[Winona Online Democracy]

For nearly two years, Winona City Council has used the excuse to justify the
Phillips development as “it is just a bunch of NIMBy’s” (Not In My Back Yard)
trying to halt development. No longer can they hide behind this excuse. I am
the only Spring Brook resident (A NIMBY in their books) that responded to the
second EAW, all others live many miles from the Phillips development. Many are
experts, this is not about NIMBYs, it never was but the City continues to
ignore this.

Environmental specialists have now responded twice to the EAW. This second time
the message is stronger. These are experts in the area of conservation,
geology, archeology, soil, natural resource and wildlife preservation,
pollution control and others.  State, County, and City experts; their motives
are not to stop development. Many have no invested interest in Winona. They do
however; have investment in responsible care and preservation of our natural
resources.  Phillips second EAW clearly ignores it’s responsibility.

·The stream was not studied – one of the most controversial pieces of this
property. Instead printed data of “like” streams were used to try and justify
this development. 
·Field studies were not completed to confirm the existence of rare and protected
species of birds, reptiles and plants, yet other reports prior to the Phillips
interest have confirmed this.
·Calcareous Fens are protected in Minnesota.  Phillip’s own expert stated it was
“likely” there are fens on this land, yet it was not studied.
·The development is slated to start in late spring. considerable months for
nesting bird.  Minnesota Rule states development cannot occur during this time
unless plans are made to relocate nesting birds. No study or plan is in place.
·Home placement on bluffs and hills exceeds the recommended Minnesota sloping
percentage recommendations and guidelines.
·Effects of run-off to the stream were not adequately studied, again Minnesota
rule states a shoreland ordinance must be in place for develop of this type,
the City has no shoreland ordinance for property of this type.
·Justification for high-end housing was not supported
·The City had a verbal agreement that the development would be finished by 2012
to justify the high cost of running the utilities to the property (they could
start regaining the taxpayers money) yet the Phillip’s EAW has the develop
going on indefinitely, 10 years, 20 years…30?
·Traffic issues were not addressed 

There are so many inadequacies in this study; they cannot all be listed in a
small editorial. The study was a sham; Mr. Phillips did not get his money’s
worth.  The experts who are not NIMBY’s have given the City of Winona their
expert advice, twice now: Don’t follow through on this development; raise the
study to an EIS (Environmental Impact Study) or an AUAR.  

It’s time to listen not only to the experts but to the Nimby’s as well.  Save
the taxpayers money and back off on this development.  It will only continue to
cost the taxpayers millions of dollars.  It will not only be the cost of
spending millions to run pipes to this land, but as the experts continue to
say, the development will continue be to an expensive nuisance to the city tax
payers.  It will be a dramatic loss and devastating impact to natural resources
and the environment.

I will urge you taxpayers once again to call your City Council and ask them to
put a stop to this development. 

Janice Turek



_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
 http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org

Reply via email to