Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance Amendments Stormwater Bluff topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff presents stormwater and bluff-definition ordinance amendments; county board hearing set for March 11
Summary
Planning and environmental staff proposed changes to Stearns County ordinance language on stormwater (aligning with Minnesota NPDES guidance) and clarified bluff definitions and measurement procedures; county staff said a public county board hearing is scheduled for March 11.
County staff presented proposed amendments to Stearns County’s Land Use and Zoning Ordinance at the Feb. 27 planning commission meeting that would (1) update stormwater standards to align with Minnesota NPDES (state permit) guidance and the Minnesota Stormwater Manual and (2) simplify and clarify the county’s bluff identification and measurement procedures.
Why it matters: The amendments aim to reduce ambiguity for applicants and staff, speed technical review of stormwater plans, and reduce subjective variation in bluff determinations that can affect shoreland development and protections.
Stormwater changes: Nick (staff) said the proposal would make county standards consistent with state NPDES applicability and the Minnesota Stormwater Manual. Key changes described by staff include treating one inch of runoff for water‑quality treatment in many cases, aligning plan content with state permit requirements, clarifying applicability (disturbance thresholds and common‑plan considerations), and requiring operation and maintenance plans and financial guarantees up front. Staff said the change will reduce complexity for engineers and county reviewers and is intended to improve turnaround times.
Bluff definition changes: Staff proposed a clearer method for identifying bluffs using 50‑foot horizontal transects. Under the proposed language, a 50‑foot transect that gains at least 15 feet meets the 30% slope threshold used to identify a bluff; the top of bluff is then verified by finding adjacent transects that fall to 18% slope or less and by confirming that the slope rises at least 25 feet above the ordinary high water level. Staff said the change will make determinations more straightforward to administer and may be slightly more protective of top‑of‑bluff areas in some cases.
Technical and drafting questions: Commissioners and consultants raised drafting points: one commissioner asked whether references to the Minnesota Stormwater Manual should read “consistent with” rather than “in accordance with” because the manual is guidance and not always legally prescriptive. Another comment pointed out that SWPPP/SWIP plan signoff language needs to be clear about which documents require a licensed professional engineer’s signature versus those that can be prepared by SWPPP/SWIP‑certified personnel.
Next steps: Staff told the commission the proposed ordinance amendments will be taken to the county board for a public hearing on March 11. If the county board adopts the amendments after the hearing and required publication, the changes would take effect shortly thereafter.
Context: Staff said the draft amendments were circulated to local engineers and surveyors for comment; staff will incorporate further edits from technical reviewers before the county board hearing.
No formal vote to adopt the ordinance changes was taken at the planning commission; the item was informational and advanced to the county board process.
