Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/12/2005 Env Bd Packet• • City of Lino Lakes Environmental Board Meeting October 12, 2005 6:30 p.m. (This meeting not televised) AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Minutes from August 31, 2005 to be approved at the October 26, 2005 Meeting 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 4. OPEN MIKE 5. ACTION ITEMS A. I -35E Corridor Final AUAR 6. DISCUSSION ITEMS A. Hardwood Creek Update B. Rice Creek Professional Building 7. ADJOURN • • Environmental Board Meeting Date: Topic: Background: Agenda Item 5A October 10, 2005 Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review (FAUAR) l -35E Corridor The l -35E DRAFT Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) was transmitted to persons on the Environmental Quality Board's (EQB) official distribution list on June 30, 2005 for the required 30 -day public comment period. The 30 -day comment period started on July 4, 2005 and ended on August 3, 2005. The document was distributed to all required state and federal agencies, the AUAR Advisory Panel, and local units of government including Anoka County, Washington County, Rice Creek Watershed District, City of Centerville, City of Hugo, and Columbus Township. The document was also made available to the public at local and regional libraries, City Hall, and the City's website. The AUAR process requires that the Draft AUAR be distributed for the public comment period and revised to address comments received during the public comment period. This gives the city the opportunity to have the knowledge and expertise of various public agency staff reflected in the Final AUAR. Draft AUAR Comment Letters The City received comment letters from the following state agencies and local units of government during the 30 -day public comment period: • Washington County Department of Transportation and Physical Development • Brit -Vue, LLP • Emmons & Olivier Resources for Rice Creek Watershed District ■ County of Anoka Public Services Division Highway Department ■ City of Hugo ■ HERON Group • Minnesota Department of Natural Resources • Metropolitan Council • Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan District • Village of Hardwood Creek, LLC ■ Wayne LeBlanc Response to Draft AUAR Comment Letters As required by Minnesota Rules, the City must provide replies to comments that are substantive (involving matters with major or practical importance). City staff and the AUAR consultant team has completed the "Response to Comments" element of the Final AUAR, which provides responses to substantive comments received Mitigation Plan The Final AUAR document includes a Mitigation Plan. The mitigation plan takes on the nature of a commitment by the City to prevent potentially significant impacts from occurring from specific projects within the AUAR area. It is more than just a list of ways to reduce impacts -- it includes information about how the mitigation will be applied and assurance that it will. The City's final action on the AUAR must specifically adopt the mitigation plan; therefore, the plan has a "political" as well as a technical dimension. Final AUAR Review Process The Lino Lakes Environmental Board and AUAR Advisory Panel met on September 22, 2005 to review and comment on the city's Response to Draft AUAR Comments and the Mitigation Plan. The City Council authorized distribution of the Final AUAR to persons on the EQB's distribution list as well as to any persons who commented on the Draft AUAR. State agencies and the Metropolitan Council have ten days from receipt of the document to file an objection to the Final AUAR. If no objections are filed, then the City Council is required to adopt the Final AUAR. The objection period ends on October 14, 2005. The City Council will be considering the adoption of the Final AUAR on October 24, 2005. Recommendation: Staff is recommending adoption of the Final AUAR. Attachments: 1. Final AUAR Executive Summary 2. Distribution List I -35E Corridor Final AUAR September 26, 2005 • Executive Summary The I -35E Corridor Final AUAR has been prepared for the City of Lino Lakes (city) in accordance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410. This AUAR process was prompted by the fact that large portions of the AUAR area are facing development pressure, that the city has a strong commitment to conserving natural resources and that the city wants to balance development with natural resource conservation. The city determined that undergoing the AUAR process would provide the city with an invaluable tool as they plan for and manage growth within the northeastern portion of the city (Figure 5 -1). The AUAR follows the format of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) and provides a level of analysis commensurate with an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The large geographic scope of the AUAR area (over 4,500 acres) allows for a comprehensive analysis of the cumulative impacts of development within the AUAR area (Figure 5 -2). Mn Rules state that, "the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) may specify more than one scenario of anticipated development provided that at least one scenario is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan. At least one scenario must be consistent with any known development plans of property owners within the area," (Mn Rules. Chapter 4410.3610 subp.3). This AUAR includes a review of three development scenarios. 1. Scenario One is consistent with the adopted plans of the city and allows for an additional 2,237 housing units, 2,985,733 ft2 of commercial uses, and 11,175,035 ft2 of industrial uses (see Figure 6- 2). 2. Scenario Two is based on known development plans of property owners within the AUAR area and has a commercial and industrial emphasis (see Figure 6 -3). Scenario Two allows for an additional 5,715 housing units, 5,617,890 ft2 of commercial uses, and 9,570,045 ft2 of industrial uses. 3. Scenario Three has a residential emphasis and allows for an additional 8,659 housing units, 4,141,554 ft2 of commercial uses, and 5,829,722 ft2 of industrial uses (see Figure 6 -4). Distribution of the proposed Final AUAR does not constitute approval of any specific project pursuant to zoning, subdivision, or other official controls of the City of Lino Lakes. Rather, preparation and distribution of the proposed Final AUAR is mandated by the Environmental Review Program, Environmental Quality Board, Chapter 4410 Minnesota Rules. Any proposed specific project within the AUAR area remains subject to applicable local zoning, subdivision, or other official controls. Specific projects that are consistent with the assumptions of the adopted Final AUAR and which comply with the mitigation plan within the Final AUAR are exempt from further environmental review pursuant to Minnesota Rules Section 4410.3610 Subp. 5 E. AUAR PROCESS SUMMARY This AUAR process is unique in that it includes a strong public participation and an agency participation component throughout the process, rather than only involving the public-and reviewing agencies after the Draft AUAR is completed, which is the standard process required by Minnesota Rules. To ensure very strong and timely communication and the participation of numerous key stakeholder groups throughout the planning process, an Advisory Panel was selected to serve as the primary working group during the course of the research, planning and environmental review process. The Advisory Panel includes property and business owners within the AUAR area as well as members of the city's Planning and Zoning Board, Environmental Board, and Economic Development Advisory Committee. All information, work products, findings and recommendations developed by the AUAR consultant team were presented to the Advisory Panel for its review and comment. Also, this information was made available to the general public on the city's website viii I -35E Corridor Final AUAR September 26, 2005 • Advisory Panel A series of Advisory Panel workshops were held to present research related to the AUAR, to assist in the creation of the development scenarios that are reviewed in this AUAR document, and to review the Draft and Final AUAR documents. Several Advisory Panel workshops were held for the purposes of presenting the development scenarios, receiving comments on the scenarios, reviewing the revised development scenarios. A list of workshops follows. • Topic Introduction to the AUAR Process Municipal Services Natural & Cultural Resources Transportation Demographics and Market Analysis Development Scenarios I Development Scenarios II Development Scenarios III Draft AUAR Final AUAR Date November 18, 2004 December 2, 2004 December 16, 2004 January 6, 2005 January 20, 2005 February 3, 2005 February 17, 2005 March 3, 2005 June 9, 2005 September 22, 2005 Environmental Board Several members of the Lino Lakes Environmental Board are on the Advisory Panel. In addition to their participation on the Advisory Panel, the Environmental Board devoted its June 7, 2005 meeting to reviewing and discussing the Draft AUAR. The Environmental Board discussed and provided comments on each AUAR item. Several revisions to the Draft AUAR were made to address the comments of the Environmental Board prior to the City Council authorizing its distribution. The Environmental Board met jointly with the Advisory Panel on September 22, 2005 to review the Final AUAR. The focus of that meeting was reviewing the Mitigation Plan. City Council All of the information provided by the Advisory Panel and Environmental Board, including comments, suggestions, and concerns, was assembled and delivered to the Mayor and City Council prior to their review and consideration of the work completed. The City Council held three work sessions regarding the AUAR prior to ordering the preparation of the document at their April 11, 2005 City Council meeting. The purpose of the first work session, held January 19, 2005, was to introduce the City Council to the AUAR process and review the relevant background research. The City Council held two work sessions to review the draft development scenarios on March 29 and April 6, 2005. The City Council held a work session on September 21, 2005 to review the Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan. The City Council authorized distribution of the Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan at its September 26, 2005 meeting. Agencies To engage reviewing agencies early in the AUAR process, a series of agency meetings were held to present background research, to solicit initial comments on the research, and to help the AUAR team scope out the level of detail needed in the AUAR analysis. Valuable information was gained from agency staff that was incorporated into the AUAR analysis. Staff from the following agencies attended some or all of the meetings: Department of Natural Resources, Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Council, Anoka I -35E Corridor Final AUAR September 26, 2005 • County, Washington County, US Army Corps of Engineers, US Fish and Wildlife Service, Anoka Conservation District, Rice Creek Watershed District, and Environmental Quality Board. A list of agency meetings follows. Topic Date Municipal Services & Tour of AUAR area November 23, 2004 Natural & Cultural Resources December 7, 2004 Transportation December 28, 2004 Development Scenarios I January 25, 2005 Development Scenarios II February 22, 2005 The City received comment letters on the Draft AUAR from the following agencies: Department of Natural Resources, Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Council, Anoka County, Washington County, and Rice Creek Watershed District. City staff and members of the AUAR technical team met with agency staff to better understand the comments on the Draft AUAR and to further involve the agencies in the preparation of the Final AUAR and Mitigation Plan. City staff and members of the AUAR technical team met with the commenting agencies to discuss their comments, the city's approach to addressing the comments, and additional mitigation strategies. A meeting was held with Rice Creek Watershed District staff on August 23, 2005 to discuss stormwater management issues and a meeting was held on August 26, 2005 with staff from the Department of Transportation, Metropolitan Council, and Anoka County to discuss transportation issues. Public Open House In addition to the Advisory Panel, City Council, and agency workshops, a public open house was held on February 17, 2005. The purpose of the public open house was to give the general public the opportunity to review and submit comments on the background research and the draft development scenarios. Public Comment Period The Draft AUAR, including a draft Mitigation Plan Outline was prepared and distributed to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and persons and agencies on the official EQB mailing list in accordance with EQB rules. In addition, the Draft AUAR was transmitted to the Advisory Panel and surrounding communities. The 30 -day comment period occurred from July 4 to August 3, 2005. Two state agencies, five local units of government, two business ventures, one citizen group and one citizen submitted comment letters on the I -35E Corridor Draft AUAR. The Draft AUAR comment letters are included in Appendix H. MAJOR ISSUES AND PROPOSED MITIGATION SUMMARY The potential impacts and major issues identified in the Draft AUAR and/or in the Draft AUAR comment letters are summarized in the following section. The major issues include traffic, ecologically sensitive resources, storm water management, regional sanitary sewer infrastructure capacity, and cultural resources. The discussion of each issue also includes a discussion of the proposed mitigation measures that address the identified impacts and issues. A comprehensive summary of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation strategies are included in the Mitigation Plan. The final Mitigation Plan will become a component of the action plan to ensure that the city avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant environmental impacts from the development of the AUAR area • Traffic A detailed traffic impact analysis has been prepared to fully investigate the effects of the proposed land use scenarios on the local and regional roadway systems (see Item 21. Traffic). The traffic analysis focused on x l -35E Corridor Final AUAR September 26, 2005 the operation of the primary roadways and their intersections during the p.m. peak period, which is typically the time when the most severe traffic congestion is incurred. The traffic analysis was expanded to include a noise impact analysis (see Item 21, Traffic), a 2020 no -build traffic analysis (see Appendix E), and a 2030 a.m. peak analysis (see Appendix F) to address comments received on the Draft AUAR. Evaluating the development scenarios involved the complex process of developing and distributing background and development scenario related traffic through the areas roadway network. The network includes a system of frontage roadways that will assist in the circulation of traffic through the area. This roadway system, which was presented to the City and Anoka County early in the AUAR process, was used as a guideline in determining where to put the various developments. The key guidelines included: • Limit access to CSAH 14 and 80th Street between CSAH 21 and Elmcrest Avenue North • Limit access and preserve mobility on CSAH 14, CSAH 21, and 80th Street (assuming future interchange) • Signalized (primary) intersections at 'A mile spacing • Collector (secondary) intersections at '/ mile spacing • Enhance existing street network to serve local trips (e.g., upgrade Elmcrest Avenue North) • Develop frontage/backage road system to provide property access • Consolidate existing access as opportunities arise • Consider I -35E park and ride location • Provide bicycle /pedestrian trail connectivity In general, the overall development scenarios resulted in significant increases in traffic to /from the AUAR area. The major problems with the intersection were southbound left -turns and westbound left -turns. The lane geometry that was assumed was single left -turns on all approaches. The results indicate that given the expected development in the AUAR area that several of the approaches would require dual left-turn lanes to adequately accommodate study area traffic. The redesigned interchange at CSAH 14 and I -35E overall functioned satisfactory during the p.m. peak hour for the 2030 land use scenarios. The northern section of the AUAR area, along 801 Street and the bypass, also showed high traffic volumes and intersections projected to operate over - capacity under the assumed lane geometry. Table 21 -5 displays the overall Level of Service (LOS) for all of the analyzed intersections for the development scenarios for 2030 build -out and post 2030 build -out conditions. Table 21 -6 displays the LOS for each of the turning movements for the 2030 build -out conditions. The intersection traffic volumes for the full development of the scenarios (post 2030) resulted in severe congestion for virtually all turning movements and therefore are not shown in the table. The proposed developments will increase traffic on roadways within, and adjacent to the AUAR area. Mitigation will include adding traffic signals and turn lanes and widening roads as necessary during the various stages of development (see Figures 25 -8 through Figure 25 -12). In general, Scenario One had the least impact on traffic congestion with two intersections performing at LOS F, without mitigation. Scenario Two had four intersections and Scenario Three had six intersections operating at LOS F, respectively. With reasonable mitigation measures all the intersections in Scenarios One and Two were able to operate at LOS E or better. Even with reasonable mitigation measures, Scenario Three, which has a residential emphasis, still had intersections performing at LOS F. These include the east ramps at the proposed Northerly Bypass/I -35W interchange, and the intersection of CSAH 14 and Otter Lake Road. xi I -35E Corridor Final AUAR September 26, 2005 • To mitigate the impact of the additional traffic on the regional system I -35W and I -35E would need to be reconstructed to provide a six -lane cross - section. 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 proj ected growth of the entire Twin Cities region should warrant expansion to the interstates by the year 2030. • • As future growth occurs, alternative modes of transportation may be needed to maintain the area's mobility. These modes may include express bus service, buses operating on exclusive right -of -way (busways), or commuter rail. All three of these modes were looked at in the transit study conducted in 2001 by the Rush Line Corridor Task Forces. The general alignment proposed for the Rush Line is adjacent to TH 61 in Washington County, or within 2 -miles AUAR area. Opportunities should be explored to provide a link to this system as it is being developed. Pedestrian and bicycle paths are another way to improve mobility within and to the AUAR area. It is recommended that any roadway improvements being planned in the AUAR area should include provisions for the addition of pedestrian / bicycle facilities. These facilities should ideally be at least 10 feet wide and separated from the highway shoulder by a minimum of 20 feet. Figures 21 -8, 21 -9, and 21 -10 display the intersection LOS for each of the scenarios and also display the mitigation measures that were identified to address the deficiencies. These figures represent general/conceptual improvements that were shown to improve overall traffic operations for the respective development scenarios. The improvements are 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 that are identified within the AUAR area. Draft AUAR comment letters suggested that the city establish a monitoring program in an effort to link permitted development to the capacity of the surrounding road network. The City will implement an on- going traffic management plan to monitor traffic volume growth and any operational issues that may develop in and around the AUAR area. This monitoring program is intended to give the City, County and other agencies the opportunity to evaluate future development projects within the AUAR area and their cumulative impacts on the transportation system. The results of the monitoring program will be shared with the various road authorities on a regular basis. To implement the monitoring program, a traffic impact study will be required for all developments within the AUAR area and a consistent methodology will be followed. Each traffic impact study will identify the deficiencies and reasonable mitigation measures that are related to the development. Per the City of Lino Lakes subdivision and zoning ordinances, specific level of service guidelines must be followed to obtain an acceptable level of service. Section 1002 -6 of the Lino Lakes Subdivision Ordinance states that if a proposed subdivision is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan with respect to the Land Use Plan, or the Transportation Plan, specific guidelines to roads or highways to serve the development must be met. For reference, Section 1002 of the Subdivision Ordinance is included under the "General Implementation Tools" of the Mitigation Plan. If no reasonable mitigation measures are agreed upon or are unfeasible, the intensity or timing of the proposed development would be staged so as to not overly burden the transportation system. xii • • I -35E Corridor Final AUAR September 26, 2005 Ecologically Sensitive Resources The AUAR area contains a wealth of ecologically sensitive resources including high quality natural and semi - natural areas, wildlife corridors, two rare animals, the Peltier Lake Island Heron Rookery, two rare plant communities, and portions of the Rice Creek Chain of Lakes Regional Park. Mitigating impacts to ecologically sensitive resources is discussed throughout the Final AUAR. The Conservation Design Framework (Figure 10 -3 and described under Item 10) is designed to conserve wildlife habitat and natural plant communities, and will provide an invaluable tool for conservation of wildlife and rare features within the AUAR area. Most importantly, the Conservation Design Framework protects the existing significant fish, wildlife, and ecological sensitive resources in the northwest portion of the AUAR, and goes beyond to identify and protect the most significant outlier habitats, buffering them, and connecting them with greenway corridors. In brief, conservation design principles behind the Framework include: • protect streams, lakes, and groundwater by purifying, filtering, and infiltrating surface runoff to the maximum extent possible • preserve, restore, and enhance existing natural and semi - natural areas and wildlife habitat • create wildlife opportunities by restoring and managing wildlife habitat • establish wide buffers and connections around and between core and outlier habitats The greenway corridors are designed to connect the larger and higher quality natural areas. These corridors will provide three main services: 1) stormwater collection and conveyance, 2) ecological corridors for wildlife movement and native plant dispersal, and 3) recreational trails for people. Certain greenway corridors may warrant design for specific wildlife species, may provide certain stormwater management opportunities, or may need to accommodate different types of trails or passive recreational uses. Design considerations may include corridor width, appropriate vegetation structure, human access and use, and whether or not it is appropriate for a corridor to cross a particular type of roadway. New developments represent opportunities to plan and carry out ecological restoration and management. Ecological restoration, enhancement, and/or expansion will help mitigate potential impacts on wildlife and rare features, and if these activities are planned, scheduled, and carried out at the recommended broad scale, will likely result in a net increase in conservation and ecological benefits within the AUAR area compared with existing conditions. Various tools exist or can be developed to ensure the protection and stewardship of the preserved, restored, and enhanced natural resources in the AUAR area. These tools can be used to establish a consistent set of standards for treating the open space across different areas as they are developed. For example, the buffers shown on the Conservation Design Framework (Figure 10 -3) are conceptual and will allow the city the flexibility to consider several land protection and preservation tools in these areas. The variety of tools listed throughout this Final AUAR will enable public and private sectors to cooperate in creating this natural open space network over time in a realistic market and regulatory context. Stormwater Management Effective stormwater management and planning within the AUAR area is a challenging pursuit, but one that is critical to prudent and environmentally sound development. The AUAR process presents an opportunity for logical and innovative stormwater management that integrates traditional stormwater detention and water quality requirements with environmental restoration and conservation objectives. This ideal can be implemented on both a regional and site scale to minimize the impact of development on runoff rates and volumes, water quality, and the region's aquatic resources. The stormwater analysis is fully discussed under Item 17 and Appendix D contains the Hydrologic Analysis. X111 I -35E Corridor Final AUAR September 26, 2005 The majority of the AUAR area faces many obstacles to effective stormwater management. In many cases agricultural ditch and tile networks have significantly altered drainage basins and changed sub - watershed divides. The drainage capacity of these existing tile networks will be insufficient to convey stormwater runoff from further residential, commercial, or industrial development. The recommendations made within this AUAR document are intended to improve post - development runoff water quality; attenuate runoff release rates downstream and drainage infrastructure capacities for both frequent and occasional rainfall events; and enhance groundwater recharge as the AUAR area is developed. Stormwater management areas (SMAs) will play a critical role in mitigating potential impacts from stormwater following development of the AUAR area. Appropriate design, construction, and maintenance of these areas will enable development to occur without compromising the integrity of the region's aquatic resources. The stormwater management approach outlined in this Final AUAR provides adequate detention of runoff for post - development conditions. It also provides a framework for water quality enhancement and increased groundwater recharge. The stormwater detention facility design will provide hydraulic properties appropriate for native plant species to thrive. All of these factors will help mitigate potential water quality problems associated with development in the AUAR area. The most effective approach to addressing stormwater issues is by implementing an integrated system of stormwater management elements. The Conservation Design Framework provides an appropriate layout for the regional implementation of an integrated system (see Figure 10 -3). Within the greenway corridors shown in the Framework, bio- swales, wet prairie, and wetlands can be oriented in series to effectively retard runoff rates, reduce stormwater volume, and enhance water quality. Runoff rates and volumes are decreased due to increased infiltration, evapotranspiration, and increased friction imparted on the flow. These decreased rates also reduce the ability of runoff to generate and carry sediment and associated pollutants. The runoff volume into the receiving waters will likely increase with development due to the increased impervious area constructed in the AUAR area. However, with the stormwater management requirements outlined in this document, the peak runoff release rates will be decreased from storms of 1 -, 10 -, and 100 - year recurrence intervals and runoff volumes will be no less than 80% and no more than 150% of existing conditions. The recommended large area stormwater management elements will result in relatively small water level fluctuations, provide area to enhance the groundwater recharge necessary to provide base flow to the receiving streams, and provide the detention time necessary to cleanse the runoff of contaminants and meter the increased runoff volume in compliance with Rice Creek Watershed District (RCWD) Rules. Regional Sanitary Sewer Infrastructure Capacity The city has met with Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) staff on several occasions from 2003 through Spring 2005 to discuss existing and future MCES service to Lino Lakes. The MCES is in the process of updating their comprehensive planning for the "Northeast Region," which includes Lino Lakes, Centerville, North Oaks, Forest Lake, Hugo, White Bear Lake, and White Bear Township. They anticipate the need to provide additional capacity in the Forest Lake Interceptor and downstream facilities to serve the future needs of those communities. Currently, MCES is engaged in plans to construct additional capacity support for the Forest Lake Interceptor. Following a series of meetings in early 2005, MCES agreed to construct an additional interceptor to serve the easterly portion of Lino Lakes. The MCES intends to construct this pipe in 2006, in conjunction with a proposed county highway improvement project. The new interceptor should be designed to convey the excess flow not accommodated by the existing Centerville Interceptor. Assuming the existing interceptor can handle 1.7 MGD, the new pipe should be designed to convey flows ranging from 1.3 MGD for Scenario One to 2.5 MGD for Scenario Three (see full discussion under Item 18). xiv l -35E Corridor Final AUAR September 26, 2005 Design of the new interceptor is now in progress. Lino Lakes provided flow estimates, based on the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan Scenario, to MCES in March 2005 (see Item 18 for additional information). MCES has directed the designers to provide capacity in the new interceptor for 2.0 MGD average daily flow. Discussions are currently underway between Lino Lakes and MCES regarding the capacity to be provided in the new interceptor. Assuming capacity remains at 2.0 MGD, the existing and new interceptors will have adequate capacity for projected development through at least 2030 under any of the three AUAR Scenarios. However, ultimate development as projected by Scenarios Two and Three could eventually exceed capacity. If the city chooses to amend its Comprehensive Plan to accommodate components of Scenarios Two or Three, then a subsequent revision to the Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan will be required. The Comprehensive Planning process, including review by the Metropolitan Council, is the appropriate process to resolve any potential sewer capacity issues. Cultural Resources Ten precontact archaeological sites have been recorded in the north and western portions of the AUAR area, and numerous others have been documented in proximity to it (see Table 25 -1). For the most part, sites are located in proximity to water: Centerville Lake, George Watch Lake, Peltier Lake, Rondeau Lake, Clearwater Creek, Hardwood Creek, and Rice Creek. The undisturbed landforms adjacent to these bodies of water have the greatest potential for containing intact archaeological sites. Several sites have been identified on slight rises within the wetlands surrounding Rice Creek; therefore, those wetlands, and the northern portion of Peltier Lake, have high potential to contain intact archaeological resources. Further, those undisturbed areas adjacent to known sites are also considered to have high archaeological potential. Because of the high level of archaeological sites in the AUAR area, appropriate levels of historical and archaeological surveys in areas identified as having high potential for containing cultural resources will occur prior to future development. This is intended to mitigate any intentional or unintentional damage to, or destruction of, important archaeological sites and historic properties without due process and consideration. The 106 Group created a map that shows areas with a high potential for archaeological sites. 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. The city will have this map on file and consult it when development applications are submitted for review. 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 IlI 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. xv • • • I -35E Corridor Final AUAR September 26, 2005 MITIGATION PLAN A comprehensive summary of potential impacts and the proposed Mitigation Plan are included in this Final AUAR. A draft mitigation plan outline was included in the Draft AUAR to assist in the public in understanding the City's initial approach to mitigating impacts. The potential impacts and mitigation strategies included in the Draft Mitigation Plan Outline in the Draft AUAR have been revised and expanded upon to address Draft AUAR comments. The final Mitigation Plan will become a component of the action plan to ensure that the city avoid, minimize, or mitigate significant environmental impacts from the development of the AUAR area. xvi Distribution List • The FAUAR was transmitted to the following agencies and individuals: • Environmental Quality Board, Environmental Review Program • Board of Water and Soil Resources • Department of Agriculture • Department of Health, Environmental Health Division • Department of Commerce • Department of Natural Resources • Minnesota Pollution Control Agency • U.S. Army Corp of Engineers • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • Department of Transportation .* • Metropolitan Council , • Minnesota Historical Society • Technology and Science, Minneapolis Public Library • Anoka Conservation District • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency • Legislative Reference Library • Anoka County Highway Department • Anoka County Parks and Recreation • Anoka County Libraries - Centennial Branch • Washington County, Transportation and Physical Development 4 • Rice Creek Watershed District - • City of Hugo -4- • City of Centerville • Columbus Township • Dean Johnson, Resource Strategies • HERON Group • Brite -Vue, LLP • Village of Hardwood Creek, LLC • Wayne LeBlanc • Lino Lakes AUAR Advisory Panel ✓f��i� "�rZS ( (Y (V'EN1i • t_E fil" isle- �1:��� -tom