05-11-2015 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, April 27, 2015 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 11 of 21 5. #15-3722 STORMWATER AND DRAINAGE TRUNK FEE – SECOND REVIEW (continued) Printup stated it would be less expensive for some in a new development that does not send the runoff downstream and keeps it onsite, which ultimately will preserve the wells and Lake Minnetonka, etc., as it flows downstream. Printup stated stepping back to Orono, does the Council want to think about reducing the fees if they are doing stormwater management onsite. Walsh stated adding the engineering factors into it will likely make it more complicated. Mattick stated on a large project, there will already be engineers involved. Mattick stated to his understanding the draft ordinance will also apply to single lot building. Gaffron stated the draft ordinance is talking about new development where there is a subdivision and that they have not started talking about redevelopment. Mattick stated that is something to keep in mind. Mattick stated he has spoken with Staff about the basic logic underneath all of this, which is the acreage component. Currently the City is charging a stormwater fee based on stormwater. Mattick stated there is something about a larger lot that can typically absorb what it is creating and that those might not be the lots that are having an impact on the City’s stormwater system. Mattick stated on the flip side, the City already has requirements in place that talk about how much water can leave the site. Mattick stated if someone starts analyzing that and looks at how much they are really contributing to the system downstream, it might be that the development is neutral in terms of what is being discharged as well as the quality of the water. Mattick stated he does not have an answer in terms of a formula, but that he has passed along to Staff the various formulas that other cities have used. Mattick stated it is important to study the basis of what it is the City is trying to accomplish here. Mattick pointed out Orono’s stormwater system is not the same as Minneapolis since Orono relies on a lot of natural features, such as ditches and wetlands, but that does not mean that the City does not have stormwater related projects. Levang stated the language has to be unique to Orono. Printup asked how many new developments the City is looking at and whether there are other developments in adjoining cities that will impact Orono. Gaffron stated Staff has taken a look at quite a number of cities in the metro area and only a very small number have a stormwater trunk fee, such as 20 to 30 percent, which means that 80 or 90 percent do not. Gaffron stated as it relates to the range of fees, there are a few cities that are similar to Orono and in the $5,000 to $10,000 per lot range and other cities are less. Gaffron stated there is not a lot of precedent where a large number of cities are doing this and that Staff has only found a few cities where they do it. Gaffron stated Staff has found that the cities that have a higher fee also exclude wetlands, areas that are in stormwater ponding, and road rights-of-way. Staff is proposing something similar to what someone would see in other cities that offer a reduction in their per acre fee. Item #02 - CC Agenda - 05/11/2015 Approval of Council Minutes 04/27/15 [Page 11 of 21]