Laserfiche WebLink
ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />MINUTES FOR APRIL 28,1997 <br />(#14 - Spring Hill Golf Club - Continued) <br />Jabbour asked if Councilmembers were looking favorably on a CUP as a Planning Commission <br />recommendation so the applicant does not proceed with the expense of this project <br />unnecessarily. Flint stated he would want to see the data and possible mitigation before making <br />a decision. Goetten agreed with Flint and felt the process was moving along as expected. <br />Peterson agreed with Flint. <br />Crosby suggested a work session in two weeks rather than waiting 30 days. Hopefully in that <br />time Braman could work out with the DNR the specific information they are looking for. <br />Jack asked what Council wants the applicant to do. Jabbour responded that Council wants to be <br />sure the DNR has the information they need so an EIS is not required. <br />Flint agreed that the DNR should be satisfied but the City should also be satisfied that every <br />effort has been made to mitigate the impact on the Big Woods. <br />Kelley asked if the DNR should tell the City that they do not want an EIS. Jabbour thought that <br />the DNR should respond with their position. <br />Flint reiterated that the design on the 9lh hole could save a large portion of the Big Woods. <br />Braman responded that an earlier design had it closer to the property line. A wetland separates <br />the Big Woods from the non-Big Woods along the north end. One of the neighbors in Medina in <br />that area vehemently objected to the golf hole being so close to his house. As a result, the 9th <br />hole was redesigned. <br />Jabbour asked if the DNR ever gets enough infomiation so that they would not need an EIS. <br />Jolinson responded that they often get enough information through the environmental document, <br />however, sometimes they do find that an EIS would better address the natural resource concerns. <br />Tom Volkman, DNR, added that they don't recommend an EIS very often. The 30 day period <br />adds some time for study. The City does not have to use the full 30 days. Volkman also thought <br />it would be beneficial to have more DNR people on site with the consultants, project proposers <br />and City staff. <br />Jabbour asked if Council had the commitment of the DNR to assist in gathering the information <br />still needed. The DNR agreed to committing their resources. <br />Kelley moved, Goetten seconded, to approve the 30 day extension from May 9,1997 to June 9, <br />1997 postponing the decision on the need for an EIS so that more information can be obtained. <br />Ayes 5, nays 0.