Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br />.. ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 11. 1995 2 <br />. <br /> MOTION: Malone moved and Hicks seconded a motion to approve the Consent Calendar as <br />. presented, and authorize execution of all necessary documents contained therein. <br /> The motion carried unanimously (5-0). <br />. PUBLIC COMMENTS <br />. Ms. Doris Canniff, 3946 Glenview, expressed concern about City spending, she felt the City was <br /> spending money unwisely. Ms. Canniff suggested any expenditure over $5,000 should be voted <br /> upon by the residents. <br />. Ms. Canniff indicated it was aggravating to the citizens to see spending on such items as park <br /> improvements. <br />. Mayor Probst extended an invitation for further public comment, hearing none, he moved on to the <br /> next item of business. <br />. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS <br />.- O~ren EA W <br />. Community Development Director Ringwald briefly reviewed the staff report in regard to the <br /> Environmental Assessment Worksheet ordered by the City Council for the Ogren development. <br />. Mr. Ringwald indicated the 30 day public comment period for the Environmental Assessment <br /> Worksheet (EA W) closed on August 30, 1995. Therefore the City Council is being requested to <br /> either; decide on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), or postpone a decision for <br />. up to 30 days to gather information which is critical to the decision on the need for an EIS. <br /> Mr. Ringwald explained the EA W is a brief document prepared in a worksheet format which is <br />. designed to rapidly assess the environmental effects which may be associated with a proposed <br /> project. The criteria for determining significant environmental effect are found in Minnesota Rule <br /> Chapter 4410.1700, Subll\lfl7, which states: "In deciding whether a project has the potential for <br />. significant environmental effects, the following factors shall be considered: <br /> A. Type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects; <br />. B. Cumulative potential effects ofrelated or anticipated future projects; <br /> C. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing <br />. public regulatory authority; and <br /> D. The extent to which the environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as <br /> . a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project <br />. proposer, or of EIS's previously prepared on similar projects. <br />. <br />----.- <br />