The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10/30/2002 Env Bd PacketCity of Lino Lakes Environmental Board Meeting October 30, 2002 6:30 p.m. *This meeting will not be televised* AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: August 28, 2002 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. OPEN MIKE 5. ACTION ITEMS A. Eagle Brook Church /EAW Comments B. Car Wash /Ray Benkler /Lake Drive /CUP and Site Plan Review 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Metro Greenways Focus Areas. B. Zoning Task Force Update C. Heron Rookery/Peltier Lake D. 2003 Meeting Dates 7. DEPARTMENT REPORTS A. Forestry B. Solid Waste Recycling 8. ADJOURN Agenda Item 5A Environmental Board Meeting Date: October 30, 2002 Topic: EAW /Eagle Brook Church Background: A Citizen petition was submitted to the Environmental Quality Board to perform an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the proposed construction of a church East of Peltier Lake. Once application is received by the Environmental Quality Board, the RGU or Regulating Government Unit, the project proposer becomes responsible for supplying all necessary data to the Responsible Government Unit. The Responsible Government Unit, or RGU, prepares the EAW by completing the standard form supplied by the Environmental Quality Board. The RGU in this case is the City of Lino Lakes. The Lead Person on this review for Eagle Brook Church is Jeff Smyser, City Planner. The EAW in your packet is a result of a determination made that all relevant information has been received. The EAW was approved for distribution by the City Council. Upon this approval, the EAW is sent to several review agencies, and City Boards for comment. This comment period is 30 calendar days. After the 30 -day comment period, the RGU responds to the comments received and makes a determination on the need for an EIS based on the EAW comments received and responses to the comments. The RGU and other units of government may require modifications to the project to mitigate environmental impacts as disclosed through the EAW process. The EAW is on the October 30, 2002 Agenda for your comments. I have included the EAW (attachment 1), and the EQB Item -By Item Guidelines for your reference (attachment 2). Analysis: Environmental Board analysis to be performed, and comments recorded at the Environmental Board meeting. Options: Submit comments to the RGU Recommendation: To be determined Attachments: 1. Eagle Brook Church Environmental Assessment Worksheet. 2. EQB Item by Item Guidance reference. Chapter Item -by -item guidance Item -by -item guidance This chapter provides guidance for each item of the Environmen- tal Assessment Worksheet, developed by the Environmental Quality Board and revised in 1999. If an answer does not fit in the available space on the printed six -page worksheet, provide or complete the response on an additional sheet of paper and attach to the form; include the question number next to the response. An electronic version of the worksheet is available online from the Environmental Quality Board home page at www.mnplan.state.mn.us. 1. Project title Indicate what kind of project is involved, such as residential sub- division, gravel mine or county road resurfacing; its specific identification and location. For example: Joe Smith Gravel Mine, Lincoln Township. 2. Proposer Self - explanatory. 3. RGU The Responsible Govemmental Unit should only give an e-mail address if it intends to accept comments electronically. 4. Reason for EAW preparation Most EAWs are prepared because of mandatory requirements and should be noted accordingly. If the EAW is not mandatory, mark an appropriate option to indicate how the EAW process was initiated. If more than one could be said to apply — for instance if a citizen petition was filed but the proposer volunteered for an EAW before the RGU acted on the petition — either mark all that apply or none of the items and explain the situation. EIS scoping should be marked only if an EIS is mandatory or the proposer has voluntarily agreed to initiate an EIS. If an EAW or EIS is mandatory, list the citation for the applicable mandatory category(ies) from the EQB rules. The citation can be found in the rules at parts 4410.4300 or 4410.4400 or in Chapter 6 of the Guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules. Also, give the name of the category as listed in the rules after the subpart number. 5. Project location Township, range and section numbers are found on deeds, U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps and county highway maps. The county assessor will also have this information. All applicable section numbers should be listed. • Maps may be obtained from map stores or the U.S. Geological Survey; county maps are available from the Minnesota Depart- ment of Transportation or county sources. • Photocopies of maps are perfectly acceptable as long as they are clearly legible; if less than the complete map is copied, be sure that the label of the map is included so reviewers can refer to the original map if necessary. Be sure to clearly mark the project boundaries on the map. • The site plan should provide a graphic "close -up" of the project in sufficient detail to identify the key physical construction features, including roads, utilities, buildings, wells, drainage structures, cut and fill areas, materials or waste storage areas, parking lots and project boundaries. Significant natural features should also be indicated. Note: Some items on the EAW form ask that specific features be noted on the site plan. 6. Description This is the single most important item in the EAW, and care should be taken to ensure that it is completed thoroughly and accurately. Additional sheets should be added to the EAW as needed to provide a complete response. • a. Summary for publication in the EQB Monitor. Submitted by the RGU, this should be a concise statement of the project's basic nature, characteristics and location, which the EQB staff can print verbatim in the EQB Monitornotice of the EAW. It should not exceed 50 words. • b. The description should be focused on aspects of the project that may directly or indirectly manipulate, alter or impact the physical environment. This can include: construction methods, especially in regard to site preparation; operational features, especially in regard to waste production and management and in some cases such as mining activities, project dosure actions. The EAW description should not include information that serves only to justify or promote the project, and is otherwise irrelevant to the EAW process. The purpose of the EAW is to identify and assess environmental impacts. • c. This item was added to the EAW in the 1997 rule amend- ments. For private projects, state the purpose of the project. For public projects, state the purpose and in addition, explain why the project is needed and describe who will benefit from the project. This information was added to assist reviewers in identifying appropriate mitigation. Without a clear idea of the project's goals, it is difficult to assess whether changes in process, scale or design that may be environmentally superior would also meet the goals. 6 EAW Guidelines Item -by -item guidance Chapter ■ d. These items identify past or future stages of the project and describe how the present EAW relates to prior or future review. If the answer to either part of d is °yes,' it is likely that the project is related to other developments as a "phased action' or a 'con- nected action' as defined by the EQB rules at part 4410.0200, subpart 60 and 9b, respectively. The rules require that all parts of these actions be reviewed as a single project. The RGU should refer to the EQB rules (parts 4410.1000, subpart 4 and 4410.2000, subpart 4) and Chapter 2 of the Guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules to ensure that the complete project has been reviewed in the EAW. If the project is a residential project, relevant requirements are at part 4410.4300, subpart 19 and part 4410.4400, subpart 14. Also note that the certification at the end of the form asks the RGU to verify that it has complied with the requirements for reviewing the complete project. 7. Project magnitude data This item asks for certain data that help quantify the magnitude of the project. Depending on the type of project, some of the data requested may not be applicable, in which case simply leave the item blank. • Total project area or length. For linear projects such as roads, pipelines, sewers or electric transmission lines, the length should be given; for other projects the area should be given. If the total acres involved in a linear project are known, give both area and length. • Residential units. Single family, duplex and triplex units are considered unattached while four or more units to a building are attached. Each individual dwelling unit counts as one attached unit; therefore, a 24 -unit apartment building has 24 attached units. • Commercial, industrial and institutional building ar- eas. The form asks for a total of the gross floor space for any project of a commercial, industrial or institutional nature such as a school, prison or hospital. Count all floors of all enclosed struc- tures on the site except for any space used for parking. The form also asks for a breakdown of the total among nine subclasses of commercial, industrial and institutional space. This should be self - explanatory except for 'agricultural,' which is intended primarily for the building areas of feedlot projects. If you are uncertain about where something fits, list it under "other commercial" and describe what it is. • Building heights. List at least the maximum height of the buildings; provide more information where appropriate, such as an office complex with two or more towers of varying sizes, or an office tower with a communications tower mounted on top. A comparison to the heights of other nearby buildings is required if any buildings will exceed two stories. 8. Permits and approvals required List the permits, approvals, reviews and financing required or sought from all government agencies prior to the beginning of the project. Include any necessary regional reviews and approvals from agencies such as the Metropolitan Council. Include approv- als already obtained and any modifications of any existing permits. A comprehensive listing of state and local permits can be obtained from the Minnesota Small Business Assistance Office listed in the appendix. The local unit's planning and zoning office can also help identify necessary permits. Federal permits most likely to be required would be from the Army Corps of Engineers or the Fish and Wildlife Service; listed in the Appendix. Any public funding or support must now be listed, including Tax Increment Financing, public infrastructure constructed to assist the project, bond guarantees and other forms of public assistance or subsidies. If a potential environmental impact will or can be addressed by conditions of any required permits or approvals, this should be discussed in the EAW. See also item 31, which provides an oppor- tunity to explain how potential impacts can be mitigated through permit and approval conditions. When an EAW is required or ordered, no final decision to grant any govemmental permit or approval (including financial assis- tance) can be made until either a decision has been made that no EIS is needed or until an EIS has been completed. See part 4410.3100 or Chapter 2 of the Guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules. In some cases there may be permits previously issued for activities on or near the project site that are relevant to the review of the proposed project. This is most likely where the proposed project is an expansion of an existing project, but could occur under other conditions as well, for example, if a past dredging project permit- ted by the Corps of Engineers or the DNR placed soil on the proposed project site. These permits should be identified, includ- ing the permit number and issuing agency. This information can either be presented under this item or preferably under the items most relevant to the nature of the permit. 9. Land use The point of this question is two -fold: (1) to identify any past land uses on the site which might contribute to present environmental concerns such as soil contamination from past industrial use; and (2) to identify any potential conflicts between the project and existing surrounding land uses with environmental aspects that may require mitigation. A typical example would be a gravel operation proposed next to a residential area: dust and noise could cause significant conflicts with the residential land use. The form asks whether potential land use conflicts involve environ- mental matters because not all land use conflicts do. For example, heavy truck traffic from a gravel mine near a residential area may Environmental Quality Board 7 Chapter Item -by -item guidance cause a land use conflict due to safety concems but it is not an environmental matter. The EQB rules define "environment" to include: land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, energy resources, and man -made objects or natural features of historic, geologic or aesthetic significance (part 4410.0200, sub- part 23). As of 1998, the item includes any pipelines for gas or hazardous liquids that may pass through or near the site. 10. Cover types Estimates of the acres of land cover before and after the project should be provided. One important purpose of this information is to assess the project's impact on wildlife habitat. Site surveys or recent aerial photos provide the best source of information. If the total number of acres is not equal for the pre - project and post - project conditions, explain why not. Be sure to provide descriptions for any acres listed under "other." In identifying types of wetlands, use the guidelines in the Appendix. Dedicated stormwater detention ponds should not be designated as wetlands. The "wooded/forest" category should be applied only to relatively undisturbed wooded areas; "urban/suburban lawn/landscaping' is the appropriate classification for develop- ments constructed in wooded areas, even if many of the trees are maintained. Similarly, the "brush/grassland " category applies to areas that are undisturbed or infrequently maintained; if an area is to be regularly mowed or maintained, even if in a rural setting, list it under " urban/suburban lawn/landscaping." 11. Fish, wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources • a. Fish and wildlife habitat areas exist throughout the state and are not all specifically designated. State and federally designated refuges and protected trout streams or spawning areas are well - defined and lists can be obtained for your county. Nearly all undeveloped land has some wildlife habitat value. The quality and value of the habitat depends on many factors includ- ing the degree of disturbance, the nature of the adjoining areas, and the area and type of vegetation or water resources present. Questions about the value of the habitat can be directed to re- gional offices of the DNR listed in Appendix A. Keep in mind, however, that it is the responsibility of the RGU to determine the nature and significance of any project- related impacts. If unusu- ally valuable or extensive habitat may be impacted, it may be necessary to hire a specialist to conduct a field survey of the site. • b. "Ecologically sensitive resources" generally refers to rare or unique natural features or features of special significance, includ- ing threatened and endangered species; habitats that are rare statewide such as prairie remnants or virgin timber, locally rare habitats; colonial waterbird nesting colonies; and high quality wetland complexes. A database of these features is maintained by the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Program; contact pro- gram staff for a listing of known features near the project (a fee may be charged for this information). This information should be incorporated into the EAW; state the correspondence number on the EAW for reference. The worksheet also asks whether a habitat site survey was conducted. Ecologically sensitive resources not in the DNR database should also be identified and described in the EAW. "Mitigation measures" for fish, wildlife or ecologically sensitive resources impacts include avoiding, minimizing and compensating for impacts. Examples include landscaping or revegetation with plant species of value to wildlife, retaining wooded travel corri- dors (especially along waterways), and construction or restoration of wetlands. 12. Physical impacts on water resources Physical or hydrologic alteration of any surface water should be discussed in this question. Hydrologic modifications include all actions which alter the existing hydrologic regime, that is, rate of discharge into or out of a waterbody, frequency and extent of water level fluctuations, interaction with ground water. The de- scription of the alteration should address: the construction process; volumes of dredged or fill material; the area to be af- fected; the timing and magnitudes of fluctuations in water surface elevations; spoils disposal sites; and any other relevant informa- tion. Modifications of all wetlands should be discussed, not only "pro- tected wetlands" subject to DNR regulation. Refer to the appendix for information on wetlands classifications. The public waters inventory number and information on permits required for alteration of or construction in aquatic areas may be obtained from DNR regional or area hydrologist offices. 13. Water use This item covers information about the appropriation and use of water and the systems from which the water will be obtained. It also covers information about any wells already existing on the project site. The EAW should describe any water use such as water supply, dust control, dewatering or pond testing, and give the source and the permit number if issued. In cases of major appropriations, or where cumulative appropriations are significant, it may be neces- sary to include a quantitative analysis of the impacts on ground water levels. Appropriation of water in excess of 10,000 gallons per day or one million gallons per year requires permits from the DNR Division of Waters. Information can be obtained from the division or the applicable DNR regional or area hydrologist's offices. You must have a licensed well contractor and a permit from the Minnesota Department of Health or the local community health services agency before the construction of any new wells, includ- 8 EAW Guidelines Item -by -item guidance Chapter ing monitoring wells and dewatering wells. Consult the well management program of the Minnesota Department of Health for more information about wells and well construction requirements. If the project requires the creation, connection or a change to public water supply, it is important to identify wells that will be used as water sources. Plans for the creation, connection or changes to a public water supply may need to be reviewed and approved by the Minnesota Department of Health. Contact the department's public water supply program for more information. To locate existing wells, the Minnesota Department of Health recommends conducting a field well inventory on properties affected by the project. Special attention should be paid to areas where construction will take place and where any farmsteads, homes or industrial wells may have been located in the past, as well as along boundaries where wells may exist on adjacent properties. Locating existing wells is important to maintain dis- tances between wells and sources of groundwater contamination. Existing wells cannot be buried during construction without first being properly sealed. If no wells are believed to exist on the site, your response must indicate how this was determined; for ex- ample, by a field survey. All wells that are no longer going to be used must either be sealed by a licensed well contractor according to Minnesota Rules, chapter 4725, or have a maintenance permit from the Minnesota Department of Health, or from the local Community Health Services Agency, if there is a delegation agreement for local well regulation. Currently, this includes Dakota, Blue Earth, Goodhue, LeSueur, Mower, Olmsted, Wabasha, Waseca, and Winona counties and the cities of Minneapolis and Bloomington. All wells constructed since 1974 were assigned a Unique Well Number, provided to the property owner by the licensed well contractor. The number can also be obtained from the Minnesota Geological Survey or from some local planning and zoning offices. 14. Water - related land use management districts Shoreland areas refer to developments within 1,000 feet of a lake, pond or flowage (reservoir) or within 300 feet of a river or stream. If a flood plain has been delineated by ordinances, then the outer limits of the flood plain delineate the shoreland jurisdiction. The local planning and zoning office should be contacted regarding local shoreland and flood plain ordinances that may apply. Special wild, scenic, and recreational river districts are identified in the appendix. Contact the local planning and zoning office or the applicable DNR Regional or Area Hydrologist's office regard- ing setbacks and other restrictions which apply along these rivers. Shoreland, flood plain and wild or scenic rivers land use districts are protected by special zoning ordinances designed to protect the resources of such lands. The EAW should discuss whether the project fully complies with all these special zoning requirements. The EAW should also indicate whether the applicable ordinances have been approved by the DNR; this information can be obtained from the DNR regional or area hydrologist's offices. 15. Water surface use Provide an estimate of the current and projected watercraft use, including the number of acres of water surface per watercraft. In assessing impacts on fish and wildlife resources, consider the presence of colonial waterbird nesting colonies; nests of bald eagles, osprey or loons; important waterfowl feeding or brooding areas; and other resources sensitive to disturbance. If applicable, discuss any mitigation measures that will be used to minimize conflicts, such as controls on watercraft and their sizes, motors and sizes, speed limits and area zoning. 16. Erosion and sedimentation Be sure to address both construction and post - construction phases in describing erosion and sedimentation control. Post - construction control measures may be described here or under item 18. NOTE: If the project will grade or alter five or more acres, an NPDES stormwater permit may be required from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Steep slopes of 12 percent or more and erosion prone soils, as indicated in item 11, should be described and shown on the site plan or on a separate grading plan. Specific erosion and sedimentation control measures should be described. If the proposer has not prepared definite plans for these measures, the requirements of the local govemmental unit should be described. If erosion control plans or grading plans have been prepared they should be attached. Special attention should be given to discussing erosion control on any identified steep slopes or erosion prone soils. If significant amounts of soils will be excavated, the EAW should identify the types involved, to where they will be relocated and how they will be used. 17. Water quality: surface water runoff • a. The intent of this question is to characterize the effect of the project on the amounts and the composition of stormwater runoff from the site and the techniques planned to minimize adverse quantity and quality impacts. The emphasis should be on post - construction stormwater impacts and on permanent mitigation measures rather than on erosion and sedimentation control dur- ing construction, which should be discussed under item 16. The amount of detail provided and the level of sophistication of the analysis should be commensurate with the magnitude of the potential impacts. For example, if the project will only cause a Environmental Quality Board 9 Chapter Item -by -item guidance small increase in impervious surface and would add only minor amounts of any potential pollutants, it would be sufficient to qualitatively describe the extent of increase and give a general identification of the types of pollutants involved such as fertilizer and herbicides from suburban lawns or pollutants typical of park- ing lot runoff. On the other hand, if significant increase in runoff or significant amounts or kinds of pollutants would result, a more detailed and quantitative assessment would be necessary to adequately characterize the impacts. Similarly, the amount of detail provided about management or treatment methods should befit the significance of the quantities and quality of the runoff. Where it is dear or suspected that the runoff would pose water quality problems if not adequately man- aged or treated, sufficient detail is needed so that reviewers can judge the adequacy of the proposed system. Locations, dimen- sions and design capacities of detention or retention basins should be given if they will be used to manage runoff. The EAW should discuss the conformance of the proposed system with any applicable requirements of the local municipality and any watershed district with jurisdiction over the area. If the project is subject to a stormwater pollution prevention plan, it should be discussed. • b. The first part of this answer should identify the point(s) of discharge of the stormwater system into receiving waters and also indicate any downstream receiving waters that may be influenced by the stormwater discharge, in terms of volumes or quality. This should include any downstream waters that may be noticeably influenced by the discharge, especially those more sensitive or more valuable than the waters receiving the direct discharge. An estimate of the stormwater impact on the quality of receiving waters should be made. The level of sophistication of this analysis must be guided by the likely magnitude of the impact and the importance of the water body(ies) affected. Where it is clear that only a minor degradation of water quality and no noticeable impairment of water use would result, only a general qualitative discussion is needed. Where noticeable impairment may occur, however, more quantitative assessment methods should be em- ployed, and predictions should be made about whether any water quality standards will be violated. A stormwater discharge that may affect a lake is an example of a situation in which the RGU must exercise judgement about the extent of analysis needed. Generally regarded as sensitive and valued resources, the lake may require a numerical nutrient bud- get analysis to adequately characterize the extent of the potential impact. Any nutrient budget analysis performed should be based on a generally accepted model of a lake's response to increase in phosphorus loading or other critical nutrients if phosphorus is not limiting. The choice of a model should be based on available data, and its expected accuracy based on the likely magnitude of the impact, in addition to the time and costs of using the model. In other words, the greater the likely impact, the greater the need for a more sophisticated model. If insufficient data is available to allow the use of any numerical model, it is necessary to gather the minimally needed data unless the EAW can establish through other analysis that there is no reason to expect noticeable degra- dation. If the matter is left in doubt in the EAW, it may result in calls for an EIS and a more in -depth analysis. 18. Water quality: wastewaters • a. For any project that generates wastewater, details of the sources, composition and amounts need to be given in the EAW. For normal domestic sewage generation such as toilet wastes or wash water from human occupancy, only the amounts need be given, calculated from the number of occupants at a rate of 100 gallons per person per day unless another figure is justified in the particular case. For industrial processes, the sources of all wastewater streams should be identified and a description should be given of how the various potential pollutants enter the stream or are generated within the stream. The anticipated chemical analysis of the vari- ous waste streams should be estimated, and the basis for the estimate should be indicated, such as measurements made at an existing similar plant. • b. Provide sufficient information about the nature of any pro- posed wastewater treatment system to demonstrate that it will be adequate to treat the wastewaters generated. The level of detail needed will depend on the nature of the wastewaters and the proposed system and the degree of treatment that must be achieved; where wastewaters or proposed treatment methods are non - routine, a higher level of detail demonstrating that the sys- tem will work will be necessary. For industrial wastewaters, it is advisable to consult with PCA early in the EAW preparation pro- cess. The second part of this question calls for identification of receiv- ing waters for discharges. This should include any downstream waters that may be noticeably influenced by the discharge, espe- cially those more sensitive or more valuable than the waters receiving the direct discharge. An estimate of the impact of the discharge(s) on the quality of the receiving waters should be made. The level of sophistication of this analysis must be guided by the likely magnitude of the impact and the importance of the water body(ies) affected. Where it is clear on the basis of the amounts and quality of the discharge compared to the volume, quality and assimilative capacity of the receiving waters that only a minor degradation of water quality will occur, and no noticeable impairment of uses of the water would result, only a qualitative discussion is generally needed. Where noticeable impairment may occur, however, more quantitative assessment methods should be employed, and predictions should be made about whether any water quality standards will be violated. 10 EAW Guidelines Item -by -item guidance Chapter In the event that a wastewater discharge may degrade a lake a numerical nutrient budget analysis may be required; however, it is unlikely that any new discharges to any lake would be permitted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Any nutrient budget should be based on a generally accepted model of a lake's re- sponse to increase in phosphorus loading or other critical nutrients if phosphorus is not limiting. The choice of a model should be based on available data, and its expected accuracy based on the likely magnitude of the impact, in addition to the time and costs of using the model. In other words, the greater the likely impact, the greater the need for a more sophisticated model. If insufficient data is available to allow the use of any numerical model, it is necessary to gather the minimally needed data unless the EAW can establish through other analysis that there is no reason to expect noticeable degradation. If the matter is left in doubt in the EAW, it may result in calls for an EIS and a more in -depth analysis. Where the method proposed is on -site sewage treatment such as septic tanks and drainfields or similar soil absorption facilities, this response must address the suitability of the site conditions for the use of such systems, and should be focused on demonstrating that the systems will function adequately. Where there will be on- site systems on separate Tots, the discussion should demonstrate that each system can be reasonably expected to function. Where site conditions require special methods to allow on -site systems to work properly, the proposed methods should be discussed, includ- ing information about how they will be employed. • c. If wastewaters will be treated by an existing publicly owned treatment system, this question should address the adequacy of that system to handle the volume and composition of wastewa- ters from the project. Information about the system characteristics, existing loads and present treatment performance should be given. Anticipated improvements to handle the new wastes, including their scheduling, should be discussed. Any pre- treatment of the wastewater before it is discharged into the public system should be discussed under this section, including the nature of the pre- treatment and the wastewater composition and quantity after pre- treatment. Any sludges or other materials removed from the wastewater during pre - treatment must be discussed under the appropriate sections of the EAW. • d. This item is intended for projects that involve animal feedlots. 19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions • a. This question attempts to provide information pertinent to potential groundwater contamination, including any geologic or Iandform features of special concern. Possible sources of informa- tion include: site surveys, soil surveys, topographic maps, and county sanitation or health department, the State Department of Health and the Minnesota Geological Survey. If any such features are present at the site, the EAW should address how potential ground water contamination problems that could result from these hazards will be prevented. • b. Describe the types of soils present using the Natural Resources Conservation Service classification system. Soil surveys showing this information are available from the offices of County Agricultural Extension, Soil and Water Conservation districts. If several soil types exist on the site, a soils map is helpful. It is not necessary to attach copies of the soil interpretation sheets to the EAW. Discuss how soil characteristics, especially granularity, affect the potential for the spread of contaminants through the soil into groundwater, if applicable. If soil borings have been made, it may be necessary to attach a copy of the boring logs to the EAW if the project may have poten- tial to contaminate the soils or ground water, including projects involving use of on -site sewage treatment by septic tanks and drainfields. When it is not clear that the logs need to be attached, you may simply note that the Togs exist and are available upon request. 20. Solid waste, hazardous waste, storage tanks • a. All types of wastes generated by the project that are not wastewaters, liquid manure or air emissions should be identified here. This includes any hazardous wastes, all forms of 'solid wastes," any sludges, any ashes from combustion, animal ma- nures in solid form, demolition wastes, construction wastes and asbestos. Estimates of the composition and quantities should be given. For common types of wastes of fairly uniform composition, such as municipal solid waste and animal manures, the composi- tion need not be identified other than as by type of waste; for example, "turkey manure mixed with straw bedding" would be sufficient. For other types of wastes, especially if they are hazard- ous or contain toxic constituents, a chemical analysis should be given along with how it was determined. The method and location of disposal of all the wastes should be provided. This should include information demonstrating that the proposed method and location is environmentally acceptable. Discuss source separation, recycling, hazardous waste minimiza- tion and reduction assessment plans as appropriate. • b. List any chemicals or other substances that will be on the site for any purpose. The level of detail provided should be com- mensurate with the likelihood that the materials could enter the ground water, the risk associated with the materials and the quantities present or used. The response may reference other items as appropriate, such as item 21 for storage tanks. • c. The anticipated contents of all tanks should be specified. It may be useful to show the location of tanks on a site map or plan. If special precautions will be taken to prevent leaks or other problems, these should be indicated, including emergency re- sponse containment plans. Environmental Quality Board 11 Chapter Item -by -item guidance 21. Traffic A reasonable estimate is called for for projects with only minor traffic generation, it is not necessary to provide the maximum peak hour traffic generated. The trip generation rates used to estimate traffic (such as trips per household) and their source should be identified. It is recommended that the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual be used, unless other numbers are justified for the particular project. The level of effort put into the analysis should be commensurate to the amount of traffic generated and the existing level of con- gestion; therefore, the more likely the project will contribute to a growing problem, the more detail that should be provided. The analysis should consider not only the adjoining roads but also other connecting roads that may be adversely impacted. One commonly accepted measure of congestion is the level -of- service and delay times. If a traffic analysis is being prepared because of the requirements of the local unit of government, that analysis should also be used for the EAW, provided that it is based on generally accepted principles of traffic analysis. If an Indirect Source Permit is re- quired, as described in item 22, the traffic analysis method used in the EAW should be consistent with the requirements of the permit application; the Pollution Control Agency should be con- sulted before the EAW analysis is prepared. If the proposer or the local government has identified needed traffic improvements to serve the project, they should be identified in the EAW. For projects within the seven - county Twin Cities metropolitan area, the EAW must address the project's potential impact on the regional transportation system. 22. Vehicle - related air emissions The level of detail needed here depends on the magnitude of the traffic congestion due to the project as described in item 21. When there is no reason to expect traffic congestion or that exist- ing congestion will be noticeably worse due to the project, indicate that it will not cause any significant decrease in air qual- ity. However, if item 21 indicates that the project will cause or worsen traffic congestion, an estimate of the air quality impact of this congestion must be prepared here. This analysis should focus primarily on carbon monoxide concentrations. The level of sophistication of this air quality analysis will depend on two factors. First, the likely magnitude of the air quality im- pact the greater the anticipated impact, the more sophisticated and detailed the analysis must be. Second, whether or not the project will require an Indirect Source Permit from the Pollution Control Agency. Projects involving 500 or more parking spaces may require an ISP, depending on various other factors; for assis- tance, contact the agency. If the project requires an ISP, in most cases, the air quality analysis provided in the EAW should be the same analysis required to apply for the ISP; the PCA should be consulted before this analysis is prepared. Some projects that do not require an ISP may nevertheless require an estimate of likely air quality impacts if they may contribute to traffic congestion. The most common example of this is a project that will attract large numbers of people but will rely on off-site parking to accommodate them. The air quality analysis in such cases should be comparable to that used in the ISP process. 23. Stationary source air emissions This response should cover all sources of air emissions other than traffic, odor sources and construction -phase dust. The most com- mon sources of such emissions are boilers and industrial processes. The level of detail and the degree of sophistication of the analysis should be commensurate with the magnitude of the emissions and their likely impacts on air quality. Where emissions will be large or contain significant air pollutants, quantitative estimates derived from generally accepted air quality models may be necessary. If emissions will be minor, a qualitative emissions description should suffice. Any hazardous air pollutants must be specifically addressed, as well as the greenhouse gases identified on the form. Judgment must be exercised in determining the level of information needed for the pollutants carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide from the project in question. This item now includes dust except construction -phase dust. Fugitive dust is defined as 'particulate matter uncontaminated with industrial emissions that becomes airbome due either to the force of wind or man's activity,' such as dust generated by traffic on unpaved roads or parking areas, or dust from storage piles. The locations of and distances to sensitive receptors should be given. Proposed mitigation measures should be described. Air emission sources frequently require air quality permits from the PCA and applications for such permits may require extensive information. In these cases, the EAW may be based on informa- tion being developed for the air permit application. The proposer is advised to consult with the PCA regarding air permit require- ments prior to preparing the EAW data. 24. Odors, noise and dust • Odors. Identify any strong or potentially offensive odors and identify the locations or and distances to sensitive receptors. Describe any mitigation measures. Discuss both odors which have potential human health effects and also those which, although they do not pose health risks, may result in a loss of quality of life to surrounding neighbors due to nuisance or annoyance conditions. • Noise. Any major noise should be described, including infor- mation on their levels (dBA) and hours of duration. However, construction noise need not be described unless the construction 12 EAW Guidelines Item -by -item guidance Chapter of the project will be unusually noisy — the blasting of rock, for example; prolonged; affect especially sensitive receptors — a hospital, for example; or otherwise can be expected to have unusual noise impacts during construction. The locations of and distances to sensitive receptors should be given. For projects in the vicinity of major noise sources, such as highways, railroads or airports, noise levels should be estimated using generally ac- cepted noise prediction models, regardless of whether the noise standards are legally enforceable with respect to the project. Mitigation measures should be described, and their effects as- sessed. Projects requiring PCA Indirect Source air quality permits, de- scribed under item 23, often require a noise analysis as part of the permit application, which should be induded in the EAW. • Dust. Wind -blown dust from construction, demolition, haul roads and other activities should be addressed here instead of under item 23 if the quantities of dust will be large, prolonged or otherwise greater than routinely expected during project con- struction. Mitigation measures should be discussed. 25. Nearby resources • Archaeological, historical or architectural resources. Contact the State Historical Preservation Office, Minnesota His- torical Society, listed in the appendix, for information about possible archaeological or historical resources at the site. A local "heritage preservation" committee may also provide assistance. Where archaeological resources exist, a site survey by a qualified archeologist may be necessary. Results of the survey should be presented in the EAW. • Prime or unique farm lands and agricultural pre- serves. Information on prime and unique farmlands is available from the Natural Resources Conservation Service or the Minne- sota Planning Office Land Management Information Center. The local unit of govemment (county or city) has information on any established agricultural preserves. • Designated parks, recreational areas or trails. Loca- tions of these may be obtained from the local unit's planning and zoning or recreation office or from the DNR. • Scenic views and vistas. These may include spectacular viewing points along lakes, rivers or bluffs; virgin timber tracts; prairie remnants; geological features; waterfalls; specimen trees; or plots of wildflowers. Many are not officially designated or marked, but because of their local or statewide interest should be considered by the RGU. Impacts on the visual quality or integrity of these resources should be addressed as well as the physical impacts. 26. Visual impacts Describe any nonroutine impacts that may be due to the emission of light or a "visual nuisance" caused by the project during con- struction or operation. An example of an emission impact is an intense Tight causing a glare problem for passing motorists. Ex- amples of "visual nuisances" include lights on tall communication towers intruding on the visual integrity of a scenic vista, or a large water vapor plume from an exhaust stack or cooling tower. 27. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations Discuss whether the project is subject to any official govemmental management plans adopted for the area. These could indude a local comprehensive land use plan (likely in any city in the Twin Cities metropolitan area); a local comprehensive water plan; or management plans specific to resource areas under public man- agement such as parks, watershed districts or rivers. Plans of all levels of govemment should be considered here: local, regional, state and federal. The local planning and zoning office is probably the best source of this kind of information. If no such plans exist in the area, the EAW should so indicate. If there is a plan, but the project is not subject to the plan, the EAW should indicate why not. If the project is subject to a plan, the EAW should identify its requirements relevant to the project and discuss how the project complies with the plan. The RGU should consult with the govern- ment unit responsible for the implementation of the plan regarding provisions that relate to the project and about the consistency of the project with the plan. Emphasis in the EAW should be given to any conflicts or incompatibilities between the project and plan provisions that relate to the environment or use of natural resources. 28. Infrastructure and public services Identify new or expanded public services or public works neces- sary to serve the project such as sewers, storm sewers, streets, water mains, water towers, power lines, gas lines, police protec- tion, fire protection and schools. NOTE: Any infrastructure utilities constructed to serve the project and not independent of this specific project must be treated in the EAW as part of the project for example, a road built to serve a specific project must be treated as part of the project and its impacts should be included in the EAW. According to the EQB rules, all "connected actions" are to be reviewed as one project. Connected actions are defined as projects related in any of the three following ways: (1) one project would induce the other, (2) one project is a prerequisite for another, or (3) neither project is justified by itself (part 4410.0200, subpart 9b). Further guidance regarding connected actions is presented in Chapter 2 of the Guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules. Environmental Quality Board 13 Chapter Item -by -item guidance If the project will result in a future commitment to build an infra- structure, the EAW should identify that infrastructure and its timing and provide a general assessment of its impacts. 29. Cumulative impacts The intent here is to put the project's potential impacts into the context of impacts caused by other past, present or future projects in the area, so that the RGU can assess the cumulative impacts to the environment. One criterion which must be consid- ered in determining the need for an EIS is the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" (part 4410.1700, subpart 7, item B). The EAW record must provide some information about potential cumulative impacts in order to support the EIS need decision according to the rules. Such infor- mation can be presented under item 29. Some of the analyses under other items may also address cumulative impacts. To do an accurate traffic analysis, for example, the background traffic from other sources must be considered. For potential cumulative impacts that are not addressed under another EAW question, the RGU should provide the information here, to the extent known. References should be made to other questions where a cumulative impacts- related response has been made. 30. Other potential environmental impacts This item is provided in case there should be some type of envi- ronmental impact from the project which cannot be adequately discussed under any other items on the form. This item will sel- dom need to be used. 31. Summary of issues This section should include a brief synopsis of the potential im- pacts defined in the EAW. It should also discuss further studies of impacts which may be planned or necessary and mitigation mea- sures or alternatives which could be implemented to avoid or minimize possible impacts. Discussion of mitigation measures or alternatives should include information about how these will or could be required through various permits or approvals required for the project. This section of the EAW should be used to summarize the exami- nation of altematives, focusing on the reasons why the proposed project was selected and the comparative environmental impacts of other altematives considered. Certification by the RGU The worksheet requires the signature of an authorized official of the RGU. The EQB will not accept an EAW for publication of the notice of availability without an appropriate signature on the worksheet. The signature represents certifi- cation by the RGU that: (1) the information is complete and accurate; (2) the "complete" project is reviewed by the EAW; there are no aspects of the project such as future "phased actions" or other related "connected actions" that have not been taken into account in the EAW; and (3) the EAW has been properly distrib- uted to the official distribution list, available from the EQB home page at www.mnplan.state.mn.us, or by contacting the EQB staff. 14 EA W Guidelines Agenda Item 5B Environmental Board Meeting Date: October 30, 2002 Topic: Lake Drive Carwash /CUP /Site Plan Review Background: The Environmental Board reviewed this site plan at the August 28, 2002 Environmental Board Meeting. The following are the comments and recommendations from that meeting concerning the proposed car wash: The Environmental Board made the following recommendations concerning the Car Wash Proposal on Lake Drive: The high water elevation of the large basin on the west is indicated at 897.2. The West infiltration basin on the site is proposed to have a base elevation of 897.0. There needs to be at least a 3 -foot separation between the bottom of the basin and the seasonally high ground water level. The applicant should demonstrate that adequate separation exists or redesign the improvements to achieve this separation. This 3 -foot separation is consistent with MPCA's guidelines for septic systems. In addition, given this is a light industrial site, the applicant should submit a soil sensitivity test for designed systems to evaluate potential effects on groundwater. If runoff water could contain a significant concentration of soluble pollutants, infiltration basins should not be used. Proximity to drinking wells must be evaluated. Basins should be at least 150 feet from any wells and be situated at least 10 feet down - gradient and 100 feet up- gradient from building foundations . Basins should be designed with pretreatment features such as grit chambers, swales with check dams, filter strips, or sediment fore bays. Traps should be a component of any infiltration system. Desirable side slope dimensions of the basin should be no greater than 3H: 1V. Flatter slopes are preferred. The basin water depths should be no more than 2 feet to eliminate compaction to the basin, and the ponding time no more than 72 hours. A desirable length to width ratio for an infiltration basin should be 3:1 or greater. Overflow should include check dams, level bars or other structures to ensure sheet washing. Access to the site for maintenance should be addressed. . Swale areas should be kept to a 1% to a 2% slope. Recommend that the design of these swales be modeled after Met Council/Barr engineering design standards. . Sequencing Suggested (Attachment and Construction Sequencing Plans (BMP's) should be submitted. guidelines are in the Minnesota Urban Small Sites BMP Manual. 10). A Maintenance Plan should be submitted with the BMP Plan. (Attachment 11). • The landscape plan seems to have appropriate materials. All soil areas in the landscape, and surface water treatment train, should follow written and approved BMP's. There are no trees that will be saved on this site. The City native plant seed schedule (attachment 12), should be used in and around the basins and swales, unless cultured sod appearance is desired in front. All sod areas must be irrigated. • Lighting should be low- impact, downward focused, low- spill, flush mounted lens design. • Amur maple and Honeysuckle should be changed to non - invasive species. • Any changes to soils (importing or exporting soils) should be approved by City Staff. Recommendation by Donlin, Second by O'Dea to table until redesigned and the Environmental Board has a chance to review again. If the Environmental Board does not have a chance to review again, than the above listed review comments should be addressed. Analysis: Surface Water The recommendation to provide for 3 -foot separation between seasonally high water and the bottoms of infiltration basis remains the same. The applicant has not demonstrated any difference in these elevations. There are additional pervious pavement features added to the site plan. However, Guidelines from Barr Engineering /Met Council (attachment 1), recommend that infiltration not be used on commercial sites, and only used if adequate separation can be provided in the design of the basins, and only after a soil sensitivity study has been performed. Fortunately, this sensitivity study is done for Lino Lakes soils. This area is defined as highly sensitive to ground water pollution. MPCA 2000, Chapter 11 Urban Runoff (attachment 2), states that Minnesota state laws (Minn.R.ch.7060) prohibits the direct discharge of untreated stormwater to the saturated zone if the discharge threatens the ground water from potential pollutants. A minimum requirement for this site should be those of the MPCA standards for on site septic systems. This requirement calls for a 3 -foot separation between the bottom of the septic system and the seasonally high water table. A 3 -foot separation of filtration sand would give the proposed basins a minimum standard of ground water protection. Lighting The lighting plan submitted is inappropriate. The Environmental Board recommended in August to change the lighting plan to low impact, downward spilling types of lighting. This was not changed. New design for lighting needs to be submitted. Landscaping The Environmental Board recommended in August that Amur Maple and honeysuckle be changed to a non - invasive species. The changes have not been made on the new plan. The Environmental Board recommended that the seed mix be changed to the City Specifications for seed mix. The changes have not been made on the plan. A new recommendation would be to change the Pine species to hardwoods, and add additional trees. Recommend these trees be Northern red maple and Hackberry. Options: 1. Approve with suggested changes 2. Do not approve Recommendation: Approve contingent upon changes to the surface water management plan. The Planning and Zoning Board and City Council should consider all previous and present recommended changes. Environmental Board Comments: Attachments: 1. "Infiltration Systems/Infiltration Basins ", Metropolitan Council/Barr Engineering 2. MPCA 2000 Chapter 11, "Urban Runoff' 3, Pla�S { in ativaanasinss ir ti2Epfcgagisecrits • Treatment of a small drainage area (lower sediment loadings) • Careful consideration of depth of ponding and inundation times that reflect plant tolerances • Good construction techniques that prevent smearing, over - compaction, and operation of the basin during the construction period • Performance of regular maintenance All of these topics are discussed in further detail below. Site Sensitivity Analysis Before an infiltration system can be designed, a site sensitivity analysis must be performed. This evaluation may eliminate an infiltration practice from consideration because of soil characteristics or potential effects on ground- water. Because of varying geologic settings, a site evaluation needs to be tailored to the specific site conditions. A team approach to this evaluation is recommended where various disciplines such as engineering, hydrogeology and soil science are represented. The applicability of infiltration basins on a site depends on numerous site factors, including soils, slope, depth to water table, depth to bedrock or impermeable layer, contributing watershed area, land use, proximity to wells, surface waters, foundations, and others. Generally, infiltration basins are suitable to sites with gentle slopes, permeable soils, relatively deep bedrock and groundwater levels, and a small contributing watershed area (less than 2 acres, ideally). When performing a site evaluation, the following items should be considered: • Runoff water quality: If runoff water will contain a significant concentration of soluble pollutants that could contaminate groundwater, an infiltration basin should not be used. Specifically, infiltration basins are not recommended for industrial and commercial land uses since there is a high potential for groundwater con- tamination from chemical spills and maintenance (salting and sanding) activities. In site - specific cases where infiltration basins are deemed acceptable for these land uses, the design must be located off -line and incorpo- rate some form of upstream treatment (e.g., an upstream oil -grit separator or sand filter). • Degree of detail: The level of detail required for the study should be considered. For instance, a small struc- ture receiving runoff from a rooftop will not require as much detail as a structure serving a larger area and having a higher potential pollutant load. • Geologic (groundwater) sensitivity: A site with a highly sensitive geology, such as one with a carbonate or surficial sand aquifer, may eliminate this practice from consideration. • Depth to water table and bedrock: The seasonally high water table must be far enough below the bottom of the infiltration basin (at least 3 feet) to allow the structure to function hydraulically and to allow trapping and treatment of pollutants by the soil. Similarly, the bottom of the infiltration basin should be at least 3 feet from bedrock, although in the case of fractured bedrock, separations up to 10 feet may be required. This minimum separation distance is required to trap or treat pollutants before they reach the groundwater or bedrock and to maintain vegetation in the basin (MPCA, 2000). Metropolitan Council / Barr Engineering Co. 3 -159 • • In atn�i�traitgems asIONHARierts • Proximity to drinking water wells and building foundations: Basins should be located at least 150 feet away from drinking water wells to limit the possibility of groundwater contamination, and should be situated at least 10 feet downgradient and 100 feet upgradient from building foundations to avoid potential seepage problems. • Soil infiltration rate: The infiltration rate of the soil must be great enough to drain the structure in a reason- able amount of time, generally 72 hours or less. Sites with clayey soils are not appropriate for infiltration basins. Infiltration rates are discussed in further detail below. If the infiltration rate of the site's soils are not acceptable, the filtration family of BMP systems should be considered. • Size of the tributary drainage area: Although infiltration basins were originally designed to accommodate larger drainage areas, research which has been undertaken to date indicates that large -scale infiltration is not feasible. One of the main problems with centralized infiltration basins is that water from a large area is expected to infiltrate into a relatively small area. This does not reflect the natural hydrologic cycle and generally leads to problems (groundwater mounding, clogging, compaction). For these reasons, the contribut- ing drainage area to any individual infiltration basin should be restricted to 2 acres or less. General Design Considerations Design Volume Infiltration basin systems infiltrate a portion of the runoff from a rain event (usually the first flush or up to the first inch) while the remaining runoff bypasses the infiltration basin. The design infiltration volume can be calculated in many ways. Ultimately, the magnitude of the design infiltration volume depends on local authori- ties' practices and requirements. Off -Line Placement The purpose of the basin is to temporarily store surface runoff for a specific design frequency storm and allow it to infiltrate through the bottom and sides of the basin. A flow splitter or weir is usually used to divert runoff into an off -line infiltration basin. Infiltration basins provide total peak discharge, runoff volume and water quality control for all storm events equal to or less than the design storm. Storm events greater than the design storm simply continue down the larger conveyance system, bypassing the infiltration basin. Pretreatment Infiltration basins are susceptible to high failure rates due to clogging from sediments, and therefore require pretreatment of stormwater in order to remove as much of the suspended solids from the runoff as possible before it enters the basin. Pretreatment, such as grit chambers, swales with check dams, filter strips, or sediment fore - bays/traps should be a fundamental component of any BMP system relying on infiltration. Even when infiltrating rooftop runoff, it is a practical decision to implement some form of pretreatment to remove sediments, leaf litter, and debris. This pretreatment will help to ensure the proper functioning of the infiltrating facility and allow for longer periods between maintenance. When designed properly, pretreatment devices may remove some 25 -30% of sediment loads. Figure 2 shows and infiltration basin with pretreatment in the form of a settling pond. 3 -160 Minnesota Urban Small Sites BMP Manual atiRtransflams Infiltration Rate The soils of a prospective site are an important consideration when determining the suitability for infiltration. County soil surveys are useful for preliminary screening of a site for soil infiltration rate. The Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) Soil Group is found in the National Engineering Handbook. Conservative estimates of infiltration rates for a range of hydrologic soil groups (A through D) have been developed for some Minnesota authorities and are shown below (Riley- Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District, 1999). Soil Group A B C D Rate (in/hr) Max. Water Depth (ft) 0.38 0.23 0.1 0.03 2 1.4 0.6 0.2 If these estimates are deemed too conservative for the site, a geologic investigation of the specific site should be conducted to verify higher infiltration rates. Infiltration rates should be measured in situ according to the stan- dards presented in: • Annual Book of ASTM Standards, 1997, Section 4, Vol 4.08, Soil and Rock (I): Designation D 3385 -94, Standard Test Method for Infiltration Rate of Soils in Field Using a Double -Ring Infiltrometer, pp 331 -337. • Annual Book ofASTMStandards, 1998, Section 4, Vol 4.09, Soil and Rock (II): Designation D 5093 -90, Standard Test Method for Field Measurement and Infiltration Rate Using a Double -Ring Infiltrometer with a Sealed -Inner Ring, pp 87 -92. • Johnson, A.I., 1963, "A field method for measurement of infiltration," United States Geological Survey, Water- Supply Paper, W 1544 -F, p. F1 -F27. The depth of water within the infiltro -ter should be maintained at the following depths: Hydrologic Soil Type Water Depth (Inches) A 18 B 9 C 4 D 1 Notes on alternative infiltration measurement methods: • Alternative methods other than reference standards should use a double -ring apparatus and be acceptable to local authorities. Metropolitan Council / Barr Engineering Co. 3 -161 reduce pollutant loading and reduce impacts to benthic biota may raise the allowable imperviousness. However, even when effective practices are widely applied, the threshold of imperviousness is eventually crossed, which results in a degraded condition. It is, therefore, critical that local government units (LGUs) address the impacts of imperviousness very early on by aggressive land use policies. There are many policies that can be adopted on a local level to reduce the impacts of imperviousness. Narrower streets, smaller parking requirements, swales instead of curb and gutter, and a host of other practices are outlined by documents from numerous centers, associations and agencies. One of the many growing practices is "Cluster development." This is defined as the grouping of all residential structures of a development on a portion of the available land, reserving a significant amount of the site as protected open space. Many communities in Minnesota and across the United States are updating their comprehensive plans and establishing ordinances to guide the development and construction of cluster developments. New ordinances are requiring design standards, and identifying open space and density standards. These key changes have prompted some communities to opt for more descriptive terminology, such as "open - space development" or "conservation subdivision design," instead of the more traditional "cluster development." While this use of different terminology has created some confusion, each still maintains the three basic goals of cluster development: (1) preserving open space, (2) protecting critical ecological habitat and (3) preserving agricultural land. The useable open space created by a cluster development can serve to meet a number of community goals, such as the protection of critical ecological resources, protection of wooded areas or the preservation of farmland. Obviously, these goals overlap and have the potential to conflict with one another. For example, the protection of wildlife habitat may be incompatible with the preservation of agricultural land. However, the key benefit is the quality of life preserved by the availability of open space made possible through the clustering of units. POLICIES TO PROTECT GROUND WATER When development occurs, the problems of runoff need to be addressed; often this is by "management policies" or "infiltration devices." Management policies, in this context, means reducing impervious surfaces, discharging impervious surfaces over pervious areas, disconnecting roof drains from the storm water system or other measures. Management policies are encouraged and are essential; however, general policies may require special considerations in industrial areas or other unusual cases. The other category of activity is called infiltration devices. This is everything from filter strips and swales to large infiltration ponds or infiltration trenches, tubes or other devices that conduct the runoff into the ground. In most cases the types of devices that are of most concern are devices that bypass the zone of aeration above the ground water table (vados zone) and conduct surface runoff directly into the ground. For example, swales and ditches are generally of less concern, while devices that conduct into deep aquifers are generally of greater concern. Note that these are generalizations that need to be evaluated on a site - specific basis. A site analysis should be conducted before implementing infiltration devices on project or in a community. Infiltration devices, such as basins and trenches, are controversial as BMPs for storm water management. Literature indicates ( e.g. see Pitt et al. January 1994) that operation of infiltration devices is a concern for two reasons: (1) failure to Urban Runoff 11 -13 operate properly, (often due to maintenance) and (2) concerns for ground water contamination. These concerns are made greater or diminished depending on site circumstances, and must be compared to the benefits that infiltration can provide for reducing storm water flows in surface waters and replenishing ground water through recharge. Therefore, infiltration devices should be used only after thorough, site - specific evaluation of these concerns and of the pros and cons of other storm water management options. Infiltration should also be used in conjunction with other measures, such as avoidance and pretreatment practices to protect ground water quality to the maximum extent practicable, and to protect the function of the infiltration device. Sound judgment; good design, including a detailed site evaluation and proper construction techniques should alleviate the operational problems with these systems. OTHER REQUIREMENTS Class 5 Wells Under federal laws, "Class 5 wells," which are essentially any storm water infiltration device that is deeper than it is wide, are required to be inventoried by reporting to the USEPA and the MPCA. There are no other regulations at the present time, but future regulation is anticipated. Minn. R. ch. 7060 Minnesota state laws (Minn. R. ch. 7060) prohibit the direct discharge of untreated storm water to the saturated zone if the discharge threatens ground water from potential pollutants. There could be liability if it is determined that a discharge has introduced contaminants into ground water in violation of state law. Treatment before infiltration is a suggested means to discourage the possible introduction of pollutants into the ground water. Wellhead and Source Water Protection Plans For storm water systems located in defined wellhead and source water protection areas, the local unit of government must develop a "Wellhead or Source Water Protection Plan" in accordance with state laws and requirements. Special attention should be given to injection wells or infiltration basins and trenches which may pose a high risk to the wellhead, especially for drinking water wells classified by the Minnesota Department of Health as vulnerable to contamination. SUMMARY OF AUTHORITIES AND PROGRAMS In addition to the authorities listed above, many other state and local agencies have leadership responsibilities in storm water pollution control. The primary role of the involved agencies can be summarized as follows: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Administration and Enforcement of the NPDES storm water program, including Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) • Apply effluent and water quality standards for storm water, erosion and sediment control where applicable • Adopt and provide technical assistance on acceptable technical standards and BMPs as permit requirements and as accepted tools in nonpoint source (NPS) watershed programs • Coordinate review and approval of local programs • Provide technical assistance and administrative assistance for NPS watershed projects under the Clean Water Partnership (CWP) program Urban Runoff GRAD a NG GRAPHIC SCALE ( w FMM.r ) 1 WS - MU IL PL; N • SALVAGE AND REPLACE RPR • 0.5CY CLO WRAP r cuu • 6" ADS N12 WRAP PERFORATED PIPE CNECIC DAY NO ODOM TO BE 001E OFF STE ,i tuasrAbLos MIX EROSON CONTROL 4CY COI RPRAP OVERFLOW/CHECK y f FLAT cUR / DAM GRADING NOTES AND SEQUENCING SILT FENCE TO BE INSTALLED DOWNHILL FROM ANY GRADING ACTIVITY SOME TREES AND DEAD FALL ARE TO BE CLEARED BEGIN STRIPPING TOPSOIL IN RIGHT OF WAY SITEWORK SHALL BEGIN ONCE SILT FENCE IS INSTALLED CONSTRUCT AND MAINTAIN ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE OFF LAKE DRIVE SILT FENCE TO BE MAINTAINED DURING GRADING SEED AND MULCH DISTURBED AREAS WITHIN TWO WEEKS OF FINAL DISTURBANCE SEED MIXTURE SHALL BE MNDOT SPEC 3876. AT A RATE OF 35 PLS Lbs /ACRE OR MNDOT SPEC. 500 AT A RATE OF 50 PLS ibs /ACRE MULCH RATE SHALL BE TWO TONS PER ACRE MIN. BSMT. OR FLOOR ELEV. SHALL BE A MIN. OF TWO FEET ABOVE 100 YEAR POND/LAKE ELEVATIONS ANY RIPRAP SHALL BE CLASS 11 ..• CONTACT WILUAM MCCULLY AT GLENN REHBEIN COMPANIES AT (763) 784 -0657 STRIP PERVIOUS PARKING AREA AND FILL WITH WASHED SAND 2' BELOW FINISHED GRADES OVERSIZE WASHED SAND AREAS AT 1:1 PREVENT COMPACTION OF PERVIOUS AREA DRAINTILE UNDER BITUMINOUS TO BE COVERED WITH 2" INSULATION. 4' WIDE •---------- -598 -- suriasRAP� -- . a". ADS TiTY" !/y` 896----- - f11111111-I1 11■11-1 7 V V V 7 a sVVV V V V V 594 - -- iX 902. -- 892 - - -- IV • 4vi^% CL- CASINO R',4342 altar/ 7O WW161fo r Pvc $9.1.00 4CY ELI ac i / J °` /i • J / / / P / / r / / / • •'•N0 GRADING TO BE DONE OFF SITE LEGEND SILTFENCE PERVIOUS PARKING SF SF Q.Q�o oVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV RAINWATER GARDEN V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V a) �e7VV"' VVVVVOVVVVVVS�V1 oyva•»�t. .-yvopavo CINFILTRATION BASIN - • • • • • - - _ - - • • -i NETLON AREAS / 902.05 4 01 • CL / 4902.04 1.5" =1T WE 1.5 BIT. BASE 6" CL V RECYCLED ocy / 4' Ri,. J / 02.02 CL r MMNMUM 11LPM r - r ousel Neat Mr UMW OUT Off 11011 TO MOM NNW MOM MC NMITAMI MOCK D1MtMCC • A0 lC MINS ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE /REVISIONS BY\ PER fM 9 -09 -M DRL PER OTY 10-IM 7 WA (MEW CERt1FT THAT TIIIS"\ PLNI 0R'SPECIFICATION WAS PREPARED BY NE au moat MY AIME:T S11PERa9ION AND THAT i'ANA DULY 1 t SIONN. NCINEER STATE OF IIIINESOTA �MAULT. WOOLLY «J 7 W o � Q —1 l DRL DCTM os 22/2002 VERTICAL ti A0B NO. 02504 BOOK PAGE SECT 1 3 stows} SITE AND UTILITY PLAN 60'8' PVC SIM350.5X CON18:& TO DU57NC .OUTSIDE OR CORE * V 889.0 SSYH1 R8t901.0 IiV:889.40 mK889.30 A ITA MANHOLE EX— N4413-3 TC 9010 WV: 97 8' 8 O 889 V I M1t 901.0 I V:890.05 WIV:889.95 x 901.141-2 �c4 I UTILITY NOTES ' . • • • WATERMAIN SERVICE CONNECTION TO BE MADE . FROM EXTENSION OF 12" TRUNK MAIN IF REQUIRED DOMESTIC AND FIRE —FLOW SHALL BE SPLIT . IN THE BUILDING PROPOSED 12" WATERMAIN EXTENSION WAS PROPOSED TO BE ON THE EAST SIDE OF LAKE DRIVE CITY TO DETERMINE IF 12" DIP WATERMAIN NEEDS TO MOVE TO WEST SIDE OF LAKE DRIVE SANITARY SEWER SERVICE SHALL BE EXTENDED FROM MAINLINE ON WEST PROPERTY UNE NO SEWER SERVICE CURRENTLY EXISTS FROM THE WEST SANITARY SEWER TO BE EXTENDED FROM 411 AVENUE AND TO THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY UNE PLAN AND PROFILE CONSTRUCTION DRAWING SHALL BE SUBMITTED AFTER AUGNMENT APPROVAL NO TREES TO BE PLANTED OVER UTIUTY UNES OR IN ANTICIPATED EXPANDED ROW PROVIDE 2" INSULATION. 4' WIDE OVER /t'" DRAINTILE WHERE IT IS UNDER BITUMINOUS SITE NOTES TOTAL SITE AREA:1.56AC TOTAL IMPERVIOUS:0.98AC /42,819 SF OR 63.1% TOTAL PARKING SPACES:16 FLAT CURB USED WHERE SHOWN TO CONVEY WATER TO RAINWATER GARDENS AND INFILTRATION BASINS AND SWALES RETAINING WALL TO BE NO TALLER THAN FOUR FEET RETAINING WALL GREATER THAN 3.5 FEET SHALL HAVE METAL BANISTER NETLON NETPAVE 50 USED TO CREATE PERVIOUS PARKING SPACES AND DRIVE LANES LEGEND PERVIOUS PARKING RAINWATER GARDEN 7V79.99•9991,77799799.7 C^V9494 V ' 797017779V9.779797071 V O C O V 0 4 0 V 4 7 9 V C O V 9 9 OJ 47 4 ^;- 9797979 INFILTRATION BASIN [ - • - - • NETLON AREAS / / / , • 400' 8" PVC SCR 35 0.52 to O Q 726 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 GRAPHIC SCALE a • a a (SI PUT) 1 Yob 00 11.. 1 (REVISIONS BB\ PER CRY MY -O- PER Y 10-10. (HOMY =WY AYWT UfK PLAN WI E66 KIION WAS PREMED MY RE OR tRW MY OMECT SOPERWOON AND THAT,' AN A OILY WEOS$J6D UNDER STATE OF A6NESOTA 892105 - I4V:8915 Warm Am OW a•al MOAT VLA.L tAcCUL .Y N0S/ maga SEW 1' m i l •M I I P MA OA SSMiI4 RDA: 901 1NV:892.63 \ • V, MOMS MOOS 01 L01ER RAT 24. CARS SLOPED tr Mt P06 1S St FAME mug PERAK 50 101611.1111 0EIR -1690 OIE61R 11111 610. A061 NAa WILCO LEO 6p 1ETIP r1T660 WHO. RAT ux COW 6m DOS IMAM W 561 CA Al Q� SIOPP116 LA= If 11 11 11 II if tC =11 If ll:'71 :d if �11 It II li=lt If `II 1111111 „I1 -11 II „II- 11.,,11 „II „11 =,i1 „11.,,11 - 11..11. 11-1L 11 =11 - 1= 11= I( =T1 =11 =' . a =. "i� •� 11 =11 =I1 =I1 =11 ; ........�.... V It =IIII111- IIIIIilIlli1i iie tl ==-11=11711=-1' - NETLON AREAS GRANULAR V 91U MATERIAL CURB TO CURB DETAIL MAY BE LANDSCAPED GLOWS ESOP 16F6AL 101E• MSpLL 1ASM1 AS SAN) 6 .6IM1ID Iti ' PFNF. ADS 61 16901 COICKE 16 910119E10 net SRO NETPAVE AREAS CURB TO CURB DETAIL OM SRO maS W 1E OCRS= AT A Al WPC Wa AOTcEMD OATS 08/12/2002 VERIc t, SCALE •10RIZ, 1.: 30 ROOK JOB 02504 PACE SHEET 2 or 3 steels] • LANDSCAPING Sc TREE PRESERVATION PLAN EBY soimiSeNme Cc.mosmm Comments Ammo oMwss andflo s •AmamBallims' AnOmosBnlknoo Baviab.ay b® Clomp ken AR Aeor nem. lisodnottemie NonhwmdsBdeiyL M BN Adak' airs RbaB'mh MD 02.P Tom CC datawarsensed Tor. *NNW* Manley Numb= )m D eoothttolmm CO Colas eacidamils Alai= =mate' lkammy Pmimeaso bwenaOSbotOs bm M 541 Akio llotyanne ewelm•T'bmia u POS Rom Blink IOUs Some PN Pima Mrs AmaimP.e )® PR Pbm mem= N.w5y.rRdris bo Pr QB Pomrlamr.e■Rm/. Qd.aAmes Qwn=biokr Swoop Whim Oak ELM npsmns SRI Ayiaapmtalm'Imry SUN' Ja mmrmiase M Roy SeimNtitiaNam Comments AOC Aarsinak•amPmm• CammothmeMmi MD CS Comm r swims Sate InabDo`weod MW Malone bloom DL Pend& Ambers DemfBmbRm mrkle DM DromMtele me ]BC .Adpam•BbeChiw• MD Cremes PPG Pkgpram Ylnbm' Roo Somme MD 4'.S RC Rm'Qrmpbim• Clmmskin Nob Rem QaaEaeWaader Snit @ m M RC Row Vasef a Waded M R.d2i7 amtbkemiat Pink2A'emiblerias ROY ROM Meow VammnY RE Gomm Ymmara Dinh Rom Mary Bads Shaba= M Rad3' M whir A' RED Rem Slope fwBmmky' Raps for HmeibNumb Rom M Rd23.7 a.ablomiig EW Rasa Ws** Pads• Minolta siabRae M SG 8Mmen'Oaldmead' gy bsaslpmma6ll.s 'Ieobamme Oaidmam Ulu lbebamr DM R•2-25 a/ebkmia Cawood 54 10-17 SP SpriNSapark '1lmTb' Ms Cis L1a M 44r panzawas 11JD nvom PLANis (F0IBS) KEY admb&Nona Cm.msem Reim Sze Commas AI Amiepim•mm.. swap MPlwmd MW 27 WideIydelbk CV CenropsirowtkillateLipde Zagreb Commis MD fl ral.mmdtoaalt ESA RrpaidmmNwlrm km PM Wad MW 2P IW EthiNaespap.sa Pot* Come Meer MD Y TolaMss mollies HPM Bmaaodk'Padm)i•a'Baja DWIIW 7885011101I M 41 Deep Rd 1LSD HaaaomRtr'm0adsOm• IDepylasf m �o DyOy M 41 0-r Gddm Y•Bm Wit Yellow 1S Mradtrim•Wead Vane RadadV.drd Osaka his M EI IV tiiwaiair Mm Maids MW P 0 Itammalbi err W040aNSmnt . MWD 2? NW N.aesljiamas'PIskmLel WakdslwCsmkt MD 0 Takatesdram& RO Rroti.aW'Gatdmm• Gadmm Raladiaa MD P KW Saadi&Nee Cmmeamme Bahiat Sim C.coomrd CA Cabmaraml.s amallas Tart Pants' PmiaRad Gam M 4' WideIydelbk SR SparaeimAmmvkpts Dario Dammed M 4' SN Sassbabaaamown bairn Gems M 4' SP Sprtlmpeesisb Donis Codgm MW 25' TolaMss mollies SS 8011memwmm ammodas L'NalLlrmm MD 4" •D'17mtmemsd rMos.M- Merie-phut pntm&MagmaN mods Isly Wing am makL W- Plmt palms .naim balks Ind mill adastsshaapmidaafamdmsea •aarmd.d•ly long paidsdmstmay wimsa7emilisea ERQDIA 21mR[SROBTREfJ.s11 0R.PIQIIO'QAT3.ANDPRATs0-lPLANsit • ARdmiimmInlet web to Mammies a' par (mmamat.E• Sum pemd)rdmatyalma MB end kmkppad01iE)mdmpp.kdi sturdy win bmk.that bolds smrootb.a i fst4 Neill 'Nation Okepp 54 km 3.3.1 tlu.ush 1.4MAAN &Wo bthNaomiSbms). • All e.esarem(esahnm)bem ere bbe7 -C height and teas dogad psamedoag B&B method with Moody mi. Went asomd soot boa Midmm Football &mmm fa be the =no as IhosospooMmi Ter Madams bem(lws 111 tbnmsh IA mdpp 14.15. Non32.1). Minimum damaabon kZ0'bre 3' emifor,25" miooesmf.ar tae. • Aa&Nubs, metre= mddeadao,, abbe d4Spamamaim size (iq a 0 potams) • AUpaeoek ed path plum mem M in emtiesom oar thawing kopooi"NSd Impart Ent *Miner sizes "WOW Mivabes max b the dkmetaso width ofeossiaapa. A C sine aalmstoa1atoms ®maim= OTHICRRRQORtnm4'8s: • Mukh as Moos NA shrubs with 4•dbrdsoad.brdbd be* =AL MokAd anus mooed tree ire* Amid MP idimmr.. • Mukh alpamoia beds with db.d.md shredded balkmdeb • Miff Min ad bean amibms, appy armadas pawameigeet kib Dods sPam) amend 0-6 plasm • Raptabdawith EkakDimmd Vise Weis et squealed. • WatrpJmt thoroughly afar plotting. Aim wade= =kb thomtahy m whom purism= its 0-.7 below i order to amivmhmbkida BRQUIRSKE4rs ROR ssRD14G ARzA3: • feLYatimbasim shall beseeded eithaProisieRama .timsmimdheisWldme Widaowa.d sac Seediq she Memadeamaa4 ozl1000 SF. • Ohms eras red bums Man ho seeded with Pains ReMatim Sh.VDgmeielk Sadms m6sbreadeaam•03 as PLS/10000or ddkd a 10 hePLSAtam • RAM wake sedum shall be plate! with hmmiDoswmd.Rd Twig Dogwood and Pussy Willow throbs. I oddities SwmpM$wsad,A1s•b Matigad, Joe Pye Weed• Blur Peg kk,. Black Byd Sam and Big Moe Stet Clumps ■a M med. A pint shaft M pled may 25 spore feet 8 rainwater gatdm∎B06 d NB rainwater pdar17is d GRAPHIC SCALE m (N POT ) 1 Ina .m IL SSMH3 RIM: 898,0 INV:892.05 INV: 892.15 LEGEND SWAMP WHITE OAK ilk- GRASS CLUMP e A SHRUBS AND Q Q PERENNIALS GENERAL LANDSCAPING NOTE NO IRRIGATION PLANNED SEED ALL DISTURBED AREAS AND BERMS WITH SPECIFIED SEED SEED INFILTRATION BASINS WITH THE PRAIRIE RESTORATION MIX AU. TREES TO BE BALL AND BURLAPPED ALL TREES SHALL BE STAKED AND GUYED PER NURSERYMAN'S STANDARDS LANDSCAPER TO INSTALL EDGING MATERIAL AROUND SHRUBS, FILLED WITH MULCH OR ROCK PER DEVELOPER'S CHOICE PRESERVE AS MANY TREES ALONG NORTH, WEST AND SOUTH PROPERTY LNES AS POSSIBLE o I REIa9T CERrNY PLAT 3.05 N11 OR SPECIFICATION IMS MR9MRED RY =dE -OR WISER MY ONECT DIPER SON MO PRATPROFES40N1R ENGINEER WRCER PE LAPS OF 1NE STATE OF I Nt450TA PA.L IkCIRLT ain ___,e____T._ 1 -.."---":...........777";,,irs.i, ..,,n, ,'''''-'...WC:42-,..:;=...7-..-. ' it p ..7.m./a aaa 1 yid V iN1MEi0 V w \\ \�` 000HMIpMtOwQw OV 04V • • • ••• •_•_•_•_•_•_•_0-_•_•_v_ • u�'•V =ANC R -4342 80887.30 r PVC 505.00 SMH4 M: 901 V: 892.63 BN 0 1 DATE 084_12/2002 NOW A. 1' :)0 BOOK JOB N0. 02504 PAGE sea 3 \ or 3 sKEETS) • L01•p0• A 6W'llisOC&cidJGiR. Amuses .- 44/4f.rli6 • f''VC sums. Crti • • / RAM. lBlif/I.O0.A. 3 !1� 44 s . . 2 i 0 tii iii i 4 11 CE•r0 :••.+� A gib • .sidA14. wows _=---AcccrarNiryr D 64 151141.1110. • M9 -11im crna n R.vr+W eACE .•vc 191.0CIfii 44P-011. 14 :ia & P1WKi Y.gl.d L.A 60hC :OWY14-sartmr_Ill_ Lliinola. 4�i. l9iiSJ�£I� • T 44%4140 A-MO.4 3 4 44.01 t•i WAY ato,4 to'xi • * td f 1 I Id • 1 I_ -- --I I— _ J r T � i it our xto� f- �'°rx'e 1 'tl�W $ rrpyt; ,:.w,..yy •r +.ENKY,+IR. MI . ,MINW At +�lsnMnMw;eA�+V Aot.YHM�Nho�}•A�M� ;rn�wesrrmw i9�Ah a�x�.= � . _t s a_ Aoge . 4., . OA 2 re: rei or 4 . 4, res rof,A. r ( MEMORANDUM To: Environmental Board Members From: Dawn Bugge, Community Development Secretary Date: October 24, 2002 Re: 2003 Meeting Schedule Attached please fmd a draft 2003 Application Deadline and Meeting Schedule. Please review the dates for the proposed 2003 Environmental Board Meetings. Meetings have been scheduled for the last Wednesday of each month, except for the months of November and December. The November and December meeting dates have been rescheduled to reflect holidays within the month. Please be prepared to confirm these dates, or request changes, at the Environmental Board meeting on October 30. City Council Meeting (2nd & 4th Monday) 1 January 13, 2003 January 27, 2003 1 February 10, 2003 1 February 24, 2003 March 10 March 24 April 14 00 N CL. Q IMay 12 May 27 June 9 June 23 July 14 July 28 August 11 August 25 September 8 September 22 October 13 October 27 November 10 November 24 December 8 December 22 January 12, 2004 February 9, 2004 I City Council Work Session (Wednesday before Council mtg.) January 8, 2003 January 22, 2003 February 5, 2003 February 19, 2003 March 5 March 19 Q Nrl. Q L Auy1i I May 21 I June 18 July 9 July 23 August 6 August 20 September 3 September 17 October 8 October 22 1 November 5 November 19 December 3 December 17 January 7, 2004 January 21, 2004 February 4, 2004 Planning & Zoning Board (2nd Wednesday) December 11, 2002 January 8, 2003 February 12, 2003 March 12 ON a, May 14 ti July 9 August 13 September 10 October 8 November 12 December 10 January 14, 2004 Park Board (1st Monday) December 2, 2002 January 6, 2003 February 3, 2003 March 3 l--- }: Q h ti July 7 August 4 September 8 October 6 November 3 December 1 January 5, 2004 Environmental Board (Last Wednesday) November 20, 2002 EDAC Dec. 5 December 18, 2002 EDAC Jan.2 January 29, 2003 EDAC Feb. 6 February 26 EDAC March. 6 March 26 EDAC April 3 April 30 EDAC May I May 28 EDAC June 5 June 25 EDAC July 3 July 30 EDAC Aug. 7 August 27 EDAC Sept. 4 September 24 EDAC Oct. 2 October 29 EDAC Nov. 6 November 19 EDAC Dec. 4 December 17 Application Deadline (Monday four weeks before P & Z mtg.) November 12, 2002 December 9, 2002 January 13, 2003 February 10 IMarch 10 May 12 c 0 g July 14 August 11 September 8 October 13 November 10 December 8