Laserfiche WebLink
Addressing looking ahead(e.g. parking lots), Mr. Freihammer noted triggers when <br /> additional impervious surfaces are being considered (e.g. reconstructing parking <br /> lots) and information proposed at next month's PWETC meeting to discuss those <br /> triggers, and research from other cities and watershed districts as to how to identify <br /> that threshold or interpret further restrictions or requirements to mitigate larger <br /> parking surfaces. <br /> Further discussion included probability projections for 100 year rainfall events and <br /> shifts from previous precipitation data as more intense rainfalls are realized; and <br /> flexibility of this plan update to reference and incorporate those higher volumes <br /> during that time period; identifying data now being used versus past use of"Atlas <br /> 14" data; and whether certain areas of the city needed more strict requirements for <br /> flood areas versus those allowed more leniency where no or little flooding was <br /> experienced. <br /> Additional discussion included newly-constructed stormwater retention ponds and <br /> city-required emergency overflow spillways or larger retention ponds in those areas <br /> already recognized as being more susceptible based on historical flooding and <br /> current/relevant climate data(changes to 44, 5 and 6 accordingly). <br /> Mr. Johnson clarified that, in part of the plan, areas considered "flood prone"were <br /> identified and language changed to add more protection for those areas,not specific <br /> goals, but just added language within the flood portion of the plan and <br /> corresponding maps giving more leeway for flood zones instead of using normal <br /> standards based on lower probabilities. <br /> Member Wozniak noted 47 related to minimizing impervious surface, and recent <br /> City Council approval for a residential stormwater fee for purchasing credits to <br /> allow more impervious surface areas. <br /> Mr. Freihammer clarified that the intent of the fee was in lieu of mitigating efforts <br /> on site that were not feasible; and noted this did not encourage impervious <br /> coverage, but required sequencing and mitigate on-site if at all possible; and only <br /> allowed if no stormwater structure was available to tie into or contaminated soils <br /> that may be tapped into would cause more harm. <br /> Goal 2 - Surface Water Protection <br /> Discussion included the City Council's adoption of a lower threshold(4,000 versus <br /> 10,000 square feet); goals for water quality as addressed by flood protection, <br /> encouragement for rain gardens and other BMP options; identifying the purpose of <br /> a rain gardens and underground BMP's for larger areas: all goals to reflect a broad <br /> spectrum of goals and policies for the city. <br /> Chair Cihacek asked where actual code enforcement for wetland areas and zoning <br /> regulations would be addressed in the plan language for city enforcement for <br /> wetland use. <br /> Page 13 of 20 <br />