08-11-2009 Council Work Session Packet

Home Browse Search

S should be no significant increase in staff workload or cost to add floodplain alteration to the Ciry's current review items for projects not along the Lake Minnetonka shoreline. For projects on Lake Minnetonka, however, there might be a significant increase in staff time since administering floodplain alteration rules becomes more complicated among the many older homes and lots along the lakeshore. Typically, the costs for reviewing projects under the floodplain alteration rule would be recovered by Orono through fees or the submittal of escrow by the project proposer. Rule D: Wetiand Protection The City of Orono passed its Wetland Ordinance on August 22, 2005. Ordinance revisions are not anticipated as part of assuming the Rule D permitting authority. Orono's wetland ordinance provides water quality protection of wetlands from adjacent land-use utilizing native vegetated buffers, setbacks and water qualiry treatment requirements. Prior to the City developing and passing a wetland ordinance, wetland protection from adjacent land-use was under the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District jurisdiction. Though the City of Orono has taken on the responsibility for protecting wetlands from adjacent land-use, the authority to protect the wetlands themselves resides with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and their administration of the State Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). To take over authority under Rule D, Orono would be assuming the new position as the Local Governmental Unit (LGU) for this state law. The WCA protects wetlands from draining, filling, and in some cases excavation. In cases where wetland protection is not feasible, wetland mitigation is required. The responsibilities of the LGU (Orono) for WCA include: 1. Wetland delineation review and record of decision 2. Wetland permit, no loss and exemption review and records of decision 3. Wetiand Replacement Site Monitoring Report Review (submitted by applicants, these are post construction reports for wetland repiacement sites that show how wetlands are developing). 4. Providing knowledgeable and trained staff with expertise in water resource management to manage the program or securing a qualified delegate (consuitant). The administration of the Wetland Conservation Act would add to the current work load though some tasks, such as wetland delineation review, would be incorporated into the buffer review to minimize the additional time. The main addition to staff time and/or consultant cost would involve the review of permits, exemptions, and no loss certifications for compliance with the Wetland Conservation Act rules and for reviewing monitoring reports. These activities are typically billed back to the applicant either through an escrow set up for longer duration activities or a combined escrow and fee for shorter duration activities. MGaffron RBarth^O�ono LGU Discussion 8-10-09.doc Page 2 of 3