My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-10-1997 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1997
>
03-10-1997 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/31/2023 3:08:57 PM
Creation date
7/31/2023 3:05:25 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
376
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING <br />HELD FEBRUARY 20,1997 <br />Gaffron noted that Hennepin County Department of Transportation will be reviewing the <br />EAW and will also address the traffic issues. <br />8. <br />9. <br />Gustafson added that the Tamarack and County Road 6 intersection is a safety consideration. <br />There may need to be some safety improvements such as turn lanes. This should be part of <br />the CUP review process. <br />Flint requested that "no impact" be changed because there will be some impact. Braman <br />responded that on page 15, the Conclusion does not say there will be "no" impact but that <br />it is "not significant". <br />Gustafson commented there was no discussion about safety. Moorse suggested wording that <br />would include "no significant increase regarding capacity but the potential need for upgrades <br />and safety improvements". Braman responded that other sections regarding infrastructure <br />would refer to the issues of road quality and safety. <br />Flint pointed out that Question 29 states that no improvements or additional infrastructure <br />will be required off-site. Moorse responded there would be changes in the response. Braman <br />noted that soil borings will be done to study the structural integrity of Spring Hill Road. <br />Water quality - wetlands. Moorse questioned changes that could happen to the wetlands. <br />He felt the applicant had responded adequately, and the agencies reviewing the EAW will <br />have enough information provided in the EAW. <br />Water quality - use of pesticides. Moorse suggested the Pest Management Plan be included <br />in the EAW but questioned how much detail was neccssar>'. Braman commented the <br />reviewing agencies would understand the Integrated Pest Management practices and would <br />not need further description. This plan describes the process of when chemicals are applied. <br />Since the EAW is also »o put the public on notice, it might be beneficial to include a brief <br />description of Pest Management practices. <br />Goetten questioned how citizens w ould get a copy of the EAW. Gaffron responded that the <br />project proposers would be providing numerous copies to the City and libraries. Citizens <br />could check out a copy from the City offices for a short period of time. <br />Flint suggested that Long Lake water quality information be added. Braman responded that <br />the Sum.nary describes water as it currently hits the site and as it is projected to leave the <br />site. Flint added that since 1992 the water quality has been substantially improved and the
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.