CC_Minutes_2013_1014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, October 14,2013 Page 17 Ms. Giga advised that, for all new impervious surfaces, the City was required to address the volume from the first 1.8 inches of rainfall through a storage or place for the water to go and the quality of the water (e.g. removal of pollutants and sediments) before it reached the Stormsewer system, and eventually lakes and ponds. Ms. Giga explained that this was part of a watershed district's require- ments to grant approval of the permit allowing construction. Ms. Giga advised that the City was required to provide calculations that would address any addi- tional Stormsewer volume or needs. At the request of Mayor Roe, Ms. Giga addressed any issues that may come for- ward after construction that would be addressed in the maintenance agreement signed by the City with the watershed district to maintain the stormwater features and continue monitoring and mitigation as applicable. Since the City had always met those requirements to-date, Ms. Giga advised that she was unsure of the con- sequences if the City did not meet them. Mr. Schwartz reiterated staff's willingness to meet with individual residents to re- view final design plans, once they were completed, or to visit on-site; with staff willing to share plans to correct situations or concerns. Mayor Roe clarified for the public that any projects done by the City were re- quired under its Stormwater Management Plan to not make any situation worse, but to try to improve it as part of the project. Ms. Giga, referencing the previous petition submitted as part of the 2005 pro- posed project, advised that staff had been unable to locate a copy of that petition against the project at this time to include in the packet materials, and invited that resident to speak to the petition tonight if she chose to do so. Councilmember Willmus requested staff to provide the different design elements for the project at this time and how they differed from previous plans. Mr. Schwartz advised that the 2005 project had to be designed to meet federal re- quirements to qualify for the multi-use trail grant, with the pathways having to be at a minimum 8' in width on one side of the street, with the option for an on-street bike path as well. Mr. Schwartz advised that part of the rationale in declining to proceed with the project at that time, even with some federal funding to assist,had been due to the significant impacts on private property due to the required width. Mr. Schwartz advised that, at that time, there had been some willingness by resi- dents for staff to bring back a single sidewalk on one side of the street, similar to this, which may make this proposed project more acceptable to them.