2003-04-24_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Special Provision #3 requires the District's presence at the preconstruction meeting, at which time the importance of protecting the wetland will be emphasized. Tina will place this site on the high priority inspection schedule. Cliff also felt that it will be important to work closely with the City of Oakdale building official,(Keith Lappegaard) in order to prevent problems from occurring at this site. Board. members expressed their desire to protect the wetland but did not know what could be done legally in the case of large, multi-phase private developments such as Gateway. Tracey Galowitz stated that any new rule that the District imposes must have a scientific basis to promote the public good. Although the original permit was grandfathered in, she feels that the District reserved their right to re-assess individual building sites within the development when they stipulated that each building site requires a new permit. Cliff suggested that the Board could deny the plan as submitted, and require the applicant to make revisions to comply with the District's 10-foot minimum "no-disturb" buffer. Motion: Roger Lake moved to approve Permit #03-10 as recommended by staff to include Special Provisions #1 through #3. The motion was seconded by Jack Frost. Motion to Amend: Roger Lake moved to amend the original motion to add a new Special Provision #4 to Permit #03-10 to place the applicant on notice that any unauthorized disturbance of the wetland will require mitigation and that the District can pursue any remedies as provided by the Wetland Conservation Act. The motion was seconded by Bob Johnson. Motion to Amend: Roger Lake moved to amend the original motion to delete Special Provision #2. The motion failed for lack of a second. Vote on original motion, as amended: The original motion as moved by Roger Lake and seconded by Jack Frost, and reflecting the amendment to the motion, was voted upon to approve Permit #03-10 with the addition of a new Special Provision #4. The motion carried with 3 ayes (Frost, Ellefson, Johnson), 1 nay (Skinner), and 1 abstention (Lake). 5. SOUTH WASHINGTON WATERSHED DISTRICT BOUNDARY CHANGE PETITION The Request for Board Action discusses the issues that led to SWWD's initiation of various boundary changes, beginning with the need to consolidate the jurisdictions of SWWD and East Mississippi WNIO. Other boundary changes include: • The City of Maplewood's desire to transfer the south edge of Maplewood into RWMWD. • The transfer of 40 acres that includes La Lake to SWWD. This area will never by hydrologically connected to RWMWD's watershed. • Clean up several minor boundary issues along our eastern border in Woodbury that resulted from development activity and storm sewer routing changes. Matt Moore reported that the petition has yet to be acted on by a few other affected entities, but the plan is to bring the complete package to BWSR by April 1, at which time anon-controversial hearing will be scheduled. He hopes to complete the process in time for Washington County to make required property tax roll changes by July 1. Motion: Paul Ellefson moved, Bob Johnson seconded, to adopt Resolution No. 03-03, concurring with the Boundary Change Petition of the South Washington Watershed District to be submitted to BWSR. Motion carried.. PERMIT APPLICATIONS, continued (Item 4) Permit 03-12; Krispy Kreme - St. Paul This is a redevelopment site on Suburban Avenue, and the applicant is proposing less impervious surface and the addition of a stonnwater pond before outletting to the storm sewer system. Motion: Bob Johnson moved, Roger Lake seconded, to approve Permit #03=12. Motion carried. Permit 03-13; Sibley Cove -Maplewood An apartment building is proposed at the intersection of County Road D and Ariel Street, and a stormwater pond is proposed for treatment and storage of the runoff from the site. Motion:. Roger Lake moved, Bob Johnson seconded, to approve Permit #03-13. Motion carried. Page 2 March 5, 2003, RWMWD Minutes