01-08-2018 Council Meeting Packet

Home Search

CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION December 4, 2017 DRAFT 5 The actions to be requested are acceptance of amended feasibility report, setting public 180 hearing dates, beginning of 60 day waiting period under city charter. 181 182 Council Member Rafferty asked about Chapter 429 process. Ms. Hankee explained that 183 process: feasibility, public hearing, no waiting period. 184 185 Council Member Maher asked what data is indicating that the West Shadow Lake 186 residents want water (which may be a change from the past). Ms. Hankee said that is the 187 purpose of the public hearing. The two projects themselves are not apples to apples. 188 Council Member Maher said she’s hearing about storm water management but not 189 necessarily about flood plain; Ms. Hankee responded that it is part of design planning. 190 Council Member Maher noted that ditches are under discussion and Ms. Hankee 191 concurred. Ms. Maher asked when the watershed report is submitted and Ms. Hankee 192 said January. Council Member Maher said there are some unknowns then as far as what 193 the watershed will say about those ditches; Ms. Hankee said based on experience and 194 knowledge, staff can anticipate somewhat and doesn’t expect significant change 195 recommendations. Council Member Maher asked if a permit is required related to flood 196 plain and Ms. Hankee concurred, noting that the Army Corps of Engineer permit can take 197 up to about four months. 198 199 Mike Trehus. 675 Shadow Court, said at the neighborhood meeting staff told residents 200 that the ditches will be protected wetlands. They couldn’t be filled. His radar went up 201 based on environmental information – ditches are alongside a road and they will be wet. 202 If the ditches were dug in an existing wetland they would require special consideration, 203 but not if they are not in wetland. He has spoken with Anoka County on that information. 204 The Minnesota Bureau of Water and Soil Resources (BOWSR) does have a grant 205 program and if it’s a scenario of a wetland, they will just take care of it. Mr. Grochala 206 remarked that BOWSR gets involved if there are safety issues being addressed. Mr. 207 Trehus suggested that is the case. Ms. Hankee added that the city is proposing that the 208 ditches be incidental wetlands but at this point she doesn’t know if that will be accepted. 209 210 Mr. Trehus suggested that the report hasn’t been submitted but staff is moving ahead with 211 an assumption. If the ditches are protected, how could they be regraded them. Ms. 212 Hankee said the actual proposal is to regrade the ditches. Mr. Trehus asked why not 213 refill them; doesn’t staff have to work with the other agencies and then report back about 214 what will be allowed? Ms. Hankee said staff understands what the neighborhood wants 215 and is working to that; some of the concerns she feels are premature. Mayor Reinert 216 said he hears that from staff. Community Development Director Grochala spoke to the 217 need to balance flow and control volumes since there are different flows on each side of 218 the road. Mayor Reinert asked how far away the process remains from those answers – 219 Ms. Hankee said January. 220 221 Mr. Trehus said staff is going to try and fill ditches and keep both sides of the roadway 222 looking the same and Plan B would be other options mentioned. Ms. Hankee said to 223 accommodate the water management, there will no doubt have to be something on the 224