12/04/2002 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MEETING OCTOBER 30, 2002 Chair Kukonen inquired about the depth of the sand. Mr. McCully responded that the site was very low, so it would be about two to three feet deep. Grundhofer asked for an example of a site that was very low and the system worked. Mr. McCully answered that the bank on 35E was a good example. The water leaving the system into the sewer was clear and only a trickle. Mr. McCully stated that pervious paving areas would be vacuum cleaned once a year. He had used them in Minneapolis, Saint Paul, and in Wisconsin. Asleson stated that it was a well - designed treatment train, however his only question was the final destination of the water above the groundwater. Mr. McCully stated that another soil boring could be done on the west side and that it would not be a problem. The system needed to be verified. The species of trees needed to be changed such as the honeysuckle. The only other concern was lighting issues. Chair Kukonen requested that the new copies of the lighting codes be sent to the developer. He called for a motion per the approval of the City Engineer, a redesigning of the lighting plan, and the noted species changed. Halen made a motion to approve with the recommendations of staff and Board. O'Dea seconded the motion. Donlin reiterated her concern over the use of pesticides. Asleson indicated that the Best Management Practices were encouraged for storage and maintenance. He indicated that the site was on a sanitary sewer. There was filtration at the doors where any spills would occur. Halen accepted the friendly amendment. Schneider seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. B. Eagle Brook Church, EAW Comments Asleson introduced the topic by reviewing the background material. A citizen petition was submitted to the Environmental Quality Board to perform an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the development proposal. When the application was received, the project developer was required to supply all data to the Responsible Government Unit, which prepared the EAW using a standard form supplied by the Environmental Quality Board. The Responsible Government Unit was the City of Lino Lakes, with Jeff Smyser as the Lead Person in the review. The EAW was prepared by the information supplied, and was approved by the City Council for distribution. Copies had been sent to several review agencies for a comment period of 30 days. After the comment period, the Responsible Government Unit would respond to comments and DRAFT MINUTES