10/24/2001 Environmental Board Minutes

Home Search

ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING 'OCTOBER 24, 2001 Trehus added that the decision to waive the fees for Target was in conflict with the policies, fee schedules, and wetland mitigation of the City. Asleson stated that there were inconsistencies with the Handbook initially upgrading to the rules. Donlin inquired about how stringent the Plan would be. Powell answered that the City rules were generally more strict than the Watershed District's, adding that there were seven levels to Surface Water Management and typically half the charges were credited. Trehus stated that in project reviews the Board assumes that th ,elopers comply with the watershed districts, but now it seemed that the City would bejetgozemingauthority for wetland conservation permitting. Powell answered that theiggit'lledtdistrict typically did the permitting, although the City could have jurisgie if:A:lose to, but the City never desired the responsibility because it put toon-pclim01. on the elected officials. Asleson stated that the watershed districts were the ultimate responsibility concerning the level of envir that the watershed district had the general review administer it. They are to refer to the latest eg---f Trehus inquired about the reason the Cit y4Itedearp!urface Water Management Plan. Powell answered that it was one compnf th0fArhole in addition to rate control, vobimes, education, and standards for Trehus questioned whether ther,0, for both the City and the watershed district ,:twe a. • IN f, but the City had the ent qaality. Powell clarified lty, and had a legal obligation to consistency. vtir, to cover the topic. Powell re oll uboth, but they needed to be consistent. Asleson stated that the Surl`a.- 0rOanagement Plan was the most important of the documents concernin t1W0 nt, conservation, and development. kff Trehus stated the Boardn told up until recently that the Board did not need to deal with it,“ but that thtrshed district would address the issues. Powell explained that the Gily vs Theiisc; and sioes deal with it in the areas of facility design, easements, Act47.,.i hydrology;Wo's Ort r u tof from the catch basins through the sewer system to the pond, and c •itches and ponds annually. Grundhofer contented on a discussion with a resident where the land was fully landscaped but tre watershed district stated that they needed a wall, not a slope in the yard. The Army Corps of Engineers said there were too many houses in the area. She lamented that there was conflicting information given to the resident, and inquired about to whom the residents should answer. Powell answered the Army Corps of Engineers had overstepped their bounds, that they dealt with wetland delineation or the boundaries of the wetlands. He continued that wetland delineation was as much an art as a science. Typically the City used a committee process and received three or four opinions looking 4