02-20-96 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FEB-16-1996 1?:00 TKDR 612 292 0093 P.02i11 ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS February 16, 1996 Honorable Mayor and City Council Lake Elmo, Minnesota Re: Petition for EAW New Public Works Facility (Berschens Site) Lake Elmo, Minnesota Dear Mayor and Council: TOLTZ, KING. DUVALL. ANDERSON AND ASe001ATES, INCORPONA7ED 1E00 PIPER JAFFRAY KA7A 4u0EDARSTREET ONNT PAUL, MINNISOTA5510Lm40 PNON&eta/2oY Atee FA%NIIM00�e0 Mcmbers of the neighboring public have submitted a petition under the rules of the Environmental Quality Board (Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410) to requite an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). The purpose of an EAW is to identify the potential environmental impacts of a particular project to aid in the determination whether further environmental review is necessary In the form of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The City is the Responsible governnteatal Unit (RGU) to make this detemrination. There are two EAW categories: Mandatory and Discretionary. The rules list 35 categories of projects for which preparation of on EAW is mandatory and 25 categories of projects which are exempt. If a project is detemlined not to be in the mandatory or exempt categories, then preparation of an EAW is at the discretion of the City. The project, as originally proposed by the City, was a new public works maintenance facility and yard waste composting. This proposal could be considered under two separate categories: Industrial, Commercial and Institutiowd; or Solid Waste. The sections of the rules pertaining to mandatory and exempt projects iu these categories are reproduced for you and attached to this letter. A review of the mandatory categories for projects of this type clearly reveals this project is not In the mandatory category. A review of the exempt categories indicates this project may be exempt. The exemptions for Industrial, Commercial, or Institutional projects list conflicting thresholds for exemptions: See page 65 of the EQB rules attached to this letter. Since the City is both the project proposer and the RGU in this case, the City could decide to do a discretionary EAW. 'Ilre City must detemnine if the evidence presented by the petitioners or other persons, or otherwise known to the City demonstrates that the project may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The information presented in the petition focuses primarily on the proposed yard waste composting and included information .from the MPCA. We understand that the City has withdrawn its proposal to compost at that site, therefore there is no longer any environmental reason to evaluate it for composting. The petition also expresses concern for surface water runoff quality, loss of prime farm land, traffic, noise and odors but does not provide any evidence of the potential for significant envirormrental effects. An Eq m) Opportunity Employer