My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
02/28/2001 Environmental Board Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Environmental Board
>
Minutes
>
2001
>
02/28/2001 Environmental Board Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/22/2016 4:30:08 PM
Creation date
6/5/2014 4:21:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Environmental Board
Env Bd Document Type
Env Bd Minutes
Meeting Date
02/28/2001
Env Bd Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING FEBRUARY 28, 2001 <br />money should be spent on a reputable company to write up the survey, then have an open <br />brainstorming meeting. <br />Mach stated that raising awareness and education needed to take place. <br />Asleson noted the small changes the Board had made were significant. Chair Lanyon <br />agreed the goals should be set high but the citizens should celebrate the small changes. <br />Donlin pointed out that crafting good ordinances was important. <br />Mach questioned the necessity of originally crafting good ordinances, that they could be <br />shared. <br />Grundhofer stated she went online, and found a parking ordinance in California. <br />Chair Lanyon noted that the Board is ahead of the City in terms of ordinances, and added <br />that they find themselves reacting when you want to be proactive on an issue. <br />Kukonen pointed out that rapid rate of growth is a concern. <br />Mr. McQuillan commented that the Board is asking for a change in the conventional way <br />of thinking and one was in the area of the width of the streets. <br />Asleson stated that the developer tonight was open tothese <br />1:•l. <br />that it was because of the ordinances. <br />se Chair Lanyon added <br />Asleson explained that project NEMO;a'group„..with solid engineering emphasis was <br />formed at the University of Connecticut. This `group will be the one to bring the ideas <br />into the forefront with funding and coordination of efforts. <br />Donlin asked if an exampleofa developer who has no desire to save oak trees could be <br />referred to them for technical"s ppoit .Asleson indicated that example could be <br />accomplished by the City conveying a consistent message. <br />Chair Lanyon agreedit would be beneficial for the City to deal with the developers and <br />drop the proJec_t byefore it needed to go the Board. <br />Donlin noted he had planned 70 units, and he had moved the configurations. Chair <br />Lanyon indicated the,developer was aligned with the ordinances. <br />Asleson stated NEMO would identify the imperviousness of an area after it is built up. <br />4;'Iyr <br />�J <br />O'Connell asked if the company ADC was in Shakopee, and did they do the landscaping <br />on their own or did they receive assistance from the City of Shakopee. <br />11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.