The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPK PACKET 04022025 WorksessionCITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE PARKS AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION WORKSESSION AGENDA Wednesday, April 2, 2025 at 5:30 PM Members of the public who wish to attend the meeting may do so in person. Call To Order Roll Call Approval Of Agenda Approval Of Minutes Approval Of PK Meeting Minutes PK 03 -10 -2025 WS.PDF Presentations Climate Plan Overview: Energy Focus Area Minette Saulog, Sustainability Coordinator, presenting. CLIMATE PLAN -ENERGY OVERVIEW.PDF Commission Reports Other Business Sustainability Building Policy Discussion Minette Saulog, Sustainability Coordinator, presenting. COVER MEMO.PDF CEE POLICY GUIDE AND BMPS.PDF Community Forum Individuals may address the Parks 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 three minutes. Generally, the Park 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. Those unable to attend the meeting in person may submit comments via the City's PUBLIC COMMENTS FORM . Adjournment Next Meeting 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 promote a high quality of life to those we serve through outstanding city services. I. II. III. IV. A. Documents: V. A. Documents: VI. VII. A. Documents: VIII. IX. X. CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGEPARKS AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION WORKSESSION AGENDAWednesday, April 2, 2025 at 5:30 PM Members of the public who wish to attend the meeting may do so in person. Call To OrderRoll CallApproval Of AgendaApproval Of MinutesApproval Of PK Meeting MinutesPK 03 -10 -2025 WS.PDFPresentationsClimate Plan Overview: Energy Focus AreaMinette Saulog, Sustainability Coordinator, presenting.CLIMATE PLAN -ENERGY OVERVIEW.PDFCommission ReportsOther BusinessSustainability Building Policy DiscussionMinette Saulog, Sustainability Coordinator, presenting.COVER MEMO.PDFCEE POLICY GUIDE AND BMPS.PDF Community Forum Individuals may address the Parks 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 three minutes. Generally, the Park 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. Those unable to attend the meeting in person may submit comments via the City's PUBLIC COMMENTS FORM . Adjournment Next Meeting 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 promote a high quality of life to those we serve through outstanding city services. I.II.III.IV.A.Documents:V.A.Documents:VI.VII.A.Documents: VIII. IX. X. City of St. Anthony PARKS AND ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION WORK SESSION Minutes March 10, 2025 Present: Parks and Environmental Commission: Commissioners Yaacoub Hark and Kristen Peterson Absent: Chair Lily Fee, Commissioners Jessica Swiontek and Natalie Synhavsky Staff: Assistant City Manager Ashley Morello and Sustainability Coordinator Minette Saulog Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 5:31 p.m. Oath Swearing: Assistant City Manager and Deputy City Clerk Ashley Morello conducted the swearing in of new Commission Members Yaacoub Hark and Kristen Peterson. Commissioner Onboarding: Ms. Morello welcomed the new members to the Planning Commission. Ms. Morello began the orientation and informed Commissioners about the demographics of the city, the city’s governance structure and key laws to be mindful of as a representative of the city. The Commissioners and Staff engaged in discussion considering roles and responsibilities and some city best practices as they relate to the Parks and Environmental Commission members. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:19 p.m. Climate Plan Overview Energy Focus Area Presented April 2, 2025 Background • The Energy section is a Climate Plan focus area for the City in 2025, along with the Transportation section. • PEC will be most focused on supporting action items and strategies that are policy-oriented, which are being covered tonight. The Climate Plan includes the full list of strategies that include these as well as education and operations-oriented strategies being owned by staff. Background • The previous PEC group completed a ranking activity in Dec 2024 to provide input on how the city should consider prioritizing the pursuit of these strategies. • (* = highest priority actions) • The Energy Action Plan has several strategies mirroring those in the Climate Plan, creating parallels and stronger initiative for the City to make progress in those areas. • (** = Energy Action Plan mirror strategy) Improve efficiency of homes, businesses, and public Energy Initiative 1 facilities in SAV Action Current Status Share existing information on resources for reducing energy use in buildings, including the Inflation Reduction Act’s Home Energy Rebates, free energy audits from power companies, etc. Ensure educational resources and opportunities for home energy improvements are accessible to low-income residents. Specific information and education- sharing tactics are being planned with Partners in Energy/the Energy Action Plan.** Action Current Status Consider developing an incentive program or grant funding for residents to pursue a home audit. One example would be to refund residents the cost of their home audit if they address a certain number of inefficiencies identified in the home audit. Examine providing low-income residents with financial support in improving home efficiency if a home audit identifies significant issues. Long-term planning needed to determine funding source and budgetary resources for an incentive or cost-share program. Staff are staying updated on available grant opportunities and may pursue grants that could provide funds to pilot an incentive program for residents.** Initiative 1 Initiative 1 Initiative 1 Action Current Status Consider adopting a sustainable building policy for all new and remodeled construction projects. PEC is starting discussions on this topic at tonight’s work session! Discuss participating in Partners in Energy Program and creating an Energy Action Plan.* Energy Action Plan is being presented to City Council on 4/8/25 for approval. 18-month implementation period to follow with Partners in Energy support. Subsidize Home Energy Audit for residents who commit to investing in some form of energy efficiency in their homes. Same comment as for the action on previous slide: Long-term planning needed to determine funding source and budgetary resources for an incentive or cost-share program.** Increase usage of renewable energy Energy Initiative 2 Initiative 2 Action Current Status Partner with Minnesota Renewable Energy Society to build Community Solar Gardens on public property (e.g. parking lot canopies) where qualifying households can apply for a subscription and save money on their monthly electric bill. Action determined unfeasible (as written) during Partners in Energy meetings. Focusing efforts on promoting opportunities to participate in existing Community Solar Gardens through the utilities. Address financial barriers for low-to-moderate-income residents by reducing or waiving permit submission fees for solar panels. Tabled for future discussion by staff. Explore solar panel installation on public facilities. Seek funding from utility providers and government programs, and integrate implementation costs into the annual budget.* Received Solar on Public Buildings Department of Commerce grant for Public Works and Water Treatment Plant. Installations will be constructed 2025.** Increase the purchasing of electric devices and appliance alternatives Energy Initiative 3 Initiative 3 • There are no policy-oriented actions in this initiative. • Mostly education-based strategies to increase public awareness of alternative options and resources (e.g. rebates for homeowners). • Involves internal city evaluation for capital equipment replacement schedules and opportunities for switching to electric. THANK YOU MEMORANDUM To: City of Saint Anthony Village Parks & Environmental Commission From: Minette Saulog, Sustainability Coordinator Date: April 2, 2025 Parks & Environmental Commission Work Session Request: Sustainable building policy discussion BACKGROUND As part of the Climate Plan, an identified action item under the Energy focus area is to “Consider adopting a sustainable building policy for all new and remodeled construction projects.” This is a policy-coded Climate Plan action that will eventually require a recommendation from PEC to move forward with the City Council. SUSTAINABLE BUILDING POLICY OVERVIEW For the purpose of this discussion, we define sustainable building policies as those that establish minimum sustainability criteria beyond existing state code for new constructions or significant renovations, targeting pollution reduction, resource conservation, and environmental responsibility. These can also be referred to as green building policies. The intent of the work session discussion is to begin outlining what criteria would apply to a potential sustainable building policy in Saint Anthony Village, the types of projects for which it would apply, and other possible requirements. The city has no existing policy aside from a brief section for sustainability considerations in the language for general regulations for R-4 zoning district multi-family developments: §154.105 (C) Sustainability. The city will review multi-family residential projects with a consideration for sustainability measures included in the project development. Elements that may be included are charging stations for electric vehicles, storm water treatment and re-use for landscape irrigation, accommodations for sustainable energy provisions, such as roof-top solar or wind, and other measures. The city encourages a creative and affirmative approach to sustainability consistent with its Comprehensive Plan and related policies. The Center for Energy and Environment and Hennepin County published a sustainable building policy guide in 2021 with recommendations for policy frameworks and best practices. There are three approaches that may be considered: a mandatory approach, scoring approach and suggestion approach. All three have been used in other Minnesota cities. A city can activate its existing sustainable building policy due to the following triggers: funding incentives, land use incentives, process incentives, and building size. Staff is considering enforcement of the policy and how to ensure compliance as part of the development process. THIRD-PARTY RATING SYSTEMS To encourage standardization across the region, compliance with a third-party rating system is recommended. These rating systems are well known in the construction industry and allow for developer flexibility to meet policy requirements. RaƟng System ApplicaƟon(s) General areas addressed LEED Building Design and ConstrucƟon (BD+C): New ConstrucƟon and Major RenovaƟons Municipal, Commercial, Mixed- Use, Industrial Energy performance, water efficiency, sustainable site development, materials selecƟon LEED for ResidenƟal BD+C: Single Family Homes Single-family Energy efficiency, water efficiency, indoor environmental quality, sustainable site development LEED for ResidenƟal BD+C: MulƟfamily Homes MulƟ-family Energy efficiency, water efficiency, indoor environmental quality, sustainable site development B3 Guidelines Municipal, Commercial, Mixed- Use, Industrial, MulƟ- family Site design, water, energy (includes the SB 2030 Energy Standard), indoor environment, materials, waste GreenStar Homes MulƟ-family, Single- family Materials, energy, indoor environment, home equipment performance Green CommuniƟes MulƟ-family, Single- family IntegraƟve design, LocaƟon and neighborhood, site improvements, water, energy, materials, indoor environment, operaƟons and maintenance Park Smart (can be pursued in complement to a LEED BD+C project) Parking Garage/parking facility management, carshare/rideshare ameniƟes, general vehicle ameniƟes, EV ameniƟes, bicycle ameniƟes, access to transit, renewable energy and storage, stormwater management, water use at site, energy, materials, waste The below table provides an informational overview of the most common and recommended third-party rating systems for a sustainable building policy. These systems are comprised of sustainability criteria and prescriptive pathways for meeting the criteria. They are generally broad and cover different sustainability areas (e.g. water, energy, waste, materials). Rating systems are often similar but not identical, and each system has strengths and weaknesses relative to one another. Making different systems acceptable for various projects can help the city address priority impact areas being targeted in the sustainable building policy. SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE OVERLAY PEC has the opportunity to provide input on criteria for a Saint Anthony Village overlay. An overlay describes the criteria specific to the City, and is typically in addition to the third-party rating system. A list of recommended overlay criteria and rules (adapted from the Center for Energy and Environment’s guidance document) are shown in the following table. These are the most common city overlay criteria as seen in other cities’ policies, and demonstrates recommended rules that would fulfill those criteria. Cities are advised to prioritize criteria for adoption that balance needs for implementation with city goals (i.e. those in the Climate Plan) to ensure policy success. Recommended Overlay Criteria Recommended Rule Examples Predicted and actual energy use Meet SB 2030 Energy Standard through design and operaƟon; for 1-3-unit buildings, meet DOE’s Zero Energy Ready Homes standard. Predicted greenhouse gas emissions Calculate and report. Predicted and actual use of potable water Achieve 30% below the water efficiency standards of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. Predicted use of water for landscaping Achieve 50% reducƟon from consumpƟon of tradiƟonally irrigated site. UƟlizaƟon of renewable energy Evaluate 2% of on-site renewables; install if cost-effecƟve using SB 2030 guidance. Electric vehicle charging capability (if parking is included) Install conduit that allows charging staƟons to be installed at a future date. Diversion of construcƟon waste from landfills and incinerators Achieve 75% diversion rate Indoor environmental quality Use low-VOC (volaƟle organic compounds) materials including paints, adhesives, sealants, flooring, carpet, as well as ASHRAE thermal and venƟlaƟon minimums. Stormwater management Adhere to quanƟty and quality requirements, including infiltraƟon rate, suspended solid, and phosphorous reducƟons. Resilient design Document a design response to several idenƟfied potenƟal shocks and stressors such as uƟlity interrupƟon, extreme rainfall and transportaƟon interrupƟon. Design Team shall integrate the idenƟfied strategies into the design of the project. Ongoing monitoring of actual energy and water use Benchmark using ENERGY STAR® Porƞolio Manager annually. DISCUSSION ITEMS FOR COMMISSION FEEDBACK Below are the specific items for discussion and feedback:  Which type of approach would work best for Saint Anthony? (Mandatory approach, scoring approach or suggestion approach)  What priority impacts do we want to target in a city overlay?  What types of projects do we want this policy to apply to? (such as zoning and/or size of building) ATTACHMENT:  Minnesota Municipal Sustainable Building Policies Guide and appendix of local sustainable building policies MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL SUSTAINABLE BUILDING POLICIES GUIDE Policy Framework and Implementation Recommendations Updated February, 2022 Originally published January, 2021 Prepared by Katie Jones, Marisa Bayer Center for Energy and Environment In collaboration with Hennepin County OVERVIEW Cities throughout Minnesota seek to improve public health, environmental justice, and environmental and economic S sustainability. As cities set targets to reduce carbon D emissions, reduce waste, protect natural areas, and mitigate Sstormwater runoff, many are turning to building-related esstrategies to help achieve these goals. su Generally, cities have three main levers to create change: be mandatory requirements, process incentives, and financial ne incentives. Because the State of Minnesota sets the building si code, cities are unable to establish building requirements that de are more strict than existing code; however, with financial ty levers and authority over land use, cities have tremendous po potential to use sustainable building policies as a tool to make re progress toward sustainability goals. kn po To da te, Minnesota cities have taken three approaches in the application of sustainable building policies, listed below in order of impact: 1. Mandatory approach (Recommended). This policy approach identifies default sustainability requirements E for funding programs and land use variances above Acertain thresholds. These requirements are in addition cito other program and land use requirements. f2. Scoring approach. Buildings are scored on a set of acriteria and those with the highest scores qualify for city program funding and approval. 3. Suggestion approach. Developers are strongly N encouraged to consider sustainability in construction L through a sustainability questionnaire. T Based on research of existing policies and interviews with tr Minnesota cities, we identified best practices and p recommendations for creating a framework and implementing st a mandatory sustainable building policy. s dThe intent of this guide is to provide a resource for cities pconsidering sustainable building policies and to encourage standardization across cities. Standardization has many benefits including improving efficiency and cost-effectiveness across the region, facilitating the adoption of sustainable building practices, and reducing competition among cities for development. ustainable Building Policy efined ustainable building policies tablish minimum stainability criteria that go yond existing state code for w construction or gnificantly renovated velopments. Included criteria pically target areas for llution reduction and source conservation. Also own as green building licies. xisting Policies s of 2022, eight Minnesota ties have some type of ormal sustainable building pproach: Duluth, Edina, Maplewood, Minneapolis, orthfield, Rochester, St. ouis Park, an d Saint Paul. he affected building types, iggers, and criteria vary by olicy, although some andardization is taking hape. See the Appendix for etailed comparison of the olicies. 1 POLICY FRAMEWORK GUIDE A policy framework addresses the fundamental questions of “what” and “who” — what does the policy cover, who does this apply to, who manages the policy, and what happens with non- compliance. Identify City Overlay and Applicable Rating Systems The first step is to understand the universe of existing third-party green building rating systems.1 Such rating systems provide processes for developers to achieve the city’s aims. Rating systems are often similar but not identical. For that reason, the city should note the strengths and weaknesses of the rating systems relative to one another and make a list of priority impacts the city wants to target. That list, along with considerations of other city goals, becomes a city overlay — a set of specific measurable minimum requirements that go beyond the base construction code and may exceed a standard’s requirements. DOE Zero Energy Ready Homes ENERGY STAR® certification Water conservation, waste diversion, indoor environmental quality, etc. City Overlay: Single Family Rating System: MN Green Communities Figure 1: Example relationship between the city overlay and an existing rating system for a single- family home new construction. A development must comply with everything in the city overlay. For many components, the MN Green Communities rating system meets the city’s criteria. However, as this example shows the city is specifically targeting higher building performance with DOE Zero Energy Ready certification. Applicable rating systems and the overlay should both be included in a policy. The two work in tandem, giving the city high-level policy customization, while giving developers flexibility in how to meet the targets. One benefit for the city is that using such rating systems lessens the need for specialized staff. In addition, leveraging existing rating systems that are well known in today’s construction industry allows for ease of communication and cost-effectiveness of implementation. 2 1 Green building rating systems — sets of sustainability criteria with detailed and proscriptive pathways for meeting the criteria. They are generally broad covering many sustainability areas (e.g., water, energy, waste, materials) and can include topic focused standards (e.g., Sustainable Buildings 2030 energy standard). Municipal, -Commercial, Mixed Use, Industrial • • LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations; Certified Silver or higher B3 Guidelines Multifamily • • • • LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations; Certified Silver or higher B3 Guidelines GreenStar Homes; Certified Silver or higher Green Communities * - Single family • • • LEED for Homes; Certified Silver or higher MN GreenStar; Certified Silver or higher Green Communities* Parking • Park Smart Silver Leverage existing third-party rating systems Cities with existing sustainable building policies recognize the value of standardization across the region — the more ubiquitous the rules, the more practiced the industry becomes at complying with them and the more cost-effective implementation becomes. Because of the unique characteristics of different building types, policy requirements should specify the appropriate rating system for each building type. The table below shows the most common and recommended minimum rating systems and their associated levels by building type. *For projects with MHFA funding, it is recommended that the MN Overlay version be used. Establish City Overlay Criteria Below we lay out the most common overlay criteria. Where possible, criteria are performance-based, which gives developers flexibility, and drives innovation and cost efficiencies. Cities should prioritize criteria for adoption that balance needs for implementation with city goals to ensure policy success. It is also important to note that as environmental and economic conditions change, flexibility within each criterium is valuable. For that reason, it is recommended that a department director be charged with promulgating the detailed overlay requirements. It is also critical to include a third-party verification component in the policy. Verifiers should be proposed by the developer and acceptable to the city. 3 Recommended Overlay Criteria Recommended Rule Predicted and actual energy use Meet SB 2030 Energy Standard through design and operation; for 1-3-unit buildings, meet DOE’s Zero Energy Ready Homes standard. Predicted greenhouse gas emissions Calculate and report. Predicted and actual use of potable water Achieve 30% below the water efficiency standards of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. Predicted use of water for landscaping Achieve 50% reduction from consumption of traditionally irrigated site. Utilization of renewable energy Evaluate 2% of on-site renewables; install if cost-effective using SB 2030 guidance. Electric vehicle charging capability (if parking is included) Install conduit that allows charging stations to be installed at a future date. Diversion of construction waste from landfills and incinerators Achieve 75% diversion rate Indoor environmental quality Use low-VOC (volatile organic compounds) materials including paints, adhesives, sealants, flooring, carpet, as well as ASHRAE thermal and ventilation minimums. Stormwater management Adhere to quantity and quality requirements, including infiltration rate, suspended solid, and phosphorous reductions. Resilient design Document a design response to several identified potential shocks and stressors su as utility interruption, extreme rainfall and transportation interruption. Design Team sh integrate the identified strategies into the design of the project. ch all Ongoing monitoring of actual energy and water use Benchmark using ENERGY STAR® Portfolio Manager annually. 4 ding Sources prehensive policies count all c dollars toward the hold that triggers pliance including: . Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) . Bonds . Tax Increment Financing (TIF) . HOME Investment Partnership Program . Housing Redevelopment Authority funds . Land write-downs . Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) . A dedicated Sustainable Building Policy fund . Any other Federal, State, Regional (e.g., Met Council), or City funding source Policy Triggers Given the regional competition for development, cities often balance priorities of encouraging development while achieving community-wide goals, such as sustainability targets. For this reason, we 1) encourage the greatest number of cities to adopt similar sustainable building policies to standardize the practice across a region, and 2) recommend cities consider their unique leverage points for the greatest impact. Cities can use the following triggers to activate a sustainable building policy: 1. Funding incentives. The most straightforward trigger is a developer’s request for public funding. To date, several cities Fun have successfully used a minimum trigger of $200,000 in Comcumulative public funding. The types of qualifying funding publisources vary. We recommend maximizing public funding thressources for the greatest impact. (See examples below.) com 12. Land use incentives. Though there is little track record of this approach for sustainability in Minnesota, it is used in other 2areas of the country. For cities with established zoning rules, 3we recommend cities consider three types of land use triggers: 4a. Planned unit development (PUD). Where a city has a large tract of land for development, it can set high-level 5density and other rules, such as a sustainable building policy, for the site, while giving the developer flexibility 6in how that is accomplished. 7b. Premiums. Setting clear expectations for developers can reduce costs and encourage specific types of 8 development. We recommend cities consider codifying sustainability premiums as an incentive for density and 9 height bonuses. c. Variance. Where not codified as premiums, cities should consider applying a policy when more intense variances are requested. 3. Process incentives. Cities can create faster approval processes and higher prioritization in permit and inspection reviews for developments that adhere to the sustainable building policy. This has not yet been tried in Minnesota but has been done elsewhere. 4. Building size. Because larger building developments have the greatest environmental impact and more sophisticated design teams, we recommend that a policy apply to buildings that meet the following size thresholds. This trigger is only activated when a project receives a funding, land use, or process incentive. a. New construction of 10,000 square feet and greater. b. Significant renovation of buildings 10,000 square feet and greater that include a new heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system. 5 Enforcement Enforcement can be approached from two angles — either for financially incentivized projects or for those triggered by land use and process incentives. The financial incentive is often needed to encourage and make such developments viable in the first place, making a financial penalty for non-compliance challenging to employ. For that reason, the best practice is to be proactive on the front end, providing sufficient resources and check-ins during the design development process to ensure compliance along the way. For projects triggered by land use and process incentives, the city could enact a fine for violation, which has been done i n other American cities with some as high as $500 per day for non-compliance. In either case, compliance with the sustainable building policy should be included in the development agreement and loan documents. Evaluation Cities should evaluate a policy’s impact and adjust over time in order to meet stated goals. A best practice is to build a framework for these components within the policy itself by requiring an annual progress and impact report and setting a reassessment timeline (e.g., every 3-5 years) for overlay criteria and the approved third-party rating systems. Codify the Policy After the city council or board adopts the sustainability building policy, it is important to codify the policy within or near zoning-and planning-related chapters in city code because a sustainable building policy concerns land development. IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE Before approval, it is important to have a plan to address questions of “how” — namely, how to operationalize the policy. Policy adoption alone will not ensure a sustainable building policy will be successful. Additional steps are needed to create structure, ownership, and awareness of the policy. Identify Leaders and Collaborators Policies are often managed by departments that are responsible for education, awareness, and enforcement. In some cases, these responsibilities may fall across departments, so it is important early on to identify the department and individual who will take primary ownership for the policy. Below is a list of key stakeholders to involve: Sustainability Staff As topic specialists, sustainability staff should either lead or play a significant part in policy development and assist in policy implementation. Such staff can advocate for the policy internally and educate external stakeholders. In addition, any initial meetings with 6 a project’s development team should include sustainability staff or other designated, qualified individuals who can speak to the technical nature of sustainability requirements. Planning Department City planning departments should be involved in the management of the sustainable building policy. City planners are responsible for reviewing project applications, engaging with developers, and ultimately drafting the developer’s agreement, which is the document holding a project developer accountable for following policies and codes. External Collaborators External partners can provide technical assistance to project teams to meet policy rating systems. These generally fall into two categories: • Specific: A partner that develops and manages an individual rating system is best equipped to answer questions regarding pathways for compliance for their rating system (e.g., USGBC for LEED). • Broad: A partner that can answer questions across multiple rating systems. Community Highlight: St. Louis Park, MN Because the City’s Community Development Department oversees project and land use applications as well as financial incentives for development, it is a natural fit for the sustainable building policy to be managed by that department. Sustainability staff, who are in a different department, remain engaged by attending project meetings with developers to educate them about the City’s climate goals and aspects of the policy. The City also keeps an architecture and engineering firm on retainer for more detailed review beyond sustainability staff’s abilities and to help developers meet the goals of the policy. Increase Awareness of the Policy A key question to ask is: how do developers, architects, and contractors know the policy exists? If the policy is new, or if major changes have been made to an existing policy, cities should take proactive steps to inform their development community about how this policy will impact future projects. At minimum, cities should post the policy clearly on the city’s website for easy access. Additional engagement would build support and acceptance of the policy. We recommend cities offer trainings, networking events, and building tours, as well as engage building associations to spread the word about the policies. Cities could also partner on outreach initiatives to increase reach and minimize cost. Community Highlight: Rochester, MN The City of Rochester hosts green building tours to showcase successful implementation of their policy in new development. Developers and architects can tour new buildings, ask questions, and learn how their peers are following Rochester’s sustainable building policy. 7 Identify Projects Subject to the Policy Although a policy itself specifies minimum requirements for subject developments, the city must create a process to easily identify incoming projects that meet those requirements. This is accomplished by leveraging existing development review processes. Planners also often use checklists and review guides to ensure projects meet required development policies and codes. For that reason, we recommend cities use this process to integrate a review for the sustainable building policy. Cities should make sure someone with sustainability expertise, either sustainability staff or other designated reviewers, attend development review meetings. Educate Project Teams Once the city has identified an eligible project, the policy should be reviewed with the project’s development team to ensure they understand all the components of the policy. This is a great opportunity for development teams to ask questions and for city staff to champion their policy. Community Highlight: Saint Paul, MN The City of Saint Paul uses funding and size minimums to determine the projects subject to their sustainable building policy. After public project funding is requested and before it is approved, the staff member responsible for managing the policy is notified of the project. Staff send a letter to the project team detailing compliance requirements for the project, and soon after they hold a meeting involving the project team to review these requirements. Sustainability staff leverage this opportunity to walk through the policy step by step to make sure there are no surprises for the project team. This meeting should be scheduled after a project application or funding application is received to ensure policy criteria can be incorporated as early as possible in the design process. Having the right people at the meeting will ensure that the policy expectations are clearly communicated, and any questions are addressed. On the city’s side, this meeting should include those involved in managing the policy, such as sustainability and planning staff. If the city is working with an external collaborator to help with technical assistance, including them in this meeting would be advantageous. From the project team, the architect and owner’s representative should be invited so that the team responsible for designing and funding the project understand the expectations. Ensure Compliance A best practice for compliance is for cities to connect project teams with external collaborators who are technical experts in both the development process and sustainability requirements. Cities then track compliance with the list of requirements. Because most projects that have been subject to sustainable building policies in Minnesota have been commercial, mixed use, or large multifamily, city staff have relied on the B3 Tracking Tool to monitor compliance for most recommended overlay criteria and then have separate manual tracking mechanisms to track any remaining criteria. 8 Another best practice is to leverage other existing processes for front end-confirmation of sustainable design, such as Xcel Energy’s Energy Design Assistance program and other similar utility programs that incentivize energy modeling to meet building performance criteria. Enforce the Policy Enforcement comes into play once a project receives the necessary approvals to start construction. In most cases, following the previous steps will ensure that a project adheres to the policy; however, if the project does not meet minimum standards, enforcement may be necessary. Formal enforcement should be codified in the policy, so developers understand the implications of not complying. Informally, city staff can communicate with project teams about the negative impact to their relationship and concerns over future projects following city policies. Community Highlight: Rochester, MN The City of Rochester structures their Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreements as pay-as- you-go disbursements, giving the city the opportunity to withhold future disbursements if a project does not adhere to certain policies or codes. The city has used this approach for projects in the Destination Medical Center and throughout the municipality. Evaluate Impact Evaluating the policy’s impact helps city staff and city decision-makers understand if the policy achieved the intended goals. Project reports should detail the size, cost, and anticipated savings compared to actual performance. A summary of these along with the collective environmental benefits (e.g., gallons of water and greenhouse gas emissions saved compared to code) should be shared with city council, staff, and the public. In addition, annual or biennial reviews with project teams, city staff, and external collaborators give valuable input into the effectiveness of the policy. Cities should talk to project teams about what worked and what could be improved about the sustainable building policy’s implementation process. They should also talk to external collaborators and sustainability experts about the latest trends and best practices for sustainable buildings. Having both quantitative and qualitative data on the policy’s success will be useful during future policy updates to strengthen its impact. FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS Going forward, these policies should evolve as new sustainability standards become available and as city goals around reducing structural racism and ensuring equity become clearer and more focused. As cities find alignment on these issues, they should continue to exchange best practices and evolve together. We recommend cities check in on at least a biannual if not quarterly basis. This could be led by cities themselves or by an external coordinator. Areas that may warrant further exploration include: • Compliance tracking tool. Cities currently lack a holistic method for tracking compliance for all property types and may benefit from the development of one. 9 • Additional compliance strategies. Another possible route to ensure compliance is by leveraging permitting and inspections processes. However, because construction code is prescriptive and most sustainability criteria is performance-based, there has been no attempt in Minnesota thus far to take either of these two routes: o During permit approval. Because cities approve permits that give the green light for construction, they could explore issuing permits only once design models adequately indicate that sustainability requirements will be met. Incorporating permit approvals that are based on modeled designs of performance would necessitate thorough consideration of expertise and permitting staff needs. o During inspections. Building inspectors could take a bigger role in ensuring sustainability criteria are incorporated during construction. Similar to design review for permits, inspectors evaluate a building based on prescriptive code. For that reason, inspector scope would need to expand to include evaluation against a performance-based model design. • A one-stop-shop for expertise on sustainable building policies. An external collaborator would not only consult on multiple rating systems, but also serve as a single point of communication for technical questions and compliance monitoring for project teams and cities, respectively. This type of group has not yet been established to serve Minnesota cities. However, such a partner with broad expertise, design review experience, and implementation support ability could serve multiple cities while reducing sustainability staff needs. Although sustainable building policies have been around more than a decade in Minnesota, there remain great opportunities for more cities to leverage such policy tools and for better standardization among cities to ease implementation. As cities actively invest in new developments or receive developer requests outside existing zoning rules, they can use these policies to achieve sustainability goals. In the end, the built environment has strong impacts on environmental health and livability, and sustainable building policies are an important tool to build the physical environment that cities want and need. APPENDIX See a table summary of current Minnesota municipal sustainable building policies here: https://www.mncee.org/minnesota-municipal-sustainable-building-policies-guide 10 CategorySubcategoryCitySaint PaulSt. Louis ParkRochesterDuluthEdinaMaplewoodMinneapolis - EnterpiseMinneapolis - Residential 1-3Minneapolis - MultifamilyNorthfieldPolicy Sourcehttps://stpaul.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=3287262&GUID=CF83D092-B5F9-443B-8B72-28AA846CE8A8&Options=&Search=&FullText=1https://www.stlouispark.org/home/showdocument?id=18588https://www.rochestermn.gov/home/showpublisheddocument?id=26828https://duluthmn.gov/media/5536/form-udc-sustainability-checklist-120.pdfhttps://edina.novusagenda.com/AgendaPublic/CoverSheet.aspx?ItemID=12522&MeetingID=1775https://library.municode.com/mn/maplewood/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=COOR_CH12BUBURE_ARTIIBUCO_S12-41GRBUhttps://lims.minneapolismn.gov/Download/RCAV2/25330/Draft%20Sustainable%20Building%20Policy.pdf; https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/Download/RCAV2/25330/Draft%20Sustainable%20Building%20Policy.pdfhttps://lims.minneapolismn.gov/Download/RCAV2/15500/Sustainability-Policy---1-to-3-units_Final.pdfhttps://lims.minneapolismn.gov/Download/RCAV2/11549/Sustainable%20Building%20Policy%20Resolution.pdfhttps://northfield.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=5368140&GUID=850E8118-34C3-4768-84A9-7FE4A878A6CC&Options=&Search=&FullText=1NameSustainable Building PolicyGreen Building PolicySustainable Building Guidelines Sustainability StandardsSustainable Building PolicyGreen Building Code Enterprise Sustainable Building PolicyMinneapolis Homes Sustainability PolicySustainable Building PolicyAdoption ModeOrdinanceResolutionResolutionResolutionOrdinanceOrdinanceResolutionResolutionResolutionResolutionSystem UsedCity Overlay + Third Party Rating SystemCity Overlay + Third Party Rating SystemCity Overlay + Third Party Rating System* Third Party Rating System - OR - Point SystemCity Overlay + Third Party Rating SystemGreen CodeCity Overlay + Third Party Rating SystemCity Overlay + Third Party Rating SystemCity Overlay + Third Party Rating SystemCity Overlay + Third Party Rating SystemMunicipalYesYes, for buildings 15,000 square feet and greaterYesYes, for developments 10,000 square feet and greaterYesYesYes, for projects 10,000 + sqftYesCommercialYesYes, for buildings 15,000 square feet and greaterYesYes, for developments 10,000 square feet and greaterYesYesYesMultifamilyYesYesYesYes, for developments 3 units and greaterYesYesYesYesSingle FamilyYesYesYesYesYesYesYes, for residential 1-3 unitsYesIndustrialYesYes, for buildings 15,000 square feet and greaterYesYes, for developments 10,000 square feet and greaterYesYesYesParkingYesYesYesYesRenovations / AdditionsNew construction means the planning, design, construction and commissioning of a new building, or an addition to an existing building if such addition requires installation of new mechanical, ventilation, or cooling systems.Renovations of municipal, commercial, and industrial buildings at least 50,000 square feet and greaterRenovations performed on an existing building or portion thereof consisting of at least 10,000 square feet for non-municipal buildings and 2,500 square feet for municipal buildings, and requiring installation/replacement of HVAC systems. Additions of 10,000+ sqft that require new HVACYesThis policy will apply to all additions, renovations, and site work (including workspaces) on buildings that the City owns or leases when project costs are 50% or more of the total building valuation. For renovation projects less than 50% of the total building value and leased space not owned by the City, this policy will beused as a best practices guide and evaluate on a case-by-case basis any renovations required by the City, proprietary ownership of HVAC, electrical, and water systems, and other considerations that affect the City’s influence. When the City is determined to have influence in renovations that fall within policy criteria, these policy standards will apply. Renovations performed on an existing building or portion thereof consisting of at least 10,000 square feet for non-municipal buildings and 2,500 square feet for municipal buildings, and requiring installation/replacement of HVAC systems. Additions of 10,000+ sqft that require new HVACMechanismsProject receiving more than $200,000 in financial assistance or is built with the intent of having the City or HRA become the sole tenant.Private developments receiving more than $200,000 in financial assistance; residential private MF $200,000+ and single family $10,000+All tax increment financed projectsProjects of specified size.Projects receiving financial assistance through the City or HRA. No $ threshold. OR projects requesting Planned Unit Development approval. OR projects in which the City or HRA is to become the sole tenant.Projects receiving city financingMunicipal projects only.Minneapolis Homes projectsProjects receiving financial assistance from the City, EDA, or HRA. Projects receiving $300,000 or more in public fianncial assistance are required to follow the policy. Those receiving $150,000-299,999 must comply or prove they are unable to. OR projects in which the City or HRA is to become the sole tenant. Funding Sourcea. Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) b. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) c. HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME) d. Multi-Family Housing Revenue Bonds e. Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) f. Any other Federal, State, or Metropolitan Council (Met Council) funding source g. Any other City of Saint Paul funding source h. Any other HRA funding source i. Notwithstanding the above, City Funding does not include the following: a. Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) Cleanup and Investigation Grants b. Met Council Tax Base Revitalization Account (TBRA) Contamination Cleanup Grants c. Met Council TBRA Site Investigation Grants d. Conduit Bonds issued for the benefit of qualified 501(c)(3) entitiesa. City of St. Louis Park Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) b. Housing Improvement Area Loans c. Housing Rehabilitation Fund d. Reinvestment Assistance Program Revenue Bonds (private activity bonds are negotiable) e. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) f. Tax Abatement Housing Authority (HA) g. Funds Land h. WritedownsTax Increment Financingi. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) ii. HRA Fundsiii.Metropolitan Council Livable Communities Grantiv. Housing Improvement Area v. Affordable Housing Trust Fund v. Conduit Bondsvi. Land write-downs below market valuevii. Other funds that are available to the City of Edina and Edina HRANotwithstanding the above, Financial Assistance does not include environmental remediation funds such as the following: i. Department of Employment and Economic D Development (DEED) Cleanup and Investigation Grants ii. Met Council Tax Base Revitalization Account (TBRA) Contamination Cleanup Grantsiii. Met Council TBRA Site Investigation GrantsAny for muni projects.Any for Minneapolis Homes Financed projects.a. Tax Increment Financing (TIF)b. HRA Fundsc. EDA grants and forgivable loansd. Land write downse. Bondsf. Tax abatementg. Low-income housing tax credith. MIF i. Conduit financingj. Other funds requiring approval by the City of Northfield, Northfield EDA and Northfield HRANotwithstanding the above, Financial Assistance does not include environmental remediation funds, including but not limited to such as the following:, a. Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) Cleanup and Investigation Grants.Municipal (select 1)i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B3 iii. Saint Paul Port Authority Green Design Reviewi. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B3i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B3i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. Points (# of which depends on building size))i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B32012 International Green Construction Codei. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Gold ii.State of Minnesota B3 Guidelines iii. Passive House US Certified Commerciali. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B3Commercial (select 1)i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B3 iii. Saint Paul Port Authority Green Design Reviewi. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum* ii. B3*i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B3i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. Points (# of which depends on building size))i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B32012 International Green Construction Codei. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B3Multifamily (select 1)i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii.State of Minnesota B3 Guidelines certified iii. GreenStar; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum iv. Green Communities; Certifiedi. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum** ii. GreenStar; Certified Silver or greater** iii. MN Green Communities - MN Overlay**i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver or greater ii. GreenStar; Certified Silver or greater iii. MN Green Communities - MN Overlayi. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. Points (# of which depends on building size))i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii.State of Minnesota B3 Guidelines certified iii. Enterprise Green Communities; Certified2012 International Green Construction Codei. Green Communities; Certifiedi. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii.State of Minnesota B3 Guidelines certified iii. Green Communities; CertifiedSingle Family (select 1)i. LEED for Homes ii. GreenStar; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum iii. MN Green Communities - MN Overlayi. LEED for Homes** ii. GreenStar; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum** iii. MN Green Communities - MN Overlay**i. LEED for Homes ii. GreenStar; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum iii. MN Green Communities - MN Overlayi. LEED for Homes; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. Points (# of which depends on building size))i. LEED for Homes ii.State of Minnesota B3 Guidelines certified iii. Enterprise Green Communities; CertifiedCC 700-2008 National Green Building Standardsi.MN Green Communities - MN Overlayi. LEED for Homes ii.State of Minnesota B3 Guidelines certified iii. Green Communities; CertifiedIndustrial (select 1)i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B3 iii. Saint Paul Port Authority Green Design Reviewi. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum* ii. B3*i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. Points (# of which depends on building size))i. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B32012 International Green Construction Codei. LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation; Certified Silver, Gold or Platinum ii. B3ParkingPark Smart Minimum Silver CertificationPark Smart Minimum Silver CertificationPark Smart Minimum Silver CertificationUniversal Sustainability Requirements (a.k.a. overlay)a. Predicted and actual energy use b. Predicted greenhouse gas emissions c. Predicted and actual use of potable water d. Predicted use of water for landscaping e. Utilization of renewable energy f. Electric vehicle charging capability g. Diversion of construction waste from landfills and incinerators h. Indoor environmental quality i. Stormwater management j. Resilient Design k. Ongoing monitoring of actual energy and water use2% of energy needs to be met on site through renewable energy; that projects be electric vehicle ready (including prewiring); it will include a resilience component, that is a tool for developers to identify “shocks and stressors” a building may encounter and potentially alleviate; and it will require tracking actual water usea. Predicted and actual energy use and greenhouse gas emissions - meet SB 2030 Energy Standard through design and operation*** b. Predicted and actual use of potable water: 30% below Energy Policy Act of 1992levels*** c. Predicted and actual use of water for landscaping: 50% reduction from consumption of traditionally irrigated site*** d. Diversion of construction waste from landfills and incinerators: 75% diversion rate*** e. Indoor Environmental Quality: Low VOC materials includes paints, adhesives, sealants, flooring, carpet as well as ASHRAE thermal and ventilation minimums*** f. Stormwater Management: Quantity and quality requirements, including infiltration*** g. Comply with benchmarking ordinance h. Obtain a written cost estimate for achieving “green” certification by at least one third party sustainable building programa. Predicted and actual energy use and greenhouse gas emissions - meet SB 2030 Energy Standard through design and operation b. Predicted and actual use of potable water: 30% below Energy Policy Act of 1992 levels c. Predicted and actual use of water for landscaping: 50% reduction from consumption of traditionally irrigated site d. Utilization of renewable energy: Evaluation of 2% of on-site renewables; installation if cost-effective using SB 2030 guidance e. Electric vehicle charging capability: install conduit that allows charging stations to be installed at a future date f. Diversion of construction waste from landfills and incinerators: 75% diversion rate g. Indoor Environmental Quality: Low VOC materials includes paints, adhesives, sealants, flooring, carpet as well as ASHRAE thermal and ventilation minimums h. Stormwater Management: Quantity and quality requirements, including infiltration rate, suspended solid and phosphorous reductions i. Resilient Design: Document a design response to several identified potentiala. Predicted greenhouse gas emissionsi. Calculated and reportedb. Electric vehicle charging capabilityi. 5% of parking spaces must be dedicated to Level 2 or higher charging stations –OR- ii. Install conduit that allows 10% of spaces dedicated to Level 2 or higher charging stations, which would be installed at a future datec. Energy efficiency standardi. For 1-4 unit residential New Construction and Major Renovation projects:1. US Department of Energy Zero Energy Ready Homesii. For all other residential and commercial New Construction and Major Renovation projects:1. Sustainable Buildings 2030d. Bird-safe glazingi. For New Construction and Major Renovation projects seeking LEED:1. Achieve bird collision deterrence pointii. For New Construction and Major Renovation projects seeking all other Sustainable Rating Systems:1. Follow B3 Guideline S.9: Bird-Safe Buildinga. Diversion of construction waste from landfills and incinerators: 75% diversion rate a. Total Annual Energy Use - meet SB 2030 Energy Standard and benchmark annually b. Renewable Energy - meet 10% of annual energy need on-site thru renewables if cost effective thru use of social cost of carbon and 15-year simple payback; project must be solar capable c. EV-ready for all parking; charging capacity for 20% of total spaces levelsd. Benchmark indoor and outdoor water use e. Predicted and actual use of potable water: 50% below Energy Policy Act of 1992f. Natural hazard assessment and design response; as defined by specific project’s RFPg. Assessment of renewable energy generation battery storageh. Irrigation – designed landscape requires no potable water after 2-year establishment periodi. Stormwater management – must meet new Mpls Stormwater and Sanitary Sewer Guide; seek to retain on site j. Bird Strike – WBTF of 45 or less for non-critical sites; 15 or less for critical sitesk. Native plantings – 25% of site native plants; biochar and compost when possiblel. Pollinator friendly plantings – utilize pollinator species when possiblea. Minimum efficiency standard - Department of Energy Zero Energy Ready Homes (ZERH) ProgramCouncil directed staff to develop these but none have been adopted as of 2022.02.07.a. Predicted greenhouse gas emissionsi. Calculated based on predicted energy use, as ascertained through the sustainability rating system modeling, using utility emissions factors and reported to the City in metric tons of CO2eb. Energy efficiency standardi. For 1-4 unit residential New Construction and Major Renovation projects:1. US Department of Energy Zero Energy Ready Homes ii. For all other residential and commercial New Construction and Major Renovation projects:1. Sustainable Buildings 2030c. Renewable energy standardi. Conduct economic and technical evaluation of providing 2% of building energy load with on-site renewablesii. Install if cost-effective using a payback of 15 years following the Sustainable Buildings 2030 methodologyUniversal Equity Requirementsa. Complete Racial Equity Impact Analysis formb. Incorporate Universal Designc. Wayfinding throughoutd. At least one private-use space (lactation room) Universal Engagement RequirementsUtilize the City's Racial Equity Impact Analysis (https://minneapolismngov.sharepoint.com/:w:/r/sites/c00003/SREAP/REIA/_layouts/15/Doc.aspx?sourcedoc=%7BF330B777-BED3-42C4-9FB0-5678238F4CC2%7D&file=Racial%20Equity%20Impact%20Analysis%20FULL%20.docx&action=default&mobileredirect=true) and guide (https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/Download/File/4827/REIA_Process_Guide.pdf)Point System CategoriesNoneNoneNoneLocation, Energy Efficiency, Alternative Energy, Passive Solar, Water, Stormwater, Vegetation, Urban Agriculture, Transportation* Developers must use one of the design tools and submit a checklist of credits likely to be achieved. Certification is not required.* Proposed developments receive higher priority for funding if proposals meet one of these standards** Proposed developments receive higher priority for funding if proposals meet one of these standards***For non-residential developments onlyRequirementsAffected DevelopmentsPolicy TriggersNotes11