HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 263-07 h l F tf
RESOLUTION
A RESOLUTION DECLARING THAT AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) FOR
THE CITY OF ROCHESTER 50T"AVENUE NW PHASE II PROJECT IS NOT REQUIRED
WHEREAS, the City of Rochester is the . Responsible Governmental Unit in the
preparation of the Environmental Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed 50th Avenue N.W., Phase
II Project from 51st Street N.W./Nicklaus Drive to Valleyhigh Road N.W./CSAH 4 in the City of
Rochester; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Rochester has submitted a copy of the EAW to all agencies on
the official EQB Distribution List, publishing EAW availability in the EQB Monitor on April 23,
2007, all of which were done in accordance with applicable State laws, rules and regulations;
and,
WHEREAS, the 30-day comment period ended on May 23, 2007, with three regulatory
agencies commenting: and,
WHEREAS, the comments received do not support the need for an Environmental Impact
Statement on the proposed project; and,
• WHEREAS, the City of Rochester has considered the comments that were received and
shall complete a Record of Decision supporting the declaration of negative need, including
responses to the commenting regulatory agencies; and,
WHEREAS, the social, economic and environmental impacts have been identified and
are not significant, and there is a commitment of mitigation to further reduce impacts; and,
WHEREAS, the Common Council met at a regularly scheduled meeting on June 4, 2007,
and considered the EAW, the reports of its staff, and the comments received from the parties as
noted above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Common Council of the City of
Rochester that the EAW is adequate and that the preparation of an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for the project which is the subject of the EAW is not needed based on
application of criteria found in Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City adopts the attached Findings of Fact and
Conclusion, and directs City staff to notify the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board of the
Council's determination of adequacy.
•
• PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COMMON. COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ROCHESTER, MINNESOTA, THIS DAY OF (:Y� , 2007.
Goo �'v
ARZEDEINI-017 SAID COMMON COUNCIL
ATTEST:
ITY CLERK
APPROVED THIS DAY OF �� 2007.
MAYOR OF SAID CITY
(Seal of the City of
Rochester, Minnesota)
.Zone05\Eaw-eis.need.50ave
•
•
2
` CITY OF ROCHESTER
Olmsted County, Minnesota
RECORD OF DECISION
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
DATE: June 4, 2007
RE: Determination of Need for an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)
PROJECT: 50th Avenue NW Phase H EAW
SP 159-080-13
ALIGNMENT: 51St Street/Nicklaus Drive to Valleyhigh Road NW(CSAH 4)
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Pursuant to Minnesota Rules for Highway Projects, 4410.4300, Subpart 22(A),
The City of Rochester, Olmsted County, Minnesota, acting as the Responsible
Governmental Unit (RGU)prepared the mandatory Environmental Assessment
Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed 50th Avenue NW Phase H improvement
• proj ect.
2. The EAW is incorporated by reference in this Record of Decision.
3. As indicated in the EAW, the proposed 50th Avenue NW Phase H Project includes
reconstruction of approximately 1.2 miles of 50th Avenue NW from 51St
Street/Nicklaus Drive to Valleyhigh Road (CSAH 4), from a two-lane rural
section to a four-lane urban facility with off-road trails, signal at Valleyhigh Road
(CSAH 4) and roundabout at Badger Hills Drive in the City of Rochester,
Olmsted County, Minnesota. Project also includes installation of storm sewer and
two stormwater ponds; one stormwater pond is a regional pond that will outlet
under 50th Avenue NW into a stilling basin within the adjacent Northern Hills
Golf Course, a Section 4(f)property. A Net Benefits Programmatic Section 4(f)
Evaluation was completed along with the Project Memorandum Update and the
EAW.
4. The EAW was submitted to the Environmental Quality Board (MEQB) on April
16, 2007.
5. A press release announcing the availability of the EAW for public review and
comment was published in the EQB Monitor on April 23, 2007. A copy of the
EAW was sent to all persons on the MEQB Distribution List and to persons who
• requested a copy. The EAW was also made available for review at the City of
Rochester's Public Works Department.
50`h Avenue NW Phase II Project June 2007
Findings offact, Conclusion and City Council Resolution
• 6. The 30-day public review and comment period for the EAW began on April 23,
2007 and ended on May 23, 2007.
7. During the 30-day public review and comment period, the City of Rochester
received four written comments on the EAW from three regulatory agencies. No
comments were received after the close of the comment period. Comments were
received from: The Rochester-Olmsted Planning Department, the Minnesota
Department of Natural Resources and the Minnesota Department of
Transportation District 6.
The written comments received are presented below with a City of Rochester
response following each comment.
ROCHESTER-OLMSTED PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Comment: Fish,Wildlife and Ecoloaically Sensitive Resources (Question 911)
In question#11, the review does not mention that about 1/3 of the corridor is
located within the Cascade Creek watershed. In a review of the planned
stormwater runoff system the EAW however, does note the watershed divide and
need for stormwater facilities near Valleyhigh Drive,NW.
. Response: Fish, Wildlife and Ecoloi4ically Sensitive Resources (Question #11)
Comment noted. The project area is entirely within one minor watershed. The
watershed divide is south of Valleyhigh Road NW(CSAH 4) which is south of
the project area. The Cascade Creek watershed is south of this watershed divide
and is also south of the project area. The small tributary that runs through the
project area is a tributary to King's Run as noted in Question#11.
Comment: Phvsical Impacts on Water Resources (Question #12)
Question#12 reviews impacts on wetlands and includes sequencing or
alternatives review. The selected alternative indicates that the wetland will be
replaced through the BWSR transportation bank. Chapter 59 of the City Code of
Ordinances, the Wetland Conservation Ordinance, requires that wetlands located
within the city limits of Rochester must be replaced in Olmsted County. At this
time, there are no approved BWSR banks in Olmsted County, so an alternative
replacement location will be necessary. This requirement can be reviewed in
more detail through a wetland replacement plan application and review.
Response: Phvsical Impacts on Water Resources (Question #12)
The City acknowledges Chapter 59 of the City Code of Ordinances, the Wetland
Conservation Ordinance, which requires impacted wetlands within the city limits
of Rochester to be replaced in Olmsted County. Current design results in 0.92
acres of impact eligible for the BWSR Local Road Wetland Replacement
program. BWSR's current efforts in replacing statewide impacts under this
• program are focused on those reported up to two years prior to the present date.
Therefore,replacement efforts at this time are focused on impacts reported
50`h Avenue NW Phase II Project June 2007
Findings of Fact, Conclusion and City Council Resolution
• through May 2005. Any application for replacement received from this project
would not be considered a top priority until two years after the date of reporting
the impact (i.e. impacts would be replaced during 2009, if construction occurs in
2007).
There currently are no BWSR bank sites located in Olmsted County. However,
BWSR continues to build bank sites and purchase existing credits to cover the
required replacement obligation, including sites in Olmsted County and southeast
Minnesota. Before 2009, BWSR may be successful in establishing replacement
site(s) in Olmsted County that would meet the requirement of Chapter 59 of the
City Code of Ordinances. In the event that BWSR is not able to cover the
required mitigation within Olmsted County, the City will be responsible for
mitigating these impacts within the County. The required mitigation for the 0.92
acres of impact, at a 2:1 ratio, is 1.84 acres (at least 1.38 acres of which must be
new wetland credits (NWC) in order to comply with both the WCA and COE
requirements).
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
Comment:
The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources provided a letter(see Appendix
for copy of letter) that stated from a natural resources management perspective,
the proposed project does not have the potential for significant environmental
• effects and does not require preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS).
Response:
Comment noted.
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 6
Comment:
The Minnesota Department of Transportation(Mn/DOT)District 6 provided a
letter(see Appendix) that stated the proposed project did not have any significant
impacts to Mn/DOT roads and is acceptable to Mn/DOT District 6.
Response:
Comment noted.
8. Based on the information contained in the EAW and provided in written
comments received and in response to those comments, the City of Rochester has
considered the following as potential environmental effects associated with the
proposed project. Mitigation measures are discussed:
a. Water Quality: Surface Water Runoff
Discussed in Item 17 of the EAW. The proposed storm water ponds will
• need detailed modeling and design work prior to construction.
50`h Avenue NW Phase II Project June 2007
Findings of Fact, Conclusion and City Council Resolution
b Physical
• Impacts on Water Resources
Discussed in Item 12 of the EAW. Estimated total wetland impacts for
this project (roadway and storm water pond) are 4.92 acres.
Through preliminary design efforts, impacts to wetlands were minimized
to the extent practicable. Complete avoidance is not possible, due to the
close proximity of the wetlands to the edge of the roadway. There are no
practical location alternatives for the road and storm water pond, as
previously described. Wetlands are located on either side of the existing
roadway. Overall impacts to the wetlands will be minimized by
maintaining a low road profile and steeper side slopes where possible.
Temporary and permanent erosion control measures such as silt fencing,
bio rolls, and seeding will prevent sedimentation from entering wetland
areas. In addition, it is important to note that the regional storm water
pond will have intangible open space/environmental benefits by providing
open water and wetland upland areas for habitat.
Mitigation for the wetland impacts is required at a 2:1 ratio by the
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act and at a 1.5:1 ratio by Section 404
of the Clean Water Act [administered by the Corps of Engineers (COE)].
A total of 9.84 acres of mitigation must be provided, at least 7.38 acres of
which must be New Wetland Credits (NWC) or "equivalent", in order to
comply with both the WCA and COE. The remaining 2.46 acres may be
Public Value Credits (PVC) or a combination of NWC and PVC.
Mitigation for wetland impacts will be through off-site replacement.
A permit application and wetland replacement plan has been submitted to
the Wetland Conservation Act Local Government Unit (WCA LGU) and
Corps of Engineers (COE).
Additional comments related to Physical Impacts on Water Resources,
along with responses, is discussed in item 7 of this Record of Decision.
9. The following permits and approvals will be required for the project:
Permit Agenc Action Required
Federal
Project Memorandum Update FHWA Approval
Section 4(f) FHWA Approval
Section 404 Authorization- General U.S. Army Corps of Permit
Permit/Letter of Permission GP/LOP) Engineers
State
Project Memorandum Update Mn/DOT Approval
EAW MEQB Approval
. National Pollutant Discharge Minnesota Pollution Permit
Elimination System/State Disposal Control Agency
50`h Avenue NWPhase II Project June 2007
Findings offact, Conclusion and City Council Resolution
System (NPDES) WCA)
Sanitary Sewer/Watermain Construction Minnesota Department Permit
of Health
Hazard Class II Dam MnDNR Approval/Permit
Section 4(f) Mn/DOT Review/Comment
Section 106 (Historic/Archeological) Mn/DOT Cultural Determination of No
Resources Unit(CRU) Effect/Concurrence
and Minnesota State
Historic Preservation
Officer(SHPO)
Federal Threatened and Endangered Mn/DOT Office of Determination of No
Species Environmental Services Effect
Local
Project Memorandum Update City of Rochester Approval
EAW—EIS Need Decision City of Rochester Approval/Negative
Declaration
Wetland Conservation Act Rochester-Olmsted Approval of
(Replacement Plan) Planning Department Replacement Plan
Right-of-Way Olmsted County Permit
FINDINGS OF FACT/DECISION ON THE NEED FOR EIS
Minnesota Rule 4410.1700 provides that an EIS shall be ordered for projects that
have the potential for significant environmental effects. In deciding whether a
project has the potential for significant environmental effects the following factors
shall be considered:
A. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects
B. Cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects
C. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by
ongoing public regulatory authority; and
D. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and
controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken
by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs.
Based on the information contained in the 50t' Avenue NW Phase H EAW,
comments received on the EAW, and the criteria listed above, findings of fact
include:
A. The type and extent of environmental effects are similar to effects
associated with other reconstruction projects and the project does not have
• the potential for significant environmental effects.
50`h Avenue NW Phase II Project June 2007
Findings of Fact, Conclusion and City Council Resolution
B. No cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects
exist that would pose significant'environmental effects.
C. The anticipated environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing
public regulatory authority including the US Army Corps of Engineers,
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Minnesota Department of
Health, Minnesota Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, the City of Rochester City Council and Olmsted County;
and
D. The extent of environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a
result of experience with other similar reconstruction projects with similar
environmental effects.
CONCLUSIONS
1. All requirements for environmental review of the proposed project have
been met.
2. The EAW and permit processes related to the project have generated
information that is sufficient to determine whether the project has the
potential for significant environmental effects.
3. Potential environmental effects have been identified and will be addressed
during the final design phase. Mitigative measures will be incorporated
into the final design phase and will be coordinated with the appropriate
agencies during the permit process.
4. Based on the criteria set forth in Minnesota Rule 4410.1700, the project
does not have the potential for significant environmental effects.
5. The EAW for the 50th Avenue NW Phase H Project was adequate and a
negative declaration is made on the need for an EIS by the City of
Rochester City Council by resolution.
6. The City of Rochester City Council approves the distribution of the
Record of Decision documenting this decision to all persons on the MEQB
Distribution List, to persons commenting and to persons who requested a
copy.
Name and Title of Signer:
Richard Freese, Public Works Director
City of Rochester, Minnesota
Date:
50`1'Avenue NW Phase II Project June 2007
Findings of Fact, Conclusion and City Council Resolution