6.9. SR 09-06-2011REQUEST FOR ACTION
TO ITEM NUMBER
Ci Council 6.9.
AGENDA SECTION MEETING DATE PREPARED BY
Consent Se tember 6, 2011 ustin Femrite, Ci En ineer
ITEM DESCRIPTION REVIEWED B)/
Authorize Publication of Draft AUAR for 171ST Avenue Study erem Barnhart, Plannin Mana er
Area REVIEWED BY
Robert Thistle, Interim City
Administrator
ACTION REQUESTED
Authorize publication of the draft 171St AUAR for 30 day public comment period.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Based on discussion at the August 8 City Council meeting, the draft 1715` AUAR has been revised. The
main changes to the document are included in the transportation and water sections.
If approved, the draft will be published for comment in the EQB as required by statute. The comment
period will run from September 19 to October 19. Once the comment period is complete, responses will
be made to comments received, and if appropriate, the AUAR will be revised before the final 10-day
comment period. If no objections from the State or Local agencies are filed, the City Council will then
be asked to adopt the final AUAR.
As part of the public comment process, staff is proposing to host a public open house on September 26
to give the public a chance to review and comment on the document.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
This is part of the already authorized AUAR process.
ATTACHMENTS
^ Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review for the 1715L Avenue Study Area
Action ~4otion by Second by Vote
Follow Up
N:\Public Bodies\City Council\Council RCA\Agenda Packet\09-06-2011\AUAR%20RFA%209-6-11%20Publish%20Dxaft[1].docx
,~r~
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
171st Avenue Area
..,,, 15
DRAFT
ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW
171ST AVENUE AREA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures
List of Appendices
Executive Summary Page 3
Summary of Mitigation Measures Page 9
1. Project Title Page 15
2. Proposer Page 15
3. RGU ~ Page 15
4. Reason for AUAR Preparation Page 15
5. Project Location Page 15
6. Description Page 15
7. Project Magnitude Data Page 23
8. Permits and Approvals Required Page 23
9. Land Use Page 24
10. Cover Types Page 26
11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources Page 27
12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources Page 31
13. Water Use Page 31
14. Water-Related Land Use Management Districts Page 37
15. Water Surface Use Page 38
16. Erosion and Sedimentation Page 38
17. Water Quality: Surface Water Runoff Page 39
18. Water Quality: Wastewater Page 42
19. Geologic Hazard and Soil Conditions Page 51
20. Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, Storage Tanks Page 53
21. Traffic Page 55
22. Vehicle-Related Air Emissions Page 77
23. Stationary Source Air Emissions Page 80
24. Dust, Odors, or Noise Page 81
25. Nearby Resources Page 85
26. Visual Impacts Page 86
27. Plan Compatibility Page 87
28. Impact on Infrastructure and Public Services Page 89
29. Cumulative Impacts Page 89
30.Other Potential Environmental Impacts Page 90
City of Elk River
' Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 1 of 90
LIST OF FIGURES '
Figure 5-1: General Location Map
Figure 5-2: USGS Map
Figure 5-3: Aerial Photo '
Figure 6-1: Scenario 1
Figure 6-2: Scenario 2 & 3
Figure 9-1: Potential Pollutant Sources '
Figure 10-1: Existing Conditions Cover Types
Figure 11-1: Public Waters, Wetlands, Watercourses
Figure 11-2: Significant Natural Resources '
Figure 13-1: Wells and DWSMA Location
Figure 13-2: Water System Improvement Plan Scenario 1
Figure 13-3: .Water System Improvement Plan Scenario 2 and 3 '
Figure 14-1: Water Related Management Districts
Figure 16-L• Soils Map -
Figure 17-1: '
Subwatershed Map
Figure 18-1: Sanitary Sewer for Scenario 1
Figure 18-2: Sanitary Sewer for Scenario 2 and 3
Figure 21-1: '
Existing Traffic Volumes and Lane Geometrics (2011)
Figure 21-2: Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs) and Development Phasing
Figure 21-3: Development Traffic Distribution
Figure 21-4: '
Future Roadway Network
Figure 21-5: Scenario 1-Full Development Turning Movements
Figure 21-6: Scenario 2 -Full Development Turning Movements '
Figure 21-7: Scenario 3 -Full Development Turning Movements
Figure 24-1: Sound Monitoring and Modeling Receptor Locations I,
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Figures '
Appendix B: Agency Correspondence
~i
~i
~i
~i
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review ,
August 2011 Page 2 of 90
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
The 171St Avenue Area is approximately 253 acres located in the southeast portion of Elk
River (see Figure 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3). The study area is bound by the Mississippi River to
the west with State Trunk Highway (TH) 10/169 bisecting the study area running parallel
to the river. A mixture of office and light industrial land uses is located along the northern
edge of the study area with high and low density housing and parkland to the northeast.
The majority of the land to the east and south of the project area is owned by Cargill
Corporation and Great River Energy (GRE) (see Figure 5-3). Cargill uses their land. and
facility for agricultural research and production. The GRE site contains the Elk River
Resource Derived Fuel (RDF) processing plant.
The Burlington Northern Sante-Fe rail line borders the study area running from the
northwest to the southeast and carries a large number of heavy rail trains each day in
addition to the Northstar commuter train. The Northstar station is located to the north of
the study area.
This AUAR has been completed in conformation with Minnesota Rules 4410.3610. Three
different development scenarios were evaluated as part of this study as outlined below.
Scenario 1-Comprehensive Plan (Figure 6-1)
In 2004 the City completed an update of the Comprehensive Plan that provided new land
use guidance for the study area as well as surrounding areas. The land use designations in
this scenario reflect the land use that is guided in the updated Comprehensive Plan. This
scenario also reflects the anticipated development density that the City has experienced in
the past and for which is allowed for each land use. The following table outlines the land
uses for this scenario:
Table 6-1: Scenario 1
Land Use Acres
Gross Housing Commercial
units s ft Industria
l s ft
Agricultural Research 75
Rural Residential 9 3
Highway Commercial 64 696,960
Light Industrial 82 892,980
Open Space 14
TH 10 ROW 10
TOTAL 253 3 696,960 892,980
* Calculations do not take into account existing or proposed wetlands, storm ponds, roads, right-of-
way, parks, or railroad easements in the study area.
Scenario 2 (Figure 6-2)
Scenario 2 is based on the City's 171St Avenue Focused Area Study (FAST) 'Future
Development Framework Plan'. This scenario evaluates the low end of the density ranges
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 3 of 90
(8 du/acre for High Density Residential Zoning and a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.25 for
Commercial and Industrial uses). A Comprehensive Plan Amendment and amendments to
the Zoning Ordinance would be needed if development were to follow this scenario. The
following table outlines the land uses for this scenario:
Table 6-2: Scenario 2
Acres Housing Commercial Industrial
Land Use Gross units s ft s ft
High Density 46 368
Residential
Job Area 116 1,263,240
Destination Retail 45 490,050
Temporary Destination 20 217,800
Retail _
Transit Center 8 87,120
Service /Commercial 3 32,670
Open Space 5
THIOROW 10
TOTAL 253 368 827,640 1,263,240
* Calculations do not take into account existing or proposed wetlands, storm ponds, roads, right-of-
way, parks, or railroad easements in the study area.
Scenario 3 (Figure 6-2)
Scenario 3 uses the same land use proposed in Scenario 2, but evaluates the high end of the
density ranges (20 du /acre for High Density Residential and a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of
0.35). The Transit Center land use designation does not reflect the increased `Flood Area
Ratio of 0.35 as it is not likely to host increased densities over Scenario 2. A Comprehensive
Plan Amendment and amendments to the Zoning Ordinance would be needed if
development were to follow this scenario.
Table 6-3: Scenario 3
Acres Housing Commercial Industrial
Land Use Gross units s ft s ft
High Density 46 920
Residential
Job Area 116 1,768;536
Destination Retail 45 686,070
Temporary Destination 20 304,920
Retail
Transit Center 8 87,120
Service /Commercial 3 45,738
0 en S ace 5
TOTAL 243 920 1,123,848 1,768,536
~` Calculations do not take into account existing or proposed wetlands, storm ponds, roads, right-of- '~ I,
way, parks, or railroad easements in the study area. '
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 4 of 90
SUMMARY OF MAJOR ISSUES
Fish and Wildlife (Item 11)
The majority of the site. is in agricultural production and therefore offers limited habitat for
wildlife due to crop monocultures and frequent disturbance. There are a few wetlands and
wooded areas within the study area that provide some connection to wetlands and wooded
areas outside the study area. Information from the DNR Natural Heritage Database
identified possible loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), astate-listed threatened bird
species that prefers dry upland prairie or open grassland with scattered hedgerows,
shrubs, and small trees, within aone-mile radius of the study area. With the agricultural
areas being planted in grasses and the adjoining trees associated with the windbreaks
within the study area, this area could be suitable for loggerhead shrike.
To provide mitigation for development, a corridor for wildlife, storm water management,
and recreational opportunities will be implemented as part of development in the study
area. Additionally, the City will require buffers around wetlands and storm water ponds as
part of the development.
Water Supply (Item 13)
The City's water system is split into two pressure zones, the high pressure zone is located in
the north portions of the City and the low pressure zone is located in the south portion of the
City. The AUAR study area is located in the low pressure zone. The low pressure zone and
high pressure zone are connected by three booster stations. Both the water storage and well
supply capacities for the entire City are sufficient for the entire City's water demands and the
demands of Scenarios 1 and 2. For Scenario 3, the water demand will require water to come
from the high pressure zone at a higher rate on the peak day than Scenarios 1 and 2. There
are additional PRV's within the City between the low and high pressure zones. The operation
of one or more additional PRV's would provide the necessary flows to meet the Scenario 3
peak day demands.
For trunk watermain requirements, watermain will be required to be extended within the
study area to provide sufficient fire flow. It is recommended that a 16-inch diameter
watermain is extended south from the existing 16-inch diameter watermain within the TH 10
right-of-way at 171 Avenue. The 16-inch diameter watermain should be extended through
the west portion of the development ideally within aCity-owned right-of-way. It could then
be downsized to a 12-inch diameter on the east side of TH 10 within the 165 Avenue right-
of-way. The 12-inch diameter watermain should then be looped within the eastern portion
of the development and connected to the existing 16-inch watermain within 171St Avenue.
The remaining looping could be accomplished with 8-inch diameter watermain as shown on
the attached Figure 13-2 and 13-3.
Wastewater/Sanitary Sewer (Item 18)
The wastewater generated from the City is diverted to the sanitary sewer collection system
and directed to the City's Wastewater Treatment Facility (WW'fF) located between TH ()
169 and the Burlington Northern Rail Line, north of the Great River Energy plant. Treated
wastewater from Elk River's WWTF is discharged to the Mississippi River. The WWTF has a
current average day treatment capacity of 2.2 Million Gallons per Day (MGD). Based on
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Rage S of 90
data for the years from 2005 through 2010, the WWTF currently receives an annual
average daily wastewater flow of 1.23 MGD. The highest annual average daily flow was in
2005 and was 1.419 MGD.
The estimate average daily wastewater flows projected from the proposed development
area range from 0.135 MGD for Scenario 1 to 0.375 MGD for Scenario 3. The estimated
peak hour wastewater flows from the proposed development area range from 0.526 MGD
for Scenario 1 to 1.351 MGD for Scenario 3. The existing eastern area wastewater
collection and the existing WWTF have capacity to provide wastewater service for the
proposed development area under all three scenarios. However, under Scenario 3 hour,
85% to over 90% of the capacity of sections of the existing trunk sewer system along Twin
Lakes Road from 179th Avenue NW to 171St Avenue would be utilized during estimated
peak hour flow conditions. Also under Scenario 3, approximately 97% of the current
pumping capacity of the TH 169 Lift Station would be utilized during estimated peak hour
flow conditions.
To address the needed infrastructure to accommodate the sewer system, wastewater from
the west side of TH 10 would be conveyed north through a new sanitary sewer line to the
existing 15-inch sewer that crosses TH 10 just north of 170th Avenue. Under Scenarios 1
and 2 a 10-inch diameter gravity sewer line would have sufficient capacity to carry the
projected peak hour wastewater flows from the portion of the study area west of TH 10,
plus potential flow from future development south of the study area. Under Scenario 3 a
15-inch gravity sewer line would be required. For Scenario 1 a 10-inch diameter sewer
would be recommended to serve the area along the west side of TH 10. For Scenarios 2 and
3 a 15-inch gravity sewer line would be needed to carry the projected flows west of TH 10
to allow for potential future development south of the study area.
Wastewater from the east side of the study area between TH 10 and the Burlington
Northern Railroad could be conveyed north and connected to the existing 15-inch sewer
just south of 171St Avenue that extends north to 173rd Avenue. For all three scenarios, a 10-
inch gravity sewer would be large enough to convey the estimated peak hour flow from the
portion of the study area between TH 10 and the Burlington Northern Railroad. However,
because the current urban service area boundaries extend beyond the limits of the study
area, a 12-inch sanitary sewer is recommended to provide additional capacity for future
development.
Storm Water Management (Item 17)
Approximately 15 acres of the study area is within subwatershed ER02 and drains to the
Rum River. The remaining area is within subwatershed ER01 which drains to the
Mississippi River. The portions of the Mississippi River and the Rum River which are
downstream of these subwatersheds are classified as Outstanding Resource Value Waters
(ORVW). Both rivers are listed as impaired by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for
mercury (Mississippi and Rum Rivers) and PCB's in fish tissue (Mississippi River).
Scenario 1 represents the development conditions with the least amount of impervious
surfaces. Much of the agricultural and open space land uses are preserved under this
scenario with the majority of the remaining area being developed to 75% impervious.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August ZOll
Page 6 of 90
Scenarios 2 and 3 largely consist of commercial/retail land use with 75% impervious and
95% respectively. Scenario 3 represents the most extreme development scenario with
respect to impervious surfaces. Storm water management for any scenario can be provided
• through a combination of wet detention ponds and infiltration features. The soils within
the study area will likely provide ideal conditions for achieving volume reduction and
pollutant reduction through the use of infiltration.
' The City will require a 60% removal of total phosphorus and total suspended solids from
the post-construction developed condition. Any development will also be required to meet
' the requirements of the NPDES permit. In addition, it is anticipated that development will
need to meet the ORVW requirements of the State and therefore, no increase in storm
water runoff volume or pollutant loads from the 1988 baseline land use condition will be
t allowed. Therefore, infiltration of storm water to meet these requirements will be required.
Traffic Analysis (Item 21)
' The analysis included evaluating traffic impacts in the 171St Avenue AUAR study area for
the existing 2011 no build, 2013 no build (beginning of development Phase 1), Phase 1
development completed, Phase 2 development completed and full development of the area
' (development Phase 3 - 5 competed) for all three future land use Scenarios. Each
development Scenario contains a mixture of residential and commercial uses as well as a
transit center and open space.
The future land develo ment will have a si nificant im act on the o erations of
P g P P
' intersections in the project area. The increased trips from development scenarios were
used to forecast future traffic volumes and evaluate traffic operations on the roadway
system within the study area.
The existing 2011 No-Build conditions were analyzed to determine the current level of
operations of the study area and to set a baseline in determining what future roadway
improvement are needed and when they may be required. The results concluded that the
' intersections on TH 10 / 169 currently experience operational issues during both the AM
and PM peak hours and that with any development some level of improvements will be
' required.
The 2013 No-Build analysis indicates that with closing of the 173rd Avenue intersection (with
' Mn/DOT mill and overlay project) and with only background traffic growth (no development
traffic), the intersection of TH 10 / 169 and 171St Avenue will be operating at a LOS F in the
PM peak hour. In order to mitigate this deficiency a dual left turn lane would be needed for
' southbound TH 10 / 169 to eastbound 171St Avenue to improve the overall intersection LOS
to D.
At the completion of Phase 1 development, the analysis results indicates that with any
development scenario the intersection of TH 10 / 169 and 171St Avenue will be operating
at a LOS F in the PM peak hour. In order to mitigate these deficiencies a dual left turn lane
' would be needed for westbound 171St Avenue to southbound TH 10 / 169 and the
installation of a traffic signal at the new TH 10 / 169 and Twin- Lakes Parkway intersection
City of Elk River
' Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011 Page 7 of 90
to improve the overall LOS at both intersections to a LOS D or better for any of the,
development Scenarios.
At the completion of the Phase 2 development, the results of the analysis indicate that with
any of the Scenarios both the intersections of TH 10 / 169 at 171St Avenue and TH 10 / 169
at Twin Lakes Parkway will be operating at a LOS F in the PM peak hour. In order to
mitigate these deficiencies an interchange at TH 10/169 and Twin Lakes Parkway would be
needed to improve the overall LOS of all intersection to a LOS D or better with any
development Scenario.
The analysis concluded that with the completion of Phase 2 of the development, with any
Scenario, an interchange will be needed on TH 10 at Twin Lakes Parkway, to accommodate
any future traffic growth. Based on this assumption, it was determined that there was not a
need to analyze each of the remaining development Phases separately. Therefore, the full
development condition was analyzed to determine if any. further mitigation would be
needed to accommodate the full traffic growth of the area.
Depending on how and where development occurs in the area and how traffic on TH 10 /
169 increases, a third lane on TH 10 / 169 could delay the need for an interchange on TH
10 / 169 at Twin Lakes Parkway by eight years with Scenario 1, six years with Scenario 2
or four years with Scenario 3.
For the Full Build condition for each Scenario it was assumed that an interchange would be
constructed at TH 10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway. Based on the level of development
and the analysis for each Scenario, three intersections on Twin Lakes Parkway (168th
Avenue, Wilson Street and 171St Lane) could have approaches with Level of Service. at or
below acceptable levels, assuming a side street stop traffic control.
If a roundabout or traffic signal is installed at the Twin Lakes Parkway and 168th Avenue in
all three scenarios, the operations would improve to an LOS C. The Twin Lakes Parkway
and Wilson Street intersection will experience approach delays with Scenario 2 or 3. The
delays are strictly the result of the interchange operation and would be eliminated with a
higher capacity interchange. The Twin Lakes Parkway at 171St Lane intersection will
experience some delays for the eastbound and westbound minor street approaches with
Scenario 3 during the PM peak hour. However, the overall intersection LOS is still at a B.
All other study area intersections would be operating at LOS C or better during both the AM
and PM peak hours for all three development Scenarios.
City of EZk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 8 of 90
SUMMARY OF MITIGATION. MEASURES
Pursuant to Minnesota Rules, mitigation measures have been developed as part of the
' AUAR. These measures would apply to any proposed development that may occur within
the study area.
' A. Land Use and Com rehensive Plan
P
A1. Screening between residential neighborhoods, the rail line, and other intensive
' land uses will be required in accordance with the City zoning ordinance.
A2. Changes will need to be made to the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning
' ordinances through the. City's amendment processes if any of the components of
...the land uses proposed in Scenario 2 or. 3 are implemented.
A3. Any development is required to meet the standards in the City's Wild and Scenic
River Protection Ordinance and Floodplain Ordinance.
B. Geologic Hazards, Erosion Control, Hazardous Material, and Waste
B1. The NPDES Phase II Construction Site permit requires a site specific Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be completed for the construction.
This SWPPP is required to include pollution prevention management measures
for solid waste and hazardous material spills that occur during construction.
B2. .Mitigation includes conformance with the City spill response plan. Hazardous
waste spills will be reported immediately to emergency response agencies via
emergency dispatch service. The release of non-hazardous materials will be
reported to the city no later than the next business day.
B3. If a gas station with an underground tank is proposed in the area, annual
licensing from the MPCA would be needed.
B4. Project proposers shall make environmental documents, such as Phase I reviews,
available to the City...
1~
iJ
B5. Development will be required to remove and properly dispose of trash and
debris located within the site.
B6. The municipal waste hauler company will make residential and commercial
recycling programs available to the area. General municipal waste will be
.removed by these waste hauler companies.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 9 of 90
C. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources
CL Wetlands will need to be delineated in conformance with the Wetland
.Conservation Act as part of the development process. The City will review and '
verify the wetland delineation.
C2. Wetland impact is anticipated to be minimized to the maximum extent possible '
throughout the review area. Wetlands will be managed based on the Wetland
Conservation Act (WCA) and the City's Wetland Ordinance.
C3. The Ci will re uire 25 foot buffers around wetlands and storm water onds or '
t3' q P
per the City's ordinance, whichever is more restrictive.
C4. If wetland impacts are proposed, wetland mitigation will be required within the
study area by the project proposer.
C5. Development in the study area will be required to establish a corridor for
wetlands, wildlife, storm water management, and recreation.
C6. The City will actively pursue opportunities to preserve and create natural areas
and through parkland dedication and alternative storm water management
.strategies.
C7. .Storm water management features should incorporate native plantings of
grasses, trees, and shrubs.
C8. The City will encourage planting of trees suitable for loggerhead shrike habitat '
along areas that are adjacent to existing cropland and windbreaks if Scenario 2
and 3 develop and the existing windbreaks are removed.
C9. A loggerhead shrike survey maybe required by the DNR as part of a '
development project if tree or shrub disturbance would be planned during the
nesting season. ,
D. Municipal Water Use and Service
D1. The water demand information as presented in this AUAR will be provided to
the Elk River Municipal Utilities to confirm the water supply, storage, and
distribution systems are adequate as the existing water system model provided
to the City by the Elk River Municipal Utilities, was incomplete. The City's water
system is a split pressure zone system with the proposed development site
located on the low pressure zone side. The water system model provided was
for the low pressure system only and does not take into account the PRV
interactions of the two pressure zones.
D2. A 16-inch diameter watermain should be extended south from the existing 16-
inch diameter watermain within the TH 10 right-of--way at 171St Avenue. The
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011 Page 10 of 90
16-inch diameter watermain should be extended through the west portion of the
' development ideally within aCity-owned right-of--way. It could then be
downsized to a 12-inch diameter on the east side ofTH 10 within the 165th
Avenue right-of--way. The 12-inch diameter watermain should then be looped
' within the eastern portion of the development as shown on Figure 13-2 for
Scenario 1 or on Figure 13-3 for Scenarios 2 and 3. The 12-inch diameter
watermain should then be connected to the existing 16-inch watermain within
' 171St Avenue.. The remaining looping could be accomplished with 8-inch
diameter watermain as shown on the attached Figures 13-2 and 13-3. As the
City does not have a Comprehensive Water System Plan, the trunk watermain
' was sized in accordance with typical development recommendations.
D3. Any abandoned wells found within the study area will be sealed in accordance
' with Minnesota Department of Health {MDH) guidelines..
D4. As the City currently does not have a Wellhead Protection Plan (WHPP), a
Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) has not been established. A
DWSMA will -be detailed for future wells as they are constructed and when the
City is called into the WHPP program by the MDH.
E. Water Quality and Quantity Mitigation Plan
E1. Infiltration best management practices will be required. to meet volume control
goals as listed in Table 17-2. Group A soils within the Study Area will likely
provide sufficient infiltration capacity to achieve these goals.
E2. Design considerations for comprehensive storm water management should
include regional. ponding, individual site underground infiltration systems and a
perforated trunk storm sewer conveyance system.
E3. Approved Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) load reductions and
implementation plans for the Mississippi River and the Rum River shall be
addressed by the development's storm water management plan.
E4. The storm water management plan(s) for the future developments will provide
an in depth analysis of existing and proposed drainage patterns and pollutant
loads.. The plan(s) will demonstrate. compliance with nondegradation, City and
other local storm water management requirements.
E5. It will be required that post-development discharge rates will be no greater than
pre-development discharge rates for the critical duration event to reduce
erosion impacts downstream of the site.
E6. The developer will be responsible for grading the site appropriately to provide
adequate storm water management to the extent necessary and will be required
to obtain the necessary permits for storm water management and grading, to
preserve the existing natural features, and to provide water quality protection to
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 11 of 90
meet State nondegradation requirements in addition to City and other local '
requirements.
E7. Storm water will be required to be pretreated prior to discharge to wetlands. '
E8. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in conformance with the
NPDES regulations will be needed for any development in the study area. t
Review of the SWPPP for each development will be required by the City.
F. Wastewater Mitigation Plan '
F1. Under all three scenarios wastewater generated from the study area will be
conveyed north through existing 15-inch and 18-inch trunk sewer lines along
Twin Lakes Road and then west through the 24-inch trunk sanitary sewer to the '
TH 169 Lift Station.
F2. .Under all three scenarios, the existing collection system, including the TH 169 '
Lift Station, and the WWTF have existing available capacity to handle the
additional projected flows from the AUAR Study Area. However, under Scenario
3, 85% to over 90% of the capacity of sections of the existing trunk sewer system '
along Twin Lakes Road from 179TH Avenue NW to 171 Avenue would be utilized
during estimated peak hour flow conditions. Also under Scenario 3, ,
approximately 97% of the current pumping capacity of the TH 169 Lift Station
would be utilized during estimated peak hour flow conditions.
F3. Wastewater from the portion of the study area on the west side of TH 10 could '
be conveyed north through a new sanitary sewer line constructed along the west
side of TH 10 and connected to the existing 15-inch sewer that crosses TH 10 '
just north of 170Th Avenue. Under Scenarios No.1 and No. 2 a 10-inch diameter
gravity sewer line would have sufficient capacity to carry the. projected peak.
hour wastewater flows from the portion of the study area west of TH 10, plus '
potential flow from future development south of the study area. Under Scenario
No. 3 a 15-inch gravity sewer line would be required. For Scenario No.1 a 10-
inch diameter sewer would be recommended to serve the area along the west
side of TH 10. For Scenarios No. 2 and No. 3 a 15-inch gravitysewer line is
recommended for carrying the projected flows from the portion of the study
area west of TH 10 to allow for potential future development south of the study '
area.
F4. Wastewater from the portion of the study area between TH 10 and the
Burlington Northern Railroad could be conveyed north and connected to the
existing 15-inch sewer just south of 171~T Avenue that extends north to 173ra
Avenue. For all three scenarios, a 10-inch gravity sewer would be large enough
to convey the estimated peak hour flow from the portion of the study area
between TH 10 and the Burlington Northern Railroad. However, because the
current urban service area boundaries extend beyond the limits of the study
area, a 12-inch sanitary sewer is recommended to provide additional capacity
.for future development.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 12 of 94 ,
G. Traffic and Transportation
G1. Prior to beginning the development and after Mn/DOT has closed the full
movement access at TH 10 /.169 and 173rd Avenue, a dual left turn lane should be
installed on eastbound TH 10 / 169 to northbound 171St Avenue. This should be
included with the Mn/DOT mill and overlay project currently scheduled for 2013.
GZ. Realignment /extension of Twin Lakes Road (as Twin Lakes Parkways from the
railroad crossing to south of TH 10 / TH 169 to accommodate future traffic growth
in the area. The roadway cross section should include four (4) lanes with left turn:
lanes at the primary intersections. This roadway would be completed as
development occurs in the area. The first segment from the railroad crossing to
171St Avenue should be completed to accommodate the beginning of the Phase 1
development. The remainder of the roadway should be completed by the end of
Phase 1 prior to starting or in conjunction with Phase 2 development.
G3. At the completion of the development in Phase 1 or in conjunction with the
beginning of Phase 2 a new traffic signal system should be constructed at the TH
10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway intersection, The intersection should include
dual left turn lanes for southbound Twin Lakes Parkway to eastbound TH 10 / 169
and dual left turn lanes for eastbound TH 10 / 169 to northbound Twin Lakes
Parkway.
G4 The existing traffic signal at TH 10 / 169 and 171St Avenue should be maintained
until such time as the new interchange is constructed to accommodate current and
future traffic demand.
G5. The existing full movement intersection on TH 10 / 169 at 165th Avenue should be
maintained until such time as a connection is made from. Twin Lakes Parkway to
165th Avenue via 168th Avenue and Olson Street, or such time as the interchange.
at TH 10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway is constructed.
G6. Depending on how and where development occurs in the area and how traffic on
TH 10 / 169 increases, a third lane on TH 10 / 169 could delay the need for an
interchange on TH 10 / 169 at Twin Lakes Parkway by eight years with Scenario 1,
six years with Scenario 2 or four years with Scenario 3.
G7. The future primary full movement access (Twin Lakes Parkway) to TH 1.0 / 169 in
the area should be at a location as far south of the TH 10 /169 /101 interchange as
possible (as approved by Mn/DOT).
G8. At the completion of the development in Phase 2 andprior to or in conjunction
with the beginning of the development in the remaining Phases a standard.
diamond interchange should be constructed to accommodate the projected traffic
for Scenario 1, however for Scenario 2 and Scenario 3 an interchange with
additional capacity, such as a single point or diverging diamond should be
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2411
Page 13 of 94
considered. Preliminary concept plans to identify right of way needs should be '
completed as part of the. Twin Lakes Parkway extension project during Phase 2
development.
G9. Th i
e nternal roadway and intersections can be constructed as development occurs
in the area. These roadways should have a two (2) lane cross section with turn
lanes at the primary intersections. ,
G10. The intersections of Twin Lakes Parkway and 171 Avenue and 168th Avenue will
experience delays by full development in all Scenarios and should be constructed
to accommodate a signal system or roundabout in the future when traffic volumes
indicate the need.
G11. Location and traffic control at development access /driveway locations shall
follow the City's Access Spacing Guidelines and be evaluated as development.
occurs in the area. At a minimum each location should include a left turn lane from
the primary roadway.
H. Noise, Construction Dust, and Screening ~
H1. Construction dust control shall be in compliance with the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) at the site boundaries. '
H2. The City limits construction activities to 6:OOAM to 9:OOPM. Construction in the
study area will be required to meet these standards.
H3. Site plans for future developments should include measures such as appropriate
setback distances, earthen berms, noise walls, and appropriate site design (such '
as outdoor activity areas being developed away from major noise sources). Each
of these items should be considered on a case-by-case basis. The site plans
developed for specific projects should show the proposed locations and types of '
mitigation, with the estimated noise reductions for all areas projected to exceed
noise standards.
I. Trails, Parks, Open Space, and Visual Impacts
IL Per the City's ordinances, park dedication will be in conformance with City Code
and the City's Park Plan.
I2. Trail connection to the Mississippi River Regional Trail will need to be
incorporated into development plans for the area.
I3. Through the plan review process, the City shall require appropriate screening
and buffers of development in the study area to screen for visual impacts.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 14 of 90 '
171St Avenue Area AUAR
1. PROJECT TITLE:
' 171St Avenue Area
2. PROPOSER
There is no specific project proposer for development within the study area.
' 3. RGU
Mr. Justin Femrite, PE
City Engineer
' City of Elk River
13065 Orono Parkway
Elk River, MN 55330
4. REASON FOR EAW PREPARATION
EQB guidance indicates no response is necessary
~ 5. PROJECT LOCATION
County: Sherburne
City/Township: Elk River
' Section 11 and NW1/4 Section 14 , T32N, R26W
6. DESCRIPTION
The 171St Avenue Area is approximately 253 acres located in the southeast portion
of Elk River (see Figure 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3). The study area is bound by the
' Mississippi River to the west with State Trunk Highway (TH) 10/169 bisecting the
study area running parallel to the river. A mixture of office and light industrial land
uses is located along the northern edge of the study area with high and low density
' housing and parkland to the northeast. The majority of the land to the east and
south of the project area is owned by Cargill Corporation and Great River Energy
(GRE)(see Figure 5-3). Cargill uses their land and facility for agricultural research
and production. The GRE site contains the Elk River Resource Derived Fuel (RDF)
processing plant.
' The Burlington Northern Sante-Fe rail line borders the study area running from the
northwest to the southeast and carries a large number of heavy rail trains each day
' in addition to the Northstar commuter train. The Northstar station is located to the
north of the study area.
' A. Description of Development Scenarios
The existing conditions of the 253 acre study area include undeveloped agricultural
areas, wetlands, wooded areas, and open space. Wooded areas are located along the
' Mississippi River, wind breaks along the agricultural fields, and isolated patches
surrounding wetlands. The existing cover types are described in Item 10.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
' August 2011 Page 1 S of 90
Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.3610, Subpart 3 requires 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." The 171St Avenue Area
AUAR includes the review of three development scenarios.
Scenario 1-Comprehensive Plan (Figure 6-1)
In 2004 the City completed an update of the Comprehensive Plan that provided new
land use guidance for the study area as well as surrounding areas. The land use
designations in this scenario reflect the land use that is guided in the updated
Comprehensive Plan. This scenario also reflects the anticipated development
density that the City has experienced in the past and for which is allowed for each
land use. The following table outlines the land uses for this scenario:
Table 6-1: Scenario 1
Land Use Acres
(Gross) Housing Commercial
(units) (sgft) Industrial
(sgft)
Agricultural Research 75
Rural Residential 8 3
Highway Commercial 64 696,960
Light Industrial 82 892,980
Open Space 14
TH 10 Right-of-way 10
TOTAL 253 3 696,960 892,980
* Calculations do not take into account existing or proposed wetlands, storm ponds, roads,
right-of-way, parks, or railroad easements in the study area.
Scenario 2 (Figure 6-2)
Scenario 2 is based on the City's 171St Avenue Focused Area Study (FAST) `Future
Development Framework Plan'. This scenario evaluates the low end of the density
ranges (8 .dwelling units/acre for High Density Residential Zoning and a Floor Area
Ratio [FAR] of 0.25 for Commercial and Industrial uses). A Comprehensive Plan
Amendment and amendments to the Zoning Ordinance would be needed if
development were to follow this scenario. The following table outlines the land uses
for this scenario:
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 16 of 90
Table 6-2: Scenario 2
Land Use Acres
(Gross) Housing
(units) Commercial
(sgft) Industrial
(sgft)
High Density Residential 46 368
Job Area 116 1,263,240
Destination Retail 45 490,050
Temporary Destination 20 217,800
Retail
Transit Center 8 87,120
Service /Commercial 3 32,670
Open Space 5
TH 10 Right-of-way 10
TOTAL 253 368 827,640 1,263,240
* Calculations do not take into account existing or proposed wetlands, storm ponds, roads,
right-of-way, parks, or railroad easements in the-study area.
Scenario 3 (Figure 6-2)
Scenario 3 uses the same land use proposed in Scenario 2, but evaluates the high
end of the density ranges (20 dwelling units/acre for High Density Residential and a
Floor Area Ration [FAR] of 0.35). A Comprehensive Plan Amendment and
amendments to the Zoning Ordinance would be needed if development were to
follow this scenario.
Table 6-3: Scenario 3
Land Use Acres
(Gross) Housing
(units) Commercial
(sgft) Industrial
(sgft)
High Density Residential 46 920
Job Area 116 1,768,536
Destination Retail 45 686,070
Temporary Destination 20 304,920
Retail
Transit Center 8 87,120
Service /Commercial 3 45,738
Open Space 5
TH 10 Right-of-way 10
TOTAL 253 920 1,123,848 1,768,536
* Calculations do not take into account existing or proposed wetlands, storm ponds, roads,
right-of-way, parks, or railroad easements in the study area.
Development Assumptions
The development assumptions used to create the three scenarios are intended to
satisfy guidance from the Environmental Quality Board (EQB), which indicates that
the AUAR document should cover the possible impacts through a `worst case
scenario' analysis or else prevent the impacts through provisions of the mitigation
plan. This means that the residential density assumption used to analyze the
development scenarios maybe higher than the actual built density and the assumed
intensity of commercial and industrial development may be more intense than that
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 17 of 90
of future development. Slightly overestimating the amount of potential development
in the AUAR will help to ensure validity of the AUAR for development projects in the
future. If the RGU determines in the future that the project is not consistent with the
AUAR assumptions and mitigation measures, then the AUAR will need to be
amended or a separate environmental analysis (e.g. EAW, AUAR, or EIS) would need
to be completed in accordance with Minnesota Rules Chapter 4410.
• Agriculture Research
The purpose of the Agricultural Research land use in Scenario 1 is to reflect the
agreement between the City of Elk River and Cargill. This land use allows for the
continued use of the property for animal nutrition and agricultural research and
other related activities pursuant to the agreement, while protecting the City's
ability to guide other development in the area.
• Rural Residential
Rural Residential area includes land currently developed and guided for future
residential growth as residential uses in the areas that maybe served by
municipal sewer and water in the future as guided by the `urban growth
boundary' as shown in the City's Comprehensive Plan. A small portion along the
western portion of the AUAR study area is guided in the Comprehensive Plan as
Rural Residential. A gross density of 0.4 units per acre (1 unit per 2.5 acres) is
the target density in the Rural Residential area. The Comprehensive Plan does
allow density bonuses for developments that achieve certain public objectives
such as preserving natural features (which are not otherwise protected by
ordinance), implementing the City's trail and park master plan (beyond the
typical required park dedication) or incorporating energy saving building
techniques.
High Density Residential
The High Density Residential land use category consists of multi-family attached
housing oriented in a vertical fashion, more commonly referred to as apartments
and condominiums. This land use category can accommodate a combination of
side by side townhomes and multi-story buildings (3-4 story buildings). The
density target range, as guided in the Comprehensive Plan, is over 8 and up to 20
units per acre. While 20 units per acre is rather high, an analysis (Scenario 3) has
been performed to include a density assumption based on the `worst case'
densities allowed in the High Density Residential area.
• Community Commercial
The Community Commercial land use focuses on community retail development.
These areas, as described in the City's Comprehensive Plan, are often service and
convenience oriented. Developments in these areas are generally smaller in size
and oriented more towards the neighborhoods. Examples of Community
Commercial uses include drug store, hardware store, and coffee shop often
arranged in a "strip mall" configuration. Developments under the community
commercial designation generally consist of less than 100,000 square feet of
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 18 of 90
retail and professional services. To determine the appropriate Floor Area Ratio
(FAR) assumptions for Community Commercial development within the AUAR, a
review of FAR standards and assumptions was conducted. A range of FARs (0.2-
0.5) could be applied to the AUAR development scenarios. Given the wide range
of commercial, retail, office and business uses that could be accommodated in
areas guided for Community Commercial development, a composite FAR of 0.25
and 0.35 will be analyzed in the scenarios for these areas.
• Highway Business
The Highway Business land use is the most intensive form of commercial
development in Elk River. Businesses in this category may be the largest both in
terms of size and traffic generation. Market orientation tends to be regional in
nature, as described in the Comprehensive Plan. Examples of Highway Business
uses include discount retailers, grocery, and general merchandise. Highway
Business designation are often in excess of 200,000 square feet. Given the wide
range of commercial, retail, office and business uses that could be
accommodated in areas guided for Highway Business development, a composite
FAR of 0.25 and 0.35 will be analyzed in the scenarios for these areas.
• Light Industrial
The Light Industrial category includes industrial uses that are lower in intensity
of activity. These uses limit the potential for adverse impacts on adjacent land
uses due to factors such as noise and odor. Examples of Light Industrial uses
include offices, enclosed storage and warehousing, research laboratories and
light manufacturing. Given the range of light industrial and warehousing uses
that could be accommodated in areas guided for Light Industrial development, a
composite FAR of 0.25 and 0.35 will be analyzed in the scenarios for these areas.
• Open Space
The Open Space category contains both public and private park and recreation
systems, as well as wetlands or preserves. These areas will encompass natural
features and include visual amenities. Trails, wildlife habitat, storm water
filtration, and view sheds are present in these areas.
Job Area
The Job Area district is intended to contain 1-3 story buildings with associated
surface parking and contain buildings with multiple uses in combination with
Community Commercial, Highway Business and Light Industrial. The intent is to
allow a mixture of commercial and industrial uses in the district in a manner that
is compatible with the surrounding uses within the Transit Center land use
designation as guided in the 171St Avenue FAST. These uses include a mixture of
office, retail, and industrial uses. Given the range of uses that could be
accommodated in this area, a composite FAR of 0.25 and 0.35 will be analyzed in
the scenarios for these areas.
Ciry of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
' August 2011
Page 19 of 90
• Transit Center
The Transit Center area is envisioned as a mixed-use district which will include
vertical (2-5 story buildings) mixed-use with ground level retail, office, and
industrial uses. In the AUAR study area, NO residential uses are planned
pursuant to the Settlement Agreement between the City of Elk River and Cargill,
Incorporated. Given the range of uses that could be accommodated in this area, a
composite FAR of 0.25 and 0.35 will be analyzed in the scenarios for these areas.
Service/Commercial
The Service /Commercial district plans for future development of small
professional offices, small service uses, and retail development in 1-2 story
buildings. A number of parcels north of the AUAR study area along the west side
of TH 10/169 already exist. A small portion of the study area (roughly 3 acres)
will continue to develop in this manner. Given the range of uses that could be
accommodated, and the fact that much of the service /commercial uses are
generally small in area than those found in other categories, a composite FAR of
0.25 and 0.35 will be analyzed in the scenarios for these areas.
• Destination Retail
This district responds to considerations for the future interchange along TH
10/169 as mentioned in the 171St Avenue Focused Area Study. The Destination
Retail area suggests a large area of highway commercial land use typically seen
in 1-2 story buildings. Areas west of TH 10/169 are suited for larger commercial
users, while areas east of TH 10/169 are suited for areas of retail and office use.
Projected land use area within this district was calculated as part of the FAST
study and a composite FAR of 0.25 and 0.35 will be analyzed in the scenarios for
these areas.
Temporary Destination Retail
The small area (approximately 18 acres) along the east side of TH 10/169 is
designated as Temporary Destination Retail. This area falls within the future
right of way for the interchanges and as a result, the city must balance the level
of near-term public infrastructure and private investments, knowing that the
future interchange will be built. Mixtures of retail and office uses in 1 story
buildings are expected here, and the projected land use area within this district
was calculated as part of the FAST study and a composite FAR of 0.25 and 0.35
will be analyzed in the scenarios for these areas.
B. Description of Surrounding Areas
The study area is located in southern Elk River. Based on the historical aerial
photos, the site has historically been agricultural. Since the late 1980's/early
1990's, a mixture of office and light industrial land uses have developed along the
northern and eastern edges of the study area. In the early 2000's, high and low
density housing and parkland to the northeast have developed. The majority of the
land to the east and south of the project area is owned by Cargill Corporation and
Great River Energy.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 20 of 90
The Burlington Northern Santa-Fe (BNSF) rail line borders the study area extending
from the northwest to the southeast, and carries a large number of heavy rail trains
each day in addition to the Northstar commuter train. The Northstar commuter
train station is located to the north of the study area, and is located approximately
two miles from Downtown Elk River to the northwest.
C. Anticipated Infrastructure
To accommodate any development of this site, municipal sewer and water will need
to be extended to the site. Additionally, transportation infrastructure and storm
water management facilities will be needed. These improvements are summarized
below.
Wastewater
To address the needed infrastructure to accommodate the sewer system,
wastewater from the west side of TH 10 would be conveyed north through a new
sanitary sewer line to the existing 15-inch sewer that crosses TH 10 just north of
170th Avenue. Under Scenarios 1 and 2 a 10-inch diameter gravity sewer line
' would have sufficient capacity to carry the projected peak hour wastewater
flows from the portion of the study area west of TH 10, plus potential flow from
future development south of the study area. Under Scenario 3 a 1S-inch gravity
sewer line would be required. For Scenario 1 a 10-inch diameter sewer would
be recommended to serve the area along the west side of TH 10. For Scenarios 2
and 3 a 15-inch gravity sewer line would be needed to carry the projected flows
' west of TH 10 to allow for potential future development south of the study area.
' Wastewater from the east side of the study area between TH 10 and the
Burlington Northern Railroad could be conveyed north and connected to the
existing 15-inch sewer just south of 171St Avenue that extends north to 173rd
' Avenue. For all three scenarios, a 10-inch gravity sewer would be large enough
to convey the estimated peak hour flow from the portion of the study area
between TH 10 and the Burlington Northern Railroad. However, because the
current urban service area boundaries extend beyond the limits of the study
area, a 12-inch sanitary sewer is recommended to provide additional capacity
for future development.
Water Supply.
Watermain will be required to be extended within the study area to provide
sufficient fire flow. It is recommended that a 16-inch diameter watermain is
extended south from the existing 16-inch diameter watermain within the TH 10
right-of-way at 171St Avenue. The 16-inch diameter watermain should be
extended through the west portion of the development ideally within aCity-owned
right-of-way. It could then be downsized to a 12-inch diameter on the east side of
TH 10 within the 165th Avenue right-of-way. The 12-inch diameter watermain
should then be looped within the eastern portion of the development and
connected to the existing 16-inch watermain within 171St Avenue. The remaining
looping could be accomplished with 8-inch diameter watermain.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative ilrban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 21 of 90
Storm Water Management
Development will be required to develop asite-specific storm water
management plan that provides rate control, volume control, and treatment of
storm water. Development is also required to meet the policies outlined in the
City's Nondegradation Plan and this AUAR. A trunk storm sewer system could be
constructed with perforated pipe to provide volume control and regional
treatment basins could be constructed to provide additional pollutant removal.
Transportation
Several roadway improvements will be included as development occurs in the
area. These include construction of roadways to accommodate future traffic
growth, as well as those to accommodate traffic from the proposed development.
The baseline build future roadway network was based on the recommendations
in the 171St Avenue Focused Area Study (FAST). The primary roadway network
is shown in Figure 21-4.These improvements would include, but are not limited
to the following:
1. Realignment /extension of Twin Lakes Road(as Twin Lakes Parkway)
from 171St Avenue to west of TH 10 / 169 intersecting TH 10 / 169 at a
location approximately 1/z mile south of the exiting 171St Avenue
intersection.
2. Construction of a traffic signal system at the TH 10 / 169 and Twin Lakes
Parkway intersection.
3. Closing 173rd Avenue and 165th Avenue to Right-in /Right-out access.
4. Construction of 168th Avenue / Olson Street from Twin Lakes Parkway to
165th Avenue.
5. Construction of a connecting local street from 171St Avenue to Twin Lakes
Parkway.
6. Future construction of a third lane to TH 10 / 169 and a potential future
interchange at Twin Lakes Parkway.
D. Phasing
Development is anticipated to occur over the next 2-20 years, depending on
housing, commercial, and industrial development demand. The timing of
development will be largely dependent on the timing of construction of the required
infrastructure improvements, such as trunk water and sewer improvements.
Development is anticipated to be phased generally from the north to the south
portion of the site, immediately adjacent to 171St Avenue with the surrounding area
following.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 22 of 90
7. PROJECT MAGNITUDE
Table 7-1 summarizes the proposed land uses for each scenario based on the
scenario descriptions in Item 6.
Table 7-1 Proposed Land Use by Scenario (in acresl
f0
'
y~ f0
' ~
L ~
• ~ 3
++
C C
++
G! C 3 L
~ i i
~ c0
~ O.
H O
~
~ C
s 'Q
u ~
~ ,
_ ~
~
ei J
F-
~ ~ ~
_ ~
a ~
~ ~
00
~ ~ Q.
o
~
o
Scenario 1 8 ac 0 ac 75 ac 64 ac 82 ac 14 ac 10 ac 253 ac
Scenario 2 0 ac 46 ac 0 ac 76 ac 116 ac 5 ac 10 ac 253 ac
Scenario 3 0 ac 46 ac 0 ac 76 ac 116 ac 5 ac 10 ac 253 ac
Most building heights would range from 1-2 stories in Scenario 1. For Scenarios 2
' and 3, building heights would range from 3-4 story buildings (High Density
Residential); 1-3 story buildings (Job Area); 2-5 story buildings (Transit Center).
8. PERMITS AND APPROVALS. List all known local, state and federal permits,
approvals and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of
any existing permits, governmental review of plans, and all direct and indirect
forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment
Financing and infrastructure.
Federal Permit/Approval
US Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Permit
State Permit/Approval
Pollution Control Agency NPDES Storm Water Permit
Pollution Control Agency Sanitary Sewer Permit
Department of Natural Resources Temporary dewatering for construction
Department of Health Water main
Mn/DOT Drainage permit, if needed
Mn/DOT TH 10 corridor plan approval and access
a royal
Mn/DOT /FHWA Interchange Access approval
Regional/ County/ Local Permit/Approval
City Comprehensive Plan amendment, if
Scenarios 2 or 3 are ro osed
City WCA Approval
City Preliminary plat approvals
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 23 of 90
City Final plat approvals
City Building permits
City Rezoning
9. LAND USE. Describe current and recent past land use and development on the
site and on adjacent lands. Discuss project compatibility with adjacent and
nearby land uses. Indicate whether any potential conflicts involve
environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to
past site uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks, or
proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines.
Existing and Surrounding Land Use
The study area is bound by the Mississippi-River to the west with TH 10/169
bisecting the study area running parallel to the river. The study area is located in
southern Elk River. Based on the historical aerial photos (available upon request),
the site has historically been agricultural. Since the late 1980's/early 1990's, a
mixture of office and light industrial land uses have developed along the northern
and eastern edges of the study area. In the early 2000's, high and low density
housing and parkland to the northeast have developed.
The land to the east and south of the project area is owned by Cargill Corporation
and Great River Energy (GRE) (see Figure 5-3). Cargill uses their land and facility
for agricultural research and production. The GRE site contains the Elk River
Resource Derived Fuel (RDF) Processing plant, where municipal solid waste is
processed to make refuse-derived fuel for powering Great River Energy's Elk River
Energy Recovery Station. Combustible materials recovered at this plant are sorted
and cut and trucked to the Elk River Energy Recovery Station in another part of the
City to produce energy. Metal materials are saved for recycling.
The Burlington Northern Sante-Fe rail line borders the study area to the east from
the northwest to the southeast and carries a large number of heavy rail trains each
day in addition to the Northstar commuter train. The Northstar commuter train
station is located to the north of the study area, and is located approximately two
miles from Downtown Elk River to the northwest. A natural gas pipeline crosses
through the center of study area from north to south .
Information from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and a state and federal
database search was obtained to determine if potential environmental hazards due
to past land uses or spills would affect the study area. This information indicated
there are no known environmental issues such as leaking underground storage
tanks or spills within the study area. There are a number of underground storage
tanks and generators of hazardous waste (small quantity) outside the study area
(see Figure 9-1). These items outside the study area are not anticipated to impact
the study area.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 24 of 90
Land Use Compatibility
' The City updated their Comprehensive Plan in August of 2004. The Comprehensive
Plan includes a "Land Use Plan" which provides the framework for the growth and
' development of Elk River. The Land Use Plan serves as a guide for the character and
intensity of development throughout the city, including the study area.
All of the land within the study area is undeveloped. This area is currently being
used as agricultural land, and has been established for many years and is generally
compatible with the surrounding land uses.
~ Immediately north of the AUAR study area are a number of existing light industrial
developments. The Comprehensive Plan guides this area to remain light industrial
' through the year 2030. Just north of the study area is the Northstar Commuter Rail
Station that is guided to remain in public/semi-public land use. These land uses
should be compatible with development that occurs in the AUAR study area and vice
versa since they are all urban land uses of a similar nature.
East of the AUAR study area across the Burlington Northern Railroad track the land
' use pattern is agricultural. The Elk River Comprehensive Plan guides this area to
remain agricultural (agricultural research). These areas may experience some
impacts from light and traffic noise from the AUAR study area. Scenario 1 identifies
' the area along the east portion of the study area as agricultural research which
would likely create fewer negative impacts for surrounding land owners. Scenarios
2 and 3 guide the eastern portion of the study area as job areas, which may develop
' in a similar manner as existing light industrial and commercial land uses further to
the south, to the north and to the west of the AUAR study area. Although this land
use is different than existing conditions, as well as those agricultural areas to the
west, these land uses proposed in the development scenarios could provide jobs and
services to those residents living nearby.
South of the AUAR study area the land use pattern is largely agricultural. However,
this area is guided for highway business and light industrial land uses by the City's
Comprehensive Plan. This development will likely be similar to existing
development that occurs north of the study area, as well as those land use scenarios
developed in this AUAR.
West of the study area the land use pattern is currently made up of existing
commercial developments, as well as agricultural and rural residential land uses.
Open space along the Mississippi River corridor currently existing with steep slopes
and vegetative areas running parallel to the river. These existing land uses are
consistent with scenarios reviewed in the AUAR and should not present any
compatibility issues or environmental conflicts with appropriate site design.
Mitieation Plan
• Project proposers shall make environmental documents, such as Phase I reviews,
available to the City.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 25 of 90
• Development will be required to remove and properly dispose of trash and debris
located within the site.
• Screening between residential neighborhoods, the rail line, and other intensive
land uses will be required in accordance with the City zoning ordinance.
• Changes will need to be made to the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning
ordinances through the City's amendment processes if any of the components of
the land uses proposed in Scenario 2 or 3 are implemented.
10. COVER TYPES. Provide a cover type map and overlay map showing
anticipated development.
A Minnesota Land Cover Classification System (MLCCS) inventory was completed
for the City in 2004 and this information was supplemented with information from a
field review to create the existing cover types map shown on Figure 10-1. The
acreages of each cover type are summarized in Table 10-1. Based on this
information and field review of the study area, the following land cover types are
found in the study area:
• Cropland: Much of the site is currently cropland with wheat and alfalfa. Based
on historic photo review, the majority of the site has been in agricultural
production for many years.
• Wetland: There are a few isolated wetland complexes in the study area and a
linear wetland that crosses the study area in the northern portion of the site. The
wetlands have been impacted by agricultural activities either by past tilling or by
sediment runoff. Wetlands are mostly dominated by Phalaris arundinacea (reed
canary grass) and Typha species (cattail). Salix species (willow) is also present
in the northern wetland. The wetlands are Type 2 and 3 wetlands. While some of
the wetlands are isolated in the southern portion of the site, the northern
wetlands are part of a larger system that extends outside of the study area.
• Wooded/Forested: The wooded areas consist of the wooded slope along the
Mississippi River, wind breaks along the agricultural fields, and isolated patches
of wooded area that surround wetlands. Figure 10-1 shows the wooded areas
and these are described in more detail as follows based on MLCCS data and a
field review:
Area 1: Oak forest (dry subtype). This is a small, isolated oak forest area.
This area received a "C" ranking based on the DNR's Natural Heritage's
Element Occurrence Ranking Guidelines. A "C" ranking means this area is a
moderate condition community with past disturbance and some invasive
species, but still retains a dominant native plant community.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative. Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 26 of 90
Area 2: Altered deciduous woodland. This area contains sparse oaks and
silver maple with a Kentucky bluegrass and brome understory. It is not
ranked in the MLCCS data as it has been impacted and disturbed in the past.
Area 3: Floodplain forest and oak woodland/brushland. This area is
along a steep bank between the study site and the river terrace below. It
generally contains elm, ash, and oak with thick understory of prickly ash. The
northern half of his forest is not ranked in the MLCCS data; the southern
portion of this forest is ranked as "D" quality meaning that it is a poor
condition natural community and is dominated bynon-native species.
Area 4: These areas are wind breaks between agricultural fields. They
consisted of planted pines, cottonwood, ash, and red cedar.
• Right-of--way/ Developed: This cover type is associated with TH 10, residential
areas, and a substation within the study area.
Table 10-1: Existing and Proposed Cover Types*
Cover Type Existing
Conditions Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Wetlands 8 ac 7 ac 6 ac 6 ac
Wooded/forest 33 ac 14 ac 10 ac 10 ac
Brush/grassland 0 ac 2 ac 2 ac 2 ac
Cropland 196 ac 75 ac 0 ac 0 ac
Right-of-
way/Developed 16 ac 155 ac 235 ac 235 ac
TOTAL: 253 ac 253 ac 253 ac 253 ac
*These acreages are based on estimates and not actual development plans. Further, these
acreages do not take into account and wetland or wildlife mitigation measures for purposes of
reviewing potential environmental impact.
11. FISH, WILDLIFE, AND ECOLOGICALLY SENSITIVE RESOURCES
a. Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and
describe how they would be affected by the project. Describe any
measures to be taken to minimize or avoid impacts.
b. Are any state (endangered or threatened) species, rare plant communities
or other sensitive ecological resources such as native prairie habitat,
colonial waterbird nesting colonies or regionally rare plant communities
on or near the site? ®Yes ^ No
If yes, describe the resource and how it would be affected by the project.
Indicate if a site survey of the resources has been conducted and describe
the results. If the DNR Natural Heritage and Nongame Research program
has been contacted give the correspondence reference number: ERDB
20060789 . Describe measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 27 of 90
Existing Conditions
The existing fish, wildlife, and ecologically sensitive resources have been analyzed
based on previous studies, historical aerial photos, and site visits during 2011. The
habitat available for wildlife is a function of the vegetation and land cover present
discussed in Item 10. The habitat on the site is described below.
• Mississippi River: Mississippi River is adjacent to the study area to the west.
While not directly within the study area, the Mississippi River provides a
significant habitat corridor for fish and wildlife. The River is designated as
"Scenic" in this area. A portion of the study area is within the City's designated
Wild and Scenic overlay district.
• Wetlands: Approximately 8 acres of the site contains wetlands. The wetlands on
the site have been degraded by adjacent agricultural activity, but they do offer
habitat for species accustomed to disturbance. Red-winged black birds were the
most abundant species observed during the site visit. Great blue herons were
also seen flying over the area. Chorus frogs were noted in the wetlands. The
wetland that crosses the site in the northern portion of the study area is part of a
larger wetland complex that extends beyond the study area boundaries. Again,
this is not a pristine wetland and it contains both native and invasive species;
however, its contiguous nature that provides a natural corridor to the east and
west does provide some habitat within the study area. Figure 11-1 shows the
National Wetlands Inventory and DNR Public Water wetlands within and
adjacent to the study area.
• Forest and Woodland Communities: Approximately 33 acres of the site
contains forested and woodland areas. The Elk River Natural Resources
Inventory report (2004) was reviewed for a description of these areas.
Floodplain forest is present to the west, adjacent to the Mississippi River.
Portions of this forested area are low quality. An oak woodland/brushland
community is also present in the southwestern portion of the study area. This
woodland is currently in poor condition, likely due to a lack of grazing or fire
regime, but has moderate restoration potential. Other small sections of forest
exist as wind breaks and small groves along the border of the agricultural fields.
• Agricultural Area: Approximately 196 acres of the site are in agricultural
production. This activity is generally located throughout most of the study area
with the exception of the wetlands and slopes near the Mississippi River. Most or
a part of these areas have been in agricultural production since at least 1937.
The agricultural areas are expected to provide limited habitat value, except for
resting areas during bird migration. During the site visit, species typical of
agricultural areas were noted, including red-tailed hawk, Eastern Kingbird,
swallows, sparrows, and other songbirds. The area provides limited cover with
an occasional and monotypic food source. The tilling and mowing that occurs in
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 28 of 90
the area results in wildlife at the site that are accustomed to frequent
disturbance.
Rare/Endangered Species: The DNR Natural Heritage Database was consulted
to determine if rare or endangered species are present in the area. The
information from the DNR is included in Appendix B. Based on this information,
loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus) was documented nesting within a one
mile radius of the project area in 1996. The loggerhead shrike is astate-listed
threatened bird species that prefers dry upland prairie or open grassland with
scattered hedgerows, shrubs, and small trees. With the agricultural areas being
planted in grasses and the adjoining trees associated with the windbreaks within
the study area, this area could be suitable for loggerhead shrike.
The DNR also noted that the black sandshell (Ligumia recta), astate-listed
mussel of special concern, has been documented in the Mississippi River.
Mussels can be affected by changes in water flow or water quality.
The US Fish and Wildlife Service was also contacted regarding federally
' threatened and endangered species. There are no federally threatened or
endangered species within or near the study area.
' • Surrounding Resources: The surrounding areas consist mainly of additional
agricultural and residential uses. The area north and east of the study area
contains sites of biodiversity significance rated as moderate and below by the
' DNR's County Biological Survey (see Figure 11-2). The historic Kelley Farm is
located south of the study area and contains a significant amount of oak
' communities and planted prairie, although these resources are of poor to
moderate quality.
Scenario 1
This scenario allows for agricultural research to remain with 75 acres of the study
area and open space to remain for 14-21 (woods and wetlands) acres of the study
' area. The remaining area would develop into highway commercial, light industrial,
and a small area of rural residential.
With this scenario, a portion of the wooded areas that provide wind breaks would
remain (Area 4, Figure 10-1). This would leave a portion of the potentially suitable
loggerhead shrike habitat within the study area. The oak forest (Area 1) and
degraded wooded area (Area 2) would likely be removed in part or in entirety. Most
of the wooded area in Area 3 would remain. Based on state and federal
requirements, the wetlands would likely remain intact with some anticipated
impact and resulting mitigation. There would be opportunities to create habitat
with storm water management requirements as part of development. While the
existing conditions provide some habitat, the habitat provided is not significant and
development of this scenario would be anticipated to have minimal impact on fish
and wildlife habitat. The areas of biodiversity significant (Figure 11-2) would not
be impacted by development in the study area.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 29 of 90
Scenario 2 and 3
These scenarios would eliminate the agricultural resource area in Scenario 1 and.
provide for development in that area. This could eliminate the potential loggerhead
shrike habitat in the study area by removing the wheat fields and adjoining treed
windbreaks if no mitigation were provided. The oak forest (Area 1) and degraded.
wooded area (Area 2) would likely be removed in part or in entirety. Most of the
wooded area in Area 3 would remain because of topography in that area. Based on
state and federal requirements, the wetlands would likely remain intact with some
anticipated impact and resulting mitigation. There would be opportunities to create
habitat with storm water management requirements as part of development. The
main wildlife habitat impact from these scenarios would be the potential loss of
loggerhead shrike habitat, estate-listed threatened species, if mitigation is not
provided. The areas of biodiversity significant (Figure 11-2) would not be impacted
by development in the study area.
Fish. Wildlife. and Ecologically Sensitive Resources Mitigation Plan
• Wetlands will need to be delineated in conformance with the Wetland
Conservation Act as part of the development process. The City will review and
verify the wetland delineation.
• Wetland impact is anticipated to be minimized to the maximum extent possible
throughout the review area. Wetlands will be managed based on the Wetland
Conservation Act (WCA) and the City's Wetland Ordinance.
• The City will require 25 foot buffers around wetlands and storm water ponds, or
per the City's ordinance, whichever is more restrictive.
• If wetland impacts are proposed, wetland mitigation will be required within the
study area by the project proposer.
• Development in the study area will be required to establish a corridor for
wetlands, wildlife, storm water management, and recreation.
• The City will actively pursue opportunities to preserve and create natural areas
and through parkland dedication and alternative stormwater management
strategies.
~ Storm water management features should incorporate native plantings of
grasses, trees, and shrubs.
• The City will encourage planting of trees suitable for loggerhead shrike habitat
along areas that are adjacent to existing cropland and windbreaks if Scenario 2
and 3 develop and the existing windbreaks are removed.
City of EIk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 30 of 90
• A loggerhead shrike survey maybe required by the DNR as part of a
development project if tree or shrub disturbance would be planned during the
nesting season.
12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources. Will the project involve the physical or
hydrologic alteration (dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure,
diking, and impoundment) of any surface waters such as a lake, pond,
wetland, stream or drainage ditch? ®Yes ^ No
If yes, identify water resource affected. Describe alternatives considered and
proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. Give the DNR Protected
Waters Inventory (PWI) number(s) if the water resources affected are on the
PWI.
Wetland Impact: No specific development plans have been developed for the study
area. Both state and federal wetland regulations require avoidance and
minimization of-wetland impact. However, with anticipated infrastructure needed to
serve the study area such as roads and utilities, it is anticipated some wetland
impact would occur.
Approximately 1-3 acres of wetland impact for each scenario could be anticipated as
part of development in the study area. Wetland impact would be subject to State
regulations through the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) and by the City's Wetland
Ordinance. The City is the Local Government Unit (LGU) for the WCA. Impacts
would also be regulated by the US Corps of Engineers through Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act. Wetland impact would need to be avoided and minimized to the
greatest extend practical. The wetland complex in the north provides a more
contiguous connection to wetlands and natural areas outside of the study area and
could be incorporated into a larger wetland mitigation and stormwater
management plan for the study area.
Impact on Public Waters: There are no DNR Public Waters/Wetlands within the
study area as shown on Figure 11-1. The Mississippi River (a DNR Watercourse) is
adjacent to the study area. No DNR Public Waters would be impacted by any of the
development scenarios.
13. Water Use. Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water
' wells, connection to or changes in any public water supply or appropriation of
any ground or surface water- (including dewatering)? ®Yes ^ No
If yes, as applicable, give location and purpose of any new wells; public supply
affected, changes to be made, and water .quantities to be used; the source,
duration, quantity and purpose of any appropriations; and unique well
numbers and DNR appropriation permit numbers, if known. Identify any
existing and new wells on the site map. If there are no wells known on site,
explain methodology used to determine.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 31 of 90
Available geology, surrounding private and public wells, and the existing water
system has been evaluated. With regard to the existing water system, the existing
water supply and storage system for the entire City was evaluated with respect to the
City's overall water system average and peak day demands. The City's existing
distribution system was evaluated for only the low pressure zone. The Elk River
Municipal Utilities provided the City with the existing low pressure zone water system
model and not the entire system.
To determine the existing available aquifer and surrounding well information, existing
bed rock maps and the County Well Index maintained by the Minnesota Department
of Health was utilized. The Department of Natural Resources provided historical
water use data, including annual water pumped and peak day demands. The
information provided by the DNR also included the number of water connections
within the City; however, water demands specific to the low pressure zone was not
available.
To provide recommendations for the water service within the AUAR study area, water
demands for the three development scenarios were calculated and evaluated using
the City's low pressure zone water model. For each development scenario, the water
demand was calculated based on per unit for residential land uses and per square
footage for non-residential land uses. The water demand assumptions used are based
on our experience with other projects and are typical of cities of similar size for
planning purposes. The following table presents the water use assumptions that were
used during the development of this memo.
Table 13-1. Residential and Non-Residential Water Demand Assumptions
Average Daily
Units/Water Water Demand
Peak Hour
Land Use Per Calculated Peak Day Factor*
Connection Factor**
Water
Connection (gpd)
Residential 1 Residential
Connection 274 2.6 1.5
Commercial 3,000 Sq ft of
Building 274 2.6 1.5
Industrial 5,620 Sq ft of
Building 274 2.6 1.5
*the City's Peak Day factor is based on the historical 5-year average day to peak day factor
information provided by the DNR.
**the Peak Hour Factor is based on our experience with other projects in City's of a similar size.
Available Geology and Existing Surrounding Wells
Currently, there are only private wells adjacent to the study area that serve either
residential and/or irrigation water supply needs. According to a review of the County
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 32 of 90
Well Index, no private or public wells are contained within the AUAR study area.
' There are other existing residences in and adjacent to the study area that are assumed
to have private wells as the properties are not served by the City's Water System, but
the locations of these wells are not available from the existing databases. The wells on
' the County Well Index are shown on Figure 13-1.
' There are number ofnon-community supply wells adjacent to the study area. Most of
these wells are related to commercial food processing that takes place in the area.
None of these wells have Drinking Water Supply Management Areas (DWSMA)
recorded at the Minnesota Department of Health. The nearest DWSMA is "Otsego
East", located just west of the Mississippi River adjacent to the project area. This
DWSMA is also shown on Figure 13-1.
There are two primary groundwater sources in the Elk River Area: bedrock aquifers
and unconsolidated sand and gravel aquifers. The Paleozoic sedimentary rocks
around the Twin Cities Metro Area have three primary bedrock aquifers (in
descending order): the Prairie du Chien-Jordan, the Franconia-Ironton-Galesville
(FIG), and the Mt. Simon-Hinckley. Each of these is separated by a confining layer that
essentially separates the aquifer.
The Prairie du Chien-Jordan aquifer is the best producing bedrock aquifer in
Minnesota. Elk River is located in a part of the region where this aquifer is absent, so
it is unavailable for use by the City. This also means that development within the
study area will have very little, if any, impact of this major water source.
The shallowest continuous bedrock aquifer available to Elk River is the FIG. The FIG is
the most commonly used aquifer for wells adjacent to the study area. The confining
layer that usually occurs over the FIG is absent in most of the area and therefore, this
makes the aquifer more vulnerable to contamination if the overlying sediments are
highly permeable.
The deepest of the three bedrock aquifers is the Mt. Simon-Hinckley. Elk River's
supply wells all tap this aquifer for a combined total pumping capacity of 6,800
gallons per minute (gpm) (Wells 2-8). There are no geologic factors that would limit
further use by Elk River. According to available records, none of the wells adjacent to
the project area use this aquifer.
The unconsolidated sand and gravel deposits in the Elk River area are aquifers that
yield considerable volumes of water. Slightly less than half of the private wells
adjacent to the study area are in one of these aquifers. Where there are wells finished
in these unconsolidated sand and gravel deposits near the study area, special
attention must be given to avoid contamination of these aquifers as they are often
small and unconfined.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 33 of 90
Water Supply and Storage Requirements
As part of this study, existing and future demands for the entire City were reviewed.
Demands assumptions given in Table 13-1 were used to project out the water
demands for each of the development scenarios given in this study. The City's average
day demand, which is based on a historical 5-year average, is 2,194,000 gallons per
day (gpd) or 1,523 gallons per minute (gpm). The City's peak day demand, which is
also based on a historical 5-year average is 5,455,000 gpd (3,788 gpm)..
According to AWWA, it is typical to recommend that the City have an approximate
storage capacity equal to the average day demand plus a fire flow equalization
amount. For purposes of this study, a fire flow of 3,500 gallons per minute for 3 hours
(630,000 gallons) was added to the average day demand to determine the required
storage capacity for the entire City. Therefore, 2,824,000 gallons is required for the
City's water storage. Currently, the City has approximately 3,750,000 gallons in
elevated storage.
According to 10-State Standards, a City should be able to provide a water supply in the
amount of their peak day demands with their largest well out of service (firm
capacity). The City of Elk River has a firm capacity for the entire City of 5,500 gpm,
with Well No. 8 having a capacity of 1,300 gpm out of service.
Both the water storage and well supply capacities for the entire City are sufficient for
the entire City's water demands. However, the City's water system is split into two
pressure zones, the high pressure zone is located in the north portions of the City and
the low pressure zone is located in the south portion of the City. The AUAR study area
is located in the low pressure zone. The low pressure zone and high pressure zone
are connected by three booster stations.
The City's water model was provided by Elfering and Associates for the low pressure
zone. According to the water model provided the existing average day demand for the
low pressure zone is 999,000 gpd (694 gpm) and the peak day demand is 3,936,000
gpd (2,733 gpm) (Elfering used a peak day factor of 3.94 which is higher than the
City's historical peak factor). Only Wells 2, 3, and 4 and the Gary Street and Freeport
Towers are located within the low pressure zone; therefore, the low pressure zone
has a storage capacity of 2,000,000 gallons and a total well capacity of 3,600,000 gpd
(2,500 gpm). In the model provided by Elfering, the total low pressure zone well
capacity was used during the peak day calculations. As shown, the low pressure zone
has sufficient storage capacity for the low pressure zone's average day demand plus a
fire flow capacity of 630,000 gallons, which results in a required storage capacity of
1,629,000 gallons. The total low pressure zone well supply capacity, however, cannot
accommodate the peak day demands from the low pressure zone as a stand alone
system and therefore, Elfering directed the City to include a supply of 700 gpm flow be
added to the model to mimic the supply that is available from the high pressure zone
through the opening of the City's Pressure Reducing Valves (PRV's). This resulted in a
total water supply to the low zone of 3,200 gpm. Once this was added to the water
model, there was sufficient well capacity provided to the low pressure zone on the
existing peak day.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 34 of 90
Scenario 1
Development within the entire study area will be connected to municipal water
supply in this scenario with the exception of the agricultural research area. Full
build out average day demand and peak day demands resulting from this
development scenario are estimated to be 108,000 gpd (75 gpm) and 280,800 gpd
(195 gpm), respectively.
The entire City storage and supply system as well as the low zone storage and
supply system will be sufficient to provide service with this development scenario
assuming the 700 gpm of supply added to the model to mimic the high pressure
zone interaction is accurate.
Scenario 2
' Development within the entire study area will be connected to municipal water
supply in this scenario. Full build out average day demand and peak day demand
are estimated to be 238,000 gpd (165 gpm) and 618,800 gpd (429 gpm),
respectively.
The entire City storage and supply system as well as the low zone storage and
' supply system will be sufficient to provide service with this development scenario
assuming the 700 gpm of supply added to the model to mimic the high pressure
zone interaction is accurate.
Scenario 3
Development within the entire study area will be connected to municipal water
supply in this scenario. Full build out average day demand and peak day demand
are estimated to be 441,000 gpd (306 gpm) and 1,146,600 gpd (796 gpm),
respectively.
The entire City storage and supply system will be sufficient to provide service
with this development scenario. The low pressure zone storage system by itself
will not be sufficient to provide service to this area under this development
scenario. It will require water to come from the high pressure zone particularly
in the event of a fire on the low pressure zone side. In addition, the low pressure
zone water supply system will not be sufficient even with the additiona1700
gpm of supply added to the model to provide water on the peak day under this
development scenario. It will require water to come from the high pressure
zone at a higher rate on the peak day. It is our understanding that there are
additional PRV's within the City between the low and high pressure zones. The
operation of one or more additional PRV's would provide the necessary flows to
meet the Scenario 3 peak day demands. To confirm this assumption the City
would need the entire water system model from Elfering and Associates.
Ciry of Elk Rivet
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 35 of 90
i
Trunk Watermain System Requirements
To evaluate the trunk water distribution system required for all three scenarios, the
provided low pressure zone water model was utilized. The water demands from each
scenario were entered into the City's existing low pressure zone model to determine a
sufficient trunk watermain pipe size that will provide the development with sufficient
pressures and fire flows on the peak water demand day. Typically, it is recommended
that a public water supply system provide water pressures between 40 and 80 psi and
available fire flows of over 1,000 gpm for residential areas and over 3,000 gpm for
non-residential areas in the trunk watermain on the peak day. Fire flow
recommendations can be decreased if buildings within the development are required
to be sprinkled for fire suppression purposes. It is recommended for the purposes of
this study that minimum fire flows are 2,000 gpm with the assumption that fire
suppression will be required for all multi-family and commercial buildings
Based on the low pressure zone water model, trunk watermain will be required to be
extended within the study area to provide sufficient fire flow. It is recommended that
a 16-inch diameter watermain is extended south from the existing 16-inch diameter
watermain within the TH 10 right-of--way at 171St Avenue. The 16-inch diameter
watermain should be extended through the west portion of the development ideally
within aCity-owned right-of--way. It could then be downsized to a 12-inch diameter
on the east side of TH 10 within the 165th Avenue right-of-way. The 12-inch diameter
watermain should then be looped within the eastern portion of the development and
connected to the existing 16-inch watermain within 171St Avenue. The remaining
looping could be accomplished with 8-inch diameter watermain as shown on the
attached Figure 13-2.
With the above described watermain extension, the following are the pressures and
available fire flows that can be expected according to the low pressure zone water
model provided by Elfering and Associates:
Table 13-2. Anticipated Peak Day Pressure and Fire Flows
Scenario Anticipated Pressure (psi) Anticipated Available Fire Flow
(gpm)
Scenario 1 57 - 62 2,500 - 2,750
Scenario 2 57 - 61 2,250 - 2,500
Scenario 3 53 - 57 2,000 - 2,100
Water Use Mitigation Plan
• The water demand information as presented in this AUAR will be provided to
the Elk River Municipal Utilities to confirm the water supply, storage, and
distribution systems are adequate as the existing water system model provided
to the City from Elfering and Associates, consultant to the Elk River Municipal
Utilities, was incomplete. The City's water system is a split pressure zone system
with the proposed development site located on the low pressure zone side. The
water system model provided was for the low pressure system only and does not
take into account the PRV interactions of the two pressure zones.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 3b of 90
• A 16-inch diameter watermain should be extended south from the existing 16-
inch diameter watermain within the TH 10 right-of-way at 171St Avenue. The
16-inch diameter watermain should be extended through the west portion of the
development ideally within aCity-owned right-of-way. It could then be
downsized to a 12-inch diameter on the east side of TH 10 within the 165th
Avenue right-of-way. The 12-inch diameter watermain should then be looped
within the eastern portion of the development as shown on Figure 13-2 for
Scenario 1 or on Figure 13-3 for Scenarios 2 and 3. The 12-inch diameter
watermain should then be connected to the existing 16-inch watermain within
171St Avenue. The remaining looping could be accomplished with 8-inch
diameter watermain as shown on the attached Figures 13-2 and 13-3. As the
City does not have a Comprehensive Water System Plan, the trunk watermain
was sized in accordance with typical development recommendations.
• Any abandoned wells found within the study area will be sealed in accordance
with Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) guidelines.
• As the City currently does not have a Wellhead Protection Plan (WHPP), a
Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) has not been established. A
DWSMA will be detailed for future wells as they are constructed and when the
City is called into the WHPP program by the MDH.
' 14. Water-related land use management districts. Does any part of the project
involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100-year flood plain, or a
state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? ®Yes ^
' No
If yes, identify the district and discuss project compatibility with district land
use restrictions.
' shoreland District: There are no designated shoreland zoning districts within the
study area.
Floodplain District: The Mississippi River has a designated FEMA floodplain
adjacent to the study area shown on Figure 14-1. No impacts to the floodplain are
' anticipated with any of the development scenarios.
Wild and Scenic River District: The Mississippi River is designated as wild and
' scenic within and adjacent to the study area as shown on Figure 14-1.
Development within the study area within this district will need to meet the
requirements of the City's Wild and Scenic River Protection ordinance.
Water-Related Land Use Management Districts Mitigation Measures
' • Any development is required to meet the standards in the City's Wild and Scenic
River Protection Ordinance and Floodplain Ordinance.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 37 of 90
15. Water Surface Use. Will the project change the number or type of watercraft
on any water body?
^ Yes ®No
If yes, indicate the current and projected watercraft usage and discuss any
potential overcrowding or conflicts with other uses.
16. Erosion and Sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and
the cubic yards of soil to be moved: NA acres; NA cubic yards
Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site
map. Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used
during and after project construction
Existing Conditions
A detailed list of the soils present on the site is provided in Item 19. The site can be
described as generally flat in the western portion of the site with some gently rolling
hills in the eastern portion of the site. Of the soils on the site, the following are listed
as highly erodible (HEL) (see Figure 16-1):
~ 258E: Sandberg (HEL)
Scenario 1
In this scenario, much of the proposed area would be graded to construct roads,
residential, and commercial/industrial areas. Seventy-five acres on the eastern side
of the study area would remain as agricultural land use and approximately 14 acres
along the southwestern border would be designated as open space.
Scenarios 2 and 3
In these scenarios, much of the proposed area would be graded to construct roads,
residential, and commercial/industrial areas.
For all scenarios, it is anticipated that grading will be needed to accommodate
building pads and storm water drainage from the area. It is anticipated that grading
will be phased over the next 2-20 years, depending on development demand. The
timing of development will be largely dependent on the timing of construction of the
required infrastructure improvements, such as trunk water and sewer
improvements and roads.
Erosion and Sedimentation Mitigation Plan
~ A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in conformance with the
NPDES regulations will be needed for any development in the study area.
Review of the SWPPP for each development will be required by the City.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 38 of 90
17. Water Quality -Surface Water Runoff
a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the
project. Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any
storm water pollution prevention plans.
b. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include
major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters.
Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters.
Existing Conditions
The study area currently consists mainly of small grain straight rows, small wooded
and grassed areas and a few small wetlands. Existing impervious areas include TH
10, which runs through. the middle of the study area and some small farm and
residential structures on the southwest corner of the study area. Approximately 15
acres of the study area is within subwatershed ER02 and drains to the Rum River.
The remaining area is within subwatershed ER01 which drains to the Mississippi
River (see Figure 17-1). The portions of the Mississippi River and the Rum River
which are downstream of these subwatersheds are classified as Outstanding
Resource Value Waters (ORVW). Both rivers are listed as impaired by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency for mercury (Mississippi and Rum Rivers) and PCB's in fish
tissue (Mississippi River).
About 13 acres of the study area consists of Group B/D rated soils (mainly in the
wetland areas) and the remaining area contains Group A rated soils. These soils
ratings are based on hydrologic soils classifications with A soils having high
infiltration rates even when thoroughly wetted. The infiltration rates range from
0.8 to 1.63 inches per hour. 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. Group D soils have very slow
infiltration rates ranging from 0 to 0.2 inches per hour when thoroughly wetted.
Group D soils are typically clay soils with high swelling potential, soils with high
permanent water table, soils with a clay layer at or near the surface, or shallow soils
over nearly impervious material.
Proposed Conditions
Due to the conceptual nature of the development scenarios, the amount of
impervious surfaces in each land use was assumed based on the values presented in
the City's Nondegradation Review (November 2007) and characteristics of existing
developments in the City. Scenario 1 represents the development conditions with
the least amount of impervious surfaces. Much of the agricultural and open space
land uses are preserved under this scenario with the majority of the remaining area
being developed to 75% impervious. Scenarios 2 and 3 largely consist of
commercial/retail land use with 75% impervious and 95% respectively. Scenario 3
represents the most extreme development scenario with respect to impervious
Ciry of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 39 of 90
surfaces. Stormwater management for any scenario can be provided through a
combination of wet detention ponds and infiltration features. The soils within the
study area will likely provide ideal conditions for achieving volume reduction and
pollutant reduction through the use of infiltration.
Local Stormwater Management Requirements
Stormwater management within the future development of the study area must be
in conformance with local requirements. Some requirements are more stringent
than others. However, the development in the study area will demonstrate that all
local standards are being met under proposed Stormwater management techniques.
The following is a summary of major Stormwater management requirements which
will be addressed by future development of the study area:
City Stormwater Management Requirements and Design Standards
The City's Stormwater Management Ordinance and current design standards
require 60% removal of total phosphorus and total suspended solids from the
post-construction developed condition. The City also encourages the use of
infiltration and regional treatment where it is practical and feasible to do so.
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Standards
The Mississippi River is listed as impaired and is located within one mile of the
study area. As a result, the post-construction water quality standards of the
NPDES permit will require future development to provide treatment for the
water quality volume of 1-inch of runoff from the new impervious surfaces.
Infiltration BMPs must allow this volume to be fully infiltrated within 48 hours.
Wet Ponds must provide extended detention for this volume by providing
permanent pool storage of 1,800 cubic feet per acre of drainage area and by
restricting discharges.
Non-degradation and Restricted Discharge
The State of Minnesota's current non-degradation rules prohibit new and
expanded discharges to surface waters designated as Outstanding Resource
Value Waters (ORVW's). Specifically, this means no increase in storm water
runoff volume or pollutant loads from the 1988 baseline landuse condition.
The stretches of the Mississippi River and the Rum River which the City of Elk
River drains to are designated as ORVWs. As a result, for the purpose of this
analysis, it is anticipated that future development of the study area must meet
non-degradation standards.
Water Quantity and Quality Analysis
A water quantity and quality analysis was completed for the existing and proposed
conditions within the study area. This analysis uses the assumptions and methods
described in the Non-degradation Review and Loading Assessment developed for
the City of Elk River in 2007. This analysis also assumes that Stormwater runoff
discharges offsite under the baseline condition. If it is determined that the study
area is landlocked, future development may be required to retain all runoff onsite to
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 40 of 90
the extent feasible or offset new and expanded discharges by constructing Best
' Management Practices (BMPs) at an offsite location to achieve compliance with
Non-degradation requirements.
Table 17-1 summarizes the total pollutant loads for each development scenario
compared to the baseline condition.
Table 17-1: Annual Estimated Pollutant Loads
Development Scenario Annual Runoff
Volume (ac-ft) Annual TP
Load (Ibs)
Annual TSS Load (Ibs)
Baseline Condition -1988 61 83 25,639
Scenario 1 209 208 80,932
Scenario 2 259 252 108,561
Scenario 3 320 309 133,692
To achieve compliance with nondegradation requirements, future development
must provide annual volume and pollutant load reductions in the amounts
presented in Table 17-2. These values represent reductions from the post-
development condition and are comparable to the City's current stormwater
management standards.
Table 17-2: Required Annual Pollutant Load Reductions to Achieve Baseline Condition (1988)
Development Scenario Annual Runoff
Volume (ac-ft) Annual TP Load
(Ibs) Annual TSS Load
(Ibs)
Scenario 1 71% 60% 68%
Scenario 2 77% 67% 76%
Scenario 3 81% 73% 81%
Potential Impact to Downstream Receiving Waters
In addition to other stormwater management requirements, future development
within the Study Area maybe required to maintain 1988 baseline conditions for
runoff volume and pollutant loads. If these requirements are met on site, it is not
anticipated that any significant impacts to downstream water quality will result
from development.
Water Quantity and Quality Mitigation Plan
• Infiltration best management practices will be required to meet volume control
goals as listed in Table 17-2. Group A soils within the Study Area will likely
provide sufficient infiltration capacity to achieve these goals.
• Design considerations for comprehensive storm water management should
include regional ponding, individual site underground infiltration systems and a
perforated trunk storm sewer conveyance system.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 41 of 90
• Approved Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) load reductions and
implementation plans for the Mississippi River and the Rum River shall be
addressed by the development's stormwater management plan.
• The stormwater management plan(s) for the future developments will provide
an in depth analysis of existing and proposed drainage patterns and pollutant
loads. The plan(s) will demonstrate compliance with nondegradation, City and
other local stormwater management requirements.
• It will be required that post-development discharge rates will be no greater than
pre-development discharge rates for the critical duration event to reduce
erosion impacts downstream of the site.
• The developer will be responsible for grading the site appropriately to provide.
adequate storm water management to the extent necessary and will be required
to obtain the necessary permits for storm water management and grading, to
preserve the existing natural features, and to provide water quality protection to
meet State nondegradation requirements in addition to City and other local
requirements.
• Storm water will be required to be pretreated prior to discharge to wetlands.
• Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in conformance with the
NPDES regulations will be needed for any development in the study area.
Review of the SWPPP for each development will be required by the City.
18. Water Quality -Wastewater
a. Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and
industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site.
b. Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give
estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters, including
major downstream water bodies, and estimate the discharge impact on the
quality of receiving waters. If the project involves on-site sewage systems,
discuss the suitability of site conditions for such systems.
c. If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility,
identify the facility, describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the
facility's ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes, identifying
any improvements necessary.
d. If the project requires disposal of liquid animal manure, describe disposal
technique and location and discuss capacity to handle the volume and
composition of manure. Identify any improvements necessary. Describe any
required setbacks for land disposal systems.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 42 of 90
Existing Conditions
Within the City of Elk River there are approximately 8,710 total residential units. Of
these units, approximately 3,969 are connected to the sanitary sewer system and.
4,201 units are served by on-site septic system. There are approximately 542 non-
residential services that are connected to regional sewer. These non-residential
services include schools, churches, commercial development, industrial
development and parks.
The wastewater generated from the City is diverted to the sanitary sewer collection
system and directed to the City's Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) located
between TH 10 and the Burlington Northern Rail Line, north of the Great River
Energy plant. Treated wastewater from Elk River's WWTF is discharged to the
Mississippi River. The WWTF has a current average day treatment capacity of 2.2
Million Gallons per Day (MGD). Based on data for the years from 2005 through 2010,
the WWTF currently receives an annual average daily wastewater flow of 1.23 MGD.
The highest annual average daily flow was in 2005 and was 1.419 MGD.
Table 18-1 summarizes the current residential-and non-residential units served by
the regional sewer system within the entire City of Elk River and the estimated
average day and peak hour wastewater flows that are directed to .the City's WWTF.
Table 18-1. Existing Residential and Non-Residential Units within the City of Elk River Served
and the Estimated Average Day and Peak Hour Wastewater Flow
Average Daily Total Average peak Hour
Type Units Wastewater Daily Wastewater
Flow per Unit Wastewater Flow d
~gp
(gpd) Flow (gpd)
Residential 3,969 200 794,000 2,382,000
Non-Residential 542 805 436,000 1,308,000
connections
Total 1,230,000 3,690,000
Table 18-2 is a summary of the wastewater characteristics for Elk River based on
WWTF influent data from 2005 through 2010.
Table 18-2. Wastewater Characteristics and Total Average Daily Wastewater Loading for the
Citv of Elk River (2005 to 2010 Data)
Parameter Estimated Wastewater Characteristics and Average
Daily Loading
mg/I Ibs/day
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 295 3,025
Total Suspended Solids 150 1,540
Total Phosphorous 6.5 67
Elk River's wastewater collection system includes over 60 miles of sewer lines that
range in size from 8-inch diameter to 24-inch diameter. The collection system
includes 19 lift stations. Three of these lift stations are main stations that collect
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 43 of 90
wastewater from the major service areas of the City's current urban service area
and direct it straight to the WWTF. These three lift stations include the TH 10 Lift
Station, the Evans Avenue Lift Station, and the TH 169 Lift Station.
Wastewater generated from the western portion of the Elk River urban service area,
as well as a portion of the central area, is directed east and then southeast to the TH
10 Lift Station located along the west side of TH 10. The TH 10 Lift Station pumps
wastewater directly to the WWTF through a 14-inch diameter forcemain that runs
east across TH 10.
Wastewater from the northern portion of the Elk River urban service area is
directed south to the Evans Avenue Lift Station. The Evans Avenue Lift Station is
located along Evans Avenue, just north of the intersection of Main Street and Evans
Avenue. This lift station pumps wastewater south along Evans Avenue through a
14-inch forcemain that discharges directly to the WWTF.
Wastewater from the eastern portion of the Elk River urban service area is directed
west to the TH 169 Lift Station. The TH 169 Lift Station is located along the east side
of TH 169, approximately 1500 feet south of Main Street (181 Avenue).
Results and Conclusions
The proposed development area (253 acres) is within the City's eastern urban
service area that is served by the TH 169 Lift Station. The trunk sanitary sewer
system from the study area north to the TH 169 Lift Station consists of 15-inch,l8-
inch, and 24-inch gravity sewer pipe. The 15-inch gravity sewer pipe has a
minimum full flow capacity of 1.6 MGD; the 18-inch gravity sewer pipe has a
minimum full flow capacity of 2.4 MGD; and the 24-inch has a minimum full flow
capacity of 4.1 MGD.
The TH 169 Lift Station pumps wastewater west across TH 169 through a 14-inch
forcemain that discharges directly to the WWTF. The total eastern urban service
area encompasses an area approximately 2,935 acres in size. However, only about
50% of this area is currently served by sanitary sewer. The current estimate
average daily wastewater flow to the TH 169 Lift Station is 0.388 MGD. This was
based on a review of the City's GIS mapping and the number of parcels that have
sanitary sewer service available. The estimate current peak hour wastewater flow
to the TH 169 Lift Station is 1.40 MGD (970 gpm). The TH 169 Lift Station has two
submersible solids handling pumps, each with a pumping capacity of 2.60 MGD
(1800 gpm), based on design information. The TH 169 Lift Station is capable of
being upgraded to provide a firm pumping capacity of 5.20 MGD (3600 gpm), with
the installation of two additional pumps.
Three development scenarios are being evaluated for the study area. The estimate
average daily wastewater flows projected from the proposed development area
range from 0.135 MGD for Scenario 1 to 0.375 MGD for Scenario 3. The estimated
peak hour wastewater flows from the proposed development area range from 0.526
MGD for Scenario 1 to 1.351 MGD for Scenario 3. The existing eastern area
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 44 of 90
wastewater collection and the existing WWTF have capacity to provide wastewater
' service for the proposed development area under all three scenarios. However,
under Scenario 3, 85% to over 90% of the capacity of sections of the existing trunk
' sewer system along Twin Lakes Road from 179th Avenue NW to 171St Avenue would
be utilized during estimated peak hour flow conditions. Also under Scenario 3,
approximately 97% of the current pumping capacity of the TH 169 Lift Station
' would be utilized during estimated peak hour flow conditions.
The estimated wastewater flows and characteristics for each of the development
' scenarios as well as the proposed means for providing wastewater service to the
study area is describe in the following paragraphs for each scenario.
Scenario 1
In this scenario, development would be consistent with the City's current
Comprehensive Plan (2004). It will be assumed that the rural residential units on
the west side of TH 10 will be connected to the sanitary sewer system and each
single family residential connection will generate an average of 200 gpd. An average.
daily wastewater flow of 1,200 gpd/acre will be used for Highway Commercial and
700 gpd/acre will be used for Light Industrial. A peaking factor of 3.9 will be used to
determine the peak hour flow from the overall AUAR area. The portion of the study
area west of TH 10 would consist of 8 acres rural residential, 48 acres light
industrial, 7 acres highway business, and 14 acres of open space. Therefore, the
estimate average day wastewater flow from the portion of the study area west of TH
10 is 0.043 MGD and the peak hour wastewater flow is 0.17 MGD.
The portion of the study area east of TH 10, between TH 10 and the Burlington
Northern Railroad would consist of 57 acres highway business, 34 acres light
industrial, and 75 acres of agricultural research. The estimate average day
wastewater flow from this portion of the study area under Scenario 1 would be
0.092 MGD and the peak hour wastewater flow is 0.36 MGD.
Future wastewater flow for the study area under Scenario 1 is shown below in
Table 18-3.
Table 18-3. Estimated Average Day and Peak Hour Wastewater Flow from Scenario 1
Average Total Average peak Hour
Type Acres Housing Daily Daily Wastewater
(Gross) (units) Wastewater Wastewater .Flow d
(gp )
Flow (gpd) Flow (gpd)
Agricultural Research 75 - 0 0
Rural Residential (SF) 8 3 200/unit 600 2,300
Highway Commercial 64 - 1,200/acre 76,800 299,600
Light Industrial 82 - 700/acre 57,400 224,100
Open Space 14 - 0 0 0
Right-of-Way 10 - 0 0 0
Total 253 134,800 526,000
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 45 of 90
Table 18-4 summarizes the estimated wastewater characteristics and loading for
the wastewater that will be generated from the 171St Avenue Area under Scenario 1
Table 18-4. Estimated Wastewater Characteristics and Total Average. Daily Wastewater
Loading from Scenario 1
Parameter Estimated Wastewater Characteristics and Average
Day Loading
mg/I Ibs/day
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 295 332
Total Suspended Solids 150 169
Total Phosphorous 6.5 7
The wastewater generator from the study area will be conveyed north through the
existing 15-inch and 18-inch trunk sewer lines along Twin Lakes Road and then
west along 179th Avenue NW through the 24-inch trunk sanitary sewer to the TH
169 Lift Station.
Wastewater from the portion of the study area on the west side of TH 10 could be
conveyed north through a new sanitary sewer line constructed along the west side
of TH 10 and connected to the existing 15-inch sewer that crosses TH 10 just north
of 170th.Avenue (Figurel8-1). An 8-inch sewer would be large enough to convey
the estimated peak hour flow of 0.17 MGD wastewater generated from this area
west of TH 10. However, because the current urban service area boundaries extend
beyond the limits of the study area, a 10-inch sanitary sewer is recommended to
provide additional capacity for future development.
Wastewater from the portion of the study area between TH 10 and the Burlington
Northern Railroad could be conveyed north and connected to the existing 15-inch
sewer that extends north to 173rd Avenue (Figure 18-1). Again, an 8-inch gravity
sewer would be large enough to convey the estimated peak hour flow of 0.36 MGD
from the portion of the study area between TH 10 and the Burlington Northern
Railroad. However, because the current urban service area boundaries extend
beyond the limits of the study area, a 12-inch sanitary sewer is recommended to
provide additional capacity for future development.
Under this scenario, the collection system, including the TH 169 Lift Station, and the
WWTF have the available capacity to handle the additional flows -from the AUAR
Study Area.
Scenario 2
Under this scenario the portion of the study area west of TH 10 would consist of
approximately 46 acres of high density residential with 368 units, 28 acres of
destination retail, and 3 acres service/commercial. An average daily wastewater
flow of 200 gpd/unit will be used for high density residential and 1,000 gpd/acre
will be used for destination retail and service/commercial. A peaking factor of 3.8
was used to determine the peak hour flow from the overall AUAR area under this.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 46 of 90
scenario. Based on these generation rates, the estimated average day wastewater
flow projected for the portion of the study area west of TH 10 under Scenario 2
would be 0.105 MGD and the estimated peak hour flow would be 0.40 MGD.
The portion of the study area between TH 10 and the Burlington Northern Railroad
would consist of approximately 20 acres temporary destination retail, l7 acres
destination retai1,116 acres of job area, 8 acres of transit center, and 5 acres of open
space. An average daily wastewater flow of 1,000 gpd/acre will be used for
destination retail, and transit center. An average daily wastewater flow of 700
gpd/acre will be used for jobs area. No wastewater flow is projected for temporary
destination retail and open space. Based on these generation rates, the estimated
average day wastewater flow projected from this area would be 0.106 MGD and the
estimated peak hour flow would be 0.403 MGD
Table 18-5 summarizes the estimated wastewater flow generated from the study
area under Scenario 2.
Table 18-5. Estimated Average Day and Peak Hour Wastewater Flow from Scenario 2.
Average Total Average peak Hour
Type Acres Housing Daily Daily Wastewater
(Gross) (units) Wastewater Wastewater
Flow (gpd)
Flow (gpd) Flow (gpd)
High Density. 46 368 200/unit 74,000 281,000
Residential
Job Area 116 700/acre 81,200 309,000
Destination Retail 45 - 1,000/acre 45,000 171,000
Temporary Destination 20 - 0 0 0
Retail
Transit Center 8 - 1,000/acre 8,000 30,400
Service/ 3 _ 1,000/acre 3,000 11,600
Commercial
Open Space 5 - 0 0 0
Right-of-Way 10 - 0 0 0
Total 253 211,200 803,000
Table 18-6 summarizes the estimated characteristics and loading for the
wastewater that will be generated from the 171 Avenue AUAR study area under
Scenario 2.
Table 18-6. Estimated Wastewater Characteristics and Total Average Daily Wastewater
Loading from Scenario 2.
Parameter Estimated Wastewater Characteristics and Average
Day Loading
mg/I Ibs/day
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 295 520
Total Suspended Solids 150 264
Total Phosphorous 6.5 11
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
' August 2011
Page 47 of 90
As with Scenario 1, wastewater generated from the study area will be conveyed
north through existing 15-inch and 18-inch trunk sewer lines along Twin Lakes
Road to 179 Avenue NW and then west through the 24-inch trunk sanitary sewer
to the TH 169 Lift Station.
Wastewater from the portion of the study area on the west side of TH 10 could be
conveyed north through a new sanitary sewer line constructed along the west side
of TH 10 and connected to the existing 15-inch sewer that crosses TH 10 just north
of 170 Avenue (Figure 18-2). An 8-inch sewer would be large enough to convey
the estimated peak hour flow of 0.40 MGD wastewater generated from this area
west of TH 10. However, because the current urban service area boundaries extend
beyond the limits of the study area, a 15-inch sanitary sewer is recommended to
provide additional capacity for future development.
Wastewater from the portion of the study area between TH 10 and the Burlington
Northern Railroad could be conveyed north and connected to the existing 15-inch
sewer that extends north to 173rd Avenue (Figure 18-2). A 10-inch gravity sewer
would be large enough to convey the estimated peak hour flow of 0.403 MGD from
the portion of the study area between TH 10 and the Burlington Northern Railroad.
However, because the current urban service area boundaries extend beyond the
limits of the study area, a 12-inch sanitary sewer is recommended to provide
additional capacity for future development.
Under this scenario, the collection system, including the TH 169 Lift Station, and the
WWTF have the available capacity to handle the additional flows from the AUAR
Study Area.
Scenario 3
The land use for this scenario is similar to Scenario 2 with the exception that a
higher density for residential units is used (20 units per acre rather than 8 units per
acre) and the building square footage for job area, destination retail, temporary
destination retail, and service/commercial are higher than for Scenario 2. For
Scenario 3, an average daily wastewater flow of 200 gpd/unit will be used for high
density residential and 1,400 gpd/acre will be used for destination retail and
service/commercial development. An average daily wastewater flow of 1,000
gpd/acre will be used for job area and transit center. As with Scenario 2, no
wastewater flow is projected for temporary destination retail and open space. A
peaking factor of 3.6 was used to determine the peak hour flow from the overall
AUAR area under this scenario. Based on these wastewater generation rates, the
estimated average day wastewater flow projected for the portion of the study area.
west of TH 10 under Scenario 3 would be 0.227 MGD and the estimated peak hour
flow would be 0.82 MGD.
The portion of the study area between TH 10 and the Burlington Northern Railroad
would generate the same estimated average day wastewater flow projected for
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 48 of 90
Scenario 2, which would be 0.148 MGD and the estimated peak hour flow would be
0.83 MGD
Table 18-7 summarizes the estimated wastewater flow generated from the study
area under Scenario 3.
Table 18-7. Estimated Average Day and Peak Hour Wastewater Flow from Scenario 3
Average Daily Total Average peak Hour
Type Acres Housing Wastewater Daily Wastewater
(Gross) (units) Flow (gpd) Wastewater Flow (gpd)
Flow (gpd)
High Density 46 .920 200/unit 184,000 662,000
Residential
Job Area 116 1,000/acre 116,000 418,000
Destination Retail 45 - -1,400/acre 63,000 227,000
Temporary 20 - 0 0 0
Destination Retail
Transit Center 8 - 1,000/acre 8,000 29,000
Service/ 3 - 1,400/acre 4,200 15,000
Commercial
Open Space 5 - 0 0 0
Right-of-Way 10 - 0 0 0
Total 253 375,200 1,351,000
Table 18-8 summarizes the estimated wastewater characteristics and loading for
the wastewater that will be generated from the 171St Avenue AUAR study area
under Scenario 3.
Table 18-8. Estimated Wastewater Characteristics and Total Average Daily Wastewater
Loading from Scenario 3
Parameter Estimated Wastewater Characteristics and
Average Day Loading
mg/I Ibs/day
Biochemical Oxygen Demand 295 923
Total Suspended Solids 150 469
Total Phosphorous 6.5 20
As with Scenario 1 and 2, wastewater generator from the study area will be
conveyed north through existing 15-inch and 18-inch trunk sewer lines along Twin
Lakes Road to 179th Avenue NW and then west through the 24-inch trunk sanitary
sewer to the TH 169 Lift Station.
Wastewater from the portion of the study area on the west side of TH 10 could be
conveyed north through a new sanitary sewer line constructed along the west side
of TH 10 and connected to the existing 15-inch sewer that crosses TH 10 just north
of 170th Avenue (Figure 18-2). A 10-inch sewer would be large enough to convey
the estimated peak hour flow of 0.83 MGD wastewater generated from this-area
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 49 of 90
west of TH 10. However, because the current urban service area boundaries extend
beyond the limits of the study area, a 15-inch sanitary sewer is recommended to
provide additional capacity for future development.
Wastewater from the portion of the study area between TH 10 and the Burlington
Northern Railroad could be conveyed north and connected to the existing 15-inch
sewer that extends north to 173rd Avenue (Figure 18-2). A 10-inch gravity sewer
would be large enough to convey the estimated peak hour flow of 0.53 MGD from
the portion of the study area between TH 10 and the Burlington Northern Railroad.
However, because the current urban service area boundaries extend beyond the
limits of the study area, a 15-inch sanitary sewer is recommended to provide
additional capacity for future development.
Under this scenario, the collection system, including the TH 169 Lift Station, and the
WWTF have the available capacity to handle the additional flows from the AUAR
Study Area. However, under peak hour flow conditions 85% to over 90% of the
capacity of sections of the existing trunk sewer system along Twin Lakes Road, from
179th Avenue NW to 171St Avenue would be utilized. Also under estimated peak
hour flow conditions approximately 97% of the current pumping capacity of the TH
169 Lift Station would be utilized.
Wastewater Mitigation Plan
The mitigation plan for wastewater collection and conveyance associated with
development of the AUAR Study area are shown in Figures 18-1 and 18-2:
Under all three scenarios wastewater generator from the study area will be'
conveyed north through existing 15-inch and 18-inch trunk sewer lines along
Twin Lakes Road and then west through the 24-inch trunk sanitary sewer to the
TH 169 Lift Station.
Under all three scenarios, the existing collection system, including the TH 169
Lift Station, and the WWTF have existing available capacity to handle the
additional projected flows from the AUAR Study Area. However, under Scenario
3, 85% to over 90% of the capacity of sections of the existing trunk sewer system
along Twin Lakes Road from 179th Avenue NW to 171St Avenue would be utilized
during estimated peak hour flow conditions. Also under Scenario 3,
approximately 97% of the current pumping capacity of the TH 169 Lift Station
would be utilized during estimated peak hour flow conditions.
• Wastewater from the portion of the study area on the west side of TH 10 could
be conveyed north through a new sanitary sewer line constructed along the west
side of TH 10 and connected to the existing 15-inch sewer that crosses TH 10
just north of 170th Avenue. Under Scenarios No. 1 and No. 2 a 10-inch diameter
gravity sewer line would have sufficient capacity to carry the projected peak
hour wastewater flows from the portion of the study area west of TH 10, plus
potential flow from future development south of the study area. Under Scenario
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 50 of 90
No. 3 a 15-inch gravity sewer line would be required. For Scenario No.1 a 10-
' inch diameter sewer would be recommended to serve the area along the west
side of TH 10. For Scenarios No. 2 and No. 3 a 15-inch gravity sewer line is
recommended for carrying the projected flows from the portion of the study
' area west of TH 10 to allow for potential future development south of the study
area.
' • Wastewater from the portion of the study area between TH 10 and the
Burlington Northern Railroad could be conveyed north and connected to the
' existing 15-inch sewer just south of 171St Avenue that extends north to 173ra
Avenue. For all three scenarios, a 10-inch gravity sewer would be large enough
to convey the estimated peak hour flow from the portion of the study area
between TH 10 and the Burlington Northern Railroad. However, because the
current urban service area boundaries extend beyond the limits of the study
area, a 12-inch sanitary sewer is recommended to provide additional capacity
' for future development.
19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions.
a. Approximate depth (in feet) to groundwater: 13 minimum; 65
average
Approximate depth (in feet) to bedrock: 151 minimum; 175
average
' b. Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and
also identify them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone
formations or karst conditions. Describe measures to avoid or minimize
environmental problems due to any of these hazards.
' Information from the MPCA indicates that the study area is not in an active karst
area. No limestone, sinkholes or karst conditions are known at the site.
c. Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications, if known.
Discuss soil granularity and potential for groundwater contamination from
wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss any
' mitigation measures to prevent such contamination.
' The soils within the study area, as in other areas of Elk River, are sandy and are
conducive to infiltration. Most of the area has a hydrologic soils group of A with
some areas of B/D. (See Item 17 for more information about soil infiltration
rates.) This high infiltration rate can pose a risk to groundwater. Table 19-1
lists the soils present on the site and Figure 16-1 shows the location of these
soils.
The Minnesota Geological Survey indicated the bedrock for the majority of the
site is between 151-200 feet below the surface. The Sherburne County Water
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 51 of 90
Plan indicated that the surficial aquifers throughout the county are rated as high
to very high in geologic sensitivity to contamination. In addition, the Natural
Resources Conservation Service's Web Soil Survey rated the aquifer within the
study area as "sensitive" to contamination.
Table 19-1. Soils within the Study Area
Map Symbol Map Unit
Name Hydrologic
Group Hydric
1110 Isa n B/D Yes
1231 Hubbard A No
1288 Seelyville A/D No
258B Sandberg A No
258E Sandberg A No
260 Duelm A No
261 Isan B/D Yes
771 Elkriver B No
7A Hubbard A No
7B Hubbard A No
7C Hubbard A No
Scenario 1
Under this scenario, the proposed land use within the study area would be a
combination of highway business, light industrial, and rural residential. Seventy-
five acres in the eastern portion of the study area would be left for agricultural
research and 14 acres in the southwest portion of the study area would be
designated as open space. These types of land uses are not anticipated to present a
hazard to groundwater contamination since contaminants are generally not
expected to be present within the area.
Scenarios 2 and 3
Under either of these scenarios, the proposed land use within the area would be a
combination of high density residential, highway business, service/commercial,
light industrial, and destination retail. These types of land uses are not anticipated
to present a hazard to groundwater contamination since contaminants are generally
not expected to be present within the area.
Under any of the scenarios, a neighborhood convenience store with gas station
would be a likely commercial use along the TH 10/169 corridor. The gas station
service would pose a potential source of groundwater contamination. However, this
type of development would be required to adhere to State regulations for
containment of underground petroleum tanks.
Based on the proposed land use, the potential for groundwater contamination
and/or adjacent drinking well contamination should be no greater than, and is
anticipated to be less than, the potential that exists with the existing agricultural
land use. The pesticides and fertilizers that are used in agricultural uses currently
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 52 of 90
are allowed to run off the site and/or infiltrate into the ground, thus having the
' potential to contaminate existing wells.
Geologic Hazards and Soil Conditions Mitigation Plan
' • The NPDES Phase II Construction Site permit requires a site specific Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to be completed for the construction.
' This SWPPP is required to include pollution prevention management measures
for solid waste and hazardous material spills that occur during construction.
• Mitigation includes conformance with the City spill response plan. Hazardous
waste spills will be reported immediately to emergency response agencies via
emergency dispatch service. The release of non-hazardous materials will be
' reported to the city no later than the next business day.
• If a gas station with an underground tank is proposed in the area, annual
' licensing from the MPCA would be needed.
20. Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, Storage Tanks.
' a. Describe types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes,
including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during
construction and operation. Identify method and location of disposal. For
' projects generating municipal solid waste, indicate if there is a source
separation plan; describe how the project will be modified for recycling. If
hazardous waste is generated, indicate if there is a hazardous waste
minimization plan and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments.
No hazardous wastes are anticipated to be produced by the development scenarios.
' Municipal solid waste will be hauled away by the municipal garbage service and
residents will be encouraged to recycle. Table 20-1 outlines estimated quantities of
' municipal solid waste for each development scenario. These numbers are
approximated for use within the AUAR.
Table 20-1. Estimated auantities of municipal solid waste generated annually.*
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Solid Waste
Generated
2,533,7001bs
5,215,7951bs
8,072,0641bs
* Estimated municipal solid waste numbers generated with the following
' assumptions:
• 4.91bs/person/day of solid municipal waste is generated. This number is an
aggregate number that takes into account commercial and business use and is
based on information from the Environmental Protection Agency (1999).
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 53 of 90
For the purposes of generating solid waste numbers only, it was assumed that 3
persons were present per household for the residential use and 10 people per
acre were present per retail use.
b. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site
and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating
groundwater. If the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a
regulated waste, discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to
minimize or eliminate the waste, discharge or emission.
The only hazardous material anticipated to be present on site would be the fuel and
oil used by construction equipment during construction activities. Post-
construction land use would include residential, light industrial, destination retail,
and service/commercial, none of which are anticipated to generate toxic materials.
Some. businesses could be small generators of possible hazardous materials (such as
medical offices). These businesses would be permitted by the MPCA.
The management, containment, and procedures to clean any spills that may occur
within the site during construction will be addressed during the MPCA NPDES Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) preparation. A copy of this plan is
required on-site during construction and utilized in the event that a spill or
discharge may occur.
c. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground
tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe
any emergency response containment plans.
The proposed commercial areas have the potential for a neighborhood convenience
store and gas station to be constructed. The gas station would have underground
petroleum tanks. This type of development would be required to adhere to State
regulations for containment of underground petroleum tanks and an annual license
would be needed.
Solid Waste. Hazardous Waste and Storage Tanks Mitigation Plan
• The municipal waste hauler company will make residential and commercial
recycling programs available to the area. General municipal waste will be
removed by these waste hauler companies.
• Mitigation includes conformance with the City spill response plan. Hazardous
waste spills will be reported immediately to emergency response agencies via
emergency dispatch service. The release ofnon-hazardous materials will be
reported to the city no later than the next business day.
• If a gas station with an underground tank is proposed in the area, annual
licensing from the MPCA would be needed.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 54 of 90
21. Traffic. Parking spaces added Not Necessary for GUAR .Existing spaces (if
project involves expansion) NA .
Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and time of
occurrence See Table 21-3
Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on affected roads and
describe any traffic improvements necessary. If the project is within the Twin
Cities metropolitan area, discuss its impact on the regional transportation
system.
Background
The 171 Avenue study area is approximately 253 acres located in the southeast
portion of Elk River. The study area is bound by the Mississippi River to the west
with State Trunk Highway (TH) 10/169 bisecting the study area running parallel to
the river. A mixture of office and industrial land uses run along the northern edge of
the study area with high and low density housing and parkland to the northeast. The
majority of the land to the east and south of the project area is owned by Cargill
Corporation and GRE, of which about half of the land is currently utilized as
agricultural research. The remaining land area is comprised of wetlands.
The BNSF rail line borders the study area extending from the northwest to the
southeast and carries'a large number of heavy rail trains each day in addition to
Northstar commuter trains. A Northstar station is located to the north of the study
area and is located approximately two miles southeast of Downtown Elk River.
The following three future land use scenarios are under consideration for the 171St
Avenue AUAR area:
• Scenario 1:2004 Comprehensive Plan Future Lane Use Scenario
• Scenario 2: Focused Area Study (FAST) Lower Impact Concept
• Scenario 3: FAST Higher Impact Concept
Each development scenario contains a mixture of residential and commercial uses
as well as a transit center and open space as outlined in the Scenario memo dated
May 20, 2011. Future land development will have a significant impact on the
operations of intersections in the project area. Increased trips from future
development scenarios will be used to forecast future traffic volumes and evaluate
traffic operations on the roadway system within the study area.
Data Collection and Assumptions
Eight key intersections were identified for the existing conditions analysis for the
171St Avenue study area. AM and PM peak hours were used as the critical periods
for the traffic analysis. Peak hour vehicle counts were obtained at the key
intersections in May 2011. These counts are attached. Current signal timing at the
US 10 and 171St Avenue intersection was obtained from Mn/DOT. The eight key
intersections include:
TH 10 / 169 and 173rd Avenue
TH 10 / 169 and 171St Avenue
Ciry of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 55 of 90
• TH 10 / 169 and 165th Avenue
• Twin Lakes Road and Tyler Street
• Twin Lakes Road and 175th Avenue
• Twin Lakes Road and 172nd Avenue
• Twin Lakes Road and 171St Avenue
• 171St Avenue and Ulysses Street
Traffic Forecasts
In order to estimate the traffic impacts the proposed development scenarios have
on the study area roadways, it is necessary to estimate the expected background
traffic growth, as well as the amount of traffic expected to be generated by the
proposed development. The traffic forecasting process consists of the following key
components:
• Existing traffic conditions
• Background traffic growth
• Site /development generated traffic
• Trip distribution
• Future roadway network
• Trip assignment /forecasted traffic volumes
Existing Traffic Conditions
In order to provide a base condition for the traffic analysis, turning. movement
counts were collected at the eight key intersections during the peak AM and PM
periods in May of 2011. Figure 21-1 displays the existing AM and PM peak hour
turning movements along with the existing intersection lane geometry. For
reference, the raw count data at the key intersections is attached.
Background Traffic Growth
Traffic growth in the vicinity of a proposed development will occur between existing
conditions and any given future year due to other growth and development within
the region. This background growth must be accounted for and included in future
year traffic forecasts. Reviewing the historical traffic counts on TH 10 / 169 we
determined that: in 2000 the ADT was 31,000 vpd; the current count completed in
2011 is 31,500 vpd; and, the highest volume reported between 2000 and 2011 was
36,000. vpd in 2004, 2006 and 2007.Over the ten year time frame this represents
just over a 16% or about 1.5% per year increase in traffic from the low volume to
the high volume.
The 20-year State Aid traffic growth factor for Sherburne County is 1.8 or
approximately 2.9% per year growth. In order to be conservative and insure that all
potential adjacent development is accounted for the 20 year 1.8 (2.9% /yr) growth
was used for none site background traffic in the operations analyses.
Site/Development Generated Traffic
Once the future land use scenarios for the undeveloped land in the project area was
established and agreed upon by the City of Elk River, trip generation was developed.
to estimate the traffic that will be generated by the new development. Traffic
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 56 of 90
Analysis Zones (TAZ) were developed for the study area in order to accurately
assign traffic to the roadway network.
The development is anticipated to be completed in phases. In order to determine
what improvements may be needed with each Phase of development, a portion of
each TAZ was assumed to be included as part of a particular Phase. Below is a
summary of assumed development for each Phase and Scenario of the project.
Table 21-1-Phase 1 Development
(TA7. 1 - 1 M%_ TA7. 7. - 1 nn°/n_ TA7. 3 - 50°/nl
~
Agricultural Research (acres) ~
0 ~
0 ~
0
Rural Residential (units) 0 0 0
Highway Business (sf) 69,696 0 0
Light Industrial (s~ 180,828 0 0
Open Space (acres) 0 3 3
High Density Residential (units) 0 0 0
Transit Center (s~ 0 87,120 87,120
Service Commercial (sf7 0 0 0
Destination Retail (s~ 0 0 0
Temp Destination Retail (st) 0 0 0
Jobs Area (sf7 0 85,269 119,376
Table 21-2 -Phase 2 Development
"TAZ1-100%,TAZ2-100%,1'A"L~-1
~
Agricultural Research (acres) UU"/o,'1'A"L4-1UU~/o,~1HG5-l
~ ~
0 0 U"/off
~
0
Rural Residential (units) 0 0 0
Highway Business (sf) 564,538 0 0
Light Industrial [s~ 281,289 0 0
Open Space (acres) 0 5 5
High Density Residential (units) 0 0 0
Transit Center (sf7 0 87,120 87,120
Service Commercial (sf7 0 0 0
Destination Retail (sf7 0 220,523 308,732
Temp Destination Retail (sf) 0 217,800 304,920
Jobs Area (sfJ 0 353,707 495,190
(includes Phase 1 development)
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 57 of 90
Table 21-3 -Phase 3 - 5 (Full Development)
(TAZ1-6-100%)
~
Agricultural Research (acres) ~ ~
75 0 ~
0
Rural Residential (units) 3 0 0
Highway Business (sfJ 696,960 0 0
Light Industrial (s~ 892,980 0 0
Open Space (acres) 14 5 5
High Density Residential (units) 0 368 920
Transit Center (sf) 0 87,120 87,120
Service Commercial (st) 0 32,670 45,738
Destination Retail (s~ ~ 0 490,050 686,070
Temp Destination Retail [sfJ 0 217,800 304,920
Jobs Area (sf7 0 1,263,240 1,768,536
(includes Phase 1 and 2 development)
Figure 21-2 shows the study area with the Traffic Analysis Zones and anticipated
Development Phases.
Trip generation rates were taken from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition.
Rates were provided for the AM and PM peak hours as well as for daily totals. Trip
generation values were then adjusted for internal and pass-by/diverted trips.
Table 21- 4 shows the anticipated traffic generation for each scenario.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 58 of 90
Table Z1- 4 -Development 1~rarnc generation
,
'ra
~ ~
0
_
Y
IO
v
d
~
Q ~
0
_
Y
f0
d
d >,
~ 'm
a ~ ~
0
_
Y
f7
N
d
~
Q ~
0
_
Y
(p
~
d >.
~ m
a 0 ~
0
_
Y
f0
G/
C
~
Q ~
0
_
Y
fC
N
d >.
~ m
d ~ ~
0
_
Y
c0
d
a
~
Q ~
0
_
Y
f0
N
s
~
a
m
~ 3
0
_
Y
f0
N
d
~
Q ~
0
_
Y
f0
v
d
~
a ~~
00
__
Y Y
f0 f0
N p1
d d
'm ~ ~
0 Q d ~~
00
__
Y Y
10 f0
G1 GJ
G. d
'co ~ ~
~ Q d
00
__
Y Y
f0 f0
G1 G1
a s
m ~ ~
~ Q a ~~
00
__
Y Y
IO f0
v N
>, d d
_~ ~ ~
O Q a ~
00
__
Y Y
f0 f0
C1 d
>, d C
'm ~ ~
O Q a
O
m
~
00
__
Y Y
N f0
G/ N
. d
~ ~
Q a
,
'n
0 3
0
_
Y
(O
N
d
~
Q ~
0
_
Y
f0
G1
d
~
a
°f C
= FC F
i V~ a ~
• -_
~ o Q
~ d t#
•
' d
•~ L y W
d Or
. ~
W
~_
y
~ ~ ~ y d i
~ d
~ C C W
'
~ 'o 4 ~ U .q L
Q l7
~
~
~ S rn ~,
~ ' o
U o
R a a
~ FG d ~, ~ q
7 i ~
O
°J
~
Y
~
~'
-~ _
~
bD
~ °° ~ A F' ~ °~' C° ~
x ~ ~ a a a
a '
x o
H
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 59 of 90
Trip Distribution
Figure 21-3 shows the distribution of site /development generated trips that
would be expected to access the major roadways in the network. The distribution
was developed using the City's Transportation Plan Travel Demand Model and
existing turning movement counts. Trip distribution is separated directionally and
also by the AM and PM peak hours. This method takes into account differing travel
patterns during different times of the day, likely due to congestion.
Future Roadway Network
The baseline build future roadway network was based on the recommendations in
the 171St Avenue Focused Area Study (FAST). It was assumed that these
improvements would be constructed as development occurs in the study area. The
primary roadway network is shown in Figure 21-4 and includes:
1. Realignment /extension of Twin Lakes Road(as Twin Lakes Parkway) from
171St Avenue to west of TH 10 / 169 intersecting TH 10 / 169 at a location
approximately 1/z mile south of the exiting 171St Avenue intersection. The
roadway cross section includes four (4) lanes (2 lanes in each direction) with left
turn lanes at the primary intersections. A traffic signal system is assumed at the
TH 10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway intersection and include dual left turn
lanes from TH 10 / 169 to northbound Twin Lakes Parkway and dual left turn
lanes from Twin Lakes. Parkway to eastbound TH 10 / 169.
2. Maintaining the existing full movement intersection with the traffic signal
system at the TH 10 / 169 and 171St Avenue intersection. It is assumed that dual
lefts for eastbound TH 10 / 169 to northbound 1715tAvenue would be required
to accommodate existing and future traffic volumes.
3. Closing 173rd Avenue to Right-in /Right-out access. MnDOT has indicated this
access will be closed to Right-in /Right-out with their planned overlay project in
2013.
4. Construction of 168th Avenue / Olson Street from Twin Lakes Parkway to 165th
Avenue. The roadway cross section includes two (2) lanes with right and left
turn lanes at the primary intersections.
5. Construction of a connecting local street from 171St Avenue to Twin Lakes
Parkway. The roadway cross section includes two (2) lanes with right and left
turn lanes at the primary intersections.
6. Development /site access will be provided at locations based on the City's
Transportation Plan Access Spacing Guidelines and will be determined with each
development.
In addition to the baseline roadway network, a potential short term improvement of
a third lane on TH 10 / 169 and a potential future interchange at Twin Lakes
Parkway was considered and evaluated as to when they maybe needed. It was
assumed that with the interchange option, all other access to TH 10 / 169, including
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 60 of 90
the right-in /right-out access at 165th Avenue, and the full movement signalized
intersection at 171St Avenue would be removed.
Trip Assignment/Forecasted Traffic Volumes
Turning movements at each intersection for each Phase and Scenario were
estimated by applying the approach direction distribution percentages to the site-
generated traffic. In addition to the site-generated traffic, the background traffic
growth was added to thru traffic on the development area roadways. This traffic
was then added to the existing traffic to develop the future projected traffic
volumes. Figures 21-5 thru 21-7 show the projected full build out traffic volumes
with an interchange at TH 10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway for each Scenario.
Traffic Operations Analysis
The traffic operations analysis is derived from established methodologies
documented in the Highway Capacity Manua12000 (HCM). The HCM provides a
series of analysis techniques that are used to evaluate traffic operations.
Intersections are given a Level of Service (LOS) grade from "A" to "F" to describe the
average amount of control delay per vehicle as defined in the HCM. The LOS is
primarily a function of peak traffic hour turning movement volumes, intersection
lane configuration, and the traffic controls at the intersection. LOS A is the best
traffic operating condition, and drivers experience minimal delay at an intersection
operating at that level. LOS E represents the condition where the intersection is at
capacity, and some drivers may have to wait through more than one green phase to
make it through an intersection controlled by traffic signals. LOS F represents a
condition where there is more traffic than. can be handled by the intersection, and
many vehicle operators may have to wait through more than one green phase to
make it through the intersection. At a stop sign-controlled intersection, LOS F would
be characterized by exceptionally long vehicle queues on each approach at an all-
way stop, or long queues and/or great difficulty in finding an acceptable gap for
drivers on the minor legs at athrough-street intersection.
The LOS ranges for both signalized and un-signalized intersections are shown in
Table 21- 5. The threshold LOS values for un-signalized intersections are slightly
less than for signalized intersections. This variance was instituted because drivers'
expectations at intersections differ with the type of traffic control. A given LOS can
be altered by increasing (or decreasing) the number of lanes, changing traffic control
arrangements, adjusting the timing at signalized intersections, or other lesser geometric
improvements. LOS also changes as traffic volumes increase or decrease.
City of Elk River
' Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 61 of 90
Table 21- 5 -Intersection Level of Service Ranges
A ~
..,
<_10 ~ ~- - ~
•
<_10
B 10-20 10-15
C 20-35 15-25
D 35 - 55 25 - 35
E 55 - 80 35 - 50
F >80 >50
Source: HCM
LOS, as described above, can also be determined for the individual legs (sometimes
referred to as "approaches") or lanes (turn lanes in particular) of an intersection. It
should be noted that a LOS E or F might be acceptable or justified in those cases
where a leg(s) or lane(s) has a very low traffic volume as compared to the volume on
the other legs. For example, improving LOS on such low-volume legs by converting a
two-way sTOP condition to an all-way stop, or adjusting timing at a signalized
intersection, could result in a significant penalty for the many drivers on the major
road while benefiting the few on the minor road. Also, geometric improvements on
minor legs, such as additional lanes or longer turn lanes, could have limited positive
effects and might be prohibitive in terms of benefit to cost.
Although LOS A represents the best possible level of traffic flow, the cost to
construct roadways and intersection to such a high standard often exceeds the
benefit to the user. Funding availability might also lead to acceptance of intersection
or roadway designs with a lower LOS. LOS D is generally accepted as the lowest
acceptable level in urban areas. LOS C is often considered to be the desirable
minimum level for rural areas. LOS D or E may be acceptable for limited durations.
or distances, or for very low-volume legs of some intersections.
The LOS analysis for the 171 Avenue Area AUAR was performed using
Synchro/SimTraffic:
Synchro, a software package that implements Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
methodologies, was used to build each signalized intersection and provide an
input database for turning-movement volumes, lane geometries, and signal
design and timing characteristics. In addition, Synchro was used to optimize
signal timing parameters for future conditions. Output from Synchro is
transferred to SimTraffic, the traffic simulation model.
• SimTraffic is amicro-simulation computer modeling software that simulates
each individual vehicle's characteristics and driver behavior in response to
traffic volumes, intersection configuration, and signal operations. The model
simulates drivers' behaviors and responses to surrounding traffic flow as well as
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 62 of 90
different vehicle types and speeds. It outputs estimated vehicle delay and queue
lengths at each intersection being analyzed.
Synchro/SimTraffic was used not only to project future LOS conditions, but to define
existing conditions using existing signal timing and traffic count information
described previously. The traffic analysis was conducted for the following
conditions for each Scenario:
1. Existing 2011 No-Build
2. 2013 No-Build (beginning of phase 1)
3. Phase 1 Completed
4. Phase 2 Completed
5. Full Development (Phases 3 - 5 completed)
The results of the LOS analysis for each condition and Scenario are discussed below.
Existing 2011 No Build
The existing no-build condition assumes the in-place intersection control and
access. The existing no-build conditions were analyzed to determine the current
level of operations of the study area and to set a baseline in determining what future
roadway improvement are needed and when they maybe required. Table 21- 6
shows the results of the LOS analysis for the existing no-build conditions.
City of Elk River
' Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 63 of 90
I~
J
1
r
Ta ble 21- 6 - Existin 20 11 No-B uild Anal sis
. .
• ~ ~ 1 ~
1
~
~ -.
.~
-
-
~ NB 4 A 9 A
N
'~
173rd Ave and
WB
22
C
4
A
>200
26
D
.y TH 10/169 SB 3 A 14 B
~ EB >200 >200
.~ NB 12 B 39 D
.~
171st Ave and
WB
38
D
20
C
66
E
36
D
~,
r TH 10/169 SB 19 B 25 C
n
EB
34
C
50
D
., N B 1 A 2 A
m 165th Ave and WB 4 A 6 A >200 35 E
~, TH 10/169 SB 8 A 14 B
~ EB 0 A 0 A
d NB 2 A 7 A
171st Ave and WB 1 A 2 A 1 A 2 A
.~ Ulysses St SB 7 A 9 A
~ EB 1 A 1 A
NB 2 A 2 A
N
'~
Twin Lakes Rd and
WB
7
A
2
A
9
A
3
A
.y
?~
C 171st Lane SB 1 A 1 A
~ EB 4 A 8 A
m NB 1 A 1 A
'~ Twin Lakes Rd and WB 6 A 1 A 8 A 2 A
.N 175th Ave SB 0 A 0 A
~ EB 4 A 5 A
TH 10 / 169 at 173rd Avenue -During the AM and PM peak hours the eastbound and
westbound approaches are operating at LOS F with the overall intersection operating
at A during the AM peak and D during the PM peak. The primary issues are with
delays to the left turning vehicles turning off of TH 10 / 169 to 173rd Avenue.
TH 10 / 169 at 171St Avenue -During the AM and PM peak hours all approaches are
operating at LOS E or better with the overall intersection operating at LOS C in the AM
peak hour and D in the PM peak hour. The left turn movements from TH 10 / 169 to
171St Avenue do experience delays, operating as an LOS F during the PM peak hour.
TH 10 / 169 at 165th Avenue -During the PM peak hour the westbound approach
operates at a LOS F however the overall intersection operates at LOS A in the AM peak
hour and E in the PM peak hour. The primary issue is with delays to the left turning
vehicles turning off of TH 10 / 169 to 165rd Avenue.
All other study area intersections are operating at LOS A during both the AM and PM
peak hours with the existing conditions.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 64 of 90
2013 No-Build
The 2013 no-build condition assumes the roadway configuration on TH 10 / 169
following the completion of the Mn/DOT mill and overlay project and prior to
develuptiient in the study area. This included revising the fuii movement access at
173rd Avenue to a right-in /right-out and maintaining the full movement access at
165 Avenue. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 21- 7. The TH 10 at 171St
Avenue is the only result shown in the table since all other intersection in the study
area would continue to operate at LOS C or better during both the AM and PM peak
hours.
The results of the analysis indicate that with closing of the 173rd Avenue intersection
and with only background traffic growth (no development traffic), the intersection of
TH 10 / 169 and 171St Avenue will be operating at a LOS F in the PM peak hour. This is
primarily the result of the additional left turn traffic turning left from TH 10 / 169 to
171St Avenue. In order to mitigate this deficiency a dual left turn lane was assumed for
southbound TH 10 / 169 to eastbound 171St Avenue. The results indicate that the
overall intersection would then be operating at a LOS D with only the westbound
171St Avenue approach at a LOS E. The results of that mitigation are shown in Table
21-8.
Table 21- 8 - 2013 No-Build with
Phase 1 Development Completed
The baseline condition for Phase 1 assumed the mitigation proposed in the 2013 no-
build was completed and the phase 1 area was fully developed. Tables 21- 9, 21-
10 and 21-11 show the results of the Phase 1 development conditions with the
baseline roadway configuration. The TH 10 at 171St Avenue is the only result shown
in the table. All other intersection in the study area would continue to operate at
LOS C or better during both the AM and PM peak hours.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 65 of 90
1
Table 21- 7 - 2013 No-Build
Table 21-10 -Phase 1 /Scenario 2 Baseline Conditions
- --
.~
171st Avenue and WB 43 D 26 C 103
~, TH 10/169 SB 28 C 59
y
EB 50 D 124
E
80
The results of the analysis indicate that with any development Scenario the
intersection of TH 10 / 169 and 171St Avenue will be operating at a LOS F in the PM
peak hour. This is primarily the result of the additional traffic from the Phase 1
development area. In order to mitigate these deficiencies a dual left turn lane was
assumed for westbound 171St Avenue to southbound TH 10 / 169 and the
installation of a traffic signal at the new TH 10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway
intersection. The results indicate that with the proposed mitigation, the overall
intersection would then be operating at a LOS D or better with any development
Scenario, however with development Scenario 1 and Scenario 3 there would be
movements at a LOS F. The results of including the mitigation are shown in Tables
21-12,21-13 and 21-14.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 66 of 90
Table 21- 9 -Phase 1 /Scenario 1 Baseline Conditions
Table 21-11-Phase 1 /Scenario 3 Baseline Conditions
Ta ble 21 - 12 -Phase 1 Scenario 1 wi th Mit ano n
. .
.- ~- .-
- .-
a NB i 7 is 4U D
.~
171st Avenue and
WB
44
D
22
C
82
46
D
m TH 10/169 SB 20 C 44 D
EB 68 E 90
a NB 6 A 29 C
A
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
49
D
15
B
73
E
30
C
~,
N TH 10/169 SB 17 B 26 C
EB 0 A 0 A
Ta ble 21 - 14 ~- )-'base 1 ,' Scenari~-- 3 wi th !~Iit i anon
~. ~
~ •
•~ -
~ .
- • . e -
• ..
.
.
~ ~ NB i 7 B 39 D
.~
171st Avenue and
WB
44
D
23
C 85
53
D
TH 10/169
SB
21
C
62
E
EB 66 E 91
~ NB 5 A 26 C
.q
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
74
E
17
B 79
E
27
C
N TH 10/169
SB
18
B
21
C
EB 0 A 0 A
Phase 2 Development Completed
The baseline condition for Phase 2 assumed the mitigation proposed for Phase 1
was completed and the Phase 2 area was fully developed. Tables 21-15, 21-16
and 21-17 show the results of the Phase 2 development conditions with the ,
baseline roadway configuration for each Scenario. The TH 10 / 169 at 171St Avenue
and TH 10 / 169 at Twin Lakes Parkway are the only result shown in the table. All
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011 Page 67 of 90
other intersection in the study area will continue to operate at LOS C or better
during both the AM and PM peak hours.
1
Ta ble 21- 15 -Phase 2 u~ Scenari o 1 Ba seline Cond itions
--
..
~ ... . .
.
.-
.-
.-
.-
.~ NB 18 l~ i 87 F
171st Avenue and WB 75 E 43 D 268 F 175
~, TH 10/169 SB 48 D 138 F
EB 105 111 F
.~ NB 9 A 100 F
.~
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
74
E
29
C
408
F
118
~, TH 10/169 SB 34 C 44 D
y
EB 0 A 0 A
Ta ble 21 - 16 -Phase 2 ~` Scenari o 2 Ba seline t_:;c-~i~( rt~::pis
• ~ • s • ~ • ~
• • ~• •.
.~ NB 22 G 205 F
.~
171st Avenue and
WB
68
E
49
D
286
F
199
rn TH 10/169 SB 57 E 168 F
~
EB 97 92 F
.~ NB 36 D 117 F
Twin Lakes Pkwy and WB 124 40 D 475 F 141
~,
r TH 10/169 SB 30 C 34 C
n
EB 0 A 0 A
Table 21 - 17 -Phase 2 Scenari o 3 Baseline Cond iticira
. .
.. ~ ....
•.,.
.
..
-
.- .- .- .-
9 NB 28 ~ is ~~s~ F
171st Avenue and WB 144 59 E 334 F 206
~, TH 10/169 SB 62 E 159 F
y
EB
90
80
F
.~ NB 33 C 125 F
.~
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
87
37
D
328
F
129
~,
f TH 10/169 SB 32 C 54 D
N
EB
0 A
0
A
' The results of the analysis indicate that with any development Scenarios both the
intersections of TH 10 / 169 at 171St Avenue and TH 10 / 169 at Twin Lakes
Parkway will be operating at a LOS F in the PM peak hour. This is primarily the
result of the additional traffic from the Phase 2 development area. In order to
' City of Elk River
Draft Alternative urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 68 of 90
mitigate these deficiencies an interchange at TH 10/ 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway
was assumed. This also assumed that all access to TH 10 / 169 in the area would be
removed. The results indicate that with the proposed mitigation, the ramp
intersections would be operating at a LOS D or better with any development
Scenario, with no movements at a LuS F. The results of including the mitigation are
shown in Tables 21- 18, 21-19 and 21- 20.
I'~~ ble'1 ~ 10 i'hase ~ Scenari o 1 wi th Mit i anon
... . . .
.
9 NB 0 A 0 A
.q
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
20
B
18
B
24
C
27
C
~, TH 10/169 EB Ramps SB 20 B 31 C
EB 7 A 20 C
.~ NB 6 A 17 B
.q
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
4
A
4
A
10
B
10
B
~, TH 10/169 WB Ramps SB 0 A 0 A
EB 4 A 4 A
I°a ble 21 e 19 -~ F'f~~4~~ ,' '~s ~~n~i1 i.-~ "` ~~ i t h !~'iit i ~atia~~i.
.. .
.. .
.. .
-
.
a NB 0 A 0 A
.~
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
22
C
22
C
30
C
32
C
~, TH 101169 EB Ramps SB 24 C 35 C
EB 7 A 27 C
.~ NB 9 A 21 C
.~
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
5
A
6
A
15
B
13
B
~,
rn TH 10/169 WB Ramps SB 0 A 0 A
EB 5 A 4 A
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011 Page 69 of 90
Full Development Conditions
The previous analysis concluded that with the completion of Phase 2 of the
development, with any Scenario, an interchange will be needed on TH 10 / 169 at
Twin Lakes Parkway, to accommodate any future traffic growth. Based on this
assumption, it was determined that there was not a need to analyze each of the
remaining development Phases (Phase 3 - 5) separately. Therefore, the Full
Development conditions (all Phases completed) were analyzed to determine if any
further mitigation would be needed to accommodate the full traffic growth of the
area.
For each development Scenario, an analysis was also completed to determine if a
' third lane on TH 10 / 169 would potentially delay the need for the interchange at TH
10 and Twin Lakes Parkway. The analysis of each full build Scenario is discussed
below.
Scenario 1
Based on the analysis of future traffic volumes for Scenario 1 adding a third lane on
TH 10 / 169 could delay the need for an interchange by approximately eight years.
TH 10 / 169 Interchange -The full build conditions were analyzed assuming a
standard diamond interchange at TH 10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway with the
future roadway network shown in Figure 21-4, and assuming full development of
the area. The results of the analysis indicate both ramp intersection would operate
at LOS C or better during both the AM and PM peak hours.
Twin Lakes Parkway at 168 Avenue -This intersection would experience delays
for the westbound 168 Avenue approach turning left on to Twin Lakes Parkway
during PM peak hour. The overall LOS at this intersection is projected to be E during
the PM peak hour. If a traffic signal system or a roundabout is installed the
operations would improve to an LOS A.
All other study area intersections would be operating at LOS C or better during both
the AM and PM peak hours. Table 21- 21 shows the results of the Full Development
/ Scenario 1 analysis.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 70 of 90
Ta ble 21 -l1 l u.~l D~ c el ~ roarlt•r~t ' ~+c t~ nare 1 :~na lvsi
. .
~,.
..
..
..
-
.- .- .- .-
d NB 5 A % A
Twin Lakes Pkwy and WB 1 A 3 A 1 A 5 A
•y Wilson St gg g A 7 A
~ EB 0 A 0 A
•~ NB 0 A 0 A
.~
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
24
C
22
C
23
C
27
C
m TH 10/169 EB Ramps Sg 23 C 31 C
EB 11 B 25 C
•~ N B 19 B 38 D
.~
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
7
A
8
A
31
C
27
C
;, TH 10/169 WB Ramps SB 0 A 0 A
EB 5 A 14 B
d NB 1 A 2 A
'~ Twin Lakes Pkwy and WB 11 B 2 A > 200 48 E
.~' 168th Ave SB 0 A 1 A
EB 0 A 0 A
d NB 1 A 3 A
'~ Twin Lakes Pkwy and WB 0 A 1 A 0 A 4 A
.N 170th Ave SB 1 A 1 A
~ EB 5 A 11 B
d NB 0 A 0 A
Twin Lakes Rd and WB 0 A 1 A 0 A 1 A
•°' 171stAve gg 1 A 1 A
~ EB 0 A 5 A
~ NB 1 A 1 A
Twin Lakes Rd and WB 9 A 3 A 20 C 3 A
.y
C 171st Lane SB 1 A 2 A
~ EB 8 A 11 B
a NB 0 A 2 A
Twin Lakes Rd and WB 7 A 2 A 13 B 3 A
•~' 175th Ave SB 1 A 0 A
~ EB 5 A 10 A
d NB 0 A 4 A
171st Ave and WB 0 A 0 A 1 A 2 A
•N Ulysses St SB 0 A 4 A
~ EB 0 A 0 A
d NB 0 A 0 A
165th Ave and WB 0 A 2 A 1 A 3 A
•~' Olson St Sg 5 A 5 A
~ EB 0 A 0 A
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011 Page 71 of 90
Scenario 2
Based on the analysis of future traffic volumes for Scenario 2 adding a third lane on
TH 10 / 169 could delay the need for an interchange by approximately six years.
TH 10 ,/ 169 Interchange - The fu11_ build condi*_ions were analyzed assuming a
standard diamond interchange at TH 10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway with the
future roadway network shown in Figure 21-4, and assuming full build of the
development area. The results of the analysis indicate that with the standard
diamond interchange the amount of traffic turning at the interchange ramps is
extremely high and cannot be accommodated with this type of interchange. The
overall LOS at both ramp intersections is LOS C / B in the AM peak hour and LOS D /
F in the PM peak hour. Assuming an interchange with additional capacity such as a
single point or diverging diamond, the overall LOS could be improved to a LOS D / E,
with some movements still at LOS F.
Twin Lakes Parkway at 168 Avenue -This intersection would experience delays
for both the northbound and westbound approaches during AM and PM peak hours.
The overall LOS at this intersection is projected to be F during both the AM and PM
peak hours. If a roundabout or traffic signal is installed the operations would
improve to an LOS C.
fl
Twin Lakes Parkway at Wilson Street -This intersection is located on the south side
of TH 10 / 169. The delays at this intersection are strictly the result of the
interchange operation and would be eliminated with a higher capacity interchange.
All other study area intersections would be operating at LOS C or better during both
the AM and PM peak hours. Table 21- 22 shows the results of the Full Development
/ Scenario 2 analysis.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 72 of 90
Ta blo ~1 _ ~~ -~ Fail L)ec~e~l o mpnt ,~ Scenario ~ A>~a l~~~i~
....
... . .
~ ....
.- .- .- .-
NB 8 A 106 F
Twin Lakes Pkwy and WB 2 A 6 A 2 A 68
•c Wilson St gg 13 B 182
' EB 0 A 0 A
.~ NB 0 A 0 A
.~
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
46
D
32
C
32
C
54
D
m TH 10/169 EB Ramps Sg 29 C 75 E
EB 23 C 54 D
• NB 31 C 220
~
.~
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
12
B
13
B
55
E
110
~,
~ TH 10/169 WB Ramps SB 0 A 0 A
EB 5 A 73 E
d NB 10 A 4 A
N
~~
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
>200
68
>200
53
•c 168th Ave SB 22 C 10 A
' EB 0 A 0 A
d NB 2 A 1 A
Twin Lakes Pkwy and WB 0 A 1 A 0 A 2 A
.~' 170th Ave SB 1 A 1 A
' EB 7 A 9 A
N NB 0 A 1 A
Twin Lakes Rd and WB 0 A 1 A 0 A 1 A
H 171st Ave gg 1 A 1 A
' EB 0 A 11 B
d NB 2 A 1 A
'~ Twin Lakes Rd and WB 10 B 2 A 27 D 5 A
O1
'~ 171st Lane
SB
1
A
2
A
' EB 7 A 27 D
d NB 1 A 3 A
Twin Lakes Rd and WB 8 A 2 A 22 C 4 A
•y 175th Ave SB 1 A 2 A
' EB 5 A 12 B
d NB 0 A 4 A
171st Ave and WB 0 A 0 A 1 A 2 A
•y Ulysses St SB 0 A 4 A
' EB 0 A 0 A
N NB 0 A 0 A
~~ 165th Ave and WB 1 A 2 A 1 A 4 A
•~' Olson St SB 5 A 6 A
' EB 0 A 0 A
~i
~i
ii
1
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011 Page 73 of 90
Scenario 3
Based on the analysis of future traffic volumes for Scenario 3 adding a third lane on
TH 10 / 169 could delay the need for an interchange by approximately four years.
TH 10 ,/ 169 Interchange - The fi,1_l b>>i1_d conditions were analyzed assuming a
standard diamond interchange at TH 10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway with the
future roadway network shown in Figure 21- 4, and assuming full build of the
development area. The results of the analysis indicate that with the standard
diamond interchange the amount of traffic turning at the interchange ramps is
extremely high and cannot be accommodated with this type of interchange. The
overall LOS at both ramp intersections is LOS F in both the AM and PM peak hours.
Assuming an interchange with additional capacity such as a single point or diverging
diamond, the overall LOS could be improved to an overall LOS E with some
movements still at LOS F.
Twin Lakes Parkway at 168th Avenue -This intersection would experience delays
for both the northbound and westbound approaches during AM and PM peak hours.
The overall LOS at this intersection is projected to be F during both the AM and PM
' peak hours. If a roundabout or traffic signal is installed the operations would
improve to an LOS C.
~, Twin Lakes Parkway at Wilson Street -This intersection is located on the south side
of TH 10 / 169. The delays at this intersection are strictly the result of the
interchange operation and would be eliminated with a higher capacity interchange.
St
Twin Lakes Parkway at 171
Lane -The eastbound and westbound minor street
approaches will experience some delays during the PM peak hour. However, the
overall intersection LOS is still at a B.
All other study area intersections would be operating at LOS C or better during both
' the AM and PM peak hours. Table 21- 23 shows the results of the Full Development
/ Scenario 3 analysis.
n
' City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 74 of 90
ia bie ~i _ ~~ _ ti~i i~-t~~,t~ ~, tETlt~~i~ >(en~r~ica ~ tid lb~;~
. .
.. .
.- .- .-
d IvB S5 F 10~ F
N
'~
Twin Lakes Pkwy and
WB
3
r
46
E
2
A
81
.y Wilson St SB 46 E 260
~ EB 0 A 0 A
9 NB 0 A 0 A
. Twin Lakes Pkwy and WB 137 58 E 40 D 54 D
~
`o, TH 10/169 EB Ramps SB 33 C 78 E
EB 27 C 37 D
.~ NB 59 E 289
. Twin Lakes Pkwy and WB 253 95 59 E 130
~
~, TH 10/169 WB Ramps SB 0 A 0 A
EB 11 B 72 E
NB 31 D 6 A
Twin Lakes Pkwy and WB 0 A 77 >200 120
.y 168th Ave SB 412 78
~ EB 0 A 0 A
NB 4 A 1 A
Twin Lakes Pkwy and WB 0 A 3 A 0 A 2 A
.y 170th Ave SB 1 A 1 A
~ EB 12 B 9 A
d NB 1 A 0 A
Twin Lakes Rd and WB 0 A 1 A 0 A 0 A
.y 171st Ave SB 1 A 0 A
~ EB 0 A 2 A
d NB 2 A 1 A
Twin Lakes Rd and WB 24 C 5 A 74 13 B
.y 171st Lane SB 1 A 2 A
~ EB 11 B 96
NB 1 A 3 A
Twin Lakes Rd and WB 10 B 3 A 40 E 6 A
.y
C 175th Ave SB 1 A 1 A
~ EB 7 A 29 D
d NB 0 A 4 A
171st Ave and WB 1 A 1 A 1 A 2 A
.N Ulysses St SB 0 A 5 A
~ EB 0 A 0 A
NB 0 A 0 A
'~ 165th Ave and WB 1 A 3 A 1 A 4 A
•N Olson St SB 5 A 6 A
~ EB 0 A 0 A
Ciry of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review '
August 20] 1 Page 75 of 90
Traffic and Transportation Mitigation Plan
• Prior to the beginning of the development and after Mn/DOT has closed the full
movement access at TH 10 / 169 and 173rd Avenue, a dual left turn lane should be
installed on eastbound TH 10 / 169 to northbound 171St Avenue. This should be
included with the Mn/DOT mill and overlay project currently scheduled for 2013.
Realignment /extension of Twin Lakes Road (as Twin Lakes Parkway) from the
railroad crossing to south of TH 10 / TH 169 to accommodate future traffic
growth in the area. The roadway cross section should include four (4) lanes with
left turn lanes at the primary intersections. This roadway would be completed as
development occurs in the area. The first segment from the railroad crossing to
171St Avenue should be completed to accommodate be beginning of the Phase 1
development. The remainder of the roadway should be completed by the end of
Phase 1 prior to starting or in conjunction with the Phase 2 development.
At the completion of the development in Phase 1 or in conjunction with the
beginning of Phase 2 a new traffic signal system should be constructed at the TH
10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway intersection, The intersection should include
dual left turn lanes for southbound Twin Lakes Parkway to eastbound TH 10 / 169
and dual left turn lanes for eastbound TH 10 / 169 to northbound Twin Lakes
Parkway.
• The existing traffic signal at TH 10 / 169 and 171St Avenue should be maintained
' until such time as the'new interchange is constructed to accommodate current and
future traffic demand.
r
C
• The existing full movement intersection on TH 10 / 169 at 165th Avenue should be
maintained until such time as a connection is made from Twin Lakes Parkway to
165th Avenue via 168th Avenue and Olson Street, or such time as the interchange at
TH 10 / 169 and Twin Lakes Parkway is constructed.
• Depending on how and where development occurs in the area and how traffic on
TH 10 / 169 increases, a third lane on TH 10 / 169 could delay the need for an
interchange on TH 10 / 169 at Twin Lakes Parkway by eight years with Scenario 1,
six years with Scenario 2 or four years with Scenario 3.
• The future primary full movement access (Twin Lakes Parkway) to TH 10 / 169 in
the area should be at a location as far south of the TH 10 /169 /101 interchange as
possible (as approved by Mn/DOT).
• At the completion of the development in Phase 2 and prior to or in conjunction
with the beginning of the remaining phases a standard diamond interchange
should be constructed to accommodate the projected traffic for Scenario 1,
however for Scenario 2 and Scenario 3 an interchange with additional capacity,
such as a single point or diverging diamond should be considered .Preliminary
concept plans to identify right of way needs should be completed as part of the
Twin Lakes Parkway extension project during Phase 2 development.
Ciry of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
' August 2011
Page 76 of 90
The internal roadway and intersections can be constructed as development occurs
in the area. These roadways should have a two (2) lane cross section with turn
lanes at the primary intersections.
The intersections of Twin Lakes Parkway and 171St Avenue and 168th Avenue will
experience delays by full development in all Scenarios and should be constructed
to accommodate a signal system or roundabout in the future when traffic volumes
indicate the need.
• Location and traffic control at development access /driveway locations shall
follow the City's Access Spacing Guidelines and be evaluated as development
occurs in the area. At a minimum each location should include a left turn lane from
the primary roadway.
22. Vehicle-related Air Emissions. Estimate the effect of the project's traffic
generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect
of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts.
Note: If the project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult EAW
Guidelines about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.
In addition to controlling air pollutants for which there are National Ambient Air.
Quality Standards, EPA also regulates air toxics. Most air toxics originate from
human-made sources, including on-road mobile sources, non-road mobile sources
(e.g., airplanes), area sources (e.g., dry cleaners) and stationary sources (e.g.,
factories).
Controlling air toxic emissions became a national priority with the passage of the
1990 Clean Air Act Amendments, whereby Congress mandated that the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency regulate 188 air toxics, also known as hazardous
air pollutants. The EPA has assessed this expansive list in their latest rule on the
Control of Hazardous Air Pollutants from Mobile Sources (February 26, 2007) and
identified a group of 93 compounds emitted from mobile sources that are listed in
their Integrated Risk Information System. In addition, EPA identified seven
compounds with significant contributions from mobile sources that are among the
national and regional-scale cancer risk drivers. These are acrolein, benzene,l,3-
butadiene, diesel particulate matter, plus diesel exhaust organic gases (diesel PM),
formaldehyde, naphthalene, and polycyclic organic matter. While FHWA considers
these the priority mobile source air toxics, the list is subject to change and maybe.
adjusted in consideration of future EPA rules.
The 2007 EPA rule mentioned above requires controls that will dramatically
decrease MSAT emissions through cleaner fuels and cleaner engines. According to
an FHWA analysis using EPA's MOBILE6.2 model, even if vehicle activity increases
by 145 percent as assumed, a combined reduction of 72 percent in the total annual
emission rate for the priority MSAT is projected from 1999 to 2050.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 77 of 90
u
ii
n
~i
Air toxics analysis is a continuing area of research. While much work has been done
to assess the overall health risk of air toxics, many questions remain unanswered. In
particular, the tools and techniques for assessing project-specific health outcomes
as a result of lifetime MSAT exposure remain limited. These limitations impede the
ability to evaluate how the potential health risks posed by MSAT exposure should be
factored into project-level decision-making within the context of the National
Environmental Policy Act. The FHWA will continue to monitor the developing
research in this emerging field.
Because of the uncertainties outlined above, a quantitative assessment of the effects
of air toxic emissions impacts on human health cannot be made at the project level.
While available tools do allow us to reasonably predict relative emissions changes
between alternatives for larger projects, the amount of MSAT emissions from each
of the study scenarios and MSAT concentrations or exposures created by each of the
study scenarios cannot be predicted with enough accuracy to be useful in estimating
health impacts. Therefore, the relevance of the unavailable or incomplete
information is that it is not possible to make a determination of whether any of the
scenarios would have."significant adverse impacts on the human environment."
This document acknowledges that the build scenarios may result in increased
exposure to MSAT emissions in certain locations, although the concentrations and
duration of exposures are uncertain, and because of this uncertainty, the health
effects from these emissions cannot be estimated.
Although a qualitative analysis cannot identify and measure health impacts from
MSATs, it can give a basis for identifying and comparing the potential differences
among MSAT emissions, if any, from the various scenarios. The qualitative
' assessment presented below is derived in part from a study conducted by the FHWA
entitled A Methodology for Evaluating Mobile Source Air Toxic Emissions Among
Transportation Project Alternatives.
For each scenario in this AUAR, the amount of MSAT emitted would be proportional
to the average daily traffic (ADT) assuming that other variables such as fleet mix are
the same for each scenario. The ADT estimated for each of the build scenarios is
higher than that for the no build condition, because the interchange facilitates new
development that attracts trips that would not otherwise occur in the area. This
increase in ADT means MSAT under the build scenarios would probably be higher
than the no build condition in the study area. There could also be localized
' differences in MSAT from indirect effects of the project such as associated access
traffic, emissions of evaporative MSAT (e.g., benzene) from parked cars, and
emissions of diesel particulate matter from delivery trucks. Travel to other
' destinations would be reduced with subsequent decreases in emissions at those
locations.
r
For all scenarios, emissions are virtually certain to be lower than present levels in
the design year as a result of EPA's national control programs that are projected to
reduce annual MSAT emissions by 72 percent from 1999 to 2050, as shown in the
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 78 of 90
following graph. The magnitude of the EPA-projected reductions is so great (even
after accounting for ADT growth) that MSAT emissions in the study area are likely to
be lower in the future than they are today.
NATIONAL MSAT EMISSION TRENDS 1999 - 2050
FOR VEHICLES OPERATING ON ROADWAYS
USING EPA's MOBILE6.2 MODEL
i~ooa~
y, lUUUUU
H
C
0
•~
W .r3~ n~~
~~`' ~
~~~
~'
r~
r ~'
~r
.''
J r
R.~
r~
r''
~~
7
5
L
si
zooo ~oia 70~o ao3o zoaa
Cal endar Year
~' Q
Soso
Note:
(1) Annual emissions of polycyclic organic matter are projected to be 561 tons/yr for 1999, decreasing
to 373 tons/yr for 2050.
(2) Trends for specific locations maybe different, depending on locally derived information
representing vehicle-miles travelled, vehicle speeds, vehicle mix, fuels, emission control programs,
meteorology, and other factors
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. MOBILE6.2 Model run 20 August 2009.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has designated all of Hennepin, Ramsey,
Anoka and portions of Carver, Scott, Dakota, Washington and Wright counties as a
maintenance area for carbon monoxide. The 171st Avenue AUAR study area is in
Sherburne County and thus not in the carbon monoxide maintenance area.
Furthermore, the EPA has approved a screening method to determine which
intersections need a hotspot analysis. A hot spot analysis is required if the
intersection is above the benchmark average annual daily traffic (AADT) threshold
of 79,400 or listed as one of the "Top Ten" intersections. All of the top ten
intersections are within the Twin Cities carbon monoxide maintenance area. Below
is a list of the top ten intersections and their 2007 AADT.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 79 of 90
l
~i
u
i~
r
i~
1
7
C
L
ii
n
1. TH 169 at CSAH 81- 79,400
2. TH 7 at CSAH 101- 66,600
3. TH 252 at 85th Avenue - 66,800
4. University Avenue at Snelling Avenue - 59,700
5. TH 252 at Brookdale Drive - 61,300
6. Cedar Avenue at County Road 42 - 75,100
7. TH 7 at Williston Road - 54,900
8. University Avenue at Lexington Avenue - 59,700
9. TH 252 at 66th Avenue - 72,500
10. Hennepin Avenue at Lake Street - 37,000
The screening method demonstrates that because this project has less than the
benchmark AADT of 79,400 and does not involve or affect the "Top Ten
Intersections," a hotspot analysis is not needed.
In summary, under all build scenarios in the design year it is expected there would
be slightly higher MSAT emissions in the study area relative to the no build
condition due to increased ADT. There also could be increases in MSAT levels in a
few localized areas where ADT increases. However, EPA's vehicle and fuel
regulations will bring about significantly lower MSAT levels for the area in the
future when compared to today.
23. Stationary Source Air Emissions. Describe the type, sources, quantities and
compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such
as boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air
pollutants (consult EAW Guidelines for a listing), any greenhouse gases (such
as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxides), and ozone-depleting
chemicals (chlorofluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or
sulfur hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention
techniques and proposed air pollution control devices. Describe the impacts
on air quality.
AUAR Guidance: This item is not applicable to an AUAR. Any stationary air emission
source large enough to merit environmental review requires individual review. These
types of uses are not anticipated by this project.
City of Elk River
' Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 80 of 90
ii
24. Odors, noise and dust. Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during
construction or during operation? ®Yes ^ No
If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and
any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify locations of
nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss potential
impacts on human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by
operations maybe discussed at item 23 instead of here.)
AUAR Guidance: Dust, odors, and construction noise need not be addressed. Traffic-
related noise is included in the analysis along with a dust and noise mitigation plan.
Construction Noise
Noise will be generated during construction of the project by construction
equipment. Construction noise will be a temporary impact and maybe controlled
by limiting construction activities to daytime hours in accordance with City
ordinances and assuring that construction equipment is properly muffled.
Traffic-Related Noise
Federal and state standards have been developed for maximum sound levels in
residential and commercial areas. By comparing existing and estimated future
sound levels to these standards, areas can be recognized that are in need of possible
noise mitigation.
The analysis that follows characterizes existing traffic noise levels in the project
area, assesses the effect of the project on future noise levels, and analyzes potential
mitigation measures. The noise analysis consisted of selecting specific receptor
sites and modeling existing and future noise levels. Analyzed receptor sites consist
of the outdoor areas of residential and commercial properties.
Background
Noise is defined as any unwanted sound. Sound travels in a wave motion and
produces a sound pressure level. This sound pressure level is commonly measured
in decibels. Decibels represent the logarithmic measure of sound energy relative to
a reference energy level. A sound increase of three dBA is barely perceptible to the
human ear, a five dBA increase is clearly noticeable, and a 10 dBA increase is heard
twice as loud.
For highway traffic noise, an adjustment, or weighting, of the high- and low-pitched
sounds is made to approximate the way that an average person hears sounds. The
adjusted sound levels are stated in units of "A-weighted decibels" (dBA). In
Minnesota, traffic noise levels that are exceeded 10% and 50% of the time during
the hour of the day and/or night that. has the heaviest traffic. These numbers are
identified as the L1o and Lso levels.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 8l of 90
~i
n
u
n
L
r
D
i
1
i~
r
C
Table 24-1 provides a rough comparison of the noise levels of some common noise
sources.
Table 24-1: Decibel Levels of Common Noise Sources
140 Jet Engine (at 25 meters)
130 Jet Aircraft (at 100 meters)
120 Rock and Roll Concert
110 Pneumatic Chipper
100 Jointer/Planer
90 Chainsaw
80 Heavy Truck Traffic
70 Business Office
60 Conversational Speech
50 Library
40 Bedroom
30 Secluded Woods
20 Whisoer
SOURCE: "A Guide to Noise Control in Minnesota"
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (2008)
Along with the volume of traffic and other factors (i.e. topography of the area and
vehicle speed) that contribute to the loudness of traffic noise, the distance of a
receptor from a sound's source is also an important factor. Sound levels decrease as
distance from a source increases. The following rule of thumb regarding sound
decreases due to distance is commonly used: Beyond approximately 50 feet, each
time the distance between a line source (such as a road) and a receptor is doubled,
sound levels decrease by three decibels over hard ground, such as pavement or
water, and by 4.5 decibels over vegetated areas.
Noise standards vary based on the intended use of the impacted property. The State
noise standards are shown in Table 24-2.
Table 24-2: MPCA State Noise Standards -Hour
Sound Levels
Residential NAC-1 65 60 55 50
' Commercial NAC-2 70 65 70 65
Industrial NAC-3 80 75 80 75
' The existing and planned land uses within the project area are a mixture of
residential, commercial and industrial land. As the standards for residential
properties (NAC-1) are the most stringent, this analysis will primarily consider the
' impacts of the development scenarios on existing residential properties in the area.
This analysis also considers only daytime noise impacts.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
' August 2011 Page 82 of 90
7
Sound Monitoring
The existing sound levels were measured at three locations where existing
residential properties were located near impacted roadways. The locations of the
three monitoring sites are shown on Figure 24-1. The results of the measurements
are shown in Table 24-3. The results indicate that in many cases, the existing sound
levels exceed the State noise standards.
Table 24-3: Sound Level Monitoring Results
7
00
9
00 AM 66
0 61
5
1 12-Jul :
-
: 63.5 . 60:9 .
4
00 PM
00
6 63
8 61
1
:
-
: 64:8 . 6°:5 .
7
00
9
00 AM ' 66
5 ' 7
60
2 12-J
l :
-
: 64
9 . 59
5 .
u 4
00
6
00 PM 7
68 63
8
:
-
: 70.2 . 64.0 .
7
00
9
00 AM ' 67
0 60
1
3 12-Jul :
-
: 64
$ . 60.1 .
4
00
6
00 PM 71
3 0
65
:
-
: 7~.7 . 64:7 .
Cells that are bold indicate that the measured sound levels exceed State standards.
Sound Modeling
The traffic noise impacts associated with each scenario were assessed by modeling
noise levels at the receptor sites likely to be most affected by the proposed project..
Three receptor locations were identified to correspond with the three locations
where existing sound levels were monitored. Site 1 is located near Yale Street and
represents the existing single-family homes at this location. Site 2 is located near the
intersection of Twin Lakes Road and 171st Lane, and represents the apartments and
townhomes located nearby. Site 3 is located along Twin Lakes Road and represents
the townhomes and single-family homes to the northeast.
Noise modeling was completed using the noise prediction program MINNOISE, a
version of the FHWA STAMINA 2.0 model adapted by MN/DOT and approved by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). This model uses peak hour vehicle
volume, speed, vehicle class, and the typical characteristics of the roadway being
analyzed to estimate traffic noise levels. In all MINNOISE models, an alpha factor of
0.5 was used to represent the soft ground in the area. No shielding factors were
used.
The model was used to estimate traffic noise at the receptor sites for five scenarios:
Existing (2011), No Build (2031), Scenario 1 (2031), Scenario 2 (2031), and
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 83 of 90
~i
~i
u
r
i~
i~
II~
-i
Scenario 3 (2031). Vehicle class percentages throughout the study area were
assumed to be 90% cars, 5% medium trucks, and 5% trucks/buses in all scenarios.
The PM peak hour traffic volumes (as documented under item 21) were used to
represent worst-case daytime conditions. The results of the MINNOISE models are
shown in Table 24-4.
Table 24-4: Daytime Modeling Results
1 67.0 55.9 68.7 58.5 68.9 58.8 69.0 58.9 69.1 59.1
2 71.5 63.4 71.6 63.6 73.1 65.7 74.0 66.9 74.7 67.8
3 73.2 64.1 73.2 64.2 74.8 66.4 75.7 67.6 76.4 68.5
State
Standards
(daytime)
65
60
65
60
65
60
65
60
65
60
Numbers that are bold indicate that the modeled sound levels exceed State standards
The model results indicate that the project will have a traffic noise impact. The
model predicts that State noise standards will be exceeded during daytime hours at
all three modeled receptor locations. Anticipated Lio traffic volume in each of the
three development scenarios increases from 1 to 4 dBA over the No Build scenario.
It is not uncommon for noise levels to exceed the State noise standards at sensitive
noise receptors adjacent to major roadways similar to those in the project area.
Therefore, noise abatement measures should be considered to minimize the noise
impact associated with each of the development scenarios.
Dust
During construction, particulate emissions will temporarily increase due to the
generation of fugitive dust. Construction dust and exhaust from construction
equipment may have a temporary impact on air quality. Carbon monoxide and
other vehicle-related pollutants may also increase in areas under construction due
to reductions in traffic capacity, lane closures, and other construction-related
delays.
Most construction equipment would be diesel-powered, so carbon monoxide
emissions from the equipment should be minimal. Wetting areas under
construction will control fugitive dust. After construction is complete, dust levels
are anticipated to be minimal because all. soil surfaces would be in permanent cover
(i.e., pavement or grassed areas).
' Odors
The construction and/or operation of this project are not anticipated to involve any
' processes that would generate any odors.
Odors, Noise, and Dust Mitigation Plan
' • Construction dust control shall be in compliance with the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) at the site boundaries.
City of Elk River
' Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011 Page 84 of 90
~1
• The City limits construction activities to 6:OOAM to 9:OOPM. Construction in the
study area will be required to meet these standards.
• Site plans for future developments should include measures such as appropriate
setback distances, earthen berms, noise walls, and appropriate site design (such
as outdoor activity areas being developed away from major noise sources). Each.
of these items should be considered on a case-by-case basis. The site plans
developed for specific projects should show the proposed locations and types of
mitigation, with the estimated noise reductions for all areas projected to exceed
noise standards.
Z 5. Nearby resources. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the
site?
a. Archaeological, historical, or architectural resources? ^Yes ®No
b. Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? ®Yes ^No
c. Designated parks, recreation areas, or trails? ®Yes ^ No
d. Scenic views and vistas? ®Yes ^ No
e. Other unique resources? ^Yes ®No
If yes, describe the resource and identify any project-related impacts on the
resource. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.
Archaeological. historical. or architectural resources
Information from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has been obtained
and is contained in Appendix B. Based on the SHPO database review, there are no
archaeological sites or historic structures identified in the search area. The report,
Prehistoric and Euroamerican Archaeology of Elk River Township, Minnesota:
Probability Modeling and Reconnaissance Survey (Rothaus et al. 2005), was also
reviewed and did not identify any archeological or historic resources within the
study area. Nearly 222 acres, or 88% of the study area, is in agricultural land use.
The western portion of the site does contain more woodland as the site begins to
descend toward the Mississippi River, although this only accounts for 6% of the total
land cover. Although the Mississippi River is located west of the study area, given
the intense agricultural use it is unlikely that this area would contain any intact
archaeological resources.
Prime or unique farmlands
Based on the information from the Sherburne County Soil Survey less than 1% of the
soils within the study area are considered prime farmland. The soil unit "Elk river "
(map symbo1771 on Figure 16-1) is the only designated prime farmland soil in the
study area.
These soils are located along the western boundary of the study area along the
Mississippi River. Most of the land within the study area is currently in agricultural
production. If redeveloped under Scenario 1, an eastern portion of the study area
would be designated under agricultural research and portions of the prime farmland
soils along the western boundary of the study area would remain as open space. No
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 85 of 90
~i
~i
~i
J
L
i~
n
D
i~
i
7
C
L
i~
farming practices will occur on the prime farmland soils in any development
scenario,
Designated parks, recreation areas, or trails
Based on the information from the Sherburne County Parks, Trails, and Open Space
plan, a proposed trail corridor is identified through a portion of the study area. This
proposed trail corridor would be an extension of the Anoka County Mississippi
River Regional Trail. No other parks or open space areas were identified within the
study area. Redevelopment under any scenario would not likely. impact the
potential trail alignment. If redeveloped under Scenario 1, a southwest portion of
the study area would be designated as open space.
Scenic views and vistas
The Mississippi River is located west of the study area and is considered "Scenic"
within this area. A portion of the study area is within the City's designated Wild and
Scenic overlay district. Under the existing conditions, much of land within the study
-.area that is within the Scenic district is in agricultural production. Under Scenario 1,
the Scenic area within the study area would redevelop into a combination of open
space, rural residential, and light industrial. Scenarios 2 and 3 would result in
redevelopment of the Scenic area into high density residential, destination retail,
and service/commercial. Under any scenario, the redevelopment will change the
look of the study area, but it will not impact the scenic area directly adjacent to the
Mississippi River.
Nearby Resources Mitigation Plan
• Per the City's ordinances, park dedication will be in conformance with City Code
and the City's Park Plan.
• Trail connection to the Mississippi River Regional Trail will need to be
incorporated into development plans for the area.
26. Visual impacts. Will the project create adverse visual impacts during
construction or operation? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in
wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust
stacks? ^ Yes ®No
If yes, explain.
' Only routine visual impacts associated with construction of typical residential,
commercial, and light industrial land uses are anticipated by development within
the area. The development of high density residential along the Mississippi River as
' proposed in Scenarios 2 and 3 may have more of a visual impact than the proposed
open space in Scenario 1, as well as the existing agricultural land use. Under any
scenario, the redevelopment will change the look of the study area, but it will not
' impact the visual impact directly adjacent to the Mississippi River.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
' August 2011 Page 86 of 90
~i
The development of higher density residential, commercial, and light industrial
properties may also result in parking lot and building lighting. The City's adopted
lighting ordinance will be applied to new development. This ordinance limits the
foot-candles of light outside a development site and requires light pollution
reduction measures such as downcast cut-off lighting.
Visual Impacts Mitigation Plan
• Through the plan review process, the City shall require appropriate screening
and buffers of development in the study area to screen for visual impacts.
27. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations. Is the project subject to an
adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other
applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional,
state or federal agency? ®Yes ^ No
If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain
how any conflicts will be resolved. If no, explain.
Elk River has an existing Comprehensive Plan that was completed in 2004.Of the
three scenarios developed as part of this AUAR, Scenario 2 and Scenario 3 would
require modifications to the Comprehensive Plan to allow the land uses that are
being proposed. Redevelopment under Scenario 1 can be completed without a
Comprehensive Plan amendment. The City of Elk River is outside of the
Metropolitan Council jurisdiction; however the City's Comprehensive Plan complies
with the requirements set out in Minnesota Rules 4410.3610, Subpart 1, which
requires local comprehensive plans to address land use, transportation, and
sanitary sewer systems and include an implementation program.
Development within the study area is subject to the standards, policies, regulations,
and ordinance approved by the City. These plans include:
• City of Elk River Comprehensive Plan
City of Elk River Transportation Plan
Scenario 1
Scenario 1 represents Elk River's existing Comprehensive Plan (2004), and
therefore it is compatible with the land use designations adopted. The densities
analyzed in this scenario represent the densities allowed by the Comprehensive
Plan. No Comprehensive Plan amendments or updates would be necessary for
redevelopment to proceed as outlined in this scenario. Scenario 1 is shown in
Figure 6-1.
Scenario 2
Scenario 2 is based on the City of Elk River's 171St Avenue Focused Area STudy
(FAST) as depicted in Figure 6-2. This master plan provides a framework for future
development pattern in and around the area of Scenario 2. This Scenario would
require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. This
scenario evaluates the low end of the density ranges and a lower FAR.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 87 of 90
0
~i
Scenario 3
This Scenario would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning
Ordinance and is depicted in Figure 6-3. This scenario evaluates the high end of the
density ranges and a higher FAR.
Zoning Ordinance
The AUAR area is currently zoned Agricultural Research (AR), Business Park (BP),
Highway Commercial (C3), Light Industrial (I1), and Single Family Residential
(R1d).
AR agricultural research district is established for the purpose of preserving and
maintaining the use of land for agricultural research. The R-1d district is intended to
provide single-family residences with larger lots and higher quality housing types in
areas with full municipal public sewers, storm sewers, and municipal water in areas
that possess significant natural features, including vegetation, wetlands, and
topographic features. This district is also intended to encourage design of
subdivisions that protect natural features while providing high quality housing sites.
Permitted uses include single family dwellings, public parks and open spaces,
homeowner -occupied bed and breakfast establishments, agricultural uses, truck
tractor and / or trailer parking, and business and professional offices.
The C3 highway commercial district is intended to recognize the need for
commercial establishments on or serving with immediate access to major highways.
Permitted land uses include a variety of business and professional offices, retail and
personal service establishments, as well as public parks.
The I1 light industrial district serves as a transition between more industrial uses
and residential and business uses. This district is appropriate for manufacturing,
' warehousing, and similar industrial uses because of its access to warehousing,
thoroughfares, and full complement of urban services. The BP business park district
also encourages similar uses, but encourages them in a planned, integrated
' environment for certain industrial, office, and commercial uses that are compatible
with each other as well as the surrounding land uses.
' If components of the land uses proposed in Scenario 2 or 3 are adopted through a
subsequent amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, amendments to the Zoning
Ordinance will need to occur in order to be consistent with any amendments to the
' Comprehensive Plan.
Compatibility with Land Use Regulations Mitigation Plan
' • If the City chooses to implement any components of the land uses proposed in
Scenarios 2 or 3, changes would need to be made to the City's Comprehensive
Plan and zoning ordinances through the City's amendment processes. To do this,
' the City would follow set guidelines and procedures regarding Comprehensive
Plan and Zoning Ordinance amendments.
City of Elk River
' Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011 Page 88 of 90
~i
28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. Will new or expanded utilities,
roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project?
® Yes ^ No
If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure or services needed.
(Note: any infrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the project
must be assessed in the EAW; see EAW Guidelines for details.)
Municipal Sewer. Water. Storm Water and Transportation Services
The City intends to provide municipal services to the area. This municipal
infrastructure includes sanitary sewer, water, storm water management and
transportation improvements. These items are discussed in the previous items as
indicated:
• Municipal Water System Improvements -See Item 13
• Storm Water Management Improvements -See Item 17
• Sanitary Sewer Improvements -See Item 18
• Transportation System Improvements -See Item 21
Police and Fire Department
Development in this area will also have an impact on social services such as schools,
police, fire, and community activities. The City has its own police and fire
department. The City has approximately 41 firefighters and approximately 31
police officers, 15 reserves, and 3 CSO's for a total of 49. These services will be
provided to the study area. The City uses a ratio of residents to police officers to
estimate the need for additional police service. The City will evaluate the need for
additional officers and will provide additional officers as needed.
School System
The study area is located within Independent School District #728. School District
has planned for and can accommodate the students from this area.
29. Cumulative impacts. Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7, item B requires that the RGU
consider the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future
projects" when determining the need for an environmental impact statement.
Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may
interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause
cumulative impacts. Describe the nature of the cumulative impacts and
summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether
there is potential for significant environmental effects due to cumulative
impacts (or discuss each cumulative impact under appropriate item(s)
elsewhere on this form).
The 171St Avenue study area includes the expansion of commercial, industrial, and
residential along TH10/169 in southern Elk River. Development also includes the
construction of municipal services to serve the area. Although services will be
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011 Page 89 of 90
n
~i
n
extended through the study area, additional development outside of the study area
is not anticipated within the Cargill and GRE sites (see Figure 5-3). Cargill will
continue to operate as an agricultural research area and the GRE site will continue
to operate.
30. Other Potential Environmental Impacts. If the project may cause any adverse
environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss
them here, along with any proposed mitigation.
There are no other potential environmental impacts known at this time.
City of Elk River
Draft Alternative Urban Areawide Review
August 2011
Page 90 of 90
I
I
I_ ,
D
J
APPENDIX A
FIGURES
~~
if~~
hiching
I
~itkin S i
I
' --
I
_ ~
__
i
1
~ Lake ; ;'
i I ~,
I ;-
Elk River, Sherburne County
~~ 169 I Nowthen
t-~ i
t~ i
~1 Sherburne
'~~~ I
Mississippi River ~ ~
-~~ Elk River ~
i
~ Anoka
I
Wright i Ramsey
Otsego ~ n
Project Location
General Location N ~ Figure
~t',Lrk 171stAve Area AUAR
r,l -'~ City of Elk River, Minnesota ~ 5-1
River & A..,x.;~,~,,. ,~<..
F.
~:
,-~.
;:
` ' ~ ,?>" ,- ~ ~ legend
j~~
~L,Fj _ `
t £
; 173rd Ave ~ '~„+ ~ r {y`
~~ r - t;
~
~ O Environmental First Search Sites
..~` '~ _ ~{
~
' '°r~a,
_ ; c °'"~~'`'' Study Area
'~~
L`'~~r;;
,23~ fir---: ~~ N Nocthstar Commuter
F;r:~ ! ~ N: ,~(- - \Rail Station
.._
;, . ,. ~ . ~ , ~ .r . to I ,~ ~
~~Znd
r , Abe _~-. ~ ~~
` ~..~~ ~`
,, :
.,
_ o
.
_
.~
r~ 004 -~ ~: ~
,~
~ ~~
.~>,,..,,~r,:,. ,...............w
i7th St '_ _
,.
~. p
_ ° °~°
` - - ; ~.~-
~~. '- RDF~ Plant 1
a '' .' ~ r ..
"~ ~ 1 u
"~~. `~ 165th Aver
r ~ y ~ ~
V i I.. ~ t°" P ~ ~ • a.
~.
_
'~ ..,~~*' ~ '~~~~~ Cargill ~~
a. ~•.
-~` ° ~ , _
r _ -
.~.. ~`
~'`-
~ __
-~.a
;~
art
q S w
e ~ ~~ ~ '~
~~- ~ ~ a
1-~ ~ i~-~~ ;gyp}y µ_ k ,
Map ID Name Address Descriptm®
1 Lefebvre and Sons Inc 10895 17Lst Ave N W No Longer Regulated
2 Morrel I Transfer 10752 171st Ave N W No Longer Regulated
3 Northern Natural Gas Elk River 16601 US Hwy No Longer Regulated
4 Jerry's of Elk River Inc 16848 US Hwy 10 UST
5 Steve's Oil Service 165th St NW and US Hwy 10 No Longer Regulated
6 House of Rental 16862 US Hwy 10 Small Quantty @ ner ata, I i ffiI e W strfl
7 North Star Auto Sales 16501 US Hwy 30 UST
8 North Star Sales and Repair 16501 US Hwy 10 Small Quantty 6 ner a[Q, Igti ffiI e W st~l+
9 Lefebvre Trucking 1089571st Ave NW UST
10 ABRA Auto Body and Glass 17038 US Hwy 10 Small Quantryy 6 ner ~a, nl tent s, ~dni urfel
11 Elk River Ford 17219 US Hwy 10 UST
12 Elk River Ford Inc 17219 US Hwy 10 Small Quantry re ner~o-D
13 SuperAmerica 4196 17079 Yale StNW UST
14 Car ill Research Farms 17083171st Ave NE UST
15 Great River Ener y -Elk River 10700165th Ave NE UST
16 NSP Elk River Railroad Facility 10700165th Ave NW UST
17 Red Carpet Inn 17291 US Hwy SO UST
18 Ford and Fuel Mart 7767 NE River Rd UST
19 Hitech Motorsport Inc- Elk River 16820 US Hwy 10 Small Quantry Qnerato-~
Not Mapped United Power Ash Disposal Area 1/4 Mile South of US Hwy 10 Solid Waste Disposal
Not Mapped Great River Energy -Elk River 1/4 Mile South of US Hwy 10 Solid Waste Disposal
Not Mapped Americ Inn Motel US Hwy 10 Spill
Potential Pollutant Sources N ~ Figure
E~` _ 171st Ave Area AUAR o 500 1,000 Feet ~/~/SB 9-1
Ve~ City of Elk River, Minnesota ~
d A.MnuNuku', hiC.
Rat.
a;:
~,<, , . r
v
kn 3+ ''~__a' ~ ~~,~ ~ i ~ac~~~ r~s' ycg~~, .~~ 175th Ct a
,_
~.
i ~ 6 &---~
tt,, a
'~'~'it~-~~~~~, * ~3 ~ `~~ '. ~ `'~" ~ ~ ~ ~~ 175th Ave. ~_~~'~ d ~ ~ ~ `i ~'~;,~ ~
. r~~
.°~^,`.~~? ...sFt' ~ '~ ji-.~6 ~ ~ ?. '!:, ~ ~ ~i' "~~ £ is ~ fi~~ R ~ ~~~~ gig ?
v
' !"
. ,' a
. _ _.
~ ' a r~ i a .
d
r f
~` ~ "
+,,
~, ;, f
a
.~. ~' '~ ~ _ _ 173rd Ave _ _.. ~" -s
~ F ~ ~..
_ "~,~-,
f
>.
~~ ~ _ ~ ~
~r i
.~ _
,- °
„ i,
-~.. „., N - Nark star Commuter ~~?. r *,'r .11 ~N' n ~~ ~?'
~t~~ ~ ~_ , :~ ~ m
*t •:;} r
. ~~. ~ ~~ .' i N ,~ Ral! Jts"3IS.~, f'E hygVQ ~~_ ` O'_ ~'`~,..,-
i
171st L
. ~ r ap { ~'
~~ ~. 171st Ave .; 3 a o ~ ,
1
f
M t „, , t' ~t .~'
if? ~~~
,;170th Ave ~ ~ ~'' -.~ ' ~ r- ~ ~ `_~ ~ 't -~.~' ~ ` ,~
§, ~ ,
~~- ,t,
~ ~ s
x~
~-
~.~~
~.
.:~~ ,
;:"Mr,~,
~,
~ ~ '~
~~: ~'
" `~~~ , ~ ~ ~~'~'. ;~ / . r Legend
thstar Commuter ~ ~~ r
'tRail Station' ' - ?naq~ 8" Existing Water Main o
~I "~ .'e ~ ~ 10" Existing Water Main N
~ :, 1_ ~ a
-, ~ v .~ '~ ~ 12" Existing Water Main ~
yY:S ~ ~ ~L `Y -
{.. ~ r , r ~:_.a° _,a ~ ~ 16" Existing Water Main w
M ~~ ~
-~ ~ °` r.* ` _~ ~ ~ -~ 8" Proposed Water Main
~'•,f' T C -~~~ "~ ~ 12" Proposed Water Main ~N
~'','~ ~•; • ~ 16" Proposed Water Main ,
'~ _- ~ N
_ m Study Area ~%
R ~. ij I f ,.
iSl~'t fly l~ ~ ' a ~£
~. ~`~ 'vim +
~ ~
•
-~~.:~
,~ ~ '
e ~ ~" r
~~ a? ~ .. ~ ~` ,-„~ -~ ~ ~ _ _ ~~' Legend
' ' ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 100-Year Floodplain
` ~
,.. 1 '~~~t` ~~ a ~, :% k ~
~~ ~ ~ ~ N. ,... ~ ~~~ ,~ .. ~ Wild & Scenic River District
// ^.
/ , '~~ 175th Aver ~p~ 1 a , Study Area
~`~ N + ~ `~ 7c N ° s~tr~' +w!-~ tti. ~.~r.+s"i` ?r.'€".~ a ~~ idly ~x
'~~/ , ~l,C ~ ~ ~ / /_173(-rd Ave' ~; ~_ _`'` '~ ~~ r _ K., ~^°
:~
~ ran "
y
,~ ,.
~ A c
~
.,~~
~ .t
.171st Ln .
~ ,_ ;~ ,.n
x ;
.
~, ,
«„s;-
"k.
YB^, ~ ~ d,
.~~ ~~ y4
I ELY
. 1r ~"".a '~ ~ .--Storm Pipe
`- •~ 10ft Contours
~" Subwatersheds
t" ~ °V Study Area
Subwatersheds Map N ~ Figure
EI 171st Ave Area AUAR 0 350 700 Feet ~/{/$B 17-1
R1Ver City of Elk River, Minnesota ~
~ i1.iJPCIAfPd. /I1C.
L o ". 1 0 - . ~ ~Y,; r u~~ . ~' Legend
~~" °~~'~".' ; "~r Study Area
~` ~ ~ ~~~ rt.. ~ ~'~:~'"~~' Sanitary Sewer
~, z ~~ ~' ~~ ~ - ' ~ ~ "~~~s~k ,1 ~ ~ , ,~~ . 8.. Existing
~.~ ~ ~ r ~"~~ ~ jig 1 r Commuter ,~ d
. - - - 17'
~ ~ r
°~'~~~, ~ s ~ ~~„ °~ ,. ,~"~' r~.l~::~'~ a ~o ttRa (;Station ~ 2haq~e ., .- * 10" Existing ~,
r
r ~. ~`" ) q
A
~,,,~.,, ,~ ~_ s ~~ .4 °~{~ ~` _ L ,,, ~ i°°` - ~ 15" Existing ,
- °~" ~ ~;,. N .R~. ~ p n'~~ {. ~ , ~~ ... Y o ~ 171St ,~ ~. 16" Existing d
,, L~'/r o
0 o d 1
171st Ave O - ~ ~.. ~ r. ~ - 0 Pr p se , 0
x ~ ~
` ~ t, ~ ,~',t ~ Pro osed 8
,~
~ o
E~ "~
. v~
,~ .
~,
.... ...
s ;r~ ~.;3 ' O~ ~ ~ 3 ~ : ~,~. ~ 12" Proposed
i. ~ ~~ f~` ~ . ~: ~ , „ .,~~ ~ ~ ; ., ~ ~ ~ z • Proposed MHs
170th Ave ~ , ~ ~ ° t i„~ i ~> ® Existing MHs
-.
~. 4~ r x
,~;~~ ': '"- ;' ~ r= Oct. ~"~~ '~ ~~'~ ,..,~ ;w~
~ ~ s u
F '~`
~ ~~~
am.. ~ ~~ .~ ~ ,,. `7 ~, _. t R ~.
~i
w
i
i
~ g _ ~e9end
M'p/ ~ 169 ~~=ir r ~`ra~~s,~^#~[~~~5,. rp,~
1 0 e, * 'g ~` i~ ~ ,~y f ~ ~ Local Road
~S •~". ~,~~ //' ~` ~ Y„yyyy ~ ~~~ ~Mrg~ ~ ~ State Highway
t .}~ i!.. `"°` Interchange Ramps
t • V ~ ~"
t.gL _.1~. ~~~~`~~-' ~ Sg /~6/ -`. r. y `r ~ ~.r, dam'' n
Railroad
~e t a ~ /~,, 0 7 (15)
R" ''' ~<=,t,y ` ~ ~ /OLZ/~•~Z ~ +•'Mr N N e ~ 4( 0) O Signalized Intersection
i ;~
¢ ' _ -+.., , (~~/9t ~ ~ ~ j ~ 68(35) ~ Full Thru-Stop Intersection
.,. 'w
0
i~~. "• f '- Right-In/Outlntersection
`,
1 r ( ) ~ ;,; ~ N AM (PM) Turning
Y
C ~i Y ~ 7 p ~ ~ 10(20) Movements
w
N ~ .'.
~~
r ..
x~$ ~+ ~ ,- . ~` ~... ~' -~_ F •<Fy ~ f 175`h Avenue
~ _ `~ 3 - ~'~> `: R 17(28)
~',' r ° ll
9421 ~'-'. nsr~ ,r~a.. N' ~ ta~~}~r .'~.
i 1111 _ r r .`` ~, ~,. ,-~: Ol ~ f'•g*~F '~~~tKA'i, o
a o m l °1 ~ ~~ >Z _ ~ n
. :. .. nd
del ~ a r, "~~• 6s r-F~.~ ~"'~'~ ~,~~Northstar Comr^ r: . ` 172 AVenue
° ~ J ~ ' 1~'
~ Ol y' • ~ - ~ ~ `; N rRa§I Station, .;~ ~ t ., -
,.
-•~
~, ;. ,~__ . _ ~ i~ r
~ g /~ ,~ n• ~ ~ ` ' `171~SrLane~; i.'~ '~~ "`r'._
tr ~~~
~~,'~ ~`~ 7~15~ - Avenue ~~ ~~` , 6\` `ry~1~ ~ •
,:, N m 707(799) Y ;~4Vgr _ ~ ~ 7 '~ ~
~7 ~ > ~ ~ si
t, ~.
J lj L r tat (739) ,; ~~ M v ~ a(te) rr s ~~ ~ ,` i~~~ °' a~ 9ii
( as) 22 a 1 11 ~' .: ~~ ~ ~~~', _.~ ~ , °' 0 37a (3aa) •~ _~~ ~`~,~ . ~ ~~~/~ is ~~ ? is~~
_ ~ a ~, , >~~ ~,
N
.~ ~ ~ f c `` p w~ °j
~ ,. (48) 78 y '" ~tr v P (61 6 ~- - ~` °tp. `a A°~
'. .` , ~
- Ll P a ~, ~ `j# ~ o o ~ ~q
t~ g: r 4 ~a ,. ~ (479) 740 .n ~., ae 't~2p ,[
.~=. -; a R is ~ r g'~ s ~ .... ~ ~ "~'/
i ti ~ '. ~ ~ "~ N l 61 1 ~ ,r~
~, 'r
~N' ~i`~.~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ='
- ~_ ~6\ ~ RDF Qlant ~ ~
''
~~ ~ ~
'`'~ `~ ~s ~s '~~ ~ 165"'Avenue - ~
*, ~.~ i ~. fir. ~d.~..•~.,. -. ~~
~~ +^ ~ ~ ~` t ~~i _. ~ ~ Legend
.. , • - ~
x'`, ,~ ~ 69 ~- ;:~ jta ; +,~ .~ ~, ~, Local Road
~ / ~ i- ~`""' ,__ ° ~~ 'I:~' '` _ ~ State HighwaRy
' ..
- ,: ~ ~ ~' Interchange amps
`' ~ >a~r "- ~ -- Railroad
~~ ~. _.:.
?. _. Q -
'r~ +; ~ «~ ~,, k . ` Future Roadways
~' ~` ~ . ~ ~ - _ - ~ ~~A y r are Approximate
r' ~.
r, Y ~ .
.. , ~
u *!~ ~-. _. ~ .,.. , ~ ~ , r -,. d.. a ..
~`~ r}'~ry~''~,~:. ~ ~ _ #' • ~~- ', -- - ~ ti~~~~~~ . ~"~^~ .. 175th Avenue ~'
y C ,
v ~
a N ~ ~~' ~P~^~ .~~ ~- x
`1
~»i~,a `, ~ ~4F ,n ...tea, C °`~~~ ', t ~ k, ! # ~. ~"
k )
.~.- '
- ^tr ~ '` yr" ~ ' ~,.} ' ^+ y„°~~,' ~`•~.vs b~* .
.~
7 O „s d "S
z~ 9 _ ~`~ ~; ",~„ji.~ OJ' ~ A-L 9~'a,~~i ~ ~e~ ~j K Y' ~ P~
,.
{ ~, n
~tm _,--~
_'.< ~ '~'
r - .,
1', '~'~ ~a~ ' i-~=~.. u, ~ .~ ~ 172"d AVenue ~,. ~R~.
~'~: :. ru' .~ r - ~, ~ Northstar r`r ~ ~ ` ~:'
~. r ,__
_ :_.
f
,~ ,.t, ~ .. ~ _ ~ I-Rail Ste ~
~1
' ~ ~ ol- ~ ~ ,, i ,
~;< ~_ ~ ~ ~. - ~ 1 i ~
~_
.~ ~ _.
t ~ ~ f - 115
,,
~~ ~ -. ~ ~• ~ ' 17 tLane_~ ~ ~
~;
9- ` ~ - _ -17151 Avenue • ;~ ~ ~~ ~ K
. 6th ~ ~ _ 9
.>n S ~ S~' f i~oP•.°'. ~ ~ ..•~. a /'~
3 ~ l ~ ~ r
1 0 i ~`, '~.~; 169 ,~ r ~ k ~ I r-'= a rx~ ~
~f, • ~
'~ ~ ~ f h`~` iv ~.
3
i
'2; i +,4~ rt
{G'~~~ ~ • ~ s~t `~'~
~,
~ ~ ~:"~ .
~j ' ~ E• ```~ r v
e''+~'~~I ~ ~ ~ ,
~•;r,~ r~ ~~ 1 ~~. ~:. ,~.~.r.:..
Wrthoutlnterchanee ~ -- `
ter°" Right-in/out access ~ ~_ 173idAvenue ~ ~ ,~.
~ '~.. C
~'
With Interchangg r ~ ~. kr_. ,'^n,~-~
", Removf -~ ,r, ,. •, r ~ v N3rcr,sta,
r ~~ i
~_F _ ' ~.a..r~_.
~ N i--RailS
- ,-
,.
3' r f0
~~
With Interchange 171ST .Avenue
Remove Access ±o US 10 °
r'~
i'
a ;.
,~ ~ ~~
~~ rte; ,~,r ~~ a
~ i* ` :~
`~ `~ ~ ~ ~
r
-.?~._ y ,
.~:...y~•....f
W
4 ~,
} ~ ~
~,
r ^"
~~ ~
~ ~%~~ ~
~
~
i ' '~~
y
r
' ~?
SS ~ ~t
.
.
~
,~:: ^'-
tf
¢F
fr
*"~
a
x t
3s
r u
~t ~,.
-
4~ r !,
~ ~.
Future Roadway Network
Elk _ 171stAve Area AUAR
RlVer City of Elk River, Minnesota
dr
i ~ ~~7
~ ~~ ~0/
_N
Q `
!A4".ry+.l.~
i ~ r I 1
. F.}; ~ ~v,...
y1lithout Interchange
Right-in/out access
With Interchanee
Remove Access to US 10
N
n w.SB
/~
Figure
21-4
Legend
' ~~ Local Road
-' ~ ~ State Highway
+~ ~ ;,,' + ~ '°' Interchange Ramps
}r ~ vp ~ ~ -- Railroad
4 + H. ~
~+~ '~~"s~y~'~'~X 1~- Driveway/Development
'~ ~^ ~'~' "` Access
,~i Signalized Intersection
~" ''„~,yt~;±~'r ~ Full Thru-Stop Intersection
,^~, ~ ~"" ski '~ ~ '
+ -~~i ~ .' F ~~ a Right-In/Out Intersection
tai`;. + t~ ~t Future Roadways
! '~ 'y~l
~~`~ are Approximate
r ~,;, t~ ~ x ~. ~ TAZ 1
`'.175"'.Avenue ~~ ~ TAZ 2
,... ,
~,' ,, ~.`~~~'' ~ TAZ 3
~ TAZ 4
ti
r on e '~ , ~ TAZ 5
~m ,w ."s 5°'::.~ ~ ~ TAZ 6
~ ~ ti
~ ~~~ ,~~
Q~ } p4f~-,'a~~~S~ M+~~'~a s t+aMF' y .. c ~ '! 13 ' ~ ~q~ r~~
'~
come f 172 Avenue ~ r
tation 1 J
A.S r F
~~~~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~I ~ ~ ;~
~~• ~ ,_.r,` 171stLane.j ~ ~ ~ ~~.
~ a ~ *`4
~.
ti„a :. ..: ~ ..~ .
r t~~ ;' ~~~nal or Roundabout
-~ __ _ _
10~
~~ ~ 'i ~l ... ~' ~~ Legend
~ 16 9 `. l r . ~'. k n n+~`` r mom:
`~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ f r ~ ~_ . ~ ~ -~ ,;~~~._ '~ 1, q .~,:', = Local Road
r •' - t _ StateH,ghway
F€- ~ • ~ ,°~o g 10(20) ""'~ Interchange Ramps
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~.~ ,_ r M e __ Railroad
- - _ ,,
..~ i ''' ^' ~ ~ 10 ( 0) O
1_
r,, , ,,~~ '~ ~t" Analyzed Intersection
~r~ ~' 'rte. ~ j ~ 100(60) AM(PM)Tuming
~ ~ ~ `~ rr ~ (40) 20 ~ t ~ 10 (20) Movements
~' ~ x,
} ~.
~ ~. , °e $, ° ~ TAZ 1 TAZ 4
" ~ °` "" ' ~ ~ • a' ~" - ` ° ~ ° Q TAZ 2 ~ TAZ 5
~~ ~,
-. ~
t { .. ~ ,v ~ - ~ ~- ~ (40) 20 '-' '° ~ r_] TAZ 3 f~ TAZ 6
ip ~~ ~ ` ~. ~ to ~ h}'~,. i~ ~~ <. -.
/ ~ ~~, ,~~ FT ;. ~~c175t''A~venue*' ,
~..
y~ ~
a ~~.r ~ ~'. ~ -1. ~'„4f i e A ,~O
;, q c g~ 30(140) ~' , ~ a ~.` , ~ °P ryo~ pow
3 M ` xj, b ~ ~'~
. • , -- a o 0 0 ( o- .~ ., , . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~. ~~ ~•: y~ do
~ ~ 10(20) J `t;t \~,~'`-~' h~ ~F~z@ J'^~{r ~~-~`-~ /0/7p ~' ~~ ?~l
~ ai
j _ - i ' , O Y~rh ~, J, a ~y, e ~8 0 X i 9p/
- (o) o~ a o ~ 173`dAvenue ~~ ,.,. -. _ \ry~ \~ P~
C .~ ^y° ~°
~ ~
,tea ,. ._ N " . ` { ,;, , ~ \
', ~ r, ` %~, ~4 _ -. ;~ ~''ti~ 1.72ndAvenue • }
o
o ~ ~:~ t' j w Ago
e ~ - 171St ;Avenue ` •~, ~° ~, rd
:~ ~ o
.~ j •' ~ `~2~ ., ~ goy
°o^ o O O
^., .., ,
0 0
~`, (290) 70 1 ~ ° ~ t t ~ ~ „ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~,~ol
",~
,}c.. .: .;fir, b`!at-~ ~ ~,1;'..`.p~ ~ ..
t ,. • ~r r ~ ~ , .. ~ ~, Legend
' ``~ 169 ' r _ -- ~ ti,:"~ r r ri~~°as Local Road
1 0 ~ - ~~ •"~wY ~ .~9 ~~ `~,'~~~~"~ "~ ~ State Highway
t 1 j
~`'~. ~ ''' '<~~ ~ I ~°" Interchange Ramps
Y
~ , ~ r +si i`' Railroad
~. "_ .
,t,', ..~,~ ~' ~( ~ O Analyzed Intersection
° ~~ ~ -~ ~ _~~- ~ j ~ 130( 70) 10(20) AM (PM) Turning
~ > o. `~ sp $y (40) 20 1 t r Movements
.~ ~ ~;, o e o ~ TAZ 1 ® TAZ 4
~~} ~ r • ~!" '~'# (10) 0 ~- a r,
r ,_
~ ",~ ' `"'' ° o^ a ~ TAZ 2 ~ TAZ 5
.. ~: ^`''` ~~' 0) TAZ 3 TAZ 6
~ _ v
..•
.<, :_
Y
.t *> ~
f r
a ~'~ h
~~ 'b ~ ~~ ai- " ~~". - ~'-, ,
_~
%~ 1` N ~ ` ~ ~T ;:175"'Avenue ~~ ~~ ~1~
;~ 30(140) ~ "ti, ~ ~ , t w" ~. ~j ~ o~ ;~I
i:. r. 0 0 0 0 ( 0) ''r` ~' r ~' >r`~ °O/ ~ X20
9 ` "~ slur 1 ) /
~ i /
l 01 0 ~ ~1 ~'' ' ..-- J ~ '~ ~ s ~~~ ~' Y #~ f '2° o r - ,III
l 0) 0 - - 173~d Avenue ~ ;~,,,~ ~ ~ h°, ~ ~'
,~~ ,~ .~. . -«_ ~ x-172,.. Avenue ~..
~. ~~
~ ,,. s.r"+. ~ ., N.,~ ~ v+i Northsta- r ~~ ~,~°~
+'~':`~ N r `Rai Sta ,u ! ` ~"
.~O y0
2`~ ~ -q ~ - 1 - ~
~ - '. ! .L ` .171St Lane ~ ~,!
171St Avenue ~~ ?i
0
'p
s • K' ~' ,ty
(140 30 1 e°o ~ "er °^~ Y a`~r r~,. t `~ ~ x f ~ 10~0~ ~ ,~'
a
~£ ~
iw+
`+' ~ ~ E.e., +~.~ ~ ~'~~~
rt: ~ ~~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~' ~
,.~-.A:: ~ 4 . , 1 ~ f
. ~ . ~ n ~ - ~ ; -~ ~.~; '~~ 168th Avenue ~ ~~
~,
,.` • ~ _ ~! Legend
.. ~ • 169 ~ ` - i t ~ t c ,~ ~ ~ ~~ .~~,~~~~ r
• _ ~ ~ „~ :- Yr,"`~~~ ^~ ', Local Road
i ~~ ~
10 a .- ~~~ ~ •• .~ ~ ~`• r. .._ ~ ~,,,~ ~. '~~~-~ ~ ~ State Highway
.. ` ~~ ~ _
~ - . -° • ; ~"~~ ~ ~ T '~ g '"'@° Interchange Ramps
~Y ~ , ~ " `- "= -- -- Railroad
do ;~, ~ ~Y• .~ vi-- r-'-- J O Analyzed Intersection
~, i ,;,• ~ I s"~ L°•r'r 'il S` 150(80) AM(PM)Tuming
_,• 1020
r ( )
~; • {~ - (40) 20 1 t f- Movements
t ~ ~, ~ r tt • ~~~4 ' (10) 0 ~ °v o e ~ TAZ 1 ® TAZ 4
..•.~ ,- r- ~,
' •• ^^" ° ~ ~~ TAZ 2 ~ TAZ 5
• (SO) ~ -- m `„
~~° ~ y _
~. ~ N ~` ~. Y )'l . (~ TAZ 3 TAZ 6
~" '"' of
' ~ • r ~i t,r~t
t"';,. ~ ~
.. ~~• r o
` R~: ~, ~~' -175th Avenue ~~" ~~ e`°
o^ 30 (140) •• ~ ~ t ~ ~ r »-~' 7~ `" ~0`
~' ~O
l of o ~ ~ f' ~- ,- `• ~~'Y o ,~ t .~„r}.~ {K~,~,Y °/90 0~ ~r ~/
( U) 0 0 0 0 ` ~ ,,.•• .•.; xr. ~_~ _, Q, ..~.' ~'!'° ice`.. _ +'K'.~.»:. ~1' .~ s..
~v... (ol o - -- 173`dAvenue • ''~`. ~ ~. ~~.'~ yo\
--
~ /
.v~ _ '`_.~ ~~ r ;-"~~~- ~, r 172"d Avenue I~~ _~~
~. _
~ _~ - ~`~ P ~ l/i ~ C `Rani S'l.c~ ~ - r" r ~~ ~~,....
~. j
$ ,. ..x._
~ ~ 171St Lane ~ !f
M ~ - .171st ;Avenue '~ ~~~ ~ '~° ~
"11
o L f i K• ,ELF g ,., 1~\ j\
~ v, *r IX ;~ ~ ~'~ "`p ~' ~~~~ ~j_ '4 `1'110
(180) 30 7 "' M ~ rt~'% a b `Q'~j 11
¢~+ r ~.~ ~ p, ~Y ¢. ~~ 'Y... ~ 'l. ~
(`~ Legend
' • ~ 169 ~ , , ~ t , ~~~~~~,~ ~ ~ ,.~~
°.
1 ~ + ~' • ^~' - ` +t ,~~ ~~& ~ ~ ~ Local Road
€ .
~ Yr / •• ,~ .'._ ~ ~ ~r~+1~~ ~r-h- tT_" ,t~ ,~ ~ StateHighway
• "'~~ ' ~ r ,~ '"~ •'~' `"" Interchange Ramps
• ~ f ~ 'fit, r ;`:` ~` -- Railroad
,• _ ~ .. r .
t '; ~;,• `~ tt--~ ~- `- t• O Sound Monitoring and
~ ~'• -~ r~ ~'`~_' - - ,,,,.., '~-" '"'" ~ Modeled Receptor Sites
.L"~. ,~,, • ~ ~ Site 3 ,, ~~ i r~ ,~-~
,.
<ti
t~'
+
-~ .
~y7~r g, ~„~ i ~ c -~__ ~~~r.• th AVenUe ~ ,
~.~
r
~ ~ F
~P: ~~~rr5 r_ .-t• +KR ~.., O ,+; rt r,~~ ,'~, 7.~ w ~"21 ~,~~, I ~. -w,"
,_
. ~, ~ - • a r.,.; + tea,; . . ;~ '
•
. ..
- _
"
,,
t ~
~ n
,~ s: -~ ~ ~ ~ ~, r=:~. ~;.--~.~; ~~~•';r;. ,..172"-d Avenue ' ~F
t
`~ ; .i ~ ~ 1 ..: ,.~.: ~, t/~ IRail Sta i ~ 'y ~ ~ Y
~~~~~ ~~ ~~_ ~ ~ • ~ .~ r 171stlanet~ ~
r -' ,
r 4:. Y~ _ 1715 Avenue ~~ ~,~~4 `;~, ~~» ~~ a ~
~ ~$.. ~ `~ Site2 <~ Ica ~`~°
` t~'~::. .~° ~' ~~ R. 1 •.. air ui.~
,.
_~
,,
~~- ~ ,•~
• •.
1 ~ -~~ ~, t
.~
•
~ .
_ __ u
~ .F3. ix-~~.,, .,. Slte 1 •~` .. ~~t _~ "PuruwY:-.'a1:7~aA~ Kw.. k~i..+~M~ f~
Sound Monitoring and Modeled Receptor Locations
N ~ Figure
Elk 171stAve Area AUAR ~ wSB 24-~
RlVer City of Elk River, Minnesota ~
1
t
t
1
ii
1
APPENDIX B
AGENCY CORRESPONDENCE
1
~~'~"~S°~a `' Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Box 25
500 Lafayette Road
St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4025
EIERARTPdENTOF Phone: (651) 259-5109 E-mail: lisajoyal@state.mn.us
PPATUr~ALRE50URCE5
June 10, 2011 Correspondence # ERDB 20110509
i~
Ms. Alison Harwood
WSB & Associates, Ina
701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
RE: Natural Heritage Review of the proposed 171 S` Avenue Area AUAR,
T32N R26W Sections 11 and 14, Sherburne County
Dear Ms. Hazwood,
t
n
~~
i~~
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, see the enclosed database reports; please visit the Raze Species Guide at
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/rs~Jindex.html for more information on the biology, habitat use, and conservation
measures of these rare species). Please note that the following rare features may be adversely affected by
the proposed project:
The loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), astate-listed threatened bird, was documented nesting
in the vicinity of the project site in 1996. The preferred habitat of this species is dry upland prairie or
other open grassland with scattered hedgerows, shrubs, and small trees. Shrikes are also found
azound shelterbelts, old orchards, pastures, cemeteries, grassy roadsides, and farmsteads. Shrikes use
the scattered trees and shrubs in these areas as nesting sites and hunting perches. Prey, however, are
caught in the surrounding open grassy areas. As such, forests or dense brushlands do not provide
suitable habitat for this bird. Likewise, open grasslands without any trees or shrubs do not provide
suitable habitat either. Shrikes frequently shift territories between years so it is not unusual for a
particular nesting azea to be vacant for several years before it is used again.. If the project boundary
contains suitable habitat, then it is possible that loggerhead shrikes may breed in the area. Please
refer to the DNR Rare Species Guide at htt~//www.dnr.state.mn.us/rsg/index.html for more
information on the biology, habitat use, and conservation measures of this rare species.
• The black sandshell (Ligumiarecta), astate-listed mussel of special concern, has been documented in
the Mississippi River in the vicinity of the project. Mussels can be affected by changes in water flow
or water quality, especially increased siltation.
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.
www.mndnr.gov
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
~i
The enclosed results include an Index Report and a Detailed Report of records in the Rare Features
Database, the main database of the NHIS. To control the release of specific location information, which.
might result in the destruction of a rare feature, both reports are copyrighted.
The Index Report provides rare feature locations only to the nearest section, and may be reprinted,
unaltered, in an environmental review document (e.g., EAW or EIS), municipal natural resource plan, or
report compiled by your company for the project listed. above. If you wish to reproduce the index report for
any other purpose, please contact me to request written permission. The Detailed Report is for your
personal use only as it may include specific location information that is considered nonpublic data
under Minnesota Statutes, section 84.0872, subd. 2. If you wish to reprint or publish the Detailed
Report for any purpose, please contact me to request written permission.
For environmental review purposes, the Natural Heritage letter and database reports are valid for one
year; they 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 if an updated review is needed.
Please note that locations of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), federally-listed as threatened and state-listed
as special concern, and the Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), federally-listed as threatened, are not currently
tracked in the NHIS. As such, the Natural Heritage Review does not address these species.
Furthermore, 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. Additional rare features for which we have no data may be present in
the project area,. or there may be other natural resource concerns associated with the proposed project. For
these concerns, please contact your DNR Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist (contact information
available at http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/eco/ereview/erp re~ioncontacts.html). Please be aware that
additional site assessments or review may be required.
Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare
natural resources. An invoice will be mailed to you under separate cover.
Sincerely,
(tea
Lisa Joyal
Natural Heritage Review Coordinator
enc. Rare Features Database: Index Report
Rare Features Database: Detailed Report
Rare Features Database Reports: An Explanation of Fields
~i
11
ii
ii
M
w
0
P.
' A
i.
'~
O
.~ ~ ~ Qi
s°. yR„ ~
tC
Q
-y
:.. c~
~
_y
~ ~ Q'
~
y ~i N .--+
~;~>~~
~ ~ Q o ~
° ~3 ~ •~ v
o
.~
~,a ~ v~ °'
~~3~
a, iccyy
~
C4.~
Cw
~OOz~
~ ~
M
CQ O
.~.~ CL ~ H
x d~
ice. '~ W
~ ~
zA
~
~ O
d
a
a
~
/.
`~
"" T
C ~
N O
d ~
ti w°
b
~,,~' >
•~, ~
a
q
N
O
N
A
O
W
F
~U.,
OUq
on
O
fJ
.~
O
a
u
C
C
d
.~
i~.i
r7
W
b
Y
v,
0
..
:°.
Y
z
M
Y
d
^O
L=,
r c
N N
~ ~
O C
i ~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
Ci y
A A
.a ^a
v ~
oa
r-1 W
.~
O
w
4-~
O
O
.~
°
.~
~•
P.
L O
~~
w
~x
a~ y
CW
b
N
y
y
Q
~'
.~
b
°
i.
~ ~
1
p W
ai ~ ~
wax
,~ _o
v~ G7 W
N
O
d
A
d
+..
R
a
~ ~
R^ U
ti Y
°' 3
> N
a ~ ~
++
ei d
C+ ~L M
F °
A N
°' ' ~ F.,
a
'~
z
~V-I N
. 3
y O
r-.
ti ~ N
a ~ a
O O
~ x >
~ ~ b
y y C
'~ ~ •~
~' 3 x
d ~~
°' v a~
F~, s. e.;
~ ~~
~ 7 c~
~~•~
ti
b
O
3
O
O
W
0
3
0
?:
ti
.~ ~
N
s~.U• q
b ~
3 N
Q ~
O ~
O a`~+
.~ '>
~ M
en
.~
N ^d
zb
~+ O y
~ d o
'y +~
~ ~ ~
V A R
~ ~ ~
a+ Q
p d 0
raj C7 W
R
C
R
0
H
z
d
C.
Q
L
d
d
D
C.
'O
ti
a
C
~'
.v
~ ~
a° °'
o ~
a°i M ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ '
~ C W
w ~ ~ R~r ~
~ a ~
~..~ x
z ~ "~ ~ ~
fSr v~ U' W
~ y
N
~ N p,
i L
~ ~ r ,~
.-+
,`: w N N
A A °' ~
..
a ,~ ~ ~ ~
°~ °' A i ei
~ H
~~~ d
cow
r ~ = w
Y. y v, ~
H
v w
~"
Q N ~
7CyJ
U
3 ~~ a
.N ~.
O '~" N
A ~ ~ ~
H ~ ~ ~
O ~ q
Z a `D ~
c `~ cC v~
Q •~ M y ~
y
O ~„ M y
X c~ N ~ y
~ 3 .~ ~
A `~ 3 b
•
w 3 ~ ~ ° ~
v~Q~~ y
~ ~
C O~ ~
a+ V]
z °N~ ~
eC ~' Q" ~~ '~ ~ C
y C D+ u v~
~. 3 H ~ ~ ~
'O ~; 's ~ z ~ ' 'v~
U
~" d ~ F, Z W d
Hr L' V ~ ,y L
O W Q ra C/~ Fi Ch
~ 4-i 7 sU. ~" ~
O cd
O ~ ~ ~
3 ~b 04+N.~ ^ y.".
U ~ .O ~ .~ U v y b
A '"
y ~ a ~ h ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ o
cv •~, -o Q 3
m 3 a7 'O a~`"i N ~ V] y
3 ° ° o ~,~ ~
a`~i a`i 'o .~ ~ a 'b ~ a '~' y
c.~ .~ ~ H ~" ~: ~ ~.. '=boa
b
°? ~,,
3 ~ c. '~ v'
x .~ ~. b '~ „ ~ ..,
V ti ~ 'y O ~ ~ ~ ~ N
cd U U .., Pr Tl 'b y C p
q ~ ~ ? ; C ~ N CU. '~
'O ~ ~ .1 N 4+ ~» ~ ~ U
~ ~ ^o W ~ °ti° ; O o
°' ~ ~, ~ ° ~ o 3 ~
~.
o C N ~n ~ °-~ °: o v
.. •, ~
M 3 H ~ V y •~ ~ ~~
s. 1~ ;ty ¢, q s~,. y, ~ ~ ~"
h .O M ~+ bhp 'O 0 3 p N
O eC p i, w U •~
~~ ,.1, ~ O x b Q O
a~i ~ ° =N-' a °•~ 3
~ v°i ~ w ~ ~ .~ ~
ti ; eu Z o ,~ ~ 'a. ~ ~
3'O b ~'~ ~ aUi '~>,'Od
~ a~
~~~~ yv ~~ ~.~
° s. b ~ a°i ~ '° ° 3
'd .'~- ~A
~ ~ ~ ti a' p > O
~ T `e~ ,C. O V] fC 3 'b .~
3 0 ~ •p,a ° ~ w a abi
~ N ~ .~ ~ N ~ ~ N ~ U
a•~b ~ ~ ~3~0 ~ ~
h ;o
'~ y V] Q y tJ
A ou on .~ .~ ~ •~ ~ n+ ~
° ~' 'v a ~
C3 T3 'O R ti y d 'O M O O
a~ ~ ~ O ~O 6)~~' 00 N N
~i
M
4-+
0
N
N
a
A
~" w.;
~ O
~"OQ
~•~ ~~_
~ ~ Q ~
~ ~ ~ ~ 7
Q o 0
0 3~~~U
'~ ~ .fir ~ N
~~'3~
~~y
w c N
°~z
e°~us ^"N
~ p ~ M
~Ly ~ ~ ~
w .~
~• w
~ A
z
0
ai
C
R
~T
o~
N ~
~' ~'
Fr-, '++
b
~ ~
~ ~
a~
Q
N
N
O
M
A
O
w
R
iii
.~
a
V
"C
C
R
z
d
w
zW
O Q
~ U
Q .S
°
°
~
,
o
N
~~ ~
v w
v •p j O 'N
ai
~ ~ Q ~ .~
~ (~ ~ Hai
~~~ x
~ w~
°
y R~ _ az
~°' ~ R
a ~ aw
o~
„ ~
x w .~
z'° ~ ,
-0 z
ww a
~ w ~ c7 w w~
o
~ Q b
~"
a •o
a
~
~ ~ w
y N ,b
~ GULF ~ y
7
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~
p
Q
U ~ a
6a ~ N
~ ~
~ F Q ~
~
A A ~:
'° d A v
d ~
a 3 ~~
A a3
R
~ >
y ~ i
' G~
y
~ ~ Q ~
F ~
o H ~
~
~
op~ d
~ d "z o
~
~l GTr ~l ~ ra v~ ¢ vxi w
Qa
H
~ O N
z~ o
~3 ~~ ~
~a¢ ~~
~ ~ z ~a
Q ~~
C U ~" Q `~n
H
c
'° ~w
p
~ ~°
ti
p cn ,
'~ ~ A Z b ~
w 33 a° ~
o z
~ o
~ E 0 0 °
;,
~ ~
"
N a~.] rC-gy
F4 ,~
NR~i
X y
Q F4 .~y ...
A ~°
~ ~3.
c a
Q 3~
a +,
x ~ 'Q' U
~; ~
~ .~
Q .
~ x ~ .~. M ~
Ki y N
° ~ Q F~ s; Q
`" 0. ~ ~ ~' v
C
~
C cn
° N
°~ ~
o ~ n
°
b
~ y
y ~ ~
~' Wet
+r '' ~ a
i
~
•
~
A ~ ~ v ~
d ~ ~ 0.
N V]
dx s ~ z £ =
~ H
A~~ ~~
a+ L ° M R A L i~r W R0..
pw p a v~ ~ C7~~ w~
N
M
a
H
O
w
m
N
z
b
L
a"i
0
0
J
0
'~
C
R
R
z
~".
u
s
Q
w
°a
.~
X
'O
Cl. '
z~~
zq
w ~ .~
R ~ w
~~ ~a
y ~ ai R
d~~x
z d~so
~ W v~ U' w
N
O
O~ ~
O ~
0
N
L d
.. ~.
CQ R
A A
>d ~ A
L y
VJ y
~ ~
~ ~
oo~
y
tyC R
awa
^O
ti
d
0
.~
a
O
R
b
y U
v ~ ,
R ~;
~ c
^o F,
CC d
C
R
~ ~
N
3
z
N
F
~~
U F
~~
~ ~ w
N
N
~~Hx
.a
° C M W
~ ~ x
H
d= ~;•~ry3 0
i '~ (~ y W V]
~e° °'A z ei
dxL=~~
~ u ~ R H z
.O ~ '~ O ate..
cwpa ~
3
0
0
N
0
O
N
N
O
O
N
O~
V1
a
.-r
M
~ ~
~,
w ~
~~
c~ ~
°
o W
x
GQ ~
~~
~ ~
N ~
'--i
fYi
a
~~ h
v, y
~a
°o a
•~
a..N
•~ _ti
A ~
y R
d A
c~ w
R
d
7
~;
d
L.
.~
a
'~
O
U
f:
C~
Ri
z
U
O
d
y
d
a
0
d
~.
a.
s°.
O
O
r
O
U
C
C~
R
z
~i
~i
~i
~i
ii
M ~
4-i ~
O ~
M ~
a I W
.~
A
~;
~w
o
W .Q
L ~ Q
a .=
~.
~ .-.
a~i ~Q~
a ~-~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ o
~ 3 ~ ~ U
o ^,
'¢,~~~ a>
~~'3~
~ cr~`y]
C e~. ~ W .~
oozes
aN H
x ~
..
~•~w
.~ d
RA
O
c
c
j ~~
T
o ~
N C
v ~,
ti W
•u ~°
~ ~
~. c~
a
Q
O
b
G
ea
E
z
+.+
C
6
d
W
~_ w
~ ~ ~
~+ QQ
~
aa
~Q~
Oq
~ P.
U P.
`^
'> p~~
w
~,
xU¢
~z~a
.~ ~~z
o
o M~Q
cn N (•~ ~ C A
Z ,
. ~ ~ Q
y
~ N
x~a
~,
'~ ~a~ A~~
w~a ~
z.Q a e~ o~
Q~waa•
~
~
°~
a~~'3~
T a Q
b aoFz
O ~~~~z
~ U~v~iA
~ W
~
U
H
a~W~
.. ~>~x~o
~, ~ A L a; A ~~~~
`9
O C ri, en H
A
a, a
°, ~ 'U7 O
~ Q
0.
++ y w C
~' i y R
awa ~ >
>
Q
L L
0 Vj
~~~ao~a
U
w~
~
W C7
xO
U~c4
0
a0..
~ a~a
~ ¢ ~, w
z w
~
N ~
~ p., Q W
~~
z
a
ua
¢~w~
M
U H oo AO~0.
~,
~ ~ a F ~ ~
~
~
3 ~
NO
z
b~~x
~ H ~ tae ~°z
'v", cG~,a
~
CJ ~ ~ (~ ~
~
0
" o ~ W Q
~ ~"~
d
a
~~
o p
~ w V] V] op
.,
'«
~, Q' ~
Rte. a d3 ~ ~ ...0.~w~
e
d
sAZ E
m
~ °Aa~O
x
~+ L C CN7 R
~
G ~ R L ~ ~" .3 CQ
A
~.
°'. ° v
d L' on ~~ O W
~
O W O av~ vs > C7 cn
w W
W w U
O
O
Q ~ M
~~O
~A`i'
a, ~
O ~ >
x
O
~ U
W
a Q
~
> O
~~~
~ ~~
o
z •~ ~, z ~,
~~a
N O w
~
a 0
2 ~ ~ U
R ~ a
F
w `~' ~ a x a¢~7
~ a ~
d
o o
z~ a,w~
w°
~
~wv~C7 W W
~a
d
oU
w
H~
~
qq
~`"~z
'" ~w~~,
wQa~
,~ o,~Q~
d~ ~x~~w
R ;; ~:
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w
3?~w
W ~ a+ A d A
W FGA>
~ ~ a~i di'
~ a°, "AZ~~
~
~ ~ ~
oo
O
O a,
~ °>, ~ °" Q
~
~ Q
L y ~
S awa ~ ~ ~~z~o
~ H
zoao
w
z ~~Aw
zo~~
°oFa
w
~
~P.~QQ
~A~o
a~Ov~
U W ~
d
F
~ N j.
~w
30~
o ~ ~ .~ ~
Q~oz
~ ~ ~ 3'" z ~¢HFo
~~~ ~ ~
•-" '~ y czv ~ ~ C4]~~
~ U
v
~ ~ ~~ M x
ce ~ F" a
W U
~ W
~
'~ ~" ° U
.°
U o ',. e ~
O L1. i+ V] x
F"' ~
~+, qO~d
O V~1 s
4; ei w
i ea y ,ca N Z W
y~O
U „
~~~1 c,q ~ ;;
~ p„i
¢
a A~
yxa
~
~ ~
Q ~ Q
a+
a~+ r' v
OW O a ~ L
~ 00 C ~''
~ C7 ~ Q 0 W
fl
w
O
a
o
x
~;~¢
o~¢
+r ^ ~
~. a~~
~ ~~~
w~ ~~ ~'
C. ~
T..
H ~" Q~ O O
~ ~ '
~~3~ ~V '~
., ~ ~ ~ a~
F~.I ~i , 3
W v O1 ~ ~
R ~ ~ ~ ~
t, w o ~
~ ~ N
CE ~ p ~.,~
z o~H
+R~+ d ~
O
YE
C '~ W
-.i
T
C ~
N O
ti `°
b "O
y O
~>
a
Q
A N N N M ai r
O O O O m Obi O
W N M M .-~ ~--i
~ ~ ~
d ~ a a v t~ t~
~~ o o ~ 0 0 0
O A ~ o rn o oQo oO1o
ra N N
R ~
~ C7 C7 C~ C7 C7 C7
i C ~ ~ ~ ~~-+ tii N N
C
CC
++
L
c
N ~ U U '?
Q d
z ~ ~, ~ ~ 'z ;~ 'z z
~~
a
d ' y
`n
w v' z
~.''
~'".
0
~, U ,-.
~ ~ `~ .a
o e° ~ '~•
'yon ? ~ o ~
Ca 'C ~ ~ ~
a~
z o
~' x 3 ~ U ~ ~
77 '~Jj
Q ~ ~ ~ C ~ G
_ ¢ ~ ~ ~,
u ~ % Q
O ~ ~' CN/]
N l~ 00
~3 y
3 c3y ~ ~ y 3
`~ a oo N a e
c
N M ti H O N
H H z~ ~ M~
N V1 'O ~ C ~ l~ ,~..~ l~'
v~ 3 :o y „ ~ ~ a
3 ~ ~° °' 3
o ~
~ ,x ~ M ~ H o >. O M ~ y
7 .L M~ M ri O N~ ~ H ~ V]
^Z C/~ ~ 00 ~ M ~ V] ~ ~ 00 O ...
N C/2 an y C/1
~~~ ~3 ~~ ~ ~3 ~t~y
~ i m ~ '~C~ cy~ ~ '~C~ ~ ~ M F ~ fcy~ C4
CC v bq .C C C4 U q ~+ , G Z ~ cC^~ ai
CQ O ~ ~ ~ oz0 ~ N ~ a~ N ~ cd N ~'" N
x ` x
A ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ H ~ H~ ~ ~ ~" ~ ~ H o H
L d '~ ~ ~ ~C ~ N m ~ N ~ ~ .O Uj O ".~ .Mr > .N-~
s. ~
o U ~ rn
~~~ ~3 y ~ ~ ~,~ ~
z y bM ~, ~ ~ M
w ~ z ~~ ~ ~~.~, ~~~ ~ ~~ a ~~ ~~
~.
NGC ~ a~"i ~ ~ > ~ N ~ ~ N ~ 'q O .Nr eY M m
h~-I W ~ ~l H rki ~l H `.4' ~l H~ d' U H z Q H Q H i
~~
0. ,-.
~ a
~.
v O
xw
o
s a.
~ ~
~~.~
y ~r~.+ ,~
~ 5 ~»
b y O
N
~ bU
U vQi"~".
~ N
Ry ~ U
O
~ L". ti
00 d t.
p ~ O
L1
O y O
L' ~~" 'O
U ~ ~
~ ~
y w ~
°,~' ° :x
~.
~ ~ ~'
oy~~
~~~
~~w°
0
a,
3~~...
M_ p
.~ ~ ~
o °
an
o ~
N 'pp
~,
b
~ ~ ~
N~
y ~ U
ti ~ •~
N
~ N G
~ N
~ ~
~' Rare Features Database Reports: An Explanation of Fields
The Rare Features Database is part ofthe Natural Heritage Information System, and is maintained by the Division of Ecological and Water
Resources, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR).
**Please note that the database reports are copyrighted and may not be reproduced without permission**
Field Name: [Full (non-abbreviated) field name, if different]. Further explanation of field.
-E-
Element Name and Occ #: [Element Name and Occurrence Number]. The Element is the name ofthe rare feature. For plant and animal
species records, this field holds the scientific name followed by the common name in parentheses; for all other elements (such as native
plant communities, which have no scientific name) it is solely the element name. Native plant community names correspond to Minnesota's
Native Plant Community Classification (Version 2.0). The Occurrence Number, in combination with the ElementName, uniquely identifies
each record.
EO Data: [Element Occurrence Data]. For species elements, this field contains data collected on the biology ofthe Element Occurrence*
(EO), including the number of individuals, vigor, habitat, soils, associated species, peculiar characteristics, etc. For native plant community
elements, this field is a summary text. description of the vegetation of the EO, including structure (strata) and composition
(dominant/characteristic species), heterogeneity, successional stage/dynamics, any unique aspects of the community or additional
noteworthy species (including animals). Note that this is a new field and it has not been filled out for many of the records that were
collected prior to conversion to the new database system. Some of the information meeting the field definition may be found in the General
Description field.
EO ID#: [Element Occurrence Identification Number]. Unique identifier for each Element Occurrence record.
EO Rank: [Element Occurrence Rank]. An evaluation ofthe quality and condition of an Element Occurrence (EO) from A (highest) to D
(lowest). Represents a comparative evaluation of: 1) quality as determined by representativeness ofthe occurrence especially as compared
to EO specifications and including maturity, size, numbers, etc. 2) condition (how much has the site and the EO itself been damaged or
altered from its optimal condition and character). 3) viability (the long-term prospects for continued existence of this occurrence -used in
ranking species only). EO Ranks are assigned based on recent fieldwork by knowledgeable individuals.
Extent Known?: A value that indicates whether the full extent of the Element is known (i.e., it has been determined through field survey) at
that location. If null, the value has not been determined.
-F-
Federal Status: Status of species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act: LE =endangered; LT =threatened; LE,LT =listed endangered in
part of its range, listed threatened in another part of its range; LT,PDL =listed threatened, proposed for delisting; C =candidate for listing.
If null or "No Status" the species has no federal status.
First Observed Date: Date that the Element Occurrence was first reported at the site informat YYYY-MM-DD. A year followed by "Pre"
indicates that the observed date was sometime prior to the date listed, but the exact date is unknown.
-G-
General Description: General description or word picture of the area where the Element Occurrence (EO) is located (i.e., the physical
setting/context surrounding the EO), including a list of adjacent communities. When available, information on surrounding land use maybe
included. Note that the information tracked in this field is now more narrowly defined than it was in the old database system, and some of
the information still in this field more accurately meets the definition ofthe new EO Data field. We are working to clean up the records so
that the information in the two fields corresponds to the current field explanations described herein. Also note that the use of uppercase in
sentences in this field is not significant but rather an artifact of transferring data from the old database system to the new system.
Global Rank: The global (i.e., range-wide) assessment ofthe relative rarity or imperilment ofthe species or community. Ranges from Gl
(critically imperiled due to extreme rarity on a world-wide basis) to GS (demonstrably secure, though perhaps rare in parts of its range).
Global ranks are determined by NatureServe, an international network of natural heritage programs and conservation data centers.
-L-
Last Observed Date: Date that the Element Occurrence was last observed to be extant at the site in format YYYY-MM-DD.
Last Survey: Date ofthe most recent field survey for the Element Occurrence, regardless of whether it was found during the visit. If
the field is blank, assume the date is the same as the Last Observed Date.
Location Description: County or Counties in which the Element Occurrence was documented followed by Township, Range, and Section
information (not listed in any particulaz order). Each unique Township, Range, and Section combination is separated by a comma. In some
cases, there aze too many Township, Range, and Section combinations to list in the field, in which case, the information will be replaced
with, "Legal description is too lengthy to fit in allotted space".
-M-
Manaeed Area(s): Name of the federally, state, locally, or privately managed park, forest, refuge, preserve, etc., containing the occurrence,
if any. If this field is blank, the element probably occurs on private land. If"(Statutory Boundary)" occurs after the name of a managed
area, the location may be a private inholding within the statutory boundary of a state forest or park.
MN Status: [Minnesota Status]. Legal status of plant and animal .species under the Minnesota Endangered Species Law: END =
endangered; THR =threatened; SPC =special concern; NON =tracked, but no legal status. Native plant communities, geological features,
and colonial waterbird nesting sites do not have any legal status under the Endangered Species Law and are represented by a N/A.
-N-
NPCClassification (v1.5): Native plant community name in Minnesota's Native Vegetation: A Key to Natural Communities (Version 1.5).
This earlier classification has been replaced by Minnesota's Native Plant Community Classification (Version 2.0).
-O-
Observed Area: The total area of the Element Occurrence, in acres, which is measured or estimated during fieldwork. If null, the value has
not been determined.
Ownershi~Type: Indicates whether the land on which the Element Occurrence was located was publicly or privately owned; for publicly
owned land, the agency with management responsibility is listed, if known.
-S-
Site Name: The name of the site(s) where the Element Occurrence is located. Sites are natural areas of land with boundaries determined and
mapped according to biological and ecological considerations.
Survev Site #/Name: The name of the survey site, if applicable, where the Element Occurrence is located.;Survey sites are sitesthat provide
a geographic framework for recording and storing data, but their boundaries aze not based on biological and ecological considerations.
Minnesota County Biological Survey site numbers, if applicable, aze also listed in this field.
Surve~ype: Information on the type of survey used to collect information on the Element Occurrence.
Surve, or~r(s): Name(s) of the person(s) that collected survey information on the Element Occurrence.
State Rank: Rank that best characterizes the relative rarity or endangerment of the taxon or plant community in Minnesota. The ranks do
not represent a legal status. They are used by the Minnesota Department ofNatural Resources to set priorities for reseazch, inventory and
conservation planning. The state ranks are updated as inventory information becomes available. S 1 =Critically imperiled in Minnesota
because of extreme rarity or because of some factor(s) making it especially vulnerable to extirpation from the state. S2 =Imperiled in
Minnesota because of rarity or because of some factor(s) making it very vulnerable to extirpation from the state. S3 =Vulnerable in
Minnesota either because raze or uncommon, or found in a restricted range, or because of other factors making it vulnerable to extirpation.
S4 =Apparently secure in Minnesota, usually widespread. SS =Demonstrably secure in Minnesota, essentially ineradicable under present
conditions. SH = Of historical occurrence in the state, perhaps having not been verified in the past 20 yeazs, but suspected to be still extant.
An element would become SH without the 20-year delay if the only known occurrences in the state were destroyed or if it had been
extensively and unsuccessfully looked for. SNR =Rank not yet assessed. SU = Unable to rank. SX =Presumed extinct in Minnesota. SNA
=Rank not applicable. S#S# =Range Rank: a numeric range rank (e.g., S2S3) is used to indicate the range of uncertainty about the exact
status of the element. S#B, S#N =Used only for migratory animals, whereby B refers to the breeding population of the element in
Minnesota and N refers to the non-breeding population of the element in Minnesota.
-V-
Vegetation Plot: Code(s) for any vegetation plot data that have been collected within this Element Occurrence (i.e., either Releve Number
or the word "RELEVE" indicates that a releve has been collected).
* Element Occurrence - an area of land and/or water in which an Element (i.e., a rare species or community) is, or was, present, and which
has practical conservation value for the Element as evidenced by potential continued (or historical) presence and/or regular recurrence at a
given location. Specifications for each species determine whether multiple observations should be considered 1 Element Occurrence or 2,
based on minimum separation distance and barriers to movement.
Data Security
Locations of some raze features must be treated as sensitive information because widespread knowledge of these locations could result in harm to the rare features. For
example, wildflowers such as orchids and economically valuable plants such as ginseng are vulnerable to exploitation by collectors; other species, such as bald eagles, are
sensitive to disturbance by observers. For this reason, we prefer that publications not identify the precise locations of vulnerable species. We suggest describing the location
only to the nearest section. If this is not acceptable for your purposes, please call and discuss this issue with the Natural Heritage Review Coordinator at 651- 259-5109.
Revised 9/2010
I__I
From: Alison Harwood
Sent: Tuesday, May 31,-2011 1:12 PM
To: Andi Moffatt
Subject: Fwd: 171st Ave Area AUAR
Fyi
Sent from my Verizon Wireless Phone
Our records indicate there are no federally listed or proposed species
`and/or designated or proposed critical habitat within the action area of
the proposed project. If project plans change, additional information on
listed or proposed species becomes available, or new species are listed
that may be affected by the project, consultation should be reinitiated.
This concludes section 7 consultation for proposed construction at the
above location. Thank you for your cooperation in meeting our joint
responsibilities under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. If you
`have any further endangered species questions, please contact me at (612)
725-3548 x2208
Andrew Horton
Fish and Wildlife Biologist
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Twin Cities ES Field Office
4101 American Blvd East
Bloomington, MN 55425-1665
(612) 725-3548 ext. 2208
Please consider the environment before printing this email message.
Alison
763.231.4847
' Please consider the environment before printing this email message.
0
~le:///KI/01992-000/Admin/Docs/Wildlife%20and%20Wetlands/EMAIL%20-%20053111%20-%20USFWS.htm[8/31/2011 11:48:49 AM]