07/25/2007 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

. Mr. James E. Studenski Page 5 July 18, 2007 Rice Creek Watershed District Rules City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota (1) The District will regulate wetland alterations that do not require replacement under WCA rules and do not qualify for one of the specific exemptions in Minnesota rules 8420.0122 according to the rules and procedures of WCA, except as specifically provided in this Rule. Alteration under this paragraph requires replacement to ensure no loss of wetland quantity, quality, or biological diversity. Notwithstanding, replacement in the form of vegetative and hydrologic restoration of a degraded wetland will be credited in the amount of twice the acreage restored (Paragraph 4(c)). (2) A wetland alteration not subject to WCA that does not change the type or function of a wetland and that preserves wetland quantity, quality, and biological diversity is exempt from the replacement requirement (Paragraph 4(d)). In addition to the wetland replacement plan components and procedures in WCA, the following criteria also are proposed to apply to wetland replacement under both WCA and RCWD standards, as applicable: (1) Sequencing avoidance minimization replacement analysis would be required to address each contiguous wetland area separately (Paragraph 5(a)). (2) At least 50% of the area of disturbed wetland would need to be replaced by wetland of the same type (Paragraph 5(c)). OP) • To receive New Wetland Credit, replacement wetland must be accompanied by protected vegetated buffer at least 25 feet in width at all points (Paragraph 5(b)). The buffer may be credited as Public Value Credit. (4) To qualify for New Wetland Credit replacement, wetland must be designed to meet specified slope limits at the wetland edge (Paragraph 5(e)). Rule G: Bridges and Culvert Crossings Current: Crossings must preserve hydraulic capacity equivalent to the existing condition (Paragraph 3). Proposed: Where the Board of Managers has not established an official profile, the proposed rule would state in the permit that the permittee bears the risk that the structure later may be found to be an obstruction within the meaning of the ditch law, and, in the event it is later found that the structure lies above the official profile, to protect benefited lands from a claim that the crossing structure was approved by the ditch authority and therefore, not subject to the ditch authority's power of direct removal (Paragraph 3).