Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 04/03/2006

Home

Coordinator Anderson stated that the Goals and Objectives would be presented to the City Council as a consent agenda item. Chairperson McDilda suggested adding the work plan as an agenda item for the next City Council meeting, and including it on a poster board for the Environmental Expo. Case #2: Discussion of Functions and Values Preliminary Report from PEC Chairperson McDilda explained that at the March 6, 2006 EPB meeting, Staff was directed to add a discussion of the preliminary functions and values report, submitted by Peterson Environmental Consulting (PEC), to the April EPB agenda. Board members were subsequently asked to review the report in detail prior to the April meeting and bring any questions .or concerns to the meeting for discussion regarding the preliminary report as they go through the ground-truthing. Board Member Bentz stated it was his preference to have a map that displays all references to recognizable locations. Chairperson McDilda stated this report is similar to other PEC reports that previously included layers. He stated layered maps can be requested if members of the EPB want them included. Environmental Specialist Bacon stated that from the wetland impact, the roads add relevant information. Board Member Bentz asked if the additional information on the far right column of the report was used in part of the determination for the classification, or simply for information pertaining to furore projects. Chairperson McDilda confirmed the column was there for information purposes. Chairperson McDilda explained that some additional information would have been included had there been more money to spend on the project. Board Member Bentz noted that some of the columns don't designate what they are on the Wetland Functional Assessment Summary Wetland Inventory. He asked whether the columns should be taken off page four of the memo if they don't state what they are on the Wetland Inventory. Coordinator Anderson noted that in the preliminary report, wildlife habitat appeared to be taken out. He stated he would follow up with PEC on it. Chairperson McDilda stated that clarification should be made where "non applicable" appears in the report. Board Member Sibilski stated that there are different levels of wildlife habitat and it wasn't clear to him whether other wetlands had wildlife habitat. He stated he needed clarification about whether only the five that are listed as "Preserve" have wildlife habitat. He noted further that the column on Aesthetics, Recreation, and Education indicate that none of the wetlands had any Environmental Policy Board/April 3, 2006 Page 3 of 10