My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1C, Draft Comp Plan
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2008
>
04-21-08-WS
>
1C, Draft Comp Plan
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/18/2008 11:28:52 AM
Creation date
4/18/2008 11:27:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
Draft Comp Plan
General - Type
Agenda Item
Date
4/21/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
118
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 />City of Arden Hills - Comprehensive Plan - DRAFT <br /> <br />This resource protection map has two primary purposes. First, it is meant to <br />help develop regulations to protect significant natural resources where it is <br />feasible to do so. Secondly, it is meant to help make more informed <br />development decision in places where there may be significant resources. The <br />map displays the following information: <br />o Remaining natural areas within your community <br />o Results of a natural resource assessment <br />o Results of a wetland restoration assessment <br />o Lakes and streams currently listed on the 303(d) list of impaired waters <br />o Results of lake water quality assessment <br /> <br />10.5.1 Natural Resources Assessment <br /> <br />The Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) evaluated the natural areas within <br />its jurisdiction, which includes all of Arden Hills, to determine the relative quality <br />of remaining natural areas. The RCWD evaluated the natural resource data <br />based on the foilowing characteristics: <br />o Health of natural area: High quality areas with native vegetation were <br />considered more important than areas with partial or total dominance by <br />invasive species. <br />o Size: Large natural areas (5 acres or greater) were considered more <br />important that smail natural areas (less than 5 acres). <br />o Rarity of community type within the watershed: Natural community types <br />that are rare due to specific site requirements (fens, bogs, etc.), or have <br />become rare due to histonc land use changes or degradation (prairie, oak <br />savanna, etc.) were considered more important than more common <br />natural community types. <br />o Adjacency to other natural areas: Natural areas that are immediately <br />adjacent to several other natural areas were considered to be more <br />important than natural areas that are adjacent to one or no other natural <br />areas. <br />o Proximity of healthy natural areas to other healthy natural areas: Healthy <br />natural areas that are in close proximity to each other (within 1/8 of a <br />mile) were considered more important than isolated healthy natural <br />areas, healthy natural areas in close proximity to degraded natural areas, <br />or degraded natural areas in close proximity to each other. <br /> <br />These natural resource characteristics were combined to form the overail natural <br />resource assessment ranking for each area shown on map X. <br /> <br />DRAFT <br />4/18/2008 <br /> <br />72 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.