07/15/2004 Env Bd Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Comments on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet For Pheasant Hills Preserve 12th Addition Proposer: Ed Vaughan RGU: City of Lino Lakes Section 6. Description. 6 (b): According to the EAW Guidelines Document (Preparing Environmental Assessment Worksheets, as published by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board), this section should include the following information: The description should be focused on aspects of the project that may directly or indirectly manipulate, alter or impact the physical environment.... The purpose of the EAW is to identify and assess environmental impacts. Subpart 23 of the Environmental Quality Board's Environmental Review Rules (Chapter 4410.0200) defines the word "environment" as follows: Subp. 23. Environment. "Environment" means physical conditions existing in the area that may be affected by a proposed project. It includes land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, energy resources, and artifacts or natural features of historic, geologic, or aesthetic significance. Any environmental review of this project that does not discuss the "aesthetic significance" of the proposed bridge would be grossly incomplete and negligent. The Proposer, Ed Vaughan, has shown a video of the proposed bridge to a subset of residents of the Quail Ridge neighborhood. I have seen it; in my opinion, the proposed bridge design very negatively impacts the aesthetic significance of the area. In addition to being 300+ ft in length, the proposed structure stands nearly two - stories high, and is proposed to be a steel - trussed (think "jungle -gym) style. The proposer has made no effort to propose a bridge style that would blend aesthetically with the environment. As of 9/17/03 (according to Jeff Smyser, Lino Lakes City Planner) the RGU had yet to see a drawing and/or photograph of the proposed bridge structure. The proposer should provide such information to the RGU as drawings, and especially a photograph of a similarly- constructed bridge; provide a description of the visual impact of the bridge; and include an analysis of the "viewshed" of the bridge. An analysis of the "viewshed" is requested in the EAW Guidelines Document (Subpart 33) with regard to communications towers. While the proposed bridge is not a communications tower, given the aesthetics and the height of the proposed bridge, it is not unreasonable to request the proposer provide a viewshed analysis. According to the EQB Rules and EAW Guidelines Document, "visual impact" of the bridge is a legitimate environmental concern. This EAW should be considered incomplete without such items. EAW Comments, Pheasant Hills 12th Addition Page 1