My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_03022
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF3000 - PF3801
>
3000
>
pf_03022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/17/2007 12:30:03 PM
Creation date
12/8/2004 2:46:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
3022
Planning Files - Type
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Address
2660 CIVIC CENTER DR
Applicant
CITY OF ROSEVILLE
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
144
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 />included; Roseville should monitor groundwater for indications <br />of groundwater contamination. <br /> <br />C. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency: (comments received on <br />June 9) property owners and developers should be advised of <br />potential liabilities for cleaning up contamination; information on <br />two-year flood events should be provided; additional <br />wastewater flow information should be provided to determine if <br />sufficient capacity exists in receiving sewers; night time noise <br />and seasonal noise variation information should be provided. <br /> <br />D. Everest Development Ltd commented as follows: traffic <br />analysis does not include forecasts and capacity analysis on <br />the west side of 1-35W at southbound ramps/Long Lake Road <br />and Long Lake Road/County Road C; traffic analysis does not <br />analyze problems that may be created by the removal of <br />northbound exit Joop to west bound County Road C (City/BRW <br />plans call for safety improvements and dedicated exit lane <br />along Cleveland, to County Road C); air quality analysis does <br />not show combined impacts from Centre Pointe EAW and Twin <br />Lakes EAW; explain/clarify cumulative impacts and future <br />development stages; disagrees with City estimate that no new <br />development or roadway will be constructed before March <br />2001. <br /> <br />E. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources commented as <br />follows: Clarify location of County Ditch 4 and loss of wildlife <br />habitat due to intra-specific competition. <br /> <br />F. Minnesota Historical Society commented as follows: There are <br />no properties listed on the National or State Registers of <br />Historic Places; there are no suspected archaeological <br />properties in the area. <br /> <br />1.5 Attached are the responses to the comments received and the <br />findings of fact which address the comments received and which the <br />City Council may utilize to make a decision on whether an EIS is <br />necessary . <br /> <br />~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.