January 3, 2006 CCP - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

decidedly lacking in 'substance, we can not find the required "copy of the written communication as a proof of coordination" in the application appendix related to either Lake Elmo or Washington County — the two most affected communities. In fact, the required communication was sent to Lake Elmo by the applicant on September 23, 2003 - a month after the application was submitted to the TAB (August 25, 2003). No communication whatever tools place with Lake Elmo prior to the August 25 date that the application was submitted to TAB. We note, however, that communications to MnDOT, Woodbury and Minneapolis TMO from Metro Transit regarding the project — and endorsing responses from those agencies - are all dated well before the application was submitted — July, 2003. 3. Even though Lake Elmo promptly responded to the September 23, 2003 communication from Metro Transit regarding the project, we see no evidence that this October 8, 2003 letter from the City raising objections to the project is included in the application Appendix AA, as are the letters from Woodbury, MnDOT,.and Minneapolis TMO. 4. On Page 16 of the application, Response Paragraph #3 states that "Preliminary discussions have been held with City of Lake Elmo staff regarding the site." That statement is simply not true. No discussions have been held with City of Lake Elmo staff regarding the site — ever. Had there been such discussions in advance of the application, the siting issue noted in #1 above would have been discovered. 5. On Page 16 of the application the "Approvals needed to implement of the project' are reported by the applicant. There is no reference here to the access permits that would likely be required to City and County Streets, nor the Planning/ZoningBuildirig permits that would be required to be obtained from the City. Coordination/Communications Between Lake Elmo and Metro Transit In addition the applicant/host community (Lake Elmo) communication issues noted above, on January 23, 2004 Lake Elmo sent a letter to Kevin Roggenbuck at the Metropolitan Council noting some of the issues addressed here, and requesting inclusion of that letter and the October 8, 2003 letter from Lake Elmo in the application documentation being reviewed and ranked by TAC/TAB. We requested that Mr. Roggenbuck advise Lake Elmo as to whether it was his intent to do so. As of today (February 18, 2004) we have not had any response to our January 23 letter from Metro Transit or Mr. Roggenbuck. Lake Elmo Basis for Objection to the Project — As Proposed The City of Lake Elmo — by its City Council — offers the following considerations in support of its objections to the proposed siting of the I-94 East Park & Ride in Lake Elmo: 1. Should use of Mn/DOT right of way as the park and ride site be found to be physically impossible — as it appears to be — any other location in Lake Elmo will result in "office" zoned and/or guided private property being purchased for the