The URL can be used to link to this page

6.1. SR 03-17-2003Item # 6.1. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Stephen Rohlf, Building and Zoning Administrator DATE: March 17, 2003 ~/~. SUBJECT: Environmental Assessment Worksheet for Schmidt Gravel Mine Included in your packet is a copy of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Schmidt Gravel Mine project. This was not a mandatory EAW, but rather was done at the discretion of the petitioner. The purpose of the EAW is to describe the project and gather information to identify any potential environmental effects. For this EAW, the City Council for the City of Elk River is the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) charged with determining from the information gathered through the EAW process, whether or not this project has significant potential to cause irreversible environmental effects. If the Council feels there is a significant potential to cause irreversible environmental effects, they shall order an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be prepared for the project. To make their decision the Council will consider the following information: the EAW itself, comments received on the EAW, and the responses to the comments received. The Planning Commission reviewed the pertinent information concerning the EAW and they are not recommending the preparation of an EIS. The Council shall order an Environmental Impact Statement be prepared, if they determine that the impacts that may reasonably be expected by the project have the potential for significant environmental effects. The Council shall consider the impacts of the project under the following criteria: · type, extent, and reversibility of the environmental effects; · cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects; · the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority; and · the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other environmental studies. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS The following are staff's responses to comments received on the EAW: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) - letter dated February 12, 2003 from Kathleen A. Wallace. Comments - No objection as long as Blanding's Turtle guidelines are adhered to and an enforceable reclamation plan is developed. Response - Staff concurs with the DNR's comments and has drafted appropriate language in the conditional use permit for this request that safe guards Blanding's Turtle and that ensures appropriate reclamation. RECOMMENDATION Staff feels that the EAW accurately describes the project and the potential environmental effects. Mitigation measures to reduce the environmental effects have been identified by the EAW and will be incorporated into the plans for the project. Staff and the Elk River Planning Commission are both recommending a negative declaration on the need for an EIS on the Schmidt Gravel Mine request. A resolution to this effect, which includes findings of fact for this decision, is attached. RESOLUTION 03- CITY COUNCIL CITY OF ELK RIVER RESOLUTION REGARDING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR THE SCHMIDT GRAVEL MINE PROJECT A resolution of the City Council of the City of Elk River regarding the environmental review process for the proposed Schmidt Mineral Excavation Project; setting forth the City Council's findings of fact regarding the need for an Environmental Impact Statement; and declaring that the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement is not necessary WHEREAS, Schmidt Gravel Mining is proposing to mine 14.81 acres of a 66.06 acres site, and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Rules, Part 4410.1000, Subparts 3.D a discretionary Environmental Assessment Worksheet was initiated by the petitioner (EAW) under Minnesota Environmental Policy Act (MEPA); and, WHEREAS, the City of Elk River, as the responsible governmental unit (RGU) under EQB Rules, prepared an EAW as required by EQB Rules; and, WHEREAS, notice of availability of the EAW was published in the EQB Monitor on January 20, 2003; a press release was given to the Elk River Star News on January 14, 2003; posted notice was given at the Elk River Public Library and Elk River City Hall on January 14, 2003; and copies of the EAW were supplied to all persons and agencies on the EQB official EAW distribution list; and, WHEREAS, comments have been received on the EAW from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, by letter dated February 12, 2003, from Kathleen A. Wallace and, WHEREAS, all substantive comments have been responded to appropriately by the City as RGU in the staff memorandum to the City Council, dated March 17, 2003, from Stephen Rohlf, Building and Environmental Administrator; and, WHEREAS, the environmental review process mandated by the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act and implemented through the EQB Rules has been followed and this resolution shall be the City's record of its compliance with the EQB Rules and decision in this matter; and, WHEREAS, the City, as RGU, shall order the preparation of an ElS if the Project has the potential for significant environmental effects; and, WHEREAS, in deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the City is to apply the criteria set forth in Section 4410.1700 subparts 6 & 7 of the EQB Rules. NOW, THEREFORE, BASED ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE EAW, THE COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE EAW, AND THE RESPONSES THERETO FROM CITY STAFF IN THEIR MEMORANDUM TO THE COUNCIL DATED MARCH 17, 2003, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ELK RIVER FINDS THE PROJECT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: A. The environmental effects of the Project are minimal. B. The project will be subject to ongoing regulatory authority of the City of Elk River and other state agencies. C. The project will not cause future development. D. Future development in the area of the Project will be subject to the requirements of the EQB Rules and will be subject to the ongoing regulatory authority of the City and other governmental agencies. The foregoing resolution was introduced by Council Member and duly seconded by Council Member The following voted in favor of the resolution: The following voted against the resolution: The following were absent: Whereupon the resolution is adopted. Passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Elk River this 17th day of March, 2003. ATTEST: Stephanie Klinzing, Mayor Sandra A. Peine, City Clerk ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET SCHMIDT GRAVEL MINE ELK RIVER, MINNESOTA Prepared for: ROGER SCHMIDT January 2003 Pre_pared by: Liesch Companies LIE.S ¢H · . Minneapolis, MN · Madison, WI · $cottsdale, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET SCHMIDT GRAVEL MINE ELK RIVER, MINNESOTA Prepared For: ROGER SCHMIDT 10107 105TM STREET NORTHWEST ANNANDALE, MINNESOTA 55302 Prepared By: LIESCH ASSOCIATES~ INC. 13400 15TM AVENUE NORTH PLYMOUTH, MN 55441 (763) 489-3100 JANUARY 10, 2003 PROJECT NUMBER: 64480.01 This report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision C. Lidaier, P.E.~ x ironmental Engineer 3 nathon J Blaha . /n~vironmental Geologist TABLE OF CONTENTS 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Page PROJECT TITLE: PROPOSER: RGU: REASON FOR EAW PREPARATION: PROJECT LOCATION: ..................................................................................................... 1 DESCRIPTION: ................................................................................................................. PROJECT MAGNITUDE DATA: ..................................................................................... 4 PERMITS AND APPROVALS REQUIRED: ................................................................... 4 LAND USE: ........................................................................................................................ 5 COVER TYPES: .............................................................. ................................................... FISH, WILDLIFE AND ECOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE RESOURCES: ....................... 6 PHYSICAL 12MPACTS ON WATER RESOURCES: ....................................................... 8 WATER USE: WATER-RELATED LAND USE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT: .................................... 9 WATER SURFACE USE: .................................................................................................. 9 EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION: ............................................................................... 9 WATER QUALITY: SURFACE WATER RUNOFF: .................................................... 10 WATER QUALITY: WASTEWATERS: ........................................................................ 11 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS AND SOIL CONDITIONS: ....................................................11 SOLID WASTES, HAZARDOUS WASTES, STORAGE TANKS: .............................. 15 TRAFFIC: VEHICLE-RELATED AIR EMISSIONS: ....................................................................... 17 STATIONARY SOURCE AIR EMISSIONS: ................................................................. 17 ODORS, NOISE AND DUST: ......................................................................................... 18 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. NEARBY RESOURCES: ................................................................................................. 19 VISUAL IMPACTS: ........................................................................................................ 20 COMPATIBILITY WITH PLANS AND LAND USE REGULATIONS: ...................... 20 IMPACT ON INFRASTRUCT~ AND PUBLIC SERVICES: .................................. 20 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS: ............................................................................................. 21 OTHER POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: ............................................... 21 SUMMARY OF ISSUES: ................................................................................................ 22 RGU CERTIFICATION: .............................................................................................................. 24 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D APPENDICES Figure 1 - City Map Figure 2 - Site Location Map Figure 3 - Site Plan Figure 4 - Proposed Final Contours Figure 5 - Properties Zoned for Mineral Excavation Figure 6- National Wetlands Inventory Map Figure 7 - DNR Protected Waters Map Figure 8 - Sherbume County Soil Survey Map Figure 9 - NRCS Prime and Statewide Important Soils Map Aerial Photographs Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Response Minnesota Historical Society SHPO Response Revised format 2/99 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the City of Elk River, the Responsible Government Unit (RGU) during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS. 1. Project Title: Schmidt Gravel Mine 2. Proposer: Roger Schmidt 3. Contact person: Roger Schmidt Title: Owner/Developer Address: 10107 105th Street NW . City, State, Zip: Annandale, MN 55302 Phone: 320-274-3042 Fax: 320-274-8759 E-mail: clearh2o~Ikdllink.net RGU: City of Elk River Contact Person: Stephen Rohlf Title: Building and Zoning Coordinator Address: 13065 Orono Parkway City, State, Zip: Elk River, MN 55330 Phone: 763-441-4904 Fax: 763-441-7425 E-mail: srohlf~ci.elk-river.mn.us Reason for EAW Preparation: (check one) EIS scoping Mandatory EAW ~ ~Proposer volunteered Citizen petition X RGU discretion Minnesota Rule 4410.1000, Subpart 3. B. Subpart. 3. Discretionary EAWs. An EAW shall be prepared: B. when a project is not exempt under part 4410.4600 and when a governmental unit with approval authority over a proposed project determines pursuant to the petition process set forth in part 44t0.1100 that, because of the nature or location of a proposed project, the project may have the potential for significant environmental effects. If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number and subpart name Project Location: County: Sherbume County City/Township: City of Elk River NW ¼ of the NE ¼, Section 10 and the North V2 of the NE ¼ of the NE ¼, Section 10 and the North 200 feet of the South ½ of the NE ¼ of the NE ¼, Section 10, T 33 North, R 26 W · Jan-2003 · LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Page I · Attach each of the following to the EAW: (figures are provided in Attachment A) Figure 1: City Map (showing the general location of the project) Figure 2: Figure 3: Figure 4: Figure 5: Figure 6: Figure 7: Figure 8: Figure 9: United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map (indicating project boundaries) Site Map (showing significant project and natural features) Proposed Final Contours Map Properties Zoned for Mineral Excavation National Wetlands Inventory Map DNR Protected Waters Map Sherburne County Soil Survey Map National Resource Conservation Service Prime and Statewide Important Soils Map ao Description: Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor. Schmidt Gravel Mining proposes to operate a private gravel mining operation, for approximately ten years. A portable asphalt plant will also be included in the operation. Approximately 500,000 cubic yards of material will be mined from approximately 14.81 acres of the 66.06 acre site. The gravel mined will be processed on Site or hauled to a local asphalt facility located approximately ¼-mile south of the Site. At the conclusion of mining, the site will be returned to agr/cultural use or developed as residential property. Give a complete description of the proposed project, and related new construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes. Include modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. Schrnidt Gravel Mining (Schmidt) will propose through the submittal of a conditional use permit application to the City of Elk River (the City) to mine gravel and operate a portable asphalt plant on an approximate 66.06 acre site in the northern portion of Elk River (the Site). The location of the Site is illustrated on Figures 1 and 2 in Attachment A. The proposed gravel mining location is situated on two private properties owned by Schmidt. The aerial extent of the mining is approximately 14.81 acres and the proposed duration of the mining is 10 years. The gravel mining operation will include mining, processing, stockpiling, and hauling of gravel to construction and road project sites. A portable crusher will be utilized on site 'Jan-2003- LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Page 2 · Ce periodically. The proposed operation does not include gravel washing. Operation of the portable asphalt plant will include drying and heating of aggregate and mixing with asphalt cement coating to produce asphalt. Mining will be conducted in phases (see Figure 3 in Attachment A). As a phase is opened topsoil will be stripped from the desig-nated area and stockpiled on-site for later use in site restoration. The gravel mined will be processed on Site or hauled to a local asphalt facility located approximately ~A-mile south of the Site. Truck traffic generated by the gravel mine will be limited to an approximate 1,000 foot stretch between 219th Avenue and 217th Avenue on Trunk Highway 169. Auxiliary northbound and southbound shoulder lanes will be constructed according to Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) specifications. The mining area at its complete aerial extent will be approximately 14.81 acres. The site is unique nature, in that all of the gravel to be mined is located in existing hills. These existing hills will be essentially cut down therefore, eliminating the creation of any steep slopes. Based on the geology of the Elk River Gravel Mining District (Mining District) the groundwater elevation is the area of the Site is approximately 950 feet. The proposed maximum depth of mining will not extend below an elevation of 955 feet, or five feet above the water table. Upon phased completion of gravel mining activities the stockpiled soils and topsoil will be distributed and graded across the mined area. The average restoration grade will be approximately 950-960 feet. Figure 4 in Attachment A shows the proposed final contours of the Site. Backfilling will be with materials that are suitable for building and backfill. Stockpiled topsoil will be placed on graded and mined surfaces intermittently as the phased mining progresses. Topsoil will be seeded and mulched or stockpiled in a manner to prevent erosion. Upon completion of all mining the Site is proposed to be returned to agricultural use or potentially used for residential development if market conditions are favorable. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. The project purpose is to obtain natural aggregate material for use in the construction industry. Gravel material mined will be used for the production of asphalt, which will be used for building new roads and improving existing roads in the surrounding area. Are future stages of this development including development on any outlots planned or likely to happen? __Yes _~X No If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for environmental review. eo Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? __Yes X No If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and an), past environmental review. LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 - · Page 7. Project Magnitude Data: o Total project acreage: Approximately 14.81 acres of mining on a 66.06 acre parcel Number of residential units: none Commercial, industrial or institutional building area: none Indicate areas of specific uses (in square feet): Office: none Retail: none Warehouse: none Light industrial: none Other commercial (specify): none Manufacturing: none Other industrial: none Institutional: none Agricultural: none Building height (If over 2 stor/es, compare to heights of nearby buildings): not applicable Permits and Approvals Required: List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure. Unit of government City of Elk River Type of application Status Rezoning for Mineral Pending Excavation City of Elk River Conditional Use Permit Pending City of Elk River Mineral Excavation License Pending City of Elk River Wetland Conservation Act Pending MN Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) MPCA Access Approvals NPDES/SDS Permit For Storm Water Discharge Air Quality Permit Required for access to major arterial Road Required for gravel mining operations Required for gravel mining operations and asphalt plant emissions LIESCH ASSOCiATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · · Page 4 - 9. Land Use: Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss project compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses. Indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past site uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks, or proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. Land use associated with the Site was determined from observing current conditions and fi-om review of historic aerial photographs for the years 1939, 1953, and 1991 as obtained from Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR); USGS 7.5-Minute Series topographic maps for Elk River (1961, 1961; photorevised 1980, and 1961 revised 1993); and the City of Elk River Zoning Map (January 2002). In the 1939 aerial photograph, the majority of the Site appears to be open grassland and/or cropland. Four areas of possible wetlands appear across the Site. A farmstead is located adjacent to the south of the eastern half of the Site and includes a small cluster of four buildings. A wooded area is located to the northwest of the farmstead. The remaining surrounding property land use is primarily open agricultural or wooded land. The 1953 aerial photograph depicts little change from the 1939 aerial photograph. One additional potential wetland area appears on the western portion of the Site. An additional wooded area appears on the southern portion of the Site, southwest of the farmstead. The remaining portions of the Site are unchanged from the 1939 aerial photograph. The 1991 aerial photograph appears similar to the 1953 aerial photograph. The areas of potential wetlands appear more defined across the western portion of the Site. Two additional areas wetlands areas appear on the eastern portion of the Site. The remaining portions of the Site are unchanged from the 1953 aerial photograph. Currently, land use at the Site is as it appears in the 1991 aerial photograph, with the exception that none of the Site croptand. All open areas of the Site are currently grassland. Copies of the aerial photographs provided by EDR are included as Attachment B. Review of the topographic maps confirm the same general land uses as observed from review of the aerial photographs including wooded and open areas, depressions for potential wetland areas, and the location of the farmstead. According to the 2002 Elk River zoning Map, the Site is zoned for agricultural conservation. Adjacent properties to the east and west are also zoned for agricultural conservation. Properties adjacent to the north and south are zoned for both mineral excavation and agricultural conservation. Active ~avel mines are operating adjacent to the north and south and across Trunk Highway 169 to the west. Figure 5 in Attachment A shows the properties zoned for mineral excavation in the surrounding area. The information reviewed does not indicate environmental hazards due to past land use. LIESCH ASSOCiATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · · Page 5 · 10. Cover Types: Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development: 11. Before After Types 1-8 wetlands 11.43 11.43 Wooded/forest 5.02 5.02 Brush/Grassland 49.61 49.61 Cropland 0 0 Lawn/landscaping 0 0 Impervious surfaces 0 0 Other (describe) 0 0 TOTAL 66.06 66.06 If before and after totals are not equal, explain why: The estimated acreage of cover types at the Site is based on the percentage of various cover types as determined from review of the aerial photographs. At this time it is estimated that all mining activities will occur in brush/grassland areas. These areas will be restored to their original condition upon completion of the mining activities. Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources: Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and describe how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid impacts. Fish and wildlife resources on and near the Site include the wetland areas located throughout the Site. No alteration of the wetlands is anticipated at this time. Prior to starting work, all wetlands will be delineated and marked as required. There is little tree cover in the areas of the proposed mining, therefore the removal of trees will be minimal. No mining is proposed in the wooded areas at this time. Efforts to minimize impact from the proposed operation will include adherence to a proposed grading plan to control runoff and completion of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Upon completion of the mining, the Site will be restored to a natural condition. Additionally, the adjacent properties to the north and south; and the properties across Tnmk Highway LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · · Page 6 - 169 to the west, are currently operating as mines, thus the potential for affecting any surrounding sensitive resources is minimal. Are any state-listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie habitat, colonial waterbird nesting colonies or regionally rare plant communities on or near the site? XYes m No If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources has been conducted and describe the results. If the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research program has been contacted give the correspondence reference number: (NHNRP Contract # ERDB 20030175) The Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program of the DNR was contacted to determine if there were any rare plant or animal species or significant natural features within an approximate one-mile radius of the Site. The database represents the most complete source of data on rare and significant natural features and species. The information in the database is generated from an ongoing county-by-county survey of such occurrences. A survey for Sherburne County has been completed. The DNR response is provided as Attachment C. The DNR information identifies three known occurrences of rare species or natural features for the area searched. The first is a rare feature occurrence noted as the Oak Woodland-Bmshland (Central #4). According to the DNR, this feature is located approximately 6,000 feet northwest of the Site and is not anticipated to be affected by the project at the Site. The two remaining occurrences are rare species identified as Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle). Two occurrences of the Blanding's Turtle have been documented in area of the Site. The first occurrence was in 1996 and was located south of the Site. The second occurrence was in June 2002, east of the Site. According to the DNR, Blanding's Turtles spend much of their time in shallow wetlands and nest in open, sandy uplands up to one mile from wetlands. Nesting occurs in June and eggs hatch in September. The young turtles then enter deep wetlands where they spend the winter in soft sediments. According to the DNR no occurrences of the Blanding's Turtle have been documented on the Site. A site survey for Blanding's Turtles has not been conducted. Describe measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. As recommended by the DNR, flyers with an illustration of the Blanding's Turtle will be distributed to all site workers. If observed, any turtles in imminent danger will be moved by hand out of harms way to a safe location. Any turtles observed that are not in danger will be left undisturbed. All construction areas will be surrounded by silt fencing to keep turtles from entering construction areas. The silt fencing will be removed after the area is re-vegetated. Wetlands will not be dredged or filled and all wetlands will be protected from pollution sources. Graded areas will be re-vegetated with standard MN DOT seed mixtures and the terrain will be left with as much natural contour as possible upon · Jan-2003 · LIESCIq ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Page 7 · 12. 13. completion of the project. No permanent roads or utilities will be installed at the Site. Attachment C contains the handout to be distributed to Site workers. Physical Impacts on Water Resources: Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration -- dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, and impoundment -- of any surface waters such as a lake, pond, wetland, stream or drainage ditch? __Yes X No If yes, identify water resource affected and give the DNR Protected Waters Inventory number(s) if the water resources affected are on the PWI: Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. No DNR Protected Waters are located in the area of the Site. However, seven separate wetlands are identified on the 1991 National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) map at the Site. It is not anticipated that any of these wetland areas will be altered or hydrologically affected by the proposed mining. As indicated in Item 11 (a), a SWPPP will be prepared to manage storm water run off at the Site. The SWPPP will detail the preventative measures and best management practices that will minimize potential impacts to the wetlands and other off Site water resources. A copy of the NWI Map is included as Figure 6 in Attachment A. A copy of the DNR Protected Waters Map is attached at Figure 7 in Attachment A. On site surface water runoff from precipitation is to be controlled by desi=o-nated grading plans and installation of silt fences in areas of the Site to be graded. Water Use: Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water wells, connection to or changes in any public water supply or appropriation of any ground or surface water (including dewatering)?__Yes X No If yes, as applicable, give location and purpose of any new wells; public supply affected, changes to be made, and water quantities to be used; the source, duration, quantity and purpose of any appropriations; and unique well numbers and DNR appropriation permit numbers, if known. Identify any existing and new wells on the site map. If there are no wells known on site, explain methodology used to determine. The project will not involve the installation of any water wells, changes to public water supply or the appropriation of any groundwater or surface water. No wells are located on Site. This was determined through visual observations and through a search of the County Well Index (CWI). One well currently exists at the house on the farmstead located southeast of the Site. The · Jan-2003 - LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Page 8 · 14. 15. 16. well is located approximately 500 feet from the boundary of the mining area. It is not anticipated that the well will be affected by the mining operation, as no new wells are planned and the mining is not expected to disturb the underlying aquifer. All mining will occur at least five feet above the water table. Water-Related Land Use Management District: Does any part of the project involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100- year flood plain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? Yes X No If yes, identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land use restrictions. Water Surface Use: Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? BYes ~X No If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other uses. Erosion and Sedimentation: Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: Approximately 14.81 acres; 500~000 cubic yards. Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after project construction. The mining operation will not involve the creation of any steep slopes. The nature of the Site is unique, in that the gravel resources to be mined are located only in long narrow ridges (eskers). It is anticipated that these ridges will be excavated and removed, leaving a relatively flat landscape behind. Once removed, only minimal excavation will occur below the ridges. Based on the topographic contours of the Site, surface water runoff from the eastern portion of the Site will flow to the east. Surface water runoff from the western portion of the Site will remain on site and flow into the low areas or wetlands. Surface water runoff and erosion controls are proposed to control surface water discharge off site. The proposed controls will include installation of silt fence/hay bales, rip-rap placement in drainageways, and phased topsoil replacement and seeding of completed phases. The silt fence/hay bales and rip-rap will be placed in areas deemed necessary during mining operations. Since most of the Site will remain undisturbed during the mining operations, only minimal, if any, off site surface water run off is anticipated. LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · · Page 9 · 17. Water Quality: Surface Water Runoff Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any storm water pollution prevention plans. Surface water runoff and proposed controls have been discussed in the preceding item. As noted in Items 9 and 10, the majority of the Site is grassland and will remain unaltered. Currently, no surface water runoff or sedimentation controls are employed at the Site. be The proposed mining operation will change the existing topography and may increase the quantity ofrunoffthrough the Site to some extent. However, it is anticipated that most of the run off will flow into topographic depressions or wetlands on the Site and eventually infiltrate to the shallow groundwater aquifer. The engineered erosion and sedimentation controls identified in Item 16 will be based on runoff from the mining area. Preparation of a SWPPP will be required to manage storm water run off. Specifically, the SWPPP will describe site conditions and operations, including outdoor storage of materials and a description of spill response procedures. If recycled asphalt is used and stored at the Site, drainage from the piles will be prevented from entering any surface waters. If applicable, monitoring of surface water quality may also be proposed or required. Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the SWPPP will be implemented as part of routine operations at the Site. The Site will be returned to its natural state upon completion of the mining and pre- development runoff rates leaving the Site will be maintained upon completion of the project. In addition, all current hydrology of the on Site wetlands will be maintained. Any additional water brought on Site via water trucks to control dust on roads will not be over-applied to create an increase to sediment loads or runoffrates. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters. Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters. Based on a review of the USGS topographic map, surface water on the western portion of the Site is expected to flow into the topographic depressions and wetlands. The western portion of the Site may eventually drain into wetlands approximately 2,000 feet to the north and eventually to an intermittent stream that drains into Trott Brook. Runoff on the eastern portion of the Site will flow into a wetland located on the eastern boundary of the Site and may eventually drain into Trott Brook located approximately 3,400 feet east of the Site. Trott Brook flows into Eagle Lake located approximately 1.5 miles southeast of the Site and eventually to the Rum River. These drainage conditions and distances and the proposed Site erosion and sedimentation and control measures suggest little to no impact on receiving water bodies. LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists. Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · - Page 10 · 18. Water Quality: Wastewaters a. Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. Wastewater generated by the operation of the proposed sand and gravel mine will include sanitary waste from workers or employees of independent trucking companies. Portable self-contained sanitary facilities will be provided and maintained weekly by an independent company during the annual operating months. During non-operating months the portable facilities will be removed. No wastewater will be discharged as a result of the mining operations. No other wastewater will be generated at the Site. DJ Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters, including major downstream water bodies, and estimate the discharge impact on the quality of receiving waters. If the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of site conditions for such systems. Not applicable Co If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility, identify the facility, describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility's ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes, identifying any improvements necessary. Not applicable do If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure, describe disposal technique and location and discuss capacity to handle the volume and composition of manure. Identify any improvements necessary. Describe any required setbacks for land disposal systems. Not applicable 19. Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions ao Approximate depth (in feet) to groundwater: (approximate water elevation 950) Existing conditions: <10 minimum; 50+ average Operating Conditions: <10 minimum; 25 average (base of mining elevation 975) Restored Conditions: <10 minimum: 20 average (average restored elevation 970) Depth to bedrock: (top of bedrock elevation approximately 825) Existing conditions: 125 minimum; 150 average Operating Conditions: 125 minimum; 150 average (base of mining elevation 950) Restored Conditions: 125 minimum: 145 average (average restored elevation 970) LI£SCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists °Jan-2003 · · Page 11 · Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to groundwater and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. Sinkholes or other karst conditions, or shallow limestone formations do not exist in the area of the Site. The general geologic and hydrogeologic conditions in the vicinity of the Site were described in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) prepared for the Elk River Gravel Mining District, Elk River, Minnesota, prepared by Maier Stewart and Associates, Inc (MSA), dated May 1994 (the 1994 EIS). The following discussion is a summary of the geology and hydrogeology of the Elk River Gravel Mining District, repeated from the 1994 EIS. "The mining district is situated on the northwestern edge of a major regional structural feature termed the Twin Cities Basin. The general geology of the mining district, and vicinity consists of a sequence of glacio-fluvial deposits overlying an erosional surface of Paleozoic sedimentary bedrock units. Bedrock formations in the area dip southeastward, towards the center of the basin." "The surficial deposits and topography result from at least two major glacial events. The glacial depositional event responsible for many of the larger landforms in the region, occurred as a result of advance of the St. Croix phase of the Superior Lobe (Helgeson, Ericson and Lindholm, 1975). This glacial advance occurred from the northeast and deposited a sandy till that is characteristically red in color. The terminal moraine, formed by stagnation of the St. Croix lobe, trends northwest-southeast through the region and forms the core of many of the regions larger geomorphic features. The Grantsburg Sublobe of the Des Moines Lobe subsequently advanced through the region from the northwest and deposited a characteristic calcareous grey till with shale fragments. The Grantsburg till was the last major glacial depositional event in the region. Typically, the St. Croix glacial features are reworked with, and overlain by, a relatively thin veneer of Des Moines Lobe outwash sands and till. The Anoka sand plain is situated east of the mining district and was formed during wastage of the Grantsburg Sublobe. It was during this period of wastage that an esker complex was formed. This esker complex provides the thick sand and gravel deposits of the mining district (Wright, 1972)." "In the mining district three major classifications of glacial sediments are present, till, outwash and ice contact deposits, with the later being most prevalent. Each of these deposits has a unique although interrelated depositional history. The till units typically consist of var/able unstratified material ranging in size from silts and clays to large cobbles. Typically, till units are of low permeability and as such impede groundwater flow. The tills in the region consist of primarily silts and clays with a lesser sand and gravel fraction. Smaller lenses of sand and gravel are often present within the tills and evidence small scale fluvial activity during deposition. Glacial outwash deposits, such as those of the Anoka sand plain are relatively permeable consisting of stratified fine sands to gavels deposited by glacial meltwaters at the front of a retreating glacier. Ice contact deposits often result in LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · - Page 12 · specific geomorphic features such as the gravel rich esker complex which comprises the surficial geology of the gravel mining district. Eskers or more generally, ice contact deposits are the result of deposition by subglacial fluvial processes such as meltwater streams and rivers. These deposits are essentially reworked till fi.om which the fines were removed by fluvial activity. The lack of fines provides for the relatively high permeability of these deposits." "An alternating sequence of till and glacio-fluvial deposits are present beneath the esker deposit. The uppermost unit beneath the esker appears to be a relatively continuous till unit that is variable in thickness. A sand and gravel unit is generally present below the till. Other sand and gravel units are interbedded within or between successively deeper till units. These sand and gravel units are important water supplies for local residential use. A majority of the residential developments west of the mining district utilize the first sand and gravel unit present below the esker deposit." "Beneath the glacial deposits the first bedrock encountered in the immediate vicinity of the mining district is the Eau Claire formation. This formation consists of alternating sandstone and shale, and is generally recognized as a regional confining layer. Beneath the Eau Claire formation are the Mount Simon and Hinckley formations. These two formations are generally described as fine to coarse grained quartzose sandstones which combine to form the Mt. Simon-Hinckley Aquifer. The Mt. Simon-Hinckley is an important water supply locally and throughout the Twin City Basin, as well. According to USGS Hydrologic Atlases, the basement rock beneath the Mt. Simon-Hinckley consist of undifferentiated Pre- Cambrian igneous and metamorphic rocks including quartz, diorite, granodiorite and quartz m, onzonite." "The bedrock elevation beneath the mining district and over much of the area to the west and south appears to be at an elevation of 800 to 850 feet National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD). Slightly east of the mining district and extending along an approximate north- south trend is a reported major bedrock valley incised over 100 feet deeper than the bedrock elevation beneath the mining district. No major bedrock structures are documented west of the district and the bedrock elevation averages 800 feet NGVD." "The uppermost aquifer within the mining district is a water table aquifer present within the gravel deposits. Several glacial aquifer sequences are present beneath the water table aquifer and do not appear to be in complete hydraulic connection with the water table aquifer. These confined aquifer units are important water supplies to residential housing developments around the perimeter of the mining district. The glacial aquifer systems are separated from deeper bedrock aquifer units by the confining properties of the Eau Claire formation and till units overlying the Eau Claire Formation. The Eau Claire formation overlies the Mount Simon-Hinckley aquifer which is the lowermost aquifer in the vicinity of the mining district. Bedrock aquifers beneath the Eau Claire formation may be under artisan pressure where confined by the Eau Claire formation and/or till units." "Shallow groundwater in the mining district is present as an unconfined water table aquifer. Water table conditions are manifested within the esker complex at elevations LmSCH ASSOCI^TES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · · Page 13 · ran~ng from 950 in the northern part of the district to 925 at the southern margin. The thickness of unsaturated sand and gravel ranges between 40 and 70 feet. The water table aquifer is approximately 30 feet thick throughout the mining district." "Various other sand and gravel units are present beneath the water table aquifer. The first confined glacial aquifer beneath the water table aquifer occurs at a general elevation of 860 NGVD with a variable thickness of between 20 and 80 feet. This unit is utilized as the primary water supply for residential developments west of the district. Other deeper glacial aquifers are also present but are limited in thickness. The Mt. Simon-Hinckley formations combine to form one confined aquifer and together are generally 150 feet thick. There are no significant aquifer units beneath the Mt. Simon-Hinckley aquifer." "The esker complex contains numerous depressions both natural and man-made that influence the shallow groundwater flow system. The sand and gravel surficial material is conducive to the rapid infiltration of precipitation and surface water depression storage into the water table. Accordingly, standing water in these areas frequently represents a surface expression of the water table. The flow patterns of the water table aquifer are primarily controlled by recharge and discharge, surface topography and the relative · permeability of the shallow geologic materials in the area. Shallow groundwater discharge likely occurs at springs near the base of slopes or into topographically low streams or wetlands." Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards. General measures for minimizing risk to groundwater are noted below. Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications, if known. Discuss soil granularity and potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination. The following is a listing of the Site soils as identified in the Soil Survey of Sherburne County, Minnesota, dated May 1998 (Soil Survey). A map depicting the numbered units is included as Figure 8 in Appendix A. 158B Zimmerman fine sand 3 to 6% slopes 158E Zimmerman fine sand 12 to 25% slopes 162 Lino loamy fine sand 0 to 2% slopes 540 Seelyeville muck 0 to 1% slopes 730B Sanburn fine sandy loam 2 to 6% slopes 1109 Isanti loamy fine sand 0 to 2% slopes 1253B Stonelake-Sanburn Complex 1 to 6% slopes 1253C Stonelake-Sanburn Complex 6 to 15% slopes 1253E Stonelake-Sanbum Complex 15 to 40% slopes 1254 Rice Lake fine sandy loam 0 to 3% slopes 1260E Stonelake-Nebish Complex 12 to 25% slopes LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 - · Page 14 · 20. The majority of the Site is covered by the Stonelake-Sanburn Complex, the Zimmerman fine sand, and the Seelyeville muck. The Stonelake-Sanburn Complex consists primarily of gravelly sand with moderately rapid to very rapid permeability. This is the primary unit where mining will occur. The Zimmerman fine sand consists of fine sand with rapid permeability. The Seelyeville muck is primarily decomposed organic material with moderately rapid permeability. The permeability of the granular sand and gravel deposits is greater than that of silty or clayey soils. Potential vertical migration of impacts from spills or releases is greater for soils with higher permeability. Mitigative measures to prevent and/or control contaminant releases include use of best management practices and compliance with local, state and federal regulations. Such regulations include NPDES permits and development of a SWPPP. Such plans provide for control and spill response associated with releases. General practices should include proper use and routine maintenance of equipment, performance of maintenance activities in designated areas or on designated surfaces with appropriate spill containment measures at hand and, secondary containment of as appropriate. Controlled access to excavation and operating areas should also be maintained to provide against such things as vandalism or illegal dumping. Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, Storage Tanks: Describe types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during construction and operation. Identify method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste, indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how the project will be modified for recycling. If hazardous waste is generated, indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments. Only minimal amounts of waste will be generated by the proposed project. Waste will include that generated from the small number of on-site workers and from intermittent maintenance of on-site equipment. Any maintenance of on-site equipment will be completed by mobile equipment maintenance trucks which will provide collection and contaimnent of fluids and lubricants. Used oils and fluids that are collected and contained with the maintenance truck will be removed from the site the day that they are exchanged out of the machinery and properly recycled off-site. As used oil is considered a non- hazardous waste, the generation of hazardous wastes at the Site is not anticipated. · Jan-2003 · LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers - Environmental Scientists · Page 15 · Co Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating groundwater. If the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a regulated waste, discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or eliminate the waste, discharge or emission. Fuel and lubricants (oil, grease, hydraulic fluid) will be used at the Site for machinery fueling and maintenance. Portable generators for the asphalt plant will be equipped with fuel tanks. In addition, portable temporary fuel tanks will be used for the asphalt plant operation. Any other oils, greases, or hydraulic fluid used at the Site will be delivered to the site intermittently for on-site equipment via a mobile maintenance truck. Empty containers and/or spent fluids will be removed from the site at the completion of maintenance by the mobile maintenance truck and will be properly recycled off-site. Ail on-Site storage tanks will be double-walled or equipped with secondary containment features. Additionzlly, all tanks will comply with MPCA aboveground storage tank rules. All oil handling personnel will be properly trained in spill prevention and response. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe any emergency response containment plans. At this time, there will be no permanent above or below ~ound storage tanks located at the Site. Temporary or portable above~ound tanks will be used store fuels. If storage will exceed 1,320 gallons, a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan meeting the requirements of 40 CFR Part 112, will be prepared and implemented for the Site. 21. Traffic: Parking spaces added: None Existing spaces (if project involves expansion): None Estimated total average daily traffic generated: 40 trucks per day Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and time of occurrence: Unknown Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. If the project is within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, discuss its impact on the regional transportation system. Average annual daily traffic (AADT) and heavy commercial average annual daily traffic (HCAADT) volumes were reviewed for Trunk Highway 169 for the year 2000. In the area of the Site, AADT volumes are 27,300 and HCAADT volumes are 1,140. The estimated average of 40 truck per day is low compared to the current traffic volumes on Trunk Highway 169. Therefore, the proposed mining operation is not anticipated to have an adverse impact on traffic in the surrounding area. LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · - Page 16 - 22. 23. Additionally, potential traffic issues on Trunk Highway 169 will addressed by the MnDOT requirements of constructing auxiliary northbound and southbound lanes located on the shoulders of Trunk Highway 169 between 217th Avenue and 219th Avenue. All drivers will be instructed to travel in the auxiliary lanes only. Truck traffic generated by the gravel mine will also be limited to the 1,000 foot stretch between 219th Avenue and 217th Avenue as the drivers travel from the gravel mine to a local asphalt plant and back. Vehicle-Related Air Emissions: Estimate the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. Note: If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EA W Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed. As discussed in Item 21 above, the proposed project is not anticipated to cause traffic congestion on nearby roadways. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to significantly decrease air quality in the area. Stationary Source Air Emissions: Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such as boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air pollutants (consult EA W Guidelines for a listing) and any greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) and ozone-depleting chemicals (chloro-fluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control devices. Describe the impacts on air quality. Air emissions associated with the proposed gravel mining operation are associated with fugitive dust generated from excavation and conveying of gravel. Air emissions associated with the portable asphalt plant include fugitive emissions from material handling, emissions from generators and storage tanks, and process emissions. Fugitive particulate matter (PM) emissions will be generated from transporting the aggregate from storage piles to the feed unit hoppers and from the hoppers to the dryer. Crushing operations may also result in fugitive PM emissions. Diesel generators may be used to provide electricity. Emissions from generators correlate to fuel usage and would include oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and carbon monoxide (CO). Portable storage tanks may be used to store fuel oils, heated liquid asphalts, and/or asphalt cement and may be a source of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions. The most si~ificant source of emissions from the portable asphalt plant will be the dryer. Combustion emissions will include carbon dioxide (CO2), water, NO×, oxides of sulfur (SOx) (if sulfur is present in the fuel), CO, and VOCs, including small quantities of benzene, toluene, and xylenes (hazardous air pollutants). In addition to combustion emissions, dryer emissions include · Jan-2003 · LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists o Engineers - Environmental Scientists · Page 17 - water and PM from the aggregate. Baghouses will be utilized on the asphalt plant to control fugitive particulate emissions. Baghouses are designed to filter fine particles through the use of fabric. Particles will be caught on the surface of the bags, leaving clean flue gas to pass through. Bags will be cleaned periodically as dust layers build up to minimize pressure drop. Captured dust from these devices will be returned to the production process. MPCA Air Quality Permits are required for sand and gravel mining operations and asphalt plants depending on the size of the operation and the "potential to emit." The Conditional Use Permit documents will indicate the need for air quality permits. Potential to emit calculations will be performed and the proper permits will be obtained. 24. Odors, Noise and Dust: Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during operation? X Yes No -If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify locations of nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss potential impacts on human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may be discussed at Item 23 instead of here.) Odors, noise and dust will be generated when mining and crushing activities are being conducted. Crushing operations will only be conducted using a portable crusher a few times per year. Aecording to information in the 1994 EIS, noise levels in the Mining District have not been shown to exceed MPCA noise standards. Standard mining equipment and portable asphalt producing equipment will be used for the mining operation which will have decibel (dBA) levels that are similar to those measured for the 1994 EIS. Therefore, noise levels should be within allowable standards for the project. Any nuisance noises will be minimized by limiting hours of operation. Selected placement of gravel stockpiles can also be used to control noise. On-Site generators may be housed in trailers or other temPorary structures to minimize noise, if necessary. Additional mitigative measures for noise will also include proper equipment maintenance and muffling. Mining operations be conducted between the hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM as required by the City of Elk River. The specific hours of operation will be determined at part of the Conditional Use Permit. Dust generated during mining operations will be limited to the active mining area and haul roads. Water will be delivered to the Site via a water truck and applied primarily to haul roads, but also to any exposed soil/topsoil stockpiles and areas where mining has been completed as is necessary. Mitigative measures to minimize fugitive dust from these areas may include of stockpiling soils in a maturer to prevent erosion and phased restoration of completed areas. Additionally, paving 100 feet of the approach to Trunk · Jan-2003 · LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers - Environmental Scientists · Page 18. 25. Highway 169 may be considered to reduce dust. As discussed under Item 23 above, fugitive dust generated from the asphalt plant operations will be addressed through the use of baghouses. The proposed asphalt plant is the primary source of odor for the project. Odors will be controlled and minimized by engineering and designing the appropriate stack height for the operation. The use of recycled asphalt in the plant operation will also be limited, thus reducing some of the nuisance odors. Hours of plant operation will be adjusted as needed based on weather conditions and/or periods of inversion. Based on the adjoining properties to the north and south (gravel mines) there are no sensitive receptors in the area. The farmstead located southeast of site is currently owned by Roger Schmidt, the Proposer of this project. Nearby Resources: Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site? Archaeological, historical or architectural resources? Yes X No Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? X Yes Designated parks, recreation areas or trails? Yes X No Scenic views and vistas? Yes X No Other unique resources? Yes XNo No If yes, describe the resource and identify any project-related impacts on the resource. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) for Sherburne County was contacted to determine if any prime or unique farmlands or lands within an agricultural preserve were located on the Site. According to Edward Musielewicz, District Conservationalist, 2.4 acres of statewide important soils and 3.9 acres of prime soils are located on the Site. A map showing the areas of these soils is included as Figure 9 in Attachment A. The soil identified as important is the Sanbum fine sandy loam, located in the extreme northeast comer of the Site. The soil identified as prime is the Rice Lake fine sandy loam, located in the north central portion of the Site. Neither of these soil units include the desirable gravel quantities and thus are not expected to be mined. Special consideration will be given to these areas as not to disturb the topsoil or unnecessarily excavate these areas. If it is determined that portions of these areas will be disturbed, the topsoil will be stripped, stockpiled and replaced and restored to farmland upon completion of mining activities. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) of the Minnesota Historical Society was requested to review their records for information regarding any historic properties or archaeological sites that may be present near the Site. The response is provided in Attachment D and indicates there were no inventoried historic properties or archaeological sites found for the search area. However, if any archeological artifacts are discovered during mining activities, operations will be stopped and the City will be LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers * Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · · Page 19 · 26. 27. 28. notified. Appropriate investigation of any discovered archeological sites would be required. Visual Impacts: Will the project create adverse visual impacts during construction or operation? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks? Yes X No If yes, explain. Visual impacts will be minimized by hours of operation (daylight hours). A portion of the mining area will be screened from adjacent highway to the west by trees and topogaphy. No intense lighting will be used at the Site. Compatibility with Plans and Land Use Regulations: Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state or federal agency? X Yes __No. If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will be resolved. If no, explain. The Site is currently zoned for agricultural conservation. According to the City of Elk River Zoning Map (January 2002) the properties adjacent to the north and south of the Site and across Trunk Highway 169 to the west of the Site are zoned for agricultural conservation with mineral excavation. Active mines are operating in each of these areas, which are included in the Mining District. The property adjacent to the east is zoned for a~icultural conservation and is currently undeveloped. The City of Elk River recognizes mineral excavation as an appropriate and compatible interim land use for agricultural conservation zoned areas. Site ownership will propose that the Site re-zoned for mineral excavation. A Mineral Excavation License and Conditional Use Permit will be required subject to approval by the Elk River City Council. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services: Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? X Yes m No If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure or services needed. (Note: any infrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the project must be assessed in the EAW; see EA W Guidelines for details.) In accordance with MnDOT requirements, Schmidt will construct auxiliary truck lanes on Trunk Highway 169 between 219th Avenue and 217th Avenue (see Figure 1, Appendix A). One auxiliary lane will be built southbound from 219th Avenue to 217th Avenue on · Jan-2003 · LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Page 20 · 29. 30. the left hand shoulder of the highway. The second auxiliary lane will be built northbound from 217th Avenue to 219th Avenue on the right hand shoulder of the highway. The construction of the auxiliary lanes as described above has been approved by MnDOT. Construction plans and details will be prepared in accordance with all MnDOT requirements and specifications and will be forwarded to the City upon completion. No other new or expanded public services or utilities are anticipated for the proposed project. Cumulative Impacts: Minnesota Rule part 4410.1700, subpart 7, item B requires that the RGU consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause cumulative impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts (or discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate item(s) elsewhere on this form). Currently, the Site is bounded to the north and south by larger gravel mines. Large active gravel mines are also located west of Trunk Highway 169, just west of the Site. Thus, the Site will correspond with current and projected area land use in the area. The extent of mining is estimated to cover approximately 14.81 acres of a 66.06-acre parcel and is expected to remove 500,000 cubic yards of gravel over a 10-year period. At the end of mining operations, the asphalt plant will be removed and the Site will be returned to agricultural use. No expansions of the mine are projected for the future, as no additional gravel resources are present on the Site. Cumulative impacts from the proposed project are anticipated to be minor and are comparable to those presented in the 1994 EIS prepared for the Mining District. The City of Elk River is aware of the cumulative impacts for the Mining District and has considered and addressed them accordingly. Other Potential Environmental Impacts: If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. A potential environmental impact not addressed includes vibration from crushing operations. Mitigative measures to reduce the impacts caused by any vibration will include locating the gravel stockpiles and crushing operations on areas of the property farthest from the most sensitive receptors. Additionally, the crusher will be manned at all times during operation. No other potential enviromr~ental impacts are anticipated. · Jan-2003 · LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Page 21 · 31. Summary of Issues: Do not complete this section if the E~4 }V is being done for EIS scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document, which must accompany the E~4 ~. List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is begun. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. Environmental issues that have been identified for the proposed project include the following: noise, dust, traffic, air quality, potential surface water impacts, potential groundwater impacts, potential rare species disturbances, and potential affect on prime or unique farmlands. The City of Elk River will address these issues through the Conditional Use Permit and Excavation License process, including annual review. Noise and visual impacts have been addressed by designating allowable hours of operation. No intense lighting will be used at the Site. The physical setting of the project site (surrounded to north, south, and west by mining) conforms to the surrounding land · use and therefore reduces these potential impacts. The specific hours of operation will be determined as part of the Conditional Use Permit. Potential dust generation has been addressed by requiring dust control on an as needed basis. Completed mining areas and soil stockpiles are to be seeded to stabilize soil and minimize wind blown dust particulates. Paving of a portion of the site entrance/exit road will also be considered to reduce dust. The affect of the proposed project on traffic is not anticipated to be .of concern due to the project location. Potential traffic issues have been addressed by the MnDOT requirements of constructing auxiliary northbound and southbound shoulder lanes on Trunk Highway 169 between 217th Avenue and 219th Avenue. All drivers will be instructed to travel in the auxiliary lanes only. Truck traffic generated by the gravel mine will be limited to the approximate 1,000 foot stretch between 219th Avenue and 217th Avenue on Trunk Highway 169 only. Odors from the asphalt plant will be controlled and minimized by engineering and designing the appropriate stack height for the operation. The use of recycled asphalt in the plant operation will also be limited, thus reducing some of the nuisance odors. Hours of plant operation will be adjusted as needed based on weather conditions and/or periods of inversion. Potential to emit calculations will be performed for the gravel mining operation and portable asphalt plant and the need for an air quality permit will be assessed at that time. Permits will be obtained from the MPCA. It is not anticipated that the proposed project will not adversely affect air quality in the surrounding area. Surface water, erosion, and sedimentation have been reviewed and mitigative measures have been proposed to control these issues. The proposed project does not encounter or alter drainage into the wetlands located on the Site, or contribute directly into other surface water bodies. Adherence to NPDES requirements is also required. Physical controls to be implemented during the proposed operation include adherence to a grading L1ESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · · Page 22 · plan and phased development and restoration, seeding of stockpiled soil and completed phases, and silt fences. Some control of contaminant migration from potential releases is afforded by these physical controls. Additional mitigative measures to control potential releases to surface water include conformance with best management practices, proper equipment maintenance, and storage tank safeguards. Prior to beginning work, a wetland delineation report may be necessary. The proposed gravel mining operation does not include installation of a supply well, thereby eliminating potential interference with other nearby supply wells. Dewatering for mining is not proposed, as none of the mining will extend below five feet above the water table, as is required by the City of Elk River. Mining of the Site may include removal of some topsoil, which will be stockpiled for site restoration. The Site soils include primarily sand and gravel which have greater vertical permeability and affords less protection to the migration of spills or releases. Mitigative measures to control potential releases include conformance with applicable regulations and best management practices, proper equipment maintenance, storage tank safeguards, and site security. The Blanding's Turtle was identified as a state-listed threatened species for the vicinity of · the proposed project. As recommended by the DNR, flyers with an illustration of the Blanding's Turtle will be distributed to all site workers. If observed, any turtles in imminent danger will be moved by hand out of harms way to a safe location. Any turtles observed that are not in danger will be left undisturbed. All construction areas will be surrounded by silt fencing to keep turtles from entering construction areas. The silt fencing will be removed after the area is re-vegetated. Wetlands will not be dredged or filled and all wetlands will be protected from pollution sources. Graded areas will be re- vegetated with standard MN DOT seed mixtures and the terrain will be left with as much natural contour as possible upon completion of the project. No permanent utilities will be installed at the Site. 2.4 acres of statewide important soils and 3.9 acres of prime soils are located on the Site. Neither of these soil units include sources of gravel and are not expected to be mined. Special consideration will be given to these areas as not to disturb the topsoil or unnecessarily excavate these areas. If it is determined that portions of these areas will be disturbed, the topsoil will be stripped, stockpiled and replaced and restored to farmland upon completion of mining activities. LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · · Page 23 · RGU CERTIFICATION: The Environmental Quality Board will only accept SIGNED Environmental Assessment Worksheets for public notice in the EQB Monitor. I hereby certify that: The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. The EAW describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined at Minnesota Rules, parts 4410.0200, subparts 9b and 60, respectively. Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list. Signature Date Title W:\env\64480\ Schmidt EAW Final.doc LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Hydrogeologists · Engineers · Environmental Scientists · Jan-2003 · ' Page 24 · .... ; ~*' I _L_ ~ LOCATION I .... .......... ...... .......... ~~~_.~ ...... ~ ~ ' ,, ~ . ~ I I I'~' ~ _, , , ~ ~ , ~ , -' ~ ' I l~ I ~' : "~ ~ ' ~ ' ,~ ' ~o , ~ : ~ i ~: : River ~ I~ ~e, ~'l . ~a2-~.s.~2~w. , ~ It . } ._ ~: o ~ ~ ~ Perennial Drainage DiSh , ~ "~ , ~ I ' ~ Inle~lUent ~lre~ ._ ~ ~ .... ~ - Transportation · Im,~t O~.g, ~t~ ~ ~ ~ U.S. Highway ~ To.ship ~O,d %. 14 ~ ~ound~ties So.ce: Sh~bme Co~. 8/02. Sc~e: As Sho~ : Ci~ Map Sept 02 Schmidt G~vel Mine Figure ~ ~a~lt ~. Sui~ ~3 13~ 15~ A~ N 43~ N Mill~ ~, Sui~ ~ MMda ~ 53713 Mi.~ ~ SS~ ~ ~ asm Elk ~er, M~nesom 1 (~8) 2~-1532 (763) 489-31 ~ (~0) 421~g53 Ill ~ ~. ~'~ .~:, c,?z', <?..<- ~ ~ I~/- ~.~"'< ~ .~'~ ~ ~, ~' ~lt..~ --- ~ z_ ,~;~kS'-, ' ~.:,,~.,~7:. .4: -'- : / So,ce: USGS. 7.5 M~ute O~&anules. E~ ~ver and Lake Freemom. ~. 1961.. revised 1993 Scale: 1" = 2,000' ~ Site Location ~ap Sept 02 kl~1~ Hydrogeologists. Eng.eers. Environmental Scientists 6~ Ohholt ~. Suite 203 13400 15~ Avenue N 43~ N Mitl~ R& Suite 200 Schmidt Gravel Mine Figu re M~iaon, ~ 53713 Minnca~lis, ~ ~s~, s~,,~i,. = s~m Elk ~ver, Minnesota 2 (~8) 223-1532 (763) 489-3100 (480) 421-0853 01/13/03 W:\¢nv\64480~Figur¢ 3.doc = Gravel Mining Area ./ 1 :Phase 2 = Prime Soils = Statewide Important Soils - Site Plan Sept 02 LI~:CH Hydrogeologists · Engine .... Envi ...... tel Scientists Sehmidt Gravel Mine Figure 6000 Gisholt Dr, Suile 203 13400 15* Avenuo N 4300 N Miller Rd, Suite 200 lvladison, WI 53713 Minneapolis, MN 55441Scollrxlalo, aZ ans~ Elk River, Minnesota 3 (aoa) 223-1532 (76~) 489-3 ;00 (4so) 421 = Wetlands Scale: 1" = 480' st ST I I i!/ I I ,,/ / GRAVEL MINING _DISTRICT BOUN D__AR2, LECEND SURFACE 200 0 200 400 _.~ Proposed Final Contours Sept 02 Li-= Schmidt Gravel Mine FIGURE ~,} m-zm '~ ~ ~_~m,, n.~m~ ,,z-~" '~ Elk River, Minnesota 4 Source: Soil S~ev of Sherb~e County. Mi~esota, May 1998 Scale: 1" = 1,000' -~ Sherburne County Soil Survey Map Sept 02 LIB :CHHydrogeologists. Engineers. Environmental Scientists Schmidt Gravel Mine Figure Madison, ~ 53713 Minne~lis, ~ 55441 Scoasdale, ~ 8525~ Elk ~ver, Minnesota 8 (608) 223-1532 (763) 489-31~ (480) 421-0853 EAW PRIME AND STATEWIDE IMPORTANT SOILS INVENTORY 1253C 1253C 12531) [--] SOILS WITH IN PROJECT AREA ~~ ~ STATEWIDE IMPORTANT SOILS- 2.4 ac. ~ ~ ~ PRIME SOILS- 3.9 ac. ~0 0 ~ ~ Feet So.ce: Sherb~e Co~ ~CS. 9/]0/02 Sc~e: ]" = 400' ~ ~ P~e and S~tewide Impo~nt Soi~ Sept 02 Schmidt G~vel Mine Figure ~a~lt ~, Sutte ~3 13~ 15~ Avenue N 4300 N Milt~ Rd, Suite ~ MMi~ ~ 53713 Mi~li~ ~ ~ ~"~.~, ~ ~:~ Elk River, Minnesota 9 (608) ~-1532 (763) 48%31~ (~0) 421~853 .,~ " ~ /' '?,.?. ? ~ .... ~ ~:~:~{ ~r ~ '~ ~_~_ ~ I,~ .-J ~ 0 '~l~ ~ ' .- ~ ~ ~,?-o..0 ' /,.' /' · ~, .,, ~ . '~ , .. ~ / ~. ~ . , · ~ ~ ~ ~ ::(} ,, ~ ~[ : ;. ..' , "- ...-~ /.r,,j , -[ ..... ~~~, · -' _:?:,'. ' -.I .~ ~~;~,. ~'-. . -_~'~.~",'~~~. , ~ /~[ .~~/ ..... -~. (...r. ,~:.ti~x.- -: ,_' .'~ ~ ( ~. , ~ ~ ~~(, }~l / I~[ / ./ ~h. .'m~:~ - _ ...... ~ .... ~~ . _~e,A:. ~..~. ~, ?~"~! ~t ~ ~' ~ C~~ ',.:~/ '. ',', ,:', ",~X~' : ~ ~- ~ ~ ~(~ / . ., , ,,, ~. . . .. ~ · , .. _ ~ ~. ~. ~ t~. ,.~ , .,-~ , ,, ,,; _: ~--' ~ r , ~ .r~ ~. ~ · -": .z~'- ,~ ' ' ' ' , E~' x' ."' ~. ~ ' ,.- ~~,Nx' ~ ."~ P~ ,..~.~s ~z~,'.~ ...... ;" '- '. ,',' . '~ ~j / --,' , ~ . '~ .... . ...... 2.C: ~- ' ' . .~, r~ '.. ' · - ~ ~. .... ~r ~ ~ . ~ ,,,:, ~~2~, '., , _., '~~~/,'. ! ~' ~ ~o~ ~ ~~,~ ,~k, ...... , ......... : / ~ .~ ~ ~. , ,,, ., ~ ,. .. ,f ~ ,.~t,.,~: ~u~ : ~, :~. ,~ . , .. . . '~. ~ ...... ~ .......... [~_..:. ~,~ ,( ,~ -. . ~'~" ...... ~ ....... ~-'~ ~. - -, i-~ :- '- ~'~'~~~ - ,~L~ ' / I ~' ~:' -:,=,--'- -~-- :'. ~- .' --' - .... ~ · I - ' .. ,. -, ... m: . t.7 Source: U~ted States DeCt. of the Intehor Fish and Wildlife Se~ice. Elk ~ver. ~. 1991 Scale: 1": 2.000' ~i -- National Wetlands Invento~ Map Sept 02 LmEHydrogeologists · Engine .... Envi ...... ,al Scientists Sehmidt Gravel Mine Figure 6000 ~sholl ~, State 203 13400 l 5~ Argue N 43~ N MiIIg Rd, Suite 200 ~.ai~o., ~ s37~ ~i..~li~, ~ s~l S:o~a~, ~ ~s~ Elk ~vet~ ~in~esota 6 (608) 223-1532 (763} 489-31~ (480) 42]-0853 · ~ ........ ~ ':' : .~ ' ' -~ ~, *~. ~a-~t~:~~ ~o~ ~?~;~i ~,-....-1:-,..-~ ~ ...... ; ,I :~ ' ~'~ ~..~;: CI~ ~.~ ~r~ ~~ ,' .... ', .~ ~-'~-:~ ' _, ........ ~ , ,., . ~:~ ...... iisi t~l~,~.~;~:~,a.., ..... ,., ~,~/~. '~ Prope~ zoned as used for mmer~ excavation So~ces: 2001 Sherb~e Co. Atlas~lat Map Book; Ci~ ofE~ ~ver Zo~n~ Map~ J~. 2002 Sc~e: Not to Sc~e % Prope~ies Zoned for Mineral Excavation Sept 02 LIE H Hydrogeologists * Engineers · Envi .... ~nt.I Scientists Sehmidt Gravel Mine Figure 6~0 ~sholt ~, Suile 203 13400 15m Argue N 4300 N Mill~ Rd, Suile 200 M,di~ ~ 53713 Minn~lis. ~ ~S~ S~,~,~. ~ *Sm Elk River, Minnesota 5 27 0 C --I z ~ i L L Sr~e L G ~PROPERTY. lOCATION 35 ,W © z 1~27w RIVER I z Source: MN DNR Protected Waters and Wetlands, Sherbume Co., 1983: revised 1996 '25 DNR Protected Waters Map Schmidt Gravel Mine Elk River, Minnesota DAYTON ~ Scale: 1" = 2 Mile~, - Sept O '1 Figur The EDR-Aerial Photography Print Service Schmidt Gravel Mine Highway 169 N and 219th Ave. Elk River, MN 55330 August 14, 2002 Inquiry Number: 828958-3 : Environmental : Data · : Resources, Inc. · ·' an.~ir'company The Source For Environmental Risk Management Data 3530 Post Road Southport, Connecticut 06490 Nationwide Customer Service Telephone: 1-800-352-0050 Fax: 1-800-231-6802 Environmental Data Resources, Inc. Aerial Photography Print Service Em&oamenml Dam Resources, Inc.'s 0EDP) Aer/al Photography ~ ServSce is a screen/ng tool designed to assist professionals m evalu~armg potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. ASTM E 1527-00, Section 7.3 on HJsxor/cal Use Information, identifies the prior use requirements for a Phase I en,,-ironmental site assessment. The ASTivl standard requJx:s a review of reasonably ascertainable standm'd historical sources..Reasonab~ ascertainable means information thru is lx~lic& available, obtainable from a source ~, 4th reasonable time and cost conxrrab~tx, and practically reviewable. To meet the prior use requirements of ASTM E 1527-00, Section 7.3.4, the follow/rig standard historical sources may be used: aerial photographs, fire insurance maps, !m'operty mx files, land title records (although these cannot be the sole historical source consuked), topographic maps, city directories, building department records, or zoning/land use records. ASTbl E 1527-00 reqairm "Ail obvious uses of the property shall be idemified from the present, back to the propeny 's obvious fi~xt cte~.~lotw_d z~ or back to 2940, whichever is earlier. This taskre.~dres reviewing on~. ax many of the standard historical sources as are necexswy, and that are reasonably ascertainable and likely to be usefid. "(ASTM E 1527430, Section 7.3.4, page 12. Aerial Photographs Aerial photographs are a valuable historical resource for documenting past land use and can be particularly helpful when other historical sources (such as city directories or fu-e insurance maps) are not reasonably ascertainable. The EDR Aerial Photograph Print Service includes a search of aerial photograph collections flown by public and private agencies for the state of Minnesota. EDR's professional field-based researchers provide digitally reproduced historical aerial Photographs at approximately ten year inrervals. Disclaimer Copyright and Trademark Notice This report contains information from a variety of public and other sources..Environmental Data .Resources, ]nc. (£DR)® has relied on the information provided to ii from such sources. EDR has not reviewed and does not warram or ~mtarantee the completeness, accuracy, timeliness or attthenticiry of such in./brmation in preparing this report. THE DTOP&L4 770N ?bVD METHODOLOGY USED TO COiV~ILE THIS REPORT. .4ND THE,4NAL YSIS AND SERP7CES ]NTEtVDED TO BE PROVYDED BY THIS REPORTARE PROVIDED "AS IS" }P777qOLrF W,,.4RRA.R,TT OR GUAP~4NTY OF ANY Kh'VD. EDR DISCL4~S , 4NT OTI-iZ~ ~D~P,~2~ O~ & ~ f II D WARRA~VI2~ WiTH RESPEC770 7t-~ ~ 4ND ALL TI-tE Sx dVORM 4 710¥ COVE-1EVF_D I'-iERE~, iN2b D#~, };7T'HOU7 LL~,z~.q~ON, L~,EVLI~D WARJL4~VTiES OF ~,~RC~4aV~.~-LBILITY OR ?~Z_g FOR.{ P.4,qTICUL.Li!. PURPOSE. hz no ~.,nt shall EDR be liable for atW indirect, special, punitive or conseqvential damages, whether arising out of contract, tort or other~vise, arising out of this report and the information contained herein even if EDR has been advised of the possibility that such damages may arise. Emire c. omen= copmglu 2000 by Er~qrownentat Da~a Rezoum_ex, Inc (T-DR) All ngtv. s w. sene. d. £epro&tcfion in w~y meda'a or./bt?na~in whole or in pan, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resource& Inc., or its q~5liate$, is prohibited without prior written pertnission. EDR and tim eob' logos are t~=mstered trademar~ of Em~'roarnenta] Data Resources, bm or its affhatem. All other n-adernmq<x z~ed herein are the property, of their respective owners. 1939 1953 1991 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, Box 25 500 Lafaye'tte Road St. Pa.l, Minnesota 55155-40_ Phone: (651) 296-7863 Fax: (651) 296-1811 E-mail: sarah.hoffmann@dnr.state.mn.us August 19, 2002 Jonathon Blaha Liesch Associates, Inc. 13400 15t~ Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55441 Re: Request for Natural Heritage information for vicinity of proposed Schmidt Gravel Mine, T33N R26W Section 10, Sherburne County NHNRP 'Contact #: ERDB 20030175 Dear Mr. Blaha, The Minnesota Natural Heritage database has been reviewed to determine if any rare plant or animal species or other significant natural features are 'known to occur within an approximate one-mile radius of the area indicated on the map enclosed with your information request. Based on this review, there are three known occurrences of rare species or natural communities in the area searched (for details, see enclosed database printout and ex. planation of selected fields). Following are specific comments for only those elements that may.be impacted by the proposed project. Rare feature occurrences not listed :below are not anticipated to be affected bythe proposed project. , . · Blanding'.s Turtles (Emydoidea blandingii),.astate,listed threatened sPeCies, are reported from the vicinity of the project area. The Blanding's Turtle records represent observations of individuals from a population. We do not know the size or the full extent of that population. Although we have no records from directly within the project area, it is possible that turtles exist in the area if there is suitable habitat on the site. Blanding's Turtles spend much of their time in shallow wetlands (1-3 feet deep), but they nest in open, sandy uplands up to 1 mile from wetlands. Nesting is in June and eggs hatch inSeptember, at which time young turtles enter deep wetlands where they over-winter in soft sediments. Factors believed to contribute to the decline of this species include ~,vefland drainage and degradation, development on upland nesting areas, and possibly collection for the pet trade. In addition, because of the' tendency for Blanding' s Turtles to travel long distances over land, they are often forced to cross roads in developed areas. Many of. the records we have of Blanding's Turtles are from turtles killed crossing roads. For your information, I have attached a fact sheet and a flyer about the Blanding's Turtle. The fact sheet is intended to provide you with background information regarding habitat use, life history, and reasons for the species' decline, as well as recommendations for avoiding and minimizing impacts to this rare turtle. As you will note; there are two lists of recommendations..The first list contains recommendations to prevent harm to turtles during.constmction work, and is relative to all areas inhabited by Blanding's Turtles. Please refer to this first list of recommendations for your project. -The' second c61umu expands On the £rrst column, and contains greater protective measures to be considered for areas known-to beof state-wide importance to Blanding!s Turtles, or-any area where greater protection for turtles is desired. Your project area is not within one of these priority DN'R Information: 651-296-6157 An Equal Opportunity Employer Who Values Diversity · 1-888-646-6367 · TTY: 651-296-5484 · 1-800-657-3929 Printed on Recycted Paper Containing a Minimum of 10% Post-Consumer Waste areas. The flyer, which should be given to all crews working in the area, contains an illustration and description of the Blanding's Turtle, as well as a summary of the recommendations provided in the fact sheet. The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Services, Department of Natural Resources. It is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, natural communities, and other natural features. Its purpose is to foster better understanding and protection of these features. Because our information is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there may be rare or otherwise significant natural features in the state that are not represented in the database. A county-by- county survey of rare natural features is now underway, and has been completed for Sherburne County. Our information about natural communities is, therefore, quite thorough for that county. However, because survey work for rare plants and animals is less exhaustive, and because there has not been an on- site survey of all areas of the county, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist on the project area, The enclosed results of thedatabase search are provided in two formats: index and full record. To control the release of locational information which might result in the damage or destruction of a rare element, both printout formats are copyrighted. The index provides rare feature locations only to the nearest section, and may be reprinted, unaltered, in an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, municipal natural resource plan, or report compiled by your company for the project listed above. If you wish to reproduce the index for any other purpose, please contact me to request written permission. Copyright notice for the index should include the following disclaimer: "Copyright (year) State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources. This index may be reprinted, unaltered, in Environmental Assessment Worksheets, municipal natural resource plans, and internal reports. For any other use, written permission is required." The full-record printout includes more detailed locational information, and is for your personal use only. If you wish to reprint the full-record printouts for any purpose, please contact me to request written permission. Please be aware that review by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program focuses only on rare natural features. It does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whole. If you require further information on the environmental review process for other wildlife- related issues, you may contact your Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Mike North, at (218) 828-2433. An invoice for the work completed is enclosed. You are being billed for map and database search and staff scientist review. Please forward this invoice to your Accounts Payable Department. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. Sincerely, Sarah D. Hoffmann Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator encl: cc: Database search results Rare Feature Database Print-Outs: An Explanation of Fields Fact sheets: Blanding's Turtle Invoice Mike North Para Perry Minnesota Natural Heritage Database Element O~currence Records TWP RNG PRIMARY FED MN SECTION STATUS STATUS T033N R26W 03 T033NR26W 11 THR T033N R26W 13 771R RECORDS PRINTED = 3 RANK $4 SCI4MIDTGRAVEL MINE T33N R26W SEC 10, S~ERBURNE COUNTY MnDNR, Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program ELEMENT and OCCURRENCE NLhMBER OAK WOODLAND-BRUSHLAND (CENTRAL) EMYDOIDEA BLANDINGII (BLANDING'S TURTLE) #1001 EMYDOIDEABLANDINGII (BLANDING'S TURTLE) #840 9:21 Thursday, AUGUST 08, 2002 Copyright 2002 Stats of Minnesota DNR MANAGED AREA Minnesota Natural Heritage Database Element Occurrence Records SCHMIDT ORAVEL MINE T33N R26W SEC 10, S}{ERBURNE COUNTY MnDNR, Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program T033N R26N NW03 SHERBURNE COUNTY, ~ Element: OAK WOODLAND-BRUSHI~n~ND (CENTRAL) #4 S Rank: S4 EO Size: 160 acres appro EO Rank: Current Status: Site: ELK RIVER 3 WEST Ownership: Owner unknown Managed Area(s): not managed or no record Source: PARTCH,M.; TNC 9:21 Thursday, AUGUST 08, 2002 Copyright 2002 State of Minnesota DNR Intended Status: CBS Site #: 194 *** SITE THREATENED *** Last Observed Date: 1973 DNR Region: ] Wildlife Area: 320 Quad Map: LAKE FREMONT (Q15A) Forestry District: 351 Latitude: 45 22' 55" Long: 9] 34' 2" Precision: approx, boundaries have been determined Voucher: Verification: verified DECIDUOUS SAVANNA COVER CLASS ON STEEP PAi~ALLEL MORAINE RIDGES RUNNING N-S. VEGETATIONAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN E ~ W FACING SLOPES. AREA IS USED AS GRAVEL PIT AND LANDFILL. BEST PART IS IN SW CQRNER OF SECTION 34. T033N R26W }{Eli S}[ERBURNE COUNTY, ~q Element: EMYDOIDEA BLANDINGII (BL;kNDING'S TURTLE) #1001 State Status: THREATENED EO Size: EO Rank: Current Status: Site: ELK RIVER 11 Ownership: Owner ttnknown Managed Area(s): not managed or no record Intended Status: Last Observed Date: 12 June 2002 Quad Map: ELK RIVER (Q15D) Latitude: 45 22' 7# Long: 93 32' 16" Precision: within 0.25 mile, confirmed DNR Region: 3 Wildlife Area: 320 Forestry District: 351 Source: SWANSON, D. (2002 BLANDING'S TURTLE REPORT) Voucher: Verification: sight or sound rec. ONE TURTLE OBSERVED CROSSING OLSON STREET IN ELK RIVER. OBSERVER NOTED YELLOW THROAT AND ESTIMATED TURTLE W~%S 6-0" WIDE. CREEK AND "DUCK POND" NEARBY. T033N R26W SE15 SHERBURNE COUNTY, MN Element: E~YDOIDEA BLANDINGII {BLANDING'S TURTLE) #840 State Status: THREATENED EO Size: EO Rank: Current Status: Site: ELK RIVER 15 Ownership: Owner unknown Managed Area(s): not managed or no record Intended Status: Last Observed Date: 24 June 1996 Quad Map: ELK RIVER (Q15D) Latitude: 45 20' 55" Long: 93 Precision: within 0.25 mile, confirmed DNR Region: ] Wildlife Area: 320 Forestry District: 351 Source: VELDHOUSE,D.(1996 BLANDING'S TURTLE REPORT) Voucher: Verification: sight or sound rec. 1 TLTRTLE (10 X 8 INCHES) OBSERVED ALONG DRIVEWAY. TURTLE IS MISSING LEFT FRONT FOOT, HAS ONLY A STUB, BUT APPEARS TO GET AROUND FINE. TURTLE RETURNED TO POND (5.5-6 FT DEEP, -9 ACRES, NEXT TO HWY 169). OBSERVERS ;%RE QUITE SURE THEY OBSERVED THE SAME TURTLE NESTING IN THEIR PASTURE IN 1995. Rare Features Database Print-outs: An Explanation of Fields ~ Rau'~ l=ea.~ databas~ is peat of the Natural Heritage Information System. and is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongart~ Re. scarab ~'ogra. m. a unit wittan t~ Section of Eco~ogicsl Services. Minnesota D~partn~nt of Nan,u-n) Resources (DN'R). *Please note that the print-outs are copyrighted and may not be reproduced without permission Field Name: [Full (non-abreviated) field name, if different]. Further explanation of field. CBS Site: [County Biological Survey site number]. In each county, the nttmb~ring system begins with 1. CLASS: A code which classifies features by broad taxonomic group: NC = uana'al community; SA = special animal; SP = special plant; GP = geologic process; GT = geologic tim~; CCI` = other (e.g. colonial waterbird cotomes, bat hibernacula). Ct'y: [County]. Minnesota counties (ordered alphabetically) are numbexed fi.om 1 (Aitkm) to 87 (Yellow Medicine). CURRENT STATUS: Present protection status, fi.om 0 (owner is not awar~ of record) to 9 (dedicated as a Scientific and Natural Area). -D- · DNR Region: I=NW, 2=NE, 3=E Central, a=SW, 5=SE, ~ Minneapolis/St. Paul Metro. DNR Quad: [DNR Quadrangle code]. DNR-assigned code of the U.S. G~ologic Survey topographic map on which the rare feature occurs. -E- ELEMENT or Element: Sec "Element Nart~ (Common Name)" Element Nsrn~ (Common'Name): The name of the rare feature. For plant and animal species records, this field holds the scientific name, followed by the common name in parentheses; for all other elements (such as plant communities, which have no scientific name) it is solely the element name. EQ RANK: [Element Occurrence Rank]. An evaluation of the quality and condition of natural commumties from A (highest) to D (lowest). EO Size: [Element Occurrence Size]. The size in acres (often estimated) of natural communities. FED STATUS: Federal Status]. Stares of species under the Federal Endangered Species Law: ~ndangered, LT=threatened, C=species which have been proposed for federal listing. Federal Status: Sec "FED STATUS" Forestry District: The Minnesota DNR: s Division of Forestry district number. -C, .Qj,,.Qj~__P~&~: The abundance of an element globally, fi'om Gl (critically imperiled duc to extreme rarity on a world-wide basis) to G5 (demonstrably secure, though perhaps rare in parts of its range). Global ranks arc determined by the Conservation Science Division of The Nature Conservancy. INTENDED STATUS: Desired protection status. See also "CURRENT STATUS." If a complete list of protection status codes is needed, plea.sc coatact thc Natural Heritage Program -L- LAST OBSERVED or L,ut'Obsgrved Date or Last Observation: Date of the most recent record of thc element at the location. Latitude: The location at which the occ~ce is mapped on Natural Heritage Program maps. NOTE: There are various levels of precision in the original information, but this is not reflected in the latitudeAongitude data. For some of the data, particularly historical records, it was not possible to determine exactly where the original observation was made (e.g. "Fort Shelling", or "the south shore of Lake Owasso"). Thus the latitucieAongitude reflect the mapped location, and not necessarily the observation location. Legal: Township, range and section numbers. Long: [Longitude]. See NOTE under "Latitude" MANAGED AREA or Managed Area(s): Name of the federally, state, locally, or privately managed park, forest, preserve, etc., containing the occurrence, if any. If this field is blanlc, the element probably occurs on private land. If "(STATUTORY BOUNDARY)" occurs after the name of a managed area, the locadon may be a private inholding within the statutory boundary of a state forest or park. Map Syrn: [Map Symbol]. MN STATUS: [Minnesota Status]. Legal status of plant and animal species under the Minnesota endangered species law: END--endangered, TH~R--threatenea:L SPC--Sl~Cial concern. NON-- no legal status, but rare and may become listed if declines continue. This field is blank for natural communities and colonial waterbird nesting sites, which have no legal status in Minnesota. but are tracked by the database. NC Rank: [Natural Commtmity Rank]. Occ #: [Occurrence Number}. The occurrence number, in combination with the element name. uniquely identifies each record. OCCURRENCE NUMBER: See "Occ # OF OCCURS: The number of records existent in the ctatabase for each element within the area searched. Ownership: Indicates Whether the site is publicly or privately owned; for publicly owned land, the agency with management responsibility is listed. Precision: Precision of locational information of occurrence: C (comfrmed) = know~ wi'thin l/a mile radius, U (unconfirmed = known within 1/2 mile, N (non-specific) = known within I mile, G (general) = occurs within the general region, X (unmappable)=Iocation is unmappable on USGS topographic quadrangles (often known only to the nearest county), O (obscure./gone)=element no longer exists at-the location. PS: [Pr/mary Section]. The secticJn containing all or the greatest part of the occun--mce. Quad Map: See "DNR Quad" .Ro Rec #: [Record number]. RN0 or Rng~ [Range number]. SECTION or Section: [Section number(s)]. Some records are given only to the nearest section (s), but most are given to the nearest quarter-section or quarter-quarter-section (e.g., SWNW32 denotes the SWl/a of the NWl/4 of section 32). A "0" is used as a place holder when a half-section is specified (e.g., 0N03 refers to the north 182 of section 3). When a occurrence crosses section boundaries, both sections are listed, without punctuation (e.g., the NE1/a of section 19 and NWl/4 of section 20 is displayed as "NE 19NW20"). Site: A name which refers to the geographic area within which the occurrence lies. If no name for the area exists (a locally used name, for example), one is assigned by the County Biological Survey or the Natural Heritage Program. Source: The collector or observer of the rare feature occurrence. S RANK: [State Rank]. A rank assigned to the natural community type which reflects the known extent and condition of that community in Minnesota. Ranlcs range from 1 (in greatest need of conservation action in the state) to 5 (secure under present conditions). A "7" following a rank indicates little information is available to rank the commtmity. Communities for which information is especially scarce are given a "U", for "rank undetermined". The ranks do not represent a legal status. They are used by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to set priorities for research, inventory and conservation planning. The state ranks are updated as inventory information becomes available. State Status: See "MN STATUS" TWP or Twp: [Township number].' .....~ Verification: A reflectio~ of the reliability of the information on which the record is based. The highest level of reliability is "verified," which usually indicates a collection was made or, in the case of bird records, nesting was observed. Plant records based on collections ~ before 1970 are unverified. Voucher: The museum or herbarium where specimens are maintained, and the accession number assigned by the repository. In the case of bald eagles, this is the breeding area number. Wildlife Area: The Minnesota DNR's Section of Wildlife administrative n~mber. Data Security Loca~ons of ~orr~ rare features must be tr~.a,-d as sensitive informalaon because W~de~pr~l knowledge of these locanons could r~sult in harm m the tart features. For example, wildflowers such as orchi~ and ecoaomcally valuable plants such as gm.~ng ar, vulneral~le to exploitauon by collectors: other species, such as bald e~gles, ar~ sensitive to disturbance by c/oservcrs. Fro' ~ r~ason, w~ pr=fer that pubhCat~o~q not itt~nfif-y the precise locauons of vulnerable species. We suggest clescnbmg the location only to the near,st secUon. If tttis is not acceptable for your tauposes, please call an~ discuss this issue with me Environmental Review Specialist for the Heritage and Nongame Research Program at 651~96-7863. Revised 11/2000 Endangered, Threat, ened, and Special Concern Species of Mhmesota Blanding's Turtle ( Emydoidea blandingii) Minnesota Status: Threatened State Rankl: S2 Federal Status: none Global RankS: G4 HABITAT USE Blanding's turtles need both'wetland and upland habitats to complete their life cycle~ The types of wetlands used include ponds, marshes, shrub swamps, bogs, and ditches and streams with slow-moving water. In Minnesota, Blandir/g's turtles are primarily marsh and pond inhabitants. Calm, shallow water bodies (Type 1-3 wetlands) with mud bottoms and abundant aquatic vegetation (cattails, water lilies, etc.) are preferred, and extensive marshes bordering rivers provide excellent habitat. Small temporary wetlands (those that dry up in the late summer or fall) are frequently used in spring and summer -- these fishless pools are amphibian and invertebrate breeding habitat, which provides an important food source for Blanding's turtles. Also, the warmer water of these shallower areas prObably aids in the development of eggs within the female turtle. Nesting occurs in open (grassy or brushy) sandy uplands, often some distance fi.om water bodies. Frequently, nesting occurs in traditional nesting grounds on undeveloped land. Blanding's turtles have also been known to nest successfully on residential property (especially in low density housing situations), and to utilize disturbed areas such as farm fields, gardens, under power lines, and road shoulders (especially of dirt roads). Although Blanding's turtles may travel through woodlots during their seasonal movements, shady areas (including forests and lawns with shade trees) are not used for nesting. Wetlands with deeper water are needed in times of drought, and during the winter. Blanding's turtles overwinter in the muddy bottoms of deeper marshes and ponds, or other water bodies where they are protected fi.om freezing. LIFE HISTORY Individuals emerge from overwintering and begin basking in late March or early April on warm, sunny days. The increase in body temperature which occurs during basking is necessary for egg development within the female turtle. Nesting in Minnesota typically .occurs during June, and females are most active in late afternoon and at dusk. Nesting can occur as much as a mile fi.om wetlands. The nest is dug by the female in an open sandy area and 6-15 eggs are laid: The female turtle returns to the marsh within 24 hours of laying eggs. After a development period of approximately two months, hatchlings leave the nest from mid-August through early- October. Nesting females and hatchlings are often at risk of being killed while crossing roads between wetlands and nesting areas. In addition to movements associated with nesting, all ages and both sexes move between wetlands from April through November. These movements peak in June and July and again in September and October as turtles move to and fi.om overwintering sites, In late autunm (typically November), Blanding's turtles bury themselves in the substrate (the mud at the bottom) of deeper wetlands to overwinter. IMPACTS / THREATS / CAUSES OF DECLINE · loss of wetland habitat through drainage or flooding (converting wetlands into ponds or lakes) · loss of upland habitat through development or conversion to agriculture · human disturbance, including collection for the pet trade* and road kills during seasonal movements · increase in predator populations (skunks, racoons, etc.) which prey on nests and young *It is illegal to possess this threatened species. Minnesota DNK Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Prognm~. Environmental R. eview Fact Sheet Series. Blandmg's 'I~rtle. 2 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING AND MINIMIZING IMPACTS These recommendations apply to typical construction projects and general land use within Blanding's turtle habitat, and are provided tO help local governments, developers, contractors, and homeowners minimize or avoid detrimental impacts to Blanding's turtle populations. List 1 describes minimum measures which we recommend to prevent harm to Blanding's turtles during construction or other work within Blancling's turtle habitat. List 2 contains recommendations which offer even greater protection for Blanding's turtles populations; this list should be used in addition to thefirst list in areas which are known to be of state-wide importance to Blanding's turtles (contact the DNR's Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program if you wish to determine if your project or home is in one of these areas), or in any other area where greater protection for Blanding's turtles is desired. List 1. Recommendations for all areas inhabited by Blanding's turtles. List 2. Additional recommendations for areas known to be of state-wide importance to Blanding's turtles. GENERAL A flyer with an illustration of a Blanding's turtle should be given to all contractors Working in the area. Homeowners should also be informed of the presence of Blanding's turtles in the area. Turtles which are in imminent danger should be moved, by hand, out of harm's way. Turtles which are not in imminent danger should be left undisturbed. Ifa Blanding's turtle nests in your yard, do not disturb the nest. Silt fencing should be set up to keep turtles out of construction areas. It is critical that silt fencing be removed after the area has been revegetated. Turtle crossing signs can be ins?led adjacent to road- crossing areas used by Blanding s turtles to increase public awareness and reduce road kills. Workers in the area should be aware that Blanding's turtles nest in June, generally after 4pm, and should be advised to minimize disturbance if turtles are seen. If you would like to provide more proteetiori for a Blanding's turtle nest on your property, see "Protecting Blanding's Turtle Nests" on page 3 of this fact sheet. Construction in potential nesting areas Should be limited to the period between September 15 and June 1 (this is the time when acti-,4ty of adults and hatchlings in upland areas is at a minimum). WETLANDS Small, vegetated temporary wetlands (Types 2 & 3) should not be dredged, deepened, filled, or converted to storm water retention basins (these wetlands provide important habitat during spring and summer). Wetlands should be protected from poiltttion;:use of fertilizers and pestimdes should be avoided, and run-off from lawns and streets should be controlled. Erosion should be prevented to keep sediment from reaching wetlands and lakes. Shallow portions of wetlands should not be disturbed during prime basking time (mid morning to mid- afternoon in May and June). A wide buffer should be left along the shore to minimize human activity near wetlands (basking Blanding's turtles are more easily disturbed than other turtle species). Wetlands shoald be protected from road, lawn, and other chemical run-offby a vegetated buffer strip at least 50' wide. This area should be left mowed and in a natural condition. ROADS Roads should be kept to minimum standards on widths and lanes (this reduces road kills by slowing traffic and reducing the distance turtles need to cross). Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If curbs must be used, 4 inch high curbs at a 3:1 slope are preferred (Blanding's turtles have great difficulty climbing traditional curbs; curbs and below grade roads trap turtles on the road and can cause road kills). Tunnels should be considered in areas with concentrations of turtle crossings (more than 10 turtles per year per 100 meters of road), and in areas of lower density if the level of road use would make a safe crossing impossible for turtles. Contact your DNR Regional Nongame Specialist for further information on wildlife tunnels. Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. Minnesota DNR Natural Heritage and Nmagarne Keseareh Program Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series, Btanding's Turtle. ROADS cont. Culverts between wetland areas, or between wetland areas and nesting areas, shOuld be 36 inches or greater in diameter, and elliptical or flat-bottomed. Wetland crossings should be bridged, or include raised roadways with culverts which are 36 in or greater in diameter and tim-bottomed or elliptical (raised roadways discourage turtles from leaving the wetland to bask on roads). Road placement should avoid separating wetlands from adjacent upland nesting sites, or these roads should be fenced to prevent turtles from attempting to cross them (contact your DNR Nongame Specialist for detall~). Road placement should avoid bisecting wetlands, or these roads should be fenced to prevent turtles from attempting to cross them (contact your DNR Nongame Specialist for details). This is especially important for roads with more than 2 lanes. Culverts under roads crossing streams should be oversized Roads crossing streams should be bridged. (at least twice as w/de as the normal width of open water) and flat-bottomed or elliptical. UTILITIES Ut. it!ty access and maintenance roads should be kept to a mm~mum (this reduces road-kill potential). Below-ground utility construction sites should be returned to original grade (trenches can trap turtles). LANDSCAPING AND VEGETATION MANAGEMENT Terrain should be left with as much natural contour as As much natural landscape as possible should be preserved possible. (installation of sod or wood chips, paving, and planting of trees within nesting habitat can make that habitat unusable to nesting Blanding's turtles). Graded areas should be revegetated with native grasses and Open space should include some areas at higher elevations forbs (some non-natives form dense patches through which for nesting. These areas should be retained in native it is difficult for turtles to travel), vegetation, and should be connected to wetlands by a wide corridor of native vegetation. Vegetation management in infrequently mowed areas -- such as in ditches, along utility access roads, and under power lines -- should be done mechanically (chemicals should not be used). Work should occur fall through spring (after October l't and before June 1 '~ ). Ditches and utility access roads should not be mowed or managed through use of chemicals. If vegetation management is required, it should be done mechanically, as infrequentlyas possible, and fall through spring (mowing can kill turtles present during mowing, and makes it easier for predators to locate turtles crossing roads). Protecting Bianding's Turtle Nests: Most predation on turtle nests occurs within 48 hours after .the eggs are laid. After this time, the scent :is gone from the nest and it is more diffia3~!hfor predators to locate the nest. Nests more than a week old probably do not need additional protection, unless they are in a particularly vulnerable spot, such as a yard where pets may disturb the nest. Turtle nests can be protected fxom predators and other disturbance by covering them with a piece of wire fencing (such as chicken wire), secured to the ground with stakes or rocks. The piece of fencing should measure at least 2 ft. x 2 ft., and should be of medium sized mesh (openings should be about 2 in. x 2 in.). It is very important that the fencing be removed before Aueust 1st so the young turtles can escape from the nest when they hatch! REFERENCES 'Association for Biodiversity Information. "Heritage Status: Global, National, and Subnational Conservation Status Ranks." NatureServe. Version 1.3 (9 April 2001). http://www.natureserve.org/ranking.htm (15 April 2001). Coffin, B., and L. Pfanmueller. 1988. Minnesota's Endangered Flora and Fauna. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 473 pp. Minnesota DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Progntm Envfl'onrmmmt Review Fact Sheet Series, Bl:mding's Turtle. 4 REFERENCES cont. Moriarty, J. J., and M. Linck. 1994. Suggested guidelines for projects occurring in Blanding's turtle habitat. Unpublished report to the Minnesota DNR. 8 pp. Oldfield, B., and J. J. Moriarty. 1994. Amphibians and Reptiles Native to Minnesota. University o£Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 237 pp. Sajwaj, T. D., and J. W. Lang. 2000. Thermal ecology of Blanding's turtle in central Minnesota. Chelonian Conservation and Biology 3(4):626-636. Com?ited by the Minnesota Deparrmcn! of'Natural Resource. v Narurat Herbage and Nongame Research Program, September, 2001 Endangered SI~ecies Enmronmentat Re~,,ieu: Coordinator; 500 Lq/ktyette Rd, Box 2.5, St. Paul MN 5.515.5 / 651-296-7863 CAUTIO.N BLANDING'S TURTLES MAY BE ENCOUNTERED IN THIS AREA The unique and rare Blanding's turtle has been found in this area. Blanding's turtles are a State Threatened species and are protected under Minnesota Statute 84.095, Protection of Threatened and Endangered Species. 'Please be careful of turtles on roads and in construction sites. For additional information on turtles, or to report a Blanding's turtle sighting, contact the DNR Nongame Specialist nearest you: Bemidji (218-755-2976); Brainerd (218-828-2228); New UIm (507-359-6033); Rochester (507-280-5070); or St. Paul (651-297-2277). DESCRIPTION: The Blanding's turtle is a medium to large turtle (5 to 10 inches) with a black or dark blue, dome- shaped shell with muted yellow spots and bars. The bottom of the shell is hinged across the front third, enabling the turtle to pull the front edge of the lower shell firmly against the top shell to provide additional protection when threatened. The head, legs, and tail are dark brown or blue-gray with small dots of light brown or yellow. A distinctive field mark is the bright yellow chin and neck. Illustration by Don Luce, from Turtles in Minnesota, Natural I-Iistor),, Leaflet No. 9, June 1989, James Ford Bell Museum of Natural History SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AVOIDING AND MINIMIZING IMPACTS TO BLANDING'S TURTLE POPULATIONS (see Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series for full recommendations) · A flyer with an illustration of an adult Blanding's turtle should be given to all contractors working in the area. Homeowners should also be informed of the presence of Blanding's turtles in the area. · Turtles which are in imminent danger should be moved, by hand, out of harm's way. Turtles which are not in imminent danger should be left undisturbed to continue their travel among wetlands and/or nest sites. · If a Blanding's turtle'nests in your yard, do not disturb the nest, and do not allow pets near the nest. · Blanding's turtles do not make good pets. It is illegal to keep this threatened species in captivity. · Silt fencing should be set up to keep turtles out of construction areas. It is critical that silt fencing be removed after the area has been revegetated. · Small, vegetated temporary wetlands should not be dredged, deepened, or filled. '· All wetlands should be protected from pollution; use of fertilizers and pesticides should be avoided, and mn-off from lawns and streets should be controlled. Erosion should be prevented to keep sediment from reaching wetlands and lakes. · Roads should be kept to minimum standards on widths and lanes. · Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If curbs must be used, 4" high curbs at a 3:1 slope are preferred. · Culverts under roads crossing wetland areas, between wetland areas, or between wetland and nesting areas should be at least 36 in. diameter and flat-bottomed or elliptical. · Culverts under roads crossing streams should be oversized (at least twice as wide as the normal width of open water) and flat-bottomed or elliptical. · Utility access and maintenance roads should be kept to a minimum. · Below-ground utility construction sites should be returned to original grade. · Terrain should be left with as much natural contour as possible. · Graded areas should be revegetated with native grasses and forbs. · Vegetation management in infrequently mowed areas -- such as in ditches, along utility access roads, and under power lines -- should be done mechanically (chemicals should not be used). Work should occur fall through spring (after October l't and before June 1"). Compiled by the Minnesota Departmenl ~.f Nantral Resourc¢~s Natural Heritage~ aJut Ntmgame Research Program. August, 20(11 E~tangered Species £~,ironmenml Review Coordinator, 500 Lcffayerte Rd, Box 25, SI. Pau], Mhz 55] 55 / 651-296-7863 AUTHORIZATION TO USE COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL Authorization No. NI-INRP-2003-0001 NAME OF AUTHORIZED USER: Jonathon Blaha Liesch Associates, Inc. 13400 15~ Avenue North Plymouth, MN 55441 WORK BEING AUTHORIZED: Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program Index and Full Record printouts sent August 19, 2002, for Natural Heritage information for the vicinity of proposed Schmidt Gravel Mine, T33N R26W Section 10, Sherbume County. Contact #: ERDB 20030175 NATURE OF USE: Include print-outs in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Schmidt Gravel Mine. This letter contains the terms and conditions under which the State of Minnesota. Department of Natural Resources is authorizing you to reproduce the above-described work. The State of Minnesota, is and remains the owner of this work, and reproduction of it is not allowed without our express permission. Permission is granted to you without fee. Your right to reproduce the work is limited to that use set forth above under the heading NATURE OF USE. If you wish to expand your use beyond these parameters, you will have to obtain separate permission from us. The permission granted to reproduce is given to you alone, on a non-exclusive basis, and you may not transfer your right to reproduce to any other person or entity. In order to protect our rights to the work, the following notice must be affixed to all items employing the work: Copyrighted [year], State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources Reprinted with Permission We ask that the notice be located on the work in a place where it will be easily seen by those who come into contact with the work. The authorization granted to you to reproduce the above-described work will last for a period of one year, with the period beginning on the date of this letter. If you wish to reproduce the work beyond one year, it will be necessary to obtain a new authorization. In this regard, we would ask that you contact us at least one month before the end of the present authorization period so that your use of the work may be uninterrupted. Of course, we expect you to maintain high quality standards on all items containing the above-described work. This authorization does not give you the right to use the department name or any of its logos and is not an endorsement of the user or the user's material. This letter describes the scope of your authorization to use the above-described work. Your use of the work is acceptanCe on your part of all the terms and conditions set forth herein. State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources / Title: Environmental Review Coordinator Date: September 9, 2002 MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE September 16, 2002 Mr. Jonathon Blaha Liesch Associates 12400 15th Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55441 RE: Schmidt Gravel Mine T33 R26 S 10 NE, Elk River, Sherbume County SHPO Number: 2002-3959 Dear Mr. Blaha: Thank you for consulting with our office during the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the above referenced project. Based on our review of the project information, we conclude that there are no properties listed on 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. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the assisting federal agency. Please contact us at (651) 296-5462 if you have any questions regarding our comments on this project. Sincerely, Dennis A. Gimmestad Government Programs and Compliance Officer 345 KELLOGG BOULEVA. R1) WEST / SA.INT PAUl., MINNESOTA 55102-1906 TEI.EPHONE: 65]-296-6126 Li= CH LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 13400 15TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55441 763/559-1423 FAX: 763/559-2202 August 7, 2002 Ms. Sarah Jordan-Beimers State Historical Society 345 Kellogg Boulevard West St. Paul, MN 55101 File Search for Property: Approximate 60-acres located in NW ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 10 and the North ½ of the NE ¼ of the NE ¼ of Section 10, Township 33 North, Range 26 West, City of Elk River, Sherbume County, Minnesota Dear Ms. Jordan-Beimers: Liesch Associates, Inc. (Liesch) would like to request an archeological, historical and cultural resources search for the above-referenced property in Elk River, Minnesota which meets the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, procedures of the Advisory Council of Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties (referred to as Section 106 and 36CFR800, respectively). Liesch is interested in identifying any verified archeological, historical or cultural attributes associated with the property. The above-referenced property currently contains one house with the remaining portions used for agricultural crop production. A site location map has been included which identifies the property. Please forward the results of the search to Liesch. This information is part of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) being conducted at the above-referenced property and will be included in the EAW submitted to the Responsible Government Unit (RGU). I look forward to receiving the requested information as soon as possible. If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at (763) 489-3178 or e- mail me at ion.blaha~liesch.com. Sincerely, LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. Enclosure w:\env\ 64480\ltr-histofical file.080602.doc ~ ~ ~ 3'~' ~::~?~)-~-~. -- ~ Jl~, ~ ..... I: -"i ....... ?~'~ '.~ .' ~'~'..'~".', ' ,3~ ..... '~ '~.- .... 1 .'-,, ,..~ - / :../.'~ "., ~-- ~ V'Y'2~ ~'~ ...... ~ ..... ~ "". ~ ~ ....... ~ > .... ~ ?, ",.~ ,- . ~ , , ~.,~ ~;~.,., ~, ..~?'7' ~ ... .' .., ,. _ ,. ~'.', ~:, ~' ~ VI · .' ' ~ .~ ~ - ~ ~-~-- ,~.~~~ ~ ~-~"' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-'~ . .. ~ ~ > ,~ ~,~ _ ~ _ ~- ~ _~ ~ -...~;~?.,~.., ~ .... ~ ,:'~~~~ f~ ..... '.:. ~,"~.~.~.. ~:> : ~.~., .. · __.~_~ ~ ....... .. g~ .... . ..... ..~ ~, ~ /~' , ~.., (' ~ ~...1 ,~ I~?.~ ~;.~ ~,. ) ~x ~ ,, ,'~ r,.: '~-., ~9~.~'~'.: Source: USGS 7.5 Minute Ouadran~le. Elk River and Lake Freemont. ~. 1961. revised 1993. Scale: 1" = 2,000' : Property Location Map Aug 02 LIE Hydrogeotogim. Enginee~. Environmental Scienti,t, Schmidt Gravel Mine Figure ~0 G~holl ~, Suite 203 13a~ 15,~ Avenue N 4300 N Mill~ Rd, Sui:e 200 Ma~i~ofi, < 53713 Minneapolis, ~ ~n~ S~ot,~a~*,~ ~:~ Elk ~ver, Minnesota {608) ~3-I$32 (763) 489-3100 (4g0) I I