DRAFT

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

for

CONSTRUCTION OF

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)

TEMPORARY EMERGENCY HOUSING IN

ROSEAU, MINNESOTA

FEMA-1419-DR-MN

Prepared for:

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Region X

Bothell, Washington

Prepared by:

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

St. Paul District

St. Paul, Minnesota

August 2002

DRAFT

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

for

CONSTRUCTION OF

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)

TEMPORARY EMERGENCY HOUSING IN

ROSEAU, MINNESOTA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

[Page]{.underline}

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

1.  Project Authority 1

2.  Project Location 1

2.0 PROJECT PURPOSE 1

2.1 Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action 1

3.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED 2

3.1 No Action 2

3.2 The Proposed Action 2

3.3 Sites Considered and Dismissed From Further Consideration 3

4.0 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING RESOURCES AND PROJECT IMPACTS 3

4.1 Climate/Geology/Soils 3

4.2 Water Resources 4

4.2.1 Surface Water 4

4.2.2 Groundwater 4

4.2.3 Waters of the United States 5

4.2.4 Floodplains 5

4.3 Air Quality 5

4.4 Noise 6

4.5 Natural Resources 6

4.5.1 Vegetation 6

4.5.2 Fish and Wildlife 7 4.5.3 State and Federally Listed Threatened,
Endangered or

Proposed Species and Critical Habitats 7

4.6 Cultural Resources 7

4.7 Socioeconomics/Aesthetics 8 4.8 Environmental Justice 10

4.9 Safety And Security 10

4.10 Hazardous Materials and Waste 10

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont)

[Page]{.underline}

5.0 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS 11

6.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 11

7.0 AGENCIES CONSULTED 11

8.0 CONCLUSION 11

LIST OF FIGURES

NO. TITLE

1.  Location Map

2.  Alternative Site Location/Staging Area

3.  Project Map

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A -- AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

1.  Record of Telephone Conversation with the Minnesota Department of
    Natural Resources, July 29, 2002

2.  Email from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, July 19, 2002

3.  Letter to the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office, July 26,
    2002

**DRAFT**

**ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT**

**for**

**CONSTRUCTION OF**

**FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)**

**TEMPORARY EMERGENCY HOUSING IN**

**ROSEAU, MINNESOTA**

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 PROJECT AUTHORITY

In accordance with 44 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) for the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), Subpart B - Agency Implementing
Procedures, Section 10.9, an environmental assessment (EA) was prepared
pursuant to Section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) as implemented by the regulations promulgated by the President's
Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508). The purpose
of the EA is to analyze the potential environmental impacts of the
construction of FEMA temporary emergency housing in and around Roseau,
Minnesota, and to determine whether to prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) or a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI).

1.2 PROJECT LOCATION

Roseau, Minnesota, is located in north central Minnesota, approximately
220 miles northwest of Duluth, Minnesota and 10 miles from the Canadian
border (Figure 1). The area is located in the border area between the
flat prairie region of northwestern Minnesota and the boreal forest
region of north central Minnesota.

2.0 PROJECT PURPOSE

2.1 PURPOSE AND NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION

During storm events of June 8 and 9, 2002, up to 14 inches of rain fell
on the community of Roseau and surrounding areas. By midday on June 9,
the Roseau River, which runs through the community, was 2.5 feet above
flood stage. During the evening of the 9^th^, sandbagging activity was
initiated in the community. During the afternoon of the 10^th^, a dike
running along the Roseau River broke, and water entered much of the
downtown and adjacent residential areas of Roseau. On the evening of the
12^th^, the river crested 7.5 feet above flood stage. The river began
receding on the night of the 13^th^, and most of the city was accessible
again by June 15^th^. At the request of the Governor of Minnesota, the
President issued an emergency declaration for Roseau County on June 14,
2002 (FEMA 1419-DR-MN).

Initial surveys estimated that approximately 150 (over 80 percent) of
the commercial and public buildings had direct flood damage and were
closed for over 10 days. More than 800 of the approximately 995
residential structures received direct flood damage to their basement
and/or first floor living areas. Since the emergency declaration, FEMA
placed 152 camper trailers at residences that did not permit human
habitation because of flood damage. The latest survey information
indicates that up to 60 family units will need temporary housing
assistance during the coming winter because their permanent residences
will not be ready for occupancy, and the camper trailers are not
adequate for the extreme winter weather of northern Minnesota. The
purpose of this action is to provide temporary housing assistance under
the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, as amended

3.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

3.1 NO ACTION

Implementation of the no action alternative would entail no construction
or preparation of sites for temporary emergency housing of flood
victims. Because of the extreme cold weather that occurs in the winter,
residents would not be able to remain in the uninsulated camper
trailers. Residents who could not return to their homes would have to
find other accommodations such as with friends or family members or in
hotels or apartments available in Roseau or nearby areas. Initial
community surveys have found that there are very few undamaged,
available rental units. Since this alternative did not solve the
existing problem, it was not selected.

3.2 THE PROPOSED ACTION

The proposed action is to construct temporary emergency housing for
people displaced by the flood event who cannot return to permanent
housing before the onset of winter. The preferred location is a 40-acre
site located on the south side of the community along State Highway 89
(Figure 2). The site could accommodate up to 100 mobile homes. The site
currently is used as cropland. The city rezoned the entire parcel in
late June 2002 as residential and commercial. The owner had intended to
develop approximately 40 residential lots on the site. Up to 68
temporary emergency houses will be located on the eastern two-thirds of
the acreage which is zoned residential. The western one-third of the
site would be left in its current condition but would provide up to 30
additional temporary emergency home sites if they were needed. The
layout of the proposed 68-mobile home site is presented on Figure 3.
Gravel road material would be placed to form the roadbeds and pad sites.
The temporary emergency housing would consist of manufactured homes.
These structures would be placed on the proposed site at a density of
approximately six homes per acre. Electrical hookups and water and sewer
service systems would also be developed on the entire 68-unit site
before the first set of trailers was installed. The area within the
project site not covered with gravel or impermeable material would be
seeded with grass. These temporary residential structures would be
removed within 18 months, at which time the Federal Government would
clean up any debris left on the site. Utilities (water, sewer and power)
will remain in place for future use. A natural swale runs through the
site on a northwest to southeast axis. This swale would be deepened 2
feet to provide drainage for the site. Included within the project area
are two Type 1 (seasonally flooded) wetland areas (Figure 3). This
larger wetland acreage would be left in its existing state, other than
being seeded to provide a vegetative cover. The second wetland area (B)
is 0.25 acre area within the swale. This area would be deepened along
with the rest of the drainage site.

An existing grass field/parking area on the county fairgrounds (Figure
2) would be used for the mobilization area for accepting delivery,
assembling, and testing the homes. The homes would be delivered to the
mobilization site in groups of three to five. There they would be tested
and prepared for installation at the mobile home park. The use of this
county fairgrounds area would be limited to the installation period,
which would end around October 1, 2002.

3.3 SITES CONSIDERED AND DISMISSED FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION

Additional sites that had general physical characteristics required for
development of mobile home parks in or near Roseau were also considered
(Figure 2). Site 2 was located approximately 1 mile to the northwest of
the selected site. It is topographically similar to the selected site
and also has been intensively farmed in the past. It was not selected
because a portion of the parcel is not located within the city limits of
the affected community, which is a FEMA program requirement.

Site 3 is located in the northeast corner of Roseau. It is larger than
the selected site (80 acres). It also is a topographically flat piece of
land that has been farmed in the recent past. It was not selected
because it is located within the 100-year floodplain.

Site 4 is also located in the northeast corner of Roseau, just to the
south of Site 3. It is a 6-acre site that has been vacant for the past
10 years. It was not selected because it did not have sufficient
capacity for the number of mobile homes that would be needed for the
community, and one of the planning criteria was to have all of the
provided temporary residences in one location.

4.0 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING RESOURCES AND PROJECT IMPACTS

The site is an existing agricultural field located adjacent to the city
limits of Roseau. The site is surrounded by agricultural land and
residential and commercial development. Existing residential and
commercial development is located to the north of the site. The City
proposes to extend residential development into the site from the north.
A residential development is currently being developed to the east and
south of the site. This residential development is surrounded by a golf
course.

4.1 CLIMATE/GEOLOGY/SOILS

Roseau County has a subhumid to humid continental climate with
moderately warm summers, cold winters, and rapid changes in daily
weather patterns. On average, the mean monthly temperatures range from 5
degrees to 68 degrees Fahrenheit. About three-quarters of the area's
approximately 20 inches of annual precipitation falls during April to
September, with two-thirds occurring during May, June and July. The
driest months are November through February. Average snowfall is
approximately 40 inches per year.

The proposed project area lies within the large, flat geographical area
formed by glacial Lake Agassiz. This lake covered northeastern
Minnesota, eastern North Dakota, and a large area of southern Manitoba.
Since the recession of Lake Agassiz, streams such as the Roseau River
have established meandering courses over the relatively flat till and
lake plain. The soils found in the general project area consist mainly
of clayey glacial drift, alluvium, and lacustrine soils along with
organic soils that derived in marsh/bog areas. The immediate project
area consists of Ausburg loam, Enstrom loamy fine sand, and Croke very
fine sandy loam with Mustinka clay loam in the swale area. The existing
soils would not preclude the use of the proposed site.

Information on landform, bedrock geology, soils, climate, hydrology,
pre-settlement vegetation, present vegetation, land use, natural
disturbance, and conservation concerns is available at:
<http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/ecological_services/ecs/laurentian/ecs_c.html>,
a web site maintained by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.

4.2 WATER RESOURCES

4.2.1 SURFACE WATER

The Roseau River is located approximately three-quarters of a mile to
the east of the proposed project area. A series of road ditches connects
the site to the river. The existing swale probably historically had a
more direct connection to the river, but this was obliterated by the
development of the residential area and golf course that currently
exists between the proposed site and the river.

Preparation of the proposed temporary emergency housing sites would
require the removal of much of the existing wheat crop on the site. This
vegetation would normally be removed in the early fall when the crop is
harvested, so the proposed action would cause little overall change in
site conditions. The contribution of sediment into the drainage ditches
would be minimal. However, in order to minimize any erosion and
sedimentation that could occur, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) would be prepared for the site, and the measures indicated in
the plan would be implemented for the proposed action. The SWPPP would
contain specific construction measures (e.g., silt fences, drainage
swales, hay bales, etc.) to reduce or eliminate runoff impacts during
proposed construction activities and reduce the potential for soil
erosion after construction. Best management practices as provided in the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency *Protecting Water Quality in Urban
Areas: A Manual* will be used. The construction contractor would also be
required to implement protective measures to prevent spillage of
chemicals, fuels, oils, greases, bituminous materials, waste washings,
herbicides, insecticides, or any other materials associated with
construction activities, and keep these materials from entering
drainages. With implementation of measures identified in the SWPPP and
the incorporation of best management practices (BMP) to reduce spillage,
the proposed project would have minimal adverse impacts on surface
waters.

The no-action alternative would not result in any increased erosion from
the existing sites because no construction activities would occur.

.

4.2.2 GROUNDWATER

The geologic formations underlying the City of Roseau consist of bedrock
overlain with glacial till and glacial lake silt. Neither of these
glacially derived formations yields much water. Because of the low
relief and relative impermeability of the underlying sediments, the
water table in the area is located within 1 to 6 feet of the ground
level. Community water supply is obtained from the deeper aquifers and
is not directly dependent on the shallow subsurface water formations.

Construction of water, sewer, or lift station lines or any ground
surface preparations would not exceed 8 feet. Subsurface geology and
implementation of the management plans mentioned in the preceding
section would minimize potential adverse impacts to groundwater in the
proposed project area.

The no action alternative would not result in any potential impacts to
groundwater because no construction activities would take place.

4.2.3 WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers has reviewed the locations of the
proposed sites and has identified two Type 1 wetlands in the proposed
project area (Figure 3). The area of the two wetlands is approximately
1.5 acres (A) and 0.25 acre (B). For at least the past 15 years, these
wetlands and the surrounding area were plowed and cropped. Because of
this usage, the wetlands are in a degraded state. The standing water
this spring/summer killed the agricultural crop, and both areas
currently have bare earth conditions. The only project related impact to
wetland A would be seeding the area to minimize erosion.

The smaller wetland (B) will be excavated along with the other portions
of the swale to form a collection area for runoff. The entire swale area
will also be seeded with a wetland seed mix. The proposed action would
change the conditions of the wetland and the surrounding area. The
current condition is that of a converted wetland used to provide an
annual agricultural crop. With the deepening and seeding of the swale,
much of the excavated area would likely develop as a wetland. This would
be an enhancement of the existing wetland conditions. The avoidance and
enhancement measures incorporated into the proposed project are in
compliance with Executive Order (E.O.) 11990, Protection of Wetlands.

The no action alternative would not entail compliance with Section 404
of the Clean Water Act and E.O. 11990 since no construction activities
would take place.

4.2.4 FLOODPLAINS

Although the swale area of the proposed project site is located within
the 100-year floodplain, the individual home sites and access roads are
located above this elevation. The proposed staging area is located
within the 100-year floodplain. On the basis of historic precipitation
patterns, however, it is very unlikely that a flood event would occur
during the August-October time frame the staging area would be used. If
there was an event, the small number of units that would be present at
any one time could rapidly be moved to higher ground. On the basis of
these conditions, compliance with E.O. 11988, Floodplain Management
Guidelines, would be achieved

The no action alternative would not affect any established 100-year
flood hazard area because no construction would take place.

4.3 AIR QUALITY

Roseau County is considered an attainment area for all criteria
pollutants. Construction activity associated with the proposed project
would produce pollutant emissions. Heavy equipment would produce small
amounts of hydrocarbons and exhaust fumes. It would be expected that
some air pollutants would increase in the project areas; however, the
concentrations of these pollutants would not cause the region to reach
non-attainment status. The construction contractor would be required to
maintain the vehicles on the sites in good working order to minimize
pollutant emissions. Fugitive dust would also result from proposed
construction activities. The contractor would be required to address
dust suppression activities. Adverse impacts to air quality resulting
from the proposed activity would be short-term and temporary during
construction only.

The no action alternative would result in some longer commutes by the
displaced people than under the proposed action and therefore a very
small amount of additional car emissions. However, since the no action
alternative would not involve construction activities and emissions, it
would result in fewer emissions overall and less impact to air quality.

4.  NOISE

Noise is defined as "unwanted sound" and, in the context of protecting
public health and welfare, implies potential effects on people and, in
general, the environment. Noise is one of the major concerns associated
with construction-related activities. Existing noise levels in the
vicinity of the proposed project site are relatively low, originating
from residential construction in the adjoining areas and vehicular
traffic along the residential streets.

Residents near the proposed site would experience an increase in noise
levels during the proposed construction activities. The construction
noise would be greater than the noise from traffic at these sites. The
work would be done relatively quickly; thus, the disruption would be
temporary. In addition, there are no sensitive receptors located near
either the staging or temporary home sites.

Once the temporary emergency housing was established, additional noise
would be generated from the vehicles and activities of people inhabiting
the completed units. While noise at the selected site would increase,
noise levels would not be expected to result in any significant
long‑term adverse impacts to residents in the adjacent areas, because
the sites would eventually be vacated. The potential future development
of the site will be for residential development.

The no action alternative would not result in any increase in noise
because no construction activities would take place.

4.5 NATURAL RESOURCES

4.5.1 VEGETATION

Land use in the project area is predominantly residential or
agricultural. The lands to the west and south are seeded in wheat and
canola, respectively. The areas to the east and north are residential
housing and a golf course. The proposed project area is currently seeded
in wheat. Site preparation for construction of temporary emergency
housing would require clearing and grading. This would result in the
loss of the existing wheat cover. Upon completion of the construction
activities, the exposed earthen areas would be reseeded primarily with
residential grasses. The overall impact would be to exchange one
non-native grassy species with another.

The no action alternative would not result in any potential impacts to
vegetation because no construction activities would take place.

4.5.2 FISH AND WILDLIFE

Wildlife in the area is typical of an agricultural landscape. Common
wildlife species include white-tailed deer, mink, muskrat, red fox,
coyote, striped skunk, meadow vole, meadow jumping mouse and masked
shrew. Migrating waterfowl such as mallard, blue-winged teal, gulls and
a variety of shorebirds traverse the area. Other common birds include
the yellow warbler, veery, Baltimore oriole, warbling vireo, red-winged
blackbird, bobolink, and swallows. Overall, habitat quality in the
immediate project area would be considered low because of agricultural
and residential disturbance, which severely limits the extent and
diversity of wildlife habitat. The proposed action would have minimal
impact on the existing faunal conditions.

The no action alternative would not result in any potential impacts to
fish and wildlife because no construction activities would take place.

4.5.3 STATE AND FEDERALLY LISTED THREATENED, ENDANGERED OR PROPOSED
SPECIES AND CRITICAL HABITATS

Three Federally listed threatened and endangered species are listed for
Roseau County: the gray wolf (*Canis lupus*) -- threatened; the Canada
lynx (*Lynx canadensis*) -- threatened; and the bald eagle (*Haliaeetus
leucocephalus*) -- threatened. After evaluating the quality of habitat
and records of these species in the area, a determination was made that
the project would have no impact on these species or their habitats. The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service concurred with this determination
(Attachment 1). The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources was
contacted in regard to the presence of protected species. There are no
State protected species in the immediate project area (Attachment 2).

The no action alternative would have no effect on Federal or State
endangered, threatened, or proposed threatened species.

4.6 CULTURAL RESOURCES

Although no cultural resource sites have been identified within the
project area, numerous cultural resource sites indicating continual
human occupation for approximately 10,000 years have been recorded
throughout the area. Archaeological sites within the region exist on a
variety of landforms, including uplands, terraces, and glacial beach
ridges, and consist of such sites as precontact lithic scatters, burial
mound sites, and historic Euro-American structures and roads.

Although no cultural resource surveys are known to have been conducted
within the project area, several cultural resource investigations have
been conducted near the project area, primarily associated with road
construction. Several cultural resource sites are located within 1 mile
of the temporary housing placement site. The nearest cultural resource
site, 21ROak, is located immediately southwest of the proposed site.
Little information is available on 21ROak, evidently consisting of a
precontact cemetery located somewhere in the eastern half of Section 26.
Other precontact burials in the area include 21RO8, a burial mound (now
destroyed) located on the west side of the Roseau River, and 21RO29,
located east of the river and consisting of a "skull and bones"
unearthed during construction of a water line in 1969. North of the
project area, and within the city limits, is the Roseau County
Courthouse, listed on the National Register of Historic Places. A
historic road running between Roseau and Thief River Falls was recorded
to have passed on or near the proposed project site. Two historic
cemeteries are located adjacent to the site.

A Phase I cultural resource survey was conducted in July 2002 by a Corps
archaeologist. No cultural resource sites were observed within the
project area. The relatively level agricultural field does not harbor a
glacial beach ridge or buried soils. No evidence of the historic road
was extant in the field. No surface evidence suggests that graves may be
located outside the cemetery boundaries or within the project limits. No
known historic properties will be directly or indirectly affected by
this project. Coordination with the Minnesota State Historic
Preservation Office (SHPO) has been initiated.

The no action alternative would have no effect on cultural properties.

4.7 SOCIOECONOMICS/AESTHETICS

The proposed project area is located in the city of Roseau, Roseau
County, in northwestern Minnesota. Roseau is the county seat for Roseau
County and serves as a strong retail trade center for the region. Roseau
is the largest city within Roseau County, with a market area of over
60 miles. It is approximately 360 miles northwest of Minneapolis/St.
Paul, Minnesota, and 220 miles west/northwest of Duluth, Minnesota. It
is located just 10 miles from the Canadian border and 21 miles west of
Lake of the Woods at the junction of State Highways 11, 89, and 310. The
city comprises an area of approximately 170 acres.

The city of Roseau, occupying what once was the bottom of glacial Lake
Agassiz, has a relatively flat topography, sloping gently to the north.
The city has a topographic relief of approximately 20 feet, with
elevations varying from 1055 to 1035 feet.

The 2000 population of Roseau is 2,756, an increase of 15.0 percent from
1990. Roseau County\'s 2000 population totaled 16,338, an increase of
8.7 percent from 1990. Roseau County\'s 2000 population is equivalent to
only 9.8 persons per square mile, compared to the statewide and
nationwide densities of 61.8 and 79.6 persons per square mile,
respectively.

### POPULATION

+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| Area      | ### 19    | ### 19    | ### 19    | ### 19    | ### 20    |
|           | 60 Census | 70 Census | 80 Census | 90 Census | 00 Census |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| City      | 2,146     | 2,552     | 2,272     | 2,396     | 2,756     |
|           |           |           |           |           |           |
| County    | 12,154    | 11,569    | 12,580    | 15,026    | 16,338    |
+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+

The city of Roseau's population has a median age of 37.9 years, with
26.3 percent of the population under the age of 18 and 20.7 percent of
the population aged 62 years and over.

Among persons 25 years and over, 81.2 percent of Roseau's population has
achieved high school or higher educational attainment compared to 82.5
percent for Roseau County, and 87.9 percent for the State of Minnesota.
Approximately 22.8 percent of the adults 25 years and over possess
bachelor's degrees or higher, compared with 14.9 percent for Roseau
County, and 27.4 percent for the State of Minnesota.

According to 2000 census figures, there are a total of 1,229 housing
units in Roseau. There were 821 owner-occupied (66.8 percent), 336
renter-occupied (27.3 percent), and 72 (5.9 percent) vacant housing
units. The median value of owner-occupied housing units is \$78,000 and
the median monthly rent for renter-occupied housing units is \$477.

Roseau County's labor force totaled 8,918 in May 2002, with an
unemployment rate of 3.3 percent, compared to 3.7 percent (unadjusted)
for the State of Minnesota and 5.5 percent (unadjusted) for the United
States.

Employment in Roseau County is dominated by manufacturing, which
accounts for 44.3 percent of total employment, compared to 16.3 percent
Statewide. Major manufacturers include Polaris Industries (city of
Roseau) and Marvin Windows (city of Warroad). The presence of these
companies accounts for the county's population growth in recent years.
Other significant industries in Roseau County are educational, health,
and social services (16.8 percent of employed persons) and retail trade
(9.2 percent). Roseau is also home to a strong agricultural community.
The chief agricultural enterprise in the region is the production of
grass seed. Roseau County provides 80 percent of the Timothy and 15
percent of the Kentucky Bluegrass marketed in the United States. The
diversified land with its ample rainfall and good soil also yields
abundant wheat, oats, barley, canola, sunflower, and flax crops.

According to information from the U.S. Census Bureau, the 1997 median
household money income for Roseau County was \$36,832, compared to
\$41,591 for the State of Minnesota and \$37,005 for the United States.
In Roseau County, 7.7 percent of the population is below the poverty
level, compared to 8.9 percent for the State of Minnesota and 13.3
percent for the United States.

The proposed project would result in minimal t social or economic
impacts. The project would have a positive impact on public health and
safety, community cohesion, and employment in the area. People displaced
by the flood event will be able to stay in the community and keep their
jobs while their homes are being made habitable. The site being
considered for development of temporary emergency housing is near
existing residential and commercial areas. The temporary residents would
therefore be close to stores, post offices, schools and other services
necessary for urban living.

During site development and the staging and placement of the mobile
homes, short-term negative impacts would likely occur in the following
areas: an increase in noise levels and disruption of normal community
traffic patterns. These effects would be attenuated through the
appropriate placement of construction and safety signage. These effects
would be short-lived and terminate when site development and mobile home
placement was complete.

The no action alternative would entail no construction or preparation of
sites for temporary emergency housing of flood victims. Because of the
cold weather that occurs in the winter, up to 60 of the 152 family units
presently housed in uninsulated camper trailers would not be able to
remain in their temporary accommodations. Residents that could not
return to their homes would have to find other accommodations such as
with friends or family members or in hotels or apartments available in
Roseau or nearby areas. Initial surveys have found that there are very
few undamaged, available rental units. Persons unable to remain in
Roseau would face longer travel times and social disruption as a result
of relocation.

4.8 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

Executive Order 12898, Environmental Justice, provides that each Federal
agency identify and address, as appropriate, disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects of its programs, policies,
and activities on minority populations and low-income populations in the
United States.

The proposed action is not expected to have disproportionately negative
impacts on minority or low-income populations. The level of commitment
is proportional to the level of assistance requested by the State of
Minnesota and the level of need of the affected community, regardless of
socioeconomic status.

4.9 SAFETY AND SECURITY

Safety and security issues associated with the proposed action that were
considered included the health and safety of the individuals working on
site development activities, placing utilities, and relocating housing
units, and the well-being of the people living at or adjacent to the
manufactured home sites. The Corps construction engineer would identify
and rectify potential safety hazards at the selected site staging and
housing sites. Safety fencing would be included if it was determined to
be necessary as part of the site design. Safety during construction is a
concern for the personnel associated with the proposed action. All
construction activities would be conducted in a safe manner. First aid
and other medical services would be readily available throughout the
duration of this action.

The safety and security of the residents of the manufactured homes is
also of utmost concern. Fire and police protection would be provided by
the City of Roseau. The school district would provide busing for the
areas students. The location of pickup points would be determined in the
same manner as in the other residential areas in the City of Roseau.
Adverse impacts resulting from the safety and security issues associated
with this project would be minimal.

4.10 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND WASTE

Corps of Engineers personnel examined the proposed sites for the
presence of hazardous materials and waste. No evidence was observed that
would indicate surface or subsurface contamination. Past usage has been
limited to production of agricultural product. Hazardous materials such
as oil, fuel or paint may be used on the sites during construction
activities. Any hazardous materials and waste on the site associated
with construction activities would be stored in appropriate containers
or facilities. Fueling of construction equipment would normally occur
off site, and all hazardous materials would be handled and disposed of
in accordance with applicable local, State, and Federal regulations.
Proper implementation of these regulations would prevent the occurrence
of significant adverse impacts resulting from hazardous materials and
wastes.

5.  CUMULATIVE EFFECTS

The project will ultimately provide the installation of utility and
roadway infrastructure supporting future residential development of the
site. This residential development is not inconsistent with the City's
desire to provide residential development, especially outside flood
hazard areas. The water and sewer service may allow for future
development of adjoining areas. However, these areas are largely outside
the City limits. Expansion to these areas would, by its nature, need to
be consistent with the City's growth management objectives.

6.0 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

The public will be provided an opportunity to comment on the proposed
action from August 2 to August 6, 2002. A public notice identifying the
action, location of the proposed site, participants, location of the
draft EA and FONSI, and who to call to provide comments will be
advertised in the Grand Forks Herald and posted at the Ram Community
Center and Roseau County Courthouse. The Environmental Assessment will
be sent to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Minnesota Chippewa Tribe - Red Lake Band, Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and Minnesota
State Historic Preservation Office. Flyers will be distributed to owners
of businesses and homes within the vicinity of the proposed activity.

7.0 AGENCIES CONSULTED

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources

Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Roseau County Engineer

City of Roseau Engineer

8.0 CONCLUSION

The proposed project is to construct temporary emergency housing for
people displaced by the Roseau River flood of 2002. Construction
activities associated with the proposed project would include land
clearing, gravel road construction, placement of facilities to
accommodate utilities, and placement of the manufactured housing units.

On the basis of the findings of this EA and coordination with the
appropriate agencies, it is our initial determination that
implementation of the proposed project and contingency plans as
described in this EA would not have any significant adverse impacts to
the human or natural environment. All requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act will be satisfied after the review period for
the Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.

LIST OF FIGURES

1.  Location Map

2.  Alternative Site Locations / Staging Area

3.  Project Map

![](media/image1.jpeg){width="5.81875in" height="8.99236111111111in"}

![](media/image2.jpeg){width="6.49375in" height="8.403472222222222in"}

![](media/image3.jpeg){width="5.81875in" height="8.99236111111111in"}

APPENDIX A

AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

[**CONVERSATION RECORD** \|Time: 0830 \|Date: 29 July 2002]{.underline}

**Type**: Visit\| Conversation\| X Telephone \| X Incoming Outgoing

[**Location**:]{.underline}

**Name of Person Contacted**: Bruce Lenning

**Organization**: Minnesota Department of Natural Resources - Bemidji

[**Telephone No.**: 218-755-3635]{.underline}

**Subject**: Roseau Temporary Housing -- State Listed Endangered Species

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Summary**: Mr. Lenning called to respond to our request of potential
presence of State listed threatened species in or near the proposed
project area. He informed that there were no species listed for the
immediate project area. One bird species was listed for an adjacent
section in 1991. Based on this information, Mr. Lenning concurred with
our determination that the project would not impact any State listed
species.

**==================================================================**

**Action Required: None**

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Name of Documenter**: Richard J. Beatty

**Signature**: Signed \|**Date**: 29 July 2002

**=================================================================**

**Action Taken:**

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Signature**: \|**Date**:

**==================================================================**

From: Dan_Stinnett@fws.gov

Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 3:09 PM

To: Beatty, Richard J MVP

Cc: Laurie_Fairchild@fws.gov

Subject: Re: Legal Description for Proposed Project Area in Roseau, MN

Hi, Dick. I have checked for Threatened and Endangered Species in Roseau
County. The Gray Wolf (with Critical Habitat), Canada lynx, and bald
eagle are threatened species that may occur in Roseau County. I have
referenced the subject location for temporary housing and found there to
be no records of Federal species in the project area; therefore, we
agree with your determination that the project would have no effect on
Federally listed species or their habitats.

Dan Stinnett

Field Supervisor

Twin Cities Ecological Services Office

\"Beatty, Richard J MVP\"

\<richard.j.beatty@mvp02.usac To: \"\'dan_stinnett@fws.gov\'\"
\<dan_stinnett@fws.gov\>

e.army.mil\> cc:

July 26, 2002

Environmental and Economic Analysis Branch

Planning, Programs and Project Management Division

SUBJECT: Roseau Temporary Housing Project, Roseau County, Minnesota

Mr. Dennis Gimmestad

State Historic Preservation Office

Minnesota Historical Society

345 Kellogg Boulevard West

St. Paul, Minnesota 55102-1906

Dear Mr. Gimmestad:

The St. Paul District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is
installing temporary housing for the Federal Emergency Management Agency
in Roseau, Minnesota, for flood victims. The temporary housing will
consist of placing trailers and installing subsurface utilities (e.g.,
electric, sewer and water), constructing roads, and introducing other
associated features within the trailer park. The temporary housing
placement site is located in Roseau, Roseau County, in the SW1/4, SW1/4
of Section 24, T162N, R40W (Figure 1).

The temporary housing placement site is located in an agricultural field
approximately one-half mile west of the Roseau River and on the
southwest edge of the City of Roseau. The field is situated on
relatively level terrain that formed on a glacial lake plain (i.e.,
glacial Lake Agassiz). A shallow swale runs roughly east-west through
the east-central portion of the field, and a north-south running
overhead power line crosses the western portion of the field. The field
is currently planted in wheat, although the precontact vegetation
consisted of tall-grass prairie. The field is bounded on the west and
south by ditched roads, with housing developments on the north and east.
Immediately northeast of the field are the Hope and Sacred Heart
cemeteries.

No cultural resource surveys are known to have been conducted within the
project area. No cultural resource sites are recorded within the project
area. However, the Trygg map indicates that, by 1889, the north-south
running Thief River Falls to Roseau Road traversed the western portion
of the field. Several cultural resource sites are located within 1 mile
of the temporary housing placement site. The nearest cultural resource
site, 21ROak, is located immediately southwest of the placement site.
Little information is available on 21ROak, evidently consisting of a
precontact cemetery located somewhere in the eastern half of Section 26.
Other precontact burials in the area include 21RO8, a burial mound (now
destroyed) located on the west side of the Roseau River, and 21RO29,
located east of the river and consisting of a "skull and bones"
unearthed during construction of a water line in 1969. North of the
project area, and within the city limits, is the Roseau County
Courthouse, listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

A Phase I survey of the project area was conducted by Bradley E. Perkl
(Corps) on July 22, 2002. Field methods included a pedestrian survey
across the field in 10- to 15-meter transects. Surface visibility ranged
from 10 to 100 percent. According to the Roseau County Soil Survey, none
of the mapped soils over the field contain buried soil horizons, and no
glacial beach ridges are located within the wheat field. No evidence of
the historic road was extant in the field. Close attention was given to
the two cemeteries northeast of the placement site. No surface evidence
suggests that graves may be located outside the cemetery boundaries or
located within the project limits. Aside from recent debris (e.g.,
lumber, fabric sandbags, tin cans) deposited across the field by
floodwaters, no cultural materials were observed.

The Corps believes that no historic properties will be affected by this
project. We ask that you review the above and provide your comments as
soon as possible. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Bradley
Perkl, Corps archaeologist, at 651-290-5370.

> Sincerely,
>
> Joseph H. Mose
>
> Acting Chief, Environmental and Economic
>
> Analysis Branch

Enclosure