Laserfiche WebLink
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION December 4, 2017 <br />APPROVED <br />180 The actions to be requested are acceptance of amended feasibility report, setting public <br />181 hearing dates, beginning of 60 day waiting period under city charter. <br />182 <br />183 Council Member Rafferty asked about Chapter 429 process. Ms. Hankee explained that <br />184 process: feasibility, public hearing, no waiting period. <br />185 <br />186 Council Member Maher asked what data is indicating that the West Shadow Lake <br />187 residents want water (which may be a change from the past). Ms. Hankee said that is the <br />188 purpose of the public hearing. The two projects themselves are not apples to apples. <br />189 Council Member Maher said she's hearing about storm water management but not <br />190 necessarily about flood plain; Ms. Hankee responded that it is part of design planning. <br />191 Council Member Maher noted that ditches are under discussion and Ms. Hankee <br />192 concurred. Ms. Maher asked when the watershed report is submitted and Ms. Hankee <br />193 said January. Council Member Maher said there are some unknowns then as far as what <br />194 the watershed will say about those ditches; Ms. Hankee said based on experience and <br />195 knowledge, staff can anticipate somewhat and doesn't expect significant change <br />196 recommendations. Council Member Maher asked if a permit is required related to flood <br />197 plain and Ms. Hankee concurred, noting that the Army Corps of Engineer permit can take <br />198 up to about four months. <br />199 <br />200 Mike Trehus. 675 Shadow Court, said at the neighborhood meeting staff told residents <br />201 that the ditches will be protected wetlands. They couldn't be filled. His radar went up <br />202 based on environmental information — ditches are alongside a road and they will be wet. <br />203 If the ditches were dug in an existing wetland they would require special consideration, <br />204 but not if they are not in wetland. He has spoken with Anoka County on that information. <br />205 The Minnesota Bureau of Water and Soil Resources (BOWSR) does have a grant <br />206 program and if it's a scenario of a wetland, they will just take care of it. Mr. Grochala <br />207 remarked that BOWSR gets involved if there are safety issues being addressed. Mr. <br />208 Trehus suggested that is the case. Ms. Hankee added that the city is proposing that the <br />2o9 ditches be incidental wetlands but at this point she doesn't know if that will be accepted. <br />210 <br />211 Mr. Trehus suggested that the report hasn't been submitted but staff is moving ahead with <br />212 an assumption. If the ditches are protected, how could they be regraded them. Ms. <br />213 Hankee said the actual proposal is to regrade the ditches. Mr. Trehus asked why not <br />214 refill them; doesn't staff have to work with the other agencies and then report back about <br />215 what will be allowed? Ms. Hankee said staff understands what the neighborhood wants <br />216 and is working to that; some of the concerns she feels are premature. Mayor Reinert <br />217 said he hears that from staff. Community Development Director Grochala spoke to the <br />218 need to balance flow and control volumes since there are different flows on each side of <br />219 the road. Mayor Reinert asked how far away the process remains from those answers — <br />220 Ms. Hankee said January. <br />221 <br />222 Mr. Trehus said staff is going to try and fill ditches and keep both sides of the roadway <br />223 looking the same and Plan B would be other options mentioned. Ms. Hankee said to <br />224 accommodate the water management, there will no doubt have to be something on the <br />5 <br />