5.b) and c) Staff Report-ScandiaPC Ordinance items 10 7 14
Memorandum
To: Scandia Planning
Commission
Reference: Ordinance Items—address
requests from August meeting
Copies To: Kristina Handt, City
Administrator
Brenda Eklund, Clerk
Project No.: 15486.000
From: Sherri Buss, RLA AICP,
Planner
Routing:
Date: October 1, 2014
The Planning Commission discussed some potential changes to the Development Code at the
July and August meetings. At the August meeting, the Commission requested information or
ideas from the Planner on several topics. The items and suggested options for discussion at
the October meeting are included below (identified in Bold text). The text for the other items
that we discussed in August (3-5 below) have not changed:
1) Add language to the Development Code to permit an “administrative exception” for lots
that are close to, but do not meet, the ordinance requirements for some approvals.
Stillwater Township’s attorney created a section that was added to the Stillwater
Township ordinance to allow for “administrative deviations,” in response to some similar
issues in the Township. Such exceptions are allowed by many municipalities. I have
attached a copy of the section that was added to the Stillwater Ordinance. It was placed
in the Administrative chapter of the zoning ordinance.
The Stillwater ordinance allows the administrative exceptions through approval of an
administrative permit. We have used it only about once per year since it was adopted,
and do not use it for minimum lot sizes for subdivision.
The Scandia Planning Commission asked for information on the following issues
at the August meeting:
Has there been language regarding “marginal” lots in the Code in the past?
City staff reviewed past ordinance language, and could find no reference to
“marginal lots” in past Code language. The code does include a couple of items
related to lots that do not meet minimum size requirements:
The subdivision ordinance includes a requirement that “All remnants of lots below
minimum lot size left over after subdividing a larger tract must be added to
adjacent lots or planned as outlots, rather than allowed to remain as unusable
Scandia Planning Commission
Ordinance items from July 1 Meeting Page 2 October 7, 2014
parcels. The development agreement shall restrict the use and ownership of
outlots.”
The Code includes a definition for “nominal parcels: A parcel not reduced by
more than 10% of its lot area due to road right-of-way dedication.” However,
nominal lots are not referenced anywhere in the Development Code, so staff do
not know how this definition has been used by the City in the past.
The Planner asked Dennis O’Donnell from Washington County about the
definition, since many elements of the County Code became part of the City’s
code after incorporation. Dennis said that the same definition of “nominal
parcels” exists in the County’s Code, but that to his knowledge it has never been
used, and nominal parcels are not mentioned anywhere in the County’s
Development Code other than the definitions section.
The definition of “nominal parcels” may have been intended for a similar purpose
to “administrative deviations” used in Stillwater Township—to allow parcels that
are smaller than a minimum requirement due to right-of-way dedication to be
considered to meet the minimum requirement, but the intent of the definition is
not clear because nominal parcels are not discussed elsewhere in the Code.
The Planning Commission could consider whether this definition should be used
or removed from the Code.
Should neighbors receive notice about administrative permits for
administrative exceptions?
Neighbors are not noticed when an administrative permit is granted. If the
Planning Commission wants to use the option for “administrative exceptions” to
be granted by administrative permit, it should be for items where notice to
neighbors is not a concern.
What items could the change to permit administrative exceptions affect in
the Development Code?
The following items in the development code require a minimum lot size:
o Minimum lot sizes permitted in each zoning district
o Sizes and numbers of accessory structures
o Minimum lot size permitted for cemeteries (5 acres)
o Minimum lot size permitted for golf driving ranges (35 acres)
o Minimum lot size permitted for commercial kennels (10 acres)
o Minimum lot size for livestock (5 acres)
o Minimum lot size for motor vehicle/recreational vehicle/boat sales (2.5
acres)
o Minimum lot size for resort (50 acres)
o Minimum lot size for wind energy systems (10 acres)
o Minimum lot size for yard waste facilities (10 acres)
o Minimum lot size for Open Space Conservation Development (40 acres)
o Exemption from subdivision requirements for large lots (all parcels
exceed 20 acres in size and have 500 feet of roadway frontage)
Scandia Planning Commission
Ordinance items from July 1 Meeting Page 3 October 7, 2014
The Planning Commission should consider whether there is an interest in
allowing administrative deviations for some or all of the items listed: for example,
the ordinance could specify that the deviations do not apply to minimum lot sizes
for subdivision, but could apply to permit livestock or the other uses listed in
Section 3.0 Development Standards on parcels that are slightly smaller than the
minimum lot sizes required for those uses.
The Subdivision Ordinance includes a current requirement that “No lot shall have
less area or width than is required by zoning regulations applying to the area in
which it is located.”
2) Add language to provide incentives or exceptions to ordinance requirements to
encourage preservation of historic structures in the accessory structures section of the
ordinance.
The question before the Commission was an application that needed a variance to
construct an accessory building closer to the roadway than the primary structure.
At the August meeting, the Commission requested a definition of “historic
structures,” and some options for providing a “bonus” or incentives to residents
who preserve historic structures.
The Development Code currently includes a definition for “Historic Building and
Structure: A structure which has been identified by the Washington County
History Network Inventory or the State Historic Preservation Office and other
undesignated structures such as residences and barns having public value due to
its notable architecture or historic features relating to the cultural heritage of the
community.”
The Planner could not find the “Washington County History Network Inventory”
on line. The Washington County Historical Society has a list of historic structures
on their website—those listed for Scandia are also listed in the City’s Comp Plan.
If the Commission wants to update the definition, the reference could be changed
to Washington County or the Washington County Historical Society, unless we
can identify the Inventory referenced in the definition.
Given the Gacek example, the ordinance could apply to “A structure or group of
structures”, and “farmsteads” could be listed as an example.
The attached Accessory Structure section of the Development Code includes
some options in Red type for addressing the Gacek issue and providing
incentives for preserving historic structures, including:
An item that would allow historic structures or structures that maintain the
appearance of a historic farmstead to be located closer to the roadway right-of-
way than the principal structure on the parcel. An administrative permit could be
required so that there is staff review of the proposed buildings and location. This
might require adding a definition of historic farmstead to the ordinance.
An item that would address historic structure height. This could address the
issue in the Rodsjo application that will be heard on October 7. If the
Commission wants to allow historic structures to exceed the maximum height
requirement, the City would also need to change the language in Chapter Two,
Scandia Planning Commission
Ordinance items from July 1 Meeting Page 4 October 7, 2014
Section 3.1 Item 3(f) to the following: “Height. No structure shall exceed the
maximum height permitted for the zoning district in which it is located, except for
church spires, chimneys, flag poles up to 45 feet in height, silos, wind generators,
and historic buildings and structures.”
A item that would permit the city to grant an exception to the number and total
square footage of accessory structures on the parcel for Historic Buildings and
structures. Staff recommend that the exception could be made by administrative
permit. The Zoning Administrator has the option to bring the permit to the
Planning Commission if needed for review or recommendations.
o The option suggests that this could be done on parcels that exceed 3
acres in size. The Commission should discuss whether it could be
recommended for smaller parcels as well.
o The Commission should discuss whether the number or total area of
historic accessory structures should be limited.
The Planner reviewed other communities and resources to determine if there were some
examples of ordinance exceptions or incentives for historic structures. Ordinance
exceptions for historic structures typically included exceptions for signage or other building
elements, but did not relate to accessory structures. Cities that provide incentives for
preservation of historic structures typically did so through allowing uses not typically allowed
in zoning districts (such as B&B’s), creation of historic districts or overlay districts with
unique standards or requirements, by eliminating or reducing permit costs for preservation
actions, or by providing financial incentives.