Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-116 Council ResolutionCITY OF LINO LAKES RESOLUTION NO. 04-116 RESOLUTION MAKING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED PHEASANT HILLS PRESERVE 12TH ADDITION WHEREAS, the City received and application for Pheasant Hills Preserve 12th Addition, a residential development within the City of Lino Lakes, and; WHEREAS, the Lino Lakes City Council makes the following specific findings of fact: 1. The City received a petition requesting the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the project, under Minnesota Rules 4410.1100. 2. The City of Lino Lakes is the responsible governmental unit for the EAW. • 3. The City Council decided with Resolution No. 02 -21 that an EAW should be prepared. 4. An EAW was prepared and the City Council approved its distribution with Resolution No. 03 -118. The EAW was distributed according to the requirements of MN Rules 4410. 5. The public comment period ended October 1, 2003. 6. The City has reviewed comments on the EAW and has prepared responses to these comments, which are included in the Record of Decision. 7. The extent to which environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority indicates that this project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. 8. In considering the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects, there will be no significant environmental effects from the project. 9. The project involves no related developments, connected actions, or phased actions as defined by MN Rules 4410. 10. The City Council must make either a negative declaration or a positive declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lino Lakes City Council makes a negative declaration regarding the need for an EIS, meaning that an EIS is not needed for the Pheasant Hills Preserve 12th Addition project as currently proposed. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that if the City determines that a substantial change has been made in the proposed project that may affect the potential for significant adverse environmental effects, a new EAW will be required as stated in MN Rules 4410.1000, Subpart 5. Adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council this day of A^J ,,uL • , 2004. ATTEST: • Ann Blair, City • - 4 5 - n, ayor Resolution 04 -116, page 2 • AGENDA ITEM 6 E STAFF ORIGINATOR: Jeff Smyser C. C. MEETING DATE: August 9, 2004 TOPIC: PUBLIC HEARING Resolution 04 -116 Negative Declaration On The Need For An Environmental Impact Statement Pheasant Hills Preserve 12th Addition VOTE REQUIRED: 3/5 BACKGROUND An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) prepared for Pheasant Hills Preserve 12th Addition has undergone public review. The City received public comments and staff prepared a draft Record of Decision document in July, which includes responses to the public comments. The Environmental Board considered the draft Record of Decision and recommended a negative declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The next step is for the City Council to make a declaration on the need for an EIS. For reasons discussed in the Record of Decision document and summarized in this report, staff is recommending a negative declaration: a decision that an EIS is not justified. The responses to the public comments can be revised as determined by the City Council. The Record of Decision, including the resolution, will be sent to all agencies on the EAW distribution list and to everyone who sent in comments on the EAW. The City Council discussed the question at the work session on July 21st and decided to hold a public hearing. As a reminder, the decision on the EAW is not an approval or denial of the development project. The EAW addresses potential environmental impacts. Information in the EAW should inform the decision on the project itself, but action on the project is a different decision. Once the environmental review process is completed, the project application itself will come to the City Council for consideration. Because of information collected for the EAW, revised plans will be needed to bring the project application to the City Council. ANALYSIS The environmental review process is laid out in MN Rules Chapter 4410. To assist in considering the need for an EIS, here is a part of Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, Subpart 7, Pheasant Hills Preserve 12th Addn. page 2 • which lists the criteria to be considered to determine if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects —that is, if an EIS is warranted. 4410.1700 DECISION ON NEED FOR EIS. Subpart 1. Standard for decision on need for EIS. An EIS shall be ordered for projects that have the potential for significant environmental effects. Subp. 7. Criteria. In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the following factors shall be considered: A. type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects; B. cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects; C. the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority; and D. the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs. The EAW review highlighted several issues. The main environmental issues are noise and vibration from the pile driving activity during construction of the bridge, and the visual impact of the bridge. Noise: The noise from the pile driving will be unpleasant for nearby residents. It will be temporary —the duration of the bridge construction. Construction hours will be limited by a standard city requirement in all development agreements: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday; 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturday; no work on Sundays or holidays. There likely will be dewatering pumps running beyond those hours. Temporary noise walls will be required around the pumps to minimize any disturbance to existing homes. Vibration: As with construction noise, this is a temporary, though unpleasant impact. A pre - construction survey and ongoing monitoring program, as well as additional fmancial security, will be required. Visual: A flat bridge design will minimize the visual impacts compared to a truss bridge. The bridge will be visible: it will be about 10 feet higher than the tops of the vegetation. The City will require the use of wooden railings, which will fit into the wooded environment. There will be a visual impact, and it will be permanent. The impact will be similar to the type and extent of changes that occur when new roads are constructed and homes are built in previously undeveloped areas. However, the bridge will be more visible than most roads because the top of the railings will be about ten feet above the vegetation tops. • Pheasant Hills Preserve 12th Addn. page 3 SUMMARY The EAW analyses and the public comments do not illustrate the potential for significant environmental effects. Possible impacts can be addressed through ongoing public regulatory authority of various jurisdictions including the City of Lino Lakes, the Rice Creek Watershed District, the Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources, and others. Therefore, an EIS is not warranted. OPTIONS 1. Approve Resolution 04 -116 making a negative declaration on the need for an EIS. 2. Return to staff with direction. RECOMMENDATION Open public hearing, take comment, close hearing. If no new substantive information is offered, staff recommends Option 1: approve Resolution 04 -116.