1995-04-27_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

April 21, 1995 Mr. Karl Keel Public Works Director City of Roseville 2660 Civic Center Drive Roseville, MN 55113 Dear Karl: 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, 200 SEH CENTER, ST. PAUL, MN 55110 612 490-2000 800 325-2055 ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION RE: Grass Lake Watershed Management Organization American Legion Park Pond EAW A-GRASS9502.01 In accordance with your Apri113,19951etter, Ihave reviewed the comments offered regarding the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the American Legion Park Pond. Ihave generated a response to these comments in accordance with your instructions.. These responses are enclosed for your information and for inclusion into the Grass Lake WMO Board's packet of information for the Apri127, 1995 meeting. The provision of a written response to EAW comments is required by law. The generation of the enclosed written responses (and subsequent dispersal to the commenting agencies) should adequately satisfy the legal requirements. The comment period officially terminates 30 calender days from the EQB publication date of March 27, 1995 which is Apri126, 1995. The Board may want to make a resolution directed to the City of Roseville which is considered the Responsible Government Unit (RGU) for the project. The resolution may be to accept the response to comments as proposed or with amendments as the Board recommends. The Board may want to also recommend that an Environmental Impact Statement is not required for this project (in other words, the RGU make a "negative declaration"). The next step in the environmental review process is for the RGU to decide whether a EIS is needed or not. The earliest a decision can be made is 3 working days after the 30-day review period ends which would correspond to May 2,1995. The decision is to be based upon the following factors as outlined in the "Guide to the Rules" published by the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) in 1989. A. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects; B. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects; C. The extent to which environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority; and D. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, or of EIS's previously prepared. SNORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. MIfP:%EAPOLIS, MN ST CLOUD, MN CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI MADISON, WI LAKE COUNTY. IN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER