Laserfiche WebLink
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 18, 2001 <br />Trehus mentioned that the Watershed District dealt with the minimum requirements of law <br />and lacked the teeth to enforce. <br />Asleson stated the Metropolitan Council spoke of impact to trees, but they impacted the <br />area when the highway was located through the area. Trehus answered that was the 1967 <br />Metropolitan Council, and the representatives have changed. He recommended the Board <br />attach some conditions to be met, because they were maximizing development, but doing <br />little for the environment. <br />Asleson indicated the Army Corp of Engineers needed to approve the project. Trehus <br />explained that the Metropolitan Council suggested more could be done. He believed they <br />should be attached as requirements. <br />Chair Lanyon mentioned that the issues were all on the table including the potential <br />environmental impacts. <br />Trehus stated that they did not comply with the Watershed District's requirements, and <br />there were other agencies involved. <br />Trehus moved for recommending option #3, Table the decision, until the submission of <br />additional information i.e. the Watershed District and add the recommendation that an <br />analysis should be done to fully determine the impacts 9f-inscreased runoff volumes and <br />water quality to the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Preserve, wetlands and Lakes. This <br />analysis should include computer modeling. The Metropolitan`ouncil has determined this <br />must be done prior to a negative declaration. Water. volumes should be reduced to <br />predevelopment conditions. Grundhofer seconded theMotion for the purpose of <br />discussion. <br />+i1ti� <br />Grundhofer asked who would be payinglor it, anda could the Council require it. <br />Trehus indicated that three agencies stated concerns with the proposed project. He pointed <br />out the Metropolitan Council stated that= the:`'•runoff volumes should stay at predevelopment <br />JAS -'S, <br />levels. Asleson mentioned' that; it wasnot a real expensive venture for the developer. x,�''Y fir. <br />Trehus explained that`they`would need to discuss the impacts, not just a number for water <br />volumes, but whatnumber going to do to George Watch Lake. <br />Chair Lanyon=Wstated that the concern was who would be doing the analysis. Trehus <br />responded tttieatershed District could do it. <br />-�. fey. <br />Asleson mentioned that the developer needed to meet minimum requirements. <br />Trehus urged the City not to make the decision until the Watershed District responded. <br />6 <br />