Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Shoreland Management topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mendota Heights commission reviews draft shoreland ordinance after DNR meeting
Summary
City staff told the Natural Resources Commission that the Minnesota DNR recommended separating non-public tributaries into a separate ordinance, noted that only tributaries with drainage areas of 2 sq mi or more are considered public waters, and flagged rising water levels above the established OHW for Augusta.
Manager Krista Spreiter told the Mendota Heights Natural Resources Commission on Jan. 14 that a Jan. 13 meeting with the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources produced several takeaways for a draft Shoreland Management ordinance.
Spreiter said the DNR advised that non-public water tributaries may be clearer to regulate in a separate ordinance rather than by trying to fold them into a single shoreland code. The DNR also noted that, under its guidance, only tributaries with drainage areas of 2 square miles or greater are considered public waters; staff will investigate whether Valley Creek meets that threshold.
The DNR flagged rising water levels above the established ordinary high water (OHW) for Augusta and indicated it is looking into adjusting the OHW. Commission members discussed possible flexibility for redevelopment in the ordinance — for example, allowing variances in exchange for restoration and buffer establishment — and emphasized that setbacks should be prioritized over lot standards such as building height. Spreiter said the DNR indicated it would be open to approving an ordinance that does not include building-height standards.
Community Development Manager Madden and the city attorney joined the Jan. 13 meeting with DNR staff and members of the Goal 1 Committee, Spreiter reported. Next steps identified by staff include verifying Valley Creek’s drainage area and refining ordinance language to reflect DNR guidance on buffers, setbacks and redevelopment flexibility before bringing revisions back to the commission for further review.
No formal action or vote was recorded at the Jan. 14 meeting; staff are expected to return with additional analysis and draft language.
