My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
06/27/2001 Env Bd Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Environmental Board
>
Packets
>
2001
>
06/27/2001 Env Bd Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2014 3:49:13 PM
Creation date
7/31/2014 9:35:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Environmental Board
Env Bd Document Type
Env Bd Packet
Meeting Date
06/27/2001
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.
/
155
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 MAY 30, 2001 <br />Trehus stated that the original recommendation from the Board was to work with staff <br />using conservation practices. Donlin concurred explaining the zoning and ordinances <br />were not what they should be, and expressed concern over the area being of high <br />ecological value. <br />Mr. Schmidt indicated he was working with the present zoning and ordinances and were <br />compliant. <br />Trehus inquired if there had been a response from the Watershed District concerning <br />runoff and surface water. Mr. Cooper responded that the appropriate forms had been <br />submitted and rates for stormwater had been approved. <br />Asleson explained the rates were inconsequential, the greatest impact was the water <br />volumes. He indicated the City could go beyond the standards of the Watershed District <br />in terms of water volumes. Discharged water was regulated by the MPCA. <br />Mr. Cooper noted there were flatter swales in the backyar of the lots. Mach mentioned <br />the vegetation in the swales was important. <br />Asleson pointed out the Watershed District used F e umbe uncompacted sandy <br />soils, and had concerns over the compaction. le w that a bobcat compacted <br />the soil 18 inches, and urged the plowing to restor:e soil. Mr. Cooper indicated he <br />planned to disc the area. <br />Asleson stated using a disc would <br />will probably be reworking the <br />adding a maintenance plan. <br />h, and explained the watershed district <br />the next tree to five years in addition to <br />Trehus reviewed the fin .i that ; cluded: <br />• The proposed developm not using conservation development principles. <br />• Significant tree loss could e avoided. <br />• The developer had not provided adequate information on surface water management. <br />Donlin inquired about the swale in the Southwest comer of the property and the <br />feasibility of a swale with the trees present. Mr. Cooper answered the area would be left <br />as it is presently. <br />Asleson indicated the native grasses had deep roots, and there have been studies that it <br />takes 70 years for the plants to recover if the soil is compacted. <br />Chair Lanyon reviewed the soil needs to be loosened so that the numbers in the model <br />being used work. <br />Mach added there should be an attempt to preserve the trees unless it needed to be graded. <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.