Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Minnesota Pollution Control Agency <br /> <br />~ <br />~\~r\ <br /> <br />February 26, 1997 <br /> <br />Mr. Dennis Welsch <br />Community Development Director <br />2660 Civic Center Drive <br />Roseville, Minnesota 55113 <br /> <br />RE: Centre Pointe Business Park Environmental Assessment Worksheet <br /> <br />Dear Mr. \Velsch: <br /> <br />Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above referenced Environmental Assessment <br />Worksheet (EA W). The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Environmental Planning and Review <br />Office (EPRO) staff review focused on the environmental issues for which the MPCA has regulatory authority <br />and expertise. Based on our review we have the following concerns with the infonnation contained in the <br />EAW. <br /> <br />First, it is noted in response to item 4 of the EA W that the preparation of the EA W was voluntary . Would not <br />the size of the proposed development exceed the threshold for the preparation of a mandatory EA W? <br /> <br />Second, the stonn water management plans are not thoroughly described in the EA W. The reader cannot <br />deduce whether the ponds are adequately sized to manage the expected runoff. <br /> <br />Third, a traffic analysis was conducted for this project and has been included in this EA W. However, some of <br />the traffic issues were inadequately addressed in the EA W, given the size of the proposed development. Our <br />specific concerns with the traffic analysis are as follows: <br /> <br />. The traffic analysis in the EA W did not use the proper analysis-year. If the full development is expected to <br />be completed in late 1998, then the traffic analysis shouid have analyzed the worst case conditions one year <br />after completion of the project. The correct analysis year should have been 1999, instead of 1997. <br /> <br />. The EA W should have included a description of a detailed trip generation with all assumptions, including <br />any trip discount rate used. <br /> <br />. The traffic report should have included a detailed description of trip distribution and assignment, using <br />accurate and current traffic data and taking into consideration ~everallocation-specific conditions, including <br />the size of the proposed project, the types of development proposed, the prevailing conditions of the existing <br />street system, and the reasonable availability of data. <br /> <br />520 Lafayette Rd. N.; St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (612) 296-6300 (Voice); (612) 282.5332 (TTY) <br />Regional Offices: Duluth · Brainerd · Detroit Lakes · Marshall · Rochester <br />Equal Opportunity Employer. Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20% fibers from paper recycled by consumers, <br />