Loading...
11-15-11 Plan Comm PacketCITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, 15 NOVEMBER 2011 7:00 P.M. A G E N D A CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL / (LIAISON) SCHEDULE GENG (Open) ______ HASEK (Open) ______ HUTCHINS (Dec) ______ CHARBONNET (Open) ______ GARELICK (Open) ______ DAVIS (Oct) ______ ARNST (Nov) ______ APPROVAL OF AGENDA APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 1, 2011  1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING – COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT – SMITHTOWN CROSSING REDEVELOPMENT STUDY 2. PUBLIC HEARING – FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE (Continued from November 1, 2011) Applicant: Don and Kiki Gloude Location: 4675 Fatima Place 3. GREENSTEPS PROGRAM BEST PRACTICES DISCUSSION 4. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR 7. OLD BUSINESS 8. NEW BUSINESS 9. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA 10. REPORTS Liaison to Council  SLUC  Other  11. ADJOURNMENT CITY OF SHOREWOOD COUNCIL CHAMBERS PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD TUESDAY, 1 NOVEMBER 2011 7:00 P.M. MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Chair Geng called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Chair Geng; Commissioners Arnst, Davis, Garelick (arrived at 7:17 P.M.), Hasek (arrived at 7:01 P.M.) and Hutchins; Administrator Heck; Planning Director Nielsen; and Council Liaison Woodruff Absent: Councilmember Charbonnet APPROVAL OF AGENDA Hutchins moved, Arnst seconded, approving the agenda for November 1, 2011 as presented. Motion passed 4/0. APPROVAL OF MINUTES  October 18, 2011 Hutchins moved, Davis seconded, Approving the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of October 18, 2011, amended in Item 1, Page 5, Paragraph 5, Sentence 12, change “buildings that are over 1200 square feet in size” to “buildings that are over 150 square feet in size”. Motion passed 5/0. 1. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING – FRONT YARD SETBACK VARIANCE Applicant: Don and Kiki Gloude Location: 4675 Fatima Place Chair Geng opened the Public Hearing at 7:02 P.M., noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. He explained items acted upon this evening would be placed on a November 28, 2011, Regular City Council meeting agenda for further review and consideration. Director Nielsen explained Don and Kiki Gloude own the property located at 4675 Fatima Place. They have begun a substantial expansion and remodeling of their existing home, including a new garage. They propose building a new entry and covered porch on the front of the house as part of the project. The entry is an allowable encroachment in residential districts, but the porch is specifically precluded. They propose building the covered porch 4.5 feet into the front yard setback. Therefore, they have requested a front yard setback variance. The property is located in the R-1D/S, Single-Family Residential/Shoreland zoning district. In addition to their home there is an attached garage, swimming pool and two small accessory buildings on the property. In this district the minimum allowable lot size is 10,000 square feet. Their lot contains 26,866 square feet of area with the current hardcover at 16.4 percent. The proposed additions will increase the amount of CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 2 of 15 hardcover to 20.8 percent. Currently the house is situated 31.7 feet back from the street right-of-way. The new garage and addition will be built out to the 30-foot required setback; the smallest front setback of all of the four single-family residential districts. The enclosed entry extends 4.5 feet into the front setback area which is allowed under the City’s zoning regulations. The covered porch to the left of the entry also extends 4.5 feet into the front setback area and that is specifically prohibited. The applicants propose having a 3-foot by 3-foot concrete stoop coming off of the entry way. When Staff first discussed this project with the applicants Staff told them that is not allowed. Therefore, the applicants thought they needed to include the stoop in their variance request. Upon further investigation Staff determined the stoop is allowable as long as it is not covered. The stoop is no longer part of the variance request. Nielsen displayed illustrations of the site location map and the proposed floor plan. He noted this is the first variance request being considered under the new “practical difficulties” regulations versus the old “hardship” regulations. With regard to the analysis of the case, Nielsen explained the request has to conform to all of the criteria for a variance. He reviewed how the applicants’ request conforms to the criteria. Although it is not unreasonable to want a covered porch, the question at hand is if it should be allowed to encroach into what is already a minimal front yard setback. The Ordinance requires porches comply with the setback requirement. Its encroachment into the setback could be considered inconsistent with the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan. Practical difficulties include three factors: reasonableness; circumstances are unique to the property and not caused by the landowner; and, the variance will not alter the essential character of the area. All three criteria must be met. Reasonableness was just discussed. The applicants’ circumstances are not unique to the property. Many homes in the neighborhood have a similar type of entry condition as the applicants, but they do comply with the setback requirement. While the applicants may not have built the original house, the house was built very near the minimal setback and therefore it does not allow for additions to the front of the building. The applicants have inherited what the previous owner has done. Nielsen reviewed the four reasons the applicants have given for granting the variance. They are: 1) safety; 2) handicap access; 3) use of land; and 4) aesthetics/property value. With regard to safety, the applicants are allowed an eave overhang of 3.7 feet. This is nearly double what many of the houses in the neighborhood have. There are other ways of directing drainage away from the stoop. The applicants want a shed-type roof off of the new entry feature. In other instances people have gone with an “eyebrow” design where the entry is covered by a gable facing the street, directing drainage away from the doorway. The ability of the applicants to have the stoop should resolve any handicap access issues. Being able to have the front stoop should resolve any use of land issue. Aesthetics and property value are not criterion for granting variances under the previous hardship standard or in the practical difficulties test. They are simply too subjective to use as reasons. The City has historically placed considerable value on the open space afforded by reasonable setback areas. Nielsen stated based on the analysis of the case Staff believes the applicants’ request does not satisfy the criteria for granting a variance under the “practical difficulties” test. Staff believes a text amendment to the Zoning Code would be a more appropriate way to address the request. It would be difficult to say the same arguments could not be made for any number of homes in the neighborhood. Nielsen then stated Staff recommends not approving the variance request. Nielsen noted the applicants are present this evening. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 3 of 15 In response to a question from Commissioner Hasek, Director Nielsen explained the four-foot wide step next to the stoop is allowed. In response to another question, Nielsen stated it’s the roof that is the issue. Mr. Gloude clarified the notch in the eyebrow roof is the only thing that is being talked about for a variance. He noted the house was built about 50 years ago by other people that owned the property. He explained the current house is a flat faced house with about 8 inches of eave. During the approximate 10 years he and his wife have owned the property they have had problems with ice forming on the front stoop and steps because there is nothing to cover them. Their proposed design should address that issue. The first design they considered did have a gable entry going toward the street. They were told they couldn’t have that because it encroached too much into the setback. They were also told they had to do a side entry door. When they open the door to their house the door almost hits the stairs going to the upstairs. There is no internal room to recess an entry. Mr. Gloude stated that he and his wife have friends that are wheelchair bound. Therefore, they are trying to make their home more handicapped accessible for those friends. He then stated they believe the proposed design for the roofline and covered sidewalk improve the aesthetic appearance of the house and it naturally guides you to the front door. It would enhance the value of the property. Mr. Gloude stated he and his wife worked the design a number of different ways. The proposed design is the one that fits best within the constraints they have, but they do need a variance for the one section of the roof. He noted they have spoken with their neighbors and the neighbors are very supportive. Commissioner Davis asked how people in wheelchairs will be able to get up the step that is depicted on the floor plan. Mr. Gloude explained they had spoken to people about putting in a slopped sidewalk and were told that would be more unsafe than a step. Visitors would still have to get up the step but they wouldn’t have to maneuver on the small stoop. Their proposed design addresses access and safety by mitigating the buildup of ice and snow near the entry to the house. Commissioner Hasek asked Mr. Gloude if they had a handicapped accessible bathroom for their visitors. Mr. Gloude responded the proposed remodeling includes adding a handicapped accessible bathroom. Chair Geng asked if there has been consideration given to gutters. Mr. Gloude explained there are gutters on the house today, but that hasn’t stopped the buildup of ice dams. There will be gutters on the new design. Mr. Gloude noted the eyebrow design proposed in the roof will be metal. Having a gutter in the middle of that portion of the roof would not have been aesthetically appealing. Commissioner Arnst commented having a roof over the stoop will help mitigate the ice and snow problem. Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this case, Chair Geng opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 7:25 P.M. Commissioner Hasek asked if the proposed stone on the front of the house will be located in the setback. Director Nielsen responded that is an allowable encroachment. Mr. Gloude stated the brick that had been on the house has been removed and the proposed stone is just replacing that. Hasek stated it appears to him that the Gloude house is located closer to Fatima Place than the other houses in the neighborhood, but there is another house that is almost as close. He expressed concern about creating a variance precedent for what seems to him to be aesthetic reasons thereby requiring the City to grant similar variances in the future. He commented that he is pleased the applicants propose other improvements to accommodate those with physical challenges. He stated what he hears is that the applicants want to do what they propose, not that they need to do it. He commented there are times when gutters have to be used. He asked if a variance would be required if the proposed roof didn’t have posts under it to which Director Nielsen responded it would because it is more than two feet deep. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 4 of 15 Commissioner Hutchins asked Mr. Gloude what the current status of the exterior construction is and what the estimated time to complete it is. Mr. Gloude stated the back of the home has builtright and exposed wall in the back and the builders are continuing to build according to plan. The brick and siding has been removed from the front portion of the house. Most of the house has sheathing on the first floor, but not on the front of the garage. Mr. Gloude stated the builder had indicated at the start of the project that it would take seven months but it may take longer because of some engineering things that had to be worked out for two beams. He thought the estimate completion date is at least six months out. Hutchins stated he had some concerns about the proposed variance request. He noted he had not had time to visit the site because he had been out of town most of the time between when he received the supporting material for this request and now. He stated he did not believe he had enough information to make an informed decision on this variance request this evening. He questioned if the construction timetable would permit continuing this item to the next meeting. Director Nielsen noted the City would have to give notice that it will not be able to satisfy the 60-day rule for acting on this request. The notice can extend the time to 120 days. Commissioner Arnst and Commissioner Garelick expressed their support for continuing this item to the next meeting. Commissioner Hasek expressed his disappointment with doing that. Director Nielsen stated if this request is continued it could still be placed on the November 28, 2011, City Council meeting agenda for consideration. Therefore, it would not have to be noticed. Commissioner Hutchins noted that independent of the construction schedule he would have made the same recommendation. Davis moved, Garelick seconded, continuing consideration of the front yard variance request from Don and Kiki Gloude, 4675 Fatima Place, to the November 15, 2011, Planning Commission meeting. Motion passed 6/0. In response to a question from Commissioner Arnst, Director Nielsen explained either the City or an individual can initiate a request for an amendment to the City’s Zoning Code. Chair Geng stated he was intrigued by Director Nielsen’s comments that this request could be handled by an amendment to the ordinance. He asked if the amendment would be for the R-1D/S District only or would it be City wide. He suggested before considering an amendment Staff find out how many properties in the neighborhood have a similar problem. He noted the residences existed prior to the setback requirements being added to the Zoning Ordinance. He asked if the problem is unique to that District. Nielsen stated the problem exists in that District because it has some of the older homes. The lots tend not to comply with the requirements set up in the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Davis stated there has been discussion about retrofitting homes for the older population. People are trying to make their homes safe for people with mobility problems. Chair Geng stated from his vantage point variances should be granted sparingly. Therefore, it may be more appropriate to amend the Zoning Ordinance to adjust the front yard setback requirement to accommodate neighborhoods with older houses that were built near or in the setback so property owners don’t have to apply for a variance. Commissioner Hasek stated if it were amended the amendment would have to specifically identify what could be built closer to the street. He noted that he doesn’t want to see structures be built closer to the street than they have to. He asked if an amendment discussion should preclude the continued discussion about this variance request. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 5 of 15 Director Nielsen stated there are two ways to handle this. One is to deny the variance and then amend the ordinance. He explained that in the past variances have been granted in some cases when there was an assumption more requests of similar nature were going to be asked for and a note was made that when the similar requests are made the City should consider an amendment. He stated if this variance request were to be granted because it seems reasonable then it makes sense to address an amendment immediately. Director Nielsen reiterated the variance request is for the roof over the porch that encroaches into the setback area and that is not allowable in the ordinance. Chair Geng clarified he doesn’t think the Planning Commission should ever encourage someone to build in the setback area. In this neighborhood there are a number of houses that are close to the street. He stated he thought the property next to the applicants on the south side is even closer to the street than the applicants. The problem in this neighborhood is not unique. He then stated he thought it would be wise to limit a front yard setback amendment to the R-1D District and to make it clear that it would not be for a substantial addition into a setback area. Commissioner Hasek suggested the Commissioners spend some time in that neighborhood and to get a good understanding of what the limits of the R-1D District are so they fully understand what needs to be addressed. Director Nielsen suggested looking at all of the R-1D Districts on the zoning map. Nielsen stated the amendment would apply to those neighborhoods as well. Chair Geng suggested the discussion of such an amendment be added to the Planning Commission’s 2012 work program. Commissioner Hasek stated if a second Planning Commission meeting was to be scheduled for December th he asked when it would be. Director Nielsen responded the meeting would be on December 20. Council Liaison Woodruff noted the City Council traditionally only schedules one regular meeting in December. Administrator Heck agreed with putting the amendment discussion on the 2012 work program. The schedule for the remaining two 2011 Planning Commission meetings are already full and items have already been pushed into 2012. Chair Geng stated he is not convinced the ordinance needs to be changed. He supports discussing the possibility of an amendment in 2012 to ensure the Commission has sufficient time to thoroughly assess the need. Ms. Gloude stated they were originally told there were two items that needed a variance with one of them being the concrete stoop. When they received a copy of the material in the meeting packet on October 29, 2011, they learned the stoop was really never an issue. She explained the cutback in the eyebrow roof leaves lots of snow on the porch. Mr. Gloude stated from his perspective the City has already established a precedent with the front entry allowance. That is to say age of home relative to the current ordinance and limited size. The front entry is a 4-foot by 6-foot allowance in the setback for homes of a certain age. Chair Geng closed the Public Hearing at 7:51 P.M. 2. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING – DYNAMIC SIGNS Chair Geng opened the Public Hearing at 7:51 P.M., again noting the procedures utilized in a Public Hearing. Items acted upon this evening would be placed on a November 28, 2011, Regular City Council meeting agenda for further review and consideration. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 6 of 15 Director Nielsen stated the meeting packet contains a copy of a revised proposed amendment to the City’s Zoning Code Chapter 1201.03 Subd. 11 addressing dynamic signs. He noted the Planning Commission has been working on this for several months. There has been consensus that keeping up with technology is a good thing to do, but it does need to be controlled and regulated. Nielsen highlighted the changes the Commission discussed during its October 4, 2011, meeting. The extensive Findings section was replaced with a smaller Purpose section. A provision was added that prohibits a dynamic display sign from being located closer than 20 feet from a side lot line. A provision was added stating “Any portion of a dynamic display sign that consists solely of an alpha-numeric message shall not be counted in the allowable area for the sign, provided the alpha-numeric message remains static for no less than four hours at a time.” A provision was added for residential zoning districts, including the R-C, Residential/Commercial zoning district stating “Alpha-numeric institutional signs shall be limited to 20-square feet in area and shall be timed to remain static for no less than 90 minutes at a time.” He noted those provisions are only for conditional uses in those districts. There were also a few minor changes made. Nielsen noted that earlier in the day the City received a request from Mike Cronin, a representative for Holiday Stationstores (Holiday) who has been part of the previous dynamic display sign discussions, asking for the opportunity to review changes Holiday would like to have made to the Zoning Code text amendment. Mr. Cronin, 8809 West Bush Lake Road, Bloomington, and representing Holiday Stationstores, stated he thought the proposed ordinance is cautious and safe. He then stated Holiday is requesting three changes be made to the ordinance. He noted he thinks the changes could be made without compromising what the City’s intents are with regard to dynamic display signs. From Holiday’s perspective the changes would make the use of the signs much more effective. Mr. Cronin explained the first requested change relates to night-time operation. He distributed some photographs and sections of the ordinance to help illustrate his points. He noted the ordinance states “… any dynamic display sign located within 500 feet of single- and two-family residential homes must be programmed to freeze the image between the hours of 10:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M. ...”. One photo displays how far back the 500-foot radius reaches from the sign at a Holiday location in the City. In those instances when the face of the dynamic sign is shielded from single and two family homes by the orientation of the sign face, intervening structures or other buffers, Holiday is asking that its representatives be given an opportunity to request to City staff to wave the 10:00 P.M. restriction. A second photo showed the signs are pointed toward the road, not residential property. A third photo showed you can’t see any houses. A fourth photo showed there were only two houses from which the signs could be seen. He commented the City has done a good job of trying to protect residential properties from commercial properties. Mr. Cronin then explained the second requested change relates to the size of a sign. He distributed information supporting the reason for this request. The ordinance states “Dynamic display signs may occupy no more than 25% percent of the actual copy and graphic area.”. Holiday is requesting that be increased to 45 percent but no more than 32 square feet of the actual copy and graphic area. That would allow Holiday to have a 32 square-foot sign. What Holiday is talking about is 12 square feet of sign area. He is not sure the 12 square feet makes much difference to the City, but it does make a big difference to Holiday with regard to letter height. It also impacts the geometry of the sign and that is a big issue for Holiday. Holiday would like to maintain its 1-tall by 2-wide standard for the Holiday station in Shorewood. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 7 of 15 Mr. Cronin went on to explain the third request relates to message duration. He distributed information supporting the reason for this request. The ordinance states “A dynamic display sign’s image, or any portion thereof, may not change more often than once every 10 minutes ... A display of time, date, or temperature must remain for at least 10 minutes before changing to a different display, but the time, date, or temperature information itself may change no more often than once every 60 seconds.” Holiday is asking that the image be able to change not more than once every 10 seconds and deleting the entire second sentence. If not every 10 seconds, then at least every 20 or 30 seconds. A person wouldn’t see the sign change if it changed that frequently.He noted some other cities allow signs to change every 10 – 12 seconds and it doesn’t cause any safety issues. Mr. Cronin stated there is technology for ambient light sensors. He recommended that be made a requirement in the ordinance so a sign can’t go from 500 nits (candelas per square meter) to 5000 nits at the crack of dawn or so that it is not as bright on a grey day. He asked the Planning Commission to consider the changes Holiday has proposed. Commissioner Garelick expressed concern that there wouldn’t be any standardization if the City were to grant exceptions to the 10:00 P.M. – 6:00 A.M. restriction. That would make the ordinance too subjective. He thought making the change would make it too easy for people to ask for an exception. Commissioner Hasek expressed his agreement with that concern. Mr. Cronin stated that is not Holiday’s intent and explained that specific request applies only to the provision that the image be static between those hours. That would be the only provision in the ordinance where an exception could be granted. If the provision doesn’t add any protection because of things such as the orientation of the sign then the provision doesn’t need to be applied. Chair Geng asked if there is anything that would prevent an applicant like Holiday from applying for a conditional use permit (C.U.P.) or a variance. Director Nielsen explained the City doesn’t have a conditional use for that. Nielsen noted most cities do not handle dynamic display signs by C.U.P. Geng clarified that he was asking if the City adopts a standard and an organization or person wants something different can they apply for a C.U.P. Nielsen stated not unless the ordinance is changed to have criteria for that. Visibility from houses could be a criterion, but the criteria would have to be pre-established. Nielsen stated if there is any leaning toward an exception like that, that is how he would suggest handling it. He noted he is not convinced an exception is in order. Geng noted he is not convinced one is needed either. Commissioner Garelick asked how the draft ordinance compares to other surrounding cities’ ordinances. Mr. Chronic stated he thought it was similar to other ordinances, yet the City’s ordinance deals with brightness more than many others. Director Nielsen explained after reviewing other ordinances he has concluded there is a wide range of how dynamic display signs are handled. Staff considered the City’s character when drafting the ordinance. The City is a residential community. The commercial areas in the City in general support residential uses. The Waterford Shopping Center has a condition where the lights have to be dimmed somewhat at 11:00 P.M. because of the neighborhood. Mr. Cronin stated he thought the Waterford Shopping Center and the CUB Foods light dimming standards are both 11:00 P.M. He asked if the Planning Commission would consider changing the static display restriction to 11:00 P.M. That would at least tie the restriction to some standard. Director Nielsen clarified CUB doesn’t have a restriction at all to lower its lights. Nielsen stated CUB does have a restriction on the site lighting and he will check out what restrictions there are. Mr. Cronin stated changing it to 11:00 P.M. would be helpful to the Holiday station. Commissioner Arnst stated she would support having consistent light dimming standards. Chair Geng and Commissioner Hasek expressed their support for having consistent standards. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 8 of 15 Commissioner Hutchins noted that sections 1 – 9 in Subd. 11 of the ordinance have titles. He suggested sections 10 – 11 be given titles also. He stated section 11 addresses two issues. One point is dynamic display signs cannot be located closer than 100 feet from a residential zoning district. The second is any dynamic display sign located within 500 feet of single- and two-family residential homes must be programmed to freeze the image between the hours of 10:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M. He stated Mr. Cronin’s proposed change to Section 11 contains language saying “and intervening structures and other buffers”. Those things can change over time and that language can create too much opportunity for complaints. He shared other’s concerns that leaving it up to Staff to grant exceptions is not the way to go. Commissioner Hasek asked if the church across the street from the Holiday station is located in a residential zoning district, to which Director Nielsen responded yes. Nielsen noted that zoning district is more than 100 feet away from the Holiday station; therefore, it doesn’t impact Holiday. Seeing no one present wishing to comment on this case, Chair Geng opened and closed the Public Testimony portion of the Public Hearing at 8:22 P.M. Commissioner Hutchins stated the word “be” should be inserted between the words “must instantaneous” in section 4. He thanked Mr. Cronin for his efforts and for his working with the Planning Commission on this over the last few months. It made the Commission’s job easier. He stated this amendment needs to apply to the entire City and all applications. He cautioned against focusing it on Holiday. In response to a question from Commissioner Hasek, Director Nielsen explained in the provision that “a dynamic display sign’s image, or any portion thereof, may not change more often than once every 10 minutes, except …” the 10 minute restriction is in the range of what other cities’ ordinances have. Hasek asked if there is any way to control different signs within the same vicinity from changing within the same period thereby causing a blinking effect. Nielsen thought that would be difficult to do. Commissioner Arnst recapped what she understood the outcome of this discussion to be. Some minor changes were proposed by Commissioner Hutchins. There was agreement to change the nighttime static display restriction start time to be consistent with the start time for the light dimming standards for the Waterford Shopping Center and for CUB Foods. The remainder of the ordinance will remain as is. She asked what else needs to be addressed. Director Nielsen stated Holiday has requested a change to the provision that “Dynamic display signs may occupy no more than 25% percent of the actual copy and graphic area.” to increase it to 45 percent of the sign but not more than 32 square feet. He stated a picture submitted this evening by Mr. Cronin confirms for him that it should remain 25 percent because the majority of the sign was covered with advertising. The primary reason for the sign is for identification not advertising. He noted that percentage varies a lot in the ordinances reviewed. Commissioner Hasek stated the 25 percent or some specific size is appropriate. Hasek moved, Arnst seconded, recommending approval of the Zoning Code text amendment for Dynamic Display Signs subject to the following changes to Section 1201.03 Subd. 11. b(2)(e): in (4) insert the word “be” between the words “must instantaneous”; in (10) and (11) add a title; and in (11) change the start time for the static display restriction to be consistent with the light dimming standards for the shopping centers in the City. Motion passed 6/0. Commissioner Hasek also thanked Mr. Cronin for all of his hard work on this. Mr. Cronin reiterated his recommendation for light sensors to be made a requirement in the ordinance so a sign can’t go from 500 nits (candelas per square meter) to 5000 nits at the crack of dawn or so that it is CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 9 of 15 not as bright on a grey day. Commissioner Hasek suggested Council Liaison Woodruff convey that to Council. Woodruff stated Council prefers to receive a complete recommendation from the Planning Commission, although Staff could bring this forward as something Staff thinks is reasonable to consider. Woodruff suggested Staff do that. There was consensus for Staff to bring Mr. Cronin’s recommendation forward. Chair Geng closed the Public Hearing at 8:37 P.M. 3. CITY CODE DISCUSSION – ANIMAL REGULATIONS (Except Dogs) Director Nielsen noted the Planning Commission had been provided with a copy of third draft of Ordinance Chapter 704 Farm and Other Animals. This draft includes the changes discussed by the Planning Commission during its October 18, 2011, meeting. It does not address dogs because they are addressed in Chapter 701 of the City Code. th He highlighted the changes made during the October 18 meeting. They include the following. A definition for Nuisance Animal and it somewhat ties into the Nuisance Chapter of the City  Code. In the definition of wild animal the statement “Animals that can transmit rabies and cannot be  vaccinated against rabies, except domestic animals such as cows” was changed to “Animals that can transmit rabies and cannot be vaccinated against rabies”. “All animals - maintenance standards” was changed to “Maintenance standards”.  In 704.06 Subd. 2 the statement “Before commencing an action to enforce compliance with these  standards, enforcement personnel must give an owner notice of a violation and a reasonable opportunity to comply.” was replaced with “An action to enforce the provisions of this chapter shall follow the procedures set forth in Chapter 104 of this Code.”. In 704.06 Subd., 2(d) was added and it states “All feed kept for animals shall be stored in animal-  proof, galvanized containers.” In 704.06 Subd. 3 was changed to read “Veterinary clinics with indoor overnight care and indoor  kennels. In addition to the standards established under Subd. 1. above, veterinary clinics with indoor care and indoor kennels, where allowed by zoning, must comply with Minnesota Rules Chapter 9100, as may be amended.” All items under 704.06 Subd. 3 were deleted.   Under 704.09 Subd. 2(a) “An urban farm animal must not be kept or maintained on the front yard An urban farm animal may of the property, as defined by the Zoning Code.” was changed to “ only be kept in the buildable area of the rear yard of the property, as defined by the Zoning Code.” Item 704.09 Subd. 2(i) Permit issuance; fees was added along with three items underneath it. Nielsen noted permit fees have not been discussed yet. He stated he will come up with a fee schedule. Commissioner Arnst stated she wanted to be certain that a person will place their beehives closer to their house than their neighbor’s house. She expressed concern that the ordinance language may not ensure that. Director Nielsen noted the language before the Commission states the location section must be rewritten to address location, size standards and screening. Nielsen stated he did not think there should be separate standards for chickens and beehives. Commissioner Davis stated there is a need for separate standards. Arnst noted there is a resident who puts their beehives in close proximity to someone’s swimming pool. Nielsen stated that is the special requirement that is yet to be defined. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 10 of 15 Chair Geng questioned if roosters should be added to the definition of rural farm animals. They are included Section 704.09 Subd. 2(d) and that seems out of place. Director Nielsen stated the ordinance should be very clear that roosters are not allowed. Geng asked if they should therefore be listed in the definition of rural farm animals. Commissioner Hasek stated they are a form of a chicken. Geng stated Commissioner Charbonnet had sent him an email questioning if under nuisance animal should be amended to say “enjoyment of their property or public property”. Nielsen stated that would be appropriate. Geng stated 704.06 Subd. 1(c) references barn yet there is no definition for barn. He asked if barn needs to be defined. Commissioner Arnst suggested changing barn to shelter. Geng questioned if Section 704.08 Forfeiture of Animal Rights should be changed to Forfeiture of Animal Ownership Rights. Nielsen stated he thought that would be a good change. He stated Section 704.09 Subd. 2(i)(2) states “…or publicly owned real estate within 150 feet of the outer boundaries of the premises for which the permit is being requested or, in the alternative, proof that the applicant’s property lines are 150 feet or more from any structure”. He asked if the word “residential” should be inserted in between “any structure”. Commissioner Hasek stated a swimming pool wouldn’t be classified as a residential structure. Geng asked if it should be limited to exclude out buildings. Council Liaison Woodruff clarified this section is about getting written approval from other property owners; it’s not about the location of anything. Geng stated he is okay with how that is written. Commissioner Arnst suggested combining item a and item b under the definition of wild animal. She also suggested combining item e and item g. Chair Geng suggested if 704.05 Impounding of Animals 1(a) and 1(b) should be reversed. There was consensus to put people first. In response to a comment from Council Liaison Woodruff, Director Nielsen explained that the word city is capitalized when it refers to government and it is not when it refers to the geographical area. Woodruff stated Section 704.07 Subd. 3(i) states “If a wild animal bites a person, the animal must be forfeited immediately to authorized City personnel for rabies testing.” He suggested it be changed to saying if a wild mammal bites a person because only mammals can get and transmit rabies. Woodruff then stated in Section 704.09 Subd. 2(a) reference to confinement, he asked if bees should be excluded because they can’t be confined. Chair Geng suggested it state the “urban farm animal shelter may only be kept”. Woodruff agreed with that change. Commissioner Hasek expressed concern that the animal could be fenced in and run in the front yard. Nielsen stated he will add something to specifically address bees. Commissioner Davis stated Section 704.07 Subd. 3(i) states “If a wild animal bites a person, the animal must be forfeited immediately to authorized City personnel for rabies testing.” She questioned why that is there because wild animals are prohibited. Commissioner Arnst asked why wild animals were defined. Director Nielsen explained because the City regulates them. Director Nielsen stated he will update the ordinance to include the changes just discussed. He then stated th he wants to put the next draft on the December 6 meeting agenda because he will not be in the office next week. 4. CITY CODE DISCUSSION – MASSAGE THERAPIST LICENSE Director Nielsen noted he has not sent out a draft amendment of the Therapeutic Massage Licensing Ordinance. The Planning Commission discussed the topic of massage therapist licensing during its October 18, 2011, meeting. Staff suggests the Commission do the same thing as it did with dog licensing. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 11 of 15 That is, to forward a recommendation to Council and if it agrees Council can direct Staff to draft an actual amendment. Nielsen reviewed the licensing options the Commission discussed. Under the current Code the City licenses the individual therapist; not the business. He stated it’s his recollection there was consensus among the Commissioners that the business should be licensed instead. The owner of the business would be responsible for the background checks and verifying the qualifications. He asked if the same fee should be charged independent of the number of therapists. If so, an individual who provides massage services out of their home would pay the same license fee as a business owner who has, for example, 13 massage therapy beds. He suggested there be a base license fee for a business plus so much per therapist. That would let the City know how many therapists there are. There is also the option of licensing the business and the individual therapist. The main fee would be on the business and there would be a minimal fee for each therapist. Commissioner Arnst asked if a dentist has to be licensed by the City to operate in the City. Director Nielsen responded no, noting a dentist is licensed by the State. Nielsen also noted individual massage therapists are not licensed by the State. Commissioner Garelick asked if a barber is licensed by the State. Nielsen responded yes, noting he thought individual barbers have to have their own state license. Chair Geng stated he did not think any massage therapist is licensed by the State. Director Nielsen explained this came about because a business owner who has quite a few therapists providing services at his location expressed concern to the City about what it costs the therapists to get a license. The fee charged for licensing could possibly be too high. From his vantage point, a business license plus a small individual therapist license fee makes some sense. Chair Geng stated he doesn’t understand why it makes sense. The purpose of licensing the business is to put the onus on the business owner to make sure the people working for them are properly qualified. The City would no longer be responsible for that. He asked what the rationale would be for charging each therapist a fee when the business would already have paid a fee. The City wouldn’t be responsible for verifying the therapist’s qualifications. Director Nielsen stated that implies the City would never verify that the business is being responsible for having qualified therapists. Commissioner Arnst stated she thought that would be over kill. Licensing the business only is more than sufficient. She then stated the City Building Official would know how many massage rooms there are in the office when he conducts an inspection. She noted she does not personally support over regulating this because someone at sometime did something inappropriate. th Administrator Heck reiterated comments he made during the October 18 meeting. He suggested looking at massage therapist licensing from the same perspective of alcohol and tobacco licensing. For liquor sales and tobacco sales the license is for the business and if one of the business’ employees violates the ordinance by selling to a minor the proprietor is cited for the violation and the individual who made the sale is also cited. The only reason for licensing the individual therapist is if the therapist is doing something the proprietor doesn’t know about then the City could go after the therapist. But, the City would likely go after the proprietor because they should have known what the therapists are doing. He expressed his support for putting the onus on the business owner. He stated he is not sure inspecting a business that employs, in some way, multiple therapists is any different than a tobacco or liquor sale business that employs multiple people. He explained that a therapy business with for example 10 beds may have more than 10 therapists working for the business. Keeping track of them all would be onerous CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 12 of 15 for the City. He expressed he favors licensing the business/proprietor and making them responsible for everything. In response to a comment from Commissioner Hasek, Director Nielsen stated by licensing the individual therapist in addition to the business there is a little more enforcement control. Nielsen questioned if it would be prudent to shut an entire business down when one therapist does something wrong. Nielsen stated if the therapist does something wrong they don’t get more than one chance. A suspension of a license would be quite painful. Commissioner Hasek stated he supports licensing the business/proprietor and making them responsible. Council Liaison Woodruff stated there are a civil sanction and a criminal sanction. If there were to be an issue there in all likelihood there would both be a civil violation and a criminal violation. The City has ways to sanction for criminal activity under State Statute. The City doesn’t have a way to control if a business exists or not if the City doesn’t license the business. He commented if a business gets a tobacco license it is obligated to adhere to state law and on a civil level it’s obligated to operate per the City Code. A tobacco business can have any number of people selling tobacco provided they meet the state requirements. If tobacco is sold to minors it will result in a criminal violation, and the City prosecutor can decide to prosecute both the individual who made the sale and the business/proprietor. He supports licensing the business and if the City wants to make sure the therapists have the appropriate credentials then the City should require the business owner/proprietor to make sure they have the proper credentials. Chair Geng asked what the proper credentials would be. Director Nielsen explained the City Code already addresses that and the business owner/proprietor would have to prove the individual therapist has the required credentials. Geng stated he is troubled by having a solo practitioner pay the same business fee as a business with multiple therapists. Commissioner Arnst asked what the business license fee would be. Director Nielsen stated that has not been decided but he thought it could be what the therapist license fee today is. Administrator Heck explained today there are a $50 license fee to practice and a $100 one-time investigative fee. If the business were to be licensed similar to tobacco and alcohol licensing then the City would have a background check conducted on the business owner/proprietor. Heck noted that in most instances when a massage therapy business has gone awry it’s because the owner/proprietor was acting inappropriately. Director Nielsen stated it’s his understanding that the Planning Commission wants to license the business owner/proprietor only. Commissioner Arnst recommended giving consideration to charging a smaller license fee for a sole practitioner. Chair Geng agreed with that. Nielsen asked what the rationale for doing that is. Geng asked why the City would charge the same fee for a one-person massage therapy business as it does for a business that has a number of therapists. Commissioner Arnst stated the $50 license fee doesn’t bother her but the $100 investigative fee does. Administrator Heck asked if the Planning Commission wants to have the opportunity to review the text amendment to the Therapeutic Massage Licensing Ordinance before it is presented to Council for consideration. The Commission indicated it wants that opportunity. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 13 of 15 5. SMITHTOWN CROSSING Director Nielsen noted during its November 15, 2011, meeting the Planning Commission is scheduled to hold a public hearing to consider a Comprehensive (Comp) Plan amendment that would incorporate the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study (the Study) into the Appendix Chapter of the Plan. He stated th as of the Commission’s October 18 meeting the City had only received one comment sheet from a resident who attended the open house on the Study. Since that date the City has received a few more. The meeting packet contains copies of the returned comment sheets for the Commissions review. He asked if the Planning Commission wants to hold the hearing on the amendment as the Study stands today or does it want to discuss whether or not the Study should be revised to incorporate any of the comments received. Chair Geng suggested hold the hearing based on the current version of the Study. He recommended reinforcing the fact that there is no redevelopment plan for that area. He stated the people that attended the open house didn’t seem to understand that there is no redevelopment plan or proposal, and that the City is not driving anything. Commissioner Hasek stated the Study primarily conveys the City prefers the area be redeveloped with a common vision; not piecemeal. He indicated it’s time to bring the Study project to conclusion. Commissioner Hutchins stated one of the individuals that sent in comments suggested creating some form of special buffering between the redevelopment area and the residential area to the west, and possibly a noise barrier as well. The intent would be to make sure the redevelopment doesn’t negatively impact the residential property values. He expressed he thought it is a fair thing to consider. When the area is redevelopment there needs to be consideration given to how it impacts the surrounding area. Chair Geng stated that’s consistent with what the Planning Commissioners heard at the open house. Commissioner Hasek stated it’s also consistent with what the Commission has talked about over the last two years. Commissioner Hasek stated all too frequently people try to put dimensions and specific design on concept plans. That’s not what concept plans are intended to be. He commented that twin homes could be a way to transition from commercial to residential. Director Nielsen stated the Study has tried to emphasize the transition space, noting there is a difference between transition and buffer. If it would be the right land use the buffer part can be kept to a minimum. Depending on the redevelopment there may be a desire for a deeper, more extensive buffer. Administrator Heck asked if the Study report could be summarized into a statement of guiding principles or something of that nature. It would be a list of ten or so bullet points that the Council and the Planning Commission would prefer to come about when the area is redeveloped. For example, landscaping, building materials and things of that nature. Commissioner Hasek stated he thought that is what the Commission has done. Chair Geng stated people appear to be thinking the City is pushing some type of concrete development. Commissioner Arnst stated after living in the City for over 30 years that’s the way some residents tend to think. Arnst encouraged Geng not to be overly concerned about that. Director Nielsen stated the vision could be reformatted into bullets and renamed to guiding principles. Commissioner Arnst expressed her support for doing that. Chair Geng stated then it wouldn’t look like a plan that the City is trying to sell. Geng then stated he has heard residents ask why they are just hearing about the Study now. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 14 of 15 Director Nielsen stated people have a tendency to focus on what they don’t want to see as part of a redevelopment effort such as density and height. Commissioner Arnst stated the information Administrator Heck sent to the Planning Commission regarding a development opportunity in the City of Plymouth where there was an attempt to educate residents about what may occur was great. Commissioner Hasek stated he thought a great deal of residents’ discussions during the open house was very positive. He then stated four of the roughly forty people that came to the open house submitted written comments and some of the comments are not as supportive. The four did agree they don’t want the area to be developed piecemeal. Director Nielsen asked if the Planning Commission wants him to take the information from the vision statement and create bulleted list of guiding principles and present that at the public hearing. Chair Geng asked if it would be sufficient to just provide an explanation of why the Planning Commission did the Study. Director Nielsen stated he thought the introduction in the Study report does that. 6. MATTERS FROM THE FLOOR There were no matters from the floor presented this evening. 7. OLD BUSINESS None. 8. NEW BUSINESS Chair Geng stated he received a request from the person who is resuming the job of transcribing the Planning Commission meeting minutes to note who makes motions. He noted that at least for the foreseeable future she will transcribe the minutes from a recording. He recommended the Commissioners try to limit side conversations when another person is talking. He asked them to speak into their microphones when making a point and then turn it off if they want to make a side comment. 9. DRAFT NEXT MEETING AGENDA Director Nielsen stated there are two public hearings slated for the November 15, 2011, Planning Commission meeting. One is the continuation of the front yard setback variance for Don and Kiki Gloude. The other is to consider a Comprehensive (Comp) Plan amendment that would incorporate the Smithtown Crossing Redevelopment Study (the Study) into the Appendix Chapter of the Plan. Best practices for the sustainability program will be reviewed. The text amendment to the Therapeutic Message Licensing Ordinance will be reviewed. There will be a discussion about the capacity on water towers for cellular antennas. the right-of- Commissioner Hasek asked Director Nielsen to send the Commissioners what the width of way for Fatima Place is. CITY OF SHOREWOOD PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING November 1, 2011 Page 15 of 15 10. REPORTS • Liaison to Council Council Liaison Woodruff reported on matters considered and actions taken at the October 24, 2011, Regular City Council meeting (as detailed in the minutes of that meeting). He noted a Planning Commissioner was not present at the meeting. • SLUC No report was given. • Other Chair Geng noted he read in a recent local newspaper article that Shorewood was one of two cities that have already met the 2015 recycling goals. The City of Minnetonka Beach was the other city. He thanked Staff and the Council for driving that effort. Administrator Heck stated he thought the City’s move to single-sort recycling helped with increasing the amount of recyclable material collected. 11. ADJOURNMENT Arnst moved, Davis seconded, Adjourning the Planning Commission Meeting of November 1, 2011, at 9:46 P.M. Motion passed 6/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder MINNESOTA GREENSTEP CITIES BEST PRACTICES, ACTION Staff assigned Estimated Best practice the City will Action Items the city will responsibility for completion OPTIONS AND PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS (1/11/2011) pursue accomplishaction itemdate Current Status 5 Buildings & Lighting Best Practices - must complete BP 1 and at least one more. REQUIRED BEST PRACTICE 1. Public Buildings Brad Nielsen to start w/ Initial entry assistance from completed by Brad is in the process of entring Required action (1)Enter baseline information into the Minnesota B3 database and continue entering monthly     finance.11/30initial information. energy use data from city-owned buildings. Xcel contacted, counicl to take (2)Audit (or when cost-effective, recommission) all city-owned buildings in the bottom third     Julie Moore and Joe Complete audit action authorizing expenditure Required action of the B3 energy performance ranking and implement a majority of energy efficiency Pazandakby 12/3110/24. opportunities that have a payback under 5 years. Improvements City will complete improvement Joe Pazandak will work to begin in as identified in the audit with contractor's. Brian 2012 and (3)Complete energy efficiency improvements in at least one city, school or park district     beginning in 2012 as funds allow and Bruce will continue until building (in addition to buildings addressed in action 2) via retrofit and retro-/re- commissioning, and include other improvements cooordinate budget completed Work on this item will begin upon with financing at attractive interest rates under MN’s PBEEEP program or related lease- as part of CIPand CIPthereaftercompletion of energy audit purchase financing, energy performance contracting, or other cost-justified program. (4)Participate in other state or utility programs that provide rebates or co-funding for energy     efficiency improvements to public buildings. (5)Document that the operation, or construction / remodeling, of at least one city-owned     building (excluding park buildings) meets or qualifies for a green building standard. (6)Create an internal loan fund for making public building improvements based on an energy     or green building standard. (7)Install in at least one public building at least one of the following energy efficiency     measures: a.A distributed energy technology: micro-turbine, fuel cell, reciprocating engine.        b.A ground-source, closed loop geothermal system where net greenhouse gases       are less than those generated by the system being replaced. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=1 This Best practice is optional 2. Private Buildings City will publicize energy Ongoing reduction and efficiency beginning as Will consider adding energy information as part of the regular Julie Moore is assigned soon as reduction and efficiency (1)Create a marketing and outreach program with the local utility and/or the local     newsletter and websitethis taskpracticableinformation in next newsletter Community Action Program to promote residential energy use reduction and energy efficiency. (2)Integrate green building information into the building permit process.     (3)Develop a (or modify an existing) truth-in-housing inspection program for homes being     sold, to include a blower-door test and energy-use rating. (4)    Document at least one of the following green building practices, partnering with an assistance provider such as a utility, EnergySmart, MNTAP or ReTAP as appropriate: a.Building energy improvements in businesses.        b.Use of Energy Star’s Portfolio Manger by businesses.       c.The construction of and/or operation of at least three buildings that meet or        qualify for a green building standard. The city will complete this action item (5)Take action to conserve drinking water resources through at least one the following:     city watering restrictions in place, City has a watering restriction need to look at ordinance. Program needs enforcement by PWOngoingenforcement a.Implement a robust watering ordinance.        Council adopted conservation Finance DepartmentOngoingrates for water in 2010 b.Implement a conservation rate structure.       Planning Department with Planning Not started - should be part of c.Adopt, with modifications as necessary, a model landscaping ordinance to allow        Commission 12/31/20122012 PC work program for low water-use landscaping. Look for possible Grants and discuss with council possible d.Create a rebate or feebate program to promote purchases of WaterSense- and       Julie, Brian, and Bruce12/31/2012programs Energy Star-rated appliances. (6)Provide a meaningful and significant incentive to private parties (builders, homeowners,     We will not pursue at this time businesses, institutions) who renovate to a green building standard: a.Building permit fee discount        b.Grant, rebate or tax breaks (e.g., property tax abatement)       c.Expedited permit review        d.Green building design assistance       e.Density bonus       (7)Customize a model sustainable building renovation policy and adopt language governing     We will not pursue at this time commercial renovation projects that: a.Receive city financial support, and/or        b.Require city regulatory approval (conditional use permit, rezoning, PUD status).       (8)Arrange for on-bill financing, using either utility or property tax bills, to make     We will not pursue at this time home/building sustainability improvements easier and more affordable. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=2 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 3. New Green Buildings (1) Require by ordinance that all new city-owned buildings and substantial remodels meet or     We will not pursue at this time qualify for a green building standard. (2)Work with the local school district to ensure that all new schools are built to a green     We will not pursue at this time building standard. Brian obtained information and need to consider discussions with We will look into the possibility of planning commission and how to this item work language into potential (3)Customize a model sustainable building policy and adopt language governing new private     Brian and Bradredevelopment projects. development projects that: a.Receive city financial support, and/or        b.Require city regulatory approval (conditional use permit, rezoning, PUD).       (4)Provide a meaningful and significant incentive to private parties (residents, builders,     We will not pursue at this time developers) who build to a green building standard: a.Building permit fee discount        b.Expedited permit review       c.Green building design assistance        d.Grant, rebate or tax breaks (e.g., property tax abatement)       e.Density bonus       (5)Adopt covenant guidelines for common interest communities addressing issues such as     We will not pursue at this time stormwater, native vegetation, growing food, clothes lines and renewable energy. (6)Work with local financial institutions to use energy-efficient mortgages for buildings     We will not pursue at this time seeking a green building certification. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=3 We will pursue this Best Practice 4. Outdoor Lighting & Signals As we look at replacement fixtures or We will work to accomplish this consider action item adding new Work on this item has not begun (1)Require energy efficient, Dark-Sky compliant new or replacement outdoor lighting fixtures     Brian and Larryonesyet. on city-owned buildings and facilities. (2)Require all new street lighting and traffic signals to be Dark-Sky compliant, energy efficient     this may be completed Larry lighting technologies. Draft agreements completed. Will review to make sure this action Will pursue this (3)Modify any city franchise or other agreement with a utility to facilitate rapid replacement     Brian12/31/2011item is included. of inefficient street lighting. We don't operate any traffic lights - we will work with state and (4)Synchronize traffic signals so as minimize car idling at intersections yet maintain safe and     Larry and James county on this. publicly acceptable vehicle speeds. Joe and Larry We will consider this project (5)Install solar powered lighting in a street, parking lot or park project.     (6)Work with a utility program to relamp exterior building lighting for at least 30% of city-     We will pursue this project Joe and Larry owned buildings with energy efficient, Dark-Sky compliant lighting. (7)Replace at least 50% of the city’s parking lot lighting with Dark-Sky compliant, energy     may be completed already Joe and Larry efficient, automatic dimming lighting technologies. (8)Replace at least one-third of the city’s traffic signals with energy efficient LED lighting     may be completed already Larry and James technologies. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=4 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 5. Building Reuse (1)Develop and adopt an historic preservation ordinance to encourage adaptive reuse, with     attention to energy and resource conservation, indoor air quality and other green building practices. (2)For cities with traditional downtown areas, implement the Minnesota Main Street model     for commercial revitalization with attention to green building practices. (3)Work with a local school to either add on space, or to repurpose space into non-school     uses, with attention to green building practices. (4)Create/modify a green residential remodeling assistance/financing program to assist     homeowners in adding space to their existing homes while retaining historic architectural elements. (5)Adopt development and design standards that facilitate infill and redevelopment, such as     developing strip/large format commercial areas into more livable/walkable neighborhoods and gathering places. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=5 5 Land Use Best Practices - must complete BP 6 and one additional BP Required BP 6. Comp Plan (1)Adopt/have an adopted comprehensive plan that is less than ten years old (required for     Brad and planning completed, with continuing Category A cities) OR, Category B and C cities may simply adopt a land use plan that was Required action commissioncompletedrevisions as necessary adopted by a regional entity or the county less than ten years ago. (2)Demonstrate that regulatory ordinances comply with the comprehensive plan including     Brad and planning completed, with continuing but not limited to having the zoning ordinance explicitly reference the comprehensive plan as Required action commissionCompletedrevisions as necessary the foundational document for decision making. (3)Include requirements in comprehensive plans for intergovernmental coordination dealing     City will complete this action with at least six of the following issues: Brad and Julie a.Transportation        James and Brian b.Watershed impacts       Brad and Brian c.Land use        Brad and Brian d.Economic development       Brad and Brian e.Housing and foreclosures       completedcompletedcompleted Completed f.Police         completedcompletedcompleted Completed g.Fire        completedcompletedcompleted Completed h.Health       Sewer completed. Working with Sewer TB and Excelsior for more Sewer completed Sewer CompletedCompletedinterconnection i.Sewer and water          (4)Include ecological/transportation provisions in the comprehensive plan that explicitly aim     to achieve all of the following goals: a.Minimize the fragmentation and development of agricultural, forest, wildlife, and        Completed/Planning Dept. high quality open space lands in and around the city. b.For cities adjacent to undeveloped land: establish a growth area with staging       criteria that reflects projected population growth and, if applicable, is subject to an orderly annexation agreement and planned extension of municipal services. c.Establish policies with numerical targets to reduce vehicle miles traveled.        (5)Adopt climate protection or energy independence goals and objectives in the     comprehensive plan or in a separate policy document, and link these goals to direct We will not pursue at this time implementation recommendations. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=6 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 7. Higher Density (1)Limit barriers to higher density housing by including in the city zoning ordinance and zoning     map a zoning district that allows: a.eighborhood single-family density at six units per acre or greater.   N b.Multi-family housing at a gross density of at least 15 units per acre adjacent to a   commercial zoning district or transit center. (2)Encourage higher density housing through at least two of the following strategies:       a.Incorporate a flexible lot size/frontage requirement for infill development.        b.Use density and floor area ratio (FAR) bonuses in selected residential zoning       districts. c.Tie a regulatory standard to comprehensive plan language defining compact city        expansion zones that limit low-density development. d.Allowing accessory dwelling units by right in selected zoning districts.       (3)Encourage a higher intensity of commercial land uses through at least one of the following     strategies: a.Include in the city zoning ordinance and zoning map a commercial district with        reduced lot sizes and zero-lot-line setbacks, or a FAR minimum between .75 and 1. b.Set targets for the minimum number of employees/acre in different commercial       zones. (4)Provide one or more of the following incentives for infill projects, or for life-cycle housing      near job or retail centers, or for achieving an average net residential density of seven units per acre: a.Building permit fee discount.        b.Expedited permit review.       c.Grant or tax breaks.        d.Other incentives.       (5)Modify the city zoning ordinance and zoning map to allow, without variance or rezoning in      at least one district, developments that meet the prerequisites for LEED-Neighborhood Development certification. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=7 We will consider parts of this BP 8. Mixed Uses (1)Create a main street program or organize a Minnesota Design Team planning charrette.     We will work to accomplish this action item (2)Locate or lease a government facility that has at least two of these attributes:     Brad and city council this may be completed a.an existing employment or residential center.        Adjacent to Brad on trail plan, Brian and Bruce on trail budgets, James and Trail committee plan completed, In process Larry on trail projects, Comp plan updated. Julie and Twila on 2012 and Implementation of trail segments grantsbeyondbeginning in 2012. b.Designed to facilitate and encourage walking and biking.       access by this may be completed c.Accessible by existing regular transit service.        Brad and planning (3)Modify a planned unit development – PUD - ordinance to emphasize mixed use     In process commission2012 development or to limit residential PUDs to areas adjacent to commercial development. (4)Certify a new development as complying with LEED-ND standards, including the mixed-use     credits. (5)Create, or modify an existing, downtown zoning district to allow residential and small     compatible commercial development, based on the 2009 Minnesota Model Ordinances for Sustainable Development. (6)Create, or modify an existing, district to use form-based zoning standards that de-     emphasize use-based standards. (7)Create incentives for vertical mixed-use development in appropriate locations (downtown,     commercial districts near colleges or universities, historic commercial districts). http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=8 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 9. Highway Development (1)Conduct a visual preference survey with community members and establish design goals     for highway corridors. (2)Participate in regional economic development planning with representatives from     surrounding townships, cities, the county and business interests to: a.Estimate commercial/industrial needs among all jurisdictions.        b.Jointly implement recommendations to stage highway commercial development       in order to avoid overbuilding and low-density development. (3)Adopt transportation infrastructure design standards that accomplish at least one of the     following: a.Improve the ecologic functions of land adjacent to highway corridors.        b.Facilitate clustering of commercial highway development.       c.Context-sensitive design.        (4)Adopt, with modifications as necessary, at least one of the following model corridor     management and design ordinances: a.Model access management overlay        b.Highway Commercial District       c.Adequate Public Facilities ordinance that stages highway commercial        development concurrently with infrastructure expansion. (5)Require decommissioning in development agreements for large format developments     should they remain vacant for several years. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=9 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 10. Conservation Design (1)Conduct a Natural Resource Inventory and Assessment (NRI and NRA) and incorporate     protection of priority natural systems or resources through the subdivision or development process, as described in Minnesota’s 2009 Model Ordinances for Sustainable Development. (2)For cities outside or on the fringe of metropolitan areas, conduct a cost of public services     study for development outside the city grid and adopt development standards or a concurrency ordinance to ensure staged urban growth that protects natural systems. (3)For cities within metropolitan areas, incorporate by policy woodland best management     practices into zoning or development review. (4)For cities with undeveloped natural resource areas use, or adopt as policy the use of, a     conservation design scorecard as a tool in negotiating development agreements. (5)Develop and fund a conservation easement program, such as a purchase of development     Completed/Planning Comm. rights program, in collaboration with a land trust. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=10 4 Transportation Best Practices - city must complete one of the best practices We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 11. Complete Green Streets (1)Adopt a complete streets policy that addresses street trees and stormwater, and modify     street standards accordingly. (2)Adopt zoning language for a selected area/project that is substantially equivalent to the     LEED for Neighborhood Development credits for Walkable Streets or Street Network. (3)Document the installation of trees, and other green stormwater infrastructure, and utility     renovations as needed (sewer, water, electric, telecommunications) as part of at least one complete street reconstruction project. (4)Identify and remedy non-complete street segments by, for example, adding a bike     route/lane or sidewalk. (5)Identify and remedy street-trail gaps (at least one) between city streets and trails/bike     In process/Trail Comm. trails to better facilitate walking and biking. (6)Implement traffic calming measures in at least one street redevelopment project.     http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=11 We will work on this Best Practice 12. Mobility Options (1)Promote walking, biking and transit use by one or more of the following means:     a.Produce/distribute a map(s) and/or signage and/or a web site that shows (by        neighborhood if a larger city) key civic/commercial sites, best bike and pedestrian In process/Trail Comm. routes, and transit routes and schedules. b.Increase the number of bike facilities, such as racks, bike stations, showers at city       offices. c.Add bus infrastructure, such asignage, benches, shelters and real-time arrival        s data streaming.. d.Increase the number of employers who offer qualified transportation fringe       benefits instead of only a tax-free parking fringe benefit. e.Launch an Active Living campaign in concert with your local community health       board. (2)Launch a Safe Routes to School program with educational, public health and other     In process/Trail Comm. partners. (3)Prominently identify on the city’s web site mobility options for hire: transit services;     paratransit/Dial-A-Ride; cab service(s); rental car agency(s). (4)Promote carpooling or ridesharing among community members, city employees,     businesses, high schools and institutions of higher education. (5)Launch an eWorkPlace Minnesota campaign, working with business and transportation     management organizations, or help bring telemedicine technology to a local health care provider. (6)Accomplish at least one of the following transit / mobility sharing projects, working with     other units of local governments as needed: a. Add/expand transit service.        b.Launch a car sharing or bike sharing business.       http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=12 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 13. City Fleets (1)Decrease use of city vehicles by means such as trip bundling, video conferencing,     carpooling and financial incentives for efficient vehicle use. (2)Right-size the city fleet with the most fuel-efficient vehicles that are of an optimal     size/capacity for their intended functions. (3)Document the phase-in of at least three of the following equipment and operational     changes in vehicle contracts, for city or local transit fleets, or for school/park board fleets: a.Monthly monitoring and reporting for staff on fuel usage and costs.        b.Training for more efficient driving, including anti-idling behavior/rules.       c.Maintenance schedules that optimize vehicle life and fuel efficiency.        d.Alternative fuel vehicles.       e.Charging stations (solar or wind powered) for plug-in hybrid and full electric       vehicles. f.Lower-carbon fuels (such as biodiesel above the State-mandated 5%, straight         vegetable oil) using a life-cycle calculation. g.More fuel-efficient vehicles.        h.Car share vehicles owned by a third party to decrease fleet size.       i.Bicycles.          (4)Phase in bike, foot or horseback police patrols.     (5)Document that the local school bus fleet has optimized routes, start times, boundaries,     vehicles, bus fuels, and driver actions to decrease fuel use. We will work to accomplish this (6)Participate in Project GreenFleet to retrofit or replace diesel engines, or to install auxiliary     Brad M / Julie action item power units that reduce truck and bus idling. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=13 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 14. Demand-Side Travel Planning (1)In development standards, right-size parking minimum standards and add parking     maximums in pedestrian-friendly or transit-served areas. (2)For cities with regular transit service, require or provide incentives for the siting of retail     services at transit/density nodes. (3)For cities with regular transit service, require or provide incentives for the siting of higher     density housing at transit/density nodes. (4)Incorporate demand-side transportation strategies into development regulations,     adopting, with modifications as necessary, at least one of the following from Minnesota’s 2009 Updated Model Ordinances for Sustainable Development: a.Travel Demand Management Performance Standard        b.Transit-oriented Development Ordinance       (5)Document that a development project certifies under the LEED for Neighborhood     Development program and is awarded at least one of the following credits: a.Transportation Demand Management.        b.Housing and Jobs Proximity.       http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=14 9 Environmental Management Best Practices - City must complete best practice #15 and #16 and one additional. Required BP 15. Environmental Purchasing This action is required (1)Adopt a policy or administrative practice directing that the city purchase only:     Upon All appliances are new and energy BruceReplacementstar compliant. a.EnergyStar certified equipment and appliances and        Purchasing policy in process of Bruce and Pat11/30/2011development. b.Paper containing at least 30% post-consumer recycled content.       (2)Purchase 15% of city energy requirements from renewable energy sources.     (3)Establish a local purchasing preference and, working with a local business association,     develop a list of locally-produced products and suppliers for common purchases. (4)Require purchase of U.S. EPA Water Sense-certified products for all product categories     covered by the Water Sense program. Start now and We will work to accomplish this (5)Set minimum standards for the percentage of recycled-content material in at least 5     Bruce, Larry, Jameson going products typically purchased by the city, such as asphalt and roadbed aggregate. action item We will work to accomplish this (6)Require printing services to be purchased from companies certified by Minnesota Great     Julie action item Printers or by the Sustainable Green Printing Partnership. (7)Lower the environmental footprint of meetings and events in the city through one or more     of the following: a.Adopt a policy for meetings and events hosted by city government.        b.Adopt a policy for meetings and events taking place on city property, including       parks and libraries. c.Distribute educational materials for use at city-supported events such as National        Night Out. (8)Specify the use of state and national green standards/guidelines for at least 3 of the     following categories of purchasing: a.Electronics, including printers, printer supplies - especially remanufactured        cartridges - and printer operation. b.Wood products / bio-based products.       c.Organic food        d.Cleaning products       e.Paints, coatings and adhesives       f.Carpets         g.Furniture        h.Paper products       http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=15 Required BP 16. Urban Forests (1)Qualify as a Tree City USA.     (2)Adopt as policy MN Tree Trusts’ Best Practices and use the guidelines in at least one     development project to achieve an excellent an exemplary rating. (3)Budget tree installation and maintenance to, within 15 years, achieve the following tree     canopy shading for streets, sidewalks and parking lots in the following zoning districts: a.At least 25% for industrial and commercial zoning.        b.At least 75% for residential zoning.       (4)Maximize tree planting along your main downtown street.     We will work to accomplish this action item (5)Adopt at least one of the following ordinances/policies:     Brad and planning 2012 possible commissionwork plan item a.Adopt a policy of no net loss of specified natural landscapes.        Brad and planning b.Adopt an ordinance/policy relating to protection of trees on parcels affected by       Possibly completed commission city planning/regulatory processes. Brad and planning 2012 possible c.Adopt landscaping/nuisance ordinances that promote, rather than create        commissionwork plan item barriers for, native vegetation. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=16 We will pursue this Best Practice at this time 17. Stormwater (1)Complete the Blue Star City stormwater management assessment and achieve a minimum     threshold of specific activities detailed in this program. (2)Adopt by ordinance one or more of the following:     Each year Indicated this is complete - will a.A narrower streets provision that permits construction of 24-foot roads for        during road review as street improvements public, residential access and subcollector streets (with fewer than 500 average daily Larry and Jamesdesign process trips). are designed Believe some of this is part of the We will work to accomplish this During project new Watershed District b.A 1.5 inch rainfall on-site rainwater infiltration design requirement for       action item Jamesdesignsrequirements. construction sites. c.A stormwater runoff volume limit to pre-development volumes for the 5-year, 24-        hour rainfall maximum event. (3)Maintain less than 12% impermeable surfaces in the watershed in which the city lies.     (4)Create a stormwater utility that uses variable fees to incentivize enhanced stormwater     management and funds community stormwater infrastructure and assistance/education programs. (5)Adopt and implement guidelines for, or adopt required design standards for at least one of     the following stormwater infiltration/reuse techniques: a.Rain gardens.        b.Green roofs with or without cisterns, or water/greywater reuse systems.       c.Green alleys.        d.Green parking lots.       Indicated this is complete - will Review as review ordinance and other projects are Coordinate as necessary with the (6)Adopt an ordinance with erosion and sediment control provisions as well as requirements     regulations for compliance. JamesproposedMCWD for permanent stormwater treatment. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=17 We will pursue parts of this best practice 18. Green Infrastructure Trail committee plan completed, Comp plan updated. This task is nearly complete Brad, Brian, Larry, parks Implementation of trail segments (1)Identify gaps (connectivity breaks) in your city’s system of parks, trails and open spaces,     commission12/31/2011beginning in 2012. and remedy at least one of them. (2)Plan and budget for a network of parks, green spaces, water features and trails in all new     development areas. (3)Document at least one of the following performance measures:     a.At least 20% of total city land area in protected green infrastructure (parks and        protected natural resource areas and trails). b.All residents are within ½ mile of a park or protected green space.       (4)Adopt low-impact design standards in parks and trails that infiltrate or retain all 2 inch, 24-     hour stormwater events on site. (5)Create park management standards that maximize at least one of the following:     a.Low maintenance native landscaping.        b.Organic or integrated pest management.       c.Sources of non-potable water for irrigation.        (6)Certify at least one golf course in the Audubon Cooperative Sanctuary Program for Golf     Courses. (7)Document that the operation, or construction/remodeling, of at least one park building     meets or qualifies for a green building standard, with special attention to highlighting and educating around the green features. (8)Develop a program to involve community members in land restoration and stewardship.     http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=18 We will pursue parts of this best practice 19. Surface Water (1)Assist at least one lake or river association to earn the Star Lake/River designation for their     lake/river. (2)Assist at least one lake or river association to become Star Lake/River-ready by achieving     nearly all of the program requirements. (3)Work with other organizations to support citizen education about and involvement with     actions to attain measurable, publicly announced surface water improvement targets for lakes, Indicated this action is completedJames and public worksOn-goingOngoing process streams and wetlands, adopted by the city council and reported on each year. Brad and planning (4)Adopt a shoreland ordinance consistent with MN Dept. of Natural Resources rules as     Indicated this action is completedcommissioncompletecomplete modified. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=19 We will complete action item 3 20. Water and Wastewater Facilities (1)Compare the energy use and performance of your facilities with other peer plants using     standardized, free tools. (2)Plan and budget for motor maintenance and upgrades so as to assure the most energy     efficient, durable and appropriate equipment is available when upgrades or break downs occur. (3)Establish an on-going budget and program for decreasing inflow and infiltration into sewer     Completed Jame and pubic worksOngoingOngoing process lines, involving at least gutter, foundation drains and sump pump disconnects. (4)Assess energy and chemicals use at drinking water facilities and implement one-third of     recommendations with a payback of less than 3 years. (5)Require property owners to have their private sanitary sewer lateral pipe inspected before     a property sale or title transfer. (6)Implement at least one of the following efficiency projects/programs:     a.Assist local businesses, institutions and/or residents in pre-treating and lowering        volumes and toxicity of sewer inflows. b.Co-generate electricity and heat from the wastewater treatment plant.       c.Reuse water (sell reclaimed water) from a wastewater plant for nonpotable ag-        processing, irrigation, cooling or power plant uses. d.A greywater reuse system in at least one public or private building.       http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=20 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 21. Septic Systems (1) Report to landowners suspected noncompliant or failing septic systems as part of an     educational, informational and financial assistance and outreach program designed to trigger voluntary landowner action to improve septic systems. (2)Create a program that follows the five-step process for addressing failing septic systems     developed by the University of Minnesota’s Onsite Sewage Treatment Program. (3)Clarify/establish one or more responsible management entities for the proper design,     siting, installation, operation, monitoring and maintenance of septic systems. (4)Adopt a Subsurface Sewage Treatment System ordinance based on the Association of     Minnesota Counties model ordinance. (5)Create a program to finance septic systems upgrades through, for example, a city revenue     bond, repayable through taxpayers’ property taxes. (6)Work with homeowners and businesses in environmentally sensitive areas and areas     where standard septic systems are not the least-cost option to promote innovative waste water systems. (7)Arrange for assistance to commercial, retail and industrial businesses with water use     reduction, pollution prevention and pretreatment prior to discharge to septics. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=21 We will work on this Best Practice 22. Solid Waste Reduction (1)Adopt percentage reduction goals for waste and toxicity generated from city operations     (including schools, libraries, parks, municipal health care facilities). Accomplish reduction goals in at least three of the following areas: a.Overall waste generation        b.Paper use and junk mail       c.Pesticide/herbicide use        d.Water use/waste water generation       (2)Adopt and meet aggressive goals for the overall percentage diversion of currently disposed     waste from city operations into recycling and organics collection. (3)Document signing of at least one resource management contract with a waste hauler for     Action item completed Juliecompletecomplete one or more of: a.City government operations.        b.Schools, libraries, parks, or municipal health care facilities.       c.A commercial or industrial business.        (4)Publicize, promote and use the varied businesses collecting and marketing used and     repaired consumer goods in the city/county. (5)Arrange for a residential or business/institutional organics collection/management     We will work to accomplish this in the process of starting organics program (food-to-people, food-to-animals, composting, anaerobic digestion, and backyard action item Julie and Pat12/31/2012pilot composting). Staff will facilitate discussion with We will work to accomplish this (6)Organize residential solid waste collection by private and/or public operations to     Julie, Brian, and Pat6/30/2012council after 1/1/12 action item accomplish multiple benefits. If organized collection is selected We will work to accomplish this (7)For cities that provide direct or contract waste collection services, offer volume-based     method, will incorporate this with action item pricing on residential garbage and/or feebates on recycling so that the price differences are Julie, Brian, and Pat12/31/2012agreement large enough to increase recycling/composting but not illegal dumping. (8)Adopt a construction and demolition ordinance for projects over a specified size that     mandates levels of recycling and reuse for materials and soil/land-clearing debris and is tied to demolition permits. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=22 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 23. Local Air Quality (1)Conduct an education/financial assistance campaign around one of the following wood     burning / auto exhaust issues: a.Indoor and outdoor wood burning behavior, to ensure that wood burning is only        done with seasoned wood and in a manner that doesn’t negatively impact neighbors. b.Indoor wood burning technology, to result in community members upgrading       from inefficient/more polluting fireplaces and wood stoves to natural gas stoves and fireplaces or the most efficient certified wood stoves. c.Smoker cars - older model/high polluting vehicles, to result in repairs spurred by        repair vouchers. (2)Regulate outdoor wood burning, using model ordinance language, performance standards     and bans as appropriate, for at least one of the following: a.Recreational burning.        Completed/City Council b.Outdoor wood boilers.       (3)Conduct one or more education/behavior change campaigns on the topics below and     document: a.Decreased vehicle idling in specific locales or by specific fleets.        b.Increased sales by retail stores of low and no-VOC household products.       c.Replacement of gasoline-powered equipment with lower polluting equipment.        (4)Document the participation of at least 3 larger businesses using trucks in at least one of     the following: a.Clean Air Minnesota’s Project GreenFleet.        b.U.S. EPA’s SmartWay Transport program.       c.Installation of auxiliary power units that reduce truck and bus idling.        (5)Install at least two public charging stations for plug-in hybrid and full electric vehicles.     http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=28 5 Economic and Community Development Best Practices - city is required to complete Best Practice 24 and 25 Required BP 24. Benchmarks & Community Engagement (1)   Report progress at least annually to community members on implementation of GreenStep Required City best practices, including energy/carbon benchmarking data if gathered. (2)   Organize goals/outcome measures from all city plans – comprehensive, parks, library, housing, stormwater, drinking water, transportation, economic development, energy, sustainability, etc. – and annually report to community members data that show progress toward meeting these goals. (3)   Engage community members in a public process involving a city council committee or We will work to accomplish this Community survey in process of community task force that results in city council adoption of and commitment to measure and action item Brian12/31/2012completion. report on progress toward sustainability indicators. (4)   Conduct or support an energy efficiency or sustainability education and action campaign for: a.       The entire community b.      Homeowners c.       Block clubs/neighborhood associations d.      Congregations e.       Schools and youth (5)   Conduct or support a community education, visioning and planning initiative using a sustainability framework such as: a.       Strong Towns b.      Transition initiatives c.       Eco-municipalities/The Natural Step d.      ISO 14001 e.       Post Carbon Cities f.       Permaculture g.      Natural Capitalism h.      Genuine Progress i.        Healthy communities j.        Multi-generation learning http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=23 Required 25. Green Business Development (1)   Identify new and emerging local businesses in the green economy and support these businesses and green jobs through one or more of the following: a.       Coordinated marketing and business assistance. b.      Incubator space. c.       Streamlined grants, loans or permitting processes. d.      Workforce training opportunities with community colleges and job training centers. (2)   Connect at least 5 businesses with assistance providers, including utilities, who conduct personalized energy, environmental sustainability, and waste audits. (3)   Distribute green tourism resources to all tourism and hospitality businesses in the city and facilitate follow-up with at least five businesses to assist them in greening their business. (4)   Support the creation of a value-added business utilizing local waste products, such as wood from felled trees or reusable deconstruction and landscaping materials. (5)   Document steps taken to lower the environmental footprint of a brownfield remediation/redevelopment project. (6)   Use a green business certification program to publicly promote that a targeted number or percentage of businesses has improved the environmental performance of their company. (7)   Conduct or participate in a buy local campaign, working with local organizations and assistance providers. (8)   Work with the state Small Business Environmental Assistance Program (SBEAP) to help at least 5 businesses to use SBEAP services. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=24 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 26. Renewable Energy (1)   Adopt, with modifications as necessary, at least one of the following from Minnesota’s 2009 Model Ordinances for Sustainable Development: a.       Solar energy standards. b.      Model wind energy ordinance. (2)   Consistently promote at least one of the following means of increasing renewable generation: a.       A local utility’s green power purchasing program for homes and businesses. b.      Local, state and federal financial incentives for property owners to install renewable energy systems. (3)   Create a renewable energy financing program for property owners to install generation capacity. (4)   Promote firms that contract with property owners (in groups or individually) to install/finance renewable installations, some at little or no upfront cost. (5)   Install a public sector renewable energy technology, such as solar electric (PV), solar hot water or hot air, micro-hydro or wind. (6)   Work with private/public partners to create renewable energy generation capacity with one or more of the following attributes: a.       Fueled by flowing water, wind, or biogas. b.      Fueled in part or whole by woody biomass, optimized for minimal air and other environmental impacts and for energy efficiency and water conservation. c.       Distributing heating/cooling services in a district energy system. d.      Producing combined heat and power. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=25 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 27. Local Food (1)   Incorporate working landscapes - agriculture and forestry - into the city by adopting, with modifications as necessary, one or more of the 2009 Minnesota Model Ordinances for Sustainable Development: a.       Agriculture and Forest Protection District b.      Local Food Production District c.       Performance Standards for Minor and Major Agricultural Retail. (2)   Permit the incorporation of food growing areas/local food access into a residential development. (3)   Expand/strengthen or create at least one of the following means of expanding local food access: a.       A farmer’s market. b.      A community-supported agriculture (CSA) - arrangement between farmers and community members/employees. Larry, TwilacompleteOngoing process Completed c.       A community or school garden, orchard or forest. d.      A rural grocery store. (4)   Conduct at least one of the following campaigns to measurably increase: a.       Purchase of food with at least one of the following attributes -- local, Minnesota- grown, organic, humanely raised, grown by fairly compensated growers. b.      Backyard gardening / chickens. c.       Institutional buying of local foods by schools, hospitals/nursing homes, restaurants and hotels, or grocery stores d.      Sale of local food in markets and restaurants. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=26 We will not pursue this Best Practice at this time 28. Business Synergies (1)   Help at least three businesses register as users of the Minnesota Materials Exchange and document their exchanges/sales of byproducts with other local/regional businesses. (2)   Assist at least one business to use waste heat or water discharge from another business. (3)   Require, build or facilitate at least four of the following in a business/industrial project: a.       Shared parking/access. b.      Shared recreation /childcare facilities. c.       A green job training program. d.      Green product development, manufacturing or sales. e.       Buildings located within walking distance of transit and/or residential zoning. f.       Renovated buildings. g.      Buildings designed for reuse. h.      Green buildings built to exceed the Minnesota energy code. i.        Combined heat and power (CHP) generation capacity. j.        Shared geothermal heating/cooling. k.      Low-impact site development. (4)   Use eco-industrial park tools to identify industrial facilities that could achieve economic and environmental benefit by co-locating in the city’s industrial park or industrial zone. http://greenstep.pca.state.mn.us/bestPracticesDetail.cfm?bpid=27 Any TWO additional best practices From among all the best practices (1 - 28), the "floating BP" requirement: 12 TOTAL BEST PRACTICES IMPLEMENTED TO BE RECOGNIZED AS A STEP 3 GREENSTEP CITY