Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2017

Home

Need for the Proposed Rules The MRCCA program has been administered under Executive Order 79-19 for over 35 years. The executive order brings with it a variety of issues that this rulemaking effort seeks to resolve: • Executive Order 79-19 cannot be readily changed or updated. There is no mechanism for revising an executive order, short of issuing a new executive order. Executive orders are not a desirable method for regulating or managing state programs that affect local land use. State rulemaking offers a more transparent process for developing a state program that affects local land use because it includes opportunities for public participation and provides an appropriate foundation for local land use regulation. • Executive Order 79-19 provides insufficient guidance to local governmental units for developing local plans and ordinances, and to the DNR for reviewing and approving them. The Standards and Guidelines in Executive Order 79-19 are written as "performance standards" that describe a goal or desired end state. Performance standards lack specificity and, therefore, provide insufficient guidance for local plans and ordinances. This has led to the application of a broad range of standards and approaches across the MRCCA, as well as uncertainty in the approval process over time. This rulemaking effort has provided an open and transparent process for developing more specific and consistent standards across the MRCCA, and more specific and consistent criteria for the review and approval of local plans and ordinances. • Executive Order 79-19 limits redevelopment and reinvestment. Executive Order 79-19 categorizes all land in the corridor into four districts based on general land use characteristics. Land use regulations specific to each district are the primary means for achieving protection goals within the MRCCA. These districts were defined based on land uses in 1976 and are legally described in the State Register. Because executive orders are not regularly updated, the districts and associated land use restrictions put in place in 1976 still govern development activity today. These 1976 land use districts have limited the ability of communities to redevelop and encourage reinvestment. For example, the City of Champlin plans to redevelop the area at the Highway 169 bridge crossing as a walkable mixed -use development with both housing and new commercial buildings. Some of these buildings will be up to five stories in height and have reduced river setbacks. This plan deviates considerably from the 35' height limit that currently applies to the Urban Developed District, and from the current management purpose of the district as set forth in the Executive Order, which is "to maintain the largely residential character, and to limit expansion of commercial use" within the land use district. It is difficult for local governments and the DNR to equitably evaluate development proposals like the Champlin proposal, which conflicts with the outdated management purposes and associated standards developed in 1976. This leaves local governments uncertain about what they can or cannot do within the MRCCA, and limits their ability to achieve more sustainable development patterns and a stronger tax base. 6