Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />COUNCIL MEETING MAY 26, 1987 <br />that the petitioners are not trying to stop the development, but do <br />want a second opinion regarding the issues raised on the petition. <br />Mr. Gary Uhde introduced Mr. Peter Beck, an attorney who has already <br />submitted a letter to the Council outlining the procedure for an EAW <br />and noting that Mr. Uhde's subdivison does not fall under the <br />requirements for the preparation of an EAW. <br />Mr. Uhde told the Council he is not afraid to provide an EAW for the <br />subdivision. However, time is important at this point and if this was <br />a requirement he would have had it completed last winter. Requiring <br />an EAW now would set his program behind schedule. <br />Mr. Francis Hagen of Westwood Development addressed some of the <br />concerns regarding water quality and quanity. He noted that RCWD <br />requires a permit and a plan for both concerns and they are one of the <br />hardest agencies to satisfy. He also noted that the CORPS of <br />Engineers and the Department of Natural Resources require a permit and <br />review of this subdivision. There will be second, third and fourth <br />opinions on the subdivision. <br />Mr. Stahlberg explained that he has had computer checks run on the <br />calculation provided by Mr. Uhde's engineer and they do check out. <br />Mayor Benson noted that at the preliminary plat hearing the Council <br />had directed that the weir system be built to greater specification <br />than required by RCWD. Mr. Hagen explained that a plastic weir will <br />be used and outlined its advantages and also noted that this type of <br />device is used to control oil spills on rivers. Mr. Hagen said that <br />this type of weir is being used in several communities at this time. <br />Mr. Swenson said he was concerned because at the preliminary plat <br />hearing Mr. Uhde had shown him a letter indicating that his plat had <br />been reviewed by the DNR environmental staff. However he had talked <br />to the environmental staff at the DNR and they had never heard of the <br />proposed subdivision. <br />Mr. Reinert moved to take the petition under advisement and report <br />back at another Council meeting. There was no second to this motion. <br />Mr. Marier noted that what the petitioners are really asking is that <br />there be a second opinion on the proposed subdivision. He said he <br />could see their concerns if 162 homes were being built at one time. <br />However only thirty six are planned at this time. The questions <br />regarding traffic have not been addressed but it is logical to believe <br />that there will be some sort of a traffic impact because of the <br />development. The environmental concerns are taken care of because <br />there are only thirty six homes planned at this time. In the future <br />the Council could require an EAW for the second phase. <br />PAGE 3 <br />119 <br />