Stemmer Ridge Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension FOF ... · STEMMER RIDGE ROAD TRUNK SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION . PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA . FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER

ǇπŜŀǊнπтлō

STATE OF MINNESOTA MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY

IN THE MATTER OF THE DECISION ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED STEMMER RIDGE ROAD TRUNK SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA

FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER

FINDINGS OF FACT Pursuant to Minn. ch. 4410, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff prepared and distributed an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed Stemmer Ridge Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension (Project). Based on the MPCA staff environmental review, the EAW, 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, Conclusions of Law, and Order.

Project Description 1. The city of Prior Lake (Proposer) is proposing to extend the Stemmer Ridge Road trunk sanitary

sewer from its current ending point at Stemmer Ridge Road North towards County Highway 82 (154th Street). The extension will include a 30 inch gravity sewer, connecting both trunk sanitary sewer force mains at the Stemmer Ridge Road ending point to the existing 30 inch trunk sanitary gravity sewer that flows along County Highway 82. The proposed Project is 0.75 miles in length with a construction area of 11.27 acres. The sewer will be constructed with 30 inch polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe and concrete manholes. Following the same alignment as the sanitary sewer, the Project will also include the extension of a 20 inch trunk water main connecting to existing water main stubs at Stemmer Ridge Road and County Highway 82. The proposed alignment of the Stemmer Ridge Road Sanitary Sewer as well as the water main extension is based on the City’s 2030 Comprehensive Plan (City’s 2030 Plan).

2. This planned alignment is explained in the City’s 2030 Plan, dictating the need for additional sewer capacity and water as the City expands. The City predicts a full build out population for the City’s 42,400 residents by 2030. The new trunk sanitary sewer and water main will service the southwest portion of the City. The new sewer extension will direct wastewater to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) interceptor at the intersection of Sunset Avenue and County Road 12; that interceptor then directs wastewater north to the MCES Blue Lake Wastewater Treatment Facility (Blue Lake WWTF) in Shakopee, Minnesota. According to correspondence from MCES, the Blue Lake WWTF will be able to accommodate Prior Lake’s growth in the coming years without need for expansion.

TDD (for hearing and speech impaired only): 651-282-5332

Printed on recycled paper containing at least 30% fibers from paper recycled by consumers

On the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement Findings of Fact Stemmer Ridge Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension Conclusions of Law Prior Lake, Minnesota And Order

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE PROJECT

3. This Project will have more than 2,000,000 gallons per day of wastewater flow capacity. Therefore,

Minn. R. 4410.4300, subp 18A, requires the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW).

4. An EAW is a brief document designed to set out the basic facts necessary to determine whether an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required for a proposed project or to initiate the scoping process for an EIS (Minn. R. pt. 4410.0200, subp. 24). The MPCA is the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for preparing the EAW for this Project.

5. The MPCA provided public notice of the Project as follows:

a. Notice of the availability of the EAW for public comment was published in the EQB Monitor on February 2, 2015, as required by Minn. R. 4410.1500.

b. The EAW was available for review on the MPCA website at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/news/eaw/index.html.

c. The MPCA provided a news release to media, Twin Cities metro counties, and other interested parties on January 30, 2015.

6. During the 30-day comment period that ended on March 4, 2015, the MPCA received comment

letters from U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE), Minnesota Historical Society, and the MCES. There were no letters received from citizens. A list of the comment letters received and copies of the letters are included as Appendix A to these Findings.

7. The MPCA prepared written responses to the comment letters received during the 30-day public

comment period. The responses to the comments are included as Appendix B to these findings.

Standard for Decision on the Need for an EIS

8. The MPCA shall base its decision on the need for an EIS on the information gathered during the EAW process and the comments received on the EAW (Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 3). The agency must order an EIS for projects that have the potential for significant environmental effects (Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 1). 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. 4410.1700, subp. 7. These criteria are: A. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects.

B. Cumulative potential effects. The responsible governmental unit (RGU) shall consider the

following factors: whether the cumulative potential effect is significant; whether the contribution from the Project is significant when viewed in connection with other contributions to the cumulative potential effect; the degree to which the Project complies with approved mitigation measures specifically designed to address the cumulative potential effect; and the efforts of the Project Proposer to minimize the contributions from the Project.

2


C. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority. The RGU may rely only on mitigation measures that are specific and that can be reasonably expected to effectively mitigate the identified environmental impacts of the Project.

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.

Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects 9. The MPCA finds that the types of impacts that may reasonably be expected to occur from the

Project include:

· Impacts to surface waters · Impacts to wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources

Findings on impacts to surface waters 10. With respect to the extent of potential impacts on surface that are reasonably expected to occur

from the Project, the MPCA makes the following findings.

Impaired water Surface waters in proximity to the construction area are Howard Lake (0.3 miles to the west), Spring Lake (within 1 mile to the south) and several wetlands. The total acreage of surface waters within the sanitary sewer line construction area is 0.02 acres based on the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System. According to the MPCA impaired waters list, Spring Lake is listed as impaired due to mercury and nutrients. Therefore, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Construction Stormwater (CSW) General Permit will require more protective erosion and sediment control during construction.

Surface water runoff The Project will not result in a significant increase in impervious surface on the Project site, and thus will not change the quality or quantity of surface water runoff after the Project has been completed. During construction, soils will be disturbed and there will be an increased risk of erosion and sedimentation throughout the Project area during that time. The CSW General Permit will contain mitigation measures know as Best Management Practices (BMPs) to address potential construction related impacts. These mitigation measures may include erosion control blankets, silt fences, and bio rolls. Disturbed areas of soil will be stabilized in conformance with the CSW General Permit.

3


Wetlands There is one wetland identified by the National Wetlands Inventory that may be impacted by construction. A wetland delineation will be conducted prior to construction to identify potentially impacted areas. Potential impacts to wetlands as a result of the construction of the sanitary sewer will be temporary in nature and the land cover will be returned to its pre-construction condition, following the completion of the Project.

11. The MPCA finds that information presented in the EAW and other information in the environmental review record is adequate to address the concerns related to surface water runoff, impaired waters and wetlands.

12. With respect to the reversibility of effects related to surface water runoff, impaired waters and wetland quality, the MPCA finds the impacts that are reasonably expected to occur from this Project would be reversible. As discussed above, the expected effects on surface water quality due to construction and operation can be addressed by the installation and maintenance of BMPs and addressed in respective permits.

13. The MPCA finds the Project, as it is proposed, does not have the potential for significant

environmental effects based on the type, extent, and reversibility of impacts related to surface water runoff, impaired waters, and wetlands that are reasonably expected to occur from the Project.

Findings on impacts to wildlife, and ecologically sensitive resources

14. Two rare biological features had been identified within the Project construction boundaries, the

Blanding’s Turtle, a state-listed threatened species and a Regionally Significant Ecological Area (RSEA).

15. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) was contacted to complete a Natural

Heritage Information System review of the proposed Project site. The Blanding’s Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii), a Minnesota state-listed threatened species, has been reported within a one mile radius of the proposed Project and thus may be encountered on the Project site. Blanding’s Turtles may be encountered on both upland and wetland habitats, and thus they will be a concern for the entire construction site.

16. Portions of the Project area have been identified as having both statewide and local importance to

the Blanding’s Turtle. The MDNR provided both general recommendations on avoiding and minimizing impacts to the rare turtle, as well as additional special recommendations based on the areas identified as having particular importance to the Blanding’s Turtle. The City will ensure that appropriate measures are followed during construction to prevent impacts to Blanding’s Turtles, including, but not limited to, the posting of fliers in Project areas for workers, placing silt fences to keep turtles out of construction areas, then ensuring the silt fencing is removed, and checking trenches and removing the turtles if found.

4

On the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement Findings of Fact Stemmer Ridge Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension Conclusions of Law Prior Lake, Minnesota And Order 17. To prevent negative impacts to the Blanding’s Turtle, several mitigation measures will be

implemented on the construction site. MDNR fact sheets about Blanding’s Turtles will be distributed to contractors and fliers will be posted throughout the construction area. Additionally, employees will be instructed to check trenches before backfilling to remove turtles that have been unintentionally trapped. If turtles are encountered in other instances during Project construction, they will be moved out of harm’s way or otherwise left undisturbed. Once the Project has been completed, disturbed areas will be seeded and returned to conditions similar to pre-project land cover; impacts to the Blanding’s Turtle and its habitat are not expected throughout the operation of the sanitary sewer.

18. Approximately 0.55 acres of the Project area falls within RSEA in the seven county Metro area. The

potentially impacted areas are already developed and would not be further impacted with the addition of a sanitary sewer and water main. As a result, no special permits, approvals, or construction methods will be required for the Project. There is also a migratory waterfowl feeding and resting lake about a mile east of the construction area. No impacts to these areas are expected as a result of this Project. No other designated habitat areas exist on or near the Project site.

19. The MPCA finds that information presented in the EAW and other information in the environmental

review record is adequate to address the concerns related to impacts to wildlife, and ecologically sensitive resources. The impacts on the Blanding’s Turtle and RSEA that are reasonably expected to occur from the Project have been considered during the review process and appropriate mitigation measures are available and will be required to prevent significant adverse impacts.

20. 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 impacts related to impacts to wildlife, and ecologically sensitive resources that are reasonably expected to occur from the Project.

Cumulative Potential Effects 21. The second criterion that the MPCA must consider when determining if a project has the potential

for significant environmental effects is the "cumulative potential effects.” In making this determination, the MPCA must consider “whether the cumulative potential effect is significant; whether the contribution from the project is significant when viewed in connection with other contributions to the cumulative potential effect; the degree to which the project complies with approved mitigation measures specifically designed to address the cumulative potential effects; and the efforts of the proposer to minimize the contributions from the project.”Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7.B. The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below.

22. The EAW, public comments, and MPCA follow-up evaluation did not disclose any related or

anticipated future projects that may interact with this Project in such a way as to result in significant cumulative potential environmental effects.

23. In considering the cumulative potential effects, the MPCA finds that the Project does not have the

potential for significant environmental effects due to related or anticipated future projects.

5

On the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement Findings of Fact Stemmer Ridge Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension Conclusions of Law Prior Lake, Minnesota And Order The Extent to Which the Environmental Effects Are Subject to Mitigation by Ongoing Public Regulatory Authority 24. The third criterion that the MPCA must consider when determining if a project has the potential for

significant environmental effects is "the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority. The RGU may rely only on mitigation measures that are specific and that can be reasonably expected to effectively mitigate the identified environmental impacts of the project." Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7.C. The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below.

25. The following permits or approvals will be required for the Project:

Unit of Government Type of Application Status Federal USACE Section 404 permit To be obtained

State MPCA NPDES/SDS Construction

Stormwater General Permit To be obtained

MPCA Sanitary Sewer Extension To be obtained

DNR Temporary Water Appropriation (Dewatering)

To be obtained if necessary depending on final design

Minnesota Department of Health (MDH)

Well sealing permit To be obtained if necessary

MDH Water main extension To be obtained Gopher State One Call Utility line location

verification Prior to Excavation

Local MCES Sanitary Sewer Connection

Permit To be obtained

Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District

Project approval To be obtained

City of Prior Lake WCA Approval To be obtained City of Prior Lake Grading Permit To be obtained Scott County Right-of-way permit To be obtained

26. USACE, Section 404 Permit. This general permit provides language describing procedures and

permissions regarding excavation in wetlands and placement of excavated materials into the waters of the United States or their associated wetlands.

27. MPCA, NPDES General Stormwater Construction Permit. A General NPDES Construction Stormwater

Permit is required when a project disturbs one or more acres. It provides for the use of BMPs 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

6


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.

28. MPCA Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit. After completion of administrative and technical reviews by

MPCA staff, a SDS Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit will be required for the interceptor and for lateral sewer that will connect to it. Review of sewer extension permits will verify that hydraulic capacity will exist in the receiving wastewater interceptor systems as well as the MCES – Blue Lake WWTF.

29. MDNR Construction Dewatering Permit. Approval of dewatering through an MDNR Water

Appropriation Permit is required when the amount of appropriation exceeds 10,000 gallon per day, or one million gallons per year.

30. MDH, Well Sealing Permit. The decommissioning of wells in accordance with State Rules and

Regulations. 31. MCES, Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit. Review and approval of plans and specifications for

projects for community and municipal water systems for the installation of watermains, community water supply wells, pumphouses, chemical feed systems, water treatment plants and plant renovations, elevated or ground storage tanks and reservoirs, booster stations, and any other type of potable water related infrastructure project.

32. Prior Lake Spring Lake Watershed District, Project Approval. Review of work within the Watershed

District. 33. City of Prior Lake, Grading Permit. Building permits and inspections assure that the Project will be

constructed or installed in accordance with city ordinances and codes. 34. Scott County, Right-of-Way Utility Permit. The Right of Way Permit ensures that the work will be

accomplished in a manner that will not be detrimental to the Right of Way and that will safeguard the public, and that the right of way on trunk highways is restored to its original condition.

35. The above-listed permits include general and specific requirements for mitigation of environmental

effects of the Project. The MPCA finds that the environmental effects of the Project are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority.

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 36. 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

7


public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs,” Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7. D. The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below.

37. The following documents were reviewed by MPCA staff as part of the environmental impact

analysis for the proposed Project.

· data presented in the EAW · permit application(s) · other reports and analysis as appropriate · permits and environmental review of similar projects

38. This list is not intended to be exhaustive. The MPCA also relies on information provided by the

Project Proposer, persons commenting on the EAW, staff experience, and other available information obtained by staff.

39. The environmental effects of the Project have been addressed by the design and permit

development processes, and by ensuring conformance with regional and local plans. There are no elements of the Project that pose the potential for significant environmental effects

40. Based on the environmental review, previous environmental studies by public agencies or the

Project Proposer, and staff expertise and experience on similar projects, the MPCA finds that the environmental effects of the Project that are reasonably expected to occur can be anticipated and controlled.

41. The MPCA adopts the rationale stated in the attached Response to Comments (Appendix B) as the

basis for response to any issues not specifically addressed in these Findings.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 42. The MPCA is the governmental unit responsible for determining the need for an EIS for this Project.

43. The EAW, the permit development process, 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 a comparison of the impacts that are reasonably expected to occur from the Project with

the criteria established in Minn. R. 4410.1700 subp. 7, the Project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects.

46. Based on the record, the MPCA makes a negative declaration on the need for an EIS for the Project.

8

APPENDIX A

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Stemmer Ridge Road Sanitary Sewer Extension

Environmental Assessment Worksheet

LIST OF COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED 1. Ryan Malterud, Army Corps of Engineers, Letter received February 10, 2015.

2. Sarah J. Beimers, Minnesota Historical Society, Letter received February 26, 2015. 3. LisaBeth Barajas, Metropolitan Council, letter received March 5, 2015. 4. Brooke Haworth, Department of Natural Resources, letter received March 4, 2015.

1

2

3

4

APPENDIX B

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Stemmer Ridge Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)

RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE EAW

1. Ryan Malterud, Army Corps of Engineers, Letter received February 10, 2015. Comment 1-1: The commenter stated that based on available information a Department of the Army permit could be required for the proposed activity. Response: The EAW identified the need for a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Section 404 Permit which is supported by this letter which has been forwarded to the project proposer. 2. Sarah J. Beimers, Minnesota Historical Society, Letter received February 26, 2015. Comment 2-1: The commenter stated that based on their review, no properties were listed in the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. Response: No response necessary. 3. LisaBeth Barajas, Metropolitan Council, letter received March 5, 2015. Comment 3-1: The commenter recommends that the city of Prior Lake notify Scott County prior to initiation of development of the sanitary sewer line. Response: Metropolitan Council’s recommendation has been passed along to the city. Comment 3-2: The commenter stated that additional clarification in regards to the “located” wells on the site. Response: Upon exploration of the County Well Index, there is evidence of three wells in and around the construction area, these include two located and one unlocated well. Of the two located wells, one is associated with the unique number 205996, its use is domestic, and depth is 153 feet. The other located well is number 257038 and its depth is 160 feet. These wells are not expected to be impacted by the project; however, if impacts are expected, a Minnesota Department of Health well sealing permit will be obtained. Comment 3-3: The commenter stated that the current transit route serving the area was not properly identified. Route 492 currently operates non-stop across 154th /Co Rd 82 at the north end of the project. Response: Thank you for the clarification and the EAW will be updated with that information.

Stemmer Ridge Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension Responses to Comments on the Prior Lake, Minnesota Environmental Assessment Worksheet 4. Comments by: Brooke Haworth, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MDNR), letter

received March 4, 2015. Comment 4-1: The commenter points out that the EAW states that right of way easements will be acquired for 80 feet on each side of the project. The MDNR recommends that, if possible, project proposers consider a narrower right of way through forested areas to minimize tree removal and the accompanying detrimental impacts of forest fragmentation. In addition, please consider the following Best Management Practices for work that occurs through natural plant communities:

· Inspect and clean all equipment prior to bringing it to the site to prevent the introduction and spread of invasive species;

· Minimize vehicular disturbance in the area (allow only vehicles/equipment necessary for construction activities);

· Do not park equipment, spoils or stockpiled supplies within the forested areas; · Re-vegetate disturbed soil with native species suitable to the local habitat as soon after

construction as possible. Response: The project proposer will consider a narrower right-of-way through any wooded areas. Consideration to these resources will be made along with constructability and safety. Additionally, information will be provided to the contactor about preventing the spread of invasive species through Best Management Practices for their practices and equipment. Comment 4-2: The commenter stated that while conversion of forest to herbaceous cover will be unavoidable within the corridor, please consider careful selection of native seed mixes. With consultation from the Scott County SWCD, select the appropriate state seed mix for native grasses and forbs. In addition, we recommend mowing be restricted to management of invasive species, allowing plants to seed and flower. This vegetation will serve the function of providing food and habitat for butterflies, native pollinators, birds and small nongame species. Response: The project proposer will consider using native seed mixes to re-vegetate disturbed areas.

Comment 4-3: Commenter points out that during erosion-control activities throughout the project, the MDNR encourages the use of wildlife-friendly erosion control mesh (non-plastic, non-welded). Traditional erosion control mesh is known to cause injury and may be fatal to wildlife, particularly small nongame, reptiles and amphibians. Response: Wildlife friendly erosion control mesh is anticipated to be used for the project to minimize impact to wildlife. Comment 4-4: Commenter states that a new road will be constructed in conjunction with this project. Please be aware there may be increased traffic hazards from displaced wildlife during construction. Correspondence from the MDNR Natural Heritage review (dated April 8, 2014) informs proposers of the potential to encounter the state-threatened Blanding’s Turtle and provides minimization recommendations. Please make drivers and contractors aware of this rare species, and instruct caution during all construction activities. Response: Information about Blanding’s Turtles will be provided to the contractor during construction.

2

Documents

Stemmer Ridge Road Trunk Sanitary Sewer Extension FOF ... · STEMMER RIDGE ROAD TRUNK SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION . PRIOR LAKE, MINNESOTA . FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER