Laserfiche WebLink
Haviland Fields Development <br />Finding of Facts and Record of Decision <br />Name <br />Comment <br />Response <br />remain untouched would greatly benefit the <br />endangered Northern Long-eared Bat and the <br />proposed -endangered Tricolored Bat. The <br />DNR's listed protections and actions <br />concerning the <br />threatened/endangered/proposed- <br />endangered species don't actually seem to be <br />stipulating much protection of their existing <br />homes, albeit not officially designated <br />"critical habitats." (Appendix C, pg 1-4 plus <br />succeeding detailed pages.) <br />5. 18b. and 7b. The Geothermal energy source <br />"may" continue to be used. This should be <br />necessary and confirmed, especially <br />considering the amount of tree removal <br />estimated to take place (approximated in <br />"Table 5: Trees"). The geothermal source is <br />also referenced in Table 2: Climate <br />Considerations and Adaptations. It is stated in <br />the last row of this table that, in regards to <br />project construction, "Existing on -site <br />geothermal panels will provide a portion of <br />the sites energy usage." Please consider this <br />being a requirement along with a minimum % <br />goal for the length of construction. <br />6. 20a-b. Traffic studies. Additional signalized <br />intersection should be included in the traffic <br />study, as the majority of bottlenecking occurs <br />in north and south directions: MN-47 & <br />Bunker Lake Blvd // MN-47 & Pleasant <br />St. Severe bottlenecks occur in both AM and <br />PM rush periods which would be further <br />exacerbated by an additional 113-168 trips <br />estimated in "Table 7: Trip Generation <br />Forecast." I also feel that this table <br />underestimates the potential effects the <br />additional vehicle flow will cause at the CSAH <br />5 & Lord of Life Access intersection, namely <br />during AM and Sunday peak hours, requiring <br />left-hand turns onto CSAH 5 from the Lord of <br />Life Access into often relentless eastbound <br />traffic. <br />3. Conclusions <br />1. All requirements for environmental review of the proposed project have been met. <br />2. The EAW and the permit development processes related to the project have generated <br />information that is adequate to determine whether the project has the potential for <br />significant environmental effects. <br />17 <br />