My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 10/06/2008
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Environmental Policy Board
>
2008
>
Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 10/06/2008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/18/2025 2:27:03 PM
Creation date
12/4/2008 7:46:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Environmental Policy Board
Document Date
10/06/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
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
<br />Motion by Chairperson McDilda and seconded by Board Member Max to add a case to the <br />November agenda to formulate an EPB response to send directly to the Lower Rum River Water <br />Management Organization to act as transference between, open the lines of communication, and <br />keep the lines of communication active between the two organizations. <br /> <br />Motion carried. V oting Yes: Chairperson McDilda, Board Member Bentz, Freeburg, Max, and <br />Stodola. Voting No: None. Absent: Board Member Sibilski. <br /> <br />Case #2 <br /> <br />Establishing Topsoil Requirement in City Code <br /> <br />Chairperson McDilda advised that most of the Boardmembers had heard something about this <br />item in recent times and passed the floor to Environmental Coordinator Anderson. <br /> <br />Environmental Coordimitor Anderson advised that the EPB had brought this item forward about <br />a year ago because the DNR had identified Ramsey as one of the highest users of non- <br />consumptive water in the metro area. He advised that the City has reviewed its' water <br />conservation policies and determined that more steps could be implemented. He advised that the <br />Public Works Committee reviewed this item in July and directed staff to draft an ordinance that <br />would require four inches of topsoil in all new developments, which differed from the six inch <br />requirement drafted last year. He advised that the Public Works Committee included in the <br />motion. for staff to reference the MnlDOT requirements. He advised that after staff researched <br />this and spoke with surrounding communities they could tweak the requirement slightly to have <br />more beneficial results. He advised that staff is proposing a maximum of 35 percent of sand <br />content. He advised that Andover and Blaine have the language setup very similar to what staff <br />is suggesting and it has worked very well for those two communities. He advised that the <br />ordinance is not in draft format, but advised that it would boil down to three components: the <br />definition of topsoil, black dirt composed of unconsolidated material, with a sufficient amount of <br />un-decomposed organic matter and should contain no more than 35 percent sand content; four <br />inches of topsoil to be spread across landscaped areas of all new developments; and if the work <br />is not completed at the time of issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, that an escrow shall be <br />collected to ensure the landscaping work is completed within six months of issuance date. He <br />stated that at the end of that Public Works Committee discussion, it was noted that this was a <br />good step towards water conservation but that staff and the EPB should continue to work on <br />water conservation ideas that could be used throughout the community. <br /> <br />Board Member Max questioned why it was changed from six inches to four inches. <br /> <br />Environmental Coordinator advised that it was done to come into line more with the surrounding <br />communities. He advised that when mass grading occurs they would then need to respread that <br />topsoil and add a minimum of four inches of topsoil at that time. <br /> <br />Board Member Freeburg questioned what is included in un-decomposed organic matter. He also <br />questioned if it was based on weight or volume. <br /> <br />Environmental .Coordinator Anderson advised that they are looking at finished compost and <br />explained that it would be based on volume. <br /> <br />Board Member Bentz questioned if sod was included in that four inches. <br /> <br />Environmental Policy Board / October 6, 2008 <br />Page 4 of 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.