Laserfiche WebLink
May 14, 2014 Location: Pbrama>H:Drive>15153>FindingsReport <br />development of the Subject Property. The purpose of said additional research was to <br />improve the competitiveness of this site in the larger marketplace. Examples below: <br />■ Conducting Phase I & II Environmental Assessments (EA), Limited Site Investigation <br />(LI), and a Response Action Plan (RAP) <br />■ Conducting Pre Building Demolition Hazardous Material Survey, and an Hazardous <br />Materials Abatement Plan <br />■ Wetland Delineation Survey <br />■ Geotechnical Soils testing <br />Standard Review Process includes the following: <br />■ Stormwater management program review. <br />■ Site plan review process <br />(several land use/zoning standards related to environmental concerns enforced) <br />■ Building plan review process <br />(several State building codes related to environmental concerns enforced) <br />For a more in-depth environmental review, the City would rely on the State of <br />Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB). This level of review includes either an <br />EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) or EAW (Environmental Assessment Worksheet); <br />and, would require an actual development proposal. <br />Who decides if an EQB review is needed? <br />Responsibility of making case -by -case decisions on the need for EISs and EAWs and for <br />determining if an EIS or EAW is mandatory lies with local governments and State <br />agencies. For almost any project, the rules identify the governmental unit which has <br />this responsibility. The EQB provides assistance to governmental units in interpreting <br />the rules and carrying out their responsibilities, but the EQB is not involved in decisions, <br />except in specific, limited circumstances. <br />The EQB has the following 'minimum' thresholds for requiring a review <br />on the Subject Property specifically. <br />• Residential: 250 single family homes, 375 multiple family units <br />• Data Center: 500 employees or 450,000 square feet of building <br />• NOTE: cumulative effects do not exist in this scenario, as defined by the EQB <br />For more information on the EQB, please see the appendix or click here. <br />Another environmental review option the City may be interested in considering is an <br />Alternative Urban Area wide Review (AUAR). For more information please see the <br />Appendix or click here. <br />MEETING NOTES <br />Safety was not discussed at length; comments and questions were minimal, in comparison to other <br />issues outlined in this Findings Report. Stormwater ponds received most discussion, followed by general <br />environmental concerns. <br />A number of questions were asked at this meeting. Follow up answers were provided via email, and are <br />included in the Findings Report Appendix (click here fora hyperlink, page 15). <br />OMC Study Group, Findings Report (DRAFT) Page 28 of 42 <br />