Laserfiche WebLink
MCWD Board of Managers /� <br /> January 12, 2010 /�' � <br /> Page 2 � <br /> � <br /> � <br /> 3. Pro osed Rule: Buildin s can be constructed u to the ed e o the bu er. � � <br /> P g P g f ff <br /> Comment: There should be a setback from the buffer for buildings. The City's wetland <br /> regulations require a 20 foot setback from the buffer for buildings. This provision was <br /> based on the City's experience with properties with houses constructed up to the edge of <br /> the buffer. The property owners complained about the lack of a usable yard or not being <br /> able to walk around their house because of the unmowed buffer. The setback is intended <br /> to reduce the propensity of yards to gradually encroach on the buffer and to provide for <br /> access to all sides of buildings. (The requirement for markers at the edge of the buffer is <br /> one that we intend to add to our regulations.) <br /> 4. Proposed Rule:A project that disturbs more than �,000 square feet of land or includes <br /> the excavation of more than 50 cubic yards would trigger the buffer requif•ement. <br /> Comment: To be reasonable there should be some connection between the buffer <br /> improvement requirement and the triggering event. Simply excavating or disturbing land <br /> may not have a permanent impact on a wetland. The following criteria(from the City's <br /> regulations) should be added: 1- The portion of the property being disturbed must drain <br /> to the wetland. 2-There must be a net increase in the square footage of impervious surface <br /> that drains to the wetland or results in the relocation of impervious surfaces closer to the <br /> wetland, or results in changes to drainage patterns that the District's Engineer determines <br /> will increase the velocity or rate of runoff to the wetland. <br /> 5. Proposed Rule: Proposed buffer widths are wider than ��equi��ed by the Ciry but buffer <br /> averaging is allowed. <br /> Comment: The addition of erosion control permits as a trigger for buffer improvement <br /> will result in the regulations being applied to developed properties. Implementing a <br /> wetland buffer requirement on a developed property where the location of existing <br /> structures, improvements, and property lines must be taken into consideration is much <br /> more difficult than for a new development. City regulations allow buffer averaging as <br /> well as redirecting drainage to an area where a buffer is feasible, use of rain gardens, and <br /> other methods to achieve results equivalent to a standard buffer. Other options besides <br /> buffer averaging should be allowed to avoid creating severe hardships for property <br /> owners. <br /> 6. Proposed Rule: The i�ules pf�opose an enforcement process similar to those required��hen <br /> a wetland is filled and mitigated. <br /> Comment: This process would seem to be excessive for individual lots. We collect an <br /> escrow to guarantee installation and establishment of buffers. Staff performs compliance <br /> checks. Rather than losing a growing season while we remind the property owner about <br /> the inspection report, our staff can make the inspection and quickly issue any necessary <br /> notices. As a last resort the City is able to have the work done and assess any costs <br />