08-24-2015 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Avoidance. Both the CWA and the WCA require that impacts to aquatic resources be avoided if practicable alternatives exist. Clearly describe all on-site measures considered to avoid impacts to aquatic resources and discuss at least two project alternatives that avoid all impacts to aquatic resources on the site. These alternatives may include alternative site plans, alternate sites, and/or not doing the project. Alternatives should be feasible and prudent (see MN Rules 8420.0520 Subp. 2 C). Applicants are encouraged to attach drawings and plans to support their analysis: No Build: The No Build Alternative would eliminate wetland impacts from the project area. However, the No Build would not address the purpose and need of the project which is to provide permanent access points for the future fire station that will allow for minimized response time for first responders. The temporary entrance for the fire station does not comply with Anoka County Access Guidelines and would is not a permanent solution for the city. Because the No Build Alternative would not allow for a permanent access solution for the fire station, it was rejected. Shift Birch Street Access East: Under this alternative, the eastern access, located off of Birch Street, would have been shifted to the east to coincide with an existing field access. The field access is an upland area and therefore wetland impacts would have been reduced under this alternative. However, the wetland located east of the existing field access is a large wetland and of higher quality than the wetland west of the field access. The impacted portion of Wetland D is a ditched section of wetland adjacent to the Birch Street. In an effort to minimize wetland impacts, the city chose to shift the roadway to the west; thus impacting three wetlands, rather than four. Minimization. Both the CWA and the WCA require that all unavoidable impacts to aquatic resources be minimized to the greatest extent practicable. Discuss all features of the proposed project that have been modified to minimize the impacts to water resources (see MN Rules 8420.0520 Subp. 4): In an effort to minimize wetland impacts associated with the turn lane project, the city has incorporated various BMPs and design details into the project: • Turn lane widths and lengths are designed at the minimum required by State Aid Standards and Anoka County guidelines. • The eastern access intersection was shifted west to avoid impact to a larger wetland within the Wetland Management Corridor. Alternatively, the access intersection and turn lanes impact a ditched section of wetland. • Erosion control BMPs, such as silt fence and erosion control blanket, will be incorporated into the design to reduce the risk of erosion from the site. • Side slopes outside of the clear zone within wetland areas were reviewed for options to increase the slope from 1:4 to 1:3. This design option was not feasible inside of the clear zone, per minimum State Aid Standard 8820.9920: Minimum Design Standards; Rural and Suburban Undivided; New or Reconstruction Projects. Off -Site Alternatives. An off-site alternatives analysis is not required for all permit applications. If you know that your proposal will require an individual permit (standard permit or letter of permission) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, you may be required to provide an off-site alternatives analysis. The alternatives analysis is not required for a complete application but must be provided during the review process in order for the Corps to complete the evaluation of your application and reach a final decision. Applicants with questions about when an off-site alternatives analysis is required should contact their Corps Project Manager. N/A