Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2014-08-05 Council Packet
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS x CITY COUNCIL AGENDA August 5, 2014 — 8:00 pm Mendota Heights City Hall **Note Change in Start Time** 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Adopt Agenda 5. Consent Agenda a. Approval of July 15, 2014 City Council Minutes b. Acknowledgement of July 22, 2014 Planning Commission Minutes C. Approval of Out of State Travel Request for Officers Lambert and Willson d. Approval of Christmas Eve Floating Holiday Designation e. Receipt of June 2014 Fire Department Synopsis Report f. Approval of Computer Network Infrastructure Purchase g. Approval of Personnel Action Report h. Approval of Personnel Policy Revision Regarding City Employee Political Activity i. Approval of Replacement Public Works Truck Purchase j. Approval of Third Amendment to Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization Joint Powers Agreement k. Approval of June 2014 Treasurer's Report I. Approval of Claims List M. Approval of Contractors List 6. Public Comments 7. Presentations a. ISD 197 Sibley Stadium Advisory Committee Report 8. New and Unfinished Business a. Planning Case 2014-19, Resolution 2014-44 Approving a Lot Split at 641 Callahan Place b. Review Recommended Comments to Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area Proposed Rules 9. Community Announcements 10. Council Comments 11. Adjourn page 2 5 a. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, July 15, 2014 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Krebsbach called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: Councilmembers Duggan, Povolny, Petschel, and Norton. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance. AGENDA ADOPTION Mayor Krebsbach presented the agenda for adoption. Councilmember Duggan noted that item f. had been withdrawn and item h. had been modified. Councilmember Povolny moved adoption of the agenda. Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Mayor Krebsbach presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and approval. Councilmember Duggan moved approval of the consent calendar as presented and authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein, pulling items e) Approval of Time Change for August 5th City Council Meeting, g) Approval of Resolution 2014-43 Honoring Eunice Diedrich, and h) Approval of Personnel Action Report. a. Approval of July 1, 2014 City Council Minutes b. Acknowledgement of July 8, 2014 Parks & Rec Commission Minutes c. Acknowledgement of July 9, 2014 Airport Relations Commission Minutes d. Receipt of May 2014 Fire Department Synopsis Report e. Approval of Time Change for August 5t City Council Meeting due to Night to Unite f. Appfeval ef Reseltifien 2014 42 Revising Bttildiiig Peffflit Fee Sehedule (Withdrawn) g. Approval of Resolution 2014-43 Honoring Eunice Diedrich h. Approval of Personnel Action Report July 15, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page I page 3 i. Receipt of June Par 3 Report j. Approval of Claims List k. Approval of Contractors List 1. Approve Building Activity Report June 2014 Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PULLED CONSENT AGENDA ITEM E) APPROVAL OF TIME CHANGE FOR AUGUST 5TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING DUE TO NIGHT TO UNITE City Administrator Justin Miller explained that August 5, 2014 is National Night to Unite, which is an opportunity for neighborhoods to get together and invite police, fire and other city representatives to their gatherings. Historically, the City has moved the Council meeting time back to 8:00 p.m. to allow City Council and staff time at those parties if they so wish. Councilmember Petschel moved to approve changing the time of the August 5th city council meeting to 8:00 pm. Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 G) APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION 2014-43 HONORING EUNICE DIEDRICH Councilmember Petschel described Ms. Eunice Diedrich as a long-time resident of the city of Mendota Heights. She recently celebrated her 100th birthday. She has lived in her home, which she and her husband built, since 1932. She is a delightful woman and the City is proud to have her as a resident. Councilmember Petschel will have the resolution framed and present it to Ms. Diedrich. Councilmember Petschel then read the resolution. Councilmember Duggan moved to adopt RESOLUTION 2014-43 A RESOLUTION HONORING MENDOTA HEIGHTS RESIDENT EUNICE DIEDRICH ON HER 100TH BIRTHDAY. Councilmember Norton seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 H) APPROVAL OF PERSONNEL ACTION REPORT Councilmember Duggan asked staff to explain the revisions made to the Personnel Action Report. City Administrator Justin Miller replied that staff had an opportunity to interview Mr. Cliff Kirchner for the open Parks Maintenance position and is pleased to recommend him for hire in that position. This move would leave his current position as a mechanic open and staff requested authorization to begin the recruitment process to fill that position. July 15, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 2 page 4 Mayor Krebsbach also noted that effective July 1, 2014, Ms. Tamara Schutta successfully completed her one-year probationary period for her promotion to Assistant to the City Administrator/HR Coordinator. Mayor Krebsbach mentioned the Personnel Action Report from the July 1, 2014 Council meeting and requested an explanation of that as well. Administrator Miller described the domino effect that has occurred in the Public Works Department with the retirement of Mr. Tom Olund. Mr. Tom Olund, Superintendent Public Works — retired; Mr. Terry Blum was promoted to Superintendent Public Works; Mr. John Boland was promoted to Parks Superintendent; Mr. Cliff Kirchner, promoted to Parks Maintenance; there is now an open Mechanic position. Councilmember Duggan moved to approve the actions as outlined in the Personnel Action Report with congratulations to all, but particularly to the staff for all of the work they have done over the years to enable the promotion of internal candidates. Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS A) PLANNING CASE 2014-17, VARIANCE REQUESTS, 1704 VICKI LANE, NED RUKAVINA AND LESLIE PILGRIM, RESOLUTION 2014-39 (CONTINUED FROM JULY 1, 2014) Planner Nolan Wall recapped Planning Case 2014-17, variance requests from the front and side yard setback requirements to allow for construction of an addition to their single-family residential dwelling located at 1704 Vicki Lane. At the request of the applicant, this application was tabled at the July 1, 2014 Council meeting to consider new information. Planner Wall then shared the revised site plan received this day by staff and explained the changes as follows: The side yard encroachment would be decreased from 18 square feet to 6 square feet The front yard encroachment would be decreased from 204 square feet to 155 square feet The total encroachment for the proposed addition would be decreased from 222 square to 161 square feet However, it appears that the addition would still expand as much as 15 feet closer to the street. Planner Wall also noted that since these revisions were received this day, the dimensions have not been verified. The homeowner, Mr. Ned Rukavina, came forward and introduced his architect, Mr. Bill McCrum. He also noted that the neighbor, Mr. Joe Morgan, had also returned to this meeting. Mr. Morgan is supportive of the addition and variances. July 15, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 3 page 5 Mr. Rukavina then recapped the different iterations to his plans and the challenges of each and ended with the current version. Councilmembers asked Mr. Rukavina questions regarding the number of car stalls and the dimensions of the addition. Councilmember Duggan expressed his appreciation for the changes made and his support of this application. Mr. Bill McCrum, 1133 Palace in St. Paul, introduced himself and answered questions from the Councilmembers regarding the location of the house in relation to the cul-de-sac, the reasoning behind the proposed remodel, and the size of the proposed encroachments. Councilmember Povolny reiterated his acceptance of the side yard setback request but not to the front yard setback request; mainly because of the precedent it would set. In response, Mr. McCrum shared his opinion on the hardship and justification for the variance request. Mayor Krebsbach asked Planner Wall for the validity of the submitted sketch. Planner Wall replied that the sketch was just received; staff needs to utilize the right-of-way records they have and any information submitted that is different from that needs to be considered and vetted. Staff has not had the opportunity to do that. In regards to hardship, Mayor Krebsbach stated that she is pleased that the homeowners want to remodel, however, it is not the Council's responsibility to accommodate in terms of cost. She believes the lot presents a problem and asked for the opinion of City Attorney Tom Lehmann. Counsel Lehmann replied that by granting the variance it is unique and specific to this property; however, it applies then to any other applicant who comes before the City looking for a variance. That is why the law has three objectives that need to be met, with the second one being the most difficult to meet— the applicant is required to establish that there are practical difficulties with complying with the ordinance due to circumstances that are unique to the property that are not created by the applicant. Ultimately the granting of variances destroys the rule — if variances keep being granted then there is no rule. Mayor Krebsbach then asked how the house being positioned on the left side of the lot is a hardship for any kind of addition that would be on the left. Counsel Lehmann replied that the difficulty or hardship comes into play when an applicant looks to add on — it is the next addition that needs to have a hardship created. This is not the case because the applicant is creating the hardship because they want to fit something onto the property that will not fit, not that the land created the hardship, there are other practical ways to work around it. Councilmember Norton stated, based on the variance criteria required to be met, he does not believe the practical difficulties or hardship criteria has been met. Councilmember Duggan shared his opinion that the size and location of the home on a cul-de-sac does present a practical difficulty. He viewed the addition proposed as very reasonable in the neighborhood, very practical from the point of view of the light to the back, adding on to the right side of the home does not make sense and would destroy the property. From the point of view of practicalities, the shape of a lot on a cul-de-sac is a huge challenge. He would support the granting of the variances as presented. July 15, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 4 page 6 Councilmember Norton requested an articulation of the practical difficulties on the lot that would enable the Council to approve the variances. Mr. McCrum explained that the back yard is a pristine private space and is not huge. They were reluctant to push the building to the backyard. [At this point, Councilmember Povolny presented a sketch to Mr. McCrum that he drew of what could be done without involving a variance] Mr. McCrum designs with a `sense of space', spaces that can be lived in. The space has to do with the scale, the finishes, and in this case the backyard being treated like an additional living space. Councilmember Norton reiterated that he would like to hear more about the basis for a practical difficulty. The idea that the yard is a living yard does not play into the granting or denial of a variance. Mr. Rukavina stated that the practical difficulty is the original placement of the house and then trying to create an addition that is cost effective. Councilmember Norton inserted at this point that economic factors are not a practical difficulty. City Attorney Tom Lehmann confirmed. Councilmember Norton asked, given the change that has been presented to the application, the lack of vetting on the actual size of the encroachment does the Council have something upon which they can vote. Planner Nolan Wall replied that regardless of the new design, staff's recommendation still stands that the front yard encroachment is excessive and does not comply with the variance requirements. To the extent that the Council may want to consider approval then staff would want to verify what the measurements are. Mayor Krebsbach noted that she was inclined to support the application; however, as the two points have been made in terms of preserving the back yard and economic challenges — anyone can present that as a practical difficulty for why they would need to have a variance. She would not be in support of the variance requests. Councilmember Petschel stated that she would be comfortable with the small side yard encroachment but is not convinced of the practical difficulty for the front variance. She applauded the aesthetics they want to create but an aesthetic cannot drive a practical difficulty. She is not convinced of the practical difficulty and would not support this application. Ms. Leslie Pilgrim came forward and shared her reasons for needing her studio to be located as outlined in the application. As a professional artist she needs natural lighting and ventilation; this space would give her that. Also, the other remodeling plans would enable continued living in the home as they age. City Attorney Tom Lehmann stated that he believed that Council had enough information that if they wanted to vote on the application, they could do so. The issue as to the amount of the setback encroachment does not seem as important as to the idea that it is encroaching on the setback and the idea that there is no showing of a practical difficulty, which is required by law. Councilmember Norton asked if the Council could table this application again. Planner Wall replied that the 60 -day would run out on August 3, 2014 and the next Council meeting is scheduled for August 5, 2014. However, it could be extended by another 60 days with a notice to the applicant. Mayor Krebsbach asked if there was any interest by the Council to table this application and extend it another 60 days. July 15, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 5 page 7 Councilmember Duggan moved to table the variance requests for construction of the proposed addition within the front and side yard setbacks. Mayor Krebsbach seconded the motion. Councilmember Norton asked if the application were to be denied, would there be a time limitation on when the applicant could resubmit a revised application. He was informed that Council could waive that time limitation and the applicant fee for resubmittal. Ayes: 3 (Duggan, Norton, Krebsbach) Nays: 2 (Petschel, Povolny) B) PLANNING CASE 2014-13, VARIANCE AND WETLAND PERMIT REQUESTS, 677 4' AVENUE, KEN AND MARY KAY NOACK, RESOLUTION 2014-38 (CONTINUED FROM JULY 1, 2014) Planner Nolan Wall recapped Planning Case 2014-13, which includes a lot split, a lot width variance, a detached garage size variance, and a wetland permit. The subject parcel is located at 677 4th Avenue and owned by Ken and Mary Kay Noack. If approved, the applicant intends to construct a single-family home on the newly created parcel. The subject parcel was formally two parcels containing two single- family dwellings. The lots were combined in order to facilitate demolition of the home on the original lot in 2010. The reason for combining the lots at that time was based on the fact that the house was being demolished and the existing detached structure could not exist on a lot without a principal structure. The existing detached garage variance request is due to the fact that this building exceeds the newly adopted allowable square footage, which is based on lot size. Therefore, any configuration or scenario of subdividing this lot would require a variance for this structure to remain on either lot. In addition, the subject parcel is within 100 feet of a wetland or water resource related area. Therefore, if approvals for the subdivision and variance requests were granted, a wetland permit would be required before construction of the new dwelling is allowed. Planner Wall then explained the lot split request would create two lots from the original 1.19 acre subject parcel; Parcel A would be reduced to approximately 0.76 acres, and Parcel B would be approximately 0.43 acres. The subdivision ordinance allows a subdivision of parcels provided that the resulting lots are in compliance with the requirements of the applicable zoning district. Both parcels meet the R-1 district lot size and setback standards. Parcel B is proposed to be 70 feet wide, which does not meet the 100 foot standard for the R-1 district and requires a variance. In order to meet the setback requirement and to keep the existing garage a 70 foot wide lot is required and the non-compliance lot line is gone as they have extended that all the way to the north. Planner Wall explained the standards of review that would apply to a lot size variance request and noted how the application met or did not meet those standards of review. Specifically to the lot width variance request, Councilmembers asked questions regarding the setback from the existing garage to the proposed Lot B, this request being specifically made due to the owners July 15, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 6 page 8 wish to retain the detached garage, the history of the property and the buildings, and whether or not the existing garage could be grandfathered in since it existed before the new garage ordinance was adopted. Planner Wall reviewed the detached garage size variance request and the standards of review for consideration. The garage, based on the current lot configuration, is a legal non -conforming structure due to the subject parcel not exceeding 1.5 acres. Councilmember Duggan interjected that initially this was two lots owned by the same family. They decided to remove the home but had to combine the lots to prevent the garage from being on a lot without a principal structure. If they had known at the time that the garage ordinance was going to be changed, they probably would not have done that. Now they are looking to re -divide so that a family member could continue to live on the family property. Councilmember Duggan would be in support of this application. Mayor Krebsbach asked for confirmation that the proposed lot split is what the owners would prefer. Planner Wall confirmed and stated that it is based on their desire to have the existing garage remain on a parcel that includes the existing home; not on a newly created parcel. Mayor Krebsbach asked for confirmation that no flag lot would be created; which was confirmed by Planner Wall. Councilmember Povolny asked how many 70 foot lots currently exist in the area. Planner Wall indicated that there are 30 lots in the area that are under the required 100 feet. Of those 30, nine are 70 foot wide or less. Planner Wall then reviewed the third piece of this request, the wetland permit. Staff had no issue with allowing the wetland permit. In summary, staff recommended approval of Resolution 2014-38, which is actually a denial of the entire application request based on the Findings of Fact. An alternate resolution for approval of the entire application request was also provided to the Councilmembers, based on the Findings of Fact with Conditions. Councilmember Petschel made the observation that this has been a unique piece of property with some historical significance. She stated she feels the 70 foot lot width is within the character of the neighborhood. Mayor Krebsbach asked about the size of the building pad. Planner Wall replied that the plan indicated a 48 foot by 55 foot building pad. A single family dwelling with an attached garage could be located somewhere within that building pad and meet the setback requirements. Upon request by Councilmember Duggan, Mr. Ken Noack, 677 4th Avenue, explained that the practical difficulty with the variance is where the garage is located; it cannot be moved and it cannot be downsized. That played into the necessity for the 70 -foot lot width request. Councilmember Duggan moved to approve RESOLUTION 2014-38 (ALTERNATE) RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT SPLIT, LOT WIDTH VARIANCE, DETACHED GARAGE SIZE VARIANCE, AND WETLANDS PERMIT based on the following Findings of Fact and Conditions as stated in the resolution. July 15, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 7 page 9 Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion. Councilmember Petschel noted as a point of clarification as opposed to the previous request for a variance where the Planning Commission voted unanimously against granting the Rukavina variance, this was a split vote by the Planning Commission and there was some sympathy for the Noack request. Councilmember Duggan asked, in relation to the fourth condition, if a park dedication fee had been paid when the original farmhouse was built. City Administrator Justin Miller replied that a park dedication fee is due because they are creating a new lot. It is a statutory fee. Councilmember Duggan then asked if there should be some clarification in condition six that this is a pre-existing condition in relation to the variance. Planner Wall replied that the sentence states is it an `existing' condition. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Councilmember Duggan suggested that the City consider placing a plaque on the garage indicating its prior use as a place to store fire trucks. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS Assistant to the City Administrator Tamara Schutta made the following announcements: • The Mendota Heights Moms Club donated and planted a tree at Valley View Heights Park. It was planted in loving memory of Alex Reed, a brother of one of the moms. • The next Concert in the Park is taking place on Wednesday, July 16, at Market Square with a performance by Twin Cities Show Chorus. • The next field trip is on Thursday, July 24, going to the Edina Water Park. • Night to Unite is Tuesday, August 5. Neighborhoods have until July 25 to register their event. • The Primary Election is Tuesday, August 12. Residents can now absentee vote if they cannot make it to the polls on August 12. Applications to absentee vote can be found online or stop by City Hall. Voters have until July 22 to preregister to vote. • TK's 6th Annual Coffee event to benefit the West St. Paul K-9 Unit; silent auction and music; will be on Saturday, July 19. COUNCIL COMMENTS Mayor Krebsbach asked Sergeant Eric Petersen to come forward. She noted that on June 28 there was vandalism in a quadrant of the City. The Mayor and Council take acts of vandalism very seriously and they sympathize with the victims of those acts. Sergeant Petersen updated the Council on the status on the investigation. He also noted that there had been 15 separate reports in the area located north of Highway 110, west of 35E, south of Highway 13, and east of Lexington. A reward of $500 [which has now been increased to $1,000] has been offered by the Mendota Heights Community Criminal July 15, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 8 page 10 Apprehension Fund. Some of these have been classified as Biased Motivated crimes. Tips have been received and are being investigated. Councilmember Petschel noted that in the past, when a resident would hear the weather siren go off, they could turn on channel 101 and access the Dakota County Comcast Weather Scan. Comcast has cancelled that channel. She feels that this action by Comcast needs to be addressed. She asked Councilmember Duggan, as the City's cable liaison, to have the group bring some pressure to Comcast to reinstate channel 101. Mayor Krebsbach requested that staff provide an update as to where Comcast is with the cable franchise agreement. Councilmember Petschel reminded residents that on July 29 the MAC Noise Staff will be in the City Hall Chambers for a listening session, beginning at 7:00 p.m. She requested staff to run this information on the City's Facebook page and to post it in the local newspapers. She also expressed her appreciation to the Police Department for placing the speed cart on Decorah. The Airport Relations Commission had a productive visit to the tower to see air traffic control in action. Councilmember Duggan noted that the school district will provide for transportation for students from the Copperfield and Friendly Hills area to Sibley High School. He also asked if staff would consider sending a letter to those private homeowners on the bluff lines, in relation to all of the challenges, about the upcoming meetings and discussions by the DNR. City Administrator Justin Miller replied that the DNR has been in the process for the last couple of years of establishing new rules along the Mississippi Corridor. It was his understanding that the DNR is sending notices out to everybody along the bluff line. He agreed to put the dates and locations on the City's website. Mayor Krebsbach stated that she was privileged to welcome the kids to the 3 -day Safety Camp at Kaposia Park. There were approximately 40-50 kids there from Mendota Heights. There were also kids there from West St. Paul and South St. Paul. ADJOURN Councilmember Duggan moved to adjourn. Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 July 15, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 9 Mayor Krebsbach adjourned the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Sandra Krebsbach Mayor ATTEST: Lorri Smith City Clerk page 11 July 15, 2014 Mendota Heights City Council Page 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 page 12 Sb. 7 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSON MINUTES July 22, 2014 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 22, 2014, in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M. The following Commissioners were present: Chair Litton Field, Jr., Commissioners Michael Noonan, Doug Hennes, Robin Hennessy, Mary Magnuson, and Ansis Viksnins. Those absent: Commissioner Howard Roston. Others present were City Planner Nolan Wall and Public Works Director/City Engineer John Mazzitello. Approval ofAzenda The agenda was approved as submitted. Approval of June 24, 2014 Minutes COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JUNE 24, 2014, AS PRESENTED. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 Hearin -s PLANNING CASE 92014-18 Elite Motor Sports Conditional Use Permit Chair Litton Field noted that this planning case was noticed and asked if there was anyone in the audience who came to speak about it during the public hearing. Seeing no one coming forward, Chair Field explained that the case was cancelled because the application was withdrawn. PLANNING CASE 92014-19 Mark Gergen, on behalf of Cory Morrisette and Gail Darling, 641 Callahan Place Subdivision Request Planner Nolan Wall explained that the applicant requested a lot split for the subject parcel located at 641 Callahan Place. The subject parcel is approximately 1.0 acre or 43,510 square feet and owned by Cory Morrisette and Gail Darling. It is zoned R-1 and guided for low density residential July 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting — DRAFT Page I 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 page 13 development on the Comprehensive Plan. The applicant has a purchase offer on the parcel contingent upon the approval of this subdivision. If approved, the applicant intends to demolish the existing home and construct two new single family homes. Planner Wall shared a copy of the submitted survey. The subdivision would create two lots, both in excess of the 15,000 square foot minimum lot size requirement for the R-1 district. Parcel A would be 21,679 square feet and parcel B would be 21,722 square feet; both parcels would have 100 foot of frontage on Callahan Place, would be compliant with the R-1 lot standards, and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This request only considered the lot split and was not a site plan specific to any future development; although the setbacks were noted. Any drainage and setback issues would be addressed by staff once final plans are submitted as part of the building permit application. Staff recommended approval of the subdivision request for this lot split with conditions. Staff also recommended an additional condition be added requiring a five foot drainage and utility easement along the rear property boundary line. Based on the findings of fact, the subdivision would be consistent with the City Code and Comprehensive Plan. Commissioner Magnuson asked for confirmation that the 100 foot frontage on Callahan Place would be consistent with at least some of the lots in the area. Planner Wall confirmed. Chair Field opened the public hearing. Mr. Mark Gergen, 18004 Jacquard Path, Lakeville, came forward to answer questions from the Commission. There were no questions from the Commission. Mr. Jerome Schiltgen, 646 Callahan Place, asked what kind of structures are planned to be put up and how they would change how the neighborhood looks. He also wondered if they would be spaced far enough apart. Chair Field replied that due to the nature of the application, a lot split request only and not a site plan or building application, the Commission would be unable to answer his questions. Mr. Mark Bade, 632 Marie Avenue, also owns a property at 636 Marie Avenue that he is developing. He stated that his only concern is that there are some drainage issues in the back of these lots and would like them to be addressed. Chair Field replied that these issues would be addressed in the building permit phase of the application. Mr. Bade suggested that the owners review the drainage issue before the lot is split to make sure they could correct that problem. Mr. Mark Gergen stated that he would work with staff on addressing the drainage issue. COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSENT: 1 July 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting — DRAFT Page 2 page 14 93 COMMISSIONER NOONAN MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO 94 RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLANNING CASE 2014-19, SUBDIVISION REQUEST 95 BASED ON THE FINDING OF FACT THAT THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS 96 CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY CODE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND WITH THE 97 FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 98 1. The existing single family dwelling is demolished prior to the subdivision being recorded by 99 Dakota County. 100 2. Park dedication fee in the amount of $2,700, in lieu of land, is collected after City Council 101 approval and before being recorded by Dakota County or issuance of any additional permits 102 by the City. 103 3. Street reconstruction assessment fee, as part of Callahan Place Improvement 2008-04, is 104 collected after City Council approval and before being recorded by Dakota County or issuance 105 of any additional permits by the City. 106 4. Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a 107 building permit. 108 5. The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and a dimensioned site plan with associated 109 easements, subject to review and approval by the City Engineering Department as part of any 110 building permit application. 111 6. Any land disturbance activities must be in compliance with the City's Land Disturbance 112 Guidance document. 113 AND WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITION REQUIRING A FIVE FOOT DRAINAGE AND 114 UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG THE REAR PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINE 115 AYES: 6 116 NAYS: 0 117 ABSENT:1 118 119 Chair Field advised the City Council would consider this application at its August 5, 2014 meeting, 120 which begins at 8:00 p.m. 121 122 Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Rulemakinz 123 124 Chair Litton Field reminded the Commission that this subject was briefly discussed at the June 24, 125 2014 Planning Commission Meeting. Since that time, Planner Nolan Wall had prepared an outline 126 of the issues that would apply to the City of Mendota Heights. Staff requested input and questions 127 from the Commission on the proposed rules. The City Council would be requested to provide 128 similar input at their August 5, 2014 meeting; after which staff would combine the feedback 129 received with their own and submit them to the Department of Natural Resources by August 15, 130 2014. 131 132 Planner Nolan Wall provided background on the proposed draft rules and indicated the areas that 133 would affect the City of Mendota Heights specifically. He also explained that once adopted, the 134 amended rules would require the City to amend the existing Critical Area Overlay District 135 standards. In addition, the MRCCA section of the Comprehensive Plan would have to be amended. 136 137 Commissioners asked questions and provided comments regarding the roles and responsibilities 138 of the different entities involved, how many homes are in the critical area and would be affected July 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting — DRAFT Page 3 page 15 139 by the changing rules, height limits associated with the difference categories, the possibility of 140 contracting the scope of the critical area, assuming this is adopted when would the City of Mendota 141 Heights be required to amend its Comprehensive Plan, and reference to the flexibility provision. 142 143 Verbal Review 144 145 Planner Wall gave the following verbal review: 146 147 PLANNING CASE 92014-13 148 Ken and Mary Kay Noack, 677 — 4th Avenue 149 Lot Split, Lot Width and Detached Garage Size Variance, and Wetland Permit Requests 150 Approved by the City Council 151 152 PLANNING CASE 92014-17 153 Ned Rukavina and Leslie Pilgrim, 1704 Vicki Lane 154 Front and Side Yard Setback Variances 155 • Tabled by the City Council at the July I and July 15 City Council Meetings 156 • Application deadline has been extended to allow for additional review and discussion at 157 next months' City Council meeting 158 159 StaffAnnouncements 160 161 • Critical Area Public Information Meeting, July 24, 2014 at 6:30 p.m. in Hastings, MN 162 • Two industrial developments on Pilot Knob Road and on Lemay Avenue are both 163 progressing nicely now that the weather is cooperating 164 • Next Planning Commission Meeting, August 26, 2014 165 166 Adjournment 167 168 COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO 169 ADJOURN THE MEETING AT 8:02 P.M. 170 AYES:6 171 NAYS: 0 172 ABSENT:I July 22, 2014 Mendota Heights Planning Commission Meeting — DRAFT Page 4 page 16 Sc. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota•heights.com CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Mike Aschenbrener, Chief of Police / Emergency Manager SUBJECT: Out of State Travel for Officers Lambert and Willson BACKGROUND Officer Bobby Lambert and Officer Chad Willson are members of the Dakota County Mutual Aid Assistance Group (MAAG) or SWAT team. The members train as a group monthly. Annually they train at an Army base specifically equipped to drill police officers. This year's training session is scheduled for Camp McCoy in Wisconsin. Annually we have sent officers to this training rotating between Camp Ripley in Little Falls, Camp Dodge in Iowa and Fort McCoy in Wisconsin. For the third year in a row the training is set for Fort McCoy from September 29 to October 3, 2014. The primary reason that the team will be training in Wisconsin is cost savings. The officers stay on the base. The room and two meals per day are covered by our MAAG dues. We are responsible for the cost of transportation (Officer Willson's take home investigations unit), one meal per day and 500 rounds of ammunition. The officers will follow the out of state travel policy of the city. In 2013 the expense not including the vehicle depreciation was less than $300. The expenses are budgeted. They will be training with members of the DC MAAG team. The Washington County Team will cover the county while our members are training. We will cover their county when they attend the training. RECOMMENDATION: If the Council so desires to implement the recommendation pass a motion authorizing Officers Lambert and Willson to attend a conference in Wisconsin. page 17 Sd. nol V1CWW CUW i mmma �51.457.1i96D�1' 1 651.s5�.$5iax WWW'M ad 2-hL;ighL5z= CITY OF of MENDOTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator FROM: Tamara Schutta, Assistant to the City Administrator/HR Coordinator SUBJECT: Floating Holiday Designation BACKGROUND Non-union staff have one floating holiday to use this year. The City Council, upon recommendation of the City Administrator, may designate the floating holiday as a fixed date when City offices will be closed. The Christmas holiday is Thursday, December 25, 2014. Traditionally several employees have taken a vacation day for Christmas Eve day. Once again, staff anticipates a number of employees will be requesting Wednesday, December 24, 2014, leaving a very limited number of non-union employees covering the responsibilities of city hall. In addition, past history has shown that there is very little activity at city hall from the public on Christmas Eve and most expect the building to be closed in the first place. The City Council may want to consider designating the floating holiday for Wednesday, December 24, 2014. As provided for in the Mendota Heights Personnel Code, staff recommends that the City Council designate Wednesday, December 24, 2014 as a floating holiday for non-union employees. BUDGET IMPACT Not applicable RECOMMENDATION If the city council agrees with staff recommendation, a motion should be made to designate Wednesday, December 24, 2014 as a floating holiday for non-union staff. A simple majority vote is all that is needed on this issue. page 18 Se. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com MiCITY O MENDDTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Dave Dreelan, Assistant Fire Chief SUBJECT: June 2014 Fire Synopsis Fire Calls The department responded to 27 calls for the month. The majority of calls were classified as false alarms or as good intent calls. Eight of the calls were residential in nature, of the other 19 calls, four were commercial responses, four were EMS calls, three calls were for car fires, five were utility checks, and three were injury accidents. Monthly and Squad and Department Training The monthly department and squad trainings were held at the vacant home on Wagon Wheel Trail. All of the trainings incorporated basic fire ground skills such as interior fire attack, ventilation, and search and rescue. The home has proved to have excellent hands-on opportunities for the firefighters. Additional trainings are scheduled through the month of July. page 19 27 MISC. TOTALS TO DATE Grass/Brush/No Value Contract TOTAL MONTHLY FIRE LOSSES MEDICAL Assist 2 $0 $0 $0 Extrication 1 HAZARDOUS SITUATION FIRE LOSS TOTALS MENDOTA HEIGHTS $0 $49,000 $36,500 Spills/Leaks MENDOTA HEIGHTS FIRE DEPARTMENT AGENCY THIS MONTH TO Dj JUNE 2014 MONTHLY REPORT FIRE CALLS NO. 14118 - 14144 NUMBER OF CALLS ALL FIRES, ALL AREAS (MONTH) $0 $610,500 FIRE ALARMS DISPATCHED: NUMBER STRUCTURE CONTENTS MILW. RR $0 ACTUAL FIRES 2 MEND. HTS. ONLY STRUCT/CONTENTS Structure - MH Commercial FALSE ALARM OTHERS: Structure - MH Residential 8 Residential Malfunction Structure - Contract Areas MEND. HTS. ONLY MISCELLANEOUS $36,500 Vehicle - MH 6 9 Vehicle - Contract Areas Unintentional - Commercial 1 Grass/Brush/No Value MH $561,500 Unintentional - Residential page 19 27 MISC. TOTALS TO DATE Grass/Brush/No Value Contract TOTAL MONTHLY FIRE LOSSES MEDICAL Assist 2 $0 $0 $0 Extrication 1 HAZARDOUS SITUATION FIRE LOSS TOTALS MENDOTA HEIGHTS $0 $49,000 $36,500 Spills/Leaks 1 AGENCY THIS MONTH TO Dj Steam Mistaken for Smoke Arcing/Shorting 3 ALL FIRES, ALL AREAS (MONTH) $0 $610,500 Chemical MUTUAL AID MILW. RR $0 Power Line Down 2 MEND. HTS. ONLY STRUCT/CONTENTS $525,000 FALSE ALARM OTHERS: 4 8 Residential Malfunction 1 MEND. HTS. ONLY MISCELLANEOUS $36,500 Commercial Malfunction 6 9 INSPECTIONS Unintentional - Commercial 1 MEND. HTS. TOTAL LOSS TO DATE $561,500 Unintentional - Residential 1 Criminal BILLING FOR SERVICES 0 GOOD INTENT Smoke Scare 2 AGENCY THIS MONTH TO Dj Steam Mistaken for Smoke TOTALS: $0 $0 Other 13 22 MN/DOT $0 MUTUAL AID MILW. RR $0 MENDOTA 1 CNR RR $0 TOTAL CALLS 27 FIRE MARSHAL'S TIME FOR MONTH OTHERS: 4 8 $0 LOCATION OF FIRE ALARMS: TO DATE LAST YEAR TOTALS 1051.5 6416.75 4721.5 REMARKS: SEE OTHER SIDE FOR SYNOPSIS TOTALS: $0 $0 MENDOTA HEIGHTS 22 123 83 MENDOTA 1 4 2 FIRE MARSHAL'S TIME FOR MONTH SUNFISH LAKE 4 8 5 LILYDALE 0 6 9 INSPECTIONS 37 OTHER 0 3 5 INVESTIGATIONS 0 TOTAL 27 144 104 RE -INSPECTION 4.5 WORK PERFORMED HOURS TO DATE LAST YEAR MEETINGS 6 FIRE CALLS 482 2613.5 1749 MEETINGS 37 206.5 240 ADMINISTRATION 13.5 DRILLS 162 926.5 923.5 WEEKLY CLEAN-UP 35.5 216 227 SPECIAL PROJECTS 1 SPECIAL ACTIVITY 273 2143.25 1227 ADMINISTATIVE 0 0 0 TOTAL 62 FIRE MARSHAL 62 311 355 TOTALS 1051.5 6416.75 4721.5 REMARKS: SEE OTHER SIDE FOR SYNOPSIS page 20 5f. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Hr y� L7, , i De to 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota•heights.com mCITY OF MENDDTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Sue Donovan, IT Manager SUBJECT: Computer Network Infrastructure Purchase BACKGROUND: The life cycle of network switches as dictated by the manufacturer, Cisco Systems, Inc. is five years. In March of 2015 our network equipment will have reached its life cycle. Once equipment has reached its life cycle, it is no longer under warranty. In order to spread the 2015 capital expenditure for network infrastructure equipment, $14,000 was budgeted in the 2014 budget under Administration Capital. From this line item, I propose purchasing two switches with the funds, as well as pay for the LOGIS configuration fee and an additional 24 port patch panel. (Per the NDC4 agreement, changes to the core router must be done by either LOGIS or OET group.) The decommissioned switches will be used for expanding network capacity. Please see attached purchase order for additional cost information. BUDGETIMPACT: I recommend that the city purchase two Cisco Catalyst 3850 switches for the amount of $13,250.00 and the 24 port patch panel for $500, for a total of 13,750.00. $15,000 was allocated in the approved 2014 budget. ACTION REQUIRED: If the City Council desires to implement the recommendation, pass a motion authorizing the City Administrator to sign the purchase order. page 21 Sg. 1101 Vi4�orcd C17TVB I MendpR� hlglghk5. r'.�+ ;:, �51.457.1�6D�1' 1 6s1.a5�.95iax wynY�ne�Idata�reigNts,rnm CITY OF N4ENaOTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Tamara Schutta, Assistant to the City Administrator/HR Coordinator SUBJECT: Personnel Action Items Item 1: Authorize Appointment of Police Officer Several months ago, staff began the recruitment process to fill Police Officer vacancies. At a recent meeting, the City Council authorized staff to begin the final phases of the process which included a thorough background investigation, psychological evaluation and a physical examination including a drug test. We are happy to report that we have completed a thorough background investigation on Police Officer Candidate Nicholas Gorgos. Mr. Gorgos is scheduled to complete his psychological evaluation and physical examination by Monday, August 4, 2014. It is our pleasure to recommend to you that the city council appoint Nicholas Gorgos as a Police Officer for the City of Mendota Heights. Mr. Gorgos, originally from St. Paul, MN, has seven years of patrol, narcotics, SWAT and detective experience with the Savannah Chatham Metropolitan Police Department. He earned a Bachelor's degree majoring in Criminal Justice and graduated Magna Cum Laude from Armstrong Atlantic State University. Throughout the interview process, Mr. Gorgos demonstrated a high level of professionalism. Mr. Nicholas Gorgos will be a great addition to the Mendota Heights Police Department. A conditional job offer was made contingent upon receipt of results of a background check, pre- employment drug test and city council approval. City staff recommends that city council approve the appointment of Nicholas Gorgos as a Police Officer. Date of employment will be based upon final results of his physical examination and psychological evaluation. Wages will be set in accordance with the 2014 — 2015 Law Enforcement Labor Services, Inc. Labor Agreement. Mr. Nicholas Gorgos will be formally introduced to the city council at the August 19, 2014 meeting. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mendota Heights City Council approves the action requested above for item 1. page 22 5h. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota H& = , >j118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com , T mCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Tamara Schutta Assistant to the City Administrator/HR Coordinator SUBJECT: Employee Political Activity Policy BACKGROUND Attached is a new Employee Political Activity Policy for the Mendota Heights Personnel Code. The intent of this policy is prevent and avoid the appearance of impropriety on the part of any city employee. All city employees have a right to be actively involved in political campaigns, express their opinion on political subjects and candidates, and vote as they choose. This policy addresses political activity restrictions employee will have while at work, when representing the City and when in conflict with an employee's official duties. This policy also addresses Minnesota State Statute 412.02 that prohibits full-time employees serving as the mayor or as a city council member for the City of Mendota Heights. It has been reviewed by the city's labor attorney and has also been distributed to all city employees and firefighters for their review and comment. Staff is recommending the city council adopt Section 32a. Employee Political Activity policy. Attachment(s): 1. Draft copy of Section 32a — Employee Political Activity Policy BUDGET IMPACT Not applicable. RECOMMENDATION If the city council agrees with the proposed changes, a motion should be made to adopt Section 32a — Employee Political Activity Policy, of the Mendota Heights Personnel Code. Approval of this item requires a simple majority vote of the City Council. page 23 1 IFT.,TM Section 32a. Employee Political Activity Policy Cit,} employees have a right to be actively involved in political campaigns, express their opinions on political subjects and candidates, and vote as they choose. These rights, however, are restricted while at work, when representing the City, and when in conflict with an employee's official duties. The term "employee" includes the City's paid -on-call firefighters for purposes of this policy. The purpose of this policy, i�prevent and avoid the appearance of impropriety on the part of any City employee. City employees are neither appointed to, nor retained in, the City's service on the basis of their political affiliations or activities. Cita} employees may not, at any time, use their official authority or influence to compel a person to: • Apply for membership in or become a member of any political organization, or • Pay or promise to pay political contribution, or • Take part in political activity. An employ, emy not serve as the mayor or as a city council member for the City of Mendota Heights while also working as a full-time employee of the City. In addition, full-time and part- time employees may not hold an appointed or elected public office that imposes duties and obligations that are incompatible with city employ Resources: MN Statute § 211B.09 MN Statute § 211B.19 MN Statute § 412.02 page 24 Si. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.rnendota-heights.com MCITY OF i MENDDTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: John R. Mazzitello, PE, PMP, MBA Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Purchase of a New Pickup Truck for Public Works (Streets Division) BACKGROUND On July 10th, one of the pick-up trucks assigned to the Public Works Department was in a traffic accident and damaged beyond repair. The driver of the Public Works vehicle was not at fault and staff is currently working with our insurance company as well as the insurance company of the other party in the accident to settle the insurance claim as quickly as possible. Since the vehicle involved in the accident is considered a total loss, the Public Works Department would like to purchase a new pickup truck to replace it. The damaged vehicle, a 1999 Chevy full -ton pick-up, was on the prioritized list for replacement. Staff proposed replacement of this truck in the 2014 budget workshop session (Streets Department), and estimated the cost to be $60,000.00. The quotes received to replace the truck are (prices listed are dealer price. Tax and license not calculated): - State Contract (2015 model) - $36,200.00 — 10-12 week delivery - Inver Grove Ford (unsold 2014 3/4 -ton model) - $39,000.00 — 1-2 week delivery The equipment and accessories on the damaged vehicle are also not salvageable. Staff has obtained quotes to outfit the new vehicle with necessary equipment and accessories (plow & rack, light bar, mud flaps, seat covers, etc.), and Staff estimates this will cost $10,725.00. BUDGETIMPACT This purchase would total $49,725.00 plus tax and license fees. The anticipated insurance settlement amount received should be between $7,200.00 and $7,500.00 and will be applied against this purchase. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council authorize a purchase order to be made to Inver Grove Ford for $39,000.00 plus tax and license fees. This is to expedite delivery of a new vehicle, and to avoid up to a three-month waiting period. In addition Staff recommends that the City Council authorize purchase orders made out to various vendors in the amount of $10,725.00 to cover equipment and accessories. If the City Council concurs with the recommendation, they should pass a motion approving the recommended action by a simple majority vote. page 25 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, M 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-heights.com if CITY OF m i ME MENDDTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: John R. Mazzitello, PE, PMP, MBA Public Works Director/City Engineer SUBJECT: Approval of the Third Amendment to the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization Joint Powers Agreement BACKGROUND Since the establishment of Watershed Management Districts and Organizations, the City of Mendota Heights has been members of two different Watershed Management Organizations; the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization (LMRWMO) and the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization (GCLWMO). At the end of 2013, the GCLWMO voted to disband and reorganize without the portion of Mendota Heights originally contained within its boundaries. This action was initiated at the request of the City of Mendota Heights in order to provide some efficiency in surface water management within the City. The attached amendment to the LMRWMO Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) redefines the boundary of the LMRWMO to include the area of Mendota Heights that used to belong to the GCLWMO. The City is required to belong to a watershed organization of some type, and this amendment would place the entirety of Mendota Heights within the LMRWMO, with the exception of Fort Snelling State Park which is part of the Lower Minnesota River Watershed Management District. There is a map included with the JPA amendment depicting the new LMRWMO boundary. BUDGET IMPACT None. The anticipated increase in membership dues to the LMRWMO are anticipated to be less than or equal to the dues Mendota Heights used to pay to the GCLWMO. Membership dues are budgeted expenses and are paid out of the Storm Sewer Utility Fund. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached Third Amendment to Revised and Restated Joint Powers Agreement Establishing a Watershed Management Organization for the Lower Mississippi River Watershed. This approval requires a simple majority vote. page 26 THIRD AMENDMENT TO REVISED AND RESTATED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING A WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION FOR THE LOWER MISSISSIPPI RIVER WATERSHED THE PARTIES TO THIS AGREEMENT are members of the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization and have land that drains surface water into the Mississippi River. This Agreement amends the Revised and Restated Joint Powers Agreement between the members. This Agreement is made pursuant to the authority conferred upon the parties by Minn. Stat. §§ 471.59 and 103B.201 - 103B.255. 1. EXISTING AGREEMENT. The existing Revised and Restated Joint Powers Agreement, as previously amended by a First and Second Amendment for the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization, shall remain in full force and effect, except as specifically amended by this Agreement. 2. AMENDMENT. Section 1 of the Revised and Restated Joint Powers Agreement is amended to read: SECTION 1. NAME AND LEGAL BOUNDARY. The parties hereby establish the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization, hereinafter referred to as the "WMO." The "Revised Legal Boundary Map of the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization" is attached hereto as Exhibit A. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned governmental units, by action of their governing bodies, have caused this Agreement to be executed in accordance with the authority of Minn. Stat. § 471.59. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank.] 177167v1 Approved by the City Council CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS -20 BY: Attest: 177167v1 page 27 4 Wre 1 U.9 C _ US-12 WUS-12 E I-94 W/.84 E - - US-t0 E 194 W 1-94 E page,2,4 t 1N, EXHIBIT A SSTOPAUL Revised Legal Boundary Map of the Lower Mississippi River Watershed Management Organization h>rl f. Paul I ----------,--- L------------------- a MY r LILYDALE' I 1 Ic I I i ( 2- �� �� = SOUTH WEST ST PAUL % ST PAUL MENDOTA --�---=----I MENDOTA SUNFISHQ N HEIGHTS LAKE II Z = I I I th gt W V 7 I I y I � i I I m I MN s I s Hv $5 E 80111'StE I Inver Hills 2' o--ty _ j � collage y INVER GROVE Eagan 5= _ HEIGHTS v�y 09 "0111 _ N % i 1 i I / I Miles 0 0.5 1 2 3 iflA i-llff F,nE I�gt�a Newport i Sources: Esri, HERE, DeLorme, USGS,,Intermap, increment P Corp NRCAN, Esri Japan,.METI, Esri China (Hong Kong), Esri (Thailand), TomTom, Mapmylndia, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community jay CITY OFK8ENDOTAHEIGHTS TRE&SURER�REp��RTJUNE 2Q14 \W»`' Rates Money Market June Bank 0.0396 GYr. Tr. 1.62% BALANCE COLLATERAL American Bank Checking Account .02% $28,455.83 Savings Account .0296 $640.36 $29,096.19 CoUetera|-Bondo $1.100.000.00 Gov't. Guar. $260.000.00 Investments Cost PV Saving Cert 7/3EV14@O.15Y6Cherokee $13.952.59 $13.952.59 FHLB 1.0OY6O3/27/2O $350.000.00 $360.465.50 FHLNlC1.25%O3/2G/21 $300.000.00 $300.069.00 FHLB 1.26Y613/14/22 $510.000.00 $510.88740 FHLB 1.00Y612/28/22 $700.000.00 $699.055.00 FHLB 1.2596U2/22/23 $260.000.00 $260.036.40 FHLB 1.2696O3/27/23 $255.000.00 $254.036.25 FHLB 1.12596O8/2O/23 $1.750.000.00 $1.752.817.50 FHLB 2.00Y64/30/24 $185.000.00 $184.806.40 Goldman Sachs Bank 1.5096 13/08/14 $245.000.00 $245.803.60 8ECapital Financial Inc 2.O69611/4/1G $245.000.00 $249.057.20 American Express Cent Bank 2.O59612/1/1S $245.000.00 $248.897.95 GE Capital Retail Bank 2.00% 7/6/18 $200.000.00 $200.832.00 Sallie Mae Bank 2.O5OY611/2O/18 $245.000.00 $245.683.55 BMW Bank 2.0O9612/11/18 $245.000.00 $245.945.70 Fidelity Institutional Government Portfolio (Piper) $1.114.832.66 $1.114.83286 Gov'LSecurities Fund 2896Sold G/4 $433.187.00 $1.031.000.00 K8YNk1Fd(VVF) $305.294.01 TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE 6/30/14 $7.631.362.45 Funds Available 1/1/2O14 $11.334.237.68 Rates Money Market June Bank 0.0396 GYr. Tr. 1.62% page 30 51. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota HeiLgHts, M14 5 118 651.452.1850 phone 1651.452.8940 fax www.mandnta-hainhts.com MENOOTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director SUBJECT: Claims List Summary SiLynificant Claims Metro Council Environmental Services — Sewer & SAC Charges $ 137,872.89 Xcel Energy — Utilities $ 9,085.40 Astech — Crack Sealing Streets $ 67,728.40 Gartzke Construction — Storm Sewer Repairs $ 10,039.00 GM Contracting — Force Main Project $ 53,843.26 ISD 197 — Sibley Park Maintenance Agreement $ 20,730.54 KDV — 2013 Fire Relief Audit $ 4,500.00 Mansfield Oil Company — Fuel $ 16,594.07 McNamara Contracting — Victoria Rd/Rolling Green Project $ 168,892.90 North Star Pump Service — Lift Station Repairs $ 7,050.50 US Bank — June Credit Card Billing $ 6,631.97 Manual Checks Total $ 182,784.72 System Checks Total $ 424,965.41 Total for the list of claims for the August 5, 2014 city council meeting $ 607,750.13 RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the list of claims for August 5, 2014. page 31 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 07/31/142:14 PM Page 1 Claims List MANUALCHECKS 07/31/14 MAN Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name HENNEPIN COUNTY WARRANTS G 01-2030 WARRANT MONEY - #14416607 PARK CELEBRATION SUPPLIES $78.00 Search Name HENNEPIN COUNTY WARRANTS E 45-4330-490-45 $78.00 Search Name HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES $103.09 E 01-4490-110-10 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG EQUIPMENT MAINT. - CITY HALL Spec Fds $9.98 E 45-4335-045-45 BLDG MAINTENANCE - PAR3 Golf Course $13.54 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $104.34 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation -$104.34 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $97.40 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $69.88 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG SUPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds $14.94 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $62.50 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG REPAIR SUPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds $24.80 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $23.47 G 01-2035 OPERATING SUPPLIES - FIRE DEPT E 45-4490-045-45 -$1.02 Search Name HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES $70.00 $315.49 Search Name I C M A RETIREMENT 457 Golf Course $95.98 G 01-2072 07/18/2014 PAYROLL PLAYGROUNDS SUPPLIES $483.99 G 01-2073 07/18/2014 PAYROLL E 45-4300-045-45 $192.00 Search Name I C M A RETIREMENT 457 $21.06 $675.99 Search Name MENDOTA HEIGHTS GENERAL ACCT. Parks & Recreation $55.89 G 01-1019 REPLENISH POLICE PETTY CASH $60.40 G 01-1021 REPLENISH PETTY CASH $479.09 Search Name MENDOTA HEIGHTS GENERAL ACCT. $539.49 Search Name METRO COUNCIL ENVIRONMENT SVC R 15-3615 JUNE 2014 SAC -$521.85 R 15-3320 JUNE 2014 SAC $52,185.00 E 15-4449-060-60 AUG 2014 SEWER SERVICE Utility Enterprise $86,209.74 Search Name METRO COUNCIL ENVIRONMENT SVC $137,872.89 Search Name NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION G 01-2072 07/18/2014 PAYROLL $50.00 Search Name NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION $50.00 Search Name SAM S CLUB E 01-4435-200-70 PARK CELEBRATION SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $146.44 E 45-4330-490-45 EQUIPMENT REPAIRS - PAR3 Golf Course $103.09 E 01-4490-110-10 MEETING SUPPLIES Administration $65.40 E 45-4310-210-45 CONCESSIONS - PAR3 Golf Course $66.85 E 45-4334-045-45 COURSE BEAUTIFICATION - PAR3 Golf Course $51.38 E 45-4310-210-45 CONCESSIONS - PAR3 Golf Course $205.11 E 01-4435-200-70 PARK CELEBRATION SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $319.98 E 01-4305-020-20 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PD Police $150.85 E 45-4335-045-45 BLDG EQUIPMENT - PAR3 Golf Course $182.09 E 45-4310-210-45 CONCESSIONS - PAR3 Golf Course $192.60 E 45-4490-045-45 LEAGUE PRIZES - PAR3 Golf Course $70.00 E 45-4334-045-45 COURSE BEAUTIFICATION - PAR3 Golf Course $95.98 E 01-4435-200-70 PLAYGROUNDS SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $21.67 E 45-4300-045-45 OFFICE SUPPLIES - PAR3 Golf Course $21.06 E 01-4435-200-70 PLAYGROUNDS SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $55.89 page 32 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 07/31/14 2:14 PM Page 2 Claims List MANUALCHECKS 07/31/14 MAN Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 45-4310-205-45 BEVERAGES -PAR3 Golf Course $111.00 E 45-4310-210-45 CONCESSIONS - PAR3 Golf Course $271.18 Search Name SAM S CLUB $2,130.57 Search Name SW/WC SERVICE COOPERATIVES E 01-4131-050-50 AUG 2014 HEALTH PREMIUM E 01-4131-070-70 AUG 2014 HEALTH PREMIUM E 01-4131-020-20 AUG 2014 HEALTH PREMIUM E 05-4131-105-15 AUG 2014 HEALTH PREMIUM G 01-2071 AUG 2014 HEALTH PREMIUM G 01-1145 AUG 2014 HEALTH PREMIUM G 01-2074 AUG 2014 HEALTH PREMIUM E 01-4131-110-10 AUG 2014 HEALTH PREMIUM Search Name SW/WC SERVICE COOPERATIVES Search Name THOMPSON, KYIA G 01-2030 WARRANT REFUND Search Name THOMPSON, KYIA Search Name UNITED WAY OF ST. PAUL G 01-2070 07/18/2014 PAYROLL Search Name UNITED WAY OF ST. PAUL Search Name XCEL ENERGY E 01-4212-310-70 E 01-4211-420-50 E 08-4211-000-00 E 15-4211-310-60 E 28-4211-000-00 E 01-4212-315-30 E 08-4212-000-00 E 01-4212-320-70 E 15-4212-310-60 E 15-4211-400-60 E 01-4211-315-30 E 01-4211-320-70 E 01-4212-320-70 E 45-4211-047-45 E 45-4212-046-45 E 45-4211-046-45 E 01-4211-310-70 E 01-4211-310-50 E 01-4211-300-50 E 01-4212-310-50 E 15-4212-400-60 E 01-4211-320-70 Search Name XCEL ENERGY JUNE 2014 GAS UTILITIES JUNE 2014 EL. UTILITIES JUNE 2014 EL. UTILITIES JUNE 2014 EL. UTILITIES JUNE 2014 EL. UTILITIES JUNE 2014 GAS UTILITIES JUNE 2014 GAS UTILITIES JUNE 2014 GAS UTILITIES JUNE 2014 GAS UTILITIES JUNE 2014 EL. UTILITIES JUNE 2014 EL. UTILITIES JUNE 2014 UTILITIES JUNE 2014 UTILITIES JUNE 2014 UTILITIES JUNE 2014 UTILITIES JUNE 2014 UTILITIES JUNE 2014 EL. UTILITIES JUNE 2014 EL. UTILITIES JUNE 2014 GAS UTILITIES JUNE 2014 GAS UTILITIES JUNE 2014 GAS UTILITIES JUNE 2014 EL. UTILITIES Road & Bridges Parks & Recreation Police Engineering Enterprise Administration Parks & Recreation Road & Bridges Spec Fds Utility Enterprise Spec Fds Fire Spec Fds Parks & Recreation Utility Enterprise Utility Enterprise Fire Parks & Recreation Parks & Recreation Golf Course Golf Course Golf Course Parks & Recreation Road & Bridges Road & Bridges Road & Bridges Utility Enterprise Parks & Recreation $3,013.00 $1,364.50 $14,744.50 $4,268.50 $5,901.00 -$2,157.00 $1,364.50 13.488.00 4i.i1,ytS/.UU $2.00 $2.00 $47.89 $47.89 $21.97 $220.16 $2,432.36 $301.53 $802.16 $95.61 $78.43 $50.00 $21.96 $1,447.11 $660.24 $12.37 $9.62 $643.99 $28.84 $78.43 $301.53 $301.53 $1,252.90 $21.97 $25.00 $277.69 $9,085.40 $182,784.72 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 08/05/14 PAY page 33 08/01/14 8:35 AM Page 1 Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name 3RD LAIR SKATE PARK E 01-4435-200-70 SKATEBOARD CAMP Parks & Recreation $675.00 Search Name 3RD LAIR SKATE PARK $675.00 Search Name 4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL LLC E 01-4225-800-90 JUNE 2014 ANIMAL CONTROL Animal Control $610.63 G 01-2035 JUNE 2014 ANIMAL CONTROL -$20.63 Search. Name 4 PAWS ANIMAL CONTROL LLC $590.00 Search Name AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES E 29-4337-000-00 REPAIR MATERIALS - STORM SEWER Spec Fds $234.08 Search Name AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES $234.08 Search Name ALLIANCE BENEFIT GROUP E 01-4490-110-10 JUNE 2014 COBRA ADMIN FEE Administration $12.00 Search Name ALLIANCE BENEFIT GROUP $12.00 Search Name AMERICAN FLEET SUPPLY E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS - STREETS Road & Bridges $680.88 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS - STREETS Road & Bridges -$100.00 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS - STREETS Road & Bridges $70.82 Search Name AMERICAN FLEET SUPPLY $651.70 Search Name AMERICAN PROMOTIONAL INCENTIVE E 01-4435-200-70 SAFETY CAMP T-SHIRTS Parks & Recreation $401.91 Search Name AMERICAN PROMOTIONAL INCENTIVE $401.91 Search Name AMERIPRIDE SERVICES E 01-4335-310-50 MAT SERVICE - PW GARAGE Road & Bridges $25.87 E 45-4335-045-45 MAT SERVICE - PAR3 Golf Course $29.87 E 08-4335-000-00 MAT SERVICE - CITY HALL Spec Fds $84.20 E 01-4335-310-70 MAT SERVICE - PW GARAGE Parks & Recreation $25.86 E 15-4335-310-60 MAT SERVICE - PW GARAGE Utility Enterprise $25.86 Search Name AMERIPRIDE SERVICES $191.66 Search Name ASCHENBRENER, MICHAEL E 01-4318-020-20 POSTAGE - PD Police $7.35 E 01-4490-020-20 SUPPLIES - PD Police $63.38 Search Name ASCHENBRENER, MICHAEL $70.73 Search Name ASSURANT EMPLOYEE BENEFITS E 01-4132-031-30 AUG 2014 LTD PREMIUM Fire $185.50 Search Name ASSURANT EMPLOYEE BENEFITS $185.50 Search Name ASTECH E 01-4423-050-50 STREETS CRACK -SEALING Road & Bridges $67,728.40 Search Name ASTECH $67,728.40 Search Name B C A -TRAINING & EDUCATION E 01-4400-020-20 TRAINING COURSES - P. FLEMING Police $285.00 Search Name B C A -TRAINING & EDUCATION $285.00 Search Name BERTELSON TOTAL OFFICE SOLUTNS E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES - ADMIN Administration $19.15 E 01-4300-080-80 OFFICE SUPPLIES - PLANNING Planning $9.17 page 34 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 08/01/14 8:35 AM Page 2 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 08/05/14 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name BERTELSON TOTAL OFFICE SOLUTNS $28.32 Search Name BESSER WELDING & FABRICATION E 01-4305-050-50 SHOP PARTS Road & Bridges $30.04 E 01-4305-070-70 SHOP PARTS Parks & Recreation $30.03 E 15-4305-060-60 SHOP PARTS Utility Enterprise $30.03 Search Name BESSER WELDING & FABRICATION $90.10 Search Name BLUE CHIP TREE CO. E 01-4500-050-50 TREE REMOVAL Road & Bridges $2,185.00 Search Name BLUE CHIP TREE CO. $2,185.00 Search Name BLUE TARP FINANCIAL E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREETS Road & Bridges $236.91 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS - STREETS Road & Bridges $39.98 Search Name BLUE TARP FINANCIAL $276.89 Search Name BOLTON & MENK INC E 27-4220-788-00 VICTORIA RD PROJECT WORK Spec Fds $708.00 Search Name BOLTON & MENK INC $708.00 Search Name C. DARLENE OEHLKE, CAP E 01-4220-110-10 07/15/14 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Administration $151.00 E 01-4220-080-80 07/22/14 PLANNING COMM. MEETING Planning $65.60 Search Name C. DARLENE OEHLKE, CAP $216.60 Search Name CDW GOVERNMENT, INC E 01-4301-114-14 COMPUTER SUPPLIES Info Tech $47.70 Search Name COW GOVERNMENT, INC $47.70 Search Name CENTRAL IRRIGATION SUPPLY E 01-4330-215-70 IRRIGATION REPAIR PARTS Parks & Recreation $200.21 Search Name CENTRAL IRRIGATION SUPPLY $200.21 Search Name CENTURY LINK E 45-4210-045-45 JULY -AUG 2014 SERVICE - PAR3 Golf Course $55.51 Search Name CENTURY LINK $55.51 Search Name CITY AUTO GLASS E 01-4330-440-20 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PD Police $689.53 Search Name CITY AUTO GLASS $689.53 Search Name COCA-COLA REFRESHMENTS E 45-4310-210-45 BEVERAGES - PAR3 Golf Course $232.80 Search Name COCA-COLA REFRESHMENTS $232.80 Search Name COMMERCIAL ASPHALT E 01-4422-050-50 ASPHALT MIX Road & Bridges $1,013.76 Search Name COMMERCIAL ASPHALT $1,013.76 Search Name DAKOTA COMMUNICATIONS CENTER E 01-4275-020-20 AUGUST 2014 DCC FEE Police $16,835.00 E 01-4275-030-30 AUGUST 2014 DCC FEE Fire $535.00 Search Name DAKOTA COMMUNICATIONS CENTER $17,370.00 Search Name DAKOTA COUNTY TREASURER page 35 CITY om�1n4o55mm ��� ���������� HEIGHTS Page Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 08/06114 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 05-4220-105-15 COST SHARE - AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHY Engineering Enterprise $720.00 Search Name DAKOTA COUNTY TREASURER $720.00 Search Name DELTA DENTAL EU5-41J1,105 15 AUG 2O14DENTAL PREMIUM Engineering Enterprise $19I.40 GO1-2074 AUG 2014DENTAL PREMIUM $167.00 GO1'2O71 AUG 2O14DENTAL PREMIUM $1,348.55 [O8'4131'000 -0O AUG 2O14DENTAL PREMIUM SpeuFdo ¢41.75 [O1'4131'O7V-7O AUG 2014 DENTAL PREMIUM Parks &Recreation $301.30 EO1-4131-U2O'2O AUG ZU14DENTAL PREMIUM Police $736.90 E15'41]1-OOO'6O AUG ZO11DENTAL PREMIUM Utility Enterprise $217.80 E01'1131'110'1O AUG ZO11DENTAL PREMIUM Administration $259.55 EU1'4131-O5O'50 AUG ZD14DENTAL PREMIUM Road &Bridges $301.30 Search Name DELTA DENTAL $3,566.55 Search Name DIGITAL -ALLY EO1^QV5'O2O-ZO OPERATING SUPPLIES 'PD Police $364/0_ Search Name DIGITAL -ALLY $364.00 Search Name DONOVAN,SUSAN EO1+BO1'O2O'2O ANTIVIRUS 'PD Police 153.55_ Search Name DONOVAN,SUSAN $55.55 Search Name ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC E15-43O5-OOO'6O OPERATING SUPPLIES -SEWER Utility Enterprise $531.00_ Search Name ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC $531.80 Search Name EVEREST EMERGENCY VEHICLES INC EU1-433O-410'2O EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS -PD Police $163.60 Search Name EVEREST EMERGENCY VEHICLES INC $163.60 Search Name FLEET FARM/GE MONEY BANK E15-433U-49O'0O EQUIP. REPAIR SUPPLIES 'SEWER Utility Enterprise $299.93 Search Name FLEET FARM/GE MONEY BANK $299.93 Search Name pLEETP0DE EO1'433O'10O-3O EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS ' FIRE DEPT Fine �E32.08_ Search Name FLEETPRIDE $32.08 Search Name FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL E 15'1305'060-00 OPEoADNGSUPPUES-SENEK Utility Enterprise $70.15 Search Name FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL $870.15 Search Name FORCE AMERICA [01-433O'19O'5O EQU[PMENTREPAQRPAKT;-STREBS Road &Bridges $17.36_ Search Name FORCE AMERICA $17.36 Search Name FRONTIER AG&TURF EO1~03O-49O-7O EQUIPMENT REPAIR SUPPLIES 'PARKS Parks 8Recreation $23.48 Search Name FRONTIER AG&TURF $23.48 Search Name GARTZKECONSTRUCTION INC E29^8JO'O0O'OO FLOODING REPAIRS Specpds __$10,039.00«� Search Name GAK7ZKECONSTRUCTION INC $10,039.00 Search Name GENERATIONS CUSTOM CABINETS page 36 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 08/01/148:35 AM Page 4 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 08/05/14 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 01-4331-020-20 CABINET PARTS - PD Police $25.00 Search Name GENERATIONS CUSTOM CABINETS $25.00 Search Name GERTENS GREENHOUSE E 45-4334-045-45 COURSE MAINTENANCE - PAR3 Golf Course $450.98 G 45-2035 COURSE MAINTENANCE - PAR3 -$29.01 E 01-4330-215-70 TREES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $626.00 Search Name GERTENS GREENHOUSE $1,047.97 Search Name GM CONTRACTING, INC. E 15-4460-789-00 FORCEMAIN REPLACEMENT PROJECT Spec Fds $53,843.26 Search Name GM CONTRACTING, INC. $53,843.26 Search Name GOLDCOM E 01-4305-030-30 OPERATING SUPPLIES - FIRE DEPT Fire $9.18 Search Name GOLDCOM $9.18 Search Name HANCO CORPORATION E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS - PARKS Parks & Recreation $81.16 E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS - PARKS Parks & Recreation $29.36 Search Name HANCO CORPORATION $110.52 Search Name HELENA CHEMICAL CO E 01-4330-215-70 CHEMICALS - PARKS Parks & Recreation $103.52 E 01-4330-215-70 CHEMICALS - PARKS Parks & Recreation $36.00 Search Name HELENA CHEMICAL CO $139.52 Search Name HIRSHFIELD S PAINT & MFG INC E 01-4330-215-70 FIELD STRIPING PAINT Parks & Recreation $912.00 Search Name HIRSHFIELD S PAINT & MFG INC $912.00 Search Name HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SEWER Utility Enterprise $37.59 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $36.94 E 01-4403-030-30 TRAINING SUPPLIES - FIRE DEPT Fire $34.11 E 45-4335-045-45 BLDG MAINT. SUPPLIES - PAR3 Golf Course $17.16 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG REPAIR SUPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds -$35.89 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG REPAIR SUPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds $35.89 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT. SUPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds $28.94 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG EQUIPMENT SUPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds $16.97 E 01-4305-070-70 OPERATING SUPPLIES - PARKS Parks & Recreation $20.98 E 01-4403-030-30 TRAINING SUPPLIES - FIRE DEPT Fire $41.90 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG REPAIR SUPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds $12.97 Search Name HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES $247.56 Search Name I S D 197 E 01-4268-070-70 SIBLEY PARK EXPENDITURES Parks & Recreation $20,730.54 Search Name I S D 197 $20,730.54 Search Name INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS E 01-4300-020-20 OFFICE SUPPLIES - PD Police $83.41 E 01-4300-020-20 OFFICE SUPPLIES - PD Police $97.19 E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES - ADMIN Administration $26.49 E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES - ADMIN Administration $3.62 E 01-4300-110-10 OFFICE SUPPLIES - ADMIN Administration $23.86 Search Name INTAB INC E0-4300-640-12 ELECTION SUPPLIES Elections page 37 Search Name ONTABINC CITY OF��ENDOTA HEIGHTS omn1�4�usmw Search Name INT[GKATELECOM Page EU5-1210'105-15 Claims List Engineering Enterprise $167.52 E15-421D'V6O'6O SYSTEM CHECKS Utility Enterprise $250.50 [O1~131O'02O'2O no/V6n4P/w' polios $127.52 Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 01-4300-030-30 OFFICE SUPPLIES - FIRE DEPT Fire $4.71 EO1'13V0'51O'1Z OFFICE SUPPLIES 'ELECTIONS BooUnnn ¢12.00 EO1-430U'11O'1O OFFICE SUPPLIES 'ADMIN Administration $88.72 EO5-480O'1O5-1G OFFICE SUPPLIES -ENGINEERING Engineering Enterprise $10.02 EO1-43OO'61V'1Z OFRCESUPPLlES-EL[CTIONS Elections $10.62 Search Name INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS $391.24 Search Name INTAB INC E0-4300-640-12 ELECTION SUPPLIES Elections Search Name ONTABINC $46.10 Search Name INT[GKATELECOM EU5-1210'105-15 JULY -AUG 2O14TELEPHONE SERVICE Engineering Enterprise $167.52 E15-421D'V6O'6O JULY -AUG 2O14TELEPHONE SERVICE Utility Enterprise $250.50 [O1~131O'02O'2O JULY -AUG 2O14TELEPHONE SERVICE polios $127.52 EO1'421O-05O'5O JULY -AUG 2O11TELEPHONE SERVICE Road &Bridges $43.40 EO1~f21O'O2O'3O JULY -AUG ZO14TELEPHONE SERVICE Police $268.04 E01'421O'O5O'50 JULY -AUG 2O14TELEPHONE SERVICE Road 8Bridges $13.40 EO1-421O'11U-10 JULY -AUG 2O11TELEPHONE SERVICE Administration $]]5.04 EO1-421O'O4O'1U JULY -AUG 2O14TELEPHONE SERVICE CodeEnfnnemenV[nspo Search Name lNTEGRATELECOM' *1,302.49 Search Name KDV EO1~*2lO-13O']O 2O13AUDIT - FIRE RELIEF ASSOC. Re $4,500.00 Search Name KDV $4,500.00 Search Name KREMEKSERVICES, LLC EU1~}33O'49O-5O DOT INSPECTION Road &Bridges Search Name KKEMERSE0DCES, LLC $87.95 Search Name LELS GO1'2D75 AUGUST 2O14UNION DUES 9540.00 Search Name LEL5 $540.00 Search Name LMCIT] G45 -1Z15 PAR3LIABILITY INSURANCE $281.50 E 45'4250'0*5'15 PAR3LIABILITY INSURANCE Golf Course 1281.50_ Search Name LMClT3 $503.00 Search Name bAWSDNPRODUCTS, INC EO1-43O5-U7O-7O OPERATING SUPPLIES 'SHOP Parks &Recreation $73.61 E15-43O5'OhO-OO OPERADNGSUPPLlES-SMOP Utility Entoqphse $73.60 EO1-4305'O5O'50 OPERATING SUPPLIES -SHOP Road &Bridges $73.61_ Search Name LAWSONPRODUCTS, INC $I20.82 Search Name U}GlS EO1'1223'O2O'2O APPLICATIONSUPPORT-PD Police $2,272.00 EO1-4301'D3O-3O APPLICATION SUPPORT ' FIRE DEPT Fire $55.08 EO1~f22O-111-1f NETWORK SERVICE Info Tech $265.4� Search Name LDGI5 *2,592.48 Search Name MTlDISTRIBUTING COMPANY EO1~f330'f9V'7O EQU[PMENTKEPAIRPARTS-PARKS Parks &Recreation $43.61 E01'433O-49O-7U EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 'PARKS Parks &Recreation $104.55 E01 -43]O -49V -7O EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS 'PARKS Parks &Recreation $161.11 page 38 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 08/01/148:35 AM Page 6 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 08/05/14 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount ,�cm .m Search Name M T I DISTRIBUTING COMPANY $669.27 Search Name MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY G 01-1210 FUEL - DIESEL $6,488.34 G 01-1210 FUEL - GASOLINE $10,105.73 Search Name MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY $16,594.07 Search Name MAZZITELLO, JOHN E 05-4415-105-15 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT Engineering Enterprise $53.20 Search Name MAZZITELLO, JOHN $53.20 Search Name MCCARTHY WELL CO E 45-4334-045-45 ANNUAL WELL PUMP INSP. PAR3 Golf Course $235.00 Search Name MCCARTHY WELL CO $235.00 Search Name MCNAMARA CONTRACTING, INC. E 27-4460-788-00 VICTORIA RD/ROLLING GREEN IMPR. Spec Fds $168,892.90 Search Name MCNAMARA CONTRACTING, INC. $168,892.90 Search Name MENARDS E 01-4305-050-50 OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREETS Road & Bridges $121.39 E 01-4336-050-50 DAMAGE REPAIR SUPPLIES Road & Bridges $109.22 E 01-4335-315-30 BLDG REPAIR SUPPLIES - FIRE HALL Fire $8.58 E 27-4460-788-00 REPAIR SUPPLIES - VICTORIA RD PROJEC Spec Fds $60.31 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG REPAIR SUPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds $28.27 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT. SUPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds $19.75 G 45-2035 BLDG MAINT. SUPPLIES - PAR3 -$1.63 E 45-4335-045-45 BLDG MAINT. SUPPLIES - PAR3 Golf Course $25.40 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG REPAIR SUPPLIES - CITY HALL Spec Fds $25.68 Search Name MENARDS $396.97 Search Name MENDOTA HEIGHTS, CITY OF E 45-4427-045-45 2ND QTR 2014 SEWER CHARGES - PAR3 Golf Course $284.15 Search Name MENDOTA HEIGHTS, CITY OF $284.15 Search Name MENDOTA, CITY OF R 15-3400 2ND QTR 2014 SEWER - ST. PETER $624.00 Search Name MENDOTA, CITY OF $624.00 Search Name METRO CASH REGISTER E 45-4305-045-45 SUPPLIES - PAR3 Golf Course $18.70 G 45-2035 SUPPLIES - PAR3 -$1.20 Search Name METRO CASH REGISTER $17.50 Search Name METRO SALES E 15-4330-490-60 QUARTERLY COPIER MAINT. - PW Utility Enterprise $28.79 E 01-4330-490-50 QUARTERLY COPIER MAINT. - PW Road & Bridges $28.79 E 01-4305-020-20 COPIER/PRINTER - PD Police $1,500.00 E 01-4330-490-70 QUARTERLY COPIER MAINT. - PW Parks & Recreation $28.79 Search Name METRO SALES $1,586.37 Search Name MID NORTHERN SERVICES E 01-4335-310-50 LIGHTING REPAIR SUPPLIES - PW Road & Bridges $67.50 E 01-4335-310-70 LIGHTING REPAIR SUPPLIES - PW Parks & Recreation $67.50 E 28-4330-000-00 STREET LIGHTS REPAIRS Spec Fds $405.00 page 39 CITY ��F ��EN��OTA HEIGHTS uo01�4a�smw Page Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 08/05/14 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 28-4330-000-00 STREET LIGHTS REPAIRS Spec Fds $270.00 EZ8-4D3O-OOO'OO STREET LIGHTS REPAIRS Specpds $337.50 EO1-433O'42O-5U TRAFFIC LIGHTS REPAIRS Road &Bridges $275.70 E15 -4335'31O'60 LIGHTING REPAIR SUPPLIES 'Pm Utility Enterprise $67.50 Search Name MID NORTHERN SERVICES $1,190J0 Search Name MIDWEST AQUA CARE, INC EO1'4]3O-215'7O KOGERSLAKE TREATMENT Parks &Recreation $1,517.50 G01'1115 ROGEKSLAKE TREATMENT $1,517.5L Search Name MIDWEST AQUA CARE, INC $3,035.00 Search Name MDTMELL1 EO1-4SOO'U4O-40 JULY 2O14SERVICE CndeEn(hoomenVlnspe ¢159.00 EUJ~0OO'105-15 AUGUST ZO14SERVICE Engineering Enterprise $159.00 Search Name MrTCMELL1 $318.00 Search Name MNBENEFIT ASSN GO1'ZO73 AUGUST 2O14PREMIUM $11.95 E01'q131'O5O-5O AUGUST ZU14PREMIUM Road aBridges $11.82_ Search Name MNBENEFIT ASSN $26.77 Search Name MNGLOVE INC EO1-43O5'050'5O SAFEr/SUPPLlES-STREETS Road &Bridges $79.96 Search Name MNGLOVE INC $79.90 Search Name MNWANNER COMPANY EO1+BJO'215-7O EQUIPMENT REPAIR PARTS -PARKS Parks &Recreation $95.00 EO1'13]O�D0'7O EQUIPMENT PARKS �lUIP Recreation Parks U� $93.51 Search Name MNWANNER COMPANY $188.51 Search Name MNPEA GO1'3O75 AUGUST Z014UNION DUES $78.00 Search Name MNPEA $78.00 Search Name NATURE CALLS, INC E01 -420O -010'7O JUNE 2O14RENTALS -PARKS Parks &Recreation $968.50 E15'4%VO-01O-15 JUNE 2O14RENTALS 'PAR3 Golf Course $53.11 G45'2O35 JUNE ZO14RENTALS - USE TAX -$3.44 Search Name NATURE CALLS, INC $1,018.50 Search Name NCPERSGROUP LIFE INS. G01 -2O71 AUG ZO14PREMIUM $80.00_ Search Name NCPERSGROUP LIFE INS. $80.00 Search Name NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE E15-433O~10V-0O LIFT STATION REPAIRS Utility Enterprise $1,190.50 E15-433O~1OO'6O LIFT STATION REPAIRS Utility Enterprise $5,560.00 Search Name NORTH STAR PUMP SERVICE $7,050.50 Search Name NORTHLAND CHEMICAL E01-43O5'U50'5O OPERATING SUPPLIES -SHOP Road &Bridges $67.10 EO1'4]OS'07O'70 OPERATING SUPPLIES 'SHOP Parks &Recreation $67.09 E15-1305'0OO'6O OPERATING SUPPLIES 'SHOP Utility Enterprise $67.09_ Search Name NORTHLAND CHEMICAL $201.28 Search Name OXYGEN SERVICE CO E 01-4305-070-70 E 15-4305-060-60 E 01-4330-490-50 E 01-4305-050-50 Search Name OXYGEN SERVICE CO Search Name PAC E 01-4200-610-50 Search Name PAC Search Name PCE, INC. E 01-4220-070-70 Search Name PCE, INC. OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP EQUIP. REPAIR SUPPLIES - STREETS OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP EQUIPMENT RENTAL -STREETS WORK FLOW STUDY Search Name PHYSIO CONTROL (MEDTRONIC) E 01-4305-020-20 AED BATTERIES - PD Search Name PHYSIO CONTROL (MEDTRONIC) Search Name R D 0 EQ CO E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP. REPAIR PARTS - STREETS Search Name R D 0 EQ CO Search Name RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIP. REPAIR PARTS - PARKS Search Name RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED Search Name ROTARY CLUB WSP/MH E 01-4404-110-10 Search Name ROTARY CLUB WSP/MH Search Name RUZEK, RYAN E 29-4330-000-00 Search Name RUZEK, RYAN Search Name SAFE -FAST, INC. E 01-4305-050-50 Search Name SAFE -FAST, INC. Search Name SELECT ACCOUNT E 01-4220-070-70 E 15-4220-060-60 E 01-4220-080-80 E 01-4220-020-20 E 01-4220-110-10 E 05-4220-105-15 2014 MEMBERSHIP EQUIPMENT RENTAL - STORM WATER OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREETS JULY 2014 HSA PARTICIPANT FEE JULY 2014 HSA PARTICIPANT FEE JULY 2014 HSA PARTICIPANT FEE JULY 2014 HSA PARTICIPANT FEE JULY 2014 HSA PARTICIPANT FEE JULY 2014 NSA PARTICIPANT FEE Parks & Recreation Utility Enterprise Road & Bridges Road & Bridges Road & Bridges Parks & Recreation Police Road & Bridges Parks & Recreation Administration Spec Fds Road & Bridges Parks & Recreation Utility Enterprise Planning Police Administration Engineering Enterprise $250.91 $250.91 $36.92 $250.92 $789.66 $1,225.00 $1,225.00 $1,123.32 $1,123.32 $495.98 $495.98 $2,217.93 $2,217.93 $78.97 $78.97 $141.50 $141.50 $58.56 $58.56 $168.00 $168.00 $1.20 $2.11 $2.11 $13.24 $12.04 $5.42 page 40 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 08/01/148:35 AM Page 8 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 08/05/14 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount Search Name OREILLY AUTO/FIRST CALL E 01-4330-460-30 EQUIP. REPAIR SUPPLIES - FIRE DEPT Fire $29.98 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP. REPAIR SUPPLIES - STREETS Road & Bridges $29.98 E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIP. REPAIR PARTS - PARKS Parks & Recreation $12.49 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP. REPAIR SUPPLIES - STREETS Road & Bridges $279.96 E 01-4620-070-70 NEW PARKS TRUCK EQUIPMENT Parks & Recreation $121.85 Search Name OREILLY AUTO/FIRST CALL $474.26 Search Name OXYGEN SERVICE CO E 01-4305-070-70 E 15-4305-060-60 E 01-4330-490-50 E 01-4305-050-50 Search Name OXYGEN SERVICE CO Search Name PAC E 01-4200-610-50 Search Name PAC Search Name PCE, INC. E 01-4220-070-70 Search Name PCE, INC. OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP EQUIP. REPAIR SUPPLIES - STREETS OPERATING SUPPLIES - SHOP EQUIPMENT RENTAL -STREETS WORK FLOW STUDY Search Name PHYSIO CONTROL (MEDTRONIC) E 01-4305-020-20 AED BATTERIES - PD Search Name PHYSIO CONTROL (MEDTRONIC) Search Name R D 0 EQ CO E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP. REPAIR PARTS - STREETS Search Name R D 0 EQ CO Search Name RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED E 01-4330-490-70 EQUIP. REPAIR PARTS - PARKS Search Name RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED Search Name ROTARY CLUB WSP/MH E 01-4404-110-10 Search Name ROTARY CLUB WSP/MH Search Name RUZEK, RYAN E 29-4330-000-00 Search Name RUZEK, RYAN Search Name SAFE -FAST, INC. E 01-4305-050-50 Search Name SAFE -FAST, INC. Search Name SELECT ACCOUNT E 01-4220-070-70 E 15-4220-060-60 E 01-4220-080-80 E 01-4220-020-20 E 01-4220-110-10 E 05-4220-105-15 2014 MEMBERSHIP EQUIPMENT RENTAL - STORM WATER OPERATING SUPPLIES - STREETS JULY 2014 HSA PARTICIPANT FEE JULY 2014 HSA PARTICIPANT FEE JULY 2014 HSA PARTICIPANT FEE JULY 2014 HSA PARTICIPANT FEE JULY 2014 HSA PARTICIPANT FEE JULY 2014 NSA PARTICIPANT FEE Parks & Recreation Utility Enterprise Road & Bridges Road & Bridges Road & Bridges Parks & Recreation Police Road & Bridges Parks & Recreation Administration Spec Fds Road & Bridges Parks & Recreation Utility Enterprise Planning Police Administration Engineering Enterprise $250.91 $250.91 $36.92 $250.92 $789.66 $1,225.00 $1,225.00 $1,123.32 $1,123.32 $495.98 $495.98 $2,217.93 $2,217.93 $78.97 $78.97 $141.50 $141.50 $58.56 $58.56 $168.00 $168.00 $1.20 $2.11 $2.11 $13.24 $12.04 $5.42 page 41 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 08/01/148:37 AM Page 9 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 08/05/14 PAY Account�mm�n Commentsmmm DEPT Descrr�mAmount Search Name SELECT ACCOUNT$36.12�n�� Search Name SHEL S AUTO ELECTRIC E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP. REPAIR PARTS - STREETS Road & Bridges $158.00 Search Name SHEL S AUTO ELECTRIC $158.00 Search Name SPRINT E 01-4210-110-10 JULY 2014 CELL SERVICE Administration $180.94 E 05-4210-105-15 JULY 2014 CELL SERVICE Engineering Enterprise $185.68 E 01-4210-030-30 JULY 2014 CELL SERVICE Fire $79.98 E 45-4210-045-45 JULY 2014 CELL SERVICE Golf Course $88.97 E 01-4210-020-20 JULY 2014 CELL SERVICE Police $930.75 E 01-4223-020-20 JULY 2014 CELL SERVICE Police $319.92 E 15-4210-060-60 JULY 2014 CELL SERVICE Utility Enterprise $48.98 Search Name SPRINT $1,835.22 Search Name SPRWS E 45-4425-045-45 2ND QTR 2014 SERVICE - PAR3 Golf Course $31.52 E 08-4425-000-00 JUNE 2014 SERVICE - CITY HALL Spec Fds $57.99 E 01-4425-070-70 JUNE 2014 SERVICE - PARKS Parks & Recreation $86.45 E 15-4425-310-60 JUNE 2014 SERVICE - PW Utility Enterprise $12.18 E 01-4425-310-70 JUNE 2014 SERVICE - PW Parks & Recreation $12.18 E 01-4425-070-70 JUNE 2014 SERVICE - PARKS Parks & Recreation $179.92 E 01-4425-310-50 JUNE 2014 SERVICE - PW Road & Bridges $12.18 Search Name SPRWS $392.42 Search Name STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES E 01-4220-135-80 PLANNING ASSISTANCE Planning $700.00 Search Name STANTEC CONSULTING SERVICES $700.00 Search Name SULLIVAN, TERRY E 08-4415-000-00 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT Spec Fds $76.16 E 45-4415-045-45 MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT Golf Course $6.72 Search Name SULLIVAN, TERRY $82.88 Search Name SUN LIFE E 15-4131-060-60 AUG 2014 TERM LIFE & DISB. PREMIUM Utility Enterprise $89.50 G 01-2071 AUG 2014 TERM LIFE & DISB. PREMIUM $1,367.83 E 05-4131-105-15 AUG 2014 TERM LIFE & DISB. PREMIUM Engineering Enterprise $114.81 E 01-4131-070-70 AUG 2014 TERM LIFE & DISB. PREMIUM Parks & Recreation $185.36 E 01-4131-050-50 AUG 2014 TERM LIFE & DISB. PREMIUM Road & Bridges $248.36 E 01-4131-020-20 AUG 2014 TERM LIFE & DISB. PREMIUM Police $330.07 E 01-4131-110-10 AUG 2014 TERM LIFE & DISB. PREMIUM Administration $302.89 E 08-4131-000-00 AUG 2014 TERM LIFE & DISB. PREMIUM Spec Fds $84.05 Search Name SUN LIFE $2,722.87 Search Name T MOBILE E 01-4210-070-70 JUNE 2014 CELL SERVICE - PARKS Parks & Recreation $265.93 Search Name T MOBILE $265.93 Search Name TESSMAN CO E 01-4330-215-70 FIELD CHALK - PARKS Parks & Recreation $467.60 Search Name TESSMAN CO $467.60 Search Name TRAFFIC DATA INC page 42 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 08/01/148:37 AM Page 10 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 08/05/14 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount E 27-4220-788-00 TRAFFIC COUNT - VICTORIA RD Spec Fds $170.00 Search Name TRAFFIC DATA INC $170.00 Search Name TRI STATE BOBCAT E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP. REPAIR PARTS - STREETS Road & Bridges $21.48 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP. REPAIR PARTS - STREETS Road & Bridges $10.68 E 01-4330-490-50 EQUIP. REPAIR PARTS - STREETS Road & Bridges $36.30 Search Name TRI STATE BOBCAT $68.46 Search Name TWIN CITY AUTOBODY E 01-4481-110-10 EQUIPMENT REPAIR - PD Administration $1,797.23 Search Name TWIN CITY AUTOBODY $1,797.23 Search Name TWIN CITY TELEPHONE E 01-4335-310-50 TELEPHONE REPAIRS - PW Road & Bridges $34.34 E 15-4335-310-60 TELEPHONE REPAIRS - PW Utility Enterprise $34.33 E 01-4335-310-70 TELEPHONE REPAIRS - PW Parks & Recreation $34.33 Search Name TWIN CITY TELEPHONE $103.00 Search Name U. S. BANK E 01-4306-020-20 MEETING SUPPLIES - PD INTERVIEWS Police $177.80 E 01-4435-200-70 FIELD TRIP SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $11.82 E 01-4435-200-70 TENNIS LESSONS EXPENSE Parks & Recreation $70.00 E 01-4435-200-70 FISHING DERBY PRIZES Parks & Recreation $415.00 E 01-4490-110-10 MEETING SUPPLIES Administration $22.39 E 15-4404-060-60 2014 APWA MEMBERSHIP Utility Enterprise $91.25 E 01-4435-200-70 PLAYGROUNDS PROGRAM SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $19.98 E 45-4300-045-45 OFFICE SUPPLIES - PAR3 Golf Course $195.87 E 15-4305-060-60 OPERATING SUPPLIES - SEWER Utility Enterprise $121.88 E 01-4400-110-10 TRAVEL EXPENSE - J. MILLER Administration $368.50 E 01-4435-200-70 PLAYGROUNDS PROGRAM SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $260.50 E 01-4400-110-10 CONFERENCE REGISTRATION - J. MILLER Administration $645.00 E 01-4435-200-70 FISHING DERBY SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $26.78 E 01-4435-200-70 TENNIS LEAGUES EXPENSE Parks & Recreation $60.00 E 29-4337-000-00 STORM SEWER MAINT. MATERIALS Spec Fds $87.22 E 01-4490-020-20 MEETING SUPPLIES - PD Police $82.41 E 01-4400-080-80 PLANNING WORKSHOP - N. WALL Planning $70.00 E 01-4400-030-30 TRAVEL EXPENSE - FIRE DEPT Fire $395.52 E 45-4490-045-45 LEAGUE PRIZES - PAR3 Golf Course $40.00 E 01-4435-200-70 FIELD TRIP SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $1,573.52 E 08-4335-000-00 BLDG MAINT. MATERIALS - CITY HALL Spec Fds $37.37 E 01-4404-050-50 2014 APWA MEMBERSHIP Road & Bridges $91.25 E 05-4404-105-15 2014 APWA MEMBERSHIP Engineering Enterprise $91.25 E 01-4400-030-30 TRAVEL EXPENSE - FIRE DEPT Fire $362.55 E 01-4400-030-30 TRAVEL EXPENSE - FIRE DEPT Fire $362.55 E 01-4435-200-70 TENNIS LESSONS EXPENSE Parks & Recreation $60.00 E 01-4435-200-70 FISHING DERBY SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $538.31 E 01-4404-070-70 2014 APWA MEMBERSHIP Parks & Recreation $91.25 E 01-4435-200-70 FISHING DERBY SUPPLIES Parks & Recreation $2.00 E 45-4490-045-45 LEAGUE PRIZES - PAR3 Golf Course $40.00 E 01-4435-200-70 TENNIS LESSONS EXPENSE Parks & Recreation $220.00 Search Name U. S. BANK $6,631.97 Search Name UNIFORMS UNLIMITED page 43 CITY ��F �@EN����TA HEIGHTS omo��4V�7mw Page 11 Claims List SYSTEM CHECKS 08105114 PAY Account Comments DEPT Descr Amount EO1-441O'OZ0'ZO UNIFORMS 'M.ASCUEN8RENER Police $175.00 EO1-4410'O20'2O UNIFORM 'B.PENTEL Police Search Name UNIFORMS UNLIMITED $209.90 Search Name YE0ZDNWIRELESS EO1-421O'Ol0'2U PHONE SERVICE -PD Police $90.53_ Search Name VERIZONWIRELESS $90.53 Search Name VERSATILE VEHICLES E15^fZOU-61O-15 AUG 2D14LEASE - GOLF CARTS Golf Course ¢550.00 E15-4lUO-61O-q5 MAY %O14LEASE - GOLF CARTS Golf Course Search Name VERSATILE VEHICLES $1,100.00 Search Name VIKING INDUSTRIAL CNTR EO1411O-O50-5O PROTECTIVE CLOTHING 'STREETS Road &Bridges Search Name VIKING INDUSTRIAL CNTR $71J6 Search Name V0LLSON,CHAD EO1'43Oh'OZO'2U TRAVELEXPENSE-BACKGROUND CHECK Police Search Name NDLLSON,CHAD $211.90 ¢124,965.41 2014 licensing list for City Council Type Contractor Name General HVAC Masonry Sign All Poolside Services, Inc Amerect, Inc Midwest Roof Service, Inc Plaza Construction Services R.A.G. Services, Inc Titus Contracting, LLC Assured Comfort Heating &Air Heating & Cooling Two, Inc S R Mechanical, Inc Weld & Sons Plumbing, Inc Woodland Stoves & Fireplaces Concrete Images, Inc Kopp Concrete, Inc Impression Signs And Graphics Corp page 44 Sm. Friday, August 01, 2014 Page 1 of I page 45 7a. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heig s, 5118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8440 fax www.rrendota-heights.com CITY OF rn MENDDTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Justin Miller, City Administrator SUBJECT: ISD 197 Sibley Football Field Presentation BACKGROUND Representatives from ISD 197 will be present at the August 5th city council meeting to discuss preliminary plans for a football stadium proposed to be located on the Henry Sibley High School campus. Attached are some drawings that they will be prepared to discuss with the council. BUDGET IMPACT N/A RECOMMENDATION No action will be necessary. This is simply for information purposes only. W � C: O C: O O O O � U � � o � CDLL c� uj LL m O N o O (n O LL U U � � � cn O E co U +� L =3 CU O a� •� N� > o Co CD CC: 0) E m u N D o C o o (nLO M.O c = N o +- N LD 4-0•• cn .T O _ N N �� •� N (D U v) V) co o cn p_ N CL N Q— �+� O 0 n a) 0 QL N U O U v� E c� ia i a0=LU wcno] cr. y 0 0 r mw -r N [U Lu C 0w U WX �Z, a C7 � vm O o �w co (n uaX a ;� U IX LLI 4-0 mw -r N [U C 0w U WX �Z, a vm O o �w co ;� U LLI U) . CO 22 v � w _-. -.dkvfi�.. li i 0 L E E =3 /1 ^-0 W m O O O m b9 O O CD N LO b9 O O N b9 O O O O O O O co 1 co O O O O co O O O U-) N b!> O O O O O LO Efl O) i m O � O N U (1) C) E U m U Qcz � ca O O oE M °° a N � E _ � LL L cn (D U H U) H H page 50 8a. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota He, 5118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.rrendota-heights.com CITY OF MENDDTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Nolan Wall, AICP Planner SUBJECT: Resolution Approving a Subdivision Request for a Lot Split at 641 Callahan Place BACKGROUND The applicant, on behalf of the property owners, is seeking approval to subdivide the existing parcel at 641 Callahan Place. The subject parcel is approximately one acre (43,510 square feet) and contains an existing single-family dwelling. The parcel is zoned R-1 and is guided for low density residential development. The applicant has a purchase agreement for the subject parcel contingent on the City's approval of the subdivision request. If approved and purchased by the applicant, the existing home would be demolished and two new single-family homes constructed. The new parcels would be approximately 21,679 square feet and 21,722 square feet and meet the lot size and width requirements for the R-1 One Family Residential District. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing at the July 22 meeting. The comments from the public were in regards to the future location and design of the new homes and drainage concerns in the rear yard of the subject parcel. As noted in the staff report, those issues were not considered as part of the subdivision request and will be reviewed as part of the building permit applications. BUDGETIMPACT N/A RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended approval of the lot split application, with conditions, as described in Planning Case 2014-19. If the City Council desires to implement the recommendation, pass a motion adopting RESOLUTION 2014-44 APPROVING A SUBDIVISION REQUEST FOR A LOT SPLIT AT 641 CALLAHAN PLACE. This matter requires a simple majority vote. page 51 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2014-44 RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION REQUEST FOR A LOT SPLIT AT 641 CALLAHAN PLACE WHEREAS, Mark Gergen, on behalf of Cory Morrisette and Gail Darling, has applied for a lot split at 641 Callahan Place (PID 27-84300-00-310; Willow Spring Addition, Lot 31) as proposed in Planning Case 2014-19; and WHEREAS, the Mendota Heights Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter at their regular meeting July 22, 2014. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Mendota Heights City Council that the lot split as proposed in Planning Case 2014-13 is hereby approved based on the finding of fact that the request is consistent with the City Code and Comprehensive Plan; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that a lot split as proposed in Planning Case 2014-19 is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1. The existing single family dwelling is demolished prior to the subdivision being recorded by Dakota County. 2. Park dedication fee in the amount of $2,700, in lieu of land, is collected after City Council approval and before being recorded by Dakota County or issuance of any additional permits by the City. 3. Street reconstruction assessment fee in the amount of $8,000, as part of Callahan Place Improvement 2008-04, is collected after City Council approval and before being recorded by Dakota County or issuance of any additional permits by the City. 4. Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and a dimensioned site plan with associated easements, subject to review and approval by the City Engineering Department as part of any building permit application. 6. Any land disturbance activities must be in compliance with the City's Land Disturbance Guidance document. 7. The applicant shall dedicate a 5 -foot wide drainage and utility easement along the rear property line to be denoted on the map submitted to Dakota County. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this fifth day of August, 2014. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor ATTEST: Lorri Smith, City Clerk page 52 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights, MN 55118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.rrendota-heights.com , m{ CITY OF MENDDTA HEIGHTS DATE: July 22, 2014 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Nolan Wall, AICP Planner SUBJECT: Planning Case 2014-19 Subdivision Request for Lot Split APPLICANT: Mark Gergen/Cory Morrisette and Gail Darling PROPERTY ADDRESS: 641 Callahan Place ZONING/GUIDED: R-1 One Family Residential/LR Low Density Residential ACTION DEADLINE: September 12, 2014 DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST The applicant, on behalf of the property owners, is seeking approval to subdivide the subject parcel located at 641 Callahan Place. The request requires City approval before being recorded with Dakota County. BACKGROUND The subject parcel is approximately 1 acre (43,510 square feet) and contains an existing single-family residential dwelling (see attached Site Map). The parcel is zoned R-1 and is guided for low density residential development. The applicant has a purchase agreement for the entire subject parcel contingent on the City's approval of the subdivision request. If approved and purchased by the applicant, the existing dwelling would be demolished and two new single-family homes would be constructed. ANALYSIS Comprehensive Plan The subject parcel is guided LR, Low Density Residential in the 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The applicant's request to subdivide the subject parcel into two parcels, consisting of approximately 0.50 acres each, is consistent with the LR maximum density of 2.9 units per acre. R-1 One -Family Zoning District Title 11-3-2 of the Code (Subdivision Ordinance) allows the subdivision of parcels, provided that the resulting lots are compliant with the requirements of the applicable zoning district. According to the Certificate of Survey included as part of the application submittal, and shown in the table below, both proposed parcels meet the R-1 lot standards. 53 Lot Area 15,000 sq. ft. 21,679 sq. ft. 21,722 sq. ft. (0.34 acres) (0.50 acres) (0.50 acres) Lot Width 100 ft. 100 ft. 100 ft. The Certificate of Survey includes the required setback lines for any future principal structures on the properties; actual compliance will be verified upon submission of building permit applications based on the proposed dwellings' design. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the subdivision request with the following conditions: 1. The existing single family dwelling is demolished prior to the subdivision being recorded by Dakota County. 2. Park dedication fee in the amount of $2,700, in lieu of land, is collected after City Council approval and before being recorded by Dakota County or issuance of any additional permits by the City. 3. Street reconstruction assessment fee, as part of Callahan Place Improvement 2008-04, is collected after City Council approval and before being recorded by Dakota County or issuance of any additional permits by the City. 4. Connection charges for sanitary sewer and water main shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. The applicant shall submit grading and utility plans and a dimensioned site plan with associated easements, subject to review and approval by the City Engineering Department as part of any building permit application. 6. Any land disturbance activities must be in compliance with the City's Land Disturbance Guidance document. ACTION REQUESTED 1. Recommend approval of the subdivision request, based on the finding of fact that the proposed subdivision is consistent with the City Code and Comprehensive Plan, with conditions. K171 2. Recommend denial of the subdivision request, based on the finding of fact that the proposed subdivision is not consistent with the City Code or Comprehensive Plan. 3. Table the request. MATERIALS INCLUDED FOR REVIEW 1. Aerial Site Map 2. Planning Application, including supporting materials Planning Case 2014-19 641 Callahan Place Date: 7/14/2014 (b 0 60 SCALE IN FEET City of Mendota Heights GIS Map Disclaimer: This data is for informational purposes only and should not be substituted for a true title search, property appraisal, plat, survey, or for zoning verification. The City of Mendota Heights assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data. The City of Mendota Heights, or any other entity from which data was obtained, assumes no liability for any errors or omissions herein. If discrepancies are found, please contact the City of Mendota Heights. Contact "Gopher State One Call" at 651-454-0002 for utility locations, 48 hours prior to any excavation. page 55 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota Heights. MN 55118 651.452.1850 plione I 651:452.8940 fax ww%,v.mendota-helghts.cojn CITY OF MENOOTA HEIGHTS APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST Office Use Only. . ❑ Rezoning ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Application, ;Date.' ❑ Variance ❑ Wetlands Permit Applicaf?le Ordinance Section: ❑ Subdivision Approval Existing Zoning: 1:- I Proposed Zoning S Existing Use. .S' F .�c!'t� Proposed Use e - Property Address/Street Location: ( 4/S C * 114, 41 4" P/a e- e Applicant Name: 7*Y7 4 6 -e f Er -.m Phone: 6 /Z_ Applicant E -Mail Address: er jG' /kine r r- r- x'49 e� Applicant Mailing Address: J�aOa 14" -/Ie-4 a- /.�%/� �oor�s. ,� �a.•r - S��-�3`� Property Owner Name:G'%hone: 65-/ Property Owner Mailing Address: /�10 A /7/c e -e A ter%?* / Legal Description & PIN of Property: (Complete Legal from Title or Deed must be provided) 31 L./i //a g,✓ Sir �n i99��•���. Type of Request: ❑ Rezoning ❑ Conditional Use Permit ❑ Conditional Use Permit for PUD ❑ Variance ❑ Wetlands Permit ❑ Preliminary/Final Plat Approval ❑ Subdivision Approval ❑ Critical Area Permit ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment ❑ Code Amendment J ( Lot Split ❑ Other I hereby declare that all statements made in this request and on the additional material are. true. I further authorize City Officials and agents to inspect t ab ve p perty during daylight hours. 7-i -/�t Signat re of Ap I"c nt Date Sig u o Ow er Date 7 -71,/Y gnature of Owner (if more than e) Date Planning Application (modified 1/28/2014) Page 1 of 1 Date: July 7, 2014 To: Nolan Wall City of Mendota Heights From: Mark Gergen Miles Realty, Representing GreenWood Design Build Regarding: Property located at: 641 Callahan Place Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Interest: page 56 We currently have a fully executed Purchase Agreement on the above property with the contingency the property could be divided into 2 parcels. Our Request: Permission to divide the property into 2 single family home sites. Our intention with the property: Our intention is to build 2 custom single family, new construction homes by GreenWood Design Build. i E O O O O O O O O O O O p O W W W W W W W W W W W W W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O.El OQ� O C, 00 O O J W� Q� zo Zp' II WNL Qr o� Z�oZ�i Q~ q o p Z moWW�� SYJ%I 69'!;1,7 Jv7d OB*gIZ W h h 3N17 NOM35 ,01 0 CO 11 w oahw � �ISHO�Cti � �pOoWh a �1 I (n OW ti � FCr��gN �hh�Atiti ��Otiwwh a �C��hAO �wwho� a oo�w�W aV W[rh O�O�AN a R40>q�0 14 �w w�aWZq >w a 4a2S14 ZU �J Z --------- 3N ---- ------ � 3N17 �1OY,0112 T 17 913S '• i �V of i I h h' � o h ZU �J Z --------- of h h --- Z I Ol I I � QI �I WI�I I NI hl - --- ------4 -------------- -- 0'8S i i _ i i W i NI R V I 01 r N g s w D U) U) 2 H Q 2 H LU U } m LU LU or page 58 Affidavit ®f Publication Mate of Minnesota SS County of Dakota ANNE THILLEN being duly sworn, on oath, says that he/she is the publisher or authorized agent and employee of the publisher of the newspaper known as SOUTH-WEST REVIEW and has full knowledge of the facts which are stated below: (A) The newspaper has complied with all of the requirements constituting qualification as a qualified newspaper, as provided by Minnesota Statute 331A.02, 331A.07, and other applicable laws, as amended. (B) The printedNOTICE OF HEARING which is attached was cut from the columns of said newspaper, and was printed and published once each week, for 1 successive weeks; it was first published on SUNDAY , the 13TH day of JULY 2014 , and was thereafter printed and published on every to and including , the day of , 20 ; and printed below is a copy of the lower case alphabet from A to Z, both inclusive, which is hereby acknowledged as being the size and kind of type used in the composition and publication of the notice: *ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ *abcdefgh ijklmnopq rstuvwxyz Subscribed and sworn to before me on t is 14TH day of NLY , 20 14. 4 - 14 'L':k LA 4Q - Notary Public BY: 'x- 2" TITLE LEGAL COORDINATOR *Alphabet should be in the same size and kind of type as the notice. T®NYA R. WHITEHEAD Notary Public -Minnesota RATE INFORMATION w`ea;': My COInr(1355iW! Expir®s Jen 91, 21115 (1) Lowest classified rate paid by commercial users for comparable space... .......................... ............................. $25.00 per col. inch (2) Maximum rate allowed by law for the above matter ............................................. $25.00 per col. inch (3) Rate actually charged for the above matter.......................................................... $ per col. inch 1114 page 59 Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a Map Scale legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning 1 inch = 224 feet verification. Dakota County assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data. 7/2/2014 page 60 Planning Case 2014-19 Public Hearing Notice Mailing List x e ti�• • a V _ s 278430000080 278430000341 Q 647 MARIE AVE W M 624 CALLAHAN PL ALAN J & JAIME M ELDER ERIC J WAGNER 278430000171 270250007050 © 636 MARIE AVE W 654 CALLAHAN PL BADE PROPERTIES LLC GARY I & ELIZABETH L WESTLUND 278430000090 278430000320 © 645 MARIE AVE W 631 CALLAHAN PL BONNIE J ROCKE HUGO MUNOZ 278430000331 277590001130 a 623 CALLAHAN PL 640 CALLAHAN PL BRIAN P & JANICE M MARSHALL JAMES N & MARGARET MAZZONI 278430000291 278430000120 © 653 CALLAHAN PL 625 MARIE AVE W BRIAN ROSS JANE E VOGEL 278430000321 278430000190 0 635 CALLAHAN PL M 646 MARIE AVE C KAY TSTE GABELMANN JEFFREY S & MARY L HOLLAND 278430000200 270250007030 a 652 MARIE AVE W 646 CALLAHAN PL CHRISTOPHER J WILLIAMS JEROME N & KATHRYN SCHILTGEN 278430000310 277590001010 641 CALLAHAN PL 1851 WARRIOR DR CORY MORRISETTE JOSEPH 5 & TERESA M LAWDER 278430000290 278430000342 651 CALLAHAN PL M 632 CALLAHAN PL DAVID J & MARY L ROSS KARL & TERESA ESSLINGER 278430000340 274250006020 620 CALLAHAN PL 542 CALLAHAN PL DOROTHY J LAPEAN KENT M TSTE STUEVE Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a Map Scale legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning 1 inch = 224 feet verification. Dakota County assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data. 7/2/2014 page 61 Page 2 • 'L .� s K . 01 1 r :A �► f 277590001120 277590001140 M 1852 SOUTH LN 1851 SOUTH LN LAUREEN MARIE BRUBER STEPHEN A BAKER 278430000170 278430000181 632 MARIE AVE 640 MARIE AVE W MARK ❑ & MARYCLARE BADE STEPHEN M NORTON 278430000302 278430000202 645 CALLAHAN PL 648 MARIE AVE W MARK P & LINDA M SCHARLATT TAO & KELLY NGUYEN 278430000182 278430000161 638 MARIE AVE W E9620 MARIE AVE MARY T LATHROP THEODORE A & V H HUSNIK 277590001150 278430000162 1861 SOUTH LN 610 MARIE AVE W NICHOLAS G & SONIA N HOULE TIMOTHY M & NANCY RYAN 270250007040 278430000110 650 CALLAHAN PL 637 MARIE AVE PETER G & JOAN SCHLAGEL VERNON C & BRIGITTE EDSTROM 278430000301 278430000332 647 CALLAHAN PL 615 CALLAHAN PL ROBERT JR & BARBARA ERICKSON WILLIAM & MARIA KOSKI Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a Map Scale legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning 1 inch = 224 feet verification. Dakota County assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data. 7/2/2014 page 62 8b. 1101 Victoria Curve I Mendota He,, 711 13118 651.452.1850 phone 1 651.452.8940 fax www.mendota-helghts.com T CI7Y OF m MENDOTA HEIGHTS DATE: August 5, 2014 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Nolan Wall, AICP Planner SUBJECT: Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Rulemaking BACKGROUND The DNR is in the process of amending the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) Rules. The previous amendment process which began in 2009 was never implemented and expired in 2011. The Legislature directed the DNR to resume the rulemaking process in 2013. The corridor encompasses 30 communities that are required to adopt DNR -approved plans and ordinances, and administer and enforce them. Title 12, Chapter 3 of the City Code contains the existing regulations for the Critical Area Overlay District. The DNR recently published a Request for Comments, which ends August 15, 2014. Comments submitted during this informal comment period will be considered by the DNR in revising and finalizing the draft rules for formal rule adoption. Prior to responding to the request for comments, Staff is seeking input and questions from the Council on the proposed rules. The rules are highly technical and the proposed revisions are not entirely applicable in Mendota Heights. Staff and the Planning Commission have reviewed the draft rules and have the following comments: 1. `Bluff' and `Bluffline" Definitions [Part 6106.0050 Definitions, Subp. 10 & 121 Proposed definitions "Top of bluff' means the higher point of the highest horizontal ten -foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent. "Bluffline" means a line delineating the top of the bluff. More than one bluffline may be encountered proceeding landward from the river. Current definitions (Title 12-3-4) Bluff. Not defined Bluffline: The line along the top of a slope connecting points at which the slope becomes less than 40%. Comments While the setback from the bluffline/top of steep slopes remains the same for residential properties in the Critical Area within the City (40 feet), the revised definitions may create additional hardships for already developed properties to make improvements which would have complied with the setbacks based on the current definition. Revision of the "bluff' and "bluffline" definitions to areas with an average slope over 18% is too flat and is a common slope from the front yard to the back yard of a walkout home. page 63 The City would support a revised bluffline definition to at least 25% or greater. Or, only apply the 18% slope definition if the 18% is over a 100 -foot run distance or greater. 2. "Steep Slopes" and "Very Steep Slopes" Definitions [Part 6106.0050 Definitions, Subp. 74 & 851 Proposed Definitions "Steep slope" means a natural topographic feature with and average slope of 12-18%, measured over a horizontal distance equal to or greater than 50 feet. "Very steep slope" means a natural topographic feature greater than 18% (summarized). Current definitions — NOT DEFINED Comments As defined, steep slopes are common in yards throughout the City and are not generally regarded as "steep." A 33% slope (3:1) can be still be mowed and would be defined as "very steep." 3. Duties of Commissioner [Part 6106.0060 Administration of Program, Subp. 5(B)] The development and adoption of the required plan and ordinance amendments will be costly to local governments. The draft rules indicate the DNR will provide "advice and assistance" in this process. Will assistance include funding or other cost-sharing opportunities? 4. Duties of Local Governments [Part 6106.0060 Administration of Program, Subp. 7(D)] The City's current public hearing notice requirement is not less than ten (10) days nor more than thirty (30) days before the meeting. Application submittal deadlines are typically less than 30 days before the public hearing date. The proposed 30 -day notice requirement for the DNR, NPS, and surrounding jurisdictions does not comply with the City's current regulations and would require significant policy changes for compliance. 5. Contents of Ordinances [Part 6106.0070 Preparation, Review, and Approval of Plans and Ordinances, Subp. 5(A)] As proposed, local ordinances must "substantially comply" with the MRCCA rules, including definitions. Many of the proposed definitions included in the draft rules are inconsistent with those in the City's zoning ordinance. Substantial compliance is vague and the rules should defer to the local government's definition for common zoning terms such as structure and lot width, in order to promote consistency. 6. District Boundaries (Part 6106.0100 Districts) The existing MRCCA boundary remains unchanged. While we support the intent behind the Critical Area corridor, we would request consideration of revision of the boundaries within Mendota Heights, as it currently encompasses too many unaffected properties, especially within the proposed CA -SR District. In addition, the existing boundaries do not follow parcel boundary lines in some cases and should include the entire parcel. We understand this would require legislative action and are willing to work with the DNR to provide the appropriate information and/or data required to pursue this process. 7. Nonconformities [Part 6106.0080 Administrative Provisions for Ordinances, Subp. 31 The draft rules would allow expansion of legally nonconforming principal structures that do not meet the revised setback requirements, provided that such expansion does not extend further into the new setbacks. We would suggest additional language that allows the reasonable use of properties already developed under the existing rules and excluding them from the proposed 18% very steep slope/top of bluff definitions at the City's discretion. Additional permitting and conditions, including compliance with the existing setback provisions the property was developed under, would be required. page 64 8. Structure Height [Part 6106.0120 Dimensional Standards, Subp. 2(A)(4)] Proposed Standards CA -ROS: 35 feet CA -RN: 35 feet CA -SR: TBD by local government underlying zoning, provided the structure's height is generally consistent with the height of existing surrounding development as viewed from the OHWL of the opposite shore. Existing Standards (zoning districts within the Critical Area Overlay District) R-1: 2 stories or 25 feet, whichever is less MR -PUD: 2 stories or 25 feet, whichever is less B-1: 3 stories or 35 feet, whichever is less B -IA: 4 stories or 45 feet, whichever is less Comments As proposed, the City's existing building height standards for the R-1, MR -PUD, and B-1 Districts are stricter and supersede the draft rules. The Xcel propane plant is zoned B -IA and would be the only property potentially impacted in the proposed CA -SR District, if it were to be redeveloped in the future. However, the proposed standard requiring consistency with heights of surrounding development as viewed from the opposite shore could cause a significant burden on the applicant to provide the appropriate information and for the City to verify. This also does not seem to account for structures under the height requirement or existing nonconforming structures, both of which could negatively impact the implementation of this standard. BUDGETIMPACT Once adopted, the amended rules will require the City to amend the existing Critical Area Overlay District standards. In addition, the MRCCA section of the Comprehensive Plan will have to be amended. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council discuss the proposed MRCCA Rules and provide comments and follow- up questions for Staff in preparation of the City's formal comments to be submitted to the DNR. Attachments (7): 2013-2015 MRCCA Rulemaking schedule Project Overview Homeowner's Guide 2014 DRAFT Rules — dated June 2, 2014 MRCCA Bluff Maps (2) St. Paul Pioneer Press Article •11 • • i O u1 O +^�+ N o N o }' o ii J L a' Q- 0(1) ON a > a O a••+ C: a••+ N O L Q W +-tto a, Q Q _ E � a N E 3 0 Q1 +� N L O o[ N O v N = _0 }, (n O >o c . `^ cn N >++ N > m in> I . V O E -0 Q Q Q > C) O Q Z a- �z zz mz a°p (O 0° <o U U- �' N '� N N .L 4- C O �.. y 0 N i N L pc: o m _ E iQ 0 p O O z o . O 4- O(1) N 4- �_y( 0Nf6 J C)0 L C: NN Q(1 ° E �Up co a Z �, Q N N OO V a1 a--+ U N O N O QJ w. • 1 d 1 Z 1 d c� v�j oL cn cr- U- of U- N N U o_ .+- O 4 U L Q 4--+ F Uji 2! C1' U N .C: H -0 > U U • O L - N s 4- 0 3 3 Q to Z) v W L M N N N 0 QN Q H 4- O Q N J ; U o Q a) O o z History of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area 1973 Minnesota passes Critical Areas Act of 1973 (MN Statutes, Chapter 116G) EQB adopts rules to implement Act (MN Rules, parts 4410.8100 — 4410.9910) 1976 Mississippi River and adjacent corridor designated a state critical area by Governor Wendell Anderson (Executive Order No. 130) 1979 Designation continued by Governor Albert Quie (Executive Order 79-19) Metropolitan Council acts to make designation permanent (Resolution 79-48) 1988 Mississippi National River and Recreational Area (MNRRA) established by Congress as unit of NPS (MNRRA shares same boundary as Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area) 1991 MNRRA designated a state critical area per Critical Areas Act (MN Statutes, section 116G.15) 1995 Responsibility shifts from EQB to DNR by Governor Arne Carlson (Reorganization Order 170) 2007 Legislature directs DNR to prepare report on the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (Completed January 2008) 2009 Legislature amends MN Statutes, section 116G.15 and directs DNR to conduct rulemaking for the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MN Laws 2009, Chapter 172, Article 2, Section 5.e.) 2011 DNR develops draft rule after participatory stakeholder process, but rulemaking authority lapses 2013 Legislature directs DNR to resume rulemaking process in consultation with local governments Current Status i • 30 communities along corridor (21 cities, 5 counties, 4 townships) + several quasi-governmental entities. Anoka Most have adopted critical area plans and ordinances. • EO 79-19 establishes four land use districts: J rhe-Yt1 nakB G3yrGn ChrmplVi a.on F Pits Rural Open Space �� Urban Open Spacee�— ioolilynPai �l Urban Developed aknn ;1e Urban Diversified — Washington ) • EO 79-19 establishes performance standards and Hennepin RamWp v d guidelines for each land use district. M;m92Po F4 • Local government units (LGUs) administer and enforce a variety of plans and regulations to meet the performance standards. zP a� • The critical area is cooperatively managed: ; �,' erefOeHe' aroma°1QB 1 � DNR Role: Adopts rules, reviews/approves plans 5rvn9 Ratting and ordinances, and may review and comment on T_ , actions requiring a public hearing. Mississippi River Critical Area Dakota Boundary and Districts �,. NPS Role: Has provided funding assistance to rural open space r--�' _ urtdasslfied local, regional, and state agencies; encourages _ urban developed 1 LGUs to incorporate voluntary MNRRA policies urban drvercifled � _ into plans; and provides stewardship, education, urban open space 5 25 0 501es and historical and cultural resource protection. 11=� Page 1 Minnesota DNR-Division of Ecological &Water Resources — 05123114 page 67 Met Council Role: Reviews plans for consistency with regional policies, EO 79-19, and MNRRA policies and submits recommendation to DNR; and provides assistance to LGUs adopting or amending plans. LGU Roles: Adopt DNR -approved plans and ordinances, and administer and enforce them. Key Points of 2009 and 2013 Legislation The legislation authorizes the DNR to adopt rules and requires the DNR to: • establish, by rule, districts within the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. The DNR must: — determine appropriate number of districts within each municipality, — take into account municipal plans and policies, and existing ordinances and conditions, and — consider protection of key identified resources and features. • establish, by rule, minimum guidelines and standards for the districts to protect key resources and features and use them when approving plans and regulations and reviewing development permit applications. • consult with local governments prior to rule adoption (new in 2013). • protect existing commercial, industrial and residential uses (new in 2013). • 2009 legislation required preparation of a preliminary bluff map; this requirement was eliminated in 2013, but protection of bluffs and related features remains a priority. General Overview of State Rulemaking Process (MN Statutes, Chapter 14) Output of 2009-2010 Process Starting point for 2013-2015 Process N4 Formal rulemaking to be conducted in 2014-2015 *The DNR re -published a Request for Comments on June 2, 2014 and will continue to involve local governments, interest groups, other agencies, and the public in improving and refining the draft rules. The DNR also intends to hold a public hearing as part of the formal rulemaking process. For more information, including a detailed 2013-2015 rulemaking schedule, visit the project website: httr)://mndnr.00v/waters/watermamt section/critical area/rulemakina.html Page 2 Minnesota DNR -Division of Ecological &Water Resources — 05123114 page 68 Homeowner's Guide to the MRCCA Working Draft Rules Purpose The purpose of this guide is to familiarize homeowners in the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) with the working draft rules dated June 2, 2014. This guide focuses on those rule provisions most likely to affect homeowners. It is intended to be used with the "MRCCA Overview' document, which explains the MRCCA and its history. This guide describes how the working draft rules differ from the existing MRCCA regulations. The rule part or subpart number referencing the actual rule language is shown in the title of each summarized rule provision. Background on Local Control Property owners have been subject to MRCCA regulations since the MRCCA was established by Executive Order in the 1970s. Since that time, MRCCA regulations have been implemented through local government zoning ordinances. The proposed rules will update the MRCCA regulations, which will then be implemented through updates to these local zoning ordinances. The DNR and Metropolitan Council both review local ordinances for consistency with MRCCA standards, with the DNR having final approval authority. The working draft rules will not change these inter -governmental relationships. Districts (part 6106.0100) What are districts? Resources are currently protected through the use of four districts established in the Executive Order. The working draft rules propose six districts that better reflect the existing character and development along the river and recognize planned future development. In which district is my property located? Most residential neighborhoods are located in the proposed CA -ROS, CA -RN and CA -SR Districts. To find where your property is located, please see maps showing the existing districts and the proposed districts. Dimensional Standards (part 6106.0120) What standards apply to my property? Standards for building height and setbacks from the river and the top of 18% slopes are regulated by district. The setback provisions are intended to keep buildings and other development activity away from sensitive shoreline areas and areas prone to soil erosion. Sediment is a pollutant and it also carries nutrients and other pollutants into the river, which reduces water clarity and water quality. Will the standards change for my property? Building height and setbacks are currently Mlnnesata regulated by local zoning ordinances and will not change for most homeowners. The tables on the following page outline the standards currently contained in most local ordinances, as well as those proposed in the working draft rules. DEPARVENTOF HAiUARLAF.S MS Minnesota DNR -Division of Ecological &Water Resources — 06102114 page 69 Existine Reeulations - Executive Order 79-19* * These regulations are implemented through local zoning ordinances. Standards may differ from one community to another. Check your community's ordinance to verify which standards currently apply to your property. Proposed Working Draft Rules Rural Open Urban Urban Urban Open CA -UM Space Developed Diversified Space 48 - 56' TBD Underlying 65' Underlying 35 35' 35' 35' Height Height zoning CUP > 56' zoning CUP > 65' zoning Underlying 200' 100' 100' River Setback 200' 100' zoning NA 18% Slope 100' 40' 40' 40' Setback zoning 18% Slope * These regulations are implemented through local zoning ordinances. Standards may differ from one community to another. Check your community's ordinance to verify which standards currently apply to your property. Proposed Working Draft Rules Expansion of Nonconforming Structures (part 6106.0080, Subp. 3) Legal nonconforming structures are structures that were lawfully permitted when they were built. However, when zoning standards change, these lawfully established structures that do not conform to the new standards become legally nonconforming or "grandfathered". The ability to expand these structures is unclear in the existing MRCCA regulations and has raised concern among some homeowners. To address this, the working draft rules clarify that local governments may allow the expansion of nonconforming structures, as long as they do not expand further into required setbacks from 18% slopes and from the river. For additional information on nonconformities, refer to "Nonconformities Guide". Vegetation & Land Alteration Standards (part 6106.0150) Why do we need rules on vegetation and land alteration? Vegetation is the primary means for stabilizing soil and for slowing, absorbing, and filtering stormwater before it runs into the river. Land alteration in areas near water and on steep slopes increases the risk of soil erosion and the movement of sediment into water. Retaining and/or restoring deep-rooted vegetation along the river's edge and on steep slopes, and preventing erosion during development are important strategies for protecting water quality and animal habitat. What is wrong with the existing regulations? Existing MRCCA regulations for managing vegetation removal and land alteration activities are vague and are not clear on what homeowners can and can't do. Changes are proposed to better protect vegetation and manage land alteration. The biggest change would require homeowners to obtain a permit from the local government for land alteration and vegetation removal activities in sensitive areas (primarily along the river's edge and on 18 % slopes on developed lots) that exceed certain thresholds Minnesota DNR -Division of Ecological &Water Resources — 06102114 CA -ROS CA -RN CA -RTC CA -SR CA -UM CA -UC 48 - 56' TBD Underlying 65' Underlying 35 35 , Height CUP > 56' zoning CUP > 65' zoning Underlying River Setback 200' 100' 75' NA 50' zoning 18% Slope 100' 40' 40' 40' 40' 40' Setback Expansion of Nonconforming Structures (part 6106.0080, Subp. 3) Legal nonconforming structures are structures that were lawfully permitted when they were built. However, when zoning standards change, these lawfully established structures that do not conform to the new standards become legally nonconforming or "grandfathered". The ability to expand these structures is unclear in the existing MRCCA regulations and has raised concern among some homeowners. To address this, the working draft rules clarify that local governments may allow the expansion of nonconforming structures, as long as they do not expand further into required setbacks from 18% slopes and from the river. For additional information on nonconformities, refer to "Nonconformities Guide". Vegetation & Land Alteration Standards (part 6106.0150) Why do we need rules on vegetation and land alteration? Vegetation is the primary means for stabilizing soil and for slowing, absorbing, and filtering stormwater before it runs into the river. Land alteration in areas near water and on steep slopes increases the risk of soil erosion and the movement of sediment into water. Retaining and/or restoring deep-rooted vegetation along the river's edge and on steep slopes, and preventing erosion during development are important strategies for protecting water quality and animal habitat. What is wrong with the existing regulations? Existing MRCCA regulations for managing vegetation removal and land alteration activities are vague and are not clear on what homeowners can and can't do. Changes are proposed to better protect vegetation and manage land alteration. The biggest change would require homeowners to obtain a permit from the local government for land alteration and vegetation removal activities in sensitive areas (primarily along the river's edge and on 18 % slopes on developed lots) that exceed certain thresholds Minnesota DNR -Division of Ecological &Water Resources — 06102114 page 70 that pose risks. The purpose of requiring a permit is to connect property owners with a qualified person who can guide these activities to minimize negative impacts to water quality and habitat. When and in which areas would a permit be required for land alteration? A permit would be required for any activity that disturbs more than 5- Comments are requested on the 10 cubic yards or 250 — 3,000 square feet of soil in the following areas: specific amount of disturbance • In the shore impact zone - 50% of the structure setback from activity that should trigger the the river permit - please suggest a specific number within the • Within 50 feet of a public water, wetland, or natural drainage highlighted range of numbers, way or some other number you feel • In a slope preservation zone — areas with slopes greater than is more appropriate. 18%, including land within 20 feet of these areas. • In a bluff impact zone — areas with slopes greater than 30% including land within 20 feet of these areas. Disturbance activity exceeding these levels in these areas must use temporary and permanent erosion and sediment control measures sufficient to retain sediment onsite. Except for a limited number of exceptions, land alteration is not allowed in slope and bluff preservation zones. Local governments would have the authority to attach conditions to the permit that would minimize environmental impacts. What if 1 need riprap or retaining walls? The construction or replacement of riprap, retaining walls, and bioengineering systems are considered a form of land alteration that would also require a permit in the following areas: • In the shore impact zone - 50% of the structure setback from the river • In a slope preservation zone — areas with slopes greater than 18%, including land within 20 feet of these areas. • In a bluff impact zone — areas with slopes greater than 30%, including land within 20 feet of these areas. Riprap, retaining walls or other "hard armoring" can only be used to correct an erosion problem that cannot be controlled through vegetation or a bioengineered system (as determined by the local government). Patios and retaining walls would be allowed in slope preservation zones that don't abut the river, a bluff, or natural drainageway, as long as slope stability is maintained, and the project is not readily visible from the river. When and in which areas would a permit be required for Comments are requested on the vegetation management? specific amount of vegetation A permit is also proposed for removal of tree canopy or other natural removal that should trigger the permit —please suggest a vegetative cover that reduces cover more than 5-15 percent or more specific number within the than 1,000 — 5,000 square feet, whichever is less, in the following highlighted range of numbers, areas: or some other number you feel • In the shore impact zone - 50% of the structure setback from is more appropriate. the river. Minnesota DNR -Division of Ecological &Water Resources — 06102114 page 71 • In a slope preservation zone — areas with slopes greater than 18%, including land within 20 feet of these areas. • In a bluff impact zone — areas with slopes greater than 30%, including land within 20 feet of these areas. • Areas of native plant communities anywhere in the MRCCA. • Other areas of significant vegetation identified in local government plans. Vegetation removal activity that exceeds these levels in these specific areas must comply with local government permit conditions that minimize environmental impact. For example, the removal of native plant communities would need to be replaced with vegetation similar to the habitat value, slope stabilization, and stormwater retention value of the removed native plant communities. Another example would require the planting of deep-rooted vegetation on any highly erodible soils that are disturbed. Within the above listed areas, intensive vegetation clearing or clear -cutting is prohibited. The proposed rules also state that the local government must require a restoration plan for violations of the standards. The proposed standards also list the following activities for which NO permit is required: • Pruning of trees and shrubs to maintain plant health and improve aesthetics • Maintenance of existing lawns, landscaping, and gardens • Removal of vegetative cover less than the amounts described above Shoreline Facilities & River Access on Riparian Lots (part 6106.0140) The existing MRCCA regulations do not address shoreline facilities and river access such as access paths, stairways, recreation areas and water -oriented structures. The working draft rules propose the following: • Driveways or parking areas must meet structure setbacks and cannot be placed in the slope preservation or bluff impact zones. • No impervious surfaces within the shore impact zone (50% of structure setback) except for: o Access paths no greater than eight feet wide o Stairways and lifts no greater than four feet wide - landings may be up to 32 square feet in area. • One shoreline recreation area per lot no larger than 5,000 square feet and no wider than 25 feet or 12% of the lot width, whichever is greater, and not extending more than 25 feet landward from the water. • One water -oriented accessory structure for every 300 feet of river frontage. Lots less than 300 feet may have one structure. The water -oriented accessory structure is limited to a 12 foot height, 120 square feet, and must be at least 10 feet from the water's edge. Structures are not allowed in the bluff impact and slope preservation zones. Minnesota DNR -Division of Ecological &Water Resources — 06102114 page 72 Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (MRCCA) DNR Working Draft Rules — Clean Version June 2, 2014 Alinnaso�a oaam�ru glnIRUARVWSY page 73 Introduction & MRCCA Rulemaking Background The MRCCA is a unique land corridor along the Mississippi River within the seven -county metro area. The corridor is 72 miles long, 54,000 acres in area, and within the jurisdiction of 30 local governments (LGUs). Land development in the corridor is guided by state regulations, which are currently implemented through local plans and ordinances that are reviewed and approved by the DNR. The Metropolitan Council works with the DNR to review plans and ordinances. The MRCCA was established in the 1970s by Executive Order, a type of state regulation that cannot be readily changed or updated. Over the last decade, it has become increasingly challenging for the state and local governments to administer regulations under the Executive Order because it: • does not provide DNR with clear criteria for evaluating local plans and ordinances, • limits redevelopment and reinvestment in the corridor, • is complex and costly to administer, • provides inadequate resource protection due to vague and outdated language, and • requires that numerous and often conflicting resources and functions be conserved (scenic, environmental, mineral, economic, cultural, and historic) but does not prioritize among them. In 2009, the Minnesota Legislature directed the DNR to establish rules for the MRCCA. The DNR undertook an extensive participation process from 2009-2010 that resulted in the "2011 draft rules." At the conclusion of the process, the previous administration did not support the proposed rules, and local concern and opposition to the rulemaking was growing. As a result, the rulemaking process halted in 2011 and the DNR's statutory authority to do rulemaking expired. In 2013, the Legislature restored DNR's rulemaking authority and made changes to the statutory language guiding rule development, with greater emphasis on addressing local government concerns and consideration of existing and potential new development. The DNR established the following goals to guide this new rulemaking effort: • maintain and improve water quality and habitat, • better recognize existing and planned development, • increase flexibility for local governments, • focus on rules that best achieve resource protection, and • simplify administration and clarify language. Rulemaking Schedule Phase I: LGU Review During Phase I of the rulemaking schedule (Figure 1), consultation with LGUs was the primary focus of DNR's renewed rulemaking effort. Over the past ten months, DNR staff has met individually with each LGU's staff/officials and three times with a group of LGUs convened by Metro Cities, with multiple follow-up calls and meetings. The DNR has also met with the Metropolitan Council and National Park Service, as well as with several groups representing environmental and development interests. PHASE I LGU review July 2013 - April 2414 Kick-off Meeting with LIVIC/Metra }ul 13, 2013 Meetings with LGUs to Identify Qpportunities for Improving Draft Aug - Sep 1013 Recap Meeting with LNEC/Metro C Oct 24, 2013 Revise Draft Rules' Nov 2013 — March 2014 Recap Meeting with LMC/Metro Cities. April 1.& 2QL _j PHASE II Public Outreach & Rule Revision June 2014 - October 2414 publish Request for Comments (RFC June 2014 Notify all property Owners June 2014 Public Comment Period (starts upon publication of RFCj SpringfSummer 2014 Meetings with Interested Parties Summer 2014 Public Meetings & Open Houses Summer 2014 Revise Rules Based on Comments Foil 2014 Revise SONAR Fall 2014 PHASE III Formal Rule Adaption November 2014 - Early 2015 Publish Notice of Intent to Adopt Rules with a Public Hearing Nov 2014 Notify all Parties on Mailing List Nov 2014 30 -Day Formal Comment Period Nov — Dec 2014 Public Hearing TBD Respond to Comments/Rebuttal TBD Administrative Law Judge Report TBO Governor Review & Approval/Veto TBD Adopt Rule TBD page 75 • reduction in the number of nonconformities (existing or created) and greater emphasis on the continuance of those structures/lots going forward; • stronger rules governing vegetation removal and land alteration; subdivisions and other large scale development and redevelopment projects; and the protection of native plant communities, bluffs, steep slopes, and shore impact zones; and • simplified and streamlined administrative procedures for the review and approval of plans and ordinances, and improved organization for easier reading and administration. This phase is intended to provide for informal feedback on the working draft rules before they are finalized for Phase III — Formal Rule Adoption (Figure 1). Phase III: Formal Rule Adoption This third phase is a formal process that begins with a Notice of Intent/Hearing to adopt the rules, with a public hearing presided over by an Administrative Law Judge. How to read this document... All proposed revisions to the 2011 draft rules have been incorporated into this "clean" version for a less complicated reading experience. A parallel, "tracked" version is also available that shows all changes made to the 2011 draft rules. Potential changes to numeric thresholds, such as height, setbacks, open space dedication, and permit requirements, have not been "set in stone", but rather are presented in the draft as ranges that are highlighted for public input. A commentary column to the right of the proposed rule text guides readers through the rules and provides some explanation for various provisions and proposed changes, and also draws attention to specific thresholds and provisions for which DNR is seeking input and direction. How to comment... Interested persons or groups may submit comments on these working draft rules in writing until 4:30 p.m. on August 15, 2014. Guidance on submitting comments is available at the MRCCA rulemaking webpage (link below). Comments and questions should be directed to: Daniel Petrik at Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155-4025, 651-259-5714 (phone), 651-296-1811 (facsimile), and mrcca.rulemaking@state.mn.us. For additional information on the MRCCA rulemaking, including information on public meetings over the summer, visit: http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/input/rules/mrcca/index.html Table of Contents PART page 76 6106.0010 POLICY......................................................................................................................... 1 6106.0020 PURPOSE.....................................................................................................................1 6106.0030 SCOPE..........................................................................................................................1 6106.0040 SEVERABILITY............................................................................................................... 2 6106.0050 DEFINITIONS................................................................................................................2 6106.0060 ADMINISTRATION OF PROGRAM................................................................................ 10 6106.0070 PREPARATION, REVIEW, AND APPROVAL OF PLANS AND ORDINANCES ....................... 13 6106.0080 ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS FOR ORDINANCES....................................................... 18 6106.0090 INCORPORATIONS BY REFERENCE............................................................................... 20 6106.0100 DISTRICTS.................................................................................................................. 21 6106.0110 USES.......................................................................................................................... 23 6106.0120 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS....................................................................................... 26 6106.0130 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC FACILITIES ..................................... 28 6106.0140 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE FACILITIES ................................... 30 6106.0150 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT AND LAND ALTERATION STANDARDS ............................. 32 6106.0160 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STANDARDS............................................................... 37 6106.0170 SUBDIVISIONS AND LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ............................................... 37 page 77 Page intentionally left blank. page 78 Proposed Rules Relating to Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes PART 6106.0010 POLICY It is in the interest of present and future generations to preserve and enhance the natural, aesthetic, cultural, and historical values of the Mississippi River corridor within the Twin Cities metropolitan area and protect its environmentally sensitive areas. In furtherance of the policies declared in Minnesota Statutes, chapters 116G, =3=94 462, and 473, and by Executive Order 79-19, the commissioner does hereby provide standards and criteria for the preservation, protection, and management of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area The policy statement establishes the overall goal of the proposed rules as authorized by state statute. PART 6106.0020 PURPOSE The following minimum standards and criteria are provided for the This part lays out the goals of the rules. MS subdivision, use, and development of land within the Mississippi National 116G.15 designates the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area, which is designated the Mississippi River River Recreation Area (MNRRA) as a state critical area per the Critical Areas Act and Corridor Critical Area. The purposes of the minimum standards and criteria identifies these five purpose statements, are to: which come directly from EO 79-19 and MS A. protect and preserve the Mississippi River and adjacent lands that 116G.15. the legislature finds to be unique and valuable state and regional resources for the benefit of the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of the state, region, and nation; B. prevent and mitigate irreversible damages to these state, regional, and national resources; C. preserve and enhance the natural, aesthetic, cultural, and historical values of the Mississippi River and adjacent lands for public use and benefit; D. protect and preserve the Mississippi River as an essential element in the national, state, and regional transportation, sewer and water, and recreational systems; and E. protect and preserve the biological and ecological functions of the Mississippi River corridor. PART 6106.0030 SCOPE This part describes the physical land area Subpart 1. Applicability. The standards and criteria for the Mississippi covered by the rules, the general roles and River Corridor Critical Area, defined for the purpose of these parts as responsibilities of agencies in furthering the the "MRCCA rules," established in parts 6106.0010 to 6106.0170 purpose of the rules, and the applicability of pertain to public waters and to public and private lands within the river 0 ther regulations within the MRCCA. Using corridor boundary established by Executive Order 79-19. the terminology of "MRCCA rules" enables us to refer to the rules in a simpler manner than Subp. 2. Government actions. The state and all local governments, parts 6106.0010 to 6106.0150" including councils, commissions, boards, districts, departments, and This subpart requires all state and local units other public authorities, must exercise their powers so as to further the of government with jurisdiction in the MRCCA purposes of the MRCCA rules. to act in accordance with these rules. Subp. 3. State land. Land owned by the state and its agencies and MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 79 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes subdivisions must be administered according to the MRCCA rules. Subp. 4. Conflicting standards. In case of a conflict between this chapter and any other rule, the more protective provision applies. Subp. 5. Local determination. Local governments may determine whether to administer the Minnesota statewide shoreland management standards in parts 6120.2500 to 6120.3900 within the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. Subp. 6. Superseding standards. Specific standards found in this chapter supersede Executive Order 79-19 and parts 4410.8100 to 4410.9910 for management of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. Subpart 5 was added at the request of local governments to reduce complexity and confusion on overlapping regulations. It gives local governments the option of discontinuing administration of statewide Shoreland Management within the MRCCA. PART 6106.0040 SEVERABILITY Severability means that if particular elements of these rules are found to be Minnesota Statutes, section 645.20, applies to this chapter. unconstitutional, the remaining provisions will continue in force as law. This is a standard clause of all rules and ordinances. PART 6106.0050 DEFINITIONS Of these terms and definitions: Subpart 1. Scope of terms and measurement of distances. For the ' 16 refer to or are derived from Minnesota purposes of parts 6106.0010 to 6106.0150, the terms used have the Statutes, section 1166 and/or Executive meaning given in this part. All distances, unless otherwise specified, are Order 79-19, including: adjacent, barge fleeting area, bluffline; developer, measured horizontally. development, discretionary action; essential Subp. 2. Access path. "Access path" means an area designated to services; local government, MUSA; off - provide ingress and egress to public waters. premise advertising signs; parcel, public transportation facilities, public safety Subp. 3. Adjacent. "Adjacent" means having a boundary that physically facilities, setback, steep slope; and touches or adjoins. transmission services. Subp. 4. Aggregate extraction. "Aggregate extraction" means removal ' 22 refer to existing terms and definitions of stone, sand, gravel, or other material from the land for commercial, in other state statutes or another chapter of rule, including: agricultural use; conditional industrial, or governmental purposes. use; conservation easement, dock, feedlot, Subp. 5. Aggregate mining. "Aggregate mining" means construction, floodplain; interim use; lot, marina; mooring reconstruction, repair, relocation, expansion, or removal of any facility facility, nonconformity, ordinary high water for the extraction, stockpiling, storage, disposal, or reclamation of level, plat, port, public waters; storm water, nonmetallic minerals. Aggregate mining does not include ancillary subdivision; subsurface sewage treatment facilities such as access roads, bridges, culverts, and water level control system; variance, wetland; and wharf. structures. For purposes of this subpart, "facility" includes all mine pits, ' the remaining definitions are new and quarries, stockpiles, basins, and any structures that drain or divert clarify concepts useful in administering the rules. public waters to allow mining. Subp. 6. Agricultural use. "Agricultural use" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 40A. Subp. 7. Alternative design. "Alternative design" means subdivision design methods such as conservation design, transfer of development density, or similar zoning and site design techniques that protect open space and natural areas. MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Working Draft Rules Subp. 8. Barge fleeting. "Barge fleeting" means temporarily parking and securing barges on the river, on or off channel, while tows are assembled or broken up. Subp. 9. Bioengineering. "Bioengineering" means use of living and nonliving plant materials, in combination with natural and synthetic support materials, for slope stabilization, erosion reduction, and vegetative establishment. Subp. 10. Bluff. "Bluff' means a natural topographic feature having all of the following characteristics: A. a slope that rises at least 25 feet above the ordinary high water level or toe of the bluff. For the purposes of this subpart, "toe of the bluff' means the lower point of a horizontal ten -foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent; and B. the grade of the slope from the ordinary high water level or toe of the bluff to the top of the bluff averages 30 percent or greater. For the purposes of this subpart, "top of the bluff' means the higher point of the highest horizontal ten -foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent. page 80 Commentary/Rationale for Changes The bluff definition is consistent with that in the statewide Shoreland Management rules. A bluff is a natural feature in contrast to man- made features such as highway embankments and road ditches. Bluff impact zone is the same definition used in the state shoreland rules. "Toe" and "top" are incorporated here for ease of reference and understanding. Subp. 11. Bluff impact zone. "Bluff impact zone" means the bluff and Bluffline is used for measuring structuresetbacks. land within 20 feet of the bluff. Bluff Impact Zona (SIZI Subp. 12. Bluffline. "Bluffline" means a line delineating the top of the bluff. More than one bluffline may be encountered proceeding landward from the river. See also "Top of Bluff." I" _�;'°" Subp. 13. Buildable area. "Buildable area" means the area upon which structures may be placed on a lot or parcel of land and excludes areas needed to meet setback requirements, rights-of-way, bluff impact zones, slope preservation zones, historic sites, wetlands, designated floodways, land below the ordinary high water level of public waters, and other unbuildable areas. Subp. 14. Building. A structure with two or more outside rigid walls and a fully secured roof, that is affixed to a permanent site. Subp. 15. Certificate of compliance. "Certificate of compliance" means a document, written after a compliance inspection, certifying that development is in compliance with applicable requirements at the time of the inspection. Subp. 16. Commissioner. "Commissioner" means the commissioner of natural resources or his or her designee. Subp. 17. Conditional use. "Conditional use" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, chapters 394 and 462 Subp. 18. Conservation easement. "Conservation easement" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 84C. Subp. 19. Conservation design. "Conservation design" means a pattern 3 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 a3a9E w�°m.em ww..�wMu .:sn "Building" - New definition is based on FEMA NFIP Standard Flood Insurance Policy definition — to distinguish "building" from "picnic shelter." page 81 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes of subdivision that is characterized by the grouping of lots within a portion of a parcel, where the remaining portion of the parcel is permanently protected as open space. Subp. 20. Conventional subdivision. "Conventional subdivision" means a pattern of subdivision that is characterized by lots that are spread regularly throughout a parcel in a lot and block design. Subp. 21. Deck. "Deck" means a horizontal, unenclosed, aboveground level structure, with or without attached railings, seats, trellises, or other features, attached or functionally related to a principal use or site. Subp. 22. Developer. "Developer" has the meaning given under Local governments asked for clarification on Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.03. which actions fall under "discretionary actions." This definition has been clarified: Subp. 23. Development. "Development" has the meaning given under only land use actions that pertain to the Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.03 MRCCA rules are covered. Subp. 24. Discretionary action. "Discretionary action" means an action under these MRCCA rules related to land use that requires a public hearing, such as preliminary plats, final subdivision plats, planned unit developments, conditional use permits, interim use permits, variances, appeals, and rezonings. Subp. 25. Dock. "Dock" has the meaning given under chapter 6115. Subp. 26. Ecological functions. "Ecological functions" means the functions of vegetation in stabilizing soils, retaining and filtering runoff, providing habitat and recharging groundwater. Subp. 27. Electric power facilities. "Electric power facilities" means equipment and associated facilities for generating electric power or devices for converting wind energy to electrical energy as identified and defined under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 216E. Subp. 28. Essential services. "Essential services" means underground or overhead gas, electrical, communications, steam, or water distribution, collection, supply, or disposal systems, including stormwater. Essential services include poles, wires, mains, drains, pipes, conduits, cables, fire alarm boxes, traffic signals, hydrants, navigational structures, aviation safety facilities or other similar equipment and accessories in conjunction with the systems. Essential services do not include buildings, wastewater treatment works as defined in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 115, or electrical generation and transmission services. Subp. 29. Feedlot. "Feedlot" has the meaning given for animal feedlots under chapter 7020. Subp. 30. Floodplain. "Floodplain" has the meaning given under chapter 6120. Subp. 31. Historic site. "Historic site" means an archaeological site, 4 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Working Draft Rules standing structure, site, district, or other property that is: A. listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the State Register of Historic Sites or locally designated as a historic site; B. determined to meet the criteria for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places or the State Register of Historic Sites after review by the state archeologist or the director of the Minnesota Historical Society; or C. an unplatted cemetery that falls under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, chapter 307. Subp. 32. Impervious surface. "Impervious surface" means a constructed hard surface that either prevents or retards the entry of water into the soil and causes water to run off the surface in greater quantities and at an increased rate of flow than prior to development. Examples include rooftops, decks, sidewalks, patios, parking lots, storage areas, and driveways, including those with concrete, asphalt, or gravel surfaces.. Subp. 33. Intensive vegetation clearing. "Intensive vegetation clearing" means removal of trees or shrubs in a contiguous patch, strip, row, or block. Subp. 34. Interim use. "Interim use" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, chapters 394 and 462. Subp. 35. Land alteration. "Land alteration" means an activity that exposes the soil or changes the topography, drainage, or cross section of the land, excluding gardening or similar minor soil disturbances. Subp. 36. Local government. "Local government" means counties, municipalities, and townships and all agencies, boards, commissions, councils, and departments thereof. Subp. 37. Lot. "Lot" has the meaning given under chapter 6120. Subp. 38. Lot width. "Lot width" means the shortest distance between lot lines measured at both the ordinary high water level and at the required structure setback from the ordinary high water level for riparian lots. For nonriparian lots, the lot width is the shortest distance between side lot lines as measured at the midpoint of the longest axis of the lot. Subp. 39. Marina. "Marina" has the meaning given under chapter 6115. Subp. 40. Metropolitan urban service area. "Metropolitan urban service area" means the area in which the Metropolitan Council ensures that regional services and facilities under the council's jurisdiction are provided. Subp. 41. Mooring facility. "Mooring facility" has the meaning given under chapter 6115. Subp. 42. Native plant community. "Native plant community" means a MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 82 Commentary/Rationale for Changes Local governments asked for clarification on what surfaces were considered "impervious". Working Draft Rules a plant community that has been mapped as part of the Minnesota Biological Survey or equivalent survey. Subp. 43. Natural vegetation. "Natural vegetation" means any combination of ground cover, understory, and tree canopy that, while it may have been altered by human activity, continues to stabilize soils, retain and filter runoff, provide habitat and recharge groundwater. Subp. 44. Nonconformity. "Nonconformity" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, chapters 394 and 462. Subp. 45. Nonriparian lot. "Nonriparian lot" means a lot that does not abut public waters. Subp. 46. Off -premise advertising signs. "Off -premise advertising signs" means those signs that direct attention to a product, service, business, or entertainment venue that is not exclusively related to the premises where the sign is located. Subp. 47. Ordinary high water level. "Ordinary high water level" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005. Subp. 48. Parcel. "Parcel" means a quantity of land capable of being described with such definiteness that its location and boundaries may be established, which is designated by its owner or developer as land to be used or developed as a unit or which has been used or developed as a unit. Subp. 49. Patio. "Patio" means a constructed hard surface located at ground level. Subp. 50. Picnic shelter. "Picnic shelter" is a roofed structure open on all sides, accessory to a recreational use. Subp. 51. Planned unit development. "Planned unit development" means a method of land development that merges zoning and subdivision controls, allowing developers to plan and develop a large area as a single entity, characterized by a unified site design, a mix of structure types and land uses, and phasing of development over a number of years. Planned unit development includes any conversion of existing structures and land uses that utilize this method of development. Subp. 52. Plat. "Plat" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, chapters 505 and 515B. Subp. 53. Port. "Port" means a water transportation complex established and operated under the jurisdiction of a port authority according to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 458. page 83 Commentary/Rationale for Changes "Natural vegetation" is used in the vegetation and land alteration standards. Picnic shelter is defined to distinguish it from "building." Picnic shelters may be placed within setbacks, but not in SIZ, BIZ or SPZ. Subp. 554. Primary conservation areas. "Primary conservation areas" The purpose of defining 'primary means key resources and features, including shore impact zones, bluff conservation areas"is to clearly identify key impact zones, slope preservation zones, floodplains, wetlands, gorges, resources and features to protect as land is areas of confluence with key tributaries, natural drainage routes, developed or redeveloped. The term is used in several parts of the rules, includina the MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 84 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes unstable soils and bedrock, significant existing vegetative stands, tree standards for subdivision and open space, to canopies, native plant communities, public river corridor views, other ensure that key resources and features are scenic views and vistas, and cultural and historic sites and structures. given priority consideration for protection as open space. Subp. 55. Professional engineer. "Professional engineer" means an engineer licensed to practice in Minnesota. Subp. 56. Project area. "Project area" means a parcel in its entirety as proposed for development. Subp. 57. Public recreational facilities. "Public recreational facilities" means recreational facilities provided by the state or a local government or dedicated to public use, including scenic overlooks, observation platforms, trails, docks, fishing piers, picnic shelters, water access ramps, and other similar water -oriented public facilities used for recreation. Subp. 58. Public river corridor views. "Public river corridor views" means views toward the river from public parkland and views toward bluffs from the ordinary high water level of the opposite shore, as seen during the summer months. Subp. 59. Public transportation facilities. "Public transportation facilities" means all transportation facilities provided by the state or a local government or dedicated to public use, such as roadways, transit facilities, railroads, and bikeways. Subp. 60. Public utilities. "Public utilities" means electric power facilities, essential services, and transmission services. Subp. 61. Public waters. "Public waters" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005. Subp. 62. Readily visible. "Readily visible" means land and development that is easily seen from the ordinary high water level of the opposite shore during summer months. Subp. 63. Resource agency. "Resource agency" means any federal, state, regional or local agency that engages in natural or cultural resource protection or restoration activities, including planning, implementation and monitoring. Subp. 64. Retaining walls. "Retaining walls" means vertical or nearly vertical structures constructed of mortar and rubble masonry, rock, or stone regardless of size, vertical timber pilings, horizontal timber planks with piling supports, sheet pilings, poured concrete, concrete blocks, or other durable materials. Subp. 65. Riparian lot. "Riparian lot" means a lot that abuts public waters. Subp. 66. Riprap. "Riprap" means coarse stones, boulders, cobbles, broken rock or concrete, or brick materials placed or constructed to armor shorelines, streambeds, bridge abutments, pilings and other MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 "Public river corridor views" is a new definition used in standards that encourage identification and protection of key views of the corridor. "Readily visible" provides a performance standard in response to requests by local governments and other stakeholders to clarify visual standards. "Resource agency" is a new definition — the term is used in the text. Working Draft Rules shoreline structures against scour, water or ice erosion. Subp. 67. River -dependent commercial and industrial use. "River - dependent commercial and industrial use" means use of land for commercial or industrial purposes, where access to and use of a surface water feature is an integral part of the normal conductance of business, such as barge facilities, ports, and marinas. page 85 Commentary/Rationale for Changes Subp. 68. Selective vegetation removal. "Selective vegetative removal" 'Selective vegetation removal' - new term means the removal of individual trees or shrubs that are not in a used in the vegetation management contiguous patch, strip, row, or block and that does not substantially standards. reduce the tree canopy or understory cover. Subp. 69. Setback. "Setback" means a separation distance measured horizontally. Subp. 70. Shore impact zone. "Shore impact zone" means land located between the ordinary high water level of public waters and a line parallel to it at a setback of 50 percent of the required structure setback or 50 feet landward of the ordinary high water level in areas of agricultural use. Subp. 71. Shoreline facilities. "Shoreline facilities" means facilities that require a location adjoining public waters for ingress and egress, loading and unloading, and public water intake and outflow, such as barge facilities, port facilities, commodity loading and unloading equipment, watercraft lifts, marinas, short-term watercraft mooring facilities for patrons, and water access ramps. Structures that would be enhanced by a shoreline location, but do not require a location adjoining public waters as part of their function, are not shoreline facilities, such as restaurants, bait shops, and boat dealerships. Subp. 72. Shoreline recreational use area. "Shoreline recreational use area" means the area within the shore impact where natural vegetation may be cleared for recreational purposes. Subp. 73. Slope preservation zone. "Slope preservation zone" means land on and within 20 feet of a very steep slope. Subp. 74. Steep slope. "Steep slope" means a natural topographic feature with an average slope of 12 to 18 percent, measured over a horizontal distance equal to or greater than 50 feet. Subp. 75. Storm water. "Storm water" has the meaning given under chapter 7090. Subp. 76. Structure. "Structure" means a building, sign, or appurtenance thereto, except for aerial or underground utility lines, such as sewer, electric, telephone, telegraph, or gas lines, including towers, poles, and other supporting appurtenances. Subp. 77. Subdivision. "Subdivision" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 462. 8 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Shore Impact Zone (SiZ) OHWL ❑ H W L Setback Structure Selheck Share Impgcl24ne �S"Ot.Ure Shoreline facilities are river -dependent and need a riverfront location, consistent with the economic purposes of the river corridor as described in EO 79-19. The term is used in several parts of the draft rules, including the design standards for river -dependent commercial and industrial uses, and the list of exceptions to OHWL setbacks. Slope Preservation Zone ISPZj ------------------------- X18% .iofl ro mnd �+wn ,18 w �Yu�•�wri Working Draft Rules Subp. 78. Subsurface sewage treatment system. "Subsurface sewage treatment system" has the meaning given under chapter 7080. Subp. 79. Toe of the bluff. See under "Bluff". Subp. 80 Toe of the slope. See under "Slope" Subp. 81. Top of the bluff. See under "Bluff". Subp. 82. Top of the slope. See under "Slope" Subp. 83. Transmission services. "Transmission services" means: A. electric power lines, cables, pipelines, or conduits that are: (1) used to transport large blocks of power between two points, as identified and defined under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 216; and (2) for mains or pipelines for gas, liquids, or solids in suspension, used to transport large amounts of gas, liquids, or solids in suspension between two points; and B. telecommunication lines, cables, pipelines, or conduits. Subp. 84. Variance. "Variance" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, chapters 394 and 462. Subp. 85. Very steep slope. "Very steep slope" means a natural topographic feature having all of the following characteristics: page 86 Commentary/Rationale for Changes A. the slope rises at least ten feet above the ordinary high water level or toe of the slope. For the purposes of this subpart, "toe protection of slopes over 18% was required by of the slope" means the lower point of the lowest horizontal EO 79-19. ten -foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent; and B. the grade of the slope from the ordinary high water level or toe of the slope to the top of the slope averages 18 percent or greater. For the purposes of this subpart, "Top of the slope" means the higher point of the highest horizontal ten -foot segment with an average slope exceeding 18 percent Subp. 86. Water access ramp. "Water access ramp" means a boat ramp, carry -down site, boarding dock, and approach road, or other access that allows launching and removal of a boat, canoe or other watercraft with or without a vehicle and trailer. Subp. 87. Water -oriented accessory structure. "Water -oriented accessory structure" means a small building or other improvement, except stairways, fences, docks, and retaining walls that, because of the relationship of its use to public waters, reasonably needs to be located closer to public waters than the normal structure setback. Examples include gazebos, screen houses, fish houses, pump houses, and detached decks and patios. Subp. 88. Wetlands. "Wetlands" has the meaning given under Minnesota Statutes, section 103G.005. 9 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 "Water -oriented accessory structures" identifies structures that are commonly constructed closer to the river than most structures. These types of accessory structures are listed as an exception to OHWL setbacks in the dimensional standards. page 87 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes Subp. 89. Wharf. "Wharf' has the meaning given under chapter 6115. PART 6106.0060 ADMINISTRATION OF PROGRAM This part lays out the specific roles, responsibilities, and procedures for administering the rules. Many provisions are relatively unchanged from MS 116G.15, EO 79-19 and/or MR 4410. Subpart 1. Purpose, terms, and time frames. This part establishes the This subpart clarifies which plans and roles, responsibilities, and authorities for administration of these ordinances are affected by these rules, the MRCCA rules. For the purposes of this part and part 6106.0070: role that underlying zoning plays, and the timeframes for specific actions. A. the terms "plan," "ordinance," and "plan and ordinance" mean "Plans" refer to only those elements of each Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area plans and ordinances, city's comprehensive plan (or stand-alone and updates or amendments to plans and ordinances, prepared plop) that deal with land use in the MRCCA. to implement the MRCCA rules; and "Ordinances" are those ordinances that B. time frames are measured in calendar days. specifically regulate land use activity within the MRCCA. This clarification in timeframes was requested by local governments. Subp. 2. Responsibilities and authorities. The standards and criteria for This subpart explains the roles and the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area established in these MRCCA responsibilities of the DNR, the Metropolitan rules must be adhered to by: Council, and local units of government. These three bodies have distinct responsibilities A. the commissioner for reviewing and approving plans and related to plans, ordinances and discretionary ordinances and reviewing discretionary actions; actions. (Discretionary actions refer to actions B. the Metropolitan Council for reviewing plans and commenting requiring a public hearing.) This is unchanged from EO 79-19. on ordinances; Metro Council preference is to focus on plans, C. local governments when preparing, updating, or amending plans not ordinances. This draft includes some and ordinances and reviewing and approving discretionary changes intended to simplify the review actions; and process and reduce the time required. Change to MS 116G will be needed to D. state and regional agencies for permit regulation and plan implement these. development within an agency's jurisdiction, and compliance with zoning regulations of local governments. Subp. 3. Substantial compliance. Local governments within the This subpart states that local governments Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area must adopt, administer, and are responsible for implementing these rules enforce plans and ordinances in substantial compliance with these on the ground. This is unchanged from EO 79- MRCCA rules. Plans and ordinances must be submitted to the 19. Metropolitan Council and the commissioner for review and must be The concept of "substantial compliance" is approved by the commissioner before they are adopted as provided new to the MRCCA and provides local under subpart 11. governments with flexibility to negotiate methods that satisfy the purpose of the rules without being in strict conformance with the rules. The method for pursuing flexibility is covered in part 6106.0070, Subp 6. The flexibility approach is used in the shoreland rules. 10 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 88 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes Subp. 4. Greater restrictions. This subpart clarifies that local governments may adopt regulations that are stricter than Nothing in these MRCCA rules shall be construed as prohibiting or the rules. This clarification was sought by discouraging a local government from adopting and enforcing plans and local governments and other stakeholders. ordinances that are more restrictive than the rules. Subp. 5. Duties of commissioner. The commissioner must: This subpart details the specific duties of the DNR in administering the rules. A. consult with the United States Army Corps of Engineers, National Park Service, Metropolitan Council, and other agencies and local governments to ensure that the Mississippi River This item states that the DNR must consult Corridor Critical Area is managed as a multipurpose resource with other agencies and LGUs to ensure the consistent with the purposes of these MRCCA rules as stated in corridor is managed as a multipurpose part 6106.0020 and Minnesota Statutes chapter 116G.15, subd. resource. 2; B. provide advice and assistance to local governments and Item a outlines how the DNR will assist local agencies in the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area during the governments in complying with the rules. development, adoption, administration, and enforcement of plans and ordinances, consistent with the purposes in part 6106.0020; C. be the lead agency to coordinate the preparation, submission, The ordinance review process is now covered review, and modification of plans and ordinances that are under part 6106.0070. prepared by local governments as provided under 6106.0070. D. review and approve final draft plans and ordinances before The optional activities in this subpart have adoption by a local government as provided under part been deleted because these need not be 6106.0070; and included in rule. E. consult with agencies identified in subpart 9 to ensure that the agencies administer lands and programs under the agencies' jurisdictions consistent with these MRCCA rules. Subp. 6. Duties of Metropolitan Council. The Metropolitan Council Duties of the Metropolitan Council are must: described in this subpart. The Met Council is responsible for reviewing plans and A. incorporate the standards and criteria in parts 6106.0010 to ordinances and providing recommendations 6106.0150 into the council's planning processes; to the DNR for approval of plans and B. work with local governments and the commissioner to ensure ordinances. The Met Council prefers to focus that the standards and criteria in these MRCCA rules are being on plan review rather than ordinance review. adopted and implemented; and C. coordinate with the commissioner on review of plans and commenting on ordinances that are prepared by local governments as provided under subpart 7 Subp. 7. Duties of local governments. Local governments must: This subpart outlines LGU responsibilities: A. prepare or amend plans and ordinances to meet or exceed the ' Updating plans and policies for minimum standards and criteria in these MRCCA rules and as consistency with the rules. provided under part 6106.0070; • Updating ordinances for consistency with B. submit proposed plans and ordinances that affect lands within the rules 11 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 89 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes the boundaries of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area to • Reviewing and approving discretionary the Metropolitan Council and the commissioner for review and actions consistent with their ordinance approval by the commissioner, before adoption as provided and plans. under part 6106.0070,subp. 3; C. adopt, administer, and enforce plans and ordinances as provided underpart 6106.0070,subp. 3; D. send notice of public hearings to consider plans and ordinances Item D details the specific notification and development requiring discretionary action affecting lands requirements. within the boundaries of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area to the following parties so that the parties receive the Statutory change would be needed to change notice at least 30 days before the public hearing: notice requirement to 30 days. (1) the commissioner, in a format prescribed by the DNR only needs the notice, and will ask for commissioner, and; extra documents as needed. (2) the National Park Service; and Notification of adjoining local governments (3) for buildings exceeding height limits specified in part will only be required for conditional use 6106.0120, as part of the conditional use permit or variance processes and variances for buildings process, adjoining local governments, including those with exceeding height limits, notfor all overlapping jurisdiction and those across the river; and development requiring discretionary action. Notification within 10 days of action is E. send notice of final decisions for actions under item D, including required by MS 116G.15. findings of fact, within ten days following the final decision, to those parties listed under and in the manner prescribed by item D. Subp. 8. Duties of townships and counties. This subpart applies to four townships (Denmark, Grey Cloud Island, Nininger, and A. According to subpart 7, townships must prepare or amend plans Ravenna) and two counties (Washington and and ordinances in substantial compliance with these MRCCA Dakota) that have land use authority within rules, under the authority of Minnesota Statutes, chapters 394, the MRCCA. It describes the responsibilities 462, and 473. and notification requirements of townships B. According to subpart 7,counties must prepare or amend plans, and counties. and may prepare ordinances in substantial compliance with these MRCCA rules under the authority of Minnesota Statutes, chapters 394 and 473. If a county has adopted ordinances under this part: (1) a township's plan and ordinances must be consistent with Township regulations must be at least as and at least as restrictive as the plan and ordinances adopted restrictive as the counties they are in. by the county in which the township is located as provided Since a county and township may have under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 394; concurrent or overlapping jurisdiction, a (2) a township must provide for administration and enforcement township could adopt a county's ordinance by of Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area ordinances; and reference. (3) a township may adopt a county's ordinances by reference. Subp. 9. Duties Of Other agencies. This subpart describes the duties for all special units of government or government An agency owning and managing lands within the Mississippi River agencies. This is unchanged from EO 79-19, Corridor Critical Area must manage the lands under the agency's which states that agencies will comply with ownership consistent with these MRCCA rules. For purposes of this MRCCA requirements. subpart, "agency" means the Metropolitan Airports Commission, 12 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 90 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes University of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources, Metropolitan Council, Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, Three Does not include federal agencies and Rivers Park District, Department of Transportation, Anoka -Ramsey institutions over which the state has no Community College, watershed management organizations as authority. established under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103B, watershed districts as established under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 103D, or any other state or local general or special purpose unit of government. PART 6106.0070 PREPARATION, REVIEW, AND APPROVAL OF PLANS AND ORDINANCES Subpart. 1. Purpose. The purpose of this part is to establish the process, responsibilities, timeframes, content requirements, and evaluation criteria for the preparation, review, and approval of plans and ordinances, in order to ensure an efficient process aligned with other regional and local planning processes. Subp. 2. Adoption schedule. A. The commissioner and the Metropolitan Council will jointly This subpart clarifies that, once promulgated, develop a notification schedule for local governments to these rules won't take effect immediately, prepare or amend plans and ordinances to substantially comply local governments won't be required to prepare or amend plans and ordinances until with these MRCCA rules. The schedule will align as closely as notified by DNR, and will be given a possible with the comprehensive plan update process scheduled reasonable amount of time to do so. Existing under Minnesota Statutes, section 473.851 to 473.871. local plans and ordinances remain in effect B. All plans and ordinances adopted by local governments until new plans and ordinances are approved pursuant to Executive Order 79-19 and chapters 6105 and 6120 by the DNR. that are in existence on the effective date of these MRCCA rules remain in effect and must be enforced until plans and ordinances are amended in substantial compliance with these MRCCA rules, approved by the commissioner, and adopted by the local government as provided under subpart 3. C. Where a local government has not adopted plans and Item C pertains to the cities of Brooklyn ordinances, development must continue to be governed by the Center and Hastings, which currently do not interim development regulations in Executive Order 79-19, until have approved MRCCA ordinances in place such time as plans and ordinances that substantially comply and are subject to the interim development with these MRCCA rules are approved by the commissioner and regulations in EO -79-19. adopted by the local government as provided under subpart 3. D. The adoption of plans and ordinances in substantial compliance Item D clarifies that land use applications and with these MRCCA rules does not in any way limit or modify the projects approved by a local government rights of a person to complete a development that is authorized prior to the adoption of ordinances for as provided under Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.13. compliance with this rule may be completed as approved. Subp. 3. Plan and ordinance review. A. Within one year of notification from the commissioner under subpart 1, local governments must prepare or amend plans and ordinances to substantially comply with these MRCCA rules. The 13 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Working Draft Rules commissioner may grant extensions to local governments if requested in writing and if the local government is making a good faith effort to meet the submittal deadline. The extension, if granted, must include a timetable and plan for completion of the ordinance. Local governments must formally submit drafts of plans and ordinances to the commissioner and the Metropolitan Council for concurrent review, for review in a format prescribed by the commissioner. C. Local governments may propose ordinance standards that are not in strict conformity with these MRCCA rules, as provided under subpart 6. If ordinances prepared under item B refer to standards in underlying zoning, then the underlying zoning documents must be submitted and considered in combination with the ordinance, and together must substantially comply with these MRCCA rules. page 91 Commentary/Rationale for Changes Metropolitan Council staff suggests concurrent submittals (currently submitted first to Met Council). This would require a change to MS 116G to take effect. See cross-reference to flexibility procedures (subpart 6). To adequately review ordinances, underlying zoning needs to be documented D. Within 60 days of receiving draft plans and ordinances from The 60 -day and 30 -day time frames are local governments as provided under item A, the commissioner suggested for coordinated review. 60 -day and the Metropolitan Council must review the plan or ordinance period is consistent with requirements for and communicate a decision to the local government. LGus under MS 15.99. (1) The Metropolitan Council must submit its comments to the commissioner within (30) days. The commissioner will have (30) days to complete the review, taking into account the comments submitted by the Metropolitan Council. (2) Plans must be reviewed for consistency with these MRCCA rules and regional systems and policies as specified in MS 473.859. The Metropolitan Council must review and comment on the plan regarding consistency with the council's comprehensive development guide for the metropolitan area. (3) Ordinances must be reviewed for consistency with these MRCCA rules and with comprehensive plans adopted by local governments. E. Upon completing the review, the commissioner must take one of the following two actions and provide a copy of the decision to the Metropolitan Council and the National Park Service: (1) approve the draft plans and ordinances by written decision and notify the local government; or (2) return the draft plans and ordinances to the local government for modification, with a written explanation of the need for modification. F. When the commissioner returns a draft plan and ordinances to the local government for modification, the local government must revise the draft plan and ordinances within 60 days of 14 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Metro Council roles are adjusted per their input in order to clarify time frames and coordination. page 92 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes receipt of the commissioner's written explanation, and must resubmit the revised draft plan and ordinances to the commissioner. Upon receiving the revised draft plan and ordinances from the local government, the commissioner and the Metropolitan Council must conduct the review as provided under item D. (1) The commissioner may grant extensions to local governments if requested in writing and if the local government is making a good faith effort to meet the submittal deadline. The extension, if granted, must include a timetable and plan for completion of the ordinance. G. Within 60 days of receiving the commissioner's approval of a draft plan or ordinance, the local government must adopt the commissioner -approved draft plan and ordinances and submit a copy of the final adopted plan and ordinances, with evidence of adoption, to the commissioner, the Metropolitan Council, and the National Park Service. H. Only those plans and ordinances approved by the commissioner shall have the force and effect of law. I. Once in effect, the local government must implement and enforce the commissioner -approved plans and ordinances. If a local government fails to prepare and submit a draft plan and ordinances within one year of notification as provided under item A, fails to incorporate modifications that are acceptable to the commissioner as provided under item E(2), or fails to adopt commissioner -approved plans or ordinances as provided under item H, the commissioner must: (1) prepare plans and ordinances in substantial compliance with these MRCCA rules within 90 days of the deadline for preparation or adoption of plans and ordinances as provided under items A to E or the end date of an extension of time approved by the commissioner as provided under item D; (2) conduct a public hearing as provided by Minnesota Statutes, chapter 14, and other statutes as applicable; (3) within 60 days of the conclusion of the public hearing, adopt the plans and ordinances for the local government's portion of the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area by written order; and (4) give notice of the adopted plans and ordinances to the affected local government, the Metropolitan Council, and the National Park Service. K. Plans and ordinances that have been adopted by the commissioner apply and have the same effect as if adopted by the local government and must be administered and enforced 15 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 93 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes L. M. by the local government. Local governments may amend plans and ordinances at any time following the procedures detailed in items C through I above. Plans must be updated regularly on the same schedule as other comprehensive plan elements according to Minnesota Statutes, chapter 473. Item M was added to ensure that MRCCA plans are updated regularly and are considered and better integrated with other comprehensive plan elements that are being updated every 10 years (i.e. land use, transportation, etc.) . Subp. 4. Contents of plans. A. The plan must be a component of the local government's This subpart identifies the specific elements comprehensive plan prepared according to Minnesota Statutes, to be included in each LGU MRCCA Plan. chapter 473. Requirement to prepare the plan is in Subp. 3.A above. B. Plans must contain maps, policies, and implementation provisions to: (1) identify and protect primary conservation areas; (2) identify areas that are priorities for restoration of natural Priorities for restoration will be considered as vegetation, erosion prevention, bank stabilization, or other port of the subdivision, PUD, and restoration activities; redevelopment process as outlined in part (3) minimize potential conflict of water surface uses as 6106.0170. provided under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 8613; (4) provide for commercial barge terminals, barge fleeting, and recreational marinas, where appropriate and if applicable; (5) provide for future commercial and industrial uses that require water access; (6) provide for the creation and maintenance of open space and recreation facilities, including parks, scenic overlooks, natural areas, islands, and wildlife areas; (7) identify potential public access points and trail locations; and (8) provide for transportation and public utility development in a manner consistent with these MRCCA rules. Subp. 5. Contents of ordinances. This section outlines what must be included in local ordinances. Requirements on how the A. Local ordinances must substantially comply with the standards ordinance is structured as an overlay district in these MRCCA rules and must include: means that enough information will be (1) definitions consistent with those in part 6106.0050; provided for assessment of changes in (2) administrative provisions consistent with those in part underlying zoning. 6106.0080; (3) minimum standards and criteria consistent with those in part 6106. 0110 through 6106.0170; B. The local ordinance must be structured as an overlay district. If a conflict exists with underlying zoning, the provisions of the overlay district shall govern. Where the underlying zoning standards apply (e.g., height in some districts) those standards must be referenced in the overlay district. Where specific 16 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Working Draft Rules dimensions are listed in part 6106.0120, those dimensions must be included in the overlay district. Subpart 6. Flexibility requests for ordinances. A. Local governments may, under special circumstances and with the commissioner's prior approval, adopt ordinances that are not in strict conformity with these MRCCA rules, if the purposes of Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.15, are satisfied, and the ordinance is consistent with the plan prepared by the local government. Special circumstances may include the following situations: (1) areas where existing urban, residential, commercial or industrial development patterns have been in place for many years and much of the development does not meet the minimum state standards; (2) designation of areas where standards are more restrictive than minimum state standards as trade-offs for other areas where they are less restrictive; (3) the requirements of development, redevelopment, stormwater, parks and other specific plans that are part of an approved comprehensive plan; and (4) existing or planned wastewater, stormwater, water supply and/or utility facilities and similar physical or infrastructural constraints. A local government requesting ordinance flexibility must submit the following items to the commissioner as part of the ordinance submittal required under subpart 2: (1) a detailed description of the proposed alternative standards that are not in strict conformity with a demonstration that the alternative standards are consistent with the policies, purposes, and scope of this chapter according to these MRCCA rules; (2) a description of the special circumstances that justify the use of alternative standards; (3) input from adjoining local governments, including those with overlapping jurisdiction and those across the river, and the public potentially affected by the alternative standards; and (4) supporting information, maps, and documents, as appropriate, to explain the request to the commissioner. C. Within 60 days of receiving a complete request for ordinance flexibility as provided in item B, the commissioner must: (1) evaluate the request based on: a) the extent to which alternative standards satisfy the purposes of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 116G, and the policies, purposes and scope of this chapter; 17 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 94 Commentary/Rationale for Changes This provision, along with subpart 3, provides flexibility to local governments to adopt ordinances that deviate from the rules for special circumstances. Flexibility was requested by local governments to propose their own ordinances to meet the intent of the MRCCA page 95 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes b) the likely impact on primary conservation areas and ; and public river corridor views; and c) the opportunities for mitigation techniques that address any adverse impacts. (2) Approve or deny the request, state in writing to the local government the reasons for the approval or denial, and, as appropriate, suggest alternative solutions or regulatory approaches that would be acceptable to the commissioner. Subpart 7. Plans and projects of state and regional agencies. State This subpart was added to clarify that state and regional agencies owning and managing lands within the agencies must comply with these rules. Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area must comply with the standards in these MRCCA rules and with local government ordinances. Agencies must include the following elements in their plans and project designs for parks and other protected lands: A. standards for public utilities and facilities consistent with the standards in part 6106.0130; and B. provisions for protection of primary conservation areas and public river corridor views. PART 6106.0080 ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS FOR ORDINANCES This part was added to improve rule Subpart 1. Purpose. The purpose of this part is to identify organization and provide a logical sequence of requirements for local ordinances. administrative provisions that must be included in local ordinances to ensure that ordinances are administered consistent with the purpose of these MRCCA rules. Subp. 2. Variances. Requiring mitigation is an option for local A. A local government must consider applications for variances government where warranted; however, if an impact is determined, mitigation must be consistent with Minnesota Statutes, chapters 394 and 462. In required. addition, the local government's review must consider potential impacts on primary conservation areas and other resources identified in local governments' plans. B. If a local government determines that a variance would affect primary conservation areas or other identified resources, it must require mitigation proportional to the effect of the requested variance on the affected resource as provided in subpart 5. Subp.3. Nonconformities. A. The purpose of this subpart is to allow uses and structures that came into existence legally, in conformance with then - applicable requirements, to continue to exist and be put to productive use. B. Nonconformities are regulated by local governments consistent with Minnesota Statutes, chapters 394 and 462. C. Local governments may choose to allow expansion of legally 18 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 96 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes 19 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 nonconforming principal structures that do not meet the setback requirements in part 6106.0120, provided that such expansion does not extend further into setbacks required by these MRCCA rules. D. New structures erected in conformance with the setback averaging provisions of part 6106.0120, subp. 3.D are considered to be in conformance with local ordinance requirements. E. Site alterations that were made legally prior to the effective date of local ordinances adopted under this rule are not considered nonconformities. Subp. 4. Conditional and interim use permits. The rules require a CUP or IUP for mining, cellular towers, facilities to accommodate A. In addition to meeting the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, disabilities, and buildings exceeding height chapters 394 and 462, a local government's review of limits in some districts. This subpart also conditional and interim uses must consider potential impacts applies to activities that LGUs regulate on primary conservation areas and other resources identified in through their required CUPS and IUPs. local governments' plans. B. When evaluation and assessment identify an impact under item A, then the issuance of a conditional or interim use permit include conditions for mitigation according to subpart 5. C. Interim use permits must require compliance with plans and ordinances adopted under this part. Subp. 5. Mitigation. This subpart clarifies when mitigation is A. When a local government identifies a potential negative impact required. to primary conservation areas and other resources identified in the local government's plan, it must require mitigation for: (1) a variance granted to ordinances adopted under these MRCCA rules; and (2) a conditional or interim use permit granted pursuant to ordinances adopted under these MRCCA rules. B. Mitigation must be proportional to the impact of the project on Local government may determine primary conservation areas and other resources identified in appropriate mitigation. local governments' plans. Subp. 6. Site plans. This subpart lists what should be included in plan sets to support decision-making on A. Site plans are required for development within the Mississippi discretionary actions such as subdivisions, River Corridor Critical Area that requires discretionary action or PUDs, CUPS, IUPs and for specific permits that requires a permit under these MRCCA rules. required by these rules—for vegetative B. In addition to local requirements, site plans must include, at a removal, land disturbance, or work in the BIZ, SIZ, or SPZ minimum: (1) a detailed description of the project, including how the project complies with the plans and ordinances adopted under this part; and 19 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 97 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes (2) scaled mapping, dimensional renderings, plans, maintenance agreements, and other materials that identify and describe the following and demonstrate compliance with plans and ordinances, as applicable: a) primary conservation areas; including native plant communities; b) buildable area; c) existing and proposed topography and drainage patterns; d) proposed storm water and erosion and sediment control practices; e) existing and proposed vegetation to be removed and established; f) ordinary high water level, blufflines, and all required setbacks; g) existing and proposed structures; h) existing and proposed impervious surfaces; and i) existing and proposed subsurface sewage treatment systems. Subp. 7. Accommodating disabilities. Ramps or other facilities to This subpart outlines exceptions to the provide persons with disabilities reasonable access to their property, as standards to accommodate people with required by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act and the federal disabilities through an lUP to allow forADA Fair Housing Act and as provided by chapter 1341, are allowed by compliance without needing to go through interim use permit, subject to the following standards: the variance process. A. parts 6106.0120 to 6106. 0170 must be complied with to the maximum extent practicable; and B. the interim use permit expires and the ramp or other facilities must be removed once the property is no longer primarily used by persons with disabilities. PART 6106.0090 INCORPORATIONS BY REFERENCE For purposes of these MRCCA rules, the following documents are These resources are included in this part to incorporated by reference, are subject to frequent change, and are help local governments comply with the rules available through the Minitex interlibrary loan system: using current best practice guidance. A. The Minnesota Stormwater Manual, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (2013) and as subsequently amended); B. Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas; Stormwater Best Management Practices Manual, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (2000 and as subsequently amended); C. Conserving Wooded Areas in Developing Communities: Best Management Practices in Minnesota; Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (2000 and as subsequently amended); D. Design Handbook for Recreational Boating and Fishing Facilities, State Organization for Boating Access (2006 and as 20 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 98 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes subsequently amended); E. Trail Planning, Design, and Development Guidelines, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (2007 and as subsequently amended); F. Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area District Map, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (2014 and as subsequently amended); G. Mississippi National River and Recreation Area Visual Resources Protection Plan, National Park Service (2014 and as amended); and H. Native Vegetation Establishment and Enhancement Guidelines, Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (2012 and as subsequently amended). PART 6106.0100 DISTRICTS This part establishes new districts as required by MS, chapter 116G.15. Six districts are Subpart 1. Establishment of districts. For purposes of these MRCCA provided in this part. These districts have rules, six districts are established, as described in this part. It is been revised to incorporate feedbackfrom intended that all districts protect and enhance the resources and LGus and other stakeholders. The features identified in Minnesota Statutes, section 116G.15. dimensional standards covered in Part 6106.0120 vary by district. Subparts 2-8 below describe each district. Subp. 2. Rural & Open Space District (CA -ROS) The most rural portions of the corridor and public parkland in those areas are included inthe A. The CA -ROS district is characterized by rural low density CA -ROS district. development patterns and land uses, and includes land that is riparian or visible from the river, as well as large, undeveloped tracts of high ecological value, floodplain, and undeveloped islands. Many primary conservation areas exist in this district. B. The CA -ROS district must be managed to sustain and restore the rural and natural character of the corridor, and to protect and enhance existing habitat, public river corridor views, and scenic, natural, and historic areas. Subp. 4. River Neighborhood District (CA -RN) CA -RN District: Developed residential lands and existing/planned parkland that are visible A. The CA -RN district is characterized by residential neighborhoods from the river, or that abut riparian parkland, that are riparian or readily visible from the river or that abut for example, within the Mississippi Gorge. riparian parkland. These areas generally have consistent B. The CA -RN district must be managed to maintain the character building heights below 35 feet. of the river corridor within the context of existing residential development. Minimizing erosion and the flow of untreated stormwater into the river and enhancing shoreline habitat are priorities. Subp. 5. River Towns & Crossings District (CA- RTC) CA -RTC District: Historic downtown and river crossing commercial areas, as well as existing A. The CA -RTC district is characterized by historic downtown areas institutional campuses. and limited nodes of intense development at river crossings, as 21 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 99 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes well as institutional campuses that predate designation of the MRCCA and include taller buildings. B. The CA -RTC district must be managed in a manner that allows continued growth and redevelopment in historic downtowns and more intensive redevelopment in limited areas at river crossings to accommodate compact walkable development patterns and connections to the river. Minimizing erosion and the flow of untreated stormwater into the river, and providing public access to and public views of the river are priorities in the district. Subp. 6. Separated from River District (CA -SR) CA -SR District: Land that is separated and not visible from the river. A. The CA -SR district is characterized by its physical and visual distance from the river. It includes land separated from the river by distance, development, or a transportation corridor. The land in this district is not readily visible from the river but may be visible from public land across the river. B. The CA -SR district provides flexibility in managing development without negatively affecting the key resources and features of the river corridor. Subp. 7. Urban Mixed District (CA -UM) CA -UM District: Commercial, institutional, and industrial mixed-use areas as well as A. The CA -UM district includes large areas of highly urbanized, existing/planned parklands. mixed-use areas that are a part of the urban fabric of the river corridor, including institutional, commercial, and industrial areas. B. The CA -UM district must be managed in a manner that allows for future growth and potential transition of intensely developed areas without negatively affecting public river corridor views, and that protects bluffs, very steep slopes, and floodplains. Restoring and enhancing bluff and shoreline habitat, minimizing erosion and flow of untreated stormwater into the river, and providing public access to and public views of the river are priorities in this district. Subp. 8. Urban Core District (CA -UC) CA -UC District: Urban cores of Minneapolis and St. Paul. A. The CA -UC district includes the urban cores of Minneapolis and St. Paul. B. The CA -UC district shall be managed with the greatest flexibility. Providing public access to and public views of the river is a priority in the district. Subp. 9. District boundaries. A. The physical boundaries of each district are laid out in the This subpart describes the provisions to Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area District Map, modify district boundaries administratively. incorporated by reference under part 6106.0090. The This was requested by local governments in the 2009-2010 process since EO 79-19 does 22 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 100 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes commissioner must maintain the map and may amend the map not provide a mechanism for changing as provided in item B. boundaries. B. The boundaries of a district established under item A may be amended according to subitems (1) to (4). (1) A local government or the Metropolitan Council must submit a formal written request to the commissioner requesting a district boundary amendment. The request must: a) be approved by the appropriate governing body; b) identify proposed changes to plans and ordinances; c) identify changes in land uses, infrastructure, or other conditions that justify the proposed changes since these MRCCA rules were adopted; d) be consistent with local, regional, state, and federal plans; e) address potential negative impacts to primary conservation areas and other resources and features identified in local government plans. f) contain a summary of feedback from affected parties as provided under subitem (2). (2) The local government or the Metropolitan Council requesting the district boundary amendment must give notice of the proposed district boundary amendment to adjoining or overlapping local governments, the Metropolitan Council, the commissioner, the National Park Service, and property owners in the area directly affected by the proposed district boundary amendment and publish notice in an official newspaper of general circulation in the area. (3) Upon receiving a complete request for a district boundary amendment as provided under subitem (1), the commissioner has 60 days to approve or deny the request or return the request for modification. (4) The commissioner must consider the request and all items submitted under subitem (1) and must, by written decision, approve or deny the request or return the request for modification. The decision must include findings that address the consistency of the proposed district boundary amendment with the purposes of these MRCCA rules. C. This subpart does not apply to the river corridor boundary established by Executive Order 79-19. PART 6106.0110 USES Subpart 1. Underlying zoning. Uses permissible within the Mississippi This part describes how uses are regulated. River Corridor Critical Area are generally determined by the local With a few exceptions, uses are regulated by government's underlying zoning, with additional provisions for certain a local government's existing or underlying 23 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Working Draft Rules uses as specified by this part. Subp. 2. Agricultural use. Where agricultural use is allowed by the local government, perennial ground cover is required within 50 feet of the ordinary high water level and within the bluff impact zone. Within the slope preservation zone, a local government may allow row crops subject to a conservation plan approved by the soil and water conservation district board. Subp. 3. Feedlots. New animal feedlots and manure storage areas are prohibited. Existing animal feedlots and manure storage areas must conform to the standards in chapter 7020. Subp. 4. Forestry. Where forestry is allowed by the local government, tree harvesting and biomass harvesting within woodlands, and associated reforestation, must be conducted consistent with recommended practices in Conserving Wooded Areas in Developing Communities, Best Management Practices in Minnesota, incorporated by reference under part 6106.0090. Subp. 5. Aggregate mining and extraction. If allowed by the local government, aggregate mining and extraction requires a conditional use permit or interim use permit issued by the local government, subject to the following: A. new aggregate mining and extraction are prohibited within the shore impact zone, slope preservation zone, bluff impact zone, and within 40 feet of the bluffline; B. processing machinery must be located consistent with setback standards for structures as provided in part 6106.0120; C. only one barge loading area, which must be limited to the minimum size practicable, is permitted for each mining or extraction operation; D. new and, where practicable, existing aggregate mining and extraction operations must be managed to minimize visibility and must be screened by establishing and maintaining natural screening devices. The unscreened boundaries of aggregate mining and extraction areas are limited to only the barge loading area; E. a site management plan must be developed by the operator and approved by the local government before new aggregate mining and extraction commence. Operations must be consistent with the site plan throughout the duration of operations at the site. The site management plan must: (1) describe how the site will be developed over time with an emphasis on minimizing environmental risk to public waters; (2) explain where staged reclamation may occur at certain 24 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 101 Commentary/Rationale for Changes zoning. Subparts 2 — 7 describe six uses with special considerations. Mining, cellular towers, and disability accommodations are the only uses that require a CUP or IUP in these rules. Working Draft Rules points during the life of the site; and (3) address dust, noise, storm water management, possible pollutant discharges, days and hours of operation, duration of operation, any anticipated vegetation and topographic alterations outside the pit, and reclamation plans consistent with the stated end use for the land; and existing and new aggregate mining and extraction operations must submit land reclamation and reforestation plans to the local government compatible with the purposes of these MRCCA rules. Subp. 6. River -dependent uses. By the nature of their use, river - dependent uses, such as river -dependent commercial and industrial uses, water supply facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, storm water facilities, and hydropower facilities, cannot comply with all shoreline setback standards under part 6106.0120, but must comply with items A to C. A. Parking areas and structures, except shoreline facilities, must meet the dimensional and performance standards in these MRCCA rules and must be designed to incorporate topographic and vegetative screening. B. Shoreline facilities must comply with chapter 6115 and must: (1) be designed in a compact fashion so as to minimize the shoreline area affected; and (2) minimize the surface area occupied in relation to the number of watercraft or barges to be served. C. The placement of dredged material is allowed subject to existing federal and state permit requirements and agreements. Subp. 7. Cellular telephone towers. Cellular telephone towers require a conditional use permit or interim use permit issued by the local government, subject to the following: A. The tower must not be located in the bluff impact zone, shore impact zone, or slope preservation zone; B. Placement of the tower must minimize interference with public river corridor views; and C. The applicant must demonstrate that functional coverage cannot be provided through colocation, a tower at a lower height, or a tower at a location outside the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. 25 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 102 Commentary/Rationale for Changes MS 116G.15 provides for continued river - dependent uses. This provision clarifies standards for those uses in the immediate riverfront area. Note also the development standards in part 6106.0140. Cellular tower use moved from 'Structure Height Exemptions" since it must be treated as a required conditional/interim use. Working Draft Rules PART 6106.0120 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS Subpart 1: Purpose. The purpose of this part is to establish dimensional standards that protect primary conservation areas from impacts of development and ensure that new development is sited in appropriate locations. Subpart 2. Structure height. A. Structures, including accessory structures, must be no taller than the heights specified for each district: (1) CA -ROS: 35 feet; (2) CA -RN: 35 feet; (3) CA -RTC: (48 - 56) feet, provided tiering of structures away from the Mississippi River and from blufflines is considered, with lower structure heights closer to the river and blufflines and that structure design and placement minimizes interference with public river corridor views. Taller buildings may be allowed by conditional use permit, as provided under item D. (4) CA -SR: height is determined by the local government's page 103 Commentary/Rationale for Changes This part outlines standards for structure height, setbacks from the water and bluff,• and lot area and width. These standards vary by district. This subpart defines the height standard for each district. CA -RTC. Input requested! DNR is considering increasing height from 48' to 56' and adding a CUP for taller buildings, based on LGU comments & redevelopment plans. underlying zoning, provided the structure's height is CA -SR: Input requested! This revision uses generally consistent with the height of existing surrounding more general language, focusing on the development as viewed from the ordinary high water level height of surrounding development rather than the treeline. Is this change justifiable of the opposite shore; and appropriate? (5) CA -UM: 65 feet, provided tiering of structures away from the Mississippi River and from blufflines is considered, with CA -UM: Input requested! This draft adds a lower structure heights closer to the river and blufflines, CUP provision for taller buildings, based on and that structure design and placement minimize LGU comments /redevelopment plans. interference with public river corridor views. Taller buildings I "Public river corridor views" is defined as (a) may be allowed by conditional use permit, as provided and (b). under item D. (6) CA -UC: height is determined by the local government's underlying zoning, provided tiering of structures away from the Mississippi River and blufflines is considered, with lower structure heights closer to the river and blufflines, and structure design and placement minimize interference with public river corridor views: B. For the purposes of this subpart, height must be measured on the side of the structure facing the Mississippi River. C. The height requirements in Item A do not apply to those structures and facilities identified in Table 1, Exemptions, meeting the requirements of part 6106.0130. D. Standards and criteria for conditional use permits for taller buildings. Criteria for considering conditional use permits for buildings exceeding the height limits in item A must include the 26 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Revision uses definition of height in underlying zoning, provided it is measured on the 'river side' of a structure. Item C refers to structures that are exempt from the height limits. Exemptions have been consolidated in Table 1 for ease of reference. New standards in D apply to taller buildings that may be allowed by conditional use, a new provision in item A above. Input requested on CUP standards for taller buildings. page 104 Working Draft Rules Commentary/Rationale for Changes following: (1) assessment of the visual impact of the proposed building on public river corridor views, using the methodology set forth in the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area Visual Resources Protection Plan, incorporated by reference, including public river corridor views from other communities; (2) identification of techniques to minimize the perceived bulk of the proposed building, such as: a) placing the long axis of the building perpendicular to the river; b) stepping back of portions of the fagade; c) narrowing the profile of upper floors of the building; or d) increasing the setbacks of the building from the Mississippi River and/or blufflines. (3) identification of techniques for preservation of view corridors identified in the local government's plan; and (4) opportunities for creation or enhancement of public river corridor views. Subp. 3. Location of structures. A. Structures and impervious surfaces must not be located in the This subpart describes the structure setbacks shore impact zone and must meet the following setback in each districtfrom the ordinary high water requirement from the ordinary high water level of the level of the Mississippi River and other rivers tributary to the Mississippi River in the Mississippi River and other waters within the Mississippi River MRCCA. It also clarifies that no structures are Corridor Critical Area, as specified for each district: allowed in the shore impact zone — while this (1) CA -ROS: 200 feet from the Mississippi River and 150 feet may seem obvious, since the shore impact from the Minnesota and Vermillion Rivers; zone is half the specified setback distance, (2) CA -RN: 100 feet from the Mississippi River and 75 feet from some LGUs requested clarity on what could and could not be placed in the shore impact the Rum River; zone since it is not explicitly stated anywhere (3) CA -RTC: 75 feet from the Mississippi River, Crow River and in the rules. Table 1 also helps to clarify. Rum River; Structure setbacks from the OHWL vary by (4) CASR: 75 feet from the Vermillion River; district and river. Specific standards were (5) CA -UM: 50 feet from the Mississippi and Rum Rivers; derived from E079-19, existing standards in (6) CA -UC: underlying zoning; and local government ordinances, and existing (7) all other public waters within the Mississippi River Corridor development patterns. Critical Area are subject to underlying zoning. Revision: setbackfor CA -UC not required. —no B. Structures and impervious surfaces must not be located in the setback was specified for the current urban bluff impact zone or the slope preservation zone and must meet Diversified district in EO 79-19. the following setback requirements from the bluffline and the top of very steep slopes as specified for each district: Item e lists the setbacks from bluffs in each district, and also clarifies that no structures (1) CA -ROS: 100 feet; are allowed in bluff impact zones or slope (2) CA -RN: 40 feet; preservation zones. (3) CA -RTC: 40 feet; (4) CA -SR: 40 feet; 27 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 105 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes (5) CA -UM: 40 feet; and (6) CA -UC: 40 feet. C. The structure location requirements in items A and B do not Item Crefers to the table of exemptions from apply to those structures and facilities listed in Table 1 as height and setback requirements, SIZ, BIZ, exempt from these requirements. and SPZ. It includes many items requested by local governments. D. Where principal structures exist on the adjoining lots on both sides of a proposed building site, the minimum setback may be Item D allows forsetback averaging in altered to conform to the adjoining setbacks, provided that the developed areas. This will reduce new structure's height, area, and width riverward or bluffward nonconformities in developed areas. of the setbacks required under items A and B are compatible with adjoining development. No structures or impervious surfaces are allowed within the bluff impact zone, shore impact zone, or slope preservation zone, unless specified in the exceptions under item C and Table 1. E. Subsurface sewage treatment systems, including the septic tank Item E requires septic systems to be set back and absorption area, must be located at least 75 feet from the at least 75 feet from the ordinary high water ordinary high water level of the Mississippi River and all other level. public waters within the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. PART 6106.0130 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC This part specifies standards for the design of FACILITIES public facilities, including utilities, Subpart 1. Purpose and Scope. The purpose of this part is to establish transportation and recreation facilities. standards for public facilities that are consistent with best management Design standards for private facilities arecovered in part 6106.0140. practices and protect primary conservation areas. The term "public facilities" as used in this part includes public utilities, public Many public facilities are governed by other state statutes and agencies, and DNR role transportation facilities, and public recreation facilities. These facilities regarding these regional facilities is primarily serve the public interest by providing public access to the Mississippi advisory. River corridor or require locations in or adjacent the river corridor, and therefore require some degree of flexibility. Subp. 2. General design standards. All public facilities must be designed and constructed to: A. minimize visibility of the facility to the extent reasonable and consistent with the purpose of the facility; B. comply with the dimensional standards in part 6106.0110, except where indicated in Table 1; C. comply with the land alteration and storm water management requirements in parts 6106.0150 - 0160. D. avoid primary conservation areas, unless no reasonable alternative exists. If no reasonable alternative exists, then design and construction must minimize impacts; and E. minimize disturbance of spawning and nesting times by scheduling construction to be undertaken at times when local fish and wildlife are not spawning or nesting, respectively. Subp. 3. Right-of-way maintenance standards. Right-of-way maintenance for public facilities is subject to the following standards: 28 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 106 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes A. vegetation currently in a natural state must be maintained, where reasonable and prudent; B. where vegetation in a natural state has been removed, native plants must be planted and maintained on the right-of-way; and C. chemical control of vegetation should be avoided when practicable, but when such methods are necessary, chemicals used and the manner of their use must be in accordance with the rules, regulations, and other requirements of all state and federal agencies with authority over the chemical's use. Subp. 4. Crossings of public water or public land. Crossings of public River crossings are governed by existing waters or land controlled by the commissioner are subject to approval statutes. by the commissioner according to Minnesota Statutes, sections 84.415 and 103G.245. The commissioner must give primary consideration to crossings that are proposed to be located within or adjoining existing rights-of-way for public transportation and public utilities. Subp. 5. Public utilities. Public utilities must comply with the following Standards for the design of high voltage standards: power lines and other utilities. A. high-voltage transmission lines, wind energy conversion systems greater than five megawatts, and pipelines are regulated according to Minnesota Statutes, chapters 216E, 216F, and 216G, respectively; and B. if overhead placement is necessary, utility crossings must be hidden from view as much as practicable. The appearance of structures must be as compatible as practicable with the surrounding area in a natural state with regard to height and width, materials used, and color. Subp. 6. Public transportation facilities. Where public transportation facilities intersect or abut two or more of the districts established under part 6106.0100, the least restrictive standards apply. Public transportation facilities must be designed and constructed to give priority to: A. scenic overlooks for motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians; B. safe pedestrian crossings and facilities along the river corridor; C. access to the riverfront in public ownership; and D. reasonable use of the land between the river and the transportation facility. Subp. 7. Public recreational facilities. A. Buildings and parking. Buildings and parking associated with Item (A) was added to clarify that, unlike recreational facilities, with the exceptions noted in Table 1, other public recreational facilities, buildings must meet the setback requirements in part 6106.0120 and and parking must meet structure setbacks. must not be placed within the bluff impact zone, shore impact zone, or slope preservation zone. B. Roads and driveways. Roads and driveways associated with public recreational facilities must not be placed in the bluff 29 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 107 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes impact zone, shore impact zone, or slope preservation zone unless no other reasonable placement alternatives exist. If no reasonable alternative exists, then design and construction must minimize impacts. Public trails maybe placed in sensitive areas C. Trails, access paths, and viewing areas. Facilities providing subject to these design guidelines. access to or views of the Mississippi River may be placed within the bluff impact zone, shore impact zone, or slope preservation zone if design, construction, and maintenance methods are consistent with the best management practice standards in Trail Planning Design and Development Guidelines, incorporated by reference under part 6106.0090. Trails, paths and viewing areas must be designed and constructed: (1) to minimize visibility from the river and interference with public river corridor views; and (2) to minimize fragmentation of primary conservation areas. D. Water access facilities are subject to the following requirements: (1) watercraft access ramps must comply with chapters 6115 and 6280; and (2) public water access facilities must be designed and constructed consistent with the standards in the Design Handbook for Recreational Boating and Fishing Facilities, incorporated by reference under part 6106.0090. PART 6106.0140 GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR PRIVATE Design standards for private facilities are FACILITIES described in this part. Subp. 1 Purpose. The purpose of this part is to provide design standards for private facilities within the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area that are consistent with best management practices and will minimize impacts to primary conservation areas and other identified resources. Local government ordinances must be consistent with the standards in this part unless the commissioner approves a flexibility request under part 6106.0070 subp. 6. Subp. 2. General design standards. All private facilities must be developed in accordance with the land alteration, vegetation, and stormwater management requirements in parts 6106.0150 and 6106.0160. Subpart 3. Private roads, driveways and parking areas. Private roads, Private roads, driveways and parking areas driveways, and parking areas, with the exemptions noted in Table 1, must meet structure setbacks from the river must: and bluffs and cannot be placed in slope preservation zones. A. be designed and constructed to take advantage of natural Note the exemption in Table 1 for private vegetation and topography to achieve maximum screening from roads, and conveyance structures serving view to minimize visibility; river -dependent uses. B. comply with structure setback requirements according to part 6106.0100; and 30 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Working Draft Rules C. not be placed within the slope preservation zone, bluff impact zone, or shore impact zone. Subpart 4. Private water access and viewing facilities. A. Access paths: (1) if placed within the shore impact zone, an access path must be no more than eight feet wide; and (2) if placed within the bluff impact zone or slope preservation zone, an access path must be no more than four feet wide. Water access ramps: (1) must comply with chapters 6115 and 6280; and (2) must be designed and constructed consistent with the applicable standards in the Design Handbook for Recreational Boating and Fishing Facilities, incorporated by reference under part 6106.0090. C. Stairways, lifts and landings. Design and construction of stairways, lifts, and landings are subject to the following standards: (1) stairways and lifts must not exceed four feet in width on residential lots. Wider stairways may be used for commercial properties and residential facilities held in common, if approved by the local government; (2) landings for stairways and lifts on residential lots must not exceed 32 square feet in area. Landings larger than 32 square feet may be used for commercial properties, and residential facilities held in common, if approved by the local government; (3) canopies or roofs are prohibited on stairways, lifts, or landings; (4) stairways, lifts, and landings must be located in the least visible portion of the lot; and (5) facilities such as ramps, lifts, or mobility paths for persons with physical disabilities are allowed for achieving access to shore areas according to items (1) to (4) and as provided under part 6106.0080, subpart 7. D. Shoreline recreational use areas. One shoreline recreation use area is allowed on each lot, not to exceed 5,000 square feet in total area and 12% of the total lot width or 25 feet, whichever is greater, and not extending more than 25 feet landward from the OHWL. E. Water -oriented accessory structures. One water -oriented accessory structure may be allowed for each riparian lot less than 300 feet in width at the ordinary high water level, with one additional water -oriented accessory structure allowed per each additional 300 feet of shoreline on the same lot. Water - oriented accessory structures are prohibited in the bluff impact 31 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 108 Commentary/Rationale for Changes This subpart identifies private water access and use facilities and provides specific standards for them. Provisions are applicable to residential and to commercial recreation, i.e. yacht clubs, rowing clubs, private institutions, etc. Item C describes the design standards for private stairways, lifts and landings. Local governments requested clarification on what is allowed and appropriate design standards for these features. page 109 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes zone and the slope preservation zone. A water -oriented accessory structure must not exceed 12 feet in height and 120 square feet in area. The structure must be placed a minimum of 10 feet from the ordinary high water level. Subpart 5. Landscaping, patios and retaining walls in non -riparian This new provision applies to existing residential yards in slope preservation zones. developed lots with yards in the Slope Preservation Zone; based on local A. Where non -riparian residential yards within the slope government comments. preservation zone have been altered with lawns, gardens, and similar landscaping, local governments may allow patios and retaining walls up to (250 — 500) square feet to be constructed, Seeking feedback on the threshold; ideally, this threshold would match that for permit in compliance with part 6106.0150, provided that: requirements under the land alteration (1) the slope is not abutting a bluff or part of a natural standards in part 6106.0150 subp. 7. d ra i nageway; (2) the stability of the slope is maintained; (3) the development will not result in erosion problems; and (4) the site is not readily visible. Subp. 6. Private signs. Placement of signs is guided by the local This subpart describes the design and government's underlying zoning, with the following additional placement of signs. provisions: A. The local government may allow off -premise advertising signs, provided that: (1) the signs meet all required setbacks and height limits "Readily visible"— visible from the ordinary standards of these MRCCA rules; and high water level on the opposite site of the (2) the signs are not readily visible. river. B. The local government may allow directional signs for patrons arriving at a business by watercraft, provided that the signs (1) are consistent with Minnesota Statutes, chapter 8613; (2) if located within the shore impact zone, convey only the location and name of the establishment and the general types of goods and services available; (3) are no greater than ten feet in height and 32 square feet in surface area; and (4) if illuminated, have lighting that is shielded to prevent illumination out across the river or to the sky. PART 6106.0150 VEGETATION MANAGEMENT AND LAND ALTERATION STANDARDS Subpart 1. Purpose. The purpose of this part is to establish standards This new part combines previous separate that: parts on vegetation management, land A. sustain and enhance the ecological functions of vegetation; alteration, and bluffs and steep slopes. It establishes general requirements and a B. preserve the natural character and topography of the MRCCA; permit process to achieve the stated purpose. and The ecological function of vegetation, as C. maintain stability of bluffs and very steep slopes; and ensure defined, is to stabilize soils, retain and filter stability of other areas prone to erosion. runoff, provide habitat and recharge groundwater. 32 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 110 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes Subpart 2. General provisions. The standards in this section apply to various types of development/land alteration. This A. Applicability. The standards and criteria of this part apply to: approach is very similar to that used by the (1) land alteration: Capital Region and Ramsey -Washington a) within the shore impact zone or 50 feet, whichever is Metro Watershed Districts for managing greater, abutting a public water, wetland, or natural erosion. drainage way; b) within a slope preservation zone; or c) within a bluff impact zone (2) vegetation removal within: a) a shore impact zone; b) a bluff impact zone; c) a slope preservation zone; or d) areas of native plant communities; e) tree canopies and significant vegetative stands identified in local governments' adopted plans. B. In the areas specified in item A, no land alteration or vegetation removal activities are allowed except as provided by this part. Subpart 3. Permit process. Local governments must regulate the land This subpart outlines the permit process and alteration and vegetation removal activities identified in Subpart 2 options for integrating land alteration and through a permit process. vegetation removal permits with other existing permits and/or delegating permitting A. The permit process established by the local government may be responsibilities. through a building permit, land alteration permit, vegetation management permit, or other permit process. B. Local governments may delegate the permitting responsibilities described in this part to a resource agency or other qualified agent as determined by the local government. C. Local governments must require permit applicants to submit information sufficient to evaluate permits for consistency with the standards and requirements of this part and consistent with part 6106.0080 subp. 6., site plans. D. Local governments must evaluate permit applications for consistency with Table 1 and the performance standards in this part as applicable to guide land alteration and vegetation removal activities. E. When reviewing permit applications, local governments must refer to those areas identified under subpart 2 (A)(2). F. Local governments may grant the permit, deny the permit, or grant the permit with conditions necessary to achieve the purposes of this part, as provided under subpart 5. Subpart 4. General performance standards. The following standards The performance standards in this subpart guide all land alteration and vegetation removal activity in the areas apply to all activities in the designated areas, described in subpart 2. whether or not a permit is required. A. Intensive vegetation clearing is prohibited. B. Development, if permitted, must be sited to minimize land alteration and the removal of or disturbance to natural 33 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Working Draft Rules vegetation. C. Maintenance of dead and dying trees that do not pose a potential hazard is encouraged to provide shelter and nesting sites for wildlife. D. Grading that results in terrain that is not characteristic of the natural topography must be avoided. E. Local governments must not restrict the height of ground cover vegetation in the shore impact zone, the slope preservation zone, or bluff impact zone. F. Land alteration and vegetation removal activities must be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time. G. The amount of the land alteration and vegetation removal activity must be increasingly limited as the degree of slope and the risk of soil erosion increases. Subpart 5. Vegetation permit requirements. A. Permit not required. The following activities within the areas described in subpart 2, item B, are allowed without a permit: (1) Pruning of branches that pose a visual security or physical safety hazard, and to maintain plant health and to improve aesthetics; (2) Selective vegetation removal that does not reduce the total tree canopy or vegetative cover by more than (5-15% ) or affect an area of more than (1,000 — 5,000) square feet, whichever area is less, over a two-year period. This includes removal of vegetation that is dead, dying, or diseased; removal of invasive, non-native plants; or to prevent the spread of known diseases or insect pests. (3) Maintenance of existing lawns, landscaping, and gardens. (4) Removal of vegetation in emergency situations as determined by the local government. (5) Right-of-way maintenance for public facilities meeting the standards of part 6106.0130, subp. 3. (6) Agricultural activities meeting the standards of part 6106.0100 subp. 2. B. Permit required. Selective vegetation removal above the thresholds identified in item A(2) or as required for permitted development as specified in Table 1 requires a permit from local government. C. Vegetation removal permit conditions. The local government must require protective and/or restoration measures as a condition of permit approval as follows: (1) Any native plant communities removed must be replaced with vegetation equivalent to their habitat, slope stabilization, and stormwater retention value. Stabilization of erodible soils, restoration or enhancement of shoreline 34 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 111 Commentary/Rationale for Changes Item E is intended to prohibit "weed" control ordinances from allowing natural vegetation of any height in these sensitive areas. Requesting feedback on the vegetation removal threshold in (A.2)! Property owners routinely remove small amounts of vegetation; the goal is to allow this to continue in a non -burdensome way. Is "percent of natural vegetative cover" something that can be administered or would another metric be better? This provision seeks to address parcels with variable amounts of natural vegetation. Permit conditions vary depending on the type of vegetation being removed, soil conditions, and other factors determined by local government. page 112 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes vegetation, and revegetation of bluffs or very steep slopes visible from the river are priorities for restoration. (2) Removal of other vegetation, including dead, dying, or diseased vegetation and removal of invasive non-native plants, must be replaced with natural vegetation to the greatest extent practicable. Priorities for replacement are the same as those listed in item C(1). (3) Any disturbance of highly erodible soils must be replanted with appropriate deep-rooted vegetation with a high stem density. (4) Other conditions determined necessary by local government. Subpart 6. Vegetation restoration plan requirements. A vegetation restoration plan is required as a Reestablishment of natural vegetation according to a restoration plan condition of violations, as well as for large must be required upon failure to comply with the requirements in this subdivisions or land developments (part part or as part of the planning process for subdivisions as provided in 6106.0170) part 6106.0170. A. The vegetation restoration plan must: (1) include vegetation that provides suitable habitat and effective soil stability, runoff retention and infiltration capability. Vegetation species, composition, density, and diversity must be guided by nearby patches of native plant communities; (2) be prepared by a qualified individual as defined by the local government; and (3) include a maintenance plan that includes management provisions for controlling invasive species and replacement of plant loss for three years. B. The local government must issue a certificate of compliance after it has determined that the restoration requirements of items A have been satisfied. C. Vegetation management and restoration activities must be guided by Native Vegetation Establishment and Enhancement Guidelines, incorporated by reference under part 6106.0090, or other appropriate guidance material. Subpart 7. Land alteration permit requirements Requesting feedback on (A)! The 2011 draft rules require erosion and sediment control A. When required. A land alteration permit is required for any BMPsforactivity disturbing 3,000squarefeet activity that disturbs a total land surface area of (5-10) cubic or more anywhere in the MRCCA. This yards or (250 — 3,000) square feet within the areas specified in revision proposes to limit the requirement for subpart 2(A)(1). BMPs to disturbances to the specific areas (1) Construction or replacement of retaining walls, riprap, or listed in subp. 2(A)(1). Should the disturbance other erosion control structures within the areas specified in threshold at which BMPs are required be the subpart 2(A)(1) requires a permit. some as the permit threshold or something higher? (Note: Capital Region and Ramsey (2) Land alteration within the bluff impact zone and slope Washington Metro watershed districts 35 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 113 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes preservation zone is prohibited except as provided in Table 36 require BMPs for disturbances greater than 1. 1,000 square feet within 500 feet of water.) B. Permit conditions. Temporary and permanent erosion and Land disturbance is prohibited in the bluff sediment control measures must be sufficient to retain impact zone and the slope preservation zone, sediment onsite consistent with established best management subject to some exceptions (see Table 1). practices. Subpart 8. Rock riprap and retaining walls. A. Within shore impact zones, bluff impact zones, and slope preservation zones, construction or replacement of retaining walls, riprap, or other impervious surfaces, or use of bioengineering techniques must meet the following requirements: (1) except as provided under item B, retaining walls, riprap, or other erosion control structures must only be used for the correction of an established erosion problem that cannot be controlled through the use of vegetation, slope stabilization using mulch, a biomat, or similar bioengineering methods. This determination must be done by a qualified person as determined by the local government; (2) design, construction, and maintenance must be consistent with best management practices in Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas Manual, incorporated by reference under part 6106.0090, or other appropriate resource agency manual; and (3) placement of riprap or retaining walls below the ordinary high water level requires a permit from the commissioner and must comply with chapter 6115. B. In the CA -UC district, bluffs that have been structurally altered Item B addresses existing reinforced bluffs in and/or structurally reinforced may continue to be reinforced, urban areas—i.e., downtown St. Paul. consistent with the best management practices specified in item A(2). Subpart 9. Development on steep slopes A local government may Steep slopes are defined as slopes between allow structures, impervious surfaces, land alteration, vegetation 12% and 18%. removal, or construction activities on steep slopes when the following conditions are met: Vegetation removal standards in this part A. The applicant can demonstrate that the development can be apply if the steep slopes include native plant accomplished without increasing erosion or storm water runoff; communities, tree canopies or significant B. The soil types and geology are suitable for the proposed vegetative stands identified in local development; and governments' adopted plans. C. Vegetation is managed according to the requirements of this part. Subpart 10. Compliance with other plans and programs. All development must: A. be consistent with Minnesota Statutes, chapter 10313, and local 410; water management plans completed under chapter 8410,- 36 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 114 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes B. meet or exceed the wetland protection standards under chapter 8420; and C. meet or exceed the floodplain management standards under chapter 6120. PART 6106.0160 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT This part describes measures to protect water Subpart 1. Purpose. The purpose of this part is to: quality of the Mississippi River and its A. protect property from damage resulting from storm water tributaries. It recognizes and relies on existing runoff and erosion; federal, state, and local regulations as key B. protect water quality from pollutant loadings of sediment, elements in addressing water quality. nutrients, bacteria, and other contaminants; and C. promote infiltration and groundwater recharge. Subpart 2. Performance standards. The requirements in this part apply Requesting feedback! This provision would to all development that creates new or fully reconstructs impervious reduce the threshold typically required by the surface of more than 10,000 square feet on parcels that abut a public MS4 permit for required stormwater water body, wetland or natural drainageway. treatment from one acre to 10,000 square A. If a local government is covered by an MS4 General Permit from feet in these highly sensitive areas. the pollution control agency, then the requirements of the Comments on the cost of administering this provision by local governments compared to General Permit for post -construction storm water management the water quality benefits are welcome. for new development and redevelopment projects apply. B. If a local government is not covered by an MS4 General Permit, then runoff from the new or fully reconstructed impervious surface must comply with the treatment requirements in the current National Pollution Discharge and Elimination System (NPDES) Program permit for construction storm water. C. Multipurpose trails and sidewalks are exempt from items A and B if there is down gradient vegetation or a filter strip that is at least 5 feet wide. D. Storm water treatment located at the top of slopes must be designed to maintain slope integrity. PART 6106.0170 SUBDIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS This part describes standards for subdivisions, PUDs and other large-scale developments/redevelopments. Subpart 1. General provisions. A. Purpose. The purpose of this part is to provide for subdivision, development and redevelopment of land while protecting primary conservation areas and preserving or restoring the ecological functions of those areas. B. Applicability. This part applies to all subdivisions, planned unit Requesting feedback on (B) —should the developments and redevelopment of land involving (10-20) or threshold for these subdivision/land more acres, including smaller individual sites that are part of a development standards be set at 10 acres, 20 common plan of development that may be constructed at acres, or other size? Inventory of parcels in different times, with the following exceptions: the MRCCA [TBA] will show numbers of (1) minor boundary line corrections; parcels in each category. (2) resolutions of encroachments; (3) additions to existing lots of record; and 37 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 115 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes (4) placement of essential services. C. Site information. Local governments must require detailed site information and provide for pre -project review of all proposed subdivisions, redevelopments, and planned unit developments as provided under part 6106.0080, subpart 6. Subp. 2. Lot standards for new lots. The lot width provision applies only to new A. Where new lots are created, lot area and width standards for lots on tracts exceeding the size threshold conventional subdivisions and commercial and industrial lots established under subp. 1. Narrower lots may must comply with the requirements of the underlying zoning be allowed if conservation design methods or districts, except as follows: other techniques are used to protect riparian (1) the width of riparian lots in the CA -ROS district must be at areas. least 200 feet, unless alternative design methods are used that provide greater protection of riparian areas. B. Lots must have adequate buildable area to comply with part 6106.0120. C. Local government ordinances must contain incentives for alternative design methods such as conservation design, transfer of development density, or other zoning and site design techniques that achieve better protection of primary conservation areas. Subpart 3. Design standards. A. Primary conservation areas must be set aside as protected open Feedback requested on percentages of open areas. The amount of area to be protected must be determined space: are these ranges reasonable and as a percentage of tract size as follows: appropriate? (1) CA -ROS (1/2): at least (30-50%) (2) CA -RN (3): at least (20-30%) (3) CA -RTC (4), CA -UM (6), CA -UC (7): at least (10-20%) (4) CA -SR (5): (10-20%) if the parcel includes native plant communities or provides feasible connections to a regional park or trail system; otherwise, no requirement B. If the primary conservation areas exceed the percentages provided by item A, then the local government may determine which primary conservation areas are to be protected. C. If primary conservation areas exist but do not have natural vegetation, then a vegetation assessment must be completed for the areas to be protected to determine if vegetation restoration is needed. If restoration is needed, it must be restored according to part 6106.0150 subpart 7. D. If the primary conservation areas do not exist or do not meet the percentages specified under item A, local governments must determine whether any portions of the parcel have been Item D: new provision for restoration of land identified as potential restoration areas in local plans, according areas according to a restoration plan. to part 6106.0070 subpart 4. Where such areas have been identified, vegetation must be restored consistent with a 38 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 116 Working Draft Rules I Commentary/Rationale for Changes restoration plan according to 6106.0150, subpart 7. E. Stormwater treatment areas or other green infrastructure may be used to meet the coverage standards if the plants provide suitable habitat. F. The permanent protection of areas that have been set aside for protection or restoration may be achieved through: (1) public acquisition by a government entity for conservation purposes (2) a permanent conservation easement, as provided in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 84C; (3) a deed restriction; or (4) other arrangements that achieve an equivalent degree of protection as determined by the local government. G. Any of the above permanent protection methods must ensure the long-term management of vegetation to meet its ecological functions, prohibit structures, and prohibit land alteration, except as needed to provide public recreational facilities and access to the river. H. Protected open areas must connect neighboring or abutting open space, natural areas, and recreational areas as much as possible to form an interconnected network. Supbart 4. Land dedication. Those local governments that require This section cites existing dedication dedication of land or equivalent amounts of cash for parks and open requirements, but does not add to them. space under Minnesota Statutes 462.358 or 94.25 shall encourage dedication of lands suitable for riverfront access, parks, open space, storm water management or other public facilities within the MRCCA. 39 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 117 Table 1: Exemptions from Setbacks, Height Limits, and Other Requirements in parts 6106.120 through 6106.170 Note that all exemptions in the Shore Impact Zone (SIZ), Bluff Impact Zone (BIZ) and Slope Preservation Zone (SPZ) are also subject to the Vegetation and Land Alteration standards in part 6106.0150 and the Storm Water Management standards in part 6106.0160. 40 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Setbacks Height SIZ BIZ / SPZ Standards (the use Limits must comply with standard or referenced parts) Industrial and utility structures requiring N E N N Structure design and placement greater height for operational reasons must minimize interference with (i.e., elevators, refineries, railroad public river corridor views signaling towers, etc.) Barns, silos, farm structures N E N N Bridges, bridge approach roadways E E E E part 6106.0130 Cellular telephone towers E E N N part 6106.0100 subp. 7 Chimneys, church spires, flag poles, N E N N public monuments, mechanical service stacks, and similar mechanical equipment Historic sites and districts E E E E Public utilities (essential services, E E E E part 6106.0130 electric power facilities and transmission services) Public transportation facilities E N (E) (E) part 6106.0130 Public recreational facilities • Buildings and parking N N N N part 6106.0130 • Roads and driveways (E) N (E) (E) part 6106.0130 • Picnic shelters E N N N part 6106.0130 • Trails, access paths and viewing E N E E part 6106.0130 areas • Water access ramps E N E (E) part 6106.0130 River -dependent commercial, industrial and utility uses • Buildings and parking that are not N N* N N part 6106.0110 subp. 6 part of a "shoreline facility' • Shoreline facilities, i.e., barge and E N* E E part 6106.0110 subp. 6 port facilities, marinas, etc. • Private roads and conveyance E N* E E part 6106.0110 subp. 6 structures serving river -dependent uses Private residential and commercial water access and use facilities • Private roads, driveways and N N N N part 6106.0140 parking areas • Access paths E N E E part 6106.0140 • Water access ramps E N E N part 6106.0140 • Stairways, lifts & landings E N E E part 6106.0140 • Shoreline recreational use area E N E N part 6106.0140 • Water -oriented accessory E N E N part 6106.0140 40 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 page 118 E = exempt (E) = may be allowed if no reasonable alternatives exist N = not exempt - must meet standard in rules (i.e., setback, height limit) * Some river -dependent commercial, industrial and utility structures may also be exempt from height limits if greater height is required for operational reasons. ** Exemption applies only to Slope Preservation Zones 41 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 Setbacks Height SIZ BIZ / SPZ Standards (the use Limits must comply with standard or referenced parts) structures Signs • Off -premise advertising signs N N N N part 6106.0140, subp. 6 • Directional signs for watercraft E N E N part 6106.0140, subp. 6 (private) • Public directional, interpretive, E N E E Structure design and placement educational, safety, or handicapped must minimize interference with designation signs public river corridor views, except as necessary for public safety Rock riprap & retaining walls to correct E N E E Part 6106.0150, subp. 8 erosion problems Structural reinforcement of bluffs in E N N E part 6106.0150, subp. 8 urban areas in CA -UC district Flood control structures E N E E Landscaping, patios and retaining walls E N N E** part 6106.0140 subp. 5 in non -riparian residential yards in slope preservation zones Vegetation restoration and soil E N E E part 6106.0150, subp. 6C stabilization projects Expansion of nonconforming structures E N N E part 6106.0080, subp. 3 due to setbacks. E = exempt (E) = may be allowed if no reasonable alternatives exist N = not exempt - must meet standard in rules (i.e., setback, height limit) * Some river -dependent commercial, industrial and utility structures may also be exempt from height limits if greater height is required for operational reasons. ** Exemption applies only to Slope Preservation Zones 41 MRCCA Working Draft Rules — DNR, June 2, 2014 r E o o� 0 Q N N -. O U O (6 N N .� N O O -O p _ O tf a_ O L U)O �' U)°)�L�EUV ern �rn� EO _ o N 7 to ON Ln H to mTo O +�-• (O -J 1 /yt :F�- 'f •, Awl`. - _ r J I Ir Jf Tno '4 + J ��. _ '� a 1.. ",.� `_'��"�,� 3 tea. r. - �� ff�r�, ••R.I ..:112! .a.. ' r .01 "•1 �� . it � ,� -L �4 � � r � � �-� , �, ��',� + �' �: -=- " ,�� ref--� ��� II 1•_�� "�<�-� 'r. _- _ — — - F -" IT 1 �. �. V � J r E o o� 0 Q N N -. O U O (6 N N .� N O O -O p _ O tf a_ O L U)O �' U)°)�L�EUV ern �rn� EO _ o N 7 to ON Ln H to mTo O +�-• (O -J 1 /yt :F�- 'f •, Awl`. - _ r J I Ir Jf Tno '4 + J ��. _ '� a 1.. ",.� `_'��"�,� 3 tea. r. - �� ff�r�, ••R.I ..:112! .a.. ' r .01 "•1 �� . it � ,� -L �4 � � r � � �-� , �, ��',� + �' �: -=- " ,�� ref--� ��� II 1•_�� "�<�-� 'r. _- _ — — - F -" IT 1 �. �. U _= LU L (6 N cn c>3 � c � o ) O U) Q O 1 _J o E U) o �y1��{, �r�� _�] 1' _ �ri+;!►' � �w'� y3rtr i-�-r-� .i• � '� _ j r_L � ��.:. �e �'r` r' Jr- Kv ` � /• (((( I J Ijy�I J •L��•� \r Ism•. el i -L VyV no I Li I I s 6 i7-71 } 4 kz' � i StarTribune - Print Page StarTribune DNR land -use rules draw concerns along the Mississippi riverfront Article by: Jim Anderson Star Tribune July 3, 2014 - 11:49 PM A renewed attempt to revamp land -use rules along the stretch of the Mississippi River that runs through the Twin Cities area is once again pitting cities and development interests against environmental concerns. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is about halfway through a two-year process that jump-started an earlier attempt to set the rules that would affect 21 cities, five counties and four townships along a 72 -mile stretch of river from Dayton to Hastings. The effort has two purposes: formalize into law rules that were created by executive orders in the late 1970s by Govs. Wendell Anderson and Al Quie, and update those rules to reflect the changes that have taken place along the river. The first attempt to do that fizzled in 2011 as differing interests clashed. The DNR, hoping things go smoother this time, is asking the public to weigh in on a new draft of the rules at meetings this month. In St. Paul, which has ambitious plans for redeveloping its downtown riverfront, the proposed rules and the process are raising alarms, said Matt Kramer, president of the St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce. The city's plans include the likely demolition of the former Ramsey County jail and West Publishing complex. Almost 2,000 buildings and nearly 3,000 parcels of land in the city would come under new construction limits near bluffs and steep slopes along the river. St. Paul riverfront. David Brewster. StarTribune DNR listening sessions The Minnesota Departnent of Natural Resources (DNR)will hold three public information meetings in July to present information and receive comments on proposed rules forthe Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area. The meetings will run from 6:30 to 9 p.m.: • July 16, Greenhaven Golf Course, 2800 Greenhaven Road, Anoka. • July 22, Nova Classical Academy, 1455 Victoria Way W., St. Paul. • July 24, Schaaes BluffGathering Center (Spring Lake Park Reserve), 8395 127th St. E., Hastings. Each meeting will include a presentation and discussion scheduled from 7 to 8 p.m. and opportunities to visit with DNR staffthe rest of the time. The DNR will accept comments on its working draft of rules through Aug. 15. The comment period is intended to gatherfeedback on the draft rules before they are revised and proposed for formal rule adoption. More information is available on the DNR's project website at w .dnr.state.mn.us/inout/mles/mrcca/ndex.html. Jim Anderson "One of my concerns with the whole process is that it's been much more informal than the last time through, the DNR seems to be just kind of moving along on this," Kramer said. "But wait a sec —this is a significant economic impact." Under the proposed rules, the redevelopment of the West site, for example, probably would require a variance, he said. "And who knows if that variance will be granted?" Existing buildings could be affected, too, because any alterations or expansion would require approval and could be restricted by new limits. Local governments also would be encumbered with the cost of rewriting their local zoning ordinances, training staff, enforcing the regulations and adjudicating disputes. "This imposes significant costs on every community in the river corridor," Kramer said. The city, chamber, St. Paul Port Authority and Ramsey County plan to meetjointly and soon with DNR officials to present their concerns formally, he said. River advocates worried Meanwhile, the Friends of the Mississippi River, the chief environmental advocate for the waterway, has major concerns of its own, said Whitney Clark, the group's executive director. In developing the draft, the DNR has spent months meeting with officials in every community affected by the rules. One result was a "flexibility provision" that would allow cities to rewrite local zoning ordinances that don't fully comply with the rules in certain cases. "That's just not acceptable," Clark said. "Why have a rule that says, 'You have to follow these rules unless you don't want to, then maybe we'll let you break them?'" The draft also allows the DNR to change boundaries of land -use districts created by the rules, opening up a slippery slope that could expose the river to development where it was never intended, he said. The rules weaken scenic protections by allowing taller buildings along the river, including some of its most beautiful stretches: the gorge near the University of Minnesota, West Side Flats, Pine Bend Bluffs in Inver Grove Heights and the bluff lands of eastern Dakota and southern Washington counties. Dan Petrik, who is coordinating the project for the DNR, said some of the fears about riverfront properties being classed as "nonconforming" are overblown and based on a misperception of what the new rules will mean. That's why the agency has gone to great lengths to gatherfeedback and explain their implications. The river corridor is also a national park —the Mississippi National River and Recreational Area. For that reason, said John Anfinson, the park's acting superintendent, the resulting rules should protect what makes the river notjust a local and state resource but one with national and even global significance. "Our job is to help cities on the river to look beyond their own boundaries, to see the bigger picture," he said. "I get very clearly that locals want to do their own thing —that's just natural. But the Mississippi River is worthy of high consideration." Page 1 of 2 page 121 http://www.startribune.com/printarticle/?id=265778591 7/14/2014 StarTribune - Print Page Page 2 of 2 He said the federal agency supports rules that set a high protective standard, are consistently enforced and reflect why the area known as the Mississippi Corridor Critical Area was created. "If we really believe this is a great river, one of the great rivers of the world, shouldn't that reflect what we do along it?" Anfinson asked. "Why can't we have a corridor that celebrates the river and does the right thing by it? The better we do by the river, the better we do by the cities along the river." Jim Anderson • 651-925-5039 © 2014 Star Tribune page 122 http://www.startribune.com/printarticle/?id=265778591 7/14/2014