Loading...
1999-03-10 MPCA EAWon March 10, 1999 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Ms. Linda Goeb, City Administrator P. O. Box 9 Albertville, Minnesota 55301 RE: Albertville Crossing Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Dear Ms. Goeb: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above referenced project, to be built in the city of Albertville. Based on the information contained in the EAW and relative to areas within the regulatory authority of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), staff believes that significant environmental effects are not likely to occur as a result of the project. The preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) therefore does not appear to be necessary. However, during our review, issues have been identified that should be further addressed in the response to comments and record of findings that you are required to prepare by the Environmental Quality Board Rules. These issues include the Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification, wetland impacts, and the proposed method for treating stormwater runoff, as detailed below: Item 8, Permits: It should have been indicated that a Clean Water Act Section 401 Certification will be required to be obtained prior to the issuance of any Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit. A Section 401 Certification can be issued only if it is demonstrated that the proposal will comply with water quality standards as listed in Minn. R. 7050, and particularly for wetland alterations in Minn. R. 7050.0186. An Indirect Source Permit (ISP) is not required for the project since the number of proposed parking spaces do not exceed the parking threshold requirement needed for an ISP. Item 12, Physical Impacts on Water Resources: This section indicates that there will be 3.4 acres of type 1 wetlands filled as part of the project and that there will be 4.0 acres of wetland mitigation on the site. The functions and values and designated uses of the wetland that is proposed to be filled are required to be replaced, per federal and state rules and policies of no -net loss of wetlands. The proposal of replacing lost type 1 wetlands with type 3 wetlands does not achieve that requirement. The applicant should explore the opportunities to replace the filled wetlands with an in -kind type 1 wetland. It should be noted that the creation of storm water management basins shall not be considered as wetland compensatory mitigation for Clean Water Act requirements. If the proposed expansion, or creation of wetlands on site is primarily designed and constructed for the purpose of storm water retention, detention or sedimentation control then the proposal cannot be considered wetland mitigation. Also, any existing wetlands 520 Lafayette Rd. N.; St. Paul, MN 55155-4194; (612) 296-6300 (Voice); (612) 282-5332 (TTY) Regional Offices: Duluth • Brainerd • Detroit Lakes • Marshall • Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer • Printed on recycled paper containing at least 20 % fibers from paper recycled by consumers. i Ms. Linda Goeb Page Two that are altered by excavation or other construction to function as stormwater retention basins should be counted as being adversely significantly impacted and should be evaluated for an avoidance alternative and if considered unavoidable, then compensatory mitigation be required to offset that impact. The preliminary plat provided in the EAW indicates the location of the wetlands proposed to be filled. The layout demonstrates complete destruction of all type 1 wetlands on site with no apparent attempt demonstrated by the EAW or plan layout to avoid these wetlands. The State Wetland Conservation Act and Federal Clean Water Act basically require the applicant demonstrate that there are no prudent and feasible alternatives to the filling of wetlands. This would include layout modification to avoid wetland impact. Should you have any questions pertaining to wetlands issues, wetlands impact mitigation, and the Section 401 certification, please contact Larry Zdon at (651)297-8219. Item 18, Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff. The narrative does not say where the ponds will be located. It also states that the post -development rates of runoff will be the same or less than before development. This seems unlikely, given the increase in impervious surface involved in the project. The ponds must be designed to accommodate the required settling rate and particle size that will be precipitated in accordance with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Storm Water Permit for Construction Activity. The storm water pond must be sized sufficiently large to treat a 1/2 inch rainfall event from each acre of new impervious surface created by the development. Adequate treatment in this case means "wet" detention ponds that remove approximately 60% of the phosphorus. No wetlands can receive storm water runoff prior to treatment, nor can wetlands be converted into storm water treatment ponds. Should you have any questions about storm water treatment or the General Storm Water Permit please contact Keith Cherryholmes, Ph. D. at (651)296-6945. Item 23, Vehicle -related Air Emissions: The EAW has addressed the traffic impacts expected from the proposed project. The effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality is based on the air quality analysis that was conducted for a proposed retail/commercial project located in proximity to this project, across I-94. The air quality analysis conducted for that project shows that projected maximum carbon monoxide concentrations are well below the state ambient air quality standards. Additionally, based on the projected average daily traffic volumes for the Albertville Crossing project, it is anticipated that traffic impacts resulting from the project are expected to be minimal, and therefore, no significant air quality impacts are expected as a result of the project. Ms. Linda Goeb Page Three Please note that the Section 401 Certification issue must be resolve prior to issuance of a Corps of Engineers 404 Permit. The wetland issues, and the closely related issue of how stormwater runoff will be treated, need to be resolved before the project can be permitted. Thank you for the opportunity to review the Albertville Crossing EAW. Should you have any questions, in general, about the EAW, please call me at (651)296-8643. Questions about specific aspects discussed in the EAW may best be referred to Mr. Zdon or Dr. Cherryholmes. I look forward to receiving a copy of your Response to our comments and the Record of Decision. Sincerely, Eric J. Kilberg Planner Principal Operations and Planning Section Metro District EJK: sj s cc: Marly Glines, Cascade II Todd W. McLouth, P.E., John Oliver and Associates October 5, 2000 Eric Kilberg Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Metro Division Operations and Planning Section 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 RE: Albertville Crossing EAW Dear Mr. Kilberg: GOP Please find enclosed with this letter copies of the following documents as you requested: (1) City Council Findings of Fact & Decision, dated March 10, 1999 (2) Comment letters on the EAW • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, dated March 10, 1999 • Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, dated March 8, 1999 (3) Response to EAW Comments • John Oliver & Associates, dated March 16, 1999 (4) Resolution #1995-25 • A Resolution Making A Negative Declaration on the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement for Albertville Crossings Should you need any other information, please contact me. Sincerely, Linda Goeb City Administrator Enclosures (5) sue+ I a �StAGr�l. ., nesok Polludoii Contml Agency Metro District, Operations and Planning Section 520 Lafayette Road North, St. Paul, MN 55155 Wit Ididd RGU:A4 /� L L i ' - Project Title: V Please send us a copy of the Findings of Fact document, copies of all Comment Letters received and Response to Comments along with your EIS need decision for the above referenced project. If you have any questions, please contact: 'e-AG �'�G �•�'6 at (651) -J- ZY3 Thank you