6.a) Scoping Meeting, Environmental Impact, Tiller Corporation's Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project . , �
�� �
Meeting Date: 4/7/2009
� Agenda Item: ti , � ;
A ��.e..«+�` � . ' .
Pianning Commission/ � �
City Council Agenda Report
City of Scandia
14727 209t" St. North
Scandia, MN 55073 (651) 433-2274
Action Requested: Hold a public meeting to take public input on the scope of the EIS
(Environmental Impact Stateinent) for the Zavoral Mining and
Reclamation Project.
Deadline/ Timeline: Minnesota Rules 4410.2100 Subp. 4.B. requires the city to issue a
final scoping decision within 15 days of the public scoping meeting
(at the April 21, 2009 City Council meeting.)
Background: • On March 3, 2009 the City Council ordered preparation of an EIS
for this project.
• • The attached memorandum from City Planner Sherri Buss
describes the.EIS scoping process. A draft scoping decision
document has been prepared for review by the Planning
Commission, City Council and the public.
• Individuals and agencies that made comments during the EAW
process were notified of the scoping meeting by e-mail, and a copy
of the attached reports have been made available on the city
website.
Recommendation: The Planning Commission and City Council should take public
comments on the draft scoping decision document, and make any
comments or recommendations to staff for changes to the decision
document. It is suggested that any comments be submitted not later
than April 10 so that they may be incorporated into the final scoping
decision document that must be approved on April 21.
Attachments/ • TKDA Memorandum dated Apri12, 2009
Materials provided: . Draft Scoping Decision Document
Contact(s): Sherri Buss, TKDA (651) 292-4582
Prepared by: Anne Hurlburt, Administrator
• (Tiller-Zavoral EIS Scoping Meeting)
Page 1 of 1
04/02/09
!' .
���� 444 Cedar Street,Suiie 1500
Saint Paul,MN 55101-2140
ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS•PLANNERS (651)292-4400
(651)292-0083 fax •
www.ikda.com
MEMORANDUM
To: City Council and Planning Reference: Tiller Corporation - EAW/EIS
Commission
Anne Hurlburt, City Administrator Application for Zavoral Mine
Copies To: Mike Caron, Tiller Corporation City of Scandia, Minnesota
Kirsten Pauly, Sunde Engineering
From: Sherri Buss, R.L.A. Proj. No.: 14305.001
Date: April 2, 2009 Routing:
SUBJECT: Tiller Corporation, Inc. —Draft Scoping Document for EIS
MEETING DATE: April 7, 2009
LOCATION: Sections l 8 and 19, Township 32 North, Range 19 West
APPLICANT: Tiller Corporation •
P.O. Box 1480 �
Maple Grove, Minnesota 5531 1
120-DAY PERIOD: N/A
ZONING: Agricultural District
ITEMS REVIEWED: EAW and Related Submittals, EAW Comments,
Outline for Additional Studies
LEGAL REFERENCE: Minnesota Statutes 116 (particularly 116D.04); Minnesota Rules 4410
City of Scandia Mining Ordinance No. 103
BACKGROUND
On March 3, the City Council adopted the Findings of Fact and Record of Decision for the Zavoral Mine and
Reclamation Project EAW. The Council found that an Environmental Impact Statement is needed for this
project, and adopted a resolution requiring an EIS. The Findings of Fact and Resolution were published in
the EQB Monitor.
Next steps in this process include the following: •
An Employee Owned Company Promoting Af(irmative Action and Equal Opportunity
Scandia Council and Planning Commission Page 2 April 2, 2009
Tiller Corporation EAW/EIS for Zavoral Mine
•
• Detern�ine the scope of the EIS, under the process described in Minnesota Rz�les 4410.2/00:
o Tlie project proposer must submit a scoping cost paymen�t to the Ci.t��. Tiller Corporation has
submitted the requested pay�nent to the City.
o A public scoping nzeeting will be held by tl�e Ciry. The public meeting was noticed and will
be held on April 7.
o Within I S days of the public scoping meeting, the City shall issue its_final decision regarding
tlze scope of the EIS. The decision must be made at tlae next regularly scheduled meeting of
tlie body.following the scoping meeting, but not more than 45 days after the positive
declaratia� is published in the EQB Monitor. A Draft Scoping Document is attached, and the
final decision on the project scope is scheduled to be�nade at the April 21 Council ineeting.
o Government agencies and the public were notified of the scoping meeting and may submit
comments and participate in the scoping meeting and process. The City has sent the draft
scope for the EIS to the agencies that commented on the EAW, and has offered to meet with
the agencies to discuss the Draft Scoping Document. The agencies may also attend the public
meeting on April 7 to provide comments on the Draft Scoping Document.
� Based on the Final Scoping Document, the City will develop a Request for Proposals (RFP) to
identify a consultant team to complete the EIS.
TILLER CORPORATION COMMENTS ON DRAFT SCOPING DOCUMENT
• A Draft of the Scoping Document was provided to Tiller Corporation, and City staff inet with Tiller
representatives on March 30 to discuss the Draft. These issues related to the Alternatives were discussed at
the meeting:
1. Tiller requested that Alternatives 4 and 5 be added to the Draft Scope. Those alternatives have been
included in the Draft.
2. The Tiller representatives indicated that they may request that the City revise Alternative #1 to begin
reclamation at the start of the project, and complete reclamation within the first five years of the
project. If accepted, this modification to Alternative#1 would make Alternative#6 unnecessary. As
a part of the proposed revisions to Alternative#1, the City may require that activities within the
Riverway District consist of"restoration" of natural communities rather than "reclamation," and that
the restoration plan be developed in cooperation with the Minnesota DNR and National Park Service,
and approved by the City.
3. Tiller Corporation may request that Concrete Recycling be removed from the processing activities at
the site. In that case, the City may consider modifying Alternative#1 or#3 to remove recycling.
City staff have requested that Tiller Corporation make any requests for the changes identified in#2 and #3 in
writing at or before the April 7 public hearing.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Staff request that the Planning Commission and Council review the Draft Scoping Document, receive
• comments at the public hearing, and provide comments for the Final Scoping Document by April 10, 2009.
City af Scandia �
Zavoral Minin�, and Reclamation Project
Draft Scoping Decision Document
April, 2009
I. Introduction and Purpose
Tiller Corporation is proposing to operate a gravel mine and processing operation on a dormant,
un-reclaimed gravel mine site in the City of Scandia—called the Zavoral Mining and
Reclamation Project. The 1 14-acre site is lc�cated along St. Croix Trail North (State Trunk
Highway 95 [TH 95]) near its intersection with State Trunk Highway 97 (TH 97). A portion of
the site is located in the St. Croix River District Zone. While, the area proposed for sand and
gravel mining and related processing activities is located outside the limits of the St. Croix River
District zone, the application proposes reclamation activities within the River District Zone. The
site was mined by multiple operators before it was taken out of production in the 1980's. No
environmental review was required for that operation.
The proposed project required completion of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
to comply with Minnesota Rules 4410.4300. The City of Scandia was the Responsible
Governmental Unit (RGU) for the EAW. On March 3, 2009, the Scandia City Council approved •
the Findings of Fact and Record of Decision that concluded that an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) is needed to determine the project's potential for significant environmental
impacts.
The EAW for the Zavoral site was submitted to the City on November 25, 2008. The site is
within the General/Rural Agricultural Area on the City's 2020 Comprehensive Plan and Land
Use map, which was the current plan at the time of the EAW submittal. The proposed use is
consistent with the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The City's 2030
Comprehensive Plan, adopted on March 17, 2009 proposes Mining as a specific land use
designation. The Zavoral site is not included in the areas designated for Mining in the 2030
Plan. However, since the EAW was submitted under the 2020 Comprehensive Plan, the EAW
must be reviewed under that plan.
The Recard of Decision noted that the City received a large number of comment letters from
agencies and individuals that identified over a dozen issues that were not adequately addressed in
the EAW. The City determined that the EAW did not provide the information necessary to allow
the City to make a decision about the potential for and significance of potential environmental
impacts of the proposed Zavoral Mining Project. Many of the identified issues relate to the
project's location and potential impacts to the St. Croix River, National Scenic Riverway, and
other unique and sensitive resources. Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, Subpart 2a indicates that if
the RGU determines that information necessary to a reasoned decision about the potential for, or
significance of, one or more possible environmental impacts is lacking, but could reasonably be •
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 1
City oFScandia—March,2009
obtained, the RGU may make a positive declaration of the need for an EIS, and include within
• the scope of the EIS appropriate studies to obtain the necessary infornlation.
The Notice of Decision for the EAW was published in the EQB Monitor on March 23, 2009.
The City of Scandia will be tlle RGU for the EIS for the Zavoral Mine a»d Recla�nation Project
pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410.0500 , Subpart 1. The EIS will need to meet the requirements
of Minnesota Rules 4410.0200 to 4410.7800 (Minnesota Environmental Quality Board rules),
which govern the Minnesota Environmental Review Program.
This Scoping Decision Document (SDD) identifies the issues and alternatives that will be
examined in depth in the EIS. This is a Draft SDD, and the decisions presented here are subject
to change based on comments received from agencies and the public, or future analysis. The
SDD also presents a tentative schedule of the environmental review process.
II. Project Alternatives
The MEQB rules require EIS studies to include at least one alternative in each of the following
categories, or provide a description of why no alternative is included in the EIS (MN Rule
4410.2300, Item G):
• Alternative sites
• Alternative technologies
• Alternative designs or layouts
• • Modified scale or magnitude
• Alternatives that incorporate reasonable mitigation measures identified through the
scoping process
Minnesota Rules part 4410.2300, subpart G also states that an alternative may be excluded from
analysis in the EIS under the following conditions: (1) when it does not meet the underlying need
for or purpose of the project, (2) it would likely not have any significant environmental benefit
compared to the project as proposed; or(3) another alternative, of any type, that will be analyzed
in the EIS would likely have similar environmental benefits, but substantially less adverse
economic, employment or sociological impacts.
The Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project EIS will include up to six alternatives, as described
below:
Alternative#1—Applicant's Preferred Alternative
The project proposer, Tiller Corporation, is proposing to re-open and expand the dormant
aggregate mine and ancillary operations on the Zavoral property. The Zavoral Mine and
Reclamation Project Area location is shown on Figure 1. The proposed project does not include
mining into the ground water. The site was mined by multiple operators before it was taken out
of production in the 1980's.
The site proposed for mining and processing is within the Agriculture Zoning District under the
� City's current Comprehensive Plan. Mining is an allowed use within the Agriculture zone. A
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 2
City of Scandia--Maroh,2009
portion of the site is located within the St C'roix National Scenic Riverway. Reclamation
activities are proposed within this area. Mining is not allowed within the Riverway Zone. •
The proposed project area includes 1 14 acres. Mining activity has previously disturbed
approximately 56 acres. The site was actively mined in the 1960's tllrough the 1980's. Mining
operations included stripping, extraction, crushing, washing, hot mix asphalt production,
stockpiling and hauling from the site. The operation was taken out of production without
reclamation in the 1980's. All processing equipment has been removed from the site, but it llas
not been reclaimed. The site has recently been used as a source of aggregate from stockpiles
located throughout the site. Much of the material in the stockpiles has been removed over the
last eight to ten years, but there are irregular landforms because the site has not been reclaimed.
The proposed project will involve mining and restoration of 64 acres located predominately on
the previously disturbed portions of the site. The active mining area will include mining to an
additional depth of about 15 feet, and expanding the limits of mining by about 8 acres. In
addition, Tiller Corporation is proposing to restore approximately 4 acres of the previously
mined area located within the St. Croix Riverway and scenic ease�nent area during the final
phase of restoration of the active mining site. Figure 2 illustrates the previously disturbed and
undisturbed mining and reclamation area.
Tiller Corporation is proposing the following activities at the Zavoral site:
• Clearing and grubbing the site of vegetation, as necessary
• Removal of overburden from areas to be mined, and stockpiling the material on the site
for potential future use in reclamation •
� Excavation of raw aggregate mate'rials
• Crushing, washing, and stock piling of aggregate materials
• Recycling of concrete and asphalt materials
• Transporting finished aggregate materials internally for subsequent processing and to
construction sites beyond the Zavoral Mine area
• Fuel storage and storage of related materials such as oil, anti-freeze, grease, and hydraulic
fluid
• Reclamation activities, including grading,placing topsoil and seeding.
Mining operations will be conducted on a seasonal basis, typically from April through mid-
November. The site is proposed to be worked in phases, with the duration of the project
expected to be approximately 10 years.
When an area has been stripped of vegetation and overburden, aggregate will be excavated using
front-end loaders. The raw material will be transported to a wash plant. At the plant the material
is fed through a series of crushers, screens, conveyors, wash decks and classifiers to produce the
commercial grade construction aggregates. The finished products are stockpiled adjacent to the
plant until they are hauled off-site by trucks to various construction sites, or internally
transported and stockpiled. Portable processing equipment will be brought to the site as needed,
and removed from the site after a sufficient volume of material has been processed and
stockpiled. When the stockpiled aggregates are nearing depletion, the portable equipment will �
be brought back to the site to replenish the stockpiles.
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 3
City of Scandia--March,2009
• Water is an important tool for the processes that are proposed to occur at the site. Water is used
to wash the aggregate, equipment, and suppress dust. Water for tliese activities will be secured
from the existing production well on the site. Surface water collected in the sediment ponds on
the project site may also be recycled and re-used at the site.
Tiller Corporation is also proposing to bring concrete and asphalt inaterials froin other sites to
this site for recycling. Recycling involves transporting, crushing, washing and mixing these
materials with the aggregate materials mined at the site, and transporting the recycled materials
to other sites in the region.
The proposed inining operations will result in lowering and a reconfiguration of the surface
topography, and the reconfiguration and redirection of the existing surface drainage system.
In general, the reclamation is proposed to progress in increments. In the first several years, as
the mine is reopened, little reclamation is proposed to occur. Reclamation will proceed as areas
of mining are completed. The reclamation plan proposes that perimeter areas be sloped and the
interior areas backfilled and graded to restoration grades. Topsoil would be applied to these
areas and vegetation established to reduce erosion. The previously-mined area within the St.
Croix Riverway is proposed for restoration during the final phase of mining operations at the
site.
Mining is proposed to begin when the environmental review process has been completed, and the
• project proposer has obtained the necessary Conditional Use Permit and Annual Operating
Permit froin the City of Scandia.
Alternative#2--No-Build Alternative
The No-Build Alternative will be described in the EIS. The No-Build Alternative will describe
the potential impacts, outcomes, constraints,benefits and disadvantages, and economics if the
existing land uses on the Zavoral site were to continue. The description will be based on the
existing and allowed use of the site for Agricultural and Rural Residential purposes, and will
make projections or forecasts based on this use, to identify the No-Build Alternative effects and
impacts. The No-Build Alternative does not include the Reclamation Activities on previouly
mined areas that are included in Alternative#1.
Scale of Magnitude Alternatives
Four alternatives will be considered that propose a different scale or project magnitude. The
Alternatives include the same project area as described for the Preferred Alternative. Each varies
from the preferred alternative in the following respects:
Alternative#3--Mining and Reclamation Activities with No Asphalt and Concrete Rec ��g
This Alternative will focus on the impacts of the proposed asphalt and concrete recycling
activities at the site--particularly the noise, dust, impacts to water and natural resources, and
•
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 4
City oF Scandia--March,2009
traffic. It will identify and compare the i►npacts of the }�roject without the proposed recycling
activities to the impacts of the Preferred Alternativc that includes these operations. •
Alternative #4—Mining and Reclamation Activities--Evaluate of Impacts of Washing
This Alternative will focus on the iinpacts of the washing activities at the site—particularly
impacts to ��-oundwater, groundwater-dependent resources, springs and wells. It will identify
and coinpare the impacts and mitigation options for the project with various levels of water
use for washing to the impacts of the Preferred Alternative that includes the maxiinum level
of washing that is expected to occur at the site.
Alternative#5—Mining and Reclamation Activities—Evaluate Impacts and Seasonal
Scheduling of Processing Activities
This Alternative will focus on the impacts of the processing activities that are proposed to be
part of the site operations—including screening, sorting, and priinary and secondary
crushing. It will identify and compare the impacts of each of these activities to the impacts
of the Preferred Alternative that includes all of these activities at the site. It will look at
options for scheduling the processing activities in the early spring and late fall, to avoid times
of highest recreational use in the areas that may be impacted by the project. Noise and dust
impacts are expected to be issues of particular focus for potential impacts and mitigation.
Alternative#6--Revised Reclamation Schedule
This Alternative will revise the reclamation schedule--to include reclamation of the area
within the St. Croix Riverway and scenic easements areas during the first years of mining
operations, rather than in the final year of operation, as proposed in the Preferred Alternative. .
It will examine the potential impacts to the site and surrounding areas if reclamation
activities are completed at the beginning of the project, compared to the impacts with late-
stage reclamation as proposed in the Preferred Alternative.
Alternative Sites
Off-site alternatives are not being investigated because they do not meet the project purpose and
need of making use of significant aggregate resources that are found within the Zavoral Mine
site. Site Alternatives are limited to the presence of the natural resource. This resource is
located within the Metropolitan Area, and may cost-effectively serve the needs of the region. A
regional study by the Metropolitan Council, Department of Natural Resources and the University
of Minnesota in 2002, titled Aggregate Resources Inventory of the Seven-Countv Metropolitan
Area identified significant aggregate resource areas within the Metro Region, including the
general area in which the Zavoral Mine and Reclamation Project is located, and describes the
Region's need for these resources in the future.
Technology Alternatives
Technology alternatives are not within the scope of the Zavoral Mine and Reclamation Project
and will not be considered in the EIS. Best practicable technologies for the various activities
will be utilized as part of the preferred alternative.
•
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 5
City of Scandia--March,2009
Modified Scale Alternatives
� Modified design or layout alternatives will not considered in the EIS. The area represented as
the Preferred Alternative (Figure 1) may be modified depending upon the results of the analysis
that will be compieted for the EIS and the pennit requirements for operations on the site.
Project Site with Reasonable Miti�ation Measures
MEQB rules require consideration of mitigation measures identified through comments on the
EAW. The EIS will consider all relevant mitigation measures suggested through public and
agency comments and will recommend incorporation of reasonable mitigation measures into
project design and permitting as warranted.
11I. EIS Issues
MEQB guidance documents indicate that the purpose of scoping is to streamline the EIS process
by identifying only potentially signficant and relevant issues, and defining alternatives to be
analyzed in the EIS. Issues that were not adequately addressed in the EAW and require
additional data gathering and analysis in the EIS were identified in the Findings of Fact and
Record of Decision for the Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project (March 3, 2009). These
issues are discussed in further detail below, including the potential signficance of each issue and
the extent of analysis needed so that each issue is adequately addressed in the EIS. Mitigation
• measures, permitting and approvals, public comments, and the results of analyses, existing data,
and separate studies will all be addressed,in the EIS, to fully disclose the potential impacts from
the alternatives.
EAW Items Screened and Removed from Further Review
The following items were adequately assessed in the EAW and were found to be not relevant or
so minor that they will not be addressed in the EIS:
• Water surface use (Item 15) –impacts to boating and recreational use
• Water quality: wastewaters (Item 18)—impacts to municipal or on-site sewage treatment
systems
• Vehicle-related air emissions (Item 22)
• Archaeological, historical or architectural resources (Item 25a)
• Prime or unique farmlands (Item 25b)
• Impact on infrastructure and public services (Item 28)
Topics to be Included in the EIS (Item numbers below are those used in the EAW):
Item 9—Land Use/Potential Environmental Hazards/Reclamation Plan
The general description of the local government land use plans and policies included in
the EAW was adequate.
•
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 6
City of Scandia--March,2009
The analysis in the EIS sllould address the following land use issues for this ite�n:
Land Use �
• Assess the impacts of each of the alten�atives on the current and future land
use in the area that will be impacted by the project—primarily the City of
Scandia and St. Croix Wild and Scenic Riverway District.
Reclamation Plan
• Describe the reclamation plans for each alternative in detail. The reclamation
plan shall include the detailed plans for grading, plant communities to be
established on the site, phasing and timing of reclamation activities, planting
schedules, habitat reconstruction and invasive species management, and
monitoring and maintenance to ensure the success of reclamation efforts.
� Evaluate the compatibility of the alternatives with existing and future land
uses, and the potential i�npacts of the reclamation plans on habitat areas and
future land use in the area.
• Coordinate and consult with the Minnesota DNR, National Park Service, City
of Scandia, and others to develop the reclamation plans. Consideration should
be given to reclamation requirements for areas within the St. Croix River
District, which may be different from those for site areas outside the District.
Economic Impacts
• Assess any secondary social, economic and environmental impacts of each
alternative on the local community, including impacts to the local economy,
tourism, and similar impacts. •
Item 10—Cover Types
The EAW did not identify existing wetland cover types in the project area and indicate
the proposed project's potential impacts to this cover type.
The analysis in the EIS should indicate the existing area of all cover types in the project
area, and the acreages of cover types that would result from each of the alternatives.
Item 11—including lla Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically-Sensitive Resources and
Item 11 b—Threatened and Endangered Species
The EAW included a list of threatened and endangered plant and animal species based on
published lists from the Minnesota DNR's Natural Heritage Program. The lists noted a
number of sensitive resources and threatened species within the project area and the area
of potential impact. The Carnelian-Marine St. Croix Watershed District (CMSCWD)
noted that 65 occurrences of rare features (plants, animals and habitat areas) have been
documented with a 1 mile radius of the proposed project. CMSCWD noted that no
known focused field surveys have been conducted for rare elements within or near the
project boundaries and that the high concentration of rare elements within one mile of the
project site suggests that the likelihood of rare features within the project area is high. •
The analysis in the EIS should include the following:
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 7
City of Scandia—March,2009
• • Detennine the area of potential impacts of the proposed project and the
alternatives on natural l�abitats and protected species.
• Co�nplete a biological assessment and Protected Species Field Survey of the
project area and the area of potential impacts. The survey of plants, animals and
land and water habitats sl�ould be completed by surveyor pre-qualified by the
DNR. The assessment would identify and map the presence of all ecologically
sensitive resources (rare, threatened and endangered plant and animal species and
habitats) in the project area, along Zavoral's stream and surrounding areas that are
potentially iinpacted by the project. The assessment would assess the quality and
characteristics of the resources in relation to the proposed project and potential
impacts. The Draft EIS should include exhibits showing the location of the
species or habitats.
• Analyze the potential impacts of each of the alternatives on the sensitive resources
(species and habitats), and the reversibility of the potentia] impacts.
• Identify strategies that will be implemented to avoid, minimize or mitigate for the
potential impacts.
• Identify coordination coinpleted with the Minnesota DNR, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, or other agencies to complete the biological assessment and Protected
Species Survey, discuss proposed project activities and reclamation plans and
address potential impacts by avoiding, minimizing or reducing the project impacts
and incorporating appropriate elements in the reclamation plan for the site.
� Item 12—Physical Impacts on Water Resources
The EAW did not adequately identify the wetland resources and other surface waters
within the proposed project area and the area of potential impacts.
The analysis in the EIS should include the following:
• Identify and map the presence of all surface water resources in the project area
and area of potential impact of each of the alternatives (rivers, streams, wetlands,
lakes). The Draft EIS should include exhibits showing the location of these
resources.
• Analyze the current quality and regulatory status of these resources, potential
physical impacts of each of the alternatives on the resources, and the reversibility
of the potential impacts.
• Identify mitigation strategies that will be implemented to address the potential
impacts.
• Identify coordination completed with the Washington Conservation District,
Carnelian-Marine Watershed District or other agencies to complete the mapping,
assessment and mitigation strategies.
Item 13—Water Use
• The EAW indicates that an existing production well on the Zavoral property would be
used as the water supply well for the preferred scenario. The EAW does not analyze the
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page S
City of Scandia—March,2009
potential impacts of the water use on groundwater resources, groundwater-dependent
►-esources, or local wells in the project area or area of potential impact. �
Tl�e analysis in the EIS should include the following:
• Idei�tify the quantity and source(s) of water to be used for wasl�ing, processing
and dust control activities.
• Identify existing or proposed production well construction details including
locations, well depths, screened intervals, and the geologic logs.
• Quantify the potential water use under each of the proposed scenarios.
• Identify the potential impacts of water use on groundwater resources,
�-oundwater-dependent resources and local wells in the project area or area of
potential impact under each of the proposed scenarios.
• Develop a ground water monitoring plan that will be used to identify any potential
impact to the groundwater resources as a result of the water use, and proposed
mitigation strategies for any potential impacts.
• Develop a plan for abandoning the existing well and proposed monitoring wells
on the site when no longer needed.
Item 14—Water-Related Land Use Management Districts
The project area includes a portion of the St. Croix River District. The project has the
potential for impacts to the River District and the federally-designated National Scenic
Riverway. The EAW analysis was limited to a discussion of the restoration proposed
within the River District under the preferred alternative. •
The analysis in the EIS should include the following for each of the alternatives included
in the EIS:
• Identify potential adverse effects on the natural, cultural and recreational values of
the Riverway. Potential adverse effects may include impacts to the use, purpose,
and values of the Riverway District, alteration of the setting, or deterioration of
water quality.
• Consult with the National Park Service (managing agency for the Riverway and
District) regarding the impacts analysis and identification of strategies to avoid,
minimize and mitigate for the impacts
• Identify the measures that will be utilized to avoid, minimize or mitigate the
identified impacts.
Item 16 Erosion and Sedimentation
The EAW included a general discussion of erosion and sedimentation, and potential
controls and best manageinent practices that could be implemented to avoid or minimize
the impacts of erosion and sedimentation resulting from the preferred alternative.
The EIS analysis should include the following:
• Identify the area of potential impacts of erosion and sedimentation from the •
proposed project under each of the alternatives.
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 9
City of Scandia March,2009
• A»alyze the potential impacts of erosion and sedimentation on each of the
• resources within the project area and area of potential impact under each of the
alternatives, particularly including impacts high quality and unique resources,
such as to the St. Croix River, Zavoral Creek, other streams on the site, seeps,
wetlands and aquatic habitats.
• Identify specific measures that will be i�nplemented to avoid, minimize or
mitigate for the identified impacts.
Itenz 17—Surface Water Quality and Quantity
The EAW indicated the direction of stonnwater runoff from the site, and indicated that a
stonnwater pollution prevention plan would be completed to obtain an NPDES permit.
The EAW did not identify all of the waters that would receive stormwater runoff from the
site, including Zavoral's Creek, other creeks on the site, and areas wetlands. The project
site is located in the subwatershed of Zavoral Creek, a trout stream that is a tributary to
the St. Croix River. The St. Croix is an Outstanding Resource Value Water in both
Minnesota and Wisconsin, has been identified by the MPCA as an impaired water. Lands
adjacent to the creek and other portions of the subwatershed area contain unique and
high-value resources that have been identified by the Carnelian-Marine Watershed
District and other agencies. The EAW did not quantify the runoff or impacts of runoff on
the quality of the receiving waters to these resources.
The EIS analysis should include the following:
• • Identify all of the surface waters that will receive runoff from the site, and the
quality of those waters.
• Quantify the expected runoff from the site and impacts on the quality of receiving
waters under each of the alternatives, including impacts of pollutants such as
phosphorus, Total Suspended Solids (TSS), heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAH's), volatile organic compounds (VOC's) and temperature
• Identify potential impacts to waters of Special Concern, including the St. Croix
River and Zavoral's Creek.
• Identify the location and quantify the potential impacts of the sedimentation
ponds proposed on the site, including impacts of sediments, nutrients and
temperature to downstream water resources.
• Identify specific measures that will be used to avoid, minimize or mitigate the
impacts of stormwater runoff to the receiving waters.
Item 19—Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions
This element of the EIS should include analysis of impacts to ground water resources
within the project area and area of potential impact. The proposed project area includes
groundwater dependent resources (trout stream, seepage wetlands), and residents in the
area use shallow goundwater resources for domestic wells. The EAW did not identify
these resources or analyze the potential impacts of the project on goundwater-dependent
• resources and wells in the area.
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 10
Ciry of Scandia—March,2009
The EIS should include the following;
• Identify and map the grounclwater reso�u-ces and groundwater-dependent •
resources (springs, wetlands and creeks) within the project area and area of
potential impact .
• Identify and map the directicm of groundwater flow in the unconsolidated and
bedrock aquifers within the project area and area of potential impact.
• Identify and map local potable water su}�plies (residential wells or spring boxes)
within the area of potential i�npact. Tl�e inventory should include geologic logs
and well or spring construction details for the purpose of identifying the aquifers
utilized.
• Model potential impacts to �,noundwater levels and flow directions, and related
groundwater-dependent resources undei- each of the alternatives.
• Identify the potential for contamination and impacts to the quantity and quality of
groundwater resources, groundwater-dependent resources, and private wells that
may result from each of the alternatives--including potential impacts from
pollutants such as phosphorus, PAH's,VOC's and heavy metals.
• Develop a gound water monitoring plan and strategies to avoid, minimize or
mitigate for the potential impacts.
Item 20b and c—Solid Waste, Hazardous Waste, Storage Tanks
Based on the analysis completed for Item 19, this section should identify:
• Identify any potential impacts of toxic waste, hazardous waste or storage tanks at •
the site on groundwater resources, groundwater-dependent resources or local
wells under each of the alternatives. This would include analysis of potential
impacts from the recycled asphalt and conerete materials proposed to be
processed at the site.
• Identify strategies that will be implemented to monitor groundwater resources and
avoid, minimize or mitigate for the potential impacts.
Item 21—Trarfic
The EAW included a traffic analysis for the preferred alternative,but did not evaluate
impacts to recreation traffic on TH 95 and TH 97, including access to the Riverway and
State Parks, pedestrian and bicycle facilities in the project area.
The EIS should include the following:
• Revise the traffic analysis to include all of the alternatives and address safety
issues. Safety issues include sight lines and stopping distances for traffic on TH
95.
� Analyze and evaluate traffic conditions under each of the alternatives, and
potential impacts to recreation traffic in the area.
• Identify current and anticipated bicycle and pedestrian facilities in the project area
and area of potential impacts, and analysis of impacts to these facilities under
each of the scenarios. •
• Identify measures to avoid, reduce or mitigate for the potential impacts.
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 11
City of Scandia March,2009
• If the preferred alternative would sever an existing major route for non-motorized
• traffic, the proposed project needs to provide a reasonable alternative route, or
demonstrate that such a route exists.
Item 23—Stationary Source Air Eniissio�is
The EAW included a general discussion of potential types and sources of air emissions
under the preferred alternative, but did not quantify the emissions or analyze potential
iinpacts on resources within the project area or area of potential impacts.
The EIS should include:
• Identify the area that may be impacted by air emissions from the proposed project
under each of the alternatives.
• Identify and quantify the type, sources and compostion of emissions from all
sources at the site, including fugitive dust sources, under each of the alternatives.
• Quantify the impacts of the air emissions on air quality and water quality,
specifically including impacts to the St. Croix Wild and Scenic Riverway.
• Identify pollution prevention techniques and strategies that will be used to avoid,
minimize and mitigate for the identified impacts.
Item 24—Odors, Noise and Dust
The EAW indicated that the project will operate within air emissions and noise limits
• established by the MPCA. It listed some strategies that will be used to reduce noise and
dust impacts under the preferred alternative. It did not quantify the current noise
conditions in surrounding areas and the noise and dust that will be created by operations
at the site, or the impacts of noise and dust on the surrounding area.
The EIS should include the following:
Noise
• Describe the noise sensitive areas and habitats (residences, parks, recreation
areas such as the St. Croix River, and sensitive wildlife habitats), including
information on the number and types of activities that may be affected.
• Quantify the current ambient noise levels near the site in the identified noise-
sensitive areas: on the St. Croix River(where use by recreationists is
expected); at the National Park Service primitive camp sites along the
Riverway; on adjacent residential properties; on the recreational trails
paralleling TH 95 and TH 97.
• Develop a model that will predict future noise levels and account for site-
specific conditions such as topography, equipment placement, truck traffic,
and operating hours.
• Quantify the extent of the impact (in decibels) in each sensitive area, under
each of the alternatives, including noise from mining, processing and
recycling operations, and truck traffic.
. • Analyze expected noise under each of the alternatives based on noise
standards for each land use.
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 12
City of Scandia—March,2009
• Identify noisc ���itigation strate�ies as needed to avoid, minimize or mitigate
for identified iloise iinpacts. �
Dust
� Quantify ��on-stationary dust that will be generated froin site operations, sucl�
as truck traffic.
• Analyze impacts of dust pollution on surrounding areas and resources,
including the St. Croix River.
• Identify strategies to avoid, reduce or mitigate for identified impacts of dust
generated by operations under each of the alternatives.
Item 26—visual Impacts
The EAW stated that the site will not be visible from the St. Croix River, but did not
provide an analysis to support this claiin. It did not indicate whether equipment or
structures on the site would be visible from the St. Croix Riverway, or other recreational
and scenic areas.
The EIS should include a viewshed analysis that addresses the following:
• Identify the key view areas, through coordination with the National Park Service,
City of Scandia, and others as needed. Key view areas are likely to include
neighboring residences, the St. Croix River, nearby bluff areas in Wisconsin, and
TH 95 and TH 97.
• Develop a model in ArcGIS or other software that models site specific conditions
such as topography, vegetation, and equipment and stockpiles on the site. •
• Accurately represent the views of the site from key view areas through drawings,
photos or other imaging methods that clearly shows the views of the site so that
they may be easily understood by reviewing agencies and the public.
• Complete a written analysis describing the visual impacts of the site.
• Identify the strategies to avoid, minimize or mitigate visual impacts to key
viewing areas.
Item 27—Compatibility with Plans and Land Use Regulations
The EAW focused its analysis on impacts to City of Scandia plans and land use
regulations. The EIS should also analyze the relationship of the proposed project to the
water resource plans of the Carnelian-Marine Watershed District and St. Croix Riverway
Management Plan (2002).
Item 29—Cumulative Impacts
This section should identify the potential cumulative impacts of all alternatives analyzed
for the EIS.
i
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 13
City of Scandia— March,2009
IV. ldentification of Phased oi� Connected Actions
� There are no phased elements or coiu�ected actions associated with tlle project.
V. EIS Schedule
March 23, 2009 Record of Decision and Positive Declaration for EIS for Zavoral Mine
and Reclamation Project published in EQB Monitor
April 7, 2009 Public Scoping Meeting
April 21, 2009 Final Scoping Decision
May-Oct., 2009 Draft EIS preparation
Nov-Dec., 2009 Draft EIS Cominent Period and Public Meeting
Jan.-March, 2010 Final EIS Preparation
April, 2010 Final EIS Adequacy Determination
Vl. Special Studies or Research
Special studies that will be completed for the EIS are described under each Item discussed in
section III above. These will detailed include surface water and ground water analyses; air, noise
and dust analyses; and a detailed visual impacts analysis.
� VII. Governmental Permits or Approvals
The EIS will identify all permits and approvals potentially required for this project. The EIS will
not necessarily contain all information required for a decision on those permits. No permits have
been designated to have all information developed concurrently with the preparation of the EIS.
No permits will require the preparation of a record of decision pursuant to Minnesota Rules
4410.2100, Subpart 6D. Coordination with Carnelian-Marine Watershed District, Washington
County, the Minnesota DNR, MPCA, National Park Service and other permitting and reviewing
agencies was initiated during the EAW process and will occur throughout the EIS process.
•
Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project—Draft Scoping and Decision Document Page 14
City of Scandia--March,2009
�
Slt@
olumbu "��.
Forest Lake Scandia �� �
�
Marine on St. roix
ino Lak s Hugo
entervil e May Twp. •
White Bear Twp. ' !
Dellwood �i
. I, Stillwater Twp.
Grant
White Bear Lake'
� � Mahtomedi �� � �� � �
hite Bear Twp. I ,
I
Stillwater
em;take Birchw odVilla e � � '.. �
Washington County Location Map , �
Zavoral Property Proposed Mining Project �Mile
�
TKDA
/
, . .
____ ___..._._— _
� y �,,: - — '�. . � +;. �+�.�
,
., � ; �
_ r. '
.�:,.r -__� �� .n%i �._�__.—. _.-. .:<•.1 � "� �� �t,HtSAi:U f(7 - _ . -�1�;'�
__z -�- �. "___.'_.— _ - — _ ._ '_
-.-" _'" `
. . ... .. �.: - -� ,
• i .. ... � .� . .. �'; . ;.S � .._,' � ` F- �— i .\.A..il'vl�fl)� 1 .� t �^jl� .
�1 41 �J I+ �'
� �' '� .." . . . �'�`L.� . 1 . ; .: _4 1'�'�Y
-. �` E.` !Jy y.� -�
• g � 4 �✓
�i 1, .��' ' !� r d. ^.� � '�4' �
. � e 4 , ' .� �' C .�. q. 1 y�.. ' .
` v ,' � ,�� � J-"• � � -�� /
�" �W f,.r � : �f� � '�h ,r .�. _ ) .���... � .
' T� _ �. _lc � � i c��� � :T : te �_-f t ,1..' fi'-. � I�•� 7� � �j,y,.,,` /' ' .(r
t"� Su., !i .
`.�. 4 ''� �" !�� �'i� -= � � t:���.�;:1 e i ,// ,- � �.';' L-�---- '�''� t'rJor Genn :
� ��f �ii, Cs i� �:�, � ��.� iZ�.,! `ti1 �y .� "1,,; / �s.
,�� �� f' . _ �� �-��� �� ' � �� � l; � 1;.3�
� � �r.=_ • �I' , ;,, -.�� . � ., ' ; �' ��� '� ' 'r
�{� .1 ' � ; �f � Y au I
`� . L .I �1 _ - ��� P`" �- � �\ ' . �' �'I �' ' �v��� ""1-- � C�" I �t�.,_.
n, I _ - ,t .I � � � .� � 1 t i. yr f
��: 1 �.�. u�-_ . � �+ � ��i'
�1 ��:, � � _i� � �, � \ (/y( 4 � �,F �
,
ih� +": .. .r3 r y'; iw:��, �I�'.x ��,�._. -� 1` k r7 ��I �I.%,G. ,
_ 1 ni ' �e � L� _ �
. _ -,-�s 4.� � f � �;1�.,� �� � .� ':1 1 . .
� �.� ` .. I' ;�.� lj �' , �. ��s�u � ;�
� � � 1�•'`�,' f e '
il,. , ,I I, ' ` `Ftii � , , � . ���="��� � � . ;_ f��s-�"�.: �M}', , �r �,�i`��`�
'i� - � � �1..� d` l . �° . C �- ' . � '�pE \ ' ��,�� F
I a
-�n .. � . �\ �� - � _C� l� ' t _�. � _� i� Y`' � :^-
( 3j � 4- .��'� J rr�1
- � . . _ _ � _ b _, � �_ . �Y� - � �(• \�1
- i , { � �,t� �t (. ��� >� � a � �� �. �,.�����
p �-, 'I fl r ;-'' �,/�` . �: y_ c ��� r,�b-�1� ' 1 ;�,, �,,�,,d E dz �S r'� ,? t i
` > r•�� ,� � +� •
t � � � - � . v i , �' ( � ` � �_� :R�� � �f � �.
- -� - � �1 �y �+
� '�.� � �i�.� ���\ Ili :�._� l.�jy � . ��., r ��'V �� ��.�� ����,A
' <,;� �� � �, . , -�^ � �� t 'hZ� �Ji'�x� �:� . _ •� �..
�V r�� � �; � A ��� D I A '_�� '.. � � 1.�� � "�ti��i � �,� �,.
n _ 1 :,`� �� � ni�.,-...t�, �',
1�,: �<ti ���h<LuN , __} �., � • 'r,.�� I— --- �
- u' � r t a r:�. b;z .,V` � . ' .� ' ; �•_ — �`_'..�: �i�p:�'�''�� � M
� f r 1 1
.1 � ; .�.�, ,���. � ��? 1 ��' � ":i l G�� � � �i� �' �_� ����'_� x 4L
. . !.. � � I ^`��i �� �4 � � ���� �
_ . . ' �. �:_` .,I � 'I �� _ � '! �� , , 1 ' 1 � � ' '� 1
� � i �+r i � �';
� T ' �,.., �
�
,� `1 . z�t
F , f\. � l � � J� i _
' y � �J 1 bT '� --1 r 1�'� L� � � ! � ' 1
� � ,j I �f �' % rS ( a' 1 °y D� � �� 4 � v�i) 3 -: � ' ~•� `J�:A
�� � �. � f � .,q
I�i� ��' -� � � � ' � �
_ _�� , � , � . � _,� �, `. - � "
v\` �15 �''�'� - �z '!1� �,`� ��, r\�x �1s�f ti�i�,.: '� % `1,
/k,
� L`� ` :� ���i J'.l i }f � V��e �,� � ,�Ki� �
� i��. � ,i � ; � �� ,� � , I U G �� _ � �� r�� . , ���` G�.
, �. �� ��. `�'+..' ^�r �:-' T-�-��,'�,�1�e .;�\ Ise,°-f_—.�� ,_ � "�� s/ �'4f'"*�:w'
i �� � � �- � l� , .�'z� ..
� 4 • r ' ( ' �+ / r3
' 'j�;� �� ste.as D�sves�. t ��� ti �rend�s � ��!)07��.1' ' I� �� �,�1� •� � 1� X. �_ � , � � "�.t
� ���- ,�L r. �,- � � � t4 > � 1 �- ..�L �f� t �4-. y�—: � .
S�� � � '_ X� .T.� �� Q�i./.? .: /\ -�_ �', c .� j � ` ' ,.'.
, �",- 1. i v.r �� -;3, � , ,...is- .
V �c, 1} � r,o,'� / � � � .
',��, i �_ 9�+ � y:.�rt f , , ��� t�.-,- ! � ���� l �,���,�- . � .%•'.T• �y
� n '� 4 �� - �� C ,�`�i,.� ?/ '.�.+_. T `z1=�'v` r�< �:.:r� .R'•.'
- �-�,-' ; �� 5 �" r ` - " ' L�--.��1��)) � I .,.� 1 � L-�,�. `
` n�� I
,. t�`� /��l� � ��{��i/��Ir n�a' `�1��e (� �j � �l�tiJ�1 �*1' �� ��� �it .
., -'� . �.-�C�..�� J � � �T . �._. �Tiott��4a � �J _.,�,/'1�����_ �� f (1t+8 ill�}{St"S' I v,
J 6
pk , � � n � 0� ��i ��� ��1. �!� 23� � �� � f �-!� � �.� � ._� \� �t�!'r'(' �� i iV^i�*Ya-. �� .� �,
���� ` � �-� J��� � :L � � r- r V� d��- ,. ��,r;� a �:� �,,� 4 �� � :������
1 -'i ^.U L ��,i
`.�� '/,�.:�,1 \ {�`( _. /�Sa�r� r��..,° . � ' ��, , . o�. U :�c` .1,� � . J `. '�i�'� ���.."
G d • 1� �� �� ��
' - ��. ,���� ;�,-, --. U � � -- ��� �� �;��,� ��1�,.��;� �� � ' �� r � �� �
, ,Z �`_ � � 4•�, a �, :C � , ,,: � A
��3 ,,�J . - .:\ � ��� � ' .� � 1�f '(�.� ; � � ,' i, �
S"� .�
r.. ,�;, ,r .�� r � �
�� O�t �J '� � U \ '.� C�. 1�,; � ��*�' � :
.r iV�_ ('� . .�`�ic , � _ . .} i �v�;., � � _ �i rn�"e�- �'j/ � :',� .
.. .� . �` .��s . a �F , n.�.r
< � 5 �I ����LL;f 1! �r i� .� oi't�
� � � ,� _ � :i � ,� ' ,/ � ;E ��� � �
/� � � ��� � �.�r. �,�
��, ! �: • � � , � ,� a��� > �� �� �
J r o��� � �yf i �..� ��"��'�� -�'e
�t ,r,� ., Ha!l�Lakr �: , r ." . . �( > �., ,J".
���
:'' i T; _' ,'` C.` r - ti . .� .. r>' '
�� � ��� C A� �I� ll I A , � `,��. � ,`t, u 1 . � �: «� ; � � ;
. . ' � � g, 1 rl� \, . � ,r7,fi l � � ny��{. �...� �t � ''.��� . f, �y i ~ ..
- — ,� �%ne y — ��. � � i � — r �� � � � 2�
- i
���t:� � .o�-� �� � '� ��� � rt„�9 � I - '� ; ��� � '��•
USGS Location Map o.5
Zavoral Property Proposed Mining Project "'��e
�
TKDA
Land Use - 2020 Comp Plan ,: ,���."` /� ��,a�
3 .�;.
Agricuiiure (AG) �;�"f �:�`;` '+
.� i�ii S •
Semi-Rural Residential (SR) � �'�': � (�" '•.j�,
t'� �'"�' " � !' � .
Retail Business (RB) � � '�€a ��` � � �� � p
=f. .�/�w•�,J-
>i^�'i��� - 'a
Saint Croix River District �;� , �
�,*r�1��,J¢ ��,,� ' •j
Site � �
� ���`` � '�
��; �` �° +
. { � ,° ; f� �
4„ � �-.
���.^} �� �'`�,,./
r� � �
,, �', �
-, ;� r� I
� ��,�'` - . �l.� ; �S�
,� .�;, �
�` � f ��;, � � ¢
�, , .��.. f
� j �.
f1'�+!M1 .� :..aY'M j`��. -
r b � � � `�
�'�+, _ � ` � �. ',('.�� r�s' •� //' �� a� `a
'' " c �*�'+R, '" �'�;. 1 ,�.' �.
• � �.
F�. .� � y. " ar
- m '�'��,.�,-�... �4. .y��* ����� .+. ' ' �:'�� � �� � l'P
.,�'��i .. ..,�+q, ,w. ... � s'1:'��,,��� r�'/ f'.C���,f �e I �� '..� �
3 �� ,� �
. . , .- � . . � � . . � t'� 4�. . � �� �
.. . ' . .. . .�"��: �
. . ... •.�+' ' � �
. . . . �. - . � � . � �
,. , •. �
� �
, �, . ��� , ` � S �,
�_ , - Y'�• .ri��,} � '�;" '�,� j�.. � /.
._ -. ��"'i�_}�, W"�� � .�i
' � � � �,
�`��.���� `,"� �t. r �a��yy�' { <
"'#;, � '� �M'".�p°' �..}+� . ' . ...� k) �%., a c"�.,�r R #'�,,:
F � s � #` }.� - � �.� �,�tlY� , .. .
� j k, ,. . �� : .,. I . �
z.: �._..�..�s,...�. `'�. �; .�`,"
� ,� � �"��� ;,; �; '" � '�:
";a;:�� ,��� . °,� .»,r ��; , �:� . f� '�y' •
��. ' :-' � ,� >°
,'�'` �,; �
�'� , �,'.� �� r�, ��� ,� � ,� ,'�t� � ,wir >c .
� 'p �,�#'w w� -1 � � � „" . � 'i
� •
.. St+� ' � .-i�r c �� y, i,�� T 'L . `
r t.��`.� r � � M
� � , �.V� � ;,
��.:'�"�,� �" s � ��;'" � ;;' �
y ,r ��: � ti��'� 1•
�,1 , dY
J��. .��� _ . . . .. �. � ��S`��.
� !
� �t
�•' ,#`� �� Y . • _.. . . �? :��',1
�z��� � ;6�°r�`�yP•'.�w��y., � ���d�r�TMn;: •��1�`. . � . �. ���� .r�
^•. .a , . " � , r � 1�•..
� � ,y �
„_.� , .�.,... . . . nU!' . :y�� .
.. .� �����,, .. �/ia�. ... ._._. . � �-«�" �
. �.�� . w �� . . � ��,�� t
t . . .. � . .'�. 1 � ��
� s��"� .. b ���t � N� � ��-�
y i'. �
. � � ... . . . _ � �.
• � � � p �♦
7� f�� Y �'i� � e '�
�" �/ .�+�
. y��� � ;,�� �, ., '.
j .�e' ,rT i'..:s� 4► „�;.- -. .'�+ . . _ ��1 l� �
. . . � . r - - -� � • " � ;:7
Planned Land Use 500 �'''�
Zavoral Property Proposed Mining Project ��Feet
�
TKDA
� }
f�
Scoping Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS April 7, 2009
. . :�..
EIS = Environmental Impact
�,,.
Statement
The purpose of an EIS is to provide
��' w Scoping Meeting information to evaluate proposed projects
Zavoral Project EIS which have the potential for significant
■ environmental effects, to consider
alternatives to the proposed project, and to
explore methods for reducing adverse
environmental effects.
Minneso(a Rules<4102000
■ ■
■p ■ �
EIS Scoping Process EIS Scoping Process
Used before preparation of an EIS to reduce the ■ Proposer submits scoping cost payment.
scope and bulk of an EIS,identify only those ■ Public scoping meeting is held(April 7,2009)
potentially significant issues relevant to the ■ Agencies and public may submit comments.
proposed project,define the form,level of detail,
content,alternatives,time table for preparation,' ■ Final scoping decision must be made within 15
and preparers of the EIS,and to determine the days of ineeting(April 21,2009)
permits fro which information will be developed
concurrently with the EIS.
Minnesota Rules 44f0.2100
■ �Pe
� . .... �� , . '.
Draft Scoping Decision Document II. Project Alternatives
i. Introduction and Purpose i ApplicanYs Preferred Alternative
n. Project Alternatives 2. No-Build Alternative
m. EIS Issues Scale olMagnitude Alternatives
iv Identification of Phased or Connected Actions s No Asphalt and Concrete Recycling
(none) a. Evaluate Impacts of Washing
v EIS Schedule s Impacts and Seasonal Scheduling of
vi. Special Studies or Research Processing
vn. Governmental Permits or Approvals s Revised Reclamation Schedule
1
Scoping Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS April 7, 2009
. .
� ,�
III. EIS Issues Topics to be included in EIS:
■ EAW Items Screened and Removed from ■ Item 9—Land Use/Potential Environmental
Fufther Review Hazards/Reclamation Plan
❑Water surface use(Item 15)-impacts to boating and ■ Item 10—Cover Types
recreational use • Item 11—including lla—Fish,Wildli/e,and Ecologically-
o Water quality:wastewaters(Item 18�-impacts to Sensitive Resources and Item 11b—Threatened and
municipal or on-site sewage treatment systems Endangered Species
❑Vehicle-related air emissions(Item 22) ■ Item 12—Physical Impacts on Water Resources
❑Archaeological,historical or architectural resources ■ Item 13—Water Use
(Item 25a) ■ Item 14—Water-Related Land Use Management
❑Prime or unique farmlands(Item 25b) Districts
❑Impact on infrastructure and public services(Item 28) ■ Item 16—Erosion and Sedimentation
■ , ■
r ■e
Topics to be included in EIS: EIS Schedule
March 23,2009 Record of Decision and Positive
■ Item 17—Surface Water Quality and Quantity Declaration for EIS for Zavoral Mine
■ Item 19—Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions and Reclamation Project published in
■ Item 20b and c—Solid Waste,Hazardous Waste, EQB Monitor
Storage Tanks April 7,2009 Public Scoping Meeting
■ Item 21—Tra�c April 21,2009 Final Scoping Decision
■ Item 23—Stationary Source Air Emissions '
■ Item 24—Odors,Noise and Dust May-Oct.,2009 Draft EIS preparation
■ Item 2f�Visual Impacts Nov-Dec.,2009 Draft EIS Comment Period and Public
■ Item 27—Compatibility with Plans and Land Use Meeting
Regulations Jan.-March,2010 Final EIS Preparation
■ Item 29—Cumulative Impacts April,2010 Final EIS Adequacy Determination
� � �.
� �
Next Steps: Amendments to Scoping Decision
■ Receive public comment on draft scoping ■ Scoping decision may be amended
decision document(April 7)
■ Council approval of final scoping decision(April ■ Proposer must agree, unleSs:
21) ❑substantial changes are made in project that
■ Proposer pays not less than half EIS cost to City affect the potential environmental effects
■ Publish EIS preparation notice and summary of
scoping decision ❑substantial new information significantly
■ Consultant selection affects potential effects of the project or the
■ Preparation of EIS availability of prudent and feasible
alternatives.
Minnesofa Rules 44102100 Subp 8
2
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Scoping Process
Zavoral Property Mining and Reclamation Project
Scandia, Minnesota
Written Comments Received through 4:00 p.m., Tuesday, April 7, 2009
� • � . f . ' -�
1. Gregory Page 4/08/09 (e-mail)
a e riverfrontco oration.com
2. St. Croix River Association and the St. Croix Scenic 2/6/09 - 2/7/09 (e-mail)
Coalition
3. Georgiana Anderson 4/7/09 (e-mail)
20453 Quinnell Ave. N., Scandia
4. Pamela Arnold & Anr� Bancroft 4/7/09 (e-mail)
16560 220'h St. N., Scandia
1
Page 1 of 1 '
Anne Huriburt �
From: Gregory Page [page@riverfrontcorporation.com]
Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 4:12 PM
To: Anne Hurlburt
Cc: azconley@comcast.net
Subject: Zavoral &Tiller Mining and Reclamation Proposal EIS
Attachments: EIS concerns.doc
Date: April 6, 2009
To: Anne Hurlburt, Administrator
City of Scandia
From: Gregory Page
Re: Zavoral/Tiller Mining and Reclamation Project EIS
I have voiced two main concerns about the Zavoral/Tiller Mining and Reclamation Project: sound impacts and potential
water quality and/or water quantity impacts. As the process moves into EIS, I want to clarify my concerns on those two
points.
Sound
Gravel mining, cleaning, and transport–as well as the proposed concrete and asphalt crushing, are very noisy(and dusty)
activities. I know. 1 own the property immediately north of the gravel pit and was there when Barton was still operating the
pit.
Prior to the February 3 City Council/Planning Commission Meeting, Mr. Zavoral recognized my concern and agreed to
foresting the northern 4 acres of the site in a manner suitable to reducing the sound(and dust) from mining operations as
much as possible, as a precondition to beginning mining - so that the plants and trees would grow in and up as mining
moved more towards my property(homestead) over the next decade or so. I would like to have this stipulated in the
Alternative#1—Applicant's Preferred Alternative section, as well as in Alternative technologies, Alternative designs or
layouts, and Modified scale or magnitude sections, in appropriate language, such as:
"Tiller Corporation will plant appropriate native trees and shrubs on the northern four acres of the site (which are not
planned for minin�, marked on fzgu��e 2, during the initial phase of mining operations, suitable to mitigati»g minirrg
operation noise and dust to the greatest extent possible. Tiller Co�poration shall coordinate and consult with the
Minnesota DNR, National Park Service, Ciry of Scandia, and otl�ers to develop the plan.
Water Quality and Water Ouantity
The trout stream,noted as"Zavorals' Stream" in documents(I call the stream Minniboha, an Ojibwa word far gully or
ravine caused by water),actually has its beginnings on my property. Two springs on my property, about 100 or so feet
from the proposed mining site's northern property line are the source of the stream's year `round flow, flowing through the
coldest winter and driest summer. I am deeply concerned over the potential of something happening to the springs and
steam –either water quality degradation from chemicals or sedimentation seeping through the soil, and/or loss of year
`round flow from the water table being disturbed. The water from the spring is now good enough to drink(tested 4 years
ago) My historical research finds the spring/stream was called Crystal Spring by early settlers and it was a drinking water
source for early residents in the area. I would like to make sure that hydrologists thoroughly investigate any and all
potential issues relating to proposed mining operations and these springs and trout stream. They can contact me for a site
visit.
Thank you, the Planning Commission and City Council for your consideration.
Copy:
Jim Zavoral azconley@comcast.net
4/6/2009
. �
COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT SCOPING AND DECISION DOCUMENT FOR
THE TILLER/ZAVORAL PROPERTY MINING AND RECLAMATTON PROJECT—
APRIL 6, 2009
Presented jointly by the St. Croix River Association and the St. Croix Scenic
Coalition.
The St. Croix River Association and the St. Croix Scenic Coalition
submit the following recommendations for the scope of the
Environmental Impact Statement that the City of Scandia has
ordered be prepared for the Tiller/Zavoral mining proposal. This
builds on the issues we raised in our January 28, 2009 letter to the
City addressing the EAW.
Statutory guidance for the EIS is found within Minnesota Statutes
section 116D.04, subdivision 2a:
The environmental impact statement shall be an analytical
rather than an encyclopedic document which describes the
proposed action in detail, analyzes its significant
environmental impacts, discusses appropriate alternatives
to the proposed action and their impacts, and explores
methods by which adverse environmental impacts of an
action could be mitigated. The environmental impact
statement shall also analyze those economic, employment
and sociological effects that cannot be avoided should the
action be implemented.
We have reviewed the Draft Scoping and Decision Document put
forward by the city on its web site. We find it thorough and
responsive to the above statutory guidelines, with regard to the EIS
Issues put forward in section III of the draft. We have nothing to
add in those areas.
We do see opportunities for improvement in the Alternatives
discussion in section II of the scoping draft.
The EAW pictured an operation running from April through
November, 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., Monday through Friday, for perhaps
ten years. At the hearing on the EAW, Tiller described a periodic
operation, with the processing equipment running for a time, then
being taken away for a time, then coming back. The EIS needs to
pin all this down. What quantity of material does Tiller envisage
removing from the pit over its operational lifetime? How many days
of excavating and processing does it take to generate that much
material? How many days does it take to haul that much material
away? Does Tiller expect to operate the facility until the target
amount of material has been excavated, processed, and hauled
away, however many years that may take? How did Tiller come up
with the ten year lifetime projection? What about an alternative that
gets Tiller in and out of there in five years, processing in April/May
and October/November only�, Tuesdays through Thursdays, 9 a.m.
to 4 p.m. In short, Alternative #5 should explore all the options for
limitations on when the mine would (1) excavate, (2) process, and
(3) ship out.
The scoping document's Alternative #3 re reprocessing trucked-in
materials, is not an independent alternative. Not allowing such
activity, can go with any other alternative operating scenarios
discussed.
The discussion of the no-build alternative should be expanded
beyond the do nothing scenario. What would it cost to restore the
existing pit? What if it is not restored, but just left alone? Would the
city like to have it as a park? Will the county buy a conservation
easement on the area as it presently exists, and if yes would the
county require the owner to undertake restoration. Would removal
of only the present stockpiled material provide sufficient funds for
restoration of the area?
The description of the project as proposed, is weak on restoration.
What slopes will the sides of the pit be graded to? How much dirt
will be trucked in to provide what thickness of base for vegetative
planting? Where will that dirt come from and what will be the impact
on the source(s) from which it is removed? What grasses will be
used? What continuing oversight will be provided to assure that the
revegetation takes proper hold?
The owner talks of placing a conservation easement on the
restored area. What would be the terms of the easement? Does
the owner intend to donate the easement , or does he expect fair
market value, or what?
The statute cited at the beginning of these comments asks for
analysis in the EIS of the "economic, employment and sociological
effects that cannot be avoided should the action be implemented".
When given a choice of where to go and where to spend their
money, visitors will not return to places that have permitted
significant erosion of community character or significant damage to
the environment. It would be far better to capture the tourism
potential in Scandia by making the Zavoral parcel into a public park
rather than to erode tourism income by permitting a gravel pit
that will help to move tourists to enter the St. Croix valley on
Highway 8 instead of Highway 97.
The St. Croix Scenic Byway, which follows along Highway 95
through Scandia, was designated by the State of Minnesota in 2004.
The purpose of the scenic byway designation is to afford scenic
protection to the highway route and to promote local economic
benefits by promoting byway communities as important destinations
for the traveling public. The Zavoral proposal conflicts with the
purpose of the scenic byway and may cause irreparable economic
impacts to the local economy. Protecting the Highway 95 scenic
byway corridor from unnecessary expansion of gravel mining and
truck traffic serves a number of important environmental and
economic purposes. A gravel pit in this location would conflict with
Scandia's environmental protection goals. It could not escape notice
of residents and tourists that the City is the only entity that could
have permitted such an environmental blunder if Highway 97 is
permitted to run headlong into an unscreened driveway leading to a
gravel pit. Permitting this proposed industrial use with its visual
eyesore and increased truck traffic in immediate proximity to a
State-designated scenic byway and National Scenic Riverway would
be seen by tourists and residents as a real local failure to correctly
assess the high potential for significant environmental impacts.
Thank you for inviting comments on the draft scoping document.
Randy Ferrin, president
St. Croix River Association
Bill Neuman, president
St. Croix Scenic Coalition
� Page 1 of 1
Anne Hurlburt �
From: georgiana anderson [simba@backpack.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 10:59 AM
To: Anne Hurlburt
Subject: Re: EIS Scoping Meeting for Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project
The recent,very recent,information in the Startribune about the deteriorating state of the St. Croix below
Stillwater,should be a heads up. We need to be sure we do not follow the threat, from the area South of
Stillwater, into degradation. We need to be sure our river stays clear of run off from any source. The gravel pit
plan is going to require over sight systems not yet divulged. I am not confident that Tiller's ,or anybody's for that
matter,ability to protect the river absolutely does not exist. This is too important to experiment with.
Georgiana Anderson
20453 Quinnell Ave
Scandia,Mn
On Apr 3, 2009, at 9:54 AM, Anne Hurlburt wrote:
You are receiving this message because you either submitted comments on the EAW(Environmental
Assessment Worksheet)for the Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project or requested to be notified of
meetings and/or city actions regarding this proposed project.
The Scandia Planning Commission and City Council will hold a public meeting on Tuesday, April 7, 2009 at
7:30 p.m. at the Scandia Community Center, 14727 209th St. N, Scandia, MN 55073. The purpose of the
meeting is to receive comments on the proposed scope of the EIS (Environmental Impact Statement)for the
project.
Materials related to this project, including a draft�scoping decision document, are available for review at the
City of Scandia Office, 14727 209th St. N., during office hours (9:00 a.m. to Noon and 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.,
Monday through Friday)and on the City's website(www.ci.scandia.mn.us) . The public is invited to attend
the meeting to offer comment on the scope of the EIS. Written comments will also be accepted.
After the public scoping meeting, a final scoping decision document will be prepared. The City Council is
expected to approve the final scoping decision at its April 21, 2009 meeting.
Written comments should be directed to my attention. Please feel free to contact me with any questions.
Anne Hurlburt, Administrator
City of Scandia
14727 209th Street North
Scandia, Minnesota 55073
651 433-2274
Fax: 651 433-5112
Cel I: 651 746-4080
a.hurlburt anci.scandia.mn.us
http://ci.scandia.mn.us
4/7/2009
� y
7 April, 200�
Anne Hurlburt, Administrator
City of Scandia
14727 209th Street North Scandia, Minnesota 55073
651433-2274 Fax: 651433-5112 Cell: 651 746-4080
a.hurlburt@ci.scandia.mn.us
http://ci.scandia.mn.us
To Scandia Council, and Administrators:
Thank you for another opportunity to contribute to the Zavoral Mine planning process.
The Scandia Strategic Plan, in our view, is a thoughtful and balanced vision for Scandia...
we are very prideful to be represented by a thoughtful and hardworking group of staff and
volunteer commissioners. The decision to require an EIS as part of the planning of the Zavoral
Quarry Mine is another indication of both the conservation-oriented value that Scandia brings to
all discussions regarding development, but also reveals a consciousness that we do represent
larger interests. The impact of the Zavoral Mine on the St. Croix River is at the center of the EIS,
as it should be. We predict that the outcomes of the EIS will be comprehensive, and systemic,
and it may inform all property owners along the river about our role in the larger life
of the river's social and ecological communities.
Among the many issues that concern us, most have been included in the Scoping outline,
is the issue of economic impact of the mine located at a juncture that we now call The Gateway
to Scandia (referring the Strategic Plan). Hwys 97 and 95 are main arteries for north and
southerly traffic, as well as connections to 35W/35E at Forest Lake; the impact of the proposed
mine should be considered as potentially beneficial to, or harmful to, many economic interests
within a 22 mile radius. The bridges to Wisconsin along 95(Stillwater, Osceola, Taylors/St Croix
Falls) might provide geographic references that show traffic intersections effecting commercial,
tourist, as well as residential traffic. As we propose to envision Scandia as a rural and agricultural
community mixed with low impact residential development, imagine that vision in the context
of a working mine, producing 120 truckloads (to and from) per day. If one considers the future
development of the Scandia vision, the attraction of businesses and families to the
rural/agricultural landscape, and in proximity to a rare Natural and Scenic River, how does a mine
—that both greets visitors to Scandia at its geographic entrance, as well as frustrates visitors
as they try to travel to other destinations along the river—signify our commitment?
Among the consequences that a Scoping plan could consider are the economic interests of
existing and future endeavors among the many surrounding communities. Many of these are
small scale and integrated with the purpose and value of rural/agricultural/scenic river. Many
employ local people, including high school kids. Many support families and individuals who are
part of a potentially thriving Scandia, and consistent with the Scandia Brand identity that the
Strategic Plan proposes. Among these are cafes and shops that attract visitors and sustain local
residents; canoe and bike rental; retreat and residency programs (Scientific Research Station,
Dunroven, Wilder Forest, Warner Nature Center, WII O'Brien Park, Wild Mt; CSAs here and in
Wisconsin; Prairie Restoration, Landscape Alternatives...), hiking and camping trails/areas,
bed & breakfasts, small scale commercial businesses, including landscaping, farm/ag sales,
school programs, ski slopes, schools and school programs. Would a mine at the intersection
of 95/97 present an economically beneficial addition to the economies of local businesses?
How will traffic congestion encourage residential development in concord with the Strategic Plan?
How will we as a community present ourselves as the Scandia of our vision?
How will the future economic interests of others be impacted by the mine?That is a question
to be considered. We live just a stone's throw north of the proposed mine. We have been
developing our plan for a sustainable life style here for the last 20 years. The thought of hours
of mining noise, and the night sky littered with security lights, is almost surreal to contemplate.
How will a gravel pit effect property values in the vicinity? Our fear is that the waters of Zavoral
creek will be polluted with sediment, and toxins... that the zoning rules by which residences along
the river abide might be waved for a mining operation that offers a lucrative future for a few, and
an unknown future for the land it excavates. Our well water shares its source with the quarry, we
all share our water with the River. It is hard to fathom that our ability to dream a healthy,
sustainable future—in harmony with the river, and with the Scandia community—might be curtailed
by a gravel mine. The Scoping Plan should include a model for local economic viability with and
without a mine at the Zavoral location, including future plans, consistent with the strategic
comprehensive plan.
Once again, thank you.
Pamela Arnold, Ann Bancroft
16560 220'h Street North Scandia
TILLER Tiller Corporation
nnd its oprratirig dinisions
�����A���� E3arton Sand&Gravcl Co.
Commercial Asphalt Co.
Corporate Office:
(3arton Enterprises,[nc.
PO[3ox 1980
7200 Hemicxk I.ane,Stiite 200 ge�ieraL(763)425-4191
facsimile:(763)425-7]53
Maple Grove,Minnesota 55311 web: �vww.tillercorp.com
April 7, 2009
Anne Hurlbert,Administrator
City of Scandia
14727 209�h St. North
Scandia, MN 55073
Re: Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project Scoping Document Decision
Dear Ms. Hurlbert:
Tiller Corporation has reviewed the Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project Draft Scoping
Decision Document April,2009 (Draft SDD),the written comments on the Draft SDD received
yesterday and today and eariier comments received at previous meetings. We are evaluating
the effect of these items on the Project and analyzing our ability to redefine the Project in an
effort to address concerns while maintaining the Project viability.
As previously discussed we have agreed to two revisions of the Project; 1)We have dropped
the plan to accommodate contractor requests for asphalt and concrete recycling; and 2) We are
revising the restoration and phasing plan to include restoration of the area within the St Croix
Riverway and scenic easement areas during the first years of operation.
As we continue to receive comments,other aspects of the Project will be evaluated and
analyzed to determine their feasibility and effects on the viability of the Project. Our main goal
is to make certain the entire process and resulting EIS are meaningful and addressing concerns
that can be mitigated through redefining the Project is a strategy we are employing. After
receiving additional comments from the Apri17, 2009 public meeting,there may be a further
redefining of the Project.
An April 10,2009 deadline for comments has been suggested for the Draft SDD. In order to
adequately evaluate,analyze and possibly further redefine the Project after the public meeting,
Tiller will likely not be able to submit comments until April 16, 2009.
Your consideration is appreciated. Please contact me if you have any questions. I may be
reached at(763) 425-4191.
Respectfully,
Tiller Corporation
i�j��.��`� �r
� __. „�q'��
'�l
Michael Caron
Director of Land Use Affairs
This Company is an Equal Opportunity Employer