Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Council Regular Meeting - 11/22/04 <br />Minutes - Page 31 <br /> <br />than "100 feet;" and staff s interpretation of the shoreland <br />management code did concur with that of the developer <br />as presented. <br /> <br />Councilmember Ihlan sought clarification regarding the <br />TCE studies and their status. <br /> <br />Mr. Knapp advised that a Phase I and Phase II review of <br />the project had been completed by the Minnesota <br />Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) <br /> <br />10.c City Staff City Staff <br />Community Development Director Dennis Welsch <br />thanked the City Council for hearing all sides of this <br />issue. Mr. Welsch proceeded to provide a staff summary <br />of valuable points raised by both parties. <br /> <br />Mr. Welsch referred to Section 15 of the written <br />comments, as prepared by staff, and provided a quick <br />overview of staff s interpretation of the validity of the <br />2001 AUAR; and staffs response to and perspectives on <br />the point by point petition concerns. <br /> <br />Mr. Welsch referenced the staffs sources, the Natural <br />Resource Management Plan developed in 2001/2002 that <br />provided an analysis of Langton Lake, noting that the lake <br />quality was improving, as completed by a competitor of <br />the Barr Group, and due to the city's construction of <br />storrnwater ponding in the area. <br /> <br />Mr. Welsch specifically addressed the petition points <br />regarding the validity of the AUAR: <br />1) More roadway: Staff noted that Mount Ridge and <br />Prior were existing local streets; and the length of <br />the proposed Parkway was similar; <br />2) Location of parkway: Staff noted that realignment <br />in the plan was not considered significant; <br />3) Parkway connection to Snelling: Staff noted that <br />the plan to connect the two was proposed to be <br />staged; no intersection at Parkway and Snelling <br />4) Wildlife protection: Staff noted that the park was <br />