Citizen's Environmental Quality Committee

CITIZENS ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY COMMITTEE MEETING NOTES DATE: Thursday Oct. 6, 2022 TIME: Scheduled for 4:30 pm in the City Hall Council Chambers PRESENT: Paul Schmidt, Madalyn Bollig, Sadie Neuman, Niki Ciulla, David Ruff and Dan Hall GUESTS: Abby Wickboldt (AmeriCorps) STAFF: John Howard 1. Call to Order: Call to order at 4:31 PM by Dan Hall (Chair). 2. Review and Approval of Sept. 2022 Meeting Minutes: Motion by David, 2nd by Paul. Approved unanimously. 3. Community Forestry Initiative Member: Abby Wickboldt is the new member serving with the City of Winona as a Climate Change Corps member in the Community Forestry Initiative. Abby shared the preliminary work done by the program in September. The CEQC asked what Abby is working on currently, which is tree watering and care. She will work on the City’s EAB plan and arboretum in a City park. She is a graduate of WSU. 4. Land Disturbance Policy update: John shared that the City’s attorney is doing a legal review of the code, with particular emphasis on the shoreland dimensions since they are delegated from the state. John expects these to be ready for the first November meeting. Dan shared that a homeowner recently presented a proposal for a native garden in their Cobblestone Creek lot. This seems like a really nice project that replaces invasives with indigenous plants. David asked if this work would involve the physical streambanks – John said it is just the land vegetation. Sadie asked what inspired this project, and why they sought the land disturbance permit. John was not sure, but believe it was due to them learning about the process from a neighbor. 5. Community Garden Update: John stated the final report should be sent to taskforce for their approval tomorrow, and would then go to the City Council for discussion. John said the report hasn’t changed much, but does include the CEQC’s recommendations around the Madison School site and Knopp Valley Park. Abby asked if the ERC gardens would stay? Yes, John said the task force recommends keeping the ERC gardens and adding a west side garden. NIki asked if the ERC gardens are safe even though the public safety proposal was voted down. John said that it is undecided about the gardens. The previous proposal for the ERC site becoming a friendship and rec center had the garden plots being replaced with a food forest and walking areas. Niki noted that the garden survey respondents support the idea of food forests, but at a lesser rate than individual plots. Thus the conversion to the food forest would be unwanted by some current users at the ERC. Abby asked about expanding the garden there, but not sure how that would work. Dan asked if it was back to square one for the ERC plans, but John believes the plans existing prior to the combined public safety building are now back to being the prevailing option. David voiced the value in having green space, such as the community garden. Sadie noted the high use of the existing basketball courts and other outdoor play area. 6. Stormwater Code Amendment: John began the conversation by including passing around a revised edition of page 25 that more fully describes the new permit language about linear project reconstruction. John asked that members provide comments on the overall readability and also if the proposed changes are appropriate. Many changes are required by the MPCA. Sadie asked whether the code is intended to be plain language, or needs to be technical? John said it probably could be written in a plain text way. David asked if most repaving projects would now count as “reconstruction” require the infiltration of water. John said most road construction projects, so long as over an acre, would meet this definition. Solely repaving would not count as “reconstruction”. Dan asked for clarification on the volume calculation, and what needs to happen with that water. Ideally the water gets infiltrated into the ground. Sadie asked whether these same reconstruction projects would require an EAW. John said he believes the threshold is much larger. Dan asked about the practical ways to get infiltration. John listed raingardens, tree trenches and permeable pavers as options, but which are not common in Winona. David wondered about crediting for stormwater and utilizing neighboring properties as a way to meet the requirements. John unsure how the MPCA views stormwater crediting. Dan asked about aspects impacting industrial stormwater. John said that the MPCA regulates the stormwater for industrial sites – the one impact is a requirement to cover salt piles. Sadie asked about the timeline for approval and discussing. John said it should be approved by Nov. 18th to meet the MPCA guideline. Sadie is wary of the language of “reasonable attempt”. Not sure what a good substitute would be. Abby suggested a threshold of a percentage. David suggested project cost percentage – maybe 15%. Paul asked about the approval process. John said it would be going before the City Council. Dan expects the City Council will not be inclined to allowed added cost to reconstruction. Abby asked about metro management of the rain gardens. Niki believes it is the residents. Sadie asked whether the lawns to legumes neighborhood program might make sense for street projects. Discussion also considered using local contractors. David clarified his recommendation that cost effective would be defined as stormwater enhancements not exceeding 15% of project costs, and moved that this definition be included in the stormwater code. Seconded by Niki. Passed unanimously. David added that any definition, whether or not it is 15%, would be useful. 7. Other Business: John passed along well wishes and appreciation from Julie to the CEQC since her term is ending, and she was not able to be in attendance. Niki is also ending her term, and expressed her appreciation with working with everyone. 8. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn by Niki, second by David. All in favor. Adjourned at 5:40. Notes prepared by John Howard.