My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 03/03/2014
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Environmental Policy Board
>
2014
>
Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 03/03/2014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/18/2025 2:18:51 PM
Creation date
4/9/2014 8:35:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Environmental Policy Board
Document Date
03/03/2014
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
to make this available and encourage projects and did not want to see it become <br />overly cumbersome. <br />Board Member Lewis stated that the review Subcommittee step could be removed to <br />speed up the process. <br />Board Member Prendergast suggested that the term entry be used in place of <br />application, as to not confuse people into thinking that this would be asking for <br />permission to proceed with the project. <br />City Planner Anderson noted that in most cases things will come to the attention of <br />City staff through telephone conversations, similar to the process of the recent Girl <br />Scouts project. <br />Board Member Stodola noted that the Subcommittee did discuss how projects would <br />be reviewed comparing projects completed on public land to the scale of a project that <br />would be completed on private property. <br />Chairperson Max expressed concern with the possibility of the process becoming <br />lengthy and getting too specific. <br />City Planner Anderson stated that he believes that youth groups would most likely be <br />the recipients of the award. He noted that once the framework is fully developed <br />there could be a joint meeting with the Parks and Recreation Commission to discuss <br />the recognition program. He advised that certain projects may be more applicable to <br />the Parks and Recreation Commission rather than the EPB. <br />Board Member Lewis suggested that the draft version of the framework be sent to the <br />Parks and Recreation Commission for their input. He noted that if the program could <br />be developed and agreed upon, both groups would be working with the same <br />baseline. <br />City Planner Anderson stated that he could meet with Parks and Assistant Public <br />Works Superintendent Riverblood to discuss the framework and could then schedule <br />a joint meeting with the EPB and the Parks and Recreation Commission. <br />Board Member Lewis stated that as long as the input of the Parks and Recreation <br />Commission is obtained, he did not think a joint meeting would be necessary in order <br />to move the item forward more quickly. <br />City Planner Anderson stated that if there is a joint meeting to occur he would suggest <br />holding the meeting on the regular meeting date of one of the groups. <br />Board Member Lewis believed that it would be perfect to hold the joint meeting at the <br />next regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission. <br />Environmental Policy Board / March 3, 2014 <br />Page 5 of 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.