My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_02881
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF2000 - PF2999
>
2800
>
pf_02881
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 12:19:45 PM
Creation date
12/8/2004 1:24:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
2881
Planning Files - Type
Planned Unit Development
Address
2660 CIVIC CENTER DR
Applicant
CENTRE POINTE
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.
/
209
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />.. - <br /> <br />v <br /> <br /> <br />Minnesota Pollution Control Agency <br /> <br />~~ <br />~~~ <br /> <br /> <br />February 26, 1997 <br /> <br />Mr. Dennis Welsch <br />Community Development Director <br />2660 Civic Center Drive <br />RoseviUe, Minnesota 55113 <br /> <br />RE: Centre Pointe Business Park Environmenta.1 Assessment Worksheet <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Welsch: <br /> <br />Thank you for the opportlmity 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 bas regulato%y authority <br />and expertise. Based on our review we have the following concerns with the information 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 storm water management plans are not thoroughly described in the EA W. The reader cannot <br />deduce whether the ponds are adequately sized to manage tbe 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 inadequate1y addressed in the EA W, given the size of the proposed development. Our <br />specific concerns with the traffic analysis are as ronows: <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 should have analyzed the worst case conditions one year <br />;.f"~ comple-don of the projcct_ The 00Irect l!I!aIy!is year should have been 1999t instead of 1997. <br /> <br />. The EA W should have included a description of a detailed trip generation with all 8SSUIDptions, incIudmg <br />any trip discount I1ISe used. <br /> <br />. The traffic: report should have included a detailed clesc.ription of trip distributioD and assignment, using <br />accurate and current ttaffic data aDd taking into consideration several location-specific conditioDS. 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 Latayvtte Rd. N.: st. Paul. UN 56155-4104: (812) 2~ (Voice): (812) 282-5.m (TTV) <br />Regional omc:..: Duluth · Braln9rd · o.troIt LaIaI. · MafshaO · Rochnter <br />!qIMJ ~ e~.Pmted on ~ ~ 00fI1III,,~ at 1NIt2O%....fftHn psperrecydcd by COItNMte. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.