Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.c. UMore EIS ROSEI v1OUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL City Council Work Session Meeting Date: April 9, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: UMore EIS AGENDA SECTION: Discussion PREPARED BY: Kim Lindquist, Community Development AGENDA NO. Director C ATTACHMENTS: None. APPROVED BY: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provide staff direction. BACKGROUND As the Council is aware the University of Minnesota has been working toward development of the Umore property within the City of Rosemount. There are a variety of tasks they are undertaking in preparation of site development. One such activity is assessing the viability of mining aggregate on the site. DISCUSSION The University has spent the last several months assessing the extent of aggregate deposits within the Umore property. Preliminary information indicates there are deposits worth mining. Given the size of the site and the amount of mining which could occur, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be undertaken to allow this activity. Typically the City is the responsible governmental unit for preparation of EISs and EAWs. The University has requested that they be designated the RGU in this instance and have asked for a letter from the City stating such. Staff has spoken with the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and found that in some cases, such as the new Gopher Stadium, the University has served as the RGU with approval by the local unit of government. Because the mining EIS will address mining and post restoration of the affected land, staff is comfortable allowing the University to act as the RGU. However, staff expects to be involved in the preparation of the EIS and selection of the EIS consultants, consistent with the representations made by University personnel. Support in this instance should not lead people to assume the University will be the RGU for all environmental reviews necessary to allow property development. At this point, staff is very interested in having the City as the RGU for the future AUAR that will occur as part of the planning process. CONCLUSION Staff is comfortable allowing the University to serve as the RGU for the EIS necessary for the anticipated aggregate mining that will occur on the property. With Council agreement a letter will be sent to the University stating the City's support, although asking for extensive involvement in the process and recognizing that this support does not address future environmental reviews that may need to be conducted for property development.