Laserfiche WebLink
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD SPECIAL MEETING JANUARY 21, 2004 <br />Mr. Moberg indicated that the Preliminary Plat submission was addressed. The <br />Army Corps of Engineers wanted to see a wetland delineation. The response of <br />the City was that it was being reviewed by Rice Creek Watershed District. The <br />comments from the MPCA were limited to storm water requirements. The <br />response from the City was that there would be no problem because Rice Creek <br />Watershed District had more stringent storm water permit requirements than the <br />MPCA. <br /> <br />Chair Kukonen stated his impression was that they were implying the NURP <br />ponds were not adequate. Asleson answered that the Phase II exceeded the <br />requirements. <br /> <br />Mr. Moberg noted that a concern for the DNR was the wood removal and disposal <br />from the site. The response from the City was that staff would be contacting <br />them. Asleson stated he did contact them, and discussed the 60 oaks. <br /> <br />Donlin inquired if there would be a buffer zone so that the development could not <br />be seen from Wargo Nature Center. Asleson indicated there would be one on the <br />other side. <br /> <br />Mr. Moberg stated the second concern was that storm water runoff should not <br />increase for Marshan Lake. The City response was that the area was in the <br />George Watch watershed, even though it was in the Shoreland District for <br />Marshan Lake. He added that given the size of the wetland, it would be <br />impossible to show the amount of bounce. Asleson had indicated that the water <br />level might be too low at the present time, and that historically it might have been <br />higher to support the Tamarack swamp that once existed there. <br /> <br />O’Connell expressed concern that there was no concern about the ditch at the <br />Target NURP pond increasing the water into Marshan Lake. <br /> <br />Mr. Moberg indicated that there was no response letter from Rice Creek <br />Watershed District. He tried to contact them several times. There was a <br />preliminary submittal with one round of responses. Their engineers <br />recommended approval of the project, so they were very aware of the plan. <br /> <br />O’Connell inquired about the parking situation. She wanted to know if it had <br />changed, and if there were any new figures. Mr. Moberg answered that the <br />numbers had not changed, but the shared parking models had. The Hartford <br />Group proposed underground secured parking for the residents. <br /> <br />Grundhofer stated she understood that underground parking was only a <br />possibility. Grochala answered that the users would determine the numbers, so <br />they might decrease. <br /> <br /> 4 APPROVED MINUTES