2011-04-26_PWETC_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Ordinance for recommended adoption to the City Council; and then built into the next BMP summary sheet, attempting to achieve consistency in those documents. Ms. Bloom opined that the Erosion Control Ordinance was a direct result of the 2010 audit. In Section 4.13-1, Member Stenlund questioned what corrective actions resulted from their review of submitted plans, with ninety -nine (99) plans reviewed in 2010; and questioned feedback benefits from those reviews. Ms. Bloom advised that staff had chosen to measure by the number of plans reviewed, not qualitatively; and if they are approved, they have been determined to be good plans. Ms. Bloom clarified that a submitted plan may go through a number of alliterations prior to its actual approval; but when staff was satisfied in its review, the plan was approved. Member Vanderwall recognized Member Stenlund's intent in attempting to determine the quality of plans presented. Member Vanderwall clarified that if staff was not supportive of a submitted plan, it was returned until brought up to standard, at which time staff approved it. Ms. Bloom reviewed the MPCA audit report in detail; concurring with Ms. Schwartz that the audit experience had been a great experience, with MPCA staff spending July 14 15, 2010 with City staff, both in -house and in the field. Compared with other communities, Ms. Bloom felt confident in the outcome of that audit; recognizing things that staff was doing well; and only one (1) "must do" indicated, creation of the Erosion Sedimentation Ordinance. Ms. Bloom advised that the MPCA's concern appeared to be the lack of consistency in staff responses when interviewed, and the need to coordinate interpretation and application of the ordinance among building officials, inspection staff, engineering, and Public Works staff Related to "Stop Work" orders, they were not defined in current ordinance; even though staff followed a precise process, the MPCA was not confident that it was clear for applicants for use of this type of tool by the City. Ms. Bloom advised that staff took that criticism as a constructive opportunity to improve their process for consistency; and in updating the ordinance. Ms. Bloom noted the urgency in getting the ordinance update approved and enacted, since applications were already being received, and staff was unable to enforce MPCA requirements until the ordinance was enacted and published. Ms. Bloom noted the various staff assignments for BMP's; and the number of staff representing various City departments who were involved. In addressing the BMP for training for discharge detection, Mr. Dolan advised that training would be across all departments to ensure the same criteria was being consistently used; and that in initiating the action plan, the Fire Department would Page 9 of 18