Laserfiche WebLink
<br />· Langton Lake is not listed on the current USEPA g 303(d) impaired waters <br />list. Petitioners have asserted that it may be listed in the future based on <br />new eutrophication and nutrient criteria proposed as a part of the possible <br />7050 rule changes. As stated above, the proposed Rule changes have not <br />been adopted, and are not legally effective. In any event, the project will <br />have to meet applicable 7050 Rules, and the Rules constitute ongoing <br />regulatory controls that are designed to mitigate adverse environmental <br />effects. <br /> <br />· As previously indicated herein, no new information has been presented that <br />demonstrates new plant or animal species of special concern have been <br />discovered in the Langton Lake Area that would be threatened, in a greater <br />sense, by the Rott1und proposal as opposed to the AUAR worst case <br />scenano. <br /> <br />· The Council finds the Petitioners have failed to meet their burden of <br />demonstrating that new information exists that the AUAR analysis is <br />substantially in error so that environmental effects have been substantially <br />underestimated. <br /> <br />13. Regarding paragraph H of subpart 7 of Rule 4410.3610, Petitioners allege that the <br />Council should exercise its discretionary authority to require revision of the <br />AUAR. The Council concludes, however, that no "other substantial changes" <br />have occurred that may affect the potential for or magnitude of adverse <br />environmental impacts. The Council determines that the Rottlund proposal will <br />begin the process for remediation and redevelopment of a recognized Brownfields <br />area: a result that is beneficial to all City residents. <br /> <br />NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the <br />City of Roseville, Minnesota, that the Petition from the Friends of Twin Lakes relating to <br />Phase I of the Rottlund Project is hereby denied for the reasons set forth above. <br /> <br />The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by <br />Council Member Maschka, and upon vote being taken thereon the following voted in <br />favor thereof: Klausing, Schroeder and Maschka <br /> <br />and the following voted against the same: Kough and Ihlan <br /> <br />WHEREUPON said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted on the 6th <br />day of December, 2004. <br /> <br />RRM: 70549/cmp <br /> <br />19 <br />