02-04-08 PCITEM 3-1f
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners@1nacplanning.com
11 O Z \ 1 Wil
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht, AICP
DATE: 29 January 2008
RE: Otsego — Banack CUP
NAC FILE: 176.02-08.
BACKGROUND
The Planning Commission opened a public hearing at their meeting on 22 January 2007
to consider a conditional use permit application to allow construction of a home on Lot
5, Block 1 Island View Estates. Information was submitted as part of the public hearing
indicating that the subject site and an abutting lot were under common ownership, which
in accordance with Section 20-95-4 of the Zoning Ordinance would make the property
unbuildable. The Planning Commission tabled the application to allow City staff to
research the issue further.
ANALYSIS
The current ownership of Lots 4 and 5, Block 1 Island View Estates is as follows:
Lot 4, Block 1: Randolph P. and Barbara C. Henk
Lot 5, Block 1: Barbara C. Neddermeyer
Ms. Neddermeyer and Ms. Henk are the same person. Ms. Neddermeyer-Henk owned
Lot 4, Block 1 with a previous husband who passed away and she has remarried. She
now jointly owns Lot 4, Block 1 with Mr. Henk. In 1986, Ms. Neddermeyer-Henk and
her previous husband acquired Lot 5, Block 1, which she now owns independently.
Under this situation, Section 20-94-5.E of the Zoning Ordinance renders Lot 5, Block 1
unbuildable and it must be considered as a zoning lot combined with Lot 4, Block 1
based on contiguous ownership on the date the WS District was adopted as part of the
Otsego Zoning Ordinance on 27 December 1994:
20-95-4E. If in a group of two or more contiguous lots under a single
ownership any individual lot does not meet the lot width
requirements of the local ordinance, such individual lot cannot be
considered as a separate parcel of land for purposes of sale or
development, but must be combined with adjacent lots under the
same ownership so that the combination of lots will equal one or
more parcels of land each meeting the lot width requirements of the
local ordinance, or to the greatest extent practical.
City staff discussed the applicant's options to proceed with an application to construct a
house with DNR staff given the WS District issues. Both City staff and DNR staff agree
that the City and DNR would be within their authority to declare Lots 4 and 5 to be a
zoning lot for the purposes of complying with the current minimum lot area requirement
of 2.5 acres based on contiguous ownership that existed in 1994 when Otsego adopted
its WS District. However, the provisions of Section 20-95-4 of the Zoning Ordinance
contemplate development of lots with less than the minimum lot area (down to parcels
with an area of 20,000 square feet) within the WS District. Development of these
substandard parcels is allowed provided that the construction and site work complies
with all other applicable provisions of the Zoning Ordinance in a manner consistent with
the intent of the regulations and compatible with the character of the area. City staffs
evaluation of applicant's development plan is that the proposed house construction
would meet all WS District requirements except the pre-existing lot area and lot width.
Only the ownership status, and not physical constraints caused by the non -conforming
lot dimensions, prevents development of the property.
Lot 5, Block 1 is one of 76 lots within Island View Estates approved on 24 May 1973
prior to adoption of the WS management plan but now subject to WS District
performance standards and there are 16 riparian lots along Kahler Avenue that are
approximately the same dimension as Lot 5, Block 1. City staff believes that only three
of the lots in Island View Estates that are within the WS District, including Lot 5, Block 1
are vacant. The other two lots (and an outlot) are also riparian and are located
northeast of Lot 5, Block 1. These lots have severe drainage issues that City staff has
previously advised the property owner(s) will require their combination in order to allow
for any construction. As such, Lot 5, Block 1 is unique in that it is the only one of 76
lots prevented from development within Island View Estates based only on its
ownership status and the owner of Lot 5, Block 1 is being denied reasonable
entitlements allowed for other properties within the same R-1/WS District. That the
application of the WS District lot requirements makes this lot unbuildable when other
lots of the same size within the same plat were developed may be a hardship justifying
a variance as provided for Section 20-6-2.B.2.b of the Zoning Ordinance:
20-6-2.B.2.b. Literal interpretation of the provisions of this Chapter would
deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other
properties in the same district under the terms of this Chapter or
deny the applicant the ability to put the property in question to any
reasonable use.
2
Variances within the WS District are subject not only to approval by the City Council, but
certification by the DNR. City staff recognizes that the factors outlined above may be a
hardship unique to this property justifying a potential variance related to application of
the WS District to specific only to Otsego. However, the DNR must ensure consistent
implementation of the WS management plan along the entire Mississippi River.
Recognizing this and the City's own past practice of not approving variances, another
option other than a variance was discussed by City staff and DNR staff.
Lot 5, Block 1 became a non -conforming lot of record upon the date that Wright County
adopted WS District regulations on 1 August 1978. In 1990, the Otsego incorporated as
a City and in 1994 adopted as part of the local Zoning Ordinance essentially the same
WS District regulations that had applied to Lot 5, Block 1 since 1978. Lot 5, Block 1
would have been considered a buildable substandard lot at the time it was purchased
by the Neddermeyers in 1986 but for Otsego's incorporation and adoption of a local WS
District in 1994. Therefore, the consensus of City staff and DNR staff is to propose an
amendment to Section 20-95-4 of the Zoning Ordinance to state that substandard lots
had to exist under separate ownership upon the specific date that WS District
regulations were adopted by Wright County. City staff and DNR staff agree that such
an amendment would be consistent with the intent of the WS District regulations that
have applied to Otsego and Lot 5, Block 1 since adoption of the Management Plan,
allowances granted other properties under similar physical conditions and would avoid
any potential precedents for Otsego and the DNR that may result from approval of a
variance.
The applicant has submitted an additional application to amend Section 20-94-5 of the
Zoning Ordinance as outlined above and a public hearing scheduled for 19 February
2007. An ordinance amending of Section 20-94-5 of the Zoning Ordinance has been
drafted by City staff that would allow for development of substandard lots of record
existing under separate ownership on 1 August 1978 as a conditional use subject to
compliance with all other applicable provisions of the WS District and the Zoning
Ordinance. DNR staff has stated that the amendment would be certified if approved by
the City Council.
The City Engineer is also reviewing a detailed site and grading plan for construction of a
single family home Lot 5, Block 1 relative to the area drainage issues and bluff erosion
concerns raised during the public hearing on 22 January 2008. Their office's
recommendations will be available at the public hearing on 18 February 2008. City staff
would note however that concerns related to the integrity of the retaining walls on Lot 6,
Block 1 is a property maintenance issue that is the responsibility of that property owner.
The decision to build these retaining walls to allow for construction of a home upon Lot
6, Block1 should not infringe on the property rights for Lot 5, Block 1 and their
maintenance would not be a reasonable criteria related to the conditions for
development of substandard lots within the WS District set forth by the existing and/or
proposed requirements of Section 20-95-4 of the Zoning Ordinance.
CONCLUSION
A public hearing has been scheduled for 18 February 2008 to consider an amendment
to Section 20-95-4 of the Zoning Ordinance and a CUP for development of a
substandard lot within the WS District based on the proposed ordinance amendment
language. No action regarding the Banack application is required by the Planning
Commission at their meeting on 4 February 2008.
C. Mike Robertson, City Administrator
Judy Hudson, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator
Tim Rochel, Building Official
Ron Wagner, City Engineer
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Dale Homuth, DNR
Roger Stradal, DNR
Barbara Henk, property owner
Joe Banack, applicant
11
ORDINANCE NO.: 2008 -
CITY OF OTSEGO
COUNTY OF WRIGHT, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING
SUBSTANDARD LOTS WITHIN THE WSRR DISTRICT.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF OTSEGO DOES HEREBY ORDAIN:
Section 1. Section 20-95-4 of the Zoning Ordinance is hereby amended to read as
follows:
20-95-4: SUBSTANDARD LOTS: Any lot of record established on or before
August 1, 1978 that does not meet the dimensional requirements of this
Section may be allowed as a building site subject to approval of a conditional
use permit, provided that:
A. The use is allowed in the WSRR District and base zoning district.
B. If two or more contiguous lots were under common ownership on August 1,
1978, any individual lot that does not meet the minimum lot area or lot width
requirements of this Section shall not be considered as a separate parcel of
land for purposes of sale or development, but must be combined with
adjacent lots under the same ownership so that the combination of lots will
equal one or more lots each meeting the lot requirements of this Section to
the greatest extent practical.
C. The lot is at least twenty thousand (20,000) square feet in area.
D. The proposed use shall comply with all applicable setback requirements of
the WS District and base zoning district.
E. Sewage treatment is provided for as required by Chapter 6, Section 3 of the
City Code.
Section 2. This Ordinance shall become effective immediately upon its passage
and publication.
MOTION BY:
SECOND BY:
ALL IN FAVOR:
THOSE OPPOSED:
ADOPTED by the Otsego City Council this 25th day of February, 2008.
CITY OF OTSEGO
AA
Larry Fournier, Mayor
ATTEST:
Judy Hudson, Zoning Administrator/City Clerk
ITEM 3-2
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422
Telephone: 763.231.2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners@nacpianning.com
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Otsego Planning Commission
FROM: Daniel Licht, AICP
RE: Otsego — ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
REPORT DATE: 31 January 2008
NAC FILE: 176.02 — 06.27
BACKGROUND
Eagle Trucking Inc. and Frattalone Companies have submitted plans for excavation of
approximately 946,460 cubic yards of sand and gravel from 63.15 acres of the 100 acre
property owned by Randy and Karen Pouliot located northwest of Mason Avenue and
83rd Street. The proposed excavation would occur in three phases to remove gravel
from the hill straddling the west property line of the subject site.
The Comprehensive Plan guides the subject site for future low density residential
development within Urban Service Expansion Area W2. The subject site is zoned A-1,
Agriculture Rural Service District and the Shoreland Overlay District of Otsego Creek.
The current use of the property includes a dairy farmstead and tilled crop land, which is
a permitted use within the A-1 District. Excavation and transport off-site of more than
50 cubic yards of material from a site within the A-1 District requires an interim use
permit (IUP) when not related to a development plan subject to other zoning or
subdivision approvals.
A citizen's petition requesting preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet
(EAW) for a previous application to excavate the site had been received on 29 January
2007. In accordance with Minnesota Rules 4410.1100, Subp. 5, the EQB has
determined that the City of Otsego is the Responsible Government Unit (RGU) in
deciding if an EAW is to be required. Upon submission of the current application, the
City Council considered the need for an EAW at their meeting on 23 April 2007 and
ordered preparation of a Discretionary EAW in accordance with Minnesota Rules
4410.1000, Subp. 3.A. After the EAW was ordered, the scope of the project was
increased and as proposed exceeds the threshold for a mandatory EAW under
Minnesota Rules 4410.4300 Subp. 12.13.
Exhibits:
A. Aerial Photograph
B. Future Land Use Plan
C. Sewer Staging Plan
D. Excavation Comparison (3 sheets)
E. Project summary dated December 5, 2007
F. Plan set dated 12-7-07 (14 sheets)
G. Environmental Assessment Worksheet dated 7 January 2008 by reference
ANALYSIS
Application. Section 20-4-2.13 of the Zoning Ordinance provides that any person with
interest in property within the City may make application for an IUP as allowed within
the various zoning districts. Consideration of IUP applications are quasi-judicial actions
in that the decision of the City Council must be based on whether established criteria
and standards relating to public health, safety and general welfare or consistency with
the Comprehensive Plan have been satisfied. The requirements for excavation uses
are specified in Chapter 7, Section 7 of the City Code and Section 24 of the Zoning
Ordinance (with related general requirements in Section 16). Evaluation of the request
by the Planning Commission and City Council is to be based upon (but not limited to)
the following criteria established by Section 20-2-4.F of the Zoning Ordinance:
The proposed action's consistency with the specific policies and provisions of the
Otsego Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed use's compatibility with present and future land uses of the area
3. The proposed use's conformity with all performance standards contained within
the Zoning Ordinance and other provisions of the City Code.
4. Traffic generation of the proposed use in relation to capabilities of streets serving
the property.
5. The proposed use can be accommodated by existing public services and
facilities and will not overburden the City's service capacity.
A decision to approve or deny the application must be based on information presented
as part of the application, City staff reports and legally sufficient testimony at the public
hearing in relation to requirements for allowing the excavation. Community opposition
to an allowed use of property is not a legally sufficient reason for denial of an application
when factual evidence, professional analysis and compliance with established
performance standards has been provided for or conditioned as part of the application.
Surrounding Land Uses. The subject site is surrounded by the following
proposed/existing land uses:
2
Direction
Land Use Plan
Zoning Map
Existing Use
North
LD Residential
A-1 District
Agricultural fields
Rural Single Family
East
LD Residential
A-1 District
Agricultural fields
Rural Single Family
South
LD Residential
A-1 District
Agriculture fields
Farmstead
West
LD Residential
A-1 District
Agriculture fields
The subject site and surrounding area north of 80th Street is within Urban Service
Expansion Area W2, where sanitary sewer and water utilities may be available within an
estimated 10 to 15 years. Until utilities are extended, the Comprehensive Plan directs a
continuation of rural land uses and rural residential densities not exceeding one dwelling
unit per 10 acres. In allowing excavation for transport uses as an interim use within the
A-1 District, compliance with performance standards imposed by the Zoning Ordinance
on the proposed use is considered to be sufficient to ensure compatibility of the grading
operation with existing surrounding uses.
With respect to future uses in the area, the limited extent of the grading operation being
proposed and the defined phasing of the excavation that will establish a defined period
of the operation provide that the activity will be completed well in advance of any urban
residential development in the area. Included as part of the application is a final grading
plan showing the site restored to elevations suitable for future low density residential
uses guided by the Comprehensive Plan. The elevations for the final grading plan are
based on the City's Trunk Sanitary Sewer Collection System Plan.
ISD 728 has purchased the 80 acres immediately west of the subject site for future
development of school facilities. The timeframe for construction of the future school
facilities is unknown at this time. Future development of a school on the ISD 728
property will require a Zoning Map amendment and other zoning approvals. No
application has been received by the City for a Zoning Map amendment and there is no
entitlement for a school use on the ISD 728 property. The City may only consider the
property as guided for future low density residential uses by the adopted Future Land
Use Plan and the timing of future development in accordance with the Urban Service
Staging Plan. In the interim, ISD 728 has made an agreement with the applicant to
allow construction of haul roads across their property to provide access from the
excavation site to MacIver Avenue at 80th Street. .
Project Description. The subject site is a 100 acre property located northwest of
Mason Avenue and 83rd Street. The operator is proposing to excavate approximately
63.15 acres of the property to extract approximately 946,460 cubic yards of sand and
gravel material for exportation from the subject site. The effect of the excavation will be
to lower the hill southwest of the existing farmstead approximately 40 feet and the hill
northwest of the farmstead approximately 35 feet. The resulting grade will be at
elevations consistent with the eastern portions of the subject site along Otsego Creek or
not more than 10 feet below the existing farmstead in the center of the property. The
maximum slope from the lowest grade to the top elevations at the west and north
perimeter of the site is a 5:1 slope (run:rise), which is a gradual enough to allow for
reestablishment of agricultural use after the excavation is complete. Slopes greater
than 3:1 are considered steep.
The proposed excavation is to occur in three phases beginning in 2008 and ending in
2009. As each phase is completed, the area would be restored to the elevations shown
on the final grading plan to allow for resumption of crop production and potential future
development of low density residential uses. The area upon which the farmstead sits
will be undisturbed as part of the proposed excavation and would be lowered to match
surrounding grades at such time as the property develops with urban uses. The table
below summarizes the proposed phasing plan:
Phase
Year
Volume
Area
1
2008
464,460 cu/ ds.
24.05ac.
2
2009
482,000 cu/ ds.
28.74ac.
3
2009
24,000 cu/ ds.
10.36ac.
To better illustrate the scope of the project, the City Engineer has complied information
regarding past mining permits and development related earth work occurring within
Otsego. The City has previously issued seven mining permits of which, only one is still
active at the southwest quadrant of TH 101 and CSAH 37 (Mining Permit #7). The
volume of material to be removed from the subject site indicating traffic generation is
less than that for Mining Permit #7 and Mining Permits #1 and #4, which excavated the
area at the northwest quadrant of TH 101 and CSAH 37 where The Pointe subdivision
was developed (same site). The City Engineer has also provided information
comparing the overall 63.15 acres of the subject site to be disturbed in comparison with
past mining permits and developments using mass grading indicating potential dust,
erosion or other earth work related concerns. While the total disturbed area of the
subject site is proposed to be larger than the other past mining permits, there are 10
subdivisions developed within the City since 2003 that have mass graded larger areas
than the total area of the proposed excavation. The area of the subject site actively
excavated at any one time based on the phasing plan will be less than the mass graded
area of any of the 15 subdivisions listed.
Site Plan. The submitted site plan identifies the locations of interior haul roads that will
be utilized during the excavation, the location of temporary office, trash, restroom
parking and crusher equipment north of the farmstead and stockpile locations for top
soil stripped from the excavation area to be replaced as part of the final grading plan.
The use of an on-site crusher has been interpreted an incidental accessory use to
excavation activities previously permitted in the City. The table below illustrates
setbacks applicable to the structures/equipment within the proposed staging area:
North
East
South
West
Required 50 ft.
35 ft.
35 ft.
10 ft.
Proposed 450 ft.
525 ft.
1800 ft.
525 ft.
Otsego Creek. Otsego Creek crosses the eastern portion of property from south to
north parallel to Mason Avenue. Otsego Creek is a designated Mississippi River
Tributary and land within 300 feet of the Creek is included with a Shoreland Overlay
District. All excavation activities meet the minimum setback of 100 feet from the
centerline of Otsego Creek. Silt fencing is required at the perimeter of active excavation
areas and top soil stockpiles are required to be seeded to minimize erosion. Run off
from the grading area to Otsego Creek will pass through stormwater basins constructed
with each phase as shown on the grading plan to protect water quality allowing
sedimentation to settle out before reaching Otsego Creek and control stormwater flow to
current rates. The provision of proper stormwater management facilities is subject to
the requirements of Section 20-16-9 of the Zoning Ordinance and approval of the City
Engineer.
Access. The site plan provides for a system of internal gravel haul roads to move
within the subject site. Access to the site and transport of material from the site will
utilize a 30 foot wide gravel haul road leaving the subject site and running south along
the west side of the ISD 728 property to the MacIver Avenue / 80th Street intersection.
A rock construction entrance as specified by the Engineering Manual will be installed at
the site entrance along with a security gate. Signs indicating "truck hauling" will also be
installed on MacIver Avenue and 80th Street approaching the site. A Letter of Credit
(LOC) must be established as security to provide for on-going repair of street damage
caused by the operation.
The traffic to be generated by the proposed excavation is expected to generate 184
trips per day, which is within the capacity of MacIver Avenue. The Institute of
Transportation Engineers estimates a single family home generates an average of 10
trips per day illustrating that the traffic volume generated by the proposed excavation is
equivalent to 19 homes. MacIver Avenue will be the only haul route allowed requiring
trucks to travel south to CSAH 37 for access to regional construction projects. MacIver
Avenue was completed in 2004 and is constructed to a 10 -ton, MSA collector street
standard. According to the City Engineer, the roadway has capacity to carry 12,000
vehicles per day of which 20 percent or 2,400 trips may be anticipated to be trucks.
ISD 728 contracts with Vision Transportation, Inc. for school bus service and the
contractor is responsible for establishing the school bus routes and stop locations. City
staff contacted Vision Transportation, Inc. regarding school bus routes on MacIver
Avenue and received the following information:
AM
PM
Routes
Stop
Routes
Stop
Traveling
Locations
Traveling
Locations
MacIver
MacIver
High School
1
7625 MacIver
1
No stop
1
No stop
1
75t / MacIver
Middle School
None
_ _
1
No stop
Otsego Elem.
1
7625 MacIver
1
7625 MacIver
1
None
Rogers Elem.
1
No stop
1
No stop
1
No stop
1 No stop
No stop
Vision Transportation will review the current school bus routes to determine if these
stops can be relocated away from MacIver Avenue. However, the design of the
MacIver Avenue is adequate to accommodate a bus stop having a 46 foot width from
back of curb to back of curb allowing for two 12 foot drive lanes, 10 foot shoulders and
17 foot boulevards. Furthermore, Minnesota Statutes 169.444 provides that when a
school bus is stopped on a public street or location where school bus stop signs have
been erected and is displaying an extended stop signal arm and flashing red lights,
vehicles approaching the bus are required to stop at least 20 feet away from the bus
and are not allowed to move until the school bus stop signal arm is retracted and the
red lights are no longer flashing. City staff recommends posting bus stop signs at
locations on MacIver Avenue at the designated stops.
Questions regarding the operator's vehicle safety record would be beyond the City's
land use jurisdiction except to require compliance with all traffic laws and that vehicles
be licensed and maintained for use on public streets. The City also cannot impose
restrictions on the use of air brakes as the City cannot regulate what braking force the
driver deems necessary to slow or stop the truck operating on public streets.
Hours of Operation. Section 20-24-6.B of the Zoning Ordinance specifies the allowed
hours of operation for the proposed use are limited to 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM Monday
through Friday unless specifically extended by the permit. These hours are more
restrictive than the earth work allowed for subdivision development regulated by the
Engineering Manual, which allows hours of operation between 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM
Monday through Friday and 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturdays. City staff recommends
allowing operations hours in accordance with Engineering Manual consistent with
Mining Permit #7 and other development related earth work that occurred in the area
while also prohibiting grading activity on the site during Federal holidays
Wetlands. Existing wetlands on the property have been delineated and are shown on
the grading plan. Wetland 3 in the west portion of the site will be temporarily impacted
by construction of a haul road including installation of a culvert. The construction of the
temporary haul road impacting the wetland and other potential wetland impacts are
subject to review by the City Engineer and issuance of a wetland permit.
Drainage/Erosion Control. The applicant has provided grading and erosion control
plans for the three phases of excavation. The grading and erosion control plans are
subject to review and approval by the City Engineer.
Dust. Section 20-16-12 of the Zoning Ordinance requires compliance with MPCA
Minnesota Regulations APC 7005 standards pertaining to air quality. Research done by
the City Engineer indicates that dust from grading operations similar to that proposed
and that have occurred elsewhere in the City do not exceed MPCA limits and that most
of the dust travels no more than 300 feet beyond the grading site. To limit the amount
of dust generated by the grading activity, Best Management Practices will be required,
interior haul roads and staging areas must be surfaced with Class 5 and the operator
will be required to apply water and/or chemical dust control as necessary. A rock
construction entrance at 83rd Street consistent with City Standard Plate 505 will be
provided to minimize dirt being carried out onto the public street. City staff recommends
0
that the operator be required to keep a street sweeper on site and sweep approaching
streets daily as deemed necessary by the City Engineer and/or Public Works
Supervisor.
Noise. The applicant has submitted specifications for the proposed crushing equipment
to be located on the subject site demonstrating compliance with MPCA Minnesota
Regulations NPC 7010. Other equipment used on site including excavators, front end
loaders, graters, rollers tractors and trucks are common to development related
activities and do not generate noise above MPCA limits.
Ground Water Impacts. There is to be no on-site well for the grading operation and
water may be obtained from existing City wells at a cost to the operator as needed. The
applicant has provided soil boring information that indicates that the proposed
excavation will be no less than 10 feet above the known ground water level. The City
Engineer has concluded that there will be o impact to the water table or area wells is
anticipated as a result of the excavation.
Vibration. The proposed use involves primarily excavation and grading of the subject
site. No piling or other similar actions are anticipated as part of this operation. Past
environmental studies regarding similar grading operations have not identified vibration
impacts as a potential concern.
Tree Preservation. The property owner has removed existing trees from the northwest
corner of the Pouliot property that would have been disturbed by the excavation, which
is not restricted by the Zoning Ordinance. Any remaining trees within the Pouliot
property along the boundary with the ISD 728 property will also be removed as a result
of the excavation.
Securities. Section 20-24-7 of the Zoning Ordinance allows the City to require a
security to provide for necessary erosion control, site restoration and project oversight.
The amounts of securities to be required are to be determined by the City Engineer and
submitted in a form approved by the City Attorney.
Performance Agreement. City staff recommends execution of a performance
agreement by the property owner and operator for the proposed use. The performance
agreement will establish the terms and conditions of the CUP approval provide for
administration and inspection of the operation and an escrow for costs incurred in the
administration of the permit and the terms of the securities. The performance
agreement is to be drafted by the City Attorney and is subject to approval by the City
Council.
RECOMMENDATION
The scope of the excavation operation proposed to occur on the ISD 728 / Pouliot
property is not unusual and is similar in character to past mining permits issued by the
City and earth work completed as part of approved subdivision development.
Furthermore, the proposed grading operation conforms to the requirements established
by the Zoning Ordinance and City Code for excavation operations. City staff
recommends making a finding that the proposed project does not have potential for
significant environmental effects and approval of the IUP as set forth below.
POSSIBLE ACTIONS
Decision 1 — Environmental Assessment Worksheet
A. Motion to recommend that the proposed development plan does not have
potential for significant environmental effects and that preparation of an EIS is
not to be required based on a review of the submitted EAW and evidence
received, subject to the following condition:
The project shall proceed in conformance with IUP and applicable
stipulations as may be approved by the City Council.
B. Motion to recommend that the proposed development plan does have potential
for significant environmental effects and that preparation of an EIS is to be
required based on a review of the submitted EAW and evidence received.
C. Motion to table.
Decision 2 — Conditional Use Permit
A. Motion to approve an IUP allowing excavation for transport of the subject site
based on the submitted plans and other information received to date, subject to
the following conditions:
The comments of the Engineering Review dated January 31, 2008 are to
be addressed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
2. The use is allowed pursuant to the submitted plans and information
approved by the City Council except as modified herein, including but not
limited to the excavation phasing plan and shall at all times comply with
the requirements of the City Code, Zoning Ordinance, Engineering Manual
and the conditions of this permit.
3. The Final Grading / Closure Plan shall be completed within 30 days after
termination of use of the Property. The reclamation/restoration security will
be returned to the Property Owner upon confirmation by the City Engineer
that all aspects of the Reclamation and Restoration Plan have been
completed and ground cover is established.
4. The hours of operation are restricted to 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM Monday
through Friday and 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM on Saturday. No activities related
to the grading operation shall occur outside of these times. Operations
are prohibited on Sundays and Federal holidays.
5. The Property Owner and Operator shall cause the property or equipment
located on the property to be secured from unauthorized entry. A locked
gate across the haul road shall be installed and locked appropriately when
mining is not in operation.
6. Signs designating school bus stops shall be installed at locations
determined by ISD 728 and their transportation contractor, subject to
approval of the City Engineer.
7. Vehicles used for hauling material from the site shall be subject to the
following restrictions:
a. All vehicles shall be licensed and maintained as required to operate
on public streets.
b. Vehicles shall obey all traffic laws.
C. Vehicles shall be limited to the following routes to/from the subject
site:
MacIver Avenue between 60th Street and 80th Street.
d. Vehicles shall be subject to seasonal road weight restrictions on
local streets.
8. The operator shall comply with MPCA Minnesota Regulations APC 7005
and institute the following additional measures to control dust related to
the operation:
a. A rock construction access consistent with City Standard Plate 505
shall be provided at the site entrance.
b. Provide for daily sweeping of streets approaching the site entrance
as deemed necessary by the City Engineer and/or Public Works
Supervisor.
C. All interior haul roads and processing or staging areas shall be
surfaced with Class 5, subject to approval of the City Engineer.
d. Apply water/chemical dust treatment to haul roads and exposed
soils as deemed necessary by the City Engineer.
9. Site drainage and erosion control shall be provided for as required by the
Zoning Ordinance and Engineering Manual, subject to review and
approval of the City Engineer.
10. The Property Owner and Operator shall provide proof of an NPDES
permit issued by the State of Minnesota for the Property, and Property
Owner shall comply at all times with the conditions of that permit.
11. Noise generated on the subject site in relation to grading activities shall
conform to Section 20-16-14 of the Zoning Ordinance with reference to
MPCA Minnesota Regulations NPC 7010.
12. The property owner and operator shall provide the following securities as
a letter of credit or cash escrow in amounts approved by the City Engineer
within a performance agreement executed between the property owner,
operator and City:
a. Erosion control and restoration security in the amount of $3,000.00
per gross acre of land being actively graded or not fully restored at
the completion of each phase.
b. A street security as determined by the City Engineer for repair and
overlay of designated City street haul routes damaged by vehicles
involved in the exportation of material from the subject site,
including trips to and from the subject site.
C. A security in the amount of $10,000.00 for daily street sweeping.
The security shall be re-established to $10,000.00 each time its
balance falls below $1,000.00. The intent of the escrow is to allow the
City Public Works Department to complete the required daily street
sweeping if the operator fails to do so and recover costs incurred in
this action. The City shall provide Property Owner with a monthly
statement detailing any charges against the escrow.
d. A cash escrow in the amount of $5,000.00 for the purposes of
assuring that the City has funds available to cover costs of
administering the operation. The escrow shall be re-established to
$5,000.00 each time its balance falls below $1,000.00. It is the intent
of this Agreement that the City have available to it at all times
sufficient funds to administer the operation.
e. The City shall provide Operator with a monthly statement detailing
any charges against the escrow.
10
At the end of the operation all remaining unused securities shall be
returned to the Operator.
13. The property owner and grading operator shall execute a performance
agreement with the City regarding the conditions of the IUP and provide all
securities and administrative escrows required by it, subject to approval of
the City Attorney.
B. Motion to deny the application as the request is inconsistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
C. Mike Robertson, City Administrator
Judy Hudson, City Clerk/Zoning Administrator
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Ron Wagner, City Engineer
Roger Stradal, DNR
Gregg Downing, EQB
Butch Belair, Eagle Trucking, Inc.
Randy and Karen Pouliot, property owners
Dr. Mark Bezek, ISD 728
Ben Bastyr, EAW Petitioner's Representative
11
m
And-,
250 500 1,000
Feet
83RD
77TH
n IT, lu
250 500 1,000
Feet
83RD
77TH
EXCAVATION COMPARISON
DAVIS MISSISSIPPI COVES
0 50,000
NORINS LANDING
7 80,000
MINING PERMIT #1
F-] 90,000
v MINING PERMIT #3
144,000
w
0 MINING PERMIT #5
w
190,000
CL
H
Z MINING PERMIT #6
w
230,000
m
a
0 MINING PERMIT #2
37C,000
w
w
0 GATEWAY NORTH
37
,000
MINING PERMIT #8 50,000
MINING PERMIT #7 1,300
MINING PERMIT #4
2,800,000
0 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 2,000,000 2,500,000 3,000,000
VOLUME HAULED OFFSITE (CU. YDS)
SOURCE: HAKANSON ANDERSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
EXCAVATION COMPARISON
SOURCE: HAKANSON ANDERSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
0 50 100 150 200
DEVELOPMENT AREA (ACRES)
232
Q1111
MINING PERMIT #3
=1 7.5
MINING PERMIT #1
8
MINING PERMIT #2
17
MINING PERMIT #6
25
MINING PERMIT #7
33
MINING PERMIT #5
34
REMINGTON COVES
38
PLEASANT CREEK FARMS 2ND - 4TH ADDITIONS
41
CRIMSON PONDS WEST
148
OTSEGO WATERFRONT EAST 1ST - 3RD ADDITIONS
151
MINING PERMIT #4
152
NORINS LANDING
59
H.
MINING PERMIT #8
65
U
w
OTSEGO PRESERVE 1 ST - 3RD ADDITIONS
70
p
WILDFLOWER MEADOWS
71
CL
a
GREAT RIVER CENTRE
191
F-
KITTREDGE CROSSINGS 1 -9TH ADDITIONS
z
w
GATEWAY NORTH
CL
ZIMMER FARMS 1 ST - 6TH ADDITIONS
i
DAVIS MISSISSIPPI COVES
Lu
MARTIN FARMS
Lu
o
ARBOR CREEK 1ST - 4TH ADDITIONS
RIVERWOOD NATIONAL
SOURCE: HAKANSON ANDERSON ASSOCIATES, INC.
0 50 100 150 200
DEVELOPMENT AREA (ACRES)
232
Q1111
JAN-30-2008(WED) 12;37
MINING PERMIT SUMMARY
Eagle Trucking Inc.
i
Frattalone Companies
November 30, 2006
Rovised January 22,2007
Revised April 10,2007
Revised Augusl 21,2007
Revised December 5,2007
Plans prepared by:
Solid Ground Engineering
4756 Banning Averue, Suite 206
White Bear Lake, MN. 55110
Phone - 651-407-6018
Fax - 651-407 6019
Summary prepared by E,igle Trucking Inc.
.0021016
JAN-30-2008(WED) 12;37
Excavation permit summary
Eagle Trucking Inc. and Frattalone Companies are requesting a permit that will be refered
to as "Pouloit Gravel Mining -Interim Use Pen -nit ". The permit will be refered as City
of Otsego mining permit # 8.
lntroduCtion I
Eagle Trucking, Inc. and Frattalone Companies are requesting a permit to excavate and export
material from the Randy and Karen Pouliot farm. The site is located on the NE corner of the
intersection of Mason Avenue NE and 83`� Street N;_. The total area to be excavated Is
approximately 63.15 acres with approximately 946,460 cubic yards of material exported. The
excavated soils will help provide an economical source of material for future city and private
projects. The goal is to have the project completed in 3 years (fall of 2010). When the mining
operation Is completed, the site will be returned to f{ rmland with option of future development.
The City of Otsego may use a Interim Use Permit for a period of one year that may be renewed
annually until the school is opened.
Plan of Operation
The proposed mining operation consists of 3 phase;:, Phase 1 Completed the summer of 2008,
Phases 2 $ 3 — Fall of 2009. Phaze-1 has 464,460 cubic yards,phase-2 has 482,000 cubic
yards,phase-3 has 24,000 cubic yards. The mining project will be in operation April - February
from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm Monday thru Friday and limited to daylight hours. Saturdays may be
worked with prior permission from the city. It is proposed that the topsoil will be stripped from the
phase area and stockpiled in a future phase. Once lopsoii has been stripped, mining and export
operations would begin. When the export materials in the phase have been exhausted, the
phase will be finish graded, topsoil re -spread and seeded. Erosion control blankets with seed will
be placed on steep slopes. Once the phase has been restored, the operation will move to the
next phase and the process will begin again.
The following table is an estimate of average loads per day/hour: Trucks returning to the pit
empty will double the trips per day/hour.
AVERAGE LOADS ARE BASED ON TRAILERS
Average
Loads
onuy Uumps I r.a cy, End dumps 17.5 cy. Side dumps 11.5 cy. Quad axels 14 cy, Tri axels 12 cy,
Tandems 10 cy.
It is anticipated that there will be crushing operations at the site approximately two weeks per
year. It is proposed that the contractor and city have weekly meetings to discuss any issues that
may arise. The access for the site will be on 83d Street NE and Macgiver ave. There will be a
parking lot and staging area on the southern side of tie site. The site will be gated to prevent
unauthorized access. For safety precautions If the proposed school is opened before the
completion date of the project, trucks will not haul out of the site during the arrival and departure
of students.
003/016
Material per
Trucks per
Trucks per
Years
Weeks
Das
day
Day
Hour
12
3
112
672
1409
81
8
Months
10
3
96
676
1644
94
10
1 Months
onuy Uumps I r.a cy, End dumps 17.5 cy. Side dumps 11.5 cy. Quad axels 14 cy, Tri axels 12 cy,
Tandems 10 cy.
It is anticipated that there will be crushing operations at the site approximately two weeks per
year. It is proposed that the contractor and city have weekly meetings to discuss any issues that
may arise. The access for the site will be on 83d Street NE and Macgiver ave. There will be a
parking lot and staging area on the southern side of tie site. The site will be gated to prevent
unauthorized access. For safety precautions If the proposed school is opened before the
completion date of the project, trucks will not haul out of the site during the arrival and departure
of students.
003/016
JRN 30-2008(WE0) 12.37 j �.00411
i
Haul routes, traffic control and toads Hauled
The travel routes proposed are the following_
Leave the site on the west side of the property usinc the temporary haul road j
to get to Maciver ave
Travel south on Maciver Ave to county 37, go east on county 37 to get to Hwy 101.
Travel south on Maciver Ave to 70 th street NE, traval west on 70tt street to get to county 19.
The materials will be hauled off site in belly dump trzilers, side dump trailers and tri axle or quad
axle dump trucks.
The contractor will provide a stop sign at the end of the entrance and truck hauling signs along
haul routes were needed.
Erosion control
Silt fence will be installed around the site to protect the adjacent properties in areas where Inoff
could occur. Silt fence will also be placed around the storm water basins to minimize
sedimentation. Topsoil stockpiles will be seeded immediately after placement. As stated atyove,
all steep slopes will receive erosion control blankets with seed. A rock construction entrance will
be placed on the access road, Ditch checks will be lzstalled in areas of concentrated
flows.Pending approval of the mining permit,the NPDES permit will be submitted to the city for
approval
Dust control and wind erosion e� ntrot
The interior roads will be sprayed with calcium chloride. There will be a water truck on site to
control additional dust. The contractor will purchase water from the city for dust control and wind
erosion control. Municipal water will be purchased from the City of Otsego for use in the water
truck. The project will be performed In separate phases. Each phase will be restored before
moving to the next phase.
Drainage_ control
With the excavating being started from the south going north In phases, the first 2 phases, storm
water will be directed to the storm water basin on the south east portion of the property_ In the
following phases, storm water will directed to the storm water basin on the north east portion of
the property.
$treet_sweeping and spill Clea. n up
The rock construction entrance will minlmize tracking onto the haul roads. However, there are
situations, especially after a rain, when the rock entrance is not enough. In these situations, a
road sweeper will be available on site to keep the roads dean. If there is a spill on the roadway,
the pit personnel will take responsibility for the clean up.
Proposed land use
After our completion of our excavation, the site will be restored back to farm land. All structures
and haul roads will be removed. The type of seed and mulch used on the slopes and field area
will be determined later.
16
JAN-30-2008(WED) 12:38
Ground Water
See attached soil borings for water table depths.
Per soil borings ground water ranges between elevvations 900 and 908. i f
Soll borings were performed by Baurley Brothers Inc. in November 2004. Contact person Frank.
Final grade
All silt fence, gates,fencing,haul roads and structurUS will be removed and all disturbed areas will
be restored at the and of the project.
Site closer I
The owners will grant a right of entry for one year from the date that the project doses, i
}
Right of entry
See attached form.
1
�. 005/ 16
0061JAN-30-2008(WED) 12:38
16
i
POULIOT BORROW SITE !
I I
RIGF.,i'I' OF ENTRE' AGREEWNT
j
I/We Randy and Karen Pouliot the owner(,) of tht. property commonly identified as R4S7 MaS4i
St NE(street),Qtsego(city/town), nLr zt(county), State of Minnesota
do hereby grant and give freely and without coercion, the right of access and entry to said
property in the CountylCity of Wri htg !Otsego, its agencies, contractors, and subcontractors j
thereof, for the purpose of evaluating the wetland and completed project for a period of one year!
i
I
y
Address and TYeph6ne Number
G-1
10/1
-5, -7
o ��
-Owner Date
Pouliot Mining Site
OTSEGO, MINNESOTA
Eagle Trucking, Inc. / Frattalone Companies OWNER:
a
a
m
/ °1\
solidgroL
ENGIN
C
CADJrIM l9M
1EINA 6q YYn�lo 06110
Phmt 661-4]R-7033
Randal T. Pouliot
8457 Mason Avenue NE
Otsego, MN 55330
763-497-3158
APPLICANTS:
Eagle Trucking, Inc.
20920 Forest Road N
Forest Lake, MN 55025
651-426-4141
and
Frattalone Companies
3205 Spruce Street
St. Paul, MN 55117
651-484-0448
GEOTECHNICIAL ENGINEER:
Braun Intertec
1826 Buerkle Road
St. Paul, MN 55110
651-487-3245
CIVIL ENGINEER:
Solid Ground Engineering, LLC
5386 Andelie Lane
White Bear Lake, MN 55110
651-472-3633
2. SITE PLAN
3. GRADING — EROSION CONTROL
PHASE 1
NORTH
4. GRADING — EROSION CONTROL
PHASE 1
SOUTH
5. GRADING — EROSION CONTROL
PHASE 2
NORTH
6. GRADING — EROSION CONTROL
PHASE 2
SOUTH
7. GRADING — EROSION CONTROL
PHASE 3
8. CLOSURE PLAN WEST
9. CLOSURE PLAN EAST
10. CROSS—SECTIONS A—A TO D—D
11. CROSS—SECTIONS E—E TO G—G
12. CROSS—SECTIONS H—H TO J—J
13. DETAILS
14. SURVEY / EXISTING CONDITIONS
Ronald J. Wagner, P.E. City Engineer
SURVEYOR:
E.G. Rud & Sons, Inc.
6776 Lake Drive NE, Suite 110
Lino Lakes, MN 55014 HIM
651-361-8200 MNNESOTA YAMQ UNFgTiR
901a10 SMALL CON M ro TIE
DONIEOL DENCEA ffl q TN F
W1N1AL M T]igIMY TIAiFID f
— LAYQIT{ (DAM JAMMY H
EXHIBIT F
za
®O w
UN
Q 3 I
� I
1
2WW BIL Roadway �—
We
..'.; ...
w.
v�
Pd IOtP '�' I Q
e f II W
W W
H
-Tem usher L 't n (n
i
4
l Interior Hau
; I a
uy o PHASE 3 _; iE
•sr PHASE 2 }: O O
R r' I U Q)
a
,.
Lu
t.
0 0
o
N I
0
I"
U (n
U
rn o
Interi yr Haul R !!''! W
LU
A'�'�.'t':': •.'. LU
Temp. Crusher Location'''"''' Z F-
-��... .... H W
':t:':::•:•:':':': .'. :•: :•' Z
W p
}ir:•:'- x IL
.. t....
PHASE 1 '. [i'}}:•ii:•l:::
t {i:':'r: 388ddd d3
HU��s`s
SCHOOL PROPERTY"-�
5
i i s
---26' Bit. Roadway
I
r,ow 66'
x
' i S
g
y NOU
mo aTum E'o10—
< 'Q
E ?S
_0 o I 1 Uoop
x.6' yd S u
3 �a�
O w'�
4
ree
I6'
It Roadway
V3 y4 �n£
21
„€n
113
1
o:
77-1
x
9165
r
r �
i
\\
<
o-
---
0
sem, x� 1 t o
i
®
I
\ BZ
M �,,, 9M4
V � x
917.9
x 9191
-30
969.4f
\83 \0
LOND
E 4
ROS:
SL P TO RECEIVE—
ONTR L L �KETS I .•+•,• •+• - ac 91e6
x 91
,STORM WATER*BASIN
xBASIS1.N
WW .91
Lill
® .'. ._-.•
i1917X
___ ENOINEERINO.R�
" �`""Ma°"10
s..r..a... no..aq . a
�tVt"`a,,
°..
..� �.
_� a�
CLIENT NAME Eagle Trucking Inc./Frattalone Companies SHEET
Pouliot EROSION CONTROL
SHEET NO.
PROJECT
Mining Site —Otsego, MN PLAN
3 14
-30
\e \# . . . .
I N \ \ \ \
\62A
\ \ { 1 •9766
\ ( \ s \\ 1a4 dH LNE E 3 \ EjLAtVQ 5.
\ 1 STORM WATER* BASIN'''''
Elk
a
x
BSA \ �� • • \ •vim,• Otsego�P.r `r�!� 977.7
• NNL 910.9
i It
X979
On
AL���� 1 �0;41) 1�SrPES TO RECEIVE •' !((
«--�� x \ \\ \ \ � \O,g10 TRi11\LANKETS\�
9434
9442 1 1L.J %.j I u I 1, y 925
9464
'-
1 tp x 941.6 -�`40-
1
bullu
"" " a....:"" CLIENT Trucking Inc.�Frattalone Companies SHEET SHEET NO.
�9 ENOINEERINO TELA PHASE 1 SOUTH — GRADING
^" �1- °°"° °, ,° PROJECT Pouliot Mining Site — Otsego, MN EROSION CONTROL PLAN 4 14
926 4
92
9375 934.9
% X
\ 933 - �P.LL 3\1 POND SLOES fa>. RECEIVE
IEROSIC�N COTR L BJ�NKET \
I X 914.7
SN
x 9! x 931a 1 \ \
33.
x 926.4
�'. ST-ORM�ATC BASIN
1 \ \ ® \\ \ \ g \ %914__
WETLAND 4----'
137,247 sf
x 925
\ ( '948.3
x 9150
ets
080
ED
ED
93L1 \ \ \ .�� \ \ \AN � S E\ ET 6
2 Ss
6 all
917
CLIENT NAME Eagle Trucking Inc./Frattolone Companies SHEET SHEET NC
ENOINEERINO �.,�hu1r a1Mt�[h
ph—�''°�'��� ?,M`� PROJECT Pouliot Mining Site — Otsego, MN EROSION CONTROL PLAN
5 14
l
1 \tv
`. '� \ 1 POND LOPES TO ECEIVE
\ \ �-' -�— . ` '� �\\� ` \ \ SIGN\ NTRV BLANKET ` \
B4Xr- T I EN EE 5L4 820
All
® ��
f
ell
$4�7--3� �(1 \111\ /// j
AUL OA
/ \ N '-. \I%
T B4
94
x 9416
1
x �� �'�' ` ' ®� --\ ------ I ----------
9WA \ \ 1, %' 1; 825 r 82
• i �r1rq... SHEET -
ENOINEERINO I eww...e """'"`°�""'—� PRO ECT CLIENT MEEPouI oagle rt Mining ucking cS teattalOtsegoone m Nies EROSION CONTROL PLAN SHEET NO.
PHASE 2 SOUTH GRADING
rw. e.� uwlwot. esno
vnaK e.i-Oir'!-xao v„�„
w... x.. n.a.
fr�✓ 9326 / \ 19183
928.9
law IQ
A I
` / �_ +• -- \ ALL 3:.Y POND Si,@PES '�Q RECEIVE
' \ J EROS ON CON 0L BLANKETS,
9
x 930.9 r , / \ \ ✓ '\ 93L4 \
AIV8.6
/ � r
`' � `� �• � �' �x
9<L3 / PHASE 3
\ % ! IN, x 9374
HAUL ROAD '
9.
------------
94"
N
\• \ `1 \ gat • \ l ' / \ \ 215 3' T
f y
•(
• •,.%
\ ..
lzxR
x 943.6
1
933.4Uri
•"' °`"" " .: wwwe°��` CLIENT NAME Eagle Trucking Inc./Frattalone Companies SHEET SHEET NO
ENOINEERINO PHASE 3 —GRADING
MMIM YMwWe 53110
-`:� �,,,, PROJECT Pouliot Mining Site —Otsego, MN EROSION CONTROL PLAN ,a
NW 'o6as}p — a}lS 6umVI }o11nod 1o3rmid - mad;;; "° """°��, Lwin
1Sb3 — NVId 38nsolp «�•.-,w.�,
oN1a33MINI
133HS 133HSsaluodwoo auolo}}o.Jd/'oul 6ui�3naj 816o33WVN1N3110
.4k M4
ww>
I_
—7
/
H
tot—
\ \ \\ \\\\ wN \\ A 220
` � ` �\\ \\\\\\\ �l-"tet\ �) \� Bb• -- �� \ � I / l // /
#19224`\\�\
99-Ld
#192203
'/
—'• f
// I I////1
\ \\
1
ill
//
/'——�_
\ \\ \
alga
\F19440
c
LLJ
It-
-� \\\\ 1
\ 1 1\ \ \ \ \
\ \
2
\\/#193200/
/
\
/ ( \ 1\\\\\\\�\\\
\�� \ ♦} \1
\\\\\ \\ \\ \\\
I; j
47_3
Ld
W
'/
—'• f
// I I////1
^\\
1
ill
//
/'——�_
\ \\ \
alga
LLJ
-� \\\\ 1
\ 1 1\ \ \ \ \
\ \
2
\\/#193200/
/
\
/ ( \ 1\\\\\\\�\\\
\�� \ ♦} \1
\\\\\ \\ \\ \\\
I; j
WEST
WESI
Section A—A
EAST
WEST= EAST
„ Etl10n9 Frm•IreE .� .
O
EAST
NOTE: HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL
SCALES ARE DIFFERENT
vv■■My I v u l I Nw9yoNry ura. osn n.. neam.o �a_- SHEET
ENOINEERINO I.m•ew� a°•9..": CLIENT NAME Eagle Trucking Inc./Frattalone Companies SHEET NO.
�""°�°°"° , 1� �`� ""� PROJECT Pouliot Mining Site — Otsego, MN CROSS—SECTIONS A—A to D—D 10 14
935oys
9b
Pl0
NIS
9T5
yiy
�
9zo
9T0
ms
9is
no
wo
Section A—A
EAST
WEST= EAST
„ Etl10n9 Frm•IreE .� .
O
EAST
NOTE: HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL
SCALES ARE DIFFERENT
vv■■My I v u l I Nw9yoNry ura. osn n.. neam.o �a_- SHEET
ENOINEERINO I.m•ew� a°•9..": CLIENT NAME Eagle Trucking Inc./Frattalone Companies SHEET NO.
�""°�°°"° , 1� �`� ""� PROJECT Pouliot Mining Site — Otsego, MN CROSS—SECTIONS A—A to D—D 10 14
WES'
WESI
955 gyy
D 950
D 915
9 u V;G Db
9 F 835
a G'ad
Bap 930
2%Grade
915 925
O
920 920
Section E—E
wo 9)0
cas gay
3Bo B80
9a5 gyy
850 2 50
LL �.
915
B35 gay
B O 930
2 % Grade
915 915
sed Grade
310 920
915 915
Section F—F
--AST
EAST
D
F
♦5
NORTH a
SOUTH
93y
9 ftpoaea Grade $
e
9J0
Section G—G NOTE:
HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL SCALES ARE DIFFERENT
/\
sul• ENGINEERING
m•d�"�k^ �19gwae °
,„,eo
Eagle Trucking Inc Frattalone Companies
CLIENT NAME g g ./ P
SHEET
SHEET NO.
53aer�d. —
MM1It. Seo W9 tial. 55„0
Iv RSi�oµ��•w�.
11V
�.Ee
CROSS—SECTIONS E—E to G—G
PROJECT POUIIOt Mining Site Otsego, MN
11 14
Bn,e. ea,-.il-3aii
oro
oro
9es
Seo
� vw
oe5
NORTH
915
e
°w
933
SOUTH
966
9w
935
ROeM60 C+oda �
925
Section H—H
9ro
665
9)0
990
965
955
950
NORTHm
9W
SOUTH
Av
9b
9]0
935
9
920
WHsr LM x ZO BMow 99s L6r 900 15
BJO
920
Section 1-1
9a
ax
910
9]0
NORTH
Ew (ii606 � F
93a
SOUTH
920
WS
925
925
9f5
Section J—J
6
NOTE: HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL SCALES ARE DIFFERENT
ENOINEERINO
c.ro.m
�^�:.a'6..�
r w::�.
CLIENTNAMEEagle Trucking Inc.�Frattalone Companies
SHEET
SHEET NO.
PROJECT Pouliot Minin Site — Otsego, MN
g 9
�z �a
66b557,o
TREL 111
,, ,,,
,
�q _,
CROSS—SECTIONS H—H
to J—J
ENviRoNmENTALAsSESSMENT WORKSHEET
Note to preparers: This form is available at www.mnplan.state.mn.us. EAW Guidelines will be
available in Spring 1999 at the web site. The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides
information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The
EAW is prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit or its agents to determine whether an
Environmental Impact Statement should be prepared. The project proposer must supply any reasonably
accessible data for — but should not complete — the final worksheet. If a complete answer does not fit
in the space allotted, attach additional sheets as necessary. The complete question as well as the answer
must be included if the EAW is prepared electronically.
Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the 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: ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
2. Proposer: Eagle Trucking, Inc./Frattalone
Companies
Contact Person Butch Belair
and Title Project Manager
Address 20920 Forest Road North
Forest Lake, MN 55025
Phone 651-426-4141
Fax 651-426-6641
E-mail bltrail@,yahoo.com
4. Reason for EAW Preparation:
EIS Mandatory Citizei
Scoping EAW Petitio
3. RGU: Cityof Otsego
Contact Person Judy Hudson
and Title
City Clerk
Address
8899 Nashua Ave. NE
Otsego, MN 55330
Phone
763-441-4414
Fax
763-441-8823
E-mail
judy@,ci.otsego.mn.us
RGU Proposer
Discretion X Volunteered
If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number and name: 4410.4300 Subp 19
5. Project Location: County Wright City/Twp Otsego
SE 1/4 1/4 Section 19 Township
121
Range
Tables, Figures, and Appendices attached to the EAW.•
• County map showing the general location of the project; (Exhibit A)
• United States Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries
(photocopy acceptable); (Exhibit B)
• Site plan showing all significant project and natural features. (Exhibit C, D)
• Wetland Map; (Exhibit E)
• MNDNR Natural Heritage Information; (Exhibit F)
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
23
• Soil Classification; (Exhibit G)
• Data on Noise, Odors and Dust (Exhibit H)
a. Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor.
The subject site is located on 100 acres in the center of the City of Otsego. The project consists of the
excavation and export of approximately 946,460 cubic yards of sand and gravel. The site will be retuned
to farmland when the operation is complete.
b. 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.
The site is 100 acres of which approximately 63.15 acres will be disturbed. The proposed excavation
operation consists of 3 phases, Phase 1 - 2008, Phase 2 - 2009 and Phase 3 in 2010. The project will be
in operation April — February from 7:00 am to 7:00 pm (daylight hours only) Monday thru Friday.
Saturdays may be worked with prior permission from the City. It is proposed that the topsoil will be
stripped from the phase area and stockpiled in a future phase. Once topsoil has been stripped,
excavation and export operations would begin. When the export materials in the phase have been
exhausted, the phase will be finish graded, topsoil re -spread and seeded. Erosion control blankets with
seed will be placed on steep slopes. Once the phase has been restored, the operation will move to the
next phase and the process will begin again. It is anticipated that there will be crushing operations at the
site approximately two weeks per year.
c. 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 is being proposed by a private company. The excavated soils will help provide an
economical source of sand and gravel for future public and private construction projects.
d. Are future stages of this development including development on any outlots planned or likely to happen?
❑Yes ®No
If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for environmental
review.
e. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? ❑ Yes ® No
If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review.
7. Project Magnitude Data
Total Project Area (acres) 100 acres (63.1disturbed) or Length miles)
Number of Residential Units: Unattached 0 Attached 0
Commercial/Industrial/Institutional Building Area (gross floor space):
Indicate area of specific uses (in square feet):
Office NA
Retail NA
Warehouse NA
Light Industrial NA
maximum units per building
Total square feet NA
Manufacturing NA
Other Industrial NA
Institutional NA
Agricultural NA
NA
2
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
Other Commercial (specify)
NA
Building height NA If over 2 stories, compare to heights of nearby buildings NA
8. 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
Type of Application
Status
STATE
Before
After
Pollution Control Agency
NPDES Construction Permit
To be obtained
DNR
Wetland Permit
To be obtained
LOCAL
0
0
Ci of Otsego
Interim Use Permit
To be obtained
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.
The current and recent past use of the site is a farmstead with agricultural fields. The current and recent
past uses of the adjacent lands are as follows:
North — Agricultural Fields & Rural Single Family
East — Agricultural Fields & Rural Single Family
South — Agricultural Fields, Farmstead
West — Agricultural Fields
The majority surrounding area is in agricultural production and will likely remain in agricultural use for
the foreseeable future. The location of the subject site is within an area where sanitary sewer and water
services may be available within an estimated 10 —15 years. Until utilities are extended, the
Comprehensive Plan directs a continuation of rural land uses and rural residential densities.
There are no known recognized environmental hazards within the site. However, with any agricultural
use there may be oil and/or gas present. If encountered, these items will be disposed of appropriately.
10. Cover Types. Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after
development:
11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources.
a. 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.
3
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
Before
After
Before
After
Types 1-8 wetlands
9.71
9.71
Lawn/landscaping
1
1
Wooded/forest
0
0
Impervious Surfaces
1
1
Brush/grassland
69.29
69.29
Storm Ponds
0
0
Cropland
19
19
TOTAL
100
100
11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources.
a. 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.
3
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
Natural habitats (totaling 100 acres) present on the site and utilized by wildlife resources include wetlands
and hayfields/grasslands as quantified above. Agricultural uses including crop fields and pasture occupy the
majority of the property and are also quantified and shown on Exhibit E.
Types 1 and 3 wetlands make up 9.71 acres on the site (Exhibit E). Most of these wetlands have been
degraded by farming, grazing, and drainage activities, and invasive vegetation. Wildlife that use the
wetlands varies by type but would be expected to include common turtles, frogs and salamanders; a variety
of waterfowl, waders, raptors, gamebirds, and songbirds; deer, furbearers, small mammals, and
invertebrates. Intermittent fish habitat may be provided by Otsego Creek that was delineated within the
boundaries of Wetlands 4 and 5. Otsego Creek is a DNR Protected Waterway and flows through the site
from south to north. The creek and its adjacent wetland are not proposed for impact. Silt fence will be
installed along the entire perimeter of the creek and constructed stormwater basins will prevent sediments
from entering the creek and adjacent wetland.
Cropland on the site provides limited food and cover for a few game and edge species such as white tailed
deer and pheasant. Both white tailed deer and pheasant utilize cropland for food, however, cropland
provides minimal cover value since it is only available during the growing season. The hayfield, and
grassland (pasture) communities/habitats are dominated by planted and exotic disturbed field species such as
alfalfa clover, Kentucky bluegrass, smooth brome grass, and reed canary grass. The mix of grasses and
forbs does provide habitat for a few game and edge species such as those noted above for cropland when not
actively grazed. In addition, due to the increased diversity and persistence of vegetation other species such
as a few bird and mammal species will likely use this habitat for food, cover, and nesting/burrowing. Also,
a larger diversity of invertebrates such as butterfly, beetle, and moth species likely utilize this habitat.
However, due to the dominance of disturbed field species and lack of native vegetation, wildlife diversity is
expected to be relatively low.
Wooded areas of any significant acreage were included within the boundary of Wetland 4 and delineated as
partially drained, forested wetland (PFO 1 Ad) along the section of creek located north of the driveway.
Forested wetland is dominated by boxelder with an understory of stiff dogwood and lesser amounts of
willow shrubs and trees. Forested wetland would not be directly impacted by the project.
The proposed project would temporarily convert most of the cropland, hayfields, and pasture area to active
excavation area; therefore, wildlife species utilizing these habitat communities would be temporarily
affected by this project. Once the project is complete, this land will be restored to farmland (hayfields,
pasture, and cropland). These habitats have been highly degraded by past land use activities, are utilized
primarily by invasive and exotic edge dwelling species, and are found in abundance in the eastern Wright
County region. Therefore, temporary impacts to wildlife species across the regional landscape would be
minimal.
b. Are any state (endangered or threatened) 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? ® Yes ❑ 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.
ERDB 20080112
Describe measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
According to the Minnesota Natural Heritage database report (Exhibit F), the proposed project site identified
one element, Blanding's Turtles (Emydoidea blandingii), have been documented as occurring within a one -
4
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
mile radius of the project site. The report states that although there are no records of Blanding's Turtles
within the project area, it may be possible this species utilizes the site if suitable habitat exists. According to
Minnesota DNR Environmental Review Fact Sheet, Blanding's Turtles prefer calm shallow water, rich
aquatic vegetation, and select open (i.e., grassy) uplands with sandy soils for nesting. Blanding's Turtles
hibernate over winter in the muddy bottoms of deeper marshes and ponds, or other water bodies where they
are protected from freezing.
Wetlands l and 2 on the site are both seasonally flooded basins with little to no standing water throughout
much of the season. These wetlands do not appear to provide suitable habitat for Blanding's Turtles.
Upland adjacent to these wetlands is in crop and hayfield production, is mapped with loam soils, and is
likely not used for nesting.
Wetland 3 on the site is a shallow marsh wetland/drainageway with up to 6 inches of water in the center of
the ditch. This wetland, and the excavated basin to its north, likely freeze to the bottom in the winter. The
Environmental Review Fact Sheet does not consider excavation or deepening of wetlands (such as what has
occurred to this wetland) to be beneficial for Blanding's Turtles habitat. Therefore, this wetland does not
appear to provide suitable habitat for Blanding's Turtles. Upland soils are mapped as loams and clay loams,
which are generally considered unsutiable for nesting.
The majority of Wetland 4 on the site consists of a channelized ditch with steep (2:1) side slopes, border by
loam soils. Wetland 5 consists of a steeply slopes (2:1) meandering creek channel, and lacks shallow water
pockets. Based on the above information and habitat use as described in the Environmental Review Fact
Sheet, these wetlands do not appear to provide suitable habitat for Blanding's Turtles. Upland adjacent to
both Wetland 4 and Wetland 5 is in crop and hayfield production, is mapped with loam soils, and is likely
not used for nesting.
DNR recommendations for minimizing impacts to Blanding's Turtles will be incorporated into the project.
These include the following:
1. Silt fencing will be set up to keep turtles out of active excavation areas, and then will be
removed after construction.
2. Runoff from the site will be routed through sediment basins to protect wetlands that could
provide Blanding's Turtle habitat.
3. An oversized (36 -inches in diameter or greater) culvert with an elliptical or flat bottom, to
allow passage of turtles (and other wildlife), will be used for the haul road crossing over
Wetland 3. The culvert will be removed upon project completion.
12. 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 ❑ No
If yes, identify water resource affected. Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures
to minimize impacts. Give the DNR Protected Waters Inventory (PWI) number(s) if the water resources
affected are on the PWI.
A haul road crossing will be constructed across Wetland 3 in the western portion of the site. The crossing
will consist of an oversized culvert (at least 36 -inches in diameter) with an elliptical or flat -bottom. The
culvert will be in place for the duration of the project. The wetland is expected to revert to pre -project
conditions (reed canary grass and cattail dominated wetland/ditch) naturally once the culvert is removed.
The crossing is expected to impact 900 square feet of Type 3 wetland. Because the duration and amount of
proposed impacts appears to exceed regulatory allowances, it is likely that a wetland replacement plan for
this impact will be required by the City and the Army Corps of Engineers. Due to the small amount of
5
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
impact, the wetland replacement will likely be accomplished through the purchase of wetland bank credits
in accordance with Wetland Conservation Act and Section 404 rules.
Alternatives to the proposed wetland crossing were considered during the planning of this project. For
safety concerns, other possible haul routes were eliminated due to limited roadway and shoulder widths on
other possible routes. The City will only allow site access the intersection of Maciver Avenue. and 8e
Street.
Due to a change in drainage patterns, Wetland 1 and Wetland 2 may have a portion of their drainage areas
removed. This will be investigated prior to construction. If required, an alteration to the plans or
appropriate mitigation measure will be implemented.
13. 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 ® 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.
Soil boring and cross sections were prepared as part of the project plans. Through this exercise, it was
determined that proposed excavations will be no closer than 10 feet to existing ground water.
14. Water -related land use management districts. 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 ❑ No
If yes, identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land use restrictions.
Otsego Creek crossing the property from south to north near the east property line is a DNR protected
waterway. The City has adopted a shoreland overlay district as part of the Zoning Ordinance consistent
with DNR Water Management Rules and the proposed project will comply with applicable regulations as
a condition of the interim use permit approval allowing for the operation.
15. Water Surface Use. Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body?
❑ Yes ® No
If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or
conflicts with other uses.
16. Erosion and Sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be
moved: 63.15 acres; 946,460 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 contractor is required to obtain an NPDES Storm Water Permit. Measures to be taken during
construction to control erosion included the following:
1. Silt fence to protect existing wetlands
2. Temporary sedimentation basins
3. Fiber blankets on steep slopes
4. Temporary seeding of areas not actively being worked in conformance with NPDES
regulations
6
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
Erosion control Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be installed prior to construction and are subject
to inspection of the City Engineer. These measures will be inspected weekly and after a 0.5" rain event in
24 hours in conformance with the NPDES permit. Maintenance on these BMP measures will be
completed within the timeframes outlined in the NDPES permit.
17. Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff.
a. 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.
Three (one for each phase) temporary stormwater ponds will be constructed prior to the mining operations
to prevent sediment from leaving the site. Ponds will be constructed prior to the start of each phase and are
subject to inspection and approval by the City Engineer. Ponds will be cleaned as needed when determined
by the City Engineer. Once excavation operations have been completed and vegetation established, the
ponds will be removed. Silt fence and fiber blankets (on steep slopes) will also be used to control erosion.
The surface of the site will be returned to pre project conditions at the conclusion of the project. No
impervious surface will be added to site once project has been completed. Runoff will remain the same as
pre project conditions. A SWPPP will be in place and enforced on the site.
b. 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.
Runoff will leave the site via Otsego Creek. During the period that the project is operational, water
leaving the site will be treated with temporary sedimentation basins. The size of the temporary
sedimentation basins are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Once project has been
completed and vegetation established, ponds will be removed. There is no anticipated adverse
impact to receiving waters caused by the proposed project.
18. Water Quality — Wastewater.
a. Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and industrial wastewater
produced or treated at the site.
The only source of wastewater at the site will be from employees working at the site. There will be a
portable restroom facility located at the site. There is also an existing home on the site that will
remain. The home's individual sewage treatment system will not be impacted by the project.
b. 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.
The portable restroom located on the site will be pumped once a week, or more frequently if needed.
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.
Only wastes from site will be from portable restroom. Waste from the portable restroom will be
transported to and processed at the Blue Lake Sanitary Facility in Shakopee, MN.
7
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
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.
a. Approximate depth (in feet) to Ground water: 0' minimum; 6' average.
Bedrock: >60' minimum; >60' average.
Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site
map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. Describe measures to avoid or
minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards.
There are no known sinkholes, limestone formations, or karst conditions on the site.
b. Describe the soils on the site, giving 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.
Soils on the site consist of clay, sand and sandy gravel (see Exhibit G). The only anticipated
chemicals onsite would fuel for the excavation equipment. Fueling of excavation equipment will be
performed by a fuel truck. No storage tanks will be present onsite. If a fuel spill occurs during
fueling by the fuel truck, the State Duty officer will be notified, and the area will be cleaned in
conformance with State regulations.
20. Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, Storage Tanks.
a. 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.
The excavation of this site is not anticipated to generate any hazardous waste. Construction debris
will be collected from the site and disposed of in accordance with the Otsego Zoning Ordinance and
City Code.
b. 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.
During construction, vehicles containing fuel will be present on site.
C. 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.
Fueling of equipment on the site will be by fuel truck. No fuel tanks will be located on site.
21. Traffic. Parking spaces added: NA Existing spaces (if project involves expansion): NA
Estimated total average daily traffic generated: 184 Trips/Day Estimated maximum peak hour traffic
generated (if known) and its timing: 18.4 Trips/Hour Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic
8
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
congestion 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.
The only haul route will be leaving the site on the south side of the site exiting on MacIver Avenue at 80`''
Street, traveling south on MacIver Avenue to CSAH 37. From CSAH 37, haul vehicles may go east to
Trunk Highway 101 or west to Interstate -94 or CSAH 19. MacIver Avenue is an improved major
collector with the capacity of 12,000-16,000 trips per day consistent with the Otsego Comprehensive Plan
and Northeast Wright County Transportation Plan. CSAH 37 is also designated as a major collector street
by the Otsego Comprehensive Plan and Northeast Wright County Transportation Plan. The traffic
generation estimates above are based on 10 months operating per year, 10 hours per day and 5 days a
week of operation. It is anticipated that peak hour traffic will not be recognized and the City Engineer
finds adequate capacity exists of the proposed haul routes to accommodate traffic generated by the
proposed use.
22. 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 EAW Guidelines
about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.
A carbon monoxide analysis is not required for this project, as the state and federal guidelines are not
exceeded and there are not more than 500 parking spaces. Equipment used on site will run on diesel
fuel. With the small amount equipment to be used on the site, vehicle related emissions are expected to
have minimal impact. (See Exhibit H for data on odors). Studies done regarding diesel fumes as a
carcinogen to humans have been inconclusive. (See Report on Carcinogens- I lb Edition).
23. 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 WGuidelines for a listing), any greenhouse gases (such
as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxides), and ozone-depleting chemicals (chlorofluorocarbons,
hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution
prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control devices. Describe the impacts on air quality.
The project has the potential to generate fugitive dust, which would mainly come from exposed soils.
(See Exhibit H for data on dust). Dust control measures will include use of water or other dust control
chemicals to minimize the potential of fugitive dust and will be applied as determined necessary by the
City Engineer. Also, the project is being proposed in 3 phases to reduce the amount of exposed soils.
Once a phase has been completed, vegetation will be established removing the possible source of fugitive
dust from exposed soils.
24. Odors, noise and dust. Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during
operation? ® 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.)
Since the project is located in a rural location, the population near the site is low. There are
approximately 28 single family dwellings on rural parcels within a one mile radius of the site. No
potential impacts, other than those listed below, is anticipated to affect human health or quality of life.
(See Exhibit H for data on noise, odors and dust).
9
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
There will be excavation near existing wetlands on the site. The wetlands will be protected during
construction and post construction as described in paragraph , until vegetation is established, to ensure
no negative impacts.
The existing condition generates noise, dust and odors associated with agriculture uses. This is similar
to the existing surrounding area. The excavation operation is expected to generate noise and dust as
with any construction. Although, diesel fumes are known to be harmful in large doses, the small
amount of equipment to be used on the site is expected to have minimal impact. Studies done regarding
diesel fumes as a carcinogen to humans have been inconclusive.(See Report on Carcinogens- 11`h
Edition.)
Post -construction, the project will be returned to its current state for agricultural uses.
Construction Noise
The Contractor will work cooperatively with the City reduce noise impacts. The hours of operation per
City Ordinance will be limited to 7:00 am — 7:00 pm. (Limited to daylight hours).
Dust
During construction, particulate emission will temporarily increase due to generation of fugitive dust.
The following will be required to control dust during construction:
1. Temporary seeding and staging plans will be required to be submitted by the Contractor and
review by the City.
2. Street sweeping will occur to remove dirt that has been tracked onto adjacent roads during
construction. Additional street sweeping will be performed at the direction of the City
Engineer or Public Works Supervisor.
3. Rock construction entrances as required by the Otsego Engineering Manual will be used and
maintained in conformance with the NPDES permit.
4. Exposed areas will be sprayed with water or other dust control chemicals if dust is traveling
beyond the site limits. Additional dust control will be applied as directed by the City
Engineer.
Odors
The construction and/or operation of this project is not anticipated to involve any processes or materials
that would generate any significant odors.
25. Nearby resources. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site?
a. Archaeological, historical, or architectural resources? ❑ Yes ® No
b. Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? ❑ Yes ® No
C. Designated parks, recreation areas, or trails? ❑ Yes ® No
d. Scenic views and vistas? ❑ Yes ® No
e. Other unique resources? ❑ Yes ® No
If yes, describe the resource and identify any project -related impacts on the resources. Describe any
measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
26. 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 ® No
If yes, explain.
10
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
Construction operations will be limited to daylight hours only.
27. 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? ® Yes ❑ No
If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will be
resolved. If no, explain.
Otsego adopted a Comprehensive Plan in 2004 that guides the subject site for future low density
residential development within Urban Service Expansion Area WI when sanitary sewer and water utilities
are available. In accordance with the Interim Land Use Plan established by the Comprehensive Plan, the
subject site is zoned A-1, Agricultural Rural Service District and is also within the Shoreland Overlay
District of Otsego Creek. Excavation of more than 50 cubic yards of material from a site within the A -I
District requires an interim use permit when not related to a development plan subject to other zoning or
subdivision approvals. Chapter 24 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes specific performance standards
applicable to excavation operations. Chapter 92 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes performance
standards specific to land uses within the Shoreland Overlay District to prevent any impacts to sensitive
natural areas. The City Engineer has drafted a technical review of the proposed project relative to the
requirements of Chapters 24 and 92 of the Zoning Ordinance and finds the use to be in compliance. The
interim use permit is subject to review by the Planning Commission as part of a required public hearing
and approval of the City Council, which may include additional conditions to address potential impacts
and compatibility issues related to the proposed use in addition to compliance with established
performance standards.
28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure
or public services be required to serve the project? ❑ Yes ® 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 EAW Guidelines for details.)
A temporary 30' wide gravel haul road will be required for the duration of the project. Upon project
completion, the road will be removed. The haul route from the site will be traveling south on MacIver
Avenue. As described in Paragraph 21, public streets have adequate construction and design capacity to
accommodate traffic generated by the proposed use. No other impacts to public infrastructure will occur.
29. Cumulative impacts. Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 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).
There are no other known future projects that will generate cumulative impacts.
30. 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.
There are no other known potential environmental impacts associated with this development.
31. Summary of issues. 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
11
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
conditions.
It is proposed that wetland credits will need to be purchased. This issue may require further
investigation and is subject to City approval of a wetland permit.
12
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
RGU CERTIFICATION.
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 Minn. R. 4410.0200, subps. 9b and 60, respectively.
• Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list.
Name and Title of 001,
Signer: l
D. Daniel Licht, AICP
Senior Planner
Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc.
4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202
Golden Valley, MN 55422
Phone: 763.231.2555
Facsimile: 763.231.2561
dlicht(&nacplanning.com
NAC serves the City of Otsego as City Planner.
Date: 7 January 2008
The format of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental Quality
Board at Minnesota Planning. For additional information, worksheets or for EAW Guidelines, contact:
Environmental Quality Board, 658 Cedar St., St. Paul, MN 55155, 651-296-8253, or at their Web site
http://www.mnplan.state.mn.us.
13
ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Otsego, Minnesota
January 2008
EXHIBIT A
JEXHIBIT B
'r f? ,
rti
ANc;
Image Courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey
(e) 2004 Microsoft Corporation. Terms of Use Privacy Statement
�� \r
_
/ X192203 / \ \ \
\ \ \ ` o
�(j " odo \ \ \ 111 �__�� \\� ��_� _ \� ♦ 1 \ \ I /
�z
/ 1 �-\ \ �_♦ / \ \ •�,\ \\ \ 'moi\\ \ �� �``�-� � \ \ \ \ \ � \ /
I
1 I p�\� _11 I _
\ 1 1\\ \ 1 1 1\`"\\ �/` _.,� `\�_.--- _1 /l / / \\ 1 I 1► \\ 1111 I I \
1 � / ¢, `` I ► i ► �-' ." \ � \ \\ : / ' .- �/// / / _ \ 1'11 1 \ I �1
If
8457-30 JI
X11\\I}\\\\0\ 1\1\ l\ I \\I 1�\\ \ \\\\\\
/#193200// i \\\\\\�\\�\\\\\ \ ) \\ ^\ z`�
j 1�\\\ \ 1 1 1 1 \ \ I
10
jl�\�\\ \��I • „ II IN I
It
71 OK
EXHIBIT E
Site Boundary
Land Use Observed During May 2007 Site Visit (2003 Aerial Photograph)
Engle Trucking Site (KES No. 2007-049)
Otsego. Minnesota
fOLNAUC E,N-IRoN)4ErrrwisexvtcEscoMPA-%'Y
+N 1 inch - 550 feet
EXHIBIT F
Minnesota Deparnnent of N It1. rel Res—out-ccs
Ntrluml t&"Hg s atxd Nuage rc Rexam+ ftWwa, Mw 25
7(] Lafayette F mid
St. Paul, rvl:rn,aso:a 55155 4025
l'lramc_ (651) 259-5109 Vax: (651) 291x1$11 E-mail: liisajoyaWa-stde_maae
August 13, 2007
Mq. Melissa Barrett
Kjolhaug Fnvir nunCAtal SeMces Company, I=
26105 Wild Rose lane
Shorewood, MN 55331
Re: Request for Natural Heritage infom%ation for vicinity of proposed rap le'Ituckittg Mining Project,
T121N R23W Section 19, Wright County
'NHNRP Cotdact *: ERDB 20080112
Dent Ms. Barrett,
'111 NtinnesotaNatarraI Heritage datalvw bw been mviewed to determine if any rare plant or animal
species or other significant natural ti res ane known to occur within an appy udmate one -mile radius of the
area indicaW oa the map emkos d wiih your information request. Based on this review, there are 2 known
occtn -en es of ran' specie or native plant communities in the area searched (for details, please see the
claclowd database printouts and the explanation ofsetected fields). Following arse specific comments for only
thane ele meals thatmay be impacted by the proposed project. Rare frame occun•enm not listed below are
not anticipated to be aflectod by the proposed pr*jecw
Blandi ng's Turtles (F.rnydvidw blra~), a shiRo-listed tlueatered!ipedes, have been nepoat d
from the vicinity of the pccuject area. Abbough we have no records fn>'m directly within the
project area, it is possible that turtles exist in the area if there is suitable habitat on the site,
Blandiing's Tuurtles Wend mach of *p it time in shallow wetlands (1-3 feel dwp), but they tle st in
open, sandy uplands up to 1 mile from wetlands, Nesting is in June and eggs hffich in September,
at which time young turtles lender deep wahtnds where they over -winter in soft sediments.
Factors believed to caonuibute to the decline of this species hicluc wetland drainage and
degradation, de°velopmgnri on upland nesting areas, and powibly collection for the pct trade_ in
addition, bExayse of the tendency for landing's Turtles totmvei long distances overland, they
are often forced to cross ruads in devekgmd areas. Many of the rmoWs we have of $landing's
rurtles are from turtles killed crossing roads.
1"or your information, l have attached a fact sheet and a flyer about the Blandings 'Turtle. The
fact sheet is intcnded to provide you with background information regarding habitat use, litre
history, and reawns for the species' decline, as well as recommendalions for avoiding and
minimizing i mpacts to thio rare turtte. As you will note, there are two lists of reomtwwndations.
"e first list contains recommendations to prevent harm to turtles during construction work, and
is relative U) all areas inbabited by Blandings Tu ttes. Pleaw refer to this first list of
recommendatimsfor your project. The second colromexpandson dhefimteolumn,and contains
gm*er prutective measures to be considered for areas known to be of stale -wide importance to
Blandinleg Turtles, or any area. where greaterprotecdon forturtles is desired. Your project area
is not within one of these priority areas. The flyer, which should be giver, to al l contractors
working in the area,, contains an illustnni-txt and degc:ciption of the Blandings Turtle, as well as a
stmtmary or the recommendatiom-i provided in the fact sheet.
DVR fniorn aloe ra 1-8884W-6367 M T1Y- 651-295-5484 a I 0 ' L57-15329
An F.-qual Opportunity Employe; VAo Values Diversity
The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research
Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Resources, 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, native plant 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 Wright County. Our information about
native plant 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 the database search are provided in two formats: short record report and long
record report. 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 short record report 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 short record report for
any other purpose, please contact me to request written permission. The long record report includes more
detailed locational information, and is for your personal use only. If you wish to reprint the long record
report 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 natural resource -
related issues, you may contact your Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Mike North, at (320)
255-4279.
An invoice in the amount of $72.58 will be mailed to you under separate cover within two weeks
of the date of this letter. You are being billed for the database search and printouts, and staff scientist
review. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare
natural resources.
Sincerely,
Lisa Joyal
Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator
encl: Database search results
Rare Feature Database Print -Outs: An Explanation of Fields
Fact sheets: Blanding's Turtle
The Natural Heritage & Nongame Research Program recently adopted a new database system called Biotics. As a result of this
change, the layout and contents of the database reports have been revised. Many of the fields included in the new reports are
the same or similar to the previous report fields, however there are several new fields and some of the field definitions have
been slightly modified. We recommend that you familiarize yourself with the latest field explanations.
Rare Features Database Reports: An Explanation of Fields
The Rare Features database (Biotics) is part of the Natural Heritage Information System, and is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame
Research Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Resources, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
**Please note that the print-outs are copyrighted and may not be reproduced without permission**
Field Name: [Full (non -abbreviated) field name, if different]. Further explanation of field.
_E_
Element Name and Occ #: [Element Name and Occurrence Number]. The Element is 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 native
plant communities, which have no scientific name) it is solely the element name. Native plant community names correspond to Minnesota's
Native Plant Community Classification (Version 2.0). The Occurrence Number, in combination with the Element Name, uniquely identifies
each record.
EO Data: [Element Occurrence Data]. For species elements, this field contains data collected on the biology of the Element Occurrence*
(EO), including the number of individuals, vigor, habitat, soils, associated species, peculiar characteristics, etc. For native plant community
elements, this field is a summary text description of the vegetation of the EO, including structure (strata) and composition
(dominant/characteristic species), heterogeneity, successional stage/dynamics, any unique aspects of the community or additional
noteworthy species (including animals). Note that this is a new field and it has not been filled out for many of the records that were
collected prior to conversion to the new database system. Some of the information meeting the field definition may be found in the General
Description field.
EO ID#: [Element Occurrence Identification Number]. Unique identifier for each Element Occurrence record.
EO Rank: [Element Occurrence Rank]. An evaluation of the quality and condition of an Element Occurrence (EO) from A (highest) to D
(lowest). Represents a comparative evaluation of: 1) quality as determined by representativeness of the occurrence especially as compared
to EO specifications and including maturity, size, numbers, etc. 2) condition (how much has the site and the EO itself been damaged or
altered from its optimal condition and character). 3) viability (the long-term prospects for continued existence of this occurrence - used in
ranking species only). EO Ranks are assigned based on recent fieldwork by knowledgeable individuals.
Extent Known?: A value that indicates whether the full extent of the Element is known (i.e., it has been determined through field survey) at
that location. If null, the value has not been determined.
-F-
Federal Status: Status of species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act: LE =endangered; LT =threatened; LE,LT =fisted endangered in
part of its range, listed threatened in another part of its range; LT,PDL = listed threatened, proposed for delisting; C = candidate for listing.
If null or "No Status" the species has no federal status.
First Observed Date: Date that the Element Occurrence was first reported at the site in format YYYY-MM-DD. A year followed by "Pre"
indicates that the observed date was sometime prior to the date listed, but the exact date is unknown.
-G-
General Description: General description or word picture of the area where the Element Occurrence (EO) is located (i.e., the physical
setting/context surrounding the EO), including a list of adjacent communities. When available, information on surrounding land use may be
included. Note that the information tracked in this field is now more narrowly defined than it was in the old database system, and some of
the information still in this field more accurately meets the definition of the new EO Data field. We are working to clean up the records so
that the information in the two fields corresponds to the current field explanations described herein. Also note that the use of uppercase in
sentences in this field is not significant but rather an artifact of transferring data from the old database system to the new system.
Global Rank: The global (i.e., range -wide) assessment of the relative rarity or imperilment of the species or community. Ranges from GI
(critically imperiled due to extreme rarity on a world-wide basis) to G5 (demonstrably secure, though perhaps rare in parts of its range).
Global ranks are determined by NatureServe, an international network of natural heritage programs and conservation data centers.
-L-
Last Observed Date: Date that the Element Occurrence was last observed to be extant at the site in format YYYY-MM-DD.
Last Survey Date: Date of the most recent field survey for the Element Occurrence, regardless of whether it was found during the visit. If
the field is blank, assume the date is the same as the Last Observed Date.
Location Description: County or Counties in which the Element Occurrence was documented followed by Township, Range, and Section
information (not listed in any particular order). Each unique Township, Range, and Section combination is separated by a comma. In some
cases, there are too many Township, Range, and Section combinations to list in the field, in which case, the information will be replaced
with, "Legal description is too lengthy to fit in allotted space".
-M-
Managed Area(s): Name of the federally, state, locally, or privately managed park, forest, refuge, preserve, etc., containing the occurrence,
if any. If this field is blank, the element probably occurs on private land. If "(Statutory Boundary)" occurs after the name of a managed
area, the location may be a private inholding within the statutory boundary of a state forest or park.
MN Status: [Minnesota Status]. Legal status of plant and animal species under the Minnesota Endangered Species Law: END =
endangered; THR = threatened; SPC = special concern; NON = tracked, but no legal status. Native plant communities, geological features,
and colonial waterbird nesting sites do not have any legal status under the Endangered Species Law and are represented by a N/A.
-N-
NP- Classification (v 1.5): Native plant community name in Minnesota's Native Vegetation: A Key to Natural Communities (Version 1.5).
This earlier classification has been replaced by Minnesota's Native Plant Community Classification (Version 2.0).
-O-
Observed Area: The total area of the Element Occurrence, in acres, which is measured or estimated during fieldwork. If null, the value has
not been determined.
Ownership Type: Indicates whether the land on which the Element Occurrence was located was publicly or privately owned; for publicly
owned land, the agency with management responsibility is listed, if known.
-S-
Site Name: The name of the site(s) where the Element Occurrence is located. Sites are natural areas of land with boundaries determined and
mapped according to biological and ecological considerations.
Survey Site #/Name: The name of the survey site, if applicable, where the Element Occurrence is located. Survey sites are sites that provide
a geographic framework for recording and storing data, but their boundaries are not based on biological and ecological considerations.
Minnesota County Biological Survey site numbers, if applicable, are also listed in this field.
Survey Type: Information on the type of survey used to collect information on the Element Occurrence.
Surveyor(s): Name(s) of the person(s) that collected survey information on the Element Occurrence.
State Rank: Rank that best characterizes the relative rarity or endangerment of the taxon or plant community in Minnesota. 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. S 1 = Critically imperiled in Minnesota
because of extreme rarity or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the state. S2 = Imperiled in
Minnesota because of rarity or because of some factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the state. S3 = Vulnerable in
Minnesota either because rare or uncommon, or found in a restricted range, or because of other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation.
S4 = Apparently secure in Minnesota, usually widespread. S5 = Demonstrably secure in Minnesota, essentially ineradicable under present
conditions. SH = Of historical occurrence in the state, perhaps having not been verified in the past 20 years, but suspected to be still extant.
An element would become SH without the 20 -year delay if the only known occurrences in the state were destroyed or if it had been
extensively and unsuccessfully looked for. SNR = Rank not yet assessed. SU = Unable to rank. SX = Presumed extinct in Minnesota. SNA
= Rank not applicable. S#S# = Range Rank: a numeric range rank (e.g., S2S3) is used to indicate the range of uncertainty about the exact
status of the element. S#B, S#N = Used only for migratory animals, whereby B refers to the breeding population of the element in
Minnesota and N refers to the non -breeding population of the element in Minnesota.
-V-
Vegetation Plot: Code(s) for any vegetation plot data that have been collected within this Element Occurrence (i.e., either Releve Number
or the word "RELEVE" indicates that a releve has been collected).
* Element Occurrence — an area of land and/or water in which an Element (i.e., a rare species or community) is, or was, present, and which
has practical conservation value for the Element as evidenced by potential continued (or historical) presence and/or regular recurrence at a
given location. Specifications for each species determine whether multiple observations should be considered 1 Element Occurrence or 2,
based on minimum separation distance and barriers to movement.
Data Security
Locations of some rare features must be treated as sensitive information because widespread knowledge of these locations could result in harm to the rare features. For
example, wildflowers such as orchids and economically valuable plants such as ginseng are vulnerable to exploitation by collectors; other species, such as bald eagles, are
sensitive to disturbance by observers. For this reason, we prefer that publications not identify the precise locations of vulnerable species. We suggest describing the location
only to the nearest section. If this is not acceptable for your purposes, please call and discuss this issue with the Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator for
the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program at (651) 259-5109.
Revised 4/2006
Element Name and Occurrence Number
Minnesota Natural Heritage & Nongame Research Program
Short Record Report of Element Occurrences within 1 mile radius of:
Eagle Truck Mining
T121N R23W Section 19
Wright County
Federal MN
Status Status
Page 1 of 1
State Global Last Observed
Rank Rank Date EO ID #
Sherburne, Wright County, MN
Native Plant Community. Undetermined Class #2162 N/A SNR GNR 1979-06-07 24722
Location Description: T32N R27W S1, T32N R26W S6, T121N R23W S18
Wright County, MN
Emydoidea blandingii (Blanding's Turtle) #348 THR S2 G4 1988-06-02 9000
Location Description: T121N R23W S20
Records Printed = 2
Copyright 2007 State of Minnesota DNR Printed 8/6/2007
Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series
Endangered,11ireaterned, and Special Coneern Species of Minnesota
Blanding's Turtle
(Eingdoidea blandingii)
Minnesota Status: Threatened State Rank': S2
Federal Status: none Global Rank': 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,
Blanding'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 from 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 from 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 from 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 from
overwintering sites. In late autumn (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 DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding' s Turtle
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 Blanding'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 the first 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
List 2. Additional recommendations for areas known to
Blanding's turtles.
be of state-wide importance to Blanding's turtles.
GENERAL
A flyer with an illustration of a Blanding's turtle should be
Turtle crossing signs can be installed adjacent to road -
given to all contractors working in the area. Homeowners
crossing areas used by Blanding's turtles to increase public
should also be informed of the presence of Blanding's
awareness and reduce road kills.
turtles in the area.
Turtles which are in imminent danger should be moved, by
Workers in the area should be aware that Blanding' s
be
hand, out of harms way. Turtles which are not in
turtles nest in June, generally after 4pm, and should
imminent danger should be left undisturbed.
advised to minimize disturbance if turtles are seen.
If a Blanding's turtle nests in your yard, do not disturb the
Louwould like to provide more protection for a
nest.
Blandmg's turtle nest on your property, see "Protecting
Blanding's Turtle Nests" c page 3 of this fact sheet.
Silt fencing should be set up to keep turtles out of
Construction in potential nesting areas should be limited to
construction areas. It is critical that silt fencing be
the period between September 15 and June 1 (this is the
removed atter the area has been revegetated.
time when activity of adults and hatchlings in upland areas
is at a minimum).
WETLANDS
Small, vegetated temporary wetlands (Types 2 & 3) should
Shallow portions of wetlands should not be disturbed
not be dredged, deepened, filled, or converted to storm
during prime basking time (mid morning to mid- afternoon
left
water retention basins (these wetlands provide important
habitat during
in May and June). A wide buffer should be along the
to human near wetlands (basking
spring and summer).
shore minimize activity
Blanding's turtles are more easily disturbed than other
turtle species).
Wetlands should be protected from pollution; use of
Wetlands should be protected from road, lawn, and other
fertilizers and pesticides should be avoided, and run-off
chemical run-off by a vegetated buffer strip at least 50'
from lawns and streets should be controlled. Erosion
wide. This area should be left unmowed and in a natural
should be prevented to keep sediment from reaching
condition.
wetlands and lakes.
ROADS
Roads should be kept to minimum standards on widths and
Tunnels should be considered in areas with concentrations
lanes (this reduces road kills by slowing traffic and
the distance turtles to
of turtle crossings (more than 10 turtles per yearper 100
in lower density if the level
reducing need cross).
meters of road), and areas of
of road use would make a safe crossing impossible for
turtles. Contact DNR Regional Nongame Specialist
your
for further information on wildlife tunnels.
Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade. If
Roads should be ditched, not curbed or below grade.
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).
Minnesota DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding's Turtle.
1.1107111.1 6mi
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 flat-bottomed or elliptical (raised roadways
discourage turtles from leaving the wetland to bask on
roads).
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.
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 details).
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.
Roads crossing streams should be bridged.
UTILITIES
Utility access and maintenance roads should be kept to a
minimum (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
possible.
Graded areas should be revegetated with native grasses
and forbs (some non -natives form dense patches through
which it is difficult for turtles to travel).
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 V and before June V).
).
As much natural landscape as possible should be preserved
(installation of sod or wood chips, paving, and planting of
trees within nesting habitat can make that habitat unusable
to nesting Blanding's turtles).
Open space should include some areas at higher elevations
for nesting. These areas should be retained in native
vegetation, and should be connected to wetlands by a wide
corridor of native vegetation.
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 infrequently as possible, and fall through spring
(mowing can kill turtles present during mowing, and
makes it easier for predators to locate turtles crossing
roads).
Protecting Blanding'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 difficult for 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 from 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 August 18 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. Pfannmuller. 1988. Minnesota's Endangered Flora and Fauna. University of Minnesota
Press, Minneapolis, 473 pp.
Minnesota DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program Environmental Review Fact Sheet Series. Blanding' 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 of 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.
Compiled by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, September, 2001
Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator, 500 Lafayette Rd., Box 25, St. Paul, MN 55155 / 651-259-5109
ii
ar �. yr wv+ a0.d+ ctts 001 46C Oe41 Y.(1Gle: tiKll�151I'ib
�pOv
'
BCw--F.0vl
•
+ir_(1
y`
b7 J�3�.1 .J�,� 1.0e601d!(wl
-Cay
iYlir
Site
ame hte Driller
LG-Gravet
l
tainr
1s ao
34 30 /SS
$rnd
ST -;8k
t •sol! ..-./[
i '•��� I
�Q
I � �� � � 1 � s .'(.%
(
�
Q
Ijl
5 00 25 �0
ix 30
.,5
Hok i s
fjr �' l ._�1� f iaeielWe (N)
HO(c J:L 4l J�; .fir 1.■mod! lN1
a ` %? [,wood, (1i')
Htlic 1)
5 10 U 2 ]a 35
liiafe01 � f.i a iaptu6sf(N) aq:CV, IA;- Loo�tnde(Sllj `
Hess
is 30 15
liokm Ji.altw"ms e 1471glnLat(vi)
EioJc
30
Ha]e i$-L1CrtuQi (ie) J[.o,ISlted�r (1v)
Hae
a s la 14 20 - 911
Hol!#9 Uni(' k (f'ii Lgegitudc (M
f .lf
o �1 9 LS as 90 3�
Holy
Hsk X71.9 1.nfihi111 {iV) _ .-,Iivac MI
holt si I ieleia+Y?!V) fagiln do (►k)
f(p;; ;" i .thud! ih-) Ltmviladc (W)
35
Role 04 LxingoOq
b7 J�3�.1 .J�,� 1.0e601d!(wl
i s10
1s ao
34 30 /SS
Se1e95!j+-� lartlabe (iV)
�,� ! 1.ottiiip'h(�7
Hole
� 5 i(i
li 30
ly -is
HO(c J:L 4l J�; .fir 1.■mod! lN1
a ` %? [,wood, (1i')
x
f
I !ate �+
1 f J
3 iB
i3 3D
Z3 30 SS
•
iink i/7 7S,T,� I��txtHuOl f-_�i?
L"'7.T Jae �'� it i.Gn�fiidi(�
EioJc
30
Ha]e i$-L1CrtuQi (ie) J[.o,ISlted�r (1v)
Hae
a s la 14 20 - 911
Hol!#9 Uni(' k (f'ii Lgegitudc (M
f .lf
o �1 9 LS as 90 3�
Holy
Hsk X71.9 1.nfihi111 {iV) _ .-,Iivac MI
holt si I ieleia+Y?!V) fagiln do (►k)
f(p;; ;" i .thud! ih-) Ltmviladc (W)
fA11°pai�aa-i 6
W2PRIll •'�jr� CINPI�ii
[i53 alwUJua7 �� /r f � � � � -
rNl iprtilyv�""�"' ' •—��, T?r �TaSi
:i
Q6 '-Z
6i S
S
�!•-��—
I
r •a I
Ifo
[M}tiarl" Y"""i
Sf
0£ 5T
0L ST
L e
'tali
rkV }pursSao'I lo &
(N) aORNI�T
d of �: f i 8:°ICK
•.
r
/� ".i
Si
0f iC
0t 6t
01 i
6� ;7
;ION
(,.l } �,
G
cc
91 SE
or
01 S
°
r
r1�
ar ter'
f
(AdJ �Plw
r
�
S£
0£SL
bL SI
01 S
(
i� l- -�
C
r
r
Ih0gni ,f v n0
a
pr.tojS
�
SE
BE
Q= St
Ul i
57 1
410H
(61)'Pa4pa
;7cj� gl�lv►l
5f
CIE 9Y
lz Fr
QL
7-7 :•�* F
�OIl
P
Ql)'jPmpvl—ar-" ZN wN
-
r
or
Of SZ
4< SL
01 5
a16�
[,� ipai�ua3 d^ .t iF ..
v
� �BaiNNi ✓ E: alaH
d
PC
R
SI
J
OY
J • Y '
�aloH
'
�gS•AS
"PIA -A
QQES-S
eosao -i
12upa
oi$Q OMSK a.1�
.
46ino�rJ
der? iJ77'�
.. _•
~
y
ft --ANT 177nVW
TVQQ QS! TOR YVR L5:01 L0GX/0C/2T
171/1DIZOUT 10:4f rn.a tf51 COO 0641 1AUVIAIM7 'd7..
L •; 1K
f�.hk cry Gtoarr
Site Name Date Driller T TopsoU W-'Naic
s•Sdnd S9' -Sift
aL
Hole
r
5 10
b
L'��
Holt
2s
alr l: i f�t [. ft k (N3 e l ler % �Ie9gisade f� }
xz z
10 r u 2a :s SO 35
a d
Holt* k? f� • R �% 1AMPOle (M Q l le _Y14 a OVf d- M
Ste!%IGS'
3• to v as '30 35
flak kd LxSltuJc (N) all � jL % 1 % J.M8lktdkM
Mok f
W07 C L ,xr+
25 30 3,;
aa�md-s4"!j Tzetmkf) ��il_�R. ! t9tuec[ag
C
Hatt S* I/-� !�_ � LaiisYs3e(itiI iam de�Yj
f V
ic s v in iL is 20
L f Is 37,J
Kolt
_
Hrk�Y9 :,�'rai(p��.?_�. L179Mde&4l
ft�� A;7_ IauaglNdi(tiYf
Holt
a s ►o
Hok mk
as --�--- _
J
2s 30—"'3s
i t im
G'P J 7- 7% LaaRJa t m
HOk
f
3 19
ag ay
23 9p ]S
'fink
a _ iR
a
is R0
35 30S
ts9xxt! (_ . F ' y3.a!sada iN3
a_ Lm irttuat(W)
i '" ,� •$�
•,•,:: _ate.: -
D
`�c
Hcl: A!;, :, ^ •'��;`�` LasgVdf 11�
'• � 3.{ i+ .• - Laag5p»Ae jw�
EXHIBIT H
NOISE LEVELS
A crusher will generate the most noise of the equipment used onsite. It is anticipated that
crushing operations will take place a few weeks per year and not be a continuous
operation.
Noise levels for agricultural properties under MPCA rules are listed in the Table below.
The L 10 is the level exceeded 10% or six minutes of the hour. The L50 is the level
exceeded 50% or 30 minutes of the hour.
MPCA NOISE STANDARDS
Time Period
L 10 (dBA)
L50 dBA
Daytime 7 am - 10 m
80
75
Nighttime 10 m- 7 am
80
75
Sound levels of the crusher proposed to be used on the project were monitored at a gravel
pit in Washington County on November 12, 1999. Sound levels were measured at a
number of different locations around the crusher. A summary of the readings and
observed overall sound levels is dBA are presented in the table below.
Sound
#
Location
Level (dBA)
Remarks
1
50' east of crusher
90.6
Perpendicular to conveyor axis
2
100' east of crusher
84.6
Perpendicular to conveyor axis
3
200' east of crusher
78.6
Perpendicular to conveyor axis
4
00' north of crusher
72.6
Affected by nearby loader
5
200' north of crusher
71.2
In line with conveyor axis
6
750' west of crusher
66
Perpendicular to conveyor axis
7
750' west of crusher
46.6
Behind large berm
8
200' north of roadway
61.2
Truck passing on roadway
9
East of May Ave
41.3
mbient west of quarry
10Adjacent
to Residence
33.2
mbient north of quarry
The observed sound levels measured at different distances were consistent with the
theoretical decay of sound level with distance from a sound source. The readings also
demonstrated that the sound level associated with the crusher is approximately 7dBA
along the conveyor axis compared with levels perpendicular (to the side) of the conveyor
axis where more of the crushing machinery is exposed.
On the proposed ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Project the nearest roadway is approximately
600 feet and the nearest residence is approximately 750 feet from the proposed crusher
location.
EXHIBIT H
(page 2)
DUST (Particulate Mater)
The following is the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution as
defined by the EPA's Clean Air Act. The proposed ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Project will
not exceed these standards.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution
Pollutant Primary Stds.
Averaging Times Secondary Stds.
Particulate Matter Revoked ( i)
Annual(1)(Arith.
Pl
Mean
150 pg/m3
24-hour (2)
Particulate Matter 15.0 µg/m3
Annual (3) (Arith. Same as Primary
(PM2.5)
Mean)
35 µg/m3
24-hour (4)
(see the complete table of National Ambient Air Quality Standards at
http://www.epa.(,ov/air/criteria.html)
Units of measure for the standards are micrograms per cubic meter of air (µg/m3).
Footnotes:
(1) - Due to a lack of evidence linking health problems to long-term exposure to coarse
particle pollution, the agency revoked the annual PM10 standard in 2006 (effective
December 17, 2006).
(2) - Not to be exceeded more than once per year on average over 3 years.
(3) - To attain this standard, the 3 -year average of the weighted annual mean PM2.5
concentrations from single or multiple community -oriented monitors must not exceed
15.0 gg/m3.
(4) - To attain this standard, the 3 -year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations at each population -oriented monitor within an area must not exceed 35
gg/m3 (effective December 17, 2006)."
(http://www.epa.gov/air/particlepoll ution/)
OROR (Diesel Particulate Mater)
MSHA and ACGIH have both proposed exposure limit standards for Diesel Particulate
Matter (DPM). MSHA set an interim standard exposure level of 400 µg/m3 (400
micrograms per cubic meter of air). The agency started enforcing this standard in 2003.
This exposure level has been revise to 160 µg/m3 and will take effect in May 2008. The
ACGIH has a proposed guideline exposure limit of 50 µg/m3 for diesel particulates less
than 1 µm in size. The particle size for the MSHA limit is less than 10 µm. Only the
MSHA limits are enforceable. The proposed ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Project will not
exceed these standards.
Review No. 7
ENGINEERING REVIEW
Hakanson Mining Permit
Anderson for the City of Otsego
Assoc., Inc.
by
Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc.
Submitted to: Honorable Mayor and City Council
cc: Mike Robertson, Administrator
Judy Hudson, City Clerk
Dan Licht, City Planner
Andy MacArthur, City Attorney
Butch Belair, Eagle Trucking, Inc.
Frattalone Companies
Jeff Bock, P.E. Solid Ground Engineering
Reviewed by: Ronald J. Wagner, P.E.
Brent M. Larson, P.E.
Date: January 31, 2008
Proposed
Development: ISD 728/Pouliot Mining Permit #8
Street Location The west'/2 of the southwest'/ of Section 25, T121 N, R23 and a
of Property: portion of the northwest'/4 of the southwest'/ Section 25, T121 N,
R23. North of 83rd Street, west of Mason Avenue, and south of 87th
Street.
Applicant: Eagle Trucking, Inc. Frattalone Companies
20920 Forest Road N. and 3205 Spruce Street
Forest Lake, MN 55025 St. Paul, MN 55117
Developer: Eagle Trucking and Frattalone Companies
Owners of Record: Randal T. Pouliot
8457 Mason Avenue NE
Otsego, MN 55330
Purpose: Mining approx. 946,460 cubic yards of sand & gravel from the site
to be used as an economical source in future construction projects.
Jurisdictional Agencies: City of Otsego, Wright County, and Minnesota Department of
(but not limited to) Natural Resources, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Permits Required: NPDES
(but not limited to)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
MINING PERMIT SUMMARY
Introduction
Plan of Operation
Haul Routes and Traffic Control
Erosion Control
Dust Control
Wind Erosion Control
Drainage Control Plan
Street sweeping and spill clean up
Proposed Land Use
Ground Water, Final Grade, Site Closure, Right of Entry
CONSTRUCTION PLANS
Title Sheet
Existing Conditions
Site Plan
Grading and Erosion Control Plans
Final Grading/Closure Plan
Cross -Sections
Details
Preliminary Certificate of Survey
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
SUMMARY AND/OR RECOMMENDATION
ot903MP#8 RVW7 Page 2 of 6
INFORMATION AVAILABLE
Mining Permit Summary, 12/5/07 revision, by Eagle Trucking Inc.
Pouliot Mining Site Plans for Eagle Trucking and Frattalone Companies, 12/7/07 revision, by
Solid Ground Engineering
Environmental Assessment Worksheet, dated January 7, 2008, prepared by Solid Ground
Engineering
Soil Borings for Randy Pouliot, dated 11/15/04
Sieve Analysis for Frattalone Companies (mislabeled Gateway North), dated 8/10/06, by Braun
I ntertec
City of Otsego Zoning Ordinance Chapter 24
City of Otsego Comprehensive Plan
City of Otsego Engineering Manual
Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410 — EAW Requirement
Trunk Stormwater Facilities Study for Portions of the Otsego Creek Watershed, February 2003
City of Otsego Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, 10/14/02
National Wetland Inventory Map, 1991
ot903MP#8 RVW7 Page 3 of 6
Mining Permit Summary
The project shall be referred to as the "ISD 728/Pouloit Gravel Mining Application — Interim
Use Permit", City of Otsego, Mining Permit #8.
Excavation permit summary
We recommend removing this section. This information is repeated in the introduction.
1. No comments.
Plan of Operation
1. The timing of the Phase 3 portion of the project (2009) in this section does not agree
with the timing of the project in the Introduction or the EAW (both 2010).
Haul Routes and Traffic Control
1. No comment.
Erosion Control
1 No comments.
Dust Control
1. No comment.
Wind Erosion Control
1. No comment.
Drainage Control Plan
1. Engineer has indicated that the Hydrology Report will be revised and submitted.
Street sweeping and spill clean up
1. No comment.
Proposed Land Use
1. No comment.
ot903MP#8 RVW7 Page 4 of 6
Ground Water
1. Provide the bottom of the excavation elevation, and a statement regarding any impacts
on the existing ground water.
Final Grade
1. No comment.
1. No comment.
Right of Entry
1. No comment.
CONSTRUCTION PLANS
Title Sheet
1. The plans shall be certified by the design engineer prior to City acceptance.
Site Plan (Sheet 2)
1. No comments.
Gradinq and Erosion Control Plan, Phase 1 - 3 (Sheet 3-7)
1. The hydrology report shall be submitted. The existing and proposed high water levels
of the wetlands in the hydrology report shall be included on the grading plans.
2. Prior to the start of construction, further investigation will be required regarding the
wetland mitigation or purchase of wetland credits for the impact to wetlands. All wetland
mitigation/replacement areas shall be shown on the grading plans.
3. Sheets 5 & 6, the contours do not work near the high point of the hill in Phase 2. We
suggest moving the phase line to be able to mine the hill at one time.
Final Grade/Closure Plan
1. No comment.
Cross -Sections
1. No comment.
ot903MP#8 RVW7 Page 5 of 6
Details
The detail of the sedimentation basin(s) shall include the overflow structure, emergency
rip -rap overflow, top of berm, etc. The temporary sedimentation basins shall meet the
NDPES permit requirements.
2. A detail of the Fiber Blanket is required.
Certificate of Survey
No comments.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW)
Item 12, prior to the start of construction, further investigation will be required regarding
the wetland mitigation or purchase of wetland credits for the impact to wetlands.
Currently, Wetland 3 will be impacted (temporarily) by the haul road crossing and
Wetlands 1 and 2 will have a significant decrease in the drainage areas supplying runoff
to them (permanent). These impacts will be researched further during the 30 -day EQB
reviewal period.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS
A revised hydrology report shall be submitted.
SUMMARY AND/OR RECOMMENDATION
We cannot recommend approval at this time due to the lack of a qualified engineer's signature
certifying the plans and a lack of a revised hydrology report. All of the above comments shall
be address prior to recommending approval.
ot903MP#8 RVW7 Page 6 of 6