subdivisions, is that the decision meets the legal standard for local government land use regulation. This is often called the “rational basis” standard of review. In short, a local government may regulate land use so long as there is a rational basis for the regulation, and the regulation bears a reasonable relationship to the attainment of a legitimate governmental interest. Violations of this test are often called “arbitrary and capricious”. For many land use decisions, there are numerous reasons the decision was made. Each of these reasons may be completely legitimate, and based on evidence available to the Planning Commission or City Council. However, if a decision is challenged, and the City has not made its decision accompanied by written findings of fact, the Court may throw out the City’s decision, and put itself in the City’s place. There are a number of standards to apply when making the findings: 1.Findings need to be made “contemporaneously” with the decision. The City does not have the latitude to decide an issue one month, then adopt formal findings the next. Recent court decisions have made it clear that the City needs to support its 12 decision with findings at the time of the decision. This can make things difficult if the 60-day calendar is running out. 2.Findings need to be based on evidence submitted as a part of the City’s hearing process. This means that if the City is going to decide a permit request based on a particular reason, that reason must have been a part of the debate or submissions made to the City. It does not necessarily have to have been brought up by the applicant. Planning Commissioners or Councilmembers may raise an issue during the debate, and having arrived at a conclusion based on that issue, may include it in the findings. 3.Findings need to be written. This means that the City should rely on a written record documenting the debate and the decision, and the record should include the findings. This may be in the form of a separate resolution, or it may be imbedded into the meeting minutes. 4.Findings should be as specific as possible. They should include references to specific policies or components of the City’s Comprehensive Plan or a specific ordinance standard. Vague findings may be better than none, but only a little better. If a City makes clear, written, contemporaneous findings of fact with their land use decisions, a court will most often rely on the City’s record in reviewing a challenged City decision. And, if the findings meet the rational basis test, the City’s decision will most likely withstand challenge. “60 Day Rule ” This rule is a statute (Minn. Stat. §15.99) which requires local governments and state agencies to respond to zoning applications within (usually) 60 days of application. There are a number of complications to this law. 1.The City has 15 days from the time that an application is made to determine whether or not the application is complete. The City must notify the applicant within this time period of any incompleteness. The 60 day period does not begin until the application is complete. However, if the City does not notify an applicant as to incompleteness within the first 15 days, the application is deemed complete as a matter of law, and the calendar starts running as of the original date of submission. It is important to note that completeness does not mean acceptability. The application just has to have addressed the required items – the subsequent review process will determine whether the project is acceptable under the City’s regulations. 2.If the City cannot come to a final decision prior to the end of the first 60 days, for almost any reason, it may extend the review period by an additional 60 days, if the applicant is notified in writing prior to the expiration of the first 60 day period. There appears to be little constraint on the “quality” of the reason - a simple explanation 13 that the City’s review schedule does not permit adequate time for the City Council to act properly on the item is sufficient. 3.The City cannot “automatically” notify the applicant of a 60 day extension. The City is required to review the application enough to make a reasonable determination that the first 60 days will be inadequate. Therefore, a separate letter should be sent after the material is received. 4.If the City reaches the end of the 120 day review period, including a noticed extension, it must make a final decision, or the application will be considered approved as submitted. For complex projects, negotiations often occur between the City and the applicant, and can take several weeks. Most Cities will ask the applicant to sign a form letter waiving the 60-day rule if a decision can not be made. The City can be quite persuasive with this request as the alternative to further consideration is usually to deny the proposal. 5.Subdivisions have their own 120 review calendar listed in the Statutes. However, most Cities apply the 60-day rule to subdivisions just to be on the safe side. 6.Cities are required to notify an applicant in writing of a denial of a permit, including the reasons for denial. This notice is required to be provided within the statutory period. It is a safe assumption that approvals with conditions must also be notified in this manner. This notification can have consequences that cities need to be careful of. Imagine that a City Council is meeting on the final day of the timeline. They would essentially have to present the written notice of denial, along with the reasons, to the applicant at the meeting to meet the deadline. The 60-day rule is not necessarily difficult to comply with, but it requires attention to avoid a trap of automatic approval. The safest option is to be careful with the application package and notify the applicant of deficiencies in the application to delay the start of the calendar. For multi-part applications, it is best to require that each part is a separate application. For instance, with Planned Unit Developments, the ordinance provides for a Concept Stage review, Development Stage review, and Final Stage PUD. For complex projects, there is no way that the project can be submitted, reviewed, revised, and reviewed again within the full 120 day period. As such, most Cities separate the stages into distinct applications. Subdivisions and Plats Subdivisions are any division or combination of land parcels. A “Plat” is a specific type of subdivision that involves the filing of new title information with the County Recorder that results in all future legal descriptions referring to the mapped Plat, rather than historical description information. 14 There are generally three types of subdivision actions that a City will consider. The simplest is sometimes referred to as a “Minor Subdivision”. These actions usually involve no more than two parcels, and may include lot combinations, lot line adjustments, and occasionally, the splitting of one platted lot into two new parcels. This type of approval is typically not applied to unplatted land due to the complicated legal descriptions that can result. The County Recorder may reject subdivisions when the legal description is too long or complex. In certain circumstances, where the subdivision is clear and simple, Minor Subdivisions are eligible to be approved by the City staff, relieving the applicant of the procedural requirements of Planning Commission and City Council review. Minor Subdivisions are commonly permitted by what is referred to as a “Metes and Bounds” certificate of survey. These surveys are prepared by registered surveyors, and include a map of the property and a legal description that provides an exact description of the parcel or parcels in question. The survey will usually show lot dimensions, existing buildings, and existing easements that may exist on the property. The second type of subdivision action is a “Registered Land Survey”. This is a legal method of subdivision for registered property, also known as “Torrens” property. Torrens parcels are registered with the County, and have had new registered title certificates prepared. These are in contrast to the more common “Abstract” property, in which an abstract of the title to the property exists that lists the chain of title back to its original conveyance (often from the original United States government land grant). The third type of subdivision is the Plat. Platting re-titles the subject property into new lots and blocks, and eliminates previous underlying lot lines (it should be noted that easements and streets need to be separately vacated). The platting process typically consists of a Preliminary Plat and a Final Plat. In many instances, a City will ask for a sketch plan for preliminary concept review, prior to a formal Preliminary Plat application. An approved Preliminary Plat conveys specific rights to a property owner, and as such, should be reviewed carefully. This stage of review will usually include a plat drawing showing the layout of the subdivision; a grading and drainage plan that identifies the changes to the existing grade and stormwater management impacts; a utility plan that provides for preliminary sanitary sewer and water designs; a street plan that identifies the street profile; and a landscaping plan that identifies new landscaping and erosion control planting in the subdivision. Minnesota courts have determined that the approval of a Preliminary Plat gives the developer a reasonable expectation that he or she will be able to develop the property as proposed. It is common for small adjustments to be made between the Preliminary Plat and the Final Plat, but the City needs to make sure that it has addressed all of its major issues in its review and approval of the Preliminary Plat. Because many Preliminary Plats get approved with a number of technical conditions, it is usually a good idea to require that a revised and corrected Preliminary Plat is submitted for City records and reference. There are several issues to look for when reviewing new subdivision proposals: 15 1.Does the street system provide for an adequate number of new and future street connections to surrounding land? Most planning recommendations look for residential neighborhoods that limit traffic to less than 500 vehicle trips per day – 250 trips per day is considered the more optimal threshold. If the street design creates a high number of trips past some lots, additional street connections should be considered. As a general rule, more connections result in better and more even traffic distribution. Cities often hear people argue for fewer connections over fear of increased traffic. The opposite is actually the case. 2.Does the regional street system support the number of lots in the subdivision, or should a new collector route be considered in the area? 3.Does the design of the individual lots allow for comfortable building placement? Occasionally, lot designs may meet the City’s technical regulations, but due to unique considerations, result in difficult building sites. Most cities consider newly platted lots to be “variance-proof”, that is, there should be no need to consider variances to make reasonable use of a new lot – it is presumed to be buildable as approved. 4.Does the subdivision make reasonable consideration for the existing character of the land? Heavily graded projects, woodland areas that are being eliminated for additional lots, elimination of significant views of surrounding countryside or water features, or other similar characteristics indicate a subdivision that is not making the best use of the property. The City has a stake in managing these issues. 5.Does the subdivision minimize the impact on the City’s utility and maintenance system? Some subdivision designs can make it difficult for the City to serve the project once constructed. Issues such as snow-plowing, maintenance access to stormwater ponding areas, fire-fighting capability, access for emergency vehicles, and other issues need to be considered to ensure the protection of the City’s future residents. It is tempting to think of the subdivision’s defects as the problem of the developer in selling the lots. But these problems will become the City’s when the future new residents raise concerns over poor design. 6.What kinds of public use might be necessary in the subdivision, or in the area? Should the City require a dedication of park land or trail right of way? Is there a need for the construction of sidewalks or other improvements not commonly found in other areas? 7.What kinds of ideas might improve the livability of the subdivision? How can the existing landscape be capitalized upon to ensure the best neighborhood? Or, what additional amenities might be considered to improve the area? 8.What dedication requirements should be considered? The authorizing statutes permit the City to exact certain amounts of land for streets, utilities, and parks from subdivisions. In the case of parkland, the city may exchange the land requirement for an equivalent amount of cash, which is to be used for acquisition or development of parks in other locations in the community. 16 Planned Unit Development Planned Unit Development is a zoning technique that permits a developer and City to negotiate the applicable zoning standards for a project. PUD can affect a number of elements in any project design – those below are a generalized outline of common elements: a.The City will allow flexibility from some of its zoning standards, in exchange for a higher standard in other areas. b.The flexibility is intended to result in a project of superior design and amenity than would otherwise be possible if basic zoning regulations were to be applied. Superior design is often considered to be a better method of achieving the City’s land use objectives that would result from a common zoning approach. c.PUD is not intended as a method of merely skirting around inconvenient regulations. d.The process is designed to allow for the integration of several disparate project elements, resulting in better coordination of public facilities, and hopefully, more efficient use of land and public resources. e.The process ends with a development contract that accompanies an associated Zoning Ordinance amendment for the construction of the project. In many zoning ordinances, there are two types of Planned Unit Development projects. Both follow the processing section of the Zoning Ordinance, but they differ in the nature of the regulation. The first is a rezoning of the property to a PUD zoning district. In this type of PUD, The City is essentially writing a new zoning ordinance that applies only to this district. The ordinance will list which uses are allowed, what development standards apply, and any other requirements of the district. While this sounds complex, most PUD District ordinances refer to some other existing zoning district and the master development plans, and then list only additions or deletions. The second type of PUD is actually a Conditional Use Permit allowing the use of PUD flexibility on a development parcel, keeping the underlying zoning district in place. In this type of PUD, the base zoning district regulates the allowable uses in the district, and sets out the general conditions. The site plan and other documents are then used to identify the areas where flexibility is being approved. This type of PUD used to be quite common, but is becoming less common in favor of the zoning district approach. For many PUD projects (especially residential projects), one of the most common areas of flexibility requested is for the use of private streets. With private street design, an association is formed of the owners in the project, and the association becomes responsible for street maintenance, and many other aspects of project operation. For a developer, the advantage of using a private street design is a marked increase in potential density. Setbacks from the edge of a private street need not be a strict as might be typical with public streets, and the street itself will typically require less than half of the area of a public street right of way. The 17 City should feel confident in requiring significant upgrades to the design and amenity package of such a PUD, given the increased density that usually accompanies this type of project. The key for the successful use of Planned Unit Development is to be able to identify the specific, tangible benefits from the use of PUD design. These benefits may include upgraded architecture (both building design and materials), significantly increased landscaping, or additional open space offsetting greater building density. In many cases, the developer may be adding specific amenities to the project, including recreational facilities, or similar elements. When these types of “upgrades” can not be easily identified, the City should reconsider the flexibility being requested by the applicant. Nonconformities A common issue that faces Planning Commissions in the application of zoning regulations is how to treat existing buildings or land uses that are no longer allowed by newer zoning requirements. Such buildings and uses are called “nonconformities”, and have specific rights under State law. Until recently, the municipality applied a “50% Rule” to all nonconformities. Under this rule, a community was permitted to require that any existing nonconformity be removed and replaced only by a fully conforming use if it was destroyed by more than 50% of its value. Thus, a property owner who lost most of a building through damage by storm, accident, or even one’s own demolition, was required from that point on to comply with the current zoning requirements. The newer rule expands the rights of the owners of nonconformities. The Statute explicitly provides that nonconformities may be replaced or improved, but not expanded, so long as the owner has applied for a building permit within 6 months, and completed the work within 12 months. After this timeframe, the 50% Rule comes back into play. This is true even for the removal of nonconformities that are removed by the owner intentionally – natural or accidental damage is no longer a factor. One aspect of this issue relates to the “legality” or illegality” of the use or building. The nonconforming rights accrue only to those uses that are “legal nonconforming”, that is, they must have been legally established at the time of their construction or occupancy, according to the rules in place at that time. If they were never legal, such as someone who built a building outside of the regulations that would have applied, then no nonconforming rights accrue to that use or building. There are specific exclusions for Floodplain nonconformities that should be checked out when applying this relatively new language. 18 Annexation Not technically a “planning and zoning” issue, annexation is nonetheless an important factor for communities managing growth and development. Annexation is a discretionary decision on the part of the City. While the interests of the Township government and subject property owners can affect the process, a City can not be forced by either to accept an annexation (the State theoretically could, but this would be extremely unusual). For cities in the Metro area counties of Hennepin, Ramsey, Anoka, and Washington, annexations are extremely rare – particularly because there is very little unincorporated land, and the annexation request would imply a “detachment” of the subject land from the adjoining city. Cases of concurrent detachment and annexation almost always will require the willingness of both cities to participate. Otherwise, there would have to be an extremely unusual set of compelling circumstances present before the State would impose this type of remedy on an unwilling city. In Carver, Scott, and Dakota counties, where there are still several township governments, annexation requests by growing incorporated cities are not uncommon. The State of Minnesota sets out annexation rules in Chapter 414 of the State Statutes. There are essentially three types of annexation: 1.Orderly Annexation 2.Annexation by Ordinance 3.Contested Case Annexations With Orderly Annexation, the City and Township work together to establish a set of conditions under which annexations can occur. These conditions usually include rules about contiguity and the ability to serve the site with public utilities. Other common conditions include specific geographic areas that are eligible or off-limits, and whether the City will provide a fee to the Township to mitigate the Township’s loss of tax base. Orderly Annexations can occur one at a time, with an agreement reached between City and Township as each property comes up, or, more comprehensively – subject to a larger Orderly Annexation plan. In either case, the City and Township will create an agreement and a joint resolution effecting the annexation. The resolution is forwarded to the State of Minnesota Department of Administration’s Office of Municipal Boundary Adjustments for certification. The second type, Annexation by Ordinance, is an annexation decision between the City and the property owner. There are a few specific conditions to Annexation by Ordinance, in which case no direct Township involvement occurs. These conditions include: a.The subject parcel is no more than 120 acres in size;* b.100% of the property owners of the parcel(s) in question petition for the annexation; and c.The subject parcel is contiguous to the current City limits. *There are now some additional limitations affecting “serial” annexations. 19 When these conditions are met, the City can call for a public hearing to annex the parcel through the adoption of an Ordinance. While the Township may object to the annexation during the hearing process, it does not have the authority to “veto” or otherwise interfere with the decision. If the City adopts the ordinance in compliance with the statutory requirements, the State’s Office of Municipal Boundary Adjustments then certifies the annexation. The third type of annexation is sometimes referred to as a “contested case” annexation. In these situations, the City is considering an annexation that does not comply with the Annexation by Ordinance rules, and the Township will not agree to a joint resolution or “Orderly Annexation”. Contested Cases are treated like trials, held before an Administrative Law Judge. Prior to trial, however, the City and Township must conduct a series of negotiation sessions to attempt to come to an agreement. If no agreement is reached, the judge reviews the evidence presented, and rules based on specific criteria laid out in the statutes. These criteria are centered around whether or not the area “is or is about to become urban or suburban in character”. This phrase is somewhat ambiguous, however. As a result, Cities most often support their contested case annexations with studies demonstrating growth demand and shortage of available land area, and the cost of providing services to unincorporated areas. These trials have become rarer, and are very expensive and time consuming. One additional point about annexation policy relates to the City’s ability to recover the costs of growth. Once a property has been annexed, the fees charged for development services (such as sewer and water extensions, road improvements, etc.) must meet specific and strict statutory requirements for “proportionality” to the impacts created by the development. However, property owners do not have any implicit right to annex into a City. As such, the City can negotiate a development fee agreement with the owner/developer of annexing land to cover extraordinary costs that would otherwise be spread to the general City taxpayer. This is an important factor to remember when considering annexation agreements and requests. 1/12/2023 1 St. Anthony Village Planning Commission Orientation 2023 Planning and Zoning - Introduction •Land Use Planning is an activity permitted to local governments by the State – MN Stat 462 governs planning and zoning. •Prior to our current zoning process, land use was regulated by nuisance law. •Nuisances are infringements on property rights held by another person. •Property rights include the right to use one’s property for one’s own benefit, and not to be unreasonably interfered with by others. 1/12/2023 2 Introduction, cont’d •Nuisance law is notoriously difficult to manage – expensive, uncertain, inconsistent from place to place. •Public zoning took the place of private nuisance lawsuits in the early 1900s. The theory was that a consistent set of land use expectations could be written and defended, and people could make more predictable investments in real estate, under a public scheme. •Public land use regulation acknowledges that the public has a stake in how property is developed, since the public will be asked to maintain the infrastructure and public safety to preserve it – the “police powers”. Meeting Conduct – Roberts’ Rules of Order •Roberts’ Rules govern – generally – the conduct of meetings. •The objective of the rules is to run a fair, open meeting and get the best information out to the decision-makers. •Most meetings are run very informally, where the chair has significant latitude to vary the process to run efficiently, while maintaining fairness. 1/12/2023 3 Comprehensive Plan •The fundamental planning document – required in the 7-County metro area. •Most recognizable portion – the Future Land Use Plan. The most critical – statement of Goals and Policies. •Everything done as a part of land use regulation should relate to the City’s land use goals and policies. Comp Plan, cont’d •The City has a great degree of discretion in setting the terms of its Comprehensive Plan. •As one works from the bottom of this pyramid to the top, discretion lessens, until at the top, the City is functioning in what is referred to as a “clerical” role only. 1/12/2023 4 Zoning, and Zoning Ordinances •Zoning and Subdivision regulations are by far the most common implementation tools of Comprehensive Plan policy. •Zoning amendments consist of two types: Text Amendments and Map Amendments (commonly called “rezoning”). •Both adopted by ordinance. •Regulated by statute according to City class size – large cities (like Minneapolis and cities in other states) can often do things St. Anthony can not! Zoning and Subdivision, cont’d •Zoning amendments are regulated by the following basic criterion: •Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with achieving the goals and objectives outlined in the comprehensive plan. 1/12/2023 5 Zoning and Subdivision, cont’d Other common considerations: i. Traffic levels capable of being handled on existing roadways. ii. Utility demands capable of being served with existing utility capacity. iii.Land Use compatibility with adjoining property. iv.Consistency with Land Use guide plan. v. Environmental concerns (air, soil, water) and potential hazards to the public. vi.Impacts on Schools, Parks or Open Space. Conditional Use Permits •Uses that are presumed to be allowed but require special conditions to address special impacts of the use. •Difficult to deny – the City should be able to identify specific issues that need changing to meet the intent of the City’s land use goals. •The most common generator of conditions of approval, and the conditions must address an impact created by the proposed use. 1/12/2023 6 Interim Use Permits •Just like a Conditional Use Permit, but with a specific timeline attached. •Expiration may be a date or an event. •Should be accompanied by a written statement of agreement from the applicant verifying the expiration of the permit. •New permits are new, technically not “renewals” – there is no inherent right to continue a use after the termination date. Variances •An approved variation to a (usually) dimensional standard, such as a setback, or lot coverage, or number parking spaces, etc. •Requires a finding that there is a specific, unique “practical difficulty” in putting the property to what would otherwise be a reasonable way to use the property. •Designed to be somewhat difficult to get – there is a presumption that the City’s general ordinances do a thorough job of addressing the most common conditions. 1/12/2023 7 Decision-making, Findings •Findings of Fact are critical to good decision-making. •The Commission or Council should be able to state the reasons, based in the City’s land use goals/policies, why a decision is being made, pro or con. •Should be made at the time of the decision, in writing. •Should be based on evidence presented to the public body – not some outside knowledge the Council or Commission has. •Solid findings protect the City from future litigation – a court will rarely overturn clear findings, and will presume those facts. •Staff’s practice will be to build findings into the resolution, but the Commission should add findings it deems relevant. “60-Day Rule” •An administrative responsibility – from MN Stat 15.99 – to ensure zoning decisions are made promptly, within 60 to 120 days. •The date is from the date of complete application to the final Council decision. •The City has 15 days to determine whether a land use application is “complete” for review. Once complete, the 60-day clock starts ticking. 1/12/2023 8 Subdivisions and Plats •A separate responsibility of City land use regulation. •Typically, the City should try to imagine how the design of the subdivision will create neighborhoods that are consistent with the City’s land use objectives. •Not a significant issue for SAV, given full development. Subdivisions will usually be functions of other zoning requests. Planned Unit Development •PUD is considered a single project on a single parcel of real estate, even though it may be many of both. •PUD is used to coordinate large complex developments,or manage smaller projects that use unique planning techniques – the lower threshold in SAV is 3 acres. •At all times, the threshold for a PUD proposal is whether it does a better job of meeting the City’s land use objectives that would straight zoning. 1/12/2023 9 Nonconformities •Land uses that were once legal under the then-existing code, but which now no longer meet the requirements or uses allowed in the zoning district. •A nonconformity owner may continue the use into the future if it is continuous, including reconstruction (but not expansion), but the code is designed to bring the use of the property into conformance eventually. •The City has only limited authority to eliminate lawful nonconformities. Questions? Stephen Grittman SAV City Planner Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. 4150 Olson Memorial Hwy, Suite 320 Golden Valley, MN 55422 763.957.1100 sgrittman@nacplanning.com planner@savmn.com