08-09-1993 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

minimize off-site storm water runoff maximize overland flow over vegetative surfaces increase on-site infiltration replicate pre-development hydrologic conditions minimize discharge of pollutants encourage natural filtration functions reduce mosquito breeding habitat Depending upon a person ’s perspective the legislation has two flaws or two good points. First, the law carries no oversight or penalties. Second, the law only provides for the development of guidelines instead of rules that have the force and effect of law. The BWSR is charged with the responsibility of adopting guidelines for local government to follow. The first set of guidelines has undergone agency internal review. The second draft has just been submitted for agency review. The BWSR desires to have a third and final draft of the guidelines adopted by late May. It is the BWSR’s position that when LGUs are compliant with the recently adopted rules for metro watershed planning, they will be in full compliance with the Reding Bill. In fact, when many first generation "509 plans" are fully implemented, the affected LGUs will find themselves already compliant with this law. Within the next year the BWSR plans to begin the process to amend the rules for non-metro comprehensive water plans. This rule revision will attempt to establish specific performance standards for controls for implementing best management practices in non-metro Minnesota. VI. Tying ll Together The challenge for all levels of government is to provide a coordinated approach to assuring that storm water doesn ’t degrade our water resources. It will not be easy. State laws that conflict add to the confusion. For example, the WCA protects all wetlands from draining and filling yet the Reding bill charges local governments to use BMPs to "reduce mosquito breeding habitat." Water managers often also point out that one of the legislatively defined purposes of "509" is to "protect, preserve and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems..." This is consistent with the state shoreland rules which also encourage the use of wetlands for treatment of storm water (MN rule Chap 6120.3300, Subp. 11). Both of these policy directives may in fact be in violation of existing and future state water quality regulations. A reasonable and prudent person will likely conclude that a balanced approach needs to be taken to resolve such conflicting policies. The issue of erosion control, wetlands management, and storm water management need not be as complex as the state and federal government mandates sometimes seem to make it. As you hear about other mandates today, keep in mind that they originate from