8.3. SR 07-15-2019
Request for Action
To Item Number
Mayor and City Council 8.3
Agenda Section Meeting Date Prepared by
General Business July 15, 2019 Amanda Bednar, Environmental Coordinator
Item Description Reviewed by
Lake Orono Restoration and Enhancement Brandon Wisner, Stormwater Coordinator
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
Reviewed by
Cal Portner, City Administrator
Action Requested
Adopt, by motion, a resolution issuing a negative declaration of need for an Environmental Impact
Statement for the Lake Orono Restoration and Enhancement Project.
Background/Discussion
WSB Engineering has completed an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed
Lake Orono Restoration and Enhancement dredging project. The proposed project would remove
approximately 125,000 cubic yards of material from Lake Orono to improve navigation, recreation and
wildlife habitat. The lake was previously dredged in 1998. The project triggers the need for a mandatory
EAW per Minnesota State Statute.
The EAW was filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, circulated for review and
comment to the required EAW distribution list and noticed via press release in the Star News. The public
comment period ended June 19, 2019. Comments were received from the Minnesota Department of
Transportation, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Administration – State
Historic Preservation Office, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and US Army Corps of
Engineers. Comments were considered in determining the potential significant environmental impacts of
the project. An Environmental Impact Statement is required for projects that have potential for
significant environmental effects.
Based on the comments received and information generated, it has been determined that the project does
not have potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW identified areas of potential
environmental effects, but appropriate mitigation will be incorporated into the project plans. All required
approvals and permits will be obtained as well.
Financial Impact
None
Attachments
Resolution No 19-__ issuing a negative declaration of need for an Environmental Impact
Statement for the Lake Orono Restoration and Enhancement Project.
Environmental Assessment Worksheet Record of Decision
The Elk River Vision
A welcoming community with revolutionary and spirited resourcefulness, exceptional
service, and community engagement that encourages and inspires prosperity
City of Elk River
City Council
Resolution 19-____
A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Elk River issuing a negative
declaration of need for an environmental impact statement for the Lake
Orono Restoration and Enhancement project
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) Rules, Chapter
4410, part 4410.1000, Subpart 2, the City of Elk River as the responsible governmental unit
completed an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Lake Orono
Restoration and Enhancement project; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota EQB Rules, Chapter 4410.4300 Subpart 27, the
project meets the thresholds for an EAW for work within wetlands and public waters; and
WHEREAS, copies of the EAW were distributed to all persons and agencies on the
official EQB mailing list prior to May 20, 2019; and
WHEREAS, copies of the EAW were distributed to all persons and agencies on the
official EQB mailing list prior to May 20, 2019; and
WHEREAS, notice of the availability of the EAW for public review for a 30-day comment
period was published in the EQB Monitor on May 20, 2019; and
WHEREAS, a press release was published in the Elk River Star News on May 17, 2019 and
June 6, 2019 to announce the availability of the EAW to interested parties; and
WHEREAS, the 30-day comment period ended on June 19, 2019 and all comments
received have been considered; and
WHEREAS, the EAW, in conjunction with comment responses, identified permitting,
mitigation, water quality improvements, and habitat improvements, if met, will address
environmental effects caused by the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Elk
River, Minnesota, as follows: That it should and hereby does make a negative declaration on
the need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the improvements included in the Lake
Orono Restoration and Enhancement EAW, provided all mitigation measures of the EAW
are implemented by the city as part of the project, and all local, state, and federal
environmental standards are followed and incorporated into the final site plans for the
project.
Passed and adopted this 15th day of July 2019.
John J. Dietz, Mayor
ATTEST:
Tina Allard, City Clerk
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
ST. PAUL DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS
180 FIFTH STREET EAST, SUITE 700
ST. PAUL, MN 55101-1678
REPLY TO ATTENTION OF
REGULATORY BRANCH
Regulatory File No. MVP-2019-01134-BBY
City of Elk River
c/o Amanda Bednar
13065 Orono Parkway
Elk River, Minnesota 55330
Dear Ms.Bednar:
We have received your EAW prepared by WSB & Associates for the proposed project to
remove accumulated sediment from Lake Orono in the City of Elk River.The purpose of this
letter is to inform you that based on available information a Department of the Army (DA) permit
may be required for your proposed activity. This type of proposed work often includes the
permanent or temporary discharge of fill material into waters of the United States for temporary
or permanent storage of dredged materials.Any activity that temporarily or permanently impacts
a water of the United States might require a DAPermit. If the project is designed not to include
a discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States, then a DA\\ permit may
not be required. We suggest that you contact this office as the project is being designed and
dredged material disposal sites have been identified to determine whether or not aDApermit is
required. This letter also provides general information regarding the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) regulatory program.
When a proposal involves the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United
States, it may be subject to Corps jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA
Section 404). Waters of the United States include navigable waters, their tributaries, and
adjacent wetlands (33 CFR § 328.3). CWA Section 301(a) prohibits discharges of dredged or
fill material into waters of the United States, unless the work has been authorized by a DA
permit under CWA Section 404. Information about the Corps permitting process can be
obtained online at http://www.mvp.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory.aspx.
The Corps evaluation of a CWA Section 404 permit application involves multiple analyses,
Policy Act (NEPA) (33 CFR part 325), (2) determining whether the proposal is contrary to the
public interest (33 CFT § 320.4), and (3) determining whether the proposal complies with the
Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines (Guidelines) (40 CFR part 230).
The Guidelines specifically
permitted if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have less
adverse impact on the aquatic environment, so long as the alternative does not have other
signif
spent on the proposal prior to applying for a CWA Section 404 permit cannot be factored into
the Corps decision whether there is a less damaging practicable alternative to the proposal.
You are advised not to perform any work that requires DA authorization without obtaining
that authorization. If you have any questions about the Corps regulation of a particular
Regulatory Branch (File No. MVP-2019-01134-BBY)
waterbody (including wetlands) or activity, please contact the Regulatory project manager listed
below and arrange for an on-site consultation. To proceed without first obtaining required DA
authorization violates Federal law and exposes the responsible party to criminal, civil, and
administrative penalties.
If you would like to request a jurisdictional determination, please contact the Corps
representative identified in the final paragraph of this letter. If you would like to apply for a DA
permit, please fill out the attached application form. Additional application guidance has been
included for your use. Please send your completed application form to the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Regulatory Branch, 180 Fifth Street East Suite 700, Saint Paul, MN 55101-1678.
If an application for a Corps permit has not yet been submitted, the project proposer may
request a pre-application consultation meeting with the Corps to obtain information regarding
the data, studies or other information that will be necessary for the permit evaluation process. A
pre-application consultation meeting is strongly recommended if the proposal has substantial
impacts to waters of the United States, or if it is a large or controversial project.
For further information or to request a pre-application consultation meeting, please contact
Brian Yagle in our St. Paul office at (651) 290-5975 or Brian.B.Yagle@usace.army.mil. In any
correspondence or inquiries, please refer to the Regulatory file number shown above.
Sincerely,
Brian Yagle
LeadProject Manager
Cc: Shawn Williams WSB
Page 2 of 2
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) AntidegradationAssessmentfor Section 401
Water Quality Certification Applicants
7.18.17
In addition to completing the Joint Application Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota, applicants
whoseproposedprojects may require anMPCA Individual 401 Water Quality Certification for work in aquatic resources
must also provide the information requested below. This will facilitate the MPCA’s review of the proposed project for
compliance with the antidegradation water quality standards (Minn. R. 7050.0250 to 7050.0335). Section 401 of the
Clean Water Act requires any applicant for a federal license or permittoconduct an activity that may result in a
discharge to waters of the United States to obtain certification from the statein which the discharge originatesto
ensure compliance with state water quality standards. Theantidegradation assessmentis not required for all projects; if
you know that your projectwill qualify for a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers404 GeneralPermit or Letter of Permission
(LOP), you do not need to fill outthis form.If the information requested below is already provided in your Joint Permit
Application (JPA), please indicate where.
Applicant/ProjectName:
Date:
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
Identifywhetheran EAW or EIS was prepared(or will be required)for this project,andinclude theEAW/EISprocess
completiondate.
Analysis of Non-Preferred Alternatives That Avoid and Minimize Degradation
Describe prudentand feasible alternatives thatwouldminimize degradation and avoid or minimize surface water
impacts (such as wetlands, lakes, streams, etc.).An analysis of each alternative must include a description ofhow
impacts tosurface watersare avoided and/or minimized, and include information on any design considerations and
constraints, expected performance, construction, operation, and maintenance costs, and reliability for each alternative.
Preferred Alternative
Provide a description ofand justification forthe preferred alternative, and verify that the preferred alternativeisthe least
degrading prudent and feasible alternative for surface water.Note: Informationin Attachment C of the Joint Application
Form for Activities Affecting Water Resources in Minnesota (Application) maybe used to help determine if the preferred
alternative, relative to other available prudent and feasible alternatives,is appropriate.
Beneficial Uses
Describe the current existingbeneficialusesof the surface watersimpacted by the project and how thebeneficialuses
will be protected during and after the project. Review Minnesota Rules 7050. 0410-0430 for the classificationthat fits the
existing beneficial usesof the waters impacted by your project. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/?id=7050
Indirect Impacts
Where partial alteration of asurface water will occur, describe the potential indirect impacts to the remaining surface
water,andthe potential impact to nearby wetlands, stream, lakes, etc. When the entire function/acreageof a surface
water is lost, describe the impacts to nearby wetlands, streams, lakes, etc. Indirect impacts can include changes in
hydrology, aquatic species health or population, changes in vegetation or macroinvertebrate (bug) populations, etc.
Loading and Degradation to Surface Waters
Describe any anticipated net increases in loading and other causes of degradation expectedinsurface waters that are
not directly filled or dredged when your proposed projectpreferred alternativeis fully implemented.
Water Quality Comparison Before and After Project
Compare and describe the existing water qualityat the project sitewith the anticipated water quality after the project is
fully complete and operational. If thesurface area of awater resource will be completely filled, this step is not necessary,
but must be addressed in the Mitigation Planbelow.
Comparison of Existing and Expected Economic Conditions and Social Services
Provide a comparison of existing and expected economic conditions and social services when the proposed project
(preferred alternative) is fully implemented. Include description of economic gainsor losses attributable to the proposed
activity; contribution to social services; prevention/remediation of environmental or public health threats; trade-offs
between environmental media; the value of the water resources; and other relevant environmental,social, and economic
impacts of the proposed activity.
Description of the Mitigation Plan
If the applicant will mitigate the project’s permanent surface water impacts via an approved wetland bank AND the
mitigation is type-for-type ANDlocated in the same major watershed (https://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/watersheds)
the applicant does not need to complete this portion.
Using the project information provided above,describe how the proposed compensatory mitigation will replaceexisting
uses and maintain the current level of water quality at the proposed project site(e.g. wetland types, replacement ratio,
water monitoring data if available).
Describe how the compensatory mitigation will be maintainedandthe monitoring activities that will be conducted to
ensure the proposed mitigation is viable. Include a timeline for reporting progressandan intervention/remediationplan
to be implemented ifthe mitigation fails.
June 14, 2019
Amanda Bednar
Environmental Coordinator
16065 Orono Parkway
Elk River, MN 55330
RE: Lake Orono Restoration and Enhancement EAW
Dear Amanda Bednar,
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EAW) for the Lake Orono Restoration and Enhancement project. Regarding matters for which the DNR has
regulatory responsibility or other interests, we offer the following comments.
We understand that a Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS) license was used for the review and that a
concurrence request was submitted to the DNR but had not been received by the time of submittal of the EAW.
The DNR review letter is attached so that it can be included as part of the record, and referenced for greater
details.
The DNR requests that the project proposer prepare an avoidance plan for Blanding’s Turtles, a state-listed
threatened species. The plan must include a description of project activities, construction methods, and
measures that will be taken to avoid and minimize disturbance to this state-protected species. The avoidance
measures should include the following timing restriction: dewate between May 15 and
September 15. Other avoidance measures that may be employed are discussed in the attached NHIS review
letter and in the EAW. In addition, there may be opportunity to minimize risk of road mortality with strategic
fencing placement or other measures. Please see the attached letter and contact non-game specialist Erica
Hoaglund
(Erica.hoaglund@state.mn.us) for assistance.
On behalf of the DNR, thank you for consideration of these comments.
Sincerely,
Rebecca Horton
Region Environmental Assessment Ecologist
Attachments: DNR Natural Heritage Information System review letter
CC: Lisa Joyal (Endangered Species Review Coordinator) Erica Hoaglund (Non-game Specialist), James Bedell
(Area Hydrologist)
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Ecological and Water Resources
1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55404
Lake July 15, 2019Environmental Assessment Worksheet Restoration & EnhancementOrono
Overview Next StepsReview of Select ItemsEAW Process and TimelineProject Highlights/Summary
Why is the EAW required?acre or more of any public water or public waters wetland.section of one -change or diminish the course, current, or crossprojects that will –Wetlands and Public
Waters –Subpart 27 CATEGORIESMN Administrative Rules Ch. 4410.4300 MANDATORY EAW
LORE Improvements Summary 125,500 cubic yards of sediment (excavate in winter).depth for navigation, recreation, reduce curly leaf pondweed..), provide PhosImprove dissolved oxygen,
water clarity (TSS, study/measurements.Based on DNR comments and sediment depth habitat.Project will improve approx. 53 acres/6 locations of aquatic recreation and adversely affecting
the aquatic habitat.Since 1998, sediment has accumulated in the lake, restricting
LORE Improvements Summary
EAW Process/Timeline•RGU: Responsible Government Unit (City of Elk River)•EIS: Environmental Impact Statement•EAW: Environmental Assessment Worksheet•EQB: Environmental Quality Board•Relevant
Terms
EAW Process/Timeline
Important Aspects Forthcoming: Project Design Refinement and Permitting Excavation to occur during winter/frozen conditionsEngineers)US Clean Water Act Authorization (US Army Corps
of down timing, Aquatic Plant Management-DNR Public Waters Work Permit, Blanding’s Turtle, Lake Drawtraffic access (US Highway 10)MnDOTSHPO Phase 1A archaeological studyComments
were received during the comment period:
Findings of Fact and Conclusion approvals.City will be required to obtain all necessary permits and 4.City notifies EQB and agencies on decision.3.for Negative Declaration (NO EIS required).City
Council votes whether to approve the Record of Decision 2.significant environmental effects. An EIS is not required.on Need for EIS), the project does not have the potential for Based
on criteria established in MN Rule 4410.1700 (Decision 1.