Laserfiche WebLink
1i <br />February 3,1997 <br />Spring Hill EAW <br />Page 5 <br />future, the elevation of the proposed tunnel under County Road 6 may be a factor in <br />accomplishing that. <br />While these two concerns may be significant in the City ’s variance/CUP review process, it may be <br />arguable whether they are 'environmental concerns' in the context of the EAW. Staff feels the <br />wording of the EAW is acceptable as-is, but if Council feels otherwise, the above concerns could <br />be added to the EAW. <br />Item 23: This item indicates that impacts on overall air quality are expected to be minimal. <br />Item 24: This item confirms there will be no stationary source emissions. <br />Item 25: This item defines the anticipated impact of noise, dust and odors during construction and <br />after construction is completed. <br />Item 26: This item identifies and details the two areas of archaeological importance which were <br />identified through the Phase I Archaeological surv'ey conducted at the site. It also notes that there <br />are no prime or unique farmlands on the site. <br />This item fuither states that there are no designated parks, recreation areas or trails on or inclose <br />proximity to the site. It should be noted that the Orono Park Commission in 1990 adopted a <br />proposed Bike/Hike Trail Plan which includes a trail corridor along Spring Hill Road from East <br />Long Lake Road northwestward to Count)' Road 6 and westward. Further, the City of Medina has <br />indicated they may request a trail easement on the east side ol Tamarack as part of this project. The <br />Park Commission's Plan has not been formally adopted as an amendment to the Orono <br />Comprehensive Plan but may be in the near future. Council should discuss whether disclosure <br />of the proposed trail route should be added to the EAW. <br />This may also be an appropriate section to again note the proximity of the site to Wolsfeld and <br />Wood-Rill SNA's, although that is already noted in Item 11. <br />Item 26 also indicates there are no "scenic views and vistas" at the site. The EAW Guidelines <br />describe such features as including "spectacular viewing points along lakes, rivers or bluffs; virgin <br />timber tracts; prairie remnants; geologic features; waterfalls; specimen trees; plots of wildflowers; <br />etc." Staff is unaware of any such features of local or statewide interest at this site. <br />Item 27: This item indicates no adverse visual impacts will be created by this project. Although the <br />proposed location of maintenance facilities w ill place a rather large pole building type structure at <br />a location that is veiy visible from neighboring roadways and properties, and although the character <br />of portions of the site will likely change slightly from 'woods and fields’ to a more manicured <br />I