2017-02-28_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

to benefit the entire community. With the increasing intensity of storms being realized, Member Wozniak noted the need to do something now, questioning when the next opportunity may arise to look at the issue. Member Wozniak opined that other sources of runoff needed to be taken into account, in other words any impervious surfaces, whether driveways, patios, parking lots or structures, and to spread the word that everyone has a role in controlling that runoff. Mr. Johnson clarified that the city had some policies already in place to address impervious coverage on a lot and what did or didn't trigger a permit, particularly on the residential side. However, Mr. Johnson noted that while there were some comparisons between residential and commercial properties, the extent of that coverage at a higher percentage for commercial and typically on larger lots, made a parking lot situation easier to work with since it was more in the open. Member Wozniak asked if that meant there was a limit on residential properties but not as much of a limit for commercial properties. Mr. Freihammer responded that there was an upper limit on all zoned properties throughout the community; but noted that commercial properties were well beyond the maximum 30% impervious coverage for residential properties. Since commercial businesses differed in their purpose and role versus that of residential parcels, Chair Cihacek asked if further consideration was needed as to whether or not the maximum 85% impervious coverage was appropriate for commercial sites. Chair Cihacek stated that he was leaning toward Option 1, in not wanting to be more restrictive without abroader more comprehensive policy. Chair Cihacek opined that part of this involved watershed district rules to define city policies. In the future, Chair Cihacek advised that he would entertain development of a comprehensive set of requirements with the three watershed districts and the city. Chair Cihacek questioned if it was fair to not require the burden to be shared citywide, especially considering that many commercial properties in Roseville are older than the residential properties that had developed adjacent to and around them. Without objection, Chair Cihacek summarized that the PWETC's consensus was for Option 1; with the caveat that they supported further study to develop a more comprehensive way to deal with the stormwater management issue citywide, preferably in the very near future and incorporating additional research by staff as per this discussion. Mr. Freihammer thanked the PWETC for their direction; advising that staff would make the definition change to provide further clarification for Option 1; and also work with respective watershed district staff toward the goal of more consistent requirements of a more comprehensive nature whether or not they were more restrictive than those currently in place, and with the city's requirements then matching those restrictions. Mr. Freihammer noted that ideally the city would like Page 8 of 11