Laserfiche WebLink
.� <br />;� <br />.� <br />;a <br />k} <br />r <br />� <br />ca <br />1 �.f <br />11 <br />1� <br />1:� <br />1� <br />Regular City Council Meeting — DRAFT Minutes <br />Monday, April 23,2007 <br />Page 9 <br />sponsibilitie�, thus their designation of Roseville rather than Arden <br />Hills. <br />Discussion included the role the City of Arden Hills would play in <br />proposed development; the City of Roseville Planning Commission's <br />role in requesting EAW as part of the requested ainended Planned <br />Unit Development (PUD) for Northwestern College; the purpose of <br />the EAW as a scoping document, to hold a Public Hearing and make <br />findings to make a negative or positive declaration to determine <br />whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is necessary; and <br />whether the City's Community Developinent Department would be <br />reimbursed for staff time by the developer as part of their reimburs- <br />able costs. <br />1� Mayor �la�.ising opined that the EAW won't recognize political <br />]��� boundaries, but general impacts to contiguous properties; and may <br />1 r also provide the City with some authority as the reviewing entity by <br />1� providing greater control over environmental impacts of the PUD. <br />I �3 <br />�[� Councilmember �hlan opined that she wasn't prepared to vote on ac- <br />� l cepting the designation without contacting the City of Arden Hills and <br />� � obtaining additional information. <br />�;� <br />�� <br />�� <br />� �� <br />� �� <br />City Attorney Anderson, when questioned regarding time constraints, <br />clarified that time constraints for the EAW review period would only <br />commence upon publication of the EAW, allowing response time for <br />agency review. <br />� �s <br />2t� Mr. Stark opined that, since the City's Planning Commission had re- <br />_�� quested the EAW, staff had assumed there would be City Council <br />:�7 support for the EAW process. <br />��� <br />�ti� Councilmember Pust opined that, with a project of this size and its po- <br />�� tential impacts, she was supportive of an EAW; and was willing to ac- <br />�� cept the RGU role and designation. Councilmember Pust noted that, <br />:��; since the City of Roseville was znost impacted by access points, traffic <br />:� r concerns and other impacts, the City should retain their designation as <br />;�z� the RGU. <br />�{� <br />