09/26/2001 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING JULY 18, 2001 Chair Lanyon asked if the City Council approved the resolution, was it still contingent on approval by the Watershed District, and could the District call for an Environmental Impact Statement. Grochala stated the RGU (meaning the City Council) would make the final decision, with a probable yes or no addressing potential impacts. Chair Lanyon explained the Board had concerns that the Council was deferring to the Watershed District on certain issues. Grochala indicated the City would base its approval on how the issues were addressed. Chair Lanyon questioned if the Environmental Impact Statements were for large projects only, and not usually done on smaller projects. Grochala answered they often take about a year to complete, but the City did not want to miss anything. If Rice Creek and other agencies with their standards were not a part of the process, more studies would be required. Grundhofer asked if there were permit requirements to be met, specifically on p. 2 of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency comments regarding what standards of infiltrations were used for stormwater. Asleson stated that in terms of amounts, the Watershed District had extended the standards as much as possible, however with regard to design, there were many models that could apply. Grundhofer inquired if they decided on a model. Asleson responded that a design was being considered for Spirit Hills, and a similar one would apply here. Grochala stated requirements could be made as conditions for approval. The islands in the parking lot for vegetation were being planned for - infiltration areas, however, the planned grading needed to be inquired about. Asleson indicated the quantity would be answered, but the quality would need to be maintained. Grochala commented on issues:( regulatory control which would be written up in an operation and maintenance agrement'and'discuss how the costs would be split. He indicated that best management practices would be recommended to reduce phosphorus loading. Asleson noted that the Watershed District may require them. Kukonen questioned ifthe gre islands would be basins with curbs around them. Asleson pointed out the islands'at City Hall were supposed to be basins. Grochala explained that'iere was a risk of backing up in the spring. Maplewood had basins, which plld-4 with runoff debris. Asleson commented that in the spring or times of rainfall, there was little puddling. Chair Lanyon referred to p. 2, top of p. 6, and p. 8 the fourth paragraph, where the City's response indicates that 29 acres or less would not significantly affect the wetlands. Grochala added there was a similar comment on p. 6 response #4, "the loss of significant