Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Case #1: <br /> <br />Natural Resources Inventory <br /> <br />Environmental Coordinator Anderson reviewed that at the August Environmental Policy Board <br />meeting, representatives from Bonestroo & Associates presented the draft Natural Resources <br />Inventory (NRI) to the Board. Board members also received a copy of the draft report for review <br />and comment and were asked to submit comments back to Staff within two weeks. Staff <br />compiled the comments that were received and met with Bonestroo & Associates to discuss and <br />review appropriate revisions. The presentation of the final NRI report to City Council is <br />scheduled for September 25, 2007. <br /> <br />Environmental Coordinator Anderson explained the purpose of completing the NRI at this time <br />was to ensure that the City had access to this data for inclusion in the comprehensive plan update <br />that is due to the Metropolitan Council in 2008. The report provides the City with a wealth of <br />information that can and should be used to guide more sustainable and ecologically sound <br />growth. Therefore, Staff is recommending that the NRI be forwarded to City Council for <br />acceptance and recognition as an official planning tool and that it also subsequently be forwarded <br />to other public agencies such as the MN DNR and the Anoka Conservation District (ACD). <br /> <br />Environmental Coordinator Anderson stated that Bonestroo is still working on revisions to the <br />report and thus, the final report is not yet completed. Currently, it is scheduled to be presented to <br />Council at a Council work session September 25,2007, assuming the necessary edits have been <br />completed. It will also be placed on the regular agenda for a Council meeting where Staff will <br />ask Council to accept the NRI and recognize the report as a formal planning document for the <br />City. <br /> <br />Acting Board Member Max stated it would be nice that all names be standardized using <br />scientific and common names. Environmental Coordinator Anderson stated the access database <br />will automatically show both names. Environmental Coordinator Anderson stated he appreciated <br />the handwritten notes in the report but that it doesn't serve much purpose if they are not legible. <br /> <br />Board Member Sibliski asked ifthe front part of the report is completed. <br /> <br />Board Member Freeburg requested a list of the revisions. Environmental Coordinator Anderson <br />reviewed the revisions included corrections to the map, clarification on landowner notification, <br />more in depth discussion on some of the recommendations and removal of the discussion <br />regarding an upland setback recommendation, revisions to the pie chart to eliminate some <br />confusion regarding the amount of impervious area in the City, and expanding on some themes <br />or concepts to help the City prioritize lands for possible public acquisition and/or protection. <br /> <br />Acting Chairperson Max stated last weekend he met with the environmental specialist from Lino <br />Lakes and they regularly have minimum buffer widths from wetlands. Environmental <br />Coordinator Anderson stated that Lino Lakes has regulations in place that allows them to utilize <br />a little bit different process in which everyone involved in the development process (all <br />commissions, council, city staff, the developer and the public) gets together very early in the <br />development process, typically at the concept stage, to discuss what outcomes they want to see. <br />This approach may allow for a bit more flexibility for everyone, including a developer, if the end <br />result creates a win-win situation for everyone. Environmental Coordinator Anderson stated <br />Maplewood is looking at minimum buffer width also, some possibly as large as 200 feet. <br /> <br />Environmental Policy Board / September 10, 2007 <br />Page 2 of8 <br />