07/18/2001 Environmental Board Minutes

Home Search

ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 18, 2001 Grochala stated the wetland adjacent to the property was about seven times the size of the plat, and asked if there was a connection for the animals to go. Chair Lanyon answered that initially there could be an increase in the population, but ultimately they would die. Grundhofer expressed concern that the temperature 'change as a result of the runoff could cause problems for the frog and dragonfly eggs. Asleson stated that it would be difficult to measure, but the shading in the parking lot would help cool the runoff. Grochala suggested that it might bounce in the outlet. Asleson answered that the effects were unknown. Chair Lanyon stated that it would be worth it to monitor the outflow temperatures. Grochala concurred that a case study could be done. Asleson stated he took surface temperature readings on two occasions at George Watch Lake and Marshan Lake. He found that the water temperatures did not fluctuate much in George Watch Lake because the lake was so shallow it would never stratify. Chair Lanyon concurred adding that freshwater systems were adapted to sudden charigii'i--He continued 7.,. that most of the water would go through the infiltration ponds. ,,5,,,,,,:- O'Connell noted the area was zoned for intense commercial development. Grochala responded that it was technically zoned a shopping center*,,,,, Wessel pointed out that it was the only site in the City ahosen for a'ghopping center. Previously, there had been at least twelve plans, but no one was interested. 71,0,t4r, Chair Lanyon mentioned on p. 6 at the top-fli8reqs another example of similar language, and asked Grochala to work on the language for runoff and use it throughout the document. O'Connell expressed concern ov,eat the.refer:95s9ii p. 7 discussing filling the wetland. Grundhofer asked about stusiiestir.,rat6itti6iis on site. Asleson responded that nothing significant was planned on site O'Connell inquired about the City's response. Grochala indicated that they needed to be consistent with the Master Plan, which called for an equal amount of public park as to mitigation. He added that Anoka County was in support of it. Wessel stated*.thereNvas an agreement in effect where adjacent land could be accepted ,k ,,- for the park. .The City had difficulty giving up land for Anoka County. _ Kukonen noted that a maintenance plan would go through the County. 4