03-24-1997 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MARCH 10,1997 (U7 - #2202 County Road 15 Reconstruction - Continued) Joel Settles explained where the mitigation would occur. The stonnwater treatment would occur in the Excelsior pond The wetland mitigation would occur at Painters Creek. The other mitigation is under the jurisdiction of the State and would occur at a 2:1 ratio in an undetermined location. The flood plain mitigation will occur on site. Goetten inquired about the mitigation ratios. Settles said the DNR requires 1:1 replacement which will occur in Independence and approved by the MCWD The Wetland Conservation Act requires a 2.1 replacement. The City does not have requirements in place regarding replacement ratios. Jabbour indicated that the CUP relates to the movement of earth and not to mitigation. Gafifron noted the City has a prohibition of filling wetlands but has no standards developed and follows the standards developed by other agencies, Jabbour asked the Council to indicate to the County their opinion for or against the project. Kelley said he was in favor of the project. His concern regards the lack of informing the City about the requirement of an EAW. Discussion then centered on this lack of communication. The County representatives said they were unaware that the City was not familiar with the EAW requirement for such projects. It is a typical procedure followed by their department. It was noted that two comments have been received to date regarding the document. The comment portion of the process closes on March 12. Jim Grube and Vem Genslinger of Hennepin County DOT have the authority to sign the EAW. Knowlan said he, along with two other people, write the EAW and make recommendations. Flint expressed his concern that the County viewed only a narrow corridor and did not consider all of the options in the design to minimize wetland impacts. Jabbour noted that even with 100% treatment, mitigation was still required. GafFron said the County does not own the land necessary to make such changes. Knowlan also indicated that elevations are a concern. Settles noted that the County had to show evidence that there was no ponding site available before the contribution was allowed by the MCWD toward the regional ponding. Flint asked what information will be seen as a result of the EAW. Settles said the comments received indicate the Met Council saw no need for an EIS. The Pollution Control Agency encouraged the County to review ways to treatment stormwater.. Settles said the MCWD reviews their needs in the planning stage rather than through the vehicle of the EAW. 12