HomeMy WebLinkAbout11.b. Vesterra Mining EAWCITY OF ROSEMOUNT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: May 20, 2003
AGENDA ITEM: Vesterra Mining EAW
AGENDA SECTION:
New Business
PREPARED BY: Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer
AGENfM 11 L 9
ATTACHMENTS: None.
APPROVED BY:
At the April 3, 20023 City Council meeting, Council authorized the distribution of the Vesterra Mining EAW
for public review and comment. The 30 -day comment period ended May 14, 2003. At this time, responses are
being prepared for the comments received and will be presented to Council at the meeting.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
COUNCIL ACTION:
7
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Jamie Verbrugge, City Administrator
FROM: Andrew J. Brotzler, P.E., City Engineer oll/
DATE: May 19, 2003
RE: Supplemental Information
Item ILb Vesterra Mining EAW
Please find attached the following additional information with regards to the EAW for the
proposed Vesterra Mining operation:
Memorandum from Andi Moffatt with WSB & Associates, Inc.
2. Draft memorandum to review agencies dated May 16, 2003.
3. Findings of Facts and Conclusions.
4. Resolution Issuing a Negative Declaration of Need.
Andi Moffatt with WSB & Associates, Inc. will be in attendance at the Council meeting to
address specific questions or comments with regards to the EAW.
Based on the comments received and the responses to those comments, Staff is recommending
that Council take action to issue a Negative Declaration of Need for an EIS. Should Council take
the above noted action, the next step for the applicant will be to submit a mining application. As
part of this application process, the Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing. Upon
the completion of a public hearing by the Planning Commission, a recommendation from the
Planning Commission will be brought forth to the City Council.
Should you have questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at 651.322.2025.
Cc: Rick Pearson, City Planner
GAENGPROJ\Vesterra Mininglccmemo.051901doc
A
WS B
cPc rLracx:iate�, lrx:.
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Rosemount
From: Andi Moffatt, Biologist
WSB & Associates
Date: May 16, 2003
Re: Vesterra, LL Sand and Gravel Mine
Environmental Assessment Worksheet
WSB Project No. 1005 -70
The public comment period for the Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) ended May 14, 2003. The purpose of the EAW is to identify
potential environmental impacts and determine whether or not an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) is required. An EIS is a more extensive environmental review process.
Determining whether or not an EIS is needed does not relate to providing approval or denial
for the project.
Based on the information in the EAW and review agency comments regarding the EAW, the
gravel mine does not have the potential for significant environmental impacts that cannot be
addressed as part of the permitting process. Therefore, it is our recommendation that an EIS
is not required
Enclosed, please find the following items for your review relating to this EAW:
• • • • Draft memo dated May 16, 2003 to the review agencies responding to
comments received on the EAW (hereby referred to as the comment /response
memo). This memo restates the agencies'comments and then responds to
each issue.
• • • • The Findings of Fact on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS).
•• • • A copy of the agencies' comment letters.
... • Draft resolution relating to a Negative Declaration of Need.
May 16, 2003
Page 2
Summary of Major Comments
As part of the public comment period, comments were received from the Metropolitan
Council and Department of Transportation. Outlined below is a brief summary of only the
major issues provided in the review agency comments:
1. The Metropolitan Council encourages the City to take into consideration tree
preservation, creating a more natural landform appearance upon final grading of the
site, and planting native grasses as part of the end -use plan.
2. Mn/DOT's concern relates to the truck traffic and its impact on the TH52 and 117
interchange construction in Inver Grove Heights as well as needed right turn lanes at
County Road 71 and 117 Street. These issues can be addresses through the
permitting process and developer's agreement.
City Council Decision Action
The decision before the City Council regarding the EAW is to decide whether or not the
project has the potential for significant environmental impacts that cannot be addressed
through the permitting processes. If the Council determines that the project does not have
the potential for these significant environmental impacts, the Council should issue a
Negative Declaration of Need for an EIS. If the Council determines that the project does
have the potential for significant environmental impact that cannot be addressed through the
permitting and approval process, the Council should require an EIS. Based on our review, it
is our recommendation that an EIS is not needed for this project.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (763)287 -7196.
C. Andy Brotzler, P.E., City of Rosemount
Rick Pearson, City of Rosemount
Bret Weiss, P.E., WSB & Associates, Inc.
Jonathan Wilmshurst, Vesterra, LLC
F: I WPWIN11005- 701051 5 03 hmcc. doc
A
WSB
A A,Arx:iUfM, I1W.
To: Phyllis Hanson, Metropolitan Council
Mary McNeff, Mn/DOT — Waters Edge
From: Andi Moffatt, WSB & Associates, Inc.
Date: May 16, 2003
Re: Responses to Comments
Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine EAW
WSB Project No. 1005 -70
Memorandum
The public comment period for the Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) ended May 14, 2003. Comments were received from the
Metropolitan Council and Department of Transportation.
Outlined below, please find the comments from each agency followed by responses to these
comments. The comment letters are also attached for your information.
Comments from Metropolitan Council
Comment #1: The project proposes a sand and gravel mine that will be operated by
Vesterra, LLC and provide construction aggregates for the Twin Cities area. The mine
would include a crushing, washing, and screening plant. The proposed mine location is in
an agricultural area immediately south of the Flint Hills Refinery in Rosemount. Council
staff review finds that the EAW is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns
and raises no major issues of consistency with Council policies.. An EIS is not necessary for
regional purposes.
Response: No response is necessary.
Comment #2: Item 10. Based on aerial photography and EAW text, there are mature trees
located on old farmsteads and other scattered locations on the property. The Council
encourages preservation of as many trees as possible and mitigation for tree removal
according to the City's tree ordinance.
Revegetation of the site with native grasses and plantings is encouraged.
Response: There are some trees immediately adjacent to the farmhouse and
outbuildings. These trees will remain during the mining process to screen
operations. Some trees may be removed as part of the end -use plan. However, any
May 16, 2003
Page 2 of 2
tree removal will be subject to the City's tree ordinance and revegetation of the site
will be addressed through the end -use plan approval.
Comment #3: Exhibit 5. The [Council] encourages the proposer to revise the final grading
to exhibit a more natural landform appearance. The western most "notch" with steep slopes
on three sides, as designed, would be very hard to use for agriculture or to develop with
other uses.
Response: The City Council will take this suggestion under advisement when
reviewing the end -use plan and permitting the project.
Comments from MnDOT
Comment #1: A significant amount of additional truck traffic from the proposed
development will need to gain access to Trunk Highway (TH) 52, most likely at I I7` Street
East. TH52 is an Interregional Corridor, and construction of the 117` Street East
Interchange, to replace the current signal - controlled intersection, will begin during the
Spring and Summer of 2003, and is likely to continue until some time in 2004. Although
the intersection will remain in service as much as possible, construction will degrade the
level of service for the intersection. The likely result is that trucks from the development
will need to seek alternate accesses to TH52, including signage, meeting with Mn/DOT,
meeting with management of the proposed gravel mine, etc. In addition, please describe any
plans the City has for arranging for the addition of Right Turn Lanes, and/or facilities to
improve the flow of traffic through the TH52 -117` Street East intersection, while the
interchange is being constructed. For questions on Mn/DOT participation in efforts to guide
truck traffic to alternative accesses to TH52, or for requirements on adding turn lanes, please
contact Nancy Daubenberger, Area "C" Engineer at (651)582 -1379.
Response: The City is aware of the pending TH 52 at 117` Street construction
activities. The City has been and will continue to work with Mn/DOT and Dakota
County on any required detours. The developer will work with all impacted agencies
in detouring truck traffic to the TH 52 at CSAH 42 interchange during construction.
The City of Rosemount will work with the Mn/DOT, Dakota County and the City of
Inver Grove Heights on the development of Right Turn lanes at the C.R. 71 and 117`
Street intersection. This improvement will be part of the developer's agreement
between the City and Vesterra LLC.
This concludes our responses to comment on behalf of the City. If you have any questions,
please feel free to contact me at (763)287 -7196.
C. Andy Brotzler, P.E., City of Rosemount
Rick Pearson, City of Rosemount
Bret Weiss, P.E., WSB & Associates, Inc.
Jonathan Wilmshurst, Vesterra, LLC
F: I WPWIM 1005- 701051403CRmemo. doc
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
In the matter of the
Decision on the Need for an
Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for
Vesterra, LLC Sand and
Gravel Mine in Rosemount,
MN
FINDINGS OF FACT
AND CONCLUSIONS
Vesterra, LLC proposes to operate a sand and gravel mine with a crushing, washing, and
screening plant to provide construction aggregates for the Twin Cities Metropolitan area.
The 75 -acre site will be located in an agricultural area south of County Road 38 and 0.25
miles west of CSAH 71 /Blaine Avenue. Pursuant to Minnesota R. 4410.43 00, subp. 12,
the City of Rosemount has prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for
this proposed project. As to the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on
the project and based on the record in this matter, including the EAW and comments
received, the City of Rosemount makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Project
The proposed project involves sand and gravel mining on 75- acres. The mine
will remove up to 50 feet of material from the higher ground covering all but
the east end of the property. A washing operation on site will require the use
of a well and a two -stage settling pond system. The duration of the operation
is expected to be approximately 10 years and assumes a production rate of
approximately 500,000 tons annually. The ultimate end -use plan for this
property will depend on zoning in the area as determined by the City.
B. Project Site
The proposed project is located within a 75 -acre area south of County Road
38 and 0.25 miles west of CSAH 71 /Blaine Avenue within the Section 23,
T115N, R19W in the City of Rosemount. This is generally south and west of
the Flint Hills refinery. The site currently contains 10 acres of
brush/grassland, 63 acres of cropland, and an existing farmhouse.
II. PROJECT HISTORY
A. The project was subject to the mandatory preparation of an EAW under
Minnesota R. 4410.4300 subp. 12.
B. An EAW was prepared for the proposed project and distributed to the
Environmental Quality Board (EQB) mailing list and other interested parties
on April 7, 2003.
F:1 WPWINU 005- 701051403FOF. doc
C. A public notice containing information about the availability of the EAW for
public review was published in the Rosemount Town Pages on April 11, 2003.
D. The EAW was noticed in the April 14, 2003 EQB Monitor. The public
comment period ended May 14, 2003. Comments were received from the
Metropolitan Council and Department of Transportation. Copies of these
letters are hereby incorporated by reference. Responses to the comments are
also incorporated by reference.
III. CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS.
Minnesota R. 4410.1700, subp. 1 states "an EIS shall be ordered for projects that
have the potential for significant environmental affects." In deciding whether a
project has the potential for significant environmental affects, the City of
Rosemount must consider the four factors set out in Minnesota R. 4410.1700,
subp. 7. With respect to each of these factors, the City finds as follows:
A. TYPE, EXTENT, AND REVERSIBILITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL
EFFECTS
The first factor that the City must consider is "type, extent and reversibility of
environmental effects ", Minnesota R. 4410.1700, subp. 7.A. The City's
findings with respect to each of these issues are set forth below.
1. The type of environmental impacts and mitigation efforts anticipated
as part of this project include:
a. Traffic Impacts: The addition of truck traffic on local county
roads is anticipated as part of this development. This traffic
impact will be reviewed by the County Engineer and City as
part of the permitting process. The applicant will cooperate
with any mitigation measures brought forward by the County
Engineer.
Additionally, construction activities at TH 52 at 117 Street are
pending. The City will continue to work with Mn /DOT and
Dakota County on any required detours. The developer will
work with all impacted agencies in detouring truck traffic to
the TH 52 at CSAH 42 interchange during construction.
The City of Rosemount will work with the Mn/DOT, Dakota
County and the City of Inver Grove Heights on the
development of Right Turn lanes at the C.R. 71 and 117
F:1 WPWINI1005- 701051403FOF.doc
Street intersection. This improvement will be apart of the
developer's agreement between the City and Vesterra LLC.
b. Noise and Dust: All operations will be conducted in a
professional manner and will fall within state guidelines. The
applicant will work closely with the two neighbors that may be
impacted by these operations to ensure that problems are
addressed in a timely manner. It is intended to locate the
processing plant and associated activities as far back into the
hillside as practical to maximize the screening.
c. Visual Impacts: Berms and plantings wilt be used to screen
those parts of the operation that are open to view. However,
the activities will be surrounded on three sides by the natural
landscape, resulting in a relatively low visual impact as far as
the general public in concerned.
d. Storm Water: The project is anticipated to generate some
additional storm water runoff. This runoff will be treated
within on -site ponding facilities to reduce the runoff rate
leaving the site and provide for storm water quality treatment.
2. The extent and reversibility of environmental impacts are consistent
with those of a mining operation.
B. CUMULATIVE POTENTIAL EFFECTS OF RELATED OR
ANTICIPATED FUTURE PROJECTS
The second factor that the City must consider is the "cumulative potential
effects of related or anticipated future projects ", Minnesota R. 4410.1700
subp.7.B. The City's findings with respect to this factor are set forth below.
1. The City of Rosemount recently approved mining as an interim use in
the area east of Akron Avenue, south of 135 Street, north of County
42 and west of County 71, with the exception of properties covered
under the Agricultural Preserve Program. The proposed Vesterra sand
and gravel mine is located within the approved mining area. No other
gravel mining or other development is currently proposed in the
vicinity of the Vesterra mining operation. The gravel mining use is
consistent with the surrounding area.
F. I WPWIIV 11 005- 70105 1 4 03FOR doc
C. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL AFFECTS ARE
SUBJECT TO MITIGATION BY ONGOING PUBLIC REGULATORY
AUTHORITY
1. The following permits or approvals will be required for the project:
Unit of Government Permit/Approval Required
Rosemount Mine permit
Rosemount WCA permit (if applicable)
MPCA NPDES permit
MPCA Air permit
MDNR Water appropriations
Dakota County Highway Traffic review
Dakota County Highway Posting ruling on CSAH 71
Mine Safety and Health Administration Mine registration
2. The City finds that the potential environmental impacts of the project
are subject to mitigation by ongoing regulatory authorities such that
an EIS need not be prepared.
D. THE EXTENT TO WHICH ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS CAN BE
ANTICIPATED AND CONTROLLED AS A RESULT OF OTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES UNDERTAKEN BY PUBLIC
AGENCIES OR THE PROJECT PROPOSER, OR OF EISs
PREVIOUSLY PREPARED ON SIMILAR PROJECTS.
The fourth factor that the City must consider is "the extent to which
environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other
environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer,
or of EISs previously prepared on similar projects," Minnesota R. 4700.1700,
subp. 7.D. The City's findings with respect to this factor are set forth below:
The proposed project is subject to the following plans prepared by the City:
1. City of Rosemount Comprehensive Plan
2. City of Rosemount Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan
The City finds that the environmental effects of the project can be anticipated
and controlled as a result of the environmental review, planning, and
permitting processes.
F: I WPWIN11005- 701051403FOF.doc
CONCLUSIONS
The preparation of Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine EAW and comments received
on the EAW have generated information adequate to determine whether the proposed
facility has the potential for significant environmental effects.
The EAW has identified areas where the potential for significant environmental effects
exist, but appropriate measures have or will be incorporated into the project plan and/or
permits to mitigate these effects. The sand and gravel mine is anticipated to comply with
all City of Rosemount standards and review agency standards.
Based on the criteria established in Minnesota R. 4410.1700, the project does not have
the potential for significant environmental effects.
Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the project does not have the potential for
significant environmental impacts.
An Environmental Impact Statement is not required.
F. I WPWIMI005- 7M051403FOFdoc
CITY OF ROSEMOUNT
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2003 —
A RESOLUTION ISSUING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF NEED
WHEREAS, the preparation of the Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine EAW and comments received
on the EAW have generated information adequate to determine whether the proposed mine site has the
potential for significant environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, the EAW has identified areas where the potential for significant environmental effects
exist, but appropriate measures have or will be incorporated into the project plan and/or permits to
reasonably mitigate these impacts; and
WHEREAS, the Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine is expected to comply with all the City of
Rosemount and review agency standards, and
WHEREAS, based on the criteria established in Rosemount R.4410.1700, the project does not have the
potential for significant environmental effects; and
WHEREAS, based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the project does not have the potential for
significant environmental impacts.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City of Rosemount has determined that an
Environmental Impact Statement is not required.
ADOPTED this 20` day of May, 2003.
William H. Droste, Mayor
ATTEST:
Linda Jentink, City Clerk
Motion by:
Voted In Favor:
Second by:
Voted Against:
- WSB
A 1k
& AurwiaiKh Imr,
To: Lynn Moratzka, Dakota County Planning
From: Andi Moffatt, WSB & Associates, Inc.
Date: May 20, 2003
Re: Responses to Comments
Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine EAW
WSB Project No. 1005 -70
Memorandum
The public comment period for the Vesterra, LLC Sand and Gravel Mine Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) ended May 14, 2003. Comments were received from the
Metropolitan Council and Department of Transportation. Responses to the comments from
the Metropolitan Council and Mn/DOT were provided in a separate memo dated May 16,
2003. Comments were received on May 16 from the Dakota County. Responses to these
comments are outlined below.
Comments from Dakota County Planninz
Comment #1: Item 8 — Permits and Approvals. An access permit will likely be needed
from Dakota County for CR38 or CSAH 71.
Response: It is noted that an access permit from Dakota County for CR 38 or CSAH
71 may be needed for this project. The applicant will be responsible for obtaining all
necessary permits.
Comment #2: Item 13 - The EAW indicates that washing operations will use an estimated 4
to 5 million gallons of water per year, that some wash water will be recycled, and the bulk of
the water used will be well water. The direction of groundwater flow in the proposed project
area is to the northeast, towards the Pine Bend area. The Darsow well is located about 2,000
feet upgradient of the proposed well for the wash plant. The Kraft well is located about 800
feet upgradient. Because of the fractured and cavernous nature of the Prairie du Chien group
dolostones in the area, the proposed well may interfere with the withdrawal of the
groundwater by one or both wells and may substantially lower the water tables - especially if
drought conditions prevail.
The EAW and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Groundwater Appropriation
Permit application should address what contingencies are planned in the event that well
interference, groundwater depletion, or groundwater pollution occur.
May 20, 2003
Page 2 of 4
Response: It is noted that the residences adjacent to the proposed gravel mining
operation are between 800 to 2,000 feet upgradient of the site and that the County
believes that these wells have the potential to be affected by the pumping operations
of the gravel mine. This project is subject to permitting and review by the City. The
project is also subject to permitting review for the well from the DNR. Therefore,
this issue will be addressed through these permitting processes.
Comment #3: Item 13 - Because wash water will be recovered and combined with well
water for processing of aggregate, the EAW should address how the project will safeguard
the well water from the possible back - siphonage and backflow of the reused water that is
combined with the well water in the wash water supply system.
Response: Hazardous materials that could contaminate groundwater are not
anticipated to be on the site. Further, the City will investigate the potential for
groundwater contamination through the permitting process. If it appears that
contamination of the groundwater from the wash water is possible, a liner for the
ponding area will be required.
Comment #4: Item 17 - Drainage diversions, berms, and two settling ponds will be the
primary storm water controls. The settling ponds will also be used for wash water from the
processing of aggregate. Each pond will hold an approximate volume of 112,000 to 188,000
gallons, about one week's output of wash water. The EAW does not address the expected
volumes of water that will be handled separately by evaporation, groundwater infiltration,
and reclamation of wash water. It appears that the project will rely upon groundwater
infiltration through the floor of the ponds for the bulk of the plant's water use. Storm water
that is not detained on -site will likely infiltrate to the groundwater aquifers on the adjacent
properties.
The EAW does not address the quality of surface water that is generated on or leaving the
project site. The EAW also does not discuss the prevention and control actions needed to
handle the suspended solids generated from the wash operation, or the possible use of
chemical surfactants. In particular, the use of surfactants will suspend arid solubilize any
solids or contaminants that are generated from leaks and spills. If the soluble contaminants
infiltrate to the groundwater, they will degrade the quality of the groundwater.
Response: The storm water ponds on site will be required to meet City standards for
both water quality and quantity. These requirements include treating runoff to NURP
guidelines, providing infiltration, and limiting the peak discharge rate to 0.05cfs /acre
for the 100 -year, 24 -hour storm event. Through the permitting process, the design of
the proposed ponds will be reviewed and required to meet City standards.
Additionally, if during the permitting process it is determined that contamination of
the groundwater is possible, lining for the ponds will be required.
A: W51403Countymemo.doe
May 20, 2003
Page 3 of 4
Comment #5: Item 19 - The EAW does not identify the fact that Rich Valley is a covered
karst valley. There are approximately 50 feet of outwash sand and gravel sediments that
overlie the fractured and cavernous Prairie du Chiens's dolostones and sandstone. These
sediments offer no barrier to the rapid infiltration of surface water. Along the length of the
valley, there is no permanent surface stream. Stormwater runoff does not last long because
of the significant number of shallow, sediment - covered closed depressions which act as
subsidence sinkholes.
Groundwater beneath Rich Valley is already impacted by residential, agricultural,
commercial, and industrial sources of pollution in the area of the proposed project (see
section 20b below). The EAW should discuss the precautions and measures that will be
included in the project design, construction methods, and long -term maintenance for the
diversion, drainage, ponding, sedimentation, subsurface infiltration and groundwater
infiltration of surface water runoff, to prevent environmental pollution and to protect public
health and safety.
Response: The City notes that the project site is a covered karst valley. Infiltration
rates of the soils within the area are very high. As stated in the response to Comment
#4, the City will review the storm water plan for the site and require changes as
necessary to accommodate the surface water and prevent groundwater contamination.
Comment #6: Item 20 — All solid wastes generated by the proposed project must be
properly disposed in a State - permitted, Dakota County licensed solid waste facility or a
similarly regulated facility elsewhere. No hauling back of demolition concrete, asphalt and
other construction materials to the aggregate mine for storage, recycling, or reuse will be
allowed — unless first approved by Dakota County.
Response: The applicant will be required to conform to all City and County
regulations.
Comment #7: Item 28 — CSAH 71 (Blaine Avenue) currently has a 5 -ton per axle load limit
all year long. The 5 -ton posting will limit truck loading to less than 20 tons per truck.
CSAH 71 may need to be strengthened to allow higher axle loading. County Road 38 (135
Street) is a gravel road and is not designated at all for such loads, unless it is also
strengthened and paved. Dakota County may need to permanently post this road a 5 Ton if
the loads damage the roadway. According to our maintenance unit, this section of roadway
is a poor road that is one of the first to fail in the spring. Considerable work may be
necessary both roadways before this traffic can be permitted. The necessary road
improvements are not planned or funded at this time. The only way to move forward is to
make the necessary improvements a part of the project activity. Dakota County must have
these roadway issues resolved before development proceeds further.
The turn lanes should be noted as necessary initially if the roads can be made to handle the
loads. The need for right turn lanes on CR 38 at CSAH 71, CSAH 71 at 117` Street and
A: W51403Countymemadoc
May 20, 2003
Page 4 of 4
CSAH 71 at CSAH 42 should be monitored as hauling operations begin. Vesterra should be
responsible to contribute toward the cost of constructing the turn lanes, if aggregate
operations contribute significantly to the need.
Response: The City, applicant, and the County will continue to work together to
address the load limits and turning lane issues associated with CSAH 71 and CR 38.
These issues will need to be resolved prior to approval of a mining permit and can be
addressed through the permitting process. The turn lane improvements will be part
of the permit requirements for the mining operation. See also response to Mn/DOT
comments in the memo dated May 16, 2003.
Comment #8: Item 28 — The interchange at TH52/117"' Street is planned for construction
during 2003 -2004. At this time, it cannot be assumed that both ramp intersections will be
signalized.
Response: If the gravel mining operation begins prior to the completion of the work
at TH52 and 117 Street, trucks will be detoured to TH52 at the CSAH 42
interchange. See also response to Mn/DOT comments in the memo dated May 16,
2003.
This concludes the responses to County comments on behalf of the City. If you have any
questions, please feel free to contact me at (763)287 -7196.
Andy Brotzler, P.E., City of Rosemount
Rick Pearson, City of Rosemount
Bret Weiss, P.E., WSB & Associates, Inc.
Jonathan Wilmshurst, Vesterra, LLC
A: W51403Countymemo. doc