My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10/05/2022 Environmental Board Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Environmental Board
>
Minutes
>
2022
>
10/05/2022 Environmental Board Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/16/2023 12:37:28 PM
Creation date
3/16/2023 12:36:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Environmental Board
Env Bd Document Type
Env Bd Minutes
Meeting Date
10/05/2022
Env Bd Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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
Environmental Board <br />October 5, 2022 <br />Page 6 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br /> <br /> <br />following questions: <br /> <br /> Regarding section 4.2.8, comment #14 <br /> He asked if the accumulation of fertilizers and chemicals in the soil <br />would be something that an EIS would address. He noted that a <br />number of the neighboring property owners are cancer survivors. With <br />the land’s history of agriculture, we don’t know the full extent of the <br />chemicals and fertilizers in the soil. The concern is that construction <br />would result in dust, airborne particles, and carcinogens that would <br />then drift into surrounding neighborhoods. He noted that a primary <br />function of any city is to provide for the health and safety of its <br />residents. Why would we not take the additional step of requiring an <br />EIS for a project of this magnitude? He stated that it’s simply the right <br />thing to do. <br /> <br /> Mr. Sullivan stated that the need for an EIS is if the EAW doesn’t <br />adequately provide the information required. <br /> <br /> Mr. Grochala responded that agricultural areas being developed into <br />residential is typical. . <br /> <br /> Mr. Peterson stated that when the Phase 2 site assessment is submitted, <br />the concerns related to soil contamination will be satisfied. He added <br />that the soils will all have to meet residential standard in order to <br />construct the site. Soils near the helicopter crash site and storage barn <br />do not meet the requirements and will be hauled to the landfill. <br /> <br /> Regarding the Traffic Study <br /> Mr. Rennaker asked if the traffic study took into consideration the <br />existing traffic from the Century Farm development that will be using <br />the Carl Street connection. <br /> <br /> Mr. Grochala responded that yes, the traffic study does take into <br />account surrounding area trip generation. <br /> <br /> Regarding the helicopter crash site <br /> Kevin Dunrud, resident at 314 Carl Street, detailed his familiarity with <br />the helicopter crash site. He stated that its way out of line to compare <br />contamination from the crash site with the contamination from what <br />has been put on the sod fields. He added that the crash site was spread <br />over a large area and wondered how much of the site would be cleaned <br />up. <br /> <br /> Regarding general comments about the content of the EAW <br /> Mr. Rennaker attributed the following quote to Mr. Grochala. “There <br />was not a lot of research within the comments.”
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.