The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and Surfside Development of Tofte have reached an agreement resolving the company’s alleged failure to follow permit and storm water management requirements related to the planned unit development.
Surfside will pay a $14,250 penalty, but the stipulation agreement between the company and the MPCA states that the agreement does not necessarily mean Surfside agrees that the violations occurred.
A January 13, 2010 MPCA news release states, “When calculating penalties, the MPCA takes into account how seriously the violation affected the environment, whether it is a firsttime or repeat violation, and how promptly the violation was reported to appropriate authorities. It also attempts to recover the calculated economic benefit gained by failure to comply with environmental laws in a timely manner.”
Construction of Surfside started in August of 2006, two months after the company applied to Cook County for a conditional use permit and three months after it submitted a storm water pollution prevention plan to the county, which was under a joint powers agreement with the MPCA to monitor storm water management projects on behalf of the MPCA.
Several days after the site preparation was underway, Cook County Planning & Zoning Department staff visited the site and noted that Surfside had failed to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System State Disposal System permit. According to co-owner Dennis Rysdahl, this was an accidental oversight.
Rysdahl was overseas on vacation when he learned that while the plans had been filed properly with the county, an additional one-page application form and fee had not been sent to the MPCA. He was reached by phone and got the application and fee to the MPCA that day. He had already received approval from the county after submitting project plans to Planning & Zoning and agreeing to make recommended upgrades and changes.
To receive approval for a planned unit development, “there are probably 20 things one needs to turn in,” Rysdahl said in a February 2, 2010 phone interview. “The process is so laborious.” Theyhad to deal with the Minnesota Department of Transportation regarding their entry from Highway 61, Arrowhead Electric regarding their power supply, the state regarding their water systems, and the county regarding things like parking and site density. It was the county’s job to conduct a plan review, but the permit application had to be sent directly to the MPCA.
Surfside appealed the Administrative Penalty Order, which called for a fine of $5,750. Rysdahl later learned from his environmental law attorney that companies usually don’t appeal Administrative Penalty Orders. The MPCA did rescind the order, but at the same time it cited Surfside for additional violations that had been discovered. Some of those violations were not cited until the September 10, 2007 meeting at which the appeal was discussed.
Other violations regarded soil erosion measures that were considered insufficient for the conditions, developing only “potential” rather than “permanent” storm water management areas, and constructing one building within a buffer zone that was supposed to extend at least 100 feet from Lake Superior.
Rysdahl said that project plans had been approved not only by the county, but also by the North Shore Management Board, another level of oversight that “basically follows DNR rules.” The rule about a 100-foot buffer zone was buried in the regulations, Rysdahl said.
Rysdahl said that MPCA told him that if he withdrew his appeal regarding not submitting the application and fee before starting construction, they wouldn’t make him tear down the building that crossed the buffer zone line. If he didn’t withdraw the appeal, he was told, they would have to enforce the buffer zone regulation. He has not been required to tear the building down, however, but fines for the other violations were levied.
Rysdahl offered an example of the violations that were cited: At one point during construction, a trench for sewer lines surrounded a pile of dirt, preventing erosion from the site, but the trench did not qualify as an erosion prevention measure because it was not listed on the storm water management plan.
Rysdahl said he is not against government regulations and does not believe they kill businesses as some people claim. He does believe the MPCA’s punishment was harsh, however. “I think this is an example that was being made that was way out of proportion,” he said. He has spent $55,000 on construction changes, fines, and legal fees.
Surfside will include up to 27 3,000-square-foot town homes, a guest services center, a recreation building with a pool, whirlpool, sauna, fitness center and spa, a laundry and maintenance facility, and a tennis court. The development replaced approximately 13.7 acres of natural area and created about two acres of impervious surface.
Eco-friendly details have been included in the design, such as 98% energy efficient gas furnaces, energy efficient Andersen windows, James Hardie cement board siding, and native species landscaping. Surfside’s website describes the surroundings as “spectacular, pristine, and holistic.”
Leave a Reply