1996-09-25 MN DNR EAWr ~.
Minnesota Department of Natural 1Zesources
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-40_ 10
September 25, 1996
Garrison Hale, City Administrator
City of Albertville
P.O. Box 9
5975 Main Avenue, NE
Albertville, MN 55301
RE: Minneapolis Factory Shoppes
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
Dear Mr. Hale:
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the EAW for the above-mentioned
project. We offer the following comments for your consideration.
The EAW correctly indicates that wetlands are present onsite, however the EAW understates the
associated habitat value of these wetlands for wildlife. The wetland quality as habitat can be
rated as locally good to high, which results from their relative isolation from direct human
disturbance(being adjacent to I-94). These wetlands provide a desirable mosaic of semi-open
water, dense wetland vegetation, and upland nesting cover. This complex likely supports a wide
array of wildlife species, and is particularly good for waterfowl, herons, and egrets. Great
egrets, Ring-billed gulls, and a Great Blue heron were observed during a brief site visit made
recently.
Upon review of the site plan provided in the EAW, we agree that the project demonstrates
avoidance of wetland impacts. However, we believe it is possible to further limit wetland
impacts by locating stormwater ponds to upland areas. If these ponds were located in upland
areas, the loss of type 3/4 wetlands and non-reed canary grass type 2 wetland would not occur
and impacts to local wildlife populations would be reduced. We also note that Lot 1, as shown
in Exhibit 3, is future development and will require approximately one-half acre of wetland fill.
Wetland filling should not occur until a specific development proposal exists; filling for
speculative development does not meet the sequencing requirements of the Wetlands
Conservation Act (WCA) in our opinion.
In the wetlands discussion, it is unclear whether the project proposer expects to get wetland
mitigation credit from development of the stormwater ponds. We recommend against the
granting of credit in this instance because the ponds are to be surrounded on three (3) sides by
impervious surface; lost wildlife values will not be replaced. We look forward to reviewing the
Wetland Replacement Plan and the proposal for compensating for lost wildlife values.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this project. The project does not require preparation of
an environmental impact statement (EIS) in our opinion. We look forward to receiving your
record of decision and responses to comments. Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, subparts 4 & 5,
require you to send us your Record of Decision within five days of deciding this action.
~~.i~ ?n;t>rm,ation: 512-Z96 6t~7., i-r()i)-7hh b0)t~ a ~`€Y: 6]?-29Ei ~?84, 1-80i`r-55?-392.4
A r~ i d unuy Employer ~ Pr ntcd nn R;. y~ I ~~ Pap i Con~am ug
tiro 4u.~Ies i rvt s ty ~~ Vh unum of t~) ~ Post-~onsrr-~~;r~l~'astc
'Garrison Hale, City Administrator
September 25, 1996
Page 2
Please contact Bill Johnson of my staff at (612) 296-9229 if you have questions regarding this
letter.
Sincerely,
~_ c~ ~~~
Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor
Natural Resources Environmental Review Section
Office of Planning
c: Bob Hance
Con Christianson
Pete Otterson
Ellen Heneghan
Lynn M. Lewis, USFWS
Gregg Downing, EQB
#970045-01 /ER21. SHOPPES.DOC