My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.2. SR 09-08-1997
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
City Council
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
1993 - 1999
>
1997
>
09/08/1997 - SPECIAL
>
5.2. SR 09-08-1997
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/21/2008 8:32:56 AM
Creation date
8/7/2003 1:52:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
SR
date
9/8/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP <br /> <br />Mr. Stephen Rohlf <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />August 13, 1997 <br /> <br />(c) <br /> <br />the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation <br />by ongoing public regulatory authority; and <br /> <br />(a) <br /> <br />the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and <br />controlled as a result of other environmental studies undertaken by <br />public agencies or the project proposer, or of EISs previously prepared <br />on similar projects. <br /> <br />Minn. Rule 4410.1700, subpt. 7. <br /> <br /> It must be emphasized that in applying these factors, the RGU must not <br />consider only part of a project; all phases to the project and all connected actions <br />associated with the project must be considered so that the cumulative <br />environmental impacts are reviewed before final decisions are made. Minn. Rules <br />4410.1000, subpt 4. Under the EQB rules, "connected actions" include projects that <br />are related in the sense that one induces another or neither project is justified by <br />itself. Minn. Rule 4410.0200, subpt. 9b. The term "cumulative impact" is defined to <br />include all incremental environmental effects of a project and "past, present and <br />reasonably foreseeable future projects" related to the initial activity. Id at subpt. 11. <br /> <br />The Urban Service EAW <br /> <br /> The Urban Service EAW prepared by MSA for the various utility, roadway <br />and other facilities identified in the document does not meet the requirements of <br />MEPA and the EQB in several ways. Perhaps its most fundamental flaw, however, <br />is that the report fails to provide any meaningful analysis of the real cumulative <br />environmental impacts associated with the project, as it is narrowly described in the <br />MSA report, and the ultimate development that would follow construction of the <br />proposed utility and road systems. <br /> <br /> As outlined above, the EQB's rules do not permit Elk River to evaluate the <br />potential environmental impacts of its proposed municipal infrastructure project in <br />isolation. The residential, commercial and industrial development for which Elk <br />River is planning in connection with the proposed project defined in the EAW, as <br />well as the cumulative impacts of all of the anticipated urban development that <br />would result from the proposed sewer and water, water-resource management <br />structures and enlarged traffic system, all must be analyzed. There cannot be <br />piecemeal analysis of the infrastructure project as if it exists in a vacuum unrelated <br />to the development it would serve if the project were constructed. Unfortunately, <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.