09-09-2013 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, August 26, 2013 7:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 of 21 (9. WETLAND DELINEATIONS CODE INTERPRETATION, Continued) Kanive stated having permanent wetland delineation gives the same certainty to the property owners as those located along the lakeshore. For example, lake levels are not measured every five years to determine if the house is set back far enough from the lake or if an improvement needs to be set back further. Those landowners know what they have to comply with. In addition, the standard of expiring wetland delineations puts the risk of shrinking or expanding wetlands on existing homeowners near or on wetlands. Kanive noted the widening of Willow Road that is currently taking place is going to cause more runoff in general. Kanive stated had this stance been clear, he would have been opposed to the widening of Willow Road since any expansion of a wetland is forced to be borne by the residents. Kanive stated if the wetlands are expanded, there effectively is the taking of property, which does not appear to be a sustainable or equitable situation for the homeowners. Kanive indicated he did quickly read through the information compiled by Staff and that he is not sure where the confusion lies. Kanive stated Page 3 of Staff’s memo says the same thing he said in his application back in April, which is, Minnehaha perpetually relies upon wetland delineation. An email from Catherine Bach says that as long as you are not constructing a large, brand-new house, the setback will be based on the old wetland boundary. Kanive stated he does not see any change in that. Kanive stated he understands the memo from Staff to the Council insinuates that he was told something incorrect, but the e-mail from Catherine Bach on April 29 to Lynda Peterson with BWSR says as long the project triggers a permit under the Watershed District’s Erosion Control Rule and that is the only thing that triggers it and it does not involve any other wetland impacts, the applicant only needs to show the location of any existing buffer on the property required under a past permit on their plans, which would be based on the old boundary. Kanive noted his entire neighborhood has a permit from the original development that clearly shows the old boundaries. McMillan stated the way she interprets it is that the buffers are determined based on a delineation and the buffer line is set in stone. When the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District says here is your buffer, it is based on a delineation done at a certain point of time and it is then set. Kanive stated according to Catherine Bach, the buffer stays and the wetland delineation stays. McMillan stated with respect to the wetland delineation that would remain in place for that buffer. The buffer is determined based on the delineation line that was completed at the time the buffer was determined. Kanive stated the email states that even if the wetland boundary changes from when it was originally delineated, which it sounds like it may have happened in this instance, the location of the buffer of is required but the WCA permits do not change with that boundary. The email goes on to say that for developments like Willow View, the MCWD relies perpetually on the wetland buffer as approved with the development permit, even those over five years old. Item #03 - CC Agenda - 09/09/2013 Approval of Council Minutes 08/26/2013 [Page 12 of 21]