Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wetlands topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
River Falls staff move to extend city wetland protections after DNR audit
Summary
City staff told the Planning Commission that a DNR audit of the city’s MS4 stormwater permit prompted proposed amendments to Title 17 to apply state DNR wetland protections citywide; commissioners voted to forward the draft to the City Council for public hearings.
Chris Buncher, the city’s senior civil engineer, told the Planning Commission that the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources conducted an audit of River Falls’ MS4 (municipal separate storm sewer system) permit and identified an action item requiring ordinance changes.
Buncher said the draft amendment to Title 17, zoning chapter 17.124, would expand the ordinance so that DNR protective-area performance standards, buffer requirements and definitions apply to all wetlands inside city limits rather than only those inside the shoreland zone. He summarized the planned changes to the title, general provisions and the Shoreline Wetland Zoning District and said the ordinance would adopt DNR definitions and exemptions for construction activity allowed in protected areas.
Commissioners questioned whether the state already requires compliance. City staff responded that DNR permitting remains the controlling compliance mechanism but the ordinance amendment is intended to codify those standards locally so they are not overlooked during city review and to ensure consistency, especially for potential future annexations. The staff noted there are currently "two or three" wetlands outside the shoreland zone but said more could be identified with annexations.
A member of the public, William Hanson, urged protection of Lake George and characterized the feature as "a unique water feature" in the watershed, and he warned against spending what he described as "24 million taxpayer and electric utility ratepayer dollars to destroy Lake George." Hanson also pointed out a possible incomplete sentence in packet Attachment B (Title 17, section 4B-1).
After discussion, commissioners moved and voted to forward the proposed Title 17 amendment with a favorable recommendation to the City Council and to set the required public hearings. The forwarding action does not itself adopt the ordinance; the City Council will consider the amendment at a later public hearing.
The Planning Commission’s next procedural step is the public hearing before City Council on the proposed Title 17 amendment; staff recommended the ordinance forward to council to satisfy the DNR audit action item.
