2014-05-27_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Chair Stenlund suggested that the City needed to define a process for addressing diseased trees (EAB, Oak Wilt, and Dutch Elm) in quarantined areas and/or after storms to ensure they were not spreading the diseases. 7. Possible Items for Next Meeting—June 24, 2014 Other than those items listed in the staff report dated May 27, 2014, as possible discussion items at the June 24, 2014 meeting, other considerations included: • Alternative mitigation options for train noise and how other municipalities deal with it (Cihacek) • Additional discussion and information on how the City addresses and provide initiatives for rain gardens; where programs exist and where they overlap for residents as part of a broader management plan area; how the City encourages them and the assets behind them; if and how the City tracked sites that may be good rain garden sites and the planning process to achieve those goals. (Cihacek) • Discussion on double car garages and the permit process (Seigler) Public Comment Jim Anderson, 2085 Marion Street As he listened to comments about storm debris, Mr. Anderson advised that he moved to his current residence from across the park, and when a tornado went through their back yard in 1982, the City helped remove the debris. Mr. Anderson advised that he purchased his current home in SE Roseville, and subsequently built a garage, at which time Mr. Johnson designed his rain garden as the new garage moved him over the 30% impervious coverage limit. Mr. Anderson advised that he had built the rain garden substantially larger than needed, as he planned to eventually build a screen porch and expand the kitchen on the rear side of the home. Since the garage was constructed prior to the 2010 code change for BMP's and rain garden, and the kitchen and porch constructed after that, it pushed him into the new code requirements. Besides the addition and garage adding to his property value, and raising property taxes, Mr. Anderson noted that he would now be required to pay for a stormwater permit recertification and inspection every five years, with forms submitted annually. Mr. Anderson opined that this seemed like overkill for a small residential rain garden. Related to the MS4 permit, and the extra paperwork for that new requirement and related costs, Mr. Anderson questioned - as he contemplated adding other rain gardens to facilitate down spouts on his property—if the City planned to mitigate or encourage the addition of rain gardens, or if the additional fee in perpetuity and recertification would discourage residents from improving their properties, and thus the ability of the City to increase property taxes on those improvements. As discussions continue for residential BMP's, Mr. Johnson suggested consideration to waiving those fees and requirements based on the broader community benefits of those improvements, since the property taxes would increase accordingly. Page 19 of 20