Laserfiche WebLink
-3- <br />The developer has suggested using an alternative method for <br />analyzing phosphorus stripping. The alternative presented <br />was reviewed by Barr Engineering and found to be lacking in <br />its ability to analyze a critical storm event. The Planning <br />Commission and Barr Engineering recommended that the City <br />Council utilize a different model than the Ramsey Soil and <br />Water Conservation District methodology to evaluate <br />phosphorus stripping for this and other developments. <br />Because of the length of time that would be needed to pursue <br />alternative phosphorus stripping models, the City Council <br />has chosen not to direct Barr Engineering to review this <br />matter further. The City Council by State Statute is <br />required to act upon the preliminary plat by August 5, 1988, <br />unless an extension from the developer was received. <br />Chapter 48.06, Subdivision 3(D)2 <br />action shall not cause storm water runoff <br />Barr Engineereing stated in their May 13, 1988 memo, "At <br />this point it is difficult to determine what the natural <br />outflow rate from the wetland was. However, the outflow <br />rate from the wetland would be lower after development <br />than before, under the applicant's proposal . <br />Chapter 48.06, Subdivision 3(D)4 <br />4. The allowed total increase in runoff, in combination <br />with total fill allowed, shall not cause the total natur; <br />flood storage capacity of the wetland to fall below the <br />projected volume of runoff from the whole developed <br />wetland watershed generated by a_six-inch ra nfall in 24 <br />Barr Engineering has found that this development proposal <br />will increase the storm water storage volume of the <br />wetland. <br />Chapter 48.06, Subdivision 4, 3(B)9 and 10 <br />9. The time period for commencement_ and completion of the <br />