2019.04.15 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Ken Meek (Earth Science Associates) submitted a MN Joint Application on February 15, 2019 on behalf of Chris Stokka (MAT Properties) requesting a no -loss, sequencing, sequencing flexibility, and replacement plan approval. The application was considered complete on March 7, 2019. A notice of decision was issued on November 5, 2018 approving an updated wetland boundary and type application. The project involves constructing a 45-unit apartment complex along with parking (above and below ground) and stormwater facilities which will result in wetland impacts in five (5) different areas of the parcel and are further divided into six (6) areas; Areas A, B, C, D, E, and F. Areas A, B, and C are located along the northern boundary of the project limits and are proposed to accommodate stormwater treatment. Area D may be found in the southeastern corner of the project and also accomodates stormwater treatment, while areas E and F are found in the southwestern portion of the project and are proposed to accomodate parking. No -loss The applicant is requesting a no -loss for areas A, B, C, and E. These areas do support soil, hydrologic, and vegetative wetland characteristics, but may be considered incidental as they were newly delineated (in 2018) since a prior, approved wetland boundary delineation completed in 2012. Since the 2012 wetland delineation, a wetland mitigation area was constructed adjacent to the proposed development site, which increased hydrology sitewide. This resulted in the creation of wetland in nonwetland areas, by actions of which the purpose was not to create wetland area outside of the defined conservation easement. Large spoils piles also directed additional drainage to Areas A, B, and C. Sequencing and Sequencing Flexibility_ The application discusses alternative sites and the no -build option to avoid all wetland impacts. The alternative site consideration was rejected as the project required city sewer, water, and utilities and the current site also provides the road network connection needed for residential development. The no - build option was rejected, as not building the apartment complex would not help meet the need for affordable housing within the City of Hugo. The applicant provided four (4) alternatives that varied the number of units and parking stalls and shifted the footprint of the building, parking area, and stormwater facilities. Alternative 4 minimized the amount of permanent wetland impact and was selected as the preffered alternative. Wetland impacts were minmized from 0.42 acres to 0.18 acres as part of this analysis. Lastly, the applicant requests sequencing flexibility for permanent wetland impacts in Areas D and F. The wetland where these areas are found is dominated by reed canary grass. A MnRAM analysis was completed for both the impacted wetland and the replacement wetland. This analysis showed that the impacted wetland is categorized as Manage 3, which requires the least amount of protection. Six (6) of eight (8) functions were rated as low and two (2) of eight (8) functions were rated as moderate (stormwater attentuation and wetland sensitivety to stormwater and urban developoment; while vegetative diversity/integrity was ranked low). The proposed replacement wetland was ranked as Preserve which requires the greatest amount of protection. This wetland ranked moderate for two (2) of nine (9) functions, high for six (6) of nine (9) functions, and exceptional for one (1) of nine (9) functions (aesthetics/recreation/education/cultural). Based on this analysis, replacement for impacts to the degraded wetlands with the replacement wetland would result in a gain in function and public value. BWSR Forms 11-25-09 Page 2 of 5