HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC RES 96-020 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) FINSING NO NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) Meeting Sheet
IIIIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIVIIIIIII IIII
103284
Box: 26
Folder: RES 1996
Document: CC RES 96-020 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SILVER LAKE
CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) FINSING NO NEED FOR AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS)
• CITY OF ST. ANTHONY
RESOLUTION 96-020
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE SILVER LAKE CENTER
COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) FINDING NO NEED FOR AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS)
WHEREAS, Minnesota Rules Part 4410.4300 Subp. 14 (B) requires that an EAW be prepared
for construction of any commercial facility equal to or greater than 200,000 s.f.
in a fourth class city; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700 Subp. 9 requires that multiple phases be
considered as a single project; and
WHEREAS, on January 10, 1996, an EAW was completed for a phased commercial
redevelopment project known as Silver Lake Center, which is ultimately planned
to include 306,000 s.f. of new/renovated retail space and would be located on
the existing Apache Plaza site; and
• WHEREAS, on January 10, 1996, copies of the EAW were distributed to all persons and
agencies on the official Environmental Quality Board (EQB) mailing list and
other interested parties; and
WHEREAS, on January 15, 1996, the EAW was publicly noticed in the EQB Monitor,
commencing the 30 day public comment period; and
WHEREAS, on January 24, 1996, a press release was published in the St. Anthony Bulletin
announcing the completion of the EAW, availability to interested parties, and
process for submitting comments on the EAW; and
WHEREAS, the 30 day comment period ended February 14, 1996, at 4:30 P.M. and the City
of St. Anthony Village continued to accept comments after the closing; and
WHEREAS, no negative comments were received during the public comment period.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:
1. The EAW was prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota
Environmental Policy Act and Minnesota Rules, Parts 4410.100 to 4410.1700 (1993),
2. The EAW satisfactorily addressed all of the issues for which existing information could
have been reasonably obtained,
• Resolution 96-020
Page 2
3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700, the project does
not have the potential for significant environmental effects,
4. The City makes a "Negative Declaration," and
5. An EIS is not required, and
6. The City Clerk is directed to maintain a Record of Decision including the Response to
Comments on the EAW and to notify in writing the project proposer and the EQB.
Adopted this z 7-& day of `F�-Ir u_re-^�Z , 1996.
�12110APAA C�
Mayor
•
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Reviewed for administration:
City 4aiQer
•
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS,
FINDINGS OF FACT, AND
RECORD OF DECISION
FOR THE
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL
REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET (EAW)
FEBRUARY 1996
RGU PROPOSER
St. Anthony Village Ste. Marie Company
Attn.: Mr. Mike Momson, City Manager Attn.: Ms. Mary Rothchild
3301 Silver Lake Road First Bank Place
St. Anthony, MN 55418-1699 601 Second Ave. South
(612) 789-8881 Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 973-2141
CONSULTANT
Westwood Professional Services, Inc.
Attn.: Mr. Jay Riggs
14180 West Trunk Highway 5
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
(612) 937-5150
• To be considered by the City of St. Anthony Village City Council on February 27, 1996
• CITY OF ST. ANTHONY VILLAGE
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS,
FINDINGS OF FACT, AND
RECORD OF DECISION
FOR THE
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW)
FEBRUARY 1996
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................1
RESPONSETO COMMENTS....................................................................................................1
EAW Notification, Distribution, and Comment Period.........................................................1
• Comments Received and Response.................. ......................................................1
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Timothy Fell, January 17, 1996......................................... 1
Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District, Tom Peterson, January 31, 1996............... 1
Minnesota Historical Society, Britta Bloomberg, February 2, 1996......................................2
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Thomas W. Balcom, February 14, 1996.....2
Minnesota Department of Health, Patricia Bloomgren, February 14, 1996.........................2
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Paul Hoff, February 16, 1996....................................3
FINDINGSOF FACT..................................................................................................................4
ProjectDescription ...............................................................................................................4
ProposedProject.................................................................................................................4
Site Description and Existing Conditions.............................................................................5
Criteria Used in Deciding Whether the Project has the Potential for Significant
EnvironmentalEffects...........................................................................................................5
Criteria A: Type, Extent, and Reversibility Of Environmental Effects..................................5
Criteria B: Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects............7
Criteria C: Extent to Which the Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation................7
Criteria D: Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled.......8
RECORDOF DECISION............................................................................................................9
•
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET(EAW)
•
INTRODUCTION
The Ste. Marie Company(SMC) is proposing a phased redevelopment of Apache Plaza in the City of St.
Anthony Village, Minnesota. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW)was prepared pursuant to
Minnesota Rules 4410.4300 Subp. 14(B). The EAW, comments received on the EAW, and other pertinent
materials have been reviewed in accordance to Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 in order to determine if the
proposed project has the potential for significant environmental effects. The following includes responses
to all of the comments received by the City of St. Anthony Village(City), Findings of Fact supporting the
decision, and the Record of Decision indicating an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) is not necessary
for this project.
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
EAW Notification, Distribution, and Comment Period
In accordance with Minnesota Rules 4410.1500, the EAW was completed and distributed on January 10,
1996 to all persons and agencies on the official Environmental Quality Board(EQB) mailing list and other
interested parties. The notification was published in the EQB Monitor on January 15, 1996, initiating the
30-day public comment period. The comment period ended on February 14, 1996.
• Comments Received and Response
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Timothy Fell January 17 1996
The Corps confirmed that the project is not within the regulatory jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers.
Response: So noted for the record. The project proposer and the RGU appreciate the Corps'
prompt response.
Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District, Tom Peterson January 31 1996
The Ramsey SWCD stated that, "based on the information contained in the EAW and discussions with
Ramsey County Public Works Personnel and Rice Creek Watershed District staff, it appears, with the
addition of four storm water management ponds, that the redevelopment plan may be an improvement
over current stormwater management conditions at the site." SWCD staff recommended that the Rice
Creek Watershed District's ponding requirements be utilized for ponding design, and, if at all possible
and feasible, that the ponds be maximized to improve nutrient removal. The SWCD also stated that
soil erosion and sediment control during project construction will be critical.
Response: It is the intent of the project proposers to minimize the short and long-term
downstream water quality impacts associated with this project to the extent practicable. As
stated in the EAW, modeling results indicate the project will reduce peak runoff rates from the
existing conditions for both the interim and ultimate redevelopment proposal. The results
• predict a 26 percent reduction in phosphorus runoff from the 54-acre tributary watershed(a
PAGE 1
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET(EAW)
• small portion of the drainage area is outside the subject property)followingthe construction o
.f
the first three ponds (Phase ]). The inclusion of the fourth basin will result in further
stormwater discharge rate reductions and will provide a 45 percent total reduction in
phosphorus discharge relative to existing conditions. All stormwater ponding will meet or
exceed RC WD permitting standards.
As stated in the E4 W, all site grading and erosion control activities are subject to Rice Creek
Watershed District (RCWD) and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permits and will comply with pertinent requirements as described in the required Grading and
Erosion Control Plan which will likely incorporate multiple Best Management Practices (BMP).
Because the site lacks steep slopes and numerous BMPs will be implemented, significant adverse
impacts from construction-related sediment and erosion are not expected.
Minnesota Historical Society, Britta Bloomberg, February 2, 1996
The Minnesota Historical Society indicated that the probability of unknown historical or archeological
properties being present on the site is low, and therefore the"no" response to question 26a is
appropriate.
Response: So noted for the record. The project proposer and the RGU appreciate confirmation
of the accuracy of the EAW with respect to Item 26a.
• Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Thomas W. Balcom, February 14, 1996
The DNR stated"we have no comments to offer at this time. Preparation of an EIS is not required in
our opinion."
Response: So noted for the record.
Minnesota Department of Health. Patricia Bloomgren, February 14, 1996
The MDH offered the following comments:
1. Please remember that any new [water supply] wells must be installed by a licensed well contractor
and meet all other requirements.
Response: The site is and will continue to be connected to the City of St. Anthony Village public
Water Supply. And, as such, no new water supply wells will be installed..
2. Any unused, unsealed wells (including monitoring wells) must be sealed by a licensed well
contractor and, in accordance with Minnesota Rules, brought into operating conditions. A site
evaluation is recommended to specifically determine if any unused, unsealed wells(s)exist on this
property. Particular attention should be given to the area where a farmstead might have been
located.
•
PAGE 2
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET(EAW)
• Response: When MPCA requirements are monitoring ed, the three satisfied, g wells located behind the
New Market building will be abandoned in accordance with all applicable local, state, and
federal regulations. If circumstances require, the monitoring wells may be abandoned and
relocated in order to accommodate building demolition and site redevelopment. As stated in the
EA W, if any abandoned wells or septic fields associated with the abandoned farmstead are
encountered during site redevelopment, these systems will be properly abandoned.
3. Please be aware that removal of friable asbestos-containing materials and materials that will
become friable during removal must be performed by companies licensed by the MDH. In
addition, the mandatory safe work practices must be used to do the removal.
Response: As stated in the EA W, all asbestos materials will be removed from the buildings
demolished during redevelopment excluding Category 1 non friable materials. The MPCA and
U.S Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) will be notified prior to building demolition, all
activities will be conducted by licensed contractors, and all applicable rules and regulations will
be followed.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Paul Hoff, February 16, 1996
The MPCA stated"the information provided appears to properly identify the potential environmental
effects of the project and appropriate mitigation. The MPCA does not recommend the preparation of
an Environmental Impact Statement." The MPCA also noted that"Phase 1 grading . . . will require the
• construction of temporary stormwater storage before construction is started."
Response: So noted for the record. Temporary stormwater storage will be incorporated into the
grading and erosion control plan and the project will comply with NPDES requirements.
•
PAGE 3
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET(EAW)
•
FINDINGS OF FACT
Project Description
Proposed Project
The Silver Lake Center Commercial Redevelopment involves redevelopment of Apache Plaza, and is
ultimately planned to include 306,600 s.f of new/renovated retail space and four stormwater ponds.
Initiating in spring of 1996, Phase I will include partial demolition of the existing mall, construction of
a 75,200 s.f supermarket, development of two lots, and installation of three stormwater ponds. The
table below summarizes the proposed redevelopment.
Development Summary
Building Acreage Parking
Proposed Use Phase Area(s.f) (a x.) Stalls
Cub Foods 1 75,200 9.23 553
Cub Foods Addition 2+ 12,600 01 0
Home Improvement 2+ 74,000 11.40 300
Department Store 2+ 80,0002 7.48 400
Retail or Restaurant 1 7,500 1.14 59
• Retail or Gas/Conv./Car Wash 1 7,500 1.51 25
Retail 2+ 7,800 0.73 30
Video 2+ 7,000 1.08 77
Oil Chane 2+ 4,000 1.10 29
Pet Supply 2+ 22,000 3.14 110
—Liquor 2+ 9,000 0.89 55
New Market Lot ? 0 4.96 0
Stormwater Ponds A-C 1 0 1.09 0
Stormwater Pond D 2 0 2.41 0
Pond Landscaping 1-2+ 0 2.68 0
306,600 48.843 1638
1 This use is proposed to occur within the 9.23-acre Cub Foods site.
2 Approximately 60,000 s.f of the Department Store building includes renovation of existing
facilities.
3 Combine this lot acreage with the existing uses (First Bank, Taco Bell, and Tires Plus --
approximately 1.96 acres)to obtain the total site area of 50.8 acres.
Minnesota Rules 4410.4300 Subp. 14(B)state that the mandatory EAW threshold for"construction of
a new or expansion of an existing industrial, commercial, or institutional facility" in a fourth class city
is 200,000 square feet(s.f.). Because 60,000 s.f. of the proposed project is renovation of an existing
facility, this multi-phased project involves the construction of new commercial space totaling 246,600
• s.f This exceeds the mandatory EAW threshold by 46,600 s.f.
PAGE 4
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW)
• Site Description and Existing Conditions
The site is located in the Southwest Quarter of Section 31,Township 30 North, Range 23 West,
Ramsey County, City of St. Anthony village, Minnesota. The site encompasses 50.8 acres and is
dominated by the Apache Plaza building, parking lot, and associated buildings. An abandoned health
club is located directly north of the main Apache Plaza building. Only approximately 142,400 s.f of
pervious surface exists on the site, which predominantly includes an area of mowed grass along the
north-western portion of the property. A strip center called Apache New Market Plaza is located
southwest of the main mall building. In addition, a Tires Plus, Taco Bell, First Bank, and additional
paved parking areas are located along the Silver Lake Road frontage.
Criteria Used in Deciding Whether the Project has the Potential for Significant Environmental
Effects
Criteria A: Type, Extent. and Reversibility Of Environmental Effects
According to Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (A)the first factor that the City must consider is the
"type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects." The City's findings are set forth below.
1. Project Site. The site is an existing mall with extremely limited pervious area. A number of
"environmental conditions"outlined in the EAW were observed on the site. In response to these
• observed conditions, a number of studies and remediation actions have been conducted.
Accordingly, all of the known environmental conditions have been addressed adequately in
accordance with MPCA and other state and local standards.
2. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources. The proposed project will not have a
negative impact on habitat or natural resources. The proposed stormwater management practices
will likely improve habitat in Silver Lake.
3. Water Resources. No direct impacts to water resources are proposed. Indirect downstream
impacts are discussed below.
4. Water Use. The site will be connected to the St. Anthony Village public water supply. The
demand per day will be typical of retail/commercial developments of this sort and is expected that
the quantity of water used will be approximately 32,232 gallons per day on a maximum potential
average daily basis. No adverse effects on public water supply are anticipated.
5. Water-related Land Use Management Districts. No special shoreland districts apply.
6. Soils. The site's soils are compatible for the proposed uses.
7. Erosion and Sedimentation. All site grading and erosion control activities are subject to Rice
Creek Watershed District(RCWD)and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits and will comply with pertinent requirements as described in the required Grading
• and Erosion Control Plan which will incorporate multiple Best Management Practices (BMP).
PAGE 5
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET(EAW)
•
Because the site lacks steep slopes and BMPs will be implemented, significant adverse impacts
from construction-related sediment and erosion are not expected.
8. Water Quality-Surface Water Runoff. The project will reduce peak runoff rates and improve
runoff water quality relative to existing conditions. Modeling results predict a 26 percent reduction
in phosphorus runoff from the 54-acre tributary watershed(a small portion of the drainage area is
outside the subject property) following the construction of the first three ponds (Phase 1). The
inclusion of the fourth basin will result in further stormwater discharge rate reductions and will
provide a 45 percent total reduction in phosphorus discharge relative to existing conditions. All
stormwater ponding will meet or exceed RCWD permitting standards and significant, negative
downstream impacts are not anticipated.
9. Water Quality-Wastewaters. Wastewater will be typical of developments of this sort and the
estimated maximum potential wastewater production is 31,963 gallons per day. All wastewater
will be conveyed to the City's sanitary sewer system and no adverse impacts are anticipated.
10. Ground Water- Potential for Contamination. Although some groundwater beneath the
southwest portion of the site is known to contain low levels of petroleum contaminants from an off-
site source, the proposed project is not expected to increase the potential for future releases of
contaminants that could impact groundwater below the site because (1) substantial site cleanup has
and will occur as a direct result of this redevelopment, (2) the majority of the site will be covered
by impervious surfaces, (3)the proposed underground storage tanks will be installed and monitored
• in accordance with MPCA standards, and (4)all wastewater will be conveyed to the sanitary sewer
system.
11. Solid Wastes; Hazardous Wastes; Storage Tanks. It is anticipated that solid waste generation
will be typical of developments of this sort. The maximum potential solid waste generation for the
ultimate development will likely be in the range of 1,000 to 1,500 tons per year. Source separation
will be encouraged by the St. Anthony Village for the restaurants and retail businesses to be
constructed on the site and these businesses will be expected to take advantage of recycling
programs to reduce costs for solid waste trucking and disposal. Three to five USTs may be
installed during site redevelopment. Appropriate measures to minimize environmental risks
associated with solid wastes, hazardous wastes, and storage tanks are proposed.
12. Traffic. The proposed project will have no significant impact on the regional roadway system
surrounding the project or on the signalized intersections near the project. The minor impacts to
the local, unsignalized intersections will not cause significant environmental risks.
13. Air Quality. No significant impacts are expected.
14. Adverse visual impacts. No significant visual nuisances are expected.
15. Compatibility with Plans. The proposed project is consistent with existing zoning and no
conflicts with adjacent land uses are anticipated.
•
PAGE 6
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET(EAW)
•
Criteria B: Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects
According to Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (B)the second factor the City must consider is the
"cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects." The City's findings are set forth
below.
As stated in the EAW, project proposers are not speculating about the ultimate development of the 4.96
acre lot to be located in the southwest corner of the site(currently occupied by the New Market
building). All of this area is incorporated into the proposed stormwater management plan. Due to the
small size of this lot, no additional or cumulative environmental impacts associated with its
development are anticipated.
Criteria C: Extent to Which the Environmental Effects are Subiect to Mitigation
According to Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (C)the third factor the City must consider is the
"extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory
authority." The City's findings are set forth below.
The following permits and approvals are required for this project:
Unit of Government Type of Application
• St. AnthonyVillage Building Permit
St. AnthonyVillage Preliminary and Final Plat
St. AnthonyVillage Demolition Permit
St. AnthonyVillage Grading Permit
St. AnthonyVillage Municipal Water Connection Permit
St. AnthonyVillage Parking Lot License
St. AnthonyVillage Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit
St. AnthonyVillage Setback Variance for Cub Foods Store
MPCA NPDES/General Storm Water Permit
MPCA Utility Extension
MN Dept. of Health Water Main Extension
Rice Creek Watershed District Grading and Stormwater Management
As noted under Criteria A above, the potential environmental effects associated with this project are not
significant and/or effectively mitigated in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations
(including, but not limited to the permits and approvals included in the table above). Accordingly,the
City finds that the potential environmental effects of the project are"subject to mitigation by ongoing
public regulatory authority"and an EIS need not be prepared.
•
PAGE 7
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET(EAW)
•
Criteria D: Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled
According to Minnesota Rules 4410.1700 Subp. 7 (D)the final factor the City must consider is the
"extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other
environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, or of EIS's previously
prepared on similar projects." The City's findings are set forth below.
1. The proposed project is similar to other commercial redevelopment projects within fully-developed
urban areas. Other projects of similar scope with similar stormwater management plans and
BMPs generally reduce off-site environmental impacts relative to existing conditions.
2. The EAW currently contains or references all of the known studies that would likely provide
information or guidance regarding environmental effects which can be anticipated and controlled.
3. Because the proposed project only surpasses the mandatory EAW threshold by 46,600 square feet,
no EIS that addresses a similarly sized project was available.
4. The City finds that the environmental effects of the project can be anticipated and controlled as a
result of environmental review and permitting processes for similar projects.
•
•
PAGE 8
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND RECORD OF DECISION
SILVER LAKE CENTER COMMERCIAL REDEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET(EAW)
• RECORD OF DECISION
Based on the EAW, the response to comments, and the Findings of Fact, the City of St. Anthony Village,
the RGU for this environmental review, concludes the following:
1. The EAW was prepared in compliance with the procedures of the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act
and Minnesota Rules, Parts 44 10.1000 to 4410.1700 (1993),
2. The EAW satisfactorily addressed all of the issues for which existing information could have been
reasonably obtained,
3. Based on the criteria established in Minnesota Rules Part 4410.1700, the project does not have the
potential for significant environmental effects,
4. The City makes a"Negative Declaration,"and
5. An EIS is not required.
•
PAGE 9