Current through Register Vol. 49, No. 13, September 23, 2024
Subpart 1.
Responsibilities and authorities.
These minimum standards and criteria apply to those
shorelands of public waters of the state which are subject to local government
land use controls. They are intended to be incorporated into local government
shoreland management controls. Each local government is responsible for
administration and enforcement of its shoreland management controls adopted in
compliance with these standards and criteria. Nothing in these standards and
criteria shall be construed as prohibiting or discouraging a local government
from adopting and enforcing controls that are more restrictive.
Subp. 1a.
North Shore
Management plan.
The minimum standards and criteria for the subdivision, use,
and development of the shoreland of Lake Superior, other than for the city of
Duluth, are those specified in the North Shore Management plan, A Shoreland
Management Plan for Lake Superior's North Shore, December 1988, adopted by the
North Shore Management Board on November 29, 1988. The plan is incorporated by
reference, is available through the Minitex interlibrary loan system, and is
not subject to frequent change.
Local governments shall comply with part 6120.3900, subpart
6, in administration of their shoreland management controls.
Local governments shall adopt shoreland management controls
conforming to the North Shore Management Plan within 18 months of the effective
date of this part.
Subp. 2.
Adoption schedule.
Counties, and those cities designated by the commissioner in
consultation with the appropriate county, must adopt or amend land use controls
to bring them into substantial compliance with these standards and criteria
within two years of being notified by the commissioner.
Subp. 3.
Implementation
flexibility.
Local governments may, under special circumstances and with
the commissioner's approval, adopt shoreland management controls that are not
in strict conformity with these minimum standards and criteria, provided the
purposes of Minnesota Statutes, sections
103F.201
to
103F.221,
are satisfied.
A. Special
circumstances may include the following situations:
(1) where shorelands have been developed with
an assortment of urban land uses for many years and much of the development
does not meet the standards in parts 6120.2500 to 6120.3900;
(2) cities with central business districts
located within shorelands;
(3)
cities whose only shorelands are along rivers classified as
tributary;
(4) small cities that
have not had, and do not anticipate, much development activity within
shorelands;
(5) counties or
portions of counties with topography or vegetation characteristics that would
make use of particular minimum state standards impractical;
(6) shorelands that are managed under other
water and related land resource management programs authorized by state or
federal legislation with goals compatible with Minnesota Statutes, sections
103F.201
to
103F.221,
and parts 6120.2500 to 6120.3900; or
(7) individual lakes or systems of lakes that
are being managed under standards developed specifically for these water
resources after a comprehensive study and planning effort.
B. Alternative management standards may use
the following concepts and approaches, or others:
(1) expanded or different public waters
classification systems;
(2)
designation of areas where land use districts and associated standards are more
restrictive than these standards and criteria as trade-offs for other areas
where they are less restrictive;
(3) standards and other management approaches
that are developed for specific water resources after a comprehensive
evaluation and planning effort;
(4)
standards developed to take into account commonly occurring hydrologic,
geologic, property ownership, topographic, and vegetation patterns and
shoreland accessibility issues that would make use of these standards and
criteria impractical; or
(5) other
types of management or acquisition programs such as storm water management and
public land acquisition programs that reduce the need for use of specific
standards in parts 6120.2500 to 6120.3900.
C. Local governments must request
consideration of an alternative approach under this subpart and must provide
written justification and supporting information, maps, and documents, as
appropriate, to justify the request to the commissioner, including the
following:
(1) existing land use plans and
controls for shorelands of each public water;
(2) for the shorelands of each public water,
the number, average size, and percent of shoreline occupied by undeveloped lots
of record and land in public ownership;
(3) characteristics of existing development,
including types, densities, heights, colors, and presence or absence of
screening vegetation or topography;
(4) presence or absence of public sewer and
storm water management practices or facilities; and
(5) explanations of how deviations from state
standards are justified.
D. The commissioner shall respond to the
local government's request for consideration of an alternative approach under
this subpart in accordance with subitems (1) to (5).
(1) The commissioner shall in writing
acknowledge and approve or deny the request within 60 days of receipt of the
request and all necessary supporting documents and technical data. For
extraordinarily complex issues and requests involving multigovernment
coordination or multiorganization coordination, the commissioner and the
affected local units of government may mutually agree to an extension of the
60-day response.
(2) The
commissioner in the approval or denial pursuant to this subpart shall state to
the local governments the reasons for the approval or denial and, as
appropriate, suggest alternative solutions or regulatory approaches that would
be acceptable to the commissioner.
(3) The local governments proposing the
alternative control and the commissioner shall solicit the input of the public
and other governmental bodies that could be affected by the alternate
control.
(4) Alternate shoreland
controls must be approved by other units of government having adjacent land use
authority impacted by the alternate controls.
(5) The local government either proposing an
alternate local control or a local government being impacted by an alternate
local control may request a contested case hearing under Minnesota Statutes,
section
103G.311.
