CC_Minutes_2008_0825 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

~a.~. Bill Malinen From: sangwon [sangwon@umn.edu] Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 3:58 PM To: "RVCouncil Subject: A message from EQB on citizens' petition for EAW Dear Council Members, Per tonight's council meeting, I would like to share the following a-mail message from Mr. Jon Larson at the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) on the exemption status (see further down below). In summary, Mr. Larson opines that the exemption status is not granted if the project as currently proposed is not sufficiently similar to the characteristics used in the AUAR study. As far as I could find, any previous studies including the AUAR studies referred by the city staff have never considered the development site as a Business-Park category (see the AURA reports and maps), and the BP category is the only category that will allow a 60ft high and 620ft wide single-block building as proposed by the plan. Furthermore, nowhere in the previous AURA study the visual impacts and solar access impacts are mentioned. So there are enough evidences that the characteristics considered under the AURA study are NOT sufficiently similar to the proposed development, and thus exemption rule is not applicable. Besides, I would like to share our neighbors' concerns over the Applewood point proposal, and I would appreciate if I am allowed to speak before the council decision tonight. Best regards, sangwon Suh 1960 Brenner Ave. Roseville, MN sangwon: In making a final decision on the need for an EAW, in addition to determining if the information available to the RGU demonstrates that there is a potential for significant environmental effect(s), the RGU must also determine if review of the proposed project is either mandatory or exempt (see cover letter from EQB sent with the original petition to City of Roseville). In this case, one of the considerations is that an AUAR has been previously prepared for projects in this area. The City must determine if the project as currently defined is sufficiently similar to the characteristics analyzed in the AUAR to be covered. If so, then the project is exempt from further review. If the project is significantly different it is possible that the AUAR could be updated for any of the reasons listed in Minnesota Rules, 4410.3610, subpart 7, Items A through H; or a separate EAW decision based on the petition if the AUAR is no longer to be followed. It is within the judgment of the City of Roseville (not the EQB) to decide if the previously prepared AUAR applies to this project or not; if it does apply, the project is exempt. The final decision on the need for environmental review, whatever decision that is, can be challenged by any interested party by filing a declaratory judgment action in district court within thirty days of the decision. I hope this information is helpful. Jon Jon Larsen, Principal Planner Environmental Quality Board a division of the Department of Administration 651-201-2477