Meeting Date: April 21, 2022
To: Members of the Planning Commission
From: Ben Martig, City Administrator
Title
Review and Discuss Land Development Code provisions related to City buildings and facilities including initial potential amendments for clarification.
Body
Action Requested:
The Planning Commission will review and discuss Land Development Code provisions related to City buildings and facilities including initial potential amendments for clarification.
Summary Report:
During the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC) review of the proposed Bridge Square changes, questions arose about the review process and if there was the need for a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) under the Land Development Code (LDC). The letter from the HPC is attached to explain their viewpoint and three Commission members will be present for the discussion.
Under LDC 8.5.8, a Certificate of Appropriateness is required, “Unless otherwise exempted in Section 7.8.3, Exemptions, in the H-O district no zoning certificate or building permit for construction, exterior alteration or rehabilitation, moving, or demolition of a building or structure on a heritage preservation site shall be issued until the project has been submitted to, and received approval of a certificate of appropriateness from the heritage preservation commission.”
Land Development Code (LDC) Section 7.8.3 Exemptions reads: “(A) The city and other government entities carrying out a governmental function, activity, or implementation of essential services may be exempt in whole or in part from this LDC to the extent permitted in state and federal law. (B) The city and other governmental agencies that are exempt from the regulations of this LDC, in whole or in part, are encouraged to meet the requirements of this LDC to the maximum extent possible.”
Staff, including the City Attorney, have interpreted this to mean that the City is not required to receive a Certificate of Appropriateness from the HPC. Furthermore, under LDC 7.6.2 it is the administrative power and duty of the City Planner to “interpret the meaning and application of this LDC as allowed in Section 8.5.18, Code Interpretation.” It is not up to individual HPC members, residents, or other staff members to interpret and apply the LDC.
The City Council, however, can seek advisory input from the HPC for public projects. The HPC is a unique commission that has specific duties under State Statute and some quasi-judicial authority. Specifically, under the powers and duties ascribed to the HPC in the LDC, “Following designation of a heritage preservation commission site by city council, the heritage preservation commission shall act as a resource and in an advisory capacity to the owner of the property regarding preservation, restoration, and rehabilitation activities. Heritage preservation commission activity in this regard shall include participation in the planning and implementation of activities within the downtown historic district and other sites that have been designated as heritage preservation sites.” In the case of public properties, the City is the owner of the property and can seek advice from the HPC on any potential changes. City Council values the HPC’s opinion and sought input on the proposed Bridge Square renovations.
Furthermore, there is a requirement under state statute that requires public bodies, such as the City of Northfield, to seek review from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) before altering sites on the National Register of Historic Places. Under Minnesota State Statute 138.665, “The state, state departments, agencies, and political subdivisions, including the Board of Regents of the University of Minnesota, have a responsibility to protect the physical features and historic character of properties designated in sections 138.662 and 138.664 or listed on the National Register of Historic Places created by Public Law 89-665. Before carrying out any undertaking that will affect designated or listed properties, or funding or licensing an undertaking by other parties, the state department or agency shall consult with the State Historic Preservation Office pursuant to the society's established procedures to determine appropriate treatments and to seek ways to avoid and mitigate any adverse effects on designated or listed properties.” The Bridge Square concept plan has been submitted to SHPO for review and staff are waiting for SHPO to respond in May.
Public properties are different from private properties and subsequently, it makes sense to have a different review process. A COA approval allows the applicant to then receive a building permit upon meeting all applicable requirements. In the case of Bridge Square, this is a multi-year project and currently, we are only in the conceptual phase. Therefore, staff are seeking input early on from stakeholders before budgeting for and approving final construction drawings. A high level of detail is required for a COA, typically architect designs or a similar type of plans. If a COA were to be received for the Bridge Square plan, this wouldn’t happen until final construction drawings were ready. However, at that point, any major changes suggested by the HPC would delay the final project. Furthermore, City Council is the elected decision-making body for Northfield. Therefore, the City Council and not the HPC, should have the final decision in publicly funded projects.
Key Definitions Related to a COA (Article 9 of LDC)
Building. A structure, of more or less permanent construction, having a roof and intended to be used for sheltering people, animals, property, or business activity.
Structure. Anything constructed or erected on the ground or attached to the ground or on-site utilities, including, but not limited to, buildings, factories, sheds, detached garages, cabins, manufactured homes, recreational vehicles not meeting the exemption criteria specified in Section 4.1.9(C) of this division and other similar items.
*Note: 4.1.9 Manufactured Homes and Manufactured Home Parks and Placement of Recreational Vehicles.(C) All manufactured homes must be securely anchored to an adequately anchored foundation system that resists flotation, collapse and lateral movement. Methods of anchoring may include, but are not to be limited to, use of over-the-top or frame ties to ground anchors. This requirement is in addition to applicable state or local anchoring requirements for resisting wind forces.
Based on direction tonight, staff will initiate an LDC text amendment language.
Alternative Options:
If there are questions on how to apply the LDC, it should be clarified with a text amendment. Going forward, there are a few options:
1) Leave the LDC language as-is (not recommended as there has been issues raised on clarity of language).
2) Change the LDC language so that no public project can be considered for an exemption.
3) Modify the LDC language to be very clear that public projects are exempt from needing a COA.
4) Modify the LDC language to add the Council for appeals of COAs rather than the Planning Commission.
Option 1: Staff would continue to apply the LDC in the same manner. Public projects would not require a COA, but the Council may seek advisory input from the HPC. Public properties on the National Register of Historic Places would be reviewed by SHPO as stipulated under State Statute.
Staff does not recommended however, as it could be clarified to avoid confusion.
Option 2: In this option, public projects would follow the COA process like any private property owner. The HPC has the final approval on a project before the building permit or zoning certificate would be issued. Furthermore, public properties on the National Register of Historic Places would be reviewed by SHPO as stipulated under State Statute.
Option 3: This option makes it clearer on the role of the HPC with regards to public projects. A COA would not be required for public projects, but the HPC can offer advisory input. Furthermore, public properties on the National Register of Historic Places would be reviewed by SHPO as stipulated under State Statute.
Option 4: This option would modify the language to change the appeals for all COAs from Planning Commission to the City Council. The model SHPO ordinance for appeals has the City Council as the example. This would change appeals for all private situations. For public projects under Option 2 there would need to be some way to initiate an appeal by the City Council. Staff and legal counsel hasn’t determined a good solution on how that would be applied at this point. Under Option 3 since the HPC would be advisory for city projects the appeal wouldn’t be applicable or necessary.
City Council Work Session
On April 12, 2022 the City Council discussed this item at the work session. At this was an initial discussion, Councilors heard from some HPC members on their viewpoint and discussed some draft LDC amendments for options 2-4. Councilors gave direction to staff to further explore option 4, to change the appeal process of HPC decisions to the City Council, and to research how other cities handle their COAs. Initial research on other cities’ codes is attached for PC review and was sent to the HPC in a supplemental memo.
Heritage Preservation Commission Discussion
On April 14, 2022 the Heritage Preservation Commission discussed this item. The HPC motioned to direct staff to craft ordinance language that: requires a COA for public and private properties, with some exemptions for emergency repairs, and to change the appeal process from the Zoning Board of Appeals to the City Council for HPC decisions. Staff is drafting this proposed ordinance and will provide it in a supplemental memo to the PC.
Financial Impacts:
N/A
Tentative Timelines:
4/12/22 Initial Council Discussion
4/14/22 Heritage Preservation Commission Review of Options and Discussion
4/21/22 Planning Commission Review of Options and Discussion
5/3/22 Council Discussion of Options
5/14/22 Heritage Preservation Commission Review of Proposed LDC Amendment
5/19/22 Public Hearing: Planning Commission Recommendation of LDC Amendment
6/7/22 City Council: First Reading of Ordinance Amendment
6/21/22 City Council: Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment
6/29/22 Newspaper Publication
7/29/22 Ordinance Takes Effect