A-1 Surface Water Management UpdateAdministration
A-1.
The purpose of this report is to inform council of recent changes in Minnesota
MEMORANDUM
CY OF
TO:
Todd Gerhardt, City Manager
CHMNSENFROM:
Wetland Conservation Act
Terry Jeffery, Water Resources Coordinator z
7700 Market Boulevard
PC Box 147
DATE:
September 9, 2013
Chanhassen, MN 55317
Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources regarding our administration of the
Fax: 952.227.1170
Wetland Conservation Act. Overall, the auditor felt that Chanhassen was acting
SUBJ:
Surface Water Management Update
Administration
Phone: 952.227.1100
Fax: 952.227.1110
The purpose of this report is to inform council of recent changes in Minnesota
Surface Water Laws and the potential implications of these changes.
Building Inspections
Phone: 952.227.1180
Wetland Conservation Act
Fax: 952.227.1190
On August 15, 2013, Chanhassen was audited by a representative from the
Engineering
Phone: 952.227.1160
Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources regarding our administration of the
Fax: 952.227.1170
Wetland Conservation Act. Overall, the auditor felt that Chanhassen was acting
in accordance with our responsibilities as the Local Government Unit (LGU)
Finance
responsible for the administration of the Wetland Conservation Act.
Phone: 952.227.1140
Fax: 952.227.1110
During that review, it was discovered that although the City had adopted a
resolution accepting responsibility for the administration of the Wetland
Park &Recreation
Phone: 952.227.1120
Conservation Act, the resolution was silent on specific LGU duties. Staff is
Fax: 952.227.1110
recommending that a resolution be presented to Council for consideration which
would continue our current practice, which is as follows:
Recreation Center
2310 Coulter Boulevard
1. The City must have on staff, at least one person knowledgeable in wetland
Phone: 952.227.1400
science.
Fax: 952.227.1404
2. All delineation reviews and approvals or denials will be handled
Planning &
administratively by staff with any appeal being heard by the City Council.
Natural Resources
3. All exemptions and no -loss determinations will be handled
Phone: 952.227.1130
administratively by staff, with any appeals being heard by the City
Fax: 952.227.1110
Council.
4. All replacement plan decisions will be made by the City Council with
Public works
appeals being heard by the Board of Soil and Water Resources. These will
7901 Park Place
be public hearings and council will authorize staff to sign on behalf of the
Phone: 9522271300
City.
Fax: 952.227.1310
5. Annual wetland mitigation monitoring reports will be reviewed by staff
Senior Center
and the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP). Staff will make
Phone: 952.227.1125
recommendations to the applicant based upon TEP comments.
Fax: 952.227.1110
6. Any decision on the issuance of a satisfactory completion of wetland
replacement or continuation of monitoring after five years will be made by
Web Site
www.ci.chanhassen.mn.us
council with recommendation from staff and the TEP.
Chanhassen is a Community for Life - Providing for Today and Planning for Tomorrow
Mr. Todd Gerhardt
September 9, 2013
Page 2
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permits update
MS4
The General Permit Authorization to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Municipal Separate
Stone Sewer Systems under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination/State Disposal System
Permit Program (MS4) was reauthorized on August 1, 2013. The City of Chanhassen is required
to submit our application within 150 days of the reauthorization and update our Surface Water
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) within 24 months of reauthorization. Some parts of the
SWPPP, such as construction site stormwater runoff controls, must be updated within 6 months
of reauthorization.
In prior years, staff has asked Council to hold a public hearing and take comment on our MS4
permit. The permit requires that a minimum of one (1) opportunity is annually provided to the
public to participate in the development of, and provide comment on, the SWPPP. As long as
appropriate notice requirements are followed, this meeting can occur anywhere. Staff feels that
it may be more appropriate to provide this opportunity to comment at other meetings, such as the
Arbor Day celebration or an open house such as those that are currently held for road
reconstruction projects. Any comments received will then be brought to council for their
consideration with the annual report.
Construction
On August 1, 2013, the General Permit Authorization to Discharge Stormwater Associated with
Construction Activity under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal
System Program (NPDES Construction Permit) was reissued. With this reissuance came several
changes. The most notable change is in section III.D. Permanent Stormwater Mana ern
System.
This section states that the permittee must construct a permanent stormwater management system
meeting the requirements of this section or, if they are within an MS4 that has "established
permanent treatment requirements that include volume reduction," the permittee can comply
with the MS4 requirements. In either case, the permanent stormwater management must be
designed to retain one (1) inch of runoff from new impervious surface on site and not discharge
it to a surface water. The most common method of achieving this is through infiltration;
however there are other acceptable methods including reforestation, preservation of native
vegetation, and stormwater capture and reuse. The Minimal Impact Design Standards group has
developed several practices and methods of calculations. Carver County and Minnehaha Creek
have also developed guidelines and standards for these practices and the Riley- Purgatory Bluff
Creek Watershed District is in the midst of developing standards. Staff will develop standards as
part of the process for updating the Surface Water Management Plan.
Surface Water Utility Fees
Staff is preparing information pertaining to potential changes to the surface water utility fee
assessment methodologies for Horticultural /Garden Center businesses. These businesses are
currently classified as either commercial or as agriculture depending upon their underlying
Mr. Todd Gerhardt
September 9, 2013
Page 3
zoning. Staff would like to discuss possible changes and the implications of these changes with
council.
Fee Justification
Minnesota Stables section 444.075 authorizes local governments to create " stormwater utilities"
and to levy user charges for the use and availability of stormwater facilities as well as for the
connection to these facilities. This allows local government units to look ahead several years at
programmatic and facility needs necessary to meet state and federal requirements as well as to
address more acute issues such as drainage and flooding.
As of 2007, the Metropolitan Council determined that 83 communities within the seven county
metropolitan area have a stormwater utility. Over 1/3 of these came to exist in the early 1990's
after the Minnesota Board of Soil and Water Resources adopted rules that required the creation
of local surface water management plans. In, or around 2004, there was another spike in the total
number of communities that formed a stormwater utility. This later spike was in response to the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System MS4 permit. By having a utility fund for
stormwater, we are able to have a stable, adequate and equitable fund directed solely to the
maintenance, expansion and improvement of the storm sewer system.
Numerous basic rate methodologies have been employed by various municipalities and other
local units of government. Some of these basic methods for predicting demand on the system
include impervious area calculations, the ratio of impervious area to gross area, gross area with
some factor or constant related to development intensity, or runoff coefficient. Regardless of the
methodology used, the intent is still the same, to make the fee proportionate to the impact on the
system. The greater the impervious surface, the greater the impact upon or use of the system.
When Chanhassen adopted their utility fee, it was decided to equate it to land use and gross area.
This land use is used as a surrogate for impervious surface coverage as each land use is allowed a
certain amount of impervious coverage. The exception was with agricultural land and single -
family residential land where a base charge is applied.
Statement of Problem
The discussion will revolve around three points:
1. Are these land use types similar enough to warrant them being placed in the same cohort?
2. Does a land use classification already exist to which these all belong?
3. Should a new land use classification be created specifically for
horticultural /nursery /garden center businesses?
G \FNG \rary lasue Papers \Surface Water Management CC Update_09092013.dota