Laserfiche WebLink
Scoping Doc~ent <br />Northfork Planned Unit Development <br />Page 8 <br /> <br />2. ~he Minnesota Dep~r~ent of Natural Resources (DNR) commented that <br />any filling of or near wetlands, shorelands, and flood plain areas <br />would require DNR approval before such filling begins. In addition, <br />the DNR expressed (~)ncern regarding possible development of the slopes <br />surrounding Lake Itasca. ~he DNR also indicated concern as to the <br />effects of the develo[ment on wildlife habitat in the area. Wetland, <br />shoreland, flood plain area, and slope development will be addressed <br />in the ElS. ~he impact of the development on wildlife habitats will <br />also be addressed in the Els. <br /> <br />3. ~he Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) commented on its <br />concerns regarding water quality due to the construction of on-site <br />septic systems in the area and the potential impacts on ground water. <br />~e MPG% also expressed its concerns about surface water quality due <br />to increased runoff fr~m the site. MPCA indicated that an indirect <br />source permit would be required regarding air quality of the <br />development. Subsequent discussions with MPCA staff have concluded <br />that such a pem]t is not required for this development. MPCA also <br />commented on the increased noise level that may result from the <br />development. Final cz~m~ents from the MPf~ included concern regarding <br />construction-related dust and noise that may be generated. ~he MP(~'s <br />concerns regarding ground and surface water quality, air quality and <br />noise levels will be addressed in the ElS. <br /> <br />4. ~he Metropolitan Council commented that its concerns were the <br />density of the project as it relates to the use of on-site septic <br />systems, access to the development, and the density of the project as <br />it relates to Metropolitan Council density standards for the area. <br />Concerns regarding density and access will be addressed in the Els. <br /> <br />5. ~e Minnesota Depar~ent of Transporation (MN/DOT) co~ented that <br />a study of traffic generated by the project should be completed. In <br />addition, MN/DOT co~ented that traffic patterns and access to the <br />site should be reviewed in terns of MN/DOT's highway and railroad <br />grade crossing requirements. MN/DOT's concerns regarding traffic <br />generation, traffic patterns and access to the site will be addressed <br />in the Els. <br /> <br /> <br />