Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL — AUGUST 12, 2024 8 <br />Rachel Haase, Kimley Horn, provided a brief presentation on the TCAAP AUAR updates and <br />mitigation plan. She explained an AUAR was an Alternative Urban Areawide Review that <br />addressed the environmental review process under Minnesota State rules, was completed by the <br />responsible governmental unit (RGU) and was a planning tool used to understand how different <br />development scenarios would affect the environment. She reported an AUAR evaluates different <br />development scenarios rather than a specific plan while identifying potential impacts and <br />mitigation strategies. She explained AUAR's have to be updated every five years in order to <br />identify any changes that have been made to the development scenarios. <br />Ms. Haase reported the original AUAR was completed in 2014. She noted the AUAR was <br />updated in 2019 and again in 2024. She reviewed the two comments that were received on the <br />2024 AUAR from the Met Council and DNR. The two different development scenarios that were <br />considered within the AUAR were further discussed with the City Council, along with the <br />changes reflected within the AUAR update. The traffic study and trip generation within the two <br />different scenarios was further reviewed as was the mitigation plan updates. She reported next <br />steps for the AUAR included adoption by the City Council. <br />Councilmember Holden requested further information regarding the trip generation from the <br />site. <br />Jacob Rojer, Kimley Horn, explained the trip generation numbers were just for people destined <br />to the development and do not take into account other people at the intersection traveling to <br />different destinations. <br />Councilmember Monson requested further information regarding the typical nature of the two <br />different scenarios approach. <br />Ms. Haase stated AUAR's cover a range of development that includes the proposed scenario and <br />a worst -case scenario in order to understand the higher levels of impact. <br />Councilmember Monson asked for further information on how the A through F ratings for the <br />intersections worked. <br />Mr. Rojer explained intersections were given a grade similar to grades used in school. He stated <br />an A is the least amount of delay and an F had the highest level of delay. He reported mitigation <br />recommendations were not made until an intersection reached a D, E or F rating. He discussed <br />how intersections have to be right sized in order to properly moved traffic levels while also <br />considering what were the proper service delays for the public. He commented further on the <br />tradeoffs for overbuilding intersections. <br />Councilmember Monson requested further information on how the changes that were made to <br />the level of commercial uses and residential uses would impact traffic flow. <br />Mr. Rojer stated he would recommend site specific traffic studies being completed to this level, <br />noting he had not analyzed the traffic flow from the site to this level of detail. <br />Councilmember Monson commented there were many improvements that happened between <br />2014 and after 2019. She questioned how many of these improvements were prior mitigation <br />measures. <br />