My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
01/31/2001 Env Bd Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Environmental Board
>
Packets
>
2001
>
01/31/2001 Env Bd Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/28/2014 2:41:37 PM
Creation date
10/3/2014 12:45:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Environmental Board
Env Bd Document Type
Env Bd Packet
Meeting Date
01/31/2001
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.
/
176
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 JANUARY 3, 2001 <br />Donlin indicated that with each development, residents' taxes have increased so the <br />businesses should have to pay more. Wessel answered that Target would pay over one <br />million dollars annually for taxes. The area was zoned commercial, and would provide <br />tax relief for residents. He indicated that Powell could also address the issue. <br />Wessel excused himself to bring Powell to the meeting at 8:48 p.m. <br />Donlin addressed the lighting, and stated that there should be an attempt to minimize the <br />glare. She expressed her dislike for the cream color chosen for the building. <br />Mach urged the Target representatives to use their services to improve other areas of the <br />City. Mr. Palmquist offered that if some wetlands were affected by the project, Target <br />could contribute money for preserving trees or wetlands in the City. <br />Donlin noted that there were three school districts in the City, and submitted that Target <br />could contribute money for environmental education, specifically the Teachers of Vision <br />program. Mr. Palmquist stated that the contribution would flow from a financial model. <br />Donlin stated that there would be a need for upland :, =;tland mitigation. <br />Wessel stated that the discussion would contin „and �:s e spe •= °ic recommendations from <br />the Environmental Board were helpful. He in • c 0tir that the City Council would <br />ultimately make the decision. Asleson stated the q ' ►n was how to mitigate <br />environmental impact. <br />Mach reiterated: <br />• Move the building t <br />• Avoid monocul <br />• Reduce bounce in <br />• Decrease the number o king spaces and increase plantlife <br />Kukonen explained that one way to increase the plantlife would be through buffering. <br />Mr. Palmquist asked if a model existed, so they could work from that and put it into an <br />economic model. <br />Donlin requested that minimal lighting be used, especially at night. Trehus agreed and <br />asked if the lights would be turned off at night. <br />Donlin inquired if the 38 -foot pole height was necessary, or if it could be reduced. Mr. <br />Palmquist stated that if the pole height was reduced, there would be an increase in the <br />number of lights. The Board was assured that the lights would be shoebox lights, to aim <br />the light down, not out. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.