Loading...
09-25-12 Special CouncilSeptember 25, 2012 A special meeting of the Scandia City Council was held on the above date. The purpose of the meeting was to determine the adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project. Mayor Simonson called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following council members were present: Council members Chris Ness, Jim Schneider, Sally Swanson, Connie Amos and Mayor Randall Simonson. Staff present: City Administrator Anne Hurlburt, Interim City Administrator Kristina Handt, City Attorney Tom Miller and City Planner Sherri Buss. Also present: AECOM consultant Leslie Knapp. FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (FEIS), ZAVORAL MINING AND RECLAMATION PROJECT City Planner Sherri Buss began with an explanation of the criteria to be considered in determining the adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Statement. Based on Minnesota rules, the EIS is adequate if:  the EIS addresses the potentially significant issues and alternatives that were raised in the scoping document so that all significant issues for which information can reasonably be obtained have been analyzed;  the EIS provides responses to the substantive comments that were received during the draft EIS review concerning the issues raised in the scoping document; and  the EIS was prepared in compliance with the Environmental Policy Act. The Council approved distribution of the Final EIS on August 8, 2012. Notice of availability of the FEIS was published in the EQB Monitor on August 20, 2012 and a public comment period ran through Monday, September 10, 2012. A total of 21 comment letters and e-mails were submitted during this period. They were provided to the Council and were an attachment to the Record of Decision. Buss noted that most comments were similar to comments received on the Draft EIS or were issues outside of the scope of the EIS. Two specific issues related to the adequacy of the EIS required additional response. These concerns were 1) noise, specifically how it relates to the National Park Service’s recommended standards and tourism, and 2) providing background data that was gathered to complete the FEIS traffic analysis. MnDOT’s Traffic Impact Study indicated that the projected traffic volumes would be well below the threshold. The additional analysis identified no significant potential impacts. Buss explained that the traffic analysis information was added as an attachment to the Final EIS. Buss then addressed the noise related issue. National Park Service Management Plan policies state that noise levels should be consistently low along the St. Croix Riverway. Maximum noise level information was not provided by the NPS. Buss stated that the NPS Management Plan policy standards cannot be applied as law; the Minnesota PCA noise standards are to be applied in the mitigation plan. The detailed noise analysis used in the EIS showed a median noise level from the proposed Project on the St. Croix Riverway of 42 decibels (Project plus ambient). This is approximately the same noise level as would be expected in a quiet residential neighborhood, and therefore meets the standards as a relatively low level of noise. September 25, 2012 Scandia City Council Page 2 of 6 Buss noted the mitigation strategies proposed in the EIS to maintain low noise levels during mining operations. These include construction of berms on the east side of the site to provide shielding to reduce noise impacts to residents and the St. Croix River; and the city’s ordinance which prohibits mining operations on weekends and holidays, a time of peak recreational and tourist activity in the Riverway. Buss explained that additional mitigation measures to address noise and traffic impacts were incorporated into the Final EIS. The City may consider a condition that the mine may operate only between the hours of 7 a.m. and Noon on Fridays to reduce the potential impact on recreational traffic. The City could also require the inspection of trucks and on-site equipment to determine that mufflers are in good working order. Buss then described three options the Council may proceed with:  adopt the Record of Decision finding the EIS to be adequate;  postpone action to a future date if the Council needs additional information in order to make a decision;  find that the EIS is inadequate, if it believes that the Final EIS does not meet the three criteria as described at the start of the presentation. Buss explained that the MEQB Rules require that the City prepare an adequate EIS. Denying the Final EIS or ending the process without preparing an adequate FEIS is not an option. If the Council finds the FEIS inadequate, the City would have up to 60 days to prepare an adequate EIS. Mayor Simonson opened the floor to public comments. Richard Leider, 23229 St. Croix Trail: Mr. Leider read from a letter being sent to the City from former Vice-President Walter Mondale, who Mr. Leider described as the author of the legislation that designated the St. Croix River as a protected river and national park. The letter stated that the proposed mine has the potential to damage the resource values that were intended to be protected. The letter agreed with the findings of the NPS that the Final EIS is inadequate and advised that the Council select the no action alternative and deny the request for a conditional use permit to operate the mine. Kristen Tuenge, 20595 Quinnell Avenue: Ms. Tuenge asked if the Council had all the information needed to make a decision on the EIS. City Planner Buss stated the three criteria the Council would use in their evaluation of the adequacy, emphasizing that all significant issues for which information can reasonably be obtained have been analyzed. Ms. Tuenge spoke as a representative of the Take Action – Conserve Our Scandia group and relayed that many residents and others have serious concerns about the adequacy and limitations of the document. The TACOS group asked the Council to keep in mind all the information submitted and not to consider only this study and to retain independent judgment. Tuenge stated that only the No-Build alternative is adequate to the TACOS group. September 25, 2012 Scandia City Council Page 3 of 6 Jill Medland, Environmental Coordinator for the National Park Service, St. Croix Falls, WI: Ms. Medland stated her concerns on behalf of the NPS that the study did not adequately address noise issues. Ms. Medland felt the Final EIS applied the wrong noise standards, those from the State, rather than those from the NPS Management Plan. Medland described that the State noise standards would allow for such an increase in noise levels on the River that two people canoeing side-by-side would not be able to carry on a conversation. Medland also noted that the EIS did not take into account the higher ambient noise levels which are present in the summer months, when natural sounds are high. At other times of the year, the mine noise would be more audible. Medland added that the cumulative impacts of the proposed operation were not adequately considered, nor were post-reclamation mining depths fully explained. This information would be critical to determine whether the mine could have significant impacts on the seeps and springs within the Riverway. Medland concluded with a point that the NPS believes the Final EIS is inadequate and should be revised to provide the City with the necessary environmental information upon which to base their decision. Gregory Page, 17001 220th Street: Mr. Page expressed his concern that the Final EIS is inadequate and incomplete. The seeps, by their capillary action through the soils, should be documented. Page also noted that the fiscal issues were not fully disclosed. Ed Summersby, 20457 Quinnell Avenue: Mr. Summersby stated that upon reading the additional 21 comments, it is inconceivable to him that a reasonable person could accept the numerous negative impacts described. Summersby asked the Council to be objective and come to a conclusion to reject the project, as the mine would be a disservice to the community which has as a logo “dedicated to rural values”. Laurie Allmann, 16260 Norell Avenue: Ms. Allman asked the Council to read the Environmental Policy Act, which is one of the deciding criteria. Based on this, there are many issues yet to be evaluated. Allmann stated that the definition of “significant impacts” is not supported in the language of the EPA. Allmann asked the Council to consider the features of the National Park which are in the proximity of the site, and to consider that the standards of the NPS Management Plan are relevant. Pam Arnold, 16560 220th Street: Ms. Arnold stated that the noise study applied the wrong MPCA classification standards. A standard for historical installations and parks should have been used as the noise standard. On these grounds, Ms. Arnold asked the Council to determine the study to be inadequate and to ask for more information to substantiate the noise issue. Ms. Arnold asked the Council if they have any personal reasons that would allow them to benefit from the project, to recuse themselves from a vote. Bill Clapp, St. Croix River Association: Mr. Clapp stated that he was representing the St. Croix River Association which has the mission to preserve the natural resources and character of the watershed. Mr. Clapp felt that the comments of the Association were not responded to September 25, 2012 Scandia City Council Page 4 of 6 effectively, and asked the Council to find the Final EIS not adequate. Mr. Clapp gave as an example of a wrong statement that the Zavoral site is Tiller’s only mining resource available in the area, but did not consider the Franconia pit a few miles to the north. Mr. Clapp stated that the site has better development potential now than after the mining project is complete, and the No- Build Alternative should be chosen because no one would build in a crater. Mr. Clapp felt the EIS failed to recognize this. Mr. Clapp said there were repetitive comments throughout the response section which he termed as “non-responses”. Mr. Clapp noted that the Park Service has noise standards to consider, and asked the Council not to be bound by the conclusion statements. There were no further comments from the public. Mayor Simonson stated his appreciation of the speakers’ comments, and that he is taking the issue very seriously. Simonson offered that it would not be possible to satisfy everyone with the document and it may never be perfect, but this is part of the process. A decision tonight would not mean that mining is approved, but moving ahead for continued discussion. Simonson invited continued feedback from the public. Mayor Simonson asked for Council members’ comments. Council member Ness asked if the Met Council’s comment on well monitoring was addressed? Consultant Leslie Knapp answered that monitoring wells are a required condition of the CUP and reporting the data is required. Ness asked who would handle the inspections concerning noise? City Planner Buss answered that the CUP would set the conditions to determine noise monitoring. Ness stated that he has issues with the traffic situation and finds the MnDOT report not adequate. Council member Amos stated that her questions were answered and had no comments. Council member Swanson stated that the traffic issue is a big concern of hers and asked about MnDOT’s position. City Planner Buss explained that MnDOT’s findings state that the roadways can handle the additional traffic, and Washington County also finds the roadways to be sufficient. Buss noted that the CUP can require traffic monitoring, and then follow with additional mitigation measures if needed. Swanson asked if the mitigation measures contained in the EIS can be expanded on? Buss stated yes, other reasonable conditions can be added within the CUP. Swanson stated that there is still a long process ahead, and the Council cannot provide a “no” to mining at this time; they must follow the rules. Swanson said that she believed the consultants worked diligently to get answers to the issues brought forth. Swanson noted the groundwater concerns and asked Buss to discuss this. Buss answered that staff at the DNR, Watershed District, and Conservation District examined the water resource analysis and agreed with the EIS that no negative impacts were identified. September 25, 2012 Scandia City Council Page 5 of 6 Swanson asked for clarification that Tiller would be responsible for all monitoring costs. Buss replied that the Applicant pays for the monitoring. Swanson stated that the EIS followed Minnesota law in applying the MPCA standards. Council member Schneider asked if the NPS could provide a set decibel number as a noise limit? Ms. Medland replied that the Riverway Plan recognizes low noise levels from recreational users and aims to keep the noise level low, but does not have an assigned level. She felt the EIS analysis made a jump to 42 decibels to fit that. Schneider asked if there is a level that could be compared to, such as traffic over a bridge? Medland answered that the Plan does not generalize a noise level. Schneider stated that the EIS can be used as a guidance document. The CUP will be a lengthy and involved process in which significant issues can be weeded out, and conditions put in place to address these. Schneider asked if allowing the mine to operate from 7 a.m. to noon on Fridays would lengthen the total operating days offered in the Alternatives? Mr. Caron, Tiller Corporation, answered that shortening a typical 12-hour day would increase the time needed. Mayor Simonson stated his concerns about noise issues. Simonson understands that the NPS is looking for an acceptable level, but they need to define a measurable standard. Ms. Medland stated that they are looking for a full disclosure of the impacts, and have measured a natural ambient level of around 35 decibels in the summer. They are looking for th e EIS to say it would increase up to how many decibels at other times of the year, and to have the noise impacts fully disclosed in order to understand the consequences of a decision. Pam Arnold asked if the sound of loading trucks was included in the study? City Planner Buss answered yes. Chris White, AECOM, addressed the Council with information on the report. Mine noise was monitored from an operating Tiller mine, and the loading truck noise then added to the levels modeled at the Zavoral site. Ms. Arnold stated that she is skeptical about the numbers as one would not expect industrial noise in a National Park. Lisa Schlingermann stated that the river valley acts as an echo chamber and more tests for sound travel should be done. Mayor Simonson asked under what conditions could mining be halted? City Planner Buss explained that the Annual Operating Permit can be revoked if there are serious issues and the operator is out of compliance. City Attorney Miller added that if conditions are violated, the City has the ability to stop the operation and revoke the CUP and impose fines. Council member Amos asked if the City could go back to MnDOT if traffic issues were to arise? September 25, 2012 Scandia City Council Page 6 of 6 City Planner Buss answered if traffic conditions are different than anticipated or unsafe, the City could ask for an additional study or could hire their own consultants. MnDOT could be asked to re-evaluate if the conditions in reality are not as projected. Pam Arnold stated that the TACOS consultant did not agree with the MnDOT analysis and it would be impossible to consider the 95/97 intersection as safe once trucks are hauling gravel. City Planner Buss explained that MnDOT, as an agency that is concerned about long-term traffic and has standards for maximum traffic levels and speed under a variety of conditions, has stated that they are in agreement with the AECOM analysis contained within the EIS. Mayor Simonson noted that Scandia’s Scenic Viewshed Analysis has recognized the 95/97 corridor as a priority viewshed. City Planner Buss stated that a view analysis was included in the EIS. The view was based on berms and the reclamation plan. The analysis suggests the operation would be non-visible from the roadway. Mayor Simonson called for final comments and none were given. Simonson, seconded by Swanson, moved to adopt Resolution No. 09-25-12-01, Adopting Record of Decision in the Matter of the Determination of Adequacy of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Zavoral Mine and Reclamation Project. Simonson asked for discussion from the Council. Council member Ness stated that he finds the study to be not adequate. Council member Amos had no comment. Council member Swanson stated that she finds the EIS to meet the criteria. Council member Schneider stated that it needs to end sometime, and the public comments will be used as guidance. Mayor Simonson called for a roll call vote: Amos – yes; Swanson – yes; Schneider – yes; Ness – no; Simonson – yes. The motion carried 4-1. ADJOURNMENT Ness, seconded by Amos, moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion carried 5-0. The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Brenda Eklund Deputy Clerk