Laserfiche WebLink
Interim Storm Water Ordinance <br />August 6, 1993 <br />Page 9 <br />proposed for revision to provide stronger direction for wetland management as well as address <br />federally-mandated language updates. <br />Subdivision 8 (J) is an absolute prohibition on "land dismrbing or development <br />activities" on slopes of 18% or more. This appears to be a much stronger requirement than the <br />Shoreland Regulations recently adopted, which merely required thorough review of the possible <br />soil erosion impacts and visual impacts before a pennit may be issued. This new prohibition <br />clearly suggests the need for a variance for any land dismrbing activity on slopes of 18% or <br />more. We often find individual residence development on slopes steeper than 18%. Adoption <br />of this requirement should be carefully considered. <br />Subdivision 8 (M) sets out a program of inspection and maintenance of constructed storm <br />water management facilities, a practice which has not formally been in the code in the past. It <br />is staffs understanding that the City Engineer and Public Works Department have occasionally <br />inspected those storm water facilities for which the City has drainage easements, but this section <br />now formalizes that practice. <br />Subdivision 9 contains lawn fertilizer regulations, which would seem to serve as <br />excellent guidelines but will be impossible to enforce. Staff has neither the man hours nor the <br />inclination to act as "fertilizer cops", but the guidelines provide the basis for what could be a <br />very productive public relations campaign. Wc would anticipate creating a brochure and perhaps <br />asking the newspaper to publish intormation on lawn fertilizing. <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Planning Commission is requested to carefully review the wording and the impact of the <br />proposed Interim Storm Water Management Ordinance. Clearly there are certain sections which <br />will require additional staff time, additional City Engineer review, and in some cases result in <br />applicants incurring greater costs for development of storm water management plans for