05-20-2013 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

' � ' PC Exhibit B S �� � r 6 1VIEMORAIVD:ZTM , '�P,C.Wor.'k:sess`ion.5-1-13 - � ' . .L-:"Y To: Planning Commission Melanie Curtis Jessica Loftus � From: Mike Gaffron Date: 4/26/13 Subject: #I3-3601 Wetland Ordinance Revisions Orono Council and Planning Commission met in a joint work session on April 3 to discuss potential changes to the wetlands ordinance. A number of specific questions were asked and a general consensus was reached, as follows: > Orono should revise its buffer triggers to be in line with those of the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD); i.e. requiring wetland buffers for an existing developed . homesite should only be triggered when a `complete home rebuild accompanied by hardcover increase' is proposed, and not for residential additions or accessory structures or for volume/area threshold-lirilced land alteration activities. > Orono should revise its buffer width standards to be in line with MCWD buffer width standards, and accept/adopt MCWDs standards for buffer modification; but we want to ensure we continue to have some setback from the buffer or from the wet[and itself when MCWD regulations don't provide for one. > Orono should revise its code to eliminate the requirement to avoid future nonconformities when the buffer requirement is not triggered. > Orono should revise its code to no longer require establishment of buffers when the wetland in question is on an adjacent property, at least for existing single-family home situations, but retain that ability for subdivisions (the issue then is whether developer has the right to do wetland delineation on adjoini.ng property he doesn't control). > Orono should revise its code to no longer require buckthorn and other invasive species removal from buffers unless required under MCWD code, because it's a losing battle anyway when just the buffer area is required to have invasives removed and not the rest of the property. > If Orono code is revised to be in complete conformity with MCWD Code, it was acknowledged that there are certain aspects of Orono code that are not in MCWD Rules and which we may not want to give up. Specifically is the ability to require buffer setbacks, and in the absence of a buffer, a wetland-to-structure setback. Consensus was that we need to retain the ability to require a structure setback from established buffers as well as a setback from wetlands where there is no established buffer. MCWD is Orono's designated Local Government Unit (LGU} for administering the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), which deals strictly within the wetland boundaries; for non-WCA activities such as buffer establishment and management, MCWD and Orono have two separate sets of standards and parallel jurisdiction. This causes confusion for residents.