90-025
J II>
.
.
.
..
. \
RESOLUTION NO. 25-90
A RESOLUTION DENYING A PETITION FOR A NEW
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
FOR WATERFORD P.U.D.
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood (the City) proposes to complete
construction of a sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, street construction
and appurtenant work as part of the Waterford P. U. D. (the project); and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared
for the proposed development on July 23, 1984; and
WHERE.l\S, the EAW and other pertinent information were revievled by
the City Council on September 5, 1984, and the council determined that an
environmental impact statement was not required for the project; and
WHEREAS, the City has since received a petition for a new EAW from
twenty-six (26) residents of the City alleging that since 1984 significant
changes have taken place in the project and project area which indicate a new
EAW should be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the petitioner's petition at
its regular meeting on 12 March 1990, and after hearing reports from the City
staff and testimony from the petitioner's representative, directed the City
A ttorney to prepare Findings of Fact denying the petition.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Shorewood as follows I
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. T hat the City Council reviewed an E A W for the project on
September 5, 1984, and determined that an environmental impact statement was
not required.
2. T hat since 1984 the residential density in the area of the
project has been reduced by ninety (90) residential units.
3. That such reduction in density will lower the traffic flow
generated in the project area from the original figure estimated at the time
the project was approved.
4. T hat no evidence has been submitted by the petitioner of
increased traffic in the area resulting from the proposed extension of the
Crosstown westerly to State Highway 101.
.
.
.
.
. 'ff
....
5. That the plan to revise the intersection of Covington Road and
Old Market Road is being held in abeyance pending determination of the
proposed Crosstown-Highway 101 intersection plan.
6. T hat the orientation of the parking lots with respect to the
commercial buildings in the area has no substantial impact on the total
traffic which is anticipated for the area.
7. That the relocation of Silverwood Park to the south end of
Waterford .will have little effect on the use of the park by residents
inasmuch as the park was designed to front on Old Market Road in both cases.
8. That the Department of Natural Resources, the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District, and the Riley-Purgatory-Creek-Bluff vvatershed District
have reviewed the plans and have approved the majority of significant site
alterations which have been completed in the area. Additionally, the Third
Phase of Waterford proposes several ponding areas to handle stormwater
runoff, including the restoration of a previously filled wetland area.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That most of the issues raised in petitioner's petition have
already been addressed in the 1984 EA W prepared by the City, and those
changes that have occurred in the plan, primarily the red uction in
residential density, would serve to lessen the potential for environmental
effects.
2. That petitioner's petition fails to present any material
evidence that changes occurring in the project since 1984 would have the
potential for significant environmental effects.
3. That petitioner's petition for a new Environmental Assessment
Worksheet is hereby denied.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
this 19th day of March, 1990.
~TTEST: q L I tt
.~ ) ~tt,L ..! U ~q:ttlG~~l-j
Laurence E. Whittaker
City Administrator/Clerk
Roll C all Vote:
Ayes -
Nays -
.
.
.
. .
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION DENYING A PETITION FOR A NEW
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
FOR WATERFORD P.U.D.
WHEREAS, the City of Shorewood (the City) proposes to complete
construction of a sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, street construction
and appurtenant work as part of the Waterford P. U. D. (the project); and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared
for the proposed development on July 23, 1984; and
WHEREAS, the EAW and other pertinent information were reviewed by
the City Council on September 5, 1984, and the council determined that an
environmental impact statement was not required for the project; and
WHEREAS, the City has since received a petition for a new EAW from
twenty-six (26) residents of the City alleging that since 1984 significant
changes have taken place in the project and project area which indicate a new
EAW should be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the petitioner's petition at
its regular meeting on 12 March 1990, and after hearing reports from the City
staff and testimony from the petitioner's representative, directed the City
Attorney to prepare Findings of Fact denying the petition.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council
of the City of Shorewood as follows:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. That the City Council reviewed an EAW for the project on
September 5, 1984, and determined that an environmental impact statement was
not required.
2. T hat since 1984 the residential density in the area of the
project has been reduced by ninety (90) residential units.
3. That such reduction in density will lower the traffic flow
generated in the project area from the original figure estimated at the time
the project was approved.
4. T hat no evidence has been submitted by the petitioner of
increased traffic in the area resulting from the proposed extension of the
Crosstown westerly to State Highway 101.
.
.
.
5. That the plan to revise the intersection of Covington Road and
Old Market Road is being held in abeyance pending determination of the
proposed Crosstown-Highway 101 intersection plan.
6. T hat the orientation of the parking lots with respect to the
commercial buildings in the area has no substantial impact on the total
traffic which is anticipated for the area.
7. That the relocation of Silverwood Park to the south end of
Waterford will have little effect on the use of the park by residents
inasmuch as the park was designed to front on Old Market Road in both cases.
8. That the Department of Natural Resources, the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District, and the Riley-Purgatory-Creek-Bluff Watershed District
have reviewed the plans and have approved the majority of significant site
alterations which have been completed in the area. Additionally, the Third
Phase of Waterford proposes several ponding areas to handle stormwater
runoff, including the restoration of a previously filled wetland area.
CONCLUSIONS
1. That most of the issues raised in petitioner's petition have
already been addressed in the 1984 EAW prepared by the City, and those
changes that have occurred in the plan, primarily the reduction in
residential density, would serve to lessen the potential for environmental
effects.
2. That petitioner's petition fails to present any material
evidence that changes occurring in the project since 1984 would have the
potential for significant environmental effects.
3. That petitioner's petition for a new Environmental Assessment
Worksheet is hereby denied.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHOREWOOD
this 19th day of March, 1990.
Jan Haugen, Mayor
ATTEST:
Laurence E. Whittaker
City Administrator/Clerk
Roll Call Vote:
A yes -
Nays -