Laserfiche WebLink
Board Member Bentz asked if some of the developments would have associations. He suggested <br />that this could be incorporated into the association rules, as it would provide a good enforcement <br />tool. <br />Mr. Anderson referenced the seeding specifications and asked if the Board decided to defer to <br />MnDOT specs or do they want something specifically outlined. <br />Acting Chairperson McDilda recalled that the Board agreed to adopt MnDOT's seeding <br />specification. He explained that in adopting MnDOT's specifications the city would have <br />MnDOT's specs as a reference point to help determine what should or should not be planted. <br />Board Member Bentz asked if there is a subsection heading or chapter that could be referenced <br />specifically for wetlands. He suggested including a reference to the section within the verbiage <br />of the ordinance. <br />Acting Chairperson McDilda confirmed that there would be a section that specifically deals with <br />the wetlands and reviewed. He asked Mr. Anderson to have Peterson Environmental take care of <br />this or have Michael Max work with it. <br />Mr. Anderson stated that he would touch base with Michael Max. He asked the Board if they are <br />talking about referencing a section within the actual ordinance or just having it on hand. Board <br />Member Bentz clarified that they want to have it on hand. <br />Mr. Bacon referenced native shrubs and asked if trees could be planted in the buffer area. Mr. <br />Anderson clarified that Mr. Bacon originally suggested the reference to include a statement that <br />native shrubs could be planted within the buffer zones. He stated that he did not plan to call out <br />anything specific within the ordinance because they have decided to utilize MnDOT's <br />specifications. <br />Mr. Anderson stated that since they are adding verbiage and including setback requirements <br />would the Board want this to back to the Planning Commission for review. <br />Board Member Sibilski stated that the Board decided at last month's meeting that the document <br />would go back to the Planning Commission in July for a final review and comments. <br />Acting Chairperson McDilda stated that it should go back to the Planning Commission for <br />another review because additional items have been included and they should be given an <br />opportunity to review and provide their thoughts on it. <br />Mr. Anderson agreed stating that the setbacks are a significant change since their last review and <br />it does warrant going back to the Planning Commission for their review. He stated that he would <br />add this as an agenda item for the July 7, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. <br />Motion by Acting Chair person McDilda and seconded by Board Member Olds to accept the <br />Wetland Buffer Ordinance Draft as presented and to schedule a discussion with the Planning <br />Commission at the July 7, 2005 meeting. <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Acting Chairperson McDilda, Board Member Olds, Bentz, <br />Freeburg, and Sibilski. Voting No: None. Absent: Board Member Hustvedt and Max. <br />Environmental Policy Board / June 20, 2005 <br />Page 6 of 9 <br />