STATE OF MINNESOTA MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY FINDINGS OF FACT

Transcription

1 STATE OF MINNESOTA MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY IN THE MATTER OF THE DECISION ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED SKB TRANSFER STATION, BLAINE ENVIRONMENTAL CAMPUS BLAINE, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER FINDINGS OF FACT Pursuant to Minn. R (2003), the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff has prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed project. Based on the MPCA staff environmental review, comments, and information received during the comment period, and other information in the record of the MPCA, the MPCA hereby makes the following Findings of Fact,, and Order: Overview The proposed SKB Transfer Station in (Facility), would be constructed and operated by SKB Environmental, Inc. (SKB), a subsidiary of Carl Bolander and Sons Company. A new 10,000 square-foot Butler-style building would be constructed to house the waste transfer operations. The Facility would accept, then process, and/or place wastes in transfer trailers so that they can be transported to approved disposal facilities and/or processing facilities, as appropriate. The new Facility will process a maximum of 156,000 tons per year of municipal solid waste (MSW) and construction/demolition debris; and up to 15,600 tons of yard waste per year. Permitting History This Facility will be new construction. No permits or approvals have been issued for this Facility to date. Previous Environmental Review Since this project involves new construction, no environmental review has been conducted in the past. Compliance/Enforcement History Given this will be a brand new Facility, there is no compliance history. TDD (for hearing and speech impaired only): (651) Printed on recycled paper containing at least 30% fibers from paper recycled by consumers

2 PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed New Construction/Proposed Modification Construction and Demolition (C&D) debris and MSW delivered to the Facility by homeowners and commercial waste hauling companies would be processed as follows: Municipal Solid Waste/Non-Hazardous Industrial Solid Waste Loads of MSW and non-hazardous industrial solid waste would be transported to the Facility, arriving at the site through the south gate on Naples Street Northeast. An inbound/outbound truck scale and scale house would also be located on the site. All incoming waste delivery vehicles would pass across the truck scale and receive a ticket from the attendant. The waste trucks would enter the transfer building through the overhead doors on the east side of the building. After depositing waste on the tipping floor in the north corner of the building, trucks would exit the building through the overhead doors on the west side. After the trucks have been weighed on their way out of the Facility, they would leave the site, using Naples Street Northeast. C&D Debris and Recyclables C&D debris, and selected other recyclables, delivered by residents and waste hauling firms, would also be processed and/or transferred from the Facility. The C&D debris delivery vehicles would also pass across the scale to obtain a ticket, although weighing in will be optional. The C&D trucks will enter the building through the overhead doors on the east side of the building and proceed to the C&D tipping floor, which is located in the south corner of the building. After tipping, these vehicles will exit the building through the overhead doors on the west side and leave the site via the south exit. Loads of C&D debris and recyclables will be shipped from the Facility via semi-transfer trailers. These vehicles will use the load-out area on the south corner of the building. Transfer vehicles will exit the site via the south exit. Residents will be allowed to drop off recyclables, such as paper, glass, aluminum, tin, and cardboard, at the Facility, using the same tipping floor as the commercial customers. SKB does not anticipate a large volume of residential drop-offs. Source Separated Organics and Yard Waste Source Separated Organics and yard waste from commercial, industrial, and institutional facilities will be transferred to appropriate composting facilities. These materials include, but are not limited to, food processing residues, garden wastes, yard wastes, soiled paper, and non-recyclable paper. These wastes can be easily composted instead of disposing of them at high-cost landfills or other waste management facilities. All organic waste that could be processed would be loaded on separate transfer trailers and delivered to an organic processing facility. White Goods/Tires. Etc. The Facility will also accept tires, white goods, and mattresses and prepare them for transport to the appropriate disposal sites. 2

3 Hours of Operation The expected operating hours will be based on the time of year and the amount of incoming material. Although SKB reserves the right to operate the Facility 24 hours per day when necessary to provide appropriate waste acceptance and waste disposal, the initial hours of operation will be approximately 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday. An entrance gate will be placed across the site access road at Naples Street. The gate will remain locked when the Facility is closed for business or an operator is not on duty. An operator will be on duty at the site during all normal hours of operation. The attendant will be responsible for monitoring and approving each load of material as it enters the site. The operator(s) are responsible for inspecting the loads and for removing prohibited materials as they are left on the tipping floors. Proposed Building/Site Design Information The Facility on-site access roads and parking areas would be surfaced with an all-weather asphalt surfacing in order to minimize the generation of dust and to ensure easy access. The asphalt surfaces and surface markings would be constructed/applied to conform with applicable standards of the Minnesota Department of Transportation. The Facility building would consist of a 10,000 square foot (100 feet by 100 feet) steel and concrete block building (Butler or equivalent), with an approximate 30-foot height and a sealed concrete base floor. The building would be accessible through overhead doors located on the west and east sides of the building. The overhead doors would be either manually or electrically operated depending upon the anticipated frequency of use for each door. Ventilation in the Facility would be achieved through a combination of natural and mechanical means. The Facility would typically operate with overhead doors opened, unless prohibited by high winds or other inclement weather. Additional mechanical ventilation would be offered by a series of fans, vents, and filters placed at upper and lower levels. Lighting within the working area of the Facility would be provided by high-bay lighting fixtures and/or clear panels within the roofing system. Since the Facility would be operated primarily during daylight hours, the exterior lighting would be primarily for security purposes. Such lighting would be located over key entrances, exits, and the parking areas. Proposed Capacity The Facility can accept a maximum of 156,000 tons of waste each year, including all waste streams combined. The exact quantity of each kind of waste transferred each year will vary, however, SKB estimates these amounts will be handled: Municipal solid waste and non-hazardous industrial waste tons per day. C&D tons per day. 3

4 The Facility would have adequate capacity to provide: Approximately three days of MSW storage, dependent on seasonal delivery quantities. Storage of this product would occur first in transfer trailers and second on the Facility tipping floor. All putrescible waste would be removed at least once a week, in accordance with Minn. R , subp. 4, Item C. C&D debris would be stored and removed as needed. Storage of this product would occur first in dedicated recycling and waste roll-off containers and second on the C&D tipping floor. Thirty days of recyclable storage at projected delivery quantities. Storage of this product would occur in dedicated recycling roll-off containers. As roll-off containers are filled, they would be tarped and shifted outside the building, awaiting pickup. It is anticipated that construction would begin in the spring of 2005 and be completed by the end of the year. Environmental Concerns Habitat Loss/Impacts to Rare, Endangered and Special Concern Species Stormwater Runoff to Onsite Wetlands Vehicle-related Air Emissions Odors, Noise and Dust Additional Concerns Described in Comment Letters Potential Impacts to Golden Lake PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. Pursuant to Minn. R subp. 4300, an EAW was prepared by MPCA staff on the proposed project. Pursuant to Minn. R (2003), the EAW was distributed to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) mailing list and other interested parties on January 28, The MPCA notified the public of the availability of the EAW for public comment. A news release was provided to one county, as well as, other interested parties on January 31, In addition, the EAW was published in the EQB Monitor on January 31, 2005, and available for review on the MPCA Web site at on January 31, The public comment period for the EAW began on January 31, 2005, and ended on March 2, During the 30-day comment period, the MPCA received three comment letters from government agencies and no comment letters from citizens. 4. The MPCA prepared responses to all comments received during the 30-day public comment period. Comment letters received have been hereby incorporated by reference as Appendix A to these findings. The MPCA responses to comments received are hereby incorporated by reference as Appendix B to these findings. 4

5 CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 5. Under Minn. R (2003), the MPCA must order an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for projects that have the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur. In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the MPCA must compare the impacts that may be reasonably expected to occur from the project with the criteria set forth in Minn. R , subp. 7 (2003). These criteria are: A. the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects; B. cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects; C. the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority; and D. the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs. THE MPCA FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO EACH OF THESE CRITERIA ARE SET FORTH BELOW Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects 6. The first criterion that the MPCA must consider, when determining if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur, is the "type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects" Minn. R , subp. 7.A (2003). The MPCA findings with respect to each of these factors are set forth below. 7. Reasonably expected environmental effects of this project to natural resources: A. Impacts to Rare, Endangered, and Special Concern Species 8. The extent of any potential water quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: A. Impacts to Rare, Endangered, and Special Concern Species An undeveloped portion of the Blaine Environmental Campus, which will be the site of the proposed Facility, includes a number of mature trees and open grassy areas. This habitat is likely the home for small mammals, song birds, some reptiles, and amphibians. As a result of this project, some animals and songbirds may be forced to move to other areas where they may have to compete for space and food. Some animal or bird mortality may occur as a result, however, the losses are not expected to be substantial. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Natural Heritage Database was queried to determine whether there are any endangered or threatened species on or near the proposed project site. DNR staff found that there were 42 known occurrences of rare species or natural communities in the area searched. Of particular concern to the DNR was the potential presence of the following plant species: 5

6 Rare Species Tubercled Rein-Orchid (Platanthera flava var. herbiola) Cross-leaved Milkwort (Polygala cruciata) Twisted Yello-eyed Grass (Xyris torta) Threatened Species Lance-Leaved Violet (Viola lanciolata) Tooth Cup (Rotala ramosior) Special Concern Species Autumn Fibristylis (Fibristylis autumnalis) Marginated Rush (Juncus marginatus) DNR requested that a botanical survey of the project area be conducted. On August 5, 2003, Applied Ecological Services, Inc. (AES) completed a rare plant species survey on the approximately 40-acre site. Their survey found no occurrences of rare plants on the project site. The existing and proposed Facility and the related facilities, have been designed such that they occupy less than half of the total area that comprises the Blaine Environmental Campus. A significant amount of wildlife habitat will remain once construction is complete. 9. The reversibility of any potential natural resources effects that are reasonably expected to occur: The MPCA finds that any potential effect that is reasonably likely to occur from this project would be reversible. As discussed above, the expected effects on natural resources are minimal. There is no reason to believe that this project is reasonably expected to cause a significant negative effect on natural resources. 10. Comments received that expressed concerns regarding potential effects to natural resources: Some comment letters expressed a general concern for impacts to habitat quality. As discussed above in Findings 8 and 9, the analysis indicates that the effects on natural resources that are reasonably expected to occur are not significant. 11. The MPCA finds that the environmental review is adequate to address the concerns because: All potential impacts to natural resources that are reasonably expected to occur from the proposed project have been considered during the review process and methods to prevent these impacts have been developed. 6

7 12. The MPCA finds that the project, as it is proposed, does not have the potential for significant environmental effects based on the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects reasonably expected to occur as a result of its impacts to natural resources. 13. Reasonably expected environmental effects of this project to water quality: A. Erosion and Sedimentation during Construction of the Facility B. Stormwater Runoff to On-site Wetlands 14. The extent of any potential water quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: A. Erosion and Sedimentation during Construction of the Facility There are no highly erodible soils or steep slopes on this property. The total surface area that will be disturbed during construction is approximately three acres. The size of this project requires the proposer to obtain a MPCA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction Stormwater Permit prior to construction. During the construction process, temporary silt fences, check dams, and erosion control mats will be used to control soil erosion on the property. After construction is completed, stormwater runoff will be managed through the use of concrete and asphalt curb and gutter systems and infiltration basins designed to hold and treat runoff from 2, 10 and 100-year storm events. Precipitation falling on the impervious areas of the site will be intercepted and infiltrated into the soil at a slow rate. With proper maintenance of the stormwater ponds, nearby surface waters should be protected over the life of the Facility. B. Stormwater Runoff to On-site Wetlands Currently, runoff from the proposed project site is minimal due to the fact that the area is covered with trees and grasses. Once the site is developed and impervious surfaces are created, runoff will increase. Surface-water runoff will need to be managed according to the requirements of the Solid Waste Permit application and MPCA Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Proposed measures to manage runoff rates include installation of concrete and asphalt paving, curb and gutter systems, and stormwater infiltration basins. All stormwater from 2, 10, and 100-year storm events will be intercepted and diverted to the infiltration basins. Overflow from the infiltration basins would be discharged to nearby wetlands, however, the quantity of water would not exceed the pre-development peak flow rates already occurring during similar storm events. The ponds are designed to meet all of the Rice Creek Watershed District and MPCA Construction Stormwater Permit requirements. The existing stormwater ponds on the Blaine Environmental Campus have never filled completely and have never overflowed. Therefore, the proposer expects that only during extreme storm events would any stormwater be discharged to wetlands on the site. Should this occur, sunlight, as well as, bacteria and microorganisms within the wetlands would treat pollutants prior to their reaching Golden Lake, which is located several miles away. Consequently, Golden Lake should not be negatively impacted. 15. The reversibility of any potential water quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: 7

8 The MPCA finds that any potential effect that is reasonably likely to occur from this project would be reversible. As discussed above, the expected effects on water quality are minimal. There is no reason to believe that this project is reasonably expected to cause a significant negative effect on water quality. 16. Comments received that give a specific basis for concerns regarding potential effects to water quality: Some comment letters expressed concern that wetlands on the site could be impacted, as well as, water quality in Golden Lake, an important recreational lake nearby. As discussed above in Findings 14 and 15, the analysis indicates that the effects on water quality that are reasonably expected to occur are not significant. 17. The MPCA finds that the environmental review is adequate to address the concerns because: All potential impacts to water quality that are reasonably expected to occur from the proposed project have been considered during the review process and a method to prevent these impacts has been developed. 18. The MPCA finds that the project as it is proposed does not have the potential for significant environmental effects on water quality based on the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects reasonably expected to occur. 19. Reasonably expected environmental effects of this project to air quality: A. Vehicle-related Air Emissions 20. The extent of any potential air quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: A. Vehicle-related Air Emissions One hundred and fifty additional trucks will visit the Blaine Environmental Campus after the Facility is completed. This will generate some additional air pollution. Motor vehicles emit a variety of air pollutants including carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides, and particulates. While there will be an increase in vehicle-related air pollution over existing levels, the contribution from this site is not expected to be substantial. 21. The reversibility of any potential air quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: The MPCA finds that any potential effect that is reasonably likely to occur from this project would be reversible. As discussed above, the expected effects on air quality are minimal. There is no reason to believe that this project is reasonably expected to cause a significant negative effect on air quality. 8

9 22. Comments received that give a specific basis for concerns regarding potential effects to air quality. No comments were received regarding air quality impacts. 23. As discussed above in Findings 20 and 21, the analysis indicates that the effects on air quality that are reasonably expected to occur are not significant. 24. The MPCA finds that the project as it is proposed does not have the potential for significant environmental effects on air quality based on the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects reasonably expected to occur. 25. Reasonably expected environmental effects of this project to aesthetics: A. Odor, Noise, Dust, and Litter 26. The extent of any potential aesthetics ffects that are reasonably expected to occur: A. Odor, Noise, Dust, and Litter Odor Due to the use of an enclosed Facility and the short time that waste will be kept on site before being trucked off the site for disposal, odor problems should be negligible. Noise Once the Facility is constructed, there will be 150 additional trucks per day entering and leaving the site. Truck traffic will increase noise in the vicinity of the new Facility to some degree as a result. Given the fact that the Facility would be located within an area zoned for industrial use and that there are very few residences nearby, increased noise should not cause serious impacts to any homeowners in the area. The sorting and transferring of waste will occur within a large, enclosed area within the Facility. This should help to mitigate noises from the site. Building setbacks, as well as, the tree plantings that are required by the city of Blaine, should also help to mitigate noise impacts. Dust The Facility would be surrounded by road base material (i.e. asphalt, concrete, etc.) that produces little dust. The transfer and packing of waste is also not expected to produce noticeable amounts of dust. A ventilation system will be incorporated into the design of the building to ensure that dust and fumes are managed in the working area. Dust leaving the building should be negligible and should not impact any residences in the vicinity of the Facility. Litter Waste transfer activities occur primarily within the enclosed Facility s building. Any product stored outside the building will be tarped or otherwise covered to minimize windblown litter. Employees will be dispatched on a regular basis to collect litter that may accumulate on site. 9

10 27. The reversibility of any potential aesthetic effects that are reasonably expected to occur: The MPCA finds that any potential effect that is reasonably likely to occur from this project would be reversible. As discussed above, the expected effects on aesthetics are minimal. There is no reason to believe that this project is reasonably expected to cause a significant negative effect on aesthetics. 28. Comments received that give a specific basis for concerns regarding potential effects to aesthetics. No comments were received regarding aesthetic concerns. 29. As discussed above in Findings 26 and 27, the analysis indicates that the effects on aesthetics that are reasonably expected to occur are not significant. 30. The MPCA finds that the project as it is proposed does not have the potential for significant environmental effects on aesthetics based on the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects reasonably expected to occur. Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects 31. The second criterion that the MPCA must consider, when determining if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur, is the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects," Minn. R , subp. 7.B (2003). The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below. 32. The proposed Facility is the second phase in a three-phase plan for this property. In addition to the existing Blaine Environmental Campus LLC Waste Transfer Station, already in operation on this site, and the proposed SKB Waste Transfer Station, there is a plan to also build a multi-purpose office building on this property. Both waste transfer stations, and eventually the office development will contribute in a minor way to the expansion of the Twin Cities Metro Area. As a result of this project and any future projects on this site, there will be an increase in truck and car traffic in the area, an increase in the production of wastewater and municipal waste. However, the increases will be insignificant when viewed in the context of the city of Blaine and/or the metro area. The Facility, itself, has a low potential for creating additional environmental impacts in the area, given its design and the kinds of materials that would be handled there. 10

11 33. Public comments concerning cumulative impacts: No public comments were received regarding the potential for cumulative impacts. Based on MPCA staff experience and available information on the project and information presented by the commentors, the MPCA does not reasonably expect significant cumulative effects from this project. 34. In considering the cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects, the MPCA finds that the reasonably expected effects from this project will not be significant. The Extent to Which the Environmental Effects Are Subject To Mitigation by Ongoing Public Regulatory Authority 35. The third criterion that the MPCA must consider, when determining if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur, is "the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority," Minn. R , subp. 7.C (2003). The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below. 36. The following permits or approvals will be required for the project: Unit of Government Permit or Approval Required Status A. City of Blaine Conditional Use Plan, Water, and Approved Sewer Permits B. Anoka County License Pending C. Rice Creek Watershed Permit Approved Watershed District D. MPCA Solid Waste Permit Pending E. MPCA General Stormwater Permit for Pending Industrial Activity F. MPCA NPDES Stormwater Construction Permit Pending 37. A. City of Blaine Conditional Use Plan, Water and Sewer Permits This permit, issued by the city of Blaine, allows for a specific use of a given piece of property and sets certain limitations for the Facility s operation. B. Anoka County License This permit ensures that the proposed project meets all county design and operation requirements. C. Rice Creek Watershed Permit This permit outlines strict requirements for ensuring the proper handling and treatment of stormwater on the site. The Watershed District has developed specific infiltration standards that all facilities must meet. D. MPCA Solid Waste Permit Typical mixed municipal waste includes garbage collected in aggregate from residential routes. The project proposer is responsible for submitting engineering plans and for managing 11

12 the Facility in accordance to the final permit requirements which would regulate design parameters, construction, operation, leachate management, monitoring, closure, post-closure, and emergency/contingency action plans, among other things. E. MPCA General Stormwater Permit for Industrial Activity The NPDES/State Disposal System (SDS) Industrial Stormwater Permit requires that specific conditions be adhered to for construction and operation of the Facility, and for overall compliance with water quality requirements. The Facility will need to prepare a Spill Response Plan and/or revise its Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. F. MPCA NPDES Stormwater Construction Permit A general NPDES Stormwater Construction Permit is required when a project disturbs one or more acres. It provides for the use of Best Management Practices such as silt fences, bale checks, and prompt revegetation to prevent eroded sediment from leaving the construction site. The proposer must have a sediment and erosion control plan that will provide more detail as to the specific measures to be implemented and will also address: phased construction; vehicle tracking of sediment; inspection of erosion control measures implemented; and timeframes in which erosion control measures will be implemented. The general permit also require adequate stormwater treatment capacity be provided to assure that water quality will not be impacted by runoff once the project is constructed. 38. The MPCA finds that ongoing public regulatory authority will address any significant potential environmental effects that were identified as reasonably expected to occur. The Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled as a Result of Other Available Environmental Studies Undertaken by Public Agencies or the Project Proposer, Including Other EISs. 39. The fourth criterion that the MPCA must consider is "the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs." Minn. R , subp. 7.D (2003). The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below. 40. The following documents were reviewed by MPCA staff as part of the potential environmental impact analysis for the proposed project. This list is not intended to be exhaustive. The MPCA also relies on information provided by the project proposer, commentors, staff experience, and other available information. A. Solid Waste Permit Application B. Draft Completed Data Portion for the EAW 41. There are no elements of the project that pose the potential for significant environmental effects that cannot be addressed in the project design and permit development processes, or by regional and local plans. 42. Based on the environmental review, previous environmental studies, and MPCA staff expertise on similar projects, the MPCA finds that the environmental effects of the project that are reasonably expected to occur can be anticipated and controlled. 12

13 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 43. The MPCA has jurisdiction in determining the need for an EIS for this project. The EAW, the permit development process, the Facility planning process, responses prepared by MPCA staff in response to comments on the SKB Transfer Station, Blaine Environmental Campus EAW, and the evidence in the record are adequate to support a reasoned decision regarding the potential significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur from this project. 44. Areas where the potential for significant environmental effects may have existed have been identified and appropriate mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design and permits. The project is expected to comply with all MPCA standards. 45. Based on the criteria established in Minn. R (2003), there are no potential significant environmental effects reasonably expected to occur from the project. 46. An EIS is not required. 47. Any findings that might properly be termed conclusions and any conclusions that might properly be termed findings are hereby adopted as such. ORDER The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency determines that there are no potential significant environmental effects reasonably expected to occur from the SKB Transfer Station, Blaine Environmental Campus project and that there is no need for an Environmental Impact Statement. IT IS SO ORDERED Commissioner Sheryl A. Corrigan Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Date 13

14 APPENDIX B Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) SKB Transfer Station, Blaine Environmental Campus Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE EAW 1. Phyllis Hanson, Metropolitan Council. Letter received March 1, Comment 1-1: Metropolitan Council staff review finds the EAW is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Council policies. An EIS is not necessary for regional purposes. Response 1-1: The comment is noted. Comment 1-2: This EAW specifically addresses Phase 2 of a three-phase project. The entire property is 37 acres including 6 acres of wetlands that will be avoided. It is recommended that a native vegetation wetland buffer be restored and maintained around the wetland areas. Wide buffers with more native vegetation are generally more effective in protecting water quality and wetlands. Response 1-2: This site is zoned for industrial development. An additional eight acres will be developed under Phase 3 of the site development plan. Wetlands will be avoided during all phases of the site s development. Vegetated buffers will remain between ponds, buildings, and parking lots. No changes to the vegetation around the wetlands are currently planned. The greatest potential threat to the water quality in the wetlands is from stormwater runoff. To mitigate for these impacts, the proposer must construct stormwater ponds. While we agree that placement of additional native vegetation around the wetlands would be beneficial, there are no state or local regulations that require the proposer to do so. The comment will, however, be transmitted to the proposer for consideration. Comment 1-3: Item 11 states that a significant amount of the wildlife habitat will remain after the project will be constructed, including six acres of wetlands that will be avoided. If no additional project phases are planned and if the wooded/forest area remains in a natural condition, it is recommended that a conservation protection strategy be implemented. This could include a conservation easement on the wetlands and wooded areas of the property that is to remain natural. Response 1-3: As stated in Response 1-2, this is an industrial site which is privately owned. Once this project is completed (Phase 2), a significant amount of habitat on the site will remain. Eventually, however, an additional phase of development will occur when an office building is constructed. At that point, some of the site s remaining habitat will be lost. To mitigate for that impact, the city of Blaine (City) has implemented strict development codes which require replacement of trees removed during construction of the new facility. So, while mature habitat will be lost, tree replacement and landscaping will occur on the site.

15 Responses to Comments on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet At this point in time, the proposer does not intend to establish any conservation easements; however, they will fully comply with City land use ordinances and state wetland protection regulations, including any setback requirements that pertain. Comment 1-4: The region-wide Natural Resources Inventory and Assessment identifies most of the site as having regionally important natural areas. It is recommended that a more detailed inventory be done using the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System to further define the natural resources on the site. This information could help determine the natural resources on the site. This information could help determine the highest quality areas that should remain undisturbed and be used to develop an ecological restoration plan for the natural areas that will be conserved. Response 1-4: The proposer believes that adequate review of the site has already occurred. First, the City required that the proposer conduct a tree survey on the property. This ensures that there is an adequate documentation of what currently exists on the site. Then, when trees are removed during construction, the appropriate number can be replaced to compensate for those lost. In addition, wetlands on the property have all been delineated and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Natural Heritage Database was queried to determine if rare and endangered species were located there. In addition, DNR requested that a botanical survey of the project area be conducted. A consultant completed a rare plant species survey on the approximately 37-acre site. Their survey found that there were no occurrences of rare plants on the project site. Therefore, no additional survey work is planned for the site. 2. Diane K. Anderson, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Letter dated March 1, Comment 2-1: From a natural resources management perspective, the proposed project does not appear to have the potential for significant environmental effects. Response 2-1: No response required. Comment 2-2: The EAW indicates that surface-water runoff from this project area will ultimately drain into Golden Lake. This is the only lake in the city of Circle Pines, which makes it an important local resource. Golden Lake is aerated, stocked with walleye and other game fish, and has a fishing pier and other recreational amenities. Adverse water quality impacts must be avoided to ensure the maintenance of the fisheries resources of Golden Lake. Response 2-2: In an effort to protect on-site wetlands and downstream surface waters, the Rice Creek Watershed and the MPCA have established strict requirements for stormwater management. The ponds must be designed such that surface waters are protected during 2, 10, and 100-year storms. Infiltration ditches are designed to capture some of the initial precipitation. The remaining runoff is diverted to stormwater ponds for treatment. These basins are designed to capture and encourage the slow infiltration of stormwater through the soil. The existing ponds on the site have never filled completely and have never overflowed. Therefore, the proposer expects that only during extreme storm events would any stormwater be discharged to wetlands on the site. Should this occur, sunlight as well as bacteria and microorganisms within the wetlands would treat the runoff prior to it reaching Golden Lake, which is located some distance from the site. Consequently, Golden Lake should not be negatively impacted by stormwater runoff. 2

16 Responses to Comments on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet 3. Mary Jackson, Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT). Letter received February 9, Comment 3-1: The Minnesota Department of Transportation has reviewed the above-referenced document and has no comments, as the proposed project should have little or no impact on MnDOT s highway system. Response 3-1: No response needed. 3