My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10-10-2022 City Council Packet
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2022
>
Searchable Packets
>
10-10-2022 City Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/12/2022 7:32:43 PM
Creation date
12/12/2022 2:13:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Packet
Meeting Date
10/10/2022
Council Meeting Type
Regular
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
316
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
PUBLIC COMMENTS: <br />In addition to the government agencies, the City received 15 emails from the public. These <br />include: <br />• Nicki Roland Ecker —August 25, 2022 <br />• Anna Jungbauer —August 25, 2022 <br />• Morgan C —August 25, 2022 <br />• Justin Carver —August 26, 2022 <br />• Mike Trudeau — August 30, 2022 <br />• Mara Lipinski — September 5, 2022 <br />• Greg and Sarah Austin —September 10, 2022 <br />• Carl Street Residents — September 12, 2022 <br />• Ann Rudie — September 12, 2022 <br />• Doug and Cindy Hansen — September 12, 2022 <br />• Steven Anderson — September 12, 2022 <br />• Scott Zbikowski — September 13, 2022 <br />• Lisa and Ernst Olsen —September 14, 2022 <br />• Kevin and Tammy Dunrud — September 14, 2022 <br />• Reilly Anderson — September 15, 2022 <br />4. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS <br />This document responds to comments individually. It includes summaries of comments <br />followed by responses. The complete comment letters and emails are included in Appendix A. <br />Responses to comments are generally confined to substantive issues that "address the accuracy <br />and completeness of the material contained in the EAW, potential impacts that may warrant <br />further investigation before the project is commenced, and the need for an EIS on the proposed <br />project." (MN Rules 4410.1600). Some of the comments included general remarks or <br />recommendations. Such comments are noted for the record and further detail of the <br />statements or recommendations is included in Appendix A. <br />4.1 COMMENTS FROM GOVERNMENT AGENCIES <br />4.1.1 Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) —September 9, 2022 <br />Comment: The Minnesota SHPO concludes that there are no properties listed in the National or <br />State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological resources located <br />in the area that will be affected by this project. <br />Response: This comment has been noted for the record. The SHPO was contacted as <br />part of the EAW process and their response is included in Appendix E of the EAW. <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.