The URL can be used to link to this page

2003-01-28 Review and Comment EAWWestwood Professional Services, Inc. PiANN1NG ENGINEERING SURVEYING MEMORANDUM DATE: January 28, 2003 TO: EAW Distribution List FROM: Shannon Hansen, Environmental Scientist~'°u ~~~ 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: 952-937-5150 Fax: 952-937-5822 Toll free: 1-888-937-5150 E-mail: wpsC~westwoodps.com TWIN CITIESlMETRO ST. CLOUD BRAINERD Ref_ 19990360.Oi RE: Review and Comment Period for Towne Lakes Phase 11 Mixed-Use Development EAW Enclosed for your review is/are the Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW(s) indicated for distribution to your agency on the enclosed EAW Distribution List. As required under Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) Rules, the abstract for this EAW has been submitted for publication in the January 27, 2003 edition the EQB Monitor and a press release is being submitted for publication in the Crow River News. According to the EQB Monitor Publication Calendar, the 30-day comment period begins on February 3, 2003. Ms Linda Goeb, City of Albertville, must receive comments on this EAW by 4:30pm on March 5, 2003. Designing the Future Today..since 1972 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development Albertville, Minnesota EAW Distribution List Address City of Albertville, Attn: Linda Goeb, City Administrator 5975 Main Avenue NE, P.O. Box 9, Albertville, MN 55301-0009 City of Albertville Planner, Attn: Alan Brixius, c/o Northwest Associated Consultants Inc. 5775 Wayzata Boulevard, Suite 555, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 City of Albertville Engineer, Attn: Pete Carlson, c/o Short Elliot Hendrickson 113 Fifth Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302 City of Albertville Attorney, Attn: Michael Couri, c/o Couri & MacArthur Law Office Box 369, 705 Central Avenue East, St. Michael, MN 55376 Contractor Property Developers Company, Attn: Mike Waldo 7100 Northland Circle, Suite 108, Minneapolis, MN SS428 Westwood Professional Services, Inc., Attn: Rob Bouta 7599 Anagram Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Attn: Linda Fisher 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza, 7900 Xerxes Avenue South, Bloomington, MN 55431 Washington County SWCD, Attn: Kerry Saxton 306C Brighton Avenue, Buffalo, MN 55313 Wright County Planning & Zoning Administrator, Attn: Thomas Salkowski 10 N.W. Second Street, Buffalo, MN 55313-1193 Great River Regional Library 405 St. Germain, St. Cloud, MN 56301-3697 Board of Water and Soil Resources, Attn: Jim Haertel One West Water Street, Suite 200, St. Paul, MN 55107 Department of Agriculture, Attn: Becky Balk 90 West Plato Blvd., St. Paul, MN 55107 Department of Public Service, Attn: Marya White 85 7th Place East, Suite 500, St. Paul, MN 55101 Department of Health, Environmental Health Division Policy, Planning and Analysis Unit, 121 East 7th Place, Suite 230, St. Paul, MN 55101 Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, Environmental Review Program 300 Centennial Office Building, 658 Cedar Street, St. Paul, MN 55155 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Attn: Thomas W. Balcom Environmental Review Unit, 500 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155-4010 Minnesota Department of Transportation, Attn: Gerald Larson Mn/DOT Environmental Services, 395 John Ireland Blvd., MS 620, St. Paul, MN 55155 Minnesota Historical Society, State Historic Preservation Office 345 Kellogg Blvd. West, Level A, St. Paul, MN 55102 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, Attn: Beth Lockwood, Supervisor Environmental Review UnitlMajors/Rem Division, 520 Lafayette Road, St. Paul, MN 55155 Environmental Conservation Library Minneapolis Public Library, 300 Nicollet Mall, Minneapolis, MN 55401 Legislative Reference Library, Attn: Carol Blackburn 645 State Office Building, St. Paul, MN 55155 Number of Copies 13 t i~ fl I~ ~~ Environmental Assessment Worksheet Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development NW '/4 of Section 36, T121 N, R24W Albertville, Minnesota January 22, 2003 Responsible Governmental Unit lb~rtvi~~~ y. Small Tuwn living. Big tit4 life. Project Proposer City of Albertville P.O. Box 9 Albertville, MN 55301-0009 Phone (763) 497-3384 Fax (763) 497-3210 ~, Contractor Property Developers Company ~ ~ ~ 7100 Northland Circle, Suite 108 Minneapolis, MN 55428 Phone (763) 971-0477 ~ ~ ~ Fax (763) 971-0576 ueaong ~~agnoumuum m meni Consultant to Project Proposer Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone (952) 937-5150 Fax (952) 937-5822 19990360.01 fl '' t t ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) TOWNE LAKES Phase II MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT January 22, 2003 CONTENTS Page List of Tables ............................................................................................................... ii List of Exhibits ............................................................................................................. ii List of Appendices ....................................................................................................... ii 1. Project Title .......................................................................................................1 2. Proposer ...........................................................................................................1 3. RGU ..................................................................................................................1 4. Reason for EAW Preparation ............................................................................1 5. Project Location .............................................................................................. ..1 6. Description ...................................................................................................... .. 2 7. Project Magnitude Data .................................................................................. ..4 8. Permits and Approvals Required .................................................................... ..5 9. Land Use ........................................................................................................ ..5 10. Cover Types ................................................................................................... .. 7 11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources ...................................... ..7 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources ........................................................... ..8 13. Water Use ....................................................................................................... 13 14. Water-Related Land Use Management District ............................................... 15 15. Water Surface Use .......................................................................................... 20 16. Erosion and Sedimentation ............................................................................. 20 17. Water Quality: Surface Water Runoff .............................................................. 21 18. Water Quality: Wastewaters ........................................................................... 23 19. Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions ............................................................ 24 20. Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, and Storage Tanks ................................... 26 21. Traffic .............................................................................................................. 28 22. Vehicle-Related Air Emissions ........................................................................ 32 23. Stationary Source Air Emissions ..................................................................... 32 24. Odors, Noise, and Dust ................................................................................... 32 25. Nearby Resources .......................................................................................... 33 26. Visuallmpacts ................................................................................................. 34 27. Compatibility with Plans and Land Use Regulations ....................................... 35 28. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services .................................................. 36 29. Cumulative Impacts ........................................................................................ 36 30. Other Potential Environmental Impacts ........................................................... 37 31. Summary of Issues ......................................................................................... 38 Page Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 TABLES L Page [~ 6.1 Housing Types ..................................................................................................2 8.1 Permits and Approvals Required .................................................................... ..5 10.1 Estimated Before and After Cover Types ........................................................ .. 7 12.1 Wetland Characteristics .................................................................................. 10 12.2 Proposed Wetland Impacts by Basin and Wetland Type ................................ 11 13.1 Municipal Water Demand Based on the "Ten State Standards" ..................... 14 14.1 Residential Suitable Area ............................................................................... 18 14.2 Residential Shoreland Density Analysis .......................................................... 18 15.1 Acres of Water Surface per Watercraft ........................................................... 20 17.1 Proposed Stormwater Ponds .......................................................................... 22 19.1 Soils within the Project Area ........................................................................... 25 20.1 Solid Waste Generation Estimate ................................................................... 26 20.2 Typical Solid Waste Composition .................................................................... 27 21.1 Existing Delay /Level of Service ..................................................................... 29 21.2 Trip Generation for Towne Lakes Phase I I ..................................................... 30 21.3 Project Phasing for Towne Lakes Phase 11 ..................................................... 30 21.4 Post-Development Delay /Level of Service .................................................... 31 24.1 Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels ................................................ 33 31.1 Summary of Issues and Mitigation Measures ................................................. 38 EXHIBITS J Exhibit Site Location Map ........................................................................................................ 1 2002 Aerial Photography and Adjacent Land Use ....................................................... 2 Preliminary Site Plan ................................................................................................... 3 Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................... 4 Existing Cover Types ............................ ....................................................................... 5 National Wetlands Inventory Mapping ......................................................................... 6 Shoreland Tier Analysis ............................................................................................... 7 USGS Topography and Minor Watershed Boundary ................................................... 8 Preliminary Grading Plan ............................................................................................. 9 APPENDICES Appendix DNR Natural Heritage Database Search .................................................................... A Wetland Boundary Confirmation Letters ..................................................................... B Minnesota Survey Geological Well Log ...................................................................... C Traffic Study ............................................................................................................... D State Historic Preservation Office Correspondence ................................................... E Page ii ~~ t t ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW~ TOWNS LAKES PHASE II MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT Note to Preparers: The Environmental Assessment Worksheet provides information about a project that may have potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW is prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) or its agents to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared. The project proposer must supply any reasonably accessible data for -but should not complete - the final worksheet. If a complete answer does not fit in the space allotted, attach additional sheets as necessary. The complete question as well as the answer must be included if the EAW is prepared electronically. Note to Reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation, and the need for an EIS. The City of Albertville must receive comments on this EAW by 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, March 5, 2003. 1. Project Title Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development 2. Proposer: Contractor Property 3. RGU: City of Albertville Developers Company Contact person: Mike Waldo & Dave Hempel Contact person: Linda Goeb Address: Land Development Mgrs. Title: City Administrator ' 7100 Northland Circle Address: City of Albertville Suite 108 P.O. Box 9 Minneapolis, MN 55428 Albertville, MN 55301-0009 Phone: (763) 971-0477 Phone: (763) 497-3384 Fax: (763) 971-0576 Fax: (763) 497-3210 4. Reason for EAW Preparation ^ EIS Scoping D Mandatory EAW ^ Citizen Petition ^RGU Discretion ^ Proposer Volunteered If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart numbers(s) Part 4410.4300 Subp. 32.,Subp. 14.B.(22, and Subp. 19.B. and subpart name(s) Mixed Residential and Industrial- Commercial, Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Facilities and Residential Development. j 5. Project Location County: Wright County City: Albertville, Minnesota Twp: Part of the NW '/ of Section 36, T121N, R24W Attach copies of each of the following to fhe EAW: • County map showing the general location of the project; • U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy !i acceptable); ^ • Site plan showing all significant project and natural features. Page 1 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 6. Description a) Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor. CPDC is proposing construction of 215 residential units and up to 265,000 square feet of commercial development on 93.9 acres in the southeast quadrant of County Road 19 and 70tH Street N.E. in Albertville, Minnesota. The project includes traditional neighborhood design principles and architecture. b) Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation methods, and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes. Indicate modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant demolition, removal, or remodeling of existing structures. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. Towne Lakes Phase II (Vetsch property) is a mixed-use development proposed by Contractor Property Developers Company (CPDC) for construction in portions of the NW '/ of Section 36, T121N, R24W, City of Albertville, Minnesota. The project site is located north of Interstate 94, east of County Road 19, and south of 70f' Street N.E in Albertville, Wright County, Minnesota (Exhibit 1). Existing land use surrounding the site consists of tilled agricultural fields to the north and west, Towne Lakes Phase I (Balfany property) to the east, and the existing Albertville Outlet Mall to the southwest. Phase two of the Albertville Outlet Mall will be located south of the project site. The project is bordered on the southeast by School Lake. Mud Lake and the municipal wastewater treatment facility are located east of School Lake (Exhibit 2). The proposed project includes 34 single-family lots, 55 detached townhomes, 24 row townhomes (102 units), and 12 twinhomes (24 units) for a total of 215 residential units (Exhibit 3). The following table provides a breakdown of the proposed housing types. Table 6.1. Housing Types Type of Housing Attached' /Unattached Number of Units Row Townhomes Attached 102 Twinhomes Unattached 24 Detached Townhomes Unattached 55 Sin le Famil Lots 10,000 s . ft. Unattached 24 Sin le Family Lots 15,000 s . ft. Unattached 10 Total Units 215 ' Attached units consist of groups of four or more units, each of which shares one or more common walls with another unit, as defined in Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.0200. Page 2 t f t Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Portions of the project are being designed through the use of traditional neighborhood design (TND) principles and architecture. TND includes narrower streets, variable setbacks, alleys, and public open space amenities. This approach seeks to achieve a walkable, neighborly feel to the development by placing houses, rather than garages, closer to the street, building sidewalks, creating tree-lined boulevards, and providing access to park spaces for everyone. Neighborhoods will be connected with sidewalks to promote pedestrian activity and connect to small neighborhood parks and open spaces. Commercial development is proposed in the western portion of the site on Outlots A, B, and C (see Exhibit 3). Businesses that could potentially be located in this portion of the site include a motel, automobile convenience store, and restaurants. The integration of residential and commercial development, combined with pedestrian convenience, is expected to reduce traffic generation. The Lakeshore buffer established on Towne Lakes Phase I (Balfany) will be extended onto the project site. The design includes dedication of a shoreland conservation easement averaging 30 feet wide as measured from the OHWL or the delineated wetland that is situated adjacent to the OHWL whichever is greater. Additional landscape buffer plantings will be provided that enhance vegetative quality and wildlife habitat. Native shoreland tree and shrub species such as red maple, black ash, swamp white oak, red-osier dogwood, highbush cranberry, and pussy willow will be planted within the established shoreland buffer. Permanent markers will be installed and maintained to identify the Lakeshore buffer area. Project construction is expected to begin in the spring of 2003 and be completed in the fall of 1 2006. However, the ultimate development schedule will depend upon market conditions. The site will be mass graded in two phases to install sewer and water and construct streets and building pads. Project construction will begin in the southern portion of the site and proceed toward the north. The three existing homes and other farmstead buildings will be demolished or moved, and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. The existing barn located in the southwestern portion of the site maybe converted to a community center to serve as an amenity within the park. Construction will convert approximately 73.4 acres of agricultural fields, 16.7 acres of grassland, and 0.2 acre of woodland to residential lots, streets, buildings, parking, stormwater ponding, and replacement wetland. The project will entail about 0.66 acre of wetland fill, excavation, and drainage, which will be mitigated by all applicable state and federal requirements. Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be implemented during and after construction to protect water quality and reduce the potential for soil erosion and sedimentation. c) Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. The purpose of Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development is to provide life-cycle residential housing, retail opportunities, business services, and amenities for persons of all ages. The City of Albertville Comprehensive Plan (1995) identifies the need for additional housing for young couples, single person households, and older couples. The project is based onpedestrian-friendly traditional neighborhood design principals and integrates diverse Page 3 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 housing types with nearby retail and business services. The project will be carried out by , CPDC, a private developer. d) Are future stages of this development planned or likely? ^ Yes D No. If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to the present project, timeline, and plans for environmental review. Future stages of this development are not being proposed in conjunction with this project. e) Is the project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? Q Yes ^ No. If yes, briefly , describe the past development, timeline, and any past environmental review. The proposed project is the second and last phase of what is collectively referred to as Towne Lakes. The first phase (Balfany), included 150 single-family homes on 85 acres and its environmental effects were reviewed under the Balfany Residential Development EAW. The Balfany EAW was completed in July 2000 and the Albertville City Council adopted a negative declaration on October 30, 2000 (Resolution No. 2000-38). Towne Lakes Phase I (Balfany) is an existing project for which substantially all discretionary governmental decisions have been made. The entire 85-acre site has been rezoned to PUD District and a PUD Agreement has been executed. The overall density, housing type, and layout of homes and streets have been approved. Over 80 percent of the property has been platted. All shoreland approvals, and all required Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and Army Corps of Engineers wetland permits have been issued, and all wetland replacement has been constructed. The entire 85-acre site has been graded and all streets and utilities have been constructed or are under contract. Home construction is proceeding in reliance on the October 2000 EAW negative declaration and on subsequent government approvals 7. Project Magnitude Data T l P A ota roject creage: 93.9 acres Number of Residential Units: Unattached 113 Attached 1 102 Maximum Units per Building 6 Commercial, Industrial, or Institutional Building Area (gross floor space): Total square feet 265,000 Indicate area of specific uses (in square feet): i Retail/Office 220,000 2 Other Industrial N/A Warehouse N/A Institutional N/A Light Industrial N/A Agricultural N/A Manufacturing N/A Other Commercial (specify) MoteURestaurant/Automobile Convenience: 45,000 Building Height Maximum 35 Feet Residential and 40 Feet Commercial If over 2 stories, compare to Nearby buildings are 1 and 2-stories; the proposed project may heights of nearby buildings include buildings up to 3 stories tall. ~ Attached units consist of groups of four or more units each of which shares one or more common walls with another unit, as defined in Minnesota Rules Chapter 44l 0.0200. z The retail/office square footage is a preliminary estimate. Page 4 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW 1 ~~ I1 t t 8. Permits and Approvals Required January 22, 2003 List all known local, state, and federal permits, approvals, and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans, and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing, and infrastructure. All required permits and approvals will be obtained. Any necessary permits or approvals that are not listed in the table below were unintentionally omitted. Table 8.1. Permits and Approvals Required Unit of Government T e of A lication Status Cit of Albertville Rezonin from R-lA and B-2A to PUD t Submitted Cit of Albertville Preliminary Plat/PUD Approval Submitted Cit of Albertville Shoreland Conditional Use Permit/Variances 2 Submitted Cit of Albertville Final Plat A royal To be a lied for City of Albertville Site Plan Approval Submitted City of Albertville Grading Permit To be a lied for Cit of Albertville Buildin Permit To be a lied for City of Albertville Municipal Water Connection Permit To be a lied for City of Albertville Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit To be applied for Cit of Albertville WCA Certificate of Wetland Re lacement To be a lied for Wri ht County Permit for Access to County Road 19 To be a lied for MN DNR Division of Waters DNR Public Waters Work Permit To be a lied for MN DNR Division of Waters DNR Water A ro riation Permit To be a lied for MN DNR Div. of Lands and Minerals DNR Utility Crossin License To be applied for MN Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit To be a lied for MN Pollution Control A enc NPDES/SDS General Permit To be a lied for MN Department of Health Water Main Extension Approval To be a lied for MN De artment of Health Sanita Sewer Extension Permit To be a lied for U.S. Army Corps of En ineers GP/LOP-98-MN To be applied for The project proposer is requesting the existing residential R-IA District be rezoned to PUD, and the commercial area south of Laketown Drive (Outlot C) be rezoned from B-2A to PUD. See Item 14 for further discussion on variances. 9. Land Use Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss the compatibility of the project with adjacent and nearby land uses. Indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazard due to past land uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks, or proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. Land Use Historic aerial photography and statements made by the current landowners indicate the site has been continuously farmed for the past 66 years. Mr. and Mrs. Vetsch indicated they have farmed the land for the past 44 years, and prior to 1958, the Vetsch's parents farmed the site. Based on 2002 aerial photography, two homesteads and one large farmstead are located on the site (Exhibits 2 and 4). Existing land use of the site is primarily tilled agricultural with small areas of grassland, Page 5 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 wetland, and woodland (Exhibit 5). Approximately 73 acres, or 78 percent of the site, is used for growing agricultural crops. Adjoining Land Use Compatibility The proposed project will include a mix of residential and commercial lots, and is compatible with existing and future adjoining land uses. The newly constructed Towne Lakes Phase I residential development is located east of the site, and the existing Albertville Outlet Mall is located southwest of the project site. Existing land north and west of the site is predominantly agricultural and undeveloped. The City of Albertville Proposed Land Use Plan indicates that adjoining land use to the west and south is guided for Industrial and Commercial, and land use to the east is guided for Low Density Residential. The second phase of the Albertville Outlet Mall will be located south of the project site. Potential for Environmental Contamination The City of Albertville requested that an ASTM Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) be conducted to identify recognized environmental conditions present at the site. Tetra Tech EM, Inc. completed a Phase I ESA for the property on June 23, 2000 and documented the following conditions on the project site: 1. Eleven structures including homes, a barn, metal pole barn, four silos or grain bins, storage sheds, and old corn cribs; 2. One 500-gallon gasoline above-ground storage tank (AST); 3. One 1,000-gallon diesel AST; 4. One fuel oil AST in the basement of the house; and 5. One pole-mounted transformer located on the east side of the farmstead. Tetra Tech observed slight soil staining near the ASTs in the metal pole barn, and indicated the property owners were not aware of any leaks or spills associated with the ASTs. Containers of petroleum and agricultural chemicals observed in the barn include: (1) seven five-gallon cans of oil, (2) a 55-gallon drum of multigear Tube, (3) seven five-gallon gas cans, (4) one 30-gallon drum of used motor oil, and (5} four 2.5-gallon containers of herbicide. Tetra Tech also observed concrete mix and spray paint. Item 13 contains specific information regarding domestic wells on the property and their proposed abandonment. An overhead transmission line crosses the property from the southeast to the northwest. Due to the presence of stained soil in the vicinity of the ASTs in the metal pole barn, Summit Envirosolutions, Inc. (Summit) conducted a Phase II ESA to further assess the potential for environmental contamination. The Phase II ESA identified gasoline and diesel range organics near the ASTs in the metal pole barn. Summit concluded the concentrations appeared consistent with normal farming operations, and did not recommend additional assessment for the project site. The project proposer will be required to properly dispose of any drums, ASTs, and other chemical containers that remain on the site prior to developing the property. No conflicts involving environmental matters are anticipated in conjunction with adjacent or nearby land uses. Page 6 t t r C~ Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 1 iJ u t t 10. Cover Types Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development. The cover type map (see Exhibit 5} indicates the site currently consists of tilled agricultural fields, wetlands, a small woodland, brush grassland, lawn/landscaping, two homesteads, and one farmstead. Table 10.1. Estimated Before and After Cover Types Land Cover Before (acres After (acres) Tilled A 'cultural Fields 73.4 0.0 Delineated Wetlands Types 1 through 8 1.3 13' Woodland/Forest 0.2 0.0 Brush/Grassland 17.9 1.2 Lawn/Landsca in 0.6 39.9 Im ervious Surface/Pavement/Buildin s 0.5 48.0 Stormwater Ponding 0.0 3.5 Total 939 93.9 ~ Although 0.66 acre of wetland will be filled, drained, or excavated and converted to stormwater ponding, 0.67 acre of new wetland will be created, and the net wetland acreage will not change. If Before and After totals are not equal, explain why: Before and after totals are equal. 11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources a} Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and describe how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid impacts. Fish and wildlife resources on and near the site relate directly to the composition, quality, size, and connectivity of natural communities including grasslands, woodlands, and wetlands. Interpretation of historical aerial photography from the years 1937 through 1991 indicates the majority of the site (roughly 78 percent) has been tilled for agriculture for at least the past 66 years. Intensive agricultural land use has significantly altered most of the pre-settlement natural communities that once existed in this location. Minnesota's Natural Heritage: An Ecological Perspective (Univ. of Minn. Press; Tester, 1995) suggests that natural vegetation in this portion of Wright County at the time of the Public Land Survey of 1847-1907 was maple- basswood forest. Land clearing for agriculture has displaced or extirpated many of the wildlife species that historically occurred within the maple-basswood community. The agricultural fields, grasslands, wetlands, and adjacent shallow lakes provide habitat for wildlife species commonly found in the upper Midwest such as pheasants, waterfowl, songbirds, small rodents, and amphibians. Other species adapted to agricultural land and habitat fragmentation also likely exist throughout the site. Cornfields provide seasonal food and cover for such species. Page 7 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Some local decline in wildlife abundance is expected to result from the project. Measures to reduce the amount of species loss include preservation of a 30-foot vegetative shoreline buffer from the OHWL of School Lake or the delineated wetland that is situated adjacent to the OHWL whichever is greater, 0.67 acre of new wetland creation, 0.64 acre of upland buffer seeded to native prairie grasses and forbs, construction of approximately 4.28 acres of stormwater ponding, and creation of additional passive parkland and open space. These measures are expected to nominally mitigate adverse effects on some small wildlife. Populations of species that depend more on cropland and grassland, such as ring-necked pheasants, will be displaced. Migratory birds are expected to respond to the development by locating alternative nesting sites upon their return from wintering habitats. Non-migratory species with limited home ranges such as small mammals will experience more adverse effects These species, such as meadow voles and shrews, will have to compete with other individuals of the same species in neighboring habitats for territory and resources. b) Are any state-listed (endangered, threatened, or special concern) species, rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie habitat, colonial waterbird nesting colonies or regionally rare plant communities on or near the site? ^ Yes D No If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources has been conducted and describe the results. If the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research program has been contacted give the correspondence reference number: ERDB 20030476. Describe measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. There are no known state-listed species, rare plant communities or other ecological resources or regionally rare plant communities on the site. The Minnesota DNR Natural Heritage Program conducted a database search to determine if any records exist for occurrences of rare or endangered plants, animals, or communities on or within an approximate one-mile radius of the site. The DNR database search indicated there are no known occurrences of rare species or natural communities within the search area. The results of this search are contained in Appendix A. Because the DNR database is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there maybe rare or otherwise significant natural features within the state that are not represented in the database. However, no rare communities or species were documented during the consultants' site reviews, and the DNR completed a survey of rare natural features for Wright County. Therefore, the information provided by the DNR is quite thorough. 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration-dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, and impoundment-of any surface water such as a lake, pond, wetland, stream or drainage ditch? D Yes ^ No If yes, identify the water resource affected and give the DNR Protected Waters Inventory number(s) if the water resources affected are on the PWI. Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. The project plans propose 20,306 square feet (0.47 acre) of wetland fill and drainage regulated by the City of Albertville, as the Local Government Unit (LGU) under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA); 20,073 square feet (0.46 acre) of wetland fill, excavation, and drainage regulated by the Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; and 1,921 square feet (0.04 acre) of wetland fill in a public watercourse north of Mud Lake regulated by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Page 8 l__J fl t 1 f] t t Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Wetland and watercourse impacts will be replaced on site using a combination of New Wetland Credit (NWC) from two wetland replacement areas and Public Value Credit (PVC) from adjacent upland buffer. Overall, the project design provides 29,304 square feet (0.67 acre) of NWC wetland replacement and 27,778 square feet (0.64 acre) of upland buffer PVC. Wetland Delineation Westwood Professional Services, Inc. delineated and flagged six wetlands (Wetlands A through F) on the project site using the onsite routine determination method set forth in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, Waterways Experiment Station, 1987). Wetlands were classified according to Wetlands of the United States (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Circular 39; Shaw and Fredine, 1971) and Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States (FWS/OBS Publication 79/31; Cowardin et. al. 1979). Prior to delineating wetlands in the field, Westwood reviewed National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) mapping, FSA aerial slides for the years 1988 to 1999, the Soil Survey of Wright County, Minnesota (USDA, 1968), and the DNR Protected Waters Inventory for Wright County (Minnesota DNR, 1984). Wetland boundaries were marked by pink "wetland delineation" pin flags, and located using professional land surveying methods. The delineated wetlands are shown on Exhibit 4. Westwood submitted a wetland delineation report to the City of Albertville on May 9, 2000. ' The Wright SWCD and the City of Albertville reviewed these boundaries in the field. On June 8, 2000, the City's consultant sent a letter to Westwood confirming and accepting the delineated wetland boundaries that are shown on Exhibit 4. This correspondence is included in Appendix B. Wetland Mapping The Soil Survey shows the site includes Lester loam, 6-12 percent slopes; Angus-Cordova Complex, 0-5 percent slopes; Cordova loam, 0-2 percent slopes; and Angus loam 2-5 percent slopes. Hydric soils mapped on the site include Cordova loam (Hydric Soils of Minnesota, list revised December, 1995). NWI mapping shows six wetlands on the property including four Type 1, one Type 3, and one Type 5 wetland (Exhibit 6). These mapped areas closely correspond with the areas of wetland delineated on the property. The Protected Waters and Wetlands Inventory for Wright County (Minnesota DNR, 1984) indicates School Lake is Public Water 86-ZSP and Mud Lake is Public Water 86-26P. The DNR set the Ordinary High Water Leve1(OHWL) for these lakes at 947.3 feet above mean sea level (msl), based on the 1929 vertical datum. The OHWL was converted to the 1988 vertical datum, resulting m its adjustment to 947.65 feet, which corresponds to the vertical datum currently used by the City of Albertville. The DNR Inventory also depicts a DNR Public Watercourse in the northern portion of the site, which flows north from Mud Lake and beneath 70th Street NE. Page 9 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Wetland Descriptions Westwood Professional Services delineated and flagged six wetlands that encompass 55,342 square feet (1.27 acres) within the project site. Wetland A is a Type 5 DNR Public Watercourse with a Type 1 WCA jurisdictional wetland finger. The watercourse portion of this wetland is dominated by open water and reed canary grass. The Type 1 wetland finger protruding from the eastern side of the watercourse extends into manicured bluegrass lawn. Only the portion below the top of the bank of the channel of this watercourse is DNR jurisdictional. Four of the six wetlands (B through E) are Type 1 Seasonally flooded basins that show signs of hydrologic and vegetative disturbance from historic agricultural and grazing practices. Several of these wetlands are partially drained by agricultural drain the and shallow ditches. Vegetation within these wetlands is also disturbed and in some cases monotypic reed canary grass. Observed species include reed canary grass, chufa, curly dock, and smartweed. Wetland F includes the shoreline of School Lake and is classified as a Type 5 wetland with a Type 1/3 fringe. This wetland extends offsite to the southeast. This wetland fringe of School Lake is dominated primarily by reed canary grass and livestock have heavily grazed the Type 1 portions of the wetland adjacent to the drainage swale to School Lake. Four of the six wetlands (A, C, D, and F) were determined to be tributary to navigable waters of the U.S. These wetlands are therefore Corps jurisdictional and subject to regulation under Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act. Characteristics of delineated wetlands are listed in Table 12.1. Table 12.1. Wetland Characteristics Wetland ID Wetland T e Size S . Ft. Size Acres Corps Status Corps Jurisdiction? A 5/1 9,907 0.23 Tributa Yes B 1 8,400 0.19 Isolated No C 1 7,357 0.17 Tributa Yes D 1 6,804 0.16 Tribut Yes E 1 2,960 0.07 Isolated No F 5; 1 /3 frin e 19,914 0.46 Tribut Yes Total 55,342 1.27 Page 10 n t t ,~ ~~ t t Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Proposed jurisdictional wetland impacts are summarized by wetland and type in Table 12.2. Proposed Jurisdictional Wetland Impacts Table 12.2. Proposed Wetland Impacts by Basin and Wetland Type Wetland ID Wetland Type Im acted FiII S . Ft. Acres Excavation S . Ft. Acres Drainage S . Ft. Acres A 5/1 4,256 0.10 0 0 0 0 A DNR Watercourse 1,921 0.04 0 0 0 0 B 1 1,356 0.03 0' 0.32 4,448 0.10 C 1 0 0 6,318 0.15 1,038 0.02 D 1 5,146 0.12 0 0 0 0 E 1 2,960 0.07 0 0 0 0 F 5; 1 /3 frin e 1,102 0.03 292 0.01 0 0 Total 16,741 0.38 6,610 0.15 5,486 0.13 ~ An additional 13,970 square feet of non jurisdictional wetland excavation is proposed in isolated wetland B. This excavation is not regulated under the WCA because it occurs in a Type I wetland. The WCA only regulates excavation in permanent or semi-permanently flooded areas of Type 3/4 wetlands. Sequencing t The project proposer recognizes that sequencing is required to demonstrate that, to the extent practicable, wetland impacts have been avoided, minimized, reduced and eliminated over time, and replaced, in that order. The project proposer indicated that wetland impacts were avoided and minimized to the extent practicable in the proposed project design. However, total avoidance of wetland is not considered practicable on this site due to: (1) necessary street alignments, (2) commercial development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, (3) stormwater pond requirements, and (4) maintenance of wetland hydrology within Wetland B. Consideration was given to multiple design alternatives including a No Build Alternative before the project proposer settled on the Preliminary Site Plan shown on Exhibit 3. Only the No Build Alternative would avoid wetlands completely. However, the No Build Alternative is not considered practicable because: (1) the site is guided for residential and commercial use and would eventually be converted to these uses even if this project were not proposed at this time, and (2) the No Build Alternative would not fulfill the purpose of the project. The project proposer will prepare a detailed alternatives analysis that will be included in the WCA, Corps, and DNR permit applications. As required by the WCA regulations, the alternatives analysis will include two alternatives in addition to the proposed project to avoid wetland impacts. t t Fi11 within Wetlands A and E is necessary for proposed street alignments; fill and drainage within Wetland B is essential to maintain wetland hydrology within this wetland following site development; excavation and drainage within Wetland C is necessary for stormwater pond construction; fill within Wetland D is unavoidable for commercial development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan; and fill within Wetland F is necessary for trail construction, park access, and stormwater conveyance channel construction. Page 11 Towne Lakes Phase 11 Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Wetland Replacement Under the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), 40,612 square feet (0.93 acres) of wetland replacement credit is required, and 20,073 square feet (0.46 acres} is required to meet Corps requirements. The proposed wetland replacement calculations follow: Wetland Replacement Required (Square Feet) Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act U.S. Army Corps of En ig veers 14,820 wetland fill 0 Type 3, 4, 5 excavation 5,486 wetland drainage 20,306 x 2 2 to 1 replacement 40,612 minimum required 12,425 wetland fill 6,610 wetland excavation 1,038 wetland drainage 20,073 total impact x 1 1 to 1 replacement 20,073 minimum required Under the WCA, 40,612 square feet (0.93 acres) of wetland replacement will be required to compensate for the 14,820 square feet of wetland fill and 5,486 square feet of wetland drainage. Up to half of the wetland replacement maybe provided by upland buffer Pubic Value Credit (PVC), which can be applied toward the second half of the 2 to 1 replacement ratio. The project proposer will be required to monitor and document the success of the proposed wetland replacement under the WCA. The Corps will require 20,073 square feet (0.46 acres) of New Wetland Credit wetland replacement to compensate for 12,425 square feet (0.29 acre) of wetland fill, 6,610 square feet (0.15 acre) of wetland excavation, and 1,038 square feet (0.02 acre) of wetland drainage within Corps jurisdictional wetlands A, C, D, and F. The DNR and the Corps of Engineers will require replacement for 1,921 square feet of fill within the DNR public watercourse for the road crossing (1,821 square feet} and two outfalls from adjacent stormwater ponds (100 square feet). The project will replace these impacts at a 2 to 1 ratio, consistent with WCA requirements. In all, the project will require a minimum of 22,227 square feet (20,306 S.F. + 1,921 S.F. _ 22,227) of NWC and an additional 22,227 square feet of PVC. The project exceeds these replacement requirements by providing 29,304 square feet (0.67 acre) of NWC, and 27,778 square feet (0.64 acres) of PVC derived from upland buffer. Proposed New Wetland Credit Exhibit 3 shows the locations of the two proposed wetland mitigation areas for Towne Lakes Phase II. Mitigation area M1 will result from excavating Wetland B to a hydrologically sustainable elevation. The bottom contour elevation within this proposed wetland is 946 feet, with 11,434 square feet of NWC anticipated below an elevation of 949 feet. An equalizer pipe will be installed between mitigation area Ml and Mud Lake, which will provide additional hydrology to the wetland during high water periods. Relative to the low quality, vegetatively monotypic, hydrologically disturbed wetland currently occupying this location, the proposed wetland replacement area is expected to provide higher functions and values with a sustainable hydrology source and greater vegetative diversity from native seed mixes. Page 12 t t J n Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Mitigation area M2 is located in the southeastern portion of the project on the shore of School Lake. This wetland replacement area will be constructed by excavating above the OHWL of School Lake. Replacement area M2 will provide 17,870 square feet of NWC below an elevation of 948 feet. Compared to the marginal Type 1 wetlands this mitigation area will replace, M2 will have a sustainable source of hydrology from School Lake and will be seeded to a wet prairie and wildflower mix (Mn/DOT mix 25B) to increase vegetative diversity. This wetland will do more towards enhancing the water quality of School Lake than the existing, small isolated Type 1 wetlands because it will provide a vegetative buffer along the edge of the lake. Sufficient wetland hydrology for wetland creation is evident in the existing wetland (School Lake) directly adjacent to the wetland replacement area. Proposed wetland edges will feature irregular contours and slopes no steeper than 5:1 to help assure a functional transition to upland. Topsoil maybe spread in the basin bottoms at depths of 6 to 12 inches to produce finished grades and provide a fertile substrate for vegetation establishment. Topsoil spreading will be omitted in locations where the only available topsoil contains abundant reed canary grass propagules. Newly created wetland areas above water levels will be seeded to Mn/DOT seed mix 25B, a native wet prairie and wildflower mix. These native grasses, sedges, and wildflowers are expected to improve the wildlife habitat and visual value of the area. Proposed Public Value Credit J L; t The WCA allows PVC for upland buffers adjacent to wetland replacement areas. Towne Lakes Phase II will create 27,778 square feet of upland buffer PVC adjacent to mitigation area M2. This upland buffer will be a minimum of 16.5 feet wide with an average width of at least 25 feet. Slopes of the upland buffer will be designed to be 5:1 or more gradual. Newly graded upland buffer areas will be seeded to Mn/DOT seed mix 15B, a native prairie and wildflower mix. To minimize erosion and encourage slope stabilization, regraded surfaces will be seeded as soon as practical after completion of final grading. In addition, the project proposer has agreed to consider implementing low-impact development (LID) practices, such as vegetated swales and grassed filter strips, to further mitigate the potential for indirect impacts on School Lake. 13. Water Use Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water wells, connection to or changes in any public water supply or appropriation of any ground or surface water (including dewatering)? D Yes ^ No. If yes, as applicable, give location and purpose of any new wells; public supply affected, changes to be made, and water quantities to be used; the source, duration, quantity and purpose of any appropriations; and unique well numbers and DNR appropriation permit numbers, if known. Identify any existing and new wells on the site map. If there are no wells known on the site, explain methodology used to determine. The project site includes one registered well and one unregistered well (see Exhibit 4}. According to the Well Location Points digital database from the Minnesota Geological Survey's (MGS) County Well Index, there is one field-verified registered well (Unique Well No. 437596), which is Page 13 Towne Lakes Phase 11 Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 associated with the home in the northeast portion of the project (Appendix C). The well data consists of a Geographic Information System (GIS) point coverage that was created from wells listed in the County Well Index (CWI) database, and is current as of 2002. A second well associated with the farmstead in the southeast portion of the site was located in the field by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. The two wells identified within the project boundaries will be sealed and abandoned in accordance with the Minnesota Department of Health requirements prior to site development. The proposed project will be connected to and served by the Joint Powers Water Board (JPWB) public water supply and will not entail the installation of new domestic wells. The JPWB currently serves Albertville, St. Michael, and Hanover with four municipal wells that are permitted to pump up to 4,050 GPM (gallons per minute) and 675 MGY (million gallons per year). The JPWB public water supply is permitted under DNR Water Appropriation Permit number 79-3116. The average municipal water demand of the proposed project is estimated at 69,582 gallons per day based on Table 13.1 below. With the addition of Towne Lakes Phase II public water consumption, the peak demand on the JPWB water supply is expected to reach about 81 percent of the current supply, and the average annual use is expected to reach about 75 percent of the amount permitted for appropriation by the Minnesota DNR. The JPWB continues to plan for an adequate water supply to serve this and other future developments. The JPWB system expansions include a water treatment plant, an additional elevated reserve, a booster pump at the ground storage facility, and additional wells. Consequently, adverse effects on the municipal water supply are not anticipated. Table 13.1. Municipal Water Demand Based on the "Ten State Standards" Proposed Use Units Gross Acres Gallons/Acre' Average Gallons/Da Residential 215 homes 60.87 600 36,522 Commercial 265,000 sf 33.06 1,000 33,060 93.93 Total 69,582 Maximum Daily Demand/Supply =((69,582 + 1,322,467) x 2.5)/4,320,000 = z 80.6% Ave. Annual Use/DNR Permitted Amount = ((69,582 x 365)+482.7 million) /675 million = s 75.3% Gallons/acre/day for residential and commercial use are based on data from the "Ten State Standards" (Recommended Standards for Wastewater Facilities, Great Lakes -Upper Mississippi River Board of State and Provincial Public Health and Environmental Managers, 1997), as communicated by the Albertville City Engineer. Maximum Daily Demand is the average daily demand multiplied by a peaking factor of 2.5. 1,322,467 is the existing average daily demand on the JPWB water supply, based on use of 482.7 MGY in 2001, as indicated by DNR water appropriation permit records. Supply assumes one of the JPWB wells would be out of service and that the three remaining wells would pump at a total of 3,000 gpm for 24 hours. 675 million gallons per year is the amount currently authorized by the DNR under the JPWB Water Appropriation Permit. A temporary Minnesota DNR Water Appropriation Permit will likely be necessary because project construction dewatering necessary to install utilities will likely pump more than 10,000 gallons per day or 1,000,000 gallons per year. These thresholds trigger the need for a DNR Water Appropriation Permit. The DNR General Permit 97-0005 for Temporary Water Appropriations will likely apply, because construction dewatering will not likely exceed 50 million gallons in total and a duration of one year from the start of pumping. It is anticipated that dewatering will be accomplished by pumping water from open trenches excavated for utility installation and discharging the appropriated water into sediment basins or stormwater ponds to allow suspended Page 14 ~~ t Towne Lakes Phase 11 Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 sediment to settle before the water drains to School or Mud Lakes. The quantity and duration of dewatering is unknown at this time, but dewatering activities are expected to be temporary. Dewatering will likely be accomplished by pumping water from open trenches excavated for utility installation. The appropriated water will be discharged into sediment basins or stormwater ponds. This method will allow suspended sediment to settle before the water drains to School or Mud Lake. The quantity and duration of dewatering is unknown at this time, but dewatering activities are expected to be temporary. 14. Water-Related Land Use Management District Does any part of the project involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100-year flood plain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? Q Yes ^ No If yes, identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land use restrictions. Shoreland Overlay Zoning District About 49.36 acres of the 93.9-acre project site is located within the shorelands of two Natural Environment waters, School and Mud Lakes (Public Waters 86-25P and 86-26P, respectively). These shorelands fall within the S-1 Shoreland Overlay Zoning District shown on the City Zoning Map. The shoreland district extends 1,000 feet from the ordinary high water levels ("OHWL"} of the lakes. The ordinary high water level of both School Lake and Mud Lake is 947.65 feet. In the early to mid-1990s, the DNR approved the City's Shoreland Overlay Zoning District Ordinance ("Shoreland Ordinance"). The Shoreland Ordinance included provisions to allow planned unit developments (PUDs) for new projects on undeveloped land, redevelopment of previously built sites, or conversions of existing buildings and land within a shoreland overlay zoning district. The Shoreland Ordinance provides that shoreland PUDs are processed as a conditional use. This involves a Planning Commission public hearing, subject to notice and comment by the DNR, and City Council approval of a conditional use permit. The shoreland PUD process is separate and distinct from review of a standard planned unit development (PUD) under the City's Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance establishes two development procedures for standard PUDs: 1) a PUD conditional use permit, whereby internal site design deviations are allowed in order to accommodate two or more principal structures, and/or facilities, and to improve site design and operation; and 2) a PUD zoning district whereby a mix of buildings and uses can occur which cannot otherwise be addressed under the Zoning Ordinance and whereby internal site deviations may also be allowed to improve site design and operation. During the earlier environmental review process for Towne Lakes Phase I, the DNR and the City identified several conflicts between the City's standard PUD and shoreland PUD review processes. Representatives of the DNR, the City and the project proposer met in November 2002 to discuss DNR concerns. On January 5, 2001, the DNR withdrew its initial objections to the City's preliminary approval of Towne Lakes Phase I, provided that several modifications to the development plan were included in the City's final project approval. The DNR also recommended that the City consider amending the Shoreland Ordinance to accommodate and clarify the appropriate use of standard PUD procedures in shoreland areas. In April 2001, after review and comment by the DNR, the City Council adopted an amendment to the Shoreland Ordinance to provide compatibility between the City's standard PUD and shoreland Page 15 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 PUD review processes. The amendment authorizes the City to waive shoreland PUD provisions , where the City approves a request to process an application as a standard PUD under the Zoning Ordinance. This allows flexibility in a variety of dimensional requirements without approval of a variance, including but not limited to setbacks, lot area, lot width, and building height, provided that site and design criteria enumerated in the amended Shoreland Ordinance are met. (Section 4908.75 of the Shoreland Ordinance). Subsequently, the City identified a need to adopt a second amendment to its Shoreland Ordinance , to allow high quality development within commercially zoned shoreland areas, while allowing for impervious surface coverage that is reasonable for commercial uses. After substantial coordination with DNR, the City Council adopted a second amendment to the Shoreland Ordinance in August 2002. The amendment applies to shoreland overlay districts with an underlying Business zoning designation. It authorizes lot coverage to exceed 25 percent and be up to 80 percent, subject to site and design criteria enumerated in the amended Shoreland Ordinance (Section 4905.61 C of the Shoreland Ordinance). Approval of lot coverage greater than 25 percent in commercially zoned shoreland areas requires issuance of a conditional use permit, subject to prior notice and comment ' by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. The current proposal, Towne Lakes Phase II, is subject to and generally compatible with the amended Shoreland Ordinance. On December 23, 2002, representatives of the City and the project proposer met with John Stine, DNR Permits and Land Use Administrator, Division of Waters; Pete Otterson, DNR Shoreland Program Hydrologist; and Patty Fowler, DNR Area Hydrologist to , discuss application of the City's amended Shoreland Ordinance to the currently proposed project. The DNR agreed with the City's method of calculating density under the ordinance and with its proposed procedures for allowing flexibility in shoreland dimensional requirements under the standard PUD District rezoning process that applies to this project. The DNR also verified that the City and project proposer had correctly identified the need for two Shoreland Ordinance variances due to the unique circumstances of the proposed development. These variances are discussed in greater detail below. The City's Zoning Ordinance specifies that in a PUD District, the land use designations in the Comprehensive Plan determine the maximum allowable density on the property. Approximately 60.87 acres of the project site are designated Low Density Residential which allows development of up to four units per gross acre. The total density of the proposed project is 3.53 units per acre l (215 units), which is less than the maximum density allowed under the Comprehensive Plan (243 units). This means that the project complies with Section 4908.75(2) of the amended Shoreland Ordinance. Density in the residential shoreland areas of the project site was calculated using procedures set , forth in the amended Shoreland Ordinance. Shoreland tiers were offset from the OHWL in 320- foot increments. The tiers were adjusted to match lot Imes and street center Imes for the purpose of calculating lot density and impervious surfaces (Exhibit 7). Lots split by tier boundaries were placed inside or outside the tier based on the location of the building pad. Tier 3 was extended 40 feet m order to calculate density within the 1,000-foot shoreland overlay district. Suitable development area within each tier was determined by excluding all wetlands, bluffs, and area below the OHWL of School and Mud Lakes. The project site does not include any slopes that meet the ordinance definition of a bluff. Page 16 Towne Lakes Phase 11 Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 As reviewed with the DNR in the above-referenced December 23 meeting, the allowable base residential density was then calculated by dividing the suitable area within each tier by the single family residential lot size standard for lakes (20,000 square feet for nonriparian lots) as set forth in ' the Shoreland Ordinance. The nonriparian lot size was used because the current project does not include any riparian lots on School or Mud Lakes. Flexibility with respect to minimum lot widths and individual lot areas was assumed pursuant to the amended Shoreland Ordinance (Section ' 4908.75). The amended Shoreland Ordinance allows use of residential unit density increase multipliers if the impact on the water body is reduced through vegetative management or additional means acceptable to the City and the setback is at least 25 percent greater than the minimum setback. The minimum structural setback from the OHWL of School and Mud Lakes is 150 feet, and the proposed residential structures will be located at least 188 feet from the OHWL. The following Lakeshore impact mitigating features were approved by the City and the DNR for Towne Lakes Phase I and will also be provided with the current proposal: ~ 1. A restored natural vegetative upland buffer at least 30 feet wide adjacent to the OHWL or the delineated wetland that is situated adjacent to the OHWL whichever is greater adjacent I to the lakes. 20 A planting plan designed and implemented to enhance or restore the natural buffer, with a combination of grasses, shrubs, and trees appropriate to complement the natural habitat. 3e Much of this area has historically been tilled for agriculture crops. Native shoreland tree and shrub species, such as red maple, black ash, swamp white oak, red-osier dogwood, highbush cranberry, and pussy willow will be planted to protect and enhance natural environmental values. ' 4. Permanent markers installed and maintained to indicate the buffer edge along the entire shoreland boundary. 5, A homeowners association document created and recorded to provide for maintenance of shoreland markers, prohibit use of fertilizers containing phosphorus in rear yards, and provide a mandatory penalty for violations of the document's shoreland provisions. Page 17 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 As shown in the following tables and on Exhibit 7, the proposed development includes 106 residential units within the shoreland overlay district. The Shoreland Ordinance allows 186 residential units in the shoreland when density multipliers are considered consistent with the procedures specified in the Zoning Ordinance and reviewed with the DNR on December 23. Table 14.1. Residential Suitable Area Unsuitable Area (square feet) Tier Total Area (sq. ft.) Total Area (acres) Wetlands Bluffs Lake Access Lots Suitable Area (sq. ft.) Suitable Area (acres) 1 292,577 6.72 19,914 0 0 272,663 6.26 2 607,148 13.94 12,251 0 0 594,897 13.66 3 706,175 16.21 11,380 0 0 694,795 15.95 Total 1,605,900 36.87 43,545 0 0 1,562,355 35.87 Table 14.2. Residential Shoreland Density Analysis 1 2 2a 3 4 5 6 7 I Suitable Suitable Required Allowable Density Allowable Density Tier Area (sq. ft.) Area (acres) Lot Size Base Increase Density w/ proposed (sq. ft.) Density Multi tier Multiplier 1 272,663 6.26 20,000 14 1.5 21 15 2 594,897 13.66 20,000 30 2.0 60 59 3 694,795 15.95 20,000 35 3.0 105 32 Total 1,562,355 35.87 79 186 106 ~ Suitable area does not include wetlands, bluffs, lake access lots, or any area below the OHWL. See the Table 14.3 for details. z In accordance with the Shoreland Ordinance, at least 50 percent of the residential shoreland area is open space. The project also includes increased structural setbacks ftom the OHWL and mitigating vegetative management features, which allows for use of density multipliers. About 72 percent of the residential shoreland area will be preserved as public or private open space. About 28 percent of the residential shoreland project area is impervious surface. Impervious surface represents the area occupied by homes, garages, roads, driveways, alleys and sidewalks. Residential shoreland area open space was calculated by dividing the total residential impervious surface area within the shoreland by the total residential shoreland project area. About 60 percent of the total residential and commercial shoreland area is open space. Over 50 percent of Tier 1 is preserved open space, but one half of the required open space in the shoreland is not located in Tier 1 as required by Section 4908.75(4) of the Shoreland Ordinance. Compliance with this requirement is not possible because the total Tier 1 area is less than the 50 percent preserved open space requirement. As discussed with the DNR on of December 23, the project proposer has applied to the City for approval of a variance from the strict application of this requirement. The project proposer has also applied for approval of a variance from Section 4908.75(3) of the Shoreland Ordinance, which establishes a 30 percent individual lot impervious surface coverage limit. The overall percentage of impervious surface for the entire residential shoreland area meets the 30 percent requirement, but several individual lots do not, especially in the townhome areas. The commercial shoreland portion of the project generally meets all applicable amended Shoreland Ordinance requirements. Approximately 78.5 of the commercial shoreland area is impervious surface, which requires City approval of a conditional use permit under Section 4905.61C(1). The Page 18 f~ n Towne Lakes Phase 11 Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 project is eligible for the conditional use permit because all buildings will be set back at least 300 feet, which is double the 150 foot Natural Environment structure setback. Storm water management, shoreland buffer, vegetative management and parking lot lighting criteria for issuance of the conditional use permit will also be met. If requested by the City, the project proposer will also consider including additional low impact development practices in the commercial shoreland area to capture and treat runoff from impervious areas above the 50 percent lot coverage. Low impact development practices that maybe considered include, but are not limited to, vegetative swales, depressional storage or infiltration areas, grass filter strips, and other similar practices. As part of the PUD District review process, the project proposer will also request flexibility to deviate from the 25-foot building height limit in the residential and commercial shoreland areas. Depending on final roof design, some of the residential homes may exceed 25 feet and the proposed motel in the commercial shoreland area south of the southerly access road will also likely exceed the 25-foot limit. Building height is not expected to exceed 40 feet in the shoreland area. As described in the response to Question 17 of this EAW, the proposed development complies with all requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and the City Storm Water Management Ordinance. Five new storm water ponds will be constructed to pretreat storm water runoff before discharging to School and Mud Lakes. These ponds will meet National Urban Runoff program guidelines for removal of suspended sediment, phosphorus, and other nutrients. Best management practices will be employed during construction to reduce erosion and sediment loading of storm water runoff. Floodplain, Wild and Scenic River, and Other Areas The project site does not include a delineated 100-year floodplain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district, and the project is not subject to a comprehensive land use plan of the Project Riverbend or the Mississippi River Headwaters Boards. The City of Albertville does not participate in the National Flood Insurance Rate Map Program (FIRM). Therefore, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has not established flood elevations and flood limits for School and Mud Lakes. Section 4905.22 of the City Zoning Ordinance indicates the lowest floor elevations must be placed at least three feet above the highest known water elevation, or the OHWL, whichever is greater. The DNR Division of Waters has indicated that the highest recorded water elevation for School and Mud Lakes does not exceed the DNR established OHWL of 947.3 feet. Therefore, basement elevations for homes near the lakes will require a minimum floor elevation of at least 950.3. J Page 19 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 15. Water Surface Use Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? D Yes ^ No If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other uses. The proposed project may increase the number of watercraft on School Lake. Because only one communal pier is being proposed on School Lake, the increase in the number of watercraft on School Lake will be minimal. Only non-motorized watercraft are allowed on School and Mud Lakes. The communal pier will be located the southeastern portion of the project (see Exhibit 3), and consist of four boat slips that will provide space for possible paddleboats or canoes. The pier will not include an overhead cover (roof), but will include a wood railing around the perimeter. Afoot trail will provide access from the park to the pier. The Homeowners Association will likely be responsible for maintenance of the pier. Towne Lakes Phase I (Balfany) proposed four piers and one scenic overlook pier on Mud Lake, and two piers on School Lake. The piers are fitted with four boat slips, for a total of 24 slips. Estimates on the projected watercraft usage, including the number of acres of water surface per watercraft, are based on the proposed number of boat slips for Towne Lakes Phases I and II. Table 15.1 provides information on the acres of water surface per watercraft. Table 15.1. Acres of Water Surface per Watercraft Lake Surface Water (acres) Boat Slips Acres of Water Surface er Watercraft Mud 128.0 24 5.3 School 76.0 12 6.3 Total 204.0 36 5.7 It is estimated there will usually be at least 5.7 acres of surface water per watercraft on School and Mud Lakes. Because motorized boats are not allowed the lakes and the DNR regulates the number of boat slips, watercraft conflicts regarding overcrowding or usage are not anticipated. 16. Erosion and Sedimentation Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: Acres: It is anticipated that approximately 87.5 acres of the 93.9-acre site will be graded, of which about 47 acres will be in the first phase of grading, and 40.5 acres in the second phase. All wetland impacts and new wetland creation will be completed during the first phase of grading. Cubic Yards: On-site grading: X400,000 cubic yards (Note: the anticipated cubic yards of grading is a preliminary estimate that is subject to change) Page 20 u u Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after project construction. The USDA/NRCS Highly Erodible Land (HEL) List for Wright County Minnesota (1998) indicates there are no highly erodible soils identified on the site: Additionally, there are no slopes greater than 12 percent on the site, according to two-foot contour mapping and the Soil Survey of Wright County, Minnesota (USDA, 1968). Existing topography ranges from about 946 feet near School Lake to 972 feet in the central portion of the site, north of School Lake. USGS topographic mapping (Exhibit 8) indicates that surface topography is gradually undulating and becomes steeper in the central and northern portions of the site. Because the project will involve disturbance of more than five acres of land (Exhibit 9), application for coverage under the NPDES/SDS General Permit will be submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency prior to initiating earthwork on the site. This permit is required for discharge of stormwater during construction activity and requires that Best Management Practices (BMPs) be used to control erosion and that all erosion controls be inspected after each rainfall exceeding 0.1 inch of precipitation. Erosion control practices to be considered for use on the site include: 1. Construction of temporary sediment basins in the locations proposed for stormwater ponding, and development of these basins for permanent use following construction. 2. Silt fence and other erosion control features installed prior to initiation of earthwork and maintained until viable turf or ground cover is established on exposed areas. 1 3. Periodic street cleaning and installation of a rock construction entrance to reduce tracking of dirt onto public streets. 4. Stabilization of exposed soils within 14 calendar days of completion of rough grading unless otherwise directed by the project engineer. 5. Energy dissipation, such as riprap, installed at storm sewer outfalls. 6. Use of cover crops, native seed mixes, sod, and landscaping to stabilize exposed surface soils after final grading. 1 Erosion control plans must be reviewed and accepted by the City of Albertville prior to project construction. Because the above BMPs will be implemented during and after construction, potential adverse effects from construction-related sediment and erosion on water quality will be minimized. 17. Water Quality: Surface Water Runoff a) Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any stormwater pollution prevention plans. Existing surface water runoff drains southeast and overland to School and Mud Lakes. After development, stormwater runoff from impervious surfaces will be routed through the proposed ponding system, which will be designed to reduce peak runoff rates and meet all requirements of the City of Albertville Comprehensive Plan (September, 1995). stormwater ponds will be designed to meet NURP (National Urban Runoff Program) guidelines for removal of Page 21 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 suspended sediment, phosphorus, and other nutrients from stormwater runoff before discharging to School and Mud Lakes. The total quantity of surface water runoff will increase after development due to the addition of approximately 48 acres of impervious surface. The increase in impervious surface will be mitigated by construction of five new stormwater ponds designed to increase the total flood storage volume on the site and handle a 2-, 10-; and 100-year storm event prior to discharging to School and Mud Lakes. The rate control to be provided by the Stormwater ponds will not increase the 100-year HWL (High Water Level) of School and Mud Lakes. One existing stormwater pond located within Town Lakes Phase I (Balfany) will also be used to store runoff from Towne Lakes Phase II. This pond was appropriately sized to store runoff from Phase I and anticipated runoff from Phase II. Characteristics of the six Stormwater ponds are summarized in Table 17.1 below and shown on Exhibit 3. Table 17.1. Proposed Stormwater Ponds P d L i NWL Area at NWL on ocat on Sq. Ft. Acres 1 Towne Lakes Phase I (Balfan) 948.0 35,460 0.81 2 Southeast 948.5 15,005 0.34 3 West 951.0 36,925 0.85 4 Southeast Corner 948.0 40,102 0.92 5 Northeast 946.0 45,000 1.03 6 Northeast 946.0 14,183 0.24 Total 186,675 4.28 Best Management Practices will be employed during construction to reduce erosion and sediment loading of stormwater runoff. Inspection and maintenance of Best Management Practices during construction will be consistent with NPDES/SDS General Permit requirements, including site inspection after rainfall events, perimeter sediment control maintenance, and sediment removal. b) Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters. Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters. According to the DNR Division of Waters digital watershed mapping and the City of Albertville Comprehensive Plan (1995), the project site is located within the Otsego Creek minor watershed (see Exhibit 8). Stormwater runoff generated from this development will be routed into one of five onsite Stormwater ponds and one offsite pond. These Stormwater ponds will be designed according to NURP (Nationwide Urban Runoff Program} guidelines to handle a 100-year storm event prior to discharging to School and Mud Lakes. Ponds 2 and 3 will flow through Pond 1 and discharge into School Lake. Pond 4 will also discharge to School Lake. Ponds 5 and 6 will flow into the DNR waterway outlet from Mud Lake, which flows to the north boundary of the site, under 70th Street N.E. into Otsego. The proposed routes for stormwater runoff will provide rate control and water quality treatment. The ponds will hold the runoff from Page 22 J i C fl t Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 impervious surfaces and release it at controlled rates, which will not exceed existing peak runoff rates for the 2-, 10-, and 100-year storm events. The project will have a negligible effect on the quality and water levels of downstream water resources. 18. Water Quality: Wastewaters a) Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. Only normal domestic sewage wastewater production is expected. Sanitary wastewater production has been estimated at 69,520 GPD (gallons per day) based on the methods described under Item 13. b) Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters, including major downstream water bodies, and estimate the discharge impact on the quality of receiving waters. If the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of site conditions for such systems. No onsite wastewater treatment is proposed. All wastewater will be discharged to the City of Albertville sanitary sewer system. !, The 1993 NPDES Permit that was issued to Albertville Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) for the Mud Lake discharge included monitoring requirements for several parameters for Mud Lake. The performance of the Albertville WWTP has resulted in the continual improvement of water quality in Mud Lake, despite a continuing increase in phosphorus concentrations from runoff and other surface waters. In recent years, mumcipalities m the area of the Crow River basin have received effluent phosphorus limits of one milligram per liter (mg/L), and in several instances, have voluntarily presumed that such effluent limits are prerequisite to obtaining NPDES Permits. Albertville is one of these municipalities, and it has elected to construct a biological phosphorus removal system to this end. The one mg/L concentration is among the lowest in the Upper Mississippi basin, with the exception of Bemidji and Melrose. ' c) If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility, identify the facility, describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility's ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes, identifying any improvements necessary. Wastewater will flow to a 12-inch municipal gravity sewer, which connects to a lift station and then to a 10-inch force main that leads away from the lift station and ultimately discharges to the Albertville WWTP. The estimated daily wastewater flow of 69,520 gallons is well below the 235,000 GPD excess capacity of the Albertville WWTP. The Albertville WWTP has a current treatment capacity of 615,000 GPD, currently treats about 380,000 GPD. The City of Albertville has planned for trunk sewer to accommodate full development of the City consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and has adopted wastewater treatment expansion improvements to treat up to 925,000 GPD for growth expected within its service area beyond the year 2010. It is not anticipated that this project will create an additional need for improvements to the sanitary trunk sewer system or the Albertville WWTP. 1 Page 23 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 , d) If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure, describe disposal technique , and location and discuss capacity of handle the volume and composition of manure. Identify any improvements necessary. Describe any required setbacks for land disposal systems. The project will not include facilities that generate liquid animal manure regmnng disposal. 19. Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions ' a) Approximate depth (in feet) to groundwater: 3.9 minimum 9.9 average Approximate depth to groundwater is based the elevation of lake water levels and geotechnical information obtained for Towne Lakes Phase I. American Engineering Testing, Inc. and Braun Intertec Corporation performed geotechnical evaluations in June 1997 and October 1999, respectively. Standard soil borings and piezometers were used to collect information on groundwater levels. In general, groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from 3.9 to 16 feet below the surface, which corresponds to surface elevations of 948.9 to 967.2 feet above msl. Approximate depth (in feet) to bedrock: 100 minimum 150 avera e , g Surface elevations across the site range from about 946 to 972 feet above msl. The highest slopes are located in the central and northern portions of the site. Depth to bedrock ranges from 100 to 200 feet, with an average depth of approximately 150 feet. b) Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. ' Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards. No known geologic hazards in the form of sinkholes, faults, shallow limestone formations, and karst topography are present on the project site. Measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to these hazards are not proposed. Page 24 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW 0 C r~ C i January 22, 2003 c) Describe the soils on site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications, if known. Discuss soil granularity and potential for groundwater contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination. The Soil Survey of Wright County (USDA/NRCS, 1999) indicates the following soils occur within the project area: Table 19.1. Soils within the Project Area Map S mbol Soil Name Hydric' Acreage 106C2 Lester loam, 6-12% slo es, eroded No 4.5 1094B Angus-Cordova Com lex, 0-5% slopes No 75.0 1156 Cordova loam, 0-2% slo es Yes 13.0 1362B Angus loam, 2-5% slopes No 1.0 W Water 0.5 Total 94.0 ~ Based on the NRCS List of Hydric Soils of Minnesota (1995). According to the Soil Survey, the site is located on the Hayden-Dundas-Peat Association, which consists of deep, medium and moderately fine textured soils on gently rolling uplands. The mineral soils in this association formed under a hardwood forest in loamy glacial till with a high lime content that supports species such as oaks, basswood, black walnut, and red and white pine. Soils in this association are mostly deep loamy and silt loamy with a subsoil of clay loam and silty clay. Hayden soils are located on the slopes and are well drained. Dundas soils are found on flats and are poorly drained. The finer textured Dundas subsoil restricts the movement of water. Peaty soils are found in the depressional areas underlain by silty material. A majority of the site is located on Angus-Cordova complex 0-5 percent slopes and Cordova loam. The Angus series consists of very deep, well-drained soils formed in calcareous loamy glacial till. Permeability is moderate and runoff is low. A seasonal high apparent water table is at 3.5 to 6 feet during March to June in most years. Cordova loam consists of soils with less than 2 percent slopes and are very deep, poorly drained soils that formed mostly in loamy calcareous glacial till. These soils have moderately slow permeability and surface runoff is low. The potential for groundwater contamination is estimated to be moderate based on the permeability of the dominant soil types found on the site. Sensitivity of groundwater systems to pollution is indicated by the approximate time it takes water to infiltrate the land surface until it is discharged or pumped from an aquifer. Although shallow groundwater is highly susceptible to contamination, moderately permeable soils with finer textures will slow or restrict the movement of water, which extends the time needed for chemicals to break down before reaching the water table. Page 25 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use development EAW 20. Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, and Storage Tanks January 22, 2003 , a) Describe types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during construction and operation. Identify method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste, indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how the project will be modified for recycling. If hazardous waste is generated, indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments. It is anticipated that solid waste generation will be typical of developments of this sort. According to the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance, there are no available statewide solid waste generation studies for Minnesota. Based on data provided by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/WasteChar/WasteGenRates/default.htm and Solid Waste Characterization Study: Results and Final Report, December 1999), solid waste generation for the development is estimated at 1,843 tons per year. This estimate is detailed in the following table. No animal manure, sludge, or ash generation is anticipated. Table 20.1. Solid Waste Generation Estimate Use Unit of Measure Tons/Unit Year Number of Units Waste Generation Estimate Tons/Year Sin le Famil Residential Unit 1.88 113 212 Multi-Family Residential Unit 0.97 102 99 Retail/Office 100 SF 0.51 2,200 1,122 Motel 100 SF 1.08 300 324 Restaurant 100 SF 0.57 150 86 Total 1,843 Types of solid waste generation expected and the relative percentage of each type (by weight) are estimated in the following table. These estimates are rough approximations based on studies of similar but unrelated developments (Solid Waste Characterization Study: Results and Final Report, California Integrated Waste Management Board, December 1999). Page 26 u f! Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Table 20.2. Typical Solid Waste Composition W T t Percenta e e ype as Residential Retail Office Motei Restaurant Pa er 27.6 39.9 40.9 37.2 39.9 Glass 4.0 2.4 3.1 9.8 2.4 Metal 4.6 7.7 7.3 3.2 7.7 Plastic 8.8 10.0 11.0 10.4 10.0 Other Organics' 45.0 30.6 31.1 37.1 30.6 Construction/Demolition ~ 4.5 6.4 3.9 1.2 6.4 Household Hazardous Wastes 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.0 00.3 Special Waste a 1.2 2.0 1.0 0.4 2.0 Mixed Residue 4.0 0.7 1.0 0.7 0.7 Total 100 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 ~ Other Organic includes such items as food, leaves, grass, prunings, and textiles. 2 Construction/Demolition includes items such as concrete, asphalt, lumber, gypsum board, and soil. ~ Household Hazardous Waste includes items such as paint, vehicle fluids, and batteries. 3 Special Waste includes items such as ash, sewage solids, industrial sludge, and bulky items. The City of Albertville does not require recycling, but does have a biweekly curbside recycling ' program for cardboard, newspaper, glass, aluminum, plastic, mixed mail, and magazines. Participation in recycling program by future residents of the site will be expected to reduce costs for solid waste trucking and disposal. The City of Albertville contracts with various licensed solid waste haulers for disposal ofnon-recycled waste. The licensed haulers truck the waste to an approved sanitary landfill. u ';1 b) Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating groundwater. If the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a regulated waste, discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or eliminate the waste, discharge or emission. As discussed under Item 9, the petroleum and agricultural chemicals that have been stored on the site in the past will be properly disposed of prior to development of the property. Future businesses that may generate hazardous wastes within the proposed project will be required to be licensed annually by the MPCA. The licensing and inspection requirements of the MPCA are expected to mitigate or minimize the potential impacts from these normal business activities. Consideration will be given to development of spill and leak detection and prevention technologies, as well as double-walled tank construction, to reduce the potential for groundwater contamination from storage tanks that maybe developed if the retail portion of the project includes a automobile convenience station. Any underground storage tanks will be installed according to MPCA regulations. ' Page 27 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 c) Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe and emergency response containment plans. As listed and discussed under Item 9, three above ground storage tanks (ASTs) were observed on the site during the inspection for the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by Tetra Tech EM, Inc. These tanks will be properly disposed of prior to development of the property. It is currently unknown whether above or below ground tanks to store petroleum or other materials will be located on the project site. If the above or below ground tanks are proposed on the site, they will be installed according to MPCA regulations and consideration will be given to spill and leak detection and prevention technologies, as well as double-walled tank construction. 21. Traffic Parking spaces added: 1,325 Existing spaces (if project involves expansion): 0 Estimated total average daily traffic generated: 9,388 Estimated maximum peak hour traffic (if known) and time of occurrence: 1,035 trips, 5:00 - 6:00 PM Provide and estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. If the project is within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, discuss its impact on the regional transportation system. Summary Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development, by itself, will not cause negative impacts to the surrounding transportation network. As the Towne Lakes Phase II development proceeds over the next several years, there will be many other developments coming on-line concurrently in surrounding areas of Albertville and Otsego. The Albertville City Engineer, Short Elliott Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH), recently conducted !; an area-wide, comprehensive study of cumulative traffic impacts related to anticipated growth in the Albertville-Otsego area. Conclusions from the SEH study (included in Appendix D) suggest that, although nearly every project will show that it does not have significant traffic impacts when considered alone, future development in the Albertville and Otsego areas consistent with the respective Comprehensive Plans will require transportation improvements near CSAH 19 and CSAH 37. Specific improvements that will ultimately be necessary include an eastbound I-94 on ramp and a westbound I-94 off ramp. '~ Page 28 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Background Information CSAH 19 borders the west side of the project and serves as the major access route to the site. Accordingly, any potential traffic related impacts of the site are focused along CSAH 19. The site location is depicted in Exhibit 1. Appendix D includes Figure 1, which shows existing traffic volumes at the intersections along CSAH 19 in the vicinity of the Towne Lakes development. The City Engineer provided existing traffic volumes. Intersection capacity analyses were conducted for each intersection based on existing traffic volumes. The results of the existing volumes traffic analysis are summarized in Table 21.1. This 'i table shows that with current volumes, each of the intersections along CSAH 19 operates at an acceptable level of service in the P.M. peak hour. Table Zl.l. Existing Delay /Level of Service' C 0 0 L__7 Intersection Name Control Type Delay in Seconds LOS 70th Street 2-way Stop 11.0 ~ B ~ 67th Street 2-way Stop 0.0 ~ A ~ Outlet Mall Road Signal 7.0 A WB I-94 On-Ramp Signal 1.4 A EB I-94 Off-Ramp Signal 6.4 A CSAH 37 Signal 17.0 B ~ Delay and LOS were determined using HCM 2000 methodologies in Synchro. ~ Delay & LOS for 2-way Stop analysis are for critical Westbound Left movement. Page 29 Towne Lakes Phase 11 Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 ~ ~~ ~I ~~ ~' ~I ~' ~'' Trin Generation Trip generation for the site was computed using the standard trip generation rates contained in the publication Trip Generation, 6`h Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997). Table 21.2 summarizes the trip generation for the entire site and table 21.3 provides an estimate of the yearly phasing of units until full build-out. Table 21.2. Trip Generation for Towne Lakes Phase II' ITE Number Daily PM Peak Daily Trip PM Peak Use Code Unit of Units Trips/Unit Hour Generation Hour Trip Tri s/Unit Generation Single-family Residential 210 Dwelling 113 9.57 1.01 1,082 114 Multi-family Residential 230 Dwelling 102 5.86 0.54 598 55 Specialty Retail 814 1,000 sf 100 40.67 4.93 4,067 493 General Office 710 1,000 sf 120 11.01 1.49 1,321 178 Motel 2 320 1,000 sf 30 12.15 0.77 365 23 High-turnover Sit-down 832 1,000 sf 15 130.34 10.86 1,955 163 Restaurant Total 9,388 1,035 ~ Trip generation was determined based on the standard trip generation rates contained in Trip Generation, 6th Edition (Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1997). The Motel trip generation rate was converted from trips per occupied room to trips per 1,000 square feet of floor space based on assumptions that each room occupies 500 square feet and that 2/3 of the motel floor space is dedicated to rooms. The resulting conversion is: (rate/room) x (1 room/500 sf) x (2/3 room space) x (1,000 sf). Table 21.3. Project Phasing for Towne Lakes Phase II' ITE N b D il PM Peak D il T i PM Peak Units Occu ied b End of Year U i um er y a y a r p se Code Un t of Units Tri s/Unit p Hour Generation Hour Trip 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Tri s/Unit Generation Single- family 210 Dwelling 113 9.57 1.01 1,082 114 16 33 33 31 0 0 0 0 113 Residential Multi- family 230 Dwelling 102 5.86 0.54 598 55 8 32 32 30 0 0 0 0 102 Residential Specialty g 14 1 000 sf 100 40.67 4.93 4 067 493 0 10 15 15 I S I S I S I S 100 Retail , , General 710 1,000 sf 120 11.01 1.56 1 321 187 20 20 20 20 20 20 120 Office , Motel 320 1,000 sf 30 12.15 0.77 365 23 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 High- turnover g32 I,000sf 15 130.34 10.86 1 955 163 5 5 5 IS Sit-down , Restaurant Total 9 388 1 035 24 130 105 98 35 40 35 15 480 Page 30 ~'~ ~', ~I ~I Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Trip Distribution The distribution of Towne Lakes traffic was established based the least restricted access to I-94 and area-wide patterns reflected in the SEH comprehensive study. Figure 2 of Appendix D shows the distribution. Approximately half of the Towne Lakes traffic is oriented to I-94, with the remaining traffic distributed to the surrounding local network. Traffic Assignment Based on the trip generation and distribution, Towne Lakes Phase II traffic was assigned to the surrounding roadway network. Several figures are included in Appendix D to show the respective amounts of traffic due to distinct elements of development: ' 1. Figure 3, included for reference, shows the amount and locations of traffic assigned due to Phase I of Towne Lakes. 2. Figure 4 shows traffic assignment of Phase II of Towne Lakes. u J C 0 3. Figure 5 shows the traffic generated by the Outlet Mall Phase 3 expansion, which is adjacent to the Towne Lakes Phase II development and is currently proceeding. 4. Figure 6 shows a summation of these amounts of development traffic added onto the existing traffic counts previously depicted on Figure 1. °I`he intersection level of service for each subject intersection along CSAH 19 was analyzed using the volumes shown on Figure 6 of Appendix D. The results of the analyses are summarized in Table 21.4. Table 21.4. Post-Development Delay /Level of Service' Intersection Name Control Type Delay in Seconds LOS 70th Street 2-way Stop 12.3 z B 2 Signal 5.3 A 67th Street 2-way Stop 26.2 ~ D ~ Signal 10.4 A Outlet Mall Road Signal 12.4 A WB I-94 On-Ramp Signal 1.5 A EB I-94 Off-Ramp Signal 6.8 A CSAH 37 Signal 20.9 C Delay and LOS were determined using HCM 2000 methodologies in Synchro. Delay & LOS for 2-way Stop analysis are for critical Westbound Left movement. As shown in Table 21.4, the intersections along CSAH 19 will continue to operate at acceptable levels of service in the PM peak hour after traffic from Towne Lakes Phase II and the previously approved Albertville Outlet 1VIa11 Phase 3 are added to the system. Page 31 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 (~'nnchisinnc The roadway network around the proposed Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Used Development presently experiences an acceptable level of operation and service. Addition of Towne Lakes Phase II traffic will not cause degradation to the system. However, it is acknowledged that the cumulative impacts of many new developments in the Albertville-Otsego area will cause overall area impacts. The City of Albertville is currently addressing those issues in a comprehensive study that includes Towne Lakes Phase II, as well as all other expected long-range development in the area. 22. Vehicle-Related Air Emissions Estimate the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. Note: If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EAW Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed. Because the intersections in the area are predicted to operate at acceptable Levels of Service, the project is expected to have a negligible impact on air quality. Baseline air quality monitoring or predictive air quality modeling has not been scheduled at this time, and measures to mitigate air quality impacts have not been considered. 23. Stationary Source Air Emissions Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such as boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air pollutants (consult EAW Guidelines for a listing) and any greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide) and ozone-depleting chemicals (chloro-fluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control devices. Describe the impacts on air quality. No stationary source air emissions are anticipated as a result of this project because development of heavy industrial facilities is not proposed on this site. 24.Odors, Noise, and Dust Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during operation? D Yes ^ No If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify locations of nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss potential impacts on human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may be discussed at item 23 instead of here.) It is anticipated that noise levels will increase locally during construction of Towne Lakes Phase II The noise levels on and adjacent to the site will vary considerably depending on the pieces of equipment being operated simultaneously, the percent of time in operation, and the distance from the equipment to the receptors. It is anticipated that most construction activities will be confined to the hours between 7:00 am and 7:00 pm and that a number of machines could potentially be Page 32 u u i G 7 C f'. 1 1 0 n 0 1 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 operating simultaneously. Noise generation estimates for various types of equipment that maybe used on the site are given in the following table. Table 24.1. Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels Machine Type Manufacturer Model Noise Level (dBA at 200' Noise Level (dBA) at 400' Noise Level (dBA) at 800' Crane' American 7260 70 64 58 Crane' American 5299 58 52 46 Backhoe' Link Belt 4000 80 74 68 Backhoe' John Deere 609A 73 67 61 Front Loader' Cate illar 980 72 66 60 Front Loader' Caterpillar 966 69 63 57 Scra er' Cate illar 660 80 74 68 Scraper' Cate illar 641B 73 67 61 Truck 2 Uns ecified Unknown 79 73 67 Jack Hammer 2 Unspecified Unknown 76 70 64 'Data originated from a Federal Highway Administration study published in 1973. z Data originated from the Traffic Noise and Vibration Manual, Illinois Department of Transportation, 1977. No known sensitive noise receptors are in the vicinity of this development. Several farmsteads exist north of 70`'' Street and west of County Road 19 and commercial development exists west of County Road 19 and south of I-94, south of the site. Surrounding properties are proposed for residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Consideration will be given to limiting the daily duration of a majority of the construction activity to 7:00 am and 7:00 pm to help minimize objectionable effects of noise generated by construction activity. The construction process is also expected to generate some dust. It is not anticipated that fugitive dust will be generated in objectionable quantities. Consideration will be given to suppression of airborne dust by application of water if significant fugitive dust generation occurs during site grading. It is not anticipated that construction or operation of Towne Lakes Phase II will generate significant odors. 25. Nearby Resources Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site? If yes, describe the resource and identify any project-related impacts on the resource. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. Archaeological, historical or architectural resources? ^ Yes a No r A cultural review was requested from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in advance of EAW publication to expedite the review process. Towne Lakes Phase II was assigned SHPO Number 2003-0563 and correspondence from SHPO is included in Appendix E. Based on their review, the SHPO concluded that there are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by the project. According to the SHPO, the search area consisted of Section 36 in Township 121 North, Range 24 West. Page 33 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Ms. Christina Harrison of Archaeological Research Services (AES) conducted a cultural resource reconnaissance survey for Towne Lakes Phase I and II and surrounding properties between June 11 and July 19, 2000. Ms. Harrison compiled her methods and findings in a Final Technical Report dated August 2000. A summary of Ms. Harrison's results for Town Lakes Phase II follows: "Most of this segment, which encompasses the area west/northwest of School Lake, is still under active cultivation. With the exception of (1) a grassy area in the southern portion (all low and wet near the lake and therefore lacking in archaeological potential) and (2) a still inhabited farmstead with subsoil disturbances that eliminated the need for testing, the entire area had been planted this spring and did, at the time of survey, provide excellent surface exposure between rows of emerging crops. All were visually inspected, with negative results." Because the project will require a Section 404 Permit (GP/LOP-98-MN) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which constitutes Federal involvement, SHPO's finding will need to address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? D Yes ^ No According to the Prime Farmlands of Wright County, Minnesota (USDA NRCS, 1998), the site contains one soil unit that occupies one acre of land and is classified as prime farmland. Two other soil units on the site are considered prime farmland when drained, and these occupy a total of 88 acres. Because the project area is guided for residential and commercial development, no alternative to conversion of prime farmland is readily identifiable. According to the City of Albertville Zoning Map, the project site does not include any established agricultural preserves. The Agricultural Preserve Program ("Agricultural Preserve") is designed to value and tax qualifying agricultural properties located in the metropolitan area. The property must be zoned long-term agricultural by the City in order for the land to be enrolled in the Agricultural Preserve Program. Designated parks, recreation areas or trails? ^ Yes B No Scenic views and vistas? ^ Yes Q No Other unique resources? ^ Yes D No 26. Visual Impacts Will the project create adverse visual impacts during construction or operation? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks? ^ Yes ~ No. If yes, explain. Proposed street and parking lighting will increase the artificial light sources in the project vicinity. Any lighting used will be arranged to deflect light away from adjoining residential areas or from public streets. Any light or combination of lights that cast light on a public street will not exceed one foot candle as measured from the street centerline. Any Light or combination of lights that cast Page 34 [' fl [] 0 ~l i n n n ~~ ~,~ CI Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 light on residential property will not exceed four-tenths foot candle in compliance with Albertville Zoning Ordinance 1000.10. (Glare). 27. Compatibility with Plans and Land Use Regulations Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state or federal agency? D Yes ^ No. If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will be resolved. If no, explain. The proposed development is subject to the December 1996 City of Albertville Comprehensive Plan Update ("Comprehensive Plan"). The Comprehensive Plan includes a land use plan that provides the framework to guide and direct future community growth and improvement. The land use plan includes a Proposed Land Use Plan Map ("Land Use Plan Map") that establishes future land use designations for property in the City. The project site is located in District 8, which is bounded by 70th Street on the north, MacIver Avenue on the east, CSAH 19 on the west, and the i southern shores of School and Mud Lakes. The Land Use Plan Map designates about 61 acres of the project site Low Density Residential land use and about 33 acres of the project site Commercial land use. Consistent with District 8 planning recommendations, the Commercial land use borders CSAH 19 on the west and was intended to implement the City's goal of establishing a business corridor along CSAH 19 and CSAH 37. Low Density Residential use allows up to five units per acre and a variety of housing types and lot sizes. Commercial use allows a wide variety of retail commercial, service commercial, hospitality and office uses. The overall gross density of the residential portion of the proposed development is 3.53 units per acre. Therefore, the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. No Comprehensive Plan amendment will be required. The project development is also compatible with the Land Use Plan Map designations for surrounding properties. The land use designation of property to the east is Low Density Residential, the land use designation of property to the south is Commercial, and the land use designation of property to the west of CSAH 19 is Commercial and Industrial. The project site is currently zoned R-lA Residential Low Density Single Family District and B-2A Special Business District. The B-2A District is a new business zoning district that provides for high quality limited retail and service commercial development that serves both local and regional needs. The project proposer has applied for a rezoning from R-1 A to PUD Planned Unit Development District for the portion of the project site that is designated Low Density Residential on the Land Use Plan Map. The rezoning is necessary to accommodate the proposed mixture of detached and attached homes and a variety of lot sizes. As required by the City's Zoning Ordinance, the overall density of the project is consistent with the maximum density allowed in the Comprehensive Plan. The project proposer has also applied for a rezoning from B-2A to PUD for the portion of the property designated Commercial in the Land Use Plan that lies south of the southernmost access road to CSAH 19. The balance of the project site designated Commercial on the Land Use Plan Map will remain zoned B-2A until subsequent phases of the overall planned development are proposed in response to market demand. As described in the response to Question 14 of this EAW, about 49.36 acres of the project site fall within the shorelands of two Natural Environment Lakes, School Lake and Mud Lake. These project site shorelands are zoned S-1 Shoreland Overlay District on the City Zoning Map. The S-1 designation applies to most of the shorelands of Albertville. Consistent with the goals and ' objectives of the City's adopted Shoreland management controls, the proposed development ' Page 35 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 `J protects the water quality of School and Mud Lakes, conserves the natural environmental and economic values of the shorelands, and provides for their wise use and development. As described in greater detail in the response to Question 14, the project proposer has applied to the City for a shoreland conditional use permit and variances for the proposed development. As required by the Zoning Ordinance, the City will provide notice of the public hearing on the shoreland zoning approvals to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources at least ten days before the hearings. 28. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? Q Yes ^ No. If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure or services needed. (Note: any infrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the project must be assessed in the EAW; see EAW Guidelines for details.) Certain public infrastructure improvements will need to be constructed in association with this project, and the City of Albertville has planned to expand the municipal infrastructure to accommodate full development of the City consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Infrastructure improvements necessary to serve Towne Lakes Phase II include sanitary and storm sewer, municipal water service, electrical and telephone lines, municipal streets, and trails. Road improvements will eventually be necessary to widen County Road 19 from two to four lanes along the western property boundary. Impacts and mitigation associated with these improvements are directly tied to the Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development and are discussed throughout this document. 29. Cumulative Impacts Minnesota Rule part 4410.1700, subpart 7, item B requires that the RGU consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future project that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause cumulative impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative impacts (or discuss each cumulative impact under the appropriate item(s) elsewhere on this form). Assessing the potential for cumulative environmental effects involves identifying cumulative impacts associated with the proposed action, and identifying the geographic scope of cumulative actions affecting natural and cultural resources. Towne Lakes Phase I (Balfany) was an earlier stage of this project that included 150 single-family homes on 85 acres, and its environmental effects were reviewed under the Balfany Residential Development EAW, which was completed in July 2000 and the Albertville City Council adopted a negative declaration on October 30, 2000 (Resolution No. 2000-38). The geographic scope of determining cumulative impacts includes Towne Lakes Phase I and Phase II. These developments cover a total of 178.9 acres, involve grading a total of 160.8 acres of land, and filling, excavating or draining 1.72 acres of wetland. Towne Lakes Phases I and II include similar mitigation measures such as BMPs for soil erosion control, creation of 5.67 acres of stormwater ponding, and creation of 1.74 acres of new wetland. Page 36 i u 0 0 u [] u u 0 0 0 Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 Both projects include a Shoreland Overlay District and include a 30-foot wide upland shoreland buffer with vegetative plantings around the periphery of Mud and School Lakes to enhance vegetative quality and wildlife habitat, and dedication of parkland along the lakeshore. ri C II ~~, 0 u 0 0 fl [] 0 n 0 0 Phase I was projected to generate 1,436 vehicles trips per day, and Phase II is projected to generate 9,388 trips per day, for a total of 10,824 trips per day. A majority of the trips from Phase I will primarily exit the site easterly along 62na Street, and trips from Phase II will primarily exit to the west along County Road 19. Thus, the trips will be distributed in a manner that minimizes cumulative effects. As indicated under Item 6d, future stages of development are not proposed in conjunction with this project. Existing land north and west of the site is predominantly agricultural and undeveloped. The City of Albertville Land Use Plan indicates land surrounding the proposed project site is guided for future development that includes Residential, Industrial and Commercial uses. The project proposer does not own or have options on other land in the project vicinity. Consequently, the precise timing and nature of future development in the project vicinity is unknown. However, land located west of County Road 19 is eventually expected to develop, and convert additional land to residential and commercial uses. The land that will be converted is predominately cropland, with smaller areas of wetland, grassland, and woodland. 30. Other Potential Environmental Impacts If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. No other adverse environmental impacts are anticipated as a result of this project. Page 37 Towne Lakes Phase 11 Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 31. Summary of Issues Do not complete this section if the EAW is being done for EIS scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document, which must accompany the EAW. List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project begins. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. Table 31.1. Summary of Issues and Mitigation Measures Item Title Issues / Miti anon Measures Mitigation of unavoidable wetland impacts, wetland 12 Physical Impacts on Water replacement, and creation of stormwater ponding; Resources Approvals from the City of Albertville, U.S. Army Corps of En ineers, and the Minnesota DNR. Sealing and abandonment of wells on the property; 13. Water Use Compliance with DNR Water Appropriation Permit re uirements. Compliance with the intent of Albertville Shoreland 14 Water-Related Land Use Ordinance; Approval of a Shoreland CUP and Variance; Management Districts ~ Installation of Shoreland Buffer and Vegetative Filter Strips. 16. Erosion and Sedimentation BMP implementation; Compliance with NPDES/SDS General Permit requirements. Solid Wastes, Hazardous Proper disposal of existing above-ground storage tanks; 20. Wastes, and Storage Tanks Installation of potential future above orbelow-ground stora e tanks in com liance with MPCA re ulations. The roadway network around the proposed Towne Lakes Phase II Mixed-Used Development presently experiences an acceptable level of operation and service. Addition of Towne Lakes Phase II traffic will not cause degradation to the system. However, it is acknowledged that the 21. Traffic cumulative impacts of many new developments in the Albertville-Otsego area will cause overall area impacts. The City of Albertville is currently addressing those issues in a comprehensive study that includes Towne Lakes Phase II, as well as all other expected long-range development in the area. 25. Nearby Resources Continued coordination with the SHPO for Section 106 review. Compatibility with Plans and Rezoning from R-lA (Low Density Residential) and B- 27. Land Use Regulations 2A (Special Business District) to PUD (Planned Unit Develo ment). Page 38 ~~ I~_~ i Towne Lakes Phase 11 Mixed-Use Development EAW January 22, 2003 RGU CERTIFICATION The Environmental Quality Board will only accept SIGNED Environmental Assessment Worksheets for public notice in the EQB Monitor. I hereby certify that: The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. The EAW describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined at Minnesota Rules, parts 4410.0200, subparts 9b and 60, respectively. Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list. r_ ,, %' - Signature ..~.,~~ - Date ~ ~~ L Title: Linda Goeb, City Administrator The Environmental Assessment Worksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental Quality Board at Minnesota Planning. For additional information, worksheets or for EAW Guidelines, contact: Environmental Quality Board, 658 Cedar Street, St. Paul, MN 55155, (651 } 296-8253, or www.mnplan.state.mn.us i~ ii Page 39 d 0 ~ Data Source: Mn/DOT BaseMap (2002), MNDNR Lakes & Wetlands. rn rn ,-, o Legend Towne Lakes Phase II Project Area rn Lake/Wetland/River v 1 _~ a w ' °° ^~° Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-937-5150 Towne Lakes Phase II N 0 ~ 5,000 Feet Date: January 17, 2003 Site Location Map I ' I Albertville, Minnesota EXHIBIT 1 © 2002 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. rt ~~ ~~,- .~ ~. ~~ Towne Lakes w ~,'~' *"~ Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Phase ~~ z ' 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-937-5150 Albertville, Minnesota ~' ~~~- ~~~ T?~ ~=i~ ~~ - _~ ~~ #=~h . ~.~~ ~~ nt~ ~"~'~ .~ S = ~` ~! ~ N 0 1,000 Feet Date: January 17, 2003 2002 Aerial Photography and Adjacent Land Use EXHIBIT 2 S ourcor A COMMERCIAL OFFICE/RETAIL POND 5 70TH STREET N.E. POND 6 , I ~ ~~ ~~ ~ i~ / _ _ ~ I ~ ~ .~ - _" ' ~, - - ,~ - -~ I- - fB _ ~ :~:_ - - 1, - A .~ ~~ 'i- e1 ;'.~iLAND FILL L ~' --M1 ~ ~~, -~~ 11,434 S. F. ~NETLAND - ' - c' 1,37' S. F. DNR :;REATION ~B~LOW 549 , ~- - - - WETLAND F.LL ~~ _ _ j \i\\ ~1,z56 SF. 4,44 S. F. ~ ~ - - -- -- - ~~ WETLAND FILL WE A I I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ,~ - J / G WAGE i _ ;. OUTLOT B ~ ~ ~ I ~~' ,-O° ~ ~~ COMMERC/AL ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ''' OFF/CE/RETAI ~~ -- ~ -L- ~~ / -- -- I ~~ ~ MUD LAKE Q POND 3 ~ ~ _~ i l _ a ~ j _~ i ~ . ~ OHWL 947.65 O ~ ~ - - -~ - -. ~ - - ~ -6, 31 &~F. - EX AVATION pgRK ~ TOWNE LAKES ~• ~ POND 2 PHASE l \~ Z ~ WETLAND- \ ~ ~J DRAINAGE 1 ~ -. ~ ~~' II EX/STING POND 1 ,~ D 5,146 S.F ~~ i - WETLAND FILL ~ ~-~ \\ ~ ~,\ ~ r -~ ourLOr c - COMMERCIAL ~ ~. PARK OFFICE/RETAIL /~ if ~_--- _~ - ~F 1,102 S. F. 292 S. F. \ ~~~ ~ ~ - WETLAND FILL WETLAND ~~ ~ M 2 ~~ '~,J> 12,710 S. F. WETLAND EXCAVATION f' ~ y ~ i MP CREATION BELOW 948 \ 2,960 S F. ; ,~,)~~ P K ~ WEl1AND FILL~~ ~Y~ i 2,592 S. F. WETLAND \ / C EATION BELOW 948 \ \\ SCHOOL LAKE / M2 OHWL 94265 F 2,568 S. F. WETLAND _ O CREA ION BELOW 948 \~ POND 4 Legend Single Family 10,000 s.f. (24 lots) Single Family 15,000 s.f. (10 lots) Detached Townhome (55 units) Row Townhome (102 units) Twinhome (24 units) Towne Lakes Phase II Project Area Prepared by. -- 'Westwood Pro essional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 . Phone: 952/937-5150 Fax: 957J937-5822 Towne Lakes Phase II Albertville, Minnesota N 0 400 Feet gate: 12/31/02 19990360.O1WTF2.DWG Preliminary Site Plan EXHIBIT 3 U' 2002 Westwood Processional Services, Inc. I ' . u i l [~ i ®i Lt n (i^ ~a~,TH STREET N.E. _ I I~ ~I -- e _ - - _. ° ~ - m '~ m Exis ing III ~~ " Hou e I I °. I I Wel I WETLAND B WETLAND A - TYPE t, PEMA °~ TYPE 5/7 ' .l AREA=8,400 S0. FT. AREA=9,907 SQ. FT. ~ ~ ~~ ° . CJr \ ti s J __ ~ __ ' f / `~, ~_ v -~ `5 lV ° CJ . \ ~\ see $. see oP_1 ~ azz ~, ~ ~ m `°~~q s,e ~ ~ MUD LAKE Q WETLAND C A ., ~ ONWL 94765 e ~, i A TYPE 1 PEM d - ~' i _ AREA=7,357 SQ. FT. _ =" _ _ ~ _ __ __ x ~ ~ ___ ~~ - r ~iI ~r-TL~WNE LAKES.,, ,_ q Electric Transmission Line r ~~ ~° I ~Eesement per Goc. No. 'PHASE l ,^ ~ ~~ .~ +asss9 A FANY . L . N _. i ~ ~ e., ~ ez. eee ~., ~~ ~ ~~ ~' WETLAND D "° ~, g ., °„ , TYPE 1, PEMAd F ~~ n ~ -"~ J o s. ~ r. a AREA 6 804 S0. FT. I Existing ~--~ o~~~~ L - ~, Farmstead, _ ~ ,~ ,,. _ --I - __ ~J i ~~ ~' _ a ~ oRhf - ~. - - ~ Fyn,-rte °, ,°, o m ~ v, _ ~~ „ Well-~ ~ ~_ .°- - - °' _. _ ~ i ~ r ., Tu- - WETLAND E ~ TYPE 1, PEMP~d` ~ WETLAND F (WESTWOOD) e ~ _~ I AREA=2,96~p SQ. FT ~ ~ TYPE 5, PUSH with ~ . TYPE 1/3, PEMA/PEMC ~ „,~ fringe 1 AREA=19,914 S0. FT. A °" Existin \, '~ ~° Houseg~ - ~ - ~ ~_ ~. _e. ~, / Ordinary Hi h ~I water Leve SCHOOL LAKE - ;~ ~ ~ - ~° I \ ~' ~v ~ OHWL 94765 ~ ~ ~~'° ~~ -- I ~ ~~ e I ~~ ~~ ~ I A N Lam- /~ Towne Lakes Phase II Project Area 0 4~ Feet Date: 12/31/02 19990360.O1WTF3.DWG Prepared by: Towne Lakes _ Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Phase II EX13t1Itg 7599 Anagram Drive Conditions Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: 952/937-5150 Fax: 9521937-5822 Albertville, Minnesota EXHIBIT 4 ©2002 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. !1~ __~,~ ~ r ~~_ ~~~~~~- ~ --~ ~, ~: __~ _- ~ __ ~~ x ~. Data Source: MNDNR Minor Watersheds (1999), USGS DRG (St Michael Quad, 1991) rn °~ Legend ~ p Towne Lakes Phase II Project Area ~ Delineated Wetland Tilled Agricultural Field ~ Brush/Grassland/Lawn/Landscaping Impervious Surface/Pavement/Building ®Woodland/Forest Towne Lakes w ~: ~~"" Westwood Pro essional Services, Inc. ' 7599 Anagram Drive Phase II Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-937-5150 Albertville, Minnesota - -- -, ~, A ~_. 0 400 Feet Date: January 17, 2003 Existing Cover Types EXHIBIT 5 ,• ~. / _ ~~"` - F f !: ,. , }'' s Towne Lakes Phase II Albertville, Minnesota N 0 400 Feet Date: January 17, 2003 National Wetlands Inventory Mapping EXHIBIT 6 __ _ _ 70TH STREET N.E. ,.___ __ -- -~ ~ % ~ i i i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ / _ _ , ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~, ~~ O~FICE RETAIL ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ /i ~ ~~ ,G~ ~l ' ~~ ~ j ~_ ~ _~. ~._ J - , - ~ _ ~ _ ~~ _~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~''' \ ~~ ~ COMMERCIAL ~ ~~ ~ i OFFICE/RETAIL ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ MUD LAKE Q \ ` ~\ \ ~~` I i / I OHWL 94265 ~ i \' \ O - - ~ ~- - ~ - -~--- - - ~ _ ,r ~ ~ ~ PARK TOWNS LAKES ~ ~. _,i-. ~~~i~ ~~~ ~ PHASE l ~~ ~~ (BALFANY) ~~~ ~~ _~>g8~ ~ v ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~, i ', ~~- ~ ,' ~ ~,, .~ ~~li I _ II ~~~ ~ ,~ `~~ ~ ~ x ~' \ COMMERCI TAIL /~ ~ ^~ \ ~ ~ •\ PARK .j OFFICE/RE r ~F `- ~ F ~ - _ -- - y ~ ~~ y \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~' t~~~PARK ~ / ~. ~ ~\, / SCHOOL LAKE \ OHWL 947 65 F ~: ~ II ~~~ ___ Legend _ ~ -~ _-z--, Tier 1 limits _.... Tier 2 limits ~ ~ ~ Tier 3 /Shoreland limits Towne Lakes Phase II Project Area Prepared by: Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: 952/937-5150 Fax: 952/937-5822 v 0 400 Feet Date: 12/30/02 19990360.O1WTFLDWG Towne Lakes Phase II Shoreland Tier Analysis Albertville, Minnesota EXHIBIT 7 0 CI u i~ 0 0 I 1 0 © 2002 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. i __ ~, - - - -.7 -- }: _5 Vii, +, i f; }. is ~ .. t - . - - __ _ !-''~ _ _ _ _ {~.(~} - . - ti.. - _ f~ i ~~ _ Ot~~ego'Creek Vt(atErstied ~ _ ~ +; _ -- f , k'`i L 1 - . - _- i i •1 ~ _ _ . _ ~ - l - _ .- - ''~- - _ _ - ~ _ ,-- r - - _ ~ i S ,5 °~.~' C,'E;ar.iy[' _- - sY:RN '-1tiT7Y~. ~ I ~~ ~k. ti: ~ - ela4 e ._ "'~ ---- -.-.1'~.lil:d I'S;f~L~ -.l,~~kil' - -- FyF~..^~--`--- --- ~ I~ `} F.,.., r-e ..s.. h ----_.-,~„=,._l~ 93 ~ rf - ~ ~ ~ ~•f -' { 'any + - - _ ~1~ ~~: - ~ i Data Source: MNDNR Minor W atersheds (1999), USGS DRG (St Michael Quad, 1991) Legend Towne Lakes Phase II Project Area Minor Watershed ' Westwood Professional Services, Inc. ~ W~ - ~,-. ' `~' 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-937-5150 Towne Lakes Phase II - ,RYf~ 'motif" N 0 2,000 Feet Date: January 17, 2003 USGS Topography and Minor Watersheds ' I Albertville, Minnesota I EXHIBIT 8 r a~ ~J z `'I inc. 7G %~i S ; ~~EET N.E. r 'i ~~ ~ MUD LAKE OHWL 94765 ~~ . ~~__ ~~,~ - . ~~ \;~~ ~~~; , ?` \``\ -- . -~_ -- , LL-emend Towne Lakes Phase II Project Area _/\~- Proposed Contours Existing Contours Prepared ~: Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagrem Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Phone: 952/937-5150 Fax: 952N37-5822 Towne Lakes Phase II Albertville, Minnesota POND 5 ~ POND o N 0 400 Feet vate: 12/31/02 19990360.O1WTF7.DWG Preliminary Grading Plan EXHIBIT 9 [7 0 n 0 December 5, 2002 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, Box 25 500 Lafayette Road St. Paul, Minnesota SS I S>-40_ Phone: (651) 296-7863 Fax: (651) 296-1811 E-mail: sarah.hoffmann@dnr.state.mn.us Shannon Hansen Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Re: Request for Natural Heritage information for vicinity of proposed Vetsch Property Mixed-Use Development, T121N R24W Section 36, Wright County NHNRP Contact #: ERDB 20030476 Dear Ms. Hansen, The Minnesota Natural Heritage database has been reviewed to determine if any rare plant or animal species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one-mile radius of the area-indicated on the map enclosed with your information request. Based on this review, there are no known occurrences of rare species or natural communities in the area searched. • Please note however, that there are Natural Resource -related issues for Lakeshore developments which should be considered in addition to their potential effect on rare features. If a buffer zone of native vegetation is present around School Lake, I recommend that it be maintained and enhanced. If not, I recommend that one be established. The combination of upland, Lakeshore, and aquatic plants creates a buffer zone of natural vegetation in and around lakes, which provide numerous ecological benefits. Lakeshore and upland plants help stabilize banks and protect the shoreline from erosion by absorbing the forces of wind, waves, and boat traffic. They filter pollutants that would otherwise drain from the watershed into the lake, thereby protecting water quality. Most noticeably, Lakeshore and upland plants provide a variety of vital habitat components for wildlife including food, protection from weather and predators, denning sites and nursery areas for young, perching and sunning sites for birds and turtles, and flyways and travel corridors. Aquatic plants produce oxygen, purify lake water by stabilizing bottom sediments and reducing nutrient cycling, and provide underwater cover for fish. Please refer to the enclosed brochures for additional information on aquatic plants and Lakeshore ' design. If you would like more information on how to enhance Lakeshore habitat for wildlife, I recommend the book, "Lakescaping for Wildlife and Water Quality" which was produced by the DNR Nongame Wildlife Program. This book covers a wide array of topics associated with managing Lakeshore property and provides step-by-step instructions for designing ecologically sound lakeshores. If you have any questions about the concepts of Lakescaping, please contact Carrol Henderson, Nongame Wildlife Program Supervisor, at (651) 296-0700. Another helpful ' reference is the newly released "Restore Your Shore" CD ROM, which guides the user through the process of protecting a natural shoreline or restoring a degraded shore with a natural buffer zone (see http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/restoreyourshore/index.html for details). DNR Information: 651-296-6157 1-888-646-6367 TTY: 651-296-5484 i-800-657-3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer ~ Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a ' Who Values Diversity ~~1i Minimum of 10% Post-Consumer Waste The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Services, Department of Natural Resources. It is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, natural communities, and other natural features. Its purpose is to foster better understanding and protection of these features. Because our information is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there maybe rare or otherwise significant natural features in the state that are not represented in the database. A county-by- county survey of rare natural features is now underway, and has been completed for Wright County. Our information about natural communities is, therefore, quite thorough for that county. However, because survey work for rare plants and animals is less exhaustive, and because there has not been an on-site survey of all areas of the county, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist on the project area. Please be aware that review by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program focuses only on rare natural features. It does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whole. If you require further information on the environmental review process for other wildlife- related issues, you may contact your Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Mike North, at (218) 828-2433. An invoice for the work completed is enclosed. You are being billed for map and database search and staff scientist review. Please forward this invoice to your Accounts Payable Department. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. £Sincerely, ~~ A -. ~ Sarah D. Hoffmann Endangered Specie encl: Aquatic plant and Lakeshore design brochures Invoice cc: Mike North s l ~. ~~/ ~.. Environmental Review Coordinator 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 RECE~v~~ ' JAN 21 2000 wFSYNwaor~ i ~ 3535 VAL7N~41~~~~~~DRA ESQ SEH EENTER, ST. PAUL, MN 55110 657 490-2000 800 325-2055 ® ARCHITECTURE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL - TRANSPORTATION January 20, 2000 RE: Albertville, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Boundaries SEH No. A-ALBEV0001.00 1 Mr. David Weetman Westwood Professional Services 7599 Anagram Dave Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Weetman: ' This will confirm our meeting of December 14, 1999 when we met on site in the City of Albertville for a field review of the wetland delineation boundaries on the CPDC site around Mud Lake. Mr. Mark McNamara from the Wright S WCD was also present at this meeting. You may recall that on December 14 there was consensus on wetland boundary changes that should be made to four wetland basins in the field. On January 12, 2000 you submitted the four wetland boundary changes to SEH and the Wright SWCD. We are in agreement with these four wetland boundary changes and look forward to receiving your completed wetland delineation report on this site. ' Sincerely, / '~~~~ Wa ne E. Jacobson P.S.S. P.W. Y S. Professional Soil Scientist Professional Wetland Scientist ' sah c: Mark McNamara, Wright SWCD Pete Carlson, P.E., SEH F:\projects\ab\albev\0001\c\we~tmaa.j20.wpd n SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON 1NC. M/NNF11 POLIS. MN SL CLOUD, MN CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI MADISON, W/ LAKE COUNTY, IN EQUAL OPPORTUNI TY EMPLOYER n i~ n i~ n D n C 0 3535 Vadnais Censer Drive, 200 SEH Center, St. Paul, MN 55110-5108 651.490.2000 651.490.2150 FAX architecture engineering environmental transportation F~~C~~'~~l~'P,~ June 8, 2000 JUN - ~®~® RE: Albertville, Minnesota Wetland Delineation Boundaries ~~'§-`~ ~'~'~UD SEH No. A-ALBEV0001.00 t'~?f?~~~vi0,~,~t S)mi;~11~ES Mr. David Weetman Westwood Professional Services 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Mr. Weetman: I had a phone conversation with Mr. Mark McNamara of the Wright SWCD on May 15, 2000 regarding your completed wetland delineation map on the Albertville CPDC site around Mud Lake. Mr. McNamara and I approve the wetland delineation boundaries on the map as shown. However, we must caution you that in the future we will be looking at your wetland boundaries closely. Your boundaries, according to our field inspections, have been low in the past. Please be sure to apply the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual more accurately in the future. Sincerely, ~.--!~ `Wayne E. Jacobso .S.S., P.W.S. Professional Soil Scientist Professional Wetland Scientist sah c: Mark McNamara, Wright SWCD Pete Carlson, P.E., SEH \\sp£ le s 1 \co rpdoc\wp\projects\ab\albe v\0001 k\weetman. m26. doc Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Offices located throughout the Upper Midwest Equal Opportunity Employer We help you plan, design, and achieve. o~ ~s ~ ^' E ~ a a o ~ x ~ $ ~< ~ o a~ ~~ $ . yS g ' ~ + ~* ~g g a~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ a ~ i ~ -------- T -~------ r ----- ------ I ~ ~ I~ ~ ~ a i ~ ~ , ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i a'~ ~ ~ m~ ~ , ~ a r°ii I a°,~' ~~ z ~ W W ZN 0 W W } S N F /n W d I Cl V .~ i~ /~.{~'ti~~„ ~!/ ~ ~ ;i i~/ 1_i/+:y`%Jpl!!iI ~~i/.~~~i ~1 I ifill//! i a .~ .~~'i~V i r _ v+~ '~ c 3.: ~ ~ Q O Mdd~r .-N`_ ia~ O V i-~ ", ~~ ~~ O m ~' ~~ F \W WN a ~~ ~` JI uZ-iWw ~ m~¢ ~- ~, I m `~ E ~a°n! Z~ Q r W Y m~af Q M e % ~ J~ ~ O 3. _ ~ O w ~ _ = U Q ~ 3`~~? o J ;~ ~~•~~ ~ ~ i o o a , ^+.^ 2 Q {Oi ~ N ~ V ~t ~U O O, ~ `. ~E~ ~O = ~ ~ V w ~~e da g ~ 4Q o` x3 - a W y m ~ m ~«' ~~3c °~ `vo yU~U ~ ~3-• t `o$ ~rn ` off ma U ~ O.'C O N O N , ~ O ~ ~ ~' O OO'i of crn hro ~~ ~ '+o c v a aos~,°v c £ W.a EN ~'t°~ ~ ~ ° O m ~'O`x o c m c2 v~~ / o a ~ ~ d s a m a ~',m cm eai m ° ° 3 ° m ~ ff 99y 5 i lJ .c y > o v~n~ m o ~ 2 t. O L d N 6 c 3.3 tl ~ 3 n mmcmv 3 .Q L ~O ~ ~ O .p g o a a c p i~ ii a 2 m ~o ago o o a s !~ ~'a 3+ a a y ~ a N cif o3yo.c OjaAi ~ { m 3a c3 0 j # ;~ ~~ 3~ ~s +^~a n W t5~ ~! 3~ ... ,.. .. 9.ct1 .. ' u Unique No. 00437596 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH WELL AN Update Date 2002/06/07 D BORING RECORD County Name Wright Minnesota Statutes Chapter 1039 Entry Date 1992/07/17 Township Name Township Range Dir Section Subsection Well Depth Depth Completed Date Well Completed 121 24 W 36 BAAACB 200 ft. 200 ft. 1988/04/07 Well Name VETSCH, DAN IEUBARTHEL C Drilling Method Non-specified Rotary Contact's Name VETSCH, DANIEUBARTHEL C Drilling Fluid Well Hydrofractured? ^ Yes ^ No From ft. to ft. ALBERTVILLE MN Use Domestic Casing Drive Shoe? ^ Yes ^ N Hole Diameter in. to 200 ft. GEOLOGICAL MATERIAL COLOR HARDNESS FROM TO Casing Diameter Weight(Ibs/ft) CLAY 0 15 4 in. to 185 ft. 1.89 GRAVEL + CLAY 15 120 SHALE 120 200 Screen N ~ Open Hole From 185 ft. to 200 ft. Make Type Static Water Level 30 ft. from Land surface Date 1988/04/07 PUMPING LEVEL (below land surface) ft. after hrs. pumping 40 g.p.m. Well Head Completion Pitless adapter mfr MONITOR Model Casing Protection ^ 12 in. above grade ^ At-grade(Environmental Wells and Borings ONLY) Grouting Information Well grouted? ~ Yes ^ No Material From To (ft.) Amount(yds/bags) G 0 185 Nearest Known Source of Contamination ft. direction type Well disinfected upon completion? ~ Yes ^ No Pump ^ Not Installed Date Installed Y Mfr name AERMOTOR Model HP 0.5 Volts Drop Pipe Length 60 ft. Capacity 9•p•m Type S Any not in use and not sealed well(s) on property? ^ Yes [] No Was a variance granted from the MDH for this Well? ^ Yes ^ No USGS Quad: Bi Lake 954 El g evation: Aquifer: CAMB Alt Id: Well CONTRACTOR CERTIFICATION Lic. Or Reg. No. 27056 License Business Name Re OI"t Co Name of Driller TORGERSON. S. 1 HE-01205-06 (Rev. 9/96) o°0 5 ~ 70th St '~ ~'~ RR~' r 00 15"`~ NI~~ 1~ bo r L C W N ~". o ~ ~ ~ Towne Lakes Entr. ~~.~.~ ~ o ~. ~ 67th Street o~ _~ ~T~T~ m Q U 0 ~n o_ p _ ~~~L ~ ~ a 2~ 180 ~~o~~ w$~9 O ~ei94mp~~CS ~~pN °~~a Ay 19 d .~ ~pfOC ~9 .L J. ~~ CS qy ~, Outlet Mall Road 00 ~m~ ~J. ~.~, ~11s F-225 ~~~y x'105 s~ ~rr~ N ~ CSAH 37 Towne Lakes Phase II Existing Volumes Figure D-1 Development Study Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-937-5150 8% 70th St c w z Towne Lakes Entr. 67th Street ~~ 3% rn a U N d' Outlet Mall Road 6' l Q /g4o~ram ~~ ` Fe p from 23% X94 CSgH 19 o~rai~'e fo 26% csgy ~9 ~----- Csgy rn `~~ _ c¢n 11% 10% v CSAH 37 ~'-'~ 19% Towne Lakes Phase II Trip .Distribution Figure D-2 Development Study Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-937-5150 3 ~ 70th St '~~~' ~ ~ w z '~'~N ~--~ ~ Towne Lakes Entr. ~- ~~ ~L ~2a 67th Street ~~ ~ '~T~,T~' ~~ m Q U ~~~~~ ~ ~ o o-y '~T T~' B79go~t~~mCSAH19 ~.~~ a ~pfOc Sgti r9 ~N~ '~T T ~ ~u cs~y ° TAT 3~ o ~~ ~rr~ Outlet Mall Ro CSAH 37 Towne Lakes Phase II Traffic Assignment, Figure D-3 Development Study Towne Lakes Phase I Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagram prive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-937-S15Q ~. 70th St '~ ~"~' ~ ~ o~T ~ ~ ~o M W i C W Z '~~~ ~$oo Towne Lakes Entr. -~ ~~ - r ~~~~ X10 67th Street e- 217 5~ -~ ,~ ~T~r o~ ~ N !~ Q U M ~~"~~ ~ ~.. o q r o~ dT Td Wg~ 9go~~ m csgy ~s ~ J.1 a Shp fO C Shy 7g ~ ~ dT~T ~ ~? y csq ~~ TMT ~~~ N O r} ~A ~~.~J.4 X59 4 y °~ ~rT~ 0 Outlet Mall Ro; o-~ CSAH 37 Towne Lakes Phase II Traffic Assignment, Figure D-4 Development Study Towne Lakes Phase II Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagram Qrive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-937-5150 0 ~ 70th St '~ ~'~o ~ ~ W _ z '~'~"o ~ Towne Lakes Entr. --> T ~o ~ ~'~ ~"~ ~ ~ 67th Street as -~ ~T~~ m Q U Q _~ `~~~L ¢°7 Outlet Mall Ro ~. 135 ~T T w$'9 ~8°~ ram o ~o /`94°ff~~m CggH 19 ~.L1 d n1p t0 csgy,9 0 '~T T J.J. cs qy a, - - - ~s0 y ~, o-~ CSAH 37 Towne Lakes Phase II Traffic Assignment, Figure D-5 Development Study Outlet Mall Phase 3 westwooa rroxesswna~ aernces, mc. 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-937-5750 ~ 70th St m OriO '~'~~ 14 ~ ~o° 5~ ~~`n 1° ~o --~ 15 a N W L _ W Q ~"~' -111 Towne Lakes Entr. T~~r ~ N N 7ry0 ~~ y~ N~ 26 X ~ 241 67th Street sJ, 13~ ~~ ~~ -~ N 1~ m N r Q ~a~ Net .- '~~"~~' ¢°7 O tl t M U R F 135 u e a o; 25~ -'` ~. j' ~' ~ - ( 180 ~ ~ N ~ u~ N B, a &~9 fip ~ N Csgy 4o~ 19 ,~ ~. ~ fa~ pf Oc s~ ' y,s ~ ITT ~~ ~~ ~ 23 ti ~~ n _N .~- ~ m ~ ~~ X235 ~o~ Dios CSAH 37 spy R . -~ Towne Lakes Phase 11 Development Total, Existing Plus Development Traffic Figure D-6 Westwood Professional Services, Inc. 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 952-937-5150 ~ ~SEH MEMORANDUM 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55110-5196 ~I~I t t ~~ ., 0 TO: Pete Carlson, P.E. FROM: Jaimison Sloboden, P.E. DATE: January 27, 2003 651.490.2000 800.325.2055 651.490.2150 FAX RE: Albertville Traffic Study for Darkenwald and Vetch Propoerties SEH No. AALBEV0301.00 14.00 This study is being prepared for the City of Albertville in conjunction with the planning and approval process for developments proposed for the Darkenwald properties and Vetch properties located north of I-94 in the City of Albertville. The properties are identified in Figure 1. The study has taken a comprehensive look at the traffic effects. these properties will have at full development on the planned roadway system. Included in the analysis was additional traffic growth attributed to anticipated growth in Otsego, Outlet Mall phase III, all remaining residential development in Albertville, and partial development of commercial development in Albertville along County Road 19 south of I-94. With all of the development mentioned taking place there will be traffic congestion along County Road 19 and County Road 37. There is a pending study to develop a comprehensive transportation system in Eastern Wright County including additional and revised access to the Interstate system. Until the additional study is completed, there will be a limit to the system improvements that can be accounted for in this study. Methodology The study was developed using the City of Albertville Traffic Model. The model was developed by SEH in 2002 for the City to assess impacts of traffic growth scenarios including the growth in traffic associated with development within Albertville, development in the City of Otsego western sewer service area, and parts of St. Michael. The Albertville model consists of two models; the first model is a traffic operations model using the SYNCHRO traffic program, the second model is a traffic forecast model in a series of Excel spreadsheets. The models include County Road 19 from 70`h Street to 50`h Street; County Road 37 from Kadler Avenue to the I-94 Interchange; and 50`h Street from County Road 37 to Main Street. The first step for this study was to develop traffic projections for a typical weekday PM peak hour for two conditions. The first condition was existing traffic plus traffic growth as a result of Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Your Trusted Resource Equal Opportunity Employer Albertville Traffic Study for Darkenwald and Vetch Propoerties January 27, 2003 Page 2 1 other background development not associated with the two proposed developments. The second condition was existing traffic plus the background and proposed developments. r The second step was to update the SYNCHRO model with the two traffic volume conditions. The Synchro model was. truncated to include only County road 19 from the intersection of 57th Street to 70th Street. The first analysis was to determine individual intersection capacities using Highway Capacity Manual techniques. SYNCHRO provides these calculations. This level analysis provides an indication of how the intersections pertaining to the development would work if there were no traffic congestion on the system. The third step was to analyze the same intersection using SimTraffic. SimTraffic is a microscopic traffic operations program that analyzes individual vehicles on a second by second basis. This type of analysis is more detailed and will analyze the effects that a bottleneck will have on the system. Panned Developments The planned developments are two large properties that will contain a mix of commercial, industrial, and residential developments. The properties and plan are described below. • The Albertville Business Park otherwise known, as the Darkenwald Property is a 110-acre development located alongside of the north side of I-94 and west of the existing Outlet Mall. The site is currently programmed to have approximately 750,000 square feet of buildings. The exact uses of these buildings are unknown at this time. The analysis estimated a mix of commercial retail, office, and light industrial as the uses. The primary access road is 67th Street to CSAH 19 there is another internal north-south street. • Town Lakes Phase II otherwise known, as the Vetch Mixed Use Development is a 93.9-acre development located east of CSAH 19 is a defined mix of residential, retail, office, motel. The primary access road is 67th Street. Background Growth The proposed developments will not likely be built out unti12010. During this time frame there will be other growth in the City of Albertville and in the surrounding communities that will have an impact on the transportation system. The planned developments that are part of this study include the following: • Albertville Outlet Mall Phase III • Town Lakes Phase I I • The City of Otsego has planned a sewer service expansion along the City of Albertville's northern border, this expansion is referred to as the `western sewer service area'. There is over 2,600 housing units, and an industrial park platted for this area. At this time, it is not clear how quickly this area will develop, estimates ranged from 40 units per year to 400 per year. For this study 679 residential units were estimated based on the high growth scenario 1 it 1 Albertville Traffic Study for Darkenwald and Vetch Propoerties January 27, 2003 Page 3 of 97/units per year for 7 years. Almost all of the regional traffic from Otsego will pass through the City of Albertville on county Road 19. • All remaining residential development in Albertville south of I-94, which includes 1,398 residential units. • 50% of commerciaUindustrial development in Albertville south of I-94, which was estimated at 954,000 square feet of commercial, and 102 Acres of industrial property. Existing Roadway System The existing principal roadway system consists of County Road 19, County Road 37, and Interstate 94. County Road 19 is the major artery for the City of Albertville that provides direct access to the I-94 to the west and I-94 to the east via County Road 37. County Road. 19 also provides the same access to I-94 for the western half of the City of Otsego, and northwest parts- of the City of St. Michael. There is a bottleneck condition on County Road 19 at the intersection of County Road 37. This is a result of the traffic demands between County Road 19 and I-94 to the east and the right-of--way constraints at the intersection prohibiting the construction of multiple turn lanes. County 19 is a 2lane-undivided arterial with signalized intersections at County 19/37, and outlet mall intersections. Speed limits range from 40 mph to SSmph. Over time it is anticipated that the speed limit will be 40 mph along the entire length of County 19 within the City of Albertville. County Road 37 is a 2 lane un-divided arterial with no signalized intersections. There is a full access diamond type interchange with I-94 and County Road 37. The ramp terminal intersections are currently un-signalized, with stop control on the ramp approaches. Planned Roadway System The roadway system in eastern Wright County including the City of Albertville is in the process of being re-defined. There will be a major study beginning in February of 2003 that will consider additional inter-city corridors and the future of interstate access for the Albertville Area. The study will be a joint study with the City of St Michael, the City of Otsego, and Wright County. The City of Albertville's main desire from this planning effort will be the construction of a full access interchange at County 19. However, the FHWA has indicated that there would be no approval of new or modified interstate access without a comprehensive local road plan in Eastern Wright County. Until the transportation study and Mn/DOT and FHWA approval is obtained, the full access interchange cannot be considered as a committed improvement at this time. In advance of the major transportation study, The City of Albertville is proceeding with County Road 19 improvements for 2003; these improvements include one additional through lane in each direction from south of 57`" Street to north of the Outlet Mall Road Intersection. The widening project will include the addition of a traffic signal at 57`h Street and signal modifications at the Outlet Mall Road intersection and the intersection with County Road 37. LI I~ ~.. Albertville Traffic Study for Darkenwald and Vetch Propoerties January 27, 2003 Page 4 As part of this study it was assumed that the county road widening would be extended beyond 67 Street, in addition, the I-94 ramp intersections at County 19 would be signalized. These improvements are lower cost improvements that require a minimal approval process. Traffic Volumes t ~I ~~, Future traffic volumes were developed using the Albertville Traffic Model. The model is a spreadsheet tool that applies ITE Trip Generation manual techniques across the entire city. The City of Albertville was divided into a number traffic analysis zones (TAZ's), within each zone the specific land use types were identified and quantified. Each Land Use was applied a trip generation rate from ITE's Trip. Generation Manual 6th Edition. Table A-1 in the appendix contains the typical land use types used in the traffic model. The traffic volumes that were calculated in each. zone were assigned to the primary roadway network based on two levels of assignment, the first level was internal to internal (I-I) trips within the City of Albertville. This was conducted to eliminate duplicate trips generated by each zone, for instance if a residential trip was generated in Zone A and was destined to a commercial use in Zone B, the commercial trip would not be generated twice. The second level of assignment is trips destined to or originating from Beyond the City of Albertville, these are identified as External to Internal trips (E-I). The direction of approach for these trips was based on the percentages summarized in Table 1. The. estimated traffic was combined with existing traffic that was counted in April of 2002, the existing counts are illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 3 illustrates the projected background growth in traffic. Table 1 Direction of Approach for Traffic In and out of Albertville Location Inbound Outbound East I-94 27% 29% West I-94 32% 17% North Count 19 7% 13% South Count 19 17% 17% East Count 37 6% 9% West County 37 4% 11 Naber Avenue 7% 4% 100% 100% i Albertville Traffic Study for Darkenwald and Vetch Propoerties ' January 27, 2003 Page 5 1 Proposed Development Trams The trip generation for the proposed developments was developed using ITE Trip generation rates. Calculations for the Vetch Mixed Use Development were provided by the developer's consultant and are summarized in table 3. These calculations were reviewed and incorporated. into the analysis. An internal capture rate (trips that go between uses and do not go onto County 19) was estimated at 15%, the higher rate was a result of the mix between retail and residential uses. Table 3 Vetch Mixed Use Development Trip Generation Use ITE Unit Number Daily PM Peak Hour Daily Trip PM Peak Hour Code of Units Trips/Unit Trips/Unit Generation Trip Generation Single-family Residential 210 Dwelling 115 9.57 1.01 1,101 116 Multi-family Residential 230 Dwelling 102. 5.86 0.54 598 55 Specialty Retail 814 1,000 sf 100 40.67 4.93 4,067 493 General Office 710 1,000 sf 120 11.01 1.56 1,321 187 Motel z 320 1,000 sf 30 12.15 0.77 365 23 High-turnover Sit- down Restaurant g32 1,000 sf 15 130.34 10.86 1,955 163 Total 9,407 1,037 ' The trip generation calculations for the Albertville Business Park were estimated based on assumed uses for individual parcels within the development. Specific uses for this- site has not been determined, but based on discussions and the demands in the area there will likely be a mrx of commercial retail in the parcels close to the Outlet mall and I-94, and a mix of Office and light industrial uses further away from I-94. Table 4 summarizes the estimate in Land Use allocations and corresponding trip generation rates. The internal capture rate for this development was 6%. Table 4 Albertville Business Park Traffic Volumes Use ITE Code Unit Number of Units Daily Trips/Unit PM Peak Hour Trips/Unit Daily Trip Generation PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Retail 820 1,000 sf 315 42.92 4.25 13,505 1,338 ffice 710 1,000 sf 166 12.54 1.60 2,075 265 Li ht Industrial 130 1-,000 sf 271 6.96 0.95 1,886 257 Total 17,467 1,860 ' Figure 4 in the back of the report illustrates the assignment of the development related traffic on the roadway system. Figure 5 illustrates existing plus background growth and Figure 6 illustrates existing plus background, plus the proposed development. Albertville Traffic Study for Darkenwald and Vetch Propoerties January 27, 2003 Page 6 Capacity Analyses The intersections analyzed as part of this study includes the intersections on CSAH 19 from 70th Street north of Albertville and 57th Street in Albertville south of I-94. The intersections are summarized in Table 5 along with the volume to Capacity ratios (v/c), total intersection delays and level of service. The analysis indicated the need to extend the widening of County road 19 through the 1 intersection of 67th Stree/Laketown Drive. Also, the intersection of County Road i 9 and 70th Street would need to be signalized. This isolated intersection analysis indicates that the. intersections providing direct access to the developments would opoerate sufficiently given no other system congestion. The 67th Street/Laketown intersection. will require two-through lanes in each direction on County Road 19, the westbound approach will require an exclusive left turn lane, and a shared through/right ' lane. The eastbound approach will require an exclusive left, through and right turn lane. The capacity analysis indicated problems with the intersection with County Road 37 and County Road 19. Table 5 shows a volume to capacity (V/c) ratio of 1.21 with Full development conditions. The V/c ratio with existing plus background traffic was only 0.89, however, the southbound left-turn movement. exceeded capacity. The effects of the poor left turn movements were realized in the operations analysis. Li .Table 5 Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis PM Peak Hour Intersection Back round Growth Only Full Develo ment County 19 @ V/c Ratio Delay/LOS V/c Ratio DelaylLOS 70t Street n/a n/a 0.68 22.3/C 67 Street/ Laketown Drive n/a N/a 0.84 37.5/D Outlet Mall Road 0.54 26.8/C 0.85 35.0/D I-94 North Ramp 0.60 3.4/A 0.69 6.3/A I-94 South Ramp 0 77 18.78 0.90 16.28 County Road 37 0.89 48.6/D 1.21 94.2/F 57t Street 0.71 25.3/C 0.79 26.7/C 1 N/a: 1 hese intersections are unsignalized with minimal cross-street traffic without the developments in place L Albertville Traffic Study for Darkenwald and Vetch Propoerties January 27, 2003 Page 7 Traffic Operations ' Traffic operations were evaluated using Simtraffic software. This program is a micro simulation traffic program that analyzes individual vehicles instead of using equations to estimate groups of vehicles. This program analyzes the overall levels of congestion on the system when there are ' bottlenecks at intersections that potentially impact other intersections. In this study, the constraints at the intersection of County Road 19 and 37 creates a bottleneck that has a significant impact on County Road 19 north past 67th Street. Table 6 summarizes the vehicle delay and corresponding level of service for the intersections in the study area. The County Road 37 intersection does not operate adequately with existing plus background growth, however the congestion is contained to this intersection and does. not significantly impact the .surrounding intersections. When the proposed developments are in place, the added traffic creates extreme congestion at County Road 37. The congestion is so severe that intersection operations are affected all the way to the 67th Street/Laketown Drive ' intersection. The congestion has an affect on the I-94 off ramp at County Road 19 and would likely impact the operations at I-94 and County Road 37. The crux of this problem is the concentration of traffic at the intersection of County Road 19 and 37 and the lack of space to adequately widen the intersection to accommodate the demand. The major traffic pattern that can potential be relocated and would reduce the overall congestion on ' County Road 19 is traffic destined to I-94 eastbound. If this traffic were to be relocated to a full access interchange at County road 19, overall congestion would be reduced. ~J J L Table 6 Signalized Intersection Operations Analysis PM Peak Hour Intersection Back round Growth Onl Full Develo ment County 19 @ Dela LOS Dela LOS 70th Street n/a n/a 26.2 C 67t Street/ Laketown Drive n/a n/a 213.4 F Outlet Mall Road 18.6 B 65.0 E I-94 North Ramp 7.1 A 30.0 C I-94 South Ramp 14.5 B 211.8 F County Road 37 1395 F 360.1 F 57th Street 18.0 B 18.0 B i n r u i~ J 0 u i~ 5EI~1 Tragic Study Figure 1 Vetch & Darkenwald Properties Site Locations n in t-- 5 70th Street .-~ ,~ ~- ,~ 5 5 -~ '~l f~` 5 -- 15 ~ ~ ~ u> `V o N L 0 67th Street ~ ~ ~ a o ~' t r-- 0 -- o~ o~o r o L O Outlet Mall Road .~ ;~ ° ~ o 25 -} ~ (~ 0 ~oo 180 ~r ~- r u~ u~ r- I-94 WB on-ramp ~ j ~t VAN ~ M Laketown Drive O? r -~ m 0 0 U I-94 WB off-ramp i Legend 000 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume North 55 ~' 130 -} o v ~o L 115- ~ 61 st Street ~ 1;i ~- 105 County Road 37 40 ~' ~ r- 100 -~ 65 ~, ~n ~ o ~ c'nv `~' Traffic Study Figure 2 Vetch & Darkenwald Properties Exsiting Traffic 70th Street 67th Street Outlet Mall Road i-94 WB on-ramp co ~ 0 O N rt ~- 0 0 -~ ~l (~ ~ -- u~ co 0 19 ~ ~~ v N O M I!) ~~ o ~' 0 -- 0 L g `r- as Laketown Drive M N 27 t ~ co cfl c~ r - f- 50 .~ ~, ~' 223 12 ~` ~ (; 50 96 ~~~ r N O r ~~ 211 --~ 360 U -94 WB off-ramp ` 61st Street 07 c~ 0 '~ t ~ ~~ M QO 0 t v 0 Legend 000 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume North ~ ~ ~ ~. 380 .,~ ~%, ,~- 386 County Road 37 85 ~ f'(T r- 63 -- ~a°'ouMi 77 ~ cn u~ N Traffic Study Figure 3 Vetch & Darkenwald Properties Background Growth 't-o ~~~ 70th Street .~ j ~. ~ °~a 58 -} 'fl (~' 0 -i 266 tic~o° ~ '~ 50 ~ 67th Street ..- ~ t~ ,r-- 239 25 -~ t f 595 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~- 12 Outlet Mall Road :~ j `~ ~ o o ~ 'o ~ o -~,, ~ O M c~ N I-94 WB on-ramp ~ i Laketown Drive ~t o~ rn r c~ 0 a c 0 U N 1-94 WB off-ramp 222 o -~ T ~ ~ ~ '~. 315 61st Street M N N .- o ,.~ ,~ ~. ,F- o 48 ,` ~ r- 0 -- o~o 0 ~, N Legend 000 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume North County Road 37 Traffic Study Figure 4 Vetch &Darkenwald Properties Vetch & Darkenwald Traffic 70th Street 67th Street Outlet Mall Road I-94 WB on-ramp ~ ~- 5 oc~v '~-0 5 -~ ~l fi' 5 -• ~~~ 34 ~ o rn ~r o v ~.o o ~' o -- 0 '~ 9 ~--- 0 ,~ 49 Laketown Drive T~ cri N (~. r 27 t r- ~ co c~ v •- -- f- 50 ~ ~, ~ 223 37 ~' ~ ~-- 50 .- ~ - ~n 276 -i, N o°o m~ N N N t~ j I-94 WB off-ramp 1 61st Street 266 -} 490 -i N O ~ N 1 0 NO L3.. -~-+ 0 U ~ ~ N '~ 495 N m cri f- 451 ..a ~ ~,. f- 491 Cou 125 ~' ~ I ~- 1s3-- Mao 142 ~, v o~ r~ Legend 000 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume North Road 37 Traffic Study Figure 5 Vetch & Darkenwald Properties Existing Plus Background Growth 70th Street ~- t 5 rnM~ f'-0 .~ ~, ~-- ,~ 220 63 -! '~l r 5 -~ AMU' 300 ~ N n ado o t- 59 filth Street ;, °° i~ ,j- Za8 Laketown Drive 25 -~' 595 ~, corn ~ 39 t- Outlet Mall Road .- ti o .~ jN - ~2°0 44 ~ a~ r- 50 275 --~ ~- rn rn N ~ ~° 0 m ~n I-94 WB on-ramp ~o ~ , ~ ~t N ~ ~ O N 0 -94 WB off-ramp l 488 -} I 490 --~ ~ 0 N 61st Street 07 0 U Legend 000 PM Peak Hour Traffic Volume North ch ~- cfl '~ 810 i~rr rn c°o ~-- 451 ~ ~, ~ f- 489 County Road 37 173 ~' ~l 1 f' 162-~- Moo 136, v~ch Traffic Stud Figure 6 y Total Traffic Vetch &Darkenwald Properties Existing, Background, & Vetch/Darkenwald Traffic 1 i u Table A-1 Typical Trip Generation Rates Average Rates LAND USE ITE DESCRIPTION CODE (6th Ed.) UNITS DAILY AM PEAK PM PEAK Residential Single Family 210 Dwelling Units 9.57 0.77 1.02 Medium Density (Apartment) 220 Dwelling Units 6.63 0.56 0.67 High Density (High Rise) 222 Dwelling Units 4.20 0.34 0.40 C ommercial Single Tenant Office Building 715 Building Size: 11.57 1.78 1.72 1,000 SF Shopping Center 820 Building Size: 42.92 1.03 74 3 1,000 SF . High Turnover 832 Building Size: 130 34 14 62 19 38 Restaurant 1,000 SF . . . Fast-Food 834 Building Size: 496 12 54 81 46 28 W/Drive Through 1,000 SF . . . Apparel Store 870 Building Size: 66.40 1.00 4 80 1,000 SF . I ndustrial Light Industrial 110 Acres 51.80 7.51 7.26 Heavy Industrial 120 Acres 6.75 1.98 2.16 Warehousing Acres Manufacturing 140 Acres 38.88 9.30 9.21 MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE ~~~~~~~~ December 19, 2002 DEC 2 3 2002 Ms. Shannon Hansen ~fi.~T~~Ui~ Westwood Professional Services ~RQFE'~SiiJ{VpLgEf~VlCEB 7599 Anagram Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 RE: Project No. 19990360.01 Vetsch Property Mixed Use Development T121 R24 S36 NW, Albertville, Wright County SHPO Number: 2003-0563 ' Dear Ms. Hansen: Thank you for consulting with our office during the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the above referenced project. Based on our review of the project information, we conclude that there are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the assisting federal agency. ' PleaS° ^^rt7rt ~N t (F 7 \ QF ri ~ ~ t-..,,, r .-~• .- :.~ +....,~ s a ,~5 , 2.,:,-~46 ~f yvu ~i~v~ aify quesuon~ regi~rUiiig Cii.lf i.G~illlilelltj fill ifIIS project. Sincerely, ~` ~ Dennis A. Gimm a ~\ Government Programs and Compliance Officer } I~ CIS 345 Kellogg Boulevard ~estlSaint Paul, Minnesota 55102-7.906/Telephone 651-296-61'26