PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA March 26, :00pm

Transcription

1 1) Call to Order a) Approval of Agenda PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA March 26, :00pm b) Approval of Minutes February 26, ) Public Hearings a) CLASS III SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAT WITH VARIANCE: Application from BIF2, LLC to plat 2 existing lots into 3 lots which results in a total of 1 newly created lot with a variance from the required lot width. The properties are located at 2650 Northview Drive; A Agriculture Zoning District; PID# and 7890 County Road 110W; A Agriculture Zoning District; PID# b) CODE TEXT AMENDMENT: The city of Minnetrista will consider Ordinance 453 which will amend Chapter 5 of City Code. The purpose of the public hearing is to hear from the public and make a recommendation on the proposed amendment which would prohibit the use of property within the City for short term rentals. 3) Informational Items a) Staff Reports b) Council Reports 4) Adjournment - The agenda packet with all background material is located at the back table for viewing by the public. - Published agenda subject to change without notice. - Information and materials relating to the above items are available for review at city hall by appointment. The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES February 26, :00pm 1) Call to Order Chair Sandholm opened the meeting at 7:00 p.m. In attendance: Commissioners Chair Lora Sandholm, Peter Vickery, Gary Pettis, Damian Young, John Tschumperlin, Justin Forbrook and Paul Stone (Alternate 1); Council Liaison: Councilmember Shannon Bruce (arrived at 7:15 pm); Staff: Associate Planner Nick Olson and City Clerk Kris Linquist. Also present: Bob Rabin (Alternate 2) Absent: Steve Livermore a) Approval of Agenda Motion by Vickery, seconded by Pettis to approve the agenda as presented. Motion passed 7-0. Absent: Livermore b) Oath of Office and swear in Planning Commission Members City Clerk Linquist swore in Peter Vickery, Gary Pettis, Paul Stone (Alternate 1) and Robert Rabin (Alternate 2) as Planning Commission members. c) Approval of Minutes of November 27, 2017 Motion by Tschumperlin, seconded by Young to approve the minutes from November 27, 2017 as presented. Motion passed 7-0. Absent: Livermore d) Elect Chair and Vice Chair for 2017 Motion by Pettis, seconded by Stone to elect Sandholm as Chair and Vickery as Vice Chair for Motion passed 7-0. Absent: Livermore 2) Public Hearings: a) CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (CUP) AMENDMENT: Application from Buell Consulting, Inc. c/o Verizon Wireless on behalf of the property owner Steel Peak, LLC for an amendment to an existing CUP to allow for the addition of new antennas on the existing monopole and new equipment on a platform near the existing monopole on the property located at 4700 Merrywood Lane; R-1 Low Density Single-Family Residence Zoning District; PID# City Planner Olson presented the staff report found in the Planning Commission packet dated February 26, The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character. City of Minnetrista Planning Commission February 26, 2018 Page 1 of 5

3 Highlights included in the presentation were: The applicants are seeking approval to allow for the addition of new antennas on the existing monopole and new ground equipment on a platform near the existing monopole. The new antennas will look very similar to the existing antennas. Verizon will utilize the existing access off of Merrywood Lane. Steel Peak, LLC was granted permission to construct the monopole in 1999 (Res. No There are three different users of the monopole: Sprint (Res. No ), T-Mobile (Res. No ) and AT&T (Res. No ). Staff recommends approval of the CUP based on the finding of facts and conditions outlined in the packet. Pettis questioned if the tower was privately owned. Olson stated that the property is privately owned. Young commented that there is an Osprey nest on top of the tower. He contacted the DNR and they were not concerned with the placement of the antenna. He had concerns with the nesting of the Osprey and the timing of construction. There was discussion on the need for an amendment. Brian Kabat, Buell Consulting Energy Park Dr., St. Paul, commented that he was not aware of the Osprey nest. The company will not disturb the nesting of the Osprey. He did not know when construction would begin since there were other permits that needed to be obtained first. Chair Sandholm opened the Public Hearing at 7:18 p.m. There was no one to speak on the item. Chair Sandholm closed the Public Hearing at 7:18 p.m. Young commented he would like something in the conditions that reflect that the applicant must check with the DNR to ensure the least amount of disturbance to the Osprey nesting season. Motion by Young, seconded by Pettis to recommend to the Council to approve the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Amendment to allow for the addition of new antennas on the existing monopole and new ground equipment on the property located at 4700 Merrywood Lane based on the finding of fact in the staff report and subject to the following conditions: 1. The new antennas and ground equipment shall be constructed in accordance with the approved building plans; 2. Changes or expansion of infrastructure on the site will require an additional amendment of the CUP. Minor changes in the number or configuration of antennae mounted on the monopole may be administratively approved by the City Planner, Zoning Administrator, or other duly authorized staff responsible for zoning administration and enforcement; 3. The Applicant must obtain all necessary permits and approvals from The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character. City of Minnetrista Planning Commission February 26, 2018 Page 2 of 5

4 other applicable entities with jurisdiction over the Property prior to construction; 4. The Applicant is responsible for all fees incurred by the City in review of this application; and 5. The Applicant shall contact the DNR and follow their recommendations on how to install the antennas around the Osprey nesting season. Motion passed 7-0. Absent: Livermore b) VARIANCE: Application from Eric & Elisa Engesser for a 23 foot variance from the required 50 foot wetland setback to allow for an addition to the existing home to be located 27 feet from the delineated edge of the wetland on the property located at 1135 Marina Drive; R-1 Low Density Single- Family Residence Zoning District; PID# City Planner Olson presented the staff report found in the Planning Commission packet dated February 26, Highlights included in the presentation were: The applicant is requesting a Variance for the property located at 1135 Marina Drive. The applicant is proposing a 3 story addition to the south of the existing home and an extension to the north of the current deck which would encroach upon the 50 wetland setback. A wetland delineation was performed during late fall of Staff sent notices to all residents within 500 feet. To date, staff has not received any comments or concerns form neighbors. Staff made the following findings of facts: 1. The proposed addition is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the City s zoning ordinance; 2. The proposed addition is consistent with the City s comprehensive plan; 3. The proposed addition complies with property line setbacks and the maximum height requirement while minimizing the variance request, which is reasonable; 4. The location of the existing home relative to the wetlands is out of the control of the Applicants as they are not the original owner or builder; 5. The existing home does not currently meet the required wetland setback which makes a complying addition challenging; and 6. The proposed addition has been designed with similar scale and materials of the existing homes in the area, which is consistent with the character of the neighborhood. Based on the above finding of facts, staff recommends approval of the side yard setback variance with the following conditions: 1. The Applicants obtain all necessary permits and approvals from the City and other applicable entities with jurisdiction prior to any construction; 2. Any required grading should maintain existing drainage patterns or improve the existing drainage of the lot and adjacent lots; 3. No impacts to any wetlands shall occur as a result of grading or any other construction related activity unless the appropriate permits The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character. City of Minnetrista Planning Commission February 26, 2018 Page 3 of 5

5 and approvals from the City and other applicable entities with jurisdiction over the Property have been received; 4. The Applicants are responsible for all fees incurred by the City in review of this application; and 5. The variance approval is valid for one year from the date of approval and will become void and expire unless a building permit has been issued for the site. Tschumperlin stated it looked like it already encroaches. Olson stated there could have been different zoning requirements at the time of original construction. Tschumperlin questioned if the Wetland could change. Olson stated that it could depending on construction activity or element conditions in the surrounding area. Eric Engesser, applicant, stated that he has discussed his plans with his immediate neighbors and they do not have concerns with the project. Chair Sandholm opened the Public Hearing at 7:32 p.m. No one was present to speak on this item. Chair Sandholm closed the Public Hearing at 7:32 p.m. Motion by Vickery, seconded by Forbrook to recommend to the Council to approve the requested wetland setback variance at 1135 Marina Drive based on the findings of fact and the conditions outlined in the staff report. Motion passed 7-0. Absent: Livermore 3) Informational Items a) Staff Reports City Planner Nick Olson All packet items from November 2017 meeting were passed by Council Overviewed items for March meeting State of the City Address 2/27 b) Council Reports Councilmember Bruce Short Term Rental update Deer Creek Dr. update 4) Adjournment Motion by Sandholm, seconded by Vickery to adjourn the meeting at 7:43 p.m. Motion passed 7-0. Absent: Livermore Respectfully Submitted, Kris Linquist Kris Linquist, MMMC, CMC City Clerk The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character. City of Minnetrista Planning Commission February 26, 2018 Page 4 of 5

6 CITY OF MINNETRISTA PUBLIC HEARING Subject: Prepared By: CLASS III SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAT WITH VARIANCE: Application from BIF2, LLC to plat 2 existing lots into 3 lots which results in a total of 1 newly created lot with a variance from the required lot width. The properties are located at 2650 Northview Drive; A Agriculture Zoning District; PID# and 7890 County Road 110W; A Agriculture Zoning District; PID# Nickolas Olson, City Planner Meeting Date: March 26, 2018 Overview: BIF2, LLC (the Applicant ) has made a Preliminary and Final Plat Application with a Variance to the required lot width to develop 2 existing lots, 2650 Northview Drive & 7890 County Road 110W (the Properties ), into 3 lots which results in a total of 1 newly created lot. Background: Dating back to 2017, Staff has been working with the Applicant to develop a proposal that meets the goals and objectives of the Applicant while best meeting City Code standards. The result of which is the attached application before you this evening. Variance Request: In order for the Applicant to plat the Properties as proposed, a variance must be granted to the minimum required lot width. With the layout of the current properties, before the proposed subdivision, it is not possible to achieve road frontage for the proposed new lot. There are a couple of factors that are out of the control of the Applicant. They are the wetlands on the edge of Whaletail Lake, which bisect the property, and the existence of an undeveloped piece of private property, which lies between one of the properties included with the plat and Highland Road. The issue with the undeveloped private property presents an access issue for the proposed new lot. However, the Applicant has an easement in place that grants access to this area of the property for the use proposed. City Code Section Subd. 9 allows the City to issue variances from the provisions of the zoning code. A variance is a modification or variation of the provisions of the zoning code as applied to a specific piece of property. A variance is only permitted when: Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

7 a. The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this ordinance. The ordinance states that lots shall be 300 feet wide at the street side setback, the purpose of which is to establish reasonable standards of design and procedures for subdivisions and resubdivisons in order to further the orderly layout and use of land. The proposed variance is required because of the lack of frontage on a public street. The variance is in harmony with the purpose of the ordinance because while the lot does not have street frontage, it has access through an existing driveway easement and is of sufficient size and shape to accommodate future development (construction of a new single family home). b. The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. The Comprehensive Plan contains the following policy regarding this request: Residential subdivision design must preserve important natural features and promote Minnetrista as a distinct location from its suburban neighbors. Specifically, developers must design subdivisions which preserve farmlands, wetlands, natural lakes and other natural features and the design of new subdivisions must include amenities which establish a rural character and feel. The variance request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan because the lack of street frontage does not prohibit the subdivision from preserving the natural features (wetlands) or impact the rural character of the neighborhood. A variance may be granted when the applicant establishes there are practical difficulties in complying with this ordinance. Practical difficulties, as used in connection with granting a variance, means: 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by this ordinance. The Applicant proposes to use the property in a reasonable manor because the existing lots contain enough acreage to subdivide as proposed and meet the required 10 acre minimum per lot. The resulting lots contain enough buildable area to support a future single family dwelling. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner. There are circumstances unique to the property because there currently exists undeveloped land to the west that prevents the possible extension of city right-ofway which would allow the Applicant to meet the low width (frontage) requirement. Absent the extension of the right-of-way, it is not possible to meet the definition of lot width for the proposed new lot. 3. The variance would not alter the essential character of the locality. The variance will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood because the proposed lot will maintain similar size and other characteristics to other lots in the area. The requested variance does not result in lots unique or different from others in the neighborhood. Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

8 Subdivision Request: Should the City Council deem the requested variances appropriate, they must then review the proposed lot layout. As proposed, the plat will develop the Properties into a total of 3 lots. General: The Properties are a combined 74.9 gross acres and are located north of City Hall across County Road 110W. A wetland delineation determined there are 19.3 acres of wetlands and 4.1 acres of buffer on the Properties. Net residential acreage is calculated by subtracting from gross acres wetlands and water bodies, public parks, arterial streets, and natural resources mapped and protected by ordinance. Site Data: The Applicant has included general information and site data in the attached narrative. Outside of the lack of lot frontage, which the Applicant has appropriately applied for a variance for, the proposed lots comply with City Code requirements. Parks, Trails, & Open Space: Pursuant to MN Statutes, section , subd. 2b, the city requires all subdividers to dedicate to the city or preserve for public use as parks, recreational facilities, playgrounds, trails, open space or areas of natural and environmental significance a reasonable portion of the buildable land of the subdivision. The city council, at its discretion, may elect to require in lieu of land an equivalent cash payment based on the fair market value of the buildable land no later than the time of final subdivision approval. Any cash payment shall be placed in a special fund and used only for the purposes for which it was obtained, including the acquisition and development or improvement of the public park system or debt retirement in connection with land previously acquired. In review of the current Parks, Trails, and Open Space Plan, the proposed development area is not located within an existing or planned park service area. The Properties, however, are located within close proximity to both Gale Woods Regional Park which is owned and operated by Three Rivers Park District and the Westonka Recreational Association Park which is owned and operated by the Westonka Recreational Association. Analysis of the required park dedication, according to Section , a development which has between 0 and 1 units per acre requires 5% of buildable land or equivalent market value in cash to be dedicated. An appraisal may be required to determine fair market value. o Gross Site Area o Wetlands and Buffers o Net Site Area o Net Proposed Density o Park Dedication Requirement 74.9 acres 23.4 acres 51.5 acres 0.06 units/acre 5% of land or land value Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

9 o Net site area is 51.5 acres * 5% requirement = acres of land. o Staff is working with the Applicant to determine fair market value of the land. This will be done by the City Council meeting. The required cash in lieu fee would be 5% of the fair market value, with a maximum of $25,000 per new lot. At their March 13, 2018 meeting, the Parks Commission made a motion to require cash in lieu of land for the park dedication requirement in the sum of 5% of the fair market value to be determined by the City Council meeting. The motion passed 4-0. Tree Preservation Section : All subdivisions resulting in five or more units, lots, parcels, tracts or long-term leaseholds regardless of the particular zoning district. The proposed subdivision only results in a total of 3 lots, therefore tree preservation does not apply. Sanitary Sewer System General: All lots, proposed and existing, will be served by onsite septic systems. There would be no extension of city utilities. Water System General: All lots, proposed and existing, will be served by onsite wells. There would be no extension of city utilities. Streets General: The Applicant is not proposing to construct any city streets. Existing roadways should be sufficient to serve the additional proposed lot. Access General: Proposed Lot 1, Block 1 would access off of County Road 110W. Proposed Lot 2, Block 1 contains the existing home which accesses off of Northview Drive. Proposed Lot 3, Block 1 would access off of Highland Road over a neighboring property by an existing easement document already in place. Conclusion: The Planning Commission shall review and consider the Applicant s consistency with the intent and purpose of the Comprehensive Plan goals. At the advertised time and place, the planning commission will hold a public hearing which will constitute the platting authority public hearing as required by MN Statutes. At the discretion of the planning commission, the public hearing may be closed or may be held open for additional information. The Planning Commission will recommend approval, conditionally approve or disapprove of the preliminary plat for City Council consideration. A public hearing notice was sent to property owners within 500 feet of the site. To date, staff has spoken with a few neighbors as a result of that notice. Written comments have been attached for review. Recommended Action: Motion to recommend the City Council approve the requested Preliminary & Final Plat Application with a Variance from the required lot width at the Properties generally known as 2650 Northview Drive & 7890 County Road 110W, subject to the following conditions: Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

10 1. The Applicant shall construct an emergency warning siren for the subdivision or pay the City the required fee of $64 as a contribution towards a siren to serve the area; 2. The Applicant shall pay the City a park dedication fee in the sum of 5% of the fair market value of the Property to be determined by the City Council meeting date that would be dedicated in lieu of a land contribution at the time of final plat approval; 3. The Applicant shall comply with rules, regulations and permitting requirements of Hennepin County, the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and all other governmental agencies having jurisdiction over the Property; 4. Standard drainage and utility easements shall be dedicated around the perimeter of all lots and improvements within the subdivision; 5. The Applicant shall submit title evidence satisfactory to the city attorney prior to final plat approval; and 6. The Applicant shall pay to the City a fee in an amount sufficient to reimburse the City for all costs of reviewing the submissions for platting the Property and the negotiation and preparation of all related agreements and documents. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant Narrative 3. Preliminary Plat 4. Final Plat 5. Neighbor Comments Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character.

11 2650 Northview Drive & 7890 County Road 110W 2650 Northview Drive 7890 County Road 110W 1 inch = 752 feet March 5, 2018 Map Powered by DataLink from WSB & Associates

12 WHALETAIL ONE PRELIMINARY PLAT NARRATIVE Otto Project No February 5, 2018 CONTACT INFORMATION Developer/Owner: Engineer & Land Surveyor: BIF2, LLC Brad Clouser 2650 Northview Drive Minnetrista, MN Otto Associates, Inc. Paul E. Otto, P.L.S., P.E. 9 West Division Street Buffalo, MN (763) paul@ottoassociates.com SITE DATA Site Address: 2650 Northview Drive and 7890 County Road 110 W Current Zoning: AG (Agricultural) Parcel Size: 74.9 Acres ( Sq. Ft.) PID: and Legal Description: That part of Government Lot 4, Section 21, Township 117, Range 24, lying Southerly of a line running East parallel with the North line thereof from a point in the West line thereof distant feet South from the meander corner on South shore of Whaletail Lake and Lot 1, Block 1, TRISTA FIELDS, Hennepin County, Minnesota. GENERAL INFORMATION Proposed Name: WHALETAIL ONE Number of Lots: 3 Lots Area Calculations: Description Area (ft²) Area (acres) Gross Area Wetland Areas Wetland Buffers PROJECT DENSITY Proposed Density Calculation: 1 Unit per 23.6 Acres Allowed Density: 1 Unit per 10 Acres SUMMARY This project is located in the Agricultural zoning district which allows for 1 unit per 10 acres. The proposed plat meets this requirement. Access will be provided through the existing private street for both parcels. The proposed plat will dedicate half of the road width on the east side to accommodate the existing private road. The proposed homes sites will be single family. 9 West Division Street, Buffalo, MN Fax

13

14

15

16 Nickolas Olson From: Sent: To: Subject: Minnetrista Wednesday, March 21, :11 PM Nickolas Olson FW: Class III Subdivision Application from BIF2, LLC From: Sent: Wednesday, March 21, :08 PM To: Minnetrista Cc: Christopher Clouser Subject: Class III Subdivision Application from BIF2, LLC Nick Olson, Planning Commission and City Council, As an adjoining landowner to the proposed subdivision, we have reviewed the application and proposed subdivision. We fully support this application without objection. Sincerely, Don and Mary Somers 7780 County Road 110W Minnetrista, MN 1

17 Nickolas Olson From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Joan Sandquist Thursday, March 22, :33 PM Nickolas Olson David Abel BIF2, LLC Class III Subdivision Application To: Minnetrista Planning Commission Mayor and City Councilmembers In regard to the proposal of an additional lot creation, we have comment and concerns. We live off Highland Road at which the most northerly lot would require driveway access off of a shared driveway. Currently there are three homes, potentially five, utilizing this gravel road. (2350, 2485 & 2500 Highland Rd) Not being a city maintained road, we share in the cost of the rock when needed and tend to its grading and snow plowing. A shared driveway becomes a concern when there are no written documents; and assumed responsibilities are often not shared with prospective buyers. Heavy construction vehicles and increased contractor traffic will surely cause considerable damage to an already fragile roadway. We ask that conditions be applied to this proposal to help protect and maintain our privately maintained road. Thank you for your considerations John & Joan Sandquist 2485 Highland Road Minnetrista 1

18 Nickolas Olson From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Missy Graner Thursday, March 22, :56 PM Nickolas Olson; David Abel Rhys Jones Re: BIF2, LLC Class III Subdivision Application Hello We currently live at 2500 Highland Road and will be impacted by the proposed new lots that are going to be discussed at the meeting next week. The meeting has been scheduled over our spring break and as such we will not be able to attend. We are concerned that one of the lots will connect to our private road. We currently are sharing the cost of maintaining this road with one other neighbor at 2485 Highland Road. This is costly and time consuming and we are very concerned about the impact of construction vehicles and additional homes on this fragile road that we already spend so much time maintaining. We would ask that you help to ensure that this road will remain in good repair as part of this project. Thank you, Missy Graner and Rhys Jones 2500 Highland Road, Minnetrista From: Joan Sandquist Sent: Thursday, March 22, :33 PM To: Cc: Subject: BIF2, LLC Class III Subdivision Application To: Minnetrista Planning Commission Mayor and City Councilmembers In regard to the proposal of an additional lot creation, we have comment and concerns. We live off Highland Road at which the most northerly lot would require driveway access off of a shared driveway. Currently there are three homes, potentially five, utilizing this gravel road. (2350, 2485 & 2500 Highland Rd) Not being a city maintained road, we share in the cost of the rock when needed and tend to its grading and snow plowing. A shared driveway becomes a concern when there are no written documents; and assumed responsibilities are often not shared with prospective buyers. 1

19 Heavy construction vehicles and increased contractor traffic will surely cause considerable damage to an already fragile roadway. We ask that conditions be applied to this proposal to help protect and maintain our privately maintained road. Thank you for your considerations John & Joan Sandquist 2485 Highland Road Minnetrista 2

20 CITY OF MINNETRISTA PUBLIC HEARING Subject: Prepared By: CODE TEXT AMENDMENT: The city of Minnetrista will consider Ordinance 453 which will amend Chapter 5 of City Code. The purpose of the public hearing is to hear from the public and make a recommendation on the proposed amendment which would prohibit the use of property within the City for short term rentals. Nickolas Olson, City Planner Meeting Date: March 26, 2018 Issue: Throughout the state and nation there is a new form of lodging on the rise called vacation rental or VRBOs (vacation rental by owner). VBROs involve the lodging of guests in traditional single-family neighborhoods, usually in typical single family homes. The draft Ordinance 453 would add language to city code clarifying the existing prohibition on the use of residential property for the commercial purpose of short term rentals. Background: This topic has been prevalent in common resort and tourism-oriented communities for several years now. People who choose this type of lodging are often looking for a more economical way to travel as a group or are seeking a different type of experience than the traditional hotel/motel or bed & breakfast establishment provides. Some concerns raised with renting out private homes are those of public safety, traffic or parking on roads; public health, safe drinking water supplies or adequate sewage treatment systems; location, impact on the neighborhoods due to factors like loud activity; and fairness, putting renters on a level regulatory playing field with resorters, who are held to a much higher standard. Early in 2017, the City Council first discussed this topic at a work session meeting. At that time, there was no action taken or direction given regarding a possible ordinance. Recently, short term rentals have been brought to the attention of the City Council and again it was discussed at a February 2018 work session meeting. After their most recent discussion, the City Council directed staff to begin work on a draft ordinance regarding short term rentals. Discussion: The following represents a sampling from popular websites used to advertise VRBOs. It should be noted, due to the private nature of VRBOs, there may be no way of determining the actual number of VRBOs in Minnetrista at any given time. Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character v2 AMB MN415-59

21 Staff found or been informed of a total of 13 listings with one being a non-active listing in the City. To date, there have been complaints made regarding one of the properties listed below. 1 Home in Turtle Creek 1 Home in Palmer Pointe (Heights) 2 Homes in Trillium Bay 1 Home on CO RD 44 (Halstead Bay) 1 Home on Minneapolis Ave 1 Home in Jennings Cove 1 Home on Crane Island 1 Home in Orchard Cove 1 Home on Stonebridge Road 1 Home in Cardinal Cove 1 Home on Tuxedo Road (non-active) 1 Home on Cedar Point Road Typically, you see two basic approaches used to regulate VRBOs. They can be licensed or permitted which requires monitoring and inspection, or prohibiting them all together. Enforcement of a VRBO ordinance involves multiple challenges. If you choose to ban short-term rentals, you will have to figure out how to enforce a ban on what can be difficult to detect and is increasing in popularity. If you choose to permit these situations with regulations you will have to find a way to do so that doesn t discourage participation in the regulation. In either scenario there is a cost of enforcement. Conclusion: Regulating VRBOs is a decision for each city to make. Attached with this report is an article published by the League of MN Cities on the topic. The links below will take you to two newspaper articles recently published on the topic. See: Recommended Action: The Planning Commission should open the public hearing and continue it until the April 23 rd meeting. Given the complexity of the issue and the large amount of information being provided, the Planning Commission should take extra time to review everything presented. No other action is requested at this time. Attachments: Draft Ordinance 453 League of MN Cities Article Crow Wing County Study Explore Minnesota Report Mission Statement: The City of Minnetrista will deliver quality services in a cost effective and innovative manner and provide opportunities for a high quality of life while protecting natural resources and maintaining a rural character v2 AMB MN415-59

22 DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. CITY OF MINNETRISTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN STATE OF MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING SHORT-TERM RENTALS WITHIN THE CITY OF MINNETRISTA THE CITY OF MINNETRISTA HEREBY ORDAINS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Minnetrista hereby amends Chapter V, Section of the Minnetrista City Code by adding a new subdivision 16 to prohibit short-term rentals within the City as follows: Subd. 16. Short-term rentals. (a) Definitions. In addition to the definitions contained in Section of this Code, the following definitions shall apply to this subdivision. (1) Operator means the person or enterprise or its agent who is owner or proprietor of a rental dwelling or rental Dwelling, whether in the capacity of owner, lessor, lessee, sublessee, mortgagee in passion, licensee, or any other capacity. Where the operator performs their functions through a rental agent, the managing agency or the rental agent has the same duties as the Operator. (2) Remuneration means compensation, in money or other consideration, given in return for occupancy, possession, or use of real property. (3) Rent means the Remuneration charged, whether or not received, for the occupancy or use of property for a temporary period. (4) Short-term rental means any occupancy of a Dwelling that is rented to a transient for fewer than thirty (30) consecutive calendar days. (5) Transient means any person who, at their own expense or at the expense of another, exercises occupancy or possession, or is entitled to occupancy or possession, by reason of any rental agreement, concession, permit, right-of-access, option to purchase, license, time sharing arrangement, or any other type of agreement for a period of fewer than thirty (30) consecutive calendar days. (b) Short-term rentals prohibited. (1) Purpose. The City finds that short-term rentals constitute a commercial use of residential property, which conflict with the fundamental character of residential zoning districts, disrupt the residential character of neighborhoods, and have a negative impact on the livability of residential neighborhoods. The City further finds that, while short term rentals are prohibited v3 AMB MN

23 DRAFT under the current provisions contained in the City Code, an ordinance amendment clarifying those regulations is necessary. The City has received complaints from residents regarding shortterm rentals, including but not limited to complaints related to noise, over- occupancy, and illegal parking. To ensure adequate housing options for residents, preserve the residential character of the City s residential districts, preserve property values, and reduce land use conflicts, the City determines, in furtherance of the public health, safety and general welfare, that it is necessary to limit short-term rentals to hotels, motels, lodging establishments, and similar accommodations which are appropriately zoned and have the appropriate infrastructure and services for short-term use. (2) Prohibition. Short-term rental of any Dwelling to a Transient for less than thirty (30) consecutive calendar days in a residential zoning district is prohibited. State licensed hotels, motels, and lodging establishments located outside residential districts or residential planned unit development districts are allowed, pursuant to applicable City codes. (3) Enforcement. a. An owner, Operator, tenant, or occupant of any building or property in violation of the provisions of this section may be charged and found guilty of a misdemeanor and may be held responsible for the cost of enforcement in addition to penalties. b. The City may exercise any and all remedies at law or in equity to ensure compliance with this section. All unpaid costs, charges and penalties may be certified as a special assessment levy against the property. c. The City hereby further declares the Short-Term Rental of any Dwelling as a public nuisance pursuant to Section of the Minnetrista City Code. The City may take actions to abate such nuisance pursuant to Section 1510 of the Minnetrista City Code and applicable state law. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect following its adoption and publication. Adopted Date:, Attest: v3 AMB MN Lisa Whalen Mayor Kris Linquist City Clerk

24 DRAFT (seal) v3 AMB MN

25 Cities Bulletin Print Page Page 18 of 20 4/18/2016 City Regulation of Short-Term Vacation Rentals by Owners Cities are increasingly looking for ways to regulate short-term rentals available through organizations like Airbnb. (Published ) Organizations like Airbnb (Link to: 26G_CR%3D %26G_N%3Ds%26G_K%3Dairbnb.%26G_P%3D%26G_D%3Dc&gclid=CKCz- YXbmMwCFQmSaQod4X8Dlw&dclid=CMuBhobbmMwCFYx4AQodmU0E9w) and VRBO.com (Link to: have made things interesting for cities and residents. These are services individuals may use to arrange short-term rental of someone s house, apartment, room, or bed for a night or more. Sometimes they cause issues for cities. Increasingly, cities are seeking information on whether and how to regulate these short-term rental situations. League research attorneys are available to answer your questions. What can cities regulate? Under state law, the Department of Health has jurisdiction to license and inspect hotels, motels, and lodging establishments unless a city or county has been delegated that responsibility. Hotels and motels are defined as buildings, structures, enclosures, or any part thereof used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out to be places where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public for a stay of less than a week. This alone captures a lot of short-term situations advertised online. Lodging establishments are defined as buildings, structures, enclosures, or any part thereof used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out as places where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public as regular roomers for stays of a week or more and having five or more beds to let to the public. (Lodging establishments also include accommodations for those awaiting medical treatment, their family, and caregivers.) In short, a lot of typical AirBNB or VRBO.com situations are subject to state regulation, but that does not preclude additional regulation by the city. The state and its delegates have invested a lot of effort into locating and requiring licensing compliance by applicable properties throughout the state offering accommodations through AirBNB, VRBO.com, or other means. However, the level of state/delegate licensing compliance of short-term rentals might inevitably remain low due to:

26 Cities Bulletin Print Page Page 19 of 20 4/18/2016 The amount of state/delegate manpower required. The fact that new short-term rentals constantly enter the market. Those offering accommodations not in compliance may be notified and then take steps to avoid further detection from licensing authorities. For these reasons, the state fully supports cities adopting some regulation of situations potentially subject to state licensing to the extent it better enables state law licensing compliance. The short-term rental of any space having fewer than five beds and for periods of a week or more is unregulated by state law. These are situations only a city may regulate at least until a legislative change gives regulatory authority to the state and its delegates or makes it exempt from any regulation, including city ordinance. There are plenty of situations the city can regulate. How can cities regulate these situations? The two basic approaches cities currently use to regulate short-term rentals are licensing/permitting or prohibition. How cities regulate short-term rentals varies in what constitutes rental, what accommodations are subject to regulation, the location of the property, and other respects. For information on cities and counties that have taken steps to regulate these situations, contact the League Research and Information Department at (651) , (800) , or research@lmc.org (Link to: mailto:research@lmc.org). Should cities regulate short-term rentals? This is a decision for each city to make. If a city chooses to ban short-term rentals, it will have to figure out how to enforce a ban on what can be difficult to detect and yet is an increasingly popular phenomenon. If a city licenses or otherwise permits these situations, it will have to find a way to do so that doesn t discourage participation in the regulation. There are certainly reasons to, at the very least, have a record of the short-term rentals being made available within the city and to have a person to contact in the event there are complaints by neighbors. Again, the state or its delegated licensing authority is eager to work with cities to maintain state licensing compliance. If you have questions about short-term rentals, contact the League Research and Information Department at (651) , (800) , or research@lmc.org (Link to: mailto:research@lmc.org). Read the current issue of the Cities Bulletin (Link to:

27 Cities Bulletin Print Page Page 20 of 20 4/18/2016 Your LMC Resource Contact Edward Cadman Staff Attorney/Special Counsel (651) or (800) (Link to:

28 Vacation Dome Rental Study Committee of the Whole Presentation November 17, 2014 Presented by Ilan Listug Crow Wing County Land Services Exhibit D

29 Executive Summary: Private rental of vacation and lake homes by owners ( commonly called vacation rental by owner or VRBO) has been a growing trend nationally and locally, Different approaches have been taken by state and local jurisdictions in deciding whether and to what extent to regulate VRBOs. From a land use perspective, the central question concerning VRBOs is whether the use of a single family home as a VRBO is compatible with the zoning district in which it is located. This question raises the closely related issue of whether and at what point a VRBO may become a commercial operation, This report reviews the treatment of VRBOs by popular tourist states, cities, and counties in Minnesota and across the country. A special emphasis was placed on approaches taken by Minnesota counties, including survey data from 32 responding counties. This report incorporates that data and presents a summary of the issues surrounding regulation of vacation rentals as Crow Wing County pursues a thorough, objective analysis of this issue. In Minnesota, the issue was heavily discussed at the Legislature in 2010, however no action has been taken at the state level. Existing Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) licensing laws governing lodging establishments encompass a great deal of VRBO activity, however the number of VRBOs currently licensed by the state is minimal. MDH has licensed 18 properties which would be considered VRBOs in Crow Wing County, In the absence of state regulations, some Minnesota counties have enacted VRBO - specific land use ordinances. In Crow Wing County, VRBOs are not specifically regulated in the Land Use Ordinance. In the past year, complaints have been received on two properties, Survey data collected from 32 counties shows that only five counties have VRBO ordinances, an additional seven counties state they would require a conditional use permit if the VRBO was determined to be a commercial operation, and 20 counties report they do not regulate VRBOs, Of responding counties, complaints have been received on 26 properties in the past year with no citations being issued and only one case pending in district court. This data also highlights many of the difficulties associated with enforcement against VRBOs including; identification, multiple complaints against single properties, after -hours complaints, renter behavior /nuisance activity, parking, shoreline activities, and costs of enforcement, One regulating county reports it requires between hours of staff time to bring one VRBO into compliance. Additionally, emerging legal issues regarding property rights, regulation of rental properties and property tax classification of VRBOs represent additional challenges to this discussion. This report concludes by summarizing some of the key issues that remain unresolved and key next steps regarding VRBOs,

30 I. Crow Wing County Overview: A. VRBO Regulations: VRBOs may be regulated by a county under the scope of the planning and zoning authority contained in Minnesota Chapter 394. In general, zoning regulation challenges are subject to the deferential rational basis standard, and are likely to withstand judicial scrutiny ifthe regulation is found to have a substantial relationship to land use impacts in the area. Additionally, regulations most not infringe upon constitutional rights of equal protection and the 51' Amendment protections against taking of private property without just compensation and due process. A case pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court may have direct impact upon how rental regulations are viewed by courts. In Dean v. City ofwinonalproperty owners challenged a rental ordinance passed in Winona which limits the number ofrental licenses available to 30% of a the dwellings in a given area. The ordinance has been upheld in district court and the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Several groups including; the American Civil Liberties Union, the Institute for Justice, the Minnesota Vacation Rental Association, the Minnesota Association of Realtors and the Center for the American Experiment have all joined the case raising the argument that the right to rent property is a fundamental right. If the right to rent property is determined to be a fundamental right, all regulations limiting the right would be reviewed under the strict scrutiny standard rather than the rational basis standard. Such a ruling by the Court would have significant impact upon government' s ability to regulate rental property through traditional zoning ordinances. The case is expected to be decided in early B. Ordinance Challenges: Given the recent rise in popularity of using single - family dwellings located in residential or shoreland residential districts as VRBOs, many land use ordinances do not clearly encompass the use within existing definitions. A Minnesota Court of Appeals case from 2009 demonstrates the difficulty in applying existing ordinances to regulate or stop operations of undefined VRBOs. In Douglas County v. Owen2, after receiving complaints from neighbors, the county determined that 3 VRBOs (rented for 13, 53 and 19 days respectively) owned by the Owens were operating as resorts" under the zoning ordinance. The county sought to enjoin the rental of the properties until a CUP was obtained. The Court held, citing many deficiencies in the ordinance, that the zoning ordinance did not restrict the rental of single - family dwellings on a short -term basis, and the use ofthe properties did not compel the conclusion that the properties are resorts. In part because zoning laws are construed against the county and because the county sought to impose regulation on these homes beyond the plain language of the ordinance, the county' s efforts to classify a VRBO within their existing ordinance failed and was held invalid twice by the court. 1 Ethan Dean, et al., v. City ofwinona, A ( Minn, Ct. App. 2014). 2 County ofdouglas v. Richard N. Owen and Judith A. Owen, A , ( Minn. Ct. App, 2009).