![https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=0sGWID_0uK3ypwu00](https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?type=thumbnail_580x000&url=0sGWID_0uK3ypwu00)
With an eye on bidding out Phase 1 of the controversial Gaiter Lake residential development project next year, engineering consulting firm Stantec brought a detailed plan and cost estimates for preliminary work to the Waseca City Council’s July 2 meeting.
While it was strictly an informational item and did not precipitate any discussion, the proposal laid out by Stantec’s Joe Pfeiffer would the company would see the city invest more than $300,000 to complete the necessary preliminary work.
The most significant part of the latest investment in the lot would be to complete the Environmental Assessment Worksheet, which is required under state law because of the development’s shoreland location.
In a proposal sent to City Manager Carl Sonnenberg, Stantec touted its robust experience in helping cities to produce EAWs and its team of water quality experts, particularly crucial since the development’s impact on Gaiter Lake is likely to be a centerpiece of any assessment.
As Stantec’s memo notes, both the Minnesota DNR and area residents have raised concerns that the project could increase flooding issues with Gaiter Lake. For the DNR, the issue is a red line — it expects planners to come up with ways to avoid any exacerbation of flooding issues.
To address those concerns, Stantec promises to provide a thorough assessment of the project’s stormwater management plans, adherence to Shoreland District requirements and impacts on the local floodplain, including through the DNR-required hydrologic modeling.
Another portion of the EAW that will be of crucial importance for the DNR will be around Climate Adaptation and Resilience. Stantec promises to provide a full analysis of historical and projected climate data and potential climate impacts from the project.
One area that will not be covered in the EAW is the project’s potential impacts on traffic. Staff at Stantec have concluded that the proposed project doesn’t rise to the level which would require a traffic study, which would take additional time and resources.
A 30-day public comment period would provide additional opportunity for the public to react to the project and EAW findings specifically. Stantec has already held several open public forums relating to the project and is looking for additional ways to beef up public engagement.
Pfeiffer said that the city can anticipate that the EAW could take around six months to complete. Additional topographic and site data to guide Stantec’s recommendations is expected to be provided by an additional site visit.
The city will also need to re-plat the property in order to ensure that all 50 future lots meet local and state requirements. Preliminary Plats will be developed and eventually approved, then submitted to the County Highway Department, County Surveyor and others.
After final approval from the city, Stantec will also work to put together construction documents which incorporate the city’s conditions and agency comments. In addition, a final Stormwater Management Plan will need to be approved.
The cost of the preliminary work will come in at around $250,000, or roughly 6% of the projected project cost of $4.2 million, which Pfeiffer said is not unusual for a project of the size proposed, with 67 housing units spread out over 50 lots.
Sonnenberg further recommended allocating $43,000 for potential overages and $25,000 for an archeological survey with the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, which could be required if Native American artifacts are discovered on-site.
The project’s size and expense have polarized the community and the council, though it has moved forward thus far with backing from a fragile four-vote coalition of Mayor Randy Zimmerman and councilors Mark Christiansen, Stacey Schroeder and Darren Arndt.
To supporters, such a large housing development on Gaiter Lake will provide a necessary boost to the city’s housing supply. On the other side, critics question the large up front expense and whether the city should leave such efforts more in the hands of private developers.
Comments / 0