2011-06-07_Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

103 104 Mr. Schwartz advised that there had been no formal review of the City of Roseville's Plan at past 105 GLWMO Board meetings; and advised that the City would be updating their Plan next year, as required 106 to be done within two (2) years of jurisdictional WSD's and WMO's. 107 108 At the request of Mr. Petersen, Mr. Schwartz confirmed that a City's storm water management plan was 109 usually updated within 2 -3 years of a Comprehensive Plan Update, also mandated every ten (10) years. 110 111 No additional revisions to Section 8 were indicated. 112 113 Executive Summary 114 The consensus of Board members was that they liked the easy - reading format presented in this draft of 115 the Executive Summary, recognizing it as a great tool for the public and new WMO members as currently 116 integrated and formatted into the previous 2001 Plan. 117 118 Discussion included putting the Executive Summary as a separate document on the GLWMO website, in 119 addition to its inclusion in the full Plan when final and adopted. 120 121 Mr. Schwartz asked that Ms. Correll would verify the dimensions /depths of several of the lakes in the 122 Executive Summary for possible correction. 123 124 At the request of Ms. Correll, contact information on the back page for the member Cities, it was Board 125 member consensus to include the GLWMO website information as well. 126 127 While discussing the GLWMO website domain, it was noted that, while the website domain was through 128 the City of Shoreview, the Board was unsure if an invoice had been received; and Chair Eckman directed 129 Action Step Mr. Petersen to research that issue and report back to the Board at a future meeting. 130 131 Public Question/Comment Period regarding revised May 6, 2011 Version DRAFT Watershed 132 Management Plan 133 Mr. Ferrington expressed his preferences for public review of tonight's DRAFT Plan and its subsequent 134 posting to the GLWMO website prior to the Public Hearing scheduled for August. 135 136 Mr. Petersen advised that, as part of the anticipated Board motion regarding approval of the DRAFT Plan, 137 they would declare the official start of the public /agency review period. 138 139 At the request of Chair Eckman, Ms. Correll advised that the 60 -day review period was not triggered until 140 the agencies received the DRAFT Plan by mail. 141 142 Mr. Petersen suggested that the Board insist on a receipt from the recipient at each of the agencies; and 143 further suggested that the DRAFT Plan be hand - delivered to keep costs manageable, given the size of the 144 document. 145 146 Mr. Ferrington opined that he was concerned with the timeframe, given the summer and vacation times, 147 with August being a typical vacation time for many people; and suggested that the Board give 148 consideration to a 70 -day, rather than 60 -day, review period to facilitate that timing concern; noting that 149 this would provide the Public Hearing the week before the State Fair was held and avoiding another 150 potential deterrent to public attendance at the Public Hearing. 151 152 153