Agenda - Council - 10/27/2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Board Member Lewis clarified this agenda item is to request endorsement of determining the feasibility of putting together a report to see what needs to be done. He suggested using the word "partners" and identifying who they are so they can be used appropriately as needed. Board Member Bentz advised this will rely on the cooperation of the landowners along the way. City Planner Anderson agreed. He noted some previous discussions have been around finding out the condition of the riverbanks and also getting buy -in from the landowners. Chairperson Stodola noted this work would not mean spending any money, except for the City Planner's time. Since staff came to the board with it, it would seem Staff would think it is worth the time. He suggested contacting the DNR and asking them to be a communication point. If there are calls and concerns from residents, they should be directed to the DNR for further information. Motion by Board Member Valentine to recommend that Staff explore completing a shoreline inventory to establish a baseline data set of current conditions and use that data to prioritize potential project sites, proactively contact those property owners, and engage other public agencies to discuss development of a comprehensive program to assist riparian land owners with erosion concerns. Further discussion: Board Member Lewis suggested adding the language of "and identify potential partnerships" Motion seconded by Board Member Bentz. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Stodola, Board Member Valentine, Bentz, Lewis, and Covart. Voting No: None. Absent: Board Members Bernard, and Hiatt. Councilmember LeTourneau stated this will continue to be discussed with the community while being considerate of how it is discussed. The City wants to be part of a solution and not part of a problem, so public perception will be important. City Planner Anderson reminded the Board that shoreline erosion is a detriment to the river and thus there is a public benefit to assessing the current condition of the riverbank and identifying priority sites for possible stabilization. Also, the DNR is working through potential rule revisions to the river. This could heighten the public's perception of what the City could do and the level of involvement the public would like to have. 5.03: Discuss Potential Policy to Address Buildable Area on Parcels with Floodplains and Wetlands City Planner Anderson presented the staff report. He provided an example of a case in which a building permit was issued for a new home that met all zoning standards but was very near to a drainage and utility easement and wetland. Since it met all the standards and criteria, and the City could not deny the permit even though it was evident that a future deck would be problematic due to the proximity to the easement and wetland. Ultimately, the homeowner had to go to several agencies to get permission to put a few holes in the ground for the deck. This type of situation is becoming more common as more challenging and/or less desirable lots are now being built out. Environmental Policy Board / August 17, 2015 Page 5 of 11