My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-28-1993 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
07-28-1993 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/28/2013 2:28:07 PM
Creation date
8/28/2013 2:26:09 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
122
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
THINGS TO CONSIDER WHEN APPLYING <br />FOR A DNR PROTECTED WATERS PERMIT TO PLACE <br />FILL FOR ROAD OR TRAIL CROSSING <br />Minnesota Rules, part 6115.0190, subp. 3., item F. allows federal, <br />state or local government agencies to fill in DNR protected waters <br />and wetlands for roadway or pathway crossings only if (1) there is <br />4 no other feasible and practical alternative to the project that <br />would have less environmental impact; and (2) that the public need <br />for the project rules out the no -build alternative. <br />4 The applicant must demonstrate the public need for all crossings. <br />If there is no public need demonstrated, then a DNR permit cannot <br />be issued for a road crossing. This document, however, will focus <br />on identifying the least impact alternative and appropriate <br />compensatory mitigation. The review of each application is based <br />on the site - specific characteristics of the individual project. <br />The review of a DNR protected waters permit application may result <br />in: 1) a permit for the requested project, 2) a limited permit for <br />a modified version of the requested project, or 3) denial in all <br />respects. <br />The following considerations are intended to guide applicants for <br />DNR permit applications that involve filling for roads or trail <br />crossings. <br />LEAST IMPACT ALTERNATIVE <br />An applicant must demonstrate the range of alternatives for <br />avoiding the protected water or wetland which were evaluated. If <br />no feasible alternatives to wetland filling existed, the applicant <br />must then demonstrate that all possibilities for minimizing the <br />extent of any necessary filling have been incorporated into the <br />proposal (e.g., reduced width, steeper side slopes, retaining <br />walls, reduced grade, etc.) <br />(- OVER -) <br />Page 54 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.