Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPL PACKET 06172025CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA Tuesday, June 17, 2025 at 7:00 PM 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 04 -15 -2025 WORK SESSION.PDF PC 04 -15 -2025 REG.PDF Public Hearing Ordinance 2025 -0x: DRAFT - EV Charging Stephen Grittman, City Planner, presenting. COVER MEMO.PDF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE - EV CHARGING ORDINANCE.PDF EV CHARGING ORDINANCE FORM 06 -17 -25.PDF Ordinance 2025 -0x: DRAFT - Rental Steve Grittman, City Planner, presenting. COVER MEMO.PDF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE.PDF RENTAL HOUSING ORDINANCE FORM 06 -17 -25.PDF RENTAL HOUSING -CHAPTER 152 AMENDMENTS.PDF General Business Commission & Staff Reports 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 three 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. Those unable to attend the meeting in person may submit comments via the City's PUBLIC COMMENTS FORM. Information And Announcments 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 promote a high quality of life to those we serve through outstanding city services. I. II. III. IV. V. A. Documents: VI. A. Documents: B. Documents: VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGEPLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDATuesday, June 17, 2025 at 7:00 PMMembers 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 04 -15 -2025 WORK SESSION.PDFPC 04 -15 -2025 REG.PDFPublic HearingOrdinance 2025 -0x: DRAFT - EV ChargingStephen Grittman, City Planner, presenting.COVER MEMO.PDFPUBLIC HEARING NOTICE - EV CHARGING ORDINANCE.PDFEV CHARGING ORDINANCE FORM 06 -17 -25.PDFOrdinance 2025 -0x: DRAFT - Rental Steve Grittman, City Planner, presenting.COVER MEMO.PDF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE.PDF RENTAL HOUSING ORDINANCE FORM 06 -17 -25.PDF RENTAL HOUSING -CHAPTER 152 AMENDMENTS.PDF General Business Commission & Staff Reports 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 three 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. Those unable to attend the meeting in person may submit comments via the City's PUBLIC COMMENTS FORM. Information And Announcments 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 promote a high quality of life to those we serve through outstanding city services. I.II.III.IV.V.A.Documents:VI.A.Documents:B.Documents: VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. 1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 2 PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSESSION MEETING 3 APRIL 15, 2025 4 5:30 p.m. 5 I.6 CALL TO ORDER. 7 8 Vice Chair Morita called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. 9 10 Commissioners Present:Chair Socha (arrived at 5:36 p.m.), Vice Chair Morita, 11 Commissioners Anderson, Corneille, Erickson, Mayne, and Morita. 12 13 Absent:Commissioner Hark 14 15 Also Present: Assistant City Manager Ashley Morello and City Planner Stephen 16 Grittman. 17 18 19 II.STAFF REPORTS. 20 A.21 Long Term Rentals 22 23 Assistant City Manager Ashley Morello reviewed the Planning Commission is requested to review 24 and provide feedback for City Council related to long-term rentals of single-family homes. 25 26 The City has convened a couple of work sessions with the Planning Commission in the past couple of 27 years to discuss the rental of single-family properties. This discussion has focused on two main 28 aspects: short-term and long-term rentals. Most recently, the City Council held a work session on 29 February 25 to review proposed ordinance language for the two types of rentals. The group discussed 30 some new considerations related to the topics. 31 32 The City Council agreed that it would be beneficial to obtain input from the Planning Commission 33 related to long-term rentals of single-family properties. Once there is consensus on both short-term 34 and long-term housing, Staff will develop proposed ordinance language based on recommendations. 35 The Planning Commission would have the opportunity to review and provide comments on specific 36 ordinance language once available. 37 38 Previous work session discussions have resulted in diverse considerations. Issues and discussion have 39 included (1) Working toward the creation of affordable housing opportunities; (2) Identifying 40 strategies that can foster “Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing” (NOAH), through home 41 ownership; (3) Balancing impacts of market influences with local regulations; (4) Potential use of 42 outside agencies or strategies that could realistically assist St. Anthony in reaching its goals as they 43 may be defined. 44 45 Affordable housing efforts are being pursued on various fronts by the City. In the rental context, the 46 City has focused largely on if and how the City might consider limitations on renting of its single- 47 family housing stock. 48 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 2 1 Based on feedback from previous work sessions, updated single-family rental housing ordinances 2 should meet the following goals: 3 4 Goal 1 – Preserve single-family neighborhoods in the Village as the primary driver of 5 neighborhood character. 6 7 Goal 2 – Preserve opportunities for interested families to purchase owner-occupied housing 8 (including both single- and multi-family housing types). 9 10 Goal 3 – Seek opportunities for development of new housing that supports the goal of adding 11 affordable units in the community, whether through redevelopment, or through the use of 12 outside agency expertise. Preserve single-family housing in the Village through limitations on 13 rental licensing that manage and avoid loss of such housing to investor-ownership. 14 15 Goal 4 – Balance protection for ownership opportunities in ways that accommodate special 16 circumstances, and general healthy-market conditions, given the Village’s low rate of renter- 17 occupied patterns and higher housing values. 18 19 In addition, the following considerations may help identify how the City compares to the metro-wide 20 average. Estimates of these numbers often vary, but these represent an average of the data sources. 21 22 The number of single-family dwellings that are being rented long-term in the City has ranged 23 from the high 50s to mid-60s over the past few years. The City has 1,954 single-family homes 24 in the city, resulting in a percentage of 3% of single-family homes. In comparison, over 20% 25 of single-family homes region-wide are renter-occupied. There is no discernible trend in 26 single-family rentals over the past few years. 27 Of the City’s total housing stock (~4,300 units), 60% are reported to be owner-occupied. This 28 estimate assigns an owner-occupied rate of approximately 25% of the multi-family units in the 29 City. This compares to a region-wide owner-occupied percentage of approximately 66%. 30 The disparity is in the relative ratio of attached/multi-family units. St. Anthony has a higher 31 percentage of attached residential units than the metro at-large, which is at about 30% multi- 32 family overall (50+% in St. Anthony). However, this disparity appears to be mitigated 33 somewhat in that a higher percentage of St. Anthony’s multi-family units are owner-occupied 34 than is common in the region. 35 Code compliance staff have reported no clear correlation between rental- or owner-occupied 36 units as far as the levels of code violations or issues. 37 As staff has reported in the past, the large majority of single-family homes being rented are 38 owned by parties who are licensed for only one such unit in the City, and the next largest 39 category is of those who own and license two rental units. Only a few of the City’s 40 landlord/owners own more than one or two units for rent. 41 Market costs for single-family homes in the Village remain relatively high, which is believed 42 to discourage large-scale investor-owned housing speculation. 43 Previous work session meetings with Planning Commissions have expressed interest in 44 limiting single-family rentals and a desire to avoid large concentrations of single-family 45 rentals in any area of the City. 46 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 3 1 Ms. Morello reviewed the Long-Term Single-Family Rentals Existing Conditions. There are 2 approximately 1,954 single-family homes in St. Anthony. The City estimates that there are 58 rental 3 single-family properties to date. Based on this, the City estimates that approximately 3% of single- 4 family properties are currently used for long-term renting. Based on feedback to avoid large 5 concentrations of rental properties in any area of the City, Staff identified four zones within the City 6 where rentals exist. Most zones have just under 3% of single-family properties utilized for long-term 7 rental. Zone 1, which is the area north of 37th Avenue, has an existing long-term single-family rental 8 inventory closer to 4%. 9 10 During work sessions with the City Council and Planning Commission, it was discussed to propose 11 opportunities for limited growth of long-term rentals of single-family properties, with caps or 12 limitations, of long-term rentals per each zone. During the February 25 City Council work session, 13 there was some discussion of whether long-term rentals were an affordable option for families. The 14 City Council is considering capping long-term single-family rentals at 3%, or at existing conditions, 15 but would be interested in obtaining feedback from the Planning Commission to continue to reflect on 16 the topic. Staff provided tables for Commission review illustrating possible alternatives for long-term 17 rental properties, including caps at 3% (existing), 4%, and 5%. 18 19 During the February 25 City Council meeting, the Council also discussed short-term rentals, or 20 vacation rentals. It was determined that Staff will provide ordinance language to prohibit short-term 21 rentals in the City. No action is requested from the Planning Commission related to short-term rentals 22 at this time. 23 24 The City Council will have another work session to review the Planning Commission's input. Once 25 there is a consensus, Staff will draft ordinance language reflecting short-term and long-term rentals, 26 which will be reviewed by Planning Commission during a Public Hearing and then proceed to City 27 Council for formal consideration. 28 29 In addition to possible further ordinance language modifications, staff have been examining the 30 City’s codes related to rental housing and licensing, and has developed a lengthy list of updates and 31 code changes to better (and more consistently) address the rental licensing process. These range from 32 applicant requirements to specific maintenance standards, to process and penalties for non- 33 compliance in the event the City is faced with a prospective landlord who works too hard to avoid the 34 City’s policies. 35 36 A Rental Properties Existing Conditions Map was also provided for Commission review. 37 38 Chair Socha arrived at the meeting at 5:36 p.m. 39 40 Commissioner Morita asked if the 3% cap in a particular zone is met, could someone needing to leave 41 their home for a period of time, and would like to rent. Ms. Morello stated that once the threshold is 42 met it would be capped at that level. There would be no exceptions. 43 44 Commissioner Corneille noted he is a rental property owner in St. Anthony (3 rental properties), all 45 licensed through the City, and they have been long-term rentals for the last 5 years. He stated that the Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 4 1 concept of rental properties negatively impacting the character of the neighborhood is troubling. He is 2 sad Council would use that language. 3 4 Chair Socha stated she was involved in these discussions originally. There were a number of Planning 5 Commission – City Council Joint Sessions and later the Planning Commission was dropped from 6 those Joint Sessions. She believes it would be helpful to have a Joint Session with the City Council so 7 they can hear directly what the Planning Commission thinks about this. Previously, the City Council 8 was not “super fans” of what the Planning Commission recommended. The Planning Commission 9 asked how long-term rentals affect affordable housing goals. Market Conditions determine what the 10 housing market is. The fear of corporate landlords coming in and buying properties has not 11 materialized. The Planning Commission has further unanswered questions, such as how the goals of 12 affordable housing would be furthered by having rental limits. The idea of the character of a 13 neighborhood being preserved is not clear at all. The Planning Commission had asked if there should 14 be a cap or is this a restriction of property rights. There are some exceptions that should be 15 considered. Chair Socha asked how a cap on rental properties would impede the passing on of 16 generational wealth. She is disappointed the Planning Commission got dropped from the 17 conversation. She asked if there should be a cap at all. It is a huge restriction on property rights. She 18 is not a landlord. The question is what the justification is for capping it at all. She would like to 19 discuss this with the City Council again in a joint session. She wants to understand the justifications 20 better. If there is no justification, the property rights should be left alone. 21 22 Commissioner Erickson questioned if a cap is necessary. If there will be exceptions, would there be 23 an application process, and what is the criteria. He generally agrees it is odd to restrict property rights 24 to this extreme degree. He has not heard of this before. He stated his opinion that a community needs 25 some balance it its development. He believes St. Anthony is over a 50% rental community, and 26 limiting the single-family housing rental stock to a cap would help to balance some of that. He sees 27 some benefit to having some community balance in terms of the housing mix. Stability can have 28 benefits to a community. 29 30 Commissioner Corneille stated it is unclear what problem is being solved by this. The problem is not 31 articulated. Is the problem that there are too many renters, the housing prices are too high, the renters 32 are not in the character of the community, people don’t want to live in an apartment, etc. The result is 33 higher prices for renters who are here. We are further reducing affordability. This is the exact 34 opposite of what the Council has stated their goals are on affordability. 35 36 Commissioner Anderson agreed it feels like a solution to a problem that is not identified. If we are 37 already setting a cap with exceptions, we are admitting it is not a workable solution if the cap is so 38 low there can only be one more rental. This would be unfair to residents. 39 40 Commissioner Corneille stated the Federal Reserve put out a research paper in March of 2024. One of 41 the outcomes of rental caps decrease access to affordable housing. This does not seem to be a data- 42 driven recommendation. Most of the rentals are owned by residents who only have one rental license 43 and this is not vast corporate ownership. There could be many reasons. There needs to be a trigger 44 point and when that trigger is reached, readdress the situation. The Federal Reserve stated there is a 45 reduction in property values when rental caps are in place. In an environment where people can’t 46 afford the down payment or have monies to make repairs on a home. This causes a degradation in Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 5 1 housing stock. This does not tick many of the boxes in the positive categories. One of the goals is to 2 add affordable housing while avoiding investor takeover of single-family homes. There is no 3 destruction of housing stock when people rent. There is 40% non-owner occupant residents. 4 5 Chair Socha asked Staff if the City Council had been sent the Federal Reserve study, and Mr. 6 Grittman stated he does not believe it was. Commissioner Corneille was requested to forward the 7 study to Mr. Grittman who in turn can forward to the City Council. Chair Socha found Commissioner 8 Corneille’s comments compelling. She has heard it is difficult to engage renters. There are other ways 9 to get engagement and get people’s input. It is a valid point that stability and engagement in the 10 community is good. How that is achieved is being questioned as far as a rental cap. 11 12 Commissioner Mayne stated investor ownership decreases affordable housing in the community. 13 Commissioner Corneille stated that is not correct. Chair Socha stated there is an understanding or a 14 belief that if there are corporate landlords that want to come in they bid above market value, and 15 suddenly the property values of homes is sky high and individual homeowners are being priced out. 16 That is not happening in Minnesota. 17 18 Commissioner Erickson stated if you are increasing the supply of rentals, it will bring down the rental 19 rates. 20 21 Commissioner Corneille referred to a standard mortgage payment. The rental prices in St. Anthony 22 are lower than a median mortgage payment. Renters are generally not responsible for the maintenance 23 of the property. Housing affordability changes over time. 24 25 Commissioner Mayne noted for investor owners. they would like to make money on that transaction. 26 He believes the cost of renting a home is greater than owning that home. If there is more supply in an 27 area the rental rates are lower. 28 29 Chair Socha stated she has unanswered questions. More discussion on exceptions needs to take place. 30 Chair Socha asked if corporate owners could be limited on owning rentals in the City. Mr. Grittman 31 stated there are a number of problems with that approach. There are ways to work around that. 32 33 Commissioner Mayne asked if there has been some discussion about capping the number of rental 34 licenses a person can hold. 35 36 Commissioner Corneille asked if the Commission agrees that restraining supply increases price. If the 37 number of licenses are capped, the cost of rents in the City would increase. The affordability of 38 housing would be decreased with this Ordinance. Commissioner Erickson stated St. Anthony is part 39 of the metro area, and there are plenty of rental units. If that supply increases, it would impact cost. 40 Commissioner Morita noted the cheaper rentals are out of the school district. 41 42 Commissioner Morita stated he has been against regulations in the City restricting homeowner rights. 43 It creates fear for residents as he does not know what his future looks like and his possible need to 44 move due to job. He does not support a cap on rentals. He believes it started when discussing short- 45 term rentals. There is a benefit from long-term rentals. 46 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 6 1 Ms. Morello stated she is hearing general disagreement with the current proposal and asked if that 2 was disagreement with any cap. She asked what would be an acceptable cap. 3 4 Chair Socha stated she is against any cap unless there is a compelling reason which she has not heard. 5 If there was a moderate cap of 15% there needs to be exceptions. She would suggest a cap to how 6 many licenses an owner can have to rent their properties. She thinks it should be 1/3 to prevent a 7 surprise takeover. 8 9 Commissioner Corneille stated if there is a problem of people not picking up after their dogs, and we 10 say we want to cap the number of dogs on each block. Trying to control one thing has nothing to do 11 with the other. To put a cap in it would be admitting it would be beneficial. He is against any type of 12 cap. If there are issues with code enforcements on his street and none of them are rentals. There is a 13 good process for rental licensing in the City. The same standard is not being applied to the resident 14 home-owners. There are more restrictions on rental properties than owner-occupied properties. What 15 problem is being solved and what data is there to show a problem would be solved. Why are we 16 doing it. The real question is what is the purpose of this. 17 18 Commissioner Erickson stated this does not seem like there is a problem or issue, as the percentage is 19 low of single-family homes being rented. Without knowing what the issue is, we are trying to solve 20 no cap is needed. The pending bill before the Senate for the zoning issue allowing two or more 21 families on a single parcel. 22 23 Chair Socha stated she does not want a cap at all unless she is presented with evidence that it is 24 needed. 25 26 Ms. Morello referred to dividing the City into zones and not wanting any concentration in any 27 particular area of the City of rental homes. If caps were pursued what is the Commission’s thoughts 28 on caps on zones. 29 30 Commissioner Corneille asked if the City Council had a reason for no concentration in a particular 31 area. Mr. Grittman stated Council’s concern was an overconcentration of renters would have an 32 immediate negative impact on property values in that area. 33 34 Mr. Grittman stated staff was requested to examine property values around rentals, and the 35 impression that was gleaned was there was more of an impact on property values. 36 37 Commissioner Anderson stated in 2010 she had a house, and if she had tried to sell at that time, it 38 would have been a fire sale. It was less than half the value of when she purchased it. 39 40 Chair Socha stated Ex-Commissioner Rude, who was a rental property owner, was very adamant in 41 the discussions that there are other ways to enforce rental properties to meet the goals instead of 42 prohibiting. The goals did not make any sense to him as a property owner. She is generally not 43 opposed to regulations. These regulations make no sense to her. She is not willing to support any 44 regulation that doesn’t make sense. If this happens, St. Anthony is less desirable for her to live in or 45 buy in because this restriction is here. She would not want this restriction on her. 46 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 7 1 The consensus of the Commission is not to support a cap on rentals within St. Anthony. 2 3 Commissioner Corneille noted there is an increasing number of families who are on some rental 4 housing assistance, and Staff could bring that data, and we would be further restricting access to units 5 to people who are on housing assistance and unable to purchase a house. In his rental properties, 15% 6 of his tenants are receiving some form of housing assistance. These are people living and working in 7 St. Anthony right now. 8 9 Chair Socha stated in her former job, she was in a position where she was providing legal advice to 10 people who were of limited means. Repeatedly, people who were eligible for housing assistance were 11 on wait lists for available units. The economy is very uncertain right now. People may not be in the 12 best position to buy a home if we go into a recession. Now may not be the time to restrict rentals. 13 14 Commissioner Mayne asked Ms. Morello if the short-term rental conversation was dropped. Ms. 15 Morello stated on February 25, the decision was made to prohibit short-term rentals that will result in 16 ordinance language revisions. 17 18 Chair Socha asked what the Commissioners feel about short-term rentals. Commissioner Morita 19 noted it is not on the agenda, Chair Socha stated it can be discussed, and this is a public meeting. Ms. 20 Morello stated the City Council was looking more for long-term rental input. Chair Socha stated she 21 does not have objections to prohibiting short-term rentals. They may not be desirable in a residential 22 community. It is not a restriction on homeowners’ rights regarding short-term rentals. 23 24 Commissioner Erickson recalled that when discussed previously on short-term rentals, there was talk 25 of Roseville restricting the length of time a certain rental was available for short-term use. Chair 26 Socha stated there was discussion about how difficult it would be to license short-term rentals. 27 28 Mr. Grittman stated that the baseline for short-term rentals (less than 30 days) are not a residential use 29 and would be a commercial lodging use. They are not allowed in any of the residential zones. 30 Roseville modified its code approach to limiting the number of rental contracts that any one owner 31 could issue in a time period. City Council decided they did not want short-term rentals in the City and 32 directed Staff to make it more explicit that short-term rentals are not allowed. 33 34 Commissioner Anderson stated it is a nice option to have some, and if owners have invested a lot of 35 money in making it a rental, it may not be fair, but it makes sense in a zoning perspective. Mr. 36 Grittman when this was discussed there was not anything in code compliance. 37 38 The consensus of the Commission was to have a joint work session with Council regarding this 39 matter. 40 41 III.OTHER BUSINES - NONE. 42 43 IV.COMMUNITY FORUM. 44 45 Mr. Paul White, 3201 32nd Avenue NE, does not understand how this would help affordable 46 housing and protect the character of the neighborhood. He is impressed with the 47 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 8 1 Commission’s discussion this evening but there is a lot of guesswork on what the purpose is. 2 He suggested that City Staff get more data on how this would be helpful. He has a short-term 3 rental available for a family that was in the middle of a crisis. They have invested a lot in the 4 property to make it work well as a short-term rental. Neighbors who have family or friends 5 come use it as do the Whites. They have had good success. 6 7 V.INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS - NONE. 8 9 VI. ADJOURNMENT. 10 11 Chair Socha adjourned the Work Session at 6:45 p.m. 12 13 14 Respectfully submitted, 15 Debbie Wolfe 16 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. 1 CITY OF ST. ANTHONY 2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 3 APRIL 15, 2025 4 7:00 p.m. 5 I.6 CALL TO ORDER. 7 8 Chair Socha called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 9 II.10 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 11 12 Chair Socha invited the Commission and the audience to join her in the Pledge of Allegiance. 13 III.14 ROLL CALL. 15 16 Commissioners Present:Chair Socha, Commissioners Anderson, Corneille, Erickson, Mayne, 17 and Morita. 18 19 Absent:Commissioner Hark. 20 21 Also Present: City Planner Stephen Grittman and Assistant City Manager Ashley 22 Morello. 23 IV.24 APPROVAL OF AGENDA. 25 26 Motion by Commissioner Morita, seconded by Commissioner Erickson, to approve the April 27 15, 2025, Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. 28 29 Motion carried 6-0. 30 V.31 APPROVAL OF MINUTES. 32 33 Motion by Commissioner Morita, seconded by Commissioner Erickson, to approve the March 34 18, 2025, Work Session and Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes as presented. 35 36 Motion carried 6-0. 37 VI.38 PUBLIC HEARING. 39 A.40 Land Use Application – Impervious Variance – 0 Foss Road 41 42 Chair Socha opened the public hearing at 7:03 p.m. 43 44 City Planner Steve Grittman reviewed the Planning Commission is requested to consider requests for 45 Conditional Use Permit for a 34-unit Assisted Living Facility in an R-4 District, Variances to 46 required side yard setback, Variance for parking requirements, and Variance to impervious surface 47 coverage for revised parking (New). This item was tabled by the Planning Commission at their 48 March 18, 2025, Meeting. The plans were modified to increase impervious surface and increase Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 2 1 parking supply. The applicant is Able View/David TeBrake o/b/o Nou Vang Owner Sheldon 2 Mortenson. 3 4 At the March 18, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting, the applicant brought a request for a 5 Conditional Use Permit to develop a new 2-story, 34-unit Assisted Living Facility on a 0.86-acre 6 parcel at 0 Foss Road. The parcel is vacant with the exception of a garage building in the southeast 7 corner of the site. The building would be removed as a condition of approval of the project. The 8 applicant has indicated that the building may be removed without impacting other property rights on 9 the neighboring land. 10 11 The project requires a Conditional Use Permit for a senior residential building of between 20 and 40 12 units per acre. With the CUP, the applicant has prepared a plan that requires approval of a variance to 13 the south (side yard) setback (reducing the setback from 20 feet to 10.5 feet), and a variance to 14 parking requirements, reducing the parking supply from 37 to 11 parking spaces and waiving the 15 requirement for underground parking on the site. 16 17 At the public hearing in March, the Planning Commission heard testimony from the applicant related 18 to the project, as well as from neighbors of the property in question. Neighbor testimony raised a 19 number of concerns, including the following: 1.20 Parking supply on the site and whether parking demand would flow onto Foss Road – a 21 particular concern due to its already congested on-street parking conditions. 2.22 Proximity of the trash enclosure to neighboring townhouse units to the north of the property. 3.23 Visibility of the parking area to townhouse units to the north, and options for screening. 4.24 Other comments related to development of the site within an already heavily developed area./ 25 26 Several neighbors also expressed support for the land use generally, in the context of those particular 27 concerns expressed above. 28 29 After significant discussion, the Planning Commission voted to recommend either of two optional 30 paths for the developer. The first was to table action on the application and provide the applicant the 31 opportunity to modify the plan to increase off-street parking supply for the facility, and address any 32 impervious surface issues that such a modification would create, in addition to those other aspects of 33 the Commission’s discussion. This option would be returned to the Planning Commission for further 34 review. The second alternative offered to the applicant was to treat the Commission’s action as a 35 recommendation for denial if they wished to proceed to the City Council without making the 36 suggested changes. 37 38 The applicant has since provided updated plans and applied for a third variance, this one to the 39 standard maximum impervious surface based on an expansion of the parking lot. Other site plan 40 amendments have been added. 41 42 The applicant has revised the application following the Initial Planning Commission public hearing 43 with a series of modifications to the plans, one of which has resulted in a request for a third variance 44 to accommodate an expansion of the allowable impervious surface on the site to approximately 45 54.3% beyond the standard allowance of 50% in the R-4, Multi-family Residential zoning district. 46 Plan modifications include: Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 3 1 Addition of 5 parking spaces, increasing the supply from 11 to 16 total parking spaces. 2 Request for a variance to the impervious surface standard as noted above, for the increased 3 parking area. 4 Modification to the building façade along the south side, as recommended by staff. o5 Gable in roofline to break up roof plane. o6 Addition of stone wainscot to the south and west facades. o7 Shifting the trash enclosure to the east and adding a roof cover to screen the view of 8 the trash dumpsters within the enclosure from adjoining residential units. o9 Provision of parking supply data from other related projects. o10 Supplementary shrub planting (in addition to the proposed tree planting) along the 11 north boundary of the screening of the parking area above the retaining wall. o12 Addition of shrub and perennial grass planting along the south wall of the building. 13 14 Staff believes that there may be reasonable ground for variance consideration in this case, given that 15 the purpose of the underground (or under-building) parking is to limit surface parking and the 16 impervious surface that comes with it. In this case, there would still be a need for some surface 17 parking for visitors and transient employees, even if there were underground spaces available. In this 18 case, the underground requirement can be viewed as an unreasonable burden on the otherwise 19 reasonable use of the property. Staff’s position is that the 16-space parking supply would be sufficient 20 for nearly all conditions, with an occasional exception for a few high-demand events such as 21 Mother’s Day. 22 23 Staff Recommendation 24 Planning staff recommends approval of the proposed project including the Conditional Use Permit, 25 Variance for side setback, Variance for parking, and Variance for impervious surface. The land use is 26 clearly within the intent of the zoning ordinance and meets all aspects of the R-4 district with the 27 exception of the variance requests. For the setback variance, staff believes that the existing site 28 dimensions dictate the need for shifting the building toward one side property line or the other, and 29 the north boundary is encumbered by an existing storm sewer installation. It would not be reasonable 30 to expect that some other multi-family building could be built on this property as zoned, without a 31 similar setback variance. The parking variance is a close question, however, given the nature of the 32 use, staff supports the variance as requested. The addition of 5 stalls for a total of 16 spaces should be 33 adequate for nearly all circumstances for an assisted living use. 34 35 Staff recommendations come with a set of recommended conditions that apply both to the CUP and 36 Variance applications: 1.37 The applicant maintains a policy that prohibits tenants from storing personal vehicles on the 38 premises. 2.39 No conversion of the property to any type of housing that is not specifically designated for 40 assisted living may occur without a new CUP demonstrating compliance with all the terms of 41 the applicable zoning in effect, including unit count, parking supply, and other factors. 3.42 The retaining wall is designed by an engineer if it remains more than four feet in height. 4.43 The trash enclosure is constructed of materials that match those of the principal building 44 including the proposed roof. Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 4 5.1 The applicant modifies the south building exposure to add architectural features and interest to 2 both the wall and roofline, subject to staff review and approval. The plans as resubmitted meet 3 this condition as recommended by staff. 6.4 The applicant works with the City to sign the emergency vehicle lane along Foss Road for no 5 parking. 7.6 The City Engineer reviews and approves the grading and drainage plans. Substantive 7 modifications to the site plan resulting from grading plan changes may result in additional 8 official review of the proposed plan. 8.9 The City Engineer approves required final designs of the bioretention and other aspects of the 10 stormwater (and other) plans as noted in the Engineer’s memo of April 3, 2025. 9.11 The weed-barrier material under the deck is pervious fabric to ensure compliance with 12 impervious surface regulations. 10.13 Additional landscaping plant materials are provided in the rock mulch edge along the south 14 side of the building to help mitigate impacts of the lessened setback in this area. The updated 15 plans reflect compliance with this condition. 11.16 The applicant supplement landscape plans with the recommendations of the City Engineer and 17 as suggested in this report. 12.18 Additional sustainability elements recommended by the Planning Commission and approved 19 by the City Council may be included in any final approval. 13.20 The proposed sign will be reviewed separately and permitted under standard sign permitting 21 procedures. 14.22 The applicant constructs the project consistent with the final approved plans. 15.23 The applicant enters into a Conditional Use Permit Development Agreement guaranteeing the 24 terms of the permit and operational elements. 16.25 The approval recommendation incorporates the findings of fact noted in this report, and as 26 included in the draft City Council Resolution. 17.27 Any additional recommendations of the Planning Commission following the Public Hearing. 28 29 Staff proposed alternative Planning Commission Actions as: 1.30 Motion to recommend denial of the CUP and/or Variances. In the event of a recommendation 31 for denial, the Planning Commission must state its findings related to denial on the record. 2.32 Request Additional information and Table Action. A motion to table should be accompanied 33 by the specific information requested of staff or the developer necessary to make a 34 recommendation. Staff note: Given 60-day timelines, the Planning Commission should 35 attempt to forward a recommendation at this time to provide the City Council adequate time to 36 consider the application. 37 38 Also provide for Planning Commission consideration was the PowerPoint presented by Mr. Grittman, 39 the Application and Supporting Material and the Draft City Council Resolution. 40 41 Commissioner Mayne asked if the stormwater changes are indicated in the drawing, and Mr. 42 Grittman stated the City Engineer will work with the applicant on the stormwater changes, and it will 43 be made a condition for approval that the applicant agrees with the City Engineer recommendations. 44 Commissioner Mayne asked about the landscaping. Mr. Grittman stated the tree planting will be on 45 the north side with other planting on the south side. 46 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 5 1 Chair Socha re-opened the public hearing at 7:12 p.m. 2 3 Mr. Grittman noted a comment was received via email from Kevin Landware, representing the 4 ownership of the parcel, and read the email in detail. 5 6 Mr. Dave TeBrake, Architect, stated Staff did a great job of explaining all the changes. All 7 suggestions were incorporated into the changes, and they have no objections to the City Engineer’s 8 recommendations. Commissioner Morita asked if he had any concerns about the stormwater revisions 9 and Mr. TeBrake stated there are no concerns. 10 11 Ms. Kelly Maxwell, resident of St. Anthony Townhomes, stated she was concerned with the amended 12 plan asking for a third variance. She sees no other compromise on the applicant’s part regarding 13 occupancy number or building size. She is concerned that a third variance is being requested. She 14 asked why the building is facing the north side rather than the south side. 15 16 Chair Socha closed the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. 17 18 Commissioner Erickson commented that after last month’s meeting, he drove past the site and was 19 struck by the size of the site. In looking at the site now, it is slightly larger than the site to the south 20 (19-unit apartment building). He appreciates the work the applicant did to accommodate some of the 21 concerns expressed. In his opinion, the parking issue has been solved. Some design features of the 22 building have also been improved. Ms. Maxwell’s point about how the building faces is interesting. 23 24 Commissioner Socha re-opened the public hearing at 7:22 p.m. 25 26 Mr. TeBrake stated the big reason is because of the stormwater inlet coming from the townhome 27 property. There was no other option for placing the building. 28 29 Commissioner Socha closed the public hearing at 7:22 p.m. 30 31 Commissioner Morita thanked the applicant for listening and adjusting to suggestions made. He is 32 hopeful the parking needs are being met. He is relieved by the information Staff researched on 33 parking needs. 34 35 Commissioner Anderson asked about sustainability features but doesn’t see it as a condition for 36 approval. Mr. Grittman stated that would be included in the stormwater conditions. 37 38 Chair Socha noted that in the conditions, it is listed the City Engineer approves the required final 39 design of the stormwater and other plans. Chair Socha asked if there are concerns there will be 40 additional needs other than those outlined in the April 3 memo. Mr. Grittman stated they are 41 reasonably sure that the April 3 memo includes all, but if extraordinary measures that would impact 42 the plan or approval, Staff would need to come back with an amendment to the Planning 43 Commission’s review. Chair Socha asked if condition #8 would need to be amended. She is nervous 44 the condition refers to the April 3 memo. Mr. Grittman stated the City Engineer will need to approve 45 the final design, which has not yet been completed. 46 Planning Commission Regular Meeting Minutes April 15, 2025 Page 6 1 Commissioner Corneille commented that there is some interesting conversation about the facing of 2 the building, he suggested that the Applicant look at that prior to it going before the City Council. 3 4 Chair Socha stated she is glad the applicant took the Commission’s comments to heart and 5 implemented the changes in the plan. Given the unique conditions of this property, this would be a 6 viable use of the property, and an exception would be in order. She feels comfortable moving forward 7 with approval of this. 8 9 Motion by Commissioner Morita, seconded by Commissioner Corneille, to recommend the City 10 Council approve a resolution approving a request for a Conditional Use Permit for a 34-unit Assisted 11 Living Facility, as well as Variances from the Side Yard Setback in an R-4 Zoning District, from 12 Parking Requirements in an R-4 Zoning District, and from the Impervious Surface Maximum in an 13 R-4 Zoning District with conditions noted. 14 15 Motion carried 6-0. 16 17 VII.STAFF REPORTS. 18 19 Mr. Grittman reviewed that the State Legislation modifying local zoning authority is still moving 20 through the Legislature. There are four bills that cross over waiting for additional Local Government 21 Committee (LOMC) hearings. The LOMC has been working with the various bill authors on the 22 Code. There are a number of groups lobbying currently. Mr. Grittman will keep the Commission 23 updated. 24 25 VIII.OTHER BUSINES - NONE. 26 27 IX.COMMUNITY FORUM - NONE. 28 29 No one appeared to address the Planning Commission. 30 31 X.INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENT. 32 33 XI. ADJOURNMENT. 34 35 Motion by Commissioner Morita, seconded by Commissioner Anderson to adjourn the 36 meeting at 7:45 p.m. 37 38 Motion carried 6-0. 39 40 Respectfully submitted, 41 Debbie Wolfe 42 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. MEMORANDUM To:Saint Anthony Village Planning Commission From:Stephen Grittman, City Planner Date:June 17, 2025 GC Project No.140.00 - Gen Property Location:NA Request: City Code Amendments – Electric Vehicle Charging Regulations BACKGROUND AND GENERAL INFORMATION The City has been considering amendments to the zoning ordinance that would create a baseline requirement for electric vehicle charging in new residential projects. The direction has included background from City Council worksession discussions and input from the Parks and Environment Commission (PEC). The attached ordinance proposal relies on regulations currently in place in the adjoining communities of Roseville and New Brighton, with some modification to those regulations based on feedback from Council and PEC. ANALYSIS The City’s Goal Setting activities over the past few years have included specific emphasis on Sustainability measures, including accommodation of electric vehicle infrastructure. For private development, there is no current requirement for electric vehicle charging, nor are there any incentives identified in the Code. To further the City’s Sustainability objectives in this regard, the attached ordinance is designed to set a basic minimum requirement for charging infrastructure for new parking lots, and any existing parking lots that are undergoing significant renovation. Parking areas that are subject to maintenance projects, including sealcoating and/or mill-and-overlay projects, would be exempt from the requirements. The proposed ordinance would add to the existing Parking section of the code (§154.179). The language in the proposed ordinance closely mirrors the standards used by both Roseville and New Brighton, with one addition based on feedback from the PEC. That addition is to lower the threshold for Level 1 charger installation to parking lots of 10 – 29 spaces. In New Brighton and Roseville, no requirement is made for projects of less than 29 spaces under their current code. Level 1 charging is accomplished with an inline charging unit and cable from a common 110 Volt/15 Amp “household” circuit. Installed costs are generally $500, and less than $1,000. For comparison, Level 2 chargers require additional power supply, and installed costs are generally in the $5,000 range. Level 3 chargers (“Fast” or “Superchargers”) will commonly cost more than $100,000 to install, and usually require additional transformer infrastructure. It is common, although not required, for these chargers to be constructed in pairs. Parking lots of 10 spaces for residential projects would assume 4-5 clustered units. For commercial parking, a 10 space parking lot would be required for a 2,500 square foot building. Parking Lots of 30 spaces would correlate to a residential project of approximately 20 units, or a commercial project of approximately 8,000 square feet. Finally, on recommendation from the PEC, the proposed ordinance includes a timing waiver of up to two years if an applicant installs infrastructure that can support Level 3 charging at the time of parking lot construction. The waiver would apply to the charger facilities, and could be deferred for the two-year period by development contract. CONCLUSION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION The proposed ordinance creates a baseline for EV charging, and generally reflects the requirements currently in place in neighboring communities. Staff recommends approval of the ordinance to reflect a portion of the City’s Sustainability goals. ALTERNATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission may choose to recommend adoption of the attached ordinance as proposed, make changes as a part of a recommendation, or recommend denial. If there are specific questions or additional research that staff can provide answers for, the Commission may consider tabling action to a future meeting. ATTACHMENTS Public Hearing Notice Draft Ordinance NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING June 17, 2025, 7:00 p.m. City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road, Saint Anthony, MN 55418 Notice is hereby given that the City of Saint Anthony Village Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to solicit public response to a proposed amendment to the City Code, including Sections 154.089 (R-3 District), 154.105 (R-4 District), 154.125 (C District), 154.144 (I District), 154.159 (R/O District), and 154.179 (Parking), as well as any other Sections that may be necessary to incorporate regulations addressing Electric Vehicle charging requirements. The City Council is expected to consider the Planning Commission’s recommendation of the proposed Conditional Use Permit at their regular meeting on July 8, 2025, pending Commission action. The Planning Commission agenda and packet item relating to this application will be made available prior to the meeting online at www.savmn.com. Ways to Comment: In Person The public is welcome to attend in person at the City of Saint Anthony Village City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road, in the Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. Written Written comments may be taken at the Saint Anthony Village City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road, Saint Anthony Village, Minnesota 55418, online at savmn.com (Planning Commission—Comment or Question) or via email to planner@savmn.com until the date of the public hearing. Questions? Questions may be directed to the City Planner at 612-409-6503. Steve Grittman City Planner 1 CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE ORDINANCE 2025-0X AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 154.179 OF THE CITY CODE TO PROVIDE FOR REGULATIONS RELATED TO ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING REQUIREMENTS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE HEREBY ORDAINS: Section 1.Section §154.179 (Parking) is hereby amended to read as follows: Section 154.179 (Parking) (A)(12) Electric Vehicle Charging. (a) All developments that require new Commercial Parking Lots as defined in this Section, and any existing Commercial Parking Lots being reconstructed that are not exempt under Subp. (b) of this Section, shall include one or more locations to allow for electric vehicle charging. The thresholds for adding EV charging spaces to new developments are as follows in Table (12)(a): EV Charging Space Thresholds No. of New Parking Spaces Required No. of EV Spaces and Level of Charger At least 10 spaces up to 29 spaces 1 charger at Level 1 or greater 30 spaces up to 49 spaces Residential: 5% of spaces at Level 1 or greater; 30 spaces up to 49 spaces Non-residential: 2 spaces at Level 2 50 spaces or more Residential: 10% at Level 1 or greater, plus 2 spaces at Level 2 or greater 50 spaces or more Non-residential: 5% at Level 2 or greater (b) These requirements shall not apply to maintenance of existing parking areas when that maintenance consists only of restriping, seal-coating, patching of less than 25% of the total area of the parking lot, or “mill and overlay” projects. (c) Spaces designated as EV charging spaces shall be included in meeting the property’s required parking quantities per this code. (d) EV charging spaces shall be placed in locations easily accessible to tenants of, or visitors to, the property, and shall be designed so at least one 2 of the provided EV charging spaces is accessible to vehicles requiring handicapped access. (e) If EV charging equipment, including charging stations, transformers, and other above-ground mechanical equipment, is proposed to be located in the front yard, such equipment shall be screened from view of the public right-of-way with fencing or landscaping consistent with applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. (f) When electric infrastructure is installed, such infrastructure shall be designed and installed to accommodate convenient expansion of the charging system on the property. (g) The City may grant an applicant for parking lot construction a waiver by development agreement of up to two years to install the required charging facilities if the applicant develops infrastructure to install Level 3 chargers rather than Level 2, and installs charging facilities no later than two years following completion of the parking area. Section 2.The City Clerk is hereby directed to make the changes required by this Ordinance as part of the Official St. Anthony City Code, Title XV, Zoning Ordinance, and to renumber the tables and chapters accordingly as necessary to provide the intended effect of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is further directed to make necessary corrections to any internal citations that result from said renumbering process, provided that such changes retain the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as has been adopted. Section 3.This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and publication. This ordinance may be published by summary publication, per a duly adopted resolution of the City Council. The ordinance in its entirety and any related map shall be posted on the City website after publication. Copies of the complete Ordinance and map are available online and at St. Anthony City Hall for examination upon request. ADOPTED BY the City Council of Saint Anthony Village, Minnesota this ____ day of _____, 2025. ___________________________________ Mayor Webster ATTEST: ___________________________________ City Clerk AYES: NAYS: MEMORANDUM To:Saint Anthony Village Planning Commission From:Stephen Grittman, City Planner Date:June 17, 2025 GC Project No.140.00 - Gen Property Location:NA Request: City Code Amendments – Rental Housing BACKGROUND The City has been working toward policy and regulatory efforts related to a series of housing goals over the past few years. These goals include seeking methods to support affordable housing development and preservation of existing single-family housing, including the concept of “Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing” – NOAH, which relies on the availability of older housing stock, often at more affordable prices, allowing younger and/or more modest income families to attain single-family housing ownership in the community. Accompanying this report are two ordinance drafts. One builds standards for rental single-family housing as a land use. The second establishes additional licensing and process requirements for license applicants and ongoing operation of rental housing. The Planning Commission’s review will primarily focus on the first ordinance, with the second informal ordinance language provided for additional context. GENERAL INFORMATION Limitations on Single-Family Rentals The first ordinance illustrates proposed redlined changes to Chapters 152, 154 and 157. To help maintain single-family preservation, the City Council has directed research into options for limiting the loss of ownership housing. Three strategies have been identified as a part of this objective. These are the following: 1.Limit Corporate Ownership of Rental Units. This strategy is designed to ensure that large-scale corporate purchases of existing single family housing stock cannot happen in the Village. While this phenomenon has not been an issue to date, corporate ownership (and the conversion of owner-occupied single-family homes to rental units) has been seen in communities around the Twin Cities area. The attached ordinance amendment is designed to restrict “corporate” ownership to no more than 4 rental units per person or organization. The language is adapted from draft legislation that the State Legislature has considered over the past few years (although not enacted). Applications for rental license would include a declaration of financial interest in other Saint Anthony Village single-family housing. 2.Prohibit Short-Term Rental of Single-Family Housing. The City considered a variety of approaches to short-term rental regulation during previous worksessions (including adaptations of neighboring community regulations). The Council directed staff to prohibit this aspect of transient rentals. Under current ordinance definitions, short-term rentals are not residential dwelling units, and therefore, not allowed in any residential zoning district. However, a number of such rentals have been discovered, including several that have raised a variety of neighborhood compatibility and maintenance concerns. The attached amendments related to short term rentals are aimed at defining the use, and explicitly prohibiting them in residential districts. Short-term rental is essentially a “hotel” use, that would otherwise be eligible only for commercial zoning districts. 3.Long Term Rentals. As a measure to ward off potential issues, the third strategy establishes a cap on the amount of single-family rental housing in the community. As noted in prior discussions, the existing licensed single family rental percentage in Saint Anthony is around four percent, and appears to have remained relatively stable over the past several years. In follow- up research, staff found that other communities in the area have adopted rental caps, usually in the range of the percent of total single-family housing. The attached ordinance incorporates that threshold city-wide, and also breaks the city into four subareas (north of 37th, 33rd to 37th, 29th to 33rd, and south of 29th). This would ensure that no one neighborhood would be subject to an oversupply of rental housing beyond that available in other areas. 4.Finally, an additional sign amendment for rental property is included as an addition to Chapter 157. This addition is intended to accommodate notice of rental or for-sale real estate, signs which are common, but otherwise prohibited by the sign regulations. Licensing and Operation of Rental Housing The second ordinance updates Chapter 152 related to Rental Housing. Various amendments are proposed to clarify licensing application and processing policies, as well as ongoing enforcement and operation practices. Also included are specifics related to those exempt from the licensing requirements, and a revocation process for rental property owners that fail to reapply for licensing under the existing process. The various Sections of 152 are included with redlined additions/changes. This is presented as an informal text document (rather than Ordinance form) to assist in review. An ordinance form of the recommended text will be prepared for Council consideration to accompany this text format. Finally, there are a number of definitions that are proposed that are drawn from the Building Code and Property Maintenance Code – these have not been detailed in this draft as they are taken from other adopted sources. CONCLUSION AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff has prepared two ordinance sets for Planning Commission consideration. The first presents regulations related to corporate ownership of single-family rental housing, prohibition on short-term rentals, and a cap on the total number of single-family rentals in the community. The second presents modifications and updates to Chapter 152 which is the City’s existing Rental Housing ordinance section. Staff requests comment from the Planning Commission, and a recommendation to the City Council on adoption as presented, or with modifications as directed. ALTERNATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Planning Commission may recommend approval of the rental housing ordinances as presented, with modifications, or denial as preferred. ATTACHMENTS Public hearing notice Draft ordinance Draft informal ordinance NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING June 17, 2025, 7:00 p.m. City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road, Saint Anthony, MN 55418 Notice is hereby given that the City of Saint Anthony Village Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to solicit public response to a proposed amendment to the City Code, including Sections 152 (Rental Dwellings) and 154 (Land Use) as well as any other Sections that may be necessary to incorporate regulations related to the rental of Single Family Dwellings in the Village. The City Council is expected to consider the Planning Commission’s recommendation of the proposed Conditional Use Permit at their regular meeting on July 8, 2025, pending Commission action. The Planning Commission agenda and packet item relating to this application will be made available prior to the meeting online at www.savmn.com. Ways to Comment: In Person The public is welcome to attend in person at the City of Saint Anthony Village City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road, in the Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. Written Written comments may be taken at the Saint Anthony Village City Hall, 3301 Silver Lake Road, Saint Anthony Village, Minnesota 55418, online at savmn.com (Planning Commission—Comment or Question) or via email to planner@savmn.com until the date of the public hearing. Questions? Questions may be directed to the City Planner at 612-409-6503. Steve Grittman City Planner 1 CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE ORDINANCE 2025-0X AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE, SECTIONS 152, AND 154 RELATED TO LICENSING AND REGULATIONS FOR RENTING OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE HEREBY ORDAINS: Section 1.Section §154.007 DEFINITIONS (Zoning) is hereby amended to add the following: RESIDENCE OR RESIDENTIAL USE: A dwelling unit that is intended for occupancy for no less than 30 consecutive days, whether owned or rented. SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT: A form of transient occupancy, similar to motels or other such uses, in a residential zoning district for which occupancy of a residential building, room, or suite of rooms is offered, rented, or used, for periods of fewer than 30 consecutive days. MOTEL (Includes “HOTEL”). Premises furnishing sleeping or overnight stopping accommodations for travelers and other transient guests for stays of fewer than 30 consecutive days. Section 2.Section §152.05 DEFINTIONS (Rental Housing) is hereby amended to add the following: RESIDENCE OR RESIDENTIAL USE: A dwelling unit that is intended for occupancy for no less than 30 consecutive days, whether owned or rented. SHORT-TERM RENTAL UNIT: A form of transient occupancy, similar to motels or other such uses, in a residential zoning district for which occupancy of a residential building, room, or suite of rooms is offered, rented, or used, for periods of fewer than 30 consecutive days. Section 3. Section §154.051 (A) is hereby amended to read as follows: (A)Single-family detached residential dwellings, but not including short term rentals; Section 4.Section §154.036 (A) is hereby amended to read as follows: (A)Single-family detached residential dwellings, but not including short term rentals; Section 5.Section §154.066 (B) is hereby amended to read as follows: (B)Two-family detached residential dwellings, but not including short term rentals; Section 6.Section §154.086 (B) is hereby amended to read as follows: (B) Townhouse buildings containing not less than three residential dwelling units nor more than eight units, but not including short term rentals; 2 Section 7.Section §154.088 (C) is hereby amended to read as follows: (C)Multiple residential dwellings with not more than four apartments residential dwelling units, but not including short term rentals. Section 8.Section §154.101 is hereby amended to read as follows: Within an R-4 District, the only permitted uses are multiple family residential dwellings, including rental apartment units and condominium apartment units. Permitted multi-family buildings shall meet the standards and requirements of this subchapter. Short term rentals shall not be allowed in the R-4 District. Section 9.Section §154.102 (B) is hereby amended to read as follows: (B)   Townhouses, but not including short term rentals; Section 10.Section §152.08 is hereby amended to read as follows: (A) LICENSE REQUIRED.   It is unlawful to operate a rental dwelling in the  city without first having obtained a license from the city. An owner must obtain a license for each rental dwelling. If the rental dwelling contains two or more units, and has a common owner and a common property identification number, the owner may obtain a single license for the rental dwelling. (B) NUMBER OF LICENSED RENTAL UNITS PER OWNER. (1)No individual owner, including any natural person, partnership, company, corporation or organization however formed, shall own or have any ownership interest in more than four (4) single family rental or non-homestead residential dwellings in the City. An ownership interest shall include fee interest, partial or whole financial interest in any corporate or business form that owns single family rental properties, any partial or whole financial interest in any trust or other organization that owns single family rental properties, or any other interest of the kind. The City shall not issue any license for the rental of a single-family residence to anyone who already has such an interest in four (4) or more rental or non-homestead single family residences in the City. (2)EXCEPTIONS. a. The City Council may issue such a license to an owner in a hardship case for a temporary rental period of up to twelve (12) months. b. The limits of this Section shall not apply to a bona fide housing program of any agency of the State of Minnesota or of the Metropolitan Council. (C) NUMBER OF LICENSED RENTAL UNITS IN THE CITY. The total number of single-family rental licenses shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the total number of single family detached houses in the City as determined by the City of St. Anthony based on the City’s available data. In addition, the number of 3 licensed rental single-family units shall not exceed ten percent (10%) of the total number of single family detached houses in each of four subareas of the City, each of the subareas defined as follows: (1) Subarea 1 shall be all single-family homes lying north of 37th Avenue NE. (2) Subarea 2 shall be all single-family homes lying south of 37th Avenue NE and north of 33rd Avenue NE. (3) Subarea 3 shall be all single-family homes lying south of 33rd Avenue NE and north of 29th Avenue NE. (4) Subarea 4 shall be all single-family homes lying south of 29th Avenue NE. Section 11: 157.18 SIGNS REQUIRING NO PERMITS (J) Residential zoned properties may place one sign per street frontage with up to two sides during period when said property is available for sale, or when said property is available for rent if the property has a valid rental license.  No single  sign face shall exceed six (6) square feet.  Such signs and sign structures shall be  constructed of durable all-weather materials, such as but not limited to steel, coreaplast plastic foam-core, alumacore, polycarbonate (Lexan), vinyl and nylon. Section 12.The City Clerk is hereby directed to make the changes required by this Ordinance as part of the Official St. Anthony City Code, Title XV, Zoning Ordinance, and to renumber the tables and chapters accordingly as necessary to provide the intended effect of this Ordinance. The City Clerk is further directed to make necessary  corrections to any internal citations that result from said renumbering process, provided that such changes retain the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as has been adopted.  Section 13.This Ordinance shall take effect and be in full force from and after its passage and publication. This ordinance may be published by summary publication, per a duly adopted resolution of the City Council. The ordinance in its entirety and any related map shall be posted on the City website after publication.  Copies of the  complete Ordinance and map are available online and at Saint Anthony City Hall for examination upon request.     ADOPTED BY the City Council of Saint Anthony Village, Minnesota this ____ day of _____, 2025. ___________________________________ Mayor Webster ATTEST: 4 ___________________________________ City Clerk AYES: NAYS: 152.05 (DEFINITIONS). Terms defined herein shall apply specifically to this Chapter 152. Terms used in this Chapter that are not defined shall refer to the adopted Building Code, Property Maintenance Code, or Zoning Code as applicable. [There are a series of definitions to be added that reflect building code and/or property maintenance code requirements in this Section] OWNER. Any person who owns a dwelling. Or, Aany person or entity that holds an ownership stake of any kind, and/or any person representing any such owner. Any such owner must comply with the provisions of this chapter to the same extent as the OWNER. 152.06 RESPONSIBILITIES OF OWNER AND LANDLORD. (C) Obtain license. The owner or resident agent must obtain a license and pay all license fees as required by this subchapter before the rental dwelling may be rented. Failure to obtain the required license shall cause The City to take the steps to remove the rental opportunity established in 152.14. 152.08 LICENSE REQUIRED. It is unlawful to operate a rental dwelling in the city without first having obtained a license from the city. An owner must obtain a license for each rental dwelling. If the rental dwelling contains two or more units, and has a common owner and a common property identification number, the owner may obtain a single license for the rental dwelling. Failure to obtain the required license shall cause The City to take the steps to remove the rental opportunity established in Chapter 152.14. 152.09 LICENSE APPLICATION. (A) The owner of a rental dwelling must submit an application for a license on forms and in the format provided by the city. The owner must give notice, in writing, to the city within five business days of any changes to the information contained in the license application. The application must include: (1) The owner’s name, address, and telephone number, owning partners if a partnership, corporate officers if a corporation; (2) The name and address of a person residing or having a business office in Hennepin or Ramsey County, and appointed by the owner as an agent for purposes of notices under this chapter and for services of process upon the owner; (3) The name and address of any managing operator or agent; (4) The name and address of the contract for deed vendor if the rental dwelling is owned under a contract for deed; (5) The legal address of the rental dwelling; (6) The type and number of units within the rental dwelling; (7) The height and the multiple dwelling in stories; (8) The type of structure to be licensed (i.e., single-family, duplex, triplex); and (9) The exterior finish of the building. 10) The name and contact information for the party responsible for exterior maintenance of the property. 11) The applicant must provide proof that the property meets the requirements established in Section 150.16, including all required I&I inspections (12) If the license application is for rental of a single family detached dwelling: For the applicant and for any other persons or entities with a financial or ownership interest in the proposed rental dwelling, a complete listing of all other non-homestead single family real estate in which any such person or entity has a financial or ownership interest of any kind, along with the manner and amount of each said ownership interest. (B) Upon approval by the City Council, the City Clerk will issue a license to the owner of the rental dwelling. A license is personal to the owner of a specified rental dwelling. No license may be transferred to a purchaser of a multiple dwelling or to any other person or entity. If a rental dwelling is sold, the purchaser may not own or operate the rental dwelling without first obtaining the license provided for in this chapter. A license will be valid for one year. If a license is issued during the year, the license will be prorated accordingly at the renewal time. (C) All owners of residential rental properties are required to register their properties according to Section 152.08, however, the following property owners are exempt from the registration fee and the requirement to post a registration inspection; 1. Per M.S. 273.124(1c) owners of residential rental properties where all renters residing in the rental property are related to the owner as parent, stepparent, child, stepchild, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew, or niece and the owner or agent that each of the renters is one of these relations. This relationship may be by blood or marriage. This exemption does not provide for any of the exempted occupants to receive compensation, in any form, from allowing occupancy to anyone not covered under this exemption, nor does it apply to non-family members residing as a guest or invitee of an exempted individual listed above. 2. Owners of residential rental property licensed by the State of Minnesota as a group home and used as such. The owner or agent must provide the current license number on the registration form. 3. In all cases, property owners meeting the criteria of this exemption are required to complete the Affidavit of Rental License Exemption prior to owner leaving occupancy of the property. 4. In all cases, an owner must notify the City in writing within 30 days if an exemption, as described in this Section, is no longer applicable. 152.11 ISSUANCE OF LICENSE. (E) Renewal of license. An owner may continue to rent a dwelling after the expiration day of the license provided the owner has filed with the city on or before June 30, the appropriate renewal license application and license fee. The issuance of a license under this chapter shall be considered a privilege and not an absolute right of the owner and shall not entitle the owner to an automatic renewal of the license. Allowing the owner to continue to rent while the renewal is being processed does not obligate the city to automatically renew the license. Failure to submit the renewal license application and license fee by June 30 will result in late penalties established is Chapter 33 of this City Code. [* Fee schedule requires amending to identify $100 fine upon the first of each month beginning 7/1] 152.12 INSPECTIONS (B) Occupant initiated inspections. An occupant who believes that his or her rental dwelling is not in compliance with the provision of this chapter, city code, or the International Housing Maintenance Code may provide written notice to the owner or resident agent of the rental dwelling specifying the alleged deficiency. If the owner or resident agent does not take action to correct the alleged problem the occupant may contact the city and request an inspection of the rental dwelling by the City Manager or designee upon showing proof that the owner or resident agent had been properly notified and has been given a reasonable time in which to correct deficiencies. The cost of the inspection shall be paid by the owner if the city’s inspection reveals actual deficiencies as described by the occupant. If the inspection by the city substantiates the claim of non-compliance made by the occupant, the city inspector shall issue a compliance order to the owner or resident agent establishing the scope of work and timeframe for completion. The cost of the inspection to affirm the work identified in the compliance order shall be paid by the owner in the amount established in the city fee schedule. [* Fee schedule requires amending to identify $50 r-inspection fee] 152.13 CONDUCT ON LICENSED PREMISES; VIOLATIONS. (A) Owner responsible. It shall be the responsibility of the owner or resident agent to see that persons occupying the rental dwelling conduct themselves in such a manner as not to cause the premises to be disorderly. This section applies to all licenses. For purposes of this section, a rental dwelling is disorderly at which any of the following activities occur: (1) Violation of M.S. Chapter 609, Criminal Code, as it may be amended from time to time; (2) Violation of M.S. Chapter 152, Drugs; Controlled Substances, as it may be amended from time to time; (3) Violation of M.S. Chapter 340A, Liquor, as it may be amended from time to time; (4) Violation of M.S. Chapter 624, Crimes; Fireworks; Firearms, as it may be amended from time to time; or (5) Violation of any of the provisions contained in Titles IX or XIII of this code. (B) City enforcement. The City Manager or designee is responsible for enforcement of this section. (C) First violation. Upon determination by the City Manager or designee that a licensed premises was used in a disorderly manner, as described in division (A) above, the City Manager or designee must give notice to the licensee of the violation and direct the licensee to take steps to prevent further violations. 152.14 CONDITION OF LICENSED PREMISES. (A) Compliance order. Whenever the Manager, or designee, determines that the condition of any rental dwelling or the premises surrounding it fails to meet the provisions of this subchapter, other applicable city code provisions or the International Property Maintenance Code, he or she may issue a compliance order setting forth the specific violations and ordering the owner to correct such violations. Failure to meet the expectations stated within a compliance order issued for a violation of any section of city code may result in the City Council denying, suspending, revoking or not renewing a rental license consistent with the procedures established in section 152.15 152.15 HEARING PROCEDURE. (A) Scheduling of hearing. If the city makes a determination that it will be denying, suspending, revoking or not renewing a license pursuant to this subchapter, or if the owner or resident agent is appealing the compliance order pursuant to §152.12, §152.13 or 152.14 the City Council shall conduct a hearing on the matter. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular City Council meeting following the date of the notice or receipt of the owner’s notice of appeal of a compliance order.