Agenda - Planning Commission - 02/02/2017

Home

• The MRCCA is costly and complex to administer. Unlike the state's other shoreland protection programs (Shoreland, Wild and Scenic River, and Lower St. Croix River), which are governed by Minn. Stat. Ch. 103F, the MRCCA program requires local governments to adopt a plan in addition to a zoning ordinance, and it requires the administration and oversight of two state agencies — the DNR and Metropolitan Council. The exact contents and submittal requirements for plans and ordinances are not clearly laid out, which has led to confusion by local governments. Furthermore, the Metropolitan Council has an established process and timeline for updating comprehensive land use plans, but it is unclear how local MRCCA plans relate to comprehensive land use plans or whether comprehensive land use plans need to be updated regularly to reflect identified land use changes within the MRCCA. • Poor resource protection due to vague and outdated language. Many natural resources are not adequately protected by Executive Order 79-19 because the Standards and Guidelines are too vague to implement effectively. Examples of words or phrases that are not defined, too vague to interpret and implement, or outdated include the following italicized phrases: o Provision C. 2.a (1). "New development and expansion shall be permitted only after the approval of site plans which adequately assess and minimize adverse effects and maximize beneficial effect" (emphasis added). o Provision C.2.e (2). This standard dealing with existing development requires that "local plans and regulations shall include provisions to amortize non -conforming use" (emphasis added). Amortization of most nonconforming uses was prohibited by statute in 1999. See Minn. Stat. §§ 462.357, subd. lc and 394.21, subd. la. o Provision C. 2.e (4). "Local plans and ordinances shall include provisions to provide for the screening of existing development which constitutes visual intrusion, wherever appropriate" (emphasis added). o Provision C.6.f. "In the development of residential, commercial, and industrial subdivisions, and planned development, a developer shall be required to dedicate to the public reasonable portions of appropriate riverfront access land or other lands in interest therein" (emphasis added). • No resource protection priority. Neither Minn. Stat. § 116G.15 nor Executive Order 79-19 prioritizes resources for protection. Both call for the equal protection of a list of natural, cultural, historical, scenic, recreational, and economic resources in the corridor. Priorities are important for guiding rulemaking that achieves meaningful resource protection, and to help resolve conflicts in ongoing program administration. Alternative Format Upon request, this SONAR can be made available in an alternative format, such as large print, braille, or audio. To make such a request, contact Jennifer Shillcox at the Department of Natural Resources, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155-4025, phone 651-259-5727 and fax 651-296-0445, or mrcca.rulemaking@state.mn.us. TTY users may call the Department of Natural Resources at 651-296- 5484 or 1-800-657-3929. 7