HomeMy WebLinkAbout04/29/2020 EB PacketHow to Join the Meeting
Phone: Dial 1-312-626-6799
Meeting ID: 973 6280 9858
Weblink:
hgps://zoom.us/j/97362809858
CITY OF LINO LAKES
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD
MEETING
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: February 26, 2020
5. OPEN MIKE
6. ACTION ITEMS
Wednesday, April 29, 2020
6:30 p.m.
Meeting to be held electronically
Pursuant to MN Statute 13D.021
A. I-35E Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) 5 Year Update
7. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Status of Annual Recycling Day
B. Boulevard Tree Plans
8. ADJOURN
CITY OF LINO LAKES
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD MINUTES
DATE : February 26, 2020
TIME STARTED : 6:31 P.M.
TIME ENDED : 7:35 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT : John Sullivan (chair), Paula Andrzejewski, Shawn
Holmes, Wendy Nelson, Alex Schwartz
MEMBERS ABSENT : Eric Flower, Liz Kaufenberg
STAFF PRESENT : Andy Nelson, Connor Kvendru
I. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL:
Mr. Sullivan called the Lino Lakes Environmental Board meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. on
February 26, 2020
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mr. Sullivan added to the Agenda the following discussion items:
ADD:
Magnesium in the water education
City Recycling Day - May 16
Agenda approved as presented
IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Ms. Andrzejewski made a MOTION to approve the January 29, 2020 Meeting Minutes.
Ms. Holmes supported motion. Motion carried 5 - 0.
V. OPEN MIKE
Mr. Sullivan declared Open Mike at 6:35 p.m.
DRAFT MINUTES
Enivonmental Board Minutes
February 26, 2020
Page 2
Open Mike closed at 6:36 p.m.
VI. ACTION ITEMS — No Action Items
VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. EAB/Ash Removals Update
Mr. Nelson mentioned the city response to EAB is to remove all boulevard ash trees,
replacement of these trees with a diverse mix of species and the insecticide injections
is to stagger the removal of trees over time.
There are 21 boulevard Ash trees on Clearwater Creek Drive has begun.
Replacement trees will be planted either this spring or fall, depending on plant
availability.
Mr. Schwartz asked what species of trees will be used to replace the Ash trees.
Mr. Nelson stated that in this area the trees will be Honey Locust and Kentucky
Coffee trees. The trees do not have pods.
Mr. Nelson also wanted to comment on the question that Mr. Flower asked at the last
meeting about having a company referral for the Ash tree injections. At this time
most of the companies work with cities and give a bulk rate. So for residents they
should go with a reputable company and studies show that injections instead of
drenching gets better results.
B. Heron Colony Work and February 28th Meeting
On February 8th, six volunteers were out on Peltier Island for about three hours and
did mostly repairing and replacing the metal flashing that is used to limit raccoon
access to the young herons. An inventory of the rookery counted approximately 352
nests.
Discussion at the February 28 meeting from 2 -3 pm will be to talk about the metal
flashing — if it is hindering or hurting the trees.
Questions that came up for discussion were
• Is it just Ash trees that are dying
Most of the trees that have heron nests are Ash trees and disease it is mostly
• Were nest in trees that are not flashed
There were nest in trees that are not flashed
DRAFT MINUTES
Enivonmental Board Minutes
February 26, 2020
Page 3
• It was sugguested that maybe just flash the ash trees and continue with
replanting trees on the island
Mr. Nelson wanted to thank Wayne LeBlac for his photos, reports and work with the
Heron Rookery.
Also the no -wake buoys are damaged and should be replaced, Anoka County has
been notified and will be replacing them this spring.
C. Earth Day Preparations
On February 12th, there was a Earth Day planning meeting, which will be held on
April 25th at Wargo.
Mr. Nelson would like to hear from the board what they would like to have at the
Earth Day event.
Mr. Kvendru wonders if the information would need to be updated.
Ms. Andrzej ewski stated that we should pick a theme and stick with two or three
items because there is too many items on the table. "Less is more"
Ms. Nelson suggested having resources for EAB tree injection.
Ms. Holmes stated that the EAB infestation map would have to be updated.
Ms. Holmes mentioned that seed balls are a hit with the children but we need seeds
that flower. It is disappointing to not have the seeds produce anything.
Ms. Andrzej ewski wanted to know if anyone from the city will be there to discuss the
manganese in the city water.
Mr. Nelson let the board know that the city newsletter contained a lot of information
on community gardens, manganese in the water, water conservation, a water usage
calculator, and recycling tips.
D. Recycling Updates, Connor Kvendru
"Fix It Clinic" good event about 40 items were fixed which would be a 93 % of items got
fixed. Lamps, a sewing machines, coffee machine, vacuum cleaners were a few of the items.
In February at the Saturday recycling, again there was no paper shredding because of broken
equipment, so for 2 months there has been no shredding. Which has been disappointing.
DRAFT MINUTES
Enivonmental Board Minutes
February 26, 2020
Page 4
Mr Sullivan and Mr. Kvendru attended the Anoka Country Waste Abatement meeting and
mentioned some highlights of that meeting
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
Ms. Andrzejewski made a MOTION to adjourn the meeting at 7:35 p.m. Ms. Holmes
supported the motion. Motion carried 5 - 0.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Fogarty
\`
DRAFT MINUTES
ENVIRONMENTAL BOARD
AGENDA ITEM 6A
STAFF ORIGINATOR: Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: April 29, 2020
AGENDA ITEM: AUAR Update
BACKGROUND
The I-35E Corridor Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) is an environmental review
document that analyzed potential impacts of development within a study area of 4,660 acres.
The final document was originally adopted by the Lino Lakes City Council on October 24, 2005.
The AUAR serves as a substitute environmental review. As long as a development project is
consistent with the assumptions of the analyses in the AUAR, no additional environmental
review is required. A key component of the AUAR is the mitigation plan that addresses
cumulative impacts of development as the corridor develops.
In order to remain valid, the AUAR must be revised under certain criteria. One of the criteria is
the passing of five years. The City has previously approved updates in 2010 and 2015. The
2020 update identifies development or changes that have occurred during the last five years. The
document has been updated to reflect changes including the modification of the three
development scenarios investigated. These include:
1) Draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan Full Build Out Land Use
2) Modified Full Build Out with increase residential and commercial development and
reduction in industrial development
3) The City's existing 2030 Comprehensive Plan
WSB and Associates, the City's Engineer, completed the draft update in February of 2020.
Notice of the documents availability for review was published in the Environmental Quality
Board (EQB) Monitor and made available for public and state agency review. The City
received comments from four agencies:
• Metropolitan Council
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
• Minnesota Department of Administration/State Historic Preservation Office
• Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
A summary of the comments and the City's response is included in Appendix I of the
document. A fifth agency, the Minnesota Department of Transportation, responded that they
had reviewed the update and had no comment.
Andi Moffatt of WSB and Associates will be available at the meeting for questions.
ANALYSIS
The original I-35E AUAR was a very comprehensive document covering the City's 35E corridor
from Birch Street to our northern city limits. The most significant developments over the past
five years are the 372 acre Watermark residential development and the 402,000 square foot
Distribution Alternatives fulfillment center on 21" Avenue. Each of these projects were subject
to the mitigation requirements of the AUAR including but not limited to transportation and water
management improvements.
The AUAR update generally provides and assessment of current conditions based on changes
over the past five years and assessment of comprehensive plan and development scenario
changes. Each of the revised scenarios are within the development thresholds assumed in the
original AUAR.
The Mitigation Plan, included in Appendix H, has been updated to reflect changing conditions or
regulatory requirements as necessary.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is requesting a recommendation of approval of the 2020 AUAR update.
ATTACHMENTS
Draft AUAR Update, dated April 15, 2020
C I T Y O F
LINOL7,kKES
2020 ALTERNATIVE URBAN
AREAWIDE REVIEW
UPDATE
1-35E CORRIDOR AUAR UPDATE
LINO LAKES, MN
APRIL 15, 2020
Prepared for:
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
WSB PROJECT NO. 015144-000
wsb
1-35E CORRIDOR AUAR UPDATE
This document provides for an update to the Lino Lakes 1-35E Corridor AUAR. The original AUAR was
completed in 2005. Updates were adopted in 2010 and 2015. This document serves as the 2020 five-year
update. An abbreviated version of the EAW questionnaire form has been used for this update to assist in
the review of this AUAR Update. The following figures and appendices are included in this Update.
Figures
Figure 1 — Project Location
Figure 2 — Revised Scenario 1
Figure 3 — Revised Scenario 2
Figure 4 — 2030 Comprehensive Plan
Figure 5 — Developments
Appendices
Appendix A — Figures
Appendix B — Stormwater Management Memo
Appendix C — Water Appropriation Memo
Appendix D — Wastewater Management Memo
Appendix E — Transportation Memo
Appendix F — SHPO and DNR Information
Appendix G — Contamination Review Memo
Appendix H — Mitigation Plan
Appendix I — Responses to Comments
1. Project title: Lino Lakes 1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
2. Proposer: NA
4. Reason for EAW Preparation: (check one)
5. Project Location:
County: Anoka
City/Township: Lino Lakes
3. RGU City of Lino Lakes
Contact person: Michael Grochala
Title: Community Development Director
Address: 600 Town Center Pkwy
City, State, ZIP: Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Phone: (651) 982-2427
Email: mgrochala@linolakes.us
6. Project Description:
Overview
The City of Lino Lakes adopted the 1-35E Corridor AUAR in conformance with Minnesota Rules 4410
in 2005. The City has subsequently updated the AUAR every five years. The AUAR study area is
approximately 4,500 acres and is located in the northeastern portion of the City as shown in Figure 1.
Development Scenarios
Three development scenarios were included in the 2005 AUAR and Updates. The City has since
updated its 2040 Comprehensive Plan and reviewed the scenarios. Three updated scenarios are
included in this update and are consistent with the original AUAR. These revised scenarios are within
the original density thresholds of the original AUAR.
Revised Scenario 1 — Draft 2040 Full Build Out Land Use
This scenario is in conformance with the current, draft 2040 Comprehensive Plan. This scenario
has a higher industrial use and less residential than the Revised Scenario 2. It is still within the
assumptions of the original AUAR. Table 1 provides a summary of this uses for this scenario.
1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
April 15, 2020
Page 1
Figure 2 shows the studied land uses.
Revised Scenario 2
This scenario has higher residential and commercial land use, with less industrial than Revised
Scenario 1. It is still within the assumptions of the original AUAR. Table 1 provides a summary of
this uses for this scenario. Figure 3 shows the studied land uses.
2030 Comprehensive Plan
To address comments obtained during the AUAR Update comment period, the current 2030
Comprehensive Plan scenario has been included. This scenario is in conformance with the
currently approved Comprehensive Plan. It is the lowest in terms of residential development, has
slightly less commercial development, and similar industrial development anticipated to the other
two scenarios. Figure 4 shows the 2030 Comprehensive Plan land use.
Table 1: Summary of 2005 and 2020 AUAR Scenarios
Land Use
2005 AUAR Scenarios
Old Scenarios
2020 Scenarios
Revised Scenarios
Scenario 1
Revised Scenario 1
Residential units
2,237
4,888
Commercial sf
2,985,733
5,084,819
Industrial sf
11,175,035
12,817,289
Scenario 2
Revised Scenario 2
Residential units
5,715
7,403
Commercial sf
5,617,890
5,306,914
Industrial sf
9,570,045
10,053,499
Scenario 3
2030 Comprehensive Plan
Residential units
8,659
2,455
Commercial sf
4,141,554
3,228,667
Industrial sf
5,829,722
10,128,296
Development timing is dependent on market conditions and is anticipated to continue over the next 5-
40 years. Some development has occurred within the study area as shown in Figure 5.
Planned Infrastructure
Development in the study area will require infrastructure improvements. The analysis for the
stormwater, water, wastewater, and traffic have been updated as part of this AUAR Update to
evaluate the revised scenarios. These analyses are included in the appendices.
Stormwater: The stormwater analysis was updated based on the revised development
scenarios. Additionally, rules and regulations have changed over the years regarding stormwater
management in the study area since the original AUAR was completed. Stormwater will be
required to be managed based on local, regional, and state water resource rules. The updated
analysis indicates that runoff volumes will be reduced by approximately 70% compared to existing
conditions based on implementation of stormwater management controls. This will also reduce
downstream pollutant loading. Appendix B contains the stormwater management analysis.
1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
April 15, 2020
Page 2
Water: The projected water demands for the revised scenarios have remained within the
parameters discussed in the original AUAR. These scenarios are anticipated to increase the
annual water use above the current authorized appropriated volume for the City, similarly as
anticipated in the original AUAR. The mitigation measures for water appropriation and use have
been reviewed and minor revisions were made. Appendix C contains the water appropriation
analysis.
Wastewater: Wastewater within the study area would be conveyed with existing and future
sanitary sewer and then directed to two Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES)
interceptors. Wastewater is then conveyed through the regional collection system to the
Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant. The revised analysis projects less wastewater flow
than anticipated in the original AUAR. The mitigation measures have been revised and no
changes were needed with this Update. Appendix D contains the wastewater management
analysis.
Traffic: The traffic analysis was updated based on the revised scenarios. This incorporated the
current existing conditions and projected 2040 conditions. The analysis shows that future traffic
generated with the revised development scenarios will be less than those assumed in the original
AUAR. No changes to the mitigation measures are needed. Appendix E contains the traffic
analysis.
Approved Development within the Study Area
Since the 2015 AUAR Update, some anticipated development did not occur, and some projects were
constructed within the study area. Figure 5 shows the areas that have developed in the study area.
Since the 2015 Update, the following has occurred in the study area:
• Watermark: Phase 1 for Watermark (formerly planned as the Hardwood Creek Site) is under
development. The full plan includes a total of 864 residential units (692 single family and 172
townhomes).
• Distribution Alternatives: A 402,000 SF distribution facility was completed in 2016.
• 21st Avenue: A'/2 mile extension of 21St Avenue was completed in 2016.
• Eastside Villas: A 32 lot single-family subdivision is under construction.
• Main Street Shoppes: A 9,000 SF multi -tenant commercial building was completed.
• Moon Marsh and Main Street Villages that were noted in previous updates were not
constructed and their permits expired.
AUAR Mitigation Plan
The mitigation plan that has been developed as part of the AUAR process has been revised with his
Update. It is included in Appendix H.
7. Cover types: Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after
development:
The original AUAR sites the Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS). This data is
applicable today. Some areas as shown in Figure 5 have developed. The land cover continues to be
consistent with the original AUAR with planted or cultivated areas, urban areas, wooded and shrub
areas, and wetlands.
1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
April 15, 2020
Page 3
The Conservation Design Framework outlined in the AUAR has continued to be carried forward in the
mitigation plan. This framework outlines open space and corridor space where some areas would be
preserved, and some areas would be reviewed for development that could be inclusive to open
space.
8. Permits and approvals required: List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals,
certifications, 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 of these final decisions are
prohibited until all appropriate environmental review has been completed. See Minnesota Rules,
Chapter 4410.3100.
Unit of Government
Type of Application
Status
Federal
Army Corps of Engineers
Section 404 Permit
To be Applied for
State
Minnesota Environmental Quality
Board
Environmental Assessment (AUAR)
In progress
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Section 401 Water Quality Certificate
To be Applied for
NPDES/SDS General Permit
To be Applied for
Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
To be Applied for
State Historic Preservation Office
Cultural Resources Review
To be Applied for
Minnesota Department of
Use of or Work within MnDOT right of way
To be Applied for
Drainage Permit
To be Applied for
Transportation
Minnesota Department of Natural
Water Appropriations Permit
To be Applied for
Resources
Preliminary Well Construction
To be Applied for
Assessment
Public Waters Work Permit
To be Applied for
General Permit 97-0005 for Temporary
Water Appropriations (need if more than
10,000 gpd of water is appropriated
To be applied for, if
necessary
Minnesota Department of Health
Watermain Extension Approval
To be Applied for
Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
To be Applied for
Approval
Well Location and Construction Approval
To be Applied for
Regional
Rice Creek Watershed District
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan
To be Applied for
Approval
Stormwater Management Plan Approval
To be Applied for
Wetland Delineation Boundary
Confirmation
To be approved
upon completion of
wetland delineation
Certificate of Wetland Exemption
To be Applied for
To be approved
Wetland Impact/Replacement Application
upon completion of
wetland delineation
1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
April 15, 2020
Page 4
Unit of Government
Type of Application
Status
Metropolitan Council
Sanitary Sewer Service Connection
Approval
To be Applied for
County
Anoka County
County Roadway Access Permits
To be Applied for
Local
City of Lino Lakes
Site Plan Approval
To be Applied for
AUAR and Mitigation Plan Approval
Ongoing
Planned Unit Development Approval
To be Applied for
Preliminary Plat Approval
To be Applied for
Final Plat (multiple) Approval
To be Applied for
Grading, Excavation and Foundation
Permits (multiple)
To be Applied for
Building Permits (multiple)
To be Applied for
Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit
(multiple)
To be Applied for
Municipal Water Connection Permit
(multiple)
To be Applied for
Use Permit — Floodplain District
To be Applied for
City Roadway Access/Crossing Permits
To be Applied for
Comprehensive Plan Amendment(s)
To be Applied for
9. Land use:
No significant changes to the original AUAR are noted for this section. The surrounding land uses are
residential, highway, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and open space. The scenarios are
consistent with development that has occurred in the area and compatible with adjacent land uses.
10. Geology, soils, and topography/land forms:
The soils and geology of the study area have not changed from the original AUAR. The area is within
the Anoka Sandplain and has a flat topography. The Anoka County Soil Survey shows numerous
types of soils in the study area including loamy fine sands, fine sandy loams, and hydric soils in
wetland areas.
11. Water Resources:
a. Describe surface water and groundwater features on or near the site in a.i. and a.ii. below.
i. Surface water — lakes, streams, wetlands, intermittent channels, and county/judicial
ditches. Include any special designations such as public waters, trout stream/lake,
wildlife lakes, migratory waterfowl feeding/resting lake, and outstanding resource
value water. Include water quality impairments or special designations listed on the
current MPCA 303d Impaired Waters List that are within 1 mile of the project. Include
DNR Public Waters Inventory number(s), if any.
Surface water in the study are remains the same as the original AUAR and includes
numerous wetlands and water bodies. Of note continues to be Peltier Lake (#2000400),
Rondeau Lake (#2001500), Clearwater Creek (#82006a), and Hardwood Creek (#0213a).
Based on a review of information from the MPCA, impaired waters in the study area include:
• Peltier Lake
• Clearwater Creek
1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
April 15, 2020
Page 5
• Hardwood Creek
Additional information can be found in Appendix B which contains an updated analysis of
stormwater management for the study area.
ii. Groundwater— aquifers, springs, seeps. Include: 1) depth to groundwater; 2) if project
is within a MDH wellhead protection area; 3) identification of any onsite and/or nearby
wells, including unique numbers and well logs if available. If there are no wells known
on site or nearby, explain the methodology used to determine this.
As indicated in the original AUAR, the study area has shallow groundwater. Additional
information about groundwater can be found in Appendix C.
b. Describe effects from project activities on water resources and measures to minimize or
mitigate the effects in Item b.i. through Item b.iv. below.
Wastewater — For each of the following, describe the sources, quantities and
composition of all sanitary, municipal/domestic and industrial wastewater
produced or treated at the site.
1) If the wastewater discharge is to a publicly owned treatment facility, identify
any pretreatment measures and the ability of the facility to handle the added
water and waste loadings, including any effects on, or required expansion of,
municipal wastewater infrastructure.
2) If the wastewater discharge is to a subsurface sewage treatment systems
(SSTS), describe the system used, the design flow, and suitability of site
conditions for such a system.
3) If the wastewater discharge is to surface water, identify the wastewater
treatment methods and identify discharge points and proposed effluent
limitations to mitigate impacts. Discuss any effects to surface or groundwater
from wastewater discharges.
Updated analysis on the wastewater system can be found in Appendix D.
Stormwater — Describe the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff at the site
prior to and post construction. Include the routes and receiving water bodies for
runoff from the site (major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate
receiving waters). Discuss any environmental effects from stormwater discharges.
Describe stormwater pollution prevention plans including temporary and
permanent runoff controls and potential BMP site locations to manage or treat
stormwater runoff. Identify specific erosion control, sedimentation control or
stabilization measures to address soil limitations during and after project
construction.
Updated analysis on the stormwater impacts system can be found in Appendix B.
iii. Water appropriation — Describe if the project proposes to appropriate surface or
groundwater (including dewatering). Describe the source, quantity, duration, use,
and purpose of the water use and if a DNR water appropriation permit is required.
Describe any well abandonment. If connecting to an existing municipal water
supply, identify the wells to be used as a water source and any effects on, or
required expansion of, municipal water infrastructure. Discuss environmental
effects from water appropriation, including an assessment of the water resources
available for appropriation. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate
environmental effects from the water appropriation.
Updated analysis on water system impacts can be found in Appendix C.
1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
April 15, 2020
Page 6
iv. Surface Waters
a) Wetlands — Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to wetland
features such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging and
vegetative removal. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from
physical modification of wetlands, including the anticipated effects that any
proposed wetland alterations may have to the host watershed. Identify
measures to avoid (e.g., available alternatives that were considered), minimize,
or mitigate environmental effects to wetlands. Discuss whether any required
compensatory wetland mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts will occur in
the same minor or major watershed and identify those probable locations.
b) Other surface waters — Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations
to surface water features (lakes, streams, ponds, intermittent channels,
county/judicial ditches) such as draining, filling, permanent inundation,
dredging, diking, stream diversion, impoundment, aquatic plant removal and
riparian alteration. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from
physical modification of water features. Identify measures to avoid, minimize,
or mitigate environmental effects to surface water features, including in -water
Best Management Practices that are proposed to avoid or minimize
turbidity/sedimentation while physically altering the water features. Discuss
how the project will change the number or type of watercraft on any water
body, including current and projected watercraft usage.
Impacts to wetlands and surface waters include potential impacts associated with
filling or draining as development occurs. These impacts were contemplated in the
original AUAR. Estimates of wetland impact for the study area are difficult to
anticipate without specific site plans. However, these impacts are anticipated to be
typical of development and are subject to local, state, and federal wetland rules
through the Rice Creek Watershed District, Wetland Conservation Act, US Corps of
Engineers, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, and the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency. Hardwood Creek and Peltier Lake are impaired waters. Impacts will
need to meet the sequencing requirements or water quality regulations and wetland
replacement and/or treatment may be needed. Replacement could occur on -site or
through the purchase of wetland banking credits. No significant difference in analysis
from the original AUAR is needed for this Update.
12. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes:
a. Pre -project site conditions — Describe existing contamination or potential environmental
hazards on or in close proximity to the project site such as soil or ground water
contamination, abandoned dumps, closed landfills, existing or abandoned storage tanks,
and hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. Discuss any potential environmental effects from
pre -project site conditions that would be caused or exacerbated by project construction
and operation. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from
existing contamination or potential environmental hazards. Include development of a
Contingency Plan or Response Action Plan.
No significant changes to existing conditions in relation to existing contamination or hazards have
occurred based on a review of "What's In My Neighborhood." A summary of the review is
included in Appendix G.
b. Project related generation/storage of solid wastes — Describe solid wastes
generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of
disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from solid waste handling, storage and
disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the
generation/storage of solid waste including source reduction and recycling.
1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
April 15, 2020
Page 7
There are no changes from the original AUAR in terms of solid waste assumptions.
c. Project related use/storage of hazardous materials — Describe chemicals/hazardous
materials used/stored during construction and/or operation of the project including
method of storage. Indicate the number, location and size of any above or below ground
tanks to store petroleum or other materials. Discuss potential environmental effects from
accidental spill or release of hazardous materials. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or
mitigate adverse effects from the use/storage of chemicals/hazardous materials including
source reduction and recycling. Include development of a spill prevention plan.
As indicated in the original AUAR, there is the potential for location gas stations to be included as
development occurs with the appropriate land use and zoning per scenario. A gas station or
convenience store would have underground storage tanks. There may also be light industrial
development that includes storage of diesel fuel for operations. These types of developments
would be required to meet all other state and federal permitting and guidance for operations.
d. Project related generation/storage of hazardous wastes — Describe hazardous wastes
generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of
disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from hazardous waste handling,
storage, and disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects
from the generation/storage of hazardous waste including source reduction and recycling.
Generation of significant amounts of hazardous wastes are not anticipated with development of
either of the scenarios. Waste generated will be of similar nature to residential, light industrial,
and commercial uses and will be required to comply with applicable state laws.
13. Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources (rare features):
a. Describe fish and wildlife resources as well as habitats and vegetation on or in near the site.
b. Describe rare features such as state -listed (endangered, threatened or special concern)
species, native plant communities, Minnesota County Biological Survey Sites of Biodiversity
Significance, and other sensitive ecological resources on or within close proximity to the site.
Provide the license agreement number (LA- ) and/or correspondence number (ERDB-
20200206) from which the data were obtained and attach the Natural Heritage letter from the
DNR. Indicate if any additional habitat or species survey work has been conducted within the
site and describe the results.
c. Discuss how the identified fish, wildlife, plant communities, rare features and ecosystems may
be affected by the project. Include a discussion on introduction and spread of invasive
species from the project construction and operation. Separately discuss effects to known
threatened and endangered species.
d. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to fish,
wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources.
Information from the DNR Natural Heritage Information Database was obtained for the AUAR
Update. This information is similar to the information obtained in the previous updates and the
original AUAR. The mitigation plan contains measures that acknowledge the natural resource
features in the area. The DNR NHIS information is included in Appendix F.
1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
April 15, 2020
Page 8
14. Historic properties:
Describe any historic structures, archeological sites, and/or traditional cultural properties on
or in close proximity to the site. Include: 1) historic designations, 2) known artifact areas, and
3) architectural features. Attach letter received from the State Historic Preservation Office
(SHPO). Discuss any anticipated effects to historic properties during project construction and
operation. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects
to historic properties.
The State Historic Preservation Office was contacted regarding historic resources in the area. The
resources are similar to past updates (Appendix F). The City has a robust review for cultural
resources when development is proposed, and the mitigation plan is adequate to address this issue.
15. Visual:
Describe any scenic views or vistas on or near the project site. Describe any project related
visual effects such as vapor plumes or glare from intense lights. Discuss the potential visual
effects from the project. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate visual effects.
No changes from previous AUARs.
16. Air:
a. Stationary source emissions - Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of
any emissions from stationary sources such as boilers or exhaust stacks. Include any
hazardous air pollutants, criteria pollutants, and any greenhouse gases. Discuss effects to
air quality including any sensitive receptors, human health or applicable regulatory
criteria. Include a discussion of any methods used assess the project's effect on air
quality and the results of that assessment. Identify pollution control equipment and other
measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects from stationary
source emissions.
Not applicable to an AUAR.
b. Vehicle emissions - Describe the effect of the project's traffic generation on air emissions.
Discuss the project's vehicle -related emissions effect on air quality. Identify measures
(e.g. traffic operational improvements, diesel idling minimization plan) that will be taken to
minimize or mitigate vehicle -related emissions.
An updated traffic study is included in Appendix E. The traffic generation is within the parameters
of the original AUAR.
c. Dust and odors - Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of
dust and odors generated during project construction and operation. (Fugitive dust may
be discussed under item 16a). Discuss the effect of dust and odors in the vicinity of the
project including nearby sensitive receptors and quality of life. Identify measures that will
be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of dust and odors.
No changes from the original AUAR.
17. Noise:
Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of noise generated
during project construction and operation. Discuss the effect of noise in the vicinity of the
project including 1) existing noise levels/sources in the area, 2) nearby sensitive receptors, 3)
conformance to state noise standards, and 4) quality of life. Identify measures that will be
taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of noise.
No changes from the original AUAR.
1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
April 15, 2020
Page 9
18. Transportation
a. Describe traffic -related aspects of project construction and operation. Include: 1) existing
and proposed additional parking spaces, 2) estimated total average daily traffic generated,
3) estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of occurrence, 4) indicate
source of trip generation rates used in the estimates, and 5) availability of transit and/or
other alternative transportation modes.
b. Discuss the effect on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic
improvements necessary. The analysis must discuss the project's impact on the regional
transportation system.
If the peak hour traffic generated exceeds 250 vehicles or the total daily trips exceeds
2,500, a traffic impact study must be prepared as part of the EAW. Use the format and
procedures described in the Minnesota Department of Transportation's Access
Management Manual, Chapter 5 (available at:
http://www.dot.state.mn.us/accessmanagementlresources.html) or a similar local
guidance.
c. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate project related transportation
effects.
An updated traffic study is included in Appendix E.
19. Cumulative potential effects: (Preparers can leave this item blank if cumulative potential effects are
addressed under the applicable EAW Items)
NA to AUAR
20. Other potential environmental effects: If the project may cause any additional environmental
effects not addressed by items 1 to 19, describe the effects here, discuss the how the environment
will be affected, and identify measures that will be taken to minimize and mitigate these effects.
No additional environmental effects have been identified.
1-35E Corridor AUAR Update
April 15, 2020
Page 10
Appendix A
Figures
-w
.WARDS LAKE
w
w
FARWE
pr ,
Watermark
J
-w
Appendix B
Stormwater Management Memo
0
U
C0
Z
W
m
U)
z
U)
J
0
a
a
W
Z
Z
0
0
w
U)
T
W
Z
W
a
a
Z
w
x
0
ws b
Final Technical Memorandum
To: Michael Grochala, City of Lino Lakes
From: Madison Rogers, WSB
Andi Moffatt, WSB
Date: April 8, 2020
Re: Stormwater Management — 1-35 Corridor AUAR
City of Lino Lake, Minnesota
WSB Project No. R-015144-000
INTRODUCTION
The original Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) was completed and approved in
September 2005. The AUAR analyzed the stormwater impacts of the three development
scenarios. Based on the analysis, a Mitigation Plan was developed.
AUAR updates are required every five years from the original date of the approved AUAR.
Updates were prepared in 2010 and 2015. Each assumed no change in the proposed
development land use scenarios and included discussion of mitigation improvements that had
been completed at the time. Since the 2015 AUAR update was prepared, the City has completed
an updated Comprehensive Plan. This AUAR Update includes review of three revised scenarios.
The information and analysis outlined within this memo is intended to complete a portion of the
AUAR Update related to Item # 11.ii — Water Resources — Stormwater related to revising of the
three revised scenarios. This memo is intended to update the stormwater analysis provided in the
original AUAR where applicable.
WATER RESOURCES — STORMWATER
ii. Stormwater - Describe the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff at the site prior to
and post construction. Include the routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the
site (major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters). Discuss
any environmental effects from stormwater discharges. Describe stormwater pollution
prevention plans including temporary and permanent runoff controls and potential BMP
site locations to manage or treat stormwater runoff. Identify specific erosion control,
sedimentation control or stabilization measures to address soil limitations during and after
project construction.
Procedures and Methods Followed
The procedures and methods used to estimate the runoff volumes and pollutants loads within the
AUAR were based on the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) runoff curve number
method and event mean concentration pollutant values from the Minnesota Stormwater Manual.
Any development within the study area will be required to meet the stormwater standards of the
City of Lino Lakes and Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD). These standards include:
• Promote volume control and groundwater recharge.
• Protect water quality from nutrients, heavy metals, and other urban pollutants.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Stormwater\MEMO - 040920 - Stormwater AP.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 2
• Protect life, public and private property, and the natural resources from damage resulting
from runoff and the dangers associated with flooding.
Existing Conditions
The study area currently consists of agricultural area, rural residential, and park and open space
areas. The impervious surface is primarily made up of the existing roadways. The major roads
include 2Ot" Avenue, 8Ot" Street, County Road 14, and Interstates 35E and 35W.
There are four major watersheds within the study area. The west and central portion of the study
area is part of the Peltier subwatershed. The north part of the study area is within the Hardwood
Creek subwatershed and Upper Rice Creek subwatershed, and the southeast part is within the
Clearwater Creek subwatershed. All of these subwatersheds drain to Peltier Lake through tile
drain or county ditch systems.
Future development will need to address any requirements that are established due to current
regulatory standards adopted by the RCWD, City of Lino Lakes, and Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (MPCA).
The MPCA has listed three water resources within the study area as impaired: Peltier Lake,
Hardwood Creek, and Clearwater Creek. Peltier Lake and Hardwood Creek have approved Total
Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) that provides additional guidance and requirements for pollutant
loads.
Approximately 68% of the study area consists of Group D soils, and the remaining area consists
of Group A and B soils. These soil ratings are based on hydrologic soil classifications with A soils
having high infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted. The infiltration rates for A soils range
from 0.8 to 1.63 inches per hour (Minnesota Stormwater Manual). These soils consist chiefly of
deep, well drained to excessively drained sands and gravel. Group A soils have a high rate of
water transmission, therefore resulting in a low runoff potential. Group B soils have moderate
infiltration rates ranging from 0.3 to 0.6 inches per hour when thoroughly wetted. Group B soils
consist of deep moderately well to well drained soils with moderately fine to moderately coarse
textures. Infiltration is very low in areas with Group D soils, and the design of infiltration basins is
not recommended in areas with Group D soils (per the MPCA National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System Construction General Permit).
Proposed Conditions
The three revised scenarios were considered in this analysis in the proposed conditions. Due to
the conceptual nature of the development scenarios, the Land Use type classifications for each
scenario were evaluated using curve numbers from the NRCS. The existing conditions and three
proposed revised land use scenarios were evaluated. Stormwater management for any scenario
can be provided through a combination of wet detention ponds and infiltration and filtration
features. Achieving volume reduction and pollutant reduction through the use of infiltration may
be challenging for a majority of the study area due to a majority D soils with low infiltration rates,
and a high groundwater table. Stormwater management via green infrastructure such as
stormwater reuse will be encouraged by the City of Lino Lakes and RCWD to achieve volume
reduction and pollutant removal requirements.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Stormwater\MEMO - 040920 - Stormwater AP.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 3
Local Stormwater Management Requirements
Stormwater management within the future development of the study area must be in
conformance with local requirements of the City of Lino Lakes, RCWD, and MPCA. Some
requirements are more stringent than others. However, the development in the study area will
need to demonstrate that all local standards are being met under proposed stormwater
management techniques. The following is a summary of major stormwater management
requirements:
• Rice Creek Watershed District
The RCWD rules (approved December 14, 2016) require that for rate control, proposed
peak runoff rates shall not exceed existing for the 2, 10, 100-year 24-hour rainfall events.
Proposed projects must not adversely affect off -site water levels or resources supported
by local recharge, or increase potential for off -site flooding, during or after construction.
The RCWD requires a water quality treatment volume depending on the area of new or
reconstructed impervious surface. Applicants can use BMPs including infiltration, water
reuse, filtration, and stormwater ponds to achieve the required water quality treatment
volume. Each BMP design variation has a different pollutant removal factor, and
applicants must provide sufficient treatment volume depending on the BMP used for the
site. The RCWD has an approved Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan
(CSMP) for a portion of the AUAR area (Northeast Lino Lakes Drainage Area CSMP).
This purpose of the CSMP is to present an alternative means to meet the RCWD rules.
Projects within the CSMP area must conform to design requirements detailed in the
CSMP report as applicable.
City of Lino Lakes
The City's Stormwater, Erosion, and Sediment Control Ordinance (adopted October 26,
2015) requires proposed development to maintain or decrease runoff volume and flow
frequency, duration and peak runoff rates. Proposed development must also increase
infiltration or filtration opportunities, maintain existing flow patterns, and provide storage
of stormwater runoff on site. Stormwater BMPs must provide infiltration where feasible,
but if infiltration is shown as not feasible for a site due to physical or contamination
limitations, then another stormwater BMP may be used. Water discharged to BMPs shall
be pretreated to National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) standards.
• National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Standards
The MPCA is responsible for implementing NPDES standards. The NPDES requirements
in the AUAR area will be from the NPDES Construction General Permit (effective August
1, 2018) and the NPDES Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit
(effective August 1, 2013).
The NPDES Construction General Permit will require that for sites replacing pervious
surfaces with one acre or more of impervious surface, a water quality volume equivalent
to 1 inch of runoff from the new impervious surface should be treated. This can be met
through wet sedimentation basins, infiltration/filtration, or regional ponding. There are
three impaired waterbodies within the study area, and sites that are within one mile of
impaired water bodies require additional BMPs.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Stormwater\MEMO - 040920 - Stormwater AP.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 4
The NPDES MS4 permit requires permittees to provide post -construction water quality
standards adopted at the local level. The NPDES MS4 Permit is currently drafted and out
for public review (available for comment through January 11, 2020). The MS4 permit will
require permittees to meet the requirements of future TMDLs. Currently there is a TMDL
Implementation Plan proposed for discharges to Peltier Lake and Hardwood Creek, they
are identified as the Peltier Lake and Centerville Lake TMDL and the Hardwood Creek
Impaired Biota (Fish) and Dissolved Oxygen TMDL. Depending on the location and
proximity to impaired waters, development within the AUAR area may need to complete
an anti -degradation analysis for the impaired water.
Water Quantity and Quality Analysis
A water quantity and quality analysis was completed for the existing and proposed conditions
within the study area. This quantitative analysis uses the NRCS runoff curve number method to
calculate runoff and the results are summarized in Table 1 and Table 2.
Table 1 summarizes the total runoff volumes for each development scenario compared to the
existing condition.
Table 1. Existing and Proposed Annual Runoff Volumes'
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
Comp
2020
Existing
Scenario
Scenario 1
Scenario
Scenario 2
Plan
Comp Plan
conditions
1 w/o
with
2 w/o
with
(2030) w/o
(2030) with
(AC -FT)
Volume
Volume
Volume
Volume
Volume
Volume
Reduction
Reduction
Reduction
Reduction
Reduction
(AC -FT)
(AC -FT)
(AC -FT)
(AC -FT)
Reduction
AC -FT
(AC -FT)
AUAR
Area
11,201
11,363
3,326
11,381
3,328
11,383
4,678
'Annual runoff volumes are based on an average of 32 inches of rainfall for the state of
Minnesota.
21.1 inches represents approximately 90% of all rain events in Minnesota (Minnesota Minimal
Impact Design Standards, MPCA), therefore volume reduction of 90% was assumed in all
land use areas for proposed scenarios, except Permanent Rural, Urban Reserve and Right -of
Way, which are assumed to not require any future stormwater management.
Table 2 summarizes the total pollutant loads for each development scenario compared to the
existing condition.
Table 2. Total Suspended Solids and Total Phosphorus Annual Loads
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
2020
Scenario
Scenario
Scenario
Scenario
Scenario
Scenario
Pollutant
Existing
1 w/o
1 with
2 w/o
2 with
2 w/o
2 with
conditions
Volume
Volume
Volume
Volume
Volume
Volume
Reduction
Reduction
Reduction
Reduction
Reduction
Reduction
AUAR
TSS
Area
tons/ r
906
946
299
957
301
925
372
TP
8,522
8,407
3,059
8,573
3,076
8,344
4,679
Ibs/ r
'Pollutant loading was determined using Event Mean Concentration values from the MPCA Stormwater
Manual, based on Land Use classification for the AUAR area.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Stormwater\MEMO - 040920 - Stormwater AP.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 5
To achieve compliance with regulatory requirements, future development must provide annual
volume and pollutant load reductions in the amounts required by Local Stormwater Management
Regulations and comply with the TMDL. The values presented in Tables 1 and 2 show the
estimated annual volume and pollutant load reductions based on the conceptual analysis, and
don't include any site -specific constraints for individual developments within the AUAR area.
Potential Impact to Downstream Receiving Waters
The analysis within the AUAR area shows that the runoff volumes will be reduced by
approximately 70 percent for each of the three revised land use scenarios as compared to
existing conditions. This is achieved through implementing City of Lino Lakes, RCWD, and
NPDES volume reduction requirements. This reduction in runoff translates directly to the
reduction in pollutant loads shown in Table 2.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Stormwater\MEMO - 040920 - Stormwater AP.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 6
Review and Update of the Mitigation Plan
The table below provides the mitigation plan for stormwater management. These mitigation measures have been reviewed and revised as needed for this
AUAR Update.
Table 3. Water Quantity and Quality Mitigation Plan
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
17.3
Require stormwater management systems to be developed in accordance with the current
Updated to be inclusive of the current version of the
version of the Rice Creek Watershed District Rules (these rules assist in achieving the
rules.
goals of the Resource Management Plan — 3) and all other local, state, and federal
stormwater management requirements.
The RCWD rules are intended to meet the goals of
the Resource Management Plan-3 that was
included in the 2010 AUAR Update.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Stormwater\MEMO - 040920 - Stormwater AP.docx
Appendix C
Water Appropriation Memo
0
U
C0
Z
W
m
U)
z
U)
J
0
a
a
W
Z
Z
0
0
w
U)
T
W
Z
W
Q
Q
Z
w
x
0
ws b
Final Technical Memorandum
To: Michael Grochala, City of Lino Lakes
From: Jon Christensen, WSB
Andi Moffatt, WSB
Date: April 8, 2020
Re: Water Appropriations — 1-35 Corridor AUAR
City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota
WSB Project No. R-015144-000
INTRODUCTION
The original Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) was completed and approved in
September 2005. The AUAR analyzed the stormwater impacts of the three development
scenarios. Based on the analysis, a Mitigation Plan was developed.
AUAR updates are required every five years from the original date of the approved AUAR.
Updates were prepared in 2010 and 2015. Each assumed no change in the proposed
development land use scenarios and included discussion of mitigation improvements that had
been completed at the time. Since the 2015 AUAR update was prepared, the City has completed
an updated Comprehensive Plan. This AUAR Update includes review of three scenarios.
The information and analysis outlined within this memo is intended to complete a portion of the
AUAR Update related to Item # 11.b.iii — Water Resources — Water Appropriation related to
revising of the three scenarios. This memo is intended to update the water analysis provided in
the original AUAR where applicable.
WATER RESOURCES — WATER APPROPRIATIONS
11.b.iii - Water appropriation - Describe if the project proposes to appropriate surface or
groundwater (including dewatering). Describe the source, quantity, duration, use and purpose of
the water use and if a DNR water appropriation permit is required. Describe any well
abandonment. If connecting to an existing municipal water supply, identify the wells to be used as
a water source and any effects on, or required expansion of municipal water infrastructure.
Discuss environmental effects from water appropriation, including an assessment of the water
resources available for appropriation. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate
environmental effects from the water appropriation.
Existing Conditions
Currently, the majority of the study area is served by private wells. The Minnesota Well Index
indicates there are approximately 90 wells within the study area which are nearly all for domestic
use. No information is available regarding these private wells beyond the Minnesota Well Index.
The municipal water supply system has a DNR water appropriation permit. The water distribution
system exists in the southern portion of the study area and currently extends north of Main Street
on either side of 1-35E. The system will continue to be extended as development progresses.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820-Water.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 2
The southern portion of the study area overlaps with a moderate vulnerability portion of the City of
Lino Lakes Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) that is delineated in the City's
Wellhead Protection Plan.
The geology of the City's existing wells is consistent with other communities in the Twin Cities
Metro Area. The Paleozoic sedimentary rocks around the Twin Cities Metro area have three
primary aquifers (in descending order): Prairie du Chien —Jordan, Tunnel City-Wonewoc (formerly
the Franconian -Ironton -Galesville (FIG)), and Mt. Simon -Hinckley. Each of these are separated
by a confining layer that essentially separates the aquifers.
The Prairie du Chien —Jordan aquifer is the highest yielding aquifer in the Metro Area. Although
these two formations have different names and are geologically different, the two units have been
shown to be hydraulically connected. All of the City's existing production wells are located in the
Prairie du Chien —Jordan aquifer, and all future wells are anticipated to be as well.
Existing and future water demands for the entire City are detailed in the City's 2040
Comprehensive Water Supply Plan (Plan). Future infrastructure needs for the City, encompassing
the AUAR study area, were developed in the Plan. A future well field was preliminarily located
within the study area.
The water system currently has six wells and two water towers. Tower No. 3 is currently under
construction, and Well No. 7 is under investigation. Well capacities range from 600 gallons per
minute (gpm) to 1,800 gpm. The existing system firm capacity (with the largest well out of service)
is 4,350 gpm.
From 2014-2018, the City averaged a total water demand of 79 gallons per capita per day and a
maximum day to average day ratio (peaking factor) of 2.8. For the existing population served of
approximately 18,000, this results in an average day demand of 1.42 million gallons per day
(MGD) and a maximum day demand of 3.98 MGD.
Proposed Conditions
Three possible development scenarios were considered. These were revised from the 2005
Original AUAR. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan corresponds to revised Scenario 1. Scenario 2
has also been revised. The third scenario considered is the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Scenario.
Based on the planned land uses for each scenario, the projected water demand is summarized
below. New development within the study area will connect to the municipal water system.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820-Water.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 3
2020 Scenario 1
The projected water demands within the study area for 2020 Scenario 1 are shown in Table 1.
There are a number of properties within the southern portion of the study area that already
receive municipal water, so these areas have been removed from the areas listed in Table 1.
Table 1. Projected Water Demand for 2020 Scenario 1
Land Use Type
Area
(acres)
Density
(units/acre)
Demand
Assumption
(gpd/acre) *
Average Day
Demand
(gpd)
Max Day
Demand
(gpd)
Low Density Sewered Residential
282.6
2.3
449
126,752
354,906
Low Density Mixed Residential
376.9
3.5
683
257,234
720,257
Medium Density Residential
180.5***
5.0
975
175,968
492,710
High Density Residential
39.0
7.0
1,365
53,257
149,119
Planned Residential / Commercial**
89.9
9.0
1,378
123,902
346,926
Office Residential**
139.5
5.0
988
137,747
385,692
Mixed Use
0.0
2.3
449
0
0
Commercial
348.9***
N/A
1,000
348,907
976,940
Business Campus****
624.0
N/A
1,000
623,978
2,047,138
Industrial
472.4***
N/A
1,000
472,434
1,322,815
Civic/Institutional
1.0
N/A
750
775
2,169
Urban Reserve
0.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Permanent Rural
358.1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Park & Open Space
837.5
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Right -of -Way
3.7
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Total
3,754.1
N/A
N/A
2,320,954
6,798,672
*Based on residential per capita water use of 62.5 gallons per capita per day (historical average from 2014-2018)
and 3.12 persons per household (projected 2020 household size per Comp Plan).
**Assumes 50% residential and 50% commercial development.
***Areas for properties within the southern portion of the study area that already receive municipal water have been
removed.
****Includes contingency for higher intensity max day water demands.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820-Water.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 4
2020 Scenario 2
The projected water demands within the study area for Scenario 2 are shown in Table 2. There
are a number of properties within the southern portion of the study area that already receive
municipal water, so these areas have been removed from the areas listed in Table 2.
Table 2. Projected Water Demand for 2020 Scenario 2
Land Use Type
Area
(acres)
Density
(units/acre)
Demand
Assumption
(gpd/acre) *
Average Day
Demand
(gpd)
Max Day
Demand
(gpd)
Low Density Sewered Residential
173.2
2.3
449
77,698
217,555
Low Density Mixed Residential
376.9
3.5
683
257,234
720,257
Medium Density Residential
240.9***
5.0
975
234,853
657,588
High Density Residential
391.1
7.0
1,365
533,908
1,494,942
Planned Residential / Commercial**
89.9
9.0
1,378
123,902
346,926
Office Residential**
0.0
5.0
988
0
0
Mixed Use
0.0
2.3
449
0
0
Commercial
348.9***
N/A
1,000
348,907
976,940
Business Campus****
362.6
N/A
1,000
362,561
1,315,171
Industrial
480.3***
N/A
1,000
480,285
1,344,797
Civic/Institutional
90.9
N/A
750
68,195
190,947
Urban Reserve
0.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Permanent Rural
358.1
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Park & Open Space
837.5
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Right -of -Way
3.7
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Total
3,754.1
N/A
N/A
2,487,544
7,265,123
*Based on residential per capita water use of 62.5 gallons per capita per day (historical average from 2014-2018)
and 3.12 persons per household (projected 2020 household size per Comp Plan).
**Assumes 50% residential and 50% commercial development.
***Areas for properties within the southern portion of the study area that already receive municipal water have been
removed.
****Includes contingency for higher intensity max day water demands.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820-Water.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 5
2030 Comprehensive Plan Scenario
The projected water demands within the study area for the 2030 Comp Plan Scenario are shown
in Table 3. There are a number of properties within the southern portion of the study area that
already receive municipal water, so these areas have been removed from the areas listed in
Table 3.
Table 3. Projected Water Demand for 2030 Comp Plan Scenario
Land Use Type
Area
(acres)
Density
(units/acre)
Demand
Assumption
(gpd/acre) *
Average Day
Demand
(gpd)
Max Day
Demand
(gpd)
Low Density Sewered Residential
47.1
2.3
449
21,124
59,148
Low Density Mixed Residential
0.0
3.5
683
0
0
Medium Density Residential
140.E***
5.0
975
137,068
383,791
High Density Residential
39.0
7.0
1,365
53,253
149,107
Planned Residential / Commercial**
0.0
9.0
1,378
0
0
Office Residential**
0.0
5.0
988
0
0
Mixed Use
374.0
2.3
449
167,739
469,669
Commercial
293.0***
N/A
1,000
292,962
820,293
Business Campus****
276.8
N/A
1,000
276,826
1,075,113
Industrial
572.9***
N/A
1,000
572,888
1,604,086
Civic/Institutional
1.0
N/A
750
775
2,169
Urban Reserve
820.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Permanent Rural
361.3
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Park & Open Space
824.4
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Right -of -Way
4.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Total
3,754.2
N/A
N/A
1,522,635
4,563,377
*Based on residential per capita water use of 62.5 gallons per capita per day (historical average from 2014-2018)
and 3.12 persons per household (projected 2020 household size per Comp Plan).
**Assumes 50% residential and 50% commercial development.
***Areas for properties within the southern portion of the study area that already receive municipal water have been
removed.
****Includes contingency for higher intensity max day water demands.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820-Water.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 6
All three scenarios will trigger the need for additional municipal water supply infrastructure. The
additional wells and storage needed are summarized in Table 4. The storage needs assume that
Water Tower No. 3 (1.5 MG) will be constructed and in use by the time of development.
Table 4. Supply and Storage Summary
Existing
System
With
Scenario 1
With
Scenario 2
With 2030
Comp Plan
Average Day Demand (MGD)
1.42
3.74
3.91
2.94
Maximum Day Demand (MGD)
3.98
10.78
11.25
8.54
Additional Wells Required
N/A
3 to 4
3 to 4
2
Additional Storage Required (MG)
N/A
0 to 0.3
0 to 0.4
N/A
The City's existing authorized appropriation volume is 900 million gallons per year (MGY), and
the City's historical water use from 2014-2018 was 470 MGY. All three scenarios are projected to
increase the annual water use beyond 900 MGY. Therefore, the City will likely require an
amendment to its appropriation volume prior to full build out of the study area. The City's
historical water use shows a decreasing trend in per capita use, which will likely decrease these
projections by the time of development.
Water Demand Projection Comparison
Table 5 summarizes the projected average water demands from the 2005 Original AUAR and this
2020 AUAR Update for the scenarios outlined above.
Table 5. Comparison of Averaae Water Demand Proiections
Scenario
2005 Original
AUAR
2020 AUAR
Update
Scenario 1
1.86 MGD
2.32 MGD
Scenario 2
2.45 MGD
2.49 MGD
Scenario 3
2.61 MGD
N/A
2030 Comp Plan
N/A
1.52 MGD
The projected water demands have remained within the parameters discussed in the original
AUAR. The expansion and layout of the water supply system will generally conform to the layout
identified in the 2005 Original AUAR. The 2005 Original AUAR identified the need for 1.0 MG of
additional storage, approximately four additional wells, and trunk and lateral watermains. Water
Tower No. 3 (1.5 MG) is currently under construction, and this AUAR Update reiterates the need
for three to four additional wells. Computer modeling completed as part of the City's 2040
Comprehensive Plan Update confirmed the adequacy of the planned 16-inch trunk watermain
loop.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820-Water.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 7
Review and Update of the Mitigation Plan
The table below provides the mitigation plan for water appropriations. These mitigation measures have been reviewed and revised as
needed for this AUAR Update.
Table 6. Water Use
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
13.1
Monitor water usage and do not permit new development to proceed if it
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
exceeds the capacity of the water supply and distribution system.
13.2
Construct the water supply and distribution system in accordance with
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Minnesota Department of Health standards and with the goals, policies,
and recommendations set forth in the City's Comprehensive Water
Supply Plan.
13.3
As necessary, amend the City's Comprehensive Water Supply Plan and
This mitigation measure is ongoing. No
Capital Improvement Plan to be consistent with any future amendments
updates have been needed to date for the
or updates to the Comprehensive Plan that would necessitate expansions
study area.
or alterations to the water system.
13.4
Follow the adopted Wellhead Protection Plans for Lino Lakes and
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Centerville. As necessary, amend the City's Wellhead Protection Plan for
new wells.
13.5
Require abandoned private wells to be sealed in compliance with the
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Minnesota Department of Health regulations.
13.6
Require that the installation of any private individual wells be constructed
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
and installed in accordance with the Minnesota Department of Health
regulations (Minnesota Well Code).
13.7
Continue to implement the City's adopted water conservation policies
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
which are intended to attenuate peak water demands throughout the City.
13.8
Mitigation will be regulated through the City's development approval and
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
permitting process. Proposed master development plans, planned unit
development and subdivision applications, plats, and/or site plans must
K:\015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820 - Water.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 8
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
address relevant water conservation mitigation measures prior to final
approval by the City. Implementation of mitigation measures will be
assured through developer agreements with the City, which will require a
financial security for land and infrastructure improvements and/or revoke
the right to acquire building permits and/or certificates of occupancy until
all relevant mitigation measures have been addressed.
K:\015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820 - Water.docx
Appendix D
Wastewater Management Memo
0
U
C0
Z
W
m
U)
Z
U)
J
0
a
a
W
z
z
0
0
M
W
U)
T
ws b
Final Technical Memorandum
To: Michael Grochala, City of Lino Lakes
From: Jon Christensen, WSB
Andi Moffatt, WSB
Date: April 8, 2020
Re: Wastewater Management — 1-35 Corridor AUAR
City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota
WSB Project No. R-015144-000
The original Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) was completed and approved in
September 2005. The AUAR analyzed the stormwater impacts of the three development
scenarios. Based on the analysis, a Mitigation Plan was developed.
AUAR updates are required every five years from the original date of the approved AUAR.
Updates were prepared in 2010 and 2015. Each assumed no change in the proposed
development land use scenarios and included discussion of mitigation improvements that had
been completed at the time. Since the 2015 AUAR update was prepared, the City has completed
an updated Comprehensive Plan. This AUAR Update includes review of three scenarios.
The information and analysis outlined within this memo is intended to complete a portion of the
AUAR Update related to Item # 11.b.i — Water Resources — Wastewater related to revising of the
three scenarios. This memo is intended to update the wastewater analysis provided in the original
AUAR where applicable.
WATER RESOURCES — WASTEWATER
Describe effects from project activities on water resources and measures to minimize or mitigate
the effects in Item b.i. through Item b.iv. below.
Wastewater - For each of the following, describe the sources, quantities and
composition of all sanitary, municipal/domestic and industrial wastewater produced or
treated at the site.
1) If the wastewater discharge is to a publicly owned treatment facility, identify
any pretreatment measures and the ability of the facility to handle the added
water and waste loadings, including any effects on, or required expansion of,
municipal wastewater infrastructure.
2) If the wastewater discharge is to a subsurface sewage treatment systems
(SSTS), describe the system used, the design flow, and suitability of site
conditions for such a system.
3) If the wastewater discharge is to surface water, identify the wastewater
treatment methods and identify discharge points and proposed effluent
limitations to mitigate impacts. Discuss any effects to surface or groundwater
from wastewater discharges.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820 - Wastewater.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 2
Existing Conditions
Within the City of Lino Lakes, there are approximately 5,200 connections to the municipal sanitary
sewer system. Of the 5,200 connections to the public sanitary sewer system, most are single
family residential with some multi -family residential, commercial/ industrial, and institutional
connections. The City has approximately 1,705 properties that are served by on -site septic
systems. Based on Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) meter data from 2014-
2018, the City's existing average daily wastewater flow is 1.04 million gallons per day (MGD).
Since the wastewater generated within the City of Lino Lakes is primarily from residential units,
the wastewater characteristics are assumed to be of typical domestic strength. Table 1 is a
summary of the estimated existing wastewater characteristics for Lino Lakes.
Table 1. Estimated Existing Wastewater Characteristics and Total Average
Loading
Parameter
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(lbs/day)
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
220
1,909
Total Suspended Solids
220
1,909
Ammonia — Nitrogen
25
217
Total Phosphorous
8
69
Wastewater generated within the City is collected by a series of laterals, trunk sewer mains, and
lift stations and is then directed to one of three interceptor sewers that are owned, operated, and
maintained by MCES (Interceptors 9106, 8361, and 9708). Wastewater is then conveyed through
the MCES regional collection system to the Metropolitan WWTP. The Metropolitan WWTP has a
design capacity of 314 MGD and currently receives an average daily flow of 191 MGD.
Proposed Conditions
Three possible development scenarios were considered. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan
corresponds to revised Scenario 1. Scenario 2 has also been revised. The third scenario
considered is the 2030 Comprehensive Plan Scenario. The projected wastewater flow for each
scenario is based on the planned land uses as described below.
The municipal collection system currently extends to Main Street on either side of I-35E. The
municipal trunk sewers will continue to be extended as development progresses. As detailed in
the 2040 Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan, development within Sanitary Sewer District 3 and
5 will require at least one large regional lift station and several smaller lift stations.
The majority of the wastewater generated within the study area will discharge to MCES
Interceptor 802325 which is currently stubbed at the City boundary at the intersection of Main
Street and Elmcrest Avenue. The remainder will discharge to MCES Interceptor 7651 which
currently serves the existing Sanitary Sewer District 3. All of the flow generated within the study
area will be conveyed through the MCES regional collection system to the Metropolitan WWTP.
2020 Scenario 1
The proposed development within the study area for revised Scenario 1, the assumed
wastewater flow for each land use type, and the projected wastewater flow for that development
are summarized in Table 2. There are a number of properties within the southern portion of the
study area that are already sewered, so these areas have been removed from the areas listed in
Table 2.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820 - Wastewater.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 3
Table 2. Projected Average Dail Flow for 2020 Scenario 1
Land Use Type
Area
(acres)
Density
(units/acre)
Flow
Assumption
(gpd/acre)
Average
Flow
(gpd)
Low Density Sewered Residential
282.6
2.3
414
117,002
Low Density Mixed Residential
376.9
3.5
630
237,447
Medium Density Residential
180.5**
5.0
900
162,432
High Density Residential
39.0
7.0
1,260
49,160
Planned Residential / Commercial*
89.9
9.0
1,210
108,836
Office Residential*
139.5
5.0
850
118,567
Mixed Use
0.0
2.3
414
0
Commercial
348.9**
N/A
800
279,126
Business Campus***
624.0
N/A
800
799,182
Industrial
472.4**
N/A
800
377,947
Civic/Institutional
1.0
N/A
600
620
Urban Reserve
0.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
Permanent Rural
358.1
N/A
N/A
N/A
Park & Open Space
837.5
N/A
N/A
N/A
Right -of -Way
3.7
N/A
N/A
N/A
Total
3,754.1
N/A
N/A
2,250,319
*Assumes 50% residential and 50% commercial development.
**Areas for properties within the southern portion of the study area that are already sewered have been
removed.
***Includes contingency for higher intensity wastewater flow.
Table 3 summarizes the projected wastewater flow by MCES connection point under Scenario 1.
Note that the flows listed in Table 3 include only additional flows generated within the study area.
Table 3. Projected Additional Regional Wastewater Flow by MCES Connection Point for
2020 Scenario 1
MCES
Interceptor
City Sanitary
Sewer District
Average
Flow (MGD)
Peak Hourly
Flow (MGD)
7651
3
0.62
2.11
802325
5
1.63
4.73
Table 4 summarizes the projected wastewater characteristics and additional loading for the
wastewater that will be generated under Scenario 1.
Table 4. Projected Wastewater Characteristics and Additional Total Average Daily
Wastewater Loading for 2020 Scenario 1
Parameter
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(lbs/day)
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
220
4,131
Total Suspended Solids
220
4,131
Ammonia —Nitrogen
25
469
Total Phosphorous
8
150
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820 - Wastewater.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 4
2020 Scenario 2
The proposed development within the study area for Scenario 2, the assumed wastewater flow
for each land use type, and the projected wastewater flow for that development are summarized
in Table 5. There are a number of properties within the southern portion of the study area that are
already sewered, so these areas have been removed from the areas listed in Table 5.
Table 5. Projected Average Daily Flow for 2020 Scenario 2
Land Use Type
Area
(acres)
Density
(units/acre)
Flow
Assumption
(gpd/acre)
Average
Flow
(gpd)
Low Density Sewered Residential
173.2
2.3
414
71,721
Low Density Mixed Residential
376.9
3.5
630
237,447
Medium Density Residential
240.9**
5.0
900
216,787
High Density Residential
391.1
7.0
1,260
492,838
Planned Residential / Commercial*
89.9
9.0
1,210
108,836
Office Residential*
0.0
5.0
850
0
Mixed Use
0.0
2.3
414
0
Commercial
348.9**
N/A
800
279,126
Business Campus***
362.6
N/A
800
590,049
Industrial
480.3**
N/A
800
384,228
Civic/Institutional
90.9
N/A
600
54,556
Urban Reserve
0.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
Permanent Rural
358.1
N/A
N/A
N/A
Park & Open Space
837.5
N/A
N/A
N/A
Right -of -Way
3.7
N/A
N/A
N/A
Total
3,754.1
N/A
N/A
2,435,589
*Assumes 50% residential and 50% commercial development.
**Areas for properties within the southern portion of the study area that are already sewered have been
removed.
***Includes contingency for higher intensity wastewater flow.
Table 6 summarizes the projected wastewater flow by MCES connection point under Scenario 2.
Note that the flows listed in Table 6 include only those generated within the study area.
Table 6. Projected Regional Wastewater Flow by MCES Connection Point for 2020
Scenario 2
MCES
Interceptor
City Sanitary
Sewer District
Average
Flow (MGD)
Peak Hourly
Flow (MGD)
7651
3
0.64
2.18
802325
5
1.79
5.19
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820 - Wastewater.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 5
Table 7 summarizes the projected wastewater characteristics and additional loading for the
wastewater that will be generated under Scenario 2.
Table 7. Projected Wastewater Characteristics and Additional Total Average Daily
Wastewater Loading for 2020 Scenario 2
Parameter
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(lbs/day)
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
220
4,471
Total Suspended Solids
220
4,471
Ammonia —Nitrogen
25
508
Total Phosphorous
8
163
2030 Comprehensive Plan Scenario
The proposed development within the study area for the 2030 Comp Plan Scenario, the assumed
wastewater flow for each land use type, and the projected wastewater flow for that development
are summarized in Table 8. There are a number of properties within the southern portion of the
study area that are already sewered, so these areas have been removed from the areas listed in
Table 8.
Table 8. Projected Average Daily Flow for 2030 Comp Plan Scenario
Land Use Type
Area
(acres)
Density
(units/acre)
Flow
Assumption
(gpd/acre)
Average
Flow
(gpd)
Low Density Sewered Residential
47.1
2.3
414
19,499
Low Density Mixed Residential
0.0
3.5
630
0
Medium Density Residential
140.E**
5.0
900
126,524
High Density Residential
39.0
7.0
1,260
49,156
Planned Residential / Commercial*
0.0
9.0
1,210
0
Office Residential*
0.0
5.0
850
0
Mixed Use
374.0
2.3
414
154,836
Commercial
293.0**
N/A
800
234,369
Business Campus***
276.8
N/A
800
521,461
Industrial
572.9**
N/A
800
458,310
Civic/Institutional
1.0
N/A
600
620
Urban Reserve
820.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
Permanent Rural
361.3
N/A
N/A
N/A
Park & Open Space
824.4
N/A
N/A
N/A
Right -of -Way
4.0
N/A
N/A
N/A
Total
3,754.1
N/A
N/A
1,564,776
*Assumes 50% residential and 50% commercial development.
**Areas for properties within the southern portion of the study area that are already sewered have been
removed.
***Includes contingency for higher intensity wastewater flow.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820 - Wastewater.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 6
Table 9 summarizes the projected wastewater flow by MCES connection point under the 2030
Comp Plan Scenario. Note that the flows listed in Table 9 include only additional flows generated
within the study area.
Table 9. Projected Additional Regional Wastewater Flow by MCES Connection Point for
2030 Comp Plan Scenario
MCES
Interceptor
City Sanitary
Sewer District
Average
Flow (MGD)
Peak Hourly
Flow (MGD)
7651
3
0.52
1.77
802325
5
1.04
3.22
Table 10 summarizes the projected wastewater characteristics and additional loading for the
wastewater that will be generated under the 2030 Comp Plan Scenario.
Table 10. Projected Wastewater Characteristics and Additional Total Average Daily
Wastewater Loading for 2030 Comp Plan Scenario
Parameter
Concentration
(mg/L)
Average Load
(lbs/day)
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
220
2,873
Total Suspended Solids
220
2,873
Ammonia —Nitrogen
25
326
Total Phosphorous
8
104
Wastewater Projection Comparison
Table 11 summarizes the projected average wastewater flows from the 2005 Original AUAR and
this 2020 AUAR Update for the scenarios outlined above. The 2005 Original AUAR used flow
assumptions of 274 gpd/unit for residential development and 1,500 gpd/acre for commercial and
industrial development. The 2005 flow assumptions were very conservative, so the 2020 flow
assumptions used in this update have been revised to agree more closely with metered
wastewater flows from the last five years.
Table 11. Comparison of Averaae Wastewater Flow Proiections
Scenario
2005 Original
AUAR
2020 AUAR
Update
Scenario 1
2.529 MGD
2.250 MGD
Scenario 2
3.646 MGD
2.436 MGD
Scenario 3
3.733 MGD
N/A
2030 Comp Plan
N/A
1.565 MGD
The projected wastewater flows have decreased in this update. Due to topography constraints,
the expansion and layout of the sanitary sewer system will generally conform to the layout
identified in the 2005 Original AUAR. However, the exact sizing of trunk facilities may be revised
based on the most current wastewater flow projections.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820 - Wastewater.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 7
Review and Update of the Mitigation Plan
The table below provides the mitigation plan for stormwater management. These mitigation measures have been reviewed and revised as
needed for this AUAR Update.
Table 12. Water Quality: Wastewater
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
18.1
Monitor wastewater flows and not permit new development to proceed if it
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
exceeds the capacity of the wastewater system.
18.2
Construct the major infrastructure improvements needed to expand the
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
capacity of the wastewater system (i.e. lift stations, forcemains, and
upgrades to the existing systems) in accordance with the Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan and Capital Improvement Plan.
18.3
Adequately phase capacity improvements.
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
18.4
Amend the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan and Capital Improvement
This mitigation measure is ongoing. No
Plan to be consistent with any amendments to the Comprehensive Plan
updates have been needed to date for the
that would necessitate expansions or alterations to the sanitary sewer
study area.
system and regional capacity needs.
18.5
Each proposed development will be required to provide a detailed
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
projection of wastewater generation and flows. These calculations will be
checked by the City's Engineering Consultant.
18.6
The City will create a year-end report to evaluate wastewater increases by
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
major sewer lines and overall system usage in relation to capacity. Results
of this assessment will become the targets for growth for the following year.
K:\015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Water Wastewater\MEMO - 040820 - Wastewater.docx
Appendix E
Transportation Memo
0
U
c�
Z
W
m
Z
U)
J
0
a
a
w
z
z
0
0
M
w
U)
T
Final Technical Memorandum WSb
To: Michael Grochala, City of Lino Lakes
From: Chuck Rickart PE, PTOE, WSB
Andi Moffatt, WSB
Date: April 8, 2020
Re: Transportation — 1-35 Corridor AUAR
City of Lino Lakes, Minnesota
WSB Project No. R-015144-000
INTRODUCTION
The original Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) was completed and approved in
September 2005. The AUAR analyzed the transportation impacts of the three development
scenarios for the years 2030 and post 2030. Based on the analysis, a Mitigation Plan was
developed. Mitigation included adding new roadway connections, intersection control, turn lanes,
and widening roads as necessary as development occurs throughout the area.
AUAR updates are required every five years from the original date of the approved AUAR.
Updates were prepared in 2010 and 2015. Each assumed no change in the proposed
development land use scenarios and included discussion of mitigation improvements that had
been completed at the time. In both cases no additional mitigation was recommended. Since the
2015 AUAR update was prepared, the City has completed an updated Comprehensive Plan
including a Transportation Plan for the 2040 forecast year.
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION UPDATE
There have been several developments in the study area that have been approved since the
original AUAR was completed in 2005 including:
• Park -and -Ride in the northwest quadrant of 1-35E and CSAH 14
• McDonald's restaurant and Main Street Shoppes east of 1-35E on CSAH 14
• NorthPointe residential development north of Birch Street between 1-35E and CSAH 54
• Watermark residential development west of 1-35E, north of CSAH14
• Clearwater Creek commercial development west of 1-35E south of CSAH 14 on 21 st
Avenue
In addition, there have been roadway improvements completed since the original AUAR
including:
• CSAH 14 Improvements west of 1-35E
• 1-35E at CSAH 14 Interchange Improvements
As previously discussed, three development scenarios were included in the original AUAR and
Updates. The City has since updated its Comprehensive Plan and reviewed the scenarios. Two
consolidated scenarios are now included in this update and are still consistent with the original
AUAR.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Traffic\MEMO - 040820 - Transportation.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 2
Traffic Generation
The original AUAR include traffic generation for the three land use scenarios using the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) "Trip Generation Manual, 711, Edition." The traffic generation was
prepared for both the 2030 base year and the Post 2030 conditions. For comparison purposes,
the Post 2030 conditions were used. Tables 1 - 3 shows the Post 2030 Traffic Generation from
the original AUAR.
Table 1. 2005 AUAR Scenario 1 - City Comprehensive Plan
Land Use
Unit
Size
AM Peak
PM Peak
ADT
Rural Land Use
DU
125
93
127
1,196
Low Density
DU
510
383
516
4,880
Res
Med Density
DU
1,129
416
496
6,078
Res
High Density
DU
473
241
294
3,178
Res
Commercial
SF
2,985,000
5,090
6,773
63,598
Industrial
SF
11,175,000
7,912
8,270
68,872
Total
14,135
16,476
147,802
Table 2. 2005 AUAR Scenario 2 - Commercial / Industrial Emphasis
Land Use
Unit
Size
AM Peak
PM Peak
ADT
Rural Land Use
DU
44
33
44
422
Low Density
DU
118
88
119
1,130
Res
Low/Med
DU
2,419
1,439
1,060
18,662
Density Res
Med/High
DU
2,173
954
1,149
13,150
Density Res
High Density
DU
981
490
596
6,458
Res
Commercial
SF
5,617,000
9,577
12,745
119,676
Industrial
SF
9,570,000
6,775
7,082
58,980
Total
19,356
22,795
218,478
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Traffic\MEMO - 040820 - Transportation.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 3
Table 3. 2005 AUAR Scenario 3 - Residential Emphasis
Land Use
Unit
Size
AM Peak
PM Peak
ADT
Rural Land Use
DU
43
32
43
412
Low Density
DU
118
88
119
1,130
Res
Low/Med
Density Res
DU
3,685
2,192
1,614
28,430
Med/High
DU
3,247
1,425
1,718
19,650
Density Res
High Density
DU
1,566
799
971
10,524
Res
Commercial
SF
4,141,000
7,060
9,396
88,228
Industrial
SF
5,829,000
4,127
4,313
35,924
Total
15,723
18,174
184,298
For this 2020 AUAR Update, the traffic generation was updated based on the revised
development scenarios. Traffic generation rates from the current ITE Trip Generation Manual
"Trip Generation Manual, 101, Edition" were used to determine the updated traffic forecasts. Table
4, Table 5, and Table 6 show the updated Scenario traffic generation.
Table 4. 2020 AUAR Update Scenario 1 - City 2040 Comprehensive Plan
Land Use
Unit
Size
AM Peak
PM Peak
ADT
Low Density
DU
2,335
1,728
2,312
22,042
Res
Med Density
DU
1,675
687
838
11,089
Res
High Density
DU
678
312
380
4,963
Res
Commercial
SF
5,085,000
3,865
4,831
67,936
Industrial
SF
12,817,000
5,127
4,999
41,014
Total
11,718
13,358
147,044
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Traffic\MEMO - 040820 - Transportation.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 4
Table 5. 2020 AUAR Update Scenario 2
Land Use
Unit
Size
AM Peak
PM Peak
ADT
Low Density
DU
2,283
1,689
2,260
21,552
Res
Med Density
DU
1,977
811
989
13,088
Res
High Density
DU
3,143
1,446
1,760
23,007
Res
Commercial
SF
5,307,000
4,033
5,042
77,270
Industrial
SF
10,054,000
4,022
3,921
32,173
Total
12,001
13,971
167,089
Table 6. 2020 AUAR Update Scenario 3 - City 2030 Comprehensive Plan
Land Use
Unit
Size
AM Peak
PM Peak
ADT
Low Density
DU
190
140
188
1,794
Res
Med Density
DU
1,991
816
996
13,180
Res
High Density
DU
273
126
153
1,998
Res
Commercial
SF
3,229,000
2,454
3,068
47,014
Industrial
SF
10,128,000
4,051
3,950
32,410
Total
7,588
8,354
96,396
Comparing the land use scenarios shows that the future traffic generated with the updated land
uses will be less than that from the original AUAR. The percent reduction in traffic generation is
shown below in Table 7.
Table 7. Scenario Comparison
2006
2020
AM Peak
PM Peak
ADT %
Scenario
Reduction
Scenario
Reduction
Reduction
Scenario 1
Scenario 1
21 %
23%
1 %
Scenario 2
Scenario 2
61 %
63%
31 %
Scenario 3
Scenario 2
31 %
30%
10%
Scenario 1
Scenario 3
86%
97%
53%
Traffic Analysis
The Transportation Study completed as part of the original AUAR analyzed the effects the land
use scenarios had on the local and regional roadway systems. The analysis was based on
existing traffic counts at the time and the Anoka County version of the Metropolitan Council's
Travel Demand Forecasting Model.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Traffic\MEMO - 040820 - Transportation.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 5
The Traffic analysis focused on the operation of the primary roadways and their intersections
during the peak travel periods (a.m. and p.m. peak hours), which is typically the time when the
most severe traffic congestion is incurred. The results found that mitigation improvements would
be required for each Scenario for the transportation system to operate at acceptable levels.
Based on the analysis a Mitigation Plan was developed. Mitigation included adding new roadway
connections, intersection control, turn lanes and widening roads as necessary as development
occurs throughout the area. The improvements were intended to represent the minimum level of
infrastructure investment that would be needed to meet acceptable level of service standards.
Additional roadway and non -motorized improvements, beyond the minimum level, may be
identified to accommodate specific development needs.
Updated traffic forecasts were developed for 2040 and Post 2040 with the Cities "Draft 2040
Transportation Plan". The forecasts assumed a roadway network consistent with the AUAR
mitigation improvements. Figure 1 shows the forecasted 2040 and Post 2040 Average Daily
Traffic volumes with the future roadway network.
Based on the comparison of the forecasted traffic generation from the AUAR area and the
forecasted 2040 traffic volumes, the traffic analysis conducted, and Mitigation Plan recommended
with the 2005 AUAR and the 2010 and 2015 updated AUAR's remains valid for this AUAR
Update.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Traffic\MEMO - 040820 - Transportation.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 6
Review and Update of the Mitigation Plan
The table below provides the mitigation plan for Transportation. These mitigation measures have been reviewed and revised as needed for
this AUAR Update.
Table 7. Transportation
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
21.1
Create a monitoring program that closely evaluates traffic impacts from proposed
Traffic Impact Studies are required for
developments within the AUAR area.
proposed developments showing the
impact on the transportation system and
consistenc with the AUAR.
21.2
Implement traffic mitigation measures as development occurs within the AUAR
CSAH 14 improvement was completed in
area. Specific mitigation measures for the three development scenarios are
2009 and noted in the 2010 AUAR
discussed in Item 21 and depicted on Figures 21-8, 21-9, and 21-10. These
Update
mitigation measures improve overall traffic operations for the respective
development scenarios. The improvements are intended to represent the
CSAH 54 with CSAH 14 (formerly CSAH
minimum level of infrastructure investment that would be needed to meet
21) 20th Avenue North intersection
acceptable level of service standards. Additional roadway and non -motorized
improvements were completed and
improvements, beyond the minimum level, may be identified to accommodate
noted in the 2010 AUAR Update.
specific development needs that are identified within the AUAR area. Primary
improvements, regardless of land use scenario, include:
1-35E Interchange reconstruction was
completed in 2011. This mitigation
21.2.1 Develop frontage road system in compliance with local, county and state
measure is complete.
access management guidelines to serve local and regional traffic.
21.2.2 Work with appropriate road authorities to reconstruct and provide
additional capacity for CSAH 21.
21.2.3 Work with appropriate road authorities to construct Northerly Bypass
with new interchanges at 1-35W and 1-35E (80th Street East) to improve traffic
operations and access to and within the AUAR area. As recommended by
FHWA and Mn/DOT, a phasing plan should be established to construct each
piece of the Northerly Connector as it becomes necessary to maintain the
serviceability of the transportation system.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Traffic\MEMO - 040820 - Transportation.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 7
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
Phase Improvement
�GtiGR)
GGRStr�
2. GS ^ urn i-35 E inteFGhange
3. CR 140 (801h Street)/1-35E Interchange
4. CSAH 14 across Peltier Lake (Northerly
Bypass/Connector)
5. CSAH 14/1-35W Interchange
As part of these improvements, the following steps should be taken as the
opportunity is presented:
■ Inclusion of the northerly bypass and proposed interchanges in future
transportation and comprehensive plans
■ Preservation of right of way through official mapping or other process
■ Right of way dedication through the platting process
21.3
Require a traffic impact analysis for all development projects within the AUAR
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
area. The traffic impact analysis will assist the City and other road authorities in
determining the appropriate mitigation measures that are required to mitigate
impacts of a specific development proposal.
21.4
Work with appropriate road authorities to mitigate the impact of the additional
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
traffic on the on the regional system, specifically Interstates 35W and 35E, by
reconstructing each to provide a six -lane cross-section consistent with the
recommendations outlined in the 1-35 IRC. It should be noted that it was
determined that an expansion will be necessary even without the development
scenarios used in this analysis. As the interstates serve a much larger area, the
projected growth of the entire Twin Cities region should warrant expansion by
the year 2030.
21.5
Prioritize alternative travel modes within the AUAR study area and require
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
project proposers to address alternative travel modes (e.g., buses, bicyclists,
and pedestrians) by identifying appropriate accommodations.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Traffic\MEMO - 040820 - Transportation.docx
Mr. Michael Grochala
April 8, 2020
Page 8
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
21.6
Consider the need for additional infrastructure improvements (see item #21.2) in
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
future updates or amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Submit the plan
update to the appropriate agencies (i.e., FHWA, MnDOT, Met Council, etc.).
21.7
Require project proposers to follow all appropriate guidelines and policies related
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
to traffic nose and noise walls.
21.8
Require that site plans for each of the developments include measures such as
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
appropriate setback distances, earthen berms, noise walls, and appropriate site
design to reduce the impact of traffic noise to residential areas.
21.9
Continue to require the implementation of the conditions of approval for the
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Eagle Brook Church relating to mitigating traffic impacts.
21.10
Achieve effective traffic operations within the city by requiring that site plans
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
make use of access management practices to promote safe, effective traffic flow.
21.11
Require project proposers to follow the Anoka County Highway Department
This mitigation measure is ongoing and
Development Review Process Manual (updated June 2013).
has been updated to reflect the newest
manual.
21.12
Continue to coordinate capital improvement programming with applicable
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
transportation authorities.
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR -Update 2020\Traffic\MEMO - 040820 - Transportation.docx
-W.
Appendix F
SHPO and DNR Information
HISTORY/ARCHITECTURE INVENTORY
COUNTY CITYTWP
Anoka
Centerville
Lino Lakes
PROPNAME
house
house
Bridge 9830
Bridge 02802
ADDRESS
7238 Main St.
1695 Sorel Rd.
CSAH 14 over I35 W 2.2 miles NE of hmetin TH49
CR 140 over I 35E 1.5 miles S of Junction TH 35W
TOWNSHIP RANGE SECTION QUARTER USGS
31
22
14 SW -SW
Centerville
31
22
22 SW -NW
Centerville
31
22
10 SE -NW
Centerville
31
22
12 NE -NW
Centerville
REPORTNUM NRHP CEF DOE INVENTNUM
AN-20054H AN-CVC-009
AN-20054H AN-CVC-035
AN-LKC-009
AN-LKC-011
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE LOCATIONS
COUNTY SITENUM
SITENAME
Anoka
21AN0003
21AN0037
Paul
21AN0038
Hensel
21AN0039
Wards Lake
21AN0040
Cartier
21AN0041
21AN0049 Dupre
Dupre
21AN0060
Peltier Island
21AN0067
21AN0071
(overlaps w/21AN72)
21AN0072
(overlaps w/21AN71)
21AN0083
21AN0089
21AN0090
Anoka
TOWNSHIP RANGE SECTION XQUARTERS
ACRES WORKTYPE DESCRIPT
TRADITION CONTEXT ReportNum Natreg CEF DOE
31
22
11 C-S-S
62
EW, AS
W-1
Ps-2, SO-2
AN-01-11
SE-NE-NW-SE,SE-NE
31
22
10 SW -NE
161
AS
W-1
MW-I, LW-
31
22
22 NA -NW
801,2
AS
W-1,PL-2
2,P1-2
AN-16-13
31
22
22 W-NW-SW
262,1
AS
W-1
AL-2, HR-1,
31
22
10 SW -SE -SE
60 1
AS
A-2, W-1
LW-2
AN-02-03
31
22
10 N-S-SW
251
AS
W-1
RA-1
31
22
10 SE -NW -SW
251
AS
W-1
RA-1
31
22
10 SW -NE -SW
251
AS
W-1
RA-1
PI-1,AL-1,HR-
31
22
14 SW -NW -SW
21 1,2
AS
PL-1,A-I,W-1
2,SO-1,Ka-2
PI-1,AL-1,HR-
31
22
14 NW -SW -SW
21 1,2
AS
PL-I,A-I,W-1
2,SO-1,Ka-2
31
22
11 W-SW
50 2
AS
W-1
MW-1
AN-02-03
31
22
3 SW -SE -NE -NW
3 1
AS
A-1
31
22
14 SE -NE -SE -NW
1 1
AS
W-2
MW-2
31
22
14 NE -SE -SE -NW
1 1
AS
W-2
MW-2
31
22
2 S-NE-SW,N-SE-SW
15 1
AS
W-1
31
22
10 C-NE-NW-NW
3 1
LS
A-2
31
22
2 C-N-NW-SW
6 1
AS
W-1
S-NW-NE-NW, N-SW-
21AN0091
31
22
2NE-NW
51
AS
W-1,0-2
21AN0095
31
22
2 SE -SE; E-NW-NE-NE
24 1
AS
W-1
LW-1
31
22
11
241
AS
W-1
LW-1
21AN0128
31
22
22 NE -SE -SW -SW
0.5 1
LS
21AN0132
Iverson 111
31
22
12 NE -NE
0 5
LS
21AN0143
31
22
14 SW -SE -SW
2.4 1
AS,LS
A-3,W-1
21AN0166
31
22
22 NW -SW -SW -SW
1 1
LS
21AN0168
PaulF— (east)
31
22
10 SW -SE
19 1
AS
W-1
RA-1
21AN0174
Old Willow
31
22
1 SW -SW -NW -SW
0.1 1
LS
21ANd
31
22
14 C-SW
5
LS
AN-97-02
MDEPARTMENT OF
-
.;NATURALRESOURCES
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Division of Ecological & Water Resources
500 Lafayette Road, Box 25
5t. Paul, MN 55155-4025
February 20, 2020
Correspondence # ERDB 20200206
Mr. Matt Unmacht
WSB & Associates, Inc.
701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
RE: Natural Heritage Review of the proposed 20201-35E Corridor AUAR Update,
T31N R22W Sections 1-3,10-14, 24 & 25; Anoka County
Dear Mr. Unmacht,
As requested, the Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System has been queried to determine if any rare
species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one -mile radius of the
proposed project. Based on this query, rare features have been documented within the search area (for details,
please visit the Rare Species Guide Website for more information on the biology, habitat use, and conservation
measures of these rare species). Please note that the fallowing rare features may be adversely affected by the
proposed project:
Ecologically Significant Areas
• Peltier Lake has been identified as a Lake of High Biological Significance. Lakes of Biological Significance
were ranked as Outstanding, High or Moderate based on unique bird and plant presence. This particular
lake has records of a plant spices, water -willow (Decodon verticillatus var. loevigatus), a species of special
concern. As such, it is important that effective erosion prevention and sediment control practices be
implemented and maintained near the lake throughout the duration of any nearby projects. Indirect
impacts, such as the introduction or spread of invasive species, should also be considered and minimized.
• The Minnesota Biological Survey (MBS) has identified multiple Sites of Moderate Biodiversity Significance
within T31N R22W Sections 2, 10 & 11. Sites of Biodiversity Significance have varying levels of native
biodiversity and are ranked based on the relative significance of this bacliversity at a statewide level. Sites
ranked as Moderate contain occurrences of rare species and/or moderately disturbed native plant
communities, and/or landscapes that have a strong potential for recovery. These particular Sites contain
the following native plant communities:
o Alder —(Maple — Loosestrife) Swamp
o Northern Mixed Cattail Marsh
o Red Oak —Sugar Mapie —Basswood —(Bitternut Hickory) Forest
o Southern Dry-Mesic Oak (Maple) Woodland
o Tamarack Swamp (Southern)
o Willow— Dogwood Shrub Swamp
(GIS shapefiles of MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance and DNR Native Plant Communities can be
downloaded from the MN Geosoatial Commons. Please contact me if you do not have access to the
appropriate mapping services.) We encourage you to consider project alternatives that would avoid or
minimize disturbance to these ecologically significant areas. Actions to minimize disturbance may include,
butane not limited to, the following recommendations:
o Minimize vehicular disturbance in the MBS Sites (allow only vehicles/equipment necessary for
construction activities);
o Do not park equipment or stockpile supplies in the MBS Sites;
o Do not place spoil within MBS Sites or other sensitive areas;
o Retain a buffer between proposed activities and the MBS Sites;
o If possible, conduct the work under frozen ground conditions;
o Use effective erosion prevention and sediment control measures;
o Inspect and clean all equipment prior to bringing it to the site to prevent the introduction and
spread of invasive species;
o As much as possible, operate within already -disturbed areas;
o Revegetate disturbed soil with native species suitable to the local habitat as soon after
construction as possible; and
o Use only weed -free mulches, topsoils, and seed mixes. Of particular concern are birdsfoot trefoil
(Lotus corniculatus) and crown vetch (Coronilla varia), two invasive species that are sold
commercially and are problematic in prairies and disturbed open areas.
• If the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) is applicable to this project, please note that Prairie Rich Fen may
qualify as a "rare natural community' under this Act. Minnesota Rules, part 8420.0515, subpart 3 states
that a wetland replacement plan for activities that modify a rare natural community must be denied if the
local government unit determines the proposed activities will permanently adversely affect the natural
community.
State -listed Species
• Blanding's turtles (Emydoideo blandingii), a state -listed threatened species, have been reported in the
vicinity of the proposed project. Blanding's turtles use upland areas up to and over a mile distant from
wetlands, waterbodies, and watercourses. Uplands are used for nesting, basking, periods of dormancy,
and traveling between wetlands. Factors believed to contribute to the decline of this species include
collisions with vehicles, wetland drainage and degradation, and the development of upland habitat. Any
added fatality can be detrimental to populations of Blami ng's turtles, as these turtles have a low
reproduction rate that depends upon a high survival rate to maintain population levels.
For additional information, see the Blanding's turtle fact sheet, which describes the habitat use and life
history of this species. The fact sheet also provides two lists of recommendations for avoiding and
minimizing impacts to this rare turtle. Refer to the both list of recommendations for projects within the
Page 2 of 4
AUAR area. The use of erosion control blanket shall be limited to'bio-netting' or'naturalnetting' types,
and specifically not products containing plastic mesh netting or other plastic components. Also be aware
that hydro -mulch products may contain small synthetic (plastic) fibers to aid in its matrix strength. These
loose fibers could potentially re -suspend and make their way into Public Waters. As such, please review
mulch products and not allow any materials with synthetic (plastic) fiber additives in areas that drain to
Public Waters.
The Blanding's turtle flyer should be given to all contractors working in the area. If Blanding's turtles are
encountered on site, remember Minnesota's Endangered Species Statute (Minnesota Statutes, section
84.0895) and associated Rules (Minnesota Rules, part 6212.1800 to 6212.2300 and 6134) prohibit the take
of threatened or endangered species without a permit. If turtles are in imminent danger they must be
moved by hand out of harm's way, otherwise they are to be left undisturbed. If any projects include
wetland impacts, a Blanding's turtle is encountered, or if further assistance regarding the Blanding's turtle
is needed, please contact the DNR Regional Nongame Specialist, Erica Hoaglund (651-259-5772 or
Eri ca. Hoaglu nd @state, m n. us).
• Trumpeter swans (Cygnus buccinator), a state -listed species of special concern, has been documented
nesting in the area. During the breeding season, trumpeter swans select small ponds and lakes with
extensive beds of cattails, bulrush, sedges, and/or horsetail. Ideal habitat includes about 100 on of open
water for take -off, stable levels of unpolluted water, emergent vegetation, low levels of human
disturbance, and the presence of muskrat (Ondatro zibethicus) houses and American beaver (Costor
conadensis) lodges for use as nesting platforms. Construction activities near suitable habitat that occur
during the breeding season could disrupt nesting swans, if present.
• The Bell's Vireo, (Vireo bellii), a state -listed bird species of special concern, has been documented in the
area. In Minnesota, Bell's vireo prefers shrub thickets within or bordering open habitats such as grasslands
or wetlands. This bird suspends its nests from forks of low branches of small trees or shrubs. If feasible,
avoid tree and shrub removal from May 151h through August 151h to avoid disturbance of nesting Bell's
Vireo and other birds.
Environmental Review and Permitting
• Please include a copy of this letter in any state or local license or permit application. Please note that
measures to avoid or minimize disturbance to the above rare features may be included as restrictions or
conditions in any required permits or licenses.
The Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS), a collection of databases that contains information about
Minnesota's rare natural features, is maintained by the Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Department
of Natural Resources. The NHIS is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most
complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, native plant communities, and other
natural features. However, the NHIS is not an exhaustive inventory and thus does not represent all of the
occurrences of rare features within the state. Therefore, ecologically significant features for which we have no
records may exist within the project area. If additional information becomes available regarding rare features in
the vicinity of the project, further review may be necessary.
Page 3 of 4
For environmental review purposes, the results of this Natural Heritage Review are valid for one year; the results
are only valid for the project location (noted above) and the project description provided on the NHIS Data
Request Form. Please contact me if project details change or for an updated review if construction has not
occurred within one year.
The Natural Heritage Review does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as
a whole. Instead, it identifies issues regarding known occurrences of rare features and potential effects to these
rare features. If needed, please contact your DNR Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist to determine
whether there are other natural resource concerns associated with the proposed project. Please be aware that
additional site assessments or review may be required.
Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and foryour interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources.
An invoice will be mailed to you under separate cover.
Sincerely,
Samantha Bump
Natural Heritage Review Specialist
Samantha .Bump @ state. m n. u s
Links: Rare Species Guide
http://www.dnr,state.mn.us/rsg/index.htmi
DNR Regional Environmental Assessrmantt udgist Contact Info
http://www.d nr.state. m n.us/eco/ereview/erp_regionco n tacts.htm]
MBS Sites of Biodiversity Significance
http://www.dnr.state. mn.us/eco/mcbs/biod iversity_gu idelines.htm I
DNR Native Plant Communities
httP://www.dnr.state.mn.us/npc/index.html
MN Geospatial Commons
https://gisdata.mn.gov/
BWSR Native Vegetation/Seed Mixes
http://www.bwsr.state.mn.us/native_ vegetation/
Blanding's Turtle Fact Sheet
http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/animals/reptiles_amphibians/turtles/blandings_turtle/factsheet.pdf
Blanding's Turtle Flyer
http://files.dnr.state.mn.us/natural_resources/animals/reptiles a mph ibians/tu rtles/bla ndi ngs_tu rtle/flyer. pdf
Wildlife Friendly Erosion Control
http://files.dn r.state.mn. us/eco/nongame/wi ldlife-friendly-erosion-control.pdf
CC. Melissa Collins, Leslie Parris, Erica Hoaglund, Kit Elstad-Haveles
Page 4 of 4
Appendix G
Contamination Review Memo
7.
0
0
0.
z
w
m
U)
0
00
Lo
Lo
co
0
z
U)
J
0
a
a
w
z
z
2
0
0
w
Z)
U)
T
ws b
Memorandum
To: Michael Grochala, City of Lino Lakes
From: Ryan Spencer, WSB
Andi Moffatt, WSB
Date: January 31, 2020
Re: Desktop Contamination Review — 1-35 Corridor AUAR
Lino Lakes, Minnesota
WSB Project No. R-015144-000
INTRODUCTION
WSB reviewed public database information to identify sites that pose a contamination risk to the
Lino Lakes 1-35E Corridor located in Lino Lakes, Minnesota (the Project Area). A map showing
the Project Area is included as Figure 1. The following online databases were reviewed on
January 30, 2020 as part of this desktop environmental review:
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) "What's in My Neighborhood?" website
• Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA) "What's in My Neighborhood?" website
This desktop contamination review is not intended to replace a Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment (ESA) performed per ASTM E1527-13. WSB did not verify the database information
for accuracy. Therefore, further environmental review is recommended prior to performing any
follow-up investigation work (e.g. subsurface borings) to verify WIMN source information. Based
on this desktop review, the following information is provided:
Protect Area Sites
Thirty-three (33) sites were identified at the Project Area (see Figures 2, 2A, and 213). The sites
are associated with 50 database listings, summarized below:
• Twenty-one (21) stormwater permit listings (18 construction and 3 industrial);
• Fifteen (15) hazardous waste generator listings. Inclusion on the hazardous waste
generator database indicates the site generates hazardous waste requiring a permit;
• Five (5) listings were for sites with aboveground tanks (AST) and/or underground
tanks (USTs) but do not directly indicate a petroleum spill or release;
• Two (2) air quality permit listings; and
• One (1) site assessment listing. Site Assessment sites are places where
contamination or regulated waste activities have been reported to the MPCA. If it is
determined that little or no exposure potential exists and no further remedial actions
are planned, the site is closed and listed as inactive.
None of the identified Project Area listings indicate a hazardous material spill or release except
for the following six (6) listings:
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR - Update 2020\Contamination Review\0 -Contamination Review Memo - AUAR 2020 - text.docx
Michael Grochala
January 31, 2020
Page 2
Site 1 — Rehbein Shop/Office, 6805 201h Avenue South, Centerville, MN
• Leak Site LS0015707: The identified leak was discovered in 2003, consisted of diesel,
did not impact groundwater, and was issued site closure by the MPCA in 2006. Site
closure does not mean that the site is free of contamination.
Site 5 —Acton Construction, 2209 Phelps Road, Lino Lakes, MN
• Leak Site LS0001284: The identified leak was discovered in 1989, consisted of fuel oil
#1 & #2 and leaded gasoline, impacted groundwater, and was issued site closure by
the MPCA in 1992. Site closure does not mean that the site is free of contamination.
• Brownfields VP3340: The site entered the Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC)
Program from 1992 to 1997. Brownfields are potentially contaminated sites where the
MPCA is assisting with environmental investigations and/or redevelopment activities.
• Brownfields BF0001207: A second VIC listing associated with Site 5 was listed as
active from June 2019 to December 2019.
Site 25 — Eagle Trucking Inc, 7087 20th Avenue, Centerville, MN
• Leak Site LS0013133: The identified leak was discovered in 1999, consisted of diesel,
and was issued site closure by the MPCA in 2000. Site closure does not mean that
the site is free of contamination.
Site 33 — Lakes 1 Stop, 7090 21s' Avenue South, Centerville, MN
• Leak Site LS0013380: The identified leak was discovered in 2000, consisted of
gasoline, and was issued site closure by the MPCA in 2003. Site closure does not
mean that the site is free of contamination.
Adiacent Sites
Ten (10) sites were identified adjacent to the Project Area (see Figures 2, 2A, and 2113). The
sites are associated with 14 listings, summarized below:
• Two (2) construction stormwater listings;
• Two (2) hazardous waste generator listings. Inclusion on the hazardous waste
generator database indicates the site generates hazardous waste requiring a permit;
• Two (2) listings were for sites with LISTs but do not directly indicate a petroleum spill
or release; and
• One (1) feedlot listing.
None of the listings identified adjacent to the Project Area indicate a hazardous material spill or
release except for the following seven (7) listings:
Site 8 — Corner Express, 1990 Main Street, Centerville, MN
• Leak Site LS0018115: The identified leak was discovered in 2010, consisted of
unleaded gasoline, impacted groundwater, and was issued site closure by the MPCA
in 2011. Site closure does not mean that the site is free of contamination.
• Leak Site LS0020747: The identified leak was discovered in June 2018, consisted of
gasoline, and was issued site closure by the MPCA in August 2018. Site closure does
not mean that the site is free of contamination.
Site 10 — Jim Stevens Construction, 7007 20th Avenue, Centerville, MN
• Leak Site LS0009694: The identified leak was discovered in 1996, consisted of diesel
and gasoline, impacted groundwater, and was issued site closure by the MPCA in
1998. Site closure does not mean that the site is free of contamination.
Site 20 — Hugo 30 Acres, 4330 170th Street North, Hugo, MN
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR - Update 2020\Contamination Review\0 -Contamination Review Memo - AUAR 2020 - text.docx
Michael Grochala
January 31, 2020
Page 3
Brownfields PB4670: The site entered the Petroleum Brownfield (PB) Program from
September 2014 to December 2014.
Brownfields VP31840: A second VIC listing associated with Site 20 was listed as
active from September 2014 to January 2015. Brownfields are potentially
contaminated sites where the MPCA is assisting with environmental investigations
and/or redevelopment activities.
Site 42 — Mcneely Residence, 6687 20th Avenue South, Lino Lakes, MN
• Leak Site LS0015090: The identified leak was discovered in 2003, consisted of fuel oil
#1 and #2, impacted groundwater, and was issued site closure by the MPCA in 2005.
Site closure does not mean that the site is free of contamination.
Site 43 — Lino Lakes Well #4, 6786 Clearwater Creek Drive, Lino Lakes, MN
• Leak Site LS0014107: The identified leak was discovered in 2000 and was issued site
closure by the MPCA in 2003. The type of product released is not known. Site closure
does not mean that the site is free of contamination.
Surrounding Area Sites - Within 500 Feet
Three sites (Sites 21, 36, and 41) were identified in the surrounding area (beyond adjacent) within
500 feet of the Project Area and are associated with four (4) listings. The surrounding area
listings are for stormwater and hazardous waste permits and do not indicate the presence of
contamination.
CONCLUSION
All identified Project Area leaks and VIC listings (Sites 1, 5, 25, and 33) and adjoining leak or
VIC/PB listings (Sites 8, 10, 20, 42, and 43) pose a contamination risk if future redevelopment
involves excavation activities in the vicinity of these sites. Prior to redevelopment in the vicinity of
the identified leak or VIC/PB sites, it is recommended that subsurface environmental
investigations be conducted to determine if contaminated soil and/or groundwater will need to be
managed during redevelopment.
If evidence of contamination or regulated materials are discovered during construction, it is
recommended that WSB's Environmental Group is contacted immediately to ensure all materials
are managed in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. If you have any questions
or need additional information, please contact me at 763-231-4854 or rspencer(Qwsbeng.com.
Enclosures:
Figure 1 — Project Location
Figure 2, 2A, and 2B — MPCA/MDA What's in My Neighborhood Search Results
KA015144-000\Admin\DOCSWUAR - Update 2020\Contamination Review\0 -Contamination Review Memo - AUAR 2020 - text.docx
x
r
` n
+•c
n
i
s let
W4 - r
F a �
O
---------------■
III •
—_—_
III
III
�
III
�
w
_i,
_
� t
_� yy
e-
I
I
---
- - -
-----
Study Area
r City Boundary
Al
Figure 1 - Project Location
Contamination Review
CITDF Y'
L��L -r5 1-35 Corridor AUAR Project
N
2'70eet WS b
Lino Lakes, MN
1 inch = 2,700 feet
Oki
•i
it �
5:.
-
v
}
c
_
I
r• r
,E20
-
3
..� -. 'S
!Y ., �! `•
lit.{` -
a
r
r.1
21
I
{
- 1
..
28 I� 19 37 1'8
iv 15 39
41
•
i 8 34 16 2
32 4
-
•
25 31 4U 33 26
45 27
h
. -
29 1r2 I 35
3 .. •
36
Stud Area
Y
• Investigation and Cleanup
9 p
-
23 l ® 38
Y
r — —
1500ft Buffer
L
• Solid Waste
_
I City Boundary
A Tanks and Leaks
-
WIMN Search Results
0 Water
%42
LJ Feedlot
O Multiple Activities
qq
■ Hazardous Waste
I
-�
Figure 2 - MPCA/MDA WIMN Search Results
CITDF Y'
Contamination Review
1-35 Corridor AUAR Project
N
2'70eet
WS b
LNCL KE5
Lino Lakes, MN
1 inch = 2,700 feet
'�kr.. ..� �..-Y... � ! II• 'fie + •-
F
Study Area LL Hazardous Waste
_ 1500ft Buffer C Solid Waste
City Boundary A Tanks and Leaks
WIMN Search Results n� Water ,
.. h
C Feedlot O Multiple Activitiesu
Figure 2A - MPCA/MDA WIMN Search Results N
Contamination Review
L IN EXI« 1-35 Corridor AUAR Project 0 2,000Feet W S b
LL S Lino Lakes, MN 1 inch = 2,000 feet
$ ' 25 4p1
m + o
III
45 I
❑
—�� ` Q'- ■ 3
Le
27
�
F _•
I
_
12 35 5
■
. -
29
= 36_'
0
�
I
III
23
38
�
,
- _
• 1 0.22
'•
6 t
6TRIFFFIFF
.�
m
4
•
.
I
QStudyArea
Hazardous Waste
I
_ 500ft Buffer
v
Investigation and Cleanup
44
City Boundary
A
Water
WIMN Search Results
O
Multiple Activities
I
Figure 213 - MPCA/MDA WIMN Search Results
N
LINO EU S
Contamination Review
1-35 Corridor AUAR Project
0 1,700
Feet W S b
Lino Lakes, MN
1 inch = 1,700 feet
Appendix H
Mitigation Plan
MITIGATION PLAN
The AUAR Mitigation Plan is outlined below.
ITEM 8. PERMITS AND APPROVALS REQUIRED
As projects are proposed, the project proposer will be required to obtain permits and approvals. Projects proposed since the original AUAR have
obtained proper approvals. Additional permits that may not be listed here may also be required.
Unit of Government
Type of Application
Status
Federal
Army Corps of Engineers
Section 404 Permit
To be Applied for
Federal Highway Administration
Interchange Access Request
To be Applied for
State
Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
Environmental Assessment (AUAR)
In progress
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Section 401 Water Quality Certificate
To be Applied for
NPDES/SDS General Permit
To be Applied for
Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit
To be Applied for
State Historic Preservation Office
Cultural Resources Review
To be Applied for
Minnesota Department of Transportation
Use of or Work within MnDOT right of way
To be Applied for
Drainage Permit
To be Applied for
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Water Appropriations Permit
To be Applied for
Preliminary Well Construction Assessment
To be Applied for
Public Waters Work Permit
To be Applied for
General Permit 97-0005 for Temporary Water Appropriations
(need if more than 10,000 gpd of water is appropriated
To be applied for, if
necessary
Minnesota Department of Health
Watermain Extension Approval
To be Applied for
Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit Approval
To be Applied for
Well Location and Construction Approval
To be Applied for
Regional
Rice Creek Watershed District
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Approval
To be Applied for
Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
Unit of Government
Type of Application
Status
Stormwater Management Plan Approval
To be Applied for
Wetland Delineation Boundary Confirmation
To be approved upon
completion of wetland
delineation
Certificate of Wetland Exemption
To be Applied for
Wetland Impact/Replacement Application
To be approved upon
completion of wetland
delineation
Metropolitan Council
Sanitary Sewer Service Connection Approval
To be Applied for
County
Anoka County
County Roadway Access Permits
To be Applied for
Roadway Plan Approval on County Roads
To be Applied for
Local
City of Lino Lakes
Site Plan Approval
To be Applied for
AUAR and Mitigation Plan Approval
Ongoing
Planned Unit Development Approval
To be Applied for
Preliminary Plat Approval
To be Applied for
Final Plat (multiple) Approval
To be Applied for
Grading, Excavation and Foundation Permits (multiple)
To be Applied for
Building Permits (multiple)
To be Applied for
Sanitary Sewer Connection Permit (multiple)
To be Applied for
Municipal Water Connection Permit (multiple)
To be Applied for
Use Permit — Floodplain District
To be Applied for
City Roadway Access/Crossing Permits
To be Applied for
Comprehensive Plan Amendment(s)
To be Applied for
Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
ITEM 11. FISH, WILDLIFE, ECOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE RESOURCES
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
11.1
Implement the Conservation Design Framework (CDF, see Figure 10-3),
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
which includes conservation of "Core" and "Outlier" habitat areas,
buffering these natural resources, and establishing greenway corridors
throughout the AUAR area to provide connectivity for ecological and
wildlife corridors, regional stormwater collection and conveyance, and
passive recreational opportunities.
11.2
Add the "Core" and "Outlier" habitat areas to the City's Parks, Natural
This has been added to Fig 2-9 in the
Open Space/Greenways, and Trail System Plan map.
Comprehensive Plan.
11.3
Require public land dedication of priority natural open space areas
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
through the subdivision process.
11.4
Require that cash in lieu of public land dedication for subdivisions within
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
the AUAR area be spent within the AUAR area to purchase, restore,
and/or maintain priority natural open space areas.
11.5
Consider provisions for conserving "Other" habitat areas (see Figure 10-2)
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
during the development review process.
11.6
Establish mechanisms for ecological restoration, management,
This mitigation measure is ongoing and
stewardship, and education.
implemented through the Comprehensive Wetland
Protection and Management Plan.
11.7
Provide for turtle and other wildlife passage by continuing to require
This mitigation measure is ongoing. Residential
surmountable curbing in new residential developments and encouraging
developments that have occurred within the study
ecologically sensitive site design.
area have all incorporated surmountable curbs.
11.8
Consult with the DNR and/or US Fish and Wildlife Service to determine
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
appropriate mitigation strategies for activities near the Bald Eagle's nests
within the AUAR area before development occurs within the vicinity of the
nests, including reviewing recommended disturbance limit guidelines
developed by the DNR.
11.9
Continue to enforce the Peltier Lake No -Wake Zone ordinance and
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
establish buffers to protect the Peltier Lake Heron Rookery.
Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
11.9A
The City will limit development within 300 meters of the edge of a heron
Measure was included in original AUAR within the
colony and not allow disturbance in or near colonies from March to
text.
August.
11.10
Require rare plant surveys, by qualified personnel, prior to development in
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
wetland areas and of areas of banded soils between muck soils and
adjacent Isanti, Soderville, or Zimmerman soil map units. These surveys
shall be conducted by qualified professionals at an appropriate time of
year to identify the rare plants.
11.11
Encourage ecologically sensitive design and construction practices for the
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
proposed northerly bypass that would connect 1-35W and 1-35E.
11.12
Implement the Conservation Design Framework (CDF) of the AUAR
Measure was included in original AUAR within the
(Figure 10-3 and 10-2). The CDF includes consideration of:
text.
• Conservation of the most ecologically significant natural resources
within the AUAR area (in particular, the "Core" and "Outlier"
habitats as shown in Figure 10-2 of the original AUAR).
• Protection of ecologically significant natural resources from
adjacent land uses by implementing buffering.
• Connection of ecologically significant natural resources via multi-
functional greenway corridors.
Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
ITEM 12. WATER RESOURCES: WETLANDS
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
12.1
Delineate wetlands in accordance with the Corps of Engineers Wetlands
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Delineation Manual and classify wetlands according to Wetlands of the
United States (Circular 39) and Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the
United States.
12.2
Follow sequencing process of wetland avoidance, minimization,
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
rectification, and mitigation as outlined in the Wetland Conservation Act
(WCA) if wetlands area altered.
12.3
Apply for applicable wetland permits to obtain authorization for wetland
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
alterations under WCA and Section 404 prior to project construction if
development activities will impact a jurisdictional wetland.
12.4
Mitigate areas of wetland impacts according to the requirements of the
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Wetland Conservation Act.
12.5
Submit wetland permit applications and replacement plans, as
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
appropriate, to the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, Rice
Creek Watershed District, and the City of Lino Lakes.
12.6
Follow the requirements for wetland alterations delineated by the Rice
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Creek Watershed District (RCWD).
12.7
Minimize or avoid totally any filling of public waters through careful design.
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
ITEM 13. WATER USE
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
13.1
Monitor water usage and do not permit new development to proceed if it
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
exceeds the capacity of the water supply and distribution system.
13.2
Construct the water supply and distribution system in accordance with
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Minnesota Department of Health standards and with the goals, policies,
and recommendations set forth in the City's Comprehensive Water Supply
Plan.
13.3
As necessary, amend the City's Comprehensive Water Supply Plan and
This mitigation measure is ongoing. No updates
Capital Improvement Plan to be consistent with any future amendments or
have been needed to date for the study area.
updates to the Comprehensive Plan that would necessitate expansions or
alterations to the water system.
13.4
Follow the adopted Wellhead Protection Plans for Lino Lakes and
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Centerville. As necessary, amend the City's Wellhead Protection Plan for
new wells.
13.5
Require abandoned private wells to be sealed in compliance with the
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Minnesota Department of Health regulations.
13.6
Require that the installation of any private individual wells be constructed
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
and installed in accordance with the Minnesota Department of Health
regulations (Minnesota Well Code).
13.7
Continue to implement the City's adopted water conservation policies
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
which are intended to attenuate peak water demands throughout the City.
13.8
Mitigation will be regulated through the City's development approval and
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
permitting process. Proposed master development plans, planned unit
development and subdivision applications, plats, and/or site plans must
address relevant water conservation mitigation measures prior to final
approval by the City. Implementation of mitigation measures will be
assured through developer agreements with the City, which will require a
financial security for land and infrastructure improvements and/or revoke
the right to acquire building permits and/or certificates of occupancy until
all relevant mitigation measures have been addressed.
Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
ITEM 15. WATER SURFACE USE
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
15.1
Consider restricting individual lake access and dock construction along
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
public and private shorelands by encouraging the use of clustered access
and dock facilities.
ITEM 16. EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
16.1
Require project proposers to acquire NPDES/SDS General Stormwater
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
Permit for Construction Activity from the MPCA prior to initiating
earthwork.
16.2
Require project proposers to meet the erosion and sediment control
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
regulations in all applicable regulations, ordinances and rules of the City
and MPCA, and Rice Creek Watershed District.
16.3
Require project proposers to minimize runoff, improve the quality of runoff,
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
and provide erosion control through BMPs and other low impact
development techniques.
16.4
Provide construction oversight to ensure designed sediment and erosion
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
control measures are being implemented.
16.5
Implement the Conservation Design Framework (CDF, Figure 10-3).
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
ITEM 17. WATER QUALITY: SURFACE WATER RUNOFF
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
17.3
Require stormwater management systems to be developed in accordance
Updated to be inclusive of the current version of the
with the current version of the Rice Creek Watershed District Rules (these
rules.
rules assist in achieving the goals of the Resource Management Plan — 3)
and all other local, state, and federal stormwater management
The RCWD rules are intended to meet the goals of
requirements.
the Resource Management Plan-3 that was
included in the 2010 AUAR Update.
7 Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
ITEM 18. WATER QUALITY: WASTEWATER
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
18.1
Monitor wastewater flows and not permit new development to proceed if it
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
exceeds the capacity of the wastewater system.
18.2
Construct the major infrastructure improvements needed to expand the
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
capacity of the wastewater system (i.e. lift stations, forcemains, and
upgrades to the existing systems) in accordance with the Comprehensive
Sanitary Sewer Plan and Capital Improvement Plan.
18.3
Adequately phase capacity improvements.
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
18.4
Amend the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan and Capital
This mitigation measure is ongoing. No updates
Improvement Plan to be consistent with any amendments to the
have been needed to date for the study area.
Comprehensive Plan that would necessitate expansions or alterations to
the sanitary sewer system and regional capacity needs.
18.5
Each proposed development will be required to provide a detailed
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
projection of wastewater generation and flows. These calculations will be
checked by the City's Engineering Consultant.
18.6
The City will create a year-end report to evaluate wastewater increases by
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
major sewer lines and overall system usage in relation to capacity.
Results of this assessment will become the targets for growth for the
following year.
Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
ITEM 19. SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
19.1
Require the removal of all tanks and associated underground piping in
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
accordance with applicable state and federal laws.
19.2
Require that any party that may discover residual petroleum
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
contamination shall follow state law and report the information to the
MPCA for further investigation and potential remediation.
ITEM 21. TRANSPORTATION
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
21.1
Create a monitoring program that closely evaluates traffic impacts from
Traffic Impact Studies are required for proposed
proposed developments within the AUAR area.
developments showing the impact on the
transportation system and consistency with the
AUAR.
21.2
Implement traffic mitigation measures as development occurs within the
CSAH 14 improvement was completed in 2009 and
AUAR area. Specific mitigation measures for the three development
noted in the 2010 AUAR Update
scenarios are discussed in Item 21 and depicted on Figures 21-8, 21-9,
and 21-10. These mitigation measures improve overall traffic operations
CSAH 54 (formerly CSAH 21) 20th Avenue North
for the respective development scenarios. The improvements are
intersection improvements were completed and
intended to represent the minimum level of infrastructure investment that
noted in the 2010 AUAR Update.
would be needed to meet acceptable level of service standards. Additional
roadway and non -motorized improvements, beyond the minimum level,
1-35E Interchange reconstruction was completed in
may be identified to accommodate specific development needs that are
2011. This mitigation measure is complete.
identified within the AUAR area. Primary improvements, regardless of land
use scenario, include:
21.2.1 Develop frontage road system in compliance with local, county,
and state access management guidelines to serve local and regional
traffic.
21.2.2 Work with appropriate road authorities to reconstruct and provide
additional capacity for CSAH 21.
Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
21.2.3 Work with appropriate road authorities to construct Northerly
Bypass with new interchanges at 1-35W and 1-35E (80th Street East) to
improve traffic operations and access to and within the AUAR area. As
recommended by FHWA and Mn/DOT, a phasing plan should be
established to construct each piece of the Northerly Connector as it
becomes necessary to maintain the serviceability of the transportation
system.
Phase Improvement
1. CSAH 14, 1-35W to 1-35E (funded and
fnr
programmed Genotri 1Gtk)n\
_ . CS A u�1 35 i nterchige
3. CR 140 (80th Street)/1-35E Interchange
4. CSAH 14 across Peltier Lake (Northerly
Bypass/Connector)
5. CSAH 14/1-35W Interchange
As part of these improvements, the following steps should be taken as the
opportunity is presented:
• Inclusion of the northerly bypass and proposed interchanges in
future transportation and comprehensive plans
• Preservation of right of way through official mapping or other
process
• Right of way dedication through the platting process
21.3
Require a traffic impact analysis for all development projects within the
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
AUAR area. The traffic impact analysis will assist the City and other road
authorities in determining the appropriate mitigation measures that are
required to mitigate impacts of a specific development proposal.
10 Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
21.4
Work with appropriate road authorities to mitigate the impact of the
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
additional traffic on the on the regional system, specifically Interstates
35W and 35E, by reconstructing each to provide a six -lane cross-section
consistent with the recommendations outlined in the I-35 IRC. It should be
noted that it was determined that an expansion will be necessary even
without the development scenarios used in this analysis. As the
interstates serve a much larger area, the projected growth of the entire
Twin Cities region should warrant expansion by the year 2030.
21.5
Prioritize alternative travel modes within the AUAR study area and require
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
project proposers to address alternative travel modes (e.g., buses,
bicyclists, and pedestrians) by identifying appropriate accommodations.
21.6
Consider the need for additional infrastructure improvements (see item
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
#21.2) in future updates or amendments to the Comprehensive Plan.
Submit the plan update to the appropriate agencies (i.e., FHWA, MnDOT,
Met Council, etc.).
21.7
Require project proposers to follow all appropriate guidelines and policies
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
related to traffic nose and noise walls.
21.8
Require that site plans for each of the developments include measures
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
such as appropriate setback distances, earthen berms, noise walls, and
appropriate site design to reduce the impact of traffic noise to residential
areas.
21.9
Continue to require the implementation of the conditions of approval for
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
the Eagle Brook Church relating to mitigating traffic impacts.
21.10
Achieve effective traffic operations within the city by requiring that site
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
plans make use of access management practices to promote safe,
effective traffic flow.
21.11
Require project proposers to follow the Anoka County Highway
This mitigation measure is ongoing and has been
Department Development Review Process Manual (updated June 2013).
updated to reflect the newest manual.
21.12
Continue to coordinate capital improvement programming with applicable
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
transportation authorities.
11 Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
ITEM 25. CULTURAL RESOURCES / FARMLANDS
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
25.1
Consult the map that shows areas with a high potential for archaeological
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
sites when development applications are submitted for review. Given the
sensitive nature of this information, this map cannot be included in the
AUAR document, nor can it be made available to the public. If a
development application falls within an area that is considered to have a
high potential for archaeological sites, the City will require that the
following steps and procedures involved in the identification and analysis
of any archaeological sites is followed prior to development:
■ Conduct a Phase I archaeological survey within the area of
potential effect (APE). The objective of the archaeological
fieldwork is to determine if there are archaeological sites in
the areas identified as having high potential for such and
define the extent of those sites that may be impacted by
development plans.
■ Conduct a Phase II archaeological survey. If archaeological
resources are uncovered within the APE that may be eligible
for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)
a Phase II survey should be conducted. The objective of the
investigation is to determine whether archaeological
resources are eligible for listing on the NRHP.
■ Plan for avoidance or conduct Phase III data recovery. If a
significant archaeological site is identified that will be
impacted by development, avoidance is recommended. If this
is not possible, then a data recovery of the site should occur.
■ If human remains are recovered at any time during
archaeological investigation or development, all activities
must stop, and consultation initiated with the Office of the
State Archaeologist and Minnesota Indian Affairs Council.
12 Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
25.2
Consider preservation of agricultural heritage sites by implementing
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
thoughtful interpretive planning. As development plans for the two Century
Farms come to fruition, the City can encourage landscaping and other
amenities that reflect the agricultural heritage of this city. In addition, the
City can continue to reflect the agricultural heritage of the community in
public buildings and gathering places (for example, City Hall reflects
elements of the community's agricultural heritage).
ITEM 27. COMPATIBILITY WITH PLANS
Item No.
Mitigation Description
Update
27.1
Use the information contained in the AUAR during future considerations of
The City has completed the 2040 Comprehensive
updates or amendments to the adopted Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Plan.
Ordinance. Any future consideration of amendments or updates to the
Comprehensive Plan and Ordinances would follow the City's set
procedures and guidelines for such amendments.
27.2
Require that tools such as clustering, buffering, and/or screening be
This mitigation measure is ongoing.
incorporated into future development plans to mitigate potential land use
conflicts.
13 Mitigation Plan Update — 2020 January 31, 2020
Appendix I
Responses to Comments
Comment
March 13, 2020
Michael Grochala, Community Development Director
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
RE: City of Lino Lakes, 1-35E Corridor Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) 2020
Update
Metropolitan Council Review File No. 19528-5
Metropolitan Council District No. 11
Dear Mr. Grochala
The Metropolitan Council received the City of Lino Lakes AUAR Update for the 1-35E Corridor
on February 25, 2020, The City adopted the Final AUAR for the 1-35E Corridor on September
26, 2005. Pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410.3610 Subp. 7, an AUAR must be updated every
five years in order to remain valid. The Council reviewed a previous AUAR Update for the 1-35E
Corridor on July 14, 2015.
Council staff have conducted a review of the 1-35E Corridor AUAR 2020 Update to determine its
accuracy and completeness in addressing regional concerns. The staff review has concluded
that the AUAR Update is not complete; and its mitigation plans do not reflect scenarios that are
likely or conform to either the 2040 Transportation System Plan or the 2040 Regional Parks
Policy Plan (RPPP), Council staff offer the following comments:
S. Land Use l Appendix A (Michael Larson, 651-602-1407)
The AUAR Update is not complete because Revised Scenario 1— 2040 Comprehensive
Plan does not reflect the comprehensive plan that is currently in effect (Minn. Rules
4410.3610, subp 3). The AUAR Update incorrectly asserts that Scenario 1 reflects the
"current, adopted Comprehensive Plan." The City of Lino Lakes submitted its proposed 1.
2040 comprehensive plan (2040 Plan) for review by the Metropolitan Council on
November 27, 2019. On December 20, 20191 the Council found the 2040 Plan
incomplete for review. The City of Lino Lakes can only adopt its Plan following
authorization by the Metropolitan Council, which has not yet occurred. Until that time, the
City's 2030 comprehensive plan remains in effect.
The Council also does not consider Scenario 1, as presented, to be consistent with the
2040 Plan submitted for Council review. Scenario 1 reflects a build -out of the City's
Urban Reserve that is located west of 1-35E and east of Rice Creek Chain of Lakes
Regional Park Reserve. The City's proposed 2040 Land Use Plan (Figure 3-2) does not
show development in this location prior to 2040. The City may present a build -out
scenario, but not as one that represents the comprehensive plan. The remaining land
uses shown in Scenario 1 appear to be consistent with 2040 Plan Figure 3-2.
METROPOLITAN
C 0 U N C I L
1. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan scenario has
been added into the AUAR Update. The traffic,
sewer, water, and stormwater technical memos
has been reviewed and updated to include this
scenario in the appendices. This has been added
to the AUAR Update in response to this
comment.
Comment
Response
2. As part of the long-term planning process, the
City of Lino Lakes is anticipating the future need
for 80th Street to connect to the west. The
Michael Grochala, City of Lino Lakes
March 13, 2020
planned timing for this connection is post 2040.
Page 2
The City recognizes the need to begin this
9. Land Use 111, Water Resources 113. Fish, wildlife, etc. (Lmmett Mullin, 651-602-
dialogue between the Met Council and Anoka
The proposed mitigation measures of a westward extension of 80th Street (County Road
Thep
County and therefore has indicated this future
140) and an interchange with 1-35W does not conform to the 2040 Regional Parks Policy
road connection in its transportation plan and in
Plan. The Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Reserve is owned and operated by Anoka 2.
❑
this AUAR. This project could be subject to a
County and has a Metropolitan Council -approved master plan that was originally
developed in 1975 and revised in 1999. In 2003, 2012, and 2013, the master plan was
separate environmental review process and
amended to adjust the boundaries of the park reserve to what is existing today. The
would be evaluated for environmental review at
5,300 acre Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Park Reserve is one of the largest in the seven-
that time.
county metropolitan area and contains some of the most significant native wildlife habitat
and water resources in the region. It is also rich in cultural resources with several known
significant archaeological sites within its boundary,
3. We understand that these improvements are
not identified by Met Council 2040 Transportation
The original AUAR acknowledges that the proposed transportation improvements would
have impacts on the Park Reserve, However, it asserts that these mitigation measures
Policy Plan. However, the City has identified the
would have lesser impacts than an alternative of increasing the capacity of CSAH 14
improvements in the current 2040
(Main Street). Council staff believe that there has been insufficient study of alternatives
Comprehensive Plan update in the "Post-2040"
to make this determination.
conditions. It is also understood that as the area
18. Traffic and Transportation l Appendix E (Russ Owen, 651-602-1724)
develops these improvements or other
As with the original AUAR, the proposed mitigation of transportation demand includes a
improvements would be considered. If
proposed westward expansion of 80th Street (County Road 140) through Rice Creek
Chain of Lakes Regional Park Reserve, including new interchanges of this roadway at I-
environmental review for the future roadway
35E and 1-35W. These interchanges are not included in either the current or increased 3.
❑
connection is required, it will be completed at that
revenue scenarios of the 2040 Transportation Policy Plan. The likelihood of an
time.
interchange at 1-35W are diminished by potential findings in an Environmental Impact
Statement for the interchange, which would inevitably include both Section 4(f) and
Section 6(f) evaluation. Although the original AUAR acknoweeged the need for further
environmental review required by state and federal agencies, the mitigation plan should
consider alternative local and regional connections that do not have such obvious
environmental constraints or programmatic obstacles.
If you have any questions or need further information, please contact the listed technical
reviewer or Michael Larson, Principal Reviewer, at 651-602-1407.
Sincerely,
LisaBe Baraj , Director
Community D elopment Divisi
CC', Minnesota Environmental Quality Board
Todd Sherman, Development Reviews Coordinator, MnDOT - Metro Division
Susan Vento, Metropolitan Council District No 11
Michael Larson, Sector Representative / Principal Reviewer
Raya Esmaehi, Reviews Coordinator
N:ICammi7ev4LPAICammunitieslLrno LakeslLefterslbno Lakes 2020 AUAR 135E Corridor 19523 5.docx
Comment
Response
1. Comment noted.
MINNESOTA POLLUTION
" CONTROL AGENCY
P 2. As the area develops the traffic noise will be
addressed on a case by case basis.
520tafayette Road North I St, Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 1 651-296-63o0
800-657-3864I Use your preferred relay service I info,pca@state.mn.us I Equal Opportunity Employer
3. Comment noted.
March 12, 2020
Michael Grochala
Community Development Director
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Parkway
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
Re: 1-35F Corridor Alternative Urban Areawide Review Update
Dear Michael Grochala:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Alternative Urban Areawide Review
(AUAR) Update for the 1-35F Corridor project (Project) in the city of Lino Lakes, Anoka County,
Minnesota. The Project consists of a large mixed -use development area. Regarding matters for which
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has regulatory responsibility of other interests, the
MPCA staff has the following comments for your consideration.
Contamination Hazardous Materials Wastes Item 12
As noted in the AUAR Update, the MPCA database What's In My Neighborhood? identified the presence 1 ,
of several properties near the Project area with actual or potential soil and/or groundwater
contamination. State law requires that persons properly manage contaminated soil and water they
uncover or disturb - even if they are not the party responsible for the contamination. Developers
considering construction on or near contaminated properties should begin working early in their
planning process with the MPCA's Brownfields Program to receive necessary technical assistance in
managing contamination. For some properties, special construction might be needed to prevent the
further spreading of the contamination and/or prevent vapors from entering buildings or utility
corridors. Information regarding the Brownfields Program can be found at:
htts)s://www. pca. state. rn n. us/wa ste/brownfie I d s. If contamination is found, it must be reported
immediately to the state duty officer at 651-649-5451 or 800-422-079R.
Noise (item 171
The 2005 AUAR discusses traffic noise and the impacts of noise on certain wildlife. Although the
responsible governmental unit is not required to consider noise as part of this assessment, the MPCA
recommends that they revisit traffic -related noise (2005 AUAR p. 97-100). The Minnesota Department
of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration have updated their noise modeling since
2005. Other noise concerns can be addressed on a case -by -case basis upon development. For noise
related questions, please contact Fawkes Steinwand at 651-757-2327 or
Fawkes.SteinwandCZD5tate.mn.us.
Transportation (item 18)
The original AUAR was completed in 2005 and analyzed three scenarios for development for the years 3
2030 and post 2030. Mitigation plans developed included adding new roadway connections, intersection
control, turn lanes, and widening roads as necessary. Based on the comparison of the forecasted traffic
generation from the AUAR area and the forecasted 2040 traffic volumes, the traffic analysis conducted,
and Mitigation Plan recommended with the 2005 AUAR and the 2010 and 2015 updated AUAR's remains
Comment
Response
Michael Grochala
Page 2
March 12, 2020
valid for this AUAR update. Many of the mitigation measures outlined in the previous update were
completed in the past few years and there are several mitigation measures that are currently ongoing.
Please contact Mehjabeen Rahman at Mehjabeen.Rahman@state.mn.us if you have any questions.
We appreciate the opportunity to review this Project. Please provide your specific responses to our
comments and notice of decision on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement. Please be aware
that this letter does not constitute approval by the MPCA of any or all elements of the Project for the
purpose of pending orfuture permit action(s) by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the
Project proposer to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit conditions. If
you have any questions concerning our review of this AUAR Update, please contact me by email at
Karen.kromar(&state.mn.us or by telephone at 651-757-2508.
ISSiinncerelly,, �^,
Karen Kromar
Project Manager
Environmental Review Unit
Resource Management and Assistance Division
KK:bt
cc: Dan Card, MPCA, St. Paul
Fawkes Steinwand, MPCA, St. Paul
Mehjabeen Rahman, MPCA, St. Paul
Comment
Response
1. An extensive cultural resource review was
DEPARTMENT OF
completed with the original AUAR. The
ADMINISTRATION
mitigation plan requires Phase I studies within
sites that fall within areas of high potential for
STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
archaeological sites. These are mitigation
measures 25.1 and 25.2.
March 13, 2020
Mr. Michael Grochala
2. Comment Noted.
Community Development Director
City of Lino Lakes
600 Town Center Pkwy
Lino Lakes, MN 55014
RE: AUAR Update: 1-35E Corridor
T31 R22 S1, 2, 3, 10, 11, 12, 13
Lino Lakes, Anoka County
SHPO Number: 2020-1179
Dear Mr. Grochala:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this AUAR Update. We note that we did not review the
initial AUAR nor any subsequent updates, so we have not commented on this development area in the
past.
Due to the nature and location of the proposed project, we recommend that a Phase I archaeological
survey be completed. The survey must meet the requirements ofthe Secretary ofthe Interior's
1
Standards for Identification and Evaluation. The survey should include an evaluation of eligibility for the
National Register of Historic Places for any properties that are identified. For a list of consultants who
have expressed an interest in undertaking such surveys, please visit the website
preservationdirectory. mnhs.org, and select "Archaeologists' in the "Search by Specialties" box.
We will reconsider the need for survey if the project area can be documented as previously surveyed or
disturbed. Any previous survey work must meet contemporary standards. Note. plowed areas and
right-of-way are not automatically considered disturbed. Archaeological sites can remain intact beneath
the plow zone and in undisturbed portions of the right-of-way.
Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 ofthe National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36 CFR § 800. If this project is considered for federal financial
assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, then review and consultation with our office will need
to be initiated by the lead federal agency. Be advised that comments and recommendations provided by
our office for this review may differ from findings and determinations made by the federal agency as
part of review and consultation under Section 106.
If you have any questions regarding our review of this project, please contact our Environmental Review
Program at (651) 201-3285.
Sincerely,
`m-w-
Sarah J. Beimers
Environmental Review Program Manager
MINNESOTA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE
50 Sherburne Avenue 1 Administration 13uilding2o3■ Saint Paul, Minnewta 55155■ 651-201-3287
mn.go ladminlshpol■ moshpopoate.mn—
W EQVALOPMOUNIi 0SERVICE PROMD R
Comment
Response
1. The City will obtain any necessary permits
Mr. Grochala,
and reviews for city -lead projects. The
The DNR has
reviewed the 1-35E Corridor AUAR Update and would like to provide the following
Preliminary Well Construction Assessment
comments:
has been added to Item 8 in the Update and
1.
Page 2, Water. When planning for additional municipal water supply infrastructure,
the Mitigation Plan.
please apply for a Preliminary Well Construction Assessment through MPARS,
MNDNR's online permitting and reporting system. The City of Lino Lakes is required
2. Comment noted. This permit was listed in the
to request the amendment of the City of Lino Lakes DNR Water Appropriation Permit
AUAR Update.
1985-6168 at least 6-12 months prior to exceeding the authorized volume of DNR
Water Appropriation Permit 1985-6168.
3. These PWI numbers have been added to the
2.
Page 3, Approved Development. Please note that a DNR Water Appropriation Permit
Update.
is required for the pumping of groundwater, pond water, or surface water in volumes
4. Comment note. This will be taken into
that exceed 10,000 gallons per day, or one million gallons per year, to allow grading,
consideration as development is proposed in
building construction, pond construction, stream crossing construction and the
the study area.
construction of utilities.
3.
Page 5, Water Resources. Under Section 11.a.i., please include MNDNR Public
5. The DNR has been added to this section.
Waters Inventory numbers for Peltier Lake, Rondeau Lake, Clearwater Creek, and
Hardwood Creek.
6. These waters have been noted as impaired in
4.
Page 6, Stormwater. The DNR urges the City of Lino Lakes to consider using
this section.
stormwater to irrigate landscaping as a means of conserving groundwater. Minnesota
7 The DNR NHIS letter has been added to the
Statutes exempt stormwater use from DNR Water Appropriation Permit requirements.
Update in the appendix and referenced in this
5.
Page 7, Surface Waters. Under Section 11.b.iv., please include MNDNR in the list of
section. The information from the NHIS
agencies under which future projects affecting water resources may be regulated.
system is similar to information obtained
6.
Page 7, Surface Waters. Please note that Hardwood Creek and Peltier Lake are
during the original AUAR and its subsequentupdates. The mitigation plan acknowledges
impaired waters. Every effort must be made to reduce further impact to these public
the areas contained within the Minnesota
waters. The planned increase in impervious surfaces will also increase the amount of
Biological Survey Sites Biological
road salt used in the project area. Chloride released into local lakes and streams
Significance.
does not break down, and instead accumulates in the environment, potentially
reaching levels that are toxic to aquatic wildlife and plants. Consider promoting local
8. This Assessment has been added to the
business and city applicator participation in the Smart Salting Training offered through
AUAR and Mitigation Plan as noted in
the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. More information and resources can be
Response #1 above.
found at this website. Many winter maintenance staff who have attended the Smart
Salting training — both from cities and counties and from private companies — have
used their knowledge to reduce salt use and save money for their organizations.
7.
Page 8, Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources (rare
features). Items 13.a-d. do not provide any discussion of natural resources. The
2/20/2020 Natural Heritage letter was not included in AUAR attachments. Please see
a copy of this letter (attached to this email) and include it, and a discussion of its
contents, in the AUAR and Mitigation Plan. The City of Lino Lakes contains many
natural resources which could be impacted by this project.
8.
Appendix C, Water Appropriation Memo, Page 5. Appendix C indicates that the City
of Lino Lakes will need to construct an additional three wells to serve the growth in
population of the City of Lino Lakes. Please note that the DNR will need to conduct a
"Well Construction — Preliminary Assessment" for each of the new wells within 6-12
months prior to the construction of the well.
9. The majority of the area covered by the 1-35E AUAR is within the Drinking Water
Supply Management Area of the City of Lino Lakes. This is an area where
groundwater pollution will enter the water system of the City of Lino Lakes within 10
years of the initial contamination event. Care should be taken in the handling of
potential pollutants in this area.
10. Due to entanglement issues with small animals, use of erosion control blankets
throughout the project should be limited to `bio-netting' or `natural netting' types, and
specifically not products containing plastic mesh netting or other plastic components.
These are Category 3N or 4N in the 2016 & 2018 MnDOT Standards Specifications
for Construction. Also be aware that hydro -mulch products may contain small
synthetic (plastic) fibers to aid in its matrix strength. These loose fibers could
potentially re -suspend and make their way into Public Waters. As such, please review
mulch products and do not allow any materials with synthetic (plastic) fiber additives
in areas that drain to Public Waters.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you,
Melissa Collins
Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist I Ecological and Water Resources
Pronouns: She/her
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
1200 Warner Road
St. Paul, MN 55106
Phone: 651-259-5755
Email: melissa.collins(a�state.mn.us
mndnr.gov
MDEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL RESOURCES
9. This comment is noted.
10. The comment is noted and will be reviewed
when development is proposed in the study
area.
7