03-235O�IGi�A�
s�►•b S�C:-��..,�e. - A�pr� � q�
„ aoa3
INNESOTA
Presented
Referred To
Council File # 03-235
Green Sheet # 204630
�
a�
Committee Date
2
An ordinance amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code
pertaining to citywide zoning regulations for development on steep slopes.
3 WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462357 and Section 64.400 of the Legislative Code, the
4 City Council bit its File #01-1013 requested the Planning Commission to establish a community-based small
5 area planning task force and make recommendations on the proper zoning far Irvine Avenue and Pleasant
6 Avenue between Ramsey Street and the Walnut Street public stairs;
WHEREAS, in March 2002 the small area planning task force developed a draft Irvine Avenue Development
Plan, which included proposed zoning regulations for development on steep slopes that are applicable not only
in the study area but also to steep slopes throughout the city;
10 WHEREAS, on August 9, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the draft plan, the
11 associated zoning map changes in the study azea, and the citywide zoning text amendments relating to
12 development on steep slopes, at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard; notice of the
13 public hearing was mailed to all property owners in the study area, to all district councils and the citywide Eazly
14 Notification List, and was published on three successive weeks in the Saint Paul Pioneer Press;
15 WHEREAS, on October 11, 2002, the Planning Commission made some refinements in the proposed citywide
16 steep slope regulations and recommended their adoption by the City Council;
17 WHEREAS, a public hearing before the City Council having been conducted on March 26, 2003 at which all
18 interested parties were given an opportunity to be heazd, the Council having considered ail the facts and
19 recommendations concerning the citywide zoning amendments for steep slope development; now, therefore,
20 THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN:
21
Section 1.
22 That Saint Paul Legislative Code Chapter 67 on Subdivision Regulations be amended to read as follows:
23 Sec. 67.304. Approval of lot splits and adjustments of common boundaries.
24 Lot splits and adjushnents of common boundaries are permitted without platting, provided the following
25 conditions are met:
26 (1) The lot or lots have frontage on an existing improved street and access to municipal services.
27 (2) The lot or lots to be divided are previously platted land.
�
';�1 !Ki
1(3) The lot or lots meet the minimum standards for lot width and area far the zoning district in which they are �
2 locat R � G i(� A L D3-a3
3(4) The division of the lots shall not cause a remaining part of a lot to become a separately described tract which
4 does not meet the minimum standards of the zoning district in which it is located or which does not have street
5 frontage and access to municipal services.
6(5) The division does not result in a split zoning classification on a single lot.
7(6) The division does not result in the creation of a nonconfornung structure or use.
8(71 No lot shall be created where the buildin�pad azea for the principal structure has an existing slope steeper
9 than eiehteen (181 percent or where a drivewa ��per than twentv (201 nercent is required to reach the building
10 site However the planning administrator mav approve the creation of a steeper lot as an exception to this
11 re�ulation, where the steeper lot is specifically consistent with a citv-approved nei�hborhood plan or
12 redevelopment proiect.
13 Sec. 67.306. Planning administrator and board of zoning appeals approval.
14 (a) The planning admuustratar sha11 have the authority to approve those lot splits and adjustments of common
15 boundaries which meet a11 of the required conditions in section 67304. In approving lot splits and adjustments
16 of common boundaries, the planning administrator shall review the application for compliance with section
17 67304 and cause the application to be reviewed by the public works deparhnent and other affected city
18 departments, if appropriate, and shall notify the applicant of any required modifications. When a11 conditions are
19 met and modifications made, the planning administrator sha11 stamp the survey as approved. Such surveys and
20 legal descriptions shall then be recorded. In instances where a variance from one (1) or more of the conditions
21 for a lot split or adjusrinent of common boundary is needed, the planning administrator shall not approve it until
22 a variance from the board of zoning appeals is granted.
23 (b) Where condition f3}ar-f6j (3L6 , ar(71 of section 67304 is not met, the board of zoning appeals shall hold
24 a public hearing to consider the variance from the required condition. The hearing shall be held in accordance
25 with the provisions of sections 64.201 through 64.209 of this Code which give the board of zoning appeals the
26 power to grant variances from the strict enforcement of the Code upon making the required findings of section
27 64.203.
28 Sec. 67.406. Review of divisions of land. '
29 (a) Subdivision review criteria. The city council, in the review of subdivision requests
30 and in the application of this chapter shall take into consideration the requirements of the city and the best use of
31 the land being subdivided. Particular attention shall be given to the width and location of streets, sidewalks,
32 suitable sanitary utilities, surface drainage, lot sizes and arrangements, as well as requirements such as parks and
33 playgrounds, schools and recreation sites and other public uses. All of the following findings shall be made prior
34 to the approval of a subdivision or a lot split:
35 (1) All the applicable provisions of the Legislative Code are complied with;
36 (2) The proposed subdivision will not be detrimental to the present and potential surrounding land uses;
37 (3) The area surrounding the subdivision can be planned and developed in coordination and compatibility with
38 the proposed subdivision;
Q� ���e' S�D�Ji�si�n is in conformance with the comprehensive plan;
i /1 L
c� 3 -a35
2(5) The subdivision preserves and incorparates the site's important existing natural features, whenever possible.
3 In oarticulaz no lot shall be created where the building pad area for the principal structure has an existine slope
4 steeper than ei2hteen (181 roercent or where a drivewav stee�er than twenty (20�percent is required to reach the
5 buildin� site However the council ma�apurove a subdivision that creates a steeper lot as an excevrion to this
6 re�ulation and without a variance where the steeper lot is specificallv consistent with a cit�rooroved
7 nei�hborhood pian or redevelopment proiect.
8(6) All land intended for buildmg sites can be used safely without endangering the residents by peril from
9 floods, erosion, continuously high water table, severe soil conditions or other menace; and
10 (7) The subdivision can be economically served with public facilities and services.
11 (b) Delegation of planning commission review. The planning commission may, by general rule, delegate to the
12 pIanning administrator its power to review and approve such matters and cases.
13
Section 2.
14 That Saint Paul Legislative Code Chapter 62 on Site Plan Review Standards be amended to read as
15 follows:
16 Sec. 62.108. Site plan review (all districts).
17 (a) Plan to be submitted. A site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the planning commission before a
18 permit is issued for grading or the erection or enlargement of gross floor area for any development except one-
19 and two-family dwellings, but including the following:
20 (1) Any development of one- and twafamily residences which together exceed two (2) acres (87,120 square
21 feet) in area.
22 (7) Any development on a slope of twelve (12) percent ar greater.
23 (g) Review of residential development on steep slopes In reviewing residential development on slopes of
24 �reater than twelve (12�percent the zoning administrator sha11 in addition to general site plan standards above
25 consider the followin.�requirements and standards:
26 � An en in¢ eerine report on slope stabilitv and h d�oev, if the zonine administrator determines that such
27 a report is warranted The zoning administrator shall establish and maintain written criteria to use in
28 making this determination which criteria mav include the size of the proposed development and anv
29 official recards of soil instability,_�roundwater, and erosion in the vicinitv. An en ine eering report must
30 be prenared bv a registered h� ie ca1 geotechnical or soils en¢ineer. Before a r� adin�permit will be
31 issues the followin2 elements of the engineering renort must be submitted to the Citv and approved:
32 � An evaluation of existin�conditions includine slope stabilitv, eround water, and
33 surface water. TesTine should use techniques thaT minimize disturbance To existing slo e�s
34 and veeetation (for example drillin¢ cores for soil samples rather than diggin� with a back hoe.)
35 � Site-specific recommendations for consiruction. Recommendations will depend
36 on site conditions but mav include the use of drain tiles, water- rv oofin� ls, poured concrete
37 foundations and sum_p pumps.
�RI
3
o3-a35
and durine installation of an�special measures required to deal with slope stabilitv or water conditions.
4 $efore any additional buildin�permits will be issued, a post- r�g report must be submitted and
5 a�proved bv the CiTy. This report must document conditions after erading. note anv problems or
6 condirions that were not anticipated ar adequatelv addressed in the pre-gradin�portion of the
7 en¢ineerine renort and make recommendations for solutions to any problems found.
8�2,� Buildines should be designed to fit into the hillside without significant regrading to protect the stabilitv
9 of the slope and preserve existine trees while preventin¢ excessivelv tall retaining walls and unattracrive
10 trou�shaped yards between buildin�s and retainine walls. Multi-storv buildines are encouraeed to
11 reduce the size of the buildin� foo rint.
12 � Existin¢ trees sha11 be preserved where possible and shall be protected during construction. New trees
13 should be planted to artiallv obscure new hillside buildin�s and pazkin�. To accomplish this a tree
14 preservation plan sha11 be included with the site plan.
15
16
17
�al Tree preservation blan � Required in�rmation The tree preservation plan shall include the following:_
1. The location, diameter at breast height (DBHI and species of all existinQ trees six (6� inches DBH or
larQer within the limits of disturbance.
18 2. The location and dimension of all buildin�s (existing and proposed); the location of easements,
19 adjacent roadwa�and vehiculaz access driveways; existin¢ and �roposed eradine: site draina�e
20 facilities: parkin¢ areas; sidewalks and utilities.
21 3. The location of all trees that will be preserved and incorporated into the proposed site desi�n. All tree
22 drip lines shall be noted.
23 4. A description of how trees will be protected before and durin¢ construction.
24 5. The location of trees to be removed, replacement trees and areas proposed for additional landscaoine,
25 includine, but not limited to, the tree name (botanical and common : the quantity of each species: tree
26 caliper, measured six (6) inches above¢round; and a tvnical plantin� detail.
27 �b Tree replacement. In areas with slopes steeper than twelve (121 percent, trees to be removed for
28 development or reasonabl�anticipated to be lost due to development shall be replaced accordin� to the
29 followin¢ rec�uirements:
30
31
32
33
34
35
1. Individual trees of at least twelve (12) inches DBH but less than ei�hteen (18) inches DBH shall be
r�laced on the basis of one Ll replacement tree for every one (11 tree removed.
2. Individual trees of at least ei htg een (18Zinches DBH but less than twentv-four (24) inches DBH shall
be replaced on the basis of two f21 replacement trees for every one (11 tree removed.
3. Individuat trees of twent�four (24) inches DBH or lar¢er shall be replaced on the basis of three (3)
revlacement trees for every one 11 tree removed.
36 4 Replacement shall not be required far removal of trees in areas to be occupied by buildin¢s private
37 streets driveways areas required for accessorv parkine or within a distance of fifteen (15 feet of a
38 buildin¢ foundation or for trees determined by the superintendent of parks to be hazardous, diseased,
39 dvin� or dead.
0
tz! � {
03 -a3s
3 6. Deciduous replacement trees of nurserv stock shall be at least two and one-half (2 'hl caliper incbes
4 and of a svecies similaz to the tree(sl lost or removed. Coniferous replacement trees shall be at least si�c
5 (61 feet in height and of species snnilar to the tree(sl lost or removed.
6� Retainin2 wails taller than four feet sha11 be constructed under City_permit with frost footin sg as required
7 bv the State Buildin¢ Code and shall be en@ineered to retain lateral earth pressures consistent with the
8 principles fo soils mechanics, and shall be detailed to m;n;mize hvdrostatic pressures. On a case bv case
9 basis, the zonine administrator may relax these standazds for retaining walls taht serve minor
10 landsca �i�ng�ucposes.
11 Renumber existing paragraphs (g) and (h).
12
Section 3.
13 This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage, approval and publication.
Requested by Deparhnent of.
Adopted by CounciL Date ���� �C��
Adoption Certifie y Council Secretary
By: �
Approved by a} r: Date. y �
By:
�
Form Appr d by City Attomey
By: �.v�'� �" v �►' �/' /—
Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council
` '�
� _ t��
DEPARTMENT/OFFICE/COUNCIL: DATE INITIATED GREEN SHEET No.• 204360 d����
PED 2/11/03 '
CONTACT PERSON & PHONE: INITTAi/DATE INiTTAr�DATE
Larry Soderho;m (266-6575) � z DEPn�zx�rrr Dm. s cmrcovxcn.
Mi75f BE ON COUNCII, AGENDA &Y ATE �SIGN 3 CTTY ATTORNEY _ CTTY CLERK
� � NUMBER �`�CIAL SERV DIl2. FINANCIAL SERV/ACC1'G
ASAP (Irvine Ave. moratorium set gpg 4 MAYOR(ORASST.) 1 SeanKe�haw�G
to e�pire on 2/17/03) xovrIIVc
ORDER
TOTAL N OF SIGNATi1RE PAGES 1 (CLIP ALL LOCATIONS FOR SIGNATURE)
acnox �QuESrEn: Adoprion of new citywide zoning teact amendments regarding steep slope development. �
(Adoption of these zoning amendments should b� done together with adoption of the Irvine Avefzue Development
Plan as an addendum to the comprehensive plan and its corresponding zoning map changes.) _
RECOMMENDATIONS: Approve (A) or Reject (R) PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACI'S MiJST ANSWER TEiE FOLT.OWING Qi7ESTIONS:
� 1. Has this person/firm ever worked mder a covhrnct for this deparhneni?
A PLANNING COMMISSION Yes No �
CIB COMMITTEE 2. Has Uiis pexson/fum ever been a city employce?
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION Yes No
3. Does this person/fum possess a skill not no�mally possessed by any curreM city employee?
A Mayor Yu No
A PED Esplain all yes answers on separate sheet and attach to green sheet
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTi7NITY (Who, WLat, Wltien, Where, Why):
Due to complaints about ground water, traffic, parking, lot splits, over-building, and street wash-outs, the City
Council in October 2001 initiated an Irvine Avenue planning study at the request of the CapitolRiver
Council/District 17. The task force and City staff realized that some of Irvine Avenue's problems with the steep
slope development were also found on bluffs and hillsides elsewhere in the city. This led to the proposal of several
citywide zoning amendments.
ADVANTAGES IF APPROVED:
The proposed citywide zoning amendments require that new lots have a building pad area that is not too steep, that
appropriate engineering is done for steep slope development, that trees aze protected where possible, and that
mspections are made during construction. Whereas there is some disagreement about the proper zoning districts for
Irvine Avenue land, there is nearly consensus about the new steep slope regulations. They haue the support of the
task force, the Planning Commission, and the LIEP and PED staff Irvine Avenue property owners support these
regulations and the Pla.miing Commission heazd no opposition at its citywide public hearing.
IIISADVANTAGES IF APPROVED:
None.
DISADVANTAGES IF NOT APPROVED:
Steep slope development will continue to cause more erosion than necessary and to cause baze spots that detract
from the City's natural beauty.
TOTALAMOUNTOFTiL4NSAC°fION:$ 0 COST/REVENUEBUDGETEA
FUNDING SOURCE: ACTIVITY NUMBER:
FINANCIALINFORMATION:(EXPLAIN} ^ � ,4,
t✓��
:'� � '( ��
K\SLarM�PED\SODHRHOUIrvb�eANgceensheeFS[eep slopes admance.wpd ' — °' � ' � W
ORIG{NAL
Council File # a��j _ a_� 7
Ordinance #
Green Sheet # �0�3«'
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
NT PA4lJY,(, MINNESOTA
Presented By
Referred To
Committee:/ Date
� Y
An ordinance amending Chapter 60 ofthe Saint Paul Le slative Code
pertaining to citywide zoning regulations for developme on steeps slopes.
WHEREA5, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462357 and ction 64.400 ofthe Legislative Code, the
City Council by its File # 01-1013 requested the Planning Co � sion to establish a community-based small
area planning task force and make recommendations on the pr er zoning for Irvine Avenue and Pleasant
Avenue between Ramsey Street and the Walnut Street public tairs;
WHEREAS, in March 2002 the small area planning task rce developed a draft Irvine Avenue Development
Plan, which included proposed zoning regulations for velopment on steep siopes that are applicable not only
in the study area but also to steep slopes throughout e city;
WIIEREAS, on August 9, 2002, the Planning Co 'ssion held a public heazing on the draft plan, the
associated zoning map changes in the study aze and the citywide zoning text amendments relating to
development on steep slopes, at which all inte sted parties were given an opportunity to be heard; notice of
the public hearing was mailed to all property wners in the study area, to all district councils and the citywide
Early Notification List, and was published n three successive weeks in the Saint Paul Pioneer Press;
WIIEREAS, on October 11, 2002, th lanning Commission made some refinements in the proposed citywide
steep slope regulations and recomm ded their adoption by the City Council;
WHEREAS, notice of a public h ing before the City Council on the Irvine Avenue and Pleasant Avenue
rezoning proposals and the ci ide steep slope regulations was duly mailed to all property owners in the
study area and was duly pub ' hed in the official newspaper of the City on datel ; and
WHEREAS, a public
interested parties wer
recommendations co�
before the City Council having been conducted on (datel at which all
an opportunity to be heard, the Council having considered all the facts and
the citywide zoning amendments for steep slope development; now, therefore,
ORIGINAL
33 THE COLTNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN:
34
35
36
37
38
39
Section 1.
�
That Saint Paul Legislative Code Chapter 67 on Subdivision Regulations be amended to read as
follows:
40 Sec. 67.304. Approval of lot splits and adjustments of common boundaries.
41 Lot splits and adjustments of common boundaries are pernutted without platting, provided the
42 conditions are met:
43 (1) The lot or lots have frontage on an e�sting improved street and access to municipal
44 (2) The lot or lots to be divided are previously platted land.
45 (3) The lot or lots meet the minimum standards for lot width and azea for the
46 located.
47 (4) The division of the lots sha11 not cause a remaining part of a lot to
48 which does not meet the minimum standazds of the zoning district in �
49 street frontage and access to municipal services.
50 (5) The division does not result in a split zoning classification on a si�
51 (6) The division does not result in the creation of a
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
redevelooment proiect.
lot.
district in which they are
Pa separately described tract
is located or which does not have
or use.
Sec. 67.306. Planning administrator and board of6zoning appeals approval.
(a) The planning administrator shall have the auth
boundazies which meet all of the required condi ' ns in section 67304. In approving lot splits and adjustments
iministr or shall review the application for compliance with section
revie ed by the public works department and other affected city
oti the applicant of any required modifications. When all conditions
'ng administrator shall stamp the survey as approved. Such surveys
rded. In instances where a variance from one (1) or more ofthe
of common boundary is needed, the planning administrator shall not
ird of zoning appeals is granted.
61 of common boundaries, the planning ai
62 67304 and cause the application to be
63 departments, if appropriate, and shall r
64 are met and modifications made, the pl
65 and legal descriptions shall then be re
66 conditions for a lot split or adjustme�t
67 approve it until a variance from tl�bo�
68 (b) Where condition {3j
69 hold a public hearing to
70 accordance with the vrc
to approve those lot splits and adjustments of common
3�(6), or (� of section 67304 is not met, the board of zoning appeals shall
r the variance from the required condition. The hearing shall be held in
of sections 64.201 tlu�ough 64.209 of this Code which give the board of zoning
K:\Shared�PED\SODERHOLUrvineAJ�CC ordinance-CW2-b03.wpdAA-ADA-EEO Employer
ORIGfNq�
o� -z�s
71 appeals the power to grant variances from the strict enforcement of the Code upon making the required
72 findings of section 64.203.
73 (C.F. No. 95-794, §§ 2, 8-9-95)
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
Sec. 67.406. Review of divisions of land.
(a) Subdivision review criteria. The city council, in the review of
requests and in the application of this chapter shall take into consideration the requirements
best use of the land being subdivided. Particular attention shall be given to the width and lo�
sidewalks, suitable sanitary utilities, surface drainage, lot sizes and azrangements, as well
as parks and playgrounds, schools and recreation sites and other public uses. All of the Ilc
be made prior to the approval of a subdivision or a lot split:
82 (1) All the applicable provisions of the Legislative Code are complied with;
of e city and the
ion of streets,
requirements such
wing findings shall
83 (2) The proposed subdivision will not be detrimental to the present and pote,�ial surrounding land uses;
84 (3) The area surrounding the subdivision can be planned and developed i coordination and compatibility with
85 the proposed subdivision;
86 (4) The subdivision is in conformance with the comprehensive plan
87 (5) The subdivision preserves and incorporates the site's import t e�sting natural features, whenever
88 possible. In articular no lot shall be created where the build� ad area for the rinci al structure has an
89 e�stin slo e stee er than ei hteen 18 ercent or where a rivewa stee er than twent 20 ercent is
90 required to reach the buildine site. However, the council av apnrove a subdivision that creates a stee ep r lot.
91 as an exception to this re lation and without a variance�where the steeper lot is specifically consistent with a
92 citv-aonroved neiehborhood nlan or redevelonment nr ect.
93 (6) All land intended for building sites can be use�fely without endangering the residents by peril from
94 floods, erosion, continuously high water table, se re soil conditions or other menace; and
95 (7) The subdivision can be economically
96 (b) Delegatzon of planning commission
97 planning administrator its power to revi
98
99
100
101 That
102 amer
103
104 Sec. 62.108. Site plan revj
public facilities and services.
The planning commission may, by general rule, delegate to the
approve such matters and cases.
Section 2
'aul Legislative Code Chapter 62 on Site Plan Review Standards be
read as follows:
(all districts).
105 (a) Plan to be s�miffed. A site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the planning commission
106 before a permrt is issued for grading or the erection or enlazgement of gross floor area for any
107 development except one- and two-family dwellings, but including the following:
K:\Shazed�PED\SODERHOULvineANCC mdinattce-ClY2-6-03.wpdAA-ADA-EEO Employer
ORIGINAL °,-'�
108 (1) Any development of one- and two-family residences which together exceed two (2) acres
109 (87,120 square feet} in azea....
110 (7) Any development on a slope oftwelve (12) percent or greater....
111
112 (g Review o{residential development on steep slopes In reviewina residential development on
113 slo es of eater than twelve 12 ercent the zonin administrator shall in addition to eral site
114 plan standards above, consider the followine requirements and standazds:
115
116 � An en ' eerin re ort on sio e stabili and h drolo if the zonin ad � strator deternune
117 that such a re ort is warranted. The zonin administrator shall establi and maintain written
118 criteria to use in makin this deternunation which criteria ma incl e the size of the ro osi
119 develo ment and an official records of soil instabilit roundw er and erosion in the vicini
120 An engineerine reoort must be vrepared by a registered hydro ical, eeotechnical or soils
121 en �neer. Before a radin ermit will be issued the follo ' elements of the en ineerin
122 reoort must be submitted to the City and approved:
123
124 a An evaluation of e�stin conditions includin sl - e stabilit round water and surface
125 water. Testin should use techni ues that minimi disturbance to existin slo es and
126 ve etation for exam le drillin cores for soil s les rather than di in with a back hoe
127 b Site-s ecific recommendations for constru ion. Recommendations will de end on site
128 conditions but ma include the use of drain t'es water- roofin walls oured concrete
129 foundations and sum�pum�s
130 c A schedule of ins ections to be atte ed b Cit staff the builder and the en ineer who
131 prepared the revort. As a minimum, i ections shall be scheduled prior to eradine• after
132 radin and durin installation of an s ecial measures re uired to deal with slo e stabilit o
133 water conditions.
134
135 Before an additional buildin muts will be issued a ost- radin re ort must be submittei
136 and a roved b the Cit . T' re ort must document conditions after radin note an
137 roblems or conditions that ere not antici ated or ade uatel addressed in the re- radin
138 ortion ofthe en ineerin e ort and make recommendations for solutions to an roblems
139 found.
140
141 � Buildin s should be esi ned to fit into the hillside without si nificant re radin to rotect th
142 stabilit of the slo and reserve existin trees while reventin excessivel tall retainin wa
143 and unattractive ou h-sha ed ards between buildin s and retainin walls. Multi-sto
144 buildin s are e oura ed to reduce the size of the buildin foot rint.
145
146 � Existin tre shall be reserved where ossible and shall be rotected durin constnxction.
147 New trees hould be lanted to artiall obscure new hillside buildin s and arkin .
148
149 � Retai � walls taller than four feet shall be constructed under Cit ermit with frost footin s
150 iea � ed bv the State BuildinQ Code and shall he en�ineered tn retain lateral aarth nreecnras
K:�Shared�PED\SODERHOULvineAJ�CC ordinance-CW2-6-03.wpdAA-ADA-EEO Employu
ORIGiNAL
o� -��
151 consistent with the principles of soils mechanics. and shall be detailed to minimize hvdrostatic
152 pressures. On a case by case basis, the zonin� administrator maYrelaac these standazds for
153 retainine walls that serve minor landscap�pumoses.
154
155 Renumber e�cisting paragraphs (g) and (h).
156
157
158 Section 3
159
160 This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage, approval, and blication.
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168 ,;
169 ;%
I �� �e
Requested by Department of:
Plannin & Eco o' v 1 ment
�B /
Approved by Financial Services
Adopted by Council: Date
Adoption Certified by Council
�
Approved by Mayor: Date
By:
B �r�.��--
Form Approved by City Attorney
By:
Approved b}
Council
�
K:\Shared�PED\SODERHOLUrhneANCC ordinznce-CW2-6-03.wpdAA-ADA-EEO Employer
1
o3-a3s
C��'rt� �, �o D 3
�� � . � ��
i� E , � � ��-- � �
�;+�m ; �'�� - ������ �� � 0�
-����� , �
/ �.�.�-t-� �-�� .�� ,�.� �,.����
�
� �'� � � ,,��� �"� G�`,�` �,'�"����.e�
:.�=� .� .��'� ��- ��'�� . ��
t/" '-'� C�..1n�^ """�..i F
�, . � .�� ��-fZ� 1 ��;��',��, � ..��`.� � l�IC �
1� �� �--c� �Cz��/� �;���� �'�`�G �'�'�C' Gf��'�
��'�-G� �(..c�� � �d�eE'�� ,�c�t� ,L�o r�v c���
✓�-`�i�i�iv i��-2— _ -�
�
�C�� �,�� � �,� u�U,��
�y,pART'MENT/OFFICFJCOUNCII,: � DATE INiTLyTED GREEN SIiEET Nor 204360 �
PED zii i�o3 • � - a3s
CONTACT PERSON & PAOIQE: Il�Ti7AI/DqTE
IN1Y7ALDATE
I,arry Soderholm (266-6575) � 2 DEPARTMENT DIIt 5 CITY COUNCII.
ly[[75T BE ON COUNCB. AGENDA BY (DATE) ��TG�' 3 CITY ATI'ORNEY _ CITY CLERK
ASAP (Irvine Ave. moratorium set r�
FINANCLSE,.SERVDIR. £INANCIALSERV/ACCTG
FOR 4 MAYOR (OR ASST.) 1 Sean Kecshaw g��
to e�ire on 2/17l03) ROUTING
ORDER
TOTAL'� OF SIGNATURE PAGES '- 1 (CLIP
ncrioN x�QUESrEn: Adopuon of ci 'de zonin ndments regardin stee slo e developmen .
(Adoption of these zoning amendments should be done together with adoption of the Irvine Avenue ,
Plan as an addendum to the comprehensive pian and its corresponding zoning map changes.)
RECOMIvfENDATIONS: Apptove (A) or Reject (R)
A PLANIVING COMMISSION
CIB CAMMITTEE
CIVII. SERVICE COMMISSION
A Mayor
A PED
INITIATING PROBLEM, ISSUE, OPPORTU1VITy (W}io, What, W}ien, Where, Why):
Due to compiaints about ground water, traffic, parking, lot spliYs, over-buildi�g, and street wash-outs, the City
Council in October 2001 initiated an Irvine Avenue planning study at the request of the CapitolRiver
CounciUDistrict 17. The task force and City staff realized that some of Irvine Avenue's problems with the steep
slope development were also found on bluffs and hillsides elsewhere in the city. This led to the proposal of several
citywide zoning amendments. .
ADVANTAGESIFAPPROVED:
The proposed citywide zoning amendments require that new lots have a building pad area that is not too steep, that
appropriate engineering is done for steep slope development, that uees are protected where possible, and that
inspections are made during construction. Whereas there is some disagreement about the proper zoning districts for
Irvine Avenue land, there is nearly corisensus about the new steep slope regulations. They have the support of the
task force, the Planning Commission, and the LIEP arid PED staff. Irvine Avenue property owners support these
regulations and the Planning Commission heazd no opposition at its citywide public hearing.
pISADYANTAGES IN APPROVED:
None.
DISADVANfAGES IF NOT APpROVED:
PERSONAL SERVICE CONTRACfS MUST ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
1. Has f}lis personffum ever worked under a co�ract for this depz�eat?
Yes No
2. Has this person/fum ever been a city employee?
Yu No
3. Does this pe�son/fvm possess a skill not noimally possessed by any cvirent city employee?
Yes No
Explain all yes answen on separate sheet and attach to greensheet
Steep slope development will continue to cause more erosion than necessary and to cause bare spots that detract
from the City's natural beauty.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF T32ANSACTION: $ 0
FUNDING SOURCE:
COSTlREVENUE BUDGETED:
ACTIVITY NUMBER:
fi����
FINANCIAL INFORM.4TION: (EXpLAIl�'
� � b�
', \�
�,
G ,� , �tJ�'p'�� � �.� �
� v, r �
���'�� .
, ��
03 -a3S
Council Fi1e #
Ordinance #
Green Sheet ',�.
ORDINANCE
CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNfSOTA
Presented By
Referred To�
Committee: Date
2
0
An ordinance amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code
pertaining to citywide zoning regulations for development on steeps slopes.
6 WI3EEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462357 and Section 64.400 ofthe Legislative Code, the
7 City Council by its File # 01-1013 requested the Planning Commission to establish a community-based small
8 area planning task force and make recommendations on the proper zoning for Irvine Avenue and Pleasant
9 Avenue between Ramsey Street and the Walnut Street pubiic stairs;
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
WHEREAS, in March 2002 the small area planning task force developed a draft lrvine Avenue Development
Plan, which included proposed zoning regulations for development on steep slopes that are applicable not only
in the study area but also to steep slopes throughout the city;
WHEREAS, on August 9, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the draft plan, the
associated zoning map changes in the study area, and the citywide zoning text amendments relating to
development on steep slopes, at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heazd; notice of
the public hearing was mailed to all property owners in the study area, to:all district councils and the citywide
Early Notification List, and was published on three successive weeks in the Saint Paul Pioneer Press;
WHEREAS, on October 11, 2002, the Planning Commission made some refinements in the proposed citywide
steep slope regulations and recommended their adoption.by the City Council;
WFiEREAS, notice of a public hearing before the City Council on the Irvine Avenue and Pleasant Avenue
rezoning proposals and the citywide steep slope regulations was duly mailed to all property owners in the
study azea and was duly published in.the official newspaper of the City on (date) ; and
Wf�REAS, a public hearing before the City Council having been conducted on _Sdate) at which all
interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard, the Council having considered all the facts and
recommendations conceming the citywide zozung amendments for steep slope deveiopment; now, therefore,
03 -a�
33 THE COUNCIL OF Tf� CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN:
34
35 Section 1.
36
37 That Saint Paul Legislative Code Chapter 67 on Subdivision Regulations be amended to read as
38 follows:
39
40 Sec. 67.304. Approval of lot splits and adjusfinents of common boundaries.
41 Lot splits and adjustments of common boundaries are permitted without platting, provided the following
42 conditions are met:
43 (1) The lot or lots have frontage on an existing improved street and access to municipal services.
44 (2) The lot or lots to be divided are previously platted land.
45 (3) The lot or lots meet the minimum standards for lot width and area.for the zoning district in which they are
46 located.
47 (4) The division of the lots shall not cause a remaining part of a lot to become a separately described tract
48 which does not meet the minimum standards of the zoning district in which it is located or which does not have
49 street frontage and access to municipal services.
50 (5) The division does not result in a split zoning classification on a single lot.
51 (6) The division does not result in the creation of a nonconforming structure or use.
52 (71 No lot shall be created where the buildinepad azea for the principal structure has an existine slope steeper
53 than ei¢hteen (18�percent or where a drivewav steeper than twentv (201 percent is required to reach the
54 buiidine site. However the plannin� admitustrator mav a�prove the creation of a steeper lot as an exception
55 to this reeulation. where the steeper lot is specificallv consistent with a citv-aQproved neishborhood lp an or
56 redevelopment project.
57
58 ' Sec. 67.306. Planning ailministrator and board of zoning appeals approval.
59 (a) The planning administrator shall have the authoriTy to approve those lot splits and adjustments of common
60 boundazies which meet all of the required conditions in section 67304. In approving lot splits and adjustments
61 of common bouttdaries, the planning, administrator shall review the application for compliance with section
62 67304 and cause the application to be reviewed by the public works department and other affected city
63 departments, if appropriate, and shall notify the applicant of any required modifications. When all conditions
64 aze met and modifications made, the planning administrator shall stamp the survey as approved. Such surveys
65 and legal descriptions shall then be recorded. In instances where a variance from one (1) or more of the
66 conditions for a lot split or adjustmenf of common boundary is needed, the platming administrator shall not
67 approve it until a variance from the board of zoning appeals is granted.
68 (b) Where condition �3}ar{fij �3L(61, or (7� of section 67304 is not met, the boazd of zoning appeals shall
69 hold a public hearing to consider the variance from the required condition. The hearing shall be held in
70 accordance with the provisions of sections 64201 through 64.209 of this Cade which give the board of zoning
K�SLaTCd�PEDVSODERFiOLUxtiacAv�CC ordinance-CW2-6-03.wpdAA-ADq-E&O Employct
o3-a3s
71 appeals the power to grant variances from the strict enforcement of the Code upon malang the required
72 findings of section 64.203.
73 (C.F. No. 95-794, §§ 2 8-9-95)
74 Sec. 67.406. Review of divisions of land.
75
76 (a) Subdivision review criteria. The city council, in the review of subdivision
77 requests and in the application of this chapter shall take into consideration the requirements of the city and the
78 best use of the land being subdivided. Particular attention shall be given to the width and location of streets,
79 sidewalks, suitable sanitary utilities, surface drainage, lot sizes and arrangements, as well as requirements such
80 as parks and playgrounds, schools and recreation sites and other public uses. All of the following findings shall
81 be made prior to the approval of a subdivision or a lot split:
82 (1) All the applicable provisions of the Legislative Code are complied with;
83 (2) The proposed subdivision will not be detrimental to the present and potential surrounding land uses;
84 (3) The area sunounding the subdivision can be planned and developed in coordination and compatibility with
85 the proposed subdivision;
86 (4) The subdivision is in conformance with the comprehensive plan;
87 (5) The subdivision preserves and incorporates the site's unportant existing natural features, whenever
88 possible. In particular. no lot shall be created where the buildine nad area for the orincipal structure has an
89 eafistine slooe steeper than eiehteen (181 oercent or where a drivewav steeper than twenty (201 Dercent is
90 required to reach the buildine site However the council may approve a subdivision that creates a steeper lot
91 as an exceDtion to this reeulation and without a variance where the steeroer lot is�ecifically consistent with a
92 citv-approved neiehborhood plan or redevelopment project
93 (6) All 1and intended for building sites can be used safely without endangering the residents by peril from
94 floods, erosion, continuously high water table, severe soil conditions or other menace; and
95 (7). The subdivision can be economically served with public facilities and services.
96 (b} Delegation of planning commission review. The plamung commission may, by general rule, delegate to the
97 planning aduiitustsator its power to review and approve such matters and cases.
98
99 Section 2
100
101 That Saint Paul Legislative Code Chapter 62 on Site Plan Review Standazds be
102 amended to read as follows:
103
104 Sec. 62.108. Site plan review (ail districts). .
105 (a) Plan to be submitted. A site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the planning commission
106 before a permit is issued for grading or the erection or enlargement of gross floor area for any
107 development except one- and two-family dwellings, but including the following:
K:VSUued�PEDVSODERHOL�Irvin<ANCC oidinanu-CW2-6-03.wpdP A-ADA-&EO &mployn
03 _a�s
208
109
110
(i)
��)
Any development of one- and two-family residences which together exceed two (2) acres
(87,120 squaze £eet) in azea....
Any development on a slope oftwelve (12) percent or greater....
111
112 �e Review of residential development on steeD slopes In reviewine residential develooment on
l I3 slones of greater than twelve (121 percent, the zonine administrator shall, in addition to eeneral site
114 plan standards above consider the following requirements and standards�
I15
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
� An en�ineerin�reoort on slope stabilitv and hvdroloev, if the zonine administrator determines
that such a report is warranted. The zonina administrator shail establish and maintain written
criteria to use in makinQ this determination which criteria mav include the size of the proposed
development and any official records of soil instability��roundwater, and erosion in the vicinit�
An engineering report must be preoared by a reeistered hvdrolo¢ical. 2eotechnical or soils
enQineer. Before a�rading permit will be issued, the followine elements of the engineering
report must be submitted to the Citv and approved�
(a) An evaluation of existin¢ conditions includin¢ slope stabilitv. eround water. and surface
water. Testine should use techniques that minimize disturbance to existing slopes and
veeetation (for example drilling cores for soil samples rather than die¢in¢ with a back hoe �
�b Site-s�ecific recommendations for construction Recommendations will deoend on site
conditions but may include the use of drain tiles, water-proofing walls, poured concrete
foundations and sum� u�m�s
�cl A schedule of inspections to be attended bv City staff the builder and the eneineer who
prepared the report As a minimum inspectinns shall be scheduled prior to erading after
�,radine, and durine installation of an�peciai measures required to deal with slooe stabilitv or
water conditions.
Before anv additional buildine pernuts will be issued a post-eradin� report must be submifted
and approved bv the Citv This report must document conditions after adin note any
problems or conditions that were not anticipated or adequately addressed in the pre-gradine
portion of the enpineerin¢ report and make recommendations for solutions to any_pro�lems
found.
� Buildines Should be desiened to fit into the hillside without sienifrcant re radin� to protect the
stabilitv of the slope and preserve existin� trees while preventing excassivelv tall retainine wails
and unattractive troueh-shaped vazds between buildin¢s and retainin� walls Multi-story
buildines are encouraeed to reduce the size of the buildina foot rint
�
���� �
K\SLazed�PEDVSODERHOLUrvineANCC ordinance-CW2-603.wpdPA-ADA-E&O Pmpioycr
required bv the State Buildine Code and shall be engineered to retain lateral earth pressures
,
, � � � „, � ' ,,►• �
' 'I ► ' 1 ' � ',`► � ' � �
62.108.g.3 Exisfing trees shall be preserved where possible and shall be protected during
construction. New trees shall be planted to partially obscure new hillside buildings and parlang.
a tree preservation plan shall be included with the site plan.
Tree preservation plan. T'he tree preservarion plan shall include the following:
(1)The location, diameter at breast height (DBI� and species of all existing trees sis (6) inches
DBH or larger withixi the limits of disturbance.
(2) The location and dimension of all buildings (existing and proposed); the location of
easements, adj acent roadways and vehicular access driveways; existing and proposed grading;
site drainage facilities; pazking areas; sidewalks and utilities.
o� -a �s
(3) The location of all trees that will be preserved and incoxporated into the proposed site design.
All tree drip lines sha11 be noted.
(4) A description of how trees will be protected before and during construction.
(5) The location of trees to be removed, replacement trees and areas proposed for additional
landscaping, including, but not limited to, the tree name (botanical and common); the quantity of
each species; tree caliper, measured six (6} inches aboveground; and a typical planring detail.
(b) Tree replacement. In areas with slopes steeper than twelve (12) percent, trees to be removed
for development or reasonably anticipated to be lost due to development sha11 be replaced
according to the following requirements:
(1) Individual trees of at least twelve (12) inches DBH but less than eighteen (18) inches DBH
shall be replaced on the basis of one (1) replacement tree for every one (1) tree removed.
(2) Individual trees of at least eighteen (18) inches DBH but less than twenty-four (24) inches
DBH shall be replaced on the basis of two (2) replacement trees for every one (1) tree removed.
(3) Individual trees of twenty-four (24) inches DBH or larger shall be replaced on the basis of
three (3) replacement trees for every one (1) tree removed.
(4) Replacement shall not be required for removal of trees in areas to be occupied by buildings,
private streets, driveways, areas required for accessory parking or within a distance of fifteen (15)
feet of a building foundation ar for trees deternuned by the superintendent of parks to be
hazardous, diseased, dying or dead
(5) Trees designated for removal within the limits of disturbance may be transplanted within the
site and counted as raplacement trees.
(6) Deciduous replacement trees of nursery stock sha11 be at least two and one-haif (2 1/2)
caliper inches and of a species similar to the tree(s) lost or removed. Coniferous replacement
irees shall be at least six (6) feet in height and of species similaz to the tree(s) lost or removed.
.
03 -a�5
151 consistent with the principles of soils mechanics. and shall be detailed to *n;n;m;�e hvdrostatic
152 pressures. On a case bv case basis. the zoning administrator mav relax these standazds for
153 retainin� walls that serve minor landscaping�urposes.
154
155 Renumber existing paragraphs (g) and (h).
156
157
158 Section 3
159
160 This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage, approval, and publication.
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
Requested by Department of:
Planninct & Economic Development
.J`e�' By :
Approved by Financial Services
By:
Adopted by Council: Date Form Approved by City Attorney
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary
By:
By:
Approved by Mayor for Submission to
Council
Apgroved�by Mayor: Date
By:
By:
K:\Sharcd�PEDVSODERfiOLUxvineAV�CC ordinance-CW2-6-03.wpdPA-ADA EEO fisploy«