6.a Memo DNR Model Shoreland Ord 1.2.184-44 Ctedar Slreel, 5vle 1500
Saint Paul, MN 55101
551.297,440.'1
Aduxom
TKDA
Memorandum
To: Scandia Planning
Commission
Copies To: Neil Soltis, City
Administrator
Brenda Eklund, City Clerk
Reference: DNR New Model Shoreland
Ordinance—continuing discussior
Project No.: 16323.000
From: Sherri Buss, RLA AICP, Routing:
Planner
Date: December 21. 2017
The Planning Commission discussed several sections of the Draft ordinance in December,
including the following:
• Height of Building definition: the Planning Commission recommended using the City's
definition of building height rather than the DNR definition.
• 4.2 Land Uses: The Commission recommended that duplexes be allowed, and that
water -oriented commercial uses be permitted with a CUP
• Lot Area and Width Standards (Section 6.0): The Commission decided to leave both
the Model Ordinance standards and current Scandia standards in the draft and request
public comment on whether the City should reduce the minimum sizes to the DNR
standards.
o The Commission recommended that densities within residential PUD's in
Shoreland be permitted to be denser than in the underlying zoning district, based
on the requirement to dedicate a significant area near the lake as a permanent
conservation area.
o The Commission recommended that uses and lot sizes in the shoreland area of
tributary streams should be the same as the underlying zoning district
requirements.
• 6.4 Setbacks and Wetlands: added a note regarding the OHWL of wetlands.
• A few other minor text changes identified in the meeting minutes.
Staff made one additional change to the draft:
An rtnl*Ud*owned compaaW prornminq affrmatlo o[llon artd equal appo-rlunily
Shoreland Model Ordinance Page 2 December 5, 2017
Scandia Planning Commission
• Bluff Diagram: the DNR recently provided a revised drawing for the Bluff definitions
diagram (page 3). The only change is in the symbols that were shown as < and > have
been changed to <_ and >_.
We will begin the discussion on January 2 with Section 8.0:
• Section 8.0: Neil has reviewed several sites where the amount of material that was
graded did not meet the ordinance requirement for permit, but it still had impacts on
adjacent properties or city drainage ways, or impacted steep slopes. Should the
standards be modified to require grading permits for any grading or fill within the bluff
impact and shore impact zone, and/or to require a lower threshold for other permits?
Section 9.0
o Suggest replacing the DNR's section with a reference to the Scandia Subdivision
Ordinance. The DNR section is mostly duplicative and does not include all of the
City's standards.
Section 10.0
o The City's Development Code permits PUD's, but does not allow increases in
density as the DNR's Model ordinance does. The DNR's ordinance is specifically
adapted for Shoreland issues, and also allows more commercial development
than the City's Code does in most districts. This section may require some
significant discussion.
Next steps could include sending the draft ordinance to the local lake associations and setting a
public hearing date.
7