03-08-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Maxwell Bay Estates EAW Need Determination March 8, 2004 Page 3 of S Maxwell Bay Estates: EAW Not Mandatory, But Not Exempt . . tu Minnesota Rules 4410.4300 lists 36 categories of projects for which an EAW is mandatory, mandatory categories section is attached as Exhibit D-1. Staff concludes that the Maxwell Bay Estates project does not fall within any of the Mandatory EAW categories, because non of the thresholds are exceeded, nor even approached. Minnesota Rule' 4410.4600 lists 25 categories of projects which are exempt from the EAW process (Exhibit D-2). The Maxwell Bay Estates application does not meet any of the exempt categories and is therefore not exempt from the EAW process. It is staffs conclusion that an EAW is not mandatory for this project, but the project is not exempt from the EAW. Therefore, the City Council must determine whether there is a potential for ‘significant environmental effects’. Determination of Potential for Significant EnvironmenUl Effects The EQB rules do not define “significant environmental effects” nor do they specify a procedure for determining whether there is a potential for such effects. This is left solely to the discretion of the ROU. The most appropriate process would be to address the specific concerns stated in the citizen petition, and then address any additional concerns which the Council may feel is relevant to the matter. It is staffs opinion that the concerns listed in the petition have each been adequately and folly addressed through the preliminary plat review process, and that no EAW should be required. Following is a listing of each conct.-n noted in the petition with a response addressing the concerns. In each case, staff believes that the listed concerns either have been adequately addressed such that the project will have no significant environmental effects, or the concerns have been demonstrated to be unfounded. Coneern I: Surface Water and Water Quality **Based on the proposed MPCA (Minnesota Pollution Control Agency) rule changes and the proximity of the proposed drain fields to Lake Minnetonka, a detailed subsurface investigatioa must be conducted as part of the EAW to determine the iropaccs of each ISTS (individual jewage treatment systems) and to avoid or mitigate the potential of significant adverse environmental impacts.” City Response The ISTS reports and plans that were submitted meet all current requirements of the City and the State Health Department, including the sites towards Lhe lake side of the lots. With the new proposal of the 3 lot subdivision these sites arc not even necessary as additional sites have been tested more than 600 feet from the shoreline. Concern 2: fifh. Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources “Since a large portion of the Site consists of undeveloped hardwood forest and grasslands, *be applicant must consult with the MDNR Natural Heritage Program as part of the EAW to verify that no threatened or endangered species or potential habitats for these species will be i