Loading...
PC WS 2017 10 03 CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION SUMMARY MINUTES October 3, 2017 Discussion began at 7:27 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Andrew Aller, Nancy Madsen, Mark Randall John Tietz, Mark Undestad MEMBERS ABSENT: Steve Weick STAFF PRESENT: Kate Aanenson, Community Development Director; Robert Generous, Senior Planner; and Vanessa Strong, Water Resources Coordinator PUBLIC PRESENT: None A. 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN – DISCUSSION SURFACE WATER Vanessa Strong presented the Surface Water Plan for the comprehensive plan. She pointed out that the plan provides direction for the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit as well as the surface water management plan (SWMP) and will provide an overview of surface water issues and efforts within the community. The adoption of a plan allows us to manage or surface water system. The SWMP is for the period 2018 – 2027 (10 years). The Comprehensive Plan surface water chapter connects and integrates the surface water management plan and the MS4 permit, which are in turn integral to the comprehensive plan. The city is located within four watershed districts: Carver County WMO, Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek, Minnehaha Creek, and the Lower Minnesota River Watershed Districts. All 4 WMO’s are updating their 10 year Comprehensive Plans. The city is required to amend their SWMP to be consistent with each WMO. All the watershed districts are amending their rules. The city needs to be consistent with them and the city will be amending its codes to be consistent with the most stringent rules, which will allow the city to regain the regulatory authority for storm water issues. Additionally, the amendments would help the city to meet its water quality goals. Draft Surface Water goals are as follows: Goal 1. Promote abstraction through infiltration, reuse and other methods where practicable to do so to provide flood protection, ground water recharge and improved water quality. (Quantity) Goal 2. Achieve water quality standards in lakes, streams, and wetlands consistent with their designated uses and established classifications. (Quality) Planning Commission Summary – Page 2 Goal 3. Protect and rehabilitate wetlands to maintain or improve their function and value. (Wetland) Goal 4. Prevent contamination of the aquifers and promote groundwater recharge to maintain base flows in streams and wetlands. (new Ground Water) Goal 5. Maintain primary responsibility for managing water resources at the local level where efficient to do so but continue coordination and cooperation with other agencies and organizations. (Regulatory Responsibility) Goal 6. Provide information and educational resources to improve knowledge and promote an active public role in management of water resources. (Education) She pointed out that to be compliant with our MS4 permit, the city will need to document our efforts and procedures. As part of the ordinance updates, changes would be made to Chapter 1 (Definitions), Chapter 4 (Fees), Chapter 18 (connection fees and credits, new appendices), Chapter 19 (storm water) and Chapter 20 (wetland buffers and development requirements). The city will need to use current climate data for all plans and ordinances. Commissioner Tietz asked if the most stringent regulations were stringent enough? Vanessa Strong replied that for the most part they are and that there are some very aggressive standards. Primarily, the city would like to regain the regulatory authority for development review. Most common requirement is for capture of the first 1.1 inch of rainfall. Also, the city will need to adopt the Atlas 14 for modeling. The commissioners agreed that that would be preferable, a one-stop, shop. Vanessa Strong said that even if the city were to regain regulatory authority, the watershed districts would still be able to take review responsibility in the case of variance requests from the storm water standards. Commission Randall asked about the potential for subsidies for residential rain capture and use. Vanessa stated that our plan is to promote water reuse programs. However, the city does not have to subsidize these programs. We could also promote other organizations’ programs, e.g. rain barrels. She noted that the state is also getting into these programs. Reuse is so important because the city has very low infiltration capacity in our system due to the clay soils. The city performs maintenance of storm water ponds. Due to the expense of maintenance, the city generally does approximately three per year. However, the city has an excellent program to review pond conditions. The city has until December 2018 to adopt the SWMP. The process would be to 1) plan completion, 2) plan comment and review, 3) plan approval and adoption, 4) memorandum of understanding, 5) ordinance and appendices adoption and 6) amend plan as needed rather than Planning Commission Summary – Page 3 waiting for one significant amendment. The SWMP must follow Minnesota Statutes 103 B and Minnesota Rules 8410. Commission Tietz asked what if other communities don’t do the same and how do you coordinate across subwatersheds. Are we looking at special districts across subdistricts? Vanessa Strong said that the watershed districts have jurisdiction beyond municipal boundaries and that each community would have to meet the same standard. Vanessa Strong said that part of the work is data collection. It helps to understand what is happening. The city looks at sub watersheds to prioritize requirements and projects. The goal of the Metropolitan Council is to make sure jurisdictions are providing storm water management and meeting storm water goals. Surface water management is becoming more stringent statewide. Commissioner Undestad asked about existing lots of records that were in developments that when developed met the storm water requirements. Vanessa Strong told him that existing lots of records now have to meet these more stringent standards. It becomes and economic versus natural resources issue. The state has lost between 50 – 80 percent of our wetlands. Rain events are getting larger. The city needs to plan for this. The Planning Commission appreciated her presentation and answers to their question. INTRODUCTION AND GOALS AND POLICIES Kate Aanenson presented this chapter stating that it represents a presentation of the city’s values and expectations for development. The introduction talks about the link between housing, jobs and development. The city has been providing assistance to development. She pointed out that the Surface Water goals will be added to the document and that the Introduction will be included in the document for that review. She requested that the commission review comprehensive plan goals and contact staff if they have any comments. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES Kate Aanenson presented the capital improvement and implementation chapter of the comprehensive plan. She noted that the city had incorporated the existing 5-year CIP in the plan. Additionally, the city is required to provide a list of potential implementation ordinances, code amendments and initiatives that will be required to implement the goals and policies in the comprehensive plan. We are given, as a city, a one year time frame to make these changes. Planning Commission Summary – Page 4 GENERAL DISCUSSION Kate Aanenson advised the Planning Commission that the draft 2040 Comprehensive would come back for a public hearing at the next Planning Commission meeting on October 17, 2017 and that the November 7, 2017 meeting would not be held due to the School Board election. She advised the commissioners that they had been provided a three-ring binder that as each chapter is presented they should add it to the binder. Commissioner Tietz asked about housing diversity and the use of smaller units as an option for accessory dwellings on a parcel as a housing option. Kate said that that had been looked at previously and the city had opted out of the legislation in 2017 that would have made it mandatory. Kate Aanenson advised the commission that the 2040 Comprehensive Plan will be coming before the Planning Commission on October 17, 2017 for a public hearing. The persons with land use amendment requests will probably be at the hearing. She noted that the SWMP would be a separate document which would be referenced in the comprehensive plan since it is as big as the comprehensive plan and is full of more technical information then is required in the comprehensive plan. The Planning Commission Work Session ended at 8:33 p.m. Submitted by Kate Aanenson Community Development Director Prepared by Robert Generous