2017-01-24_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Freihammer advised that it was intentional to not to define "reclaim, mill and overlay, complete resurfacing, or reconstruction, but to leave as "aggregate base" in a broader sense to allow flexibility in future clarification and direction. At the request of Chair Cihacek, Mr. Johnson reviewed current watershed district and city rules, with the city typically not as strict as those of the watershed districts, particularly those of the Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). Mr. Johnson advised that in developments or improvements of over one acre, the strictest requirements would supercede those less stringent, but that the goal was to bring them into consistency. Mr. Culver noted the variables depending on the specific area or section, but clarified that an improvement must ultimately meet both city and watershed district requirements, whether or not they were currently at different thresholds. Mr. Culver advised that there was no statute or law that one trumped the other, but both needed to be met, and the goal was to have a policy in place that didn't overly burden property owners and/or developers, but still achieved adequate or improved stormwater management standards. Mr. Culver clarified that from his perspective, the city should be consistent with watershed district rules when reaching their threshold. Member Wozniak noted that in some instances, the watershed district seemed less restrictive. Mr. Freihammer confirmed that the city was more aggressive as to what triggered a disturbed area, but noted that the city's definition was up in the air now. Mr. Freihammer noted the area for discussion needed to include if and when all pavement was removed, but the base remained in place, did that trigger city water quality treatment and rate control requirements, or was t triggered if you did light grading but didn't disturb native soils as per watershed district rules. If the city stuck with its current rules, Mr. Freihammer noted that they either needed to be clarified as to the trigger or revised the match watershed district requirements accordingly as to that threshold. As part of his presentation, Mr. Johnson displayed an illustration showing pavement section cross sections, and where current city and watershed district policies differed, the major point needing clarification based on PWETC feedback on the actual policy going forward. While the city is just under fourteen square miles in area, Mr. Johnson noted that within that area there were 127 miles of storm water. At the time of original installation for a major portion of that storm sewer infrastructure, Mr. Johnson noted that it had been undersized and therefore in today's world, couldn't more water through the systems efficiently. Mr. Johnson reviewed examples of local flooding issues throughout the community and current design standards for 10% probability storms (10 year, 4.2 inches within 24 hours). While having consistently Page 10 of 17