Goodhue County: Mining Study Committee Report and Plan Amendments

Goodhue County Land Use Management
Goodhue County Government Center 509 West Fifth Street Red Wing Minnesota 55066 Building Planning Zoning Telephone: 651/385-3104 Fax: 651/385-3106
June 11, 2013 To: From: RE: 1. Honorable Board of County Commissioners Land Use Management Public Hearing to consider an amendment to replace Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan, Element 1, Goal 7 (Preservation of Aggregate Resources) with a new version of Element 1, Goal 7 (Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources). This amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is intended to establish a Comprehensive Plan Goal and associated Policy Statements that address land use planning and management of all non-metallic mineral resources that may be found in Goodhue County including silica sand.
2. Public Hearing to consider various amendments to the text of the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance - Article 14 (Mineral Extraction). The proposed amendments to Article 14 reflect further refinement of Non-Metallica Mineral Extraction Facility application requirements, operating standards and land reclamations requirements. Attachments: Mining Study Committee Report. Copy of Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Element 1, Goal 7 (Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources). Copy of Proposed Amendments to Article 14 (Mineral Extraction)
In addition to the above referenced attachments, other background information was distributed to the Mining Study Committee at their meetings. Some of the additional related documentation is available for review on the Goodhue County Website: http://www.co.goodhue.mn.us/countygovernment/committees/MiningCommittee/Miningcom m.aspx Summary: At the August 16, 2012 County Board meeting the Goodhue County Board of Commissioners approved a one year extension of the citizen request to put a moratorium on the issuance of any Conditional Use Permit for a new silica/frac sand mining operation (Mineral Extraction Facility) within rural Goodhue County. The County Board accepted and approved the Planning Advisory Committees (PAC) findings and recommendation, which included the MSCs report and recommendations. In addition to extension, the County Board listed eighteen other items for the MSC to review: 1. Relationship between economic and recreational value 2. Explore statewide study with the legislature 3. Existing mines not grandfathered 4. Pros/Cons of banning silica sand mining 5. Hours of operation 6. Setbacks to dwellings and sensitive features
Page 1 of 6 An Equal Opportunity Employer
7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.
Quantity limits on mining High, medium and low impact mining classification Meeting with Township Officials How to evaluate silica sand differently, based on intensity and size, and create a definition and specific rules for it Disenfranchisement of the landowners who currently own this resource Land reclamation Defining best practices Emergency fund Comprehensive Plan and silica sand More definition for the reclamation funds (how to estimate, provide a three year projected amount) Explore production tax or other revenue-capture financial options Evaluate if there are areas that would be inappropriate for mining
In response to this direction from the County Board a second phase of the planning study to address the above referenced issues was initiated by the Mining Study Committee with the assistance of County Staff. Extensive additional research, presentation of information, MSC Dialogue, input from Township Officials, and comments/ideas from the general public have resulted in a proposed amendment to the Goodhue Comprehensive Plan (Element 1, Goal 7) and various amendments to the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance (Article 14). Included with this report is a copy of the Mining Study Committee Report for Phase II of the Silica Sand Moratorium. This report consolidates the discussions, research, and suggested Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance Amendments which represent consensus views of the MSC. Findings of Fact: 1. At the August 16, 2012 County Board meeting the Goodhue County Board of Commissioners approved a one year extension of the citizen request to put a moratorium on the issuance of any Conditional Use Permit for a new silica/frac sand mining operation (Mineral Extraction Facility) within rural Goodhue County. 2. The Goodhue County Mining Study Committee (MSC) held eight (8) meetings between September 2012 and May 2013. The purpose of the MSC Meetings was to address the eighteen (18) items identified by Goodhue County Board when they approved the extension of the moratorium on the issuance of any Conditional Use Permit for a new silica/frac sand mining operation (Mineral Extraction Facility) within rural Goodhue County on August 16, 2012. 3. Land Use Management Staff and MSC Members attended meetings with all Goodhue County Townships between February 2013 and May 2013 to brief Township Officials and interested Township residents regarding the work being conducted by the MSC to resolve the Silica Sand Mining Moratorium. LUM Staff and MSC Members received comments and questions from Township Officials and residents regarding non-metallic mineral extraction related issues and concerns. 4. A meeting/open house was held on April 25, 2013, at the Zumbrota City Hall to provide an update to Township Officials and the public to on the on-going work of the MSC. Following a presentation to provide an overview of the how the eighteen mining related issues identified by the County Board are being addressed through proposed amendments to the
Page 2 of 6
Countys Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, comments and questions were received from those in attendance. County Officials present included numerous MSC Members, PAC Member and County Commissioners. 5. The MSC chose to consolidate the eighteen items to be considered to the following list of thirteen (13) discussion items: Relationship between Economic and Recreational Value Coordinating with State Agencies and Legislature Existing Registered Mines Pros/Cons of Banning Silica Sand Mining Hours of Operation Location Restrictions Limit Silica Sand Operation Sizes Meeting With Township Officials Disenfranchisement of Landowners with the Silica Sand Resource Defining Best Practices Reclamation Emergency Funds Comprehensive Plan and Silica Sand
The Goodhue County Mining Study Committee Summary Report May 2013, summarizes these key issues and references proposed amendments to the Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan and Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance. 6. The proposed amendment to Element 1, Goal 7 (Preservation of Aggregate Deposits) to be replaced by a new version of Element 1, Goal (Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources) recognizes that various non-metallic mineral resources of commercial value are present in Goodhue County and that County policies related to management of these resources are needed to support official controls including land use regulations and infrastructure investment programs and projects to protect the public health safety and welfare. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment notes that such policies should strive to minimize land use conflicts and degradation of the Countys scenic, recreational and natural resources while allowing limited opportunities for development of mineral extraction facilities. 7. Various proposed amendments to the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance Article 14 (Mineral Extraction) reflect adjustments to the Countys Mining Regulations beyond those approved by the County Board on August 16, 2012 that were determined to be necessary by the MSC to protect the publics health, safety and welfare. 8. Proposed amendments to Article 14 represent a further refinement of County Regulation of Non-Metallic Mineral Extraction and related activities. The most significant area of change involves substantive revisions to strengthen and clarify land reclamation requirements. 9. The Planning Advisory Commission (PAC) held a public hearing May 20, 2013 to review the Mining Study Committees report and recommendations for Article 14 and the Comprehensive Plan. They also took public comment concerning the proposed changes.
Page 3 of 6
Planning Advisory Commission Recommendation: Motion by Volz seconded by Overby to recommend to the County Board APPROVAL of the proposed amendment to replace the Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan, Element 1, Goal 7,PreservationofAggregateResourceswithanewversionofElement1,Goal7,Management ofNonMetallicMineralResourcesasattachedwiththefindingsoffactincludedinthisreport. Motioncarried70. Motion by Overby seconded by Fueling to accept the MSC report including all supplemental documentation and Findings of Fact, with a recommendation to the County Board APPROVAL of the various amendments to the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance Article 14, Mineral Extraction(attached)withthefollowingrecommendations: 1. Article 14, Section 5, Subd. 2 T. A map location of schools, churches, nursing homes, campgrounds,andplattedresidentialareaswithinonemileoftheproperty. 2. Article 14, Section 5, Subd. 4E 17, Require conditions that would mitigate silica sand ambientairparticlesfromleavingtheminingproperty. Motioncarried70. Motion by Fueling seconded by Olson to delete the paragraph on page five of the Goodhue CountyMiningStudyCommitteeSummaryReportfromMay2013thatreads: On one side, the tourism industry in Goodhue County has been shown to have significant importance to the economic health of the community. One example is the Cannon Valley Trail which brings in approximately $100,000 per year just in wheel passes alone. On the other side, the report The Economic Impact of FracSandMininglookedatpotentialjobsandearningsfromtheminingindustry in Wood Lake, Wisconsin which indicated millions of dollars in new infrastructure,jobs,andotherrevenues. Motioncarried70. Alternatives for County Board Action: Proposed Amendments to both the Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan and the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance have been forwarded to the County Board by the PAC for consideration. Following the public hearing (held to accept public comments on both items) the County Board should plan on taking separate actions on the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and the Various Amendments to Article 14 of the Zoning Ordinance. Alternatives for action regarding the amendment to replace Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan, Element 1, and Goal 7 (Preservation of Aggregate Resources) with a new version of Element 1, Goal 7 (Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources) include the following: Alternative A: Accept the PAC recommendations including all supplemental documentation and Findings of Fact, and approve the proposed amendment to replace Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan, Element 1, Goal 7, Preservation of Aggregate Resources with a new version of Element 1, Goal 7, Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources (see attachment).
Page 4 of 6
Alternative B: Accept the PAC recommendations including all supplemental documentation and Findings of Fact, and approve a modified version of the proposed amendment to replace Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan, Element 1, Goal 7, Preservation of Aggregate Resources with a new version of Element 1, Goal 7, Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources (see attachment) with the following modifications: 1. Modifications of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment language suggested by the PAC may be offered by the County Board. Alternative C: Accept all of the PAC supplemental documentation and Findings of Fact, and table the proposed amendment to replace Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan, Element 1, Goal 7, Preservation of Aggregate Resources with a new version of Element 1, Goal 7, Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources (see attachment) for the following reasons: 1. If this alternative for action is selected, the County Board will need to set direction regarding whether this item would be taken up at a scheduled Special Meeting, or at its next regular Board meeting. Alternative D: Accept all of the PAC supplemental documentation and Findings of Fact, and motion to deny the proposed amendment to replace Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan, Element 1, Goal 7, Preservation of Aggregate Resources with a new version of Element 1, Goal 7, Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources (see attachment) for the following reasons: 1. Any recommendation for denial should include Findings of Fact as established by the County Board. Alternatives for action regarding the various proposed amendments to the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance, Article 14 (see attachment) include the following: Alternative A: Accept the PAC recommendations including all documentation and Findings of Fact, and approve the proposed amendments to the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance, Article 14, Mineral Extraction (see attachment). Alternative B: Accept the PAC recommendations including all documentation and Findings of Fact, and to approve the proposed amendments to the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance, Article 14, Mineral Extraction (see attachment) with the following modifications: 1. Modifications of the proposed amendments to Article 14 language suggested by the PAC may be offered by the County Board. Alternative C: Accept all of the PAC supplemental documentation and Findings of Fact, and table consideration of the proposed amendments to the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance, Article 14, Mineral Extraction (see attachment) for the following reasons: 1. If this alternative for action is selected, the County Board will need to set direction regarding whether this item would be taken up at a scheduled Special Meeting, or at its next regular Board meeting.
Page 5 of 6
Alternative D: Accept all of the PAC supplemental documentation and Findings of Fact, and motion to deny the proposed amendments to the Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance, Article 14, Mineral Extraction (see attachment) the following reasons: 1. Any recommendation for denial should include Findings of Fact as established by the County Board. Interim Ordinance (Moratorium) Expiration: Minnesota Statutes 394.34 allows a County to authorize a land-use planning study to adopt an Interim Ordinance for a period of twelve (12) months from the date it is effective (and an additional 12 months extension), to allow for such study and adoption of a comprehensive plan, zoning, and/or other official land-use controls. At the August 12, 2012 County Board meeting, the Board extended the moratorium with 18 more items of study, however, the Board reserved the right to end the moratorium in less than twelve months upon completion of the land-use planning study and satisfactory resolution of the issues of concerns as determined by the County Board. Recent legislation allows a local unit of government to extend for one year an interim ordinance or renew an expired ordinance prohibiting new or expanding silica sand projects, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, section 116C.99, and extend the ordinance an additional year by resolution of the local unit of government. The effective date on this legislation is retroactive from March 1, 2013. The Mining Study Committee has submitted their final study report with recommendations for changes to Goodhue Countys Zoning Ordinance, Article 14, Mineral Extraction, and to Goodhue Countys Comprehensive Plan regarding Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources. The PAC has held a public hearing and recommended approval with some modifications to those two documents. The County Board may choose to let the moratorium expire automatically on September 6, 2013, end the moratorium before the automatic expiration, or schedule another public hearing date to take action to extend the moratorium with specific items to study.
Page 6 of 6
ARTICLE 14 MINERAL EXTRACTION SECTION 1. PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to protect the public health, safety and welfare through the following: Subd. 1. Subd. 2. Subd. 3. Subd. 4. Identify areas in County where mineral extraction is most appropriate and with other land uses. minimizes conflicts
Establish permitting requirements, environmental review procedures and performance standards to regulate mineral extraction. Establish standards that prevent or minimize environmental and aesthetic impacts on extracted properties, adjacent properties and the County as a whole. Establish standards and financial guarantees that restore extracted land to a condition compatible with adjacent properties and suitable for future uses that are compatible with the Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS Subd. 1. ACCESSORY USES: Accessory uses of a mineral extraction facility include the manufacture, storage and sale of products made from minerals on the premises and storage and sale of minerals, recycled asphalt, recycled concrete and topsoil not extracted on the premises. In addition, the storage and manufacture of explosives may be permitted as an accessory use of a mineral extraction facility-subject to approval of a conditional use permit. BOARD: The County Board of Commissioners of Goodhue County. COMMISSION: The Planning Advisory Commission of Goodhue County. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan. COUNTY: The County of Goodhue, Minnesota. DEWATERING: The pumping, extraction or removal of surface and subsurface water DUST: Airborne mineral particulate matter. EXCAVATION: The removal of soil and minerals from the ground. MINERAL RESOURCE: Sand, gravel, rock, clay, topsoil, and similar higher density non-metallic natural minerals. MINERAL EXTRACTION: The removal of sand, gravel, rock, clay, topsoil, and other minerals from the ground and off the site. MINERAL EXTRACTION FACILITY: Any area that is being used for removal, stockpiling, processing, transferring, or storage of minerals.
Subd. 2. Subd. 3. Subd. 42. Subd. 53. Subd. 64. Subd. 75. Subd. 86. Subd. 97. Subd. 108. Subd. 119.
Subd. 1210. MINERAL EXTRACTION PERMIT: The permit required for mineral extraction facilities. Subd. 1311. MINING TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL. A panel of two or more professional experts in the fields of mining, engineering, geology, hydrology, ecology, and landscape architecture that are retained for the purpose of reviewing and evaluating mining proposals, requesting pertinent information necessary for the application review, and reporting findings to staff, the Planning Advisory Commission, and the County Board. The panels fees and expenses shall be paid for by the applicant. Subd. 1412. OPERATOR: Any person or persons, partnerships, or corporations or assignees, including public or governmental agencies, engaging in mineral extraction. Subd. 1513. PRINCIPAL USE: The principal use of mineral extraction facility is the extraction, processing, storage and sale of minerals from the facility.
14-1
Board DRAFT June 2013
Subd. 1614. PROCESSING: Any activity which may include the crushing, screening, washing, stockpiling, compounding, mixing, concentrating, or treatment of sand, gravels, rocks, or similar mineral products into consumable products such as construction grade sand, gravel, concrete, asphalt, proppant, glass, or other similar products. Subd. 1715. RECLAMATION: To renew land to self-sustaining long-term use which is compatible with contiguous land uses, present and future, in accordance with the standards set forth in this ordinance. Subd. 1816. SILICA SAND: Round formed sand having a high percentage of silicon dioxide (quartz) found primarily in high concentration in the Jordan and St. Peter Geologic Formations. Subd. 1917. SOIL: A natural three-dimensional body of the earths surface. Subd. 2018. SUBJECT PROPERTY: The land on which mineral extraction is permitted. Subd. 2119. TOPSOIL: The upper portion of soils present that is the most favorable material for plant growth. Subd. 2220. ZONING ORDINANCE: The Goodhue County Zoning Ordinance. SECTION 3. EXCEPTIONS FROM PERMIT REQUIREMENTS
A mineral extraction permit shall not be required for the following: Subd. 1. Subd. 2. Subd. 3. Subd. 4. Subd. 5. Subd. 6. Excavation for structure if a building permit has been issued. Excavation in a right-of-way, temporary easement, or utility corridor by state, county, city or township authorities in connection with construction or maintenance of public improvements. Excavations not exceeding four hundred (400) cubic yards annually. Excavation for agricultural purposes if the excavated material is not moved off-site. Excavation for public utility purposes. Temporary excavations involving mining operations associated with road construction, including commonly known as temporary borrow pits, used exclusively for public infrastructure construction projects A. Iif the project is under the administration of a public entity and the contract requires erosion control, sediment containment and site restoration provisions must be in compliance with at least as strict as those in the MPCAs NPDES General Storm Water Permit. B. These tTemporary borrow pits must be closed and restored within 24 months of the first date of work on the project. A.C. A reclamation plan as outlined in this ordinance as Map C must be submitted for approval by the Zoning Administrator prior to excavation. The Zoning Administrator may request appropriately licensed professionals to review the plan. Any costs for the plan review shall be paid for by the applicant. In addition, a financial security may be required. MINERAL EXTRACTION PERMIT REQUIRED Conditional/Interim Use Permits Owners and operators of any mineral extraction facility commencing on or after the adoption of this Ordinance shall obtain a conditional/interim use permit and shall be processed in accordance with Article 4 of this Ordinance and the additional procedures and requirements of this Article. Land Use Permits/Registration of Existing Mineral Extraction Facilities Existing mining extraction facilities shall not be required to obtain a conditional/interim use permit provided that the facility has been continuously registered with the County since July 2004 and provide the following information:
SECTION 4. Subd. 1.
Subd. 2.
The following items shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator: A. Name, address, phone number of contact person for the operator and landowner.
14-2
B. C. D. E. F. G. H.
I. J. K.
L. M.
Property boundaries by a Minnesota Licensed Land Surveyor. Existing structures. Existing drainage and permanent water areas. Existing vegetation. Existing wells and private sewer systems. Acreage and complete legal description of the subject property on which the facility is located, including all contiguous property owned by the landowners. A narrative outlining the type of material to be excavated mode of operation, estimated quantity of material to be extracted, plans for blasting, and other pertinent information to describe the existing Mineral Extraction Facility request in detail. Estimated time frame facility has been operated, to include hours per day, days per week, months per year, number of years in operation. A general description of surface waters, existing drainage patterns and groundwater conditions within one-quarter (1/4) mile of the subject property. Copies of all applicable state and federal application documents and operating permits, including but not limited to, MPCA permits, wetland permits, historical and archeological permits, storm water permits issue for the existing Mineral Extraction Facility. A description of site screening, landscaping, and security fencing. A description of the site hydrology and drainage characteristics during extraction for each phase of mineral extraction including plans to control erosion, sedimentation and water quality of storm water runoff.
Subd. 3.
Excavation Setbacks shall be in compliance with Section 6, Subdivision 4, L of this Article. Setbacks and performance standards for Registered Mines existing prior to the adoption of the August 2012 mining ordinance shall be governed by the terms of their existing conditional use permits or other permits, prior zoning regulations and performance standards in existence at the time of their initial operation, but shall be obligated to conform to all health and safety standards. As a condition of registration (Section 6, Subd.2 of this Article), Goodhue County staff has the right to access the subject property after providing notice to the operator. Mining operations shall be conducted so active extraction operation of the existing Mineral Extraction Facility exposes no more than forty (40) acres at any one time, unless approved by county staff. Mineral extraction facility operation sites (including extraction, processing, stockpiling, roads), shall be limited to no more than forty (40) acres of exposed or uncovered ground at any one time.
Subd. 4.
Subd. 5.
Subd. 6. Any significant change (such as a change in the primary product excavated or processed, increase in noise, dust, hours of operation, blasting, etc.) to the operations or use of the land approved under a current existing registered mineral extraction facility permit shall require an amended conditional/interim use permit and all procedures shall apply as if a new permit were being issued.
SECTION 5. CONDITIONAL/INTERIM USE PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW MINERAL EXTRACTION FACILITIES Subd. 1. Application Form: An application for a mineral extraction permit shall be submitted to the County on a form supplied by the County. The required maps and application Information shall include but not be limited to the following: A. Site maps of the proposed operations will show the entire site (s) and include areas within 600 feet of the site. All maps shall be drawn at a scale of one-inch (1) to two hundred feet (200) unless otherwise stated below: 1. Map A- Existing site conditions to include: 1. a. Property boundaries surveyed by a Minnesota Licensed Land Surveyor. 2. b. A survey which provides contour lines at five (5) foot intervals. 3. c. Existing vegetation including plant community, evaluation of condition of plant community, and dominate species 4. d. Existing structures.
14-3
e. Existing pipelines, power lines and other utilities. f. Easements affecting the permitted property. g. Adjacent public road right-of-way. h. Existing access points to public roads. i. Existing Bluff Impact zones according to Article 12 of this ordinance J. Test borings and monitoring wells used to characterize the site. k. Threatened and Endangered Species on the site and within mile of the site l. Distribution, thickness and type of existing topsoil and subsoil m.Location of existing historical, cultural, and archeological features identified in the SHPO and Countys databases and those not identified but discovered onsite 14. n.Location of areas previously affected by mining on site, including location of stockpiles, wash ponds, and sediment basins GEOLOGY 15.n Geologic units and contacts. 16.o Depth to bedrock (if applicable). 17.p Confining units (clays, shale, siltstone) 18.q Fracture patterns and traces (for rock quarries) 19.r Location of any known caves, joints, fractures, sinkholes, stream sinks, and springs HYDROLOGY 20s. Drainage patterns and permanent water areas within 600 feet of the property lines 21t. Water-table elevations with ground water flow direction 2u2. Wells within one mile radius of the property lines showing location, depth, static water level, age, and construction 23v. Location and elevation of any known springs within 600 feet of the property lines 24w. General location of septic systems within 600 feet of the property lines 25x. Location of designated trout streams within 600 feet of the property lines 2. Map B Proposed operations to include: a. Proposed Property boundaries of the mineral extraction facility extents surveyed by a Minnesota Licensed Land Surveyor. b.Vegetation protection plan for vegetation remaining on site c. Soil salvage plan, including storage areas, methods of protection from erosion, compaction and weeds d.Structures to be erected. 5. e. Location of sites to be mined showing depth of proposed excavation. 6. f.Location of tailing (strippings or overburden) deposits showing maximum height of deposits. 7. g.Location of processing areas and machinery to be used in the mining operation. 8. h. Location of storage of mined materials, showing height of storage deposits. 9. i. Location of vehicle parking. 10. j.Location of storage of explosives. 11. k.Location of fuel storage 12. l.Erosion and sediment control structures. 13. m. Water retention ponds 14. n. Drainage Plan including revisions to existing drainage patterns. 15. o. Proposed internal road system including typical cross sections. 16. p. Proposed new access points to adjacent public roads. 17. q,Proposed haul routes of vehicles removing material from the pit including current spring weight restrictions on the proposed routes. 3. Map C Reclamation plan. The Reclamation Plan must take into account the Performance Standards listed in this Article in addition to: 1. a. Property boundaries surveyed by a Minnesota Licensed Land Surveyor. 2. b. Final grade of proposed site showing elevations and contour lines at five (5) foot intervals. 3. c. Proposed land use after mining 4. d. Location, species, rate, and density of vegetation to be seeded and planted. 5. e. Location and nature of any structure to be erected in relation to the end use plan. 6. f. Proposed improvements such as roads, paths, ponds, etc. 7. g. Topsoil restoration plan
14-4
5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.
8. 9. 10.
11.
h. Rates, kinds, and location of soil amendments i. Mulching, erosion control fabric, and other soil stabilization methods j. Include the grading plans, topsoil protection and replacement, seeding, revegetation, mulching, erosion control, and sedimentation control specifications for each phase and final restoration. k.Including quantified performance standards for the reclamation and maintenance of each plant community to be restored. These shall be based on a minimum percent cover of acceptable vegetation, maximum percent cover of unacceptable vegetation, and minimum species diversity at reclamation milestones: 0-24 months, 2-5 years, 6 years or more after substantial completion. Acceptable and unacceptable vegetation shall be defined in the plan.
B. C. D. E.
Name, address, phone number, of contact person for the operator. Name, address, phone number of landowner. Acreage and complete legal description of the subject property, on which the facility will be located, including all contiguous property owned by the landowners. A narrative outlining the type of material to be excavated, mode of operation (including any screening, drying, and storage of material), estimated quantity of material to be extracted, plans for blasting, and other pertinent information to explain the request in detail. Estimated time frame to operate facility, to include hours per day, days per week, months per year, number of years in operation. A description of all vehicles and equipment estimated to be used by the operator in the operation of the facility. A description of the estimated average daily and peak daily number of vehicles accessing the facility. If more than one access to the pit is proposed to the Mineral Extraction facility, provide a breakdown of anticipated average daily and peak number of vehicles using each access. Any other information or documentation required for issuance of a conditional/interim use permit under Article 4 of this Ordinance.
F. G. H.
I. Subd. 2.
Supporting Documentation. Every application for a mineral extraction facility permit shall include submission of supporting documentation. The documentation must take into account the Performance Standards listed in this Article and may be presented in descriptive or map form. Supporting documentation shall include, but is not limited to the following: A. B. C. A description of existing land uses on the subject property. A description of land use designations in the Comprehensive Plan and zoning classifications of the subject property. A description of the soil, vegetation, mineral content and topography of the subject property. A minimum of three (3) soil boring logs representative of the site and a description of the subsurface materials on the subject property must be submitted. A general description of surface waters, existing drainage patterns and groundwater conditions within one-quarter (1/4) mile of the subject property. A general description of the depth, quantity, quality and intended uses of the mineral deposits on the subject property. Copies of all applicable state and federal application documents and operating permits, including but not limited to, MPCA permits, wetland permits (Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act and/or Corps. of Engineers), Historical and Archeological permits, Storm Water Permits, Mine Safety and Health Administration permits, and the required EAW for subject property over forty (40) acres. A description of the site hydrology and drainage characteristics during extraction for each phase of mineral extraction including plans to control erosion, sedimentation and water quality
14-5
D. E. F.
G.
of storm water runoff. H. If there are any proposed changes to the existing drainage patterns, include proposed mitigation plans to control downstream off site damage caused by any increase to the natural flow of water or any diversion of the existing natural flow of water. A description of actions to be taken to mitigate potential impacts resulting from mineral extraction and processing, including potential impact related to; wetlands, erosion, noise, air pollution, surface water contamination, traffic, dust or vibrations. A description of site screening, landscaping and security fencing. A description of the method in which complaints about any aspect of the mineral extraction facility operation or off-site transportation are to be received and the method which complaints are to be resolved, such as neighbor notifications, meetings, or property value guarantees A plan for groundwater quality protection. The plan shall include a minimum of three (3) borings showing depth to groundwater. If washing or processing are not proposed, and If groundwater is not encountered at a depth of fifteen (15) feet below the bottom of the proposed pit floor, the applicant need not extend borings any further. If washing/processing operation is proposed a minimum of three (3) monitoring wells shall be installed to evaluate the hydrogeologic environment. The County reserves the right to require additional borings or monitoring wells if necessary. A minimum of three (3) cross-sections showing the extent of overburden, extent of mineral deposits, the water table, and any evidence of the water table in the past. Description of methods to control the weight of the vehicles leaving the pit and the methods to insure vehicles do not travel on roads with weight limits lower than the weight of the vehicles. Description of methods to prevent mud and debris from being tracked onto public roads. If a mineral extraction facility proposes to dewater the site, a plan must be submitted that includes: dewatering points and their elevations hydro-geologic parameters of the unit dewatered including hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, and storativity proposed volume and rate of dewatering discharge point duration of dewatering
I.
J. K.
L.
M. N. O. P.
Q. Contingency Plans. A plan for responding to spills and berm/earthen dam failure, or accidental release of chemicals, process water, or tailings. R. Seismic Monitoring. If a mineral extraction facility proposes using explosives, a pre-blast survey performed by a Minnesota Licensed Engineer of surrounding dwellings and buildings within one half mile shall be conducted prior to initial blasting. Yearly seismic surveys will be offered and conducted by the applicants engineer if blasting has occurred within the previous year. S. Description of site security and property boundary signage to be utilized at the facility. T. Map of the location of public schools, churches, campgrounds, nursing homes, platted residential properties within one mile of the proposed Mineral Extraction Facilities property lines. Subd. 3. Additional Requirements for Underground Mining Extraction Facilities A. A description of the stability of lands overlaying the underground workings B. Locations of adits, ventilation shafts, and other surface openings C. Detailed description of water handling procedures, including dewatering and processing water D. A detailed description of the fate and transport of groundwater into and out of the mine workings. E. Residential and farm wells will be centered inside a 500 foot radius of undisturbed ground F. Designs for mining under public roads require approval of the road authority
14-6
G. Mining or tunneling must maintain a 200 foot vertical extension setback from permanent surface structures Subd. 4. Permitting Procedure for Conditional/Interim Use Permits: A. Application. A request for a mineral extraction conditional/interim use permit, as provided within this Ordinance, shall be filed with the Zoning Administrator on an official application form, the required application fee shall be paid, and a deposit made to reimburse the County for its out-of-pocket costs in processing the application. 1. The application shall also be accompanied by twenty (20) hard copies and one electronic copy of the detailed written and graphic materials fully explaining the proposed change, development, or use as specified in this Article. 2. If a Mining Technical Evaluation Panel report is required, it must accompany the application in order for the application to be considered complete. 3. The Zoning Administrator shall refer the application along with all related information, to the County Planning Advisory Commission for consideration. B. Notice. The Zoning Administrator shall notice a public hearing as specified in Section 3 of Article 4 of this Ordinance. Additional Information. The Planning Commission and County staff shall have the authority to request additional information from the applicant or to retain expert testimony with the consent and at the expense of the applicant if said information is declared to be necessary by the County to review the request or to establish performance conditions in relation to this Ordinance. Referrals. The Planning Commission, County staff, and County Board may refer the application for review and comment to other agencies, including but not limited to the Soil and Water Conservation District, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, or the Mining Technical Evaluation Panel. Recommendation. The Planning Commission shall make a finding of fact and recommend such actions or conditions relating to the request to the County Board. The County may impose such additional restrictions or conditions as deemed necessary to protect the public interest. These conditions may include, but are not limited to the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Matters relating to the appearance of the Mineral Extraction Facility. Hours of operation. Increasing setbacks. Blasting notifications and frequency. Limiting the height, size or location of buildings and stockpiles. Controlling the location and number of vehicle access points. Increasing street width and improving access conditions, including turn lanes, bypass lanes, etc. Increasing the number of required off street parking spaces. Limiting the number, size, location, or lighting of signs. Requiring diking, berming, fencing, screening, landscaping, or other facilities to protect adjacent or nearby property. Designating sites for open space. Delineating the area to be mined, total size and open area at any one time. Requiring phased reclamation. Requiring financial security to guarantee compliance with the conditions of approval. Water quality monitoring. On and off site improvements to mitigate impacts caused by revisions to the natural flow of surface waters. Requiring conditions that would mitigate silica sand ambient air particles from leaving the facility property.
C.
D.
E.
F.
County Boards Action and Findings. The County Board shall approve, modify, or deny the request and state the findings of its actions. Approval of a Conditional Use/Interim Use Permit shall require passage by majority vote of the full County Board. The Zoning Administrator
14-7
shall notify the applicant of the County Boards action. G. H. Reapplication/Lapse of Conditional Use Permit. The Board shall not accept reapplication for the same or substantially same Conditional/Interim Use Permit within six (6) months of denial. Amended Conditional/Interim Use Permit. Any change to the operations or use of the land approved under a current conditional use permit shall require an amended conditional/interim use permit and all procedures shall apply as if a new permit were being issued.
SECTION 6. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR REGISTRATION/LAND USE PERMITS AND CONDITIONAL/INTERIM USE PERMITS Subd. 1. Security. The County shall require the applicant or owner of the property on which the mineral extraction is occurring, to post a letter of credit, bond, or cash escrow in such form and sum as determined by the Board as part of the permit. The security shall be sufficient to reimburse the following costs: A. Costs of bringing the operation into compliance with the mineral extraction permit requirements including site monitoring and enforcement costs. Extraordinary costs of repairing roads due to the special burden resulting from the hauling of materials and traffic associated with the operation. Site restoration. Costs the county may incur in enforcing the terms of the conditional use permit, and land use permit, including attorneys fees. Bonds shall be for a minimum of one (1) year and shall include a provision for notification to the County at least thirty (30) days prior to cancellation or non-renewal.
B. C. D. E.
Subd. 2.
Annual Registration. Annual registration of all mineral extraction facility permits is required. The purpose of the annual registration is to maintain an updated listing of active mineral extraction facilities in the County, to decertify any permits where the activity has ceased, to monitor compliance with the conditions of approval and to review the applicability of the conditions and to review bonding requirements. A. Permit holders must complete and return registration forms provided by the County. Failure to maintain registration shall be cause for revocation of the permit. Other Goodhue County conditional/interim use permits may expire if there is no activity authorized under the permit within one (1) year of permit approval. B. Conditional/Interim use permits and land use permits for mineral extraction facilities will not automatically expire because there is no activity as authorized with in a years time as long as the permitee complies with the annual registration specified herein. Annual registration is done administratively by the Zoning Administrator and will not require a review by the Planning Commission or the Board of Commissioners provided all conditions are being met and the activity meets all standards as outlined in this Ordinance, other permits, Road Impact Agreements, and Development Agreements. For underground mineral extraction facilities, a map prepared by a Minnesota Licensed Land Surveyor showing the property boundaries, the location, depth, size, and elevation of the tunnels and extent of the area mined must be submitted with the annual registration fee. Permit holders must show current proof of insurance coverage for the facility operations and property with each annual registration. Use Restrictions. The following uses are prohibited unless specifically authorized in the mineral extraction permit:
C.
D.
E.
Subd. 3.
14-8
A.
The production or manufacturing of veneer stone, sills, lintels, out flagstone, hearthstones, paving stone and similar architectural or structural stone, and the storing or stockpiling of such products on the site. The manufacture of concrete building blocks or other similar blocks permanent ready-mixed concrete, or permanent asphalt production plants and any similar production or manufacturing processes.
B.
Subd. 4.
Mineral Extraction Facilities Performance Standards . The following performance standards apply to all mineral extraction facilities in the County: A. Recommended Hours of Operation. Mineral extraction facilities shall operate only between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday unless specified otherwise in the conditional use permit for the facility. 1. Operators are allowed a maximum of five (5) one-day extensions to the hours of operation for evening work in a calendar year. Operators must notify the County three working days in advance of the proposed extension. 2. Other exceptions to the hours of operation must be approved by the County Zoning Administrator. Approval may only be granted in conjunction with the furnishing of material for a public improvement, public safety or a public good project, that is underway during hours that the mineral extraction facility is not otherwise allowed to operate. Approval will be limited to those functions that cannot occur during normal hours of operation. B. Fencing. Fencing, signs, and barriers are required around ponding areas and steep sloped excavation areas unless, because of their location they are not deemed to create a safety hazard. Access. The permittee must obtain a permit from the road authority for all proposed new access points to public roads. The road authority may restrict the weight of vehicles allowed to use any permitted access. Roadway Dust Control. Operators shall be responsible for providing continuous dust control during facility operation on gravel roads that are the primary routes to or from a mineral excavation facility. . Watering roadways or other dust control measures along paved roads accessing the facility such as pavement sweeping and wheel washing may be required.
C.
D.
E. Mineral Extraction Facility Dust Control and Air Quality. To mitigate public nuisances and public health concerns the County shall require dust control in a mineral extraction facility. 1. Remedies to control dust may include methods such as berming, landscaping, enclosures for processing equipment, and watering stockpiled materials and all roads within the site 2. All equipment used for mining operations shall be constructed, maintained, and operated in such a manner as to minimize, as far as practicable, dust conditions which are injurious or substantially annoying to persons living within six hundred feet (600) of the mineral extraction facility lot line. 3. The County may require air quality/air particulate monitoring of a mineral extraction facility. Mineral Extraction Facilities that excavate, transfer, process or stockpile silica sand shall monitor air quality/air particulates as described herein. Monitoring equipment shall be in accordance with MPCA or the Goodhue County best practices standards, whichever are more stringent. a) If required, the operator shall begin air quality/air particulate and weather monitoring at least six months prior to operation to create a baseline of the area. b) Stationary monitors shall be located at strategic locations along the mineral extraction facility property lines, within the site, and may also be required to be located at neighboring residences within 600 feet of the facilities property lines. c) Continuous remote readings shall be taken and reported to the County when requested; a summary report shall accompany the operations annual renewal documentation and fees.
14-9
F.
Noise. Maximum noise levels at the facility will be consistent with the standards established by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. To mitigate public nuisances, the facility shall use County approved practices including building berms, enclosing generators, and leaving existing trees at the property boundaries to minimize noise impacts. Vibration. Operators shall use all practical means to eliminate adverse impacts on adjacent properties from vibration of equipment according to all Federal and State laws, rules and statutes. Blasting. Seismic blasting records shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator within 10 days of receiving the blast analysis. Water Resources. The mineral extraction operation shall not allow surface water to leave the site in a manner that causes flooding, erosion, or alteration of natural drainage patterns. The mineral extraction operation shall not adversely affect the quantity and quality of surface or subsurface water. Surface water leaving the site shall be of equal quality as water originating off site before it passes through the site. The operator shall perform any water treatment necessary to comply with this provision. Screening. Screening barriers shall be subject to the approval of the permitting authority. 1. To minimize problems of dust and noise and to shield mining operations from public view, a screening barrier may be required between the mining site and adjacent properties. 2. A screening barrier may be required between the mineral extraction facility and any public road. 3. A screening barrier may be required to mitigate visual impacts of the mineral extraction facility from existing historical, cultural, recreational features and dwellings, including but not limited to trails, navigable waters, and sites identified in the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and Countys cultural databases. Unauthorized Storage. Vehicles, equipment, or materials not associated with the mineral extraction facility or not in operable condition may not be kept or stored at the facility. Setbacks. The following minimum setbacks shall be maintained from property boundaries at the surface and their vertical extensions below the surface: 1. No mining activities, (including stockpiling) shall take place within fifty (50) feet of adjoining property lines, except for visual screening, reclamation, and berming of overburden material unless by written consent of the owner of the adjoining property is first secured and recorded with the county recorder and a copy submitted to the Zoning Administrator.
G.
H. I.
J.
K. L.
2. One thousand (1000) feet from any existing dwelling or platted residential subdivision, not owned by the operator or owner. The setback may be reduced down to three hundred (300) feet if written consent of the owner of the adjoining property is first secured, recorded with the county recorder and a copy submitted to the Zoning Administrator. This paragraph is not applicable for Mineral Extraction Facilities in operation before and has been used annually since a subdivision within 300 feet of the Mineral Extraction Facilities was platted. 3. Setbacks for new dwellings and new platted residential subdivisions shall be reciprocal unless the mineral extraction facility agrees to waive the setback by written consent and recorded with the county recorder and a copy of the recorded consent submitted to the Zoning Administrator. 34. Fifty (50) feet to the boundary of any zone where such operations are not permitted. 45. Fifty (50) feet of any road right-of-way line of any existing or platted street, road, or highway, unless written consent by the adjacent road authority with jurisdiction over rightof-way and a copy submitted to the Zoning Administrator. 56. No mining activity shall take place within fifty (50) feet of any road right-of-way of any
14-10
existing or platted street, road or highway, except for berm construction, vegetative screening, or maintenance activities unless by written consent of the adjacent road authority having jurisdiction over the right-of-way. 7. Mineral extraction facilities must conform to shoreland and DNR regulated trout stream regulations. Setbacks from shoreland areas, trout streams, and other water resources such as sinks, springs, and seeps may be imposed based upon the proposal and the potential risks to these areas.
6.8 The Planning Commission or County Board may increase the setbacks based upon residential locations, social or economic concerns, type of mining, or to mitigate public nuisance concerns.
M.
Phasing. Phasing plans must be prepared for all mineral extraction facilities. The proposed size of the extraction, processing, staging, and stockpiling operations are to be identified. Size of each operation may be limited by the permit approving authority. Weed Control. The operators shall be required to control noxious weeds and mow or harvest other vegetation to maintain reasonable appearance of the site. Waste Disposal. Any waste generated from the mining operation, including waste from vehicle or equipment maintenance, shall be disposed of in accordance with Federal, State, and County requirements. 1. Portable asphalt and concrete plants to be approved on a per project basis by the permitting authority. 2. An estimate of the amount of recycled concrete and asphalt material to be processed must be submitted. An estimate of the time required and the amount required to be stockpiled before being processed must be submitted.
N.
O.
P.
Water Quality Monitoring. Water Quality monitoring shall be performed when a mineral extraction facility meets any of the following:is: a. Mining below the water table b. If the property lines are within 600 feet of known Karst features, springs, streams, or lakes c. If the operation is proposing to dewater the site d. If the site is using chemicals as part of the washing or ponding process e. If otherwise required by the County Board or the MPCA f. If mining silica sand 1. If a washing/processing operation is proposed a minimum of three (3) monitoring wells shall be installed to evaluate the hydro-geologic environment. The County reserves the right to require additional borings or monitoring wells if necessary. 2. A Water Monitoring Plan shall include placing a sufficient number of monitoring wells in strategic locations along the property lines and within the site to adequately characterize and monitor surface and groundwater. 3. Monitoring of residential wells within 600 feet of the property lines may also be required 4. Continuous remote readings shall be taken and reported to the County when requested; a summary report shall accompany the operations annual renewal documentation and fees. General Compliance. The operators must comply with all other federal, state, regional, county, and local laws and regulations applicable to the operation of the mineral extraction facility, including but not limited to floodplain management regulations, shoreland management regulations, and Zoning Ordinance regulations. Additional Regulations. The County may impose additional regulations and requirements to the mineral extraction facility to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. Land Reclamation. The following minimum standards and conditions shall apply: the
14-11
Q.
R.
S.
reclamation plan is a crucial component of this ordinance and shall follow Best Practices and approved plans. It is expected that reclamation will be occurring in phases and completed in step with the opening of new excavation areas of the facility. 1. Land shaping. For sand and aggregate facilities, final grades may not exceed one (1) foot vertical to three (3) feet horizontal slope except for rehabilitated areas in existence at the time of adoption of this Ordinance. In completing final grading in each phase, the top of the slope may begin twenty (20) feet from property lines. Proposed topography shall fit in with regional topography and mirror landforms typical of Goodhue County 2. Soil restoration, vegetation, and stabilization. a. If the restoration plan includes areas intended for plant growth, topsoil depth shall be replaced within 2 inches of the original undisturbed depth, with a minimum thickness of 4-6 inches. If the land use following reclamation is intended for row crop agricultural production, a minimum topsoil thickness may need to be increased. b. Seeding and mulching shall be consistent with approved plans, permits and Best Practices. c. Soil restoration, seeding, and mulching must occur within each phase as soon as final grades, or interim grades identified in the phasing plans, have been reached. d. Soil erosion and sedimentation control plans shall be submitted to the County and be consistent with MPCAs General Storm Water Permit and NPDES/SDS permits. 3.Reclamation plan review. A comprehensive review of the reclamation plan is necessary to stay current with the progress of the facility, address issues, adjust financial securities, and incorporate current Best Practices. Reclamation plans may be required to be amended in order to address these concerns. a. Reclamation plans will be reviewed after the first year of permitting, and as needed thereafter, yet no more than three years between the reviews. b. Site visits may be required as part of the review and evaluation. c. As-built surveys, soil borings, or other testing may be required as part of the review to ensure phased reclamation is completed according to the approved or amended reclamation plan. d. Amended reclamation plans may need to be reviewed by the Mining Technical Evaluation Panel. e. Amended reclamation plans must be approved by the Planning Commission, or may be approved administratively if the changes are consistent with the overall final concept. f. All final grades and restoration must be consistent with the approved and amended reclamation plans.
1. For gravel pits, final grades may not exceed one (1) vertical to three (3) horizontal slope except for rehabilitated areas in existence at the time of adoption of this Ordinance. In completing final grading in each phase, the top of the slope may begin twenty (20) feet from property lines. a. Proposed topography shall fit in with regional topography and mirror landforms typical of Goodhue County b. For rock quarries, the permittee shall submit a plan to explain how the quarries are to be rehabilitated. 2. A minimum of three (3) inches of topsoil shall be placed on all graded surfaces. 3. Seeding and mulching shall be consistent with Minnesota Department of Transportation specifications for rights-of-way. Areas returned to agricultural production are exempt from the seeding and mulching requirements. 4. Soil restoration, seeding, and mulching must occur within each phase as soon as final grades, or interim grades identified in the phasing plans, have been reached. a. Land shall be reclaimed to native vegetation unless inconsistent with final proposed land use. b. Proposed land uses shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning requirements and applicable local, state, and federal regulations in effect at the
14-12
time the plan is submitted, and may be required to be amended over time. 5. Soil erosion and sedimentation control measures shall be consistent with MPCAs Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas and MPCAs General Storm Water Permit. 6. Unless otherwise amended or approved by the County, all final grades and site restoration efforts shall be consistent with the Reclamation Plan. 4.7. Within twelve (12) months after completion of mineral extraction or after termination of the permit, all equipment, vehicles, machinery, materials, and debris shall be removed from the subject property. 85. Site reclamation must be completed Wwithin twelve (12) months after completion of mineral extraction, or after termination of the permit, or according to an approved plan schedule,site reclamation must be completed. Failure to annually register the mineral extraction facility will be considered termination of the mineral extraction facility and the twelve (12) month period begins. 9. All water areas resulting from excavation shall be addressed upon reclamation of the site. In unique instances where the County Board has reviewed proposals for water bodies at the time of approval of the overall plan and has determined that such would be appropriate as an open space or recreational amenity in subsequent reuse of the site, water bodies may be permitted. T. Best Practices The County expects applications to incorporate Best Practice standards into the design, operation, and reclamation of Mineral Extraction Facilities. A list of Best Practice documents is available through the Zoning Administrator. The County reserves the right to update the list as appropriate.
TU. Violations and Penalties. 1. Any firm, person or corporation who violates any of the provisions of these regulations shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be subject to a fine and/or imprisonment as provided by law. Each day that a violation is permitted to exist shall constitute a separate offense. 2. In the event of a violation or threatened violation of any of the terms of this Ordinance, the County may take appropriate action to enforce this Ordinance, including exercising the performance bonds application for injunctive relief, action to compel performance, or other appropriate action to court if necessary to prevent, restrain, correct or abate such violations or threatened violations. Upon motion, the court may award costs, disbursements and reasonable attorneys fees and witness fees, which costs and fees can be assessed against the property. Subd. 5. Mineral Extraction Facilities may be required to enter into Road Impact and Development Agreements as conditions of their permit and registration. A. Road Impact Studies and Agreements: When a proposed or amended Conditional/Interim Use Permit is requested, the County may require a Road Impact Study and a Road Impact Agreement to alleviate the additional burden on the Countys financial resources associated with the road infrastructure maintenance affected by granting the request. B. Development Agreements. When a proposed or amended Conditional/Interim Use Permit is requested, the County may require a Development Agreement. SECTION 7. MINING TECHNICAL EVALUATION PANEL PROCEDURES. Subd. 1 The members of the Mining Technical Evaluation Panel shall consist of two or more professional experts in the fields of mining, engineering, geology, hydrology, ecology, and landscape architecture.
14-13
Subd. 2
The Zoning Administrator will advertise every five years, or as needed, for Request for Qualifications for the Mining Technical Evaluation Panel professionals. The Zoning Administrator shall maintain a list of qualified professionals from which to choose for evaluation of individual proposals. The Zoning Administrator will present the proposed list to the Planning Advisory Commission and County Board for review. Mining Technical Evaluation Panel members must not have a pecuniary interest in the project, including any present financial relationship from the applicant company, or worked on the mineral extraction facility proposal and must disclose potential conflict of interest for each proposal they review. When the Zoning Administrator determines that a proposal warrants a review by the Mining Technical Evaluation Panel, the applicant must submit the information required in Sections 5 and 6 of this Article to the Zoning Administrator to distribute to the Panel. The Zoning Administrator will assemble the Panel and distribute the material. The material shall also be distributed to the County engineer and SWCD staff. The applicant shall respond to any questions or requests for more information or clarification from the Mining Technical Evaluation Panel in a timely manner. The Mining Technical Evaluation Panel shall have 30 days after the material is distributed to review the proposal in accordance with this Article and report the results of their review. The report will be submitted to the Zoning Administrator and made part of the application.
Subd. 3
Subd.4
Subd. 5
Subd. 6
14-14
PROPOSED GOODHUE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT

In order to address concerns regarding potential issues that may arise if silica sand mineral extraction facilities are proposed in Goodhue County once the current moratorium on the permitting of silica sand mineral extraction facilities ends, the following Draft Amendment to the Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan has been prepared for consideration by the Goodhue County Board of Commissioners. This proposed amendment to the Goodhue Comprehensive Plan would expand on the current Element 1, Goal 7 that is oriented solely on aggregate resources with the intent of keeping that particular nonmetallic mineral resource available for future needs. The revised Element 1, Goal 7, recognizes that there are additional non-metallic mineral resources present in Goodhue County including silica sand and establishes a broader planning framework to guide responsible planning and regulation of various nonmetallic mineral extraction facilities. Delete the following language from the 2004 Goodhue County Comprehensive Plan, Element 1, Goal 7:
GOAL 7: PRESERVATION OF AGGREGATE DEPOSITS Manage and maintain aggregate resources in future growth zones. SUMMARY The Twin Cities have been challenged with the dilemma of diminishing aggregate resources due to urban development over those resources. It has proved to be excessively expensive to haul aggregate long distances. Managing our aggregate resources will ensure adequate economical quantities to meet Goodhue County needs. Policy 1. Discourage mining in environmentally sensitive areas. 2. Discourage mining in prime farmable agricultural areas. 3. Ensure each mining site has a reclamation plan. 4. Consider the preservation of aggregate deposits when approving added housing density.
Replace Element 1, Goal 7 with the following:
GOAL 7: Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources

SUMMARY Various non-metallic mineral resources of commercial value are present in Goodhue County. These include clay, peat, industrial sand and gravel, limestone and dolomite, and silica sand. The mining and use of some of these resources has played an important role in the development of Goodhue County. Heightened interest in non-metallic mineral extraction has arisen in recent years due to increased demand for silica sand for use in the oil and natural gas industries. Increased public awareness regarding the potential for negative environmental impacts related to mineral extraction facilities and related transportation of various non-metallic mineral products emphasizes the need to thoughtfully plan and responsibly regulate this land use that has the potential to bring significant change to the Goodhue County Landscape. County policies to guide management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources are needed to support official
1|Page
controls including land use regulations and infrastructure investment programs and projects to protect the public health safety and welfare. Policies should strive to minimize land use conflicts and degradation of the Countys scenic, recreational and natural resources while allowing limited opportunities for development of mineral extraction facilities. In addition, it remains essential that the Countys rural land use policies recognize the need to keep aggregate resources needed to supply local and regional infrastructure and development projects accessible into foreseeable future. Policy 1. Protect environmentally sensitive areas. Utilize the Countys Environmental Constraints Land Use Model (ECLUE) and all other available data resources as tools to evaluate potential impact on environmentally sensitive areas from mining of non-metallic mineral resources and utilize that information as part of Best Practice management of facilities. 2. Establish and administer official controls to responsibly regulate non-metallic mineral extraction, processing and transportation facilities. This shall include any official controls that may be needed to address specific health issues or potential environmental impacts unique to silica sand mining, processing and transportation. 3. Evaluate any proposed new Mineral Extraction Facility or any proposed changes to any existing Mineral Extraction Facility to determine if the proposed project would be subject to requirements of the Minnesota Environmental Review program pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 116D.04 and 116D.045 and the administrative rules adopted by the EQB as Minnesota Rules, chapter 4410, parts 4410.0200 to 4410.7070. 4. Ensure that Environmental Review and/or Permitting Procedures for Non-Metallic Mineral Extraction Facilities follow the steps defined in the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Standards and Guidelines for the entire Area of Potential Effect (APE) for any proposed mineral extraction facility. 5. Plan and regulate the development, operation and reclamation of non-metallic mineral extraction facilities to be compatible with other rural land uses, understanding the priority and importance of maintaining an agricultural farming community. 6. Require non-metallic mineral extraction, processing and transportation facilities to adhere to best management practices as recognized by Goodhue County. 7. Plan and regulate the use of land in rural Goodhue County to ensure on-going cost effective availability of aggregate to meet County and Regional needs. 8. Work closely with Goodhue County Townships and Cities to best determine areas within the county where various types of non-metallic mineral extraction and related activities may be most suitable from both land use compatibility and public acceptance standpoints. 9. Periodically analyze and evaluate demand versus supply of aggregate resources necessary to meet local needs.
2|Page
GoodhueCounty
MiningStudy Committee

Goodhue County Board of Commissioners: District 1: Ron Allen District 2: Richard Samuelson District 3: Dan Rechtzigel District 4: Jim Bryant District 5: Ted Seifert Mining Study Committee Members: Commissioner District: Member Name: st 1 (Ron Allen) Roseanne Grosso* nd 2 (Richard Samuelson) John Hobert rd 3 (Dan Rechtzigel) Rich Ellingsberg th 4 (Jim Bryant) John Tittle th 5 (Ted Seifert) Howard Stenerson Environmentalist: Beau Kennedy, SWCD *Members of the 2002 committee studying Mineral Extraction Facility ordinance updates
Planning Advisory Committee Members: Bernie Overby Joan Volz Mining Experts: John Litsenberger Ken Kuhn*
Goodhue County Land Use Management Staff: Lisa M. Hanni, L.S. Director Michael Wozniak, AICP, Planner/Zoning Administrator Kristi Gross, AICP Zoning Assistant
Other Goodhue County staff from Land Use Management, Geographic Information Systems, Assessors, Public Works, and the County Attorneys offices provided valuable insight and information as part of this study process.
1|Page
Mining Study Committee
Contents INTRODUCTION RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC AND RECREATIONAL VALUE COORDINATING WITH THE STATE AGENCIES AND LEGISLATURE EXISTING REGISTERED MINES PROS/CONS OF BANNING SILICA SAND MINING HOURS OF OPERATION LOCATION RESTRICTIONS LIMIT SILICA SAND OPERATION SIZES MEETING WITH TOWNSHIP OFFICIALS DISENFRANCHISEMENT OF LANDOWNERS WITH THE SILICA SAND RESOURCE DEFINING BEST PRACTICES RECLAMATION EMERGENCY FUNDS APPENDIX A- SOURCES OF BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES APPENDIX B- MAPS
3 5 6 7 9 15 17 21 23 24 25 26 28 31 34
2|Page
Introduction
This document is the second report prepared by the Mining Study Committee (MSC). At the August 16, 2012 County Board meeting the Goodhue County Board of Commissioners approved a one year extension of the citizen request to put a moratorium on the issuance of any Conditional Use Permit for a new silica/frac sand mining operation (Mineral Extraction Facility) within rural Goodhue County. The County Board accepted and approved the Planning Advisory Committees (PAC) findings and recommendation, which included the MSCs report and recommendations. In addition to extension, the County Board listed eighteen other items for the MSC to review: 1. Relationship between economic and recreational value 2. Explore statewide study with the legislature 3. Existing mines not grandfathered 4. Pros/Cons of banning silica sand mining 5. Hours of operation 6. Setbacks to dwellings and sensitive features 7. Quantity limits on mining 8. High, medium and low impact mining classification 9. Meeting with Township Officials 10. How to evaluate silica sand differently, based on intensity and size, and create a definition and specific rules for it 11. Disenfranchisement of the landowners who currently own this resource 12. Land reclamation 13. Defining best practices 14. Emergency fund 15. Comprehensive Plan and silica sand 16. More definition for the reclamation funds (how to estimate, provide a three year projected amount) 17. Explore production tax or other revenue-capture financial options 18. Evaluate if there are areas that would be inappropriate for mining As a number of these items had similar discussions, we grouped the items under the following headings: Relationship between Economic and Recreational Value (1) Coordinating with State Agencies and Legislature (2, 17) Existing Registered Mines (3) Pros/Cons of Banning Silica Sand Mining (4) Hours of Operation (5) Location Restrictions (6,10,18) Limit Silica Sand Operation Sizes (7,8,10) Meeting With Township Officials (9) Disenfranchisement of Landowners with the Silica Sand Resource (11) Defining Best Practices (13) Reclamation (12,16) Emergency Funds (14) Comprehensive Plan and Silica Sand (15) Through this process, the committee has consolidated their discussions, research, and suggested ordinance changes with this document. It was felt that some of the background information and discussion would be beneficial to those not
3|Page
directly involved in the process to understand the thoughts and reasons behind the suggested wording changes and, why some of the ordinance wording has not changed. Please refer to the additional information concerning the Committees work at: http://www.co.goodhue.mn.us/countygovernment/committees/MiningCommittee/Miningcomm.aspx
4|Page
Relationship between economic and recreational value

This issue was discussed in the last report of the Mining Study Committee. The County has mapped existing dwelling locations and its extensive historical, cultural, and recreational features dataset. Staff provided individual maps of the Countys existing registered mining parcels showing a one mile buffer and all of the aforementioned datasets. Wording was added to the ordinance to include additional requirements for screening barriers between the operation and certain features: Article 14, Section 6, Subd.4 J. Mineral Extraction Facilities Performance Standards. J. Screening Barriers. Screening barriers shall be subject to the approval of the permitting authority. 1.To minimize problems of dust and noise and to shield mining operations from public view, a screening barrier may be required between the mining site and adjacent properties. 2.A screening barrier may be required between the mineral extraction facility and any public road. 3 .A screening barrier may be required to mitigate visual impacts of the mineral extraction facility from existing historical, cultural, recreational features and dwellings, including but not limited to trails, navigable waters, and sites identified in the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and Countys cultural and archeological databases. In addition to the above wording, as part of Map A in the ordinance, any proposed application must include the Location of existing historical, cultural, and archeological features identified in the SHPO and Countys databases and those not identified but discovered onsite. Through the application review process, other information such as haul routes and hours of operation are presented in order to ascertain if restrictions to any part of the operation should be added as conditions, or if the operation is such that it does not fit in the location as proposed, the application can be denied. The tourism industry in Goodhue County has been shown to have significant importance to the economic health of the community. There are also economic benefits from the current mining operations in the County. Both industries bring jobs and revenue into the County. As in all land use decisions, it is important to find the right balance and location for proposed uses. The last few decades in Goodhue County have seen the local economy supported primarily through the agricultural and tourism industries. The MSC recommends that the PAC address recognition of the economic value of tourism and recreational facilities and opportunities in the Countys Comprehensive Plan.
5|Page
Coordinating with the State Agencies and Legislature

As the topic of silica sand mining increases throughout the state and region, it was suggested that County become engaged in a conversation with the legislators about various state-wide initiatives. One initiative proposed by opponents of silica sand mining was to petition the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) to order a statewide Generic Environment Impact Study (GEIS) and to recommend a statewide moratorium on silica sand mining during the study. One bill (SF 425, HF0425) that has been introduced in the 2013 legislative session is to request appropriations from bond proceeds to fund the acquisition of land or interests in land as scientific and natural areas where industrial silica sand resources are likely to be mined; and to appropriate funds from bond proceeds to acquire permanent easements to prevent industrial silica sand mining in wellhead protection areas. Other bills concerning restrictions on silica sand mining are expected to be introduced. Another bill (SF 796, HF742) restricts silica sand mining within one mile of any spring, groundwater seepage area, fen, designated trout stream, class 2a water, or any perennially flowing tributary of a designated trout stream or class 2a water within the DNR designated Paleozoic Plateau Ecological Section. It also prohibits the DNR from issuing any water use permits associated with silica sand mining within this designated area, and prohibits silica sand mining within 25 feet of the static water level within this designated area. Other Revenue capturing options: One area that could be addressed would be in the existing aggregate tax legislation (MS 298.75) which sets the amount of production tax on aggregate material (including silica sand) and how the tax is distributed to different funds within the county and townships. The rate is 21.5 cents per cubic yard or 15 cents per ton of material excavated or imported into a County that has adopted the tax. The market value for silica sand is significantly higher than other aggregate and could have a different rate imposed upon it. As the topic continues to be debated, the County will monitor the various legislative activities proposed.
6|Page
Existing Registered Mines

It is recognized that the Existing Registered Mines (ERM) have rights and conditions that pre-date the current ordinance adopted in August 2012, that may be in conflict with this ordinance. It is also recognized that the County understands the importance and significance that our ERM operations play as an essential partner in County and Regional construction projects. Because of the similarities between the mining processes of silica sand mining and other non-metallic mining operations, the MSC, PAC, and the County Board maintained one ordinance for all non-metallic mining operations. However, due to the uncertainty of some of the potential health concerns, the ordinance has outlined additional requirements specifically for silica sand mining. Non-Conforming ERM Staff has reviewed the ERMs to understand if any of them would have non-conforming aspects to their operation as compared with the current ordinance. Below is a summary of the items: Some of the operations registered numerous contiguous parcels Seven had platted residential property within 300 feet Five operations had hours of operation different than what is listed in ordinance Of the eleven mines that are closest to the Jordan formation: o Five are designed/mining at the 300 foot setback from a dwelling o 0-17 cultural features (listed in the Countys dataset) are within one mile of the mine o Eight have water features within 400 feet o Ten are either mining bluffs or are surrounded by bluffs Setbacks When the pre-August 2012 ordinance was reviewed, it was noted that the existing mines and any new mines had the same setback wording. For efficiency, one proposed change was to have the existing mines language simply refer to the section for setbacks under the new mines. At that time, the setbacks to dwellings and platted residential properties was at 300 feet. When the County Board altered the distance to dwellings and residential platted property to 1000 feet, it also affected the ERM setback. It is believed that it was not the intention to affect the ERM in that manner. To avoid potential conflict with existing registered mine setbacks a suggested wording for discussion could be as follows: Section 4. MINERAL EXTRACTION PERMIT REQUIRED Subd. 3 Excavation Setbacks shall be in compliance with Section 6, Subdivision 4, L of this Article. Setbacks and performance standards for Registered Mines existing prior to the adoption of the August 2012 mining ordinance shall be governed by the terms of their existing conditional use permits or other permits, prior zoning regulations and performance standards in existence at the time of their initial operation, but shall be obligated to conform to all health and safety standards. Existing Registered Mines and Silica Sand Mining Some counties are currently reviewing this same issue about allowing existing mines to begin silica sand mining operations. As we have learned from past experiences, when enforcing Land Use or Conditional Use Permits, specificity is important. Although the mines that registered in the 2002 ordinance provided the necessary information, listing what they intended to mine did not have the importance as it does today it was all non-metallic mining. Part of this discussion includes our definition of Accessory Uses which are described as follows and permitted with Mineral Extraction Facilities:
Article 14, Section 2. Definitions Subd. 1. ACCESSORY USES: Accessory uses of a mineral extraction facility include the manufacture, storage and sale of products made from minerals on the premises and storage and sale of minerals, recycled asphalt, recycled
7|Page
concrete and topsoil not extracted on the premises. In addition, the storage and manufacture of explosives may be permitted as an accessory use of a mineral extraction facility-subject to approval of a conditional use permit.
If an existing registered mine begins to mine silica sand, it would have to be determined if the action has significantly gone beyond their permitted conditions. Some questions to ask to determine if it has significantly changed are: Does the operation meet the Performance Standards listed in Section 6, Subd. 4? Is there an increase in traffic, noise, dust, hours of operation, etc. (even if an accessory use is a permitted use)? Is it a temporary or permanent change? Will it affect the neighboring landowners in a different way? If it is determined that a use has changed significantly, the County would require either the permit to be amended or come completely under the new rules. In either case, the action would require public hearings at the PAC and the County Board. Suggested wording to address this concern would be:
Article 14, Section 4. Mineral Extraction Permit Required
Subd. 6. Any significant change (such as a change in the primary product excavated or processed, increase in noise, dust, hours of operation, blasting, etc.) to the operations or use of the land approved under a current existing registered mineral extraction facility permit shall require an amended conditional/interim use permit and all procedures shall apply as if a new permit were being issued. Understanding that some of the ERMs were established years ago by use or land use permits and not Conditional Use Permits, staff will coordinate with them in the future to ensure that they provide additional information including more detailed reclamation plans and securities.
8|Page
Pros/Cons of banning silica sand mining

The MSC discussed the pros and cons of banning silica sand mining many times throughout the course of the nearly 18 months of meetings, and more specifically at length after receiving the County Attorneys opinion. This moratorium was a citizen request by those who do not wish to have silica sand mining in the County. Their major concerns range from known and unknown issues involving water, dust, transportation, and potential negative tourism effects. Some of the committee felt that a simpler solution would have been to ban the specific type of mining (silica sand) from the County rather than rewrite the mining ordinance which they felt would have had less of a negative impact on current mining operations within the County. It was reported that others such as truck drivers, other ancillary businesses, and landowners are waiting to see if they will get jobs or other financial benefits from the mining activity. Some members of the committee felt that the limitations placed in the ordinance including the zoning designations, the setbacks, and the higher standard of operations required by the ordinance, will sufficiently regulate mining operations and gives the County adequate tools and information to address future situations where health, safety, or public welfare impacts are currently unknown, contested, or unsubstantiated. Throughout the meetings and as part of the banning discussions, it appeared that the size of the mine was of particular concern. The MSC discussed that 40 acre limitation in the 2004 Ordinance already discouraged large mines such as the Unimin mine in Le Sueur County, or even smaller silica sand operations on the scope of the Menomonie mine in Wisconsin, which the MSC toured in 2011. The clarification of the 40 acre limit is discussed in the section entitled Limit Silica Sand Operation Sizes. At the conclusion of the discussion, there was no movement from the committee to recommend a complete ban of silica sand mining from Goodhue County. Below is the legal opinion presented to and released from confidentiality by the County Board from County Attorney Steve Betcher concerning this topic:
9|Page
10 | P a g e
11 | P a g e
12 | P a g e
13 | P a g e
14 | P a g e
Hours of operation
During the public hearings, there was discussion about the hours of operation listed in the current ordinance. Below are the references to hours of operation in the current ordinance:
SECTION 4. MINERAL EXTRACTION PERMIT REQUIRED Subd. 2. Land Use Permits/Registration of Existing Mineral Extraction Facilities The following items shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator: I. Estimated time frame facility has been operated, to include hours per day, days per week, months per year, number of years in operation. SECTION 5. CONDITIONAL/INTERIM USE PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW MINERAL EXTRACTION FACILITIES Subd. 1. Application Form: An application for a mineral extraction permit shall be submitted to the County on a form supplied by the County. The required maps and application Information shall include but not be limited to the following: F. Estimated time frame to operate facility, to include hours per day, days per week, months per year, number of years in operation. Subd. 4. Permitting Procedure for Conditional/Interim Use Permits: E. Recommendation. The Planning Commission shall make a finding of fact and recommend such actions or conditions relating to the request to the County Board. The County may impose such additional restrictions or conditions as deemed necessary to protect the public interest. These conditions may include, but are not limited to the following: 2. Hours of operation
SECTION 6. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR REGISTRATION/LAND USE PERMITS AND CONDITIONAL/INTERIM USE PERMITS Subd. 4. Mineral Extraction Facilities Performance Standards. The following performance standards apply to all mineral extraction facilities in the County: A. Recommended Hours of Operation. Mineral extraction facilities shall operate only between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday unless specified otherwise in the conditional use permit for the facility. 1. Operators are allowed a maximum of five (5) one-day extensions to the hours of operation for evening work in a calendar year. Operators must notify the County three working days in advance of the proposed extension.
2. Other exceptions to the hours of operation must be approved by the County Zoning Administrator. Approval may only be granted in conjunction with the furnishing of material for a public improvement, public safety or a public good project, that is underway during hours that the mineral extraction facility is not otherwise allowed to operate. Approval will be limited to those functions that cannot occur during normal hours of operation.
The existing wording sets the standard hours between 6am and 10pm Monday through Saturday. The operator is asked during the permit process numerous questions about their business plan which includes information about their projected hours of operation especially if it differs from the standard. The original discussion of the hours of operation in 2002 centered around the typical mining facility which was a seasonal operation, in which the mining, blasting, and trucking occurred during the daylight hours, and allowed trucking to job sites working during those times. There may be reasons to deviate from the standard with more restrictive hours. Considerations to restrict or add conditions can be based upon the individual mining facilitys operation and location. Items considered can be: Distance to the nearest neighbor 15 | P a g e
The amount of noise produced The frequency of truck trips The trucking routes (if going by schools may restrict start and end of school day traffic) When and how often blasting can occur
The MSC discussed the standard hours of operation and the majority felt that the County needed the flexibility to adjust the hours based upon the specific mining operation. The existing wording allows the Planning Commission to make recommendations to the County Board to add conditions or restrict the hours of operation based upon the individual mining extraction facilitys proposed operation.
16 | P a g e
Location Restrictions
Some of the concerns brought forth in the public meetings were to review the setbacks to dwellings, sensitive features, and if any areas within the County would be completely restricted from mining. The current language for setbacks is as follows:
owned by the operator or owner. The setback may be reduced down to three hundred (300) feet if written consent of the owner of the adjoining property is first secured, recorded with the county recorder and a copy submitted to the Zoning Administrator. This paragraph is not applicable for Mineral Extraction Facilities in operation before and has been used annually since a subdivision within 300 feet of the Mineral Extraction Facilities was platted.
Section 6, Subd. 4, L.2: One thousand (1000) feet from any existing dwelling or platted residential subdivision, not
After public comment at the August 16, 2012 board meeting, the County Board determined that the previous set back of 300 feet from a dwelling was not a sufficient distance. Their findings included the fact that the 1000 foot distance was consistent with another provision in our ordinance that sets feedlots at a minimum of 1000 feet from a dwelling, excluding the feedlot operators dwelling. Some of the discussion during the MSCs meetings centered around separating silica sand mining operations from other non-metallic mining operations. The issues of noise, dust control, blasting, and truck traffic are similar and no consensus was reached to allow non-silica mining operations closer setbacks. Although the setback has increased to 1000 feet, the County Board allowed a provision for Mineral Extraction Facilities to operate as close as 300 feet from a dwelling if the Facility secures a written agreement stating such from the affected landowner. This provision is similar to the Countys Wind Energy Conversion Systems Regulations (Article 18 of the Zoning Ordinance) which allows the setback to be waived under written agreement. Underground Facilities: Section 5, Subd. 3 lists additional setbacks for any proposed Underground Facilities: E. Residential and farm wells will be centered inside a 500 foot radius of undisturbed ground G. Mining or tunneling must maintain a 200 foot vertical extension setback from permanent surface structures Sensitive Features: The MSC viewed a live demonstration of the Countys Environmental Constraints Land Use (ECLUE) model which identified key natural resource factors, regulatory factors and various additional considerations that should be taken into account when determining the appropriateness of various land uses in rural Goodhue County. The organization of the ECLUE into the following three sub-models including various data layers was presented to the Committee.
ECLUE Sub-models and data layers
Natural Resources 1. High Quality Ecological Areas 2. Riparian Habitat 3. Bluff Land 4. Water Features - rivers and lakes 5. Streams Regulatory Additional Considerations
1. Steep Slope & Hydric Soils 1. Aggregate Resources 2. Cannon River Wild & Scenic Area 3. Shoreland Areas (around protected water features) 4. Floodplain Areas 5. Areas Around Bluff Land 2. Registered Mining Locations 3. Prime Agricultural Soils 4. Potential Green Corridors 5. Wind Power Potential 6. Publically-owned Land
17 | P a g e
ECLUE Sub-models and data layers

Natural Resources 6. Wetlands 7. Sinkholes 8. Sensitivity to Groundwater Pollution 9. Geologic Edges Regulatory 6. Registered Feedlots Additional Considerations
The Mining Study Committee was briefed on how the ECLUE would be used as part of the environmental review and permitting processes related to Mineral Extraction Facilities. After viewing the demonstration the committee reviewed aspects of our current ordinance where many of these features and concerns are addressed in our Conditional Use Permitting process. The committee was asked if there were additional features beyond Bluff Impact Zones (See MSC Summary Report July 2012 pages 23-26) that should be automatically restricted from mining; if they felt there was sufficient review of the existing site-specific built and natural environments through the proposal process; and if they felt that any additional restrictions could be added as part of the conditional use process. Staff discussed the typical Conditional Use Permitting process as follows: Request information as part of the review process (listed in the ordinance) Applicant to follow Best Practices or standards (listed in the ordinance or added as conditions as part of the public process)
If permitted, monitor/regulate through inspections and reporting per the ordinance and permit conditions
Respond to any complaints or violations
The MSC felt that the process provided appropriate oversight and review with the knowledge that applications would be scrutinized on an individual basis and could result in additional setbacks, conditions, or complete denial. When reviewing the township resource maps with the regulatory setbacks and bluff restrictions, it is apparent that some townships have little if any potential for mining the silica resource, while others may have more potential (purple color is the potential resource):
18 | P a g e
Hay Creek Township
Pine Island Township
Although mining is a conditionally permitted use in Agricultural districts, the MSC was asked to study if there are areas that should not be open to mining, as well as areas that should be open to mining in essence creating a mining overlay district. Some public comments have indicated that an overlay district will forever determine if an area is open for mining or not. If an overlay district was established, it would not preclude a landowner from applying for a zoning district change for their parcel to a zoning district that would allow mining. Instead of using a rudimentary determination by section or township, we have mapped the physical aspects of the natural and built environment to guide us in our analysis. The mapping suggests that the regulatory setbacks and restrictions, the location of the potential resources, and the financial feasibility of mining the resource (depth and transportation networks) have essentially created areas where mining can and cannot occur. As the MSC heard at individual township meetings and the larger township meeting in April, not all residents or townships are in favor of banning or limiting the right to mine silica sand. As the County Attorney explained, County ordinances paint with a broad brush to cover the entire County, as the resources the County has need to be used across the whole County. However, as discussed previously, townships can be more restrictive and in some townships such as Hay Creek and Florence, they have chosen to create their own ordinances to restrict silica sand mineral extraction facilities from being allowed to be permitted in their townships. If an operator were to propose a facility in townships with more restrictive regulations, the townships would have to process the applications and make a determination. An applicant would have to follow the most restrictive of rules. The topic of additional setbacks from Trout Streams and other water features was discussed as proposed in one of the legislative bills currently being debated. This recreational activity is very active in parts of Goodhue County and the sensitivity of these streams have been well documented. The proposal of imposing a one mile buffer seemed to be an arbitrary setback, knowing that each site and operation is different. If there is no blasting, or mining below the water table, is a one mile buffer necessary? If there is blasting or mining below the water table near a spring that feeds into a trout stream perhaps a one mile buffer is not far enough.
19 | P a g e
In response to the concern the MSC suggests (Article 14, Sec. 6, Subd. 4, L):
7. Mineral extraction facilities must conform to shoreland and DNR regulated trout stream regulations. Setbacks from shoreland areas, trout streams, and other water resources such as sinks, springs, and seeps may be imposed based upon the proposal and potential risks to these areas.
20 | P a g e
Limit Silica Sand Operation Sizes

The MSC was asked to research the possibilities of limiting Silica Sand operations by impact and intensity (low, medium, or high), and if so, to establish recommendations for those limits. The current ordinance already sets a limit on the size of mines in a number of ways. First, Section 3 of the ordinance outlines exceptions from the permitting requirements under certain conditions:
A mineral extraction permit shall not be required for the following: Subd. 1. Excavation for structure if a building permit has been issued. Subd. 2. Excavation in a right-of-way, temporary easement, or utility corridor by state, county, city or township authorities in connection with construction or maintenance of public improvements. Subd. 3. Excavations not exceeding four hundred (400) cubic yards annually. Subd. 4. Excavation for agricultural purposes if the excavated material is not moved offsite. Subd. 5. Excavation for public utility purposes. Subd. 6. Temporary excavations associated with road construction.
may still be subject to other local and state regulations and/or permits.
These exceptions are relatively small, one-time excavations typically associated with projects in which the only way to complete the project is to excavate some material as part of the design. These exceptions separate site-specific projects from those activities intended solely for mineral extraction operations. Regardless of reason for this work, the operation
Secondly, another size limit is the forty acre threshold. If a mineral extraction facility is forty acres or more in size, a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is required and referenced in the Ordinance in Sec. 5, Subd2, F. Below is a list of the EAW Item-by-item guidance topics, along with Goodhue Countys ordinance references in italics (see link in the Appendix for the full document titled EAW Guidelines, Preparing Environmental Assessment Worksheets published by the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board) : 1. Project title 2. Proposer [Sec.5, Subd1,B,C] 3. RGU 4. Reasons for EAW preparation 5. Project location [Sec.5, Subd1,A,D] 6. Description [Sec.5, Subd1,A-C] 7. Project magnitude data [Sec.5, Subd1,F] 8. Permits and approvals required [Sec.5, Subd2,F] 9. Land use [Sec.5, Subd1,A] 10. Cover types [Sec.5, Subd1,A] 11. Fish, wildlife and ecologically sensitive resources [Sec.5, Subd1,A] 12. Physical impacts on water resources [Sec.5, Subd1, A2-3; Subd2, D,G-I,L,P; Sec. 6, Subd. 4,I,P,S9] 13. Water use [Sec.5, Subd1, A2-3; Subd2, D,G-I,L,P; Sec. 6, Subd. 4,I,P,S9] 14. Water-related land use management districts [See County Zoning Districts] 15. Water surface use 16. Erosion and sedimentation [Sec. 5,Subd 1A,Subd 2G; Sec.6, Subd 4,5] 17. Water quality: surface water runoff [Sec. 5, Subd 2H; Sec. 6, Subd 4I] 18. Water quality: wastewaters [Sec.5, Subd 2Q; Sec. 6, Subd 4 O-P] 19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions [Sec. 5, Subd 1 A] 20. Solid waste, hazardous waste, storage tanks [Sec. 5, Subd1, A-B; Sec. 6 Subd 4O] 21. Traffic [Sec.5, Subd 1 F-H; Sec. 6 Subd 5A, Traffic Study] 22. Vehicle-related emissions 23. Stationary source air emissions [Sec. 5, Subd1 A] 21 | P a g e
24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31.
Odors, noise and dust [Sec. 6, Subd 4, D-F,J] Nearby resources [Sec. 5 Subd 1A] Visual impacts [Sec. 6, Subd 4 J] Compatibility with plans and land use regulations [Sec.5, Subd2 B] Infrastructure and public services [Sec. 5, Subd 2 Q] Cumulative impacts [Traffic Study] Other potential environmental impacts Summary of issues
The forty acre threshold is also listed in the Countys Ordinance in Section 4, Subd. 5 where it states:
Mining operations shall be conducted so active extraction operation of the existing Mineral Extraction Facility exposes no more than forty (40) acres at any one time, unless approved by county staff.
To clarify this statement as to what is considered in the 40 acres, the MSC suggests the following wording:
Mineral extraction facility operation sites (including extraction, processing, stockpiling, roads), shall be limited to no more than forty (40) acres of exposed or uncovered ground at any one time.
The MSC discussed this statement at length and the importance of keeping a 40 acre threshold. This threshold has been the limit expectation for new facilities for the past 10 years. The MSC reviewed maps of existing registered mines and concluded that the clarified statement of the 40 acres fairly describes the current practice for the majority of the mines in the County. Thirdly, at the one hundred and sixty acre or more size, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared. As stated in the Guide to Minnesota Environmental Review Rules (see link in the Appendix for the full document):
The primary purpose of the Minnesota environmental review program is to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for each project with potential for significant environmental effects, as mandated in Minnesota Statutes, section 116D.04, subdivision 2a. Although prepared much less frequently than an EAW, the EIS is the heart of the program. The EIS provides information about the extent of these potential environmental impacts and how they may be avoided or minimized. Intended primarily for government decision-makers who must approve the project, the information is used by the proposer and the general public as well. A key point: the EIS is not a means to approve or disapprove a project, but is simply a source of information to guide approval decisions. Occasionally, the information results in an alternative site or design being selected. More commonly, the information suggests changes or mitigative measures to minimize potential impacts that can later be imposed via governmental approvals. However, the legal basis for choosing an alternative other than the proposers preference or for imposing mitigative measures comes from other statutory authorities. Again, the EIS can only point out problems and solutions, it cannot enforce them.
Because the County continues to limit the size of exposed or uncovered site operations to 40 acres, we have not seen nor have we allowed large open mines as what is witnessed in other counties or states. In essence, the County has not allowed large, industrial-scaled, exposed mines to be permitted since 2004. The EIS gives the RGU information to limit the size or operation through conditions based upon the determination of the EIS. As a final thought in the discussion of limiting the size of mining operations by levels, the bigger question becomes: What information listed in the current Mineral Extraction ordinance should not be answered or addressed by any applicant? For instance, should an applicant not answer questions about traffic, dust, noise, operations? Additionally, as in all application processes, items that do not pertain to a proposed operation are not addressed if no proposed blasting is occurring, obviously the questions and regulations concerning blasting do not apply. 22 | P a g e
Meeting with Township Officials

Because the MSC, Planning Commission, and County Board have heard very little from the majority of the Townships, it was felt that the best approach to try to engage them would be to visit each of them individually. County staff and MSC members have scheduled attendance at all of the Countys townships between January and April 2013 as follows: Date: 2/6/2013 2/11/2013 2/12/2013 Township: Belle Creek Warsaw Hay Creek Kenyon Featherstone Vasa Zumbrota Minneola Township: Goodhue Roscoe Holden Cherry Grove Belvidere Date: 2/13/2013 2/19/2013 2/20/2013 2/25/2013 2/26/2013 3/4/2013 3/7/2013 Township: Cannon Falls Stanton Wanamingo Florence Pine Island Leon Wacouta Welch
Date: 3/18/2013 4/8/2013 4/9/2013 4/11/2013
MSC members that have attended meetings were John Litsenberger, Joan Volz, John Hobert, Bernie Overby, and John Tittle. County Board members Richard Samuelson, Jim Bryant, and Ron Allen have also attended meetings. The purpose of the meetings was to discuss the background of the moratorium, where the MSC was in the process of completing their research and recommendations, and the next steps for the County. The Townships were given a brief background summary update, a copy of the existing Mineral Extraction ordinance, and a large map showing of their Township (depicting where the St. Peter and Jordan layers were the uppermost bedrock layer within their township, existing registered mines, and regulatory setbacks from dwellings, roads, and property lines). It was also an opportunity for Townships to be informed of the Countys website where the MSCs work is available for downloading, and to ask any questions about the moratorium. Additionally, the MSC organized another public informational meeting for all the Townships on April 25, 2013 at the Zumbrota VFW. This allowed yet another opportunity for the Township officials and MSC to discuss any issues concerning the ordinance prior to the public hearings at the PAC and County Board meetings.
23 | P a g e
Disenfranchisement of landowners with the silica sand resource

Concerns were expressed at the Planning Commission regarding the potential disenfranchisement of the landowners who have this valuable resource should the County ban the mining of the product, or create such onerous regulations that in essence, bans the mining of the product.
Minnesota Statutes 93.001 POLICY FOR MINERAL DEVELOPMENT states: It is the policy of the state to provide for the diversification of the state's mineral economy through longterm support of mineral exploration, evaluation, environmental research, development, production, and commercialization.
On the one hand, the state supports mineral development and landowners have a bundle of land rights as it pertains to the use of their property. However, as a caveat to the support and recognition of property rights, land uses may be subject to zoning and other regulation restrictions in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. As part of this discussion, the MSC examined the basic concepts of zoning as it pertains to the principles of arbitrary and capricious decisions. As in any type of decision or action by an administrative agency, the determination must be reasonable, supported by findings, and not seen as erratic or inconsistent. At this point, the County has regulations in place for mineral extraction facilities to locate and operate within certain zoning districts of the County. Through the application process, the aspects of the operation and location of a proposed facility are scrutinized to ensure not only responsible, reliable, and safe operations, but also to determine compatibility with surrounding land uses and any potential conflicts. As outlined in other sections of this report and in the previous report, mining is allowed within certain zoning districts in the County and under certain restrictions. Some requests may undoubtedly be denied, some may be approved, and some may be approved with additional conditions placed upon them. Regardless of the final recommendation and decision, the determination must be made in a circumspect, rational manner with supported findings for the decision.
24 | P a g e
Defining best practices

Staff has researched other ordinances, studies, and industry documentation to gather a library of what would be regarded as Best Practices or standards to be considered as a part of any Mineral Extraction application review. (See Appendix: Sources of Best Management Practices). The list of references identified as sources of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Non-Metallic Mineral Extraction Facilities offers a thorough cross-section of ideas, recommendations and BMPs that will serve as a tool box to help shape and inform Mineral Extraction Projects in Goodhue County. BMPs to address key concerns related to development, operations, and reclamation of Mineral Extraction Facilities are addressed in these various documents. Issues addressed include: Surface and Ground Water Management, Dust Control, Prevention of Silicosis, Protection and Mitigation of Environmental Impacts, and Mine Reclamation. These sources include specific recommendations and BMPs already crafted for Goodhue County by a multi-discipline team of consultants led by Summit Envirosolution, Inc. Also included are specific standards, requirements and BMPs that would relate to satisfy specific Federal, State or Local Government Rules, Regulations or Permit Requirements. Some of the documents included in this list relate to mining occurring in other states or are intended to address BMPs applicable to mining activities throughout the Country.
In order to address this issue the following language should be added to Article 14, Section 6: Section 6, Subd. 4 T. Best Practices The County expects applications to incorporate Best Practice standards into the design, operation, and reclamation of Mineral Extraction Facilities. A list of Best Practice documents is available through the Zoning Administrator. The County reserves the right to update the list as appropriate.
Requiring periodic review of the operation and the reclamation plan (see Reclamation discussion) also allows the County to work with mining facilities to incorporate new technology and Best Practices in their management plans as time goes by.
25 | P a g e
Reclamation
The Reclamation Plan is one of the crucial components of the Mineral Extraction Facility application. According to an article by Ivan Weber Actualizing Sustainable Mining: Whole Mine, Whole Community, Whole Planet Through Industrial Ecology and Community-Based Strategies, Restoration must not be viewed as literal replication of what preceded mining, but rather the implementation of what is necessary for prevention of further environmental releases or public health endangerment. Restoration, consequently, pursues the highest-and-best alternative that benefits ecosystems, community or planet, preferably all. Keeping this in mind, through best practices as listed in the Summit Envirosolutions report (see link in Appendix) and other sources, the reclamation plan should consider the best sustainable land value, and how to use integrated solutions with the grading, vegetation, habitat, and built environments. The MSC reviewed the tools staff will be using to estimate restoration costs according to an applicants reclamation plan. Based upon a number of factors including the amount of acreage, type of plants, soil amendments, grading, and mobilization costs, staff can estimate the cost of reclamation and require that amount to be placed in an account as security in the event the operator fails to perform according to the plan. The estimated costs per acre or per unit will be adjusted according to current prices. Understanding that many Mineral Extraction Facilities are long-term operations and final restoration may not be completed for generations, it is important to periodically review the phased reclamation plans in an iterative manner. Adjustments to the financial securities and incorporation of current Best Practices may be necessary as the excavation process proceeds over the years. Below are the suggested changes to the current ordinance regarding reclamation: Section 6. MINERAL EXTRACTION PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Subd. 4
S. Land Reclamation. The reclamation plan is a crucial component of this ordinance and shall follow Best Practices and approved plans. It is expected that reclamation will be occurring in phases and completed in step with the opening of new excavation areas of the facility. 1. Land shaping. For sand and aggregate facilities, final grades may not exceed one (1) foot vertical to three (3) feet horizontal slope except for rehabilitated areas in existence at the time of adoption of this Ordinance. In completing final grading in each phase, the top of the slope may begin twenty (20) feet from property lines. Proposed topography shall fit in with regional topography and mirror landforms typical of Goodhue County 2. Soil restoration, vegetation, and stabilization. a. If the reclamation plan includes areas intended for plant growth, topsoil depth shall be replaced within 2 inches of the original undisturbed depth, with a minimum thickness of 4-6 inches. If the land use following reclamation is intended for row crop agricultural production, a minimum topsoil thickness may need to be increased. b. Seeding and mulching shall be consistent with approved plans, permits and Best Practices. c. Soil restoration, seeding, and mulching must occur within each phase as soon as final grades, or interim grades identified in the phasing plans, have been reached. d. Soil erosion and sedimentation control plans shall be submitted to the County and be consistent with MPCAs General Storm Water Permit and NPDES/SDS permits. e. Description of fill material, including any chemicals, or chemically treated materials. 3. Reclamation plan review. A comprehensive review of the reclamation plan is necessary to remain current with the progress of the facility, address issues, adjust financial securities, and incorporate current Best Practices.
26 | P a g e
Reclamation plans may be required to be amended in order to address these concerns. a. Reclamation plans will be reviewed after the first year of permitting, and as needed thereafter, yet no more than three years between the reviews. b. Site visits may be required as part of the review and evaluation. c. As-built surveys, soil borings, or other testing may be required as part of the review to ensure phased reclamation is completed according to the approved or amended reclamation plan. d. Amended reclamation plans may need to be reviewed by the Mining Technical Evaluation Panel. e. Amended reclamation plans must be approved by the Planning Commission, or may be approved administratively if the changes are consistent with the overall final concept. f. All final grades and restoration must be consistent with the approved and amended reclamation plans. 1. For gravel pits, final grades may not exceed one (1) vertical to three (3) horizontal slope except for rehabilitated areas in existence at the time of adoption of this Ordinance. In completing final grading in each phase, the top of the slope may begin twenty (20) feet from property lines. a. Proposed topography shall fit in with regional topography and mirror landforms typical of Goodhue County b. For rock quarries, the permittee shall submit a plan to explain how the quarries are to be rehabilitated. 2. A minimum of three (3) inches of topsoil shall be placed on all graded surfaces. 3. Seeding and mulching shall be consistent with Minnesota Department of Transportation specifications for rightsof-way. Areas returned to agricultural production are exempt from the seeding and mulching requirements. 4. Soil restoration, seeding, and mulching must occur within each phase as soon as final grades, or interim grades identified in the phasing plans, have been reached. a. Land shall be reclaimed to native vegetation unless inconsistent with final proposed land use. b. Proposed land uses shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning requirements and applicable local, state, and federal regulations in effect at the time the plan is submitted, and may be required to be amended over time. 5. Soil erosion and sedimentation control measures shall be consistent with MPCAs Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas and MPCAs General Storm Water Permit. 6. Unless otherwise amended or approved by the County, all final grades and site restoration efforts shall be consistent with the Reclamation Plan. 4. Within twelve (12) months after completion of mineral extraction or after termination of the permit, all equipment, vehicles, machinery, materials, and debris shall be removed from the subject property. 5. Site reclamation must be completed within twelve (12) months after completion of mineral extraction, or after termination of the permit, or according to an approved plan schedule. site reclamation must be completed. Failure to annually register the mineral extraction facility will be considered termination of the mineral extraction facility and the twelve (12) month period begins. 9. All water areas resulting from excavation shall be addressed upon reclamation of the site. In unique instances where the County Board has reviewed proposals for water bodies at the time of approval of the overall plan and has determined that such would be appropriate as an open space or recreational amenity in subsequent reuse of the site, water bodies may be permitted.
27 | P a g e
Emergency Funds
There is concern from the public that if a mineral extraction facility has a failure in pond design, or if a natural event occurs that compromises the facilities erosion control structures, or any other such unplanned breakdown, that an appropriate emergency fund can be accessed to cover the costs for repair or initial mitigation. Because each mineral facility is unique in its design and operation, it is important to review each application to determine if it is being designed to cover failures or natural events that could cause erosion, pollution, or destruction of property. The current ordinance allows for the County to negotiate a road impact security fund to cover any repairs or necessary adjustments to the haul routes used by a mineral extraction facility. Depending on the proposed operation, the routes, the amount of traffic, and other factors, the road authority will determine an appropriate amount for the proposed facility to set aside in a bond, or other financial security that could be accessed under certain conditions. The current ordinance also allows for a separate Development Agreement to be entered into. A Development Agreement may be required as one condition of a Conditional Use Permit. The requirement, the purpose, and the extent of any Agreement would be based upon the proposed operation. For instance, if it is believed that the operation has an increased risk to the environment due to a settling pond or use of chemicals, an emergency funding mechanism could be incorporated into the Development Agreement or as a separate condition in the permit. Depending on the proposal, some facilities may not require any additional emergency funds beyond those negotiated in a possible road impact agreement. It is important to keep in mind this additional tool when reviewing any Mineral Extraction Facility proposal.
28 | P a g e
Comprehensive Plan and silica sand

This proposed amendment to the Goodhue Comprehensive Plan would expand on the current Element 1, Goal 7 that focuses solely on aggregate resources with the intent of keeping that particular non-metallic mineral resource available for future needs. The revised Element 1, Goal 7, recognizes that there are additional non-metallic mineral resources present in Goodhue County including silica sand and establishes a broader planning framework to guide responsible planning and regulation of various non-metallic mineral extraction facilities. GOAL 7: PRESERVATION OF AGGREGATE DEPOSITS
Manage and maintain aggregate resources in future growth zones. SUMMARY The Twin Cities have been challenged with the dilemma of diminishing aggregate resources due to urban development over those resources. It has proved to be excessively expensive to haul aggregate long distances. Managing our aggregate resources will ensure adequate economical quantities to meet Goodhue County needs. Policy 1. Discourage mining in environmentally sensitive areas. 2. Discourage mining in prime farmable agricultural areas. 3. Ensure each mining site has a reclamation plan. 4. Consider the preservation of aggregate deposits when approving added housing density.
Replace Element 1, Goal 7 with the following: GOAL 7: Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources SUMMARY Various non-metallic mineral resources of commercial value are present in Goodhue County. These include clay, peat, sand, gravel, limestone, dolomite, and silica sand. The mining and use of some of these resources has played an important role in the development of Goodhue County and will continue to be in demand in future development and construction projects. Heightened interest in non-metallic mineral extraction has arisen in recent years due to increased demand for silica sand for use in the oil and natural gas industries. Increased public awareness regarding the potential for negative environmental impacts related to mineral extraction facilities and related transportation of various non-metallic mineral products emphasizes the need to thoughtfully plan and responsibly regulate this land use that has the potential to bring significant change to the Goodhue County Landscape. County policies to guide management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources are needed to support official controls including land use regulations and infrastructure investment programs and projects to protect the public health safety and welfare. Policies should strive to minimize land use conflicts and degradation of the Countys scenic, recreational and natural resources while allowing limited opportunities for development of mineral extraction facilities. In addition, it remains essential that the Countys rural land use policies recognize the need to keep aggregate resources needed to supply local and regional infrastructure and development projects accessible into foreseeable future. Policy 1. Protect environmentally sensitive areas. Utilize the Countys Environmental Constraints Land Use Model (ECLUE) 29 | P a g e
and all other available data resources as tools to evaluate the potential impact on environmentally sensitive areas from mining of non-metallic mineral resources and utilize that information as part of Best Practice management of facilities. 2. Establish and administer official controls to responsibly regulate non-metallic mineral extraction, processing and transportation facilities. This shall include any official controls that may be needed to address specific health issues or potential environmental impacts of mining, processing, and transportation of the materials. 3. Evaluate any proposed new Mineral Extraction Facility or any proposed changes to any existing Mineral Extraction Facility to determine if the proposed project would be subject to requirements of the Minnesota Environmental Review program pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 116D.04 and 116D.045 and the administrative rules adopted by the EQB as Minnesota Rules, chapter 4410, parts 4410.0200 to 4410.7070. 4. Ensure that Environmental Review and/or Permitting Procedures for Non-Metallic Mineral Extraction Facilities follow the steps defined in the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Standards and Guidelines for the entire Area of Potential Effect (APE) for any proposed mineral extraction facility. 5. Plan and regulate the development, operation and reclamation of non-metallic mineral extraction facilities to be compatible with other rural land uses, understanding the priority and importance of maintaining an agricultural farming community. 6. Require non-metallic mineral extraction, processing and transportation facilities to adhere to best management practices as recognized by Goodhue County. 7. Plan and regulate the use of land in rural Goodhue County to ensure on-going cost effective availability of aggregate to meet County and Regional needs. 8. Work closely with Goodhue County Townships and Cities to best determine areas within the county where various types of non-metallic mineral extraction and related activities may be most suitable from both land use compatibility and public acceptance standpoints. 9. Periodically analyze and evaluate demand versus supply of aggregate resources necessary to meet local needs.
30 | P a g e
APPENDIX A- Sources of Best Management Practices

The following list of references identified as sources of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for Non-Metallic Mineral Extraction Facilities offers a thorough cross-section of ideas, recommendations and BMPs that may serve as a tool box to help shape and inform Mineral Extraction Projects in Goodhue County. BMPs to address key concerns related to development, operations and reclamation of Mineral Extraction Facilities are addressed in these various documents. Issues addressed include: Surface and Ground Water Management, Dust Control, Prevention of Silicosis, Protection and Mitigation of Environmental Impacts, and Mine Reclamation. These sources include specific recommendations and BMPs already crafted for Goodhue County by a multi-discipline team of consultants led by Summit Envirosolution, Inc. Also included are specific standards, requirements and BMPs that would relate to satisfy specific Federal, State or Local Government Rules, Regulations or Permit Requirements. Some of the documents included in this list relate to mining occurring in other states or are intended to address BMPs applicable to mining activities throughout the Country. The Sources of Best Management Practices for Non-Metallic Mineral Extraction Facilities included below are kept on file with the Goodhue County Land Use Management Department. SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION REGARDING NONMETALLIC MINING IN GOODHUE COUNTY, MINNESOTA , prepared for Goodhue County by Summit Envirosolutions, Inc., June 2012. This document prepared by a multi-disciplined team of consultants led by Summit Envirosolutions, Inc., include Best Management Practices (BMPs) applicable to the planning, permitting, operation and reclamation of Non-Metallic Mineral Mining and Processing Facilities. The following chapters of this report include specific recommendations and BMPs directly applicable to Goodhue County Mineral Extraction Facilities: Chapter 2 (Regulatory Summary), Chapter 3 (NonMetallic Mining Environmental Impacts and Chapter 4 (Reclamation Issues). As the Mining Study Committee is aware this document is a product of consultant services to address various issues identified under the Interim Ordinance to Establish a Moratorium on the Permitting of New Silica Sand Mining Operations adopted by the Goodhue County Board of Commissions in September, 2011. The Consultant ideas, recommendations and BMPs included in this document were discussed and review by the MSC, the PAC and the County Board and should be very applicable to any new Non-Metallic Mineral Extraction Facilities that may be proposed in the County. Best Practices for Dust Control in Metal/Nonmetal Mining, IC 9521 Information Circular 2010, US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). In light of on-going silica overexposures and reported silicosis deaths in metal/nonmetal miners, an ongoing threat to miners health is evident. This handbook was developed to identify available engineering controls that can assist the industry in reducing worker exposure to respirable silica dust. The controls discussed in this handbook range from longused controls which have developed into industry standards, to newer controls, which are still being optimized. The intent of the handbook is to identify best practices that are available for controlling respirable dust levels in underground and surface metal/nonmetal mining operations. The handbook provides general information on the control technologies along with extensive references. Specific recommendations and BMPs are offered for both mining and materials processing activities.
31 | P a g e
Template Best Management Practices of Fugitive Dust Control Plans for the Ledge Rock Quarry and Industrial Sand Mining Industries The control of fugitive dust is required under section NR 415.04, Wisconsin Administrative Code, for all affected facilities. Section NR 415.075(2), Wis. Adm. Code, has specific requirements for fugitive dust control for ledge rock quarries and industrial sand mines. This template has been developed to help the facility reduce or eliminate fugitive dust emissions from these operations. National Industrial Sand Association (NISA) Guide to Silicosis Prevention Program The scope of this guide is to outline the seven steps set forth in the National Industrial Sand Associations (NISA) Silicosis Prevention Program to eliminate silicosis among its workforce. It does not address in detail the seven steps involved in the total program, but aims to give explanation to the seven steps that can be put in place by management to eliminate silicosis. NISA has prepared for its member companies other information sources and conducted training on silicosis prevention to include dust sampling, medical surveillance, engineering controls, respiratory protection, and other measures which supplement this guide. A Handbook for Reclaiming Sand and Gravel Pits in Minnesota, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources , Division of Lands and Minerals, July 1992. This handbook focuses on reclamation of sand and gravel mines of surficial deposits as opposed to crushed stone, industrial sand (silica sand) or dimension stone. Some of the concepts for reclamation and habitat restoration set forth in the handbook are applicable to reclamation of sites associated with other types of mining or processing of non-metallic minerals. Numerous existing surficial sand and gravel mining sites could benefit from application of mine reclamation BMPs set forth in this handbook. Aggregate Mining Fact Sheets Prepared by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Lands and Minerals, January 2001. Fact Sheet 1: Environmental Regulations for Aggregate Mining Fact Sheet 2: Mining Plans for Aggregate Operations Fact Sheet 3: Reclamation at Aggregate Mining Sites Fact Sheet 4: Using Native Prairie Species for Reclaiming Aggregate Mining Sites These Aggregate Mining Fact Sheets explain various regulatory standards and highlight best practices related to planning, operation and reclamation of Aggregate Mines. Best Management Practices for Reclaiming Surface Mines in Washington and Oregon, Washington Division of Geology and Earth Sciences, Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, December 1997. This manual provides information about planning a mine from start up to final reclamation, incorporating water and erosion control during operation and reclamation, soil salvage and replacement, land shaping and re-vegetation. This document offers ideas and BMPs for Surface Mine Reclamation as practiced in another part of country for some perspective and breadth. It is useful to compare the BMPs recommended in this document to the Minnesota Handbook for Reclaiming Sand and Gravel Pits. The Human Factor in Mining Reclamation, United States Geologic Survey (USGS) Circular 1191, 2000 This review of the literature for actual and proposed reclaimed mine sites may enable land planners, industry and the public to recognize that innovative designs exist in both past and present. Although some mines sites with serious problems are described in this document, in notes that attention needs to be drawn to thoughtful reclamation projects 32 | P a g e
for better future management. The human perception of mining can bring about possible confusion from a historic perspective, with regards to regulation, and from varying definition of landscape. Selected sites in this report provide information in terms of their history, landform, design approach and visual discernment. Examples in Colorado are included as a jumping-off place for the broader issue of regions soundly developing mining sites, permitting the best utilization of natural resources, and respecting the landscape. It notes that only in seeing and recognizing our own visual prejudices can we hope to evaluate land-use wisely. Minnesota Stormwater Manual Version 2, Created by the Minnesota Stormwater Steering Committee, published by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, January 2008. This manual was initiated by the Minnesota Stormwater Design Team, which evolved into the Minnesota Stormwater Steering Committee. The manual offers a useful product that helps the everyday user better manage storm water. Although not geared specifically to mining and mineral extraction related facilities the manual does offer specific design standards, recommendations and BMPs to manage stormwater generated on industrial sites. The manual is well written, well-illustrated and well documented. It is a tool used by many stormwater system design professionals to comply with federal, state and local stormwater management requirements. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Industrial Division National Pollutant Elimination System (NPDES)/State Disposal System (SDS) General Permit MNG490000 for Nonmetallic Mining and Associated Activities MODIFICATION DATE: March 20, 2012 EXPIRATION DATE: October 31, 2016 This Permit may authorize storm water discharge for a variety of mining related activities including the following: Discharge stormwater from the construction sand and gravel, industrial sand, dimension stone, crushed and broken limestone, crushed and broken granite, crushed and broken stone (not elsewhere classified) mining and quarrying areas, hot mix asphalt production areas, (including portable hot mix asphalt plants), concrete block and brick, concrete products (other than block and brick), and ready mix concrete, as well as aggregate dredging operations and uncontaminated asphalt and concrete rubble recycling at sites already listed. Discharge mine site dewatering from construction sand and gravel, industrial sand, dimension stone, crushed and broken limestone, crushed and broken granite, and crushed and broken stone (not elsewhere classified) mining and quarrying areas. Non-stormwater discharges that meet the requirements of this permit and occur at the abovementioned facilities.
This General Permit document includes many performance standards and best management practices that current or prospective Goodhue County Mineral Extraction Facilities may be subject to and offers insight on State of Minnesota Storm Water Management requirements for Non-Metallic Mineral Extraction Facilities. Interim Sediment control Water Application of Polymers, State of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, November 2002 This document outlines various issues and concerns, references applicable laws and regulations and identifies various considerations pertaining to the use of products containing polymers for use in sediment control structures. These chemicals may be used in association with wash operations in conjunction with mining.
33 | P a g e
APPENDIX B- Maps
34 | P a g e
Jordan and St. Peter resources with setbacks including property lines, dwellings, bluffs, platted property
35 | P a g e
Depth to Resource Map (Jordan and St. Peter layers). Data obtained from Summit EnviroSolutions
36 | P a g e
One mile buffer around designated Trout Streams in Goodhue County, MN
37 | P a g e

Goodhue County: Mining Study Committee Report and Plan Amendments

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Goodhue County: Mining Study Committee Report and Plan Amendments

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Goodhue County Land Use Management

Page 1 of 6 An Equal Opportunity Employer

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18.

5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

Board DRAFT June 2013

Board DRAFT June 2013

PROPOSED GOODHUE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT

GOAL 7: Management of Non-Metallic Mineral Resources

Mining Study Committee

Relationship between economic and recreational value

Coordinating with the State Agencies and Legislature

Existing Registered Mines

Pros/Cons of banning silica sand mining

ECLUE Sub-models and data layers

Respond to any complaints or violations

Hay Creek Township

Pine Island Township

Limit Silica Sand Operation Sizes

24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31.

Meeting with Township Officials

Date: 3/18/2013 4/8/2013 4/9/2013 4/11/2013

Disenfranchisement of landowners with the silica sand resource

Defining best practices

Comprehensive Plan and silica sand

APPENDIX A- Sources of Best Management Practices

One mile buffer around designated Trout Streams in Goodhue County, MN

Anda mungkin juga menyukai