Resolution No

Transcription

1 Resolution No RESOLUTION DECLARING THAT PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT IS NOT NEEDED FOR THE PROPOSED EXPANSION OF CLEARWATER ROAD FROM CLEARWATER ROAD/HEATHERWOOD ROAD TO 60TH STREET SOUTH IN THE I94 BUSINESS PARK WHEREAS, the City of St. Cloud on November 28, 2016 authorized the distribution of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed expansion of Clearwater Road from Clearwater Road/Heatherwood Road to 60th Street South in the I94 Business Park; and, WHEREAS, a press release was issued on December 1, 2016 inviting public comment regarding the EAW; and WHEREAS, notice of the EAW comment period was published in the EQB Monitor on December 12, 2016; and WHEREAS, upon completion of the 30 day review and comment period on January 11, 2017 responses had been received from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and Minnesota Historical Society (attached as Exhibit A); and WHEREAS, the City of St. Cloud finds (attached as Exhibit B) that sufficient information exists regarding potential environmental impacts of the project and that those issues will be mitigated and/or controlled through regulatory permits and actions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF ST. CLOUD, MINNESOTA THAT: 1. The Record of Decision for the proposed Clearwater Road expansion project is hereby accepted and approved. 2. An Environmental Impact Statement is not required for the proposed Clearwater Road expansion project as defined in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. ADOPTED this 13th day of February, 2017.

2

3

4 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological and Water Resource 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN January 11, 2017 Transmitted Electronically Matt Glaesman Community Development Director City of St. Cloud nd Street South St. Cloud, MN Re: Clearwater Road Extension EAW Dear Matt Glaesman, The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Clearwater Road Extension. The proposed road extension exists within the Scenic River District of the Mississippi River and bisects an area designated as having moderate biodiversity significance by the Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) and as a Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Area (RSEA) of High rank. The area has also been identified as an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) with High Priority by the City of St. Cloud. The DNR has concerns regarding the impacts this road extension will have on the quality habitat within this area, both due to direct and indirect impacts as a result of this project. We recommend the City consider an additional alternative route along the already disturbed corridor, extending southeast along the existing Franklin Road sewer line to 4 th Avenue South. General Comments: Figures The proposed Trail is not depicted on the figures, even though it is noted on the legend of each map (Figures 2, 3, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17). For review purposes, it would be helpful if Figures 9 and 16 included the environmental constraints and Parks and Open Space areas that are noted on Figure 7. Please provide a map showing the alternative routes considered, as noted in Table 8. This map should also display relevant ecological layers noted above. Figure 7 incorrectly shows the proposed Clearwater Road Extension Project alignment as connecting with Glenn Carlson Drive, instead of the intended connection with 8 th Avenue South as shown in the other figures and discussed in the EAW. Bridge Construction: Please provide explanation on why the new bridge will be placed at a different location, expanding the cleared corridor of the area. Removal of the existing bridge and construction of the new bridge would require a Public Waters Permit through DNR. The proposed road alignment moves the bridge into the floodway zone of the Mississippi River and Johnson Creek, therefore a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106

5 hydraulic study will be required for the new bridge to show that no increase in flood stages will occur (upstream or down) from the placement of the bridge; the stage increase must be certified to be 0.00 feet. Walleye, northern pike, trout, and smallmouth bass in seasonal migration use this portion of Johnson Creek for spawning and feeding. The Mississippi River downstream of this site supports a trophy fishery for smallmouth bass, walleye, northern pike, muskellunge, and channel catfish, as well as a diverse mussel community. In addition, redhorse and several other non-game fish species use tributary streams for spawning. These species depend on clean gravels, cobbles and sands to survive. Designated trout streams are located approximately 5 miles upstream of the proposed Clearwater Road Extension Project bridge crossing. The proposed expansion of Clearwater Road will allow surface runoff to cause increased erosion and sediment loads to Johnson Creek and the Mississippi River, impacting aquatic resources within these systems. Specific Comments: Page 3. Please explain the difference in total project acreage noted in Tables 1 (13. 2 acres) and 2 (20.6 acres). Please reconsider the response to question 6e. Please provide an answer to Question 6f. Page 5. 9a. iii. As noted in the EAW, this area is designated as Scenic by the Minnesota Wild and Scenic Rivers Program, and is located within an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) as defined by the City of St. Cloud s Land Development Code. Portions of the project area are designated as FEMA 100- year floodplain. Provided the classifications given to this area, the DNR feels that the area this road bisects warrants conservation. Limiting the proposed three lane road to two lanes in the area that contains the ESA (as the City of Saint Cloud staff had mentioned to DNR staff in person on December 22, 2016) is preferred by the DNR in order to limit impacts on the existing quality habitat present. Furthermore, with no need for a three lane road through an area with no planned adjacent businesses to access, a two lane road in these sections would be sufficient and should be noted in the EAW. Pages 5 and 6. 9b. while the proposed Clearwater Road Extension Project may be compatible with zoning and future land uses identified in the area, it is incompatible with conserving the existing ESA without additional protections to ensure they are not degraded into the future. Goals of the City s Environmentally Sensitive Areas Ordinance are to provide and encourage measures of protection to those properties identified as Environmentally Sensitive Areas and to provide for equitable economic return in consideration of protection and preservation of ESA. Devolpment within these areas would undermine the intent of this ordinance. Further description of the purpose of the City s ESA ordinance in relation to the area impacted by this road extension should be noted in the EAW. Further discussion on why this area would not be subject to the ESA designation as a result of going through Minnesota Environmental Review should also be included. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106

6 St. Cloud Environmentally Sensitive Areas Ordinance web links references can be found at the following locations: EwjAxrq3ranRAhWEyoMKHQ8ND2kQFgglMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Ffiles.dnr.state.mn.us%2Fwaters%2 Fwsrivers%2FWorkshop2007_ _St%2520CloudNRI_ESA_presentation.ppt&usg=AFQjCNEVQ3rxwrckEvUnC0X0tZiwTcPwNw EwjAxrq3ranRAhWEyoMKHQ8ND2kQFgg1MAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ci.stcloud.mn.us%2FDocu mentcenter%2fview%2f4965&usg=afqjcngqllbxuihwn5iu3yp1apbjhk19la Page 10.11b.ii. We recommend that any erosion control materials be limited to wildlife friendly products (i.e. made of bio-degradable, natural fibers, flexible (not welded) netting with rectangular (not square) mesh. See Wildlife Friendly Erosion Control attachment. Revegetation of disturbed soils should include native mixes in areas that are not proposed for mowed turf grass. Please utilize the native recommendations developed by BWSR or MnDOT in the Vegetation Establishment Recommendations dated November 13, 2015: Page b. iv. DNR is pleased to see the wildlife passage bench included in the proposed bridge crossing. For the safety of motorists and deer and other wildlife, we recommend installing a wildlife fence (10' woven wire deer exclusion fence) along both sides of the road corridor to keep deer and other wildlife from crossing the proposed road. Blanding s Turtles can be kept off of the road (where they are likely to be struck by vehicles and killed) by installing a half pipe barrier that directs the movement of the turtles to the wildlife passage bench. We recommend using this approach in this situation to mitigate Blanding s turtle impacts. If the half pipe barrier does not direct turtles to the wildlife passage bench they will simply attempt to cross the road at the end of the barrier. A similar barrier has been used in Sauk Rapids along the Summit Ave. extension located at: , ( We recommend installing curb and gutters that allow Blanding s Turtles and other reptiles and small mammals to more easily exit the roadway once they have entered it. Traditional curbs may be too tall and steep to climb, and gutters with side box inlets create a hole for these small animals to potentially fall into. Mountable curbs have been used along Goose Lake Road/Zachary Lane North in Champlin, MN. (Viewing Google Maps street view at , ( will provide a visual example of this type of curb design). Gutters without the side box inlet can allow animals a better chanced to move past the storm sewer as they seek a safe way off the road (see Curb Design and Small Animals attachment). Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106

7 For assistance on designing wildlife passages, please contact Nicholas Snavely, Assistant Area Wildlife Manager at or ) Page 17. We encourage any tree surveys be conducted as early as feasible, rather than waiting until the final design of the project. This would ensure that the alignment of the proposed project is designed in an effort to minimize impacts to high quality habitat and state protected species, particularly the presence or absence of butternut (Juglans cinerea), a state-listed endangered tree. Minnesota s endangered species law (Minnesota Statutes, section ) and associated rules (Minnesota Rules, part to and 6134) prohibit the taking of threatened or endangered species without a permit. Page 29. Section 18c. Table 8. Incidental wetlands, such as the stormwater ponds located along the road extension between the St. Augusta Landfill and the Mississippi River would not require replacement. This information should be considered when analyzing potential road alignment. In addition to Table 8, which shows alternative routes considered for the road extension, a map displaying these routes should be included. This map should also display relevant ecological areas, such as St. Cloud s Environmental Sensitive Area, and the areas identified by DNR as moderate biodiversity significance and as a Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Area. Particularly, the DNR would like to see alternative routes east of Johnson Creek that avoid/minimize impacts to the neighboring high quality habitat. DNR suggests an additional route for consideration include extending the road east of the bridge crossing straight along the existing sewer line along Franklin Road until it reaches 4 th Avenue South. This scenario would minimize impacts to the habitat compared to the proposed route, which connects to 8 th Avenue South. Page We disagree with the assessment that there will be no cumulative impacts as a result of this project. The very nature of the Clearwater Road expansion is to allow future development to occur along the road. This includes development within the area that the Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) has identified as a Site of Moderate Biodiversity Significance (Figure 9). Sites of Biodiversity Significance have varying levels of native biodiversity and are ranked based on the relative significance of this biodiversity at a statewide level. Sites ranked as Moderate contain occurrences of rare species and/or moderately disturbed native plant communities, and/or landscapes that have a strong potential for recovery. This particular Site is also a Central Region Regionally Significant Ecological Area (RSEA; that is ranked High. This area has also been identified as an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) by the City of St. Cloud. While Figure 7 and Section 19 note an area reserved for Parks and Open Space, this area is mostly limited to the north side of the proposed Clearwater Road Extension Project. Areas that have been identified by the DNR as quality habitat will be bisected and fragmented by this road extension and as noted by future zoning, eventually developed. To avoid cumulative impacts, the DNR recommends that the City consider expanding the areas zoned as Parks and Open Space shown on Figure 7, to include areas identified by the City as Environmentally Sensitive Areas and by the DNR as quality habitat (MBS Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106

8 and RSEA sites). The establishment of a city park within the boundaries of the area identified as quality habitat by the DNR may be another option to conserve this area. The MN DNR would like to ensure that the area bisected by this proposed Clearwater Road Extension has some designation placed on it to ensure that it remains in its natural state to conserve these few remaining natural features in St. Cloud into perpetuity, as intended in the previously passed St. Cloud's Environmentally Sensitive Areas Ordinance. Thank you for the consideration of our comments. Please contact me with any questions at keith.parker@state.mn.us or Sincerely, Keith Parker, Regional Director Enc. Wildlife Friendly Erosion Control Curb Design and Small Animals CC: Lisa Joyal, Endangered Species Review Coordinator Nicholas Snavely, Assistant Area Wildlife Manager Nicola Blake-Bradley, Area Hydrologist Rebecca Horton, Region Environmental Assessment Ecologist Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Ecological and Water Resources 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, MN 55106

9 Curb Design and Small Animals Traditional curb and gutter inadvertently directs small mammals and reptiles into the storm sewer. Animals trying to leave the road are blocked by the steepness and height of the curb and they will travel parallel to it until they find an exit. The storm sewer is the exit they literally fall into, often with fatal consequences. A design without the side box inlet does give the animals a better chance of moving past the storm sewer to seek a safe way off the road. Coincidentally, this design is increasingly being utilized due to reduced installation and maintenance costs. A sloped curb allows small animals to leave the road surface at any point. Yet it still provides for the collection and treatment of stormwater. If this modification to the entire curb system is not possible, a compromise is install sections of the curb on either side of the storm water drain for several feet will allow an area for animals to exit. Priority areas for mountable curbs are those with nearby wetlands. (Specify Type D or Type S curb in plans) In typical rural sections, trapping of animals on road surfaces is not an issue. Yet the movement onto the road surface from adjacent areas is a continuing concern. In areas of known concentrations, a wildlife barrier may be something to consider to reduce the likelihood of vehicleanimal collisions. ( Best Practices for Meeting DNR GP (version 4, October 2014) Chapter 1, Page 24

10 Wildlife-friendly Erosion Control Wildlife entanglement in, and death from, plastic netting and other man-made plastic materials has been documented in birds (Johnson, 1990; Fuller-Perrine and Tobin, 1993), fish (Johnson, 1990), mammals (Derraik, 2002), and reptiles (Barton and Kinkead, 2005; Kapfer and Paloski, 2011). Unfortunately, the use of these materials for erosion control continues in many cases, often without consideration for wildlife impact. This plastic netting is frequently used for erosion control during construction and landscape projects and can negatively impact terrestrial and aquatic wildlife populations as well as snag in maintenance machinery, resulting in costly repairs and delays. However, erosion-control materials that are wildlife friendly do exist and are sold by several large companies. Below are a few key considerations before starting a project. Know Your Options Remember to consult with local natural resource agencies (DNR, USFWS, etc.) before starting a project. They can help you identify sensitive areas and rare species. When erosion control is necessary, select products with biodegradable netting (natural fiber, biodegradable polyesters, etc.). DO NOT use products that require UV-light to biodegrade (also called photodegradable ) as they do not biodegrade properly when shaded by vegetation. Use netting with rectangular-shaped mesh (not square mesh). Use netting with flexible (non-welded) mesh. Know the Landscape It is especially important to use wildlife-friendly erosion control around: o o o Areas with threatened or endangered species. Wetlands, rivers, lakes, and other watercourses. Habitat-transition zones (prairie woodland edges, rocky outcrop woodland edges, steep rocky slopes, etc.). Use erosion mesh wisely; not all areas with disturbed ground necessitate its use. Do not use plastic mesh unless it is specifically required. Other erosion-control options exist (open weave textile (OWT), rolled erosion control products (RECPs) with woven, natural fiber netting). WFEC Fact-sheet MN DNR 2013 (acc.)

11 Protect Wildlife Avoid photodegradable erosion-control materials where possible. Use only biodegradable materials (typically made from natural fibers), preferably those that will biodegrade under a variety of conditions. The cost of erosion-control material that is wildlife friendly is often comparable to conventional plastic netting. Literature Referenced Barton, C. and K. Kinkead Do erosion control and snakes mesh? Soil and Water Conservation Society 60:33A-35A. Derraik, J.G.B The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review. Marine Pollution Bulletin 44: Fuller-Perrine, L.D., and M.E. Tobin A method for applying and removing bird-exclusion netting in commercial vineyards. Wildlife Society Bulletin 21: Johnson, S.W Distribution, abundance, and source of entanglement debris and other plastics on Alaskan beaches, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Marine Debris Kapfer, J.M., and R.A. Paloski On the threat to snakes of mesh deployed for erosion control and wildlife exclusion. Herpetological Conservation and Biology 6:1-9. WFEC Fact-sheet MN DNR 2013 (acc.)

12 EXHIBIT A COMMENTS RECEIVED Three agencies submitted written comments on the EAW which were dated or received prior to the comment period deadline. Copies of these timely comment letters are included at the end of this document. The following table lists the comment letters received in chronological order. Comment Letters Received No. Comment Letter Received From Signatory Abbreviation Date 1. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Karen Kromar MPCA January 11, Minnesota Historical Society Sarah J. Beimers MHS January 11, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Keith Parker DNR January 11, 2017

13 EXHIBIT B RESPONSE TO COMMENTS Commenting Agency MPCA Comment: MPCA commented that it is the responsibility of the Project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. Response: The City of St. Cloud acknowledges the future permitting requirement. Commenting Agency MHS Comment: MHS recommended that a qualified archaeologist conduct investigations to determine if the project could adversely impact archaeological resources. Response: The City of St. Cloud agrees to complete a Phase I archaeological survey prior to preparation of construction drawings and project authorization. Commenting Agency - DNR Comment: DNR have made comments which identify additional information for inclusion or revision of inaccuracies in the EAW (see below). Response: The document has been revised in response to these comments. The proposed Trail is not depicted on the figures, even though it is noted on the legend of each map (Figures 2, 3, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17). For review purposes, it would be helpful if Figures 9 and 16 included the environmental constraints and Parks and Open Space areas that are noted on Figure 7. Please provide a map showing the alternative routes considered, as noted in Table 8. This map should also display relevant ecological layers noted above. See Figure 18. Figure 7 incorrectly shows the proposed Clearwater Road Extension Project alignment as connecting with Glenn Carlson Drive, instead of the intended connection with 8th Avenue South as shown in the other figures and discussed in the EAW. Comment: Provide explanation on why the new bridge will be placed in a different location, expanding the cleared corridor of the area. Removal of the existing bridge and construction of a new bridge will require a DNR Public Waters Permit and a hydraulic study. Johnson Creek and the downstream Mississippi River support a diverse fishery. These species depend on clean gravels, cobbles, and sand to survive. The proposed expansion of Clearwater Road will allow surface runoff to cause increased erosion and sediment loads to Johnson Creek and the Mississippi River, impacting aquatic resources in these systems.

14 Response: The proposed crossing location was a result of a variety of design considerations, including the sewer force main location, location of the landfill, and the downslope to the stormwater pond east of the landfill. The City of St. Cloud acknowledges the permitting and hydraulic study requirements. To reduce the risk of sedimentation during construction, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be created and will include sediment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) which will be in place during construction and after construction until permanent stabilization measures are in place. Specific BMP types are listed in the EAW. Exposed soils will be stabilized within 7 days following either the temporary or permanent completion of construction activity and temporary sedimentation basins will be provided, if necessary, for areas draining 5 acres or more. Additionally, work within Johnson Creek will occur outside of the fish spawning periods (March 15 to June 15). Following construction of Clearwater Road, stormwater runoff will enter the storm sewer system via curb and gutter and be directed to water quality ponding areas. The ponding area will be required to infiltrate 1 inch of runoff from the new impervious and rate control will need to be provided as not to exceed the existing conditions for the 2, 10, and 100-year rain events. A buffer zone of at least 100 feet will be maintained between the Mississippi River and the project area, both during and after construction. Riprap may be installed along the bridge abutments in Johnson Creek to prevent soil erosion. These measures will minimize the potential for aquatic resource impacts due to erosion or sediment loading. Item-By-Item Responses 3. Project Description Comment: Explain the difference in total acreage noted in Table 1 (13.2 acres) and 2 (20.6 acres). Response: Table 1 includes the total right of way that will be consumed by the project (13.2 acres) and will be permanently owned by the City of St. Cloud. Table 2 includes the project right of way and also other area within the construction limits (20.6 acres), which includes areas that will be only temporarily be used for construction, but not remain within permanent right of way. Comment: DNR has requested reconsideration of answers provided for questions 6e and 6f. Response: The EAW has been updated to include the following information. The project completes the public infrastructure connecting the I94 Business Park with Clearwater Road north of Johnson Creek. Development of the adjacent publicly-owned parcels is not anticipated at this time. Development of one of the adjacent privately held parcels was reviewed by a 2004 Environmental Assessment Worksheet and a preliminary plat was approved by the City of St. Cloud. Although no specific development plans have been submitted to the City, the preliminary plat included grading within the southern portion of the parcel located immediately north of the intersection of 60th Street and 8th Avenue. The grading included in the preliminary plat did not include any areas located within the ESA. All proposed grading was located within existing agricultural fields, planted coniferous trees, or over an area of land that is currently developed.

15 No specific development plans for this, or any other privately-owned parcels, have been present to the City if St. Cloud at this time. Past Projects: Approximately 0.5 mile of Clearwater Road north of the St. Augusta Landfill was constructed in The project did not require an environmental document. Prior to construction, the land was in agricultural production. 9a. iii Land Use Comment: Limiting the proposed 3-lane road to 2-lanes within the Environmentally Sensitive Area is preferred by the DNR. Response: The current design recommends a 3-lane, which is preferred when adjacent properties have direct access into the roadway. The City will consider the DNR s comment with regard to the 2-lane option as they proceed into the final design process. 9b Land Use: Compatibility with nearby land uses, zoning, and plans Comment: Provide further description of the purpose of the City s ESA Ordinance in relation to the area impacted by this road extension and further discussion on why this area would not be subject to the ESA Designation as a result of going through the Minnesota Environmental Review process. Response: Three inventoried areas are included on the City s ESA Map: Site 69, 113, and 114 (Figure 9). Sites 69 and 114 are identified as High Priority Areas. The Ordinance s goal is to protect these areas and avoid any deterioration. Site 113 is identified as a Low Priority Area. The goal in this area is that the design, placement, and construction techniques used for development would enhance in general ambiance and character of the natural resource. Development guidelines within the ESA indicate that development must: a) Maximize the protection of the ESA: The proposed project would impact approximately the same amount of land within the ESA regardless of the alternative chosen. b) Provide for an equitable economic return for development: The proposed project provides for an equitable economic return by providing a corridor for travelers between the I94 Business Park and Clearwater Road north of Johnson Creek. c) Maintain viable riparian and wildlife corridors, rare species, and connections between ESA: The proposed project has been designed to incorporate wildlife passage as part of the bridge design and the City will be taking into consideration the DNR s recommendations regarding other features that would potentially benefit wildlife corridors. d) Keep undeveloped ESA large enough to maximize sustainability and minimize fragmentation: Development of the publically-owned parcels is not expected at this time. Much of the land adjacent to the project and within the ESA is publically-owned, which will minimize fragmentation. e) Maintain a buffer adequate to the health and viability of the ESA: Following construction of the roadway, buffers would be developed to protect the surrounding ESA areas. f) Minimize adverse construction impacts on the ESA: the project will be constructed in a manner that minimizes impacts on the ESA and environment in general. Specific practices are described in the EAW.

16 Based on the City of St. Cloud s Land Development Code, Article 4.4 Applicability, Public right of way dedication and improvement projects that are subject to the Minnesota Environmental Review Program (MERP), and comply with the Comprehensive Plan, are exempt from an Environmentally Sensitive Areas Site Plan Review. Additionally, property located within and subject to the regulations of the Floodplain, Shoreland, or Scenic Rivers Overlay District or regulated under the Wetland Conservation Act or Section 404 of the Clean Water Act are also exempt. Future development on parcels adjacent to the proposed Clearwater Road and within the ESA will be evaluated in accordance with the ESA Site Plan Review. 11b.ii Water Resources (Stormwater) Comment: DNR recommends that wildlife-friendly erosion control materials be used for this project and revegetation of disturbed soils includes native mixes in areas that are not proposed for mowed turf grass. Response: The City of St. Cloud will use the recommended erosion control materials and native seed mixes. 11b. iv Water Resources (Surface Waters) Comment: DNR is pleased to see that the proposed bridge includes a wildlife passage bench. DNR recommends installing wildlife fencing along both sides of the road corridor to keep deer and other wildlife from crossing the road. They also recommend that Blanding s turtles be kept off the road by installing a half pipe barrier that direction the movement of turtles to the proposed wildlife passage bench and that curb and gutter be installed that will allow turtles and other reptiles to more easily exit the roadway once they have entered it. Response: The City of St. Cloud has noted the DNR s recommendation and will consider these measures during the final design process. 13d Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (rare features) Comment: DNR encourages that tree surveys be done earlier, rather than waiting until final design, in order to ensure the proposed project is aligned in such a way that minimizes impacts to high quality habitat and the butternut tree (Juglans cinerea). Response: The City of St. Cloud will consider completing the survey prior to starting final design on the project. Any planned survey will be coordinated with the DNR. 18c Table 8: Alternatives Analysis Comment: Incidental wetlands, such as the one located east of the landfill, would not require replacement and should be considered during alignment alternative analysis. Response: The City of St. Cloud acknowledges that stormwater ponds created within upland areas do not require mitigation for impacts. The City has not definitively identified the area as a stormwater pond created entirely within upland area, but will do so as project plans move forward.

17 The location of the roadway under Alternatives 1, 2, and the Preferred Alternative were similar with respect to the location of the Johnson Creek crossing and adjacent areas that included Environmental Constraints (Figure 18). Comment: DNR would like to see alternative alignments east of Johnson Creek that would avoid/minimize impacts to the neighboring high quality habitat. Specifically, DNR suggests a route that would utilize the existing bridge crossing and area cleared for the sewer line along Franklin Road until it reaches 4th Avenue South. Response: The City of St. Cloud evaluated the use of the existing area cleared for the sewer force main early in the planning process. Due to various constraints, the City did not move this option into their alternatives analysis process. The concerns regarding this area include: 1. Following the force main to the southeast is not practical because of force main maintenance and access issues. Additionally, the City of St. Cloud is concerned by the risk posed by the force main pipe breaking under the roadway. 2. Connection of the proposed roadway to 60th Street at 8th Avenue provides a more direct connection for motorists to the I94 interchange. If connected to Franklin Road, motorists would need to travel through the business park. 3. An alignment further to the southeast would be closer to the Mississippi River, be further within the Scenic River corridor, and within additional areas identified as ecologically significant. Additionally, current known occurrences of butternut are located east of the force main and could be impacted if the roadway were shifted southeast. 19 Cumulative Potential Effects Comment: DNR feels that this project will have cumulative impacts as a result of future development along the roadway. Response: Based on guidance from the Environmental Quality Board, only future projects that are actually planned or for which a basis of expectation has been laid need be considered during an evaluation for Cumulative Potential Effects. This information has been added to the EAW. This project would complete the public infrastructure connecting the I94 Business Park with Clearwater Road north of Johnson Creek, so no future public roadway development is planned or anticipated in the environmentally-relevant area. Figure 19 depicts the parcels that are publicly-owned versus privately owned. Development of the adjacent publicly-owned parcels (those owned by MPCA or City of St. Cloud) is not anticipated at this time. Development of one of the adjacent privately held parcels was reviewed by a 2004 Environmental Assessment Worksheet and a preliminary plat was approved by the City of St. Cloud. Although no specific development plans have been submitted to the City, the preliminary plat included grading within the southern portion of the parcel located immediately north of the intersection of 60th Street and 8th Avenue. The grading included in the preliminary plat did not include any areas located within the ESA. All proposed grading was located within existing agricultural fields, planted coniferous trees, or over an area of land that is currently developed. No specific development plans for this, or any other privately-owned parcels, have been present to the City if St. Cloud at this time. Although no specific development plans have been submitted, potential impacts for the area that has an approved preliminary plat likely include vegetation removal (planted coniferous

18 trees), soil disturbance, and impervious surface and stormwater. Each development project would be required to be reviewed for each of these potential impacts and comply with the City of St. Cloud s Ordinances, including the Land Development and Stormwater System Use. Due to the existing land use within the areas for which a preliminary plat has been approved, no impacts from development on that parcel are anticipated to combine with the impacts resulting from the proposed Clearwater Road extension project to produce cumulative impacts. No other privately-owned parcels have development plans at this time. While the City acknowledges that these areas are guided for Light Industrial in the Future Land Use Plan, no specific development plans are available at this time. Therefore, there is no basis of expectation for development on these parcels and the potential for cumulative impacts cannot be assessed. Comment: DNR recommends that the City consider expanding the areas zoned as Parks and Open Space as shown on Figure 7 (Future Land Use), to include areas identified by the City as Environmentally Sensitive Areas and by the DNR as quality habitat (MBS and RESA sites). Response: The City will consider, as appropriate, the DNR s request to expand the Parks and Open Space into the ESA and other DNR-identified sensitive areas.