Preview:

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A08-1264 Friends of Twin Lakes, Appellant, vs. City of Roseville, Respondent. Filed April 21, 2009 Affirmed Connolly, Judge Ramsey County District Court File No. 62-CV-07-2454

Julie A. Root, 1370 Carling Drive, Suite 303, St. Paul, MN 55108 (for appellant) John M. Baker, Pamela L. VanderWiel, Greene Espel, P.L.L.P., 200 South Sixth Street, Suite 1200, Minneapolis, MN 55402 (for respondent)

Considered and decided by Worke, Presiding Judge; Connolly, Judge; and Stauber, Judge. SYLLABUS When determining if a proposed project has the potential to create significant environmental effects for the purpose of deciding whether an environmental-impact statement is necessary under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act, a municipality may take into account pre-existing regulatory oversight if such oversight requires that mitigation measures are established to prevent any significant environmental harm.

OPINION CONNOLLY, Judge Respondent City of Roseville approved a development plan submitted by Northwestern College without requiring the completion of an environmental-impact statement (EIS). Appellant Friends of Twin Lakes challenged respondent's decision in district court, and the district court granted summary judgment in favor of respondent. Because no EIS was required, we affirm. FACTS The southern portion of Northwestern College's main campus is located in the City of Roseville and borders Lake Johanna and Little Lake Johanna. Appellant is a nonprofit corporation located in Roseville. On November 17, 2006, Northwestern submitted an application for an amendment to a pre-existing Planned Unit Development (PUD) to respondent. The application is part of Northwestern's plan to accommodate an anticipated increase in enrollment. Over a 12-20 year time frame, the plan proposes construction of 8 new structures, additions to several existing buildings, and the creation of a campus green by re-routing a road that currently bisects the campus. On February 7 and March 7, 2007, respondent's planning commission held public hearings to review and consider Northwestern's application. On March 7, the planning commission voted 6-0 to recommend the application's approval to respondent's city council, subject to the completion of an environmental assessment worksheet (EAW). Northwestern agreed to complete the requested EAW. 2

On May 7, respondent determined that it was the responsible government unit (RGU) tasked with reviewing the EAW under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). On May 11, the EAW was submitted to respondent. Respondent received written public comments on the amendment from May 21 to June 20, 2007. On July 23, respondent held a public hearing to discuss the amendment. At the end of this meeting, respondent determined, by a 3-2 vote, that the proposed amendment did not have the potential for significant environmental effects and that, as a result, an EIS was not required. Respondent issued findings of fact in support of its negative declaration. On October 8, respondent approved the amendment. Following the city council's vote, appellant initiated suit, alleging that respondent failed to conduct a proper review of the amendment. The district court granted

respondent's motion for summary judgment under MEPA. A notice of appeal was filed with this court. ISSUES I. Was the city's decision not to prepare an environmental impact statement arbitrary and capricious or unsupported by substantial evidence? a. b. Was the environmental assessment worksheet complete? Did respondent violate the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act by considering pre-existing regulatory oversight when determining that the proposed plan does not have the potential to create any significant environmental effects?

3

ANALYSIS "On an appeal from summary judgment, we ask two questions: (1) whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and (2) whether the [district] court[] erred in [its] application of the law." State by Cooper v. French, 460 N.W.2d 2, 4 (Minn. 1990). An EAW is "a brief document which is designed to set out the basic facts necessary to determine whether an environmental impact statement is required" for a particular proposal or project. Minn. Stat.

Download A08-1264, Friends of Twin Lakes, Appellant, vs. City of Roseville, Respondent..p

Minnesota Law