Agenda - 02-28-2011 - C.1 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

206 DRAFT 549 550 May Becker: On number 13 on page 42 you took out that number and you put it into section d on page 43, number 9 is that 551 correct? 552 553 Perdita Holtz: There was already a number nine that allowed storm water management ponds with mitigation that did not have 554 a riparian buffer and the Board may or may not been aware of that. Now we took storm water management ponds that have a 555 riparian buffer that you were allowed to do as a right, it was an allowable use, and we've now moved it to, you have to mitigate. 556 It's a little bit odd that whether or not you have the riparian buffer around your new storm water management pond that you have 557 to provide mitigation but it works. We can enforce that. 558 559 Tommy McNeill: Can you take it one step further and define mitigate. 560 561 Perdita Holtz: Generally, it means establishing a vegetative buffer somewhere else. Mitigate means compensate. 562 563 Mark Marcoplos: That was the conclusion after a pretty long discussion at the last meeting. We wrestled to try to make sure it 564 was the best way to make sure that it was acceptable. 565 566 May Becker: I am just trying to be clear on this, so number 13, it said before you changed it, new storm water management 567 ponds provided by riparian buffer that meets the requirements of this section is established adjacent to the pond and then now 568 you have replaced it with, new storm water management ponds with or without a riparian buffer established adjacent to the pond. 569 Essentially, you could have a pond without a riparian buffer but you require mitigation. 570 571 Craig Benedict: If you didn't have one you'd have to build one. Mitigation process is reparation is a repair or creation of a buffer. 572 573 Shannon Berry: There are many things that could be for mitigation but you have to do something to compensate. 574 575 Perdita Holtz: I want to be clear that previously new storm water management ponds without a riparian buffer was allowed with 576 mitigation. That is not new, it is new in red, but we didn't change that since the last meeting. 577 578 Alan Campbell: I think I was probably one of the ones that suggested moving this and I was aware that was already there. 1 579 frankly felt like it didn't make a lot of sense to move it but my goal was to try to address the issue of having some process which 580 moving it over here makes it much more clear that there is a process because of mitigation required, it would subject it to some 581 type of approval. To me that was the main focus of moving it over. My recollection is that there was something already there, 1 582 think it makes sense to put it together basically just saying that 13 now have to go through extra hoops but otherwise it doesn't 583 change. 584 585 Perdita Holtz: Correct. 586 587 May Becker: My understanding of our discussion is just when I read the text it reads as if you used to have something that says 588 provided a riparian buffer that meets the requirements is established and now it reads as if you can have it with or without a 589 riparian buffer. 590 591 Perdita Holtz: With mitigation, the requirements of the section was establishing the riparian buffer width. 592 593 May Becker: I just want to be clear. The text reads to me as if you had something with the riparian buffer and now you going to 594 saying with or without a riparian buffer even though you're saying with mitigation but it sounds confusing to me on one hand to 595 say that without a riparian buffer is a possibility but then on the other hand you're saying but it's with mitigation so it's not a 596 possibility any more. 597 598 Shannon Berry: Mitigation isn't going to necessarily going to be the same riparian buffer that you would have had without 599 mitigation. There could be other things you do for mitigation other than creating this giant buffer around the pond. 600 601 May Becker: Which is, from what I understand, also a possibility before this new language but it didn't sound like it based on 602 how it was written here before on page 42 in my understanding. It makes sense to me what you're explaining, is it necessary to 603 say with or without a riparian buffer? 604 605 Shannon Berry: No, it would basically be all new storm water management ponds, that's all it needs to say because its under 606 the allowable mitigation section. Would you rather have us change the with or without and basically make it say new storm water 607 management ponds? 608 609 May Becker: I would prefer if you said something provided about riparian buffer meets the requirements of this section. I realize 10