07-08-2019 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Page 1 of 2 Variance Guidance Series – ISC, Updated 10/10/2012 Shoreland & Floodplain Variance Guidance Series This is one of a series of examples developed as guidance for considering variance requests along lakes and rivers. Consult your local shoreland and floodplain ordinances. Why are impervious surface coverage limits important? In the protection of water quality, the management of rainwater on individual lots is one of our most important tasks. Rainwater that does not infiltrate into the ground or evaporate runs downhill to lakes, wetlands, or rivers. As impervious surface coverage increases, the rate and amount of runoff and pollutants entering public waters increases. When runoff from impervious surface coverage is not addressed, pollution increases and the diversity of aquatic life is reduced. Local governments have limited discretion to deviate from - or grant a variance to - impervious surface limits. They may do so only if all of the variance criteria established in state statutes and their local ordinances are met. In evaluating such requests, local governments must examine the facts, determine whether all statutory and local criteria are satisfied, and develop findings to support the decision. If granted, local governments may impose conditions to protect resources. An example impervious surface variance request, with considerations, is provided below. Example Impervious Surface Variance Request A property owner wishes to build a large lakehome on a conforming lot. The lake lot includes a private driveway with a spur to the neighbor’s lot, which was placed to avoid an adjacent wetland. The building plans for the new construction plus the existing private road spur to the neighbor’s property would exceed the impervious surface limit provision in the local ordinance. Considerations for Findings A good record and findings help keep communities out of lawsuits and help them prevail if they find themselves in one. In evaluating the facts and developing findings for this variance request, all of the following statutory criteria must be satisfied, in addition to any local criteria:  Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? Considering a variance request is a balancing test that requires weighing the need of an individual property owner against the purposes of the shoreland regulations for protecting the public interest. These purposes are derived from Minnesota Shoreland Rules, which established impervious surface caps to prevent excessive runoff from constructed surfaces. Such excessive runoff causes erosion, transport of pollutants to public waters thereby degrading water quality. Considerations: Will deviating from the required limit on this property undermine the purposes and intent of the ordinance? Why or why not? Is it possible to mitigate the consequences of additional impervious surface on-site such that additional runoff will not be produced? Would this mitigation be in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? Why or why not?  Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan? The local comprehensive plan establishes a framework for achieving a community’s vision for the future. Most plans contain goals and policies for protecting natural resources and shorelands, as well as maps that identify areas of high risk or with high ecological value where development should be avoided. The variance request must be considered with these goals and policies in mind. Maps should be consulted to determine if the property is within any areas identified for protection. Considerations: Which goals and policies apply? Is allowing additional impervious surface and runoff consistent with these goals and policies? Why or why not? Impervious Surfaces