My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.10. SR 05-08-1995
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1995
>
05-08-1995
>
5.10. SR 05-08-1995
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2007 9:37:47 AM
Creation date
12/21/2007 9:37:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
5/8/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
.t _. ____ _~_____ <br />_.._ -- <br />.~ <br />Wetlands bill advances- <br />Joel Jamnik <br />The House approved its version of <br />amendments to the Wetland Conserva- <br />tion Act (WCA} 127-4 on Wednesday, <br />April 19. Floor action on the Senate's <br />proposal is expected on Thursday, <br />April 27, but could be delayed. The <br />League supports both bills, H.F.. 787 <br />(Munger, DFL-Duluth) and S.F. 483 <br />(Stumpf, DFL-Thief River Falls). The <br />environmental lobby and state agen- <br />cies find H.F. 787 acceptable but S.F. <br />483 too broad while the property <br />owners, developers, and some local <br />governments strongly favor the Senate <br />version over the more restrictive <br />House version. <br />Given these differences, S.F. 483 <br />appears to be is a more favorable bill <br />from the operational perspective of <br />city government.. However, from the <br />perspective of protecting wetland <br />resources from public and private <br />draining and filling activities, H.F. 787 <br />is preferable. <br />A compromise is attainable. The <br />League will continue to support <br />passage of amendments to the WCA <br />Issue House <br />Local planning plans as Significant agency Little oversight, allows <br />alternatives to WCA oversight and approval, total exemption by wetland <br /> allows function and value type. <br /> exemptions <br />Shoreland area wetlands Special rules to protect Special rules would apply <br /> wetlands within 300 feet of only within the building <br /> river or stream and 1,000 setback area (often as little <br /> feet of lakes as 75 feet from lakes) <br />Road construction and Reduces 2:1 mitigation No mitigation required for <br />maintenance exemptions ratio to 1: l any road project. which is <br /> exempted from federal. <br /> wetlands rules <br />Defense :and State may assume State assumes. <br />indemnification for local responsibility after responsibility <br />governments which are appropriations process is <br />sued for "takings" because followed <br />of state WCA <br />and will focus our efforts on the <br />defense and indemnification provi- <br />sions to ensure that they adequately <br />protect city governments from liability <br />arising from a state law. ~ <br />Senate <br />Changes proposed in SAW and EIS rules <br />Joel Jamnik <br />City officials have until May 10 <br />to review and comment on proposed <br />amendments to state rules governing <br />the Environmental Review Program. <br />The program is the system of environ- <br />mental assessment worksheets <br />(EAW's) and environmental impact <br />statements (EIS) that must be applied <br />to various land use or public project <br />proposals. <br />The amendments address: <br />• Revision of the criteria for <br />assigning petitions for EAW's to units <br />of government; <br />• Revisions to the contents and. <br />preparation procedures for EAW's; <br />• Clarification of the criteria by <br />which it is determined that an EIS is <br />needed; <br />• Clarification of which impacts <br />and alternatives must be addressed in <br />an EIS and in what level of detail, <br />including treatment of unavailable <br />information; <br />• Modification of the procedures <br />for terminating an EIS process; <br />• Modification of the way of <br />applying EAW and EIS mandatory <br />category thresholds to existing stages <br />of certain projects; <br />• Modification of the mandatory <br />EAW and EIS and Exemption catego- <br />ries for certain types of projects <br />including industrial, commercial, and <br />institutional facilities, air pollutant <br />sources, solid waste facilities, waste- <br />water systems, residential projects, <br />recreational projects, airport projects, <br />water appropriations and impound- <br />ments, marinas, stream diversions, <br />projects impacting wetlands, agrieul- <br />tore, and forestry; projects destroying <br />historic .places, and communications <br />towers; <br />• Establishment of a mandatory <br />EIS category for certain PCB incinera- <br />tion activities; <br />• Revision of the time period for <br />filing legal appeals of decisions that <br />EAW's and EIS's are or are not <br />needed; and <br />• Revision of the procedures for <br />assessing EIS casts to the project <br />proposer. <br />These rules will have a significant <br />impact on developing cities and cities <br />which undertake large projects. We <br />encourage city planning officials to <br />review the. proposah To obtain the: <br />proposal or additional information, <br />contact Gregg Dawning at the Envi- <br />ronmental Quality Board at (612) 296- <br />2603, FAX (612) 296-3698. ~ <br />April 28, 1995 L-,rh C C.+~~ e5 ~K lrol~~l~ Page 5 <br />~. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.