10/05/2022 Environmental Board Minutes

Home Search

Environmental Board October 5, 2022 Page 4 APPROVED MINUTES habitat prior to any dredging for pond maintenance. Mr. Sullivan mentioned that the well on site would be capped. He asked if the well water was ever tested, and if the well water was different than the aquifer. He had concerns related to water contamination associated with the sod operation. Mr. Grochala responded that the well would be tapped into an aquifer, noting that this well water would not be tested with the same frequency as the municipal water supply. He added that the well capping requirement was a measure to reduce the potential for contamination of aquifers. Mr. Sullivan asked for specifics on the origin and quality of the water currently running through the ditches on the site. Mr. Grochala provided details about the water that reaches the project site. Ms. Harwood added that with the development, the public and many of the private drainage features will remain in place. Ms. Holmes commented positively on the overall thoroughness of the EAW. She asked if the cumulative impacts of this development and other development in the area, such as the Natures Refuge project, had been considered. She also mentioned concerns for wildlife. Ms. Harwood responded that the most noteworthy cumulative impacts for residential developments are related to infrastructure, such as water infrastructure and traffic impacts. She added that these impacts are accounted for both in long- range planning documents like the Comprehensive Plan, and through the project- specific traffic study. She also stated that the DNR would like to see a species survey, not necessarily due to species already found on the site, but for species that have been documented within a one-mile radius of the proposed project. Wildlife impacts would also be mitigated through the native plant buffers around storm water features and in open space areas. Mr. Grochala stated that there will be a significant landscaping component included with the development, which would be an improvement upon the current turf grass sod from a wildlife perspective. Mr. Sullivan asked what is done with the soil that is removed for contamination remediation. Ms. Harwood responded that soil that meets MPCA standards will likely be reused on site. Soil that does not meet residential use requirements will likely be landfilled.