Sponsored by

EAW INADEQUACIES AND INACCURACIES (fws, mc, mpca, dnr)

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - "The EAW does not adequately identify how this and related DNR-projects could affect significant natural resources, such as the Black Dog Fen or the Minnesota River, or other factors such as surface and ground water quality, traffic, or infrastructure. In addition, recognition should be offered on whether this development in total has the potential to adversely affect the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge (MVNWR), which is managed and operated by the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The MVNWR is a valuable, significant resource that provides important natural resource functions and values in terms of habitat protection, recreational opportunities, and water quality protection for the Minnesota River."

MINNESOTA POLUTION CONTROL AGENCY - "Page 3, #13 Z At some time dewatering wells will likely be needed, therefore this should not be marked "No", as it is misleading. A simple statement should be added to state that there is a potential for future dewatering wells to be installed."

CORPS OF ENGINEERS - 34 the EAW states, "....COE staff indicated that maintaining the Edward Kraemer and Sons property west of the site as flood plain would favorably impact their review of the restoration." While the long term plans for adjacent properties is important in considering cumulative impacts, predicting the long range uses of the Kraemer property could be problematic. Furthermore, flood plain issues are only one of many issues considered in our evaluation. This statement does not accurately characterize the Corps position on this issue and should be deleted from he EAW."

CORPS OF ENGINEERS -". . . this letter provided no directives to remove the levee. The EAW also implies various restoration options are acceptable to the Corps. We have made no decisions regarding restoration of the site. Furthermore, this case has been referred to EPA for enforcement. The lead Federal enforcement agency would be the appropriate agency to address this issue."

MINNESOTA POLUTION CONTROL AGENCY - "Statements that the dikes in the formerly proposed marina area or on the east side of the McGowan quarry would provide remediation of leachate are unfounded. The leachate would remain in the groundwater, below grade, until it discharged into the Minnesota River. It is also unlikely that a leachate seep would daylight after the final cover is installed, as the cover would prevent new moisture from entering the landfill from precipitation, precluding leachate seeps from occurring."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - "The EAW process should specifically consider whether the environmental consequences of this project, in conjunction with other anticipated related projects, may in total result in adverse impacts to natural resources, infrastructure, or public services. Both Minn. Rules part 4410.1700, subp. 78 and Minn. Rules part 4410.2000, subp. 5 address the issue of considering cumulative impacts. We cite these rules to alert you that the Minnesota Environmental Review Program anticipates circumstances where cumulative impacts across multiple projects are determined to be potentially significant. If your examination of cumulative impacts does leads to a conclusion that significant resources will be adversely impacted by these developments in total, then preparation of a related actions EIS is the mean to accomplish the necessary analysis."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES -"Given the controversy that often surrounds these types of projects, an EIS may be the best means available to comprehensively address the full range of issues that are associated with the project."

MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - ". . . has had an ongoing concern over the potential impact which the project may have on the operation of Interstate Highway 35W when amphitheater patrons are arriving and leaving major events."

MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - "Generally, our most important concern has been whether the proposed Embassy Road/North Amphitheater Access/I35W interchange would handle projected traffic without adversely affecting I35W. Unless this interchange is adequate to manage projected traffic, certain conditions could result in a standing queue on the I35W mainline,"

MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - "In the Traffic Impact Study, the Directional Orientation or distribution indicates that only 54% of the traffic forecasted for the amphitheater will be coming from the north. The remaining traffic will be coming from the south, east or west, but that essentially means that 46% of traffic comes from south of the site. Does this distribution seem reasonable with the site being on the south end of the metro area?"

MINNESOTA POLUTION CONTROL AGENCY - "The initial assumptions contained in the Traffic Impact Study indicate a peak arrival hour of 7 p.m. - 8 p.m., with 60-percent of the patrons arriving during this hour. The EAW states that the gates to the parking areas will be opened two hours before an event; this assumes 6 p.m. for an 8 p.m. concert. Assuming a majority of the patrons are general admission ticket-holders and would arrive early to obtain good seats, it is likely that as attendance approaches the design level maximum capacity (16,200 - 19,500 persons), the percentage of general admission patrons arriving prior to or during the 6 p.m.-7 p.m. time period is expected to be higher than what is assumed in the EAW. This additional traffic would put added pressure on 1-35W during the p.m. peak hour. Please discuss and state what information the 60 percent is based on."

MINNESOTA POLUTION CONTROL AGENCY - "The Indirect Source Permit (ISP) for the proposed project will include a provision requiring completion of the assumed roadway improvements before occupancy of the facility."

BLOOMINGTON TRAFFIC CONSULTANT - "One of the main factors influencing vehicle occupancy is the type of event. Concerts with a young, popular draw tend to have higher vehicle occupancies. Events appealing to an older crowd or a less popular draw tend to have lower vehicle occupancies (various sources). It could be assumed that the high-attendance events upon which the traffic analysis is based would be the younger, popular market and thus have higher vehicle occupancy. The Brooklyn Park Performing Arts Center analysis was initially based on an assumption of 3.3 persons per vehicle, with subsequent analysis conducted at 2.7 persons per vehicle. The Ogden (Scott County) analysis assumed 2.8 persons per vehicle. The Q-Prime proposal assumed 3.0 persons per vehicle."

BLOOMINGTON TRAFFIC CONSULTANT - "Considering these factors in establishing the direction of approach, it can be concluded that approximately 84 percent of the traffic to the amphitheater would approach the site from the north on I-35W compared to the 54 percent assumed in the EAW."

BLOOMINGTON TRAFFIC CONSULTANT - "Using assumptions of an 84 percent approach on 1-35W, the peak arrival hour would be near the combined capacity of the two interchanges, and the departure volume would exceed the capacity of the two interchanges. This clearly would cause operational problems."

BLOOMINGTON TRAFFIC CONSULTANT - "It should also be noted that current layout shows nine parking-fee collection bays within 700 feet of the proposed realigned Black Dog Road interchange. An expected 1900 vehicle demand at that entrance would require a queue discharge rate of one vehicle every 17 seconds. It would be necessary to ensure that traffic queues do not build up to the point of interfering with the traffic flow on the ramp and freeway. As noted above, peak events would result in both the Black Dog Road and Cliff Road exit ramps operating near capacity (1900 vehicles per hour) and queuing at one entrance or the other could result in a significant disruption on 1-35W."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - "The EAW fails to adequately address how the increased traffic associated with each event will impact the Refuge visitor's ability to enter and leave Refuge lands. Will any of the events cause high levels of traffic congestion that will make it difficult for visitors to access the Refuge? How much delay can Refuge visitors expect to encounter when visiting the evening of a major event? This problem may be exacerbated when an event at the amphitheater is scheduled the same time as an event at the Target Center or Metrodome."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - "Item 15. The discussion of Water Surface Use should recognize the likelihood that recreational watercraft will congregate on the Minnesota River at the project site during music events. This congregation could result in competition/conflict with commercial navigation on the river in this area. There is heavy barge usage of the river in this area. There may also be a need for increased water patrol on the river at certain times, or other management actions such as trash and refuse cleanup."

MINNESOTA POLUTION CONTROL AGENCY - "Page 4, #15 Z Even though a "river audience" is not planned for by this proposal, it seems a statement should be made to recognize that during concerts it would seem likely that boat traffic would increase in the area near the amphitheater."

MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT -"Surface Water Use: The EAW state that there will not be any surface water usage. There is the potential for recreational boaters to anchor in the Minnesota River channel to listen to concerts. This would pose a hazard and obstruction to barge traffic in this area. How will this issue be addressed?"

MINNESOTA POLUTION CONTROL AGENCY - "The Acoustical Analysis performed by Paoletti Associates, Inc. for the Proposed Black Dog Amphitheater (Paoletti Report) identifies potential violations of the State noise rules. The proposed Black Dog Amphitheater must comply with the State noise rules for event noise and traffic noise."

BLOOMINGTON SOUND CONSULTANT - "Violations of the MPCA noise limits of up to 11 dB are expected to occur on a regular basis. We are concerned that an 11 dB reduction will be difficult to achieve without changing substantially the nature of the amphitheater's construction or operation."

BLOOMINGTON SOUND CONSULTANT - "Finally, several Bloomington residents along the Minnesota River bluffs have mentioned that they and guests frequently hear conversational (not shouting) voices in their backyards as if the people are very close when, in fact, these voices are from people on barges on the river over 1000 ft away. These situations imply that especially enhanced sound propagation conditions (such as channeling) may occur regularly between the river and the bluffs."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - "Noise generated by the crowd is not adequately evaluated. Crowd noise levels of over 100db from other venues were referenced. The conclusion was that crowd noise may exceed the standards but it depends on weather. A more thorough discussion and analysis is needed. The cumulative effect of crowd and concert noise should be modeled."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - "As indicated above, the EAW does not adequately analyze or address the impacts that amplified noise from musical instruments and voices will have upon wildlife using the lands in the area, including the Refuge. Many wildlife species, like humans, can distinguish between sound sources. As indicated by the literature on this subject, noise has great potential to impact the distribution of wildlife and the use of the their habitats. Sudden loud noises cause some animals to react with "flight" response. This increases stress levels and physiological responses. Without question, the operation of this amphitheater will affect the use and distribution of wildlife using the Bloomington Open Space. This area, which has been proposed to become part of the Refuge, has excellent wildlife values. We frequently observe bald eagles in this area and have had a report of a nesting pair in the area."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - "Inadequate Assessment of Public Use Impact. Closely related to the above comment, the EAW is inadequate in its assessment of noise effects on visitors to the Refuge and nearby wildlife lands especially during early evening hours. Many hikers and birders use Refuge trails and adjacent lands in the evening hours because air temperature are normally cooling and the chances of viewing wildlife is greater. Significant amounts of literature suggests that man-made noise such as that generated from an amphitheater will significantly decrease if not destroy the outdoor experience that these visitors have come to enjoy. In addition, the proposal fails to address how amphitheater noise will impact the ability of educators and naturalists to communicate with students and Refuge visitors, respectively."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - "We have some concerns about constructing a "noise-generating facility" such as an amphitheater next to lands administered as part of the Refuge and other lands with wildlife values in the area including Bloomington Open Space. While we acknowledge that a high level of background noise currently exists near this area, we believe a facility of this type is inconsistent with purpose of much of the Minnesota River Valley and the noise it generates has the potential to negatively impact a host of natural resource values. Our specific comments are as below."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - "Introduction of a `Foreign' Source of Noise. As described in Section 24 of the document, the introduction of amplified "music" into the Minnesota River Valley from the operation of the Black Dog Amphitheater may not in fact significantly increase noise levels above ambient levels on Refuge lands. What may occur, however, is that visitors to the Refuge will hear a different type of noise that may seem foreign to them and their natural surroundings. While no standard exists for the type noise that is being generated, perhaps this issue should be clearly addressed, discussed, and debated in the EAW and among the City and the developers."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - "The EAW should indicate that a floodplain forest area lies immediately west of the proposed amphitheater. Any potential project-related impacts from the effects of noise and other human activity should be described."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE- Endangered Species Act. - ". . . bald eagles currently use this area of the Minnesota River floodplain for nesting and feeding purposes. We recommend that project effects on federally-listed species be included in any state and/or federal environmental documentation required for the proposed project. Environmental assessment documents should also include mitigative measures such as minimizing alteration of habitat along the existing shoreline, and establishing vegetative buffer areas (trees) along the river to reduce noise and visual impacts to eagles and provide resting sites. We also recommend that the project sponsor contact the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources concerning any state-listed species which may occur within the vicinity of the proposed project."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - "... a pair of eagles is known to nest approximately 1/4-mile from the northwest corner of the project site. Forested areas of the site along the river are part of this active eagle nesting territory. This project may have a significant impact on this eagle pair/territory."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - "The EAW fails to describe the type and duration of any mosquito control activities that are planned for this development. Of particular concern are the chemicals used for mosquito control and their potential for contamination. Some of these pesticides are extremely toxic to aquatic organisms found in nearby wetlands."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - "Failure to Address the Impacts of Flood Lights. The use of artificial lights has been known to affect the distribution of wildlife within their habitats. The EAW fails to address whether the construction and use of these lights will have any impacts upon wildlife using the area."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES- ". . . the project could affect significant resources known to be "near the site."

     Specifically:

 ". . .there are calcareous fens in the floodplain that may be affected by groundwater appropriation."

 ". . . several state listed mussel species occur, or occurred, within the Minnesota River adjacent to the proposed project. A recent survey found only dead specimens of these listed species. However, it is hoped that the water quality of the river will continue to improve to the extent where it can again support these species. Any adverse project-related impacts to the Minnesota River's water quality could in turn adversely affect or limit mussel populations in the area. This project has the potential to impact the water quality of the Minnesota River."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - "Wetland Loss. The proposed project will also result in the loss of approximately 6.97 acres of floodplain wetlands. Floodplain wetlands along the Minnesota River in the vicinity of the project are valuable to a variety of species of federal interest including migratory waterfowl, wading and shore birds, and songbirds. In the past, wetlands have been filled in the project area without necessary federal Section 404 permits."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - grassy areas: "Regardless, any benefits will be minimal and it is possible that the grassy seating area will be attractive to Canada geese, which in turn will result in an amphitheater management problem."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - "That part of the site identified as "Festival Park" could increase the project's wildlife habitat benefit if it were restored to natural floodplain conditions. As a "park" this part of the site will provide minimal habitat benefit."

MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH - "The design and use of the "soil mass" of the grass seating area as a passive treatment area for leachate which may be released from the landfill should be carefully considered. If the mass of underlying soil is not great enough, the potential exists for leachate or landfill gases to be released from the surface of the grass seating area where direct exposure could occur."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - Water Quality. "We have concerns about the potential for contaminated leachate reaching ground and surface waters within and adjacent to the site. Black Dog Lake and the Minnesota River are important surface water resources in the area that could be compromised without proper safeguards. It appears from discussion in the document that MPCA is concerned about the cross gradient movement of leachate. If this is the case, why is the geomembrane proposed to be installed on the west side only? Perhaps a geomembrane on all four sides of this landfill should be considered."

MINNESOTA POLUTION CONTROL AGENCY - "Page 39 Z Since the Kraemer quarry will cease operation within the operating life of the amphitheater the MPCA believes that it is necessary for the city to look at just what dewatering scenario will be needed in the future to deal with ground water impacts."

MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT - "Section 13 - Water use: There are no estimates of the amount of water that will need to be pumped in order to keep the amphitheater dry after the Kraemer quarry is no longer in operation. Currently there are millions of gallons per day dewatered from the Kraemer site. Will this project require a significant amount of dewatering? If so, will such dewatering be permitted by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for the purposes of maintaining an amphitheater? These are questions that should be addressed at this time because the long term operation of the amphitheater may be curtailed due to the possible non-essential pumping of groundwater."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - "Item 13. The project will require dewatering at some future date that will be subject to DNR's water appropriation permit authority. Therefore, Item 13 should be answered "yes" and Item 8 should reflect this conditional permit need. Dewatering for the amphitheater part of the site is not required at present because the project site lies within the cone of groundwater depression associated with ongoing dewatering at the nearby Kraemer Quarry. This quarry is adjacent to the project site where dewatering is a permitted use for mining purposes. Although no guarantee of closure time can be offered, the mine is expected to cease operation in 15-25 years depending upon market conditions. The mine's eventual closure serves as the basis for any future project-related dewatering because groundwater levels will rise once the quarry stops operations."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - "[DNR] can offer no assurance that a water appropriation permit will be provided for this project. This is an issue of serious concern, especially when considering it is certain that when quarrying at the adjacent mine stops local groundwater elevations will rise. Although the project-related volume will likely be less than the amount currently leaving the Kraemer site, nonetheless the volume will be substantial and will likely require preparation of a mandatory EAW consistent with Minn. Rules part 4410.4300, subp. 24A. Furthermore, if the potential appropriation is in excess of a 2 million gallon per day average in a 30-day period, then the Legislature must approve the action per Minn. Statutes Chapter 103G.265."

DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES - "Any number of factors could lead DNR to conclude that a water appropriation permit should not be issued for the proposed use. Of particular note is placement of increasing emphasis to reduce and even eliminate non- essential groundwater appropriations, especially in the southwest Twin Cities Metro Area. Extensive groundwater withdrawal from the Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer has resulted in negative impacts to State- protected calcareous fens. Dewatering of the amphitheater site may not be authorized if it results in negative impacts to the groundwater hydrology of a calcareous fen complex or other protected surface water features. Another factor rests with the site's location itself and the proposed use. Dewatering for the purposes of protecting an open space use in a floodplain is considered a low priority appropriation. In times of drought or other water shortage, water appropriation permits for non-essential uses, such as dewatering, would be suspended or otherwise administratively altered."

MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH - "Any future use of the site that involves public access should ensure that the public is not exposed to unsafe levels of landfill contaminants. Differential land settlement landfill gas production, erosion of the landfill cap, contaminated leachate and groundwater are all issues that will need to be addressed by the MPCA."

MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH - "Redevelopment of the site may increase public use of the area significantly. The potential for increased human exposures to contaminants at the neighboring Burnsville Landfill and the Old Freeway Dump should be considered during deliberations on future use of the site."

MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH - "Because the site is located in a flood plain, any redevelopment of the site must address the potential for flooding. Flooding increases concerns for human exposures to landfill contaminants (erosion of the landfill cap, increased production of landfill gas due to high moisture content of landfill waste, etc.).

MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH - "Sufficient groundwater data should be collected in order to determine whether future site use will expose individuals to unsafe levels of groundwater contaminants."

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE - "Sustainable Development in the Floodplain. We really question the wisdom of development of this type which will rely on an extensive assemblage of levees, pumps, and ditches to protect it from future flooding events. Since 1993, two large flooding events have occurred in the Minnesota River Valley which has reminded us of the problems of development in any floodplain. Furthermore, development in the floodplain near the proposed amphitheater was the catalyst that prompted a group of Burnsville citizens to form the Friends of the Minnesota Valley who was the catalyst for establishment of Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge and Recreation Area. As many communities are moving development out of floodways and floodplains, it doesn't seem logical to construct such a facility on this particular site. Perhaps the most logical use of this portion of Burnsville would be to return it back to some type of natural habitats."

MINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT - "Section 11 - Fish, Wildlife and Ecologically Sensitive Resources: While the proposed project site is already severely degraded for fish and wildlife usage, there is the potential to re- create/restore such habitats. The proposed plans for landscaping, creation of grass areas and permanent ponding areas are important aspects, however, they do not provide for natural fish and wildlife habitat. The District recommends including native vegetative cover types to create natural wildlife habitats that would normally be found in flood plains."

---

TWO VERSIONS OF METROPOLITAN COUNCIL COMMENTS

METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (Original - see supplemental letter) - "Metropolitan Council staff has reviewed the environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) on the Black Dog Amphitheater in Burnsville to determine its adequacy and accuracy in addressing regional concerns. The review concludes that the EAW is incomplete and contains inaccurate information. Staff believes that there are potential impacts that warrant further investigation before the project is commenced. Staff recommends that the decision on whether an EIS is needed should be delayed, as permitted by EQB rules, so that additional information can be obtained. If the additional information suggests the need for an EIS, the Council would encourage the city to order an EIS for the project."

METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (Original - see supplemental letter)-"Based on conversations with MPCA staff, it appears that the landfill owner (McGowan) has not yet agreed to the landfill closure plan and that full remediation of the site will probably not occur before mid-2002, if then. Use of the site for an amphitheater should not be permitted by the city until after the landfill closure has been completed and all remediation accomplished."

METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (Original - see supplemental letter) -"Significant questions have not been addressed in this EAW about the usability of the landfill and quarry site for an amphitheater. It is clear that the landfill will need to be remediated whether or not the amphitheater is built. The EAW does not address questions such as -- would it be economically feasible to maintain the site as an amphitheater if more remediation is needed in the future? Is having an active gas extraction system on the site compatible with the proposed use? Will the proposed geomembrane be successful in stopping gas migration into the quarry? Will smoking, the use of grills and other uses for fire be permitted at the amphitheater or in the parking areas?"

METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (Original - see supplemental letter): "The EAW states that the exit ramp from southbound I-35W will be operating at or near capacity during the peak-hour arrival time. Further analysis and design should be conducted to develop capacity enhancements for this movement. If the ramp does operate at capacity, any incident that decreases the capacity or increases the volumes attempting to use the ramp could result in queued traffic extending back onto the mainline of I-35W, creating an extremely hazardous condition."

METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (Original - see supplemental letter) -"As noted above in Item 11, the Refuge is immediately adjacent to the site, and according to the noise analysis it will be impacted by noise from concerts. The EAW does not adequately address noise impacts on wildlife or on public use enjoyment of the Refuge."

METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (Original - see supplemental letter) - ". . . wastes out of the floodplain, and to raise them above the likely groundwater level, which will rise with the closing of the Kraemer quarry and the cessation of its dewatering activities. The movement of landfilled wastes on the site is likely to release trapped highly volatile organic compounds (HVOCs), which are "hazardous air pollutants" found in older sanitary waste landfills, as well as cause additional methane (a potentially explosive gas) generation. While a landfill geomembrane to prevent inflow of precipitation into the landfill and to control migration in the landfill gases has become a standard for landfill closure and remediation measure, its safety in preventing the release of these gases into the proposed amphitheater is not addressed. The EAW should specifically address the question of the proposed gas control measures, what happens if the membrane is torn or punctured in the amphitheater area, the likely health effects of such accidental release on amphitheater patrons, and on special populations such as infants, expectant mothers and persons with chronic lung problems. The EAW should also address the question of timing. Should any work on the proposed amphitheater be allowed to go forward until all of the landfill remediation is completed and the gas extraction system is in place."

METROPOLITAN COUNCIL (Original - see supplemental letter) - "Will the proposed geomembrane be successful in stopping gas migration into the quarry? Will smoking, the use of grills and other uses for fire be permitted at the amphitheater or in the parking area?"

Metropolitan Council
Working for the Region, Planning for the Future

Environmental Services
June 30, 2000

Greg Konat, City Manager
City of Burnsville
100 Civic Center Parkway
Burnsville, MN 55337

RE: EAW ReviewŽBlack Dog Amphitheater--Supplemental Comments JULY 5
Metropolitan Council District 15
Referral File No. 18267-1

Dear Mr. Konat:

It has come to our attention that the Metropolitan Council's June 14, 2000 letter conveying staff comments on the environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) for the Black Dog Amphitheater is being taken out of context and used as a basis for opposing the proposed project. The purpose of this supplemental letter is to clarify some points in our earlier letter and to provide some additional context for a better understanding of our original comments.

Our June 14, 2000 letter contains staff comments on the city's EAW. They should not be construed as representing the official position of the Council members, who collectively serve as the policymaking board of this organization. EAW comment letters are viewed as being primarily technical reviews of facts related to a particular project. They are rarely brought to the policymaking board for review and approval unless there is an anticipated regional system or policy impact that staff believes requires the policymakers immediate attention. In this case, staff did provide Council members an informational briefing on the proposal and the nature of staff comments, but did not seek Council action on the letter.

This EAW review was not the only, or first, opportunity the Council has had to consider the impact of an amphitheater on regional systems, Council policies or adjacent jurisdictions. In late 1989, the Council reviewed an EAW for an amphitheater and waste transfer station at this site (Referral File 14886-1). In 1990, the Council reviewed a comprehensive plan update submitted by the city, which included the proposed reuse of the Freeway Landfill and associated property as an amphitheater (Referral File 15099-3). In 1999, the Council reviewed another comprehensive plan update for the city, which also included the proposed reuse of the landfill and quarry for an amphitheater and associated parking (Referral File 16907-2). While the Council does not "approve" local comprehensive plans per se, the Council did review both plan updates and did not find that the plans would have regional system impacts and did not direct the city to modify or change its plans.

In this context, it should be clear that neither the Council (as a policy-board) nor Council staff have taken a position for or against the proposed amphitheater project. The June 14, 2000 letter was intended to convey concerns about some of the data contained in the EAW and about some other data (permits and approvals needed) missing from the EAW. The letter could, and in retrospect perhaps should, have noted that the EAW overall was considered very well done, with parts like that of the traffic analysis of an EIS-level of detail.

The opening paragraph in our June 14 letter advised that in our view the EAW was "incomplete and inaccurate." We would like to clarify staffs intended meaning. It would be much more accurate to say that Council staff considers the EAW to be generally complete and accurate, but that there are some questions that we believe require further elaboration before the city decides on whether an EIS is needed.

Finally, we would like to make it clear that the Council staff did not advocate in the June 14 letter that an EIS be prepared. We asked the city to address our questions with additional elaboration before the city itself makes the determination of whether an EIS may be needed.

We hope that this helps to clarify the intent and specific language contained in our June 14 letter. If you have any questions, please contact Jim Uttley, AICP, principal reviewer, at 651-602-1361.

Sincerely,

Helen Boyer
Director, Environmental Services

cc: Martha Fuller, C. F. 0., Rose Wild L.L.C.
Elizabeth Kautz, Mayor, City of Burnsville
John Shardlow, Planning Consultant, DSU, Inc.
Gene Winstead, Mayor, City of Bloomington
Mark Bernhardson, City Manager, City of Bloomington
Sherry Narusiewicz and Paul Czech, MN DOT Metropolitan Division
Ted Mondale, Chair, Metropolitan Council
Phil Riveness, Metropolitan Council District 5
Carolyn Rodriguez, Metropolitan Council District 15
Jay Lindgren, Regional Administrator
Keith Buttleman, Director, MCES Environmental Planning and Evaluation Department
Marcel Jouseau, Manager, MCES Environmental Planning and Resource Management
Judy Sventek, MCES Environmental Planning and Resource Management
Donald Bluhm, Manager, MCES Municipal Services
Connie Kozlak, Supervisor, Transportation and Transit Development
Mark Filipi, AICP, Transportation and Transit Development
Thomas C. McElveen, Director, Community Development Division
Eli Cooper, Director, MCCD Planning and Growth Management Department
Richard E. Thompson, Supervisor, MCCD Comprehensive Planning
Sandra Pinel, AICP, MCCD Planning and Growth Management Department
Jim Uttley, AICP, MCCD Planning and Growth Management Department

EAW 18267-1 .doc