07/25/2001 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

unit before preparing a replacement plan. The local government unit may request additional information needed to make a determination. For projects impacting wetland areas less than 0.1 acres the local government unit may provide an on -site sequencing determination without written documentation from the applicant; except for projects which are located in wetlands adjacent to and within 1,000 feet of outstanding resource value waters as defined in chapter 7050; trout streams as designated in Commissioner's Order Number 2294; and trout lakes as designated in Commissioner's Order Number 2230. Subp. 3. Determination of impact avoidance. A. Avoidance must be required when indicated by part 8420.0540, subpart 9. B. Wetland dependence determination: (1) Based on information provided by the applicant, the local government unit shall determine if the proposed project is wetland dependent. A project is wetland dependent if wetland features, functions, or values are essential to fulfill the basic purpose of the project. A wetland present at the site of a proposed project does not make that project wetland dependent. (2) A project that has been determined by the local government unit to be wetland dependent is exempt from the analysis of avoidance alternatives in item C. C. Alternatives analysis: (1) The applicant shall provide the local government unit with documentation describing at least two alternatives in addition to the proposed project, one of which may be the no -build alternative, that would avoid impacts to wetlands. The alternatives may include consideration of alternate sites or alternative project configurations on the proposed site.,-The alternatives must be judged by the local government unit as good faith efforts, or the local government unit may require the applicant to redraft them for reconsideration. (2) The local government unit shall determine whether any feasible and prudent alternatives are available that would avoid impacts to wetlands. An alternative shall be considered feasible and prudent if it is capable of being done from an engineering point of view, is in accordance with accepted engineering standards and practices, is consistent with reasonable requirements of the public health, safety, and welfare, is an environmentally preferable alternative based on a review of social, economic, and environmental impacts, and would create no truly unusual problems. The local government unit shall consider the following in evaluating alternatives as applicable: (a) whether the basic project purpose can be reasonably accomplished using one or more other sites in the • same general area that would avoid wetland impacts. An 35